{"doc_id":"0258b367556747d8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Misrep 4871281\nNarrative\n[REDACTED] AT 2249Z, 1.4a TOOK OFF FROM OKAS. AT 2300Z, 1.4a HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE. FROM 2338Z TO 0825Z, 1.4a FROM 1319Z TO 1855Z, 1.4a FROM 0117Z TO 1835Z, 1.4a SUPPORTED NAVCENT FOR OPERATION (b)(1)1.4a IVO ARABIAN GULF, STRAIT OF HORMUZ AND GULF OF OMAN. SEE ISR LINE 1. AT 0727Z, 1.4a RECEIVED A GUARDCALL. SEE GUARDCALL LINE 1. AT 0854Z, 1.4a RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARDCALL LINE 2. AT 1122Z, 1.4a RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARDCALL LINE 3. AT 1236Z, 1.4a RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARD CALL LINE 4. AT 1315Z, 1.4a RECEIVED GUARDCALL. SEE GUARD CALL LINE 5. AT 1829Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X UAP, SEE OBSERVATION LINE 1. AT 1835Z, 1.4a WAS CLEARED TO RTB. AT 1922Z, 1.4a HANDED BACK TO THE LRE. AT 1953Z, 1.4a LANDED AT OKAS. FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS-1. 21 MISSION HOURS, 17.3 IMINT HOURS, 1 IMINT TASKING PROSECUTED, 15.3 1.4a HOURS, 3 1.4a TASKING PROSECUTED, 4 TOTAL TASKINGS PROSECUTED\nAdmin\nCLASSIFICATION\n• Classification: [REDACTED]\n• Associated Caveats: [REDACTED]\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20450301\nOPERATION\n• Operation: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFCENT\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\nMSGID\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Sqnadron): 482ATKS\n• Submit Date (Auto-generated):"} {"doc_id":"0258b367556747d8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MSNID\n• Tasking Order (ATO): DR\n• Mission Type: AREC\n• ATO Mission Number: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\nPoc\nPOC\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 482 ATKS\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\nQC\n• Rank: Ctr\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Unit: PAROC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c,(b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\nAPPROVER\n• Rank: Capt\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 609 AOC ISRD Unit Support\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC"} {"doc_id":"0258b367556747d8","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INGEST\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\nACEQUIP\nACEQUIP\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination: -\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: -\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• MWS Name or Designator: -\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• IRCM Name or Designator: -\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• ECM Name or Designator: -\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• CMD Name or Designator: -\n• Chaff Designator: -\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: -\n• Flare Designator: -\n• Num Flares: -\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator: -\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Num Towed Decoys: -\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Gun Name or Designator: -\n• Num Gun Rounds: -\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4(a)\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: ANDAS4\n• Additional Avionics: AH-BS_WARIO"} {"doc_id":"0258b367556747d8","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Data Link: -\n• Gentext: -\nTimeline\nLanding\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Last Land Time: 021953:00ZOCT20\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 022003:00ZOCT20\n• Total Mission Time: 21 hours 4 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\nTakeoff\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number: (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Takcoff Time DTG: 012249:00ZOCT20\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Mission Canceled:\nOn Station\n• Time On Station DTG: 012300:00ZOCT20\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: AREC\n• JTAC Callsign: -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\nISR\n• Time-on Station DTG: 020117:00ZOCT20\n• Time-off Station DTG: 021835:00ZOCT20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Msn Type: AREC"} {"doc_id":"0258b367556747d8","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Primary Sensor: ANDAS4\n• Sensors Available: AH\\GMESH\n• Tasking Type: PLANNED\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 39RWK7(b)(1)1.4a(b)(1)1.4a\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\nGENTEXT/ISR\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] 1.4a COORDINATED WITH NAVCENT 24 HOURS PRIOR TO TAKE OFF. PRECOORD WAS SATISFACTORY. AT 0117Z 1.4a ARRIVED ON STATION ISO NAVCENT FOR OPERATION (b)(1)1.4a TO CHARACTERIZE IRIN\\IRGCN VESSELS, UAS ACTIVITY, ACTIVITY OUTSIDE OF PORTS, AND TO ESTABLISH PATTERN OF LIFE. FROM 0117Z TO 1835Z, 1.4a CONDUCTED SCANS IAW THE TARGET DECK IN THE ARABIAN GULF (AG). AT 1244Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X UI AIRCRAFT ON RUNWAY AT ABU MUSA ISLAND AIRFIELD. AT 1344Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1XU/I AIRCRAFT AT ABU MUSA ISLAND AIRFIELD ASSESSED TO BE AN ATR 72-500. AT 1657Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X POSS NASER WAP DOCKED IVO BUSHERH IRIN BOATYARD. AT 0727Z, 1.4a RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARDCALL LINE 1. AT 0854Z, 1.4a RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARDCALL LINE 2. AT 1122Z, 1.4a RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARDCALL LINE 3. AT 1236Z, 1.4a RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARDCALL LINE 4. AT 1835Z, 1.4a WAS CLEARED OFF TASKING AND RETURNED TO BASE (RTB)\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n• Supported Unit: NAVCENT\n• Supported Operation: OPERATION (b)(1)1.4a\n• Precoord Time: 24 HOURS\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\nWEATHER\n• Weather: (U) HEAVY HAZE PRECLUDED IMINT ANALYSIS\nEFFECTIVENESS\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: No\n• Gentext: -"} {"doc_id":"0258b367556747d8","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 16 March 2026\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n[REDACTED]\nOff Station\n• Time Off Station DTG: 021922:00ZOCT20\n• Total Time On Station: 20 hours 22 minutes\nGUARDCALL\n• GUARDCALL DTG: 020727:00ZOCT20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Ground Station Callsign: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Location: 40RCP76 (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: 020 M\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL180\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Number of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\n• Guardcall Tone: PROFESSIONAL\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 0727Z, 1.4a WAS HAILED ON GUARD (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g DEFENSE. ORDERS GIVEN: STANDARD CALL 1.4a RESPONDED WITH STANDARD RESPONSE 1. NO IMPACT TO THE MISSION\nGUARDCALL\n• GUARDCALL DTG: 020854:00ZOCT20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Ground Station Callsign: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Location: 40RDP78 (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: 145 M\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL180\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Number of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\n• Guardcall Tone: PROFESSIONAL\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 0854Z, 1.4a WAS HAILED ON GUARD (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g DEFENSE. ORDERS GIVEN: STANDARD CALL 1.4a RESPONDED WITH STANDARD RESPONSE 1. NO IMPACT TO THE MISSION\nGUARDCALL\n3.5c, (b)(6)\n[REDACTED]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0028 Approved for Release to AARO- FOUO / PA applies 03/16/26 000006"} {"doc_id":"0258b367556747d8","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 16 March 2026\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n[REDACTED]\n• GUARDCALL DTG: 021122:00ZOCT20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Ground Station Callsign: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Location: 40RCQ75 (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: 264 M\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL160\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Number of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\n• Guardcall Tone: Directive\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 1122Z 1.4a WAS HAILED ON GUARD (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g DEFENSE. ORDERS GIVEN: STANDARD CALL 1.4a RESPONDED WITH STANDARD RESPONSE 1. NO IMPACT TO THE MISSION\nGUARDCALL\n• GUARDCALL DTG: 021236:00ZOCT20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Ground Station Callsign: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Location: 40RCP72 (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: 128 M\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL 160\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Number of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\n• Guardcall Tone: Professional\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\n• Gentext: (S//REL AT 1236Z, 1.4a WAS HAILED ON GUARD (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g DEFENSE. ORDERS GIVEN: STANDARD CALL 1.4a RESPONDED WITH STANDARD RESPONSE 1. NO IMPACT TO THE MISSION\nGUARDCALL\n• GUARDCALL DTG: 021315:00ZOCT20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Ground Station Callsign 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Location: 40RCP77 (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: 227 M\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL 160\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n3.5c, (b)(6)\n[REDACTED]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0028 Approved for Release to AARO- FOUO / PA applies 03/16/26 000007"} {"doc_id":"0258b367556747d8","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 16 March 2026\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n[REDACTED]\n• Number of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\n• Guardcall Tone: Directive\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 1315Z, 1.4a WAS HAILED ON GUARD (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g DEFENSE. ORDERS GIVEN: STANDARD CALL. 1.4a RESPONDED WITH STANDARD RESPONSE 1. NO IMPACT TO THE MISSION\n3.5c, (b)(6)\n[REDACTED]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0028 Approved for Release to AARO- FOUO / PA applies 03/16/26 000008"} {"doc_id":"02b95ebf74e34d54","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(b) (6)\n\n(b) (6)\n\nGood morning!\n\nThank you for your patience on this-- like I said, this was a first for me.\nUpon consulting internally here at HQ, our folks confirmed we do have the\nauthority to process this as a derivative classification review, instead of\na declassification request. Based upon the summary you provided below, I\nconcur with using this at the UNCLASSIFIED level in your product. Consider\nyour request approved.\n\nPlease let me know if there's anything else I can do for you!\n\nThanks,\n(b) (6)\nOSI CI Collections and Operations PM\nIntelligence Oversight PM\n(b) (6)\n(b) (6)"} {"doc_id":"02b95ebf74e34d54","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)\n\nGood morning,\n\nThank you for your request. Our process for declassifying IIRs is lengthy\nand requires AFOSI Commander signature so I'm exploring options akin to a\nsecurity review of the UNCLASS summary you have provided below. This is a\nfirst for me so I appreciate your patience as I try to streamline this\nrequest for you!\n\nThanks,\n(b) (6)\nOSI CI Collections and Operations PM\nIntelligence Oversight PM"} {"doc_id":"02b95ebf74e34d54","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"02b95ebf74e34d54","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)\n\nCURRENT CLASSIFICATION S//NF-REQUESTED CLASSIFICATION UNCLASSIFIED\n\nReported Appearance: An individual reported observing a large blue\nfeatureless triangular object with a solid, unwavering silhouette emitting\npowerful \"whitish blue\" light from multiple points along its perimeter.\n\nReported Behavior: The reporter described the object as \"hovering\"\nstationary above or near a national security facility for approximately\nthree minutes. They then reported observing it move to a position higher in\ntheir field of view. The reporter characterized the object's motion as\n\"backing up\" in a \"jerking\" or \"jumping\" manner inconsistent with \"smooth\"\njet propulsion. The individual reported that they observed the object for\napproximately eight minutes.\n\nOther Observations: The reporter commented that they could not discern\nwhether or how the object was controlled, could not identify its means of\npropulsion, and could not determine whether it had a defined \"front or\nrear.\" They stated that they \"didn't think\" the object was a drone.\n\nThe reporter also commented on behaviors and capabilities they did not\ndirectly observe. They stated that the object did not seem to travel along a\ndefined flight path, possess any \"photograph or data collection\ncapabilities,\" emit a \"vapor trail,\" or demonstrate \"cloaking capabilities.\"\n\n\nEvent Summary:\n\nLocation: Pacific Time Zone\n\nDate: March 2023\n\nTime of Day: Night\n\nDuration: Approx. 8 minutes\n\nReporter Type: Civilian\n\nObtained by: Personal cellular device\n\n\nReported Characteristics:\n\nAltitude: Not reported"} {"doc_id":"02b95ebf74e34d54","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Speed: Not reported\n\nSize: Large\n\nShape: Triangular\n\nColor: Blue\n\nMaterial: Not reported\n\nMarkings: Featureless\n\nBehavior: Emitting light, erratic movement\n\n\nThe IIR and draft report are attached.\n\nThis is a routine request, please confirm receipt.\n\n\nIf you have any questions, please contact me.\n\n[REDACTED]\nInformation Disclosure Analyst\nOffice of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security\n(b) (6)\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\n\n\n\nCLASSIFICATION: SECRET//NOFORN\n\n\nCLASSIFICATION: SECRET//NOFORN"} {"doc_id":"02b95ebf74e34d54","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"03038da43f8adc15","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nApproved for Release 2026\n\nSIGNATURE RECORD AND COVER SHEET\n\n1 NOV 1955\nASD 178\n\nDOCUMENT DESCRIPTION\nREGISTRY\nSOURCE\nAD/SC\nCIA CONTROL NO.\n115485\nDOC. NO.\nDOC. DATE\nDATE DOCUMENT RECEIVED\n1 NOV 1955\nCOPY NO. 6 of 6\nNUMBER OF PAGES 2\nLOGGED BY\nNUMBER OF ATTACHMENTS\nnone\n\nATTENTION: This form will be placed on top of and attached to each Top Secret document received by the Central Intelligence Agency or classified Top Secret within the CIA and will remain attached to the document until such time as it is downgraded, destroyed, or transmitted outside of CIA. Access to Top Secret matter is limited to Top Secret Control personnel and those individuals whose official duties relate to the matter. Top Secret Control Officers who receive and/or release the attached Top Secret material will sign this form and indicate period of custody in the left-hand columns provided. Each individual who sees the Top Secret document will sign and indicate the date of handling in the right-hand columns.\n\nREFERRED TO | RECEIVED | RELEASED | SEEN BY\nOFFICE | SIGNATURE | DATE | TIME | DATE | TIME | SIGNATURE AND OFFICE | DATE\nOSI | REDyze | 1 Nov | 1030 | | | Frank Winthrop | 1 Nov 55\n| | | | | | W. Lee | 1/11/55\n| | | | | | Michael Kelly OSI | 30 Oct 1955\n| | | | | | G Minard | 30 Oct 55\n\nNOTICE OF DETACHMENT: When this form is detached from Top Secret material it shall be completed in the appropriate spaces below and transmitted to Central Top Secret Control for record.\n\nDOWNGRADED | DESTROYED | DISPATCHED (OUTSIDE CIA)\nTO | BY (Signature) | TO\nBY (Signature) | WITNESSED BY (Signature) | BY (Signature)\nDATE | DATE | OFFICE | DATE\n\nFORM NO. 26 USE PREVIOUS EDITIONS. 1 APR 55 (40)\nTOP SECRET"} {"doc_id":"03038da43f8adc15","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Central Intelligence\n\nSUBJECT : Sightings of Flying Saucers or Unconventional Aircraft\n\n1. All four participants in the observation of the flying saucers or unconventional aircraft have now been debriefed and the following is a summary of their observations.\n\n2. The party was travelling by train from Bahn to Tiflis at the specific request of Senator Russell who tried to use rail transportation whenever it was at all feasible. The sightings were noted about ten minutes beyond Alyaty at 1910 hours when it was already dark. Senator Russell was resting alone in his compartment with the lights out when he noted a small greenish-yellow glowing ball rising quite rapidly. He informed the other members of the party who were occupying the other compartment and a few minutes later they too observed another object.\n\n3. Senator Russell never saw the form of the object only the luminescent ball. Mr. Efron saw only two lights resembling eyes. Colonel Hathaway saw a shadowy object with a single light in the middle at the top and a rotating light or lights similar to exhausts at the base. Senator Russell had the impression that the object could have been as small as a rocket although there were no objects available to produce a satisfactory scale and no trail was left by the rising ball. Mr. Gros and Colonel Hathaway considered the size of the object to be comparable to that of a U.S. jet fighter. However, Colonel Hathaway believes that the object did not resemble any aircraft, rocket or missile that he had ever seen. All observers agree on the impression that the object was rotating or whirling during its rise along its initial steep trajectory. Neither Senator Russell nor Mr. Gros noted any change in this trajectory, but Colonel Hathaway and Mr. Efron stated that the object altered its pattern to horizontal flight quite sharply. Neither Senator Russell, Colonel Hathaway nor Mr. Efron saw any objects on the ground with the exception of the search light, but Mr. Gros reported the presence of a triangular object with three lights which appeared to be ejected from a launching site.\n\n4. Based on the interviews so far, the only testimony which would support the existence of flying saucers or radically unconventional aircraft is that of Colonel Hathaway. All other\n\nT.S. 115485\nCopy 6 of 6"} {"doc_id":"03038da43f8adc15","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUBJECT: Sightings of Flying Saucers or Unconventional Aircraft\n\nobservations can probably be explained as steep climbing aircraft or missiles. Further discussions will probably be required before the matter can be completely resolved. In the meantime, however, the evidence does not appear sufficiently firm to warrant the conclusion that the Soviets have developed and have in operation a radically new type of aircraft.\n\nHERBERT SCOVILLE, JR.\nAssistant Director\nScientific Intelligence\n\nOSI:HScoville:gs (31 October 1955)\n\nDistribution\nOrig & 1 - fwd\n1 - DD/I\n1 - OCI\n1 - ASD/SI\n1 - GM/SI\n2 - AD/SI\n\nT.S. 115485\nCopy 2 of 2\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"03079193c7579072","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Misrep undefined-9629373\n\nNarrative\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nAT 0109Z, (b)(1)1.4a CONDUCTED SLR TAKE OFF FROM LGLR. (b)(1)1.4a PROCEEDED TO\nFRAGGED TASKING TO SUPPORT (b)(1)1.4a\n\nAT 0509Z, (b)(1)1.4a OBSERVED AN UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENON (SEE UAP 1).\n\nAT 0135Z, (b)(1)1.4a WAS 7-LINED TO SUPPORT (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a ARRIVED ON-STATION AT 0635Z,\nCHECKED IN WITH (b)(1)1.4a AND PERFORMED FMV/SIGINT COLLECTION AT 36R XV 19 (b)(1)1.4a\n63 (b)(1)1.4a (SEE ISR 1).\n\nAT 1504Z, (b)(1)1.4a RETURNED TO BASE. AT 2149Z, (b)(1)1.4a LANDED AT LGLR. FULL MOTION\nVIDEO WAS EXPLOITED BY GET. 20:40 MISSION HOURS, 08:29 FMV HOURS, 1X FMV\nTASKINGS PROSECUTED, 08:27 SIGINT HOURS, 1X SIGINT TASKINGS.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\n\n(S//RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: REL TO USA, FVEY\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MS\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20490125\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: [REDACTED]\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 603rd\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFSOC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 001\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"03079193c7579072","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 33 SOS\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): 24-024\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• ATO Mission Number: 4055\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: 56 SOIS\n• Wing: 27 SOW\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 AOC Det 1\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: 27 SOW\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 002\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"03079193c7579072","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 603 AOC\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination:\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator:\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data:\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator:\n• Chaff Designator:\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges:\n• Flare Designator:\n• Num Flares:\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM:\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 003\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"03079193c7579072","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Type of IR-Guided AAM:\n• Num IR-Guided AAM:\n• Gun Name or Designator:\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: -\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: AN/DAS-4\n• Additional Avionics: AH/GMESH/SANTA FE\n• Data Link: LINK 16\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): LGLR\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 250109:00ZJAN24\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): 4055\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): LGLR\n• Last Land Time: 252149:00ZJAN24\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 252159:00ZJAN24\n• Total Mission Time: 20 hours 40 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 250635:00ZJAN24\n• Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• JTAC Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 004\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"03079193c7579072","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Off Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 251504:00ZJAN24\n• Total Time On Station: 8 hours 29 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 250635:00ZJAN24\n• Time-off Station DTG: 251504:00ZJAN24\n• Aircraft Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Msn Type: AREC\n• Primary Sensor: FMV\n• Sensors Available: BLASPHEMY\n• Tasking Type: Planned\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): DATA MASKED\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 36RXV19 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed: Yes\n• Number of EEIs: 1\n• Global Campaign Plan:\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED]\nUPON ARRIVAL TO THE SP AT 0635Z, (b)(1)1.4a OBSERVED NO EEI RELATED ACTIVITY. FROM\n0635Z- 1353Z, (b)(1)1.4a CONDUCTED POL AND OBSERVED NSTR. FROM 1353Z-1500Z, (b)(1)1.4a\nCONDUCTED A 1X STOP FOLLOW ON 1X ADM IN A SILVER SUV. AT 1400Z, (b)(1)1.4a OBSERVED\nA LARGE WHITE BOX BEING TRANSFERRED FROM BLACK SUV TO WHITE VAN.\n[REDACTED]\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Supported Operation: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Precoord Time: -\n• Precoord Effectiveness: -\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 005\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"03079193c7579072","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLEAR WX\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: Yes\n• Gentext: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nSATISFACTORY\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 250509:00ZJAN24\n• UAP Event Type: UAP Incident\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations: NONE\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions: NONE\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Tail Number: (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 35SQT67 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: FL250\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory: 162\n• Observer Assessment of UAP: Benign\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: 176 KTS\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns):: NO\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters: NONE\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable): -\n• Operational Range: -\n• UAP Physical State: Solid\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n• UAP Propulsion Means: UNK\n• UAP Payload:\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNK\n• UAP Signatures: SWIR WHT\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP RF Frequency: -\n• UAP RF Duration: -\n• UAP Event Serial Number: 250509ZJAN2024-CENTCOM 001\n• UAP Effects on Persons: NO\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Effects on Equipment: NONE\n• Full Name:"} {"doc_id":"03079193c7579072","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Rank/Grade: SENIOR AIRMAN/E-4\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE): 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Observer Engagement of UAP (yes/no; if yes, describe): NONE\n• First Coordinate: 35SQT48 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• First Seen Radius: 20\n• Last Accuracy: Estimated\n• Last Coordinate: 35SPT62 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Last Seen Radius: 20\n• Kinetic Altitude Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Altitude: FL200\n• Kinetic Depth Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Depth: -\n• Kinetic Velocity Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Velocity:\n• Kinetic Trajectory Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Trajectory: W\n• UAP Date of DoD Acquisition: 250509:00ZJAN24\n• UAP Reaction to Observation, Interrogation, Engagement (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Anomalous Characteristics/ Behaviors: MAINTAINED STEADY FLIGHT PATH, INCREASED AND DECREASED ALTITUDE PROFILE, DID NOT CHANGE TRAJECTORY\n• First Accuracy: Estimated\n• Call Sign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• UAP First Seen Location:\n• UAP Last Seen Location:\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): ROUND DIAMOND SHAPE WITH STRAIGHT, NON MANUEVERABLE \"TAIL\"\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nAT 0509Z, (b)(1)1.4a OBSERVED 1X UAP WHILE IN TRANSIT. UPON INITIAL OBSERVATION, THE UAP WAS FLYING AT A SPEED OF APPROX 434 KNOTS. THE UAP APPEARED DIAMOND IN SHAPE WITH A NON-MANUEVERING PROBE AT THE BOTTOM. THE UAP ONLY APPEARED ON THE SWIR CAMERA. THE EVENT LASTED APPROX 2 MINUTES ENDING AT 0511Z, WITHOUT ANY OTHER INCIDENT OCCURING.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)"} {"doc_id":"034b25be252a7252","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n- 1 of 2 -\n[REDACTED]\nOFFICIAL RECORD\n[REDACTED]\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nDate of entry [REDACTED] 2026\n[REDACTED] On or about [REDACTED]/2026, FBI [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]received from [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] Special Agent [REDACTED] a written\nstatement co-signed by [REDACTED] Special Agent [REDACTED]\nThe statement will be attached to this FD-302 and is provided verbatim below\nfor ease of reading:\n\"Unidentified Aerial Object Observation Report evening of [REDACTED]26\n\"On [REDACTED] 2026, at approximately 1923 hours, [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]Special Agent [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] stationed at [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] called out a detection for a thermally elevated aerial\nobject located west of his position at an estimated bearing of 251 degrees.\nI, [REDACTED] Special Agent\n[REDACTED], and [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] Special Agent [REDACTED] stationed\nseveral miles to the west at [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] Based on this notification, I, accompanied by [REDACTED]\nran from the eastern side of our observation post to the western side in an\nattempt to collect further data related to the detection from Observation\nPost 6. We initiated a visual survey of the western horizon and almost\nimmediately observed a substantial, nonreflective, dark black triangular\nobject most resembling a delta wing drone. We estimated the object's\nwingspan at approximately nine to fifteen feet, its depth at six to nine\nfeet, and its thickness at one to two feet. I viewed the object through a\nhandheld thermal device and noted it appeared hotter than ambient\ntemperature with a completely consistent thermal signature across the entire\nairframe and no visible exhaust gases, while [REDACTED] tracked the object\nunaided for the duration of the sighting.\n\n\"We both observed the object ascend vertically over a ridge line situated\napproximately 3.2 miles west of our location on a heading of about 268\ndegrees. The object climbed to approximately 200 feet above the ridge line,\n[REDACTED]\nInvestigation on [REDACTED]/2026 at [REDACTED] United States [REDACTED]\nFile # [REDACTED] Date drafted [REDACTED]\nby [REDACTED]\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"034b25be252a7252","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] Statement of [REDACTED] SA [REDACTED] and\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED], On [REDACTED]/2026, Page 2 of 2\n\nthen transitioned from vertical to horizontal flight at a very significant\nvelocity, approaching our position, then descending southeast into the\n[REDACTED] along [REDACTED] We\nlost visual contact while the object was flying along this [REDACTED] at an\nestimated range of about 1.5 miles from our position. The total duration of\nthe sighting was approximately three seconds. Throughout the observation,\nneither [REDACTED] nor I detected any auditory output from the unmanned\naerial system.\n\n\"Co-signed SA [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"034b25be252a7252","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"034b25be252a7252","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"034b25be252a7252","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"034b25be252a7252","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"034b25be252a7252","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"034b25be252a7252","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"034b25be252a7252","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"034b25be252a7252","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"034b25be252a7252","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62- HQ 83894\nSECTION 2\nSERIALS 53-100\n#62-HQ-83894-2#\nSECTION 2\nSERIALS 53-100\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nMAR 2 1976 BY\nFOIPA #\nINVESTIGATION\nDESTROY\nDO NOT DESTROY\nFOIPA # 13166404\nUSE CARE IN HANDLING THIS FILE\nTransfer-Call 3421\nPICKETT STREET\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 2 53 100\n8/11/1274197\nRRP0031XH3\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO: Director, FBI - Attention: Assistant Director D. M. LADD\nFROM: SAC, San Francisco\nDATE: August 8, 1947\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n46103\nReference is made to my letter to the Bureau dated July 28, 1947 entitled as above forwarding a copy of a report furnished to me by Lieutenant Colonel DONALD SPRINGER, A-2, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California, setting forth the results of inquiries made by his office concerning the reported sightings of flying discs.\nAs of further interest to the Bureau in this regard, there are transmitted herewith photostatic copies of three letters dated August 4, 1947 and entitled \"Investigation of Flying Discs,\" furnished to me by Major WILLIAM R. GRAHAM, Deputy AC of S, A-2, Army Air Forces, Hamilton Field, California, who is acting in the absence of Lieutenant Colonel SPRINGER, enclosing copies of reports of additional reported sightings of flying discs by persons in Oregon and Arizona, together with the results of their investigations in that regard.\nIt is noted that these investigations were conducted prior to the time Bureau instructions were issued that our own Bureau would conduct inquiries into the reported sightings of flying discs.\nCopies of these reports are being forwarded to the Portland and Phoenix Offices for the completion of their files in connection with this subject.\nHMK:emb\nEnclosures - 3\ncc Portland (with enclosures - 3)\nPhoenix (with enclosures - 3)\nRECORDED & INDEXED\n162-83894-53\n37 AUG 14 1947\n55 OCT 6 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM: SAC, NEWARK\nDATE: August 13, 1947\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISC REPORTED AT HACKENSACK, NEW JERSEY AUGUST 3, 1947 - MISCELLANEOUS\nReference is made to the teletype from the Newark Division to the Bureau dated August 4, 1947 stating that a \"Flying Disc\" had been reported to have been seen at Hackensack, New Jersey on August 3 last by one CHARLES CASELLA, JR. and WILLIAM TRUEX.\nCHARLES CASELLA, JR., 287 Euclid Avenue, Hackensack, upon interview by Special Agent ARTHUR F. WILLIAMS of this Division, stated that on August 3 he had been standing with WILLIAM TRUEX, a soldier stationed at Fort Dix, observing a \"ham\" radio rig atop a two-story house on Simons Avenue, Hackensack. It was approximately 7:45 p.m., and they were in this vicinity for the purpose of meeting TRUEX's girlfriend, one JOYCE Mc FARLAND.\nTRUEX commented to CASELLA that a child had apparently lost its balloon. CASELLA looked and about a block or a half block away noticed a round, black object moving from south to north and east of the stop where he and TRUEX were standing. CASELLA noticed that it was moving too fast to be an ordinary balloon, but he could not discern whether it was globular in form or a disc. He said it was about thirty to forty inches in diameter moving north in a horizontal plane about two hundred yards above the top of the hill at Summit Avenue and Simons Avenue. It proceeded at a steady rate, emitted no rays, and was moving fast enough to require them to turn their heads steadily in order to follow it. TRUEX's girlfriend came out about fifteen seconds after they first sighted it. They pointed it out to her, and she said that it looked like a bird on the horizon so small. It faded out of sight shortly thereafter. CASELLA said that a line drawn along its apparent course of flight would go from the vicinity of Bendix, New Jersey to a point west of Westwood, New Jersey.\nCASELLA also said that a man on the porch across the street also noticed it and pointed it out to the women. CASELLA said that this man seemed excited but did nothing about it.\nCASELLA said that he was positive it was no optical illusion. He was not facing into the sun and saw the object clearly. He also said that he would have thought nothing of it except for the speed at which it was traveling.\nRECORDED 162-83894-53\n37 AUG 14 1947\nINDEXED\nAFW:EMC\n62-\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964\n63 OCT 1 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to Bureau August 13, 1947\n\nMiss JOYCE Mc FARLAND, 476 Simons Avenue, upon interview by Special Agent WILLIAMS, stated that the event in question occurred at about 7:30 on the evening of Sunday, August 3. She said that she was in the house when CASELLA or TRUEX called to her. She went out immediately, and they pointed out the object in question. She saw it just before it disappeared over the horizon, but she declared that it was in view from that time for approximately one minute. She said it was round and silver-blue in color and appeared to be revolving. She said that she did not recall making any comment that it might have been a bird and herself had no idea of what it could be. In view of the distance from which she noticed it, she said that it could not have been more than six inches in diameter but would have been much larger if she had been near to it. Miss Mc FARLAND said that she had never seen anything like it before.\n\nShe said that across the street the BOOTHS, mother and daughter, were the only people sitting on the porch and she, herself, did not notice anyone pointing toward the object in question. The only other person around, to her knowledge, was GLORIA TRUEX, sister of WILLIAM TRUEX, who remained in the house and did not see the object at all.\n\nMrs. WINFIELD S. BOOTH, 459 Simons Avenue, stated that she was on the porch on the evening in question with her mother but did not notice any unusual object in the sky nor had any man been present there to point out the object in question.\n\nThe following information was received from TRUEX through interview by Special Agent T. HOWARD WALDRON:\n\nPrivate WILLIAM A. TRUEX, RA 12282003, Company G, 2nd Battalion, 47th Infantry Regiment, 9th Division, Fort Dix, New Jersey, advised he was born April 12, 1930 at Jersey City, New Jersey and completed eight and one half years of school. He enlisted in the United States Army on May 29, 1947. His mother is Mrs. GRACE FIELDS of 88 Wales Avenue, River Edge, Bergen County, New Jersey. TRUEX stated that on Sunday, August 3, 1947, at 8:00 p.m., he was standing outside the home of his girlfriend, Miss JOYCE Mc FARLAND, 478 Simons Avenue, Hackensack, New Jersey, accompanied by CHARLES CASELLA of 287 Euclid Avenue, Hackensack, New Jersey, who is his sister's fiance. He said that he and CASELLA were looking at the radio antenna on a home near the 478 Simons Avenue address when they noticed an object"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"about two to three feet in diameter moving rapidly about two hundred yards off the ground. TRUEX said he thought at first it was a child's balloon, but when he noticed there was no wind and the object had no strings to it, he decided it was something else. He stated the object was moving in a steady, straight path, going north, and he said there was no exhaust or indication of any motive power for the object. TRUEX said they observed the object for fifteen or twenty seconds. He could not give a description of the object's color or the material it was composed of but said it looked more like a large, flat child's cup than anything else he could think of, as the object was oval on the top and came to a point on the bottom side. TRUEX said that CASELLA stated \"Maybe it's a flying saucer\". He said he had never seen anything move through the air quite like this object, and he had no idea where it came from.\n\nTRUEX stated that neither he nor CASELLA had had anything to drink, and there was sufficient light for them to observe the object very clearly.\n\nThe \"Flying Disc\" was reported by CASELLA to Sergeant JAMES PERONE of the Hackensack Police Department. Sergeant PERONE advised the writer that his Department had taken no further action nor had they received reports of the object in question from any other source. It may be noted that no other Police Department in the vicinity has brought to the attention of this Division any information regarding this matter.\n\n-3 -"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nAUG 5 1947\n\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI DETROIT 8-5-47 5-08 PM EST JOH\n\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\n\nUNSUBS, RAYMOND EDWARD LAND, MRS. LAURA LANE, INFORMATNTS, FLYING DISC, MISC. INFO RECEIVED FROM DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, MIDLAND, MICHIGAN, THAT ON JULY TEN LAST RAYMOND EDWARD LANE AN EMPLOYEE OF DOW AND SUBSIDIARY SINCE ABOUT NINETEEN TWENTY TWO, BROUGUTH SOME MATERIAL TO THEIR PHYSICS LABORATORY STATING THAT ABOUT FIVE FEETEEN PM JULY NINE LAST HE AND WIFE, LAURA LANE, WERE WALKING IN A FIELD OWNED BY DOW AND ABOUT A HUNDRED FEET AWAY HEARD A PUFF NOISE, TURNED AND SAW A BALL OF WHITE ABOUT THE SIZE OF A BUSHEL BAKET BURNING ABOUT A FOOT OFF THE GROUND. THE FIRE DIED OUT IMMEDIATELY AND LANE LATER SCOOPED UP A THREE INCH AREA OF FUSED SAND INTO A CAN AND TOOK THIS TO THE PHYSICS LAB. BOTH COMPLAINANTS INTERVIEWED. RAYMOND TELLING SUBSTANTIALLY SAME STORY BUT WIFE RELUCTANT TO TALK AND VERY INDEFINITE ON WHAT HAPPENED. THERE ARE MAKRED DISCREPANCIES IN THEIR STORY. DOW AUTHORITIES CONSIDERED STORY FANTASTIC BUT HAVE EXAMINED MATERIAL AND STATE CONTENTS TO BE ORDINARY SAND, NOT RADIO ACTIVE, BUT GIVING OFF AMMONIA GAS, A SMALL SILVER NUGGET ALMOT PURE EXCEPT FOR SAND MISED IN IT NOT RADIO ACTIVE, MELTED GRINDS SAND WHICH GIVES OFF AMMONIA ODOR, AND LITTLE DROPLETS OF SILVER MELTED IN SAND AND SOME OTHER GRAYISH COLOR IN MATERIAL WHICH IS RADIO ACTIVE. LEVEL OF RADIO ACTIVITY EXTREMELY LOW AND EMPLOYEE FORMERLY EMPLOYED BY GOVERNMENT AT LOS ALAMOS PROJECT STATES FUSED SAND HAS SOME CHARACTERISIC"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\n\nOF LOS ALAMOS SAND BUT NOT BELIEVED TO BE THE SAME. RAYMOND LAND KNOWN TO HAVE IN HIS POSSESSION SMALL QUANTITY OF LUMINOUS PAINT, RADIO ACTIVE, TO BE AN AMATEUR PHOTOGRAPHER, TO HAVE LIMITED KNOWLEDGE OF CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS FROM EMPLOYMENT AT DOW. LAND DESCRIBED AS VERY PECULIAR, SURELY, ANTAGONISTIC TO PLANT PROTECTION OFFICERS, INTERESTED IN PHOTOGRAPHY AND ELECTRICITY. LANE IS WHITE, BORN MAY SEVEN, NINETEEN NAUGHT TWO, AT FREESOIL, MICHIGAN, FIVE FEET NINE AND ONE HALF, ONE HUNDRED FORTY FIVE POUNDS, DARK BROWN HAIR, PARTLY BALD, SERVED US ARMY NINETEEN EIGHTEEN TO NINETEEN TWENTY THREE, CONVICTED NINETEEN TWENTY FOUR MIDLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN, FOR BURGLARY, SERVING SIXTY DAY SENTENCE. NEITHER PARTY ADMITS STORY IS A PRANK, BUT LANE HAS MENTIONED FLYING DISCS AND ROCKETS. ON INTERVIEW LANE WAS RELUCTANT TO DISCUSS MATTER AND NEITHER HE NOR HIS WIFE ARE ABLE TO LOCATE THE EXACT LOCATION WHERE MATERIAL WAS FOUND. ARMY AIR FORCES INTELLIGENCE AT SELFRIDGE FIELD, MICHIGAN, HAVE BEEN ADVISED. SUTEL IF BUREAU DESIRES MATERIAL FORWARDED TO FBI LABORATORY FOR EXAMINATION.\n\nO-CONNOR\n\nCORRECTION LINE ONE WORD FOUR SHOULD RAXXX READ - LANE\n\nEND\n\n6-16 PM OK FBI WASH DC WJR\n\nO"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAUG 5 6 18 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n[illegible]\nRECEIVED\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF B I\nAUG 30 1 24 PM '47\nRECEIVED\nAUG 6 4 42 PM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Mr. Ladd\nFROM : J. P. Coyne\nSUBJECT: UNKNOWN SUBJECTS;\nRaymond Edward Lane,\nMrs. Laura Lane - Informants;\nFLYING DISC\nMISCELLANEOUS\nDATE: August 8, 1947\nThere is attached a memorandum setting forth the pertinent\ninformation received by the Detroit Office from Raymond Edward Lane and\nMrs. Laura Lane relative to \"flying discs.\"\nRECOMMENDATION:\nIt is recommended that this material be personally delivered by\nthe Liaison Section to the appropriate contact in the War Department.\nAttachment\nRGF:MAW:EW\nRECORDED\n62-83894\nAUG 14 1947\n135\nSC Jacobus 8/11/47"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Mr. Ladd\nDATE: August 8, 1947\nFROM : J. P. Coyne\nSUBJECT: UNKNOWN SUBJECTS;\nRaymond Edward Lane,\nMrs. Laura Lane - Informants;\nFLYING DISC\nMISCELLANEOUS\nThere is attached a memorandum setting forth the pertinent\ninformation received by the Detroit Office from Raymond Edward Lane and\nMrs. Laura Lane relative to \"flying discs.\"\nRECOMMENDATION:\nIt is recommended that this material be personally delivered by\nthe Liaison Section to the appropriate contact in the War Department.\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nAUG 11 9 51 AM '47\nLIAISON SECTION\nRECEIVED\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nAUG 26 12 23 PM '47\nLIAISON SECTION\nRECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 8, 1947\nFLYING DISCS\nInformation was received from the Dow Chemical Company, Midland,\nMichigan, that on July 10, 1947, one Raymond Edward Lane, an employee of\nDow Chemical Company since about 1922, brought some material to their\nPhysics laboratory. He stated that about 5:15 p.m., July 9, he and his\nwife, Laura, were walking in a field when they heard a puff noise about\none hundred feet away. They turned and saw a ball of white about the size\nof a bushel basket burning approximately a foot off of the ground. The fire\ndied out immediately and later Lane scooped up a three inch area of fused\nsand into a can for examination at their laboratory.\nUpon interview by FBI Agents, Raymond told substantially the same\nstory, but Mrs. Lane was reluctant to talk and very indefinite about what\nhappened. There were marked discrepancies in their stories.\nDow authorities considered the story fantastic but have examined\nthe material and state contents are: ordinary sand, not radio active; but\ngiving off ammonia gas; a small silver nugget almost pure except for sand\nmixed in it, not radio active; melted or fused sand which gives off ammonia\nodor and little droplets of silver melted in sand and some grayish color\nmaterial which is radio active. The level of radio activity in this material\nis extremely low. An employee of Dow, formerly employed by the Government at\nLos Alamos Project, stated the fused sand has some characteristics of Los Alamos\nsand but he does not believe it is the same.\nRaymond Lane is known to have in his possession a small quantity of\nluminous paint, radio active, to be an amateur photographer and to have a\nlimited knowledge of chemistry and physics. He is described as very peculiar,\nsurly, antagonistic to plant protection officers and interested in photography\nand electricity. Lane is white, was born May 7, 1902, at Freesoil, Michigan.\nHe is 5' 9½\", weighs 145 pounds, has dark brown hair, partly bald, served in\nthe U.S. Army from 1918 to 1923. He was arrested for burglary in Midland County,\nMichigan, in 1924, for which he served a sixty day sentence.\nNeither Raymond Lane nor his wife will admit their story is a prank.\nHowever, neither are able to point out the exact location of this incident.\nThe Army Airforce Intelligence at Selfridge Field, Michigan, has been\nadvised and the material has been turned over to them.\nRGF:mae"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nAUG 8 1947\nTELEMETER\nWASH 9 FROM CGO 8-8-47 800 PM RLS\nDIRECTOR \"URGENT\"\nFLYING DISC SIGHTED BY MRS. ROBERT LITTLE, SECURITY MATER X.\nCHICAGO HERALD AMERICAN TODAY REPORTED THAT LITTLE OF SIX THREE TWO\nSEVEN HARPER AVENUE CHICAGO REPORTED SEEING A DISC THREE THIRTY AM\nTODAY SAILING ABOVE LAKE MICHIGAN OFF JACKSON PARK BEACH. LITTLE\nUNAVAILABLE FOR INTERVIEW TODAY. FATHER IN LAW JOSEPH REINER,\nSIX THREE TWO SEVEN HARPER AVENUE, ADVISED LITTLE SIGHTED DISC OVER\nA MONTH AGO AND SHE IS EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE. NO FURTHER INQUIRY\nCONTEMPLATED.\nMC SWAIN\nINDEXED\nRECORDED\nSE 17\n62-83894\n15 AUG 12 1947\nG. I. R. -9\nEND ACK"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAUG 8 9 28 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nTELEMETER\n\nNL PD\nNEWYORK NY JUL 5\nMAJOR PAUL GAYNOR\nAAF HQTS WASHDC\nFOR FURTHER DETAILS CONCERNING FLYING DISKS SUGGEST IMMEDIATE CONTACT OF MR. RICHARD F SHAVER LILY LAKE ILLINOIS WHO MAY HAVE IMPORTANT INFORMATION CONCERNING THEIR ORIGIN\nUNSIGNED\n651P."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : D. M. LADD\nFROM : E. G. Fitch\nDATE: 7/21/47\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nColonel Carl Golbranson of the Intelligence Division of the War Department advised Special Agent S. W. Reynolds of the Liaison Section that the War Department has received a telegram, dated New York, New York, July 5, as follows:\n\n\"FOR FURTHER DETAILS CONCERNING FLYING DISKS SUGGEST IMMEDIATE CONTACT OF MR. RICHARD F. SHAVER LILY LAKE ILLINOIS WHO MAY HAVE IMPORTANT INFORMATION CONCERNING THEIR ORIGIN.\"\n\nColonel Golbranson furnished Mr. Reynolds with a copy of the memorandum entitled \"Report on Flying Saucers,\" dated July 7, 1947, addressed to Commanding General, 32d AAF Base Unit, Bolling Field, Washington, D. C., from John D. Schindler, Jr., a copy of which is attached to this memorandum. The attached memorandum sets forth information and statistics regarding two reportings of incidents of flying disks. There is also attached hereto a map of the Illinois River area which was furnished to Mr. Reynolds by Colonel Golbranson. Colonel Golbranson stated that according to this map the incidents reported in the attached memorandum are in the general vicinity of Lily Lake, which was given as the address of Mr. Richard F. Shaver in the anonymous telegram received by the War Department.\n\nColonel Golbranson advised that in view of the fact that the observation of the flying saucers was made on July 7th and the date of the unsigned telegram is July 5th, together with the proximity of Lily Lake to the points where the objects were observed, he desired the Bureau conduct some investigation of Shaver to determine whether or not he has any information pertaining to the origin of the flying saucers.\n\nMr. Reynolds advised Colonel Golbranson that his request would be made known to you and the results of any investigation would be brought to his attention.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\nIt is recommended that the field be directed to make inquiries regarding Shaver and, if deemed advisable, interview him regarding any information that he has relative to flying disks. The results of any investigation should be forwarded to the Liaison Section for delivery to the Intelligence Division of the War Department.\n\nAttachments\n\nSWR:AJB"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Olavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nSAC, Chicago\nDirector, FBI\nFLYING DISCS\n\nAugust 16, 1947\n\nThe War Department has furnished this Bureau with the following telegram dated July 5 at New York, New York:\n\n\"FOR FURTHER DETAILS CONCERNING FLYING DISKS SUGGEST IMMEDIATE CONTACT OF MR. RICHARD F. SHAVER LILY LAKE ILLINOIS WHO MAY HAVE IMPORTANT INFORMATION CONCERNING THEIR ORIGIN.\"\n\nThe War Department has furnished a memorandum entitled \"Report on Flying Saucers\", dated July 7, 1947, addressed to Commanding General, 32d AAF Base Unit, Bolling Field, Washington, D. C., from John D. Schindler, Jr., two copies of which are attached. The War Department has stated that the incidents referred to in the attached memorandum are in the general vicinity of Lily Lake, which was given as the address of Richard F. Shaver in the above telegram.\n\nIt is, therefore, desired that the Chicago Field Division conduct appropriate inquiries regarding Shaver, and in the event such inquiries do not reveal information indicating that he should not be interviewed, he should be interrogated for any information he might have relative to flying discs. It is desired that this matter be handled as soon as possible and the Bureau promptly advised.\n\nEnclosure\n\nRGF:mae"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : FBI\nFROM : WDGS, US BRANCH\nDATE: 16 July 47\nSUBJECT: RICHARD F. SHAVER\n\n1. Attached hereto:\na. Copy of unsigned telegram received by HQ. AAF 9 July 1947, in which it is indicated that Richard F. Shaver, Lilly Lake, Illinois may have information concerning the origin of the \"flying saucers\".\nb. Copy of a report on flying saucers which were observed by four witnesses while in flight in two airplanes over southern Wisconsin.\nc. Map with indications as to proximity of the locations where the flying saucers were reported to have been seen in relation to Lily Lake, Ill.\n2. In view of the fact the observation of the flying saucers was made corresponds closely with the date of the unsigned telegram, and considering the proximity of Lily Lake to the points where the objects were observed, it is requested that Mr Shaver be investigated to determine whether or not he has information pertaining to the origin of Flying Saucers.\n\nmemo to Ladd 7/21/47 SWR\nRECORDED INDEXED 130\n162-83894"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"7 July 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Report on Flying Saucers.\n\nTO:\tCommanding General\n\t32d AAF Base Unit\n\tBolling Field\n\tWashington, D. C.\n\n1. Following are statistics regarding reports by four witnesses while in flight in two airplanes.\n\n2. Weather CAVU. Visibility exceptionally good. Scattered altocumulus 6000 feet.\n\n3. First report:time 1145 hours CST. Alt. of observers 800 feet above the ground. Altitude of saucer 4000 feet MSL. Observed period - First sighted over Koshkonong, Wisconsin. Flight was observed from town of Koshkonong to Elkhorn, Wisconsin. This flight covered twenty-five (25) miles in fifteen (15) seconds, which is a speed of six thousand (6000) miles per hour.\n\n4. Second report: Time 1430 hours CST. Altitude of observers thirty-five hundred feet (3500) MSL. Altitude of saucer twenty-five hundred feet (2500). Observation period. Observers at East Troy, Wisconsin, flight observed from Eagle, Wisconsin to Muskego, Wisconsin. This flight covered twenty-two (22) miles in twenty (20 seconds, which is a speed of three thousand nine hundred sixty (3960) miles per hour.\n\n5. Flight maneuvers: First observation-saucer descended vertically edgewise through altocumulus clouds, stopped at four thousand (4000) feet and assumed horizontal position and proceeded in horizontal flight from a horizontal position for fifteen (15) seconds covering twenty-five (25) miles and again stopped and disappeared. S econd observation: Observed in horizontal flight in a horizontal attitude for a period of twenty (20) seconds covering twenty-two (22) miles. By the time the pilot had removed his camera from the glove compartment of his plane, the saucer disappeared and again reappeared approximately ten (10) miles farther along its course after six (6) seconds making its final disappearance.\n\n6. The first two observers were an instructor and a student, having just taken off from Elkhorn Airport. The second two observers, one being Capt. R. J. Southey, Wing Supply Officer and a passenger.\n\n62-83894-58\n\nENCLOSURE John D. Schindler, Jr.\nMaj. Air Corps, AAF-GAP Liaison Officer,"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI SEATTLE\t8-6-47\t7-13 PM PST\nDIRECTOR FBI\tURGENT\n\nFLYING DISCS, S. M. - X. RETEL PORTLAND TO DIRECTOR, SAN FRANCISCO, AND SEATTLE AUGUST FIVE LAST. INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS MCCORD FIELD, WN., ADVISE THAT IN THEIR OPINION AND FROM THEIR INVESTIGATION THERE IS NO QUESTION OF THE CRASH OF THE B- TWENTYFIVE AT KELSO, WN. APPROXIMATELY TWO FIFTY A. M., AUGUST ONE LAST HAVING BEEN CAUSED BY ANY SABOTAGE. THEY STATE THEIR INVESTIGATION INDICATES THE LEFT ENGINE BURNED OUT AN EXHAUST STACK WHICH CAUSED THE WING TO BURN AND BREAK OFF. THE LEFT WING AS IT BROKE OFF TORE OFF THE TAIL AND THE PLANE CRASHED INTO THE GROUND KILLING CAPT. DAVIDSON AND LT. BROWN INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS OF THE FOURTH AIR FORCE WHO WERE RETURNING FROM MCCORD FIELD, WN., TO HAMILTON FIELD, CALIFORNIA. THE CREW CHIEF AND A HITCHHIKER PARACHUTED TO SAFETY FROM THE PLANE. ONLY FOUR MEMBERS WERE ABOARD THE PLANE, DAVIDSON AND BROWN BEING PILOT AND CO- PILOT AND HAD NO CHANCE TO ESCAPE WHEN THE WING BROKE OFF. LT. COL. DONALD L. SPRINGER, A- TWO [REDACTED] OFFICER FOR THE FOURTH AIR FORCE, HAMILTON FIELD, CALIFORNIA, ADVISED THAT CAPTAIN DAVIDSSON AND BROWN WERE SENT FROM HAMILTON FIELD TO INTERVIEW HAROLD A. DAHL AND FRED CRISMAN AT TACOMA, WN., REGARDING THEIR REPORT OF SEEING SOME FLYING DISCS OVER MAURY ISLAND, WN., AND THAT THEY OBTAINED SOME OF THE DISC FRAGMENTS. CRISMAN AND DAHL ARE PARTNERS IN A LUMBER BUSINESS AT TACOMA, WASHINGTON."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\nCAPTAIN DAVIDSON AND LT. BROWN ON THURSDAY, JULY [REDACTED] THIRTYFIRST LAST INTERVIEWED DAHL, CRISMAN, KENNETH ARNOLD, FROM BOISE, IDAHO, WHO WAS ONE OF THE FIRST THAT REPORTED SEEING FLYING DISCS AND EMIL H. SMITH, UNITED AIRLINES PILOT FROM SEATTLE, WN., WHO ALSO REPORTED SEEING FLYING DISCS. THIS INTERVIEW TOOK PLACE AT THE [REDACTED] WINTHROP HOTEL ON THE AFTERNOON OF JULY [REDACTED] THIRTYFIRST LAST. CAPTAIN DAVIDSON AND LT. BROWN WERE RETURNING TO HAMILTON FIELD FOR AIRFORCE DAY AND HAD WITH THEM SOME OF THE DISC FRAGMENTS AS REPORTED BY DAHL AND CRISMAN.\n\nREPORTER PAUL LANTZ OF TACOMA TIMES, AND UNITED PRESS WIREMAN TED MORELLO OF TACOMA, RECEIVED ANONYMOUS PHONE CALLS JULY THIRTYFIRST AND AUGUST FIRST LAST REGARDING THE MEETING AT THE WINTHROP HOTEL OMER THE DISCS FRAGMENTS AND THAT THE B- TWENTYFIVE WHICH CRASHED THE MORNING OF [REDACTED] AUGUST ONE WAS [REDACTED] SABOTAGED OR SHOT DOWN. INFORMATION AS YET NOT VERIFIED INDICATED THE ENTIRE STORY STARTED BY DAHL AND CRISMAN POSSIBLY TO PROMOTE SALE OF SLAG FOUND IN A GRAVEL PIT ON MAURY ISLAND, WN. NO INFORMATION AVAILABLE AS YET AS TO THE IDENTITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO MADE THE ANONYMOUS PHONE CALL TO THE TACOMA TIMES AND THE UNITED PRESS, DAHL AND CRISMAN WILL BE INTERVIEWED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. INVESTIGATION CONTINUING.\n\nWILCOX\n\nEND\n\n11-33 PM OK FBI WA GH"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAUG 6 11 34 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nSEP 15 9 01 AM '47\nRECEIVED\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nJUL 22 10 09 AM '47\nRECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CC - 150\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nAugust 14, 1947\n\nTO: COMMUNICATIONS SECTION.\nSAC, Seattle URGENT\nTransmit the following message to:\nREURTEL AUGUST TWELVE. IT IS NOTED FROM INTERROGATION OF EMIL SMITH, SMITH CLAIMS THAT DURING THE CONFERENCE ON JULY THIRTY ONE THAT DAHL AND CHRISMAN APPARENTLY REPEATED THEIR FALSE STORY ABOUT THE MATERIAL BEING FRAGMENTS OF A FLYING DISC AND ONLY ON SATURDAY NIGHT AUGUST SECOND DID DAHL ADMIT THAT THE STORY WAS A HOAX. IF SUCH IS THE CASE IT WOULD APPEAR EITHER SMITH OR ARNOLD MADE THE ANONYMOUS PHONE CALLS SINCE THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN UNDER THE IMPRESSION AT THAT TIME THAT THE MATERIAL FURNISHED TO CAPTAIN DAVIDSON AND LIEUTENANT BROWN WAS ACTUALLY PARTS OF A FLYING DISC. IT WOULD ALSO APPEAR THAT DAHL AND CHRISMAN DID NOT ADMIT THE HOAX TO THE ARMY INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS BECAUSE IF THEY HAD DONE SO THE OFFICERS PROBABLY WOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN THE ALLEGED FRAGMENTS WITH THEM ON THEIR FATAL FLIGHT. THIS MATTER SHOULD BE CLEARED UP UPON REINTERVIEW WITH DAHL AND CHRISMAN. WHEN THIS POINT CLARIFIED NO FURTHER INVESTIGATION NECESSARY.\n\nHOOVER\n\nRGF:mjp\n\nRECORDED\nFBI\nAUG 15 1947\n62-83894\nSENT VIA\n6:51 PM\nPer"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"F.B.I.\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Sirs -\nI was wondering whether these rockets in which the young students are sending mail or messages from California to Arizona would have any connection with the so called Flying Saucers\nFlying Saucers\nMRS ARTHUR DOUGLASS ANDERSON\n\nMrs. Arthur Douglass Anderson\n16 Medlney Road\nSpringhaven\nChester\nPa\n\nac phila\n8/1/47\nWRC\nJuly 9/1947."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 1, 1947\n\nMrs. Arthur Douglass Anderson\n16 Medbury Road\nSpringhaven, Chester, Pennsylvania\n\n62-83894-61\nDear Mrs. Anderson:\n\nThis will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated\nJuly 9, 1947.\n\nAfter a careful review of the contents of this letter\nit was ascertained that the information contained therein would\nprobably be of interest to the War Department, therefore, I have\ntaken the liberty of furnishing this information to that agency.\n\nYour interest in writing as you did is indeed appreciated.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Carson\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Hendon\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 9\nAUG 2 1947 P.M.\nWVC:mjp\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\ncc - Philadelphia\n(There is no identifiable information in the Bureau files concerning the writer of this letter.)\nThis letter referred to \"flying saucers.\""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 10\nFlying Discs\n\nGentlemen-\n\nEnclosed you have a clipping which speaks for itself. Had nothing better to do so I tried to decode it for a joke. My decoded version is correct it's clear joke - dead one\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED\n62-83894-61X\nF B I\nJUL 14 1947\n\nENCL. ATTACHED\nENCL.\nEx-6\nAck Rec\ncc wp 7-21-47 WVC"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tired of human nonsense\nDon't await Atomic war.\nDisrupting solar system so sent flying discs and will set up world order under - late this year.\n\nPlease advise\n\nVery sincerely\nMildred Sarbanis\nMILDRED SARBANIS\n\nADDRESS\nMRS. A.G. SARBANIS\n66 NOTRE DAME AVE.\nHICKSVILLE, L.I., N.Y.\nTEL. 15281 HICKSVILLE, L.I. (NOT LISTED)"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"L-48a\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nLABORATORY\n\nDate 1/17 1947\n\n___Mr. Harbo 7639\n___Mr. Long 7639\n___Mr. Parsons 7639\n___Mr. Baughman 7121\n___Mr. Conrad 7140\n___Mr. Downing 7630\n___Mr. Sizoo 7601\n___Miss Frawley 7639\n___Miss Keough 7639\n___Miss Mills 7635\n___ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 7th Floor\n___PERSONNEL RECORDS 6635\n✓M Adjustance\nRoom No. 1732\n\nNo comments. Decode is substantially as set forth in letter.\n\nFiled\nCRYPTANALYSIS SECTION\nROOM 7630"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ND-6\n\nSECURITY DIVISION - FBI\nINTERNAL SECURITY SECTION\n\n7/16/47\n\n___MR. STRICKLAND\n___MR. DeFORD\n\nSUPERVISORS\n\n___Mr. Ackerman\n___Mr. Baumgardner\n___Mr. Blakesley\n___Mr. Bly\n___Mr. Brown\n___Mr. Casper\n___Mr. Collier\n___Mr. Costello\n___Mr. Donohue\n___Mr. Fletcher\n___Mr. Harvey\n___Mr. Hayden\n\n___Mr. Howe\n___Mr. Jennings\n___Mr. Jones\n___Mr. McAndrews\n___Mr. Meehan\n___Mr. Milnes\n___Mr. Powers\n___Mr. Ranstad\n___Mr. Smith\n___Mr. Turner\n___Mr. Whitson\n___Mr. Winterrowd\n___Mr.\n\n___MISS\n___ROOM\n___Mrs. Dorset, 1736\n___Mrs. Walch, 1736\n___Miss Arnold, 1742\n___Miss Niedjelski, 1649\n___Typists, 1641\n___Correct\n___Redate\n\n___RECORDS SECTION\n___Send file\n___Bring file up-to-date\n___Place on Record\n___Place on Record and Return\n___Indicate index reference\n___Please call me\n___Please see me\n___Note and return\n\nDo you have any comments to make re attached before it is accumulated?\n\nFiled\nSUPERVISOR Richard Lovland\nROOM 1732"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 2 3 4 5 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4\nDITER FO NUHMA SOESNENN TWON\n3 2 5 4 1 2 1 3 2 4 5 1 2 2 3 4 1\nTIRED OF HUMAN NONSENSE WONT\n\n1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5\nLATWA MOTCIA WRA RUSPIDGNIT DREOR\n4 3 6 3 2 1 5 4 1 3 6 5 3 1 2 4 10 9 8 7 4 2 1 3 5\nAWAIT ATOMIC WAR DISRUPTING ORDER\n\n1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5\nLASOR STEYMS SO STEN YLFNIG SKIDS\n3 4 1 2 5 6 4 1 2 3 5 1 2 1 3 4 2 3 2 1 5 4 6 4 3 1 2 5\nSOLAR SYSTEM SO SENT FLYING DISKS\n\n1 2 3 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5\nDAN WLIL EST UP WLORD DREOR NERUD\n2 3 1 1 3 2 4 2 1 3 1 2 1 3 4 2 5 4 2 1 3 5 4 1 5 2 3\nAND WILL SET UP WORLD ORDER UNDER\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3\nTIRMANAS TEAL HIST ARYE\n4 5 3 1 2 7 6 8 4 3 1 2 4 1 2 3 3 4 1 2\nMARTIANS LATE THIS YEAR"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COUNTY IRRITANT\nfrom our Mail Box\nCalling for Decoders\nBellmore—About nine at night on July 4th I received the following shortwave message in code, origin unknown. I kept listening, and about an hour later the message was repeated letter for letter. I can't figure out what it means, but here it is:\nDITER FO NUHMA SOESNENN TWON LATWA MOTCIA WRA RUSPIDGNIT DREOR LASOR STEYMS SO STEN YLFNIG SKIDS DAN WLIL EST UP WLORD DREOR NERUD TIRMANAS TEAL HIST ARYE.\n—Radio Ham.\n(Neither can we, but we hope it's legal.—Ed.)"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REER\npattern which other might do well to copy, ed here in pictures. stra's president, Dr. costuming by making anikin doll. Her collespecial interest in the\nely-assorted sources as y studied and histori-\nl but fashionable lady tanding, giving painsAs coiffure was shown shown below, doesn't earranged to the style"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED 62-83894-61X\nJuly 21, 1947\nMrs. A. C. Sarbanis\n66 Notre Dame Avenue\nWicksville, Long Island, New York\nDear Mrs. Sarbanis:\nI wish to acknowledge receipt of your letter and enclosure dated July 10, 1947.\nI have instructed the Special Agent in Charge of our New York Office to have a Special Agent call upon you for the purpose of obtaining further information in connection with this matter.\nYour interest in calling this information to my attention is indeed appreciated.\nSincerely yours,\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\ncc - New York (With incoming). There is no identifiable information in the files of the Bureau concerning the writer of this letter. The decoding of the message on the newspaper clipping was referred to the Laboratory, who subsequently advised that the writer's decoding was substantially correct. There is being set forth below the results of the Laboratory's decoding:\n\"TIRED OF HUMAN NONSENSE WONT AWAIT ATOMIC WAR DISRUPTING ORDER SOLAR SYSTEM SO SENT FLYING DISKS AND WILL SET UP WORLD ORDER UNDER MARTIANS LATE THIS YEAR\".\nThe New York Office should interview the writer of this letter to ascertain from what newspaper the clipping in question was obtained. Thereafter, contact should be made with this newspaper to ascertain the identity of the person who sent in the coded message. This individual must be thoroughly interrogated to obtain all possible information surrounding the alleged receipt of the coded message. The Bureau should be promptly advised of the results of these inquiries.)"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. E. A. TAMM\n\nFROM : MR. D. M. LADD\n\nDATE: August 15, 1947\n\nSUBJECT:\n\nFlying discs\n\nThe Director advised on August 14, 1947, that the Los Angeles papers were carrying headlines indicating that Soviet espionage agents had been instructed to determine the facts relative to the flying discs. The article carried a Washington date line and indicated that Red espionage agents had been ordered to solve the question of the flying discs, the Russians being of the opinion that this might be some new form of defense prefected by the American Military. The article further recalled that during the recent war pieces of tin foil had been dropped in the air for the purpose of off setting the value of radar being used by the enemy forces and that these aluminum discs might be a new development along this line. The Director inquired as to whether the Bureau had any such information.\n\nI informed him that I had never heard of any information indicating that Soviet espionage agents had been instructed to obtain such information.\n\nA check with the officials at G-2, ONI and at the Air Corps Intelligence was made and it was found that they had no information relative to such a story.\n\nIn accordance with the Director's instructions, I advised Mr. Nichols that in the event any inquiries were made concerning such a story, that the story should be flatly denied in so far as the FBI was concerned.\n\nDML:FA\n\nRECORDED 62-83894-62\nEX-42\n32 AUG 19 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : D. M. Ladd\n\nFROM : E. G. Fitch\n\nDATE: August 18, 1947\n\nSUBJECT:\n\nReference is made to your telephonic conversation with the Director on Wednesday of last week, at which time the Director advised that Los Angeles papers carried under a Washington date line an article indicating the Soviet espionage agents in the United States are under instruction to solve the flying discs. Such instructions were believed to be based on the assumption that the flying discs were a secret weapon of the Army or Navy. The article attributed the source of its information to a Federal investigative agency.\n\nPursuant to your instructions, liaison representatives have contacted the Headquarters of Military Intelligence, the Headquarters of the Air Forces Intelligence, Office of Naval Intelligence and CIG. All agencies denied any knowledge of the flying discs, as well as any knowledge of the basis for this article.\n\nEGF:OME\n\nRECORDED 62-83894-63\nEX-29\n36 AUG 20 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED LIAISON SECTION AUG 25 1 12 PM '47 FBI US DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED-NICHOLS FBI US DEPT OF JUSTICE AUG 18 5 22 PM '47\n\nRECEIVED FBI MR. JONES"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Mr. D. M. Ladd\n\nFROM : Mr. J. P. Coyne\n\nDATE: August 14, 1947\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nThere are attached two copies of a blind memorandum setting forth the facts relative to the reported air crash of two AAF officers investigating flying disc complaints.\n\nRECOMMENDATION\n\nIt is recommended that a copy of this memorandum be furnished by the Liaison Section to the Air Force Intelligence.\n\nAttachment\n\nRGF:mjp\n\nRECORDED 62-83894-64\n15 AUG 19 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : BUREAU\nFROM : SAC, PORTLAND\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nDATE: 8-23-47\n\nThe following investigation was conducted at Canyonville and\nMyrtle Creek, Oregon on August 12, 1947.\n\nRAY VIRGIL HATFIELD, Route 1, Box 195, Roseburg, Oregon, operator\nof the Tri City Airport, Myrtle Creek, Oregon, advised that on 8-6-47 at\napproximately 6:15 PM while instructing a student in a take off at the airport,\nhe noticed an object east of Myrtle Creek which appeared to be from 5,000 to\n8,000 feet in the air. The sky was completely clear and visibility was\nexcellent. He stated that the object glistened and appeared to be of aluminium\nsheeting. Upon noticing it he had immediately taken over the controls of the\nplane which at that time was at 400 feet, and proceeded East in an attempt to\nfurther observe the object. He advised that the object appeared to be\nclimbing and traveling East at a high rate of speed which he estimated on a\ncomputer in his plane as 1,000 miles per hour. He believed the object to be\nspherical in shape and recalled noticing a darker object to the right the first\ntime he saw it. He observed no vapor trails nor did he hear any noise from the\nobject. After searching the area for approximately 10 minutes HATFIELD and\nhis student NOBLE ELLISON returned to the airport and made another landing and\ntake off. In practically the same position at 400 feet altitude, both ELLISON\nand HATFIELD saw the object in approximately the same position as seen before.\nHe estimated the sphere to be 30 feet in diameter and stated when they first\nobserved it it appeared to be so near he could fly right to it. However, the\nobject sighted the second time disappeared in the same manner as the first had.\n\nIt is noted that HATFIELD served as a Lieutenant JG in the U. S. Naval\nAir Corps for about 3 1/2 years, flying constantly on the Atlantic submarine patrol.\nHe is a reputable citizen in Douglas County and is reported to be a qualified\npilot.\n\nMr. NOBLE ELLISON, Myrtle Creek, Oregon, verified the above information\nas furnished by HATFIELD, stating that the first object sighted had been\ncalled to his attention when HATFIELD took over the controls of the plane at\nabout 400 feet following his take off, but that they had both sighted the\nobject on the second take off at the same time. ELLISON described the object\nas a \"silver ball or balloon\" which he believed to be 8 miles east of Myrtle\nCreek, traveling East, and climbing very fast until it disappeared in approximately\n45 seconds. ELLISON estimated the sphere as being 50 feet in diameter and\nstated in his opinion the second object appeared to climb straight up.\n\n63SEP 30 1947\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964\nRECORDED 62-83894-65\nINDEXED 135\nEX-34"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : BUREAU\nFROM : SAC, PORTLAND\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nDATE: 8-23-47\n\nThe following investigation was conducted at Canyonville and\nMyrtle Creek, Oregon on August 12, 1947.\n\nRAY VIRGIL HATFIELD, Route 1, Box 195, Roseburg, Oregon, operator\nof the Tri City Airport, Myrtle Creek, Oregon, advised that on 8-6-47 at\napproximately 6:15 PM while instructing a student in a take off at the airport,\nhe noticed an object east of Myrtle Creek which appeared to be from 5,000 to\n8,000 feet in the air. The sky was completely clear and visibility was\nexcellent. He stated that the object glistened and appeared to be of aluminium\nsheeting. Upon noticing it he had immediately taken over the controls of the\nplane which at that time was at 400 feet, and proceeded East in an attempt to\nfurther observe the object. He advised that the object appeared to be\nclimbing and traveling East at a high rate of speed which he estimated on a\ncomputer in his plane as 1,000 miles per hour. He believed the object to be\nspherical in shape and recalled noticing a darker object to the right the first\ntime he saw it. He observed no vapor trails nor did he hear any noise from the\nobject. After searching the area for approximately 10 minutes HATFIELD and\nhis student NOBLE ELLISON returned to the airport and made another landing and\ntake off. In practically the same position at 400 feet altitude, both ELLISON\nand HATFIELD saw the object in approximately the same position as seen before.\nHe estimated the sphere to be 30 feet in diameter and stated when they first\nobserved it it appeared to be so near he could fly right to it. However, the\nobject sighted the second time disappeared in the same manner as the first had.\n\nIt is noted that HATFIELD served as a Lieutenant JG in the U. S. Naval\nAir Corps for about 3 1/2 years, flying constantly on the Atlantic submarine patrol.\nHe is a reputable citizen in Douglas County and is reported to be a qualified\npilot.\n\nMr. NOBLE ELLISON, Myrtle Creek, Oregon, verified the above information\nas furnished by HATFIELD, stating that the first object sighted had been\ncalled to his attention when HATFIELD took over the controls of the plane at\nabout 400 feet following his take off, but that they had both sighted the\nobject on the second take off at the same time. ELLISON described the object\nas a \"silver ball or balloon\" which he believed to be 8 miles east of Myrtle\nCreek, traveling East, and climbing very fast until it disappeared in approximately\n45 seconds. ELLISON estimated the sphere as being 50 feet in diameter and\nstated in his opinion the second object appeared to climb straight up."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"He advised that he did not observe any evidence of motion such as\nvapot or trails, etc. and could hear no noise over the noise of his\nown ship.\n\nInvestigation in the vicinity of Myrtle Creek, Oregon, has\nfailed to reveal any other person sighting the objects reported by\nHATFIELD and ELLISON. No further investigation is being conducted.\n\nPJM:MB\n62-1531\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\n1947\n\nThe Director\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Carroll\nMr. Coyne\nMr. Fletcher\nMr. Laughlin\nMr. McCabe\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Nease\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Tyler\n\nRecords Section\nStamp and mail\nPrepare tickler\nCall file\n\nSee Me\nCall me re this\nNote and return\n\nMr. R. G. Fletcher\nRoom\n\nMiss Gandy\nMiss Gray\nMiss Lyon\nMiss Artley\n\ncheck with Army Air Force\n\nEdward A. Tamm\n5734"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nAUG 21 11 01 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI BUTTE 8-20-47 3-22 PM LB\nDIRECTOR URGENT\nFLYING DISCS. BETWEEN NINE THIRTY AND NINE FORTY FIVE PM LAST NIGHT, AUGUST NIMETEENTH, MR. AND MRS. H. H. HEDSTROM, THIRD AVENUE NORTH, TWIN FALLS, IDAHO, WHILE SITTING ON THE FRONT PORCH WITH MRS. HENRY SCHULTZ, OBSERVED AN OBJECT RESEMBLING A FLYING SAUCER TRAVELING VERY RAPIDLY FROM THE SOUTHWEST TO THE NORTHEAST SECTION OF THIS CITY. ABOUT TEN MINUTES LATER, ALL OF THESE INDIVIDUALS SAW TEN SIMILAR OBJECTS PROCEEDING RAPIDLY IN THE SAME DIRECTION IN THE FORM OF A TRIANGLE. AS THIS GROUP OF OBJECTS WAS ABOUT TO DISAPPEAR IN THE OVERCAST SKY, THREE OF THE OBJECTS ON THE LEFT FLANK PEELED OFF AND PROCEEDED IN A NORTHERLY DIRECTION. THE REMAINING OBJECTS IN THE TRIANGULAR FORMATION APPEARED TO CLOSE RANKS AND CONTINUE IN A NORTHEASTERLY DIRECTION. THREE TO FIVE MINUTES LATER THESE INDIVIDUALS SAW ANOTHER GROUP OF THREE OBJECTS PROCEEDING IN THE SAME DIRECTION AGAIN IN THE SHAPE OF A TRIANGLE. THREE TO FIVE MINUTES LATER INFORMANTS OBSERVED ANOTHER GROUP CONSISTING OF FROM FIVE TO SIX OBJECTS, AGAIN IN TRIANGULR FORMATION, PROCEEDING RAPIDLY IN A NORTHEASTERLY DIRECTION. A FEW MINUTES LATER A LARGE GROUP OF OBJECTS ESTIMATED AT BETWEEN THIRTY FIVE AND FIFTY FLEW OVER THE CITY IN A NORTHEASTERLY DIRECTION, AGAIN IN"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\nTRIANGULAR FORMATION. BETWEEN TWENTY AND TWENTY FIVE MINUTES AFTER THE LAST GROUP WAS OBSERVED, SIMILAR OBJECTS WERE NOTED COMING BACK OVER THE CITY VERY RAPIOLY AND PROCEEDING IN A SOUTHWESTERLY DIRECTION. AT THIS TIME INFORMANTS STATED THE OBJECTS APPEARED IN GROUPS OF THREE, FIVE AND SEVEN. AT THIS POINT MRS. HEDSTROM CALLED DETECTIVE RICHARD FRAZIER OF THE TWIN FALLS PD, A NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR, WHO ACCOMPANIED BY M. E. ROUNDTREE AND RICHARD SCOTT, ALSO MEMBERS OF THE TWIN FALLS PD, PROCEEDED TO THE HEDSTROM HOME WHERE THEY OBSERVED A GROUP OF TWELVE OBJECTS FLYING IN FORMATION OVER THE CITY IN A SOUTHWESTERLY DIRECTION. INFORMANTS, ALL REPUTABLE CITIZENS THIS COMMUNITY, UNABLE TO ESTIMATE HEIGHT OF OBJECTS OR SPEED, BUT CLAIMED THEY RESEMBLED ILLUMINATED FLYING SAUCERS. THESE INDIVIDUALS WERE OF THE OPINION THAT THE OBJECTS OBSERVED WERE NOT THE LANDING LIGHTS OF AIRPLANES NOR SHOTING STARS. NONE OF THESE OBJECTS WERE SEEN TO COME TO EARTH NEAR TWIN FALLS AND NONE APPEARED TO BE FLYING IN AN ARC. NONE OF THESE OBSERVERS HEARD ANY SOUND AS THE [REDACTED] ABOVE OBJECTS PASSED OVER THE CITY. INVESTIGATION CONTINUING IN LINE WITH BUREAU INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED BUREAU BULLETIN NO. FORTY TWO, PARAGRAPH B, DATED JULY THIRTY LAST. IN EVENT BUREAU IN POSSESSION OF ANY INFORMATION CONCERNING EXPERIMENTAL ACTIVITIES ON"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE THREE\nPART OF ARMY AIR FORCES WHICH MAY EXPLAIN THESE PHENOMENA, ADVICE WOULD\nBE GREATLY APPRECIATED. IT IS BELIEVED CONTINUED APPEARANCE OF SUCH\nOBJECTS WITHOUT OFFICIAL EXPLANATION MAY RESULT IN HYSTERIA OR PANIC\nTWIN FALLS, IDAHO.\nBANISTER\nACK AND HOLD PLS\n5-31 PM OK FBI WASH DC WJR"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED DIRECTOR\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nAUG 20 6 11 PM '47\nRECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAUG 20 5 34 PM '47\nRECEIVED\n11 02 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\nSEP 29 3 16 PM\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AUGUST 25, 1947 - URGENT\nSAC BUTTE\nFLYING DISCS. EXTENSIVE INQUIRIES AT ARMY AIR FORCES REVEAL THAT NO RESEARCH\nOR EXPERIMENTS WERE BEING CONDUCTED BY AAF IN THE VICINITY OF TWIN FALLS, IDAHO\nON OR ABOUT AUGUST NINETEEN. IN THE EVENT YOUR SOURCES IN THE ARMY, NAVY OR\nAIR FORCES INDICATE OTHERWISE ADVISE BUREAU PROMPTLY.\nRECORDED 62-83894-67\nHOOVER\nRGF:EW FX-30"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : D. M. Ladd\nFROM : E. G. [REDACTED]\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nDATE: August 22, 1947\nReference is made the teletype from the Butte Field Division dated August 20, 1947, in the above captioned matter.\nIn accordance with your request, this matter was checked with Army Air Forces. Lieutenant Colonel George D. Garrett, Jr., advised Special Agent F. P. Griffee that extensive inquiries with the Army Air Forces revealed that no research or experiments were being conducted by the AAF in the vicinity of Twin Falls, Idaho on or about August 19, 1947. Colonel Garrett stated that he had no information which would throw any light on the matter reported in the teletype.\nACTION\nIt is suggested this memorandum be routed to the Internal Security Section to the attention of Supervisor Fletcher.\nFPG:ome\nRECORDED 62-83894-67\nEX-30"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CC - 150\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nAUGUST 30, 1947 URGENT\n\nTO: COMMUNICATIONS SECTION.\n\nTransmit the following message to: SACS SAN FRANCISCO AND PHOENIX\n\nREPORT OF FLYING DISCS. RE SANF MEMO AUGUST TWENTY EIGHT LAST CONCERNING\nINTERVIEW WITH WILLIAM RHODES, PHOENIX, ARIZONA. SANF ADVISE A-TWO AIR\nFORCE NOT NECESSARY FOR FUGATE TO PROCEED TO PHOENIX, THAT BUREAU WILL HANDLE\nINTERVIEW IF DESIRED, BUT JOINT INVESTIGATION NOT DEEMED NECESSARY. IF FUGATE\nPROCEEDS PHOENIX IN SPITE OF ABOVE, ADVISE HIM YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO CON-\nDUCT JOINT INVESTIGATION AND NOT POSSIBLE FOR FUGATE TO SIT IN ON INTERVIEW\nWITH RHODES.\n\nHOOVER"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Director\nFROM: SAC, Portland\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nDATE: September 5, 1947\n\nReference is made to my teletype dated August 15, 1947 advising that a Mr. JOHN BARTLETT of Agate Beach, Oregon had reported on August 7, 1947 that he sighted what he believed to be a disc. Mr. JOHN BARTL, instead of BARTLETT, now residing in Newport, Oregon was interviewed by Special Agent ROBERT J. PETTYJOHN. Mr. BARTL stated that on August 7, 1947 he was residing at Agate Beach, Oregon and that his house was very near the ocean beach; that at about 12:30 A. M. he was awakened by his son coming in and that while awake he noticed a bright glow of light across the sky out over the ocean. He stated that he immediately thought of flying discs and thought this might be one of the discs.\n\nMr. BARTL went on to say that he had no idea as to the shape or size of this object but that it appeared to be about five miles out over the ocean and that he was able to see it for about 15 to 30 seconds. He further stated that due to the darkness he could tell nothing about the speed of this object but thought it was traveling a great deal faster than any airplane he had ever seen. He informed that this glow of light was somewhat similar to \"The Northern Light\" which sometimes appears in the sky but of course not nearly as large and that it appeared to be going up and down, that is fluctuating in altitude as it traveled along. He stated it disappeared in the west, either falling into the ocean or disappearing over the horizon. He could give no other information concerning this object of light reported by him as possibly being a flying disc. Mr. BARTL has an Agate and Myrtlewood shop in Newport.\n\nRJP/es"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Director\nFROM: SAC, Portland\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nDATE: September 5, 1947\n\n[Mirrored text of the same memorandum, largely illegible due to show-through from the reverse side.]"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED 62-83894-70\nINDEXED 129\n\nSeptember 2, 1947\n\nMrs. W. T. Williams\n417 East Stevenson Street\nFlorence, Alabama\n\nDear Mrs. Williams:\n\n89-XE Your letter of August 18, 1947, has been received, and I am most appreciative of the thoughtfulness which prompted you to communicate with me. For your information, no reward has been offered by any U. S. Government Agency for the location of \"flying saucers.\" I regret that I am unable to be of assistance in this instance.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nFEC:blf"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8/18/47\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover:\nF.B.I. Washington, D.C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nI hardly know how to go about trying to tell you what I want you to know. But just in my own simple way I'll do the best I can. I know you are a very busy man altho I hope you will take time to read my letter and I'll try to make a long story short.\n\nMr. Hoover almost five weeks ago. What we all call a \"Flying Saucer\" fell in my front yard a distance of five or six feet from where I was standing. I saw it coming straight down out of the skies. It came down at a terrific speed and exploded. I turned the piece over to Chief Noah Stanley of\n\nMr. Hoover I don't know what the police did with what ever we might call it that fell in my yard and you probably know all about it. But I did what I thought was right. I called the police at once and turned it over to them. Then in three or four days later a neighbor and I found more of it in some tall grass nearby and I also carried it to the police station.\n\nIf there is a reward Mr. Hoover I know you are the one to see that I get it. Will you help me please.\n\nVery truly yours,\nMrs. W. H. Williams\n417 E. Stevenson St.\nFlorence, Ala."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the Florence Police for which he said he turned over to the F.B.I. in Washington. I haven't heard any more from the \"Flying Saucer\".\n\nI do know I have heard over the air many times that a reward was being offered for any one finding a Flying Saucer. I also read it in the Birmingham News. We have all heard of the Flying Saucer and great numbers have seen them but the police have told me so far I am the only one that has ever gained custody of one. And I know if it had of struck a person in the head it probably would have killed or injured them seriously"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Director, FBI\nDATE: August 20, 1947\n\nFROM: SAC, Springfield\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISC\n\nReference is made to Bureau Bulletin No. 42, Series 1947, dated July 30, 1947 re the above.\n\nFor the Bureau's information a Mrs. JUNE ANDERSON of Saybrook, Illinois reported to this office the finding of a flying disc in her front yard at 6:00 A.M. on July 26, 1947.\n\nIt appears from investigation conducted by an Agent of this office that the stability of JUNE ANDERSON is questionable. However the alleged flying disc was obtained and it is apparently the concoction of some of the juveniles in the area. It is an old wooden platter, which has assembled on it a silver plate, a spark plug, a timer, and some old brass tubing. Photographs were taken of the same and there are six views enclosed herewith.\n\nNo doubt this was someone's idea of a prank.\n\nThe disc is presently being retained by the Springfield Office and will be retained pending receipt of Bureau advice relative to its destruction. The thought in retaining it was that perhaps the Bureau might desire to have it transmitted to Washington for any novel value it might have.\n\nJBP:hg\n62-0-1445\nEnc. (6)"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Enclosure - To Bureau\n\nPhotographs of \"Flying Disc\" found\nat Saybrook, Ill. 7-26-47\n\nSI File 62-0-1445\n\n62-83894-71"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Flying Disc\"\nFound Saybrook, Ill. 7-26-47"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Flying Disc\"\nFound Saybrook, Ill. 7-26-47\n62-83894-71"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Flying Disc\"\nFound Saybrook, Ill. 7-26-47"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8 i 5\n\n\"Flying Disc\"\nFound Saybrook, Ill. 7-26-47"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8 i 5\n\n\"Flying Disc\"\nFound Saybrook, Ill. 7-26-47"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Flying Disc\"\nFound Saybrook, Ill., 7-26-47"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, Springfield\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSeptember 5, 1947\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nFLYING DISC\n\nRECORDED 62-83894-71\n\nWith reference to your letter, dated August 20, 1947, it is desired\nthat you contact the appropriate Army officials and in the event they are not\ninterested in receiving this alleged flying disc, it may be destroyed.\n\nEX-56\n\nRGF:LH\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Carson\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Hendon\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 10\nSEP 6 - 1947 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nSEP 4 1947\n\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI PORTLAND\t\t9-4-47\t\t3-42 PM PST\tKAM\n\nDIRECTOR\tURGENT\n\nRE FLYING DISCS. A MRS. RAYMOND DUPUI, OSWEGO, OREGON, REPORTED TO HAVE\nSEEN TWELVE TO FIFTEEN ROUND SILVER OBJECTS AT A HIGH ALTITUDE AT\nTWELVE FIFTEEN PM, SEPT. THIRD, FORTYSEVEN, ABOVE OSWEGO, OREGON, WHILE\nWATCHING A LOCAL PLANE FLYING OVERHEAD. WILL BE INTERVIEWED.\n\nBOBBITT\n\nEND\n\n94HODD PLS\n\n7-45 PM OK FBI WASH DC NAT\n\nENDEXED\nRECORDED\nEX-66\n62-83894-72\n31 SEP 16 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nSep 4 7 45 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\n\nRECEIVED-LAISON SECTION\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nSEP 5 6 12 AM '47\nRECEIVED DIRECTOR\nF B I\n\nRECEIVED\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR\t\t\t\t\t\tDATE: 9-13-47\n\nFROM : SAC, PORTLAND\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nReference is made to my teletype dated 9-4-47, advising that Mrs. RAYMOND DUPUIS, Oswego, Oregon, was reported to have seen a number of discs on 9-3-47 above Oswego.\n\nMrs. DUPUIS was interviewed and described the object which she has observed as follows:\n\nWhile entertaining her 7 year old son and 10 year old neighbor child on her lawn, at about noon, Mrs. DUPUIS and the children noticed approximately two dozen round silver objects high in the sky. Mrs. DUPUIS stated she believed these objects to have been platter shaped rather than spherical and to have been considerably larger than an airplane of the cub type which was flying in a different portion of the sky at the same time. She advised that these objects appeared to her to be at a great distance and constructed of some white metallic material.\n\nMrs. DUPUIS' attention was first drawn to the objects by an explanation from one of the children to the effect that the airplane was skywriting. The objects were grouped in approximately an arc about level with the sun and to the left of the sun as viewed by Mrs. DUPUIS. They did not change positions during the 3 or 4 minutes which she observed them but some of the larger of the objects appeared to rotate rapidly in the manner of a wheel. One of the objects was separated by considerable distance from the main group and while she was watching Mrs. DUPUIS states this object began to fall and floated slowly downward until it was no longer visable because of trees on the horizon.\n\nMrs. DUPUIS advised that she continued to observe the remaining objects until her eyes began to be affected by the brightness of the sky whereupon she went into her house and is unable to state what became of the group.\n\nLHK:MB\n62-1531\n\nHANDLED BY STOR DESK\nRECORDED & INDEXED 32\n62-83894-73\nF B I\n15 SEP 17 1947\nEX-42\n55 SEP 30 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nRECEIVED\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nSEP 20 3 04 PM '47"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. D. M. LADD\n\nDATE: September 8, 1947\n\nFROM : E. G. Fitch\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nReference is made to my memorandum to you in the above captioned matter dated August 22, 1947, which indicates that Special Agent Griffee of the Liaison Section had contacted Lieutenant Colonel G. D. Garrett, Jr., of the Air Forces Intelligence at which time Colonel Garrett advised that the Army Air Forces were conducting no research or experiments in the vicinity of Twin Falls, Idaho, on or about August 19, 1947. Colonel Garrett at that time indicated to Mr. Griffee that he would check with the Army area in order to ascertain whether or not they were conducting any experiments in this vicinity at that time.\n\nColonel Garrett has subsequently advised Mr. Reynolds that he has been advised by the Army area that no such experiments were being conducted in the area of Twin Falls, Idaho, on or about August 19, 1947, which would in any way throw any light on the matter reported in the teletype.\n\nRECOMMENDATION\n\nIt is recommended this memorandum be forwarded to Mr. Fletcher of the Internal Security Section.\n\nSWR:vhr\n\n62-83894-74\n\n63SEP 22 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nSeptember 25, 1947\n\nMr. A. Courtney Parker\nSuperintendent of Schools\nSouth Royalton, Vermont\n\nDear Mr. Parker:\n\nI wish to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated September 17, 1947. An Agent of our Albany, New York, Office will call upon you in the near future for any additional information in your possession.\n\nYour courtesy and interest in bringing this matter to my attention are indeed appreciated.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncc - Albany (separate cover letter)\n62-83894-75\nRGF:cmw\n\nEX-41"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, Albany\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nFLYING DISCS\nA. Courtney Parker, Informant\n\nSeptember 25, 1947\n\nAttached hereto are copies of an incoming communication from A. Courtney Parker, Superintendent of Schools, South Royalton, Vermont, and copies of acknowledgment of same.\n\nIt is requested that an Agent of your Office call on Mr. Parker to obtain any additional information in his possession concerning flying discs.\n\nEnclosures\nRGF:mae\n62-83894-75\n\nEX-41"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STATE OF VERMONT\nDEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION\nORANGE - WINDSOR - DISTRICT\nA. COURTNEY PARKER, Superintendent\nSOUTH ROYALTON\n\nSeptember 17, 1947\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sirs:\n\nAt 3:40 P.M. to-day I observed a so-called flying saucer. This occurred while I was half way up Rix Ledges north of Lebanon, N. H. As I was intently watching the honey bees circling in a patch of sky after leaving my bee box my attention was called to a floating object that appeared to be as large as a tennis ball and as white as cotton batting. This object approached rapidly and noiselessly from the East and was followed closely by another object that appeared in size and shape like a saucer which maintained a constant angle of inclination to the ball and followed it at a constant distance. The two objects made an angle with my eye of approximately five degrees. They were in my vision for more than a minute when I lost them in the glare of the sun.\n\nIf I had seen this in the night sky with my six inch telescope I would have thought that the planets Venus and Saturn had suddenly gotten together and were traveling at great speed much nearer the earth.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nA. Courtney Parker\nSuperintendent of Schools"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STATE OF VERMONT\nOFFICE OF GOVERNOR\nMONTPELIER, VERMONT\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nSeptember 10, 1947\n\nDirector\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sirs:\n\nAt 2:50 P.M. today I observed a so-called flying saucer which occurred while I was half way up my lodge north of Lenox, N.Y. As I was intently watching the sky a [illegible] object was sailing in a stretch of clear sky. The object appeared to be round in shape, as large as a dinner plate, and was white or silver in color. The object was moving at a rapid rate of speed. It was followed closely by another object that appeared to be like a saucer in shape and was flying at a constant altitude. The two objects were in sight for about five minutes until I lost them in the glare of the sun.\n\nIt has been said that in one of the sky-writing tests one of six men witnessed the same phenomenon at approximately the same time. I would have thought that the number of persons who observed the objects would have been much greater, but apparently most persons were occupied at that hour."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF DIRECTOR\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nSeptember 8, 1947\n\nThe attached was sent to the Director by Walter Winchell.\n\nThe notations appearing thereon read:\n\n\"Ack & F.B.I.\"\n\n\"Please excuse haste - Trying to make airmail west.\"\n\nAttachment\n\nmt\n\nRECORDED\nINDEXED 62-83894-76\n\nBureau files fail to reflect any record on a Mrs. Madeline Gwynne Merchant, the writer of the attached letter.\n\nF B I\nSEP 16 1947\n\nno action necessary\n51 SEP 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Carson\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Hendon\nMr. Jones\nMr. Pennington\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Holmes\nMiss Gandy\n\nSeptember 9, 1947\n\nThe attached was sent to the Director by Walter Winchell.\n\nThe notations appearing thereon read:\n\n\"Ack & F.B.I.\"\n\n\"Please excuse haste - Trying to make airmail west.\"\n\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED-LAND\nSEP 9 9 45 AM '47\nSEP 8 5 08 PM '47\nRECEIVED DIRECTOR\nBureau files fail to reflect any record on a Mrs. Madeline Gwynne Merchant, the writer of the attached letter."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mrs. Madeline Gwynne Merchant\nBox 263, Santa Fe, New Mexico\n\nJuly 13, 1947\n\nMr. Walter Winchell,\n% Postmaster,\nLos Angeles, Calif.\n\nDear Mr. Winchell:\n\nThis letter deals with what are being called \"discs.\"\n\nYou are not to mention the contents of this letter over the air, nor to any individual other than officials of the War Dep't., members of the FBI, or an American whose patriotism would rank with your own, and who might donate $10,000 or more for the purpose of my continuing the collection of field data concerning \"discs,\" while time may remain in which to do so.\n\nI have had respectful attention from the following persons: (But no checks, nor expense accounts even.)\n\nCol. Herbert C. Gee, Comm. Officer,\nLos Alamos Atomic Project,\nLos Alamos, N.M.\n\nMaj. Sidney Newburger, Security Official,\nLos Alamos Atomic Project,\nLos Alamos, N.M.\n\nMr. Willard Zimmer, Military Intelligence,\nP.O. Box 681,\nSanta Fe, N.M.\n\n62-83894-76\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nF.B.I.\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nSEP 9 3 16 PM '47"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Francis Finley, Agent-in-Charge,\nFederal Bureau of Investigation, (Phone 1366)\nSanta Fe, N.M.\nGen. S.R. Brennault,\nAss't. to Lt. Gen. Nathan F. Twining,\nAAF Materiel Command,\nWashington, D.C.\n\nCol. Zumwalt,\nAss't to Colonel Bunker, Comm. Off.\nKirtland Field,\nAlbuquerque, N.M.\n\nGen. Patrick Hurley, (Former Ambassador to China,)\n1210 Shoreham Bld'g. (Also Santa Fe, N.M.)\nWashington, D.C.\n\nAnd through the courtesy of Gen. Patrick Hurley,\na letter from Sec. of War Robert Patterson, War Dep't, Washington, D.C.\n\nAll were highly interested, appreciative, with the\ngeneral trend of contacts being, \"This is fine. Go right ahead.\"\n\nMy point in writing you is to raise some money to\nproceed with. No budgets seemed to allow for the unexpected, elusive\n\"discs.\"\n\nSen. Carl Hatch, D-N.M., U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.\nhas been contacted by mail for an appropriation, but even if this\nonly requires one more week, it may be too late.\n\nYou may contact any of the above listed persons to verify my contacts (excuse repetition word contact) during the past four months. In other words, I began reporting directly to Dr. Norris Bradbury, Scientific Head of Los Alamos, and Colonel Gee, et al, some time ago that this type aerial \"disc\" was a reality."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(3)\n\nThis material was considered confidential, and still is.\n\nI have been asked by Colonel Gee not to speak any further than material which has been published in the press. And I have chosen simply not to speak at all, except to a source which I consider might further my own work.\n\nIf you ask of the above persons, to ascertain whether or not I have made serious, materially valuable contributions, which may indicate much scientifically...... and which, if action can be continued soon enough, may a little later save our nation much.... please make inquiries quietly, and as promptly as convenient.\n\nI must ask you not to speculate, even to yourself... but simply to act.\n\nDo not mention in any manner, until release by the War Dep't, even the receipt of this letter, except to the above persons, or proper government officials there. Or, to one whom you know will make a donation.\n\nPerhaps your savest bet would be simply to telephone the FBI there, and let them telephone Francis Finley here for verification.\n\nI promise you an exclusive, behind the scenes story when, and if, the War Dep't releases the material nationally. Meantime, your action now may save your own life, and that of others who may have wondered what a \"disc\" is.\n\nRest assured I have all the proper scientific and governmental contacts needed...... all I need is the wherewithall. I have the proper background to discuss the subject, secure the further field"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(4)\n\ndata I now need, explain it technically, and secure proper action, provided I am given the means to do so.\n\nI regret that I cannot be more specific now, but duty to country rests above.\n\nI have met before with the mental reaction, \"What? A woman handling this type material? \" And my signature below will probably evoke the same response from you. So I assure you, yes, it is a woman who is coming in with the information which men have gone out to seek. And doing the proper thing about it.\n\nMost respectfully,\n\nMrs. Madeline Gwynne Merchant\n\ncc/\n\nP.S. Am a former newspaper person, and very proud of it. Am 39, but dress and feel some younger.\n\nAgain, I must ask you not to mention even the town from which this letter comes, as you may be endangering lives to so so. Simply ascertain my contributions, get some money to me, and wait. (Francis Finley himself would give me a gas budget, if he were not so close himself.)"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"7407\nEstill S.C. [illegible]\nTo B.I.\nDear Sirs\nI am mailing you a [illegible]\nafter [illegible]\nsomething [illegible]\na [illegible]\ndecided [illegible]\nyour [illegible]\ncompleted [illegible]\nWashington\n\nSee outgoing 9-7-47\nRECORDED 62-83894\nINDEXED\nSEP 18 1947\n\n5 OCT 22 1947\nMixed"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nAUG 19 1947 9:32 AM\nSEP 29 1947 2:58 PM\nRECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Mr. R. T. Harbo\nFROM : T. F. Baughman\nSUBJECT: Letter and material received from\nMrs. J. H. Mixon\nEstill, South Carolina\nRoute 1, Box 30\n\nDATE: August 28, 1947\n\nThe attached letter dated August 14, 1947 from Mrs. Mixon together with the material which she reports to be part of a flying saucer was received in the Laboratory on August 19, 1947. The material which was submitted with Mrs. Mixon's letter has been identified as powdered soap stones.\n\nInasmuch as the Investigative and Security Divisions might possibly be interested in this matter, I request that you advise me as to the final disposition of the submitted material as well as the type of reply which should be made to Mrs. Mixon's letter.\n\nJWM:PVH\n\nEX-83"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED AUG 29 10 23 AM '47 FBI INTERNAL SECURITY DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nAUG 28 5 30 PM '47 RECEIVED-HARBO LABORATORY DIVISION FBI"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : D. M. Ladd\nFROM : J. P. Coyne\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCER\n\nDATE: September 4, 1947\n\nReference is made to the memorandum from Mr. Baughman to Mr. Harbo, dated August 28, 1947, requesting advice as to the final disposition of material submitted by Mrs. J. H. Mixon, Estill, South Carolina. It is noted that this material, which Mrs. Mixon reported to be a part of a flying saucer, has been identified as powdered soap stones.\n\nIt is recommended that the material be returned to Mrs. Mixon along with a letter advising that such has been identified as powdered soap stones.\n\nRGF:LH\n\nEX-46"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SEP 5 2 27 PM '47 RECEIVED-HARBO\n\nSEP 5 2 15 PM '47 RECEIVED-LADD\n\nFBI LABORATORY DIVISION\n\nTECHNICAL LABORATORY\n\nS. DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nFROM : SAC, Phoenix\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\n\nATTENTION: ASSISTANT DIRECTOR D. M. LADD\n\nDATE: September 4, 1947\n\nReference is made to San Francisco letter dated August 28, 1947, and to Bureau teletype to Phoenix dated August 30, 1947.\n\nWith reference to the above matter, I desire to point out that the letter of reference from San Francisco did not reach Phoenix until September 2, 1947.\n\nOn August 29, 1947, a Mr. GEORGE FUGATE, JR. called at the Phoenix office and exhibited credentials reflecting that he is a representative of A-2, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California. He also exhibited orders emanating from the office of Colonel DONALD SPRINGER, A-2, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California, instructing him to proceed to Phoenix immediately and contact the FBI office, at which time a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation would be designated to accompany him to interview WILLIAM RHODES, who had previously reported the photographing of a flying disc. The orders further indicated that the San Francisco office of the FBI was transmitting further information relating to Mr. FUGATE'S mission.\n\nASAC HEBER M. CLEGG telephonically communicated with SAC HARRY KIMBALL of the San Francisco office and Mr. KIMBALL verified the above information and stated that a letter had been directed to the Phoenix office suggesting that the Phoenix office assist any representative who called from A-2 in the interrogation of RHODES. SAC KIMBALL stated that in connection with flying discs, he had maintained close contact with Colonel SPRINGER and that close cooperation existed. He further advised that many reports of flying discs had been received at San Francisco and that a full discussion concerning the results of inquiries had been held with Colonel SPRINGER.\n\nIn connection with flying disc investigations, Mr. KIMBALL advised he had maintained close touch with the Bureau and had apparently handled these matters in accordance with Bureau policy.\n\nIn view of the above, Special Agent J. BAILEY BROWER of the Phoenix office was permitted to work with Mr. FUGATE in the interview of WILLIAM ALBERT RHODES. The results of the inquiry are set out hereunder.\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nRECEIVED\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nSEP 19 1 15 PM '47\nRECEIVED-LAUDE\nFBI\nSEP 9 1 45 PM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nSEP 23 10 11 AM '47\nRECEIVED\nSEP 15 10 50 AM '47\nLIAISON SECTION\nRECEIVED\nSEP 10 8 58 AM\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nRECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Phoenix file 62-213\n\nWILLIAM ALBERT RHODES, 4333 N. 14th Street, Phoenix, Arizona, owns and maintains the Panoramic Research Laboratory and Hobby Shop at this address, and he related the following as occurring on the afternoon of July 7, 1947:\n\nA storm had occurred in Phoenix on the afternoon of July 7, 1947, and the clouds were at approximately 5000 feet, the color of which was grey and they resembled dense cumulus. A fifteen mile per hour wind was blowing. At approximately 5 p.m. on that date, Mr. RHODES was walking from his home to the Hobby Shop and he heard a noise resembling a P-80 aircraft, apparently coming in a westerly direction. Upon searching the skies he observed to the northeast what appeared to be an odd shaped ship. He described this ship as being possibly 20 to 30 feet in diameter, traveling at an estimated speed of 100 miles per hour. It appeared to be making a spiral in a small radius of possibly one-half to three quarters of a mile. RHODES stated the sound which he first heard was no longer audible; that he hurriedly procured a 120 Brownie Box Camera from his shop, and as the aircraft completed the first circle he obtained a photograph. As the ship started on the second turn, it was in a northwesterly direction from his place and he again snapped a photograph, which more closely resembled the shape of the ship than photograph #1, this being designated as Exhibit II, as submitted to the Bureau with letter dated August 4, 1947, by the Office of Assistant Chief of Staff A-2 Intelligence, Hamilton Field, California. RHODES further described the direction of the ship by stating that instead of completing the lefthand downward spiral the ship banked to the right and disappeared into the clouds. He stated that just as it banked, he had snapped the second photograph, Exhibit II.\n\nAt the last point, which was at the time the ship made this turn, Mr. RHODES estimated it to be between 1,000 and 2,000 feet high. He further described the appearance of this ship as closely resembling a picture which appeared on the front cover of the May, 1947, issue of the Mechanics Illustrated Magazine, the only difference noted by Mr. RHODES being that the ship appeared to be flying backward.\n\nMr. RHODES also related that he did not associate the appearance of this ship with the numerous reports of flying discs. He related, however, that after a three minute interview with newspaper reporters the story that appeared in the local papers was \"blown up\" to the extent that he, RHODES, barely recognized the information furnished by him. Mr. RHODES explained that the aforementioned dimensions and distances were only estimated, pointing out, that his previous experience probably assisted him in making fairly close estimates. He related that he had been doing experimental work for the past ten years. He also stated he was employed at the Naval Ordnance Laboratory, Washington, D. C. during the early part of World War II and left there the beginning of 1942. Upon his return to Phoenix, he was employed at Falcon Field near Phoenix which was leased by the British Government for training purposes. He instructed in instrument training, aircraft identification and gunnery practice. He explained that his hobbies have to do with science, physics, radio, electronics and astronomy. He produced a model which he had made of a radio controlled airplane. He related that most of his work consists of building transformers, but it is also necessary for him to depend upon his music ability for his livlihood.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Phoenix file 62-213\n\nIn explaining the results of photographing the ship, Mr. RHODES stated that he was surprised that the object appeared dark on a light background; that he fully expected that the object would be light on a dark background. He described the light spot which appears in the center of the object (Exhibit II) as being a green house. RHODES insisted that the ship made no noise that was audible to his ear and he was unable to detect the presence of any propeller. He also related that after the newspaper release over Radio Station KTAR, wherein statements were made that he, RHODES, had stated Army officials were studying the photographs, and that it was a top secret, he attempted to determine the source of this release and the Radio station finally told him that it was a United Press release from Washington, D. C.\n\nThe following description of RHODES was obtained from observation and interrogation:\n\nAge 30\nDate birth 12-29-16\nPlace birth Garden City, Kansas\nHeight 6' 3\"\nWeight 155 pounds\nEyes Blue\nHair Brown\nEducation Phoenix Union High School\nMarital status Married- one son\n\nIt should be stated that at the time of interview with RHODES, Mr. BROWER identified himself as an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and exhibited his credentials. However, pursuant to a request from Mr. FUGATE, he was introduced only as a representative of the United States government. His exact official connection was not made known to Mr. RHODES. Agent BROWER advised that he felt it was a peculiar procedure, but it was not his business. However, at the conclusion of the interview, Mr. FUGATE requested Mr. RHODES to furnish him with the negatives and RHODES stated he would be glad to do so, but they were not in his immediate possession, and he would deliver them to the FBI the following morning. Mr. RHODES requested that the negatives be returned to him. Agent BROWER states that to this request, Mr. FUGATE made no reply. Agent BROWER states that after leaving Mr. RHODES he asked FUGATE if the negatives would be returned to Mr. RHODES and FUGATE stated that he doubted very much that they would be returned. Mr. BROWER then advised Mr. FUGATE that before he, BROWER, would accept these negatives that RHODES must be advised of Mr. FUGATE'S identity and also advised that the negatives, if turned over to Mr. FUGATE, would not be returned to him.\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Phoenix file 62-213\n\nIn view of which, on the morning on August 30, 1947, when Mr. RHODES called at the Phoenix office to deliver the negatives, they were accepted only after he was advised that they were being given to Mr. FUGATE, a representative of the Army Air Force Intelligence, United States Army, and that there was little, if any, chance of his getting the negatives back. Mr. RHODES turned the negatives over to this office with the full understanding that they were being given to the Army and that he would not get them back.\n\nThe Phoenix office did not receive the Bureau teletype of reference instructing that no joint investigation should be conducted until after the matter had been handled.\n\nInasmuch as military authorities have complete knowledge of the results of the interview with Mr. RHODES no copy of this report is being designated for A-2.\n\nJBB-kb\n\ncc-San Francisco\n\n62-213\n\n- 4 -"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\nR. B. Hitches\n\nFBI PORTLAND 9-13-47 8-08 PM HHS\nDIRECTOR URGENT\nFLYING DISCS. LEON V. JENKINS, CHIEF OF POLICE, PORTLAND, STATES HE OBSERVED AT ABOUT FIVE FIFTEEN PM ELEVENTH INSTANT, AN OBJECT SIMILAR IN SIZE TO A WEATHER BALLOON, WHICH APPEARED TO BE MADE OF ALUMINUM OR SOME OTHER BRIGHT METAL, TRAVELING RAPIDLY NORTHWEST TO SOUTHEAST OVER PORTLAND AT AN ESTIMATED TEN THOUSAND FEET. OBJECT VEERED TO SOUTH AND DISAPPEARAD IN THE DISTANCE IN APPROXIMATELY ONE MINUTE. ALSO OBSERVED BY PATROLMAN H. S. RANEY, DRIVER OF JENKINS CAR, AND POSSIBLY BY OTHER PORTLAND POLICE OFFICERS. SMALL ARTICLE APPEARED IN PORTLAND NEWSPAPER, THE OREGONIAN, CONCERNING THIS ON TWELFTH INSTANT. INVESTIGATION BEING CONDUCTED.\n\nBOBBITT\n\nEND\n\n1210AM OK FBI WA"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nSep 14 12 10 AM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nF.B.I.\nRECEIVED\nSep 16 2 25 PM '47\nLIAISON SECTION\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nRECEIVED\nSep 15 10 03 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nRECEIVED\nSep 24 9 30 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nSEP 13 1947\nTELETYPE\nFBI NORFOLK 9-13-47 4-15 PM CLC\nDIRECTOR URGENT\nFLYING DISCS. MRS. G. H. STOCKTON, ONE SIX NINE A VIEW AVENUE, OCEAN VIEW, VA., REPORTED SIGHTING FLYING DISC AT SHOUNS, TENN., SEPTEMBER SIXTY, LAST. SON-IN-LAW, HUGH JENNINGS, ONE ONE ONE BELLGRAVE, OCEAN VIEW, CONFIRMS SIGHTING OF THIS OBJECT WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS BEING SHAPED LIKE FOOTBALL, MOVING IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION AT CONSTANT ALTITUDE OF APPROXIMATELY TWO THOUSAND FEET, AND TURNING END OVER END IN THE AIR. RATE OF SPEED COMPARABLE TO CUB PLANE. JENNINGS STATES OBJECT VISIBLE FOR APPROXIMATELY FIVE MINUTES AGAINST OVERCAST SKY. NO DETAILS DISCERNIBLE. JENNINGS DOES NOT BELIEVE OBJECT WAS DISC BUT THAT IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A LOOSE METEOROLOGICAL BALLOON. RUC.\nROBEY\nEND\n5-17 PM OK FBI WA BW\nRec'd from m 1D 9/17/47\nRECORDED & INDEXED\n62-83894\n82\n29 SEP 19 1947\n31\nEX-30\ncc: Mr. Ladd"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nSep 13 5 19 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n[illegible]\nFBI NORFOLK 9-13-47 4-15 PM\nDIRECTOR URGENT\n[illegible]\nRECEIVED\nSep 15 12 54 PM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nRECEIVED\nSep 26 9 03 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nRECEIVED\nSep 15 9 54 AM '47\nF.B.I.\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nSep 13 5 29 PM '47\nRECEIVED BY DIRECTOR"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nHEADQUARTERS, ARMY AIR FORCES\nWASHINGTON\nIN REPLY REFER TO: AFBIR-CO\n5 SEP 1947\nDirector\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nDepartment of Justice\nWashington 25, D. C.\nDear Sir:\nAttention: Liaison Section\nIn answer to a verbal request of your Mr. S. W. Reynolds, a complete survey of research activities discloses that the Army Air Forces has no project with the characteristics similar to those which have been associated with the Flying Discs.\nYours sincerely,\nGEO. F. SCHULGEN\nBrigadier General, U.S.A.\nDeputy, Ass't. Chief of Air Staff-2\nRECORDED\n62-83894-83\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\nCONFIDENTIAL\nADDRESS REPLY TO: COMMANDING GENERAL, ARMY AIR FORCES, WASHINGTON 25, D. C."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : D. M. LADD\nFROM : E. G. Fitch\nDATE: 9/16/47\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nSpecial Agent S. W. Reynolds of the Liaison Section has discussed with Lieutenant Colonel George Garrett of the Intelligence Division of the Air Forces the possibility that the flying discs or saucers are in fact a project of the Army Air Forces. It should be noted that Colonel Garrett agreed with this possibility. At that time Mr. Reynolds pointed out to Colonel Garrett the possible embarrassing position of the Intelligence Division of the Air Forces if it was subsequently ascertained that this was the truth, especially since they had requested the assistance of the Bureau in the captioned matter.\nColonel Garrett advised Mr. Reynolds that he would institute a further search, and he has now advised that a letter was addressed by Major General McDonald, Director of the Intelligence Division of the Air Forces, to the Research and Development Section of the Air Forces.\nThere is attached hereto a letter addressed to the Director, dated September 5, 1947, from Brigadier General George F. Schulgen, which states that a complete survey of research activities discloses that the Army Air Forces have no project with characteristics similar to those which have been associated with the flying discs.\nRECOMMENDATION:\nIt is recommended that this memorandum be forwarded to the Internal Security Section for their information.\nAttachment\nSWR:AJB\nRECORDED\n62-83894-84\n55 SEP 30 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nSEP 17 9 11 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED\n23 11 12 AM\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF. B. I.\n\nSep 16 4 06 PM '47\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED\nINVESTIGATIVE DIVISION\nSEP 23 9 48 AM '47\nF B I\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\n\n[illegible]\n\nAttachment\n\nSecurity Section for their information.\nIt is recommended that this memorandum be forwarded to the Internal\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\nwith the flying disc.\nhave no Project with characteristics similar to those which have been associated\na complete search of research activities discloses that the Army Air Forces\nSeptember 5, 1947, from Brigadier General George F. Schulgen, which states that\nThere is attached hereto a letter addressed to the Director, dated\n\nthe Research and Development Section of the Air Forces.\nGeneral Schulgen, Director of the Intelligence Division of the Air Forces, no\nfurther action, and he has now advised that a letter was addressed to Major\nColonel Garrett advised Mr. Reynolds that he would institute a\n\nof the Bureau in the published matter.\nthat this was the truth, especially since they had requested the assistance\nIntelligence Division of the Air Forces if it was subsequently ascertained\npointed out to Colonel Garrett the possible embarrassing position of the\nthat Colonel Garrett agreed with this possibility. At that time Mr. Reynolds\nsaucers are in fact a Project of the Army Air Forces. It should be noted\nDivision of the Air Forces the possibility that the flying discs or\ncussed with Lieutenant Colonel George Garrett of the Intelligence\nSpecial Agent H. W. Reynolds of the Liaison Section has dis-\n\nFROM: FLYING DISCS\n\nFROM: E. G. FITCH\n\nTO: D. M. LADD 9/16/47"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":127,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nDATE: 9-17-47\n\nFROM : SAC, Portland\n\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nRefer Bureau teletype dated September 4, 1947.\n\nMr. [illegible] JOHNSON, Hobo Hotel, 206 1/2 First Avenue, Portland, reported about consulting in records that on June 24, 1947, while prospecting at a point in the Cascade Mountains approximately five thousand feet from sea level, during the afternoon he noticed a reflection, looked up, and saw a disc proceeding in a southeasterly direction. Immediately upon sighting this object he placed his telescope to his eye and observed the disc for approximately forty-five to sixty seconds. He remarked that it is possible for him to pick up an object at a distance of ten miles with his telescope. At the time the disc was sighted by Mr. JOHNSON it was peaking in the sun, and he observed five or six similar objects but only concentrated on one. He related that they did not fly in any particular formation and that he would estimate their height to be about one thousand feet from where he was standing. He said the object was about thirty feet in diameter and appeared to have a hill. It made no noise.\n\nAccording to JOHNSON he remained in the vicinity of the Cascades for several days and then returned to Portland and noted an article in the local paper which stated in effect that a man in Boise, Idaho, had sighted a similar object but that authorities had disclaimed any knowledge of such an object. He said he communicated with the Army for the sole purpose of attempting to add credence to the story furnished by the man in Boise.\n\nJOHNSON also related that on the occasion of his sighting the objects on June 24, 1947 he had in his possession a combination compass and watch. He noted particularly that immediately before he sighted the disc the compass acted very peculiar, the hand waving from one side to the other, but that this condition corrected itself immediately after the discs had passed out of sight.\n\nInformant appeared to be a very reliable individual who advised that he had been a prospector in the states of Montana, Washington, and Oregon for the past forty years.\n\n2 cc: San Francisco (6-RUC)\n\nRECEIVED\nF.B.I.\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nSEP 24 2 08 PM"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : D. M. LADD\nFROM : E. G. FITCH\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nDATE: August 19, 1947\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Carson\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Hendon\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Holmes\nMiss Gandy\n\nSpecial Agent S. W. Reynolds of the Liaison Section, while dis-\ncussing the above captioned phenomena with Lieutenant Colonel Garrett\nof the Air Forces Intelligence, expressed the possibility that flying\ndiscs were, in fact, a very highly classified experiment of the Army or\nNavy. Mr. Reynolds was very much surprised when Colonel Garrett not only\nagreed that this was a possibility, but confidentially stated it was his\npersonal opinion that such was a probability. Colonel Garrett indicated\nconfidentially that a Mr. Carroll, who is a scientist attached to the Air\nForces Intelligence, was of the same opinion.\n\nColonel Garrett stated that he based his assumption on the\nfollowing: He pointed out that when flying objects were reported seen over\nSweden, the \"high brass\" of the War Department exerted tremendous pressure\non the Air Forces Intelligence to conduct research and collect information\nin an effort to identify these sightings. Colonel Garrett stated that, in\ncontrast to this, we have reported sightings of unknown objects over the\nUnited States, and the \"high brass\" appeared to be totally unconcerned.\nHe indicated this led him to believe that they knew enough about these\nobjects to express no concern. Colonel Garrett pointed out further that the\nobjects in question have been seen by many individuals who are what he\nterms \"trained observers,\" such as airplane pilots. He indicated also that\nseveral of the individuals are reliable members of the community. He stated\nit is his conclusion that these individuals saw something. He stated the\nabove has led him to come to the conclusion that there were objects seen\nwhich somebody in the Government knows all about.\n\nMr. Reynolds pointed out to Colonel Garrett that if it is a fact\nexperimentations are being conducted by the United States Government, then it\ndoes not appear reasonable to request the FBI to spend money and precious\ntime conducting inquiries with respect to this matter. Colonel Garrett stated\nthat he agreed with Mr. Reynolds in this regard and indicated that it would be\nextremely embarrassing to the Air Forces Intelligence if it later is learned\nthat these flying discs are, in fact, an experiment of the United States\nGovernment.\n\nMr. Reynolds subsequently discussed this matter with Colonel L. R.\nForney of the Intelligence Division of the War Department. Colonel Forney\nstated that he had discussed the matter previously with General Chamberlin.\nColonel Forney indicated to Mr. Reynolds that he has the assurance of General\n\nSWR:LL\nEX-64\nRECORDED\nINDEXED\n162-83894-86\nFBI\n34 SEP 23 1947\n51 SEP 29 1947\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : D. M. LADD DATE: August 19, 1947\n\nFROM : L. O. FITCH\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nSpecial Agent S. W. Reynolds of the Liaison Section, while discussing the above mentioned phenomena with Lieutenant Colonel Garrett of the Air Forces Intelligence, expressed the possibility that flying discs were, in fact, a very highly classified experiment of the Army or Navy. Mr. Reynolds was very much surprised when Colonel Garrett not only agreed that this was a possibility, but confidentially stated it was his personal opinion that such was a probability. Colonel Garrett indicated confidentially that a Mr. Carroll, who is a scientist attached to the Air Forces Intelligence, was of the same opinion.\n\nColonel Garrett stated that he based his assumption on the following: He pointed out that when flying objects were reported seen over Sweden, the \"high brass\" of the War Department exerted tremendous pressure on the Air Forces Intelligence to conduct research and collect information in an effort to identify those sightings. Colonel Garrett stated that, in contrast to this, we have reported sightings of unknown objects over the United States, and the \"high brass\" appeared to be totally unconcerned. He indicated this led him to believe that they knew soon about these objects to express no concern. Colonel Garrett pointed out further that the objects in question have been seen by many individuals whom he terms \"trained observers,\" such as airplane pilots. He indicated also that several of the that [illegible] are reliable members of the community. He stated it is his conclusion that these individuals saw something. He stated the above led him to come to the conclusion that there were objects seen which somebody in the Government knows all about.\n\nMr. Reynolds pointed out to Colonel Garrett that if in fact experimentations are being conducted by the United States Government, then it does not appear reasonable to request the FBI to spend money and precious time conducting inquiries with respect to this matter. Colonel Garrett stated he agreed with Mr. Reynolds in this regard and indicated that it would be extremely embarrassing to the Air Forces Intelligence if it later developed that these flying discs are, in fact, an experiment of the United States Government.\n\nMr. Reynolds subsequently discussed this matter with [illegible] of the Intelligence Division of the War Department. Colonel [illegible] stated that he had discussed the matter previously with General Chamberlain. Colonel Garrett [illegible] to obtain the assurance of General\n\nRECEIVED-TAMM\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nAUG 21 2 55 PM '47\n\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nAUG 21 10 35 AM '47\n\nRECEIVED\nAUG 22 10 05 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR MR. LADD\n\nChamberlin and General Todd that the Army is conducting no experimentations with anything which could possibly be mistaken for a flying disc.\n\nColonel Garrett of the Air Forces Intelligence subsequently contacted Mr. Reynolds and indicated that he had discussed this matter with General Schulgen of the Army Air Forces. General Schulgen had previously assured both Mr. Reynolds and Colonel Garrett that to the best of his knowledge and information no experiments were being undertaken by the Government which could be mistaken for flying discs. Colonel Garrett indicated to Mr. Reynolds that he had pointed out his beliefs to General Schulgen and had mentioned the possibility of an embarrassing situation arising between the Air Forces Intelligence and the FBI. General Schulgen agreed with Colonel Garrett that a memorandum would be prepared for the signature of General McDonald, A2, to General LeMay, who is in charge of Research and Development in the Air Corps. Colonel Garrett indicated that this memorandum will set forth the characteristics of the objects seen by various reliable individuals. The memorandum will then request General LeMay to indicate whether or not any experiments are being undertaken by the Air Forces which could possibly be connected with any of the observed phenomena. Colonel Garrett stated that when a reply is received from General LeMay, a communication will be addressed to the Bureau.\n\nMr. Reynolds will follow this matter closely with Colonel Garrett and General Schulgen so that the Bureau will be promptly advised of all information regarding the flying discs, especially any information indicating that they are, in fact, an experiment of some Governmental agency.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: D. M. LADD\nFROM: J. P. COYNE\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS AND FLYING DISCS\nDATE: 8-8-47\n\nReference is made to the memorandum to you from the Liaison Section dated July 21, 1947, setting forth a request from Colonel Golbranson of the Intelligence Division of the War Department for the Bureau to conduct investigation to determine the origin of the flying discs.\n\nOBSERVATIONS:\n\nIt is felt that the situation regarding these flying saucers and flying discs is very similar to the situation which was previously encountered by the Bureau during the past war in handling complaints arising out of the sighting of Japanese baloons. You will recall that at the inception of these complaints the Bureau conducted considerable investigation and located numerous baloons as a cooperative measure for the Army and that after considerable work had been done, the Army then informed that these were military weapons and that they would take over the handling of these completely. This they did and in an extremely short time issued a big press release as to the splendid work of the Army in locating these Japanese baloons. From the information available thus far, it does not appear that these discs should be treated other than as a military weapon. Certainly the Bureau has no way to determine what experiments the Army and Navy are conducting and whether such might be arising out of experiments being conducted by them nor do we have any way of determining how far the Russians have progressed in certain experiments and whether such might be the results of experiments by the Russian Army. It short, it would certainly appear that this is a military situation and should be handled strictly by military authorities.\n\nIn this connection it might be pointed out that our present Portland case arose out of the fact that two Army Intelligence officers were returning from an interview of two individuals who reportedly had seen flying discs. If the Army Intelligence officers are handling some of these interviews, it is believed that they should be handling all of these interviews, and it is not believed that the Bureau should be expending its precious manpower on these complaints which thus far have no connection with our Russian espionage program. The military authorities certainly are better equipped to know what they are looking for than we are and have more facilities for handling any material which it is necessary to examine as a result of its being reported as a remnant of a flying disc. It is believed that the Bureau is merely playing bird-dog for the Army by using our manpower to run out these complaints on flying discs.\n\nACTION:\n\nIn view of the recent Bureau Bulletin #42 dated July 30, 1947, however, there is attached a letter to the Chicago Office asking that they conduct the requested investigation.\n\nAttachment"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mrs. Joseph H. Ryan\nBieber, California\n\nDear Mrs. Ryan:\n\nReceipt is acknowledged of your letter dated September 19, 1947, requesting information concerning the origin of the \"Flying Saucer Mystery\".\n\nIn this connection, you are advised that in view of a long established policy I am unable to furnish the results of investigations by this Bureau to other than Governmental sources. For this reason I regret that I am unable to answer your question, but I appreciate your interest in writing to me in this regard.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"II\nX\n2\n\n2o\n\nThe E.R.D.\nWashington D.C.\n\nDear Sir:-\n\nRecently a little paper was handed\nto me called. Kingdom Voice - The March\nAHEAD OF TIME\nahead of Time Printed in Los Angeles cal.\nBox 6450 Metropolitan Station\noffice 1204 S. Olive St LA. This is official\npublication of the Temple of Jehovah.\nNow, there is an article called the Flying\nSaucer mystery. It states the discs\nare sent by the Russians with the assistance\nof germany, Japan & others\nSent from the north Pole. They are ugly\nplanes flying very high. The Pilots are\nqueer strong fedalines etc etc.\n\nFLYING DISC"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Some are dollars and lots of other\nthings which look off color to\nme. Of course R.A. is a hotbed of\ncults etc. For this to be read by the\nPublic is rather startling.\n\nI just that I would ask\nabout this. I do not believe it\nmyself. How could Germany and\nJapan do anything now they way\nthey are policed and guarded?\n\nSincerely\nMrs Jos. St. Ryan\nMRS JOSEPH H RYAN\n\nworld war 1 nurse overseas for\nthree years and member of our local\nPost & Region here."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI, SEATTLE 8-747 5-20 PM PST RH\nDIRECTOR AND SAC, CHICAGO AND BUTTE URGENT\nFLYING DISKS SIGHTED BY FRED CHRISMAN AND HARLD A DAHL, TACOMA, WN.\nSM DASH X. REMYTEL AUGUST SIX, LAST CAPTIONED FLYING DISKS. HAROLD A.\nDAHL AND FRED CHRISMAN, TACOMA, IN SIGNED STATEMENT INSTANT DATE\nSTATE THAT IN EARLY PART OF JUNE, LAST, THEY PICKED UP SOME STRANGE\nROCK FORMATIONS FROM A GRAVEL PIT, MAURI ISLAND, WASHINGTON. THEY STATE\nA CIGAR BOX OF THESE ROCK FORMATIONS THEY SENT TO RAY PALMER, EDITOR OF\nVENTURE MAGAZINE IN EVANSTON, ILLINOIS. THEY STATE PLAMER IS ALSO\nEDITOR OF FANTASY MAGAZINE, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS. THEY STATE THEY REQUESTED\nPALMER ONLY TO MAKE A CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROCK FORMATION.\nDAHL AND CHRISMAN STATE PALMER LATER WROTE ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL SAMPLES\nSTATING HE HAD BEEN UNABLE TO ANALYZE THE MATERIAL. DAHL AND CHRISMAN\nSTATE PALMER, A FEW DAYS AFTER THE FLYING DISK STORIES STARTED THE LATTER\nPART OF JUNE, LAST, CONTACTED THEM BY PHONE AT TACOMA, WASHINGTON, SAYING\nHE WOULD PAY FOR AN EXCLUSIVE STORY IF THE MATERIAL WHICH THEY HAD SENT\nHIM WAS FRAGMENTS OF A FLYING DISK. DAHL STATES HE WROTE PALMER A\nLETTER IN WHICH HE STATED THE MATERIAL WAS PART OF A FLYING DISK. DAHL\nAND CHRISMAN ADMIT THIS STATEMENT WAS ENTIRELY FALSE. DAHL AND CHRISMAN\nSTATE THEY WERE CALLED BY KENNETH ARNOLD OF BOISE, IDAHO TO MEET WITH\nHIM AT THE WHITHROP HOTEL, TACOMA, WASHINGTON, ON JULY THIRTYFIRST,\nLAST. THEY STATE ARNOLD CALLED IN ARMY INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS FROM"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\nHAMILTON FIELD, CALIFORNIA, AND CAPTAIN EMIL H. SMITH OF UNITED AIR\nLINES, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON TO ATTEND THE MEETING. DAHL AND CHRISMAN\nCLAIM THEY TOLD THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS, CAPTAIN DAVIDSON AND LIEUTEN-\nANT BROWN, AS WELL AS KENNETH ARNOLD AND EMIL SMITH EXACTLY HOW THEY GOT\nTHE ROCK FORMATIONS AND THAT THEY HAD NO CONNECTION WITH ANY FLYING DISK.\nDAHL AND CHRISMAN STATE THEY FURNISHED SOME OF THE ROCK FORMATION TO THE\nINTELLIGENT OFICERS AS SAMPLES. CAPTAIN DAVIDSON AND LIEUTEANT BROWN\nLEFT TACOMA, WASHINGTON IN A B TWENTY FIVE TO RETURN TO HAMILTON FIELD,\nCALIFORNIA ABOUT TWO THIRTY A. M. AUGUST ONE, LAST, AND WERE KILLED\nWHEN THEIR PLANE CRASHED AT KELSO, WASHINGTON, AFTER THE LEFT ENGINE\nBURNED OUT AN EXHAUST STACK WHICH IN TURN CAUGHT THE LEFT WING ON FIRE\nAND IT BROKE OFF. THE CREW CHIEF AND EACH OFFICER PARACHUTED TO SAFETY.\nERNIE VOTEL, ASSOCIATED PRESS WIREMAN, TACOMA, ADVISED THAT TWO OR THREE\nDAYS AFTER THE FLYING DISK STORIES STARTED, HE CONTACTED DAHL TO CHECK\nA STORY THE SEATTLE POST INTELLIGENCER HAD GOTEN FROM THE FIRE CHIEF AT\nHARBOR, WASHINGTON, TO THE EFFECT THAT DAHL HAD SOME FLYING DISK\nFRAGMENTS. AT THIS TIME DAHL ADMITTED TO VOGEL THE ENTIRE STORE WAS\nFALSE. DAHL AND CHRISMAN STATE ARNOLD WAS PAID BY RAY PALMER OF THE\nFANTASY MAGAZINE AND POSSIBLY THE BOISE STATEMAN NEWSPAPER, TO COME\nTO TACOMA, WASHINGTON AND OBTAIN A STORY FROM THEM REGARDING THE\nFLYING DISK FRAGMENTS. THEY FURTHER STATE THAT EMIL H. SMITH HAD A"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nSEP 27 2 36 PM '48\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE THREE\nFRIEND ON THE CHICAGO TIMES AND WAS POSSIBLY SELLING THE STORY TO THE\nCHICAGO TIMES THROUGH THIS FRIEND. A CHECK OF THE RECORDS AT THE\nWITHROP HOTEL, TACOMA WHERE ARNOLD HAD HIS ROOM, REFLECT THAT ON JULY\nTHIRTY FIRST, LAST, ARNOLD CALLED PALMER AT A. N. FIVE TWO NAUGHT NAUGT,\nEVANSTON, ILLINOIS, COLLECT, AND ALSO CALLED NAUGHT ONE NAUGHT NINE J AT\nBOISE, IDAHO, COLLECT. ON AUGUST ONE, LAST, ARNOLD CALLED PALMER AT\nDEARBORN FIVE TWO NAUGHT NAUGHT CHICAGO, COLLECT, AND EMIL SMITH CALLED\nBLANK RODDY AT DEARBORN TWO THREE TWO THREE. ON JULY THIRTY FIRST AND\nAUGUST ONE, LAST, A TOTAL OF FIVE ANONYMOUS CALLS WERE RECEIVED BY A\nTACOMA TIMES REPORTER AND THE UNITED PRESS WIRE MAN AT TACOMA, GIVING IN-\nFORMATION REGARDING THE MEETING AT THE WINTHROP HOTEL OVER THE DISK\nFRAGMENTS AND STATING THAT THE B TWENTY FIVE HAD BEEN SHOT DOWN OR\nSABOTAGED WHICH KILLED CAPTAIN DAVIDSON AND LIEUTEANT BROWN INFERRING\nTHAT THIS WAS DONE BECAUSE THE INTELLIGENE OFFICERS WERE CARRYING DISK\nFRAGMENTS IN THEIR PLANE. DAHL AND CHRISMAN STATE THESE CALLS COULD ONLY\nHAVE COME FROM THEMSELVES, SMITH OR ARNOD, AND DENY THAT THEY MADE THE\nCALLS. NO RECORD OF THE CALLS AS HAVING BEEN MADE FROM ARNOLD-S ROOM\nIN THE WINTHROP HOTEL CAN BE LOCATED. DAHL AND CHRISMAN ARE EVASIVE AS\nTO JUST WHAT INFORMATION THEY DID FURNISH BY PHONE OR LETTER TO RAY\nPALMER. ERNIE VOGEL, UNITED PRESS WIRE MAN, TACOMA, WASHINGTON,\nSTATE IT APPEARS THE BOISE STATEMAN-S PAPER AND KENNETH ARNOLD HAVE"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE FOUR\nBEEN PUSHING THE PUBLICITY ON THE FLYING DISK STORIES. VOGEL STATES\nTHAT ARNOLD WAS EIGHER THE FIRST OR ONE OF THE FIRST TO CLAIM HE HAD\nSEEN FLYING DISKS. DAHL AND CHRISMAN STATE THAT ARNOLD ADMITTED RE-\nCEIVING MONEY FROM RAY PALMER TO COME TO TACOMA TO CHECK THE DISK\nSTORY. UNLESS ADVISED TO THE CONTRARY BY THE BUREAU, THE BUTTE OFFICE\nAT BOISE, IDAHO, WILL OBTAIN ALL INFORMATION REGARDING THE CONNECTION\nBETWEEN THE BOISE STATEMAN-S PAPER AND KENNNETH ARNOLD. WILL INTERVIEW\nKENNETH ARNOLD, ROUTE ONE, MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, BOISE FOR WHAT INFORMTION\nHE HAS AS TO THE ABOVE FACTS AND WHAT INFORATION HE FURNISHED RAY PALMER\nAND THE BOISE STATEMAN REGARDING THE TACOMA MEETING AND THE SABOTAGE\nOF THE B TWENTYFIVE. THE CHICAGO OFFICE AT CHICAGO WILL INTERVIEW RAY\nPALMER, EDITOR OF FRANTASY MAGAZINE, REGARDING HIS CONNECTIONS WITH\nDAHL AND CHRISMAN AND ARNOLD AND WHAT INFORMATION EACH FURNISHED TO HIM.\nWILL ALSO ATTEMPT TO ASCERTAIN WHAT INFORMATION CAPTAIN EMIL H. SMITH\nFURNISHED THE CHICAGO TIMES. THE SEATTLE OFFICE AT SEATTLE WILL\nINTERVIEW EMIL H. SMITH, THREE NAUGHT TWO SEVEN WEST LAURELHURST\nDRIVE ALONG THESE SAME LINES. WILL ALSO ASCERTAIN WHAT INFORMATION THE\nFIRE CHIEF AT [REDACTED] HARBOR, WASHINGTON OTAINED FROM DAHL AND\nCHRISMAN.\nWILCOX\nACK IN ORD PLS\nWA 9-39 PM OK FBI WASH DC VH\nCG OK FBI CG MDG\nBT OK FBI BT VGW\nDISC PLS"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAUG 7 9 39 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nAUG 8 5 37 AM '47\nDIRECTOR\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED\nMINOR\nCG OK FBI CG\nBT OK FBI BT VGW\nDISC PLS"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING DISCS\nBLUE\nFBI SEATTLE 8-12-47 1:05 PM PST KLS\nDIRECTOR AND SACS CHICAGO AND BUTTE URGENT\nFLYING DISCS SIGHTED BY FRED CHRISMAN AND HAROLD A. DAHL, TACOMA, WN., SM DASH X . REMYTEL AUGUST SEVEN LAST. EMIL J. SMITH, UNITED AIRLINES PILOT, INTERVIEWED RE ASSOCIATIONS WITH HAROLD A. DAHL , FRED CHRISMAN AND KENNETH ARNOLD IN TACOMA, WN., FROM JULY THIRTYONE TO AUGUST THIRD LAST. SMITH HAS RECEIVED PREVIOUS PUBLICITY FOR HAVING SEEN FLYING DISCS OR SIMILAR OBJECTS ON JULY FOURTH LAST IN COMPANY WITH HIS CO-PILOT, RALPH STEVENS, DURING ROUTINE UNITED AIRLINES FLIGHT OUT OF BOISE, IDAHO. SMITH RELATES THAT HE WENT TO TACOMA, WN., FROM SEATTLE ON THURSDAY, JULY THIRTYONE LAST IN RESPONSE TO TELEPHONE CALL FROM KENNETH ARNOLD AT TACOMA. SMITH CLAIMS HE HAD PREVIOUSLY MET ARNOLD ON TWO OCCASIONS, THE FIRST TIME ON JULY FIFTH LAST IN OFFICES OF SEATTLE POST- INTELLIGENCER WHERE BOTH WERE INTERVIEWED RE FLYING DISCS THEY HAD SEEN, AND ON SECOND OCCASION IN BOISE, IDAHO, ABOUT THREE WEEKS AGO WHILE HE, SMITH, WAS PASSING THROUGH ON ROUTINE FLIGHT. ON THIS LATTER OCCASION, ARNOLD WAS IN COMPANY OF CAPTAIN DAVIDSON AND LIEUTENANT BROWN, ARMY INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS, AND A REPORTER JOHNSON OF THE IDAHO STATESMAN NEWSPAPER. SMITH CLAIMS NO PREVIOUS ACQUAINTANCE WITH DAHL OR CHRISMAN. SMITH RELATES THAT ON NIGHT OF JULY THIRTY ONE LAST IN TACOMA, WN., THE DAHL AND CHRISMAN STORY, WHICH BOTH HAVE SUBSEQUENTLY ADMITTED TO BE FALSE WAS TOLD TO SMITH, ARNOLD , CAPTAIN DAVIDSON, AND LIEUTENANT BROWN BY CHRISMAN AND DAHL. SUBSEQUEST TO THIS INTERVIEW, CHRISMAN GAVE CAPTAIN DAVIDSON AND BROWN A BOX OF THE ALLEGED FRAGMENTS WHICH THEY APPARENTLY TOOK WITH THEM ON THEIR FATAL FLIGHT. SMITH STATES THAT ON SATURDAY, AUGUST FIRST LAST, AFTER LEARNING OF THE CRASH AND DEATH OF DAVIDSON AND BROWN, ARNOLD CALLED RAYMOND PALMER, EDITOR OF THE VENTURE PRESS IN EVANSTON, ILLINOIS AND WAS TOLD BY PALMER TO DISCONTINUE HIS INVESTIGATION OF THE DAHL-CHRISMAN STORY AND TO KEEP THE TWO HUNDRED DOLLAR EXPENSE MONEY WHICH PALMER HAD PREVIOUSLY"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AUG 13 1947\nRECEIVED-TAMM\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nAUG 13 9 39 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF B I\nP 25 3 53 PM\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nAUG 13 11 40 AM '47"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\nSMITH RELATES THAT HE AND ARNOLD MADE SUBSEQUEST ATTEMPTS TO GO OUT TO MAURI ISLAND WITH CRISMAN AND DAHL ON FRIDAY, SATURDAY AND SUNDAY, AUGUST FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD, BUT WERE PUT OFF BY CHRISMAN AND DAHL FOR VARIOUS REASONS, SMITH STATES THAT REPORTER LANTZ OF TACOMA TIMES AND MORELLO OF UNITED PRESS OFFICE TACOMA INFORMED HIM AND ARNOLD OF THE ANONYMOUS PHONE CALLS , AND FROM ACCCURACY OF THE INFO TRANSMITTED BY THESE ANONYMOUS CALLS, SMITH BELIEVES THEY WERE MADE BY EITHER DAHL OR CHRISMAN. SMITH ADMITS CALLING HIS PERSONAL FRIEND MAURICE RODDY, AVIATION EDITOR OF CHICAGO TIMES, ON FRIDAY, AUGUST FIRST LAST, TO INFORM HIM OR THE TACOMA INCIDENT AS PER A PREVIOUS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THEM THAT SMITH WOULD LET RODDY IN ON ANY FLYING DISC STORIES WHICH HE MIGHT RUN INTO. SMITH ALSO ADMITS THAT HE TOLD REPORTER JOHNSON OF IDAHO STATESMAN IN TELEPHONE CONVERSATION SATURDAY NIGHT, AUGUST SECOND LAST, THAT CAPTAIN DAVIDSON AND LIEUTENANT BROWN WERE CARRYING FRAGMENTS WITH THEM ON THEIR FATAL FLIGHT. SMITH SAYS THAT DAHL TOLD HIM ON SATURDAY NITE AUGUAT SECOND LAST THAT HE, DAHL, IF CONTACTED BY THE ARMY OR OTHER AUTHORITIES WAS GOING TO SAY THAT THE ENTIRE STORY WAS A HOAX. SMITH STATES THAT HE TOLD HIS COMPLETE STORY TO MAJOR SANDERS OF MCCORD FIELD, TACOMA, ON SUNDAY MORNING , AUGUST THIRD LAST, AND THAT ARNOLD LEFT TACOMA. UNLESS ADVISED TO CONTRARY, LANTZ AND MORELLO WHO ARE BOTH TACOMA NEWSPAPERMEN MENTIONED ABOVE, WILL NOT BE CONTACTED FOR VERIFICATION OF SMITHS STORY ABOVE. UNABLE TO LOCATE FIRE CHIEF OF HARBOR, WN. TO VERIFY INFORMATION RECEIVED BY HIM FROM DAHL AND CHRISMAN. SINCE THIS STORY ORIGINATED IN SEATTLE POST- INTELLIGENCER NEWSPAPER THIS LEAD IS BEING DISCONTINEED UNLESS ADVISED TO CONTRAYY. LETTER CONTAINING COMPLETER INTERVIEWS WITH DAHL AND CHRISMAN AS OUTLINED ABOVE WILL BE FORWAREDE TO BUREAU.\nWILCOX\nEND\nACK IN ORDER PLS\nWA 10-30 PM OK FBI WA BW\nOK FBI CG DBR\nBT O\nOK FBI BT HEW"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT Aug 12 10 33 PM '47 F.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED DIRECTOR U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE F B I Aug 13 5 58 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY F B I P 25 3 53 PM"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE COMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nAUG 6 1947\nTELEMETER\nFletcher\nWASHINGTON FROM SFRAN S5 8-6-47 12-09 PM RN\nDIRECTOR URGENT\nFLYING DISCS, SM - X. RE PORTLAND TELETYPE REFERENCING PHONE CALL FROM MR. LADD AT BUREAU ONE PM AUGUST FIFTH LAST. A-TWO SAN FRANCISCO UNABLE TO VERIFY. LT. COL. DONALD SPRINGER A-TWO HAMILTON FIELD, IN CHARGE OF INVESTIGATION BY A-TWO IS THOUGHT BY A-TWO TO BE RETURNING FROM KELSO, WASHINGTON AREA HAVING GONE TO KELSO UPON LEARNING OF DEATHS OF AAF INVESTIGATORS MENTIONED IN REFERENCE TELETYPE. HE PLANNED, UPON DEPARTURE, TO OBTAIN RESULTS OF AAF INVESTIGATORS OR REINTERVIEW PERSONS MENTIONED IN REFERENCED TELETYPE. SPRINGER WILL BE CONTACTED UPON HIS RETURN AND BUREAU ADVISED.\nKIMBALL\nRECORD 62-83894-91\nEX-56\n29 SEP 24 1947\n30CT 2 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAUG 6 4 22 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nTELEMETER\n\nWASHINGTON FROM DPHAN 5:M 6-6-47 12-02 PM RN\nDIRECTOR URGENT\n\nFLYING DISCS. 1SM - X. RE PORTLAND TELETYPE REFERENCING PHONE CALL FROM MR. LADD AT BUREAU ONE PM AUGUST FIFTH LAST. A TWO SAN FRAN-CISCO UNABLE TO VERIFY. LT. COL. DONALD KEYHOE? A TWO MAJ. FIELD. IN GRANDE OF INVESTIGATION BY A TWO IS THOUGHT TO BE RETURNING FROM KELSO, WASHINGTON AREA NAVAL CONFERENCE ON DEATHS OF AAF INVESTIGATORS MENTIONED IN RECENT EXPLANATIONS? UPON DEPARTURE, IF RESULTS OF AAF INVESTIGATIONS OR REINTERVIEW PERSONS WITH REFERENCE TO FLYING DISCS. SHEPHERD WILL BE CONTACTED UPON HIS RETURN AND BUREAU ADVISED.\n\nKIMBALL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nSEP 10 12 56 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED\nSEP 11 9 14 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nSEP 10 1 08 PM '47\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED-LAND\n\nSEP 10 2 00 PM '47\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED-TAMM\n\nSEP 10 4 54 PM '47\nRECEIVED-HARBO\n\nLIAISON SECTION\nRECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nAUG 7 10 26 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nFBI SALT LAKE CITY 9\" 9-10-47 9-55 AM MST MMH\nDIRECTOR\nM.......URGENT....\n\nFLYING DISCS. NEWS ITEM IN SALT LAKE TRIBUNE OF TENTH INSTANT REFLCTS THAT EIGHT DIFFERENT PEOPLE AT LOGAN, UTAH REPORTED SEEING THREE DIFFERENT FLIGHTS OF FLYING DISCS BETWEEN TEN FORTY AND ELEVEN TEN PM MONDAY, EIGHTH INSTANT. INVESTIGATION BEING CONDUCTED AND BUREAU WILL BE ADVISED.\n\nEND\n\n12-55 PM OK FBI WASH DC CAR\n\nRECORDED 162-83894-92\nSEP 19 1947\ncc Mr. Ladd\n5-R7"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\nNew York, N. Y.\n\nIN REPLY, PLEASE REFER TO\nFILE NO.\n\nSeptember 4, 1947\n\nDirector, FBI Attention: FBI Laboratory\n\nRe: Mrs. A. G. SARBANIS, Informant\n\nDear Sir:\n\nReference is made to Bureau letter dated July 21, 1947, addressed to Mrs. A. G. SARBANIS, 66 Notre Dame Avenue, Hicksville, Long Island, New York, a copy of which was sent to the New York Office.\n\nMrs. SARBANIS was interviewed by Special Agent William A. Johnson on August 12, 1947, at which time she advised that this coded message had appeared in \"Newsday,\" the local newspaper of Nassau and Suffolk County, Long Island, New York. She stated that the message had appeared in the \"County Irritant,\" a feature of this paper, and had been signed \"Radio Ham.\"\n\nMr. JACK ALTSCHUL, City Editor of \"Newsday,\" Hempstead, New York, was interviewed and advised that this article had been sent to the newspaper by letter which was signed \"Radio Ham,\" and explained that he had no way of determining the identity of the writer. Mr. ALTSCHUL stated that it was his opinion that the code had been made up by some local \"screwball\" who had been affected by all of the newspaper publicity that had been given at that time to the story about flying discs.\n\nThere is enclosed an article appearing in the July 12th issue of \"Newsday\" concerning this coded message, which might be of interest in this matter.\n\nUnless advised to the contrary, no further effort is being made to establish the identity of the person who signed himself \"Radio Ham.\"\n\nVery truly yours,\nEdward Scheidt\nEDWARD SCHEIDT,\nSAC\n\nEnc.\nWAJ:ja\n62-9227\n\nRECORDED\nINDEXED\n162-83894-93"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\nNew York, N. Y.\n\nSeptember 4, 1947\n\nDirector, FBI Attention: FBI Laboratory\n\nRe: Mrs. A. G. SARBANIS, Informant\n\nDear Sir:\n\nReference is made to Bureau letter dated July 21, 1947, addressed to Mrs. A. G. SARBANIS, 66 Notre Dame Avenue, Hicksville, Long Island, New York, a copy of which was sent to the New York Office.\n\nMrs. SARBANIS was interviewed by Special Agent William A. Johnson on August 12, 1947, at which time she advised that this coded message had appeared in \"Newsday,\" the local newspaper of Nassau and Suffolk County, Long Island, New York. She stated that the message had appeared in the \"County Irritant,\" a feature of this paper, and had been signed \"Radio Ham.\"\n\nMr. JACK ALTSCHUL, City Editor of \"Newsday,\" Hempstead, New York, was interviewed and advised that this article had been sent to the newspaper by letter which was signed \"Radio Ham,\" and explained that he had no way of determining the identity of the writer. Mr. ALTSCHUL stated that it was his opinion that the code had been made up by some local \"screwball\" who had been affected by all of the newspaper publicity that had been given at that time to the story about flying discs.\n\nThere is enclosed an article appearing in the July 12th issue of \"Newsday\" concerning this coded message, which might be of interest in this matter.\n\nUnless advised to the contrary, no further effort is being made to establish the identity of the person who signed himself \"Radio Ham.\"\n\nVery truly yours,\nEDWARD SCHEIDT,\nSAC\n\nEnc.\nWAJ:ja\n62-9227\n\nFBI LABORATORY DIVISION\nSEP 8 5 27 PM '47\nRECEIVED-HARBO"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"7/12/47 Newsday\nCOUNTY\nIRRITANT\nfrom our Mail Box\nComing His Way\nMerrick—Out all day yesterday looking for a house to rent, but no luck. I got so disgusted I ended up in a tavern and got lit. When I got home and went in the house I SAW FLYING SAUCERS IN AIR!\n—No Foolin.\nGarbles\nWestbury—Bellmore Radio Ham's message seems to be from some gentleman occupying an Olympian height. As with many of these erudite souls, the sender cannot resist including a few \"garbles\" in his code. Or is our Ham guilty? Here is your message: TIRED OF H-U M A N NONSENSE WONT AWAIT ATOMIC WAR DISTURBING SOLAR SYSTEM SO SENT FLYING DISKS AND WILL SET UP WORLD UNDER MARTIANS LATE THIS YEAR.\n—Simple transposition. Hope all your readers are appropriately warned.\n—Stephen M. Schuster.\n(Other ungarblers got \"outlaw\" (ATLAW) instead of \"await,\" \"disrupting\" instead of \"disturbing\". Miss Rita Flood of Port Washington expects the world order to be set up under \"minister.\" Is Radio Ham satisfied?—Ed.)"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nSTANDARD FORM NO. 64\nTO: Mr. J. P. Coyne\nFROM: W. V. Cleveland\nSUBJECT: Mrs. A. G. Sarbanis Informant\nDATE: 9/17/47\nYou will recall that a letter was received from the above captioned individual dated July 10, 1947, in which she inclosed a newspaper clipping signed \"Radio Ham.\" This newspaper clipping contained a coded message which Mrs. Sarbanis decoded. The FBI Laboratory checked Mrs. Sarbanis' decoding of this message and advised that it was substantially correct. The Laboratory's decoding of the message is being set forth below:\n\"TIRED OF HUMAN NONSENSE WONT AWAIT ATOMIC WAR DISRUPTING ORDER SOLAR SYSTEM SO SENT FLYING DISKS AND WILL SET UP WORLD ORDER UNDER MARTIANS LATE THIS YEAR.\"\nThe New York Office was asked to interview Mrs. Sarbanis to determine from what newspaper the clipping in question was obtained. They were further instructed to contact this newspaper in an effort to ascertain the identity of the person who sent in the coded message, in order that the person might be interviewed for information concerning the alleged receipt of the coded message.\nBy letter dated September 4, 1947, the New York Office advised that they had ascertained from Mrs. Sarbanis that the coded message had appeared in \"Newsday,\" the local newspaper of Nassau and Suffolk County, Long Island, New York. The City Editor of this newspaper stated that the original had been signed only \"Radio Ham\" and knew of no way of determining the identity of the writer. It was the City Editor's opinion that the code had been made up by some local \"screwball\" who had been affected by all of the newspaper publicity that had been given to stories concerning \"flying discs.\"\nThe FBI Laboratory has now advised that the FCC maintains their amateur records by a geographical breakdown as well as by call letters and that the Laboratory could possibly get the names of all amateurs in the Bellmore, Long Island, New York Section in the event it is desired that another attempt be made to identify the person who sent this coded message to the \"Newsday.\"\nRECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that no further action be taken in connection with this matter in view of the opinion expressed by the City Editor of the \"Newsday\" that the letter received by him signed \"Radio Ham\" was from some local \"screwball.\"\nWVC:tgh\n105-0-2270"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO: Director, FBI - Attention: Assistant Director D. M. LADD\nFROM: SAC, San Francisco\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nDATE: July 28, 1947\nThere is transmitted herewith for the information of the Bureau a report received from Lieutenant Colonel DONALD L. SPRINGER, A-2, Hamilton Field, California, containing the results of an investigation by his office concerning the reported sighting of flying discs.\nIn addition to containing the detailed descriptions of what was allegedly seen by several persons, the Bureau's attention is particularly called to the first memorandum setting forth the notes of Agent FRANK M. BROWN, CIC, Fourth Air Force, concerning an interview he had with Mr. KENNETH ARNOLD, Box 387, Boise, Idaho, who reported that on July 12, 1947 he had seen nine strange objects flying over the Cascade Mountain Range of Washington State. It will be noted that CIC Agent BROWN reports that \"Mr. ARNOLD is very outspoken and somewhat bitter in his opinions of the leaders of the United States Army Air Forces and the FBI for not having made an investigation of this matter sooner.\"\nThe thought has occurred to me that the Bureau might desire to have an agent of the Butte Office contact Mr. ARNOLD and explain to him our lack of jurisdiction in such matters.\nHMK:emb\nEnclosure\nDECLASSIFIED Authority: NND 90986\n62-83894-95\nEX-37\nR-344"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCQVERING CI-B1 FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nHamilton Field, California\nTITLE Flying Discs.\nFILE No. D333.5 ID (4AF-1208-I)\nDATE 18 July 1947\nINVESTIGATION made at Palm Springs, Calif., Boise, Idaho, and Hamilton Field, California.\nCONTROLLING OFFICE Air Defense Command\nPERIOD COVERED From 10 Jul 47 to 18 Jul 47\nCASE CLASSIFICATION Incident\nSTATUS OF CASE Pending\nREASON FOR INVESTIGATION:\nInvestigation initiated at the request of Headquarters Air Defense Command reference letter Headquarters Air Defense Command, dated 7 July 47, File D333.5 ID, subject: Investigation of Flying Discs.\nSYNOPSIS:\nFlying Discs first reported in this area 24 June 1947 near Mt. Rainier, Wash., by Kenneth M. Arnold (Incl 1, Exhibit A)\nUnidentified object reported 9 July 1947 at approximately 1277 near Boise, Idaho, by David N. Johnson, Aviation Editor, Idaho Daily Statesman. (Incl 2, Exhibit B)\nUnidentified objects reported by Capt. E. J. Smith, United Air Lines Pilot, 4 July 1947, eight minutes out of Boise, Idaho. (Incl 3 MCIC, Incl 7 News Clippings dated 5 July 1947)\nRecord check of law enforcement agencies, public utilities, and local residences revealed no record of Richard Rankin in Palm Springs. (Incl 4)\nUnidentified objects reported 8 July 1947 at 1245, traveling northeast over Hamilton Field by S/Sgt Edward R. Baker, (Incl 5, Exhibit I)\nUnidentified objects reported over Grand Canyon, Arizona, 0910 MST by Lt. W. G. McGinty, USN (Incl 6) and in vicinity of Lake Mead by Lt. E. B. Armstrong, Hq Tenth Air Force, Brooks Field, Texas. (Incl 6).\nExtent of publicity in local area indicated by press clippings. (Incl 7)\nDISTRIBUTION AAF 2; ADC 1; 4AF Files 1\nAPPROVED: DONALD L. SPRINGER Lt. Colonel, GSC AC of S, A-2\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":161,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"IDENTIAL\nCOPY\n\nIncident\n4AF 1208 I\n\nflying through the air I would never say a word about it\", due to the\nfact that he has been ridiculed by the press to such an extent that he\nis practically a moron in the eyes of the majority of the population of\nthe United States.\n\n1 Incl: Exhibit \"A\"\n\nFRANK M. BROWN, S/A, CIC 4th AF\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\nSOME LIFE DATA ON KENNETH ARNOLD\n\nI was born March 29, 1915 in Subeka, Minnesota. My father's name was\nEdward Erb Arnold; my mother's maiden name was Bertha E. Barden. I was a\nresident of Minnesota until I was six years old when my family moved to\nScobey, Montana, where they homesteaded. My grandfather, Roland C. Arnold\nalso homesteaded in Scobey, Montana, and became quite prominent in political\ncircles along with Burton K. Wheeler, the famous Montana senator.\n\nI went to grade school and high school at Minot, North Dakota. I\nentered scouting at twelve years of age and achieved the rank of Eagle scout\nbefore I was fourteen. My former scout executive was H. H. Prescott, now a\nregional commissioner for the Boy Scouts in Kansas City, Kansas.\n\nAs a boy, I was interested in athletics and was selected as an all-\nstate end in 1932 and 1933 in the state of North Dakota. I entered the\nU. S. Olympic trials in fancy diving in 1932; I was a Red Cross Life Saving\nExaminer during the years of 1932, '33 and '34. I taught swimming and diving\nat scout camps and the municipal pool in Minot, North Dakota. I went to the\nUniversity of Minnesota, where I swam and did fancy diving under Neils Thorpe,\nand also played football under Bernie Bierman, but upon entering college I\nwas unable to continue my football career because of an injured knee. My\nhigh school football coach was Glenn L. Jarrett, who is now the head football\ncoach of the University of North Dakota. I had little or no finances, and\nmy ambition in furthering my edication in college was through my athletics.\nAs a boy in Minot, North Dakota, I did a good deal of dog sled racing, placed\nfirst with my dog in 1930 in the Lions Club Dog Derby.\n\nIn 1938 I went to work for Red Comet, Inc. of Littleton, Colorado, a\nmanufacturer of automatic fire fighting apparatus. In 1939 I was made\ndistrict manager for them over a part of the western states, and in 1940 I\nestablished my own fire control supply known as the Great Western Fire\nControl Supply. I have been working as an independent fire control engineer\nsince, and I handle, distribute, sell and install all types of automatic and\nmanual fire fighting equipment in the rural areas over five western states.\n\nMy flying experience started as a boy in Minot, North Dakota, where\nI took my first flying lesson from Earl T. Vance, who was originally from\nGreat Falls, Montana. Due to the high cost at that time, I was unable to\ncontinue my flying and did not fly of any great consequence until 1943.\nI was given my pilot certificate by Ed Leach, a senior CAA inspector of\nPortland, Oregon, and for the last three years have owned my own airplane\ncovering my entire territory with same and flying from forty to one hundred\nhours per month since. Due to the fact that I use an airplane entirely in\nmy work, in January of this year I purchased a new Callair airplane, which\nis an airplane designed for high altitude take-offs and short rough field use.\n\nIn the type of flying I do, it takes a great deal of practice and\njudgment to be able to land in most any cow pasture and get out without\ninjuring your airplane; the runways are very limited and the altitude is\nvery high in some of the fields and places I have to go in my work. To\ndate, I have landed in 823 cow pastures in mountain meadows, and in over\na thousand hours a flat tire has been my greatest mishap.\n\n62-8394-95\nENCLOSURE\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\nBY KENNETH ARNOLD\n\nThe following story of what I observed over the Cascade mountains,\nas impossible as it may seem, is positively true. I never asked nor wanted\nany notoriety for just accidently being in the right spot at the right time\nto observe what I did. I reported something that I know any pilot would\nhave reported. I don't think that in any way my observation was due to any\nsensivity of eye sight or judgment than what is considered normal for any pilot.\nOn June 24th, Tuesday, 1947, I had finished my work for the Central Air\nService at Chehalis, Washington, and at about two o'clock I took off from\nChehalis, Washington, airport with the intention of going to Yakima, Wash.\nMy trip was delayed for an hour to search for a large marine transport that\nsupposedly went down near or around the southwest side of Mt. Rainier in the\nstate of Washington and to date has never been found.\nI flew directly toward Mt. Rainier after reaching an altitude of about\n9,500 feet, which is the approximate elevation of the high plateau from which\nMt. Rainier rises. I had made one sweep of this high plateau to the westward,\nsearching all of the various ridges for this marine ship and flew to the west\ndown and near the ridge side of the canyon where Ashford, Washington, is located.\nUnable to see anything that looked like the lost ship, I made a 360 degree\nturn to the right and above the little city of Mineral, starting again toward\nMt. Rainier. I climbed back up to an altitude of approximately 9,200 feet.\nThe air was so smooth that day that it was a real pleasure flying and,\nas most pilots do when the air is smooth and they are flying at a higher\naltitude, I trimmed out my airplane in the direction of Yakima, Washington,\nwhich was almost directly east of my position and simply sat in my plane ob-\nserving the sky and the terrain.\nThere was a DC-4 to the left and to the rear of me approximately\nfifteen miles distance, and I should judge, at 14,000 foot elevation.\nThe sky and air was as clear as crystal. I hadn't flown more than\ntwo or three minutes on my course when a bright flash reflected on my\nairplane. It startled me as I thought I was too close to some other air-\ncraft. I looked every place in the sky and couldn't find where the reflec-\ntion had come from until I looked to the left and the north of Mt. Rainier\nwhere I observed a chain of nine peculiar looking aircraft flying from north\nto south at approximately 9,500 feet elevation and going, seemingly, in a\ndefinite direction of about 170 degrees.\nThey were approaching Mt. Rainier very rapidly, and I merely assumed\nthey were jet planes. Anyhow, I discovered that this was where the reflec-\ntion had come from, as two or three of them every few seconds would dip or\nchange their course slightly, just enough for the sun to strike them at an\nangle that reflected brightly on my plane.\nThese objects being quite far away, I was unable for a few seconds to\nmake out their shape or their formation. Very shortly they approached Mt.\nRainier, and I observed their outline against the snow quite plainly.\nI thought it was very peculiar that I couldn't find their tails but\nassumed they were some type of jet plane. I was determined to clock their\nspeed, as I had two definite points I could clock them by; the air was so\nclear that it was very easy to see objects and determine their approximate\nshape and size at almost fifty miles that day.\nI remember distinctly that my sweep second hand on my eight day clock,\nwhich is located on my instrument panel, read one minute to 3 P.M. as the\nfirst object of this formation passed the southern edge of Mt. Rainier.\nI watched these objects with great interest as I had never before observed\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\n\nairplanes flying so close to the mountain tops, flying directly south to\nsoutheast down the hog's back of a mountain range. I would estimate their\nelevation could have varied a thousand feet one way or another up or down,\nbut they were pretty much on the horizon to me which would indicate they\nwere near the same elevation as I was.\n\n They flew like many times I have observed geese to fly in a rather\ndiagonal chain-like line as if they were linked together. They seemed to\nhold a definite direction but rather swerved in and out of the high mountain\npeaks. Their speed at the time did not impress me particularly, because I\nknew that our army and air forces had planes that went very fast.\n What kept bothering me as I watched them flip and flash in the sun\nright along their path was the fact that I couldn't make out any tail on\nthem, and I am sure that any pilot would justify more than a second look at\nsuch a plane.\n I observed them quite plainly, and I estimate my distance from them,\nwhich was almost at right angles, to be between twenty to twenty-five miles.\nI knew they must be very large to observe their shape at that distance, even\non as clear a day as it was that Tuesday. In fact I compared a zeus fastener\nor cowling tool I had in my pocket with - holding it up on them and\nholding it up on the DC-4 - that I could observe at quite a distance to my\nleft, and they seemed smaller than the DC-4; but, I should judge their span\nwould have been as wide as the furtherest engines on each side of the\nfuselage of the DC-4.\n The more I observed these objects, the more upset I became, as I am\naccustomed and familiar with most all objects flying whether I am close to\nthe ground or at higher altitudes. I observed the chain of these objects\npassing another high snow-covered ridge in between Mt. Rainier and Mt. Adams,\nand as the first one was passing the south crest of this ridge the last\nobject was entering the northern crest of the ridge.\n As I was flying in the direction of this particular ridge, I measured\nit and found it to be approximately five miles so I could safely assume that\nthe chain of these saucer like objects were at least five miles long. I\ncould quite accurately determine their pathway due to the fact that there\nwere several high peaks that were a little this side of them as well as\nhigher peaks on the other side of their pathway.\n As the last unit of this formation passed the southern most high snow-\ncovered crest of Mt. Adams, I looked at my sweep second hand and it showed\nthat they had travelled the distance in one minute and forty-two seconds.\nEven at the time this timing did not upset me as I felt confident after I\nwould land there would be some explanation of what I saw.\n A number of news men and experts suggested that I might have been\nseeing reflections or even a mirage. This I know to be absolutely false,\nas I observed these objects not only through the glass of my airplane but\nturned my airplane sideways where I could open my window and observe the[illegible]\nwith a completely unobstructed view. (Without sun glasses)\n Even though two minutes seems like a very short time to one on [illegible]\nground, in the air in two minutes time a pilot can observe a great [illegible]\nthings and anything within his sight of vision probably as many a[illegible]\nsixty times.\n I continued my search for the marine plane for another [illegible]\ntwenty minutes and while searching for this marine plane, wh[illegible]\nobserved kept going through my mind. I became more distur[illegible]\ntaking a last look at Tieton Reservoir I headed for Yaki[illegible]\n\nThis image contains all the information on the document.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\n\nI might add that my complete observation of these objects, which I\ncould even follow by their flashes as they passed Mt. Adams, was around two\nand one-half or three minutes -- although, by the time they reached Mt. Adams\nthey were out of my range of vision as far as determining shape or form. Of\ncourse, when the sun reflected from one or two or three of these units, they\nappeared to be completely round; but, I am making a drawing to the best of my\nability, which I am including, as to the shape I observed these objects to be\nas they passed the snow covered ridges as well as Mt. Rainier.\n When these objects were flying approximately straight and level, they\nwere just a black thin line and when they flipped was the only time I could\nget a judgment as to their size.\n These objects were holding an almost constant elevation; they did not\nseem to be going up or to be coming down, such as would be the case of rockets\nor artillery shells. I am convinced in my own mind that they were some type\nof airplane, even though they didn't conform with the many aspects of the\nconventional type of planes that I know.\n Although these objects have been reported by many other observers\nthroughout the United States, there have been six or seven other accounts\nwritten by some of these observers that I can truthfully say must have ob-\nserved the same thing that I did; particularly, the descriptions of the three\nWestern Air Lines employees, the gentleman from Oklahoma City and the locomo-\ntive engineer in Illinois, plus Capt Smith and Co-Pilot Stevens of United Air Lines.\n Some descriptions could not be very accurate taken from the ground unless\nthese saucer-like disks were at quite a great height and there is a possiblity\nthat all of the people who observed peculiar objects could have seen the same\nthing I did; but, it would have been very difficult from the ground to observe\nthese for more than four or five seconds, and there is always the possibility\nof atmospheric moisture and dust near the ground which could distort one's vision.\n I have in my possession letters from all over the United States and people\nwho profess that these objects have been observed over other portions of the\nworld, principally Sweden, Bermuda, and California.\n I would have given almost anything that day to have had a movie\ncamera with a telephoto lens and from now on I will never be without one - -\nbut, to continue further with my story. When I landed at the Yakima, Wash.,\nairport I described what I had seen to my very good friend, Al Baxter, who\nlistened patiently and was very courteous but in a joking way didn't believe me.\n I did not accurately measure the distance between these two mountains\nuntil I landed at Pendleton, Oregon, that same day where I told a number of\npilot friends of mine what I had observed and they did not scoff or laugh but\nsuggested they might be guided missiles or something new. In fact several\nformer Army pilots informed me that they had been briefed before going into\ncombat overseas that they might see objects of similar shape and design as I\ndescribed and assured me that I wasn't dreaming or going crazy.\n I quote Sonny Robinson, a former Army Air Forces pilot who is now opera-\nting dusting operations at Pendleton, Oregon, \"What you observed, I am con-\nvinced, is some type of jet or rocket propelled ship that is in the process\nof being tested by our government or even it could possibly be by some foreign\ngovernment.\n Anyhow, the news that I had observed these spread very rapidly and\nbefore night was over I was receiving telephone calls from all parts of\nthe world; and, to date I have not received one telephone call or one letter\nof scoffing or disbelief. The only disbelief that I know of was what was\nprinted in the papers.\n I look at this whole ordeal as not something funny as some people have\nmade it out to be. To me it is mighty serious and since I evidently did\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\n\nobserve something that at least Mr. John Doe on the street corner or Pete\nAndrews on the ranch has never heard about, is no reason that it does not\nexist. Even though I openly invited an investigation by the Army and the\nFBI as to the authenticity of my story or a mental or a physical examination\nas to my capabilities, I have received no interest from these two important\nprotective forces of our country; I will go so far as to assume that any\nreport I gave to the United and Associated Press and over the radio on two\ndifferent occasions which apparently set the nation buzzing, if our Military\nIntelligence was not aware of what I observed, they would be the very first\npeople that I could expect as visitors.\n I have received lots of requests from people who told me to make a lot\nof wild guesses. I have based what I have written here in this article on\npositive facts and as far as guessing what it was I observed, it is just as\nmuch a mystery to me as it is to the rest of the world.\n My pilot's license is 333487. I fly a Callair airplane; it is a three-\nplace single engine land ship that is designed and manufactured at Afton,\nWyoming as an extremely high performance, high altitude airplane that was\nmade for mountain work. The national certificate of my plane is 33355.\n\n /s/ Kenneth Arnold\n Box 587\n Boise, Idaho\n\ntraveling this way\nTop\nThey seemed longer than wide, their\nthickness was about 1/20th of their width\nside view\ntraveling this way\nMirror Bright\n\nThey did not appear to me to whirl or spin but seemed in fixed position,\n\ntraveling as I have made drawing. /s/ Kenneth Arnold\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\n\nIncident\n4AF 1208 I\n16 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n 1. On 12 July 1947, a call was made at the newspaper office of\nthe \"Idaho Daily Statesman\", Boise, Idaho. The aviation editor of the\npaper, Mr. David N. Johnson, was interviewed in regard to how well he\nknew Mr. Kenneth Arnold of Boise, Idaho, and as to the credibility of\nany statement made by Mr. Arnold. The purpose of this interview was an\nattempt to verify statements made by Mr. Kenneth Arnold on 26 June 1947,\nto various national news services to the effect that he, Mr. Arnold,\nhad seen 9 objects flying in the air above the Cascade Mountain Range\nof Washington. These objects were subsequently referred to as flying\nsaucers or flying disks and will here-in-after be referred to as such\nin this report. Mr. Johnson stated that he had known Mr. Arnold for\nquite a period of time, having had relations with Mr. Arnold on various\noccasions, due to the fact that both he, Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Arnold\nwere private fliers and frequently got together to talk shop. Mr. Johnson\nstated that as far as he was concerned anything Mr. Arnold said could be\ntaken very seriously and that he, Mr. Johnson, actually believed that Mr.\nArnold had seen the aforementioned flying disks. Mr. Johnson stated that\nafter Mr. Arnold reported having seen the flying disks, that the editor\nof the paper had assigned him, Mr. Johnson, the assignment of taking the\nairplane belonging to the newspaper and exhausting all efforts to prove\nor disprove the probability of flying disks having been seen in the\nnorthwest area. The results of this assignment to Mr. Johnson and what\nhe subsequently saw is put forth in a sworn statement signed by Mr. Johnson\nattached to this report as Exhibit B.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Mr. Johnson is a man of approximately 33 to 35 years of\nage. From all appearances he is a very reserved type of person. Mr.\nJohnson has logged 2800 hours of flying time in various types of airplanes\nup to and including multi-engine aircraft. During part of the war years,\nMr. Johnson was the first pilot of a B-29 type aircraft being assigned to\nthe Twentieth USAAF and stationed on Tinian Island, in the Pacific. It\nis the personal opinion of the interviewer that Mr. Johnson actually saw\nwhat he states that he saw in the attached report. It is also the opinion\nof the interviewer that Mr. Johnson would have much more to lose than gain\nand would have to be very strongly convinced that he actually saw something\nbefore he would report such an incident and open himself for the ridicule\nthat would accompany such a report.\n\n1 Incl: Exhibit \"B\"\n\nFRANK M. BROWN, S/A, CIC 4th AF\n\n62-83894-95\nENCLOSURE\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\n\nStatement of David N. Johnson\nat Boise, Idaho, July 12, 1947\n\nTo Whom It May Concern:\n\n On the sixth day of July, 1947, I received from James L. Brown,\ngeneral manager of the Statesman Newspapers, incorporated in Idaho as\nThe Statesman Printing company, an assignment which was in substance:\n\n \"Conduct an aerial search of the northwest states in an effort to\nsee and photograph a flying disc. Conduct this patrol for so long a time\nas you believe reasonable, or until you see a flying disc.\"\n In accordance to these instructions, I took the Statesman's airplane,\nand with Kenneth Arnold as passenger, flew a seven and one-half hour mission\non the seventh day of July, 1947. This mission was without result. It\ncovered an area embracing the confines of the Hanford plant in Washington,\nand territory between and around Mt. Rainier and Mt. Adams, where Arnold\nfirst reported seeing objects henceforth described as saucers or discs.\n On the eighth day of July, 1947, I took an AT-6 of the 190th Fighter\nsquadron, Idaho National Guard, of which I am a member, and flew to northern\nIdaho, into northwestern Montana briefly, to Spokane, Washington, and back\nto Boise by way of Walla Walla, Washington, and Pendleton, Oregon. This\nsearch also was negative.\n On the ninth day of July, 1947, I continued the search, again using a\nnational guard AT-6, this time centering my efforts over the Owyhee mountains\nwest and southwest of Boise, a portion of the Mountain Home desert on a track\nsoutheast of the Mountain Home army air base, thence into the Sawtooth moun-\ntains, and back in the general direction of Boise on a line carrying me well\nto the north of the Shafer butte forest service lookout station, into the\nHorseshoe Bend area, and thence back in a southwesterly direction to a point\nbetween Boise and the village of Meridian, west of Boise a few miles.\n During this search, which lasted approximately two and one-half\nhours, I flew under and around rapidly forming cumulus clouds over that\narea known as the Camas Prairie, east of Boise. The clouds were near the\nvillage of Fairfield in that valley, and Fairfield is 75 miles airline\ndistance east of Boise. At that time I saw nothing in the vicinity of\nthese clouds.\n At the time I reached the point between Boise and Meridian, I was\nflying at an altitude of 14,000 feet mean sea level, which would be a mean\naverage of 11,000 feet above the earth in this area, not considering errors\nin the altimeter induced either by barometric changes since my takeoff, or\nby the temperature at that altitude.\n I turned the aircraft on an easterly heading, pointing toward Gowen\nField, and had flown on that course for perhaps a minute when there suddenly\nappeared in the left hand portion of my field of vision an object which was\nblack and round.\n I immediately centered my gaze on the object. At that time, due to its\nerratic movement, I thought I was seeing a weather balloon. I called the\nCAA's communication station at Boise, and asked if the weather station had\nrecently released a balloon. The reply from communicator Albertson was that\nthe bureau had not. I do not remember his exact words; I am under the\nimpression he said \"not for several hours\" or gave me the exact time of the\nprevious release, which was around 08:30 that day.\n\n62-83894-95\nENCLOSURE\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\n\n Upon hearing this response, I turned the aircraft broadside\nto the object, pulled back the plexiglass covering to avoid any\ndistortion, took my camera from the map case, and exposed about 10\nseconds' duration of eight millimeter motion picture film. During\nthe time the camera was at eye level, I could not see the object be-\ncause of minuteness of scope introduced by the optical view finder\nwith which the camera, an f.1.9 Eastman, was equipped.\n Taking the camera away and once again centering my gaze on the\nobject, I observed it to roll so that its edge was presented to me.\nAt this time it flashed once in the sunlight. It then appeared as a\nthin black line. It then performed a maneuver which looked as if it\nhad begun a slow roll, or a barrel roll, which instead of being com-\npleted, was broken off at about the 180-degree point. The object\nrolled out of the top of the maneuver at this point, and I lost sight\nof it.\n This entire performance was observed against the background of\nclouds previously forming over the Camas Prairie. The object appeared\nto me, relatively, as the size of a twenty-five cent piece. I do not\nknow how far away it was. I do not know, nor can I truthfully estimate\nits speed. I can only say it was not an airplane, and if it was at a\nvery great distance from me, its speed was great, taking into consider-\nation that apparent speed is reduced to the viewer if an object is a\nvery great distance away.\n I forgot to look at my clock to determine the exact time I saw\nthe object. The CAA's log of radio contacts shows my first contact\nto have been made at 12:17 hours. But a few seconds elapsed between\nthe time I first saw the object, and the time I called the CAA's station.\n I subsequently related over the radio a description of what I\nsaw, and communicator Albertson may remember it. The control tower may\nhave a recording of the conversation. I have not checked to determine.\n The purpose of my relating over the air what I saw was to enable\nrapid transmission of the report to the newspaper, for at that time I\nwas on assignment and my energies thenceforth were devoted to (1) trans-\nmitting the information and (2) conducting a further search, which I\ndid after landing for fuel and to make some telephone calls.\n The next search, begun within half an hour after landing from the\nfirst one, consumed another two hours, but was negative. I explored\nthoroughly the region where I saw the object.\n Immediately after sighting the object, I asked if there were other\naircraft in the area. There was a P-51 of the 190th squadron practic-\ning maneuvers in the vicinity of Kuna, but that was behind me. A C-82\npassed over Boise, but I saw that aircraft go beneath me by some 2,000\nfeet. The P-51 in the vicinity of Kuna proceeded to the area where I\nsaw the object, at my request, and conducted a search. It was negative.\nDuring the afternoon, flights of P-51s were sent out to cover the area,\nand some of them flew high altitude missions on oxygen. These searches\nwere negative.\n I was subsequently informed that personnel on both the United Air\nLines side of Gowen field, and on the national guard side, observed a\nblack object maneuvering in front of the same cloud formation, which by\nnow had grown so that the clouds reached a probable height of 19,000 or\n20,000 feet from a mean base of 13,500 or 14,000 feet, mean sea level.\nThree of these men were national guard personnel and I talked to them,\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\nsaw it.\n\tThis statement is made voluntarily and freely, in response\nto the request of Mr. Brown and Captain Davidson, who called on me\nthis morning.\n\n\t\t\t\t/s/ David N. Johnson\n\n\nSubscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public, this 12th\nday of July, 1947.\n\n\t\t\t\t/s/ Geo. L. Flaherty\n\t\t\t\tNotary public for Ada\n\t\t\t\tcounty Idaho. My\n\t\t\t\tcommission expires Jan 2, 1949."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\nChart to which reference is\nmade on page six, statement\nof David N. Johnson\n\nThis design portrays the movements of the object to\nwhich reference is made in the attached statement. At\nall times the object appeared as black. Positions (1), (2)\nand (3) show the jerky, rising motion. Position (4) is where\nthe object rolled, presenting its edge to me. It then\nfollowed the dotted line, rolling over the top of the maneuver\nand disappearing at position (5).\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\nasking them to describe what they saw, before telling them my story,\nin order to avoid suggestion or inference of a leading nature. They\nsaw the object (from the ground) while I was on my second search.\nThey believed the time to have been 14:00 hours. The object performed\nin the same erratic manner, they said, as I observed.\n\tThe above is the extent of the story, and information concerning\nmyself is now in order.\n\tI have approximately 2800 hours of flying time in equipment\nranging from primary trainers to B-29s. Of course, that does not in-\ncrease my powers of observation except as to those practiced daily by\nan airman. It does not make my eyesight any sharper except again as\nto the incidental demands upon the eyes of a pilot.\n\tAt the time of the experience related above, I had flown four-\nteen and one-half hours on an assignment to find a disc and if possible,\nto photograph it. In all frankness, I was tired. I may have been\nsuffering, although slightly, from want of oxygen.\n\tPrior to sighting the object, I had concluded there was no point\nin pressing the search, that I probably would never see the disc-like\nobjects referred to by Arnold and by Captain Smith of United Air Lines.\n\tAt all times during the search, both on that day and the two\npreceeding days (particularly when I was with Arnold) I had literally\ntalked to myself to keep beating into my head that I would not fall\nvictim to the power of suggestion or self-hypnosis arising from a\nnaturally very intent desire to find a disc and bring success to the\nassignment given me.\n\tI therefore do not believe that I was the victim of suggestion\nor hypnosis. I am familiar with the optical illusion of a fixed object\nbeginning to move after it is watched a sufficient length of time. I\nknow what tricks the eyes will play as to moving bodies, and have learned\nof this particularly during night formation flying.\n\tI saw the object appear suddenly. If it had moved in a jerky\nfashion (as it did at first) for the full length of time I observed it,\nI would not be so strong in saying that I saw something not an aircraft,\nnot a balloon, and not a corpuscle moving across the retina of either\neye. The maneuver described by the object when its edge was presented\nto me convinces me that I saw an object actually performing in an\nerratic flight path.\n\tThe question remains, of course, whether I saw it. The motion\npicture film, developed and processed by R. W. Stohr in the Eastman\nlaboratories at 241 Battery Street, San Francisco, showed no trace of\nany object. Stohr says that if it was more than a mile distant from me\nat the size I described, the object would not have registered suffic-\niently on the film to be shown. He said it probably was too far away\nto be apparent even through great enlargement of the negative, and\nenlargement in that case is limited because of the size of the film\nand the fact I did not have any telescopic equipment on the lens. The\nexposure was f.16, stop set at infinity, at a speed of 16 frames per\nsecond.\n\tI have worried over this matter a great deal since seeing it.\nI \"took myself aside\" and said, \"come now, Johnson, don't be stupid.\"\nBut I cannot bring myself to the point of thinking I did not see a\nthing. The impression of the moment was too vivid, too realisti\nI knew in the air when I saw that partial slow roll or barrel r\nthat I was not a victim of illusion.\n\tI trust this matter will be of help to those investigatin\nflying disc phenomena which have been reported.\n\tA chart is attached depicting the movements of the obje\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\nIncident\n4AF 1208 I\n16 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n\t1. On 12 July 1947, Captain Smith, of the United Airlines, was\ninterviewed at the Boise Municipal Airport, Boise, Idaho. Captain\nSmith was passing through Boise on a schedule flight at the time and had\na 20 minute stop-over. Captain Smith reiterated the statements originally\nmade by him to the press as to what he had seen in the late evening of July\n4th, when 8 minutes out of Boise on the route to Seattle, Washington. It\nis the opinion of the interviewer that due to the position Captain Smith\noccupies, that he, Captain Smith, would have to be very strongly convinced\nthat he actually saw flying disks before he would open himself for the rid-\nicule attached to a report of this type.\n\n\n\nFRANK M. BROWN,S/A, CIC 4TH AF\n\n62-83894-95\nENCLOSURE\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY\nIncident\n4AF 1208 I\n14 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n\t1. On 10 July 1947, a check was made at the following locations\nin Palm Springs, California for the purpose of trying to locate Mr.\nRichard Rankin: Palm Springs Police Department, Palm Springs Newspaper,\n\"The Desert Sun\", Palm Springs Water Company, Southern California Gas\nCompany, Palm Springs Telephone Company, Palm Springs Employment Office,\nPalm Springs Chamber of Commerce, Royal Palms Hotel, 5 Palm Springs real\nestate offices, and the City Offices of Palm Springs including waste\ndisposal, water rights, tax records and etc. No record of Mr. Rankin\nexisted in any of the above mentioned offices.\n\n\t2. On 11 July 1947, Mr. Ryland M. Gorham, Postmaster of Palm Springs,\nCalifornia for the past 14 years was interviewed. Mr. Gorham stated that\nhe had lived in Palm Springs for the past 24 years and that he was unaware\nif a person named Richard Rankin had ever lived in Palm Springs. Mr.\nGorham stated that due to the fact that Palm Springs is a resort area and\ndue to the fact that in the summer months only 3 to 5 thousand people resided\nin Palm Springs, whereas in the winter months 10 to 12 thousand resided in\nPalm Springs, it was very possible that Mr. Rankin could have lived in\nPalm Springs more or less on a non-permanent status and he, Mr. Gorham, not\nbeing aware of it.\n\tA check of General Delivery records revealed a letter addressed to\nMr. Richard Rankin, Palm Springs, mailed from Cicero, Indiana, postmarked\nat Cicero, Indiana, July 1947, at 5 P.M. The return address on the\nenvelope was listed as the Gospel Tract Worker, Route 1, Cicero, Indiana.\nMr. Gorham permitted the contents of the envelope to be examined inasmuch\nas the contents was 3rd Class material and the envelope not sealed. The\nrecords were of a religious nature concerning the sad plight of American\nnon-church goers, the second coming of Christ and etc. Superintendent of\nMails was contacted by Mr. Gorham and stated that there was a Mr. Richard\nRankin who had received mail through the general delivery office of the\nPalm Springs Post Office, but that the last mail, other than the letter\nmentioned above, came through the Post Office approximately two years ago.\nThe Superintendent of Mails seemed to have a very uncanny memory and recalled\nwhere the mail coming in for Rankin had been addressed to. This mail was\naddressed to Mr. Richard Rankin in care of a trailer camp located in Palm\nSprings. On calling the trailer camp office, it was found that Mr. Richard\nRankin had lived in the camp but departed approximately two years ago and\nleft no forwarding address. Investigation is continuing in an effort to\nlocate Mr. Rankin and obtain a statement from him.\n\nFRANK M. BROWN,S/A, CIC 4th AF\n\n62-83894-95\nENCLOSURE\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nFLYING DISCS\n4AF-1208-I\n15 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\nOn 15 July 1947, S/Sgt Edward R. Baker, ASN RA 39576378, 467th AAF BU (ORD), Squadron A, Hamilton Field, California, was interviewed and stated as follows: S/Sgt Baker has been in the Army ten years and two months, twenty-six months overseas duty in the ETO, and has been in the Air Corps for about ten months. S/Sgt Baker stated that on 8 July 1947, he was going to Base Cleaners from his office and was passing along the sidewalk near the barracks of the ORD when he saw five or six men pointing toward the sky, but as he was use to this around an Army Air Base, he paid no further attention to it until a lieutenant and a captain ahead of him stopped and pointed in the same direction. He stated that on glancing up he saw three objects traveling northeast across the sky. Two seemed to be traveling faster than an ordinary flight of P-80s and he estimated the altitude between 8-10,000 feet and approximately 7-10 miles away. S/Sgt Baker stated that the two objects in the lead appeared to be round and of a very light gray color, while the object in the rear seemed to be either rotating or rolling behind the other two. S/Sgt Baker stated that from a distance he could not tell exactly the shape of the one which was rolling as it appeared to be turning over and he couldn't tell whether the object was flat. The only means he had of identifying it was the fact that it seemed to get brighter and darker as it appeared to roll. The objects were in sight approximately four seconds. As he was in a hurry, he did not stop to talk to the other men but he heard one of them remark that the one in the rear was certainly rolling fast. S/Sgt Baker was unable to identify any of the other men in the group who were reported to have seen the object. Baker stated that it was unlike anything he had ever seen and that he has been trying to convince himself that it was an optical illusion, and yet at the same time he is certain that he saw the objects as described. (See Exhibit I).\n\nNOTE: S/Sgt Baker appears to be intelligent and is a reserved sort of person. He was very reluctant to discuss the subject at first and appeared hesitant prompted by the possibility that he might be ridiculed. He seemed to be honest and sincere in what he stated he saw, and said frankly he was puzzled over the matter. A signed statement by S/Sgt Baker is attached.\n\n1 Incl:\nExhibit I.\n\nWILLIAM L. DAVIDSON, Capt, AC, OIC CI, 4AF\n\n62-83894-95\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Director FBI\nFROM: SAC Butte\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nDATE: September 2, 1947\n\nRemytel August 20, 1947.\n\nWith reference to the above-described teletype, Mr. H. H. HEDSTROM, 322 Third Avenue North, Twin Falls, Idaho, was the principal source of information. Mr. HEDSTROM, who is the Executive Director of the Twin Falls Housing Authority, explained that he and his wife and Mrs. HENRY SHULTZ, a neighbor, were sitting on their front porch at approximately 9:30 P. M., August 19, 1947. He said that Mrs. HEDSTROM suddenly shouted and pointed to the sky and thereafter stated that she had seen an object traveling at a terrific rate of speed in a northeasterly direction. The object was out of sight before Mr. HEDSTROM and Mrs. SHULTZ could see anything.\n\nWhile they were discussing what Mrs. HEDSTROM had seen, approximately ten minutes later all three saw ten similar objects proceeding rapidly in the same direction in the form of a triangle. As the group of objects was disappearing, three of the objects on the left flank peeled off and proceeded in a more northerly direction. The remaining objects appeared to close ranks and proceeded in a northeasterly direction.\n\nFrom three to five minutes later these same individuals saw another group of three objects proceeding in the same direction, and again in the shape of a triangle. From three to five minutes later all three observed another group in a triangular formation consisting of five or six objects. They were proceeding in the same direction.\n\nA few minutes later the three persons saw a large group of objects estimated at from thirty-five to fifty flying in a triangular formation in the same direction. Approximately twenty or twenty-five minutes after the large group of objects was observed, similar objects were noted coming back over the city in a southwesterly direction. These objects were generally in groups of three, five and seven and followed each other at approximately five minute intervals.\n\nMrs. HEDSTROM called Detective RICHARD A. FRAZIER of the Twin Falls Police Department, a next door neighbor, who was then accompanied by M. E. ROUNTREE and RICHARD SCOTT, also members of the Twin Falls Police Department. The three officers watched for a few minutes and observed a group of about twelve objects flying in formation over the city in a southwesterly direction. The members of the Police Department did not continue watching, although Mr. FRAZIER later saw other groups, which were also seen by the HEDSTROMs and Mrs. SHULTZ. Mrs. SHULTZ had also called her husband, who saw some of the objects.\n\nEX-23 62-83894-96 FBI 34 SEP 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BT 65-481\n\nOn the night in question the sky was overcast and the objects could not be seen closely; however, they were distinct enough so that all persons could observe what they described as a glow going through the air. They said that the objects appeared to be lighted from the inside and were of a color similar to regular electric lights.\n\nDetective FRAZIER and Mr. HEDSTROM both stated that they could not be meteors or comets, that they flew on a level line and did not appear to drop. They flew at a terrific rate of speed and were visible for only a few minutes at a time. Both persons interviewed said that the objects could not have been geese or ducks and that the lights were not a reflection of the city lights on some object or objects.\n\nNone of the persons interviewed noticed any flames or anything except the glow of lights. None of the persons who claimed to have seen these objects were drinking at the time. No other persons in Twin Falls reported seeing the objects mentioned herein; however, Mr. HEDSTROM and Mr. FRAZIER stated that it was purely by accident that they had seen the objects and that they would not have seen them unless they were looking for them, because of the speed at which they traveled. On account of the overcast sky they were unable to estimate the size of the objects or the height at which they flew.\n\nNo further investigation is being conducted by the Butte Office, and the case is being closed.\n\nRJG:FO'S\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nBT 65-481\n\n"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Director, FBI\nFROM: SAC, San Francisco\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\nDATE: September 4, 1947\nAIRMAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY\n\nEnclosed is a copy of a letter dated August 28, 1947, from Lt. Col. DONALD L. SPRINGER of A-2, Hamilton Field, Calif., with an attachment referring to the sighting of a flying object by Captain JACK PECK and his co-pilot, VINCE DALY, near Bethel, Alaska.\n\nPhotostatic copies of this letter and attachment are being forwarded to the Anchorage Field Office. In accordance with Bureau Bulletin #42, dated July 30, 1947, Anchorage is requested to interview Captain JACK PECK and his co-pilot, VINCE DALY, preferably separately, in order to obtain all details of their reported sighting of a flying object on August 4, 1947. The San Francisco Field Office should be furnished two copies of the results of these interviews for distribution to the Sixth Army Intelligence.\n\nDWK:MR\n62-2938\nEncls.\n\ncc Anchorage (Encls.)\nAMSD\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED 62-83894 97 EX-42 34 SEP 23 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nSEP 27 1 52 PM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUST.\n\nCopy\nG.5\n\n[illegible]\n\nVIA AIR MAIL\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n[illegible text, mirrored and faded, not reliably readable]\n\n[illegible]\n\nSubject: [illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nFrom: [illegible]\n\nTo: [illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED\n\nSEP 27 1947\n\nReceived\nSEP 27 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSIGAK 000 ALASKA COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, SIGNAL CORPS ACSAD\nSeattle 4, Washington\n19 August 1947\n\nSubject: Matters of National Interest\n\nTo: Commanding General\nFourth Air Force\nSan Francisco, California\n\nThe attached letter has been received from the NCOIC of\nthe Alaska Communication System station at Bethel, Alaska.\nIt is submitted for your information.\n\nFor the Commanding Officer:\n\n/s/ Svend C. Hansen\nSVEND C. HANSEN\nCaptain, Signal Corps\nActing Executive\n\n1 Incl\nCy ltr fr NCOIC\nat Bethel to Hq,\nACS, Seattle\n\n333.5/1208-I 1st Ind 4AFDA\n\nHQ FOURTH AIR FORCE, Hamilton Field, California, 28 August 1947.\n\nTO: Special Agent In Charge, FBI, U. S. Department of Justice, Room 422,\nFederal Office Building, San Francisco, California.\n\nForwarded for your information.\n\n1 Incl:\nn/c\n\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, GSC\nAC of S, A-2\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nSEP 2 1947\nSAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\nROUTED TO: FILE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY\n\nBETHEL, ALASKA\n\n5 August 1947\n\nSubject: Matters of National Interest\n\nTo: Commanding Officer, Alaska Communication System\n550 Federal Office Building, Seattle 4, Washington\n\n1. Per AGAO-S 319.1 the following report is submitted on a matter which may become of National Interest. Captain Jack Peck and his CoPilot Vince Daly have stated that on August 4, 1947 they sighted and followed a flying saucer Northwest of Bethel Alaska. This object was bigger than the Douglas DC-3 they were flying, crossed their course at right angles to them. It was flying at an Altitude of one thousand feet. They swung in behind it and followed it at an air speed of one hundred seventy miles per hour but it was out of sight in four minutes. They state the object was smooth surfaced and streamlined with no visible means of propulsion whatever.\n\n2. It is realized that the Fourth Air Force claims there are no such things but Captain Peck is Chief Pilot for Al Jones flying service and is not a man given to exaggeration. In view of the excellent reputation of Captain Peck and the fact that no one here doubts in the least but that he actually saw this object, this report is turned in for any action deemed necessary by your office.\n\n/s/ Harold D. Johnston\nT/4 Signal Corps\nOperator in Charge\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nSEP 2 1947\nSAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.\nROUTED TO: FILE\n\nInd #1\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Director, FBI\nFROM: SAC, San Francisco\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: August 27, 1947\n\nAttention: Assistant Director D. M. LADD\n\nReference is made to my letter of August 8, 1947, with which there were transmitted photostatic copies of three letters dated August 4, 1947, entitled, \"Investigation of Flying Discs\".\n\nIn order to keep the Bureau fully informed concerning this matter, I am enclosing a letter dated July 28, 1947, entitled, \"Unidentifiable Objects\" furnished to me by Lt. Colonel DONALD L. SPRINGER, GSC, A C of S A-2. Enclosed with this letter was a memorandum for the officer in charge written by LAWRENCE R. KING, JR., Special Agent CIC AdC dated July 15, 1947.\n\nLt. Colonel DONALD L. SPRINGER furnished me in person with a memorandum entitled, \"Incident for AF 1208-I\" dated August 5, 1947, and prepared by JAMES A. NELSON, Special Agent CIC 4AF.\n\nThe Bureau will be kept currently advised of any future information obtained in this matter.\n\nDWK:VL\n62-2938\nEnclosures\n\nFletcher\n\n62-83894-98\n\n62 OCT 1 1947"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Director, FBI\nFROM: SAC, San Francisco\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: August 27, 1947\n\nReference is made to my letter of August 8, 1947, with which there were transmitted photostatic copies of three letters dated August 4, 1947, entitled, \"Investigation of Flying Discs\".\n\nIn order to keep the Bureau fully informed concerning this matter, I am enclosing a letter dated July 28, 1947, entitled, \"Unidentifiable Objects\" furnished to me by Lt. Colonel DONALD L. SPRINGER, GSC, A C of S A-2.\n\nThe Bureau will be kept currently advised of any future information obtained in this matter.\n\nRECEIVED\nLIAISON SECTION\nSEP 4 1947\nRECEIVED\nSEP 27 1947\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED\nSEP 10 1947\nF.B.I."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nIncident\n4AF 1208-I\n5 August 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\nOn 5 August 1947, this agent interviewed Captain William H. Ryherd, ASN O-86356, the assistant operations officer in the 415th AAF BU, Building 95, Hamilton Field, California, regarding flying objects in the air. Captain Ryherd stated in substance: He is an instructor pilot in the 415th Training Unit. On 29 July at 1450, Captain Ryherd and a student, 1st Lt. Ward L. Stewart, 1242 Silvia Street, Berkeley, California, landed and parked an AT-6 near the hangar, building 59 of the 415th AAF BU. Walking from the aircraft toward reserve operations, and looking westward just over the hangar, Captain Ryherd saw a P-80 flying southward toward Oakland. Above this P-80, at approximately 8,000 to 10,000 feet in altitude, Captain Ryherd saw two flying objects traveling the same direction as the P-80. He, Ryherd, judged the solid, white, somewhat shiny objects were approximately 15 to 25 feet in diameter. Ryherd stated that he didn't call them discs due to the publicity these objects have been given, but in shape they were circular, like a ball on the bottom, but not completely round; and Ryherd specifically stated that these objects were not airplanes.\n\nThe first flying object was traveling straight and level; whereas the second was close behind the first, same altitude, only it seemed to be going from left to right and right to left, more or less like a guard in an aircraft formation. Captain Ryherd further stated that the speed of these two objects made a P-80 look as if it was motionless in the air.\n\nThe sky was clear, consequently Captain Ryherd and Lt. Stewart watched the two objects until they disappeared in flight, supposedly over Oakland, headed toward the ocean.\n\nDue to the noise of the P-80, no sound of any kind could be heard from these flying objects.\n\nThese objects did not leave any vapor, smoke, or any visible trails along their flight path.\n\nCaptain Ryherd informed this agent he had never told anyone about these flying objects, fearing that people would think he was crazy.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Captain Ryherd showed extreme sincerity throughout the interview, answering all questions with caution and assurance.\n\nJAMES A. NELSON, Spec. Agt., CIC 4AF"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n28 July 1947\n\n4AFDC-1\n4AF-1208-I\n\nSUBJECT: \"Unidentifiable Objects\".\n\nTO : Special Agent In Charge, FBI, 111 Sutter Street, San Francisco, California.\n\nInclosed herewith is information copy of MOIC, subject as above, dated 15 July 1947.\n\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt Col., GSC\nA C of S, A-2\n\n1-Incl: Info cy MOIC, dtd 15Jul47.\n\n-1-"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIABLE OBJECTS\nWilliams Fld., Chandler, Ariz.\n15 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n1. On 14 July 1947, 1st Lt Eric B. Armstrong, O-2059709, 170th AAF Base Unit, Ferry Division, Brooks Field, San Antonio, Texas was interviewed and the following information was obtained: Lt. Armstrong departed Williams Field, Arizona at 1400 CST on 28 June 1947 in a P-51 for Portland, Oregon, by the way of Medford, Oregon. At approximately 1515 CST on a course of 300 degrees, and ground speed of 285, altitude 10,000 feet, approximately thirty miles northwest of Lake Meade, Nevada Lt. Armstrong sighted five or six white, circular objects at four o'clock, altitude approximately 6,000 feet, course approximately 120 degrees and an estimated speed of 285 MPH. Lt. Armstrong said the objects were flying very smoothly and in a close formation. The estimated size of the white objects were approximately 36 inches in diameter. Lt. Armstrong stated that he is sure the white objects were not birds, since the rate of closure was very fast. Lt. Armstrong was certain that the white objects were not jets or conventional type aircraft since he has flown both types.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES:\n\nLt. Armstrong was very sincere in the explanation and was not the exaggerating type. He merely stated what he saw and has drawn no conclusions as to what the white objects were.\n\nLawrence R. King, Jr., Special Agent, CIC,ADC\n\nCERTIFIED A TRUE COPY:\nR. D. STEPHENS\nMajor, Air Corps"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM: SAC, SAN FRANCISCO\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\nDATE: August 27, 1947\n\nATTENTION: ASSISTANT DIRECTOR D. M. LADD\n\nColonel SPRINGER, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California, telephonically advised Special Agent MICHAEL J. CASSIDY of the San Francisco Office at 10:40 AM on August 27, 1947, that a personal letter had been received by his organization from HENRY McLEOD, city editor of the Seattle Times, which stated in effect that because there were so many stories going around relative to flying discs and related matters, and that his staff of reporters had been attempting to get reliable information concerning such stories, he was writing to inquire whether any governmental agency was going to make an official statement relative to the situation pertaining to the flying discs; that Mr. McLEOD also asked whether it would be permissible for his reporters to interview ARNOLD, DAHL, and SMITH relative to this situation.\n\nColonel SPRINGER stated that the above-mentioned letter was answered personally by General HALE on August 25, 1947, and advised Mr. McLEOD that as far as the Army Air Force was concerned, they had no information which would definitely clear up the situation; that as far as interviewing persons, Mr. McLEOD could feel free to interview whomsoever he desired, in that there was no censorship at the present time; that in the interest of economy, the Fourth Air Force Headquarters would not run out every lead or report of flying discs, but that if well-founded and apparently reliable information were received, that such information would be given attention.\n\nA copy of this letter is being forwarded to the Seattle Field Division for any action deemed advisable.\n\n62-2938\nDWK/jo\n2 cc Seattle\n\nAIRMAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, WILMINGTON, DEL.\nFROM : SAC, BALTIMORE\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nDate: September 4, 1947\n\nRe: Flying Discs - Miscellaneous\n\nOn August 29, 1947, Forrest Wenyon, 123 Rehoboth Avenue, Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, a veteran Delaware pilot, reportedly observed unidentified flying objects. The information was received by this office from Wilmington. Mr. Wenyon stated that the objects he saw were of a bright color and traveled at a tremendous rate of speed.\n\nHe stated that he had previously reported the matter to the Eastern Airlines and the Civil Aeronautics Authority, and that he had not received any answer.\n\nCopies of the attached newspaper clipping are being furnished to the Bureau for information."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MISC.\n\nThe attached newspaper clipping was taken from the \"Morning News\" of Delaware, July 8, 1947. It reports that a pilot, FORREST WENYON, 123 Rehoboth Avenue, Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, an aircraft pilot, had disclosed that in the past ten months he had twice seen flying discs which he was reported to have described as \"flying mayonnaise jars.\" He was reported to have seen the first flying disc during September, 1946, and to have noted another such object on June 2, 1947.\n\nMr. WENYON was quoted as having called the Federal Bureau of Investigation and was advised that the Bureau was not interested, whereupon he notified the Eastern Airlines and the Civil Aeronautic Authority of the objects he had seen. Both agencies are reported to have accepted the information stating they would investigate. The clipping further stated that Mr. WENYON had received no answer to date from either agency.\n\nThis clipping was submitted to me by the resident agents' office at Wilmington together with the advice that no agent in Wilmington had been contacted by Mr. WENYON. I directed Mr. WENYON be interviewed to determine the full facts.\n\nMr. WENYON was interviewed and it was determined that his correct name is HORACE P. WENYON. Mr. WENYON advised that he had been an airplane pilot approximately thirty years. He stated that in September of 1946, while flying at an altitude of 1,000 feet, two or three miles south of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, he noticed a projectile approximately fifteen inches in diameter which crossed his course at right angles and was moving in a west-to-east direction. According to Mr. WENYON, several jets of flame were spurting from the object and it was traveling at a very high rate of speed, 1,000 to 1,200 miles per hour. He stated that in October of 1946, he observed a similar projectile while flying over Rehoboth Beach at 1,400 feet. This was also traveling from west to east.\n\nMr. WENYON stated that there is little question in his mind but that what he saw was some sort of rocket being tested. He stated that he wished to call the matter to the attention of the appropriate authority inasmuch as he thought that the series of airplane crashes that have occurred recently might in part be explained by what he had observed. He stated that he reported the information to the Civil Aeronautics Authority and was telephonically interviewed by a reporter from the Wilmington News."} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"L/Dir., FBI\n9/4/47\nFlying Discs\nMiscellaneous\n\nMr. WENYON stated that what he had seen traveled at such a high rate of speed that it was very difficult to describe it, but the description \"flying mayonnaise jars\" was concocted by the newspaper reporter.\n\nThis information has not been brought to the attention of any Army sources in view of the fact that only a preliminary inquiry was conducted on the basis of a news article which sets forth essentially the facts obtained from Mr. WENYON.\n\nNo further action in this matter is contemplated by this office unless advised otherwise by the Bureau.\n\nSB:arf\n62-0\nAttachment\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"042188b6d2fb8fc5","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\nFROM: Baltimore\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nMISCELLANEOUS\nDATE: 9/4/47\n\nFlying Mayonnaise Jars Reported by Rehoboth Pilot\n\nForrest Wenyon Believes Mystery Discs, Jet-Propelled, May Have Caused Big Plane Crash on Memorial Day\n\nVeteran Delaware pilot, Forrest Wenyon of 123 Rehoboth Avenue, Rehoboth Beach, disclosed last night that in the past 10 months he has seen objects now being loosely described as \"flying saucers\" but he calls \"flying mayonnaise jars.\"\n\nThe particular difference between the mysterious objects of Mr. Wenyon's report and those which have now been observed in some 40 states in that the former, according to the pilot, held a true course until they disappeared from sight.\n\nThis would indicate a guided or at least an aimed missile while the course of the \"saucers\" has been described by observers as erratic.\n\nMr. Wenyon said last night that he first saw what loosely resembled a \"flying mayonnaise jar\" one afternoon last September while flying at about 1,000 feet. It was late in the afternoon and the pilot was flying north.\n\nSuddenly, at an estimated distance of 2,000 feet in front of his plane and traveling from west to east, Mr. Wenyon saw the \"jar.\" It was going at tremendous speed but the pilot was able to note several things.\n\nThe most important of these observations, insofar as an explanation is possible, is that the \"jar\" appeared to have some sort of rocket combustion. Mr. Wenyon said that spurts of silver flame from the tail seemed to provide the propulsion.\n\nCarrying out the description of the \"flying mayonnaise jar,\" Mr. Wenyon said that the tail appeared to be a lid which had been perforated and that from these perforations the flames escaped.\n\nIn a matter of two, at the most three, seconds the object had disappeared over and past Fort Miles. The pilot did not see it land and doesn't know whether it did or not.\n\nThen on June 2 while flying at 1,400 feet in a Stinson four-passenger ship Mr. Wenyon, a pilot of 30 years' experience, saw another \"jar.\" He didn't say much about it to Rehoboth Airport attaches although he did mention it. Mr. Wenyon, with a theory in mind, called the Federal Bureau of Investigation. They were not interested and told him so, he said. He then called Eastern Airlines and the Civil Aeronautic Authority both of which gave him a sympathetic hearing, thanked him and said they'd investigate.\n\nTo date he has received no answer from either.\n\nMr. Wenyon's theory is that one of these \"jars\" was responsible for the crash of the Eastern Airlines plane at Port Deposit, Md., on Memorial Day which killed 53 persons. He based his theory on the stories of that accident and believes now that the mystery objects may be guided missiles."} {"doc_id":"04b262f19ccefa23","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR\n5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON\nWASHINGTON, DC 20301-5000\nINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY\nTranscript of an Unresolved UAP Report, Colorado, October 2023\nThis document is a transcript of a 15-minute video recording contained in this collection under the title LLE-UAP-PR002, captured by a law enforcement officer in Colorado in October 2023. AARO removed the audio from the original recording to protect information whose release could reasonably be expected to affect the privacy or other protected interests of a U.S. person or commercial entity. This transcript is also redacted to protect the identity of the reporter and sensitive law enforcement information.\nAll descriptive and estimative language in this transcript reflects the reporter's subjective interpretation at the time of the event. Such characterizations should not be interpreted as a conclusive indication of the presence or absence of any intrinsic object features or performance characteristics.\nBeginning of transcript.\n00:10: Speaker: So, I guarantee if I go and try to track it down again, it's going to try to flash lights at me.\n00:20: Speaker: It's the second night in a row.\n00:22: Speaker: Yesterday, they were in the [REDACTED] Now they're migrating towards the [REDACTED] area.\n00:51: Speaker: It's getting...\n00:55: Speaker: Looks like it's getting... getting some altitude.\n01:04: Speaker: It's going above that power line.\n01:51: Speaker: Yeah, there it goes.\n02:00: Speaker: Definitely getting... going higher.\n02:27: Speaker: Trying to see if it's gonna... zoom away.\n02:38: Speaker: I have seen one that has disappeared in an instant, so I'm curious if this one's going to do the same thing.\n02:48: Speaker: Right now, this one's just gaining altitude.\n03:52: Speaker: So, I can definitely tell that it's flying towards me because the light is getting bigger."} {"doc_id":"04b262f19ccefa23","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"05:37: Speaker: Weird thing about these things is they stay there for hours, and they will fly in triangular motions.\n06:40: (Faint radio chatter in the background)\n06:53: Speaker: Okay, so...\n07:40: Speaker: So yesterday, one of these things shined a very, um, bright red and blue beam into my truck, a patrol vehicle. So, I'm trying to see if it's going to let off some greater light tonight or do something that resembles what happened yesterday.\n09:03: Speaker: So, it looks like... can't be for sure, but it looks like there's... maybe it's maybe separating. It's like two distinct lights in that orb.\n10:03: Speaker: Any minute now, it's going to shoot away. I'm kind of curious to see if I can catch that on camera. I've seen it twice where it'll just... disappear in an instant at like supersonic speed.\n12:29: Speaker: Just don't understand what that is.\n13:23: Speaker: Okay, now we're moving.\n13:32: Speaker: Okay, it's moving to the west... at a pretty decent speed.\n13:53: Speaker: Looks like it's got a... pretty good-sized beam coming off of it, too.\n14:20: Speaker: Okay, it's definitely moving towards me.\n14:27: Speaker: Which is... very terrifying.\nEnd of transcript; nothing follows."} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense Intelligence Reference Document\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n30 March 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-1003-018\n\nAntigravity for Aerospace Applications\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAntigravity for Aerospace Applications\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 58\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nForeword ... v\nI. Introduction ... 1\nII. Concepts for Antigravity Within Newtonian Physics ... 2\nNegating Newtonian Gravity ... 2\nEnergy Estimate for Newtonian Levitation ... 3\nIII. Concepts for Antigravity Within General Relativity ... 4\nAntigravity via Gravitomagnetic Forces ... 4\nHistorical Foundations ... 4\nForward's Dipole Gravitational Field Generator ... 4\nFelber's Relativistic Antigravity Effect ... 7\nNegative Energy-Induced Antigravity ... 9\nExamples of Exotic or \"Negative\" Energy Found in Nature ... 10\nToy Model Estimate for Negative Energy-Induced Antigravity ... 10\nCosmological Antigravity ... 13\nPressure as a Source of Gravity ... 13\nVacuum Energy of Einstein's Cosmological Constant ... 13\nDark Energy ... 15\nAntigravity Propulsion Application of Dark/Vacuum Energy ... 17\nIV. Quantum Antigravity Propulsion Concepts ... 17\nAntigravity via Quantum Vacuum Zero-Point Fluctuation Force ... 19\nAntigravity via Nonretarded Quantum Interatomic Dispersion Force ... 21\nV. Conclusion: The Way Forward ... 24\nAppendix A ... 29\nStatic Radial Electric & Magnetic Fields ... 29\nSqueezed Quantum Vacuum ... 29\nGravitationally Squeezed Electromagnetic Zero-Point Fluctuations ... 30\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nQuantum Vacuum Field Stress: Negative Energy from the Casimir Effect ... 31\n\nDynamical Casimir Effect: Moving Mirrors ... 32\n\nReferences ... 34\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Dipole Electric Field Generator ... 5\nFigure 2. Diople Gravitational Field Generator ... 6\nFigure 3. Dipole Gravitational Field Generator: Inside-Out Whirling Dense Matter Torus ... 7\nFigure 4. Illustration of the Casimir Effect. ... 31\nFigure 5. Negative Energy Flux (Gold) Emanating From a Moving Mirror ... 33\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAntigravity for Aerospace Applications\n\nForeword\n\nAntigravity effects can be implemented by manipulating spacetime. This paper reviews several different theoretical approaches for exploring the possibility of controlling gravity by generating forces that counteract, or otherwise modify, gravity for the purpose of aerospace propulsion. Einstein's General Theory of Relativity is the theoretical framework guiding this study.\n\nThe paper also reviews other antigravity approaches via the interaction of quantum theory with gravitation. And it explores the question of which method or technique is best suited for aerospace applications and evaluates the make-or-break issues that limit them.\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nI. Introduction\n\nGravity is the bane of aerospace transportation. The force of the Earth’s gravitational\nfield acts to pull all objects, whether in motion or at rest, downward towards the Earth’s\nsurface. Because aerospace transportation involves the motion of vehicles through the\natmosphere and/or into space, propulsion engineers are always faced with the\nrequirement that aerospace vehicles will have to carry enough propellant and\nassociated tankage in order to provide enough propulsive thrust to overcome the\ndownward pull of gravity and achieve rectilinear motion. Energy has to be expended by\na propulsion system to overcome the force of gravity in addition to providing for\nrectilinear motion, and the majority of propulsive energy is dedicated to overcome\ngravity. The aerospace propulsion engineer is faced with two choices for the control of\ngravity in this regard: passive control and active control. Modern aerospace propulsion\ntechnology, which is based on accumulated scientific knowledge since recorded history,\ncan only achieve the passive control of gravity whereby a given propulsion device must\ndevelop a thrust that will passively counteract the Earth’s gravitational pull, lift a\nvehicle off the surface, and propel it through the air or into space. Newton’s laws of\nmotion and gravity require that the fuel fraction of any aerospace vehicle can never be\nless than that given by a simple function of the ratio of the vehicle’s maximum speed to\nthe speed of its rocket plume, jet, fan, or propeller wake. For example, this limit implies\nthat a single-stage rocket that accelerates to escape velocity must be composed of\nmore than 93 percent fuel. That is because a rocket must accelerate its working fluid\nfrom rest (relative to the rocket) up to its exhaust speed. Thus, exhaust speeds for\naircraft and chemical rockets are limited by material science, chemical reaction rates,\nand engineering factors to only a few thousand meters per second.\n\nTo date, there is no technology that can achieve the active control of gravity. If one\ncould eliminate or otherwise control the Earth’s gravity field, then one has the ability to\ndramatically reduce the amount of propellant, its tankage, and the overall structural\nsize and mass of an aircraft or rocket because there will no longer be any need for\nthese to overcome the pull of Earth’s gravity while transporting a payload across the\nglobe or into space. Instead, aerospace vehicles will only need to have the propellant\nmass and infrastructure necessary to change their kinetic energy from rest to a final\nvelocity necessary to achieve atmospheric flight or space orbit. The Earth’s gravitational\nwell will no longer have any impact on aircraft, launch vehicle, or spaceflight dynamics\nif one were to achieve active gravity control. Aerospace vehicles would merely “levitate”\nin air and their propulsion systems would be optimized for change-in-velocity missions.\nHowever, it is possible to envision a form of active gravity control propulsion that would\nnot require a change in kinetic energy.\n\nOne of the primary concepts for the goal of affecting gravity is “antigravity,” which is a\ncolloquial expression that specifically means the negation or repulsion of the force of\ngravity. A more general term that encompasses this notion and other possibilities is\n“gravity control.”\n\nIf antigravity exists, it can be exploited to counteract or nullify the gravitational pull, or\nattraction, of a planetary (or stellar) body that acts upon a much smaller body.\nEinstein’s General Theory of Relativity gives a prescription for a variety of different\nantigravity generators. Even Newton’s law of gravity offers several different classical\nprescriptions. Newton’s law of gravity can be used to simply nullify the gravity field of\none body acting on another body by using a clever arrangement of masses. The\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ntheoretical possibility of antigravity also appears in quantum gravity theories,\ncosmological vacuum or dark energy, and quantum field theory. This report reviews all\nof these topics. The report will also review the topics of gravity control that include the\nproduction of antigravity (self-lifting) forces induced by quantum vacuum zero-point\nenergy and by nonretarded quantum interatomic dispersion forces in a curved\nspacetime (that is, in a background gravitational field). The reader should bear in mind\nthat many of these concepts are nowhere near having any form of practicable\nengineering implementation. However, the report will provide theoretical estimates to\nguide the way toward technological implementation of antigravity.\n\nII. Concepts for Antigravity Within Newtonian Physics\n\nThe basic form of Newton’s law of gravity is given by the standard expression for the\ngravitational force (Fgrav) that mutually acts between two masses (Reference 1):\n\nFgrav = − G m1 m2 / r^2 (1)\n\nwhere the negative sign indicates that Fgrav is a (mutual) force of attraction, G is\nNewton’s universal gravitation constant (6.673 × 10−11 Nm2/kg2), m1 and m2 are two\ninteracting masses, and r is the radial distance between the two masses (note: MKS\nunits are used throughout). Observe in Equation (1) that the force of gravity acting on\na small test mass becomes stronger when the other (gravitating) mass is larger in\nmagnitude or when the distance between them is very small, or both. Also recall that\nEquation (1) and Newton’s second law of motion (F = ma) to define the magnitude of the\ngravitational acceleration ag that acts on a small test mass m due to a larger\n(gravitating) mass M (Reference 1):\n\nag = GM / r^2 (2)\n\nIf Earth is chosen to be the larger gravitating mass so that M = M⊕ (5.972 × 1024 kg),\nthen according to Equation (2) a small test mass m placed near the Earth’s surface,\nwhereby r ≈ R⊕ (6.378 × 106 m), will experience a downward gravitational acceleration\nof ag ≡ g = 9.81 m/s2.\n\nNEGATING NEWTONIAN GRAVITY\n\nIt is possible to design an antigravity machine that can nullify Earth’s gravity field using\nNewton’s law of gravity. One way to use Equation (1) to nullify the Earth’s gravitational\npull at a particular location would be to locate another planet of equal mass above that\nlocation (Reference 2,3). The forces from the two Earth masses will cancel each other\nout over a broad region between them. Everything within this broad region will be in\nfree fall. However, this is not a practical solution for aerospace flight since there is no\nway to manipulate and control another planetary sized body.\n\nAlong similar lines, Forward (Reference 2,3) suggested to consider using a ball of\nultradense compact matter, corresponding to dwarf star or neutron star matter (~ 1011\n- 1018 kg/m3), having a diameter of 32 cm and a mass of 4 million metric tons. This\nultradense ball will have a surface gravitational (attractive) force of 1-g. This small\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nultradense ball could be placed near the surface of the Earth and its 1-g gravity field will\ncancel the Earth’s 1-g gravity field. All test objects placed in the broad region between\nthe small ultradense ball and the Earth will thus be in free fall. Another option Forward\n(Reference 2-5) suggested would be to shape the compact ultradense matter into a disk\nthat is 45 cm in diameter and 10 cm thick, and having the same mass and density as\nthe small ultradense ball. Its gravitational acceleration is ag = 4Gρτ, where ρ is the mass\ndensity of the disk and τ is its thickness. In this case, the disk will have a force of\ngravitational attraction that is the same on both sides, and it will be uniform near the\ncenter of the disk where the strength of the gravitational force will be 1-g. If this disk\nwere to be placed very close above the Earth’s surface, then there will be a\ngravitational force of 2-g above the disk (= 1-g due to the Earth’s gravity field plus 1-g\ndue to the top-side gravity field of the disk) while underneath the disk near its center\nthere will be a gravity-free (or free fall) region because the Earth’s gravity field\nunderneath is canceled by the gravity field of the disk’s bottom-side. While these are\ninteresting antigravity machines, they are unfortunately not feasible from an\nengineering standpoint since one does not yet have the technology or means to create\nand handle ultradense compact matter.\n\nENERGY ESTIMATE FOR NEWTONIAN LEVITATION\n\nAn ideal propulsion breakthrough could take the form of the antigravity-based levitation\nof an aerospace vehicle within the Earth’s atmosphere. Rockets like the Air Force DC-XA\ncan hover above the ground for a time that is limited by the amount of rocket fuel\navailable (Reference 6). But an ideal antigravity propulsion device should allow for the\nindefinite levitation of a vehicle above the Earth’s surface. It is illustrative to estimate\nthe energy required to levitate a 1-kg test mass above the Earth’s surface. This will\nhelp quantify a potentially key engineering parameter for such a levitation system. A\ngeneric estimate can be found by considering the amount of energy per unit mass\nrequired to nullify the (magnitude) of the Earth’s gravitational potential energy Elev for a\ntest mass m hovering at height h above the Earth’s surface:\n\nElev = G M⊕ m / h (J/kg) (3)\n\nEquation (3) can also be derived by calculating how much energy is required to\ncompletely remove a test mass from the Earth’s surface to infinity. This calculation is\nmore in line with the analogy to nullify the effect of gravitational energy. And Equation\n(3) also represents the energy required to stop a test mass at the levitation distance h\nif it were falling in from infinity with zero initial velocity.\n\nSetting h ≈ R⊕ and m = 1 kg in Equation (3), the result is Elev = 62.5 MJ/kg. This is 2.05\ntimes the kinetic energy required to put the test mass into low Earth orbit (LEO).\nHowever, this estimate will require some adjustment that depends upon the type of\ntheory and its technological implementation. That is because the operational energetics\nof a putative antigravity propulsion system must be considered in conjunction with Elev.\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIII. Concepts for Antigravity Within General Relativity\n\nIn the Sections that follow the known types of antigravity that can be derived from\nEinstein’s General Theory of Relativity are described and summarized, which is the\nmodern relativistic theory of gravity.\n\nANTIGRAVITY VIA GRAVITOMAGNETIC FORCES\n\nHistorical Foundations\n\nHeaviside (Reference 7) (in 1883), Einstein (prior to the 1916 publication of his General\nTheory of Relativity), Thirring (Reference 8,9), and Thirring and Lense (Reference 10)\n(see also, Reference 11) showed that general relativity theory provides a number of\nways to generate non-Newtonian gravitational forces via the splitting of gravitation into\nelectric and magnetic field type components. These forces can be used to counteract\nthe Earth’s gravitational field, thus acting as a form of antigravity. General relativity\ntheory predicts that a moving source of mass-energy can create forces on a test body\nwhich are similar to the usual centrifugal and Coriolis forces, although much smaller in\nmagnitude. These forces create accelerations on a test body that are independent of\nthe mass of the test body, and the forces are indistinguishable from the usual\nNewtonian gravitational force. The Earth’s gravitational field can be counteracted by\ngenerating these forces in an upward direction at some spot on the Earth.\n\nForward (Reference 12) linearized Einstein’s general relativistic field equation and\ndeveloped a set of dynamic gravitational field relations similar to Maxwell’s\nelectromagnetic field relations. The resulting linearized gravitational field relations are a\nversion of Newton’s law of gravitation that obeys special relativity. The linearized\ngravitational field relations show that there is a unique correspondence between the\ngravitational field and the electric field. For example, the Newtonian gravitational field\nof an isolated mass is the gravitational analog to the electric field of an isolated electric\ncharge.\n\nLikewise, there is an analogy to a magnetic field contained within the linearized\ngravitational field relations. In Maxwellian electrodynamics, a magnetic field is due to\nthe flow of an electric charge or an electric current. In other words, the electric field\nsurrounding an electric charge in motion will appear as a magnetic field to stationary\nobservers. If the observers move along with the charge, they see no relative motion,\nand so they will only observe the charge’s electric field. Thus, the magnetic field is\nsimply an electric field that is looked at in a moving frame of reference. In an analogous\nfashion, the linearized gravitational field relations show that if a (gravitational) mass is\nset into motion and forms a mass current, then a new type of gravitational field is\ncreated that has no source and no sink. This is called the Lense-Thirring effect, or\nrotational frame dragging effect, in which rotating bodies literally drag spacetime\naround themselves.\n\nForward’s Dipole Gravitational Field Generator\n\nForward (Reference 13,14) used the linearized gravitational field relations plus aspects\nof the Lense-Thirring effect to develop models for generating antigravity forces. One\nexample of an antigravity generator is based on a system of accelerated masses whose\nmass flow can be approximated by the electrical current flow in a wire-wound torus.\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAccording to Maxwellian electrodynamics, an electric current flowing through a wire that\nis wrapped around a torus (or ring) causes a magnetic field to form inside the torus. If\nthe current (I) in the wire increases with time, then the magnetic field B inside the\ntorus also increases with time. This time-varying magnetic field in turn creates a dipole\nelectric field E, as shown in Figure 1. The magnitude of the electric field at the center of\nthe torus is given by:\n\nE = − μ0 N r^2 İ / (4π Rt^2) (4)\n\nwhere μ0 is the vacuum electromagnetic permeability constant (4π × 10−7 H/m), N is the\ntotal number of turns of wire wound around the torus, İ is the time rate-of-change of\nthe electric current flowing through the wire, r is the radius of one of the loops of wire,\nand Rt is the radius of the torus.\n\nFigure 1. Dipole Electric Field Generator (Reference 14)\n\nIn a similar fashion, Forward’s antigravity device is a dipole gravitational field\ngenerator. As shown in Figure 2, a mass flow T through a pipe wound around a torus\ninduces a Lense-Thirring field P to form inside the torus. If the mass flow is\naccelerated, then the P-field increases with time, and thus a dipole gravitational field G\nis created. The magnitude of the anti-gravitational field at the center of the torus is\ngiven by:\n\nG = η0 N r^2 Ṫ / (4π Rt^2) (5)\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY where η0 is the vacuum “gravitational permeability” constant (≡ 16πG/c² = 3.73 × 10⁻²⁶ m/kg),¹ N is the total number of turns of pipe wound around the torus, Ṁ is the time rate-of-change of the mass current flowing through the pipe, r is the radius of one of the loops of pipe, Rt is the radius of the torus, and c is the speed of light (3 × 10⁸ m/s) (Reference 14). One should note the striking similarity between Equations (4) and (5) for the dipole electric and dipole gravitational fields. Figure 2. Diople Gravitational Field Generator (Reference 14) Using Equation (5), Forward (Reference 13,14) showed that there would be a need to accelerate matter with the density of a dwarf star through pipes as wide as a football field wound around a torus with kilometer dimensions in order to produce an antigravity field (at the center of the torus) of G ≈ 10⁻¹⁰aacc, where aacc is the acceleration of the (dwarf star density) matter through the pipes. The tiny factor 10⁻¹⁰ is composed of the even smaller η0, which is the reason why very large systems are required to obtain even a measurable amount of acceleration. To counteract the Earth’s gravitational field of 1-g requires an antigravity field of 1-g (vectored upward), and thus the dwarf star density material within the pipes must achieve aacc = 10¹¹ m/s² in order to accomplish this effect. Forward (Reference 5) also identified a configuration comprised of a rotating torus of dense matter that turns inside-out like a smoke ring as another type of dipole gravitational field generator. As shown in Figure 3, an inside-out turning ring of very dense mass (M) will create an upward force (of acceleration a) in the direction of the (constant) mass motion (Mv, v is the mass velocity). This is also a feature of the ¹ The vacuum “gravitational permittivity” constant is (Reference 12): γ0 ≡ (4πG)⁻¹ = 1.19 × 10⁹ kg·s²/m³. 6 UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Lense-Thirring effect. Forward’s linearization analysis generalizes all of these effects into the following two key ingredients that are required to produce antigravity forces: 1) any mass with a velocity and an acceleration exerts many different general relativistic forces on a test mass, and 2) these forces act in the direction of the velocity and in the direction of the acceleration of the originating mass. In summary, these forces are equivalent to gravitational forces, which can be used to cancel the Earth’s gravitational field. Figure 3. Dipole Gravitational Field Generator: Inside-Out Whirling Dense Matter Torus (Reference 5) One can also view this genre of devices as a gravity catapult machine in which the machine pushes a body away using its general relativistic antigravity forces to impart a change in velocity. A space launch operator on the ground wanting to send a payload up into orbit would just ratchet up the strength of the (upward-directed) antigravity field to some value above 1-g, and after pressing the release button the payload accelerates up and away into orbit. These devices could also be placed in Earth orbit, stationed anywhere within the solar system, or even distributed throughout the galaxy in order to establish a network of gravity catapults. Space travelers could begin their trip by being launched from the catapult on the Earth’s surface, and when they reach space they would jump through various catapults as needed to reach their destination. FELBER’S RELATIVISTIC ANTIGRAVITY EFFECT Felber (Reference 15) used the Schwarzschild solution of Einstein’s general relativistic field equation to find the exact relativistic motion of a payload in the gravitational field of a mass moving with constant velocity. His analysis gives a relativistically exact (strong gravitational field condition) calculation showing that a mass, which radially approaches or recedes from a payload at a relative velocity of vcrit > c/3^1/2 (vcrit ≡ critical velocity), will gravitationally repel the payload as seen by distant inertial observers. In other words, any source mass, no matter how large or small it is or how far away it is from a test body (payload), will produce an antigravity field when moving at any constant velocity above vcrit. 7 UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY The exact relativistic strong-field condition that establishes the lower limit criterion for vcrit to induce antigravity repulsion of a payload (as measured by distant inertial observers in the rest frame of the source or in the initial rest frame of the payload) is given by (Reference 15): γ² > (3/2)ψ[1 − (L²/GMr)(ψ/3 − GM/rc²)] (6) In this expression, γ ≡ (1 − β²)^−1/2 is the standard relativistic Lorentz transformation factor which is a function of the normalized relativistic velocity parameter β = v/c, ψ ≡ ψ(r) = 1 − (2GM/rc²) is the g00 (or time-time) component of the static Schwarzschild spacetime metric² of a source (or central) body of mass M. L is the constant specific angular momentum of a ballistic payload of mass m, and r is the radial distance of the approaching/receding payload from M. One can solve the inequality in Equation (6) for β (or v) under the condition that a payload far from M, such that r >> b (b is the periapsis distance of the payload from M) and r >> GM/c², and find that the payload will become gravitationally repelled by M whenever γ² > 3/2 or β > 3^−1/2. In order to derive an exact solution, Felber considered the case for which M >> m so that the energy and momentum delivered to the payload has a negligible back-reaction on the source body’s motion. And he found that a strong gravitational field is not required for antigravity propulsion because a weak-field solution achieves the same results. Felber discovered another interesting facet about this new relativistic antigravity effect. He found that there is also an antigravity field that repels bodies in the backward direction with a strength that is one-half the strength of the antigravity field in the forward direction. Thus a stationary body will repel a test body that is radially receding from it at any v > vcrit. To delineate the propulsion benefit from this technique, Felber determined that the maximum velocity (vpmax-wf) that can be imparted to a payload initially at rest by the weak (gravitational) field of a larger source mass moving toward the payload at constant v > vcrit is vpmax-wf << c[β − (3β)^−1]. For the strong-field case, the maximum velocity (vpmax-sf) that can be imparted to the payload (initially at rest) by the larger source mass moving toward the payload at any constant v is vpmax-sf = βc. Felber’s analysis includes examples where he uses black holes for the large source mass. This form of antigravity propulsion is not too surprising because Misner et al. (Reference 16), Ohanian and Ruffini (Reference 17), and Ciufolini and Wheeler (Reference 18) report that general relativistic calculations show that the time-independent Kerr (spinning black hole) gravitational field exhibits an inertial frame dragging effect similar to gravitational repulsive forces in the direction of a moving mass at relativistic velocities. This and Felber’s exact solution are among the genre of Lense-Thirring type effects that produce antigravity forces. It is interesting to note that even though general relativity theory admits the generation of antigravity forces at relativistic velocities (Reference 19), they have not been seen in laboratory experiments ² A spacetime metric (ds²) is a Lorentz-invariant distance function between any two points in spacetime that is defined by ds² = gμν dx^μ dx^ν, where gμν is the metric tensor which is a 4×4 matrix that encodes the geometry of spacetime and dx^μ is the infinitesimal coordinate separation between two points. The Greek indices (μ,ν = 0…3) denote spacetime coordinates, x0…x3, such that x1…x3 = space coordinates and x0 ≡ time coordinate. The Schwarzschild metric is: ds² = −(1 − 2GM/c²r)c²dt² + (1 − 2GM/c²r)^−1dr² + r²(dθ² + sin²θdφ²). The corresponding metric tensor is a diagonal matrix: gμν = diag[−(1 − 2GM/c²r), (1 − 2GM/c²r)^−1, r², r²sin²θ]. (r,θ,φ) are the usual spherical polar coordinates in 3-dimensional space. 8 UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY because repulsive force terms are second and higher-order in the source mass velocity. To invent a relativistic driver for a captured astronomical body in order to use it to launch payloads into relativistic motion presents a large technical challenge for future experimenters. For this reason, this paper will not consider this concept any further. However, it does serve the useful purpose of illustrating the unusual antigravity forces that can appear in Einstein’s general relativity theory. NEGATIVE ENERGY-INDUCED ANTIGRAVITY Negative energy density and negative pressure are acceptable results both mathematically and physically in general relativity and quantum field theories, and negative energy/pressure manifests as gravitational repulsion (that is, antigravity). Negative energy is also known as a form of “exotic matter.” In classical physics the energy density of all observed forms of matter (fields) is non-negative. What is exotic about negative energy is that it must have negative energy density and/or negative flux (Reference 20). The energy density is “negative” in the sense that a given (exotic) matter field must have an energy density, ρE (= ρc², where ρ is the rest-mass density), that is less than or equal to its pressures/tensions, pi (Reference 21,22).³ In many cases, these equations of state are also known to possess an energy density that is algebraically negative; that is, the energy density and flux are less than zero. It is on the basis of these conditions that this material property is called “exotic.” The condition for ordinary, classical (non-exotic) forms of matter that one is familiar with in nature is that ρE > pi and/or ρE ≥ 0. These conditions represent two examples of what are variously called the “standard” energy conditions: Weak Energy Condition (WEC: ρE ≥ 0, ρE + pi ≥ 0), Null Energy Condition (NEC: ρE + pi ≥ 0), Dominant Energy Condition (DEC), and Strong Energy Condition (SEC). These energy conditions forbid negative energy density between material objects to occur in nature, but they are mere hypotheses. Hawking and Ellis (Reference 23) formulated the energy conditions in order to establish a series of mathematical hypotheses governing the behavior of collapsed-matter singularities in their study of cosmology and black hole physics. More specifically, classical general relativity allows one to prove lots of general theorems about the behavior of matter in gravitational fields. The bad news is that real physical matter is not “reasonable” because the energy conditions are in general violated by semiclassical quantum effects (occurring at order η) (Reference 22).⁴ More specifically, quantum effects generically violate the average NEC (ANEC). Furthermore, it was discovered in 1965 that quantum field theory has the remarkable property of allowing states of matter containing local regions of negative energy density or negative fluxes (Reference 24). This violates the WEC, which postulates that the local energy density is non-negative for all observers. “Negative energy” has the unfortunate reputation of alarming physicists. This is unfounded since all the energy condition hypotheses have been experimentally tested in the laboratory and experimentally shown to be false − 25 years before their formulation (Reference 25). ³ Latin indices (e.g., i, j, k = 1…3) that are affixed to physical quantities denote the usual 3-dimensional space coordinates, x¹…x³, indicating the spatial components of vector or tensor quantities. ⁴ Planck’s reduced constant, η = 1.055 × 10⁻³⁴ J·s. 9 UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Further investigation into this technical issue showed that violations of the energy conditions are widespread for all forms of both “reasonable” classical and quantum matter (Reference 26-30). Furthermore, Visser (Reference 22) showed that all (generic) spacetime geometries violate all the energy conditions. So the condition that ρE > pi and/or ρE ≥ 0 must be obeyed by all forms of matter in nature is spurious. Violating the energy conditions commits no offense against nature. Negative energy has been produced in the laboratory and this will be discussed in the following sections. Examples of Exotic or “Negative” Energy Found in Nature The exotic (energy condition-violating) fields that are known to occur in nature are: • Static, radially-dependent electric or magnetic fields. These are borderline exotic, if their tension were infinitesimally larger, for a given energy density (Reference 23,31). • Squeezed quantum vacuum states: electromagnetic and other (non-Maxwellian) quantum fields (Reference 21,32). • Gravitationally squeezed vacuum electromagnetic (or other field) zero-point fluctuations (Reference 33). • Casimir effect; that is, the Casimir vacuum in flat, curved, and topological spaces (Reference 34-40). • Other quantum fields/states/effects. In general, the local energy density in quantum field theory can be negative due to quantum coherence effects (Reference 24). Other examples that have been studied are Dirac field states: the superposition of two single particle electron states and the superposition of two multi-electron-positron states (Reference 41,42). In the former (latter), the energy densities can be negative when two single (multi-) particle states have the same number of electrons (electrons and positrons) or when one state has one more electron (electron-positron pair) than the other. Cosmological inflation (Reference 22), cosmological particle production (Reference 22), classical scalar fields (Reference 22), the conformal anomaly (Reference 22), and gravitational vacuum polarization (Reference 26-29) are among many other examples that also violate the energy conditions. Since the laws of quantum field theory place no strong restrictions on negative energies and fluxes, then it might be possible to produce exotic phenomena such as faster-than-light travel (Reference 43-45), traversable wormholes (Reference 21,22,46), violations of the second law of thermodynamics (Reference 47,48), and time machines (Reference 22,46,49). There are several other exotic phenomena made possible by the effects of negative energy, but they lie outside the scope of this report. See Appendix A for more technical details on items 1 through 4. Toy Model Estimate for Negative Energy-Induced Antigravity For the purpose of this report, the discussion will be confined to how negative energy can be used to produce antigravity for the simplest case of counteracting the Earth’s gravitational field. To counteract or otherwise reduce gravity merely requires the deployment of a thin spherical shell (bubble) of negative energy around an aerospace 10 UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nvehicle. This particular case study will serve as a useful illustrative comparison with the Newtonian antigravity case discussed in Section II-A.\n\nInterest is only in the slow (non-relativistic) motion, weak (gravity) field regime that characterizes the physics of the Earth, Sun, other forms of solar system matter, most interstellar matter (excluding compact dense stars and black holes), and small test masses. In this case the time-time component of the Ricci curvature tensor (Rμν) is given by R00 ≈ Gρ/c² ≈ (7.41 × 10⁻²⁸)ρ m⁻². This is the primary quantity inside the general relativistic field equation⁵ that encodes and measures the curvature of spacetime around a source of matter and characterizes the weak or strong gravity field regime for all forms of astronomical mass density (ρ). For example, the Earth's mass density is 5,500 kg/m³ so R00 ≈ 4.08 × 10⁻²⁴ m⁻², which indicates that an extremely flat space surrounds the Earth and thus the system is within the weak field regime. Gravitational physics in the weak field regime is completely described by the standard Schwarzschild spacetime metric, which leads to the usual Newtonian and post-Newtonian gravitational physics.\n\nTwo simple approaches can be used to determine the negative energy density required to counteract the Earth's gravitational field: a) integrate the Einstein general relativistic field equation, or b) use an already derived result from general relativity that gives the repulsive force acceleration in terms of the spacetime metric components. For the first case, the generalized gravitational Poisson equation from the Einstein field equation is:\n\n−R00√(−g00) = (4πG/c⁴) Tr(Tμν)√(−g00)\n= (4πG/c⁴) Tμ^μ √(−g00)\n= (4πG/c⁴) ρE*, (7)\n\nwhere the definition\n\nρE* ≡ Tμ^μ √(−g00)\n\nis used, ρE* ≡ rest-energy density + compressional potential energy (a.k.a. pressure), g00 ≡ g00(r) is the time-time component of the metric tensor gμν, and Tr(Tμν) ≡ Tμ^μ is the trace (sum of diagonal matrix elements) of the stress-energy-momentum tensor Tμν (a matrix quantity that encodes the density and flux of a matter source's energy and momentum). Using tensor identities and grinding the algebra, Equation (7) can be re-written as\n\n∇²√(−g00) = (4πG/c⁴) ρE* (8)"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nwhere ∇² is the standard Laplace differential operator. The left-hand-side of Equation (8) is the gravitational potential. Integrating Equation (8) once over a region of space exterior to a ball (or thin spherical shell) of rest-energy density to obtain\n\n|∇√(−g00(r))| = GM/r² ≡ g (acceleration, m/s²) (9)\n\nwhere the standard spherically symmetric spacetime (or Schwarzschild) coordinate system (t,r,θ,φ) in which time t, radial space coordinate r, and angular space coordinates (θ,φ) have their usual meaning is used.\n\nThe second approach (case b) can be derived by recalling that in the exterior Schwarzschild spacetime around a central mass M (a ball or thin spherical shell) is\n\n√(−g00(r)) = 1 − GM/r (10)\n\nSince the definition is given that g ≡ |∇√(−g00(r))|, then perform the radial derivative of Equation (10) and again arrive at Equation (9).\n\nSince from special relativity M = E/c² (for a given rest-energy E), a negative energy state is identical to a negative mass state (Reference 50). Thus the mass M in Equation (9) can be replaced with the negative energy density −ρE* = −ρc² = −Mc²/V by using the volume (V = 4πr²δr) of a thin spherical shell of radius r and thickness δr, and rearrange quantities to solve for ρE* to get the final result:\n\nρE* = −gc² / (4πGδr)\n= −(1.05×10²⁷) / δr (J/m³), (11)\n\nwhere g is now the acceleration due to gravity near the Earth's surface. If one desires to use other geometries (for example, torus, cylinder, prism, cone, and pyramid) instead of a thin spherical shell, then Equation (11) will admit minor numerical adjustments to accommodate the relevant geometrical factors associated with different geometrical volumes. Equation (11) gives the negative energy density required to generate a repulsive gravitational force that counteracts the Earth's gravity field from the surface all the way up to LEO (since g in LEO is only a few percent smaller than on the surface). Any realistic value that one chooses for the bubble wall thickness δr will give a negative energy density that will always be on the order of the equivalent negative energy density of a dwarf star or neutron star. The technical challenge to implement this kind of antigravity, however, is daunting.\n\nIn the next section the case of a cosmological antigravity that is generated by a form of matter having a positive energy density and negative pressure is discussed."} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCOSMOLOGICAL ANTIGRAVITY\n\nIt turns out that there is already a naturally occurring antigravity force that acts throughout the universe. Actually, this force acts upon the entire spacetime structure of the universe, and it is called cosmological inflation. Cosmological inflation causes the universe to expand at an ever accelerating rate. In what follows, the nature of this cosmological antigravity force and its potential aerospace propulsion application is examined.\n\nPressure as a Source of Gravity\n\nNewtonian gravitation is modified in the case of a relativistic perfect-fluid (where p << ρE cannot be assumed). The stress-energy tensor Tμν for this case is (Reference 16):\n\nTμν = (ρE + p)UμUν − pgμν (12)\n\nwhere ρ is the fluid mass density, ρE ≡ ρc² is the fluid rest-energy density (or just energy density), p is the fluid pressure, Uμ is the 4-velocity vector of the fluid, and gμν is the metric tensor. The Einstein general relativistic field equation using the identity gμμ = 4 to obtain R = (8πG/c⁴)T, which is the Ricci curvature scalar can be contracted. And so Equation (12) becomes T = ρE − 3p, which is just the trace of Tμν. Since T = ρE − 3p, a modified Newtonian gravitational Poisson equation is produced:\n\n∇²φ = 4πG(ρE + 3p) (13)\n\nwhere φ is the gravitational potential. It should be noted that the energy density and pressure are kept as separate terms as opposed to Equations (7) and (8) in the previous section. Equation (13) means that a gas of particles all moving at the same speed u has an effective gravitational mass density of ρ(1 + u²/c²). Thus, for example, a radiation-dominated fluid generates a gravitational attraction twice as strong as one predicted by Newtonian gravity theory according to Equation (13).\n\nVacuum Energy of Einstein's Cosmological Constant\n\nA major consequence of the Einstein field equation is that pressure p becomes a source of gravitational effects on an equal footing with the energy density ρE. One consequence of the gravitational effects of pressure is that a negative-pressure equation of state that achieves ρE + 3p < 0 in Equation (13) will produce gravitational repulsion (that is, antigravity). The Einstein field equation that includes a cosmological constant Λ is:\n\nGμν + Λgμν = −(8πG/c⁴)Tμν (14)\n\nwhere Gμν is the Einstein curvature tensor. The Λ term, as it appears in Equation (14), represents the curvature of empty space. Now if one moves this term over to the right-hand-side of Equation (14), which has become widespread practice in modern times, then"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nGμν = −((8πG/c⁴)Tμν + Λgμν) (15)\n\nwhereby this term now behaves like the stress-energy tensor of the vacuum, Tvac μν, which acts as a gravitational source:\n\nTvac μν = (Λc⁴/8πG) gμν (16)\n\nOne should note that the absence of a preferred frame in special relativity means that Tvac μν must be the same (that is, isotropic or invariant) for all observers. There is only one isotropic tensor of rank 2 that meets this requirement: ημν (the Minkowski flat spacetime metric tensor in locally inertial frames). So in order for Tvac μν to remain invariant under Lorentz transformations, the only requirement is that it must be proportional to ημν. But this generalizes in a straightforward way from inertial coordinates to arbitrary coordinates by replacing ημν with gμν, thus justifying the curved spacetime metric tensor in Equation (16). By comparing Equation (16) with the perfect-fluid stress-energy tensor in Equation (12), one finds that the vacuum looks like a perfect fluid with an isotropic pressure pvac opposite in sign to the energy density ρvac. Therefore, the vacuum must possess a negative-pressure equation of state (according to the first law of thermodynamics):\n\npvac = −ρvac (17)\n\nThe vacuum energy density should be constant throughout spacetime, since a gradient would not be Lorentz invariant. So by substituting Equation (17) into ρE + 3p, the following is produced\n\nρvac + 3pvac = ρvac + 3(−ρvac)\n= −2ρvac\n< 0. (18)\n\nThe vacuum equation of state is therefore manifestly negative. Last, when incorporating ρvac into the Einstein field equation as a gravitational source term, and comparing its corresponding (Lorentz invariant) stress-energy tensor ρvac gμν with Equation (16), then the usual identification (or definition) is made that:\n\nρvac ≡ Λc⁴/8πG (19)\n\nThus the terms \"cosmological constant\" and \"vacuum energy\" are essentially interchangeable in this perspective and mean the same thing (whereupon ρvac ≡ ρΛ), which is seen in the present-day cosmological literature."} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBy substituting Equation (19) into Equation (17), one observes that a positive Λ will act to cause a large-scale repulsion of space (because this gives a negative vacuum pressure), whereas a negative Λ (giving a positive vacuum pressure) will cause a large-scale contraction of space. Because Λ is a constant, the vacuum energy is a constant (that is, time independent). This then implies a problem with energy conservation in an expanding universe since one expects that energy density decreases as a given volume of space increases, which is the case for the ordinary matter and cosmic microwave background that is observed in extragalactic space. In other words, the matter and radiation energy densities decay away as the universe expands while the vacuum energy density remains constant.\n\nThe cure for this apparent energy conservation problem is the vacuum equation of state given by Equation (17). A negative pressure is something like a tension in a rubber band. It takes work to expand the volume rather than work to compress it. The proof of this is as follows (Reference 51): the energy created in the vacuum by increasing (expanding) space by a volume element dV is ρvacdV, which must be supplied by the work done by the vacuum pressure −pvac dV during the expansion of space, therefore pvac = −ρvac. In other words, the work done by the vacuum pressure maintains the constant vacuum energy density as space expands. Therefore, the vacuum acts as a reservoir of unlimited energy that provides as much energy as needed to inflate any region of space to any given size at constant energy density.\n\nDark Energy\n\nDark energy is an easily misunderstood form of energy in cosmology. There are two sets of evidence pointing toward the existence of something else beyond the radiation and (ordinary and dark) matter itemized in the overall cosmic energy budget.⁶ The first comes from a simple budgetary shortfall. The total energy density of the universe is very close to critical. This is expected theoretically and it is observed in the anisotropy pattern of the cosmic microwave background (CMB). Yet, the total matter density inferred from observations is 26 percent of critical.⁷ The remaining 74 percent of the energy density in the universe must be in some smooth, unclustered form that is dubbed \"dark energy.\" The second set of evidence is more direct. Given the energy composition of the universe, one can compute a theoretical distance vs. redshift diagram. This relation can then be tested observationally.\n\nRiess et al. (Reference 52) and Perlmutter et al. (Reference 53) reported direct evidence for dark energy from their supernovae observations. Their evidence is based on the difference between the luminosity distance in a universe dominated by dark matter and one dominated by dark energy. They showed that the luminosity distance is larger for objects at high redshifts in a dark energy-dominated universe. Therefore, objects of fixed intrinsic brightness will appear fainter if the universe is composed of dark energy. The two groups measured the apparent magnitudes of a few dozen Type Ia supernovae at redshifts z ≤ 0.9, which are known to be standard distance candles (meaning they have nearly identical absolute magnitudes at any cosmological redshift-\n\n6 Dark matter and dark energy are not to be confused. Dark matter is a non-luminous, non-absorbing, non-baryonic form of matter that only interacts with all other forms of matter via gravitational and weak nuclear forces. Dark matter has a positive rest-energy density and a nearly negligible positive pressure. Thus, it has no beneficial application for breakthrough propulsion physics.\n7 26% total matter density = 4% ordinary (baryonic) matter + 22% dark matter.\n\n15"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY distance).8 The supernovae data strongly disfavored (with high confidence) the flat matter-dominated (Ωm = 1, ΩΛ = 0) universe and the pure open universe (Ωm = 0.3, ΩΛ = 0) models.9 After this discovery, a lot of attention was paid to choosing an appropriate name for this new energy. \"Quintessence\" was one good choice because it expresses the fact that, after cosmological photons, baryons, neutrinos, and dark matter, there is a fifth essence in the universe. More recently, \"dark energy\" is used more often, with quintessence referring to the subset of models in which the energy density can be associated with a time-dependent scalar field or a time-dependent cosmological vacuum energy. In analyzing the cosmological modeling results suggested by the Type Ia supernovae data, it becomes apparent that the only form of dark energy budgeted for in the models is the cosmological constant. To consider other possibilities one evaluates the time evolution of the general relativistic conservation law for energy, ∇μTμν = ∇μTμ0 = 0, where ν = 0 to signify time evolution and ∇μ is the covariant derivative (or spacetime curvature gradient), in an expanding universe as applied to the cosmological constant (Reference 16): ∂ρE/∂t + (ȧ/a)[3ρE + 3p] = 0 (20) where a is the scale factor of the universe and ȧ is the time derivative of a. Equation (20) is derived using Equation (12) in the case of a perfect isotropic fluid where there is no gravity and velocities are negligible such that Uμ = (1, 0, 0, 0), and the energy density and pressure evolve according to the continuity and Euler equations. The only way Equation (20) can be satisfied with constant energy density is if the pressure is defined by Equation (17). One might imagine energy with a slightly different pressure and therefore energy evolution. Define the equation of state w: w = p/ρE (21) A cosmological constant corresponds to wΛ ≡ wvac = −1, matter (ordinary and dark) to wmatter ≈ 0, and radiation to wrad = 1/3.10 The earlier Riess and Perlmutter supernovae data (fixing the universe to be flat) showed that values of wde > −0.52 for dark energy are strongly disfavored. In fact, Riess and a team of collaborators (a.k.a. the \"Higher-Z team\") recently published new observational data and analysis that includes a much larger survey of Type Ia supernovae that are at much higher cosmological redshift (Reference 54). The measured spectra of ancient (z ≥ 1, or up to 10 billion light-years distance or a look-back time of up to 10 billion years ago) and recent (z ≤ 0.1, or ≤ 1 billion light-years distance or a look-back time of ≤ 1 billion years ago) were compared and showed that there was no evolutionary change in the physics that drives Type Ia supernovae explosions and their subsequent spectral luminosity output. This establishes"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the efficacy of using Type Ia supernovae as a standard distance candle for cosmological dark energy surveys. The Higher-Z team's results also concluded, with 98 percent confidence, that wde = −1.0, and that this is a perpetual constant (over at least 10 billion years time) (Reference 54). This result falsifies all quintessence models for cosmology. Therefore, a cosmological constant is consistent with the dark energy data to a high degree of precision and statistical confidence whereby one can now state that dark energy is the vacuum energy of Einstein's cosmological constant because wde = wΛ = −1 (Reference 55,56). Equation (20) can be integrated to find the evolution of the dark energy density, ρde = ρΛ, as a function of the cosmological scale factor a: ρde ∝ exp{−3∫a [da′/a′][1 + wde(a′)]} (22) where a′ is the dummy integration variable for the scale factor. Since wde = −1 (= wΛ) is a constant in Equation (22), then ρde ∝ a exp[−3(1 + wde)] or ρde = ρΛ ∝ a0. This is exactly what is expected on the basis of previous analysis in Section III-D-2. For a comparison with this result, one should note that ρc2 ∝ a−3 for (ordinary and dark) matter and ρrad ∝ a−4 for radiation such that ρc2 → 0 and ρrad → 0 as a → ∞ while ρde = ρΛ remains constant. Antigravity Propulsion Application of Dark/Vacuum Energy If one could somehow harness a local amount of dark/vacuum energy, then use can be made of its negative pressure property to produce an antigravity propulsion effect? To answer this question one can use the estimated value for ρde = ρΛ ≈ 2.4ρ0c2 ≈ 10−9 J/m3, where ρ0 is the present-day value of the total cosmological mass density of (ordinary and dark) matter (Reference 54,57). Using this number one can work through the math and estimate that the total amount of dark/vacuum energy contained within our solar system amounts to the mass equivalent of a small asteroid. This means that its repulsive gravitational influence upon planetary orbital dynamics inside the solar system is completely inconsequential. Only on the extragalactic-to-cosmological scale will its repulsive gravitational property achieve strong enough influence over matter and spacetime. On this basis, one can conclude that it is highly unlikely, if not impossible, that one will be able to invent a technology in the near future that can acquire and exploit a near-cosmological amount of dark/vacuum energy to implement a useful antigravity propulsion system. IV. Quantum Antigravity Propulsion Concepts Quantum antigravity can be found within the very large genre of quantum gravity theories in which repulsive gravity terms appear as quantum corrections to the classical Newtonian gravitational force law. Generally, one can derive such correction terms by quantizing the Einstein general relativistic field equation or by starting with a particular type of quantum field theory (for example, supersymmetric field theory, quantized 5-dimensional Kaluza-Klein unified field theories, quantum superstrings/D-Brane theory, quantum loops or knots, and Yang-Mills theories) and work backwards to find the corresponding gravity theory. The particular mathematical form and quantitative magnitude that quantum correction terms can have totally depends upon the"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"quantization procedure and order of approximation used in a given quantum gravity theory. However, the linearized semi-classical quantum gravity theory is related to Einstein's classical nonlinear General Relativity Theory whereby the former uniquely implies the latter provided that the graviton, which exchanges the gravitational force between two massive particles or photons, is a pure spin-2 particle. In this theory, the stress-energy tensor of the source matter fields is quantized while gravitation (via the Einstein curvature tensor) is still treated classically. Semi-classical quantum gravity is a quantum field theory in curved spacetime that has been successful in reproducing a few of the predictions and many of the foundational precepts of General Relativity Theory. A particular example of what a quantum antigravity correction term looks like was derived in 1984 by R. L. Forward and the author, with instruction provided by R. P. Feynman and M. Scadron, during a summer quantum gravity seminar sponsored by the Hughes Research Labs in Malibu, CA. One began by studying the Feynman quantization procedure for the case of single-photon exchange between two charged particles, which tells us about the underlying nature and quantum corrections to the static Coulomb force. From this study discovered that the same is also true for the case of single-graviton exchange between two massive spin-0 particles in connection with the static Newtonian force. By applying Feynman's quantization procedure (Reference 58-60) to the linearized Einstein field equation in the nonrelativistic limit, the following static graviton-exchange potential, Vgrav(r), for two spin-0 particles undergoing a gravitational interaction can be derived: Vgrav(r) = −Gm1m2/r + (4πGħ2/c2)δ3(r) (23) where m1 and m2 are the masses of the interacting particles, r is their radial separation, and δ3(r) is the 3-dimensional Dirac δ-function with r the position vector of some reference point in space. The first term in Equation (23) is immediately recognized as the attractive Newtonian gravitational potential while the second quantum correction term is repulsive. Also, the second term is independent of the interacting particle masses and can only be measured for bound quantum s-states because the product of the coefficient 4π(Għ2/c2) ≈ 10−94 with the δ-function gives only a minute physical effect at the atomic scale. The second term happens to be analogous to the usual quantum correction to the Coulomb or nuclear force. If the two particles were to have non-zero quantum spin, then Vgrav(r) will be modified by additional spin-orbit and spin-spin correction terms. Furthermore, there are additional velocity-dependent corrections to Vgrav(r) that generate the general relativistic post-Newtonian modifications of the classical equation of motion of a particle in a gravitational field. But the most important characteristic to observe about the quantum antigravity correction term in Equation (23) is that its magnitude is incredibly minute, only affecting bound quantum s-states. In general, quantum gravity correction terms at any level of approximation, whether gravitationally repulsive or attractive, will have coefficients ∼ G(ħδ/cκ) (for δ, κ > 1), and therefore will not have a measurable impact on any macroscopic system that embodies any form of propulsion. Because these quantum corrections are so minute, and because there is no single universally accepted quantum gravity theory to work with, investigators have had little reason to look into the potential application of quantum gravity correction terms to antigravity propulsion physics."} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"However, this isn't the entire story because there are many interesting quantum field theoretic phenomenon that exist outside of that which arises in quantum corrections to Newtonian gravity. In what follows, the recent discovery of antigravity forces that arise within both QED vacuum fluctuation and nonretarded quantum interatomic dispersion force theories in curved spacetime are reviewed. ANTIGRAVITY VIA QUANTUM VACUUM ZERO-POINT FLUCTUATION FORCE Calloni et al. (Reference 61,62) explored the possibility of verifying the equivalence principle for the zero-point energy of quantum electrodynamics (QED). They used semi-classical quantum gravity theory to evaluate the net force produced by quantum vacuum zero-point fluctuations (ZPF) acting on a rigid Casimir cavity in a weak gravitational field. Their analysis assumed the rigid Casimir cavity to be a non-isolated system at rest in the Earth's gravitational field, which is modeled using the standard Schwarzschild spacetime metric geometry, so that they could evaluate the regularized (or renormalized) stress-energy tensor, ren,11 of the quantized vacuum electromagnetic field between two plane-parallel ideal metallic plates lying in a horizontal plane. ren encodes the Casimir Effect which has a negative energy density and a negative pressure along the vertical (acceleration) axis between the plates. (See Appendix A for more information about the Casimir Effect.) Their results agreed with the equivalence principle because they showed that quantum vacuum vacuum ZPF (that is, virtual quanta) do gravitate because the energy of each ZPF mode is redshifted by the factor (−g00)1/2 = [1 − (2GM/c2r)]1/2 even though the modes remain unchanged. In other words, the electromagnetic vacuum state in a weak gravitational field is redshifted. This effect remains true for strong gravitational fields. The resulting antigravity force (FCasGrav) derived by Calloni et al. is (Reference 62): FCasGrav = π2Ahg/(180cd3) ≈ (1.89×10−43)A/d3 (24) in Newtons (N), where A is the area of the plates and d is their separation. Equation (24) states that a Casimir device in a weak gravitational field will experience a tiny push in the upwards direction (that is, the opposite direction with respect to the Earth's gravitational acceleration). This is consistent with the interpretation that the negative Casimir energy in a gravitational field behaves like a negative mass (Reference 63). FCasGrav is actually the sum of two separate force terms: the first term arises from the Casimir energy encoded in ren which is interpreted as the Newtonian repulsive force on an object with negative energy, and the second term arises from the pressure along the vertical (acceleration) axis which is interpreted as the mass contribution of the spatial part of the stress-energy tensor. To evaluate FCasGrav for the case of any gravitating body of interest, one must replace g in Equation (24) with Equation (2). 11 The angular brackets denote the quantum (vacuum state) expectation value of the stress-energy tensor Tμν. Also note that stress-energy is synonymous with energy-momentum. 19"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Calloni et al. further point out that a real Casimir cavity is an isolated system in which the actual (total) resulting force is the Newtonian force on the sum of the rest-Casimir energy and rest-mechanical mass whereby the contribution of the vacuum ZPF leads to a gravitational repulsion (FCGexp) on the Casimir device that is given by (Reference 62): FCGexp = (1/4)FCasGrav ≈ (4.73×10−44)A/d3 (N), (25) which is the force that should be experimentally tested. Equation (25) takes into consideration that the contribution to the total force on a real cavity resulting from the spatial part of the stress-energy tensor is balanced by the contribution from the mechanical stress-energy tensor. Given that the typical dimensions of a Casimir device are very small, it appears that FCGexp will be very difficult, if not impossible, to measure using present-day lab technology. However, Calloni et al. propose an experimental device that could significantly magnify the repulsive force up to a measurable scale. Their proposed device is a multilayered series of rigid Casimir cavities with each cavity consisting of two thin metallic disks that are separated by a dielectric material which is inserted to maintain rigidity. They suggest SiO2 for the dielectric material because it is an efficient dielectric with low absorption over a wide range of frequencies, and it is an inexpensive material that is easy to fabricate into layers. The introduction of the dielectric material is equivalent to enlarging the optical path length by the refractive index n so that the cavity plate separation d ∝ nd. The Casimir Effect has been tested down to plate separations ∼ 60 nm while separations ≤ 10 nm is possible with present technology. But at ≤ 10 nm distances dielectric absorption and finite conductivity are expected to decrease the effective Casimir pressure compared to a cavity comprised of perfect mirrors. For example, a plate separation of 6.5 nm corresponds to a decreasing factor (ζ) of 0.07 for plates made of aluminum. Finite temperature and plate surface roughness could also introduce additional corrections to the Casimir pressure. Calloni et al. propose to magnify the total force by using Nℓ = 106 layers of rigid cavities with each cavity having a diameter of 35 cm and thickness of 100 nm, for a total device thickness of 10 cm. All these engineering factors taken together led Calloni et al. to recast FCGexp into the following new form (Reference 62): FCGexp ≈ ζN1 π2Ahg/(720c(nd)3) ≈ (4.73×10−44)ζN1A/(nd)3 (26) in Newtons. Calloni et al. also suggest that a feasible experiment will require modulating FCGexp in order to obtain a measurable force. They are investigating the possibility of modulating ζ by varying the temperature in order to induce a periodic transition from conducting state to superconducting state. They estimate that doing this could achieve ζmax ≈ 0.5, and thus produce a force FCGexp ∼ 10−14 N at a modulation"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nfrequency on the order of tens of mHz for d = 5 nm and n = 1.46 (for SiO2 dielectric). This result is more than two orders of magnitude larger than the force which the VIRGO gravitational wave antenna is expected to detect at several tens of Hz. If one could fabricate a device consisting of 10^9 layers, then F_CGexp ~ 10^-11 N. This suggests that cavities made from thin-film deposited surfaces or photonic band-gap materials would be the best approach for fabricating a multilayer Casimir device.\n\nBimonte et al. (Reference 63-65) also derived Equation (24) for this very same problem by using Green-function techniques in the Schwinger-DeWitt quantum ether prescription for _ren in a curved spacetime. They also computed the weak gravitational field-induced correction terms for the Casimir pressure on the plates, _ren, and the total energy (E_CasGrav) stored in the Casimir device which is given by (Reference 63,64):\n\nE_CasGrav = -(pi^2 A h c / 720 d^3)(1 + (5/2)(g d / c^2)) (27)\n\nin Joules (J). The correction terms for the different (measurable) physical quantities of interest are generally ~ g/c^2.\n\nFinally, Calloni et al. point out that the overriding concern with performing an experiment to test F_CGexp is whether cavities can be made sufficiently rigid, if the effect of surface roughness and defects can be quantified to improve the force estimate, and if the necessary signal modulation can be achieved in the lab. However, micro- and nano-manufacturing is maturing to the point where rigidity, surface roughness, and close plate separations are becoming routinely controllable. While the numerical estimate for F_CGexp is quite feeble, it is still significant since it is at the very low end of the macroscopic scale, and it might be possible to devise advanced methods to magnify the force to a magnitude that benefits a propulsion application. However, the upward force will have to be larger than the weight of the propulsion system in order to achieve levitation. This could be very difficult to do, but this is a concept that is ripe for further exploration.\n\nANTIGRAVITY VIA NONRETARDED QUANTUM INTERATOMIC DISPERSION FORCE\n\nPinto (Reference 66) evaluated the net lifting force produced by nonretarded electrostatic dipole-dipole interactions (that is, nonretarded van der Waals dispersion forces) acting on a quantum system of polarizable particles in a curved spacetime. The foundation of Pinto's study was the original discovery made by Fermi (Reference 67) that classical electrostatic theory must be reformulated in a curved spacetime in order to properly evaluate the effects of gravitation upon the Coulomb electric field of a single charged particle. In this case, the Laplace equation of electrostatics for a single charged particle can be generalized in the presence of a gravitational field and then extended to show that a system of classical charged particles undergoes a gravity-induced self-lifting force. Fermi and other investigators arrived at this counterintuitive result by computing the gravity-induced self-force acting on an isolated electric dipole in a weak gravitational field and showing that the self-force (times dipole size) is exactly equal to the gravitational equivalent of the electrostatic internal energy of the dipole.\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe net gravity-induced (electrostatic levitation) self-force (F_DipGrav) is given by (Reference 66):\n\nF_DipGrav = -(q_e^2 / (4 pi eps_0 r)) (g/c^2) (N) (28)\n\nwhere q_e is the electric charge on a particle and r is the radial distance between two charged particles in the dipole. There is an additional term of order g^2/c^4 in F_DipGrav that is neglected because it is negligible in magnitude. Equation (28) states that an electric dipole will experience a push in the upwards direction (opposite direction with respect to the Earth's gravitational acceleration); that is, the dipole undergoes self-acceleration in which one charged particle in the dipole appears to be chasing the other charged particle. As an example, for a dipole comprised of two charges (for example, an electron-proton system) held at fixed r to levitate in the Earth's gravitational field, r would have to be ~ 10^-15 m (the size of an atomic nucleus). An experiment to test this prediction on such a small scale is too difficult to control or measure.\n\nAn energy analysis done by Pinto showed that there is a distance r between two charges (each of rest-mass m0) in a dipole (of mass M_dip = 2m0) such that their electrostatic potential energy, U_dip = -q_e^2/4 pi eps_0 r, becomes equal to the unrenormalized mass of the system as r -> infinity. At this distance, the effective total gravitational mass M_dip + U_dip/c^2 = 0 and the self-force alone can support the dipole at rest against its own weight. The self-acceleration of the dipole is such that the acceleration process can continue indefinitely, which poses a problem for energy conservation because the dipole can be left to self-accelerate for an arbitrary period of time and then stopped to harness the resulting kinetic energy. This process could be used to extract unlimited energy from the system. Pinto claims that there is no conflict with energy conservation because the renormalized inertial mass of the accelerating system is M_dip-ren = M_dip + U_dip/c^2 = 0 and the total energy of the system is zero at all times regardless of speed. This claim requires reevaluation because there are subtle boundary conditions involved that might have been overlooked in the analysis.\n\nFermi's discovery led to a new subfield of research devoted to the study of electrodynamics and dipole and interatomic dispersion forces in a curved spacetime. Pinto's theoretical program extended the result of these studies by considering a system of polarizable atoms and adopting an approach in which the effect of a gravitational field in general relativity is modeled as an effective optical medium. In other words, the spacetime vacuum is treated as a non-uniform optical medium with a varying index of refraction that defines the components of a flat spacetime metric geometry (Reference 68). There is no spacetime curvature due to sources of matter in this model, instead its equivalent general relativistic effects (that is, gravitation) are produced by varying the vacuum index of refraction, comprised of the vacuum electromagnetic permittivity and permeability constants, in response to the presence of matter sources. Pinto's lengthy analysis gives the van der Waals dispersion self-force for two polarizable atoms in a curved spacetime (that is, a weak gravitational field) as (Reference 66):\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nF_vdWGrav = -U^(0)_vdW (g/c^2)\n= -(-(6 q_e^2 a_0^5)/(4 pi eps_0 r^6)) (g/c^2)\n~ (2.44x10^-57) q_e^2 / r^6 (29)\n\nin Newtons, where a0 is the Bohr radius (5.292 x 10^-11 m), r is the radial distance between two atoms, and U^(0)_vdW is the flat spacetime van der Waals (interatomic potential) interaction energy to second-order in quantum perturbation theory. Pinto used Equation (29) to estimate the gravity-induced self-acceleration (a_lift) for the case of two hydrogen atoms in their ground state at r = 20a0, and found that a_lift,H = F_vdWGrav/2m_H ~ 4 x 10^-15 m/s^2 (m_H = mass of hydrogen atom). For the case of two positronium (Ps) atoms, he found that a_lift,Ps ~ 8 x 10^-12 m/s^2.\n\nPinto's strategy is to dramatically magnify F_vdWGrav to a large enough magnitude that it becomes viable for propulsion applications. He claims that this can be done by manipulating U^(0)_vdW, which depends on the atomic polarizability and is strongly affected by the quantum state in which the atoms are prepared. Interatomic forces can also be manipulated by means of external electromagnetic fields that can transform van der Waals forces into a first-order interaction. He evaluated a number of schemes and settled on the following techniques for manipulating dispersion forces: 1) excitation of polarizable atoms to Rydberg states in external time-dependent electric fields, 2) polarizability resonant enhancement by laser radiation, and 3) laser-induced near-zone orientational average of the dispersion force. Also, in order to generate a macroscopic self-lifting force, it will be necessary to apply these techniques to a cluster of trapped atoms because the total self-lifting force acting on the center-of-mass of a trapped gas composed of N_a identical polarizable atoms is N_a^2 times the self-lifting force acting on a single pair of interacting atomic dipoles. Item 1 has a two-part contribution to the magnification of the self-lifting force: 1) one part from alpha^2(omega)E^2 due to the effect of external time-dependent electric fields on atomic polarization, where alpha(omega) is the atomic polarizability as a function of the electric field frequency omega and E is the electric field intensity; 2) another part from using highly-excited Rydberg atoms (with principal quantum number n_p >> 1 and Bohr radius a_n = n_p^2 a0) whose polarizability scales as n_p^7. Item 2 leads to a magnification by factors of alpha(omega)/alpha0 ~ 10^3 - 10^5 (alpha0 is the static value of the polarizability) via detuning of the (laser) excitation radiation frequency from the nearest atomic transition resonance of the atoms in the trapped cluster. Item 3 leads to a further magnification due to the effect of the incident laser radiation on the dispersion force being averaged over all directions, which changes the interatomic potential (~ 1/r^6) into a gravity-like 1/r potential.\n\nPinto's study suggests that the combined effect of items 1 - 3 will magnify the self-lifting force to the point where a cluster of trapped atoms will not only hover unsupported in the Earth's gravitational field, but will also generate an additional upward thrust. On the basis of extensive theoretical and empirical studies, along with the typical parameters for laboratory laser and optical atomic matter trap technologies, he estimates that a_lift >= 1.5-g (in the upward direction). Trapped atom gravimeters can\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nbe used to observe this effect in the lab. Pinto also points out that other polarizable systems such as nanoparticles, microspheres, and quantum dots can be used in place of atoms. The trapping of latex spheres into a form of optical matter by means of intense laser radiation has already been demonstrated in the lab. In addition, an analogy to the item 1 - 3 manipulations that produce dramatically enlarged polarizabilities in trapped interacting nanoparticles and microspheres have also been demonstrated in the lab.\n\nPinto proposes a levitation propulsion thruster in which the combined system of trapped interacting polarizable particles and external confining fields forms a single thruster element comprising a fraction of the mass of the entire vehicle. The reaction of the self-lifting force exerted by this element against the external confining fields results in the transfer of force (thrust) to the entire vehicle. In order to achieve levitation, this requires that the upward thrust per polarizable particle be larger than its own weight if the fraction of the thrusting mass is smaller than the mass of the rest of the vehicle. The propulsive levitation condition is expressed as (Reference 66): F_thrust = (M_veh + m_A N) g or F_thrust/(m_A N g) >= 1, where F_thrust is the total gravity-induced thrust, M_veh is the vehicle mass, m_A is the mass of individual polarizable particles, and N is the total number of trapped polarizable particles.\n\nPinto identified numerous technical challenges that will have to be overcome before this concept can be put to practice. One challenge is that polarizability resonant enhancement also leads to atomic transitions and decay which result in the recoil and evaporation of atoms from inside the trap. Another is the difficulty of maintaining continued confinement of a trapped cluster of polarizable particles in a specific 3-dimensional array while the cluster is simultaneously opposing the amplified interatomic forces and producing thrust. The confinement lifetime of trapped polarizable particles is finite and there is the possibility that these particles might be evaporated away or destroyed in a time that is too short to deliver the required thrust to the vehicle. Therefore, a scheme for active repopulation of the trapped cluster will have to be developed. The design of particle cluster traps and associated external confinement fields are of primary importance to determine the effective thrusting time of every polarizable particle. In addition, Rydberg atoms suffer from finite radiative lifetimes and are sensitive to external perturbations, so dispersion force manipulation might lead to the ionization of atoms. Tradeoffs will have to be made between all of the relevant system parameters in order to discover the \"sweet spot\" that achieves levitation and upward acceleration. These and other yet to be identified technical challenges need to be addressed via further empirical and theoretical studies.\n\nV. Conclusion: The Way Forward\n\nThis report has reviewed and analyzed a number of antigravity concepts that are found within Newtonian gravity theory, General Relativity Theory, semi-classical quantum gravity theory, quantum field theory, and nonretarded quantum interatomic dispersion force theory. One found that plausible mechanisms exist within Newtonian and general relativistic theories whereby one could embody a realistic device that produces a significant antigravity force. However, one discovered that there are daunting technical challenges that arise in each of the proposed embodiments. Mechanical embodiments that produce antigravity forces require kilometer-sized apparatus, astronomical-sized masses and densities, or extreme mass velocities and accelerations. There are other subtleties involved, such as the possibility of different forms of matter having a highly\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nnonlinear gravitational permeability, which could dramatically mitigate such large-scale requirements (see item 1 below for further discussion).\n\nNegative energy has been produced in the lab in very small quantities. The technologies used for producing negative energy are nascent, and so it will be some time before it can be ascertained whether they are capable of producing the astronomical amounts of negative energy required to generate significant antigravity forces as discussed in Section III-C-2 (see item 2 below for further discussion).\n\nAntigravity forces produced by quantum electromagnetic vacuum ZPF or by nonretarded quantum interatomic dispersion forces in a curved spacetime (that is, gravitational field) are very feeble, but there are proposals based on other theoretical and empirical studies which suggest that these forces can be amplified to macroscopic level. However, there are a number of difficult technical challenges to overcome in order to achieve success.\n\nGoing forward toward the demonstration of an antigravity generator will require the following steps to be taken:\n\n• Antigravity via Dipole Gravitational Field Generators: Presently, the technology does not exist to achieve the astronomical mass densities, extreme velocities or accelerations of mass motion, and the large device dimensions required to produce large enough antigravity forces for useful propulsion. The issues are: 1) dense materials, and 2) gravitational properties of matter. Forward (Reference 14) suggests investigating neutron-neutron interactions. One could cool a gas of thermal neutrons from a nuclear reactor to extremely low temperatures using magnetic confinement or magneto-gravitational traps, and concentrate them into a small region through the interaction of the trap's magnetic field with the magnetic moment of the neutrons. The Fermi energy^12 of the bound neutrons limits the neutron density to ~ 10^-3 kg/m^3. However, the formation of putative tetraneutrons^13 or the existence of a superconductive-type phase space condensation will create bosons that do not have this limitation. It turns out that exotic quantum states of matter such as Bose-Einstein (BE) and Fermionic condensates^14 transcend the Fermi energy limit and thus possess highly unusual material properties. BE condensates were first created in 1995 and Fermionic condensates were first created in 2003, but both are still undergoing laboratory exploration. As for the gravitational properties of matter, one knows from electromagnetism that the permeability (mu) of magnetic materials such as iron is anomalously large and nonlinear, which allows for the construction of highly efficient electromagnetic field generators. The gravitational equivalent to the magnetic permeability is a property of matter that is still largely unexplored. A material possessing an anomalously large, very nonlinear gravitational permeability (eta) would be useful in the construction of highly efficient, very small scale gravitational field generators. One would expect all materials to have an eta that is different from eta0 because the atoms comprising any material have quantum spin. Forward\n\n12 In condensed matter physics, this is the energy of the highest occupied quantum state in a system of fermions (that is, spin-1/2 particles such as electrons, nucleons, or atoms) at zero absolute temperature.\n13 A hypothetical stable cluster of four neutrons whereby recent empirical evidence suggests it exists. Readers should consult the technical literature for more information by using \"tetraneutrons\" as a search term.\n14 BE or Fermionic condensates are a macroscopic collection of bosons (spin-1 particles such as nucleons or atoms) or fermions that collapse into the same quantum state when they form at near-zero absolute temperature.\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n(Reference 14) reported that a rough estimate indicates there is a very small difference between η and η0. It is thus necessary to implement a coordinated theoretical program to determine the value of η for all known forms of matter and an experimental program to find materials that might possess anomalously large or nonlinear properties that can be used to intensify time-varying gravitational fields. Forward (Reference 14) also described an unsuccessful experimental attempt to find materials that have the property of converting time-varying electromagnetic fields into time-varying gravitational fields. This speculative property exploits the fact that the magnetic and inertial moments are combined in an atom via the usual quantum angular and spin momentum coupling. Other theoretical and experimental concepts incorporating the use of rotating superconductors are reviewed by Hathaway (Reference 69). Note in particular that Hathaway reviews the emerging experimental observations of Martin Tajmar in which an apparent frame-dragging effect is observed near super-cooled rotating rings as measured by ring laser gyros and accelerometers. At the time of this writing these effects were being reported but not yet independently confirmed.\n\n• Antigravity via Negative Energy: The assessment provided in Reference 70 concludes that small amounts of negative energy are already made in the lab, but one does not yet know there is access to larger amounts for extended periods of time over extended spatial distributions for the purpose of producing antigravity. In this regard, the following options for further exploration are proposed:\n\n– Squeezed quantum vacuum generators (see Appendix A): A dedicated research program to develop the two negative energy generator concepts described in Reference 70 will need to be established in order to evolve state-of-the-art quantum optics technology towards producing higher magnitudes of negative energy as well as special techniques required to separate out any positive energy fluxes that accompany the negative energy fluxes. Specifically, the Rabeau et al. (Reference 71,72) and Ries et al. (Reference 73) experimental programs should be followed as a template toward this goal. Quantum optics technology via high power fiber lasers, resonators, amplifier stages, beam conditioning stages, and so forth are rapidly advancing. So research should be conducted in parallel to invent additional ways to produce negative energy via innovative quantum optics.\n\n– Casimir effect: Even though the standard electromagnetic Casimir effect is feeble, and thus not likely to contribute to an antigravity engineering program, there are still a number of other electromagnetic and non-electromagnetic Casimir effects described in Appendix A that require further study. These other Casimir effects have not been explored with an eye toward testing them in the lab, and so there could be important new information yet to be discovered.\n\n– Moving Mirrors (a.k.a. the dynamical Casimir effect; see Appendix A): Even though this concept is too feeble to produce any useful flux of negative energy, the observable effects due to the change in the boundary conditions (for example, moving mirrors/cavity walls) of quantum fields provide crucial information on the quantum vacuum at the macroscopic level. Theoretical and laboratory efforts are underway to understand the dissipative effects of vacuum fluctuations (Reference 74,75). This dissipation mechanism should induce irradiation of photons, a phenomenon also known as the dynamical Casimir effect. This can be understood both as the creation of particles under non-\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nadiabatic changes in the boundary conditions of quantum fields, or as classical parametric amplification with the zero-point energy of a vacuum field mode as an input state. More recent developments include models for the super-radiant amplification of photons with particular emphasis on its dynamics and the optimization of the involved parameters. Experimental concepts being pursued will try to reveal directly the presence of a non-empty vacuum by using a specifically designed device to amplify the virtual vacuum photons and produce real electromagnetic radiation via the parametric amplification of the vacuum fluctuations in an electromagnetic cavity. The ‘amplifier’ is a boundary undergoing an oscillation, and hence radiates energy due to the dissipative action against the vacuum photons. This line of investigation could serve as a very useful probe to explore the possibility of generating large fluxes of negative energy. One expects that a laboratory demonstration of the dynamical Casimir effect will occur before 2012.\n\n– Dirac field states: As described in Section III-C-1, this involves either the superposition of two single particle electron states or the superposition of two multi-electron-positron states (Reference 41,42). This is still a nascent topic of study in quantum field theory. However, already a great deal of technology is dedicated to the manipulation and storage of electrons and positrons via solid state/condensed matter devices and particle accelerators. This research topic should be supported in order to establish how it could contribute to an experimental antigravity program.\n\n– Quantum coherence effects: Other types of quantum coherence effects not already identified or invented should be theoretically developed and explored for the possibility of finding new free-field or interacting field configurations that produce a significant magnitude of negative energy which could be produced by technological means. [Note that Reference 70 showed that static, radially-dependent electric or magnetic fields and gravitationally squeezed vacuum electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations (see items 1 and 3 in Section III-C-1 and Appendix A) are not useful forms of negative energy.]\n\n– Detecting Negative Energy in the Lab: Reference 70 identified proposals for observing negative energy in outer space and in the laboratory, but further work is needed to downscale astronomical techniques for use at the lab scale, and there is need to firm up our understanding of how lab detectors will respond to negative energy in situ if one is to exploit it for the production of antigravity forces. A first step in the latter direction was recently proposed by Marecki (Reference 76) who generalized the analysis of the output of balanced homodyne detectors (BHDs). The most important feature of these devices is their ability to quantify the quantum vacuum fluctuations of the electric field because the output of BHDs provides information on the one- and two-point functions of arbitrary states of quantum fields. Marecki computed the two-point function and the associated spectral density for the ground state of the quantum electric field in Casimir geometries, and predicts a position- and frequency-dependent pattern of BHD responses if a device of this type is placed inside a Casimir cavity. The proposed device allows for the direct detection of quantum vacuum fluctuations and provides a spatial mapping of the negative energy contained inside the cavity. This offers a potential new characterization of ground states in Casimir\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ngeometries, which would provide an understanding of the negative energy densities present in some regions in these geometries.\n\n– Trapping and Storing Negative Energy: Ford and Roman (Reference 20) have only superficially addressed this topic, and there is very little technical literature that addresses it fully. A theoretical program to develop the physics and technology of trapping and storing negative energy will need to be supported, and such a program should be guided by the use of laboratory detectors such as the one proposed in the previous section. However, it is the opinion of the author that free-space negative energy sources appear to be a more desirable option for producing antigravity than stored negative energy.\n\n• Antigravity via Quantum Vacuum Zero-Point Fluctuation Force: Calloni et al.’s experimental proposal reviewed in Section IV-A should be funded and performed by a high quality laboratory.\n\n• Antigravity via Nonretarded Quantum Interatomic Dispersion Force: Pinto’s experimental proposal reviewed in Section IV-B should be theoretically evaluated prior to funding an experiment. This proposal does contain enough rigor and credibility that it warrants a further look.\n\n28\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix A\n\nSTATIC RADIAL ELECTRIC & MAGNETIC FIELDS\n\nIt is beyond the scope of this report to include all the technical configurations by which one can generate static, radially-dependent electric or magnetic fields. However, there remains the problem of engineering these fields to produce a borderline exotic energy state because classical electromagnetic theory states that every observer will see a non-negative energy density that is ∝ E² + B², where the electric field (E) and magnetic field (B) strengths are measured in any observer’s reference frame. It is not known how to increase the tension in these fields using current physics, but some new physics may provide an answer. This technical problem must be left for future investigation.\n\nSQUEEZED QUANTUM VACUUM\n\nSubstantial theoretical and experimental work has shown that in many quantum systems the limits to measurement precision imposed by the quantum vacuum zero-point fluctuations (ZPF) can be breached by decreasing the noise in one observable (or measurable quantity) at the expense of increasing the noise in the conjugate observable; at the same time the variations in the first observable, say the energy, are reduced below the ZPF such that the energy becomes “negative.” “Squeezing” is thus the control of quantum fluctuations and corresponding uncertainties, whereby one can squeeze/reduce the variance of one (physically important) observable quantity provided the variance in the (physically unimportant) conjugate variable is stretched/increased. The squeezed quantity possesses an unusually low variance, meaning less variance than would be expected on the basis of the equipartition theorem. One can in principle exploit quantum squeezing to extract energy from one place in the ordinary vacuum at the expense of accumulating excess energy elsewhere (Reference 21).\n\nThe squeezed state of the electromagnetic field is a primary example of a quantum field that has negative energy density and negative energy flux. Such a state became a physical reality in the laboratory as a result of the nonlinear-optics technique of “squeezing”—that is, of moving some of the quantum-fluctuations of laser light out of the cos[ω(t − z/c)] part of the beam and into the sin[ω(t − z/c)] part (Reference 77-82).15 The observable that gets squeezed will have its fluctuations reduced below the vacuum ZPF. The act of squeezing transforms the phase space circular noise profile characteristic of the vacuum into an ellipse, whose semimajor and semiminor axes are given by unequal quadrature uncertainties (of the quantized electromagnetic field harmonic oscillator operators). This applies to coherent states in general, and the usual vacuum is also a coherent state with eigenvalue zero. As this ellipse rotates about the origin with angular frequency, ω, these unequal quadrature uncertainties manifest themselves in the electromagnetic field oscillator energy by periodic occurrences, which are separated by one quarter cycle, of both smaller and larger fluctuations compared to the unsqueezed vacuum.\n\nMorris and Thorne (Reference 21) and Caves (Reference 83) point out that if one squeezes the vacuum—that is, if one puts vacuum rather than laser light into the input port of a squeezing device—then one gets at the output an electromagnetic field with\n\n15 ω is the angular frequency of light, t is time, and z denotes the z-axis direction of beam propagation.\n\n29\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nweaker fluctuations and thus less energy density than the vacuum at locations where cos²[ω(t − z/c)] ≅ 1 and sin²[ω(t − z/c)] << 1; but with greater fluctuations and thus greater energy density than the vacuum at locations where cos²[ω(t − z/c)] << 1 and sin²[ω(t − z/c)] ≅ 1. Since the vacuum is defined to have vanishing energy density, any region with less energy density than the vacuum actually has a negative (renormalized) expectation value for the energy density. Therefore, a squeezed vacuum state consists of a traveling electromagnetic wave that oscillates back and forth between negative energy density and positive energy density, but has positive time-averaged energy density.\n\nFor the squeezed electromagnetic vacuum state, the energy density ρE-sqvac is given by (Reference 84):\n\nρE-sqvac = (2hω/L³) sinh ξ [sinh ξ + cosh ξ cos(2ω(t − z/c) + δ)] (J/m³) (A.1)\n\nwhere L³ is the volume of a large box with sides of length L (that is, put the quantum field in a box with periodic boundary conditions), ξ is the squeezed state amplitude (giving a measure of the mean photon number in a squeezed state), and δ is the phase of squeezing. Equation (A.1) shows that ρE-sqvac falls below zero once every cycle when the condition cosh ξ > sinh ξ is met. It turns out that this is always true for every nonzero value of ξ, so ρE-sqvac becomes negative at some point in the cycle for a general squeezed vacuum state. On another note, when a quantum state is close to a squeezed vacuum state, there will almost always be some negative energy densities present.\n\nGRAVITATIONALLY SQUEEZED ELECTROMAGNETIC ZERO-POINT FLUCTUATIONS\n\nA natural source of negative energy comes from the effect that gravitational fields (of astronomical bodies) in space have upon the surrounding quantum vacuum. For example, the gravitational field of the Earth produces a zone of negative energy around it by dragging some of the virtual quanta (aka vacuum ZPF) downward. This concept was initially developed in the 1970s as a byproduct of studies on quantum field theory in curved space (Reference 37). However, Hochberg and Kephart (Reference 33) derived an important application of this concept to the problem of creating and stabilizing traversable wormholes. They showed that one can utilize the negative energy densities, which arise from distortion of the vacuum ZPF due to the interaction with a prescribed gravitational background, for providing a violation of the energy conditions. The squeezed quantum states of quantum optics provide a natural form of matter having negative energy density. The corresponding local vacuum state energy density is ρE-gsvac = −2π²hc/λ⁴, where λ is the ZPF mode wavelength under consideration in the gravitational squeezing effect (Reference 70).\n\nThe analysis, via quantum optics, showed that gravitation itself provides the mechanism for generating the squeezed vacuum states needed to support stable traversable wormholes. The production of negative energy densities via a squeezed vacuum is a necessary and unavoidable consequence of the interaction or coupling between ordinary matter and gravity, and this defines what is meant by gravitationally squeezed vacuum states. One is presently unaware of any way to artificially produce\n\n30\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ngravitational squeezing of the vacuum in the laboratory for the purpose of inducing an antigravity effect for propulsion applications.\n\nQUANTUM VACUUM FIELD STRESS: NEGATIVE ENERGY FROM THE CASIMIR EFFECT\n\nThe Casimir effect is by far the easiest and most well known way to generate negative energy in the lab. The Casimir effect that is familiar to most people is the force that is associated with the electromagnetic quantum vacuum (Reference 85). This is an attractive force that must exist between any two neutral (uncharged), parallel, flat, conducting surfaces (for example, metallic plates) in a vacuum. This force has been well measured and it can be attributed to a minute imbalance in the vacuum electromagnetic zero-point energy density inside the cavity between the conducting surfaces versus the vacuum electromagnetic zero-point energy density in the free-space region outside of the cavity (Reference 86-88). See Figure 4 for an illustration of this effect.\n\nFigure 4. Illustration of the Casimir Effect\n\nIt turns out that there are many different types of Casimir effects found in quantum field theory (Reference 34-36,40,89). For example, if one introduces a single infinite plane conductor into the Minkowski (flat spacetime) vacuum by bringing it adiabatically from infinity so that whatever quantum fields are present suffer no excitation but remain in their ground states, then the vacuum (electromagnetic) stresses induced by the presence of the infinite plane conductor produces a Casimir effect. This result holds equally well when two parallel plane conductors (with separation distance d) are present, which gives rise to the familiar Casimir effect inside a cavity. Note that in both cases, the spacetime manifold is made incomplete by the introduction of the plane conductor boundary condition(s). The vacuum region put under stress by the presence of the plane conductor(s) is called the Casimir vacuum. The generic expression for the energy density of the Casimir effect is ρCE = −Ahc / d4, where A = ζ(D)/8π2 in spacetimes of arbitrary dimension D (Reference 34-36). The appearance of the zeta-function ζ(D) is characteristic of expressions for vacuum stress-energy tensors, Tvacμν. In our familiar 4-dimensional spacetime (D = 4) the equation exists A = π2/720. To calculate Tvacμν for a given quantum field is to calculate its associated Casimir effect.\n\nAnalogs of the Casimir effect also exist for fields other than the electromagnetic field. When considering the vacuum state of other fields, one must consider boundary conditions that are analogous to the perfect-conductor boundary conditions for the electromagnetic field at the surfaces of the plates (Reference 34-36,40). Other fields\n\n31\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nare not electromagnetic in nature; that is to say they are non-Maxwellian, and so the perfect-conductor boundary conditions do not apply to them. It turns out that complete manifolds exhibit what is called the topological Casimir effect for any non-Maxwellian fields. In order to define boundary conditions for other fields one replaces the conductor boundary conditions and Minkowski spacetime by a manifold of the form ℜ × Σ (that is, a product space), where ℜ is the real line defining the time dimension for this particular product space and Σ is a flat 3-dimensional manifold having any one of the following topologies: ℜ2 × S1, ℜ × T2, T3, ℜ × K2, and so forth, ℜ being the real line that defines any linear space dimension (for example, ℜ = line, ℜ2 = 2-dimensional plane), Tn being the n-torus, K2 the 2-dimensional Klein bottle, S1 the circle, and so forth.\n\nThe case Σ = ℜ2 × S1 has the closest resemblance to the electromagnetic Casimir effect, the difference being that instead of imposing conductor boundary conditions, one imposes periodic boundary conditions on some of the space coordinates in the 3-dimensional manifold. When imposing this topological constraint on the field theoretic calculation of the topological Casimir effect (for linear massless fields), one finds that the generic expression for the energy density is also ρCE = −Ahc / d4, where A = ±df(π2/90), df is the number of degrees of freedom (for example, helicity states) per spatial point, the plus sign holds for boson fields (giving a negative energy density) and the negative sign for fermion fields (giving a positive energy density).\n\nIf one were to admit spin structure in the manifolds described above and the field is spinorial, then there is another important subtlety that must be taken into account when evaluating Tvacμν. However, this introduces an additional complexity involving the relationship between the spin structure and the global structure (that is, the configuration space or fiber bundle) of the field in question whereby the topology not only of the base manifold, but of the fiber bundle itself has an effect on Tvacμν. In addition to this, there are (compactified) extra-space dimensional quantum field (that is, D-Brane or \"brane world\") analogs of the Casimir effect yet to be explored. But a detailed consideration of these is beyond the scope of this report and will be left for future investigation.\n\nAs a final note, one points out that the methods used to obtain the electromagnetic Tvacμν between parallel plane conductors can also be used when the conductors are not parallel but are joined together along a line of intersection. If the conductors have curved surfaces instead, then one obtains results that are similar to the case of intersecting conductors. These geometries have also been evaluated for the case of dielectric media. These particular cases will not be considered further since there are technical subtleties involved that complicate the calculations and application of the different approaches. This topic will also be left for future investigation.\n\nDYNAMICAL CASIMIR EFFECT: MOVING MIRRORS\n\nNegative energy can be created by a single moving reflecting (conducting) surface (a.k.a. a moving mirror). A mirror moving with increasing acceleration generates a flux of negative energy that emanates from its surface and flows out into the space ahead of the mirror (Reference 37,90). See Figure 5 (below) for an illustration of this effect. This is essentially the simple case of an infinite plane conductor undergoing acceleration\n\n32\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nperpendicular to its surface. If the acceleration varies with time, the conductor will generally emit or absorb photons (that is, exchange energy with the vacuum), even though it is neutral. This is an example of the well-known quantum phenomenon of parametric excitation. The parameters of the electromagnetic field oscillators (for example, their frequency distribution function) change with time owing to the acceleration of the mirror (Reference 91). This effect is known to be exceedingly small. However, recent theoretical and technological developments suggest that laboratory investigations of the dynamical Casimir effect will begin in the very near future (Reference 74,75).\n\nFigure 5. Negative Energy Flux (Gold) Emanating From a Moving Mirror\n\n33\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nReferences\n\n[1] Symon, K. R., Mechanics, 3rd ed., Addison-Wesley Publ. Co., Reading, Mass., 1971, pp. 10.\n\n[2] Forward, R. L., Future Magic: How Today's Science Fiction Will Become Tomorrow's Reality, Avon Books, New York, 1988, pp. 103-132.\n\n[3] Forward, R. L., Indistinguishable From Magic, Baen Publ. Enterpr., Riverdale, New York, 1995, pp. 148-178.\n\n[4] Forward, R. L., \"A New Gravitational Field,\" Science Digest, Vol. 52, 1962, pp. 73-78.\n\n[5] Forward, R. L., \"Far Out Physics,\" Analog Science Fiction/Science Fact, Vol. 95, 1975, pp. 147-166.\n\n[6] Davis, E. W., \"Advanced Propulsion Study,\" Air Force Research Laboratory, Final Report AFRL-PR ED-TR-2004-0024, Air Force Materiel Command, Edwards AFB, CA, 2004, pp. 2-5.\n\n[7] Heaviside, O., \"A Gravitational and Electromagnetic Analogy,\" The Electrician, Vol. 31, 1893, pp. 281-282, 359.\n\n[8] Thirring, H., \"Über die Wirkung rotierender ferner Massen in der Einsteinschen Gravitationstheorie,\" Physikalische Zeitschrift, Vol. 19, 1918, pp. 33-39.\n\n[9] Thirring, H., \"Berichtigung zu meiner Arbeit: 'Über die Wirkung rotierender ferner Massen in der Einsteinschen Gravitationstheorie,'\" Physikalische Zeitschrift, Vol. 22, 1921, pp. 29-30.\n\n[10] Thirring, H., and Lense, J., \"Über den Einfluss der Eigenrotation der Zentralkörper auf die Bewegung der Planeten und Monde nach der Einsteinschen Gravitationstheorie,\" Physikalische Zeitschrift, Vol. 19, 1918, pp. 156-163.\n\n[11] Mashhoon, B., Hehl, F. W., and Theiss, D. S., \"On the Gravitational Effects of Rotating Masses: The Lense-Thirring Papers Translated,\" General Relativity and Gravitation, Vol. 16, 1984, pp. 711-750.\n\n[12] Forward, R. L., \"General Relativity for the Experimentalist,\" Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers, Vol. 49, 1961, pp. 892-904.\n\n[13] Forward, R. L., \"Antigravity,\" Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers, Vol. 49, 1961, p. 1442.\n\n[14] Forward, R. L., \"Guidelines to Antigravity,\" American Journal of Physics, Vol. 31, 1963, pp. 166-170.\n\n[15] Felber, F. S., \"Exact Relativistic 'Antigravity' Propulsion,\" Proceedings of the STAIF-2006: 3rd Symposium on New Frontiers and Future Concepts, edited by M. S. El-Genk, AIP Conf. Proc. Vol. 813, AIP Press, New York, 2006, pp. 1374-1381.\n\n34\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[16] Misner, C. W., Thorne, K. S., and Wheeler, J. A., Gravitation, W. H. Freeman & Co., San Francisco, 1973.\n\n[17] Ohanian, H., and Ruffini, R., Gravitation and Spacetime, 2nd ed., W. W. Norton & Co., New York, 1994.\n\n[18] Ciufolini, I., and Wheeler, J. A., Gravitation and Inertia, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1995.\n\n[19] Sachs, M., \"The Mach Principle and the Origin of Inertia from General Relativity,\" Mach's Principle and the Origin of Inertia, edited by M. Sachs and A. R. Roy, C. Roy Keys, Inc., 2003.\n\n[20] Ford, L. H., and Roman, T. A., \"Negative Energy, Wormholes and Warp Drive,\" Scientific American, Vol. 13, 2003, pp. 84-91.\n\n[21] Morris, M. S., and Thorne, K. S., \"Wormholes in spacetime and their use for interstellar travel: A tool for teaching general relativity,\" American Journal of Physics, Vol. 56, 1988, pp. 395-412.\n\n[22] Visser, M., Lorentzian Wormholes: From Einstein to Hawking, AIP Press, New York, 1995.\n\n[23] Hawking, S. W., and Ellis, G. F. R., The Large-Scale Structure of Space-Time, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1973, pp. 88-91, 95-96.\n\n[24] Epstein, H., Glaser, V., and Jaffe, A., \"Nonpositivity of the Energy Density in Quantized Field Theories,\" Nuovo Cimento, Vol. 36, 1965, pp. 1016-1022.\n\n[25] Visser, M., \"Wormholes, baby universes, and causality,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 41, 1990, pp. 1116-1124.\n\n[26] Visser, M., \"Gravitational vacuum polarization. I. Energy conditions in the Hartle-Hawking vacuum,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 54, 1996, pp. 5103-5115.\n\n[27] Visser, M., \"Gravitational vacuum polarization. II. Energy conditions in the Boulware vacuum,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 54, 1996, pp. 5116-5122.\n\n[28] Visser, M., \"Gravitational vacuum polarization. III. Energy conditions in the (1+1)-dimensional Schwarzschild spacetime,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 54, 1996, pp. 5123-5128.\n\n[29] Visser, M., \"Gravitational vacuum polarization. IV. Energy conditions in the Unruh vacuum,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 56, 1997, pp. 936-952.\n\n[30] Barcelo, C., and Visser, M., \"Twilight for the energy conditions?,\" International Journal of Modern Physics D, Vol. 11, 2002, pp. 1553-1560.\n\n[31] Herrmann, F., \"Energy Density and Stress: A New Approach to Teaching Electromagnetism,\" American Journal of Physics, Vol. 57, 1989, pp. 707-714.\n\n[32] Drummond, P. D., and Ficek, Z. (eds.), Quantum Squeezing, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004.\n\n35\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[33] Hochberg, D., and Kephart, T. W., “Lorentzian wormholes from the gravitationally squeezed vacuum,” Physics Letters B, Vol. 268, 1991, pp. 377-383.\n\n[34] DeWitt, B. S., “Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime,” Physics Reports, Vol. 19C, 1975, pp. 295-357.\n\n[35] DeWitt, B. S., “Quantum gravity: the new synthesis,” General Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey, edited by S. W. Hawking and W. Israel, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1979, pp. 680-745.\n\n[36] DeWitt, B. S., “The Casimir Effect in Field Theory,” Physics in the Making, Essays on Developments in 20th Century Physics, In Honour of H. B. G. Casimir, edited by A. Sarlemijn and J. Sparnaay, North-Holland Elsevier Science Publ., New York, 1989, pp. 247-272.\n\n[37] Birrell, N. D., and Davies, P. C. W., Quantum fields in curved space, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1984.\n\n[38] Saunders, S., and Brown, H. R. (eds.), The Philosophy of Vacuum, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1991.\n\n[39] Milonni, P. W., The Quantum Vacuum: An Introduction to Quantum Electrodynamics, Academic Press, New York, 1994.\n\n[40] Milton, K. A., The Casimir Effect: Physical Manifestations of Zero-Point Energy, World Scientific, New Jersey, 2001.\n\n[41] Vollick, D. N., “Negative energy density states for the Dirac field in flat spacetime,” Physical Review D, Vol. 57, 1998, pp. 3484-3488.\n\n[42] Yu, H., and Shu, W., “Quantum states with negative energy density in the Dirac field and quantum inequalities,” Physics Letters B, Vol. 570, 2003, pp. 123-128.\n\n[43] Alcubierre, M., “The warp drive: hyper-fast travel within general relativity,” Classical and Quantum Gravity, Vol. 11, 1994, pp. L73-L77.\n\n[44] Olum, K. D., “Superluminal Travel Requires Negative Energies,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 81, 1998, pp. 3567-3570.\n\n[45] Gao, S., and Wald, R. M., “Theorems on gravitational time delay and related issues,” Classical and Quantum Gravity, Vol. 17, 2000, pp. 4999-5008.\n\n[46] Morris, M. S., Thorne, K. S., and Yurtsever, U., “Wormholes, time machines, and the weak energy conditions,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 61, 1988, pp. 1446-1449.\n\n[47] Ford, L. H., “Quantum coherence effects and the second law of thermodynamics,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 364, 1978, pp. 227-236.\n\n[48] Davies, P. C. W., “Can moving mirrors violate the second law of thermodynamics?,” Physics Letters B, Vol. 11, 1982, p. 215.\n\n36\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[49] Everett, A. E., “Warp drive and causality,” Physical Review D, Vol. 53, 1996, pp. 7365-7368.\n\n[50] Terletskii, Ya. P., Paradoxes In The Theory of Relativity, Plenum Press, New York, 1968, Chap. VI.\n\n[51] Peacock, J. A., Cosmological Physics, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1999, pp. 25-26.\n\n[52] Riess, A. G., et al., “Observational Evidence from Supernovae for an Accelerating Universe and a Cosmological Constant,” Astronomical Journal, Vol. 116, 1998, pp. 1009-1038.\n\n[53] Perlmutter, S., et al., “Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae,” Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 517, 1999, pp. 565-586.\n\n[54] Schwarzschild, B., “High-redshift supernovae indicate that dark energy has been billion years,” Physics Today, Vol. 60, 2007, pp. 21-25.\n\n[55] Riess, A. G., et al., “New Hubble Space Telescope Discoveries of Type Ia Supernovae at z ≥ 1: Narrowing Constraints on the Early Behavior of Dark Energy,” Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 659, 2007, pp. 98-121.\n\n[56] Astier, P., et al., “The Supernova Legacy Survey: measurement of ΩM, ΩΛ and w from the first year data set,” Astronomy and Astrophysics, Vol. 447, 2006, pp. 31-48.\n\n[57] Particle Data Group, “Review of Particle Physics,” Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics, Vol. 33, 2006, pp. 210-232.\n\n[58] Feynman, R. P., and Hibbs, A. R., Quantum Mechanics and Path Integrals, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1965.\n\n[59] Feynman, R. P., Morinigo, F. B., and Wagner, W. G., Feynman Lectures on Gravitation, edited by B. Hatfield, Addison-Wesley Publ. Co., Reading, MA, 1995.\n\n[60] Zee, A., Quantum Field Theory In A Nutshell, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 2003, Chap. VIII.1.\n\n[61] Calloni, E., et al., “Gravitational effects on a rigid Casimir cavity,” International Journal of Modern Physics A, Vol. 17, 2002, pp. 804-807.\n\n[62] Calloni, E., et al., “Vacuum fluctuation force on a rigid Casimir cavity in a gravitational field,” Physics Letters A, Vol. 297, 2002, pp. 328-333.\n\n[63] Bimonte, G., et al., “Novel features of the energy-momentum tensor of a Casimir apparatus in a weak gravitational field,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, Vol. 41, 2008, 164056.\n\n[64] Bimonte, G., et al., “Energy-momentum tensor for a Casimir apparatus in a weak gravitational field,” Physical Review D, Vol. 74, 2006, 085011.\n\n[65] Bimonte, G., et al., “Erratum: Energy-momentum tensor for a Casimir apparatus in a weak gravitational field,” Physical Review D, Vol. 75, 2007, 089901(E).\n\n37\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[66] Pinto, F., “Progress in Quantum Vacuum Engineering Propulsion,” Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, Vol. 59, 2006, pp. 247-256.\n\n[67] Fermi, E., “Sull’elettrostatica di un campo gravitazionale uniforme e sul peso delle masse elettromagnetiche,” Nuovo Cimento, Vol. 22, 1921, pp. 176-188.\n\n[68] Puthoff, H. E., “Polarizable-Vacuum (PV) Approach to General Relativity,” Foundations of Physics, Vol. 32, 2002, pp. 927-943.\n\n[69] Hathaway, G. D., “Chapter 5: Gravitational Experiments with Superconductors: History and Lessons,” Frontiers of Propulsion Science, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics Series, Vol. 227, eds. M. G. Millis and E. W. Davis, AIAA Press, Reston, VA, 2009, pp. 229-248.\n\n[70] Davis, E. W., “Chapter 15: Faster-than-Light Approaches in General Relativity,” Frontiers of Propulsion Science, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics Series, Vol. 227, eds. M. G. Millis and E. W. Davis, AIAA Press, Reston, VA, 2009, pp. 473-509.\n\n[71] Rabeau, J. R., et al., “Fabrication of single nickel-nitrogen defects in diamond by chemical vapor deposition,” Cornell Univ. Library arXiv.org e-Print Archive, URL: http://arxiv.org/cond-mat/0411245.pdf (cited 11 April 2004).\n\n[72] Rabeau, J. R., et al., “Diamond chemical vapor deposition on optical fibers for fluorescence waveguiding,” Cornell Univ. Library arXiv.org e-Print Archive, URL: http://arxiv.org/cond-mat/0411249.pdf (cited 11 April 2004).\n\n[73] Ries, J., Brezger, B., and Lvovsky, A. I., “Experimental vacuum squeezing in rubidium vapor via self-rotation,” Physical Review A, Vol. 68, 2003, 025801.\n\n[74] Agnesi, A., et al., “MIR status report: an experiment for the measurement of the dynamical Casimir effect,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, Vol. 41, 2008, 164024.\n\n[75] Brownell, J. H., Kim, W. J., and Onofrio, R., “Modelling superradiant amplification of Casimir photons in very low dissipation cavities,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, Vol. 41, 2008, 164026.\n\n[76] Marecki, P., “Balanced homodyne detectors and Casimir energy densities,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, Vol. 41, 2008, 164037.\n\n[77] Drummond, P. D., and Ficek, Z. (eds.), Quantum Squeezing, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004.\n\n[78] Slusher, R. E., et al., “Observation of Squeezed States Generated by Four-Wave Mixing in an Optical Cavity,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 55, 1985, pp. 2409-2412.\n\n[79] Slusher, R. E., and Yurke, B., “Squeezed Light,” Scientific American, Vol. 254, 1986, pp. 50-56.\n\n[80] Robinson, A. L., “Bell Labs Generates Squeezed Light,” Science, Vol. 230, 1985, pp. 927-929.\n\n38\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f2ad9a00bccb4f","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[81] Robinson, A. L., “Now Four Laboratories Have Squeezed Light,” Science, Vol. 233, 1986, pp. 280-281.\n\n[82] Saleh, B. E. A., and Teich, M. C., Fundamentals of Photonics, Wiley Series in Pure and Applied Optics, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1991, pp. 414-416.\n\n[83] Caves, C. M., “Quantum-mechanical noise in an interferometer,” Physical Review D, Vol. 23, 1981, pp. 1693-1708.\n\n[84] Pfenning, M. J., “Quantum Inequality Restrictions on Negative Energy Densities in Curved Spacetimes,” Ph.D. Dissertation, Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, Tufts Univ., Medford, MA, 1998.\n\n[85] Casimir, H. B. G., “On the Attraction Between Two Perfectly Conducting Plates,” Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wetensch., Vol. 51, 1948, pp. 793-796.\n\n[86] Lamoreaux, S. K., “Demonstration of the Casimir Force in the 0.6 to 6 μm Range,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 78, 1997, pp. 5-8.\n\n[87] Mohideen, U., “Precision Measurement of the Casimir Force from 0.1 to 0.9 μm,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 81, 1998, pp. 4549-4552.\n\n[88] Chen, F., et al., “Theory confronts experiment in the Casimir force measurements: Quantification of errors and precision,” Physical Review A, Vol. 69, 2004, 022117.\n\n[89] Brown, L. S., and Maclay, G. J., “Vacuum Stress between Conducting Plates: An Image Solution,” Physical Review, Vol. 184, 1969, pp. 1272-1279.\n\n[90] Walker, W. R., “Negative energy fluxes and moving mirrors in curved space,” Classical and Quantum Gravity, Vol. 2, 1985, pp. L37-L40.\n\n[91] Moore, G. T., “Quantum Theory of the Electromagnetic Field in a Variable-Length One-Dimensional Cavity,” Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 11, 1970, pp. 2679-2691.\n\n39\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"04f8af70413c4833","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by Mr. Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 30 June 2026\nFOUO/ Privacy Act applies\n1.4a, 1.4g\n1.4a, 1.4g\n1.4a, 1.4g\n1.4a, 1.4g\n06/30/26 029\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0001 to 26-0005\nApproved for Release to AARO - FOUO / PA applies"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 917033\n\nEXHIBIT #530 Orig. Secret Serial 00196557 R/S\nS-06200 dated 4-23-49\nSubject: Flying Discs\n\nREPORT FILED M-5 AIRCRAFT - UNIDENTIFIED\n\nJONES\n2-27-50\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSECRET SECRET SECRET\n\n020249 30014\nS 78-1(126)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nP 615"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 18 February 1948 Incident # 101\n2. Time 5:01 P.M.\n3. Location Norcatur, Kansas\n4. Name of observer M. R. Krehbiel account (taken from newspaper)\n5. Occupation of observer Editor\n6. Address of observer Norton, Kansas\n7. Place of observation Norcatur, Kansas\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 30 - 35 miles above earth\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound One big explosion - \"afterwards a lot of little explosions\"\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Bluish-white smoke smudge\n18. Shape Mushroom\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction Meteor\n21. Exhaust trails None Bluish-white smoke smudge\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Photo of vapor trail left in sky by explosion\n25. Manner of disappearance Disintegration\n26. Remarks: Oscar Monnig, of the Texas Observers, Amateur Astronomy, 1010 Morningside Drive, Ft. Worth, offers \"tangible proof that the fireball\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of February 18 over northern Kansas was just that, inasmuch as meteorites have been recovered from it.\" There were found, beginning April 24, first several smaller fragments up to one of 4 1/2 pounds. Then a disturbed spot in a clover field led to the digging up of a piece of some 109 pounds embedded about two feet in the soil. The stone is what is termed as an \"achondrite\", a technical name for an unusual type of stony meteorite. It is reported to be of a type which will deteriorate rapidly.\n\nA photograph of the trail of the meteor, made by amateur photographer Duane W. Wray of Norton, shows the vapor trail left in the sky by the explosion of a meteor which was seen in Oklahoma, New Mexico, Colorado, Kansas, and Nebraska. It was made at Wray's home, nine miles north of Norton, just four minutes after the meteor exploded. A smudge of blue-white smoke remained in the sky for an hour February 18th. This photograph is in file under Incident #101.\n\nFurther remarks are contained in supplement.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBIT B\n\nStatement taken from Leland Sammons\n\nMy name is Leland Sammons, and I live on a farm 14 miles west of Stockton and 1 mile north, off US 24.\n\nOn February 18 at about 5 P.M., I was standing near my hog-pen about 100' east of my house, when I heard the pheasants raising a disturbance and the chickens all rushed to the chicken-house. I looked around toward the house to see what was causing it and saw something hovering just above the house. I ran towardthe house, and it then lowered over the north end of the house and settled toward the ground. I was then very near it, approximately 6' when it stopped about level with my face, and just wobbled around for an instant, fire belching out of it and sucking back in. The thing was about 4' long, shaped something like a funnel. There was a pipe sticking out the back of it, and once as it wobbled around, the pipe was sticking right at my belly. Suddenly there was a lot of sparks showered from it, and the fire increased as if a fuse might have lighted, and it took off in a north-westerly direction very fast, gaining altitude as it went. My wife heard it leave and ran out where I stood, and we watched it go, leaving a trail of smoke all the way. Suddenly there was a great cloud of smoke in the sky, not more than 40 seconds after it left my yard, and in a few seconds or more, we heard an explosion. I then stepped off from my house to where it had been, and it was five steps. Yes, it was hot, I could feel the hear from it. Had I not been washing my car prior to the occurrence, wetting the ground, there would have been a bare spot in the yard where the thing started up because there was a great rush of fire from it when it left. It must have been quite high when it exploded.\n\nKenneth Hays, son of Floyd Hays, 14 miles east of Norton on US 36, at the Jct. of K-60, south side of highway. At about 5 to 5:30 P.M., not sure of time, was riding his horse in a pasture, when he heard something queer in the sky. Looking up to the south-west, he saw what appeared to him to be a rocket, just like he had seen during the war in Europe. It startled him, and he jumped off the horse. He then remounted, watched its course, almost on a level but losing altitude a little, and it then exploded with a big cloud of smoke, apparently over Norton, from where he was, south of Prairie View. He rode on toward home always, when suddenly the sound and jar of the explosion reached him. Mrs. Hays was home in the house, when she heard and felt something like a truck might have struck the house. She ran out of the house and then first saw the huge cloud of smoke. About 40 minutes later, a part of the smoke cloud drifted directly over their house, and went on east over Phillipsburg.\n\nRalph New, postmaster at Norcatur, stated that at about 4:50 P.M. he was standing just inside the front window of the postoffice in Norcatur, when he observed a blinding flash as if someone had taken a flashlight picture. He could locate no one with a camera, but noticed several men walking to the center of the street and looking up. He then walked out to where they were and looking up, saw a high cloud of smoke in the sky almost directly overhead"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(COPY)\n\n323 W. Tenth St.,\nPueblo, Colorado\nFebruary 20, 1948\n\nOffice of the Chief of Staff\nU. S. Army\nWashington, D. C.\n\nSubject:\t\tExplosion in the sky near Norcatur, Kans.\n\t\t\t4:00 p.m. (MST) February 18, 1948\n\nPurpose:\t\tTo call attention to some peculiarities\n\t\t\tin connection, whether coincidental or not\n\nAccording to an AP bulletin appearing in the Pueblo CHIEFTAIN for February 18, 1948, some object was seen moving eastward across the sky on the late afternoon of February 18th, and when this thing reached a position approximate to Norcatur, Kansas, exploded, or disrupted, or disappeared. The explosion is said to have been terrific.\n\nDirections given as to the progress of this appearance indicate that it moved from west to east.\n\nInformation contained in the dispatch under a Denver dateline indicate that while many would call this object a bolide - e.g., exploding meteor - the astronomers of Chamberlin Observatory (Denver) did not so assess it: it is said in the dispatch that these officials could offer no explanation of it.\n\nIf this is the case, the apparance is anomalous, and may lend itself to other meteoric explanation.\n\nA sketch-diagram of the earth and moon's orbit reveals a peculiarity in connection with the appearance, which may be significant.\n\nIf a line is stricken at right-angles across the meridional position of the site of explosion of this meteor at hour angle four o'clock (local time) and this line be considered the west-to-east course of the object, then it will be seen that if this line is continued outward into space toward the orbit of the moon it will intersect the lunar orbit at a place near to where the moon would be at from 80 to one hundred hours after the explosion took place.\n\nNew moon occurred at 9 D 10 H 2 M February; First Quarter at 17D 8H M. February -- the moon moves approximately 12.5 degrees per day along its orbit."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It is held by rocketry experts (example, WILLY LEY - see his ROCKETS, p. 192, diagram and note in connection therewith) that it would take about 100 hours for a rocket-craft to negotiate the distance from Earth to Moon.\n\nPrior to its explosion over Norcatur, this object of Feb. 18th was variously reported as a \"falling plane\", a \"jet plane\", and a \"ball of fire\". It is said by some to have left a trail of smoke behind it.\n\nIt is the suggestion of this writer that the Army collect and assimilate reports on this object, with a view to determining where it was seen as an object trailing smoke and where as a ball of fire.\n\nIf this thing is a rocket of some kind headed for the moon, it might first have been seen as a streak of smoke, then later as a ball of fire, and lastly as a tremendous explosion when it at last reached sufficient speed and elevation for take-off.\n\nThe writer has in mind the various and unexplained reports on \"flying saucers\", and bases this speculation upon a long consideration of various oddments of reports whose significance might be of space-craft from other worlds of space.\n\nThe so-called \"meteoric procession\" which crossed Toronto in February 1913, consisted of a number of groups of illiminated bodies traveling in groups of three and moving in \"rigid formation\", all pursuing a course across the same streak of the earth's surface. If a line is projected backward along this line of flight it will be seen that this line \"comes out\" at the position of the moon at the time. The 1913 phenomenon occurred in the mid-period of a series of reports on dirigible aircraft of appearance like zeppelins which were seen over England and whose appearance terminated - or reports on the appearances stopped - just prior to the inferior conjunction of Venus of April 24, 1913.\n\nThe writer begs to call attention to the fact that the times prior to and just after inferior conjunction of Venus are prolific in reports of strange things seen in the sky.\n\nAlso that lights have been reported on the moon from time to time, back for at least a century.\n\nIf in the future of military experiment the moon is selected as a base for the launching of rockets (which has been suggested by some writers), it may be well to look first into reports like this one on the explosion over Norcatur and the direction of the object involved.\n\nThere is a possibility, however remote this may seem, that the moon is either inhabited or in use by other than human beings.\n\nYours,\n\n/s/ NORMAN GARRETT MARKHAM\n\nIt may do not harm to watch the moon for possible arrival of this thing in the quarter at 80 to 100 hours after \"its departure\".\nNGM\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"into reports like this one on the explosion over Norcatur and the direction of the object involved.\n\nThere is a possibility, however remote this may seem, that the moon is either inhabited or in use by other than human beings.\n\nYours,\n\n/s/ NORMAN GARRETT MARKHAM\n\nIt may do not harm to watch the moon for possible arrival of this thing in the quarter at 80 to 100 hours after \"its departure\".\nNGM\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(COPY)\n\nFILE REF: - SIGGE-M-1\t\t\t\t\t\tMarch 14, 1948\n\nFrom:\t\t\t\t\t\t\tNorman G. Markham\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tMAIN HOTEL, Pueblo, Colo\n\nTo:\t\t\t\t\t\t\tChief Signal Officer\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tU. S. Army, Washington, D.C.\n\nSubject:\t\t\t\t\t\tNorcatur, Kans., sky explosion\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tof 18 February, 1948\n\nPurpose:\t\t\t\t\t\tTo show a speculation regarding the above phenomenon and another one of earlier date and to call attention to occurrences between the two which have an appearance of relationship whether coincidental or not.\n\nThe geographical position of the Norcatur explosion suggests possible linkage with other occurrences happening inside latitudinal limits arbitrarily demarkable between 43 36' North (which is the latitude of Boise, Idaho) and 36 10' North (the latitude of Nashville, Tenn.), a belt about 485 miles wide.\n\nThis suggestion is gained from positions given for occurrences happening between June 24, 1947 and February 18, 1948, as shall be hereinafter briefly described.\n\n-------------\n\nTHE BOISE (Idaho) OBJECT--This was seen either beginning or ending at 3:30 pm 24 June 1947 and was visible for 20 minutes. It was in the western sky, was of comet-like appearance, and settled gradually toward the horizon as planetary bodies set. It was seen by Lt. Gov. Whitehead and Chief Justice Lampert. Its nature was unknown.\n\nThe peculiarity which connects this object, for speculative purposes, with the explosion of some unknown object over Norcatur, Kans., on 18 February 1948 is the seeming of a relationship between the positions of the moon for the two phenomena:\n\nIn the former case the moon was at the date of phenomenon, about 7 3/4, 63 before the position of First Quarter; on the second case it was about 8 3/4.73 beyond the position of first quarter.\n\nSince the Boise object was visible for 20 minutes before it sank this argues it was about ten degrees above the horizon when first seen. Now if a line be drawn westward and at ten degrees zenithward from the"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"horizon of Boise at 3:30 p.m. and another line be drawn from the position of the moon at one hundred hours before the sighting of the Boise object, and projected to the center of the earth, it will be seen that this ten-degrees-altitude and the moon-earth line intersect as a place far above a geographical position considerably to the west of Cape Blanc, in the neighborhoof about 700 miles off the coast.\n\nThe Boise object in its appearance suggests a rocket-type of craft possibly using reaction blasts to brake itself down for a landing on the earth. The bright point and plumy tail of the description suggest this, as also its apparent fixity in space.\n\nHOLLE'S \"SHIP IN FLAMES\" -- Nine days after the sighting of the Boise object a forest lookout named Earl Holle saw at or soon after 4:00 p.m., 3rd July, 1947, something he took to be a \"tanker in flames\". This was seen horizon-ward from a point in Sonoma County, California, near to Fort Ross. A search was instituted by the Navy or Coast Guard, and nothing was found. The soviet tanker ELBRUZ, which had been in the vicinity, was queried and found to be all right. This was not explained.\n\nIf this apperance had been on the horizon, there is no telling how far it may have been from the observer.\n\nCAPE MENDOCINO BLIMP INCIDENT -- Not far from the location of Holle's \"burning ship\" an accident occurred to a navy blimp, 14 July 1947, off Cape Mendocino.\n\nThis blimp suddenly settled into the water, slipped out its crew and rose again.\n\nThe anomaly here is that one would not expect to find drastic down-drafts of such violence as to thus upset a lighter than air craft. Possibly a downdraft accounted for the accident - but if the Signal Officer will look up the incident of the British steamer Talma which, at the time of the sighting of a luminous wheel-like phenomenon in the Gulf of Martaban, reported a slowing of the engines from some unknown cause, it may be seen that possibly forces are generated in some manner by certain unknown objects at times in the ocean, which may have physical attraction for material objects. This blimp accident occurring in waters where occurred other phenomena shortly to be mentioned, seems to have a doubtful side to it.\n\nTHE OAKIAND OBJECT -- Early on the morning of 13th October, 1947, a photographer named Ben Dobus together with a taxidriver named A. J. Goldman saw a thing \"that looked like Saturn with a ring around it.\" It shot at terrific speed WESTWARD across the sky of the Bay area, and was seen shortly after midnight.\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"•This may have been heading in the general direction of what may have been the goal of two later objects which roughly resemble it in description.\n\nTHE TICONDEROGA OBJECTS -- According to the tanker Ticonderoga's second officer, two \"flying discs\" were seen heading SOUTHWEST when the ship was in 43 degrees fifteen minutes north and 124 degrees 54 minutes west, at 0620 GCT, 12th November 1947.\n\nThese may have been heading for the object seen in the Pacific off the Golden Gate, not long afterward - or possibly at the same time, if earlier reports on this are consulted.\n\nTHE PHANTOM REEF -- On November 24, 1947, the Navy denied that it had found a phantom reef or other obstruction to navigation at a point about 400 miles west of San Francisco. The Navay Survey ship MAURY, sent out there in response to reports of ships that some hugh object had been seen in the water in that neighborhood, reported that when in the approximate 1 titude and longitude of the supposed obstruction they picked up an echo from something in the water 1600 yards from the ship; but that when they had steamed to within 400 yards of this, the echo vanished.\n\nThere seems a possible connectability between the various elements so far considered.\n\nLater on January 7, 1948, there were occurrences in the neighborhood of Wilmington, O., Ft. Knox, Ky., Franklin, Ky., and Nashville, Tenn., all of which must be now familiar to the archivists of the Signal Office.\n\nSomething like a \"flying disc\" was pursued by one Lt. Mantell and two other pilots, Mantel being killed while in the process of attempting to gain altitude to get close to whatever it was he was chasing.\n\nAlso, in this connection, it may not be amiss to mention the deaths of two military officers who were said to have been bringing back material evidence from \"flying discs\" one of which was said to have met with some kind of accident over Maury Island, Puget Sound, around June, 1947.\n\nIt will be seen on inspection that the geographical locales of these incidents fit inside the belt of latitudes hereinbefore mentioned.\n\nTHE NORCATUR EXPLOSION was described in a previous letter of this writer, and it was shown in that letter that a line tangential to the meridian of Norcatur, Kans., at hour-angle 2:20 p.m., would if continued outward into space to the orbit of the moon, intersect the moon's orbit at a point where the moon would have been at about 100 hours after the time of the explosion.\n\nAccording to rocketry theory, it would take a reaction-propelled craft of the rocket type about 100 hours to reach the moon."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I submit there is a likelihood that on June 24, 1947, something like a space-ship came here from the moon and upon February 18, 1948, returned to the moon.\n\nThis is of course speculation.\n\nBut has anyone yet explained the \"flying discs\" in terms of all the pretty-well proven facts in connection with them?\n\nHas anyone yet devised a fuel powerful enough to kick a rocket from Earth to the Moon?\n\nThere have been hundreds of reports, during the past century, on occurrences which imply this world is visited from outside space. Absence of contact by these postulatable visiting entities may imply a state of culture far beyond ours, to the point where it would be inex-pedient for their members to have to do with us en-masse.\n\nThese reports have never been seriously considered by science, which in general ignores them.\n\nHowever, according to Dr. Rocht of Chamberlin Observatory, Denver, there is nothing in astronomy to explain the thing which exploded over Norcatur. Dr. Nininger's idea that the thing was a meteor flatly disregards Dr. Rocht's opinion, which may have been based on the Denver Posts' statement that a Denver woman saw the Norcatur object twenty minutes before the explosion occurred.\n\nI submit that the Army needs men who are capable of recognizing the anomalies beforementioned when they occur, evenif only to aid in speculation regarding them.\n\nThe undersigned offers his services to that end, if the Army may wish to avail itself of them.\n\n/s/ N. G. MARKHAM\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Excerpt of letter dated April 11, 1948 from Dr. Lincoln LaPaz, Director, Institute of Meteoritics, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, to the Deputy Executive Director, Committee on Geophysical Sciences, Research and Development Board:\n\nThank you for the surprising documents sent me under date of March 30. As you remark, certain aspects of Markham's letters are fantastic (for example: (1) the fireball procession of 1913, February 9, was genuinely meteoric, although a rare type of chain fall; (2) no astronomer could take seriously Markham's \"invasion by beings from Venus or the Moon\"-theory; (3) he appeals to, and biases in his favor, such untrustworthy evidence as newspaper stories, e.g., the absurd statement attributed to Dr. Rocht of the Chamberlin Observatory). Nevertheless, Markham is justified in calling attention to certain incidents as unexplained, for example, the \"flying lenses\" (in my opinion 99% hoax and imagination and 1% real).\n\nAs regards the Norcatur, Kansas incident, I remain convinced that, like the Four Corners incident, it was a genuine meteorite fall, although one of exceptional size (again like the Four Corners fall). However, there are many curious aspects of both these falls, some of an objective nature, like the singular fact that in spite of intensive searches (admittedly under bad terrain and weather conditions), not a trace of meteoritic material has so far been found; some of a non-objective nature, like the amazing testimony given by Mr. Leland Sammons, Mr. Alfred Glenn, and other witnesses of the Norcatur incident, both to members of the State Highway Commission of Kansas and to Institute of Meteoritics field survey parties. (See exhibits A, B, and C enclosed.)\n\nSome comment on such testimony as appears in A,B, and C would seem desirable:\n\n1. Glenn first reported the battery case as red hot. When I pointed out that the paper on it was not charred, his account was changed to \"too hot to handle\". The Institute of Meteoritics party found only two men, not four, who saw the battery case fall. The battery case has been examined by Dr. Victor Regener, Department of Physics, University of New Mexico, who states that it appears to be identical with the small batteries used in portable radios.\n\n2. K. Hays' identification of the Norcatur object as a rocket has the following support: On the morning of February 19, I talked to the towerman and two assistants at the Air Base at McCook Field, Nebraska. All three denied the Norcatur object was a fireball and described it as a black object with an extremely bright jet of flame pouring out of the rear. Furthermore, a 14-year old, and presumably unbiased, schoolgirl in Oberlin, Kansas wrote me a similar description of the \"Fireball.\""} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. A determined effort is under way to check up on Sammons' veracity (and sanity!) I have neither seen nor talked to Sammons, but another member of the Institute of Meteoritics party (Dr. D. M. Gragg, an Instructor in the Department of Mathematics) who did so believes Sammons (who is a well-to-do farmer) to be sincere and very badly scared. Of course nearness to a big meteorite fall would scare one as badly as an atom bomb; but how could it produce such testimony as Sammons\".\n\nThe \"meteoritic\" incidents from the great fall of 1945, November 29 (from which no meteorites have been recovered either!) through the sequence of similar falls culminating in the Four Corners and Norcatur incidents, coupled with such tings as the Ussuri incident, convince me that either the earth is under a most unusual cosmic bombardment or many of the fireballs are not meteorites at all. While I still cling to the meteoritic hypothesis, it is clear that which ever alternative is the right one, the situation cries aloud for thorough investigation."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(COPY)\n\nEXHIBIT A\n\nRoy W. Cox, Director of Highways\n\nSTATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION\n\nOF KANSAS\n\nDivision 3\n\nNorton\n\nNOTES TAKEN AT NORCATUR, KANSAS, Night of Feb 18\n\nMr. Ralph New, Postmaster at Norcatur, tells us that at approximately 4:50 PM he was standing in the north window of the post office in Norcatur looking toward the City Hall when he was suddenly illuminated very brightly by some terrific light.\n\nHe ran outside into the street where others were looking toward the northeast at a very large cloud of white smoke high in the sky. He stated that in about a minute and a half, there was a terrific explosion followed by a heavy rumbling noise like thunder and that the smoke cloud was growing larger all the time. Also there was a white smoke trail in the sky from the southwest where the missile had come from.\n\nHe said that from the center of the street, the explosion and the first big mushroom of smoke was directly overhead and at a tremendous height.\n\nAnother man in Norcatur stated that just prior to the explosion, he had heard the motors of an airplane.\n\nChief Scott learned from some man in Norton that just following the explosion, something fell at his feet on the street and he picked it up, to find that it was a small flashlight battery resembling those used in 'fountain pen flashlights' and that it was red hot. After a crowd of men gathered and examined it, he was unable to findit and thinks that someone took it.\n\nKenneth Hays of east of Norton was about 5 miles south of Prairie View when he heard something roaring in the sky to the west of him, far away and very high. He says that it resembled a rocket traveling northeast toward Norton direction, and that suddenly there was a terrific explosion followed by a mushroom of white smoke andthat there followed other explosions or something resembling explosions. When he saw it, it was nearing the ground or horizon, in other words, losing altitude.\n\nEdgar Young's boy at Reager, was standing beside the Reager elevator and heard something high over head, looked up to see a very bright flash of light and then a loud explosion followed by a big cloud of smoke.\n\nThe airport at Norton thought about 20,000 feet, time 4:50. Checked but no planes missing."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"but slightly east. Suddenly, about 1 and 1/2 minutes after he had seen the flash, there was a terrific explosion and jar, shaking the ground and causing the windows all around to rattle. Following the explosion, there were several loud reverberating rumblings across the heavens. He stated that the explosion must have been very high.\n\n----------\n\nEdgar Young, a boy living at Regar, just east of Norcatur, was outside the elevator, when he observed the explosion, looked up and saw the huge cloud of smoke. He stated that it was almost overhead but slightly west of him. He said that it was a big explosion. The elevator man was out in the elevator, when he heard the explosion. He thought that his oil-burner had exploded in the office and ran in to see about it. Finding it O.K., he ran outside to see what had exploded, saw the big cloud of smoke high overhead, slightly west.\n\n----------\n\nEastern Kansas newspaper carried a story about 6 days ago of one just like this one, coming from the south to vicinity of Iola, Kansas, where it turned west and disappeared into the sky.\n\n----------\n\nCheck with Chief Scott of Norton about a burned flashlight battery which fell in the street of Norton just after the explosion. It was too hot to be picked up for several minutes. Chief Scott has it.\n\nNote: A copy of Exhibit \"C\" referred to in letter from Dr. LaPaz, was not received."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 18 February 1948 Incident # 102\n2. Time 1500 MST\n3. Location [REDACTED] Air Near Green River, Utah\n4. Name of observer Lenord P. Marchese (B-29 Pilot, Lt. 28 Bomber Gp) Carl W. Stucki, Lt., Co-Pilot, (see reverse side\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot for other witnesses)\n6. Address of observer 77th Bomb Sq, 28th Bomb Gp (VH), Weaver AFB, S.D.\n7. Place of observation 39° N - 100° W - near Green River, Utah\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer 100 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 20,000 feet\n12. Speed Very high\n13. Direction of flight Southeast of Limon, Colorado\n14. Tactics Explosion rate\n15. Sound Could not be determined due to B-29 engine noise\n16. Size Huge\n17. Color Multi-colored ball of fire\n18. Shape Huge multi-colored ball of fire and dense cloud of smoke\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Vapor trail with ball of fire at head of trail\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: [REDACTED] Over"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A huge multi-colored ball of fire trailing a dense cloud of smoke was sighted at approx 1500 hours MST 18 Feb 48, 39° N-100° W at approx 20,000 ' by two B-29 aircraft of the 28th Bombardment Group (VH). It was seen some 100 miles southeast of the B-29s. Size was estimated as huge altho impossible to determine accurately due to the distance. It was traveling at very high speed and heading southeast of Limon, Colorado, at approx 20,000 ft.\n\nWitnesses: Capt Howard H. Berodt, AO-49504, 718th Bomb Sq 28th Bomb Gp (VH). Pilot of 1st B-29\n\nCapt Maurice T. Ritenour, AO-45043, 718th Bomb Sq 28 Bomb Gp (VH). Co-Pilot of 1st B-29.\n\n1st Lt Leonard P. Marchese, AO-748714, 77th Bomb Sq., 28th Bomb Gp (VH). Pilot of 2nd B-29\n\n1st Lt. Carl W. Stucki, AO-785916, 77th Bomb Sq, 28th Bomb Gp (VH). Co-Pilot of 2nd B-29.\n\nNOTE: See Incident 101 - Norcatur Kansas."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 18 February 1948 Incident # 103\n2. Time 1500 MST\n3. Location [REDACTED] Air near Green River Utah\n4. Name of observers Capt. Howard H. Berodt - Capt Maurice T. Ritenour (See Inc 102 - corroboration)\n5. Occupation of observor Pilots\n6. Address of observer 718th Bomb Sq, 28th Bomb Gp (VH) Weaver AFB, S.D.\n7. Place of observation 39° N - 100° W - Near Green River, Utah\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer 100 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 20,000 feet\n12. Speed Very high\n13. Direction of flight Southeast (of Limon, Colorado)\n14. Tactics Explosion rate\n15. Sound Could not be determined due to B-29 engine noise\n16. Size Huge (Seen 100 miles west of the B-29's)\n17. Color Multi-colored ball of fire\n18. Shape Huge multi-colored ball of fire and dense cloud of smoke followed\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Vapor trail with a ball of fire at the head of trail\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: [REDACTED] - Same as incident 102 which see\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Mar 48 Incident # 104\n2. Time 2055 C\n3. Location Smyrna, Tenn.\n4. Name of observer Frank L. Fenn, Maj, USAF, CO, Smyrna AF Base Cpl Richard C. Pettingill & Pvt Frank C. Johnson,\n5. Occupation of observers CO of Smyrna & radio and tower operators AACS Station\n6. Address of observor Smyrna AAF, [REDACTED] Smyrna, Tenn\n7. Place of observation Smyrna AAF - 6 miles from (ground)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 6 miles\n10. Time in sight 45 minutes\n11. Altitude About 5° above horizon\n12. Speed very slow\n13. Direction of flight WNW away from Smyrna\n14. Tactics N/S Faded away\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Unknown\n17. Color yellow-orange\n18. Shape oval\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - seemed to be flare\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions CAVU - 10 miles\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Figs (2) showing yellow orange flame-like oval\n25. Manner of disappearance faded into horizon\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A yellow-orange object which had the appearance of a flare was observed some six miles from Smyrna AAF between the west and northwest just above the horizon and moving directly away from Smyrna. The speed was estimated as slow since the object remained visible some forty-five minutes. It gradually faded away disappearing into the horizon. No exhaust trail was seen and no sound was heard."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 8 Mar 48 Incident # 105\n2. Time 1100\n3. Location Belmont, N. C.\n4. Name of observer Mr. A. C. Morrison\n5. Occupation of observer Supt. Meter Dept, Duke Power Co., Charlotte, N. C.\n6. Address of observer Charlotte, N. C. (Duke Power Co.)\n7. Place of observation Belmont, N. C. (Sighted from ground)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight about 10 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S - could not be estimated\n12. Speed Around 600 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Easterly\n14. Tactics None - moved in straight line at constant speed without change in altitude or direction\n15. Sound None\n16. Size From a distance - that of a small coin\n17. Color bright or silver - looked metallic\n18. Shape round or sphere (unable to determine which)\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction Metallic\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear with scattered white clouds\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance behind small white cloud\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nA round metallic-appearing object moving very rapidly at an estimated speed of 600 MPH was observed near Belmont, N. C., at approx 1100 the morning of 8 Mar 48. The weather was clear with excellent visibility with a few small scattered fleecy white clouds. It could not be determined if the object were a disc or sphere. Its apparent size was that of a small coin of a bright or silver color. It reflected the sun maintaining a steady reflection which did not flicker. The object which was under observation for some 10 seconds was on an easterly heading and moved in a straight line at a constant speed without apparent change in altitude or direction. It was impossible to determine the altitude but it was moving above the clouds. No sound of any kind was heard nor was any exhaust trail observed.\n\nNOTE: Witness (Mr Morrison) is a man of excellent character and reputation, a first-grade engineer and employee of Duke Power Co for some 30 years. He impressed the agent as being conservative and sound and is a technical man with a very technical and responsible position.\n\nMr. Morrison was careful in his statements. He does not claim he saw the \"flying disc\", merely claiming that they saw an object which they could not identify with any natural phenomenon or known type of aircraft. It resembled \"a round metallic appearing object moving very rapidly.\"\n\nWitnesses: Mr. Hendrix, assistant Superintendent, Meter Dept Duke Power Co., Charlotte, N. C.\nMr. G. W. Jordan, Gastonia Electric Co., Gastonia, N. C.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 5 March 1948 Incident # 106\n2. Time 1610 - 1655\n3. Location Bakersfield, California\n4. Name of observer George L. Buchner\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Bakersfield, California\n7. Place of observation From ground, southwest toward Buena Vista Lake, Calif.\n8. Number of objects Two\n9. Distance of object from observer 10 - 12 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Earthward\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Seemingly on fire, black and red smoke trailing behind\n18. Shape Similar to falling aircraft\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Brownish-white smoke and debris trailing\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Behind a water tower, which was an obstruction to the view\n26. Remarks: Comments of G. L. Buckner and other witnesses to this sighting contained in attached supplement.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA-3/1208-I\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of Flying Disc. Mar 11, 1948\n\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Forces\nWashington, D. C.\nATTN: DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nAir Intelligence Requirements Branch\n\n1. Incident reported on 9 March 1948, this headquarters, per telephone call from Sgt A. M. Larsen, Sheriff's office, Bakersfield, California.\n\na. Observation by Mr. (George L) Les Buchner, Bakersfield, California, of two objects falling to earth from unknown source on 5 March 1948 between 1610 and 1655 hours. Description of objects similar to falling aircraft with smoke and debris trailing. Observation made at Bakersfield with objects sighted southwest toward Buena Vista Lake, California.\n\nb. Observation by Mr. Denio, employee of the Pacific General Electric Company, Bakersfield, California, of two objects which fell to earth from unknown source north of Bakersfield, California, 8 March 1948. One object seemed to be on fire with red and black smoke trailing behind.\n\n2. Informant Larsen stated that searching parties, aircraft and rescue units have made numerous attempts to locate these reported objects without success.\n\n3. Investigation of incident has been initiated by this headquarters. Report will follow.\n\n/s/ Donald L. Springer\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, USAF\nAC of S, A-2\n\nInformation to:\nADC, Mitchel Fld, N.Y.\nFBI, San Francisco\nG-2, Sixth Army\nDIO, San Francisco (12th Nav.Dist)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA-3/1208-I\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of Flying Discs\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION:\n\nInformation from the Sheriff's Office, Bakersfield, California, revealed that numerous calls from residents in Bakersfield concerning peculiar objects in the sky over Bakersfield, predicated an investigation by their office and contact with A-2 Headquarters Fourth Air Force.\n\nOn 13th March 1948, two informants, Mr. George L. Buchner, and Mr. H. B. Nix, stated that they observed a flying object which appeared to be consumed in fire, and left a brownish-white plume of smoke, which suddenly stopped and disappeared. Seconds later, what appeared to be a parachute, was seen to be drifting to the east.\n\nThe object, as described, appeared to be a burning fabric airplane, consumed in smoke. Observations were made in Bakersfield of object to the south and southwest, approximately ten to twelve miles distance, around 1600 hours on 5 March 1948.\n\nOn 13th March 1948, informant, Mr. H. B. Nix, stated that he observed an object at 0830, 8 March 1948, due north of Bakersfield, approximately five miles distance. The object was a large, orange-red ball of fire, somewhat larger than a small airplane, appeared to remain static for approximately thirty seconds, then split and continued to burn; each visible as a burning half. A parachute, with a black object hanging was then observed to fall, drift to the east and disappeared into the hills east of Bakersfield.\n\nOn 13th March 1948, two informants, Mrs. Callie R. Mason, secretary, Haberfelde Building, Bakersfield, California, and Dr. J. E. Johnson, dentist Haberfelde Building, Bakersfield, California, stated that they were in Room 518, Haberfelde Building, on the morning of 9 March 1948. Mrs. Mason was a patient of Dr. Johnson. Both informants stated that they observed a flaming object which appeared at first to be a very small airplane. Orange red flames seemed to envelope the object with considerable black smoke trailing in a zigzag manner for approximately 4,000 to 5,000 feet. The object was observed at 1,000 feet, approximately due north of Bakersfield, seven to ten miles distant at approximately 0830 hours.\n\nInformants further stated that the object disappeared behind a water tower, which was an obstruction to their view, and was near the ground. Both informants watched for an explosion, thinking that it would explode upon reaching the ground, but nothing unusual was noted.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nA-2 COMMENT:\n\nAlthough there is no evidnece to substantiate the following, it is the opinion of this headquarters that this activity could be attributed to marker flares. Any further developments, or evidence obtained, will be forwarded this headquarters from the Sheriff's Office, Bakersfield, California.\n\nEVALUATION\n\nOf Source\nC\n\nOf Information\n3\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 8 March 1948 Incident # 107\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Bakersfield, California\n4. Name of observer Mr. Denio\n5. Occupation of observer Pacific General Electric Company employee\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Sighted from ground\n8. Number of objects Two\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Earthward\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color One object seemingly afire, red and black smoke trailing\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S Fell to earth\n26. Remarks: See supplement to Incident #106.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 8 March 1948 Incident # 108\n2. Time 0830\n3. Location Bakersfield, California\n4. Name of observer H. B. Nix\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Sighted from ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer 5 miles\n10. Time in sight Approx. 30 seconds before splitting and burning\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Static for approx 30 seconds, and then drifting\n13. Direction of flight eastward\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Larger than a small airplane\n17. Color Orange-red ball of fire\n18. Shape Ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Drifted to the east into the hills east of Bakersfield\n26. Remarks: See supplement to Incident #106\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 9 March 1948 Incident # 109\n2. Time 0830\n3. Location Bakersfield, California\n4. Name of observers J.E. Johnson and Mrs. Callie R. Mason\n5. Occupation of observer J.E. Johnson, Dentist, Mrs. Mason, Secretary\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation 5th Floor of business building\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer 7 - 10 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 1000 feet\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Due north of Bakersfield\n14. Tactics Zig-zaging\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Appearance of a very small airplane\n17. Color Orange-red flame\n18. Shape Appearance of a very small airplane\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Considerable black smoke trailing for 4000 to 5000 feet\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: See supplement to Incident #106\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(COPY)\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nHEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND\nAndrews Field\nWashington 20, D. C.\n\nIncident # 110\n\nA2B\n\nSAC 350 (29 Mar 48)\n\n29 March 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Report of Unidentified Aerial Sounds.\n\nTO:\tChief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nAttention: Director of Intelligence\n\n1. The following is quoted from a copy of a letter, Baltimore Office, FBI, addressed to the Director of Intelligence, Second Army:\n\n\"On March 23, 1948, an individual, who desired that her identity be kept confidential, telephonically communicated with this office and indicated that she is the wife of a former member of the United States military forces, and that she is presently active in American Legion activities, but was emphatic in stating that she was in no way hysterical or unduly apprehensive regarding present world conditions. She did, however, wish to bring to the attention of the proper authorities that during the past six or eight weeks, on a number of occasions between the hours of 3:00 and 5:00 A.M., she has heard peculiar sounding noises in the sky, which appear to come from airplanes in the distance, but the sound is not the type of airplane motor drone which is generally heard from American planes. She has discussed the matter with her husband, and he believes that the sound is more like that of a foreign type airplane. She recently discussed this matter with an unidentified woman who lives in her neighborhood, which is Hamilton, Baltimore, Maryland, and this woman stated that she, too, had heard the noise in question, and that her husband is also an ex-G.I. and he has stated that the motors sounded like that of foreign planes.\"\n\n2. No action is contemplated by this headquarters.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n\nc/c furnished CG,\nAMC, Attn: MCI.\n\nALAN MARCEAU\nCWO, USAF\nAsst Adj Gen"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 23 March 1948\n2. Time 0300 - 0500\n3. Location Baltimore (Hamilton) Maryland\n4. Name of observer Identity confidential\n5. Occupation of observer Active in American Legion activities\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation N/S\n8. Number of objects Undetermined\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Not sighted\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound Motor drone of foreign type aircraft\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: See Supplement\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\n\n1. Date of Observation 1 April 1948 . . . Incident # 111\n2. Time of Observation 0955 hrs. . . . . .\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted 124° 31' East, 12° 52' North. . . . . . . . . . . . .\n4. Observer's Position. Sighted object from plane- Phillipine Islands. . . . . .\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer 1st Lt. Robert W. Meyers, 67th Fighter Sq. 15th Fighter Group . \n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies. P-47 pilot. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By Appearing in line of sight during flight\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n9. Size of Object(s) wing span 30 feet, length 20 feet. . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n10. Color of Object(s) silver. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) A half moon closely resembling a flying wing type aircraft, turtle back and an indistinct dorsal fin.\n12. Nature of Luminosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . 3 miles. . . . . . . . . . . . .\n14. Speed of Object(s) 200 MPH- disappeared in 5 seconds indicating great acceleration.\n15. Time in Sight . Approximately 60 seconds . . . . . . . . .\n16. Tactics 90° left turn, then level flight accelerating rapidly. . . . . . . . .\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . none. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . 270°. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance). . . . . . . . . . . . .\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . none observed. . . . . . . .\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time scattered cumulous, base 3000', tops 6000'\n22. Peculiarities Noted Object made a left turn, leveled out on a 270° heading accelerated rapidly and disappeared from sight. . . . . . . . . . \n23. Summary of Incident On 1st April, at 0955, 1st Lt Meyers was leading a flight of 4 P-47 aircraft of the 67th Fighter Sq., 15th Fighter Group. He was . . . flying a heading of 180°, altitude 1500 feet, position 124° 31' East and\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12° 52' North, when he sighted an unidentified object approximately three (3) miles east of his position and at an estimated altitude of 1000' heading 360°. The object appeared to be a flying wing aircraft, its shape resembled a half moon. What appeared to be a dorsal fin was barely perceptible. The span of the object was estimated to be 30 feet, length 20 feet. The object was silver in color. Upon sighting the object, Lt. Meyers immediately started a left turn with the intention of intercepting and to more positively identify the phenomena. While Meyers was making a 240° left turn, the object made a 90° left turn, then leveled out on a heading of 270°, accelerated rapidly and disappeared from sight in approximately 5 seconds. There was no sound heard, and no exhaust trails were observed. At the time of the sighting visibility was unlimited, scattered cumulous, base 3000 feet, tops 6000 feet.\n\nNOTE: Because of the distance from which the sighting was made, no distinguishing features, i.e. power units, landing gear, armament or cockpit were observed.\n\nThe interview with Lt. Meyers indicated that he is a reliable non-excitable individual who appeared quite positive in his statements. He was the only witness to this incident as he could not contact his wing men since his radio was out. Apparently the maneuvers performed by his three (3) wing-men prevented their observation of the object."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 8 Apr 48\n2. Time 1400 - 1430\n3. Location Ashley, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Miss Winifred Paines - Mrs. Bertha Slack\n5. Occupation of observer Miss Paines: Asst Bank Cashier; Mrs. Slack: housekeeper\n6. Address of observer 227 W High St., Ashley, O.\n7. Place of observation Ashley, Ohio (ground)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer \"Quite a distance\"\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Could not estimate\n12. Speed slow-moving\n13. Direction of flight Southwest\n14. Tactics No maneuvers\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size undetermined\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape Oblong, long and narrow - like silver streak\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, no clouds near object\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - no clouds near object\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness thought she heard plane which appeared to be flying low and making an unusual amount of noise. Could not locate the plane but did see an object oblong in shape and long and narrow which had the appearance of a silver streak. It was clearly outlined and moving slowly and steadily in a southwesterly direction parallel to the ground and without changing direction. Altitude and size were not estimated.\n\nNote: See Incident #112a in which the plane was perceived flying low."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 112a\n1. Date 8 April 1948\n2. Time 1400 - 1430\n3. Location Ashley, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Melah Stephens\n5. Occupation of observer Newspaper reporter\n6. Address of observer 226 West High Street, Ashley, Ohio\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Approximately five minutes\n11. Altitude Quite high\n12. Speed Slow - dirfting\n13. Direction of flight Southwesterly\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Smaller than the airplane that was in view at the time\n17. Color Opalescent - like mother of pearl\n18. Shape Long cylindrical body, like a stick of firewood\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, few clouds in sky but non around object\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: A plane, which sounded as if it were flying low since there was an exceptionally loud roaring noise,first attracted the attention of this witness. She observed a large airplane, heading south, and about the same time also observed a strange object in the sky travelling slowly in a southwesterly direction. Witness first thought it was sky writing, as it looked like a streak; but later it became clearly outlined, appearing to be a long cylindrical body like a stick of firewood. With the sun shining on it, it appeared opalescent, like mother of pearl. The object was much higher, and quite a bit smaller than, the airplane, but drifted slowly along after the airplane disappeared. It may have been drifting with the wind."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of this witness. She observed a large airplane, heading south, and about the same time also observed a strange object in the sky travelling slowly in a southwesterly direction. Witness first thought it was sky writing, as it looked like a streak; but later it became clearly outlined, appearing to be a long cylindrical body like a stick of firewood. With the sun shining on it, it appeared opalescent, like mother of pearl. The object was much higher, and quite a bit smaller than, the airplane, but drifted slowly along after the airplane disappeared. It may have been drifting with the wind."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 112b\n1. Date 8 April 1948\n2. Time 1430\n3. Location Delaware, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. James B. Stephenson\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 93 North Franklin Street, Delaware, Ohio\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Slow\n13. Direction of flight Southwesterly\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Very large - about the size of a full moon in height but much smaller in width\n17. Color Very white\n18. Shape Cylindrical, with vapor around the top\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, no clouds around object\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: At 1430 Mrs. J. B. Stephenson's attention was attracted from her window by an object of unusual shape in the sky. Upon going outside"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to get a better view it appeared very white, with no shadows at all, was cylindrical in shape and seemed to have vapor around the top. When first seen, it appeared to be leaning at an angle, and then right itself and move along \"perpendicular\" to the ground. It appeared not to be moving at first, but upon a closer look it was seen moving slowly in a southwesterly direction, without sound or manueverings, and remaining at the same altitude. The weather was clear, and no exhaust trails were seen. The object seemed very large, about the size of a full moon in height, but much smaller in width. Since there was nothing to compare it with, she could not be sure of the size. No statement was made as to whether or not witness heard an airplane."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8 April 1948 Incident # 112c\n2. Time 1430\n3. Location Delaware, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Rev. James B. Stephenson\n5. Occupation of observer Pastor\n6. Address of observer 93 N. Franklin Street, Delaware, Ohio\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Slow\n13. Direction of flight Southwesterly\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Not Stated\n17. Color White\n18. Shape Verticle, larger at the bottom and narrow at the top\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Witness first thought that object was a plane on fire, as it was surrounded by a vaporous substance. A plane was heard, and\nit seemed low and made a great deal of noise. After a few seconds' study object became clearly outlined and looked similar to a vertical cylinder, large at the bottom and narrow at the top, with streamers or streaks of vapor attached. It gave the appearance of a white cloud, but did not behave as a cloud. It retained its shape and maintained a steady movement on a straight course against the wind. The Delaware airport was alerted for its appearance, but after a half hour it had not been sighted there.\n[RESTRICTED]"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8 April 1948 Incident # 112d\n2. Time 1430\n3. Location Delaware, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. John Bergen\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 111 North Washington Street\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Southwesterly\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound Could not be determined\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color White\n18. Shape Spherical \"blob\" with streaks above it\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Witness heard planes prior to the sighting, but doesn't know whether or not they had any connection with the object."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The object was clearly outlined, but did not look like a balloon. The Perkins Observatory was alerted but was unable to sight the object.\n[RESTRICTED]"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8 April 1948 Incident # 112e\n2. Time 1130\n3. Location Delaware, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Rev. John H. Bergen\n5. Occupation of observer Pastor\n6. Address of observer 111 North Washington Street\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer Not determined\n10. Time in sight Ten minutes\n11. Altitude Several thousand feet\n12. Speed Not too fast\n13. Direction of flight Almost due west into the wind\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Not less than 5 feet in width\n17. Color Very white\n18. Shape Spherical, with a small protrusion above it, like vapor streaks\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Disappeared from view behind the trees\n26. Remarks: This object appeared like a concentrated bit of cloud except it was clearly outlined. The size could not be determined,"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"since witness could not tell whether it was a s mall object near him or a large object far away. It traveled in a straight line and did not maneuver. It was not stated that the sound of a plane was heard."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 8 April 1948 Incident # 112f\n2. Time 1130\n3. Location Delaware, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. H. S. Kirkpatrick\n5. Occupation of observor Housewife\n6. Address of observor 107 North Washington Street\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Steady - not too fast\n13. Direction of flight Southwesterly\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound None\n16. Size It was not large enough for a person to be inside\n17. Color White - about the color of a fleecy cloud\n18. Shape Spherical - womewhat larger at top with a protruding end underneath\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, blue sky, sunny\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Witness heard, but did not see airplane, and saw instead a white object, spherical in shape, larger at the top with a protruding"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"end underneath. It was clearly outlined and maintained the same shape as it moved along, steadily, and at the same altitude. Robert Cochran, son of the witness, who is in the Merchant Marine, thought the object very unusual. He said it was in the shape of a rainspout."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 9 April 1948 Incident # 113\n2. Time 1510\n3. Location Montgomery, Alabama\n4. Name of observer Robert B. Hughes, Lt. Colonel, USAF\n5. Occupation of observor Pilot\n6. Address of observor Tactics Div., Air Tactical School, Tyndall AF Base\n7. Place of observation From the air\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight Five seconds\n11. Altitude Approximately 16000 feet\n12. Speed In excess of the viewer's 310 mph air speed\n13. Direction of flight Northwest\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Top part eight feet diameter\n17. Color Silver\n18. Shape Had the appearance of a parachute carrying a large canister or ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, visibility and ceiling unlimited\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs - Sketch (trip)\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Lt.Col Robert B. Hughes first sighted the object before completing an 180° left turn over the town of Montgomery, Alabama."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nThe object, sighted at ten o'clock off his left wing, appeared to be a silver disc. He immediately completed a sharp bank to the left and was able to get a better look at the object, and described it as follows:\n\n\"Top part of the object approximately eight feet in diameter, silver in color, had the appearance of a parachute. Attached to the bottom of this had been a dark cable or shroud which appeared to be approximately five feet long. Suspended upon the cable had been a large canister or ball (Colonel Hughes could not discern which) also silver in color. This canister or ball had the appearance of being slightly to the rear of the top part of the object. The overall appearance of the object, looked something similar to the parachute and canister containing photographic testing equipment dropped from a V-2 rocket.\"\n\nAt the time he lost sight of the object, Hughes' aircraft had been indicating 310 miles per hour air speed, and the object had appeared to fly away from him on a horizontal plane rather than a vertical decline.\n\nA sketch of the object is attached."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBIT I\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n8'\n\nSILVER\n\nDARK CABLE\n\nBALL OR A\nCANISTER\n\nSILVER\n\nEXHIBIT I\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n39"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 18 Apr 48 Incident # 114\n2. Time 1306 hours\n3. Location Approx 1 mile north of Fairbanks, Alaska\n4. Name of observer Lt Aytch Johnson\n5. Occupation of observor 1st Lt (discharged f/USAF as per authority Para 1, SO. 60 dated 28 May 48)(see)\n6. Address of observor Ft Worth, Texas\n7. Place of observation Over city of Fairbanks, Alaska\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight few minutes\n11. Altitude 2000-3000 ft\n12. Speed 250-300 miles (traveled 500 feet in 1 or 2 seconds)\n13. Direction of flight Northeast toward southwest\n14. Tactics Oscillated from horizontal plane to vertical plane at very rapid speed)\n15. Sound No sound\n16. Size 8\" in diameter\n17. Color silvery\n18. Shape round and flat\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails no trails of any kind\n22. Weather conditions Weather clear and visibility unrestricted\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n40"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nObject observed at altitude of about 2000-3000 on NE-SW heading. It appeared to be some 8 inches in diameter and gave off a silvery brilliant reflection. It oscillated from a horizontal plane to a vertical plane at a very rapid pace. Estimated speed: about 250-300 MPH -(traveled some 500 feet in 1 or 2 seconds) No sound could be heard nor were there any trails of any kind.\n\nNOTE: This sighting may have been the reflection of sun from wings of these aircraft. At the approximate time of the sighting a number of aircraft were flying in the local area.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 19 Apr 48 Incident #115\n2. Time 1615\n3. Location Over Greenville AF Base, Greenville,S. C.\n4. Name of observers 1st Lt Francis W. Hennin, Jr. & 1st Lt Robert G.Loomis, USAF\n5. Occupation of observer Both attached to Liaison sq. Greenville\n6. Address of observers Greenville AF Base, Greenville,S. C.\n7. Place of observation Greenville AF Base\n8. Number of objects 2 3 - 1 at first, 2 later\n9. Distance of object from observer 15,000 to 20,000 ft overhead\n10. Time in sight 2 minutes\n11. Altitude 15,000 to 20000 ft\n12. Speed Undetermined. Stationary, then rapidly accelerating and climbing\n13. Direction of flight North\n14. Tactics Hovering then acceleration and climbing Observed trail formation\n15. Sound none audible (?) - states: Witnesses were attracted by sound of fighter aircraft in vicinity. (no mention made of these)\n16. Size undetermined\n17. Color white\n18. Shape elliptical\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails No exhaust or condensation trail\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs 2\n25. Manner of disappearance in distance\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nWitnesses were attracted by sound of fighter aircraft in vicinity. They started searching the sky for the aircraft and sighted the objects. When first sighted, the witnesses thought the objects might be weather balloons. However, when they accelerated so rapidly in a northerly heading, they determined the objects could not be balloons. They were in a trail formation on a North-South line, and moved so rapidly they wereout of sight within a few seconds. From original sighting in the stationary position to their disappearance, a period of approximately two (2) minutes elapsed, on which the objects were in a stationary position for approximately one (1) minute.\n\nNOTE: Wind at 20,000 ft from 340° at 10 knots per hour (1230 EST Rpt) Wind at 20,000 ft 32° at 13 knots per hour at (1830 EST Rpt)\n\nNOTE: Nearest weather station releasing balloons is Spartanburg, S. C. One black balloon was released at 1230 EST.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n(4) O O In approximately 2 minutes objects had disappeared\n\n(3) O O Objects began moving in a NNE direction and rapidly accelerating and climbing.\n\n(2) O O When first seen objects were in a semi-stationary position.\n\n(1) O First one object was sighted, next, another one appeared.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 11 Mar 48\nIncident # 116\n2. Time night\n3. Location Near shores of James Bay,\n4. Name of observer V. J. Pratt\n5. Occupation of observer Employee of Hudson Bay Co.\n6. Address of observor Moose Factory\n7. Place of observation Moose Factory, Canaca\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed meteoric\n13. Direction of flight earthward\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound No noise\n16. Size size of full-grown football\n17. Color N/S Blue flame\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor dotected N/S\n20. Apparent construction meteor\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Night\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance exploded\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nA big ball of blue flame, seemingly the size of a football streaked out of the sky and exploded near this Northern Ontario community (Moose Factory) near the shores of James Bay. The explosion lit up the entire area brighter than daylight, the whole ball disappeared and a second later a streak of orange light shot upward from where the ball was last seen. The orange streak was gone within a second. Witnesses heard no noise of any kind.\n\nNOTE: This ties up with earlier reports from Cochran, 150 miles south of Moose Jaw where several citizens reported seeing what they thought to be a meteor around 11.40 P. M. EST Thurs.\n\nOne witness (a Mrs. Charles Giles) said that the object plunged downward like a spent rocket in the northern sky. She described it as about the size of a full moon which gave the appearance of disintegration as it fell.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 May 48\nIncident # 117\n2. Time 1500 to 1700\n3. Location Memphis, Tenn.\n4. Name of observer Miss Jean Bray, Housekeeper et al (see other side)\n5. Occupation of observer Housekeeper\n6. Address of observer 253 W. Waldorf Ave., Memphis, Tenn.\n7. Place of observation Memphis, Tenn.\n8. Number of objects 50 or 60\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude extremely high\n12. Speed faster than any aircraft witnesses had ever seen\n13. Direction of flight easterly\n14. Tactics Most traveled in straight line altho some of them zig-zagged.\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Very small\n17. Color shiny - like bright aluminum\n18. Shape unknown - possibly like meteor\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Some objects seemed to have a silvery tail which might have been exhaust\n22. Weather conditions CAVU, wind: 330 to 340°, 15 MPH at surface increasing to 66 MPH at 20,000; Surface temp: 72°; dew point 43° relative humidity 40%\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Fifty to 60 shiny objects were seen moving at a speed faster than any known aircraft on an Easterly heading at an extremely high altitude. For the most part these objects traveled in a straight line altho some of them zig-zagged slightly. No sound was heard. Some objects seemed to have a silvery tail which might have been exhaust. These objects could not have been weather balloons as only one balloon was released by the Memphis Weather Bureau that day.\n\nNOTE: Witnesses thought they had seen a meteor; however subsequent investigation seemed to preclude this possibility. See Supp II to Trip Report to Memphis - Visit with Dr. Paul Herget of the Observatory of Cincinnati, Ohio, in which Dr. Herget expressed serious doubt that the 50 or more objects observed 7 May 48 in Memphis were meteors. He, was, however unable to offer any explanation as to a possible identification of the objects.\n\nDr. Hynek of OSU and Dr. Lincoln LaPaz are to be consulted about the possibility of their these being a meteor shower.\n\nWitness of this incident were: Mr. F. J. Kaiser, salesman 251 W. Waldorf Ave., Memphis\n\nMrs F. J. Kaiser, housewife 251 W. Waldorf Ave., Memphis, Tenn.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 28 Mar 48\nIncident # 118\n2. Time 1630 hours\n3. Location Berlin Lichtenrade, Kirchbachstrasse 2\n4. Name of observer Dr Ormans,\n5. Occupation of observer Former guided missile expert at Exeinmetall Borsi\n6. Address of observer Berlin Lichtenrade, Kirchbachstrasse 2\n7. Place of observation As above\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 14 kilometers\n12. Speed rather fast\n13. Direction of flight South to North\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound No sound reported\n16. Size \"white point\"\n17. Color White\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails No exhaust trail reported\n22. Weather conditions clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDr Ormans, former Guided Missile expert at Exeinmetall, Borsig mentioned that he sighted 1 white point moving from South to North at an approx height of 14 kilometers, speed undetermined, rather fast, no rpt of sound, and no report of exhaust trail.\n\nWITNESSES: Dr and Mrs. Ormans.\nNo photographs available.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCheck list - Unidentified Flying Objects\nIncident # 119\n\n1. Date 20 Feb 48\n2. Time 0700 hours\n3. Location Asuncion, Paraguay\n4. Name of observer Mrs Agustina Vargas de Paula\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer resident of Asuncion (southern part of city)\n7. Place of observation Asuncion\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight west to east\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape oval\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails highly colored wake\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n\n(over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nAt approximately 0700 hours 20 Feb 48 witness saw object of oval shape traveling thru space from west to east. Its form ended in a very thin tail of approximately 3 feet in length. The forward part was bulky compared with the rear. The interior portion of the object gave off green, yellow and orange colors and it had a highly colored wake.\n\nStatesments were obtained from a local newspaper \"La Tribuna\" which has interviewed several people claiming to have seen the saucers.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n119-"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 20 Feb 48\n2. Time 0700\n3. Location Aregua - 10 miles east of Asuncion\n4. Name of observer \"withheld\"\n5. Occupation of observer employee of Bank of Paraguay\n6. Address of observer Bank of Paraguay\n7. Place of observation in Aregua\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight west to east\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape oval\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks (over)\n\nRESTRICTED\nIncident 119a"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 20 Feb 4g\nIncident # 119b\n2. Time 0700\n3. Location Villa Hayes (10 miles NNE of Asuncion)\n4. Name of observer [REDACTED] Rancher and laborers\n5. Occupation of observer Rancher.\n6. Address of observer in the \"Chaco\"\n7. Place of observation Ranch house in neighborhood of Villa Hayes\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 1,000 ft\n12. Speed less than that of a plane\n13. Direction of flight west to east\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S - gave off an intense green color\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (Over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nPerceived a disc giving off an intense green color. Witness reports that the object traveled from west to east at a speed less than that of a plane and at an altitude of approx 1000 ft. Along its edges it gave off an aureola with the color green predominant.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n119b"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date N/S - around 7 Feb 4g\nIncident # 120\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Vejle, Denmark\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer field laborers\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Gadbjerg (near Vejle)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 200 meters altitude\n10. Time in sight N/S 3 seconds\n11. Altitude 200 meters altitude\n12. Speed high speed\n13. Direction of flight SE to NW\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color shining\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (Over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nThree men working in a field in Gadbjerg (near Vejle) Denmark, have observed a shining object which moved at high speed over the sky from southeast to northwest at about 200 meters altitude. It remained visible for three seconds.\n\nNA COMMENT: No verification received of the above. Evaluation P-6\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n120"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 9 January 1948\nIncident # 121\n2. Time 2330\n3. Location Cartersville, Georgia, 34° 10' N, 84° 49' W\n4. Name of observer Hugh DuBose\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot (EAL)\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Air\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 3000 feet\n12. Speed 400 mph\n13. Direction of flight 175° M\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Light, sky-blue\n18. Shape Circular, except for the top quarter which was flat, pot-shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance 10° below the horizon\n26. Remarks: When object crossed the path of the witness all that could be observed was an intense blue flame, in a shape circular except for CONFIDENTIAL\n\n78"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the top quarter which was flat, pot-shaped. The witness states that the object definitely did not have the curved trajectory of a wingless missile. Shartly after crossing his path, the blue flame sputtered and turned immediately earthward. The flame then died altogether but nothing was seen hitting the ground. Witness states that the flame was not of the long trailing type, bub rather gave the impression that you were looking down a long exhaust stack at a short but concentrated mass of blue flame and further stated that his connections with RAF pilots in England during the war leads him now to believe this object looked the same as the \"Buzz Bombs\" chased by t ose RAF pilots at night. Arthur Porter, purser on this flight 9 January 48, also saw the object, the flame only, but can give no further evidence for its identification.\n\nMr. DuBose stated on April 29 that seventy-five cattle had died of an unknown disease on the farm of a Mr. Gordy at Newman, Georgia, and expressed concern over a possible connection between the unidentified object he reported and this unusual fatality among healthy cattle. However, the Atlanta Office of the Animal Industry Division, U.S. Department of Agriculture, advises that this \"unknown\" disease has persisted for over a year and other cases repeated elsewhere in the country for some time back. There apparently remains no basis for connection between the object Mr. DuBose reports and the death of seventy-five cattle at Newman, Georgia."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 122\n\n1. Date 5 April 1948\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Holloman Air Force Base\n4. Name of observer Mr. Olsen\n5. Occupation of observer Trained balloon observer, Geophysics Lab Section\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 30 seconds\n11. Altitude Very high\n12. Speed Faster than any known aircraft\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics Erratic - completing a large loop after its downward descent, then soaring upward and disappearing suddenly\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Large\n17. Color Grey-white\n18. Shape Rounded, indistinct form\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions C.A.V.U.\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Disappeared suddenly\n26. Remarks: This was evidently the one object, of two sighted by another witness, that veered to the right and down. Its vaguely"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"defined form gave the appearance of a large object at a great distance. The statements of other witnesses to this incident are contained in reports 112a and 112b.\n\nAll witnesses agreed that the object was very high, moved faster than any known aircraft, possessed a rounded, indistinct form, and disappeared suddenly rather than fading away in the distance. It was under observation 1/2 minutes or slightly less. It was definitely not a balloon, and apparently not manned, judging from the violent maneuvers which were performed at a high rate of speed."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 123\n\n1. Date 11 April 1948\n2. Time 2330\n3. Location 4 miles north of Alton, Illinois\n4. Name of observer Col W. F. Siegmund\n5. Occupation of observer Former Commandant of the Air Base at Kearns, Utah and at present sales manager for Western Cartridge, Co., Alton, Ill.\n6. Address of observer Western Cartridge, Co., Alton, Ill.\n7. Place of observation 4 miles north of Alton, Ill - ground\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics \"flapped its wings\"\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size \"bigger than an airplane\"\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Resembled a huge fowl and not a type of aircraft\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Col Siegmund said he observed the creature at about 11:30 A.M. 11 Apr 48, while riding four miles north of Alton, Ill (over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Siegmund said he didn't see any flapping of wings but he was sure it was a huge fowl and not a type of aircraft. He was riding with a companion, Col. Ralph Jackson, Head of Western Military Academy, at the time. Jackson, however, was talking to a farmer and didn't see it. Siegmund said he didn't mention it to him as it seemed too incredible.\n\nNote: A child, James Trares, age 12, said he saw the bird flying over his home in suburban Glendale, Mo., some 3 months previous.\n\nThe Belvidere report quoted a Robert Price and Veryl Babb as saying the bird was \"bigger than an airplane\" and flapped its wings.\n\nRELIABILITY: Impossible to evaluate.\nCol Siegmund was never questioned but some sort of investigation obviously should be made in lieu of the fact that he was once commandant of the Air Base at Kearns."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 124\n1. Date 18 April 1948\n2. Time 1500 GCT\n3. Location North Atlantic, 62°00'N 33°00'W\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer Weather station patrol\n6. Address of observer First Coast Guard District\n7. Place of observation Air\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer 6500 yards - 18000 yards\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed 30 mph\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions C.A.V.U.\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Target strength was S5 fading at 18,000 yards\n26. Remarks: This incident is the result of a radar sighting. Copy is also filed in radar sighting file.\nRESTRICTED\n53"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nThis target was contacted on the air search radar at 1500 GCT on 18 April 48. The first contact was made at 6500 yards and was tracked to 18,000 yards giving a velocity of approximately 30 m.p.h. The area in which the target was contacted was thoroughly search visually and there were no clouds nor weather fronts in said area. There were no target indications on the surface radar. The target strength was S5 fading at 18,000 yards.\nRESTRICTED\n124a"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 125\n1. Date 2 May 1948\n2. Time Night\n3. Location St. Louis, Missouri, 40°00'N 90°15'W\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Phosphorescent after dark\n18. Shape Bird\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: See Incident #123\nRESTRICTED\n54"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 126\n1. Date 30 April 1948\n2. Time 1015\n3. Location Anacostia, Naval Air Station, 38°52'N, 77°00'W\n4. Name of observer Marcus L. Lowe\n5. Occupation of observer Lt Commander, US Navy\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Air\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer One mile\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 4500 feet\n12. Speed 100 m.p.h.\n13. Direction of flight 360° N\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 25 - 40 ft diameter\n17. Color Yellow (light colored)\n18. Shape Sphere\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: The object appeared to the pilot to be a yellow (or light colored) balloon, and attracted attention principally because\nRESTRICTED\n55"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nof its flight path. No external fittings or attachments were observed on the object. The speed of the object was estimated at about 100 m.p.h. The flight of the object was in approximately a south to north direction, despite upper winds from north northwest, and apparently followed a constant altitude. Pilot did not pursue object further because it was entering the prohibited flying area, U.S. Capitol, White House Area.\nRESTRICTED\n55a"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 May 1948 Incident # 127\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Lake Doiran, along the Yugoslav-Greek frontier\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 3000 feet\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight 180°\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound Like artillery shell (shrill whine)\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Flying disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: A press dispatch quoted residents of the Lake Doiran area along the Yugoslav-Greek frontier as saying they saw a \"flying"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"disc\". It was described as speeding southward from Yugoslavia at a height of about 3,000 feet, making a noise like an artillery shell."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8 May 1948 Incident # 128\n2. Time Night\n3. Location (Hobson) Middleport, Ohio, 30° 00' N, 82° 03' W\n4. Name of observer Ben Rupe\n5. Occupation of observer New York Central System Car Inspector\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Ground\n8. Number of objects N/S\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 6 - 8 miles\n12. Speed Great amount of speed\n13. Direction of flight 90°\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 9\" diameter from ground level\n17. Color Phosphorescent\n18. Shape Round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Phosphorescent trail in sky\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: The above covers sighting of same objects by Earl Roush, New York Central System Car Inspector; Bob White, New York Central"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Yard Clerk; and C. K. Hite, New York Central Patrolman. Patrolman Hite stated in addition that his attention was called to these objects by Car Inspector Ben Rupe. Upon observing the sky Hite saw disc-shaped objects traveling from west to east in succession in the same path at about two-minute intervals. Now and then one would \"hook back apparently in the same path whence it had come.\" Occasionally one seemed to burst and disintegrate. For a resemblance, Hite said \"Take a large clock face, cover it with radium, and sail it through the air.\""} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 31 May 1948 Incident # 129\n2. Time 1320\n3. Location Wilmington, North Carolina, 34° 14' N, 77° 57' W\n4. Name of observer Mrs. H. D. Alspach\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer 709 South 6th\n7. Place of observation Ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Awfully high\n12. Speed Fast\n13. Direction of flight 90°\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size As large as an arm, and about 3 feet long\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Oblong\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Emitted smoke\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Mysterious sky object was sighted by Mrs. Alspach, her sister Mrs. Colvin, and Mrs. H.D. Hufham. It came at first at a fast"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"speed from the direction of Bluethenthal Field at 1:20 p.m., over the Cape Fear River, then veered at a low speed back towards Wrightsville, a little to the west.\n\nThe local office of the Civil Aeronautics administration discredited a supposition by Bluethenthal Field's station manager James Holomon, that object could have been a P-80 plane in flight. The CAA said there was no such plane in the sky there at the time."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident #130\n\n1. Date 17th May 1948\n2. Time Night\n3. Location Between Plevna and Miles City, Montana\n4. Name of observer W. A. Bonneville\n5. Occupation of observor Territory Mgr., B. F. Goodrich Company\n6. Address of observor 415 W. Rosser Ave., Bismark, N. D.\n7. Place of observation Ground, Route #212, West of Plevna, traveling west\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observor At closest point, approx. 2500 feet\n10. Time in sight Some twenty minutes\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Twice the speed of the Northwest Airlines planes\n13. Direction of flight West, slightly south, then west\n14. Tactics Performed arc\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Fairly large compared with an aircraft\n17. Color White - (might have had slight bluish-white tinge)\n18. Shape Ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - but apparently meteor-like\n21. Exhaust trails A long bright light shooting from under it\n22. Weather conditions Moonlight, but cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None - Map forwarded showing location of object\n25. Manner of disappearance Flew in a dark cloud bank\n26. Remarks: See Supplement"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY\nMinneapolis 3, Minnesota\n\n415 West Rosser Ave\nBismark, N. D.\n5-23-48\n\nUnited States Army - Intelligence Div.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nGentlemen:-\n\nOn the night of May 17th at about 11:30 PM driving from Baker, Montana to Miles City Montana on U.S. Highway #12 just West of Plevna, Montana before getting to the hills I noticed a very bright object in the sky to the Northwest. The sky was overcast in the West but to the South the moon could be seen at times - with a broken sky. Having traveled this same route for many years - about 15, I am pretty well used to open prairie road at night and can tell a star from an unusual object when I see it.\n\nNorthwest Airlines travel a Western route just North of this route also, but I stopped at the Powder River Bridge where the road dips considerably down from a high ridge - cut off my car motor and watched this object as it sailed around in the sky - which at times close and others seemed to speed away into the heavy cloud bank to the West and then later reappearing, at a very bright white light at what I would judge about not more than several miles away or closer. I carry a pair of field glasses with me, and after stopping the car engine watched this thing through my glasses, which seemed to appear as a small object with a long very bright light shooting from the under part of it. Because of the speed of the object and the darkness it was very difficult to make out what it might be, but I am sure that if I had had a more powerful glass I might have made it out.\n\nI am perfectly sincere and do not drink so the foregoing is absolutely the truth. With some of this newspaper funabout flying saucers etc, this had all of the appearance of just that- and in stopping the car if this had been an aeroplane I would certainly have been able to hear the motors.\n\nI stopped at a service station just before getting to the Powder River Bridge but they had all gone to bed so did not have anyone along with me to witness the object as it flew through the air. It stayed around this area for about 20 minutes and then flew off through the heavy cloud bank to the West.\n\nI am enclosing a map showing the location of the foregoing.\n\nYours very truly,\n\nThe B. F. Goodrich Company\n\n/s/ Wm. Bonneville\nTerritory Manager\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The B. F. Goodrich Company\n1653 Hennepin Avenue\nMinneapolis, Minnesota\n\n415 W. Rosser Avenue\nBismarck, N. Dakota\nJune 18, 1948\n\nCol W. R. Clingerman\nU. S. Army Air Forces\nWright Field\nDayton, Ohio\n\nRefer - MCIAXO-3\n\nDear Sir: -\n\nIn reply to your letter of June 15th in which there are several questions which you desire answered to the best of my ability - with reference to the object which I saw flying through the air between Plevna and Miles City Montana on the night of May 17th, I will answer them and give you a graphic description again with a little more elaboration than my previous letter - if that is possible.\n\nQuestion: - Did the entire object appear to be glowing, or did it give the effect of carrying lights. Answer: This thing seemed to be a ball of bright white light - and I could not make out if it was being carriedor just what made it go - however, it did disturb me quite a little because after stopping to view it at the Powder River Bridge I could not hear motors humming such as an aircraft in these parts might have, and I therefore tried to find out just what it was by the use of my field glasses.\n\n(b) Question: - An estimate of the size of the object in comparison with some other known object. Answer - the size of the light which was very brilliant would indicate that it was fairly large compared with aircraft - and I would say that this exceedingly bright light which was one light and not several was as bright as the headlight on a locomotive, only about three times that bright and without direction. By this I mean that this light simply glowed very bright and was not a directed light.\n\n(c) Question: - An estimate of the speed of the object in comparison with the jet type or conventional aircraft. Answer: This object flew at about twice the speed of any aircraft that Northwest Airlines planes fly - because it would appear coming thro where I was traveling west on Highway #212 or #12 as we call it out here appearing only faintly first and then growing larger as it approached over the hills north of the highway - until it seemed to hang there off in the northwest of me brightly and then would turn south toward the highway where it became real bright and then would start back West again and fly out of sight. This ting did this several times - which actually got my goat - if I may put it that way. (d) Question: Did the object appear to be circling at random or didit follow a definite flight pattern. Answer: As I have explained before - the object appeared first when"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the West - then turning slightly South and turning in a big swing and then heading West again - flying out of sight into the dark black cloud bank out of sight - then reappearing, and it did this several times. (e) Question: - Is it possible that its disappearance into a \"heavy cloud bank\" might have been caused by clouds obscuring reflected moonlight from a highly polished surface. Answer: - No - I have seen aircraft many times on moonlight nights - but this was not anything like that - this thing glowed brightly white light such as any real white brilliant light might. The moon was not bright enough to reflect polished light unless the craft might have been South of me in the direct light of the moon - which showed (the moon) from time to time through the clouds. This object was in the black section of the sky over to the North of me and slightly west, and was a steady oncoming light growing brighter as it came, and had the appearance of something carrying this light in the air- but without sound, and it certainly was close enough to me to have heard motors.\n\nI thought it might have been some kind of a jet aircraft that I perhaps had never seen - because we as civilians know very little as to what might be going on in defense or experimental mechanics however I felt it my duty to report the thing regardless as to what it might have been. This was somewhat difficult for me to do because of the crackpot stories making the rounds in some sections about flying saucers etc., but for the life of me this had all the ear marks of just that kind of a deal.\n\nI have traveled this road about which I have related this sighting many many times and at night Winter and Summer - and have never before in my life seen anything like this - so naturally I was somewhat alarmed about it, and have steadfastly kept the whole thing to myself. I will certainly be on the lookout for the damned thing the next trip I make through this same area which is generally after dark - because most of the time I work from Lemmon South Dakota or Hettinger North Dakota along this highway to Miles City which is about one days work with my Dealers. In times like these I feel as before stated anything of this nature which we are not familiar with we are duty bound to report to our Defense Forces who may be better equipped to understand the unfamiliar than we are.\n\nYours very truly,\n\nW.A. BONNEVILLE - Territory Mgr for the B. F. Goodrich Company\n\nWAB"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Inc 131\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nProbably true\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 20 June 1948\n2. Time 2230\n3. Location Belleville, Illinois\n4. Name of observer Lt Col Wm T. Hull\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot, Supervisor of Flying Trng Scott AF Base\n6. Address of observer Scott AF Base, Belleville, Illinois\n7. Place of observation (?)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Undetermined but below 6,000 ft\n12. Speed Approx 500 MPH\n13. Direction of flight 295° S of Base then 340° upon reaching south end of Scott AF Base\n14. Tactics Zigzag course\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Six or eight inches in diameter\n17. Color White light\n18. Shape Approx round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Complete overcast at 6,000 ft\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None RESTRICTED\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks No aircraft flying in the vicinity of Scott AF Base at the time light was sighted\n27. Disappearance: N/S"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT 132\nMA R-365-47\nNAD 12199\nT-7477\nKK 4210\n\nRESTRICTED Evaluation A-3\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 12 Dec 1947\n2. Time 2205 & 2208\n3. Location Oslo, Norway\n4. Name of observer Daughter to MA Kai E. Rasmussen, Col GSC\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Same as MA, Oslo, Norway\n7. Place of observation Oslo, Norway (Ground)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Between two and three seconds\n11. Altitude N/S (Apparently traveling fairly close to ground or would be visible to more people)\n12. Speed Not quite as fast as a meteor\n13. Direction of flight SSE-SSW to NNW-(?)\n14. Tactics Performed arc of circle, curvature-very great\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Luminous white with greenish-yellow tail\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction Meteor-like\n21. Exhaust trails Greenish-yellow trail\n22. Weather conditions No fog, sky clear and star-lit\n23. Effect on clouds none\n24. Sketches or photographs none RESTRICTED\n25. Manner of disappearance Trees obscured vision\n26. Remarks: Office employee reports unusual no. of falling stars night of 13 Dec.\nUniv Observatory has no record of incident."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 20 - 26 Feb 48\n2. Time Usually around 2130 hours\n3. Location N/S (Norway Denmark & Sweden)\nINCIDENT 133\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation N/S\n8. Number of objects N/S\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude From tree-top level to 20,000 ft\n12. Speed one to two miles per second\n13. Direction of flight Come from direction of Pennemunde\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color (green tail)\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails green\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks The trend of these objects to appear at 2130 hours might be significant. RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 28 May 1948\n2. Time 1500 hours (Eastern Daylight Saving Time)\nIncident: 134\n3. Location Selfridge Fld, Mt. Clemens, Mich / MacDill AF Base from approx 6 miles east of Monroe, Michigan\n4. Name of observer Lt Kokolonis\n5. Occupation of observer 1st Lt, Corps of Engineers\n6. Address of observer Selfridge Field\n7. Place of observation 6 miles east of Monroe, Michigan\n8. Number of objects 5 - three at first - two later\n9. Distance of object from observer 2 miles to left (first 3) 2-1/2 miles to left (two)\n10. Time in sight 10 to 15 seconds\n11. Altitude 8,000 +\n12. Speed over 500 MPH\n13. Direction of flight seven o'clock position to 35° heading north. 355 heading from MacDill to Selfridge making abrupt turn to right (pilot's left)\n14. Tactics Maintained nose-up attitude. Made abrupt turns.\n15. Sound None\n16. Size 300 to 400 ft approx. - size of lake freighters (500 ft)\n17. Color silvery-gold color\n18. Shape disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails none\n22. Weather conditions Clear - visibility: 10 to 15 miles High overcast at 18,000 ft w/thin stratus\n23. Effect on clouds layer very broken at 8,000 N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Sketch showing approx positions\n25. Manner of disappearance lost in haze at 7 o'clock position to pilot\n26. Remarks Objects maintained smooth track thru sky, and flew in line of stern stepped up. In second sighting the second object flew about 50 feet higher than the first. All had hazy or fuzzy outline."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 28 May 1948\n2. Time 1500 hours (Eastern Daylight Saving Time) Enroute to\nINCIDENT 134a\n3. Location Selfridge Fld., Mt. Clemens, Mich f/MacDill Fld Position: 6 miles due east of Monroe, Michigan\n4. Name of observer M/Sgt Ernest Davis, Jr. (colored)\n5. Occupation of observer M/Sgt\n6. Address of observer Selfridge Field\n7. Place of observation 6 miles due east of Monroe, Michigan\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer 25 to 30 miles to left\n10. Time in sight 30 seconds\n11. Altitude approx 8,000 ft\n12. Speed [REDACTED] Over 400 miles per hour\n13. Direction of flight South West from 35° at 8:00 o'clock position\n14. Tactics Pursued straight course\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Appeared to be four feet in diameter\n17. Color Shiny brass\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, high overcast at 18,000 ft; thin stratus layer broken at 8,000 ft, lateral visibility: 10 to 15 miles\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Sketch RESTRICTED\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks Discrepancy as to position of 2nd object in group 2 as sighted by Lt Kokolomis (Inc 134) Witness perceived only top-side of object. Objects seen flying over wooded section"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date\tBetween 15th & 20th Aug 47\n2. Time\t2130 MST\n3. Location\tRapid City AF Base, Weaver, S.D.\n4. Name of observer\tMaj Elmer H. Hammer, Jr. (AO-46014)\n5. Occupation of observer\tIntel Officer\n\t28th Bombardment Group (VR)\n6. Address of observer\tRapid City AFBase\n\tWeaver, S. D.\n7. Place of observation\tWeaver, S. D.\n8. Number of objects\t12 (Approx)\n9. Distance of object from observer\t4 miles\n10. Time in sight\tN/S\n11. Altitude\t10,000 ft to approx 6,000 ft.\n12. Speed\t500 MPH +\n13. Direction of flight\tApproached first from NW\n\tthen turn to right and disappeared in SW\n14. Tactics\ttight diamond-shaped formation\n15. Sound\tno noise heard\n16. Size\tLength: 100+ ft estimate\n17. Color\tYellowish-white - brilliant\n18. Shape\tElliptical\n19. Odor detected\tN/S\n20. Apparent construction\tN/S\n21. Exhaust trails\tNone\n22. Weather conditions\tClear, no clouds, stars visible, wind, calm\n\tvisibility 30+\n23. Effect on clouds\tnone\n24. Sketches or photographs\tSketches\n25. Manner of disappearance\tDisappeared on a SW heading\n26. Remarks\tThere appears to be minor discrepancies as to speed and altitude in the report given verbally to Glasebrook and 1 tr to this Hq f/Maj Hammer\n68"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident: 136\n\n1. Date: 30 June 1948\n2. Time: 2140\n3. Location\tS. Knoxville, Tenn.\n4. Name of Observer: Mrs Whitehouse\n5. Occupationof observer: wife of Maj Harvey J. Whitehouse\n\tCommending Officer, ASU, 3319 Tennessee\n6. Address of observer: see above\n7. Place of observation\tSouth Knoxville, Tenn\n8. Number of objects: 1\n9. Distance of object from observer: N/S\n10. Time in sight: 3 minutes (according to Mrs Whitehouse)\n\t3 seconds (according to ORC instructors)\n11. Altitude: 30,000 ft\n12. Speed\t1,000 MPH\n13. Direction of flight: West\n14. Tactics: N/S\n15. Sound\tN/S\n16. Size: N/S\n17. Color: orange\n18. Shape: Ball\n19. Odor detected: N/S\n20. Apparent construction \"fire\"\n21. Exhaust trails \"streamer of bluish color trailing\"\n22. Weather conditions: N/S\n23. Effect on clouds: N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs: none\n25. Manner of disappearance: Over horizon\n26: Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nAt approximately 2140 hours, 30 June, a ball of fire of orange color with a streamer of bluish color trailing, traveled thru the sky in a westerly direction and disappeared over the horizon to the west. The object traveled at a very fast rate of speed. No sound was heard.\n\nWitnesses: Mrs. Whitehouse, wife of Maj Harvey J. Whitehouse, C. O., ASU 3319 Tennessee\nORC instructors, Knoxville, Tenn.\nMr. Tryus W. Setliff (See Incident 136a)\n\nMrs. Whitehouse stated that the object remained visible for approximately 3 minutes and that the streamer emitted sparks.\n\nMr. Setliff stated that the object was visible for about 3 seconds and traveled at an estimated speed of 1,000 miles perhour at an altitude of about 30,000 feet.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n136a\n\n1. Date\t30 June 1948\n2. Time\t2140\n3. Location\tS. Knoxville, Tenn\n4. Name of observer\tMr Tryus W. Setliff\n5. Occupation of observer\tN/S\n6. Address of observer\tOakridge, Tennessee\n7. Place of observation\tKnoxville, Tenn\n8. Number of objects\t1\n9. Distance of object from observer\tN/S\n10. Time in sight\t3 seconds\n11. Altitude\t30,000 ft\n12. Speed\t1,000 MPH\n13. Direction of flight\tWesterly\n14. Tactics\tN/S\n15. Sound\tN/S\n16. Size\tN/S\n17. Color\tOrange Color\n18. Shape\tBall\n19. Odor detected\tN/S\n20. Apparent construction\tFire\n21. Exhaust trails\tBluish Color\n22. Weather conditions\tN/S\n23. Effect on clouds\tN/S\n24. Sketches or photographs\tNone\n25. Manner of disappearance\tOver horizon to West\n26. Remarks\n\nRESTRICTED\n69"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\n\n1. Date of Observation 7 July 1948\tIncident # 137\n2. Time of Observation 2114 and 2115\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted Chapel Hill, North Carolina\n4. Observer's Position On ground at Chapel, N.C.\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer University of North Carolina\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies Mathematics Instructor\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted 3\n9. Size of Object(s) 3-1/2\" in length viewed perspectively- about size of a/c\n10. Color of Object(s)\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) Blunt front tapering to a point in the rear shaped like a cigar.\n12. Nature of Luminosity\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer Far\n14. Speed of Object(s) High Speed\n15. Time in Sight Approximately 1 minute\n16. Tactics Did not pursue a general course, but moved generally North\n17. Sound Made by Object(s)\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) East.NorthEast\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance)\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail Not visible\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . Clear\n22. Peculiarities Noted\n23. Summary of Incident Objects seemed to have a blunt front which tapered to a point in the rear shaped like a cigar. Appeared about the size of an airplane in the sky. They were about 3-1/2\" in length. They didn't have any wings or any apparent means of getting around in the sky.\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 137a\n1. Date 7 Jul 48\n2. Time 2114 and 2115\n3. Location Chapel Hill, N. C.\n4. Name of observer H. W. Daniels\n5. Occupation of observor Capt., Infantry, Reserve\n6. Address of observor Box 188, Chapel Hill\n7. Place of observation Chapel Hill, N. C.\n8. Number of objects three (3)\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight Approximately one (1) minute\n11. Altitude Extreme\n12. Speed High\n13. Direction of flight East Northeast\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound Jet\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Not Visible\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Skeches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks:"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\n1. Date of Observation 8 July 1948\nIncident # 138\n2. Time of Observation 0920 hrs\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted Columbus Ohio\n4. Observer's Position Ground, Columbus, Ohio\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer Mrs Wilda Zittek, 2579 Avalon Ave., Columbus Ohio\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies Housewife\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted 2\n9. Size of Object(s) With binoculars (Type M-3, 6x30) about 3 1/2\" in length\n10. Color of Object(s) Silver\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) Like a cigar or torpedo\n12. Nature of Luminosity\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer - Altitude was about 3000'\n14. Speed of Object(s) fast\n15. Time in Sight four (4) minutes\n16. Tactics bobbed up and down\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) none\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) First headed North East, then North\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) Metallic\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail No clouds\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time clear, sunlight, no clouds\n22. Peculiarities Noted - Mrs Zittek said that the objects looked like something going through air currents. They had a blunt nose and the tail was obscured. At first they looked like a dark blot. Both ends were indistinct. They were visible for three or four minutes and began to fade away.\n23. Summary of Incident NOTE: Subjects powers of observation were checked on a/c flying in the area and were found to be good as far as direction and movement but poor for distance and altitude. Patterson Field stated 2, F-50's were in the air at the time of sighting. Cont'd next page\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident # 138 cont'd\nCapt Darnell, pilot of one P-80 was flying a loose formation in trail of Lt. Collins while pacing him in a calibrated speed check. The aircraft were not equipped with wing tanks (Tip). The pilots stated that they were in the Columbus Area. Mrs Zittek's position was from a three quarter position at sighting.\nAn article was published by the Columbus News Paper, Columbus, Ohio, 8 July 1948.\nT-42603 Incident # 138"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Information received from Captain Boyd, District Intelligence Office, 320 Old Post Office, Columbus, Ohio\nUnconventional aircraft sighted by Mrs. Wilda Zittek, 2579 Avalon Ave., Columbus at 0920 on 8 July. Weather was clear, sun shining brightly, no clouds near the object. She first saw the object with her naked eye, then spent two minutes looking for binoculars. Observed the object for about two minutes with them. There were two flying objects; both appeared to have a blunt front and seemed to taper to a point at the rear. The shape was very much like a cigar. The sun was shining on them and they appeared to be silver in color. With the naked eye, they appeared to be about the size of airplane when writing in the sky. They were about 3 1/2\" in length and 1\" in diameter. In other words, they seemed to be a little more than three times the diameter in length. Speed was not estimated. Observed for approximately four minutes. When first seen, they were headed northeast. Seemed to bob up and down rather than pursuing a set and steady course. Altitude was judged to be approximately 3000 ft. No sound audible from the object; no exhaust trail visible. First seen in east going toward Port Columbus, then moved generally north from there.\nBinoculars were M3 6X30. 1943 HMR\n* * *\nThe following was broadcast over radio this morning (9 Jul) but persons not yet interviewed: On 7 July, five members of one family saw the objects which looked like pie pans, directly over Port Columbus."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Interrogation CONFIDENTIAL\nMCIAXO-3 MCIAXO-4 12 July 48 1\n1. Contacted Captain Dwight I. Boyd, District Intelligence Officer, 109 CIC Detachment, Old Post Office Building, Columbus, Ohio, at 0900, 10 July 1948. Read the agents' report and proceeded with the agent to the home of Mrs. Paul Vittek, 2579 Avalon Avenue, Columbus, Ohio\n2. Interviewed Mrs. Vittek and received the same information as contained in the agents' report (WD AGO Form 341) except that the bobbing movement described there was brought out to be a smooth undulating movement \"like something going through air currents\".\n3. The subject stated that the object was cigar shaped, with a blunt nose and the tail obscured. \"I couldn't make it out plain. It was like a dark blot\". The main thing that had attracted her attention was the sunlight reflected from the shiny center of the object, both ends being indistinct.\n4. The subjects' powers of observation were checked on aircraft flying in the area and were found to be good as far as direction and movement were concerned, but poor for distance and altitude. The binoculars were checked and found to be Type M-3, 6 x 30, with artillary mil scales imposed. No blemishes or defects in the optics were found. The subject had no acurate idea as to the amount of the mil scale the object occupied.\n5. A check at Patterson Field Operations showed two F-80's in the air at the time of the sighting. Contacted Captain Darnell, MCRFOF, the pilot of one of the F-80's who stated that he was in the Columbus area at the time of sighting. He was flying a loose formation in trail of Lt. Collins while pacing him on a calibrated speed check. The aircraft were not equipped with wing tip tanks.\n6. In view of the fact that Mrs. Vittek's sight of the objects was from a three quarter rear position it is highly possible they were the two F-80's in the Columbus area as this position from a distance lends itself to a distortion comparable to what she saw, i.e. blunt nose, obscure tail, and apparent lack of wings.\n7. A check was made with the Intelligence Officer at the Port Columbus Naval Air Station with negative results.\nCLARENCE R. GLASEBROCK 1st Lt., USAF ATI Branch, Operations Section Technical Intelligence Div CRG/esh 6-6326 B 288 P 201F\nT-42603\nCONFIDENTIAL\n2nd 138"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 9 Jul 48 Incident # 139\n2. Time 2147\n3. Location North end of Osborn, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Clarence Glasebrook, 1st Lt., USAF, Hq AMC (MCIAXO-4)\n5. Occupation of observer ATI Investigator\n6. Address of observer Hq AMC (MCIAXO-4)\n7. Place of observation ground\n8. Number of objects one\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Appeared 3 times each time being 1-2 second duration\n11. Altitude 3000 to 4000 feet\n12. Speed between 500 & 600\n13. Direction of flight west (east to west)\n14. Tactics Made intermittent appearances at regulated intervals\n15. Sound None\n16. Size could not be estimated\n17. Color pale yellowish white (luminous)\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear w/quarter moon in the East-Southeast.\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Suddenly at angle of approx. 70° to horizon in front of observer who was looking north\n26. Remarks:\nLt. Glasebrook was a reconnaissance pilot in World War II."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"139\n\nUnidentified Flying Object\n\nMCIAXO-3 MCIAXO-4 16 July 48 1\n\n1. At 2147 hours on 9 July 1948, the undersigned sighted an unidentified object flying from east to west at approximately three or four thousand feet over the north end of Osborn, Ohio.\n\n2. The object appeared as a pale yellowish white light that seemed to glow. It was not a direct beam. The light was traveling at a rate of speed between five or six hundred miles. It appeared long enough to allow the observer to determine its flight path (approximately one to two seconds) and then went out. There was a pause of three seconds, the light then reappeared again for the same length of time, another three-second pause and the pattern was repeated. After the third appearance it was not seen again. The final sighting was made with the object at an angle of approximately [REDACTED] to the horizon in front of the observer who was looking north. The last sighting was slightly above the horizon to the west, just north of Pattern Field. The intermittent appearance of the light was at a regulated interval.\n\n3. The sky was clear with about a quarter moon rising in the East-southeast; however, nothing could be ascertained except the glow of the light. There was no sound or trail.\n\n4. The undersigned was a reconnaissance pilot in World War II and served for eight months in the 160th Reconnaissance Sqd. (J.P.) flying FP-80 type aircraft. It is believed that his powers of observation are above average and that the estimates of speed can be considered to be fairly accurate.\n\nCLARENCE GLAZEBROOK\n1st Lt., USAF\nCWG/aw\nExt 65310\nBldg 288\nPost 201F"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 1 July 1948 Incident # 140a\n2. Time Between 2100 and 2200 hours\n3. Location Gahanna, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mr Jack Taylor\n5. Occupation of observer N/S but now active in National Guard\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Gahanna, Ohio (ground)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 2 seconds\n11. Altitude 3000 to 4000 ft\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight Northeast to Southwest\n14. Tactics Pursued [REDACTED] flat line of flight\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color bright yellow-white\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction luminous\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Clear - bright moonlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Mr. Chester Taylor gave the same version as that of his son. Mrs. Taylor apparently did not observe the phenomenon.\n\nRESTRICTED 74"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"170\n\nInterrogation\n\nMCIAXO-3 MCIAXO-4 19 July 48 1\n\n1. Proceeded to the home of Mr. Howard Enslow in Gahanna, Ohio, with an Agent of the 109th CIC Detachment at 1000, 10 July 1948.\n\n2. Interviewed Mrs. Howard Enslow who stated that on the night of 1 July 1948 between 2100 and 2200 hours, she, Mr. Enslow, Mr. and Mrs. Chester Taylor and their Sons, Harold and Jack, of 400 Grove St., Columbus, Ohio, sighted an unidentified object flying through the air. Mrs. Enslow described it as a \"Beautiful golden saucer glowing like a halo with a silver rim around it.\" Direction of flight was from Northeast to Southwest and the object was visible for approximately three seconds. Subject was very vague and appeared to attribute the phenomena to holy visitations. Was unable to contact Mr. Enslow.\n\n3. Proceeded to the home of Mr. Chester Taylor and interviewed his son Jack, age 23, who had three years service and is now active in the National Guard. He stated that the object was a bright yellow-white light that moved through the sky at a terrific rate of speed. It was a glow and not a directed light and was about two seconds in duration. It didn't fade out but ceased abruptly. The line of flight appeared to be flat and the object appeared from the Northeast going Southwest, at an altitude of about three or four thousand feet. There was no audible noise although it was a quiet night and the object appeared close in at an angle to the horizon of about forty-five degrees. Although the sky was clear and the moon was bright nothing but the light was seen.\n\n4. Mr. Taylor's story was the same as that of his son's. Mrs. Taylor was in the car and did not observe the phenomena. The other witness was not readily available.\n\n5. Proceeded to the sight of the observation and determined that, under the conditions of course and altitude as estimated by the subject, it was possible that their line of vision was restricted by a grove of trees thus limiting the observed line of flight to the two three-second periods reported.\n\nCLARENCE GLASEBROOK\n1st Lt, USAF\nCWG/aw\nExt 65310\nBldg 288\nPost 201F"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 30 June 1948 Incident # 111\n2. Time 11:25 A.M., to 1:27 PM and shortly thereafter\n3. Location Hecla, South Dakota\n4. Name of observer Norman Pfutzenreuter\n5. Occupation of observer Chemical Engineer - Amateur Astronomer\n6. Address of observer Hecla, South Dakota\n7. Place of observation Between Watertown, S. D., & Webster, S. D.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Slightly over two hours\n11. Altitude 150 miles (?)\n12. Speed Stationary\n13. Direction of flight Stationary\n14. Tactics Remained in one position then disintegrated\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Like polished aluminum\n18. Shape Changing\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction Seemed to be a cluster of parts\n21. Exhaust trails Particles of disintegrating mass left very faint trails of vapor\n22. Weather conditions Brilliantly clear (CAVU) - Wind velocity 3 MPH\n23. Effect on clouds No clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs Map showing locations of sightings\n25. Manner of disappearance Disintegrated into smaller pieces\n26. Remarks: Object appeared as cluster of parts which remained fairly stationary and constant for some two hours when it underwent a rather slow change in shape. A large chunk fell off. Within the next 2-1/2 minutes the entire spot started to very slowly disintegrate. Three larger parts moved (over)\n\n75"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"away out from the mass and formed a perfect isometric triangle, the remaining mass slowly moved into hu dreds of small parts seemingly leaving very faint vapor trails. The three remaining parts continued to move apart holding their related positions of a perfect triangle but gradually getting smaller and fainter until they dissappeared some 9 minutes after the initial break-up. It could xxxiixx easily be seen that the parts were moving away from the earth."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 142\n1. Date\n2. Time\n3. Location\n4. Name of observer Mr. Charles W. Shangle, Jr.\n5. Occupation of observer\n6. Address of observer Boise, Idaho\n7. Place of observation\n8. Number of objects\n9. Distance of object from observer\n10. Time in sight\n11. Altitude\n12. Speed\n13. Direction of flight\n14. Tactics\n15. Sound\n16. Size\n17. Color\n18. Shape\n19. Odor detected\n20. Apparent construction\n21. Exhaust trails\n22. Weather conditions\n23. Effect on clouds\n24. Skteches or photographs\n25. Manner of disappearance\n26. Remarks:\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 143\n1. Date\n2. Time\n3. Location\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Felix G. Matthews\n5. Occupation of observer\n6. Address of observer Columbia, South Carolina\n7. Place of observation\n8. Number of objects\n9. Distance of object from observer\n10. Time in sight\n11. Altitude\n12. Speed\n13. Direction of flight\n14. Tactics\n15. Sound\n16. Size\n17. Color\n18. Shape\n19. Odor detected\n20. Apparent construction\n21. Exhaust trails\n22. Weather conditions\n23. Effect on clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs\n25. Manner of disappearance\n26. Remarks:\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 24 July 48\nIncident # 144\n2. Time 0245\n3. Location 20 miles south of Montgomery, Ala\n4. Name of observer Pilot Clarence Shipe Chiles & Co-Pilot John B. Whitted & Mr. McKelvie, (Occupation - N/S)\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot and Co-pilot, EAL\n6. Address of observer Atlanta Office of EAL\n7. Place of observation Air - 20 miles south of Montgomery, Ala\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer s N/S\n10. Time in sight 5 to 10 seconds\n11. Altitude 5,000 ft\n12. Speed 500 to 700 MPH (See Atlanta Constitution of 25 July 48)\n13. Direction of flight Southwest toward Mobile and New Orleans\n14. Tactics Pulled up sharply with tremendous burst of flame (Atlanta Constitution - 25 July 48)\n15. Sound none\n16. Size 100 ft long and about twice the diameter of \"B-29\"\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape cigar-shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails red-orange flame blue fluorescent glow running beneath the object\n22. Weather conditions Full moon, clear with broken cloud coverage of 4/10 at 6,000 ft\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - pulled up into one\n24. Sketches or photographs 2\n25. Manner of disappearance Disappeared intoa cloud\n26. Remarks: See attached statements\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 24 July 48\nIncident # 144a\n2. Time 0230\n3. Location Near Blackstone, Va. enroute to Raleigh-Durham\n4. Name of observer Louis Feldwary\n5. Occupation of observer pilot\n6. Address of observer LGA\n7. Place of observation Air - near Blackstone, Va.\n8. Number of objects Only trail seen\n9. Distance of object from observer n/s\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed terrific speed -\n13. Direction of flight 230°\n14. Tactics Trail covered an 80° to 90° arc laterally\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S Only trail perceived - object was not seen\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Seemed to be a jet or rocket trail\n22. Weather conditions at 0230 at Blackstone: 0/70 @ 4GF 112/73/72/ wsw 5/987. Greensboro and Raleigh-Durham had 0/15 plus\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Shortly after checking Blackstone, at approx 0230, a trail was picked up that appeared to be a jet or rocket trail. The object leaving the trail was traveling at terrific speed in a southwesterly direction and as nearly as they could estimate they calculated the degree of travel as 230°.\n\nThey were on a heading at the time of 215°. The jet or rocket trail at no time crossed their flight path. It was on the distant western horizon at approx 20° above the horizon. The trail covered an 80° to 90° arc laterally.\n\nNOTE: There is a 15 minute difference in time f/this sighting [REDACTED](0230) to the rocket sighting at 0245 in Atlanta some 400 to 475 miles distant.\n\nNOTE: The above time (0230) tallies with another sighting by another pilot in the vicinity of Blackstone, Va. who saw a very unusual meteor that appeared to be on a bearing of about 210° from them traveling in a southerly direction above but close to the horizon."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"144a\n\nSupplement to Trip Report to Columbus, Ohio - 31 July 1948\nRe: Atlanta Sighting\n\nTHRU: Col Clingerman\n\nTO: Col McCoy\n\n1. The object of this trip was to interview C. L. McKelvie, a passenger aboard the Eastern Airlines DC-3, the night of 24 July 1948.\n\n2. Mr. McKelvie's written statement is essentially as follows: He was occupying the 5th or 6th seat from the front of the plane on the right and would periodically glance out the window. There was a full moon which illuminated the ground and the skies and the ground could clearly be seen. Frequently they passed cumulus clouds. On one occasion as he was looking out he observed a sudden streak of light moving in a southeastern direction across the airway above the plane. He wondered if it were lightning but observed the flame moved in a straight line and not in a flare. The color was bright flame - he thought it was probably a light cherry red - although the edges were more of a yellow flame. He shifted his position in his seat for better observation, momentarily losing sight of it. Then he saw it again. He estimated the flame to be about 1/2 as far above the plane as the plane was above the ground. He saw no physical shape - only a streak of flame moving in a straight line. The whole experience was momentary so that detailed observation was absent. He heard no sound but stated that the vibration of the plane was much greater than normal and that it was not possible to hear any sound from the outside.\n\n3. In the interview Mr. McKelvie stated to Maj Llewellyn that the pilots seemed quite excited and that they appeared nervous over the episode.\n\nR. A. LLEWELLYN\nMajor, USAF\nRAL/aw\n65310\nBldg 286\nPost 203F"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Atlanta, Ga.\nAug 3, 1948\n\nMr. S. L. Shannon\nEastern Air Lines\nMiami, Fla.\n\nThe following is a report of an unidentified aircraft which was sighted by John Whitted and me, as we were twenty miles southwest of Montgomery, Ala. July 24, 1948, as we were on Eastern's trip 576.\n\nAt 2:45 A. M. we were cruising at 5,000 feet when there came, what looked like a Jet type of aircraft to our right and slightly above meeting us. It was a clear moonlight night with the visibility excellent; therefore, we were able to view the ship as it passed for a period of around ten seconds. It was clear there were no wings present, that it was powered by some jet or other type of power shooting flame from the rear some fifty feet. There were two rows of windows,which indicated an upper and lower deck, from inside these windows a very bright light was glowing. Underneath the ship there was a blue glow of light.\n\nAfter it passed it pulled up into some light broken clouds and was lost from view. There was no prop wash or rough air felt as it passed.\n\nAfter talking to the only passenger awake at the time, he saw only the trail of fire as it passed and pulled into the clouds. I called the company at Columbus and asked if there was any reported jet army craft and requested if the ATC had any aircraft under control. I was told that no such craft was reported by either source.\n\n/s/ C. S. Chiles\n\nC. S. Chiles\nCapt E. A. L."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 144b\n\n1. Date 24 July 48\n2. Time 0230\n3. Location Between Blackstone, Va. and Greensboro, N.C.\n4. Name of observer Capt Perry R. Mansfield,\n5. Occupation of observer Capt on 571/23 EAL\n6. Address of observer EAL\n7. Place of observation Between Blackstone, Va. and Greensboro, N. C.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 3 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed meteoric\n13. Direction of flight southerly\n14. Tactics traveling horizontally\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S -\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance \"died out\" in the distance\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At about 0230 on July 24, 1948, C. Kingsley pilot and Capt Perry R. Mansfield saw what they thought was an unusual meteor. It was brighter than any ever seen before and traveling in a horizontal direction, slightly above the horizon. It was observed for 3 seconds before it died out. At no time did it appear to travel in a downward direction. Kingsley & Mansfield discussed the matter that the meteor appeared to be traveling horizontally.\n\nAt the time they were traveling between Blackstone, Va., and Greensboro, S. C., The sky was clear and the visibility unlimited. They were on a magnetic heading of 240° and estimated the object to be on a bearing of about 210° from them - that is - about 30° to the left of their heading. It appeared to be traveling in a southerly direction, above, but close to the horizon.\n\nNOTE: There is a 15 minute variance in time f/this sighting (0230) to the rocket sighting at 0245 in Atlanta some 400 to 475 miles distant. The time (0230) also tallies with Inc 144a Pilot Louis Feldway's account of sighting a jet or rocket trail just after leaving Blackstone."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 9 July 1948 Incident # 145\n2. Time 1205 AST\n3. Location Fielding Lake\n4. Name of observers 1st Lt Dominick J. Caramia & Thomas B. Carpenter\n5. Occupation of observers (VIR) Photo\n6. Address of observer 72nd RCN Squadron (VIR) Photographic c/o APO 731, c/o Postmaster Seattle Washington\n7. Place of observation Fielding Lake, Alaska (63°11' - 145° 40' W\n8. Number of objects Approximately 20\n9. Distance of object from observer 5,000 + above\n10. Time in sight 5 seconds or less\n11. Altitude 5,000 + immediately below the clouds\n12. Speed over 500 MPH\n13. Direction of flight From WNW to ESE\n14. Tactics Jockeyed back and forth in the group formation (gave impression of shotgun blast pattern) but maintained straight course.\n15. Sound Loud roaring sound heard (thought it was strong wind) before objects were sighted; sound sharpened into a buzz as they approached and passed.\n16. Size dot\n17. Color grayish black\n18. Shape [REDACTED] Spheroid or disc-shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails none visible\n22. Weather conditions bright and sunny w/ 5/10 strato-cumulus cloud coverage\n23. Effect on clouds none - flew immediately below them\n24. Sketches or photographs sketch\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: The objects resembled a group of dots, grayish black in color and numbering about 20. They were plainly visible and either spheroid or disc shaped. They appeared to be jockeying back and\n(over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"forth in the group formation which gave the overall impression of a shotgun blast pattern. The objects were thought to be moving in excess of 500 MPH at approximately 5,000 ft (immediately below the clouds) from WNW to ESE and were definitely flying a straight course. Just before they were sighted a loud roaring sound was heard which was attributed to a strong wind blowing through the surrounding woods. However, as the objects approached and passed, the sound sharpened into a buzz much like that made by a group of jet aircraft. No exhaust trails were visible. There were no photographs available.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 17 July 1948 Incident # 146\n2. Time 1650\n3. Location Vicinity of San Acacia Dam, 65 miles south of Albuquerque\n4. Name of observers M/Sgt Wm R. Carter & M/Sgt Bernard E. Harvey\n5. Occupation of observers Carter: Armament technician Harvey: experienced AF non-com\n6. Address of observer 428th AFBU Kirtland AF Base\n7. Place of observation Vicinity of San Acacia Dam\n8. Number of objects 7\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 20,000 ft\n12. Speed 1,500 MPH (if estimated altitude correct)\n13. Direction of flight northerly heading (between north and northwest)\n14. Tactics Maintained formation\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Color of aluminum aircraft at high altitude\n18. Shape When overhead: circular. After passing zenith: indeterminate\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction metallic\n21. Exhaust trails none\n22. Weather conditions CAVU At 20,000 ft wind velocity 8 to 10 miles\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance [REDACTED] In northwest\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nAbout 65 miles south of Albuquerque 7 unidentified objects flying on northerly heading were observed. Objects initially in V formation at an estimated altitude of 20,000 ft above earth. Formation varied from \"Y\" to \"L\" to \"Q\" and then grouped in an irregular formation and a regular pulsating flashing light was observed from them after they had passed 30° beyond zenith. The shape was difficult to ascertain. When directly overhead they were circular and resembled a cluster of balloons traveling at a great rate of speed. The color was that of aluminum at high altitude (or white painted aircraft). If the altitude estimation is correct the speed could be estimated as 1500 MPH. There was no vapor, smoke or other trail visible. They did not appear spherical when viewed at oblique angle. Disappeared on heading between north and northwest.\n\nAGENTS NOTES: Sgt Carter is a sober industrious, level headed individual, an armament technician of outstanding ability. Definitely not the type to experience hallucinations. Info received in other instances from this individual in each instance proven accurate.\n\nSgt Harvey is an experienced AF non-com accustomed to the sight of aircraft at various altitudes and speeds.\n\nEVALUATION OF INFORMANTS: \"A\"\nOF INFORMATION: 3.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 27 July 1948 Incident # 147\n2. Time 2200\n3. Location Springfield, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. H. H. Gibson\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 1217 East Main St.\n7. Place of observation Springfield, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 3 seconds\n11. Altitude Great height\n12. Speed That of a jet plane\n13. Direction of flight Heading North\n14. Tactics None - traveled in a straight line\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Witness stated object resembled a \"huge ball\"\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Round\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Bright red tail of fire.\n22. Weather conditions Some thunder and lightning\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Flew out of sight\n26. Remarks: See attached\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Various parts of North Jutland have reported that on 19 Jan 48 at 7:30 AM the [REDACTED] so-called flying saucers were observed. The phenomena has been observed in Hjerring, the Scaw and Hjerup. The objects were surrounded by a bluish light and had tail of green light, moving east west. One observer thought they looked like three balls. Several observers in the Scaw say they were rocket-like objects which suddenly stopped, exploded and disappeared.\n\nM/A COMMENT: Impossible to get any verification of this from Danish officials or Danish War Ministry."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 28 July 1948 Incident # 148\n2. Time 0400\n3. Location Springfield, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Rose Henry\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 826 Dibert Avenue, Springfield, Ohio\n7. Place of observation 826 Dibert Ave., Springfield, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 1st time: 5 minutes; 2d time: 15 minutes\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Remained nearly stationary\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics Hovering\n15. Sound N/S Witness thought she heard sound of plane before she sighted object\n16. Size About the size of a basketball\n17. Color Intense yellow\n18. Shape Round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Faded away\n26. Remarks: See attached\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 19 Jan 48 Incident # 149\n2. Time 7:30 AM\n3. Location North Jutland (Hjerrin, the Scaw and Hjerup)\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation North Jutland\n8. Number of objects Three\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed apparently rocket-like\n13. Direction of flight East - West\n14. Tactics \"suddenly stopped, exploded and disappeared\"\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape ball - saucer\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction rocket-like objects\n21. Exhaust trails tail of green light\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Exploded and disappeared\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED 81"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date Approx 1 Mar 48 Incident # 150\n2. Time 0930 hours\n3. Location Swedish Coast\n4. Name of observer N/S - a Norwegian pilot\n5. Occupation of observer ONL pilot\n6. Address of observer N/S Material taken from MA R-130-48 NAD 20560\n7. Place of observation Air - enroute from Aalberg, Denmark to Oslo, Norway\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 4 seconds\n11. Altitude 20,000 ft\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Southeast - passing along Swedish Coast and disappearing over Norway\n14. Tactics N/S - flight path followed earth's surface\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S but emitted a bluish-green flame\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Over Norway\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED 88"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nAn ONL plane enroute from Aalberg, Denmark, to Oslo, Norway, sighted a projectile coming from the southeast, passing along the Swedish Coast and disappearing over Norway. The missile was at 20,000 ft and disappeared over the horizon in four seconds. It emitted a bluish-green flame but left no trail in the sky. The projectile seemed to follow the earth's surface.\n\nNOTE: Similar missiles have been observed at Rjuken, Norway & Finse, Norway.\nIn this connection, it is of interest to know that heavy water is currently being produced in Rjuken.\n\nObservers: A Norwegian pilot and his co-pilot.\nThe pilot served with the Royal Norwegian AF in Great Britain.\n\nRESTRICTED 88a"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 29 July 1948 Incident # 151\n2. Time 0955\n3. Location Northeastern part of Indianapolis, Indiana (See attached sketch of location)\n4. Name of observers Mr. James W. Toney & Mr. Robert Huggins\n5. Occupation of observors Both employees of W. O. Jones Rug Cleaners\n6. Address of observer Toney: 235 So Bradley, Indianapolis Huggins: 5040 Indianola, Indianapolis\n7. Place of observation (See attached drawing of location)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S - not over a few hundred feet\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 30 feet - just above tree-tops\n12. Speed 25 to 30 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Headed south in bank to left\n14. Tactics gliding with no apparent spinning action\n15. Sound no discernible sound\n16. Size 6 to 8 feet long by 1-1/2 to 2 feet wide (See attach drwg.)\n17. Color Aluminum and shiny in color\n18. Shape Shaped like a broad short propeller (See attached drwg.)\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction Aluminum construction\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions CAVU - no clouds\n23. Effect on clouds No clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs 2\n25. Manner of disappearance Went down in wooded area (seemingly)\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object was shaped like a broad short propeller approximately 6 to 8 ft long, each blades approximately 2 feet wide and approximately one foot thick with cups on upper side of blades. It appeared alumimum and shiny in color. Traveled approximately 25 to 30 MPH. It was sighted just above the trees at approximately a 30 ft altitude in bank to the left of approx 20° and appeared in a alight descent. There was no discernible sound and no exhaust trail.\n\nNOTE: Truck had just started across bridge (see drwg) when object was sighted directly ahead above the trees. Witnesses stopped on the other side of the cantilever bridge but could not relocate object.\n\nSearch by Lt John E. Hoskins, Base PIO, and Lt Russell J. Carey, Jr. Base Intel Off. (331st AFBU) Res Tng Stout Fld. did not produce any result. However the area in which it was believed to have fallen is densely wooded with many hills and valleys. See diagram attached."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 31 July 48 Incident # 152\n2. Time 0825\n3. Location Indianapolis, Indiana (South-Central part)\n4. Name of observers Mr. & Mrs Vernon Swigert\n5. Occupation of observors [REDACTED] an electrician and housewife\n6. Address of observors 2020 Boyd St., Indianapolis, Indiana\n7. Place of observation As above -\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight 10 seconds\n11. Altitude 2,000 ft\n12. Speed 1800 MPH\n13. Direction of flight 90° - east\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size [REDACTED] - 20 ft in dia. and approx 6 to 8 ft in height in center - Ratio about 3:1\n17. Color white with no shine\n18. Shape like a cymbal\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Sky clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs 1\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object first perceived in the west. The object was shaped like a cymbal with smooth surfaces and approximately 20 feet in diameter at the base and approximately 6 to 8 feet in height in the center. Ratio was about 3:1. It appeared to be flat white in color with no shine. It traveled extremely fast crossing the sky in approximately 10 seconds (a distance of about 5 miles on a 90° heading. It maintained a level course and shimmered in the sun giving the appearance of spinning. The altitude was estimated at approximately 2,000 ft. Object made no discernible sound and left no exhaust trail. No openings were noted on the object.\n\nNOTE: Mr. Swigert was standing by open bathroom window window which faces the west when he was attracted by the object in the sky. Couldn't believe his eyes. He rushed into adjoining kitchen and showed his wife the object thru the kitchen window facing south. He thought stated the object appeared large enough to carry one person\n\nNOTE: Investigation conducted by Intel Officer, 1st Lt Russell J. Carey, Jr., on a call from Mr. Swigert. It was noted that visibility was good from both windows for such observation.\n\nNo other reports received on this object."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 16 [REDACTED] 5 August 48 Incident # 153\n2. Time 0100 hours\n3. Location Between Parrott, Ga. and Richland,Ga.\n4. Name of observer James Amaral, Former AF Pilot\n5. Occupation of observor N/S - but formerly AF pilot\n6. Address of observor N/S (Info forwarded f/Turner AF Base)\n7. Place of observation Between Parrott, Ga. & Richland, Ga.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 5 to 10 seconds\n11. Altitude 20,000 to 35,000 ft\n12. Speed 3600 MPH (estimated)\n13. Direction of flight 250°\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color blue-white streak of light\n18. Shape \"streak\"\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction \"rocket-like\"\n21. Exhaust trails A trail of sparks several miles long followed it\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness was traveling between Parrott, Ga., and Richland, Ga., in an automobile when he observed a brilliant blue-white streak of light which lasted from 5 to 10 seconds, traveling in an apparent level flight on a heading of approximately 250°, at about 30,000 ft altitude (estimated). After the light disappeared a trail of sparks was observed which appeared several miles long. This trail lasted from 45 seconds to (1) minute\n\nNOTE: Mr. Amaral did not believe this to be any celestial but based on his experience as a pilot in the AF, he stated it appeared to be a burst of power applied to a rocket or rocket ship."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 2 Aug 48\n2. Time 1945 hours\n3. Location Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Charles Saunders\n5. Occupation of observor Attorney\n6. Address of observor 265-1/2 South High St\n7. Place of observation Yard of 1337 Clifton Ave., Columbus, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 10-15 minutes\n11. Altitude 1,500 to 2000 ft\n12. Speed 15 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Moving south from the north\n14. Tactics Constant slow speed - Once it hesitated & thin trail of smoke issued from opposite direction of travel. Changed position assuming different shapes\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Judged to be about 20 to 30 ft in diameter\n17. Color N/S. Perimeter: constant grey-black. Center: transparent.\n18. Shape Changing. First: side-view: Parallelogram. Second: circular stream then reverted to original form\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails thin trail of smoke\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds No clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs 4 sketches\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On 2 Aug 4g at approx 1945 a round object which appeared to be about 20 to 30 ft in diameter was observed moving in southerly direction from the north over center of Columbus. Had constant grey-black perimeter with a transparent center. The blue sky could be observed through this grey-black perimeter while it moved at a constant, slow speed of about 15 MPH. It made no noise of any kind. Once it hesitated in its movements and a thin trail of smoke issued from the opposite direction of travel. The smoke soon disappeared and was not seen again during the 10 to 15 minutes object was visible to the observer. The object changed position - but not direction of travel - three times. When first seen, it evidently presented a side view which was a parallelogram in shape. (See). Slowly its position altered and it became circular in form, only to revert after a time to its original form. The altitude was judged to be some 1500 to 2000 ft above ground.\nAgent's Note: Saunders drew the following sketches\nFourth Third Second First\nThe above drawings constitute four positions of one phase. The object passed thru three of these phases during the 15 minute period."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 154a\n1. Date 2 18 Aug 48\n2. Time 7:50 P. M.\n3. Location Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Jaymes Saunders, A. B., M. A.\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 1337 Clifton Ave, Columbus, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Columbus, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 15 minutes\n11. Altitude N/S 1/2 mile high\n12. Speed slow and regular speed\n13. Direction of flight from North to South to Southwest\n14. Tactics N/S Oblong to circular to oblong change in shape\n15. Sound None\n16. Size of small plane\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Changing but circular for the most part\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails tail of smoke\n22. Weather conditions Unusually favorable for observation. Light sufficient without interference from sun's rays.\n23. Effect on clouds Cloudless\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On 2 Aug 48, at 7:50 P. M. Mrs. Saunders observed an unusual object in the sky. Her attention was directed toward it because some neighborhood children were looking toward the north. She called her husband, Charles Saunders, (Inc 154) to witness the phenomenon. The sky was cloudless and the light more than sufficient, without interference from the rays of the sun which were hidden by the buildings of the city.\nObject first appeared oblong in shape and was traveling from north to south at a slow, regular speed. [REDACTED] at a height of a half mile. During the 15 minutes under observation the object traveled approx 7-1/2 miles. Although it did not change its course, it presented different appearances from time to time. From oblong to circular then to oblong. Object went thru this change three different times until observer lost sight of it. However, for the most part it presented a circular appearance. Outline very dark in contrast with the transparency of the center. Only when the shape appeared circular was observer aware of the center being a void. Once [REDACTED] it hesitated momentarily, observer noticed a tail of smoke emanating from the rear, after which the object continued in a southerly direction. This tail of smoke was observed but once. The size appeared to be that of a small plane. It made no sound altho at one time observer thought she detected one. At approx 8:00 P. M. observer lost sight of the object just as it appeared to be changing direction from South to Southwest."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 155\n1. Date 1630 31 July 48\n2. Time 1630\n3. Location 480 N. Monroe Ave., Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Edward G. Watson\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 480 N. Monroe Ave., Columbus, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Columbus, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 6 or 7\n9. Distance of object from observer Very great distance away\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S - very great\n12. Speed Hovering\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics Hovering -hanging in the sky\n15. Sound N/S -\n16. Size of an ash tray\n17. Color gold\n18. Shape starlike\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions CAVU - bright sunlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness Statement:\nObjects first looked like large stars. They seemed to be at a very great distance and appeared to be about the size of an ash tray. There were approximately six or seven of them in a formation that resembled the shape of the big dipper. Did not have a definite shape individually but just seemed to be a group of spots glittering in the sky. They were gold in color and seemed to be just hanging in the sky. The sky was clear and blue and the sun was shining but do not believe the gold color caused by a reflection of the sun.\nCorroborated by truck driver but/could not obtain his name."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 31 July 48\n2. Time 8:00 P. M.\n3. Location Columbus, Ohio - Tremont Rd near WOSU radio tower located near University Golf Course\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Martin Price & Mrs. Mary Rippetoe\n5. Occupation of observor Mrs. Price: housewife Mrs. Mary Rippetoe: mother of Mrs. Price\n6. Address of observer 2186 Lamont Ave., Columbus, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Tremont Rd near WOSU Radio Tower\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 250 feet\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 250 feet\n12. Speed very slow\n13. Direction of flight West to East\n14. Tactics Did not change course or altitude\n15. Sound No noise\n16. Size of gasoline drum - Approx 5' x 6'\n17. Color [REDACTED] Black\n18. Shape Oblong\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Spouted black smoke from the top\n22. Weather conditions Clear with no clouds\n23. Effect on clouds No clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (above)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nOn Saturday evening, 31 July 48, at approximately 8:00 P. M., while driving south on Tremont Road as observers approached the WOSU Radio Tower located on the University Golf Course, a large object resembling a huge lantern was seen floating in the sky. The weather was clear, and it was still daylight so object could be seen quite clearly. It was oblong in shape and about the size of a gasoline drum. It was coming from the west and moving very slowly. It passed close to the tower and was about 1/2 the height of the tower from the ground. As it passed overhead traveling east, it spouted black smoke from the top and at the bottom on the left side there was a dull enclosed light like that of a lamp. The object did not change its course or altitude but continued on to the east with black smoke trailing behind. The object was black. It did not make any noise. There were no wings visible nor did it have any motor. No openings of any kind could be seen.\nNOTE: Another car stopped near them with two occupants who claimed that they had never witnessed anything like it before.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 31 July 48\n2. Time 8:00 P. M.\n3. Location Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Robert C. Goshorn\n5. Occupation of observor Teletype Operator\n6. Address of observor State Highway Patrol Radio Station\n7. Place of observation Near Golf Driving Range, Columbus, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Object was balloon which fell to earth & was investigated by observer\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Came to earth from around 100 ft (when first observed)\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight earthward\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 2 ft x 3-1/2 ft\n17. Color white crepe paper\n18. Shape N/S - but said to be like old time \"County Fair\" balloon - round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. [REDACTED] construction crepe paper\n21. Exhaust trails smoking - caused by large ball of waste material\n22. Weather conditions N/S - (clear - see Incident: 156)\n23. Effect on clouds N/S (no clouds)\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Fell to earth where it was retrieved.\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nObject was perceived floating in the sky coming from the west over Ohio State Student Housing Project and was approximately 100 feet off the ground when first observed. It got lower all the time and landed in a field nearby. Three small boys ran toward it and observer went over to investigate. Saw paper bag affair approx 2 feet in diameter and 3-1/2 feet long made of white crepe paper. (like old time \"County-Fair\" hot air balloons) It was smoking when first observed and this was caused by a large ball of waste material which was fastened underneath it. There were no marks or writing on it [illegible]\nNote: See Incident 156 - in which time & direction tally.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 1 Aug 48\n2. Time 2:00 P. M.\n3. Location [REDACTED] Groveport, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Harold A. Yantis\n5. Occupation of observor Student, &\n6. Address of observor 25 West Hinman Ave.\n7. Place of observation 1 mile west of Groveport, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude [REDACTED] very high\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight in westerly direction against a light wind\n14. Tactics N/S - just exhaust visible - smoke pattern dark & very large dispersed rapidly and appeared again as wide streak a mile or so in length twisted from wide to narrow streak and back.\n15. Sound No sound\n16. Size N/S - object not seen\n17. Color N/S - object not seen\n18. Shape Just a streak observed\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction [REDACTED] An exhaust trail (smoke)\n21. Exhaust trails Appeared as black cloud with no definite shape but looked like an anti-aircraft shell a few seconds after it exploded\n22. Weather conditions [REDACTED] Few white clouds - but clear\n23. Effect on clouds black cloud silhouetted among them that moved\n24. Sketches or photographs 3 figs.\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observer noticed what appeared to be a small black cloud between two white ones. Seemed peculiar because the weather was clear and there were a few white clouds in the sky - but no other dark clouds or formations of any kind. The black cloud did not have any definite shape but looked like an anti-aircraft shell a few seconds after it explodes. Suddenly it stretched out into a wide streak with smaller vertical streaks, then rapidly turned and twisted, moving into a different direction and disappearing. In three or four seconds, the smoke burst appeared again spontaneously, approximately 20° west of the place where first noticed. Smoke pattern dark, very large, and dispersed rapidly, appearing again as a wide streak a mile or so in length which appeared to twist from a wide to a narrow streak and then back again changing direction as it twisted. Moving in westerly direction against light wind. Plainly visible altho far away and very high. No sound heard. Seemed like a streak that would be made if a flying wing with several engines was banking and turning and leaving exhaust trails.\n\nNote: Yantis was in the war and had seen a lot of anti-aircraft shells burst and many vapor trails from planes but had never observed anything like this. He states: \"It was so spontaneous like a rubber band which is round, then suddenly is stretched at length and twisted, and then disappears without a trace.\"\n\nAgent's Note: Yantis drew the sketches below\n\nStreak twisted and turned - suddenly disappeared\n\nwidth same - length estimated at 1 to 2 miles\n\n1st position"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 159\n\n1. Date 30 July 1948\n2. Time 2015 hours\n3. Location Worthington, Ohio\n4. Name of observer John A. Felton\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer 5800 High St, Worthington, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Worthington, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 15 minutes\n11. Altitude Approx 3000 ft\n12. Speed very slow\n13. Direction of flight SW\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape cylindrical\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Clear with high scattered clouds, visibility good\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object appeared cylindrical in shape with no apparent wings or tail surfaces. No standard marker lights were displayed and there were no engine noises. The object emitted a steady silver glow.\n\nAltitude was judged to be approximately 3000 ft and the object was moving very slowly in a southwest course. It was in line of vision some 15 minutes. No other aircraft, military or civilian were in vicinity of Felton's hearing or vision. The sky was clear with high scattered clouds and the visibility was good.\n\nNOTE: Felton questioned by Maj Campbell of the USAF, but nothing further was gained by this interview with the exception that his wife also saw the object.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 160\n\n1. Date 4 July 48\n2. Time 11:15 P. M.\n3. Location Dravasburg, Pa.\n4. Name of observer John Jannicky, Jr.\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Box 227, Dravasburg, Pa.\n7. Place of observation Dravasburg, Pa.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 20 seconds +\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Hovering - then moving on at undetermined speed\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics moved across sky, stopping three times and resuming movement\n15. Sound No noise\n16. Size of a star\n17. Color same as a star\n18. Shape looked like a star\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Vague sketch\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On 4 July 48 at approx. 11:15 P. M., OST, witness and his wife thought they saw a star moving. There was a light in the sky the same color and size of a star which was moving. [REDACTED] Then they thought it was a plane but it made no noise. The object moved across the sky, then changed its course a bit and went straight and stopped again for about 5 seconds, changed its course a bit and went straight for awhile and stopped again this time for at least 15 seconds, then it went across the sky a little ways and disappeared completely. When the object stopped in the sky, it resembled a star and only by following its course could the difference be noticed.\n\nNOTE: Witness states that he lives some 2-1/2 miles from the two woman (McKeesport, Pa.) who reported seeing a big silver plate zooming noiselessly overhead in the direction of Kennywood Park. See Inc. 161.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date Around July 8, 48 Incident # 161\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location McKeesport, Pa.\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Nell Veway & Mrs. Elizabeth Goltz\n5. Occupation of observor housewife\n6. Address of observor s Mrs Veway: 3404 Grover Ave Mrs Goltz: 2604 Grover Ave. ) McKeesport, Pa.\n7. Place of observation McKeesport, Pa.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S - toward Kennywood Park\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound noiseless\n16. Size 12 to 15 inches in dia.\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape \"plate\"\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds disappeared in cloud bank\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared in bloud bank\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED\n103"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness saw what looked like a \"big, silver plate\" zooming noiselessly overhead in the direction of Kennywood Park.\n\n\"Oh look, that's not a plane, screamed Mrs. Veway of 3404 Grover to her neighbor, Mrs. Goltz, 3604 Grover, \"it lookes like one of those flying saucers.\"\n\nMrs. Veway said the disc was about 12 to 15 inches in diameter. It disappeared in a cloud bank but reappeared on the far side and was seen by Mrs. Goltz. They followed the direction of the disc until out of sight.\n\nNOTE: Taken from the Daily News \"McKeesport, Pa. - July 8, 1948.\n\nRESTRICTED\n103a"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 11 Aug 48 Incident # 162\n2. Time 1200 and 1215 hours CST\n3. Location Hamel, Minnesota\n4. Name of observer Jerome Leuer (age 10 and Benne Leuer (age 8)\n5. Occupation of observor children\n6. Address of observor R/R 1 Hamel, Minnesota\n7. Place of observation As above - back yard\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer a matter of a few feet\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude rested on ground -\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight After resting on ground it ascended to a height of 30 feet and shot off in a northeasterly direction\n14. Tactics spun once, made whistling noise, shot straight up 20 ft, halted and again made whistling noise. Maneuvered around tree branches & tele\n15. Sound whistling noise - like steam whistle wires.\n16. Size 1 ft thick - 2 feet wide\n17. Color dull gray\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance into northeast\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL\n24"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nInformants stated that on 11 Aug 48 between 1200 and 1215 hours, CST, Jerome and Benno were playing in the back yard and noticed an object in descent approximately twelve feet from the ground which was descending between the two of them. It settled to the ground gently - much as a balloon. Upon hitting the ground the object spun once, made a sort of whistling noise, described by the two boys as resembling a steam whistle, and then shot straight up into the air approximately 20 feet, halted and again made a whistling noise. The object then shop upward to a height of about 30 feet, and, in this ascent, maneuvered around tree branches and telephone wires. Upon reaching a height of approximately 30 feet the object shot off in a northeasterly direction. The object approached from the northwest.\n\nThe boys described the object as \"approximately one foot thick, two feet side and round.\" The object had no windoww, wires, or any visible appurtenances. It was a dull gray in color and when it hit the ground, it made a slight clanking noise, much as metal hitting against metal.\n\nPhilip and Mrs Leuer stated the boys were visibly frightened when they ran into the house and were afraid to tell what they had seen. Upon close questioning, the boys related the above story to them.\n\nMr. Leuer advised that he then had notified Mr. E. R. Sheridan, Postmaster at Hamel, Minnesota (who subsequently notified the proper authorities)\n\nAGENTS NOTES: Agent noted that the spot where the alleged \"flying saucer\" had landed was approximately 2 feet in diameter and appeared as though some heavy object had landed there or had been set down - as the ground was dented and protruding rocks had been leveled. The spot was covered by a washtub.\n\nMr. E. R. Sheridan, Postmaster, advised that he had no reason to doubt the story of the boys or of Mr. and Mrs. Leuer. and for this reason had reported the matter to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, St. Paul, Minn.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 22 July 48 Incident # 163\n2. Time hour before dark\n3. Location Van Nuys, Calif\n4. Name of observer Capt Henry Glover & wife (Ord-Res)\n5. Occupation of observor Ordnance Reserve Officer\n6. Address of observor 8531 Variel Ave., Canoga Park, Calif\n7. Place of observation Van Nuys, Calif.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 2000 ft overhead\n10. Time in sight N/S about an hour\n11. Altitude great height\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight toward the sun from the East or W to E to W\n14. Tactics traveled a vertical arc of about 25° or more\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size of weather balloon at 2000 ft\n17. Color bluish luminescence like fluorescent lamp which gradually changed to orange color at dusk\n18. Shape round tending to spherical\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions CAVU ground temperature 70-75°\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance snapped off like a lamp when you throw switch\n26. Remarks: (Over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object appeared round and probably spherical. At first looked similar to weather balloon at about 2000 ft but there was no characteristic bobbing. The wind was blowing on the ground with fair strength and gusty yet the object was quite steady. In the time it was under observation (about an hour) it traveled thru a vertical arc of about 25° or more. After watching the object for a while the observer concluded that whatever it was the thing was at great height but not a star. It had a bluish luminescence like a fluorescent lamp and as the sun set the color gradually changed to an orange color at dusk and finally snapped off like a lamp when the switch is thrown. The outline was clear and sharp and symetrical (no fuzziness or blurring), the air clear with visibility unlimited. Direction of travel from East directly toward the sun."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 29th June\n2. Time 11 P. M.\n3. Location Uniontown, Pa.\n4. Name of observer Mrs Catherine McDonald\n5. Occupation of observer N/S widow\n6. Address of observer 38 Kensington Circle, Uniontown\n7. Place of observation Uniontown, Pa. - Observer's front porch\n8. Number of objects three - one at a time\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 5000 ft\n12. Speed Very fast\n13. Direction of flight NE\n14. Tactics spinning vertically on edge\n15. Sound none\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color luminous\n18. Shape oval\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S - transparent\n21. Exhaust trails trail of light about 1 yard long\n22. Weather conditions stormy and cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - flew across sky beneath base of clouds - lightning could be seen thru it.\n24. Sketches or photographs vague sketch -\n25. Manner of disappearance lost sight of - obstructed by neighboring houses\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness saw a luminous, oval-shaped object flying at an altitude of approx 5,000 ft which was traveling beneath the base of some clouds from southwest to northeast across the sky. The weather was stormy and cloudy and as a second object flew across the sky a flash of lightning could be seen thru it. It seemed to be transparent. The objects(3) traveled very fast and seemed to just disappear within 10 seconds. The objects appeared at approximately five minute intervals. There was no odor or sound from them. However, a trail of light about a yard long was observed. The objects rolled vertically on their edges and appeared to be spinning on end across the sky. Witnesses lost sight of the objects as neighboring houses obstructed their view.\n\nWitnesses: Mrs. Margaret Holler\nPolice Sergeant Shuh & his daughter"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 26 July 1948\n2. Time 2100 E\n3. Location Chamblee, Ga.\n4. Name of observer Doyle L. Avery et al\n5. Occupation of observer Observer, Atlanta Naval Air Base\n6. Address of observer Atlanta Naval Air Base, Chamblee, Ga.\n7. Place of observation Observation tower\n8. Number of objects 1 blue white light\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S - like shooting star\n13. Direction of flight SE turning S and gaining altitude\n14. Tactics straight & level & gaining altitude\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color blue-white light\n18. Shape N/S - object not seen\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction like shooting star\n21. Exhaust trails N/S - possibly the blue white light was the exhaust\n22. Weather conditions 2/10 cirrus at 25,000 ft; 1 to 4/10 of lower stratocirrus at 5,000 ft. Visibility 12 to 15 miles. Surf wind light & variable 2-5 MPH\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Doyle L. Avery Observer, Atlanta Naval Air Base, Chamblee, Ga., while on duty at the observation tower on 26 July 48 about 2100 hours sighted a blue-white light traveling southeast from the northeast. It was traveling very fast and maintained a uniform altitude (undetermined) and speed. It looked like a shooting star except for the fact that it maintained the same altitude. While under observation it then appeared to gain altitude and then turned sharply to the south. The weather was clear and still. There was no sound. Shortly after sighting the light several residents of the area called and reported seeing the same thing. No flights left or arrived at the station after 1910 hours on 26 July 48.\n\n165a\n\nWitnesses of this phenomena who were interviewed made statements as follows: On 26 July 48 they were seated on the lawn of the Georgia School of Technology Housing Project at Chamblee, Ga. About 2045 hours Mrs. John Gall sighted a strange light and called it to the attention of her companions. The light appeared about the size of a football and was traveling southeast on a steady course. It was green and faded into a silver-colored tail. The light appeared to lose altitude slowly much the same as a plane coming in for a landing. It appeared to fade away in flight as if extinguished. No sound was heard.\n\nWitnesses: Mr. & Mrs. Harold Shaw\nMr. Robert Sebring\nMrs. Jeanne Hill\nMrs. Myrtle Renfroe\nMrs. John Gall"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 30 Aug 48 Incident # 166\n2. Time 20,000 hours or 8:00 P. M.\n3. Location Los Angeles, Calif.\n4. Name of observer S/Sgt Leroy H. Estes\n5. Occupation of observer S/Sgt\n6. Address of observer N/S 1301 W. Olympic Blvd., Los Angeles\n7. Place of observation 1301 W. Olympic Blvd. Los Angeles, Calif.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude estimated to be well over 20,000 ft.\n12. Speed thought to be well over 700 MPH\n13. Direction of flight West to East\n14. Tactics none - flew level course\n15. Sound No sound\n16. Size Larger than B-29\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape V-2 rocket\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction rocket - like\n21. Exhaust trails blue exhaust trail\n22. Weather conditions N/S Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nObject resembled the fuselage of a V-2 rocket - but much larger. S/Sgt Estes stated that it was much larger than a B-29 and silver in color and that it completely filled the lens of a 10 B-80 field glass which was taken from a German 88 mm artillery piece. Each lens was 8\" in diameter. Speed estimated to be well over 700 MPH, and object was traveling at an altitude of well over 20,000 ft. No sound was heard Left a blue exhaust trail. Object traveling from west to east. Only one object sighted."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 6 May 1948 Incident # 167\n2. Time 0905 GCT\n3. Location 19° 08' N - 164° 05' E between Kwajalein Island, Marshall Islands and Hickam Field.,\n4. Name of observer Capt Floyd Barnes\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot USAF\n6. Address of observer Pacific Division, Milit Air Trans Service\n7. Place of observation Ahead & above his plane\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 4 to 5 miles\n10. Time in sight split second\n11. Altitude 10,000 ft\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics exploded like a shell\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color white\n18. Shape ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S \"fire\"\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions 5/10 cloud coverage\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance exploded\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A large white ball of fire was observed some four to five miles directly ahead of and slightly above the aircraft. It was observed for only a split second and was comparable to the explosion of a shell There were no streamers or \"tails\" observed such as usually related to a meteor or a distress signal. As the aircraft approached the approximate position where the ball of fire was observed a single white light was seen on the water surface. However, this disappeared within a few seconds after sighting because of the existing cloud coverage. More lights were immediately observed on the water surface some 10 miles north of the plane's course. It is the opinion of the witness (Capt Barnes) that these were from a surface vessel. Some 10 minutes elapsed after these lights were observed on the water surface when an aircraft was sighted flying a reciprocal course (240°) at about 1000 ft below the observers's aircraft and slightly to the right of the course. Capt Barnes made numerous attempts to contact this aircraft on Channel \"B\" and \"C\", \"VHF\" but acknowledgment of his transmission was never received."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 20 July 1948\n2. Time 1330 local Incident # 168\n3. Location Obrechstreet, Arnhem, The Hague\n4. Name of observer A. D. Otter\n5. Occupation of observer Chf. Investigator of Court of Damage\n6. Address of observer Arnheim, The Hague\n7. Place of observation 52° 30' N, 4° 30' E\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude very high\n12. Speed high speed - comparable to V-2\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound Same as V-2\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Aircraft with 2 decks and no wings\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions visibility unlimited - scattered clouds\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Object appeared to be wingless aircraft with two decks. It was traveling at very high altitude and was seen four times intermittently thru clouds. Visibility: unlimited."} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 29 Aug 48 Incident # 169\n2. Time 0530\n3. Location Maplewood, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mr. Faby Niswonger\n5. Occupation of observer farmer\n6. Address of observer RD #1, Maplewood, Ohio.Phone: Jackson Central 8-OF42\n7. Place of observation Maplewood, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics Arose from behind woods - seemed to unravel a silver substance that floated earthward\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size large\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape sphere\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails - silver substance (?)\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Disintegrated in mid-air\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED 113"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nWitness observed a large silver-colored sphere which seemed to arive from behind his woods and continued to float across his farm. While in flight it seemed to unravel a silver substance which floated earthward. While under observation it disintegrated in mid-air.\n\nNOTE: Witness seemed very conscientious and sincere while relating this incident. Subject arose while witness was talking to a man from this Command (MCIAXP) when an airplane chanced to fly overhead.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\n\n1. Date of Observation On or about 5 May 1948 Incident # 170\n2. Time of Observation\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted Adapazari, Turkey\n4. Observer's Position Ground in village near Adapazari, Turkey (i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer News item extracted from \"Yeni Sabah\" Istanbul, 5 May 1948\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted 1\n9. Size of Object(s)\n10. Color of Object(s) Shining\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible)\n12. Nature of Luminosity\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer\n14. Speed of Object(s)\n15. Time in Sight\n16. Tactics\n17. Sound Made by Object(s)\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s)\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance)\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time\n22. Peculiarities Noted Exploded in the air\n23. Summary of Incident - Item from Turkish newspaper, \"Yeni Sabah\" Istanbul, 5 May 1948: Quote-\" There have been reports lately to the effect that shining objects like meteors have been sighted in various parts of the country. Cont'd\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident # 170 Cont'd\n\nSome people suggest that these might be rockets. Information received from authorized circles reveals that such a thing passed over Adapazari and was seen to explode in the air. Parts of it fell into a village nearby and killed a sheep dog. The thing was found to be a rocket and the debris will be inspected by experts. Obers End Quote\".\n\nObservers say that the rocket which is claimed to have come from the northwest was flying at an altitude of 200 meters over Adapazari before it fell.\n\nAccording to rumors, it is possible that the rocket is connected with the \"flying disc\" experiments being conducted by the Russians at the station on Mt. Alagoz close to the Eastern frontiers.\n\nSource: NA Ankara, Turkey, 10 May 1948, Serial 86-48, Eval F-O\n\nComment: Air Attache, Ankara, Turkey has been requested to investigate this incident fully and encourage Turkish General Staff to do likewise. Whether incident can be confirmed or not Air Attache has been directed to determine sources for information contained in Yeni Sabah article.\n\n[REDACTED] Incident # 170"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\n\n1. Date of Observation 3 Aug 1948 Incident # 171\n2. Time of Observation Sunset\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted About 25 km (19-20 miles) NW of Moscow\n4. Observer's Position Ground\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer Moscow, USSR\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies American Newspaper Correspondent\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By Came into line of sight\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted 1\n9. Size of Object(s)\n10. Color of Object(s) Shone brightly\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) long-narrow\n12. Nature of Luminosity\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer\n14. Speed of Object(s) high but not excessive\n15. Time in Sight\n16. Tactics\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) none\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) Southwest-Northwest direction\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) Apparently metallic\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time sunny\n22. Peculiarities Noted wingless-long and narrow\n23. Summary of Incident - See attached sheet\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident # 171 Cont'd\n\nAbout Sunset on 3 Aug 1948, about 25 kilometers (20miles) northwest of Moscow an experienced American newspaper reporter saw an unidentified object at very high altitude. It was long and narrow and proceeded at a high but not excessive speed in a generally south-west- northeast direction. It shone very brightly probably from reflected sunlight. No wings could be seen and no sound was heard. It looked like a rigid airship and was so identified by a Russian acquaintance who saw it at the same time. However, the reporter, in spite of the appearance of the object was of the opinion that it was not a rigid airship due principally to its high speed. He had no theory to offer.\n\nNA COMMENT: This object might have been anything. Its speed seems insufficient for a guided missile, but it could have been either a jet or a conventional airplane as unusual light conditions and fore-shortening frequently give aircraft a freakish appearance. The possibility that it was a dirigible should not be excluded. Reference \"A\" should not be excluded.\n\nREFERENCE A: The upper winds in Russia are not published but it was noted that on the following morning there were high surface winds with storm predictions.\n\nTS-56189 Incident # 171"} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 172\n\n1. Date 1 Oct 1948\n2. Time 2100 hrs\n3. Location Fargo N. Dakota\n4. Name of observer George F. Gorman\n5. Occupation of observer Manager of Const Co. (Pilot of F-51 in Air N.G.)\n6. Address of observer Bldg. 18 Fed Hous Proj Fargo N. Dakota\n7. Place of observation from Airplane over Fargo and vicinity\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 1000 ft at the closest point\n10. Time in sight 27 minutes\n11. Altitude from 1000 to 14000ft\n12. Speed much faster than F-51\n13. Direction of flight various\n14. Tactics several left turns one right turn, diving and climbing\n15. Sound None noted\n16. Size at closest observation 6 to 8 inches\n17. Color clear white\n18. Shape round at all times\n19. Odor detected none\n20. Apparent construction none noted\n21. Exhaust trails none seen\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds none\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance in steep climb\n26. Remarks: Northern lights were visible in the nE. quadrant.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nEXHIBIT \"A\""} {"doc_id":"04fbf9d797be66d8","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Z-7341"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2-7341\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nUSAF\nAIR\nINTELLIGENCE\nREPORT\n\nDATE 28 APR 1949\nNO. 100-203-79\nCY. NO. 02 OF 103\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority AF INA Memo 5/20/85\nBy CLV NARS Date 3/6/85\n\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\n\n\"2244\""} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nLOAN DOCUMENT\n\nT/S CONTROL NO 2-7341\nOFFICE TO WHICH LOANED AFOIN-2A\nDATE DUE IN AFOIN-C/DD 8 July 1952\n\n89A\n\nPLEASE RETURN THIS DOCUMENT ON DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE TO AFOIN-C/DD, ROOM NO. 5C116 ATTENTION: TOP SECRET CONTROL OFFICER\n\nWhen the attached document is withdrawn the classification of this sheet will be changed to UNCLASSIFIED in accordance with PAR 25c, AFR 205-1.\n\nTOP SECRET"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nAir Intelligence Report No. 100-203-79\n\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS IN THE U. S.\n\nAir Intelligence Division Study No. 203\n10 December 1948\nDirectorate of Intelligence and Office of Naval Intelligence\n\nDISTRIBUTION \"C\"\n\nWARNING: This document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Act, 50 U.S.C., 31 and 32, as amended. Its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law. Reproduction of the intelligence in this publication, under the provisions of Army Regulation 380-5, is authorized for United States military agencies provided the source is indicated.\n\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nHeadquarters United States Air Force\n\nOffice of Naval Intelligence\nNavy Department\n\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority AF INA Memo 5/20/85\nBy CLV, NARS Date 3/6/85\nTOP SECRET"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS IN THE U. S.\n\nINDEX\n\nPage\n\nSUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . 1\n\nAPPENDIX \"A\" - ANALYSIS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS IN THE U. S. AND HYPOTHETICAL TACTICS EMPLOYED . . . . 3\n\nIntroduction . . . . 3\nSome Aspects Regarding Flying Object Incidents . . . . 3\nPossible Origin of Unusual Flying Objects . . . . 4\nPossible Reasons or Tactics for the Use of Soviet\nUnconventional Aircraft Over the U. S. . . . . 5\nConclusion . . . . 6\n\nAPPENDIX \"B\" - REPORTED SIGHTINGS OF FLYING OBJECTS AS OF\n1 AUGUST 1948 . . . . 7\n\nAPPENDIX \"C\" - SELECTED REPORTS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS . . . . 8\n\nAPPENDIX \"D\" - FLYING WING TYPE AIRCRAFT . . . . 17\n\nGermany . . . . 17\nGreat Britain . . . . 21\nUnited States . . . . 23\n\n- i -\n\nTOP SECRET"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS IN THE U. S.\n\nSUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS\n\nPROBLEM\n\n1. TO EXAMINE pattern of tactics of \"Flying Saucers\" (hereinafter referred to as flying objects)\nand to develop conclusions as to the possibility of existence.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n\n2. A DETAILED discussion of information bearing on the problem as set forth above is attached\nas Appendix \"A\". The main points established therein are summarized below.\n\n3. THE FREQUENCY of reported incidents, the similarity in many of the characteristics attributed\nto the observed objects and the quality of observers considered as a whole, support the contention\nthat some type of flying object has been observed. Approximately 210 incidents have been reported.\nAmong the observers reporting on such incidents are trained and experienced U.S. Weather Bureau\npersonnel, USAF rated officers, experienced civilian pilots, technicians associated with various re-\nsearch projects and technicians employed by commercial airlines.\n\n4. THE POSSIBILITY that reported observations of flying objects over the U.S. were influenced by\nprevious sightings of unidentified phenomena in Europe, particularly over Scandinavia in 1946, and\nthat the observers reporting such incidents may have been interested in obtaining personal publicity\nhave been considered as possible explanations. However, these possibilities seem to be improbable\nwhen certain selected reports such as the one from U.S. Weather Bureau at Richmond are examined.\nDuring observations of weather balloons at the Richmond Bureau, one well trained observer has\nsighted strange metallic disks on three occasions and another observer has sighted a similar object\non one occasion. The last observation of unidentified objects was in April, 1947. On all four occa-\nsions the weather balloon and the unidentified objects were in view through the theodolite. These\nobservations at the Richmond Bureau occurred several months before publicity on the flying saucers\nappeared in a U.S. newspaper.\n\n5. DESCRIPTIONS OF the flying objects fall into three configuration categories: (1) disk-shaped\n(2) rough cigar-shaped (3) balls of fire. Varying conditions of visibility and differences in angles\nat which the objects may have been viewed introduces a possibility that a single type object may\nhave been observed rather than three different types. This possibility is further substantiated by\nthe fact that in the areas where such objects have been observed the ratio of the three general\nconfigurations is approximately the same.\n\n6. THEREFORE, IT appears that some object has been seen; however, the identification of that\nobject cannot be readily accomplished on the basis of information reported on each incident. It\nis possible that the object, or objects, may have been domestically launched devices such as weather\nballoons, rockets, experimental flying wing aircraft, or celestial phenomena. It is necessary to\nobtain information on such domestic activity to confirm or deny this possibility. Depending upon\nthe degree with which this may be accomplished, foreign devices must then be considered as a\npossibility.\n\n7. THE PATTERN of sightings is definable. Sightings have been most intense throughout the states\nbordering the Atlantic and Pacific coast lines, and the central states of Ohio and Kentucky. A map\nshowing location of sightings is attached as Appendix \"B\"\n\nTOP SECRET\n- 1 -\n\nNW 91376 [REDACTED]\nDocId:34749006 Page 6"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\n8. THE ORIGIN of the devices is not ascertainable. There are two reasonable possibilities:\n(1) The objects are domestic devices, and if so, their identification or origin can be established\nby a survey of all launchings of airborne objects. Domestic flying wing type aircraft observed\nin various aspects of flight might be responsible for some of the reported flying objects, particu-\nlarly those described as disks and rough cigar shapes. (See Appendices \"C\" and \"D\".) Among\nthose which have been operational in recent years are the XF5U-1 (\"Flying Flapjack\") developed\nby Chance-Vaught, the Northrup B-35, and the turbo-jet powered Northrup YB-49. The present\nexistence of any privately developed flying-wing type aircraft has not been determined but one\nsuch aircraft, the Arup tailless monoplane, was operational at South Bend, Indiana, prior to 1935.\n(2) Objects are foreign, and if so, it would seem most logical to consider that they are from a\nSoviet source. The Soviets possess information on a number of German flying-wing type aircraft\nsuch as the Gotha P60A, Junkers EF 130 long-range, high-speed jet bomber and the Horten 229\ntwin-jet fighter, which particularly resembles some of the description of unidentified flying objects\n(See Appendix \"D\"). As early as 1924 Tscheranowsky developed a \"Parabola\" aircraft, an all\nwing design, which was the outcome of considerable Soviet experimentation with gliders of the\nsame general form. Soviet aircraft based on such designs might have speeds approaching trans-\nsonic speeds attributed to some flying objects or greater over-all performance assuming the\nsuccessful development of some unusual propulsion device such as atomic energy engine.\n\n9. THAT THE Soviets have a current interest in flying-wing type aircraft is suggested by their\nutilization of Dr. Guenther Bock who, at the end of World War II, was in charge of the flying-\nwing program in Germany (See Appendix \"A\", paragraph 3, page 4). Achievements satisfactory\nto the U.S.S.R. are indirectly indicated by the personal recognition he is reported to be receiving\nin the U.S.S.R. Recently it has been reported that the U.S.S.R. is planning to build a fleet of\n1,800 Horten flying-wing aircraft. Information of low evaluation has been received stating that a\nregiment of jet night fighters, Model Horten XIII, is at Kuzmikha, an air base two miles south-\nwest of Irkutsk. Kuzmikha is identified as one of a number of airfields for the protection of an\natomic energy plant at Irkutsk. The Horten XIII as developed by Germany was a glider.\n\n10. ASSUMING THAT the objects might eventually be identified as foreign or foreign-sponsored\ndevices, the possible reason for their appearance over the U.S. requires consideration. Several\npossible explanations appear noteworthy, viz:\n a. To negate U.S. confidence in the atom bomb as the most advanced and decisive weapon\nin warfare.\n\n b. To perform photographic reconnaissance missions.\n\n c. To test U. S. air defenses.\n\n d. To conduct familiarization flights over U.S. territory.\n\nCONCLUSIONS\n\n11. SINCE the Air Force is responsible for control of the air in the defense of the U.S., it is\nimperative that all other agencies cooperate in confirming or denying the possibility that these\nobjects have a domestic origin. Otherwise, if it is firmly indicated that there is no domestic\nexplanation, the objects are a threat and warrant more active efforts of identification and inter-\nception.\n\n12. IT MUST be accepted that some type of flying objects have been observed, although their\nidentification and origin are not discernable. In the interest of national defense it would be\nunwise to overlook the possibility that some of these objects may be of foreign origin.\n\n- 2 -\nTOP SECRET\n\nNW 91376 [REDACTED]\nDocId:34749006 Page 7"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nAPPENDIX \"A\"\n\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS IN THE U. S.\n\nAND HYPOTHETICAL TACTICS EMPLOYED\n\n1. INTRODUCTION. To formulate the possible tactics of flying objects reported over the U. S.\nassumes from the outset that firm conclusions have been reached on both the existence and origin\nof the reported flying objects. The current status of information on such incidents and over-all\nanalysis does not allow substantiation for such conclusions. However, the lack of such firm con-\nclusions points to the necessity for an immediate and sound statistical analysis of every aspect of\nthe situation and does not preclude a concurrent examination of the reported incidents to develop\nexplanations of their possible tactics. The latter will be useful at some future date should the\nexistence and origin of the flying objects be definitely established. Therefore, the following analy-\nsis of available information is advanced in order to present evidence on the actual existence of\nsome type flying object and to relate same to tactical purposes for which the objects are possibly\ndesigned. The following discussion must be considered a provisional analysis, pending a further\ndetailed analysis of all aspects of the problem.\n\n2. SOME ASPECTS REGARDING FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS. A cursory examination of evidence\non reported incidents has been made and it is possible to cite certain generalities which it appears\nmay be borne out when detailed analyses have been completed.\n\n Among the incidents reported there are many statements by reliable and experienced persons\nwhich tend to confirm that flying objects have been seen. The description of such objects seems\nto fall roughly into three categories: (1) Silver disks or balls, approximating a Horten wing type\naircraft; (2) Balls of fire of various colors and intensities; (3) Cigar or pencil-shaped objects\nsimilar in appearance to V-2 type rockets in horizontal flight. The numbers of configurations\nmight be further reduced with the following considerations in mind: Silver disks or balls have,\nfor the greater part, been observed in daylight and a number under clear weather conditions with\nvisibility unlimited. In most instances, balls of fire have been observed at night. Cigar, or\npencil-shaped objects have been sighted in fewer numbers but with about equal distribution in\ndaylight and at night. A few accounts tell of the disks having a rough cigar-shape when viewed\nwhile maneuvering. Some of the disks are described as having luminosity in daylight. It there-\nfore is possible that a single type of object may be involved in all sightings, and differences in\ndescription may result from viewing the objects at various angles and under differing conditions\nof visibility.\n\n The above tends to indicate that some type object has been seen and the possibility exists\nthat the object or objects seen are conventional domestic devices, such as weather balloons, test\nrockets, or jet-equipped aircraft with pancake or flying wing configurations.\n\n The possibility exists that the reporting of flying objects may have been influenced by earlier\nreports on similar incidents in Scandinavia and Central Europe. The publication in newspaper of\ndetails on such incidents, both foreign and domestic, may have induced some of the description\nprovided in reported domestic incidents. However, one of the earliest reported sightings in the\nU.S. was the one observed by U.S. Weather Bureau personnel in April 1947, at Richmond, Virginia,\nand on the basis of this one report it appears that the disks are not balloons. It would seem that\nthis sighting was not influenced by the reports of foreign incidents, the newspaper accounts of\ndomestic incidents, nor by misidentification of a conventional object.\n\nTOP SECRET\n- 3 -\n\nNW 91376 [REDACTED]\nDocId:34749006 Page 8"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\n Although reported domestic incidents are widely scattered throughout the U.S., frequency of\nsighting and number of observers per sighting assumes a definable pattern. There is a large con-\ncentration of sightings along the Eastern Seaboard; another large concentration throughout the\nWestern Coast states, and a few sightings in the Middle West. Distribution of incidents by con-\nfiguration of object and description of maneuverability is approximately equal in each of these\nareas and this is believed to further substantiate the possibility that one type of object might have\nbeen observed in different aspects of flight.\n\n If sightings are induced by rumor, it seems unusual that more incidents have not been reported\nfrom the areas with high concentration of population. Reports from such areas would also have\ngreater facility in channeling either to newspaper or official reporting agencies. For the most part,\nsightings have been made in fairly open country where there are few restrictions to visibility, which\nmay indicate that obstructed vision has reduced sightings in built-up areas.\n\n It therefore seems that some type of flying object has been observed; the identification of\nits origin requires the competion of other analyses.\n\n3. POSSIBLE ORIGIN OF UNUSUAL FLYING OBJECTS. Provided, upon the completion of analyses,\nit is indicated that some or all of the reported flying objects over the U.S. are of foreign origin,\nthe objects could from a logical viewpoint, be considered Soviet. It is evident from the perform-\nance characteristics attributed to the unidentified objects at this time that if they are foreign, they\ninvolve efficiencies of performance which have not been realized in any operational airborne device\nin this country. It would, therefore, be a mistake to analyze the technical aspects of the situation\nwithin the limits of our own knowledge of practical developments. It is more desirable to consider\nthen the outer limits of possible Soviet developments and objectives in attempting to formulate some\nidea of the tactics which might be involved.\n\n First of all, the scientific objectives of the U.S.S.R. have been stated many times and indicated\nin many forms. The most clearcut statement of this objective is probably the one contained in the\npreamble to the Fourth Five-year Plan (1946-1950) which states that the objective of Soviet science\nis to overtake and surpass the scientific and technical developments of the capitalist nations. It\napparently would be an impossible task for the Soviet Union to accomplish such an objective by pro-\nceeding step-by-step along the same lines of development already achieved in the capitalist nations.\nThis would mean that it would be necessary to rapidly proceed through each phase of aeronautical\ndevelopment that has already been accomplished in this country, and this probably would never have\nany prospects of accelerating Soviet development beyond any point reached by the U.S. The obvious\nanswer to accomplish their objective of not only overtaking, but surpassing the capitalist countries\nwould be a scientific shortcut. This possibility is not so remote when examined on the basis of\nour knowledge of the current situation in the U.S.S.R. Provided Soviet emphasis was given to the\nmost promising and advanced ideas acquired from Germany in 1945 and the work aided by German\nscientists, the possibility of catching up and possibly surpassing other nations in technical develop-\nments becomes more realistic. It becomes even more realistic if the Soviets have shown a tendency\nto concentrate on certain developments which have still not received a maximum of priority in our\nown programs.\n\n It is known that the U.S.S.R. has since 1945 enlisted the services of Dr. Guenther Bock, a\nGerman who headed all development of low aspect ratio (flying wing) type aircraft in Germany.\nDr. Bock is believed to be the top German scientist in charge at TSAGI and TSIAM which are\n\"Air Materiel Command\" type organizations in the U.S.S.R. Further, it is believed that Dr. Bock\nhas made available all German plans for flying wing type aircraft to the Soviets. Among the de-\nsigns considered by the Germans and possibly exploited by the U.S.S.R., are jet-propelled, flying\nwing type aircraft whose configuration would be similar to descriptions of certain objects reported\nflying over the U.S. The estimated speeds of such aircraft are within range of the lower limits\nof speed attributed to flying objects over the U.S. It is not impossible that emphasis on surpassing\nforeign developments has led to unusual progress in fuels and propulsion by the U.S.S.R. In con-\nnection with possible advancements in the field of fuels and propulsion, it should be observed that\n\n- 4 -\nTOP SECRET\n\nNW 91376 [REDACTED]\nDocId:34749006 Page 9"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nthe Russian oil situation (regardless of estimated oil reserves) is quite different from that in the\nU.S. For example, U.S. oil industry is prepared to turn out tremendous quantities of highly frac-\ntionated petroleum products, while the U.S.S.R. cannot reasonably approach such capabilities. This\nconsideration dictates different solutions on fuels for propulsion in the two countries and in turn,\ndictates the direction taken in development of jet motors or the use of other propulsive devices.\nWe must therefore, arrive at the conclusion that any Soviet device which may have made its\nappearance over the U.S. as described, would possess unusual performance characteristics which,\nin all probability, would include unusual range. The possibility that they could have been launched\nat fairly close range should not be discarded.\n\n4. POSSIBLE REASONS OR TACTICS FOR THE USE OF SOVIET UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\nOVER THE U.S. Predicated on all the foregoing assumptions, Soviet unconventional aircraft may\nhave been flown over the U.S. for one, all, or a combination of the following reasons:\n a. TO NEGATE U.S. CONFIDENCE IN ATOM BOMB AS THE MOST ADVANCED AND DECISIVE\nWEAPON. If the objects have been used in a propaganda sense, it would be reasonable to assume\nthat the Soviets would choose first to frighten pro-American nations in Europe with the appearance\nof a radically new weapon to counteract the ability of the U.S. to obtain full propaganda effective-\nness with the atom bomb. It will be remembered that strange objects first appeared over the\nScandinavian countries in 1946. The objects observed there had unusual range and unusual per-\nformance characteristics. As this demonstration over the Scandinavian countries occurred the\nU.S. was making a vigorous campaign for the economic and political alignment of these nations\nwith other pro-American Western European nations. When these incidents subsided, strange flying\nobjects began to be observed at an increasing rate over the U.S. The conclusion on this point is\nthat flying objects may have been used to frighten both European nations and the U.S. by the appear-\nance of a new device, and that failure to identify such a Soviet object would give them invaluable\nindication that U.S. development is far behind that of the Soviets. Except for this indication, it is\nbelieved that the use of the objects to promote fear has been worthless in that the U.S. public has\ntended to characterize these incidents entirely as hallucinations by \"crack pots\", misidentification\nof conventional objects, or that they represent a secret American project which should not be pub-\nlicized. Any fear that might result from Soviet use will come only by a discovery that the objects\nhave been Soviet aircraft and that they involve radical developments which are in advance of our\nown accomplishments.\n\n b. FOR PHOTOGRAPHIC RECONNAISSANCE. It is possible that the Soviets have employed the\nflying objects for the collection of photographic intelligence or the mapping of certain areas in the\nU.S. The evasive action employed by all objects sighted indicates not so much an attempt to avoid\nbeing sighted, as an attempt to prevent disclosure of the exact type of flying craft and its mission.\nThe sighting of objects over the U.S. has been most intense in Eastern and Western Coastal States.\nIn addition, sightings of flying objects have been made near Oak Ridge, Tenn., Las Cruces, N. M.,\nand in the general area of the Hanford Works in Oregon. Generally, sightings have not been made\nover what we consider strategic industrial areas. The reason for this might be either that the\nflying objects have been observed only enroute to or from missions over these more concentrated\nstrategic areas, or that the Soviets obtained sufficient information during their World War II liaison\nwith U.S. industry to satisfy their intelligence requirements and have a more active requirement\nfor information on industries and areas which were not available to them during World War II con-\ntacts. This is of interest in connection with the sightings near Oak Ridge, Las Cruces, and in the\ngeneral area of the Hanford Works since these establishments were not, and are not, accessible to\nSoviet collectors of photographic intelligence.\n\n c. TEST OF U. S. DEFENSES. It is possible that the use of Soviet flying objects over the U.S.\nis intended only to determine the ability of the U.S. defenses to spot foreign aircraft. This would\nbe of extreme importance to the U.S.S.R. in the event that a one-way all-out attack of Soviet strate-\ngic bombers is planned. Ability to operate over the U.S. uninhibited at a time when the U. S. is\nsupposedly re-arming and putting great stress on defenses would provide valuable information on\nwhich to base estimates for probability of success in bombing strategic objectives in the U. S.\n\nTOP SECRET\n- 5 -\n\nNW 91376 [REDACTED]\nDocId:34749006 Page 10"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nd. FAMILIARIZATION FLIGHTS OVER U.S. TERRITORY. This possible reason is perhaps the most improbable. It is assumed that, should this purpose be involved, other purposes are probably also accomplished in its execution. Provided the U.S.S.R. has unusually high performance aircraft they might find it advantageous to familiarize themselves with the topography of the U.S. in anticipation of future combat missions to strategic targets.\n\n5. CONCLUSION. The conclusion that some type of flying object has been observed over the U.S. seems to be substantiated. It is not known at this time whether these observations are misidentifications of domestically launched devices, natural phenomena, or foreign unconventional aircraft. It is, therefore, impossible to make any reliable explanation for their appearance over the U.S. or the tactics which they may employ if the objects observed include any foreign developments in aeronautical fields. It is likewise impossible at this time to contain discussions of possible performance characteristics or tactics within limits of practical reason, if for no other reason than the fact that proof of the existence of a foreign development of this type would necessarily introduce considerations of new principals and means not yet considered practical possibilities in our own research and development.\n\n- 6 -\n\nTOP SECRET"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nAPPENDIX \"B\"\n\nREPORTED SIGHTINGS OF FLYING OBJECTS\n\nAS OF 1 AUGUST 1948\n\n- 7 -\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAPPENDIX \"C\"\n\nSELECTED REPORTS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS\n\n1. A NUMBER of reports on unidentified flying objects come from observers who, because of their technical background and experience do not appear to be influenced by unfounded sensationalism nor inclined to report explainable phenomena as new types of airborne devices. Some of the details of their reports are presented in this appendix, along with those from possibly less reliable sources who have reported evidence which is of such a nature that it cannot be entirely ignored.\n\n2. DESCRIPTIONS OF significant incidents, arranged chronologically, follow:\na. During April 1947, two employees of the Weather Bureau Station at Richmond, Virginia reported seeing a strange metallic disk on three occasions through the theodolite while making PIBAL observations. One observation was at 15,000 feet when a disk was followed for 15 seconds. The disk appeared metallic, shaped something like an ellipse with a flat bottom and a round top. It appeared below the balloon and was much larger in size. The disk appeared to be moving rather rapidly, although it was impossible to estimate its speed. The other observations were made at 27,000 feet in like manner.\n\nb. The following month, Byron B. Savage, a field engineer for Radio Corporation of America, reported a disk flying near his home in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The object was thought to be at an altitude between 10,000 feet and 18,000 feet, and was moving toward the north at a high rate of speed, leaving no trailing effects.\n\nc. While flying at 10,000 feet on a course of 300 degrees, 30 miles northwest of Lake Meade, Nevada, an Air Force lieutenant reported seeing five or six white circular objects in close formation and traveling at an estimated speed of 285 miles per hour. This sighting occurred on 28 June 1947.\n\nd. The following day a party of three, two of them scientists, were motoring along Highway 17 toward the White Sand, New Mexico, V-2 firing grounds and reported seeing a large disk or sphere moving horizontally at a high speed and an estimated altitude of 10,000 feet. It was of uniform shape and had no protruding surfaces such as wings. The object was in sight for about 60 seconds before it disappeared to the northeast. The three observers agreed on the details of the sighting except that one thought he had seen vapor trails.\n\ne. On 7 July 1947, five Portland, Oregon police officers reported varying numbers of disks flying over different parts of the city. All observations were made within a minute or two of 1305 hours.\n\nf. On the same day, William Rhoads of Phoenix, Arizona allegedly saw a disk circling his locality during sunset and took two photographs. The resulting pictures (page 9) show a disk-like object with a round front and a square tail in plan form. These photographs have been examined by experts who state they are true photographic images and do not appear to be imperfection in the emulsion or imperfections in the lens. (See Figs. 1, 2, 3 and 4.)\n\n- 8 -\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nORIGINAL PHOTOGRAPHS BY MR. RHOADS\n\nFig. 1 Fig. 2\n\nENLARGEMENTS OF ORIGINAL PHOTOGRAPHS\n\nFig. 3 Fig. 4\n\n- 9 -\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\ng. On 10 July 1947, Mr. Woodruff, a Pan-American Airways mechanic reported a circular object flying at high velocity, paralleling the earth's surface and leaving a trail which appeared as a \"burning up\" of the cloud formation. The sighting occurred near Harmon Field, Newfoundland. Two other persons also saw the trail which remained in the sky for about an hour and was photographed by another PAA employee. The resulting photographs support Mr. Woodruff's observation as far as the sky cleavage is concerned. (See Figs. 5 and 6.)\n\nFig. 5\n\n- 10 -\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nFig. 6\n\nh. On 20 July 1947, Kenneth Arnold, while flying near Tacoma, Washington, reported a formation of flying objects. His sketch of their shape corresponds closely to that shown in the photographs made by Mr. Rhoads. On the same day, two U. S. Air Force pilots at Hamilton Field reported two flying disks trailing a P-80, following it toward Oakland, California.\n\ni. On 4 August 1947, the pilot and co-pilot of a DC-3, flying for one Al Jones, near Bethel, Alaska, reported a flying disk larger than their aircraft. This disk crossed their path at about 1,000 feet and they turned to give chase. The DC-3 was flying at 170 mph, but the disk flew out of sight in four minutes.\n\nj. On 12 November 1947, two flying disks trailing jet-like streams of fire were reportedly sighted from the bridge of the tanker Ticonderoga, according to the second officer. The Ticonderoga was 80 miles off the Oregon shore. This officer said the disks were in sight 45 seconds, moving at a speed estimated at 700-900 mph, curving in a long, low arc.\n\n- 11 -\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nk. On 7 January 1948, a National Guard pilot was killed while attempting to chase an unidentified object up to 30,000 feet. While it is presumed that this pilot suffered anoxia, resulting in his crash, his last message to the tower was, \"it appears to be metallic object....of tremendous size....directly ahead and slightly above....I am trying to close for a better look.\"\n\n1. On 5 April 1948, three trained balloon observers from the Geophysics Laboratory Section, Watson Laboratories, N.J. reported seeing a round, indistinct object in the vicinity of Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico. It was very high and fast, and appeared to execute violent maneuvers at high speed. The object was under observation for approximately 30 seconds and disappeared suddenly.\n\nm. A yellow or light colored sphere, 25 to 40 feet in diameter was reported by Lt. Comdr. Marcus L. Lowe, USN, just south of Anacostia Naval Air Station, D.C., while he was flying on 30 April 1948. It was moving at a speed of approximately 100 miles per hour at an altitude of about 4,500 feet. Although winds aloft were from the north-northwest, its course was to the north.\n\nn. On 1 July 1948, twelve disks were reported over the Rapid City Air Base by Major Hammer. These disks were oval-shaped, about 100 feet long, flying at a speed estimated to be in excess of 500 mph. Descending from 10,000 feet, these disks made a 30-degree to 40-degree climbing turn accelerating very rapidly until out of sight.\n\no. On 17 July 1948, a report from Kirtland Air Force Base describes a sighting in the vicinity of San Acacia, New Mexico, of seven unidentified objects flying in a \"J\" formation at an estimated height of 20,000 feet above the terrain. The formation varied from \"J\" to \"L\" to circle after passing the zenith. Flashes from the objects were observed after passing 30 degrees beyond the zenith but there was no smoke or vapor trail. If the reported altitude is correct the speed was estimated at 1,500 miles per hour, according to the report.\n\np. Other sightings of lights and trails, rather than disks, have been reported, viz:\n(1) On 12 September 1947, the pilot and co-pilot of a Pan American aircraft, en route from Midway to Honolulu, saw a blue-white light approaching, changing to twin reddish glows upon withdrawal. The pilot estimated the speed of the light at about 1,000 knots.\n\n(2) On 15 June 1948, Mr. Booneville, territory manager for the B.F. Goodrich Company, observed a reddish glow with a jet exhaust in the vicinity of Miles City, Montana. This glowing light made no sound, traveled about twice the speed of a conventional aircraft and flew from noth to south several times in a wide arc, finally disappearing over the horizon.\n\nq. During the early morning of 25 July 1948, two Eastern Airlines pilots reported having seen a huge flying craft similar to a V-2 pass their aircraft in flight. (See Figs. 7 and 8.) The attached drawings made by these two observers very closely resemble a flying object reported to have been seen on 20 July 1948, by A. D. Otter, chief investigator of Court of Damage Inquiry, and his daughter at Arnham, Netherlands. This object appeared to be a wingless aircraft having two decks. The craft, sighted four times through scattered clouds and unlimited visibility, was traveling at high speed at a high altitude. A sound similar to that made by a V-2 was reported.\n\nr. An object, similar in shape to the one in the preceding incident was reported by an experienced American newspaper reporter about 25 kilometers northeast of Moscow on 3 August 1948. A Russian acquaintance identified it as a rigid airship but the reporter disagrees because it flew at a high, but not excessive speed.\n\ns. On 1 October 1948 at approximately 2030 hours the pilot of a F-51 aircraft, 2nd Lt. George F. Gorman (North Dakota Air National Guard), flying near Fargo, North Dakota, sighted an intermittent white light about 3,000 feet below his 4,500 feet cruising altitude. The pilot pursued the light which appeared to then take evasive tactics. The object or light out-turned, out-speeded, and out-climbed the F-51 in every instance during the attempt to intercept. The pilot lost contact 27\n\n- 12 -\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nFig. 7\n\n- 13 -\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nFig. 8\n\n- 14 -\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nminutes after the initial sighting. The same light was observed by three other witnesses from the ground: Mr. L. D. Jensen, Air Traffic Controller, Mr. Manuel E. Johnson, Assistant Traffic Controller, and Dr. L. N. Cannon, Oculist. A comparison of all testimony revealed that one object was sighted and that it consisted only of a small round ball of clear white light with no apparent shape attached. It was about 6 to 8 inches in diamter. At times it traveled faster than the F-51 and performed maneuvers in an evasive manner. When first sighted the ball of light was traveling at an estimated 250 miles per hour. Under this condition, the light was not continuous but blinked off and on. At high performance the white light was continuous. Subsequent investigation eliminated the possibility that this incident may have been another aircraft or a meteorological balloon.\n\nt. On 18 November 1948 at approximately 2145 hours, three reserve pilots, 2nd Lt. Kenwood W. Jackson, 2nd Lt. Glen L. Stalker, and 2nd Lt. Henry G. Combs, flying near Andrews Field, Maryland, encountered an unidentified flying object. When first sighted, it appeared to be lighted and flying at about 1,700 feet. Three or four passes were made in an attempt to identify it. The pilot of the aircraft stated that while diving his aircraft at approximately 240 miles per hour, the object would climb vertically and then would drop below the aircraft from behind and continue to circle. On the last pass, the landing light was switched on and momentarily a dull gray glow from the object was observed. Lt. Combs stated he maintained contact for about ten minutes with the object flying between the lights of Washington, D. C. and his aircraft. All that could be observed was an oblong ball with one light, no wings and no exhaust flame. It finally made a very tight turn and headed toward the east coast at an estimated 500 to 600 miles per hour. At the same time Staff Sergeant John J. Kushner observed from the ground an unusual object in the air over Andrews Field. He stated that it was not very high and that it did not look like an aircraft.\n\n3. REPORTS OF radar intercepts point to unusual air activity which may be related to flying objects.\na. On 1 July 1947, a GCA radar at Hokkaido, Japan picked up an unidentified target at 16 miles, with a speed in excess of 500 mph. This target split into two targets, each estimated to be larger than a P-51.\n\nb. On 16 September 1947, an MEW radar at Fukuoka, Japan, picked up a target at 89 miles and trailed it to 19 miles, where it faded. Speed was 840-900 mph. The speed measurement, made by a good crew through a 70-mile track, is believed accurate.\n\n4. Investigations conducted by Headquarters, Air Materiel Command, have definitely established the identification of 18 of approximately 210 so-called flying saucers which have been reported. Approximately nine per cent of the total number of incidents are, therefore, eliminated from further specific consideration. Among those incidents positively explained, three were hoaxes, two were from unreliable witnesses. In the remaining 13 eliminated incidents, objects were actually seen but investigation has shown that they were celestial bodies or phenomena, meteorological and carnival balloons, and airborne cosmic ray experimental equipment. The following examples are presented for comparison of the information reported by witnesses and true identification of the object involved:\n\na. On 22 July 1948, Captain Henry Glover (Ordnance Reserve) and his wife observed at Van Nuys, California, an object which they were unable to positively identify. Object at first appeared to be round and looked like a weather balloon at about 2,000 feet but there was no characteristic bobbing. The wind was blowing on the ground but the object was quite steady. During the time it was under observation, about an hour, it traveled through a vertical arc of about twenty-five (25°) degrees or more. The observer concluded that it was not a celestial body. It has a bluish luminescence and as the sun set, the object's color gradually changed to orange at dusk and ceased to be illuminated almost instantaneously. The outline was clear and the air was clear with visibility unlimited. The object traveled from the east to the west.\n\nThis object was determined by investigation to have been a balloon carrying cosmic ray equipment.\n\n- 15 -\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"b. On 19 August 1948, at approximately 1050 hours an unidentified flying object was visible from the ground at Godman Air Force Base, Kentucky. This object was estimated to be at about 30,000 to 40,000 feet altitude, spherical in shape, bright silver color and gave a bright reflection from the sun. An F-51 was dispatched from Standiford Air Force Base, Kentucky, to observe the object. During observation from the ground, there was no change in the elevation of the object and it seemed to be moving southwest from Godman Air Force Base. The F-51 which was flying over Godman AFB at an altitude of 30,000 to 35,000 feet reported that it was unable to locate the object although it was still visible from the ground with the naked eye. Azimuth and elevation readings were taken by theodolite every minute and the path of the object was charted.\n\nThe object was determined to be the planet Venus by Mr. Moore, the head astronomer at the University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky. It is believed that earlier incidents at Godman Field (reference paragraph 2k, page 12, Appendix \"C\") may also have been observations of the planet Venus.\n\n5. AMONG THOSE incidents still not positively explained, reported observations differ to some extent, but three general categories of sightings emerge -- the flying disk, the ball of fire and the large jet rocket. Interesting observations that were noted are:\na. Most of the objects are a thin disk, round on top and flat on the bottom. The front half of the disk is often circular, sweeping back to a square tail across the full width.\n\nb. A high rate of climb as well as the apparent ability to remain motionless or hover for a considerable length of time is indicated.\n\nc. Reported sizes have varied from that of a 25-cent piece to 250 feet in diameter, and from the size of a pursuit plane to the bulk of six B-29 airplanes.\n\nd. Speeds have been estimated throughout the entire range from very slow or hovering to supersonic.\n\ne. Sounds and visual trails are not normally associated with the sightings."} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APPENDIX \"D\"\n\nFLYING WING TYPE AIRCRAFT\n\n1. AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERS in several countries have been engaged for some time in the design, construction, and flight of flying wing type aircraft. The study of flying objects requires, at least, a brief examination of proposed and existing unconventional aircraft whose configurations, when seen by the uninitiated, could lead to reports of strange flying devices. A description of some of the more significant types by country follows.\n\n2. GERMANY. At the end of World War II, German aircraft designers had numerous projects under way concerning tailless aircraft which conceivably could be mistaken for \"Flying Saucers\" or disc-like objects. It is not clear just what the Soviets are doing in the way of developing these projects but it is considered that German studies on tailless, delta-wing, and related configurations are available to the U.S.S.R.\na. ARADO NIGHT AND BAD WEATHER FIGHTER, PROJECT I. This is a tailless, low-wing monoplane with swept-back wing of large root chord and having a long, narrow fuselage.\n\nSpan 60.3 feet\nLength 42.5 feet\nPower Plant 2 HeS O11 turbo jet units\nMax. Speed (sea level) 441 mph\nMax. Speed (29,500 feet) 503 mph\n\nb. ARADO E 581-4. A high-wing tailless single-seater with a single jet unit mounted in the fuselage. Fin and rudder units are mounted on the wing midway between fuselage and wing tip at the trailing edge.\n\nSpan 29.3 feet\nLength 18.4 feet\nPower Plant 1 HeS O11 turbo jet unit\nMax. Speed (sea level) --\nMax. Speed (service ceiling) --\n\nc. GOTHA P 60 A. This was the first of the P 60 series of jet fighters. It is a flying wing type and, since the pilot and observer lie prone, there is no projecting canopy, thus permitting a particularly clean design. The jet units are mounted at the rear of the center section, one above and one below.\n\nSpan 40 feet 8 1/2 in.\nWing Area 504 square feet\nPower Plant 2 BMW 003 turbo jet units\nMax. Speed (23,000 feet) 596 miles per hour\n\nd. HEINKEL P 1080. This is a single-seat fighter with a sharply swept-back wing, resembling a flying wing type, but having a single fin and rudder with no tail plane.\n\nSpan 29.2 feet\nWing Area 218 square feet\nNo performance estimates are available."} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"e. JUNKERS EF 130. Of the flying wing type, this project was established as a long-range, high-speed jet bomber.\n\nSpan 78.8 feet\nWing Area 1290 square feet\nPower Plant 4 HeS 011 turbo jet units\nMax. Speed 620 miles per hour\nRange 3700 miles\n\nf. ME 829. This is a tailless mid-wing monoplane driven by two pusher propellers with the engines centrally located in the wings on each side of the stubby rounded fuselage.\n\nSpan 66 feet\nLength 25.4 feet\nMax. Speed 465-465 miles per hour\nPower Plant 2 DB 603 reciprocating engines\n\ng. HORTEN WING. The closest resemblance to the estimated configuration of \"Flying Disks\" is represented by the Horten Wing aircraft. Work on the Horten 229, a twin jet fighter, had progressed to the final stages at the end of World War II. Its prototype, a Horten glider, successfully soared to an altitude of 14,200 feet as early as 1938, proving the soundness of this design. (Figs. 1, 2 and 3)\n\nFig. 1"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n3. GREAT BRITAIN.\n\na. THE ARMSTRONG WHITWORTH. The AW 52 G, a glider, and the AW 52, a twin-jet air-plane, are British designs of tailless aircraft. The vertical stabilizers are located at the tips of the swept-back wing. (Figs. 4 and 5) Data on the AW 52 appear below.\n\nSpan 90 feet\nLength 37 feet\nMax. Speed (sea level) 435 knots\nMax. Speed (20,000 feet) 435 knots\nMax. Speed (36,000 feet) 417 knots\nRange 1300 nautical miles\nPower Plant 2 Nene II turbo jet units\n\nARMSTRONG WHITWORTH A.W.52 Experimental Flying Wing Aircraft\n\nFig. 4\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n- 21 -"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- 22 -\n\nFig. 5\n\nAV 52 (Armstrong Whitworth)"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n4. UNITED STATES.\n\na. NORTHROP B-35. This is a flying wing type aircraft, powered by four reciprocating engines and has a wing span of 172 feet and a length of only 53 feet. (See Fig. 6)\n\nFig. 6\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n- 23 -"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nb. NORTHROP YB-49. Powered by eight turbo-jet engines, this airplane is the jet-propelled version of the Northrop Flying Wing (B-35). (See Fig. 7)\n\nFig. 7\n\n- 24 -\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nc. CHANCE-VOUGHT XF5U-1. Developed by Chance-Vought Aircraft, this radical design promises the reality of high and low speed performance. Powered by two R-2000-2 engines, the airplane will have a speed range of from 40 to 425 miles per hour. (See Fig. 8)\n\nFig. 8\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n- 25 -"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"d. ARUP TAILLESS MONOPLANE. Jane's \"All the World's Aircraft\" (1935 edition) describes this airplane as \"a two-seat machine with a 70 h.p. LeBlond engine... This has a high aspect ratio wing with straight leading-edge and built in nacelle,...\" In plan form, the wing is almost semi-circular.\n\nAn Air Force film, \"Aeronautical Oddities\", shows this airplane in flight at South Bend, Indiana and in some attitudes appears identical to the photograph included in Appendix \"C\" as Figure 4. Although it is believed that the ARUP Manufacturing Co. is no longer in existence, it is possible that later models of this or similar U.S. civil aircraft may have been observed.\n\nSpan 22 feet\nLength 19 feet\nPower Plant 1 LeBlond engine\nMax. Speed 86 miles per hour\n\nFig. 9\n\n5. ALTHOUGH APPENDIX \"D\" is not intended to explain conclusively the phenomenon of \"Flying Saucers\", the possibility of unconventional type aircraft being the cause of flying disk reports must not be overlooked.\n\n- 26 -"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REGISTER OF PERSONNEL HANDLING TOP SECRET MATERIAL\nT.S. CONT. # 7341\nDATE DEC 5 1950\nDIVISION D/I USAF 4B 854-Pentagon\nOFFICE\nSUBJECT AND DESCRIPTION OF INCLOSURES Air Intel Rpt #100-203-79, Cy #102 of 103 SubAOFOIIT U S\nNUMBER OF PAGES IN BASIC / IN INCLS.\nNUMBER OF INCLOSURES 0\nINSTRUCTIONS\nThe above described Top-Secret document has been received in this office this date. The circulation of this material will be limited to the minimum number of persons necessary for completion of the required action. The names of all persons handling or having knowledge of the subject document will be recorded below as indicated.\nThe document will be returned to the Top-Secret Control Officer (Room ____) for record prior to dispatch from this office or other disposition. This form will not be removed from the subject document except by him when forwarding.\nNAME DATE TIME PURPOSE ALL PAPERS ATTACHED\nRoy E Ostrem 5 Dec 0900 Processing yes\nRalph R. Groshan ... 1130 Review\nCapt Alfred Pritchard 2 Jan 51 1540 Processing Yes\nJoseph Squire Capt 5 Jan 51 1025 Processing\nJohn F. Stone 8 JAN 1951 1605 PROCESSING\nDewey J. Fournet Jr 6 June 52 1605 Information Yes\n24 JUN 1952 1425 Score\nWILLIAM H. CLARK\nL. A. Angwall ... 1445 Logging\nWm Ascott 24 June 1952 1505 Logging ye\nF. J. Alyea 24 June 52 1515 Logging\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD\nAF HQ FORM 6 26 JULY 1948 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. 9-336, AF"} {"doc_id":"0642eebb50cf35bb","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\nAFOIN-283 Capt Fournet/el/55894 Wrtn 5 Jun 52\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\nPROBLEM\n1. To declassify Study 100-203-79, \"Analysis of Flying Object Incidents\" dated 10 December 1948, if practicable.\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n2. In accordance with a request from Col. W. A. Adams, AFOIN-2B, to declassify Study 100-203-79 if practicable, the following information is submitted. A search through D/I files was made, but no such study was found. However, a draft study bearing the same title and date, plus the designation \"D/I-ONI Study No. 203\" was located. This study is classified Top Secret and is presumed to be the study in question.\n3. Two copies of the latter study were distributed to ONI.\n4. Subject matter will not be submitted for inclusion in the Daily Staff Digest.\nCONCLUSIONS\n5. It is not considered advisable to declassify Study No. 203 inasmuch as it contains much speculation on the possible origin of unidentified flying objects, information on Soviet AOB and atomic energy installations, and some information on U.S. Research and Development activity. In addition, the study contains a treatise on possible Soviet intentions in utilizing controlled aerial missiles over the U.S.\nACTION RECOMMENDED\n6. None; for information only.\nCOORDINATION\nCol. J. G. Eriksen - AFOIN-283 - Ext. 52466\nCAPT. R. G. Bauer, USN - AFOIN-2B - Ext. 55909\nCol. E. H. Porter - AFOIN-2 - Ext. 71110\nDECLASSIFIED E.O. 12356, Sec. 3.3 NARS, Date 3/22/85\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"0779917879a061ec","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES 1 4\n2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. P00005 3. EFFECTIVE DATE SEP 28, 2010 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)\n6. ISSUED BY CODE HHQ402 Virginia Contracting Activity ATTN: AE-2 Bolling AFB, Bldg. 6000 Washington DC 20340-5100 (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\n7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE ZD50 Virginia Contracting Activity ATTN: DIAC, AE-2 Building 6000 Washington DC 20340-5100\n8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) BIGELOW AEROSPACE ADVANCED SPACE STUDIES, LLC 4640 S EASTERN AVE LAS VEGAS NV 891196135 DUNS: 827037768 Cage Code: 54JU7\n(X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO. 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11) 10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO. HHM402-08-C-0072 x 10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13) SEP 22, 2008\nCODE 00000434 FACILITY CODE\n11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS\nThe above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.\nOffers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods: (a)By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment your desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.\n12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) Modification Amount: $0.00\nSee Schedule Modification Obligated Amount: $0.00\n13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.\nCHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.\nB. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).\nx C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF: Mutual Agreement\nD. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)\nE. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, x is required to sign this document and return 1 copies to the issuing office.\n14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)\nThe purpose of this modification is to accomplish the following:\na) Bilaterally extend the POP from 09/22/2010 to 12/21/2010.\nb) Pursuant to FAR clause 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services, this contract is extended from 09/22/2010 TO 12/21/2010.\nc) No funding is required for this extension.\n\nNo other changes are made as a result of this modification.\n\nExcept as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.\n15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) AAP Person 4 | 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print) (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\n15B. Administ... 15C. DATE SIGNED 9/28/10 | 16B. 16C. DATE SIGNED SEP 28, 2010\nNSN 7540-01-152-8070 Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83) (48 CFR) 53.243"} {"doc_id":"0779917879a061ec","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Unclassified\nSCHEDULE Continued\nITEM NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE $ AMOUNT $\n1001 (Changed Line Item) Option Year: 22 September 2009 - 21 September 2010 Monthly Status Reports Quantity 12 1.00 LO 1,549,100.00 1,549,100.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $1,549,100.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1002 (Changed Line Item) Project Management Plan for Tasks 3.a.1 - 3.a.12 Quantity 12 1.00 LO 4,759,300.00 4,759,300.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $4,759,300.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1003 (Changed Line Item) Research Report for Tasks 3.a.1. - 3.a.12 Quantity 12 1.00 LO 2,870,600.00 2,870,600.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $2,870,600.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1004 (Changed Line Item) Comprehensive Integrated Threat Assessment 1.00 LO 220,200.00 220,200.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $220,200.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1005 (Changed Line Item) Travel 1.00 LO 36,700.00 36,700.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $36,700.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1006 (Changed Line Item) Other Direct Costs 1.00 LO 2,494,610.00 2,494,610.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB\nPAGE 2 OF 3 Unclassified"} {"doc_id":"0779917879a061ec","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Unclassified\nSCHEDULE Continued\nITEM NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE $ AMOUNT $\n9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $2,494,610.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1007 (Changed Line Item) Additional Travel 1.00 LO 18,300.00 18,300.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $18,300.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1008 (Changed Line Item) UNUSED - This line item is unused but must remain part of the contract to insure proper accounting information is aligned to revised CLINS. Original 0001 from PR 1.00 LO 0.00 0.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $0.00\n1009 (Changed Line Item) UNUSED - This line item is unused but must remain part of the contract to insure proper accounting information is aligned to revised CLINS. Original 0002 from PR 1.00 LO 0.00 0.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $0.00\nPAGE 3 OF 3 Unclassified"} {"doc_id":"0779917879a061ec","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cover Page\nSecurity Classification\nDocument: P00005 | P00005\nDocument Classification: Unclassified"} {"doc_id":"0779917879a061ec","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONTRACT DIRIBUTION LIST\nVIRGINIA CONTRACTING ACTIVITY Building 6000, Bolling AFB Washington, D.C. 20340-5100\nDATE: 29 Sep 2010 PIIN: HHM402-08-C-0072 Delivery Order /Task Order: MOD: P00005 REQ: Admin Mod CS: KO: (b)(3) 10 USC 424, (b)(6)\nTO: COPY SENT ADDRESS NO. OF COPIES\n1. Contractor Stamp the copy—\"Duplicate Original Contractor Copy\" X Bigelow Aerospace Advanced 4640 S. Eastern Ave Las Vegas, NV 89119 AAP Person 4 1\n2. Payment Office NSA X NSA FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING OFFICE P.O. Box 1685 ATTN: DF2211 FT George Meade, MD 20755-6000 Phone: 410-854-7657 & 410-854-8742 (for Invoice status) NIPR: operationpayment@nsa.gov (for Invoice status) (b) (6) 1\n4. COR/POC X (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6) 1\n5. DI FE Representative X 1\n6. Report Copy DD-350 X AE-2A 1\n7. Contract File (Original) X D.O. File 1\n8. Other\nCOPIES: TOTAL NO. 7\nDISTRIBUTION COMPLETED: (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6) (Signature) 9-29-10 (Date)"} {"doc_id":"078f151b7220d64a","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL (CLASSIFICATION) 1076806 AF FORM 112 APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948 COUNTRY Japan REPORT NO. IR-7-57 (LEAVE BLANK) 1076806 AIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT SUBJECT (U) Unidentified Flying Object Report AREA REPORTED ON Guam, M.I. FROM (Agency) DI FEAF ATILO DATE OF REPORT 8 Feb 57 DATE OF INFORMATION 15 Jan 57 EVALUATION B-4 PREPARED BY (Officer) Capt Alan G. Pound, ATILO SOURCE Messages from D/O 7th Air Force (Adv) REFERENCES (Control number, directive, previous report, etc., as applicable) AFR 200-2 Unidentified Flying Object Reports SUMMARY: (Enter concise summary of report. Give significance in final one-sentence paragraph. List inclosures at lower left. Begin text of report on AF Form 112-Part II.) 1. This report forwards information received by message from Commander, 7th Air Force (Advanced) Guam, M.I., concerning an unidentified aerial blinking light observed by an F-86D pilot flying in the Guam radio range holding pattern on the night of 31 Dec 56. 2. Further investigation determined that a lighted weather balloon had been launched one hour and thirty-eight minutes (1:38) prior to the sighting. The balloon was lost from the view of the ground station one hour and ten minutes (1:10) prior to the incident. 3. Unless the lighted balloon which was launched prior to the sighting malfunctioned and remained at a relatively low altitude, the Unidentified Flying Object can not be readily explained. APPROVED: HARRY J. KIELING Colonel, USAF Director of Collections INCLS. DECLASSIFIED DISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR AFOIN-4, W-P AFB, O; ALASKAN AIR COMD; AIR DEFENSE COMD; 5th AF; 7th AF; 3rd ADTV; COMNAVMAR, GUAM NOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF. X12913"} {"doc_id":"078f151b7220d64a","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112-PART II APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948 CONFIDENTIAL (CLASSIFICATION) AIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT FROM (Agency) DI FEAF ATILO REPORT NO. IR-7-57 PAGE 2 OF 4 PAGES 1. At 1610Z on 31 Dec 56 an F-86D pilot flying in the Guam range holding pattern sighted an unidentified blinking white light. Following is a copy of the unclassified message forwarded from Commander, 7th Air Force (Advanced), Guam, Marianas Islands, as a result of the sighting: \"The following report submitted in accordance with paragraph 7, AFR 200-2, dated 12 Aug 1954 and FEAF Supplement 1 dated 30 March 1956. This message in 12 parts. Part 1. A. Round. B. Dime. C. White. D. One. E. No. F. No. G. None. H. Not discernible. I. Blinking white light (remained constant for approximately four (4) seconds then blinked off and on quickly remaining constant again for the same amount of time). Part 2. A. Object passed under aircraft while it was in a holding pattern on the Guam range. It came from a westerly heading. B. Azimuth was thirty (30) degrees right, elevation about 25 degrees low. C. Pilot turned with the object and descended so azimuth and elevation was not discernible. D. The object came in from a westerly heading and pilot, thinking it was a B-47, turned down and into the object. The object proceeded to turn with the aircraft. Pilot began to get suspicious of object when he was unable to close with it and it continued to turn with him on the turn. The pilot knew there were no other fighters airborne at the time and other aircraft stationed in the vicinity could not turn outside the F-86D's turning radius. The object passed between the interceptor and the city of Agana, Guam, and at this time no silhouette was seen. The object proceeded south for approximately 10 miles at the pilot's altitude (20,000 MSL) then it climbed to about 30,000 MSL and came directly over interceptor. Pilot turned aircraft to keep it in sight and it started circling him. The interceptor was placed in afterburner and turned into the object trying to head it off. It continued to turn around aircraft and he was unable to gain on it or close with it. Then it proceeded west at aircraft altitude and returned over fighter at 10 to 15,000 feet high. Pilot again turned to keep it in sight and it circled fighter again. At this time pilot had to break off and return to Andersen Air Force Base due to low fuel remaining. E. Contact was lost when pilot returned to base. F. Approximately 10 minutes. Part 3. A. Air visual. B. None. C. F-86D, 52-9995, 26,000 feet MSL, 242 degrees, 200 knots, Andersen AFB. Part 4. A. 1610Z, 31 Dec 1956. B. Night. Part 5. In aircraft over Guam radio range. Part 6. A. N/A."} {"doc_id":"078f151b7220d64a","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT FROM (Agency) DI FEAF ATILO REPORT NO. IR-7-57 PAGE 3 OF 4 PAGES B. Brunson, Ted, First Lieutenant, 41st Fighter-Interceptor Squadron, alert pilot, observer considered very reliable, no other supporting. Part 7. A. Broken clouds at approximately 3,000 feet. Clear above. Visibility 15 miles plus. B. Surface-60 degrees at 9 knots; 6,000-100 degrees at 24 knots; 10,000-100 degrees at 20 knots; 16,000-70 degrees at 16 knots; 50,000-120 degrees at 35 knots; 80,000-not available. C. 10,000 feet. D. 15 miles. E. Overcast 10/10. F. Negative. Part 8. None. Part 9. Tried to get type and shape and to observe the object. Succeeded only in keeping it in sight. Part 10. No other traffic known. A check of all fields and control stations verified this. Part 11. Charles E. Heidenreich, 2nd Lt., USAF, Intelligence Officer, 41st Fighter-Interceptor Squadron. Comments: Submitted without comment. Part 12. None. 2. Since the UFOB was similar to sightings of weather balloons, 7th Air Force (Adv) was advised to check on any lighted balloons that might have been released at a time to correspond with the sighting. Confirmation was received that a lighted balloon had been launched at 1432Z 31 Dec 56 by the U.S. Weather Bureau at the U.S. Navy Communications Station (13 131'N - 144 50'E). The balloon was last tracked five (5) miles west of the station at 13 33'N - 144 46'E, altitude 20,000 feet at 1500Z. The observing pilot was again questioned and he stated that he did not believe that the UFOB was a weather balloon because the UFOB maneuvered with the F-86D and accelerated past his aircraft. 3. For convenience in evaluating this report, a sketch of the general locality of the incident follows: [sketch map of Guam showing Guam holding pattern, balloon launched here, Agana, Andersen AFB]"} {"doc_id":"078f151b7220d64a","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112-PART II APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948 CONFIDENTIAL (CLASSIFICATION) AIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT FROM (Agency) DI FEAF ATILO REPORT NO. IR-7-57 PAGE 4 OF 4 PAGES COMMENTS OF THE PREPARING OFFICER: 4. The check on the lighted weather balloon showed that it was launched at 1432Z and had ascended to 20,000 feet at 1500Z. It was lost from view at that time. It's ascension rate was somewhat slower than standard. Normally a weather balloon would be near the 27,500 foot level twenty-eight (28) minutes after launching. 5. If the weather balloon had ascended normally, it would have been much higher than the altitude of the reported sighting. If the balloon had malfunctioned and leveled off or descended, it could possibly explain the reported UFOB. Alan G. Pound ALAN G. POUND Captain, USAF Air Tech Intel Liaison Officer COMMENTS OF THE APPROVING OFFICER: This report was prepared in its entirety by a member of the Air Technical Intelligence Liaison Office. HJK"} {"doc_id":"078f151b7220d64a","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112-PART II APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948 CONFIDENTIAL (CLASSIFICATION) AIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT FROM (Agency) DI FEAF ATILO REPORT NO. IR-7-57 PAGE 4 OF 4 PAGES COMMENTS OF THE PREPARING OFFICER: 4. The check on the lighted weather balloon showed that it was launched at 1432Z and had ascended to 20,000 feet at 1500Z. It was lost from view at that time. It's ascension rate was somewhat slower than standard. Normally a weather balloon would be near the 27,500 foot level twenty-eight (28) minutes after launching. 5. If the weather balloon had ascended normally, it would have been much higher than the altitude of the reported sighting. If the balloon had malfunctioned and leveled off or descended, it could possibly explain the reported UFOB. Alan G. Pound ALAN G. POUND Captain, USAF Air Tech Intel Liaison Officer COMMENTS OF THE APPROVING OFFICER: This report was prepared in its entirety by a member of the Air Technical Intelligence Liaison Office. HJK"} {"doc_id":"08a0218b191a7a3b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:11:27"} {"doc_id":"08fcffe006001988","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, NATO\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20 March 2026\n\n67.1 P-8A OBSERVES UNIDENTIFIED LOW-FLYING OBJECT 55 NM\nNORTHWEST OF LATAKIA, SYRIA\n\n18 NOV 2016\n\nBLUF: While monitoring KCTG activity in the Eastern Mediterranean, P-8A, observed an unidentified low-flying object 55 nm northwest of Latakia from an unknown origin, traveling at approx 500KTS on a southeasterly heading outbound from KCTG, for ~2 minutes.\n\nTimeline (Z):\n\n1 (S//REL) 18/1310Z: P-8 observed a possible missile launch IVO 1.4a from an origin unknown detected via the EO/IR sensor. The possible missile appeared to be in sea skim mode traveling at approximately 500KTS on a southeasterly heading outbound from KCTG. P-8 position was 26NM S of object detection at 16121 FT 1.4a\n\n2 (S//REL) 18/1312Z: - P-8 lost visual of the object IVO 1.4a approx. 40 NM northwest of Latakia. The missile was observed to pass between (RUS) INGUL ARS and 1x U/I vessel.\n\nWeather:\n\n(U) P-8 aircrew characterized visibility as clear, no range limitations.\n\nU/I OBJ\n(RUS) INGUL ARS\nU/I VESSEL\n\nFLIGHT PATH\n(RUS) UDALOY DD 619\n(RUS) KUZNETSOV CV-063 (RUS) CHILIKIN AOR\n(RUS) KALININGRADNEFT AO\n(RUS) INGUL ARS\n(RUS) NIROV CON 099\n1310Z: 1.4a\nKTG\n1\n26 NM\n2\n~1312Z: 1.4a\nUS P-8A Location 1310Z: 1.4a\nN\n\nCTG 67.1 Comments: The mission commander for P-8 characterized the interaction as safe. While this was the first observed occurrence of possible missile activity by P-8 aircraft in the Eastern Mediterranean it is assessed to be standard activity consistent with the assessed activity of the KCTG. Video footage can be found at this link: (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, NATO\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0038 to MDR 26-0046 Approved for Release to AARO 03/27/26 000001"} {"doc_id":"091556fd01179c10","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nMisrep undefined-10055709\n\nNarrative\n\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\nAT 2100Z, (b)(1)1.4a TOOK OFF FROM OMAM VIA SLR. (b)(1)1.4a PROCEEDED TO FRAGGED TASKING.\n\nAT 1822Z, (b)(1)1.4a WAS 7-LINED. (b)(1)1.4a DID NOT ARRIVE ON-STATION DUE TO WX RTB (SEE ON/OFF STATION 1).\n\nAT 2256Z, (b)(1)1.4a CONDUCTED A NON-INTERFERENCE BASIS TASKING (SEE NIB 1).\n\nAT 0444Z, (b)(1)1.4a CONDUCTED A NON-INTERFERENCE BASIS TASKING (SEE NIB 2).\n\nAT 0457Z, DURING RTB (b)(1)1.4a DETECTED 1X UAP (SEE UAP 1).\n\nAT 0405Z, (b)(1)1.4a RETURNED TO BASE. AT 0713Z, (b)(1)1.4a CONDUCTED SLR AND LANDED AT OMAM. 10:13 MISSION HOURS.\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\n\n(S//RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: NOFORN\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MS\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20490606\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: ENDURING SENTINEL\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 001\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"091556fd01179c10","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFSOC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 3 SOS\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): DK\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• ATO Mission Number: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: 27 SOW\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: 56 SOIS\n• Wing: 27 SOW\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 AOC Det 1\n\nAPPROVER\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 002\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"091556fd01179c10","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: 379 AEW\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination:\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator:\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data:\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator:\n• Chaff Designator:\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges:\n• Flare Designator:\n• Num Flares:\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 003\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"091556fd01179c10","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM:\n• Num IR-Guided AAM:\n• Gun Name or Designator:\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each:\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: AN/DAS-1\n• Additional Avionics: AH/GMESH/SF\n• Data Link: LINK 16\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): [REDACTED]\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): [REDACTED]\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OMAM\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 062100:00ZJUN24\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): 34563\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OMAM\n• Last Land Time: 070713:00ZJUN24\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 070723:00ZJUN24\n• Total Mission Time: 10 hours 13 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG:\n• Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: ISR\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 004\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"091556fd01179c10","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• JTAC Callsign: ITC\n• Gentext/Additional Details: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nAT 1822Z, (b)(1)1.4a WAS 7-LINED. DID NOT ARRIVE ON-STATION DUE TO WX RTB AT 0405Z.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\n• Did not Arrive On Station: On\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG:\n• Total Time On Station:\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nNIB\n\n• Earliest Time Intelligence of Value: 062256:00ZJUN24\n• Latest Time Intelligence of Value: 062330:00ZJUN24\n• NIB ID: -\n• ISR Support or Effect: FMV\n• Target Name: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Location of Interest (LOI): -\n• Location (MGRS): 40RGM85 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Requested Classification of Reports: SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n• Dissemination POCs or Common File: -\n• EEIs: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nA. BEGIN SCANS AT 75NM WEST, NORTH, AND EAST OF SP FOR DHOWS TRANSITING IN THE DIRECTION OF SP\nB. PROVIDE SITREP WITH FLAG STATUS, FLAG, OR NO FLAG VISIBLE AND COUNTRY OF FLAG (IF POSSIBLE), COORDINATES AND OBSERVED ACTIVITY.\nC. CALL OUT ANY IDENTIFIABLE EQUIPMENT, COMMS EQUIPMENT, PERSONS WEAPONS, CARGO ON BOARD TO INCLUDE CANCAS COVERED ITEMS\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\n\nGENTEXT/NIB\n\n• Gentext: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nUPON ARRIVAL TO SP AT 2256Z, (b)(1)1.4a OBSERVED NO PERSONNEL OR VEHICLE ACTIVITY. BETWEEN 2257Z-2330Z, (b)(1)1.4a CONDUCTED SCANS IVO THE SP AND PROVIDED CALLS ON ANY DHOW ACTIVITY. ITC INTENT MET.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 070457:00ZJUN24\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 005\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"091556fd01179c10","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• UAP Event Type: UAP Incident\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations: FLYING STRAIGHT JUST OVER THE WATER AT SPEED\nOF 140KNOTS\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions: NO CHANGE\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Tail Number: (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 40RFM60 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: 23,999FT\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory: 294\n• Observer Assessment of UAP: Benign\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: 163 KNOTS\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns):: NO\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters: -\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable): N/A\n• Operational Range: -\n• UAP Physical State: Solid\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n• UAP Propulsion Means: UNKNOWN\n• UAP Payload:\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe):\n• UAP Signatures: -\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP RF Frequency: -\n• UAP RF Duration: -\n• UAP Event Serial Number: 060457ZJUN2024-CENTCOM\n• UAP Effects on Persons: NO\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Effects on Equipment: -\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Rank/Grade: E-4\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE): [REDACTED]\n• Observer Engagement of UAP (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• First Coordinate: 40RFM60 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• First Seen Radius:\n• Last Accuracy: Estimated\n• Last Coordinate: 40QFM92 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Last Seen Radius: 5\n• Kinetic Altitude Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Altitude: -\n• Kinetic Depth Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Depth: -"} {"doc_id":"091556fd01179c10","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Kinetic Velocity Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Velocity: 140 KNOTS\n• Kinetic Trajectory Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Trajectory: -\n• UAP Date of DoD Acquisition: 070457:00ZJUN24\n• UAP Reaction to Observation, Interrogation, Engagement (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Anomalous Characteristics/ Behaviors:\n• First Accuracy: Precise\n• Call Sign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• UAP First Seen Location:\n• UAP Last Seen Location:\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): [REDACTED]\nGLOWING HOT SPHERICAL UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT WITH A VERTICAL UNWAVERING CYLINDRICAL POLE/BAR ATTACHED ON THE BOTTOM OF THE OBJECT POSS REFLECTION FROM THE OBJECT IN THE WATER, MOVING AT 140KNOTS\n[REDACTED]\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): [REDACTED]\nDURING RTB AT 0457Z, (b)(1)1.4a OBSERVED 1X UAP WHILE TRANSITING OVER\n40RFM60 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a FLYING AT AN ALTITUDE OF 23,999FT MSL AND SPEED OF 163KTS.\n[REDACTED]\n\nNIB\n\n• Earliest Time Intelligence of Value: 070444:00ZJUN24\n• Latest Time Intelligence of Value: 070548:00ZJUN24\n• NIB ID: -\n• ISR Support or Effect: FMV\n• Target Name: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Location of Interest (LOI): -\n• Location (MGRS): 40RFM63 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Requested Classification of Reports: [REDACTED]\n• Dissemination POCs or Common File: -\n• EEIs: [REDACTED]\nA. BEGIN SCANS AT 75NM WEST, NORTH, AND EAST OF SP FOR DHOWS TRANSITING IN THE DIRECTION OF SP\nB. PROVIDE SITREP WITH FLAG STATUS, FLAG, OR NO FLAG VISIBLE AND COUNTRY OF FLAG (IF POSSIBLE), COORDINATES AND OBSERVED ACTIVITY.\nC. CALL OUT ANY IDENTIFIABLE EQUIPMENT, COMMS EQUIPMENT, PERSONS WEAPONS, CARGO ON BOARD TO INCLUDE CANCAS COVERED ITEMS"} {"doc_id":"091556fd01179c10","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n\nGENTEXT/NIB\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED]\nUPON ARRIVAL TO SP AT 0444Z, (b)(1)1.4a OBSERVED NO PERSONNEL OR VEHICLE ACTIVITY. BETWEEN 0445Z-0548Z, (b)(1)1.4a CONDUCTED SCANS IVO THE SP AND PROVIDED CALLS ON ANY DHOW ACTIVITY. ITC INTENT MET.\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"0c856dbaff0e7816","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on 16 March 2026\nFOUO/Privacy Act applies\n\nPlease do not use the purple \"submit\" button above. Save and email the complete file manually (see below).\n\nRange Fouler Reporting Form\n\nPlease complete this form to the best of your ability. If you do not have the requested information, please leave the field blank. If there was more than one \"group,\" please report each on a separate form for data collection purposes. You should receive a response within 5 business days.\n\nLast Name, First Name Rank Squadron SIPR Email Address Crew Position\n O-3 172 ATKS Other\n\nThis information is for contact only. SPEAR sanitizes all reports of identifying information.\nAbsolutely no identifying information for aircrew or squadron will be recorded for analysis.\n\n09/04/20 21:09:00 Night ISR\nDate (mm/dd/yy) Time of detection (hh:mm:ss Z) Day / Night Side No. Buno Mission Description (CAS, BFM, etc) LFE?\n\nN E 23819\nContact Working Area (Ex: W-72 1A) Contact Latitude (DD:MM:SS) N/S Contact Longitude (DD:MM:SS) E/W Contact Altitude (Ex: 22000) Altitude Constant? Wind Dir at Contact Alt (From) Wind Speed\n\nPlease attempt to determine a Lat / Long for the contact at initial detection. We recommend using JMPS to reference the sensor-derived bearing and range relative to the bullseye you had in use. If that method is not available, any reasonable derivation of location will work, but please be as specific as possible as well as make a note in the comments section. These locations may be used to cue other means of tracking.\n\nWas the contact moving? Yes\nDirection/Speed (Ex. 090/15) 168/277\n\nRadar Equipped: AIM-9x Self-Track:\nStable Trackfile?: ATFLIR Autotrack:\n# of Contacts in \"Group\": 1 Tally Achieved:\n\nPlease check all that apply:\nRound: ✓ Moving Parts:\nSquare: Metallic:\nBalloon-shaped: Markings:\nWings/Airframe: Translucent:\nOther Shape: Opaque:\nApparent Propulsion: Reflective:\n\nEA Indications (Check all that apply):\nECM Arc Letter Identifier False Trackfiles Other/ Ambiguous\n\nPlease use the field below to describe the contact and any interaction in your own words with as much detail as possible. Please be sure to include any detail not included in questions above.\n\nContact at 21:09z to 21:17z 04SEP2020. MGRS location 38P LT 7[REDACTED] 36[REDACTED] (estimated lat/long (b)(1)1.4a). While at 23,819 HAT over the Gulf of Aden we tracked a round, cold object in IR traveling 168 degrees at 277 mph. It made a few abrupt directional changes during the 8 minute contact. Our sensor was aimed -39 degrees below our altitude with a slant range of 6.17NM and ground range of 8.81KM. The IR sensor was set to black hot and the object in question was a bright white.\n\nDon't use the purple \"submit\" button! Save this form with filename \"Date_Squadron_RF.pdf\" and email it to 3.5c, (b)(6) (Also in the global). For troubleshooting, call 3.5c, (b)(6)\n\nThank you for your time. Please ensure all display tapes are ripped for the entire time of interaction and saved as a .wmv (Example: 4 May VFA-106 HUD.wmv). Squadron intel personnel shall upload those files to the repository located at this link. 3.5c, (b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM 26-0028 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO / PA applies 03/16/26 000001"} {"doc_id":"0cc3265626327dee","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nSBU\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\nSBU\n\nMRN: 04 ASHGABAT 1028\nDate/DTG: Nov 12, 2004 / 120851Z NOV 04\nFrom: AMEMBASSY ASHGABAT\nAction: RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC ROUTINE\nE.O.: 12958\nTAGS: AORC, TSPA, PREL, PGOV, EAID, OSCI, TX\nCaptions: SENSITIVE\nSubject: TURKMENISTAN, CIVIL SOCIETY AND UFOS\n\nR 120851Z NOV 04\nFM AMEMBASSY ASHGABAT\nTO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 5085\nINFO RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE\nRUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 1267\nRUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 0905\nRUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS\nRUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC\nRUEKDIA/DIA WASHDC//DHO-2/REA/NMJIC-J2//\nRHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC\nRUCAACC/USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL//CCJ2/HSE/CCJ5//\nRUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC\nRUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC//J5/RUE//\nBT\nUNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ASHGABAT 001028\n\nSENSITIVE\n\nDEPT FOR EUR/CACEN (RUBIN)\n\nE.O. 12958: N/A\nTAGS: AORC, TSPA, PREL, PGOV, EAID, OSCI, TX\nSUBJECT: TURKMENISTAN, CIVIL SOCIETY AND UFOS\n\nREF: A) Ashgabat 989 (NOTAL)\nB) Ashgabat 406 (NOTAL)\nC) Ashgabat 291 (NOTAL)\nD) Ashgabat 234 (NOTAL)\n\nSENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED - PLEASE HANDLE ACCORDINGLY\n\nSummary\n-------\n\n1. (SBU) Yes, UFOs. Somehow, over time, the Union of"} {"doc_id":"0cc3265626327dee","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nSBU\n\nUFOlogists of Turkmenabat has established a reputation as\na reliable NGO partner for a variety of activities from\nassisting with small and medium businesses, to\ndistributing humanitarian assistance, to assisting NGOs\nwith registering under the 2003 NGO law. The UFOlogists\nhave developed a good rapport with local authorities,\nthey say, and are able to accomplish their tasks because\n"everyone is interested in UFOs." The UFOlogists next\ninitiative is to publish an independent newsletter, the\nfirst in independent Turkmenistan.\n\n2. (SBU) In the appearances-are-deceiving world of\nTurkmenistan, it almost seems fitting that one of the\nUSG's most reliable implementers is equally committed to\nlooking for life on another planet. End Summary.\n\nUFOs in Turkmenabat\n-------------------\n\n3. (SBU) On November 5, DCM and USAID Director met with\nthe Board and interested members of the Union of\nUfOlogists (UOU) of Turkmenabat, Lebap Welayet\n(province). The Union of UFOlogists is working on an\n$8,532 grant to assist other local NGOs navigate the NGO\nregistration process of the new NGO law (reftels). The\nUOU was the first NGO to register after independence in\n1992 and was the first independent NGO to reregister\nsuccessfully under the new 2003 NGO law.\n\n4. (SBU) Though the Union first was established to\npursue the study of life on other planets, over time its\nactivities became more "practical." Board members told\nthe DCM. Members of the Union have attended\ninternational UFO fora and published on the subject, but\nmost members assured the DCM, they had limited or no\ninterest in the subject at all. UOU President Ovezberdy\nMuradov said the Turkmen military and government\nauthorities had consulted him about mysterious\noccurrences in Turkmen airspace, but he said there had\nbeen no confirmed sightings of UFOs in Turkmenistan.\n\nPeace on Earth\n--------------\n\n5. (SBU) Instead, the Union has attracted a local brain\ntrust of lawyers, scientists, computer experts,\naccountants, teachers and others who had joined together\nto "do good things." Pointing to their mission statement\nin English, Russian and Turkmen hanging on the wall of\ntheir office, members assured the DCM that any assistance\nthey provided would fit their mission. According to\ntheir statement, the UFOlogists "help spread the ideas\nabout the struggle for peace and human coexistence on\nEarth and in the Universe." Because of their diverse\nactivities, the UOU has become an umbrella organization\nwith at least nine member organizations running"} {"doc_id":"0cc3265626327dee","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nSBU\n\nactivities from sport, to youth, to business consulting.\nThe Union has over 1000 members including some individual\nmembers from other welayets.\n\nRegistering Small and Medium Businesses\n---------------------------------------\n\n6. (SBU) Members told the DCM they first started the\n"practical" side of their work shortly after independence\nby assisting small and medium-sized businesses register\nwith local authorities. According to the UOU President,\nduring the `90's the Union assisted 187 enterprises in\nregistering ranging from farmers unions to joint\nenterprises to a shoe factory. The UOU told the DCM all\n\nASHGABAT 00001028 002 OF 002\n\n\nthis consulting was done pro bono. The Union made money\nover the years, however, by running for-fee computer,\naccounting and other "non-traditional" courses such as\nUFOlogy and massage.\n\n7. (SBU) UOU President Muradov told the DCM the Union\nhad been successful in this effort because it had the\nrespect of local authorities. According to Muradov,\n"everyone is interested in UFOs" and local authorities\nwere eager to assist and also learn more about UFOs. The\nUnion also regularly ran UFO-related seminars and talks,\nwhich were well attended.\n\n8. (SBU) In addition to commercial work, the UOU\nobtained experience in humanitarian goods distribution\nwhen it became a partner of the State Department funded\nCHAP humanitarian assistance program administered by\nCounterpart International. UOU facilitated humanitarian\nassistance to refugees from the civil war in Tajikistan\nand also with Afghan refugees. Muradov said the Union\nwas eager to continue with such work, should the need\narise.\n\nAssisting NGOs\n--------------\n\n9. (SBU) Because of their established track record and\ntheir success in re-registering after the austere 2003\nNGO law was passed, USAID, through Counterpart\nInternational, is considering a $15,000 grant to assist\nthe UOU with internal capacity building. The grant\npassed the local grants committee and has been forward to\nthe regional committee for consideration. The UOU\nalready has successfully registered an NGO and is working\non the registration documents of four others.\n\nNext, an Independent Newsletter\n-------------------------------"} {"doc_id":"0cc3265626327dee","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nSBU\n\n10. (SBU) USAID was presented with a grant proposal by\nthe UOU for a $30k grant for printing equipment for the\nUOU to establish its own newsletter. Though printing of\nindependent media is illegal in Turkmenistan, the UOU\nassured DCM it already had advance approval from local\nauthorities because a license was needed for anything\nover 1000 copies and the UOU only planned to publish 999\ncopies. UOU members said the content of the newsletter\nwould be nonpolitical and only would describe the\nactivities of the Union. If members wanted to make\nadditional copies, the UOU told DCM, "that is up to\nthem." Eventually subscribers would be charged for the\nnewsletter, which would then become self-sustaining,\naccording to the UOU plan. USAID has requested that the\nUOU submit a stronger, more cost-effective proposal.\n\n11. (SBU) The UOU also is considering opening chapters\nin other welayets because "our services are in so much\ndemand."\n\nComment\n-------\n\n12. (SBU) Crazy? Like a fox; and worthy of USG\nattention and support. End Comment.\n\n13. (U) Minimize considered.\n\nJACOBSON\nBT\n#1028\n\n\n\n\nNNNN\n\nSignature: JACOBSON\n\nInfo: RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE ROUTINE; RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA ROUTINE;\nRUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS ROUTINE; RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC ROUTINE; RUEKDIA/DIA\nWASHDC//DHO-2/REA/NMJIC-J2// ROUTINE; RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC ROUTINE;\nRUCAACC/USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL//CCJ2/HSE/CCJ5// ROUTINE; RUEKJCS/SECDEF\nWASHINGTON DC ROUTINE; RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC//J5/RUE// ROUTINE;\nCIS COLLECTIVE ROUTINE\nXMT: ST PETERSBURG, AMCONSUL\n\nDissemination Rule: Archive Copy"} {"doc_id":"0cc3265626327dee","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0d3e1703df6f439b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CB/R.A. PARKER\n\nMSC-07632\n\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION\n\n* APOLLO 17\nCREW DEBRIEFING\nFOR SCIENCE\n\nJANUARY 8, 1973\n\nPREPARED BY\nSCIENCE REQUIREMENTS BRANCH\nPLANETARY AND EARTH SCIENCES DIVISION\n\nINDEXING DATA\nDATE OPR # T PGM SUBJECT SIGNATOR LOC\n1-8-73 MSC MSC-07632 B APO * NS 080-44F\n\nMANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER\nHOUSTON,TEXAS\n\nHS1-481238"} {"doc_id":"0d3e1703df6f439b","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"119\n\nHENRY (CONT'D) gravitationally holding it together. We though it might be in the form of ionized hydrogen. We looked for Lyman-alpha radiation, red shifted from the ionized hydrogen, and we didn't see any. We set a lower limit, which certainly excludes the possibility that the Coma cluster is held together by this ionized hydrogen. I think that may leave a real mystery as to what is holding the thing together.\n\nThe fourth point may turn out to be the most interesting thing of all. When you look in the Milky Way, you see a lot of UV coming from the stars, but the question is, what do you see when you look up to the North Galactic Pole or down to the South Galactic Pole. One of the most exciting results of X-ray astronomy was the fact that an X-ray background was observed over the sky that nobody had expected, and part of this is the gamma-ray background that Dr. Trombka talked about. In the UV, nobody knows, but you never know until you look. You do have to deal with this background of stars that we know is there. So we did look at a large number of different points at high galactic latitudes, both north and south. The spectrum that we see is above this dark count. In other words, this abnormally high dark current did not, in fact, interfere with that experiment. The spectrum that we see looks like the spectrum of the hot"} {"doc_id":"0d3e1703df6f439b","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"120\n\nHENRY (CONT'D) star; however, we know that there were no hot stars within our field of view. Therefore, the most conservative interpretation, I think, is that what we're seeing is light from hot stars in the galactic plane going up out of the plane and reflecting off interstellar dust. There are certain characteristics of the spectrum, though, that don't fit that theory, and it's at least possible that this is extragalactic radiation. I'm looking forward very much to the detailed computer study of this, but it's going to take a long time.\n\nFifth point: Lyman-alpha hydrogen radiation is a completely separate problem, and Gary Thomas at the University of Colorado and Charles Barthum [?] observed this from OGO-5. We obtained just an enormous amount of data on the Apollo that's going to straighten out this picture and clarify it considerably. This is hydrogen that is inside our solar system. It's sunlight reflecting off this. The hydrogen, Gary Thomas thinks, is hydrogen from interstellar space streaming through the solar system, and he is looking forward with great anticipation to getting detailed analyses of that.\n\nOne more thing: the spectrum of the Earth. I keep saying \"we,\" but these were the guys that were there. We looked at the Earth from outside. A lot of people have observed"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62- HQ-83894 SECTION 8\nSERIALS 344-384\n#62-HQ-83894-8#\nSECTION 8\nSERIALS 344-384\nUSE CARE IN HANDLING THIS FILE\nTransfer-Call 3421\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007.\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 8 344 384\n8/11/1274184\nRRP003IXGQ\nRECORDED - 79\n62-83894-344\nINDEXED - 79\nEX-127\nAGENCY/Cencl OSI(0-14)\nDATE FORW. 8/31/54\nHOW FORW. RLS\nBY EHM/eld\n61 AUG 4 1954\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 19 1964"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Seq 346, 353, 362, 384\nCOPIED FOR\nFOIPA\nAPR 14 1979 BY R330\n281\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nREQUESTERS FULL NAME COMPUTER NUMBER DATE BY\n349;350 Parks, Brian 263,552 3/25/80 95\n344 Richard Toronto 267, 191 5/09/80 PHS\n380 Brian Parks 263,553 3/23/80 NEW"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Director, FBI (62-83894)\nDATE: 7/22/54\nFROM : SAC, Cincinnati (65-1994)\nSUBJECT: TRUMAN BETHURUM;\nFLYING DISCS\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(ESPIONAGE)\nRemylet 6/8/54 and Bulet 6/22/54.\nAttached are five copies of a memorandum containing information set out in my letter of June 8, 1954 with additional information furnished by THOMAS EICKHOFF on July 2, 1954.\nOn July 2, 1954, although EICKHOFF had been so advised at the time of the original interview with him on June 7, 1954, he was again advised in accordance with instructions in reBulet.\nRCD:SAS\nREGISTERED MAIL\nENCLOSURES (5)\nRECORDED - 79\n62-83894-344\nINDEXED - 79\nEX-127\nJUL 26 1954\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 19 1964"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Director, FBI (62-83894)\nDATE: 7/22/54\nFROM : SAC, Cincinnati (65-1994)\nSUBJECT: TRUMAN BETHURUM;\nFLYING DISCS\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(ESPIONAGE)\nRemylet 6/8/54 and Bulet 6/22/54.\nAttached are five copies of a memorandum containing information set out in my letter of June 8, 1954 with additional information furnished by THOMAS EICKHOFF on July 2, 1954.\nOn July 2, 1954, although EICKHOFF had been so advised at the time of the original interview with him on June 7, 1954, he was again advised in accordance with instructions in reBulet.\nRCD:SAS\nREGISTERED MAIL\nENCLOSURES (5)\nFBI\nAUG 2 1954\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nFBI ESPIONAGE\nAUG 3 1954"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUMAN BETHURUM\nFLYING DISCS\nOn June 7, 1954, Mr. Thomas Eickhoff, 3721 Tappan Avenue, Cincinnati 23, Ohio, Operator of Tom's Beauty Salon, Neave Building, Fourth and Race Streets, Cincinnati, Ohio, advised that although he belongs to no organization interested in flying saucers or discs, he has been interested in this subject.\nHe said on June 3, 1954 an ad appeared in \"The Cincinnati Enquirer\", a newspaper of general circulation in Cincinnati, Ohio, to the effect that on June 11, 1954 a program would be presented at the Taft Auditorium in Cincinnati, Ohio on \"the real flying saucer story.\" Mr. Eickhoff advised that this advertisement disclosed no sponsor for this program and it was only noted on the ad that tickets for the program sold for $2.00 per person and would be on sale at the Central Ticket Office in Cincinnati.\nMr. Eickhoff continued that because of his interest in the subject of flying saucers, he desired to know the sponsor of the program and found out from the Central Ticket Office that the ad had been placed by Henry Maday, 364 West Lewiston Avenue, Ferndale 20, Michigan. He said he telephonically contacted Maday on June 3, 1954 and found that Maday was only the agent having rented the Taft Auditorium and that he was acting on behalf of Truman Bethurum and George Hunt Williamson.\nHe continued that on June 4, 1954 Maday called him back and told him there had been a disagreement between Maday, Bethurum and Williamson over Maday's arrangement for the sale of tickets of the program and the renting of the auditorium. Eickhoff advised that Maday at no time said anything to discredit either Bethurum or Williamson and indicated that their disagreement concerned only Maday's placing the ad in \"The Cincinnati Enquirer\" prior to having tickets for the program available in Cincinnati.\n62-83894-344\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 19 1964"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Eickhoff further related that about ten minutes after he had talked to Maday on Friday, June 4, 1954, he received a call from George Hunt Williamson and a Mr. Manspeaker, who confirmed to him that Maday was no longer associated with them, and asked that Eickhoff meet with them at a luncheon at the Terrace Plaza Hotel, Cincinnati, Ohio on June 7, 1954.\n\nMr. Eickhoff, in explanation of his interest in this matter, advised that he had read such books as \"Flying Saucers From Outer Space,\" written by Donald E. Kehoe, retired major, U. S. Marine Corps, which book was published by Harper's Publishers, and a book entitled \"Flying Saucers Have Landed,\" by George Adamski, which book is published by Werner-Lowery Company in England, and is distributed by the British Book Center in New York City. He said that he has also heard broadcasts by persons he considers reputable news commentators, such as Walter Winchell, Fulton Lewis, Jr., and Frank Edwards, to the effect that reliable persons have reported observing flying discs or saucers. He said contrary to these reports, the U. S. Air Force has denied the existence of the flying saucer and he felt that persons such as Truman Bethurum and George Hunt Williamson, in presenting a program such as that contemplated, were either truthful or they were frauds. He stated that if they had a true story to tell, then he felt it was of such nature that it should be given as wide a distribution as possible, so that the people might learn the true facts regarding flying discs. He said, however, if their story was not true, then the holding of such a meeting as was contemplated would be a fraud on the general public. He estimated that such a meeting in Cincinnati might draw two thousand people, which, at $2.00 apiece, would result in a $4,000.00 take for the promoters.\n\nTo identify Truman Bethurum, Mr. Eickhoff had with him two copies of the magazine \"Valor,\" which he stated he got from Bethurum, this magazine being self-identified as the \"Golden Times Weekly,\" published by Soul Craft Chapels, Post Office Box 192, Noblesville, Indiana. The two issues which Mr. Eickhoff had with him were numbers 15 and 16 of volume 6 of the publication, the number 15 being"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"dated February 6, 1954 and number 16 being dated February 13, 1954. The number 15 issue contained an article concerning Truman Bethurum, in which he is identified as a truck driver from Redondo Beach, California, and it refers to an article dated December 31, 1953, which appeared in the \"Daily Breeze,\" a newspaper at Redondo Beach, California, which allegedly contained a description of an encounter which Truman Bethurum had with a crew of assumed space explorers under the supervision of a ravishing woman commandant in the Nevada desert. The article also reflects that Truman Bethurum allegedly was aboard flying saucers on eleven occasions. At the bottom of the first page of issue number 15 there appeared in what Mr. Eickhoff stated was the handwriting of Truman Bethurum the statement \"This is a true story, a factual experience -- Truman Bethurum.\"\n\nThe above mentioned article in \"Valor\" also reflected that Truman Bethurum is 55 years of age and that his residence address is 519 North Gertruda Avenue, Redondo Beach, California.\n\nMr. Eickhoff reiterated that he felt Bethurum's story, if true, should be given wide publicity, but that if the story was false, then he should be prosecuted for fraud. He stated that he first took his information to the Air Force in the person of Lieutenant Colonel John O'Mara of Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, whom Eickhoff visited personally at O'Mara's home in Fairborn, Ohio, on Sunday, June 6, 1954. Eickhoff indicated that he asked Colonel O'Mara if there were such things as flying saucers and if Bethurum's story could be true, and he said O'Mara denied that there was such a thing as a flying saucer and indicated to him that Donald E. Kehoe, the author of \"Flying Saucers in Outer Space\" was a fraud and that information is available in Washington that Kehoe is a fraud. He said he was advised, however, by Colonel O'Mara that the Air Force could take no action with respect to Bethurum or Williamson.\n\nEickhoff continued that it was his intention to aid in the promotion of a meeting for Bethurum in Cincinnati. He advised that the original meeting schedule for June 11"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"had been cancelled, and that he felt this meeting had such important information for the people as a whole that he was going to make every effort to make the meeting one of national significance. He said he intended to invite to the meeting all nationally prominent news commentators. He intended to try to get radio time to advertise the meeting but he did not wish to participate in this matter in any way if it would violate security regulations in any manner, or if Bethurum and his associates were in any way fraudulent. He stated that he so informed Bethurum, Williamson and Mr. Manspeaker at the luncheon meeting which was held at the Terrace Plaza Hotel on June 7, 1954. They informed him that they were not afraid of an investigation; that Bethurum's story was factual, and that they had no objection to Eickhoff's advising Government authorities regarding it.\n\nMr. Eickhoff stated that his report to this office was part of his plan to inform all the Federal agencies he thought should know about the activities of Bethurum. He advised that in line with his contemplated plans that on the evening of June 7, 1954 there was to be another meeting at the home of L. H. Stringfield, 7017 Britton Avenue, Cincinnati 27, Ohio, at which meeting there would be Mr. Stringfield, Williamson, Manspeaker, Bethurum, Ralph Zimmermann and Mr. Eickhoff. He said at this meeting they would plan a method of operation and make arrangements for this meeting of national significance. He said he intended to set the date of the meeting far enough in advance so that if any Governmental agency determined that there was fraud involved that agency would have sufficient time to act prior to the holding of the meeting. He advised he intended to keep a detailed record of all actions taken by this group, and that he would voluntarily furnish such information to the F.B.I.\n\nEickhoff advised that he had not known and had not met either Bethurum, Williamson or Manspeaker prior to the events described above. He said that George Hunt Williamson identified himself as an archeologist and a writer for the magazine \"Valor,\" who resides in Noblesville, Indiana."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"He said that Manspeaker, whose first name he did not know, is also connected with \"Valor\" magazine in some way.\n\nHe was asked as to what interest \"Valor\" magazine has in Bethurum, and whether Bethurum was sponsored by any other organization. He advised that he did not know the interest of \"Valor\" magazine in Bethurum, and so far as he knew, Bethurum was acting on his own and had no organizational affiliations or sponsorship. He was asked as to what disposition would be made of receipts from a large meeting and he advised that he did not know what disposition would be made of the money. He said he understood that Bethurum had been on tour for some time and that the meeting scheduled for Cincinnati originally on June 11, 1954 was to be the beginning of a new series of meetings.\n\nWilliam Dudley Pelley, Noblesville, Indiana reportedly operates the Soul Craft Press at Noblesville and among other pamphlets, published the weekly journal entitled \"Valor\", which Mr. Pelley describes as a \"journal of the applied spirituality.\" This publication is said to deal mainly with practical mysticism, the spiritual movement called Soulcraft and the relationshop between earth man and the individuals arriving on this planet from flying saucers. Mr. Pelley is said to claim that these individuals arriving in flying saucers are of greater intelligence and learning than the earth people and are here to give the earth people intellectual guidance and spiritual endowment and guidance.\n\nOn July 2, 1954, Thomas Eickhoff advised that no progress had been made with respect to holding a meeting for Truman Bethurum in Cincinnati, Ohio which would be of national significance. He said that Bethurum had returned to California but that there was a possibility that he would again come to Cincinnati, Ohio in the fall of 1954. At the same time Mr. Eickhoff advised that he had communicated with Donald E. Kehoe, author of the book \"Flying Saucers From Outer Space\" and had advised him that he had been informed by Lieutenant Colonel John O'Mara, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio that he was a fraud and that information is avail-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"able in Washington that Kehoe is a fraud. He said that he, Eickhoff, had been requested by Kehoe to furnish him this information in writing and that he, Eickhoff, had obliged Kehoe in this respect. He said he understood that Kehoe was going to Washington with his attorneys to take up Colonel O'Mara's statements with the Air Force."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nDATE: 8/2/54\n\nFROM : SAC, Cincinnati (62-0)\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCER REPORT\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\n62-83894\n\nColonel J. M. SMITH, Deputy Director of Civilian Defense for Greater Cincinnati and Hamilton County, Ohio, called this office on 7/23/54 to report that he had received a report of a flying saucer from Mr. CARL R. KEYSER, Route 1, Milford, Ohio. Mr. KEYSER said that he could be reached at his residence which is two miles east of Milford, Ohio, on U. S. Highway 28.\n\nKEYSER reported to Colonel SMITH that both he and his wife, at approximately 2:40 p.m. on 7/23/54, had observed a silver circular or spherical shape in the sky which was located to the southeast of their residence, approximately forty-five degrees above the horizon.\n\nColonel SMITH was advised that the report made by him was being referred to the appropriate officials of the United States Air Force.\n\nI have advised the local office of the Office of Special Investigations at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base of the above.\n\nRDH:BL\n\nRECORDED - 154\nINDEXED - 154\nEX-130\n\n61 AUG 11 1954"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nDATE: 8/2/54\n\nFROM : SAC, WFO (62-0)\n\nSUBJECT: Mrs. FRANCES SWAN\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nThis interview is predicated upon a telephone call received by SAC L. L. LAUGHLIN on 7/29/54 from JOHN HUTSON, Security Officer, Bureau of Aeronautics, U. S. Navy Department.\n\nOn the same date JOHN HUTSON was interviewed in Room 2912, Main Navy Building. Also present during the interview was Commander L. T. McQUISTON, USN. HUTSON and McQUISTON furnished the following information:\n\nThey advised that the Office of Naval Intelligence had forwarded a file to the Bureau of Aeronautics with enclosures which had been received from retired Admiral HERBERT B. KNOWLES of South Berwick, Maine. According to HUTSON and McQUISTON, KNOWLES resided near Mrs. FRANCES SWAN who had been receiving messages through thought transmission. SWAN approached KNOWLES and advised him that \"flying saucers\" were here to help mankind. Information received by HUTSON indicated that KNOWLES became interested in the messages received by Mrs. SWAN and felt that the matter should be investigated by the Government.\n\nHUTSON advised that KNOWLES wrote to Admiral ESPEY, Director of Naval Intelligence, on 6/1/54 enclosing some of the messages received by Mrs. SWAN. Receiving no reply to his original communication, KNOWLES again wrote ONI on 6/7/54. HUTSON advised that the first letter that KNOWLES wrote to ONI contained information that Mrs. SWAN was receiving messages through thought control from \"outer space\" and wrote them down as she received them. The letter, according to HUTSON, stated that Mrs. SWAN would write without any effort on her part and would write continuously for four or five hours at a time without getting tired. He stated that ONI had in their possession the transmissions or messages that had been received by Mrs. SWAN.\n\nHUTSON stated that ONI had advised that in the absence of any definite evidence of conversations, they would do nothing in the matter. He also stated that the Bureau of Aeronautics took no official action in the matter. HUTSON was questioned concerning the position that the Bureau of Aeronautics had taken and he remarked that he did not believe that this was pertinent. After further questioning, he subsequently stated that the Bureau of Aeronautics was of the belief that this was a matter for ONI.\n\nHUTSON stated that he \"unofficially\" became interested in the matter and at the invitation of Admiral KNOWLES, he went to South Berwick, Maine, where he spent 7/24,25,26/54 in the residence of Admiral KNOWLES. HUTSON stated that he informed Admiral SAUCEK, his superior in the Bureau of Aeronautics, that he was going to visit Admiral KNOWLES.\n\nHUTSON stated that inasmuch as KNOWLES had received no response from the Government concerning this matter, he began reading books on flying saucers. HUTSON advised that during the time that he was a house guest of Admiral KNOWLES, there was also present WILBER B. SMITH, a Physicist of the Canadian Government who was also interested in flying saucers. HUTSON stated that SMITH was at KNOWLES' residence with his family and was there in an unofficial capacity.\n\nHUTSON advised that during his stay, he and SMITH had various interviews with Mrs. SWAN and had had contact with the \"outer space\" through Mrs. SWAN. During the interview with Mrs. SWAN and the contact with \"outer space,\" HUTSON stated that they sat in a group and he observed Mrs. SWAN writing messages that she was receiving from someone in \"outer space.\" According to HUTSON, SWAN informed him that the people from \"outer space\" could use her eyes and ears to see and hear. According to SWAN, this is accomplished by the use of a mechanical device and all conversations are recorded by the people in \"outer space.\" HUTSON indicated as an example as to how messages were relayed, he stated that he asked Mrs. SWAN a question which she was to relay to the people in \"outer space\" and before she had time to relay the question, she began writing the answer down to his question on paper.\n\nHUTSON stated that SWAN informed him that whenever she was to have contact with the people in \"outer space,\" she would get a buzzing sound in her left ear to indicate that they were \"on the line.\" HUTSON stated that Mrs. SWAN complained to the people in \"outer space\" that this buzzing sound gets very annoying and painful to her ear. She also stated that the messages had been coming since May 27, 1954, and would come at all times of the night and consequently she was losing a great deal of sleep. According to HUTSON, Mrs. SWAN arranged a schedule with the people in \"outer space\" so that the messages would not interfere with her sleep. HUTSON advised that a schedule was arranged between SWAN and the people in \"outer space\" that she would receive messages on the following schedule: 8:00 in the morning, 12 noon, 6:00 in the evening, every day of the week.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nAug 3 10 06 AM '54\nINTERNAL SECURITY SECT.\nFBI\n\nAug 3 11 45 AM '54\nLIAISON SECTION\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nAug 3 2 54 PM '54\nREC'D ESPIONAGE\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nAUG 3 9 54 AM '54\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WFO 62-0\n\nin the matter. HUTSON was questioned concerning the position that the Bureau of Aeronautics had taken and he remarked that he did not believe that this was pertinent. After further questioning, he subsequently stated that the Bureau of Aeronautics was of the belief that this was a matter for ONI.\n\nHUTSON stated that he \"unofficially\" became interested in the matter and at the invitation of Admiral KNOWLES, he went to South Berwick, Maine, where he spent 7/24,25,26/54 in the residence of Admiral KNOWLES. HUTSON stated that he informed Admiral SAUCEK, his superior in the Bureau of Aeronautics, that he was going to visit Admiral KNOWLES.\n\nHUTSON stated that inasmuch as KNOWLES had received no response from the Government concerning this matter, he began reading books on flying saucers. HUTSON advised that during the time that he was a house guest of Admiral KNOWLES, there was also present WILBER B. SMITH, a Physicist of the Canadian Government who was also interested in flying saucers. HUTSON stated that SMITH was at KNOWLES' residence with his family and was there in an unofficial capacity.\n\nHUTSON advised that during his stay, he and SMITH had various interviews with Mrs. SWAN and had had contact with the \"outer space\" through Mrs. SWAN. During the interview with Mrs. SWAN and the contact with \"outer space,\" HUTSON stated that they sat in a group and he observed Mrs. SWAN writing messages that she was receiving from someone in \"outer space.\" According to HUTSON, SWAN informed him that the people from \"outer space\" could use her eyes and ears to see and hear. According to SWAN, this is accomplished by the use of a mechanical device and all conversations are recorded by the people in \"outer space.\" HUTSON indicated as an example as to how messages were relayed, he stated that he asked Mrs. SWAN a question which she was to relay to the people in \"outer space\" and before she had time to relay the question, she began writing the answer down to his question on paper.\n\nHUTSON stated that SWAN informed him that whenever she was to have contact with the people in \"outer space,\" she would get a buzzing sound in her left ear to indicate that they were \"on the line.\" HUTSON stated that Mrs. SWAN complained to the people in \"outer space\" that this buzzing sound gets very annoying and painful to her ear. She also stated that the messages had been coming since May 27, 1954, and would come at all times of the night and consequently she was losing a great deal of sleep. According to HUTSON, Mrs. SWAN arranged a schedule with the people in \"outer space\" so that the messages would not interfere with her sleep. HUTSON advised that a schedule was arranged between SWAN and the people in \"outer space\" that she would receive messages on the following schedule: 8:00 in the morning, 12 noon, 6:00 in the evening, every day of the week.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WFO 62-0\n\nHUTSON stated that Mrs. SWAN's husband, GUY SWAN, and their daughter, DAWLYN, had also heard the buzzing sound in their ears, but have not been able to receive transmissions or messages. HUTSON stated that the transmissions related to flying saucers, location and why they were here, life on other planets, and life in the hereafter, and prophesies in the Bible. HUTSON advised that Mrs. SWAN could contact people in \"outer space\" by mental thought control.\n\nAccording to HUTSON, Mrs. SWAN stated that there were two space ships from which she had been receiving messages. They were described as 150 miles wide, 200 miles in length, and 100 miles in depth. HUTSON stated that these ships are designated as M-4 and L-11 and they also contain mother ships which measure approximately 150 to 200 feet in length. HUTSON related that SWAN had informed him that there were approximately 5,000 of these mother ships. He stated that \"AFFA\" is the Manager or the Commander of the ship M-4 which is from the planet Uranus and \"PONNAR\" is the Manager or the Commander of the ship L-11 which is from the planet Hatann. HUTSON related that Mrs. SWAN stated that these contacts with \"AFFA\" and \"PONNAR\" were for the purpose of protecting our own earth from destruction caused by the explosion of the atom bomb, hyrdrogen bomb, and wars of various kinds which they, \"AFFA\" and \"PONNAR,\" say disrupt the magnetic field of force which surrounds the earth. HUTSON stated that Mrs. SWAN also related that contact was made for the purpose of protecting the whole universe because if the \"fault lines\" break or go to pieces, it would effect the entire universe. According to Mrs. SWAN, HUTSON stated, \"AFFA\" and \"PONNAR\" are presently working in the area of the Pacific Ocean repairing \"fault lines\" which are in danger of breaking.\n\nHUTSON stated that both he and SMITH were looking for proof and they wanted to know whether they could contact the man from \"outer space.\" According to HUTSON, SWAN advised that he and SMITH could make contact in \"outer space\" on any frequency provided they informed her first of the frequency that they were to use so that she could advise the people in \"outer space.\" HUTSON stated that in connection with his contacting \"outer space,\" he could make no commitment as he did not know how far the Navy would go. He advised, however, that SMITH stated that he would try to make contact with \"outer space\" on Sunday, August 1, 1954, and was going to use a high frequency. HUTSON stated that to make sure that contact was made, Mrs. SWAN advised that the ship from \"outer space\" would come within 100 miles of Ottawa, Canada, so that SMITH would have no difficulty in making his contact.\n\nHUTSON stated that Admiral KNOWLES wanted to know if physical contact could be had with the people in \"outer space.\" SWAN advised HUTSON and KNOWLES that the people in \"outer space\" wanted to know if they could provide them protection and that if physical contact were to be made, they would appear in a force which would consist of 5,000 \"bells\" or \"flying saucers.\"\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WFO 62-O\n\nAccording to Mrs. SWAN, these \"bells\" or \"flying saucers\" would appear over many nations of the world during the latter part of August 1954, and would come close enough to the earth so that they could be seen by man and that they in turn would be able to see people on the street.\n\nHUTSON stated that Admiral KNOWLES wrote a letter to MARGARET CHASE SMITH, Senator from Maine, concerning this information, who forwarded the information to the Secretary of Defense and copies were sent to the Army, Navy, and Air Force. According to HUTSON, KNOWLES also wrote a letter to the President of the United States.\n\nHUTSON stated that none of the persons involved in this matter were interested in publicity. He stated that he would be willing to assist the Bureau in the investigation of this matter if the Bureau desired, inasmuch as he believed Mrs. SWAN and Admiral KNOWLES had confidence in him.\n\nHUTSON described Mrs. FRANCES SWAN as being of middle-class circumstances, having a very modest home with furniture below middle-class. He stated that she has no more than a high school education, if she has that. He considered her to be a very simple minded person, religious, a student of the Bible, and one who has studied spiritualism and other thought control systems.\n\nThe above information is being made available to the Office of Special Invesitgations, United States Air Force, and no further action is being taken by this office.\n\n- 4 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 150\nEX. - 109\n62-83894-346\n\nDate: August 9, 1954\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS;\nMRS. FRANCES SWAN\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nOn July 29, 1954, Mr. John Hutson, Security Officer, Bureau of Aeronautics, United States Navy Department, and Commander L. T. McQuiston, United States Navy, furnished the following information to this Bureau.\n\nThey advised that the Office of Naval Intelligence had forwarded a file to the Bureau of Aeronautics with enclosures which had been received from retired Admiral Herbert B. Knowles of South Berwick, Maine. According to Hutson and McQuiston, Knowles resided near Mrs. Frances Swan who had been receiving messages through thought transmission. Swan approached Knowles and advised him that \"flying saucers\" were here to help mankind. Information received by Hutson indicated that Knowles became interested in the messages received by Mrs. Swan and felt that the matter should be investigated by the Government.\n\nHutson advised that Knowles wrote to Admiral Espe, Director of Naval Intelligence, on June 1, 1954, enclosing some of the messages received by Mrs. Swan. Receiving no reply to his original communication, Knowles again wrote to the Director of Naval Intelligence on June 7, 1954. Hutson advised that the first letter that\n\ncc - 1 - Records Administration Branch (0-6a routing slip)\nAttention: Internal Security Division (Same date)\n\nEHM:sjr:elk\n\nTolson\nBoardman\nNichols\nBelmont\nHarbo\nMohr\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nSizoo\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Knowles wrote to the Director of Naval Intelligence contained information that Mrs. Swan was receiving messages through thought control from \"outer space\" and wrote them down as she received them. The letter, according to Hutson, stated that Mrs. Swan would write without any effort on her part and would write continuously for four or five hours at a time without getting tired. He stated that the Office of Naval Intelligence had in its possession the transmissions or messages that had been received by Mrs. Swan.\n\nHutson stated that he \"unofficially\" became interested in the matter and at the invitation of Admiral Knowles, he went to South Berwick, Maine, where he spent July 24, 25, 26, 1954, in the residence of Admiral Knowles.\n\nHutson stated that inasmuch as Knowles had received no response from the Government concerning this matter, he began reading books on flying saucers. Hutson advised that during the time that he was a house guest of Admiral Knowles, there was also present Wilber B. Smith, a Physicist of the Canadian Government who was also interested in flying saucers. Hutson stated that Smith was at Knowles' residence with his family and was there in an unofficial capacity.\n\nHutson advised that during his stay, he and Smith had various interviews with Mrs. Swan and had had contact with the \"outer space\" through Mrs. Swan. During the interview with Mrs. Swan and the contact with \"outer space,\" Hutson stated that they sat in a group and he observed Mrs. Swan writing messages that she was receiving from someone in \"outer space.\" According to Hutson, Swan informed him that people from \"outer space\" could use her eyes and ears to see and hear. According to Swan, this is accomplished by the use of a mechanical device and all conversations are recorded by the people in \"outer space.\" Hutson indicated as an example as to how messages were relayed, he stated that he asked Mrs. Swan a question which she was to relay to the people in \"outer space\" and before she had time to relay the question, she began writing the answer down to his question on paper.\n\nHutson stated that Swan informed him that whenever she was to have contact with the people in \"outer space,\" she would get a buzzing sound in her left ear to indicate that they were \"on the line.\" Hutson stated that\n\n- 2 -\n\nTolson\nBoardman\nNichols\nBelmont\nHarbo\nMohr\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nSizoo\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mrs. Swan complained to the people in \"outer space\" that this buzzing sound gets very annoying and painful to her ear. She also stated that the messages had been coming since May 27, 1954, and would come at all times of the night and consequently she was losing a great deal of sleep. According to Hutson, Mrs. Swan arranged a schedule with the people in \"outer space\" so that the messages would not interfere with her sleep. Hutson advised that a schedule was arranged between Swan and the people in \"outer space\" that she would receive messages on the following schedule: 8:00 in the morning, 12 noon, 6:00 in the evening, every day of the week.\n\nHutson stated that Mrs. Swan's husband, Guy Swan, and their daughter, Dawlyn, had also heard the buzzing sound in their ears, but have not been able to receive transmissions or messages. Hutson stated that the transmissions related to flying saucers, location and why they were here, life on other planets, and life in the hereafter, and prophesies in the Bible. Hutson advised that Mrs. Swan could contact people in \"outer space\" by mental thought control.\n\nAccording to Hutson, Mrs. Swan stated that there were two space ships from which she had been receiving messages. They were described as 150 miles wide, 200 miles in length, and 100 miles in depth. Hutson stated that these ships are designated as M-4 and L-11 and they also contain mother ships which measure approximately 150 to 200 feet in length. Hutson related that Swan had informed him that there were approximately 5,000 of these mother ships. He stated that \"Affa\" is the Manager or the Commander of the ship M-4 which is from the planet Uranus and \"Ponnar\" is the Manager or the Commander of the ship L-11 which is from the planet Hatann. Hutson related that Mrs. Swan stated that these contacts with \"Affa\" and \"Ponnar\" were for the purpose of protecting our own earth from destruction caused by the explosion of the atom bomb, hydrogen bomb, and wars of various kinds which they, \"Affa\" and \"Ponnar,\" say disrupt the magnetic field of force which surrounds the earth. Hutson stated that Mrs. Swan also related that contact was made for the purpose of protecting the whole universe because if the \"fault lines\" break or go to pieces, it would affect the entire universe. According to Mrs. Swan, Hutson stated, \"Affa\" and \"Ponnar\" are presently working the area of the Pacific Ocean repairing \"fault lines\" which are in danger of breaking.\n\n- 3 -\n\nTolson\nBoardman\nNichols\nBelmont\nHarbo\nMohr\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nSizoo\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Hutson stated that both he and Smith were looking for proof and they wanted to know whether they could contact the man from \"outer space.\" According to Hutson, Swan advised that he and Smith could make contact in \"outer space\" on any frequency provided they informed her first of the frequency that they were to use so that she could advise the people in \"outer space.\" Hutson stated that in connection with his contacting \"outer space,\" he could make no commitment as he did not know how far the Navy would go. He advised, however, that Smith stated that he would try to make contact with \"outer space\" on Sunday, August 1, 1954, and was going to use a high frequency. Hutson stated that to make sure that contact was made, Mrs. Swan advised that the ship from \"outer space\" would come within 100 miles of Ottawa, Canada, so that Smith would have no difficulty in making his contact.\n\nHutson stated that Admiral Knowles wanted to know if physical contact could be had with the people in \"outer space.\" Swan advised Hutson and Knowles that the people in \"outer space\" wanted to know if they could provide them protection and that if physical contact were to be made, they would appear in a force which would consist of 5,000 \"bells\" or \"flying saucers.\" According to Mrs. Swan, these \"bells\" or \"flying saucers\" would appear over many nations of the world during the latter part of August, 1954, and would come close enough to the earth so that they could be seen by man and that they in turn would be able to see people on the street.\n\nHutson described Mrs. Frances Swan as being of middle-class circumstances, having a very modest home with furniture below middle-class. He stated that she has no more than a high school education, if she has that. He considered her to be a very simple-minded person, religious, a student of the Bible, and one who has studied spiritualism and other thought control systems.\n\nThe above data is being furnished to the Office of Special Investigations, United States Air Force, for any investigation deemed appropriate, and for information to G-2, Department of the Army, and the Office of Naval Intelligence, United States Navy. No further action is being taken in this matter by this Bureau.\n\n- 4 -\n\nTolson\nBoardman\nNichols\nBelmont\nHarbo\nMohr\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nSizoo\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cc - 1 - Director of Naval Intelligence\nDepartment of the Navy\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\ncc - 1 - Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2\nDepartment of the Army\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nTolson\nBoardman\nNichols\nBelmont\nHarbo\nMohr\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nSizoo\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy\n\n- 5 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 12, 1954\n\nAIR MAIL\n\nRECORDED - 70\n62-83894-347\n\nMr. Roger L. Jones\n1414 Lake Drive\nZanesville, Ohio\n\nDear Mr. Jones:\n\n\tYour letter of August 7, 1954,\nwith enclosure, has been received.\n\n\tI would like to advise you that\nthe article you mentioned is entirely in-\ncorrect with reference to the FBI, and there\nis no information on the matter which I can\ngive you.\n\n\tSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nNOTE: This article was previously brought to\nour attention, and the field advised the magazine\neditor that the story was not true as far as the\nBureau's part was concerned. The editor stated\nhe regretted the error and he would publish a\nretraction in the next issue, which is not due\nfor several months yet. Enclosure was an\nairmail-stamped envelope, being used in\nreply.\n\nMLL:lt\n\nCOMM - FBI\nAUG 13 1954\nMAILED 31\n\n5 0 AUG 24 1954\n\nTolson\nBoardman\nNichols\nBelmont\nHarbo\nMohr\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nSizoo\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nRECORDED - 70\n\nAIR MAIL\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Roger L Jones\n1414 Lake Drive\nZanesville, Ohio\n\nAugust 7, 1954\n\nTo:\nDirector\nFederal Bureau Of Investigation\nWashington D.C.\n\nSubject: Inquiry about fantastic article\n\nDear Sir:\n\nThis may seem utterly silly, but I felt that I must write in about\nit.\n\nIn the August issue of MYSTIC magazine is an article telling of\ntwo men from the planet Venus who landed in a flying saucer near Barstow,\nCalifornia, obtained some old clothes, and hitch hiked into Los Angeles.\nOne of these two, the article says, got a job for a while in the\nmissing persons office of a newspaper in LA.\n\nOn page 18, 2nd column, 3rd paragraph, MYSTIC says that a Los Ang-\n-eles newspaper reporter stated that he sent a \"full report\" about\nthese beings from another planet to the FBI.\nMYSTIC also says that accompanying that account was an analysis\nrecord of a \"gouged\" piece of hard alloy steel which one of the Venus-\n-ians is supposed to have made by running his thumb lightly across the\nsurface of it. And that this particular analysis was made by \"one of\nthe foremost laboratories in LA.\"\n\nFrankly I don't believe the article. On the other hand, I can't\nprove it isn't true.\nIf such a report was sent to you, may I purchase a photostatic\ncopy of each page?\n\nSincerely yours,\nRoger L Jones\n\nRJ/\n\nRECORDED - 70\nINDEXED - 70\n62-83894-347"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nMR. JONES\n\nRECEIVED - DIRECTOR\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nAUG 10 9 21 AM '54\n\nRECEIVED - NICHOLS\nF B I\nAUG 10 11 45 AM '54\n\nAUG 9 8 56 PM '54\n\nAUG 12 8 11 PM '54"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-348 Complainant\n\nMr. L. P. Wagner\n4353 Dickerson Avenue\nDetroit 15, Michigan\n\nDear Mr. Wagner:\n\nYour letter postmarked September 30, 1954, with enclosures, has been received, and the thought prompting your bringing the matter you mentioned to the attention of this Bureau is very much appreciated.\n\nIn the event you acquire further data which you believe to be of interest to the FBI, please feel free to contact the representatives of our office located at 913 Federal Building, Detroit 26, Michigan.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncc - Detroit, with copy of incoming and enclosures.\nATTENTION SAC: The Detroit Flying Saucer Club is not identifiable in Bufiles. Neither are any of the individuals who are listed as officers or speakers whose names appear on the literature forwarded by correspondent with the exception of Desmond Leslie and Henry Maday. These latter two individuals have been brought to the Bureau's attention before as having written material or lectured on the subject of Flying Saucers. (62-83894-343 and 344)\n\nTolson\nBoardman\nNichols\nBelmont\nHarbo\nMohr\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nSizoo\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\n\nDCL:nl\n\nCOMM - FBI\nOCT 11 1954\nMAILED 30"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Sept 27, 1954\n\nFederal Bureau\nof Investigation\nWashington, D.C.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nAs recently formed organization named the Detroit Flying Saucer Club held a meeting as per enclosed literature. As the program unfolded and in face of loyalty statements by the principals I began to wonder.\n\nHere is an organization dealing in the features ensuring a good following. Fund raising is no problem as their attendance for the night runs 100 at one dollars each. They also passed out petitions requesting release of secret information. They are international in scope and have national, state, local and even neighborhood study groups.\n\nThis whole set-up would be ideal as a communist front organization. It likely is 100% loyal but anything could happen and you are the people who can watch it.\n\nSincerely,\nL. P. Wagner\n4353 Dickerson Ave.\nDetroit 15 Mich.\n\nJohn Otto\nENCLO. ATTACHED\nThompson\nMich\n\n62-83894-348\n10/13\nRECORDED - 94\nINDEXED - 94\nEX-130\nEXP-PROC\nOCT 4 1954"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Oct 4 11 52 AM '54\n\nMR. JONES\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED\nOct 4 12 26 PM '54"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-348\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE DETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB\npresents\nMR. JOHN OTTO of Chicago\nPatent Development Engineer, Member of Chicago Rocket Society, Pioneer Space Commentator and Member of Saucers International -- who will speak on\n\"An Analysis of Latest Saucer Evidence\"\n(followed by audience participation from the floor)\nWEDNESDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 22, 1954, at 7:30 P.M.\nThe Grand Ballroom, Veteran's Memorial Building, 151 West Jefferson\n\nALSO Laura Marxer will introduce the leaders of eight neighborhood groups who already are looking up ... other sightings will be reported. Our petition to President Eisenhower is ready for your signature ... extra copies are on hand.\n\nTHIS IS A SCOOP! A group of \"HAM\" operators, started within our Club, have made what they are sure is a saucer contact. It will be reported by Don Thompson and his friends.\n\nOur club is fast becoming Detroit's most interesting factual program. In presenting Mr. Otto, we are bringing a speaker who has just returned from an eastern lecture tour, where the S-R-O sign was out in New York City, following his broadcast interview over Mutual Station WOR. His talk will be illustrated. If you have heard him, you know that as a lecturer John Otto ranks among the best. Bring your friends. Incidentally: Keep your eye out for our own Detroit Flying Saucer Club magazine arriving soon!\nContribution $1.00 Henry Maday, Chairman."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Here is the man who has coupled 2½ years of\nprofound research with native Cosmic insight!\n\nThe Detroit Flying Saucer Club\nannounces the distinguished presence of\n\nMR. DESMOND LESLIE\n\nNoted Irish journalist and author; preeminent\nSaucer scholar; co-author of the best seller:\n\"Flying Saucers Have Landed\"\nwho will address our membership and friends\non TUESDAY EVENING September 28th, at 8:15 P.M.\nwith audience participation to follow.\n\nDetroit Institute of Arts--Large auditorium\n(Entrance on John R, near Kirby)\nAll seats $1.00 ** Box Office open at 6:30 P.M."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB\n6452 Cass Avenue - Detroit 2, Michigan - TRinity 5-7300\nHenry Maday, President Dolores M. Coyne, Secretary\nLaura Marxer, Vice President John C. Hoffman, Treasurer\n\nAN OPEN LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:\n\nMr. President: Sept. 22, 1954\n\nAs citizens of Detroit and vicinity, we request audience with you regarding the coming of Space ships to this earth. Many of us have seen these objects; so have others both in this country and on foreign soil.\n\nTo us it matters little whether these be called \"UFO's\" (unidentified flying objects) space ships, fireballs, flying saucers or any other name. The point is that they are continuously coming, and they are being observed both here and abroad.\n\nIt appears that our government with far greater facilities for observation than any individual is perfectly aware of such phenomena, but has adopted a policy of silence and secrecy in regard to them. We understand that certain individuals within the Defense Department are afraid of announcing the facts to the citizens for fear of panic.\n\nMr. President, we feel that this policy is false, fear-provoking and entirely mistaken for the following reasons:\n\n1. We believe that these phenomena are of a magnitude and importance such as to warrant the utmost openness and cooperation between government and citizenry.\n2. We believe that the present policy of silence and secrecy is a reflection on the intelligence and loyalty of the American citizen.\n3. We believe that this policy not only encourages fear and lack of confidence in government, but leads to exploitation by unscrupulous publishers and opportunistic individuals who prey upon the natural curiosity of the American citizen.\n4. We do not understand by what right certain public servants, utilizing the taxpayers' facilities for information and observation, gather facts relative to these phenomena, and then fail to properly inform the public.\n5. Other countries have already acknowledged these phenomena and have publicly appointed governmental commissions to investigate, collect information and report to the people.\n\nMr. President: We, therefore, call upon you, our trusted leader, to utilize the great powers of your office to change this shameful and unamerican policy of silence and secrecy.\n\nWe ask that our government come forward and make an honest and forthright acknowledgment of these phenomena, and inform the citizens of such pertinent facts as are now available. In return, the citizens then would be willing to report sightings and contacts which otherwise would remain concealed because of fear of ridicule or rebuff by government agencies.\n\nThis cooperation between the government and its citizenry would clear the atmosphere of fear and suspicion, would renew confidence in our public officials, and pave the way to a better understanding and evaluation of these great phenomena.\n\nSuch a clear acknowledgment,emenating from the head of our nation might divert mankind's attention from the spectre of impending atomic war. It could lift the consciousness of everyone on this earth to a Cosmic level where a complete new set of Spiritual, scientific and social values would be within the reach of all.\n\nDETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB\n\nName ____________ Address ____________\nName ____________ Address ____________\nName ____________ Address ____________\nName ____________ Address ____________\nName ____________ Address ____________\nName ____________ Address ____________"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Director, FBI DATE: 11/2/54\n\nFROM: SAC, Cincinnati (100-new)\n\nSUBJECT: CIVILIAN RESEARCH, INTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS\nLEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, Director, 7017 Britton Avenue\nCincinnati 27, Ohio\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nReferets to the Bureau dated 6/8/54 and 7/22/54 captioned, TRUMAN BETHURUM, FLYING DISCS, MISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING (ESPIONAGE), Bufile 62-83894.\n\nAttached for the Bureau's information is the 10/1/54 \"Newsletter\" of the Civilian Research, Interplanetary Flying Objects, designated Vol. I No. 7, which has the address P. O. Box 1855 (Cincinnati, Ohio), and which identifies LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, 7017 Britton Avenue, Cincinnati 27, Ohio, as the director of the organization. On the first page of this \"Newsletter\" STRINGFIELD reports that he had a private talk with Lt. Colonel JOHN O'MARA, Deputy Commander, Intelligence, U. S. Air Force, on 9/21/54 and that in essence Colonel O'MARA had told STRINGFIELD that flying saucers do exist and that past contradictions were unfortunate.\n\nThere is also enclosed a newspaper clipping from the Cincinnati Times Star dated 9/28/54, entitled, \"Saucers\" No Myth, Says Researcher. This article refers to the \"Newsletter\" enclosed and also reports on the interview of STRINGFIELD with Lt. Colonel JOHN O'MARA, Deputy Commander, Air Force Intelligence, Wright Field.\n\nIn addition, there is enclosed a second clipping, this being from the Cincinnati Post of October 11, 1954, entitled, \"See 'Em?---Saucers Cover City. This article reflects that several persons in Cincinnati had cited flying saucers and had reported them to LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD.\n\nRCD:BL\nEncls. (3)\nRegistered Mail\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 19 1964"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CI. 100-new\n(CIVILIAN RESEARCH, INTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS)\n\nThe \"Newsletter\" and the two newspaper clippings were\nforwarded to this office by JACK GUNDERMAN, 3914 Teleford\nAvenue, Cincinnati 20, Ohio, under date of 10/20/54. Mr.\nGUNDERMAN advised that he is employed as a layout artist\nby the DuBois Company, Inc., 1120 West Front Street,\nCincinnati 3, Ohio, and that he began work there on 8/19/54.\nHe advised that the advertising manager of this company\nis LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD who is intensely interested in\nflying saucers and has created the Civilian Research,\nInterplanetary Flying Objects organization. He advised that\nSTRINGFIELD is director of this organization and is\nassisted by his wife, that he writes and publishes monthly\nthe multi-lithographed \"Newsletter,\" and that he claims\nthat the publication now has a world-wide circulation of\nabout 4,000 copies at a subscription price of $2.00 per year.\n\nGUNDERMAN further advised that STRINGFIELD regularly\ncommunicates with FRANK EDWARDS, former A.F. of L. radio\nnews commentator, on the subject of saucers and that,\naccording to STRINGFIELD, EDWARDS is also intensely interested\nin saucers. EDWARDS recently warned STRINGFIELD to be very\ncareful or the Air Force would stop STRINGFIELD's publishing\nactivities. GUNDERMAN also related that STRINGFIELD maintains\nthat the Air Force was responsible for EDWARDS being\nfired as the A.F. of L. radio news commentator because EDWARDS\nused his program to publicize his (EDWARDS) saucer interest.\n\nGUNDERMAN related that STRINGFIELD states in the\n\"Newsletter\", and also personally, that the U. S. Air Force\nmaintains a strict censorship of news pertaining to saucers,\nthat the Air Force has several thousand saucer scientists\nworking on a research project, and that any military\npersonnel working on the project are subject to immediate\ncourt-martial if they reveal any facts about it.\n\nSTRINGFIELD has also stated to GUNDERMAN that he be-\nlieves his home telephone is being monitored, presumably\nby the Air Force, and that he makes phone calls to Wright-\nPatterson Air Force Intelligence Officer JOHN O'MARA and to\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CI. 100-new\n(CIVILIAN RESEARCH, INTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS)\n\nFRANK EDWARDS from his office at the DuBois Company.\nGUNDERMAN continued that he believes STRINGFIELD is now\nafraid to proceed too much for fear the Air Force will in\nsome way stop his operations and that EDWARDS' warning to\nSTRINGFIELD was after the issuing of the October 1, 1954,\n\"Newsletter\" which contained the article about STRINGFIELD's\ninterview with Colonel O'MARA. At the same time, GUNDERMAN\nreported that STRINGFIELD, in talking about the possibility\nthat the Air Force might stop his operations, made a state-\nment to the effect that, \"The Air Force can't do anything\nto me. I'm claiming saucers are interplanetary.\"\n\nGUNDERMAN continued in his letter that another point\nwhich may or may not be of interest is the fact that the\nDuBois Company copywriter, HERBERT E. CLARK, 4974 Strathmore\nDrive, Cincinnati, is a close friend of STRINGFIELD and is\ninterested in STRINGFIELD's organization. He identified\nCLARK as about 25 years of age and a graduate of Ohio Wesleyan\nUniversity where CLARK claims to have been a member of an\ninter-racial social college fraternity. GUNDERMAN said he\nnoticed that CLARK often brings up such subjects as the\nfalseness of religion, that atomic and hydrogen bombs may be\nthe cause of bad weather, and that colored people shouldn't\nbe discriminated against. At the same time CLARK is active\nin the Methodist Church and in the Cincinnati Civil Defense\norganization.\n\nGUNDERMAN advised that he was furnishing the foregoing\ninformation because he thought that possibly the real\npurpose of the Civilian Research, Interplanetary Flying\nObjects organization might be to gather bits of information\nabout a very secret U. S. Air Force Development Project.\n\nMy letter of 6/8/54 in referenced matter concerning\nTRUMAN BETHURUM on pages 4 and 5 contains information re-\ngarding STRINGFIELD's interest in BETHURUM and that the\nindices of this office at that time contained no information\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CI. 100-new\n(CIVILIAN RESEARCH, INTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS)\n\nregarding STRINGFIELD. This letter also contains informa-\ntion concerning a contact by THOMAS EICKHOFF with Lt.\nColonel JOHN O'MARA, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, on\n6/6/54 relative to BETHURUM's story regarding flying saucers.\n\nThe foregoing is for the Bureau's information and\nthis office is advising OSI, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base\nof the substance of the information in this letter and that\nno further action is being taken. It is noted that JACK\nGUNDERMAN requested in his letter that his identity be\nkept confidential.\n\nThe files of this office reflect that JACK SPAIN\nGUNDERMAN voluntarily appeared at this office in December,\n1951, and furnished a piece of literature which he had\nfound at the University of Cincinnati. At that time he had\nno information as to subversive activities and no further\ncontact was made with him.\n\nThe files of this office contain only one reference\nto HERBERT E. CLARK. This reflects that he is HERBERT E.\nCLARK, Jr., and that in August, 1954, as program chairman\nof the Pleasant Ridge Methodist Church Marri-eds class, he\nrequested a speaker for 11/13/54. On 9/13/54 he was advised\nthat SA MARK M. McSHURLEY would speak to the above mentioned\nclass on the topic of General Activities of the FBI."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"C.R.I.F.O. NEWSLETTER\nOctober 1, 1954\nVol. I No. 7\nCivilian Research, Interplanetary Flying Objects\n\nEXCLUSIVE: PRIVATE TALK WITH LT. COLONEL JOHN O'MARA, DEPUTY COMMANDER, INTELLIGENCE, CONFIRMS THE EXISTENCE OF \"FLYING SAUCERS\" -- TRUTH MAY BE BARED SOON AS \"TECHNICAL DATA\" REACHES THE AIR FORCE. AIR FORCE PLANS COOPERATION WITH PUBLIC.\n\nThe greatest story involving Earth and Space may soon be told. The \"silence\" group -- that official fear-faction of the Air force -- who for years fought to keep the truth from the public has now lost its anaconda-hold on accumulative evidence. Stimulated by recent events, the triumphant fearless-faction of the Air Force will take the benighted public into confidence. As Col. O'Mara intimated: we want to cooperate and dispense with the misconception that \"flying saucers\" do not exist. Here is the essence of Col. O'Mara's statements, 9/21/54:\n\nFlying saucers \"do exist\" the Colonel told me, and he added, in effect, past contradictions were unfortunate. At this point I asked the Colonel if there were two breakdowns of saucers ... the interplanetary device and the secret American missile. I was first corrected on the term \"missile\", then the Colonel said he believed there were \"three breakdowns\" -- the third, \"natural phenomena.\" By such an admission, we therefore have these three breakdowns ... 1) the controlled \"saucer\" from outer space... 2) a secret American saucer-like device and 3) unexplained natural phenomena.\n\nWhen I tried for a committal statement on the interplanetary \"saucer\" I was, as expected, rebuffed, but was told that in their research they were \"gradually getting more data.\" Then for corroboration, I asked if all the saucers seen by Americans were American devices and to this the Colonel replied: \"Definitely not! Something does exist,\" he said, which, of course, is diametric to all A. F. statements following Major Keyhoe's book. In this respect, the Colonel intimated that the A. F. plans to cooperate with the public ... and a statement will be forthcoming from the Defense Dept. which will explain some of the past contradictions and release the details behind many of the sightings. When I asked, again, about the 700 sightings a week, he told me that this would be covered in the A. F. release.\n\nCol. O'Mara and I discussed many sensative issues. Although he spoke guardedly, the Colonel was wonderfully cooperative, and I could well appreciate his position in relation to official security. When, for instance, I asked about the Earth Satellites, and the theory indicating they were \"rocks\" ( see page 3) he replied that he has not received word they were \"rocks.\" He said the scientist in White Sands \"are still working very hard and have lots of things to work on.\" When I asked about the silent Mars Committee he explained that the astronomers have not issued a report because \"they are in disagreement\" as to what they found.\n\nIn my 26 minute talk with the Colonel we also discussed saucer hostility, mysterious plane crashes, the Atlantic problem, and, whether or not the CRIFO Newsletter was slanted in the right direction. Re: the latter, the Colonel said, in effect, that it (the Newsletter) was in the right direction ...\n\nEditor's Note: Our Newsletter, due to above information, was revamped the last minute. What was the first page is now the second, et al.\n\n62-83894-349"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-2-\nSAUCERS HARASS EARTH; FEAR OF WORLD PANIC FORCES INTERNATIONAL CENSORSHIP: Behind the Mask of Comedy is tragedy -- the tragedy of censorship; on stage is the \"Flying Saucer\" whose misfortune of name has held it ludicrously before the public eye since Ken Arnold announced \"nine saucer-like things\" flying near Mt. Ranier in 1947.\n\n\"Saucers\" in their true dimension are less ludicrous to world governments. Working in cooperative secrecy they have enforced a bowstring-tight conspiracy of censorship. A recent example is found in this writer's correspondence with the Chilean Naval Mission in Washington, D. C. To quote their reply of December 23, 1953:\n\n\"We are pleased to acknowledge receipt of your letter ... regarding the photographs showing UFO's in formational flight, which you mention were taken by Captain Orrego of the Chilean Navy near Antarctica in 1948.\"\n\n\"Regarding this matter we wish to inform you that recently we received a communication from Capt. Orrego stating that he had not seen any UFO's over the Antarctica in 1948,therefore, the photographs requested by you do not exist....\"\n\n(Signed) Harold Nagel, Captain\nChief of the Chilean Naval Mission.\n\nGoing back into old files I find that Capt. Augusto Orrego said:\"During the bright antarctic night we saw flying saucers, one above the other, turning at tremendous speeds. We have photographs to prove what we saw.\"\n\nAnd now, the proof of Chilean contradiction, thus international censorship. Here I refer to Major Keyhoe's recent book. He says: \"Later, when I requested copies from the Chilean Embassy in Washington I was told that the pictures ( Captain Orrego's) were classified.\"\n\nEditor: For the pictures to be classified they first had to exist. Why, during December, did they fail to exist? Does this tie in with the U.S. Air Force's sudden security ruling, which I learned by letter from ATIC, Wright-Patterson AFB, dated Dec. 17, 1953. They said, in part: \"In reference to your letter, the ATIC has been directed to make all information on Project Blue Book available to the Dept. of Defense for release from that point only ....\"\n\nWhat happened in those yestermonth skies? Why do our Air Force and Central Intelligence bend over backwards to circumvent the truth about flying saucers? Why do foreign governments self-contradict themselves? Are they hiding supersaucer missiles of their own ... or, are they all just being cooperative to conceal some great American weapon? Hardly!\n\nThe answer is in the skies today ... right this minute! Fresh reports come to my desk daily. They come from competent and honest people. While these reports are being written other vehicles are crossing the barriers of space and time to \"violate\" earth's international boundaries ... to harass the paths of airlines, and with increasing frequency, to come closer to terra firma. Here, they hover over roof tops, \"buzz\" automobiles and peer into house windows. Some cause destruction, even death. Are these the behind-the-scenes reasons for censorship?"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-3-\nTHE EARTH SATELLITE ENIGMA -- ARE THEY MOSCOW'S ... METEORIC OR MARTIAN? Statements conflict, as usual. I first reported these two mysterious earth satellites in my April Newsletter ... then again, following Lt. Col. O'Mara's admission to me, June 8, that a govt. project was tracking the objects but that the evidence was conflicting.\n\nI heard nothing more until Aug. 3 when Edward W. Hermann, special agent for McGraw-Hill Publications, told me Dave Anderton, Engineering Editor of Aviation Week, had received a report from Dr. Lincoln La Paz regarding the satellites, and, that it would \"appear in detail in a coming issue.\" In that a correspondent friend, Ted Bloecher of New York, tells me he tried dozens of newstands for the magazine, but to no avail ( indicating a sudden scarcity) I will quote the August 23, 1954 issue of Aviation Week:\n\n\"Pentagon scare over the observance of two previously unobserved satellites orbiting the earth had dissipated with the identification of the objects as natural, not artificial satellites. Dr. Lincoln La Paz ... headed the identification project. One satellite is orbiting about 400 miles out while the other track is 600 miles from the earth. Pentagon thought the Russians had beaten the U.S. to space operations.\"\n\nNow, the rest of the story, thanks to Ted Bloecher. Says Ted: \"Being of a nature that is naturally suspicious of anything printed, I wrote Dr. La Paz and requested that he verify this release. I received an answer yesterday. (Sept. 8). In his letter, Dr. La Paz regrets 'that Aviation Week's misleading satellite story has received such widespread and uncritical publicity.' Enclosed also was the letter he (La Paz) had written to A. P. Strangely enough, the papers were content with carrying the false report, for I've seen no mention of Dr. La Paz's correction on this report.\"\nFollowing is copy of letter, in part, by Dr. La Paz, to the Associated Press:\n\n\"Scientifically and militarily, the search for nearby satellites of the earth is one of the most important on which mankind has ever embarked. It is therefore unfortunate, although not surprising, that false rumors are bound to be circulated in regard to the nature and results of this search.\n\n\"As regards the Aviation Week story on the satellite search, summarized in the A. P. release shown me, it is false in every particular insofar as reference to me is concerned.... No one representing Aviation Week has questioned me concerning any possible connection I may have with the satellite search program, and no one whatever has been authorized to credit me with the activities attributed to me in the Aviation Week story.\"\n\n(Signed) Lincoln La Paz\nDirector Institute of Meteoritics\n\nYour letters and clippings are greatly appreciated; each is carefully read and filed. Since the April Newsletter, more than 8000 letters have crossed my desk -- a tremendous load for just two people. My wife, Dell, handles all administrative details, subscriptions, mailing, etc., while I direct the research and prepare the Newsletter. We are both grateful for your kind letters and your enduring patience. KEEP THE MAIL COMING, but we're afraid to commit ourselves on a reply. The Newsletter is published first Friday of the month. Subscription $2.00 a year, starting with June 1954 issue. Six month subscriptions starting in April terminate with Oct. issue. Mark RENEWAL clearly with remittance. Back copies of April, May, June issues available at 25¢ each. Foreign subscriptions (except Canada) are $2.60 regular first class mail. Air Mail add 50¢ extra per issue of Newsletter."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-4-\nLOGAN, UTAH JOLTED BY VIOLENT EXPLOSION AND GAPING CRATER FOLLOWING MYSTERIOUS \"STREAK OF LIGHT\" IN SKY: First guess -- a meteorite, but as the evidence was assembled by foremost authorities, the theory dissipated. Here's the story, thanks to the help of Mrs. John German of Woodscross, Utah who probed the Salt Lake Tribune files for the early facts -- before SILENCE!\n\nOn May 7, 1954 the Tribune reported: \"A 'conventional meteorite fall' did not produce the crater found west of here Sunday, and probing operations at the scene have been discontinued, geologists said. In a 73-word statement, 3 scientists gave reasons why they ended their investigation, but it contained no opinion on who or what made the hole, or how it was made.\n\n\"The statement, signed by J. Stewart Williams, professor of geology, Utah State Agricultural College, Lincoln La Paz, director, Institute of Meteoritics, University of New Mexico and Clyde T. Hardy, USAC geology professor read:\n\n'In the region extending from Clarkston south to Paradise, exhaustive interrogation of numerous persons who saw or heard the explosive phenomenon at midnight on May 1 has been carried out. The testimony thus obtained and material evidence recovered as a result of subsurface investigations at the site of the explosion west of Logan have disclosed that the crater was not produced by a conventional meteorite fall. For these reasons, operations have been discontinued!\"\n\nAnd from the Tribune, May 5: \"Dr. Lincoln La Paz spent his first full day here, working with Dr. J. Stewart Williams and Dr. Clyde T. Hardy. On his arrival here Monday night, Dr. La Paz said the hole must have been made by a 'whopper' if it contains a meteorite. They decided to place a frame around the crater and cover it with wire mesh. Workers will stand on movable planks and probe with a pipe. In this way they will know they have probed every place possible under the mesh.\n\n\" 'My recommendation is that we excavate until we find what made the hole,' said Dr. La Paz, who is credited with recovering the world's largest aerolite, weighing more than one ton.\"\n\nThe incident occurred on May 1 bringing \"500 phone calls\" to the Logan City Police Dept. Residents reported their houses \"shaken\" and TV viewers said their reception was disturbed. A check made later with Hill Air Force Base and Salt Lake City indicated no planes in the area for several hours. A war veteran described the 16 ft. wide and 6 ft. deep hole as looking like a \"bomb crater.\" Sod was found scattered in all directions for more than 100 yards.\n\nOn Aug. 31, '54, I wrote Dr. Clyde T. Hardy, geologist who worked on the project, asking if any substantial evidence as to its (the explosion's) source had been uncovered. Following is Dr. Hardy's reply of Sept. 11, 1954:\n\n\"Reference is made to your letter of Aug. 31 re. the explosion and crater west of Logan. Although a fireball was reported by several people previous to the ground explosion, I am personally convinced that they were confused. One especially competent observer describes a ground flash only and he was favorably situated to see all aspects of the occurrence.\"\n\n(Signed) Clyde T. Hardy\nAssoc. Prof., Dept. Geology\n\n(Ref. File: Case 20)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-5-\nJET \"EXPLODES\" CHASING UFO NEAR UTICA, N. Y.: The gamy but saucerphobic press tried pitting wits with its readership. They handed the unsuspecting reader a front page story without the facts, then ( see July 3 New York Times) presented the facts in a separate story buried in the back pages. Reason: They feared public reaction to saucer tragedy, viz: Capt. Mantell. But, wits didn't pit right with Ted Bloecher and others such as Lester S. Parker of Topeka, Kansas. They correlated the loose ends:\n\nLet's review one \"end\" -- the front page story: A jet fighter returning from a \"scramble\" to investigate an \"unidentified aircraft\", plunged into tiny Walesville eleven miles southwest of Utica, about 12:30 P.M., July 2, 1954. The plane crashed into an auto and two buildings killing four persons.\n\nThe Air Force in Washington announced the F-94-C Starfire had been sent up on \"an active air defense intercept mission.\" According to the U.P. release of July 3, \"Air Force spokesmen said the cockpit of the plane ... became unbearably hot during the flight and that the pilot ordered his radar observer to bail out ... then bailed out himself at 7000 ft.\"\n\nAccording to the A.P. release in New York Times July 3, \"The air base (Griffis AFB) said, ' that fuel in the burning plane apparently had exploded when the jet crashed.' They said it had not been determined whether an explosion occurred while the jet was in the air.\"\n\n\"Later,\" according to A.P., \"an AF spokesman in Washington said the intercepted plane was one that had failed to file a flight plan with C.A.A. or, one that drifted off its announced flight path.\"\n\nThe U.P. and A.P. stories of disaster were essentially true, but because of the \"disaster\" angle they designated the pursued object as a \"plane\" rather than a UFO. Ted Bloecher, who did some checking, told me that his friend, Ed Wilkenson, listened to a broadcast which described the incident, thus: \"The jet had successfully contacted the UFO but still could not identify it.\"\n\nBut Ted Bloecher's real find was in the small item buried in the New York Times' (July 3) back pages. It reads:\n\n\"A silvery, balloon-like object floating high over the Utica area sent residents rushing to their telephones to make inquiries of newspapers, police and radio stations.\n\n\"The Utica Press estimated that more than 1000 calls about the object jammed its switchboard between 6 and 10:00 P.M. It was reported sighted by residents in a twenty-five mile radius extending from Rome on the west to Frankfort, east of Utica.\n\n\"Col. Milton F. Summerfelt commandant of the Air Force Depot at Rome said the object appeared to be a plastic balloon about 40 ft. long and partially deflated. He theorized that it was making a gradual descent and said that if it still were in the area tomorrow morning a plane would be sent to investigate.\n\n\"A Mohawk Airlines pilot estimated the altitude of the object at about 20,000 ft. He said he saw a light apparently shining from it.\"\n\n( Ref. Case File - 21)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-6-\nA WORD FROM \"SILENCED\" BUT NOT FORGOTTEN FRANK EDWARDS: Many hundreds of letters have been received asking for \"inside\"details behind Frank Edwards' dismissal from radio. Many have voiced their anger and, many like Shirley Watson of Vienna, Va., have vociferated their feelings to Mr. Meany, AFL President. CRIFO owes a lot to Frank Edwards, so I wrote Frank recently and asked him for a statement. Here is Frank's reply of August 26, 1954 in part:\n\n\"The facts are that for a long time I had been fighting the encroachment of censorship imposed by Meany. The final straw came when on Aug. 2nd this year he sent me a memorandum imposing conditions which my attorneys regard as a violation of my contract ... and conditions under which I could no longer continue to produce the same type of broadcast which had built my program to one of the top three ... according to AFL statements.\n\n\"Meany's Aug. 2 memo notified me that the AFL censor would tell me what items MUST be carried. Still disguised as an 'editor' the censor would inspect the scripts and stand by to see that I carried the material as directed.\n\n\"Am glad that I was able to be of assistance to you in the dissemination of the material in which we both, along with millions of others, are so deeply interested.\" Best wishes,(Signed) Frank Edwards\n\nReaders will be interested to know that Frank Edwards has written an article entitled \"SPIES IN THE SKIES?\" which is to appear in the Nov. issue of Real magazine. Says Frank: \"It deals with some of the little known aspects of the greatest news story of our times.\" DON'T MISS IT!\n\nMYSTERY METAL IGNITES ROAD: Woodside, California officials and residents were baffled by a shower of white-hot metal pellets, Aug. 27, 1954. The furore was triggered when a woman motorist saw a \"circle of fire\" along Pertola Road. Later firemen found scores of small pieces of flaming metal burning the pavement over an area about 70 by 250 feet. The blacktop bubbled where the metal burned into it and grass fires were started where the metal burned along the shoulders of the highway. A resident, Ignacio Miramontes, reported hearing a loud explosion about 4:15 P.M., but saw nothing.\n\nAccording to U.P. release, \"Metallurgists and AF officials offered no solution for the white-hot pellets. San Mateo officials reported the pellets ranging in size from a dime to a 50 cent piece, and according to Woodside Fire Chief, John Volpaino, the metal shower burned holes in the road surface a quarter of an inch deep. \"I just can't figure it out,\" he said. \"It has me completely mystified.\" Deputy Sheriff Robert Benassini said the metal scraps had irregular marking and appeared to have come from a \"cylindrical object.\"\n\nAn Air Force spokesman advanced the theory, the metal came from jet plane exhaust pipes which reach extreme temperatures in flight. However, a check with air bases disclosed no military jets were in the bay area Friday. (Thanks to Perry G. Powers of Duarte and an unnamed informant who sent in the story from San Fransisco Call Bulletin.)\n\nTHE \"SPLOTCHED PAINT MYSTERY\": On the same date in Little Hollywood, in a community in the valley by the bay just north of San Fransisco County line, residents were baffled by a \"splotched paint mystery\"! About half of the approximate 300 homes in the area were affected. One white stucco house turned pink, a gray house splotched, a green house came out looking like a \"marble cake.\" None of the residents had an explanation."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-7-\n\nTHE CINCINNATI PAINT INCIDENT -- A PARALLEL PHENOMENON?\nResidents in Cincinnati, Sept. 11, '54 had similar experiences. One Albert\nAllgeyer came home from work to find the bright yellow trim on his two-story\nhouse stained to a \"washed-out brown, almost black color.\" The stains wouldn't\nrub off, without taking the hard top coat of paint,too. It looked like someone\nhad used a blow-torch, and in some places the stains appeared in dirty brown\nrivulets. Allgeyer was certain that the stains weren't there the night before.\nSo was Howard May, neighbor, who received similar treatment. His house is\ntrimmed in yellow too, as is another house across the street where stains\nappeared.\n\nOn Sept. 22, I talked with Allgeyer again and learned that the Kettering Lab at\nUniversity of Cincinnati had taken air samples as well as specimens of the af-\nfected paint. A Dr. Hughes explained that the mystery was caused by the chemi-\ncal reaction of hydrogen sulphide which could attack the lead in certain paints.\nThe Lab averred that the chemical probably emanated from the Millcreek Valley\nwhich runs near Allgeyer's home, and which has since affected other homes in\nthe area. Although a Proctor and Gamble doctor who examined Allgeyer told\nhim that the chemical mentioned is not injurious to people, Allgeyer, five days\nafter the incident complained of extreme swelling of both hands and eye lids.\nDescribed as some kind of allergy -- not hives, they offered no explanation.\n\nEditor's Note: Remembering other ubiquitous mysteries, viz., pitted wind-\nshields, metallic pellets, curious ash deposits, I referred to a recent article\nwritten by Edward S. Schultz, of Buffalo, N.Y. entitled, \"The Growing Wind-\nshield Damage Phenomenon,\" which appeared in B.S.R.A.'s May-June, 1954\nissue of Round Robin. In this, Schultz offers plausible and provocative theory\n... and the possible answer to these phenomena. Write Meade Layne,Direc-\ntor, 3524 Adams Ave., San Diego 16, California.\n\nCASE FILE REVIEW: Space does not permit the use of all the excellent ma-\nterial received. Sightings in the U.S., Europe and Australia are continuing\nand will be used in forthcoming issues of the Newsletter.\n\nC-22, Rockford, Ill... 9/5/54) As they had done on many occasions, amateur\nastronomers, Peter Bartkus and Theodore McColm, were watching the moon\nthrough a telescope. Between the hours of 10:35 and 11:15 P.M., Bartkus\nwrites: \"I observed the most unusual phenomena I have ever had the experi-\nence of witnessing.\" Bartkus continues: \"The moon was observed through my\n6\" cassigranian reflector telescope using a secondary mirror. The total focal\nlength for this setup is over 100\", and with the use of 150 and 200 power occu-\nlars we got tremendous power with the least loss of light. The moon was in\nthe first quarter and its diameter was 29 feet, 30 inches. We saw a spherical\nobject ascending from the northern section off Mare Humboldtianum area. It\nwas not glowing or brilliant, but seemed more like a dull reflected light of a\nplanet. Its size we estimated at about the diameter of craters Pitiscus or\nVlaco. At the time it disappeared at 11:15, it had travelled more than the 29'\n30\" of arc in about 40 minutes. We checked out the possibility of atmospheric\ndiffraction in the sky or the scope by traversing the scope, and by changing\nthe occulars. The object must have been a powered body because as the moon\nwas descending at 1081 mph, the object was ascending and not following a true\norbit. It was definitely in space, and in the same field as the moon, or near\nthe moon.\""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-8-\n\nThe drawings below are Theodore McColm's. They illustrate the object's size\nand movement at 4 minute intervals in relation to the moon. McColm, through\ncalculus, estimated the object to be 12,500 ft. in diameter.\n\nEditor's Note: This incident and Case 14 transcends any notion that \"saucer\"\nvehicles are confined to earth's atmosphere, therefore U.S. or Russian origin.\nUnless these governments are secretly conducting interplanetary travel, Cases\n14 and 22 and myriads of others, add another positive link to the hypothesis\nthat \"saucers\" are extra-terrestrial and are using the moon as a hopping-off\npoint.\n\nC-23, Rome, Italy ... 9/18/54) A.P. Wire: Startled Romans who saw a strange\ncigar-shaped object streaking over the capital flooded newspaper offices with\ncalls. Radar operators also reported picking up the missile on instruments.\nTechnicians at Ciampino Airfield described the \"half-cigar\" as plummeting\ntoward earth for more than 1000 ft., then rising at tremendous speed before\nvanishing. ( Thanks to George Popowitch, Barberton, Ohio.)\n\nAn INS release by eyewitness Michael Chinigo states: \"What attracted my at-\ntention was the strange sound as it passed overhead. It was like thunder with\na staccato effect ... a series of explosions that grew louder as the object got\ncloser. This was followed by a dead silence as the thing stopped, or appeared\nto, at a height of about 6000 ft. Suddenly it shot upward and left an exhaust\ntrail of milky white smoke. It went straight up into the sky. The Defense\nDept. described it as a 'clipped cone' with a smaller surface on the bottom, or\nas two semi-circular disks, one bigger than the other, with a bigger one on\ntop. To me it seemed like an inverted sawed-off cone. What was strange was\nthe object's ability to 'park' in mid-air for several minutes. The radar station\nat Rome which picked up the 'cigar' or 'cone' said it registered for 39 minutes.\"\n( Thanks to Warren Morse, Palo Alto, Calif.)\n\nEditor's Note: Significant here is the AP and INS release. First they break\nus the news on the Labrador sighting in July, then silence, then the Norwegian\nspace man story in August, now Italy. Foreign sightings all -- a subtle\npreparation."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Subject: CIVILIAN RESEARCH,\nINTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS,\nLEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, Director,\nCincinnati, Ohio\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nEnclosures to Bureau:\n\n1. \"Newsletter\" of 10/1/54 of the Civilian Research,\nInterplanetary Flying Objects.\n\n2. Newspaper clipping from Cincinnati Times Star,\n9/28/54 entitled, \"Saucers\" No Myth, Says Researcher.\n\n3. Newspaper clipping from Cincinnati Post, 10/11/54,\nentitled See 'Em?---Saucers Cover City.\n\nCI. 100-new\n\nRM"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Saucers\" No\nMyth, Says\nResearcher\n\nFlying saucers are not a\nmyth.\nAt least, this is the studied\nconviction of Leonard H.\nStringfield, director of civil-\nian research, Interplanetary\nFlying Objects, 7017 Britton\nAvenue, a former Air Force\nintelligence officer.\nIn a newsletter to be issued\nFriday by the research bureau,\nStringfield reported results of a\n26-minute interview on flying\nsaucers with Lt. Col. John\nO'Mara, deputy commander, Air\nForce intelligence, Wright Field.\nHe wrote that Col. O'Mara\n\"intimated\" that the Air Force\nwants to \"dispense with the mis-\nconception that 'flying saucers'\ndo not exist.\"\n\nSTRINGFIELD REPORTED:\n\"Flying saucers do exist,\" the\ncolonel told me, and he added\n... (that) past contradictions\nwere unfortunate.\n\"I asked the colonel if there\nwere two breakdowns of saucers\n... the interplanetary device and\nthe secret American missile. I\nwas first corrected on the term\n'missile,' then the colonel said he\nbelieved there were 'three break-\ndowns'---the third, 'natural phe-\nnomena.'\nBy such an admission,\"\nStringfield wrote, \"we therefore\nhave these three breakdowns:\n\n\"1. The controlled 'saucer\nfrom outer space.\n\"2. A secret American saucer-\nlike device.\n\"3. Unexplained natural phe-\nnomena.\"\nStringfield continued that\nwhen he asked the officer for a\ndefinite statement on saucers\nfrom outer space he was re-\nbuffed, but was told that Air\nForce research was \"gradually\ngetting more data.\"\n\nWHEN ASKED if all saucers\nseen by Americans---700 a week\n---were U.S. aircraft, Lt. Col.\nO'Mara replied, \"Definitely not!\nSomething does exist.\"\nThe Air Force officer further\n\"intimated,\" according to String-\nfield, that an official statement\nwill soon be issued by the De-\nfense Department \"which will\nexplain some of the past contra-\ndictions and release the details\nbehind many (flying saucer)\nsightings.\"\n\n'I can pretty well declare from\nevidence in my files,\" Stringfield\ntold the TIMES-STAR, \"that\nsome flying saucers definitely\ncome from outer space.\"\n\nCINCINNATI TIMES STAR, CINCINNATI,O.\nDate 9-28-54 Edition Final\nSection News Page 25"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"See 'Em?---Saucers Cover City\nSeveral Disc Objects Reported Over Cincinnati;\nLittle Men Leave Craft in Germany, Says Here\n\nMysterious aircraft ... \"orange-red col-\nored, silent, disc-shaped and 60 feet in diame-\nter,\" were reported hovering 300 feet over Cin-\ncinnati Monday.\nThis was the fifth report within a week of\nsimilar objects seen around the city, always\ntraveling in sets of three.\nA similar wave of flying saucer reports has\ncropped up in five other parts of the world,\nincluding Germany, Belgium, Egypt, Argetina,\nLebanon and the French Cameroons.\nLATEST DISCS cited here were Monday at\n5 a.m. by WLW announcer Keith Wildeson.\nHe reported the incident to Leonard H.\nStringfield, 7017 Britton Avenue, Madison\nPlace, director of civilian research, interplane-\ntary flying objects. He said the current reports\n\"seem to indicate a pattern\" in the flight of the\nsaucers.\nOne of Stringfield's neighbors, John H.\nSundstrom, 7010 Britton Avenue, spotted a\nformation of three discs Sunday at 5 p.m.\nSTRINGFIELD SAID Cincinnati is sup-\nposed to be a megnetic fault line and that per-\nhaps the saucers come here to recharge.\nIn Muenster, Germany, 42-year-old movie\nprojectionist Franz Hoge told the news agency\nDPA that he saw a \"flying saucer\" land in a\nfield and peculiarly shaped creatures get out.\nHoge said he noticed a bright blue light\nand thought at first it came from a crashed\nairplane. On closer examination, he declared,\nhe discovered a \"cigar-shaped\" craft hovering\nabout six feet above the ground and giving off\na brilliant blue radiance which nearly blinded\nhim.\nThen, the movie projectionist added, \"he\nsuddenly sighted four creatures about three and\none-half feet in height. He said they had\n\"thick-set bodies, oversized heads and delicate\nlegs\" and wore rubber-like clothing.\n\nOct 11 1954 Cin Post\n\nTHE CINCINNATI POST\nDate 10-11-54 Edition Final\nSection News Page"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, Cincinnati (100-New)\n\nNovember 12, 1954\n\nDirector, FBI (62-83894)\n\n62-83894-349\n\nCIVILIAN RESEARCH,\nINTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS\nLEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, Director,\n7017 Britton Avenue\nCincinnati 27, Ohio\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nReurlet 11/2/54.\n\nYou are instructed to forward to the Bureau\nby November 26, 1954, a memorandum suitable for dis-\nsemination containing the pertinent information in\nyour referenced letter incorder that it can be dis-\nseminated by the Bureau to OSI headquarters and to\nthe Department. Copies of the enclosures forwarded\nto the Bureau with your referenced let will be\nfurnished to OSI and to the Department by the Bureau\nas enclosures to the memorandum being prepared by you.\n\nEX-124\n\nTolson\nBoardman\nNichols\nBelmont\nHarbo\nMohr\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nSizoo\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy\n\nEHM:baw\n(4)\n\nCOMM - FBI\nNOV 12 1954\nMAILED 24\n\nNOV 15 1954\n\n1 NOV 17 1954"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI\nS. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nNov 12 5 53 PM '54\n\nNOV 151954"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI (62-83894)\n\nDATE: 11/22/54\n\nFROM : SAC, Cincinnati (100-11671)\n\nSUBJECT: CIVILIAN RESEARCH,\nINTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS\nLEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, Director\n7017 Britton Avenue\nCincinnati 27, Ohio\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nRebulet dated 11/12/54.\n\nAttached is a memorandum containing the\npertinent information contained in mylet of 11/2/54.\n\nRCD:SAS\n\nENCLOSURE\n\nREGISTERED MAIL\n\n2 - photostats of enclosures (newsletter and newspaper article) made 12/2/54\n\nRECORDED - 24\nINDEXED - 24\n\n62-83894-350\n\n58 DEC 7 - 1954"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI (62-83894)\n\nDATE: 11/22/54\n\nFROM : SAC, Cincinnati (100-11671)\n\nSUBJECT: CIVILIAN RESEARCH,\nINTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS\nLEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, Director\n7017 Britton Avenue\nCincinnati 27, Ohio\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nRebulet dated 11/12/54.\n\nAttached is a memorandum containing the\npertinent information contained in mylet of 11/2/54.\n\nRCD:SAS\n\nENCLOSURE\n\nREGISTERED MAIL\n\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nFBI\nLIAISON SECTION\nDEC 2 4 47 PM '54\n\nRECEIVED\nNOV 29 4 52 PM '54\nINTERNAL SECURITY SECT. FBI\n\nNOV 30 9 29 AM '54\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nFBI\nRECD ESPIONAGE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CIVILIAN RESEARCH,\nINTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS\nLEONARD H. STRINGFIELD,\nDirector,\n7017 Britton Avenue\nCincinnati 27, Ohio\n\nA source of unknown reliability, an acquaintance of LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD who is the Director of the captioned organization Civilian Research, Interplanetary Flying Objects, in October, 1954 advised that STRINGFIELD created this organization due to his intense interest in flying saucers. This source advised that STRINGFIELD is the Director of the organization and is assisted by his wife, and that STRINGFIELD writes and publishes monthly the multi-lithographed \"Newsletter\" of the organization. He uses the \"Newsletter\" to report news pertaining to the sightings of flying saucers and he claims the \"Newsletter\" now has a world-wide circulation of about 4,000 copies. The \"Newsletter\" sells at the subscription price of $2.00 per year.\n\nThe same source furnished a copy of the \"Newsletter\" dated October 1, 1954, which issue is designated Volume 1, Number 7, and carries the address Post Office Box 1855 (Cincinnati, Ohio). This issue identifies LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, address as captioned above, as the Director of the organization and reports that he had a private talk with Lieutenant Colonel JOHN O'MARA, Deputy Commander, Intelligence, United States Air Force, on September 21, 1954, and that in essence Colonel O'MARA told STRINGFIELD that flying saucers do exist and that past contradictions were unfortunate.\n\nIt is noted that the final edition of the Cincinnati \"Times Star\", a newspaper of general circulation in Cincinnati, Ohio, in its issue of September 28, 1954 on Page 25, carried an article entitled \"Saucers, No Myth, Says Researcher\". This article refers to the\n\n62-83894-350\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"October 1, 1954 issue of the \"Newsletter\", supra, and also reports on STRINGFIELD's interview with Lieutenant Colonel JOHN O'MARA, Deputy Commander, Air Force Intelligence, Wright Field (Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio).\n\nThe same source also reported that STRINGFIELD regularly communicates with FRANK EDWARDS, former A. F. of L. radio news commentator, on the subject of saucers and that, according to STRINGFIELD, EDWARDS is also intensely interested in saucers. EDWARDS recently warned STRINGFIELD to be very careful or the Air Force would stop STRINGFIELD's publishing activities. This source further reported that STRINGFIELD maintains that the U. S. Air Force was responsible for EDWARDS being fired by the A. F. of L. as its radio news commentator because EDWARDS used his program to publicize his (EDWARDS') saucer interest.\n\nThis source further advised that STRINGFIELD has stated in his \"Newsletter\" and also personally that the U. S. Air Force maintains a strict censorship of news pertaining to saucers, that the Air Force has several thousand saucer scientists working on a research project and that any military personnel working on the project are subject to immediate court-martial if they reveal any facts about it.\n\nIt was also related by this source that STRINGFIELD has stated that he believes his home telephone is being monitored, presumably by the Air Force, and that he therefore, makes his phone calls to Lieutenant Colonel O'MARA at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and to FRANK EDWARDS from his office at the DuBois Company, Inc., 1120 West Front Street, Cincinnati 3, Ohio, where he is employed as the Advertising Manager. This source was of the opinion that STRINGFIELD is now afraid to proceed too much for fear the U. S. Air Force will in some way stop his operations and that EDWARDS' warning to STRINGFIELD came after STRINGFIELD had issued the October 1, 1954 \"Newsletter\" concerning his talk with Colonel O'MARA. At the same time, this source continued, STRINGFIELD in talking about the possibility that the U. S. Air Force might stop his operations, made a statement to the effect, \"The Air Force can't do anything to me. I'm claiming saucers are interplanetary.\"\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This informant advised that although he had no facts to suggest this possibility, the possibility had occurred to him that the real purpose of the above organization might be to gather bits of information about a very secret U. S. Air Force Development Project.\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED-45\nINDEXED-45\n\n62-83894-351\n\nNovember 26, 1954\n\nMrs. Helen L. Sullivan\nFirkole Bridge\nGlengariff, County Cork\nIreland\n\nDear Mrs. Sullivan:\n\nYour letter dated October 27, 1954, with enclosures, has just been received.\n\nThe thought prompting your writing me is very much appreciated, and I was interested in looking over the cuttings you forwarded.\n\nSince your communication may be of concern to another governmental agency, I am taking the liberty of forwarding a copy of it and copies of the two articles you noted to the Director, Office of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nI want to take this occasion to thank you for your kind expression of good wishes. I hope that my efforts will continue to merit your esteem.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncc - Legal Attache, London, England, with copy of incoming.\ncc - Foreign Liaison Desk and copies of enclosures\nCopies of incoming and enclosures sent by form to the Office of Special Investigations, Department of the Air Force.\n\nDCL:es\nCOMM - FBI\nNOV 29 1954\nMAILED 24"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ROME DAILY AMERICAN\n\nTuesday, September 28, 1954\n\nWindshield 'Cancer' Epidemic Moving To Northern Italy\n\nMysterious windshield explosions in Italy have followed a \"hurricane path\" of shattering glass across the country since June. The unexplainable car-windshield explosions have moved to Rome and then started north again, with the last case being noted one week ago at Modena, on the southern edge of the Po River valley.\n\nIn its wake the mystery has left sources of stunned motorists, many cut by glass, describing the phenomenon to puzzled authorities.\n\nThey were driving along, sober folk with nothing unusual visible before them, when suddenly—crash!\n\nThe \"exploded\" windshield splinters into a thousand pieces, crashing into their laps and often cutting the hands and face. More than once a serious crackup has been narrowly averted.\n\nWhat causes it? No one seems to know. Italians call it \"cancer of the windshield.\" In its course across Italy, the \"disease,\" which first appeared to strike American motorists in northwest U.S. has spread from automobiles to include streetcars and houses.\n\nIt has occurred by day and night and seems unrelated to weather, speed or age of vehicle.\n\nFollowing its June appearance in the Italian Piedmont, where it struck four cars in an area of a hundred miles, the epidemic moved east and south, hit Rome a week later. The phenomenon then moved north, blasting the front glass of a big red tourist bus in Genoa.\n\nLatest case, still further north, was the literal explosion of the windshield glass of Dr. Martino Farinetti at Modena. Dr. Farinetti, en route to a clinic, was cut in the face and momentarily lost control of the car. Attemping to brake to a stop, he spun around and nearly went over in a ditch."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Sunday, October 17, 1954\nROME DAILY AMERICAN\nPo Villagers See 'Saucer' Landing\nROVIGO, Italy, Oct. 16 (UP)—A shallow 20-foot crater and a scorched grove of popular trees in the marshlands of the Po river convinced the villagers of nearby Po Di Gnocca today that they really had seen a flying saucer.\nPolice said several score of the villagers watched the \"saucer\" go through its paces. They said the silver disc approached at great speed and then landed gently in the marshes a few miles away. After a short pause it rose perpendicularly into the air and sped away towards the east, they said.\nExcited villages who rushed to the spot where the disc appeared to land found the 20-foot crater and the scorched popolar trees.\nThe \"landing\" was the most sensational of a new wave of flying saucer reports which is mystifying Italy. Reports of \"discs\" and \"cigars\" came from all over the peninsula despite Air Ministry assurances that no such objects have been registered on the ministry's radar network."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"H. L. Sullivan\nFirkale Bridge\nGlengarriff Co. Cork\nR Glengarriff No. 97\nHon. J. Edgar Hoover\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D.C.\nU.S.A."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GLENGARRIFF CO CORK\n28 OCT 54\nWASHINGTON D.C.\nNOV 18 1954\nREG. DIV.\nGLENGARRIFF CO CORK"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Firkale Bridge\nGlengarriff Co Cork\nOctober 27, 1954\nHon. J. Edgar Hoover\nWashington D.C.\nDear Sir: \"Flying Saucers\"\nI am enclosing two articles for your attention. By a strange coincidence I read these two papers at the same time and then I suddenly remembered that when I was back \"Home\" that the papers carried many stories of \"Flying Saucers\" being seen in Oregon and Washington. It suddenly entered my mind that maybe there is a connection between \"Flying Saucers\" (?) and shattered \"windshields\"\nWe do use water to wash all kinds of glass. I just couldn't ignore the thought so I'm passing it along for what it's worth.\nWith every kind wish to you, Mr Hoover, for your wonderful work.\nRespectfully yours\n(Mrs) Helen L. Sullivan\n2 Enc.\nRome Daily American\n9-28-54\n10-17-54"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED\nNOV 19 9 29 AM '54\nMR.JONES"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nDATE: November 30, 1954\n\nFROM : SAC, Detroit (65-2677)\n\nSUBJECT: DETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB ESPIONAGE - X\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 3-27-80 BY SP-5 PSL/MMC 5-7-85 SP6 bya/tej 245974\n\nReference is made to a letter from the Director, dated October 8, 1954, to Mr. L. P. WAGNER, 4353 Dickerson, Detroit 15, Michigan, regarding the Detroit Flying Saucer Club.\n\nThe purpose of this letter is to set out for the information of the Bureau, the activities of Detroit Flying Saucer Club, as they are known. This is done chronologically.\n\nOn May 18, 1954, Mrs. JEAN PEARSON, Aviation Writer, Detroit Free Press, advised that she had been attending meetings concerning flying saucers, rockets to the moon, etc., which, she felt could be subversive. On May 27, 1954, Mrs. PEARSON and BUD GOODMAN, Detroit Free Press Editorial Writer, advised that one GEORGE ADAMSKI, had talked in Detroit on flying saucers. They were alarmed at the nature of the remarks; such as \"We are Americans, but\"......and that we should reduce our arms and would blow ourselves up with the H-Bomb, because visitors from outer space were afraid we had started something that would get out of hand. Another lecturer in Detroit, was TRUMAN BETHURUM. The sponsors of these speakers were HELEN REEVE, LAURA MARXER, HENRY MADAY, and RONALD COOK. According to pamphlets furnished by GOODMAN, a \"Flying Saucer Review Group\" was to be formed. This was headed by HENRY MADAY, 364 W. Lewiston, Ferndale, Michigan, who uses the pen name, JARED LYON. He is editor, Bresser Cross Index Directory, Detroit. They advised that LAURA MARXER was the Station WWJ-TV personality \"MIDGE\" in the \"Playschool\" program.\n\nOn July 13, 1954, GOODMAN advised that MADAY was bringing to Detroit, someone who talked to people from Venus, Clarion, etc., who are more highly advanced than earth people. They advocated the Golden Rule as the only workable rule. A meeting was to be held on July 15, 1954. GOODMAN also furnished a letter from one LAWRENCE JAMES HOGE or HUGE, encouraging him in his interest in flying saucers. GOODMAN felt such an organization could use the flying saucer scare as political propaganda or from a psuedo-religious view. He said they opposed the atomic bomb and warfare.\n\nMiss LOUISE MOONEY, 8854 Stoepel, Detroit, and a clerk in the Doubleday Bookstore, Penobscott Bldg., advised she attended the July 15, 1954 meeting of the flying saucer group. The purpose was"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nDEC 10 1 25 PM '54\nDETROIT ESPIONAGE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI RE: DETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB ESPIONAGE - X\n\nto organize a flying saucer club in Detroit. HENRY MADAY was behind it. She said she first met him when he came in the store to buy books on flying saucers. An organizational letter was passed out at this meeting stating the purpose of the \"Flying Saucer Club of Detroit\" was:\n\n1. Exchange ideas, and in general, become aware of the flying saucer picture.\n\n2. Invite national \"saucer\" speakers to Detroit, and enlighten the public.\n\n3. Spread information on flying saucers.\n\n4. To engage in those aspects of \"saucer\" interests, especially appealing to each member, such as, astronomy, engineering, spiritual, curiosity, etc.\n\nThe temporary committee setting forth these aims were: HENRY MADAY, LAURA MARXER, BRYANT REEVE, N. D. HUNTER, HOWARD KEHL, HELEN REEVE, and JOHN HOFFMAN. At this July 15, 1954, meeting, GEORGE ADAMSKI introduced CLARENCE O. TROUT, of E. Outer Drive, Detroit, who reported seeing a flying saucer July 14, 1954, at 10:30 p.m.\n\nMrs. JEAN MYRUS, 8848 Stoepel, advised that the first official meeting of the Detroit Flying Saucer Club (DFSC) would be held August 19, 1954.\n\nThe Detroit Times of August 20, 1954, in an article on the August 19, 1954 meeting, said that \"Scientists were wrong in discounting the flying saucer theory\" and that the Club would act as a clearing house for local sightings, and submit reports to the Army test center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton.\n\nMrs. MOONEY advised that the August 19, 1954 meeting consisted mostly of people saying they had seen saucers. Mr. REEVES, an engineer, commented on each reported sighting. JOHN HOFFMAN, an advertising man, and a Mr. TROUT, of Continental Motors, reported sightings.\n\nMr. VERN WILLARD, 30761 Glenmuer Rd., Farmington, Michigan, advised on September 29, 1954, that the officers of the DFSC, 6432 Cass Avenue, Detroit, were:\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI RE: DETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB ESPIONAGE - X\n\nHENRY MADAY, President\n\nLAURA MARXER, Vice-President\n\nDOLORES M. COYNE, Secretary\n\nJOHN C. HOFFMAN, Treasurer\n\nHe said the club was going to petition the President of the United States to make public all government information on flying saucers. He also stated that by letter, September 25, 1954, LAURA MARXER advised him he was a group leader in the club, and his duties would be to keep up with latest developments and advise his group, the names of which he would receive from Miss COYNE.\n\nThe Detroit Free Press of September 29, 1954, said in an article that the DFSC met September 28, 1954, and DESMOND LESLIE, British flying saucer authority, spoke, stating that GEORGE ADAMSKI made contact two years ago with space people in a California desert.\n\nMr. VERN WILLARD advised he received a letter September 30, 1954, from DOLORES M. COYNE, Secy., DFSC, setting out the discussion group in the Farmington area as:\n\nMr. and Mrs. BAILEY, 32740 Northwestern Highway Detroit, Mich\n\nALFRED S. STUDER, 28993 Parkhill Detroit, Mich\n\nM. K. ZIMMER, 29581 Belfast, Detroit, Mich.\n\nHe received a letter from her October 4, 1954, adding to the above list:\n\nMiss LUCY RAMBO, 30203 Overdale Ct., Rte. 4, Farmington, Mich\n\nMr. WILLARD, on October 13, 1954, said that LAURA MARXER asked him to call a meeting October 18, 1954. At this time, he said he felt he knew less about the club than anyone; but he thought it would make a good cover for subversive activities.\n\nHe advised the object of group discussions, according to MARXER, was:\n\n1. To indoctrinate people to receive space people.\n\n2. Mass landings in Detroit in October (not further explained.)\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\n\nRE: DETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB\nESPIONAGE - X\n\n3. A saucer landed at 4:30 a.m., September 30, 1954, at Rotunda Drive and Southfield (Detroit) with strange greenish men in brown uniforms.\n\n4. Unseen psychic forces (no further explanation.)\n\nMr. WILLARD said that a group met at his home October 24, 1954, consisting of:\n\nRUTH BAILEY and friend RUTH LOCKOUT (phonetic)\n\nLAURA MARXER\n\nJOHN HOBART\n\nAt this meeting, BAILEY said she was an athiest. The main discussion was about religion, science, and double talk, WILLARD said. Twenty such discussion groups exist. MARXER said there would be landings in Detroit in October, but she could be wrong. Before the meeting started, LUCY RAMBO called, saying, she was not coming and was resigning.\n\nMr. WILLARD said a group leaders meeting was held November 6, 1954, at Ed. ANDREWS, 7323 Mayburn, Dearborn. Seventeen were there. He did not consider any of it subversive. The Board of Directors of the DFSC are:\n\nHENRY MADAY, President\n\nLAURA MARXER, Vice-President\n\nDOLORES M. COYNE, Secretary\n\nJOHN C. HOFFMAN, Treasurer\n\nHOWARD KEHL )\n)\nRANDALL COX ) Directors\n)\nMADELINE MENDE )\n\nMr. WILLARD said the purpose of this leaders meeting was to discuss how to handle issues arising in group meetings. These were:\n\n1. Religious\n\n- 4 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\n\nRE: DETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB\nESPIONAGE - X\n\n2. Group representation to the Board of Directors of the club.\n\nThe group leaders are supposed to control discussion, and not offend any religious belief.\n\nAt this meeting, FRANK R. SCHUSTER, a group leader, 3022 Chalmers, Detroit, said that JOHN HOFFMAN opposed group meetings because of accusations against them of subversive activities. An unidentified person said he did not think it true, but it was alleged one member of the Board of Directors was a Communist. MADAY answered this by saying he would mention no names, but the accuser should see him about this, and the accused was not a Communist. He said fellow travellers could get in or infiltrate the club, but he was at a loss as to any way of controlling that. As a result of this meeting, WILLARD felt the group was either subversive, or a new religious group. He felt it all stems from ADAMSKI in California. He said one RIC. WILKINSON, a flying saucer speaker, had moved to Detroit.\n\nAt this meeting, MADAY said that had saucer landings occurred in Detroit, in October, the group leaders would have been first to know it. He said he reported to ADAMSKI the predictions of MARXER and ADAMSKI felt she should not predict more than 30 days in advance, and, even that was no good sometimes.\n\nOn November 4, 1954, WILLARD said Miss COYNE advised him another addition to his group was Mrs. CATHERINE SCHAEFER, 25390 Harcourt, and also, Mr. and Mrs. DOYLE WOODS, 26015 La Muera Drive, Farmington.\n\nWILLARD said that on November 8, 1954, LAURA MARXER advised him she was resigning from the Board of Directors of the Club as she had too many outside interests, and she had to eat. She said she was going to show the film, \"The Day the Earth Stood Still\", around Michigan, as a result of having met two men (not named). She said ADAMSKI, in California, was her God, even admitting his earthly faults.\n\nMr. HAROLD THOMPSON, 13341 Livernois, a former Chief Assistant to the Secretary of State (Michigan), and Detroit's first Interracial Committee Director, furnished this office on November 18, 1954, some literature put out by Dr. CHARLES A. LAUGHEAD, 407 Clarendon Road, East Lansing, Michigan, which THOMPSON's son obtained at a flying saucer discussion or class. LAUGHEAD's material is in the form of a letter, with attachments to American editors and Publishers, stating\n\n- 5 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\n\nRE: DETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB\nESPIONAGE - X\n\nhe feels they should publish it. He claims messages are received by extra sensory perception from other planets, which are watching the earth. He said one Mrs. DOROTHY MARTIN, Oak Park, Illinois, receives the messages, mostly as lessons for flying saucer clubs. He said she one day picked up her pencil, and it began to write for her in the form of these messages (apparently, it has been writing ever since). LAUGHEAD's letters to editors are dated August 30, 1954 and September 17, 1954. MARTIN's writings are set out as recordings, all in 1954, from April to August 27, 1954. One dated April 24, 1954, captioned \"Telepathy Our Common Means of Communication Dr. SEARLE BEIGLOW of Lansing, Michigan\". It says he was a physician and psychiatrist who suffered much, and was persecuted for his unorthodox lessons in mental disease. He seems to be the contact with outer space.\n\nIn his September 17, 1954 letter, LAUGHEAD states an important date is December 21, 1954, with the center of activity being the midwest. There will be an earthquake, buildings will fall, Lake Michigan will rise in a wave extending to Lake Erie, and here and elsewhere, he describes how the entire world will change geologically.\n\nOn November 23, 1954, Mr. GOODMAN, of the Detroit Free Press, called to advise he was going to do a story on the DFSC and their activities. He inquired whether the FBI was investigating the club, and was advised we could make no statement one way or another regarding the organization. It is not known the date his story will appear.\n\nThe Detroit Office has conducted no investigation of the DFSC, and has received its information from those indicated above, who are voluntarily furnishing it. No investigation of the club is contemplated at this time.\n\nDetroit has no identifiable subversive information on the officers of the club, or of LAUGHEAD or BEIGLOW (also BIGELOW). HENRY MADAY, mentioned in the Director's letter of October 8, 1954, above, has already come to the attention of the Bureau. He first came to the attention of Detroit Office, in 1942. He then used the pen name JARED LYON, was considered a religious fanatic, wrote widely on religious subjects, was connected with \"The Harbingers\", a \"Unity Movement\" group in Kansas City, and claimed objection to combatant military service in World War II. He has not been the subject of an investigation by Detroit.\n\n- 6 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/12/85 BY 826 bjt/ttq cont #215974\n\nTickler - Mossbury\n\nSAC, Detroit (65-2677) (original and one) December 16, 1954\n\nRECORDED - 71\n\nDirector, FBI (62-83894) 352\n\nDETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB\nESPIONAGE - X\n\nReurlet 11/30/54. You are instructed to forward to the Bureau a memorandum or report suitable for dissemination containing the pertinent information set forth in referenced letter, in order that it can be disseminated by the Bureau to OSI and to the Internal Security Division of the Department of Justice. In view of the facts set forth in referenced letter, no further investigation of this matter need be conducted by your office at this time.\n\nEHM:alp\n(4)\n\nTolson\nBoardman\nNichols\nBelmont\nHarbo\nMohr\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nSizoo\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy\n\nCOMM - FBI\nDEC 16 1954\nMAILED 24"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nSAC, Detroit (65-2677) (original and one) December 16, 1954\n\nDirector, FBI (62-83894)\n\nDETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB\nESPIONAGE - X\n\nReurlet 11/30/54. You are instructed to forward to the Bureau a memorandum or report suitable for dissemination containing the pertinent information set forth in referenced letter, in order that it can be disseminated by the Bureau to OSI and to the Internal Security Division of the Department of Justice. In view of the facts set forth in referenced letter, no further investigation of this matter need be conducted by your office at this time.\n\nEHM:alp\n(4)\n\nCOMM - FBI\nDEC 16 1954\nMAILED 24\n\nDEC 17 1954"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, Phoenix (62-213)\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nDATE: 11/26/54\n\nEnclosed herewith are envelope and form letter received by the Mayor of Tucson, Arizona, and made available to SA H. HILTON MC KEE of this office. It is noted the envelope bears return address of \"Aerial Phenomena Investigator\", 69 S Stemford Hill, London, England\" and postmark \"Stoke, Newington, 10/26/54\".\n\nThe form letter with a typewritten note bearing signature of one HAROLD MATTAN, who identifies himself as \"Aerial Phenomena Investigator\", seeks information regarding the sighting of any flying saucers. The inquiry is made by MATTAN \"in order to bring my reports and filing system up to date it would be very much appreciated if you would kindly complete the enclosed form and return same to me\".\n\nThe form calls for the following type data concerning any flying saucers observed: \"Time of sighting, size, shape, composition, speed, altitude, direction, maneuvre pattern, color, sound, length of time observed, sky conditions, visibility, direction of ground wind\". Also a space is provided for name, age and address of person executing the form and a space for general remarks.\n\nInformation concerning receipt and content of the above form has been furnished OSI offices at Williams AFB and Luke AFB in the Phoenix area. The original is enclosed for the Bureau, with the thought the information may be furnished legat, London, to be channelized to interested London agencies.\n\nJSA/hec\nEncl."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: December 9, 1954\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nThis Bureau's Office at Phoenix, Arizona, received from the Mayor of Tucson, Arizona, a form letter which he received from \"Aerial Phenomena Investigator,\" 69 Stamford Hill, London, N. 16, England. The envelope containing the form letter was postmarked \"Stoke, Newington, 10-26-54.\" The form letter with a typewritten note bearing the signature of Harold Mattan, who identified himself as \"Aerial Phenomena Investigator,\" seeks information regarding the sighting of flying saucers. Mattan indicated that the purpose of his inquiry was \"in order to bring my reports and filing system up to date it would be very much appreciated if you would kindly complete the enclosed form and return same to me.\"\n\nThe form calls for the following type data concerning any flying saucers observed: \"Time of sighting, size, shape, composition, speed, altitude, direction, maneuvre pattern, color, sound, length of time observed, sky conditions, visibility, direction of ground wind.\" On the form is provided a space for the name, age and address of the person executing the form and a space for general remarks.\n\nMattan is unknown in the files of this Bureau. The above information has been furnished your Offices at Williams AFB and Luke AFB.\n\n1 - Legal Attache (See note on P. 2) SECRET - AIR COURIER\nLondon, England\n1 - Foreign Service Desk (detached)\n\nJJM:kfc/bpk\n(6)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATTENTION LEGAL ATTACHE, LONDON:\n\nYou may desire to advise your sources concerning the receipt of this communication from Mattan and concerning the type of information he is desirous of receiving.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-353\nENCLOSURE\n62-83894-353"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"From\nAERIAL PHENOMENA INVESTIGATOR.\n69 Stamford Hill\nLondon, N.16\nEngland\nSTOKE NEWINGTON 7 15PM 26 OCT 1954 N.16\nCIVIL D\nJOIN\nTHE CITY MAYOR\nTUCSON.\nARIZONA\nU.S.A."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date 1-2-1950.\nTime of sighting\nSize\nShape\nComposition\nSpeed\nAltitude\nDirection\nManeuvre Pattern\nColour\nSound\nLength of time observed\nSky conditions\nVISIBILITY\nVisibility\nDirection of ground wind\nName ;age; and address.\nGeneral remarks PLACE WHERE SEEN, ETC. & WITNESS\nRE.Fly ing Saucers.\nDear Sir Madam,\nIn order to bring my reports and filing system up to date it would be very much appreciated if you would kindly complete the enclosed form and return same to me\nYours sincerely, Harold Mattam\nAerial phenomena Investigator.\n69 Stamford-hill London. N.16 England.\nAERIAL PHENOMENA INVESTIGATOR.\n62-83894-353"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"December 17, 1954\nRECORDED-42\nINDEXED-42\nEX-130\n62-83894-354\nMiss Marian L. White\nBox 40\nThousand Palms, California\nDear Miss White:\nYour letter dated December 6, 1954, has been received.\nAlthough I would like to be of service, information in FBI files is confidential and available for official use only. I would like to point out also that this Bureau is strictly a fact-finding agency and does not make evaluations or draw conclusions as to the character or integrity of any individual, publication or organization.\nI know you will understand the reason for these rules and will not infer either that we do or that we do not have the information you desire.\nSincerely yours,\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nNOTE: \"Aboard a Flying Saucer\" is not identifiable in Bufiles. It is to be noted that correspondent did not furnish its author's name.\n\"Per call to the Library of Congress \"Aboard a Flying Saucer\" was written by Truman Bethurum. In June, 1954, an inquiry was made by the Cincinnati Office concerning Bethurum and his flying disk lectures since that office had received a complaint similar to current correspondent's. (62-83894-342) No other references were located which might be identical with subject of current inquiry.\nDCL:rg (3)\nCOMM — FBI DEC 17 1954 MAILED 24"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEC 20 1954\n[REDACTED]\nUSS DEPT OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED FBI\n[illegible]\nEX-130\nINDEXED-45\nRECORDED-45\n62-83894-354"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECEMBER 6, 1954\n\nMR EDGAR HOOVER,\nDEPT OF JUSTICE,\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\nDEAR MR HOOVER;\n\nI HAVE MET AND TALKED WITH THE MAN WHO\nWROTE THE BOOK, \"ABOARD A FLYING SAUCER\". HE SOUNDS\nSINCERE BUT I AM ALWAYS SCEPTICAL AND I HAVE BEEN\nWONDERING IF HE COULD BE TRYING TO PUT OVER ANY\nPROPAGANDA.\n\nI AM PRESIDENT OF THE PALM SPRINGS\nREPUBLICAN CLUB, JUST BY WAY OF IDENTIFICATION, AND\nA NUMBER OF MY MEMBERS HEARD HIM AND WE WOULD LIKE\nTO KNOW IF HE IS ALRIGHT.\n\nANYTHING YOU TELL ME WILL BE KEPT IN\nSTRICTEST CONFIDENCE.\n\nVERY TRULY YOURS,\n\nMarian L. White\n\nBOX 40\n1000 PALMS\nCALIFORNIA\n\nRECORDED-42\nEX-130\n62-83894-354"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nTransmit the following Teletype message to:\n\nFBI, DETROIT 1/5/55 PM EST\nDIRECTOR, FBI (62-83894) AIRTEL AMSD\n\nDETROIT FLYING SAUCERS CLUB, ESP-X. ONE LEONARD DAVIDSON, 14896 KENTFIELD, A DETROIT PD PATROLMAN WHO IS A MEMBER OF ABOVE CLUB, ADVISED THAT RANDALL COX, WHO IS A CLUB DIRECTOR, TWICE HAS STATED HE IS \"WORKING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE FBI AND HAS BEEN TOLD TO REPORT TO WASHINGTON, D.C. FOR A CONFERENCE.\" COX REPORTEDLY SAID HE HAS BEEN INSTRUCTED TO BRING ANOTHER CLUB OFFICER, JOHN C. HOFFMAN, WITH HIM. HOFFMAN AND DAVIDSON ARE COUSINS. WHEN THE TIME CAME TO GO TO WASHINGTON, COX SAID IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR HIM TO GO AND THEY WOULD DO SO LATER. BOTH OF COX'S STATEMENTS WERE MADE WITHIN PAST MONTH. THE DETROIT OFFICE IS PREPARING A REPORT SUITABLE FOR DISSEMINATION ON THIS CLUB. IMMEDIATELY AFTER 1/15/55, COX WILL BE INTERVIEWED BY DETROIT REGARDING ABOVE STATEMENTS, REPRIMANDED AND CAUTIONED TO REFRAIN FROM SUCH IN THE FUTURE, UACB. A REPORT WILL THEN BE SUBMITTED.\n\nEND Mr. Belmont\nRBS:JEP #5 (4)\n65-2677\nAIRTEL\nApproved: Special Agent in Charge\nSent M Per\nMC INTIRE\nEX-110 RECORDED-37\n62-83894-355\n20 JAN 6 1955"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cc - Mr. Mossburg\n\nAIR-TEL URGENT\n\nJANUARY 7, 1955\n\nSAC, DETROIT (65-2677) (original & 1)\n\nDETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB, ESPIONAGE - X. REURAIRTEL 1/5/55. BUREAU SEES NO REASON FOR YOUR OFFICE TO WAIT UNTIL 1/15/55, TO INTERVIEW RANDALL COX. INTERVIEW HIM IMMEDIATELY UNLESS THERE IS SOME GOOD REASON TO THE CONTRARY IN WHICH CASE THE BUREAU SHOULD BE ADVISED. COX SHOULD BE INTERVIEWED FOR THE PURPOSES SET FORTH IN YOUR REFERENCED AIRTEL.\n\nHOOVER\n\nEX-110 RECORDED-37\n62-83894-355\n\nEHM:fjm (4)\n\nCOMM - FBI JAN - 7 1955 MAILED 20\n\nJAN 14 1955"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO: Director, FBI\nDATE: 1/18/55\nFROM: SAC, Kansas City (66-2995)\nSUBJECT: C. W. CHEEK FLYING SAUCERS MISC. - INFORMATION CONCERNING\nOn January 13, 1955 Mr. C. W. CHEEK, telephone AT 6747, Kansas City, Ks., contacted an agent of this office and advised he is employed as an aeronautical engineer at the Ford Aircraft Plant at Claycomo, Mo. He indicated he obtained the Agent's name through investigation conducted at the Ford Plant in connection with a sabotage case there approximately one year ago.\nMr. CHEEK indicated he and two other engineers had perfected plans for a \"flying saucer type aircraft\". He said they had been negotiating with the U. S. Air Force and the CAA for several months with regard to the sale of the plans for this aircraft to the Air Force. He also indicated that one JACK STAMPLER, Chief of Defense Department, Washington, D. C., was fully aware of the plans for this aircraft and had advised him that he should not divulge these plans to anyone other than Agents of the FBI or high ranking officers in the U. S. Air Force.\n[REDACTED]\nMLS/hmg (3)\nOSI, AFOSI\nRECORDED-62\n62-83894-356\nJAN 20 1955"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"To: Director, FBI 1/18/55\nRe: C. W. Cheek Flying Saucers\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nThe above information is being furnished to the Bureau because it pertains to an alleged explanation of sightings of flying saucers. It is being furnished to the Bureau primarily, however, for the purpose of giving information to the Bureau\n[REDACTED]\nOSI locally has not been furnished the information as this matter does not involve the sighting of a flying saucer.\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE F B I SECO ESPIONAGE JAN 14 9 26 AM '55"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nTransmit the following Teletype message to:\nFBI, DETROIT 1-12-55 AIRTEL\nDIRECTOR, FBI (62-83894) AMSD\nDETROIT FLYING SAUCERS CLUB, ESPIONAGE-X. RANDALL COX, 8456 COLGATE, OAK PARK, MICH., EMPLOYED AS PARTNER, USED CAR LOT, 17177 LIVERNOIS, DETROIT, INTERVIEWED 1-11-55 IN BUREAU CAR IN VICINITY 17177 LIVERNOIS. COX DENIED MAKING ANY STATEMENT HE WAS WORKING WITH OR HAD ANY CONNECTION WITH FBI. HE CLAIMED SUCH ALLEGATION COULD HAVE ARISEN AS RESULT OF QUESTIONS ASKED DURING SOME MEETING AS TO WHETHER CLUB HAD FURNISHED INFORMATION TO FBI OR OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCY. HE REPLIED HE OR THE CLUB WOULD BE WILLING TO COOPERATE WITH ANYONE AT ANY TIME. HE WAS CAUTIONED TO MAKE NO REPRESENTATION OR STATEMENT LEAVING THE IMPRESSION HE HAD ANY CONNECTION WITH FBI. AS TO REPORTING TO WASHINGTON, COX SAID HE AND JOHN C. HOFFMAN, ANOTHER CLUB DIRECTOR, WERE GOING TO WASHINGTON, D.C. TO PRESENT THEIR INFORMATION \"TO THE PENTAGON\" AND THEY HOPED TO SEE \"SOMEONE IN AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE\". COX SAID THEY INTENDED TAKING WITH THEM SOMEONE, OR POSSIBLY TWO, WHO HAD ACTUALLY SIGHTED SAUCERS. IF THEY GET NO ONE TO GO THEY WILL GET AFFIDAVITS FROM SAUCER SIGHTERS. THEIR PURPOSE IN GOING IS TO FURNISH WHAT INFO THEY HAVE (THIS IS IN POSSESSION OF THE CLUB) ON FLYING SAUCERS, SIGHTING OF THEM IN AFFIDAVIT FORM, POSSIBLY\nRBS:AMW (4) 65-2677\nApproved: Special Agent in Charge Sent Per\nAIRTEL\n62-83894-357\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 19 1964"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-36\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nTransmit the following Teletype message to:\nPAGE TWO\nPHOTOGRAPHS AND TO OBTAIN WHAT INFO THEY CAN ON SAUCERS FROM THE GOVERNMENT. COX CLAIMED HE KNEW OF NO INFO THEY HAD WHICH MIGHT EFFECT THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OR INTERNAL SECURITY OF THE U.S. HE CLAIMS ONE JOHN FRY, A TECHNICIAN NOW ASSIGNED TO SANDIA AF BASE, NEW MEXICO, HAS ACTUALLY FLOWN IN A SAUCER FROM SANDIA BASE TO NEW YORK CITY, THE ROUND TRIP REQUIRING ONLY 30 MINUTES. COX SAID FRY WAS TO COME TO DETROIT IN THE FUTURE TO SPEAK. COX CLAIMS SAUCER CLUBS HAVE ACTUALLY RECEIVED MESSAGES FROM OUTER SPACE AND ALTHOUGH SAYS HE DOES NOT KNOW, HE FEELS THEY DO EXIST; HAVE BEEN SEEN BY MANY PEOPLE AND CLAIMS HE HAS SEEN THEM HIMSELF. HE FEELS THE PURPOSE OF CONTACTS WITH EARTH IS LIMITED AT THIS TIME TO PREPARING PEOPLE TO RECEIVE LANDINGS FROM OUTER SPACE. HE SAID THE SAUCERS ARE FRIENDLY TO U. S. HE SAID MESSAGES RECEIVED INDICATE ALL PLANETS BUT EARTH HAVE CONQUERED OUTER SPACE. OUTER SPACE PEOPLE CONSIDER THOSE ON EARTH THE LOWEST FORM OF UNIVERSAL EXISTENCE. HOFFMAN IMPRESSED AGENTS AS BEING ONLY A LAYMAN (FORMERLY IN USAF, WW II) WHO HAS BEEN CARRIED BEYOND THE REALM OF SCIENTIFIC FACT INTO THAT OF POSSIBLE SCIENTIFIC FICTION. COX CLAIMS THAT DR. CHARLES A. LAUGHEAD, MICH. STATE COLLEGE PROFESSOR WHO WAS DISMISSED FOR HIS ACTIVITIES AND PREVIOUS PREDICTIONS OF GEOLOGIC UPHEAVALS WHICH WERE TO HAVE OCCURRED 12-21-54, WAS MISUNDERSTOOD BUT ALLOWED HIS THINKING TO DWELL TOO MUCH ON\nApproved: Special Agent in Charge Sent Per"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-36\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\n-----------\n\nTransmit the following Teletype message to:\n\nPAGE THREE\n\nPOSSIBILITIES OF FLYING SAUCERS AND OUTER SPACE. MUCH OF COX'S\nSTATEMENTS BEAR CLOSE RESEMBLANCE TO THE WRITINGS OF DOROTHY\nMARTIN, OAK PARK, ILLINOIS, MENTIONED IN DETROIT LETTER, 11-30-54.\nIT IS REQUESTED THE BUREAU ADVISE WHETHER ANY ATTEMPTS BE MADE BY\nDETROIT TO OBTAIN ANY OF THE MATERIAL MENTIONED BY COX AS BEING IN\nPOSSESSION OF THE FLYING SAUCER CLUB. THIS PROBABLY WOULD REQUIRE\nCONTACTS WITH OTHER OFFICERS OF THE CLUB, WHICH MIGHT BE UNDESIRABLE,\nPARTICULARLY DUE TO THE DOUBT EXISTING THAT THEY COULD BE CONTACTED\nON A CONFIDENTIAL BASIS. REPORT FOLLOWS.\n\nMC INTIRE\n\nEND\n\nApproved:____________________ Sent_______M Per_____\nSpecial Agent in Charge"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JAN 19 1955\n\nJAN 18 9 32 AM '55 JAN 18 12 17 PM '55\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nRECEIVED MAIL ROOM\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 43\n62-83894-357\n\nTELETYPE\nMr. Mossburg\nAIR - TEL\n\nJANUARY 18, 1955\n\nSAC, DETROIT (65-2677) (Orig. & 1)\n\nDETROIT FLYING SAUCER CLUB, ESPIONAGE - X. REURAIR-TEL 1-12-55.\nINVESTIGATION RE SIGHTING OF FLYING SAUCERS AND INFORMATION\nCONCERNING FLYING SAUCERS IS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF\nTHE AIR FORCE AND NOT THE BUREAU. THE BUREAU DOES NOT DESIRE\nYOUR OFFICE TO OBTAIN FROM CAPTIONED CLUB OR ITS MEMBERS,\nMATERIAL CONCERNING FLYING SAUCERS. THE INFORMATION IN YOUR\nREFERENCED AIR-TEL AND INFORMATION CONCERNING MATERIAL REPORTEDLY\nIN POSSESSION OF CAPTIONED CLUB SHOULD BE REFERRED TO IN THE\nREPORT BEING PREPARED BY YOUR OFFICE. A COPY OF YOUR REPORT\nSHOULD BE FURNISHED TO OSI LOCALLY.\n\nHOOVER\n\n62-83894\n\nEHM:rmp:dlt\n(4)\n\nMailed JAN 18 1955 COMM-FBI"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nDECLASSIFIED Authority: NND 90986\n\n27-0-718\n\n20 APR 1955\n\nHonorable J. Edgar Hoover\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nATTN: Mr. Daniel J. Sullivan\nLiaison Agent\n\nRE: CHARLES A. YOST\nOC Research Laboratory\nSt. Clair Shores, Michigan\n\nDear Sir:\n\nAttached are copies of a letter recently forwarded to this office by the Director of Special Investigations, Alaskan Air Command. In addition to the address in captioned subject, the letter reflects a return address of the 18th Cml. Tech. Intel. Det., 100th Gnl. Grp., Fort McClellan, Alabama.\n\nThe original letter was furnished by Major William H. Greenhalgh, Jr., Commander, 5004th Air Intelligence Service Squadron, Elmendorf AFB, APO 942, Seattle, Washington. Major Greenhalgh advised that the letter was turned over to Flight A of his organization by Doctor Kennidy, DDS, Nome, Alaska. Major Greenhalgh identified Dr. Kennidy as a private pilot who has in the past been the source of several reports to this organization. Dr. Kennidy reported that the letter was found in a book which he had loaned to Mr. Small over a year ago and which was recently returned.\n\nMajor Greenhalgh identified Mr. Small as a type-setter for the Nome Nugget, a newspaper which is published three times a week. Mr. Small was further described as being peculiar and a definite introvert type. He is a near alcoholic and is presently living with an Eskimo woman who is an alcoholic.\n\nMajor Greenhalgh advised that Mrs. Boucher, who is mentioned in the letter, publishes the Nome Nugget.\n\nA search of the files of this office and the files of OSI, Alaskan Air Command, failed to locate information pertinent to the persons mentioned in the attached letter.\n\nRECORDED - 15 62-83894-358\nINDEXED - 15\nCONFIDENTIAL\n10 APR 1955"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nLtr to FBI, File 27-0-718, RE: CHARLES A. YOST, OC Research Laboratory, St. Clair Shores, Michigan (Cont)\n\nThe attached letter is furnished for your information and any action deemed necessary.\n\nSincerely,\n\nLYLE D. LUTTON, JR, Lt Colonel, USAF\nAsst Chief, Counter Intelligence Div\nDirectorate of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\n\n1 Incl (in dup)\nPhotostat, Ltr fr Yost\nto Small dtd 14 Nov 54\n\ncc: Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2\nDepartment of the Army\nw/incl (in dup)\n\n2\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"14 November, 1953\n18th Cml.Tech.Intel.Det.\n100th Cml.Grp.\nFort McClellan, Alabama\n\nDear Mr. Small,\n\nYoup letter was recieved Nov.12,1953. Thank you very much for replying and offering your aid.We also wish to thank Mrs.Boucher.\n\nAs you will notice my address has changed. Until further notice it will be as shown in the upper right hand corner.\nAt the present time our research activities are being kept secret. However,at a time in the future when we have no need to use this security measure,I will personally write and inform you of what we were,and possibly are,doing. Our research does have a connection with the \"flying saucer\",although it is at present a secondary issue. The main body of our research is with electric fields.(It is not a \"copy\" of what Keyhoe mentioned in his recent book relating to the Canadian Project. The research with which we are concered has been carried on for many years now by a research foundation in Western United States-which is not connected to us.) The \"flying Saucer\" reports are of value to us because they may give clues toward the investigation of various phases in our research.\n\nI have told you these things so that you might understand the need for our recieving saucer reports,also because you are no doubt curious abcut our activities.(Every once in a while I will inform you of our activity.) Because you and Mrs.Boucher are taking the time and trouble to help us - in turn,we wish to cooperate as best we can to in some way return the favor. So,do not hesitate in calling on us in the future.\n\nYours truly,\n\nCharles A. Yost\n\nCoordinator\nOC Research Laboratory ,in\nSt. Clair Shores, Michigan"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE 62-83894-358"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nRECORDS SECTION\n\n4-25, 1955\n\nName Check Unit-Room 6523\nAttention Igor\nService Unit-Room 6524\nForward to File Review\nReturn to Supervisor Ext. 3104\nRoom 4730\n\nAll References\nSubversive References\nMain References Only\nMain References Only\nRestrict to Locality of\nBreakdown Buildup Variations\nExact Name Only\nExact Spelling\nCheck for Alphabetical Loyalty Form\n\nSUBJECT Charles A. Yost\nAddress\n\nLocalities\nBirthdate & Place\n\nR#\nDate 4-25 Searcher Initial H.D.M.\n\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\n\nN.R.\nCharles\nN1 77-5484\nN1 68-8617\nN1 46-40145\nNR 131-3-5182\nN1 100-3-14475\nN1 63-75147-37-113, Encl. A\nN1 65-12352-55,\nN1 40-28777-8-7\nN1 100-64700-1209, P-2831\nN1 98-2350-502\n\n-1-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NUMEROUS REFERENCES\n4-22a\nSEARCH SLIP\n\nSubj: Charles A. Yost\n\nSupervisor Room 4730\nR# Date 4-25 Searcher Initial H.D.M.\n\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\n\nCharles\n65-28688 - 1X1\nN1 40-28919 - 6\nN1 100-64700 - 221, Encl\nN1 P-122, 1004, P-56\nNR 100-35640 - 5, P-13\nMR 33\nN1 100-64700 - 615, Encl\n2 26, 38, 32, 21\nN1 100-35640 - 17\nN1 64-1323 - 3281, 2X8\nND 65-28688 - 1X, P-7\nND 65-36317 - 1\n100-91015 - 41\nN1 62-73747-37 - 63, Encl\nP-21A\nN1 65-18396 - 3\nN1 100-184908 - 2\nN1 71-1049 - 58\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nRECORDS SECTION\n4-25, 1955\n\nName Check Unit-Room 6523\nAttention Igou\nService Unit-Room 6524\nForward to File Review\nReturn to Moorhead Ext. 3104\nSupervisor\nRoom 4730\n\nAll References\nSubversive References\nMain References Only\nMain References Only\nRestrict to Locality of Alaska\nBreakdown Buildup Variations\nExact Name Only\nExact Spelling\nCheck for Alphabetical Loyalty Form\n\nSUBJECT Mr. Small\nAddress\n\nLocalities\nBirthdate & Place\n\nR# Date 4-25 Searcher Initial H.D.M.\n\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\nN.R. in Alaska\n65-58008-7003, Com\n65-29975-80,\nIn Lamphere's office\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nRECORDS SECTION\n4-25, 1955\n\nName Check Unit-Room 6523\nAttention Igou\nService Unit-Room 6524\nForward to File Review\nReturn to Moorhead Ext. 2104\nSupervisor\nRoom 4730\n\nAll References\nSubversive References\nMain References Only\nMain References Only\nRestrict to Locality of Alaska\nBreakdown Buildup Variations\nExact Name Only\nExact Spelling\nCheck for Alphabetical Loyalty Form\n\nSUBJECT Mrs. Boucher\nAddress\n\nLocalities\nBirthdate & Place\n\nR# Date 4-25 Searcher Initial H.D.M.\n\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\nN.R. in Alaska\n9-7364 Pa MF\n31-44946-2, etc MF\nND 100-57533-34, Wash.\nOnt\nN.R. in Alaska\n\n-4-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nRECORDS SECTION\n4-25, 1955\n\nName Check Unit-Room 6523\nAttention Igou\nService Unit-Room 6524\nForward to File Review\nReturn to Moorhead Ext. 2104\nSupervisor\nRoom 4730\n\nAll References\nSubversive References\nMain References Only\nMain References Only\nRestrict to Locality of Alaska\nBreakdown Buildup Variations\nExact Name Only\nExact Spelling\nCheck for Alphabetical Loyalty Form\n\nSUBJECT Dr. Kennedy\nAddress\n\nLocalities\nBirthdate & Place\n\nR# Date 4-25 Searcher Initial H.D.M.\n\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\nND 65-58025-170, 104\n\n-5-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HOTEL Gralynn\nCARL F. CASSIN, MANAGING DIRECTOR\nHARRY E. TUTTLE, RESIDENT MANAGER\nPlease Expnse pencil\nMIAMI, FLORIDA\n\nDear Mrs. Hoover-\nI am writing to you with an urgent request since my previous letters to the President have been ignored.\nDespite all the ridicule regarding Flying Saucers - they are real - Furthermore their source and activities are incredible and a serious threat to our country, and all countries.\nI have promised that the President would send 4 to 1000 men he considered sane, with good peripheral vision and the ability to follow"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"directions and plenty of ability to watch during the time the moon is out - I will guarantee each and everyone will see something that will prove Saucers and moon are real and attacking us, via hail, tornadoes, and so called \"weather\".\nThey never replied. No one will ever check my story - yet it comes with a guarantee.\nWhat more can I do? If I get excited they'll think me a raving maniac. As is, I'm merely \"having hallucinations\" I guess.\nI guarantee anyone who has the above mentioned qualities can also have my hallucinations."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JUL 27 10 15 AM '55 MR. JONES\nRECEIVED - NICHOLS AUG 3 12 45 PM '55\nFBI\nRECEIVED\nFBI\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Mr. Nichols\nDATE: July 26, 1955\nFROM : M. A. Jones\nTolson\nBoardman\nNichols\nBelmont\nHarbo\nMohr\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nSizoo\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy\nSUBJECT: CATHERINE AUGHENBAUGH\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nCorrespondent submitted a six-page rambling and partly\nincoherent letter postmarked July 24, 1955, wherein she requests\na number of \"F. B. I. men\" to assist her in watching for flying\nsaucers which she claims are real. She remarks she has previously\nwritten letters to the President, but that they have been ignored.\nBufiles reflect no record identifiable with correspondent.\nRECOMMENDATION:\nNo acknowledgment of correspondent's letter in view of\nher apparent [REDACTED] disturbed condition.\nJRH:afb\n(2)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HOTEL Gralynn\nCARL F. CASSIN, MANAGING DIRECTOR\nHARRY E. TUTTLE, RESIDENT MANAGER\nMIAMI, FLORIDA\nYou have exactly the shaped\neyes best suited to using this\nequipment - and your nose is\nshaped right too! Strangely\nenough, this matters! Even how\neyes are spaced matters! Please\ntry to get F.B.I. watchers with\nlarge open-end eyes, widely spaced.\nLow-bridge nose. Patience and\ncalm nerves will be necessary too.\nIf you can get some quicksilver,\nbring that along too! Or tin.\nI have a great deal of respect\nfor the F.B.I - I know it's\nterrific at finding the men they\nwant. Will they do a switch -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"must be sane, peripheral vision. No reward but Excitement\nor will this work better?\n50 Beautiful Spacegirls so\nvisible\nIn the Stratosphere\nget your telescopes here and\ncome in and\nEnjoy the Show.\nIt's Out of this world.\nSeriously Mr. Hoover - how's\nabout it? Who would doubt\nthe witness and reports of our\nF.B.I.?\nSincerely,\nCatherine (F.B.E.) Aughenbaugh\n(Spots Before the Eyes)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HOTEL Gralynn\nCARL F. CASSIN, MANAGING DIRECTOR\nHARRY E. TUTTLE, RESIDENT MANAGER\nMIAMI, FLORIDA\nMr. Hoover - would you please\nhelp me? Can you have some\nF.B.I. men watch?\nStarting July 26th, during the entire\ntime the moon is out, I need\nqualified watchers whose sanity\nis unquestioned. The same men\nmust keep watch, so that they\ncan begin to comprehend the various\ndisguises and activities of the\n\"Saucers and worse.\"\nSupply them with the following\nequipment so you'll know\nit's no trick!"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Valupte(?)fitted (lipstick & swivel powder puff) case - in black plastic opera glass (fake) carrier, black satin red lined container - Bloomingdale's Dept. Store, N.Y.C. You will need your F.B.I. skill here - the manufacturer has gone out of business! (the lipstick case is empty. About $12 ) It does NOT have opera glass qualities\n1 Combination magnifying glass, magnifying mirror, compass, fire starter from Thorensen's, N.Y.C. about $3.00.\nThey will give you a very cheap souvenir telescope. If they don't buy one. You'll need it, Don't buy a good telescope! It only magnifies glare.\nOptional - any kind of gold metal-plates, Tubes, etc. Gold foil."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JUL 25 11 58 AM '55\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nF B I\nRECEIVED-ENRICHOLS\nJUL 25 2 46 PM '55\nRECEIVED FBI\nJUL 25 3 30 PM '55\nMR. JONES"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DO-6\nOFFICE OF DIRECTOR\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Boardman\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Belmont\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Parsons\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tamm\nMr. Jones\nMr. Sizoo\nMr. Winterrowd\nTele. Room\nMr. Holloman\nMiss Holmes\nMiss Gandy\nSmith Nichols memo 7/26/55 JRH"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO: MR. L. V. BOARDMAN\nFROM: MR. A. H. BELMONT\nDATE: October 18, 1955\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\nAt the Executive Session of Intelligence Advisory Committee (IAC) this morning (10/18), Mr. Dulles, of CIA, discussed a report received from party of Senator Russell, traveling through Russia, that Senator Russell had seen a flying saucer.\n(b) (3) (A)\n[REDACTED]\n(b) (3) (A)\n[REDACTED]\nThe consensus of the discussion at the IAC meeting was that this could have been any one of a number of things, including a helicopter, but that other members of the party should be interviewed and, meanwhile, the matter should be kept quiet to avoid concern on the part of the Russians which would result in limiting of United States travel in Russia.\nFor your information.\nAHB:LL\n(5)\ncc--Mr. Boardman\ncc--Mr. Belmont\ncc--Mr. Branigan\ncc--Mr. M. V. Kuhrts, Liaison Section\n62-907718-520\nNOT RECORDED\n145 OCT 25 1955\n59 OCT 28 1955"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO: L. V. Boardman\nFROM: A. H. Belmont\nDATE: November 4, 1955\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\nReference memo to you 10-18-55 advising that at Executive Session of Intelligence Advisory Committee (IAC) on 10-18-55, Mr. Dulles of CIA discussed report received from party of Senator Richard B. Russell of Georgia, traveling through Russia, that Senator Russell had seen a flying saucer.\n[REDACTED]\nThe details were not clear and it was decided the matter should be kept quiet and all members of party interviewed. Attached memos from CIA received 11-3-55 advise members of party debriefed and following is summary of their observations: Party was traveling by train from Baku to Tiflis and after dark Russell noticed a small greenish-yellow glowing ball rising quite rapidly in sky. He informed other members of the party and a few minutes later they observed another object. Mr. Efron saw only 2 lights resembling eyes. Colonel Hathaway saw a shadowy object with similar light in middle at the top and rotating light or lights similar to exhausts at the base. Senator Russell had impression object could have been as small as a rocket, Mr. Gros and Colonel Hathaway considered size comparable to U.S. jet fighter, but Hathaway stated object did not resemble any aircraft, rocket or missile he had ever seen. All agree object was rotating during its rise along its initial steep trajectory. Based on interviews so far, CIA advises only testimony which would support existence of flying saucer or radically unconventional aircraft is that of Colonel Hathaway. All other observations can probably be explained as steep-climbing aircraft or missile or exhaust of normal jet aircraft in a dive, followed by a sharp pull-up in such a way nothing could be seen until exhaust visible to observers on train, but possible aircraft was indeed of the short or almost vertical take-off variety. CIA states further discussion will probably be required to completely resolve matter but indicates that evidence does not appear sufficiently firm to warrant conclusion that Soviets have developed a radically new type aircraft.\nACTION:\nFor your information.\n2 ENCL.\nEnclosure\nCC: LVBoardman, AHBelmont, ARJones\n62-83894\n7 NOV 8 1955\n52 NOV 14 1955"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Central Intelligence\n\nSUBJECT : Sightings of Flying Saucers or Unconventional Aircraft\n\n1. All four participants in the observation of the flying saucers or unconventional aircraft have now been debriefed and the following is a summary of their observations.\n\n2. The party was travelling by train from Baku to Tiflis at the specific request of Senator Russell who tried to use rail transportation whenever it was at all feasible. The sightings were noted about ten minutes beyond Alyaty at 1910 hours when it was already dark. Senator Russell was resting alone in his compartment with the lights out when he noted a small greenish-yellow glowing ball rising quite rapidly. He informed the other members of the party who were occupying the other compartment and a few minutes later they too observed another object.\n\n3. Senator Russell never saw the form of the object only the luminescent ball. Mr. Efron saw only two lights resembling eyes. Colonel Hathaway saw a shadowy object with a single light in the middle at the top and a rotating light or lights similar to exhausts at the base. Senator Russell had the impression that the object could have been as small as a rocket although there were no objects available to produce a satisfactory scale and no trail was left by the rising ball. Mr. Gros and Colonel Hathaway considered the size of the object to be comparable to that of a U. S. jet fighter. However, Colonel Hathaway believes that the object did not resemble any aircraft, rocket or missile that he had ever seen. All observers agree on the impression that the object was rotating or whirling during its rise along its initial steep trajectory. Neither Senator Russell nor Mr. Gros noted any change in this trajectory, but Colonel Hathaway and Mr. Efron stated that the object altered its pattern to horizontal flight quite sharply. Neither Senator Russell, Colonel Hathaway nor Mr. Efron saw any objects on the ground with the exception of the search light, but Mr. Gros reported the presence of a triangular object with three lights which appeared to be ejected from a launching site.\n\n4. Based on the interviews by the Director, the only testimony which would support the existence of flying saucers or radically unconventional aircraft is that of Colonel Hathaway. All other"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUBJECT: Sightings of Flying Saucers or Unconventional Aircraft\n\nobservations can probably be explained as steep climbing aircraft or missiles. Further discussions will probably be required before the matter can be completely resolved. In the meantime, however, the evidence does not appear sufficiently firm to warrant the conclusion that the Soviets have developed and have in operation a radically new type of aircraft.\n\nHERBERT SCOVILLE, JR.\nAssistant Director\nScientific Intelligence\n\nDistribution\nAll IAC Members\n1 - Dept. of Army\n1 - Dept. of Navy\n1 - Dept. of Air Force\n1 - Dept. of State\n1 - AEC\n1 - FBI\n1 - JCS\n1 - OCI\n1 - ORR\n1 - DCI\n\nT. S. 115405, Series A\nCopy 6 of 10\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD\n27 October 1955\n\nSUBJECT: Interview with Senator Richard B. Russell\n\n1. On 27 October, Dr. Francis Clauser, O/SI consultant, and I interviewed Senator Russell relative to an observation of unconventional or saucer-like aircraft during his visit to Russia. The following is a statement of his observations with my comments. Dr. Clauser will submit separately his views on Senator Russell's statements but I believe he is in general agreement with the views stated herein.\n\n2. The party was travelling between Baku and Tiflis on a train at the specific request of Senator Russell who made every attempt to journey by train when possible. (This tends to refute the theory that the train trip was arranged in order to stage the operation for Senator Russell's benefit.) About an hour and one-half out of Baku the subject, who was not feeling well, was resting in his compartment with the lights turned out while the remainder of the party was in the next compartment with the lights on. He suddenly noticed a greenish-yellow ball rising rapidly. He rushed into the next compartment stating that he had seen what he thought was a flying saucer. They turned out the lights and looked out the window but saw nothing and the rest of the party was initially skeptical. However, suddenly a second ball was noticed rising rapidly and then the other members of the party were convinced. The second object was initially seen at a minimum altitude of 700 to 800 feet, while the first object was initially viewed at an even higher altitude. Nothing was seen on the ground with the exception of a search light which was about one-half to one mile away and appeared to be aimed at a very low trajectory almost at the train. The subject did not on either occasion see the form of the object, only this glowing ball. No firm estimate could be made of the size or distance of the ball because there were no reference objects. However, the subject had the impression that the object could have been as small as a rocket although no trail was left as it rose. The object gave the impression of whirling and appeared to follow a single trajectory with no break in its flight pattern. The subject did not see any lights, only the yellowish glow (this is contrary to statements of other observers). The search light did not appear to be following the object. About five to ten minutes after the sightings and after the subject had returned to his own compartment, the guard came in and pulled down the\n\nT. S. 115402, Series A\nCopy 4 of 10\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUBJECT: Interview with Senator Richard B. Russell\n\nshades. No unusual attitude on the part of the guard was noted but it was dark. (This is in direct contradiction with the original dispatch and the statement of Mr. Gros.) Senator Russell was not present when the dispatch was prepared and sent from Prague, and as a consequence did not have a chance to verify the contents.\n\n3. During his trip, the Senator also made a motor trip between Moscow and Borodino. During this ride, he observed six or eight caserns with military personnel. At one point, only 150 yards from the road he noted a radar on top of a mound with a big egg beater object about 20 feet away. He thought he saw a similar installation further from the road on another occasion. One of the caserns was about a mile away on the other side of the road. There was considerable evidence of construction although none that was obviously new. He believed that the radar that was positively identified was about 40 miles from Moscow (if a map had been available, this perhaps could have been pinned down more closely). The Russians were extremely reluctant to allow Senator Russell to make this trip and at one point, it was actually cancelled when Colonel Taylor of the Embassy requested permission to go along. However, Senator Russell stated that he would publicly denounce the Russian program of free travel as being a farce unless he was allowed to make this trip. The permission was then granted. Colonel Hathaway and Mr. Efron were also along with the Senator on this trip.\n\n4. The testimony of Senator Russell does not in my opinion support the theory that the Russians have developed saucer-like or unconventional aircraft. It is quite possible that the objects seen were the exhausts of normal jet aircraft in a steep climb. The fact that none were seen on the ground might indicate that the aircraft were in a dive followed by a sharp pull-up in such a way that nothing was seen until the exhausts were visible to the observers on the train. However, it is possible that the aircraft were indeed of the short or almost vertical take-off variety.\n\nHERBERT SCOVILLE, JR.\nAssistant Director\nScientific Intelligence\n\nDISTRIBUTION\nALL IAC MEMBERS\n1 - Dept. of Army 1 - Dept. of Navy 1 - Dept. of Air Force\n1 - FBI 1 - JCS 1 - AEC\n1 - Dept. of State 1 - ORR/CIA 1 - OCI/CIA\n1 - DCI/CIA\n\nT. S. 115402, Series A\nCopy 4 of 10\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nRECEIVED FROM\nNOV 1 1955\nCIA\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD\nSUBJECT: Interview with Senator Richard B. Russell\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nThe following is a report of an interview with Senator Richard B. Russell on 27 October 1955 by Dr. Francis Clauser, O/SI consultant.\n\n\"He was riding on the train from Baku to Tiflis with 3 others (a translator, a military aide and a Pacific Coast business man). The Senator had a cold, was feeling tired, and lay down in one of the two compartments. The others were in the second compartment. The Senator had the lights out. He noticed what appeared to be a yellow spot on the window. Looking closer he saw it was outside and seemed to be a greenish yellow ball which was ascending rapidly. After it disappeared, he went in to tell the others. While he was discussing it with them, a second object appeared and they all watched it. When the second object was first sighted, the compartment lights were on, but were then switched off. It was after dark and the Senator was unable to see any outline or details of either object other than the greenish yellow light which appeared to be round. He could see no rocket trail nor smoke. He had the uncertain impression that the object was gently whirling or 'tumbling upward'. The trajectory was upward at a steep angle (not vertical) which he described as the way a Fourth of July rocket goes off a highly inclined track. In both cases, the objects were first seen at a distance which he estimated was 600 to 800 feet above the earth. However, he emphasized he had no good way of telling how far any the objects were. The objects kept on going up without a break in their course. They did not level off. He seemed uncertain as to how they finally disappeared. At no time did he hear any noise above the train noise.\n\nThere was a searchlight visible such as we used in World War II to spot planes. It was turned on but was not pointed at the objects and did not attempt to follow them. In the discussion with the others afterward they claimed to have seen lights on the objects and to have been able to make out some details. The Senator remarked that their eyes were better than his for he could see only the round yellow light. The others said the objects went over the train.\"\n\nTOP SECRET\n\nNOT RECORDED\n\nT. S. 115399\nCopy 16 of 18\n\nEX-126"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nSUBJECT: Interview with Senator Richard B. Russell\n\n\"The Senator stated that after he was back in his compartment, lying down, the porter pulled down the shades. This was at least 10 minutes later and was not unusual. The Senator stated that he preferred to ride the train, taking it whenever possible. There was nothing unusual about him using the train on this trip. He did not feel the Russians were trying to conceal anything from him in this region. He did not see anything to indicate the presence of a big airforce base in this region. Elsewhere, he passed several airbases and no attempt was made to conceal them from him.\n\n\"The Senator has never seen a jet airplane take off at night. If these objects were jet airplanes, they climbed surprisingly rapidly.\n\n\"In addition to the foregoing, Senator Russell described the following interesting experience. A Russian major-general had invited him to go to a museum at Borodino, about 60 miles west of Moscow. An American officer named Taylor was anxious to make this trip and requested permission of the Russians to accompany the Senator, his translator and his military aide. Thereupon, the Russians called the whole thing off. The Senator told the Russians he had nothing to do with Taylor's request and threatened to pack his bags and denounce their invitation as a fraud. Permission was given for them to go without Taylor.\n\n\"On the way, they went through an area which he immediately took to be the Russian equivalent of Nike aiten. It was about 40 miles from Moscow. At one place, they saw two installations which he was sure were radars. They were about 6 or 8 feet across. One he described as looking like an egg beater. About 2 or 3 miles away he saw a number of casemates which he was sure were guided missile installations. Troops, barbed wire, etc. were all around this area. They passed two military funerals. Quite a number of roads had been built in the region.\"\n\nRobert Scoville, Jr.\n\nROBERT SCOVILLE, JR.\nAssistant Director\nScientific Intelligence\n\nDISTRIBUTION\n1 - DCI\n1 - Dept. of State\n1 - Dept. of Army 1 - Dept. of Navy 1 - Dept. of Air Force\n1 - AEC\n\nE.O. 11652\nCopy 11 of 18\n-2-\nTOP SECRET"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nFBI\nFEB 21 4 00 PM '56\n\nFEB 23 1 46 PM '56\nREC'D ESPIONAGE\nFBI\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED READING ROOM\nFBI\n\nCOMM - FBI\nFEB 21 1956\nMAILED 31\n\nMR. BRANIGAN"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nFBI\nFeb 21 4 00 PM '56\n\nFEB 14 12 19 PM '56\n\nREC'D. RECORDS SEC\n\nMR. JONES\nFEB 14 1 05 PM '56\n\nFEB 23 12 50 PM '56\nREC'D BELMONT\nFBI - JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"February 21, 1956\n\n62-83894-363\n\nMr. Richard E. Guertin\n196 College Street\nSpringfield 9, Massachusetts\n\nDear Richard:\n\nYour letter dated February 12, 1956, has been received, and I sincerely appreciate the interest prompting you to write.\n\nI wish to advise that no matter such as you described was ever reported to the FBI.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nCEM:jfm:lmh\n(3)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APR 26 1 26 PM '56\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED-MOHR\nFBI\nAPR 26 2 04 PM '56\nRECEIVED-BOARDMAN\nAPR 17 5 07 PM '56\nRECEIVED-BOARDMAN\nAPR 16 9 30 AM '56\nAPR 13 7 23 PM '56\nREC'D BELMONT\nFBI - JUSTICE\nREC'D ESPIONAGE\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nFBI\nAPR 23 1 07 PM '56\nAPR 8 1956\nOn April 9, 1956, Miss Richards was interviewed concerning her sighting of an unusual object about dawn April 6, 1956, while driving on Route 1 near Henderson, North Carolina, with her fiance, Joseph L. Morris, Jr., an employee of the National Security Agency. She was interviewed for additional details in this matter on April 12, 1956, by Supervisor Mossburg."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO: L. V. Boardman\nFROM: A. H. Belmont\nSUBJECT: SYLVIA L. RICHARDS GS-5, Name Check Unit EOD 4-14-47\nDATE: April 13, 1956\nOn April 9, 1956, Miss Richards was interviewed concerning her sighting of an unusual object about dawn April 6, 1956, while driving on Route 1 near Henderson, North Carolina, with her fiance, Joseph L. Morris, Jr., an employee of the National Security Agency. She was interviewed for additional details in this matter on April 12, 1956, by Supervisor Mossburg.\nMiss Richards reviewed memorandum dated April 10, 1956, from W. G. Eames to Mr. Nichols prior to being questioned for any other details which might be of assistance to the Air Force in this matter. She advised she had seen the object for only a few seconds, that it was still dark when she observed it, although it was near daylight on April 6, 1956. She stated when daylight came she observed the sky to be cloudy and it started raining approximately 30 minutes after she had observed the object. She recalled the object had approached their car on the driver's side from straight ahead at a height which she thought to be less than 25 feet. She was unable to estimate the speed of the object. She described it as being oval shaped, being very bright and having a light blue color. It made no sound that she could hear. She advised her fiance would be able to state exactly where they had observed the object in North Carolina, inasmuch as he was familiar with that area. She was unable to recall any additional pertinent information.\nACTION:\nThere is enclosed a letter to the Office of Special Investigations in this matter.\nEnclosure\nEHM:ss\nCC: LBNichols LVBoardman AHBelmont EHMossburg\n(5)\n62-83894-364\n20 APR 20 1956"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO: MR. NICHOLS\nFROM: W. G. EAMES\nSUBJECT: SYLVIA L. RICHARDS GS-5, Name Check Unit EOD 4-14-47\nDATE: 4-10-56\nMiss Richards on 4/9/56 reported the following rather unusual occurrence which is in the \"Flying Saucer\" category.\nOn 4/5/56 Miss Richards left Washington by car with her fiance, Joseph L. Morris, Jr. (employee of National Security Agency), to go to Morven, North Carolina to meet the Morris family. Around 5 a.m. on 4/6/56 as dawn was breaking and while driving on Route 1 north of Henderson, North Carolina, the pair was startled by what appeared to be a round low-flying object coming directly towards the car. The object appeared to pass over the car and Miss Richards turned to see it appear to speed up and then veer off out of sight. She and Mr. Morris both felt they had seen something unusual which was difficult to explain and certainly did not appear to be an optical illusion.\nMiss Richards stated the object as she saw it appeared round, was spinning and was bright as though containing a series of lights in a zig-zag pattern. The object appeared to be flying very low as it came towards them, moving at great speed and gave off no particular sound. The object, to the best of her belief, was at least as wide as the highway and appeared no more than two to four feet in thickness.\nMiss Richards, who is one of our best employees, stated heretofore she has placed little credence in \"flying saucer\" stories and felt that had she and her boyfriend not seen the same object she would be inclined to think she had imagined something. She appreciates that what they saw may have been some kind of optical illusion; however, at the time the object appeared very real to them.\nRECOMMENDATION:\nIf you agree, it is recommended that this memorandum be referred to the Liaison Section of the Domestic Intelligence Division for possible referral to any interested military agencies.\nJBE:sak\n(3)\n62-83894-365\n20 APR 20 1956"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CC: LBNichols AHBelmont LVBoardman EHMossburg Liaison\nBY COURIER SERVICE\nDate: April 16, 1956\nTo: Director of Special Investigations (Original & 1) The Inspector General Department of the Air Force Building Tempo E 4th and Adams Drive, S. W. Washington, D. C.\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director Federal Bureau of Investigation\nSubject: SIGHTING OF OBJECT RESEMBLING FLYING SAUCER ON APRIL 6, 1956, NEAR HENDERSON, NORTH CAROLINA MISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING (ESPIONAGE)\nOn April 6, 1956, Miss Sylvia L. Richards, an employee of this Bureau who resides at Two East Mason Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia, while en route to Morven, North Carolina, via automobile, with her fiance, Mr. Joseph L. Morris, Jr., observed an unusual object which appeared to resemble a flying saucer.\nMiss Richards stated at about 5 A.M., on April 6, 1956, while it was still dark and while driving on Route 1 north of Henderson, North Carolina, she and Mr. Morris were startled by what appeared to be an oval-shaped, low-flying object coming directly towards their car at a great speed, on the driver's side. Miss Richards stated the object, which was less than 25 feet from the ground, appeared to be spinning, was bright as though containing a series of lights in a zigzagging pattern, was light blue in color and was at least as wide as the highway and no more than from two to four feet in thickness. She stated the object did not change shape, it made no sound and that she observed it for only a few seconds before it appeared to pass over the car, accelerate speed and veer off out of sight behind them. Miss Richards advised when daylight came she noticed it was cloudy and that approximately 30 minutes after they had sighted the object it began to rain.\nEHM:ss (8)\nNOTE: Cover memo Belmont to Boardman 4-13-56 EHM:ss, re: \"Sylvia L. Richards, GS-5, Name Check Unit, EOD 4-14-47.\"\n58 APR 26 1956"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to Director of Special Investigations The Inspector General Department of the Air Force\nMiss Richards advised Mr. Morris, an employee of the National Security Agency who resides at 6039 22nd Road, North Arlington, Virginia, would recall approximately where they sighted the object and he may be able to furnish additional pertinent information.\nThe above is furnished for your information and no further action is being taken in this matter.\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JUN 26 1956 OUTCONS\nJUN 25 1956 INCOMS\nREC'D - ESPIONAGE\nF B I\nMAY 7 9 24 AM '56\n\nReference made to memorandum Mr. Martin to Mr. Belmont, May 4, 1956, indicating Thomas Gamble, 102 Center Street, Oxford, Pennsylvania, called at 11:35 p.m., May 4, 1956, concerning a bright light he had observed traveling toward Baltimore at an altitude of approximately 2,000 feet."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO Mr. A. H. Belmont\nFROM Mr. L. H. Martin\nDATE: May 4, 1956\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISC OBSERVED\nOXFORD, PENNSYLVANIA\nMAY 4, 1956\n\nFlying discs\n\nMr. Thomas Gamble, 102 Center Street, Oxford, Pennsylvania, telephone 1177R, called 11:35 p.m., May 4, 1956, and advised that he had just observed a bright light traveling about 2000 feet in the air toward Baltimore. He last saw it at the place he was calling the Bureau from which was 121 Hodson Street, Oxford, Pennsylvania. He described the object as a solid, bright, yellow light, visible from all directions which he described at one point as being more than twice as bright and twice as big as the headlight of an automobile and another time as twice as bright as the evening star and it was impossible to persuade him to describe it more specifically. He said the object made no noise and that at first it was traveling overhead about as fast as his automobile but then it speeded up and he could not keep up with it although he was traveling at 80 miles per hour. He said that two of his buddies in the barroom where he had first observed the object had also observed it--Cecil Pew and Raymond Dixon. He said he had tried to call Civil Defense headquarters in Baltimore but no one was on duty. Bufiles reflect in information identifiable with Thomas Gamble.\n\nACTION:\n\nCaptain E. C. Brown, OSI, was advised.\n\n62-83894-366\n62-83894-66\nREROUTED\nINDEXED-13\n18 MAY 8 1956\n\ncc - Mr. Belmont\nMr. Branigan\n\nLHM:jdd\n(3)\nJUN 26 1956\n58 MAY 14 1956\nEX. - 120"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECD-ESPIONAGE FBI\nMay 14 2 26 PM 56\nRECD BELMONT FBI-JUSTICE\nMAY 7 4 16 PM '56\nRECD BELMONT FBI-JUSTICE\nMay 7 9 45 AM '56\nRECD-ESPIONAGE F B I\nMay 8 9 43 AM '56\n\nReference memorandum Mr. Martin to Mr. Belmont, May 4, 1956, indicating Thomas Gamble, 102 Center Street, Oxford, Pennsylvania, telephone 1177R, called at 11:35 p.m., May 4, 1956, and advised that he had observed a bright light traveling about 2000 feet in the air toward Baltimore.\n\nThis same individual telephonically advised at 2:45 p.m., May 5, 1956, his true name is Billy Thomas Gambill and his true residence is 419 South Broad Street, Kenneth Square, Pennsylvania.\n\nBureau indices on Billy Thomas Gambill limited to Pennsylvania were searched with negative results.\n\nAt 3:35 p.m., May 5, 1956, Captain E. C. Brown, OSI, was telephonically advised at his residence of the above information.\n\nThis is for your information.\n\ncc Belmont\nBranigan\nGlascock\nJHG:pat\n(4)\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: A. H. Belmont\nFROM: J. H. Glascock\nDATE: 5-5-56\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISC OBSERVED\nOXFORD, PENNSYLVANIA\nMay 4, 1956\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nReference made to memorandum Mr. Martin to Mr. Belmont, May 4, 1956, indicating Thomas Gamble, 102 Center Street, Oxford, Pennsylvania, called at 11:35 p.m., May 4, 1956, concerning a bright light he had observed traveling toward Baltimore at an altitude of approximately 2,000 feet.\n\nThis same individual telephonically advised the writer 2:45 p.m., May 5, 1956, his true name is Billy Thomas Gambill and that his true residence is 419 South Broad Street, Kenneth Square, Pennsylvania. Gambill desired to know the results of any investigation conducted as the result of his previous call. It was pointed out to him that the Bureau was not at liberty to disclose such information.\n\nBureau indices on Billy Thomas Gambill, limited to Pennsylvania, were searched with negative results.\n\nAt 3:35 p.m., May 5, 1956, Captain E. C.Brown, OSI, was telephonically advised at his residence.\n\nACTION: This is for your information.\n\ncc Belmont\nBranigan\nGlascock\nJHG:pat\n(4)\n\nRECORDED-75\nINDEXED-75\n62-83894-367\n27 MAY 16 1956\n\nlet to OSI\n5/11/56 EHM\n\nX-109"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cc Ladsbury\nTolson\n\nDate: May 10, 1956\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nInspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nBuilding Annex 2\n4th and Adams Drives, S.W.\nWashington, D.C.\n(Attn: 6 1)\n\nFrom: Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING DISC OBSERVED\nOXFORD, PENNSYLVANIA\nMAY 4, 1956\n\nDISCLOSURE - INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL (EXPEDITED)\n\nAt 11:35 p.m., May 4, 1956, an individual named Thomas Gamble, of Oxford, Pennsylvania, called this Bureau and advised that he had observed a bright light traveling about 2000 feet in the air toward Baltimore, Maryland. He described the object as a solid, bright, yellow light visible from all directions. He stated the object made no noise and at first it was traveling overhead about as fast as his automobile but then it speeded up and he could not keep up with it although he was traveling at 80 miles per hour. He advised that two of his buddies, Cecil Pew and Raymond Dixon, also observed the object.\n\nAt 2:45 p.m., May 5, 1956, the aforementioned individual advised his true name is Billy Thomas Gambill and his address is 419 South Broad Street, Kenneth Square, Pennsylvania.\n\nRHM:jdb\n(3)\nMAY 22 1956\nFBI-JUSTICE\nRECD BELMONT"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BY COURIER SERVICE\n\nDate: May 11, 1956\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations (orig. & 1)\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nBuilding Tempo E\n4th and Adams Drive, S. W.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING DISC OBSERVED\nOXFORD, PENNSYLVANIA\nMAY 4, 1956\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING (ESPIONAGE)\n\nAt 11:35 p.m., May 4, 1956, an individual who identified himself as Thomas Gamble, 102 Center Street, Oxford, Pennsylvania, advised this Bureau he had just observed at Oxford, Pennsylvania, a bright light traveling about 2,000 feet in the air toward Baltimore, Maryland. He described the object as a solid, bright, yellow light visible from all directions and that it was twice as bright and twice as large as the headlight of an automobile. He also described it as twice as bright as the evening star. He was unable to describe it in more detail. He stated the object made no noise, that at first its speed was the same as the car he was driving but it sped up and although he was driving 80 miles an hour he was unable to keep up with it. He advised that two of his friends, Cecil Pew and Raymond Dixon, also had observed the object.\n\nAt 2:45 p.m., May 5, 1956, the above-referred-to individual advised his true name and address were Billy Thomas Gambill, 419 South Broad Street, Kenneth Square, Pennsylvania.\n\nEHM:jdb\n(5)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\n\nThe above information was telephonically furnished to Captain E. C. Brown of your office by this Bureau on May 4 and May 5, 1956, for whatever action deemed desirable by your office. No action is contemplated in this matter by this Bureau.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(3)\nESB:so\n\n1-Tolson\n2-Nelson (Attn: [illegible])\n\n[illegible]\n\nRECD - ESPIONAGE\nF B I\nAUG 22 3 35 AM '56\n\nMR. JONES\nAUG 17 4 05 PM '56\nRECEIVED\nF B I\nESPIONAGE SECTION\nJUSTICE\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nCHARLES H. HOWARD\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nDIRECTOR, FBI"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: 8/15/56\n\nFROM : SAC, LOS ANGELES (100-24442)\n\nSUBJECT: TOD KITTREDGE\nFLYING SAUCER\n\nThe following is being furnished to the Bureau for its information in the event an inquiry should be received from the Air Force:\n\nOn 8/14/56, Lt. LOUIS SAUTER and Sgt. CHARLES M. HOWARD, 4602nd Air Intelligence Service Squadron, Norton AFB, San Bernardino, California, called at this office, accompanied by Captain DAMON ECKLES of the Air Information Service.\n\nLt. SAUTER stated he had received a teletype from his headquarters, reflecting that TOD KITTREDGE, 1430 Hatteras Street, Van Nuys, California, had reported that on 7/16/56, a spherical vehicle had landed in his back yard, splitting a large tree in two. On 7/30/56, this vehicle returned and on this occasion some little green men emerged from the vehicle and invited KITTREDGE to ride in their ship. He supposedly went up with them for approximately 20 minutes.\n\nLt. SAUTER stated he had no additional information except that KITTREDGE was believed to be employed in some minor technical capacity for the Columbia Broadcasting System.\n\nCaptain ECKLES stated he recalled that the incident reported by KITTREDGE was presented on a CBS television newscast about the time it occurred, and that during the telecast, the split tree was shown, and an interview was had with KITTREDGE. According to Captain ECKLES, the tenor of the comments by the television announcer was that he placed little credence in the story, but was presenting it for what it was worth.\n\nLt. SAUTER stated that he believes the incident reported by KITTREDGE to be utterly ridiculous, but, in accordance with instructions from his headquarters, he must make some inquiry concerning KITTREDGE in such a manner as not to result in any publicity indicating an Air Force interest. He inquired if the FBI would conduct investi-\n\n2-Bureau (Air Mail)\n1-Los Angeles\n\nESB:so\n(3)\n\nRECORDED - 83\nINDEXED - 83"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI\n8/15/56\n\nRE: TOD KITTREDGE\nFLYING SAUCER\n\ngation to obtain information concerning the background of KITTREDGE, and was advised that no such investigation would be conducted by this office in the absence of instructions from the Bureau.\n\nNo record of KITTREDGE is reflected in the indices of the Los Angeles Office and SAUTER was so advised.\n\nNo action by this office is contemplated.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D BELMONT\nFBI - JUSTICE\n\nSep 11 11 39 AM '56\n\nSep 10 11 16 AM '56\n\nRECEIVED\nSep 11 12 53 PM '56\nINTERNAL SECURITY SECT.\nFBI\n\nMR. JONES\nSep 10 11 34 AM '56\nRECEIVED\nF B I\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nO'Connor 1906\n9/19 rd 5\n\n(X)\nGROUP 1\n\n1 - DEC. FILE (62-0)\n1 - ALBUQUERQUE\n1 - SYRACUSE\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: 9/7/56\n\nFROM : SAC, ST. LOUIS (62-0)\n\nSUBJECT: THE A.P.R.O. BULLETIN,\n1712 Van Court,\nAlamogordo, New Mexico\nMISCELLANEOUS\n\nOn August 31, 1956, HARLAN N. WOLD, 1829a North Market Street, St. Louis, Missouri, employed as an electrician, Department 155, at McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, St. Louis County, Badge No. 55185, appeared at the St. Louis Office to advise that he and a group of fellow workers have subscribed to a publication entitled \"The A.P.R.O. Bulletin\", which is published at 1712 Van Court, Alamogordo, New Mexico, and which contains articles about flying saucers.\n\nWOLD stated he and a group of fellow workers saw an advertisement concerning the above described publication in a magazine and they subscribed to this publication for one year at a cost of $3.00. WOLD further stated this publication slurred and criticized the U. S. Air Force and officials of the U. S. Air Force and was in his opinion Communistic.\n\nA copy of this communication is being forwarded the Albuquerque Office for purposes of information.\n\n2 - Bureau\n1 - Albuquerque\n1 - St. Louis (62-0)\n\nCSS:nln\n(4)\n\nEXP. PROC.\n\nRECORDED-74 62-83894-369\nINDEXED-74\nEX-117"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - Liaison Section\n1 - Mr. O'Connor\n\n62-83894\n\nDate: September 19, 1956\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\n\nSubject: [REDACTED]\n\nNote: Bureau files are negative concerning captioned publication and in view of the fact that it deals with flying saucers and that the established policy has been to refer matters of this type to the Air Force, no further action is deemed necessary.\n\nSEP 20 1956\nFBI JUSTICE\nRECEIVED-MAIL ROOM"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - Liaison Section\n1 - Mr. O'Connor\n\n62-83894\n\nBY COURIER SERVICE\n\nDate: September 20, 1956\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nBuilding Tempo E\n4th and Adams Drive, S.W.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: THE A.P.R.O. BULLETIN\n1712 VAN COURT\nALAMOGORDO, NEW MEXICO\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nOn August 31, 1956, Harlan N. Wold, 1829a North Market Street, St. Louis, Missouri, who is employed as an electrician, Department 155, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, furnished the St. Louis Office of this Bureau with information that he and a group of his fellow workers have subscribed to a publication captioned \"The A.P.R.O. Bulletin,\" which contains articles about flying saucers. Wold advised he answered an advertisement in a magazine and subscribed to this publication for one year, at a cost of $3.00. Wold further advised that in his opinion, the publication slurred and criticized the U. S. Air Force and officials of the U. S. Air Force.\n\nNo action is contemplated in this matter by this Bureau.\n\nNOTE ON YELLOW:\n\nBureau files are negative concerning captioned publication and in view of the fact that it deals with flying saucers and that the established policy has been to refer matters of this type to the Air Force, no further action is deemed necessary.\n\nJJO'C:ebm\n(5)\n\nBY COURIER SVC.\nRECORDED-11 62-83894-370\nCOMM-FBI\n60 SEP 26 1956"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"October 12, 1956\n\nREGISTERED\n\nMiss Phillips\n12 Rose Street\nStamford, Connecticut\n\nDear Miss Phillips:\n\nYour letter of October 8, 1956, with enclosure, has been received.\n\nI want to thank you for the interest which prompted your writing and for your very kind words concerning my administration of this Bureau.\n\nThe information contained in your letter and the enclosure does not fall within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI, and I am taking the liberty of forwarding a copy of your letter, as well as a copy of the enclosure, to the Director, Office of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nCopy of incoming and enclosure sent by form to the Inspector General, Department of the Air Force.\n\nvdm:jm\n(5)\n\nD MAIL ROOM\nFBI\nOCT 12 1956"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED-31\nINDEXED-31 62-83874-371\n\nOctober 12, 1956\n\nMiss Esther D. Fillion\n12 Hope Street\nStamford, Connecticut\n\nDear Miss Fillion:\n\nYour letter of October 5, 1956, with enclosure, has been received.\n\nI want to thank you for the interest which prompted your writing and for your very kind words concerning my administration of this Bureau.\n\nThe information contained in your letter and the enclosure does not fall within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI, and I am taking the liberty of forwarding a copy of your letter, as well as a copy of the enclosure, to the Director, Office of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nCopy of incoming and enclosure sent by form to The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force.\n\nFJH:jfm\n(3)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12 Hope St.\nStamford, Conn.\nOctober 5, 1956\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\nDirector of F.B.I.\nWashington, D.C.\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nEnclosed is a copy of a Lecture sent to me from Detroit. I think it is the most fascinating Research ever made.\n\nIn your busy life you may not have encountered it, so I thought I would send you a copy.\n\nWhy doesn't the Government come out with the truth about Unidentified Flying Objects?\nEverybody seems to accept the \"Saucers\" as a matter of course, and"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"people are becoming annoyed at the \"ostrich attitude\" our leaders have taken about them.\n\nA number of clergymen feel that the time has come for someone to answer intelligently and sincerely the public's inquiries. They have gone to \"The Book\" - the Sacred Bible where man can always find the answers to all his needs, doubts, fears - and inquiries!\n\nI have heard many people say that you probably have all the answers - but I suppose you have been throttled too!\n\nI'm so glad you refused to accept the invitation to run for President. You would have been a good one - (if you could be let alone) - but sordid Party politics would have engulfed you too much.\n\nTo the Legions of your admirers you stand too High - are too"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"clean and honest to become so involved.\n\nThanks to Almighty God there are Character Influences like you still standing on the same firm ground of our Forefathers.\n\nEach day now a few more chips are knocked off the pillars of Learning, High Morals, decent behavior and honest standards. Where can it all end? The days are becoming Wearisome and fearful; surely the repercussions are shaking the outer walls of even Our Father's House.\n\nI wonder what the God of our Fathers is going to do about it?\n\nWith deepest respect,\n\nEsther D. Fillion"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE COPY\n12 Hope St.\nStamford, Conn.\nOctober 5, 1956\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\nDirector of F. B. I.\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\n\tEnclosed is a copy of a Lecture sent to me from Detroit. I think it is the most fascinating Research ever made.\n\n\tIn your busy life you may not have encountered it, so I thought I would send you a copy.\n\n\tWhy doesn't the Government come out with the truth about unidentified Flying Objects?\n\n\tEverybody seems to accept the \"Saucers\" as a matter of course, and people are becoming annoyed at the \"ostrich stance\" our Leaders have taken about them.\n\n\tA number of clergymen feel that the time has come for someone to answer intelligently and sincerely the public's inquiries. They have gone to \"The Book\"--the Sacred Bible where man can always find the answers to all his needs, doubts, fears--and inquiries!\n\n\tI have heard many people say that you probably have all the answers--but I suppose you have been throttled too!\n\n\tI'm so glad you refused to accept the invitation to run for President. You would have been a good one--(if you could be let alone)--but sordid Party politics would have engulfed you too much.\n\n\tTo the Legions of your admirers you stand too High--are too clean and honest to become so involved.\n\n\tThanks to Almighty God there are character Influences like you still standing on the same firm ground of our Forefathers.\n\n\tEach day now a few more chips are knocked off the pillars of Learning, High morals, decent behavior and honest standards. Where can it all end? The days are becoming wearisome and fearful; surely the repercussions are shaking the outer walls of even Our Father's House.\n\n\tI wonder what the God of Our Fathers is going to do about it?\n\n\t\t\t\tWith deepest respect,\n/s/\t\t\t\tEsther D. Fillion"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE\n62-83894- 371"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS\n\nPg. 2 - paragraph 3 - line 10 - should read \"ought to decide\".\nPg. 3 - paragraph 7 - line 13 - should read \"into space via\".\nPg. 4 - paragraph 4 - line 10 - should read \"Paul tells us\".\n\n62-83894-371"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"WHIRLING WHEELS\"\n\n(A Correlation of Flying Saucers and Visitors from other Planets in The Bible)\n\nby: Reverend John Miller, S.T.M., Pastor, Lutheran Church; Litchfield, Illinois\n\n\"Flying Saucers\" have made the headlines off and on for many months now. Much has been written about them. Research has shown that \"flying chariots\" and strange powers, both of locomotion and destruction, are described in the holy books of various heathen faiths many thousands of years older than our own. \"Flying Chariots\" have been seen and reported and not believed for many ages. That is nothing new. But what is new is that recently they have been photographed.\n\nHaving established the factuality of the \"flying saucer\", it is now about time that we find a theological confirmation of the whole matter. This is a necessity! If \"flying saucers\" inhabit outer-space, and if they have some kind of celestial character, they should have some place in the total economy of God. They should have more place in our thinking and planning, and one would expect them to be mentioned in our own holy books, too. We are therefore not surprised, upon investigation, to find \"flying\" clouds, rolls, chariots, wheels and people, mentioned in the Bible. To realize this, is to make a great many mysterious things in the Bible seem both matter-of-fact and encouraging!\n\nThe ancients, it is true, had no adequate words to describe the things they saw in their day which came from outer space. If a thing flew, it was called a \"flying\" cloud, bird, chariot or angel. We, today, should have progressed far enough scientifically to call objects from outer-space by names which are more appropriate. But the unhappy term \"flying saucer\" is a term more reminiscent of a tea-party than of the man-world of science. It seems our own nomenclature, or is it our imagination, is very inadequate also. However, the possibility and probability of realizing unheard of sources of power and speeds, and the conquering of space is to us but a matter of time.\n\nTo understand our own holy book we must replace outworn mythological terminology of yester-year with the most adequate scientific terminology of today. The heaven of yesterday we call \"space\" today! It can be nothing else. The angels of yesterday are the \"space-men\" of today. An angel was an inhabitant of space. They came from other worlds. If there are any inhabitants of outer space, we today would call them \"space-men\". The \"flying\" clouds, horses, or chariots of scripture we call \"flying saucers\" or \"space ships\". With a clarification of but these three terms, many things now fall into place quite naturally.\n\nAngels or \"space-men\" have been seen. They've walked on earth. We read way back in the Old Testament, \"Two angels (or space-men) came to Sodom in the evening. When Lot saw them he rose to meet them, and bowed himself with his face to the ground\". He spoke to them and offered them hospitality. They did him a favor too. They saved his life! For these two space-men subsequently led an attack on Sodom and Gomorrah and destroyed it with \"brimstone and fire out of heaven (space)\" (Gen. 19)."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"-2-\n\nDaniel (Dan. 9:21) calls the angel Gabriel, a man. He describes this\nspace-man as coming to him in \"swift flight at the time of the evening\nsacrifice\", and he also describes the interview which followed. Numer-\nous incidents are mentioned in scripture of space-men landing on earth\nand contacting earth-men, usually bringing to them an important message.\nAbout three hundred such incidents can be listed! They brought help as\nwell as destruction, these men from outer-space or heaven.\n\nI believe that we should take these observations more matter-of-factly.\nWe are not dealing with mythology here. A literal understanding of\nthese incidents in modern thought-patterns brings astonishing clarity\nto all. Our religion should become more materialistic in order to con-\nform with scripture, and not vice-versa as our clerics and others have\nbeen telling us for so long. We have practically and mistakenly spiri-\ntualized religion out of existence, and thus caused the great divorce\nbetween science and religion. True science is true religion.\n\nThese angels or space-men pilot some sort of vehicle. One of these\nspace-men, described as a \"mighty one\" (Rev. 10), \"came down out of\nheaven (space) wrapped in a cloud\". Let us call symbolical language\nand oriental imagery by their right names. To be \"wrapped in a cloud\"\nmeans to be surrounded by an object. In other words, this space-man\nwas piloting a space-ship. How else could the observers of that day\nhave described this phenomenon? That \"flying\" clouds don't refer to\nreal clouds we see from the quotation, \"Who are those that fly like a\ncloud?\" (Isa. 60). The following literal description of a supposed\nflying-cloud ought to decide the matter. \"A stormy wind came out of\nthe north, and a great cloud, with brightness round about it, and fire\nflashing forth continually, and in the midst of the fire, as it were\ngleaming bronze. And from the midst of it came the likeness of four\nliving creatures (spacemen)\" (Ezk. 1).\n\nThe space-man mentioned above had a \"rainbow over his head\", namely\nvari-colored lights shone from a canopy over his head which shall be\ndescribed later. Light \"like the sun\" came from this space-ship, and\nits \"legs\", no doubt landing-gear, were \"like pillars of fire\". The\nwhole earth was lit up by the power of the light given off by this\nspace-ship (Rev. 18:1).\n\nBesides describing these \"space-ships\" as \"flying\" clouds, they are\nalso described as a \"flying roll\" (Zech. 5:1), in other words \"saucer\"\nor \"cigar\" shaped. An approximate size estimated by an observer of\nthat century who had no knowledge of perspective or distance, is in-\ncluded in this description. They are also described as a \"flying ser-\npent\" (Isa. 14:29 - 30:6), referring no doubt to the long trail of\nfire left by the space-ship's exhaust.\n\nHowever, the clearest, most prominent, most detailed, and most appro-\npriate name given these flying-ships or space-ships, and one which we\nwould well adopt as the most scientific is, \"WHIRLING WHEELS\", as the\nreporter Ezekiel calls them (Ezk. 1). This reporter now gives the most\ndetailed description of the so-called \"flying saucer\" in existence to-\nday - many details of which have been verified by modern observers and\nsome even caught by camera.\n\n\"Now as I looked at the living creatures (space-men) I saw a wheel upon\nthe earth (the space-ship had evidently landed), one for each of the\nfour of them (four space-ships in all). The appearance of the wheels\nwas like the gleaming of a chrysolite (transparent or translucent olive-\ngreen). Their construction being as it were a wheel within a wheel,\nthey had spokes and rims (recent observations and pictures have verified\nthis description of an outer rim and an inner wheel, etc.). And when\nthe living creatures (space-men) rose from the earth, the wheels rose,\nfor the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels\"."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"-3-\n\nThe last sentence is extremely interesting. The reporter claims that\nwhen the space-men rose the wheels rose with them. That is exactly\nwhat a person of an unmechanical age would say. Men can move, but not\nan object. So they described the men as carrying the ships with them.\nWe, of course would say the opposite, namely that the wheels or space-\nships carried the space-men.\n\nThe \"whirling wheels\" are described as \"full of eyes\", in other words,\nfull of round openings, port-holes, or power outlets, \"all around and\nwithin\". This description again tallies with observations and photo-\ngraphs made recently.\n\nThe space-ships are described as \"darting to and fro, like the flash\nof lightning\" (Ezk. 1). \"When they went they went in any of their\nfour directions without turning as they went. In whatever direction\nthe front wheel (or ship) faced, the others followed without turning\nas they went\". Besides describing their unbelievable maneuverability\n\"without turning\", this also seems to claim that they flew in forma-\ntion, following a leader (also see Ezk. 10:9).\n\nThe fuel or power for these space-ships is found in the middle of the\nspace-ship. It is described as \"fire between the whirling wheels\"\n(Ezk. 16:6). \"In the midst there was something that looked like burn-\ning coals of fire, like torches moving to and fro, and the fire was\nbright, and out of the fire went forth lightning\" (Ezk. 1).\n\nAnd now there follows a detail which is the very acme of veracity.\n\"Over the head of the living creatures (space-men) there was the like-\nness of a firmament (the protective canopy over a pilot's head) shin-\ning like crystal (transparent glass), spread out above their heads\"\n(Ezk. 1). This \"glass globe\" has also been observed on the \"flying\nsaucers\" of today and photographed. It also seems that flying orders\nare given by remote control via radio or wireless. A voice is said\nto come \"from above the firmament (canopy) over their heads\". It is\nalso claimed by this biblical reporter that part of these space-ships\nis collapsible and other parts retractable. The latter is perhaps\nthe central turret which will be described later.\n\nIn flight these \"whirling wheels\" give off music (Rev. 4:8). This\nphenomenon has been reported in the holy books of other faiths much\nolder than our own. \"It's like the sound of many waters, like the\nthunder of the Almighty, a sound of tumult like the sounds of a host\"\n(Ezk. 1:24 - 3:13). The word \"host\" is important to keep in mind be-\ncause it refers no doubt to the great number of these space-ships fly-\ning together. The insignia which seems to be on the outer surface of\nthe space-whips are recognizable as a cherub (a humorous or should we\nsay \"human\" touch), the face of a man, a lion, and an eagle (Ezk. 1).\nThese space-ships are given orders to patrol the earth, \"Go and patrol\nthe earth\" (Zech. 6).\n\nOn the basis of what we have learned, certain events in scripture now\nare understandable and acceptable. Enoch, it is reported, went to\nanother world without dying (Heb. 11:5), as perhaps Moses did also.\nJacob thought he had a vision when he saw \"a ladder set up on the\nearth and beheld angels or space-men, ascending and descending on it\"\n(Gen. 28). The ladder obviously was let down from a space-ship for\nsome purpose or other. Space-men had a particular interest in Jacob\nit seems, for on a later occasion he wrestled with one of them, the\nspace-man only playing with Jacob until it was time for the space-man\nto go, whereupon he partially paralyzed Jacob (Gen. 32). It is inter-\nesting to note that space-men usually appear around sunset, during the\nnight, or at sunrise. Through some whirl-wind-like action Elijah dis-\nappeared into space via a \"flying chariot\" (II Kings 2:11). Moses"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"-4-\n\nand Elijah came to meet Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration via \"a\nbright cloud\". We know what these \"clouds\" were. The \"cloud\" disap-\npeared with them again. The poor man in Luke 16, was carried by space-\nmen into another world. Do space-men carry away into heaven or space\nthe \"souls\" of the dead? A woman in Rev. 12, was given unusual loco-\nmotive powers to escape her enemy. These instances can be multiplied\nhundreds of times !!\n\nEven God's activities now become clearer! God's presence in scripture\nis described \"like birds hovering\" (Isa. 31:5). The hovering is a\nhovering of some flying object. \"Clouds\" are called His chariot, with\nthem comes the wind, fire and flame (Ps. 104). One reads of \"a swift\ncloud\" (Isa. 19:1), in other words a space-ship. Note the following\ndescription: \"Then the earth reeled and rocked: the foundations also\nof the mountains trembled and quaked, because He was angry. Smoke went\nup from His nostrils, and devouring fire from His mouth: glowing coals\nflamed forth from Him. He bowed the heavens and came down. Thick dark-\nness was under His feet. He rode on a cherub and flew. He came swiftly\nupon the wings of the wind\" (Ps. 18). We have discussed these signs\nabove. They describe a space-ship, although the observer here, in not\nseeing the pilot, describes the space-ship as though it were a person.\nPerhaps in this case this space-ship might be God's own private space-\nship or the so-called \"mother\" ship. Why should we deny God the right\nto make a machine and use it too, if He wants to?\n\nGod's presence with Israel in the desert was via a \"pillar of cloud\" in\nthe day and by night a \"pillar of fire\"; the fire of course would not be\nvisible in the sky by day (Exo. 13). Out of this cloud God harassed the\nEgyptians. In Isa. 66, it is reported \"for behold the Lord will come in\nfire and His chariots like the storm-wind with flames of fire\". And a-\ngain, \"His chariots are like the whirlwind\" (Jer. 4:13). Psalms 68:17,\nclaims that God lived on Mount Sinai for a while with 20,000 chariots.\nBig \"clouds\" settled on Mount Sinai with \"fire\" and \"smoke\" for forty\ndays. Moses was given the tablets of the law on this mountain, through\nthe intervention of space-men, as Paul tells us. Sinai seems to have\nbeen God's headquarters for a certain maneuver at this time. Space-men\nwith their ships always seem to be present when God's people are in dan-\nger. Even a difficult passage like \"And the 'glory' of the Lord went up\nfrom the midst of the city and stood upon the mountain\" (Ezk. 11:23),\nnow becomes clear. It means that the ships took off from the middle of\nthe city, the take-off place, and then landed on a mountain.\n\nNeither should we forget that God is called the Lord of \"Sabbaoth\" in\nthe Bible, which means the Lord of \"hosts\" or \"armies\" - real armies,\nspace-armies. This name \"the Lord of hosts\", is the most used name for\nGod in the Bible. He is the God of war. This title is used hundreds\nof times together with the complementary phrase \"hosts of heaven\", or\nhosts of space. Jacob once saw the whole assembled army. We read,\n\"The angels (space-men) of God met him and when Jacob saw them he said,\n'This is God's army'.\" (Gen. 32). These hosts were at one time an ob-\nject of worship by earth-men. It seems that God often came down out of\nheaven or space to earth to fulfill His plans and to carry out certain\ncampaigns.\n\nWhen the space-ships were stationary and when the central turret was\nraised, they looked like thrones, and are so-called in scripture. \"His\nthrone was fiery flames, its wheels were burning fire, a stream of fire\nissued and came forth from before Him\" (Dan. 7:9). No ordinary thrones\nthese, but space-ships! In Rev. 4, we have a unique description of the\n\"mother\" ship and twenty-four others on a landing-field which looked\nlike a \"sea of glass-like crystal\", and from them all came flashes of\nlightning, voices and peals of thunder\"."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"-5-\n\nThe life of Jesus, now too, becomes clearer when these things are re-\nmembered. His powers of levitation, His ability to pass through doors,\nwalk on water, and heal the sick, are the essential attributes of men\nfrom outer space. They will also be ours someday when we will be \"free\nlike birds\" (Ezk. 13:20). At Jesus' birth the celestial army came quite\nclose to earth. A space-man appeared to the shepherds and the \"glory\"\nof the Lord, with the usual signs of His presence, shone around them.\nThere was a multitude of the heavenly army with this space-man. And\nafter their cosmic announcement, the music of their space-ships was\nheard as they again disappeared into space.\n\nJesus' ascension is described as \"a cloud (or space-ship) received Him\nout of their sight\" (Acts 1:9). His coming again is to be in the same\nmanner. \"Then will appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven (space)\ncoming on the clouds (space-ships) of heaven (space) with power and\ngreat glory\" (Matt. 24:30 - Rev. 14). He will come with His whole army\nand will then take over the destiny of the world. Jesus comes then,\nconquering and to conquer; a King of kings, and Lord of lords. This\ntime He summons the twelve legions of space-men, which He refused to\nsummon at the time of His betrayal. He will appear on a white \"horse\"\nor space-ship, \"shooting flames of fire\", leading a whole fleet of\nspace-ships, from whose mouths issue sharp swords\", no doubt blasts of\ndestructive energy. He signals all the \"birds that fly in mid-heaven\"\n(all the sky-ships in space) to the cosmic conflict, with the words,\n\"Come gather.\", and the world will be destroyed by God's black fleet\ndescribed below.\n\nThe rumbling space-ships leap on top of the mountains to await the sig-\nnal for the attack (Joel 2:5). That day will be a day of darkness and\ngloom and of hydrogen and cobalt clouds. \"Like blackness there is\nspread upon the mountains a great and powerful people, their like has\nnever been from of old nor will be again. Fire devours before them,\nand behind them a flame burns. The land is like the Garden of Eden be-\nfore them, but after them a desolate wilderness\".\n\nEarth-men who have pleased God in the meantime, will \"ascend up into\nspace in a space-ship in the sight of their foes\" (Rev. 11). Paul\nputs it this way, \"We will be caught up together with them in the\nclouds (space-ships) to meet the Lord in the air\" (I Thess. 4:17).\nIn this manner a remnant of earth-men will literally be rescued or\nsaved..... For what?\n\nFor the \"Father's house in which are many rooms\", or as some transla-\ntors put it, \"stopping-places\", \"resting-stations\" or \"filling-stations\"\nif you wish, or the way to outer-space and beyond. All the planets\nand universes in outer space are there for a good and glorious purpose.\nThey are not just dead dust. They are the planets on which these space-\nmen live, and we too will someday live.\n\nThis clear understanding of things as they are and as they will be, is\nfor our comfort. We should always remember that God's people are always\nprotected by a circle of space-ships. \"We are surrounded by so great a\ncloud of witnesses\", we read in Heb. 12. The whole heavenly host once\ncame out to protect but one man, Elijah (II Kings 6:17). \"Behold the\nmountain was full of horses and chariots of fire\". And Elijah was saved\nor rescued right from under the noses of a whole city full of enemies.\n\nGod's word to us knowing all this is: \"Fear not, for those who are with\nus are more than those who are with them!\" ... May our prayer be, --\n\n\"O, Lord, open our eyes that we may see.\"\n(II Kings 6:17)\n\nT H E E N D"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI DATE: 1/11/57\nFROM : SAC, RICHMOND (62-779)\nSUBJECT: AERIAL PHENOMENON RESEARCH GROUP 5108 FINLAY ST. SEATTLE, WASH.\nMISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION CONCERNING\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nAttached are two copies of a letter to the\nDistrict Commander of OSI at Langley Field, Va.,\nwhich are being forwarded to the Bureau for information.\n\n2 - Bureau (Encls.2)\n1 - Seattle (Encl.1)\n1 - Richmond\nRET:fec\n(4)\n\nENCLOSURE\n39\n\nRECORDED - 39\nINDEXED - 39\nEX-117\n62-83894-372\n6 JAN 14 1957\n6 JAN 23 1957"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nDATE: 1/11/57\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM : SAC, RICHMOND (62-779)\nSUBJECT: AERIAL PHENOMENON RESEARCH GROUP\nMISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nAttached are two copies of a letter to the\nDistrict Commander of OSI at Langley Air Force Base, Va., \nwhich are being forwarded to the Bureau for information.\n\n2 - Bureau (Encls.2)\n1 - Seattle (Encl.1)\n1 - Richmond\nRBT:fec\n(4)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"United States Department of Justice\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n501 Southern States Bldg.\nRichmond, Virginia\nJanuary 11, 1957\n\nDistrict Commander\n21st District\nOffice of Special Investigations\nLangley Air Force Base, Virginia\n\nRE: AERIAL PHENOMENON RESEARCH GROUP\nMISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDear Sir:\n\nMrs. Margaret Blunt, 7606 Sweetbriar Road, Richmond, Virginia, advised this office on January 2, 1957, that she had received a letter from captioned organization requesting she furnish any information she might have relative to her alleged observation of a \"flying saucer\" a year or so ago near Richmond, Virginia. Mrs. Blunt informed she is employed by the Richmond Quartermaster Depot of the United States Army and it was while on her way to work one morning that she had sighted the object in question. She stated that several other women employees of the Depot were present and subsequently one of these women had told a newspaper reporter about the incident and all their names had appeared in the papers.\n\nMrs. Blunt advised that she was reluctant to answer the letter as she felt it could be an illegal or subversive group who was trying to obtain information they should not have. She pointed out that she knew nothing about the organization but the correspondence did not reflect the group was connected with the United States Government in any way.\n\nShe informed that the letter indicated the group was a national organization whose duty it was to investigate any and all unusual aerial phenomenon. It also reflected that one Bob Gribble was the Executive Director and Jim Ewart was the Director of Investigations. The address for this organization was shown to be 5108 Finlay Street, Seattle, Washington.\n\n62-83894-372\nENCLOSURE\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 19 1964"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"District Commander\nJanuary 11, 1957\n\nThe above data is being furnished for your information, it being noted that the files of this office contain no reference to this organization.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nW. G. GRAPP\nSpecial Agent in Charge\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 54\nINDEXED - 54\n62-83894-373\nEX-173\nFlying Saucers\n\nFebruary 20, 1957\n\nMr. Hagan Parrish\nSheriff of Polk County\nPost Office Box 631\nBartow, Florida\n\nMy dear Sheriff:\n\nYour letter dated February 8, 1957, has been received, and I want to thank you for bringing the enclosed material to our attention.\n\nSince the contents of your communication are of primary concern to another governmental agency, I am taking the liberty of forwarding a copy of your letter and a copy of its enclosure to the Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, Building Tempo E, Fourth and Adams Drive, Southwest, Washington, D. C.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nCOMM - FBI\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncc - Seattle, with copy of incoming and copy of its enclosure Re Richmond letter 1-11-57 captioned \"Aerial Phenomena Research Group, Miscellaneous Information Concerning.\"\nSEATTLE, WASH.\nWASH. C\nBOB GRIBBLE\n\nNOTE: Bufiles reflect that a citizen in Richmond, Virginia, received a similar letter earlier this year from the Aerial Phenomena Research Group of the same type forwarded by correspondent. OSI at Langley Field, Virginia, made a copy of it available to the Bureau. (62-83894-372) No other pertinent references located. Copies of incoming and its enclosure sent to OSI by form.\n\nDCL:pwl\n(4)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HAGAN PARRISH\nSHERIFF\n\nCOUNTY OF POLK\nSTATE OF FLORIDA\nBARTOW, FLORIDA\n\nHAMP ROGERS, CHIEF\nCRIMINAL DIVISION\nRES. WINTER HAVEN, CY 3-0052\n\nPHONES:\nOFFICE 3-7011 - JAIL 3-7171\n\nREPLY REF.\n\nR. BRUCE ALBRITTON, CHIEF\nADMINISTRATIVE\nRES. FT. MEADE, AT 4-3955\n\nFebruary 8, 1957.\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D. C.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nI am enclosing herewith a bulletin received at this office on February 5, 1957, for your evaluation.\n\nAssuring you of our complete cooperation at all times, I am\n\nSincerely,\nHagan Parrish\nHAGAN PARRISH, SHERIFF\n\nHP:es\nEnc.\n\nENCLOSURE\n54\nENCLO. ATTACHED\n\nRECORDED - 54\n62-83894-373\n21 FEB 26 1957"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MR JONES\nFEB 14 8 41 AM '57\nRECEIVED\nFBI\nDEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE\n62-83894-373"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aerial Phenomena Research Group\nSeattle, Washington\nHeadquarters:\n5108 Findlay Street\nBob Gribble\nExecutive Director\nDear Sir:\nSeveral reports of unidentified flying objects seen over cities in your section of the country since on 17-18-56 have recently arrived at our office. We would appreciate names and addresses of witnesses reporting unidentified flying objects or other aerial phenomenon to your office during this period. All names and addresses will be held strictly confidential, to be used only when contacting the witness for information regarding their experience.\nWe are a national organization whose objectives are to investigate and determine the nature of unidentified flying objects and related phenomena. Any information you can give us pertaining to this matter will be greatly appreciated.\nThanking you in advance, I am\nSincerely yours\nBob Gribble\nDirector of Investigations\nPOLK COUNTY FLORIDA\nFEB 5 1957\nHAGAN PARRISH\nSheriff\n2 autostats made 2-15-57 jas"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO: Mr. Tolson\nDATE: March 15, 1957\nFROM: L. B. Nichols\nSUBJECT: JOHN STUART MARTIN\nGREAT MEADOWS, NEW JERSEY\nFor record purposes, John Stuart Martin (Great Meadows, New Jersey, telephone Mercury 7-2683) telephoned from his home at 12:52 p. m., March 14, 1957, while I was tied up on another matter, and talked with Wick. Martin, age 56, is one of the original founders of \"Time\" magazine, was employed by Louis de Rochemont on our movie, \"House on 92nd Street,\" and he formerly was editor of \"March of Time.\" He married Mary Gilbert, whom he says is known to the Director. He has one arm.\nMartin said, to make a long story short, that he has run into a situation which has to do with an unidentified flying object observed two days ago in the Great Meadows vicinity. Martin said he had made a formal report in writing to military authorities, as well as to two civilian groups interested in the affair. General Wedemeyer is connected with one of the latter groups. Martin said he is not satisfied that the \"intelligence\" he supplied to the military is being handled properly, nor does he know to whom he should submit information and in what fashion. He said frankly he wanted an Agent to call upon him so that the Agent could evaluate his information, although he said he well knew \"flying saucers,\" etc., were not within the scope of the FBI's interest nor jurisdiction.\n(The attached news ticker from United Press reflects that in testimony before a House Appropriations Subcommittee, 2-19-57, Dr. Hugh Dryden, Director of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, had flatly stated there is no such thing as a flying saucer. It was said too that the Air Force or some other authority should nail down the unidentified \"flying objects\" and \"say it is pure fiction.\")\nACTION TAKEN:\nWhile normally we would simply tell a caller that we have no jurisdiction and that he should refer such matter to the proper military\ncc: Mr. Boardman\ncc: Mr. Belmont\nREW:af\n62-83894-374\nRECORDED - 36\nINDEXED - 36\nMAR 26 1957\nEX 105"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-NICHOLS\nF B I\nMAR 21 4 00 PM '57\nRECD BELMONT\nFBI-JUSTICE\nMAR 21 6 01 PM '57\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nF B I\nMAR 15 5 19 PM '57\nRECEIVED-BOARDMAN\nMAR 15 6 36 PM '57\nMAR 15 4 52 PM '57\nRECEIVED-TOLSON\nF B I\nMAR 15 7 14 PM '57\nFBI-JUSTICE\nRECD BELMONT\nMAR 18 9 17 AM '57\nDIRECTOR-ESPIONAGE\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"authorities, in this instance, because of Martin's demonstrated friendliness\nto the Bureau and the Director, his sane and reasonable approach to matters\nand his apparent concern for the welfare of our country, I instructed Wick\nto have the Newark Office have an Agent when in the vicinity of Great Meadows\nsimply drop by Mr. Martin's home to see what he has in mind.\n\nASAC Commons of the Newark Office told Wick he would have\nan Agent drop by to see Martin and would send a letter to the Bureau covering\nresults."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-20\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Boardman\nMr. Belmont\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Parsons\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tamm\nMr. Trotter\nMr. Nease\nTele. Room\nMr. Holloman\nMiss Gandy\n\nUP73\n(FLYING SAUCERS)\nTHE DIRECTOR OF THE GOVERNMENT'S TOP AIR RESEARCH AGENCY HAS TOLD\nCONGRESS FLATLY THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FLYING SAUCER.\nTHE ASSURANCE CAME FROM DR. HUGH L. DRYDEN, DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL\nADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS, AT A CLOSED-DOOR HEARING BY A HOUSE\nAPPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE.\nTHE TESTIMONY, TAKEN ON FEB. 19, WAS MADE PUBLIC TODAY.\nDRYDEN AND OTHER NACA OFFICIALS INCLUDING GEN. JAMES A. DOOLITTLE,\nTHE AGENCY CHAIRMAN WERE QUESTIONED ABOUT A REPORT PUBLISHED IN\nGERMANY THAT THE NAZIS DEVELOPED SHORTLY BEFORE THE END OF WORLD WAR\nII A 138-FOOT SAUCER THAT ROSE TO 40,000 FEET AND FLEW AT A SPEED OF\n1,250 MILES AN HOUR.\n\"THERE IS NO TRUTH IN THAT STATEMENT,\" DRYDEN SAID. \"THIS IS AN\nADVERTISEMENT FOR A BOOK...\"\nREP. ALBERT THOMAS (D-TEX.), SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRMAN, PRESSING FOR A\nMORE CONCLUSIVE STATEMENT, ASKED:\n\"IS THERE NO SUCH THING AS A FLYING SAUCER, AND THE GERMANS\nDIDN'T HAVE IT IN 1945 AND DON'T HAVE IT YET?\"\n\"THAT IS RIGHT,\" SAID DRYDEN.\nDRYDEN ALSO DENIED A RELATED CLAIM THAT THE NAZIS HAD PERFECTED A\nBOMBER THAT COULD HIT THE U.S. AND RETURN WITHOUT REFUELING.\n\"YOU HAVE TO DISTINGUISH HARDWARE FROM IDEAS,\" DRYDEN EXPLAINED.\n3/14--EG1140A\n\nENCLOSURE\n62-83894-374\nWASHINGTON CITY NEWS SERVICE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-20\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Boardman\nMr. Belmont\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Parsons\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tamm\nMr. Trotter\nMr. Nease\nTele. Room\nMr. Holloman\nMiss Gandy\n\nUP76\nADD 1 FLYING SAUCERS\nDOOLITTLE ALSO DISCOUNTED THE PUBLISHED ACCOUNT OF THE SAUCER AND\nINTERCONTINENTAL BOMBER, WARNING HOWEVER THAT BACKERS OF THE BOOK\nPROBABLY WOULD USE THE DENIALS \"AS ANOTHER LEG UP\" TO PUBLICIZE IT.\nIN REFERENCE TO FREQUENTLY PUBLISHED \"SIGHTINGS\" OF WHAT OFFICIALLY\nARE CALLED \"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\" THOMAS SAID THE AIR FORCE, OR\nSOME OTHER AUTHORITY, \"OUGHT TO, ONCE AND FOR ALL, NAIL IT DOWN AND SAY\nIT IS PURE FICTION.\"\nHE SAID THE AIR FORCE HAD \"HEMMED AND HAWED\" ON THE ISSUE, APPARENTLY\nA REFERENCE TO THE 1955 AIR FORCE REPORT THAT IT HAD INVESTIGATED 5,000\nREPORTED SIGHTINGS AND FOUND \"NO EVIDENCE\" OF THE EXISTENCE OF\nSAUCERS.\nTHIS WASN'T QUITE THE SAME THING AS SAYING THE SAUCERS DID NOT\nEXIST, AS DRYDEN NOW HAS ASSERTED.\n3/14--EG1145A\n\nENCLOSURE\n62-83894-374\nWASHINGTON CITY NEWS SERVICE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI (62-83894)\n\nDATE: 4/18/57\n\nFROM : SAC, Norfolk\n\nSUBJECT: CIVILIAN RESEARCH\nINTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS\nLEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, Director,\n7017 Britton Ave., Cincinnati 27, Ohio\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nRe Cincinnati letter to Bureau 4/12/57, copies for Norfolk, requesting Norfolk check indices regarding EVA REICH, M.D. (Mrs. WILLIAM S. MOISE), Route 1, P. O. Box 721, Alexandria, Va.\n\nInasmuch as Alexandria, Va., is covered by the Richmond Office, both copies of relet designated for Norfolk, as well as enclosure, are being forwarded to Richmond for appropriate handling. Norfolk indices negative re Dr. REICH.\n\n2 - Bureau\n1 - Cincinnati (100-11671) (Info.)\n2 - Richmond (3 Encl.) (REGISTERED MAIL)\n1 - Norfolk\nJEM:SNB\n(6)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI (62-83894)\n\nDATE: 4/12/57\n\nFROM : SAC, Cincinnati (100-11671)\n\nSUBJECT: CIVILIAN RESEARCH,\nINTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS\nLEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, Director,\n7017 Britton Avenue\nCincinnati 27, Ohio\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nOn March 25, 1957, LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD appeared at the Cincinnati Office for the purpose of calling attention to a letter dated March 19, 1957, which he had received from EVA REICH, M.D. (Mrs. WILLIAM S. MOISE, Route 1, P.O. Box 721, Alexandria, Virginia, telephone South 5-7081).\n\nFor the information of the Bureau and the Norfolk Office, Mr. STRINGFIELD is presently the Advertising Manager for Dubois Company, Inc., 1120 W. Front Street, Cincinnati, Ohio. According to STRINGFIELD, he has been interested in flying discs or objects for a number of years and has cooperated with the United States Air Force to the extent of furnishing the Air Force with any information on flying objects coming to his attention. Mr. STRINGFIELD was also the publisher of a paper called the \"Orbit\", which carried the following heading: \"The official publication of Civilian Research, Interplanetary Flying Objects\". The \"Orbit\" was a monthly publication which carried information and intelligence research by STRINGFIELD on flying objects. According to STRINGFIELD, the \"Orbit\" had a limited circulation.\n\nIn connection with Dr. REICH's letter, STRINGFIELD stated that prior to the receipt of the letter he received a long distance telephone call from Dr. REICH on March 12, 1957. This call was received by him in the early morning prior to his departure for work. He related that Dr. REICH was a subscriber to the \"Orbit\" and that during the phone conversations she made reference to some of his reports which he had published in the \"Orbit\" and for the most part spoke on matters that were \"over his head\" and things that he did not understand. According to STRINGFIELD, she concluded the conversation by stating she would write him a letter, which letter was the reason for his call on the FBI.\n\n2 - Bureau (62-83894)(RM) (Enclosures - 2)\n2 - Norfolk (RM)(Enclosure - 1)\n2 - Cincinnati (100-11671)\n(1 - 65-1994)\n\nAJM:JL\n(6)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CI. 100-11671\n\nMr. STRINGFIELD furnished the letter to this office but desired the same be returned to him and it should be noted that Dr. REICH speaks of STRINGFIELD testifying before some Congressional committee in connection with flying saucers and his publication. She further speaks of events designated \"OROP Desert Ea\" which STRINGFIELD knows nothing about.\n\nIn the first paragraph of page 2 in speaking of the above event, she makes reference that there is evidence for espionage against this work and later adds that the FBI so far has declined to investigate as the subject is \"not within their jurisdiction\". It is further noted that she also speaks of the evidence of the \"orgone energy motor\", which STRINGFIELD has no knowledge of. Dr. REICH mentions a number of people as being former members on the staff of the expedition \"OROP Desert Ea\".\n\nFor the information of the Bureau and Norfolk, persons mentioned by Dr. REICH in her letter have been checked through the Cincinnati indices with negative results.\n\nThere are attached hereto two autostatic copies of Dr. REICH's letter to Mr. STRINGFIELD dated March 19, 1957, for the Bureau, and one copy for the Norfolk Office. The Norfolk Office is requested to check their indices on Dr. REICH and furnish the Bureau with any identifiable data concerning her and persons mentioned in her letter of March 19, 1957. This office is returning the original to Mr. STRINGFIELD and is not maintaining a copy of the same in this office.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, Cincinnati (100-11671)\n\nApril 23, 1957\n\nDirector, FBI (62-83894)\n\nRECORDED - 83 62-83894-376\n\nCIVILIAN RESEARCH\nINTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS\nLEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, DIRECTOR\n7017 BRITTON AVENUE\nCINCINNATI 27, OHIO\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nReurlet April 12, 1957, captioned as above.\n\nBufiles reflect that Eva Reich is the daughter of Dr. Wilhelm Reich, M.D., Director of the Wilhelm Reich Institute, aka., The Orgone Institute Research Laboratories, Inc., at Rangeley, Maine. Dr. Wilhelm Reich, following extensive investigation by the Food and Drug Administration, United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, in May, 1956, was found guilty of contempt of court following the issuance of an injunction barring interstate shipment of devices, literature and promotional material regarding treatments by Reich of cancer and other serious diseases, said devices having been described as worthless by the Food and Drug Administration. Following unsuccessful appeal efforts, Reich was imprisoned on March 12, 1957. Since early 1957, as well as previous thereto, Wilhelm Reich, Eva Reich, William Moise and other members of Reich's staff have directed voluminous correspondence to the Bureau, to various Bureau divisions, and other United States Government agencies and officials. None of the material reviewed at the Bureau has indicated any violations within the investigative jurisdiction of this Bureau.\n\nIt is noted that Dr. Eva Reich (Mrs. William S. Moise) was recently interviewed by Special Agents of the Richmond Office assigned to the Alexandria, Virginia, Resident Agency at which time she furnished information in essence comparable with that set forth in her letter to Stringfield. She also indicated at that time that she had addressed similar information to the office of United States Senator Margaret Chase Smith and had contacted Assistant United States Attorney General William Tompkins. At that time Eva Reich, a naturalized citizen of the United States, also made certain derogatory comments relating to justice\n\nTolson - Richmond, with enclosure (SEND BY REGISTERED MAIL)\nNichols\nBoardman - Norfolk (SEND BY REGISTERED MAIL)\nBelmont\nMohr\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nTrotter\nNease\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy\n\nCFM:lvp (6)\n\nCOMM - FBI APR 23 1957 MAILED 31"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, Cincinnati\n\nand government administration in the United States, representing possible admissions against interest. This information was furnished by the Bureau to Assistant Attorney General Tompkins and the Director of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.\n\nIn view of the above information and in the absence of any indication that matters related by Eva Reich in her letter to Stringfield are within the Bureau's jurisdiction, Richmond should disregard the lead set out in the last paragraph of referenced Cincinnati letter.\n\nThere is enclosed herewith for the Richmond Office an Autostat of Eva Reich's letter to Leonard Stringfield, Cincinnati, Ohio, dated March 19, 1957. In view of Eva Reich's vague threatened use of force (set forth in the last paragraph of her letter to Stringfield), Richmond Division should promptly make this information available to appropriate local officials in Alexandria, Virginia.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Leonard Stringfield\nC.I.R.F.O. Orbit\n7017 Britton Avenue\nCincinnati, 27, Ohio\n\nMarch 19, 1957\n\nDear Mr. Stringfield:\n\nThis letter is to confirm and elaborate the contents of our telephone conversation on March 12, 1957. At that time I called you on my own initiative, acting as a planetary and U.S. citizen, who was a witness to a series of facts and events designated \"OROP Desert Ea\". It was my aim to find out whether you would be willing to testify about the facts known to you concerning UFO sighting reports made by the civilian public in the USA and elsewhere, which as Editor of CRIFO Orbit you have collected and filed over several years. I also wanted to know whether under oath you would reveal what you know in your official capacity as former USAF Intelligence officer (This information about you was gleaned from Edward J. Ruppelt's book \"The UFO Story\"). I finally based my call on the title of your publication \"The official Publication of Civilian Research, Interplanetary Flying Objects\" as distinguished from the mystics who dabble in the unknown.\n\nI informed you that staffmembers of Expedition Orop Desert Ea, Arizona, 1954-1955 had lodged a charge of treason, fraud, perjury and conspiracy against certain government officials through the office of Senator Margaret Chase Smith on March 1, 1957. That these men had obstructed vital civilian research on the space problem, and have now apparently succeeded in their treacherous attack through defrauding the US court as to the nature of the work carried on during Expedition Orop Desert Ea; the discoverer of Life Energy, Dr. Wilhelm Reich being consequently imprisoned on March 12, 1957. The staff members of Expedition Orop Desert Ea wish to stress that in making their charges they are acting strictly on their own, on the basis of the respective facts known to each one. An investigation by the United States Congress has therefore been requested by us, concerning the underlying facts in this unique scandal. What has to be opened up is the entire field of UFO phenomena, the Undue Secrecy by Airforce headquarters, and the suppression of public news concerning the subject. Evidence points to the existence of a widespread conspiracy of those who want to maintain the status quo of the present world view, the atomic-mechanistic empty space hypothesis, the THEY in the background who want to kill all new knowledge by criminal means. Our evidence shows that \"they\" are in control of apparently all branches of the government. I feel personally unsure whether there exists at this point any bona fide honest constitutional government. After the events of March 11,1957 the constitution is dead, Law and rational order has failed. I am basing this statement on the fact that in spite of the evidence on court record the sentence against the Discovery of the Life Energy was executed. For reference you have to go to the nearest US District Court where you will find Volume V Record Appendix to Briefs for Appellants, Case No. 5160, Supreme Court Number 688, Secret and Suppressed Evidence, Orop Desert Ea, 1954-1955. The Title of the Report is \"Contact with Space\", Oranur, Second Report, 1951 - 1956, By Wilhelm Reich. Dr. Reich was found guilty of Contempt of Court for disobeying an UNLAWFUL and Fraudulently obtained order against his work (1954) and for stating at trial that he had to continue with his work for reasons of national security.\n\nWe, the staff members of this expedition are factual witnesses to some aspects of the work such as: Oranur experiment, Orur (Denatured Nuclear material - in other words \"Atoms for Peace\"), the Cloud-buster, Cloudbuster plus Orur equals \"Spacegun\", Disabled Ea (Epsylon alpha Dr. Reich's designation of Space craft)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-2-\n\nConferences with ATIC, notification of government officials in responsible positions, Conferences with CIA; DOR clouds and effects, DOR removal (Smog socalled, also appears as smoky substance subsequent to UFO sightings as you know); DOR as Deadly Orgone Energy; Orene; Oranur Weather control: Rainmaking, also over deserts, Hurricane dissipation; Transportation of Orur including \"queering of Radar\", Breakdown (Hemiplegia) of spacegun operator while drawing from Ea, - And many further detailed aspects of OROP Desert Ea work such as the \"energetic nodes found experimentally\", etc., etc.... There is no shortage of facts, observations, and evidence. But the Truth has so far not yet been heard, which is all it needs to win.\n\nFurthermore there is evidence for espionage against this work: Tapped radio, opened mail etc. Since to date UFO's are officially \"nonexistent\" The FBI has sofar declined to investigate as the subject is \"not within their jurisdiction\". I am personally witness to the fact of the existence of the Orgone Energy Motor, and letters, documents, etc., describing the mysterious disappearance of one William Washington who came into possession of much knowledge concerning \"orgonometry, mathematical, and the Motor principle,\" and who has disappeared since 1949. I am sure any investigating agency could locate his whereabouts in a short time. It is clear that the powerful Oil interests in this country are out to keep their predominance in the field of power and income, and are involved in keeping the Orgone Energy Motor problem suppressed.\n\nThese points are mentioned to give you a hint how necessary a bona fide, courageous, forthright investigation has become. I am appending a bibliography for your convenience where you may find some of the printed evidence for our charges.\n\nIf no investigation is forthcoming within a reasonably short time we are forced to use force;- to use the scientific power of the Energy which we have learnt to trigger (storms, floods etc.)\n\nSincerely yours\n\nEva Reich MD\n(Mrs. William S. Moise)\nRt. 1, POB 721\nAlexandria, Va\nSOuth 5 - 7081\n\nOther Former Staff members: Expedition Orop Desert Ea\n1) Robert A. McCullough\n2) William Steig\n3) William Moise\n\nPS Since it will take me a day or two to prepare reference list, it will follow and is not enclosed, as stated in letter."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Eva Reich MD\n( Mrs. William S. Moise)\nRt. 1, POB 721\nAlexandria, Va\n\nMr. Leonard Stringfield\nC.R.I.F.O. Orbit\n7017 Britton Avenue\nCincinnati 27, Ohio\n\nAIRMAIL"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURES TO BUREAU (62-83894)(RM)\n\nCI. 100-11671\n\nTwo autostats of letter to LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD from EVA REICH, M.D. dated3/19/57.\n\ncopy to Richmond as encl to Bulet 4/57"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI (62-83894)\n\nDATE: 4/24/57\n\nFROM : SAC, RICHMOND (62-0)\n\nSUBJECT: CIVILIAN RESEARCH INTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, Director, 7017 Britton Ave., Cincinnati 27, Ohio MISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nRelet from Norfolk to Bureau dated 4/18/57.\n\nFor information of Bureau, only record in Richmond indices on EVA REICH (Mrs. WILLIAM S. MOISE) is that contained in Richmond letter to Bureau dated 3/28/57 entitled \"WILHELM REICH, MISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\". RUC\n\nTEB/mcw\n(4)\n2-Director\n1-Cincinnati (100-11671)(Info.)\n1-Richmond\n\n62-83894-377\nAPR 25 1957"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nNOV 7 1957\n\nTELETYPE\n\nURGENT 11-7-57 12-41 AM GPU\n\nTO DIRECTOR 2\n\nFROM SAC NEW YORK 1P\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS OVER INCORPORATED VILLAGE OF OLD BROOKVILLE, LI, NY. EVENING OF ELEVEN SIX FIFTYSEVEN. INFO CONCERNING.\nJAMES COLYER, PD OF INC. VILLAGE OF OLD BROOKVILLE ADVISED SEVERAL RESIDENTS OF THAT AREA AND MEMBER OF PD HAVE REPORTED SIGHTING TWO RED LIGHTS HOVERING IN AIR THAT VICINITY. LIGHTS APPEAR TO BE AN EVEN DISTANCE APART AND TO BE JOINED TOGETHER. AT ONE TIME THESE LIGHTS LIT UP AND SEEMED TO CAST A RED DUST OR FOG IN SURROUNDING AIR.\nCOLYER ADVISED HE REPORTED ABOVE INFO TO MITCHELL AFB AND ROSELYN AIRFIELD. BOTH ADVISED RECEIVING NUMEROUS REPORTS RE ABOVE AND ROSELYN AIR FIELD SAID AIRCRAFT ARE INVESTIGATING MATTER. COLYER ADVISED ABOVE INFO BROADCAST ON NEWS PROGRAM LOCAL RADIO STATION WINS. OSI, ONE, G-TWO, CAA IN AREA ADVISED.\nEND AND ACK PLS\nNY R 2 WA LO\n\n62-83894-378\nRECORDED - 19\nINDEXED - 19\n13 NOV 8 1957\nMr. Belmont"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOV 7 1957\n\nTELETYPE\n\nURGENT 11-7-57 12-41 AM CST\n\nTO DIRECTOR 3\n\nFROM SAC NEW YORK 1F\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS OVER INCORPORATED VILLAGE OF OLD BROOKVILLE, LI, NY. EVENING OF ELEVEN SIX FIFTYSEVEN. INFO CONCERNING JAMES SCULLY, PD OF INC VILLAGE OF OLD BROOKVILLE ADVISED EVENING OF ELEVEN SIX FIFTYSEVEN REPRESENTATIVE OF THAT AREA AND MEMBER OF PD HAVE REPORTED EIGHT LIGHTED OBJECTS IN THE SKY IN THAT VICINITY. LIGHTS APPEAR TO BE AN ELLIPSOIDAL SHAPE AND TO BE JOINED TOGETHER. AT ONE TIME THEY SEEMED TO CAST A RED DUST OR FOG TO SURROUNDING AIR. COLLYER AND OTHER PD REPORTED ABOVE INTO HICKENELL ASB AND ROSSLYN AIRFIELD. BOTH ADVISED RECEIVING NUMEROUS REPORTS OF ABOVE AND ROSLYN NY, FIELD SAID AIRCRAFT INVESTIGATIONS. COLLYER ADVISED ABOVE INTO BROADCAST ON NEWS PROGRAM LOCAL RADIO STATION WINS, OSI, OMA, W-TWO CCAA IN AREA ADVISED.\n\nEND AND ACCEPTED\n\nNY R 2 WA L"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR FBI\n\nDATE: 11-8-57\n\nFROM : SAC KANSAS CITY (66-2995)\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nOn November 5, 1957, SA (A) WALTER S. POND received information from Mr. DONALD KEITH GASH, 3012 Blueridge, Kansas City, Missouri that an uncle, LELAND JESSE GASH or JESSE LELAND GASH, employed by an aircraft concern and residing at Fort Worth, Texas, about two years ago saw an unidentified subject in the sky near his home. He obtained his movie camera and took pictures of the object. About eighteen months ago the uncle visited in Kansas City and the movies of the flying disc were shown. According to GASH, the pictures were very good and consisted of about fifteen feet of film.\n\nMr. GASH stated that he and his uncle have felt \"foolish\" when discussing the matter and never bothered to report it. He said however in view of the late international developments he felt that the Government should have this information.\n\nIn view of the fact that the Bureau may be interested in this film, it is requested that the Dallas Office at Fort Worth, Texas locate and interview LELAND JESSE GASH or JESSE LELAND GASH and obtain the film for transmittal to the Bureau.\n\nIt is suggested that the Bureau, after reviewing the film, advise the Office of Special Investigations, USAF, of any pertinent information deemed appropriate.\n\n2 - Bureau\n2 - Dallas\n1 - Kansas City (66-2995)\n\nWSP:jl\n(5)"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n\nOn November 5, 1957, SA (A) [REDACTED] received information from Mr. [REDACTED] Kansas City, Missouri that an uncle, [REDACTED] employed by an aircraft concern and residing at Fort Worth, Texas, about two years ago saw an unidentified subject in the sky near his home. He obtained his movie camera and took pictures of the object. About eighteen months ago the uncle visited in Kansas City and the movies of the flying disc were shown. According to GASH, the pictures were very good and consisted of about fifteen feet of film.\n\nMr. GASH stated that he and his uncle have felt \"foolish\" when discussing the matter and never bothered to report it. He said however in view of the late international developments he felt that the Government should have this information.\n\nIn view of the fact that the Bureau may be interested in this film, it is requested that the Dallas Office at Fort Worth, Texas locate and interview [REDACTED] and obtain the film for transmittal to the Bureau.\n\nIt is suggested that the Bureau, after reviewing the film, advise the Office of Special Investigations, USAF, of any pertinent information deemed appropriate.\n\nNOV 13 1957 FBI ESPIONAGE\n\nNOV 12 4 45 PM '57"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-41 (Rev. 7-25-57)\n\nDECODED COPY\n\nXXX Radio ☐ Teletype\n\nDEFERRED 11-8-57\n\nTO DIRECTOR\n\nFlying Discs\n\nFROM SAC, HOUSTON 081700\n\nUNIDENTIFIED OBJECT WHICH FELL NEAR HOME MRS. DONALD BLEVINS, HOUSTON, TEXAS, OCTOBER 24 LAST. INFORMATION CONCERNING. MRS. DONALD BLEVINS, 1235 SHAWNEE, HOUSTON, ADVISED THAT ON OCTOBER 24 LAST OBJECT BETWEEN SIZE OF GOLF BALL AND FIST FELL INTO HER YARD. OBJECT ALLEGEDLY OF METALLIC ASH OF SOME KIND, WAS BRIGHT AND HOT WHEN IT FELL. OBJECT FOUND BY MRS. BLEVINS' SON WHO REPORTED IT TO SCIENCE TEACHER, WHO SUGGESTED AUTHORITIES BE CONTACTED. INFORMATION FURNISHED OSI, ELLINGTON AFB, WHO HAS CONDUCTED INVESTIGATION. PRESS INQUIRY RECEIVED TODAY. ANSWERED BY STATING REPORT OF FALLING OBJECT HAD BEEN RECEIVED AND INFORMATION CONCERNING HAD BEEN RELAYED TO MILITARY AUTHORITIES, ELLINGTON AFB. OBJECT ACCORDING TO OSI IS PART OF AN ORDINARY FLARE AND OF NO SIGNIFICANCE. FOR BUREAUS INFORMATION.\n\nRECEIVED: 4:44 PM RADIO\n\n5:11 PM CODING UNIT HJT\n\nMr. Belmont\n\nRECORDED - 50\n\nINDEXED-50\n\nIf the intelligence contained in the above message is to be disseminated outside the Bureau, it is suggested that it be suitably paraphrased in order to protect the Bureau's cryptographic systems."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECODED COPY\n\nXXX Radio ☐ Teletype\n\nDEFERRED 11-8-57\n\nTO DIRECTOR\n\nFROM SAC, HOUSTON 081700\n\nUNIDENTIFIED OBJECT WHICH FELL NEAR HOME MRS. DONALD BLEVINS, HOUSTON, TEXAS, OCTOBER 24 LAST. INFORMATION CONCERNING. MRS. DONALD BLEVINS, 1235 SHAWNEE, HOUSTON, ADVISED THAT ON OCTOBER 24 LAST OBJECT BETWEEN SIZE OF GOLF BALL AND FIST FELL INTO HER YARD. OBJECT ALLEGEDLY OF METALLIC ASH OF SOME KIND, WAS BRIGHT AND HOT WHEN IT FELL. OBJECT FOUND BY MRS. BLEVINS' SON WHO REPORTED IT TO SCIENCE TEACHER, WHO SUGGESTED AUTHORITIES BE CONTACTED. INFORMATION FURNISHED OSI, ELLINGTON AFB, WHO HAS CONDUCTED INVESTIGATION. PRESS INQUIRY RECEIVED TODAY. ANSWERED BY STATING REPORT OF FALLING OBJECT HAD BEEN RECEIVED AND INFORMATION CONCERNING HAD BEEN RELAYED TO MILITARY AUTHORITIES, ELLINGTON AFB. OBJECT ACCORDING TO OSI IS PART OF AN ORDINARY FLARE AND OF NO SIGNIFICANCE. FOR BUREAUS INFORMATION.\n\nRECEIVED: 4:44 PM RADIO\n\n5:11 PM CODING UNIT HJT\n\nRECORDED - 50\n\nINDEXED-50\n\nNOV 8 3 36 PM '57 FBI"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-41 (Rev. 7-25-57)\n\nDECODED COPY\n\nRadio Teletype\n\nDEFERRED 11-8-57\n\nTO DIRECTOR\n\nFLYING DISCS\n\nFROM SAC, SPRINGFIELD 072245\n\nREPORT OF SIGHTING OF UNKNOWN FLYING OBJECT NEAR DANVILLE, ILLINOIS, NOVEMBER 6, 1957, INFORMATION CONCERNING. ASSISTANT CHIEF WALTER A. EICHEN, ILLINOIS STATE POLICE, REPORTED THAT ISP OFFICERS CALVIN SHOWERS AND JOHN MATULIS, DISTRICT TEN, REPORTED AT APPROXIMATELY 9:00 PM, NOVEMBER 7, 1957, SIGHTING A BRIGHT WHITE LIGHT FLYING THROUGH THE AIR IN A SOUTHWESTERLY DIRECTION FROM DANVILLE, ILLINOIS. OFFICERS TRIED TO FOLLOW IN THEIR CAR IN THE SAME DIRECTION AND DROVE GENERALLY IN A SOUTHWESTERLY DIRECTION FOR TWENTY MILES WHEN THEY LOST SIGHT OF THE OBJECT. DURING THIS TIME IT APPEARED AS BRIGHT WHITE, AMBER AND ORANGE. NO INDICATION THAT IT DIPPED TO THE GROUND OR THAT IT AFFECTED THEIR CAR. THEY REPORTED FOR A FEW SECONDS IT SEEMED TO AFFECT BOTH THE RECEIVER AND TRANSMITTER OF THEIR FM TWO-WAY RADIO. REPRESENTATIVES OF INTERNATIONAL NEWS SERVICE INQUIRED THIS OFFICE CONCERNING, NO COMMENT WAS MADE. ABOVE BEING FURNISHED FOR INFORMATION BUREAU.\n\nRECEIVED: 11:49 AM RADIO\n12:17 PM CODING UNIT\n\nRECORDED - 50\nINDEXED-50\n\n62-83894-381\n\n18 NOV 12 1957\n\nMr. Rosen\n\nFred Seize OSI, Bolling Field, puts officers given above info\n\n70 NOV 20 1957\n\nIf the intelligence contained in the above message is to be disseminated outside the Bureau, it is suggested that it be suitably paraphrased in order to protect the Bureau's cryptographic systems."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECODED COPY\n\nRadio\n\nDEFERRED 11-8-57\n\nRECEIVED ESPIONAGE FBI\n\nRECEIVED BOARDMAN FBI\n\nRECEIVED NO. 1 MAN INVESTIGATIVE DIVISION\n\nRECEIVED NICHOLS FBI JUSTICE\n\nRECD BELMONT FBI-JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED ROSEN\n\nFBI COMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nLIAISON SECTION FBI U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECD-TELETYPE UNIT FBI\n\nRECEIVED DIRECTOR FBI"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nNATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL\nWASHINGTON\n\nNovember 5, 1957\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR MR. ALAN H. BELMONT\nASSISTANT DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nPursuant to my conversation with you a few moments ago, there is enclosed a letter received by General Cutler's office today from Mr. W. Kiasuski, 5457 Jos. Campau, Detroit 11, Michigan.\n\nIt would be appreciated if the Bureau, at its convenience, would arrange for a representative to interview Mr. Kiasuski for the purpose of obtaining any information in his possession in elaboration of the substance of his letter.\n\nYour assistance in this and related matters is appreciated.\n\nJ. Patrick Coyne\nJ. Patrick Coyne\n\nCoyne called me re this. I told him we would writeto the writer if he would send over the letter\n\nEnclosure\n\nADDENDUM: I would appreciate the return of Mr. Kiasuski's letter when it has served your purpose.\n\nJPC\n\nENCLOSURE\n\nRECORDED-84\n62-83894-382\n\n13 NOV 19 1957"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nNATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL\nWASHINGTON\n\nNov 8 12 54 PM '57\n\nRECD ESPIONAGE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nNov. 4, 57.\n\nDear Mr. Robert Cutler;\n\nI might have some information about the rocket in Texas. I heard about it on the Polish Radio Program.\n\nI would like to know to whom I could speak to.\n\nSincerly Your's\n\nMr. W. Krasuski\n5457 Jos. Campau\nDetroit 11, Mich.\n\nCOPY\n\n62-83894-382\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"November 6, 1957\nTELETYPE\nURGENT PLAIN TEXT\nSAC, DETROIT\n62-63894-383\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS, IS-X. MR. W. KIASUSKI,\nFIVE FOUR FIVE SEVEN JOS. CAMPAU, DETROIT, ELEVEN MICHIGAN,\nADDRESSED LETTER DATED NOVEMBER FOURTH TO ROBERT CUTLER,\nWHO IS SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT, STATING QUOTE I\nMIGHT HAVE SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE ROCKET IN TEXAS. I\nHEARD ABOUT IT ON THE POLISH RADIO PROGRAM. I WOULD LIKE\nTO KNOW TO WHOM I COULD SPEAK TO. UNQUOTE IMMEDIATELY\nINTERVIEW KIASUSKI FOR ANY INFORMATION HE MAY HAVE. BUFILES\nREFLECT NO INFORMATION RE KIASUSKI. SUTEL.\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/22/85 BY Plbyatty Comp #245974\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nHOOVER\nNOV 6 1957\nTELETYPE\nESS:dmn\n(3)\n5-40 Rm Ca\nTeletype Unit\nTolson Nichols Boardman Belmont Mohr Parsons Rosen Tamm Trotter Nease Tele. Room Holloman Gandy\nMAIL ROOM\n6 8 NOV 21 1957 F-472\n62-83894"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D BELMONT FBI-JUSTICE\nNov 6 2 07 PM '57\nREC'D - ESPIONAGE F B I\nNov 13 12 58 PM '57\nRECEIVED BOARDMAN\nNov 6 4 53 PM '57\nREC'D BELMONT FBI-JUSTICE\nNov 7 11 33 AM\nRECEIVED - POUARONA\nNov 6 4 04 PM\nREC'D ESPIONAGE F B I\nNov 13 2 33 PM '57\nRECORDED-84"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nNOV 7 1957\nTELETYPE\nURGENT 11-7-57 4-55 PM EST WHH\nTO DIRECTOR FBI\nFROM SAC, DETROIT 1P\nFLYING DISCS\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS, IS - X. REBUTEL NOV SIX LAST.\nWLAYSLAW KRASUSKI, AKA WALTER KRASUSKI, DOB [REDACTED] (b) (6)\n[REDACTED] (b) (6) WAS GERMAN POW\nMAY, NINETEEN FORTY TWO, UNTIL SUMMER OF NINETEEN FOURTYFIVE.\nARRIVED NY MAY TWO, NINETEEN FIFTYONE, AS DP, AR NO. [REDACTED] (b) (6)\n[REDACTED] (b) (6) KRASUSKI UPON INTERVIEW\nADVISED THAT WHILE GERMAN POW DURING NINETEEN FORTYFOUR OBSERVED\nA VEHICLE DESCRIBED AS CIRCULAR IN SHAPE, SEVENTY FIVE TO ONE\nHUNDRED YARDS IN DIAMETER, APPROXIMATELY FOURTEEN FEET HIGH. THE\nVEHICLE WAS OBSERVED TO SLOWLY RISE VERTICALLY TO HEIGHT\nSUFFICIENT TO CLEAR FIFTY FOOT WALL AND TO MOVE SLOWLY\nHORIZONTALLY A SHORT DISTANCE OUT OF VIEW OBSTRUCTED BY TREES.\nENGINE OF TRACTOR FAILED TO OPERATE DURING THIS PERIOD AND\nONE OTHER OCCASION WHEN HIGH PITCHED WHINNING NOISE HEARD\nIN AREA. NO INDICATION OF MENTAL INSTABILITY DURING\nINTERVIEW. FURTHER DETAILS FOLLOW AMSD.\nE CORRECT LINE FOUR WORD WX FOUR SHLD BE \"TWO\"\nEND AND A K PLS\nX 4-58 PM OK FBI WA EW\nTU DIC\nRECORDED-84 INDEXED-84\nMr. Belmont NOV 13 1957\nEX 105\ncc Brennan\n62-83894-383"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Boardman\nMr. Belmont\n1 - Mr. Sanders\n1 - Liaison\nBY COURIER SERVICE\nNovember 8, 1957\nMr. J. Patrick Coyne\nNational Security Council\nExecutive Office Building\nWashington 25, D. C.\n62-63894-383\nDear Pat:\nReference is made to the letter addressed to \"Mr. Robert Cutler, Washington 25, D. C.,\" by Mr. W. Krasuski, 5457 Jos. Campau, Detroit 11, Michigan, in which Mr. Krasuski advised that he might have some information \"about the rocket in Texas.\" He desired to know to whom he could speak in this regard.\nMr. Krasuski was interviewed on November 7, 1957, at which time he advised that his name is Wlayslaw Krasuski, that he is also known as Walter Krasuski, that he was born on [REDACTED] (b) (6) and that he was a German prisoner of war from May, 1942, until the Summer of 1945. Krasuski advised that he arrived in New York on May 2, 1951, as a displaced person, Alien Registration Number [REDACTED] (b) (6). He advised that during 1944, while he was a German prisoner of war, he observed a vehicle described as circular in shape, seventy-five to one hundred yards in diameter, and approximately fourteen feet high. He stated the vehicle was observed to rise vertically to a height sufficient to clear a fifty-foot wall and that it moved slowly horizontally a short distance out of view which was obstructed by trees. He stated that the engine of a tractor failed to operate during this period and that the engine failed on one other occasion when a high-pitched whining noise was heard in the area. During the interview, Krasuski spoke in a rational manner with no indication of mental instability.\nESS:dmn (13)\nTolson Nichols Boardman Belmont Mohr Parsons Rosen Tamm Trotter Nease Tele. Room Holloman Gandy\nMAIL ROOM\n6 8 NOV 21 1957\nBY COURIER SVC. 03 NOV 12 COMM-FBI\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/22/85 BY Plbyatty Comp #245974\nEX 105"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. J. Patrick Coyne\nYou will be advised of any further information which may be received regarding Krasuski and the information furnished by him.\nPursuant to your request, Mr. Krasuski's letter is returned herewith.\nSincerely yours,\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nEnclosure\n1 - Office of Security Department of State\n1 - Director Central Intelligence Agency Attention: Deputy Director, Plans\n1 - Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence Department of the Army Attention: Chief, Security Division\n1 - Director of Naval Intelligence\n1 - Office of Special Investigations Air Force\n1 - Immigration and Naturalization Service\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-36 (Rev. 3-1-56)\n\nFBI\n\nDate: 11/7/57\n\nTransmit the following message via AIRTEL\n\nAMSD - RM\n(Priority or Method of Mailing)\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM: SAC, DETROIT (100-26505)\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS; IS - X.\n\nRe Detroit Teletype to Bureau, 11/7/57, captioned \"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS; IS - X.\"\n\nInterview of WLADYSLAW KRASUSKI, aka. WALTER KRASUSKI, reported in Blank Memo, five copies of which are enclosed herewith for the Bureau, was conducted by SA CASSIUS RATHBUN.\n\nNo indication of irrational or otherwise abnormal behavior by KRASUSKI was observed during the interview.\n\nKRASUSKI advised that his communication was directed to Mr. ROBERT CUTLER rather than to President EISENHOWER after seeing Mr. CUTLER's picture and identification with the President's Office in a local paper.\n\nKRASUSKI resides with his wife, nee JOANN WISNIEWSKI, married in 1952 at Detroit, and four small children, in a single residence in an old Polish neighborhood at 5457 Jos. Campau Avenue, Detroit. No previous record located in Detroit Indices identifiable with KRASUSKI or his wife.\n\nOn 11/7/57, WILLIAM RECKNAGEL, Manager, advised IC PAUL DESMOND that records of the Mich. Merchants Credit Association, reflect only credit inquiries concerning WALTER KRASUSKI during 6/56 and 3/57 and 6/57, which confirm his local address and employment.\n\n3 - Bureau (Encls.5)(RM)\n1 - Detroit\n\nCR:JLK\n(4)\n\nApproved: Special Agent in Charge Sent M Per"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nDetroit 31, Michigan\nNovember 7,1957\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIn response to a letter directed by him to Mr. Robert Cutler, Special Assistant to President Dwight D. Eisenhower, reflecting that he \"might have some information about the rocket in Texas,\" Wladyslaw Krasuski, 5457 Joseph Campau, Detroit, was interviewed November 7, 1957, and furnished the following information:\n\nBorn (b) (6)\nKrasuski was brought from Poland as a Prisoner of War to Gut Alt Golssen, approximately 30 miles east of Berlin, Germany, in May, 1942, where he remained until a few weeks after the end of World War II. He spent the following years at Displaced Persons Camps at Kork, Strasburg, Offenburg, Milheim and Freiburg, Germany. He attended a radio technician school at Freiburg and for about a year was employed in a textile mill at Laurachbaden, Germany. He arrived in the United States at New York, May 2, 1951, via the \"S.S. General Stewart\" as a Displaced Person, destined to the Reverend Father Petro Walkowiak, Hamtramck, Michigan; his alien registration number - (b) (6)\n\nSince May, 1951, he has been employed at the Gobel Brewery, Detroit.\n\nNews report of mysterious vehicle in Texas causing engines to stall prompted him to communicate with the United States Government concerning a similar phenomenon observed by him in 1944 in the area of Gut Alt Golssen.\n\nAccording to Krasuski, during 1944, month not recalled, while enroute to work in a field a short distance north of Gut Alt Golssen, their tractor engine stalled on a road through a swamp area. No machinery or other vehicle was then visible although a noise was heard described as a high-pitched whine similar to that produced by a large electric generator."} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"An \"SS\" guard appeared and talked briefly with the German driver of the tractor, who waited five to ten minutes, after which the noise stopped and the tractor engine was started normally. Approximately 3 hours later in the same swamp area, but away from the road where the work crew was cutting \"hay\", he surreptitiously, because of the German in charge of the crew and \"SS\" guards in the otherwise deserted area, observed a circular enclosure approximately 100 to 150 yards in diameter protected from viewers by a tarpaulin-type wall approximately 50 feet high, from which a vehicle was observed to slowly rise vertically to a height sufficient to clear the wall and then to move slowly horizontally a short distance out of his view, which was obstructed by nearby trees.\n\nThis vehicle, observed from approximately 500 feet, was described as circular in shape, 75 to 100 yards in diameter, and about 14 feet high, consisting of dark gray stationary top and bottom sections, five to six feet high. The approximate three foot middle section appeared to be a rapidly moving component producing a continuous blur similar to an aeroplane propeller, but extending the circumference of the vehicle so far as could be observed. The noise emanating from the vehicle was similar but of somewhat lower pitch than the noise previously heard. The engine of the tractor again stalled on this occasion and no effort was made by the German driver to start the engine until the noise stopped, after which the engine started normally.\n\nUninsulated metal, possibly copper, cables one and one-half inch to two inches in diameter, on and under the surface of the ground, in some places covered by water, were observed on this and previous occasions, apparently running between the enclosure and a small concrete column-like structure between the road and enclosure.\n\nThis area was not visited by Krasuski again until shortly after the end of World War II, when it was observed the cables had been removed and the previous locations of the concrete structure and the enclosure were covered by water. Krasuski stated he has not been in communication since 1945 with any of the work crew of 16 or 18 men, consisting of Russian, French and Polish POWs, who had discussed this incident among themselves many times. However, of these, Krasuski was able to recall by name only Franciszek Grabowski, no address known, described as then about 50 years of age and presumed by Krasuski to have returned to Poland after 1945.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This report is loaned to you by the FBI, and neither it nor its contents are to be distributed outside your agency.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Boardman\nBelmont\nSanders\n1 - Liaison\n\n42761\n\nBY COURIER SERVICE\n\nNovember 15, 1957\n\n62-83894-384\n\nMr. J. Patrick Coyne\nNational Security Council\nExecutive Office Building\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Pat:\n\nReference is made to my letter of November 8, 1957, furnishing information supplied by Mr. Wladyslaw Krasuski concerning an unidentified flying object which he observed in 1944 while in Germany.\n\nAttached is a copy of a memorandum which reflects the details of the interview with Mr. Krasuski. A copy of the memorandum has also been furnished to each of the agencies receiving a copy of this letter, listed below, as a matter of interest to those agencies.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nEnclosure\n\n1 - Office of Special Investigations\nAir Force (ENCLOSURE)\n\n1 - Director\nCentral Intelligence Agency\n\nAttention: Deputy Director, Plans (ENCLOSURE)\n\n1 - Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence\nDepartment of the Army (ENCLOSURE)\n\nAttention: Chief, Security Division"} {"doc_id":"0e37a55aaec064db","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Richard Hughes\nNovember 15, 1957\n\nMr. J. Patrick Coyne\nNational Security Council\nExecutive Office Building\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Pat:\n\nReference is made to my letter of November 8, 1957, furnishing information supplied by Mr. Wladyslaw Krasuski concerning an unidentified flying object which he observed in 1944 while in Germany.\n\nAttached is a copy of a memorandum which reflects the details of the interview with Mr. Krasuski. A copy of the memorandum has also been furnished to each of the agencies receiving a copy of this letter, listed below, as a matter of interest to those agencies.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nEnclosure\n\n1 - Office of Special Investigations\nAir Force\n\n1 - Director\nCentral Intelligence Agency\n\n1 - Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence\nDepartment of the Army\n\nFBI - JUSTICE\nRECD BELMONT"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n11 March 2010\n\nICOD: 1 December 2009\n\nAn Introduction to the Statistical Drake Equation\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAn Introduction to the Statistical Drake Equation\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 80\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\n1. Introduction ....iv\n2. The Key Question: How Far are They ? ....4\n3. Computing N By Virtue of the Drake Equation (1961) ....7\n4. The Drake Equation is Over-Simplified ....10\n5. The Statistical Drake Equation ....11\n6. Solving the Statistical Drake Equation By Virtue of the Central Limit Theorem (CLT) of Statistics ....13\n7. An Example Explaining the Statistical Drake Equation ....15\n8. Finding the Probability Distribution of the Et-Distance By Virtue of the Statistical Drake Equation....18\n9. The \"Data Enrichment Principle\" as the Best CLT Consequence Upon the Statistical Drake Equation (Any Number of Factors Allowed) ....23\n10. Conclusions ....23\nAppendix A: Proof of Shannon's 1948 Theorem Stating That the Uniform Distribution is the \"Most Uncertain\" One Over a Finite Range of Values ....25\nAppendix B: Original Text of the Author's Paper #IAC-08-A4.1.4 Entitled the Statistical Drake Equation ....28\nReferences ....55\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAn Introduction to the Statistical Drake Equation\n\n1. Introduction\n\nSETI (an acronym for \"Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence\") is a relatively new branch of scientific research, having begun only in 1959. Its goal is to ascertain whether alien civilizations exist in the universe, how far from us they exist, and possibly how much more advanced than us they may be.\n\nAs of 2009, the only physical tools we know that could help us get in touch with aliens are the electromagnetic waves an alien civilization could emit and we could detect. This forces us to use the largest radiotelescopes on Earth for SETI research, because the higher our collecting area of electromagnetic radiation is, the higher our sensitivity is (that is, the farther in space we can probe). Yet, even by using the largest radiotelescopes on Earth (the 310-meter dish at Arecibo, for instance), we cannot search for aliens beyond, say, a few hundred light years away. This is a very, very small amount of space around us within our galaxy, the Milky Way, that is about 100,000 light years in diameter. Thus, current SETI can cover only a very tiny fraction of the galaxy, and it is not surprising that in the past 50 years of SETI searches, NO extraterrestrial civilization was discovered. Quite simply, we did not get far enough!\n\nThis demands the construction of much more powerful and radically new radiotelescopes. Rather than big and heavy metal dishes, whose mechanical problems hamper SETI research too much, we are now turning to \"software radiotelescopes,\" where a large number of small dishes (ATA = Allen Telescope Array, and ALMA = Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array) or even just of simple dipoles (LOFAR = Low Frequency Array) using state-of-the-art electronics and very-high-speed computing can outperform the classical radiotelescopes in many regards. The final dream in this field is the SKA (= Square Kilometer Array), currently being designed and expected to be completed around 2020.\n\n2. The Key Question: How Far are They ?\n\nBut still, the key question remains: how far are they?\n\nOr, more correctly, how far do we expect the NEAREST extraterrestrial civilization to be from the Solar System in the galaxy?\n\nThis question was first faced in a scientific manner back in 1961 by the same scientist who also was the first experimental SETI radio astronomer ever: the American, Frank Donald Drake (born 1930). He first considered the shape and size of the galaxy where we are living: the Milky Way. This is a spiral galaxy measuring some 100,000 light years in diameter and some 16,000 light years in thickness of the Galactic Disk at half-way from its center. That is:\n\nThe diameter of the galaxy is (about) 100,000 light years, (abbreviated ly) i.e., its radius, R_Galaxy, is about 50,000 ly.\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe thickness of the Galactic Disk at half-way from its center, h_Galaxy, is about 16,000 ly.\n\nThe volume of the galaxy may then be approximated as the volume of the corresponding cylinder, i.e.\n\nV_Galaxy = πR²_Galaxy h . (1)\n\nNow consider the sphere around us having a radius r. The volume of such a sphere is\n\nV_Our_Sphere = (4/3)π((ET_Distance)/2)³ (2)\n\nIn the last equation, we had to divide the distance \"ET_Distance\" between ourselves and the nearest ET civilization by 2 because we are now going to make the unwarranted assumption that all ET civilizations are equally spaced from each other in the galaxy! This is a crazy assumption, clearly, and should be replaced by more scientifically-grounded assumptions as soon as we know more about our Galactic Neighborhood. At the moment, however, this is the best guess that we can make, and so we shall take it for granted, although we are aware that this is a weak point in the reasoning.\n\nFurthermore, let us denote by N the total number of civilizations now living in the galaxy, including ourselves. Of course, this number N is unknown. We only know that N ≥ 1 since one civilization does at least exist!\n\nHaving thus assumed that ET civilizations are UNIFORMLY SPACED IN THE GALAXY, we can then write down the proportion:\n\nV_Galaxy / N = V_Our_Sphere / 1 . (3)\n\nThat is, upon replacing both (1) and (2) into (3):\n\nπR²_Galaxy h / N = ((4/3)π((ET_Distance)/2)³) / 1 . (4)\n\nThe last equation contains two unknowns: N and ET_Distance, and so we don't know which one it is better to solve for.\n\nHowever, we may suppose that, by resorting to the (rather uncertain) knowledge that we have about the Evolution of the galaxy through the last 10 billion years or so, we might somehow compute an approximate value for N.\n\nThen, we may solve (4) for ET_Distance thus obtaining the (AVERAGE) DISTANCE BETWEEN ANY PAIR OF NEIGHBORING CIVILIZATIONS IN THE GALAXY (DISTANCE LAW)\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nET_Distance(N) = ∛(6 R²_Galaxy h) / ∛N = C / ∛N (5)\n\nwhere the positive constant C is defined by\n\nC = ∛(6 R²_Galaxy h_Galaxy) ≈ 28845 light years . (6)\n\nEquations (5) and (6) are the starting point to understand the origin of the Drake\nequation that we discuss in detail in Section 3 of this paper.\n\nLet us just complete this section by pointing out three different numerical cases of the\ndistance law (5):\n\n• We know that we exist, so N may not be smaller than 1, i.e., N ≥ 1. Suppose then\nthat we are alone in the galaxy, i.e., that N=1. Then the distance law (5) yields as\ndistance to the nearest civilization from us just the constant C, i.e., 28,845 light\nyears. This is about the distance in between ourselves and the center of the galaxy\n(i.e. the Galactic Bulge). Thus, this result seems to suggest that, if we do not find\nany extraterrestrial civilization around us in these outskirts of the galaxy where we\nlive, we should look around the Galactic Center first. And this is indeed what is\nhappening, i.e., many SETI searches are actually pointing the antennas towards the\nGalactic Center, looking for beacons (see, for instance ref. [1]).\n\n• Suppose next that N=1000, i.e. there are about a thousand extraterrestrial\ncommunicating civilizations in the whole galaxy right now. Then the distance law (5)\nyields an average distance of 2,885 light years. This is a distance that most\nradiotelescopes in Earth may not reach for SETI searches right now: hence the need\nto build larger radiotelescopes, like ALMA, LOFAR and the SKA.\n\n• Suppose finally that N=1000000, i.e., there are a million communicating civilizations\nnow in the galaxy. Then the distance law (5) yields an average distance of 288 light\nyears. This is within the (upper) range of distances that our current radiotelescopes\nmay reach for SETI searches, and that justifies all SETI searches that have been\ndone so far in the first fifty years of SETI (1960-2010).\n\nIn conclusion, interpolating the above three special cases of N, we may say that the\ndistance law (5) yields the following key diagram of the average ET distance vs. the\nassumed number of communicating civilizations, N, in the galaxy right now (Figure 1):\n\n6\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAverage DISTANCE of the nearest ET civilization vs. the ASSUMED NUMBER of ET civilizations in the Gala\n2000\n1750\n1500\n1250\n1000\n750\n500\n250\n0\nAverage DISTANCE of the civilization nearest to us in LIGHT YEARS\n0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000 800000 900000 1000000\nASSUMED NUMBER of civilizations in the Galaxy (that is, N in the Drake equation)\n\nFigure 1. DISTANCE LAW; i.e., the Average Distance (plot along the vertical axis in light years) Versus\nthe NUMBER of Communicating Civilizations ASSUMED to Exist in the Galaxy Right Now\n\n3. Computing N By Virtue of the Drake Equation (1961)\n\nIn the previous section, the problem of finding how close the nearest ET civilization may\nbe was “solved” by reducing it to the computation of N, the total number of\nextraterrestrial civilizations now existing in this galaxy. In this section the famous\nDrake equation is described, that was proposed back in 1961 by Frank Donald Drake\n(born 1930) to estimate the numerical value of N. We believe that no better\nintroductory description of the Drake equations exists other than the one given by Carl\nSagan in his 1983 book “Cosmos” (ref. [2]), in its turn based on the famous TV series\n“Cosmos.” So, in this paragraph we report Carl Sagan’s description of the Drake\nequation unabridged.\n\n“But is there anyone out there to talk to? With a third or a half a trillion stars in our\nMilky Way galaxy alone, could ours be the only one accompanied by an inhabited\nplanet? How much more likely it is that technical civilizations are a cosmic\ncommonplace, that the galaxy is pulsing and humming with advanced societies, and,\ntherefore, that the nearest such culture is not so very far away – perhaps transmitting\nfrom antennas established on a planet of a naked-eye star just next door. Perhaps\nwhen we look up at the sky at night, near one of those faint pinpoints of light is a world\non which someone quite different from us is then glancing idly at a star we call the Sun\nand entertaining, for just a moment, an outrageous speculation.\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIt is very hard to be sure. There may be several impediments to the evolution of a technical civilization. Planets may be rarer than we think. Perhaps the origin of life is not so easy as our laboratory experiments suggest. Perhaps the evolution of advanced life forms is improbable. Or it may be that complex life forms evolve more readily, but intelligence and technical societies require an unlikely set of coincidences – just as the evolution of the human species depended on the demise of the dinosaurs and the ice-age recession of the forests in whose trees our ancestors screeched and dimly wondered. Or perhaps civilizations arise repeatedly, inexorably, on innumerable planets in the Milky Way, but are generally unstable; so all but a tiny fraction are unable to survive their technology and succumb to greed and ignorance, pollution and nuclear war.\n\nIt is possible to explore this great issue further and make a crude estimate of N, the number of advanced civilizations in the galaxy. We define an advanced civilization as one capable of radio astronomy. This is, of course, a parochial if essential definition. There may be countless worlds on which the inhabitants are accomplished linguists or superb poets but indifferent radio astronomers. We will not hear from them. N can be written as the product or multiplication of a number of factors, each a kind of filter, every one of which must be sizable for there to be a large number of civilizations:\n\n• Ns, the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy.\n\n• fp, the fraction of stars that have planetary systems.\n\n• ne, the number of planets in a given system that are ecologically suitable for life.\n\n• fl, the fraction of otherwise suitable planets on which life actually arises.\n\n• fi, the fraction of inhabited planets on which an intelligent form of life evolves.\n\n• fc, the fraction of planets inhabited by intelligent beings on which a communicative technical civilization develops.\n\n• fL, the fraction of planetary lifetime graced by a technical civilization.\n\nWritten out, the equation reads\n\nN = Ns · fp · ne · fl · fi · fc · fL (7)\n\nAll of the f's are fractions, having values between 0 and 1; they will pare down the large value of Ns.\n\nTo derive N we must estimate each of these quantities. We know a fair amount about the early factors in the equation, the number of stars and planetary systems. We know very little about the later factors, concerning the evolution of intelligence or the lifetime of technical societies. In these cases our estimates will be little better than guesses. I invite you, if you disagree with my estimates below, make your own choices and see what implications your alternative suggestions have for the number of advanced civilizations in the galaxy. One of the great virtues of this equation, due to Frank Drake of Cornell, is that it involves subjects ranging from stellar and planetary astronomy to organic chemistry, evolutionary biology, history, politics and abnormal psychology. Much of the Cosmos is in the span of the Drake equation.\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nWe know Ns, the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy, fairly well, by careful counts of stars in a small but representative region of the sky. It is a few hundred billion; some recent estimates place it at 4 x 10¹¹. Very few of these stars are of the massive short-lived variety that squander their reserves of thermonuclear fuel. The great majority have lifetimes of billions or more years in which they are shining stably, providing a suitable energy source for the energy and evolution of life on nearby planets.\n\nThere is evidence that planets are a frequent accompaniment of star formation: in the satellite systems of Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus, which are like miniature solar systems; in theories of the origin of the planets; in studies of double stars; in observations of accretion disks around stars; and is some preliminary investigations of gravitational perturbations of nearby stars.¹ Many, perhaps even most, stars may have planets. We take the fraction of stars that have planets, fp, as roughly equal to 1/3. Then the total number of planetary systems in the galaxy would be Ns fp ~ 1.3 x 10¹¹ (the symbol ~ means \"approximately equal to\"). If each system were to have about ten planets, as ours does, the total number of worlds in the galaxy would be more than a trillion, a vast arena for the cosmic drama.\n\nIn our own solar system there are several bodies that may be suitable for life of some sort: the Earth certainly, and perhaps Mars, Titan and Jupiter. Once life originates, it tends to be very adaptable and tenacious. There must be many different environments suitable for life in a given planetary system. But conservatively we choose ne=2. Then the number of planets in the galaxy suitable for life becomes Ns fp ne ~ 3 x 10¹¹.\n\nExperiments show that under the most common cosmic conditions the molecular basis of life is readily made, the building blocks of molecules able to make copies of themselves. We are now on less certain grounds; there may, for example, be impediments in the evolution of the genetic code, although I think this is unlikely over billions of years of primeval chemistry. We choose fl ~ 1/3, implying a total number of planets in the Milky Way on which life has arisen at least once as Ns fp ne fl ~ 1 x 10¹¹, a hundred billion inhabited worlds. That in itself is a remarkable conclusion. But we are not yet finished.\n\nThe choices of fi and fc are more difficult. On the one hand, many individually unlikely steps had to occur in biological evolution and human history for our present intelligence and technology to develop. On the other hand, there must be quite different pathways to an advanced civilization of specified capabilities. Considering the apparent difficulty in the evolution of large organisms, represented by the Cambrian explosion, let us choose fi x fc = 1/100, meaning that only 1 per cent of planets on which life arises actually produce a technical civilization. This estimate represents some middle ground among the varying scientific options. Some think that the equivalent of the step from the emergence of trilobites to the domestication of fire goes like a shot in all planetary systems; others think that, even given ten or fifteen billion years, the evolution of a technical civilization is unlikely. This is not a subject on which we can do much experimentation as long as our investigations are limited to a single planet. Multiplying\n\n¹ Carl Sagan was writings these lines back in the 1970's, when no extrasolar planets had been discovered yet. The first such discovery occurred in 1995, when Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz, working at the \"Observatoire de Haute Provence\" in France, discovered the first extrasolar planet orbiting the nearby star 51 Peg. This first extrasolar planet was hence named 51 Peg B. Many more extrasolar planets were discovered around nearby stars ever since. As of April 2009, 347 extrasolar planets (exoplanets) are listed in the Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia.\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthese factors together, we find Ns fp ne fl fi fc ~ 1 x 10^9, a billion planets on which\ntechnical civilizations have arisen at least once. But that is very different from saying\nthat there are a billion planets on which technical civilizations now exist. For this we\nmust also estimate fL.\n\nWhat percentage of the lifetime of a planet is marked by a technical civilization? The\nEarth has harbored a technical civilization characterized by radio astronomy for only a\nfew decades out of a lifetime of a few billion years. So far, then, for our planet fL is less\nthan 1/10^8, a millionth of a percent. And it is hardly out of the question that we might\ndestroy ourselves tomorrow. Suppose this were a typical case, and the destruction so\ncomplete that no other technical civilization – of the human or any other species – were\nable to emerge in the five or so billion years remaining before the Sun dies. Then Ns fp\nne fl fi fc fL ~ 10, and, at a given time there would be only a tiny smattering, a handful,\na pitiful few technical civilizations in the galaxy, the steady state number maintained as\nemerging societies replace those recently self-immolated. The number N might be even\nas small as 1 if civilizations tend to destroy themselves soon after reaching a\ntechnological phase; there might be no one for us to talk with but ourselves. And that\nwe do but poorly. Civilizations would take billions of years of tortuous evolution, and\nthen snuff themselves out in an instant of unforgivable neglect.\n\nBut consider the alternative, the prospect that at least some civilizations learn to live\nwith technology; that the contradictions posed by the vagaries of past brain evolution\nare consciously resolved and do not lead to self destruction; or that, even if major\ndisturbances occur, they are reveres in the subsequent billions of years of biological\nevolution. Such societies might live to a prosperous old age, their lifetimes measured\nperhaps on geological or stellar evolutionary time scales. If 1 percent of civilizations can\nsurvive technological adolescence, take the proper fork at this critical historical branch\npoint and achieve maturity, then fL ~ 1/100, N ~ 10^7, and the number of extant\ncivilizations in the galaxy is in the millions. Thus, for all our concern about the possible\nunreliability of our estimates of the early factors in the Drake equation, which involve\nastronomy, organic chemistry and evolutionary biology, the principal uncertainty comes\nto economics and politics and what, on Earth, we call human nature. It seems fairly\nclear that if self-destruction is not the overwhelmingly preponderant fate of galactic\ncivilizations, then the sky is softly humming with messages from the stars.\n\nThese estimates are stirring. They suggest that the receipt of a message from space is,\neven before we decode it, a profoundly hopeful sign. It means that someone has\nlearned to live with high technology; that it is possible to survive technological\nadolescence. This alone, quite apart from the contents of the message, provides a\npowerful justification for the search for other civilizations.\n\n4. The Drake Equation is Over-Simplified\n\nIn the nearly fifty years (1961-2009) elapsed since Frank Drake proposed his equation,\na number of scientists and writers tried to find out which numerical values of its seven\nindependent variables are more realistic in agreement with our present-day knowledge.\nThus there is a considerable amount of literature about the Drake equation nowadays,\nand, as one can easily imagine, the results obtained by the various authors largely\ndiffer from one another. In other words, the value of N, that various authors obtained\nby different assumptions about the astronomy, the biology and the sociology implied by\nthe Drake equation, may range from a few tens (in the pessimist’s view) to some\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nmillion or even billions in the optimist's opinion. A lot of uncertainty is thus affecting our knowledge of N as of 2010. In all cases, however, the final result about N has always been a sheer number, i.e., a positive integer number ranging from 1 to millions or billions. This is precisely the aspect of the Drake equation that this author regarded as \"too simplistic\" and improved mathematically in his paper #IAC-08-A4.1.4, entitled \"The Statistical Drake Equation\" and presented on October 1st, 2008, at the 59th International Astronautical Congress (IAC) held in Glasgow, Scotland, UK, September 29th thru October 3rd, 2008. That paper is attached herewith as Appendix B. Newcomers to SETI and to the Drake equation, however, may find that paper too difficult to be understood mathematically at a first reading. Thus, I shall now explain the content of that paper \"by speaking easily.\" I thank the reader for his or her attention.\n\n5. The Statistical Drake Equation\n\nWe start by an example.\n\nConsider the first independent variable in the Drake equation (7), i.e., Ns, the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy. Astronomers tell us that approximately there should be about 350 millions stars in the galaxy. Of course, nobody has counted (or even seen in the photographic plates) all the stars in the galaxy! There are too many practical difficulties preventing us from doing so: just to name one, the dust clouds that don't allow us to see even the Galactic Bulge (i.e. the central region of the galaxy) in the visible light (although we may \"see it\" at radio frequencies like the famous neutral hydrogen line at 1420 MHz). So, it doesn't make any sense to say that Ns = 350 x 10^6, or, say (even worse) that the number of stars in the galaxy is (say) 354,233,321, or similar fanciful exact integer numbers. That is just silly and non-scientific. Much more scientific, on the contrary, is to say that the number of stars in the galaxy is 350 million plus or minus, say, 50 millions (or whatever values the astronomers may regard as more appropriate, since this is just an example to let the reader understand the difficulty).\n\nThus, it makes sense to REPLACE each of the seven independent variables in the Drake equation (7) by a MEAN VALUE (350 millions, in the above example) PLUS OR MINUS A CERTAIN STANDARD DEVIATION (50 millions, in the above example).\n\nBy doing so, we have made a great step ahead: we have abandoned the too-simplistic equation (7) and replaced it by something more sophisticated and scientifically more serious: the STATISTICAL Drake equation. In other words, we have transformed the classical and simplistic Drake equation (7) into an advanced statistical tool for the investigation of a host of facts hardly known to us in detail. In other words still:\n\n• We replace each independent variable in (7) by a RANDOM VARIABLE, labeled Di (from Drake).\n\n• We assume that the MEAN VALUE of each Di is the same numerical value previously attributed to the corresponding independent variable in (7).\n\n• But now we also ADD A STANDARD DEVIATION σDi on each side of the mean value, that is provided by the knowledge gathered by scientists in each discipline encompassed by each Di.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nHaving so done, the next question is:\n\nHow can we find out the PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION for each Di ?\n\nFor instance, shall that be a Gaussian, or what?\n\nThis is a difficult question, for nobody knows, for instance, the probability distribution of the number of stars in the galaxy, not to mention the probability distribution of the other six variables in the Drake equation (7).\n\nThere is a brilliant way to get around this difficulty, though.\n\nWe start by excluding the Gaussian because each variable in the Drake equation is a POSITIVE (or, more precisely, a non-negative) random variable, while the Gaussian applies to REAL random variables only. So, the Gaussian is out. Then, one might consider the large class of well-studied and positive probability densities called \"the gamma distributions,\" but it is then unclear why one should adopt the gamma distributions and not any other. The solution to this apparent conundrum comes from Shannon's Information Theory and a theorem that he proved in 1948: \"The probability distribution having maximum entropy (= uncertainty) over any FINITE range of real values is the UNIFORM distribution over that range,\" This is proven in Appendix A of the present document.\n\nSo, at this point, we assume that each of the seven Di in (7) is a UNIFORM random variable, whose mean value and standard deviation is known by the scientists working in the respective field (let it be astronomy, or biology, or sociology). Notice that, for such a uniform distribution, the knowledge of the mean value μDi and of the standard deviation σDi automatically determines the RANGE of that random variable in between its lower (called ai) and upper (called bi) limits: in fact these limits are given by the equations\n\nai = μDi − √3 σDi\nbi = μDi + √3 σDi (8)\n\n(the \"surprising\" factor √3 in the above equations comes from the definitions of mean value and standard deviation: please see equations (12), (15) and (17) in Appendix B for the relevant proof). So the uniform distribution of each random variable Di is perfectly determined by its mean value and standard deviation, and so are all its other properties.\n\nThe next problem is the following:\n\nOK, since we now know everything about each uniformly distributed Di , what is the probability distribution of N , given that N is the product (7) of all the Di ?\n\nIn other words, not only do we want to find the analytical expression of the probability density function of N, but we also want to relate its mean value μN to all mean values μDi of the Di , and its standard deviation σN to all standard deviations σDi of the Di .\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThis is a difficult problem.\n\nIt occupied the author's mind for no less than about ten years (1997-2007).\n\nIt is actually an ANALYTICALLY UNSOLVABLE problem, in that, to the best of this author's knowledge, it is IMPOSSIBLE to find an analytic expression for any FINITE PRODUCT of uniform random variables Di . This result is proven in Sections 2 thru 3.3 of Appendix B (unfortunately!).\n\n6. Solving the Statistical Drake Equation By Virtue of the Central Limit Theorem (CLT) of Statistics\n\nThe solution to the problem of finding the analytical expression for the probability density function of N in the statistical Drake equation was found by this author in September 2007. The key steps are the following:\n\n• Take the natural logs of both sides of the statistical Drake equation (7). This changes the product into a sum.\n\n• The mean values and standard deviations of the logs of the random variables Di may all be expressed analytically in terms of the mean values and standard deviations of the Di .\n\n• Recall the Central Limit Theorem (CLT) of statistics, stating that (loosely speaking) if you have a SUM of independent random variables, each of which is ARBITRARILY DISTRIBUTED (hence, also including uniformly distributed), then, when the number of terms in the sum increases indefinitely (i.e. for a sum of random variables infinitely long)... the SUM RANDOM VARIABLE TENDS TO A GAUSSIAN.\n\n• Thus, the natural log of N tends to a Gaussian.\n\n• Thus, N tends to the LOGNORMAL DISTRIBUTION.\n\n• The mean value and standard deviations of this lognormal distribution of N may all be expressed analytically in terms of the mean values and standard deviations of the logs of the Di already found previously.\n\nThis result is fundamental.\n\nAll the relevant equations are summarized in the following Table 1. This table is actually the same as Table 2 of the author's original paper IAC-08-A4.1.4, entitled \"The Statistical Drake Equation\" and presented by him at the International Astronautical Congress (IAC) held in Glasgow, UK, on October 1st, 2008. This original paper is reproduced in Appendix B.\n\nTo sum up, not only is it found that N approaches the completely known lognormal distribution for an INFINITY of factors in the statistical Drake equation (7), but the way is paved to further applications by removing the condition that the number of terms in the product (7) must be FINITE.\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThis possibility of ADDING ANY NUMBER OF FACTORS IN THE DRAKE EQUATION (7) was not envisaged, of course, by Frank Drake back in 1961, when \"summarizing\" the evolution of life in the galaxy in SEVEN simple STEPS. But today, the number of factors in the Drake equation should already be increased: for instance, there is no mention in the original Drake equation of the possibility that asteroidal impacts might destroy the life on Earth at any time, and this is because the demise of the dinosaurs at the K/T impact had not been yet understood by scientists in 1961, and was so only in 1980!\n\nIn practice, the number of factors should INCREASE as much as necessary in order to get better and better estimates of N as long as our scientific knowledge increases. This is called the \"Data Enrichment Principle\" and believe should be the next important goal in the study of the statistical Drake equation.\n\nFinally, a numerical example explaining how the statistical Drake equation works in the practice will be given in the next section.\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 1. Summary of the Properties of the Lognormal Distribution That Applies to the Random Variable N = Number of ET Communicating Civilizations in the Galaxy\n\nRandom variable: N = number of communicating ET civilizations in galaxy\nProbability distribution: Lognormal\nProbability density function: fN(n) = (1/n)(1/√(2πσ)) e^(-(ln(n)-μ)²/(2σ²)) (n≥0)\nMean value: ⟨N⟩ = e^μ e^(σ²/2)\nVariance: σN² = e^(2μ) e^(σ²) (e^(σ²) − 1)\nStandard deviation: σN = e^μ e^(σ²/2) √(e^(σ²) − 1)\nAll the moments, i.e. k-th moment: ⟨N^k⟩ = e^(kμ) e^(k²σ²/2)\nMode (= abscissa of the lognormal peak): n_mode ≡ n_peak = e^μ e^(−σ²)\nValue of the Mode Peak: fN(n_mode) = (1/(√(2π) σ)) · e^(−μ) · e^(σ²/2)\nMedian (= fifty-fifty probability value for N): median = m = e^μ\nSkewness: K3/(K4)^(3/2) = (e^(σ²) + 2) √(e^(−6μ) e^(−3σ²) / ((e^(σ²) − 1)^5 (e^(3σ²) + 3e^(2σ²) + 6e^(σ²) + 6)^3))\nKurtosis: K4/(K2)² = e^(4σ²) + 2e^(3σ²) + 3e^(2σ²) − 6\nExpression of μ in terms of the lower (ai) and upper (bi) limits of the Drake uniform input random variables Di: μ = Σ⟨Yi⟩ = Σ [bi(ln(bi)−1) − ai(ln(ai)−1)] / (bi − ai) (i=1 to 7)\nExpression of σ² in terms of the lower (ai) and upper (bi) limits of the Drake uniform input random variables Di: σ² = Σ σYi² = Σ [1 − ai bi (ln(bi) − ln(ai))² / (bi − ai)²] (i=1 to 7)\n\n7. An Example Explaining the Statistical Drake Equation\n\nTo understand how things work in practice for the statistical Drake equation, please consider the following table 2. It is made up of three columns:\n\n• The first column on the left lists the seven input sheer numbers that also become\n\n• The mean values (middle column).\n\n• Finally the last column on the right lists the seven input standard deviations.\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe bottom line is the classical Drake equation (7). We see that, for this particular set of seven inputs, the classical Drake equation (i.e. the product of the seven numbers) yields a total of 3500 communicating extraterrestrial civilizations existing in the galaxy right now.\n\nTable 2. Input Values (i.e. mean values and standard deviations) for the Seven Drake Uniform Random Variables Di . The first column on the left lists the seven input sheer numbers that also become the mean values (middle column). Finally the last column on the right lists the seven input standard deviations. The bottom line is the classical Drake equation (7).\n\nThe statistical Drake equation, however, provides a much more articulated answer than just the above sheer number N = 3500. In fact, a MathCad code written by this author and capable of performing all the numerical calculations required by the statistical Drake equation for a given set of seven input mean values plus seven input standard deviations, yields for N the lognormal distribution (thin curve) plotted in Figure 2. We see immediately that the peak of this thin curve (i.e. the mode) falls at about nmode = npeak = e^mu e^(-sigma^2) ≈ 250 (this is equation (99) of Appendix B), while the median (fifty-fifty value splitting the lognormal density in two parts with equal undergoing areas) falls at about nmedian = e^mu ≈ 1740 . These seem to be smaller values than N = 3500 provided by the classical Drake equations, but it's a wrong impression due to a poor \"intuitive\" understanding of what statistics is! In fact, neither the mode nor the median are the \"really important\" values: the really important value for N is the MEAN VALUE! Now if you look at the thin curve in Figure 2 below (i.e. the lognormal distribution arising from the Central Limit Theorem), you see that this curve has a LONG TAIL ON THE RIGHT! In other words, it does NOT immediately go down to nearly zero beyond the peak of the mode. Thus, when you actually compute the mean value, you should not be too\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nsurprised to find out that it equals = e^mu e^(sigma^2/2) ≈ 4589.559 ~ 4590 communicating civilizations now in the galaxy. This is the important number, and it is HIGHER than the 3500 provided by the classical Drake equation. Thus, in conclusion, THE STATISTICAL EXTENSION of the classical Drake equation INCREASES OUR HOPES to find an extraterrestrial civilization!\n\nPROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION OF N\n\nProb. density function of N\n\nN = Number of ET Civilizations in Galaxy\n\nFigure 2. Comparing the Two Probability Density Functions of the Random Variable N Found (1) Without Resorting to the CLT at All (thick curve) and (2) Using the CLT and the Relevant Lognormal Approximation (thin curve).\n\nEven more so our hopes are increased when we go on to consider the standard deviation associated with the mean value 4590. In fact, the standard deviation is given by equation (97) of Appendix B. This yields sigma_N = e^mu e^(sigma^2/2) sqrt(e^(sigma^2) - 1) = 11195 and so the expected number of N may actually be even much higher than the 4590 provided by the mean value alone! The \"upper limit of the one-sigma confidence interval\" (as statisticians call it), i.e. the sum 4590+11195 = 15,785, yields a higher number still! (Note: the \"lower limit of the one-sigma confidence interval is ZERO because the lognormal distribution is POSITIVE (or, more correctly, non-negative)). Finally, the reader should note that the thick curve depicted in Figure 2 is just the NUMERICAL solution of the statistical Drake equation for a FINITE number of 7 input factors. Figure 2 actually shows that this curve \"is well interpolated\" by the lognormal distribution (thin curve), i.e., by the neat analytical expression provided by the Central Limit Theorem for an INFINITE number of factors in the Drake equation. That is, in conclusion, Figure 2 visually shows that taking 7 factors or an infinity of factors \"is almost the same thing\" already for a value as small as 7.\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n8. Finding the Probability Distribution of the Et-Distance By Virtue of the Statistical Drake Equation\n\nHaving solved the statistical Drake equation by finding the lognormal distribution, we are now in a position to solve the ET-DISTANCE problem by resorting to statistics again, rather than just to the purely deterministic Distance Law (5), as we did in Section 2. This is \"scientifically more serious\" than just the purely deterministic Distance Law (5) inasmuch as the new statistical Distance Law will yield a PROBABILITY DENSITY for the Distance, with the relevant mean value and standard deviation. In other words, the Distance Law (5) itself becomes a random variable whose probability distribution, mean value and standard deviation must be computed by \"replacing\" into (5) the fact that N is now known to follow the lognormal distribution. This is mathematically described in detail in Section 7 of Appendix A.\n\nThe important new result is the PROBABILITY DENSITY FOR THE DISTANCE, the equation of which is\n\n(9)\n\nholding for r≥0 . This is equation (114) of Appendix B.\n\nStarting from this equation, the MEAN VALUE OF THE random variable ET_DISTANCE is computed as\n\n(10)\n\nwhich is equation (119) of Appendix B, and finally the ET_DISTANCE STANDARD DEVIATION\n\n(11)\n\nwhich is equation (123) of Appendix B. Of course, all other descriptive statistical quantities, such as moments, cumulants etc. can be computed upon starting from the probability density (9), and the result is Table two hereafter, that is Table 3 of Appendix B.\n\nFinally, to complete this section, as well as this \"introduction to the statistical Drake equation,\" the numerical values that equations (10) and (11) yield for the Input Table 1 are determined. They are, respectively:\n\n(12)\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nwhich is equation (153) of Appendix B, and\n\n(13)\n\nwhich is equation (154) of Appendix B.\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 2. Summary of the Properties of the Probability Distribution That Applies to the Random Variable ET_Distance Yielding the (average) Distance Between Any Two Neighboring Communicating Civilizations in the Galaxy\n\nRandom variable | ET_Distance between any two neighboring ET civilizations in galaxy assuming they are UNIFORMLY distributed throughout the whole galaxy volume.\nProbability distribution | Unnamed\nProbability density function | (formula)\nNumerical constant C related to the Milky Way size | C = cube root(6 R^2 h) ≈ 28,845 light years\nMean value | = C e^(-mu/3) e^(sigma^2/18)\nVariance | (formula)\nStandard deviation | (formula)\nAll the moments, i.e. k-th moment | (formula)\nMode (= abscissa of the lognormal peak) | (formula)\nValue of the Mode Peak | Peak Value of f(r) = (formula)\nMedian (= fifty-fifty probability value for N) | median = m = C e^(-mu/3)\nSkewness | (formula)\nKurtosis | (formula)\nExpression of mu in terms of the lower (ai) and upper (bi) limits of the Drake uniform input random variables Di | (formula)\nExpression of sigma^2 in terms of the lower (ai) and upper (bi) limits of the Drake uniform input random variables Di | (formula)\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It is clarifying to draw the graph of the ET_Distance probability density (9):\n\nFigure 3. The Probability of Finding the Nearest Extraterrestrial Civilization at the distance r From Earth (in light years) if the Values Assumed in the Drake Equation are Those Shown in Input Table 1. The relevant probability density function f_ET_Distance(r) is given by equation (9). Its mode (peak abscissa) equals 1933 light years, but its mean value is higher since the curve has a long tail on the right: the mean value equals in fact 2670 light years. Finally, the standard deviation equals 1309 light years: THIS IS GOOD NEWS FOR SETI, inasmuch as the nearest ET galaxy civilization might lie at just 1 sigma = 2670-1309 = 1361 light years from us.\n\nFrom Figure 3 we see that the probability of finding extraterrestrials is practically zero up to a distance of about 500 light years from Earth. Then it starts increasing with the increasing distance from Earth, and reaches its maximum at\n\nr_mode ≡ r_peak = C e^(-μ/3) e^(-σ²/9) ≈1,933 light years. (14)\n\nThis is the MOST LIKELY VALUE of the distance at which we can expect to find the nearest extraterrestrial civilization.\n\nIt is not the mean value of the probability distribution (9) for f_ET_Distance(r). In fact, the probability density (9) has an infinite tail on the right, as clearly shown in Figure 3, and hence its mean value must be higher than its peak value. As given by (10) and (12), its\n\nmean value is r_mean_value = C e^(-μ/3) e^(σ²/18) ≈ 2670 light years. This is the MEAN (value of the) DISTANCE at which we can expect to find extraterrestrials."} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"After having found the above two distances (1933 and 2670 light years, respectively), the next natural question that arises is: \"what is the range, back and forth around the mean value of the distance, within which we can expect to find extraterrestrials with \"the highest hopes?\" The answer to this question is given by the notion of standard deviation that we already found to be given by (11) and (13),\n\nσ_ET_Distance = C e^(-μ/3) e^(σ²/18) √(e^(σ²/9) − 1) ≈ 1309 light years.\n\nMore precisely, this is the so-called 1-sigma (distance) level. Probability theory then shows that the nearest extraterrestrial civilization is expected to be located within this range, i.e. within the two distances of (2670-1309) = 1361 light years and (2670+1309) = 3979 light years, with probability given by the integral of f_ET_Distance(r) taken in between these two lower and upper limits, that is:\n\n∫[1361 light years to 3979 light years] f_ET_Distance(r)dr ≈ 0.75 = 75% (15)\n\nIn plain words: with 75 percent probability, the nearest extraterrestrial civilization is located in between the distances of 1361 and 3979 light years from us, having assumed the input values to the Drake Equation given by table 1. If we change those input values, then all the numbers change again, of course.\n\n9. The \"Data Enrichment Principle\" as the Best CLT Consequence Upon the Statistical Drake Equation (Any Number of Factors Allowed)\n\nAs a fitting climax to all the statistical equations developed so far, let us now state our \"DATA ENRICHMENT PRINCIPLE.\" It simply states that \"The Higher the Number of Factors in the Statistical Drake equation, The Better.\"\n\nPut in this simple way, it simply looks like a new way of saying that the CLT lets the random variable Y approach the normal distribution when the number of terms in the sum (4) approaches infinity. And this is the case, indeed.\n\n10. Conclusions\n\nWe have sought to extend the classical Drake equation to let it encompass Statistics and Probability.\n\nThis approach appears to pave the way to future, more profound investigations intended not only to associate \"error bars\" to each factor in the Drake equation, but especially to increase the number of factors themselves. In fact, this seems to be the only way to incorporate into the Drake equation more and more new scientific information as soon as it becomes available. In the long run, the Statistical Drake equation might just become a huge computer code, growing in size and especially in the depth of the scientific information it contains. It would thus be Humanity's first \"Encyclopaedia Galactica.\""} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Unfortunately, to extend the Drake equation to Statistics, it was necessary to use a mathematical apparatus that is more sophisticated than just the simple product of seven numbers."} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix A: Proof of Shannon's 1948 Theorem Stating That the Uniform Distribution is the \"Most Uncertain\" One Over a Finite Range of Values\n\nInformation Theory was initiated by Claude Shannon (1916-2001) in his well-known 1948 two papers:\n\nReprinted with corrections from The Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 27, pp. 379–423, 623–656, July, October, 1948.\n\nA Mathematical Theory of Communication\n\nBy C. E. SHANNON\n\nIn this Appendix, we wish to draw attention to a couple of theorems that Shannon proves on pages 36 and 37 of his work, and read, respectively (note that Shannon omits the upper and lower limits of all integrals in the first theorem: they are minus infinity and plus infinity, respectively):\n\n5. Let p(x) be a one-dimensional distribution. The form of p(x) giving a maximum entropy subject to the condition that the standard deviation of x be fixed at σ is Gaussian. To show this we must maximize\n\nH(x) = − ∫ p(x) log p(x) dx\n\nwith\n\nσ² = ∫ p(x)x² dx and 1 = ∫ p(x) dx\n\nas constraints. This requires, by the calculus of variations, maximizing\n\n∫ [−p(x) log p(x) + λp(x)x² + μp(x)] dx.\n\nThe condition for this is\n\n−1 − log p(x) + λx² + μ = 0\n\nand consequently (adjusting the constants to satisfy the constraints)\n\np(x) = (1/√(2πσ)) e^(−(x²/2σ²)).\n\nand"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n7. If x is limited to a half line (p(x) = 0 for x ≤ 0) and the first moment of x is fixed at a:\n\na = ∫₀^∞ p(x)x dx,\n\nthen the maximum entropy occurs when\n\np(x) = (1/a) e^−(x/a)\n\nand is equal to log ea.\n\nNow, we wish to point out that there is a third possible case, other than the two given by Shannon. This is the case when the probability density function p(x) is limited to a FINITE INTERVAL a ≤ x ≤ b. This is obviously the case with any physical POSITIVE random variable, such as a distance, or the number N of extraterrestrial communicating civilizations in the ,”. And it is easy to prove that for any such finite random variable the maximum entropy distribution is the UNIFORM distribution over a ≤ x ≤ b. Shannon did not bother to prove this simple theorem in his 1948 papers since he probably regarded it as too trivial. But we prefer to point out this theorem since, in the language of the statistical Drake equation, it sounds like:\n\n“Since we don’t know what the probability distribution of any one of the Drake random variables D_i is, it is safer to assume that each of them has the maximum possible entropy over a_i ≤ x ≤ b_i, i.e., that D_i is UNIFORMLY distributed there.\n\nThe proof of this theorem is along the same lines as for the previous two cases discussed by Shannon:\n\nWe start by assuming that a_i ≤ x ≤ b_i.\n\nWe then form the linear combination of the entropy integral plus the normalization condition for D_i\n\nδ∫_{a_i}^{b_i}[− p(x) log p(x) + λ p(x)] dx = 0\n\nwhere λ is a Lagrange multiplier.\n\nPerforming the variation, one finds\n\n− log p(x) − 1 + λ = 0 that is: p(x) = e^{λ−1}.\n\nApplying the normalization condition (constraint) to the last expression for p(x) yields\n\n1 = ∫_{a_i}^{b_i} p(x) dx = ∫_{a_i}^{b_i} e^{λ−1} dx = e^{λ−1} ∫_{a_i}^{b_i} dx = e^{λ−1}(b_i − a_i)\n\nthat yields\n\ne^{λ−1} = 1/(b_i − a_i)\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nand finally\n\np(x) = 1/(b_i − a_i) with a_i ≤ x ≤ b_i\n\nshowing that the maximum-entropy probability distribution over any FINITE interval\na_i ≤ x ≤ b_i is the UNIFORM distribution.\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":28,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthat the mean value of the lognormal random variable N is actually of the same order as the classical N given\nby the ordinary Drake equation, as one might expect from a good statistical generalization.\n\n1. INTRODUCTION\n\nThe Drake equation is a now famous result\n(see ref. [1] for the Wikipedia summary) in the\nfields of SETI (the Search for ExtraTerrestial\nIntelligence, see ref. [2]) and Astrobiology (see ref.\n[3]). Devised in 1960, the Drake equation was the\nfirst scientific attempt to estimate the number N of\nExtraTerrestrial civilizations in the Galaxy with\nwhich we might come in contact. Frank D. Drake\n(see ref. [4]) proposed it as the product of seven\nfactors:\n\nN = Ns · fp · ne · fl · fi · fc · fL . (1)\n\nWhere:\n1) Ns is the estimated number of stars in our\nGalaxy.\n2) fp is the fraction (= percentage) of such stars\nthat have planets.\n3) ne is the number “Earth-type” such planets\naround the given star; in other words, ne is\nnumber of planets, in a given stellar system,\non which the chemical conditions exist for life\nto begin its course: they are “ready for life,”\n4) fl is fraction (= percentage) of such “ready for\nlife” planets on which life actually starts and\ngrows up (but not yet to the “intelligence”\nlevel).\n5) fi is the fraction (= percentage) of such\n“planets with life forms” that actually evolve\nuntil some form of “intelligent civilization”\nemerges (like the first, historic human\ncivilizations on Earth).\n6) fc is the fraction (= percentage) of such\n“planets with civilizations” where the\ncivilizations evolve to the point of being able\nto communicate across the interstellar\ndistances with other (at least) similarly\nevolved civilizations. As far as we know in\n2008, this means that they must be aware of\nthe Maxwell equations governing radio waves,\nas well as of computers and radioastronomy\n(at least).\n7) fL is the fraction of galactic civilizations alive\nat the time when we, poor humans, attempt to\npick up their radio signals (that they throw out\ninto space just as we have done since 1900,\nwhen Marconi started the transatlantic\ntransmissions). In other words, fL is the\n\nnumber of civilizations now transmitting and\nreceiving, and this implies an estimate of “how\nlong will a technological civilization live?”\nthat nobody can make at the moment. Also,\nare they going to destroy themselves in a\nnuclear war, and thus live only a few decades\nof technological civilization? Or are they\nslowly becoming wiser, reject war, speak a\nsingle language (like English today), and\nmerge into a single “nation”, thus living in\npeace for ages? Or will robots take over one\nday making “flesh animals” disappear forever\n(the so-called “post-biological universe”)?\nNo one knows…\n\nBut let us go back to the Drake equation (1).\nIn the fifty years of its existence, a number of\nsuggestions have been put forward about the\ndifferent numeric values of its seven factors. Of\ncourse, every different set of these seven input\nnumbers yields a different value for N, and we can\nendlessly play that way. But we claim that these\nare like… children plays!\n\nWe claim the classical Drake equation (1), as\nwe shall call it from now on to distinguish it from\nour statistical Drake equation to be introduced in\nthe coming sections, well, the classical Drake\nequation is scientifically inadequate in one regard\nat least: it just handles sheer numbers and does not\nassociate an error bar to each of its seven factors.\nAt the very least, we want to associate an error\nbar to each Di.\n\nWell, we have thus reached STEP ONE in our\nimprovement of the classical Drake equation:\nreplace each sheer number by a probability\ndistribution!\n\nThe reader is now asked to look at the flow\nchart in the next page as a guide to this paper,\nplease.\n\n2. STEP 1: LETTING EACH FACTOR\nBECOME A RANDOM VARIABLE\n\nIn this paper we adopt the notations of the\ngreat book “Probability, Random Variables and\nStochastic Processes” by Athanasios Papoulis\n(1921-2002), now re-published as Papoulis-Pillai,\n\n29\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nref. [5]. The advantage of this notation is that it makes a neat distinction between probabilistic (or statistical: it’s the same thing here) variables, always denoted by capitals, from non-probabilistic (or “deterministic”) variables, always denoted by lower-case letters. Adopting the Papoulis notation also is a tribute to him by this author, who was a Fulbright Grantee in the United States with him at the Polytechnic Institute (now Polytechnic University) of New York in the years 1977-78-79.\n\nWe thus introduce seven new (positive) random variables D_i (“D” from “Drake”) defined as\n\nD_1 = Ns\nD_2 = fp\nD_3 = ne\nD_4 = fl (2)\nD_5 = fi\nD_6 = fc\nD_7 = fL\n\nso that our STATISTICAL Drake equation may be simply rewritten as\n\nN = ∏ D_i . (3)\n(i=1 to 7)\n\nOf course, N now becomes a (positive) random variable too, having its own (positive) mean value and standard deviation. Just as each of the D_i has its own (positive) mean value and standard deviation…\n… the natural question then arises: how are the seven mean values on the right related to the mean value on the left?\n… and how are the seven standard deviations on the right related to the standard deviation on the left?\nJust take the next step…\n\n3. STEP 2: INTRODUCING LOGS TO CHANGE THE PRODUCT INTO A SUM\n\nProducts of random variables are not easy to handle in probability theory. It is actually much easier to handle sums of random variables, rather than products, because:\n1) The probability density of the sum of two or more independent random variables is the convolution of the relevant probability densities (worry not about the equations, right now).\n2) The Fourier transform of the convolution simply is the product of the Fourier transforms (again, worry not about the equations, at this point)\n\n30\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n1. Introduction\n2. Step 1: Letting each factor become a random\n2.1. Step 2: Introducing logs to change the product into a\n2.2. Step 3: The transformation law of random variables.\n3. Step 4: Assuming the easiest input distribution for each Di: the uniform distribution.\n3.1. Step 5: A numerical example of the Statistical Drake equation with uniform distributions for the Drake random variables Di.\n3.2. Step 6: Computing the logs of the 7 uniformly distributed Drake random variables Di.\n3.3. Step 7: Finding the probability density function of N, but only numerically not analytically.\nDEAD END!\n4. The Central Limit Theorem (CLT) of Statistics.\n5. LOGNORMAL distribution as the probability distribution of the number N of communicating ExtraTerrestrial Civilizations in the Galaxy.\n6. Comparing the CLT results with the Non-CLT results, and discarding the Non-CLT approach.\n7. DISTANCE to the nearest ExtraTerrestrial Civilization as a probability distribution (Paul Davies dubbed that the Maccone distribution).\n7.1 Classical, non-probabilistic derivation of the Distance to the nearest ET Civilization.\n7.2 Probabilistic derivation of probability density function for nearest ET Civilization Distance.\n7.3 Statistical properties of the distribution.\n7.4 Numerical example of the distribution.\n8. DATA ENRICHMENT PRINCIPLE as the best CLT consequence upon the Drake equation: any number of factors allowed for.\n31\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nSo, let us take the natural logs of both sides of the Statistical Drake equation (3) and change it into a sum:\nln(N) = ln(∏ Di) = Σ ln(Di). (4)\nIt is now convenient to introduce eight new (positive) random variables defined as follows:\nY = ln(N)\nYi = ln(Di) i = 1,...,7. (5)\nUpon inversion, the first equation of (5) yields the important equation, that will be used in the sequel\nN = e^Y. (6)\nWe are now ready to take STEP THREE.\nSTEP 3: THE TRANSFORMATION LAW OF RANDOM VARIABLES\nSo far we did not mention at all the problem: \"which probability distribution shall we attach to each of the seven (positive) random variables Di?\"\nIt is not easy to answer this question because we do not have the least scientific clue to what probability distributions fit at best to each of the seven points listed in Section 1.\nYet, at least one trivial error must be avoided: claiming that each of those seven random variables must have a Gaussian (i.e. normal) distribution. In fact, the Gaussian distribution, having the well-known bell-shaped probability density function\nfX(x;μ,σ) = 1/(√(2π)σ) · e^(-(x-μ)²/2σ²) (σ ≥ 0) (7)\nhas its independent variable y ranging between -∞ and ∞ and so it can apply to a real random variable Y only, and never to positive random variables like those in the statistical Drake equation (3). Period.\nSearching again for probability density functions that represent positive random variables, an obvious choice would be the gamma distributions (see, for instance, ref. [6]). However, we discarded this choice too because of a different reason: please keep in mind that, according to (5), once we selected a particular type of probability density function (pdf) for the last seven of equations (5), then we must compute the (new and different) pdf of the logs of such random variables. And the pdf of these logs certainly is not gamma-type any more.\nIt is high time now to remind the reader of a certain theorem that is proved in probability courses, but, unfortunately, does not seem to have a specific name. It is the transformation law (so we shall call it, see, for instance, ref. [5]) allowing us to compute the pdf of a certain new random variable Y that is a known function Y = g(X) of another random variable X having a known pdf. In other words, if the pdf fX(x) of a certain random variable X is known, then the pdf fY(y) of the new random variable Y, related to X by the functional relationship\nY = g(X) (8)\ncan be calculated according to this rule:\n1) First invert the corresponding non-probabilistic equation y = g(x) and denote by xi(y) the various real roots resulting from the this inversion.\n2) Second, take notice whether these real roots may be either finitely- or infinitely-many, according to the nature of the function y = g(x).\n3) Third, the probability density function of Y is then given by the (finite or infinite) sum\nfY(y) = Σ fX(xi(y)) / |g'(xi(y))| (9)\nwhere the summation extends to all roots xi(y) and |g'(xi(y))| is the absolute value of the first derivative of g(x) where the i-th root xi(y) has been replaced instead of x.\nSince we must use this transformation law to transfer from the Di to the Yi = ln(Di), it is clear that we need to start from a Di pdf that is as simple as possible. The gamma pdf is not responding to this need because the analytic expression of the transformed pdf is very complicated (or, at least, it looked so to this author in the first instance). Also, the gamma distribution has two free parameters in it, and this \"complicates\" its application to the various meanings of the Drake equation. In conclusion, we discarded the gamma distributions and confined ourselves to the simpler uniform distribution instead, as shown in the nest section.\n32\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n4. STEP 4: ASSUMING THE EASIEST INPUT DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH Di: THE UNIFORM DISTRIBUTION\nLet us now suppose that each of the seven Di is distributed UNIFORMLY in the interval ranging from the lower limit ai ≥ 0 to the upper limit bi ≥ ai.\nThis is the same as saying that the probability density function of each of the seven Drake random variables Di has the equation\nfuniform_Di(x) = 1/(bi - ai) with 0 ≤ ai ≤ x ≤ bi (10)\nas it follows at once from the normalization condition\n∫ from ai to bi funiform_Di(x)dx = 1. (11)\nLet us now consider the mean value of such uniform Di defined by\n = ∫ x funiform_Di(x)dx = 1/(bi - ai) ∫ x dx = (ai + bi)/2.\nBy words (as it is intuitively obvious): the mean value of the uniform distribution simply is the mean of the lower plus upper limit of the variable range\n = (ai + bi)/2 (12)\nIn order to find the variance of the uniform distribution, we first need finding the second moment\n = ∫ x² funiform_Di(x)dx = (bi³ - ai³)/(3(bi - ai)) = (ai² + ai bi + bi²)/3.\nThe second moment of the uniform distribution is thus\n = (ai² + ai bi + bi²)/3 (13)\nFrom (12) and (13) we may now derive the variance of the uniform distribution\nσ²uniform_Di = - ²\n= (ai² + ai bi + bi²)/3 - (ai + bi)²/4 = (bi - ai)²/12. (14)\nUpon taking the square root of both sides of (14), we finally obtain the standard deviation of the uniform distribution:\nσuniform_Di = (bi - ai)/(2√3) (15)\nWe now wish to perform a calculation that is mathematically trivial, but rather unexpected from the intuitive point of view, and very important for our applications to the statistical Drake equation. Just consider the two simultaneous equations (12) and (15)\n = (ai + bi)/2\nσuniform_Di = (bi - ai)/(2√3). (16)\nUpon inverting this trivial linear system, one finds\nai = - √3 σuniform_Di\nbi = + √3 σuniform_Di. (17)\nThis is of paramount importance for our application the Statistical Drake equation inasmuch as it shows that:\nif one (scientifically) assigns the mean value and standard deviation of a certain Drake random variable Di, then the lower and upper limits of the relevant uniform distribution are given by the two equations (17), respectively.\n33\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nIn other words, there is a factor of √3 = 1.732 included in the two equations (17) that is not obvious at all to human intuition, and must indeed be taken into account.\nThe application of this result to the Statistical Drake equation is discussed in the next section.\n3.1 STEP 5: A NUMERICAL EXAMPLE OF THE STATISTICAL DRAKE EQUATION WITH UNIFORM DISTRIBUTIONS FOR THE DRAKE RANDOM VARIABLES Di\nThe first variable Ns in the classical Drake equation (1) is the number of stars in our Galaxy. Nobody knows how many they are exactly (!). Only statistical estimates can be made by astronomers, and they oscillate (say) around a mean value of 350 billions (if this value is indeed correct!). This being the situation, we assume that our uniformly distributed random variable Ns has a mean value of 350 billions minus or plus a standard deviation of (say) one billion (we don't care whether this number is scientifically the best estimate as of August 2008: we just want to set up a numerical example of our Statistical Drake equation). In other words, we now assume that one has:\n = 350·10^9, σuniform_D1 = 1·10^9. (18)\nTherefore, according to equations (17) the lower and upper limit of our uniform distribution for the random variable Ns=D1 are, respectively\naNs = - √3 σ = 348.3·10^9\nbNs = + √3 σ = 351.7·10^9 (19)\nSimilarly we proceed for all the other six random variables in the Statistical Drake equation (3).\nFor instance, we assume that the fraction of stars that have planets is 50%, i.e. 50/100, and this will be the mean value of the random variable fp=D2. We also assume that the relevant standard deviation will be 10%, i. e. that σfp = 10/100. Therefore, the relevant lower and upper limits for the uniform distribution of fp=D2 turn out to be\nafp = - √3 σ = 0.327\nbfp = + √3 σ = 0.673 (20)\nThe next Drake random variable is the number ne of \"Earth-type\" planets in a given star system. Taking example from the Solar System, since only the Earth is truly \"Earth-type\", the mean value of ne is clearly 1, but the standard deviation is not zero if we assume that Mars also may be regarded as Earth-type. Since there are thus two Earth-type planets in the Solar System, we must assume a standard deviation of 1/√3 = 0.577 to compensate the √3 appearing in (17) in order to finally yield two \"Earth-type\" planets (Earth and Mars) for the upper limit of the random variable ne. In other words, we assume that\nane = - √3 σ = 0\nbne = + √3 σ = 2 (21)\nThe next four Drake random variables have even more \"arbitrarily\" assumed values that we simply assume for the sake of making up a numerical example of our Statistical Drake equation with uniform entry distributions. So, we really make no assumption about the astronomy, or the biology, or the sociology of the Drake equation: we just care about its mathematics.\nAll our assumed entries are given in Table 1.\nPlease notice that, had we assumed all the standard deviations to equal zero in Table 1, then our Statistical Drake equation (3) would have obviously reduced to the classical Drake equation (1), and the resulting number of civilizations in the Galaxy would have turned out to be 3500:\nN = 3500 (22)\nThis is the important deterministic number that we will use in the sequel of this paper for comparison with our statistical results on the mean value of N, i.e. . This will be explained in Sections 3.3 and 5.\n34\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nNs := 350·10^9 μNs := Ns σNs := 1·10^9\nfp := 50/100 μfp := fp σfp := 10/100\nne := 1 μne := ne σne := 1/√3\nfl := 50/100 μfl := fl σfl := 10/100\nfi := 20/100 μfi := fi σfi := 10/100\nfc := 20/100 μfc := fc σfc := 10/100\nfL := 10000/10^10 μfL := fL σfL := 1000/10^10\nN := Ns·fp·ne·fl·fi·fc·fL N = 3500\nTable 1. Input values (i.e. mean values and standard deviations) for the seven Drake uniform random variables Di. The first column on the left lists the seven input sheer numbers that also become the mean values (middle column). Finally the last column on the right lists the seven input standard deviations. The bottom line is the classical Drake equation (1).\n3.2 STEP 6: COMPUTING THE LOGS OF THE 7 UNIFORMY DISTRIBUTED DRAKE RANDOM VARIABLES Di\nIntuitively speaking, the natural log of a uniformly distributed random variable may not be another uniformly distributed random variable! This is obvious from the trivial diagram of y = ln(x) shown below:\nFigure 1. The simple function y = ln(x).\nSo, if we have a uniformly distributed random variable Di with lower limit ai and upper limit bi, the random variable\nYi = ln(Di) i = 1,...,7 (23)\nmust have its range limited in between the lower limit ln(ai) and the upper limit ln(bi). In other words, this are the lower and upper limits of the relevant probability density function fYi(y). But what is the actual analytic expression of such a pdf?. To find it, we must resort to the general transformation law for random variables, defined by equation (9). Here we obviously have\ny = g(x) = ln(x) (24)\nThat, upon inversion, yields the single root\nx1(y) = x(y) = e^y. (25)\nOn the other hand, differentiating (24) one gets\n35\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ng'(x)=1/x and g'(x1(y))=1/x1(y)=1/e^y (26)\n\nwhere (25) was already used in the last step. By virtue of the uniform probability density function (10) and of (26), the general transformation law (9) finally yields\n\nfY(y)=Σ_i fX(xi(y))/|g'(xi(y))| = (1/(bi-ai))·(1/|1/e^y|) = e^y/(bi-ai). (27)\n\nIn other words, the requested pdf of Yi is\n\nfYi(y)=e^y/(bi-ai), i=1,...,7, ln(ai)≤y≤ln(bi) (28)\n\nProbability density functions of the natural logs of all the uniformly distributed Drake random variables Di.\n\nThis is indeed a positive function of y over the interval ln(ai)≤y≤ln(bi), as for every pdf, and it is easy to see that its normalization condition is fulfilled:\n\n∫_{ln(ai)}^{ln(bi)} fYi(y)dy = ∫ e^y/(bi-ai) dy = (e^{ln(bi)}-e^{ln(ai)})/(bi-ai) = 1 ...(29)\n\nNext we want to find the mean value and standard deviation of Yi, since these play a crucial role for future developments. The mean value is given by\n\n=∫_{ln(ai)}^{ln(bi)} y·fYi(y)dy = ∫ y·e^y/(bi-ai) dy = bi[ln(bi)-1]-ai[ln(ai)-1] / (bi-ai) (30)\n\nThis is thus the mean value of the natural log of all the uniformly distributed Drake random variables Di.\n\n = = bi[ln(bi)-1]-ai[ln(ai)-1] / (bi-ai) (31)"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"= 1/(bi-ai) ∫_{ln(ai)}^{ln(bi)} e^{(1+jζ)y} dy = (1/(bi-ai))·(1/(1+jζ))[e^{(1+jζ)y}]_{ln(ai)}^{ln(bi)}\n\n= (e^{(1+jζ)ln(bi)}-e^{(1+jζ)ln(ai)}) / ((bi-ai)(1+jζ)) = (bi^{1+jζ}-ai^{1+jζ}) / ((bi-ai)(1+jζ)). (36)\n\nThus, the characteristic function of the natural log of the Drake uniform random variable Di is given by\n\nΦYi(ζ)=(bi^{1+jζ}-ai^{1+jζ}) / ((bi-ai)(1+jζ)) (37)\n\n3.3 STEP 7: FINDING THE PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION OF N, BUT ONLY NUMERICALLY NOT ANALYTICALLY\n\nHaving found the characteristic functions ΦYi(ζ) of the logs of the seven input random variables Di, we can now immediately find the characteristic function of the random variable Y = ln(N) defined by (5). In fact, by virtue of (4), of the well-known Fourier transform property stating that \"the Fourier transform of a convolution is the product of the Fourier transforms\", and of (37), it immediately follows that ΦY(ζ) equals the product of the seven ΦYi(ζ):\n\nΦY(ζ)=ΠΦYi(ζ)=Π (bi^{1+jζ}-ai^{1+jζ})/((bi-ai)(1+jζ)) (38)\n\nThe next step is to invert this Fourier transform in order to get the probability density function of the random variable Y = ln(N). In other words, we must compute the following inverse Fourier transform\n\nfY(y)=(1/2π)∫_{-∞}^{∞} e^{-jζy}ΦY(ζ)dζ\n\n=(1/2π)∫ e^{-jζy}[Π ΦYi(ζ)]dζ\n\n=(1/2π)∫ e^{-jζy}[Π (bi^{1+jζ}-ai^{1+jζ})/((bi-ai)(1+jζ))]dζ. (39)\n\nThis author regrets that he was unable to compute the last integral analytically. He had to compute it numerically for the particular values of the 14 ai and bi that follow from Table 1 and equations 17. The result was the probability density function for Y = ln(N) plotted in the following Figure 2.\n\nPROB. DENSITY FUNCTION OF Y=ln(N)\nFigure 2. Probability density function of Y = ln(N) computed numerically by virtue of the integral (39). The two \"funny gaps\" in the curve are due to the numeric limitations in the MathCad numeric solver that the author used for this numeric computation.\n\nWe are now just one more step from finding the probability density of N, the number of ExtraTerrestrial Civilizations in the Galaxy predicted by our Statistical Drake equation (3). The point here is to transfer from the probability density function of Y to that of N, knowing that Y = ln(N), or alternatively, that N=exp(Y), as stated by (6). We must thus resort to the transformation law of random variables (9) by setting\n\ny = g(x) = e^x. (40)\n\nThis, upon inversion, yields the single root\n\nx1(y)=x(y)=ln(y). (41)\n\nOn the other hand, differentiating (40) one gets\n\ng'(x)=e^x and g'(x1(y))=e^{ln(y)}=y (42)\n\nwhere (41) was already used in the last step. The general transformation law (9) finally yields\n\nfN(y)=Σ_i fX(xi(y))/|g'(xi(y))| = (1/|y|) fY(ln(y)). (43)"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This probability density function fN(y) was computed numerically by using (43) and the numeric curve given by (39), and the result is shown in Figure 3.\n\nPROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION OF N\nN = Number of ET Civilizations in Galaxy\n\nFigure 3. The numeric (and not analytic) probability density function curve fN(y) of the number N of ExtraTerrestrial Civilizations in the Galaxy according to the Statistical Drake equation (3). We see that the curve peak (i.e. the mode) is very close to low values of N, but the tail on the right is high, meaning that the resulting mean value is of the order of thousands.\n\nWe now want to compute the mean value of the probability density (43). Clearly, it is given by\n\n = ∫_0^∞ y fN(y)dy. (44)\n\nThis integral too was computed numerically, and the result was a perfect match with N=3500 of (22), that is\n\n = 3499.99880 177509 + 0.00000012 4914686i (45)\n\nNote that this result was computed numerically in the complex domain because of the Fourier transforms, and that the real part is virtually 3500 (as expected) while the imaginary part is virtually zero because of the rounding errors. So, this result is excellent, and proves that the theory presented so far is mathematically correct.\n\nFinally we want to consider the standard deviation. This also had to be computed numerically, resulting in\n\nσN = 3953.42910 143389 + 0.00000003 2800058i. (46)\n\nThis standard deviation, higher than the mean value, implies that N might range in between 0 and 7453.\n\nThis completes our study of the probability density function of N if the seven uniform Drake input random variable Di have the mean values and standard deviations listed in Table 1.\n\nWe conclude that, unfortunately, even under the simplifying assumptions that the Di be uniformly distributed, it is impossible to solve the full problem analytically, since all calculations beyond equation (38) had to be performed numerically.\n\nThis is no good.\n\nShall we thus loose faith, and declare \"impossible\" the task of finding an analytic expression for the probability density function fN(y)?\n\nRather surprisingly, the answer is \"no\", and there is indeed a way out of this dead-end, as we shall see in the next section.\n\n5. THE CENTRAL LIMIT THEOREM (CLT) OF STATISTICS\n\nIndeed there is a good, approximating analytical expression for fN(y), and this is the following lognormal probability density function\n\nfN(y,μ,σ)=(1/y)(1/√(2πσ))e^{-(ln(y)-μ)²/(2σ²)} (y≥0). (47)\n\nTo understand why, we must resort to what is perhaps the most beautiful theorem of Statistics: the Central Limit Theorem (abbreviated CLT). Historically, the CLT was in fact proven first in 1901 by the Russian mathematician Alexandr Lyapunov (1857-1918), and later (1920) by the Finnish mathematician Jarl Waldemar Lindeberg (1876-1932) under weaker conditions. These conditions are certainly fulfilled in the context of the Drake equation because of the \"reality\" of the astronomy, biology and sociology involved with it, and we are not going to discuss this point any further here. A good, synthetic description of the Central Limit Theorem (CLT) of Statistics is found at the Wikipedia site (ref. [7]) to which the reader is referred for more details, such as the equations for the Lyapunov and the Lindeberg conditions, making the theorem \"rigorously\" valid."} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Put in loose terms, the CLT states that, if one has a sum of random variables even NOT identically distributed, this sum tends to a normal distribution when the number of terms making up the sum tends to infinity. Also, the normal distribution mean value is the sum of the mean values of the addend random variables, and the normal distribution variance is the sum of the variances of the addend random variables.\n\nLet us now write down the equations of the CLT in the form needed to apply it to our Statistical Drake equation (3). The idea is to apply the CLT to the sum of random variables given by (4) and (5) whatever their probability distributions can possibly be. In other words, the CLT applied to the Statistical Drake equation (3) leads immediately to the following three equations:\n1) The sum of the (arbitrarily distributed) independent random variables Yi makes up the new random variable Y.\n2) The sum of their mean values makes up the new mean value of Y.\n3) The sum of their variances makes up the new variance of Y.\n\nIn equations:\n\nY = Σ_{i=1}^{7} Yi\n = Σ_{i=1}^{7} \nσY² = Σ_{i=1}^{7} σYi² (48)\n\nThis completes our synthetic description of the CLT for sums of random variables.\n\n6. THE LOGNORMAL DISTRIBTION IS THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE NUMBER N OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL CIVILIZATIONS IN THE GALAXY\n\nThe CLT may of course be extended to products of random variables upon taking the logs of both sides, just as we did in equation (3). It then follows that the exponent random variable, like Y in (6), tends to a normal random variable, and, as a consequence, it follows that the base random variable, like N in (6), tends to a lognormal random variable.\n\nTo understand this fact better in mathematical terms consider again of the transformation law (9) of random variables. The question is: what is the probability density function N in equation (6), that is, what is the probability density function of the lognormal distribution? To find it, set\n\ny = g(x) = e^x. (49)\n\nThis, upon inversion, yields the single root\n\nx1(y)=x(y)=ln(y). (50)\n\nOn the other hand, differentiating (49) one gets\n\ng'(x)=e^x and g'(x1(y))=e^{ln(y)}=y (51)\n\nwhere (50) was already used in the last step. The general transformation law (9) finally yields\n\nfN(y)=Σ_i fX(xi(y))/|g'(xi(y))| = (1/|y|) fY(ln(y)). (52)\n\nTherefore, replacing the probability density on the right by virtue of the well-known normal (or Gaussian) distribution given by equation (7), the lognormal distribution of equation (47) is found, and the derivation of the lognormal distribution from the normal distribution is proved.\n\nIn view of future calculations, it is also useful to point out the so-called \"Gaussian integral\", that is:\n\n∫_{-∞}^{∞} e^{-Ax²}e^{Bx}dx = √(π/A)·e^{B²/4A}, A>0, B=real. (53)\n\nThis follows immediately from the normalization condition of the Gaussian (7), that is\n\n∫_{-∞}^{∞} (1/√(2πσ)) e^{-(x-μ)²/(2σ²)}dx = 1, (54)\n\njust upon expanding the square at the exponent and making the two replacements (we skip all steps)\n\nA = 1/(2σ²) > 0, (55)\nB = μ/σ² = real."} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In the sequel of this paper we shall denote the independent variable of the lognormal distribution (47) by a lower case letter n to remind the reader that corresponding random variable N is the positive integer number of ExtraTerrestrial Civilizations in the Galaxy. In other words, n will be treated as a positive real number in all calculations to follow because it is a \"large\" number (i.e. a continuous variable) compared to the only civilization that we know of, i.e. ourselves. In conclusion, from now on the lognormal probability density function of N will be written as\n\nfN(n)=(1/n)(1/√(2πσ))e^{-(ln(n)-μ)²/(2σ²)} (n≥0) (56)\n\nHaving said so, we now turn to the statistical properties of the lognormal distribution (55), i.e. to the statistical properties that describe the number N of ExtraTerrestrial Civilizations in the Galaxy.\n\nOur first goal is to prove an equation yielding all the moments of the lognormal distribution (56), that is, for every non-negative integer k = 0, 1, 2, ... one has\n\n = e^{kμ} e^{k²σ²/2}. (57)\n\nThe relevant proof starts with the definition of the k-th moment\n\n = ∫_0^∞ n^k fN(n)dn\n\n= ∫_0^∞ n^k (1/n)(1/√(2π)σ) e^{-(ln[n]-μ)²/(2σ²)} dn\n\nOne then transforms the above integral by virtue of the substitution\n\nln[n] = z. (58)\n\nThe new integral in z is then seen to reduce to the Gaussian integral (53) (we skip all steps here) and (57) follows\n\n= e^{kμ} e^{k²σ²/2}.\n\nUpon setting k = 0 into (56), the normalization condition for fN(n) follows\n\n∫_0^∞ fN(n)dn = 1. (59)\n\nUpon setting k = 1 into (56), the important mean value of the random variable N is found\n\n = e^μ e^{σ²/2}. (60)\n\nUpon setting k = 2 into (56), the mean value of the square of the random variable N is found\n\n = e^{2μ} e^{2σ²}. (61)\n\nThe variance of N now follows from the last two formulae:\n\nσN² = e^{2μ} e^{σ²}(e^{σ²}-1). (62)\n\nThe square root of this is the important standard deviation formula for the N random variable\n\nσN = e^μ e^{σ²/2} √(e^{σ²}-1). (63)\n\nThe third moment is obtained upon setting k = 3 into (56)\n\n = e^{3μ} e^{9σ²/2}. (64)\n\nFinally, upon setting k = 4, the fourth moment of N is found\n\n = e^{4μ} e^{8σ²}. (65)\n\nOur next goal is to find the cumulants of N. In principle, we could compute all the cumulants Ki from the generic i-th moment μi' by virtue of the recursion formula (see ref. [8])\n\nKi = μi' - Σ_{k=1}^{i-1} C(i-1,k-1) Kk μ'_{i-k}. (66)"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIn practice, however, here we shall confine ourselves to the computation of the first four cumulants only because they only are required to find the skewness and kurtosis of the distribution. Then, the first four cumulants in terms of the first four moments read:\n\nK1 = μ1'\nK2 = μ2' - K1^2\nK3 = μ3' - 3K1 K2 - K1^3\nK4 = μ4' - 4K1 K3 - 3K2^2 - 6K2 K1^2 - K1^4 (67)\n\nThese equations yield, respectively:\n\nK1 = e^μ e^(σ^2/2) (68)\n\nK2 = e^(2μ) e^(σ^2) (e^(σ^2) - 1) (69)\n\nK3 = e^(3μ) e^(9σ^2/2) (70)\n\nK4 = e^(4μ+2σ^2) (e^(σ^2) - 1)^3 (e^(3σ^2) + 3e^(2σ^2) + 6e^(σ^2) + 6) (71)\n\nFrom these we derive the skewness\n\nK3/(K4)^(3/2) = (e^(σ^2) + 2) sqrt(e^(-6μ) e^(-3σ^2) / ((e^(σ^2) - 1)^5 (e^(3σ^2) + 3e^(2σ^2) + 6e^(σ^2) + 6)^3)) (72)\n\nand the kurtosis\n\nK4/(K2)^2 = e^(4σ^2) + 2e^(3σ^2) + 3e^(2σ^2) - 6. (73)\n\nFinally, we want to find the mode of the lognormal probability density function, i.e. the abscissa of its peak. To do so, we must first compute the derivative of the probability density function f_N(n) of equation (56), and then set it equal to zero. This derivative is actually the derivative of the ratio of two functions of n, as it plainly appears from (57). Thus, let us set for a moment"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"f_N(n_mode) = (1/(sqrt(2π) σ)) · e^(-μ) · e^(σ^2/2) (82)\n\nThis is \"how likely\" the most likely number of ExtraTerrestrial Civilizations in the Galaxy is, i.e. it is the peak height in the lognormal probability density function f_N(n).\n\nNext to the mode, the median m (ref. [9]) is one more statistical number used to characterize any probability distribution. It is defined as the independent variable abscissa m such that a realization of the random variable will take up a value lower than m with 50% probability or a value higher than m with 50% probability again. In other words, the median m splits up our probability density in exactly two equally probable parts. Since the probability of occurrence of the random event equals the area under its density curve (i.e. the definite integral under its density curve) then the median m (of the lognormal distribution, in this case) is defined as the integral upper limit m:\n\n∫_0^m f_N(n)dn = ∫_0^m (1/n)(1/sqrt(2πσ)) e^(-(ln(n)-μ)^2/(2σ^2)) = 1/2 (83)\n\nIn order to find m, we may not differentiate (83) with respect to m, since the \"precise\" factor 1/2 on the right would then disappear into a zero. On the contrary, we may try to perform the obvious substitution\n\nz^2 = (ln(n)-μ)^2/(2σ^2), z ≥ 0 (84)\n\ninto the integral (83) to reduce it to the following integral defining the error function erf(z)\n\nerf(x) = (2/sqrt(π)) ∫_0^x e^(-z^2) dz (85)\n\nThen, after a few reductions that we skip for the sake of brevity, the full equation (83) is turned into\n\n1/2 + erf((ln(m)-μ)/(sqrt(2)σ)) = 1/2 (86)\n\nthat is\n\nerf((ln(m)-μ)/(sqrt(2)σ)) = 0 (87)\n\nSince from the definition (85) one obviously has erf(0)=0, (87) becomes\n\n(ln(m)-μ)/(sqrt(2)σ) = 0 (88)\n\nwhence finally\n\nmedian = m = e^μ (89)\n\nThis is the median of the lognormal distribution of N. In other words, this is the number of ExtraTerrestrial civilizations in the Galaxy such that, with 50% probability the actual value of N will be lower than this median, and with 50% probability it will be higher.\n\nIn conclusion, we feel useful to summarize all the equations that we derived about the random variable N in the following Table 2.\n\nTable 2 (rendered as lines):\nRandom variable | N = number of communicating ET civilizations in Galaxy\nProbability distribution | Lognormal\nProbability density function | f_N(n) = (1/n)(1/sqrt(2πσ)) e^(-(ln(n)-μ)^2/(2σ^2)) (n ≥ 0)\nMean value | = e^μ e^(σ^2/2)\nVariance | σ_N^2 = e^(2μ) e^(σ^2)(e^(σ^2) - 1)\nStandard deviation | σ_N = e^μ e^(σ^2/2) sqrt(e^(σ^2) - 1)"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"All the moments, i.e. k-th moment | = e^(kμ) e^(k^2 σ^2/2)\nMode (= abscissa of the lognormal peak) | n_mode = n_peak = e^μ e^(-σ^2)\nValue of the Mode Peak | f_N(n_mode) = (1/(sqrt(2π)σ)) e^(-μ) e^(σ^2/2)\nMedian (= fifty-fifty probability value for N) | median = m = e^μ\nSkewness | K3/(K4)^(3/2) = (e^(σ^2)+2) sqrt(e^(-6μ)e^(-3σ^2)/((e^(σ^2)-1)^5(e^(3σ^2)+3e^(2σ^2)+6e^(σ^2)+6)^3))\nKurtosis | K4/(K2)^2 = e^(4σ^2) + 2e^(3σ^2) + 3e^(2σ^2) - 6\nExpression of μ in terms of the lower (a_i) and upper (b_i) limits of the Drake uniform input random variables D_i | μ = Σ = Σ (b_i[ln(b_i)-1] - a_i[ln(a_i)-1])/(b_i - a_i)\nExpression of σ^2 in terms of the lower (a_i) and upper (b_i) limits of the Drake uniform input random variables D_i | σ^2 = Σσ_{Y_i}^2 = Σ(1 - a_i b_i (ln(b_i) - ln(a_i))^2/(b_i - a_i)^2)\n\nTable 2. Summary of the properties of the lognormal distribution that applies to the random variable N = number of ET communicating civilizations in the Galaxy.\n\nWe want to complete this section about the lognormal probability density function (56) by finding out its numeric values for the inputs to the Statistical Drake equation (3) listed in Table 1.\n\nAccording to the CLT, the mean value μ to be inserted into the lognormal density (56) is given (according to the second equation (48)) by the sum of all the mean values , that is, by virtue of (31), by:\n\nμ = Σ = Σ (b_i[ln(b_i)-1] - a_i[ln(a_i)-1])/(b_i - a_i) (90)\n\nUpon replacing the 14 a_i and b_i listed in Table 1 into (90), the following numeric mean value μ is found\n\nμ ≈ 7.462176 (91)\n\nSimilarly, to get the numeric variance σ^2 one must resort to the last of equations (48) and to (33):\n\nσ^2 = Σσ_{Y_i}^2 = Σ(1 - a_i b_i (ln(b_i)-ln(a_i))^2/(b_i-a_i)^2) (92)\n\nyielding the following numeric variance σ^2 to be inserted into the lognormal pdf (56)\n\nσ^2 ≈ 1.938725 (93)\n\nwhence the numeric standard deviation σ\n\nσ ≈ 1.392381. (94)\n\nUpon replacing these two numeric values (84) and (86) into the lognormal pdf (56), the latter is perfectly determined. It is plotted in Figure 4 hereafter as the thin curve.\n\nIn other words, Figure 4 shows the lognormal distribution for the number N of ExtraTerrestrial Civilizations in the Galaxy derived from the Central Limit Theorem as applied to the Drake equation (with the input data listed in Table 1).\n\nWe now like to point out the most important statistical properties of this lognormal pdf:\n\n1) Mean Value of N. This is given by equation (60) with μ and σ given by (91) and (94), respectively:"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":" = e^μ e^(σ^2/2) ≈ 4589.559 (95)\n\nIn other words, there are 4590 ET Civilizations in the Galaxy according the Central Limit Theorem of Statistics with the inputs of Table 1. This number 4590 is HIGHER than the 3500 foreseen by the classical Drake equation working with sheer numbers only, rather than with probability distributions. Thus equation (95) IS GOOD FOR NEWS FOR SETI, since it shows that the expected number of ETs is HIGHER with an adequate statistical treatment than just with the too simple Drake sheer numbers of (1).\n\n2) Variance of N. The variance of the lognormal distribution is given by (62) and turns out to be a huge number:\n\nσ_N^2 = e^(2μ) e^(σ^2)(e^(σ^2) - 1) ≈ 125328623 . (96)\n\n3) Standard deviation of N. The standard deviation of the lognormal distribution is given by (63) and turns out to be:\n\nσ_N = e^μ e^(σ^2/2) sqrt(e^(σ^2) - 1) = 11195 (97)\n\nAgain, this is GOOD NEWS FOR SETI. In fact, such a high standard deviation means that N may range from very low values (zero, theoretically, and one since Humanity exists) up to tens of thousands (4590+11195=15785 is (95)+(97)).\n\n4) Mode of N. The mode (= peak abscissa) of the lognormal distribution of N is given by (81), and has a surprisingly low numeric value:\n\nn_mode ≡ n_peak = e^μ e^(-σ^2) ≈ 250 (98)\n\nThis is well shown in Figure 4: the mode peak is very pronounced and close to the origin, but the right tail is high, and this means that the mean value of the distribution is much higher than the mode: 4590>>250.\n\n5) Median of N. The median (= fifty-fifty abscissa, splitting the pdf in two exactly equi-probable parts) of the lognormal distribution of N is given by (89), and has the numeric value:\n\nn_median ≡ e^μ ≈ 1740 (99)\n\nIn words, assuming the input values listed in Table 1, we have exactly a 50% probability that the actual value of N is lower than 1740, and 50% that it is higher than 1740.\n\n7. COMPARING THE CLT RESULTS WITH THE NON-CLT RESULTS\n\nThe time is now ripe to compare the CLT-based results about the lognormal distribution of N, just described in Section 5, against the Non-CLT-based results obtained numerically in Section 3.3\n\nTo do so in a simple, visual way, let us plot on the same diagram two curves:\n1) The numeric curves appearing in Figure 2 and obtained after laborious Fourier transform calculations in the complex domain, and\n2) The lognormal distribution (56) with numeric μ and σ given by (91) and (94) respectively.\n\nWe see that the two curves are virtually coincident for values of N larger than 1500. This is a consequence of the law of large numbers, of which the CLT is just one of the many facets.\n\nSimilarly it happens for natural log of N, i.e. the random variable Y of (5), that is plotted in Figure 5 both in its normal curve version (thin curve) and in its numeric version, obtained via Fourier transforms and already shown in Figure 2.\n\nThe conclusion is simple: from now on we shall discard forever the numeric calculations and we'll stick only to the equations derived by virtue of the CLT, i.e. to the lognormal (56) and its consequences."} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 4. Comparing the two probability density functions of the random variable N found:\n1) At the end of Section 3.3. in a purely numeric way and without resorting to the CLT at all (thick curve) and\n2) Analytically by using the CLT and the relevant lognormal approximation (thin curve).\n\nFigure 5. Comparing the two probability density functions of the random variable Y=ln(N) found:\n1) At the end of Section 3.3. in a purely numeric way and without resorting to the CLT at all (thick curve) and\n2) Analytically by using the CLT and the relevant normal (Gaussian) approximation (thin Gaussian curve).\n\n8. DISTANCE OF THE NEAREST EXTRATERRESTRIAL CIVILIZATION AS A PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION\n\nAs an application of the Statistical Drake Equation developed in the previous sections of this paper, we now want to consider the problem of estimating the distance of the ExtraTerrestrial Civilization nearest to us in the Galaxy. In all Astrobiology textbooks (see, for instance, ref. [10]) and in several web sites, the solution to this problem is reported with only slight differences in the mathematical proofs among the various authors. In the first of the coming two sections (section 7.1) we derive the expression for this \"ET_Distance\" (as we like to denote it) in the classical, non-probabilistic way: in other words, this is the classical, deterministic derivation. In the second section (7.2) we provide the probabilistic derivation, arising from our Statistical Drake"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nEquation, of the corresponding probability density function f_ET_Distance(r) : here r is the distance between us and the nearest ET civilization assumed as the independent variable of its own probability density function. The ensuing sections provide more mathematical details about this f_ET_Distance(r) such as its mean value, variance, standard deviation, all central moments, mode, median, cumulants, skewness and kurtosis.\n\nCLASSICAL, NON-PROBABILISTIC DERIVATION OF THE DISTANCE OF THE NEAREST ET CIVILIZATION\n\nConsider the Galactic Disk and assume that:\n1) The diameter of the Galaxy is (about) 100,000 light years, (abbreviated ly) i.e. its radius, R_Galaxy, is about 50,000 ly.\n2) The thickness of the Galactic Disk at half-way from its center, h_Galaxy, is about 16,000 ly.\nThen\n3) The volume of the Galaxy may be approximated as the volume of the corresponding cylinder, i.e.\n\nV_Galaxy = pi R^2_Galaxy h (100)\n\n4) Now consider the sphere around us having a radius r. The volume of such as sphere is\n\nV_Our_Sphere = (4/3) pi (ET_Distance/2)^3 (101)\n\nIn the last equation, we had to divide the distance \"ET_Distance\" between ourselves and the nearest ET Civilization by 2 because we are now going to make the unwarranted assumption that all ET Civilizations are equally space from each other in the Galaxy! This is a crazy assumption, clearly, and should be replaced by more scientifically-grounded assumptions as soon as we know more about our Galactic Neighbourhood. At the moment, however, this is the best guess that we can make, and so we shall take it for granted, although we are aware that this is weak point in the reasoning.\n\nHaving thus assumed that ET Civilizations are UNIFORMLY SPACED IN THE GALAXY, we can write down this proportion:\n\nV_Galaxy / N = V_Our_Sphere / 1 (102)\n\nThat is, upon replacing both (100) and (101) into (102):\n\n(pi R^2_Galaxy h)/N = (4/3 pi (ET_Distance/2)^3)/1 (103)\n\nThe only unknown in the last equation is ET_Distance, and so we may solve for it, thus getting the:\n\n(AVERAGE) DISTANCE BETWEEN ANY PAIR OF NEIGHBOURING CIVILIZATIONS IN THE GALAXY\n\nwhere the positive constant C is defined by\n\nET_Distance = C * cuberoot(6 R^2_Galaxy h) / cuberoot(N) = C / cuberoot(N) (104)\n\nC = cuberoot(6 R^2_Galaxy h_Galaxy) ≈ 28845 light years (105)\n\nEquations (104) and (105) are the starting point for our first application of the Statistical Drake equation, that we discuss in detail in the coming sections of this paper.\n\nPROBABILISTIC DERIVATION OF THE PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION FOR ET_DISTANCE\n\nThe probability density function (pdf) yielding the distance of the ET Civilization nearest to us in the Galaxy and presented in this section, was discovered by this author on September 5th, 2007. He did not disclose it to other scientists until the SETI meeting run by the famous mathematical physicist and popular science author, Paul Davies, at the \"Beyond\" Center of the University of Arizona at Phoenix, on February 5-6-7-8, 2008. This meeting was also attended by SETI Institute experts Jill Tarter, Seth Shostak, Doug Vakoch, Tom Pierson and others. During this author's talk, Paul Davies suggested to call \"the Maccone distribution\" the new probability density function that yields the ET_Distance and is derived in this section."} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nLet us go back to equation (104). Since N is now a random variable (obeying the lognormal distribution), it follows that the ET_Distance must be a random variable as well. Hence it must have some unknown probability density function that we denote by\n\nf_ET_Distance(r) (106)\n\nwhere r is the new independent variable of such a probability distribution (it is denoted by r to remind the reader that it expresses the three-dimensional radial distance separating us from the nearest ET civilization in a full spherical symmetry of the space around us).\n\nThe question then is: what is the unknown probability distribution (106) of the ET_Distance? We can answer this question upon making the two formal substitutions\n\nN -> x\nET_distance -> y (107)\n\ninto the transformation law (8) for random variables. As a consequence, (104) takes form\n\ny = g(x) = C / cuberoot(x) = C * x^(-1/3). (108)\n\nIn order to find the unknown probability density f_ET_Distance(r), we now to apply the rule (9) to (108). First, notice that (108), when inverted to yield the various roots x_i(y), yields a single real root only\n\nx_1(y) = C^3 / y^3. (109)\n\nThen, the summation in (9) reduces to one term only.\nSecond, differentiating (108) one finds\n\ng'(x) = -(C/3) * x^(-4/3). (110)\n\nThus, the relevant absolute value reads\n\n|g'(x)| = |-(C/3) x^(-4/3)| = (C/3) x^(-4/3). (111)\n\nUpon replacing (111) into (9), we then find\n\n|g'(x_1)| = (C/3) x^(-4/3) = (C/3) [C^3/y^3]^(-4/3) = (C/3)[C/y]^(-4) = y^4 / (3C^3). ...(112)\n\nThis is the denominator of (9). The numerator simply is the lognormal probability density function (56) where the old independent variable x must now be re-written in terms of the new independent variable y by virtue of (109). By doing so, we finally arrive at the new probability density function f_Y(y)\n\nf_Y(y) = (3C^3 / y^4) * (1 / (C^3/y^3)) * (1 / (sqrt(2pi) sigma)) * e^(-(ln(C^3/y^3) - mu)^2 / (2 sigma^2)).\n\nRearranging and replacing y by r, the final form is:\n\nf_ET_distance(r) = (3/r) * (1/sqrt(2pi) sigma) * e^(-(ln(C^3/r^3) - mu)^2 / (2 sigma^2)). (113)\n\nNow, just replace C in (113) by virtue of (105). Then:\n\nWe have discovered the probability density function yielding the probability of finding the nearest ExtraTerrestrial Civilization in the Galaxy in the spherical shell between the distances r and r+dr from Earth:\n\nf_ET_Distance(r) = (3/r) * (1/sqrt(2pi) sigma) * e^(-(ln(6 R^2_Galaxy h_Galaxy / r^3) - mu)^2 / (2 sigma^2)). (114)\n\nholding for r >= 0.\n\nSTATISTICAL PROPERTIES OF THIS DISTRIBUTION"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nWe now want to study this probability distribution in detail. Our next questions are:\n1) What is its mean value?\n2) What are its variance and standard deviation?\n3) What are its moments to any higher order?\n4) What are its cumulants?\n5) What are its skewness and kurtosis?\n6) What are the coordinates of its peak, i.e. the mode (peak abscissa) and its ordinate?\n7) What is its median?\n\nThe first three points in the list are all covered by the following theorem: all the moments of (113) are given by (here k is the generic and non-negative integer exponent, i.e. k = 0,1,2,3,... >= 0)\n\n = integral_0^inf r^k * f_ET_Distance(r) dr\n= integral_0^inf r^k * (3/r) * (1/sqrt(2pi) sigma) * e^(...) dr\n= C^k e^(-k mu/3) e^(k^2 sigma^2/18). (115)\n\nTo prove this result, one first transforms the above integral by virtue of the substitution\n\nln[C^3/r^3] = z. (116)\n\nThen the new integral in z is then seen to reduce to the known Gaussian integral (53) and, after several reductions that we skip for the sake of brevity, (115) follows from (53). In other words, we have proven that\n\n = C^k e^(-k mu/3) e^(k^2 sigma^2/18). (117)\n\nUpon setting k = 0 into (117), the normalization condition for f_ET_Distance(r) follows\n\nintegral_0^inf f_ET_Distance(r) dr = 1. (118)\n\nUpon setting k = 1 into (117), the important mean value of the random variable ET_Distance is found\n\n = C e^(-mu/3) e^(sigma^2/18). (119)\n\nUpon setting k = 2 into (117), the mean value of the square of the random variable ET_Distance is found\n\n = C^2 e^(-2mu/3) e^(2 sigma^2/9). (120)\n\nThe variance of ET_Distance now follows from the last two formulae with a few reductions:\n\nsigma^2_ET_Distance = - ^2\n= C^2 e^(-2mu/3) e^(sigma^2/9) (e^(sigma^2/9) - 1). (121)\n\nSo, the variance of ET_Distance is\n\nsigma^2_ET_Distance = C^2 e^(-2mu/3) e^(sigma^2/9) (e^(sigma^2/9) - 1). (122)\n\nThe square root of this is the important standard deviation of the ET_Distance random variable\n\nsigma_ET_Distance = C e^(-mu/3) e^(sigma^2/18) sqrt(e^(sigma^2/9) - 1). (123)\n\nThe third moment is obtained upon setting k = 3 into (117)\n\n = C^3 e^(-mu) e^(sigma^2/2). (124)\n\nFinally, upon setting k = 4 into (117), the fourth moment of ET_Distance is found\n\n = C^4 e^(-4mu/3) e^(8sigma^2/9). (125)"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nOur next goal is to find the cumulants of the ET_Distance. In principle, we could compute all the cumulants K_i from the generic i-th moment mu'_i by virtue of the recursion formula (see ref. [8])\n\nK_i = mu'_i - sum_{k=1}^{i-1} C(i-1,k-1) K_k mu'_{n-k}. (126)\n\nIn practice, however, here we shall confine ourselves to the computation of the first four cumulants because they only are required to find the skewness and kurtosis of the distribution (113). Then, the first four cumulants in terms of the first four moments read:\n\nK_1 = mu'_1\nK_2 = mu'_2 - K_1^2\nK_3 = mu'_3 - 3K_1 K_2 - K_1^3\nK_4 = mu'_4 - 4K_1 K_3 - 3K_2^2 - 6K_2 K_1^2 - K_1^4. (127)\n\nThese equations yield, respectively:\n\nK_1 = C e^(-mu/3) e^(sigma^2/18). (128)\n\nK_2 = C^2 e^(-2mu/3) e^(sigma^2/9) (e^(sigma^2/9) - 1). (129)\n\nK_3 = C^3 e^(-mu) (e^(sigma^2/2) - 3e^(sigma^2/18) + 2e^(sigma^2/6)). (130)\n\nK_4 = C^4 e^(-4mu/3) (e^(8sigma^2/9) - 4e^(5sigma^2/9) - 3e^(4sigma^2/9) + 12e^(sigma^2/3) - 6e^(2sigma^2/9)). (131)\n\nFrom these we derive the skewness\n\nK_3 / (K_2)^(3/2) =\n\n...(132)\n\nand the kurtosis\n\nK_4 / (K_2)^2 = e^(4sigma^2/9) + 2e^(sigma^2/3) + 3e^(2sigma^2/9) - 6. (133)\n\nNext we want to find the mode of this distribution, i.e. the abscissa of its peak. To do so, we must first compute the derivative of the probability density function f_ET_Distance(r) of (113), and then set it equal to zero. This derivative is actually the derivative of the ratio of two functions of r, as its plainly appears from (113). Thus, let us set for a moment\n\nE(r) = (ln(C^3/r^3) - mu)^2 / (2 sigma^2). (134)\n\nwhere \"E\" stands for \"exponent,\" Upon differentiating, one gets\n\nE'(r) = (1/(2sigma^2)) * 2(ln(C^3/r^3) - mu) * (1/(C^3/r^3)) * C^3 * (-3) r^(-4)\n= (1/sigma^2) * (ln(C^3/r^3) - mu) * (-3)(1/r). (135)\n\nBut the probability density function (113) now reads\n\nf_ET_Distance(r) = (3 / (sqrt(2pi) sigma)) * e^(-E(r)) / r. (136)\n\nSo that its derivative is\n\nd f'_ET_Distance(r) / dr = (3 / sqrt(2pi) sigma) * (-e^(-E(r)) E'(r) r - 1 * e^(-E(r))) / r^2. (137)\n\nSetting this derivative equal to zero means setting\n\nE'(r) * r + 1 = 0 (138)\n\nThat is, upon replacing (135) into (138), we get\n\n(1/sigma^2) * (ln(C^3/r^3) - mu) * (-3)(1/r) * r + 1 = 0 (139)\n\nRearranging, this becomes\n\n-3(ln(C^3/r^3) - mu) + sigma^2 = 0 (140)\n\nthat is\n\n-3 ln(C^3/r^3) + 3mu + sigma^2 = 0 (141)\n\nwhence\n\nln(C/r) = mu/3 + sigma^2/9 (142)\n\nand finally\n\nr_mode = r_peak = C e^(mu/3) e^(-sigma^2/9). (143)\n\nThis is the most likely ET_Distance from Earth.\n\nHow likely?\nTo find the value of the probability density function f_ET_Distance(r) corresponding to this value of the mode, we must obviously replace () into (). After a few rearrangements, which we skip for the sake of brevity, one gets\n\nPeak Value of f_ET_Distance(r) = f_ET_Distance(r_mode) = (3 / (C sqrt(2pi) sigma)) * e^(mu/3) * e^(sigma^2/18). (144)\n\nThis is the peak height in the pdf f_ET_Distance(r).\n\nNext to the mode, the median m (ref. [9]) is one more statistical number used to characterize any probability distribution. It is defined as the independent variable abscissa m such that a realization of the random variable will take up a value lower than m with 50% probability or a value higher than m with 50% probability again. In other words, the median m splits up our probability density in exactly two equally probable parts. Since the probability of occurrence of the random event equals the area under its density curve (i.e. the definite integral under its density curve) then the median m (of the lognormal distribution, in this case) is defined as the integral upper limit m:\n\nintegral_0^m f_ET_Distance(r) dr = 1/2. (145)\n\nUpon replacing (113), this becomes\n\nintegral_0^m (3/r)(1/(sqrt(2pi) sigma)) e^(-(ln(C^3/r^3)-mu)^2/(2sigma^2)) dr = 1/2. (146)\n\nIn order to find m, we may not differentiate (146) with respect to m, since the \"precise\" factor 1/2 on the right would then disappear into a zero. On the contrary, we may try to perform the obvious substitution\n\nz^2 = (ln(C^3/r^3) - mu)^2 / (2sigma^2), z >= 0 (147)\n\ninto the integral (146) to reduce it to the following integral (85) defining the error function erf(z). Then, after a few reductions that we leave to the reader as an exercise, the full equation (145), defining the median, is turned into the corresponding equation involving the error function erf(x) as defined by (85):"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPeak Value of f_ET_Distance(r) = f_ET_Distance(r_mode) = (3 / (C sqrt(2pi) sigma)) * e^(mu/3) * e^(sigma^2/18).\n\n46"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nRandom variable | ET_Distance between any two neighboring ET Civilizations in Galaxy assuming they are UNIFORMLY distributed throughout the whole Galaxy volume.\nProbability distribution | Unnamed (Paul Davies suggested \"Maccone distribution\")\nProbability density function | f_ET_Distance(r) = (3/r)·(1/(√(2π) σ))·e^(-(ln[6R_Galaxy^2 h_Galaxy/r^3]-μ)^2/(2σ^2))\n(Defining the positive numeric constant C) | C = cube root(6 R_Galaxy^2 h_Galaxy) ≈ 28845 light years\nMean value | ⟨ET_Distance⟩ = C e^(-μ/3) e^(σ^2/18)\nVariance | σ^2_ET_Distance = C^2 e^(-2μ/3) e^(σ^2/9) (e^(σ^2/9) - 1)\nStandard deviation | σ_ET_Distance = C e^(-μ/3) e^(σ^2/18) sqrt(e^(σ^2/9) - 1)\nAll the moments, i.e. k-th moment | ⟨ET_Distance^k⟩ = C^k e^(-kμ/3) e^(k^2σ^2/18)\nMode (= abscissa of the probability density function peak) | r_mode ≡ r_peak = C e^(-μ/3) e^(-σ^2/9)\nValue of the Mode Peak | Peak Value of f_ET_Distance(r) = ≡ f_ET_Distance(r_mode) = (3/(C√(2π) σ))·e^(μ/3)·e^(-σ^2/18)\nMedian (= fifty-fifty probability value for ET_Distance) | median = m = C e^(-μ/3)\nSkewness | K_3/(K_4)^(3/2) = e^(-μ)(e^(σ^2/2) - 3e^(18σ^2/... ) + 2e^(σ^2/6)) / (C^3 (e^(8σ^2/9) - 4e^(5σ^2/9) - 3e^(4σ^2/9) + 12e^(σ^2/3) - 6e^(2σ^2/9)))^(3/2)\nKurtosis | K_4/(K_2)^2 = e^(4σ^2/9) + 2e^(σ^2/3) + 3e^(2σ^2/9) - 6\nExpression of μ in terms of the lower (a_i) and upper (b_i) limits of the Drake uniform input random variables D_i | μ = Σ_{i=1}^{7} ⟨Y_i⟩ = Σ_{i=1}^{7} [b_i[ln(b_i)-1] - a_i[ln(a_i)-1]]/(b_i - a_i)\nExpression of σ^2 in terms of the lower (a_i) and upper (b_i) limits of the Drake uniform input random variables D_i | σ^2 = Σ_{i=1}^{7} σ^2_{Y_i} = Σ_{i=1}^{7} [1 - a_i b_i[ln(b_i) - ln(a_i)]^2/(b_i - a_i)^2]\n\nTable 3. Summary of the properties of the probability distribution that applies to the random variable ET_Distance yielding the (average) distance between any two neighboring communicating civilizations in the Galaxy.\n\n51\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n1/2 + erf[ (ln[C^3/m^3] - μ) / (√2 σ) ] = 1/2 (148)\n\nthat is\n\nerf[ (ln[C^3/m^3] - μ) / (√2 σ) ] = 0 (149)\n\nSince from the definition (147) one obviously has erf(0)=0, (149) yields\n\nln[C^3/m^3] - μ / (√2 σ) = 0 (150)\n\nwhence finally\n\nmedian = m = C e^(-μ/3). (151)\n\nThis is the median of the lognormal distribution of N. In other words, this is the number of ExtraTerrestrial civilizations in the Galaxy such that, with 50% probability the actual value of N will be lower than this median, and with 50% probability it will be higher.\nIn conclusion, we feel useful to summarize all the equations that we derived about the random variable N in the following Table 2.\n\nNUMERICAL EXAMPLE OF THE ET_DISTANCE DISTRIBUTION\n\nIn this section we provide a numerical example of the analytic calculations carried on so far.\n\nConsider the Drake Equation values reported in Table 1. Then, the graph of the corresponding probability density function of the nearest ET_Distance, f_ET_Distance(r), is shown in Figure 6.\n\n[Figure 6: Chart titled DISTANCE OF NEAREST ET_CIVILIZATION, plotting probability density function (1/meters) against ET_Distance from Earth (light years) from 0 to 5000, with peak near 2000.]\n\nFigure 6. This is the probability of finding the nearest ExtraTerrestrial Civilization at the distance r from Earth (in light years) if the values assumed in the Drake Equation are those shown in Table 1. The relevant probability density function f_ET_Distance(r) is given by equation (113). Its mode (peak abscissa) equals 1933 light years, but its mean value is higher since the curve has a high tail on the right: the mean value equals in\n\n52\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nfact 2670 light years. Finally, the standard deviation equals 1309 light years: THIS IS GOOD NEWS FOR SETI, inasmuch as the nearest ET Civilization might lie at just 1 sigma = 2670-1309 = 1361 light years from us.\n\nFrom Figure 6, we see that the probability of finding ExtraTerrestrials is practically zero up to a distance of about 500 light years from Earth. Then it starts increasing with the increasing distance from Earth, and reaches its maximum at\n\nr_mode ≡ r_peak = C e^(-μ/3) e^(-σ^2/9) ≈1933 light years. (152)\n\nThis is the MOST LIKELY VALUE of the distance at which we can expect to find the nearest ExtraTerrestrial civilization.\n\nIt is not, however, the mean value of the probability distribution (113) for f_ET_Distance(r). In fact, the probability density (113) has an infinite tail on the right, as clearly shown in Figure 6, and hence its mean value must be higher than its peak value. As given by (119), its mean value is\n\nr_mean_value = C e^(-μ/3) e^(σ^2/18) ≈ 2670 light years. (153)\n\nThis is the MEAN (value of the) DISTANCE at which we can expect to find ExtraTerrestrials.\n\nAfter having found the above two distances (1933 and 2670 light years, respectively), the next natural question that arises is: \"what is the range, forth and back around the mean value of the distance, within which we can expect to find ExtraTerrestrials with \"the highest hopes ?,\" The answer to this question is given by the notion of standard deviation, that we already found to be given by (123)\n\nσ_ET_Distance = C e^(-μ/3) e^(σ^2/18) sqrt(e^(σ^2/9) - 1) ≈ 1309 light years. ...(154)\n\nMore precisely, this is the so called 1-sigma (distance) level. Probability theory then shows that the nearest ExtraTerrestrial civilization is expected to be located within this range, i.e. within the two distances of (2670-1309) = 1361 light years and (2670+1309) = 3979 light years, with probability given by the integral of f_ET_Distance(r) taken in between these two lower and upper limits, that is:\n\n∫_{1361 light years}^{3979 light years} f_ET_Distance(r) dr ≈ 0.75 = 75% (155)\n\nIn plain words: with 75% probability, the nearest ExtraTerrestrial civilization is located in between the distances of 1361 and 3979 light years from us, having assumed the input values to the Drake Equation given by Table 1. If we change those input values, then all the numbers change again.\n\n9. THE \"DATA ENRICHMENT PRINCIPLE\" AS THE BEST CLT CONSEQUENCE UPON THE STATISTICAL DRAKE EQUATION (ANY NUMBER OF FACTORS ALLOWED)\n\nAs a fitting climax to all the statistical equations developed so far, let us now state our \"DATA ENRICHMENT PRINCIPLE,\" It simply states that \"The Higher the Number of Factors in the Statistical Drake equation, The Better,\"\n\nPut in this simple way, it simply looks like a new way of saying that the CLT lets the random variable Y approach the normal distribution when the number of terms in the sum (4) approaches infinity. And this is the case, indeed. However, our \"Data Enrichment Principle\" has more profound methodological consequences that we cannot explain now, but hope to describe more precisely in one or more coming papers.\n\nCONCLUSIONS\n\nWe have sought to extend the classical Drake equation to let it encompass Statistics and Probability.\n\nThis approach appears to pave the way to future, more profound investigations intended not only to associate \"error bars\" to each factor in the Drake equation, but especially to increase the number of factors themselves. In fact, this seems to be the only way to incorporate into the Drake\n\n53\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nequation more and more new scientific information as soon as it becomes available. In the long run, the Statistical Drake equation might just become a huge computer code, growing up in size and especially in the depth of the scientific information it contained. It would thus be Humanity's first \"Encyclopaedia Galactica,\"\n\nUnfortunately, to extend the Drake equation to Statistics, it was necessary to use a mathematical apparatus that is more sophisticated than just the simple product of seven numbers.\n\nWhen this author had the honour and privilege to present his results at the SETI Institute on April 11th, 2008, in front of an audience also including Professor Frank Drake, he felt he had to add these words: \"My apologies, Frank, for disrupting the beautiful simplicity of your equation,\"\n\nACKNOWLEDGEMENTS\n\nThe author is grateful to Drs. Jill Tarter, Paul Davies, Seth Shostak, Doug Vakoch, Tom Pierson, Carol Oliver, Paul Shuch and Kathryn Denning for attending his first presentation ever about these topics at the \"Beyond\" Center of the University of Arizona at Phoenix on February 8th, 2008. He also would like to thank Dan Werthimer and his School of SETI young experts for keeping alive the interplay between experimental and theoretical SETI. But the greatest \"thanks\" goes of course to the Teacher to all of us: Professor Frank D. Drake, whose equation opened a new way of thinking about the past and the future of Humans in the Galaxy.\n\nREFERENCES\n\n[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation\n[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SETI\n[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrobiology\n[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Drake\n[5] Athanasios Papoulis and S. Unnikrishna Pillai, \"Probability, Random Variables and Stochastic Processes\", Fourth Edition, Tata McGraw-Hill, New Delhi, 2002, ISBN 0-07-048658-1.\n[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_distribution\n[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_limit_theorem\n[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumulants\n[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median\n[10] Jeffrey Bennett and Seth Shostak, \"Life in the Universe\", Second Edition, Pearson - Addison-Wesley, San Francisco, 2007, ISBN 0-8053-4753-4. See in particular page 404.\n\n54\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0f1041085872a6e4","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nReferences\n\n[1] Benford, Gregory, Jim and Dominic, \"Cost Optimized Interstellar Beacons: SETI\", arXiv.org web site (22 Oct. 2008).\n\n[2] Carl Sagan, \"Cosmos\", Random House, New York, 1983. See in particular the pages 298-302.\n\n[3] Bennet, Jeffrey, and Shostak, Seth, \"Life in the Universe\", second edition, Pearson – Addison Wesley, San Francisco, 2007. See in particular page 404.\n\n[4] C. Maccone, \"The Statistical Drake Equation\", paper #IAC-08-A4.1.4 presented on October 1st, 2008, at the 59th International Astronautical Congress (IAC) held in Glasgow, Scotland, UK, September 29th thru October 3rd, 2008.\n\n55\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"0fbb9767810c8aed","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20 March 2026\nPlease do not use the purple \"submit\" button above. Save and email the complete file manually (see below).\n\nRange Fouler Debrief Form\n\nPlease complete this form to the best of your ability. If you do not have the requested information, please leave the field blank. If there was more than one \"group,\" please report each on a separate form for data collection purposes. You should receive a response within 5 business days.\n\nLast Name, First Name Rank Squadron SIPR Email Address Crew Position\nO-3 77 EFS\n\nThis information is for contact only. SPEAR sanitizes all reports of identifying information.\nAbsolutely no identifying information for aircrew or squadron will be recorded for analysis.\n\n10/27/20 01:12:21 Night DCA No\nDate (mm/dd/yy) Time of detection (hh:mm:ss Z) Day / Night Side No. Buno Mission Description (CAS, BFM, etc) LFE?\n\n26000 No\nContact Working Area (Ex: W-72 1A) Contact Latitude (DD:MM:SS) N/S Contact Longitude (DD:MM:SS) E/W Contact Altitude (Ex: 22000) Altitude Constant? Wind Dir at Contact Alt (From) Wind Speed\n\nPlease attempt to determine a Lat / Long for the contact at initial detection. We recommend using JMPS to reference the sensor-derived bearing and range relative to the bullseye you had in use. If that method is not available, any reasonable derivation of location will work, but please be as specific as possible and make a note in the comments section. These locations may be used to cue other means of tracking.\n\nWas the contact moving? Yes\nDirection/Speed (Ex. 090/15) 060/20\n\nRadar Equipped: Other AIM-9x Self-Track:\nStable Trackfile?: Yes ATFLIR Autotrack:\n# of Contacts in \"Group\": 2 Tally Achieved: ✓\n\nPlease check all that apply:\nRound: [ ] Moving Parts: [ ]\nSquare: [ ] Metallic: ✓\nBalloon-shaped: ✓ Markings: [ ]\nWings/Airframe: [ ] Translucent: [ ]\nOther Shape: ✓ Opaque: ✓\nApparent Propulsion: [ ] Reflective: ✓\n\nEA Indications (Check all that apply): ECM Arc [ ] Letter Identifier [ ] False Trackfiles [ ] Other/Ambiguous ✓\n\nPlease use the field below to describe the contact and any interaction in your own words with as much detail as possible. Please be sure to include any detail not included in questions above.\n\nKINGPIN DIRECTED ID OF UNKNOWN CONTACT. 1.4a OBTAINED RADAR LOCK AND TARGET POD VIDEO BUT UNABLE TO GET CLOSER THAN 16.9NM TO GET A BETTER ID. THE TARGET POD SHOWED 2 IR SIGNIFICANT CONTACTS. ONE RANGE FOULER WAS CIRCLING AROUND THE OTHER. IN 1/30TH OF A SECOND, THEY WERE GONE. TALLY ACHIEVED WAS 2X RED BLINKING STROBES AND NOISE JAMMING WAS RECIEVED. NOISE JAMMING WAS INDICATED BY TWO CHEVRONS.\n\nFIRST DETECTION OF THE RANGE FOULERS WERE AT B/E ZIM 248/17 1.4a .\n\nDon't use the purple \"submit\" button! Save this form with filename \"Date_Squadron_RF.pdf\" and email it to (b)(6) (Also in the global). For troubleshooting, call (b)(6)\n\nThank you for your time. Please ensure all display tapes are ripped for the entire time of interaction and saved as a .wmv (Example: 4 May VFA-106 HUD.wmv). Squadron intel personnel shall upload those files to the repository located at this link. (b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0038 to MDR 26-0046 Approved for Release to AARO 03/27/26 000001"} {"doc_id":"10f638b5475ea0e2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026\n\nSEE BOTTOM OF PAGE FOR ADDITIONAL SPECIAL CONTROLS, IF ANY D327456\n\nS-E-C-R-E-T\nINFORMATION REPORT\nThis material contains information affecting the National Defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S.C. Secs. 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\n\nPREPARED AND DISSEMINATED BY\nCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY\nCOUNTRY USSR\nREPORT NO. 00-B-90229\nSUBJECT\nSighting of Unconventional Aircraft\nDATE DISTRIBUTED 15 NOV '55\nNO. OF PAGES 2 NO. OF ENCLS. -\nSUPPLEMENT TO REPORT #\nPLACE ACQUIRED (By source) Azerbaijan SSR\nRESPONSIVE TO OO/C Case 19074\nDATE ACQUIRED (By source) 4 Oct 55\nDATE OF INFORMATION (Date or dates, on or between which, events or conditions described in report existed) 4 Oct 55\n\nTHIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION\nSOURCE US national, 41 years old, publicity and advertising vice president of large US corporation. His major education was in the field of political science (Phi Beta Kappa), and he has lectured extensively on current affairs. He has had no technical training or experience in aviation matters. He recently visited the USSR as a tourist at the invitation of a senior Soviet official.\n\n1. At 1630, 4 Oct 55, I boarded a train at Baku for Tiflis in the company of three other US nationals, one of whom shared a Wagon-Lit compartment with me; the other two occupied the adjoining compartment. The train ran very slowly, making every stop; I would estimate its overall speed at 20 mph. Exactly two hours and forty minutes out of Baku, one of our group in the compartment next door entered my compartment and said, \"Did you see that out there? I just saw a flying saucer.\" I and my compartment companion were about to laugh it off when the man from next door pointed out of the window again, and then we all saw the following sight.\n\n2. On the lefthand side of the train, between the train and the Caspian Sea coast, was a large air field. The evening was dark but clear. A huge searchlight, on the field itself, shone on a triangular object on the ground which I would say was probably not more than two miles distant from the railroad. Collector's comment: Source first estimated that the air field was about five miles away but, on further reflection, changed the distance to the object to two miles. The size of the object was comparable to that of a US jet fighter, with a squat shape and in the form of an equilateral triangle. There were three lights on the object, one on each point of the triangle, presumably two wing lights and a tail light. As we watched, it was ejected from its launching site, making not less than three and not more than seven fast spirals in the air, after which it climbed extremely fast at about a 45 degree angle. We watched it climb and saw it reach a high altitude; the searchlight followed it all the way.\n\n3. I wish to emphasize that this was no ordinary take-off but a launching procedure more like a missile ejection. Our companion from next door reported that this was the second launching in rapid succession.\n\n4. I believe that the train at the time of the sighting was between 50 and 65 miles south of Baku. The Caspian Sea was still visible. While the four of us were still watching the object ascending, the steward came in and pulled down the blinds. When I began to protest, the steward pointed toward the rear of the car and shook his head, indicating to me that the MVD man who had boarded the train at the moment of departure had ordered the blinds drawn.\n\nS-E-C-R-E-T\nDISTRIBUTION\nSTATE ARMY NAVY AIR FBI\nNOFORN NO DISSEM ABROAD LIMITED\nLIMITED: Dissemination limited to full-time employees of CIA, AEC and FBI; and, within State and Defense, to the intelligence components, other offices producing NIS elements, and higher echelons with their immediate supporting 's. Not to be disseminated to consultants, external projects or reserve personnel on short term active duty (excepting individuals who are normally full-time employees of CIA, AEC, FBI, State or Defense) unless the written permission of the originating office has been obtained through the Assistant Director for Collection and Dissemination, CIA."} {"doc_id":"10f638b5475ea0e2","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S-E-C-R-E-T\n- 2 -\n\n5. Our party had wished to make this part of the journey by air, but we were informed by INTOURIST in Baku that there were no flights between Baku and Tiflis. In Tiflis the INTOURIST people were surprised that our party had not flown and said that there were several flights a day.\n\n- end -\n\nB/8-02-0615\n451\n461.87\n#13 11/55\n21N\n21N\n\n(+1)\n\nS-E-C-R-E-T"} {"doc_id":"12d036c5ef655def","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLEARED\nFor Open Publication\n\nMar 10, 2026\n\nDepartment of Defense\nOFFICE OF PREPUBLICATION AND SECURITY REVIEW\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nRecommendation by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 8 Oct 25\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S\n\n10/17/25 001\n\nUSCENTCOM Recommendation to AARO"} {"doc_id":"12ebafb207ff4bb6","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:11:19"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\nDefense Futures\n\n15 December 2010\nICOD: 8 September 2010\nDIA-08-1101-001\n\nCognitive Limits on Simultaneous Control of Multiple Unmanned Spacecraft\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCognitive Limits on Simultaneous Control of Multiple Unmanned Spacecraft\n\nThe Defense Intelligence Reference Document provides non-substantive but authoritative reference information related to intelligence topics or methodologies.\n\nPrepared by:\n\nTechnology Warning Division (DWO-4)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 73\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one of a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2010 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: JUIAF - DI/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington D.C. 20340-5100\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nSummary ................................................................................iv\n\nChapter 1: Introduction ...................................................... 1\n\nChapter 2: Measurement of Mental Workload ........................ 3\n\nSubjective Measurements ..................................................... 3\n\nPerformance Measures ........................................................ 4\n\nPhysiological Measures ....................................................... 4\n\nCardiac Function ............................................................. 5\nCNS Measurements ........................................................... 6\nOcular Measurements ........................................................ 6\nSkin Measurements ........................................................... 7\nSerum Levels of Hormones ................................................. 7\n\nChapter 3: Studies in Cognitive Workload for Air Traffic Controllers .................... 8\n\nModeling the Air Traffic Control Task ................................... 15\n\nChapter 4: Studies in Command of Multiple Semi-Automated Vehicles ............... 18\n\nChapter 5: Discussion ....................................................... 22\n\nChapter 6: Conclusions ..................................................... 23\n\nReferences ..................................................................... 24\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. One-dimensional Representation of Changes in Performance as Workload Varies ................................................ 2\nFigure 2. Typical EKG Signal for a Normal Heartbeat ............................ 5\nFigure 3. Air Traffic Control ...................................................... 10\nFigure 4. Representation of Performance Results from Brookings Study ............. 13\nFigure 5. Information Processing Model for a Human Operator ................... 16\nFigure 6. Examples of Unmanned Military Vehicles ............................... 19\n\nTables\n\nTable 1. Variables used in Determining Complexity of the Traffic. ................. 11\nTable 2. Correlations among Physiological Variables ........................ 14\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCognitive Limits on Simultaneous Control of Multiple Unmanned Spacecraft\n\nSummary\n\nSpace exploration 40 years into the future may include manned missions to parts of the outer solar system. A possible scenario may include sending a small fleet of craft with different primary missions. For example, a trailing spacecraft of nuclear powered electromagnets designed to shield the manned part of the fleet from solar radiation; halo spacecraft with powerful radars to scout for incoming objects; exploration and mining craft, etc. The fleet could regularly travel out of unaided visual range of each other, joining up when necessary for maintenance, exchange of materials such as fuel, or other necessities. Piloting these multiple craft could be economically accomplished if only one remote pilot on station at a time was necessary.\n\nThe cognitive limitation of a human astronaut and his ability to perform the multiple-vehicle piloting task is the focus of this paper as little work has been done in this specific area. However, a large body of cognitive research on the limitations of object supervision and tracking for the task of air traffic control (ATC) exists. Additionally, there is an emerging body of research concerned with multiple unmanned vehicle piloting for heterogeneous missions. These are the two areas reviewed in detail as they relate to possible spacecraft missions.\n\nPilots develop an internal mental representation of the identity, position, mission, and current direction of relevant objects. This is referred to colloquially as \"the big picture.\" The primary research question we seek to answer is whether there is a cognitive limit to the number of objects that can be monitored and tracked within the big picture. Secondarily, we seek to find whether this maximum number is limited by the complexity of interaction; how those limiting factors are described, whether there is a real-time objective measure that indicates when a pilot is approaching his maximum capacity, and whether that capacity has been exceeded. The maximum number of tracked objects is highly dependent on the complexity of the piloting and mission tasks at hand.\n\nResearch is lacking in the area of cognitive limits on the number of spacecraft one pilot could control given any mission scenario. Currently, two models are being used to examine similar activities in air traffic control and remote piloting of multiple unmanned vehicles. In both areas it has been shown the cognitive limits on the number of craft capable of simultaneous control is 16 for simple destination selection, 7 for moderately complex piloting and/or mission task completion, and 4 for complex heterogeneous craft. While additional future research may help to increase the automation component of aircraft and mission control, no current evidence exists to show that a complete mental picture can be maintained for more than about 16 objects at one time, even with external working memory augmentation. However, it has also been demonstrated that physiological variables can be objectively employed to indicate overload. Nominal success has been achieved in classifying physiological states near high workload thus enabling both prediction and possibly prevention of overload.\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDue to the complexity, duration and numerous support requirements of future manned deep-space missions involving exploration, mineral exploitation, and possible colonization, a likely scenario will be the inclusion of unmanned fleets of support craft. Coupled with other requirements, an intensive research program is needed to investigate the cognitive limits on pilots and other operators responsible for the simultaneous control of multiple unmanned spacecraft making up the support fleet; a “fleet’ approach is proposed in an effort to optimize safety and exploratory reach. This research effort would also aim at maximizing the functional efficiency of the mission and reducing the operation costs of unmanned vehicle fleets.\n\nIn this scenario there is much about the ancillary craft that are automated in both navigation and mission. Many of them will not require full-time piloting but given that they could be hundreds of miles from each other at any instant of time, they need monitoring to prevent unseen system failure or collision from letting them just disappear one day during the mission like a Martian probe. Accomplishing this monitoring task and the occasional piloting task for multiple craft in the fleet could be economically accomplished if only one remote pilot on station at a time was necessary.\n\nWe will focus here on the cognitive limitation of a human astronaut to perform the multiple-vehicle piloting task. It is not a surprise that there is little work in this specific area – in fact there were zero peer-reviewed articles in the major journals concerning remote piloting of multiple spacecraft (published in the last 30 years). There is however, a large body of cognitive research on the limitations of object supervision and tracking for the task of air traffic control (ATC). There is additionally an emerging body of research concerned with multiple unmanned vehicle piloting for heterogeneous missions. These are the two areas reviewed in detail as they relate to possible spacecraft missions.\n\nWhen a pilot or ATC operator is in control of several craft they have developed an internal mental representation of the identity, position, mission, and current direction of each object tracked. This is referred to colloquially as “the big picture.” This mental representation is also called situational awareness. Keeping all of the information about all of the objects straight as long as they are in scope is the goal.\n\nThe primary research question we seek to answer is whether there is a cognitive limit to the number of moving objects that can be maintained in the big picture. Secondary questions are whether this maximum number is limited by complexity, how those limitations might be described, whether there is a real-time objective measure that will indicate when a pilot is approaching their maximum capacity, and whether that capacity has been overloaded.\n\nFor the current treatise we will consider only traditional humans as pilots. Cyborg-enhanced astrobots are a topic for another tome.\n\nIn discussing cognitive limitations, it is useful to introduce the concepts of task demand, mental workload, and a simplistic model of multiple resource theory. For a given task, the gross level of neural activity required is a representation of the mental demands of the task. Of course, a complex task can demand varied resources such as visual and\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\naudio processing, and this is where multiple resource theory enters: different resources can be considered independent if demands on one resource do not tax the availability of capacity of the other. Performance of a task can be high or low: in general if spare capacity is available, performance is high, and if capacity is limited or exceeded, performance is low. Moreover, task demand enforces a fixed theoretical relationship between mental workload and task performance: this is shown in Figure 1.\n\nRelationship between Workload and Task Performance\n\nHigh\nPerformance\nWorkload\nLow\nD A1 A2 A3 B C\nTask Demand\n\nFigure 1. One-dimensional Representation of Changes in Performance as Workload Varies. Task demand increases to the right. In the three A regions, performance remains unchanged: A2 is optimal, where a trained operator exerts minimal effort to maintain a set level of performance. At times of low demand the operator exerts effort to maintain vigilance (A1) until demand is so low, the subject disengages from the task (D). The workload curve is not well defined at very low levels of demand (dotted lines). At the other end, as demand increases, the subject can exert effort to keep up with demand (A3). Additional effort maintains performance until degradation begins (B), and in the overload condition, region C, performance is degraded beyond acceptable levels. While effort is maintained in overload, some low level of performance exists.\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 2: Measurement of Mental Workload\n\nThere are three approaches to measuring mental workload in a subject performing a primary task. The first is subjective evaluation, either post-hoc self-report questionnaires concentrating on how “busy” one may have felt, or an experimental observation of activity. The second is performance measures, an objective evaluation of how well the subject completes the primary task, a secondary task, or an experimentally inserted reference task. The final approach is to record real-time physiological measures, with the assumption that increased workload increases anxiety and this will be exhibited by changes in the autonomic nervous system (ANS).\n\nSUBJECTIVE MEASUREMENTS\n\nSelf-report measures are appealing because they get inside the mind that was performing the task. There is no absolute objective scale to measure one person’s “fully occupied” from another person’s view of the same state; however, through rating scales and self-drawn graphs, one can obtain an accurate picture of how perceived workload evolved during the experiment. Perceived workload is important because it is what needs to be maintained between a subjective minimum, where attention may wander, and a subjective maximum, where increased emotion may decrease performance capacity.\n\nThe most frequently used standardized self-report tools are the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX or just TLX) and the Subjective Workload Assessment Technique (SWAT).1,2,3,4 The TLX is a subjective workload assessment based on a multi-dimensional rating questionnaire. An overall workload score is derived based on a weighted average of ratings on six subscales: mental demands, physical demands, temporal demands, own performance, effort, and frustration. SWAT is a two-step assessment of three workload factors: time load, mental effort load, and psychological stress load. In the first step, hypothetical activities are ranked according to perceived workload. In the second step, the experimental task is evaluated post-hoc, using a 1-3 rating scale for each of the three dimensions. An interval scale of workload is derived, from 0-100, based on the reference data collected for each subject in the first step, and the evaluation of the experimental task. A custom self-report can also be designed by the experimenter to specifically focus on the research questions in a given experiment.\n\nThe second type of subjective measure is evaluation by an expert observer. In this type of measurement, assumptions are made on the mental activity of the subject based on the activities being performed. The advantage of this approach is that there is minimal variance per-to-person if the same evaluator is employed. The disadvantage of this approach is the outside observer can miss workload multiplying factors such as task complexity contributing to an overwhelmed feeling by the subject. An example of this approach is the concept of utilization. In calculating utilization it is assumed that the subject must cognitively address one issue at a time in serial order. The measure of utilization is percent time busy, or addressing any issue, as opposed to waiting or monitoring for the next event. In general is it observed for control and supervisory tasks that at around 70% utilization performance begins to degrade.5 Arguably not a perfect measure of workload, utilization has the advantage of simplicity, objectivity,\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nand a quantitative scale, allowing it to be used in threshold detection and prediction, as well as in computer-assisted workload balancing.\n\nPERFORMANCE MEASURES\n\nLaboratory, reaction time to an event stimulus is a typical real-time measure of speed. Outside the laboratory, in a more natural environment, speed is an indirect measure of a subject’s ability to keep up with a given rate of events.a Accuracy is measured in both the laboratory and naturalistic environments: for example, in an air-traffic control task, properly handing off a plane to the next controller, as it leaves the first controller's monitored airspaceb, is measured as a successful task completion.\n\nPerformance, when utilizing a secondary task, is accomplished following two paradigms. First, in the dual-task paradigm, performance on the secondary task is required and primary task performance is thus an indication of workload. For the second paradigm, instruction is given to maintain the primary task performance, and performance on the secondary task is thus a measure of “space capacity” for additional workload.\n\nCare is required in selection of secondary tasks in order to ensure they affect the resources one wishes to probe. For example, in a driving scenario, a minimally intrusive task is to push a button on the floor or steering wheel when a light flashes in the field-of-view of the driver. This visual \"detect-and-respond\" task adds to what is primarily a complex visual and motor coordination task that probes the capacity of visual attention.6 This is different than a secondary task utilizing different resources, such as having a conversation while driving. When planning the paradigm, a model needs to be developed that treats (or explicitly ignores) individual tasks and interactions among them.\n\nReference tasks are executed before and after primary tasks. Typically reference tasks focus on trending in performance due to effects such as fatigue. One important case of reference tasks is to normalize an individual’s current capacity for mental workload. Such a pre-performance measure can be used to adjust maximum workload to compensate for day-to-day variation.\n\nPHYSIOLOGICAL MEASURES\n\nThe human nervous system is anatomically divided into the Central Nervous System (CNS) – and the Peripheral Nervous System (PNS). The CNS includes the brain and the spinal cord. The PNS is made up of the somatic division, which innervates the skin, voluntary muscle, and joints, and the autonomic division, which mediates visceral sensation as well as executes motor control of smooth muscle, viscera, and endocrine glands. The autonomic division consists of sympathetic, parasympathetic, and enteric systems. The sympathetic system mediates response to stress, while the parasympathetic system works to maintain homeostasis and conserve body resources.\n\na Reaction time is not typically measured in real-time in the field as events occur at unplanned times. Post-hoc analysis can resolve reaction times down to a comparable resolution to innate motor reaction variance, on the order or 10’s of msec.\nb Contrary to what a layperson may think, the vast majority of errors in air traffic control do not result in collisions or even near misses; rather they are mistakes in procedure.\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe enteric system executes control of smooth muscle. Although the CNS and PNS are anatomically distinct, they are functionally intertwined. When discussing the function of the autonomic division, it is customary to refer to it as the Autonomic Nervous System, or ANS.7\n\nChanges in global arousal or activation through changing workload can result in changes in physiological activity. These measures are advantageous as changes are measurable continuously, in real-time, and usually unobtrusively in a naturalistic setting. The drawback of using physiology alone is that there is no direct measure of primary task performance.\n\nCardiac Function\n\nNormal beating of the human heart produces a distinct and repeating pattern of electrical activity measurable throughout the body for any two sample points that cross the chest.c The typical electrocardiogram signal is shown in Figure 2.\n\nFigure 2 (EKG waveform with labels P, Q, R, S, T)\n\nFigure 2. Typical EKG Signal for a Normal Heartbeat. Portions of the waveform are labeled P, Q, R, S, and T.\n\nDetection of the R-wave allows measurement of frequency, time,d and amplitude. For continuous monitoring, heart rate measurements will vary considerably and in a non-linear fashion; therefore, the measurement of inter-beat-interval (IBI), the time between R peaks, is more normally distributed in the absence of signal, reducing noise in the measurement.8 Averaging the heart rate over minutes of task performance and comparing to baseline yields a reliable estimate of increased metabolic function.9 An additional measure is the heart rate variability (HRV), calculated by dividing the standard deviation of IBI by an average value of IBI within a sample period. Additional measurements can be made by decomposing the spectra of HRV into low, mid, and\n\nc In fact, a typical introductory physics course for life science students will include a laboratory experiment where the heart rhythm is measured between electrodes located on the right wrist and left ankle.\nd This time measurement is properly a phase measurement, with the phase relative to some reference event.\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nhigh frequency components which have different noise contributions (for example, core temperature changes, blood pressure or speech, and respiration, respectively).10\nBlood pressure and its variability can also be measured. For continuous monitoring, a finger cuff filled with water match the inner-arterial pressure and can be used to monitor variability.11\nCNS Measurements\nMeasurement of brain activity can be unobtrusively recorded using low-count electroencephalography (EEG),e or the minimally obtrusive techniques of EEG, near-infrared spectrometry (NIRS), trans-cranial Doppler sonography (TCDS), or the non-invasive laboratory techniques of functional MRI (fMRI), magnetoencephalography (MEG), or positron emission tomography (PET). The latter three techniques are for brain research only and do not have any current naturalistic research studies (although see Genik12 for a prognosis on generation-after-next technologies including NIRS, PET, fMRI, and MEG).\nEEG measurements are typically divided into spectra and the relative power in the bands 0-4 Hz (Δ), 4-8 Hz (θ), 8-13 Hz (α), 13-30 Hz (β), and 30-100 Hz (γ). NIRS measures the BOLD effectf and is related to localized γ activity. TCDS measures CO2 as the byproduct of localized increased metabolism and is also an indirect measure of neural activity which has been shown to be related to vigilance.13 For EEG experiments in mental workload, changes are typically reported in the θ and α bands, though more recently β and γ bands have shown sensitivity.14\nEvent-related potentials (ERP) are peaks of activity measured at the skin indicative of several tens of thousands of neurons firing coherently for a short time. For example, a well-studied cognitive ERP is P300, a 10’s-of-msec-wide bump in the EEG signal occurring 200-400 msec after an event. Some success in utilizing a task-irrelevant secondary audio stimulation and N100 has been shown,15 but little further development to this approach has been found in the last 15 years.\nOcular Measurements\nMeasurements involving eye fixations, dwell time (temporal length of a fixation), and pupillary changes are well established metrics of workload in visual searching tasks.16 Additional measures of ocular changes include blink rate, blink duration, blink latency, and eye movement. These are recorded using one of various types of eye-tracking (ET) or electrodes to measure an electrooculogram (EOG). ET data will include position of a fixation and the time of each eye movement (or saccade), whereas an EOG only identifies the time that the muscle controlling eye blinks or eye position activated.\ne Low-count EEG is generally less than 10 electrodes, and usually 3 or 5.\nf The Blood Oxygen Level Dependent (BOLD) effect is a local change in the oxygen saturation ratio near neural activity due to metabolic and vascular action. This change is detectible in the infrared spectra.\n6\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nSkin Measurements\nThe ANS controls the opening and closing of sweat glands in response to stress and anxiety. These changes can be observed by measuring electrodermal activity, typically skin conductance response (SCR),17 but also skin potentials (SP) and skin temperature (ST). A standard score of these measures can be calculated by collecting resting state data prior to the task interval.\nSerum Levels of Hormones\nHormone levels are direct results of activity in the ANS. It is natural to want to continuously monitor certain stress hormones such as adrenaline or cortisol. The difficulty lies in measurement time – typical fast assays of salivary cortisol still require about 15 minutes.18 Until reliable in-situ monitoring is available, serum levels of hormones will only play a supporting role in establishing baseline capacities or post-incident analysis.\n7\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 3: Studies in Cognitive Workload for Air Traffic Controllers\nThere are a few areas of research applicable as analogues to the piloting of several aircraft. The largest of these areas analyzes the supervisory functions of air traffic controllers (ATC). In a typical ATC duty environment, a single operator is responsible for many fully-autonomous aircraft. ATC is either airport-based or en-route. Airport-based facilities include ground control, local control for active runways (Tower control), and approach control, which in the US is called Terminal Radar Approach Control, or TRACON. A zone of air-controlled space assigned to a specific control center is that center’s sector; similarly, a given controller is responsible for a sector of airspace. Between airport-controlled sectors, aircraft are monitored by an en-route facility. TRACON is the most cognitively demanding function in this chain. Terminal controllers, as ATCs are called at TRACON facilities, are responsible for departures after take-off, and approaches and flyovers within about a 50-mile radius of the airport.9 Approaching aircraft need to be vectored by the controller into an appropriate flight path for landing, avoiding all other aircraft in the air or soon to be in the air, and then handed off to the Tower controller for landing and ground instruction. Departing flights and flyover traffic mainly need to be monitored for conflicts. Approaching aircraft are by far the most cognitively challenging in the ATC task. Images of air traffic controller environment and displays are shown in Figure 3.h\nErrors in flight control are called anomalies in the industry. The most common aircraft anomaly is deviation from flightpath in en-route sectors. This anomaly is corrected by pilots themselves or after instruction from the appropriate ATC. The most common ATC error is miscommunication between controllers in an aircraft handoff between sectors.19 A study in 1997 by the National Academies showed that ATC errors occurred in both high and low workload conditions, as predicted by overload and disengagement.20\nIn looking at the cognitive limits in ATC, we should seek where typical controllers enter the B region of workload. Traffic load defined as simply the number of aircraft does not by itself show the complete picture of ATC workload. In a study of professional controllers in 2006, Boag recorded subjective measures of workload and reaction time when static air traffic displays were presented. Displays included air traffic conflicts of differing complexity that required resolution. Complexity in the display was objectively ranked using the Method of Analysis of Relational Complexity (MARC).21 Results showed that a relatively small number of aircraft can greatly increase the perceived workload. Boag concludes that perceived complexity is the number one factor in determining workload, and that although conflicts are the major source of complexity in the ATC task, and these can be modeled somewhat using a combination of aircraft separation and transitioni variables, individual differences still have significant impact on when a controller may reach overload.22\ng Each facility will vary in TRACON sector radius. For smaller airports, TRACON functions may be performed by a nearby en-route facility.\nh Of historical note in the US Air traffic Control industry was the industry-wide strike begun on August 3, 1981, by the nearly 13,000 ATC specialists. Only 1300 obeyed a Presidential order to return to work under the “peril to national safety” provision of the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act. On August 5, 1981 the remaining 11,345 controllers were fired and banned for life from federal service. The FAA rebuilt the force to pre-strike levels during the rest of the 1980s. This event resulted in a dearth of research during the 1980s on air traffic control professionals.\ni An aircraft transition is an event such as landing, hand-off to another controller, or entering/leaving a sector, where a sector is defined as a controller’s airspace of responsibility.\n8\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nIn a post-hoc examination of sources of human error in taped controller data, Chang developed a conceptual model of ATC task within a system of human, software, hardware, and environment using the SHEL23 approach of ergonomics. This study also examined several aspects of personnel management, but when overload was examined as the source of error, it was shown that all factors need to be considered along with their interaction. That is, the human and the external task cannot be considered in isolation of the environment of the other humans, and the augmentation capabilities of software, hardware, and the performance environment significantly affect error rates.24\nOperator overload can result in subsequent errors if sufficient recovery time is not allotted. Di Nocera examined specific error rates after short periods of overload. The first part of the study successfully proved that these so-called post-completion errors existed in times immediately after peaks in workload. The second part of the study examined whether an augmentation tool to assist in medium term conflict detection could reduce these errors. The subject population included 18 military ATC of varying experience. Workload was based on self-reported NASA-TLX. Results showed that augmentation processes helped junior controllers, but senior controllers were unaffected by the assistance.25\n9\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 3. Air Traffic Control: a) overview of a large TRACON facility. Potomac is pictured. b) A single ATC TRACON station. Beside the radar display is a stack of memory aid blocks when the controller writes essential aircraft information – as long as there is a physical block to the right, there should be a corresponding “blip” on the screen. c) TRACON display from Minneapolis-St. Paul. On this display are aircraft under control (undesignated), as well as craft from 3 other controllers, East (E), North (N), and Ground (G). Below each aircraft name is controller designation, altitude in hundreds of feet, and airspeed in tens of knots.\n10\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nLamoureaux researched in 1999 whether a proposed ATC augmentation system could safely allow smaller distances between aircraft and thus increase traffic capacity without building new airports or runways. Pairs of aircraft were characterized based on their direction of travel and separation as shown in Table 1. During the task, operators rated their instantaneous perceived workload on a five-point scale roughly corresponding to D, A1, A2, A3/B, and B/C.j Operators were prompted for their self-assessment once every two minutes. The experiment was able to generate self-assessment values between 1 and 4; no overload conditions were generated in this study. Using a model based on task variance and complexity of current aircraft under control, the researchers were able to predict perceived workload 74% of the time, but more importantly, were able to predict a self-rating of 4 for 80% of the cases. Predicting the boredom value of 1 was less successful, at about 60%. Besides the numerical predictions, the authors conclude that complexity of the task drives perceived workload.26\n\nTable 1. Variables used in Determining Complexity of the Traffic relationship between pairs of aircraft. Using four variables with three thresholds gives different classes of complexity. For example, an aircraft pair could be 5 miles apart (3 to 7 threshold), traveling in the same lateral direction, flying with 2500 ft of vertical separation (> 2000ft), and both straight and level. There are 81 such combinations.\n\nThreshold Low Mid High Variable\nLateral separation < 3 miles 3 to 7 miles > 7 miles\nLateral direction Same direction Opposite direction Crossing\nVertical separation < 800 ft 800 to 2000 ft > 2000 ft\nVertical direction Both straight and level One straight, one climbing or descending Both climbing or descending\n\nPhysiological indicators of stress were measured at two low-traffic control centers (Fayetteville, AR and Roswell, NM) and one higher traffic center (Oklahoma City). Heart rates were measures along with hormone secretion levels in urine. The urine specimens were pooled before analysis into two groups throughout a 5-day workweek: during the 8-hour workday, night time after work. Additionally, controllers completed the State-Trait Anxiety Index before and after each workday. Results showed that lower traffic centers exhibited lower stress levels, and that the best biological indicator of stress was epinephrine levels from urine rather than HR. The authors concluded that traffic load and complexity were the main sources of stress in the ATC task rather than the nature of the job itself.27\n\nA straightforward experiment to look at physiological responses using EEG and EOG to lapses in attention during ATC tasks was performed by Peiris in 2005. The goal of the study was to categorize expert analysis of EEG/EOG data to develop an automated analysis program that could read the data online without human intervention to alert operators to attention lapses and low levels of alertness. Professional ATC operators were given 10 minute intervals of the psychomotor vigilance task (PVT). Recorded data was evaluated by several human expert EEG and EOG analyzers. These experts were not able to correctly identify alertness or attention lapses (EEG identified only 6 of 101\n\njIn this study, the A3/B rating described \"Non-essential tasks suffering, could not work at this level for long,\" while B/C described getting behind and losing situational awareness.\n\n11"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"lapses). Peiris concluded that a built-from-scratch automated system is needed to identify subtle features, especially in the low-count electrode EEG (5 electrodes).28\nIn the definition of complexity, it is important to note that one should not focus entirely on a single aspect of the ATC task in the laboratory. Donald defines complexity in two aspects: task complexity independent of the event rate, and ancillary aspects of the job in a naturalistic environment. The complexity of the task as a whole needs to be considered instead of focusing on a single aspect such as monitor and detect and the rate at which this task can be completed.29\n\nThe naturalistic environment was in fact utilized by Brookings in 1996.30 Moreover, in situ measurements were conducted by Collet in 2009.31 Both studies examined TLX ratings, as well as several ANS variables. Brookings additionally utilized EEG.\n\nIn the Brookings study, three simulated TRACON sessions were conducted. The first session varied traffic volume between low, medium and high levels, while the second session varied task complexity at a constant rate of aircraft. The third scenario was conducted with an overwhelming number of aircraft, the goal being to take physiological data in the condition where situational awareness is lost.k\n\nThe traffic load variance session lasted 45 minutes with three 15-minute sessions where the controller was required to handle 6, 12, and 18 aircraft; the order of presentation was counterbalanced across subjects. Other complexity factors, such as the ratio of overflights, arrivals, and departures, were kept constant.\n\nIn the complexity variation session, the number of aircraft was kept constant at 12, while various complicating factors were modulated. Changing complexity factors included:\n\n- Altering the ratio of arriving to departing and flyover traffic.\n- Changing the probability that a pilot didn't hear or failed to execute a controller's instruction.\n- Increasing or decreasing the heterogeneity of aircraft type.\n\nIn the overload session, 15 aircraft were presented in 5 minutes.\n\nPhysiological variables monitored included heart activity using two electrodes on the chest, EOG using electrodes around the eyes,l respiration using elastic transducer bands, and 19 channels of EEG using a cap outfitted with a standard 10-20 configuration.m Task performance points were awarded for successfully handing aircraft, minus any points for operational errors such as separation conflicts, hand-off errors, and missed approaches. TLX ratings were recorded between workload conditions during a designed 1-minute lull in traffic. The simulation was considered quite difficult, even for professional Air Force ATC, and participants were required to practice until they didn't\n\nk In colloquial terms, ATC call this \"losing the picture.\"\nl Electrodes are pointed out here as more recent methodology could use infra-red optical devices to record heart and ocular activity.\nm The standard 10-20 configuration refers to electrodes every 10%/20% of the total distance between right-left/anterior-posterior anatomical markers. A 10-10 configuration would include twice the electrodes, etc.\n\n12"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"crash any planes in any of the scenarios - this required approximately 6 hours of practice per participant before the experiment was conducted.\n\nOnly one of the eight controllers in the Brookings study rated the overload condition as a loss of situational awareness. The results compared the TLX, primary task performance, and physiological measures to low, medium, and high workload conditions, as well as the max or overload condition. Primary task performance is represented in Figure 4 (this chart was recreated visually from the source chart to accurately represent all trends), showing a trending effect for complexity but not volume. Additional results showed that changes in task difficulty (volume or complexity) produced changes in TLX, eye blink rate, respiration rate, and the EEG power spectra. The EEG power spectra were different for changes in volume versus changes in complexity. There were no observed significant correlations with heart rate or heart rate variability. The authors conclude that psychophysiological data can be used to accurately measure workload in real-time, an observation they note confirms earlier work on F4 crew members performing flight tasks of modulated complexity.32\n\nThe Brookings data was reanalyzed by Wilson in 2003 using an artificial neural network approach as well as a stepwise discriminate analysis to classify a physiological state as either operational or overloaded. Wilson successfully classified the overload condition consistently in more than 98% of the cases. The authors admit an issue with psychophysiological variation (day-to-day) that would need to be normalized and further research is required.33\n\nFigure 4. Representation of Performance Results from Brookings Study. 30 Shown are the three scenarios with modulation of traffic volume, complexity, and the overload condition. Note that the Low workload entry for the volume modulation performance (6 planes) was already 80% and this was similar to the 12-plane medium complexity performance. Only the low complexity, 12-plane scenario showed near 100% primary task performance.\n\n13"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The more recent Collet study recorded 5 ANS variables from 25 participants during real ATC operations. The population, mean age of 44, included only fully qualified operators, who were monitored for one hour during TRACON duty at Saint Exupéry International Airport (Lyon, France). Correlation analyses were performed with the number of aircraft the operator was currently controlling. No adjustment was made for task complexity; however, data were acquired between 6 and 9 PM local time to collect medium and high workload data. Each participant handled between 1 and 10 aircraft during the study. The results of the correlation analysis are shown in Table 2. The authors conclude that changing the number of aircraft for professional ATCs produced correlations in physiological measures for SC, SBF, and IHR.31\n\nTable 2. Correlations among Physiological Variables in a study of air traffic controller workload modulation with variable number of aircraft. NA: number of aircraft; TLX: NASA self-report workload metric; Std SC: normalized skin conductance; Std SP: normalized skin potential; Std SBF: normalized capillary blood flow measured through the skin; Std ST: normalized skin temperature; Std IHR: normalized instantaneous heart rate. Bold values show significant correlation. SC, SBF, and IHR show significant correlation with changes in NA. Normalizations (standardizations) were performed against baseline data per subject to decrease inter-subject noise.31\n\nNA TLX Std SC Std SP Std SBF Std ST\nNA 1\nTLX .98 1 p<.001\nStd SC .93 .89 1 p=.002 p=.008\nStd SP .77 .67 .91 1 NS NS p=.005\nStd SBF -.97 -.94 -.87 -.75 1 p<.0001 p=.001 P=.02 NS\nStd ST -.79 -.80 -.62 -.43 .82 1 NS NS NS NS NS\nStd IHR .98 .95 .97 .85 -.93 -.88 p<.0001 p<.0001 p<.0001 p=.03 p=.002 p=.005\n\nAdaptive automation (AA) is the rebalancing of workload between the computer and human. Low workload levels can be supplemented with usually routine tasks that will keep the operator attentive, while providing the subject with additional mission information. This \"extra information\" may not be critical, but it will keep the subject from disengaging from the overall task. The goal of AA is to maintain peak performance of the system, in the A1 to A3 regions. Kaber studied AA in terms of a simulated ATC task in 2005. Forty non-professional participants were monitored for primary and a probe secondary task performances. Results showed that primary task performance was greatest when AA was added to the system.34\n\n14"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MODELING THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TASK\n\nLike any profession, ATC personnel experience day-to-day variation in performance, and there are natural variations between controllers. In order to study these differences, mentioned in most of the studies detailed above, a model needs to be built of the controller, the environment, and the task, with the goal of locating where the majority of changes may be occurring, and where any augmentation may be best suited to assist in performance.\n\nSpecific to the air traffic controllers, the major variation source found when studying large variations in performance was disruption of the circadian rhythm leading to a disequilibrium condition described as a biological instability. Fortunately, no fancy technology system was required to solve this particular problem, just proper human resource management to avoid frequent shift switching.35\n\nLoft proposed that modeling the ATC task complexity and workload is insufficient to predict performance due to the overriding effect of operator decision strategy. ATC operators can select priorities, manage their own cognitive resources, and thus regulate their own performance. The primary relief for the ATC operator is handing off traffic to another local operator.36 Our overall topic is concerned with a single pilot in a space environment, where no room full of colleagues exists to take up the slack; therefore, such group modeling techniques are outside the scope of the current treatise.\n\nWe do note that Loft develops excellent single-task descriptions of time pressure, conflict detection, conflict resolution, etc.\n\nAs shown multiple times in the preceding section, single-task processing time and intensity (difficulty or complexity) are the primary drivers of workload. Developing a model connecting time, intensity, and effort, Hendy shows how decision time connects a time-intensity-effort loop (Figure 5). Hendy contends decision time is the single variable dominant in workload. Within this loop model, increasing the event rate is akin to increasing task difficulty. The adaptation strategies are developed with training and experience, a possible explanation of the difference in junior and senior performance with augmentation aids.\n\nAverty contends that ATC workload cannot be directly measured, but must be inferred from a quantifiable mixture of including objective and subjective measures. He breaks down the controller task into monitoring, vectoring, and conflict solving, and develops a refinement of the NASA-TLX called TLI. Averty's Traffic Load Index is based on number of aircraft, but each aircraft is given additional weight according to processing requirements on the controller, including both cognitive and emotional weight: for example, aircraft with path conflicts to resolve are given the highest weight, while isolated flyover traffic is given low weight. The authors conclude that TLI needs to include physiological inputs as well to fully model the task-controller interaction.\n\n15"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIntensity\n\nDecision Time (sec) ⇐ Task load ÷ Processing Rate (bits) (bits•sec-1)\n\nassociated with\n\nStates: Fatigue Motive Anxiety… etc.\n\nTask Difficulty Capacity / Resources Modulates\n\ndecreases increases\n\nAdaptation ⇐ Effort Drives\n\nincreases\n\nDecision Time (sec) ÷ Time available (sec) ⇒ Time pressure\n\nTime\n\nFigure 5. Information Processing Model for a Human Operator. 37\n\nIn modeling the controllers themselves, one can look to selection efforts and find which candidate skills are the best predictors of training success. Pre-strike data (see footnote h on page 9) of ATC training showed that strong candidates had skills in spatial relations, abstract reasoning, and math as well as oral decision-making.38\n\nIn designing a model, it is tempting to engage subject matter experts (SME) to estimate the demand of various resources within a multiple resource model of ATC. Cohen studied SME predictions of workload within a model of 7 channels (visual perception, auditory perception, spatial information processing, analytical information processing, verbal information processing, manual activity and speech). The authors concluded that using the 7-channel multiple resource model with the SME approach doesn't work for predicting workload in the ATC task.39\n\nHancock has written extensively on the multiple-resource model of cognitive task performance under stress. He points out that functional brain imaging studies clearly show resources are separated anatomically, providing evidence that the multiple resource model should not be abandoned in future research.40\n\nOne model that was proposed was that local visual distractions interfered with cockpit ATC tasks. The model has attractiveness given the incredible complexity of cockpit displays and the popular notion that in-vehicle distraction is the root of all evil for automobile driving. Iona proposed that a tunnel display for in-cockpit ATC information would reduce the effect of outside visual distraction and increase primary task performance measures. The authors concluded that this type of augmentation has little effect on trained professional pilots in performance of their duties.41"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIn an essential foundation study for introducing forms of augmentation to the ATC task, Wickens modeled the dual task environment of pilot traffic avoidance using alarms to augment detection of conflicts. The primary task was maintaining aircraft flightpath using a simulated cockpit display of a crosshair inside a box: the crosshair indicated aircraft direction and drifted toward the sides of the box if not corrected by the pilot using a joystick control. The drift rate was variable and could increase or decrease the difficulty of the primary task. The computer monitored for potential collisions and warned pilots if another aircraft was within 3 miles.\n\nPilots were instructed to maintain their own aircraft flightpath first, and then detect conflicts. Upon alarm, the pilot was to examine an ATC display and recommend re-routing of the conflicting aircraft. Pilots were informed that the automated detection system may erroneously label some situations as conflicts; therefore the pilot needed to actually perform several ATC cognitive task functions to confirm the conflict before recommending action. Participants in the study were 12 student pilots.\n\nThe results of this experiment showed that when augmentation was correct more than about 80% of the time, performance decreased due to decreased vigilance in confirming alarms properly on the ATC display. Additionally, with a high accuracy in the alarm rate, pilots did not regularly check the ATC display to ensure that the augmentation didn't miss possible conflicts. Auditory and visual binary alarms were presented and the auditory alarms were more effective and did not interfere with the primary task (visual tracking). The authors concluded that a 20-25% false alarm rate was optimaln when it is intended for the pilot to work alongside the automation rather than rely on it.42\n\nThe Wickens study was undertaken with the plan of moving ATC to a shared responsibility of the controller and pilot: the goal being to increase airspace capacity by removing some of the more mundane functions like en-route course correction and en-route conflict detection to primarily cockpit control. This situation would be analogous to a spacecraft pilot operating their primary vehicle manually while attending many semi-automated ancillary vehicles. Although not exactly the same,\n\nLandsdown studied TLX workload measures on drivers performing multiple in-vehicle tasks. The authors here concluded that secondary tasks significantly increased perceived workload in this arrangement of task control.43\n\nn This noise in the signal is analogous to adjusting the squelch level on a CB radio: too high a setting and you miss traffic; too low a setting and all you hear is random noise."} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 4: Studies in Command of Multiple Semi-Automated Vehicles\n\nAnother analogue to remotely commanding several spacecraft is piloting or supervising operation of several unmanned ground or air vehicles (UGVs and UAVs). The primary use of these scenarios is in military operations which imposed additional criteria on the control system. Examples of several UAVs and their primary missions are shown in Figure 6. Control of vehicles can be either in-theater, at a range of yards to 10's of miles, or from a long-range command and control center, such as the Predator reconnaissance in the Iraq or Afghan Theater executed from bases within the continental United States.\n\nIn addition to single vehicle control systems, UAV swarms are being developed. In this scenario a remote pilot executes a command to the swarm which communicates amongst itself to establish, for example, an RF emitter target location.44 In this type of a control system the raw number of vehicles under one pilot's control can dramatically increase, but the number of swarms then takes the place of the number of vehicles in developing big picture cognitive limits. Such systems are also under development for space exploration.45\n\nIn 2005, the US Army was operating two tactical surveillance UAVs: the Hunter and its newer replacement, the Shadow. Each UAV requires a team of two operators. Dixon studied the workload of Hunter/Shadow operators and with the help of SMEs designed a simulation to determine if augmentation systems could increase the number of aircraft controlled per pilot from one-half to two. Pilots were responsible for mission completion (reconnaissance of a command target area), locating targets of opportunity (TOO), and on-board system monitoring. There were three levels of pilot aircraft control: baseline, autoalert, and autopilot. In the first two conditions, operators controlled the flight of the aircraft using a joystick to indicate direction; altitude and airspeed were help constant, while a computer controlled the remaining flight parameters (pitch, bank, etc.). Occasionally pilots needed to compensate for wind changes. In the autopilot condition, operators entered the final coordinates of the next command target and the aircraft proceeded in a straight line, compensating automatically for wind changes.\n\nPilots flew 10 straight flight legs. At the beginning of each leg, the command target was identified and instructions on what to locate were given. If the pilot forgot the instructions, they could hit a \"repeat\" button. At the end of each leg, high-workload tasks of loitering and zoom/pan the onboard camera to visualize the entire command target were executed. Along each leg between command targets, pilots were instructed to search for TOOs. Primary task completion included locating all relevant information about the command target. Secondary task completion included TOO identification and monitoring for an on-board system failure. The autoalert condition detected system failures and produced an audio alert when the command target was reached.\n\nResults showed that the autoalert augmentation dramatically decreased the time to locate system failures, as well as significantly decreasing the number of requested instruction repeats. Also, the autopilot augmentation dramatically decreased both flightpath deviation and the requested number of repeats, and also dramatically increased the number of TOO detections. Results were similar for the single and dual aircraft scenarios, though some performance, notably TOO detection (92% to 79%), did"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndecrease between single and dual control cases. The authors attribute this to the UAV interface complexity of 4 screens per vehicle. The authors conclude that further study is required in augmentation strategies and system development.46\n\nFigure 6. Examples of Unmanned Military vehicles: (left to right, top to bottom) Predator, Global Hawk, Fire Scout, Bell Eagle, BAE Mantis, rendering of an airwing of mixed UAVs, Tomahawk cruise missile, remote ground vehicles, and the Raven."} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nLee has previously shown that multiple automated ground vehicles can be autopiloted successfully in a two-stage process when nominal information is available beforehand about the environment to be searched. The two-stage process includes an offline, permission routing table generation where the primary path of each vehicle in planned and downloaded, and an online traffic control stage where small changes to the plan are executed to avoid collisions and deal with contingent activity.47\n\nAttempting to increase the limits of UAV to pilot ratio, Ruff examined simulations using three augmented control techniques: manual, management by consent, and management by exception. The authors concluded that the middle level of automation performed best when considering that augmentation algorithms may have associated errors. They also concluded that the absolute maximum number of UAVs a person could control is four.\n\nCummings addresses the UAV interface issue in a study on retargeting multiple in-flight cruise missiles. Cruise missiles were chosen because they require minimal active piloting. A dual screen interface was constructed very similar to the ATC setup on one map and one list of objects being tracked (in the case of the ATC system, the list is physical rather than a second computer display – see Figure 3b). Cummings side-steps the issue of a cognitive workload metric based on complexity and number of tracked objects by assuming that an operator can execute changes to only one vehicle at a time, and then counting the ratio of time busy making changes to total time in a scenario. This measure is called utilization and previous work in systems engineering48 and queuing theory has shown that utilization rates around 70% max out the typical human operator's ability to hold a big picture. We note that this scenario involves minimal interaction between the missiles, such as flight path conflicts. The missile study is compared to free flight ATC task, where en route and conflict resolution is the responsibility of pilots rather than ATC operators.\n\nCummings develops several performance measures that are worthy, but for the current treatise an analogue is more succinct: the utilization measure in multiple-object tracking and retargeting is similar to a grandmaster playing many games of chess simultaneously. They walk from board to board, think for a bit, make a move, and then move to the next board. Many high-level chess players can look at board position and evaluate what the next move is without knowledge of previous moves in the game. The question at hand is, how many simultaneous games can the grandmaster play before he is forced to revert to cold position analysis with every new presentation of a game? The conclusion is 16, and it agrees with previous work on free flight ATC.49 Cummings additionally takes issue with the Ruff limit of four UAVs, noting that this previous experiment included a far more demanding piloting task.\n\nMore recent work by Cummings added aircraft heterogeneity to the experiment.50 She concluded again that 70% utilization is optimal, but notes that the queuing theory concept of wait times will significantly affect the maximum number of vehicles that can be attended. In a multiple-vehicle control situation, a vehicle that has exhibited some decrement in performance has an interaction time with the operator to bring it back to acceptable performance. It will then follow its automated routine for a period, called the neglect time, until it falls again below performance threshold and requires the pilot's attention: the time between the need for attention and the beginning of the next interaction time is the wait time. Including wait times generated by more complex"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ninterfaces reduces the maximum number of aircraft controllable to seven.51 A final study looks at an abstract model of continuous re-planning in different time intervals. This study observes that subjects reacted differently, but in three groups, to automated suggestions for re-planning. The authors conclude that human-automation consensus is the primary driver of system performance.52 In other words, the human-task interaction must be taken into account, as suggested above by Averty, Loft, and others outlined above.\n21\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 5: Discussion\nWe have insight into the maximum number of tracked objects in a multiple space vehicle piloting experiment: it depends greatly on the complexity of the piloting and mission tasks. Brookings showed that in the ATC task, mild complexity affected performance even for a little as six planes being tracked by professional controllers, whereas these controllers regularly track up to ten. Ruff showed that when there is uncertainty in the augmentation system, a maximum of four craft can be controlled and tasked to complete missions. The number of four is consistent with standard estimates of human working memory being able to handle three to five disparate objects at a time. This implies that disparate, complex interfaces require resources from working memory to prevent loss of the big picture.\n\nAugmentation of the human capabilities mainly appears to be helping to maintain a higher number of working memory registers. Whether it is the handwritten blocks for the ATCs, the stored instructions for the Dixon study, or the dual displays of Cummings, the most effective augmentations in the studies above hold information for quick visual retrieval that the brain would otherwise keep in working memory.\n\nAny external automation system to assist the operator in making decisions will have an associated error rate. It was also shown in the ATC and piloting tasks that alerts need to contain a level of noise (false alarms) of 20-25% to avoid automation bias.\n\nRegarding where the future of this work is headed, it is certain that the field is just getting started. Apollo spacecraft required dozens of ground operators to monitor for system failures, and just a few years ago it required two soldiers to operate a simple reconnaissance drone (most of them still do). It is fortunate that ATC and UAV control appear to be extremely applicable to the initial direction of remote space vehicle operations. The 5-year timeframe should see spacecraft-specific simulator studies begin to appear in major peer-reviewed journals.\n\nThe major advance to come in developing augmented human capability to pilot multiple spacecraft will be in understanding the cognitive organization of multitasking. With brain imaging it has been shown that multiple resource theory seems to follow the anatomical organization of the brain. In the next 40 years we will find out why the functional studies in multiple task completion don't seem to follow the predictions of multiple resource theory.\n22\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 6: Conclusions\nThere is a lack of research in the area of cognitive limits on the number of spacecraft one pilot could control given any mission scenario. Two models for examining what are similar activities are air traffic control and remote piloting of multiple unmanned vehicles. We have shown the research progress in both areas, and the cognitive limits on the number of craft that can be simultaneously controlled are 16 for simple destination selection, 7 for moderately complex piloting and/or mission task completion, and 4 for complex heterogeneous craft. Future research may increase the automation component of aircraft and mission control, but there is no evidence to date that a complete mental picture can be maintained, even with external working memory augmentation, for more than about 16 objects at one time.\n\nWe have additionally shown that physiological variables can be objectively employed to indicate overload. Nominal success has been achieved in classifying physiological states near high workload and thus able to predict and thus possibly prevent overload. We expect this classification will be achieved with near perfect accuracy within five years of specific studies being commenced.\n23\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nReferences\n1 Hart, S. G. & Staveland, L. E. in Human Mental Workload, eds Peter A. Hancock & N Meshkati) 139-183 (North Holland, 1988).\n2 Hart, S. G. NASA Task Load Index (TLX): 20 Years Later, (2006).\n3 Hart, S. G. & Staveland, L. E. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research, (1987).\n4 Reid, G. B., Shingledecker, C. A. & Eggemeier, F. T. in Human Factors Society 25th annual meeting. 522-526 (Human Factors Society).\n5 Cummings, M. L. & Mitchell, P. J. Operator scheduling strategies in supervisory control of multiple UAVs. Aerospace Science and Technology 11, 339-348, doi:10.1016/j.ast.2006.10.007 (2007).\n6 Graydon, F. X. et al. Visual event detection during simulated driving: Identifying the neural correlates with functional neuroimaging. Transportation Research Part F-Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 7, 271-286, doi:10.1016/j.trf.2004.09.006 (2004).\n7 Kandel, E. R., Schwartz, J. H. & Jessell, T. M. Principles of neural science. 4th edn, (McGraw-Hill, Health Professions Division, 2000).\n8 Jennings, J. R., Stringfellow, J. C. & Graham, M. A comparison of the statistical distributions of beat-by-beat heart rate and heart period. Psychophysiology 11, 207-210 (1974).\n9 Porges, S. W. & Byrne, E. A. Research methods for measurement of heart rate and respiration. Biol Psychol 34, 93-130 (1992).\n10 Mulder, L. J. Measurement and analysis methods of heart rate and respiration for use in applied environments. Biol Psychol 34, 205-236 (1992).\n11 Steptoe, A. & Sawada, Y. Assessment of baroreceptor reflex function during mental stress and relaxation. Psychophysiology 26, 140-147 (1989).\n12 Genik, R. J., 2nd, Green, C. C., Graydon, F. X. & Armstrong, R. E. Cognitive avionics and watching spaceflight crews think: generation-after-next research tools in functional neuroimaging. Aviat Space Environ Med 76, B208-212 (2005).\n13 Warm, J. S., Parasuraman, R. & Matthews, G. Vigilance requires hard mental work and is stressful. Hum Factors 50, 433-441 (2008).\n14 Dussault, C., Jouanin, J. C., Philippe, M. & Guezennec, C. Y. EEG and ECG changes during simulator operation reflect mental workload and vigilance. Aviat Space Environ Med 76, 344-351 (2005).\n15 Kramer, A. F., Trejo, L. J. & Humphrey, D. Assessment of mental workload with task-irrelevant auditory probes. Biol Psychol 40, 83-100, doi:0301-0511(95)05108-2 [pii] (1995).\n16 Backs, R. W. & Walrath, L. C. Eye movement and pupillary response indices of mental workload during visual search of symbolic displays. Appl Ergon 23, 243-254, doi:0003687097290152L [pii] (1992).\n17 Freedman, L. W. et al. The relationship of sweat gland count to electrodermal activity. Psychophysiology 31, 196-200 (1994).\n24\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n18 Mitchell, J. S., Lowe, T. E. & Ingram, J. R. Rapid ultrasensitive measurement of salivary cortisol using nano-linker chemistry coupled with surface plasmon resonance detection. Analyst 134, 380-386, doi:10.1039/b817083p (2009).\n19 Billings, C. E. & Reynard, W. D. Human factors in aircraft incidents: results of a 7-year study. Aviat Space Environ Med 55, 960-965 (1984).\n20 Wickens, C. D., Mavor, A. S., McGee, J. & National Research Council (U.S.). Panel on Human Factors in Air Traffic Control Automation. Flight to the future: human factors in air traffic control. (National Academy Press, 1997).\n21 Halford, G. S., Wilson, W. H. & Phillips, S. Processing capacity defined by relational complexity: implications for comparative, developmental, and cognitive psychology. Behav Brain Sci 21, 803-831; discussion 831-864 (1998).\n22 Boag, C., Neal, A., Loft, S. & Halford, G. S. An analysis of relational complexity in an air traffic control conflict detection task. Ergonomics 49, 1508-1526, doi:10.1080/00140130600779744 (2006).\n23 Edwards, E. in Proceedings of British Airline Pilots Association Technical Symposium. 21-36 (British Airline Pilots Association).\n24 Chang, Y. H. & Yeh, C. H. Human performance interfaces in air traffic control. Appl Ergon 41, 123-129, doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2009.06.002 (2010).\n25 Di Nocera, F., Fabrizi, R., Terenzi, M. & Ferlazzo, F. Procedural errors in air traffic control: effects of traffic density, expertise, and automation. Aviat Space Environ Med 77, 639-643 (2006).\n26 Lamoureux, T. The influence of aircraft proximity data on the subjective mental workload of controllers in the air traffic control task. Ergonomics 42, 1482-1491 (1999).\n27 Melton, C. E., Smith, R. C., McKenzie, J. M., Wicks, S. M. & Saldivar, J. T. Stress in air traffic personnel: low-density towers and flight service stations. Aviat Space Environ Med 49, 724-728 (1978).\n28 Peiris, M. T. et al. Identification of vigilance lapses using EEG/EOG by expert human raters. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 6, 5735-5737, doi:10.1109/IEMBS.2005.1615790 (2005).\n29 Donald, F. M. The classification of vigilance tasks in the real world. Ergonomics 51, 1643-1655, doi:10.1080/00140130802327219 (2008).\n30 Brookings, J. B., Wilson, G. F. & Swain, C. R. Psychophysiological responses to changes in workload during simulated air traffic control. Biological Psychology 42, 361-377 (1996).\n31 Collet, C., Averty, P. & Dittmar, A. Autonomic nervous system and subjective ratings of strain in air-traffic control. Appl Ergon 40, 23-32, doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2008.01.019 (2009).\n32 Wilson, G. F. & Fisher, F. The use of cardiac and eye blink measures to determine flight segment in F4 crews. Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine 62, 959-962 (1991).\n33 Wilson, G. F. & Russell, C. A. Operator functional state classification using multiple psychophysiological features in an air traffic control task. Hum Factors 45, 381-389 (2003).\n34 Kaber, D. B., Wright, M. C., Prinzel, L. J., 3rd & Clamann, M. P. Adaptive automation of human-machine system information-processing functions. Hum Factors 47, 730-741 (2005).\n35 Mohler, S. R. The human element in air traffic control: aeromedical aspects, problems, and prescriptions. Aviat Space Environ Med 54, 511-516 (1983).\n25\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"150b7c5267f4c2ed","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n36 Loft, S., Sanderson, P., Neal, A. & Mooij, M. Modeling and predicting mental workload in en route air traffic control: critical review and broader implications. Hum Factors 49, 376-399 (2007).\n37 Hendy, K. C., Liao, J. & Milgram, P. Combining time and intensity effects in assessing operator information-processing load. Hum Factors 39, 30-47 (1997).\n38 Boone, J. O. Toward the development of a new aptitude selection test battery for air traffic control specialists. Aviat Space Environ Med 51, 694-699 (1980).\n39 Cohen, D., Wherry, R. J., Jr. & Glenn, F. Analysis of workload predictions generated by multiple resource theory. Aviat Space Environ Med 67, 139-145 (1996).\n40 Hancock, P. A. & Szalma, J. L. Performance under stress. (Ashgate Pub., 2008).\n41 Iani, C. & Wickens, C. D. Factors affecting task management in aviation. Hum Factors 49, 16-24 (2007).\n42 Wickens, C. & Colcombe, A. Dual-task performance consequences of imperfect alerting associated with a cockpit display of traffic information. Hum Factors 49, 839-850 (2007).\n43 Lansdown, T. C., Brook-Carter, N. & Kersloot, T. Distraction from multiple invehicle secondary tasks: vehicle performance and mental workload implications. Ergonomics 47, 91-104, doi:10.1080/00140130310001629775 (2004).\n44 Pack, D. J., Delima, P., Toussaint, G. J. & York, G. Cooperative control of UAVs for localization of intermittently emitting mobile targets. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern 39, 959-970, doi:10.1109/TSMCB.2008.2010865 (2009).\n45 Wang, J., Qu, Z. H., Ihlefeld, C. M. & Hull, R. A. A control-design-based solution to robotic ecology: Autonomy of achieving cooperative behavior from a highlevel astronaut command. Autonomous Robots 20, 97-112, doi:10.1007/s10514-006-5942-5 (2006).\n46 Dixon, S. R., Wickens, C. D. & Chang, D. Mission control of multiple unmanned aerial vehicles: a workload analysis. Hum Factors 47, 479-487 (2005).\n47 Lee, J. H., Lee, B. H. & Choi, M. H. A real-time traffic control scheme of multiple AGV systems for collision free minimum time motion: A routing table approach. Ieee Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part a-Systems and Humans 28, 347-358 (1998).\n48 Rouse, W. B. Systems engineering models of human-machine interaction. (North Holland, 1980).\n49 Cummings, M. L. & Guerlain, S. Developing operator capacity estimates for supervisory control of autonomous vehicles. Human Factors 49, 1-15 (2007).\n50 Kornguth, S. E., Steinberg, R. & Matthews, M. D. Neurocognitive and physiological factors during high-tempo operations. (Ashgate, 2010).\n51 Cummings, M. L. & Mitchell, P. J. Predicting controller capacity in supervisory control of multiple UAVs. Ieee Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part a-Systems and Humans 38, 451-460, doi:10.1109/tsmca.2007.914757 (2008).\n52 Cummings, M. L., Clare, A. & Hart, C. The Role of Human-Automation Consensus in Multiple Unmanned Vehicle Scheduling. Human Factors 52, 17-27, doi:10.1177/0018720810368674 (2010).\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"153775713ce9d1db","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Misrep 9337873\n\nNarrative\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nAT 1504Z, [1.4a] TOOK OFF FROM LGLR. AT 1515Z, [1.4a] HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE. [1.4a] PROCEEDED TO FRAGGED TASKING TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED.\n\nAT 1618Z, [1.4a] WAS 7-LINED TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED. [1.4a] ARRIVED ON-STATION AT 2018Z, CHECKED IN WITH DATA MASKED, AND PERFORMED FMV/SIGINT COLLECTION AT 36S YC 40[1.4a] 57[1.4a] (SEE ISR 1).\n\nAT 0811Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED 1X POSS UAP (SEE UAP 1).\n\nAT 0542Z, [1.4a] RETURNED TO BASE. AT 1035Z, [1.4a] HANDED BACK TO THE LRE. AT 1105Z, [1.4a] LANDED AT LGLR. FULL MOTION VIDEO WAS EXPLOITED BY GET. 20:01 MISSION HOURS, 09:24 FMV HOURS, 1X FMV TASKINGS PROSECUTED.\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] Mission Narrative\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: [REDACTED]\n• Associated Caveats: [REDACTED]\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MS\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20481028\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: [1.4a]\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 603rd\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFSOC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM"} {"doc_id":"153775713ce9d1db","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 33 SOS\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): [1.4a]\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• ATO Mission Number: [1.4a]\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 56 SOIS\n• Wing: 27 SOW\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 AOC Det 1\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: 27 SOW\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: Unavailable"} {"doc_id":"153775713ce9d1db","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 603 AOC\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Radar Name or Destination:\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator:\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data:\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator:\n• Chaff Designator:\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges:\n• Flare Designator:\n• Num Flares:\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM:"} {"doc_id":"153775713ce9d1db","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Type of IR-Guided AAM:\n• Num IR-Guided AAM:\n• Gun Name or Designator:\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 2XAGM-114R9E 2XAGM-114R2\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: AN/DAS-4\n• Additional Avionics: AH/GMESH\n• Data Link: LINK 16\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): [1.4a]\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): LGLR\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 281504:00ZOCT23\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): 34055\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): LGLR\n• Last Land Time: 291105:00ZOCT23\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 291115:00ZOCT23\n• Total Mission Time: 20 hours 1 minute\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 282018:00ZOCT23\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• JTAC Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station: On"} {"doc_id":"153775713ce9d1db","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Off Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 290542:00ZOCT23\n• Total Time On Station: 9 hours 24 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 282018:00ZOCT23\n• Time-off Station DTG: 290542:00ZOCT23\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Msn Type: AREC\n• Primary Sensor: FMV\n• Sensors Available: G-MESH\n• Tasking Type: Planned\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): DATA MASKED\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 36S YC 40[1.4a] 57[1.4a]\n• Activity Description: TARGET DEVELOPMENT\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed: No\n• Number of EEIs:\n• Global Campaign Plan:\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED]\nUPON ARRIVAL TO THE SP AT 2018Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED NO EEI RELATED ACTVITY. FROM 2019Z TO 2243Z, [1.4a] CONDUCTED POL ON SEVERAL ASSOCIATED COIS, NO EEI RELATED ACTIVITY OBSERVED. AT 2244Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED 6X VEHICLES ON PARKING GARAGE ROOFTOP AND NO PERSONNEL. CONDUCTED POL ON COI UNTIL RTB AT 0542Z.\n[REDACTED]\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: DATA MASKED\n• Supported Operation: [1.4a]\n• Precoord Time: -\n• Precoord Effectiveness: -\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (UNCLASSIFIED)"} {"doc_id":"153775713ce9d1db","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLEAR WX\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: Yes\n• Gentext: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nSATISFACTORY\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 290811:00ZOCT23\n• UAP Event Type: UAP Incident\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations: NONE\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions: NONE\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Tail Number: 1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 35SMV33 1.4a 05 1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: -\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory: -\n• Observer Assessment of UAP: Benign\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: -\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns):: -\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters: -\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable): -\n• Operational Range:\n• UAP Physical State: Solid\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n• UAP Propulsion Means: UNK\n• UAP Payload:\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Signatures: NONE\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNK\n• UAP RF Frequency: UNK\n• UAP RF Duration: UNK\n• UAP Event Serial Number: -\n• UAP Effects on Persons: NO\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Effects on Equipment: NONE\n• Full Name: -\n\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nApproved for Release to AARO\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 01/26/26 006"} {"doc_id":"153775713ce9d1db","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Rank/Grade: -\n• Email: -\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE): -\n• Observer Engagement of UAP (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• First Coordinate: 35SMV32 1.4a 06 1.4a\n• First Seen Radius: 5\n• Last Accuracy: Estimated\n• Last Coordinate: 35SMV33 1.4a 04 1.4a\n• Last Seen Radius: 5\n• Kinetic Altitude Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Altitude: -\n• Kinetic Depth Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Depth: -\n• Kinetic Velocity Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Velocity: 30 MPH\n• Kinetic Trajectory Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Trajectory: -\n• UAP Date of DoD Acquisition: 290811:00ZOCT23\n• UAP Reaction to Observation, Interrogation, Engagement (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNK\n• UAP Anomalous Characteristics/ Behaviors: -\n• First Accuracy: Estimated\n• Call Sign: 1.4a\n• UAP First Seen Location:\n• UAP Last Seen Location:\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): SEEMINGLY CIRCULAR, TOO SMALL TO MAKE OUT DETAILS\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): [REDACTED]\nAT 0811Z, 1.4a WAS RTB WHEN THEY SPOTTED A UAP FLYING JUST ABOVE THE SURFACE OF THE OCEAN WATER. THE UAP FLEW STRAIGHT ABOVE THE OCEAN TOWARDS LANDS. AT 0811Z, 1.4a LOST THE UAP FROM THEIR FEED.\n[REDACTED]\n\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nApproved for Release to AARO\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 01/26/26 007"} {"doc_id":"15ba42bcff3f0571","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026\n\nIntelligence Information Report\n\nWARNING NOTICE\nSENSITIVE INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND METHODS INVOLVED\nClassified by Recorded Reporting Officer. Exempt from General Declassification Schedule of E.O. 11652 E. Impossible to determine date of automatic declassification.\n\nDIRECTORATE OF OPERATIONS\nPAGE 1 OF\n\nTHIS IS AN INFORMATION REPORT, NOT FINALLY EVALUATED INTELLIGENCE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nREPORT NO. FIR K-311/01638-77\nDATE DISTR. 20 December 1973\n\nCOUNTRY USSR\nDOI November 1972-November 1973\nSUBJECT The Sary Shagan Weapons Testing Range\n\nACQ Germany\nFIELD NO.\n\nSOURCE [REDACTED] former Soviet citizen who served\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nThis report\n\nSummary: This report provides limited information on the Sary Shagan weapons testing range, to include facilities, work areas, security fencing, the regional headquarters (V/Ch 03080), and a warhead checkout unit (V/Ch 03142). Also included is limited information on the following: System-75 [SA-2] and System-300/Aldan [ABM-1 GALOSH] warheads; rumored laser research; and an unidentified aerial phenomenon. End of Summary.\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n3915084-13\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nSTATE DIA NSA [REDACTED] USIA FBI SWS NPIC IAS OSR OWI OSO OCR"} {"doc_id":"15ba42bcff3f0571","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL/WARNING NOTICE - SENSITIVE INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND METHODS INVOLVED\n\nFIRK-311/01638-77\n\n- 4 -\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n10. Besides the System-75 [SA-2] warheads, Site 4 also checked the warheads for a missile(s) known as the System-300 and/or Aldan. (Field Comment: Source did not know if Aldan was another name for the System-300 missile, or if they were two similar missiles.) The System-300/Aldan warheads after being checked at Site 4 were taken to Site 35 for launching. According to rumor, the missile was for antimissile defense (protivo raketnaya oborona - PRO). (Field Comment: Source identified the System-300/Aldan missile in available reference material as the ABM-1/GALOSH.)\n\n11. The warhead for the System-300/Aldan missile was about two meters long and 80 to 100 centimeters in diameter. The warhead weighed approximately 400 kilograms, and it contained an unrecalled number of black cassettes, 45 x 12 centimeters, which housed an unknown number of metal balls (shariki). Warheads for the System-75 [SA-2] missile had approximately 100 grey cassettes, 30 x 7 centimeters, each of which held about 200 to 300 metal balls, each no more than 1.5 centimeters in diameter. (Field Comment: Source had no knowledge regarding nuclear warheads. He opined that all systems could be equipped with nuclear warheads. However, Source stated all work done by his department was basically experimental (opytnaya).)\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n13. According to hearsay, experiments involving laser weapons were being conducted at an unknown location at the range. Supposedly, the tests involved powerful antennas (no further details).\n\n14. On one evening in late Summer 1973, Source observed an\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"15ba42bcff3f0571","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL/WARNING NOTICE - SENSITIVE INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND METHODS INVOLVED\n\nFIRK-311/01638-77\n\n- 5 -\n\nunidentified phenomenon at Site 7. While watching a sport competition between Canada and the USSR on television, he stepped outside for some air and observed an unidentified sharp (bright) green circular object or mass in the sky. The object was situated west of the site at an angle of sighting of approximately 70 degrees. The altitude of the object was undeterminable. (Field Comment: Although there were no clouds in the sky that evening, Source believed that the green mass would have been higher than cloud level. Source could not estimate the diameter of the object.) Within 10 to 15 seconds of observation, the green circle widened and within a brief period of time several green concentric circles formed around the mass. Within minutes the coloring disappeared. There was no sound, such as an explosion, associated with the phenomenon. (Field Comment: Source had no opinion as to what this phenomenon was. There was no resultant rumors. Source could not provide any further details.)\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"166d17c32069aa97","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:19:33"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0.9 FLYING DISCS\n\nSEPT - DEC\n\n1952\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 841508\n\nRecord Copy to Replace Unstable Original\nProperty of the National Archives"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Unclassified) Transmittal of FLYOBRPT's\nChief, ATIC, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio\n\n19 Dec 52\nCapt. Smith - AFOIN-2A2\n75990/AC\n\nDeputy Director for Estimates, D/I\n\nForwarded for your action are four inclosures, all on FLYOB's.\n\n4 Incls: (W/orig only)\n1. Ltr fr Mr. Johnston\n dtd 10 Dec 52\n2. AF IN 2127\n 18 Dec 52\n3. Comment No. 2\n SCIA dtd 17 Dec 52\n W/1 incl.\n4. Comment No. 1\n CID dtd 12 Dec 52\n W/1 incl.\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A2\nAFOIN-2A\n\nWhen incl(s) No. 1, 2, 3, 4 are/are withdrawn (or not attached), the Confidential classification of this correspondence will be downgraded to Unclassified in accordance with Par 25A, AFR 205-1.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Capt Smith/AC/75990\n19 December 1952\n\nPublic Information Division\nUnited States Coast Guard\nRoom 1004\n1300 E Street, N. W.\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nAttn: Mrs. Mary M. Mead\n\nDear Mrs. Mead:\n\nIn compliance with your telephone request of 15 December, 1952, attached will be found the negative of the photo of unidentified objects taken 16 July 1952, at Salem Air Station, Massachusetts.\n\nWe sincerely appreciate the cooperation of personnel of the United States Coast Guard in this matter.\n\nYours very truly,\n\nSIGNED\n\nEncl.\n1. Negative\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A\nAFOIN-2A2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Capt Smith/AC/75990\n19 December 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To return a photographic negative purported to be of \"flying saucers\" taken by a member of the USCG at Salem Air Station, Massachusetts, on 16 July 1952.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n2. On 15 December 1952, Mrs. Mead of the Public Information Division of the USCG here in Washington telephoned Captain Smith of AFOIN-2A2 and requested return of subject negative.\n\n3. Captain Smith contacted Captain Ruppelt of ATIC on 16 December 1952 by telephone and requested he bring the negative to HQ USAF on a staff visit which he was to make on 17-18 December.\n\n4. Captain Ruppelt stated that ATIC was finished with analyzing the photograph and that he would bring it with him for return to the USCG.\n\nACTION:\n\n5. Subject negative returned by attached letter in compliance with the request of the USCG.\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A2, Col. W. H. Smith, Ext. 71016\nAFOIN-2A, Col. W. A. Adams, Ext. 74072"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n13\nHEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND\nOFFUTT AIR FORCE BASE\nOMAHA, NEBRASKA\n3 DEC 1952\nDINC 350\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) FLYOBRPT\nTO: Director of Intelligence\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D.C.\nThe attached Air Intelligence Information Reports are forwarded\nas per instructions AFL 200-5, dated 29 April 1952, subject, FLYOBRPT.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\nHal E. Bilyeu\nMAJOR, USAF\nAsst Adj Gen\n2 Incls:\n1. IR-166-52 (4 cys)\n2. IR-167-52 (4 cys)\nKonly copy recd 0114-162\n9 Dec\nincl w/o in AV 113\nmaj Pandolfo\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n27"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nHEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND\nOFFUTT AIR FORCE BASE\nOMAHA, NEBRASKA\nDINC 350\n3 DEC 195\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) FLYOBRPT\nTO: Director of Intelligence\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D.C.\nThe attached Air Intelligence Information Reports are forwarded\nas per instructions AFL 200-5, dated 29 April 1952, subject, FLYOBRPT.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\nHAL E. BILYEU\nMAJOR, USAF\nAsst Adj Gen\n2 Incls:\n1. IR-166-52 (4 cys)\n2. IR-167-52 (2 cys)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\nw/2 December 1952\n3 Dec 52\n000.9 Flying Discs\nGentlemen:\nThe Secretary of Defense has asked me to reply to your letter of 13 November 1952, file DS, forwarding a report of an observation of an unidentified flying object submitted by Mr. Jacques Petitjean Roget of Martinique, F. W. I.\nThe Air Force has been given primary responsibility for the production of intelligence on this subject. We were very pleased to receive this report and would appreciate any additional reports which the Consulate at Martinique is able to furnish us.\nWe appreciate your cooperation in this matter.\nSincerely,\nX321.9 Secretary of Defense\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nThe Department of State\nWashington 25, D. C.\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\nRECEIVED 5 DEC 1952 DIR/INT HQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\n2 December 1952\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\nPROBLEM:\n1. To prepare a letter to the Department of State for the Secretary of Defense.\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n2. In a letter dated 13 November 1952, the Department of State transmitted to the Secretary of Defense, a copy of a letter from Mr. Jacques Petitjean Roget of Martinique, F. W. I. reporting the observation of an unidentified flying object. The Department of State requested information regarding our desire to obtain additional reports of this nature.\n3. The Office of the Secretary of Defense instructed the Air Force to prepare a direct reply to the Department of State.\n4. The attached reply to the Department of State expresses the appreciation of the Air Force for their cooperation in this matter and indicates our desire to receive additional reports which they mention are available from this area.\n5. Subject matter is not considered suitable for inclusion in the Daily Staff Digest.\nRECOMMENDATIONS:\n6. Approval, signature and forwarding of attached reply.\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A2, Col Smith, Ext. 71016\nAFOIN-2A, Col Adams, Ext. 74072"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"000.9 Flying Discs\n322.7 ATIC\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n1 Dec 52\n\nFROM AFOIN-2A2\n\nTO ATIC\n\nDF 1\nSUBJ: (Confidential) Background Investigation of Des Vergers, D.S., for\nProject Blue Book\n\n1. The inclosed report was prepared by the Directorate of Special\nInvestigations, this Hq, in compliance with a specific request from this\noffice. It is for your information and retention.\n\n* * * *\n\nFILED UNDER 383.4 INVESTIGATIONS CIVILIANS"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\nw/28 Nov 52\n\nDEC 1 1952\n\nMr. Ken W. Purdy\nEditor, True Magazine\nFawcett Building\n67 West 44th Street\nNew York 36, N. Y.\n\nDear Mr. Purdy:\n\nI appreciated your letter of November 14 forwarding a\ncopy of the December issue of your magazine. Many thanks.\n\nSincerely,\n\nThis ltr not sent out\nFile H+R\n\n095. True Magazine\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2 AFOIN\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\nAFOIN Coordination Copy"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\n28 November 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To prepare a non-military letter to Mr. Ken W. Purdy, Editor\nof TRUE magazine.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n2. By personal letter to General Samford dated 14 November 52, Mr.\nPurdy forwarded a copy of the December issue of TRUE magazine for\nGeneral Samford's perusal since it contained an article on \"flying\nsaucers\" by Donald Keyhoe. Mr. Purdy considered this article to be of\npossible interest.\n\n3. Mr. Purdy had forwarded in similar fashion a previous issue of\nTRUE which contained another article on the same subject. A reply signed\nby General Samford, expressing his appreciation, was sent to Mr. Purdy.\nA precedence was thereby established.\n\n4. Attached reply simply expresses appreciation to Mr. Purdy for\nhis latest letter. It is written in the first person from General\nSamford.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\n5. That the attached reply be signed by General Samford and dis-\npatched to Mr. Purdy.\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nAFOIN-2A2, Col Smith, Ext. 71016\nAFOIN-2A, Col Adams, Ext. 71564\nAFOIN-2, Col Morrow, Ext. 71110\nAFOIN, Maj Gen Samford, Ext. 55613"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE\nTHE MAN'S MAGAZINE\n\nFawcett Building 67 West 44th Street New York 36, N.Y. MUrray Hill 2-3606\n\nNovember 14, 1952\n\nMajor General John A. Samford\nDirector of Intelligence\nU.S. Air Force\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nDear General Samford,\n\nIn view of your kindness in commenting\non TRUE's recent exposure of the flying-saucer \"little men\"\nhoax, I feel that perhaps our latest report on the saucer\nproblem, in the December issue which will appear next\nWednesday, will be of interest to you.\n\nSincerely,\n\nKen W. Purdy\nEDITOR"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nSUSPENSE\n\nORIGIN OF BASIC DATE TYPE DATE\n\nSUBJECT ASSIGNED BY\nLetter of Appreciation NUMBER\n\nROUTING\n\nInitial \"IN\" column to denote review prior to action. Initial \"OUT\" column to denote review of completed action. (X-for action: V-for coordination)\n\nIN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\nAFOIN OIN-1 OIN-2 OIN-3\nOIN-X OIN-1X OIN-2X OIN-3X\nOIN-X1\nOIN-X2\nCABLES\nFILE SR NAVAL OFF\nDISPATCH SR ARMY OFF\n\nTO: AFOIN-2X DATE 11 Dec 52\nFROM: AFOIN-2A COMMENT NUMBER 1\n\nCOMMENTS (Use reverse, if necessary)\n\nThe attached correspondence is transmitted for forwarding to OIN for signature and dispatch.\n\nAFOIN No. 938\n\nDONALD E. BEEBE\nCaptain, USAF\nExecutive, AFOIN-2A\n\nTO: AFOIN\nFROM: AFOIN-2X\n11 December 52 Comment 2\n\nForwarded for signature.\n\nAFOIN-2X\n\nMHR AFOIN X\n#2 17 Dec 1952\nAnswer letter not required - file.\nW.K. Smith\n\nAFHQ FORM 0-86 22 JUL 52 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. D 6616"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nHEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND\nOFFUTT AIR FORCE BASE\nOMAHA, NEBRASKA\n\n467\n\nDINC 350 \n\n25 NOV 1952\n\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) FLYOBRPT\n\nTO: Director of Intelligence\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nThe attached Air Intelligence Information Reports are forwarded as per instructions AFL 200-5, dated 29 April 1952, subject, FLYOBRPT.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n3 Incls\n1. IR-162 - 52 (4 cys)\n2. IR-164 - 52 (3 cys)\n3. IR-165 - 52 (3 cys)\n\nHAL E. BILYEU\nMAJOR, USAF\nAsst Adj Gen\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D 28 NOV 1952 DIR/INT HQ USAF\n\nHEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND\nOFFUTT AIR FORCE BASE\nOMAHA, NEBRASKA\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\nWrtn 24 Nov 52\n\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: DIRECTOR OF NAVAL INTELLIGENCE\n\nATTN: Op322Y5\n\nSUBJECT: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Flying Objects\n\n1. Further to our Memorandum dated 24 October 52, same subject as above, it is requested that the inclosed roll of 16 mm Kodachrome movie film be analyzed in the same manner as the film previously forwarded. In addition, a comparison with the latter film would be most helpful.\n\n2. Background information pertaining to the inclosed film is contained in Incl 2, the official report on this incident.\n\n3. Your cooperation in satisfying this additional request is earnestly solicited. In addition, notification of preliminary results of both analyses at the earliest opportunity would be appreciated. Such preliminary data may allow us to complete some of the pending action on these films prior to receipt of the final results.\n\n2 Incls\n1. 16 mm Kodachrome movie film (original)\n2. Cy of official rept of Unconventional Acft sighting\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel USAF\nChief, Topical Division\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nover\nX062.2 Motion Pictures"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\n24-0 6 October 1950\n\nSUBJECT: UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nTO: District Commander\n5th District Office of Special Investigations\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\n\n1. Transmitted under separate cover is approximately fifteen feet of moving picture film taken by Mr. Nicholas Mariana, of 2919 First Avenue North, Great Falls, Montana, who is general manager of the Great Falls Baseball Club.\n\n2. Mr. Mariana made these pictures on 15 August 1950 between the hours of 11:25 and 11:30 A.M., at Great Falls, Montana. On interview, he stated that he first fighted the objects while standing in the grandstand of the ball park located at 26th Street and Eleventh Avenue North, Great Falls, Montana, and that he saw two bright disc shaped objects proceeding in a southerly direction at an altitude of approximately ten thousand feet and at a distance of about three-quarters of a mile in a westerly direction, from the observer's viewpoint. Mr. Mariana then stated that he ran downstairs and outside to his car from which he obtained his camera and made the pictures shown in the film. From the time of first sighting to the completion of taking of the pictures, Mr. Mariana estimated consumed approximately twenty seconds. At the time of his taking the pictures, a Miss Virginia Raunig, 112 Second Avenue North, Great Falls, Montana, who is employed as his secretary, was a witness.\n\n3. The water tower in instant pictures is located approximately seven hundred feet in a southwesterly direction from the point at which Mr. Mariana stood when taking the pictures and the tower is approximately one hundred seventy-five feet in height.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n24-0 6 October 1950\nSUBJECT: UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\n4. With reference to background information as regards Nicholas Mariana, he is a graduate of Montana State University, 1938, with a BA in journalism. He was born in Miles City, Montana, in 1912, went to Montana State University in 1935 and has, since graduation from that school, resided in Helena from 1940 to 1941 and from 1941 until the present at Great Falls. During the war, Mr. Mariana served in the Army Air Forces from June 1943 to October 1945, attaining the rank of Corporal and was editor of a newspaper, The Northern Dispatch, at Great Falls Air Force Base, at Great Falls, Montana. Subject has been married for a period of ten years and has one child, a daughter, three years of age. Presently Mr. Mariana is employed as general manager of the Great Falls Baseball Club, Great Falls, Montant, and also as a radio sports commentator and radio announcer of sporting events. He enjoys an excellent reputation in the local community and is regarded as a reliable, trustworthy and honest individual.\n\n5. Prior to concluding the interview with Mr. Mariana, he was advised that the film was being forwarded to the Air Material Command because of that agency's interest in anything which would contribute to its fund of technical intelligence data.\n\n1 Incl.\nSummary of Information per provisions of Air Intelligence Requirements Memo No. 4.\n\nJOHN P. BRYNILDSEN\nCaptain, USAF\nDistrict Commander\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n24-0 6 October 1950\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: District Commander, 5th District Office of Special\nInvestigations, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base,\nDayton, Ohio\n\nSUBJECT: UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\n1. On 5 October 1950, Mr. Mariana advised that the camera used by him in the taking of the moving picture film transmitted under separate cover, was a Revere, 16 mm., magazine loading type with an F. 1.9 wide-angle, telephoto lens. Mr. Mariana stated that the settings used at the time were: shutter opening F.22 and focal setting, infinity. Film make and type was Eastman Kodachrome, daylight type, and speed at which pictures were taken was sixteen frames per second. Mr. Mariana further advised that in operating the camera intaking the pictures, he had \"panned\" the camera slowly from right to left.\n\n2. A further check of the records of Base Operations, Great Falls Air Force Base, Great Falls, Montana, indicates that an F-94 type aircraft, #2503, and F-94 type aircraft, #2502, landed at Great Falls Air Force Base at 1133 and 1130 hours (Mountain Standard Time) respectively on 15 August 1950. These aircraft were assigned the 449th Fighter Squadron, Ladd Air Force Base, Alaska. Mr. Mariana stated that almost immediately after taking the motion pictures, two USAF jet type aircrafthad flown across the sky east of him, heading in a southerly direction.\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCOPY\n\nPART II\n\n1. 15 August 1950\n2. Between 1125 and 1130 Mountain Standard Time\n3. a. 26th and Eleventh Avenue North, Great Falls, Montana\n4. Two objects, entrail, approximately fifty yards apart.\n5. The U. S. Weather Bureau, Gore Field, Great Falls, Montana, which keeps a record of the observable celestial phenomena or planets reports that there were no such phenomena observable on 15 August 1950.\n6. Distance ofobjects from observer:\na. Approximately three-quarters of a mile laterally in a westerly direction.\nb. The angle of elevation from the horizon was about thirty-five degrees.\nc. The altitude was approximately ten thousand feet.\n7. Mr. Mariana states object was in sight to him a total of about twenty seconds and about seven seconds to his secretary, Miss Raunig.\n8. Mr. Mariana states that the appearance of the object was:\na. Of a bright clean aluminum surface.\nb. disc shape--apparently had depth\nc. Objects appeared to be of metal material\nd. According to observer, objects were about fifty feet in diameter and three feet in depth.\nNOTE: Observer has had occasion to frequently observe USAF C-54's in flight in the local area and states the objects had a diameter about three-quarters of the wing span of a C-54 when viewed from the side.\n9. Direction of flight: Objects were moving in a southerly direction.\n10. Tactics or maneuvers: Movements of objects were horizontal but slightly erratic as to speed.\n11. No evidence of exhaust.\n12. No clouds were observable on that date.\n13. No lights were observed as being attached to objects.\n14. a. No wings observed\nb. No aerodynamic list of fuselage observed.\nc. No vertical jet observed.\nd. Objects, according to observer, definitely had an appearance of a spinning motion; however no rotating cylinder or cone was observed.\ne. No aerostatic lifting devices were attached to objects.\n15. a. No propeller or jet device observed.\nb. No rotor observed.\nc. No aerodynamic vanes observed\nd. No visible exhaust or jet openings.\n16. a. No fins observed\nb. No stabilizers observed.\n17. No air ducts observed.\n18. Speed estimated by observer to be approximately two hundred mph.\n19. No sound; objects had a purported \"whoosh\" sound.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nPART II (Cont'd)\n\n20. Objects vanished from view after about eight seconds, obscured by uprights of water tank which can be noticed in the film.\n\nRELATIVE TO OBSERVER\n\n1. Name of observer: Nicholas Mariana\n2. Address: 2919 First Avenue North, Great Falls, Montana\n3. Occupation: Baseball club manager.\n4. Great Falls Baseball\n5. Pertinent hobbies: Observer is not an amateur astronomer, pilot or engineer; however, he has broadcast sporting events and is interested in photography\n6. Ability to determine color, speed and size of moving objects of observer should be relatively good in view of his experience as a sporting events announcer.\n7. Reliability of observer: Enjoys an excellent reputation in the local community and is regarded as a reliable, trustworthy and honest individual.\n8. Notes relative to observer on sightings in general: Mr. Mariana stated to the undersigned that he had read numerous newspaper articles on the subject of flying discs and flying saucers and had not attached very much significance to them. However, Mr. Mariana almost invariably carries a camera in order that he may make \"opportunity pictures\" and had previously thought that if he could see such unconventional aircraft in flight, he would take motion pictures of them.\nb. Observer's attention was definitely drawn to objects by their glint of light.\n9. Witnesses: Miss Virginia Raunig, 112 Second Avenue North, age 19, employed as a secretary. Miss Raunig impressed interrogator as being a fairly reliable individual and of good sound judgment. Miss Raunig confirmed sightings and number of objects and in substance verified Mr. Mariana's statements as regards objects' appearance, shape, speed, sound and direction of flight.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions: On 4 October 1950, Mr. C. Robert Guern, Chief Weather Observer, U. S. Weather Office, Gore Field, Great Falls, Montana, after first examining the teletypesequences of local weather conditions, Great Falls area, stated that there were thin scattered clouds, thirty thousand feet, visibility sixty miles, barometric reading, 1013.9 millibars, temperature seventy-seven degrees, dew point, forty-five degrees, altimeter 30.02 southwesterly winds, twenty-five miles per hour. Time of this teletype sequence was 1130 hours, 15 August 1950.\n\n2. Winds Aloft Report received from Mr. C. Robert Guern, Chief Weather Observer, U. S. Weather Office, Gore Field, Great Falls, Montana, who stated that:\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nPART II\n\nWINDS ALOFT REPORT (Cont'd)\n\nat 0800, surface winds, 290 degrees, 15 miles per hour,\n4000 feet, 270 degrees, 19 miles per hour,\n5000 feet, 240 degrees, 25 miles per hour,\n6000 feet, 250 degrees, 22 miles per hour\n7000 feet, 270 degrees, 22 miles per hour\n8000 feet, 270 degrees, 31 miles per hour\n9000 feet, 260 degrees, 43 miles per hour\n10,000 feet, 260 degrees, 45 miles per hour\n12,000 feet, 260 degrees, 42 miles per hour\n14,000 feet, 260 degrees, 34 miles per hour\n16,000 feet 270 degrees, 34 miles per hour\n18,000 feet, 270 degrees, 33 miles per hour\n20,000 feet, 270 degrees, 36 miles per hour\n25,000 feet, 260 degrees, 26 miles per hour\n\nat 1400 hours, same date, winds aloft readings were:\n\nsurface winds, 230 degrees, 24 miles per hour\n4000 feet, 240 degrees, 25 miles per hour\n5000 feet, 250 degrees, 36 miles per hour\n6000 feet, 250 degrees, 41 miles per hour\n7000 feet, 250 degrees, 40 miles per hour\n8000 feet, 250 degrees, 35 miles per hour\n9000 feet, 260 degrees, 28 miles per hour\n10,000 feet, 260 degrees, 24 miles per hour\n12,000 feet, 260 degrees, 30 miles per hour\n14,000 feet, 260 degrees, 55 miles per hour\n16,000 feet, 250 degrees, 54 miles per hour\n18,000 feet, 260 degrees, 36 miles per hour\n20,000 feet, 260 degrees, 34 miles per hour\n25,000 feet, 260 degrees, 39 miles per hour\n\nThere were no testing devices nor Raysonde devices sent aloft between the hours of 0800 and 1400 hours, 15 August 1950. Raysonde instruments were sent aloft at 0900 and 1400 hours, 15 August 1950 by the U. S. Weather Bureau, Gore Field, Great Falls, Montana. Mr. Guern further stated that there were no celestial phenomena listed in the U. S. Weather Bureau report for the twenty-four hour period 0800 hours, 15 August 1950, to 0800 hours, 16 August 1950.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\n21 November 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To prepare a Memorandum for Director of Naval Intelligence.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n2. A previous Memorandum to Director of Naval Intelligence dated 24 Oct 52 requested a complete analysis of a roll of movie film depicting 10 unidentified flying objects. Full details were given as to the type analysis desired.\n\n3. Another roll of film showing 2 unidentified flying objects is now available. Analysis of this film is desired. Additionally, a comparison with the previous film may prove productive. The attached Memorandum to Director of Naval Intelligence requests that these analyses be made.\n\n4. Subject matter is not considered suitable for inclusion in the Daily Staff Digest.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED:\n\n5. Approval, signature and dispatch of attached Memorandum.\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nAFOIN-2A2, Col Smith, Ext. 71016 [signature]\nAFOIN-2A, Col Adams, Ext. 74072 [signature]\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2 Maj Fournet/fh/75990/Rm 4B 864\nwrtn 24 Oct 52\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 24 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Naval Intelligence\nAttention: Op 322Y5\n\nSUBJECT: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Flying Objects\n\n1. The attached movies (see Incl. 1) are possibly the best documentary evidence yet obtained on unidentified flying objects. They have been analyzed by an Air Force photographic laboratory. However, it is our desire to obtain an independent analysis by a separate laboratory in order that we may better interpret the implications of these data. For this reason, it is requested that as complete an interpretation as possible be rendered by a Navy activity.\n\n2. Circumstances surrounding the photography are summarized in Inclosure 2. Additional details were requested by messages which are included as Inclosures 3 and 5 and were obtained in the replies attached as Inclosures 4 and 6. With regard to Inclosures 5 and 6, the final footage of film referred to has been detached and returned to CPO Newhouse. However, it was deduced from this portion that Newhouse obtained excellent results while handholding the camera; there was almost no camera motion evident. This deduction was applied to the analysis of that portion of the film depicting the motion of the single object which detached itself from the group as explained in Inclosure 2.\n\n3. A list of representative questions for the interpretation is attached as Inclosure 7. These questions are indicative of the type data desired. Any additional data which can be obtained would be most welcome, particularly as concerns the light intensity of the objects, the formations (including three-dimensional renditions, if possible), comments regarding the possibility that the images were caused by aircraft and the conditions which must have prevailed for aircraft to produce such images, etc.\n\n4. It was determined from the Naval Observatory, Washington, D.C. that the position of the sun at the time and location of the photography was 64.5° elevation and 131° azimuth.\n\n5. Your cooperation in satifying this request at the earliest practicable time is earnestly solicited.\n\nX045 Navy Oafsly Capt Matthews 27 Oct 52"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memorandum for: Director of Naval Intelligence, Attn: Op 322Y5\nSubject: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Flying Objects (continued)\n\n6. For additional data or referral of specific questions, Colonel W.H. Smith of the Current Intelligence Branch may be contacted direct. His telephone number is 71016.\n\n7 Incls.\n1. Movie (w/o neg only)\n2. Cy of ltr fr CPO Newhouse\n3. Cy of AFOIN 57264\n4. Cy of CAFIN 65202\n5. Cy of AFOIN 59782\n6. Cy of CAFIN 74096\n7. List of questions\n\nJOHN G. ERIKSEN\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Policy & Management Group\nOffice, Deputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nAFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2x AFOIN-2\n\n2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER\nOAKLAND 4, CALIFORNIA\n\nNT 4-28/8310/177283 11 August 1952\n\nFrom: Chief Photographer Delbert C. Newhouse, 177283, U.S.N.\nTo: Commanding Officer, Hill Air Force Base, Ogden, Utah\n\nSubj: Motion Pictures of Unidentified Objects in Air\n\nEncl: (1) One (1) fifty-foot roll of processed 16mm color motion picture film\n\n1. Enclosure (1) is forwarded herewith for whatever value it may have in connection with your investigation of the so-called \"Flying Saucers\". Pertinent data follows:\n\nPlace: About 7 miles north of Tremonton, Utah on U.S. Highway No. 30S.\n\nTime: 1110 Wednesday 2 July 1952.\n\nCamera: B&H Automaster, magazine load, 3\" telephotolens, 16 frames per second. Handheld.\n\nExposure: First few feet - f:8. Balance - f:16. Clear sun, cloudless sky. EKCo Kodachrome film - Daylight. Exposure was changed with the mistaken idea of darkening the sky to gain greater contrast. The result was merely general under exposures.\n\nGeneral Background: Driving from Washington, D.C. to Portland, Oregon, on the morning of 2 July my wife noticed a group of objects in the sky that she could not identify. She asked me to stop the car and look. There was a group of about ten or twelve objects - that bore no relation to anything I had seen before - milling about in a rought formation and proceeding in a westerly direction. I opened the luggage compartment of the car and got my camera out of a suitcase. Loading it hurriedly, I exposed approximately thirty feet of film. There was no reference point in the sky and it was impossible for me to make any estimate of speed, size, altitude or distance. Toward the end one of the objects reversed course and proceeded away from the group. I held the camera still and allowed this single one to cross the field of view, picking it up again and repeating for three or four such passes. By this time all of the objects had disappeared. I expended the balance of the film late that afternoon on a mountain somewhere in Idaho.\n\n/s/\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n\nEncl 2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Copy of TWX No. AFOIN-57264\n\nFrom: HQ USAF, WASH, DC\nTo: CG WADF\nHamilton AFB, California\n\nATTN: DIR OF INTELL. REPORT OF UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS AND INCLOSED MOVIE FILM ON SIGHTING 2 JUL 52 NEAR TREMONTON, UTAH RECEIVED THIS HEADQUARTERS 5 SEP 52 FROM CPO DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, 177283, USN, STATIONED AT AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT, NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, OAKLAND, CALIF. REQUEST NEWHOUSE BE INTERVIEWED AS SOON AS PRACTICAL BY AN INTELLIGENCE OFFICER AND THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION OBTAINED:\n\n(1) ANY SOUND HEARD DURING OBSERVATION? IF SO, DESCRIBE.\n(2) ANY EXHAUST TRAILS OR CONTRAILS SEEN AT ANY TIME DURING OBSERVATION? IF SO DESCRIBE.\n(3) WERE ANY AIRCRAFT, BIRDS, BALLOONS OR OTHER IDENTIFIABLE OBJECTS SEEN IN AIR IMMEDIATELY BEFORE, DURING OR IMMEDIATELY AFTER OBSERVATION? IF SO, GIVE DETAILS.\n(4) DID SINGLE OBJECT WHICH DETACHED ITSELF FROM GROUP HEAD IN DIRECTION OPPOSITE TO ORIGINAL COURSE AND DID IT DISAPPEAR FROM VIEW WHILE STILL TRAVELLING IN THIS DIRECTION?\n(5) AT APPROXIMATELY WHAT ELEVATION AND IN WHAT DIRECTION (BEARING) WAS CAMERA POINTED DURING EXPOSURE OF FILM?\n(6) WHAT WAS POSITION OF SUN RELATIVE TO OBJECTS AND TO HIM?\n(7) WHAT WERE WEATHER CONDITIONS? APPROXIMATE TEMPERATURE? HAZY OR CLEAR? WIND DIRECTION AND SPEED?\n(8) ANY METEOROLOGICAL ACTIVITY NOTICED DURING THAT DAY?\n(9) DOES HE HAVE ANY OPINION REGARDING FOLLOWING:\n\nenc 3"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(a) WAS LIGHT FROM OBJECTS CAUSED BY REFLECTION OR WERE THEY SOURCE OF LIGHT?\n(b) SHAPE OF OBJECTS?\n(c) WERE THEY ALL APPROXIMATELY THE SAME SHAPE?\n(d) COLOR OF OBJECTS?\n(e) WERE THEY ALL SAME COLOR?\n(f) TYPE MOTION ATTRIBUTABLE TO OBJECTS, BOTH ABOUT OWN AXES AND AXIS OF FLIGHT PATH?\n(g) DID ALL OBJECTS HAVE SAME TYPE MOTION?\n(h) HOW DID OBJECTS DISAPPEAR FROM VIEW?\n(10) WAS ANY FILTER USED ON CAMERA?\n(11) REMEMBER ANY LANDMARKS AROUND LOCATION WHICH WOULD FACILITATE FINDING IT IN FUTURE?\n(12) KNOW OF ANYONE ELSE WHO SIGHTED OBJECTS?\n(13) EVER SIGHTED UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS BEFORE? IF SO, OBTAIN DETAILS IAW PAR 7c OF AFL 200-5.\n\nADDITIONALLY, DESIRE INTERVIEWING OFFICER FURNISH ESTIMATE RELIABILITY AND PHOTOGRAPHIC PROFICIENCY OF NEWHOUSE. AFL 200-5 MAY AID IN CONDUCTING INTERVIEW. REQUEST INFORMATION BE FORWARDED BY ELECTRICAL MEANS AS SOON AS AVAILABLE TO ATIC WITH INFORMATION THIS HEADQUARTERS. IN RESPONSE REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2. Restricted."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Copy TWX CAFIN 65202\nR 121650Z ZNJ\nFM CG 28TH AD HAFB CALIF\nTO CHIEF ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OHIO\nINFO CG ADC ENT AFB COLO SPRINGS COLO\nUSAF WASHINGTON 25 DC\nCG WADF HAFB CALIF\nRESTRICTED/9171. ATTN DIR OF INTEL. IN REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2 AND WADF MSG WDOID 29149 FOL INFO REQ BY HQ USAF HAS BEEN OBTAINED BY INTERVIEW WITH CPO DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE. 177273, AVN SUP DEP, NAVAL SUP CEN, OAKLAND, CALIF REGARDING UNIDENTIFIED BLY OBJS AND MOVIE FILM ON SIGHTING 2 JUL 52 NEAR TREMONTON, UTAH. CPO NEWHOUSE, HIS WIFE, SON AND DAUGHTER WERE ALL INTERVIEWED AT THE NEWHOUSE HOME IN BERKELEY, CALIF ON 10 SEP 52 BY DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, 28TH AIR DIV (DEF). FOL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 1 THRU 13 IN USAF REQUEST ARE SUBMITTED:\n1. NO SOUND HEARD DURING OBSERVATION. 2. NO EXHAUST TRAILS OR CONTRAILS OBSERVED. 3. NO AIRCRAFT, BIRDS, BALLOONS, OR OTHER IDENTIFIABLE OBJECTS SEEN IN AIR IMMEDIATELY BEFORE, DURING, OR IMMEDIATELY AFTER OBSERVATION. 4. SINGLE OBJECT WHICH DETACHED ITSELF FROM GROUP DID HEAD IN DIRECTION OPPOSITE ORIGINAL COURSE AND DISAPPEARED FROM VIEW WHILE STILL TRAVELING IN THIS DIRECTION. 5. CAMERA POINTED AT ESTIMATED 70 DEGREES ELEVATION AND DESCRIBED AND ARC FROM APPROX DUE EAST TO DUE WEST THEN FROM DUE WEST TO APPROX 60 DEGREES FROM NORTH IN PHOTOGRAPHING DETACHED OBJ HEADING IN DIRECTION OPPOSITE ORIGINAL COURSE. 6. SUN WAS APPROX OVERHEAD OF OBSERVER. OBJECTS WERE AT APPROX 70 DEGREES ABOVE TRRAIN ON A COURSE SEVERAL MILES FROM OBSERVER. 7. WEATHER CONDITIONS: BRIGHT SUNLIGHT, CLEAR, APPROX 80 DEGREES TEMPERATURE, SLIGHT BREEZE FROM EAST NORTH EAST APPROX 3 TO 5 MPH. 8. NO METEOROLOGICAL ACTIVITY NOTED DURING THAT DAY. 9. OPINION REGARDING FOLLOWING CIN A. LIGHT FROM OBJECTS CAUSED BY REFLECTION: B. OBJECTS"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APPEARED APPROX AS LONG AS THEY WERE WIDE AND THIN. C. APPEARED IDENTICAL IN SHAPE. D. 12 TO 14 OBJECTS. E. ALL APPEARED LIGHT COLOR. F. NO OPINION. G. APPEARED TO HAVE SAME TYPE OF MOTION EXCEPT FOR ONE OBJECT WHICH REVERSED ITS COURSE. H. DISAPPEARED FROM VIEW BY MOVING OUT OF RANGE OF EYESIGHT. 10. NO FILTERS USED. 11. ONE LOW HILL 2 OR 3 MILES TO RIGHT OF US HWY 30 DASH S WITH OBSERVER FACING NORTH. LOCATED APPROX 10 MILES NORTH TREMONTON, UTAH. 12. OTHER PERSONS SIGHTING OBJECTS WERE: MRS. D. C. NEWHOUSE, WIFE: DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, JR, SON, AGE 14: ANNE NEWHOUSE, DAUGHTER, AGE 12. WHOLE NEWHOUSE FAMILY INCLUDED IN INTERVIEW. 13. CPO NEWHOUSE AND FAMILY HAVE NEVER SIGHTED UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS BEFORE. NEWHOUSE STATED THAT HE NEVER BELIEVED HE WOULD JOIN RANKS OF THOSE REPORTING SUCH OBJECTS PRIOR TO THIS OBSERVATION. CPO NEWHOUSE AND MRS. NEWHOUSE APPEARED TO BE EXTREMELY HONEST AND RELIABLE PERSONS. CPO NEWHOUSE STATED HE HAS BEEN IN THE NAVAL SERVICE FOR OVER 19 YEARS WITH SERVICE AS A COMMISSIONED OFFICER DURING WW 2. NEWHOUSE IS GRADUATE OF NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC SCHOOL IN 1935 AND CLAIMS OVER 1000 HOURS IN THE AIR AS A PHOTOGRAPHER ON ACTUAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH MISSIONS. NEWHOUSE ALSO DOES CONSIDERABLE GROUND PHOTOGRAPHY. IT IS BELIEVED NEWHOUSE COULD BE CLASSIFIED AS AN EXPERT PHOTOGRAPHER."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FROM: HQ USAF\n7 Oct 52 RESTRICTED\nACTION: ROUTINE INFO: ROUTINE\nTO: CG28th AIRDIV HAMILTON AFB CALIF CRYPTOPRECAUTION: NO\nINFO: CHIEF ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OHIO IDENTIFICATION: 9171 is CAF IN 65202 (12 Sep 52)\nCLASSIFICATION: [REDACTED]\nFROM: AFOIN 59782\nATTENTION: Director of Intelligence. Reference your message 9171 dated 12 Sep 52. Request CPO Newhouse be asked following additional question: Was tripod used to photograph mountain scene in Idaho which appears on final footage of film in question? Forward information by electrical means to ATIC with information this headquarters. In response reply to AFOIN-2A2\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION: RESTRICTED PAGE 1\nDRAFTER'S NAME: Maj. Dewey J. Fournet\nRELEASING OFFICER'S SIGNATURE: DONALD E BEEBE, Captain, USAF Executive Officer, Topical Division Deputy Director for Estimates Directorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nAFOIN-2A2\nTELEPHONE: 75990"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY RESTRICTED\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nSTAFF MESSAGE DIVISION\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGE\n[REDACTED]\nCAFIN 74096\nFM JWPML/CG 28th AIR DIV (DEF) HAMILTON AFB, CALIF.\nTO JEDWP/CHIEF, ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO\nINFO: JWPHQ/DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, HQ USAF, WASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n/RESTRICTED/ 9171 IN REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2 FOLLOWING INFORMATION REQUESTED BY HQ USAF HAS BEEN OBTAINED BY TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH CPO DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, 177273, AVN SUP DEP, NAVAL SUP CENTER, OAKLAND, CALIF. REGARDING AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION ABOUT MOVIE FILM ON UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT SIGHTING ON 2 JULY 1952. QUESTION: \"WAS TRIPOD USED TO [REDACTED] PHOTOGRAPH MOUNTAIN SCENE IN IDAHO WHICH APPEARS ON FINAL FOOTAGE OF FILM IN QUESTION\"? ANSWER: NEGATIVE, ENTIRE ROLL OF FILM WAS HANDHELD.\nINFO: OIN\nCAF IN: 74096 (10 Oct 52)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUGGESTED POINTS FOR ANALYSIS\nThe following questions are suggested for guidance regarding the general type of analysis desired:\n1. Are images made by light source or reflection?\n2. Any indication of what kind of objects could have caused images? Is there any bird sufficiently actinic to cause images? Could they have been caused by aircraft or balloons?\n3. What causes impression that some objects at times appear to become 2 or 3 where there was originally one, or, conversely, 2 or 3 objects at times appear to merge into one.\n4. Do all objects have same characteristics?\na. Same apparent shape?\nb. Same Color?\nc. Same relative size?\nd. Same general motion?\n5. What are shape(s), color(s) and relative size(s) of objects?\n6. To what can the \"fade-in\" and \"fade-out\" of the objects be attributed?\n7. What type motion is attributable to the objects about their own axis as well as about axis of flight path)?\n8. Is there any accelleration evident in their motion along light path axis?\n9. Can the motion of the camera (panning and joggling) be allowed for sufficiently to permit determination of the angular velocity of objects which cross the field of view? (Reference particularly the single object which crosses field; photographer states that camera was held motionless while object crossed field of view.)"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"10. Determine patterns of flight from position plots for each\nframe, then:\n\na. Is there any recurring pattern in the relative position\nof the objects?\nb. Do they maintain same relative positions in formation during\nany maneuvers, particularly violent maneuvers?\nc. Is relative position maintained coincidental with movement\nabout their axis?\nd. If undulating motion is present among a number of objects\nwhich are maintaining a semblance of formation, do those\nobjects undulate in phase? Ditto for tumbling motion?\ne. Is there any indication of abrupt changes in direction\nof flight path through fairly large angles (e.g. 90 degrees\nor more during interval of 2 or 3 frames)?\nf. Do any objects appear to remain motionless at the same time\nthat others move about?\ng. Can all objects be accounted for at all times or do some\nliterally disappear while still well within field of view?"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Transmittal of Correspondence 24 NOV 1952\nDept of the Air Force\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nChief, Air Technical\nIntelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nCapt Laidlaw/77648\nAFOIN-1B3\n\nAFOIN-1B3/Capt Laidlaw/eeb/77648\nwrtn 24 Nov 52\n\nForwarded as a matter pertaining to your Center.\n\n1 Incl\nLtr fr I.C. Hoyer,\nEugene, Oregon, dtd 10 Nov 52\n\n/s/\nJ. C. McANINCH\nMajor, USAF\nChief, Documents Branch\nDissemination Control Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nx312 Correspondence\nx322.7ATIC\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n\nAFOIN-1B3\nCapt Laidlaw\nMaj McAninch"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 21 November 1952\nMaj Fournet/tmw/75990\n\n(Uncl)\nCorrespondence from Messrs. Oliver Amlie, Harvey S. Gersenfish and Edmond LeRoy.\n\nExecutive,\nDirectorate of Research and Development, DCS/O\nAttention: Maj Forsman\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\n21 November 1952\n1\nMaj Fournet/tmw/75990\n\n1. Inclosures are forwarded as a matter of primary interest. No replies have been made by this office.\n\n2. Mr. Amlie submitted a previous letter pertaining to the alleged observation of a \"flying saucer\". It was acknowledged by this office.\n\n3. Mr. LeRoy corresponded with us a few months ago and claimed to have available some information on flying saucers which would be of interest to the USAF. Our reply to him stated that we found it impossible to contact him personally as he requested.\n\nx360.2 Research & Development\nSIGNED\n\n3 Incls (w/orig only)\n1. Ltr fr Oliver Amlie to Col Adams dtd 25 Oct 52\n2. Diagram of flying saucer fr Harvey S. Gersenfish Cincinnati 37, Ohio\nLtr fr Edmond L. LeRoy to Col Adams dtd 11 Oct 52\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nAFOIN 2A2 AFOIN 2A\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\n20 Nov 52\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical\nIntelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\n\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\n\n1. Inclosures are for your information, appropriate action and retention.\n\n2. Request preparation of 3rd Ind to Incl 1 acknowledging receipt.\n\n3. No reply has been made to Mr. Boutelle.\n\n4. Incl 4 is a copy of the reply made by General Bradley's office to Incl 3. Further action is not recommended.\n\n5. There were no previous reports from the sources who prepared Incls 5 and 6. Questionnaires were supplied by and returned to this office and constitute the only known record of these observations.\n\n6 Incls (w/orig only)\n1. Ltr fr 78th Air Base Sqdn Truax Field, Madison, Wis. dtd 4 Nov 52 w/1st & 2nd Inds.\n2. Ltr fr Arthur Boutelle, Patterson, N.J. dtd 9 Nov 52\n3. Ltr to Gen Omar Bradley fr Argyrios Kouzas, Thessaloniki, Greece dtd 24 Oct 52\n4. Cy of reply to Mr. Kouzas fr Gen Bradley dtd 29 Oct 52\n5. Questionnaire submitted by L/C Milton Morris Kaufmann, Falls Church, Va.\n6. Questionnaire submitted by Mrs. Carol Sprague, Vineland, N.J.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nx322.7ATIC\n\nNo M/R necessary."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOV 20 1952\n\nMrs. Rose Marie Holtz\n346 First Street\nNiagara Falls, New York\n\nDear\nMrs. Holtz:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbw/71379\nW/18 November 1952\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force\nIntelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN Maj Fournet/dbw/71379\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. Inclosures are for your information, appropriate action and retention.\n\n2. A letter of acknowledgement was sent to Mrs. Scott (see Incl 1). A questionnaire was inclosed for her to complete and mail to you.\n\n3. Mr. Zimmerman's letter (Incl 2) was also acknowledged. He was informed that the data which he supplied would be referred to you.\n\n4. Mrs. Zepp submitted the record of her observations (Incl 3) at our invitation. A copy of our letter of acknowledgment is attached as Incl 4.\n\n5. Incl 6 is a copy of our reply to Mr. Gorman's letter (Incl 5). These are for your information and require no further action.\n\n6 Incls (w/orig only)\n1. Ltr fr Mrs. Grace Scott, Birmingham, Ala dtd 27 Oct 52\n2. Ltr fr Mr. E.C. Zimmerman, Akron, Ohio dtd 30 Oct 52\n3. Ltr fr Mrs. C.R. Zepp, Hyattsville, Md dtd 8 Nov 52\n4. Ltr to Mrs. C.R. Zepp\n5. Ltr fr Mr. Robert J. Gorman, Chicago, Ill dtd 29 Oct 52\n6. Cy of ltr to Mr. Gorman, dtd 12 Nov 52\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2A2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Maj Fournet/AFOIN-2A2\nAC/71379\n14 November 1952\n\nMr. Narvel W. Reece\n1578 Van Fandt Road\nCincinnati 31, Ohio\n\nDear Mr. Reece:\n\nYour letter of 21 October 1952 to the Federal Bureau of Investigation was referred to us for attention.\n\nWe have studied the photograph and negative which you submitted and are happy to advise you that the \"object\" which appears on the former is a flaw or blemish resulting from the printing process. This is confirmed by the absence of a similar image on the negative.\n\nYour action in this matter was most commendable.\n\nWe are returning your negative and photograph as requested.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n2 Incls. (W/Orig. Only)\n1. Photograph\n2. Negative\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A AFOIN-2A2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbw/71379\nw/14 Nov 52\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force\nIntelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN Maj Fournet/dbw/71379\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. Inclosures are for your information, appropriate action and retention.\n\n2. Incls 2, 3, 4 and 5 were furnished by the Director of Special Investigations, this Headquarters. The latter informs that no investigative action is contemplated in regard to Incl 2 and that their files contain no additional information on Incls 3 and 4. Incl 5 is supplementary to the information on the Townsend Brown Foundation forwarded to you by DF dated 16 Oct 52.\n\n3. The movie film referred to in Incls 6 and 7 was duplicated by this office (4 copies). One copy is attached for your files. An attempt will be made to have it analyzed by the Navy in conjunction with their analysis of the movies taken 2 July 52 near Tremonton, Utah.\n\n4. Your attention is invited to the third paragraph of Incl 9; the original letter is attached as Incl 10. Further action in this matter is left to your discretion.\n\n5. Incl 11 was received over the Associated Press wire on 17 Oct 52 and may be useful in evaluating reports from the area mentioned.\n\n11 Incls (w/orig only)\n1. Cy of rept of sighting in Chicago on 19 Oct 52\n2. Photostat cy of ltr fr Johnnie L. Last, Green Bay, Wis. dtd 24 Sep 52\n3. Cy of ltr fr OSI, NY, NY dtd 20 Oct 52\n4. Cy of ltr fr Walter Wrobleski Marshall, Tex dtd 13 Oct 52\n5. Photostat cy of Credit info re Brown Townsend Foundation dtd 22 Aug 52 (in trip)\n6. Cy of ltr to CO, 1701st Air Trans Wg, Gt Falls AFB, Mont dt 14 Nov 52\n7. Cy of ltr to Mr. Mariana dtd 14 Nov 52\n8. 16 mm movie film\n9. Cy of ltr to Mr. Burgess, Black Mt, N.C.\n10. Ltr fr Mr. Burgess, Black Mt, N.C. dtd 13 Oct 52\n11. Ap Press Releases\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nWhen incl(s) No. 5 is/are withdrawn (or not attached), the Confidential classification of this correspondence will be downgraded to Restricted in accordance with Par 25e, AFR 205-1.\n\nCOORDINATION:AFOIN-2A2\nAFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Maj Fournet/AFOIN-2A2\nAC/71379\n14 November 1952\n\nMrs. C. R. Zepp\n6401 Medwick Drive\nHampshire Knolls\nHyattsville, Maryland\n\nDear Mrs. Zepp:\n\nWe have received your letter of 8 November 1952 with the record of observations attached. We are very grateful to you for making these available to us.\n\nThe records are being sent to our Air Technical Intelligence Center at Dayton, Ohio for careful study. Should they desire additional information from you, they will correspond directly with you.\n\nOnce again we extend our sincere thanks for your assistance.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A AFOIN-2A2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Maj Fournet/AFOIN-2A2\nAC/71379\n10 November 1953\n\nMr. E. C. Zimmerman\n145 S. Firestone Blvd.\nAkron 19, Ohio\n\nDear Mr. Zimmerman:\n\nI have your letter of 30 October 1952 with its very useful data. It will be forwarded to our Air Technical Intelligence Center for use in their analysis of the incident, and I know that they will be very pleased to receive it.\n\nWe are most grateful for your splendid efforts on our behalf.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A AFOIN-2A2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Maj Fournet/AFOIN-2A2\nAC/71379\n10 November 1952\n\nNOV 1 2 1952\n\n0009 Flying Saucers\n\nMrs. Bluford Scott\n732 Eighth Court W.\nBirmingham, Alabama\n\nDear Mrs. Scott:\n\n\tIn answer to the request in your letter of 27 October 1952, we enclose a questionnaire on unidentified flying objects. When you have completed it, place it in the attached envelope and mail it; no postage is required.\n\n\tWe appreciate the initiative which you have displayed in bringing this matter to our attention.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n2 Incls. (W/original only)\n1. Questionnaire\n2. Addressed Envelope\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nAFOIN-2A\t\tAFOIN-2A2\n\nAFOIN-2A Coordination Copy"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Maj Fournet/AFOIN-2A2\nAC/71379\n12 November 1952\n\nNOV 12 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Saucers\n\nMr. Robert J. Gorman\nSuite 1468\nFirst National Bank Bldg.\n38 South Dearborn Street\nChicago 3, Illinois\n\nDear Mr. Gorman:\n\n\tYour letter of 29 October 1952 to the President has been referred to the USAF since, within the Department of Defense, the USAF has primary interest in investigation of \"flying saucer\" reports. It is gratifying to receive such expression of interest from public-minded individuals. In your case, we are grateful for the opportunity to correct a misapprehension.\n\n\tThe USAF has not prepared any recent report arriving at any conclusions with respect to the existence or nonexistence of \"flying saucers\". It is believed that Mr. Robert S. Allen, in his article of September 26, referred to a report prepared for public release by a private group of civilians. In commenting on this, the USAF stated that the report reflected the conclusions of individuals who were in no way connected with the Air Force. We take this opportunity to reiterate this to you.\n\n\tIt is true that the statements of Mr. DesVergers were startling; however, a thorough investigation of the incident has been conducted and it has been determined that the sensational aspects of the original stories carried by the national press agencies were exaggerated. Further, the USAF made no attempt to restrict Mr. DesVergers' discussion or personal exploitation of the alleged incident; this he admitted in an Associated Press dispatch datelined West Palm Beach, Florida, August 27, 1952.\n\n\tThe Air Force is actively interested in the investigation of \"flying saucer\" incidents. No facts have been withheld from the public. The investigators hope to reach some conclusions concerning the existence and source of the objects. To date, sufficient evidence is not available to support any firm conclusions. I am confident that when scientific analysis of available evidence supports a conclusion, the public will be duly informed.\n\n\tIt is sincerely hoped that these comments will allay your concern on this subject. The manner in which you have sought an answer to"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"your questions and the interest that you as a citizen have shown in this matter is appreciated. If we may be of any further service to you, please do not hesitate to write again.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nAFOIN-2A\t\tAFOIN-2A2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tCOPY\n\nOctober 29, 1952\n\nPresident Harry Truman\nWhite House\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. President:\n\n\tPermit me to take the liberty of writing you on \"flying saucers\".\n\n\tIt is becoming generally known that the Air Force has a report concluding that flying saucers originate from sources outside this planet. Articles like that of Robert S. Allen, dated Sept. 26th are being photostated and circulated privately. The statements of Mr. DesVergers of West Palm Beach, Florida, concerning his flying saucer experience and what he was told by the military and other incidents have convinced many including myself that the \"saucers\" are real and interplanetary.\n\n\tI think it is unfortunate that a matter which is of such great import must be investigated privately by citizens who would like to and should be permitted to cooperate with and analyze with their government and military authorities. I think people who are afraid to tell the people of the possibilities of the flying saucers should bolster their faith in the people of this country and democracy.\n\n\tI hope you unveil the secrecy of the air force report. I also hope you decide that this is not a matter of military secrecy and that events concerning flying saucers be made available to the public as they unfold.\n\n\tVery truly yours,\n\n\tRobert J. Gorman\n\nRJG:im\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\nWrtn 10 Nov 52\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical\nIntelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\n\nNOV 12 1952\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\n\n1. Inclosures were received from the Director of Special Investigations, this Headquarters and are for your information and retention.\n\n2. A fourth report, file 24-8-41 from OSI DO #17 dated 8 Oct 52 and regarding sighting at Tuscon, Arizona on 2 Sep 52 by a USAF M/Sgt, was not forwarded since you were indicated as the action addressee by the originator and should have received a copy direct.\n\n3 Incls (w/orig only)\n1. AIIR, Form 112, dtd 9 Oct 52\n2. AIIR, Form 112, dtd 15 Oct 52\n3. Ltr fr DO #2, dtd 16 Oct 52\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nWhen incl(s) No. ____ is/are withdrawn (or not attached), the ____ classification of this correspondence will be downgraded to ____ in accordance with Par 25e, AFR 205-1.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN Coordination Copy"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\nWrtn 13 Nov 52\n\n(Unclassified) Return of Project Blue Book Material\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center Wright-Patterson AFB Ohio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\nNOV 14 1952\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\n\n1. The file on the sighting at Austin, Texas on 8 June 52, previously borrowed from ATIAA-5, is returned herewith.\n\n2. The Photographic Division, AFCAG, made a set of color duplicates (enlarged) which is attached for your retention (Incl 3). Black and white reproductions previously attached to the file are also included in Incl 3. In addition, the Photographic Division made a number of black and white enlargements which are attached for your retention (Incl 4).\n\n3. Based on further analysis, the Photographic Division and this office do not agree with the WADC evaluation of parhelions (\"sun dogs\") since the images do not appear at the required angle of 22° or 46° nor are they in line horizontally with the sun as would be required for the formation of a parhelion (which would appear at the intersection of the inner or outer halo circles - 22° and 46° respectively - with the parhelic circle; the latter is in a horizontal plane coincidental with the position of the sun). Additionally, it will be noted in the photographs that the images display a flat portion which appears inverted from the corresponding portion of the sun behind the cloud. Since a parhelion is the result of refraction through ice crystals, the resulting image would not be inverted. Instead, it is our opinion that the images are possibly a form of mirage caused by a hot air mass which traveled from left to right across the field of view and acted as a lens. However, there is a small image in the third photograph of the sequence which, if evaluated as another image of the same type, would seemingly eliminate both parhelia and mirages from consideration. This image is located directly above the seventh telephone pole from the right at a vertical distance approximately equal to the height of the pole. The minute size of this image militates strongly against the mirage theory since the hot air mass would have had to turn about 90° and proceed away from the camera in order to produce this effect. Therefore, further analysis appears to be justified. Suggest the consultant astronomer be asked for an opinion.\n\n4. Recommend that the original photographs (Incl 2) be returned to the owner immediately as requested in the report covering this incident.\n\n4 Incls (w/orig only)\n1. 8 Jun 52, Austin, Tex Sighting File Folder\n2. Envelope containing 4 transparencies\n3. \" \" color duplicates\n4. \" \" blk & white enlargements\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R necessary, self-explanatory.\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Clyde E. Howard\n2544 3/4 Cudahy\nHuntington Park, California\n\nDear Mr. Howard:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A AFOIN-2A2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nMaj Fournet/AFOIN-2A2\nAC/71379/6 November 1952\n\n(Uncl) Material for Project Blue Book\nDept. of the Air Force\nHeadquarters USAF - AFOIN\nNOV 7 1952\nMaj Fournet/AC/71379\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. Inclosed letters are for your information, appropriate action and attention.\n\n2. No replies of any kind have been made by this office.\n\n3. Particular attention is invited to inclosure one. If Ensign Frey is to be sent a questionnaire, this should be done as soon as possible since he advises that he will depart from his present location about 25 November 1952.\n\n8 Incls. (W/original only)\n1. Ltr fm Robert H. Frey dtd 27 Oct 52\n2. Ltr fm Isabel A. Gold dtd 6 Sep 52\n3. Ltr fm Miss Daisy McNeill dtd 20 Oct 52\n4. Ltr fm Miss Ida E. Valentine dtd 14 Oct 52\n5. Ltr fm Miss Ida E. Valentine dtd 15 Oct 52\n6. Ltr fm Robert Koehler dtd 23 Oct 52\n7. Ltr fm George M. Garrison dtd 22 Oct 52\n8. Ltr fm Arthur Halsted dtd 17 Oct 52\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A AFOIN-2A2\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/AC/71379\n5 November 1952\n\nMr. Walter B. Burgess\nBox 147\nBlack Mountain, North Carolina\n\nDear Mr. Burgess:\n\nBecause the Air Force has been designated the responsibility for the investigation and analysis of \"flying saucers\", the Secretary of Defense referred your letter of 13 October 1952 to us for consideration.\n\nWe find your proposal extremely edifying and desire to commend you for your great patriotism. Unfortunately, however, we cannot accept your generous offer at this time since there is no provision which allows us to increase our current organization, and your services could not be utilized without some provision of this nature.\n\nNonetheless, we are forwarding your letter to our Air Technical Intelligence center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, for future reference. Should they find that your proposal can be entertained in the future, they will contact you direct.\n\nYour interest and cooperation are a source of great satisfaction to the Air Force, and we hope that future developments will allow reconsideration of your offer to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2a AFOIN-2A2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\nWrtn 4 November 52\nRewrtn 5 November 1952\n\nMr. Edmond L. LeRoy\n36 Fifth Street\nOld Bridge, New Jersey\n\nDear Mr. LeRoy:\n\nGeneral Samford sincerely appreciated your letter of 30 July 1952 and has asked me to convey his thanks to you. We apologize for the long delay in acknowledging its receipt, but we have received such a large volume of correspondence from many citizens with similar patriotic motivation that we have found it impossible to be as prompt as we would like.\n\nWith respect to your invitation to assist us further, we are very appreciative but regret that it will be impossible to contact you personally on this matter.\n\nThank you very much for your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbw/71379\nWrtn 5 Nov 52\n\nNOV 5 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nAFOIN Coordination copy\n\nMrs. C. R. Zepp\n6401 Medwick Drive\nNorth Hampshire Knolls\nMaryland\n\nDear Mrs. Zepp:\n\nWe have a message which you left with our duty officer on 26 October 1952 concerning strange lights which you have sighted over the past few months. During your conversation you indicated that you had a record of all such observations and would be willing to submit it to a duly authorized individual.\n\nWe are interested in the record and would be very grateful if you would submit it to us by mail. You may address it to: Directorate of Intelligence, Headquarters USAF, Washington 25, D. C., ATTN: AFOIN-2A2.\n\nYour interest and cooperation are appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nZepp, Mrs. C. R.\n\n1 Incl\nself addressed\nenvelope (franked)\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Maj Fournet/AFOIN-2A2\ntmw/71379/6 Nov 52\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Uncl) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept. of the Air Force\nHeadquarters USAF - AFOIN\n\nMaj Fournet/tmw/71379\n\n1. Inclosures are for your information, appropriate action and retention.\n\n2. Inclosures 1 and 2 were received from the Directorate of Operations, DCS/O, this Headquarters. They state that Mr. Myers' letter and the clipping were referred to them by Congressman J. E. Van Zandt. Acknowledgments have been made to Congressman Van Zandt and Mr. Myers. Director of Legislation and Liaison, this Headquarters, has been furnished copies of entire file.\n\n3. Request receipt of inclosure 3 be acknowledged by indorsement direct to originator.\n\n4. Inclosures 4, 5, 6 and 7 were submitted by Miss Mary B. Hayden, an intelligence analyst assigned to Headquarters Air Resupply and Communication Service, Washington, D.C. A previous memorandum from Miss Hayden was forwarded by DF dated 5 June 52. Acknowledgment has been made by personal contact with Miss Hayden.\n\n7 Incls\n1. Ltr fm C.W. Myers dtd 6 October 1952\n2. Cy of Newspaper Clipping\n3. Ltr fm Brooks AFB dtd 10 October 1952 (in quad)\n4. Ltr fm M.B. Hayden dtd 2 October 1952\n5. Ltr fm M.B. Hayden dtd 3 October 1952\n6. Ltr fm M.B. Hayden dtd 17 October 1952\n7. Ltr fm M.B. Hayden dtd 17 October 1952\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A AFOIN-2A2\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Major Fournet/AFOIN-2A2\nAC/4B-864/27 Oct 52\n\n30 OCT 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nAFOIN-Coordination Cy\n\nMr. Gerald W. Harrington\nc/o Edwards and Angell\n15 Westminster Street\nProvidence 3, Rhode Island\n\nDear Mr. Harrington:\n\nWe have received your letter of 9 October 1952 in which you reported the observation of an unidentified flying object. It is presently in the hands of our intelligence analysts for their study.\n\nYour action in reporting your observation in detail and in determining the ship's position at the time are a source of great satisfaction to us. I would, therefore, like to express the appreciation of the Air Force for your initiative and efforts on our behalf.\n\nSincerely,\n\nHarrington, Mr. Gerald W.\n\nC. M. YOUNG\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Policy & Management Group\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2X AFOIN"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A\nMajor Fournet/AC/71379\n27 October 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To prepare a non-military letter to Mr. Gerald W. Harrington of Providence, Rhode Island.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n2. In a letter to the USAF dated 9 Oct 52 Mr. Harrington describes in detail an observation of an unidentified flying object made aboard the SS Caronia on 5 Oct 52. The data which he includes is somewhat remarkable in that it is very unusual to receive such details from the ordinary citizen. He even took the trouble to write the ship's captain at a later date and obtain the ship's location at the time of the observation.\n\n3. A reply to Mr. Harrington is attached.\n\n4. Subject matter is not considered suitable for inclusion in the Daily Staff Digest.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED:\n\n5. Because of Mr. Harrington's prominent professional position and the excellence of his report, it is strongly recommended that the attached reply be signed by General Samford.\n\n6. Approval, signature and dispatch of attached reply.\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nAFOIN-2A\nAFOIN-2\nAFOIN"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\n\nRECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE\nTYPE\nCLASSIFICATION\n\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO\nDATE RECD\n\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS\nTO: AFOIN-2X\nDATE 27 Oct 52\nFROM: AFOIN-2A\nNO. 1\n\nREMARKS:\n\nThe attached correspondence is forwarded for coordination and transmittal to OIN for signature and dispatch.\n\nAFOIN-2A\n\nAFOIN No. 562\n\nTO: OIN X\nFROM: OIN 2X\n\n29 Oct 52\n2\n\nIN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\nAFOIN AFOIN-2\nAFOIN-X AFOIN-2A\nADMIN ASST\nM&R AFOIN2B ASST EXEC\nAFOIN-1 AFOIN-3 EXEC\nAIR/INT\n\nX ACTION COORDINATION\nAction Asgd to: DATE:\nSigned: DATE:\nDispatch File: Date: 30 Oct 52\n\nAFHQ Form 0-86 Previous Editions of the Form are Obsolete 20 Nov 50\n51 25247"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Major Fournet/AFOIN-2A2\nAC/4B-864/27 Oct 52\n(Uncl) Material for Project Blue Book\nATIC\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN-2A2\nMajor Fournet/71379\n1. Inclosed letter is for your information and retention.\n2. A reply to Mr. Harrington was made by this office.\n1 Incl (With Original Only)\nOriginal copy of letter\nfrom Mr. Harrington\nWELDON H. SMITH\nColonel, USAF\nActg, Chief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\nChief, Air Technical\nIntelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\nDept of the Air Force\nHqs USAF - AFOIN\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\n1. Reference our DF dated 11 Sep 52, subject: \"Investigation of Incident of 1/2 Sep 52 Arlington Va., having possible relation to Project Blue Book\", the inclosed report was received from OSI and is for your information and retention.\n2. It will be noted that the report explains this incident completely.\n1 Incl: W/orig only\nRpt fr OSI\ndtd 6 Oct 52\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Intelligence Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nWhen incl(s) No. 1 is/are graded Confidential the of this graded to Restricted in accordance with Par 29b, AFR 205-1."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 22 Oct 52\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\nChief, Air Technical\nIntelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\nDept of the Air Force\nHqs USAF-AFOIN\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\n1. Inclosed report was furnished by OSI and is for your information and retention.\n2. The inconsistencies between the visual description reported by the observer and the attached photograph are obvious, viz. the time reported as 1000 hours while the photograph was evidently taken at night; the reported shape and relative size as compared with the image in the photograph, etc.\n3. The Photographic Division of AFCAG has evaluated the \"object\" as a light fixture superimposed on the background through double-exposure.\n1. Incl: (in dup.) w/orig. only\nPhoto cy Spot Intel Rpt\ndtd 3 Oct 52 w/attchd photo\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence,DCS/O\nNO M/R\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/71379/cmb\nWrtn 22 Oct 52\n\"The Prophet\"\n217 W. Queen Lane\nPhiladelphia 44, Pennsylvania\nDear Sir:\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been forwarded to this Headquarters by the addressee since we are responsible for the program. The ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\nSincerely,\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A/Col Adams/fh/74072\nwrtn 23 Oct 52\n23 October 1952\nMr. Leon Davidson\n804 South Irving Street\nArlington 4, Virginia\nDear Mr. Davidson:\nThe Air Force Press Desk, Office of Public Information, Department of Defence, has advised my office of your continued interest in reports of unusual observations of aerial objects. Your previous correspondence concerning this matter has been reviewed and we believe that your requests for additional information cannot be adequately treated by correspondence.\nMay I advise you that we are aware of the responsible position you hold and of the security clearance that has been granted you in your present capacity.\nWe would appreciate an opportunity to discuss your views concerning possible sources of these objects with you on a personal basis. Ofcourse the matter will be treated in complete confidence. Unfortunately the officer most cognizant of our investigations in this field will be out of town until after 1 November. If you will contact my office, Liberty 5-6700, extension 74072, on or after 3 November we will be happy to arrange a meeting with you at sometime mutually convenient.\nSincerely,\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nCOORDINATION\nAFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2AX\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 22 Oct 52\n\nOCT 23 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nMr. John F. Strauss\nGeneral Delivery\nEast Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n\nDear Mr. Strauss:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been forwarded to this Headquarters by the addressee since we are responsible for the program. The ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nX095. Strauss, Mr. John F.\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 22 Oct 52\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nMr. Robert C. Wolhar\n1301 N. Scott Street\nWilmington, Delaware\n\nDear\nMr. Wolhar:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been forwarded to this Headquarters by the addressee since we are responsible for the program. The ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nX095. Wolhar, Mr. Robert C.\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nWrtn 22 Oct 52\n\nOCT 23 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nMiss Maggie Bolan\n230 West 101st Street\nApartment 421, New York, N.Y.\n\nDear\nMiss Bolan:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been forwarded to this Headquarters by the addressee since we are responsible for the program. The ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nX095. Bolan, Miss Maggie\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 22 Oct 52\n\nOCT 23 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nMr. Joseph V. Signorelli\n412 Greentree Road\nPittsburgh 20, Pennsylvania\n\nDear\nMr. Signorelli:\n\nGeneral Samford has asked me to convey his thanks to you for your recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects.\n\nYour interest and efforts to assist us are appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nX095. Signorelli, Mr. Joseph V.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 22 Oct 52\n\nOCT 23 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nMr. Carl G. Lundin\n311 W. Franklin Street\nEl Paso, Texas\n\nDear\nMr. Lundin:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been forwarded to this Headquarters by the addressee since we are responsible for the program. The ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nX095. Lundin, Mr. Carl G.\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nWrtn 22 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/713'9/cmb\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nOCT 23 1952\n\nMr. Herman Word Jr.,\n511 North Avenue, N. E.,\nGrand Rapids, Michigan\n\nDear Mr. Word:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been forwarded to this Headquarters by the addressee since we are responsible for the program. The ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nX095. Word, Mr. Herman Jr.\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tafoin-2A\n\nCarl W. Smith\tW. Beck Capt.\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 22 Oct 52\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nOCT 23 1952\n\nMr. Oliver Amlie\nP. O. Box 92\nBala-Cynwyd, Pennsylvania\n\nDear\nMr. Amlie:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been forwarded to this Headquarters by the addressee since we are responsible for the program. The ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nX095. Amlie, Mr. Oliver\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A\n\nCOORDINATION CY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71739\nWrtn 22 Oct 52\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nOCT 23 1952\n\nMrs Edith Boyd\n500 Howell Street\nMissoula, Montana\n\nDear\nMrs Boyd:\n\nGeneral Samford has asked me to convey his thanks to you for your recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects.\n\nYour interest and efforts to assist us are appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A\n\nX095. Boyd, Mrs Edith\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 22 Oct 52\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nOCT 23 1952\n\nMrs Mary A. Curley\n169 Perry Avenue\nWorcester 4, Massachusetts\n\nDear\nMrs. Curley:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been forwarded to this Headquarters by the addressee since we are responsible for the program. The ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nX095. Curley, Mrs Mary A.\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A\n\nCOORDINATION CY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71739\nWrtn 22 Oct 52\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nOCT 23 1952\n\nMr. I. D. Harrold\n412 N. Tennessee Street\nDanville, Indiana\n\nDear\nMr Harrold:\n\nGeneral Samford has asked me to convey his thanks to you for your recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects.\n\nYour interest and efforts to assist us are appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A\n\nX095. Harold, Mr. I.D.\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN 2A2\nWrtn 21 October 1952\nMaj Fournet/tmw\nExt 71379\n\nOCT 22 1952\n\nMr. Edmond L. LeRoy\n36 Fifth Street\nOld Bridge, New York\n\nDear Mr. LeRoy:\n\nGeneral Samford sincerely appreciated your letter\nof 30 July 1952 and has asked me to convey his thanks\nto you. We apologize for the long delay in acknowl-\nedging its receipt, but we have received such a large\nvolume of correspondence from many citizens with\nsimilar patriotic motivation that we have found it\nimpossible to be as prompt as we would like.\n\nWith regard to your invitation to assist us, we\nare very sorry that we cannot contact you personally\nbecause the situation makes this impossible. However,\nwe would welcome another letter from you giving your\nideas in detail, and we assure you that they will be\nconsidered very carefully.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist\nus.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R 2A2 2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 21 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 22 1952\n\nMr. E. C. Henthorn\nSuperintendent of Schools\nSarpy County\nPapillion, Nebraska\n\nDear Mr. Henthorn:\n\nYour letter of 25 July 1952 was referred to us since the\nAir Force is responsible for the \"flying saucer\" investigation.\nWe apologize for the long delay in acknowledging its receipt,\nbut we have received such a large volume of letters from many\ncitizens with similar patriotic motivation that we have found\nit impossible to be as prompt as we would like.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us and\nassure you that the ideas which you submitted are receiving our\ncareful consideration.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Maj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 21 Oct 52\nAFOIN-2A2\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force\nIntelligence Center Hqs USAF - AFOIN\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. Inclosures are for your information, appropriate action and retention.\n\n2. No replies of any kind have been made by this office. However, Mr.\nFlorsheim was notified by the FBI that his letter was being referred to the USAF.\n\n6 Incls: (W/orig. only)\n1. Ltr fr Mrs J. Albers dtd 29 Jul 52\n2. Ltr fr Mr Willy R.P. Brand dtd 8 Jul 52\n3. Ltr fr Mrs L.S. Black dtd 7 Aug 52 (w/attch.)\n4. Ltr fr Mr A.B. Florsheim dtd 23 Sept 52\n5. Ltr fr Mr E.B. Allison dtd about 2 Oct 52 w/photo\n6. Ltr fr Mr C.E. Page dtd 3 Oct 52\n\nNO M/R\nX322.79TIC\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 16 Oct 52\n\nOCT 17 1952\n\nMr. E. L. Lull\nNew Ute Hotel\nSalt Lake City, Utah\n\nDear Mr. Lull:\n\nWe appreciated your letters of 22 and 23 September\n1952 with your additional comments regarding the date in\nquestion.\n\nYour continued interest and efforts to assist us are\ngreatly appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nX095. Lull, E.L.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 17 Oct 52\n\nOCT 17 1952\n\nMrs. Jessie Bunting\n1520 Phillips Avenue\nGreensboro, North Carolina\n\nDear\nMrs. Bunting:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying\nobjects has been received by this Headquarters, and\nthe ideas which you submitted are receiving our\ncareful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist\nus.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 17 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 17 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nMr. Robert Garrison\nBox 48\nBig Stone Gap, Virginia\n\nDear\nMr. Garrison:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A\n\nAFOIN-2 COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 16 Oct 52\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\nOCT 17 1952\n\n(Unclassified) Correspondence from Mr. Anthony Guidry\n\nExecutive,\nDirector of Research & Development, DCS/D\nAttn: Major Foresman\nDeputy Direc. for Estimates, D/I, DCS/O\n\n1. Inclosure is forwarded as a matter of primary interest.\n\n2. Other letters from Mr. Guidry dated 3 and 4 October 52 were retained since they concerned an alleged sighting of and a theory on \"flying saucers\".\n\nSIGNED\n\n1 Incl: (w/orig. only)\nLtr fr Mr. Guidry\ndtd 4 Oct 52\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A\n\nx095. Guidry, Mr. Anthony\n\nAFOIN-2 COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 15 Oct 52\n\nSECRET\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nRESTRICTED\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nOCT 16 1952\n\nChief Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHqs USAF - AFOIN\n\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\n\n1. Inclosed report is for your information and retention. Request acknowledgment of receipt by indorsement to originator.\n\n2. The many questionable aspects of the report and the circumstances surrounding it appear to leave little doubt that this was a hoax.\n\n1 Incl: (w/orig. only)\nFlyOb rpt fr ADC\ndtd 3 Oct 52 (w/3 attachs)\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n\nX322.7971C\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A\n\nWhen incl(s) war Secret (or not attached), is/are classified Restricted with Par 25b, AFR 205-1.\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECRET\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2 COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nwrtn 16 Oct 52\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nOCT 16 1952\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHqs USAF - AFOIN\n\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\n\n1. Inclosures are for your information, appropriate action and retention. No replies of any kind have been made by this office.\n\n2. A copy of the translation of Mr. Goy's letter (see Incl. 4) was furnished AFDRD for their information.\n\n4 Incls: (w/orig. only)\n1. Ltr fr Mr. D.L. Pefine dtd 23 Sep 52\n2. Card fr C. S. Stultz dtd 24 Aug 52\n3. Ltr fr Mr. H.L. Peterson dtd 28 Sep 52\n4. Ltr fr Mr. R. Goy (transla.) dtd 15 Sep 52 (w/attach in dup)\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2 COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 16 Oct 52\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nOCT 16 1952\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHqs USAF - AFOIN\n\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\n\n1. Inclosures are for your information and retention. They were supplied by the office of Naval Research to OSI.\n\n2. OSI states that the Townsend Brown Foundation was brought to their attention by Major General V. E. Bertrandias following a visit to the Foundation. During this visit General Bertrandias saw a model of a \"flying saucer\" and engaged in conversation with Townsend Brown and other scientists who disclosed that they had been working on the project for 20 to 25 years.\n\n3. OSI checked local and national agencies with negative results. Their files contain no further pertinent data.\n\n2 Incls: (w/orig. only)\n1. Rpt of Off of Nav Research\n2. Dun & Bradstreet credit Rating\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2 COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 15 Oct 52\n\nOCT 16 1952\n\nVIA AIR MAIL\n\nMr. Nicholas Mariana\n3235 Fifth Avenue South\nGreat Falls, Montana\n\nDear Mr. Mariana:\n\n\tYou are probably aware of the fact that the Air Force is still continuing the investigation and analysis of \"flying saucers\". We are presently attempting to make a comparative analysis of recent sightings against those made in previous years. In this connection, the report of a sighting made by you on 15 August 1950 has aroused our interest. Unfortunately, however, our duplicate copy of the movies which you took of these objects has been inadvertently misplaced.\n\n\tTherefore, we would be most grateful if you would permit us to borrow your original movies for study and duplication. In so doing you would be rendering us a great service.\n\n\tWe will have an officer from Great Falls Air Force Base contact you about 22 October and, should you consider our request favorably, he will obtain the movies and give you a receipt for them. We will then return them as soon as possible thereafter.\n\n\tYour cooperation and consideration in this matter is earnestly solicited.\n\nCC: ATIC\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A4/Capt Hosford/pal/74735\nW/14 Oct 52\n\nSECRET\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nRESTRICTED\n\nSECRET\nAuth CS, USAF\n\n(Restricted) Return of File on Flyobrpt\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nDayton, Ohio\nAttn: Capt E. J. Ruppelt\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHqs USAF - AFOIN-2A4\n\nOCT 14 1952\nCapt Hosford/pal/74735\n\nInclosed is complete file on Flyobrpt classified SECRET which was borrowed from your office by AFOIN-2A4.\n\n6 Incls\n1. General, G F\n2. 17 Dec 48 OSI Rpt\n3. Miscl. Fireball\n4. 13 Dec 48 OSI rpt\n5. Hoax\n6. Briefing\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Intelligence Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nWhen inclosure No. 1-6 is withdrawn, the classification of Secret on this correspondence will be canceled or changed to Restricted in accordance with par 9b., AR 380-5.\n\nAFOIN-2A4\nCapt Hosford\n\nAFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 13 Oct 52\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\n\nOCT 14 1952\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nPage 2\n\n8. No replies of any kind have been made to Inclosures 8, 9 and 14.\n\n14 Incls: (W/Orig only)\n1. Questionnaire fr Mr. Hazelwood dtd 22 Sep 52\n2. Questionnaire fr Mrs. Hazelwood dtd 22 Sep 52\n3. Questionnaire fr Mr. Dunn dtd 22 Sep 52\n4. Questionnaire fr Mr. J. Wahl dtd 22 Sep 52\n5. Questionnaire fr Mr. R.E. Lloyd dtd 22 Sep 52\n6. Questionnaire fr Mr. J.W. Burke dtd 22 Sep 52\n7. Questionnaire fr Mr. M.H. Herrell dtd 22 Sep 52\n8. rpt re flyobs fr ONI dtd 16 Sep 52\n9. Ltr fr Mrs. U. Schacht dtd 11 Sep 52\n10. Art. fr Fla. newspaper dtd 10 Sep 52 about\n11. Art. fr Evening Star paper dtd 27 Sep 52\n12. Questionnaire fr Mr. D.S. Young dtd 27 Sep 52\n13. Questionnaire fr Mr. D.S. Young dtd late Aug 52\n14. Photostat ltr fr Mr. C.P. Olivier thru OSI dtd 26 Aug 52\n\nNO M/R\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nSIGNED\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\n\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\n\n1. Inclosures are for your information and retention.\n\n2. Inclosures 1 through 7 pertain to the same incident as previously reported by TWX AFOIN 58311 dated 22 Sep 52. Four of the witnesses were interviewed in person and a fifth by telephone. Pertinent comments are included in the questionnaires.\n\n3. Inclosures 8 and 9 were received from ONI.\n\n4. The article from a Florida newspaper (Incl. 10) was furnished by OSD-OPI.\n\n5. The article from the Evening Star (Incl. 11) may be of some assistance in evaluating the sighting in the vicinity of Washington about 2000 EDT on 12 Sep 52.\n\n6. Inclosure 12 and 13 are from the same source but pertain to different sightings. He has recently advised that he has made two additional observations.\n\n7. The letter from Mr. Charles P. Olivier (Incl. 14) was received from OSI. His offer of assistance appears to warrant investigation.\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\n10 Oct 52\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\n\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\n\n1. Inclosed documents are for your information, appropriate action and retention.\n\n2. A reply to Mr. Varela (see Incl. 1) was prepared by this office; a copy is attached as Incl. 2. It will be noted that he was requested to forward direct to you any data which his group may obtain rather than to this Headquarters as indicated in his letter. Suggest that a few copies of the questionnaire be furnished him for the guidance of his group in collecting information. If the group consists of competent engineers or other technically trained personnel, they may be well worth cultivating.\n\n3. Suggest you acknowledge the report of LCDR Nelson (see Incl. 3) which, although a bit old, may prove useful since it concerns a sighting through a telescope.\n\n4. No further action is required on Inclosure 4, since this office collaborated with OSD-OPI in the preparation of a reply for signature in the Office of the Chief of Staff.\n\n4 Incls: (W/orig. only)\n1. Ltr fr Mr. Varela dtd 28 Aug 52\n2. Ltr to Mr. Varela dtd 10 Sep 52\n3. Memo fr LCDR Nelson w/attach\n4. Ltr fr Mr. Berridge dtd 30 Jul 52\n\nNO M/R\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71379\nWrtn 13 Oct 52\n\n(Unclassified) Correspondence Re Project Blue\nBook from Ralph H. Ballock of Puyallup, Washington\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\n\n1. Inclosed letter from Mr. Ballock is forwarded for appropriate action since previous correspondence was also forwarded to you. Copies of the latter were not retained by this office, therefore precluding the possibility of furnishing a comprehensive answer to his latest request.\n\n1 Incl: (W/orig. only)\nLtr fr Mr. Ballock\ndtd 19 Sept 52\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R COORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS\n6580TH MISSILE TEST WING\nHolloman Air Force Base, New Mexico\n\nMTHPI\n\n10 October 1952\n\nSUBJECT: Transmittal of Air Intelligence Information Report\n\nTO: Director of Intelligence\nHeadquarters, USAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nIn compliance with Air Force Letter 200-5, Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting, dated 29 April 1952, the following Air Intelligence Information Report is submitted for your information.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING OFFICER:\n\n1 Incl:\nAir Intel Info Rpt (3 cys)\n\nWILLIAM F. HARRIS\nLt. Col., USAF\nDeputy for Personnel\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n68D01\n\nSUBJECT: FLYORPT\n\n10 OCT 1952\n\nTO: Commanding General\nSecond Air Force\nBarksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana\nAttn: Director of Intelligence\n\n1. Herewith, in accordance with par 7a (2), Air Force letter 200-5, dated 29 April 1952 is original AF Form 112, plus five (5) onalid copies reproduced therefrom, together with inclosures.\n\n2. This observation was made by members of the 68th Bombardment Wing (M) presently stationed at this Base.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING OFFICER:\n\n1 Incl\nAF Form 112\n(in sextup)\n\nMICHAEL M DUBELKO\nMajor, USAF\nAdjutant General\n\nNOTED\nno action"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWrtn 19 Sept 1952\n\nMr. Joseph M. Varela\n17832 Fullerfarm Street\nNorthridge, California\n\nDear Mr. Varela:\n\nWe acknowledge, with sincere thanks, the kind offers made on behalf of your group in your letter of 28 August 1952. It is indeed gratifying to see the cooperation extended the Air Force by organizations such as yours in our attempt to evolve a final solution to the unidentified flying objects problem.\n\nSince the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio is the activity which is responsible for the investigation and analysis of these reports, we are forwarding your letter to them. For the same reason, we would like to suggest that you forward all data and findings directly to them rather than to this Headquarters. In this manner, the information which you supply will be incorporated into the program much more quickly.\n\nYou will probably hear from the Center in the near future.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\nWrtn 9 Oct 52\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical\nIntelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\n\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71379\n\nI. Inclosed are reproductions of three color transparencies taken by Mr. Wallace Litwin, an American press photographer, in the vicinity of the Naval formation participating in Operation Mainbrace on 20 Sep 52. The attached copy of a letter from Mr. F. Richard Anderson of the Metropolitan Sunday Newspapers, Inc. dated 2 Oct 52 (see Incl 2) includes all data on this sighting presently available this office.\n\n2. The original photographs were returned to Mr. Anderson with a letter expressing our sincere thanks for his cooperation in making the photographs available to us. The photographs were enlarged by Hq USAF from the original 2¼ x 2¼ inch size to the present size; the vertical dimension of the copies correspond to the coverage in the original photographs (enlargement ratio 2.25:5). These are the only copies which were made; none are filed in Headquarters. An enlarged reversal print of the second transparency is attached (Incl 3); it was made to show that the image is still round.\n\nPhotographs are for official use only; not for release.\n\n3. A cable to CINCNORTH, with information copy to you, was dispatched 3 Oct 52 requesting information on balloon releases by ships in the Naval formation. Message number is AFOIN 59530.\n\n4. A copy of OPNAV Notice 3830 is attached as Incl 4 for your information and retention.\n\n4 Incls (w/orig only)\n1. Pkg of 3 photos\n2. Cy ltr fr Mr. F.R.Anderson\n dtd 2 Oct 52\n3. Photo\n4. Cy OPNAV Notice 3820\nNo M/R necessary, self-explanatory.\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nAFOIN-\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 [signature] AFOIN-2A [signature]\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 6 1952\n\nMr. Alexander Factor\nP.O. Box 801\nOttawa, Canada\n\nDear\n\nMr. Factor:\n\nGeneral Samford has asked me to convey his thanks to you for your recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects.\n\nYour interest and efforts to assist us are appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\n000.9 Flying Saucers\nAFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 1 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMr. Wayne F. Rusk\nBox 66\nDodson, Montana\n\nDear Mr. Rusk:\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n\nWe have received your letter of 28 August 1952 in which you inclosed the aluminum foil strips found on your farm.\n\nFortunately, these strips do not represent any activity of which we are unaware. They are known as radar window or chaff and are dropped by our own aircraft.\n\nNonetheless, we are grateful for your interest and your efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nRewrtn 3 Oct 52\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical\nIntelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN-2A\n\nOCT 3 1952\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\n\n1. Inclosure is forwarded for your information and retention. It concerns \"theories and suggestions\" related to the Project.\n\n2. No replies of any kind have been made by this office.\n\n1 Incl (w/orig only)\nPhotostat cy of ltr to FBI\ndtd Aug 52 fr Roy Elwell\nRoadstown, New Jersey\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. John J. Phillips\n6047 Baldwin Avenue\nTemple City, California\n\nDear Mr. Phillips:\n\nThe Secretary of the Army has referred your letter of 29 August 1952 to us for attention. Although we had already processed yours of 26 August to us, we were, nonetheless, very happy to receive your additional comments.\n\nWe would like to assure you that the Air Force is not treating the \"flying saucer\" situation lightly. As recently announced, we are conducting a very serious program of intelligence investigation and analysis, and we will continue to give the problem adequate but not frantic attention. By this time you have most probably received a very detailed questionnaire from the Air Technical Intelligence Center with a request to enter as much detail as you are able to recall about the object which you observed. This should indicate to you our earnest efforts to find a satisfactory solution to the problem.\n\nWe hope that these brief comments have served to reassure you of the Air Force's attitude towards this subject. We appreciate your keen interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION COPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PETERS, Mrs. Rita M.\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nRewrtn 2 Oct 52\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMrs. Rita M. Peters\n750 O'Tarrel Street\nSan Francisco 9, California\n\nDear Mrs. Peters:\n\nWe have received your letter of 4 September 1952 with the interesting newspaper clipping attached.\n\nIn order to relieve you of any further worry about the newspaper photographs, we can assure you that they are fakes. Apparently the newspaper intended them as a form of subtle satire. Unfortunately, however, many such attempts at humor cause undue concern among the public, and this appears to be one of these instances.\n\nWe appreciate your action in sending us the clipping and hope that our comments have reassured you.\n\nSincerely,\n\nX095. Peters, Mrs. Rita M.\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWrtn 3 October 1952\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMr. J. M. Green\n2640 5th Avenue South\nMinneapolis 8, Minnesota\n\nDear Mr. Green:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMr. Charlie Williams\nP.O. Box 597\nMackinac Island, Michigan\n\nDear Mr. Williams:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been forwarded to this Headquarters by the addressee since we are responsible for the program. The ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMr. A.W. Bacon\n311 Clay Street\nJacksonville, Florida\n\nDear Mr. Bacon:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMrs. Maynard Wade\nRoute #2\nConvoy, Ohio\n\nDear Mrs. Wade:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\nAFOIN COORDINATION\n\nMiss Edna M. West\nRoute 2\nSpartanburg, South Carolina\n\nDear\n\nMiss West:\n\nGeneral Samford has asked me to convey his thanks\nto you for your recent letter concerning unidentified flying\nobjects.\n\nYour interest and efforts to assist us are appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nS\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nOUT G 7 OCT 1952 DIRINT HQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 2 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\nAFOIN COORDINATION\n\nMr. Garland Taylor\nGilson, Illinois\n\nDear\n\nMr. Taylor:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying\nobjects has been received by this Headquarters, and\nthe ideas which you submitted are receiving our\ncareful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist\nus.\n\nSincerely,\n\nS\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nOUT G 7 OCT 1952 DIRINT HQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\nAFOIN COORDINATION\n\nMr. David Finch\n803 St. Paul Street\nBaltimore 2, Maryland\n\nDear\n\nMr. Finch:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying\nobjects has been forwarded to this Headquarters by\nthe addressee since we are responsible for the\nprogram. The ideas which you submitted are receiving\nour careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nS\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nOUT G 7 OCT 1952 DIRINT HQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\nAFOIN COORDINATION\n\nMr. John E. Lang\n1413 S. Vermont\nLos Angeles 6, California\n\nDear\nMr. Lang:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying\nobjects has been received by this Headquarters, and\nthe ideas which you submitted are receiving our\ncareful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist\nus.\n\nSincerely,\n\nS\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nOUT G 7 OCT 1952 DIRINT HQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Maj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\nWrtn 3 Oct 52\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\nAFOIN COORDINATION\n\nMr. William C. Lamb\nBox 845\nNewcastle, Wyoming\n\nDear\nMr. Lamb:\n\nGeneral Samford has asked me to convey his thanks\nto you for your recent letter concerning unidentified flying\nobjects.\n\nYour interest and efforts to assist us are appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nS\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nOUT G 7 OCT 1952 DIRINT HQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMrs. Victoria Jackson\n633 East 5th South\nProvo, Utah\n\nDear\nMrs. Jackson:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nX095. Jackson, Mrs. Victoria\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\n000.9 Flying Saucers AFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Saucers-from Where?\n\nFor his advanced teachings in science; philosophy; astrology, the existence of other peopled planets ect, Joseph Smith the Mormon prophet was martyred.\nHe also said that this earth's people were least advanced of those other dwellers\nWhy then should not planetary people excel in making space vehicles, strange and marvelous, & come to look us over for reasons they best know?\nAltho comparitively few of the ten \"Lost Tribes of Israel\" were scattered among Scandinavian & other countries, Joseph Smith said that the main portion were taken to a foreign planet, & would some time return to earth. Can it be that they are now scouting over us?\nIf it be true, what skeptics say, that the increasing amount of such visitors are the results of some peoples hallucination, ect. then its full time that something be done about this fast growing"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Saucers from Where?\n2\n\nrelapse in mentality and eyesight before humanity gets mad.\nIt couldn't be, could it, that there is something lacking in the reasoning power of those who thus judge their fellow creatures? If so, then Bible prophecies must be coming true concerning such latter day unnatural tendencies.\n\nWe understand that, along with so many explanations about the saucers, a man has invented a way of making such things apparent to the public. I think it will be hard to convince many saucer spectators, that what they saw were make-believe.\n\nThe news analyst, Gabriel Heatter, asks why these saucers are over America and not over Europe. If those visitors are the lost tribes, then they must be preparing their return to earth as Joseph Smith predicted.\n\nMrs. Victora Jackson\nProvo Utah."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMr. Joseph J. Kalman\n239 S. Main Street\nMedford, Wisconsin\n\nDear\nMr. Kalman:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nX 95. Kalman, Joseph J.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\n000.9 Flying Saucers AFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWrtn 3 October 1952\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nT/Sgt Charles L. Skelley, Jr.\nCasual Company, Headquarters Battalion\nMarine Barracks\nCamp J. H. Pendleton\nOceanside, California\n\nDear Sgt Skelley:\n\n\tYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\n\tWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\t\tAFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWrtn 3 October 1952\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMr. Daniel O. Hunt\nBaskerville, Virginia\n\nDear Mr. Hunt:\n\n\tYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been forwarded to this Headquarters by the addressee since we are responsible for the program. The ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\n\tWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\t\tAFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWrtn 3 October 1952\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMrs. M. E. Johnson\nP. O. Box 23\nLake Hughes, California\n\nDear Mrs. Johnson:\n\n\tYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\n\tWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R necessary,\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\t\tAFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWrtn 3 October 1952\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMr. Jesse Tate\nP. O. Box 113\nTroutville, Virginia\n\nDear Mr. Tate:\n\n\tYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\n\tWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R Necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\t\tAFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWrtn 3 October 1952\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMiss Sally Frank\n605-1/2 North 9th St.\nAllentown, Pennsylvania\n\nDear Miss Frank:\n\n\tYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\n\tWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R Necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\t\tAFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71015\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMr. Roger Smith\nR.R. 3\nDelton, Michigan\n\nDear\nMr. Smith:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying\nobjects has been received by this Headquarters, and\nthe ideas which you submitted are receiving our\ncareful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist\nus.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtan 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMr. E.J. Sullivan\n102 Barnum Avenue\nBridgeport, Connecticut\n\nDear\nMr. Sullivan:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying\nobjects has been forwarded to this Headquarters by\nthe addressee since we are responsible for the\nprogram. The ideas which you submitted are receiving\nour careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMr. Jim Jones\n8907A Eager Road\nRichmond Heights 17, Missouri\n\nDear\nMr Jones:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying\nobjects has been received by this Headquarters, and\nthe ideas which you submitted are receiving our\ncareful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist\nus.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMr. Ben Ari\n21 East 21st Street\nNew York, New York\n\nDear\nMr. Ari:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying\nobjects has been received by this Headquarters, and\nthe ideas which you submitted are receiving our\ncareful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist\nus.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Maj Fournet/cmb/71016\nWrtn 3 Oct 52\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nMrs. S. Stechman\n209 6th Street North\nGreat Falls, Montana\n\nDear Mrs. Stechman:\n\nGeneral Samford has asked me to convey his thanks\nto you for your recent letter concerning unidentified flying\nobjects.\n\nYour interest and efforts to assist us are appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWrtn 2 Oct 52\n\n(Restricted) Unidentified Object Which Fell in\nWater Off Okinawa, Nov 50\n\nOCT 3 1952\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force\nIntelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN-2A2 Maj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. Reference our DF dated 28 August 1952, same subject as above.\n\n2. Large scale maps of the area in question were obtained and the correct spot located. It will be noted on Incl 1 that the water off the village of Ginama is rather deep. According to Sgt Guzi's sketch, the object would have fallen in at least 10 fathoms of water. A search for the object would entail diving operations at this depth over an area of approximately one-half square mile or more. For this reason it is considered impractical to request an attempt at recovery.\n\n3. It is suggested that all documents pertaining to this case be filed in the event that the future status of Project Blue Book warrants a recovery attempt.\n\n4. All documents referring to this case are returned herewith.\n\nX322.7 ATIC\n\n6 Incls (w/orig only)\n1. Map 3727-1 SW, 1:25,000\n2. Map 3727-111 NE, 1:25,000\n3. Transcript of interview w/Sgt Guzi\n4. Memo of Sgt Guzi's comments\n5. Hydro Chart Okinawa\n6. Aero Chart Okinawa\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nWhen incl(s) No. 1-6 are withdrawn (or not attached), the Restricted classification of this correspondence will be downgraded to Unclassified in accordance with Par 25a, AFR 205-1.\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWrtn 2 Oct 52\n\n(Restricted) Lab Analysis of Soil Samples Having Possible Relation to Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nCounter Intelligence Division\nDirectorate of Special Investigations, The IG\n\nTopical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates, D/I, DCS/O\n\nOCT 3 1952\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\n\n1. Reference our R&R dated 5 September 1952, same subject as above. Recent developments have prompted the attachment of increased importance to these samples. Specifically, a deposit seeming to have the same general characteristics and also related to a flying object incident has been reported from Flat Woods, West Virginia.\n\n2. In view of this possible relationship and the necessity for a prompt analysis of these two incidents, it is requested that utmost priority be given to the lab analysis of subject samples.\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n1"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWrtn 2 Oct 52\n\n(Restricted) Lab Analysis of Soil Samples Having Possible Relation to Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nCounter Intelligence Division\nDirectorate of Special Investigations, The IG\n\nTopical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates, D/I, DCS/O\n\nOCT 3 1952\n1\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\n\n1. Reference our R&R dated 5 September 1952, same subject as above. Recent developments have prompted the attachment of increased importance to these samples. Specifically, a deposit seeming to have the same general characteristics and also related to a flying object incident has been reported from Flat Woods, West Virginia.\n\n2. In view of this possible relationship and the necessity for a prompt analysis of these two incidents, it is requested that utmost priority be given to the lab analysis of subject samples.\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\n1"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWrtn 2 Oct 52\n\n(Unclassified) Additional Correspondence from Robert Spencer Carr (ref Project Blue Book)\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force\nIntelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN-2A2 Maj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. The inclosed correspondence from Mr. Carr to the President, with a copy of the reply made by the Director of Legislation and Liaison, is for your information and retention. Further correspondence with Mr. Carr is not necessary.\n\n2. It is suggested that these documents be placed in the file with other correspondence from Mr. Carr.\n\nX322.7 ATIC\n\n4 Incls (w/orig only)\n1. cc of ltr to Mr. Carr fr SAFILL dtd 22 Aug 52 w/ltr to the Pres. fr Mr. Carr attached\n2. Article taken fr 24 Sep 49 issue of Saturday Evening Post \"Nightmare At Dawn\"\n3. cc of ltr to Mr. Carr fr ATIC dtd 13 May 52 w/note to the Pres. attached\n4. Ltr to ATIC fr Mr. Carr dtd 8 Apr 52\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n\nWhen incl(s) No. 1-4 are withdrawn (or not attached), the Restricted classification of this correspondence will be downgraded to Unclassified in accordance with Par 25a, AFR 205-1.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 2 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 2 1952\n\nMr. George F. Allcorn\nP. O. Box 555\nKeyes, California\n\nDear\n\nMr. Allcorn:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 2 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 2 1952\n\nMrs. Forrest Payne\n222 Twin Oaks Road, Apt. 2\nAkron 13, Ohio\nDear\n Mrs. Payne:\n Your recent letter concerning unidentified flying\n objects has been received by this Headquarters, and\n the ideas which you submitted are receiving our\n careful consideration.\n We appreciate your interest and efforts to assist\n us.\n Sincerely,\n\n WILLIAM A. ADAMS\n Colonel, USAF\n Chief, Topical Division\n Deputy Director for Estimates\n Directorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN 2A2\nMaj. Fournet/tmw\nExt. 75990\nWrtn, 1 October 52\n\nOCT 2 1952\n\nMr. Albert A. Trogdon\nThird and Main Streets\nUnion City, Tennessee\n\nDear Mr. Trogdon:\n\n We have received your letter of 7 August 1952\nand have given your ideas careful consideration.\n\n With regard to your query about a reward, we\nmust advise that we offer no renumeration for the\nmany unsolicited ideas which we receive on the\nsubject of \"flying saucers\", but we are nonetheless\nhappy to accept them as a gesture of patriotism by\nthe writer.\n\n We appreciate your interest and efforts to\nassist us.\n\n Sincerely,\n\n WILLIAM A. ADAMS\n Colonel, USAF\n Chief, Topical Division\n Deputy Director for Estimates\n Directorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\nWrnt 1 Oct 52\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force\nIntelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN-2\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nOCT 2 1952\nMaj Fournet/dbv/75990\n\n1. Reference report of sighting Miami, Florida on 29 July 52 and related 16 mm movie film previously forwarded to you. The inclosed document, obtained from OSD-OPI, contains additional information on this incident. It is for your information and retention.\n\n2. Also inclosed for your retention are photostatic copies of selected documents in the Marine Corps personnel file on D.S. Des Vergers. These photostats were supplied by the Marine Corps with the understanding that the information therein would not be divulged to anyone who does not require it for intelligence analysis of the incident in which Des Vergers was a principal.\n\n5 Incls (w/orig only)\n1. Ltr USMC, Miami, Fla dtd 4 Aug 52 w/attachments\n2. Photostat cy of review of discharge of D.S. Des Vergers\n3. Photostat cy of ltr fr Board of Review to The Commandant of the MC, 7 Aug 52\n4. Photostat cy of ltr to Navy Dept fr Fed Reform, Chillicothe, O. dtd 14 Oct 44 re Des Vergers\n5. Photostat cy of ltr to JAG, Navy fr US Attorney, Southern Dist of Fla dtd 16 Oct 44\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nWrtn 1 Oct 52\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force\nIntelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nOCT 2 1952\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\n\n1. Inclosures are for your information and retention.\n\n2. Following receipt of Miss Butcher's memo (incl. 1) by this office, she was requested to complete a standard questionnaire which was supplied. Completed questionnaire is attached as Incl. 2.\n\n3. Inclosure 3 is questionnaire completed by LCDR Leon B. Blair, USN, following his telephonic report of a sighting to this office.\n\n3 Incls: (W/orig. only)\n1. Memo fr Lucile H. Butcher dtd 11 Aug 52\n2. Questionnaire completed by Miss Butcher\n3. Questionnaire completed by LCDR Blair\n\nNO M/R COORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nWhen incl(s) No. 2 & 3 are attached (or not attached), the Restricted classification of this document is downgraded to Unclassified in accordance with ... \n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 3 Oct 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 2 1952\n\nMr. Robert H. Branan\n114 Colonial Circle, Apt. 2\nMarietta, Georgia\n\nDear Mr. Branan:\n\n Your recent letter concerning unidentified flying\n objects has been received by this Headquarters, and\n the ideas which you submitted are receiving our\n careful consideration.\n We appreciate your interest and efforts to assist\n us.\n Sincerely,\n\n WILLIAM A. ADAMS\n Colonel, USAF\n Chief, Topical Division\n Deputy Director for Estimates\n Directorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-1B2/Maj Pandolfo/jbl/52563\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nOCT 2 1952\n\nAFOIN-1B2\n\nSUBJECT: Transmittal of AF Form 112\n\nTO:\tCommanding General\n\t27th Air Division\n\tNorton Air Force Base\n\tCalifornia\n\tATTN: Director of Intelligence\n\n1. AF Form 112 referenced on DD Form 95 was not received in this Headquarters.\n\n2. Attached as inclosures are DD Form 95 and statement by Captain Ralph P. Borgeson (2 copies).\n\n3. Request AF Form 112 as mentioned be forwarded as soon as possible with inclosures attached.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nJOHN G. GLOVER\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Dissemination Branch\nDissemination Control Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n2 Incls\na/s\n\nWhen inclosure No. 1 and 2 are withdrawn or not attached, the classification on this correspondence will be changed to UNCLASSIFIED in accordance with Par. 25e, AFR 205-1.\n\nAFOIN-1B2\nMaj Pandolfo\nCol Glover\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n\nRESTRICTED\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\n\nFROM (Location)\n27TH Air Div (Def), Norton AFB, Cal\n\nREPORT NO.\n\nPAGE 1 OF 1 PAGES\n\nStatement:\n\nOn the 19 August 1952, at approximately 2000 PDST, Algiers took control of Swanee Red from Conform at georef position DD 1050, at which time he was given a vector of 290°.\n\nSwanee Red Leader then called Algiers stating that he was steady on 290° and that he had a stranger at one o'clock. Algiers asked if he could tell what type of aircraft it was? Swanee Red Leader gave a negative reply, but Swanee Red 2 said it could possibly be a Big Photo because it appeared as a large type aircraft. Algiers then instructed Swanee Red to investigate the stranger, also that Algiers had no contact on the stranger as it was in our clutter area, in the vicinity of San Gorgonio Mountain.\n\nLt. Otis, Swanee Red Leader, then reported that upon turning into the stranger, it appeared to have no tail assembly and showed great acceleration in moving away from them in an easterly direction and disappearing into space.\n\nAlgiers did not make radar pick-up on the unusual sighting at any time.\n\nLt. Otis called the controller, (Captain Borgeson), at Algiers after landing and described the object as oval at the base and tapered to a heavy center section; he also re-affirmed that it did not have a tail section.\n\nRALPH P. BORGESON\nCaptain USAF\nChief Director\n\nRESTRICTED\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. ... ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. ... REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\n\nRESTRICTED\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n\n16-82510-4 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1950 O-914332"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 30 Sept 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nOCT 2 1952\n\nMr. Herbert H. Middleton,\nPresident, John Middleton Inc.,\n233-35 S. Third Street.,\nPhiladelphia 6, Pennsylvania.\n\nDear Mr. Middleton:\n\nWe have received your letter of 8 September 1952 in which your reported the observation of unidentified flying objects. We have referred it to our Air Technical Intelligence Center for incorporation into our study on the subject. You will probably receive a detailed questionnaire from them shortly, and your assistance in completing it will aid us appreciably.\n\nWe are very grateful for your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 29 Sept 52\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\n\nOCT 1 1952\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\n\nChief, Air Technical\nIntelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. Inclosed letter from the Federal Bureau of Investigation to OSI is for your information and retention.\n\n2. Except for the reference to a pilotless craft, the description seems to fit the Chance-Vaught V-173 or XF5U \"Flying Flapjack\". This is bolstered by the mention of Connecticut as the location of manufacture. It is presumed that Mr. McLaughlin did not obtain his information through direct contact, thus accounting for the discrepancies in his story.\n\n1 Incl: (W/orig. only)\nLtr fr FBI to OSI\ndtd 20 Aug 52\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION DESIGNATION MADE\n\nNo M/R\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A\n\nX322.7a TIC\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2 COORDINATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nwrtn 29 Sept 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\n\nOCT 1 1952\n\nMr. Henry Baker Reiley\nPublisher, Somerset Daily American\nSomerset, Pennsylvania\n\nDear Mr. Reiley:\n\nSince Air Force Intelligence is responsible for the investigation and analysis of unidentified flying objects, General Vandenberg has referred your letter of 14 September 1952 to us and requested that we answer your questions.\n\nAlthough our analysis of the many sightings which occurred on the night of 12 September is not yet complete, we have tentatively concluded that the object was a meteor. It will be quite some time before our final analysis is available since much checking and study of the various reports is required.\n\nIn reply to your query \"Are we being invaded\", we are inclosing a standard release which gives in some detail our current conclusions on the subject of unidentified flying objects plus many other things about which we have been queried often in the recent past. We trust that it will answer your question satisfactorily and assist you in answering any other questions which you may have or may receive from your readers.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and your desire to obtain the proper answers directly from us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\n1 Incl:\nstan. release\nre flyobs\n\nNO M/R\n\nCOORDINATION:\tAFOIN-2A2\tAFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nWrtn 30 Sept 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\n\n(Restricted) Report and Samples Pertaining to\nIncident vic. Flat Woods, W. Va., 12 Sept 52\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\n\nChief, Air Technical\nIntelligence Center\nWright-Patterson\nOhio\n\n1. The inclosed report, prepared by Capt. Dale L. Leavitt of the National Guard, was obtained from the National Guard Bureau, Washington. It concerns the sighting of an unidentified flying object which allegedly landed in the vicinity of Flat Woods, West Virginia around 1930 EST 12 Sept 52, and the alleged observation of a \"monster\" shortly thereafter in the area in which the flying object supposedly landed, (see Incls 1 and 2).\n\n2. Prior to receipt of the inclosed, the only information received on this incident was through the press. The Washington DAILY NEWS advised OSD-OPI of certain information which they had obtained from persons in the locale. One comment, attributed to Capt. Leavitt, was that the \"skid marks\" along the side of the hill were formed by a greasy deposit which felt like graphite. This appeared to bear a possible relation to the incident of the \"perfect circle\" in Arlington, Virginia on 2 Sept 52. Therefore, Capt. Leavitt was contacted and confirmed this statement. He was requested to obtain soil and vegetation samples and submit them to this office.\n\n3. Samples arrived 29 Sept 52 and show no evidence of a graphite-like deposit. They are attached as Incl 3 for your disposition.\n\n4. Some of the principals in this incident were on the TV program \"We The People\" on 19 Sept 52. During this program a drawing was shown which was claimed to represent a composite of the descriptions of all witnesses. A rough sketch was made of this drawing and is attached as Incl. 4. It is vaguely reminiscent of a character which appeared in a comic strip a few years ago.\n\n5. All inclosures are for your retention.\n\n4 Incls: (w/orig. only)\n1. Ltr fr Capt. D.L. Leavitt re flyob, dtd 17 Sept 52\n2. Drawing re uniden. flyob.\n3. Samples re sighting\n4. Sketch re sighting\n\nNO M/R COORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Smith/met/71092/30 Sep 52\n\n30 September 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: MR. PHILCOX - FBI\n\nSUBJECT: Comments on Article in The NEW YORKER\n\n1. A call was made to the Air Technical Intelligence Center, 1330 this date, (Captain Ruppelt) regarding the attached article.\n\n2. ATIC did not in any way indicate to Mr. Lang that the FBI has an interest in flying saucers. Furthermore, Captain Ruppelt stated that the FBI to his knowledge has never been called upon to furnish reports on flying saucers. ATIC is under the impression that Mr. Lang made the story up or picked it up from a magazine or newspaper article sometime back that definitely was not associated with their organization.\n\n3. ATIC suggests that you check further with Mr. Al Chop, Office of Public Information, and perhaps he can supply you with the information you have requested.\n\n1 Incl: Article fr NEW YORKER, dtd Sept 6, 1952\n\nC. M. YOUNG\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Policy & Management Group\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nHanded to Mrs. Philcox, 10/1/52\n\nAFOIN X\n\nW/Shuck Lt Col"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFHQ FORM 22 JUL 52 0-86 COVER SHEET SUSPENSE\n\nORIGIN OF BASIC DATE TYPE DATE\n\nSUBJECT ASSIGNED BY\n\nNUMBER\n\nROUTING\n\nInitial \"IN\" column to denote review prior to action. Initial \"OUT\" column to denote review of completed action. (X-for action: V-for coordination)\n\nIN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\n\nAFOIN OIN-1 OIN-2 OIN-3\nOIN-X OIN-1X OIN-2X OIN-3X\nOIN-X1\nOIN-X2\n\nCABLES\nFILE\nDISPATCH SR NAVAL OFF\nSR ARMY OFF\n\nTO: DATE\n\nFROM: COMMENT NUMBER\n\nCOMMENTS (Use reverse, if necessary)\n\nAFOIN No. 299\n\nPREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. D 6616"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nwrtn 26 Sept 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\nMaj Fournet/71016/cmb\n\nChief, Air Technical\nIntelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. Inclosures are for your information, appropriate action and retention. All concern sightings of objects.\n\n2. The request for a star chart made by Zella L. W. Bowers (see Incl 3) has been extracted and referred to OSD-OPI for compliance.\n\n3. The letter from Mrs. Eric C. Johnson (Incl 8) was forwarded by Mr. Clay Blair of TIME. A letter of acknowledgment has been sent Mr. Blair, but no reply has been made to Mrs. Johnson.\n\n4. The letter from Marion Leonard (Incl 2) was answered by SAFLL; a copy of their reply is also inclosed. Further correspondence is not mandatory.\n\n5. A reply to Mr. Herbert H. Middleton (Incl 10) was made by this office.\n\n10 Incls: (W/Orig. only)\n1. cy reply fr SAFLL to Mr. Leonard dtd 8 Sept 52\n2. Ltr fr Mr. Leonard dtd 27 Aug 52\n3. Ltr fr Zella L.W. Bowers dtd 25 Aug 52\n4. Ltr fr Mr. L.D. Harmon dtd 14 Sept 52\n5. Ltr fr Mrs. B. Reese dtd 5 Sept 52\n6. Ltr fr Miss B. Isaac dtd 8 Sept 52 (w/attch.)\n7. Ltr fr Mrs M. Little dtd 15 Sept 52\n8. Ltr fr Mrs E.C. Johnson dtd 19 Aug 52\n9. Ltr fr Wilson Strand dtd 15 Sept 52\n10. Ltr fr Mr. H.H. Middleton dtd 8 Sept 52\n\nNO M/R COORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Unclassified) Proposal from John S. Kim\n\nExecutive,\nDirector of Research & Development, DCS/D\nAttn: Major Forsman\nXXXXX\nFROM: Deputy Director for Estimates, D/I, DCS/O\n\n1. Inclosures are forwarded as a matter of primary interest.\n\n2. No reply to Mr. Kim has been made by this office.\n\n8 Incls:\n1. Ltr fr Mr.Kim to Sec. Lovett dtd 11 Aug 52\n2. Ltr fr Mr.Kim to Pres. Truman dtd 16 Aug 52 (w/attchd ltr copy to Sec. Lovett)\n3. Ltr fr Mr.Kim to Sec. Lovett dtd 15 Aug 52 (w/attchd info)\n4. Ltr fr Mr.Kim to Sec. Finletter dtd 11 Aug 52 w/attch.cy ltr to LI DAILY PRESS\n5. Ltr fr Mr.Kim to Sec. Finletter dtd 16 Aug 52 w/attch. cy Ltr to Sec. Lovett & info.\n6. Ltr fr Mr.Kim to Sec. State Acheson dtd 11 Aug 52,w/cy Ltr to LI DAILY PRESS\n7. Ltr fr Mr.Kim to Sec. State Acheson dtd 16 Aug 52, w/cy Ltr to Sec. Lovett (cy) & info.\n8. Cy ltr to Mr.Kim fr Dept State dtd 22 Aug 52\n\nNO M/R COORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 24 Sept 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\n\n26 SEP 1952\nMaj Fournet/71016/cmb\n\nChief, Air Technical\nIntelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. Inclosed letters are for your information and retention.\n\n2. No replies of any kind have been made by this office.\n\nx 322.7 ATIC\n\n4 Incls: (w/omg only)\n1. Ltr fr Mrs M. Loduca\n dtd 28 Jul 52\n2. Ltr fr A.E. Morra\n dtd 13 Jul 52\n3. Ltr fr Mrs M. Walter\n dtd 9 Aug 52\n4. Ltr fr V.L. Stewart\n dtd 28 Jul 52\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 25 Sept 52\nMaj Fournet/71016/cmb\nAFOIN-2A2\n\n26 Sep 1952\n\nMiss Anna Summers\n3108 West 55th Street\nChicago, 32, Illinois\n\nDear Miss Summers:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nx095. Summers, Miss Anna\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 25 Sept 52\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/71016/cmb\n\n26 Sep 1952\n\nMiss Annie Louise Givens\nBloomington, Texas\n\nDear Miss Givens:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which you submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nx095. Givens, Miss Annie Louise\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 afoin-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\n23 Sept 52\n\n26 Sep 1952\n\nMiss Lois Neuwirth\nMiss Esther Schilling\n323 East Hennepin Avenue\nMinneapolis, Minnesota\n\nDear Misses Neuwirth and Schilling:\n\nYour letter of 15 September 1952 was referred to us by the National Security Council. As they told you in their letter of 17 September 1952, we are responsible for the \"flying saucer\" investigation.\n\nWith regard to your questions about \"flying saucer\" reports, we are inclosing a standard release which sets forth the official Air Force attitude and philosophy on the subject. We hope that it will answer your questions satisfactorily.\n\nThe only report we have received of a \"fire-breathing monster\" allegedly seen in West Virginia has been through the press. Because this observation was made at night and under conditions of excitement and, furthermore, since the story has died a natural death without further mention in the press, we discount it entirely. It has been noted in the past that a flurry of \"flying saucer\" reports will stimulate the imagination and give rise to many complementary reports evolved through association. We are convinced that the report from West Virginia represents just such a case where the necessary stimulus was provided by the meteor sighting reports of the preceding Friday night.\n\nWe hope that these brief comments have provided satisfactory answers to your questions.\n\nx095. Neuwirth, Miss Lois\nx095. Schilling, Miss Esther\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\n1 Incl:\nAF standard release\nre flyobs.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 12 Sept 52\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\n25 SEP 1952\n\nMr. G. Francis Nauheimer\nDirector, Glare Research Institute\n6527 S. Seeley Avenue\nChicago 36, Illinois\n\nDear Mr. Nauheimer:\n\nI sincerely appreciated your letter of 29 July 1952 and have referred it to our intelligence analysts for very careful consideration of your ideas and suggestions.\n\nMany thanks for your efforts on our behalf.\n\nSincerely,\nx095. Nauheimer, Mr. G. Francis\n\nJOHN A. SAMFORD\nMAJOR GENERAL, USAF\nDIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\n\nTo be filed with coordination copy of DF to Chief, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio dtd 16 Sep 52 Subj: (U) Material for Project Blue Book."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 12 Sept 52\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\n25 SEP 1952\n\nMr. John N. Hollywood\nCBS Laboratories\n485 Madison Avenue\nNew York 22, New York\n\nDear Mr. Hollywood:\n\nI sincerely appreciated your letter of 29 July 1952\nand have referred it to our intelligence analysts for\nvery careful consideration of your ideas and suggestions.\nMany thanks for your efforts on our behalf.\n\nSincerely,\n\nJOHN A. SAMFORD\nMAJOR GENERAL, USAF\nDIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\nCol JW Wolfe\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n\nTo be filed with coordination copy of DF to Chief, Air Technical Intelligence\nCenter, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio dtd 16 Sep 52 Subj: (U) Material for Project Blue Book."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 12 Sept 52\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\n25 SEP 1952\n\nProfessor John C. Weber\nCollege of Engineering\nThe University of Wisconsin\nMadison 6, Wisconsin\n\nDear Professor Weber:\n\nI sincerely appreciated your letter of 2 August 1952\nand have referred it to our intelligence analysts for\nvery careful consideration of your ideas.\n\nI would be most happy to hear from you further on\nthis subject.\n\nMany thanks for your efforts on our behalf.\n\nSincerely,\n\nJOHN A. SAMFORD\nMAJOR GENERAL, USAF\nDIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\nCol JW Wolfe\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\nAFOIN\n\nTo be filed with coordination copy of DF to Chief, Air Technical Intelligence\nCenter, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio dtd 16 Sep 52 Subj: (U) Material for\nProject Blue Book."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nGLARE RESEARCH INSTITUTE\n\nDiscoverer\n\nCONTRA BLUE RAYS\n\nOffice of the Director\n6527 SO. Seeley Avenue\nChicago 36, Illinois\n\nJuly 29th, 1952\n\nMaj. Gen. John Samford,\nHeadquarters G-2, Air Force,\nDepartment of Defense,\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:-\n\nRegarding the recent reports of the so called flying saucers, I am quite\nsure that the hoax will be exposed by telling you that this is nothing more than\nthe silver iodide used in artificial rainmaking. This is especially true if the\nsilver iodide came in contact with radioactive clouds or so called thunderclouds.\n\nThe solution of this hoax is quite simple, if you will check your records\nyou will find that flying saucers were first seen about the time when silver\niodide came into usage for artificial rainmaking. Again, silver is a reflective\nagency and will reflect all types of light, which accounts for the various hues\nreported by sky gazers. Again, silver iodide, if radioactive or ionized by an\nelectrical cloud will be come fluorescent, which accounts for flyers being unable\nto overtake the so called flying saucers, and their habit of disappearing.\n\nOf course, we must eliminate such reports of flying saucers as were accountable\nby balloons, foo-fighters, meteorites, and the person who just calls up a newspaper\nwith the hope of getting his name in the papers. Also to be disqualified are such\nreports as to ascertain that they are interplanatary space ships. If it were at\nall possible for another planet to send aircraft of any type to our atmosphere,\nit would simply burn up the same as a meteorite and such space ship remains would\nbe found the same as meteorites. As far as I know, no such wreckage has ever been\nfound.\n\nRespectfully yours,\n\ns/\nG. Francis Hauheimer,\nDirector.\n\nCOPY\n\nEncl 1"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCBS LABORATORIES\nA Division of Columbia Broadcasting\nSystem, Inc.\n485 Madison Avenue, New York 22, New York - Plaza 5-2000\n\nAugust 1, 1952\n\nMajor General James A. Samford\nChief of Intelligence\nPentagon Building\nArlington, Virginia\n\nDear Sir:\n\nIn connection with \"flying saucer\" newspaper accounts of\nobservations on the search radar system at the Washington\nNational Airport, it occurred to me that the described be-\nhavior could possibly be accounted for in the following manner:\n\nHigh power, narrow beam fire control radar systems of the usual\ntype might conceivably, under unusual atmospheric conditions,\ncreate enough ionization along points on the beam in the upper\natmosphere to allow the return of an appreciable echo to the\nsearch radar system from such points. The apparent motion would\nbe quite haphazard, following whatever the fire control radar\noperator does in directing the beam.\n\nThis hypothesis is unattractive for several reasons: Firstly,\nthe power required for such an effect is many times greater\nthan that put out by the usual radar. Secondly, such echoes\nwould presumably come from ionospheric heights and therefore\ncould not appear at ranges of a few miles from the search radar,\nas was reported. Thirdly, it seems unlikely that a coincident\nvisual effect of any conspicuous magnitude would be produced.\n\nIn spite of this, I am offering this suggestion in the belief\nthat if considerable time, money and effort is being devoted to\nthis problem, it might be worthwhile trying the relatively simple\nexperiment of having a powerful fire control radar sweep out\ncertain simple patterns to see if they can be detected on the\nsearch radar system, preferably at a time when \"flying saucer\"\nechoes are being observed.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\ns/\nJohn M. Hollywood\nEngineer\n\nJMH/bas\n\nCOPY\n\nEncl 2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nTHE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN\nCollege of Engineering\nMadison 6\n\nDepartment of\nElectrical Engineering\n\nAugust 2, 1952\n\nMaj. Gen. John A. Samford\nAir Force Director of Intelligence\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI should like to present to you what I believe to\nbe a tenable theory as to the origin and nature of the\nphenomena popularly known as \"flying saucers\".\n\nIt has been amply demonstrated that electro-magnetic\nradiation of sufficient power density is capable of\nionizing gas at low pressure. Upon deionization, the\ngas emits radiation of characteristic wave lengths, some\nof which lie in the visible spectrum. Further, it is\nknown that radar equipment can detect ionized gas, such as\nnorthern lights, or charged water droplets, such as appear\nin thunderclouds.\n\nI believe that ionization of disc-shaped segments of\nair in the upper atmosphere may be caused by beams from a r\nradar transmitter held in a fixed position or slowly traversed, i\ninstead of the usual sweeping motion.\n\nTo verify the possibility, I propose in the very near\nfuture to conduct an experiment. A glass sphere containing\nair at atmosphere pressure will be exposed to radiation of a\nknown wave length and power density. The pressure in the\nsphere will then be reduced until ionization occurs. The\nscreen of a separate radar transmitter-receiver will also\nbe observed to note whether the change in the condition of\nthe air is detectable by radar.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\ns/\nJohn C. Weber\nAssoc. Prof. of E. E.\n\n2007 Engineering\n\nCOPY\n\nEncl 3"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/fh/71016\n12 Sep 52 - wrtn 19 Sep 52\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM\n\n1. To prepare DF to ATIC and non-military letters to Prof. John C. Weber, Mr. John M. Hollywood and Mr. G. Francis Nauheimer.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n\n2. In letters addressed to General Samford, the above-named gentlemen offer theories as to the cause of aerial phenomean which they believe may account for unidentified flying object sightings. It is noteworthy that Prof. Weber is Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering at the University of Wisconsin, Mr. Hollywood is an engineer for the CBS Laboratories, and Mr. Nauheimer is Director of the Glare Research Institute.\n\n3. Since the proposals of Prof. Weber and Mr. Hollywood coincide rather closely with the experiments of Mr. Scott of the Engineer Research and Development Lab at Fort Belvoir as well as with the ideas of Dr. Possony, their letters have been reviewed very carefully. Copies are being maintained here for further study.\n\n4. Original letters received from Prof. Weber and Mr. Hollywood will be forwarded to ATIC by DF after signature by D/I of replies.\n\n5. Replies to the three gentlemen are attached. They have been written in the first person from General Samford.\n\n6. Subject matter is not considered suitable for inclusion in the Daily Staff Digest.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED\n\n7. Because of the professional status of the three correspondents, it is strongly recommended that General Samford sign the attached replies.\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A2, Col Smith, Ext. 75990\nAFOIN-2A, Col Adams, Ext. 74072\nAFOIN-2, Col Morrow, Ext. 71110\nAFOIN, Maj Gen Samford, Ext 55613"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\n\nRECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: AFOIN-2A\nDATE: 17 Sep 52\nTYPE: Ltrs\nCLASSIFICATION\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO\nDATE RECD\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS\nTO: AFOIN\nFROM: AFOIN-2A\nDATE 17 Sep 52\nNO. 1\n\nThe attached letters are forwarded for signature by the Director of Intelligence.\n\nAFOIN-2A\n\nAFOIN No. 335\n\nIN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\nAFOIN AFOIN-2 AFOIN-2A ASST\nAFOIN-X AFOIN-2A EXEC\nADMIN ASST\nM&R AFOIN2B EXEC\nAFOIN-1 EXEC.\nAFOIN-3 AIR/INT\n\nACTION COORDINATION\nAction Asgd to: DATE: Dispatch File: Date: 9/24/52\nSigned: DATE:\n\nAFHQ Form 0-85 Previous Editions of the Form are Obsolete 20 Nov 50 51 25247"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWrtn 23 Sept 52\n\n(Unclassified) Staff Study on CIRVIS and FlyObRpt Procedures\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center Wright-Patterson AFB Ohio\nDept of the Air Force Hq USAF - AFOIN-2\nSEP 25 1952\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\n\n1. Subject staff study is inclosed for your review since it contains revisions which affect Project Blue Book.\n\n2. Request your comments as soon as possible.\n\n1 Incl (with orig only)\nStaff Study\n\nJOHN G. ERIKSEN\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Policy and Management Group\nOffice, Deputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nX352.7 ATIC\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\n\nWhen incl. No. 1 is/are withdrawn (or not attached), the Confidential classification of this correspondence will be downgraded to Unclassified in accordance with Par 25b, AFR 205-1.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nOUT 25 SEP 1952 DIRINT HQ USAF\n\nAFOIN Coordination Copy"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\n23 September 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM\n\n1. To submit a Staff Study for coordination and approval.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n\n2. It has become increasingly apparent over the past few months that certain revisions are required in JANAP 146(B), Communications Instructions for Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings while Airborne (CIRVIS).\n\n3. For some time there has existed quite a bit of confusion over the responsibility for evaluating CIRVIS reports, particularly the responsibility of this Headquarters. It has been noticed that very few evaluations have been made by field commands and that this Headquarters has been attempting to furnish ADC the required evaluations. However, these efforts are limited in that the information necessary for an evaluation is normally not readily available here, resulting in an inordinate time loss or, more frequently, the transmittal of an evaluation message which states that no further information is available here.\n\n4. Additionally, the number of reports of unidentified flying objects which have been received over CIRVIS channels during the cyclic flurries of such sightings has given rise to some concern that CIRVIS communication channels may at some time be saturated, thereby providing an excellent opportunity for concealing an air attack which may be mounted against this country.\n\n5. The fact that CIRVIS was restricted to airborne reports was also believed questionable.\n\n6. These factors warranted the preparation of a staff study to examine objectively and completely the adequacy of JANAP 146 (B). Since certain aspects of unidentified flying objects reporting are inseparably related to CIRVIS, the study required the inclusion of this subject as well.\n\n7. The attached study was prepared for this purpose and is believed to represent a thorough and objective analysis.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n8. Since JANAP 146 (B) is an inter-service publication, coordination must be accomplished with the Navy, Army, JIC and JCSC; the latter has been responsible for publication of JANAP 146.\n\n9. A DF to ATIC, with a copy of the study inclosed, is attached in order to obtain ATIC's coordination.\n\n10. R&R's to Director of Operations and to Director of Communications, with copies of the study inclosed, are attached to obtain their coordination.\n\n11. A letter to CG ADC, with 2 copies of the study inclosed, is attached to obtain ADC's coordination.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED\n\n12. That the attached study be approved.\n\nCOORDINATION\nAFOIN-2A2, Col Smith, Ext. 75990\nAFOIN-2A, Col Adams, Ext. 74072\nAFOIN-2, Col Morrow, Ext. 71110\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nSUSPENSE\nORIGIN OF BASIC\nDATE\nTYPE\nDATE\nSUBJECT\nASSIGNED BY\nNUMBER\nROUTING\nInitial \"IN\" column to denote review prior to action. Initial \"OUT\" column to denote review of completed action. (X-for action: √-for coordination)\nIN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\nAFOIN OIN.1 OIN-2 OIN-3\nOIN-X OIN-1X OIN-2X OIN-3X\nOIN-X1\nOIN-X2\nCABLES\nFILE SR NAVAL OFF\nDISPATCH SR ARMY OFF\nTO: AFOIN-X2B(M&R)\nDATE 25 Sept 52\nFROM: AFOIN-2X\nCOMMENT NUMBER 1\nCOMMENTS (Use reverse, if necessary)\nForwarded for dispatch.\nAFHQ FORM 0-86 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. D 6616"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2 Maj Fournet/71016/cmb 23 Sept 52\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center Wright-Patterson AFB Ohio\n(Restricted) Project Blue Book, Gun Camera Film\nDept of the Air Force Hq USAF - AFOIN\nMaj Fournet/ 71016\n1. Returned herewith is gun camera film taken of an unidentified flying object by the 97th FI Squadron.\n2. Prints were made of four frames by OSD-OFI and declassified by Security Review, OSD. It is understood that a print of two of these frames will be furnished TRUE magazine in answer to their request.\n1 Incl: (W/Orig. only) Roll 16mm film\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS COLONEL, USAF Chief, Topical Division Deputy Director for Estimates Directorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nNO M/R\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2 Maj Fournet/cmb/71016 wrtn 24 Sept 1952\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center Wright-Patterson AFB Ohio\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book Dept of the Air Force Hq USAF - AFOIN\nMaj Fournet/71016/cmb\n1. Inclosure, received from the Director of Special Investigations, is for your information and retention.\n1 Incl: (W/orig only) Memo fr Off Spec. Inves. re flyobs (in dup.)\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS Colonel, USAF Chief, Topical Division Deputy Director for Estimates Directorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nNO M/R\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 24 Sept 52\n(Unclassified) Design Proposal from Franz Pankofer\nExecutive, Director of Research & Development, DCS/D Attn: Major Forsman Deputy Director for Estimates, D/I, DCS/O\nMaj Fournet/71016/cmb\n1. Inclosed correspondence and model is forwarded as a matter of primary interest.\n2. No reply to Mr. Pankofer has been made by this office.\n4 Incls: 1. Ltr fr Capt C.B. McKinney dtd 11 Aug 52 2. Ltr fr Mr. F. Pankofer dtd 20 Jul 52 3. Trans. of Incl. 3 4. Cardboard model of \"flying saucer\" (hand-carried by Maj Fournet, 18 Sept 52)\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS Colonel, USAF Chief, Topical Division Deputy Director for Estimates Directorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nNO M/R\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 22 Sept 1952\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\n(Unclassified) Information for Preparation of Reply to Senator Monroney\nDir of Legislation and Liaison OSAF ATTN: Mr. J. O. Crawford\nXXXXX FROM: Deputy Director for Estimates, D/I, DCS/O\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016 AFOIN-2A2\n1. Correspondence from Mr. Martin V. Walsh and related referrals are returned herewith.\n2. Since appropriate comments regarding aircraft accidents have been made by CAA in their reply to Mr. Mr. Walsh, it should suffice to confine our reply to the \"flying saucer\" aspects of his theory. Mr. Walsh's \"theory\" is typical of the many completely amateurish proposals received on the subject, none of which has any scientific basis except the free use of scientific or pseudo-scientific terms. It is therefore suggested that the reply include a comment, substantially as follows:\n(Unclassified) In its investigation and analysis of the \"flying saucer\" reports, the Air Force has found no evidence whatsoever which would substantiate the proposed theory. We are grateful, however, for his efforts to assist us.\n1 Incl (w/orig only) Ltr fr CAA dtd 4 Sep 52 w/cc ltr to Sen Mike Monroney fr Martin V. Walsh dtd 23 Aug 52\nWILLIAM W. WILCOX Colonel, USAF Chief, Policy Office, Deputy Director for Estimates Directorate of Intelligence\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\n1"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nSUSPENSE\nORIGIN OF BASIC\nDept of Commerce - CAA\nDATE\n4 Sept 52\nTYPE\nLtr\nDATE\n22 SEPTEMBER 1952\nSUBJECT\nASSIGNED BY\nM.E. SMITH\nNUMBER\nSAFLL 23530 H\n(U) Information for Preparation of Reply to Senator Monroney\nROUTING\nInitial \"IN\" column to denote review prior to action. Initial \"OUT\" column to denote review of completed action. (X-for action: ✓-for coordination)\nIN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\nAFOIN\nOIN.1\nOIN-2\nOIN-3\nOIN-X\nOIN-1X\nX OIN-2X\nOIN-3X\nOIN-X1\nX OIN-2A\nOIN-X2\nX OIN-2A2\nCABLES\nFILE\nSR NAVAL OFF\nDISPATCH\nSR ARMY OFF\nTO:\nAFOIN-2\nDATE\n22 September 1952\nFROM:\nAFOIN-2A\nCOMMENT NUMBER\n1\nCOMMENTS (Use reverse, if necessary)\nSuspense SAFLL\nDate 23 SEPTEMBER 1952\nR&R for approval and signature.\nAFHQ FORM 0-86 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. D 6616"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nWrtn 16 Sept 52\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center Wright-Patterson AFB Ohio\nDept of the Air Force Hq USAF - AFOIN-2\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\n1. Inclosures are for your information, appropriate action and retention. All concern sightings of objects.\n2. No replies of any kind have been made by this office.\n8 Incls (W/orig only)\n1. Ltr fr A. Korch dtd 20 Aug 52\n2. Ltr fr D. Anda dtd 4 Sept 52\n3. Ltr fr Mrs M. Cauldren dtd 1 Sept 52\n4. Ltr fr A.R. Bernard dtd 28 Aug 52\n5. Ltr fr G.O. Stromberg dtd 4 Sept 52\n6. Ltr fr J.E. O'Brien dtd 29 Jul 52\n7. Ltr fr D.Dutton & D. Barry, dtd 2 Sept 52\n8. Ltr fr Mrs Norrie Watson dtd 3 Sept 52\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\n18 September 1952\nAFOIN-2A2\nSUBJECT: Motion Pictures of Unidentified Objects in Air\nTO: Commanding General Ogden Air Materiel Area Hill Air Force Base, Utah\nReference letter from Chief Photographer Delbert C. Newhouse, U. S. N. dated 11 August 1952, with inclosed movie film, and your first Indorsement dated 28 August 1952. Receipt is acknowledged.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nNo M/R necessary.\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(U) Material for Project Blue Book\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center Wright-Patterson AFB Ohio\nDept of the Air Force Hq USAF - AFOIN-2A\nMaj Fournet/fh/71016\n1. Forwarded for your information and retention.\n2. The writer has been notified by the Army that her letter was being referred to the USAF. Additional correspondence with Mrs. Evans is not mandatory.\n1 Incl.\nLtr fr Mrs. E. Evans dtd 25 Jul 52\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center Wright-Patterson AFB Ohio\nDept of the Air Force Hq USAF - AFOIN-2\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWrtn 18 Sept 52\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\n1. Inclosures are for your information and retention. All involve theories or suggestions related to the Project.\n2. It will be noted that a reply to Dr. Vinal was made by the Army and a reply to Mr. Glasser was made by General Bradley's office. Further correspondence with these individuals is therefore not mandatory. However, it is suggested that acknowledgment be made to Mr. Talkes (letter attached to Dr. Vinal's).\n3. Previous correspondence from Mr. Peirce and other documents related to his case were forwarded to you by DF dated 18 Aug 1952.\n4 Incls (w/orig only)\n1. 1st Ind fr OCSigO dtd 28 Aug 52 with bsc ltr dtd 25 Aug 52 w/Incls\n2. Ltr fr Mr. T.J.H. Peirce dtd 26 Aug 52\n3. CC of ltr fr Mr. J.E. Perry to the FBI dtd 22 Aug 52\n4. Ltr fr M.M. Glasser dtd 29 Aug 52 w/cc of reply to M.M. Glasser w/attachments\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nNo M/R necessary.\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWrtn 15 Sept 52\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\nSEP 16 1952\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN-2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\n1. The inclosed letters are for your information, appropriate action and retention.\n2. Replies to all letters have been prepared.\n3. Mr. Forney was advised that you would contact Dr. Buttolph for any further details which you may require. Request advice of the results of any tests which you may conduct using the sample submitted by Mr. Forney.\n3 Incls\n1. Ltr fr James C. Crockett\nCol, USA (Ret) dtd 2 Aug 52\n2. Ltr fr Charles Forney dtd\n30 July 52\n3. Ltr fr Dr. Leopold Heinemann\ndtd 30 July 52\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nX322.1 ATIC\nNO M/R necessary.\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\nAFOIN-2A\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nA OUT G 22 SEP 1952 DIR/INT HQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWrtn 16 Sept 1952\nColonel James C. Crockett\nDirector of Civil Defense\nTerritory of Alaska\nBox 2747\nJuneau, Alaska\nDear Colonel Crockett:\nYour very interesting letter to the Secretary of Defense dated 2 August 1952 has been referred to us for consideration.\nWe have forwarded it to our Intelligence analysts for very careful study and incorporation into our analysis of \"flying saucers\".\nWe are most grateful to you for bringing these facts to our attention.\nSincerely,\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\nAFOIN-2A\nA OUT G 22 SEP 1952 DIR/INT HQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWrtn 16 Sept 52\nMr. Charles Forney\nPresident, Sani-Ray Corporation\nP.O. Box 478\nNorfolk 1, Virginia\nDear Mr. Forney:\nGeneral Samford has asked me to convey his gratitude to you for your interesting letter of 30 July 1952. We have referred it to our analysts for study and experimentation along with instructions to contact Dr. Buttolph for any further details which they may require.\nWe sincerely appreciate your efforts on our behalf.\nSincerely,\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\nAFOIN-2A\nSEP 1 1952\nA OUT G 22 SEP 1952 DIR/INT HQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWrtn 16 Sep 52\nDr. Leopold Heinemann\n140 West 94th Street\nNew York 35, N. Y.\nDear Dr. Heinemann:\nGeneral Samford has asked me to convey his thanks to you for your interesting letter of 30 July 1952.\nThe ideas which you have submitted are sincerely appreciated and are being given our careful consideration.\nSincerely,\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nAFOIN-2A\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\nSEP 19 1952\nA OUT G 22 SEP 1952 DIR/INT HQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\n19 Sept 1952\n(Restricted) Results of Lab Analysis of Cap Belonging to D. S. DesVergers\n19 SEP 1952\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN-2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\n1. Report of lab analysis performed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on Mr. DesVergers' cap is inclosed for your information and retention. The cap is also returned herewith.\n2. Since it was necessary to mark and cut the cap for analysis, it is considered inadvisable to return it to Mr. DesVergers. It is believed preferable to offer a replacement for it if there existed an agreement that it would be returned.\n2 Incls\n1. Lab rept by FBI dtd 3 Sep 52\n2. Cap which was analyzed (w/orig only)\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\nX-095, DesVergers, D.S.\nNo M/R necessary\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\nAFOIN-2A\nWhen incl(s) No. 1&2 are withdrawn (or not attached), the Confidential classification of this correspondence will be downgraded to Restricted in accordance with Par 25c, AFR 205-1.\nH/C - by Capt. McGovern (for ATIC) 19 Sept 52\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nDECLASSIFIED Authority NW 34267 By BIG NARA, Date 7/16/24\n\nCOPY\n\nREPORT of the FBI LABORATORY\n\nVIA LIAISON\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nSeptember 3, 1952\n\nTO: Directorate of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force Attention: Mr. Gilbert R. Levy\nThe Pentagon Chief, Counter Intelligence\nWashington, D. C. Division\n\nFollowing is the report of the FBI Laboratory giving the results of examinations conducted on evidence received from your office.\n\nRE: Unidentified Flying Object Allegedly Sighted by Mr. D. S. DeSVERGERS, West Palm Beach, Florida\ns/J. Edgar Hoover\nJOHN EDGAR HOOVER, Director\n\nYour File No. 24-185\nFBI File No.\nLab. No. PC-33720 DE\n\nExamination requested by: Addressee\nReference: Letter dated 8-26-52\nExamination requested: Chemical Analyses\n\nSpecimens:\nQ1 Cap which Mr. Desvergers was wearing at the time of the alleged incident.\n\nRESULTS OF EXAMINATION\n\nIn answer to your specific inquiry, you are advised that the areas surrounding the three burned holes in the cap were examined for any residues which might indicate the nature of the incendiary material causing the burns, but no such residues were found. Tests conducted on the sweatband of Q1 indicate that the residue from a glowing ember used to burn a hole in the cloth was easily dislodged and removed by handling and \"roughing\" the burned area.\n\nSome observations made during the examination of Q1 may be of interest to you. The major portion of the top side of the cap bill as well as the area surrounding the yellow and black emblem or insigne and the insigne itself have been subjected to the singeing action of a flame. It is of interest to note that the singeing on these areas is not at all uniform as might be expected if the cap had been subjected to a single shot of a \"red blob\" of a fire of some kind. The fact that the front edge of the cap bill is more severely scorched or singed than other portions of the cap suggests that the singeing could not have taken place when Mr. D. S. Desvergers was fired upon from a position almost vertically above him. When the cap is observed from the front and left edge of the insigne and the fold in the blue cloth in the surrounding\n\nEnclosure -1- (continued next page)\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nareas are examined, the absence of singeing under the fold suggests the possibility that the cap was not being worn on the head when the singeing took place. It was noted that this fold \"smoothed out\" when the cap was placed on the head.\n\nAs to what might have caused the burned holes in the cap, you are advised that on the cap bill there was noted an area of particular significance which has been circled with a pencil mark. In this circle is a burned area approximately 1/32\" in diameter. It is believed to be too small to have been caused singularly and intentionally by Mr. Desvergers. The appearance of the small burned spot suggests the possiblity that a small glowing ember of some kind, very hot but containing a small amount of heat, because of its size, fell on the cap bill, causing burns in two of the threads after which the glowing ember cooled off and fell off the cap bill.\n\nSpecimen Q1 is being returned to you herewith.\n\n-2-\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nSEP 16 1952\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center Wright-Patterson AFB Ohio\n\nDept of the Air Force Hq USAF - AFOIN\nMaj Fournet/fh/71016 AFOIN-2A2\n\n1. The inclosed letters are for your information, appropriate action and retention.\n\n2. Each of these letters has been reviewed by this office for possible application to the project. Replies have been prepared expressing USAF appreciation.\n\n3. It is believed that the ideas presented by Professor Weber and Mr. Hollywood warrant your very careful consideration and study.\n\n3 Incls.\n1. Ltr fr Mr. G. Francis Nauheimer dtd 29 Jul 52\n2. Ltr fr Mr. John M. Hollywood dtd 1 Aug 52\n3. Ltr fr Prof. John C. Weber dtd 2 Aug 1952\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nX322.7 ATIC\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\n\nFrom Coordination Copy\n\n000.9 Flying Saucer\n\nG 26 SEP 1952 OUT"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLARE RESEARCH INSTITUTE\nDiscoverer\nCONTRA BLUE RAYS\nOffice of the Director\n6527 SO. Seeley Avenue\nChicago 36, Illinois\n\nJuly 29th, 1952\n\nMaj. Gen. John Samford,\nHeadquarters G-2, Air Force,\nDepartment of Defense,\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:-\n\nRegarding the recent reports of the so called flying saucers, I am quite sure that the hoax will be exposed by telling you that this is nothing more than the silver iodide used in artificial rainmaking. This is especially true if the silver iodide came in contact with radioactive clouds or so called thunderclouds.\n\nThe solution of this hoax is quite simple, if you will check your records you will find that flying saucers were first seen about the time when silver iodide came into usage for artificial rainmaking. Again, silver is a reflective agency and will reflect all types of light, which accounts for the various hues reported by sky gazers. Again, silver iodide, if radioactive or ionized by an electrical cloud will be come fluorescent, which accounts for flyers being unable to overtake the so called flying saucers, and their habit of disappearing.\n\nOf course, we must eliminate such reports of flying saucers as were accountable by balloons, foo-fighters, meteorites, and the person who just calls up a newspaper with the hope of getting his name in the papers. Also to be disqualified are such reports as to ascertain that they are interplanatary space ships. If it were at all possible for another planet to send aircraft of any type to our atmosphere, it would simply burn up the same as a meteorite and such space ship remains would be found the same as meteorites. As far as I know, no such wreckage has ever been found.\n\nRespectfully yours,\n\ns/\nG. Francis Nauheimer,\nDirector.\n\nCOPY\nEncl 1"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CBS LABORATORIES\nA Division of Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.\n485 Madison Avenue, New York 22, New York - Plaza 5-2000\n\nAugust 1, 1952\n\nMajor General James A. Samford\nChief of Intelligence\nPentagon Building\nArlington, Virginia\n\nDear Sir:\n\nIn connection with \"flying saucer\" newspaper accounts of observations on the search radar system at the Washington National Airport, it occurred to me that the described behavior could possibly be accounted for in the following manner:\n\nHigh power, narrow beam fire control radar systems of the usual type might conceivably, under unusual atmospheric conditions, create enough ionization along points on the beam in the upper atmosphere to allow the return of an appreciable echo to the search radar system from such points. The apparent motion would be quite haphazard, following whatever the fire control radar operator does in directing the beam.\n\nThis hypothesis is unattractive for several reasons: Firstly, the power required for such an effect is many times greater than that put out by the usual radar. Secondly, such echoes would presumably come from ionospheric heights and therefore could not appear at ranges of a few miles from the search radar, as was reported. Thirdly, it seems unlikely that a coincident visual effect of any conspicuous magnitude would be produced.\n\nIn spite of this, I am offering this suggestion in the belief that if considerable time, money and effort is being devoted to this problem, it might be worthwhile trying the relatively simple experiment of having a powerful fire control radar sweep out certain simple patterns to see if they can be detected on the search radar system, preferably at a time when \"flying saucer\" echoes are being observed.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\ns/\nJohn M. Hollywood\nEngineer\n\nJMH/bas\nCOPY\nEncl 2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nTHE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN\nCollege of Engineering\nMadison 6\n\nDepartment of\nElectrical Engineering\n\nAugust 2, 1952\n\nMaj. Gen. John A. Samford\nAir Force Director of Intelligence\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI should like to present to you what I believe to be a tenable theory as to the origin and nature of the phenomena popularly known as \"flying saucers\".\n\nIt has been amply demonstrated that electro-magnetic radiation of sufficient power density is capable of ionizing gas at low pressure. Upon deionization, the gas emits radiation of characteristic wave lengths, some of which lie in the visible spectrum. Further, it is known that radar equipment can detect ionized gas, such as northern lights, or charged water droplets, such as appear in thunderclouds.\n\nI believe that ionization of disc-shaped segments of air in the upper atmosphere may be caused by beams from a r radar transmitter held in a fixed position or slowly traversed, i instead of the usual sweeping motion.\n\nTo verify the possibility, I propose in the very near future to conduct an experiment. A glass sphere containing air at atmosphere pressure will be exposed to radiation of a known wave length and power density. The pressure in the sphere will then be reduced until ionization occurs. The screen of a separate radar transmitter-receiver will also be observed to note whether the change in the condition of the air is detectable by radar.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\ns/\nJohn C. Weber\nAssoc. Prof. of E. E.\n\n2007 Engineering\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Uncl) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force Maj Fournet/fh/71016\nIntelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN AFOIN-2A2\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. The inclosed letters are forwarded for your information and retention. All concern sightings of unidentified flying objects or \"experiences\" believed related thereto.\n\n2. No acknowledgments or replies have been made by this office. However, it will be noted that the Civil Aeronautics Administration has replied to Pfc. Hitchcock (Incl 1).\n\n22 Incls (w/orig only)\n(See Attached Sheet)\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nM/R not required.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCLOSURES\n\n22 Incls\n1. Ltr to Pfc Hitchcock frm Office of Aviation Information, dtd Aug 20,52, w/ltr frm Pfc Hitchcock, dtd 11 Aug 52.\n2. Ltr frm R.J. Blackman, dtd 18 Aug 52, Stover, Mo.\n3. Ltr frm Mansfield W. Williams, dtd 19 Aug 52, to Sec. Finletter, w/Incl.\n4. Santa Barbara News-Press clipping,dtd Aug 17, 1952, Titled, \"Happy Says He Saw One, Too,\"\n5. Ltr dtd 16 Aug 52, frm (Mrs. John F) Lucile S. Janssen, Richmond, Calif.\n6. Ltr dtd 17 Aug 52, frm Henry B. Lee III, Maderia Beach, Fla.\n7. Ltr dtd 17 Aug 52, frm J.Pat Farrell, Austin, Texas.\n8. Ltr dtd 30 Jul 52, frm Bert Bunnell, Northford, Conn.\n9. Clipping frm \"The Bay City Times\"\n10. Ltr dtd 11 Aug 52, frm Gerald G. McKelvey, Waynesboro, Penna.\n11. Ltr dtd 15 Aug 52, frm John Morrissey, K.C. Mo.\n12. Ltr dtd 20 Aug 52, frm Gore Vidal, Barrytown, N.Y.\n13. Ltr dtd 20 Aug 52, frm Steve Davis, La Grange, Ill.\n14. Ltr dtd 22 Aug 52, frm Lloyd Geisness, Alexandria, Minnesota\n15. Ltr dtd ? frm Robert J. Hummel, Toledo, Ohio\n16. Ltr dtd 29 Aug 52, frm Seth Pope, Downingtown, Pa.\n17. Ltr dtd 29 Aug 52, frm Mrs. Bessie Colton Johnson, Detroit, Mich.\n18. Itrdtd 28 Aug 52? frm Richard O. Nelson, Laurel, Mont.\n19. Ltr dtd 26 Aug 52, frm Maj. John J. Phillips., (retd.) Temple City, Calif.\n20. Ltr dtd 3 Aug 52, frm Barry T. Jensen, Ph.D., Hyattsville, Md.\n21. Ltr frm Sam Singer, East Chicago, Indiana.\n22. Ltr dtd 29 Aug 52, frm Roy F. Hall, Capt. U.S.Army, Retd, w/ltr frm Mrs. Cletus Dodd, Dallas, Texas."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Uncl) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force Maj Fournet/fh/71016\nIntelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. The inclosed letters are forwarded for your information, appropriate action and retention. All relate to various theories and proposals on unidentified flying objects.\n\n2. No acknowledgments or replies have been made by this office.\n\n8 Incls (w/orig only)\n1. Ltr fr A.A. Murray, Cdr. Brestow, Va., dtd 28 Jul 52\n2. Ltr dtd 13 Aug 52, fr Hans W. Groth, P.V. N.Y.\n3. Ltr dtd Aug 52, fr J. Lesher, Santa Ana, Calif.\n4. Ltr dtd 11 Aug 52, fr Mrs. B.J. Vos, McLean, Va., w/incl.\n5. Ltr dtd 7 Aug 52, fr T. Resmsnyder, Derby, N.Y.\n6. Ltr dtd 6 Aug 52, fr Mrs. Ray Sheinberg, Lake Luzerne, N.Y.\n7. Ltr dtd 29 Jul 52, fr Thad W. Culmer II, Robinson, Ill.\n8. Ltr dtd 19 Aug 52, fr E.C. Huggin, Cleveland, Ohio\n\nM/R not required.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMajor Fournet/bps/71016\nW/13 Sept 52\n\n(Uncl) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force Maj Fournet/bps/71016\nIntelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. The inclosed letters are forwarded for your information, appropriate action and retention. All relate to various theories and proposals on unidentified flying objects.\n\n2. No acknowledgments or replies have been made by this office.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n8 Incls\n1. Ltr dtd 28 Jul 52, frm A.A.Murray, Cmdr.Brestow, Va.\n2. Ltr dtd 13 Aug 52, frm Hans W. Groth, P.V. N.Y.\n3. Ltr dtd Aug 52, frm J. Lesher, Santa Ana, Calif.\n4. Ltr dtd 11 Aug 52, frm Mrs.B.J. Vos, McLean, Va., w/incl.\n5. Ltr dtd 7 Aug 52, frm T.Resmsnyder, Derby, N.Y.\n6. Ltr dtd 6 Aug 52, frm Mrs. Ray Sheinberg, Lake Luzerne, N.Y.\n7. Ltr dtd 29 Jul 52, frm Thad W. Culmer II, Robinson, Ill.\n8. Ltr dtd 19 Aug 52, frm E.C. Huggin, Cleveland, Ohio\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nAFOIN-X Reference Cy.\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Uncl) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force SEP 16 1952\nIntelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN Maj Fournet/fh/71016\nWright-Patterson AFB AFOIN-2A2\nOhio\n\n1. The inclosed letter with attachments is forwarded for your information\nand retention.\n\n2. Reply expressing USAF appreciation has been made by AFOIN-X.\n\n1 Incl. WILLIAM A. ADAMS\nLtr dtd 2 Aug 52, frm Colonel, USAF\nD. Jesch, Grants Pass, Oregon Chief, Topical Division\nw/incls Deputy Director for Estimates\n Director of Intelligence\n\nM/R not required.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nAFOIN Coordination Copy"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWrtn 15 Sept 1952\n\n(U) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force Maj Fournet/dbv/71016\nIntelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN-2\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. The inclosed letters are for your information and retention. They were\nreferred to this office by the Adjutant General, US Army.\n\n2. Replies have not yet been made to Mr. Mones and Mr. McHaney. However,\nthe Army notified Mr. Inghram that his letter was being referred to the Air Force,\nand further correspondence with him is therefore not mandatory.\n\n3. Incls\n1. Ltr fr Mr. A.H. Mones\ndtd 30 July 1952\n2. Ltr fr Mr. Orin W. McHaney\ndtd 14 Aug 1952\n3. Ltr fr Mr. Joseph W. Inghram\ndtd 5 Aug 1952\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION COPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Dept of the Air Force SEP 16 1952\nIntelligence Center Uq USAF - AFOIN Maj Fournet/fh/71016\nWright-Patterson AFB AFOIN-2A2\nOhio\n\n1. Inclosures are forwarded for your information, appropriate action and\nretention.\n\n2. Request preparation of appropriate indorsements acknowledging receipt.\n\n2 Incls. WILLIAM A. ADAMS\n1. Ltr fr Pinecastle AFB Colonel, USAF\ndtd 23 Jul 52 w/w Inds Chief, Topical Division\n2. Ltr fr Bolling AFB Deputy Director for Estimates\ndtd 14 Aug 52 w/1 Incl Directorate of Intelligence\nltr, 4th Dist. OSI, dtd\n4 Aug 52\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nAFOIN Coordination Copy"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWrtn 13 Sept 52\n\nSEP 16 1952\n\nMr. J. W. Pennington\nRoute 1, Box 132\nMobile, Alabama\n\nDear Mr. Pennington:\n\nYour recent letter concerning unidentified flying objects\nhas been received by this Headquarters, and the ideas which\nyou submitted are receiving our careful consideration.\n\nWe appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\nHowever, we don't wish to impose on your generosity any\nfurther and will attempt to render the suggested interpre-\ntations ourselves. Many thanks, though, for your kind offer\nof additional assistance.\n\nSincerely,\n\nJOHN T. MATTHEWS, Captain, USAF\nJOHN J. MORROW\nColonel, USAF\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nNo M/R necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION COPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OVER SHEET\n\nRECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\n\nFROM: AFOIN-2A2 DATE: 15 Sept 52\nSUBJECT: Non-mil ltr\n\nNon-mil ltr to Mr. J.W. Pennington,\nMobile, Alabama.\n\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS\n\nTO: AFOIN-2 DATE: 15 Sept 52\nFROM: AFOIN-2A NO. 1\nREMARKS:\n\nLtr for approval and dispatch.\n\nAFOIN-2A\n\nAction Asgd To: Date: Disposition:\nSigned: Date: File: Date:\n\nAFMG Form 0-86 Previous editions of this form are obsolete.\n20 Feb 50"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2/ Maj Fournet/fh/71016\nwrtn 16 Sep 52\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical\nIntelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\n\nMaj Fournet/fh/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\n1. Inclosed correspondence is forwarded for your information and retention.\n\n2. Request acknowledgment of receipt by indorsement to basic letter.\n\n1 Incl\nRpt of U/I flyobs,\nw/2 Incls - statements\nre subj.\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nAFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2 Maj Fournet/fh/71016\nwrtn 16 Sep 52\n\nAFOIN-2A2\n\n16 September 1952\n\nMrs. Nellie T. Dull\nRoute 3\nStaunton, Virginia\n\nDear Mrs. Dull:\n\nWe wish to assure you that the contents of your letter, dated 1 August 1952, were not divulged to anyone outside of Air Force Intelligence and that we treat all information such as you submitted as strictly confidential. Therefore, the concern expressed in yours of 12 August 1952 is unfounded.\n\nMr. Scott's announcement of his theory at about the same time that you corresponded with us was merely a coincidence. Furthermore, his theory and yours are quite dissimilar. The only thing in common is that you both utilize some aspects of electro-magnetism in arriving at your respective conclusions.\n\nWe hope that this information will help dispel any doubt which you may have concerning the use of the ideas which you submitted.\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\n15 September 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To prepare non-military letter to Mrs. Nellie T. Dull of Staunton, Virginia.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n2. On 1 Aug 52 Mrs. Dull wrote in a letter to USAF Intelligence in which she theorized, in a completely amateurish manner, that electromagnetism could account for \"flying saucers\". There was absolutely no technical foundation to her ideas, and, actually, she presented the entire thing in the form of a question, viz. \"please let me know if this is the answer.\"\n\n3. A routine reply, thanking her for the suggestion, was dispatched by this office 20 August 1952.\n\n4. In a second letter dated 12 Aug 52, Mrs. Dull expresses concern that her ideas were \"stolen\" by Mr. Noel Scott of the Engineer Research and Development Lab since the latter announced his ionization theory shortly after Mrs. Dull wrote her first letter.\n\n5. Copies of both letters from Mrs. Dull and our reply are attached.\n\n6. A reply has been prepared, the contents of which should alleviate Mrs. Dull's concern.\n\n7. Subject matter is not considered suitable for inclusion in the Daily Staff Digest.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED:\n\n8. Approval, signature and dispatch of attached letter.\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nafoin-2A2, Col Wolfe, Ext. 75990\nAFOIN-2A, Col Adams, Ext. 74072\nAFOIN-2, Col Morrow, Ext. 71110"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWrtn 13 Sept 52\n\nSEP 15 1952\n\nMiss Florence Easley\n11702 St. Clair\nCleveland, Ohio\n\nDear Miss Easley:\n\nYour recent telegram concerning unidentified flying objects has been referred to this Directorate.\n\nWe are giving your ideas careful consideration and appreciate your interest and efforts to assist us.\n\nSincerely,\n\nJOHN T. MATTHEWS, Captain, USAF\nJOHN J. MORROW\nColonel, USAF\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nNo M/R necessary\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2X\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION COPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\n\nROUTING AND TRANSMITTAL OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\n\nAFOIN-2A2\n15 September 52\nNon-Mil ltr\n\nNon-mil ltr to Miss Florence Easley\nCleveland, Ohio\n\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS\n\nTO: AFOIN-2A\nDATE 15 September 1952\nFROM: AFOIN-2A2\nNO. 1\n\nREMARKS:\n\nLtr for approval and dispatch.\n\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\n\nOFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\nAFOIN-2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A3 ASST EXEC ASST EXEC DEPUTY AIR/INT\n\nAction Assd To: Date: Dispatch:\nSigned: Date: Filed: Date:\n\nAFHQ Form 0-66 Previous Editions of this Form are obsolete 20 Nov 50 51-25247"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWrtn 13 September 1952\n\nSEP 15 1952\n\nMr. Zed Taylor\n3101 Clinton Drive\nHouston 10, Texas\n\nDear Mr. Taylor:\n\n\tYour letter of 5 August 1952 to the Department of the\nArmy was referred to us since we are responsible for the\n\"flying saucer\" investigation.\n\n\tWe will be happy to receive any additional information\non the subject which you care to volunteer.\n\n\tYour interest is appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nJOHN T. MATTHEWS, Captain, USAF\nJOHN J. MORROW\nColonel, USAF\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nNo M/R necessary. Orig ltr to be filed in AFOIN-2A2\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv//71016\n13 September 1952\n\nSEP 15 1952\n\nMr. Gustav F. Ebding\n4125 East 95th Street\nCleveland 5, Ohio\n\nDear Mr. Ebding:\n\n\tYour letter of 11 August 1952 to the Department of the\nArmy has been referred to us for attention.\n\n\tWe will be pleased to receive any information or ideas\nwhich you may have concerning the subject of \"flying saucers\".\n\n\tYour interest and efforts to assist us are appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nJOHN T. MATTHEWS, Captain, USAF\nJOHN J. MORROW\nColonel, USAF\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nNo M/R necessary. Orig ltr to be filed in AFOIN-2A2\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13 Sept 52\nLtrs\n\nLtrs to Mr. Gustav F. Ebding, Cleveland, Ohio\nMr. Zed Taylor, Houston, Texas\nMr. John Starr Kim, Westbury, N.Y.\n\nTO: AFOIN-2A DATE 15 Sept 52\nFROM: AFOIN-2A2 NO. 1\n\nREMARKS:\n\nLtrs for approval and dispatch.\n\nAFOIN AFOIN-2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2B ASST EXEC ADMIN EXEC AIR/IRT\n\nAction Coordination\n\nActing Asgd To: Date: Dispatch:\nSigned: Date: Filed:\n\nAFHQ Form 0-86 Previous Editions of this Form are obsolete 52-25247\n20 Mar 50"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWrtn 15 Sept 1952\n\nSEP 15 1952\n\nMr. E. L. Lull\nNew Ute Hotel\nSalt Lake City, Utah\n\nDear Mr. Lull:\n\n\tBased on the information in your telegram of 29 July\n1952, your book \"Daniel and the Atomic Equations of the\nLoaves\" has been carefully studied and due notice taken\nof your conclusions, particularly that regarding the date\nof 4 October 1954 (presumably revised by your telegram\nto 4 October 1952). This data is receiving our careful\nconsideration.\n\n\tYour efforts on behalf of the U.S. Air Force and of\nour country are indeed appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nJOHN T. MATTHEWS, Captain, USAF\nJOHN J. MORROW\nColonel, USAF\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nSTAFF MESSAGE DIVISION\n\nINCOMING CLEAR MESSAGE\n\nSMD A14 1\n\nWU J078 NL PD\n\nSALT LAKE CITY UTAH JUL 29 1952\n\nINTELLIGENCE UNIT US AIR FORCE\n\nPENTAGON BLDG WASHDC\n\nWITH RESPECT TO THE RECENT HYPERSPACE DEMONSTRATIONS OF THE DISC COMPANY IN FREE SPACE IT MAY HAPPEN THAT THE COMPUTATIONS SHOWN IN MY BOOK \"DANIEL AND THE ATOMIC EQUATIONS OF THE LOAVES\" ARE IN ERROR BY ABOUT TWO YEARS\n\nE L LULL NEW UTE HOTEL\n\nJUL 30 525A\n\nACTION: OIN\n\nAF IN: 14051 (30 Jul 52)\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\n13 September 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To prepare a non-military letter to Mr. E. L. Lull of Salt Lake City.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n2. In a telegram to this Directorate dated 29 July 1952 (AF IN 14051), Mr. Lull states that, based on certain recent data, his calculations in his book \"Daniel and the Atomic Equations of the Loaves\" may be in error by about 2 years.\n\n3. A copy of this book was obtained through the Army Library from the Library of Congress. It is significant that the latter classifies the book as BS (Bible).\n\n4. This analyst must plead innocent to any accusation that he is a theologian. Nonetheless, on the assumption that any information regardless of origin or nature may possibly prove helpful to Intelligence and applying amateur theology, the book was scanned and the following conclusions derived:\n\na. Mr. Lull, who is an engineer, has attempted to establish a correlation between certain significant dates in history and specific passages in the Testaments and the Book of Mormon by the use of mathematical analyses.\n\nb. Further, by the same analyses, he arrives at certain future dates which, by analogy, he concludes are indicative of extreme significance to the world. One such date is 4 Oct 54. It is implied that a revelation will be made on that date in fulfillment of one of Daniel's prophecies in the old Testament and that this revelation will be a joyous rather than a grievous one.\n\n5. It is assumed that Mr. Lull's statement to the effect that his calculations may be in error by about 2 years refers to the 4 Oct 54 derivation and, further, that the error is positive, i. e. that the date"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nshould be 4 Oct 52. This assumption is based on the urgency with which Mr. Lull informed us of his error (by telegram).\n\n6. It is additionally assumed that Mr. Lull intends that the aforementioned date be associated with Project Blue Book since:\n\na. He states in his telegram that the basis for his belief that he made an error in his original calculations (presumably re 4 Oct 54) is \"the recent hyperspace demonstrations of the Disc Company in free space\".\n\nb. His telegram was dispatched at the height of the most recent \"flying saucer\" flurry in the press (the date of the telegram is the same as that on which General Samford held a press conference on the subject).\n\n7. Accordingly, a reply to Mr. Lull has been prepared expressing appreciation and stating that due notice has been taken of his conclusions.\n\n8. Additionally, this analyst has marked 4 Oct down as a red letter day and is eagerly awaiting its arrival since it apparently means that the mystery of the \"flying saucers\" will finally be solved and his toil towards that end will no longer be necessary.\n\n9. Subject matter is not considered suitable for inclusion in the Daily Staff Digest.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED:\n\n10. Approval and dispatch of attached letter to Mr. Lull.\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nAFOIN-2A2, Col Wolfe, Ext. 75990\nAFOIN-2A, Col Adams, Ext. 74072\nAFOIN-2, Col Morrow, Ext. 71110\n\n2\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\n15 September 1952\nNon-Mil Ltr\n\nNon-Mil Ltr to Mr. E. L. Lull\n\nTO: AFOIN-2\nDATE 15 September 52\nFROM: AFOIN-2A\nNO. 1\n\nREMARKS:\n\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\n\nLtr for approval and dispatch.\n\nAFOIN-2A"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND\nOFFUTT AIR FORCE BASE\nOMAHA, NEBRASKA\n\nDINC 350\n\n13 SEP 1952\n\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) FLYOBRPT\n\nTO: Director of Intelligence\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nThe attached Air Intelligence Information Reports are forwarded as per instructions AFL 200-5, dated 29 April 1952, subject, FLYOBRPT.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nRAY P. STEWART\nMajor, USAF\nAsst Adj Gen\n\n4 Incls\n1. IR-133-52 (3cys)\n2. IR-134-52 (3cys)\n3. IR-135-52 (4cys)\n4. IR-136-52 (2cys)\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n\n14 Sept 52.\nIncl 1 to AIN 0 IN-152\nmaj. Pandolfo\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nHEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND\nOFFUTT AIR FORCE BASE\nOMAHA, NEBRASKA\n\nDINC\n350\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) FLYOBRPT\n\n11 SEP 1952\n\nTO: Director of Intelligence\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nThe attached Air Intelligence Information Reports are forwarded\nas per instructions AFL 200-5, dated 29 April 1952, subject, FLYOBRPT.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nRAY P. STEWART\nMajor, USAF\nAsst Adj Gen\n\n2 Incls\n1. IR-129-52 (3cys)\n2. IR-130-52 (2 cys)\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n\n17 Sept.\n\nmaj Landolfo\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nWrtn 10 September 52\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\n11 SEP 52\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN\n\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\nAttached cable from USAIRA Norway is for your information. It is the reply to our cable AFOIN 56103 dated 19 Aug 52, an information copy of which was addressed to you.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nIncl (w/Orig only)\nCable GAF IN 98951\ndtd 22 Aug 52\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nNO M/R NECESSARY.\n\nWhen incl No. 1 is not attached, the Confidential classification of this correspondence will be downgraded to Restricted in accordance with AFR 205-1.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN COORDINATION COPY"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Unclassified) Investigation of Incident of 1/2 Sep 52 Arlington Va. having possible relation to Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN-2A2\n\n11 SEP 52\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\n\n1. The inclosures relate to the investigation of an incident which allegedly occurred during the night of 1/2 September 1952, and which has a possible relation to Project Blue Book. The investigation was conducted by this office on 3 and 4 September 1952.\n\n2. Inclosures 1 and 2 give details of the investigation. A list of samples obtained during the investigation and pertinent data on each are included in Inclosure 3. These samples have been forwarded to OSI with a request that they be submitted to the FBI for lab analysis. The results of the analysis will be forwarded as soon as they become available.\n\n3. Inclosure 4 contains 5 photographic negatives taken of the area in question at 1430 hours on 4 September 1952. All shots except the one showing the cap on the ground were taken of the ring in its original state. The color of the deposit was approximately the same as on the preceding evening when samples were taken, but the amount of the deposit appeared to have diminished somewhat. The shot in which the cap appears on the ground was taken after limestone had been spread over the original ring in order to provide better definition. Care was taken to duplicate the original configuration, both as to shape and density.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n4 Incls (w/orig. only)\n1. Summary of investigation\n2. Sketch of area\n3. List of samples obtained\n4. Photographic negs (5) to ATIC only\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nNo M/R necessary. (Indy of Inclosures (except no. 4) to remain w/stayback cy)\n\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nHEADQUARTERS\n6580TH MISSILE TEST WING\nHolloman Air Force Base, New Mexico\n\nMTHIP\n10 September 1952\n\nSUBJECT: Transmittal of Air Intelligence Information Report\n\nTO: Director of Intelligence\nHeadquarters, USAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nIn compliance with Air Force Letter 200-5, Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting, dated 29 April 1952, the following Air Intelligence Information Report is submitted for your information.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING OFFICER:\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n\n1 Incl:\nAir Intel Info Rpt (3 cys)\n\nWILLIAM F. HARRIS\nLt. Col., USAF\nDeputy for Personnel\n\nx 319.1 AF Intelligence Rept 1952 Sept\n\nmaj Landolfo\n\n0010386\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISPATCHED: HOLLOMAN\nAF BASE, NEW MEXICO\n\n1952 SEP 11 AM 7:47\n\nREC'D\n18 SEP 1952\nDIR/INT\nHQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AGAO-CCY\t\tFlying Saucers\nChief of Staff\t\tTAGO\t\t\t11 August 1952\nU. S. Air Force\t\t\t\t\tMr. Acker/52267\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\n1. Forwarded as a matter of primary interest.\n\n2. Writers have been informed of this reference.\n\nFOR THE ADJUTANT GENERAL:\n\nWm. O. Williams\nAdjutant General\n\n8 Incl\n1. Ltr from T. Houritan\n2. Ltr 1 Aug 52\n3. Ltr 31 Jul 52\n4. Ltr 29 Jul 52\n5. Ltr from Billy Cooey\n6. Ltr 2 Aug 52\n7. Ltr 2 Aug 52 from\nMr. Schaefer\n8. Ltr 1 Aug 52\n\nTO: Chief, Air Technical FROM: Dept of the Air Force Date:\nIntelligence Center Hq USAF - AFOIN Maj Fournet/dbv/71016\nWright Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. Forwarded for your information and retention.\n\n2. Since all letters have been acknowledged by the Army, further correspondence is not mandatory.\n\n3. Inclosure 4 has been withdrawn and referred to OPI for reply.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n8 Incls\nWithdrawn Incl 4\nNO M/R Necessary\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\t\tAFOIN-2A\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nWrtn 9 September 1952\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical\t\tDept of the Air Force\t\tMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nIntelligence Center\t\tHq USAF - AFOIN\t\t\tAFOIN-2A2\nOhio\n\n1. Inclosed letter is forwarded for your information and retention.\n\n2. News releases on 18 and 19 August 1952 were scanned for indications that writer attempted to carry out threat of \"exposure\" mentioned in his letter. Nothing was found. Although this is a rather obvious hoax, it would be interesting to determine what an analysis of his photograph would reveal and, through your clipping service, if any mention of an exhibition is found, perhaps in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania newspapers.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl (W/Orig only)\nLtr dtd 2 Aug 52\n(Anonymous)\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nM/R NECESSARY.\n\nX322.79 TIC\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\t\tAFOIN-2A\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nAFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nwrtn 8 Sept 1952\n\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical\t\tDept of the Air Force\t\tMaj Fournet/71016\nIntelligence Center\t\tHq USAF - AFOIN\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\n1. The inclosed letters are forwarded for your information, appropriate action and retention. All concern sightings of unidentified flying objects.\n\n2. No acknowledgements or other replies have been made by this office.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n23 Incls (w/orig only)\n(see attached sheet for listing)\n\nJAMES P. BECKETT\n\nWILLIAM W. WILCOX\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Policy and Management Group\nOffice, Deputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2\t\tAFOIN-2A\t\tAFOIN-2\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Ltr fr C. Raymond Dillon, Capt, CAP, Balaton, Minn. dtd 24 Jul 52\n2. Ltr fr Jerry Elliott, Roanoke Rapids, N. C. w/Incl dtd 22 Jul 52\n3. Ltr fr Jerry Elliott, Roanoke Rapids, N. C. w/ Incl dtd 25 Jul 52\n4. Ltr fr Corliss Cramer, Arlington, Va. dtd 22 July 52\n5. Anonymous ltr fr Nokomis, Fla. dtd 25 July 52\n6. Ltr fr Jim Levenburger, Saginaw, Mich. dtd 22 July 1952\n7. Ltr fr Mrs. H. M. West, Creston, Iowa dtd 22 July 1952\n8. Ltr fr Betty Marshall, Havertown, Pa dtd 1 Aug 52\n9. Anonymous ltr fr San Francisco, Calif dtd 29 July 1952\n10. Ltr fr Michael Duffy, Carlin, Nevada dtd 31 July 1952\n11. Ltr fr Dora Yeaton, Portsmouth, N. H. dtd (PM) 29 Jul 52\n12. Ltr fr Doris Clemens, Pandosa, Oregon, dtd 2 Aug 1952\n13. D/F fr TAG w 1 Incl dtd 6 Aug 1952\n14. Ltr fr Monroe J. Kight, Hot Springs, Ark. dtd 3 Aug 52\n15. Ltr fr Silvino R. Castella, New Bedford, Mass dtd 27 Jul 52\n16. Ltr fr William F. O'Connor, No. Hollywood, Calif dtd 23 Jul 52\n17. Ltr fr Mrs. Raymond O. Pratt, Brattleboro, Vermont dtd 6 Aug 52\n18. Ltr fr Richard Little, Elmhurst, Ill, dtd 31 Jul 52\n19. Ltr fr Lucy D. Sanders, Ypsilanti, Mich, dtd 6 Aug 52\n20. Ltr fr Johnnie Mittl, Kutztown, Pa. dtd 31 Jul 52\n21. Ltr fr Albert H. Sundahl, (Cpt-Ret.), Spokane, Wash dtd 31 Jul 52\n22. Ltr fr John E. Byrd, Norman, Ark., dtd (PM) 8 Aug 52\n23. Ltr fr Keith W. Johnson, Dallas, Texas dtd 6 Aug 52"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nRECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST CLASSIFICATION\nFROM: AFOIN-2A2 DATE 8 September 1952 TYPE D/F\n(U) Material for Project Blue Book\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS SUSPENSE DATE ASGD BY NO. DATE REC'D\nTO: AFOIN-2 DATE 8 Sept 1952\nFROM: AFOIN-2A NO. 1\nREMARKS Maj Fournet/dbv/71016\nD/F forwarded for approval, signature and transmission.\nAFOIN-2A\nOFFICE IN OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\nACTION ASGD TO: DATE: DISPATCH: Coordination\nSIGNED: DATE: FILE: DATE:\nAFHQ Form 0-86 Previous Editions of this Form are obsolete 52 25247 20 Nov 50"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2 Maj Fournet/dbv/71016 wrtn 8 Sep 52\n(Unclassified) Suggested Reply to Mr. Berridge (Partial)\nAF Press Desk, OSAF-OPI\nDeputy Director for Estimates, D/I, DGS/O\nSEP - 9 1952 Maj Fournet/dbv/71016 AFOIN-2A2\n1. In addition to the usual comments to be incorporated into a reply to Mr. Berridge by your office, it is suggested that the following paragraph be included:\n\"The details of the observation which you made were referred to our Intelligence analysts for their study and comment. They have informed me that, although the object could possibly have been a high altitude balloon ascending through different wind strata, they find it impossible to arrive at a definite conclusion. However, they were happy to receive the information and to add it to the data from other sightings which they process and analyze constantly.\"\n2. It is also recommended that appropriate comments be made regarding General Samford's statements during his recent press conference, particularly those dealing with current USAF attitude towards the subject and plans for the future. Stressing his statement about \"adequate but not frantic attention\" should also help.\n3. Mr. Berridge's letter is returned herewith.\n1 Incl Ltr fr Wm. A. Berridge dtd 30 Jul 52\nWILLIAM W. WILCOX Colonel, USAF Chief, Policy and Management Group Office, Deputy Director for Estimates Directorate of Intelligence\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\nH/C ltr Mrs Glover AFOIN-X2B 10 Sept 52 10 o'clock A.M."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2 Maj Fournet/dbv/71016 8 September 1952\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\nPROBLEM\n1. To prepare an R & R to OSAF-OPI.\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n2. A personal letter from Mr. William A. Berridge to General Vandenberg was referred to OSAF-OPI for preparation of a reply for signature in AFCCS. In this letter Mr. Berridge reports the sighting of an unidentified flying object and comments that he is disturbed over recent public remarks made by D/I personnel on this subject.\n3. Major Fournet discussed the letter with OSAF-OPI at the latter's request and indicated that AFOIN-2A2 would be happy to suggest certain appropriate comments which could be incorporated into a reply. It was understood by OPI that AFOIN-2A2 was not undertaking the complete reply since it was largely a matter requiring public relations treatment.\n4. The attached R & R sets forth those comments and suggestions considered appropriate from the D/I standpoint.\n5. Subject matter is not considered suitable for inclusion in the Daily Staff Digest.\nACTION RECOMMENDED\n6. Approval, signature and dispatch of attached R & R.\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A2, Col Wolfe, Ext. 71379\nAFOIN-2A, Col Adams, Ext. 74072\nAFOIN-2, Col Morrow, Ext. 71110"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nRECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST CLASSIFICATION\nFROM: AFOIN-2A2 DATE 8 Sept 52 TYPE\nSUMMARY (U) Suggested Reply to Mr. Berridge (Partial) SUSPENSE DATE 1200 10 SEPTEMBER 1952 ASGD BY M.E. SMITH NO. CSS 019285 DATE REC'D D/I 29 August 1952\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS\nTO: AFOIN-2 DATE 8 Sept 52\nFROM: AFOIN-2A NO. 1\nREMARKS R&R submitted for your approval, signature and dispatch.\nAFOIN-2A Capt.\n(Use reverse for additional remarks)\nSuspense CSS 1200 10 SEPTEMBER 1952\nAFHQ FORM 15 JUL 51 0-86 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE\nACTION ASGD TO DATE DISPATCH FILE SIGNED DATE"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center Wright-Patterson AFB Ohio\nDept of the Air Force Hq USAF - AFOIN-2A2 9 SEP 1952 Maj Fournet/cmb/71016\n1. Inclosed correspondence from CIA with attached sighting report is forwarded for your information and retention.\n2. Request acknowledgment of receipt be made to CIA. The latter replied to Mr Mooskian, and, therefore, further correspondence with him is not mandatory.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n1 Incl: w/orig. only corres. fr CIA w/attached sighting rpt\nJAMES P. BECKETT\nWILLIAM W. WILCOX Colonel, USAF Chief, Policy and Management Group Office, Deputy Director for Estimates Directorate of Intelligence\nNo M/R necessary\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\n\nRECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nAFOIN-2A2\nDATE\n8 Sept 52\nTYPE\nD/F\nCLASSIFICATION\n(U) Material for Project Blue Book\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO\nDATE RECD\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS\nTO: AFOIN-2\nDATE 8 Sept 52\nFROM: AFOIN-2A\nNO. 1\nREMARKS:\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nD/F for approval, signature and dispatch.\nAFOIN-2A\nAFOIN-2A2\nAFOIN-2A\nAFOIN-2\nAction Asgd To:\nDate:\nDispatch:\nCoordination\nSigned:\nDate:\nFile:\nDate:\nAFHQ Form 0-86 Previous Editions of this Form are obsolete\n20 Nov 50\n51 25247"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN-2A2\n9 SEP 52\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n1. The inclosed letters are forwarded for your information and retention. They fall in the \"theories and suggestions\" category.\n2. No replies of any kind have been made.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nJAMES P. BECKETT\nWILLIAM W. WILCOX\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Policy and Management Group\nOffice, Deputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n19 Incls:\n1. Ltr fr L.G. Newlin dtd 5 Aug 52\n2. Ltr fr E. Helekal dtd 13 Aug 52, w/attchd article\n3. Ltr fr H.W. Michaelson dtd 3 Aug 52\n4. Ltr fr C.A. Thomas dtd 29 July 52\n5. Ltr fr P.E. Bennick dtd 20 July 52\n6. Ltr fr C.S. Keen dtd 11 Aug 52\n7. Ltr fr Miss E. Mack dtd 1 Aug 52\n8. Ltr fr J.P. Bessor dtd 31 Jul 52\n9. Ltr fr N. Rothstein dtd 31 Jul 52\n10. Ltr fr Mrs W. Schultz dtd 30 Jul 52\n11. Ltr fr R. Funk dtd 30 Jul 52\n12. Ltr fr F.E. Grote dtd 1 Aug 52\n13. Ltr fr C. Panzer dtd 7 Aug 52\n14. Ltr fr B. Hines dtd 8 Aug 52\n15. Ltr fr M. Mobley dtd 7 Aug 52\n16. card fr G.A. Swanson dtd 4 Aug 52\n17. Ltr fr F.W. Wood\n18. Ltr fr Dr O.W. Greenberg dtd 11 Aug 52 recd\n19. Ltr Mr Park dtd 8 Aug 52\nX-322.7 ATIC\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nCoordination AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\nCol JW Wolfe\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\n\nRECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nAFOIN-2A2\nDATE\n5 Sep 52\nTYPE\nD/F\nCLASSIFICATION\n(U) Material for Project Blue Book\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO\nDATE RECD\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS\nTO: AFOIN-2\nDATE 5 Sep 52\nFROM: AFOIN-2A\nNO. 1\nREMARKS:\nMaj Fournet/dbv/71016\nD/F for signature and dispatch.\nAFOIN-2A\nAction Asgd To:\nDate:\nDispatch:\nCoordination\nSigned:\nDate:\nFile:\nDate:\nAFHQ Form 0-86 Previous Editions of this Form are obsolete\n20 Nov 50\n51 25247"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nAFOIN-2A\n8 September 1952\nSUBJECT: (Restricted) Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, Discussion Conference with ONR Personnel\nTO: Chief of Naval Research Department of The Navy Washington 25, D. C.\n1. Reference is made to your letter, ONR:421:FLT:esw, Ser: 21517, subject, \"Unidentified aerial phenomena; request for information concerning,\" dated 15 August 1952, requesting Air Force participation in a discussion of unidentified aerial phenomena, at a convenient date on or after 15 September 1952.\n2. It is suggested that the discussion be held at 1000 hours on 17 September in Room 1803, Building T-3, Navy Department.\n3. In view of the technical nature of the discussions to be held, and the desirability of possible attendance by Air Technical Intelligence Center personnel, it is requested that a representative of the Office of Naval Research make direct contact with Major D. J. Fournet, USAF, Room 4B-860, Extension 71016, Pentagon, who will represent the Air Force in these discussions and is authorized to make any necessary arrangements.\n4. Should the date and time for these discussions, as recommended in paragraph 2 above, be inconvenient, it is suggested that a date be mutually decided upon between your representative and Major Fournet.\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nAFOIN-2A2\nAFOIN-2A\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":225,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nDEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nOFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nONR:421:FLT:esw\nSer: 21517\nAUG 15 1952\nFrom: Chief of Naval Research\nTo: Director of Intelligence\nU. S. Air Force\nSubj: Unidentified aerial phenomena; request for information concerning\n1. In view of current widespread interest, it is requested that a briefing be arranged for the purpose of acquainting interested activities within the Office of Naval Research with the latest developments of the investigation of unidentified aerial phenomena obtained under Project Blue Book. The meeting would be limited to about a dozen personnel with a definite \"need to know\" and an acute scientific interest in this project. All in attendance will be cleared through Secret and are acquainted with the background of this program having seen the official reports of Project Blue Book dated through April 1952.\n2. It is suggested that a question-and-answer type discussion be scheduled for a date on or after 15 September 1952 in Room 1803 of Building T-3, Navy Department, Washington, D. C.\n3. The cooperation of the Air Force in making such a briefing possible will be appreciated.\nC. M. BOLSTER\nC. M. BOLSTER\nThis material contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Act, Title 18, U.S.C., Sections 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":226,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D 18 AUG 1952 DIRINT HQ USAF\n\n[illegible]\n\n\"Reproduced at [illegible]\"\n\n1. The coordination of the Air Force Bulletin...\n\nSubject to... of [illegible] ...\n\nIt has been [illegible] ...\n\nCOORDINATION\n\nCol [illegible] ...\n\nP.S. [illegible] ...\n\nDirector of Intelligence\nChief of Naval Research"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":227,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nMaj Fournet/bmo/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\nw/8 September 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To prepare a letter for the Chief of Naval Research.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n2. In a letter to the D/I, the CNR requested a briefing and round table discussion for the purpose of acquainting interested members of his staff with the latest developments in Project Blue Book. It was suggested that the program be held after 15 September 1952 in Room 1803 of Building T-3, Navy Department.\n\n3. The attached letter will inform the CNR that Maj Fournet will conduct the program. A time of 1000 hours on 17 September 1952 is suggested with a request for confirmation. The CNR is also requested to contact Major Fournet, direct and arrange for the details of the conference.\n\n4. Subject matter is not considered suitable for the Daily Staff Digest.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED:\n\n5. Approval, signature and dispatch of attached letter.\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nCol T. W. Wolfe, AFOIN-2A2, Ext 75990\nCol W. A. Adams, AFOIN-2A, Ext 71564\nCol J. J. Morrow, AFOIN-2, Ext 71110\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":228,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Restricted) Movie Film of Flying Objects Taken 2 Jul 52, Vicinity of Tremonton, Utah\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson AFB\nDept of the Air Force, Hq USAF - AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/fh/71016\n\n1. Subject film, received this office 5 Sep 52, is inclosed for appropriate action. Duplicate of report submitted by the photographer, CPO Delbert C. Newhouse (177283, USN), is inclosed for your information in the event that the copy forwarded to you by the IG, Hill AFB, Utah has not been received.\n\n2. A message was dispatched to the CG, WADF on 6 Sep 52, with information copy to you, requesting that an intelligence officer interview CPO Newhouse and determine additional details of the sighting, if available.\n\n3. A message was also dispatched to the CO, Hill AFB, Utah requesting weather information for the period and vicinity in question. An information copy was dispatched to you.\n\n4. It has been ascertained from the Naval Observatory, Washington, D.C. that the position of the sun at the time(1810Z hours, 2 July 52) and the location (4145N - 11210W) in question was 64.5 elevation and 131 azimuth.\n\n5. Suggest the film be submitted to the WADC Photo Lab for complete analysis as soon as possible. The following are suggested questions for this analysis which, if answered, should facilitate evaluation of the incident:\n\na. Are images made by light source or reflection?\nb. Any indication of what kind of objects could have caused images? Is there any bird sufficiently actinic to cause images? Could they have been caused by aircraft or balloons?\nc. What causes impression that some objects at times appear to become 2 or 3 where there was originally one, or, conversely, 2 or 3 objects at times appear to merge into one.\nd. Do all objects have same characteristics?\n(1) Same apparent shape?\n(2) Same color?\n(3) Same relative size?\n(4) Same general motion?\ne. What are shape(s), color(s) and relative size(s) of objects?\nf. To what can the \"fade-in\" and \"fade-out\" of the objects be attributed?\ng. What type motion is attributable to the objects (about their own axis as well as about axis of flight path)?\nh. Is there any acceleration evident in their motion along flight path axis?\ni. Can the motion of the camera (penning and joggling) be allowed for\n\nCOORDINATION\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":229,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nsufficiently to permit determination of the angular velocity of objects which cross the field of view? (Reference particularly the single object which crosses field; photographer states that camera was held motionless while object crossed field of view.)\n\nj. Determine patterns of flight from position plots for each frame, then:\n(1) Is there any recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects?\n(2) Do they maintain same relative positions in formation during any maneuvers, particularly violent maneuvers?\n(3) Is relative position maintained coincidental with movement about their axes?\n(4) If undulating motion is present among a number of objects which are maintaining a semblance of formation, do those objects undulate in phase? Ditto for tumbling motion?\n(5) Is there any indication of abrupt changes in direction of flight path through fairly large angles (e.g. 90 or more during interval of 2 or 3 frames)?\n(6) Do any objects appear to remain motionless at the same time that others move about?\n(7) Can all objects be accounted for at all times or do some literally disappear while still well within field of view?\n\n6. Although CPO Newhouse did not request that the film be returned to him, it is recommended that the final footage (of the mountain scenery) be returned to him immediately and that he be asked if he is willing to accept a duplicate of the initial footage in lieu of the original. If his reply is affirmative, suggest the duplicate be forwarded whenever available.\n\n7. Request advice of the analytical results as soon as available.\n\n2 Incls: (w/orig only)\n1. Cy of ltr fr CPO Newhouse, dtd 11 Aug 52\n2. Roll of exposed 16mm film.\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nAFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":230,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Restricted) Request for Lab Analysis of Samples Having Possible Relation to Unidentified Flying Objects.\n\nCounter Intelligence Division\nDirectorate of Special Investigation, The IG\n\nTopical Intelligence Division, Deputy Director for Estimates, Directorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nAFOIN-2A 2/Maj Fournet/fh/ 71016\n\n1. It is requested that the samples submitted herewith as Exhibits A thru I be forwarded to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for lab analysis since they may have a possible relation to unidentified flying objects. These samples were removed from the yard of Mr. Charles Walter Storm residing at 102 North Garfield Street, Arlington, Va.\n\n2. The circumstances surrounding the incident to which these samples pertain are outlined in Inclosures 1 and 2.\n\n3. Inclosure 3 gives significant data about each sample. Exhibits G, H and I are submitted for comparison with A thru F because of the possibility that this incident represents a prank of some sort involving the use of one or more of these materials.\n\n3 Incls\n1. Summary of circumstances\n2. Sketch of Area relating to 1\n3. List of Exhibits\n4. Exhibits A thru I (samples)\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Intelligence Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nAFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":231,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUMMARY OF CIRCUMSTANCES: INVESTIGATION OF POSSIBLE\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT - ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA\n1-2 September 1952\n\n1. At 1600 hours on 3 Sep 52, the Directorate of Intelligence, Hq., USAF received a telephone call from Mr. Walter Storm, 227 18th Street, SE, Washington, D.C. (phone LI 31298) that an unusual circle was found marked on the lawn of his father, Mr. Charles Walter Storm, on the morning of 2 Sep 52 and that he believed it might bear some relation to the USAF investigation of unidentified flying objects.\n\n2. Major Fournet, of the D/I, called on the elder Mr. Storm at his residence (102 North Garfield Street, Arlington, Va., phone: CH 8508) during the evening of 3 Sep 52.\n\n3. The following was found on Mr. Storm's rear lawn (refer to sketch in Incl 2):\n\na. A circle 18 feet in diameter and nearly perfectly formed was marked on the lawn by a deposit of some unknown gray substance which was adhering to the grass in clusters of five globules.\n\nb. The band of the circle (around the periphery) was an average of approximately 6 inches wide.\n\nc. The deposits in the band were less pronounced and sometimes absent for short distances where depressions or uneveness in the ground surface occurred.\n\nd. A small evergreen bush was located at a point about 40 inches inside the circle and did not appear to have been disturbed in any way nor were any deposits present on or around it.\n\ne. A clothes line frame located on a central pole overhung the circle somewhat and had been in place (approximately as shown in Incl 2) on the Night in question.\n\nf. An antenna wire about 40 feet above the ground overhung the circle, exact amount undetermined.\n\ng. No other vegetation in the area contained any deposits or marks (small trees were present, as close as 6 or 8 feet from the circle).\n\nh. Three types of fertilizer were stored in covered drums near the garage about 15 feet away from the circle."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":232,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4. Mr. and Mrs.Storm were interviewed and offered the following information:\n\na. Mr. Storm cut the grass in the area in question around 1800-1900 hours on 1 Sep 52. The clippings were left where they fell.\n\nb. At 2300 hours on 1 Sep 52, Mr. Storm put his dog in the basement for the night. (Note: the dog barks at anyone who comes into the yard, and, until that time had not sounded off).\n\nc. (As related to Mr. Storm later by Mrs. Whitehurst, a neighbor immediately in the rear of the Storm residence and adjacent to the lawn in question.) Mrs. Whitehurst was awakened at about 0400 hours on 2 Sep 52 by barking of dog \"which seemed to be in distress\". She looked out of a window in the rear of her house but failed to see anything (it was a rather dark night).\n\nd. Upon going out to his car at 0730 hours 2 Sep 52, Mr. Storm noticed the circle and walked over to examine it. He describes it as having at that time a brown, oily-sandy appearance with what seemed to be a very fine granular structure (as though a fine sand mixed with light oil had been spread to form this ring). He rubbed some of the substance between his fingers and found it faintly gritty and definitely oily. Mrs. Storm corroborates this description.\n\ne. During mid-afternoon of 2 Sep 52 Mrs. Storm reexamined the ring and found that the color had changed to grayish-blue, and it no longer appeared to be oily. However it still felt oily but no longer felt gritty. She detected no odor upon smelling it.\n\nf. Upon returning from work at 1700 hours 2 Sep 52, Mr. Storm again examined it with his wife. He describes the color as purplish-gray; Mrs. Storm describes the color as bluish-gray. Both agree that the substance had begun to form small, closely-packed globules on the blades of grass and that it had begun to \"crystallize\". Mr. Storm states that it then felt slick (like graphite) when rubbed between the fingers; Mrs. Storm describes it as a powdery feel.\n\n(NOTE: There had been no rain since before the evening of 1 Sep 52, and there was a hot sun all day on 2 Sep 52. However, there was a heavy rainfall during the night of 2/3 Sep 52).\n\ng. During the morning of 3 Sep 52, Mr. Storm reexamined it and \"was surprised to find it there after so much rain\". He describes its appearance as darker (a slate gray) and still formed in globules on the grass blades. It still felt about like graphite, perhaps a bit \"thinner\" than the preceding evening. (Mrs. Storm removed Sample E that morning).\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":233,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5. Mr. and Mrs. Whitehurst were not at home and, therefore, were not interviewed.\n\n6. Samples of grass, leaves and soil, and of three types of fertilizer stored nearby were removed for analysis (see Incls 3 and 4 ).\n\n7. Mr. and Mrs. Storm were very cooperative and appeared to be completely sincere. They stated that they have not recently evinced much interest in the subject of unidentified flying objects nor had they discussed the subject with anyone, thereby eliminating any obvious motive for a practical joke."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":234,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":235,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"List of Exhibits: Investigation of Possible Unidentified Flying Object - Arlington, Virginia 1/2 Sep 52\n\nA - Soil and grass sample from circle (at A on Incl 1)\nB - Soil and grass sample from circle diammetrically opposite A (at B on Incl 1)\nC - Soil & grass samples from center of area within circle\nD - Samples of grass from various points around circle\nE - Samples of grass from various points around circle\nF - Leaves removed from circle near B.'\nG - Sample of Vigoro fertilizer\nH - Sample of other commercial fertilizer\nI - Sample of limestone fertilizer (6 years old)\n\nNOTE: A,B,C,D and F were obtained at 1930 on 3 Sep 52.\nE was obtained on the morning of 3 Sep 52.\nG, H and I were stored in covered drums about 15' from outer edge of circle."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":236,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nHEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND\nOFFUTT AIR FORCE BASE\nOMAHA, NEBRASKA\nDINC 350\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) FLYOBRPT\nTO: Director of Intelligence\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D.C.\nThe attached Air Intelligence Information Report is forwarded\nas per instructions AFL 200-5, dated 29 April 1952, subj, FLYOBRPT.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n1 Incl\nIR-123-52(3cys)\nHAL E. BILYEU\nMAJOR, USAF\nAsst Adj Gen\n11 Sept 52\nIncl w/bin 0 1H-1 82\nMaj. Pandolfo\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":237,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":238,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Conf) Des Verges, Dunham Sanborn, Request for Information about\nCounter Intelligence Division\nDirector of Special Investigations, The IG\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nMaj Fournet/bps/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\nW/5 Sept 52\n1. Subject was the principal in the alleged sighting of an unidentified flying object in the vicinity of West Palm Beach, Florida on the night of 19 August 1952. A field investigation of a technical nature has been conducted by the Air Technical Intelligence Center, but no conclusive results have yet been obtained. However, there are indications of a possible hoax, viz. the results of the FBI lab analysis on Des Vergers' cap (ref your R&R to this office dtd 30 Aug 52) and the actions of Des Vergers subsequent to the alleged sighting.\n2. A check of subject's Marine Corps personnel records has revealed that he was given a bad conduct discharge 1 November 1944 following his conviction by a civil court in Florida for violation of National Motor Vehicle Theft Act. He was sentenced to 2 1/2 years in the Federal Reformatory at Chillicothe, Ohio (Reformatory No. 23542-C). His Marine Corps medical records were negative as regards psychiatric indications or treatment.\n3. It has also been learned, from a source whose reliability cannot be judged, that subject may have been confined at one time to a mental institution in the state of New York.\n4. It is therefore requested that the following information be obtained:\na. Any records of psycho-neurotic examination and/or treatment while confined to the Federal Reformatory at Chillicothe, Ohio.\nb. Evidence that he was at one time confined to a mental institution in the state of New York.\nJOHN G. ERIKSEN\nColonel, USAF\nAssistant Deputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n1"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":239,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Wrtn 2 Sept 52\n\"Flying Saucers\"\nOffice of Public Information, OSD\nPress Branch, Air Force Desk\nDeputy Director for Collection and Dissemination\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nAFOIN-1/Col Cook/sr/56548\nGeneral Ackerman does not concur in the recommendation contained in paragraph 4, Comment 1, and accordingly has disapproved it.\nEUGENE G. COOK\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Policy & Management Group\nDeputy Director for Collection\nand Dissemination\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nNo M/R required\nAFOIN-1\nCol Cook\nCmt 1 w/orig & green.\n2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":240,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Wrtn AFOIN-1A1/Maj Harlow/71067/ht/26 Aug 52)\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nRewrtn 29 Aug 52\n(Unclassified) Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting\nAssistant Chief of Staff, Dept of the Air Force\nG-2, Department of the Army Hq, USAF\nWashington 25, D. C. AFOIN\n2 SEP 1952 Col Cook/56548\n1. Attached for your information and action considered appropriate is a copy of Air Force Letter Number 200-5, dated 29 April 1952 which expresses the Air Force interest in unidentified flying objects and provides for a reporting procedure.\n2. To assist the Air Force in collecting information on this subject, it would be appreciated if such data as may come to the attention of Army personnel on unidentified flying objects could be reported to the Air Force rapidly and substantially as outlined in paragraph 8c and 8e of attached letter.\n3. Contents of attachment may be used in any manner you desire for the issuance of instructions on the reporting of unidentified flying objects.\n4. The instructions in this communication supersede those contained in AFOIN Letter dated 18 September 1950, subject, Reporting of Information on Unconventional Aircraft, with one inclosure.\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n1 Incl (w/orig) AFL 200-5\nGEORGE E. PERRY\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Management\nPolicy & Management Group\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nPREVIOUS COORDINATION VALID\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":241,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\nAFOIN-1A1/Maj Harlow/71067/ht\nWrtn 26 Aug 52\n(Unclassified) Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting\nAssistant Chief of Staff,\nG-2, Department of the Army\nWashington 25, D. C.\nDept of the Air Force\nHq, USAF, AFOIN\nMaj Harlow/71067\n1. Attached for your information and action considered appropriate, is a copy of Air Force Letter Number 200-5, dated 29 April 1952 which expresses the Air Force interest in unidentified flying objects and provides for a reporting procedure.\n2. To assist the Air Force in collecting information on this subject, it would be appreciated if such data as may come to the attention of Army personnel on unidentified flying objects could be reported to the Air Force rapidly and substantially as outlined in paragraph 8c and 8e of attached letter.\n3. Contents of attachment may be used in any manner you desire for the issuance of instructions on the reporting of unidentified flying objects.\n4. The previous communication from the Air Force on this subject is hereby rescinded: Letter AFOIN, Subject: \"Reporting of Information on Unconventional Aircraft,\" dated 18 September 1950, with one inclosure.\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nIncl\nAFL 200-5\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\nAFOIN-1A1, Maj Harlow, Col Bell, Col Walton"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":242,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\nAFOIN-1A1/Maj Harlow/71067/ht\nWrtn 26 Aug 52\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\nPROBLEM:\n1. To advise the Army and Navy as to the current Air Force interest in unidentified flying objects and gain their cooperation in reporting such data as may become available to Army and Naval personnel.\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n2. In the past, AFOIN has requested that the Army and Navy assist the Air Force in the collection of data pertaining to unidentified flying objects. Our desires were made known in a letter AFOIN, Subject: \"Reporting of Information on Unconventional Aircraft,\" 18 September 1950 which was signed by Major General Cabell.\n3. When the latest AF Instructions on this subject were issued on 29 April 1952 (AFL 200-5) action to advise the Army and Navy of the existence of new instructions was deferred at the request of ATIC pending the development of an \"Observers Questionnaire.\" This form was to be used as an aid in the extraction of information from observers. General use of this form is not contemplated at this time.\n4. At the working level, the Navy has asked to be informed as to the current Air Force desires in this matter soonest. At levels lower than this headquarters echelons of the Air Force have mis-stated our desires to echelons of the Navy. Instructions on this subject with the Navy presently are conflicting and confused.\n5. Not for inclusion in the Daily Staff Digest.\nRECOMMENDATION:\n6. That D/F to the Army and Memo to the Navy be forwarded, asking their cooperation in the reporting of unidentified flying objects and outline a desirable reporting procedure in accordance with AFL 200-5.\nACTION:\n7. Recommended letters have been prepared. Request they be signed and forwarded.\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN- Col Berry\nAFOIN-1X Col Cook\nAFOIN-1A Col J. Satchell\nAFOIN-1A1, Maj Harlow\nCol Bell\nCol Walton\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":243,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-1A1/Maj Harlow/71067/ht/26 Aug 52\nRewrtn AFOIN-1/Col Cook/sr/56548/29 Aug 52\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\n2- SEP 1952\nAFOIN\nMEMORANDUM FOR: THE DIRECTOR OF NAVAL INTELLIGENCE\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting\n1. Attached for your information and action considered appropriate is a copy of Air Force Letter Number 200-5, dated 29 April 1952 which expresses the Air Force interest in unidentified flying objects and provides for a reporting procedure.\n2. To assist the Air Force in collecting information on this subject, it would be appreciated if such data as may come to the attention of Naval personnel on unidentified flying objects could be reported to the Air Force rapidly and substantially as outlined in paragraph 8c and 8e of attached letter.\n3. Contents of attachment may be used in any manner you desire for the issuance of instructions on the reporting of unidentified flying objects.\n4. The instructions in this communication supersede those contained in AFOIN Letter dated 18 September 1950, subject, Reporting of Information on Unconventional Aircraft, with one inclosure.\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n1 Incl (w/only) AFL 200-5\nGEORGE E. PERRY Colonel, USAF Chief of Management Policy & Management Group Directorate of Intelligence\nPREVIOUS COORDINATION VALID\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":244,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\nAFOIN-1A1/Maj Harlow/71067/ht\nWrtn 26 Aug 52\nAFOIN\nMEMORANDUM FOR: THE DIRECTOR OF NAVAL INTELLIGENCE\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting\n1. Attached for your information and action considered appropriate, is a copy of Air Force Letter Number 200-5, dated 29 April 1952 which expresses the Air Force interest in unidentified flying objects and provides for a reporting procedure.\n2. To assist the Air Force in collecting information on this subject, it would be appreciated if such data as may come to the attention of Naval personnel on unidentified flying objects could be reported to the Air Force rapidly and substantially as outlined in paragraph 8c and 8e of attached letter.\n3. Contents of attachment may be used in any manner you desire for the issuance of instructions on the reporting of unidentified flying objects.\n4. The previous communication from the Air Force on this subject is hereby rescinded: Letter AFOIN, Subject: \"Reporting of Information on Unconventional Aircraft,\" dated 18 September 1950, with one inclosure.\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nIncl AFL 200-5\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":245,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION\nSUSPENSE\nORIGIN OF BASIC\nDATE 26 Aug 52\nTYPE M/R\nSUBJECT (Uncl) Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting\nASSIGNED BY\nNUMBER\nROUTING\nInitial \"IN\" column to denote review prior to action. Initial \"OUT\" column to denote review of completed action. (X-for action: V-for coordination)\nIN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\nAFOIN\nOIN-X\nOIN-X1\nOIN-X2\nOIN-1A1\nOIN.1 (3)\nOIN-1X (2)\nOIN-1A (1)\nOIN-2\nOIN-2X\nOIN-3\nOIN-3X\nCABLES\nFILE\nDISPATCH\nSR NAVAL OFF\nSR ARMY OFF\nTO: AFOIN-1 THRU AFOIN-1A and AFOIN-1X\nDATE 26 Aug 52\nFROM: AFOIN-1A1\nCOMMENT NUMBER 1\nCOMMENTS (Use reverse, if necessary) Maj Harlow/71067/ht\nFor approval and dispatch, D/F to Department of the Army G-2, Memorandum for Director of Naval Intelligence with accompanying M/R for coordination.\nROBERT U. ROSWURM Major, USAF Executive, Collection Control Branch Collection Division Directorate of Intelligence\nAFHQ FORM 0-86 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. D 6616\nRESTRICTED SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":246,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Unclassified) Material for Project Blue Book\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF - AFOIN-2A2\n\nMaj Fournet/cmb/71016\n\n1. The inclosed letters are for your information, appropriate action and retention.\n\n2. Each of these letters has been reviewed by this office for possible application to the project. Replies have been prepared expressing USAF appreciation.\n\n3. It will be noted that the basic theme of ionization is present in varying degrees in all these letters, and they are therefore somewhat similar to letters received from Prof. Weber and Mr. Hollywood and forwarded to you by separate DF.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n7 Incls: (w/orig DF only)\n1. Ltr fr Mr A.G. Manke\n2. Ltr fr Mr G. Vondrasek\n3. Ltr fr Mr J.O. Luthy\n4. Ltr fr Mr G.F. Kennedy\n5. Ltr fr Mr J. Scott\n6. Ltr fr Mr W.E. DeLano\n7. Ltr fr Mr H.H. Sloss\n\nJames P. BECKETT\nWILLIAM W. WILCOX\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Policy and Management Group\nOffice, Deputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCOUPON DESIGNATION MADE\n\nNo M/R is necessary\n\nCOORDINATION AFOIN 2A2 AFOIN -2A AFOIN-2\n\nD.K. English Ch. USN\n\nX350.05 Projects"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":247,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n(Unclassified) Correspondence Concerning \"Flying Saucers\"\n\nCounter Intelligence Div., Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General\n\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\n\nSEP - 2 1952\nMaj Fournet/cj/71016\nAFOIN-2A2\n\n1. Inclosure 1 is forwarded for possible investigative action. Since Mr. Springer gives no address, it is impossible to correspond with him and ask for additional information. Therefore, it is requested that steps be taken to have Mr. Springer located and questioned in order to determine (a) the reliability of the information in Inclosure 1, (b) the credibility of his informer, one Samuel P. Jones, and (c) any additional information which may have a relation to the intelligence investigation and analysis of \"flying saucers\". If Mr. Springer's claims in his last paragraph have any foundation whatsoever, it could have an important bearing on the project.\n\n2. Inclosure 2 is forwarded for your information and any action considered appropriate. The clipping referred to was not recieved.\n\n2 Incls:\n1. Ltr fr H.D. Springer dtd 31 July 52\n2. Ltr fr Anonymous not dtd\n\nWILLIAM W. WILCOX\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Policy and Management Group\nOffice, Deputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nx095 Jones, Samuel P.\nx095 Springer, H.D.\nx350.05 Project\n\nAFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A AFOIN-2\nCol T.W. Wolfe Col W.H. Smith\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":248,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM\n\n1. To prepare R&R to OSI.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n\n2. In a personal letter to General Samford, Mr. H. D. Springer conveys information concerning the activities of one Samuel P. Jones who has professed complete knowledge of the \"flying saucers\". According to Mr. Springer, this Mr. Jones predicted the recent appearance of unidentified objects over Washington, D.C. and vicinity some time before it occurred. It is desired to have Mr. Springer contacted to determine certain information bearing on Project Blue Book.\n\n3. Another letter of anonymous origin intimates that there is some unusual activity on a movie set in California. It is desired to refer this letter to OSI for any action they consider warranted.\n\n4. The R&R will accomplish the referrals mentioned above.\n\n5. Subject matter will not be included in the Daily Staff Digest.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED\n\n6. Approval, signature and forwarding of attached R&R.\n\nCOORDINATION\n\nCol I. W. Wolfe, AFOIN-2A2, Ext. 75990\nCol W. A. Adams, AFOIN-2A, Ext. 71564\nCol J. J. Morrow, AFOIN-2, Ext. 71110\n\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":249,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 31, 1952\n\nMajor General John Sanford\nWar Department\nWashington, D.C.\n\nSir:\n\nGeneral Sanford everybody is taling about the flying saucers I don't know how I ever got enough nerve to write you but I think it is my turn now to put in my nickels worth.\n\nAs one serviceman to another I think I can talk frank with you. I think I know the man who is responsible for the flying saucers, it is a long story but I will try to make it as brief as possible.\n\nIn 1929 at an inventor's meeting in Long Beach in the Rainbow Pier I met a man who called himself, at that time, Samuel P. Jones he had a motor that everyone thought was a fake. He would explain it to you but no one would believe him but me. So as a dumb cluck I tried to give the man a helping hand, he said that this motor could be made in any size or horsepower, could be put in ships, locomotives, cars and airplanes. At that time I knew a doctor in Long Beach who had a clinic and a yacht, I took this Jones to this doctor thinking that this doctor might finance him for a motor for his yacht. After the doctor talked to the man awhile, the doctor didn't believe him, though he was nuts, so then I forgot all about this man Jones until World War II. I met this same man in the South Pacific and he was a Skipper in the Army Transport Service. Then after seeing him again and knowing the position he held I took it for granted that he must be pretty smart not nuts. I became very friendly with this man we chummed together for a coule of years in the South Pacifica and every onee in awhile he would tak about his invention. I asked him if this invention was so good why is it that the Government wouldn't take it. This is what he told me, that he had tried to get the Government to take it and they laughed at him and he finally got an interview with President Roosevelt and the President told him that at that time he also had an idea before Congress that if it didn't work out they would all go to the insane asylum. He also told him that his idean was a thousand years ahead of time.\n\nLater in 1947 I got a letter from this Jones asking me to come to him, which I did, in Havre, Montana he had a plane that I would call built with this motor, this was the most damnable looking plane I have ever seen. It was made like a saucer, about 17 feet in diameter and it would fly through the air with a control made from the base of a telephone. This I saw with my own eyes. He said that it would fly so fast through the air that the air would melt, and I asked him \"how fast will it go\", he said actually he didn't know but would figure it made a speed of 3 to 4000 miles per hour."} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":250,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nMajor General John Sanford July 31, 1952\nPage 2\n\nAgain, I asked him why he didn't do something about it and he said it was impossible. I also, asked him why he didn't patent this machine and he gave me amny reasons, that each and every part about the machine had already been invented and it would take a millionaire to procure the patent rights to this invention. I also asked him wasn't he afraid that someone would steal it from him and he told me that the public was funny that they couldn't see no further than the nose on their face and that if you had a secret that you wanted to keep to tell everybody and nobody would believe you.\n\nAbout three months later I received a letter from this man telling me that he was ready to make a test, a few days later was the first time I heard about the flying saucers. Since that time I have received many letters from this man Jones. About three weeks ago I received a letter from him again telling me that over Baltimore, Washington, Alexander Virginia, etc., that he was going to let the whole world know that his invention was possible. Then I went to the American Broadcasting Company, a couple of newspapers and tried to tell them this story. They wouldn't even listen to me and it has happened again. If this man Jones is not the inventor of the flying saucer how is it that he knows two or three weeks ahead of time when they are going to fly? I think that if you will find this man Jones, I know you will get this fantastic story straightened out. His address I do not know but he writes me to my box in Detroit, Michigan and I receive a letter maybe two or three weeks later. When I saw the plane or whatever you want to call it, in the air, it would go so fast you would hardly see it. It was round like a saucer, had a tail like a plane, and when it would sway (as I would say) in the air sometimes it would look like a pencil, sometimes like a egg, and again it would look like a balloon so you take it from here. Use your own judgment, you have my permission to do anything you want with this letter. My name is H. D. Springer, I have no permanent address but I live in Detroit, I am going back east tonight at 9 o'clock P.M.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nH. D. SPRINGER"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":251,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nMAJOR GENERAL JOHN A SAMFORD\nINTELLIGENCE DIRECTOR\nUS AIRFORCE\nWASHINGTON D C\nDEAR SIRS:\n\nI AM ENCLOSING A NEWSPAPER CLIPPING APROPO TO\nMY LETTER.\n\nYOUR SO CALLED FLYING SAUCERS HAVE BEEN SIGHTED IN NUMBERS\nCLOSE TO PEBBLE BEACH CAL. GOLF COURSE. THIS INFORMATION I RECEIVED FROM A S\nSTAR MEMBER OF PAT AND MIKE MOVIE CAST ON WHICH GLKF COURSE THE MOVIE\nIS IN PRODUCTION.\n\nMY INFORMANT WAS ALARMED ABOUT THIS PHENOMINA AS ON CLOSER BOOK\nTHEY RESEMBLE MIDGIT ATOM BOMBS WITH THEIR FAMILIAR UMBRELLA FORMA\nTION. I ALSO LEARNED THIS BIT OF INFORMATION. ONE OF THE WARNER BROS.\nSOLD STOCK TO SOMEONE LATER IDENTIFIED AS A CONVICT. HE SAID QUOTE\n\"I DIDN'T KNOW WHO I WAS SELLING TO.\" THIS MR WARNER WAS ALSO THERE.\nI WAS ALSO TOLD THERE ARE THIRTY ESCAPED CONVICTS OCCUPYING\nHOUSES SURROUNDING THIS GOLF COURSE. A MACHINE GUN IS MOUNTED TO STRA\nTEGICALLY GUARD GATE.\n\nOBVIOUSLY ONE OF YOUR ATOM BOMB CRIMINALS IS ON THE LOOSE.\n\nTHESE PEOPLE FEAR THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO LEAVE THIS MOVIE\nLOCATION AND ARE ALL SECRETLY WORRIED.\n\nI WAS GIVEN THE IMPRESSION THAT AT LEAST ONE OF THESE CONVICTS\nIS CRIMINALLY INSANE. YOU MAY NOT KNOW THAT IT TAKE S SOMETIMES AS\nLONG A SOUR YEARS TO COMPLETE A PICTURE IN ORDER TO GET ENOUCH TO DISTRIB\nUTE ALL OVER THE WORLD.\n\nI WAS TOLD TO NOTIFY THE POLICE. I THINK IT WILL TAKE SOMETHING BIGGER\nTHAN POLICE ACTION TO SOLVE THIS.\n\nI MUST SIGN MYSELF AN NY US"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":252,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Restricted) Unidentified object which fell in water off Okinawa, Nov 50\n\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson AFB\nOhio\n\nDept of the Air Force\nHq USAF -AFOIN-2a2\n\nMaj Fournet/fh/71016\n\n1. Reference recent report of interview with T/Sgt Emery Guzi of WADC regarding above subject, an attempt has been made to determine the feasibility of requesting an investigation by the military authorities on Okinawa. A hydrographic chart of the area (Incl. 1) was obtained in order to study the soundings. However, a question arose over the exact location. On the aeronautical chart (Incl. 2), Sgt Guzi indicated the location at the northermost point of the island (Hedo-misaki or Hedo Saki), but on checking his sketch against Inclosure 1, it appears more probable that the location was actually Oku since there is a lagoon there about 1 mile wide and a native village at the southern edge of the lagoon, which seems to check with his sketch.\n\n2. Request Sgt Guzi be reinterrogated, using Inclosure 1, to determine the most probable location in question. In addition an attempt should be made to pinpoint the exact location at which object entered water.\n\n3. If it transpires that the lagoon at Oku is the proper location, it will probably be feasible to investigate since the water is very shallow. Should it be at Hedo Saki, however, the depth of the water will probably prohibit an investigation.\n\n4. Request return of Inclosures 1 and 2 with reply.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nWILLIAM W. WILCOX\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Policy and Management Group\nOffice, Deputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n2 Incls: (w/orig only)\n1. Hydro cht Okinawa\n2. Aero cht Okinawa\n\nM/R is attached\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2A2 / AFOIN-2A / AFOIN-2"} {"doc_id":"1705f76555f9dcc5","page":253,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2\nMaj Fournet/dmb/71016\nWrtn 25 Aug 52\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To prepare DF to ATIC.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n2. T/Sgt Emery Guzi, assigned to WADC at W-P AFB, recently appeared in person before Project Blue Book personnel at ATIC and volunteered information concerning the sighting of an u/i flyob on Okinawa in Nov 50. He stated that the object had fallen into the sea.\n\n3. Sgt Guzi pointed out the approximate location on a map and drew a large scale sketch of the area.\n\n4. This information was forwarded to AFOIN-2A2 for the purpose of determining the feasibility of an attempt to recover or otherwise locate and examine the object.\n\n5. A hydrographic chart of the area was obtained to determine the soundings and thereby judge the feasibility of an investigation. However, it was found that the data reported by Sgt Guzi did not tally with the hydrographic chart. ATIC is therefore being requested to reinterrogate Sgt Guzi in order to resolve these differences. The attached DF will accomplish this.\n\n6. Subject matter will not be suitable for inclusion in the Daily Staff Digest.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED:\n\n7. Approval, signature and dispatch of attached DF.\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nAFOIN-2A2, Col Wolfe, 75990\nAFOIN-2A, Col Adams, 71564\nAFOIN-2, Col Morrow, 71110"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62- HQ-83894 SECTION 4 SERIALS 131-185 *62-HQ-83894-4* SECTION 4 SERIALS 131-185 PICKETT STREET COPIED FOR FOIPA MAR 1 1978 BY 8471 COPIED FOR FOIPA BY 1.555 Transfer-Call 421 USE CARE IN HANDLING THIS FILE FBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER HQ - HEADQUARTERS Class / Case # Sub Vol. Serial # 0062 83894 4 131 185 8/11/1274191 RRP003IXGX FOIPA# 79 3087 INVESTIGATION DESTROY"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64 Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT TO: DIRECTOR, FBI FROM: SAC, PORTLAND DATE: October 9, 1947 SUBJECT: FLYING DISCS SECURITY MATTER - X. Reference is made to Portland teletype dated September 13, 1947. Records of the Radio Dispatcher, Portland Police Department, reflect that first notice of unidentified objects in flight over the city on September 11, 1947 was received from officers in District 18, which is in the extreme northeast section of the city, at 5:21 P.M. The log further reflects that at 5:23 P.M. the radio requested District 14, which is further south, to attempt to locate and identify the objects and that at 5:24 P.M. a report was received from the car occupied by Chief of Police JENKINS, reporting that they had sighted some objects. District 14 at 5:27 P.M. reported seeing nothing unusual in the sky. ROBERT D. ADAIR, 4325 S.E. Madison Ave., Portland, advised that he was one of the two officers on duty in District 18 on September 11. The car was in the vicinity of N.E. 25th Avenue and Saratoga Court when ADAIR and his fellow officer noticed a number of people looking upward and pointing. Upon looking at the sky ADAIR observed the very bright reflection of the sun on some object which was apparently made of silvery metal. The object was coming from the east and made a wide turn over the city and disappeared to the south. ADAIR estimated its speed at about 150 miles per hour and its altitude at about 5,000 feet. He watched it for a period of about two minutes and during that time it gradually disappeared in such a manner as to appear that the angle was slowly changing, so that the sun was no longer reflected into ADAIR's eyes. He says that the shape appeared to be round but that the glare was so bright that it could have hidden the true outline of the object. There was no oscillation visible - only steady flight. ADAIR believes it was an ordinary metal airplane reflecting light of the afternoon sun. J. R. CALDWELL, 7652 S.E. Lincoln St., Portland, Oregon was ADAIR's partner in District 18 on September 11. CALDWELL states that the object appeared to him to take the same course as that described by ADAIR. He pointed out that the speed, height, and size of the object were difficult to judge, because of the interdependence of the three factors. However, he believes that the object when first sighted was about three miles away and about two miles high. He believes it was traveling at a much greater speed than a conventional airplane and was a great deal larger. It appeared to him to be elliptical in shape, and inasmuch as it did not bank or tip he could not judge its thickness. It was of a very bright silver or aluminum substance. Info Major Carlin I.D. Army 10/4/47 RECORDED EX-93 162-83894 19 OCT 1947 COPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PD 62-1531 Chief of Police LEON V. JENKINS advised that he was travelling south on N. Williams Avenue near Russell St., when he and Officer H. S. RANEY, his driver, received a call on the police radio requesting District 14 to attempt to observe an unknown object in the sky reported by officers in District 18. JENKINS observed what appeared to be a round silver object, about 10,000 feet high, travelling northeast to southwest. It was directly to JENKIN's left when observed first. He thought it was a weather balloon. Further observation convinced him that it could not be a balloon because of its speed which was extremely great. As JENKINS watched, it turned gradually until it was travelling due south, and as it did so, its shape seemed to change until it appeared to be egg-shaped. It disappeared in about 30 seconds. Patrolman H. S. RANEY stated that when he first observed the object it was straight ahead of him and travelling straight away from his car. RANEY was driving south on N. Williams Avenue. To RANEY it appeared to be just a glare of sun on some object, and he was unable therefore to tell its shape. It appeared to be very high and travelling extremely fast. It was out of sight after he had travelled 4 or 5 city blocks at a speed of about 25 mph. RANEY stated that he has never seen an object at such an extreme height before and that if the sun had not reflected from it he could not have seen it at all. He believes it could possibly have been a reflection from a large airplane at great altitude. ROBERT W. SHAYLOR, 4810 N. Fessenden St., Portland stated that he was on duty in District 14 with Officer DONALD W. COWLING on September 11, 1947 and received the call to watch for the object flying over the city. SHAYLOR and COWLING immediately scanned the sky from a vantage point in open territory where they could see the entire sky. They saw nothing in the sky at that time, SHAYLOR stating that they did not even see any airplanes. A short article in \"The Oregonian\", Portland daily newspaper, for September 12, 1947, describes the object as seen by Chief of Police JENKINS and also states that \"The Oregonian\" received several calls from other persons reporting the object. FRED M. WHITE, Assistant City Editor, advised that the paper has no record of the identities of the people making the calls. 62-1531 LHK:tkw"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT TO: Director, FBI FROM: SAC, Anchorage DATE: 10/18/47 SUBJECT: REPORT OF FLYING DISCS This is to advise that we have been able to locate a flyer, JACK PECK, who is employed by the Al Jones Flying Company in Bethel, Alaska. It had been reported to Military Intelligence that Mr. PECK and his co-pilot VINCE DALY had observed some flying object near Bethel, Alaska, in July, 1947. Efforts previously to contact Mr. PECK were negative until the above instance. He related that the occasion of seeing the flying object near Bethel was on a July day when the sky was completely clear of clouds, and it being during the early part, it is daylight the entire night. The time of his sighting this flying object was about 10 PM and the sun had just dropped beyond the horizon. Flying weather was extremely good and he, with Mr. DALY, was coming into the Bethel Airport with a DC-3. He observed the flying object immediately to his left and stated that it apparently was observed at approximately the same time by Mr. DALY and both of them manipulated the controls of the plane making efforts to miss the object inasmuch as they could not tell in which direction it was going. They made a forty-five degree turn in order to get out of the way of the object and then noted that it appeared to be going away from them. He described the object as appearing to be some flying wing and said that it appeared to be about the size of a C-54 without any fuselage. He could not see any propellor or any exhaust from jet propulsion or any vapor trails and could not estimate the size due to his failure to be able to estimate the distance he was away from the object. He was flying at 1,000 feet and stated that he tried to catch up with the object and increased his manifold pressure to approximately 42 inches and was traveling at the rate of 170 miles per hour. He called on his radio to the Civil Aeronautics Administration station at Bethel, asking what aircraft was in the vicinity and they had no reports of any aircraft. The object he sighted was some five or ten miles from the airport before his arrival and stated that the path did not go directly across the airport. He, of course, could not tell whether the object was making any noise and stated that it was flying at a thousand foot altitude and estimated travel at 300 miles per hour. It was traveling in the direction from Bethel to Nome, which is in a northwesterly direction. He noted no radio interference and is unable to describe the color other than that it appeared dark but of definite shape and did not blend into the sky but had a definite, concise outline. Both he and Mr. DALY clearly observed the object at this time. Info Major Carlin I.D. Army 11/4/47 RECORDED & INDEXED 131 162-83894-132 FBI 24 OCT 25 1947 60 NOV 6 1947 294"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- 2 -\n\nAnchorage File 100-1406\n\nIt may be stated to the Bureau that Mr. PECK is a well known flyer as well as Mr. DALY and both are known to be very reliable and responsible people, and it appears definite that they observed something.\n\nThe above is being submitted for the information of the Bureau.\n\nLOT:LMR\n100-1406"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nDATE: November 1, 1947\n\nFROM : SAC, Albany\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nA. COURTNEY PARKER, INFORMANT\n\nReurlet dated 9/25/47.\n\nAn Agent of this office contacted Mr. A. COURTNEY PARKER at his residence in South Royalton, Vermont and he stated that all the information he has concerning the flying discs he saw, is set forth in the letter that he sent to the Bureau dated September 17, 1947.\n\nMr. PARKER advised that as far as he knows, no one else in South Royalton saw these flying discs, and that he believes he saw them inasmuch as he has unusually good eyesight and that he can see bees, etc. further than anyone else. He stated that possibly these flying discs were out of the range of normal vision. Mr. PARKER was asked to furnish any additional information that comes to his attention concerning these flying discs directly to the Air Forces since they now handle matters of this type.\n\nNo further action is being taken by this office.\n\nRCC:mfs\n62-689\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED\n\n133\n\n62-83894\n\n31 NOV 8 1947\n\nR-89\n\n00 NOV 13 1947"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mrs. A. McLain\n70-33-68 Pl\nGlendale\nL.I. N.Y.\n\nMr Hoover\nF.B.I.\nDear Sir.\n\nFlying Discs\n\nThey say that if we are crazy we are the last to know it. That may be my case, but I hope not.\n\nYou had a about 2 months ago, a number of people said they saw flying discs and the papers said it was imagination. I cannot believe a hundred people could imagine the same thing at the same time, especially when separated by thousands of miles.\n\nHANDLED BY STOP DESK\n\n62-83894-134\n\nRECORDED\n\nNOV 4 1947"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This is just a wild guess. 2\nIs it not possible that there was something of a new delayed fuse, starter object. (Please do not laugh) You know about all those little flashing fuses, were time bombs & other fuses in ships, and isn't it possible some new inventor was ...\nused for this sabotage, because that is what all the people I meet think of those fires and Airplane wrecks. They are not accidents. We have had dry spells before, but did the whole country burn up at the"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"some time? May it would be a good idea to ask the people in the ruined areas if any of them had seen a disc and have long ago.\nI know we have the smartest men in the world in our F.B.I. and I do not presume to tell you people what to do, but maybe there is some connection.\nIn any event I think you people should start protecting our country the same as you did in War Time.\nBecause whatever you people think, we are at war with some one, Only they are hiding"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"are and are taking a sifting of, and and government does not seem to lower it. But I am sure you will find the guilty ones.\nYours for success from an American who is proud of her country.\nGrand Ma McCaul"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Grandma McCaul\nNovember 1, 1947\n\nMrs. A. McCaul\n70-33 68th Place\nGlendale\nBrooklyn, New York\n\nDear Mrs. McCaul:\n\nYour letter postmarked October 28, 1947, has been received and I want to express my appreciation to you for having written as you did.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNOTE: This woman rambles on and furnishes no specific information about anything."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mrs Milo A Durand\nElizabethtown\nNew York\n\nDear Sir.\n\nWith all these forest fires in Maine and out west in our Country I was wondering whether the flying discs had anything to do with it. Was that just a myth or did they exist. If so could not they have been incindiary falling to earth then with drought and heat from the sun ignite. Were not the discs seen flying over Maine Vt. and western states are the western states that have forest fires the same ones reported to have seen the flying discs.\n\nI have great respect for your bureau or should I say our. In any way the F.B.I. has been excellent. Visited the Bureau while in Mdington some years ago.\n\nI do hope I haven't taken up to much time but couldn't stop thinking of it. All Americans must be alert but not over.\n\nWe have quite a lot of different foreigners settling up here with plenty of money. Like the Dutch words I guess. Keep to themselves too."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I'm a widow with two young children and feel very anxious to do my share in bringing up honest and loyal Americans.\n\nMR. JONES\nNov 7 2 49 PM '47\nRECEIVED\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nYours truly,\nMrs. Milo A. Durand\nElizabethtown\nnew York\n\nP.S.\nI read that scientist were investigating the way the fires flared up in different parts away from the main fire that is what made me think of the incendiary discs. Thank you again."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED\nINDEXED\n62-83894-135\n\nNovember 10, 1947\n\nMrs. Milo A. Durand\nElizabethtown, New York\n\nDear Mrs. Durand:\n\nYour letter postmarked November 5, 1947, has been received and I do want to thank you for writing as you did. The patriotic motives which prompted your suggestions concerning the subject about which you have written are indeed appreciated.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nWN:jam\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 11\nNOV 10 1947 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\n55 NOV 22 1947"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"607 69th Avenue\nRidgewood #27 Queens\nNew York\nNovember 2, 1947\n\nDear Sir\n\nIn regards to the \"flying saucer\" mystery which recently received national publicity I, as a citizen would like to ask a few questions. If you, as head of the FBI would be so kind as to answer I would be greatly appreciative.\n\nFirst, has the FBI been and is the FBI still investigating the \"flying saucers\"?\n\nSecond, were copies of the July 9th/1947 issue of the Arizona Republic, published in Phoenix Arizona confiscated by the FBI?\n\nThird, is the FBI investigating the Shaver Mystery\" in which an author named Richard S. Shaver claims there are people living underground who have been there for centuries?\n\nFourth, has a newsreel, which appeared in a Los Angeles theatre showing Russian scientists examining a crashed flying saucer, been suppressed by the FBI?\n\nFifth, Does the FBI consider knowledge of the \"flying saucers\" too dangerous for the general public to know?\n\nThough the above questions may seem a trifle silly, I would appreciate an answer to them, if at all possible.\n\nThanking you for your courtesy in reading this and hoping for an answer, I am\n\nSincerely yours\nJoseph W. Omiline\n\n62-83894-136"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"November 8, 1947\n\nMr. Joseph W. Omiline\n6071 69th Avenue\nRidgewood\nBrooklyn 27, New York\n\nDear Mr. Omiline:\n\nYour letter dated November 2, 1947, has been received. The information contained in the files of this Bureau has been declared confidential and available for official use only, and I am unable to be of any assistance to you. I am sure you will draw no inference from my inability to comply with your request.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNOTE: This individual asked questions concerning flying saucers and the Bureau's investigation of Russians.\n\nPostal Guide reflects Ridgewood is a branch of the Brooklyn Station.\n\nVWP:mjl\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 12\nNOV 8 1947 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\n62-83894-136\n\nNOV 22 1947"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Copy\n\nPort Allegany, Pa.\nNovember 18, 1947.\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation,\nPittsburgh, Pa.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nFollowing the appearance in this town on November 6, 1947, of a Mr. Joe Lippincott, Director of the Eastern Area, Red Cross, Pittsburgh, Pa., as \"speaker of the evening\", at the annual local Red Cross dinner, I was told by Dr. H. E. Cromwell, local practicing dentist, that in a personal conversation, following the dinner, Mr. Lippincott told him that the \"saucers\" reported as seen in various parts of the country, were actually from Spain. He said that Mr. Lippincott said that this had been ascertained by the Government in Washington, but that it was not being made known. He said that Mr. Lippincott had been in Europe and inferred that he had been in Spain and knew conditions over there. Dr. Cromwell is a man active in the Methodist Chruch and the local Protestant Mens Club, and it is easy to see how far this report can be spread. The fact that the Federal Government indorses the Red Cross makes a statement of an official representative of that organization almost indisputable.\n\nAs a representative of the Federal Government and as a citizen interested in truth and World peace and racial and religious harmony in our own country, I question the advisability of an accredited representative of the Red Cross giving out this information, even \"off the record\". I thought you might be able to check with Mr. Lippincott or his organization.\n\nYours very truly,\n\nMary C. Teater\n(Mrs. Mary C. Teater, P.M.)"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"January 5, 1948\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nOn January 2nd I received a letter. It is postmarked Cincinnati, Ohio, and it bears no return address. Following is an exact copy of it. I will keep the original if it is needed at a future date.\n\nMarion Beuscher\n\nIn as much as all of you insist on talking and of telling of what you are supposed to be seeing, all of you must be warned. no - not warned in the true sense of the word, but these things are decidedly not supposed to be seen.\n\nplease to not mention anymore.\n\nGovernment\nRainbow City\nAntarctica"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"January 5, 1948\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nOn January 2nd I received a letter. It is postmarked Cincinnati, Ohio, and it bears no return address. Following is an exact copy of it. I will keep the original if it is needed at a future date.\n\nMarion Beuscher\n\nIn as much as all of you insist on talking and of telling of what you are supposed to be seeing, all of you must be warned. no - not warned in the true sense of the word, but these things are decidedly not supposed to be seen."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(2)\n\nIn the January, 1948 copy of \"amazing Stories\" magazine; published by Ziff-Davis Pub. Co. (one office in Washington, D.C.); my letter was printed under the heading of \"Flying Saucer Witness\" (page 167). Here is a copy of it:\n\nSirs:\nI have just finished reading the October issue of \"amazing Stories\", in which you ask for \"flying saucer\" information.\nHere is what I know: On June 28, 1947, at 3:43 P.M. my brother saw the flying saucers - about seven to ten of them - which flew directly over our house. He said they went like \"blue blazes\" - didn't make any noise and were heading approximately South. (Rockfield, where my brothers farm is, is just 16 miles northwest of milwaukee.) But what is really strange is that same afternoon the discs were seen over Illinois (they must have been the same ones). This information was given on June 29th - Sunday - over WGN - \"The Latest news\" at 8 to 8:15 A.M. with charles Sebastin. He reported that the discs had been sighted over Illinois the preceding afternoon.\nPerhaps the information is valueless to you. at any rate please keep this confidential. Our neighbors think we're slightly \"queer\" to have seen the discs. (I didn't see them but I believe my brother.)\nI have been following the Shaver\n2"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"stories and I hope you have many more of them.\n\nmarion Beuscher\nmenomonee Falls, Wisc.\n\n(Ed. note) The flying saucers are real, and you can be sure of that! Let your neighbors think what they will, in a few months you will be able to prove how good your brother's eyesight is! Thanks for your report, and we hope many more readers send them in. Rough drawings would also be helpful. - Ed.\n\nThe editor had asked for letters from readers who saw the flying discs, mentioned so much in the news. Several times the editor (Ray A. Palmer) has mentioned in \"Amazing Stories\" that he has been threatened.\nIn the same issue (Jan. 1948) on page 162, is a letter from W. C. Heffernin, following:\nyes, We Remember!\n\nSirs:\nEnclosed is a newspaper clipping, just one of many items showing up of like nature. Thumb nail sketches.\nRemember the article \"Circle-Winged Plane\" as printed by you in \"amazing Stories\" magazine, September, 1946, page 151. you have desired facts and confirmation. Now, re-read that article again, please.\n\nThe planes seen at Joliet, Ill., Kansas\n3"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"City, Oklahoma, Seattle, etc., were not the same group of planes but other groups of the same type, all on a world-wide \"mapping expedition.\nThey are only a few of the many belonging to a world government consisting of all the oppressed peoples and dominated nations of the earth, of all colors, races, and creeds.\nThis government is directed and advised by an organization headed by \"The Ancient Three, Who were, Who are, Who will be.\" They, who at one time over a year ago, sent a message to you by way of us. Their headquarters is \"Rainbow City\", antarctica.\nPermission is given to print this letter, if desired.\nW. C. Lefferlin\nRay-Ohio Mfg. Co.\nLivingston, Mont.\n(Ed. note) We print your letter because it is interesting. We don't know if it is true, naturally, we do know, however, that the \"flying saucers\" are no mirage. As for Rainbow City, if it's what you say it is, we'd sure like to pay it a visit. That sort of thing, which is the utopia all science-fiction writers have dreamed about, is just not visible anywhere in the civilized world. If it exists at the south pole, near that warm spot Byrd found, and it has what you intimate, we'll be waiting for the saucers to come back and bring peace to this nasty-minded old planet. Only we wonder how it"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"could be done-peace doesn't come by force. Perhaps the way it will ever be done is to wipe the slate clean, and just start off as veritible cavemen shocked to sanity by utter destruction. In that case, maybe the \"last\" war is our \"last\" hope. A peculiar viewpoint, but it has amazing logic. We never met the man who could learn how a kick in the pants feels without getting a kick in the pants. As for the saucers-maybe you're shooting in the dark-because your editor knows what he's talking about there! But even if you are, we'll forgive you, because your motives are so obviously of the good kind. Thank you for your letter. It wasn't really necessary. Our readers have not forgotten your article-and how they wrote us about it!-Ed.\n\nPlease notice where Lefferlin says-\"government of ... all oppressed peoples ...\" They want all rights and privileges that there are, yet want to deny them to others, especially the freedom of free speech, as witness from \"Rainbow City\" telling me to \"keep quiet\"! And why did they number their letter to me \"1\" - are they intending to write more?\n\nAs my letter is a warning letter with a threat, and coming through the U.S. mail, I am sending it to you personally so that it can be investigated. Please keep this confidential since under the circumstances, I do not feel entirely safe.\nThanking you,\nVery truly yours,\n(Miss) Marion Beuscher\n604 West Main St.\nMenomonee Falls, Wisc."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"January 14, 1948\nRECORDED 62-83894-138\nMiss Marion Beuscher\n604 West Main Street\nMenomonee Falls, Wisconsin\n\nDear Miss Beuscher:\n\nYour letter of January 5, 1948, has been received and I want to thank you for forwarding information to me relating to the subject you mentioned. The facts you related, however, do not reflect any violation of a Federal statute within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. The thoughts prompting your communication are indeed appreciated.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nWN:cm\n\nNOTE: Correspondent reports correspondence she has had with the Ziff-Davis Publishing Company in connection with the \"flying saucers\" which were observed by her brother. She is of the opinion that this publication may be trying to conceal information related to our Nation's security and she mentions a threat that does not refer to injury to person or property.\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION MAILED 8 JAN 15 1948 P.M. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Covington Ohio\nJan 29. 1948\n\nF.B.I.\nWashington D.C.\n\nDear Sirs:\n\nI have done a lot of thinking about those flying discs ever since your operators called at our home. I have figured out a possible solution that I am passing on to you. If you can see the picture as I see it.\n\nIf self propelled bombs were made to hover a few miles up and off a ways, its course looked like an ellipse to us.\n\nThe discs were seen in Texas probably dropped in the gulf. As their sight improved they no doubt dropped some in various places. The one that was seen down Tenn. way, was no doubt aimed at some lake close to Fort Knox. Maybe something went wrong with that one, is the reason it was so plainly visible. Owing to the fact that your operators called at our remote home at 8:00 P.M. on a Sunday evening and also cautioned us to keep mum. I know that the F.B.I. is doing what they can to get a line on these discs. This may help a little. A few nights ago there was a very bright ring around the moon, when I looked at it thro' the same glasses. I could barely see the ring. So this proves that what"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(3)\nup and off a ways, its course looked like an ellipse to us.\nThe discs were seen in Texas probably dropped in the gulf. As their sight improved they no doubt dropped some in various places. The one that was seen down Tenn. way, was no doubt aimed at some lake close to Fort Knox. Maybe something went wrong with that one, is the reason it was so plainly visible. Owing to the fact that your operators called at our remote home at 8:00 P.M. on a Sunday evening and also cautioned us to keep mum. I know that the F.B.I. is doing what they can to get a line on these discs. This may help a little. A few nights ago there was a very bright ring around the moon, when I looked at it thro' the same glasses. I could barely see the ring. So this proves that what"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(2)\nIf they were to drop a bomb here and lit it explode, it would cause a lot of excitement, and if they dropped one that didn't explode and someone found it then there would be excitement. So to avoid this, they pick some point in Lake Erie, lit their agents over here, know it what place and time to look for it. If the projectile plunged in the lake, the range finders wouldn't have any way to tell just where it dropped, so the projectile must have some sort of tracer. So at a certain distance from the earth some sort of tracer is released, probably something like a pin-wheel fire cracker. It must remain in the sky a while, to give the range finder a fix or what ever you call it. but in order to remain in the sky it must be in motion. So this tracer is made to fly in a circle. Because it was 2"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(4)\nwe saw was something definate.\nI think this is serious business. So if this letter helps you in any way, I will be well paid.\nRespectfully Yours,\nN. J. Marshall\nCovington, Ohio\nR.R.1\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"February 5, 1948\nRECORDED 62-83894-139\nMr. N. J. Marshall\nRural Route One\nCovington, Ohio\nDear Mr. Marshall:\nYour letter dated January 29, 1948, has been received, and I want to express my appreciation to you for having made known your views concerning the matter you mentioned.\nSincerely yours,\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nEX-93\nG.I.R.4\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION MAILED 10 FEB 6 1948 P.M. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n50 FEB 19 1948"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COMMUNICATIONS SECTION FEB 6 1948 P.M. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEB 9 5 33 PM\nINTERNAL SECURITY F.B.I.\nCOPIES DESTROYED 1964"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\nSan Francisco 2, California\nFebruary 12, 1948\nAIR MAIL\nPERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL\nDirector, FBI - Attention: Assistant Director D. M. LADD\nRe: FLYING DISCS\nSecurity Matter - X\nDear Sir:\nI am transmitting herewith for the information of the Bureau copies of an enclosure dated February 4, 1948 received from Lieutenant Colonel DONALD SPRINGER, A-2, United States Air Force, Hamilton Air Force Base, California. This enclosure is a confidential letter addressed to the Commanding Generals of the First, Second, Fourth, Tenth, Eleventh, and Fourteenth Air Forces, Air Defense Command, from Headquarters, Air Defense Command, Mitchel Air Force Base, New York, by command of Lieutenant General STRATEMEYER. It concerns the investigation of flying discs by Air Force personnel.\nYour attention is particularly called to Paragraph 2, which indicates that certain reports concerning the investigation of flying discs by Air Force Intelligence will be reported to the FBI office concerned. Your attention is further called to Paragraph 2-B, which indicates that \"investigations will be coordinated with the FBI Office concerned.........\"\nInasmuch as these recent instructions of the Headquarters, Air Defense Command, Mitchell Air Force Base, New York, are contrary to the instructions contained in Bureau Bulletin No. 57, Series 1947, dated October 1, 1947, in which it is indicated that all future reports connected with flying discs should be referred to the Air Force and no investigative action taken by Bureau agents, the Bureau is requested to advise this office, as well as other interested Bureau offices, as to whether there has been a change in Bureau policy with reference to the handling of such matters or whether Bureau Bulletin No. 57 dated October 1, 1947 is still in effect.\nVery truly yours,\nHarry M. Kimball, SAC\nHMK:remb\nEnclosure (in duplicate)\nRECORDED 62-83894-140\nEX-116\nCOPIES DESTROYED 1964"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\nSan Francisco 2, California\nFebruary 12, 1948\n\nAIR MAIL\n\nPERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDirector, FBI - Attention: Assistant Director D. M. LADD\n\nRe: FLYING DISCS\nSecurity Matter - X\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI am transmitting herewith for the information of the Bureau copies of an enclosure dated February 4, 1948 received from Lieutenant Colonel DONALD SPRINGER, A-2, United States Air Force, Hamilton Air Force Base, California. This enclosure is a confidential letter addressed to the Commanding Generals of the First, Second, Fourth, Tenth, Eleventh, and Fourteenth Air Forces, Air Defense Command, Mitchel Air Force Base, New York, by command of General STRATEMEYER. It concerns the investigation of flying discs by Air Force personnel.\n\nYour attention is particularly called to paragraph 2, which indicates that certain reports concerning the investigation of flying discs by Air Force intelligence will be reported to the FBI office concerned. Your attention is further called to paragraph 2-b, which indicates that \"investigations will be coordinated with the FBI office concerned.......\"\n\nInasmuch as these recent instructions of the Headquarters, Air Defense Command, Mitchel Air Force Base, New York, are contrary to the instructions contained in Bureau Bulletin No. 57, Series 1947, dated October 1, 1947, in which it is indicated that all future reports connected with flying discs should be referred to the Air Force and no investigative action taken by Bureau agents, the Bureau is requested to advise this office, as well as other interested Bureau offices, as to whether there has been a change in Bureau policy with reference to the handling of such matters or whether Bureau Bulletin No. 57 dated October 1, 1947 is still in effect.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nHARRY M. KIMBALL, SAC\n\nRMK:smb\nEnclosure (in duplicate)"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHeadquarters\nAir Defense Command\nMitchel Air Force Base, New York\n\n4 February 1948\n\nD 333.5 (CIB)\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation and Reporting of \"Flying Disc\" Incidents\n\nTO: Commanding Generals, First, Second, Fourth, Tenth, Eleventh, and Fourteenth Air Forces, Air Defense Command\nATTN: AC of S, A-2\n\n1. The numbered air forces of this command are responsible for the prompt investigation and reporting of incidents relating to \"flying discs\" which occur within their respective areas. Numbered air force A-2s, after evaluating disc incidents, will determine the extent of investigation. Futile expenditure of military funds and manpower must be avoided.\n\n2. \"Flying discs\" will be investigated as provided for in Counter Intelligence Incident Cases, taking cognizance of the USAF Operating Intelligence Echelon structure. Where it is evident that witnesses, who were together at the time of incident but who are widely separated at the time of investigation would corroborate each other's story, only one witness need be interrogated. If there is a reasonable indication that a reported incident is a hoax or the fabrication of a publicity seeking individual, no further investigative effort will be expended. However, a report of such circumstances will be submitted to the FBI office concerned.\n\na. CIC personnel attached to the numbered air forces of this command may be utilized to prosecute the investigation of subject incidents.\n\nb. Investigations will be coordinated with the FBI Office concerned in accordance with instructions contained in letter, this headquarters, D 333.3 EX, subject, \"Cooperation of FBI with AAF on Investigation of 'Flying Disc' Incidents,\" 3 September 1947.\n\n3. Reports will be narrative in style and will cover only those facts pertinent to the subject. Where source credibility cannot be established, or when an incident lacks foundation, the report will merely state same. Two types of report will be submitted on all incidents.\n\na. Spot Reports (fragmentary reports) will be submitted on all incidents and will be followed by a Letter Report.\n\nb. Letter Reports will be submitted to report the completed investigation of all \"flying disc\" incidents.\n\n4. Reports will be submitted in duplicate promptly, usually be regular mail. However, Spot reports on incidents of substantial character, i.e., those in which the patent credibility of the witness is beyond challenge and whose technical\n\nENCLOSURE\n62-83894-140"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"background is compatible with his observations of an occurrence obviously not atmospheric or celestial phenomena, may be transmitted by TWX. Reports will be submitted directly to Headquarters, USAF, ATTN: Directorate of Intelligence, Air Intelligence Requirements Branch. One informational copy of each report submitted will be forwarded to this command, ATTN: AC of S, Intelligence. Reports will be classified at least CONFIDENTIAL.\n\nBY COMMAND OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL STRATEMEYER:\n\nRICHARD W. GEUSS\nCaptain, USAF\nActg Asst Adj Gen"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, San Francisco\n\nDirector, FBI\n62-83894-140\nFLYING DISCS\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nFebruary 20, 1948\n\nReference is made to your letter in the captioned matter dated February 12, 1948.\n\nYou are advised that Bureau Bulletin No. 57 dated October 1, 1947, still applies with respect to flying discs. The Bureau is conducting no investigations concerning flying discs. We will, however, give the Air Forces any information which comes to our attention and will receive any information which the Air Forces volunteer.\n\nThe Headquarters of the Air Forces in Washington are being contacted by the Bureau in order to insure that there is no misunderstanding as to the Bureau's position in this matter.\n\nRGF:rb\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 2\nFEB 21 1948 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, San Francisco\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nFLYING DISCS\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nReference is made to your letter in the captioned matter dated February 12, 1948.\n\nYou are advised that Bureau Bulletin No. 57 dated October 1, 1947, still applies with respect to flying discs. The Bureau is conducting no investigations concerning flying discs. The Bureau will, however, give the Air Forces any information which comes to its attention and will receive any information which the Air Forces volunteer.\n\nThe Headquarters of the Air Forces in Washington are being contacted by the Bureau in order to insure that there is no misunderstanding as to the Bureau's position in this matter.\n\nRCF:rb\n\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nFBI\nRECEIVED-MAIL ROOM\nFEB 21 2 44 PM '48\nMAR 2 1948"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Mr. Ladd\n\nFROM : V. P. Keay\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nDATE: 3/1/48\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Coffey\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Carson\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Hendon\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Beahm\nMiss Gandy\n\nReference is made to a memorandum to you from Mr. J. P. Coyne in the above-captioned matter dated February 19, 1948. The memorandum indicated that the San Francisco Field Division had received a letter from the headquarters of the Air Defense Command, Mitchel Air Force Base, New York, dated February 4, 1948, entitled, \"Investigation and Reporting of 'Flying Disc' Incidents.\" This communication indicated that investigations should be coordinated with the FBI.\n\nThe Agent in Charge of the San Francisco Field Division inquired as to a change in policy regarding the investigation of flying discs. A letter was forwarded to San Francisco advising them that there had been no change in the Bureau's policy. This matter has been discussed by Special Agent S. W. Reynolds of the Liaison Section with Lieutenant Colonel C. P. Martin of the Intelligence Division of the Air Force. Colonel Martin advised Mr. Reynolds that apparently the Air Defense Command at Mitchel Field was not aware of the fact that the Bureau was no longer conducting investigations regarding flying discs. He stated that he would take the necessary action and straighten out the Air Defense Command as to the present policy regarding incidents of flying discs.\n\nSWR:md\n\n62-A3A9K-141\n\n51 MAR 16 1948"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nSTANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nTO : Mr. D. M. Ladd\n\nFROM : J. P. Coyne\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nDATE: February 19, 1948\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Coffey\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Carson\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Hendon\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Beahm\nMiss Gandy\n\nThe attached letter from the San Francisco Field Division dated February 12, 1948, raises the question as to whether there has been a change in policy concerning the investigation of flying discs.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\nIt is recommended that the information contained in the attached letter be discussed by the Liaison Section with the Air Forces.\n\nACTION:\n\nA letter is attached to San Francisco advising them that there has been no change in Bureau policy.\n\nRGF:rb\n\n62-A3A94-142\n\n51 MAR 16 1948"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEB 20 1 38 PM '48\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STYLES BRIDGES, N. H., CHAIRMAN\nUnited States Senate\nCOMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS\n\nMarch 22, 1948\n\nHonorable J. Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nDepartment of Justice\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nAttached you will find letter which may or may not be of interest to your office. However, I felt it should be passed on to you for whatever the information is worth.\n\nKindly return my constituent's letter although if you wish you make a copy of it.\n\nCordially yours,\n\nKENNETH S. WHERRY\n\nKSW:emn-3\n\nEnc.\n\n62-83894-143\n\n31 MAR 27 1948"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nBenkelman, Nebraska\nMarch 14, 1948\n\nMr. Kenneth Wherry\nUnited States Senate\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Wherry:\n\nOn March 13 at 2:30, M.S.T. o'clock in the afternoon I witnessed a strange sight in the sky traveling at a very high rate of speed at a very high altitude.\n\nI was first attracted to this sight by a noise of motor or whatever it was. It sound to me like that of a train rumbling in the distance of from 10 to 12 miles on a still day.\n\nAt first glance it looked like it might be a vapor trail left by a high flying plane. But the white streak that was in the sky never changed its shape or did it change in the direction of travel.\n\nIt traveled much faster than any plane I have seen traveling in sky high enough to leave vapor trail.\n\nAs near as I can describe this sight was that it might appear to be a stream lined train traveling at a very high altitude at very high rate of speed.\n\nThis rocket or whatever it might have been was high enough to disappear from sight while it was yet very far above the horizon.\n\nI am not writing this so that it might seem to be another disc, fan or whatever you might call them. I just saw this and it has been on my mind and I thought if there was anything that I could be of help to solve this thing I would write this to you and you can forward this to the proper Dept. if it is necessary. Thanking you kindly\n\nYours Truly\n\n/s/ Kenneth L. Frasier\n\nP.S.\nThis object was traveling from east to west. It looked like it might have traveled over Denver,"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nKENNETH L. FRAZIER\n\nColo. or a little to the south.\n\nI live almost due east about 180 mi. by air and I looked to the south a little to be able to get sight of object.\n\nThis object was also witnessed by my son who was with me at the time.\n\nI saw the smoke cloud left by so called meteor which exploded over at Norton_Kans. This object was not a bright ball of fire like it was.\n\nThe silver streak in the sky traveled as if it were a long connected streak. This did not resemble a line of smoke left by a train traveling along it moved altogether as a unit. If it is not against any regulation and if possible would like to have answer to this object.\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"March 24, 1948\n\nRECORDED 62-83894-143\n\nHonorable Kenneth S. Wherry\nUnited States Senate\nWashington, D. C.\n\nMy dear Senator:\n\nYour letter of March 22, 1948, with enclosure, has been received. Since the subject matter mentioned in your constituent's letter is not within the scope of authority of this Bureau, I have taken the liberty of forwarding a copy of his letter and yours to the Secretary of the Army, National Defense Building, Washington, D. C., for his information. Your thoughtfulness in bringing this to my attention is indeed appreciated. I am enclosing a copy of my letter to Mr. Frasier which I thought you might like to have for your files, together with his letter.\n\nWith expressions of my highest esteem and best regards,\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nEnclosure\nIncoming from Frasier and copy of our letter to him.\nVWP:jec\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Penn‌ington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION MAILED 3 MAR 25 1948 P.M. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"March 24, 1948\n\nRECORDED 62-83894-143\n\nMr. Kenneth L. Frasier\nBenkelman, Nebraska\n\nDear Mr. Frasier:\n\nYour letter dated March 14, 1948, to the Honorable Kenneth S. Wherry, United States Senator, has been referred to me for attention. Since the matter you mentioned is not within the scope of authority of this Bureau, I have taken the liberty of furnishing a copy of your communication to the Secretary of the Army, National Defense Building, Washington, D. C., and in the event you have any additional information, it is suggested you may desire to communicate with him.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncc: Senator Wherry - under separate cover\n\nName of town per Postal Guide\n\nVWP:jec\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION MAILED 3 MAR 25 1948 P.M. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\nMr. Kenneth L. Frasier\nWichita Falls, Texas\n\nDear Sir:\n\nYour letter of [illegible] has been received by this office. Concerning the matter of flying discs, the information you have provided has been referred to the proper authorities. [illegible]\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nThe Honorable J. Edgar Hoover\n\nSecretary\n\n[illegible]\n\nMAILED\nMAR 25 1948\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED-MAIL ROOM\nMAR 25 6 45 PM 1948\n\nFILE 121-1998"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STYLES BRIDGES, N. H., CHAIRMAN\nCHAN GURNEY, S. DAK.\nC. WAYLAND BROOKS, ILL.\nCLYDE M. REED, KANS.\nJOSEPH H. BALL, MINN.\nHOMER FERGUSON, MICH.\nKENNETH S. WHERRY, NEBR.\nGUY CORDON, OREG.\nLEVERETT SALTONSTALL, MASS.\nMILTON R. YOUNG, N. DAK.\nWILLIAM F. KNOWLAND, CALIF.\nHENRY C. DWORSHAK, IDAHO\nKENNETH MC KELLAR\nCARL HAYDEN\nELMER THOMAS\nMILLARD E. TYDINGS\nRICHARD B. RUSSELL\nPAT MCCARRAN, NEV.\nJOHN H. OVERTON, LA.\nJOSEPH C. O'MAHONEY, WYO.\nTHEODORE FRANCIS GREEN, R. I.\nEVERARD H. SMITH, CLERK\nCECIL H. TOLBERT, ASST. CLERK\n\nUnited States Senate\nCOMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS\n\nApril 1, 1948\n\nThe Honorable J. Edgar Hoover\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nThank you very much for forwarding Mr. Kenneth L. Frasier's letter to the proper authorities. Your cooperation in this instance was deeply appreciated.\n\nCordially yours\n\nKENNETH S. WHERRY\n\nKSW:f*\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED\nEX-103\n62-83894\n144\nFBI\n34 APR 9 1948\n\n50 APR 19 1948"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\n\nPost Office Box 1850\nAtlanta 1, Georgia\nAugust 10, 1948\n\nAIRMAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nRE: MRS. MADELINE GWYNNE MERCHANT;\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nFLYING DISCS\n\nDear Sir:\n\nTransmitted herewith for the Bureau's information are copies of a letter, together with enclosure, from the above captioned individual. Inasmuch as there is no record in this office concerning captioned person, no reply has been made to instant letter, with the thought the Bureau may desire to acknowledge instant communication or communicate further concerning the matter with the Dallas Office.\n\nFor the information of the Bureau and the Dallas and San Antonio Offices, the clippings referred to are transmitted herewith to the Bureau, Dallas and San Antonio Offices, it being noted that Wichita Falls is covered by Dallas and Fort Sam Houston is covered by the San Antonio Office.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nEDWIN J. FOLTZ\nSAC\n\nEnclosures - 5\n\ncc-Dallas (Enc-3) AMSD\ncc-San Antonio (Enc-3) AMSD\n\nEJF:SL\n\n145\n\nRECEIVED\nFBI\nAUG 17 1948\n\nNo action\nAUG 20 1948"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\n\nPost Office Box 1850\nAtlanta 1, Georgia\nAugust 10, 1948\n\nAIRMAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nRE: MRS. MADELINE GWYNNE MERCHANT;\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDear Sir:\n\nTransmitted herewith for the Bureau's information are copies of a letter, together with enclosure, from the above captioned individual. Inasmuch as there is no record in this office concerning captioned person, no reply has been made to instant letter, with the thought the Bureau may desire to acknowledge instant communication or communicate further concerning the matter with the Dallas Office.\n\nFor the information of the Bureau and the Dallas and San Antonio Offices, the clippings referred to are transmitted herewith to the Bureau, Dallas and San Antonio Offices, it being noted that Wichita Falls is covered by Dallas and Fort Sam Houston is covered by the San Antonio Office.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nEDWIN J. FOLTZ\nSAC\n\nEnclosures - 5\n\ncc-Dallas (Enc-3) AMSD\ncc-San Antonio (Enc-3) AMSD\n\nEJF:SL\n\nRECEIVED\nFBI\nAUG 17 1948"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAC Form No. 10-513 (Rev 1 Aug 46)\nWF-L-25 NOV 47 100M\nConfidential\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 90986\nSAVE\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\nIN REPLY ADDRESS BOTH COMMUNICATION AND ENVELOPE TO COMMANDING GENERAL, AIR MATERIEL COMMAND, ATTENTION FOLLOWING OFFICE SYMBOL:\nMCIAXO-3\nMCIAXO-3/FWA/aw\nWright-Patterson AF Base\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AF BASE, DAYTON, OHIO\n9 September 1948\n3B-CO\nL-32\nPC-23142\nDirector\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nDepartment of Justice\nWashington, D. C.\nATTN: FBI Laboratory\nSUBJECT: Project \"SIGN\"\nGentlemen:\nAccompanying this letter is a small sample of soil. This soil was taken from a depression reputed to have been caused by a \"flying saucer\" described as being approximately two feet in diameter and one foot thick which supposedly settled gently to the ground, rebounded to a height of about twenty feet and then continued on its journey. Although the declivity was immediately covered by a large washtub a heavy rain subsequently filled the depression about one/third full of water before any sample of dirt could be taken.\nIn an effort to approach this incident objectively to determine every possible clue, it has been deemed advisable to have this soil sample analyzed and tested. Upon inquiry, your Dayton representative stated that the FBI Laboratory would accomplish the required tests.\nRECORDED - 1\n62-83894-146\nIt is the desire of this Headquarters to ascertain, in particular, if there are traces of unusual elements or alloys adhering to the surface of the particles, or if any abnormality in structure exists showing that the soil was subjected to intense heat, gases or radio-active substances, etc. Unfortunately, in this regard, no one thought to forward a sample of the soil surrounding the depression so no comparison of soils can be made at this time. Should the subsequent test show anything unusual some arrangement could be made to procure some of the surrounding soil so that a comparative analysis could be made. The accompanying sample has not been tested by any other agency, nor will it be."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Project \"SIGN\"\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n9 Sept 1948\nIn the event the tests show nothing warranting further investigation you may dispose of the sample. The report should be addressed to this Command marked for the attention of MCIAXO-3. This Division will appreciate your cooperation in this matter.\nVery truly yours,\nW. R. CLINGERMAN\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Technical Intelligence Division\nIntelligence Department\nIncl\n2\nConfidential"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT of the FBI LABORATORY\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nWASHINGTON D. C.\nTo:\nOctober 7, 1948\nCommanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson AF Base\nDayton, Ohio\nAttention: MCIAXO-3\nRe: There follows the report of the FBI Laboratory on the examination of evidence received from your office on September 17, 1948.\nJohn Edgar Hoover, Director\nYOUR FILE NO.\nFBI FILE NO.\nLAB. NO.\nExamination requested by: [REDACTED]\nExamination of Soil\nReference:\nExamination requested:\nRECORDED - 98 62-83894 -146 PC-23142 CO\nSpecimens: Addressee\nLetter dated September 9, 1948\nMicroscopic (Petrographic-Geologic)\nQ1 Sample of soil.\nResults of Examination:\nThe sample of soil designated as specimen Q1 consisted of various sized pebbles, sand and dirt. This material was examined for the presence of unusual elements or alloys adhering to the surface of the particles, evidence of intense heat and radioactive substances.\nNothing unusual was noted on the pebbles or in the sand and dirt that would indicate a metallic object had rubbed or scraped against this sample. No abnormality was noted in the structure of the various pebbles and rocks, nor was there any indication of extreme heat or the presence of radioactive substances.\nThe specimen designated as Q1 will be returned to your office under separate cover by registered mail.\nRHJ/mek\nMAILED OCT 7 1948 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nL-40\nLaboratory Work Sheet\nRECORDED 9/22/48 kag\nRe: Project \"SIGN\" Examination of Soil.\nFile # 62-83894-146\nLab. # PC-23142 CO\nExamination requested by: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson AF Base, Dayton, Ohio Attention: MCIAXO-3\nDate of reference communication: letter 9/9\nDate received: 9/17 Evid. 9/14 Reg.1171535\nExamination requested: Micro (Petrographic-Geologic)\nResult of Examination:\nExamination by: JEWONS\n9/30/48\nSpecimens submitted for examination\nQ1, Sample of soil.\nConsisted of various sized pebbles, sand & dirt. most of the larger pieces were examined individually for presence of metal adhering to them. Nothing unusual noted on the pebbles or in the sand & dirt - Structure, normal. no indication of extreme heat. Does not activate geiger counter on x-ray spectrometer.\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nL-40\nRecords Section\nRECORDED 9/22/48 kag\nRe: Project \"SIGN\" Examination of Soil.\nFile # 62-83894-146\nLab. # PC-23142 CO\nExamination requested by: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson AF Base, Dayton, Ohio Attention: MCIAXO-3\nDate of reference communication: letter 9/9\nDate received: 9/17 Evid. 9/14 Reg.1171535\nExamination requested: Micro (Petrographic-Geologic)\nResult of Examination:\nExamination by: JEWONS\nReturned 10/18/48 Reg mail.\nSpecimens submitted for examination\nQ1, Sample of soil.\n52NOV 2 1948"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"609 Conkling\nValley City, N.D.\nOct. 15, 1948\n\nF.B.I.\nWashington, D.C.\nDear Sir:\nI trust that\nwhoever reads this\nwill do\nmore than\njust toss\nit in a\nwaste basket.\n\nRECORDED - 51\n62-83894-147\nEX-49\n23 OCT 22 1948\nF B I"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nNov 23 3 19 PM '48\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"October 19, 1948\n62-83894-147\nMrs. R. B. Holiday\n609 Conkling\nValley City, North Dakota\n\nDear Mrs. Holiday:\n\nYour letter dated October 15, 1948, has been received and I do want to thank you for the patriotic motives which prompted you to make available your thoughts concerning the subject you mentioned.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nFRY:mh\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 13\nOCT 20 1948 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\n51 NOV 24 1948"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n\nRECEIVED-LVDD\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nOCT 21 3 45 PM 1948\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 13\nOCT 20 1948 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office of Contents from\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\n\nL-26\n\nDate October 7, 1948\nCase References 62-83894; Project \"SIGN\"\nConsigned to: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson AF Base\nDayton, Ohio Attention: MCIAXO-3\nList of Contents\nExamination of Soil\nPC-23142 CO\n\nMr. Harbo, 7641\nMr. Conrad, 7142\nMr. Downing, 6228 IB\nMr. Sizoo, 7601\nMr. Baughman, 7121\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 1\nOCT 18 1948 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nREGISTERED MAIL\n\nREGISTERED\n797699\n62-83894\n\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Mail Room, place date of shipment and registry number; Shipping Room, show date of shipment and initial this invoice; then return it to person whose name is checked in column at right. After this checked name has been initialled, invoice should be placed in administrative file."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nDEC 28 1948\n\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI, LOS ANGELES 12-28-48 5-35\nDIRECTOR AND SACS HOUSTON, CINCINNATI URGENT\nATTENTION INSPECTOR HOWARD FLETCHER\n\nFLYING DISK, LONNIE EDWARD NOACK COMPLAINT. RE HOUSTON TELETYPE DEC. TWENTY EIGHT. MR. R.C. PERSONS, VASCO [REDACTED] ELECTRIC MANUFACTURING COMPANY, LA, PRESENTLY IN ARIZONA, EXACT WHEREABOUTS UNKNOWN TO HIS OFFICE, EXPECTED TO CALL MORNING OF DEC. TWENTY NINE. MR. NATHAN SMITH, SMITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY, SOUTH PASADENA, CALIF. ADVISED HE AND PERSONS PURCHASED AIRPORT IN MOJAVE DESERT NEAR HELENDALE, CALIF. STATED THAT IN EARLY PART OF DEC. EXACT DATE UNKNOWN, PERSONS ADVISED HIM HE HAD FOUND A FLYING DISK ON THEIR AIRPORT. MR. AND MRS. SMITH, PERSONS, AND LONNIE NOACK PROCEEDED TO AIRPORT WHERE THEY LOCATED DISK, TOOK PICTURES OF IT AND REMOVED [REDACTED] PORTIONS OF DISK, NOACK RETAINING SOME PARTS AND SMITH KEEPING SOME PORTIONS WHICH ARE STILL IN HIS POSSESSION. SMITH ADVISED THAT DAY AFTER LOCATING THE DISK AN EMPLOYEE OBSERVED PARTS RETAINED BY SMITH, AND STATED HE BELIEVED THE OBJECT HAD BEEN MANUFACTURED BY OLSEN AND RICE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, TOY MANUFACTURERS LA. SMITH STATED HE THEN CONTACTED OLSEN AND RICE WHO STATED THEY WERE FINANCING CLAUDE LEROY WOLFERT LA IN DEVELOPING A KITE FOR [REDACTED] SALE ON OPEN MARKET AS A TOY. SMITH STATED HE HAD PREVIOUSLY GIVEN OLSEN AND RICE PERSMISSION TO USE HIS PRIVATE AIRPORT AT ANY TIME. OLSEN AND RICE TOLD SMITH THEY HAD TAKEN EXPERIMENTAL KITES TO SMITHS END PAGE ONE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\n\nAIRPORT AND UPON DETERMING KITES NOT PRACTICAL HAD ABANDONED THE PROJECT. SMITH STATED HE HAD TAKEN SIXTEEN MM PICTURES WHICH ARE PRESENTLY BEING DEVELOPED. STATED WOULD MAKE PICTURES AND PARTS FROM OBJECT AVAILABLE TO THIS OFFICE. SMITH DESCRIBED OBJECT AS APPROXIMATELY SIX FEET IN DIAMETER, CONSISTING OF DISK MOUNTED ON AXEL WITH BEARINGS, WINGS ON EITHER SIDE, TAIL SURFACE SUPPORTED ON BOOMS, CUP MOUNTED ON EACH WING TIP RESEMBLING ROCKET POWER CONTAINERS. SMITH STATED DID NOT OBSERVE ANY CHEMICAL OR OTHER MATTERIAL IN CONTAINERS WHICH COULD BE USED AS SELF PROPELLING FORCE. MR. HENRY T. RICE OF OLSEN AND RICE MANUFACTURING COMPANY ADVISED CLAUDE LEROY WOLFERT FINANCED BY THEIR COMPANY IN DEVELOPING TOY KITE, THAT WOLFERT HAD PROACHED IDEA OF MAKING LARGE MODEL TO BE USED AS TOW TARGET FOR AIRPLANES BUT RICE DECIDED THAT HE MAKE ONLY KITE SUITABLE FOR SALE AS TOYS. [REDACTED] HOWEVER, WOLFERT MADE LARGE MODEL APPROXIMATELY SIX FEET IN DIAMETER, WEIGHING FIFTY POUNDS, WHICH TOGETHER WITH OTHER MODEL HAD BEEN FLOWN IN DC THREE OWNED BY OLSEN AND RICE TO PRIVATE AIRPORT OF [REDACTED] PERSONS AND SMITH. RICE COULD NOT RECALL EXACT DATE, BUT [REDACTED] STATED [REDACTED] IT WAS IN EARLY PART OF DEC. RICE STATED DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED IN FLIGHT OF KITE, AND THAT IN VIEW OF SIZE OF LARGE MODEL IT WAS NECESSARY TO TOW IT BEHIND PLANE TO OBSERVE FLIGHT. STATED MODEL CRASHED AND OLSEN AND RICE ABANDONED EXPERIMENT LEAVING AIRPORT WITH WOLFERT REMAINING BEHIND TO CONDUCT FURTHER EXPERIMENTS. RICE STATED DID NOT KNOW THAT WOLFERT HAD LEFT THE LARGE MODEL AT THIS AIRPORT UNTIL ADVISED BY SMITH END PAGE TWO"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE THREE\n\nTHAT THEY HAD FOUND THE OBJECT. CONTACT WILL BE MADE WITH SMITH, RICE, AND WOLFERT, TO SECURE PHOTOGRAPHS AND SAMPLES. BUREAU WILL BE ADVISED.\nHOOD\nEND\n\nA IN ORDER\n\nPLS\n\nA 7-45 PM OK FBI WASH DC WJR\nHOMR OK FBI HO UICF\n\nCI OK FBI CI JW\n\nCISC"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nDec 28 7 47 PM '48\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED - FLETCHER\nDec 28 3 43 PM '48\n[illegible]\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : MR. D. M. LADD\nFROM : H. B. FLETCHER\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nDATE: December 28, 1948\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Holmes\nMiss Gandy\n\nAt 10:00 a.m. today, SAC Willis, Houston, called in and stated that Fuller Blackwell, a business man in Houston, Texas, had furnished certain pictures taken by a friend of his, Lonnie Noack of the Humboldt Oil Company, Houston, Texas, and had related that Noack had been flying with a friend in a private plane from California to Houston and that at a point about 30 miles east of Lone Pine, California, some object lying on the ground made a very strong reflection and they made a check to determine what would cause this bright reflection. They finally landed the plane and found an object which could be described as being 8' in diameter with wings about 4' long. The object is about 1' in thickness and in the center there appears to be some type of gyroscope. The wings apparently are fitted with some type of jet propulsion. An examination was made by Noack and his friend and they could find no identifying marks and took photographs of the object they observed.\n\nSAC Willis stated he had informed Lieutenant Robert Fleming of the AAF, Ellington Field, and Captain Bush, the Army representative in Houston, of this object and that Noack would be interviewed that morning in the Houston Office with Lieutenant Fleming being present. Lieutenant Fleming wanted the statements of Noack taken down by a stenographer and he will furnish the stenographer for that purpose.\n\nI instructed SAC Willis to furnish complete details of this matter by air mail special delivery, including a copy of the photograph. I further instructed that he furnish the same details to the proper field office because unquestionably the Bureau would want to run this thing out.\n\nAfter talking with you, I phoned SAC Willis back and told him to insure the presence of a Bureau Agent at the time this object was examined by the Army Air Forces and that he should make proper arrangements with the office in California to see that an Agent was present. I also told him to advise me of the developments.\n\nHBF:cmw"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\nRECORDED - 137\nINDEXED - 137\n62-83894\nFBI\nJAN 4 1949\n53 JAN 7 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nDEC 28 1948\nTELETYPE\nFBI HOUSTON 12-28-48 1-12 PM CST EP\nDIRECTOR, SACS CINCINNATI AND LOS ANGELES URGENT\nATTENTION INSPECTOR HOWARD FLETCHER\nFLYING DISK. LONNIE EDWARD NOACK, COMPLAINANT. COMPLAINANT RESIDING TWO NINE TWO ONE CHICAGO STREET, HOUSTON, CONTACTED THIS OFFICE DECEMBER TWENTY SEVENTH ON CAPTIONED MATTER AND IN SIGNED STATEMENT TODAY SUBMITTED THE FOLLOWING. NOACK, EMPLOYED AS A MACHINIST BY HUMBLE OIL COMPANY, HOUSTON, LEFT HOUSTON BY COMMERCIAL AIRLINE DECEMBER FIFTH LAST ON BUSINESS FOR HOLLYWOOD, CALIF. ON MONDAY, DECEMBER SIXTH, CONTACTED R.C. PERSON, FOUR ONE ONE SIX AVALON BLVD., LA., AN ACQUAINTANCE, WHO REMARKED OF HAVING SEEN ON THAT DATE, SOME DISTANCE FROM HOLLYWOOD IN A DESERT AREA, WHAT APPEARED TO BE A FLYING DISK. PERSON OPERATES VASCO ELECTRICAL MANUFACTURING CO., LA., ADAMS FIVE TWO EIGHT ONE. ON DECEMBER SEVENTH, NOACK, PERSON, AND MR. AND MRS. NATHAN SMITH, ONE NAUGHT FIVE SOUTH PASADENA AVE., SOUTH PASADENA, CALIF., DEPARTED BY PRIVATELY OWNED AUTOMOBILE IN SEARCH OF DISK. SAME LOCATED APPROXIMATELY ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY MILES NORTHEAST OF PASADENA AND ABOUT TWENTY MILES NORTHEAST OF LONE PINE, CALIF. PERSON, SMITH, AND NOACK TOOK PHOTOGRAPHS OF DISK WITH MOVIE AND SPEEDGRAPHIC CAMERAS. THE NOACK FILM WAS EIGHT MILLIMETERS IN SIZE AND CAMERA MADE BY REVERE. DISK LOCATED DESERT AREA NEAR NINE HUNDRED ACRES OF LAND OWNED BY PERSON AS PRIVATE AIRFIELD. NOACK HAD HIS FILM DEVELOPED BY EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY AT UNKNOWN ADDRESS LOS PALMAS ST., LA.\nEND PAGE ONE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-LADD\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nDEC 28 3 55 PM '48\nRECEIVED\nJAN 6 2 55 PM '49\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nDEC 28 2 52 PM '48\n[illegible]\nSECRET\nDEC 28 1948\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\nTHESE FILMS RECEIVED NOACK, HOUSTON, BY MAIL DECEMBER TWENTY THIRD LAST. FILM SHOWS DISK TO BE APPROXIMATELY SEVEN FEET IN DIAMETER AND APPROXIMATELY TWO FEET THICK IN MIDDLE WITH FEATHER EDGE ON RIM. ABUTTING SAUCER IN MIDDLE AND ON BOTH SIDES ARE FOUR FOOT WINGS RESEMBLING CONVENTIONAL AIRPLANE TYPE. NO MARKINGS, NO RADIO, AND APPEARED TO HAVE LANDED AT GREAT SPEED. DISK IN COMPARATIVELY GOOD CONDITION. THE ENDS OF BOTH WINGS HAD ATTACHED A SMALL ALUMINUM CYLINDER APPARENTLY FOR JET PROPULSION. ONE OF THESE CYLINDERS OBTAINED BY NOACK AS SOUVENIR AND CURRENTLY IN POSSESION OF THIS OFFICE. FILM SIMILARLY MAINTAINED. SA ROBERT FLEMING, OSI REPRESENTATIVE, ELLINGTON FIELD, TEXAS, NOTIFIED DECEMBER TWENTY SEVENTH. NOACK FILM EXHIBITED THIS OFFICE INSTANT DATE AND SHOWS DISK IN ALL POSITIONS AND ARE AUTHENTIC. MR. FLEMING, OSI, ON DECEMBER TWENTY EIGHTH NOTIFIED DISTRICT COMMANDER, FIFTH OSI DISTRICT, WRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO. SAC R. B. HOOD, LA., NOTIFIED TELEPHONICALLY OF ABOVE INFORMATION WITH REQUEST THAT HE MAINTAIN CONTACT WITH R. C. PERSON IN ORDER THAT BUREAU AGENTS MAY ASSIST OR ACCOMPANY OSI REPRESENTATIVES IN ACTUALLY OBSERVING AND RETRIEVING FLYING DISK. THIS ACTION TAKEN PER BUREAU INSTRUCTIONS. NO FACILITIES AVAILABLE HOUSTON FOR REPRODUCING MOVIE FILM OF NOACK, HOWEVER, STILL SHOTS CAN BE DEVELOPED BY COMPETENT\n\nEND PAGE TWO"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nDEC 28 3 55 PM '48\nRECEIVED\nJAN 6 2 55 PM '49\nINTERNATIONAL\nF B I\nU.S DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE THREE\nCOMMERCIAL REPRESENTATIVES. ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY OSI, DAYTON, OHIO, NOT KNOWN AT THIS MOMENT AND IT IS POSSIBLE THEY MAY DESIRE FILM FOR REPRODUCTION THEIR FACILITIES THERE. IF BUREAU DESIRES LA OFFICE TO OBTAIN FROM PERSON AND SMITH THEIR FILM AND NEGATIVES, THIS MIGHT BE CONSIDERED. PICTURES TAKEN BY PERSON WITH FOUR BY FIVE SPEEDGRAPHIC CAMERA AND THZSE PICTURES SHOULD BE READILY AVAILABLE. NOACK FILM AND PART OF JET PROPULSION WING TIP BEING MAINTAINED HOUSTON AWAITING SUGGESTED DISPOSITION AND HANDLING BY EITHER BUREAU OR OSI. CINCINNATI OFFICE BEING MADE COGNIZANT TO COVER POSSIBILITY THAT BUREAU MAY DIRECT LIAISON WITH OSI, DAYTON. AMSD LETTER FOLLOWS TO BUREAU AND INTERESTED OFFICES ENCLOSING SIGNED STATEMENT OF NOACK.\n\nWILLIS\n\nEND A IN O PLS\nWA 225PM OK FBI WA LS\nCI OK FBI CI JCL\nLA OK FBI LA EDS\nDISCM\n\ncc Mr. Fletcher"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nDec 28 2 29 PM '48\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n[illegible]\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nDEC 28 3 55 PM '48\nRECEIVED\nJAN 6 2 55 PM '49\nINTERNATIONAL\nF B I"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nDEC 29 1948\nTELEMETER\nWASH 10 FROM LOS ANGELES 29 9-07 PM\nDIRECTOR ROUTINE\nFLYING DISK, LONNIE EDWARD NOACK, [REDACTED] COMPLAINANT. RE TELETYPES FROM HOUSTON AND LA TWENTYEIGHTH INSTANT. THREE THREE PARTS OF SUBJECT DESCRIBED BY NOACK SECURED FROM NATHAN SMITH, LA AND EXHIBITED TO HENRY T. RICE, OHLSON AND RICE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, THREE THREE FOUR ZERO [REDACTED] EMERY STREET, LA. RICE POSITIVELY IDENTIFIED THESE PARTS AS COMING FROM A MODEL TOW TARGET CONSTRUCTED BY CLAUDE L. WOLFORD, FIVE FOUR FIVE FOUR CHESLEY AVE., LA. ONE PART BEING STAMPED WOLFORD [REDACTED] PLASTICS MOLDING CO., LA. TOW TARGET WAS TESTED BY RICE AND WOLFORD USING RICE,S AIRPLANE OVER NATHAN SMITH,S AIRFIELD NEAR HELENDALE, CALIF. THE TEST WAS A FAILURE, THE TARGET CRASHED AND WAS ABANDONED AT THE AIRFIELD. NO FURTHER INVESTIGATION BEING CONDUCTED AND THE THREE ITEMS SECURED FROM SMITH WILL BE RETURNED TO HIM UNLESS BUREAU ADVISES TO [REDACTED] CONTRARY. REPORT WILL BE SUBMITTED.\nHOOD\nCINCINNATI AND HOUSTON ADV. SEP.\nACK PLS\nRECORDED - 42 INDEXED - 42\n62-83894\n34 JAN 3 1949\nEX-1"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nDec 29 11 18 PM '48\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nMAIN 10 FROM LOS ANGELES 29 9-07 PM\nDIRECTOR ROUTINE\n\nFLYING DISC, ALONZO EDWARD NOACK, COMPASS, CONFIRMING. TELETYPE FROM HOUSTON AND IN INVESTIGATION INSTANT. THREE PARTS OF SUBJECT DESCRIBED BY NOACK SECURED FROM MAN NAMED SMITH. IA AND EXHIBITED TO HENRY T. RICE, OLSON AND RICE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, THREE TUBES FOUR ZERO ZERO HENRY CREEK, IA. RICE POSITIVELY IDENTIFIED THESE PARTS AS FORMING FROM A MODEL TOW TARGET CONSTRUCTED BY CLAUDE O. HAWKINS, FIVE FOUR FIVE FOUR CHEROKEE AVE., LA. ONE PART BEING TAMMED MOTORED BLENDER IN MOTHER INFORMATION, LA. TOW TARGET WAS TESTED BY HIDE AND WILLIAMS BEING PLETS AIRPLANE CASE NAMED SMITH'S KENNEDY HEIDMANN, CALIF. THE TESTS WERE FAILURES. THE TARGET CRASHED AND WAS ABANDONED. THE AFFIANT CONTINUES TO FURTHER INVESTIGATE BEING CONDUCTED AND THE PARTS SECURED FROM SMITH WILL BE RETURNED TO HQ IN WIRE GIVING DETAILS TO CONTRARY. REPORT WILL BE SUBMITTED.\n\nCINCINNATI AND HOUSTON ADV. EBP.\nACS FILE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: MR. D. M. LADD\nFROM: H. B. FLETCHER\nDATE: December 28, 1948\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nReference is made to the teletype of December 28, 1948, from the Houston Office.\n\nAt 3:30 p.m., I called SAC Hood of the Los Angeles Office and instructed that he attempt to locate Mr. Person and Mr. and Mrs. Nathan Smith, secure photographs and film in their possession and also secure from them the location of the described flying disc. I also instructed that Mr. Hood send out sufficient Agents to find the disc and guard it until it could be properly handled by the appropriate Government authority. I also telephoned the Houston Office and told them to send in the photographs or film in their possession, together with the part which had been recovered from the machine by the Informant Noack.\n\nAt 5:00 p.m., SAC Hood called back and stated that all work on this matter should be immediately discontinued. They had managed to reach Mr. Nathan Smith and he stated that he knew all about this matter; that it was not a flying disc, but an object which had been identified as a tow kite, which has a disc center and wings. This kite is actually made in Los Angeles by the Olson and Rice Manufacturing Company. A call was made to Olson and Rice, who admitted making a kite along the lines described by Mr. Smith and they explained that they had tried to fly it and it had failed and they had abandoned it.\n\nMr. Hood stated he did not have full details at the time of his call, but he did have this report from the Agents. Therefore, I instructed that he call Mr. Willis of the Houston Office immediately in order that the film and the part available to the Houston Office will not be forwarded for Laboratory examination.\n\nHBF:esb"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: DIRECTOR FBI\nFROM: SAC KNOXVILLE\nDATE: January 10, 1949\nSUBJECT: \"FLYING SAUCERS\" OBSERVED OVER OAK RIDGE AREA\nINTERNAL SECURITY - X\n\nThere are being submitted herewith two photographs of reputedly flying saucers which were seen at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, sometime during July of 1947. All of the information contained in this letter was received from Mr. GEORGE RATHMAN, Chief Investigator, Security Division, Atomic Energy Commission, and Colonel C. D. GASSER, Resident Engineer, Air Material Command, United States Army, who is the principal army technician at the Nuclear Energy for the Propulsion of Aircraft Research Center at Oak Ridge, Tennessee.\n\nMr. RATHMAN advised that the attached photographs were taken by W. R. PRESLEY in July of 1947. He stated that interview with PRESLEY revealed that he had been snapping photographs of his family in front of his residence at 218 Illinois Avenue, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, late in the afternoon, when he looked into the sky and observed the vapor trail as exhibited by the photograph numbered \"1.\" PRESLEY stated that he took a snap of this trail, was winding the film to the next number, when he looked into the sky and observed the ball of fire as shown in photograph 2. Upon observing the unusual phenomena, he used his last film in taking photograph #2. PRESLEY made these photographs available to reporters of the Knoxville News-Sentinel and a story concerning them was run in that paper; however, as shown by the photostatic copy of the newspaper clipping, which is also being submitted herewith to the Bureau, the print was very indistinct; the news story did not contain any factual information; and it was regarded generally by the public at the time as a possible trick.\n\nLater, it was learned by Mr. RATHMAN and Colonel GASSER that PRESLEY had made several copies of this photograph and had distributed them among his acquaintances at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Upon Colonel GASSER's finding that the photographs had received some distribution, he requested Mr. RATHMAN as Head of the Compliance and Investigations Division, to recover as many as possible of the photographs, advise the persons in whose possession they were found to say nothing to anyone concerning them, and to return the said photographs to him for transmission to the United States Air Force Intelligence Service. Mr. RATHMAN advises that he succeeded in rounding up twenty-four copies of these photographs, and that, according to the statements of PRESLEY, no more copies were made or distributed. RATHMAN further stated that GASSER had appeared extremely concerned over the matter and seemed to be quite emphatic that the matter should be given no more publicity than was absolutely necessary. RATHMAN also advised that he studied the negatives from which the reproductions were made, and they appeared to be authentic in that trick photography should have been apparent, but from the"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: DIRECTOR FBI\nFROM: SAC KNOXVILLE\nDATE: January 10, 1949\nSUBJECT: \"FLYING SAUCERS\" OBSERVED OVER OAK RIDGE AREA\nINTERNAL SECURITY - X\n\nThere are being submitted herewith two photographs of reputedly flying saucers which were seen at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, sometime during July of 1947. All of the information contained in this letter was received from Mr. GEORGE RATHMAN, Chief Investigator, Security Division, Atomic Energy Commission, and Colonel C. D. GASSER, Resident Engineer, Air Material Command, United States Army, who is the principal army technician at the Nuclear Energy for the Propulsion of Aircraft Research Center at Oak Ridge, Tennessee.\n\nMr. RATHMAN advised that the attached photographs were taken by W. R. PRESLEY in July of 1947. He stated that interview with PRESLEY revealed that he had been snapping photographs of his family in front of his residence at 218 Illinois Avenue, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, late in the afternoon, when he looked into the sky and observed the vapor trail as exhibited by the photograph numbered \"1.\" PRESLEY stated that he took a snap of this trail, was winding the film to the next number, when he looked into the sky and observed the ball of fire as shown in photograph 2. Upon observing the unusual phenomena, he used his last film in taking photograph #2. PRESLEY made these photographs available to reporters of the Knoxville News-Sentinel and a story concerning them was run in that paper; however, as shown by the photostatic copy of the newspaper clipping, the print was very indistinct; the news story did not contain any factual information; and it was regarded generally by the public at the time as a possible trick.\n\nMr. RATHMAN advised that the photographs were not made from the original negatives and that PRESLEY had made several copies of this photograph and distributed them among his acquaintances at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Upon Colonel GASSER's finding that the photographs had received some distribution, he requested Mr. RATHMAN to recover as many as possible of the photographs and return them to him for transmission to the United States Air Force Intelligence Service."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"negatives certainly did not appear to be the case. It was Mr. RATHMAN's\nobservation that had the negative been \"doped\" with some sort of chemical, it\nwould have removed the emulsion from the face of the film in such a way that\nthe negative would have been thin at the point which is supposedly a ball of\nfire, whereas, in fact, both the vapor trail and the corona of fire are dark\non the negative, indicating that it was an actual exposure. It was the opinion\nof Mr. RATHMAN that the photographs were, without doubt, authentic.\n\nIn accordance with Bureau instructions, no active investigation of\nthis matter was made, but it was deemed advisable to interview Colonel GASSER\nprior to submitting the photographs to the Bureau.\n\nColonel GASSER predicated his remarks concerning the \"flying saucers\"\nor \"mystery missiles\" by stating that he knew nothing of an official nature\nconcerning them, other than the fact that they were believed by air force\nintelligence officials to be man-made missiles, rather than some natural\nphenomena. It was his further belief that a great deal of information had been\ncompiled concerning these missiles by air force intelligence, and that research\non the matter was being extensively done at Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. He also\nexpressed the opinion that information at the disposal of the United States Army\nAir Force Intelligence had, in all probability, been made available to the\nBureau at Washington, D. C.\n\nColonel GASSER then continued with his own ideas as to what might be\nthe nature of these discs, which ideas he had formulated through review of\nthose known facts and theoretical conjectures of himself and other scientists\nconcerning the nature of flying discs and methods of propulsion for such type\nof aerial mechanism. According to him, flying discs have long been a theoretical\npossibility and, in fact, a possibility which would indicate one of the best\nmeans by which to break through the barriers of the supersonic area. Scientists\nhave, for many years, been attempting to develop this type of aircraft. Some\nexperimentation has been done even in the United States, but insofar as is\nknown in the United States at the present time, there have never been any\npractical developments. As a second factor of consideration, Colonel GASSER\nstated that insofar as is known to U. S. scientists at this time, there is no\nknown chemical fuel which would make possible tremendous range of flight such\nas is ascribed to the reported \"flying saucers.\" There is only one possible\nfuel which could be utilized which is in accord with present theory, and that\nis the utilization of atomic energy. As further evidence of this possible means\nof propulsion, Colonel GASSER called attention to the vapor trail and gaseous\ncorona described as a ball of fire, which he states might give some evidence\nto the fact that a radio-active field is present. He explained that the corona,\nor exhaust, has what appears to be layers of intensity which are circular rather\nthan elongated and have no tendency to trail at the extremities, as would be\nthe case if a normal type of exhaust from a combustion engine was being utilized\nin the propulsion of these aircraft. He continued that the vapor trail left by\nthe missile appears to be one single line of uniform intensity which is extremely\nslow in dissipating. It was pointed out by him that in the case of a normal\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"vapor trail being left by an aircraft moving at extremely high speeds or extremely\nhigh altitudes, the vapor trail usually will be from the wing tips and/or the\nexhaust of the engines, thus presenting several lines. But, in any event, even\nthough only one line were visible, it would be rather quick to dissipate. This\nindicated to him that the vapor trail represents some atmospheric change along\nthe path of the missile, which would not be the case were it any presently known\ntype of aircraft.\n\nHe continued that information furnished by him should be treated with\nthe utmost confidence, in that he was not speaking officially, but as a personal\nmatter of cooperation. He stated that the matter was being given absolutely no\ndissemination by the air force or other military personnel, and that they had\nnot deemed it advisable to advise him of all information pertaining to the missile.\nHe continued, however, that in his conversation with representatives at Wright\nField and in reading reports returned to this country by foreign agents, he had\ngathered together certain information which might be of assistance in determining\nwhether or not these so-called missiles were authentic, usable and of danger to\nthe United States. First, he pointed out that knowledge of such a possible\naircraft is not by any means new, it having been known as early as four years\nago that some type of flying disc was being experimented with by the Russians.\nIn addition thereto, he stated that more recent reports have been received\nfrom representatives of the Central Intelligence Agency in Southern Europe and\nSouthern Asia to the effect that the Russians were experimenting with some type\nof radical aircraft or guided missile which could be dispatched for great dis-\ntances out over the sea, made to turn in flight and return to the base from which\nit was launched. This fact was extremely worthy of notice as experiments in\nthis country have so far only developed to the point where we are concerned with\ndelivering a missile to the required point of impact, and no consideration has\nbeen given to imparting to that missile the ability to return. Secondly, he\nstated that it is a known fact that the Russians are attempting to develop\nsome type of nuclear energy, that they received a wealth of information concern-\ning nuclear energy at the time of their occupation in Germany, and that they too\nhave at their disposal the limited supply of the necessary fissionable materials.\nHe stated that insofar as any opinion as to whether or not they have the ability\nand scientific knowledge to create such a nuclear-propelled missile is strictly\na matter of conjecture, and that he would hesitate to make any definite statement.\nHe pointed out, however, that the Russians have some very capable scientists in\nthe field of atomic energy and that, in addition thereto, they took into their\ncustody some of the most advanced and capable scientists of the German Nation.\n\nHe also stated that a peculiar fact concerning the missiles exists\nfrom reports he has received which is worthy of notice, and that is that from\nall appearances, they usually approach the United States from a northerly direc-\ntion and have been reported as returning in a northerly direction. None have\never been known to crash, collide or disintegrate over American soil, but it\nwould appear that they come to the United States, cruise around, and go back\nover the North Pole. He states that insofar as is known to him, there has never\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"been any piece of one recovered from any source whatever in order that analytical\nstudy of its nature could be made. Insofar as was known to him, the only actual\nmaterial which would be of any value in determining its nature are telephoto\nphotographs which are now in the possession of engineers at Wright Field, Dayton,\nOhio. How detailed and how clear these photographs are, he was unable to state.\nHe stated that one report has been received concerning a collision of these\nmissiles with another type of aircraft. This report, according to him, took\nplace a short time prior to the report of numerous discs over the United States,\nand the report emanated from Czechoslovakia. This report was that a Czecho-\nslovakian transport had collided with some unidentified missile while in mid-air\nover the ocean, and that said missile and said transport had been completely\ndisintegrated without recovery of parts or survivors from either. It was the\nbelief of Colonel GASSER that this undescribed missile was perhaps the same type\nof thing as the flying saucer. Another factor of notice, according to Colonel\nGASSER, and as is portrayed by the photographs, it would appear that the missiles\ncan be maintained at a certain altitude above the contour of the ground. This\ncould be done by means of some type of radio altimeter or radio control. Natu-\nrally, the path of the missile is not in exact parallel to the contour, as its\npurported great speed would create considerable lag in its flight. Another\nfactor which is worthy of note, according to Colonel GASSER, is that it is\nnormally reported as being seen at tremendously high altitudes and always travel-\ning in a straight line. He stated that he himself observed, on one occasion, a\nsingle vapor trail coming from some type of aircraft at unbelievably high altitudes,\nwhich vapor trail extended from horizon to horizon in a perfectly straight line.\nHe observed the vapor trail while it was in the process of formation and states\nthat it was completely unlike any vapor trail he had ever observed before in all\nof his experience with the air force. It was his judgment that whatever created\nthe vapor trail was traveling at an unbelievably tremendous speed. This, together\nwith reports that when close to the ground, the missile travels at speeds which\nmake possible visual observation of its actions, would reflect that there is\nsome ability to control the speed of these missiles as well as the altitude.\n\nColonel GASSER concluded that this matter, while still purely a matter\nof guesswork, is nevertheless a source of great concern to the military establish-\nment of this country. Great efforts have been expended by the service to determine\njust what the nature of these missiles might be and, upon so determining, decide\nwhether or not an adequate defense can be established. He also stated that it\nhas given impetus to the research being done by the air force in their own pro-\ngram of nuclear energy for the propulsion of aircraft to develop guided missiles.\nHe also advised that insofar as was known to him, there was absolutely no con-\nnection between these missiles and the fact that they were observed close to\nOak Ridge, Tennessee. He stated that this was perhaps, and probably, a matter\nof coincidence and they were seen in this area merely as they were seen in forty-\nsix of the forty-eight states of the United States during the Month of July when\nso many reports were being received.\n\nThis information is being submitted to the Bureau for whatever value it\nmay be, and no further action in the matter is being contemplated by this office,\nunless advised to the contrary.\n\nCCM:bk\n65-11\nEnclosures - 3\n\n-4-"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI DATE: 12/28/48\n\nFROM : SAC, Houston\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISC:\n LONNIE EDWARD NOACK, Complainant\n\nAttention: Assistant Director D.M. Ladd\n\nRemytel 12/28/48 in the above captioned matter.\n\nFor the Bureau's information, on 12/27/48 Mr. FULLER\nBLACKWELL, an attorney with offices 410 Kress Building,\nHouston, Texas, telephonically contacted the Houston\nOffice to advise that he had a friend, LONNIE NOACK,\nwho had some information on an object which might be\na flying disc. Mr. BLACKWELL stated he was calling in\nresponse to Mr. NOACK's suggestion and as a means of\ndetermining what authorities would have an interest\nin this matter. He said Mr. NOACK was a machinist\nemployed by the Humble Oil and Refining Company, Houston.\n\nMr. BLACKWELL, in calling, advised that the disc, or\nobject, was approximately eight feet in diameter, had a\ntail and wings, and apparently was equipped for jet\npropulsion. He stated NOACK had observed this object\nat a desert location near Las Vegas, Nevada; further,\nthat Mr. NOACK had taken some movie film of the disc and\nthat this film was currently in his possession.\n\nImmediately upon receipt of the above information,\nMr. Robert B. Fleming, Special Agent, O.S.I., Ellington\nField, Texas, was notified as was true of Captain Harold\nBush, MID representative, also Houston. As a result of\nthese referrals, arrangements were effected with Mr.\nNOACK to bring his film to the Houston Office for a showing\nat 8 P.M., 12/27/48. This was done with Messrs. Bush,\nFleming, Noack, and Special Agent Graham W. Kitchel and\nthe writer observing. Arrangements were then made for\nMr. NOACK to again appear at the Houston Office on the\nmorning of 12/28/48 in order that his information might be\nreduced to writing. Mr. NOACK in making his initial\nappearance at the office surrendered his movie film which\nconsisted of one 50 foot roll of 8 mm movie film. Approximately\nfifteen feet of this roll relates exclusively to the pictures\nof the flying disc.\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964\nRECORDED - 43\n62-83894-154\nINDEXED - 43\nJAN 14 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director\nRe: Flying Disc\nHO 12/28/48\n\nWhile observing the object, Mr. NOACK noted an aluminum\ncylinder which had become detached from one of the wing\ntips and he brought this back with him as a souvenir. This\ncylinder conceivably could act as a rudder, a rocket\nhousing, or fuel tank attachment. Mr. NOACK initialled\nthe cylinder and surrendered it also.\n\nThere are attached hereto for the Bureau two copies of a\nsigned statement taken from Mr. NOACK dated Houston, Texas,\n12/28/48. Two copies of the statement are attached for\nthe Los Angeles Office, and one informational copy is being\ndesignated for the Cincinnati Division. The original is\nbeing retained in the Houston file. One copy of the statement\nis attached to the copy of this letter for the FBI Laboratory.\nDuring the interview with Mr. NOACK, Mrs. ROSE C. ROTSEL, a\nstenographer for O.S.I., Ellington Field, recorded the\nstatement for O.S.I. use.\n\nInitial information obtained concerning this flying disc\nwas furnished telephonically to Inspector Howard Fletcher\nat the Bureau, 9 A.M., 12/28/48. Mr. Fletcher requested\nthe Bureau be given a summary of the information by teletype,\nwith interested offices being similarly notified, and that\nthe signed statement of NOACK be submitted AMSD. He further\ninstructed that he did not want the Bureau \"side tracked\" in\nthe handling of this matter, but that FBI representatives\nshould assume an active interest in the investigation\nthroughout, cooperating, of course, with O.S.I. representatives.\n\nMr. Fleming's headquarters are the District Commander, 5th\nO.S.I. District, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. On the morning\nof 12/28/48 Mr. Fleming sent a telegram to his District\nCommander giving a general summary of the original complaint.\nMr. Fleming was unable to advise how the 5th O.S.I. District\nwould handle their inquiry in this matter. He stated this\ncould either be handled by Wright Field dispatching a special\nplane to California or by having their District Commander, 18D,\nO.S.I., San Bernardino, California handle it. He stated\nin any event it would be necessary for O.S.I. representatives\nto first confer with Mr. R.C. PERSON, named in this statement,\nas being the individual who initially discovered the flying\ndisc and would know also its present whereabouts.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director\nRe: Flying Disc\nHO 12/28/48\n\nMr. PERSON, as indicated, maintains a business at 4116\nAvalon Boulevard, Los Angeles, California, telephone\nAdams 5281.\n\nTo insure the Bureau's participation in this matter,\nSAC R.B. Hood, of the Los Angeles Office, was contacted\ntelephonically at approximately 11:30 A.M. (CST)\n12/28/48 with the suggestion he maintain contact with\nMr. PERSON.\n\nAlso in keeping with Bureau instructions, the roll of\nfilm received from Mr. NOACK, together with the aluminum\nportion of the fuselage, is being forwarded separately to\nthe Bureau, attention FBI Laboratory.\n\nGNW:NK\nEncl.(2)\n\nAIR MAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY\n\nCC: Los Angeles (Encl.) AMSD\nCincinnati (Encl.) AMSD\n\nFBI, Laboratory (Encl.)\n\nPackage\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1954\n\nENCLOSURE\n\n62-83894-154"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Houston, Texas\nDec. 28, 1948\n\nI, LONNIE EDWARD NOACK, residing 2921 Chicago Street, Houston 17, Texas, make the following statement to Special Agent Robert B. Fleming and Christopher R. Bradley, representatives of the Office of Special Investigation, Ellington OSI Detachment, Ellington Field, Texas, and Special Agents Graham W. Kitchel and Galen N. Willis who I know to be Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.\n\nOn Monday afternoon December 6, 1948, at about 6 P.M., Mr. R.C. PERSON, Mr. NATHAN SMITH, Mr. C.A. TOCE, Mr. ROBERT BROUSSARD and another man, name not recalled, and I had dinner at the Old Virginia Inn, Los Angeles, California. After dinner we went back to Mr. Smith's electrical manufacturing company which he owns and operates in Los Angeles, California. Mr. PERSON told us about seeing a flying disc and we made an appointment to leave early the next morning by car, with our cameras, to go to the location of the disc. Mr. PERSON was detained at some private air field so we did not leave until about 2 P.M. on December 7, 1948. We arrived at the scene of the flying disc and took pictures of the disc which was still lying around. Mr. SMITH took about 10 feet of 16 mm film and Mr. PERSON took five or six shots with a Speed Graphic Camera. He noticed that the first three shots were taken when the adapter on his lens was closed too much and I don't know if they turned out all right. Mr. SMITH suggested I hold the flying disc up and rotate it around and he would take my picture with my camera. After taking the pictures, we patched the fence of Mr. PERSON's property where people had been cutting the wire to get to a road. We left and then drove back and had dinner at Eaton's Inn and they took me back home to Hollywood, California.\n\nI would like to recite that I left Houston, Texas 11:30 A.M. on Sunday, December 5, 1948, for California by plane and flew to Hollywood, California on a commercial plane on business matters. On arriving in Hollywood, I met Mr. PERSON in Hollywood on Monday, December 6, 1948, and at that time he told me about the flying disc he had located. He stated he had gone to Las Vegas by his personal plane and saw the disc from the air on his way back."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On December 7, 1948 we went out in Mr. NATHAN\nSMITH's car and picked up his wife and left his home in\nSouth Pasadena about 11 A.M. We drove out to an airport\nwhere his plane was about forty miles from Pasadena were\nhe was having the plane repaired. He wanted to be sure\nthe plane was on a truck before we left for the destination\nwhere the disc was. In making this trip, we proceeded\nout by a race track and passed one of the Kaiser steel\nworks and the Virginia Dare Wine Orchard. I would say\nwe went directly north or northeast from Pasadena,\nCalifornia. We drove through a town called Matonia\n(phonetic) and followed a road through some mountains and\nthrough a small desert. I would estimate the distance from\nPasadena to where the disc was found to be about 150 miles.\nThe terrain in which the disc was found could be described\nas flat,desert, and desolate.\n\nI would like to explain that Mr. PERSON has\nprivate property (an airport which he purchased from the\ngovernment) right by the location of the disc. Mr. PERSON\nthought the disc might have been launched from his airport,\nbut whether that was it or not - we don't know. Mr. PERSON\nsaid he usually flew at an altitude of about 8,000 feet\nand, of course, he flew lower in some spaced. He did not\nmention his altitude at the time he first saw the disc.\nThe disc was located practically just outside his property\nand we were going north, so it would be east of his property.\nHe has about 900 acres.\n\nWhen we arrived at Mr. PERSON's property, we saw\nthe disc, or flying wing, and it was on the ground in a\nsemi-vertical position, approximately a 45 degree angle,\nwith the left wing imbedded in the ground. In looking at\nthe ground, it appeared that the object had hit the earth with\nconsiderable force and had slid 300 to 400 feet. It was\ndented but was generally intact. I think the pictures I took\nwith a Revere 8 mm camera quite well show the form, shape\nand size of the \"wing.\" I am 5'7\" tall and in standing next\nto the object when it was in an upright position, it was\nslightly higher than my height. I would say it was roughly\nseven feet in diameter, before crashing.\n\nOn each side of the object there were wings\napproximately four feet by twenty inches and three inches thick\nwith an axle that protruded through the disc and into the wings.\nIt was mounted on ball bearings which the disc rotated on."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The disc itself was approximately two feet thick\nin the center, tapering to a feather edge at the rim. On\nthe outside of the disc, near the rim, there were funnel\nshaped cups bradded on and these were spaced all around\non both sides, each cup being approximately twenty inches\napart. The openings of these cups were to the rear. The\ndisc itself was natural aluminum with no paint on it except\nof the type of aluminum which was 24 S.T. and it bore this\nstamp. The wings were painted a yellow-green camouflage\ncolor.\n\nThe wing has a leading edge similar to that of\nan airplane and tapers to the rear to a feather edge. The\nwing was ribbed throughout with aluminum ribs for substantial\nstrength. Each wing had a similar rocket cartridge on each\ntip fastened by two bolts. I had one of the wings in my\npossession and have turned it over to the proper authorities.\nThe cartridge on the one I had was apparently knocked off\nin the crash.\n\nThere were two strut bars attached approximately\ntwenty inches from the disc leading to the rear with an\nelevator. Also, the two struts protruded toward the front\nwith something attached, a weight or some tow system, which\nwas during the crash anchored into the ground and bent\nand we could not exactly determine how it was weighted or\ncontrolled. I would say the elevator was approximately\ntwenty-two inches long and about 5/8 inch thick with a slight\ntaper to the rear and probably ten inches wide. The struts\nextending from the trailing edge of the wing to the elevator\nwere made of 5/8 inch steel tubing. The disc, in being\nlifted, I would judge to weigh from 80 to 100 pounds.\n\nWith respect to the pictures taken, I took\napproximately 15 feet of colored 8 mm film.\n\nThe disc was built where they had the proper\nequipment to do the necessary work because they had to have\na spot welder and building equipment to make the different\nangles. I might add that I am an instrument maker for the\nHumble Oil and Refining Company and have a generally good\nknowledge of machine and metal work. There was nothing on\nthe object to indicate its origin, whether American or foreign\nmake. It would appear, however, from the aluminum,workmanship,\netc. that it probably was American made.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"After we finished taking our pictures and discussing\nthe object among ourselves, Mr. PERSON expressed an intention\nof obtaining a truck and hauling the object to his shop. I\ncannot say at this time whether he did this or not or where\nthe object may be at this particular date. We finished\nour observation and picture taking at approximately 5:30\nor 6 P.M. on December 7.\n\nIn response to Mr. Fleming's inquiry, there was no\nradio equipment noted on the object in any fashion or form.\n\nWe returned to Pasadena, California, that evening\narriving in Hollywood about 9 or 9:30 P.M. I took some more\npictures that night along Hollywood Boulevard on the unfinished\nroll of film and then wetn over the Chinese Theatre and took\na picture of the signature of George Raft and finished the roll.\nI bought another roll of film, and took them to the Eastman Kodak\nCompany the following Monday which would be December 13, 1948.\nAs I recall, this Eastman shop was on Los Palmas Street in\nLos Angeles, California. They informed me they would develop\nthe film and that it would be ready on Thursday. I left\nCalifornia on Wednesday so they mailed the film to me at my\nbusiness address, Humble Oil Building, Room 159, Houston, Texas.\nI received these films on December 23, 1948.\n\nAfter my return from California I mentioned to several\nof my business and social acquaintances that I had seen this\nobject, a disc or saucer or whatever you might call it, and\ntold them that I had taken pictures and would be glad to show\nthem when the pictures arrived. As stated, I received the\nfilm on December 23 and at 1:30 P.M. on the same date I showed\nthe film in the projection room at Humble Oil to the following:\nD.W. BLAIR; J. HATTAWAY; D.A. PETERSON; JAMES S. OLIVIER;\nWILLIAM RIED, JR.; A.E. MELETON; WAYNE CRAWFORD; D.A. BATTLE\nand two other men whose names I do not recall. All of these\nmen work in the instrument shop with me at Humble Oil & Refining\nCompany. I also showed the film to my brother-in-law, E. KULAK,\nof Pasadena, Texas, at home on the following night.\n\nOn Christmas Day I met some friends and one of the\ngirls was with a young boy who was interested in photography.\nI do not know his name but he works at Southern Pacific. I told\nhim I had some pictures of the flying disc but I did not show him\nthe pictures but explained the disc. I think this boy is the\nperson who had his friend at the newspaper contact me.\n\n-4-"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I got home about 10:30 A.M. and FRANK REED,\nof the City Desk at the \"Houston Post\" called me and wanted\nto know about the disc. I told him I could not give him\nany information on it. He begged me for the story, but I\ntold him I would let him know and that I had friends I\nhad to contact before I could give him any information.\n\nI then got in touch with Mr. Blackwood, my\nlawyer, the following morning and asked him if he knew\nanyone in the FBI. He stated all the FBI personnel he knew\nwere no longer stationed here. I then contacted the FBI\nand turned the material over to them.\n\nAlthough I can't describe where this object is\nlocated, I believe I could go back to it and I am sure\nMr. PERSON and and Mr. SMITH could go back to it.\n\nMr. NATHAN SMITH's business address is Nathan\nSmith Electrical Company, 105 South Pasadena Avenue, South\nPasadena, California. Mr. R. C. PERSON is president of\nthe Vasco Electrical Manufacturing Company, 4116 Avalon\nBoulevard, Los Angeles, California.\n\nFor record purposes, in taking the pictures above\nreferred to, I did so using exposure of 16 frames per second\nat a diaphragm opening of f6.3. I used Cine-Kodak Kodachrome\nfilm.\n\nATTENTION The above statement, made voluntarily and for the\nretention of proper authorities, is made to my best knowledge\nand belief.\n\nLONNIE EDWARD NOACK\n\nWitnesses:\n\n\n\nRepresentatives OSI, Ellington Field, Texas\n\n\n\nFBI, Houston, Texas\n\n-5-"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-154\n\nENCLOSURE TO THE BUREAU\n\nRE: FLYING DISC;\nLONNIE EDWARD NOACK, Complainant"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"SAC, Houston\t\t\t\t\t\t\tJanuary 25, 1949\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nFLYING DISCS\nLONNIE EDWARD NOACK, Complainant\n\n\tReference is made to Los Angeles teletype dated 12/29/48 and to\nHouston teletype dated 12/28/48, and the subsequent transmittal of an\n8mm movie film taken by Mr. LONNIE NOACK, along with several parts of\nthe supposed flying disc to the laboratory for examination.\n\n\tSince prior to receipt of the above items by the laboratory the\ninformation was obtained which identified the supposed flying disc as a\ntow target and later a toy kite, no examination was conducted here.\n\n\tAccordingly, these items are being returned to you via registered\nmail.\n\n88-83894\ncc: SAC, Los Angeles\n\nRECORDED - 60\nINDEXED - 60\nEX-59\n\nRMZ:KAG"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO\t: The Director\t\t\t\t\tDATE: January 24, 1949\n\nFROM\t: D. M. Ladd\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\n\tI thought you might be interested in the following information\nconcerning \"Flying Discs\" which has been furnished to the Bureau on a\nconfidential basis by Colonel C. D. Gasser, Resident Engineer, Air\nMaterial Command, U. S.Army, who is the principal army technician at the\nNuclear Energy for the Propulsion of Aircraft Research Center at Oak Ridge,\nTennessee.\n\n\tColonel Gasser stated that he knew nothing of an official nature concerning\n\"Flying Discs\" other than the fact that they are believed by Air Force Intelligence\nofficials to be man-made missiles, rather than some natural phenomena. It was his\nfurther belief that a great deal of information has been compiled concerning these\nmissiles by air force intelligence, and that research on the matter was being\nextensively done at Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n\n\tColonel Gasser then continued with his own ideas as to what might be\nthe nature of these discs which ideas he had formulated through review of those\nknown facts and theoretical conjectures of himself and other scientists concerning\nthe nature of flying discs and methods of propulsion for such type of aerial\nmechanism. According to him, flying discs have long been a theoretical possibility,\nand,in fact, a possibility which would indicate one of the best means by which to\nbreak through the barriers of the supersonic area. He stated that scientists have,\nfor many years, been attempting to develop this type of aircraft. Some experi-\nmentation has been done even in the United States, but insofar as is known in the\nUnited States at the present time, there have never been any practical developments.\nAs a second factor of consideration, Colonel Gasser stated that insofar as is known\nto U. S. scientists at this time, there is no known chemical fuel which would make\npossible tremendous range of flight such as is ascribed to the reported \"flying\ndiscs.\" According to Gasser, there is only one possible fuel which could be\nutilized which is in accord with present theory, and that is the utilization of\natomic energy.\n\n\tHe stated that this subject matter was being given absolutely no dissemination\nby the air force or other military personnel, and that they had not deemed it\nadvisable to advise him of all information pertaining to this type missile. He\ncontinued, however, that in his conversation with representatives at Wright Field\nand in reading reports returned to this country by foreign agents, he had gathered\ntogether certain information which might be of assistance in determining whether or\nnot these so-called missiles were authentic, usable and of danger to the United States.\n\nEHM:hhr\n\nRECORDED - 113\nINDEXED - 113\nEX-109\n62-83894-156"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"\tHe pointed out that knowledge of such a possible aircraft is not by any means\nnew and that it was known as early as four years ago that some type of flying\ndisc was being experimented with by the Russians. In addition he said that more\nrecent reports have been received from representatives of the Central Intelligence\nAgency in Southern Europe and Southern Asia to the effect that the Russians were\nexperimenting with some type of radical aircraft or guided missile which could be\ndispatched for great distances out over the sea, made to turn in flight and return\nto the base from which it was launched. He related that this information was\nextremely worthy of notice as experiments in this country have so far only developed\nto the point where we are concerned with delivering a missile to the required point\nof impact, and no consideration has been given to imparting to that missile the\nability to return. He also advised that it is a known fact that the Russians are\nattempting to develop some type of nuclear energy, that they received a wealth of\ninformation concerning nuclear energy at the time of their occupation in Germany,\nand that they have at their disposal a limited supply of fissionable materials.\nHe pointed out that the Russians have some very capable scientists in the field\nof atomic energy and that, in addition thereto, they took into their custody some\nof the most advanced and capable scientists of the German Nation.\n\n\tColonel Gasser stated that a peculiar fact concerning these missiles\nis found in reports he has received,that from all appearances the missiles\nusually approach the United States from a northerly direction and have been reported\nas returning in a northerly direction. He advised that none have ever been known\nto crash, collide or disintegrate over American soil, but it would appear that they\ncome to the United States, cruise around, and go back over the North Pole. He\nstated that insofar as is known to him there has never been any part of a missile\nof this type recovered from any source whatever in order that an analytical study\nof its nature could be made. He stated that one report has been received concerning\na collision of these missiles with another type of aircraft. This report, according\nto him, emanated from Czechoslovakia and took place a short time prior to the report\nof numerous discs over the United States. According to Colonel Gasser a Czechoslovakian\ntransport had reportedly collided with some unidentified missile while in mid-air\nover the ocean, and that the missile and transport were completely disintegrated\nwithout recovery of parts or survivors from either.\n\n\tColonel Gasser concluded that this matter, while still purely a matter\nof guesswork, is nevertheless a source of great concern to the military establishment\nof this country. He advised that great efforts have been expended by the military\nservice to determine the nature of these missiles and upon so determining, decide\nwhether or not an adequate defense can be established. He stated that it has given\nimpetus to the research being done by the air force in their own program of nuclear\nenergy for the propulsion of aircraft to develop guided missiles.\n\nACTION:\n\n\tNone. The above is for your information.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 90986\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nSTAFF MESSAGE CENTER\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nPRIORITY\t\tPARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED\n\nFrom:\tCO Kirtland AFB New Mexico\n\nTo:\tChief of Staff USAF attn Dir of Special Investigations\nOfficer of the Inspector General\n\nNr:\tOSI-1-90\t\t\t\t\t31 January 1949\n\nReference previous reports, subject; unknown, aerial phenomena, file number 24-8. Sighting of identical object reported at 2255Z 30 Jan 49 by aprx 30 people. Estimate at least 100 total sightings. AEC, AFSWP, 4th Army, local commanders perturbed by implications of phenomena. Sighting reported from El Paso, Alburquerque, Alamogordo, Roswell, Socorro, and other locations. All appear to be same object at different points in trajectory. Unless instructed to contrary this office will make all out investigation with view to location of impact point if any. Request reply.\n\nACTION: AF\nINFO: ID, PO\n\nCM IN 321\t\t(2 Feb 49)\tDTG: 312145Z dgk/B\nRC 5/1\n\nCOPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nRoom 5744 3/23 1949\n\nTO: Director, Mr. Clegg, Mr. Glavin, Mr. Harbo, Mr. Ladd, Mr. Nichols, Mr. Rosen, Mr. Tracy, Mr. Fletcher, Mr. Mohr, Mr. Carlson, Mr. Nease, Miss Gandy, Personnel Files Section, Records Section, Mrs. Skillman\n\nSee Me\tFor Appropriate Action\nSend File\tNote and Return\n\nNote marked paragraph\n\nClyde Tolson"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, Knoxville\n\nSUBJECT: \"FLYING SAUCERS\" OBSERVED OVER OAK RIDGE AREA\nINTERNAL SECURITY - X\n\nDATE: February 18, 1949\n\nReference is made to Knoxville letter to the Director dated January 10, 1949, entitled as above.\n\nThere is being forwarded for the Bureau's information a copy of a letter from Colonel C. D. GASSER, USAF, AMC Engineering Field Officer, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, to Mr. G. J. RATHMAN, Security Division, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Oak Ridge. This letter is self explanatory and reveals that the photographs forwarded with referenced letter are the result of accident or purposeful hoax and are not actually photographs of a \"flying saucer\".\n\nColonel GASSER personally advised that while the photographs are not real, his statements made concerning the existence of flying saucers and the opinions expressed by him nevertheless stand as previously stated.\n\nCCMcS:jjc\n65-11\nENCLOSURE ATTACHED\nEnclosure"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE 1\n\n3894-158"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MCREOL8/CDG/jk\n\nNEPA Project, P. O. Box E\nOak Ridge, Tennessee 10 February 1949\n\nC\nO\nP\nY\n\nMr. G. J. Rathman\nChief, Investigation Section\nSecurity Division\nU. S. Atomic Energy Commission\nP. O. Box E\nOak Ridge, Tennessee\n\nDear Mr. Rathman\n\nThis is in response to your letter dated 16 December 1948, subject \"Photographs\", with inclosures, addressed to Major D. J. Grant at this site, concerning photographs taken during the month of July 1947 by Mr. William Presley of 218 Illinois Avenue, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, of an unidentified object that appeared to be flying over Oak Ridge.\n\nSince receipt by Major Grant of the above material, this office has taken steps to secure an evaluation of same by the Air Force office of the Chief, Technical Intelligence Division, Intelligence Department, Air Materiel Command, at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio. As a result, the following information has been revealed:\n\n\"When the negative, containing the sphere, is examined by strong incident light, it is noted that the emulsion is raised at that point above the normal level of the remaining emulsion. This indicates that either a drop of warm water or a drop of developer struck the film at this point and rolled down this negative and the succeeding negative.\n\n\"To further substantiate this, it will be noted that when the two (2) negatives are placed side by side with the edges of the film aligned, the so-called \"trail\" is continuous, that is the two sections match, indicating the drop rolled on from one negative to the next.\n\n\"Sill further proof is shown on the fogged edge of the negative containing only the trail. This is proven by the fact that the trail extends beyond the normal format\n\nC\nO\nP\nY"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"C\nO\nP\nY\n\nLtr. to Mr. G. J. Rathman, Chief, Investigation Section, U. S. AEC, dated 10 February 1949, Re Photographs\n\nof the negative. In other words, there is a trail of that section of the negative which was not exposed in the camera. This effect shows up in one negative and not in the other because the negative in question is fogged; therefore, this irregularity was developed.\n\n\"Still further proof of these defects lies in the number of unevenly developed sections of the negative.\"\n\nIn view of the above, it is recommended that this entire matter be declassified and that Mr. Presley be advised of the nature of the images, if and when the negatives are returned to him by your office.\n\nFor your information, this office is taking the liberty of furnishing a copy of this communication to Mr. C. C. McSwain, Special Agent, FBI, because of official interest evidenced by his office in the matter.\n\nYour cooperation in furnishing photographs and negatives, together with information contained in your letter of 16 December 1948 to Major Grant, is sincerely appreciated.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nC. D. GASSER\nColonel, USAF\nAMC Engineering Field Officer\n\n3 Incls.\n2 Negatives\n1 Photostat\n\ncc - Mr. C. C. McSwain\n\nC\nO\nP\nY"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"L-26\n\nInvoice of Contents from\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nWASHINGTON, D. C.\n\nDate 1/25/49 Case References FLYING DISCS\nLONNIE EDWARD NOACK, Complainant\n\nConsigned to: SAC, HOUSTON\n\nList of Contents\n\n8mm Movie Film,\nparts of supposed flying disc.\n\nMr. Harbo, 7641\nMr. Conrad, 7142\nMr. Downing, 6228 IB\nMr. Sizoo, 7601\nMr. Baughman, 7121\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION MAILED 16 FEB 8-1949 P.M. REGISTERED MAIL FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nREGISTERED 497382 62-83894\n\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Mail Room, place date of shipment and registry number; Shipping Room, show date of shipment and initial this invoice; then return it to person whose name is checked in column at right. After this checked name has been initialled, invoice should be placed in administrative file."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM: SAC, SAN ANTONIO\nSUBJECT: PROTECTION OF VITAL INSTALLATIONS BUREAU FILE # 65-58300\n\nDATE: January 31, 1949\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n[REDACTED]\n\nAt recent Weekly Intelligence Conferences of G-2, ONI, OSI, and F.B.I., in the Fourth Army Area, Officers of G-2, Fourth Army have discussed the matter of \"Unidentified Aircraft\" or \"Unidentified Aerial Phenomena\" otherwise known as \"Flying Discs\", \"Flying Saucers\", and \"Balls of Fire\". This matter is considered top secret by Intelligence Officers of both the Army and the Air Forces.\n\nIt is well known that there have been during the past two years reports from the various parts of the country of the sighting of unidentified aerial objects which have been called in newspaper parlance \"flying discs\" and \"flying saucers\". The first such sightings were reported from Sweden, and it was thought that the objects, the nature of which was unknown, might have originated in Russia.\n\nIn July 1948 an unidentified aircraft was \"seen\" by an Eastern Airlines Pilot and Co-Pilot and one or more passengers of the Eastern Airlines Plane over Montgomery, Alabama. This aircraft was reported to be of an unconventional type without wings and resembled generally a \"rocket ship\" of the type depicted in comic strips. It was reported to have had windows; to have been larger than the Eastern Airlines plane, and to have been traveling at an estimated speed of 2700 miles an hour. It appeared out of a thunderhead ahead of the Eastern Airlines plane and immediately disappeared in another cloud narrowly missing a collision with the Eastern Airlines plane. No sound or air disturbance was noted in connection with this appearance.\n\nDuring the past two months various sightings of unexplained phenomena have been reported in the vicinity of the A.E.C. Installation at Los Alamos, New Mexico, where these phenomena now appear to be concentrated. During December 1948 on the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 11th, 13, 14th, 20th and 26th sightings of unexplained phenomena were made near Los Alamos by Special Agents of the Office of Special Investigation; Airline Pilots; Military Pilots, Los Alamos Security Inspectors, and private citizens. On January 6, 1949, another similar object was sighted in the same area.\n\nDr. LINCOLN LA PAZ, a Meteorologist of some note, has been generally in charge of the observations near Los Alamos, attempting to learn characteristics of the unexplained phenomena.\n\nUp to this time little concrete information has been obtained.\n\nJEJ:md\nSA-100-7545\ncc: El Paso (2)\nDallas (2)\nHouston (2)\nLittle Rock (2)\nOklahoma City (2)\n\nRECORDED - 133 62-83894-159\nFBI 43 MAR 16 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI 1/31/49\n\nThere have been day time sightings which are tentatively considered to possibly\nresemble the exhaust of some type of jet propelled object. Night-time sightings\nhave taken the form of lights usually described as brilliant green, similar\nto a green traffic signal or green neon light. Some reports indicated that the\nlight began and ended with a red or orange flash. Other reports have given the\ncolor as red, white, blu-white, and yellowish green. Trailing lights some-\ntimes observed are said to be red. The spectrum analysis of one light indicates\nthat it may be a copper compound of the type known to be used in rocket\nexperiments and which completely disintegrates upon explosion, leaving no\ndebris. It is noted that no debris has ever been known to be located anywhere\nresulting from the unexplained phenomena.\n\nRecent observations have indicated that the unidentified phenomena travel at\na rate of speed estimated at a minimum of three miles per second and a maximum\nof twelve miles per second, or a mean calculated speed of seven and one-half\nmiles a second, or 27,000 miles an hour. Their reported course indicates that\nthey travel on an East - West line with probability that they approach from\nthe Northern Quadrant, which would be the last stage of the great circle route\nif they originated in Russia. When observed they seem to be in level flight\nat a height of six to ten miles and thus traveling on a tangent to the earth's\nsurface. They occasionally dip at the end of the path and on two occasions\na definite vertical change in path was indicated. These phenomena have not\nbeen known to have been sighted, however, at any intermediate point between\nRussia and Los Alamos, but only at the end of the flight toward the apparent\n\"target\", namely, Los Alamos.\n\nIn every case but one the shape of the objects has been reported as round\nin a point of light with a definite area to the light's source. One report\ngives a diamond shape; another indicates that trailing lights are elongated.\nThe size is usually compared to one-fourth the diameter of the full moon, and\nthey have also been compared in size to a basketball with trailing lights the\nsize of a baseball.\n\nOn no occasion has sound been associated directly with the phenomena, but\nunexplained sounds have been reported from Los Alamos. On two occasions\nreports have been received of the sighting of multiple units.\n\nSome nine scientific reasons are stated to exist which indicated that the\nphenomena observed are not due to meteorites. The only conclusions reached\nthus far are that they are either hitherto unobserved natural phenomena or\nthat they are man made. No scientific experiments are known to exist in this\ncountry which could give rise to such phenomena.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI 1/31/49\n\nMrs. MADELINE GWYNNE MERCHANT was the subject of a letter from the Atlanta office\nto the Bureau dated August 10, 1948, entitled, \"MADELINE GWYNNE MERCHANT;\nINFORMATION CONCERNING.\"\n\nShe has written many letters to Military Authorities concerning her theories\nregarding Atomic Energy. She has generally been considered unreliable and\npossibly mentally unbalanced. She, however, has submitted to Military\nauthorities the only theory thus far known that has any credibility at all,\nnamely, that the lights are manifestations of cosmic rays which are directed\ntoward a specific point. She further theorizes that such rays may interfere\nwith the ignition of motors and may account for various unexplained air crashes.\n\nThe above is submitted for the confidential information of the Bureau and\noffices to which copies of this letter are directed so that these offices may\nevaluate any such reports they may have received or may receive in the future.\n\nIt is noted that the Fourth Army has the responsibility of protecting vital\ninstallations at Los Alamos, New Mexico, Sandia Base, New Mexico, and Camp\nHood, Texas. Any information developed should be expeditiously transmitted to\nG-2, Fourth Army.\n\nIt is further noted that G-2 and O.S.I. are actively engaged in investigating\nthis matter. No investigation is being conducted by this office.\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Mr. Ladd DATE: March 14, 1949\nFROM : Mr. Fletcher\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nPURPOSE\n\n The approval of the Executives Conference is requested for the\nattached SAC letter furnishing to the field the type of information\ndesired by the Intelligence Division of the Air Force in connection with\nthe captioned matter.\n\nBACKGROUND\n\n You will recall that by Bureau Bulletin #57, Series 1947, dated\nOctober 1, 1947, the field was advised that effective as of that date the\nBureau had discontinued its investigative activities in connection with\nflying discs. The field was advised that all future reports concerning\nthis matter received in the field should be referred to the Air Forces.\n\n Colonel C. D. Gasser, Resident Engineer, Air Materiel Command,\nNuclear Energy for the Propulsion of Aircraft Research, Oak Ridge,\nTennessee, has recently and confidentially advised the Bureau that\nflying discs are believed by the Air Force to be man-made missiles\nrather than some natural phenomenon and that as much as four years ago\nit was learned that some type of flying discs were being experimented\nupon by the Russians. It was further determined from Colonel Gasser that\nmost all of the flying discs seen by persons in the United States approached\nthis country from a northerly direction and returned in the same direction,\nindicating the strong possibility that they are coming from Russia.\n\n The Department of the Air Force has furnished to the Bureau a\nsufficient number of copies of a memorandum dated February 15, 1949 captioned\n\"Unconventional Aircraft\" which can be furnished to our field offices.\n\nSTATUS\n\n At the present time this Bureau is conducting no investigation of\ninformation received in the field relating to the captioned matter.\n\nRECOMMENDATION\n\n It is recommended that the attached SAC letter and enclosure be\nforwarded to the field to advise them of the type of questions to be asked\nof persons who voluntarily submit information relative to \"flying discs.\"\nAlthough no active investigation will be conducted by the Bureau, it is\nbelieved that the captioned matter is of sufficient importance to the\ninternal security of the country that our field offices should secure as\nmuch information as possible from complainants in order to assist the\nDepartment of the Air Force.\n\nEHM:EHW\nAttachment\n\nRECORDED - 76\n162-83894-160"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI DATE: March 22, 1949\nFROM : SAC, SAN ANTONIO\nSUBJECT: PROTECTION OF VITAL INSTALLATIONS\n BUREAU FILE 65-58300\n\nFlying Discs\n\nRe San Antonio letter to the Director dated January 31, 1949, which outlined\ndiscussion had at recent weekly Intelligence Conferences of G-2, ONI, OSI and\nFBI in the Fourth Army Area concerning \"Unidentified Aircraft\" or \"Unidentified\nAreial Phenomena\" otherwise known as \"flying discs\", \"Flying saucers\" and \"balls\nof fire\". It is repeated that this matter is considered secret by Intelligence\nOfficers of both the Army and the Air Force.\n\nG-2, 4th Army, has now advised that the above matter is now termed \"Unconven-\ntional Aircraft\" and investigations concerning such matters have been given\nthe name \"Project Grudge\".\n\nG-2, 4th Army, advised on February 16, 1949, a conference was held at Los\nAlamos, New Mexico, to consider the so-called \"Green fire ball phenomena\"\nwhich began about December 5, 1948. It was brought out this question has been\nclassified \"secret\" and that investigation is now the primary responsibility\nof the U.S. Air Force, Air Materiel Command, T-2.\n\nDr. LINCOLN LA PAZ of the University of New Mexico, discussed one siting which\nhe himself had made which was termed the \"Starvation peak incident\" and des-\ncribed the following characteristics which indicated that the phenomenon\ncould not be classified as a normal meteorite fall.\n\n 1. There was an initial bright light (no period of intensity increase)\n and constant intensity during the duration of the phenomenon.\n\n 2. Yellow green color about 5200 Angstroms.\n\n 3. Essentially horizontal path.\n\n 4. Trajectory traversed at constant angular velocity.\n\n 5. Duration about two seconds.\n\n 6. No accompanying noise.\n\nJEJ:md\n2 cc: El Paso (100-4562)\n2 cc: Dallas\n\" \" Houston\n\" \" Little Rock\n\" \" Oklahoma City\n\n- 1 -\n\nRECORDED - 40\n62-83894-161\nEX-19"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tMarch 22, 1949\n\nIt was brought out that since December 5, 1948 there have been more than ten incidents analagous to the \"green fireball\" above described and some twenty others with minor deviations from the above. It is also pointed out that the only sitings which had occurred seemed to have been confined to the Los Alamos, Las Vegas, and West Texas triangle.\n\nG-2 also advised that as of November 1, 1948, information had been received from higher Military authorities that the Air Force had advised that such sitings occur periodically and that another period of sitings was then imminent. Further, on February 14, 1949, higher Military authorities advised that it was believed that ultimately it would be found that the phenomena in question have a natural explanation.\n\nIt is further noted that about 7:30 p.m., March 6, 1949, what was at first thought to be a flare was seen approximately one-half mile north of Killeen Base in the area of the Vital Installation at Camp Hood, Texas, and a second flare was noticed at 1:45 a.m., March 7, 1949, approximately three miles from Killeen Base. It has since been concluded that the flares seen near Killeen are probably similar to the phenomena previously noted in the Los Alamos, Sandia Base Area although these are the first sitings of such phenomena near Camp Hood.\n\nThere appears to be reason to believe that the above-mentioned phenomena may be connected with secret experiments being conducted by some U.S. Government Agency as it is believed that the United States is farther advanced in guided missile development than any foreign power.\n\nAlthough the primary responsibility for investigating such matters is now with the U.S. A.F. Air Material Command, G-2, 4th Army is still interested in being advised of any further sitings of such phenomena which might be observed."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nForm No. 1\nTHIS CASE ORIGINATED AT HOUSTON\tFILE NO. 105-445\n\nREPORT MADE AT: LOS ANGELES\tDATE WHEN MADE: 3/30/49\tPERIOD FOR WHICH MADE: 12/28,29;1/7/49\tREPORT MADE BY: W. NATHAN PROVINSE DPZ\nTITLE: FLYING DISCS; LONNIE EDWARD NOACK, complainant; Houston, Texas, December 27, 1948\tCHARACTER OF CASE: INTERNAL SECURITY M\n\nSYNOPSIS OF FACTS:\n\nObject described by complainant as possible flying disc determined to be a model tow target or kite which had been abandoned after unsuccessful tests. Portions of target positively identified by HENRY T. RICE, L.A. manufacturer and erstwhile financial backer as being part of the model target or kite.\n\nRUC\n\nREFERENCE:\n\nTeletype from Houston to Director dated 12/28/48.\nTeletype from Los Angeles to Director dated 12/28/48.\nTeletype from Los Angeles to Director dated 12/29/48.\n\nDETAILS:\n\nThis investigation is predicated upon the receipt of referenced teletype from the Houston Office advising that LONNIE EDWARD NOACK had located an object in the desert near Helendale, California, resembling a flying disc. This object, described as a flying disc, had been located by NOACK, R. C. PERSON and Mr. and Mrs. NATHAN SMITH of South Pasadena, California, approximately one hundred and fifty miles northeast of Pasadena or about twenty miles from Lone Pine, California.\n\nSpecial Agent EDWARD OLSEN determined that R. C. PERSON, Vasco Manufacturing Company, was traveling in Arizona and not available for interview.\n\nAPPROVED AND FORWARDED: Special Agent in Charge\nDO NOT WRITE IN THESE SPACES: 62-83894-102 RECORDED-58 INDEXED-59\n\nCOPIES OF THIS REPORT: 5 - Bureau; 2 - Houston; 1 - IFO #2, Fort MacArthur; 2 - Los Angeles\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED 61 APR 13 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nForm No. 1\nTHIS CASE ORIGINATED AT HOUSTON\tFILE NO. 105-445\n\nREPORT MADE AT: LOS ANGELES\tDATE WHEN MADE: 3/30/49\tPERIOD FOR WHICH MADE: 12/28,29;1/7/49\tREPORT MADE BY: W. NATHAN PROVINSE DPZ\nTITLE: FLYING DISCS; LONNIE EDWARD NOACK, complainant; Houston, Texas, December 27, 1948\tCHARACTER OF CASE: INTERNAL SECURITY M\n\nSYNOPSIS OF FACTS:\n\nObject described by complainant as possible flying disc determined to be a model tow target or kite which had been abandoned after unsuccessful tests. Portions of target positively identified by HENRY T. RICE, L.A. manufacturer and erstwhile financial backer as being part of the model target or kite.\n\nRUC\n\nREFERENCE:\n\nTeletype from Houston to Director dated 12/28/48.\nTeletype from Los Angeles to Director dated 12/28/48.\nTeletype from Los Angeles to Director dated 12/29/48.\n\nDETAILS:\n\nThis investigation is predicated upon the receipt of referenced teletype from the Houston Office advising that LONNIE EDWARD NOACK had located an object in the desert near Helendale, California, resembling a flying disc. This object, described as a flying disc, had been located by NOACK, R. C. PERSON and Mr. and Mrs. NATHAN SMITH of South Pasadena, California, approximately one hundred and fifty miles northeast of Pasadena or about twenty miles from Lone Pine, California.\n\nSpecial Agent EDWARD OLSEN determined that R. C. PERSON, Vasco Manufacturing Company, was traveling in Arizona and not available for interview.\n\nCOPIES OF THIS REPORT: 5 - Bureau; 2 - Houston; 1 - IFO #2, Fort MacArthur; 2 - Los Angeles"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"L. A. 105-445\n\nMr. N. SMITH, SMITH MANUFACTURING COMPANY, 105 Pasadena Avenue, South Pasadena, California, who was with NOACK at the time the object was discovered, advised Special Agent EDWARD OLSEN on December 28, 1948, that he was present at the time the object was located on his, SMITH's, landing field near Helendale, California. SMITH advised that they had taken some pieces off the object and that subsequently, upon returning to Los Angeles, he had learned that the object was actually a model kite or tow target which had been built by the OHLSON AND RICE MANUFACTURING COMPANY of Los Angeles. Mr. SMITH stated that he had talked to both OHLSON and RICE and that they had admitted to him having experimented with the object over his, SMITH's, airfield. Mr. SMITH made available three of the parts of the target which he had secured while at the airfield.\n\nThe information furnished by Mr. SMITH was verified by Special Agent EDWARD OLSEN in an interview with Mr. HENRY T. RICE, OHLSON AND RICE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, 3340 Emery Street, Los Angeles. The parts made available by Mr. SMITH were exhibited to Mr. RICE, and he advised that the model tow target or kite had been taken to the airfield for flight tests by himself and CLAUDE LEROY WOLFORD, 5454 Chesley Avenue, Los Angeles 43, California. Mr. RICE stated that WOLFORD is the inventor of the object and OHLSON AND RICE had originally agreed to finance him to develop the tow target or kite as a toy. Mr. RICE explained that they were primarily interested in developing the contraption as a toy kite to be sold in a much smaller model; however, the inventor, against their wishes, had developed a much larger model which he had hoped to sell as a tow target to be used behind airplanes. Mr. RICE stated that since he had gone that far they felt that they should give the project a test and thereupon they took it out to the desert as a precautionary measure. Mr. RICE stated that the flight test was a failure; the model crashed soon after it was airborne and was thereafter abandoned on the field.\n\nIn the absence of her husband, Mrs. CLAUDE LEROY WOLFORD, 5454 Chesley Avenue, was interviewed and exhibited the three parts of the kite made available by Mr. SMITH. She readily identified the three items as part of a kite her husband had built for the RICE MANUFACTURING COMPANY. She advised that she also accompanied her husband to the desert at the time the tests were made. She explained that the kite had crashed and that the manufacturing company did not want to put any more cash in it so it was abandoned on the desert.\n\nThe three parts of the kite were returned to NATHAN SMITH on January 7, 1949. The Sub-District Office, I. G. (USAF), 1206 Santee Street, Terminal Annex, Los Angeles, California, was apprised of the information contained herein immediately upon its receipt.\n\nREFERRED UPON COMPLETION TO THE OFFICE OF ORIGIN\n\n2."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"United States Department of Justice\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nPERSONAL ATTENTION\nSAC LETTER NO. 38\nSeries 1949\n\nMarch 25, 1949\n\nMEMO FOR MR. HOOVER, TOLSON, CLEGG, CONNELLEY, GLAVIN, HARBO, LADD, NICHOLS, ROSEN, TRACY, BAUMGARDNER, BOSWELL, CALLAHAN, CALLAN, CARLSON, CARTWRIGHT, CONRAD, DOWNING, EDWARDS, H. L., EGAN, FEENEY, FLETCHER, H. B., GURNEA, HINCE, JONES, M. A., KEAY, LAUGHLIN, LEONARD, LONG, McCABE, E. J., McCABE, N. H., McGUIRE, McINTIRE, MOBLEY, MOHR, NANNA, NAUGHTEN, NEASE, PARSONS, PENNINGTON, RENNEBERGER, ROGERS, SIZOO, TAMM, Q., WAIKART, WALL, WHITSON\n\nRE: FLYING DISCS\n\nYour attention is directed to Bureau Bulletin #57, Series 1947, dated October 1, 1947, relating to the discontinuance of investigation by this Bureau in matters concerning flying discs.\n\nFor your confidential information, a reliable and confidential source has advised the Bureau that flying discs are believed to be man-made missiles rather than natural phenomenon. It has also been determined that for approximately the past four years the USSR has been engaged in experimentation on an unknown type of flying disc.\n\nThe Department of the Air Force has furnished to the Bureau the attached memorandum classified \"restricted\" dated February 15, 1949, entitled \"Unconventional Aircraft.\" This memorandum is being furnished to you in order that all agents assigned to your office can be informed of the type of information desired by the Air Force in this matter.\n\nAs set forth in Bureau Bulletin #57, referred to above, no investigation should be conducted by your office relative to flying discs, however, the attached memorandum should be referred to in securing data from persons who desire to voluntarily furnish information to your office relating to flying discs.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nEnclosure"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI SALT LAKE CITY 4-5-49 12-25 PM HTG\nDIRECTOR URGENT\nFLYING DISCS. INFORMATION RECEIVED AT LOGAN, UTAH ELEVEN AM TODAY THAT AT NINE AM A GUARD AT THE ARMY GENERAL SUPPLY DEPOT, OGDEN, UTAH, OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE AN EXPLOSION IN THE AIR ACCOMPANIED BY A FLASH OF LIGHT FOLLOWED BY THE FALLING OF SILVER COLORED OBJECT. THIS WAS SEEN AT HIGH ALTITUDE WEST OF OGDEN NEAR THE TOWN OF TAYLOR, UTAH. ABOUT THE SAME TIME LT. RON HATFIELD OF LOGAN, UTAH PD SAW TWO PUFFS OF SMOKE HIGH IN THE AIR WEST OF LOGAN FOLLOWED BY FALLING OF SILVER COLORED OBJECT. ALSO AT ABOUT SAME TIME UTAH HIGHWAY PATROLMAN L. N. JEPPSON AT MANTUA, UTAH, SAW A SILVER COLORED OBJECT HIGH UP APPROACHING THE MOUNTAINS AT SARDINE CANYON BETWEEN LOGAN AND BRIGHAM CITY, UTAH AND AS OBJECT NEARED THE MOUNTAIN IT APPEARED TO EXPLODE IN A FLASH OF FIRE. SEVERAL RESIDENTS AT TRENTON, UTAH, WHICH IS WEST OF LOGAN, HAVE REPORTED TO SO, LOGAN, SEEING WHAT APPEARED TO BE TWO AERIAL EXPLOSIONS FOLLOWED BY FALLING OBJECT WEST OF TRENTON AT ABOUT NINE TWENTY AM TODAY. ABOVE INFORMATION IMMEDIATELY FURNISHED TO OSI, HILL FIELD, UTAH. ANY FURTHER PERTINENT DEVELOPMENTS WILL BE FURNISHED BUREAU FOR INFORMATION. OSI HILL FIELD HAS JUST NOW ADVISED ABOVE PHENOMENA PROBABLY CAUSED BY TWO B TWENTYNINES FROM WENDOVER FIELD WHICH ARE PRACTICE-BOMBING IN THE DESERT WEST OF LOGAN FROM EXTREMELY HIGH ALTITUDES WHICH WOULD CAUSE VAPOR TRAILS. OSI CHECKING FURTHER AND WILL ADVISE THIS OFFICE OF RESULTS.\nACK AND HOLD\n2:31 PM OK FBI WASH DC GAR"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT Apr 5 2 33 PM '49 F.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Discs\nRESTRICTED HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ROUTING SLIP\nTO: 1. OFFICE AFCSI ATTENTION Col Martin - Rm 4E 1075 DATE 4 march 49\n2. OFFICE DATE\n3. OFFICE DATE\nFOR: FOLLOWING ACTION(S) AS CHECKED\nCOMMENT As per your recent request, 50 copies of Air Intelligence Requirements No 4 are forwarded herewith for transmittal to the F.B.I.\nFROM: RESTRICTED OFFICE AFOIR-CO ROOM NO. 5E203 INDIVIDUAL DW McKinney PHONE 71067\nFile on file on Flying Discs 62-83894-164 Recorded-60 EX-109 58 APR 22 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 34 May 4, 1949 62-83894-165\nTO: Legal Attache Mexico City, D.F.\nFROM: Director, FBI\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nReference is made to your letter dated April 5, 1949 captioned as above in which you request a copy of the Air Force memorandum mentioned in SAC Letter #38, Series 1949 dated March 25, 1949.\nIn response thereto there is enclosed herewith the pamphlet captioned, \"Unconventional Aircraft\" issued by the Department of the Air Force under date of February 15, 1949 to which reference was made in the above-mentioned SAC Letter.\nEnclosure\nCC - Foreign Service Desk (detached)\nNLF:mk"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF THE LEGAL ATTACHÉ\nEMBASSY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA\nMEXICO CITY\n\nDate:\tApril 5, 1949\nTo:\tDirector, FBI\nFrom:\tJohn N. Speakes, Legal Attache\nSubject:\tFLYING DISCS\n\n\t\tReference is made to SAC Letter #38, Series 1949, dated March 25, 1949, advising that a copy of a memorandum from the Department of the Air Force, dated February 15, 1949, and entitled \"Unconventional Aircraft,\" as furnished to the Bureau, was being forwarded to this office in order that all agents assigned to the Mexico City Office might be informed of the type of information desired by the Air Force in this matter.\n\n\t\tThis is to advise that the above-mentioned enclosure was not received by this office and it is respectfully requested that a copy of this memorandum be forwarded to Mexico City.\n\n\nJNS:ml\n\nRECORDED - 59\n\n62-83894 - 165\nF B I\n12 APR 15 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\t\tDATE: 4-22-49\nFROM : SAC, LITTLE ROCK\nSUBJECT: UNKNOWN SUBJECTS;\nWADE H. HARRISON - INFORMANT\nFLYING DISCS\nFORT SMITH, ARKANSAS (4-16-49)\n\n\tWADE H. HARRISON, residence address Route 1, Box 293, Fort Smith, Arkansas, is employed as a Special Delivery messenger by the Fort Smith Post Office Department.\n\n\tHARRISON stated that at 5:25 p.m., Saturday, April 16, 1949, while delivering special delivery mail in Fort Smith, he stopped his automobile at a signal light located at the intersection of North Eleventh Street and Grand Avenue. He glanced up at the stop light and observed a brilliant object moving in a southeastern direction. He presumed the object was approximately 2 miles high. He got out of his automobile and pointed up with the suggestion that other automobile drivers, stopped for the signal light, could see the object. He does not know who any of the other people are or what they saw. He was obliged to move on after the light changed and the drivers began honking their horns. He watched the object until it was obscured by the line of trees in that section. He estimated he watched it travel some 3 or 4 miles before he lost sight of it. He stated the weather was clear, visibility was good, and there were no clouds near the object. The object made no noise perceptible to HARRISON. However, he commented that he was stopped at an intersection where the traffic was heavy and there was considerable noise. He first thought possibly he had seen some type of a reflector on an airplane, but could not locate or hear a plane anywhere.\n\n\tHARRISON drove to the 1400 Block of North \"C\" Street, where he observed an Army officer, wearing the insignia of a major or lieutenant colonel, standing back of the officer's automobile. He stopped and asked the officer if he had observed the flying object. The officer, name unknown to the informant, answered negatively and then remarked, \"I am glad other people are also reporting seeing flying objects.\" The officer then related that the day previous, Friday, April 15, 1949, while the officer was traveling out of Oklahoma City toward Fort Smith, his wife observed a flying object in the sky very similar to that described by HARRISON. The officer stated he saw the object too, but furnished no more information.\n\nDOS:crc\n98-0\nEnc.\nAMSD\n\nEX-118\nRECORDED - 119\nINDEXED - 119\n62-83894 - 166\n19 APR 26 1949\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964\n61 MAY 3 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LET TO DIRECTOR\nFLYING DISCS\t\t\t\t\t\t4-22-49\n\n\tHARRISON described the object as appearing some 3 or 4 inches in diameter from the distance he saw it. It was very bright and reflected a light in a manner similar to a mirror. He reported the incident to the local press at Fort Smith and inquired if anyone had made a similar report. He received a negative reply. In this connection, please find attached an article from the front page of the Southwest-Times Record newspaper published at Fort Smith, Arkansas, Sunday, April 17, 1949.\n\n\tThe interview with HARRISON developed he is 52 years of age. He has had considerable college training and attended the seminary at Westminster, Maryland 2½ years. He stated that his eyesight is very good for a man of his age and that he has worn reading glasses only for the past few years. He was positive he had observed the object as related above. He was unable of course to state just what the object was or furnish any additional information concerning it. No information was available at Fort Smith indicating the object had fallen in that section or that it was observed by others. The Little Rock Office is making no further inquiries concerning the subject matter.\n\n\tThe offices of OSI and MID have been notified of the information set out above.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SOUTHWEST - TIMES RECORD\nFt. Smith, Arkansas\nApril 17, 1949\n\nLocal Man Reports Seeing What\nHe Believes Was \"Flying Disc\"\n\nWade Harrison, Fort Smith post office employe, reported Saturday he had observed what he believed was a \"flying disc.\"\nHarrison saw what he believed was a \"flying disc\" as he was driving east on Grand avenue at Eleventh street. He said the object was small and was moving southeastward at a rapid rate of speed. He said the object resembled a tiny mirror.\nThere were no other reports of \"flying discs\" in the area Saturday."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF DIRECTOR\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nApril 20, 1949\n\nThe attached was sent to the\nDirector by Walter Winchell.\n\nAttachment\nmt\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Jones\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Holmes\nMiss Gandy"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nBY SPECIAL MESSENGER\n\nRECORDED - 128\n\nDate: May 2, 1949\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations (I.G.)\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nRe: FLYING DISCS\n\nA reliable and confidential source has recently advised this Bureau that during the first part of April, 1949, Mr. C. A. Atkins, 4312 Los Feliz, Hollywood 27, California, had informed him that three employees of the Department of Recreation in Parks in the city of Los Angeles, California, had noticed objects in the sky which appeared to be flying discs.\n\nThe above information is being furnished to you for whatever action you desire and no investigation is being conducted relative thereto by this Bureau.\n\nEHM:mdd"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 128\n\nDate: May 2, 1949\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations (I.G.)\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nRe: FLYING DISCS\n\nA reliable and confidential source has recently advised this Bureau that during the first part of April, 1949, Mr. C. A. Atkins, 4312 Los Feliz, Hollywood 27, California, had informed him that three employees of the Department of Recreation in Parks in the city of Los Angeles, California, had noticed objects in the sky which appeared to be flying discs.\n\nThe above information is being furnished to you for whatever action you desire and no investigation is being conducted relative thereto by this Bureau."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CITY OF LOS ANGELES\nCALIFORNIA\nCOMMISSIONERS\nMAURIE LUXFORD\nPRESIDENT\nMRS. ROLLIN BROWN\nVICE-PRESIDENT\nMRS. WILLIAM J. WILSON\nC. TONY PEREIRA\nROBERT L. BURNS\nJ. J. HASSETT\nSECRETARY\nFLETCHER BOWRON\nMAYOR\nDEPARTMENT OF\nRECREATION AND PARKS\n305 CITY HALL\nLOS ANGELES 12\nMichigan 5211\nGEO. HJELTE\nGENERAL MANAGER\nGILBERT L. SKUTT\nSUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS\n\nHollywood,Calif.April 10,1949.\n\nMr.Walter Winchell\nNew York City,N.Y.\nMy Dear Winchell.\n\nWith reference to flying Disc's or\nother flying objects,thought you would be interested\nin the following. It in a measure substantiates your\nstatements.\n\nFriday of last week,three of our de-\npartment employees were working in Griffith Park(the\nnations largest park) when one of them,De Jarnett by name\nnoticed an object sailing through the sky and took a\ngood look to try and distinguish it from planes that\nfrequently fly over.\n\nAbout the same time two of his men\nworking about a half mile away saw the object. They\nchecked with each other and arrived at the same conc-\nlusion. It was a Disc and they ran to a telephone to\nreport the incident. In the meantime DeJarnett started\nto the location where his men were working to check and\nsee if they had seen the object.\n\nThey had both seen it which proves\nbeyond a question of a doubt that something of the Disc\ntype was in the air and when the third man stated he\nalso saw it,I am satisfied you are very much right in\nyour statements and I am inclined to call a person a\nliar that says(there are no disc).\n\nOne of your fans\nC.A.Atkins.\n4312 Los Feliz\nHollywood 27 Calif."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC - San Antonio\nDirector - FBI\nFLYING DISKS\nINTERNAL SECURITY - R\nApril 26, 1949\n\n62-83894-168\n\nReference is made to your letter dated April 4, 1949, captioned\n\"Protection of Vital Installations.\" You are instructed in the future to\nreport information relating to flying disks under the above caption.\n\nIn regard to your request for information that would substantiate or\ndiscredit the statements made by Walter Winchell on his broadcast of\nApril 3, 1949, your attention is directed to SAC Letter No. 38 dated March 25,\n1949, captioned \"Flying Disks.\"\n\nFor your strictly confidential information, the data contained in\nSAC Letter No. 38 was obtained in confidence from a colonel in the United\nStates Air Materiel Command, who obtained his information from persons\nactively engaged in the investigation of this subject.\n\nNo interview with Walter Winchell will be made by the Bureau concerning the source of his statements referred to in your referenced letter.\n\nEHM:mpd\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED\nAPR 27 1949 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nMR. Tolson, Mr. Clegg, Mr. Glavin, Mr. Ladd, Mr. Nichols, Mr. Rosen, Mr. Tracy, Mr. Egan, Mr. Gurnea, Mr. Harbo, Mr. Mohr, Mr. Pennington, Mr. Quinn Tamm, Tele. Room, Mr. Nease, Miss Gandy"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nDATE: April 4, 1949\n\nFROM : SAC, San Antonio\nAIR MAIL\nSPECIAL DELIVERY\n\nSUBJECT: PROTECTION OF VITAL INSTALLATIONS\n(Bureau file 65-48300)\n\nReference is made to San Antonio letter to the Bureau dated March\n22, 1949 which submitted information related by military authorities concerning\nunconventional aircraft.\n\nThe Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, 4th Army, has advised\nthat at 11:50 P.M. March 31, 1949 a lighted object about the size of a basketball,\nreddish white in color, followed by a fire trail, was observed southwest of\nKilleen Base, adjacent to Camp Hood, Texas. The observation was made by 1st\nLt. FREDERICK W. DAVIS, who was in charge of a platoon, Company C, 12th Armored\nInfantry Battalion, which is assigned as a part of an alert force (called force\nAbel) from Camp Hood, whose function is to protect the installation at Killeen\nBase.\n\nLt. DAVIS advised that the object was at an altitude estimated at\n6,000 ft., was traveling parallel to the ground and passed directly over him at\na rapid rate of speed. It was in view 10 to 15 seconds and suddenly disappeared\nhigh in the sky without having descended. No sound or odor was detected. The\nnight was clear and visibility good. The object passed almost directly over the\nair strip at Killeen Base.\n\nWhen Lt. DAVIS attempted to advise his headquarters by telephone\nimmediately after the sighting, he heard static or electrical interference on\nthe telephone line which he stated might be possible radio interference.\n\nG-2 has advised that other lights of unknown origin were observed on\nMarch 6, 7, 8 and 17, 1949, by military personnel of the alert force stationed\napproximately 1000 yards east of the fences which surround Killeen Base.\n\nThe object sighted on March 31, 1949 was reported as being of a\ndifferent nature from the lights seen earlier in the month.\n\nIt is noted that Mr. WALTER WINCHELL, on his Sunday evening broadcast,\nApril 3, 1949, stated that \"flying discs\" seen in this country definitely\nemanated from Russia.\n\nOn April 4, 1949, G-2, 4th Army, contacted this office, inquiring as\nto whether we had any information that would substantiate or discredit the statements made by WALTER WINCHELL.\n\n2 cc - El Paso (100-4562)\n\nJEJ;ED\n100-7545\n\nRECORDED - 105\nINDEXED - 105\nEX-11\n\n62-83894-168\nRECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to Director\nSA-100-7545\n\nApril 4, 1949\n\nIn view of the interest and concern of 4th Army military authorities who have the duty of protecting the vital installations at Los Alamos, N. M., Sandia Base, N. M. in the El Paso Division, and the Camp Hood area in the San Antonio Division, it is suggested that the Bureau may desire to arrange to have Mr. WINCHELL interviewed concerning the source of his information that \"flying discs\" emanate from Russia.\n\nIt would be appreciated if the Bureau can supply any information that can be transmitted to military authorities which would clarify this matter."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED: 104\nINDEXED: 104\n\n62-83894-169\n\nMay 3, 1949\n\nMr. Carey L. Davis\n141 Claire Drive, Southeast\nAtlanta, Georgia\n\nEX-43\n\nDear Mr. Davis:\n\nYour letter of April 27, 1949, has been received, and I want to thank you for sending me the newspaper clipping which you enclosed together with your observations concerning the designs you submitted to the federal government in 1942. Although I would like to be of service, checks of the type you desire are not within the scope of this Bureau's activities. It was very thoughtful of you to contact me in that regard.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nWN:rlc\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 7\nMAY 4 1949 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HOTEL LAWRENCE\nWalnut Ridge, Ark.\n\nApril 27th 1949\n\n\"Flying Saucers\"\n\nHon. J. Edgar Hoover:\nWashington, D.C.\n\nHaving read the inclosed clipping you will find with this letter prompts me to send it to you and ask you to check The National Inventors Council files on the 2 types of engines & the flying saucer Design that I submitted to Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt in 1942, which Henry Wallace was Secretary of Commerce, and who was in charge of The National Inventors Council.\n\nI mean just this. See how easy it would have been for Wallace to have conveyed these designs to Russia and withheld them from our own Engineering Dept. You can make the check and find here if your life, if you took it I will appreciate a reply.\n\nCarey L. Davis\n141 Claire Dr. S.E.\nAtlanta, Ga."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"New Data, Ideas About Flying Saucers\nAnd Death of Pilot Who Chased One\n\nBy United Press\n\nDAYTON, Ohio, April 27.—The only airman who ever got near a flying saucer crashed and died before he could describe it, the Dayton Journal-Herald said today.\n\nThe newspaper printed a lengthy dispatch on the mysterious flying discs, based, it said, on hitherto unpublished reports assembled at the Wright-Patterson Air Force base. The Air Force investigation has proved that the flying saucers \"are not a joke.\" Neither \"are they a cause for alarm to the population,\" the newspaper said.\n\nThe closest any airman came to the mystery discs was on Jan. 7, 1948, when one was sighted over Fort Knox, Ky., the dispatch said. Four fighter planes were sent aloft to intercept it, but only Capt. Thomas F. Mantell was able to get close.\n\n\"I'm closing in to take a good look,\" the newspaper quoted him as reporting by radio. \"It looks metallic and of tremendous size. It's going up now as fast as I am. That's 360 miles an hour. I'm going up after it. At 20,000 feet, if I'm no closer, I'll abandon chase.\"\n\nMantell's plane crashed a few minutes later and he was killed.\n\nThe paper said a report now on file at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base lists 240 domestic and 30 foreign accounts of flying discs as having been investigated. Of these, 30 per cent seem to have been weather balloons and the like and 30 per cent more are perhaps explainable conventionally—leaving 40 per cent unexplained.\n\nThe Air Force recently said there was no evidence that the discs were guided missiles fired from some other country, but that on the other hand it was not impossible that they were. Later the Air Force announced it was not making any further comments on the discs.\n\nThe Dayton paper says the report on which its story is based said \"evaluation teams\" stated:\n\n\"We can't prove or disprove the existence of some of the remaining unidentified objects as real aircraft of unconventional design.\n\n\"The possibility that the saucers"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 135\nINDEXED - 135\n62-83894-170\n\nMay 10, 1949\n\nBY SPECIAL MESSENGER\n\nTo:\tDirector of Special Investigations, (I. G.)\n\tDepartment of the Air Force\n\tThe Pentagon\n\tWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom:\tJohn Edgar Hoover - Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject:\tINFORMATION CONCERNING FLYING SAUCERS\n\tMRS. FRANK GARDNER - INFORMANT\n\nEnclosed is a photostatic copy of a letter dated April 29, 1949, received by this Bureau from Mrs. Frank Gardner concerning flying saucers.\n\nThe correspondent has been advised that a copy of her letter has been forwarded to the United States Air Force.\n\nThis letter is being forwarded to you for any action you may deem advisable.\n\nEnclosure\n\nFRW:jmf\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nBY\nSPECIAL MESSENGER\nMAY 11 1949\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\n60 MAY 27 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2310 W. Harvey\nEl Monte Calif.\n4-29-49\n\nEdgar J. Hoover\nF.B.I.\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nDear Sir:\n\nTake this for what you think its worth, But I keep thinking I may be able to throw a light on the so called Flying Saucers, I do not know how true this is, but as our own army says it has nothing to do concerning these Saucers appearing in the Skies, I aim to tell You what a certain woman told me of a supposed secret aircraft hide out and factory that is in or under mountains near Mexico city Mexico. This young woman is married to a Mexican radio musician here. Who seems to be one of a special few who were allowed to visit this place in the mountains. She said that these aircraft was made of some metalic material that could not be recognized in the air only as an almost invisible form. That the passengers or pilot rather, could see out, but lookers on could not see inside that close up-they (the craft) looks a sort of glass. And that they were preparing them for special reason against the U.S. and the USAF 5/10/49 FRW"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that there were thousands of them. They were supposed to be the rocket type.\nNow Mr. Hoover this was told me in 1944 or 43. at the time I wrote it all down and never thought any more of it until lately. and maybe I am foolish, but I thought maybe this had something to do with the flying Saucers, if true.\nI am a true american and love my country and if I can do any service for my country I am glad of it.\nThe flying Saucer could be more dangerous than we think.\n\nRespectfully Yours.\nMrs. Frank Gardner\n\nP.S.\nI lived within a few miles of Mexican border when this was told me.\nIn Texas."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nRoom 5744 5/26 1949\n\nTO: ✓ Director\n___Mr. Ladd\n___Mr. Clegg\n___Mr. Glavin\n___Mr. Harbo\n___Mr. Nichols\n___Mr. Rosen\n___Mr. Tracy\n___Mr. Fletcher\n___Mr. Mohr\n___Mr. Carlson\n___Mr. Nease\n___Miss Gandy\n___Personnel Files Section\n___Records Section\n___Mrs. Skillman\n\nMr. Tolson, Mr. Clegg, Mr. Glavin, Mr. Ladd, Mr. Nichols, Mr. Rosen, Mr. Tracy, Mr. Egan, Mr. Gurnea, Mr. Harbo, Mr. Mohr, Mr. Pennington, Mr. Quinn Tamm, Mr. Nease, Miss Gandy\n\nSee Me For Appropriate Action\nSend File Note and Return\n\nClyde Tolson"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nFROM : SAC, Los Angeles\nSUBJECT: \"FLYING DISK\" REPORT\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDATE: May 13, 1949\n\nOn May 5, 1949 Mr. MEL HODELL, a reporter for the Sun-Star newspaper, Merced, California, advised Special Agent MARLIN W. JOHNSON, that his paper had been contacted by Lt. Col. STANLEY JACOBS, Intelligence Officer, Castle Air Force Base, Merced, California, relative to any reports that the newspaper might have received concerning \"flying disks\" in the Merced vicinity.\n\nMr. HODELL stated a close friend of his, one WILLIAM H. PARROTT, 12-A Langdon Villa, Merced, had advised him that he had observed a strange object, and as he is in the Air Corps Reserve, he reported same to the Intelligence Officer at Castle Field.\n\nOn the same date Mr. GEORGE BREMER, Detachment Commander, Office of Special Investigations, Castle Air Force Base, Merced, California, advised SA MARLIN W. JOHNSON that he had heard that an individual had reported seeing a \"flying disk\" to the Intelligence Office at the Base but that the Intelligence Officer had not furnished the information to him. Mr. BREMER later on the same date contacted SA JOHNSON and exhibited a letter written by STANLEY F. JACOBS, Lt. Col., USAF, Adjutant (Intelligence Officer) to Commanding General, Air Material Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, Wright Field, Ohio. This letter contained a statement given by Mr. WILLIAM H. PARROTT which read as follows: \"I had occasion to step from my home, located approximately one mile west of the town of Merced, on the night of April 4, 1949, at approximately 2220. My attention was diverted to a clicking noise of considerable intensity. I stopped on the sidewalk about 20 feet from the front steps and recognized the source of this clicking to be in the sky in an area about 40 degrees from the surface of the earth in an easterly direction. The sky condition was 20000 thin broken with 12 miles visibility and surface winds were reported as north nine M.P.H. at Castle Air Force weather station. My home is approximately seven miles south of Castle Air Force Base and in an area somewhat sheltered from surface winds,and no appreciable surface wind was apparent at the time the aural observation was made. After about ten seconds of looking into the area described previously as being the source of this sound, an object was observed blanking out stars in describing a flight path in a west or northwesterly direction. Only one object was apparent, its shape can be described as only a solid mass. Its size can be estimated as four or five feet in diameter in keeping with an estimated altitude of considerably less than 1000 (one thousand) feet. Color was shown by the reflection of ground lights on only two occasions, and appeared to be\n\n100-2442 MWJ:JAW\nRECORDED - 110 INDEXED - 110\n162-83894 F I 171\n13 MAY 17 1949\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964\nEX-76 EX-39"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nFROM : SAC, Los Angeles\nSUBJECT: \"FLYING DISK\" REPORT\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDATE: May 13, 1949\n\nOn May 5, 1949 Mr. MEL HODELL, a reporter for the Sun-Star newspaper, Merced, California, advised Special Agent MARLIN W. JOHNSON, that his paper had been contacted by Lt. Col. STANLEY JACOBS, Intelligence Officer, Castle Air Force Base, Merced, California, relative to any reports that the newspaper might have received concerning \"flying disks\" in the Merced vicinity.\n\nMr. HODELL stated a close friend of his, one WILLIAM H. PARROTT, 12-A Langdon Villa, Merced, had advised him that he had observed a strange object, and as he is in the Air Corps Reserve, he reported same to the Intelligence Officer at Castle Field.\n\nOn the same date Mr. GEORGE BREMER, Detachment Commander, Office of Special Investigations, Castle Air Force Base, Merced, California, advised SA MARLIN W. JOHNSON that he had heard that an individual had reported seeing a \"flying disk\" to the Intelligence Office at the Base but that the Intelligence Officer had not furnished the information to him."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IA 100-2442\n\ndull surfaced, light colored metal. The only ground lights of intensity were a row of street lights behind me one half block which leads me to believe the under surface of this object to be curved in shape.\n\n\"This object when first sighted, was moving very slowly in a west or northwesterly direction. I would estimate that I had it in my range of vision for 35 seconds, after having heard it about ten seconds before locating it. It passed on beyond the house and maneuvered through an arc of turn to the left of about ninety degrees. The clicking sound was continuous throughout this turn, however, it became louder as it returned on its new heading of south or southwest. On its return the clicking sound became louder, but I was unable to see it at this time. The clicking stopped when it was at its greatest intensity and appeared to come from a position directly over head. I was unable to see the object after the sound stopped.\n\n\"This clicking sound, retained the same pitch and speed throughout the entire course observed, but intensity varied. There was not whistle or roar, but only the clicking noise which might be compared to beaters of a home mixer that were not properly meshed. No lights or flame were observed during the entire course with exception of the previous described reflections twice. No exhaust trail was distinguishable.\n\n\"My dog was with me and directed her attention in the general direction of this object's flight throughout its course. She had been romping with me on coming out of the house but without spoken word stopped and directed her attention on to the previously described area. The clicking sound might not have been unusual to the dog, but there is a possibility of sounds on wave lengths discernable only to the dog, being emitted.\"\n\nIt is to be noted that Mr. PARROTT is a member of the Active USAF Reserve with rank of Major. He attained rating of pilot in August 1941 and has approximately 2200 hours flying time. During his active duty period in WW2 he stated that he had considerable night flying experience in connection with his military assignment. The Intelligence Officer in the above mentioned letter made the following statement, \"An attempt to locate other witnesses in the area or through the local newspaper proved unsuccessful\".\n\nMr. BREMER advised that he is planning to clear with his headquarters office and will probably conduct an investigation.\n\nThe above is being furnished for the information of the Bureau.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. FLETCHER\nFROM : V. P. KEAY\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: May 26, 1949\n\nBACKGROUND:\n\nWalter Winchell forwarded to the Director a Western Union telegram he had received from Robert Ripley which stated that he, Ripley, had the only authentic Japanese flying saucer ever recovered in this country. Mr. Winchell noted on the telegram, \"To J. Edgar Hoover - True?\"\n\nDETAILS:\n\nThis matter was discussed by Special Agent Reynolds with the Intelligence Division of the Army, who advised that they had no information concerning any Japanese flying saucer ever having been recovered in the United States.\n\nThis matter was discussed with Colonel William E. Carpenter, OSI-USAF, who advised on April 27, 1949 that he had interested himself in the flying saucers and related subjects and that in so far as could be determined by him through his sources in the Air Force, which are excellent, there is no authentic information available concerning the phenomenon of the flying saucers. He advised he would check with the authorities at Wright Field to determine if any information is available concerning the recovery of a Japanese flying saucer.\n\nColonel Carpenter has now advised that there is no information available in any arm of the Air Force to the effect that any flying saucers of any kind have been recovered in the United States. Colonel Carpenter stated delay had been encountered in determining this fact inasmuch as inquiries had been directed through individuals known to him and trusted by him and not through the usual channels from which he possibly would receive a stock answer.\n\nThe details of this case were not discussed by either Special Agents Reynolds or Sanders with the Army or Air Force and they are not aware of the telegram sent by Mr. Ripley to Mr. Winchell.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\nThe foregoing is for your information and any disposition being desirable.\n\nESS:mk\n\n172\n\nRECORDED - 91 INDEXED - 91\n\n57 JUN 6 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. TELCHER\nFROM : D. M. LADD\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nBACKGROUND:\n\nWalter Winchell forwarded to the Director a Western Union telegram he had received from Roscoe Ripley which stated that the Ripley's only authentic Japanese flying saucer were recovered in this country. Mr. Winchell noted on the telegram, \"True? - J. Edgar Hoover - ?\"\n\nDETAILS:\n\nThis matter was discussed by special Agent Reynolds with the Intelligence Division of the Army, who advised that they had no information concerning any Japanese flying saucer having been recovered in the United States.\n\nThis matter was discussed with Colonel William L. Garrett, GIT-IS, who advised on April 27, 1949 that he had interested himself in the flying saucer and related subjects and that in so far as could be determined by him through its sources in the Air Force, which are excellent, there is no authentic information available concerning the phenomenon of the flying saucers. He advised he would make no effort to determine if any information is available concerning the recovery of a Japanese flying saucer.\n\nColonel Garrett has now advised that there is no information available in any of the Air Force to the effect that any flying saucers of any kind have been recovered in the United States. Colonel Garrett stated Ripley was encountered in determining true fact situations as to the saucer was based on hearsay which was known to him and forwarded by him and not any of the usual channels from whom he had possibly would received which answer.\n\nThe details of this case were not discussed by either Local Bureau with the Army or Air Force and the substance of the telegram was referred to in the Bureau."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A•CDU1016 LONG NL PD=NEWYORK NY 13=\n=WALTER WINCHELL=RONEY PLAZA HOTEL\nMIAMI BEACH FLO=\n=HAVE THE ONLY AUTHENTIC JAPANESE FLYING SAUCER EVER RECOVERED IN THIS COUNTRY. BECAUSE OF YOUR INTEREST IN THE PRESENT DAY FLYING DISCS OF THE RUSSIANS WOULD LIKE VERY MUCH TO HAVE YOU JOIN ME ON THE BELIEVE IT OR NOT TELEVISION SHOW\n\nNEXT TUESDAY APRIL 19TH NBC NETWORK 930 TO 10PM AND GIVE YOUR COMMENTS ON FLYING DISC AND YOUR EXCLUSIVE KNOWLEDGE OF THIS LATEST RUSSIAN MENACE. REGARDS BELIEVE IT OR NOT\n=RIPLEY=\n\n19 NBC 930 10PM"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"May 10, 1949\n\nMrs. Frank Gardner\n2310 W. Garvey\nEl Monte, California\n\nDear Mrs. Gardner:\n\nI wish to acknowledge your letter dated April 29, 1949, and to express my appreciation for your thoughtfulness in writing to me.\n\nIn view of the contents of your letter, I have taken the liberty of sending a copy to the United States Air Force.\n\nIn the future, if you have information which may be of interest to this Bureau, you may find it more convenient to communicate with Mr. R. B. Hood, Special Agent in Charge of our Los Angeles Office, 900 Security Building, Los Angeles 13, California.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncc Los Angeles with copies of incoming.\n\nThe correspondent communicated with the Bureau on one previous occasion enclosing a clipping from a Spanish language newspaper in Texas. She was apparently dissatisfied with the manner in which the Latin Americans were being treated in Texas. A cordial letter of acknowledgement was sent to her. (100-33339)\n\nFRW:jmf"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF DIRECTOR\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nApril 25, 1949\n\nThe attached was forwarded to the Director by Walter Winchell. The notation thereon reads:\n\n\"To J. Edgar Hoover.\nTrue?\"\n\nAttachment\nmt\n\nMr. Tolson, Mr. Clegg, Mr. Glavin, Mr. Ladd, Mr. Nichols, Mr. Rosen, Mr. Tracy, Mr. Egan, Mr. Gurnea, Mr. Harbo, Mr. Jones, Mr. Mohr, Mr. Pennington, Tele. Room, Mr. Nease, Miss Holmes, Miss Gandy"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMiss Beach\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMiss Gandy\n\nOffice of Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\n\nAttention Mr. Clegg\n\n[illegible]\n\nTo: Mr. Pennington\n\nFBI"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Mr. H. B. Fletcher\nFROM : F. J. Baumgardner\nSUBJECT: KAYE LOCHRIE\nMISCELLANEOUS\n\nDATE: May 23, 1949\n\nOn the afternoon of May 20, 1949, Miss Kaye Lochrie, 4900 N. Harding Avenue, Chicago 25, Illinois, was referred to my office from the Director's Office.\n\nMiss Lochrie stated she was going to be in Washington for a few days and that she was staying at the Ambassador Hotel. She stated that Roy Palmer, Managing Editor of the Jeff Davis Publishing Company in Chicago, had some information regarding flying discs. Miss Lochrie said that Palmer's theory was to the effect that when people died their souls entered a space on this earth which is, of course, invisible to human eyes. He said that in this soul world there are good and bad people and that they have become involved in a war. According to Miss Lochrie, Palmer's theory is that the flying discs which have been seen are the explosives being used in the warfare between the good and bad souls.\n\nMiss Lochrie stated that the real purpose of her visit to the Bureau was to get her own name cleared. She said that the FBI has been conducting investigation regarding her and that she wanted to know the results of the investigation. I asked her what kind of an investigation the FBI had been making regarding her and she stated she was under suspicion of espionage activities. I informed her that I could not furnish her with any information which is contained in the Bureau's files inasmuch as our files have been designated as confidential by the Attorney General.\n\nMiss Lochrie accepted this explanation and stated regarding her present activities that she had been in the Wacs as a private and had received an honorable discharge in 1945. She said at the present time she is working as a model in Chicago.\n\nShe impressed me as being somewhat mentally unbalanced.\n\nA check of the files failed to reveal that we have conducted any investigation relative to this individual.\n\nFJB:TD\n\nRECORDED - 62\nINDEXED - 62\n\n62-83894-175\n\n32 JUN 2 1949\n\n52 JUN7 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nFROM : SAC, New Orleans\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: June 2, 1949\n\nRe SAC Letter 38, dated March 25, 1949 entitled as above.\n\nThe Bureau is advised that through the Office of Naval Intelligence, New Orleans, Louisiana, this office has been advised that within the past ten days three sightings of flying discs have been reported in the City of New Orleans. The information seems to be that the single discs were in straight flight and traveling in a general direction of North, in late afternoon, about the size of an observation plane, but the shape of a saucer. The Navy stated that two witnesses have advised that the object was traveling end over end; that weather conditions were good; that sightings were made outdoors by persons who did not wear glasses; that the dates were May 18, 19 and 23, 1949. The Navy states that it was possible these objects were weather balloons, but that these are used from only one airport, released over an hour before the times of sighting and would generally be out of sight in a few minutes.\n\nThe above is being furnished the Bureau for future reference since the Navy has informed that all three instances were investigated by the Army Intelligence.\n\nPW/mmd\n\n62-83894-176\n\nRECORDED - 6\nEX-138\nFIVE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nFROM : SAC, New Orleans\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nRe SAC Letter 38, dated March 25, 1949 entitled as above.\n\nThe information furnished that three sightings of flying discs were reported in the City of New Orleans, Louisiana, this office has been advised that within the past ten days. Navy stated that the object was traveling end over end, that weather conditions were good, that the dates were May 18, 19 and 23, 1949, the Navy states that it was possible these objects were weather balloons.\n\nThe above is being furnished the Bureau for future reference since the Navy has informed that all three instances were investigated by the Army Intelligence.\n\nJUN 8 1949\nF.B.I.\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nATOMIC ENERGY LIAISON SECTION"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DO-6\n\nOFFICE OF DIRECTOR\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nMay 23, 1949\n\nThe attached was sent to the Director by Walter Winchell. The handwritten notation thereon reads:\n\n\"To Hoover!\n\nHa!\"\n\nAttachment\nmt\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Jones\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Holmes\nMiss Gandy"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"To Hoover!\nHa!\n\nSan Luis Obispo, California\nMay 15, 1949\n\nWalter Winchell\nNew York, New York\n\nDear Sir:\n\nUnder attached cover you will find a sample of our item. Should you do no more than take our FLYIN' SAUCER out, carefully read the instructions, and fly it; I will have accomplished a portion of my expectations.\n\nFor the past few weeks I have listened with more than an indifferent attitude, to your various Sunday evening broadcasts and comments concerning Flying Saucers. From the start, much as many another individual who has tried to get ahead by his own initiative, I have visualized what the right type of publicity would do for my interests.\n\nTo state my actions in any other manner, would belittle your intelligence, and the weeks of forethought and sincerity in which this is submitted.\n\nYour comment this evening, concerning the Gyroscopic Theories, sparkplugged my actions.\n\nAlong with the phases of merchandising mentioned in the attached articles, I should like to mention that one troop of Boy Scouts in Los Angeles are purchasing and enthusiastically include them as a major portion of their recreation program.\n\nBy these facts, it is apparent that our FLYIN' SAUCER is worthy of every effort we are able to summons in making it another American pastime of Yo-Yo proportions.\n\nTrusting that we are justified of your consideration from a newsworthy standpoint, I remain\n\nVery Sincerely Yours,\nWarren R. Franscioni\n1767 Conejo Drive\nSan Luis Obispo, California\n\nRECORDED - 58\n62-83894-177\nINDEXED - 58\n17 JUN 1 1949\n60 JUN 15 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-177"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The Amazing\nFLYIN-SAUCER\nGREAT FUN FOR THE WHOLE FAMILY!\nFLYIN-SAUCER performs in an amazing way as you develop your skill in flying it. A novel way to play catch. You will think of many games to play. Adaptable to almost any game.\nHOW TO FLY\nLaunch your FLYIN-SAUCER straight ahead with a snap of your wrist making it spin as fast as possible. DON'T THROW TOO HARD. . . . It's the spinning that gives it lift. Begin by flying about 10 feet. When windy, throw across the wind. You will quickly learn how to bank to the left or right.\nFLYIN-SAUCER\n(A Gyroscopic Airfoil)\nPRECISELY ENGINEERED • AERODYNAMICALLY CORRECT\nMADE TOUGH TO RESIST ROUGH HANDLING"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLIGHT INSTRUCTIONS\nFLYIN' SAUCERS have flight characteristics very similar to airplanes. The SAUCER IS launched in identically the same manner as sailing your hat onto a hook---by spinning and forward motion.\nIn order to fly in a straight line, the SAUCER must leave the hand in a level position. To curve the SAUCER, it must leave the hand banked or tilted in direction of desired curve---for example: for left curve---the left side of the SAUCER must be tilted down.\nFOR BEST RESULTS -- The spinning of the SAUCER is most important and most difficult to master. Because the spin creates a gyroscopic action which controls the attitude of the SAUCER in flight, a smooth, fast spinning delivery should be developed. Do not hold the SAUCER too tight.\nAnalyze your mistakes and make corrections by tilting or banking SAUCER. The correction must be applied to the SAUCER as it leaves the hand.\nSAIL 'EM BACK AND FORTH - PLAY CATCH !\nBegin by flying your saucer about 10 feet. The distance you are able to fly it will quickly increase with practice.\nMAKE 'EM TURN !\nBy releasing the SAUCER in a tilted manner, you can make it turn to the left or right. Bank it the way you want it to turn. It is advisable to learn to fly straight before starting to make turns.\nMAKE 'EM COME BACK !\nAfter learning to fly straight and make turns, you'll be able to make your SAUCER return to you by sailing it into the breeze at a sharp angle. The harder a wind blows, the flatter an angle you can fly it to make it return. Spin SAUCER as much as possible.\nMAKE 'EM SKIP !\nRight-handers launch SAUCER so that left side strikes hard surface. Right side for left-handers.\nHARD SURFACE\nTHE GAME OF HECKLE\nTHE GAME OF HECKLE provides a means of utilizing the unique manner in which the FLYIN' SAUCER can be guided. Rules and regulations are provided, forming the basis for skill and competition\nPLAYERS -- Four -- with two on each team.\nOBJECT -- To fly SAUCER around HECKLERS into your partner's circle.\ncircle A 18 ft. circle B 30 ft. circle C 18 ft. circle D\nALL CIRCLES ARE 6 FEET IN DIAMETER -- CENTER SPACE MAY VARY WITH ABILITY.\nAll players must remain in their circle until SAUCER is airborne.\nThe game begins with the Flier (A) attempting to sail the SAUCER around the HECKLERS in the circles (B) and (C) so that his partner in the Receiver's circle (D) can catch it.\nFlier (A) must remain in his circle when serving the SAUCER.\nHECKLER (B) must remain in his circle at all times while his team is defensive. He may attempt to stop the flight of the SAUCER, or distract the Flier in any manner. Should he step or fall out of his circle, his team forfeits 1 point and the offensive team retains serve.\nHECKLER (C) remains in his circle until SAUCER is airborne. He may then leave his circle to heckle the Receiver (D) in any manner so long as he doesn't interfere with flight of SAUCER or touch the Receiver, or step into the Receiver's circle. Hecklers forfeit 2 points for each infraction.\nReceiver (D) attempts to catch the SAUCER in his circle. Should he do so, then his team receives 2 points. Should it be necessary for the Receiver to leave his circle to catch the SAUCER, then his team scores but 1 point. Should he drop or miss the SAUCER, no points are scored, and the teams change positions. (A) changes with (B) and (C) changes with (D).\n(C) is now the Flier, and (B) the Receiver. HECKLER (D) must remain in his circle, and the HECKLER (A) becomes the roving HECKLER.\nTeams change positions when the Receiver fails to catch the SAUCER.\nIn the event that no Referee is available, disputes will be settled by mutual agreement, or the flip of a coin.\nFirst team to score 25 points wins the game. KEEP 'EM FLYIN'\nThis is a PIPCO PRODUCT\nSan Luis Obispo, Calif."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Saucers Come from Southern California\nDo YOU HAVE spots before your eyes? Do vari-colored discs flutter and sail in the air in front of you? Do you see flying saucers in the skies?\nIf you do, don't call the doctor nor jump on the wagon. And don't worry. Other persons are seeing flying saucers too---seeing them fly through the air---and seeing them on the sales counters of the stores. You can even pick them up and feel them, and, preferably, buy them to play with.\nIt all started many years ago---long before the recent flurry of flying saucers---when a little boy named Freddie used to play with his mother's pie tins. If he threw them with just the right twist of the wrist, they spun and turned in fascinating curves.\nFreddie grew up into a man called Fred Morrison, who always remembered what fun he had had playing with the pie tins. As a grown-up, he applied his knowledge of aerodynamics to the problem of developing a disc which could be thrown and tossed and its flight controlled by the thrower.\nHe evolved a metal model that sailed through the air in a most satisfactory manner. The curved disc was 9 in. in diameter and a scant 2 in. deep, with radiating arc-shaped fins and a heavy outside rim. A snap of the wrist when throwing gives a centrifugal motion to the disc which in turn gives guidance in flight. The radial fins create a vacuum on top of the whirling disc, and stability from beneath is provided by the heavy rim.\nThe metal model sailed through the air beautifully---but also, being metal, it sailed through windows and hedges and other obstacles, somewhat after the manner of a miniature cyclone. A material other than metal seemed a wise idea if the disc---or flying saucer---were to become a commercial product.\nA lightweight, slightly flexible plastics looked like the answer, and Morrison brought his metal model to Southern California Plastic Co., Glendale, Calif., to see what might be done in plastics. Stanley J. Gray and Edward L. Kennedy, president and secretary of the firm, took the metal disc out on the lawn to \"demonstrate\" its possibilities and were soon breathlessly convinced that a great deal of fun could be had by young and old alike.\nA plastics model of the disc was carved from a solid block of material, and then a mold made in the shop of Southern California. Engraving of the mold was done by United Engravers, Los Angeles.\nThen came the problem of the right material. A search was made throughout the range of thermoplastic molding compounds to find the proper material that combined flexibility, impact strength, and stability while in motion. (The discs achieve considerable speed---and strain---when in flight.) Cellulose acetate provided the best combination of properties to do the job. Acetate discs will not break glass windows, nor shatter when falling from a great height, nor scar the finish on automobiles, nor injure the players.\nThat's a real Flyin' Saucer this young man has just thrown into the air---molded of tough and lightweight cellulose acetate by Southern California Plastic Co., Glendale. Designed in accordance with aerodynamic principles, the Flyin' Saucer spins through the air with the greatest of ease. Note the radial fins on the disc in the boy's left hand.\nAn interesting part of the story is that producing the acetate \"Flyin' Saucer\" is only part of the story. It is a product with a wide market (how many yo-yos were sold in the US last year, do you suppose?); but it must be demonstrated to be sold. Everyone who sees a Flyin' Saucer in action is enthusiastic. Anyone who sees one lying on a sales counter is likely to pass by.\nThat presents a merchandising problem that has the sales staff of Southern California Plastic hard at work, thinking up ways and means for demonstrations, action publicity, visual promotional stunts. With a record of steady-selling staple consumer items now on the market, Southern California has no intention of letting the Flyin' Saucers sit on the sales counters. Carefully-controlled distribution, related to on-the-spot demonstrations or promotional campaigns, has been the rule so far. National markets will not be tackled until all the promotional kinks have been unraveled.\nReprinted from PACIFIC PLASTICS, August 1948"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Sky Devil-Ship' Scares Pilots; Air Chief Wishes He Had One\nPlane Makers Dubious About Alabama 'Thing'\nBy WILLIAM KEY\nWhat was that Thing that scared the daylights out of two Atlanta Eastern Air Line pilots in the spooky hours Saturday morning?\nIs there some stratospheric Loch Ness fire-breathing monster on the Milky Way run between Atlanta and New Orleans?\nThe pilots, Capt. C. S. Chiles, of Atlanta, and Co-Pilot J. B. Whitted, of Hapeville, would like to know. The Army Strategic Air Command would like to know. Big airplane manufacturers also are curious, but slightly dubious.\nPilots Chiles and Whitted told their thrilling story upon arriving at municipal airport here Saturday on the Houston-Atlanta, Boston run. Here is what they say they saw, near Montgomery:\nA gigantic plane without wings, black against the night sky, streaking through the heavens at 5,000 feet altitude with a fiery comet's tail 25 to 50 feet in length. It had a 100-foot fuselage about four times the circumference of a B-29's, and two rows of brilliantly lighted square windows. Creepiest of all, it was a veritable Flying Dutchman of the Skies. Nary a living soul was seen aboard!\nEAL FLIERS DESCRIBE WINGLESS AIRCRAFT Copilot John Whitted and Capt. C. S. Chiles (right).\nATLANTA JOURNAL\nSUNDAY, 7/25/48"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Continuous Light\nThe pilots admitted they had goose pimples riding pick-a-back on goose pimples. What's more, they said one of their 20 passengers---C. L. McKelvie, of Columbus, Ohio---was awake and saw the same thing.\nReporters nailed Mr. McKelvie at Kennett Square, Pa. How about it, they asked him---had he seen what the Atlanta pilots said he saw?\nWell, now, said Mr. McKelvie---not exactly. He said he saw \"no form of ship\" whatever. He saw a \"continuous light speed past\" his window.\n\"But,\" added Mr. McK., \"I'm not very well versed in aeronautics, and certainly I wasn't looking for any Buck Rogers space ship.\"\nOut at Santa Monica, Cal., the famous Gen. George C. Kenney, chief of the Strategic Air Command, was bearded in his den. His eyes twinkled. No, he said, cautiously, it wasn't one of his planes. The Army as yet hasn't got anything like the Thing seen over Montgomery.\nNot Boeing Plane\n\"I wish we did,\" the general said wistfully. \"I sure would have liked to see that Thing.\"\nSo said William M. Allen, president of the Boeing Aircraft Co., up at Seattle. \"I'm pretty sure it wasn't one of our planes,\" said Mr. Allen, modestly.\nAlmost identical statements issued by the Army Air Forces at Washington and the United States Weather Bureau at Montgomery tended to throw some light on this fantasy. Both sources suggested that the Atlanta pilots had flown past an air radar weather observation balloon. Those things, they explained, are 10 feet in diameter and have square, tinfoil boxes fastened to them. The boxes reflect light and \"give strange illusions\" as they twist and turn. Maxwell Field said they send 'em up at six-hour intervals.\nAnd Maxwell Field is at Montgomery.\nATLANTA JOURNAL\nSUNDAY, 7/25/48"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Flying Floor Lamp' Again Sighted Here\nBy CHARLES POU\nThat \"flying floor lamp\" is at it again!\nAn illuminated cantaloupe rolled over the city!\nAnd a newspaperman saw \"great balls of fire!\nWhat's more, two Richmond Va., schoolteachers say they saw the same \"flame-spurting\" sky monster which was spotted by Eastern Air Lines pilots near Montgomery.\nLike Red Floor Lamp\n\"I saw Halley's comet—and it was nothing like what I saw last night,\" declared Mrs. W. R. Delk, of 914 Hemphill ave., N. W. Breathlessly, Mrs. Delk continued:\n\"The front end of it looked like a flying floor lamp—a fiery-red floor lamp. Then it trailed off in little square sections.\n\"Oh, Halley's comet was nothing like that.\"\nAnd Mrs. Delk was joined by at least 15 other Atlantians who saw a Thing which banked and rolled and breathed fire over the city Monday night between 8 p. m. and 9:45 p. m.\nIn the downtown section, Mr. and Mrs. Richard P. Sellers were minding their own business when a \"reddish-white ball of fire about the size of a cantaloupe with a tail on it\" darted over buildings.\nMrs. A. C. Kirby, of Carey Park, has never seen a purple cow but she did see \"a great ball of fire with a great long purple tail on it.\" That was about 9:40 p. m.\n\"Bluish Streak of Light\"\nAn attendant at the naval air station thought he was watching a falling star, until it started climbing and banked away from Atlanta. To him, it looked like a \"bluish streak of light.\"\nAnd now about the newspaperman, John Battle, city editor of the Augusta Chronicle, hung up the telephone after a dozen calls about weird goings-on in the Augusta skies.\nHe looked out the window [illegible] He summoned his staff. \"Great balls of fire!\""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'LIKE BIG FLOOR LAMP FLYING ALONG'\nEverybody's Seeing 'Things' Whizzing Through Night Sky\nBy CHARLES POU\nIs that Thing no more than a wayward floor lamp?\nMrs. Noah Atkinson, of Brookhaven, saw it. And what did that Thing look like?\n\"A great big floor lamp, all lit up. Oh, it was beautiful!\"\nAnd C. M. Bowles, an Exposition Mills painter who lives near the Municipal airport, Sunday night saw a \"huge, brilliantly lighted object\" streaking over Atlanta skies at maybe 30,000 feet. Mr. Bowles thinks the Thing was straight from Moscow.\nTwo air line pilots first were startled by the newest astronomical \"what-is-it\" near Montgomery early Saturday. To them, it was \"a wingless craft, spurting flame like a Buck Rogers rocket ship.\" Elsewhere, all over the country, that Thing was variously identified as:\n1. An aluminum covered balloon.\n2. A ball of fire.\n3. An unusually bright light.\n4. A red and blue flame that burst in mid-air.\n5. A flash of cherry red fire.\n6. A meteor.\nMrs. Atkinson kept her Flying Floorlamp secret three weeks. But she knew she wasn't seeing things when she saw the Thing.\nShe and her husband, who also saw it, kept mum. The story really sounded a little silly until the two air line pilots saw their Thing gamboling and fire-breathing through air-line skies early Saturday morning.\nAfter that, she decided her tale could be told:\n\"My husband and I were sitting on our front porch the night of July 5, and at a quarter to 9 o'clock we saw this Thing. Our front porch doesn't have a screen, and we were sitting near the edge where we could see good.\n\"I saw it first. It was not high up—about 200 feet, I guess, but it looked like it was right above the treetops. 'Looka there', I yelled to my husband, and he saw it too.\n\"It looked like the top part of a floor lamp, and it was the prettiest thing I ever saw. It came and passed so quick—I guess it must have been 500 miles an hour or faster.\"\nAnd how about the two airline pilots, C. S. Chiles and John B. Whitted, of Atlanta?\nWell, they took off today, armed with a camera. And they hope to bring back a picture of that Thing.\nBeach Throngs Crane At 'Silver Cylinder'\nASBURY PARK, N. J., July 26. (AP)—Boardwalk throngs at this resort city craned their necks Monday at a \"silver cylinder\" they reported flying high overhead.\nThey described it as \"way up in the air,\" and like a blimp \"only blunt at both ends.\"\nOfficials, recalling \"flying saucers,\" asked Fort Monmouth personnel to see if they could identify it."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-145\nCOPY COPY COPY\n1515 - 9th St.\nWichita Falls, Texas\nAug. 5, 1948\nPublisher,\nAtlanta Journal,\nAtlanta, Georgia.\nDear Sir:\nOn July 25, 1948, I mailed a letter enclosing .35 cents in coin and an airmail self-addressed envelop to your circulation department, asking for tear sheets of the Atlanta Journal containing the stories on a \"strange\" or \"mysterious\" aircraft seen near Montgomery, Alabama, July 24, 1948, by two pilots, Cap't C. S. Chiles and John B. Whitted, of the Eastern Air Lines.\nThese have not arrived. I asked for two copies each of the stories.\nEnclosed is an additional .35 cents, and another stamped self-addressed envelop. Will you kindly see that your circulation department complies with this simple request?\nI assure you that my interest in the above stories is prompted by interest in the defense of our country, and you are hereby given my fullest permission to turn this letter requesting the copies of the stories over to the FBI, should you wish.\nThanking you very kindly, I am,\nSincerely,\n/s/ Mrs. Madeline Gwynne Merchant\nMrs. Madeline Gwynne Merchant\ncc/Agent-In-Charge\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nAtlanta, Georgia"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The incident was, I believe, an important one. And though I have already made reports to Maj. Sidney Newburger of Los Alamos and to General Handy, I would appreciate the fuller newspaper stories appearing in the press there. Thanking you kindly, I am,\nSincerely,\n/s/ Mrs. Madeline Gwynne Merchant\nMrs. Madeline Gwynne Merchant"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-145\nCOPY COPY COPY\n1515 - 9th St.\nWichita Falls, Texas\nAug. 5, 1948\nAgent-In-Charge,\nFederal Bureau of Investigation,\nAtlanta, Georgia.\nDear Sir:\nEnclosed is a carbon of a letter requesting tear sheets of the unusual aircraft seen near Montgomery, Alabama, July 24, 1948, stories concerning which were carried by AP and UP, originating in Atlanta.\nIt may have been oversight by someone in the circulation dep't of the Atlanta Journal, or it may have been \"alarm\" that a woman would be requesting this type of information, even though it was published, and thereby open information.\nEven though I cannot identify myself to the Atlanta Journal publisher or staff, I can to you. I have worked independently on the problem of aerial missiles, of which I believe this was an example, with all my data going directly to officials and members of the security office of the Atomic Energy Comm., Los Alamos Atomic Project, Los Alamos, N.M., and to high members of the War Department, including Gen. Thomas T. Handy, Fourth U. S. Army Commander, Ft. Sam Houston, Tex., head of this U. S. Army district.\ncannot and should not try to do that again, let us not with the excessive zeal of the new convert be blindly intolerant of those who do not immediately have the courage of all our own most recently acquired convictions.\nCOUGHS due COLDS\nGet quick relief of the cough, and throat irritation due to colds, at less than 1¢ a dose. Try it today.\nJUNIPER-TAR COMPOUND over 50 years in use\nHow to get"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ex-Army Air Force Fliers Invert Novel, New Game\n\n'Flying Saucers' Catch Fancy of Daytona Beach Visitors and Residents\n\nBy JACK TROY\nTimes-Union Staff Writer\n\nDAYTONA BEACH, Feb. 14—The ingenuity of two former Army Air Force fliers from California is \"paying off\" at this Florida Beach resort where, nowadays, the air is full of \"flying saucers.\"\n\nWhen Major Warren Franscioni and Lieut. Fred Morrison of San Luis Obispo completed their war experiences in the China-Burma-India and the Italian theatres of operation, they returned home and joined forces in a novel industry.\n\nMorrison had always been intrigued by the idea of sailing pie pans on the beach, and so he and Franscioni put their heads together and came up with a plastic version with fins. They then had invented a new game, a novel way of playing catch with flying saucers, a gyroscopic airfoil aerodynamically correct, precisely engineered and a pleasant way to take exercise.\n\nGrid Coach Uses It\n\nThe football coach at Hemet, Calif., High School was intrigued with the idea of using the saucers to condition his players, teach them balance and to reach out to margin catches of the discs which, by certain methods of spinning, boomerang and also sail away from the intended receiver. A player has to be on his toes to catch them, especially if the wind is blowing.\n\nIt may be just coincidence, Franscioni and Morrison said today, but the Hemet coach last season turned out his first championship team. The boys were on their toes.\n\nAlthough they had their discs made in Glendale and had planned on extensive West Coast promotion, snow flakes unexpectedly fell and so they headed for Daytona Beach, where, according to the tourists, \"summer spends the winter.\"\n\nNo snow flakes fall here; only flying saucers, which are so durable that they are not injured by cars passing over them.\n\nMorrison was shot down in his fifty-eighth mission in Italy but escaped serious injury. The two ex-Army officers refer to themselves as the world's champion Flying Saucer pilots, and certainly their novel invention—conceived in California and promoted in Florida—has caught on with beach lovers.\n\nThey were smart enough, of course, to patent the Flying Saucer idea in order to capitalize on ready-made publicity born of repeated Saucer scares around the country. In throwing the old pie or cake tins there always was the danger of cutting one's hands. But with the new plastic fin saucers, the only danger is getting bopped in the nose. And only the less agile allow that to happen once in a while.\n\nPromotion Main Problem\n\nFranscioni and Morris feel that coaches might find their sailing gadgets just as handy in training a squad as did the coach of Hemet. And they are hopeful that they may, in time to come, expand their wares from coast to coast.\n\nAt the present time Daytona Beach is the only resort that has seen the saucers. The boys are contemplating attending a few fairs and getting their product before larger masses of the public.\n\n\"Promotion is our only problem,\" Morrison declared. \"Production is no item. All who've tried our interesting little gadget seem to have fun sailing it, and they also find that they are using muscles long neglected.\""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • United States Government\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM: SAC, RICHMOND\nDATE: 5-17-49\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS SIGHTED AT RADFORD, VIRGINIA\nMAY 12, 1949\n\nThere are enclosed two clippings concerning what has been described as a flying disc sighted at Radford, Virginia on May 12, 1949. The Bureau may desire to refer this to the Department of the Air Force. This office has no information other than that appearing in the news items which appear to cover the best information available. The matter was not reported directly to this office and, therefore, no investigation or inquiries are being made and none of the individuals who allegedly saw the thing have been interviewed.\n\nELB:GTC\nEnclosures (2)\n\nINDEXED - 78\n62-83894-178\nF B I\n31 MAY 25 1949\n\nRECORDED - 78\n\nEX-42\nENCL.\n\nNo Action\nEX-42\n\n58 JUN 13 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"May 25, 1949\n\n62-83894-179\n\nMrs. Henry Beston\nChimney Farm\nNobleboro, Maine\n\nDear Mrs. Beston:\n\nYour letter postmarked May 16, 1949, has been received and I want to thank you for sending me information concerning the matter you mentioned. It was indeed very thoughtful of you to report that data to this organization.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNOTE: Correspondent saw a small object in the sky near the end of the day which took various shapes and through glasses appeared like a double bloom trailing something below it. She belives it might be a flying disk. In view of her nebulous information and as it was very possibly a weather balloon, no further action is deemed necessary.\n\nWN:mjp"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lynchburg Advance\n5/13/49\n\nThese Flying Discs\nAre at It Again,\nVirginians Report\n\nZounds! Here we go again! Interplanetory space-ship? Visitor from Mars? A new Russian rocket ship? Airgoing submarine? Just take your choice, your guess is every bit as good as the next one according to reports from various sections of Virginia and Tennessee on last night's strange phenomenon.\nWhat it was, where it came from and where it was going, no one knows, but even Civil Aeronautics Administration officials were puzzled and had no answer.\nWhatever the thing was, it resembled a long cigar, with a bright red nose and trailing smoke. Reports coinciding with that description came from localities along an almost direct line through Tennessee and Virginia and seemed sufficient to convince even the most skeptical that what the callers said they had seen was no figment of imagination.\nThe descriptions generally indicated the object came over the southwest horizon and resembled a streak of fire. There seemed to be red lights or a powerful red glow in the nose of the object. Far back at the tail there was fire and smoke.\nThe first report came from Roanoke about 8 o'clock when J. S. Mays and W. F. Mullins, both of that city, said they noticed the object.\n\"It looked like a streak of fire,\" said Mays, \"and appeared to be going almost straight up and was stepping on it.\"\nSuddenly, he said, it appeared to level off and head eastward, resembling \"a snake wiggling on water.\"\nOther reports followed from Kingsport, Tenn., Bristol, Pulaski, Christiansburg and points west of Roanoke.\nWilliam C. Flanik, chief aircraft communicator, CAA, at Preston Glenn airport, said none of the Lynchburg tower men had sighted any unusual objects in the sky."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IN REPLY, PLEASE REFER TO\nFILE No.\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\n\nRadford News Journal\nRadford Va.\n5/13/49\n\nDid You See It? Well, What Was It?\n\nBy WELLS CALDWELL\nThe strange object seen traveling across the heavens just after sundown last night has caused widespread speculation here in Radford as well as in other sections of Southwestern Virginia and Eastern Tennessee.\nExactly what the mysterious traveler was, no one here seems to know, and the number of conflicting reports have only added to the confusion.\nThis much seems to be certain: the object appeared over the Southwest horizion shortly before 8 p. m. and was moving eastward. Also, it was black, or at least part of it was.\nA Radford man, living in the east end section, asked that his name not be used, but give this version:\n\"I was working in the yard when I glanced up and saw a long black thing flying across the sky. It came from the direction of Pulaski. It looked a great deal like a rounded stick of wood which was burning in front. The object was trailed by either vapor or smoke and faded from view when it seemed to be directly overhead.\"\nMrs. Alfred Tolley, of 1702 Seventh Street, west, reported her 12-year-old son, Albert, was playing next door and noticed the object. She said her son had been studying comets in school and called her attention to the phenomenon, thinking that it was either a comet or a meteor.\n\"The strange looking object\", she said \"was long and black with a light on the front end. It seemed to follow the air route from the directon of Pulaski, later turning and heading toward Blacksburg. There was a light on the front end and great long streaks of fire. We saw it for about 10 minutes.\"\nMiss Joe Stewart, of the Radford College biology department, said she saw the object and assumed it was the exhaust from an airplane. She added that she was \"in no way alarmed.\"\nFred W. Hurt, of Fourth and Harvey Streets, gave this version: \"At the first appearance it looked like a comet. I recall Halley's comet and it resembled that. There was, at first, a bright spot ahead of the stream of fire, but the trail didn't look so bright when the object reached its zenith.\n\"It appeared to be moving slowly at first and later very fast, which indicates that it was quite a distance away when I first saw it. The object seemed to follow a straight path, however it veered a little once - in sort of an arc - and then straighted out agin. I heard no noise.\"\nMrs. James D. Heinline, of 60 Jackson Street, Monroe Terrace, said she and her husband watched it with some neighbors.\n\"It looked like a long black cigar which was on fire\", she stated. \"We heard a faint sound, which might have been a small motor. At times it looked like an airplane 'way, 'way off. I thought at first it might be a comet or a meteor, but it seemed to be traveling too slowly for that. It appeared in the southwest and traveled toward the east. There was a kind of reddish looking smoke about it.\"\nMiss Dody Jones, of Harvey Street, reported watching the phenomenom with a group of children in the neighborhood. She said it looked like \"what I think a comet would look like.\"\n\"It was a red flare\", she continued, \"which was light on the front. It moved slowly from the Southwest and traveled what seemed to be straight up. It curved toward the east and the fire streaks trailing it got longer as they began to fade out.\"\nL. B. Graybeal, of Christiansburg, a former Air Force pilot, estimated the altitude of the object at 6,000 feet. He said there was a light from the object as it passed over and a \"roaring sound.\"\nOther reports have been received from as far West as Kingsport, Tenn., and as far East as Bedford."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Remember Flying Saucers? Well Looks Like Flying Seegars Now\n\nFlying saucers are passe. Now people in Bristol are seeing \"long, cigar-shaped object\" flashing across the sky.\nBut Bristolians were not the only spectators of the strange craft yesterday evening.\nThe flaming object was reported sighted at Kingsport, Christiansburg and Roanoke and three at Pulaski.\nRex Rainey, 1805 State Street, reported that he saw a \"whitish, glistening mass, long and cylindrical like a big cigar,\" flying from east to west about 7:15 yesterday. He said he sighted the \"cigar\" flying very rapidly over Virginia Heights and got out his binoculars to look at it.\nAn unidentified caller informed the Herald Courier last night that she had sighted something that \"looked like white smoke with a blue flame that traveled to the north and east\" about the same time. \"It didn't look like an airplane,\" she said, \"only like white smoke. It was just a streak and almost out of sight it was so high.\"\nAnother local woman reported that she had seen a \"silver streak that looked like it was about 100 feet long\" flash across the sky shortly after seven o'clock. She estimated the speed at about 200 miles per hour.\nA traffic controlman at Tri-Cities Airport, who asked that his name be withheld, said that the strange craft had not been seen at the airport although they had had inquires on the \"cigar-streak.\"\nHe said he had checked with the Atlanta Air Route traffic control center after receiving inquiries but they reported no knowledge of any jet aircraft in this vicinity.\nHe speculated that the streaks may have been caused by a jet-propelled plane or planes. \"The objects were reported flying at an altitude of 30,000 feet,\" he said. \"If a jet plane were flying that high, it would be moving so fast the vapor trail would be about all a person on the ground could see.\"\nThe controlman said that the Pulaski radio reported two seen there. One about 4 p. m., and the other an hour later. He said that Pulaski also had a pilot's report of the \"streak\" traveling northeast at an altitude of about 30,000 feet.\nReports on the \"flaming object\" were received at Christiansburg and Roanoke but airports in those vicinities reported no information on the strange craft.\n\nBristol Herald Courier\nBristol, Va\n5/14/49"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chimney Farm\nNobleboro, Maine\n\nV, M, 3-\n\nDear sirs:\n\nWe live in Maine in the town of Nobleboro, about a mile northwest of route no 1, on Damariscotta Pond. Yesterday May 14, there was a high light mist and a shower in the afternoon but it cleared off for sunset. There was a moderate southwest breeze at 7:45 P.M. and the streaks of clouds on the horizon, especially to the east were rosy.\nI happened at that time to glance at the zenith which was clear and was surprised to see a small object brightly in the sunset. It might have been half of the smallest of clouds but its shape was angular, more like a piece of torn paper. This shape changed as the object floated north easterly before the wind; sometimes it appeared to have a bite taken out of it. Several times it reminded me of a hand. I called my husband and sister and a later one house keeper and a friend of hers.\nAs the object grew smaller it seemed to be on fire, an"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"at Itein ends so that the value presented the appearance of an ormless marinette, constantly revolving. to me, with the glasses, the middle appeared sometimes bean shaped but that may well be a defect in my eyesight, as the object was then very distant.\nAt last it disappeared from sight entirely. As we had no guen at its altitude we could not guen its size although I would hazard the statement that it seemed at about the usual altitude of passing planes and seemed to fade away much as a plane would, but far more slowly.\nWe must have seen it for ten"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"effect we supposed of the sunset; it seemed to keep the same altitude but became small and dark, a line, perpendicular to the earth, always revolving but never losing its perpendicular position. With bird glasses it appeared in shape like a double balloon, trailing something below it. The lower balloon \"or body\" seemed a little large. My sister whose eyesight is remarkably good, said that both balloons appeared to her pear-shaped and the trailing object below seemed separated into two \"legs\" with heavier \"feet\"\n2"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"minutes, though we did not look at our watches until it was gone. It was then a few minutes before eight.\nThere was no audible sound.\nWe of course call it our flying saucer, but it was never oval, and never fast-moving and never appeared to be about to come down anywhere. We suppose it to have been some sort of wealthy balloon, but as we understand that you wish reports on them, here is this.\nYours sincerely,\nElizabeth C. Beston (Mrs. Henry Beston)\n3"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nForm No. 1 THIS CASE ORIGINATED AT PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA FILE NO. 62-2542 VFH\nREPORT MADE AT PHILADELPHIA, PA. DATE WHEN MADE 6-15-49 PERIOD FOR WHICH MADE 5-20-49 REPORT MADE BY JAMES L. KIRKLAND\nTITLE UNKNOWN SUBJECT; FIRE, SCRANTON, PENNSYLVANIA, UNKNOWN DATE GEORGE KINGTON, COMPLAINANT CHARACTER OF CASE MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION CONCERNING\nSYNOPSIS OF FACTS: FREDERIC MARQUARDT submitted ash residue to Fire Marshal's Office, Philadelphia, Pa., which made chemical analysis. MARQUARDT of opinion that fire may have been caused by military flare or \"flying saucer\".\n- C -\nDETAILS: This investigation is predicated upon a letter received from the office of the Fire Marshal, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, dated May 19, 1949, advising that ashes had been received from one F. MARQUARDT, purportedly from a fire which had continued to burn for twelve hours. A chemical analysis of the ashes had been requested. The Fire Marshal's Office noted that MARQUARDT had at one time worked for the Atomic Energy Commission.\nCaptain MICHAEL HANNAN, Fire Marshal's Office, advised that there had been received through the mail on April 21, 1949, an ash sample with a request for analysis. In the letter of transmittal, MARQUARDT had pointed out that the fire had continued to burn twelve hours after water had first been applied. The original letter of transmittal was examined and reflected that an object had entered the roof of the building, caused an explosion, and threw people out of bed.\nCaptain HANNAN said he attempted to locate MARQUARDT at his residence, 127 South 16th Street, but had been unsuccessful. He added that at the time the building manager had commented that MARQUARDT had been employed by the Atomic Energy Commission. MARQUARDT was then requested by letter to appear at the Fire Marshal's Office."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nForm No. 1 THIS CASE ORIGINATED AT PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA FILE NO. 62-2542 VFH\nREPORT MADE AT PHILADELPHIA, PA. DATE WHEN MADE 6-15-49 PERIOD FOR WHICH MADE 5-20-49 REPORT MADE BY JAMES L. KIRKLAND\nTITLE UNKNOWN SUBJECT; FIRE, SCRANTON, PENNSYLVANIA, UNKNOWN DATE GEORGE KINGTON, COMPLAINANT CHARACTER OF CASE MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION CONCERNING\nRECEIVED FBI BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE JUN 13 1949 RECEIVED\nCOPY IN FILE"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PH 62-2542\n\nActing Chief GEORGE KINGTON advised that he had interviewed MARQUARDT at the time he came to the office since Captain HANNAN was absent at the time. He said that he then learned for the first time that the fire in question had taken place near Scranton, Pennsylvania, and had occurred about six months previously. This caused the Marshal's Office to withdraw from the case on a question of jurisdiction and MARQUARDT was advised that any further action on his part should be referred to the State Police authorities.\n\nAt the same time, KINGTON furnished MARQUARDT with the results of the analysis which had been made of the ash submitted, and which analysis had been made by Dr. EDWARD BURKE, City Chemist, Chemical Laboratory, Room 875, City Hall. This report reflected that the ash contained Magnesium, Aluminum, Iron, and Calcium in the form of silicates, sulphur and carbonates.\n\nFREDERIC MARQUARDT was interviewed at his place of business, the H. A. KULJIAN COMPANY, Broad Street and Girard Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. At this time he advised that he had received the sample of ash from a friend, WOODY SHAEFFER, Lake Ariel, R. D., Wayne County, Pennsylvania, through the mail. He said that Lake Ariel is about one mile south of South Canaan, near Scranton, Pennsylvania. He stated that SHAEFFER's house had burned about six months ago, that the fire had occurred at night during a storm and that a large object had struck the roof and ignited the house which had burned to the ground in less than an hour.\n\nHe said that he had not been present during the fire but that these details had been furnished by letter from SHAEFFER at the time a sample of the ash was forwarded for analysis. He said that he was of the personal opinion that the ash might be a part of a military flare or a \"flying saucer\".\n\nHe pointed out that he has been advised by associates in the engineering field that one of the characteristics of some types of flares is the fact that they burn for a considerable period. He stated that the mass of the ash residue had remained ignited for a period of twelve hours. He also stated that he did not think there had been an explosion but that a loud noise had probably been caused by the vacuum created as the missile or object struck the roof. He added that there remains a quantity of the ash, amounting to one bushel, at SHAEFFER's premises at Lake Ariel."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PH 62-2542\n\nMARQUARDT advised that he had been employed by the Atomic Energy Commission at Oak Ridge until 1943. He was entirely rational. He discounted the theory that a portion of a meteor had struck the house on the basis of the chemical analysis made by the City Chemical Laboratory.\n\nMARQUARDT advised that at the suggestion of the City authorities, he had written to SHAEFFER and suggested that any further inquiries be directed to the State Police.\n\nThe file of the Philadelphia Office reflect that the records of Immigration and Naturalization Service were negative to an inquiry concerning FREDERIC S. MARQUARDT, OEM (Bureau File 77-30297). The files of this office likewise reflect that MARQUARDT by letter received August 14, 1947, requested of this office the identity of a powder or dust used to catch thieves.\n\nInasmuch as there is no violation indicated within the Bureau's jurisdiction, there is no further investigation being conducted in this matter. However, the ash residue obtained from the Fire Marshal's Office is being forwarded to the Bureau Laboratory for any interest or study the Laboratory may desire to conduct relative to flares or in connection with the possibility of the presence of \"flying saucers\".\n\n- CLOSED -"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI OMAHA 7-14-49 4-55 PM CST\nDIRECTOR URGENT\n\nFLYING DISCS, INFORMATION CONCERNING. WHILE ON VACATION RECENTLY AT LAKE OF THE WOODS, NEAR KENORA, ONTARIO, CANADA, SA CLIVE G. MATTHEWS OBSERVED UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT RESEMBLING FLYING DISC. HE HAS FURNISHED FULL INFORMATION CONCERNING SAME TO U.S. AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE, FORT CROOK, NEBRASKA, AND SAME WILL NOT BE REPORTED TO THE BUREAU UNLESS ADVISED TO THE CONTRARY.\n\nEND\nACK\n94$ PLS\n6-56 PM OK FBI WASH DC EJC"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: July 21, 1949\nFROM: SAC, NEW ORLEANS\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS AND SAUCERS\nMISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nFor the Bureau's information, several citizens in the community of Alexandria, Louisiana, have recently reportedly seen flying discs. The Alexandria, Louisiana daily paper has carried numerous articles concerning this.\n\nAt a recent meeting of the Young Mens Business Club in Alexandria, a member suggested that since Alexandria, Louisiana is known as a convention city, the club should try promoting a convention of flying saucer seers. This particular comment appeared in the Alexandria paper and was picked up by the AP lines.\n\nMr. A. M. DeANGELO, a member of the Young Mens Business Club, advised Special Agent WALTER E. MOEHLE that since the AP release, they have received a large number of requests regarding the convention of flying saucer seers from many parts of the United States. Mr. DeANGELO states that the interest of the people is evidenced by their inquiries about convention particulars, stating they are flying saucer seers and want to attend such a convention.\n\nThis gentleman further advised that in view of the volume of inquiries coming in, it appears that the YMBC will have to hire an employee to handle all the correspondence. It might be noted that he advised a representative of the Air Force from Barksdale Field, Louisiana, has inquired as to plans of a flying saucer convention, stating that they are interested in furnishing an observer if such a convention were held.\n\nThis information is being furnished the Bureau, as it is possible such an enterprise may cause people to falsify that they have seen flying discs or flying saucers. Such falsifications might be made so that they might attend such a convention or become official delegates thereto.\n\nWEM:gp\n62-0"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM : SAC, NEW ORLEANS\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS AND SAUCERS\nMISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nFor the Bureau's information, several citizens in the community of Alexandria, Louisiana, have recently reportedly seen flying discs. The Alexandria, Louisiana daily paper has carried numerous articles concerning this.\n\nAt a recent meeting of the Young Men's Business Club in Alexandria, a member suggested that since Alexandria, Louisiana is known as a convention city, the club should try promoting a convention of flying saucer seers. This portion of the meeting appeared in the Alexandria paper and was picked up by the AP wires.\n\nMr. A. M. DeMARCO, a member of the Young Men's Business Club, advised Special Agent WALTER H. HOWELL that since the AP release, they have received a large number of requests regarding the convention of flying saucer seers from many parts of the United States. Mr. DeMARCO states that the interest of the people is evidenced by their inquiries about convention particulars, stating they are flying saucer seers and want to attend such a convention.\n\nThis gentleman further advised that in view of the volume of inquiries coming in, it appears that the YMBC will have to hire an employee to handle all the correspondence. It might be noted that he advised a representative of the Air Force from Barksdale Field, Louisiana, has inquired as to plans of a flying saucer convention, stating that they are interested in furnishing an observer if such a convention were held.\n\nThis information is being furnished the Bureau, as it is possible such an enterprise may cause people to falsify that they have seen flying discs or flying saucers. Such falsifications might be made so that they might attend such a convention or become official delegates thereto."} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, Phoenix\nDirector, FBI\nWILLIAM ALBERT RHODES\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nFLYING DISCS\n\nReurlet June 8, 1949, captioned \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nIt is believed that the reference appearing in the first line of your referenced letter to the Bureau is incorrect. Complete details concerning the matter referred to in your referenced communication appear in a letter from your office dated September 4, 1947, and not September 9, 1947.\n\nPursuant to your request, you are granted authority to furnish the attached blind memorandum, which was forwarded to the Bureau with your referenced letter for approval, to Mr. Lynn C. Aldrich, OSI representative, Phoenix, Arizona.\n\nAttachment\n\nEHM:EFF\n\nJune 30, 1949"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Mr. H. B. Fletcher\nFROM : Lish Whitson\nSUBJECT: WILLIAM ALBERT RHODES\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nFLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: June 30, 1949\n\nPurpose\n\nYour approval is requested in order that the attached letter and memorandum can be forwarded to the Phoenix Office, authorizing that office to furnish the attached memorandum to Mr. Lynn C. Aldrich, OSI representative, Phoenix, Arizona.\n\nBackground\n\nIn July 1947, William Albert Rhodes was jointly interviewed by Special Agent J. Bailey Brower (Bureau Agent) and George Fugate, Jr., A-2 representative from Hamilton Field, California. The purpose of the interview was to secure from Mr. Rhodes information and photographs of a flying disc, which had been sighted and photographed by Rhodes.\n\nThe complete results of the interview and subsequent events are contained in the attached memorandum submitted by the Phoenix Office.\n\nMr. Lynn C. Aldrich, OSI representative at Phoenix, Arizona, has requested the Phoenix Office to furnish him complete facts relating to this interview, which are to be subsequently forwarded to the OSI Office at San Francisco. According to Aldrich, Mr. Fugate, referred to above, has been questioned concerning this matter by his superiors and he has advised them that his recollection is \"hazy\" on the matter. According to Aldrich, Mr. Rhodes has apparently now requested the Air Force to return the photographs, which were previously obtained from him.\n\nRecommendation\n\nIt is recommended that the Phoenix Office be advised that the memorandum attached may be forwarded by them to Mr. Aldrich, OSI representative, Phoenix, Arizona.\n\nAttachments\n\nEHM:EFF"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\nPhoenix, Arizona\n\nJune 8, 1949\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nRE: FLYING DISCS\n\nDear Sir:\n\nRefer Phoenix letter to Bureau, dated September 9, 1947, captioned, REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS, for the attention of Assistant Director D. M. LADD, setting forth the result of an interview conducted by GEORGE FUGATE, JR., then a representative of the Air Force Intelligence, from Hamilton Field, California, and Special Agent J. BAILEY BROWER with one WILLIAM ALBERT RHODES, 4333 N. 14th Street, Phoenix, Arizona, concerning his observation and photographing of an object which was considered by the Air Force of significance from a security standpoint.\n\nOn June 7, 1949, Mr. LYNN C. ALDRICH, OSI representative, Phoenix, Arizona, called at this office, advising that he had been requested by his superiors in San Francisco to obtain detailed information concerning this interview since RHODES apparently has requested the Air Force to return the photographs.\n\nFUGATE, when questioned by his superiors concerning the matter, stated his recollection was \"hazy\" on the matter. OSI is anxious to secure the substance of information in the Phoenix file concerning this matter. Mr. ALDRICH was furnished the substance of the interview, as set forth in letter of reference and he has now requested that he be furnished with a blind memorandum setting forth this information in detail in order that he may make it available to the OSI at San Francisco.\n\nA memorandum setting forth this information has been prepared by this office and is attached hereto. The Bureau is requested to advise if such memorandum should be made available to OSI.\n\nVery truly yours,\nW. A. MURPHY\nSAC\n\nAttachment\nWAM-kb\n62-213\n\nAIR MAIL"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · United States Government\n\nTO: THE DIRECTOR\nFROM: D. M. LADD\nSUBJECT: \nDATE: July 20, 1949\n\nYou will recall that Mr. Ernest Cuneo advised the Bureau of a letter which Walter Winchell had received from an individual in Los Angeles indicating that he had seen a flying saucer leave the ground within his view and in which letter he theorized that this might have been a landing from another planet.\n\nThe Los Angeles Office was requested to locate and interview the writer of this letter, Peter Camerlon Jones, 164 West 37th Street, Los Angeles 7, California.\n\nThe Los Angeles Office has now advised that the present owner and former manager at this address have no knowledge of any Peter Camerlon Jones and that other investigation to locate Jones was unproductive. It would appear, therefore, that this may have been a prank.\n\nYou may desire to advise Mr. Cuneo that there is no such person at the address given inasmuch as he indicated that Mr. Winchell intended to do a column on this letter.\n\nDML:FA\n\nRECORDED - 5\nINDEXED - 5\n\n62-83894-185\n\n7-21-49\nfee"} {"doc_id":"19520c3d57b9e6bd","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"19905cd5f93a03dd","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nOFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR\n5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON\nWASHINGTON, DC 20301-5000\n\nINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY\n\n02 JUNE 2026\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nSUBJECT: Narrative from Witness 5 - Western U.S. Event\n\nReferences: (a) https://www.war.gov/ufo/#Western-US-Event,VIRIN: 260508-D-D0360-1052, 08-MAY 2026.\n\n1. Executive Summary.\n\n\tThis memorandum presents the first-hand narrative from Witness 5 provided to the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO). Witness 5 was one of several United States (U.S.) federal law enforcement special agents who reported observing unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) over a period of two days in October 2023 in the western United States.\n\n2. Witness Narrative.\n\nIn response to AARO's request to provide a free-form narrative of the sequence of events exactly as they remember them, Witness 5 submitted the following text:\n\n\"[REDACTED] October 2023\n1. SA [REDACTED] and myself, headed for the-Gate around 1630.\n\n2. We headed south on [REDACTED] and took note of two males (20s) car and plate [REDACTED] I sedan; plate: [REDACTED], after we asked if they had car trouble. They responded with something like \"Thank you for your concern, but we are just taking a few pictures.\"\n\n3. There was a Trailer and white minivan to the left of the road shortly after as well.\n\n4. We found our turn off towards [REDACTED] I just before the sign' Wildlife National park\" (?name). The road was unpaved and rough. There were signs saying to not sleep in vehicle when we entered. About two miles into this road, there was a trailer, a white jeep wrangler, and an old red volkswagon van. I think I saw a screen on inside the trailer.\n\n5. The sun was setting, but there was still sunlight to see the mountain formations. On this road, ahead and slightly to our right, at 1858, we noticed a large orange light. Upon closer look, the orange light appeared to be placed on something, although nothing could be identified to be holding it up. It seemed to be hovering with zero resistance or movement, or to be suspended just over a distinctive peak in the ridge line. I think the light lasted less than or about a minute, but it was longer than just a flash of light.\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"19905cd5f93a03dd","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\n5.1. [REDACTED] October 2023, looking at google maps of location, SA and I believe this orange light was at coordinates [REDACTED]\n\n6. We could not travel much farther in the vehicle, parked, and continued on foot around 1910.\n\n7. Around 1918 we saw a large red orb at a further distance, facing North and slightly West, past the peak of . I am certain I saw two red, smaller orbs release from the larger one going west, towards . One released at a steady speed and horizontally. I also saw another small red orb go up, but it may have had a slight angle. This orb was fainter, than the horizontal one identified. They were simultaneously released, moving away from the larger orb. The larger orb did not move during this time, and all lights were gone from every orb in about 10 seconds. Either while the lights were on, or shortly after they were out of sight, we saw a white flash of light in the sky to the West.\n\n8. We continued to hike west up the road and saw the large orb again, at 1937, but to our left - in front of . I don't recall if this had any smaller released, and the large orb lasted about 10 seconds again. There was a similar white flash of light in the sky more southwest.\n\n9. Approximately 3 miles from where we parked the vehicle, we set up a camera in hopes to catch photos if anything returned to sight.\n\n9.1. There was intermittent radio, but when we had radio, we could hear other teams, but after reconvening on [REDACTED] October, found out that other teams could not hear us when we were responding.\n\n10. We had heard the other teams leave around 2330, and started to pack our gear to hike back to the vehicle.\n\n[REDACTED] October 2023\n1. We made it to our vehicle around 0130. We made our way down the mountain and got turned around in the wildlife area on our way out. We made it back to Highway [REDACTED] about 0330 and to the-gate about 0415.\n\n2. We were driving around- lake, headed towards- base. Around 0430, I notice two lights in the distance about 2-3ft above the ground. The lights stayed on the far side of the road, but directly over the pavement. One was white and square, the second was round and red. The red light was diagonally to the left above the white lite. I watched it and wondered if someone decided to take a bike ride.\n\n3. Another vehicle started approaching from the opposite traffic side as we were approaching the red and white light pair. I started to notice the pair drifting into the sand, off the side of the road. I pointed out to SA[REDACTED] I that the lights seemed odd and asked if he could see it. We were quickly approaching the lights and started to slow down, maybe 100 ft or so in front of us. The lights made it hard to see what would have been displaying the lights themselves. It appeared that the lights may have been directly facing us.\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"19905cd5f93a03dd","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\n4. As we were slowing our vehicle, and the opposite traffic vehicle quickly approached, the red and white light pair hovered, with zero resistance, or change in height, over the bushes to the right at about 15-20 mph. The light pair stopped just as we stopped our vehicle and I pulled out the Night Vision Goggles (NVGs) to take a look. I saw the light pair for a split second in the NVGs before the lights turned off and I saw a very thin line remain, maybe 4 ft wide, horizontal to the earth (See Image 1). It began moving at the same speed, 15-20 mph, and I could not see it for more than a second or two before I lost track of it. It also seemed to move up in height with this movement, but remained a flat line.\n\n5. SA [REDACTED] notified- of the location and activity.- said it was clear.\n\n6. We drove to building. to notify and inquire. They did not see it at the time, but said they would look into it and notified us [REDACTED] I had left\n\n7. SA[REDACTED] I told him what we saw and .. volunteered to return to our sighting location and search.\n\n8. We returned to our sighting location and maneuvered the vehicle around trying to shine the headlights to stir something. We also looked through NVG and [REDACTED] looked through the thermal binoculars. He found a few \"cold\" spots to search, but they turned out to be [REDACTED].\n\n9. It may have been about 0530 when SA-was using the NVG and said \"I see it!\" and added something about a cobweb that made me notice a cobweb. There was an identical cob web floating nearby, but floating and flowing down towards the earth. The second was moving up, but not with a natural flow. That's when I could see a shape, not perfectly outlined, but faint lights in a perfect formation that moved together (See Image 2). While SA[REDACTED] was watching it in the NVG at the same time I saw it with my naked eye. It seemed to be moving up and slightly side to side. This gave the perception of trying to evade being noticed, or blend into the stars as it was now more than 20 ft in the air. I could not judge how far away. I tried to look at a reference point to describe it and looked at a bright light in the distance, which cause my eyes to adjust differently and I lost the formation of faint lights. When my eyes readjusted, a few seconds later, I saw the exact formation of faint lights again but at the opposite angle and at the same height and location (See Image 3). I could not see it much longer as the lights grew fainter.\n\n10. We continued to test maneuvering the truck and shining lights to see any movement, but we could not identify anything. We drove around for a short time while the sun was approaching sunrise, and drove up the road and hill on the opposite side that the initial sighting was near.\n\n11. Here we noticed the truck location parked by-and the- as a marker for more investigation at a later time (placed earlier that morning around 0345 at their speculated sighting). I noted that the tire tracks of this truck led back to the road and location that we saw the red and white pair of lights at about 0430.\n\n12. I rested from 0700-1030 and then returned to the field of the 0430 sighting with the other agents to look for anomalies.\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"19905cd5f93a03dd","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\n13. We noted odd scrapes in the ground around a certain plant. This appeared to show that the particular plant was susceptible to wind, but it was not windy the night before and the dirt movement looked very sharp and very fresh. The sharp cut in the dirt was symmetrical and round, but did not always make a full circle. At other times, this exact plant did not have any similar markings, regardless of size.\"\n\nImage 1\n\nImage 2\n\nOutline was not definitve, but location of lights stayed in exact formation.\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"19905cd5f93a03dd","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nImage 3\n\nJon T. Kosloski\nDirector, AARO\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS BIGELOW AEROSPACE ADVANCED SPACE STUDIES ® April 2009 Monthly Report"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"April 2009 Report\n\nBigelow Aerospace Advanced\n\nSpace Studies\n\n(BAASS)\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PREFACE\n\nThis Progress report summarizes BAASS activities and progress for the period April 1-April 30, 2009.\n\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nTopics covered in this report are the following:\n\nProgress on Recruiting Staff.......Page 2\n\nProgress on Obtaining Clearances for Existing Staff.......Page 4\n\nProgress on Earthtech Contract to Deliver 24-30 papers.......Page 5\n\nBAASS has Contracted to Purchase Information on UAPs from MUFON.......Page 8\n\nBAASS progress on Project Northern Tier.......Page 32\n\nBAASS Continues Study of the Information on UAP Activity Released by the British, Canadian French and Danish Governments.......Page 46\n\nConclusion.......Page 48\n\n1\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Progress on Staff Recruitment\n\n• Between April 1-30, 2009 in response to job advertisements in multiple online locations, BAASS received a total of 281 resumes.\n\n• The first level of screening (removal of applications on the basis of too frequent job changes, those obviously inexperienced to work at BAASS, non-US citizens etc) was conducted on all resumes.\n\n• More than three dozen phone and face-to-face interviews were conducted during the month of February.\n\n• As a result of intensive interviewing and the transfer of some engineers from Bigelow Aerospace to BAASS, as of April 30, 2009 BAASS has thirty five full time employees and six part time employees in addition to the administrator (see table on page 4 below). Fulltime BAASS employees now include senior investigative personnel (backgrounds in law enforcement and AFOSI), engineers (specializing in electrical, software and astronautics), scientists (with expertise in physics and biology) as well as support personnel and security guards.\n\n2\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS Employees\n\nAAP Person 4 | Administrator\nAAP Person 7 | Deputy Administrator\n\nFulltime BAASS Employees | Significant Part-time BAASS Employees\n\nAAP Person 8 | Senior Analyst level V | AAP Person 98 | Principal Engineer\nAAP Person 9 | Lead Program Manager | AAP Person 52 | Senior Engineer level III\nAAP Person 10 | Lead Program Manager | AAP Person 53 | Executive Assistant RTB\nAAP Person 11 | Senior Project Manager | AAP Person 54 | Corporate Attorney\nAAP Person 12 | Senior Project Manager | AAP Person 55 | Accountant\nAAP Person 13 | Senior Project Manager | AAP Person 56 | Subject Matter Expert IV\nAAP Person 14 | Mission Analyst\nAAP Person 95 | Mission Analyst\nAAP Person 16 | Mission Analyst\nAAP Person 17 | Mission Analyst\nAAP Person 18 | Lead Scientist level V\nAAP Person 19 | Lead Scientist level V\nAAP Person 20 | Engineer Specialist\nAAP Person 21 | Lead Engineer\nAAP Person 22 | Engineer Specialist\nAAP Person 23 | Lead Engineer\nAAP Person 24 | Lead Scientist level IV\nAAP Person 25 | Subject Matter Expert I\nAAP Person 26 | Subject Matter Expert I\nAAP Person 27 | Subject Matter Expert I\nAAP Person 30 | Mission Analyst\nAAP Person 31 | Mission Analyst\nAAP Person 32 | Mission Analyst\nAAP Person 39 | Mission Analyst\nAAP Person 40 | Mission Analyst\nAAP Person 41 | Mission Analyst\nAAP Person 42 | Executive Secretary\nAAP Person 97 | Receptionist\nAAP Person 44 |\nAAP Person 46 | Security Officer\nAAP Person 47 | Security Officer\nAAP Person 48 | Security Officer\nAAP Person 49 | Security Officer\nUtah Ranch | Security Officers\n\n3\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"We are optimistic that in the next 2-3 months we can hire the first year's full complement of staff (approximately 50-60 personnel to begin the 2nd year) that will make BAASS the most maximally productive organization in this field. However, this will give BAASS a base that will only partially cover the investigative and analytical needs within the United States. It is essential to increase our funding for next year if we hope to expand to fully cover the United States, not to mention beyond the borders of the United States.\n4\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 44\nAAP Person 4 the BAASS administrator, AAP Person 7 BAASS deputy\nadministrator AAP Person 8 BAASS senior analyst, AAP Person 53 executive\nsecretary to AAP Person 4 [REDACTED] BAASS Senior Program Manager Security,\nAAP Person 9 BAASS lead program manager, AAP Person 56 BAASS senior IT\nperson, AAP Person 5 (a BAASS contractor), AAP Person 57 and [REDACTED] (from AAP Person 58\nEarthtech and BAASS contractors) all have travelled to Washington DC to\ncomplete the security clearance process. Two other BAASS employees are\nsubmitting their details and are in the first stages of investigation.\n5\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Progress by Earthtech on Production\nof 24-30 Position Papers on Physics of\nAdvanced Aerospace Vehicles\nOn December 31, 2008 BAASS awarded a contract to Earthtech International AAP Person 57 to deliver 24-30 position papers that will be based on expanding and focusing on strategically important sub-projects from the 12 position papers previously delivered by the subcontractor on twelve (12) technical areas: 1.) Lift, 2.) Propulsion, 3.) Control, 4.) Power Generation, 5.) Spatial/Temporal Translation, 6.) Materials, 7.) Configuration/Structure, 8.) Signature Reduction (optical, infrared, radiofrequency, acoustic), 9.) Human Interface, 10.) Human Effects, 11.) Armament (RF and DEW), 12.) Other peripheral areas in support of (1-11).\nAccording to an update from AAP Person 57 excellent progress is being made. Delivery of all 24-30 papers is scheduled for July 2009. Several drafts and even final papers have been already received by [REDACTED] and are in various AAP Person 57 stages of being scrutinized. The following is an update from [REDACTED] on the AAP Person 57 individual contributors and the titles of their reports as of the end of April 2009.\n6\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Contributor Organization Topic Due Date\nAAP Person 58 EarthTech Intern'l Antigravity Studies 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 75 [REDACTED] Consulting SC-mediated gravity experimentation 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 69 Positronics Research Matter-antimatter energy source 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 74 [REDACTED] Cons. Warp drives 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 73 Wayne State Univ. Brain-machine interfaces 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 65 Univ. of Arizona Novel MEMS-based biosensors 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 70 Univ. of Illinois IEC fusion as a compact energy source 6/15/2009\nAAP Person 58 EarthTech Intern'l Vacuum energy applications 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 57 EarthTech Intern'l Spacetime modification 5/30/2009\nAAP Person 58 EarthTech Intern'l Wormholes in spacetime 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 66 Ohio State Univ. Advanced metallic alloys 5/30/2009\nAAP Person 63 Johns Hopkins Univ. Metallic glass materials 6/10/2009\nAAP Person 90 Programmable Matter Corp. Programmable matter 6/10/2009\nAAP Person 65 Univ. of Arizona Novel biomaterials 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 71 Univ. of Texas/Austin Metallic spintronics 6/10/2009\n7\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 78 Univ.of Texas/Austin Metamaterials/signature reduction 6/10/2009\nAAP Person 80 Intern'l Acad. Astronautics Statistical Drake equation 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 81 Wayne State Univ. Field effects/biological tissues 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 79 DoD consultant Laser weapons 5/31/2009\nAAP Person 64 Northrop Grumman (ret.) Pulse-power-based weaponry 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 77 GravWave, LLC Gravity wave communication 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 76 Univ. of Washington FTL/quant entanglement communicatio 5/31/2009\nAAP Person 72 University of Nevada Reno Advanced Nuclear Space Propulsion 6/30/2009\nAAP Person 75 [REDACTED] Consulting Maverick vs. corporate inventor culture 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 75\n8\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS has Contracted to Purchase\nInformation on UAPs from MUFON\n\nIn order for BAASS to best serve the government it needs to become the central information source on UAPs in the United States and around the world. It is essential to receive information on current UAPs that are occurring in real time in the United States until BAASS has sufficient staff (possibly 250 people ) and other internal capabilities. One way for BAASS to achieve this goal is to contract with an organization that has hundreds of investigators already in place around the United States. The Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) is such an organization. MUFON has been in existence for four decades and currently has approximately 1000 volunteers who can investigate reports of UAP sightings in all 50 states.\n\nIn February 2009, BAASS executed a Purchase order with MUFON that entitles BAASS to: (a) receive notification of significant reports on UAP sightings from anywhere in the United States within hours, (b) receive timely reports from MUFON investigators regarding investigations of these incidents (c) receive physical evidence (including photographs, digital recordings, samples of soil, insects, plants, and animals) for scientific analysis. BAASS has multiple laboratories that are ready to conduct forensic, photographic, metallurgic, chemical, isotope, biological, chemical analysis of any specimens that BAASS receives from MUFON.\n\nBAASS has already hired a small team of ten high quality top investigators with extensive intelligence and law enforcement investigative experience. These investigators are currently located in Las Vegas and are trained to deploy as \"special forces\" rapid reaction investigative teams that are deployable anywhere in the United States if BAASS determines that high value UAP cases warrant additional investigations. However this investigative group is still far too small to even cover the geographic area needed in the United States, much less outside this country.\n\n9\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The following two documents comprise MUFON activity summaries for March and April 2009. Note: BAASS currently has concerns about the current level of productivity from MUFON, especially what appears to be a significant decrease in cases during the month of April.\n\nMUFON SIP Report for February – March 2009\n\nApril 16, 2009\n\nExecutive Summary\n\nMUFON's efforts for February and March 2009 were focused on putting in place the necessary logistical controls and personnel in support of the SIP Project and to meet MUFON's goal of initiating Dispatch operations and field deployments by April 1, 2009. The key positions of Project Coordination Manager and Project Operations Manager were filled first. MUFON then spent a considerable amount of time recruiting Dispatch Operators, State Coordinators and Field Investigators and training them on their respective project duties. MUFON's Case Management System was upgraded to support project operations and considerable effort was made at the MUFON archives to catalog archive holdings. To allow Dispatch Operators to work virtually from their homes, MUFON researched and then purchased Internet based services on Shiftboard.com and Skype.com that make MUFON Dispatch appear to be a centralized operation while at the same time providing management of all dispersed project personnel. MUFON also set up a separate bank account and books for project funds. MUFON participated in a single media interview on the project on March 15 on Coast to Coast with 1843(a)(2) All set goals were met in February and March and MUFON was able to successfully initiate Dispatch and Field Deployment operations on April 1, 2009.\n\n10\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Detailed Report for February-March, 2009\n\nAfter finalizing the MUFON-BAASS project contract on February 20, 2009, MUFON initiated efforts to put in place the necessary logistical and personnel resources in support of the project:\n\nProject Kickoff\n\nOn February 24, 2009 an email was sent to all MUFON State and Assistant State Directors announcing the SIP project. MUFON conducted three teleconferences on February 27, 28 and 29 with these directors to explain the project in detail and to gather feedback. The overwhelming response from MUFON state chapters was positive and in support of the project.\n\nOn March 2, 2009 an email was sent to the entire MUFON investigative network opening up the project for position recruitment and directing interested MUFON members to review the project details and download the position application form at www.mufon.com/MUFONSIP.htm .\n\nOn March 7, 2009, MUFON's AAP Person 102 created a series of talking points that was emailed to the MUFON investigative network with instructions to adhere to only these points if interviewed by the media concerning the project.\n\nFrom March 11 – 14, 2009, MUFON HQ in Fort Collins, Colorado hosted a project organizational meeting to review resumes and applications submitted and to discuss logistical issues. Participating in the meeting were AAP Person 103, AAP Person 104, AAP Person 59, and AAP Person 105, AAP Person 106, AAP Person 106 participated on the last day to provide feedback on issues that State Coordinators could face on a deployment.\n\nPersonnel Decisions\n\nHiring decisions for the initial Dispatch Operators, State Coordinators and Field Investigators were made on March 14, 2009. Hiring notices were sent and recruited personnel were required to sign a project confidentiality agreement.\n\n11"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MUFON created an account for each project hire on Shiftboard.com and each hire was added to the appropriate Shiftboard team. Project recruitment is ongoing. AAP Person 59 was hired on as the SIP Project Coordination Manager with an effective hire date of March 9, 2009. AAP Person 101 was hired on as the SIP Project Operations Manager with an effective hire date of March 23, 2009.\n\nCMS Changes\n\nAAP Person 107 added an additional field to MUFON cases called \"Category\" so that Dispatch Operators could categorize each case. In addition a separate notes field was set up called \"Dispatch Notes\" for Dispatch Operators to input their own notes on a case.\n\nDispatch Operations\n\nMUFON Dispatch Operators (DOs) work 4 hour shifts and there are 4 workshifts in a day starting at 6AM Pacific Time and ending at 10PM Pacific Time.\n\nTo automate dispatch operations, MUFON is maximizing the use of technology. Dispatch Operators only need an Internet connected computer with audio capability to do their jobs. DOs schedule themselves for shifts through shiftboard.com which allows project managers to verify that all shifts have coverage and that there are no overlaps in schedules.\n\nWhen a shift starts, Dispatch Operators log on to the following websites:\n\n1. MUFONCMS.COM – to monitor all incoming cases. When a new case arrives in CMS, the DO contacts the witness to verify identity and the details of the case. They then immediately categorize the case. If a case is Cat 2/3 and is recent, AAP Person 59 is immediately notified that a case exists for potential deployment. then contacts the State Coordinator and they jointly discuss logistics and available personnel. Once a decision has been made to deploy, BAASS is notified via the BAASS duty cell phone number or if during the word day by calling the BAASS office.\n\n12"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2. SHIFTBOARD.COM – to verify shift duty and to find out who the upcoming DO is.\n\n3. SKYPE.COM – all outgoing and incoming phone calls between the witnesses and DOs or between the DOs and MUFON project personnel is handled through a SKYPE phone number. This number \"rings\" on the computer of the DO who is currently on shift thereby acting as a virtual phone number. DOs can make outgoing calls to anywhere in the United States without having to use their personal phones. Headsets were purchased and mailed to DOs.\n\n4. GMAIL.COM – witnesses can communicate through email with a DO via a GMAIL account.\n\nTraining\n\nDispatch Operators were trained on the standard operating procedures of Dispatch through a teleconference call that was held on March 26, 2009. Recruited State Coordinators and Field Investigators were trained on the standard deployment protocol through a teleconference that was held on March 27, 2009.\n\nField Investigation\n\nField Investigators also have accounts at Shiftboard.com which they use to report their availability for deployment. There are multiple teams defined in shiftboard:\n\n- State Teams\n\n- Regional Teams\n\n- Nationwide Team\n\nEach investigator is a member of their respective state team, but may also be members of wider regional and a nationwide team depending on their willingness to travel outside their states. To minimize project travel costs, local state investigators will be deployed on cases in that state, but if local state investigators\n\n13"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"are not available then MUFON will deploy regional investigators or nationwide investigators.\n\nRecruited field investigators that did not have a current version of the MUFON Field Investigator manual 5.0 were sent a copy. MUFON has assembled a rapid deployment kit consisting of Group 2 and 3 equipment (as outlined in the Field Investigator manual) that would be shipped to the location of a deployment. Each investigator will be equipped with Group 1 equipment that they would personally carry to the field.\n\nTo facilitate deployments MUFON is issuing reloadable Visa cards to each field investigator. When a field investigator is deployed, MUFON HQ is able to load their Visa card with the per diem funds for their deployment, thereby minimizing the amount of out of pocket expenses a field investigator incurs. In addition central reservation of plane tickets, hotel and rental cars is made from MUFON HQ.\n\nMUFON Archives\n\nThe MUFON paper archive and library was reorganized and indexed to facilitate searching for case data and periodicals.\n\nProject Accounting\n\nMUFON set up a separate bank account and is using a separate set of books for accounting for project funds. Quickbooks is used for accounting and for assisted payroll. Project personnel are paid twice a month for work done in that month.\n\n14\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MUFON SIP Report for April, 2009\n\nMay 6, 2009\n\nExecutive Summary\n\nMUFON Dispatch began operations on April 1st with 16 hours a day, 7 days a week coverage from 6AM PST to 10PM PST with no lapse in coverage for the entire month. MUFON Dispatchers did an outstanding job vetting all incoming CMS cases. Of the 319 United States CMS cases in April, nine of them were category two cases. Three of these cases were historical. Of the remaining six, MUFON SIP investigators deployed on four, three of them in April, and the fourth one in May as it occurred at the end of the month (will be included in the May report). The remaining two were not deemed worthy of deployment. There were no category three cases in April, 2009 and the remaining 310 cases were category ones. Based on statistics kept from 2007 – 2009 (see attached report), April shows a decrease of almost 150-200 case reports as compared to the first three months of 2009. MUFON cannot determine at the time a seasonal trend that would account for this dramatic drop. The limited number of investigation deployments in April can be directly attributed to both this drop in reports in combination with Dispatch properly vetting incoming cases.\n\nDetailed Report for April, 2009\n\nCMS\n\nBAASS authorized MUFON to spend project funds on CMS programming support and MUFON is currently recruiting for a computer programmer. Future changes to CMS will include keyword search capability and other changes in support of the project.\n\nDispatch Operations\n\nThe month of April was on the job training for MUFON Dispatch Operators and shift handling and incident response has been fine tuned. MUFON now has a dedicated and efficient group of dispatch operators who are doing an excellent\n\n15\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"job at front ending all incoming reports. We experienced some issues with the Skype Call-In number, but those issues have been worked out and MUFON will now begin forwarding incoming telephone reports to MUFON's 1-800 hotline to MUFON Dispatch. In addition MUFON Dispatch Operators will start inputting MUFON historical archives in CMS.\n\nField Investigation\n\nMUFON SIP Investigators deployed on three cases in the month of April (detailed reports attached).\n\nCase #16644 Cat 2 Deployment\n\nInvestigator: AAP Person 103\n\nGPS Coordinates: 1843(a)(3)\n1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: Location of witness vehicle on highway where sighting occured\n\nLocation: Dardanelle Arkansas\n\nDate of Event: April 20, 2009\n\nTIME OF EVENT: 5:20 AM EST ( ) Exact ( x ) Approximate\n\nCase # 16539 CAT 2 Deployment\n\nInvestigator: AAP Person 108\n\nGPS COORDINATES : 1843(a)(2)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: Location of witness Residence where sighting occurred\n\n16\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LOCATION: Pasadena, MD\n\nDate of event: April 16, 2009\n\nTIME of EVENT: 3:15 AM EST ( ) Exact ( x ) Approximate\n\nCase 16421 CAT 2 Deployment\n\nInvestigator: AAP Person 109\n\nGPS Coordinates: 1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: Location of witness vehicle on highway where sighting occurred\n\nLocation: Scammon, Kansas\n\nDate of Event: April 4, 2009\n\nTime of event: 1:23 am CST ( ) Exact ( x ) Approximate\n\nMUFON Archives\n\nMUFON was authorized to spend project funds on research and MUFON is currently recruiting for a research assistant to process queries from BAASS for MUFON archive material.\n\nMUFON Advertising\n\nBAASS authorized MUFON to spend funds on advertising MUFON services in an attempt to increase MUFON's public image and subsequently the number of cases reported to CMS. MUFON has proposed to AAP Person 123 of the National UFO Reporting Center a strategic partnership to allow reports coming into NUFORC.ORG to be serviced by MUFON's CMS reporting engine. NUFORC appears at the top of the Internet search rankings and this strategic partnership will allow\n\n17\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MUFON to accomplish the same goal as paying for Internet search engine advertising. We are waiting for a response from AAP Person 123 who is considering the offer. In addition MUFON was authorized by BAASS to participate in any TV media appearances that would increase MUFON's public visibility, but cannot sign on for any appearance until MUFON's contract with Creative Differences, producers of the MUFON centric show UFOs Over Earth, expires at the end of May 2009.\n\nProject Accounting\n\nProject expense report for the month of April was submitted to BAASS on May 6, 2009 (report attached).\n\nThe following constitute preliminary summaries of three cases for which MUFON have deployed personnel during the month of April. NOTE: These are NOT final case reports. The latitude and longitude coordinates, as determined by GPS by onsite investigators, as well as the exact times of these events are given at the beginning of each narrative. The descriptions below are included as an example of the level of detail on selected cases that BAASS receives.\n\nMUFON Case #1:\n\nCase # 16421 AAP Person 109\n\nGPS Coordinates: 1843(a)(2)\n\nLocation : Scammon, Kansas CAT 2 Deployment\n\nDate of Event: 4-04-2009, 01.23 local time.\n\nOn April 7, 2009 a STAR team CAT 2 Deployment was activated on this case. STAR team Investigator AAP Person 109 was assigned as lead investigator.\n\nAAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Coordinator / Manager\n\n18\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 59\n\nINVESTIGATOR REPORT: 04/07/09 ********* case #16421\n10:00 am I visited the witness ********* and her 17 year old son, *****. We met at\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] place of employment in Pittsburg KS, which is a day care service for the elderly\ncalled 1843(a)(2)\n\nAfter brief introductions, I asked ****and her son to describe what they saw. They drew\nsketches describing the size and shape of the craft. ****and ***** chose to draw their\ndescription using the same sheet of paper. ****also showed me the picture she had\ntaken of the craft with her \"Razzor\" cell phone. 10:30 am I followed ****and ***** out to\nthe sight of the encounter.\n\nWe drove from Pittsburg, Kansas to Scammon where they live, and the sighting\noccurred. Scammon is about 10 miles down Hwy 160. We decided that the best way to\nre-enact the night of the sighting was for me to enter their vehicle sitting in the front seat\nand have ***** drive, taking the same route as that night. ****sat in the back seat. While\nI video taped,\n\n***** drove as they both described the craft, where they saw it, and it's placement in the\nsky and over the trees. They described the craft as being as large as a small house\nhovering over the tree tops about 200 feet in the air. I asked them to describe the size\nby their arm at length showing my fist as a size comparison, and they said bigger. I\nspread my fingers, and they said bigger, more the size of both of my hands side by side.\nThe color was an orange light undefined. ***** said it looked like the center was dark,\nand the light was coming from a tube light surrounding the craft. ****didn't see that from\nher angle, but saw one large round/oval odd shape indescribable light with what looked\nlike an army net attached above it. It made no sound, had no smell, they followed the\ncraft with their car and there was no electromagnetic effects. There were dogs barking,\nbut they claimed that there are a lot of dogs in the area and that they bark all the time. I\nasked them what made them notice the object?\n\nThey were out at 1:23 in the morning looking for [REDACTED] missing 14 year old son. He 1843(a)(2)\nended up being at the *****'s residence who is a neighbor down the street a couple of\nblocks away. The boys were in the basement working on a car. Both boys were thought\nto be missing. What made ****look in the direction they did was the train. A Burlington\nNorthern freight train passes through the edge of town quite frequently. There are 3\nintersections so as it passes them, the train blows its whistle in 3 separate bursts. That\nnight there was one long whistle burst. They though the kids might be in trouble on the\ntracks so with hearts beating fast they headed that way. That is when they spotted the\nlarge craft hovering at the end of the street.\n\nAs they drove towards it, the craft moved about 1 mile an hour to the left, and as they\napproached closer, it shot off / backwards out of sight. They described the craft as being"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"as big as a small house, hovering 200 feet over the tree tops, and only about 4 to 5\nblocks away. ****was afraid that her missing son may be aboard the craft because he\nwasn't answering his phone. They decided to drive home and retrieve *****'s phone to\nsee if the younger son would answer a call from his older brother. When ***** came out\nofthe house, he noticed that the craft was back. This time he said \"mom let's chase it!\"\nThey raced towards it and found it at the end of the street. They were at 1843(a)(2) and\nit was 5 blocks down dead center at the end of [REDACTED]. As they slowly moved forward, it 1843(a)(2)\nmoved slowly to the left behind some trees. They drove faster to get a better look and it\nwas gone.\n\n****and ***** pointed out the houses where the possible other witnesses lived. The first\nwas [REDACTED] *****, the father of the other missing boy. They didn't think he saw anything 1843(a)(2)\nbut showed me his house which had a green van parked in front. The other witness was\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] grandfather of the other missing boy. 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] had claimed to\nhave seen a Chinese lantern in the distance, float by his window while he was in bed.\n\nThe elder *****s live at 1843(a)(2)\n11:00-11:30 am I re-entered my jeep and followed the witnesses to a small\nneighborhood park where we did an on-camera interview.\n12:00 pm ****had to get back to work, so she left her son with me. I promised to\ndeliver him safely back to her at her work place when we were done. This was totally\nher idea, and made me a little nervous. ***** was to take me to the field where they\nthought the craft had hovered over. This was the same field where a craft had been\nseen on the ground by ***** 3 months before. The teen and I tried several entry access\npoints but were blocked first by a no trespassing sign, and further down by a creek.\nThere was\naccess from the road between cut trees, but not without permission which I would get\ntomorrow.\n12:30 pm I decided it was time to take the teen back to his mother's place of\nemployment.\n1:30 pm As I walked ***** in, I was met by*********, a witness of prior area\n1843(a)(2) and Joplin Missouri sightings. I video taped [REDACTED] description of past events and\nexpenences.\n\n1843(a)(2) 2:25 pm I thanked [REDACTED], *****, and ********and then I left.\n2:30 pm I decided to visit the Crawford County Sheriffs department where I was told\nthe dispatched officer on scene was from.\n3:30 pm I left the sheriffs department to head for the actual Sheriffs Department where\nthe dispatch came from, Cherokee county. There was some confusion by the locals as\nto what Sheriff Department had jurisdiction over the town of Scammon.\n4:30 pm I arrived at the Cherokee Co. sheriffs department. I had to ring in for access,\nexplaining to the dispatcher that I was there to check on information concerning a\ndispatched officer to Scammon on April 4th or 5th at 1:00 - 2:00 am. I was given entry\nand asked to wait at the window in plain view of the dispatcher.\n5:00 pm I met with and spoke to a retired county sheriff *******who lived in"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scammon. He didn't hear or see anything either night. I received the following info\nfrom him:\n\n➢ No nearby military bases\n➢ An army ammo plant is located in Parsons 10-15 miles away.\n➢ HM Plant formally Slurry, is in the area. During 9/11, there were military soldiers\nand police surrounding its perimeter guarding it. There was 11 million lbs of high\ngrade explosives stored there; which was rocket fuel. It has since been renamed\nHM Plant and down graded in size of inventory.\n➢ Cherokee County pays no oil or gas taxes.\n➢ The area has the largest coal shovel in existence standing 760 ft high.\n➢ The train traveling through Scammon was a Burlington/NorthernISanta\n➢ Heart of the Heartland Railroad Museum is nearby.\n➢ This area is the home of Deep Shaft Whiskey.\n\n5:50 PM: I was finally able to speak to the Police dispatcher **********. She wasn't clear\nabout whether or not a police office was dispatched to Scammon that night. I next spoke\nto Sheriff ********who first told me that it was fire works seen that night, and when I said\n\"fire works\", he said well actually it was a guy who set off 3 Chinese\nlanterns. I asked the sheriff the name of the individual who told him it was Chinese\nlanterns and the name of the person that had set them off. Sheriff *******told me he\nwould get those names for me later. I also asked the sheriff the name of the officer that\nwas dispatched that night and he said it was Deputy ********. Then, the Sheriff left.\n\nApril 8, 2009\n\n9:00 AM: I arrived back in Scammon to take some still shots, interview area witnesses,\nand get a GPS reading of the suspected landing/hovering site.\n9:45 AM: I visited the home of ******* and *******located at *******Drive, across the\nstreet from 1843(a)(2) and adjacent to the field described by ***** as where the craft had\nlanded. I was hoping for access to the field for soil samples, a quick sweep with my\nmetal detector and a walk through with my Geiger counter. The brother of ****, *****\n*******, greeted me at the door. ******* and his wife [REDACTED] were both at work and the 1843(a)(2)\nbrother ******* was from out of town. ******* had arrived Sunday night April 5th and not\nseen anything unusual. I asked for his brother's phone number but ******* claimed that\nhe didn't know it. I knew I could find it later so I thanked him and left.\n10:00 AM: I drove through town trying to find other witnesses on my list who might be\nhome, but had no luck.\n10:30 AM: I decided that it was time to leave Scammon. I had about a 325 mile trip and\nI could finish my research on-line or by phone.\n\n04/23/09: To date, no new information has been obtained. I called Burlington/Northern\nand made inquiries about April 5th from 1:00 to 1:30 am and the engineers pattern of\nwhistle blasts, but was told that whistle blasts vary. After several requests for the police\nreport on April 5th, I still have not received an answer. Nor, has the Sheriff provided me"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"with the name of the person who set off Chinese Lanterns or the name of the person\nreporting this action. I have also made several attempts to call the *******s and 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) but have had no answer.\n\nI don't believe that the *****s saw Chinese Lanterns. What they saw they described as\nbeing as large as a small house. They viewed this from 4 to 5 street blocks away\nhovering at times about 200 ft above the tree tops. They watched this object leave at a\nhigh rate of speed, and then return, finially disappearing behind trees and out of sight.\nConclusion: UAV unknown\nI will add any new information as it becomes available.\nAAP Person 109\n\nCONTACTS:\n1. Officer *******\n2. Train engineer of Burlington/Northern\n3. Sheriff *********\n4. 1843(a)(2)\n5. ******* and 1843(a)(2)\n6. Sheriff's witness who reported Chinese Lanterns\n7. Person Sheriff claimed Set off 3 Chinese lanterns that night\n\nWind direction 01 :23 am: 58.1 degrees/42.4 degrees\nDew pointl29.60in pressure/\nWind calm/gust 0.8mph/humidity 56%/rainfall 0.00\nWind out ofNE /wind gusts out of SE\nISS Not visible that night at that time.\n\nWhere are the major Planets/Stars\nMoon: west 9.17 days old\nAltitude 29* Azimuth 271 *\nVega: North East 59* 26, Azimuth 25* 35, Altitude\nNorth American Nebula: (NGC 7000\nDiffuse Nebula: Azimuth 38* 10, Altitude 7* 42,\n\nCase #2:\n\nCase #16644 AAP Person 103\n\nGPS Coordinates: 1843(a)(3)\n\nLocation: Dardanelle Arkansas - Cat 2 Deployment"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date of Event: April 20, 2009, 05.20 local time.\n\nOn April 25, 2009 a STAR team CAT 2 Deployment was activated on this case. STAR\nteam Investigator AAP Person 103 was assigned as lead investigator.\n\nAAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Coordinator / Manager\nAAP Person 59\n\nWITNESS NARRITIVE: (Witness: ***** \"*******\" *****) i left my house in ola arkansas, at\napprox. 520 am to pay a bill at Danville at the drop off box, internet bill. i took i believe it\nis hwy 27, you can look on the map , it may be hwy 28, but as i got on the long quiet\nhwy that seems to take forever to get to Dardanelle, long boring road, i noticed a star in\nthe sky that had a tail attached, it seemed to be way out in the universe, a few minutes\nlater , i saw the same star alot closer up to the upper left of my drivers side window, and\nit appeared to be alot closer,... as in hovering over the Nebo mountain. i thought oh its\nthe radio tower but still felt on edge and watched as it moved with in a 100 feet of me\nand i could see florecent lights 3 , on each side of a triagular figure. i kept thinking i am\nclose to nebo mountain that has to be their lights, but the lights moved closer, i became\nreally scared... rolled up my windows, ran off the road twice trying to get a good look\nand i saw the same rotating lights 3 on each side of a triangle. my car started a constant\nvibrating sound(soundelike a flat tire)i started to call 911 and my phone was dead, it\nwas fully charged . then all of a sudden there was a flash, like a light bulb had totally\nilluminated the road and my vehicle. and then the drive home was non-eventful, my car\nwas driving sound and secure and as i drove futher i was no where near mt,\nnebo.although i watched my vehicles clock the entire time , there was no missing time in\nthe event./ what also i would like to add is that this is the second encounter of ufo\nactivity i hve encountered, and 3 othter people in 3 different places can back me up,\nbecause in or around 2003 or sometime in that area, 3 different people have seen what\ni have seen in three different places at the same time. also we have a nuclear plant in\nlondon arkansas, it is not far from us, we are in the evacuation route area if this helps\nany.also when i got to work i checked my tires and all were fully inflated, no signs of a\nflat. my phone did not work the rest of the day , i had to fully recharge when i got home,\ni didnt think it was gonna work for a while, took alot of charging.\n\nDiscussion with Dispatcher: late this afternoon uncovered the following:\nAt 5:20 am witness was on way to work Apr. 20-09 . The witness is a Nurse.\nWitness was driving on highway encountered large Triangular Shaped craft - proximity\nwithin 100 feet at closest point. Witness said triangular vehicle was size of a B-1\nbomber (her husband was in US Air force and she has been to many air shows)\nHeard loud rumbling sound, describes as like when you get a flat tire. (were no flat tires\non vehicle after event)"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"As vehicle was directly over her car, there was a Bright flash of light that illuminated road surrounding her vehicle and lit up inside of car, the ran car off the road twice. Event Blew out her cell phone - battery dead (was fully charged before incident) would not hold charge after for a long time. She tried to call for help with out success Witness experienced physical effects upon arriving at work. Co-workers indicated she looked very ill; she tried to speak and could not talk (no voice - hoarseness) for a while and the co-workers voices were very loud (so loud sound reverberated in her head) caused pain.\n\nInterim Report – Arkansas, Case No. 16644 – [REDACTED]\nWitness ***** *****\nOur plane on the way out was cancelled due to an auto pilot failure. We were able to get a later flight out through Atlanta. Our flight from Atlanta was also delayed so that we arrived in Little Rock late and by the time we drove to Dardanelle it was 6:00 p.m..\nwe met with:\nState Coordinator,\n1843(a)(2)\n\nSince it was due to rain on Monday, we felt it best to go immediately to the site. ***** had driven the road again in the morning to determine just where she was when this happened and she was able to go right to the spot where she saw the flash. marked the fence with duct tape at the site so we could go right back to it. As we drove out, we noticed power lines which sometimes crossed over the road. ***** had not even noticed them.\n\nThere is also a power plant nearby, Arkansas Nuclear One [REDACTED] has instructed us to contact the security department there.) ***** talked to ***** about signing the media release. ***** does not want her name used or her image. We may use her voice and refer to her as ***** because no one here calls her that.\n\nThe first thing ***** saw looked like a distant star but what drew her attention to it was that there was a straight line in back of it. It got larger as she watched it. She also started thinking that her right rear tire was getting a flat because she heard a noise but she didn't really feel anything different. The car wasn't swaying. It seemed to her like dashboard wasn't lit up as it should have been. Her headlights weren't illuminating like they should have either. She got concerned for her safety and rolled up her windows. She tried to call 911 but her phone wouldn't work. She had used it the night before and that morning and believed it to be fully charged. As the craft got even closer, all of a sudden she could see three silverish, metallic blue rotating lights on each side of two sides. She started running off onto the side of the road trying to watch it. She watched the lights for approximately 20 minutes. At first she thought the light was from coming from Mt. Nebo. In the early morning light, she could see the line of the hill but the object"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was lower than that. The body of the craft was black, dark. There were 3 lights on each side of two sides on the bottom of the craft. She couldn't see anything on the back side but there is no doubt in her mind that the craft was triangular. When she held her hand out in front of her, the size of the object was larger than a baseball. The craft appeared to be tilted. She was then absolutely stunned by a flash...it reminded her of a camera flash and illuminated everything below it....going several feet in front of her car. She wondered to herself if she was having her picture taken and if they could read her thoughts. The craft was hovering but made no noise. After the flash, she looked back and the craft was gone. Her tires are just as they were with no apparent damage.\n\nAt the time, ***** was fearful of being stranded and alone on a deserted road that she's not familiar with. Later, she felt she was in shock. She walked into work and one of the girls came up to her and said what's wrong with you? The night nurse's voice was killing her ears. She went to say good morning and couldn't; her throat felt like it was choked up from the experience (rather than something that was done to her.). She went out and had a cigarette. She felt very irritable....with raw nerves. She managed to get through the day and forgot about it until noon.\n\nWhen she got home from work, she started researching on the internet. She didn't tell her son until a couple of days later. It was **** who encouraged her to file a report.\n\nWe video taped ***** talking about the event at the site. We then all returned to Russellville to go to dinner. After dinner, we went out to look at *****'s 2004 Santa Fe compact SUV. ***** had felt that the problem that she was experiencing was on the right hand side but a compass showed about an 80 degree change in direction when the compass was brought close to the back left panel. She also gave us her phone to look at.\n\n***** initially told us that she was off of work on Monday. At the end of Sunday night, however, she told us that she had to work on Monday and would be off on Tuesday. She agreed to call us after work. ********also had to work on Monday but ******* was available and wanted to join us.\n\nOn Monday, we went back out to the site and approached the farmhouse at the site\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] No one answered the door but there was a sign saying that if no one answered to look for them in the barn. We went into the backyard where we met 1843(a)(2) and her elderly father, 1843(a)(2) . ******* was extremely friendly and seemed quite interested in hearing about the event. She had left home on April 19th, the day before the event and hadn't seen anything. She added, however, that the pasture in back of her home (close to where we believe the flash went off) was a Cherokee Indian campground many, many years ago and that some strange things have happened there. Her daughter has taken pictures on the property which, when developed, show orbs. ******* believes that her daughter also saw orbs with her own eyes. She will talk to her and see what information she can get for us. ******* herself is part Cherokee. She also added that"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"there was a medicine man years ago in Chickalah (pronounced chick key la)– which is not far away.\n\n******* talked with *******'s father, 1843(a)(2) He said that they have quite a few deer every day in the pasture. Once or twice a week they will all of a sudden bolt for cover in the trees and then will quickly return to where they were and continue grazing. This appears to be quite abnormal behavior for deer.\n\nThe weeds in the pasture were curled but this was explained by the fact that they had used weed killer. [REDACTED] took a number of pictures, particularly of the power lines. They are 180,000 KV power lines – a direct feed from Arkansas Nuclear One. In one of the pictures, he zoomed in and believes he captured the number on the tower. He checked the ground radiation level here and found it to be lower than normal. We also drove along the road, before and after the mark on the fence, taking video as we went.\n\nArkansas Nuclear One: We had been unable to get a telephone number for Arkansas Nuclear One so we drove there. We were met by a guard who contacted the security department by telephone 1843(a)(2) . [REDACTED] talked with [REDACTED] (*****), the Security Officer on Duty. [REDACTED] said he was in the middle of something and couldn't make any inquiries at the time. He said he would find out if anything such as that could be monitored by the control room. If it was not being monitored by the control room then it would be monitored in the delivery section, another part of the facility. He would try to get back to [REDACTED] tomorrow.\n\nWe had lunch and then returned to our room where [REDACTED] downloaded video and pictures to his computer, including *******'s. ******* and ******* went off to a local Hyundai dealer. They used a compass on the 2009 Santa Fee and found that there was a significant movement of the compass needle on the back left panel of this vehicle and some other areas of the car. The salesman said that the body has changed quite a bit since 2004, but we felt this brought our findings on the experiencer's vehicle into question.\n\n***** and 1843(a)(2) met us back at the Best Western after work. We did another video with ***** in the room. At the end she also talked just a bit about another sighting in 2003. At that time she saw three triangular shaped crafts (which flew in a triangular formation) about 1:00 a.m. in the morning. She talked to two other people who weren't with her at the time but whom she believes may have seen the same craft at the same time. We've asked her at least three times if we couldn't meet with one of her co-workers and she continues to be resistant to this idea.\n\n***** drew a picture of the craft that she saw. [REDACTED] also checked *****'s sinus cavity area with a magnet to see if she might have had an implant there but found nothing abnormal."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED] did look at the cell phone and it appears that the cell phone was functional however the battery's internal fuse was blown. This is not a common occurrence and is usually the result of a high voltage insult.\n\nAlthough ******* was very friendly, she said it would be better to talk more in the morning. We will return there with ***** and ******* tomorrow. We also hope to obtain more information from the Security Officer and perhaps obtain more documentation on the Indian presence in this area.\n\nOur conclusion at this point is that this was a real event. At this point [REDACTED] has several thoughts regarding the cause of the flash. It could be that the craft got too close to the high voltage wires or it could have been extracting energy from the wires or unknown (awaiting report from Arkansas Nuclear One). The object is definitely unknown and does not appear to be a military craft. There is also the thought that the noise that ***** thought was a bad tire on her car could actually have been an extremely low resonant frequency emitted by the craft, which went away when the vehicle disappeared.\n\n4/28/09 *****arrived at the designated time of 8:30 a.m. We waited at the motel for ***** until about 8:40 and then called her. ***** said that she wasn't coming...her daughter had taken her car and she wouldn't be able to join us. It seemed quite unusual that she hadn't called us to tell us this earlier. ******* called her back and said he would be willing to pick her up. ***** agreed to this so ******* went to get her and we drove out to the site so that we wouldn't be too late.\n\nI talked to ******* about using her image and name. She did not want her name or image used because of her job. She did sign a release allowing us to use her voice and said that we could refer to the property as the 1843(a)(2) ******* bought the property in 1994 (bringing it back into the family). At the time or shortly after she bought the property, she was asked if she really bought the property as the previous owner said that nothing would grow there and that their animals were sterile. She has not had any problems with growing things or raising her horses and cattle.\n\n******* did say that there have been some other strange events though. Most notably for her are the significant number of people who have gone off the road and hit her fence. There have also been two occasions when whole sections of her fence have been pulled up and moved. In 9/06, a large section of a fence was just pulled out and laid down, That fence included railroad ties and solid oak boards. There were no storms or bad weather. Then towards the end of March of this year, she got up at 5:00 a.m. to leave the house early. There had been a storm and there was no electricity. As she left the house she saw that 40-50 feet of fence had been picked up and laid down. In this case, she noticed that the landscape timbers broke off under the ground. Her horses could not do this. She also mentioned that they do get static on the radio in this area. She does not get cell phone coverage in her house except in one of the rooms. Sometimes they will have a huge storm out in back and the front of the house will be totally still. They have experienced shocks underneath the high voltage lines even"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"though the energy company claims that can't happen. *******'s e-mail address is 1843(a)(2)\n\nNeighbors also report strange things. One of the neighbors reported (to *******) seeing a big black panther - even though there aren't supposed to be any panthers in this area.\n\n*******'s brother dropped in by chance while we were there even though ******* hadn't told him anything about the incident. He works at Arkansas Nuclear One in calibration and maintenance. He was not aware of any recent line disturbances but he believes that he will be able to obtain that information. What he did say was that he saw a dark helicopter flying very close to the plant within the last two weeks. He has never seen this before and said that they must have had approval for them to be flying that close. He will get back to us with whatever information he can obtain. The tape recorder was running when he came in and we didn't think to mention it to him until we were well into the conversation. He did not feel he could sign a media release because of his job. He also talked about getting shocked near the high voltage wires saying that he had been knocked down to his knees.\n\nWe said good-bye to ******* and drove ***** home and checked out of our motel. In the meantime, ******* went on to talk to the deputy sheriff of 1843(a)(2) The deputy sheriff was very interested in hearing about the event; he had not heard of any similar events in the area but took *******'s and [REDACTED] cards to contact in the future in the event that anything else arises. We are going to ask [REDACTED] to check out the Heritage 1843(a)(2) Room of the Dardanelle Public Library regarding Indian activities in this area..\n\nThe GPS location is 1843(a)(3) 1843(a)(3)\n\nIn order to complete this report we would like to send a FOIA to both the power plant and the FAA. We want to find out if we can learn any more about Indian activity in the area and also search for information on ley lines in Arkansas. We will enter the additional information onto CMS.\n\nAAP Person 103 (Chief Tech Advisor)\nAAP Person 104 (Field Investigator)\n\nCase #3:\nCase # 16539 AAP Person 108\nGPS COORDINATES : 1843(a)(2)\nLOCATION: Pasadena, MD CAT 2 Deployment"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date of event: April 16, 2009 03.15 local time\n\nOn April 20, 2009 a STAR team CAT 2 Deployment was activated on this case. STAR team Investigator AAP Person 108 was assigned as lead investigator.\n\nAAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Coordinator / Manager\nAAP Person 59\n\nWitness 1843(a)(2)\nDate of CMS report: April 20, 2009\nPlace of sighting: 1843(a)(2)\nCase Category 2\nReport by: AAP Person 108 STAR Field Investigator\n\nBACKGROUND INFORMATION OF THE WITNESSES:\n\n***** ***** is a laboratory director and has been living in his newly renovated 1,635 sqft. single-family home since September of 2008 along with his fiancée ***** *******, a radiology technician, both have degrees in chemistry.\n\nINTERVIEW - SEQUENSE OF EVENTS:\n\nApril 16th, 2009, approximately 03:15 AM in the morning, ***** was awakened by loud humming and she than woke up ***** to have him check out where this strange sound was coming from. ***** walked from bedroom to bedroom to look through the windows to see what was causing this humming, thinking to himself that it may be a street cleaner sweeping the area roads or some sort of utility truck working on something. He returned to the master bedroom to look through the window that was next to ***** and he noticed a very large triangular craft hovering above. The craft was totally black with no lights and from his point of view, had a boomerang shape resembling a very large \"stretched out\" F117 Nighthawk about 300 feet wingspan. The UFO was hovering slowly heading towards SE and took about 17 minutes to pass over their house and to fade at a distance. ***** said that the humming was very loud, constant and sounded like an electrical transformer. That Saturday, ***** mentioned to one of his neighbor [REDACTED] about 1843(a)(2) the strange incident that occurred early Thursday morning and [REDACTED] did state that he 1843(a)(2) heard the humming and was reluctant to continue the conversation. Upon my on-site investigation, I did notice a parked squad car belonging to Ann Arundel County PD on the same street 1843(a)(2)(2) that belonged to an officer that resides there."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SOURCES THAT WERE CONTACTED:\n\n•BWI (In process)\n\n•Email 4/18: ********County Department of Public Works, northern district 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) Citizens Info. Center [Street Sweepers]:\n1843(a)(2) Question: \"Were [REDACTED] area streets cleansed/swept on the night or early morning around 03:00am on April 16th?\"\nReply from DPW 4/20: \"We definitely would not sweep/clean during those hours.\"\n\n•Called 4/21: 7-Eleven (24hrs) 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) Store attendant [REDACTED] stated that nothing strange was heard or seen.\n\n•Called 4/21: Exxon/Shop (24hrs) 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] stated that nothing strange was heard or seen.\n\n•Email 4/17: Capitol Gazette Newspaper (no replies)\n\n•Email 4/18 and 4/23: ********County PD Northern District (no replies).\n(Note: I notice an AAPD squad car parked on 1843(a)(2) upon my on-site investigation; an officer resides on that same street. Second email was sent on the 23rd.)(no replies).\n\n•Email 4/19: Baltimore Sun Newspaper (no replies)\n\n•Email 4/19: Chesapeake Bay Newspaper (no replies)\n\nArea military bases and airports (from Pasadena):\n\n•Baltimore Washington International Airport (BWI) 8 miles NW\n•Fort Meade – 9 miles W/SW\n•Patuxent Naval Air Systems Command– 50 miles South\n•Dover Air Force Base, DE – 95 miles East.\n\nAREA TEMPERATURE / NIGHT OF THE SIGHTING April 16th\n\nTemperature: 39.0 °F\nDew Point: 36.0 °F\nHumidity: 89%\nPressure: 30.20\nVisibility: 9.0 miles\nWind Direction: WNW\nWind Speed: 3.5 mph"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONCLUSION:\n\n***** was perplexed and a bit shaken by this incident and wondered if this was an US military aircraft, why would they built such a thing! He also stated that most of the home occupants who reside on his street are either with the military, law enforcement agencies or working as government contractors. I found ***** ***** to be very credible, logical and he really isn't into the whole sci-fi scene or the UFO phenomena.\n\nI did not notice any high power lines in the area. There's the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant facilities about 35 miles south of Pasadena:\n\nA similar case involving a black triangular craft sans lights was witnessed five years ago in Owings Mills, Maryland, about 20 miles NNW from Pasadena. February 9, 2005, a [REDACTED], a Lockheed Martin software engineer, witnessed a low altitude triangle, about 500 to 800 feet above ground with no lights.\n\n1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3)\n\nWitness Residence Satellite photo\n1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3)\n\nAll cases are under investigation by MUFON and case reports will be forwarded to BAASS when the investigations are complete."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS Progress on Northern Tier Sightings\n\nINITIAL ANALYSIS\nProject Northern Tier\n\nIn an effort to organize the information and enhance the progress of the BAASS investigation of the Northern Tier (NT) events the following initial analysis was prepared. This will be a living document and subject to change throughout the process of the project.\n\nInitial Analysis:\n\nAfter analyzing a considerable amount of information regarding the NT events the following information is noted: This analysis concentrated on incidents from 1975 – 1976 timeframe; however, the data from all NT events over the years has had the initial look. The 1975 – 1976 timeframe was chosen based on some very simple criteria: the age of the incidents; the volume of information and the likelihood of being able to contact witnesses for re-interview who will still have a fairly good recollection of the events.\n\nSpecifically addressed in some detail are Unexplained Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) events during the period Sep – Nov 1975. During that period several U.S. Military (mostly USAF) facilities experienced very similar incidents. These were often reported as \"helicopter sightings\" as the UAP were reported having appeared to hover during the sightings. Three USAF facilities received the majority of these events during the timeframe; Malmstrom Air Force Base (MAFB), MT; Wurtsmith AFB (WAFB), MI; Loring AFB (LAFB), ME; as well as a Canadian Forces Base (CFB), Falconbridge, ON. These locations provide the largest number of potential witnesses, not to mention what would appear to be reliable sources. Additionally, a second run of the time frame of interest, this time including other military installations with nuclear weapons capability as well as non-military nuclear facilities such as power production (Attachment 1)\n\nMalmstrom Air Force Base, Great Falls, Montana\n\nThe first geographic area addressed was the area of Malmstrom Air Force Base (MAFB), Great Falls, Montana and the surrounding ICBM fields. A tremendous amount of data was available from the 1975-76 timeframe. Most of this information is due specifically to the efforts of Keith Wolverton, Deputy Sheriff, Cascade County, MT. During the period August 1975 through December 1977, Wolverton documented over 250 events in and around the geographic area. These events include what he termed \"Helicopter\" (any event where the target hovered); \"UFO\" (simply that Unexplained Flyers); and \"Animal Mutilations\". Incidents termed \"Animal Mutilations\" were not considered in this report.\n\nMAFB was, at the time, a significant Strategic Air Command (SAC) installation. During the period MAFB housed strategic bombers (B-52s) as well as hundreds of Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs). MAFB maintained alert aircraft resources; B-52 variants maintained at nuclear ready status. Additionally, the ICBM unit maintained a vast number of Launch Control Facilities and Missile Sites. These were spread across a considerable geographic area (an area of 23,000 square miles), more often than not in fairly remote and not easily accessible locations.\n\nWolverton documented 129 events titled \"UFO\"; the earliest being in August 1975 through October 1976. Attachment 2 is a map of the area with events occurring in 1975 plotted. Not all events Wolverton documented in 1975 are depicted on the map. Events with vague or unknown locations were not"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"plotted. Additionally, events documented outside of the area recognized as USAF Missile facilities were not plotted. In 1976, Wolverton documented additional 108 events. The same criterion was applied to these incidents as was used in plotting the 1975 incidents. Attachment 3 is a map of the 1976 events. The Events in the Malmstrom area continued into 1977. Wolverton documents 14 more events through December of 77. Events in that area then tapered of greatly. A considerable number of the events appear to have been in, or very near, the city limits of Great Falls. The vast majority of the events plotted are also within or very near the ballistic missile facilities.\n\nWurtsmith AFB, Oscoda, MI\n\nDuring the late evening hours of 30 Oct 75, several ground personnel reported seeing an airborne unidentified (reported as a helicopter) in the area of the perimeter of the base.\n\nInitially the sighting was near the base entry point in the Capeheart housing area. The personnel making the initial sightings were Security Police personnel. Based on the reported time of the incident (2200) these personnel would have been in the final hour of their shift. Security Police shifts normally ran during the following periods: 0700-1500; 1500-2300; 2300-0700. Shift change times, based on the above shifts, would have been 0630; 1430; and 2130. At these times the on duty shift would be preparing their posts for the oncoming personnel. The oncoming personnel would be drawing their weapons, preparing their vehicles and conducting inspections.\n\nBased on the reporting, the unidentified began its flight on the south-east side of the base and followed the perimeter, traveling to the north passing the main gate, where it was again sighted by the on duty gate guard. Another USAF enlisted member who was in the area of the Base Motor Pool also observed the"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"unidentified as it traveled along the perimeter. The unidentified then purportedly traveled on to the north approaching the Strategic Air Command (SAC) Alert facility and the area of the Weapons Storage Area (WSA). Through the reporting it was not clear the amount of time this covered or how long the unidentified loitered in the area of the either the Alert Facility or the WSA. The unidentified then departed the WAFB area and proceeded to the East over Lake Huron.\n\nA KC-135 aircraft was returning from a routine flight at the time of this incident. The 135 was tasked with locating and identifying the unidentified based on ground based radar confirmation of the ground sightings. The aircrew indicates they were vectored to the general area of the unidentified over Lake Huron by air traffic control personnel. Reporting shows they made contact with the unknown over the lake and followed it to the general area of Bay City, MI where they lost contact. Shortly after losing contact the 135 turned in a northerly direction and began their return to WAFB. Shortly following their turn the unidentified reappeared, appearing to follow the 135. It followed for a short time (NFI) and then departed. The 135 crew returned to base and landed.\n\nWhile the sighting would be questionable had it only been seen by personnel on the ground, the fact three separate ground personnel made the same basic observation would tend to enhance the credibility. Further enhancing is the ground based radar detection of an unknown target in the air in the general area of the Alert Facility/WSA. The aircrew having visual and electronic verification of the unidentified makes this one worthy of additional attention.\n\nThe pictures marked as Attachment 4 are provided to illustrate the path of the UAP, per the ground and aerial observations.\n\nLoring AFB, ME\n\nThe events on and around LAFB are eerily similar to those at WAFB. The timing was extremely close as well as the description of the incidents. The major"} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"difference was the lack of aerial sighting of the UAP. During the timing of the events numerous ground personnel reported direct observation; however, despite numerous attempts an Air National Guard helicopter crew was unable to observe the object from the air. The fact the ANG was tasked with an airborne mission based on the events at LAFB is significant; as well as the inclusion of Canadian officials on these airborne missions. An aerial map of the Loring AFB area can be found as Attachment 5.\n\nThese incidents sparked a series of high level communications, mainly from the North American Air Defense (NORAD) Headquarters, Colorado Springs, CO and Strategic Air Command (SAC) at Offut AFB, NE. While this message traffic would have been routine based on threats to SAC resources it is noted for SAC to move all their facilities to a higher alert level is itself an apparent acknowledgement of the events.\n\nDuring this same timeframe there are reports of several incidents near Canadian Forces Bases (CFBs) in the Ontario and New Brunswick provinces. There is oddly a significant lack of much detail regarding these incidents. While the \"NT\" events are significant based on the vast majority of the sightings being at or very near nuclear weapons facilities; this would not be a relationship that would hold true with the CFBs. I have not been able to track down any information to indicate the U.S. was sharing, storing or had given nuclear weapons to the Canadians. That said however, there are Canadian nuclear power and nuclear power research facilities in the general vicinity of the events in Canada.\n\nThe map listed as Attachment 6 shows most of the major USAF installations, which at the time were either active nuclear armed units; had a major role in the Command and Control of these arms; or was a \"safe haven\" for senior government personnel in the event of nuclear confrontation."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATTACHMENT 1\n\n37\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATTACHMENT 2\n\n38\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATTACHMENT 3\n39\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATTACHMENT 4\n40\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATTACHMENT 5\n41\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATTACHMENT 6\n42\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Investigative Plan\nProject Northern Tier (NT)\n\nInvestigative Plan:\n\nThis Investigative Plan is intended to focus the efforts of the BAASS personnel involved in NT. It will be broken into geographic areas to simplify the gathering of information as it pertains to that area and events. This is not intended to be a final and static document, but a living and evolving guide to the investigation. NOTE: These plans are currently general and will be focused by the initial feedback from the first wave of eyewitness interviews. Because of the uncertainty of tracking down witnesses 30 years after the fact, there are no definitive predictions that can be made regarding the outcomes of selected points of this strategy.\n\nWurtsmith Air Force Base\n\nIf these still exist there may be additional info available regarding witnesses. Based on time of day there should (could have been) many additional LE and Security personnel witness this incident. No real mention of CSC or Alert Facility or WSA Control involvement. The Alert Facility has an Alternate Central Security Control Tower with a minimum of 1 SPS member maintaining a desk blotter of incidents inside or directly affecting the Alert Facility. There is also a Gap Guard (guarding the gap in the fence allowing the alert aircraft access to the taxi and runways, as well as an Alert Fire Team (AFT) facility (AFT consists of 5 members) and a minimum of two internal Security Response Teams (SRT) (two man patrols inside the area). No mention of any of these personnel. The WSA is very similar in manning to the Alert Facility. There are a definitive number of two man SRT teams inside the area and mobile at all times. Also, the WSA has an AFT shelter as well with at least one, if not two AFT. Again, there was no mention of any of these personnel in the reporting. There should also be roving SRT vehicles tasked with staying in designated patrol sectors of these two HIGH priority areas.\n43\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Malmstrom Air Force Base\n\nInterview 1843(a)(2) regarding his extensive knowledge of the geographic area. Due t[REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) extensive knowledge, and his location locally (Las Vegas), he should be one of the first steps. This will help to refine investigative efforts.\nCompile a complete list of witnesses/potential witnesses for the MAFB events\nRefine this list by:\nThose individuals previously interviewed\nSubset of prioritizing those to be interviewed by BAASS\nNewly discovered potential witnesses\nThose witnesses independently developed by BAASS\nBegin contacting Witnesses as soon as possible\n\nLoring Air Force Base\n\nCompile a complete list of witnesses/potential witnesses for the LAFB events\nRefine this list by:\nThose individuals previously interviewed\nSubset of prioritizing those to be interviewed by BAASS\nNewly discovered potential witnesses\nThose witnesses independently developed by BAASS\nBegin contacting Witnesses as soon as possible\n\n44\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"General\n\nConsider FOIA requests to AFOSI regarding:\nAny IIR reporting responsive to CR# HQ CR 44, Para 3D and HQ CR 45 Para 3B for the period Aug – Nov 1975\nSpecifically those originated by Detachments at (NT Bases)\n\nIdentify and locate other nuclear facilities in the NT AOR (those operated by USA, USN, DOE, etc.)\n\nContinue mapping of all events in the NT AOR during the targeted period\n\nUltimately cross reference the NT events with those in the Canadian Archive release\n\nFOIA on reporting from SAC; HQ USAF; NORAD; Minot regarding Minot sighting 101125Z Nov 75\n\nAny OPREP 3 reporting generated during this time frame\n\n45\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS Continues Study on Information on UAPs released by the British, Canadian, French and Danish Governments\n\n• Over the past eighteen months, The Ministry of Defense (MoD) in the United Kingdom has released approximately 7297 pages of files pertaining to the performance of alleged UAPs in British air space. More recently the British MoD released a second group of files on March 21, 2009 comprising 1200 separate UFO cases in approximately 2000 additional pages. BAASS analysts have initiated the process of downloading, organizing and analyzing these files to determine the quality and quantity of reports that have been released by the UK government, particularly those reports that might pertain to events with national security implications.\n\n• In February 2009, the Canadian government authorized the release of 9500 pages of files pertaining to the behavior of alleged advanced aerospace vehicles in Canadian air space. The files cover the period 1947-1980. Many of the cases were investigated by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. BAASS analysts have initiated the process of downloading, printing, organizing and analyzing these files. The aim is to delineate the extent of high quality evidence pertaining to the topic of advanced aerial vehicle performance in the 9500 pages of Canadian files.\n\n• On January 29, 2009 the Danish Air Force released 329 pages of reports on unusual aerial phenomena. All reports are in Danish; therefore BAASS contracted a Danish-English translator to produce English translations of all 329 pages of released files. The translation has been completed and BAASS analysts are in the latter stages of examining them to delineate whether there are any cases that merit further study.\n\n46\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Throughout 2005-2008, GEIPAN, a department of CNES (French civilian space agency), released about 100,000 pages comprising the investigative reports from approximately 1650 cases, including 6000 eyewitness interviews involving UAPs, the majority of which have been investigated by the Gendarmerie. BAASS translators/analysts are currently sorting and codifying the cases so that only the highest value cases for BAASS will be translated and entered into the BAASS database.\n\n47\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1afa75aa81a7fe39","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conclusion\n\nSignificant progress has been made in training and initially deploying BAASS field investigative teams during the month of April. Further, BAASS has begun to acquire significant information on UAP activity in Brazil. The BAASS MUFON relationship is maturing, but the case numbers are still considerably lower than expected. The reasons for this drop in case number are currently under investigation. The BAASS database of cases is now larger than any other database owned by UAP organizations in North America.\n\nAs BAASS makes progress in and accelerates the hiring of employees in the coming weeks, it will be crucial that the organization has rapid access to the information that will keep the scientific staff engaged.\n\nSecondly BAASS is currently accelerating the acquisition of all information pertaining to this topic in the open literature, increasingly from other countries.\n\n48\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"1b34421edd0df1cb","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART I\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n832707\nCONFIDENTIAL\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n5\nHq Tempelhof AB\nLog No A815c-4\n2\nCOUNTRY\nGERMANY\nREPORT NO.\n260-53\n(LEAVE BLANK)\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nAF603026\nSUBJECT\nEXTRACTS FROM AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL LOGS\nAREA REPORTED ON\nSOVIET ZONE GERMANY\nFROM (Agency)\n7350TH BASE COMPLEMENT SQUADRON\nDATE OF REPORT\n11 AUGUST 1953\nDATE OF INFORMATION\n11 AUGUST 1953\nEVALUATION\nNONE\nPREPARED BY (Officer)\nFRED L. ALLEN CAPT. USAF\nSOURCE\nAIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER\nREFERENCES (Control number, directive, previous report, etc., as applicable)\nSUMMARY: (Enter concise summary of report. Give significance in final one-sentence paragraph. List inclosures at lower left. Begin text of report on AF Form 112—Part II.)\nThe following information was extracted from Air Traffic Control Logs, TEMPELHOF, 11 August 1953.\n10 August 1953:\n1936Z hours: British European Airways DC-3 type Aircraft, GALXK, flying inbound for TEMPELHOF via Center Corridor reported observing what appeared to be red colored rockets, being fired approximately one (1) mile in front of him.\n2245Z hours: Bad Eisen Air Traffic Control reported the following information to TEMPELHOF Air Traffic Control:\nThe pilot of British European Airways DC-3 type Aircraft, GAGIP, reported sighting a stationary red colored light twenty (20) nautical miles West of Genthin (5224N/1209E). Light appeared to be at approximately 5,000 feet but not above 5,500 feet.\n2315Z hours: British Berlin Air Safety Center reported that the Soviets checked on this reported red light and could not account for it.\n11 August 1953:\n0235Z hours: Pilot Lesser, Pan American Clipper C-193A enroute to Hanover via the Center Corridor reported to TEMPELHOF Air Traffic Control when over the area twenty (20) nautical miles West of Genthin. Pilot Lesser observed no light or activity of any description, but stated that on Friday night (7 August 1953) in this same area, he observed ground to air firing. Pilot Lesser stated that as his aircraft approached this area (7 August 1953) the ground to air firing stopped. Pilot stated he was unable to determine what type projectile was being fired.\nINCLS.\n1 WSAT\n1 DAD\n1 MSAKENH(BLO)\n1 497\n2 HQ USAFE\nSEE LAST PAGE FOR SUBJECT & AREA CODES\nDISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR\nAC/S, A-2, Hqs USAFE (Orig)\nAC/S, A-2, Hqs Twelfth AF - 1 cy\nOSI DO # 3 - 1 cy\nFile - 1 cy\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 57597\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nCONFIDENTIAL\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF."} {"doc_id":"1b34421edd0df1cb","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\nCONFIDENTIAL\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n3\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nFROM (Agency)\n7350 BASE COMPLEMENT SQ.\nREPORT NO.\n260-53\nPAGE 2 OF 2 PAGES\nNOTE: As of this report, this office has been unable to contact Pan American Airlines Pilot Lesser to gain any further information.\nFred L. Allen\nFRED L. ALLEN\nCapt. USAF\nAir Intelligence Officer\nLIBRARY SUBJECT & AREA CODES\nNodex\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE\n/RTI\n\nContract No. FO4703-91-C-0112\nRTI Report No. RTI/5180/77-43F\nSeptember 10, 1996\n\nModeling Unlikely Space-Booster\nFailures in Risk Calculations\n\nFinal Report\n\nPrepared for\n\nDepartment of the Air Force\n45th Space Wing (AFSPC)\nSafety Office - 45 SW/SE\nPatrick AFB, FL 32925\n\nand\n\nDepartment of the Air Force\n30th Space Wing (AFSPC)\nSafety Office - 30 SW/SE\nVandenberg AFB, CA 93437\n\n19961025 122\n\nDistribution authorized to US Government agencies and their contractors to protect administrative/ operational use data, 10 September 96. Other requests for this document shall be referred to the 30th Space Wing (AFSPC) Safety Office (30 SW/SE), Vandenberg AFB, CA 93437, or 45th Space Wing (AFSPC) Safety Office (45 SW/SE), Patrick AFB, FL 32925.\n\nDTIC QUALITY INSPECTED 2\n\n3000 N. Atlantic Avenue • Cocoa Beach, Florida 32931-5029 USA"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"30SW-TR-96-12\n\nContract No. FO4703-91-C-0112\nTask No. 10/95-77, Subtask 2.0\n\nRTI Report No. RTI/5180/77-43F\nSeptember 10, 1996\n\nModeling Unlikely Space-Booster\nFailures in Risk Calculations\n\nFinal Report\n\nPrepared by\n\nJames A. Ward, Jr.\nRobert M. Montgomery\n\nof\n\nResearch Triangle Institute\nCenter for Aerospace Technology\nLaunch Systems Safety Department\n\nPrepared for\n\nDepartment of the Air Force\n45th Space Wing (AFSPC)\nSafety Office - 45 SW/SE\nPatrick AFB, FL 32925\n\nand\n\nDepartment of the Air Force\n30th Space Wing (AFSPC)\nSafety Office - 30 SW/SE\nVandenberg AFB, CA 93437\n\nDistribution authorized to US Government agencies and their contractors to protect administrative/ operational use data, 10 September 96. Other requests for this document shall be referred to the 30th Space Wing (AFSPC) Safety Office (30 SW/SE), Vandenberg AFB, CA 93437, or 45th Space Wing (AFSPC) Safety Office (45 SW/SE), Patrick AFB, FL 32925."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE\n\nForm Approved\nOMB No. 0704-0188\n\n1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank)\n2. REPORT DATE September 10, 1996\n3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED Final\n\n4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE\nModeling Unlikely Space-Booster Failures in Risk Calculations\n\n5. FUNDING NUMBERS\nC: FO4703-91-C-0112\nTA: 10/95-77\n\n6. AUTHOR(S)\nJames A. Ward, Jr.\nRobert M. Montgomery\n\n7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)\nResearch Triangle Institute *\n3000 N. Atlantic Avenue\nCocoa Beach, FL 32931\nACTA, Inc. **\nSkypark 3\n23430 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 300\nTorrance, CA 90505\n\n8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER\nRTI/5180/77-43F\n\n9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)\nDepartment of the Air Force (AFSPC) 30th Space Wing Vandenberg AFB, CA 93437 Mr. Martin Kinna (30 SW/SEY)\nDepartment of the Air Force (AFSPC) 45th Space Wing Patrick AFB, FL 32925 Louis J. Ullian, Jr. (45 SW/SED)\n\n10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY REPORT NUMBER\n30SW-TR-96-12\n\n11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES\n* Subcontractor\n** Prime Contractor\n\n12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT\nDistribution authorized to US Government agencies and their contractors to protect administrative/operational use data, 10 September 96. Other requests for this document shall be referred to the 30th Space Wing (AFSPC) Safety Office (30 SW/SE), Vandenberg AFB, CA 93437, or 45th Space Wing (AFSPC) Safety Office (45 SW/SE), Patrick AFB, FL 32925.\n\n12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE\n\n13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)\nMissile and space-vehicle performance histories contain many examples of failures that cause, or have the potential to cause, significant vehicle deviations from the intended flight line. In RTI's risk-analysis program, DAMP, such failures are referred to as Mode-5 failure responses. Although Mode-5 failure responses are much less likely to occur than those that result in impacts near the flight line, risk-analysis studies are incomplete without them. This report shows how impacts from Mode-5 failures are modeled in program DAMP. The impact density function used for this purpose contains two shaping constants that control the rate at which the density function drops in value as the angular deviation from the flight line and the impact range increase. Certain Mode-5 malfunctions are simulated, and the two shaping constants then chosen by trial and error so that impacts from the simulated malfunctions and the theoretical density function are in close agreement. An appendix to the report contains a listing and brief narrative failure history of the Atlas, Delta, and Titan missile and space-vehicle launches from the Eastern and Western Ranges from the beginning of each program through August 1996. Each entry gives the vehicle configuration, whether the flight was a success, the flight phase in which any anomalous behavior occurred, and a classification of vehicle behavior in accordance with defined failure-response modes.\n\n14. SUBJECT TERMS\nlaunch risk, unlikely failure modeling, booster failure probabilities\n15. NUMBER OF PAGES 180\n16. PRICE CODE\n17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF REPORT Unclassified\n18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE Unclassified\n19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF ABSTRACT Unclassified\n20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT SAR\n\nNSN 7540-01-280-5500\nStandard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)\nPrescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18 298-102"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Abstract\n\nMissile and space-vehicle performance histories contain many examples of failures that cause, or have the potential to cause, significant vehicle deviations from the intended flight line. In RTI's risk-analysis program, DAMP, such failures are referred to as Mode-5 failure responses. Although Mode-5 failure responses are much less likely to occur than those that result in impacts near the flight line, risk-analysis studies are incomplete without them. This report shows how impacts from Mode-5 failures are modeled in program DAMP. The impact density function used for this purpose contains two shaping constants that control the rate at which the density function drops in value as the angular deviation from the flight line and the impact range increase. Certain Mode-5 malfunctions are simulated, and the two shaping constants then chosen by trial and error so that impacts from the simulated malfunctions and the theoretical density function are in close agreement.\n\nAn appendix to the report contains a listing and brief narrative failure history of the Atlas, Delta, and Titan missile and space-vehicle launches from the Eastern and Western Ranges from the beginning of each program through August 1996. Each entry gives the vehicle configuration, whether the flight was a success, the flight phase in which any anomalous behavior occurred, and a classification of vehicle behavior in accordance with defined failure-response modes. Various filtering or data weighting techniques are described. The empirical data are then filtered to estimate (1) failure probabilities for Atlas, Delta, and Titan, and (2) percentages of future failures that will result in Mode-5 (and other Mode) responses."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table of Contents\n\n1. Introduction.........1\n2. Examples Showing Need for Mode 5.........3\n3. Understanding the Mode-5 Failure Response.........7\n3.1 Effects of Mode-5 Shaping Constants.........9\n3.2 Effects of Shaping Constant on DAMP Results.........9\n4. Methodology for Assessing Failure Probabilities.........13\n4.1 The Parts-Analysis Approach.........13\n4.2 The Empirical Approach.........15\n5. Computation of Failure Probabilities.........16\n5.1 Overall Failure Probability.........16\n5.2 Relative and Absolute Probabilities for Response Modes.........24\n5.3 Relative Probability of Tumble for Response-Modes 3 and 4.........30\n6. Shaping Constants Through Simulation.........31\n6.1 Malfunction Turn Simulations.........31\n6.1.1 Random-Attitude Failures.........31\n6.1.2 Slow-Turn Failures.........32\n6.1.3 Factors Affecting Malfunction-Turn Results.........33\n6.1.4 Malfunction-Turn Results for Atlas IIAS.........35\n6.2 Shaping Constants for Atlas IIAS.........37\n6.2.1 Optimum Mode-5 Shaping Constants.........37\n6.2.2 Launch-Area Mode-5 Risks.........49\n6.2.3 Effects of Mode-5 Constants on Ship-Hit Contours.........51\n6.2.4 Range Distributions of Theoretical and Simulated Impacts.........58\n6.3 Shaping Constants for Delta-GEM.........60\n6.3.1 Optimum Mode-5 Shaping Constants.........61\n6.3.2 Launch-Area Mode-5 Risks.........64\n6.4 Shaping Constants for Titan IV.........65\n6.5 Shaping Constants for LLV1.........69\n6.6 Shaping Constants for Other Launch Vehicles.........72\n7. Potential Future Investigations.........73\n8. Summary.........74\n\n9/10/96 ii RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix A. Failure Response Modes in Program DAMP ..................................................... 79\nAppendix B. Shaping-Constant Effects on Mode-5 Impact Distributions .......................... 81\nAppendix C. Filter Characteristics ........................................................................................ 90\nAppendix D. Launch and Performance Histories ................................................................. 96\nD.1 Basic Data ........................................................................................................... 96\nD.1.1 Data Sources ............................................................................................. 96\nD.1.2 Assignment of Failure-Response Modes.................................................... 98\nD.1.3 Assignment of Flight Phase....................................................................... 98\nD.1.4 Representative Configurations ................................................................. 100\nD.2 Atlas Launch and Performance History ............................................................. 101\nD.2.1 Atlas Launch History ............................................................................... 103\nD.2.2 Atlas Failure Narratives ........................................................................... 115\nD.3 Delta Launch and Performance History ............................................................. 133\nD.3.1 Delta Launch History ............................................................................... 136\nD.3.2 Delta Failure Narratives ........................................................................... 142\nD.4 Titan Launch and Performance History ............................................................. 146\nD.4.1 Titan Launch History .............................................................................. 149\nD.4.2 Titan Failure Narratives ........................................................................... 157\nD.5 Thor Launch and Performance History (Not Including Delta) .......................... 164\nD.5.1 Thor and Thor-Boosted Launch History ................................................... 164\nD.5.2 Thor and Thor-Boosted Failure Narratives .............................................. 167\nReferences ........................................................................................................................ 171\n9/10/96 iii RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table of Figures\nFigure 1. Joust Impact Trace Showing a Mode-5 Failure Response ..................................... 6\nFigure 2. Atlas IIAS Risk Contours for Inner-Ear Injury with A = 3.0 ................................ 11\nFigure 3. Atlas IIAS Risk Contours for Inner-Ear Injury with A = 3.5 ................................ 12\nFigure 4. Filter Factor Results for Representative Configurations of Atlas ....................... 23\nFigure 5. Combined Random-Attitude and Slow-Turn Results .......................................... 36\nFigure 6. Atlas IIAS Breakup Percentages for Random-Attitude Turns ............................. 37\nFigure 7. Atlas IIAS Impacts with No Breakup ................................................................. 39\nFigure 8. Atlas IIAS Impacts with Breakup........................................................................ 40\nFigure 9. Atlas IIAS Simulation Results with B = 1,000 ................................................... 42\nFigure 10. Atlas IIAS Simulation Results with B = 50,000................................................ 44\nFigure 11. Atlas IIAS Simulation Results with B = 100,000.............................................. 45\nFigure 12. Atlas IIAS Simulation Results with B = 500,000.............................................. 46\nFigure 13. Atlas IIAS Simulation Results with B = 5,000,000............................................ 47\nFigure 14. Effects of Breakup q-alpha on A for Atlas IIAS ................................................ 49\nFigure 15. Mode-5 Density-Function Values at Three Miles ............................................. 51\nFigure 16. Atlas IIAS Mode-5 Ship-Hit Contours with A = 3.00 ....................................... 53\nFigure 17. Atlas IIAS All-Mode Ship-Hit Contours with A = 3.00 ..................................... 54\nFigure 18. Atlas IIAS Mode-5 Ship-Hit Contours with A = 3.45 ....................................... 55\nFigure 19. Atlas IIAS All-Mode Ship-Hit Contours with A = 3.45 ..................................... 56\nFigure 20. Atlas IIAS Mode-5 Ship-Hit Contours with A = 6.30 ....................................... 57\nFigure 21. Atlas IIAS All-Mode Ship-Hit Contours with A = 6.30 ..................................... 58\nFigure 22. Impact-Range Distributions ............................................................................... 59\nFigure 23. Delta-GEM Breakup Percentages ..................................................................... 61\nFigure 24. Delta-GEM Simulation Results with B =1,000 .................................................. 62\nFigure 25. Delta-GEM Simulation Results with Best-Fit Shaping Constants .................... 63\nFigure 26. Titan IV Breakup Percentages ........................................................................... 65\nFigure 27. Titan Simulation Results with B = 1,000 ........................................................... 66\nFigure 28. Titan Simulation Results with Best-Fit Shaping Constants ............................... 67\nFigure 29. LLV1 Breakup Percentages ............................................................................... 69\nFigure 30. LLV1 Simulation Results with B = 1,000 .......................................................... 70\n9/10/96 iv RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 31. LLV1 Simulation Results with Best-Fit Shaping Constants ............................... 71\nFigure 32. f-Ratios for Ranges from 1 to 25 Miles ............................................................. 86\nFigure 33. Percentage of Impacts Between Flight Line and Any Radial ........................... 87\nFigure 34. Percentage of Impacts in 5-Degree Sectors ..................................................... 88\nFigure 35. Exponential Weights for Fading-Memory Filters ............................................. 93\nFigure 36. Recursive Filter Factor for Last Data Point ..................................................... 94\nFigure 37. Atlas Launch Summary .................................................................................... 102\nFigure 38. Delta Launch Summary .................................................................................. 135\nFigure 39. Titan Launch Summary ................................................................................... 148\nFigure 40. Thor Launch Summary .................................................................................... 164\nTable of Tables\nTable 1. Effects of Mode-5 Shaping Constant A on Atlas IIA Risks .................................... 10\nTable 2. Predicted Failure Probabilities for Representative Configurations ..................... 17\nTable 3. Predicted Failure Probabilities for All Configurations ........................................ 18\nTable 4. Comparison of Weighting Percentages ............................................................... 19\nTable 5. Filter Factor Influence on Weighting Percentages .............................................. 21\nTable 6. Failure Probabilities for Atlas, Delta, and Titan .................................................. 24\nTable 7. Number of Atlas Failures - All Configurations (532 Flights) ............................... 25\nTable 8. Number of Delta Failures - All Configurations (232 Flights) ............................... 25\nTable 9. Number of Titan Failures - All Configurations (337 Flights) ............................... 25\nTable 10. Number of Eastern-Range Thor Failures (85 Flights) ........................................ 25\nTable 11. Number of Failures for All Vehicles (1186 Flights) ........................................... 26\nTable 12. Date of Most Recent Failure ............................................................................. 26\nTable 13. Percentage Weighting for Sample of 1186 Launches ........................................ 27\nTable 14. Response-Mode Occurrence Percentages ......................................................... 27\nTable 15. Recommended Response-Mode Percentages for Flight Phases 0 - 2 ................ 28\nTable 16. Recommended Response-Mode Percentages for Flight Phases 0 - 1 ................ 29\nTable 17. Absolute Failure Probabilities for Response Modes 1 - 5 .................................. 29\nTable 18. Percent of Response Modes 3 and 4 That Tumble ............................................. 30\n9/10/96 v RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 19. Sample Impact Distribution for Atlas IIAS with No Breakup ........................... 41\nTable 20. Shaping Constants for Atlas IIAS ...................................................................... 48\nTable 21. Shaping Constants and Related Risks for Atlas IIAS ........................................ 50\nTable 22. Best-Fit Conditions for Atlas IIAS ..................................................................... 52\nTable 23. Shaping Constants and Related Risks for Delta-GEM ....................................... 64\nTable 24. Shaping Constants for Titan IV ......................................................................... 68\nTable 25. Shaping Constants for LLV1 .............................................................................. 72\nTable 26. Summary of A Values for B = 1,000 .................................................................. 72\nTable 27. Failure Probabilities for Atlas, Delta, and Titan ................................................ 75\nTable 28. Recommended Response-Mode Percentages for Flight Phases 0 -2 .................. 75\nTable 29. Recommended Response-Mode Percentages for Flight Phases 0 - 1 ................. 75\nTable 30. Absolute Failure Probabilities for Response Modes 1 - 5 .................................. 76\nTable 31. Summary of A Values for B = 1,000 .................................................................. 77\nTable 32. Summary of Optimum Mode-5 Shaping Constants ........................................... 77\nTable 33. Effect on f-Ratio of Varying Mode-5 Constant A (B = 1000) - Part 1 ................ 82\nTable 34. Effect on f-Ratio of Varying Mode-5 Constant A (B = 1000) - Part 2 ................ 83\nTable 35. Effect on f-Ratio of Varying Mode-5 Constant B (A = 3) - Part 1 ...................... 84\nTable 36. Effect on f-Ratio of Varying Mode-5 Constant B (A = 3) - Part 2 ...................... 85\nTable 37. Filter Application for Failure Probability ........................................................... 95\nTable 38. Flight-Phase Definitions .................................................................................... 99\nTable 39. Flight Phases by Launch Vehicle ....................................................................... 99\nTable 40. Summary of Atlas Vehicle Configurations ...................................................... 101\nTable 41. Atlas Launch History ....................................................................................... 103\nTable 42. Summary of Delta Vehicle Configurations ...................................................... 133\nTable 43. Delta Launch History ....................................................................................... 136\nTable 44. Summary of Titan Vehicle Configurations ...................................................... 147\nTable 45. Titan Launch History ....................................................................................... 149\nTable 46. Thor Launch History ........................................................................................ 165\n9/10/96 vi RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Introduction\nThe debris from most launch vehicles that fail catastrophically tend to impact close to the intended flight line. Typical failures that produce such results are premature thrust termination, stage ignition failure, tank rupture or explosion, or rapid out-of-control tumble. Less likely malfunctions may cause a vehicle to execute a sustained turn away from the flight line. Examples are control failures that cause the rocket engine to lock in a fixed position near null, or failures leading to erroneous orientation of the guidance platform. Such failures should not be ignored, since they may produce nearly all or a significant part of the risks to population centers that are more than a mile or so uprange or many miles away from the flight line. Consequently, RTI has been tasked to estimate the probabilities of occurrence of these less-likely failures, and to determine optimum values for the shaping constants of the associated impact-density function.\nRTI has developed a prototype risk-analysis program (1) to analyze the level of risk in the launch area when ballistic missiles and space vehicles are launched, and (2) to provide guidelines for launch operations and launch-area risk management. This program, \"facility DAMage and Personnel injury\" (DAMP), uses information about the launch vehicle, its trajectory and failure responses, and facilities and populations in the launch area to estimate hit probabilities and casualty expectations. When a missile or space vehicle malfunctions, people and facilities may be subjected to significant risks from falling inert debris, or from overpressures and secondary debris produced by a stage, component, or large propellant chunk that explodes on impact. Although fire, toxic materials, and radiation may also subject personnel to significant danger, these hazards are not addressed in program DAMP. Hazards are greatest in the launch area and along the intended flight line, but lesser hazards exist throughout the area inside the impact limit lines. Small hazards exist even outside these lines if the flight termination system fails or other unlikely events occur.\nIn computing launch-area risks, DAMP makes no attempt to model vehicle failures per se. A list of possible failures for any vehicle would be extensive, and variations in failures from vehicle to vehicle would complicate the modeling process. Instead, DAMP models failure responses. Regardless of the exact nature of the failures that can occur, there are only six possible response modes that affect risks on the ground, five for failure responses, and one to model the behavior of a normal vehicle. The six modes are described in Appendix A. It can be seen from the descriptions that impacts resulting from failure-response Modes 1, 2, and 3 occur at most a mile or two from the launch point, while those from Mode 4 can only occur near the flight line, even though the vehicle may tumble before breakup or destruct. Although the hazards outside the launch area and away from the flight line may be small, vehicle flight tests through the years have demonstrated that finite hazards do exist in these areas. Such hazards are due almost entirely to Mode-5 failure responses, even through the probability of a Mode-5 failure may be only a small part of the total failure probability. The Mode-5 failure-response, theoretical though it is, was developed to reflect the facts that: (1) unlikely vehicle failures\n9/10/96 1 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"can cause impacts uprange or well away from the intended flight line, and (2) some vehicle failures cannot logically be classified as Response Modes 1, 2, 3, or 4.\n\nIn keeping with the above, the Mode-5 impact-density function was developed with the characteristics listed below. The function, which fills the void left by Modes 1 through 4, is sufficiently robust to include all possible impacts, yet seemingly comports with observed test results.\n\n(1) Impacts can occur in any direction from the launch point and at any range within the vehicle's energy capabilities.\n\n(2) At any given impact range from the launch point, the likelihood of impact decreases as the angular deviation from the flight line increases, becoming least likely in the uprange direction. For any fixed angular deviation from the flight line, the likelihood of impact decreases as the impact range increases.\n\n(3) At fixed impact ranges near the launch point, the impact density function changes gradually as the impact direction swings 180° from downrange to uprange. As the impact range increases, the decrease in the density function becomes progressively more and more rapid with change in impact direction. In other words, the greater the impact range, the more rapidly the density function changes with angular deviation from the flight line.\n\nAs modeled in DAMP, the effects of destruct action on the Mode-5 density function are accounted for in the launch area by supplementing impacts inside the impact limit lines with those that would occur outside the impact limit lines if no destruct action were taken.\n\nThe Mode-5 failure-response methodology was fully developed in an earlier RTI report[1]. As pointed out there, the shape of the impact density function can be controlled somewhat through the selection of shaping constants that appear in the defining equation. Intuition suggests that the constants should be vehicle dependent, since (1) ruggedly built missiles would, after a malfunction, be more likely to impact well away from the flight line than would a fragile space vehicle that tends to break up before deviating significantly; and (2) certain vehicles, after a malfunction, tend to stabilize and continue thrusting at large angles of attack, while other vehicles that experience similar malfunctions tend to tumble. Hit probabilities computed by program DAMP for targets located more than two miles or so uprange from the pad or more than a few miles from the flight line, are due almost entirely to the Mode-5 impact-density function. Thus, the assumed probability of occurrence of a Mode-5 response as well as the selected Mode-5 constants are of considerable importance.\n\nThe tasking for this study is set forth as Task No. 10/95-77, Paragraph 2.0, of Contract FO4703-91-C-0112. The primary purpose of the tasking is: \"Perform a study to determine the best values for Mode-5 failure probability and the Mode-5 density-function shaping constant A.\" Although not explicitly included in the statement of work, the study also develops absolute failure probabilities for Atlas, Delta, and Titan, and"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"relative probabilities of occurrence for all failure-response modes for these vehicles, LLV1, and other new launch systems.\n\nAlthough it may be reasonable to establish the relative probability of occurrence of a Mode-5 failure response by empirical means, the number of Mode-5 failures is too small to have any hope of establishing accurate values for the shaping constants from this sample alone. Inadequate descriptions of vehicle behavior in the available historical records and uncertainty in impact location following a malfunction add to the difficulty of classifying failure responses. In view of the limited data available for vehicles that have experienced Mode-5 failures, the values chosen for the Mode-5 constants must depend on simulations of vehicle behavior following failure.\n\n2. Examples Showing Need for Mode 5\n\nThe need for a Mode-5 response or some similar response mode (or a multiplicity of other response modes) can be seen from the following vehicle performance descriptions extracted from Appendix D:\n\n(1) Atlas 8E, 24 Jan 61. Missile stability was lost at about 161 seconds, some 30 seconds after BECO, probably due to failure of the servo-amplifier power supply. The sustainer engine shut down at 248 seconds, and the vernier engines about 10 seconds later. Impact occurred 1316 miles downrange and 215 miles crossrange.\n\n(2) Titan M-4, 6 Oct 61. A one-bit error in the W velocity accumulation caused impact 86 miles short and 14 miles right of target.\n\n(3) Atlas 145D (Mariner R-1), 22 July 62. Booster stage and flight appeared normal until after booster staging at guidance enable at about 157 seconds. Operation of guidance rate beacon was intermittent. Due to this and faulty guidance equations, erroneous guidance commands were given based on invalid rate data. Vehicle deviations became evident at 172 seconds and continued throughout flight with a maximum yaw deviation of 60° and pitch deviation of 28° occurring at 270 seconds. The vehicle deviated grossly from the planned trajectory in azimuth and velocity, and executed abnormal maneuvers in pitch and yaw. The missile was destroyed by the RSO at 293.5 seconds, some 12 seconds after SECO.\n\n(4) Atlas SLV-3 (GTA-9), 17 May 66. Vehicle became unstable when B2 pitch control was lost at 121 seconds. Loss of pitch control resulted in a pitch-down maneuver much greater than 90°. Guidance control was lost at 132 seconds. After BECO, the vehicle stabilized in an abnormal attitude. Although the vehicle did not follow the planned trajectory, SECO (at 280 seconds), VECO (at 298 seconds), and Agena separation occurred normally from programmer commands.\n\n(5) Atlas 95F (ABRES/AFSC), 3 May 68. Immediately after liftoff the telemetered roll and yaw rates indicated that the missile was erratic. During the first 10 seconds of flight the missile yawed hard to the left. It then began a hard yaw to the right,"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"crossed over the flight line and continued toward the right destruct line. Shortly thereafter the missile apparently pitched up violently and the IIP began moving back toward the beach. The missile was destructed at about 45 seconds when the altitude was about 14,000 feet and the downrange distance about 9 miles. Major pieces impacted less than a mile offshore, indicating uprange movement of the impact point during the last part of thrusting flight.\n\n(6) Delta Intelsat III, 18 Sep 68. Due to loss of rate gyro, undamped pitch oscillations began at 20 seconds. A series of violent maneuvers followed at 59 seconds. During the 13-second period while these maneuvers continued, the vehicle pitched down some 270°, then up 210°, and then made a large yaw to the left. At 72 seconds the vehicle regained control and flew stably in a down and leftward direction until 100 seconds. At this time, with the main engine against the pitch and yaw stops, the destabilizing aerodynamic forces became so large that quasi-control could no longer be maintained. The first stage broke up at 103 seconds. The second stage was destroyed by the RSO at 110.6 seconds. Major pieces impacted about 12 miles downrange and 2 miles left of the flight line.\n\n(7) Delta Pioneer E, 27 Aug 69. First-stage hydraulics system failed a few seconds before first-stage burnout (MECO). The vehicle pitched down, yawed left, rolled counterclockwise driving all gyros off limits, and then tumbled. Second-stage separation and ignition occurred while the vehicle was out of control. After about 20 seconds, the second stage regained control in a yaw-right, pitch-up attitude. It flew stably in this attitude for about 240 seconds until destroyed by the safety officer at T+484 seconds.\n\n(8) Atlas 68E, 8 Dec 80. Flight appeared normal until 102.7 seconds when the lube oil pressure on the B2 booster engine suddenly dropped. At 120.1 seconds, the engine shut down, followed 385 msec later by guidance shutdown of the B1 engine. The asymmetric thrust during shutdown caused yaw and roll rates that the flight control system could not correct. As a result, attitude control was lost and the thrusting sustainer pivoted the missile to a retrofire attitude before the vehicle could be stabilized. After the booster package was jettisoned, the missile was stabilized and decelerating in the retrofire mode by 148 seconds. The sustainer continued thrusting in this attitude until 282.9 seconds when reentry heating apparently caused sustainer shutdown and vehicle breakup."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It is obvious from the response-mode definitions in Appendix A that none of the described vehicle failures can be considered as a Mode 1, 2, or 3 response, or a Mode-4 on-trajectory failure.* Except possibly for (2), it also seems apparent that none can be modeled as either a rapid tumble or a slow turn.\n\n* Although prompt destruct action during any of the described flights might have resulted in a Mode-4 classification, the safety officer typically needs several seconds to evaluate data after a malfunction. Quick action is contrary to safety philosophy if impact limit lines are not threatened and the destruct system is not at risk, since additional flight time enhances the user's opportunity to pinpoint the nature of the problem."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A good illustration of a Mode-5 failure response occurred during launch of Prospector (Joust) on the Eastern Range in June 1991. The Joust consists of a single-stage Castor IV-A solid-propellant rocket motor and a payload module. The \"vehicle made a radical pitch-up maneuver due to aft-skirt structural failure at approximately T+14 Seconds.\" [2] The vacuum instantaneous impact trace from the RSO console is shown in Figure 1. If the safety officer had taken destruct action during the time interval from 18 to 25 seconds, impact would have been well away from the flight line.\n\nFigure 1. Joust Impact Trace Showing a Mode-5 Failure Response\n\nAs still another example of a Mode-5 failure response, a guided Red Tigress sounding rocket was launched from Pad 20 at Cape Canaveral on 20 Aug 91. Within a second or two after clearing the launcher, the rocket made a near 90° right turn, and flew stably in this direction until destroyed by the safety officer at 23.3 seconds. Pieces impacted some two or three miles from the launch pad. This failure might have been classified as a Mode-2 response if destruct action had been taken shortly after launch."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. Understanding the Mode-5 Failure Response\n\nUnlike failure response Modes 3 and 4, response Mode 5 (and also Mode 2) is not a direct function of time from launch. For Modes 3 and 4, the mean point of impact (MPI) for each debris class is fixed, once the failure time is established. At each instant there is only one possible location for the MPI for each debris class. On the other hand, the Mode-5 impact-density function for each debris class consists of a primary part and a secondary superimposed part. The primary impact-density function accounts for impact variability due to the erratic flight of the vehicle. It is used to determine the probability that the mean piece in a debris class resulting from vehicle breakup falls in a given area (say on a building or open field). The secondary density function accounts for debris dispersion due to vehicle breakup and to aerodynamic effects during free fall. It is used to determine the probability that fragments from the class actually hit a building or field. In other words, the primary impact-density function is used to compute the probability that the secondary function is centered in some specified area; the secondary function, which describes the distribution of class pieces about the mean point, is then used to compute the probability that one or more class pieces impacts on the specified population center or area.\n\nThe primary part of the Mode-5 impact density function, which was presented as Eq. (9.5) in Ref. [1], is reproduced here as Eq. (1):\n\nf(R,φ) = (Ce^(Aφ) + D/R) / (2(T_B − T_P)[C/A(e^(Aπ) − 1) + Dπ/R]RṘ) (1)\n\nwhere R is the range from the launch point in miles, φ* is the angle in radians between the uprange direction and a line from the pad through the impact point, Ṙ is the impact-range rate in miles per second. A and C are dimensionless shaping constants, and shaping-constant D is in miles. For a Mode-5 response, there is by definition an earliest time of occurrence T_P (pitch-over time) and a latest time of occurrence T_B (burnout, orbital injection, or some other specified termination time). The specific time in this span at which a Mode-5 response manifests itself is of no consequence, although the duration of the span must be considered in assigning a probability of occurrence for a Mode-5 response.\n\nGiven that a Mode-5 response has occurred, the probability that the center of the secondary function lies in some region or on some building (population center) is determined by integrating the primary impact-density function for the class over the region or building. The primary function depends on range (R) and direction (φ) from the launch point to the population center, but not directly on time from launch. The primary function does,\n\n* As an aid to understanding, the supplement of φ, designated as θ, is used in plots and tables in this report.\n\n9/10/96 7 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"however, involve the quantity Ṙ which is expressed explicitly as a function of R and only implicitly as a function of time. Values of R from the nominal trajectory are differenced to compute Ṙ.\n\nThe secondary Mode-5 impact-density function is circular normal in form and expressed by the equation\n\nf(d) = (1/(2πσ_c²)) e^(−½(d/σ_c)²) (2)\n\nwhere d is the distance from the impact point of the mean piece to the center of the target, and σ_c is the standard deviation (dispersion) for the debris class. The fact that the center of the secondary impact-density function (or secondary MPI for a debris class) lies on some population center does not necessarily mean that pieces in the class hit the center. The probability that one or more pieces actually hits the pop center is determined by integrating the secondary impact-density function over the center and combining results for all pieces in the class. The dispersions for the secondary function are computed by root-sum-squaring individual dispersions* arising from the effects of winds, vehicle-breakup velocities, and drag uncertainties for the class. They are computed from the nominal trajectory, and can be explicitly expressed as a function of impact range. Since the pop center can also be hit if the MPI of the secondary density function lies outside the pop center, all possible mutually-exclusive locations of the secondary function that can result in impact on the pop center must be considered. For each mutually-exclusive location, the probability that one or more class pieces impacts on the pop center is calculated, and the results combined to obtain the total hit probability for the class.\n\nThe Mode-5 primary impact-density function is modeled so it is independent of how the impact point arrives at a particular location. For example, there are myriad paths that a vehicle can travel to impact at a location two miles crossrange left from the launch pad. Figure 1 shows one such way for a Joust vehicle that failed at 15 seconds, but four seconds later had moved the impact point uprange and crossrange to a position two miles crossrange left from the launch point. Another way to place the impact point two miles crossrange left is for the vehicle to fly in the wrong direction (north instead of east) from liftoff.\n\nAlthough numerous failure mechanisms and vehicle behaviors can lead to a Mode-5 response and impact in a particular area, the exact mechanism and behavior are irrelevant. All such possibilities are assumed to be accounted for by Eq. (1). Four specific failures that produce Mode-5 responses are easily described: (1) a re-orientation of the guidance platform, (2) insertion of an erroneous spatial target into the guidance system, (3) locking of the engine nozzle in a fixed position near null thus producing a near-constant angular\n\n* These dispersions are a subset of the Mode-4 impact dispersions.\n\n9/10/96 8 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"acceleration of the vehicle body and a slow turn of the velocity vector, (4) erroneous accumulation of velocity bits by the guidance system. Many other Mode-5 responses are so convoluted that they defy description or categorization.\n\n3.1 Effects of Mode-5 Shaping Constants\n\nThe primary part of the Mode-5 impact-density function was presented previously as Eq. (1). As originally formulated, the function contained three shaping constants. If both numerator and denominator of the equation are divided by the constant C, and B is substituted for D/C, one unnecessary constant disappears so that the function may be expressed as follows:\n\nf(R,φ) = (e^(Aφ) + B/R) / (2(T_b − T_p)[1/A(e^(Aπ) − 1) + Bπ/R]RṘ) (3)\n\nThe values chosen for the shaping constants A and B that appear in Eq. (3) influence, but do not change, the basic nature of the Mode-5 impact-density function. For many years values of A = 2.5 and B = 1000 were used in the Eastern Range ship-hit computations, although in more recent risk studies the value of A has been increased to 3.0. This increase resulted from the observation that, in recent years, vehicles that experience Mode-5 failure responses seem less likely than earlier developmental vehicles to deviate significantly from the intended flight line. To see how A and B affect the distribution of Mode-5 impacts, and to further understanding of the function, the results of choosing various values of A and B are provided in Appendix B.\n\n3.2 Effects of Shaping Constant on DAMP Results\n\nAs pointed out in the Introduction, two important types of constant parameters required by DAMP for risk estimations must be determined. They are: (1) probability of a Mode-5 failure response, and (2) values of the Mode-5 shaping constants A and B, currently set at 3.0 and 1000, respectively. As will be demonstrated later, DAMP results are far more sensitive to changes in A than in B.\n\nThe following cases illustrate the effects that constant A has on calculated risks.\n\nCase 1: Baseline Risks for Atlas IIA\n\nIn the baseline risk analysis for Atlas IIA[3], the probability of a Mode-5 failure response was estimated at 12.5% of the total failure probability during the first 120 seconds of flight. Even so, risks resulting from Mode-5 responses accounted for about 90% of the total risks for people inside the impact limit lines (ILL). Table 1 indicates the range of risks inside the ILLs for day launches from Pad A using various estimates of the shaping constant A and a value of B = 1000.\n\n9/10/96 9 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 1. Effects of Mode-5 Shaping Constant A on Atlas IIA Risks\nB = 1,000 | Percent of Mode-5 IPs Uprange | Casualty Expectancy (x 10^-6) inside ILLs Mode 5 | Total for all Modes\nConstant A | | Mode 5 | Total for all Modes\n2.5 | 28.6 | 246 | 259.9\n3.0 | 20.7 | 136 | 149.4\n3.5 | 14.6 | 58.9 | 72.7\n4.0 | 10.0 | 30.5 | 44.3\n\nThe results in the third column are directly proportional to the probability that a Mode-5 failure occurs. For the Atlas IIA analysis, a value of 1/200 = 0.005 was assumed.\n\nCase 2: Risk Contours for Atlas IIAS\n\nDefinitions of Flight Hazard Area and Flight Caution Area may be based on the risk contours for inner-ear injury. Constant A can have a significant effect on the location of the 10^-6 contour, as illustrated in Figure 2 and Figure 3 for the Atlas IIAS. For these figures, the Mode-5 absolute probability of occurrence was 0.005, constant A was 3.0 and 3.5, and constant B was 1000.\n\n9/10/96 10 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Atlas IIAS Inner Ear Injury Mode-5 A = 3.0\n\n10^-6 10^-5 10^-4\n\nFigure 2. Atlas IIAS Risk Contours for Inner-Ear Injury with A = 3.0\n\n9/10/96 11 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Atlas IIAS\nInner Ear Injury\nMode-5 A = 3.5\n10^-6\n10^-5\n10^-4\nFigure 3. Atlas IIAS Risk Contours for Inner-Ear Injury with A = 3.5\n9/10/96\n12\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4. Methodology for Assessing Failure Probabilities\nA primary purpose of this study is to develop estimates of the relative probabilities of occurrence of a Mode-5 failure response for Atlas, Delta, Titan, and as a by-product, for other launch vehicles as well. Natural fallouts of this effort are the relative probabilities of occurrence of other failure-response modes used in program DAMP as well as overall vehicle failure probabilities. There are at least two approaches commonly used in estimating launch-vehicle failure probabilities: (1) a so-called parts-analysis or engineering approach, involving an engineering assessment of the reliability of various parts and components comprising each missile subsystem, and the effects of a part, component or subsystem failure; and (2) an empirical statistical approach based on actual launch results. There are serious problems with both approaches.\n4.1 The Parts-Analysis Approach\nA description of this approach, its difficulties and shortcomings, are discussed in some detail in a draft report by Booz•Allen & Hamilton, Inc.[4] prepared in 1992 for the Air Force Space Command. Since we cannot improve on the ideas and words expressed by Booz•Allen, we quote the following from that report:\n\"The engineering approach for calculation of launch vehicle success rates is based on measurement/estimation of piece-part reliabilities and their combination into reliability block models of the launch system. These block models ... include consideration of the criticality of individual components, the presence (or absence) of redundant capabilities, the likelihood that one component failure might cause a failure in another component, as well as other needed data. By combining the individual piece-part reliabilities in this model, the engineering approach produces an overall reliability estimate for the launch system.\n\"The engineering approach has several significant limitations that tend to reduce confidence in its results. First, the approach assumes that the interrelationships among and between sub-systems are understood sufficiently to enable development of a reliability block diagram. This assumption is highly questionable in complex systems, such as space launch vehicles, whose operational histories include many anecdotes regarding unexpected relationships between 'independent' sub-systems.\n\"The second drawback of the engineering approach is that it assesses the reliability of the system in a perfectly assembled condition. As a result, it assesses reliability without regard to manufacturing, processing, or operations variations and errors.\"\nEffects typically overlooked or ignored include:\na. Improper installation of components\nb. Erroneous computer programs\n9/10/96\n13\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"c. Insertion of improper computer programs\nd. Support-personnel fatigue\nA third limitation of the parts-analysis approach discussed in Ref. [4] deals with the subjectivity and invalid assumptions often used to estimate piece/component reliabilities. Here Booz•Allen quotes from a report[5] by the Office of Technology Assessment, and we do likewise:\n\"The design reliability of proposed vehicles is generally estimated using:\nData from laboratory tests of vehicle systems (e.g., engines and avionics) and components that have already been built;\nEngineer's judgments about the reliability achievable in systems and components that have not been built;\nAnalyses of whether a failure in one system or component would cause other systems and components, or the vehicle to fail; and\nAssumptions (often tacit) that:\nthe laboratory conditions under which systems were tested precisely duplicate the conditions under which the systems will operate,\nthe conditions under which the system will operate are those under which they were designed to operate,\nthe engineer's judgments about reliability are correct, and\nthe failure analyses considered all circumstances and details that influence reliability.\"\nSuch engineering estimates of design reliability are incomplete and subjective...\".\nEffects influencing reliability that the analyst may fail to consider include:\na. Lightning strikes\nb. Aging effects, particularly for solid propellants\nc. Corrosion\nd. Insufficient heat or cold insulation for critical components\ne. Icing\nf. Erroneous antennae patterns or instrumentation\nBooz•Allen concludes as follows:\n\"Finally, due to its nature, the engineering approach can not account for undetected design flaws. (If these flaws were detected, and could be modeled, they would be corrected.) However, experience has shown that design flaws do cause failures in operational launch systems, and will likely do so in the future.\"\nThe major objection to the parts-analysis approach, hinted at above but not actually expressed, is that all such approaches involve either explicitly or implicitly a so-called K-factor. The K-factor is included in the reliability calculations in an attempt to compensate for the fact that the environment in which a part or system is tested is not the same as the flight environment. Since the K-factor is surely not the same for all components and systems, multiple values must be assumed and the entire process becomes highly subjective.\nIn view of the objections and limitations just presented, in this report the parts-analysis approach is not considered in assessing vehicle reliability or in estimating the relative probabilities of occurrence of the various failure-response modes.\n4.2 The Empirical Approach\nA seemingly more objective way to evaluate vehicle reliability (or conversely, vehicle failure probabilities) is by examining the actual performance of flight-tested vehicles. In support of this approach, the following is quoted from the Office of Technology Assessment[5] report previously referenced:\n\"The only completely objective method of estimating a vehicle's probability of failure is by statistical analysis of number of failures observed in identical vehicles under conditions representative of those under which future launches will be attempted.\"\nAlthough we agree with the Office of Technology Assessment statement, the obvious difficulty with this approach is that no such sample of identical vehicles exists or is ever likely to exist.\nIn their report[4] previously referenced, Booz•Allen makes the same point in different words by stating that \"the empirical approach has one significant drawback in that it can not project the effects of changes in the launch systems\". The effects of such changes can only be assessed objectively by further flight testing.\nThe difficulty in projecting success rates (or failure rates) from past tests to future tests is clearly recognized. Nevertheless, RTI has relied exclusively on this method to estimate the relative probabilities of occurrence for the various failure-response modes. Even so, total objectivity cannot be claimed since, as will be seen later, the answers depend to a large extent on how the performance data are filtered, and how big a risk one wants to take that the true failure probability is underestimated.\n9/10/96\n14\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"they would be corrected.) However, experience has shown that design flaws do cause failures in operational launch systems, and will likely do so in the future.\"\nThe major objection to the parts-analysis approach, hinted at above but not actually expressed, is that all such approaches involve either explicitly or implicitly a so-called K-factor. The K-factor is included in the reliability calculations in an attempt to compensate for the fact that the environment in which a part or system is tested is not the same as the flight environment. Since the K-factor is surely not the same for all components and systems, multiple values must be assumed and the entire process becomes highly subjective.\nIn view of the objections and limitations just presented, in this report the parts-analysis approach is not considered in assessing vehicle reliability or in estimating the relative probabilities of occurrence of the various failure-response modes.\n4.2 The Empirical Approach\nA seemingly more objective way to evaluate vehicle reliability (or conversely, vehicle failure probabilities) is by examining the actual performance of flight-tested vehicles. In support of this approach, the following is quoted from the Office of Technology Assessment[5] report previously referenced:\n\"The only completely objective method of estimating a vehicle's probability of failure is by statistical analysis of number of failures observed in identical vehicles under conditions representative of those under which future launches will be attempted.\"\nAlthough we agree with the Office of Technology Assessment statement, the obvious difficulty with this approach is that no such sample of identical vehicles exists or is ever likely to exist.\nIn their report[4] previously referenced, Booz•Allen makes the same point in different words by stating that \"the empirical approach has one significant drawback in that it can not project the effects of changes in the launch systems\". The effects of such changes can only be assessed objectively by further flight testing.\nThe difficulty in projecting success rates (or failure rates) from past tests to future tests is clearly recognized. Nevertheless, RTI has relied exclusively on this method to estimate the relative probabilities of occurrence for the various failure-response modes. Even so, total objectivity cannot be claimed since, as will be seen later, the answers depend to a large extent on how the performance data are filtered, and how big a risk one wants to take that the true failure probability is underestimated.\n9/10/96\n15\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5. Computation of Failure Probabilities\nThe test results for Atlas, Delta, and Titan in the tables of Appendix D have been used for three primary purposes:\n(1) To predict or estimate the overall probability that each vehicle will fail during the various phases of flight (see Table 39, Appendix D, for flight-phase definitions).\n(2) To establish the relative and overall probabilities for Response Modes 1 through 5.\n(3) To establish the relative frequency of tumble for Response Modes 3 and 4.\n5.1 Overall Failure Probability\nTo predict failure probabilities for Atlas, Delta, and Titan, the test results in Appendix D for representative configurations (i.e., \"1\" in last column) have been filtered using three different weighting techniques described in Appendix C:\n(1) Equal weighting\n(2) Index-count weighting\n(3) Exponential weighting\nIn computing filtered or weighted failure probabilities, a test is assigned a score of one to indicate the occurrence of a failure or some anomalous behavior, and a score of zero if no failure occurred. Admittedly, there may be disagreements about the classification of a few flights, since the launch agency may consider as successful or partially successful some flights that are shown as failures in Appendix D. To avoid such disagreements, it is better to think of some non-normal events, particularly those occurring late in flight, as anomalies rather than failures. The flight phases, as shown in column 2 of Table 2 and defined in Appendix D.1.3, are inclusive; e.g., flight phase \"0 - 3\" includes phases 0, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, and 3. An 'NA' in the response-mode column in the tables of Appendix D indicates that some failure or anomalous behavior has had an effect on the final orbit or impact point without producing additional risks to people on the ground or necessarily failing the mission. In the failure-probability calculations of Table 2 and Table 3, an 'NA' has been considered as a success for all flight phases except \"0 - 5\", irrespective of the phase in which the failure or anomalous behavior took place. Only in flight phase \"0 - 5\" is an 'NA' response considered a failure. The filtered results for representative configurations (defined in Appendix D.1.4) are given in Table 2 for six flight phases. For flights with multiple entries in the Response-Mode and Flight-Phase columns (e.g., see Appendix D.2.1, No. 257), the first listed value was used in the filtering process.\n9/10/96\n16\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 2. Predicted Failure Probabilities for Representative Configurations\nVehicle | Flight Phase | Equal Weight | Index Count | Expon. F = 0.99 | Expon. F = 0.98 | Expon F = 0.97 | Sample Failures /Total\nAtlas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0/7\nAtlas 0 - 1 0.0256 0.0253 0.0245 0.0219 0.0186 4/156\nAtlas 0 - 2 0.0449 0.0385 0.0387 0.0313 0.0243 7/156\nAtlas 0 - 3 0.0769 0.0715 0.0714 0.0643 0.0568 12/156\nAtlas 0 - 4 0.0833 0.0811 0.0801 0.0740 0.0663 13/156\nAtlas 0 - 5 * 0.1090 0.1100 0.1078 0.1019 0.0929 17/156\nDelta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0/125\nDelta 0 - 1 0.0160 0.0126 0.0134 0.0104 0.0075 2/125\nDelta 0 - 2 0.0160 0.0126 0.0134 0.0104 0.0075 2/125\nDelta 0 - 3 0.0160 0.0126 0.0134 0.0104 0.0075 2/125\nDelta 0 - 4 0.0160 0.0126 0.0134 0.0104 0.0075 2/125\nDelta 0 - 5 * 0.0640 0.0447 0.0535 0.0469 0.0442 8/125\nTitan 0 0.0306 0.0210 0.0225 0.0292 0.0352 3/98\nTitan 0 - 1 0.0234 0.0305 0.0314 0.0403 0.0470 4/171\nTitan 0 - 2 0.0409 0.0496 0.0514 0.0642 0.0750 7/171\nTitan 0 - 3 0.0526 0.0581 0.0597 0.0689 0.0773 9/171\nTitan 0 - 4 0.0526 0.0581 0.0597 0.0689 0.0773 9/171\nTitan 0 - 5 * 0.1111 0.1167 0.1188 0.1284 0.1358 19/171\n* Includes response mode 'NA'\n\nIt is apparent from the data in Table 2 that estimates of future vehicle reliability depend on the filtering (i.e., weighting) technique applied. Since there are many ways to perform the filtering, all generally producing slightly different results, the choice of method to use in deriving empirical failure probabilities cannot be totally objective. Subjective decisions must also be made about which past configurations to consider as representative of future vehicles, which flight tests to include in the sample, how to weight the individual flights, and, in unusual cases, whether to consider a flight a success or a failure, and to which flight phase to attribute a failure. Except for data weighting (i.e., choice of filter), these decisions were made for Atlas, Delta, and Titan before computing the failure probabilities shown in Table 2.\n\nFor Atlas and Delta, it can be seen from Table 2 that the predicted failure probabilities computed with the exponential filter decrease as the value of F decreases. Since a decreasing F means more emphasis on recent data and less emphasis on the old, the launch reliability for these vehicles is apparently improving. The reverse seems to be true for Titan, suggesting either that Titan reliability is not improving or, possibly, that improvements that have been or are being made to the vehicle are not yet fully reflected in the test results. For Atlas and Delta, the computed failure probabilities based on equal weighting are higher than for all other filters, and the predicted failure\n\n9/10/96 17 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"probabilities using index-count filtering are larger than those for exponential filtering. For Titan, the results are mixed, further suggesting that Titan reliability has not improved in recent years.\n\nFor comparison purposes, the same filtering techniques have been applied to all flight tests shown in the tables of Appendix D, regardless of configuration. The results are presented in Table 3.\n\nTable 3. Predicted Failure Probabilities for All Configurations\nVehicle | Flight Phase | Equal Weight | Index Count | Expon. F = 0.99 | Expon. F = 0.98 | Expon. F = 0.97 | Sample Failures /Total\nAtlas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0/7\nAtlas 0 - 1 0.1053 0.0641 0.0422 0.0273 0.0190 56/532\nAtlas 0 - 2 0.1711 0.0990 0.0555 0.0311 0.0204 91/532\nAtlas 0 - 3 0.2086 0.1261 0.0802 0.0559 0.0455 111/532\nAtlas 0 - 4 0.2143 0.1330 0.0873 0.0627 0.0511 114/532\nAtlas 0 - 5 * 0.2575 0.1671 0.1150 0.0866 0.0725 137/532\nDelta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0/196\nDelta 0 - 1 0.0172 0.0164 0.0148 0.0110 0.0077 4/232\nDelta 0 - 2 0.0259 0.0232 0.0201 0.0133 0.0085 6/232\nDelta 0 - 3 0.0431 0.0279 0.0263 0.0150 0.0089 10/232\nDelta 0 - 4 0.0431 0.0279 0.0263 0.0150 0.0089 10/232\nDelta 0 - 5 * 0.1078 0.0766 0.0740 0.0536 0.0459 25/232\nTitan 0 0.0306 0.0137 0.0187 0.0281 0.0349 3/98\nTitan 0 - 1 0.0534 0.0319 0.0351 0.0399 0.0467 18/337\nTitan 0 - 2 0.1424 0.0771 0.0719 0.0662 0.0750 48/337\nTitan 0 - 3 0.1632 0.0924 0.0830 0.0711 0.0770 55/337\nTitan 0 - 4 0.1662 0.0942 0.0840 0.0712 0.0771 56/337\nTitan 0 - 5 * 0.1958 0.1369 0.1326 0.1277 0.1346 66/337\n* Includes response mode 'NA'\n\nA comparison of Table 2 and Table 3 shows that in most cases, but not all, exponential filtering produces failure probabilities for the representative configuration samples that are smaller than the corresponding probabilities for the all-configuration samples. The fact that most differences between corresponding samples are relatively small attests to the effectiveness of the exponential filter in down-weighting early launch failures. This is not the case for equal weighting of tests, where the predicted failure probabilities based on all configurations are up to 3.6 times as large.\n\nWith respect to the weighting of missile and space-vehicle performance data, RTI favors an exponential filter over either the equal-weight or index-count filters. Weighting percentages for the three filters are given in Table 4 for sample sizes of 4 to 1,000. Except for small samples, the percentages produced by equal weighting place too much emphasis on old data, thus failing to account for the learning process and\n\n9/10/96 18 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"hardware improvements that have taken place through the years. For samples approaching 100 or so, it seriously over-weights the old data and under-weights the more recent events. Although equal weighting does not seem suitable for this application, it could be appropriate in other large-sample situations, for example, predicting the failure probability of devices that are all manufactured at the same time by the same process, and tested to the same standards.\n\nTable 4. Comparison of Weighting Percentages\nSample Size | Filter * | Last + Point | Last 5 Points | Last 10 Points | Last 25 Points | Last 50 Points | Last Half\n4 Expon. 25.8 - - - - 51.0\n4 Index 40.0 - - - - 70.0\n4 Equal 25.0 - - - - 50.0\n10 Expon. 10.9 52.5 100.0 - - 52.5\n10 Index 18.2 72.7 100.0 - - 72.5\n10 Equal 10.0 50.0 100.0 - - 50.0\n20 Expon. 6.0 28.9 55.0 - - 55.0\n20 Index 9.5 42.9 73.8 - - 73.8\n20 Equal 5.0 25.0 50.0 - - 50.0\n100 Expon. 2.3 11.1 21.1 45.7 73.3 73.3\n100 Index 2.0 9.7 18.9 43.6 74.8 74.8\n100 Equal 1.0 5.0 10.0 25.0 50.0 50.0\n200 Expon. 2.0 9.8 18.6 40.4 64.7 88.3\n200 Index 1.0 4.9 9.7 23.4 43.7 74.9\n200 Equal 0.5 2.5 5.0 12.5 25.0 50.0\n500 Expon. 2.0 9.6 18.3 39.7 63.6 99.4\n500 Index 0.4 2.0 4.0 9.7 19.0 75.0\n500 Equal 0.2 1.0 2.0 5.0 10.0 50.0\n1000 Expon. 2.0 9.6 18.3 39.7 63.6 99.996\n1000 Index 0.1 1.0 2.0 4.9 9.7 75.0\n1000 Equal 0.1 0.5 1.0 2.5 5.0 50.0\n* F = 0.98 for exponential filter\n+ \"Last\" refers to the most recent data point\n\nThe index-count filter has serious deficiencies when applied to either small or large samples of missiles and space vehicles. For small samples, too much emphasis is placed on recent data. For a sample of four, 40% of the total weight is given to the last test, and 70% to the last two tests. For a sample of ten, 18.2% of the total weight is given to the last test and 72.7% to the last five tests. The reliability improvement rate implied by these weightings seems too optimistic unless there were serious design flaws in the early configurations that were discovered and corrected. Since many types of failures surely exist that occur only once in 50 or once in 100 or more launches, the tenth launch may be no better than the first for predicting the probability of occurrence of such failures. For large samples, the index-count filter under-weights current data\n\n9/10/96 19 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"more and more as the sample size increases. For samples of 200, 500, and 1000, the weighting of the last 50 tests are, in each case, 43.7%, 19.0%, and 9.7% of the total weight. For samples of 100 or more, no matter how large, the index-count filter assigns 25% of the data weight to the oldest half of the data sample - too much in RTI's opinion.\n\nFor missiles and space vehicles, the data weightings imposed by the exponential filter (F = 0.98) appear reasonable. For small samples less than 20 or so, there is little difference between equal and exponential weightings. For sample sizes near 80, the index-count and exponential filters produce similar results. For sample sizes of 200 and more, the weights assigned to the most recent 5, 10, 25, and 50 tests are essentially constant, showing the fading-memory nature of the exponential filter.\n\nThe denominator of the exponential-filter equation [Eq. (18), Appendix C] is a geometric series that asymptotically approaches a limit of [1/(1 - F)] as n approaches infinity. For F = 0.98, that limit is 50. Thus, the last data point, which is always given a weight of one, can never be weighted less than 2% of the total, no matter how large the sample. For samples of 200 and 300, the oldest half of the data receives only 11.7% and 5% of the total weight. For samples of 500 and larger, the oldest half of the data sample is essentially omitted altogether. The exponential filter is clearly a fading-memory filter, as it should be for space-vehicle performance data.\n\nHaving decided upon the exponential filter as the best method for weighting missile and space-vehicle performance data, a filter constant F must be chosen. To see how data weighting varies with filter-factor value, weighting percentages for various samples were computed for representative configurations of Atlas, Delta, and Titan using values of F from 0.96 to 0.995. The results are shown in Table 5.\n\n9/10/96 20 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 5. Filter Factor Influence on Weighting Percentages\nVehicle (sample) | Filter Cons't | Last Point | Last 10 Points | Last 50 Points | Last Half * | Last 100 Points | Pt. Ratio last: first\nAtlas (156) 0.96 4.01 33.6 87.2 96.0 98.5 560\nAtlas (156) 0.97 3.03 26.5 78.9 91.5 96.1 112\nAtlas (156) 0.98 2.09 19.1 66.4 82.9 90.6 22.9\nAtlas (156) 0.99 1.26 12.1 49.9 68.7 80.1 4.7\nAtlas (156) 0.995 0.92 9.0 40.9 59.7 72.7 2.2\nDelta (125) 0.96 4.02 33.5 87.5 92.9 98.9 158\nDelta (125) 0.97 3.07 26.9 80.0 87.3 97.4 43.7\nDelta (125) 0.98 2.17 19.9 69.1 78.3 94.3 12.2\nDelta (125) 0.99 1.40 13.4 55.2 65.6 88.6 3.5\nDelta (125) 0.995 1.07 10.5 47.6 58.2 84.7 1.9\nTitan (171) 0.96 4.00 33.5 87.1 97.1 98.4 1030\nTitan (171) 0.97 3.02 26.4 78.6 93.2 95.8 177\nTitan (171) 0.98 2.07 18.9 65.7 85.1 89.6 31.0\nTitan (171) 0.99 1.22 11.7 48.1 70.5 77.2 5.5\nTitan (171) 0.995 0.87 8.5 38.5 60.8 68.5 2.3\n* Last half + 1 if sample size is odd\n\nAlthough the choice of a filter constant cannot be completely objective, use of a value less than 0.97 or greater than 0.99 produces undesirable weightings. For F = 0.96, for example, the most recent test result for Titan is weighted 1030 times that for the oldest test; the last 50 data points receive 87.1% of the total weighting, leaving only 12.9% for the first 121 flights; the last 100 flights receive 98.4% of the total weighting thus, in effect, omitting the oldest 71 flights from the solution.\n\nAt the high end of the F spectrum, a value of 0.995 fails to down-weight the old test results sufficiently. Using Atlas as an example, the most recent data point (1/31/96) is weighted only 2.2 times that of the oldest data point (8/14/64). The oldest half of the data, stretching from 8/14/64 to 3/06/73, receives 40% of the total weight, and the earliest 56 launches, comprising 36% of the data, receive 27% (100 - 73) of the total weight. This is not too different from equal weighting of tests, a procedure that fails to acknowledge the improvements in Atlas reliability that have taken place over a period of 32 years.\n\nIn choosing a value of F, an attempt is made to strike a suitable balance between two contrary objectives:\n\n(1) to down-weight substantially those failures for which the probability of occurrence has been greatly reduced through redesign and replacement of components, improved test procedures, and the like;\n\n9/10/96 21 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(2) to down-weight only slightly, or not at all, those failures that are random in nature, that can still occur in replacement components, or that occur only once in 100 or several hundred launches in components that have not yet failed.\n\nNo matter what technique is employed, filtering is at best a compromise. The perfect filter would somehow down-weight to some extent or entirely those failures that have been \"fixed\" or made less likely, without down-weighting those random failures with unknown causes. The filters considered in this study have no such capabilities; they produce a result based solely on the launch sequence, and where in the sequence failures have occurred.\n\nIn predicting vehicle failure probabilities from empirical data, large representative samples are essential for a good estimate, and the more reliable the vehicle, the greater the need for a large sample. For example, if some characteristic exists in exactly 1% of a population, the probability is 0.37 that it will not appear in a random sample of 100, and 0.61 that it will not appear if the sample size is 50. If the characteristic exists in 2% of the population, it fails to appear about 36% of the time in a random sample of 50.\n\nFor reasons presented above, the data samples for Atlas, Delta, and Titan have been made as large as possible consistent with the notion of representative configurations, as set forth in Ref. [4]. In RTI's judgment, the value of F that best weights the performance data is 0.98, although a value anywhere in the interval 0.97 to 0.99 cannot be ruled out. For consistency in data weighting, the same values of F have been used for all vehicle programs. The differences in predicted failure probability that result from these three F's are illustrated in Figure 4 for Atlas. The plots show the inverse relationship between filter volatility and the value of F. For F = 0.97 vis-à-vis larger values, it can be seen that the filtered failure probability jumps higher with each failure and drops at a faster rate with each successful launch that follows."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 6. Failure Probabilities for Atlas, Delta, and Titan\n\nPredicted Failure Probability *\nVehicle | Flight Phase 0 - 1 | Flight Phase 0 - 2\nAtlas 0.022 0.031\nDelta 0.010 0.013\nTitan 0.040 0.064\n* Exponential filter with F = 0.98\n\nFor Delta, the predicted failure probabilities shown in Table 2 for flight-phases 0 - 1 and 0 - 2 are the same, since no second-stage failure has occurred in the 125 flights included in the representative sample. Obviously, this does not mean that the probability of a Delta second-stage failure is zero. As stated earlier, the choice of F is a judgment matter with the most reasonable range for F considered to be 0.97 ≤ F ≤ 0.99. To show a difference in failure probabilities between Delta flight phases, a value of F = 0.98 has been used for flight phases 0 - 1, and 0.99 for flight phases 0 - 2. It is an interesting coincidence that the same value of 0.013 is obtained using F = 0.98 and all Delta configurations (see Table 3). Another way to estimate the Delta second-stage failure probability is to calculate an upper confidence limit at some suitable level for an event that has occurred zero times in 125 trials. At the 80% confidence level, the reliability is at least 0.987, so the failure probability during second-stage burn (flight phases 1.5 - 2) is no bigger than 0.013.\n\n5.2 Relative and Absolute Probabilities for Response Modes\n\nFor Atlas, Delta, and Titan vehicles, failure-response Modes 1, 2, and 3 are much less likely to occur than Modes 4 and 5. Since the probabilities of occurrence for the less-likely modes may be only one in a thousand or less, such responses may not have occurred at all in the flight tests of representative configurations. In fact, in the combined samples for Atlas, Delta, and Titan, only 16 failures have occurred during flights phases 0 - 2. None of the 16 resulted in response-modes 1, 2, or 3. Because of the small number of failures in the representative configuration samples, the relative probabilities of occurrence for Modes 1 through 5 have been estimated using results from all vehicle configurations and launches shown in Appendix D. The rationale for this approach is that, except for obvious problems that have been corrected, other changes made through the years to improve vehicle reliability have reduced the probabilities of occurrence of all response modes more or less proportionally. The greater significance of more recent vehicle modifications and test results is accounted for by using an exponential filter to estimate overall failure probabilities. Thus, if Mode-1 failures occurred more frequently in the distant past than in recent years, the weighting process reduces the significance of the earlier Mode-1 responses in the relative probability-of-occurrence calculations. As tabulated from Appendix D, the number (count) of failures by response mode and flight phase for Atlas, Delta, Titan, and Eastern-Range Thor launches are given in Table 7 through Table 10. Thor launches"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"from the Western Range were not included since available performance records were incomplete. The results for the four vehicles are combined in Table 11. Table 12 gives last-occurrence dates by response mode for each launch vehicle.\n\nTable 7. Number of Atlas Failures - All Configurations (532 Flights)\nTable 8. Number of Delta Failures - All Configurations (232 Flights)\nTable 9. Number of Titan Failures - All Configurations (337 Flights)\nTable 10. Number of Eastern-Range Thor Failures (85 Flights)\n\nTable 11. Number of Failures for All Vehicles (1186 Flights)\nTable 12. Date of Most Recent Failure\n\nFor the reasons advanced previously, an exponential filter has been used to estimate relative probabilities of occurrence for Modes 1 through 5 and the fraction of Mode-3 and Mode-4 failures that tumble while the vehicle is thrusting. The percentage weightings for various data samples are shown in Table 13 for values of F from 0.980 to 0.999. Because of the large size of the composite sample (1186), the filter-control constant of 0.98 used previously to estimate absolute failure probabilities for individual vehicles does not seem suitable for estimating relative probabilities for the individual response modes. Use of 0.98 would effectively place 98.2% of the total weight on the most recent 200 tests thus, in effect, eliminating the earliest 986 tests from the solution. These are the very tests needed to provide an adequate sample of failures from which to estimate relative frequencies of occurrence of the individual response modes."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 13. Percentage Weighting for Sample of 1186 Launches\nFilter Constant | Last Point | Last 100 Points | Last 200 Points | Last 300 Points | Last 500 Points | Point Ratio Last:First\n0.999 | 0.14 | 13.7 | 26.1 | 37.3 | 56.7 | 3.3\n0.996 | 0.40 | 33.3 | 55.6 | 70.6 | 87.3 | 1.2 x 10^2\n0.995 | 0.50 | 39.5 | 63.5 | 78.0 | 92.1 | 3.8 x 10^2\n0.994 | 0.60 | 45.3 | 70.0 | 83.6 | 95.1 | 1.3 x 10^3\n0.993 | 0.70 | 50.5 | 75.5 | 87.9 | 97.0 | 4.2 x 10^3\n0.992 | 0.80 | 55.2 | 79.9 | 91.0 | 98.2 | 1.4 x 10^4\n0.991 | 0.90 | 59.5 | 83.6 | 93.4 | 98.9 | 4.5 x 10^4\n0.990 | 1.00 | 63.4 | 86.6 | 95.1 | 99.3 | 1.5 x 10^5\n0.980 | 2.00 | 86.7 | 98.2 | 99.8 | 99.996 | 3.9 x 10^11\n\nThe value of F = 0.999 is considered inappropriate because, as seen in Table 13, the weighting factor applied to the most recent datum is only 3.3 times that applied to the oldest test result from 39 years ago. The most recent 200 and 300 points in the sample comprising 16.8% and 25.2% of the data receive only 26.1% and 37.3% of the total weight. This is not too different from equal weighting of data, which is appropriate only if the relative frequency of occurrence of each response mode has not changed significantly through the years. On the other hand, use of F = 0.99 effectively throws out the oldest 600 to 700 launches that are sorely needed for an adequate sample size.\n\nThe results of the filtering process are given in Table 14 for failures during flight phases 0 - 2.\n\nTable 14. Response-Mode Occurrence Percentages\nFilter Factor | Response Mode 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5\n0.999 | 7.39 | 2.27 | 1.70 | 73.30 | 15.34\n0.996 | 2.24 | 4.35 | 0.37 | 80.37 | 12.67\n0.995 | 1.32 | 4.92 | 0.19 | 82.59 | 10.98\n0.994 | 0.73 | 5.26 | 0.09 | 84.57 | 9.35\n0.993 | 0.39 | 5.37 | 0.04 | 86.25 | 7.95\n0.992 | 0.20 | 5.31 | 0.02 | 87.68 | 6.78\n0.991 | 0.11 | 5.13 | 0.01 | 88.92 | 5.84\n0.990 | 0.05 | 4.87 | 0.00 | 90.02 | 5.06\n0.980 | 0.00 | 1.86 | 0.00 | 96.81 | 1.33\n\nThe results in Table 14 show that the percentages of occurrence for response-modes 2 and 4 are relatively insensitive to filter-factor values, while the percentages for Modes 1, 3, and 5 decrease as filter memory (filter factor) decreases. This suggests that occurrences of Modes 1, 3, and 5 have been decreasing over the years, while Modes 2 and 4 occurrences have not changed much. Although it cannot be argued convincingly"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that 0.993 is superior to 0.992 or 0.994, or even values outside this interval, a value of 0.993 was chosen.\n\nThis section has thus far described a rationale for selecting a filtering process and filter constant to estimate percentages of occurrence of failure-response modes for Atlas, Delta, and Titan launch vehicles. These are mature launch systems with improved reliability as a result of years of experience and corrections of problems. Although the designs of new launch vehicles may be based to some extent on mature systems, new systems are expected to fail at a higher rate. For vehicles with liquid-propellant stages burning at liftoff, the percentages of occurrence of the various response modes are more likely to be similar to the earlier versions of Atlas, Delta, and Titan than to current vehicles. For lack of any other data, for such new liquid-propellant systems the relative percentages for the five failure-response modes have been calculated using the total combined sample of Atlas, Delta, Titan, and Thor with a filter constant of 0.999 (almost equal weighting).\n\nFor new solid-propellant vehicles, use of F = 0.999 results in a Mode-1 percentage that seems much too high. All of the 13 Mode-1 failures in the composite sample (Table 11) involved liquid-propellant vehicles, whereas none of the Atlas, Delta, or Titan configurations with solid-propellant boosters have experienced a Mode-1 response. On the other hand, use of F = 0.993 that is applied for mature launch systems seems to reduce the probability of a Mode-5 response too much, since a Red Tigress vehicle and a Joust vehicle launched at the Cape in 1991 both experienced Mode-5 failure responses (see Section 2). As a compromise between new and mature liquid-propellant vehicles, a value of F = 0.996 has been assumed for new solid-propellant vehicles. The percentages shown in Table 15 for flight phases 0 - 2 have been obtained from Table 14. Similar information for flight phases 0 - 1 are given in Table 16. In future risk studies for the 45 SW/SE, RTI plans to use these relative percentages for mature and new systems.\n\nTable 15. Recommended Response-Mode Percentages for Flight Phases 0 - 2\nResponse Mode | Mature Launch Systems (F = 0.993) | New Solid Systems (F = 0.996) | New Liquid Systems (F = 0.999)\n1 | 0.4 | 2.2 | 7.4\n2 | 5.4 | 4.3 | 2.3\n3 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 1.7\n4 | 86.2 | 80.4 | 73.3\n5 | 7.9 | 12.7 | 15.3"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 16. Recommended Response-Mode Percentages for Flight Phases 0 - 1\nResponse Mode | Mature Launch Systems (F = 0.993) | New Solid Systems (F = 0.996) | New Liquid Systems (F = 0.999)\n1 | 0.5 | 3.4 | 10.7\n2 | 7.4 | 6.6 | 4.3\n3 | 0.1 | 0.6 | 2.4\n4 | 81.9 | 74.5 | 67.0\n5 | 10.1 | 14.9 | 15.6\n\nAbsolute probabilities of occurrence for response Modes 1 through 5 can be obtained by multiplying the absolute failure probabilities for flight phases 0 - 1 and 0 - 2 (Table 6) by the relative failure probabilities in Table 15 and Table 16. The results are shown in Table 17. Probabilities are listed to six decimal places to show differences, not because all figures are actually significant. To obtain these results, more precise values for relative probabilities of occurrence were used than shown in Table 15 and Table 16.\n\nTable 17. Absolute Failure Probabilities for Response Modes 1 - 5\nVehicle: | Atlas | Delta | Titan\nFlight Phase: | 0-1 (0-170 sec) | 0-2 (0-280 sec) | 0-1 (0-270 sec) | 0-2 (0-630 sec) | 0-1 (0-300 sec) | 0-2 (0-540 sec)\nMode 1 | 0.000119 | 0.000121 | 0.000054 | 0.000051 | 0.000216 | 0.000250\nMode 2 | 0.001637 | 0.001665 | 0.000744 | 0.000698 | 0.002976 | 0.003437\nMode 3 | 0.000011 | 0.000012 | 0.000005 | 0.000005 | 0.000020 | 0.000026\nMode 4 | 0.018007 | 0.026738 | 0.008185 | 0.011212 | 0.032740 | 0.055200\nMode 5 | 0.002226 | 0.002465 | 0.001012 | 0.001034 | 0.004048 | 0.005088\nTotal | 0.022 | 0.031 | 0.010 | 0.013 | 0.040 | 0.064\n\nFor each vehicle, the absolute probabilities for Modes 1, 2, and 3 differ slightly for flight phases 0 - 1 and 0 - 2. This difference is due to the unequal data weighting produced by the exponential filter. If equal data weighting had been applied, the absolute probabilities for these modes would have been identical as expected, since Modes 1, 2, and 3 cannot occur beyond flight phase 1.\n\nDifferences in absolute probabilities for Modes 4 and 5 for flight phases 0 - 1 and 0 - 2 can also be seen in the table. A part of this difference may result from unequal data weighting, but primarily it is due to the obvious fact that fewer Mode 4 and 5 failures have occurred during flight phase 0 - 1 than during the longer span of flight phase 0 - 2."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5.3 Relative Probability of Tumble for Response-Modes 3 and 4\n\nExponential filters with values of F from 0.98 to 0.999 have been used to estimate the percentage of Mode-3 and Mode-4 responses that terminate with a thrusting tumble. Results are given in Table 18 for flight phases 0 - 2 and 0 - 5. For launch-area risk calculations, only flight phases 0 - 2 are of interest. The data sample was a chronological composite of all Atlas, Delta, Titan, and Thor tests and configurations shown in Appendix D. To several decimal places at least, the values in the table are determined entirely from Mode-4 responses, since the last vehicle to experience a Mode-3 response (4/25/61) is weighted out of the solution. The results in Table 18 are based on a total sample size of 1,186 flight tests.\n\nTable 18. Percent of Response Modes 3 and 4 That Tumble\nFilter Factor | Flight Phases 0 - 2 | Flight Phases 0 - 5\n0.999 | 25.0 | 25.0\n0.996 | 26.3 | 27.0\n0.993 | 27.3 | 28.6\n0.990 | 28.3 | 30.1\n0.980 | 31.3 | 34.8\n\nThrough flight phase 2, there were 33 tumbles out of a total of 132 Mode-3 and Mode-4 responses. Through flight phase 5, there were 42 tumbles out of 168 Mode-3 and Mode-4 responses.\n\nAs seen from Table 13, the smaller the filter factor, the greater the weight placed on recent test data. In view of this, it is apparent from Table 18 that the percentage of Mode-4 responses that end with a thrusting tumble has been increasing gradually. The same conclusion is reached for flight phases 0 - 2 and 0 - 5. In recognition of this gradual increase, in future studies RTI will assume that approximately one-third of Mode-3 and Mode-4 failure responses end with a thrusting tumble."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6. Shaping Constants Through Simulation\n\nSince adequate test data are not available to establish the Mode-5 shaping constants empirically, other methods are needed for this purpose. It will be recalled that, after vehicle pitchover, any malfunction with the potential to cause a substantial deviation from the intended flight line is, by definition, a Mode-5 failure response. The malfunction need not actually cause a large deviation to be classified as a Mode-5 response. One such class of failures leading to a Mode-5 response has been termed a random-attitude failure. Such responses can result from guidance and control failures that lead to erroneous orientation of the guidance platform or an erroneous spatial target. Another class of failures that can cause sustained deviation away from the flight line is the slow turn, where the engine nozzle, in effect, locks in some fixed position, generally but not necessarily near null. Both types of malfunctions have been investigated in an attempt to estimate numerical values for Mode-5 shaping constants A and B. Basically, the idea is to (1) run a large sample of random-attitude and slow-turn failures, (2) calculate the percentages of impacts in five-degree sectors from 0° to 180°, (3) compare these percentages with those obtained from the Mode-5 impact density function when specific values are assigned to A and B, and (4) assign values to A and B until the best possible fit is obtained between the simulated-turn impacts and the theoretical Mode-5 impacts.\n\n6.1 Malfunction Turn Simulations\n\n6.1.1 Random-Attitude Failures\n\nA guidance and control failure leading to a fixed erroneous direction of thrust is termed a random-attitude failure. Such failures represent a subset of possible Mode-5 failure responses. Random-attitude failures can be used to establish the maximum possible region of impact, given that a vehicle has flown normally for a specified period of time. For this purpose RTI has developed a Random-Attitude Failure Impact Point (RAFIP) program written in Fortran (3900 lines of code) for execution on a personal computer.\n\nUsing a Monte Carlo approach, program RAFIP first selects a starting time and then a random thrust direction on the attitude sphere, with all directions having the same chance of being chosen. Each Monte-Carlo run is begun using the nominal vehicle position and velocity at the selected start time, assuming an instantaneous change in thrust direction. Thrust is applied continuously in the selected random direction, and the equations of motion are numerically integrated until one of four conditions is satisfied: (1) final stage burnout occurs, (2) the vehicle impacts while thrusting, (3) orbital insertion occurs, (4) the vehicle breaks up due to aerodynamic forces\n\nFor conditions (1) and (4), the trajectory is extended to impact using Kepler's equations. For condition (3), an impact point does not exist. The process just described is repeated"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"for a suitably large sample so the distribution of resulting impact points will, for all practical purposes, represent all possible impact points, irrespective of the actual nature of the failure.\n\nDepending on vehicle breakup characteristics and failure time, a vehicle that experiences a random-attitude failure may break up at the instant of failure, or after a few seconds into the turn, or not at all. In making the calculations, three separate breakup thresholds and a no-breakup case were investigated. With respect to vehicle breakup, the assumption was made that the vehicle would break up if qα exceeded a specified constant limit, where q is the dynamic pressure and α is the total angle of attack. Although the breakup qα may well be a complicated function of Mach number and other parameters, this simplistic approach was taken.\n\nRandom-attitude-failure calculations were made individually for Atlas, Delta, Titan, and LLV1 starting shortly after pitchover and continuing to some convenient time such as a stage burnout when the vehicle could no longer endanger the launch area. Theoretically, the Mode-5 impact density function extends downrange until the instantaneous impact point vanishes. Since this study is concerned with evaluation of density-function parameters for launch-area risk analysis, the random-attitude calculations were stopped at a staging event when the vehicle no longer had sufficient energy to return the impact point to the launch area. Using trajectory data for each vehicle, program RAFIP was run to generate 10,000 impact-point samples at each starting time. Calculations were made at ten-second intervals.\n\n6.1.2 Slow-Turn Failures\n\nCertain types of guidance and control failures can cause the thrusting engine to gimbal to null or a near-null position. Such failures can produce what is herein called a slow turn. For various reasons, after an engine is commanded to null it may not thrust precisely through the center of gravity, e.g., structural misalignments, shifting center of gravity, canted nozzles. Since, like random-attitude failures, slow turns constitute a subset of Mode-5 failure responses, they have been investigated using RTI program RAFIP. The following assumptions have been made in making the calculations:\n\n(1) The effective thrust offset of a \"nulled\" engine is normally distributed with a zero mean and a standard deviation of 0.1°.\n\n(2) A fixed thrust offset results in a constant angular acceleration of the airframe, and thus a constant angular acceleration of the thrust vector.\n\n(3) For small thrust misalignments, the angular acceleration of the airframe is proportional to the angular thrust misalignment.\n\nAt each time point, the angular acceleration produced by small thrust offsets was estimated from the malfunction turn data provided to the safety office by the range user. Malfunction turns for the Atlas IIAS were provided for three gimbal angles, the smallest being one degree. For each gimbal angle, the results were plotted as"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cumulative angle turned versus time. Since the slope of the curve (i.e., the turning rate) is greatest when the thrust (and thus airframe) is directed at right angles to the velocity vector, the average angular acceleration during the first 90° of rotation was obtained from the equation\n\nθ̈ = (1/2)θ̈ t² (4)\n\nso that\n\nθ̈ = 2θ(deg)/t²(sec²) = 180 deg/t² sec² (5)\n\nwhere t is the elapsed time from the beginning of the tumble turn until the airframe has rotated approximately 90°. If the assumption is made that the angular acceleration is directly proportional to the thrust offset angle (i.e., nozzle deflection), the angular acceleration θ̈d for any small deflection angle becomes\n\nθ̈d = θ̈ δd/δ (6)\n\nwhere θ̈ is the angular acceleration computed from Eq. (5) for deflection angle δ (1° for Atlas IIAS), and δd is some small deflection angle.\n\nUsing the Atlas IIAS data, angular accelerations θ̈ were computed at ten-second intervals from the programming time of 15 seconds to 275 seconds for δ = 1°. For each starting time, a normal distribution with zero mean and a standard deviation of 0.1° was sampled to obtain an initial thrust misalignment δd to substitute in Eq. (6). The resulting angular acceleration θ̈d was applied throughout the turn. Slow-turn calculations were made in a manner analogous to the random-attitude turns, using the reference trajectory to obtain the starting position and velocity components. The slow turn was assumed to occur in a randomly oriented plane containing the starting velocity vector. Each turn was carried out until one of the four conditions listed in Section 6.1.1 for random-attitude turns was met. For conditions (1) and (4), impact points were calculated and, along with thrusting impacts from condition (2), summed for each five-degree sector from 0° to 175°. At each starting time, 10,000 impact-point calculations were made.\n\n6.1.3 Factors Affecting Malfunction-Turn Results\n\nRandom-attitude turns and slow turns are only subsets of the totality of Mode-5 failure responses. As discussed earlier in Section 3, other types of behavior following a Mode-5 failure are numerous and largely impossible to categorize, much less simulate. Ideally, impact distributions from all types of Mode-5 responses should be combined before results are compared with those obtained from the theoretical Mode-5 impact"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"density function. Since this could not be done in general, impacts from only the two types of malfunction turns were considered. Several factors affect the results of the simulations:\n\na. Weighting of turn data: Both random-attitude and slow-turn simulations were made for Atlas IIAS. In combining impacts from the two data sets, random-attitude turns were assumed to be three times as likely to occur as slow turns. A factor of three was selected since, among the Mode-5 failure responses in the performance summaries for Atlas, Delta, and Titan, random-attitude turns appeared to occur about three times as often as slow turns. In many cases, lack of detailed information made it difficult to decide whether a Mode-5 response should be considered as a random-attitude turn, a slow turn, or some other type of failure. The relative weighting of turns makes little difference, however, since the impact distribution for the two types of turns are similar (as shown later in Figure 5), and since the weighted composite must lie between the two. It was assumed that similar results would be obtained for Delta, Titan, and LLV1, so slow-turn computations were not made for these vehicles, cutting the number of time-consuming simulations in half.\n\nb. Breakup qα: In the turn calculations, the assumption was made that vehicle breakup would occur if a certain value of qα was reached. In addition to the no-breakup case which is considered unrealistic, separate runs were made for three constant values of qα: 5,000, 10,000, and 20,000 deg-lb/ft². As stated previously, the determination of vehicle breakup is, in reality, much more involved than this simplistic approach would suggest. However, to add realism to the malfunction-turn calculations, use of a simple approach seemed better than none at all. For Titan IV, allowable (but not breakup) qα's were provided as functions of Mach number. The maximum permissible value and corresponding Mach number for Titan/Centaur, Titan/NUS, and Titan/IUS were, respectively, 6819 deg-lb/ft² at Mach No. 0.77, 5332 deg-lb/ft² at Mach No. 0.815, and 17,000 deg-lb/ft² at Mach No. 0.325. For Atlas, Delta, and LLV1 vehicles, no breakup qα data were available. The breakup qα's used in the calculations bracket the range of permissible qα's for the Titan vehicles.\n\nc. End time TB: The simulated impact distributions from random-attitude failures and slow turns were compared with impact distributions computed from the Mode-5 theoretical impact-density function. For the comparisons to be meaningful, the value selected for TB in the Mode-5 impact-density equation and the stop time for thrusting-turn simulations must be the same. To some extent, the shaping constants A and B derived by fitting the theoretical and simulated impact data depend on TB, since the percentage of impacts in each 5° sector depends on TB. However, after A and B have been established for a particular TB, using a different TB in the DAMP calculations has no effect on computed risks provided an adjustment is made in the probability of occurrence of a Mode-5"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"response. Referring to Eq. (3), the right-hand member must be multiplied by the probability p5 of a Mode-5 response to obtain absolute probabilities. Except for TB itself (and to a slight degree, shaping constants A and B), the quantities in the equation do not depend on TB. Thus if TB and p5 are both changed so that p5/(TB − TP) remains constant, the computed risks are unchanged.\n\nIf destruct action (i.e., impact limit lines) is included in the DAMP calculations, the supplemental risks* resulting from that action must be accounted for. In this case, the termination time has a minor influence on results, since it affects the number of impacts that would occur beyond the impact limit lines without destruct that are forced inside when destruct action is taken. If destruct action is omitted, the value of TB is immaterial (i.e., supplemental Mode-5 risks are non-existent) provided that the impact range along the reference trajectory at time TB exceeds the range to all targets of interest. (Except in this paragraph, supplemental Mode-5 risks are not addressed in this present report.)\n\nd. Vacuum calculations: Atmospheric effects were accounted for in determining when vehicle breakup would occur and, to some extent, during each thrusting turn by using accelerations from the nominal trajectory. To reduce computer time and cost of this study, vacuum calculations were made during free fall after vehicle breakup or burnout. Although this increased impact dispersions somewhat, vacuum results should not be drastically different from those obtainable using a maximum-beta piece. In theory at least, different mode-5 shaping constants exist for each debris class. In view of the uncertainties in vehicle breakup conditions and characteristics, and in the overall process of simulating Mode-5 malfunctions, attempts to derive unique shaping constants for each debris class did not seem justified.\n\n6.1.4 Malfunction-Turn Results for Atlas IIAS\n\nFor Atlas IIAS, the distribution of impacts for simulated random-attitude turns, slow turns, and a weighted combination (75% random-attitude and 25% slow turn) are shown in Figure 5. Since the impact distribution (i.e., the percentages of impacts in 5° sectors) for the weighted composite was not significantly different from that for random-attitude failures, slow-turn computations were not made for Delta, Titan, and LLV1.\n\n* See Ref. [1], Section 10."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Atlas IIAS Failures through 280 sec\nBreakup q-alpha = 20,000 deg-lb/ft²\no Random-attitude turns\n□ Slow turns\n▼ Combined turns (0.75 random + 0.25 slow)\nPercent in 5-deg sector (%)\nAngle From Flight Path (deg)\nFigure 5. Combined Random-Attitude and Slow-Turn Results"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6.2 Shaping Constants for Atlas IIAS\n\n6.2.1 Optimum Mode-5 Shaping Constants\n\nSince the dynamic pressures that can cause the Atlas IIAS to break up were not available, random-attitude failures were simulated for a no-breakup case and for three breakup qα's: 20,000 deg-lb/ft², 10,000 deg-lb/ft², and 5,000 deg-lb/ft². For each case, 270,000 trajectories were run, giving a total of 1,080,000. It turned out that the value chosen for the breakup qα was critical in determining shaping constant A, since the lower the qα, the less the thrusting time before breakup, and the higher the percentages of impacts in sectors near the flight line.\n\nFor Atlas IIAS, the effects of qα on breakup are shown in Figure 6 where, for the selected qα's, the percentages of random-attitude turns that result in breakup before 280 seconds are plotted against failure time.\n\nFigure 6. Atlas IIAS Breakup Percentages for Random-Attitude Turns\n\nFor failures between 10 and 30 seconds, most breakups do not occur at failure, but later in flight after the vehicle has built up significant velocity. For failures between 40 and 105 seconds, more than 80% breakup occurs, even for qα's as high as 20,000 deg-lb/ft².\n\n9/10/96 37 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In this region, breakup occurs at or shortly after vehicle failure. Beyond 170 seconds, the dynamic pressure between failure and 280 seconds stays sufficiently low so that the vehicle remains intact.\n\nThe dramatic differences in impact distributions that can result at certain times during flight if the vehicle is subject to aerodynamic breakup can be seen by comparing the impact footprints in Figure 7 and Figure 8. Both patterns show 10,000 impact points from random-attitude failures of the Atlas IIAS at 130 seconds. Figure 7 is for no breakup, and Figure 8 is for a breakup qα of 5,000 deg-lb/ft².\n\nThe data in Table 19 comprise an example of a 270,000-point sample of random-attitude failures run at 10-second intervals from 15 to 275 seconds. (For brevity, only every-other failure time is shown in the table.) Ten thousand impacts are computed at each failure time. Five-degree sectors are identified in the left-hand column. For each time, the number of impacts in each 5° sector is shown in the column for that time. The total number of impacts for all failure times and the percentages of impacts in each sector are given in the last two columns of the table.\n\n9/10/96 38 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Atlas IIAS Impacts\nRandom-Attitude Failures at 130 sec.\nThrust to 280 sec.\nNo Breakup\n\nFigure 7. Atlas IIAS Impacts with No Breakup\n\n9/10/96 39 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Atlas IIAS Impacts\nRandom-Attitude Failures at 130 sec.\nThrust to 280 sec.\nBreakup q-alpha = 5,000 deg-lb/ft²\n\nFigure 8. Atlas IIAS Impacts with Breakup\n\n9/10/96 40 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 19. Sample Impact Distribution for Atlas IIAS with No Breakup\n\nAng. | 15 | 35 | 55 | 75 | 95 | 115 | 135 | 155 | 175 | 195 | 215 | 235 | 255 | 275 | All | %\n0 255 300 411 487 608 835 1107 1843 3333 4092 5386 7906 10000 10000 87746 32.50\n5 279 314 388 465 575 808 1082 1762 3065 3827 4206 2094 0 0 38474 14.25\n10 261 316 427 495 627 744 975 1652 2820 2081 408 0 0 0 21265 7.88\n15 298 329 354 464 558 730 945 1445 782 0 0 0 0 0 12195 4.52\n20 274 319 378 421 566 670 845 1292 0 0 0 0 0 0 8875 3.29\n25 287 316 349 406 525 641 776 1203 0 0 0 0 0 0 8189 3.03\n30 257 339 337 415 452 505 617 800 0 0 0 0 0 0 6893 2.55\n35 299 336 381 368 405 506 550 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 5883 2.18\n40 275 293 388 374 409 454 520 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5593 2.07\n45 299 298 310 397 366 412 441 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5285 1.96\n50 242 282 331 346 323 352 378 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4535 1.68\n55 280 308 282 303 314 292 331 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4005 1.48\n60 272 308 289 306 293 299 260 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3827 1.42\n65 288 262 279 300 294 286 256 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3666 1.36\n70 250 275 326 281 264 243 205 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3483 1.29\n75 283 261 272 271 238 232 170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3321 1.23\n80 273 266 249 272 234 194 111 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3022 1.12\n85 287 274 241 242 219 191 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2888 1.07\n90 235 285 246 230 226 171 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2778 1.03\n95 303 283 280 235 180 136 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2815 1.04\n100 292 283 268 215 190 126 49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2620 0.97\n105 279 254 246 211 200 108 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2571 0.95\n110 283 267 237 204 168 114 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2448 0.91\n115 261 255 230 178 162 120 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2346 0.87\n120 311 263 251 211 167 98 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2321 0.86\n125 276 255 225 189 155 62 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2239 0.83\n130 266 251 227 195 126 86 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2246 0.83\n135 283 259 227 176 128 77 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2221 0.82\n140 286 244 184 186 169 63 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2138 0.79\n145 305 243 187 180 118 59 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2102 0.78\n150 251 225 178 166 128 72 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1895 0.70\n155 293 259 199 151 113 68 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2103 0.78\n160 253 213 220 177 127 59 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1952 0.72\n165 254 242 203 172 115 68 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 0.74\n170 298 256 195 171 127 60 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2034 0.75\n175 312 267 205 140 131 59 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2018 0.75\nTotal 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 270000 100.00\n\n9/10/96 41 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In Figure 9, the percentages of impacts in 5° sectors from 0° to 180° have been plotted for Atlas IIAS random-attitude turns out to 280 seconds. (It should be remembered that random-attitude turns are representative of combined random-attitude and slow turns.) For B = 1000, theoretical Mode-5 impact percentages are also plotted in the figure for best-fit values of A obtained by trial and error.\n\nFigure 9. Atlas IIAS Simulation Results with B = 1,000\n\nBy observing curve shapes, it can perhaps be seen that no single value of A causes a theoretical impact distribution and a distribution of impacts from random-attitude turns to match closely over the entire range of 5° sectors. Attempts to improve the match on one end of the curve by selecting a different A merely degrades the match on"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the other end. It is possible, however, to obtain fairly close agreement over sectors* from ±80° to ±180°, as seen in Figure 9. Since for Atlas IIAS there are few, if any, significant population centers in the launch area outside these sectors (i.e., within ±80° of the flight line), failure of the curves to match closely near the flight line is of little consequence. If a better data match is considered desirable for computing risks to population centers within ±80° of the flight line (e.g., ships), either a different A can be selected for use with B = 1,000 or other values of A and B can be derived. If only a single value of B is used, no matter what the value, a good match between theoretical and simulated data is not possible over the entire 180° sector for various breakup qα's.\n\nBefore becoming too concerned about lack of a data match between 0° and 80°, it should be remembered that many types of Mode-5 responses cannot be simulated, so that the malfunction-turn impact distributions plotted in Figure 9 are only a subset of all possible Mode-5 impacts. Based on twelve Mode-5 failure responses for which impact data are available, it is believed that inclusion of the \"non-simulatable\" Mode-5 responses would considerably improve the match in the sector from ±10° to ±80°. Another mitigating factor is that risks near the flight line are totally dominated by Mode-4 failure responses.\n\nTo see how data matching is affected by selecting widely differing values of B, the theoretical Mode-5 impact distributions were computed for B = 50,000, 100,000, 500,000, and 5,000,000. Best-fit values for A were again determined by trial and error. Results are shown in Figure 10 through Figure 13 along with the same impact distributions for random-attitude turns plotted in Figure 9.\n\n* For other values of B and qα, close agreement is possible from ±60° to ±180°."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 10. Atlas IIAS Simulation Results with B = 50,000"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 11. Atlas IIAS Simulation Results with B = 100,000"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 12. Atlas IIAS Simulation Results with B = 500,000"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"100 Atlas IIAS Random-Attitude Failures through 280 sec Breakup q-alpha in deg-lb/ft2 no breakup 20,000 10,000 5,000 B = 5,000,000 A = 4.75 A = 5.65 A = 6.10 A = 6.30 Percent in 5-deg sector (%) 10 1 0.1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Angle From Flight Path (deg) Figure 13. Atlas IIAS Simulation Results with B = 5,000,000"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The five values of B and the corresponding best-fit values of A used to compute the Mode-5 distributions shown in Figure 9 through Figure 13 are tabulated in Table 20. It is apparent that the value of A is dependent on both qα and B. In general, if a larger value of B is selected, a larger value of A is required to effect a fit with the random-attitude-turn data. On the other hand, if the breakup qα is increased, the required value of A must be decreased. Only qα is critical since, as shown later, any value of B, together with its corresponding value of A, can be used in the launch-area risk computations if significant targets do not lie within ±80° of the flight line. Table 20. Shaping Constants for Atlas IIAS Breakup qα (deg-lb/ft2) | B | A | none 1,000 1.90 | 20,000 2.75 | 14,000 * 3.00 * | 10,000 3.20 | 5,000 3.45 | none 50,000 3.15 | 20,000 4.10 | 10,000 4.50 | 5,000 4.75 | none 100,000 3.40 | 20,000 4.30 | 10,000 4.75 | 5,000 5.00 | none 500,000 4.00 | 20,000 4.85 | 10,000 5.30 | 5,000 5.55 | none 5,000,000 4.75 | 20,000 5.65 | 10,000 6.10 | 5,000 6.30 * interpolated"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Because of the uncertainties in breakup conditions, the values of A for each B in Table 20 have been plotted against qα in Figure 14. By reading from the plots, a value of A for the five values of B can be obtained for any breakup qα deemed appropriate between 5,000 and 20,000 deg-lb/ft2. Figure 14 plot: Mode-5 Constant A (2.5 to 6.5) versus Breakup q-alpha (deg-lb/ft2) (0 to 25000); lines labeled B = 5,000,000, B = 500,000, B = 100,000, B = 50,000, B = 1,000; Atlas IIAS. Figure 14. Effects of Breakup q-alpha on A for Atlas IIAS 6.2.2 Launch-Area Mode-5 Risks The twenty sets of A and B shown in Table 20 were used to compute Mode-5 launch-area risks for population centers inside the impact limit lines for an Atlas IIAS daytime launch of a Telstar-4 payload from Pad 36A. Results of these and two other cases are given in Table 21. The Mode-5 Ec in the first line (old baseline case) of Table 21 is presented for comparison only. It was obtained from data in the first line of Table 45 of an earlier RTI study[3]. In Ref. [3], the total Atlas IIAS failure probability for the first two minutes of flight was set at 0.04, with the probability of a Mode-5 failure response assumed to be 0.005. The second line in Table 21 shows the result of a recomputation of the Mode-5 baseline risks, again with B = 1000 and A = 3, using newly derived values for the total failure probability and for a Mode-5 failure response. For flight phases 0 – 2, a total failure probability of 0.031 was assumed, as extracted from Table 6 for"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"F = 0.98. The conditional probability of a Mode-5 response was assumed to be 0.08 (from the last line of Table 15), so the absolute probability was 0.031 x 0.08 = 0.0025. For the remaining cases in Table 21, the same assumptions were made for the total failure probability and for the probability of a Mode-5 response. Table 21. Shaping Constants and Related Risks for Atlas IIAS ps | TB (sec) | Breakup qα (deg-lb/ft2) | B | A | Mode-5 Ec (x 10-6) 0.005 | 118 | 14,000 * (baseline) | 1,000 | 3.00 | 227 0.0025 | 280 | 14,000 * (new ps & TB) | 1,000 | 3.00 | 49.1 0.0025 | 280 | none 1,000 1.90 139.8; 20,000 2.75 73.7; 10,000 3.20 33.4; 5,000 3.45 19.8 0.0025 | 280 | none 50,000 3.15 144.9; 20,000 4.10 75.6; 10,000 4.50 37.1; 5,000 4.75 21.8 0.0025 | 280 | none 100,000 3.40 144.8; 20,000 4.30 79.8; 10,000 4.75 36.1; 5,000 5.00 21.1 0.0025 | 280 | none 500,000 4.00 143.6; 20,000 4.85 79.9; 10,000 5.30 35.9; 5,000 5.55 20.8 0.0025 | 280 | none 5,000,000 4.75 144.8; 20,000 5.65 77.7; 10,000 6.10 34.2; 5,000 6.30 22.0 * Interpolated from Figure 14 As seen from Table 21, the Mode-5 risks are highly dependent on A and insensitive to the value chosen for B provided a proper choice is made for A. Even for values of B as different as 1,000 and 5,000,000, the Mode-5 risks (qα = 5,000) differ by only 12%. This difference drops for all other values of B. In fact, the differences probably have more to do with the choice of A than to any inherent difference in results due to the choice of B. For Atlas IIAS, 24% of the total Mode-5 Ec in the launch area is due to one population center, and 51% of the total Ec to only five population centers (see page 49 of Ref [3]). If values of A had been chosen so that theoretical distributions and random-attitude-turn distributions more nearly matched for the radial directions to these population centers,"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the differences in calculated Mode-5 risks for the different values of B would surely have been less. Further understanding of why small differences in Ec exist can be gained by plotting values of the Mode-5 density function computed from Eq. (3) This has been done in Figure 15 for a range of three miles using values of A and B from Table 21 for qα = 5,000 deg-lb/ft2. Since Eq. (3) does not include a factor to account for the probability of a Mode-5 failure, the values plotted in the figure are conditional impact probabilities per square mile. For the sector from 120° to 180°, which is where most population centers are located, the density-function value for B = 5,000,000 is largest and for B = 1,000 is smallest. Results consistent with this are shown in Table 21, where the largest and smallest Ec's are for B = 5,000,000 and B = 1,000, respectively. Figure 15 plot: Mode-5 Density-Function Value (10-5 to 10-2) versus Theta (deg) (0 to 180); legend A = 3.45, B = 1,000; A = 4.75, B = 50,000; A = 5.00, B = 100,000; A = 5.55, B = 500,000; A = 6.30, B = 5,000,000. Figure 15. Mode-5 Density-Function Values at Three Miles 6.2.3 Effects of Mode-5 Constants on Ship-Hit Contours In the preceding section, certain values were assigned to B and, by trial and error, best-fit values of A were found. For every breakup qα and every B, it was possible to find a value of A that produced good agreement between theoretical and simulated impact data over 5° sectors from ±100° to ±180° (see Figure 10 through Figure 13). In some"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cases the agreement gradually deteriorated for angles below ±100° while, in other cases, agreement was remarkably good to ±40°. Below this, agreement was generally poor except in a region between ±3° and ±6° where the theoretical and simulated curves crossed.\n\nAs pointed out previously, for Atlas pad locations at the Cape essentially all significant population centers (except ships) are located in the sectors from ±100° to ±180°. Thus any B with the corresponding best-fit value of A can be used to compute launch-area risks, irrespective of the assumed breakup qα. In unusual cases at the Cape or at other launch locations, population centers may be located outside sectors of good agreement for some B's. If such situations arise, a value of B should be used in the risk calculations that produces the best fit over the largest sector possible, generally ±40° to ±180°. The values of B producing this result are listed in Table 22 as functions of breakup conditions.\n\nTable 22. Best-Fit Conditions for Atlas IIAS\nBreakup Conditions | B | A\nnone | 50,000 | 3.15\n20,000 | 100,000 | 4.30\n10,000 | 100,000 | 4.75\n5,000 | 5,000,000 | 6.30\n\nAlthough the selected values of A produce poor agreement in the sectors from 0° to ±40°, this does not mean that good agreement in this region is impossible. Instead, it means that the value of A required to produce good agreement in the ±40° sectors will produce poor agreement elsewhere. In special situations where the only population centers of interest are within ±40° of the flight line, other values of A can be derived for use in the risk calculations.\n\nFrom a practical standpoint, the effort required to find a value of A that produces a better fit within ±40° or so of the flight line is unnecessary. Within this sector, the Mode-4 failure response, which is almost 11 times more likely to occur than a Mode-5 response, totally dominates the computed risks. As verification, the DAMP program was run for the Atlas IIAS vehicle, and ship-hit contours plotted for three vastly different pairs of A's and B's. The results are shown in Figure 16 through Figure 21, where the total failure probability during the first two minutes of flight was assumed to be 0.04, and the probabilities of Mode-4 and Mode-5 responses were 0.033 and 0.005, respectively. For each A and B, ship-hit contours were computed for Mode 5 alone, and then for all response modes. As expected, some downrange extension occurred in the Mode-5 contours as the value of A was increased, since the higher the value of A, the more concentrated impacts are near the flight line. When all response modes were included in the calculations, contour differences were almost imperceptible, showing the total dominance of Mode 4. If the calculations were remade with a Mode-4 "} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"response 10.9* instead of 6.6 (0.033 ÷ 0.005 = 6.6) times as likely as a Mode-5 response, the differences in contours would be even less.\n\nFigure 16. Atlas IIAS Mode-5 Ship-Hit Contours with A = 3.00\n\n* From Table 15, 86.2 ÷ 7.9 = 10.9."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 17. Atlas IIAS All-Mode Ship-Hit Contours with A = 3.00"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 18. Atlas IIAS Mode-5 Ship-Hit Contours with A = 3.45"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 19. Atlas IIAS All-Mode Ship-Hit Contours with A = 3.45"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 20. Atlas IIAS Mode-5 Ship-Hit Contours with A = 6.30"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 21. Atlas IIAS All-Mode Ship-Hit Contours with A = 6.30\n\n6.2.4 Range Distributions of Theoretical and Simulated Impacts\n\nEarlier discussions had to do with how well the angular part of the Mode-5 impact density function could be made to agree with angular data derived from simulated random-attitude turns. A similar procedure was used to test agreement between the range part of the Mode-5 impact density function and the simulated data. For this purpose, beginning at 15 seconds random-attitude turns were made at 2-second intervals out to 279 seconds, assuming no breakup and breakup qα's of 5,000 and 20,000 deg-lb/ft². At each time, 2,000 trajectories and impact points were computed, giving a total sample of 266,000 for each breakup condition. For each impact point, the range from the pad was computed, and the total number of impacts calculated in 10-mile range intervals out to 350 miles. Impacts beyond this range were placed in a single range category. The percentage of impacts in each range interval was then computed and plotted as shown in Figure 22."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 22. Impact-Range Distributions\n\nTheoretical impact percentages for the same 10-mile range intervals were obtained by integrating the Mode-5 impact-density function [Eq. (3)] between the angle limits of zero and π, and between the range limits of R1 and R2, and doubling the results. The percentages are plotted in Figure 22. As pointed out in more detail at the end of Appendix B, the percentage of impacts in any range interval is independent of the values of A and B.\n\nFigure 22 shows that the range impact distributions for theoretical Mode-5 impacts and random-attitude failures for breakup qα's between 5,000 and 20,000 deg-lb/ft² are in excellent agreement out to 50 miles. Theoretical percentages and random-attitude percentages for qα = 5,000 deg-lb/ft² (considered to be the most realistic value) are in good agreement out to 190 miles. Beyond that the differences appear fairly large, magnified as they are by the logarithmic scale, although the maximum absolute difference is only 0.4%. The steep rise in all curves at 350 miles is artificially created by lumping all impacts beyond 350 miles into one range interval instead of 10-mile intervals."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6.3 Shaping Constants for Delta-GEM\n\nAlthough less extensive, the computations made and graphs plotted to establish Mode-5 shaping constants for Delta parallel those described in Section 6.2 for Atlas IIAS. The approach may be summarized as follows:\n\n(1) Calculate impact points from 10,000 simulated random-attitude turns made at 10-second intervals from programming time at 6 seconds until staging at 270 seconds (260,000 simulations total). The impact points from these turns, which produce impact results similar to slow turns, are assumed to be representative of the totality of Mode-5 impacts.\n\n(2) Determine the percentages of impacts in 5° sectors from 0° to 180°.\n\n(3) For assumed values of A and B, compute the percentages of impacts in the same 5° sectors from the theoretical Mode-5 impact-density function.\n\n(4) By trial and error, find values of A and B that provide a best fit between the simulated and theoretical impact data."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6.3.1 Optimum Mode-5 Shaping Constants\n\nThe percentage of Delta vehicles that break up during simulated random-attitude turns are plotted against failure time in Figure 23. The same breakup qα's used in the Atlas IIAS calculations were used here. It can be seen from the figure that over 50% of the vehicles break up, either immediately or eventually, if a turn begins between about 10 and 115 seconds.\n\nFigure 23. Delta-GEM Breakup Percentages"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 24 shows the percentages of malfunction-turn impacts in 5° sectors for no breakup and for breakup qα's of 20,000, 10,000, and 5,000 deg-lb/ft². For B = 1,000, theoretical Mode-5 impacts are also plotted using best-fit values of A. This value of B was chosen since it is currently used by RTI in making launch-area risk studies for the 45th Space Wing. In the sectors from ±80° to ±180°, where most of the population centers are located, fairly good data fits were possible for all breakup qα's except 5,000 deg-lb/ft². No value of A could be found to produce a good fit with B = 1,000. The bottom plot in Figure 25 shows that an excellent fit between malfunction-turn and theoretical data is possible for qα = 5,000 deg-lb/ft² if a different choice of B is made.\n\nDelta-GEM Random-Attitude Failures through 270 sec\nBreakup q-alpha in deg-lb/ft²\nno breakup\n20,000\n10,000\n5,000\nB = 1,000\nA = 1.90\nA = 2.90\nA = 3.10\nA = 4.30\nPercent in 5-deg sector (%)\nAngle From Flight Path (deg)\nFigure 24. Delta-GEM Simulation Results with B = 1,000\n9/10/96\n62\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The simulated impact percentages plotted in Figure 25 are identical with those shown in Figure 24. The theoretical percentages in Figure 25 were obtained by trying various combinations of B and A until the best possible fit was obtained in the sectors from ±60° to ±180°. From these plots it seems apparent that a reasonable fit between malfunction-turn and theoretical Mode-5 impact data can be found for any qα between 5,000 and 20,000 deg-lb/ft².\n\nDelta-GEM Random-Attitude Failures through 270 sec\nBreakup q-alpha in deg-lb/ft²\nno breakup\n20,000\n10,000\n5,000\nA = 2.60, B = 10,000\nA = 3.15, B = 2,000\nA = 3.35, B = 2,000\nA = 3.50, B = 4\nPercent in 5-deg sector (%)\nAngle From Flight Path (deg)\nFigure 25. Delta-GEM Simulation Results with Best-Fit Shaping Constants\n9/10/96\n63\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6.3.2 Launch-Area Mode-5 Risks\n\nUsing values of A and B from Figure 24 and Figure 25, program DAMP was run to compute Mode-5 launch-area risks for population centers inside the impact limit lines for a Delta-GEM/GPS-10 daytime launch from Pad 17A. Results from these and two other cases are shown in Table 23. The Mode-5 Ec in the first line (old baseline case) is presented for comparison. It was obtained from the first line of Table 55 of an earlier RTI study[3]. In that study, the total Delta failure probability during the first 130 seconds of flight was set at 0.02, with the probability of a Mode-5 response assumed to be 0.0025. The second line in Table 23 shows the result of a recomputation of the Mode-5 risks, again with B = 1,000 and A = 3, using failure probabilities derived earlier in this report. From Table 6 and Table 15, the failure probability during flight phases 0 - 2 is 0.013, and the relative frequency of occurrence of a Mode-5 response is 0.08. The absolute probability of a Mode-5 response thus becomes 0.013 x 0.08 ≅ 0.001.\n\nTable 23. Shaping Constants and Related Risks for Delta-GEM\np5 | TB (sec) | Breakup qα (deg-lb/ft²) | B | A | Mode-5 Ec (x 10⁻⁶)\n0.0025 | 130 | 12,000 * (baseline) | 1,000 | 3.00 | 394\n0.001 | 270 | 12,000 * (new p5 & TB) | 1,000 | 3.00 | 88.8\n0.001 | 270 | none | 1,000 | 1.90 | 220.0\n20,000 | 2.90 | 104.4\n10,000 | 3.10 | 74.1\n5,000 | 4.30 | 5.2\n0.001 | 270 | none | 10,000 | 2.60 | 224.4\n20,000 | 2,000 | 3.15 | 102.4\n10,000 | 2,000 | 3.35 | 72.0\n5,000 | 4 | 3.50 | 5.1\n* Interpolated from data contained in Figure 24\n\nAs in the case of Atlas, Table 23 again shows that the risks in the launch area are highly dependent on qα and thus on A, but relatively insensitive to changes in B if a proper value is selected for A. For example, if qα = 10,000, the computed risks for B = 1,000 (A = 3.10) and B = 2,000 (A = 3.35) differ by less than 3%. For the no-breakup cases where B = 1,000 and then 10,000, the computed risks in the launch area differ by less than 2%.\n\nLaunch-area risks are highly dependent on the vehicle's capability to withstand aerodynamic forces. Except early in flight, low-strength vehicles generally break up quickly after a malfunction turn begins. The later such turns occur, the more likely pieces are to impact downrange of the launch point, thus lessening risks to uprange populations. The effects of vehicle strength on risk are clearly seen in Table 23 where,\n\n9/10/96\n64\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"for example, the risks are over 20 times as great if the vehicle's breakup qα is 20,000 rather than 5,000 deg-lb/ft².\n\n6.4 Shaping Constants for Titan IV\n\nMode-5 shaping constants for Titan IV were developed as described in Section 6.3 for Delta, except that a total of 290,000 simulations were run between the programming time of 18 seconds and staging at 300 seconds. The percentage of vehicles that break up during simulated random-attitude turns are plotted against failure time in Figure 26. The same qα's used with Atlas and Delta were used here, and similar breakup results were obtained.\n\nTitan IV\nq-alpha in deg-lb/ft²\nq-alpha = 5,000\nq-alpha = 10,000\nq-alpha = 20,000\nBreakup Percent (%)\nFailure Time (sec)\nFigure 26. Titan IV Breakup Percentages\n9/10/96\n65\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 27 shows the percentages of malfunction-turn impacts in 5° sectors for no breakup and for breakup qα's of 20,000, 10,000, and 5,000 deg-lb/ft². For B = 1,000, theoretical Mode-5 impact distributions are also plotted in the figure using best-fit values of A. This value of B was chosen since it is currently used by RTI in making launch-area risk studies for 45 SW/SE. Within the sectors from ±60° to ±180°, where most population centers are located, data fits are reasonably good. As seen in the next figure, the divergence for the no-breakup case can be greatly reduced by selecting other values for B and A.\n\nTitan IV Random-Attitude Failures through 300 sec\nBreakup q-alpha in deg-lb/ft²\nno breakup\n20,000\n10,000\n5,000\nB = 1,000\nA = 2.00\nA = 2.95\nA = 3.25\nA = 3.50\nPercent in 5-deg sector (%)\nAngle From Flight Path (deg)\nFigure 27. Titan Simulation Results with B = 1,000\n9/10/96\n66\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The simulated impact distributions plotted in Figure 28 are identical to those shown in Figure 27. The theoretical Mode-5 percentages were obtained by testing various combinations of B and A until a good fit between the simulated malfunction-turn results and theoretical impact-distribution data was obtained in the sectors from ±60° to ±180°. Although somewhat better fits may be possible for the lower breakup qα's, the effort to find them did not seem worthwhile, since the A's and B's shown in the figure produced fits that were more than adequate in the sectors where the population centers are located.\n\nFigure 28. Titan Simulation Results with Best-Fit Shaping Constants\n\n9/10/96 67 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The best-fit values of B and A shown in Figure 27 and Figure 28 are tabulated for convenient reference in Table 24. For breakup qα's of 10,000 and 5,000 deg-lb/ft², the currently-used value of B = 1,000 provided a better data fit than other values of B that were investigated.\n\nTable 24. Shaping Constants for Titan IV\nTB (sec) | Breakup qα (deg-lb/ft²) | B | A\n300 | none | 1,000 | 2.00\n | 20,000 | | 2.95\n | 10,000 | | 3.25\n | 5,000 | | 3.50\n300 | none | 10,000 | 2.70\n | 20,000 | 2,000 | 3.15\n | 10,000 | 1,000 | 3.25\n | 5,000 | 1,000 | 3.50\n\nRisk calculations in the launch area were not made for Titan IV.\n\n9/10/96 68 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6.5 Shaping Constants for LLV1\n\nShaping constants for LLV1 were developed as described in Section 6.3 for Delta, except that a total of 290,000 simulations were made between the programming time of 1 second and staging at 290 seconds. The percentages of vehicles that break up during simulated random-attitude turns are plotted in Figure 29. As expected, the results are similar to those shown previously for Atlas, Delta, and Titan although, due to its higher acceleration, the rapid drop-off from near 100% breakup occurs at an earlier time for the LLV1 than for the other vehicles.\n\nFigure 29. LLV1 Breakup Percentages\n\n9/10/96 69 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 30 shows the percentage of malfunction-turn impacts in 5° sectors for no breakup, and for breakup qα's of 20,000, 10,000, and 5,000 deg-lb/ft². The three breakup qα's produced impact distributions that were surprisingly similar, possibly due to the vehicle's higher acceleration. Theoretical Mode-5 impact distributions are also plotted in the figure for B = 1,000 and best-fit values of A. This value of B was chosen since it is currently used by RTI in making launch-area risk studies for 45 SW/SE. For all except the no-breakup case, values of A were found that produced good fits between the malfunction-turn and Mode-5 impact distributions in the sectors from ±60° to ±180°.\n\nFigure 30. LLV1 Simulation Results with B = 1,000\n\n9/10/96 70 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 31 shows that a good fit for the no-breakup case is possible if higher values of B and A are used. The simulated malfunction-turn impact distributions for the breakup cases plotted in this figure are identical with those in Figure 30. Since the theoretical percentages for B = 1,000 produced excellent fits, these values were simply replotted in Figure 31. For the no-breakup case, various combinations of B and A were tried before arriving at the plot shown in the figure.\n\nFigure 31. LLV1 Simulation Results with Best-Fit Shaping Constants\n\n9/10/96 71 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The best-fit values of B and A from Figure 30 and Figure 31 have been listed for convenient reference in Table 25. It is interesting to note that, for all breakup conditions, the currently-used value of B = 1,000 provided a better data fit than any other B that was investigated.\n\nTable 25. Shaping Constants for LLV1\nTB (sec) | Breakup qα (deg-lb/ft2) | B | A\n290 | none | 1,000 | 1.85\n| 20,000 | | 2.60\n| 10,000 | | 2.70\n| 5,000 | | 2.75\n290 | none | 10,000 | 2.45\n| 20,000 | | 1,000 | 2.60\n| 10,000 | | 1,000 | 2.70\n| 5,000 | | 1,000 | 2.75\n\nNo launch-area risk calculations were made for LLV1.\n\n6.6 Shaping Constants for Other Launch Vehicles\n\nProcedures for developing Mode-5 shaping constants A and B are fully described in this report. For Atlas, Delta, Titan, and LLV1, best-fit values of A were derived for four breakup conditions (1) for the currently-used value of B = 1,000, and (2) for optimum-fit values of B. For any new launch vehicle requiring risk calculations, the same procedures should be followed to obtain suitable values for A and B.\n\nAs an alternative and less time-consuming process, values of A and B can be estimated by comparing the new vehicle with one of the four vehicles referred to above and listed in Table 26. If the configuration and trajectory of the new vehicle and one of the listed vehicles are similar, values of A and B shown in the table for that vehicle and the assumed breakup condition can be used. There may, of course, be no similarity between the new vehicle and any of the listed vehicles. In that event and depending on assumed breakup conditions, one of the mean values shown in the last row of the table can be selected until better values can be developed.\n\nTable 26. Summary of A Values for B = 1,000\nVehicle | IP Range (nm) at 30 sec | 5,000 | 10,000 | 20,000 | None\nAtlas IIAS | 0.3 | 3.45 | 3.20 | 2.75 | 1.90\nDelta-GEM | 5.2 | 4.30 | 3.10 | 2.90 | 1.90\nTitan IV | 1.9 | 3.50 | 3.25 | 2.95 | 2.00\nLLV1 | 33.4 | 2.75 | 2.70 | 2.60 | 1.85\nOther vehicles | | 3.5 | 3.1 | 2.8 | 1.9\n\n9/10/96 72 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"7. Potential Future Investigations\n\nBecause of contract limitations on funds and the deadline for publishing the report, certain interesting facets of the Mode-5 modeling process could not be fully investigated. Several such issues are listed below in considered order of importance:\n\n(1) Effects on shaping constants A and B of using more precise breakup (qα) conditions during malfunction-turn simulations.\n\n(2) Effects on shaping constants A and B (and thus overall risks) if different values of TB are used in computing theoretical and simulated impacts (e.g., TB corresponding to burnout of zero, first, and second stages).\n\n(3) Effects on shaping constants A and B if drag is accounted for in computing free-fall impact points after a malfunction turn. (Shaping constants could be determined for maximum, minimum, and intermediate ballistic coefficients, then interpolated for other values. This more accurate approach would ultimately require extensive modifications to DAMP.)\n\n(4) Effects on shaping constants A and B if sectors smaller than 5° are used to compare theoretical and simulated impact data (e.g., 1° or 2°).\n\n(5) Effects on relative failure probabilities for solid-propellant vehicles if unclassified solid-propellant vehicles or declassified test results are used in the historical data samples (e.g., Pershing, Polaris, Poseidon, Trident).\n\nOther tasks that should be performed at some point in the future include:\n\n(a) Update absolute failure probabilities for Atlas, Delta, Titan, and perhaps other vehicles.\n\n(b) Develop suitable shaping constants A and B for new vehicles. (In this regard, see Section 6.6)\n\n9/10/96 73 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8. Summary\n\nIn RTI's risk-computation program DAMP, vehicle failures per se are not considered. Instead each catastrophic failure is assumed to produce one of five failure responses, and it is these response modes that are modeled in DAMP. Although most catastrophic failures result in impacts near the flight line, less likely malfunctions may cause debris to fall either uprange or well away from the flight line. In DAMP, vehicle failures with this potential are, for the most part, classified as Mode-5 failure responses. The resulting impacts are modeled by a rather formidable-looking density function that includes two shaping constants (A and B) that strongly influence the nature of the impact-density function. To obtain absolute probabilities (or risks), the function must be multiplied by a probability-of-occurrence factor (ps). The primary purpose of this study was to determine the best values for A, B, and ps for various vehicle programs. Other objectives not explicitly included in the statement of work were to develop absolute failure probabilities for Atlas, Delta, and Titan and to derive relative probabilities of occurrence for the five failure-response modes in DAMP.\n\nAlthough some risk analyses may ignore unlikely failure-response modes, Section 2 demonstrates the need for a Mode-5 response – or some similar response – through brief descriptions of actual vehicle flights. Section 3 and Appendix B provide the reader with a fuller understanding of the nature and intricacies of the Mode-5 impact-density function. Together, they show how density-function shaping is affected by values of A and B, and in particular how the Atlas IIAS launch-area risk contours change if the value of A is changed.\n\nSection 4 is a philosophical discussion of methods of assessing vehicle failure probability (or reliability). Two approaches are discussed, one strictly empirical, the other a parts-analysis method that involves the assignment of failure probabilities to individual parts, components, and systems. Although difficulties exist with both approaches, the empirical method was chosen to estimate both absolute and relative failure probabilities.\n\nAs the first step in estimating failure probabilities empirically, performance histories were gathered, summarized, and tabulated (Appendix D) by launch date for Atlas, Delta, and Titan vehicle launches from the Eastern and Western Ranges, and for Thor launches from the Eastern Range. Obtaining this information, and assigning response modes and associated flight phases for each failure consumed a large portion of the effort expended on this task.\n\nA filtering (i.e., data weighting) technique was selected (see Section 5.1 and Appendix C) and applied to the launch failure data to estimate overall failure probabilities by flight phase (see Section D.1.3) for Atlas, Delta, and Titan vehicles. The recommended failure probabilities are based on test results involving only those vehicle configurations that are considered to be representative of current launch\n\n9/10/96 74 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"configurations (see Section D.1.4). The results, summarized previously in Table 6 of Section 5.1, are repeated here in Table 27. Flight phases 0 - 1 go from liftoff through first-stage or booster cutoff, while flight phase 2 extends through second-stage or sustainer cutoff. Although failure probabilities for all flight phases are listed in Table 2, only malfunctions during flight phases 0 through 1 have significant effects on launch-area risks.\n\nTable 27. Failure Probabilities for Atlas, Delta, and Titan\nVehicle | Flight Phase 0-1 | Flight Phase 0-2\nAtlas | 0.022 | 0.031\nDelta | 0.010 | 0.013\nTitan | 0.040 | 0.064\n\nAbsolute overall failure probabilities for Atlas, Delta, and Titan were based only on flight results from \"representative\" vehicle configurations. Because of the small number of failures in the individual representative samples, test results for all configurations (including Thor) were combined into a single sample and filtered to estimate relative failure probabilities for the five failure-response modes in program DAMP (see Section 5.2). The results for flight phases 0 - 2 and 0 - 1, together with recommended values for new launch systems, were summarized in Table 15 and Table 16, respectively, and are repeated here in Table 28 and Table 29.\n\nTable 28. Recommended Response-Mode Percentages for Flight Phases 0 -2\nResponse Mode | Mature Launch Systems (F = 0.993) | New Solid Systems (F = 0.996) | New Liquid Systems (F = 0.999)\n1 | 0.4 | 2.2 | 7.4\n2 | 5.4 | 4.3 | 2.3\n3 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 1.7\n4 | 86.2 | 80.4 | 73.3\n5 | 7.9 | 12.7 | 15.3\n\nTable 29. Recommended Response-Mode Percentages for Flight Phases 0 - 1\nResponse Mode | Mature Launch Systems (F = 0.993) | New Solid Systems (F = 0.996) | New Liquid Systems (F = 0.999)\n1 | 0.5 | 3.4 | 10.7\n2 | 7.4 | 6.6 | 4.3\n3 | 0.1 | 0.6 | 2.4\n4 | 81.9 | 74.5 | 67.0\n5 | 10.1 | 14.9 | 15.6\n\nFor Atlas, Delta, and Titan, absolute probabilities for the individual response modes were obtained by multiplying absolute failure probabilities from Table 27 by the relative probabilities shown in the second columns of Table 28 and Table 29. The results, presented originally in Table 17, are repeated below in Table 30. To obtain\n\n9/10/96 75 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"these results, the relative probabilities used were more precise than those given in Table 28 and Table 29. No pretense is made that all figures in Table 30 are actually significant.\n\nTable 30. Absolute Failure Probabilities for Response Modes 1 - 5\nVehicle: | Atlas 0-1 (0-170 sec) | Atlas 0-2 (0-280 sec) | Delta 0-1 (0-270 sec) | Delta 0-2 (0-630 sec) | Titan 0-1 (0-300 sec) | Titan 0-2 (0-540 sec)\nMode 1 | 0.000119 | 0.000121 | 0.000054 | 0.000051 | 0.000216 | 0.000250\nMode 2 | 0.001637 | 0.001665 | 0.000744 | 0.000698 | 0.002976 | 0.003437\nMode 3 | 0.000011 | 0.000012 | 0.000005 | 0.000005 | 0.000020 | 0.000026\nMode 4 | 0.018007 | 0.026738 | 0.008185 | 0.011212 | 0.032740 | 0.055200\nMode 5 | 0.002226 | 0.002465 | 0.001012 | 0.001034 | 0.004048 | 0.005088\nTotal | 0.022 | 0.031 | 0.010 | 0.013 | 0.040 | 0.064\n\nThe same chronological composite sample used to estimate relative failure probabilities for the failure-response modes was used to estimate the conditional probability that a Mode-3 or Mode-4 response terminates with a rapid tumble. This was found to be about one-third (see Section 5.3).\n\nBecause the empirical data were insufficient to determine Mode-5 density-function shaping constants A and B, an alternate approach was used. Basically, for each of four vehicles (Atlas, Delta, Titan, and LLV1), Mode-5 failure responses were simulated at a series of failure times. The simulated malfunctions investigated were random-attitude turns and slow turns. At each time, 10,000 impact points were computed. The percentages of impacts in 5° sectors from 0° (downrange) to 180° (uprange) were determined. These were compared with the percentages obtained in the same sectors from the theoretical Mode-5 impact-density function when specific values were assigned to A and B. By trial and error, values of A and B producing a good match between the two sets of percentages were established (see Section 6). After best-fit values were determined, the impact percentages for Atlas IIAS in 10-mile range increments were checked to verify that the range part of the Mode-5 impact-density function was consistent with impact ranges resulting from 266,000 simulated Mode-5 failure responses (see Section 6.2.4).\n\nSince the impact distributions resulting from simulated malfunction turns were highly dependent upon the dynamic pressure (qα) assumed to cause vehicle breakup, shaping constants A and B were likewise dependent on breakup assumptions. Three breakup qα's and a no-breakup case were investigated by simulating 270,000 malfunction turns for each of the four conditions. Although a qα of 5,000 deg-lb/ft2 is considered most likely applicable for Atlas, Delta, and Titan, shaping constants for all breakup conditions were provided earlier in Section 6.\n\n9/10/96 76 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Traditionally, a value of B = 1,000 has been used by the 45 SW/SE in ship-hit calculations, and by RTI in performing launch-area risk analyses for the 45 SW/SE. Using this value of B, for each vehicle values of A were found that produced a good match between simulated and theoretical data. The results for qα = 5,000, 10,000, and 20,000 deg-lb/ft² are given in Table 31. As discussed earlier in the report, no single value of A could be found that produced a good fit over the entire 180° sector, although with one exception a good match did exist in the uprange portion of the sector from about ±90° to ±180°. For launches from Cape Canaveral, most population centers are located in this uprange sector. For any launch-area population centers located in the downrange sector, the risks are almost surely dominated by the Mode-4 failure response.\n\nTable 31. Summary of A Values for B = 1,000\nVehicle | Flight Phase | TB (sec) | Breakup qα (deg-lb/ft²) 5,000 | 10,000 | 20,000\nAtlas IIAS | 0 - 2 | 280 | 3.45 | 3.20 | 2.75\nDelta-GEM | 0 - 1 | 270 | 4.30 | 3.10 | 2.90\nTitan IV | 0 - 1 | 300 | 3.50 | 3.25 | 2.95\nLLV1 | 0 - 2 | 290 | 2.75 | 2.70 | 2.60\nOther vehicles | --- | --- | 3.5 | 3.1 | 2.8\n\nOther values of B were investigated to find combinations of B and A that provided the best possible data fits over the largest possible portion of the 0° to 180° sector. Although no combinations of A and B could be found that produced good fits for the entire 180° sector, the values shown in Table 32 extended the fit from the uprange direction to within about 40° of the downrange direction.\n\nTable 32. Summary of Optimum Mode-5 Shaping Constants\nVehicle | Flight Phase | TB (sec) | Breakup qα (deg-lb/ft²) | B | A\nAtlas | 0 - 2 | 280 | 5,000 | 5,000,000 | 6.30\nDelta | 0 - 1 | 270 | 5,000 | 4 | 3.50\nTitan | 0 - 1 | 300 | 5,000 | 1,000 | 3.50\nLLV1 | 0 - 2 | 290 | 5,000 | 1,000 | 2.75\n\nLaunch-area risk calculations were made for Atlas and Delta to ascertain the effects of using radically different values of A and B in the Mode-5 impact-density function. For example, for a breakup qα of 5,000 deg-lb/ft², values of A = 3.45 and B = 1,000 from Table 31 and A = 6.30 and B = 5,000,000 from Table 32 were used to determine total Mode-5 launch-area risks for an Atlas IIAS launch from Complex 36. The total risks differed by about 10%. (Other results for Atlas IIAS are given in Table 21, and for Delta in Table 23.) Other calculations for Atlas and Delta show that the value of B is not"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"important in the launch-area risk calculations provided an appropriate value of A is selected.\n\nSince a good data match within ±40° of the flight line was not found, the effect of this on ship-hit calculations was investigated. It was discovered that the values chosen for A and B made no significant difference, since the risks to shipping near the flight line are totally dominated by the Mode-4 failure response (see Section 6.2.3).\n\nMode-5 baseline risks for Atlas and Delta were recomputed using newly derived values for (1) shaping constants A and B, (2) the overall vehicle failure probability, and (3) the relative probabilities of occurrence of the individual failure-response modes. Results were then compared with baseline risks computed in prior RTI studies. For Atlas, Mode-5 launch-area risks were reduced by a factor between 3 to 11, the exact value depending on the assumed breakup qα for the vehicle. For Delta, the reduction factor was between 4 and 75, with the exact value again depending on assumed breakup conditions."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix A. Failure Response Modes in Program DAMP\n\nIn program DAMP, no attempt is made to model vehicle behavior for failure of specific systems and components. A list of such failures and possible behaviors for any vehicle would be extensive, and variations from vehicle to vehicle would complicate the modeling process, or make it almost impossible. Instead, failure responses are modeled in DAMP without regard to the specific failure that causes the response. There are only six possible response modes in DAMP, five for failures, and one to model the behavior of a normal vehicle. The six vehicle-response modes are described in layman's language as follows; technical descriptions are provided in Ref. [1].\n\nMode 1: Vehicle topples over or falls back on the launch point after a rise of, at most, a few feet. Propellants deflagrate or explode with some assumed TNT equivalency.\n\nMode 2: Vehicle loses control at or shortly after liftoff, with all flight directions equally likely. Destruct is transmitted as soon as erratic flight is confirmed, usually no later than six to twelve seconds after launch. For each vehicle, a latest destruct time is established that is used in computing the maximum impact distance for pieces, given that a Mode-2 response has occurred.\n\nMode 3: Vehicle fails to pitch-program normally, producing near-vertical flight while thrusting at normal levels. Vehicle may tumble rapidly out of control at any point during vertical flight resulting in spontaneous breakup, or may be destroyed when destruct criteria are violated. The mode is terminated by destruct action if the vehicle reaches the so-called \"straight-up\" time without programming. This time varies with launch vehicle and with mission, but usually occurs (at Cape Canaveral Air Station) between 30 and 70 seconds after launch.\n\nMode 4: Vehicle flies within normal limits until some malfunction terminates thrust, causes spontaneous breakup, or results in destruct by flight-control personnel. Breakup may or may not be preceded by a rapid tumble while the vehicle is still thrusting but, in any event, vehicle debris and components impact near the intended flight line.\n\nMode 5: Vehicle may impact in any direction from the launch point within its range capability. At any range, impacts are most likely to occur along the flight line, becoming less likely as the angular deviation from the flight line increases. As the impact range increases, weighting is progressively increased to favor the downrange direction. In any fixed direction, the impact probability decreases as the impact range increases. Flight may terminate spontaneously due to complete loss of vehicle stability or because of destruct action. Outside the launch area, any malfunction with the potential to cause a substantial deviation from the intended flight direction is classified as a Mode-5 failure response. By definition, Mode-5"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"responses begin at vehicle pitch-over or programming for vertically-launched missiles, and at liftoff for those not launched vertically.\n\nMode 6: Unlike impacts from response Modes 1 through 5, Mode-6 impacts result from normal flights and normal impacts of separated stages and components. Jettisoned components are assumed to be non-explosive. For each impacting stage or component, a mean point of impact and bivariate-normal impact dispersions in downrange and crossrange components are assumed. The impact dispersions include the effects of variations in vehicle performance, drag uncertainties, and winds.\n\nOf the five failure-response modes, only Mode 5 is modeled to allow for the possibility of failure of the flight termination system, since vehicles experiencing other failure responses tend to impact within the impact limit lines. In DAMP, risk computations for Modes 2 through 4 are based on the assumption that the flight termination system is successfully employed when required. Failure responses originally classified as Mode 2, 3, or 4 may be reclassified as Mode 5 if the flight termination system fails or subsequent vehicle performance does not conform with the original response-mode definition. Risks associated with vehicle failure responses accompanied by a failure of the flight termination system are assumed to be adequately modeled in DAMP by Mode 5.\n\nThe five failure-response modes modeled in DAMP are sufficient to account for all anomalous impacts in the estimation of risks. However, some vehicle failures and anomalous behaviors have an effect on mission success without increasing risks to people and property on the ground. These behaviors have been assigned Mode NA (not applicable) in the response-mode column of the launch-history tables in Appendix D."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix B. Shaping-Constant Effects on Mode-5 Impact Distributions\n\nThe values chosen for shaping constants A and B that appear in the Mode-5 impact-density function [Eq. (3)] have a significant effect on the angular distribution of impacts about the launch point. This Appendix shows the effects of A and B on (1) the ratio of impacts along the downrange line to any other radial through the launch point, and (2) the percentages of impacts in various sectors relative to the downrange line.\n\nFollowing the procedures outlined in Section 9.7 of Reference [1], it is interesting to observe the effects of varying the constants A and B. This is done in terms of a so-called f-ratio, which is expressed in Ref. [1] as Eq. (9.19), and is repeated here:\n\nf-ratio = (e^(Aπ) + B/R) / (e^(Aφ) + B/R) (7)\n\nThe ratio shows how much more likely impact is to occur along the flight line (where φ = π) than along some other radial line that makes an angle θ (θ = π − φ) with the flight line. Table 33 and Table 34 present f-ratios for values of A = 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, and 4.0, and B = 1000 for impact ranges from one to 25 miles. Table 35 and Table 36 show the effects of halving and doubling the constant B for a fixed value of A = 3.0.\n\nBefore citing numerical examples, it should be emphasized that the data in Table 33 through Table 36 are derived from the primary Mode-5 impact-density function and, as such, they indicate likelihood ratios for the location of the secondary Mode-5 density functions. A secondary function, it will be remembered, describes the dispersion of a debris class about the impact point of the mean piece in the class. Thus, referring to Table 34 with A = 3.0, it can be seen that the secondary impact-density function for a debris class is 4.7 times more likely to be centered 10 miles downrange along the flight line (θ = 0°) than 10 miles from the launch point along a radial line that makes a 30° angle with the flight line. As another example, the secondary function (i.e., the impact point for the mean piece in a debris class) is 82.2 times more likely to be located 25 miles downrange along the flight line than 25 miles crossrange (θ = 90°), and assuming no destruct action, that it is 303.2/82.2 = 3.7 times more likely to be located 25 miles crossrange than 25 miles uprange (θ = 180°)."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 33. Effect on f-Ratio of Varying Mode-5 Constant A (B = 1000) - Part 1\n\nR = 1 nm | R = 5 nm\n180 − φ | A = 2.5 | A = 3.0 | A = 3.5 | A = 4.0 | A = 2.5 | A = 3.0 | A = 3.5 | A = 4.0\n0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0\n5 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.4\n10 | 1.3 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 2.0 | 1.5 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 2.0\n15 | 1.5 | 2.0 | 2.4 | 2.8 | 1.8 | 2.2 | 2.5 | 2.8\n20 | 1.7 | 2.5 | 3.3 | 4.0 | 2.2 | 2.8 | 3.4 | 4.0\n25 | 1.9 | 3.1 | 4.3 | 5.6 | 2.6 | 3.6 | 4.6 | 5.7\n30 | 2.1 | 3.7 | 5.8 | 7.9 | 3.1 | 4.5 | 6.1 | 8.1\n35 | 2.3 | 4.5 | 7.6 | 11.1 | 3.7 | 5.8 | 8.3 | 11.4\n40 | 2.5 | 5.3 | 9.8 | 15.5 | 4.3 | 7.3 | 11.1 | 16.1\n45 | 2.6 | 6.2 | 12.6 | 21.5 | 4.9 | 9.2 | 14.9 | 22.8\n50 | 2.8 | 7.0 | 15.9 | 29.5 | 5.7 | 11.4 | 19.9 | 32.1\n55 | 2.9 | 7.9 | 19.7 | 40.2 | 6.4 | 14.1 | 26.3 | 45.1\n60 | 3.0 | 8.7 | 24.0 | 53.8 | 7.2 | 17.1 | 34.7 | 63.1\n65 | 3.1 | 9.5 | 28.5 | 70.7 | 7.9 | 20.6 | 45.2 | 87.8\n70 | 3.2 | 10.2 | 33.1 | 91.0 | 8.6 | 24.3 | 58.2 | 121.4\n75 | 3.3 | 10.8 | 37.6 | 113.9 | 9.3 | 28.5 | 73.8 | 166.3\n80 | 3.3 | 11.3 | 41.8 | 138.6 | 10.0 | 32.5 | 92.1 | 224.8\n85 | 3.4 | 11.7 | 45.5 | 163.6 | 10.5 | 36.5 | 112.6 | 299.2\n90 | 3.4 | 12.1 | 48.7 | 187.4 | 11.1 | 40.4 | 134.7 | 390.1\n95 | 3.4 | 12.3 | 51.4 | 208.9 | 11.5 | 44.1 | 157.4 | 496.7\n100 | 3.5 | 12.6 | 53.5 | 227.2 | 11.9 | 47.3 | 179.9 | 615.2\n105 | 3.5 | 12.7 | 55.2 | 242.2 | 12.3 | 50.2 | 200.9 | 739.7\n110 | 3.5 | 12.9 | 56.5 | 254.1 | 12.5 | 52.7 | 219.9 | 862.9\n115 | 3.5 | 13.0 | 57.6 | 263.1 | 12.8 | 54.7 | 236.4 | 977.7\n120 | 3.5 | 13.1 | 58.3 | 270.0 | 13.0 | 56.4 | 250.2 | 1079.0\n125 | 3.5 | 13.2 | 58.9 | 275.0 | 13.2 | 57.8 | 261.4 | 1164.0\n130 | 3.5 | 13.2 | 59.4 | 278.6 | 13.3 | 58.9 | 270.4 | 1232.6\n135 | 3.6 | 13.3 | 59.7 | 281.2 | 13.4 | 59.8 | 277.4 | 1286.0\n140 | 3.6 | 13.3 | 59.9 | 283.1 | 13.5 | 60.5 | 282.8 | 1326.5\n145 | 3.6 | 13.3 | 60.1 | 284.5 | 13.6 | 61.1 | 286.9 | 1356.7\n150 | 3.6 | 13.3 | 60.2 | 285.4 | 13.6 | 61.5 | 290.0 | 1378.8\n155 | 3.6 | 13.3 | 60.3 | 286.1 | 13.7 | 61.8 | 292.3 | 1394.8\n160 | 3.6 | 13.4 | 60.4 | 286.6 | 13.7 | 62.1 | 294.1 | 1406.3\n165 | 3.6 | 13.4 | 60.5 | 286.9 | 13.7 | 62.3 | 295.4 | 1414.6\n170 | 3.6 | 13.4 | 60.5 | 287.2 | 13.8 | 62.4 | 296.3 | 1420.5\n175 | 3.6 | 13.4 | 60.5 | 287.3 | 13.8 | 62.6 | 297.0 | 1424.7\n180 | 3.6 | 13.4 | 60.5 | 287.5 | 13.8 | 62.6 | 297.6 | 1427.6\n\n9/10/96 | 82 | RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 34. Effect on f-Ratio of Varying Mode-5 Constant A (B = 1000) - Part 2\n\nR = 10 nm | R = 25 nm\n180 − φ | A = 2.5 | A = 3.0 | A = 3.5 | A = 4.0 | A = 2.5 | A = 3.0 | A = 3.5 | A = 4.0\n0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0\n5 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.4\n10 | 1.5 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 2.0 | 1.5 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 2.0\n15 | 1.9 | 2.2 | 2.5 | 2.8 | 1.9 | 2.2 | 2.5 | 2.8\n20 | 2.3 | 2.8 | 3.4 | 4.0 | 2.3 | 2.8 | 3.4 | 4.0\n25 | 2.8 | 3.6 | 4.6 | 5.7 | 2.9 | 3.7 | 4.6 | 5.7\n30 | 3.4 | 4.7 | 6.2 | 8.1 | 3.6 | 4.8 | 6.2 | 8.1\n35 | 4.1 | 6.0 | 8.4 | 11.5 | 4.4 | 6.1 | 8.4 | 11.5\n40 | 4.9 | 7.7 | 11.3 | 16.2 | 5.3 | 7.9 | 11.4 | 16.3\n45 | 5.8 | 9.8 | 15.3 | 23.0 | 6.5 | 10.2 | 15.5 | 23.1\n50 | 6.8 | 12.4 | 20.5 | 32.4 | 7.9 | 13.2 | 20.9 | 32.7\n55 | 8.0 | 15.7 | 27.5 | 45.8 | 9.6 | 16.9 | 28.3 | 46.2\n60 | 9.3 | 19.7 | 36.7 | 64.5 | 11.5 | 21.6 | 38.1 | 65.4\n65 | 10.7 | 24.4 | 48.8 | 90.6 | 13.7 | 27.5 | 51.2 | 92.3\n70 | 12.1 | 29.9 | 64.3 | 126.7 | 16.2 | 34.8 | 68.7 | 130.2\n75 | 13.5 | 36.3 | 84.1 | 176.4 | 19.0 | 43.8 | 91.7 | 183.1\n80 | 15.0 | 43.4 | 108.6 | 243.9 | 22.1 | 54.5 | 121.8 | 256.9\n85 | 16.4 | 51.1 | 138.4 | 333.9 | 25.4 | 67.3 | 160.6 | 358.9\n90 | 17.8 | 59.1 | 173.5 | 451.4 | 28.8 | 82.2 | 209.9 | 498.3\n95 | 19.0 | 67.3 | 213.3 | 600.5 | 32.4 | 98.9 | 271.3 | 686.6\n100 | 20.1 | 75.3 | 256.8 | 782.9 | 35.9 | 117.3 | 345.7 | 936.0\n105 | 21.2 | 82.9 | 302.1 | 996.3 | 39.4 | 137.0 | 433.3 | 1258.3\n110 | 22.1 | 89.8 | 347.2 | 1233.5 | 42.7 | 157.2 | 532.8 | 1662.1\n115 | 22.9 | 96.0 | 390.2 | 1482.5 | 45.9 | 177.4 | 641.3 | 2148.4\n120 | 23.5 | 101.4 | 429.4 | 1728.6 | 48.7 | 196.9 | 754.5 | 2707.0\n125 | 24.1 | 106.0 | 463.6 | 1957.9 | 51.3 | 215.0 | 867.2 | 3315.0\n130 | 24.6 | 109.9 | 492.6 | 2159.9 | 53.5 | 231.5 | 974.6 | 3939.0\n135 | 25.0 | 113.0 | 516.4 | 2329.5 | 55.5 | 245.9 | 1072.3 | 4542.1\n140 | 25.3 | 115.5 | 535.5 | 2466.0 | 57.2 | 258.3 | 1158.0 | 5092.0\n145 | 25.6 | 117.6 | 550.4 | 2572.4 | 58.6 | 268.8 | 1230.3 | 5567.4\n150 | 25.8 | 119.2 | 562.0 | 2653.1 | 59.9 | 277.4 | 1289.7 | 5959.9\n155 | 26.0 | 120.5 | 570.8 | 2713.1 | 60.9 | 284.5 | 1337.3 | 6271.7\n160 | 26.1 | 121.5 | 577.5 | 2757.1 | 61.7 | 290.1 | 1374.6 | 6512.1\n165 | 26.3 | 122.2 | 582.5 | 2789.0 | 62.4 | 294.6 | 1403.5 | 6693.0\n170 | 26.4 | 122.8 | 586.3 | 2812.0 | 63.0 | 298.2 | 1425.6 | 6826.7\n175 | 26.4 | 123.3 | 589.1 | 2828.4 | 63.4 | 301.0 | 1442.3 | 6924.4\n180 | 26.5 | 123.7 | 591.2 | 2840.1 | 63.8 | 303.2 | 1454.9 | 6994.9\n\n9/10/96 | 83 | RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 35. Effect on f-Ratio of Varying Mode-5 Constant B (A = 3) - Part 1\n\nR =1 nm | R = 5 nm\n180 −φ | B = 500 | B = 1000 | B = 2000 | B = 500 | B = 1000 | B = 2000\n0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0\n5 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.3\n10 | 1.6 | 1.6 | 1.5 | 1.7 | 1.7 | 1.7\n15 | 2.1 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.1\n20 | 2.7 | 2.5 | 2.3 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 2.7\n25 | 3.4 | 3.1 | 2.7 | 3.6 | 3.6 | 3.4\n30 | 4.2 | 3.7 | 3.1 | 4.7 | 4.5 | 4.3\n35 | 5.2 | 4.5 | 3.6 | 6.0 | 5.8 | 5.4\n40 | 6.4 | 5.3 | 4.1 | 7.7 | 7.3 | 6.6\n45 | 7.7 | 6.2 | 4.5 | 9.8 | 9.2 | 8.1\n50 | 9.2 | 7.0 | 5.0 | 12.4 | 11.4 | 9.8\n55 | 10.8 | 7.9 | 5.3 | 15.7 | 14.1 | 11.7\n60 | 12.4 | 8.7 | 5.7 | 19.7 | 17.1 | 13.7\n65 | 14.1 | 9.5 | 6.0 | 24.4 | 20.6 | 15.8\n70 | 15.8 | 10.2 | 6.2 | 29.9 | 24.3 | 17.8\n75 | 17.3 | 10.8 | 6.4 | 36.3 | 28.5 | 19.9\n80 | 18.7 | 11.3 | 6.6 | 43.4 | 32.5 | 21.8\n85 | 20.0 | 11.7 | 6.7 | 51.1 | 36.5 | 23.5\n90 | 21.1 | 12.1 | 6.8 | 59.1 | 40.4 | 25.0\n95 | 22.0 | 12.3 | 6.9 | 67.3 | 44.1 | 26.3\n100 | 22.8 | 12.6 | 7.0 | 75.3 | 47.3 | 27.5\n105 | 23.4 | 12.7 | 7.0 | 82.9 | 50.2 | 28.4\n110 | 23.9 | 12.9 | 7.1 | 89.8 | 52.7 | 29.1\n115 | 24.3 | 13.0 | 7.1 | 96.0 | 54.7 | 29.7\n120 | 24.6 | 13.1 | 7.1 | 101.4 | 56.4 | 30.2\n125 | 24.9 | 13.2 | 7.1 | 106.0 | 57.8 | 30.6\n130 | 25.1 | 13.2 | 7.1 | 109.9 | 58.9 | 30.9\n135 | 25.3 | 13.3 | 7.2 | 113.0 | 59.8 | 31.2\n140 | 25.4 | 13.3 | 7.2 | 115.5 | 60.5 | 31.3\n145 | 25.5 | 13.3 | 7.2 | 117.6 | 61.1 | 31.5\n150 | 25.5 | 13.3 | 7.2 | 119.2 | 61.5 | 31.6\n155 | 25.6 | 13.3 | 7.2 | 120.5 | 61.8 | 31.7\n160 | 25.6 | 13.4 | 7.2 | 121.5 | 62.1 | 31.8\n165 | 25.7 | 13.4 | 7.2 | 122.2 | 62.3 | 31.8\n170 | 25.7 | 13.4 | 7.2 | 122.8 | 62.4 | 31.8\n175 | 25.7 | 13.4 | 7.2 | 123.3 | 62.6 | 31.9\n180 | 25.7 | 13.4 | 7.2 | 123.7 | 62.6 | 31.9\n\n9/10/96 | 84 | RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 36. Effect on f-Ratio of Varying Mode-5 Constant B (A = 3) - Part 2\n\nR = 10 nm | R = 25 nm\n180 −φ | B = 500 | B = 1000 | B = 2000 | B = 500 | B = 1000 | B = 2000\n0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0\n5 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.3\n10 | 1.7 | 1.7 | 1.7 | 1.7 | 1.7 | 1.7\n15 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.2\n20 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 2.8\n25 | 3.7 | 3.6 | 3.6 | 3.7 | 3.7 | 3.6\n30 | 4.7 | 4.7 | 4.5 | 4.8 | 4.8 | 4.7\n35 | 6.1 | 6.0 | 5.8 | 6.2 | 6.1 | 6.0\n40 | 7.9 | 7.7 | 7.3 | 8.0 | 7.9 | 7.8\n45 | 10.2 | 9.8 | 9.2 | 10.4 | 10.2 | 9.9\n50 | 13.0 | 12.4 | 11.4 | 13.4 | 13.2 | 12.7\n55 | 16.7 | 15.7 | 14.1 | 17.3 | 16.9 | 16.1\n60 | 21.2 | 19.7 | 17.1 | 22.3 | 21.6 | 20.3\n65 | 26.9 | 24.4 | 20.6 | 28.7 | 27.5 | 25.3\n70 | 33.9 | 29.9 | 24.3 | 36.8 | 34.8 | 31.3\n75 | 42.3 | 36.3 | 28.3 | 47.0 | 43.8 | 38.5\n80 | 52.3 | 43.4 | 32.5 | 59.7 | 54.5 | 46.6\n85 | 63.9 | 51.1 | 36.5 | 75.4 | 67.3 | 55.5\n90 | 77.1 | 59.1 | 40.4 | 94.5 | 82.2 | 65.2\n95 | 91.7 | 67.3 | 44.1 | 117.4 | 98.9 | 75.3\n100 | 107.3 | 75.3 | 47.3 | 144.4 | 117.3 | 85.5\n105 | 123.5 | 82.9 | 50.2 | 175.4 | 137.0 | 95.4\n110 | 139.7 | 89.8 | 52.7 | 210.1 | 157.2 | 104.7\n115 | 155.4 | 96.0 | 54.7 | 247.9 | 177.4 | 113.3\n120 | 170.1 | 101.4 | 56.4 | 287.7 | 196.9 | 120.9\n125 | 183.5 | 106.0 | 57.8 | 328.3 | 215.0 | 127.5\n130 | 195.3 | 109.9 | 58.9 | 368.2 | 231.5 | 133.1\n135 | 205.5 | 113.0 | 59.8 | 406.3 | 245.9 | 137.7\n140 | 214.1 | 115.5 | 60.5 | 441.4 | 258.3 | 141.5\n145 | 221.2 | 117.6 | 61.1 | 472.8 | 268.8 | 144.6\n150 | 227.0 | 119.2 | 61.5 | 500.3 | 277.4 | 147.1\n155 | 231.7 | 120.5 | 61.8 | 523.6 | 284.5 | 149.0\n160 | 235.4 | 121.5 | 62.1 | 543.2 | 290.1 | 150.5\n165 | 238.4 | 122.2 | 62.3 | 559.3 | 294.6 | 151.7\n170 | 240.7 | 122.8 | 62.4 | 572.3 | 298.2 | 152.7\n175 | 242.5 | 123.3 | 62.6 | 582.7 | 301.0 | 153.4\n180 | 244.0 | 123.7 | 62.6 | 591.0 | 303.2 | 154.0\n\n9/10/96 | 85 | RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The f-ratios in Table 33 and Table 34 (also in Table 35 and Table 36) have been plotted in Figure 32 for A = 3.0 and B = 1000. Reading from the 10-mile plot for θ = 90°, it can be seen that a vehicle experiencing a Mode-5 response is about 60 times more likely to impact along the flight line than along the 90-degree radial. Essentially the same value (actually 59.1) appears in Table 34.\n\nFigure 32. f-Ratios for Ranges from 1 to 25 Miles\n\n9/10/96 | 86 | RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"There are other ways to show how the value chosen for A affects the Mode-5 impact density function. For five values of A, the plots in Figure 33 show the percentages* of Atlas IIAS impacts that lie between the flight line and any radial line through the launch point that makes an angle θ with respect to the flight line. If A = 3.0, it can be seen that approximately 46% of all Mode-5 impacts lie between 0° and 20°. If A is 4.0, the percentage of impacts between 0° and 20° increases to about 64%.\n\nFigure 33. Percentage of Impacts Between Flight Line and Any Radial\n\n* The Mode-5 impact density function must be integrated numerically to arrive at the values plotted in Figure 33. Since the quantity Ṙ that appears in the density function is trajectory dependent, somewhat different curves would be obtained for other trajectories and vehicles.\n\n9/10/96 87 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Another way to show how the value of A affects Mode-5 impacts is illustrated in Figure 34. For the same values of A used previously in Figure 33, the graphs in Figure 34 show the percentages of impacts in any 5° sector between radials that make angles of θ° and (θ + 5)° with respect to the flight line. It is interesting to note that if A is set equal to 1.0 with B = 1,000, impacts in all 5° sectors are approximately the same, thus resulting in an impact-density function that is essentially uniform in direction.\n\nFigure 34. Percentage of Impacts in 5-Degree Sectors\n\nFor A = 1, the Mode-5 impact-density function is essentially the same as a density function formerly used in the Launch Risk Analysis (LARA) Program at the Western Range to model gross azimuth failures. This response mode was called the Gross Flight Deviation Failure (GFDF) mode. In LARA the range and azimuth portions of the GFDF density function were assumed to be independent. Impact azimuths were uniformly distributed, while the range density function can be represented as\n\nf(R) = P / (T_B R) (8)\n\n9/10/96 88 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"where p is the probability of occurrence of the GFDF mode, T_B is the stage burn time, and Ṙ is the rate of change of the impact range. The function cannot be applied early in flight before programming when Ṙ is essentially zero. The range portion of the Mode-5 impact-density function used in DAMP reduces to essentially the same form. If Eq. (3) is integrated between the limits of zero and π, the conditional Mode-5 density function reduces to\n\nf(R) = 1 / ((T_B − T_P) Ṙ) (9)\n\nwhere T_P is the programming time, and T_B and Ṙ are as previously defined. To obtain absolute values, f(R) must of course be multiplied by the probability of occurrence of a Mode-5 failure response.\n\nAlthough the GFDF density function may be a suitable model for random-attitude failures occurring at or a few seconds after programming, the performance histories in Appendix D indicate that such failures are no more likely to occur at programming than at any other time. Thus, there appears to be no need for including a GFDF mode per se in the risk calculations, since all random-attitude failures are accounted for by the Mode-5 density function. However, if for some obscure reason inclusion of a GFDF response mode is desired, two approaches are possible: (1) run the GFDF mode separately in DAMP (by using Mode-5 with A = 1) while zeroing out all other response modes; (2) modify DAMP to handle two separate Mode-5 density functions, each with its own values of A and B. Obviously approach (2) is much more involved and time consuming to implement.\n\nAlthough it may not be obvious, the probability of impact in any annular range interval obtained by integrating the Mode-5 density function between the interval boundaries is independent of the values assigned to A and B. If Eq. (3) is integrated between the angle limits of zero and π (and only for these limits), the A's and B's cancel leaving the probability of impact between R₁ and R₂ as a function of impact range alone. With a change of variable, the probability of impacting between R₁ and R₂ becomes a simple function of time (see pages 84 and 85 of Ref. [1] for details).\n\n9/10/96 89 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix C. Filter Characteristics\n\nEstimating launch-vehicle failure probabilities using empirical launch data is an uncertain process when the sample size is small and the data are obtained from an evolving system. One approach that may be used to estimate failure probabilities is to perform a least-squares fit to trial outcome values (0 = success, 1 = failure). For mature launch vehicles, failure probabilities have decreased markedly from their early experimental days. For new programs, empirical data may be scant or nonexistent.\n\nOne decision that must be made involves the type of function to fit to the data. The true nature of the failure-rate function may be unknown or extremely complex, or there may be insufficient data to estimate a complex function. The easiest calculation is made when a constant failure-rate function is assumed. However, available data appear to indicate that failure rates decrease as a program matures, at least up to a point. If it can be assumed that launch-vehicle failure probabilities decrease over time (i.e., as the number of launches increases), then some non-constant function (perhaps linear or exponential) can be chosen for the fit, or the data weighted as a function of time. In estimating Atlas reliability, General Dynamics[6] chose the latter option by adopting the Duane model. This model is based on the assumption that the mean number of launches between failures increases when causes of failure are corrected. Although this may be the case up to a point, eventually reliability seems to level off at a fairly constant value. Consequently, for mature programs RTI has chosen to fit the failure-rate function to a constant. Such a fit can be based on simple least squares using a fixed-length sliding-window filter to allow for changes in the estimated value over time, or on a least squares fit with unequal weighting.\n\nIf a constant function is fit to a set of data using least squares with equal weighting of data, the solution is given by the mean:\n\nX̄ = (1/n) Σ x_i (10)\n\nConsider the following example:\n\nx1 = 6\nx2 = 5\nx3 = 7\n\nThen,\n\nX̄ = (6+5+7)/3 = 18/3 = 6 (11)\n\nRecursively,\n\n9/10/96 90 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"X̄n = X̄n-1 (1 − an) + xn (an)\nX̄n = X̄n-1 + an (xn − X̄n-1) (12)\n\nFor the equally-weighted case, the recursive filter factor an = 1/n.\n\nUsing the same example, with X̄0 = 0,\n\nX̄1 = x1 = 6\nX̄2 = X̄1 + (1/2)(x2 − X̄1) = 6 + (1/2)(5−6) = 5.5\nX̄3 = X̄2 + (1/3)(x3 − X̄2) = 5.5 + (1/3)(7−5.5) = 6.0 (13)\n\nIn general terms, this recursive formulation of the least squares solution is called an expanding-memory filter, as opposed to a sliding-window or fixed-length filter. In an expanding-memory filter, the solution is always based on the entire data set. In the equally-weighted case, all data points have an equal influence on the solution, regardless of their locations in the sequence.\n\nIt can be seen that in the limit as n becomes very large, an approaches zero. That is, each data point in the sequence is accorded a decreased weight due to the increased number of points being fit. If the data being fit should actually describe a constant, this is exactly what is desired. Normally, however, the function that the data should fit is unknown, and a constant function is used merely as an approximation to smooth or edit the data. What is desired is a recursive least squares fit that assigns a decreasing weight to data of increasing age, so the fit de-weights data points used in earlier recursions.\n\nIn a fading-memory filter, the weighting factor decreases as time recedes into the past, so that the importance of any given datum will decrease as the age of the datum increases. An example of such a filter is one in which each datum is weighted by its count or index number in the sequence:\n\nX̄n = (Σ i x_i) / (Σ i) (14)\n\nUsing the same numerical example as before, where x1 = 6, x2 = 5, and x3 = 7,\n\nX̄ = (1·6 + 2·5 + 3·7) / (1+2+3) = 37/6 = 6.17 (15)\n\n9/10/96 91 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"For the recursive form of this filter, where each datum is weighted by its position in the chronological sequence, the recursive filter factor for the nth point is given by\n\na_n = n / (sum i=1 to n of i) = 2n / n(n+1) = 2 / (n+1) (16)\n\nUsing Eq. (12),\n\nn=1 | a1=1 | X1 = x1 = 6\nn=2 | a2 = 2/3 | X2 = 6 + 2/3(5-6) = 5.33\nn=3 | a3 = 1/2 | X3 = 5.33 + 1/2(7-5.33) = 6.17 (17)\n\nThe \"memory\" (i.e., importance) of older data in this filter fades at a rate dictated by the filter. In this case, the 50th value is 50 times more important than the first, and the 100th value is twice as important as the 50th and 100 times more important than the first.\n\nThe exponentially-weighted filter provides the analyst with more flexibility. This filter uses F^i as a weighting factor, where the filter-control constant F is a value chosen between zero and one, and i is the \"age-count\" of the ith data point. For this filter, i = 0 now designates the current or latest data point, i = 1 designates the immediately preceding or next-to-last data point, etc., so the data points are indexed in reverse chronological order starting with zero. The weighted least-squares solution is\n\nX̄n = (sum i=0 to n-1 of F^i x_(n-i)) / (sum i=0 to n-1 of F^i) (18)\n\nUsing F = 0.9 and the same example as before,\n\nX̄3 = (F^0 x3 + F^1 x2 + F^2 x1) / (F^0 + F^1 + F^2)\n= ((.9)^0(7) + (.9)^1(5) + (.9)^2(6)) / ((.9)^0 + (.9)^1 + (.9)^2)\n= (7 + 4.5 + 4.86) / 2.71 = 16.36 / 2.71 = 6.04 (19)\n\nThe weighting of each data point for sample sizes up to 300 is shown in Figure 35 for values of F from 0.8 to 1.0. For F = 1, all points in the sample are weighted equally. For"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"F = 0.8, only the most recent 25 or so data points contribute to the final result, since all older data points are essentially weighted out of the solution.\n\n[Figure 35. Exponential Weights for Fading-Memory Filters: line chart of Data Weight (F^(n-1)) versus Data Index (older ->) from 0 to 300 for F = 1 (equally weighted), 0.999, 0.998, 0.995, 0.99, 0.98, 0.95, 0.9, 0.8]\n\nFigure 35. Exponential Weights for Fading-Memory Filters\n\nFor the exponentially-weighted fading-memory filter, it can be shown that the recursive filter factor used in Eq. (12) is\n\na_n = (1-F)/(1-F^n) (20)\n\nSince 0 ≤ F ≤ 1, a_n in Eq. (20) does not approach zero as n approaches infinity (as the other two filters do), but instead approaches the value (1 - F). If F = 0, then a_n = 1 for all n, the filter has no memory at all, and the filtered value always equals the last measurement. In the limit as F approaches one, L'Hospital's rule can be applied to"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"show that a_n approaches 1/n, the filter-factor value for the equally-weighted case, and the filter memory no longer fades. For values of F between zero and one, the rate at which the filter memory fades decreases as F increases. The analyst can control the rate at which the filter memory fades by selecting an appropriate value of F.\n\nAs the number of points n increases, the value of a_n used in the recursive exponential-filter equation decreases continuously as it asymptotically approaches 1 - F. For any given n, a larger a_n means more emphasis is placed on the current data point and less on previous points. That is, the larger the recursive filter factor a_n, the faster the filter memory fades. Filter factors for sample sizes up to 300 points are shown in Figure 36 for six different filters. Early in the data-index count (n less than 30), the filter based on index-number weighting has the fastest fading memory, since for 30 data points or fewer the filter has the largest filter factors. After 160 points or so, the index-weighted filter fades at a slower rate than the exponential filter with F = 0.99. Consequently, users of index-count-based fading filters frequently calculate a filter factor for some maximum value of n that is then applied to all subsequent data points as well. For example, if a maximum count of about 180 is used for n, this filter from that point on will behave similarly to the exponentially-fading filter with F = 0.99.\n\n[Figure 36. Recursive Filter Factor for Last Data Point: log-scale chart of Recursive Filter Factor versus Number of Data Points in Sample (0 to 300) for F = 0.95, 0.98, 0.99, 0.995, Index weighting, and Equal weighting]\n\nFigure 36. Recursive Filter Factor for Last Data Point"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The fading-memory recursive filter, defined by Eqs. (12) and (20), can be applied to launch test results to estimate failure probability. For this application the values to be filtered are the test outcomes, with 0 representing a successful launch, and 1 representing a failure or anomalous behavior. Given a series of outcomes, the filtered result after each launch in the series represents the estimate of failure probability at that point. Filtered results for two filter-control constants are shown in Table 37 for a hypothetical series of ten launches for which all but the second and fourth flights were successful.\n\nTable 37. Filter Application for Failure Probability\n\nIndex | Outcome | F=0.98 Filter factor a_n | F=0.98 Fail. Prob. | F=0.90 Filter factor a_n | F=0.90 Fail. Prob.\n1 | 0 | 1.0000 | 0.0 | 1.0000 | 0.0\n2 | 1 | 0.5051 | 0.5051 | 0.5263 | 0.5263\n3 | 0 | 0.3401 | 0.3333 | 0.3690 | 0.3321\n4 | 1 | 0.2576 | 0.5051 | 0.2908 | 0.5263\n5 | 0 | 0.2082 | 0.3999 | 0.2442 | 0.3978\n6 | 0 | 0.1752 | 0.3299 | 0.2132 | 0.3129\n7 | 0 | 0.1517 | 0.2798 | 0.1917 | 0.2529\n8 | 0 | 0.1340 | 0.2423 | 0.1756 | 0.2085\n9 | 0 | 0.1203 | 0.2132 | 0.1632 | 0.1745\n10 | 0 | 0.1093 | 0.1899 | 0.1535 | 0.1477\n\nIn this example, estimated failure probabilities are shown for two values of the filter constant that force the filter to fade at two different rates. After ten launches the estimated failure probability using F = 0.98 is 0.1899. For the faster fading-memory filter (F = 0.90), the result is 0.1477. Both estimates are less than that obtained by equal weighting, since the two failures occurred early in the sequence. Note that after four launches (2 successes and 2 failures) both filtered estimates exceed 0.5, since one of the two failures occurred during the fourth flight.\n\nIf the 1's and 0's used in the example to represent failures and successes were reversed, the same filter would provide estimates of probability of success."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix D. Launch and Performance Histories\n\nD.1 Basic Data\n\nIn support of the empirical approach to use post-test results to estimate future vehicle failure rates, the performance histories for Atlas, Delta, Titan, and Thor missiles/ vehicles were studied. Results are summarized in Appendix D as follows:\n\nAppendix D.2: Atlas Launch and Performance History\nAppendix D.3: Delta Launch and Performance History\nAppendix D.4: Titan Launch and Performance History\nAppendix D.5: Thor Launch and Performance History\n\nThe histories include all Atlas, Delta, and Titan launches from the Eastern and Western Ranges prior to 1 September 1996. For Thor, only Eastern Range launches are included, since this summary was completed before it was decided not to use Thor results in predicting failure probabilities for Delta. The Atlas, Titan, and Thor summaries include both weapons systems tests and space flights, while the Delta summary includes only space flights.\n\nFor each vehicle, each section of the appendix is divided into two parts:\n\n(1) A tabular summary listing all launches in chronological order by sequence number, a mission identifier, launch date, vehicle configuration, launch range, the failure-response mode to which any failure has been assigned, the flight phase in which the failure or anomalous behavior occurred, and a configuration flag (0 or 1) indicating whether the vehicle is sufficiently representative of current vehicles to be included in the data sample used to predict vehicle reliability.\n\n(2) A brief narrative – necessarily brief in most cases due to lack of information – describing the general nature of the failure or the behavior of the vehicle after failure, or the effects of the failure on flight parameters.\n\nD.1.1 Data Sources\n\nThe vehicle performance summaries and histories were collected primarily from the following sources:\n\n(1) \"Eastern Range Launches, 1950 - 1994, Chronological Summary\", 45th Space Wing History Office.[7]\n\n(2) Extension to (1) updating the launch summary through 30 December 1995.[8]\n\n(3) \"Vandenberg AFB Launch Summary\", Headquarters 30th Space Wing, Office of History, Launch Chronology, 1958 - 1995.[9]"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(4) \"Spacelift Effective Capacity: Part 1 - Launch Vehicle Projected Success Rate Analysis\", Draft prepared by Booz•Allen & Hamilton, Inc. 19 February 1992, prepared for Air Force Space Command Launch Services Office.[4]\n(5) Isakowitz, Steven J., (updated by Jeff Samella), International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems, Second Edition, published and distributed by AIAA in 1995.[10]\n(6) Smith, O. G., \"Launch Systems for Manned Spacecraft\", Draft, July 23, 1991.[11]\n(7) \"Comparison of Orbit Parameters - Table 1\", prepared by McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Company, Delta launches through 4 Nov 95.[12]\n(8) Missiles/Space Vehicle Files, 45th Space Wing, Wing Safety, Mission Flight Control and Analysis (SEO), 1957 through 1995.[13]\n(9) Missile Launch Operations Logs, 30th Space Wing, copies provided via ACTA, Inc., (Mr. James Baeker), 1963 through 1995.[14]\n(10) \"Titan IV, America's Silent Hero\", published by Lockheed Martin in Florida Today, 13 Nov 95.[15]\n(11) \"Atlas Program Flight History\" (through April 1965), General Dynamics Report EM-1860, 26 April 1965.[16]\n(12) Fenske, C. W., \"Atlas Flight Program Summary\", Lockheed Martin, April 1995.[17]\n(13) Brater, Bob, \"Launch History\", Lockheed Martin FAX to RTI, March 13, 1996.[18]\n(14) Several USAF Accident/Incident Reports for Atlas and Titan failures.[19]\n(15) Quintero, Andrew H., \"Launch Failures from the Eastern Range Since 1975\", Aerospace memo, February 25, 1996, provided to RTI by Bill Zelinsky.[20]\n(16) Set of \"Titan Flight Anomaly/Failure Summary\" since 1959, received from Lockheed Martin, April 4, 1996.[21]\n(17) Chang, I-Shih, \"Space Launch Vehicle Failures (1984 - 1995)\", Aerospace Report No. TOR-96(8504)-2, January 1996.[22]\nThere were numerous discrepancies in the source data, particularly with regard to launch date and vehicle configuration. Some sources apparently list launch dates in local time, others use Greenwich time, and in some cases the same source may use both with no indication of which is which. Most of the launch dates shown in Appendix D agree with those in the Eastern Range and Western Range summaries published by the respective History offices. Since the dates on these summaries are not consistently local or Greenwich, neither are the dates listed in Appendix D. Although launch dates are\n9/10/96 97 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"used to order the vehicle tests for filtering, whether the dates are inconsistently in local or Greenwich times is inconsequential. In most cases, the ordering is not affected by a one-day change in launch date. In rare cases where the order of two launches might be inadvertently reversed, the filtering calculations are unaffected if the interchanged flights are both failures or both successes. Even when this is not the case, the effect on the final results for samples greater than one-hundred is negligible.\nConfiguration discrepancies also existed in the source data as, for example, the listing of the same Atlas vehicle as a IIA in one source and as a IIAS in another. In rare cases, a launch may have been called a success in one document and a failure in another, with little or no data provided to make it clear whether the difference in classification was due to error or different success criteria. Although a considerable effort was made to eliminate errors and discrepancies in Appendix D, there can be no assurance that the effort was 100% successful.\nD.1.2 Assignment of Failure-Response Modes\nIn the tabular historical summaries in Appendix D, the column labeled \"Response Mode\" refers to the failure-response modes in program DAMP. The numbers 1 through 5 in this column correlate with the failure-response modes described in Appendix A. The letter \"T\" following either a \"3\" or \"4\" indicates that the vehicle executed a thrusting tumble before breakup or destruct. An \"NA\" (i.e., not applicable) appearing in the column means that some anomalous behavior caused stages or components to impact outside their normal impact areas without necessarily failing the flight, or that the anomalous behavior resulted in an unplanned orbit that may or may not have interfered with mission objectives. If the response-mode column is blank, either the flight was a success, or there was no information in the data sources to indicate otherwise.\nIn some cases where the data sources contained only sketchy or incomplete information, assignment of the response mode involved some speculation. Mostly, this situation arose in trying to decide between response modes 4 and 5 or between modes 4 and 4T or, in rare cases, what mode to assign when the vehicle response did not exactly fit any of the response-mode definitions.\nD.1.3 Assignment of Flight Phase\nThe number shown in the \"Flight Phase\" column in the tabular summaries of Appendix D indicates the phase of vehicle flight in which the failure or anomalous behavior occurred. Definitions of flight phase are given in Table 38. The assigned numbers are arbitrary, but were chosen in a way that suggests the vehicle stage that failed or the stage that was thrusting when the failure occurred.\n9/10/96 98 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 38. Flight-Phase Definitions\nFlight Phase | Description\n0 | SRM auxiliary thrust phase\n1 | First-stage thrust phase if no auxiliary SRM's carried, or First-stage thrust phase after SRM separation\n1.5 | Attitude-control phase after first-stage thrust phase or between first and second-thrust phases\n2 | Second-stage thrust phase\n2.5 | Attitude-control phase after second thrust phase or between second and third-thrust phases\n3 | Third-stage thrust phase, or third thrust phase if second stage is restartable\n3.5 | Attitude-control phase after third thrust phase or between third and fourth thrust phases\n4 | Fourth thrust phase, or Upper stage/payload thrust phase\n5 | Attitude control phase after Flight Phase 4, or orbital phase\nIn some cases, two flight phases are listed opposite an entry, e.g., 2 and 5. This means that some failure or anomalous behavior occurred during the second-stage thrusting period that did not prevent the attainment of an orbit, but did result in an abnormal final orbit. Other somewhat arbitrary decisions were necessary in assigning a flight phase when an expended stage failed to separate, or an upper stage failed to ignite. If, for example, the first and second stages failed to separate, any of flight phase 1, 1.5, or 2 could be assigned, depending on the exact cause of the failure. The detailed information needed to make the proper choice was sometimes lacking.\nTable 39 is provided to assist in understanding how flight phases were assigned for Atlas, Delta/Thor, and Titan vehicles.\nTable 39. Flight Phases by Launch Vehicle\nFlight Phase | Atlas | Delta/Thor | Titan\n0 | Castor burn | Castor/GEM burn | SRM solo\n1 | Atlas booster | First-stage burn | Stage 1\n1.5 | Booster separation | Vernier solo - Sep 1/2 | Stage-1 separation\n2 | Sustainer | Second-stage burn | Stage 2\n2.5 | Vernier/ACS solo | Coast between stg 2/3 | Vernier solo\n3 | Agena/Centaur | Third-stage burn | TS/Centaur/IUS\n3.5 | - | Coast after stg 3 | -\n4 | Second burn | Second burn | Second burn\n5 | Orbit | Orbit | Orbit\n9/10/96 99 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D.1.4 Representative Configurations\nThe last column in the tables in Appendix D indicates whether the vehicle configuration is considered sufficiently similar to current and future vehicles for the test result to be included in the representative data sample used to predict absolute reliability. A \"1\" in the column indicates that the test result is included, while a \"0\" indicates that it is excluded. There are likely to be differences of opinion about which past configurations are representative and which are not. In determining which to include, RTI has relied entirely on the Booz•Allen & Hamilton report[4] referred to earlier. When faced with the same problem, Booz•Allen established the following criteria for deciding whether past configurations were sufficiently similar to current configurations:\n(1) Genealogy: Is the current system a direct or indirect derivative of the historical configuration?\n(2) Operations: Is the current system operated in the same manner as the historical configurations (e.g., ICBM versus space-launch vehicle)?\n(3) Composition: Does the current system use the same types of elements (i.e., SRMs, upper stage, etc.)?\nBased on these criteria and other factors, Booz•Allen decided to use test results from flights of the following vehicle configurations to predict future success rates:\nAtlas: SLV-3 and later configurations to include SLV-3A, SLV-3C, SLV-3D, G, H, I, II, IIA, IIAS. (Excluded: Atlas A, B, C, LV-3A, 3B, 3C, D, E, F)\nDelta: 291X and later configurations to include 391X, 392X, 492X, 592X, 692X, 792X.\nTitan: Titan IIIC and later configurations to include IIIB, IIID, IIIE, 34B, 34D, III/CT, IV, II-SLV.\n9/10/96 100 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D.2 Atlas Launch and Performance History\nAtlas space-launch vehicles, originally manufactured by General Dynamics and currently by Lockheed Martin, derived from the Atlas ICBM series developed in the 1950s. The primary one-and-one-half-stage vehicle played a major role in early lunar exploration activities (the unmanned Ranger, Lunar Orbiter, and Surveyor programs), and planetary probes (Mariner and Pioneer). Table 40 shows a summary of Atlas configurations since the beginning of the program.[10]\nTable 40. Summary of Atlas Vehicle Configurations\nConfiguration | Description\nA | ICBM single-stage test vehicle\nB, C | ICBM 1½-stage test vehicle\nD | ICBM and later space-launch vehicle\nE, F | First an ICBM (1960), then a reentry test vehicle (1964), then a space-launch vehicle (1968)\nLV-3A | Same as D except Agena upper stage\nLV-3B | Same as D except man-rated for Project Mercury\nSLV-3 | Same as LV-3A except reliability improvements\nSLV-3A | Same as SLV-3 except stretched 117 inches\nLV-3C | Integrated with Centaur D upper stage\nSLV-3C | Same as LV-3C except stretched 51 inches\nSLV-3D | Same as SLV-3C except Centaur uprated to D-1A and Atlas electronics integrated with Centaur (no longer radio guided)\nG | Same as SLV-3D but Atlas stretched 81 inches\nH | Same as SLV-3D except with E/F avionics and no Centaur\nI | Same as G except strengthened for 14-ft payload fairing, ring laser gyro added\nII | Same as I except Atlas stretched 108 inches, engines uprated, hydrazine roll-control added, verniers deleted, Centaur stretched 36 inches\nIIA | Same as II except Centaur RL-10s engines uprated to 20K lbs thrust and 6.5 seconds Isp increase from extendible RL-10 nozzles\nIIAS | Same as IIA except 4 Castor IVA strap-on SRMs added\nAtlas A, B, and C were developmental ICBMs. Atlas D, E, and F configurations were deployed as operational ICBMs during the 1960s. During that time, some Atlas Ds were modified as space-launch vehicles in the LV series: LV-3A, 3B, and 3C. The Standardized Launch Vehicle (SLV) series derived from a need to reduce lead times in transforming Atlas missiles to space-launch vehicles. The SLV series began with the SLV-3 vehicle, which used an Agena upper stage. The G and H vehicles evolved from the SLV series. Eventually the I, II, IIA, and IIAS configurations were developed with the aim of also supporting commercial launches.\n9/10/96 101 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Atlas vehicles are fueled by a mixture of liquid oxygen and kerosene (RP-1). The latest IIAS configuration also incorporates Castor IVA solid-rocket motors. The early Atlas core vehicle included a sustainer, verniers, and two booster engines, all ignited prior to liftoff. In the Atlas II, IIA, and IIAS vehicles, the vernier engines have been replaced by a hydrazine roll-control system. Of the four Castor SRBs on the IIAS, two are ground lit and two are air lit some 60 seconds later. Atlas vehicles are now typically integrated with the Centaur upper stage vehicle that is fueled with liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen. Earlier flights used an Agena upper stage.\n\nThe entire Atlas history through 1995 is depicted rather compactly in bar-graph form in Figure 37. The solid-block portion of each bar indicates the number of launches during the calendar year for which vehicle performance was entirely normal, in so far as could be determined. The clear white parts forming the tops of most bars show the number of launches that were either failures or flights where the launch vehicle experienced some sort of anomalous behavior. Every launch with an entry in the response mode column in Table 41 falls in this category. Such behavior did not necessarily prevent the attainment of some, or even all, mission objectives.\n\nFigure 37. Atlas Launch Summary\n\n9/10/96\n102\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D.2.1 Atlas Launch History\n\nThe data in Table 41 summarize the flight performance of all Atlas and Atlas-boosted space-vehicle launches since the program began in June 1957. A launch sequence number is provided in the first column, a mission ID and launch date in columns 2 and 3. The vehicle configuration or Atlas booster number is given in the fourth column, while the fifth column shows whether the launch took place from the Eastern or Western Range. The last three columns in the table show, respectively, the response mode assigned by RTI to any failure or anomalous behavior that occurred, the flight phase in which it occurred, and whether the vehicle configuration is considered representative for the purposes of predicting future Atlas reliability. Launches through sequence number 532 were used in the filtering process to estimate failure rate.\n\nTable 41. Atlas Launch History\n\nNo. | Mission/ID | Launch Date | Vehicle Configuration | Test Range | Response Mode | Flight Phase | Rep. Conf.\n1 | Weapons System (WS) | 06/11/57 | 4A | ER | 4T | 1 | 0\n2 | WS | 09/25/57 | 6A | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n3 | WS | 12/17/57 | 12A | ER | | | 0\n4 | WS | 01/10/58 | 10A | ER | | | 0\n5 | WS | 02/07/58 | 13A | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n6 | WS | 02/20/58 | 11A | ER | 4T | 1 | 0\n7 | WS | 04/05/58 | 15A | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n8 | WS | 06/03/58 | 16A | ER | | | 0\n9 | WS | 07/19/58 | 3B | ER | 4T | 1 | 0\n10 | WS | 08/02/58 | 4B | ER | | | 0\n11 | WS | 08/28/58 | 5B | ER | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n12 | WS | 09/14/58 | 8B | ER | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n13 | WS | 09/18/58 | 6B | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n14 | WS | 11/17/58 | 9B | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n15 | WS | 11/28/58 | 12B | ER | | | 0\n16 | SCORE | 12/18/58 | 10B LV-3A/AGENA | ER | | | 0\n17 | WS | 12/23/58 | 3C | ER | | | 0\n18 | WS | 01/15/59 | 13B | ER | 5 | 1 | 0\n19 | WS | 01/27/59 | 4C | ER | 5 | 2 | 0\n20 | WS | 02/04/59 | 11B | ER | | | 0\n21 | WS | 02/20/59 | 5C | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n22 | WS | 03/18/59 | 7C | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n23 | WS | 04/14/59 | 3D | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n24 | WS | 05/18/59 | 7D | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n25 | WS | 06/06/59 | 5D | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n26 | WS | 07/21/59 | 8C | ER | | | 0\n27 | WS | 07/28/59 | 11D | ER | | | 0\n28 | WS | 08/11/59 | 14D | ER | | | 0\n29 | WS | 08/24/59 | 11C | ER | | | 0\n30 | MERCURY (test) | 09/09/59 | 10D LV-3B | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n31 | DESERT HEAT | 09/09/59 | 12D | WR | | | 0\n\n9/10/96\n103\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. | Mission/ID | Launch Date | Vehicle Configuration | Test Range | Response Mode | Flight Phase | Rep. Conf.\n32 | WS | 09/16/59 | 17D | ER | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n33 | WS | 10/06/59 | 18D | ER | | | 0\n34 | WS | 10/09/59 | 22D | ER | | | 0\n35 | WS | 10/29/59 | 26D | ER | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n36 | WS | 11/04/59 | 28D | ER | NA | 2 | 0\n37 | WS | 11/24/59 | 15D | ER | NA | 2.5 | 0\n38 | ABLE (PIONEER) | 11/26/59 | 20D LV-3A/AGENA | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n39 | WS | 12/08/59 | 31D | ER | | | 0\n40 | WS | 12/18/59 | 40D | ER | | | 0\n41 | WS | 01/06/60 | 43D | ER | | | 0\n42 | WS | 01/26/60 | 44D | ER | | | 0\n43 | DUAL EXHAUST | 01/26/60 | 6D | WR | 4 | 2 & 2.5 | 0\n44 | WS | 02/11/60 | 49D | ER | | | 0\n45 | MIDAS I | 02/26/60 | 29D LV-3A/AGENA A | ER | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n46 | WS | 03/08/60 | 42D | ER | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n47 | WS | 03/10/60 | 51D | ER | 1 | 1 | 0\n48 | WS | 04/07/60 | 48D | ER | 1 | 1 | 0\n49 | QUICK START | 04/22/60 | 25D | WR | | | 0\n50 | LUCKY DRAGON | 05/06/60 | 23D | WR | 3 | 1 | 0\n51 | WS | 05/20/60 | 56D | ER | | | 0\n52 | MIDAS II | 05/24/60 | 45D LV-3A/AGENA A | ER | | | 0\n53 | WS | 06/11/60 | 54D | ER | | | 0\n54 | WS | 06/22/60 | 62D | ER | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n55 | WS | 06/27/60 | 27D | ER | | | 0\n56 | WS | 07/02/60 | 60D | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n57 | TIGER SKIN | 07/22/60 | 74D | WR | 5 | 1 | 0\n58 | MERCURY 1 | 07/29/60 | 50D LV-3B | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n59 | WS | 08/09/60 | 32D | ER | | | 0\n60 | WS | 08/12/60 | 66D | ER | | | 0\n61 | GOLDEN JOURNEY | 09/12/60 | 47D | WR | 4 | 2 | 0\n62 | WS | 09/16/60 | 76D | ER | | | 0\n63 | WS | 09/19/60 | 79D | ER | | | 0\n64 | ABLE 5 (PIONEER) | 09/25/60 | 80D LV-3A/AGENA | ER | 4T | 2.5 & 3 | 0\n65 | HIGH ARROW | 09/29/60 | 33D | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n66 | WS | 10/11/60 | 3E | ER | 5 | 2 | 0\n67 | Gibson Girl | 10/11/60 | 57D LV-3A/AGENA A | WR | NA | 3 & 5 | 0\n68 | DIAMOND JUBILEE | 10/12/60 | 81D | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n69 | WS | 10/13/60 | 71D | ER | | | 0\n70 | WS | 10/22/60 | 55D | ER | | | 0\n71 | WS | 11/15/60 | 83D | ER | | | 0\n72 | WS | 11/29/60 | 4E | ER | 5 | 2 | 0\n73 | ABLE 5B (PIONEER) | 12/15/60 | 91D LV-3A/AGENA | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n74 | HOT SHOT | 12/16/60 | 99D | WR | | | 0\n75 | WS | 01/23/61 | 90D | ER | | | 0\n76 | WS | 01/24/61 | 8E | ER | 5 | 2 | 0\n77 | Jawhawk Jamboree | 01/31/61 | 70D LV-3A/AGENA A | WR | NA | 2 | 0\n\n9/10/96\n104\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. | Mission/ID | Launch Date | Vehicle Configuration | Test Range | Response Mode | Flight Phase | Rep. Conf.\n78 | MERCURY 2 | 02/21/61 | 67D LV-3B | ER | | | 0\n79 | WS | 02/24/61 | 9E | ER | | | 0\n80 | WS | 03/13/61 | 13E | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n81 | WS | 03/24/61 | 16E | ER | 4 | 1.5 | 0\n82 | MERCURY 3 | 04/25/61 | 100D LV-3B | ER | 3 | 1 | 0\n83 | WS | 05/12/61 | 12E | ER | | | 0\n84 | LITTLE SATIN | 05/24/61 | 95D | WR | | | 0\n85 | WS | 05/26/61 | 18E | ER | | | 0\n86 | SURE SHOT | 06/07/61 | 27E | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n87 | WS | 06/22/61 | 17E | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n88 | WS | 07/06/61 | 22E | ER | | | 0\n89 | Polar Orbit (Midas III) | 07/12/61 | 97D, LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | | | 0\n90 | WS | 07/31/61 | 21E | ER | | | 0\n91 | WS | 08/08/61 | 2F | ER | | | 0\n92 | NEW NICKEL | 08/22/61 | 101D | WR | | | 0\n93 | RANGER 1 | 08/23/61 | 111D LV-3A/AGENA | ER | NA | 4 | 0\n94 | WS | 09/08/61 | 26E | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n95 | First Motion (Samos III) | 09/09/61 | 106D LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | 1 | 1 | 0\n96 | MERCURY 4 | 09/13/61 | 88D LV-3B | ER | | | 0\n97 | WS | 10/02/61 | 25E | ER | | | 0\n98 | WS | 10/05/61 | 30E | ER | | | 0\n99 | Big Town (Midas IV) | 10/21/61 | 105D LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | NA | 2 | 0\n100 | WS | 11/10/61 | 32E | ER | 4T | 1 | 0\n101 | RANGER 2 | 11/18/61 | 117D LV-3A/AGENA | ER | NA | 4 | 0\n102 | WS | 11/22/61 | 4F | ER | | | 0\n103 | Round Trip (Samos IV) | 11/22/61 | 108D LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | 4T | 2 | 0\n104 | MERCURY 5 | 11/29/61 | 93D LV-3B | ER | | | 0\n105 | BIG PUSH | 11/29/61 | 53D | WR | | | 0\n106 | WS | 12/01/61 | 35E | ER | | | 0\n107 | BIG CHIEF | 12/07/61 | 82D | WR | | | 0\n108 | WS | 12/12/61 | 5F | ER | 5 | 2 | 0\n109 | WS | 12/19/61 | 36E | ER | | | 0\n110 | WS | 12/20/61 | 6F | ER | 4T | 2 | 0\n111 | Ocean Way (Samos V) | 12/22/61 | 114D LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | NA | 2 | 0\n112 | BLUE FIN | 01/17/62 | 123D | WR | | | 0\n113 | BLUE MOSS | 01/23/62 | 132D | WR | | | 0\n114 | RANGER 3 | 01/26/62 | 121D LV-3A/AGENA B | ER | NA | 2 & 5 | 0\n115 | WS | 02/13/62 | 40E | ER | | | 0\n116 | BIG JOHN | 02/16/62 | 137D | WR | NA | 1.5 | 0\n117 | MERCURY 6 | 02/20/62 | 109D, LV-3B | ER | | | 0\n118 | CHAIN SMOKER | 02/21/62 | 52D | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n119 | SILVER SPUR | 02/28/62 | 66E | WR | 4T | 1.5 & 2 | 0\n120 | Loose Tooth | 03/07/62 | 112D, LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | | | 0\n121 | CURRY COMB I | 03/23/62 | 134D | WR | | | 0\n122 | WS | 04/09/62 | 11F | ER | 1 | 1 | 0\n123 | Night Hunt | 04/09/62 | 110D LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | NA | 1 | 0\n\n9/10/96\n105\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. | Mission/ID | Launch Date | Vehicle Configuration | Test Range | Response Mode | Flight Phase | Rep. Conf.\n124 | CURRY COMB II | 04/11/62 | 129D | WR | | | 0\n125 | RANGER 4 | 04/23/62 | 133D, LV-3A/AGENA B | ER | | | 0\n126 | Dainty Doll | 04/26/62 | 118D, LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | | | 0\n127 | BLUE BALL | 04/27/62 | 140D | WR | | | 0\n128 | AC-1 (SUBORBITAL) | 05/08/62 | 104D LV-3C/CENT. D | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n129 | CANNONBALL FLYER | 05/11/62 | 127D | WR | | | 0\n130 | MERCURY 7 | 05/24/62 | 107D, LV-3B | ER | | | 0\n131 | Rubber Gun | 06/17/62 | 115D, LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | 4 | 3 | 0\n132 | ALL JAZZ | 06/26/62 | 21D | WR | | | 0\n133 | LONG LADY | 07/12/62 | 141D | WR | | | 0\n134 | EXTRA BONUS | 07/13/62 | 67E | WR | 4 | 2 & 2.5 | 0\n135 | Armored Car | 07/18/62 | 120D, LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | | | 0\n136 | FIRST TRY | 07/19/62 | 13D | WR | | | 0\n137 | MARINER 1 (VENUS) | 07/22/62 | 145D LV-3A/AGENA B | ER | 5 | 2 | 0\n138 | HIS NIBS | 08/01/62 | 15F | WR | | | 0\n139 | Air Scout | 08/05/62 | 124D, LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | | | 0\n140 | PEG BOARD | 08/09/62 | 8D | WR | | | 0\n141 | PEG BOARD II | 08/09/62 | 87D | WR | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n142 | CRASH TRUCK | 08/10/62 | 57F | WR | 5 | 1 | 0\n143 | WS | 08/13/62 | 7F | ER | | | 0\n144 | MARINER 2 (VENUS) | 08/27/62 | 179D LV-3A/AGENA B | ER | NA | 2 | 0\n145 | WS | 09/19/62 | 8F | ER | | | 0\n146 | BRIAR STREET | 10/02/62 | 4D | WR | 4 | 2 | 0\n147 | MERCURY 8 | 10/03/62 | 113D, LV-3B | ER | | | 0\n148 | RANGER 5 | 10/18/62 | 215D LV-3A/AGENA B | ER | NA | 5 | 0\n149 | WS | 10/19/62 | 14F | ER | | | 0\n150 | CLOSED CIRCUITS | 10/26/62 | 159D | WR | | | 0\n151 | WS | 11/07/62 | 16F | ER | | | 0\n152 | After Deck | 11/11/62 | 128D, LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | | | 0\n153 | ACTION TIME | 11/14/62 | 13F | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n154 | WS | 12/05/62 | 21F | ER | | | 0\n155 | DEER PARK | 12/12/62 | 161D | WR | | | 0\n156 | Bargain Counter | 12/17/62 | 131D, LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | 4T | 1 | 0\n157 | OAK TREE | 12/18/62 | 64E | WR | 4T | 1 | 0\n158 | FLY HIGH | 12/22/62 | 160D | WR | 4 | 2 | 0\n159 | BIG SUE | 01/25/63 | 39D | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n160 | FAINT CLICK | 01/31/63 | 176D | WR | | | 0\n161 | FLAG RACE | 02/13/63 | 182D | WR | | | 0\n162 | PITCH PINE | 02/28/63 | 188D | WR | | | 0\n163 | ABRES-1 | 03/01/63 | 134F | ER | | | 0\n164 | TALL TREE 3 | 03/09/63 | 102D | WR | 5 | 1 | 0\n165 | TALL TREE 2 | 03/11/63 | 64D | WR | | | 0\n166 | TALL TREE 1 | 03/15/63 | 46D | WR | 4T | 2 | 0\n167 | TALL TREE 5 | 03/15/63 | 63F | WR | | | 0\n168 | LEADING EDGE | 03/16/63 | 193D | WR | 4T | 2 | 0\n169 | KENDALL GREEN | 03/21/63 | 83F | WR | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n\n9/10/96\n106\nRTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. | Mission/ID | Launch Date | Vehicle Configuration | Test Range | Response Mode | Flight Phase | Rep. Conf.\n170 | TALL TREE 4 | 03/23/63 | 52F | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n171 | BLACK BUCK | 04/24/63 | 65E | WR | NA | 2.5 | 0\n172 | ABRES-2 | 04/26/63 | 135F | ER | | | 0\n173 | Damp Clay | 05/09/63 | 119D, LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | | | 0\n174 | MERCURY 9 | 05/15/63 | 130D, LV-3B | ER | | | 0\n175 | DOCK HAND | 06/04/63 | 62E | WR | | | 0\n176 | HARPOON GUN | 06/12/63 | 198D | WR | | | 0\n177 | Big Four | 06/12/63 | 139D, LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | 4T | 1 | 0\n178 | GO BOY | 07/03/63 | 69E | WR | | | 0\n179 | Fish Pool | 07/12/63 | 201D, LV-3A/AGENA D | WR | | | 0\n180 | Damp Duck | 07/18/63 | 75D, LV-3A/AGENA B | WR | | | 0\n181 | SILVER DOLL | 07/26/63 | 24E | WR | 4 | 2 | 0\n182 | BIG FLIGHT | 07/30/63 | 70E | WR | | | 0\n183 | COOL WATER I | 07/31/63 | 143D | WR | | | 0\n184 | PIPE DREAM | 08/24/63 | 72E | WR | | | 0\n185 | COOL WATER II | 08/28/63 | 142D | WR | | | 0\n186 | Fixed Fee | 09/06/63 | 212D, LV-3A/AGENA D | WR | | | 0\n187 | COOL WATER III | 09/06/63 | 63D | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n188 | COOL WATER IV | 09/11/63 | 84D | WR | 4T | 2.5 | 0\n189 | FILTER TIP | 09/25/63 | 71E | WR | 4T | 2 | 0\n190 | HOT RUM | 10/03/63 | 45F | WR | 1 | 1 | 0\n191 | COOL WATER V | 10/07/63 | 163D | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n192 | VELA 1 & 2 | 10/16/63 | 197D, LV-3A/AGENA D | ER | | | 0\n193 | Hay Bailer | 10/25/63 | 224D, LV-3A/AGENA D | WR | | | 0\n194 | ABRES-3 | 10/28/63 | 136F | ER | 4T | 2 | 0\n195 | HICKORY HOLLOW | 11/04/63 | 232D | WR | | | 0\n196 | COOL WATER VI | 11/13/63 | 158D | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n197 | AC-2 | 11/27/63 | 126D, LV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 0\n198 | LENS COVER | 12/18/63 | 233D | WR | | | 0\n199 | Rest Easy | 12/18/63 | 227D, LV-3A/AGENA D | WR | | | 0\n200 | DAY BOOK | 12/18/63 | 109F | WR | | | 0\n201 | RANGER 6 | 01/30/64 | 199D, LV-3A/AGENA B | ER | | | 0\n202 | BLUE BAY | 02/12/64 | 48E | WR | 4 | 2 | 0\n203 | Upper Octane | 02/25/64 | 285D, LV-3A/AGENA D | WR | | | 0\n204 | ABRES-4 | 02/25/64 | 5E | ER | | | 0\n205 | Ink Blotter | 03/11/64 | 296D, LV-3A/AGENA D | WR | | | 0\n206 | ABRES-5 | 04/01/64 | 137F | ER | | | 0\n207 | HIGH BALL | 04/03/64 | 3F | WR | 1 | 1 | 0\n208 | PROJECT FIRE | 04/14/64 | 263D, LV-3A/AGENA D | ER | | | 0\n209 | Anchor Dan | 04/23/64 | 351D, LV-3A/AGENA D | WR | | | 0\n210 | Big Fred | 05/19/64 | 350D, LV-3A/AGENA D | WR | | | 0\n211 | IRON LUNG | 06/18/64 | 243D | WR | | | 0\n212 | AC-3 | 06/30/64 | 135D, LV-3C/CENT. D | ER | 4 | 3 | 0\n213 | Quarter Round | 07/06/64 | 352D, LV-3A/AGENA D | WR | | | 0\n214 | VELA 3 & 4 | 07/17/64 | 216D, LV-3A/AGENA D | ER | | | 0\n215 | RANGER 7 | 07/28/64 | 250D, LV-3A/AGENA D | ER | | | 0"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. | Mission/ID | Launch Date | Vehicle Configuration | Test Range | Response Mode | Flight Phase | Rep. Conf.\n216 | KNOCK WOOD | 07/29/64 | 248D | WR | | | 0\n217 | LARGE CHARGE | 08/07/64 | 110F | WR | | | 0\n218 | Big Sickle | 08/14/64 | 7101, SLV-3A/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n219 | GALLANT GAL | 08/27/64 | 57E | WR | 4 | 2 | 0\n220 | BIG DEAL | 08/31/64 | 36F | WR | | | 0\n221 | OGO-1 | 09/04/64 | 195D, LV-3A/AGENA B | ER | | | 0\n222 | BUTTERFLY NET | 09/15/64 | 245D | WR | | | 0\n223 | BUZZING BEE | 09/22/64 | 247D | WR | | | 0\n224 | Slow Pace | 09/23/64 | 7102, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n225 | Busy Line | 10/08/64 | 7103, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n226 | Boon Decker | 10/23/64 | 353D, LV-3A/AGENA D | WR | | | 0\n227 | MARINER 3 | 11/05/64 | 289D, LV-3A/AGENA D | ER | 4 | 4 | 0\n228 | MARINER 4 | 11/28/64 | 288D, LV-3A/AGENA D | ER | | | 0\n229 | BROOK TROUT | 12/01/64 | 210D | WR | | | 0\n230 | OPERA GLASS | 12/04/64 | 300D | WR | | | 0\n231 | Battle Royal | 12/04/64 | 7105, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n232 | AC-4 | 12/11/64 | 146D, LV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 0\n233 | STEP OVER | 12/22/64 | 111F | WR | | | 0\n234 | PILOT LIGHT | 01/08/65 | 106F | WR | | | 0\n235 | PENCIL SET | 01/12/65 | 166D | WR | | | 0\n236 | Beaver's Dam | 01/21/65 | 172D/ABRES | WR | 4 | 2 & 3 | 0\n237 | Sand Lark | 01/23/65 | 7106, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n238 | RANGER 8 | 02/17/65 | 196D, LV-3A/AGENA B | ER | | | 0\n239 | DRAG BAR | 02/27/65 | 211D | WR | | | 0\n240 | PORK BARREL | 03/02/65 | 301D | WR | | | 0\n241 | AC-5 | 03/02/65 | 156D, LV-3C/CENT. D | ER | 1 | 1 | 0\n242 | Ship Rail | 03/12/65 | 7104, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n243 | ANGEL CAMP | 03/12/65 | 154D | WR | | | 0\n244 | RANGER 9 | 03/21/65 | 204D, LV-3A/AGENA B | ER | | | 0\n245 | FRESH FROG | 03/26/65 | 297D | WR | | | 0\n246 | Air Pump | 04/03/65 | 7401, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n247 | FLIP SIDE | 04/06/65 | 150D | WR | | | 0\n248 | Dwarf Tree | 04/28/65 | 7107, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n249 | PROJECT FIRE | 05/22/65 | 264D, LV-3A/AGENA D | ER | | | 0\n250 | Bottom Land | 05/27/65 | 7108, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n251 | Tennis Match | 05/27/65 | 68D/ABRES | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n252 | OLD FOGEY | 06/03/65 | 177D | WR | | | 0\n253 | LEA RING | 06/08/65 | 299D | WR | | | 0\n254 | STOCK BOY | 06/10/65 | 302D | WR | | | 0\n255 | Worn Face | 06/25/65 | 7109, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n256 | BLIND SPOT | 07/01/65 | 59D | WR | | | 0\n257 | White Pine | 07/12/65 | 7112, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | 4 & 5 | 2 & 3 | 1\n258 | VELA 5 & 6 | 07/20/65 | 225D, LV-3A/AGENA D | ER | | | 0\n259 | Water Tower | 08/03/65 | 7111, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n260 | PIANO WIRE | 08/04/65 | 183D | WR | | | 0\n261 | SEA TRAMP | 08/05/65 | 147F | WR | | | 0"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. | Mission/ID | Launch Date | Vehicle Configuration | Test Range | Response Mode | Flight Phase | Rep. Conf.\n262 | AC-6 | 08/11/65 | 151D, LV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 0\n263 | TONTO RIM | 08/26/65 | 61D | WR | | | 0\n264 | WATER SNAKE | 09/29/65 | 125D | WR | | | 0\n265 | Log Fog | 09/30/65 | 7110, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n266 | Seething City | 10/05/65 | 34D/ABRES | WR | | | 0\n267 | GTV-6 | 10/25/65 | 5301, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | 4 | 3 | 1\n268 | Shop Degree | 11/08/65 | 7113, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n269 | WILD GOAT | 11/29/65 | 200D | WR | | | 0\n270 | TAG DAY | 12/20/65 | 85D | WR | | | 0\n271 | Blanket Party | 01/19/66 | 7114, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n272 | YEAST CAKE | 02/10/66 | 305D | WR | | | 0\n273 | LONELY MT. | 02/11/66 | 86D | WR | | | 0\n274 | Mucho Grande | 02/15/66 | 7115, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n275 | SYCAMORE RIDGE | 02/19/66 | 73D | WR | | | 0\n276 | ETERNAL CAMP | 03/04/66 | 303D | WR | 5 | 1 | 0\n277 | GTV-8 | 03/16/66 | 5302, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n278 | Dumb Dora | 03/18/66 | 7116, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n279 | WHITE BEAR | 03/19/66 | 304D | WR | 5 | 2 | 0\n280 | Bronze Bell | 03/30/66 | 72D | WR | | | 0\n281 | AC-8 | 04/07/66 | 184D, LV-3C/CENT. D | ER | 4T | 4 | 0\n282 | OAO-1 | 04/08/66 | 5001, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 0\n283 | Shallow Stream | 04/19/66 | 7117, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n284 | CRAB CLAW | 05/03/66 | 208D | WR | 4T | 1 | 0\n285 | SUPPLY ROOM | 05/13/66 | 98D | WR | | | 0\n286 | Pump Handle | 05/14/66 | 7118, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n287 | GTV-9 | 05/17/66 | 5303, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | 5 | 1 | 1\n288 | SAND SHARK | 05/26/66 | 41D | WR | | | 0\n289 | SURVEYOR-1 (AC-10) | 05/30/66 | 290D, LV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 0\n290 | GTV-9A | 06/01/66 | 5304, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n291 | Power Drill | 06/03/66 | 7119, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n292 | OGO-3 | 06/06/66 | 5601, SLV-3/AGENA B | ER | | | 1\n293 | Mama's Boy | 06/09/66 | 7201, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n294 | VENEER PANEL | 06/10/66 | 96D | WR | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n295 | GOLDEN MT. | 06/26/66 | 147D | WR | | | 0\n296 | HEAVY ARTILLERY | 06/30/66 | 298D | WR | | | 0\n297 | Snake Creek | 07/12/66 | 7120, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n298 | Stony Island | 07/13/66 | 58D/ABRES | WR | NA | 3 | 0\n299 | GTV-10 | 07/18/66 | 5305, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n300 | BUSY RAMROD | 08/08/66 | 149F | WR | 4 | 2 | 0\n301 | LUNAR ORBITER 1 | 08/10/66 | 5801, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n302 | Silver Doll | 08/16/66 | 7121, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n303 | Happy Mt. | 08/19/66 | 7202, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n304 | GTV-11 | 09/12/66 | 5306, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n305 | Taxi Driver | 09/16/66 | 7123, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n306 | SURVEYOR 2 (AC-7) | 09/20/66 | 194D, LV-3C/CENT. D | ER | NA | 5 | 0\n307 | Dwarf Killer | 10/05/66 | 7203, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. | Mission/ID | Launch Date | Vehicle Configuration | Test Range | Response Mode | Flight Phase | Rep. Conf.\n308 | LOW HILL | 10/11/66 | 115F | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n309 | Gleaming Star | 10/12/66 | 7122, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n310 | AC-9 | 10/26/66 | 174D, LV-3C/CENT. D | ER | NA | 2 | 0\n311 | Red Caboose | 11/02/66 | 7124, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n312 | LUNAR ORBITER 2 | 11/06/66 | 5802, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n313 | GTV-12 | 11/11/66 | 5307, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n314 | Busy Mermaid | 12/05/66 | 7125, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n315 | ATS-B | 12/06/66 | 5101, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n316 | Busy Panama | 12/11/66 | 89D/ABRES | WR | | | 0\n317 | Busy Peacock | 12/21/66 | 7001, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n318 | BUSY STEPSON | 01/17/67 | 148F | WR | NA | 2.5 | 0\n319 | BUSY NIECE | 01/22/67 | 35D | WR | | | 0\n320 | Busy Party | 02/02/67 | 7126, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n321 | LUNAR ORBITER 3 | 02/04/67 | 5803, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n322 | BUSY BOXER | 02/13/67 | 121F | WR | | | 0\n323 | Giant Chief | 03/05/67 | 7002, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n324 | LITTLE CHURCH | 03/16/67 | 151F | WR | | | 0\n325 | ATS-A | 04/05/67 | 5102, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n326 | BUSY SUNRISE | 04/07/67 | 38D | WR | | | 0\n327 | SURVEYOR 3 (AC-12) | 04/17/67 | 292D, LV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 0\n328 | Busy Tournament | 04/19/67 | 7003, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n329 | LUNAR ORBITER 4 | 05/04/67 | 5804, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n330 | BUSY PIGSKIN | 05/19/67 | 119F | WR | | | 0\n331 | Busy Camper | 05/22/67 | 7127, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n332 | Busy Wolf | 06/04/67 | 7128, SLV-3/AGENA D | WR | | | 1\n333 | BUCK TYPE | 06/09/67 | 122F | WR | | | 0\n334 | MARINER 5 (VENUS) | 06/14/67 | 5401, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n335 | ABRES (AFSC) | 07/06/67 | 65D | WR | | | 0\n336 | SURVEYOR 4 (AC-11) | 07/14/67 | 291D, LV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 0\n337 | ABRES (AFSC) | 07/22/67 | 114F | WR | | | 0\n338 | AFSC | 07/27/67 | 92D/ABRES | WR | | | 0\n339 | BREAD HOOK | 07/29/67 | 150F | WR | | | 0\n340 | LUNAR ORBITER 5 | 08/01/67 | 5805, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n341 | SURVEYOR 5 (AC-13) | 09/08/67 | 5901C, SLV-3/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 1\n342 | ABRES (AFSC) | 10/11/67 | 69D | WR | | | 0\n343 | ABRES (AFSC) | 10/14/67 | 118F | WR | | | 0\n344 | ABRES (AFSC) | 10/27/67 | 81F | WR | 4T | 1 | 0\n345 | ATS-C | 11/05/67 | 5103, SLV-3/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n346 | SURVEYOR 6 (AC-14) | 11/07/67 | 5902C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 1\n347 | ABRES (AFSC) | 11/07/67 | 94D | WR | | | 0\n348 | ABRES (AFSC) | 11/10/67 | 113F | WR | | | 0\n349 | ABRES (AFSC) | 12/21/67 | 117F | WR | | | 0\n350 | SURVEYOR 7 (AC-15) | 01/07/68 | 5903C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 1\n351 | ABRES (AFSC) | 01/31/68 | 94F | WR | | | 0\n352 | ABRES (AFSC) | 02/26/68 | 116F | WR | | | 0\n353 | OGO-E | 03/04/68 | 5602A, SLV-3A/AGENA D | ER | | | 1"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. | Mission/ID | Launch Date | Vehicle Configuration | Test Range | Response Mode | Flight Phase | Rep. Conf.\n354 | ABRES (AFSC) | 03/06/68 | 74E | WR | | | 0\n355 | AFSC | 04/06/68 | 107F/ABRES | WR | | | 0\n356 | ABRES (AFSC) | 04/18/68 | 77E | WR | | | 0\n357 | ABRES (AFSC) | 04/27/68 | 78E | WR | | | 0\n358 | ABRES (AFSC) | 05/03/68 | 95F | WR | 5 | 1 | 0\n359 | ABRES (AFSC) | 06/01/68 | 89F | WR | | | 0\n360 | ABRES (AFSC) | 06/22/68 | 86F | WR | | | 0\n361 | ABRES (AFSC) | 06/29/68 | 32F | WR | | | 0\n362 | AFSC | 07/11/68 | 75F/ABRES | WR | | | 0\n363 | DOD (AA-27) | 08/06/68 | SLV-3A/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n364 | ATS-D (AC-17) | 08/10/68 | 5104C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | NA | 4 | 1\n365 | AFSC | 08/16/68 | 7004, SLV-3/BURNER II | WR | 4 | 3 | 1\n366 | ABRES (AFSC) | 09/25/68 | 99F | WR | | | 0\n367 | ABRES (AFSC) | 09/27/68 | 84F | WR | | | 0\n368 | ABRES (AFSC) | 11/16/68 | 56F | WR | 4T | 2.5 | 0\n369 | ABRES (AFSC) | 11/24/68 | 60F | WR | | | 0\n370 | OAO-A2 (AC-16) | 12/07/68 | 5002C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 1\n371 | ABRES (AFSC) | 01/16/69 | 70F | WR | | | 0\n372 | MARINER 6 (MARS) (AC-20) | 02/24/69 | 5403C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | NA | 1 | 1\n373 | AFSC | 03/17/69 | 104F/ABRES | WR | | | 0\n374 | MARINER 7 (MARS) (AC-19) | 03/27/69 | 5105C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 1\n375 | DOD (AA-28) | 04/12/69 | SLV-3A/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n376 | ATS-E (AC-18) | 08/12/69 | 5402C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 1\n377 | ABRES (AFSC) | 08/20/69 | 112F | WR | | | 0\n378 | ABRES (AFSC) | 09/16/69 | 100F | WR | | | 0\n379 | ABRES (AFSC) | 10/10/69 | 98F | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n380 | ABRES (AFSC) | 12/03/69 | 44F | WR | | | 0\n381 | ABRES (AFSC) | 12/12/69 | 93F | WR | | | 0\n382 | ABRES (AFSC) | 02/08/70 | 96F | WR | | | 0\n383 | ABRES (AFSC) | 03/13/70 | 28F | WR | | | 0\n384 | ABRES (AFSC) | 05/30/70 | 91F | WR | | | 0\n385 | ABRES (AFSC) | 06/09/70 | 92F | WR | | | 0\n386 | DOD (AA-29) | 06/19/70 | SLV-3A/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n387 | DOD (AA-30) | 08/31/70 | SLV-3A/AGENA D | ER | | | 1\n388 | OAO-B (AC-21) | 11/30/70 | 5003C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | 4 | 2 | 1\n389 | ABRES (AFSC) | 12/22/70 | 105F | WR | | | 0\n390 | INTELSAT IV F-2 (AC-25) | 01/25/71 | 5005C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 1\n391 | ABRES (AFSC) | 04/05/71 | 85F | WR | | | 0\n392 | MARINER 8 (MARS) (AC-24) | 05/08/71 | 5405C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | 4T | 3 | 1\n393 | MARINER 9 (MARS) (AC-23) | 05/30/71 | 5404C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 1\n394 | ABRES (AFSC) | 06/29/71 | 103F | WR | | | 0\n395 | AFSC | 08/06/71 | 76F | WR | | | 0\n396 | ABRES (AFSC) | 09/01/71 | 74F | WR | | | 0\n397 | DOD (AA-31) | 12/04/71 | SLV-3A/AGENA D | ER | 4 | 1 | 1\n398 | INTELSAT IV F-3 (AC-26) | 12/19/71 | 5006C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 1\n399 | INTELSAT IV F-4 (AC-28) | 01/22/72 | 5008C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D | ER | | | 1"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n400 PIONEER 10 (AC-27) 03/02/72 5007C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D ER 1\n401 INTELSAT IV F-5 (AC-29) 06/13/72 5009C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D ER 1\n402 OAO-C (AC-22) 08/21/72 5004C, SLV-3C/CENTAUR D ER 1\n403 AFSC 10/02/72 102F/BURNER II WR 0\n404 DOD (AA-32) 12/20/72 SLV-3A/AGENA D ER 1\n405 DOD (AA-33) 03/06/73 SLV-3A/AGENA D ER 1\n406 PIONEER 11 (AC-30) 04/05/73 5011D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n407 INTELSAT IV F-7 (AC-31) 08/23/73 5010D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n408 ABRES (AFSC) 08/29/73 78F WR 0\n409 ACE 09/30/73 108F WR 0\n410 MARINER 10 (AC-34) 11/03/73 5014D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n411 SFT-1 03/06/74 73F WR 0\n412 ACE 03/23/74 97F WR 0\n413 SFT-2 05/01/74 54F WR 0\n414 SFT-3 06/28/74 82F WR 0\n415 NTS-1 07/13/74 69F WR 0\n416 ACE 09/08/74 80F WR 0\n417 ABRES (AFSC) 10/12/74 31F WR 0\n418 INTELSAT IV F-8 (AC-32) 11/21/74 5012D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n419 INTELSAT IV F-6 (AC-33) 02/20/75 5015D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 4T 2 1\n420 AFSC 04/12/75 71F WR 4 1 0\n421 INTELSAT IV F-1 (AC-35) 05/22/75 5018D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n422 DOD (AA-34) 06/18/75 SLV-3A/AGENA ER 1\n423 INTELSAT IVA F-1 (AC-36) 09/25/75 5016D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n424 INTELSAT IVA F-2 (AC-37) 01/29/76 5017D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n425 AFSC 04/30/76 F WR 0\n426 COMSTAR D-1 (AC-38) 05/13/76 5020D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n427 COMSTAR D-2 (AC-40) 07/22/76 5022D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n428 DOD (AA-35) 05/23/77 SLV-3A/AGENA ER 1\n429 INTELSAT IVA F-4 (AC-39) 05/26/77 5019D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n430 NTS-2 06/23/77 65F WR 0\n431 HEAO-A (AC-45) 08/12/77 5025D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n432 INTELSAT IVA F-5 (AC-43) 09/29/77 5701D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 4T 1 1\n433 AFSC 12/08/77 F WR 0\n434 DOD (AA-36) 12/11/77 SLV-3A/AGENA D ER 1\n435 INTELSAT IVA F-3 (AC-46) 01/06/78 5026D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n436 FLTSATCOM-A (AC-44) 02/09/78 5024D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n437 NDS-1 02/22/78 64F WR 0\n438 INTELSAT IVA F-6 (AC-48) 03/31/78 5028D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n439 DOD (AA-37) 04/07/78 SLV-3A/AGENA D ER 1\n440 NDS-2 05/13/78 49F WR 0\n441 PIONEER (VENUS) (AC-50) 05/20/78 5030D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n442 SEASAT A 06/26/78 23F/AGENA D WR 0\n443 COMSTAR D-3 (AC-41) 06/29/78 5021D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n444 PIONEER (VENUS) (AC-51) 08/08/78 5031D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n445 NAVSTAR III 10/06/78 47F WR 0"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n446 TIROS N 10/13/78 29F WR 0\n447 HEAO-B (AC-52) 11/13/78 5032D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n448 NAVSTAR IV 12/10/78 39F WR 0\n449 STP-78-1 02/24/79 27F WR 0\n450 FLTSATCOM-B (AC-47) 05/04/79 5027D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n451 NOAA-A 06/27/79 25F WR 0\n452 HEAO-C (AC-53) 09/20/79 5033D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n453 FLTSATCOM-C (AC-49) 01/17/80 5029D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n454 NAVSTAR V 02/09/80 35F WR 0\n455 AFSC 03/03/80 F WR 0\n456 NAVSTAR VI 04/26/80 34F WR 0\n457 NOAA-B 05/29/80 19F WR NA 1 0\n458 FLTSATCOM-D (AC-57) 10/31/80 5037D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n459 INTELSAT IV F-2 (AC-54) 12/06/80 5034D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n460 AFSC 12/08/80 68E WR 5 1 0\n461 COMSTAR D (AC-42) 02/21/81 5023D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n462 INTELSAT V (AC-56) 05/23/81 5036D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n463 NOAA-C 06/23/81 87F WR 0\n464 FLTSATCOM-E (AC-59) 08/06/81 5039D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER NA 1 & 5 1\n465 INTELSAT V F-3 (AC-55) 12/15/81 5035D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n466 NAVSTAR VII 12/18/81 76E WR 2 1 0\n467 INTELSAT V F-4 (AC-58) 03/05/82 5038D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n468 INTELSAT V F-5 (AC-60) 09/28/82 5040D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n469 DMSP F-6 12/20/82 60E WR 0\n470 AFSC 02/09/83 H WR 1\n471 NOAA-E 03/28/83 73E WR 0\n472 INTELSAT V F-6 (AC-61) 05/19/83 5041D, SLV-3D/CENT D-1A ER 1\n473 AFSC 06/09/83 H WR 1\n474 NAVSTAR VIII 07/14/83 75E/PAM-D WR 0\n475 DMSP F-7 11/17/83 58E WR 0\n476 AFSC 02/05/84 H WR 1\n477 INTELSAT V F-9 (AC-62) 06/09/84 5042G/CENT D-1A ER 4T 4 1\n478 NAVSTAR IX 06/13/84 42E/PAM-D WR 0\n479 NAVSTAR X 09/08/84 14E/PAM-D WR 0\n480 NOAA-F 12/12/84 39E WR 0\n481 GEOSTA-A 03/12/85 41E WR 0\n482 INTELSAT V F-10 (AC-63) 03/22/85 5043G/CENT D-1A ER 1\n483 INTELSAT V F-11 (AC-64) 06/30/85 5044G/CENT D-1A ER 1\n484 INTELSAT V F-12 (AC-65) 09/28/85 5045G/CENT D-1A ER 1\n485 NAVSTAR XI 10/08/85 55E WR 0\n486 AFSC 02/09/86 H WR 1\n487 NOAA-G 09/17/86 52E WR 0\n488 FLTSATCOM F-7 (AC-66) 12/05/86 5046G/CENT D-1A ER 1\n489 FLTSATCOM F-6 (AC-67) 03/26/87 5048G/CENT D-1A ER 4T 1 1\n490 AFSC 05/15/87 H WR 1\n491 DMSP F-8 06/19/87 59E WR 0"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n492 DMSP F-9 02/02/88 54E WR 0\n493 NOAA-H 09/24/88 63E WR 0\n494 FLTSATCOM F-8 (AC-68) 09/25/89 5047G/CENT D-1A ER 1\n495 P87-2 04/11/90 28E/ALT 3A WR 0\n496 CRRES (AC-69) 07/25/90 5049 I/CENT I ER 1\n497 DMSS 10 12/01/90 61E WR 0\n498 BS-3H COMSAT (AC-70) 04/18/91 5050 I/CENT I ER 4T 3 1\n499 NOAA-D 05/14/91 50E WR 0\n500 DMSP F-11 11/28/91 53E WR 0\n501 EUTELSAT (AC-102) 12/07/91 8102 II/CENT I ER 1\n502 DSCS III (AC-101) 02/11/92 8101 II/CENT I ER 1\n503 GALAXY 5 (AC-72) 03/14/92 5052 I/CENT ER 1\n504 INTELSAT K (AC-105) 06/10/92 8105 IIA/CENT ER 1\n505 DSCS III (AC-103) 07/02/92 8103 II/CENT ER 1\n506 GALAXY 1R (AC-71) 08/22/92 5051 I/CENT ER 4T 3 1\n507 UHF FOLLOW ON-1 (AC-74) 03/25/93 5054 I/CENT ER NA 2 & 5 1\n508 DSCS III (AC-104) 07/19/93 8104 II/CENT ER 1\n509 NOAA-I 08/09/93 34E WR 0\n510 UHF F/O-2 (AC-75) 09/03/93 5055 I/CENT ER 1\n511 DSCS III (AC-106) 11/28/93 8106 II/CENT ER 1\n512 TELSTAR 4 (AC-108) 12/16/93 8201 IIAS/CENT ER 1\n513 GOES-1 (AC-73) 04/13/94 5053 I/CENT ER 1\n514 UHF F/O-3 (AC-76) 06/24/94 5056 I/CENT ER 1\n515 DIRECT TV (AC-107) 08/03/94 8107 IIA/CENT ER 1\n516 DMSP F-12 08/29/94 20E WR 0\n517 INTELSAT VII (AC-111) 10/06/94 8202 IIAS/CENT ER 1\n518 ORION (AC-110) 11/29/94 8109 IIA/CENT ER 1\n519 NOAA-J 12/30/94 11E WR 0\n520 INTELSAT 704-2 (AC-113) 01/10/95 8203 IIAS/CENT ER 1\n521 EHF F/O-4 (AC-112) 01/29/95 8110 II/CENT ER 1\n522 INTELSAT VII (AC-115) 03/22/95 8204 IIAS/CENT ER 1\n523 DMSP F-13 03/24/95 45E WR 0\n524 MSAT (AC-114) 04/07/95 8111 IIA/CENT ER 1\n525 GOES-J (AC-77) 05/23/95 I/CENT ER 1\n526 EHF F/O-5 (AC-116) 05/31/95 II/CENT ER 1\n527 DSCS III (AC-118) 07/31/95 IIA/CENT ER 1\n528 JCSAT (AC-117) 08/29/95 IIAS/CENT ER 1\n529 EHF F/O-6 (AC-119) 10/22/95 II/CENT ER 1\n530 SOLAR OBSERV. (AC-121) 12/02/95 IIAS/CENT ER 1\n531 GALAXY IIIR (AC-120) 12/15/95 IIA/CENT ER 1\n532 PALAPA-C (AC-126) 01/31/96 IIAS/CENT ER 1\n533 INMARSAT-3 (AC-122) 04/03/96 IIA/CENT ER 1\n534 SAX (AC-78) 04/30/96 I/CENT ER 1\n535 UHF F7 (AC-125) 07/25/96 II/CENT ER 1"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D.2.2 Atlas Failure Narratives\n\nThe following narratives provide the available details about each Atlas failure since the beginning of the Atlas program. The narratives are numbered to match the flight-sequence numbers in Section D.2.1.\n\n1. 4A, 11 June 57, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: Flight appeared normal for 24.7 seconds when drop in fuel supply to B2 engine produced a drop in performance and shutdown. Both engines moved to hardover in pitch to compensate for thrust asymmetry. The B1 engine failed at 27 seconds. A fuel fire was observed in aft end after thrust was lost. The missile continued to rise, reaching an altitude of 9,800 feet at 38 seconds. Missile was destroyed by safety officer 50.1 seconds after liftoff. Thrust unit and other hardware impacted about 1/4 mile south of launch pad (105° flight azimuth).\n\n2. 6A, 25 Sep 57, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Flight appeared normal until about 32.5 seconds after liftoff, when performance level of both engines dropped to 35% of normal. Both engines shut down at 37 seconds. Missile was destroyed at 63 seconds. Loss of thrust was due to loss of LOX regulator in the booster gas generator. Major components impacted about 8000 feet downrange and 1000 feet right of flight line.\n\n5. 13A, 7 Feb 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: The B2 turbopump and engine stopped operating about 118 seconds due either to loss of LO2 regulator reference pressure or a control-system failure. The B1 engine ceased to operate 0.3 second later. Failure was attributed to shorting of a vernier engine feedback transducer due to aerodynamic heating. Propellant sloshing that began building up at about 100 seconds led to missile instability. Vehicle broke up at 167 seconds. Impact occurred about 280 miles downrange and about 3 miles crossrange.\n\n6. 11A, 20 Feb 58, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: Vernier engine was hardover from 51.9 seconds to 89.4 seconds, then returned to null until 104 seconds, then went hardover again. Other systems appeared normal until 109.6 seconds, when divergent oscillations began in rate-gyro outputs and engine positions. All engines reached stops by 114.3 seconds and continued thereafter to oscillate between stops until loss of thrust at 124.8 seconds. Vehicle breakup occurred one second later. Probable cause of oscillation was a component failure in flight control system. Vehicle impacted about 105 miles downrange and 8 miles right of flight line.\n\n7. 15A, 5 Apr 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Booster engines shut down prematurely at 105.3 seconds (instead of planned 127 seconds) due to B1 turbopump failure. Since B1 chamber pressure drives the gas generator, the B2 turbopump and engine also stopped. Impact was 180 miles downrange and slightly left of flight line."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"9. 3B, 19 July 58, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: Random failure of yaw rate gyro caused violent maneuvers resulting in rupture of LO2 tank, engine shutdown, and a fire near the lube oil drain. Missile broke up about 42 seconds with impact about 2 miles downrange and 0.4 miles crossrange left.\n\n11. 5B, 28 Aug 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: Missile was normal to SECO. After SECO, failure of hydraulic system caused loss of vernier engine control. Warhead impacted close to intended target.\n\n12. 8B, 14 Sep 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: Warhead impacted close to target although control was lost after SECO due to failure of vernier-engine hydraulic system.\n\n13. 6B, 18 Sep 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Except for a late-opening sustainer fuel valve, flight was apparently normal until 80.8 seconds, when the B1 turbopump failed. Performance of the B1 engine and the axial acceleration dropped sharply at about 81.7 seconds, and the B2 system shut down about 0.1 seconds later. The sustainer and vernier engines continued to operate normally until 82.9 seconds, when the missile exploded. Impact was about 25 miles downrange and about 0.6 miles right of the flight line.\n\n14. 9B, 17 Nov 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: The flight was terminated at 227.6 seconds by premature fuel depletion caused either by failure of the propulsion utilization system or by a tanking error. Missile impacted near the flight line about 2300 miles downrange, some 850 miles short of target.\n\n18. 13B, 15 Jan 59, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: The vehicle appeared normal for the first 50-60 seconds, at which time it was obscured by clouds. It was probably normal until about 100 seconds, but prelaunch removal of the mainframe telemetry system prevented a precise determination. Beginning about 101 seconds, various erratic pitch, yaw, and roll rates and oscillations were noted with accompanying drops in acceleration and velocity. These rates become excessive at 106.6 seconds. At 121 seconds, the nosecone telemetry system showed that yaw and pitch rates abruptly increased, and this condition existed until reentry at 281 seconds. All thrusting apparently stopped between 121 and 123 seconds. The missile impacted about 170 miles downrange and 7.5 miles left.\n\n19. 4C, 27 Jan 59, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 2: Since the guidance system was inoperative throughout, the flight path was controlled by the pre-programmed flight control system. Impact was about 80 miles long and 30 miles left of target point.\n\n21. 5C, 20 Feb 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: After a normal booster phase, missile exploded at 173 seconds (BECO at 149.2 sec) apparently due to loss of fuel-tank pressure and subsequent rupture of LOX/fuel-tank bulkhead. Impact was about 1000 miles downrange and 6 miles left."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"22. 7C, 18 Mar 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Booster engines shut down prematurely at 129.4 seconds, but booster section was not jettisoned until the near-normal time of 153 seconds. Guidance was inoperative. Since the sustainer engine could not gimbal before booster separation, the autopilot was unable to stabilize the missile after BECO. The sustainer shut down about 40 seconds before propellant depletion. The reentry vehicle spin rockets fired prematurely at 86.3 seconds after liftoff.\n23. 3D, 14 Apr 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Performance of B2 engine dropped 36% at launch, resulting in a violent pitch as missile left the launcher. Flight control system corrected missile attitude, and flight continued at reduced thrust until a more violent explosion tore the thrust section away from the missile at 26.1 seconds. The sustainer continued operating with decreased thrust until shutdown by the safety officer at 36 seconds. Debris impacted about 3000 feet from launch point.\n24. 7D, 18 May 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Failure in pneumatic system resulted in missile explosion at 65 seconds. A temporary failure of the thrust-structure fairing at liftoff strained the pneumatic lines and disconnects, resulting in leaks in the pneumatic system.\n25. 5D, 6 June 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Either structural damage at booster staging or failure of the booster staging valve to close resulted in a fuel leak and explosion at 159.3 seconds. Impact occurred near the flight line about 780 miles downrange.\n30. 10D (Mercury), 9 Sep 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Booster section failed to jettison resulting in a final velocity about 3000 ft/sec low and an impact range about 500 miles short of target.\n32. 17D, 16 Sep. 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: :Flight was considered a success since impact was within two miles of target point. However, failure of the vernier hydraulic package resulted in loss of missile control during the vernier solo phase.\n35. 26D, 29 Oct 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: Vernier solo phase was unstable in pitch due to loss of thrust from V2 vernier engine. The V2 engine lost chamber pressure during booster jettison. Impact was about 14 miles short and out of splash net.\n36. 28D, 4 Nov 59, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2: The flight was normal, but was terminated prematurely when the range-safety impact-predictor system failed.\n37. 15D, 24 Nov 59, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2.5: Flight was normal, except the reentry vehicle failed to arm or separate.\n9/10/96 117 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"38. 20D (Able IV), 26 Nov 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Third and fourth stages and payload broke off about 47 seconds. Atlas flight was normal and second stage ignited properly after Atlas SECO.\n43. 6D (Dual Exhaust), 26 Jan 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2 and 2.5: At 175 seconds, as a result of a full-scale positive yaw command generated for five seconds, the missile stabilized on an erroneous heading. When a range-rate flag was lost 20 seconds later, the differentiated range-rate data substituted for measured data corrected the erroneous azimuth by generating a full-scale negative yaw command. The substituted data resulted in slightly erratic steering and a premature VECO signal that was not acted upon. The verniers were subsequently cutoff by the backup signal.\n45. 29D (Midas I), 26 Feb 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: Flight was normal until firing of the retro rockets after Atlas separation. An explosion at this time, probably due to activation of the Agena inadvertent separation destruct system, destroyed both the Atlas vehicle and the Agena.\n46. 42D, 8 Mar 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: Flight was considered a success although failure of the vernier hydraulic system resulted in loss of attitude control during the vernier solo phase.\n47. 51 D, 10 Mar 60, Response Mode 1, Flight Phase 1: Due to combustion instability, an explosion occurred in the B1 chamber before missile movement. Missile was destroyed at 2.5 seconds after 2-inch motion when main propellants ignited.\n48. 48D, 7 Apr 60, Response Mode 1, Flight Phase 1: Missile was destroyed in launch stand during launch attempt, apparently due to combustion instability in the B2 thrust chamber.\n50. 23D (Lucky Dragon), 6 May 60, Response Mode 3, Flight Phase 1: An inoperative pitch gyro caused pitch instability, and resulted in destruct at 25.6 seconds.\n54. 62D, 22 June 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: Vernier engines were cutoff by autopilot backup when guidance discrete was not sent. Impact was 18 miles long.\n56. 60D, 2 July 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Depletion of helium bottle pressure led to low sustainer and vernier engine thrust, and eventually early shutdown of engines. Impact was 40 miles short of target.\n57. 74D (Tiger Skin), 22 July 60, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: A pitchover rate that was 69% above the nominal rate resulted in vehicle breakup at 69.2 seconds.\n9/10/96 118 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"58. 50D (Mercury), 29 July 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Flight appeared normal till 57.6 seconds when missile broke up apparently due to a rupture of the forward section of the LO2 tank.\n61. 47D (Golden Journey), 12 Sep 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Flight was apparently normal until about 222 seconds, when missile acceleration began to decay. A LOX regulator failure caused low sustainer performance and insufficient velocity to reach target. Impact was about 535 miles short.\n64. 80D (Able V/Pioneer), 25 Sep 60, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2.5 and 3: Atlas performed normally except for failure of vernier engines to cut off. Flight was not successful since the Agena chamber pressure stabilized at 70% of normal shortly after ignition. Stage then apparently tumbled before cutting off 30 seconds early. Third-stage spun up and stabilized in a nose-down attitude.\n65. 33D (High Arrow), 29 Sep 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: The booster engines cut off prematurely and failed to separate from sustainer. The missile remained intact, but failed to achieve the desired range because of the added booster weight.\n66. 3E, 11 Oct 60, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 2: Sustainer hydraulic pressure began to decay at 41 seconds and dropped to zero at 62 seconds. Sustainer began tumbling at booster staging when control was essentially lost. Thrust continued for about 18 seconds moving the impact point some 270 miles farther downrange and 27 miles crossrange. The missile exploded at 155 seconds.\n67. 57D (LV-3A)/Agena A (Gibson Girl), 11 Oct 60, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 3 and 5: Atlas performance was satisfactory. An umbilical failed to release properly from the Agena at liftoff, resulting in loss of pneumatic supply to the Agena attitude control system. A satisfactory orbit was not achieved. Guidance beacon failed at 106 seconds resulting in autopilot flight.\n68. 81D (Diamond Jubilee), 12 Oct 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Overpressurization of the LOX tank resulted in tank rupture and vehicle breakup at 71.6 seconds.\n72. 4E, 29 Nov 60, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 2: Sustainer hydraulic pressure lost at 41 seconds. Missile tumbled shortly after booster staging. Sustainer thrust terminated at about 150 seconds, some 22 seconds after BECO. During the sustainer solo phase, the impact point moved about 120 miles downrange and 44 miles crossrange.\n73. 91D, 15 Dec 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Vehicle performed normally till about 66.7 seconds, when a blast-band failure apparently resulted in rupture of the forward section of the LOX tank. The upper stages separated at this time, but the Atlas engines continued thrusting until 71 seconds. Control was lost between 72 and 73 seconds, and a final explosion occurred at 74 seconds. Impact was about 8 miles downrange and one mile crossrange.\n9/10/96 119 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"76. 8E, 24 Jan 61, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 2: Missile stability was lost at about 161 seconds, some 30 seconds after BECO, probably due to failure of the servo-amplifier power supply. The sustainer engine shut down at 248 seconds, and the vernier engines about 10 seconds later. Impact occurred 1316 miles downrange and 215 miles crossrange.\n77. 70D (LV-3A)/Agena A (Jawhawk Jamboree), 31 Jan 61, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2: Flight was considered successful although loss of rate lock at 222 seconds caused slightly erratic steering during the last 20 seconds of Atlas sustainer thrusting flight and failure of vehicle to pitch over during the vernier solo period.\n80. 13E, 13 Mar 61, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Sustainer main fuel valve remained in the full open position throughout flight, resulting in fuel depletion and premature shutdown of sustainer engine at 251 seconds.\n81. 16E, 24 Mar 61, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1.5: Due to depletion of helium-bottle pressure, booster section failed to jettison, leading to fuel depletion and impact far short of target.\n82. 100D (Mercury 3), 25 Apr 61, Response Mode 3, Flight Phase 1: Flight was terminated at 40 seconds by RSO when vehicle failed to perform roll and pitch-over maneuvers, apparently due to failure of the autopilot programmer. The malfunction was attributed to a plastic coating on the connector pins within the programmer, causing an open circuit. Major debris impacted about 1800 feet downrange and 6100 feet crossrange left.\n86. 27E (Sure Shot), 7 June 61, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Apparent combustion instability caused an explosion and missile destruction 3.86 seconds after liftoff.\n87. 17E, 22 June 61, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Missile destroyed itself at 101.5 seconds due to failure of flight-control system. Pitch rate was about 1.55 times normal. Just before breakup at 66,000 feet altitude, missile had pitched over almost 90° due to higher than normal pitch rate, producing excessive heating and aerodynamic loads. At breakup, flight path was nearly horizontal. Impact was about 64 miles downrange.\n93. 111D(Ranger-1), 23 Aug 61, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 4: The Agena achieved a normal parking orbit. Flight continued normally until Agena second burn. During the restart sequence the fuel valve failed to open so only oxygen was pumped into the thrust chamber. Apogee of final orbit was only slightly above the normal circular parking-orbit altitude.\n9/10/96 120 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"94. 26E, 8 Sep 61, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Sustainer engine shut down prematurely during the booster jettison sequence. Most probable cause was drop in fuel flow to the gas generator. The vernier engines continued to burn for about 28 seconds after the sustainer shut down. Vernier thrust decayed at 137 seconds, guidance platform tumbled at 163 seconds. The missile remained intact until at least 470 seconds, when data were lost. Impact was about 525 miles downrange.\n95. 106D (LV-3A)/Agena B (First Motion), 9 Sep 61, Response Mode 1, Flight Phase 1: Failure of an umbilical to eject allowed a commit/stop-power signal to reach the missile. Lack of electrical power 0.265 seconds after liftoff caused the vehicle to fall back on the launch pad after a rise of about 18 inches.\n99. 105D (LV-3A)/Agena B (Big Town), Midas IV, 21 Oct 61, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2: Flight was regarded as a success, since the Agena compensated for Atlas anomalies. Atlas roll control was lost at 186 seconds, resulting in a roll rate of over 40° per second at Agena separation. Control in pitch and yaw was maintained. A LOX leak affected sustainer performance just before SECO and throughout the vernier phase.\n100. 32E, 10 Nov 61, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: Sustainer engine shut down 0.7 seconds after liftoff. Although a fire appeared in the thrust section at 19 seconds, booster engines maintained stability until 24.5 seconds, when the B2 engine performance began to decay. All control was lost after this point, and the missile was destroyed by the RSO at 35 seconds. Impact was about 2500 feet downrange and 320 feet crossrange.\n101. 117D (Ranger-2),18 Nov 61, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 4: The Atlas booster functioned normally. A parking orbit was attained during the Agena first burn although roll control was not maintained due to failure of the roll gyro. When control gas was depleted, missile lost stability and began to tumble. Second Agena burn lasted only one second.\n103. 108D (LV-3A)/Agena B (Round Trip), 22 Nov 61, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: Flight was not successful since vehicle failed to achieve orbit. Loss of pitch control at 244 seconds was attributed to aerodynamic heating. At Agena separation the Atlas had pitched up 145°.\n108. 5F,12 Dec 61, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 2: A failure in the inertial guidance system of 1.06 seconds duration caused the existing inertial X velocity to be inserted in the Z-velocity channel. As a result, the missile impacted 575 miles short and 30 miles left of target.\n110. 6F, 20 Dec 61, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: Flight appeared normal until staging. During booster jettison, sustainer and vernier hydraulic pressure began to decay, leading to compete loss of sustainer yaw and pitch control at 229 and 232 seconds, respectively. Missile began tumbling at about 226 seconds.\n9/10/96 121 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Sustainer engine shut down at 282 seconds. Missile impacted 1300 miles downrange and 18 miles crossrange.\n111. 114D (LV-3A)/Agena B (Ocean Way), 22 Dec 61, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2: Flight was considered successful although a failure in the flight programmer prevented the SECO signal from cutting off the sustainer engine. Sustainer burned an additional 2.5 seconds to propellant depletion producing excess Atlas velocity.\n114. 121 D (Ranger 3), 26 Jan 62, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2 and 5: Failure of pulse beacon in guidance system at 49 seconds caused sustainer to burn to LOX depletion, resulting in a 300 ft/sec overspeed. Due to malfunction of pulse beacon at 49 seconds, no guidance steering commands or discretes were given. Booster was cut off by backup signal from accelerometer, sustainer by fuel depletion. Due to excess speed, spacecraft passed 22,000 miles in front of moon, and primary mission objective was not met. All other Atlas and Agena systems performed as planned.\n116. 137D (Big John), 16 Feb 62, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 1.5: Flight was considered successful, although RV did not separate properly.\n118. 52D (Chain Smoke), 21 Feb 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: A fire in the engine compartment resulted in shutdown of all engines at 60 seconds and vehicle explosion at 72 seconds.\n119. 66E (Silver Spur), 28 Feb 62, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1.5 and 2: Loss of helium-bottle pressure resulted in failure to jettison booster engines and premature vernier-engine cutoff at 131.5 seconds. Cutoff of verniers resulted in loss of roll control. Vehicle exploded at 295 seconds.\n122. 11F, 9 Apr 62, Response Mode 1, Flight Phase 1: An explosion in thrust section at 0.9 seconds after about 6 feet of motion was followed by a further explosion in the propellant tanks and total missile destruction at 1.2 seconds.\n123. 110D (LV-3A)/Agena B (Night Hunt), Midas, 9 Apr 62, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 1: An autopilot malfunction prevented sufficient pitchover during booster and sustainer phase resulting in improper SECO conditions and an improper orbit.\n128. 104D, 8 May 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Flight appeared normal until about 45 seconds when weather shield shifted. Further shocks occurred at 50 seconds with loss of weather shield. Booster-engine cutoff was initiated at 55 seconds. Missile destroyed itself at 57 seconds due to breakup of Centaur upper stage. Recorded impact was 8500 feet downrange and 8200 feet crossrange."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"131. LV-3A/Agena B (Rubber Gun), 17 June 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 3: Although Atlas performance was satisfactory, the mission was apparently a failure. No other data available.\n134. 67E (Extra Bonus), 13 July 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2 and 2.5: A LOX leak in the high-pressure line apparently froze sustainer control components. Residual sustainer thrust after cutoff continued for some 30 seconds, causing a 120-mile overshoot.\n137. 145D (Mariner R-1), 22 July 62, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 2: Booster stage and flight appeared normal until after booster staging at guidance enable at about 157 seconds. Operation of guidance rate beacon was intermittent. Due to this and faulty guidance equations, erroneous guidance commands were given based on invalid rate data. Vehicle deviations became evident at 172 seconds and continued throughout flight with a maximum yaw deviation of 60° and pitch deviation of 28° occurring at 270 seconds. The vehicle deviated grossly from the planned trajectory in azimuth and velocity, and executed abnormal maneuvers in pitch and yaw. The missile was destroyed by the RSO at 293.5 seconds, some 12 seconds after SECO.\n141. 87D (Peg Board II), 9 Aug 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: Failure of the sustainer/vernier hydraulic system to maintain system pressure prevented normal operation during the vernier solo phase.\n142. 57F (Crash Truck), 10 Aug 62, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: The roll program failed. The missile was destroyed by the RSO at 68 seconds.\n144. 179D (Mariner R-2), 27 Aug 62, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2: Flight was successful although roll control was lost during the period from 140 seconds to 190 seconds due to erratic performance of vernier engine #2. Before and after this time interval, vernier #2 and all other Atlas and Agena systems performed normally.\n146. 4D (Briar Street), 2 Oct 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: The missile self-destructed at 183 seconds. The vernier engines shut down prematurely at 46 seconds. Subsequently, closure of the vernier bleed valves led to excessively high sustainer performance and premature shutdown at 181.3 seconds.\n148. 215 D (Ranger-5), 18 Oct 62, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 5: Flight was regarded as successful although failure in the ground control system 35 minutes after launch prevented accomplishment of primary lunar impact and study mission. The guidance rate beacon failed at 94.6 seconds but backup differentiated tracking data kept the vehicle within normal limits.\n153. 13F (Action Time), 14 Nov 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: The flight was terminated when sustainer and vernier engines shut down prematurely at 94.3 seconds. A thrust-section fire before 20 seconds apparently failed the lube oil system, which led to cessation of propellant flow."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"156. 131D LV-3A/Agena B (Bargain Counter), 17 Dec 62, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: Mission failed because of an Atlas hydraulic failure. Missile lost stability at 77.5 seconds, then rolled clockwise, pitched down and yawed left before breaking up at about 80.5 seconds.\n157. 64E (Oak Tree), 18 Dec 62, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: The B2 engine failed at 37.1 seconds as a result of lubrication loss to the pinion gear. Booster engine shutdown resulted in a violent rolling yaw maneuver that caused missile breakup followed by an explosion at about 38 seconds.\n158. 160D (Fly High), 22 Dec 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Due to noisy data, range safety limits in the automatic cutoff system were exceeded, causing generation of an all-engines-cutoff signal. As a result, the vernier engines were cut off about 10 seconds early, and the reentry vehicle was about 12.3 miles short.\n159. 39D (Big Sue), 25 Jan 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Propulsion system performance was unsatisfactory after 78 seconds, when booster engine performance started to decay. Booster engines shut down shortly after this, probably as a result of excessive heating in the gas-generator regulator. The sustainer operated normally until at least 106 seconds, with shutdown occurring sometime between 106 and 126 seconds. Breakup occurred about 300 seconds. Missile apparently impacted about 100 miles downrange.\n164. 102D (Tall Tree 3), 9 Mar 63, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: A flight-control malfunction occurred at about 15 seconds at the start of the pitch program. The missile pitched excessively, reaching 310° and an altitude of 5,000 feet at 33.5 seconds when it broke up. Debris impacted close to pad.\n166. 64D (Tall Tree 1), 15 Mar 63, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: A sustainer hydraulic-system failure at 83.5 seconds resulted in loss of sustainer engine control by 86 seconds and loss of vernier control at 99 seconds. Missile control was maintained by the booster engines until booster cutoff, when lack of sustainer and vernier control caused the missile to roll clockwise, pitch up, and yaw left. Sustainer thrust decayed at 131 seconds, and the missile began tumbling at 136.6 seconds. Missile self-destructed at 146 seconds with impact point about 600 miles downrange.\n168. 193D (Leading Edge), 16 Mar 63, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: Loss of B2 pitch feedback signal at 103.5 seconds resulted in loss of vehicle stability. Missile tumbled, then self-destructed at about 270 seconds.\n169. 83F (Kendall Green), 21 Mar 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: A defective solder joint apparently led to two instances of erroneous velocity computations in the x and z velocity channels. As a result, the missile impacted about 12 miles short and 0.2 miles right of target."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"170. 52F (Tall Tree 4), 23 Mar 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Missile self-destructed at about 91 seconds for unknown reasons. Impact was near the flight line about 120 miles downrange.\n171. 65E (Black Buck), 24 Apr 63, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2.5: Vernier hydraulic-system pressure was lost at 301 seconds, resulting in loss of vernier-engine control during the vernier solo phase. The reentry vehicle impact point was not perceptibly affected by this malfunction.\n176. 139D LV-3A/Agena B (Big Four), 12 Jun 63: Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: Flight appeared normal until about 88.4 seconds when, due to a hydraulic failure, the vehicle made a violent right and down maneuver. The missile broke up five seconds later at 93.4 seconds.\n181. 24E (Silver Doll), 26 July 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Spurious voltage transients caused premature pressurization of the vernier solo tanks at 101.3 seconds, and premature sustainer engine shut down just after booster separation at 141 seconds.\n187. 63D (Cool Water III), 6 Sep 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: All systems performed satisfactorily till 110 seconds, when the sustainer/vernier hydraulic pressure dropped from 3080 to 490 psig. The failure resulted in premature shutdown of the sustainer engine at 136 seconds. Booster-engine cutoff occurred normally at 140.3 seconds, and the booster was successfully jettisoned. The impact point occurred about 620 miles downrange.\n188. 84D (Cool Water IV), 11 Sep 63, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2.5: Flight seemed normal through SECO, although the pneumatic precharge to the vernier solo accumulator was lost at 96.6 seconds. Due to this failure, missile stability was lost near the start of the vernier solo phase. The R/V probably failed to separate.\n189. 71E (Filter Tip), 25 Sep 63, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: Visual observers reported a boat-tail fire, radical oscillations in yaw, and rough running booster and sustainer engines. Failure of the sustainer hydraulic system during the staging sequence resulted in loss of missile stability at 140 seconds. Sustainer and vernier engines shut down at about 267 seconds with the impact point about 600 miles downrange.\n190. 45F (Hot Rum), 3 Oct 63, Response Mode 1, Flight Phase 1: The B-1 booster-engine fuel valve failed to open during the start sequence, so the engine did not ignite. Missile toppled over and exploded."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"191. 163D (Cool Water V), 7 Oct 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Flight was normal up to about 73 seconds when the missile exploded. Suspected cause was intermediate bulkhead reversal/rupture due to insufficient helium pressure.\n194. 136F (ABRES), 28 Oct 63, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: After a normal booster phase and staging, failure of sustainer hydraulic system resulted in loss of sustainer control and stability at 138 seconds. Sustainer and vernier engines shut down at 260 seconds, some 28 seconds early. The R/V impacted about 507 miles downrange.\n196. 158D (Cool Water VI), 13 Nov 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: The trajectory was low throughout flight. The sustainer/vernier hydraulic pressure was lost at 112.7 seconds, followed by missile self-destruct at about 118 seconds when the vacuum impact point was about 280 miles downrange and on azimuth.\n202. 48E (Blue Bay), 12 Feb 64, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: The booster engine shut down at 119.5 seconds, and the sustainer engine shut down prematurely at 198.8 seconds. Impact was near the flight line about 635 miles downrange.\n207. 3F (High Ball), 3 Apr 64, Response Mode 1, Flight Phase 1: Missile was destroyed on the pad when the B1 booster engine failed to ignite.\n212. 135D (AC-3), 30 June 64, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 3: The Centaur engines shut down early, apparently due to a hydraulic coupling failure that led to a failure in the propellant system. Impact was about 2340 miles downrange.\n219. 57E (Gallant Gal), 27 Aug 64, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Missile experienced an early SECO with no vernier burn thereafter due to a guidance-system malfunction. Impact was about 88 miles short and 0.4 miles right of target.\n227. 289D (Mariner-3),5 Nov 64, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 4: A short second burn of the Agena prevented attainment of the desired orbit, and resulted in a heliocentric orbit.\n232. 146D, 11 Dec 64, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 5: Flight was completely normal through Centaur first burn. During the coast phase, liquid hydrogen vented through the vent valve caused vehicle instability and tumbling. By second engine firing, insufficient liquid hydrogen remained at boost-pump sump to sustain normal combustion.\n236. 172D/ABRES (Beaver's Dam), 21 Jan 65: Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2 and 3: The Atlas apparently performed normally, except that the sustainer shut down 1.35 seconds early. The OV1-1 failed to separate from the Atlas and thus failed to put the spacecraft in orbit."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"240. 156D, 2 Mar 65, Response Mode 1 Flight Phase 1: At 0.36 seconds booster fuel-\npump pressure dropped due to a fuel prevalve failure, booster lost thrust, fell\nback on launch pad, and was destroyed at 3.26 seconds.\n251. 68D/ABRES (Tennis Match), 27 May 65: Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: A\nfailure in the booster gas-generator loop resulted in decreasing booster\nperformance after 116 seconds. The impact point stopped moving at 122 seconds\nwhen an explosion occurred in the thrust section. Further vehicle breakup\noccurred at 218 seconds. Destruct was sent at 293 seconds. Debris impacted close\nto the intended ground track.\n257. SLV-3/Agena D (White Pine), 12 Jul 65: Response Mode 4 & 5, Flight Phase 2 & 3:\nFlight was normal until booster engines cutoff at 131 seconds. As a result of a\ncircuit board failure caused by excessive vibrations, the sustainer also shutdown\nat BECO. The Atlas booster engines did not separate immediately from the\nsustainer, but did so some 50 seconds later after the event timer recycled. The\nAgena subsequently separated and ignited at about 198 seconds, creating wild\nuprange movements on the IP display by 255 seconds. Destruct was sent at 257\nseconds.\n267. SLV-3 (GTV-6), 25 Oct 65, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 3: The flight was a\nfailure although all Atlas objectives were achieved. The Agena startup appeared\nnormal, but the engine shut down after about one second of operation,\nPropellants ceased flowing but the helium pressurization system continued to\npressurize the propellant tanks until they burst.\n276. 303D (Eternal Camp), 4 Mar 66, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: Although track\nand rate lock were lost at 88 seconds, missile appeared normal till about 112\nseconds when skyscreen operator reported that vehicle was spiraling. A\nhydraulic system failure occurred during the staging sequence, resulting in loss of\nvehicle stability at 153 seconds and sustainer engine shutdown at 194 seconds.\nThe impact point initially appeared to stop about 800 miles downrange, well\nbeyond the booster impact point. At about this time or shortly thereafter,\ntelemetry indicated rapidly varying pitch, roll, and yaw rates and shutdown of\nsustainer and vernier engines. Final impact was estimated to be 976 miles\ndownrange and 3° left of the nominal track.\n279. 304D (White Bear), 19 Mar 66, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 2: The reentry\nvehicle impacted 82 miles beyond the target point when the head suppression\nvalve failed to close at SECO. The LOX tank thus vented through the sustainer\nchamber, adding impulse in the process.\n281. 184D (AC-8) ,7 Apr 66, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 4: Flight appeared normal\nuntil second Centaur burn. Both Centaur engines started but one could not"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"maintain thrust. Thrust imbalance resulted in tumbling, followed by fuel\nstarvation, and early thrust termination.\n284. 208D (Crab Claw), 3 May 66, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: High engine-\ncompartment temperatures were first noted at 41 seconds. The sustainer pitch-\nactuator feedback-loop failed open at 136 seconds, a few seconds before planned\nBECO. The flight appeared normal to the safety officer until about this time when\nroll and pitch rates increased. The IIP apparently stopped about 155 seconds,\nalthough General Dynamics reported that vehicle stability was not lost until 216\nseconds. Shutdown of sustainer and vernier engines occurred at 235 seconds.\nSuspected cause of malfunction was excessive heating in the boat-tail section.\n287. SLV-3 (GTA-9), 17 May 66, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: Vehicle became\nunstable when B2 pitch control was lost at 121 seconds. Loss of pitch control\nresulted in a pitch-down maneuver much greater than 90°. Guidance control was\nlost at 132 seconds. After BECO, the vehicle stabilized in an abnormal attitude.\nAlthough the vehicle did not follow the planned trajectory, SECO (at 280\nseconds), VECO (at 298 seconds), and Agena separation occurred normally from\nprogrammer commands.\n294. 96D (Veneer Panel), 10 Jun 66, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: The reentry\nvehicle undershot the target by 20 miles when the vernier engines shut down\nearly. Failure was caused by an abnormal decay of control-bottle helium\npressure.\n298. 58D/ABRES (Stony Island), 13 July 66: Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 3: Flight\nwas regarded as a success, although one of two OV's failed to orbit when it\nimpacted the structure door which had not been opened.\n300. 149F (Busy Ramrod), 8 Aug 66, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: The sustainer\nengine shut down 27 seconds early due to fuel depletion caused by an\nunfavorable ratio of propellant usage during the booster stage. Verniers burned\nto fuel depletion.\n306. 194D (AC-7), 20 Sep 66, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 5: Atlas Centaur\nperformance was normal, but Surveyor spacecraft lost stability on the way to the\nmoon.\n308. 115F (Low Hill), 11 Oct 66, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: The missile was\nnormal till about 85 seconds when it appeared to lose thrust and breakup. Several\nmajor pieces impacted 32 to 40 miles downrange near the intended flight line.\n310. 174D (AC-9), 26 Oct 66, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2: Although Atlas\npressurization system anomaly caused decaying sustainer engine performance\nand early SECO, no mission objectives were compromised."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"318. 148F (Busy Stepson), 17 Jan 67, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2.5: Flight was\nnormal except that reentry vehicle failed to separate.\n344. 81F (ABRES/AFSC), 27 Oct 67, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: Although\nvarious anomalous events occurred early in flight, the missile appeared to follow\nthe intended trajectory till about 24 seconds. Diverging roll oscillations actually\nbegan about 21.4 seconds, and pitch and roll stability were lost by 24.8 seconds.\nBy 27.9 seconds, the vehicle was tumbling about 6.5 degrees per second in pitch\nand yaw, and 12 degrees per second in roll. By 30 seconds, the vehicle lost all\nthrust and began to break up. Fuel cutoff and destruct were sent at 35 and 39\nseconds, respectively.\n358. 95F (ABRES/AFSC), 3 May 68, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: Immediately\nafter liftoff the telemetered roll and yaw rates indicated that the missile was\nerratic. During the first 10 seconds of flight the missile yawed hard to the left. It\nthen began a hard yaw to the right, crossed over the flight line and continued\ntoward the right destruct line. Shortly thereafter the missile apparently pitched\nup violently and the IIP began moving back toward the beach. The missile was\ndestructed at about 45 seconds when the altitude was about 14,000 feet and the\ndownrange distance about 9 miles. Major pieces impacted less than a mile\noffshore, indicating uprange movement of the impact point during the last part of\nthrusting flight.\n364. 5104C AC-17 (ATS-D), 10 Aug 68, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 4: A normal\nparking orbit was achieved, but when Centaur restart was attempted, thrust could\nnot be maintained because of inoperative boost pumps. Frozen H2O2 line was the\napparent root cause.\n365. 7004 SLV-3/Burner II/Agena D (AFSC), 16 Aug 68: Response Mode 4, Flight\nPhase 3: Atlas performance was normal. The vehicle failed to achieve orbit\nbecause the protective shroud surrounding the second stage failed to separate.\n368. 56F (ABRES/AFSC), 16 Nov 68, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2.5: Flight was\nnormal through SECO. The missile then lost attitude control, executing a hard\nyaw rate turn throughout and beyond the vernier solo phase.\n372. 5403C AC-20 (Mariner 6 Mars), 24 Feb 69, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 1:\nEarly Atlas BECO due to staging accelerometer failure was compensated for by\nextended Atlas sustainer and Centaur burns. Mission was successful.\n379. 98F (ABRES/AFSC), 10 Oct 69, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: The missile\nappeared normal until about 66 seconds when the sustainer engine shut down\nprematurely. The booster engine apparently continued normally to BECO. At\nabout 255 seconds the payload SPDS engine ignited. Destruct was sent at 272\nseconds."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"388. 5003C AC-21 (OAO-B), 30 Nov 70, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Since the\nnose fairing failed to separate, Centaur did not have enough energy to make orbit.\nPayload impacted in Africa.\n392. 5405C AC-24 (Mariner 8 Mars), 8 May 71, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 3:\nMission requirements were not met. The Atlas boost phase was normal. Shortly\nafter Centaur main-engine start, pitch stabilization was lost due to failure of the\nrate gyro or an electrical failure in the pitch channel of the flight control system.\nThe vehicle began an accelerated nose-down tumbling motion that subsequently\nresulted in early and erratic main-engine shutdown due to propellant starvation.\n397. SLV-3A (Agena), 4 Dec 71, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Sustainer engine\nturbine damage during engine start resulted in hot gas leaks and eventual failure\nof thrust-section hardware. Vehicle broke up at 87 seconds.\n419. 5015D AC-33 (Intelsat IV F-6), 20 Feb 75, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: The\nAtlas booster-section electrical disconnect failed at booster staging. The harness\nwas pulled apart, so flight-control avionics was unable to maintain vehicle\nstability. Missile appeared normal until the IP stopped at 200 seconds.\nPrecautionary destruct was sent at 414 seconds.\n420. 71F (AFSC), 12 Apr 75: Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Although an abnormal\noverpressure occurred at the base of the missile 620 msec before liftoff, the vehicle\nappeared normal until about 45 seconds when sustainer manifold and fuel-pump\npressures began dropping. By 61 seconds, both the sustainer and vernier engines\nhad shut down. Booster engines continued thrusting until about 123 seconds\nwhen the IIP stopped moving and radar operator reported multiple pieces. The\nbreakup apparently resulted from an external explosion in the flame bucket that\ndamaged the thrust section. Destruct was sent at 303 seconds when missile\nelevation dropped to 5°.\n432. 5701D AC-43 (Intelsat IVA F-5), 29 Sep 77, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: A\nleak in the booster hot-gas generator at 2.3 seconds resulted in a fire in the thrust\nsection at 36.5 seconds. The vehicle went into a violent maneuver at 54.9 seconds,\nfailing the structure. The Atlas exploded at 55.8 seconds, leaving the Centaur\nintact. The Centaur was destroyed by the RSO at 61.7 seconds.\n457. 19F (NOAA-B), 29 May 80: Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 1: Failure of\nturbopump seal allowed fuel to enter the gear box resulting in 21% low thrust by\nthe B1 booster engine. The payload was inserted into an abnormal orbit and the\nmission was lost.\n460. 68E, 8 Dec 80: Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: Flight appeared normal until\n102.7 seconds when the lube oil pressure on the B2 booster engine suddenly\ndropped. At 120.1 seconds, the engine shut down, followed 385 msec later by\nguidance shutdown of the B1 engine. The asymmetric thrust during shutdown"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"caused yaw and roll rates that the flight control system could not correct. As a\nresult, attitude control was lost and the thrusting sustainer pivoted the missile to a\nretrofire attitude before the vehicle could be stabilized. After the booster package\nwas jettisoned, the missile was stabilized and decelerating in the retrofire mode\nby 148 seconds. The sustainer continued thrusting in this attitude until 282.9\nseconds when reentry heating apparently caused sustainer shutdown and vehicle\nbreakup.\n464. 5039D AC-59 (FLTSATCOM), 6 Aug 81, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 1 and 5:\nThe basic mission was accomplished although three increasingly severe shock\nevents were recorded at 56.2, 70.7, and 120.8 seconds. The structural damage\nsustained by the spacecraft severely limited on-orbit operations.\n466. 76E (NAVSTAR VII), 18 Dec 81: Response Mode 2, Flight Phase 1: Shortly after\nclearing the launch tower at an altitude of about two tower heights, the thrust\nperformance of the B1 engine began to decay. The engine was shut down\ncompletely by 7.4 seconds. The unbalanced thrust caused the missile to pitch over\nto the right, and travel horizontally for about one second. It then pitched toward\nthe ground. A small explosion occurred about one-third of the way down,\nfollowed by a larger explosion when the missile impacted the ground directly\nbehind the launch pad about 19 seconds after liftoff. Cause of the engine failure\nwas plugging of the gas-generator fuel-cooling parts that resulted in a gas-\ngenerator burn-through.\n477. 5042G AC-62 (Intelsat V), 9 Jun 84, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 4:\nPerformance was normal until an abnormal shock event occurred at\nAtlas/Centaur separation. Subsequent data indicated that a Centaur oxygen tank\nleak resulted in a loss of 1483 pounds of LOX during Centaur first burn. The leak\nresulted in the LOX tank pressure falling below the LH2 tank pressure, which led\nto collapse of the intermediate bulkhead during the coast phase. Bulkhead\ncollapse caused unexpected tumbling forces during coast. The Centaur engines\nrestarted after coast, but burned for only 6 or 7 seconds of a planned 90-second\nburn.\n489. 5048G AC-67 (FLTSATCOM F-6), 26 Mar 87, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1:\nVehicle performance was normal till 48.4 seconds, when the vehicle was struck by\nlightning. As a result, the guidance computer commanded a hard right turn\nwhich caused vehicle breakup due to inertial and aerodynamic loads. RSO sent\ndestruct at 70.7 seconds.\n498. 5050 AC-70 (BS-3H COMSAT), 18 Apr 91, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 3:\nAtlas performance was normal. Although both Centaur main engines began the\nstart sequence properly, the C-1 turbo-machinery decelerated and stopped,\nleaving the C-1 engine thrust at the ignition level. Air entering through the stuck-\nopen check valve liquefied and froze in the LH2 pump and gear box of the C-1"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"engine, thus preventing the engine from achieving full thrust. Due to the resulting thrust imbalance, the vehicle tumbled out of control. Destruct was sent some 80 seconds after Centaur ignition.\n506. 5051 AC-71 (Galaxy 1R), 22 Aug 92, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 3: A Centaur engine check valve stuck open allowing air into the turbopumps. Air entering through the stuck-open check valve liquefied and froze in the LH2 pump and gear box of the C-1 engine, which prevented the engine from achieving full thrust. Destruct was sent by the RSO about 193 seconds after Centaur ignition. This is the same failure experienced by AC-70 launched on 18 Apr 91.\n507. 5054 AC-74 (UHF Follow On-1), 25 Mar 93, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2 and 5: The flight was considered successful although below normal Atlas performance resulted in a low spacecraft apogee (5000 nm vice planned 9225 nm). The perigee altitude was near nominal at 120 nm. A loose screw that allowed the oxygen regulator to go out of adjustment caused booster-engine thrust to drop to 65% of nominal at 103 seconds. The booster engines remained attached to the sustainer, which flew to propellant depletion. These events led to depletion shutdown of the Centaur stage 22 seconds early.\n9/10/96 132 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D.3 Delta Launch and Performance History\nThe Delta launch-vehicle family originated in 1959 with a NASA contract to Douglas Aircraft Company, now McDonnell Douglas Corporation. The Delta, using components form USAF's Thor IRBM program and USN's Vanguard launch-vehicle program, was operational 18 months later. On May 13, 1960, the first Delta was launched from Cape Canaveral with a 179-pound Echo-I passive communications satellite. In the intervening years, the Delta has evolved to meet the ever-increasing demands of its payloads - including weather, scientific, and communications satellites. Each Delta modification corresponded to an increase in payload capacity. Table 42 shows a summary of Delta configurations since the beginning of the program.[10]\nThe Delta 7925, the latest vehicle in the series, is a three-stage liquid-propellant vehicle with nine solid-propellant strap-on booster motors. For propellants, the Delta uses RP-1 and liquid oxygen in Stage 1, and nitrogen tetroxide and aerozine 50 in Stage 2. Stage 3 consists of a Payload Assist Module (PAM) with a solid-propellant motor. The strap-on boosters are Hercules graphite epoxy motors (GEMs) using HTPB-type solid propellant. At liftoff, the liquid-propellant Stage-1 engine and six of the nine GEMs are ignited. The remaining three GEMs are ignited some 65 seconds later.\nTable 42. Summary of Delta Vehicle Configurations\nConfiguration | Description\nDelta | Stg. 1: Modified Thor. MB-3 Blk I engine / Stg. 2: Vanguard AJ10-118 propulsion system / Stg. 3: Vanguard X-248 motor\nA | Stg. 1: Engine replaced with MB-3 Blk II\nB | Stg. 2: Tanks lengthened; higher energy oxidizer used\nC | Stg. 3: Replaced with Scout X-258 motor / PLF: Bulbous replaced low drag\nD | Stg. 0: Added 3 Thor-developed SRMs (Castor I)\nE | Stg. 0: Castor II replaced Castor I / Stg. 1: MB-3 Blk III replaced Blk II / Stg. 2: Propellant tank diameters increased / Stg. 3: Replaced with USAF-developed FW-4 motor / PLF: Fairing enlarged to 65-inch diameter\nJ | Stg. 3: TE-364-3 used\nL, M, N | Stg. 1: Tanks lengthened, RP-1 tank diameter increased / Stg. 3: Varied: FW-4 (L), TE-364-3 (M), none (N)\nM-6, N-6 | Stg. 0: Six Castor IIs employed\n900 | Stg. 0: No Castor IIs employed / Stg. 2: Replaced with Transtage AJ10-118F engine\n1604 | Stg. 0: Six Castor IIs employed / Stg. 3: Replaced with TE-364-4"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Configuration | Description\n1910, 1913, 1914 | Stg. 0: Nine Castor IIs employed / Stg. 3: Varied: none (1910), TE-364-3 (1913), TE-364-4 (1914) / PLF: 96-inch diameter replaced 65-inch\n2310, 2313, 2314 | Stg. 0: Three Castor IIs employed / Stg. 1: RS-27 replaced MB-3 / Stg. 2: TR-201 engine replaced AJ10-118F / Stg. 3: Varied: none (2310), TE-364-3 (2313), TE-364-4 (2314)\n2910, 2913, 2914 | Stg. 0: Nine Castor IIs employed / Stg. 3: Varied: none (2910), TE-364-3 (2913), TE-364-4 (2914)\n3910, 3913, 3914 | Stg. 0: Nine Castor IVs replaced Castor IIs / Stg. 3: Varied:none or PAM (3910),TE-364-3 (3913),TE-364-4 (3914)\n3920, 3924 | Stg. 2: AJ10-118K engine replaced TR-201 / Stg. 3: Varied: none or PAM (3920), TE-364-4 (3924)\n4920 | Stg. 0: Castor IVA replaced Castor IV / Stg. 1: MB-3 replaced RS-27\n5920 | Stg. 1: RS-27 replaced MB-3\n6925 | Stg. 1: Tanks lengthened 12 feet / Stg. 3: STAR 48B motor used / PLF: Bulbous 114-inch diameter used\n7925 | Stg. 0: GEM replaced Castor IVA / Stg. 1: RS-27A replaced RS-27\n9/10/96 134 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The entire Delta history through 1995 is depicted rather compactly in bar-graph form in Figure 38. The solid-block portion of each bar indicates the number of launches during the calendar year for which vehicle performance was entirely normal, in so far as could be determined. The clear white parts forming the tops of most bars show the number of launches that were either failures or flights where the launch vehicle experienced some sort of anomalous behavior. Every launch with an entry in the response-mode column in Table 43 falls in this category. Such behavior did not necessarily prevent the attainment of some, or even all, mission objectives.\nNumber of Delta Missions (y-axis, 0 to 16) vs Launch Year (x-axis, 55 to 95). Legend: Failure/Anomaly; Normal Performance.\nFigure 38. Delta Launch Summary\n9/10/96 135 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D.3.1 Delta Launch History\nThe data in Table 43 summarizes all Delta and Delta-boosted space-vehicle launches since the program began. A launch sequence number is provided in the first column. A launch ID and date are provided in columns 2 and 3. The fourth column indicates the vehicle configuration. The fifth column indicates the launch range. The sixth column indicates the failure-response mode (1 through 5 and NA) that RTI has determined best describes the failure that occurred. For Mode 3 or 4 failures, a suffix of 'T' indicates the vehicle tumbled. Successful launches are indicated by a blank in the Response-Mode column. The seventh column indicates the operational flight phase during which the failure occurred. The last column indicates whether the vehicle configuration is representative of those being launched today. Launches through sequence number 232 were used in the filtering process to estimate failure rate.\nTable 43. Delta Launch History\nNo. | Mission/ID | Launch Date | Vehicle Configuration | Test Range | Response Mode | Flight Phase | Rep. Conf.\n1 | ECHO I | 05/13/60 | DM-19 | ER | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n2 | ECHO IA | 08/12/60 | DM-19 | ER | | | 0\n3 | TIROS A2 | 11/23/60 | DM-19 | ER | | | 0\n4 | P-14 | 03/25/61 | DM-19 | ER | | | 0\n5 | TIROS A3 | 07/12/61 | DM-19 | ER | | | 0\n6 | S-3 | 08/15/61 | DM-19 | ER | | | 0\n7 | TIROS D | 02/08/62 | DM-19 | ER | | | 0\n8 | S-16 | 03/07/62 | DM-19 | ER | | | 0\n9 | S-51 | 04/26/62 | DM-19 | ER | | | 0\n10 | TIROS E | 06/19/62 | DM-19 | ER | NA | 5 | 0\n11 | TSX-1 | 07/10/62 | DM-19 | ER | | | 0\n12 | TIROS F | 09/18/62 | DM-19 | ER | | | 0\n13 | S-3A | 10/02/62 | DSV-3A | ER | | | 0\n14 | S-3B | 10/27/62 | DSV-3A | ER | | | 0\n15 | RELAY A-15 | 12/13/62 | DSV-3B | ER | | | 0\n16 | SYNCOM A-25 | 02/13/63 | DSV-3B | ER | | | 0\n17 | S-6 | 04/02/63 | DSV-3B | ER | | | 0\n18 | TSX-2 | 05/07/63 | DSV-3B | ER | | | 0\n19 | TIROS G | 06/19/63 | DSV-3B | ER | | | 0\n20 | SYNCOM A-26 | 07/26/63 | DSV-3B | ER | | | 0\n21 | IMP A | 11/26/63 | DSV-3C | ER | | | 0\n22 | TIROS H | 12/21/63 | DSV-3B | ER | | | 0\n23 | RELAY A-16 | 01/21/64 | DSV-3B | ER | | | 0\n24 | S-66 | 03/19/64 | DSV-3B | ER | 4 | 3 | 0\n25 | SYNCOM A-27 | 08/19/64 | DSV-3D | ER | | | 0\n26 | IMP-B | 10/03/64 | DSV-3C | ER | NA | 5 | 0\n27 | S-3C | 12/21/64 | DSV-3C | ER | | | 0\n28 | TIROS I | 01/22/65 | DSV-3C | ER | NA | 2 & 5 | 0\n29 | OSO-B | 02/03/65 | DSV-3C | ER | | | 0\n30 | COMSAT #1 | 04/06/65 | DSV-3D | ER | | | 0\n9/10/96 136 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n31 IMP-C 05/29/65 DSV-3C ER 0\n32 TIROS OT-1 07/01/65 DSV-3C ER 0\n33 OSO-C 08/25/65 DSV-3C ER 4 2.5 0\n34 GEOS A 11/06/65 DSV-3E ER NA 2 & 5 0\n35 PIONEER A 12/16/65 DSV-3E ER 0\n36 TIROS OT-3 02/03/66 DSV-3C ER 0\n37 TIROS OT-2 02/28/66 DSV-3E ER 0\n38 AE-B 05/25/66 DSV-3C ER NA 2 & 5 0\n39 AIMP-D 07/01/66 DSV-3E ER NA 2.5 & 5 0\n40 PIONEER-B 08/17/66 DSV-3E ER 0\n41 TOS 10/02/66 DSV-3E WR 0\n42 INTELSAT II (F-1) 10/26/66 DSV-3E ER 0\n43 BIOS-A 12/14/66 DSV-3G ER 0\n44 INTELSAT II (F-2) 01/11/67 DSV-3E ER 0\n45 TOS 01/26/67 DSV-3E WR 0\n46 OSO-E1 03/08/67 DSV-3C ER 0\n47 INTELSAT II (F-3) 03/22/67 DSV-3E ER 0\n48 TOS D 04/20/67 DSV-3E WR 0\n49 IMP-F 05/24/67 DSV-3E WR 0\n50 AIMP-E 07/19/67 DSV-3E ER 0\n51 BIOS-B 09/07/67 DSV-3G ER 0\n52 INTELSAT II (F-4) 09/27/67 DSV-3E ER 0\n53 OSO-D 10/18/67 DSV-3C ER 0\n54 TOS-C 11/10/67 DSV-3E WR 0\n55 PIONEER-C 12/13/67 DSV-3E ER 0\n56 GEOS-B 01/11/68 DSV-3E WR 0\n57 RAE-A 07/04/68 DSV-3E WR 0\n58 TOS-E 08/16/68 DSV-3L WR 0\n59 INTELSAT III-A 09/18/68 DSV-3L ER 5 1 0\n60 PIONEER-D 11/08/68 DSV-3E ER 0\n61 HEOS-A 12/05/68 DSV-3E ER 0\n62 TOS-F 12/15/68 DSV-3L WR 0\n63 INTELSAT III-C 12/18/68 DSV-3L ER 0\n64 OSO-F 01/22/69 DSV-3C ER 0\n65 ISIS-A 01/30/69 DSV-3E WR 0\n66 INTELSAT III-B 02/05/69 DSV-3L ER 0\n67 TOS-G 02/26/69 DSV-3E ER 0\n68 INTELSAT III-D 05/21/69 DSV-3L ER 0\n69 IMP-G 06/21/69 DSV-3E WR 0\n70 BIOS-D 06/29/69 DSV-3L ER 0\n71 INTELSAT III-E 07/26/69 DSV-3L ER 5 3 & 5 0\n72 OSO-G 08/09/69 DSV-3L ER 0\n73 PIONEER-E 08/27/69 DSV-3L ER 5 1 0\n74 IDCSP/A-A 11/22/69 DSV-3L ER 0\n75 INTELSAT III-F 01/14/70 DSV-3L ER 0\n76 TIROS-M 01/23/70 DSV-3L WR 0"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n77 NATO-A 03/20/70 DSV-3L ER 0\n78 INTELSAT III-G 04/22/70 DSV-3L ER NA 1 & 5 0\n79 INTELSAT III-H 07/23/70 DSV-3L ER 0\n80 IDCSP/A-B 08/19/70 DSV-3L ER 0\n81 I TOS-A 12/11/70 DSV-3L WR 0\n82 NATO-B 02/03/71 DSV-3L ER 0\n83 IMP-I 03/13/71 DSV-3L ER 0\n84 ISIS-B 04/01/71 DSV-3E WR 0\n85 OSO-H 09/29/71 DSV-3L ER NA 2 & 5 0\n86 I TOS-B 10/21/71 DSV-3L WR 4 2 0\n87 HEOS-A2 01/31/72 DSV-3L WR 0\n88 TD-1 03/11/72 DSV-3L WR 0\n89 ERTS-A 07/23/72 900 WR 0\n90 IMP-H 09/22/72 1604 ER 0\n91 I TOS-D 10/15/72 300 WR 0\n92 TELESAT-A 11/10/72 1914 ER 0\n93 NIMBUS-E 12/10/72 900 WR 0\n94 TELESAT-B 04/20/73 1914 ER 0\n95 RAE-B 06/10/73 1913 ER 0\n96 I TOS-E 07/16/73 300 WR 4T 2 0\n97 IMP-J 10/26/73 1604 ER 0\n98 I TOS-F 11/06/73 300 WR 0\n99 AE-C 12/16/73 1900 WR 0\n100 SKYNET IIA 01/19/74 2313 ER NA 4 & 5 0\n101 WESTAR-A 04/13/74 2914 ER NA 1 1\n102 SMS-A 05/17/74 2914 ER NA 1 & 5 1\n103 WESTAR-B 10/10/74 2914 ER 1\n104 I TOS-G 11/15/74 2310 WR 0\n105 SKYNET-IIB 11/22/74 2313 ER 0\n106 SYMPHONIE-A 12/18/74 2914 ER 1\n107 ERTS-B 01/22/75 2910 WR 1\n108 SMS-B 02/06/75 2914 ER 1\n109 GEOS-C 04/09/75 1410 WR 0\n110 TELESAT-C 05/07/75 2914 ER 1\n111 NIMBUS-F 06/12/75 2910 WR 1\n112 OSO-I 06/21/75 1910 ER 0\n113 COS-B 08/08/75 2913 WR 1\n114 SYMPHONIE-B 08/26/75 2914 ER 1\n115 AE-D 10/06/75 2910 WR 1\n116 GOES-A 10/16/75 2914 ER 1\n117 AE-E 11/19/75 2910 ER 1\n118 RCA-SATCOM-A 12/12/75 3914 ER 1\n119 CTS 01/17/76 2914 ER 1\n120 MARISAT-A 02/19/76 2914 ER 1\n121 RCA-SATCOM-B 03/26/76 3914 ER 1\n122 NATO-IIIA 04/22/76 2914 ER 1"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n123 LAGEOS 05/04/76 2913 WR 1\n124 MARISAT-B 06/10/76 2914 ER 1\n125 PALAPA-A 07/08/76 2914 ER 1\n126 ITOS-E2 07/29/76 2310 WR 0\n127 MARISAT-C 10/14/76 2914 ER 1\n128 NATO IIIB 01/27/77 2914 ER 1\n129 PALAPA-B 03/10/77 2914 ER 1\n130 ESRO-GEOS 04/20/77 2914 ER NA 2.5 & 5 1\n131 GOES-B 06/16/77 2914 ER 1\n132 GMS 07/14/77 2914 ER 1\n133 SIRIO 08/25/77 2313 ER 0\n134 OTS 09/13/77 3914 ER 4 1 1\n135 ISEE A/B 10/22/77 2914 ER 1\n136 METEOSAT-F1 11/22/77 2914 ER 1\n137 CS 12/14/77 2914 ER 1\n138 IUE 01/26/78 2914 ER 1\n139 L&SAT-C 03/05/78 2910 WR 1\n140 BSE 04/07/78 2914 ER 1\n141 OTS-2 05/11/78 3914 ER 1\n142 GOES-C 06/19/78 2914 ER 1\n143 ESRO-GEOS2 07/14/78 2914 ER 1\n144 ISEE-C 08/12/78 2914 ER 1\n145 NIMBUS-G 10/24/78 2910 WR 1\n146 NATO IIIC 11/19/78 2914 ER 1\n147 TELESAT-D 12/16/78 3914 ER 1\n148 SCATHA 01/30/79 2914 ER 1\n149 WESTAR-C 08/09/79 2914 ER 1\n150 RCA-C 12/07/79 3914 ER 1\n151 SMM 02/14/80 3910 ER 1\n152 GOES-D 09/09/80 3914 ER 1\n153 SBS-A 11/15/80 3910 PAM ER 1\n154 GOES-E 05/22/81 3914 ER 1\n155 DE 08/03/81 3913 WR NA 2 & 5 1\n156 SBS-B 09/24/81 3910 PAM ER 1\n157 SME 10/06/81 2310 WR 0\n158 RCA-D 11/20/81 3910 PAM ER 1\n159 RCA-C' 01/15/82 3910 PAM ER 1\n160 WESTAR-IV 02/26/82 3910 PAM ER 1\n161 INSAT-IA 04/10/82 3910 PAM ER 1\n162 WESTAR-V 06/09/82 3910 PAM ER NA 1 1\n163 L&SAT-D 07/16/82 3920 WR 1\n164 TELESAT-F 08/26/82 3920 PAM ER 1\n165 RCA-E 10/27/82 3924 ER 1\n166 IRAS 01/26/83 3910 WR 1\n167 RCA-F 04/11/83 3924 ER 1\n168 GOES-F 04/28/83 3914 ER 1"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n169 EXOSAT 05/26/83 3914 WR 1\n170 GALAXY-A 06/28/83 3920 PAM ER 1\n171 TELSTAR-3A 07/28/83 3920 PAM ER 1\n172 RCA-G 09/08/83 3924 ER 1\n173 GALAXY-B 09/22/83 3920 PAM ER 1\n174 L&SAT-D' 03/01/84 3920 WR 1\n175 AMPTE 08/16/84 3924 ER 1\n176 GALAXY-C 09/21/84 3920 PAM ER 1\n177 NATO-IIID 11/14/84 3914 ER 1\n178 GOES-G 05/03/86 3914 ER 4 1 1\n179 DELTA 180 09/05/86 3920 ER 1\n180 GOES-H 02/26/87 3924 ER 1\n181 PALAPA B2-P 03/20/87 3920 PAM ER 1\n182 DELTA 181 02/08/88 3910 ER 1\n183 NAVSTAR II-1 02/14/89 6925 ER 1\n184 DELTA STAR 03/24/89 3920 ER 1\n185 NAVSTAR II-2 06/10/89 6925 ER 1\n186 NAVSTAR II-3 08/18/89 6925 ER 1\n187 BSB-R1 08/27/89 4925 ER 1\n188 NAVSTAR II-4 10/21/89 6925 ER 1\n189 OOBE 11/18/89 5920 WR 1\n190 NAVSTAR II-5 12/11/89 6925 ER 1\n191 NAVSTAR II-6 01/24/90 6925 ER 1\n192 LOSAT 02/14/90 6920-8 ER 1\n193 NAVSTAR II-7 03/26/90 6925 ER 1\n194 PALAPA B-2R 04/13/90 6925 ER 1\n195 ROSAT 06/01/90 6920-10 ER 1\n196 INSAT-1D 06/11/90 4925 ER 1\n197 NAVSTAR II-8 08/02/90 6925 ER 1\n198 BSB-R2 08/18/90 6925 ER 1\n199 NAVSTAR II-9 10/01/90 6925 ER 1\n200 INMARSAT-2F1 10/30/90 6925 ER 1\n201 NAVSTAR II-10 11/26/90 7925 ER 1\n202 NATO IVA 01/07/91 7925 ER 1\n203 INMARSAT-2F2 03/08/91 6925 ER 1\n204 ASC-2 04/12/91 7925 ER 1\n205 AURORA II 05/29/91 7925 ER 1\n206 NAVSTAR II-11 07/03/91 7925 ER 1\n207 NAVSTAR II-12 02/23/92 7925 ER 1\n208 NAVSTAR II-13 04/09/92 7925 ER 1\n209 PALAPA B4 05/13/92 7925-8 ER 1\n210 EUVE 06/07/92 6920-10 ER 1\n211 NAVSTAR II-14 07/07/92 7925 ER 1\n212 GEOTAIL 07/24/92 6925 ER 1\n213 SATCOM C4 08/31/92 7925 ER 1\n214 NAVSTAR II-15 09/09/92 7925 ER 1"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n215 COPERNIKUS 10/12/92 7925 ER 1\n216 NAVSTAR II-16 11/22/92 7925 ER 1\n217 NAVSTAR II-17 12/18/92 7925 ER 1\n218 NAVSTAR II-18 02/03/93 7925 ER 1\n219 NAVSTAR II-19 03/30/93 7925 ER 1\n220 NAVSTAR II-20 05/13/93 7925 ER 1\n221 NAVSTAR II-21 06/26/93 7925 ER 1\n222 NAVSTAR II-22 08/30/93 7925 ER 1\n223 NAVSTAR II-23 10/26/93 7925 ER 1\n224 NATO IVB 12/08/93 7925 ER 1\n225 GALAXY I-R 02/19/94 7925-8 ER 1\n226 NAVSTAR II-24 03/10/94 7925 ER 1\n227 WIND 11/01/94 7925-10 ER 1\n228 KOREASAT 08/05/95 7925 ER NA 1 & 5 1\n229 RADAR SAT 11/04/95 7920-10 ER 1\n230 X-RAY EXPLORER 12/30/95 7920A-10 ER 1\n231 KOREASAT-2 01/14/96 7925 ER 1\n232 NEAR 02/17/96 7925-8 ER 1\n233 POLAR 02/24/96 7925-10 WR 1\n234 GPS-7 03/27/96 7925-8 ER 1\n235 MSX 04/24/96 7920-10 WR 1\n236 GALAXY 1X 05/24/96 7925A ER 1\n237 GPS-26 07/16/96 7925-9.5 ER 1"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D.3.2 Delta Failure Narratives\n\nThe following narratives provide available details about each Delta failure since the beginning of the Delta program. The narratives are numbered to match the flight-sequence numbers in Section D.3.1.\n\n1. Echo I, 13 May 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: Attitude control lost during second stage coast period. Third stage spun up, but did not fire.\n\n10. Tiros E, 19 June 62, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 5: The flight was considered a success, although failure of the BTL guidance system resulted in a propellant-depletion shutdown of the second stage. The apogee of the final orbit was 175 miles above the planned value and well outside the three-sigma limit of 76 miles.\n\n24. S-66, 19 Mar 64, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 3: Spacecraft did not attain orbit. Third-stage burn of X-248 motor was interrupted after 23 seconds of a planned 42-second burn period.\n\n26. Imp B, 3 Oct 64, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 5: The flight was considered a partial success, although it failed to reach the desired orbital altitude. The apogee was some 52,590 miles below the planned value of 110,000 miles, but perigee was within 3 miles of the desired value of 105 miles.\n\n28. Tiros I, 22 Jan 65, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2 and 5: Loss of WECO guidance during second-stage burn caused second stage to burn to oxygen depletion. As a result, spacecraft was inserted into an elliptical rather than a circular orbit.\n\n33. OSO-C, 25 Aug 65, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: Third stage ignited after spin up but before separation from second-stage spin table. Payload did not orbit.\n\n34. GEOS A, 6 Nov 65, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2 and 5: The flight was considered a success, although failure of the BTL guidance system during second-stage powered flight led to a propellant-depletion shutdown of the stage. Actual apogee was 436 miles too high, and well outside the three-sigma limit.\n\n38. AE-B, 25 May 66, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2 and 5: Due to WECO guidance failure (ground system locked on side lobe), second stage burned to propellant depletion, some 12 seconds longer than expected. As a result, the orbital apogee was 800 miles higher than planned.\n\n39. AIMP-D, 1 July 66, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2.5 and 5: Although an alternate mission was accomplished, primary objectives could not be achieved because excess velocity imparted to the spacecraft prevented insertion of the"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"spacecraft into a lunar orbit. Possible cause was malfunction of the coast-control system after third-stage spinup and separation.\n\n59. Intelsat III A, 18 Sep 68, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: Due to loss of rate gyro, undamped pitch oscillations began at 20 seconds. Vehicle began a series of violent maneuvers at 59 seconds. During the 13-second period while these maneuvers continued, the vehicle pitched down some 270°, then up 210°, and then made a large yaw to the left. At 72 seconds the vehicle regained control and flew stably in a down and leftward direction until 100 seconds. At this time, with the main engine against the pitch and yaw stops, the destabilizing aerodynamic forces became so large that quasi-control could no longer be maintained. The first stage broke up at 103 seconds. The second stage was destroyed by the RSO at 110.6 seconds. Major pieces impacted about 12 miles downrange and 2 miles left of the flight line.\n\n71. Intelsat III E, 26 July 69, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 3 and 5: Unknown but anomalous third-stage performance inserted payload into an erroneous orbit. Apogee was some 17,000 miles too low and orbital inclination was 1.5° above planned 28.8°\n\n73. Pioneer E, 27 Aug 69, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: First-stage hydraulics system failed a few seconds before burnout (MECO). The vehicle pitched down, yawed left, rolled counterclockwise driving all gyros off limits, and then tumbled. Second-stage separation and ignition occurred while the vehicle was out of control. After about 20 seconds, the second stage regained control in a yaw-right, pitch-up attitude. The vehicle flew stably in this attitude for about 240 seconds until destroyed by the safety officer at T+484 seconds.\n\n78. Intelsat III G, 22 Apr 70, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 1 and 5: The flight was considered a success, although low first-stage velocity resulted in a propellant-depletion shutdown of the second stage. As a result, the actual apogee was some 2,220 miles below the planned value of 195,400 miles, and well outside three-sigma limits.\n\n85. OSO-H, 29 Sep 71, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2 and 5: Stage-2 hydraulic-system failure caused faulty control during second-stage burn. Spacecraft injected initially into an elliptical orbit, but was later maneuvered into a more satisfactory orbit although perigee was still about 93 miles below the planned value.\n\n86. ITOS-B (WTR), 21 Oct 71, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Contamination in the oxygen vent valve apparently prevented its proper operation throughout flight. This led to bulkhead rupture during second-stage burn and loss of vehicle control."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"96. ITOS-E (WTR), 16 July 73, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: Pump-motor failure during second-stage burn at 490 seconds resulted in loss of hydraulic pressure, loss of attitude control, and vehicle tumbling.\n\n100. Skynet IIA, 19 Jan 74, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 4 and 5: Flight was within normal limits until impact point passed through Africa gate. During the second burn of the second stage, a short circuit in the second-stage electronics package resulted in an improper spacecraft orbit. The satellite reentered the earth's atmosphere five days later on 24 Jan 74.\n\n101. WESTAR-B, 13 Apr 74, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 1: One solid-rocket motor carried to MECO, but mission was still a complete success.\n\n102. SMS-A, 17 May 74, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 1 and 5: Mission was a partial success, although low first-stage velocity resulted from a liquid oxygen pressure line failure, and a booster shroud that snagged before fully jettisoning. Apogee was some 1,767 miles below the planned value, and well outside three-sigma limits.\n\n130. ESRO-GOES, 20 Apr 77, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2.5 and 5: Due possibly to a short circuit in the second stage or failure in one of the two explosive bolts that hold the stage 2/3 clamp band together, the third stage separated prematurely from the second stage while spinning at only two rpms instead of the normal 97 rpms. As a result, coning during third-stage burn resulted in a spacecraft apogee nearly 13,000 miles low, and far outside three-sigma limits.\n\n134. OTS, 13 Sep 77, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Core vehicle exploded at 57 seconds due to a burn through on the forward end of the #1 Castor IV motor.\n\n155. DE, 3 Aug 81, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2 and 5: Flight was considered a success, although a 260-pound deficiency in fuel loading led to a premature propellant-depletion shutdown of the second burn of the second stage and degradation of final orbit. The inertial velocity at SECO was 240 ft/sec lower than planned. Final apogee was some 855 miles too low and well outside three-sigma limits.\n\n162. WESTAR-V, 9 June 82, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 1: Booster performance was low but mission was a success. Apogee and perigee were within three-sigma limits.\n\n178. GOES-G, 3 May 86, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: An electrical short in a control circuit in first-stage relay box caused premature main-engine shutdown at 71 seconds. Vehicle then tumbled and was broken up by aerodynamic forces. RSO sent destruct at approximately 91 seconds."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D.4 Titan Launch and Performance History\n\nThe Titan family of launch vehicles was established in 1955, when the Air Force awarded the Martin Company a contract to build a heavy-duty space system. Titan I was the nation's first two-stage ICBM and the first to be silo-based. It proved many structural and propulsion techniques that were later incorporated into Titan II. The Titan II was a heavy-duty missile using storable propellants that became a man-rated space booster for NASA's Gemini program. Today the Titan II is returning as a space-launch vehicle with the old ICBMs converted to deliver payloads to orbit. Titan III was the outgrowth of propulsion technology developed in both Titan II and Minuteman ballistic-missile programs.\n\nToday's Titan vehicles (II, III, and IV) are derived from the earlier Titans. In 1984, the DOD called for a space-launch system that would complement the Space Shuttle to ensure access to space for certain national-security payloads. The Titan IV program began as a short-term program for ten launches from Cape Canaveral Air Station. However, after the Challenger accident in 1986, the program has grown to 41 vehicles. With the off-loading of DOD payloads from Shuttle, Titan IV has become DOD's main access to space for many of its heavy payloads. Design of the Titan II Space Launch Vehicle (SLV) began at the same time as that for Titan IV. Titan II SLV was developed from refurbished Titan II ICBMs incorporating technology and hardware from the Titan III program."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Shortly after the Challenger accident in 1986, when the US government decided to offload commercial payloads from the Space Shuttle, Martin Marietta announced plans to develop a Titan III commercial launch vehicle with its own funds. The commercial Titan III is derived from the Titan 34D with a stretched second stage and a bulbous shroud for dual or dedicated payloads. The first commercial Titan III was launched with two communications satellites in December 1989. Table 44 shows a summary of Titan space-vehicle configurations since Gemini.[10]\nTable 44. Summary of Titan Vehicle Configurations\nConfiguration | Description\nII Gemini | Titan II ICBM converted to a man-rated vehicle\nIIIA | Same as Titan II Gemini except stretched stages 1 and 2, and an integral Transtage upper stage\nIIIB | Same as IIIA except Agena upper stage instead of Transtage\n34B | Same as IIIA except stretched stage 1\nIIIC | Same as IIIA with added 5-segment SRMs\nIIID | Same as IIIC except no upper stage\nIIIE | Same as IIID except Centaur upper stage and 14-foot diameter PLF\n34D | Same as 34B with added 5½-segment SRMs. Uses either Transtage or IUS upper stage\nII SLV | Refurbished II ICBM with 10-foot diameter PLF\nIII Commercial | Same as 34D except stretched stage 2, single or dual carrier, enhanced liquid-rocket engines, and 13.1-foot diameter PLF. Can use PAM-D2, Transtage, or TOS upper stage\nIV | Same as 34D except stretched stages 1 and 2, 7-segment SRM or 3-segment SRMU, and 16.7-foot diameter PLF. Can use IUS or Centaur upper stage\n9/10/96 147 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The entire Titan history through 1995 is depicted rather compactly in bar-graph form in Figure 39. The solid-block portion of each bar indicates the number of launches during the calendar year for which vehicle performance was entirely normal, in so far as could be determined. The clear white parts forming the tops of most bars show the number of launches that were either failures or flights where the launch vehicle experienced some sort of anomalous behavior. Every launch with an entry in the response mode column in Table 45 falls in this category. Such behavior did not necessarily prevent the attainment of some, or even all, mission objectives.\nFigure 39. Titan Launch Summary\n9/10/96 148 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D.4.1 Titan Launch History\nThe data in Table 45 summarizes all Titan and Titan-boosted space-vehicle launches since the program began. A launch sequence number is provided in the first column. A launch ID and date are provided in columns 2 and 3. The fourth column indicates the vehicle configuration. The fifth column indicates the launch range. The sixth column indicates the failure-response mode (1 through 5 and NA) that RTI has determined best describes the failure that occurred. For Mode 3 or 4 failures, a suffix of 'T' indicates the vehicle tumbled. Successful launches are indicated by a blank in the Response-Mode column. The seventh column indicates the operational flight phase during which the failure occurred. The last column indicates whether the vehicle configuration is representative of those being launched today. Launches through sequence number 337 were used in the filtering process to estimate failure rate.\nTable 45. Titan Launch History\nNo. | Mission/ID | Launch Date | Vehicle Configuration | Test Range | Response Mode | Flight Phase | Rep. Conf.\n1 | Weapons System (WS) | 12/20/58 | I (A-1) | ER | | | 0\n2 | WS | 02/03/59 | I (A-2) | ER | | | 0\n3 | WS | 02/06/59 | I (A-3) | ER | | | 0\n4 | WS | 02/25/59 | I (A-5) | ER | | | 0\n5 | WS | 04/03/59 | I (A-4) | ER | | | 0\n6 | WS | 05/04/59 | I (A-6) | ER | | | 0\n7 | WS | 08/14/59 | I (B-5) | ER | 1 | 1 | 0\n8 | WS | 12/12/59 | I (C-3) | ER | 1 | 1 | 0\n9 | WS | 02/02/60 | I (B-7A) | ER | | | 0\n10 | WS | 02/05/60 | I (C-4) | ER | 4T | 1 | 0\n11 | WS | 02/24/60 | I (G-4) | ER | | | 0\n12 | WS | 03/08/60 | I (C-1) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n13 | WS | 03/22/60 | I (G-5) | ER | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n14 | WS | 04/08/60 | I (C-5) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n15 | WS | 04/21/60 | I (G-6) | ER | | | 0\n16 | WS | 04/28/60 | I (C-6) | ER | | | 0\n17 | WS | 05/13/60 | I (G-7) | ER | | | 0\n18 | WS | 05/27/60 | I (G-9) | ER | | | 0\n19 | WS | 06/24/60 | I (G-10) | ER | | | 0\n20 | WS | 07/01/60 | I (J-2) | ER | 2 | 1 | 0\n21 | WS | 07/28/60 | I (J-4) | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n22 | WS | 08/10/60 | I (J-7) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n23 | WS | 08/30/60 | I (J-5) | ER | | | 0\n24 | WS | 09/28/60 | I (J-8) | ER | | | 0\n25 | WS | 09/29/60 | I (G-8) | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n26 | WS | 10/07/60 | I (J-3) | ER | | | 0\n27 | WS | 10/24/60 | I (J-6) | ER | | | 0\n28 | WS | 12/20/60 | I (J-9) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n29 | WS | 01/20/61 | I (J-10) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n30 | WS | 02/10/61 | I (J-11) | ER | | | 0\n9/10/96 149 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"31 | WS | 02/20/61 | I (J-13) | ER | | | 0\n32 | WS | 03/03/61 | I (J-12) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n33 | WS | 03/28/61 | I (J-14) | ER | | | 0\n34 | WS | 03/31/61 | I (J-15) | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n35 | SILVER SADDLE | 05/03/61 | I | WR | | | 0\n36 | WS | 05/23/61 | I (J-16) | ER | | | 0\n37 | WS | 06/24/61 | I (M-1) | ER | 4T | 2 | 0\n38 | WS | 07/20/61 | I (J-18) | ER | | | 0\n39 | WS | 07/25/61 | I (M-2) | ER | | | 0\n40 | WS | 08/03/61 | I (J-19) | ER | | | 0\n41 | WS | 09/06/61 | I (J-17) | ER | | | 0\n42 | WS | 09/07/61 | I (M-3) | ER | 5 | 2 | 0\n43 | BIG SAM | 09/23/61 | I (SM-2) | WR | | | 0\n44 | WS | 09/28/61 | I (J-20) | ER | | | 0\n45 | WS | 10/06/61 | I (M-4) | ER | 5 | 2 | 0\n46 | WS | 10/24/61 | I (J-21) | ER | | | 0\n47 | WS | 11/21/61 | I (J-22) | ER | | | 0\n48 | WS | 11/29/61 | I (M-5) | ER | | | 0\n49 | WS | 12/13/61 | I (J-23) | ER | | | 0\n50 | WS | 12/15/61 | I (M-6) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n51 | DOUBLE MARTINI | 01/20/62 | I (SM-4) | WR | 4 | 2 | 0\n52 | WS | 01/29/62 | I (M-7) | ER | | | 0\n53 | BLUE GANDER | 02/23/62 | I (SM-18) | WR | 4 | 2 | 0\n54 | WS (first Titan II) | 03/16/62 | II (N-2) | ER | | | 0\n55 | SILVER TOP | 05/04/62 | I (SM-34) | WR | | | 0\n56 | WS | 06/07/62 | II (N-1) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n57 | WS | 07/11/62 | II (N-6) | ER | | | 0\n58 | WS | 07/25/62 | II (N-4) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n59 | WS | 09/12/62 | II (N-5) | ER | | | 0\n60 | TIGHT BRACELET | 10/06/62 | I (SM-35) | WR | | | 0\n61 | WS | 10/12/62 | II (N-9) | ER | | | 0\n62 | WS | 10/26/62 | II (N-12) | ER | | | 0\n63 | YELLOW JACKET | 12/05/62 | I (SM-11) | WR | 4T | 2 | 0\n64 | WS | 12/06/62 | II (N-11) | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n65 | WS | 12/19/62 | II (N-13) | ER | | | 0\n66 | WS | 01/10/63 | II (N-15) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n67 | TEN MEN | 01/29/63 | I (SM-8) | WR | | | 0\n68 | WS | 02/06/63 | II (N-16) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n69 | AWFUL TIRED | 02/16/63 | II | WR | 4T | 1 | 0\n70 | WS | 03/21/63 | II (N-18) | ER | 4T | 2.5 | 0\n71 | YOUNG BLOOD | 03/30/63 | I (SM-3) | WR | | | 0\n72 | HALF MOON | 04/04/63 | I | WR | | | 0\n73 | RAMP ROOSTER | 04/13/63 | I (SM-1) | WR | | | 0\n74 | WS | 04/19/63 | II (N-21) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n75 | DINNER PARTY | 04/27/63 | II | WR | | | 0\n76 | MARES TAIL | 05/01/63 | I | WR | 2 | 1 | 0\n9/10/96 150 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"77 | WS | 05/09/63 | II (N-14) | ER | 4 | 2 | 0\n78 | FLYING FROG | 05/13/63 | II (N-19) | WR | | | 0\n79 | WS | 05/24/63 | II (N-17) | ER | | | 0\n80 | WS | 05/29/63 | II (N-20) | ER | 4 | 1 | 0\n81 | THREAD NEEDLE | 06/20/63 | II (N-22) | WR | 5 | 2 | 0\n82 | SILVER SPUR | 07/16/63 | I (SM-24) | WR | 4 | 2 | 0\n83 | HIGH RIVER | 08/15/63 | I (SM-7) | WR | | | 0\n84 | WS | 08/21/63 | II (N-24) | ER | | | 0\n85 | POLAR ROUTE | 08/30/63 | I (SM-56) | WR | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n86 | DAILY MAIL | 09/17/63 | I (SM-83) | WR | | | 0\n87 | TAR TOP | 09/23/63 | II (N-23) | WR | | | 0\n88 | WS | 11/01/63 | II (N-25) | ER | | | 0\n89 | FIRE TRUCK | 11/09/63 | II (N-27) | WR | 4T | 1 | 0\n90 | FACT RIDE | 11/14/63 | I (SM-68) | WR | | | 0\n91 | WS | 12/12/63 | II (N-29) | ER | | | 0\n92 | USEFUL TASK | 12/16/63 | II (N-28) | WR | | | 0\n93 | WS | 01/15/64 | II (N-31) | ER | | | 0\n94 | RED SAILS | 01/23/64 | II (N-26) | WR | | | 0\n95 | SAFE CONDUCT | 02/17/64 | II | WR | | | 0\n96 | WS | 02/26/64 | II (N-32) | ER | | | 0\n97 | APPLE PIE | 03/13/64 | II (N-30) | WR | | | 0\n98 | WS | 03/23/64 | II (N-33) | ER | | | 0\n99 | SV: GEMINI GT-1 | 04/08/64 | II (G-1) | ER | | | 0\n100 | WS | 04/09/64 | II (N-34) | ER | | | 0\n101 | COBRA SKIN | 07/30/64 | II (B-28) | WR | | | 0\n102 | DOUBLE TALLEY | 08/11/64 | II (B-9) | WR | | | 0\n103 | GENTLE ANNIE | 08/13/64 | II (B-7) | WR | | | 0\n104 | SV (first Titan III) | 09/01/64 | IIIA (65-210)/Trans. | ER | 4 | 4 | 0\n105 | BLACK WIDOW | 10/02/64 | II (B-1) | WR | | | 0\n106 | HIGH RIDER | 11/04/64 | II (B-32) | WR | | | 0\n107 | WEST WIND I | 12/08/64 | I (SM-85) | WR | 5 | 1 | 0\n108 | SV | 12/10/64 | IIIA (65-209)/Trans. | ER | | | 0\n109 | WEST WIND III | 01/14/65 | I (SM-33) | WR | 4 | 2 | 0\n110 | SV: GEMINI GT-2 | 01/19/65 | II (G-2) | ER | | | 0\n111 | SV: LES-1 | 02/11/65 | IIIA (65-211)/Trans. | ER | | | 0\n112 | WEST WIND II | 03/05/65 | I (SM-80) | WR | 4 | 2 | 0\n113 | SV: GEMINI GT-3 | 03/23/65 | II (G-3) | ER | | | 0\n114 | ARTIC SUN | 03/24/65 | II (B-60) | WR | | | 0\n115 | BEAR HUG | 04/16/65 | II (B-45) | WR | | | 0\n116 | CARD DECK | 04/30/65 | II (B-54) | WR | 4 | 1 | 0\n117 | SV: LES-2 | 05/06/65 | IIIA (65-214)/Trans. | ER | | | 0\n118 | FRONT SIGHT | 05/21/65 | II (B-51) | WR | | | 0\n119 | SV: GEMINI GT-4 | 06/03/65 | II (G-4) | ER | | | 0\n120 | GOLD FISH | 06/14/65 | II (B-22) | WR | 4 | 2.5 | 0\n121 | SV: DUMMY PAYLOAD | 06/18/65 | IIIC (65-215)/Trans. | ER | | | 1\n122 | BUSY BEE | 06/30/65 | II (B-30) | WR | | | 0\n9/10/96 151 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n123 LONG BALL 07/21/65 II (B-62) WR 0\n124 MAGIC LAMP 08/16/65 II (B-6) WR 0\n125 SV: GEMINI GT-5 08/21/65 II (G-5) ER 0\n126 NEW ROLE 08/25/65 II (B-19) WR 0\n127 BOLD GUY 09/21/65 II (B-58) WR 4 2 0\n128 SV: OV-2, LCS-5 10/15/65 IIIC (65-212)/Trans. ER NA 4 & 5 1\n129 POWER BOX 10/20/65 II (B-33) WR 0\n130 RED WAGON 11/27/65 II (B-20) WR 0\n131 CROSS FIRE 11/30/65 II (B-4) WR 5 2 0\n132 SV: GEMINI GT-7 12/04/65 II (G-7) ER 0\n133 SV: GEMINI GT-6A 12/15/65 II (G-6) ER 0\n134 SV: LES-3,4, OSCAR 4 12/21/65 IIIC (66-001)/Trans. ER NA 5 1\n135 SEA ROVER 12/22/65 II (B-73) WR 4T 2 0\n136 WINTER ICE 02/03/66 II (B-87) WR 0\n137 BLACK HAWK 02/17/66 II (B-61) WR 0\n138 SV: GEMINI GT-8 03/16/66 II (G-8) ER 0\n139 CLOSE TOUCH 03/25/66 II (B-16) WR 0\n140 GOLD RING 04/05/66 II (B-50) WR 0\n141 LONG LIGHT 04/20/66 II (B-55) WR 0\n142 SILVER BULLET 05/24/66 II (B-91) WR 4 2.5 0\n143 SV: GEMINI GT-9A 06/03/66 II (G-9) ER 0\n144 SV: IDCSP 06/16/66 IIIC (66-004)/Trans. ER 1\n145 SV: GEMINI GT-10 07/18/66 II (G-10) ER 0\n146 GIANT TRAIN 07/22/66 II (B-95) WR 0\n147 DAILY MAIL 07/29/66 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n148 SV-IDCSP 08/26/66 IIIC (66-005)/Trans. ER 4T 0 1\n149 SV: GEMINI GT-11 09/12/66 II (G-11) ER 0\n150 BLACK RIVER 09/16/66 II (B-40) WR 0\n151 BUSY SCHEME 09/28/66 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n152 SV-OAR/OV 11/03/66 IIIC (66-002)/Trans. ER 1\n153 SV: GEMINI GT-12 11/11/66 II (G-12) ER 0\n154 BUBBLE GIRL 11/24/66 II (B-68) WR 0\n155 BUSY SKYROCKET 12/14/66 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n156 SV-IDCSP/LES/DATS 01/18/67 IIIC (66-006)/Trans. ER 1\n157 BUSY PALEFACE 02/24/67 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n158 GIFT HORSE 03/17/67 II (B-76) WR 0\n159 GLAMOUR GIRL 04/12/67 II (B-81) WR 4T 2 0\n160 BUSY TAILOR 04/26/67 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 4 2 1\n161 SV-VELA/RSCH 04/28/67 IIIC (66-003)/Trans. ER 1\n162 BUSY PLAYMATE 06/20/67 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n163 BUGGY WHEEL 06/23/67 II (B-70) WR 0\n164 SV-IDCSP 07/01/67 IIIC (66-007)/Trans. ER 1\n165 AFSC 08/16/67 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n166 GLOWING BRIGHT 09/11/67 II (B-21) WR 0\n167 AFSC 09/19/67 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n168 AFSC 10/25/67 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n9/10/96 152 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n169 AFSC 12/05/67 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n170 AFSC 01/18/68 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n171 GLORY TRIP 4T 02/28/68 II (B-88) WR 0\n172 AFSC 03/13/68 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n173 GLORY TRIP 10T 04/02/68 II (B-36) WR 0\n174 AFSC 04/17/68 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n175 AFSC 06/05/68 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n176 GLORY TRIP 8T 06/12/68 II (B-82) WR 0\n177 SV-IDCSP 06/13/68 IIIC (66-009)/Trans. ER 1\n178 AFSC 08/06/68 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n179 GLORY TRIP 18T 08/21/68 II (B-53) WR 0\n180 AFSC 09/10/68 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n181 SV-LES/OV 09/26/68 IIIC (65-213)/Trans. ER 1\n182 AFSC 11/06/68 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n183 GLORY TRIP 26T 11/19/68 II (B-3) WR 0\n184 AFSC 12/04/68 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n185 AFSC 01/22/69 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n186 SV-TAC COM 02/09/69 IIIC-17/Trans. ER 1\n187 AFSC 03/04/69 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n188 AFSC 04/15/69 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n189 GLORY TRIP 39T 05/20/69 II WR 0\n190 SV-VELA/OV 05/23/69 IIIC-15/Trans. ER 1\n191 AFSC 06/03/69 IIIB/AGENA D (23B) WR 1\n192 AFSC 08/23/69 IIIB/AGENA D (23B-1) WR 1\n193 AFSC 10/24/69 IIIB/AGENA D (23B-2) WR 1\n194 AFSC 01/14/70 IIIB/AGENA D (23B-3) WR 1\n195 SV-VELA 04/08/70 IIIC-18/Trans. ER 1\n196 AFSC 04/15/70 IIIB/AGENA D (23B-4) WR 1\n197 AFSC 06/25/70 IIIB/AGENA D (23B-5) WR 1\n198 AFSC 08/18/70 IIIB/AGENA D (23B-6) WR 1\n199 AFSC 10/23/70 IIIB/AGENA D (23B-7) WR 1\n200 SV-DOD 11/06/70 IIIC-19/Trans. ER NA 3.5 & 5 1\n201 AFSC 01/21/71 IIIB/AGENA D (23B-8) WR 1\n202 AFSC 03/20/71 IIIB/AGENA D (33B-1) WR 1\n203 AFSC 04/22/71 IIIB/AGENA D (23B-9) WR 1\n204 SV-DOD 05/05/71 IIIC-20/Trans. ER 1\n205 AFSC 06/15/71 IIID (23D-1) WR 1\n206 M1-17 06/20/71 II (B-12) WR 0\n207 AFSC 08/12/71 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-1) WR 1\n208 M2-1 08/27/71 II (B-100) WR 0\n209 AFSC 10/23/71 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-2) WR 1\n210 SV-DOD 11/02/71 IIIC-21/Trans. ER 1\n211 AFSC 01/20/72 IIID (23D-2) WR 1\n212 AFSC 02/16/72 IIIB/AGENA D (33B-2) WR 4 3 1\n213 SV-DOD 03/01/72 IIIC-22/Trans. ER 1\n214 AFSC 03/17/72 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-3) WR 1\n9/10/96 153 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n215 AFSC 05/20/72 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-4) WR 1\n216 M2-10 05/24/72 II (B-46) WR 0\n217 AFSC 07/07/72 IIID (23D-5) WR 1\n218 AFSC 09/01/72 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-5) WR 1\n219 AFSC 10/10/72 IIID (23D-3) WR 1\n220 M2-14 10/11/72 II (B-78) WR 0\n221 AFSC 12/21/72 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-6) WR 1\n222 AFSC 03/09/73 IIID (23D-6) WR 1\n223 AFSC 05/16/73 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-7) WR 1\n224 SV-DSP 06/12/73 IIIC-24/Trans. ER 1\n225 AFSC 06/26/73 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-9) WR 1\n226 AFSC 07/13/73 IIID (23D-7) WR 1\n227 AFSC 08/21/73 IIIB/AGENA D (33B-3) WR 1\n228 AFSC 09/27/73 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-8) WR 1\n229 M2-27 10/05/73 II WR 0\n230 AFSC 11/10/73 IIID (23D-8) WR 1\n231 SV-DSCS 12/13/73 IIIC-26/Trans. ER 1\n232 SV-VIKING 02/11/74 IIIE/CENT. D-1T (TC-1) ER 4 3 1\n233 AFSC 02/13/74 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-10) WR 1\n234 M2-31 03/01/74 II WR 0\n235 AFSC 04/10/74 IIID (23D-9) WR 1\n236 SV-ATS-F 05/30/74 IIIC-9/Trans. ER 1\n237 AFSC 06/06/74 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-11) WR 1\n238 AFSC 08/14/74 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-12) WR 1\n239 AFSC 10/29/74 IIID (23D-4) WR 1\n240 SV-HELIOS-A (TC-2) 12/10/74 IIIE/CENT-1T (23E-2) ER 1\n241 SOFT-1 01/09/75 II WR 0\n242 AFSC 03/09/75 IIIB/AGENA D (34B-1) WR 1\n243 AFSC 04/18/75 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-14) WR 1\n244 SV-DSCS 05/20/75 IIIC-7/Trans. ER NA 2.5 1\n245 AFSC 06/08/75 IIID (23D-10) WR 1\n246 DG-2 08/07/75 II WR 0\n247 SV-Viking/Mars (TC-4) 08/20/75 IIIE/CENT. D-1T (23E-4) ER 1\n248 SV-Viking/Mars (TC-3) 09/09/75 IIIE/CENT. D-1T (23E-3) ER 1\n249 AFSC 10/09/75 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-10) WR 1\n250 AFSC 12/04/75 IIID (23D-13) WR 1\n251 DG-4 12/04/75 II WR 0\n252 SV-DSP 12/14/75 IIIC-29/Trans. ER NA 5 1\n253 SV-HELIOS-B (TC-5) 01/15/76 IIIE/CENT. D-1T (23E-5) ER 1\n254 SV-LES/SOLRAD 03/14/76 IIIC-30/Trans. ER 1\n255 AFSC 03/22/76 IIIB/AGENA D (23B-18) WR 1\n256 AFSC 06/02/76 IIIB/AGENA D (34B-5) WR 1\n257 SV-DSP 06/25/76 IIIC-28/Trans. ER 1\n258 ITF-1 06/27/76 II WR 0\n259 AFSC 07/08/76 IIID (23D-14) WR 1\n260 AFSC 08/06/76 IIIB/AGENA D (34B-6) WR 1\n9/10/96 154 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n261 AFSC 09/15/76 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-17) WR NA 2 1\n262 AFSC 12/19/76 IIID (23D-15) WR 1\n263 SV-DSP 02/06/77 IIIC-23/Trans. ER 1\n264 AFSC 03/13/77 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-19) WR 1\n265 SV-DSCS 05/12/77 IIIC-32/Trans. ER 1\n266 AFSC 06/27/77 IIID (23D-17) WR 1\n267 SV-VOYAGER (TC-7) 08/20/77 IIIE/CENT. D-1T (23E-7) ER 1\n268 SV-VOYAGER (TC-6) 09/05/77 IIIE/CENT. D-1T (23E-6) ER NA 2 1\n269 AFSC 09/23/77 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-23) WR 1\n270 AFSC 02/24/78 IIIB/AGENA D (34B-2) WR 1\n271 AFSC 03/16/78 IIID (23D-20) WR 1\n272 SV-DSCS 03/25/78 IIIC-35/Trans. ER 4T 2 1\n273 SV-DOD 06/10/78 IIIC-33/Trans. ER 1\n274 AFSC 06/14/78 IIID (23D-18) WR 1\n275 AFSC 08/04/78 IIIB/AGENA D (34B-7) WR 1\n276 SV-DSCS 12/13/78 IIIC-36/Trans. ER 1\n277 AFSC 03/16/79 IIID (23D-21) WR 1\n278 AFSC 05/28/79 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-25) WR 1\n279 SV-DSP 06/10/79 IIIC-23C-13/Trans. ER 1\n280 SV-DOD 10/01/79 IIIC-23C-16/Trans. ER 1\n281 SV-DSCS 11/21/79 IIIC-23C-19/Trans. ER 1\n282 AFSC 02/06/80 IIID (23D-19) WR 1\n283 AFSC 06/18/80 IIID (23D-16) WR 1\n284 AFSC 12/13/80 IIIB/AGENA D (34B-3) WR 1\n285 AFSC 02/28/81 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-24) WR 1\n286 SV-DOD 03/16/81 IIIC-23C-22/Trans. ER 1\n287 AFSC 04/24/81 IIIB/AGENA D (34B-8) WR 1\n288 AFSC 09/03/81 IIID (23D-22) WR 1\n289 SV-DOD 10/31/81 IIIC-23C-21/Trans. ER 1\n290 AFSC 01/21/82 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-26) WR 1\n291 SV-DOD 03/06/82 IIIC-23C-20/Trans. ER 1\n292 AFSC 05/11/82 IIID (23D-24) WR 1\n293 SV-DSCS 10/30/82 34D-01/IUS ER 1\n294 AFSC 11/17/82 IIID (23D-23) WR 1\n295 AFSC 04/15/83 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-27) WR 1\n296 AFSC 06/20/83 34D-5 WR 1\n297 AFSC 07/31/83 IIIB/AGENA D (34B-9) WR 1\n298 SV-DOD 01/31/84 34D-10/Trans. ER 1\n299 SV-DOD 04/14/84 34D-11/Trans. ER 1\n300 AFSC 04/17/84 IIIB/AGENA D (24B-28) WR 1\n301 AFSC 06/25/84 34D-4 WR 1\n302 AFSC 08/28/84 IIIB/AGENA D (34B-4) WR 1\n303 AFSC 12/04/84 34D-6 WR 1\n304 SV-DOD 12/22/84 34D-13/Trans. ER 1\n305 AFSC 02/07/85 IIIB/AGENA D (34B-10) WR 1\n306 AFSC 08/28/85 34D-7 WR 4T 1 1\n9/10/96 155 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n307 AFSC 04/18/86 34D-9 WR 4 0 1\n308 AFSC 02/11/87 IIIB/AGENA D (34B-11) WR 1\n309 AFSC 10/26/87 34D-15 WR 1\n310 SV-DOD 11/29/87 34D-8/Trans. ER 1\n311 SV-DOD 09/02/88 34D-3/Trans. ER NA 5 1\n312 AFSC 09/05/88 II/SLV (23G-1) WR 1\n313 AFSC 11/06/88 34D-14 WR 1\n314 SV-DOD 05/10/89 34D-16/Trans. ER 1\n315 SV (first T-IV) 06/14/89 IV-1/IUS ER NA 1 1\n316 SV-DOD 09/04/89 34D-2/Trans. ER 1\n317 AFSC 09/05/89 II/SLV (23G-2) WR 1\n318 SV-JAPAN/UK 01/01/90 III ER 1\n319 SV-INTELSAT VI 03/14/90 III ER NA 2.5 & 5 1\n320 SV-DOD 06/08/90 IV-4 ER 1\n321 SV-INTELSAT VI 06/23/90 III ER 1\n322 SV-DOD 11/13/90 IV-6/IUS ER 1\n323 AFSC 03/08/91 IV WR 1\n324 AFSC 11/17/91 IV WR 1\n325 AFSC 04/25/92 II/SLV WR 1\n326 SV-MARS OBS. 09/25/92 III ER 1\n327 AFMC 11/28/92 IV WR 1\n328 AFMC 08/02/93 IV (K-11) WR 4 0 1\n329 LANDSAT 6 10/05/93 II/SLV WR 4 2 1\n330 CLEMENTINE 01/25/94 II/SLV WR 1\n331 SV-MILSTAR 02/07/94 TIV-CENTAUR (K-10) ER 1\n332 SV-DOD 05/03/94 TIV-CENTAUR (K-7) ER 1\n333 SV-DOD 08/27/94 TIV-CENTAUR (K-9) ER 1\n334 SV-DOD 12/22/94 IV-IUS (K-14) ER 1\n335 SV-DOD 05/14/95 TIV-CENTAUR (K-23) ER 1\n336 SV-DOD 07/10/95 TIV-CENTAUR (K-19) ER 1\n337 SV-MILSTAR 11/06/95 TIV-CENTAUR (K-21) ER 1\n338 DOD 04/24/96 TIV-CENTAUR (K-16) ER 1\n339 DOD 07/02/96 TIV-NUS (K2) ER 1\n9/10/96 156 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D.4.2 Titan Failure Narratives\n\nThe following narratives provide available details about each Titan failure since the beginning of the Titan I program in 1959. The narratives are numbered to match the flight-sequence numbers in Section D.4.1.\n\n7. B-5, 14 Aug 59, Response Mode 1, Flight Phase 1: Umbilicals were prematurely pulled from missile resulting in engine shutdown and impact on pad.\n\n8. C-3, 12 Dec 59, Response Mode 1, Flight Phase 1: Missile destroyed itself just before liftoff.\n\n10. C-4, 5 Feb 60, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: While pitch program was in progress, a structural failure occurred in transition section. Nose cone broke off, and missile lost aerodynamic stability. Shortly after, an explosion and fire destroyed the missile.\n\n12. C-1, 8 Mar 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Failure of gas-generator valve to open prevented Stage-II ignition.\n\n13. G-5, 22 Mar 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: Premature shut down of vernier engines resulted in impact 38 miles short of target.\n\n14. C-5, 8 Apr 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Although Stage-I performance was low, Stage II successfully separated and ignited. All data were lost about 50 seconds later, apparently due to malfunction of Stage II turbopump.\n\n20. J-2, 1 Jul 60, Response Mode 2, Flight Phase 1: Shortly after launch, hydraulic power to engine actuators was lost so control could not be maintained. The missile veered northwest and pitched down (Flight azimuth was 105.97°). Missile was destroyed by RSO 11 seconds after liftoff.\n\n21. J-4, 28 July 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Stage I thrusting flight was terminated prematurely at 101 seconds (Nominal, 136 seconds). Stage II engine did not start, apparently because the auxiliary turbopumps did not receive sufficient head pressure to effect a successful start.\n\n22. J-7, 10 Aug 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Stage II engine shutdown 0.17 seconds early and solo vernier operation did not occur. Impact was 107 miles short of target.\n\n25. G-8, 29 Sep 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Stage I shut down prematurely when a low-level sensor malfunctioned and ceased to be locked out. Stage II performed properly but shutdown prematurely due to propellant depletion. The impact was some 3600 miles short of the 8700-mile target point."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"28. J-9, 20 Dec 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: No Stage-II ignition due to failure of gas generator to start.\n\n29. J-10, 20 Jan 61, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: No Stage-II operation due to erroneous signal that appeared at umbilical disconnect. Impact some 420 miles downrange.\n\n32. J-12, 3 Mar 61, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Stage-II terminated prematurely after 54-second burn, apparently due to failure of pump drive assembly. Impact was 730 miles downrange.\n\n34. J-15, 31 Mar 61, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Booster shut down prematurely at 74 seconds. Missile subsequently tumbled and broke up.\n\n37. M-1, 24 Jun 61, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: Stage II engine shut down prematurely after 12 seconds of operation due to loss of Stage II hydraulic power. Loss of hydraulic power occurred during Stage I flight, so failure led to loss of control of sustainer and vernier actuators, producing excessive missile motion and tumbling.\n\n42. M-3, 7 Sep 61, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 2: A transient in guidance computer at 218.35 seconds (SECO at 297.7 seconds) caused impact 20 miles short and 2.8 miles left of target.\n\n45. M-4, 6 Oct 61, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 2: A one-bit error in the W velocity accumulation caused impact 86 miles short and 14 miles right of target.\n\n50. M-6, 15 Dec 61, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Start signal for Stage II was not generated. Stage II did not ignite.\n\n51. I, 20 Jan 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Missile self-destructed, apparently after Stage 2 failed to ignite. A backup automatic fuel-cutoff signal was sent at 248 Seconds.\n\n53. I, 23 Feb 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Missile self-destructed, apparently after Stage 2 failed to ignite. A backup automatic fuel cutoff signal was sent at 240 Seconds.\n\n56. N-1, 7 Jun 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Sustainer engine performance was subnormal due to reduced oxidizer flow through the gas generator. RSO terminated flight after a prolonged sustainer burn. Impact only 1100 miles downrange.\n\n58. N-4, 25 July 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: After about 60 seconds of Stage II burn, a fuel leak between the thrust chamber valve and the injector resulted in a"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"50% reduction of sustainer thrust for remainder of Stage II operation. Impact was 2888 miles short of target.\n\n63. I (Yellow Jacket), 5 Dec 62, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: Missile was command destructed at 250 seconds. No other data available.\n\n64. N-11, 6 Dec 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Stage I shut down 11.4 seconds early. As a result, no inertial velocity-dependent discretes were issued and Stage II shut down prematurely, apparently due to an oxidizer bootstrap-line failure.\n\n66. N-15, 10 Jan 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Stage II flight was terminated by backup SECO approximately 34 seconds after ignition because low thrust caused velocity to fall below performance criteria. Cause of low thrust was reduced oxidizer flow through the gas-generator injector. Impact only 556 miles downrange.\n\n68. N-16, 6 Feb 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Oxidizer depletion prior to normal SECO resulted in impact 71 miles short of target.\n\n69. N-7 (Awful Tired), 16 Feb 63, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: Missile self-destructed at 56 seconds at an altitude of 18,000 feet due to loss of roll control. Failure was caused by improper umbilical release at launch and subsequent loss of vehicle electrical control.\n\n70. N-18, 21 Mar 63, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2.5: Although vernier ignition was normal, vernier #2 received no commands, and gimbaled erratically 2.8 seconds later. R/V attitude was incorrect at separation so that impact was 4 to 5 miles short of target.\n\n74. N-21, 19 Apr 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Stage II engine shut down prematurely due to oxidizer bootstrap-line failure.\n\n76. Titan I (Mares Tail), 1 May 63, Response Mode 2, Flight Phase 1: The missile was erratic from liftoff as one engine either failed at liftoff or shutdown immediately thereafter. The missile rose about 50 feet, then fell uprange from the launch pad about 7.5 seconds after liftoff.\n\n77. N-14, 9 May 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Oxidizer depletion due to a leak resulted in premature Stage II shutdown and impact short of target.\n\n80. N-20, 29 May 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: A fuel leak in Stage I engine compartment at ignition caused a fire that spread through the engine compartment. Stage I destroyed itself at 52 seconds. Stage II was destroyed by RSO."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"81. Titan II (Thread Needle), 20 June 63, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 2: Flight appeared normal until BECO at about 146 seconds. The staging event seemed abnormally long, due to low second-stage thrust that remained considerably below normal thereafter because of reduced oxidizer flow through the gas-generator injector. The vehicle nevertheless followed closely to the intended ground track, albeit well behind schedule. At about 480 seconds (and some three minutes behind schedule), the missile began a slow turn to the left. A SECO indication was noted about 10 seconds later. Destruct was sent at 532 seconds after all track was lost.\n\n82. Titan I (Silver Spur), 16 July 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: The flight was normal through first-stage cutoff. Separation occurred but the second-stage failed to ignite.\n\n85. Titan I (Polar Route), 30 Aug 63, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: The flight appeared normal through the first and second-stage thrusting periods. At SECO the vernier engines also shut down, apparently due to shutdown of the gas generator.\n\n89. II (Fire Truck), 9 Nov 63, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: Missile tumbled out of control at 130 seconds, then broke up.\n\n104. IIIA (65-210), 1 Sep 64, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 4: Nominal mission through first transtage burn. Transtage propellant-tank pressurization system failed with resultant reduction in thrust. Vehicle impacted about 2700 miles downrange.\n\n107. Titan I (West Wind I), 8 Dec 64, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: A first-stage power-level malfunction combined with guidance deviations caused the missile to drift far to the left, then over-correct far to the right, passing north of Midway Is. No other data available.\n\n109. Titan I (West Wind III), 14 Jan 65, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: First-stage flight was apparently normal, but second stage failed to ignite.\n\n112. Titan I (West Wind II), 5 Mar 65, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Missile impacted on azimuth about 80 miles short of target due to propellant depletion.\n\n116. Titan I (Card Deck), 30 Apr 65, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Flight appeared normal until around 100 seconds when the IP slowed and then stopped due to a turbopump failure. The missile self-destructed at about 115 seconds with the impact point about 115 miles offshore.\n\n120. Titan II (Gold Fish), 14 Jun 65, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: Vehicle apparently failed during the vernier solo phase due to loss of a vernier nozzle."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"127. Titan II (Bold Guy), 21 Sep 65, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: After a normal first-stage flight, the second stage was shut down immediately after start by an erroneous guidance command.\n\n128. IIIC (65-212), 15 Oct 65, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 4 and 5: Normal mission through transtage second ignition and burn. One chamber of transtage engine failed to shutdown completely, resulting in a pitch-up deviation, loss of control, vehicle tumbling, and an unplanned orbit.\n\n131. Titan II (Cross Fire), 30 Nov 65, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 2: Trouble apparently began between 208 and 214 seconds when the rate and track beacons were lost. The radar tracked till about 360 - 380 seconds, indicating a ballistic-type trajectory veering to the right. Loss of control was due to a fuel leak at the crossover manifold.\n\n134. IIIC (66-001), 21 Dec 65, Vehicle 8, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 5: Nominal mission through transtage second burn shutdown. Attitude control system engine failed to shutdown following vernier burn with resulting fuel depletion and loss of attitude control.\n\n135. Titan II (Sea Rover), 22 Dec 65, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: Flight was apparently normal until some point well into second-stage burn. Track then indicated erratic movement left of nominal, then right of nominal, but with little downrange movement of the IP. Automatic fuel cutoff was sent at 396 seconds. Failure resulted from improper rigging of sustainer actuator that exceeded control-system capability.\n\n142. Titan II (Silver Bullet), 24 May 66, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: Flight was normal except that R/V did not separate, causing a 20-mile uprange miss.\n\n148. IIIC (66-005), 26 Aug 66, Vehicle 12, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 0: Payload fairing failed during Stage-0 powered flight. The failure at 79 seconds resulted in violent maneuvering and self destruct (ISDS).\n\n159. Titan II (Glamour Girl), 12 Apr 67, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: First-stage flight was normal. About 15 seconds after second-stage ignition, failure of the yaw-rate gyro resulted in violent roll and pitch maneuvers. Missile impacted about 660 miles downrange.\n\n160. IIIB/Agena D (Busy Tailor), 26 Apr 67, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Flight appeared normal through first-stage cutoff and separation. About 15 seconds into the second stage, a fuel-line blockage resulted in a drop in chamber pressure that reduced the thrust to about half its normal level. As a result, the velocity eventually stopped increasing. The IP moved slightly farther downrange and remained on azimuth until loss of signal at 300 seconds. Impact was about 600 miles downrange."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"200. IIIC-19, 6 Nov 70, Vehicle 19, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 3.5 and 5: All booster systems performed essentially as planned. Transtage experienced a guidance anomaly during coast prior to second burn resulting in an improper orbit.\n212. IIIB/Agena D (AFSC), 16 Feb 72, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 3: After an apparently normal Titan III B boost phase, the Agena failed to ignite. The payload impacted about 1500 miles downrange.\n232. Titan IIIE, #E1, 11 Feb 74, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 3: All Titan booster functions and Centaur separation were properly performed. Centaur stage failed to ignite.\n244. TIIIC-25, 20 May 75, Vehicle 25, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2.5: All systems performed satisfactorily through Stage II/III separation. About 230 milliseconds after staging discrete was issued, the IMU power supply failed. Transtage then tumbled and the first transtage burn failed to occur leaving transtage and attached payload in the parking orbit.\n252. TIIIC-29, 14 Dec 75, Vehicle 29, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 5: All launch vehicle objectives were met. However, satellite propulsion system malfunctioned putting satellite in uncontrollable position with no possibility of restoring mission capability.\n261. IIIB/Agena D (AFSC), 15 Sep 76, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: The stage-2 engine failed to respond to shutdown commands and thus burned to propellant depletion. Cause was thought to be a hard contaminant that blocked the fuel valve.\n268. 23E-6/Centaur D-1T, 5 Sep 77, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2: Flight was regarded as a success, although the second-stage velocity was low, probably due to a detached line diffuser lodged on top of the prevalve.\n272. TIIIC-17, 25 Mar 78, Vehicle 35, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 2: Vehicle performance was satisfactory until 16.4 seconds beyond Stage-2 start. At this time the Stage-2 hydraulic system began and continued over-pressurizing until the system burst after 125 seconds of Stage-2 operation. The pressure then dropped to zero, the vehicle tumbled out of control, and guidance shut down the second stage after detecting negative acceleration. The RSO sent arm at 629 seconds and destruct at 630 seconds.\n306. 34D (AFSC), 28 Aug 85, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: The first-stage engine suffered three separate major anomalies: (1) during subassembly-2 (S/A-2) start transient (110 sec), a large oxidizer leak of 165 lb/sec occurred in the oxidizer suction line; (2) at 213 seconds, an internal fuel leak of 30 lb/sec occurred in S/A-1 downstream of the combustion chamber and created a vehicle side force; (3) the"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S/A-1 shut down at 213 sec due to failure of its turbopump assembly. The vehicle continued flight till 221 seconds when erratic attitude rates were noted. At 229 seconds, the impact point stopped. At 257 seconds, the pressure dropped to zero in the stage-1 thrust-chamber assembly 2. At the same time, stages 1 and 2 separated as stage 2 ignited. After this time, stage-2 attitude rates were erratic. Destruct was sent by the RSO at 273 seconds.\n307. 34D (AFSC), 18 Apr 86, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 0: At about 8.8 seconds after liftoff, the insulation and case of SRM No. 2 debonded resulting in case rupture immediately thereafter. The core vehicle was destroyed by fragments from the ruptured motor. Auto-destruct was activated on SRM-1 at 9.0 seconds.\n311. 34D-3/Transtage, 2 Sep 88, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 5: Transtage pressurization system failed due to damage to the upper portion of the transtage fuel tank and pressurization lines. A leak of 1,340 pounds occurred during park orbit, and a large helium-tank gas leak occurred during transtage first burn. Not enough helium was left in system to allow start of second burn. The payload was left in a geostationary transfer orbit.\n315. Titan IV-1/IUS, 14 June 89, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 1: Late in Stage-1 burn, one of the engines failed and shut down. The other engine was able to gimbal sufficiently to maintain control until propellant depletion. Trajectory inaccuracies were compensated for during Stage-2 burn, and the mission was a success.\n319. Commercial Titan, 14 Mar 90, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2.5 and 5: Boost phase was satisfactory. The payload separation system was designed for two satellites and had two discrete outputs from the missile guidance computer (MGC), but for this mission it carried only a single satellite. The wiring team miswired the harness, which connected the MGC payload-separation discretes to the payload separation device, so the satellite never received the separation signal. PKM and satellite did not separate from Stage II resulting in low-earth elliptical orbit. Ground controllers were able to separate satellite hours later but PKM remained attached to Stage II.\n328. IV, 2 Aug 93, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 0: A leak occurred in SRM#1 at 99.9 seconds that rapidly enveloped the vehicle in propellant gases. Approximately 1.6 seconds later the vehicle blew up and disintegrated, apparently due to activation of the inadvertent-separation destruct system. Destruct was transmitted at 104.5 seconds.\n329. II/SLV (Landsat 6), 5 Oct 93, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Following a successful Titan-II second-stage burn and after payload separation, the apogee-kick motor failed to ignite and circularize the highly-elliptical orbit. The Landsat payload and Titan II followed a ballistic trajectory back into the atmosphere where burnup occurred."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D.5 Thor Launch and Performance History (Not Including Delta)\nThe entire Thor history is depicted rather compactly in bar-graph form in Figure 40. The solid-black portion of each bar indicates the number of launches during the calendar year for which vehicle performance was entirely normal, in so far as could be determined. The clear white parts forming the tops of most bars show the number of launches that were either failures or flights where the launch vehicle experienced some sort of anomalous behavior. Every launch with an entry in the response mode column of Table 46 falls in this category. Such behavior did not necessarily prevent the attainment of some, or even all, mission objectives.\nFigure 40. Thor Launch Summary\nD.5.1 Thor and Thor-Boosted Launch History\nThe data in Table 46 summarize all Thor and Thor-boosted space-vehicle launches since the program began. A launch sequence number is provided in the first column. A launch ID and date are provided in columns 2 and 3. The fourth column indicates the vehicle configuration. The fifth column indicates the launch range. The sixth column indicates the failure-response mode (1 through 5 and NA) that RTI has determined best describes the failures that occurred. For Mode 3 or 4 failures, a suffix of 'T' indicates the vehicle tumbled. Successful launches are indicated by a blank in the Response-"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mode column. The seventh column indicates the operational flight phase during which the failure occurred. The last column indicates whether the vehicle configuration is representative of those being launched today.\nTable 46. Thor Launch History\nNo. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n1 Weapons System (WS) 01/25/57 101 ER 1 1 0\n2 WS 04/19/57 102 ER 4 1 0\n3 WS 05/21/57 103 ER 1 1 0\n4 WS 08/30/57 104 ER 4T 1 0\n5 WS 09/20/57 105 ER 4 1 0\n6 WS 10/03/57 107 ER 1 1 0\n7 WS 10/11/57 108 ER 4 1 0\n8 WS 10/24/57 109 ER 0\n9 WS 12/07/57 112 ER 5 1 0\n10 WS 12/19/57 113 ER 4 1.5 0\n11 WS 01/28/58 114 ER 5 1 0\n12 WS 02/28/58 120 ER 4 1 0\n13 WS 04/19/58 121 ER 1 1 0\n14 WS 04/23/58 ABLE I (116) ER 4 1 0\n15 WS 06/04/58 115 ER 0\n16 WS 06/13/58 122 ER 0\n17 WS 07/11/58 ABLE I (118) ER 0\n18 WS 07/12/58 123 ER 4 1 0\n19 WS 07/23/58 ABLE I (119) ER 0\n20 WS 07/26/58 126 ER 4 1 0\n21 WS 08/06/58 117 ER 0\n22 PIONEER 08/17/58 ABLE I (127) ER 4 1 0\n23 PIONEER-I 10/11/58 ABLE I (130) ER NA 2&5 0\n24 WS 11/05/58 138 ER 5 1 0\n25 PIONEER-II 11/08/58 ABLE I (129) ER 4 3 0\n26 WS 11/26/58 140 ER 5 1 0\n27 WS 12/05/58 145 ER 4 1 0\n28 WS 12/16/58 146 ER 4 1 0\n29 WS 12/30/58 149 ER 2 1 0\n30 WS 01/23/59 ABLE II(128) ER 4 1.5 0\n31 WS 01/30/59 154 ER 4 1 0\n32 WS 02/28/59 ABLE II (131) ER 4 2 0\n33 WS 03/21/59 ABLE II (132) ER 0\n34 WS 03/21/59 158 ER 0\n35 WS 03/26/59 162 ER 0\n36 WS 04/07/59 ABLE II (133) ER 0\n37 WS 04/22/59 176 ER 0\n38 WS 04/24/59 164 ER 0\n39 WS 05/12/59 187 ER 0\n40 WS 05/21/59 ABLE II (135) ER 0\n41 WS 05/22/59 184 ER 0"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. Mission/ID Launch Date Vehicle Configuration Test Range Response Mode Flight Phase Rep. Conf.\n42 WS 06/11/59 ABLE II (137) ER 0\n43 WS 06/25/59 198 ER 0\n44 WS 06/29/59 194 ER NA 1.5 0\n45 WS 07/21/59 203 ER 3 1 0\n46 WS 07/24/59 202 ER 0\n47 WS 08/05/59 208 ER 0\n48 EXPLORER 6 08/07/59 ABLE III (134) ER 0\n49 WS 08/14/59 204 ER 0\n50 WS 08/27/59 216 ER 0\n51 WS 09/12/59 217 ER 0\n52 TRANSIT 1A 09/17/59 ABLE (136) ER 4 2.5 0\n53 WS 09/22/59 222 ER 0\n54 WS 10/06/59 235 ER 0\n55 WS 10/13/59 221 ER 0\n56 WS 10/28/59 230 ER 0\n57 WS 11/03/59 238 ER 0\n58 WS 11/19/59 244 ER 0\n59 WS 12/01/59 254 ER 4T 1 0\n60 WS 12/17/59 255 ER 0\n61 WS 01/14/60 256 ER 0\n62 WS 02/09/60 259 ER 0\n63 WS 02/29/60 263 ER 0\n64 PIONEER-5 03/11/60 ABLE (219) ER 0\n65 TIROS I 04/01/60 ABLE (148) ER 0\n66 TRANSIT-1B 04/13/60 ABLE-STAR (257) ER NA 1&5 0\n67 TRANSIT-2A 06/22/60 ABLE-STAR (281) ER NA 2&5 0\n68 COURIER-1A 08/18/60 ABLE-STAR (262) ER 4T 1 0\n69 COURIER-1B 10/04/60 ABLE-STAR (293) ER 0\n70 TRANSIT-3A 11/30/60 ABLE-STAR (283) ER 4 1 0\n71 TRANSIT-3B 02/21/61 ABLE-STAR (313) ER NA 4&5 0\n72 TRANSIT-4A 06/28/61 ABLE-STAR (315) ER 0\n73 TRANSIT-4B 11/15/61 ABLE-STAR (305) ER 0\n74 BIG SHOT-1 (sub-orb.) 01/15/62 337 ER 0\n75 COMPOSITE-1 01/24/62 ABLE-STAR (311) ER 5 2 0\n76 WS 05/02/62 177 ER 0\n77 ANNA-1A 05/10/62 ABLE-STAR (314) ER 4 2 0\n78 BIG SHOT-II (sub-orb.) 07/18/62 338 ER 0\n79 ANNA-1B 10/31/62 ABLE-STAR (319) ER 0\n80 ASSET ASV-1 09/18/63 232 ER 0\n81 ASSET ASV-2 03/24/64 240 ER 4 2 0\n82 ASSET ASV-3 07/22/64 250 ER 0\n83 ASSET AEV-1 10/27/64 260 ER 0\n84 ASSET AEV-2 12/08/64 SLV II (247) ER 0\n85 ASSET ASV-4 02/23/65 248 ER 0"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D.5.2 Thor and Thor-Boosted Failure Narratives\n\nThe following narratives provide information about flight failure of Thor weapons system and Thor-boosted space vehicle launches beginning with the first Thor launch in January 1957. The narratives are numbered to match the flight-sequence numbers in Section D.5.1.\n\n1. 101, 25 Jan 57, Response Mode 1, Flight Phase 1: Failure of fuel-system valve resulted in loss of thrust. Missile fell back on pad after reaching an altitude of only 9 inches.\n\n2. 102, 19 Apr 57, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Missile was apparently performing normally until destroyed by the RSO at 34.7 seconds. Erroneous DOVAP beat-beat plot showed missile heading uprange.\n\n3. 103, 21 May 57, Response Mode 1, Flight Phase 1: Missile was destroyed on the pad at T - 5 minutes. A faulty fuel-tank regulator and relief valve resulted in over-pressurizing and bursting of fuel tank.\n\n4. 104, 30 Aug 57, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: Spurious signals in the main-engine yaw feedback circuit resulted in missile breakup shortly after 92 seconds.\n\n5. 105, 20 Sep 57, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Premature propellant depletion resulted in impact some 400 miles short of target.\n\n6. 107, 3 Oct 57, Response Mode 1, Flight Phase 1: Main fuel valve closed 1.25 seconds after liftoff. Missile fell back on pad after reaching an altitude of about 17 feet.\n\n7. 108, 11 Oct 57, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Due to a mechanical failure, an abnormal main-engine shutdown (one second early) resulted in loss of the vernier solo phase.\n\n9. 112, 7 Dec 57, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: An electrical-system failure at 107 seconds produced an abnormal loading on the missile converter. The missile began deviating at 110 seconds and finally broke up at about 224 seconds (well after MECO at 156 seconds). Missile impacted 200 miles downrange and 40 miles left of flight line.\n\n10. 113, 19 Dec 57, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1.5: Flight was regarded as successful although there was no vernier solo operation and impact was 6 miles from target.\n\n11. 114, 28 Jan 58, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: Guidance system failure at 95 seconds resulted in erroneous steering commands causing the vehicle to yaw left and pitch down. Divergence began about 110 seconds and continued until the"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"vehicle was destroyed by the RSO at 152 seconds. Missile impacted about 60 miles downrange.\n\n12. 120, 28 Feb 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Failure of fuel line caused premature main engine shutdown at 109.7 seconds.\n\n13. 121, 19 Apr 58, Response Mode 1, Flight Phase 1: Failure of fuel system resulted in loss of thrust shortly after liftoff. Missile fell back on pad after reaching an altitude of about 4 feet.\n\n14. 116 (Able I), 23 Apr 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: A turbopump failure at 146.2 seconds resulted in main-engine shutdown and an explosion.\n\n18. 123, 11 July 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Although the flight was regarded as a success, the main engine failed to respond to the guidance shutdown command due to a wiring failure. When the main engine was shut down 0.43 seconds later by a backup command, the vernier engines also shut down. A large overshoot resulted from the late shutdown.\n\n20. 126, 26 July 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: An inadvertent closing of the main-engine liquid-oxygen valve terminated thrust at 58.4 seconds. Missile components were recovered about 5 miles downrange.\n\n22. 127 (Able I), 17 Aug 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: A turbopump failure led to main engine shutdown at about 74 seconds. An explosion followed with impact about 10 miles downrange.\n\n23. 130 (Pioneer I), 11 Oct 58, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2 & 5: Low upper-stage thrust reduced the planned orbital altitude from 250,000 nm to 90,000 nm.\n\n24. 138, 5 Nov 58, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: Shortly after liftoff the missile began drifting uprange and to the left, reaching a maximum uprange drift of 150 feet. It continued diverging to the left of the nominal flight path until a pitch-gyro failure caused an excessive pitch down. Shortly thereafter at 34.6 seconds, command destruct occurred.\n\n25. 129 (Able I), 8 Nov 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 3: After a normal boost phase, the third-stage (Allegheny Ballistic X-248-A3) solid-propellant motor failed to ignite.\n\n26. 140, 26 Nov 58, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 1: Erratic performance of the guidance-system inverter at 111.4 seconds resulted in erroneous accelerometer scale factors and a 37 mile overshoot of target. Flight was regarded as a success.\n\n27. 145, 5 Dec 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Although the flight was considered successful, below-normal thrust throughout flight resulted in fuel"} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"depletion before to reaching cutoff conditions. Impact was 28 miles short of target.\n\n28. 146, 16 Dec 58, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Although flight was considered a success, the main-engine fuel valve remained partially open for 14 seconds after MECO command was given. This resulted in a 6-mile overshoot.\n\n29. 149, 30 Dec 58, Response Mode 2, Flight Phase 1: A momentary ground in the electrical system at liftoff caused the guidance system to assume control at this time rather than the planned 108.5 seconds. Guidance immediately commanded a maximum pitch rate to place the missile in its proper orientation for 108.5 seconds. By 22 seconds the missile has pitched through 46°. As it attempted to maintain stability, a reverse pitch subsequently developed, but by 46.4 seconds the missile was tumbling to the right. Destruct was sent at 52.5 seconds.\n\n30. 128 (Able II), 22 Jan 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1.5: An electrical failure prevented second-stage (Aerojet General AJ10-42) separation and ignition.\n\n31. 154, 30 Jan 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: Improper propellant mixture and low thrust resulted in fuel depletion before cutoff conditions were reached.\n\n32. 131 (Able II), 28 Feb 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: Flight appeared normal until 195 seconds when all track was lost. As a result, the RSO sent cutoff at 218 seconds and destruct at 222 seconds.\n\n44. 194, 29 June 59, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 1.5: Flight was normal except that reentry vehicle did not separate and retro rockets did not fire.\n\n45. 203, 21 July 59, Response Mode 3, Flight Phase 1: The liftoff pin failed to extract so the pitch and roll programs were not initiated. Missile was destroyed at 45 seconds at an altitude of about 18,000 feet.\n\n52. 136 (Transit 1A), 17 Sep 59, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2.5: First and second stages performed normally until stage 2/3 separation. Failure of the stage-2 retro system apparently led to a collision of the stages. As a result, the third stage failed to ignite.\n\n59. 254, 1 Dec 59, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: A hydraulic-system failure resulted in premature closure of the main-engine liquid-oxygen valve. The hydraulic-system pressure decayed almost linearly from 8 seconds to 146 seconds when missile control was lost. Impact was 322 miles short of target.\n\n66. 257 (Transit 1B), 13 Apr 60, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 1 and 5: The flight was a partial success although satellite was placed in a lower-than-planned orbit. MECO velocity was 315 ft/sec below normal. Noisy data rejected by the guidance computer resulted in pitch-plane steering errors and the unplanned orbit."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"67. 281 (Transit 2A), 22 June 60, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 2 and 5: Although boost phase was normal, anomalous performance during second-stage burn produced an orbit with apogee of 570 miles and perigee of 341 miles instead of the planned 500-mile circular orbit.\n\n68. 262 (Courier 1A), 18 Aug 60, Response Mode 4T, Flight Phase 1: Hydraulic pressure began a steady decay beginning about 18 seconds after liftoff. Severe transients were noted at 129.3 seconds. Uncontrolled yaw, pitch, and roll maneuvers began about 133 seconds. Between 138 and 143 seconds the missile turned through three full revolutions in pitch. The upper stages separated at 140.4 seconds and the first stage broke up about 142.8 seconds. The second stage remained intact and was beacon tracked until 400 seconds.\n\n70. 283 (Transit 3A), 30 Nov 60, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 1: The first stage shut down 11.2 seconds prematurely at 151.85 seconds when the MECO cutoff circuit was armed. Since velocity at that time was about 2500 ft/sec below the normal cutoff velocity, portions of the first stage impacted in Cuba. The second stage separated and performed normally until shut down by the RSO at MECO plus 159.9 seconds to prevent overflight of South America.\n\n71. 313 (Transit 3B), 21 Feb 61, Response Mode NA, Flight Phase 4 and 5: Second burn of second stage failed to occur. This resulted in an orbit with perigee of 539 miles and apogee of 92 miles instead of the planned 500-mile circular orbit.\n\n75. 311 (Composite I), 24 Jan 62, Response Mode 5, Flight Phase 2: Flight was within acceptable limits until second-stage ignition. Probably because of rupture of the lower oxidizer manifold, normal thrust levels never developed. About 50 milliseconds after ignition, severe thrust chamber motion developed and the second stage began to tumble. Telemetry indicated that the first tumble period was about 29 seconds. Propellant depletion occurred at MECO plus 212 seconds. The nominal first-burn duration was 378 seconds.\n\n77. 314 (ANNA 1A), 10 May 62, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: After a successful Thor flight, an electrical malfunction prevented separation and second-stage ignition.\n\n81. 240 (Asset-2), 24 Mar 64, Response Mode 4, Flight Phase 2: The second stage either failed to ignite or burned for only one second."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"References\n\n1. Montgomery, R. M., and Ward, J. A., \"Computations of Hit Probabilities From Launch-Vehicle Debris\", RTI/4666/02F, September 19, 1990.\n\n2. Eastern Test Range Directorate of Safety Post-Test Report, Test D1000, 18 June 1991.\n\n3. Ward, James A., \"Baseline Launch-Area Risks for Atlas and Delta Launches\", RTI/5180/60/40F, September 30, 1995.\n\n4. \"Spacelift Effective Capacity: Part 1 - Launch Vehicle Projected Success Rate Analysis\", Draft, Booz•Allen & Hamilton, Inc., 19 February 1992, prepared for the Air Force Space Command Launch Services Office.\n\n5. \"Launch Options for the Future: Special Report\", Office of Technology Assessment, July 1988.\n\n6. Silke, Kevin, \"Reliability Growth Model Overview\", General Dynamics Reliability Bulletin 92-02.\n\n7. \"Eastern Range Launches, 1950 - 1954, Chronological Summary\", 45th Space Wing History Office.\n\n8. \"Eastern Range Launches, Chronological Summary\", 45th Space Wing History Office, Extension updating the launch summary through 30 December 1995.\n\n9. \"Vandenberg AFB Launch Summary\", Headquarters 30th Space Wing, Office of History, Launch Chronology, 1958 - 1995.\n\n10. Isakowitz, Steven J., (updated by Jeff Samella), International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems, Second Edition, published and distributed by AIAA in 1995.\n\n11. Smith, O. G., \"Launch Systems for Manned Spacecraft\", Draft, July 23, 1991.\n\n12. \"Comparison of Orbit Parameters - Table 1\", prepared by McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Company, Delta launches through 4 Nov 95.\n\n13. Missiles/Space Vehicle Files, 45th Space Wing, Wing Safety, Mission Flight Control and Analysis (SEO), 1957 through 1995.\n\n14. Missile Launch Operations Logs, 30th Space Wing, copies provided via ACTA, Inc., (Mr. James Baeker), 1963 through 1995."} {"doc_id":"1b582e5e2b711a07","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"15. \"Titan IV, America's Silent Hero\", published by Lockheed Martin in Florida Today, 13 Nov 95.\n16. \"Atlas Program Flight History\" (through April 1965), General Dynamics Report EM-1860, 26 April 1965.\n17. Fenske, C. W., \"Atlas Flight Program Summary\", Lockheed Martin, April 1995.\n18. Brater, Bob, \"Launch History\", Lockheed Martin FAX to RTI, March 13, 1996.\n19. Several USAF Accident/Incident Reports for Atlas and Titan failures.\n20. Quintero, Andrew H., \"Launch Failures from the Eastern Range Since 1975\", Aerospace memo, February 25, 1996, provided to RTI by Bill Zelinsky.\n21. Set of \"Titan Flight Anomaly/Failure Summary\" since 1959, received from Lockheed Martin, April 4, 1996.\n22. Chang, I-Shih, \"Space Launch Vehicle Failures (1984 - 1995)\", Aerospace Report No. TOR-96(8504)-2, January 1996.\n9/10/96 172 RTI"} {"doc_id":"1c012aca09bface5","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Trident\nhttps://www.trident.cia/DisplayDocument.do?documentView=original\nApproved for Release 2026 Under Section 1842 of the\nNational Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024\nSECRET//NOFORN\nS E C R E T NOFORN\n031710Z CIA WASHINGTON DC 455482\nTO: WHITE HOUSE SITUATION ROOM WASHINGTON DC, DNI WASHINGTON DC, SECSTATE WASHINGTON DC//INR/DSITA//, NGA NAVY YARD WASHINGTON DC, DIA WASHINGTON DC, JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC, DA AMHS WASHINGTON DC, DA WASHINGTON DC, ONI WASHINGTON DC, CNO WASHINGTON DC, DIRNAVCRIMINVSERV WASHINGTON DC//ATAC /0022//, CMC WASHINGTON DC, CSAF WASHINGTON DC, AFIAA AMHS BOLLING AFB DC, JWAC DAHLGREN VA//J2//, DIRNSA FT GEORGE G MEADE MD, ANCHORY FT GEORGE G MEADE MD, DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC, FBI WASHINGTON DC, US SECRET SERVICE WASHINGTON DC//ID//, NCTC WASHINGTON DC, FAA NATIONAL HQ WASHINGTON DC, DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION WASHINGTON DC//S-60//, HOMELAND SECURITY CENTER WASHINGTON DC, TSA HQ WASHINGTON DC, DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHINGTON DC, CDR USEUCOM INTEL VAIHINGEN GE//J-2//, JAC MOLESWORTH RAF MOLESWORTH UK//DOA//, US SURVEY DIV SHAPE BE, CDRUSAREUR DCSINT HEIDELBERG GE//AEAGB-IAD//, UTAIS RAMSTEIN AB GE//INO//, COMSIXTHFLT, SR JOIC NAPLES IT, CTF 67, CTF 69, COMSOCEUR VAIHINGEN GE, HQ USJFCOM NORFOLK VA, COMUSFLTFORCOM NORFOLK VA, COMMARFORCOM, ACC IN LANGLEY AFB VA, CJTF 6 FT BLISS TX//FCJT-J2//, COMSECONDFLT, USSTRATCOM INTEL DIRECTORATE OFFUTT AFB NE, CDR USTRANSCOM INTEL CELL SCOTT AFB IL, USSOCOM INTEL MACDILL AFB FL, COMJSOC FT BRAGG NC//J2//, HQ USAFRICOM STUTTGART GE .\nPASS: DIA FOR TERRORISM .\n----------------------------\nCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY\n----------------------------\nINFORMATION REPORT, NOT FINALLY EVALUATED INTELLIGENCE\nWARNING: SENSITIVE INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND METHODS INVOLVED. ANY TRANSMISSION OR REVELATION OF THIS INFORMATION IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED. VIOLATORS MAY BE SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL PROSECUTION, INCLUDING UNDER THE ESPIONAGE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES.\nREPORT CLASS S E C R E T --NOFORN\nDIST: 3 JULY 2008\nCOUNTRY: ZIMBABWE\nTOPIC: DEPS/FMCC\nSUBJ: PLACEMENT [REDACTED] ON HIGH ALERT DUE TO PERCEIVED AGGRESSIVE FOREIGN POSTURING\nDOI: EARLY JULY 2008\n[REDACTED]\nSUMMARY: NONE\nTEXT: 1. [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n2. As of early July 2008, [REDACTED]\nSECRET//NOFORN"} {"doc_id":"1c012aca09bface5","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] was reporting from Zimbabwe\n[REDACTED] regarding an unidentified object\nhovering at high altitude over the Harare International Airport. This object was observed, possibly by both radar and optical means, in the skies above Harare during the afternoon of 2 July 2008. Reporting [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nindicated that the object hovered at an undetermined altitude directly over the Harare airport. At one point during observation, \"beams\" were observed emanating from the object [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n3. Individuals [REDACTED] who were aware of the incident had debated whether the object was an advanced reconnaissance device belonging to a foreign government, or whether the object was an unidentified flying object of extraterrestrial origins. According to observers [REDACTED] the object was disc-like in shape with a hollow center, and had a series of rotating lights on the underside of the airframe. After a period under observation from the ground, the rotating lights under the object shifted colors and the object quickly ascended to higher altitudes and out of visual range. Regardless of the origins, this incident, [REDACTED] had resulted in the decision to place the Zimbabwe on high alert.\n[REDACTED]\nSECRET//NOFORN"} {"doc_id":"1c012aca09bface5","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n[REDACTED]\nEND OF MESSAGE SECRET\nSECRET//NOFORN"} {"doc_id":"1d30ca01b52702ba","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBIS 03\n\nRIO DE JANEIRO RADIO TUPI IN PORTUGUESE 2330 8 NOV 63 W\n\n(TEXT) REPORTS FROM THE MUNICIPALITY OF CONDE, IN BAIA, SAY A LARGE METAL SPHERE FELL IN THE CENTER OF THE CITY, GOUGING A HOLE FOUR METERS DEEP. THE MYSTERIOUS SPHERE HAS WINDOW SHAPED OPENINGS COVERED WITH THICK GLASS. INSIDE IS A HUMAN BODY DRESSED IN HEAVY CLOTHING BEARING INSCRIPTIONS WHICH CANNOT BE DECIPHERED. THE POPULATION OF CONDE IS INTRIGUED, AND THE AUTHORITIES HAVE BEEN INFORMED.\n\n9 NOV 111A RWS/GY\n\nashed State (Nesbitt)\nto let us know if Embassy\nfollows with any info.\nKeep 11/13"} {"doc_id":"1e363839ecbf237f","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nCSP-2025-00040 B-00002707028 \"UNCLASSIFIED\" 3/2/2026\nUNCLASSIFIED\nMRN: 94 DUSHANBE 259\nDate/DTG: Jan 31, 1994 / 310000Z Jan 94\nFrom: AMEMBASSY DUSHANBE\nAction: WASHDC, SECSTATE ROUTINE; MOSCOW, AMEMBASSY ROUTINE\nE.O.: Unknown\nTAGS: TSPA, EAIR, KZ, TI, TAJIK AIR, (RHODES, ED)\nReference: n/a\nSubject: TAJIK AIR PILOTS REPORT UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPAGE 01 DUSHAN 00259 310310Z\nACTION OES-09\n\nINFO LOG-00 AID-01 AMAD-01 OASY-00 DOTE-00 EAP-01 EB-01\nEUR-01 FAAE-00 TEDE-00 INR-00 ADS-00 NSAE-00 SSO-00\nSNIS-00 NISC-02 /016W\n------------------1FA298 310310Z /38\nR 310258Z JAN 94\nFM AMEMBASSY DUSHANBE\nTO SECSTATE WASHDC 2150\nINFO AMEMBASSY MOSCOW\nAMEMBASSY TASHKENT\nAMEMBASSY ASHGABAT\nAMEMBASSY ALMATY\nAMEMBASSY BEIJING\nAMEMBASSY BISHKEK\nCIA WASHDC 0224\nDIA WASHDC 0232\n\nUNCLAS DUSHANBE 00259\n\n\nDEPARTMENT FOR OES/S\n\nE.O. 12356: N/A\nTAGS: TSAP, EAIR, TI\nSUBJECT: TAJIK AIR PILOTS REPORT UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n\n1. TAJIK AIR CHIEF PILOT, AMCIT ED RHODES, AND HIS TWO AMERICAN\nPILOT COLLEAGUES REPORTED JANUARY 29 THAT, ON JANUARY 27, THEY\nHAD ENCOUNTERED A UFO WHILE FLYING AT 41,000 FEET IN THEIR BOEING\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nReleased in Full\nJohn Powers, Acting-Director\nUS Department of State\n2/25/2026\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\nPage 1 of 3"} {"doc_id":"1e363839ecbf237f","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nCSP-2025-00040 B-00002707028 \"UNCLASSIFIED\" 3/2/2026\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPAGE 02 DUSHAN 00259 310310Z\n747SP AT LAT 45 NORTH AND LONG 55 EAST, OVER KAZAKHSTAN. THEY\nFIRST ENCOUNTERED THE OBJECT AS A BRIGHT LIGHT OF ENORMOUS\nINTENSITY, APPROACHING THEM FROM OVER THE HORIZON TO THE EAST AT\nA GREAT RATE OF SPEED AND AT A MUCH HIGHER ALTITUDE THAN THEIR\nOWN. THEY WATCHED THE OBJECT FOR SOME FORTY MINUTES AS IT\nMANEUVERED IN CIRCLES, CORKSCREWS AND MADE 90-DEGREE TURNS AT\nRAPID RATES OF SPEED AND UNDER VERY HIGH G'S. CAPTAIN RHODES\nTOOK SEVERAL PHOTOS WITH A POCKET OLYMPUS CAMERA AND WILL SEND\nCOPIES TO THE EMBASSY AND THE TAJIKISTAN DESK (LOWRY TAYLOR) IN\nTHE DEPARTMENT, IF THEY COME OUT. AFTER SOME TIME, THE OBJECT\nADOPTED A HORIZONTAL HIGH-SPEED COURSE AND DISAPPEARED OVER THE\nHORIZON.\n\n2. AS IT WAS DARK WHEN THE OBJECT WAS OBSERVED, THE CREW WERE\nUNABLE TO DISCERN ITS SHAPE. THEY DESCRIBED THE LIGHT IT EMITTED\nAS HAVING A \"BOW WAVE\" AND AS RESEMBLING A HIGH-SPEED PHOTO OF A\nBULLET IN FLIGHT, IN WHICH A VERY SMALL OBJECT GIVES OFF A MUCH\nLARGER TRAILING WAVE OF HEAT/LIGHT. SOME FORTY-FIVE MINUTES\nAFTER THE INITIAL SIGHTING, AS THE SUN WAS RISING, THE AIRCRAFT\nFLEW UNDER THE CONTRAILS WHICH THE OBJECT HAD LEFT BEHIND. THE\nPLANE WAS MAKING OVER 500 KNOTS. RHODES ESTIMATED THE ALTITUDE\nOF THE CONTRAILS AT APPROXIMATELY 100,000 FEET, NOTING THAT THERE\nIS TOO LITTLE AIR/MOISTURE AT THAT EXTREME ALTITUDE TO ENABLE THE\nCREATION OF CONTRAILS BY THE PROPULSION MECHANISMS OF ORDINARY\nAIRCRAFT WHICH MIGHT BE ABLE TO REACH THAT HEIGHT. THE PATHS OF\nTHE CONTRAILS REFLECTED THE MANEUVERS OF THE OBJECT, I.E.,\nCIRCLES, CORKSCREWS, ETC.\n\n3. TO OUR SUGGESTION THAT THE OBJECT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A METEOR\nENTERING AND SKIPPING OFF THE EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE, RHODES AND HIS\nCREW WERE ADAMANT THAT THEY HAD SEEN THOUSANDS OF \"FALLING STARS\"\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPAGE 03 DUSHAN 00259 310310Z\nAND OTHER SPACE JUNK ENTERING THE ATMOSPHERE IN THEIR YEARS OF\nFLYING PASSENGER AIRCRAFT FOR PANAM. THIS, THEY INSISTED, WAS\nNOTHING LIKE A METEOR. ON THE BASIS OF ITS SPEED AND\nMANEUVERABILITY, RHODES EXPRESSED THE OPINION, WHICH HIS CREW\nSEEMED TO SUPPORT, THAT THE OBJECT WAS EXTRATERRESTRIAL AND UNDER\nINTELLIGENT CONTROL.\n\n4. COMMENT: WE HAVE NO OPINION AND REPORT THE ABOVE FOR WHAT IT\nMAY BE WORTH.\n\nESCUDERO\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nPage 2 of 3"} {"doc_id":"1e363839ecbf237f","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nCSP-2025-00040 B-00002707028 \"UNCLASSIFIED\" 3/2/2026\n\nNNNN\n\nDissemination Rule: Archive Copy\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nPage 3 of 3"} {"doc_id":"1f5edc7200d6ab27","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"22998ab29648a2a0","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n-1 of 2-\n\n[REDACTED]/[REDACTED]\n\nOFFICIAL RECORD\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nDate of entry 10/[REDACTED]/2023\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] On September [REDACTED] 2023, [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] and FBI Special Agent [REDACTED] [REDACTED] interviewed [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED]-[REDACTED]-[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]@[REDACTED].[REDACTED] via Facetime video ([REDACTED]) was\nin [REDACTED] at the time of the interview). After being advised of the\nidentity of the interviewing agents and the nature of the interview, [REDACTED]\nprovided the following information:\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] On September [REDACTED] 2023 at around 9:00 am, [REDACTED] was at [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] driving east to a test site to acquire data for LiDAR testing with\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] [REDACTED] were driving an F150. [REDACTED] was\nbehind them, driving a GMC AT4 with [REDACTED] [REDACTED] as his passenger. [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] was behind them driving a sprinter van.\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] The vehicles drove through a couple of gates and [REDACTED] saw a bright\nlight over the horizon. The light was stationary in the air, then started\nmoving to the right and then disappeared. [REDACTED] could see the light through\nthe top right of the vehicle's windshield. The light was bright white and\nwas visible for ten seconds before it disappeared. The light stayed the same\nsize throughout the incident. [REDACTED] thought the light was ten to twenty miles\naway. [REDACTED] did not notice any interference with his vehicle.\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] [REDACTED] pointed the light out to [REDACTED] but [REDACTED] looked in the wrong\ndirection. [REDACTED] was also tall and had his seat leaned back so he was not in\na good position to see the light. [REDACTED] was indifferent to the light until\nthey got to the first test site and [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] said they saw\nit too.\n\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]/[REDACTED]\n\nInvestigation on 09/[REDACTED]/2023 at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] United States (Other (Facetime Video))\n\nFile # [REDACTED]-[REDACTED]-[REDACTED] Date drafted 10/[REDACTED]/2023\n\nby [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"22998ab29648a2a0","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n[REDACTED]/[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]-[REDACTED]-[REDACTED]\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] September [REDACTED] 2023 [REDACTED] [REDACTED] UAP\n\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED], On 09/[REDACTED]/2023, Page 2 of 2\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] [REDACTED] thought the light might have been a meteor coming straight\ntoward them and burning up in the atmosphere.\n\n[REDACTED]/[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"23abe0e90bc8bceb","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-1057 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\nOFFICIAL RECORD\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nElectronic Communication\nTitle: [REDACTED] Contact with [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Date: 10/[REDACTED]/2024\nFrom: [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nContact: [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nApproved By: [REDACTED]\nDrafted By: [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nCase ID #: [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) - [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] Unidentified Anomalous Phenomenon (UAP) [REDACTED] Division;\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nSynopsis: [REDACTED] Documenting contact with [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and information [REDACTED] provided regarding repeated observations of UxS or UAP appearing as plasma orbs near [REDACTED] residence.\n[REDACTED]\nEnclosure(s): Enclosed are the following items:\n1. [REDACTED] Videos provided by [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n2. [REDACTED] Videos provided by [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n3. [REDACTED] Videos provided by [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n4. [REDACTED] Videos provided by [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n5. [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nDetails:\n[REDACTED]On October [REDACTED], 2024, [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] provided multiple video clips showing objects appearing to be unknown UxS or UAP near [REDACTED] residence. [REDACTED] had previously been referred to the FBI by a FBI [REDACTED] liaison contact\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"23abe0e90bc8bceb","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Title: [REDACTED] Contact with [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nRe: [REDACTED] 10/[REDACTED]/2024\n\nin August 2024. [REDACTED] [REDACTED] detailed his observations, [REDACTED] attempts to collect data, and [REDACTED] work to de-conflict possible prosaic explanations for [REDACTED] observations. [REDACTED] documented [REDACTED] observations and efforts in a [REDACTED] which [REDACTED] shared with SSA [REDACTED] and SA [REDACTED].\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] noted renewed activity on the evening of October [REDACTED], 2024 which [REDACTED] captured on video. [REDACTED] provided FBI [REDACTED] with clips of the video which showed the activity. [REDACTED] captured additional activity on video on the evening of October [REDACTED], 2024, which [REDACTED] later sent as well.\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] had privately documented [REDACTED] observations of anomalous lights appearing to be orbs dating back to [REDACTED] first observation in the early morning hours of November [REDACTED] 2021. [REDACTED] has observed these objects in the vicinity of [REDACTED] and sometimes as close as 200 yards from [REDACTED] residence. These objects have been observed hovering in a static position, and moving. They are sometimes observed above the horizon, as well as close to the ground, within the trees, and in or near the water.\n\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] has privately consulted with multiple people regarding [REDACTED] observations, and has set up trail cameras and other sensors to collect data from [REDACTED] property. [REDACTED] reported [REDACTED] [REDACTED] seen spikes in Gamma radiation that correlate with times [REDACTED] has observed the objects, and additional unusual effects on electronics and GPS data from devices.\n\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] stated [REDACTED] was never interested in the UAP topic prior to [REDACTED] initial observations in November 2021, and stated [REDACTED] would have described [REDACTED] as a skeptic. Since that time, [REDACTED] has made repeated observations behind [REDACTED] residence, and would like to understand what [REDACTED] is observing. [REDACTED] has lived at [REDACTED] residence since 2006 and had not seen any anomalous lights or activity behind [REDACTED] property prior to [REDACTED] first observation in November 2021. [REDACTED] had not made attempts to discuss\n[REDACTED]\n2"} {"doc_id":"23abe0e90bc8bceb","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Title: [REDACTED] Contact with [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nRe: [REDACTED] 10/[REDACTED]/2024\n\nwhat [REDACTED] was seeing with [REDACTED] neighbors due to not wanting to alarm them or give them the wrong impression. However [REDACTED] had one conversation with [REDACTED] neighbor to the south who stated that they had also seen strange lights in the tree line behind their house. [REDACTED] also stated that [REDACTED] rarely witnessed any human activity in the nature area, and no activity that would explain what [REDACTED] is seeing. [REDACTED] stated [REDACTED] wants to protect [REDACTED] family's privacy, as well as being courteous to [REDACTED] neighbors, so [REDACTED] does not want this information regarding [REDACTED] observations to become public.\n\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] had personal travel planned to [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] had proposed an in-person meeting in [REDACTED] which will likely not occur. This information was relayed to FBI [REDACTED] [REDACTED] to establish local contact, and any potential ongoing contact with [REDACTED] in [REDACTED].\n\n♦♦\n[REDACTED]\n3"} {"doc_id":"23f7577b8f32aed2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n-1 of 3-\n\nOFFICIAL RECORD\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nDate of entry 05/[REDACTED]/2025\n\nOn April [REDACTED], 2025 [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] were interviewed [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] by Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) [REDACTED], Special\nAgent (SA) [REDACTED], and Task Force Officer (TFO) [REDACTED]\nAlso attending the meeting was [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED]. After being advised of the identity of the interviewing\nagents and the nature of the interview, [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] provided the\nfollowing information:\n\n[REDACTED] served six and a half years in the U.S. Army [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] served 24\nyears in the U.S. Army [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\nOn an evening in June or July 2011, it was dark outside when [REDACTED]\nwas leaving his driveway located at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] at\nabout 8 or 9 PM. [REDACTED] was with [REDACTED], [REDACTED] who was driving the\nvehicle, and [REDACTED], [REDACTED], who was in the front passenger\nseat. The vehicle was about fifty feet from the driveway and preparing to\nmake a left turn onto [REDACTED]. When they reached the intersection,\n[REDACTED] was looking out window and saw three lights in the sky. [REDACTED] got out\nof the vehicle, and when he looked up, he saw a massive black isosceles"} {"doc_id":"23f7577b8f32aed2","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n\nFD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] , On 04/[REDACTED]/2025 , Page 2 of 3\n\ntriangle shaped object flying North. The object had a car-sized white light\nin each of its three corners that emitted a diffuse glow and were recessed\nback a bit from the corners. The object was low to the ground, and creating\na low humming noise that made a pulsing sound. [REDACTED] told him to\ntake a video, but by the time [REDACTED] got his phone out, the object had flown\nover the tree line behind the houses to the north, and out of sight. He had\nseen the object for approximately 10-15 seconds. There were no contrails\nleft behind the object. [REDACTED] felt dumbfounded and awestruck during the\nexperience.\n\nWhen [REDACTED] observed the object, he was overwhelmed by the size of it and\nhow low it was to the ground. [REDACTED] thought the object may have been 800\nfeet above the ground, and based on the dimensions of their environment, he\testimated the object was 200 feet long and 100 feet wide. [REDACTED] believed the\nobject had more of an equilateral triangle shape, but based on the\ncalculated dimensions, it could have been more of an isosceles triangle.\nThe object was moving slowly and steadily, and he also heard the pulsing\nsound. [REDACTED] saw the three lights in the corners, but also remembered seeing\nsomething in the middle of the triangle that was grayish or graphite\ncolored.\n\nNeither [REDACTED] nor [REDACTED] had a clear memory of the thickness or any other\ndescription of the vertical profile of the triangle. They opined that they\nwere initially underneath the triangle and didn't really have a view of its\nside or vertical profile. They were then temporarily distracted by their\nunsuccessful attempt to get a phone out to video record the UAP, at the\nmoment when they likely would have had a better view of the back profile.\n\n[REDACTED] believed a couple of people in the neighborhood also saw the object,\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] and [REDACTED] stated they\nwould also would try to see if [REDACTED] as well as their neighbors\nwho witnessed the UAP, would be willing to write a statement about their\nobservation, or speak to the FBI about it.\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"23f7577b8f32aed2","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n\nFD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] , On 04/[REDACTED]/2025 , Page 3 of 3\n\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense Intelligence Reference Document\nDefense Futures\n\n11 January 2011\nICOD: 10 August 2010\nDIA-08-1102-007\n\nQuantum Tomography of Negative Energy States in the Vacuum\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nQuantum Tomography of Negative Energy States in the Vacuum\n\nThe Defense Intelligence Reference Document provides non-substantive but authoritative reference information related to intelligence topics or methodologies.\n\nPrepared by:\n\nTechnology Warning Division (DWO-4)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 58\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one of a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2010 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: JUIAF - DI/DWO-3, Bldg. 6000, Washington D.C. 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ... 1\n\nREVIEW OF NEGATIVE (or SUB-VACUUM) ENERGY ... 3\nOverview ... 3\nExamples of Negative (Sub-Vacuum) Energy Found in Nature ... 4\nBasic Notions of the Quantum Field Theory of Light ... 5\nBasic Notions on the Origin of the Quantum Vacuum Zero-Point Fluctuations ... 7\nNegative (Sub-Vacuum) Energy in Squeezed Light ... 8\nNegative (Sub-Vacuum) Energy in the Casimir Effect ... 13\n\nQUANTUM OPTICAL HOMODYNE TOMOGRAPHY ... 15\nObserving Negative Energy in the Lab ... 15\nBasic Notions of Quantum Optical Homodyne Tomography ... 16\nWigner Functions ... 17\nBeam Splitters ... 24\nPhotodiodes ... 27\nBalanced Homodyne Detection ... 27\nOutline of Experimental Procedure ... 32\n\nBALANCED HOMODYNE SYSTEMS FOR MEASURING NEGATIVE (SUB-VACUUM) ENERGY ... 33\nTime-Domain Balanced Homodyne System ... 33\nBalanced Homodyne System for Casimir Cavities ... 36\n\nCONCLUSION ... 43\n\nACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... 45\n\nREFERENCES ... 46\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Illustration of a Squeezed State of Light ... 13\nFigure 2. Schematic of the Casimir Effect ... 14\nFigure 3. Illustration of Quantum Optical Homodyne Tomography ... 16\nFigure 4. Wigner Function for a Vacuum and for a Coherent State ... 19\nFigure 5. Wigner Function of a Squeezed Vacuum ... 20\nFigure 6. Wigner Function of a Single Photon ... 21\nFigure 7. Quantum Tomography of Schrödinger-Cat States ... 22\nFigure 8. Schematic of an Ideal Lossless Beam Splitter ... 25\nFigure 9. Illustration of a Fictitious Beam Splitter ... 26\nFigure 10. Schematic of a Balanced Homodyne Detector. ... 29\nFigure 11. Balanced Homodyne Detector Using Fictitious Beam Splitters ... 31\nFigure 12. Balanced Homodyne Detector Using A Single Effective Fictitious Beam Splitter ... 32\nFigure 13. Time-Domain Balanced Homodyne Detector. ... 34\nFigure 14. Experimentally Measured Squeezed State ... 35\nFigure 15. Balanced Homodyne Detector with a Local Oscillator ... 38\nFigure 16. Diagram of Casimir Cavity with BHD Photodiodes ... 40\nFigure 17. Experimental Setup of BHD Photodiodes and LO Field ... 40\nFigure 18. Detailed Schematic of Experimental BHD Apparatus ... 41\nFigure 19. Predicted Casimir Spectral Density ... 41\nFigure 20. Predicted Suppression of Vacuum Fluctuations in dB. ... 42\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nQuantum Tomography of Negative Energy States in the Vacuum\n\nIntroduction\n\nFuture aerospace vehicles could have an advanced propulsion system that uses negative quantum vacuum energy to modify the spacetime geometry in the immediate vicinity surrounding the vehicle in order to induce faster-than-light motion via traversable wormholes or warp drives, or even levitation via antigravity [1, 2]. These exotic propulsion concepts are well-known in mainstream general relativity and quantum field theory research. The notion of a physical state with negative energy is not familiar in the realm of classical physics. However, it is not rare in quantum field theory to have quantum states with negative energy density or a negative energy flux. Even for a quantum scalar field in the flat Minkowski spacetime, it can be proved that the existence of quantum states with negative energy density is inevitable [3].\n\nAlthough all known forms of classical matter have non-negative energy density, it is not so in quantum field theory. A general quantum state can be a superposition of particle number eigenstates and may have a negative expectation value of energy density in certain spacetime regions due to quantum coherence effects [3]. These considerations remain true even for quantum fields in a curved spacetime where the effects of gravitational fields, or equivalently, accelerations, can be observed due to the mass of astronomical bodies or the motions of astronomical bodies.\n\nThere are two key examples of specially prepared quantum vacuum states that are known to produce small amounts of negative energy density in the laboratory. These are the well-known Casimir effect and the squeezed vacuum states of the electromagnetic field. The former is a static quantum vacuum effect while the latter is a time-domain quantum vacuum effect. There are several other examples of special quantum vacuum or particle states that produce negative energy density, but they are beyond the scope of this report because they remain mathematical curiosities or are not practicable to implement in the laboratory in the foreseeable future.\n\nWe already make small amounts of negative energy in the laboratory via the Casimir effect and squeezed electromagnetic vacuum states, but we do not yet know if we can access larger amounts for extended periods of time over extended spatial distributions for the purpose of modifying spacetime for aerospace propulsion applications. It will be necessary to first explore the quantum nature of the Casimir effect and squeezed electromagnetic vacuum states to determine whether we can measure and spatially map their negative energy density. This is a necessary first step to take before beginning any study on producing large quantities of negative energy because we will first need to know how to measure and spatially map negative energy in order to properly control it after producing it. This is the motivation for this report.\n\nWe need to firm up our understanding of how lab detectors will respond to negative energy in situ. A first step in this direction was already taken by Hansen et al. [4] in 2001 for the time-domain negative energy pulses in squeezed electromagnetic vacuum states, and more recently Marecki [5, 6] generalized the analysis of the output of balanced homodyne detectors (BHDs) for the case of static negative energy states\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ninside Casimir cavities. The most important feature of these devices is their ability to\nquantify the quantum vacuum fluctuations of the electric field because the output of\nBHDs provides information on the one- and two-point functions of arbitrary states of\nquantum fields. Marecki computed the two-point function and the associated spectral\ndensity for the ground state of the quantum electric field in Casimir geometries, and\npredicts a position- and frequency-dependent pattern of BHD responses if a device of\nthis type is placed inside a Casimir cavity. The proposed device allows for the direct\ndetection of quantum vacuum fluctuations and provides a spatial mapping of the\nnegative energy contained inside the cavity, which will be summarized in this report.\n2\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nREVIEW OF NEGATIVE (or SUB-VACUUM) ENERGY\nOverview\nThe implementation of faster-than-light (FTL) interstellar travel via traversable\nwormholes or warp drives or other antigravity forces for propulsion, generally requires\nthe engineering of spacetime into very specialized local geometries surrounding the\nimmediate vicinity of the aerospace vehicle undergoing this type of motion. The\nanalysis of these via the general relativistic field equation plus the resultant source\nmatter equations of state demonstrates that such geometries require the use of\n“exotic” matter in order to produce the requisite FTL or antigravity spacetime\nmodification. Exotic matter is generally defined by general relativity physics to be\nmatter that possesses (renormalized) negative energy density (sometimes negative\nstress-tension = outward pressure, a.k.a. gravitational repulsion or antigravity), and\nthis is a very misunderstood and misapplied term by the non-general relativity\ncommunity. We clear up this misconception by defining what negative energy is, where\nit can be found in nature, and we also review the two primary experimental concepts\nthat are known to produce negative energy in the laboratory. Also, it has been claimed\nthat FTL and antigravity spacetimes are not plausible because exotic matter violates the\ngeneral relativistic energy conditions. However, it has been shown that this is a\nspurious issue. The identification, magnitude, and production of exotic matter is seen\nto be a key technical challenge, however. FTL and antigravity spacetimes also possess\nfeatures that challenge the notions of causality and there are alleged constraints placed\nupon them by quantum effects. Reference [1] reviews and summarizes these issues\nwith an assessment on the present state of their resolution.\n\nWhat exactly is “exotic” matter? In classical physics the energy density of all observed\nforms of matter (fields) is non-negative. What is exotic about the type of matter that\nmust be used to produce traversable wormhole, warp drive, or antigravity spacetimes is\nthat it must have negative energy density and/or negative flux [7]. The energy density\nis “negative” in the sense that the configuration of matter fields we must deploy to\nproduce a traversable wormhole, warp drive, or antigravity effect must have an energy\ndensity, ρE (= ρc², where ρ is the rest-mass density), that is less than or equal to its\npressures/tensions, pi [8, 9].* In many cases, these equations of state are also known\nto possess an energy density that is algebraically negative, i.e., the energy density and\nflux are less than zero. It is on the basis of these conditions that we call this material\nproperty “exotic.” The condition for ordinary, classical (non-exotic) forms of matter\nthat we are all familiar with in nature is that ρE > pi and/or ρE ≥ 0. These conditions\nrepresent two examples of what are variously called the “standard” energy conditions\nwhich are computed from the trace of the matter stress-energy tensor†: Weak Energy\nCondition (WEC: ρE ≥ 0, ρE + pi ≥ 0), Null Energy Condition (NEC: ρE + pi ≥ 0),\nDominant Energy Condition (DEC), and Strong Energy Condition (SEC). These energy\nconditions forbid negative energy density between material objects to occur in nature,\nbut they are mere hypotheses. Hawking and Ellis [10] formulated the energy conditions\nin order to establish a series of mathematical hypotheses governing the behavior of\n\n* From this point forward, all Latin letters (e.g., i, j, k = 1…3) that appear as indices on physical quantities denote\nthe usual 3-dimensional space coordinates, x¹…x³, indicating the spatial components of vector or tensor quantities.\n† The stress-energy-momentum tensor is a matrix quantity that encodes the density and flux of energy and\nmomentum for any type of matter under study.\n3\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ncollapsed-matter singularities in their study of cosmology and black hole physics. More\nspecifically, classical general relativity allows one to prove lots of general theorems\nabout the behavior of matter in gravitational fields.\n\nHowever, real physical matter is not “reasonable” because the energy conditions are in\ngeneral violated by semiclassical quantum effects (occurring at order ħ) [9].‡ More\nspecifically, quantum effects generically violate the average NEC (ANEC). Furthermore,\nit was discovered in 1965 that quantum field theory has the remarkable property of\nallowing states of matter containing local regions of negative energy density or negative\nfluxes [3]. This violates the WEC, which postulates that the local energy density is non-\nnegative for all observers. And there are also general theorems of differential geometry\nthat guarantee that there must be a violation of one, some, or all of the energy\nconditions (meaning exotic matter is present) for all FTL and antigravity spacetimes.\nHowever, all of the energy condition hypotheses have been experimentally tested in the\nlaboratory and experimentally shown to be false – 25 years before their formulation\n[11].\n\nIn quantum field theory, negative energy is a manifestation of what is now called the\n“sub-vacuum” levels of the quantum zero-point (or vacuum ground state) fluctuations\nthat correspond to any particular quantum field of matter under study. Hence, the\nenergy corresponding to sub-vacuum quantum fluctuations is now called “sub-vacuum\nenergy”: sub-vacuum energy ≡ negative energy. Further investigation into this technical\nissue showed that violations of the energy conditions are widespread for all forms of\nboth “reasonable” classical and quantum matter [12-16]. Furthermore, Visser [9]\nshowed that all (generic) spacetime geometries violate all the energy conditions. So\nthe condition that ρE > pi and/or ρE ≥ 0 must be obeyed by all forms of matter in nature\nis spurious. Negative energy has been produced in the laboratory and this will be\ndiscussed in the following sections.\n\nExamples of Negative (Sub-Vacuum) Energy Found in Nature\n\nThe exotic (energy condition-violating) fields that are known to occur in nature are:\n1. Static, radially-dependent electric or magnetic fields. These are borderline exotic,\nif their tension were infinitesimally larger, for a given energy density [10, 17].\n2. Squeezed quantum vacuum states: electromagnetic and other (non-Maxwellian)\nquantum fields [8, 18].\n3. Gravitationally squeezed electromagnetic vacuum fluctuations [19].\n4. Casimir effect, i.e., the Casimir vacuum in flat, curved, and topological spaces\n[20-28].\n5. Other quantum fields/states/effects. In general, the local energy density in\nquantum field theory can be negative due to quantum coherence effects [3].\nOther examples that have been studied are Dirac field states: the superposition\nof two single particle electron states and the superposition of two multi-electron-\npositron states [29, 30]. In the former (latter), the energy densities can be\nnegative when two single (multi-) particle states have the same number of\n\n‡ Planck’s reduced constant, ħ = 1.055 × 10⁻³⁴ J·s.\n4\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nelectrons (electrons and positrons) or when one state has one more electron\n(electron-positron pair) than the other.\n\nCosmological inflation [9], cosmological particle production [9], classical scalar fields\n[9], the conformal anomaly [9], and gravitational vacuum polarization [12-15] are\namong many other examples that also violate the energy conditions. Since the laws of\nquantum field theory place no strong restrictions on negative energies and fluxes, then\nit might be possible to produce exotic phenomena such as faster-than-light travel [31-\n33], traversable wormholes [8, 9, 34], violations of the second law of thermodynamics\n[35, 36], and time machines [9, 34, 37]. There are several other exotic phenomena\nmade possible by the effects of negative energy, but they lie outside the scope of this\nreport. In what follows, we consider only items 2 and 4 in the previous list for the\npurpose of this report due to their ready applicability and technical maturity. We will\nnot examine the other items in the list because they are theoretical curiosities that\nremain under study by investigators.\n\nBasic Notions of the Quantum Field Theory of Light\n\nBefore going further, it will be helpful to briefly outline the basic notions and\nterminology of the quantum field theory of light (i.e., quantum optics) because the\ncontent of this report focuses on those aspects.\n\nClassically, light is electromagnetic radiation that can be pictured as waves flowing\nthrough space at the speed of light, c (= 3.0 × 10⁸ m/s). The waves are not waves of\nanything substantive, but are in fact ripples in the state of a field. These waves carry\nenergy, and each wave has a specific direction, frequency and polarization state. This\nis called a “propagating mode of the electromagnetic field.” A simple model for this is\nthe electromagnetic oscillator. One complex-valued vector function u(x,t) called a\nspatial-temporal mode comprises all classical wave aspects including polarization. The\nsimplest example of a spatial-temporal mode is a plane wave\nu(x,t) = u₀exp[i(kx − ωt)] of polarization vector u₀, angular frequency ω, and wave\nvector k (definition: k² = ω²/c²), where i is the unit complex number, and x is the\nspace coordinate and t is the time coordinate.\n\nThis mode defines a framework in space and time that may be excited by the quantum\nfield “light.” The mode function quantifies the strength of one excitation in space and\ntime. Also, the mode function obeys the laws of classical waves given by Maxwell’s\nequations of electrodynamics. The choice of u(x,t) is made by the observer. The\nobserver singles out one mode, one quantum object from the rest of the world to make\na specific observation or measurement. This object turns out to be a harmonic\noscillator described by the annihilation operator â. A useful tool for modeling the\npropagating mode of the electromagnetic field in quantum mechanics is the ideal\nquantum mechanical harmonic oscillator: a hypothetical charged mass on a perfect\nspring oscillating back and forth under the action of the spring’s restoring force. The\noperator â stands for the quantized amplitude with which u(x,t) can be excited. In\nclassical optics it would be just a complex number α of magnitude |α| and phase\narg(α). The quantized amplitude â is neither predetermined nor given by the observer\n5\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nbut depends on the state of u(x,t). This state exists even if literally nothing is in the\nmode chosen by the observer. In this case, the light is just in the vacuum state.§\nHowever, this “nothing” can indeed cause significant physical effects as will be\ndiscussed in later sections.\n\nTo make all this more precise, we postulate that the electric field strength Ê of the light\nfield is given by Ê = u*(x,t)â + u(x,t)↠and that the amplitude operator â is a bosonic**\nannihilation operator that obeys the quantum mechanical commutation relation\n[â, â†] = 1, where u*(x,t) is the complex conjugate of u(x,t) and ↠is the adjoint (or\nconjugate) of â called the creation operator.†† The hat symbol appearing over\nquantities denotes that they are quantum operators (or observables). Another key\nelement of quantum-oscillator physics is the photon number operator n̂, which\naccounts for the number of photons (quantized light particles) in the chosen u(x,t) and\nis given by the quantum mechanical counterpart of a classical modulus-squared\namplitude: n̂ ≡ â†â.\n\nLet us now introduce a pair of operators, q̂ and p̂, called quadratures. They are\ndefined as q̂ = 2^(−1/2)(↠+ â) and p̂ = i2^(−1/2)(↠− â), which can be inverted to provide the\nadditional useful definitions â = 2^(−1/2)(q̂ + ip̂) and ↠= 2^(−1/2)(q̂ − ip̂). In optics q̂ and p̂\ncorrespond to the in-phase and the out-of-phase component of the electric field\namplitude of u(x,t) (with respect to a reference phase). The bosonic commutation\nrelation demonstrates that q̂ and p̂ are canonically conjugate observables, [q̂, p̂] = iħ.\nThe quadratures q̂ and p̂ can be regarded as the position and the momentum of the\nquantum electromagnetic oscillator. They do not appear in real space but in the phase\nspace spanned by the complex vibrational amplitude â of the quantum electromagnetic\noscillator, and they have nothing to do with the position and the momentum of a\nphoton. However, the canonical commutation relation entitles us to treat q̂ and p̂ as\nperfect examples of position- and momentum-like quantities in quantum optics. Finally,\nwe express the photon number operator n̂ in terms of the quadratures q̂ and p̂ and\nobtain, using the bosonic commutation relation, the standard Hamiltonian (or total\nenergy) of the quantum harmonic (electromagnetic) oscillator with unit mass and\nfrequency:\n\nĤosc ≡ n̂ + 1/2\n= p̂²/2 + q̂²/2 , (1)\n\n§ Here we always mean by “vacuum” simply “no light” and not an evacuated system.\n** Boson or bosonic refers to quantum particles that have integer quantum spin.\n†† In quantum mechanics, the vacuum is defined to be a state of no (or zero) particles and is denoted by the\nquantum state eigenvector |0⟩. By definition â “annihilates” the vacuum state: â|0⟩ = 0.\n6\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY where the first and second terms in the second line are the kinetic and potential energies of the oscillator, respectively. The additional 1/2 appearing in the first line of Eq. (1) is called the vacuum zero-point energy for the reason to be explained in the next section. The first line of Eq. (1) is more commonly expressed in units of energy (Joules) in quantum mechanics, which is obtained simply by multiplying the right-hand side by the photon energy ħω so that Ĥosc = ħω(n̂ + 1/2). It is beyond the scope of this report to elaborate further on the entire subject of the quantum optics. The reader should consult Reference [38] for more information. Basic Notions on the Origin of the Quantum Vacuum Zero-Point Fluctuations Here we discuss the basic notions of the quantum vacuum zero-point fluctuations (ZPF), which is an important feature in quantum optics. The origin of the ZPF is attributed to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. According to this principle, q̂ and p̂ are any two conjugate observables that we are interested in measuring, and they obey the commutation relation already shown in the previous section. Their corresponding uncertainty relation is ΔqΔp ≥ h/2, where Δq is the variance (a.k.a. uncertainty) of observable q̂ and Δp is that of the conjugate observable p̂. This relation states that if one measures observable q̂ with very high precision (i.e., its uncertainty Δq̂ is very small), then a simultaneous measurement of observable p̂ will be less precise (i.e., its uncertainty Δp̂ is very large), and vice versa. In other words, it is not possible to simultaneously measure two conjugate observable quantities with infinite precision. This minimum uncertainty is not due to any correctable flaws in measurement, but rather reflects the intrinsic fuzziness in the quantum nature of energy and matter. Substantial theoretical and experimental work has shown that in many quantum systems the limits to measurement precision is imposed by the quantum vacuum ZPF embodied within the uncertainty principle. Nowadays we rather see the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle as a necessary consequence, and therefore, a derived result of the wave nature of quantum phenomena. The uncertainties are just a consequence of the Fourier nature of conjugate pairs of quantities (observables). For example, the two Fourier-wave-conjugates time and frequency become the pair of quantum-particle conjugates time and energy and the two Fourier-wave-conjugates displacement and wave number become the pair of quantum-particle conjugates position and momentum. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle dictates that a quantized electromagnetic oscillator (a.k.a. a photon state) can never come entirely to rest, since that would be a state of exactly zero energy, which is forbidden by the commutation relation given in the previous section. Instead, every mode of the field has ħω/2 as its average minimum energy in the vacuum, and this is called the zero-point energy (ZPE). This ZPE term is added to the classical blackbody spectral radiation energy density ρ(ω)dω [i.e., the energy per unit volume of radiation in the frequency interval (ω, ω + dω)] [25]: ‡ ħω is the energy of a single mode (or photon). 7 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ρ(ω)dω = (ω²/π²c³)[ħω/(exp(ħω/k_BT)−1) + ħω/2]dω = (ħω³/2π²c³) coth(ħω/2k_BT) dω, (2) where k_B is Boltzmann's constant (1.3807 × 10⁻²³ J/K) and T is the absolute temperature. The factor outside the square brackets in the first line of Eq. (2) is the density of mode (or photon) states (i.e., the number of states per unit frequency interval per unit volume); the first term inside the square brackets is the standard Planck blackbody radiation energy per mode; and the second term inside the square brackets is the quantum zero-point energy per mode. Equation (2) is called the Zero-Point Planck (ZPP) spectral radiation energy density. Planck first added the ZPE term to the classical blackbody spectral radiation energy density in 1912, although it was Einstein, Hopf, and Stern who actually recognized the physical significance of this term in 1913 [25]. Direct spectroscopic evidence for the reality of ZPE was provided by Mulliken's boron monoxide spectral band experiments in 1924, several months before Heisenberg first derived the ZPE for a harmonic oscillator from his new quantum matrix mechanics theory [39]. Following this line of reasoning, quantum physics predicts that all of space must be filled with quantum electromagnetic ZPF creating a universal sea of zero-point energy. The other quantum forces of nature also have their own vacuum ZPF which contributes to the universal sea of zero-point energy. But that is beyond the scope of this report. Negative (Sub-Vacuum) Energy in Squeezed Light Substantial theoretical and experimental work has shown that in many quantum systems the limits to measurement precision imposed by the quantum vacuum ZPF can be breached by decreasing the noise in one observable (or measurable quantity) at the expense of increasing the noise in the conjugate observable; at the same time the variations in the first observable, say the energy, are reduced below the ZPF such that the energy becomes negative. Squeezing is thus the control of quantum fluctuations and corresponding uncertainties, whereby one can squeeze/reduce the variance of one (physically important) observable quantity provided the variance in the (physically unimportant) conjugate variable is stretched/increased. The squeezed quantity possesses an unusually low variance, meaning less variance than would be expected on the basis of the equipartition theorem. One can in principle exploit quantum squeezing to extract energy from one place in the ordinary vacuum at the expense of accumulating excess energy elsewhere [8]. The squeezed state of the electromagnetic field is a primary example of a quantum field that has negative energy density and negative energy flux. Such a state became a physical reality in the laboratory as a result of the nonlinear-optics technique of squeezing, i.e., of moving some of the quantum-fluctuations of laser light out of the 8 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY cos[ω(t−z/c)] part of the beam and into the sin[ω(t−z/c)] part [18, 40-44]. The observable that gets squeezed will have its fluctuations reduced below the vacuum ZPF. The act of squeezing transforms the phase space circular noise profile characteristic of the vacuum into an ellipse, whose semimajor and semiminor axes are given by unequal quadrature uncertainties (of the quantized electromagnetic oscillator operators). This applies to coherent states in general, and the usual vacuum is also a coherent state with eigenvalue zero. As this ellipse rotates about the origin with angular frequency ω, these unequal quadrature uncertainties manifest themselves in the electromagnetic field oscillator energy by periodic occurrences, which are separated by one quarter cycle, of both smaller and larger fluctuations compared to the unsqueezed vacuum. We digress momentarily by noting that coherent states, also called Glauber states, are the eigenstates of the annihilation operator â: â|α⟩ = α|α⟩, (3) which have well-defined amplitudes |α| and phases arg(α) (recall the discussion in Sect. IIB-1). They are called coherent states because light fields in these states are perfectly coherent, and high-quality lasers generate such fields. This is an important reason why high-quality laser light is an excellent tool for experimental quantum optics. Coherent states come as close as quantum mechanics allows to wave-like states of the electromagnetic oscillator. Because the wave aspects of light are commonly regarded as classical, coherent states are often called classical states. Furthermore, fields in statistical mixtures of coherent states (such as thermal fields) are classical as well, whereas any state that cannot be understood as an ensemble of coherent states is called nonclassical. The experimental generation and application of nonclassical light fields is the main subject of this report. Despite much recent progress, producing nonclassical states of light is still extremely challenging because they are easily destroyed (reduced to classical) by any kind of losses. Furthermore, it turns out that the vacuum is a coherent state as well because it satisfies Eq. (3) for α = 0. In other words, the vacuum is a zero-amplitude coherent state. With a little algebra we see directly from Eq. (3) that the mean (i.e., quantum expectation value of the) energy of a coherent state with unit frequency is ⟨Ĥα⟩ = ⟨α|â†â + 1/2|α⟩ = |α|² + 1/2. (4) Equation (4) is the sum of the classical wave intensity |α|² and the vacuum zero-point energy 1/2. One simply multiplies the right-hand side of Eq. (4) by ħω to put ⟨Ĥα⟩ into units of energy. § z denotes the z-axis direction of beam propagation. 9 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Morris and Thorne [8] and Caves [45] point out that if one squeezes the vacuum, i.e., if one puts vacuum rather than laser light into the input port of a squeezing device, then one gets at the output an electromagnetic field with weaker fluctuations and thus less energy density than the vacuum at locations where cos²[ω(t−z/c)] ≅ 1 and sin²[ω(t−z/c)] << 1; but with greater fluctuations and thus greater energy density than the vacuum at locations where cos²[ω(t−z/c)] << 1 and sin²[ω(t−z/c)] ≅ 1. Since the vacuum is defined to have vanishing energy density, any region with less energy density than the vacuum actually has a negative (renormalized) expectation value for the energy density. Therefore, a squeezed vacuum state consists of a traveling electromagnetic wave that oscillates back and forth between negative energy density and positive energy density, but has positive time-averaged energy density. In quantum optics the squeezed state is generated by the unitary squeezing operator: Ŝ ≡ exp[(ξ/2)(â² − ↲)], (5) where ξ is a real number that parameterizes the deviation of the variances Δq̂ and Δp̂ from their vacuum values and is called the squeezing parameter. From Eq. (5) we obtain the squeezed vacuum state |φ⟩ = Ŝ(ξ)|0⟩. The squeezing operator Ŝ(ξ) is simply an evolution operator that describes the result of the nonlinear squeezing interaction Hamiltonian Ĥint = χ(b*â² − b↲). The squeezing parameter ξ contains the product of the amplitude b, the coupling constant χ, and the interaction time. But this is not the entire story. Since we will be dealing with high-quality lasers in what follows, we also need to know about another important quantum optics operator that acts on coherent states. We introduce the unitary displacement operator D̂(α) = exp(α↠− α*â). D̂(α) displaces the amplitude â by the complex number α according to D̂†(α)âD̂(α) = â + α. To show why D̂(α) has anything to do with coherent states, we apply a negative displacement to |α⟩. From the basic property of D̂(α), we see that âD̂(−α)|α⟩ = D̂(−α)D̂†(−α)âD̂(−α)|α⟩ = D̂(−α)(â − α)|α⟩ = 0. (6) Equation (6) equals zero because of the definition Eq. (3) of coherent states. This result implies that D̂(−α)|α⟩ = |0⟩, which is the vacuum state. Therefore, coherent states |α⟩ are displaced vacua |α⟩ = D̂(α)|0⟩. This does not mean that coherent states 10 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY are physically similar to vacuum states, but instead they have only some quantum noise properties in common. It is a well known result in the quantum field theory of light that the vacuum wave function is a simple Gaussian function of the quadratures (in either q̂ or p̂ representation), and thus coherent states are also Gaussian [38]. Furthermore, a proof of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle in conjunction with the application of Ŝ(ξ) and D̂(α) on the quadrature variances and wave functions showed that all minimum uncertainty states are displaced Gaussian states such that they have displaced rescaled vacuum wave functions. Consequently, all minimum uncertainty states are displaced squeezed vacua [18, 38]: |ψ⟩ = D̂(α)Ŝ(ξ)|0⟩. (7) The squeezing interaction Ĥint is realized by the degenerate parametric amplification of the spatial-temporal mode. A crystal such as potassium titanyl phosphate (KTP) or lithium niobate (LiNbO3) is pumped by another laser beam with amplitude b and twice the frequency of the spatial-temporal mode (with amplitude â) of interest. According to Ĥint, the B photons (corresponding to b) of the pump beam are converted into pairs of A signal photons (corresponding to â² and ↲) with a probability that depends on the coupling constant χ. The KTP or LiNbO3 crystal acts like an electromagnetic swing, and the pump modulates the oscillation of the A mode at twice its frequency. The pump amplifies the signal parametrically much as a swing is amplified by changing the effective length at twice the frequency of the pump. A classical swing relies on tiny initial fluctuations (or wobbles) that are in-phase with respect to the parametric pump. In this way, the tiny fluctuations are amplified; the swing starts to oscillate. A quantum swing like the degenerate parametric amplifier experiences at least the vacuum fluctuations from the very beginning. Vacuum fluctuations that are in-phase with respect to the pump are amplified, whereas out-of-phase fluctuations get de-amplified or, in other words, squeezed. A squeezed vacuum requires a pump for generation, and, hence, when produced it carries energy. The nonlinear crystal KTP or LiNbO3 is a resonator that is shaped like a cylinder with rounded silvered ends to reflect light. This resonator acts to produce a secondary lower frequency light beam in which the pattern of photons is rearranged into pairs. The squeezed light emerging from the resonator will contain pulses of negative energy interspersed with pulses of positive energy. To quantify the amount of squeezing energy we 1) apply Ŝ(ξ) to the quadratures and find that it scales their eigenfunctions; 2) we then substitute for â its quadrature decomposition (given in Sect. IIB-1) and substitute that result into the scaled quadratures; and then 3) do further algebra to derive how Ŝ(ξ) changes â: Ŝ†(ξ)âŜ(ξ) = â cosh ξ − ↠sinh ξ. We substitute this last result into Eq. (1) and use Eq. (7) to calculate the quantum expectation value in order to express the mean energy of a squeezed state, and obtain *** i.e., q̂ gets squeezed and p̂ gets stretched. 11 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n⟨ψ|Ĥsqvac|ψ⟩ = |α|² + 1/2 + sinh²ξ. (8)\n\nEquation (8) really describes the mean photon number of a single mode in a squeezed state, but one simply multiplies the right-hand side by ℏω to get the mean energy\n⟨Ĥsqvac⟩ = ℏω(|α|² + 1/2 + sinh²ξ). We see in Eq. (8) that there are three terms contributing to the energy: the first term accounts for the coherent energy given by |α|², the second term is the vacuum zero-point energy 1/2, and the third term quantifies the fluctuation energy of squeezed states. The contribution to this squeezing energy originally comes from the pump used to generate the squeezed light. It is stored in the enhanced fluctuations of the anti-squeezed component. Because both the squeezed and the anti-squeezed quadratures contribute to the second line in Eq. (1), even a squeezed vacuum carries energy.\n\nHowever, Eq. (8) is not the final result because it only gives the mean energy of a single mode in a squeezed state, while lasers and nonlinear crystal resonators produce a very large number of modes. Equation (8) needs to be summed (integrated) over the infinite number of possible modes; it must then be \"renormalized\" by sophisticated mathematical techniques in order to get rid of the divergent (infinite) contribution from the vacuum zero-point energy (a byproduct of taking an infinite sum of modes); and then the result must be converted into units of energy density by dividing it by an appropriate volume element, because Einstein's general theory of relativity requires an energy density (or pressure, both are in the same units) to induce spacetime bending.\nThe final result we seek is the energy density, ρE-sqvac, given by Pfenning [46]:\n\nρE-sqvac = (2ℏω/L³) sinhξ[sinhξ + coshξ cos(2ω(t − z/c) + δ)] (J/m³), (9)\n\nwhere L³ is the volume of a large box with sides of length L (i.e., we put the quantum field in a box with periodic boundary conditions) and δ is the phase of squeezing.\nEquation (9) shows that ρE-sqvac falls below zero once every cycle when the condition coshξ > sinhξ is met. It turns out that this is always true for every nonzero value of ξ, so ρE-sqvac becomes negative at some point in the cycle for a general squeezed vacuum state. See Figure 1 for an illustration. Note in the figure that the blue troughs or valleys are the negative energy pulses. On another note, when a quantum state is close to a squeezed vacuum state, there will almost always be some negative energy densities present.\n\nAnother way to generate negative energy via squeezed light would be to manufacture extremely reliable light pulses containing precisely one, two, three, etc., photons apiece and combine them together to create squeezed states to order. Superimposing many such states could theoretically produce bursts of intense negative energy. Photonic crystal research has already demonstrated the feasibility of using photonic crystal waveguides (mixing together the classical and quantum properties of optical materials) to engineer light sources that produce beams containing precisely one, two, three, etc., photons. See Reference [1] for more details and for the references cited therein.\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nENERGY DENSITY\nSQUEEZED STATE\n0\nPOSITION\n\nFigure 1. Illustration of a Squeezed State of Light. (courtesy of Lisa Burnett)\n\nNegative (Sub-Vacuum) Energy in the Casimir Effect\n\nThe Casimir effect originates from the quantum electromagnetic vacuum ZPF. It is by far the easiest and most well known way to generate (static) negative energy in the lab. The Casimir effect that is familiar to most people is the force that is associated with the quantum vacuum electromagnetic ZPF [47]. This is an attractive force that must exist between any two neutral (uncharged), parallel, flat, conducting surfaces (e.g., metallic plates) in a vacuum. This force has been well measured and it can be attributed to a minute imbalance in the vacuum electromagnetic ZPE density inside the cavity between the conducting surfaces versus the vacuum electromagnetic ZPE density in the free-space region outside of the cavity [48-50]. See Figure 2 for a schematic of the Casimir effect.\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCasimir plates\nVacuum fluctuations\n\nFigure 2. Schematic of the Casimir Effect.\n\nIt turns out that there are many different types of Casimir effects found in quantum field theory [20-22, 26-28, 51]. For example, if one introduces a single infinite plane conductor into the Minkowski (flat spacetime) vacuum by bringing it adiabatically from infinity so that whatever quantum fields are present suffer no excitation but remain in their ground states, then the vacuum (electromagnetic) stresses induced by the presence of the infinite plane conductor produces a Casimir effect. This result holds equally well when two parallel plane conductors (with separation distance d) are present, which gives rise to the familiar Casimir effect inside a cavity. Note that in both cases, the spacetime manifold is made incomplete by the introduction of the plane conductor boundary condition(s). The vacuum region put under stress by the presence of the plane conductor(s) is called the Casimir vacuum. The generic expression for the energy density of the Casimir effect is ρCE = −Ahcd^−4, where A = ζ(D)/8π² in\nspacetimes of arbitrary dimension D [20-22]. The appearance of the zeta-function ζ(D)\nis characteristic of expressions for vacuum stress-energy tensors, T^μν_vac.††† In our\nfamiliar 4-dimensional spacetime (D = 4) we have that A = π²/720. To calculate T^μν_vac\nfor a given quantum field is to calculate its associated Casimir effect.\n\nWe should also point out that the methods used to obtain the quantum vacuum\nelectromagnetic T^μν_vac between parallel plane conductors can also be used when the\nconductors are not parallel but are joined together along a line of intersection. If the\nconductors have curved surfaces instead, then one obtains results that are similar to\nthe case of intersecting conductors. These geometries have also been evaluated for the\n\n_______________\n††† The Greek tensor indices (μ, ν = 0...3) denote spacetime coordinates, x⁰...x³, such that x¹...x³ ≡ space\ncoordinates and x⁰ ≡ time coordinate. Note in general that T⁰⁰ ≡ ρE (field energy density).\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":19,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nbetween the strength of the negative energy density/flux and the behavior of the detector.\n\nIt is curious that Davies and Ottewill did not consider using quantum optical homodyne tomography as a tool to test their hypothesis, because this is already a mature experimental discipline. In what follows we outline the basics of quantum optical homodyne tomography and its application to detecting and measuring negative energy density/flux states in squeezed light and in the Casimir effect.\n\nBasic Notions of Quantum Optical Homodyne Tomography\n\nTomography, from the Greek word for slice, is a method to infer the shape of a hidden object from its shadows (or projections) under various angles. Quantum tomography is the application of this idea to quantum mechanics. In optical homodyne tomography, the Wigner function or, more generally, the quantum state plays the role of the hidden object. The observable “quantum shadows” are the quadrature distributions and are measured using homodyne detection. From these distributions the Wigner function is reconstructed. See Figure 3 for an illustration of quantum optical homodyne tomography. The vertical 2-dimensional plane seen in the figure is fictitious and is shown for illustrative purposes only.\n\nq\np\n\nFigure 3. Illustration of Quantum Optical Homodyne Tomography (courtesy of Ulf Leonhardt). The Wigner function (3-dimensional hill on the right) is reconstructed in quantum phase space (gridded plane formed by quadratures q and p) from its experimentally measured projections (curve in vertical 2-dimensional plane), which represents the scanning process of tomography. The vertical axis is the magnitude of the Wigner (quasiprobability) function.\n\nQuantum tomography was developed for the simple reason that a fundamental feature of quantum mechanics prevents us from seeing physical objects in their full quantum complexity. This is due to the intrinsic fuzziness in the quantum nature of energy and matter according to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, which prevents us from simultaneously and precisely measuring the complementary features (e.g., position and momentum or energy and time) comprising quantum states. For this reason we cannot\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndirectly observe quantum states, and so the true nature of an individual quantum system is hidden. However, no principal obstacle exists to observing all complementary aspects in a series of distinct experiments on identically prepared quantum objects.\n\nIn the sections that follow, we briefly review the several parts that comprise the tomography machinery, and then put the whole picture together to understand what the entire process is. No effort will be made for completeness because the subject of quantum tomography takes up volumes of books. The reader will be referred to the key literature of importance.\n\nWigner Functions\n\nIn classical optics the state of an electromagnetic oscillator is perfectly described by the statistics of the classical amplitude α. The amplitude may be completely fixed (then the field is coherent), or α may fluctuate (then the field is partially coherent or incoherent). In classical optics as well as in classical mechanics, we can characterize the statistics of the complex amplitude α or, equivalently, the statistics of the component position q and momentum p by introducing a phase space distribution called the Wigner function, W(q,p).††† W(q,p) quantifies the probability of finding a particular pair of q and p values in their simultaneous measurement. Knowing W(q,p) for a particular quantum state that is under study, all statistical quantities of the electromagnetic oscillator can be predicted by calculation. In this sense W(q,p) describes the state in classical physics. The motivation for introducing the Wigner function was the desire to find a quantum mechanical description similar to that in classical statistical physics. However, in quantum mechanics Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle prevents one from observing position and momentum simultaneously and precisely. In addition to this, we also cannot directly observe quantum states either. Nevertheless, we are perfectly entitled to use the concept of quantum states as if they were existing entities. We use their properties to predict the statistics of observations.\n\nIt is well known that the quantum mechanical wave function depends exclusively on either the position or the momentum and contains nevertheless all the information about the quantum system under study. However, E. Wigner showed that it is possible to define a formal quantum mechanical analog to the classical distribution function. He showed that we could use W(q,p) as a quantum phase space distribution exclusively to calculate observables in a classical-like fashion. Wigner discovered that W(q,p) is a real-valued function, but it is usually not just positive; it can also become negative. This is a very nonclassical behavior for a probability distribution. It is for this reason that W(q,p) came to be called a quasiprobability distribution.\n\nW(q,p) has several properties and mathematical postulates, but it turns out that just one postulate is sufficient for the purposes of quantum tomography [38]. Using this postulate, it is assumed that W(q,p) behaves like a joint probability distribution for q and p without ever mentioning any simultaneous observation of position and momentum. The reduced, or marginal, distributions ∫W(q,p)dp or ∫W(q,p)dq\n\n††† Recall in Sect. IIB-1 that the real and the imaginary parts of the complex amplitude α can be regarded as the position and the momentum of the electromagnetic oscillator.\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nmust give the position or the momentum distribution, respectively. Furthermore, if one performs a phase shift θ all complex amplitudes â are shifted in phase,§§§ meaning that the components q and p rotate in the 2-dimensional phase space (q,p). A classical probability distribution for position and momentum values would rotate accordingly. This fact leads to the postulate that the position probability distribution pr(q,θ) after an arbitrary phase shift θ should be [38]\n\npr(q,θ) ≡ ⟨q|U(θ)ρU†(θ)|q⟩ = ∫W(q cosθ − p sinθ, q sinθ + p cosθ)dp, (10)\n\nwhere ρ is the quantum density operator (or density matrix) which describes the statistical (or most general) state of a quantum system. The first line in Eq. (10) is the quantum expectation value of the phase-shifted ρ, which simply gives the probability distribution for the q-eigenstates to occur with probabilities ρq (the elements of ρ). This single formula joins W(q,p) with quantum mechanics. It ties W(q,p) to observable quantities, and it links quantum states to observations.\n\nIt is beyond the scope of this report to repeat the entire mathematical development of the explicit functional representations, identities, transformations and modifications of W(q,p). The reader should consult Reference [38] for more information. However, Figures 4 through 7 provide an example of what the experimentally reconstructed Wigner function visually looks like from the quantum optical homodyne tomography of the following cases of interest: a vacuum state, a coherent state, a squeezed vacuum state, a single photon, and Schrödinger cat states. The Schrödinger cat states are a very interesting case study of unusual nonclassical states of light that have been experimentally measured via quantum optical homodyne tomography.\n\n§§§ The unitary phase shifting operator is U(θ) ≡ exp(−iθn̂), where n̂ is the photon number operator and θ is the phase shift angle. Its action on the amplitude â is: U†(θ)âU(θ) = â exp(−iθ).\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 4. Wigner Function for a Vacuum (top) and for a Coherent State (bottom). This clearly shows that coherent states are just “displaced vacua” (Sect. IIB-3). Optical homodyne tomography was used to reconstruct the Wigner functions from experimental data (courtesy of Ulf Leonhardt).\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nNoise current [a.u.] vs Time [ms] plot\n\nFigure 5. Wigner Function of a Squeezed Vacuum. Wigner function (top) and quadrature fluctuations (bottom). This shows the experimentally reconstructed Wigner function of a significantly squeezed vacuum generated by parametric amplification (Sect. IIB-3). The noise trace (bottom) shows a part of the experimental data used to reconstruct the depicted Wigner function via optical homodyne tomography (courtesy of Ulf Leonhardt).\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 6. Wigner Function of a Single Photon. The figure shows the experimentally reconstructed Wigner function as seen from above (top) and from below (bottom). Negative “probabilities” are clearly visible near the origin of the phase space, which demonstrates the nonclassical aspect of photons (courtesy of Ulf Leonhardt).\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 7. Quantum Tomography of Schrödinger-Cat States. Top: q0 = 3. Two separated coherent amplitudes (peaks) are clearly visible. Bottom: q0 = 4. The larger the separation of the amplitudes, the more rapid is the oscillation in the quantum interference structure between the two peaks. Negative probabilities appear within the quantum interference structure. The experimental data used to reconstruct the depicted Wigner functions was provided by A. Furusawa and H. Yonezawa, University of Tokyo.\n\nWe digress for the moment to explain what Schrödinger cat states are. Schrödinger's cat is a famous illustration of the principle of superposition in quantum theory that was proposed as a thought experiment by Erwin Schrödinger in 1935. Schrödinger's cat\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nserves to demonstrate the apparent conflict of what quantum theory tells us is true about the nature and behavior of matter on the quantum (atomic or subatomic) level compared with what we actually observe to be true about the nature and behavior of matter on the macroscopic level.\n\nSchrödinger's thought experiment is as follows: One places a living cat into a steel chamber along with a device containing a vial of hydrocyanic acid. There is also a very small amount of a radioactive substance inside the chamber. If even a single atom of the substance decays during the test period, then a relay mechanism will trip a hammer, which will in turn break the vial and kill the cat.\n\nThe observer cannot know whether or not an atom of the radioactive substance has decayed, and consequently, cannot know whether the vial has been broken, the hydrocyanic acid released, and the cat killed. Since one cannot know, the cat is both dead and alive in a superposition of quantum states according to the quantum superposition principle. It is only when one breaks open the box and learns the condition of the cat that the superposition is lost, and the cat becomes either dead or alive. This situation is sometimes called quantum indeterminacy or the observer's paradox: the act of observation or measurement itself affects the outcome, so that the outcome as such does not exist unless, and until, the measurement is made. (That is, there is no single outcome unless it is observed.)\n\nAccording to the fundamental superposition principle of quantum mechanics, we are entitled to think of quantum superpositions of coherent states. These are states that contain simultaneously two coherent components (or states), one pointing in one direction in phase space and the other pointing in another direction. We label the former component the \"alive-cat\" state and the latter component the \"dead-cat state.\" The position wave function Ψ of such a state would be the superposition of two coherent state (Gaussian) wave functions [38]:\n\nΨ(q) ∝ exp[-1/2(q-q0)^2] + exp[-1/2(q+q0)^2]. (11)\n\nThe normalization factor has been omitted in Eq. (11) because it is not important here. Equation (11) shows that Ψ has two peaks, one at +q0 (alive-cat state) and the other at -q0 (dead-cat state) according to the superimposed coherent amplitudes. Also, Eq. (11) has nothing to do with optical interference. When two fields interfere, their amplitude may be enhanced or canceled, producing, for example, coherent states of enhanced or zero amplitude (vacuum). The quantum superposition shown in Eq. (11) still contains both coherent amplitudes ±q0. It is also much different from an incoherent superposition of ±q0, where the field has either the amplitude +q0 or the amplitude -q0 with certain probabilities. The quadrature amplitude of Ψ is +q0 as well as -q0 (simultaneously!), with a resolution given by the vacuum fluctuations.\n\nThis strange behavior of Ψ being simultaneously at +q0 and -q0 turns out to be the best representation of Schrödinger's famous thought experiment in the quantum field theory of light. Schrödinger cat states are difficult to observe in the optical domain because\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthey are extremely vulnerable to quantum decoherence. Quantum decoherence is caused by linear losses, and it is the main reason why the extremely strange quantum phenomena allowed in quantum theory are very difficult to observe in practice. However, the good news is that investigators have successfully controlled or suppressed quantum decoherence to such a high degree that Schrödinger cat states were experimentally observed and measured using optical homodyne tomography [55, 56]. Figure 7 shows the experimentally reconstructed Wigner functions for two Schrödinger cat states that have different amplitude values ±q0. The observed peaks at ±q0 seen in the figure are of small magnitude, so investigators euphemistically call these \"Schrödinger kitten states.\" As seen in the figure, the interference structure halfway between the peaks displays the quantum superposition of both amplitudes, showing rapid oscillations with a frequency given by the distance 2|q0| of the superimposed amplitudes. Also seen in the figure is that the two reconstructed Wigner functions become negative (i.e., negative \"probabilities\"), indicating the nonclassical behavior of Schrödinger cat/kitten states.\n\nBeam Splitters\n\nA very important device that is used to demonstrate the quantum nature of light is the simple optical beam splitter. A large number of strange quantum effects have been experimentally observed by splitting or recombining photons using a small cube of glass. The beam splitter also serves as a theoretical model for other linear optical devices such as interferometers, semitransparent mirrors, dielectric interfaces, waveguide couplers, and polarizers. The beam splitter model can also be used to account for the effect of absorption, mode mismatch, and other linear losses.\n\nAn ideal beam splitter is a reversible, lossless device in which two incident beams of light may interfere to produce two emerging beams [38]. For example, a dielectric interface inside a cube or plate of glass splits a light beam into two. This situation may be reversed by sending the two beams back to the cube (or plate) where they interfere constructively to restore the original beam. However, if the phases of the two beams are changed, then their mutual interference generates two emerging beams in general. So four beams might be involved, two incident light modes and two outgoing light modes, and the splitting of just one beam is a special case. Therefore, the most general theoretical beam splitter model is a four-port device, which is simply a \"black box\" with two input and two output ports having certain mathematical and physical properties [38]. See Figure 8 for a schematic of an ideal lossless four-port beam splitter.\n\nThe beam splitter is quantum mechanically described by a simple unitary transformation operator (or matrix), based on an analog transformation matrix in classical optics,**** which mathematically transforms the two input light modes into the two output light modes. This operator is unitary, which reflects the fact that a lossless beam splitter conserves energy and that the total light mode intensity a1†a1 + a2†a2 is an invariant quantity. Since the incoming and the outgoing light modes are both independent bosonic modes, their annihilation operators must satisfy the following\n\n****In classical optics, the components of the transmission matrix of a real beam splitter are simply the transmissivity and reflectivity, which account for the transmission and reflection probabilities of photons passing through the glass cube or plate.\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nbosonic commutation relations: [a1', am'†] = [a1, am†] = δ1m and [a1', am'] = [a1, am] = 0,\n\nwhere δℓm (= 1 if ℓ = m and 0 if ℓ ≠ m) is the Kronecker delta and the indices (ℓ, m) are integers [38].\n\nA beam splitter is a four-port device not only in the case of two incoming light modes interfering to produce two emerging light modes; a beam splitter is always a four-port device. Even if only one beam is split into two beams, if literally nothing behind the semitransparent mirror is interfering with the incident beam, quantum mechanically this nothing means a vacuum state. The very possibility that the second light mode behind the mirror might be excited makes a difference. The vacuum fluctuations carried by the empty mode (and entering the apparatus via the so-called unused input port of the beam splitter) do cause physical effects. Therefore, the vacuum fluctuations entering the second (unused) input port of the beam splitter must always be assigned a formal mode operator, a2, in order for the system to 1) conserve energy, 2) obey the beam splitter's aforementioned bosonic commutation relations and 3) guarantee that the two outgoing beams are independent bosonic light modes.\n\nFigure 8. Schematic of an Ideal Lossless Beam Splitter. Two incident spatial-temporal light modes (with the annihilation operators a1 and a2) interfere optically to produce two emerging light modes (with the annihilation operators a1' and a2') (courtesy of Ulf Leonhardt).\n\nIn Figure 9 we illustrate the effect of vacuum fluctuations for the case of a fictitious beam splitter, which is a model for describing linear absorption or, equivalently,\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndetection losses. The input signal a is attenuated and, simultaneously, contaminated by the vacuum fluctuations entering the second (unused) input port of the fictitious beam splitter. The absorber acts like a fictitious beam splitter, and when light is attenuated it can be imagined as being split into a transmitted part and an absorbed part. On the other hand, we know from the fluctuation-dissipation theorem that losses are always accompanied by fluctuations [57]. At least the vacuum fluctuations of the absorbing medium must be taken into account. In the simple absorber model, these fluctuations come into play via the second (unused) input port of the fictitious beam splitter as shown in Figure 9. The annihilation operator a of the partially absorbed (input signal) mode is transformed by the fictitious beam splitter according to a' = η^(1/2) a + (1-η)^(1/2) a2, where the factor η (0 < η ≤ 1) reduces the intensity of any initial coherent state |α> to |η^(1/2)α> after undergoing partial absorption, a' is the output signal mode that goes to the detector (which counts the number of photons it absorbs, n' ≡ a'†a'), and a2 is the mode operator of the vacuum fluctuations entering the second (unused) input port of the fictitious beam splitter. The second term (1-η)^(1/2) a2 in a' is essential to guarantee that the attenuated light field remains a proper bosonic mode, otherwise energy conservation and the aforementioned bosonic commutation relations would be violated.\n\nFinally, we note without further elaboration that the mode operators, quadrature wave functions, and Wigner functions are all rotated through some angle under the action of a beam splitter. And the Wigner function of a signal is smoothed during absorption under the action of a fictitious beam splitter. This provides additional models to develop the properties of other types of optical instruments and understand their behavior on incoming light modes (or input signals).\n\nFigure 9. Illustration of a Fictitious Beam Splitter.\n(courtesy of Ulf Leonhardt)\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nPhotodiodes\nMost photodetectors apply a version of the photoelectric effect to operate in which incident light radiation ionizes a piece of photosensitive material in the detector and produces freely moving electrons, i.e., an electric current is created that can be amplified and handled by electronic means. A commonly used type of detector is the linear-response photodiode. In most cases, the photosensitive part of the detector is a P-I-N structure, a sandwich of Positively doped, Intrinsic, and Negatively doped semiconductor material. Commonly, silicon (Si) or indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs) are used where Si detects light out to a 1 µm wavelength and InGaAs operates in the range 0.19 µm to 2.6 µm. A bias voltage of about 10 Volts is applied to drain the majority carriers (electrons in N and holes in P) out of the intrinsic zone. In this depletion region an unstable situation is created for the minority carriers. As soon as electron-hole pairs are present in the intrinsic zone, the bias voltage produces a current that is proportional to the number of carriers. Electrons in the valence band are lifted into the conduction band by the absorption of light radiation, i.e., the absorption of a single photon lifts one electron into the conduction band, which creates electron-hole pairs in the depletion zone. This process can be made highly efficient because the applied voltage is very low so that no avalanche of charge carriers into the conduction band (via collisions) is formed. The current response of the detector is linear in the intensity of the detected light. However, thermal fluctuations cause Nyquist noise in the photocurrent. Thermal effects also create electron-hole pairs in the depletion zone thus producing dark current, which is electronic noise. Because of this electronic noise, linear-response photodiodes do not reach single-photon resolution. They are suitable for relatively high intensities, greater than about 100 photons per microsecond.\n\nThere are inefficiencies and noise associated with realistic photodetection. A convenient model to understand the effect these have on experiments is provided by imagining a fictitious beam splitter placed in front of an ideal detector. See Figure 9. Only the transmitted photons are counted, so that the transmissivity of the fictitious beam splitter corresponds to the detection efficiency. Dissipation is always accompanied by fluctuations. These degrade the quantum noise properties of the detected light. The fluctuations are modeled by a vacuum entering the unused port of the fictitious beam splitter. This analysis shows how the nonclassical features of light are lost when the detectors are inefficient.\n\nBalanced Homodyne Detection\nUnder idealized conditions the photon number is measured in direct photodetection. However, another method of detection exists, in which the light field amplitudes (the quadrature components) are measured instead of the quantized light intensity. Intensity (photon number) and field amplitude (quadrature) are distinct quantities. There is no simple relationship between the photon statistics and the quadrature distributions in the quantum regime, but the two are shown to be related via the mathematics and procedures of quantum state sampling [38]. Furthermore, the field amplitudes contain phase information, and so they are dependent on phase.\n27\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nQuadrature components q̂θ are defined†††† with respect to a certain reference phase θ that can be varied experimentally.\n\nThe principle scheme of a balanced homodyne detector is depicted in Figure 10. The signal interferes with a coherent laser beam at a well-balanced 50:50 beam splitter. The laser light field is called the local oscillator (LO), and it provides the phase reference θ for the quadrature measurement. It is assumed that the signal and the LO have a fixed phase relation, as is the case in most experiments applying homodyne detection, because both fields are ultimately generated by a common master laser. The LO should be intense with respect to the signal for providing a precise phase reference. It is also assumed that the LO is powerful enough to be treated classically, i.e., we totally neglect the quantum fluctuations of the LO. After the optical mixing of the signal with the LO, each emerging beam is directed to a linear-response photodiode. The photocurrents I1 and I2 are measured, electronically processed, and finally subtracted from each other. The difference current I21 ≡ I2 − I1 is the quantity of interest because it contains the interference term of the LO and the signal. It is assumed for simplicity that the measured photocurrents I1 and I2 are proportional to the photon numbers n̂1 and n̂2 of the beams striking each detector, which are given by n̂1 = â1'†â1' and n̂2 = â2'†â2' in terms of the mode operators â1' = 2^(-1/2)(â − αLO) and â2' = 2^(-1/2)(â + αLO) of the fields emerging from the beam splitter [38]. Here â denotes the annihilation operator of the signal and αLO is the complex amplitude of the LO.\n\nThe difference current I21 is proportional to the difference photon number (assuming perfect quantum efficiency) n̂21 = n̂2 − n̂1 = α*LO â + αLO â†, where α*LO is the complex conjugate of αLO. The phase of the LO is θ, and so we note from the definition of q̂θ that the measured quantity I21 is indeed proportional to q̂θ because n̂21 = 2^(1/2)|αLO| q̂θ, which is a result that has been verified by more sophisticated theories of homodyne detection [38]. A balanced homodyne detector measures q̂θ. The reference phase θ is provided by the LO and can be varied by adjusting the LO using a piezo-electrically movable mirror, for example. An experimental method for finding the scaling of q̂θ in the difference current I21 is to keep a record of the sum current because the sum of I1 and I2 is proportional to |αLO|² to leading order [38]. This can be experimentally important because the intensity of the LO is usually an unknown quantity.\n\n†††† We note that phase shifting rotates the quadratures, q̂θ ≡ Û†(θ)q̂Û(θ) = q̂cosθ + p̂sinθ and p̂θ ≡ Û†(θ)p̂Û(θ) = −q̂sinθ + p̂cosθ, via the quadrature decomposition defined in Sect. IIB-1 and the phase shifting property of the annihilation operator defined in Sect. IIIB-1.\n28\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 10. Schematic of a Balanced Homodyne Detector. (courtesy of Ulf Leonhardt)\n\nFurthermore, the balanced homodyne detector is also an amplifier. The LO amplifies the signal by the mutual optical mixing of the two. In other words, the homodyne detector is an interferometer that can be measurably imbalanced by a single photon in the signal mode because the reference field is very intense. A very important technical advantage of this is that the amplified signal is well above the electronic noise floor of the photodiodes. The signal amplitude is enhanced so that even the noisy linear-response photodiodes can detect the quantum features of the signal with single photon resolution. Because the LO serves as a coherent amplifier, it also chooses the signal mode. The LO singles out one spatial-temporal (bosonic) mode from the rest of the continuous quantum field \"light\" (that matches the LO field). In this way the observer separates the quantum object (a single optical mode) from the rest of the world. The mode function is given by the spatial-temporal shape of the LO beam at the detector surface and during the measurement time interval [0,T]. The overall phase and intensity of the LO is comprised in the complex amplitude αLO. Shifting the phase θ = arg(αLO) rotates the measured q̂θ. The observer defines via the LO the frame in space and time that is subject to the field-quadrature measurement. By tailoring the shape of the LO beam high spatial-temporal resolution can be achieved.\n\nPhotodetection is usually not completely efficient in practice so it is important to describe the influence of inefficiencies on homodyne detection. This is easily done by using the simple model for losses in direct photodetection that was given in Section IIIB-2. We imagine fictitious beam splitters to be placed in front of the two (assumed ideal) detectors in the measurement setup (see Figure 11). We use\n29\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nâ' = η^(1/2)â + (1−η)^(1/2)â2 from Section IIIB-2 to define the annihilation operators of the detected light modes â1'' = η^(1/2)â1' + (1−η)^(1/2)b̂1 and â2'' = η^(1/2)â2' + (1−η)^(1/2)b̂2, where b̂1 and b̂2 are the annihilation operators of the vacua entering the second unused ports of the fictitious beam splitters. The annihilation operators â1' and â2' describe the light modes (or fields) emerging from the 50:50 beam splitter where the signal is optically mixed with the LO. Again, the LO is an intense field compared with the signal so it can be treated classically. Therefore, we do some algebra to compute the difference photon number n̂21 = n̂2'' − n̂1'' = â2''†â2'' − â1''†â1'', but retain only the leading terms with respect to αLO, and obtain the final result [38]:\n\nn̂21 = η^(1/2) α*LO [η^(1/2) â + (1−η)^(1/2) b̂] + HC. (12)\n\nThe symbol HC in Eq. (12) denotes the Hermitian conjugate of the other part of an expression and b̂ ≡ 2^(-1/2)(b̂2 − b̂1). The fluctuation mode operator b̂ corresponds to the optical mixing of the fictitious vacuum-noise modes b̂1 and b̂2, and it obeys the bosonic commutation relation [b̂, b̂†] = 1 (e.g., see Sect. IIIB-2). Because the interference of vacuum with vacuum yields vacuum, the fluctuation mode b̂ can be regarded as a bosonic mode, being in the vacuum state as well.\n30\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 11. Balanced Homodyne Detector Using Fictitious Beam Splitters to Account for Detection Losses. (courtesy of Ulf Leonhardt)\n\nEquation (12) provides an additional model for detection losses. Similar to direct photon counting, a fictitious vacuum field has to be added to the attenuated signal in homodyne detection. This means that we can replace the arrangement of two fictitious beam splitters in front of the photodetectors with just one effective beam splitter in front of an ideal homodyne detector (see Figure 12). This effective beam splitter accounts for other kinds of losses including mode mismatch, whereby the quantum effects of both detection losses and mode mismatch are comprised in an effective η.\n31\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndetector\nvacuum\nb̂\nsignal\nâ\nâ′\nâ″₂\nâ″₁\ndetector\nlocal\noscillator\n(αLO)\n\nFigure 12. Balanced Homodyne Detector Using A Single Effective Fictitious Beam Splitter to Account for Detection Losses and Mode Mismatch. (courtesy of Ulf Leonhardt)\n\nThe consequence of an effective η and Eq. (12) is that the marginal distributions pr(q,θ) must become a function of the effective η [38]:\n\npr(q,θ;η) = [π(1−η)]^(−1/2) ∫ from −∞ to +∞ pr(x,θ)exp[−η/(1−η)(x−η^(−1/2)q)²]dx , (13)\n\nwhere the pr(x,θ) inside the integral is defined by Eq. (10) and x is a dummy integration variable. Equation (13) defines the measured quadrature histograms that are used to build the transmission profiles in the tomographic process, which is discussed in the following section.\n\nOutline of Experimental Procedure\n\nThe key process of quantum tomography is to picture the \"shape\" of a quantum object in phase space using the Wigner representation. The marginal distributions [Eq. (10) or (13)] correspond to the tomographic transmission profiles of the Wigner function W(q,p), i.e., to shadows projected onto a line in quantum phase space. Because of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, we cannot measure simultaneously and precisely the position q and the momentum p, and we cannot observe the Wigner function directly as a probability distribution. However, we can measure the quadrature histograms [i.e., the first line in Eq. (10)], and by varying the phase θ we observe the quantum object under different angles. Given the pr(q,θ), the mathematics of computerized tomography can be applied to deduce the Wigner function.\n\n32\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAs discussed in the previous subsection, we can use balanced homodyne detection to precisely measure the quadratures q̂θ of a spatial-temporal mode. As was also discussed in the previous subsection, the angle θ is defined by the phase of the local oscillator with respect to the signal. The phase θ can be varied using a piezo-electric translator. To measure the quadrature distributions, one may fix θ and perform a series of homodyne measurements at this particular phase to build up a quadrature histogram. Then the LO phase should be changed in order to repeat the procedure at a new phase, and so on. Another possibility is to monitor the phase while it drifts or to sweep it in a known way. In any case, the homodyne measurement must be repeated many times on identically prepared light modes (or on a continuous wave field) to gain sufficient statistical information about the quadrature values at a certain number of reference phases. Finally, the Wigner function is tomographically reconstructed from the experimental data.\n\nIt is beyond the scope of this report to summarize the entire subject of experimental quantum tomography, its mathematical basis and procedures of quantum state sampling, and the corresponding algorithms and numerical recipes. The reader should see Reference [58] for the excruciating details.\n\nBalanced homodyne detectors with local oscillators are amplifiers capable of detecting and quantifying vacuum and sub-vacuum fluctuations. This is the subject of the two experimental approaches that will be discussed in the next section.\n\nBALANCED HOMODYNE SYSTEMS FOR MEASURING NEGATIVE (SUB-VACUUM) ENERGY\n\nTime-Domain Balanced Homodyne System\n\nSqueezed states of light, which are \"darker than vacuum,\" have regions with sub-vacuum fluctuations. Slusher and collaborators [40, 41] and Robinson [42, 43] were the first to experimentally observe these sub-vacuum regions. Numerous other experiments followed, which employed variations on the experimental devices and techniques used to generate squeezed light and measure its sub-vacuum fluctuation pulses. Those early experimental devices later gave way to the development and use of balanced homodyne detectors.\n\nFor example, Schneider et al. [59] describe their compact and efficient source of amplitude-squeezed light. Their experiment used a semi-monolithic degenerate MgO:LiNbO3 optical parametric amplifier pumped by a frequency-doubled Nd:YAG laser at 532 nm. They employed injection-seeding of the amplifier by a 1064 nm wave to provide active stabilization of the cavity length and stable operation. At a pump power of 380 mW, their device detected a maximum noise reduction of 6.5 dB in the amplitude fluctuations of the 0.2 mW 1064 nm wave, while the average detected noise reduction in continuous operation over 14 minutes was 6.2 dB. They reported a squeezing of 7.2 dB in the emitted wave.\n\nHowever, most of these early and more recent series of balanced homodyne detector (BHD) measurements have been performed in the frequency domain. A significant\n\n33\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndrawback of this approach is that it reveals information about the quantum state only within the sideband chosen for the measurement. Therefore, the method is incompatible with other techniques for characterizing a quantum state for which such precise selection of spectral modes is impossible. Time-domain BHD resolves this limitation. Hansen et al. [4] describe their experimental time-domain BHD device. They developed a pulsed BHD for precise measurement of the electric field quadratures of pulsed optical quantum states. A high level of common mode suppression (> 85 dB) and low electronic noise (730 electrons per pulse) in their device provides a signal-to-noise ratio of 14 dB for measurement of the quantum noise of individual pulses. Their device achieved a signal-to-noise ratio of 14 dB at a pulse repetition rate of up to 1 MHz, enabling high-accuracy quantum measurements to be carried out in a short time. They performed a quantum tomography of the coherent state as a test for their device, and the Wigner function and density matrix were reconstructed with 99.5% fidelity while their detector exhibited 91% quantum efficiency. Their detection system can also be used for ultrasensitive balanced detection in continuous wave mode. Figure 13 shows a schematic of their time-domain BHD. The figure shows two polarizing beam splitter (PBS) cubes, a 50:50 beam splitter (BS), two half-wave plates (λ/2), two photodiodes (left-side in dotted box), and the signal processing electronics inside the dotted box.\n\nFigure 13. Time-Domain Balanced Homodyne Detector. (courtesy of P. Lodahl)\n\nAs we discussed previously in Sections IIIB-4 and IIIB-5, to perform BHD one overlaps on a beam splitter the electromagnetic wave whose quantum state is to be measured and a relatively strong LO wave in the matching optical mode. The two fields emerging from the beam splitter are incident upon two high efficiency photodiodes whose output photocurrents are subtracted. The photocurrent difference is proportional to the value of the electric field operator Êθ in the signal mode, where θ is the relative optical phase of the signal and the LO. In traditional frequency-domain BHD, one uses a certain frequency component of the difference signal to determine the quadrature quantum noise of the optical state. The measurement frequency is normally chosen to be approximately 5 to 10 MHz where the technical noise is minimized. Figure 14 shows an example of experimentally measured data for a typical (undisturbed) vacuum state and a squeezed vacuum state using a time-domain BHD system.\n\n34\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 14. Experimentally Measured Squeezed State. (courtesy of P. Marecki) This graph of vacuum dB noise vs. relative optical phase angle shows an experimentally measured squeezed state (plot (I)) and a normal (undisturbed) vacuum state (plot (II)). The deep valleys with negative dB values in plot (I) are sub-vacuum regions with sub-vacuum (negative) energy density (see also, Figure 1 for a comparison).\n\nWhen applied to pulsed sources, the frequency-domain BHD technique implies that averaging over many individual laser pulses takes place. However, in time-domain BHD, each laser pulse generates a signal that is observed in real time and yields a single value of a field quadrature. Repeated measurements of a large number of laser pulses produce a quantum probability distribution associated with this quadrature. When transform-limited LO pulses are used, time-domain BHD gives the complete information about the quantum state in the spatial-temporal mode that matches that of the LO.\n\nHansen et al. [4] point out that time-domain BHD is technically challenging, because 1) the electronics must ensure time resolution of individual laser pulses and 2) the measured quadrature values must not be influenced by low-frequency noise. The detector must provide ultralow noise, high subtraction, and a flat amplification profile in the entire frequency range from DC to at least the LO pulse repetition rate. See Reference [4] for a complete description of their device as shown in Figure 13.\n\n35\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBalanced Homodyne System for Casimir Cavities\n\nWhat has not been experimentally measured yet are the sub-vacuum fluctuations and their (negative) energy density inside a Casimir cavity. Marecki [5, 6] theoretically evaluated the use of BHDs for this purpose. He proposed that a BHD can be used to detect and spatially map the sub-vacuum fluctuation region inside a Casimir cavity as well as measure its negative energy density spectrum. Marecki discovered that by exploiting a trick with the subtraction of the output of balanced photodiodes, it is possible to quantify the fluctuations of the quantum field (even in the vacuum!), which uniquely addresses Davies and Ottewill's [54] negative energy detector hypothesis.\n\nThe quantity of interest (to be measured) is the fluctuations of the quantum electric field ⟨Êi(x,t)Êj(x,t)⟩S (for fields restricted to the frequency ω of the local oscillator) for squeezed and vacuum states, where Êi(x,t) is the quantum electric field operator (in ground-state representation and restricted in frequencies) at the point x, t represents the time-dependence of Êi(x,t), and ⟨...⟩S stands for the expectation value with respect to an arbitrary initial state S (vacuum, squeezed, ground state, coherent, thermal, etc.) of the quantum radiation field under study. ⟨Êi(x,t)Êj(x,t)⟩S is also called a two-point function. In quantum field theory, the expectation value (or matrix element) computed by inserting a product of two quantum operators between two states, usually the vacuum states, is called a two-point function. This quantity suggests a \"relation\" between two states in the same dynamics, and it expresses the fluctuations of a quantum field. The product of n-operators is called the n-point function which expresses the higher moments of the quantum field fluctuations.\n\nThe goal of the experiment is that a state S of the quantum radiation field under study needs to be characterized by its n-point functions. The typical solution in quantum optics is to use well-characterized quantum systems interacting in a simple way with the quantum radiation field. The detection scheme uses the simple model of a PIN junction photodiode in which a single electron interacts with the quantum radiation field under study. This simple interaction means that the state space of the electron can be severely restricted, the interaction is assumed to be linear in the quantum field, and so the Born approximation can be used [5, 6]. The PIN junction model of the photodetection process is an electron in an initial state |0⟩⊗S, with its bound-state |0⟩ well-localized around a certain point x0, that gets excited to the continuum of scattering states |q⟩ by the quantum field state of interest S such that the final states of the system are |q⟩⊗S.†††† The excitation is caused by the linear (dipole approximation) interaction with the quantum electric field which is\n\n†††† The symbol ⊗ denotes the tensor product of two quantum eigenstates such that |a1,a2⟩=|a1⟩⊗|a2⟩ for factorized eigenstates which correspond to independent measurements.\n\n36\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Ĥdip-int = ex^i ⊗ Ê_i(x⃗,t) • g(t) where e is the electron charge and g(t) is a smooth test (or smearing) function that is equal to 1 during the measurement and smoothly vanishing elsewhere. Using first-order time-dependent perturbation theory, Marecki [5, 6] derived the probability of excitation: P_exc(g,x⃗) = ∫_{-∞}^{+∞} dτ ds g(τ)g(s)G^{ij}(τ−s) ⟨Ê_i(x⃗,τ)Ê_j(x⃗,s)⟩_S , (14) where G^{ij}(τ−s) ≡ ∫ dq ⟨0|x^i(τ)|q⃗⟩⟨q⃗|x^j(s)|0⟩ is the electronic two-point function, τ and s are dummy time and integration variables, and ∫dτds g(τ)g(s) is the temporal sensitivity in the measurement process. The balanced homodyne detector consists of an arrangement of two photodiodes, whose outputs are subtracted, and illuminated with an auxiliary coherent state of the radiation field (i.e., the local oscillator, LO; see Figure 15). Per the discussion in Section IIIB-4, the LO is used as a tool to investigate the properties of a certain state S of the quantum radiation field under study, and so on a BHD the state S is optically mixed with the coherent LO state (see References [5] or [6] for further details). The quantum field S de-balances the detector (stochastic process of measurement). The expectation value of the observable corresponding to the electronic charge collected at the point P in Figure 15 (i.e., the BHD current) is the difference of excitation probabilities of the two photodiodes [5, 6]: ⟨J⟩_S = P_exc(g,x⃗) − P_exc(g,y⃗), where positions x⃗ and y⃗ correspond to the positions x and y in Figure 15. Further calculations and other theoretical considerations lead to the following final result for ⟨J⟩_S [5, 6]: ⟨J⟩_S = α_el • E^i_LO • ⟨Ê_i(x⃗,t0) + Ê_i(y⃗,t0)⟩_S where α_el depends on the electronic structure of the PIN semiconductor in the photodiode, E^i_LO is the electric field of the LO (corresponding to F in Figure 15), t0 is the LO phase that can easily be varied in experiments, and all field operators Ê_i(x⃗,t) are restricted to the frequency ω of the LO."} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Photodiode x P Photodiode y F(x) F(y) wavefronts LO LO Figure 15. Balanced Homodyne Detector with a Local Oscillator. (courtesy of P. Marecki) The setup is arranged so that the electric field F of the LO at position x has a reversed direction with respect to that at position y. If ⟨J⟩_S vanishes, then the variance of the BHD-output is ⟨J²⟩_S which provides a characterization of the two-point function of the state S. The variance is [5, 6]: ⟨J²⟩_S = α_el² • E^i_LO E^j_LO ⟨[Ê_i(x⃗,t0)+Ê_i(y⃗,t0)][Ê_j(x⃗,t0)+Ê_j(y⃗,t0)]⟩_S , (15) where E^i_LO E^j_LO is the power of the LO field. This expression shows that ⟨J²⟩_S scales quadratically with the amplitude of the electric field of the quantum state S under study and thus linearly with the power of the LO field. The two-point functions can be quantitatively estimated by performing measurements with different powers of the LO. Therefore, BHDs with local oscillators are amplifiers that are capable of measuring the one- and two-point functions of arbitrary states of quantum fields (even for the vacuum). For an experimental study of the vacuum state inside a Casimir cavity, the stationary state is specified to be the ground state (Grd) and thus the one-point function ⟨J⟩_{S=Grd} vanishes. For stationary states the ⟨J²⟩_Grd is related to the spectral density σ_ij(ω,x⃗,y⃗) which is defined as the Fourier transform of the two-point function ⟨Ê_i(x⃗,t0)Ê_j(y⃗,t0)⟩_S with respect to time; therefore, we have for ground states [5, 6]: ⟨J²⟩_Grd = α_el² (E^i_LO)² ∫ dω σ_ij(ω,x⃗,y⃗) |ĝ(ω−ω0)|² , (16)"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY where ĝ(ω) is the Fourier transform of g(t) and is sharply peaked around ω = 0. In general, almost all results of quantum field theory in a vacuum state or under the influence of external conditions (i.e., in vacuum states deformed by boundary conditions or external fields) are derivable from the spectral density. This quantity is usually known analytically, and it is of great interest to measure it for interesting quantum field states. Because the ground state is stationary, the quantum noise in the Casimir cavity is time-independent, i.e., it is independent of the phase of the LO, and thus the spectral density is also time-independent. Marecki [5, 6] derived the diagonal part of the spectral density for the y-components of the quantum electric field between two parallel, perfectly conducting plates (positioned at x = 0 and x = a) in a Casimir cavity (see Figure 2): σ_yy(ω,x,x) = (ω³/4π²) Σ_{n=-∞}^{+∞} [Q(ωnL) − Q(ω|2x−nL|)] (17) for y = 0, where L = 2a is twice the distance between the plates and the function Q(x) is defined as Q(x) = sinx/x + cosx/x² − sinx/x³. Note that the diagonal terms of the spectral density are the important quantities to be measured because they will be dominant if the photodiodes are separated by a sufficiently large distance [5, 6]. Spectral densities reveal much finer details of the quantum ground state than already-measured Casimir forces do. By exploring the freedom of choosing the locations of the photodiodes inside the Casimir cavity as well as the polarizations, phases and frequencies of the LO, one can obtain a detailed characterization of one- and two-point functions of any state S of the quantum electric field. Therefore, an application of this particular type of BHD measurement, via Equations (16) and (17), amounts to a tomography of the ground state of the Casimir cavity. For the experimental detection of the Casimir spectral density with a BHD-type device, the Casimir cavity plates are separated by a = 1 micrometers while the photodiodes inside it are of submicrometer width in the x-direction and submillimeter length in the y-direction (see Figure 16). Photodiodes of several nanometers in size have already been constructed and their high quantum efficiency versions are under development, see Reference [60] and the references cited therein for more technical information. As shown in Figure 16, a coherent state in the TE1 mode of the Casimir cavity with a very small wavenumber in the y-direction provides an appropriate LO. A BHD with such a LO and the photodiodes located as shown in Figure 17 would be sensitive only to the y-component of the quantum electric field. Figure 18 shows a schematic of the BHD apparatus with a LO. In the figure, the linearly polarized signal field S (if present) is optically mixed with a coherent state (LO), which is polarized orthogonally to S, on the polarizing beam splitter (PBS1). The half wave plate (HWP) reflects the planes of polarization with respect to its optical axis, thereby inducing a π/4 shift of the plane of"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY polarization of the signal field S. The subsequent PBS2 separates the two orthogonally polarized signals, which are detected at the photodiodes PDx and PDy. The charge collected at point V (corresponding to point P in Figure 15) provides a measure of ⟨J⟩_Grd (and its higher moments). Note that the setup is arranged in such a way, that if S happened to be a monochromatic coherent state, then it would be phase-matched to the LO at the point x, but shifted in phase by π at the point y. Figure 19 displays Marecki's computer model plot of the predicted Casimir spectral density as a function of the distance from the plates x and the frequency ω. For a comparison with quantum optics literature, he plotted the normalized difference between the vacuum and ground state spectral density in the figure (see References [5] and [6] for more detail). Note in the figure that for ω < πc/a, the Casimir spectral density vanishes: σ_Grd(ω,x,x) = 0, while discontinuities in it appear at ω = nπc/a. Figure 20 displays the corresponding computer model plot by Marecki of the predicted suppressed vacuum fluctuations in the ground state relative to undisturbed vacuum fluctuations (in absence of the plates) in dB, 10Log10[σ_Grd(ω,x,x)/σ_vac(ω,x,x)]. Figure 16. Diagram of Casimir Cavity with BHD Photodiodes. (courtesy of P. Marecki) Figure 17. Experimental Setup of BHD Photodiodes and LO Field. (courtesy of P. Marecki) This setup is drawn on the plot of the y-component of the electric field of the TE1 mode of the Casimir cavity. The mode, serving as the LO, propagates in the z-direction perpendicular to the plot."} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Figure 18. Detailed Schematic of Experimental BHD Apparatus. (courtesy of P. Marecki) Note that point V corresponds to point P in Figure 15. Figure 19. Predicted Casimir Spectral Density σ_yy. (courtesy of P. Marecki) σ_yy is related to the expected output of a BHD with the LO polarized along the y-direction (parallel to the plates) for the ground state in the Casimir cavity. This is plotted as a function of the position x ∈ [0, a] between the plates (separation a = 1 μm is assumed) and the frequency ω ∈ [0, 4πc/a]. Negative values (suppression of fluctuations) are shown in deep purple."} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY dB 4 2 -2 -4 4 6 8 10 12 ω/c [1/μm] Figure 20. Predicted Suppression of Vacuum Fluctuations in dB. (courtesy of P. Marecki) Vacuum fluctuations in the ground state (for field operators restricted to the frequency ω) relative to vacuum fluctuations (in the absence of the plates) for a BHD at x = 0.25 μm (solid line) and x = 0.5 μm (dashed line) within the cavity. The frequency range is ω ∈ [0, 4πc/a]. The predicted spectral density pattern shown in Figure 19 is static, i.e., it is independent of the LO phase and in some regions corresponds to the suppression of vacuum fluctuations by at least 3 dB. Such a behavior is allegedly forbidden by a theorem known as the Quantum Inequalities for quantum fields without external conditions (i.e., \"undeformed,\" or \"undisturbed,\" vacuum states). The theorem states that regions with sub-vacuum fluctuations must be followed by regions with greatly increased vacuum fluctuations no matter what the state of the quantum field is. This has only been verified for single-mode squeezed light, see, e.g., Figures 1 and 14. A major consequence of this theorem is that sub-vacuum fluctuations, and their corresponding sub-vacuum (negative) energy density, cannot persist for long times. What is surprising here is that Marecki (private communication, Leipzig University, Germany, 2010) claims that the Quantum Inequalities should also apply to the case of static sub-vacuum fluctuations, and their corresponding static sub-vacuum (negative) energy density, inside Casimir cavities. The efficacy of the Quantum Inequalities theorem in its application to curved spacetime physics, and more specifically faster-than-light spacetime geometries, has been argued in the literature in which serious theoretical shortcomings of the theorem have been identified by several investigators (see Reference [1] for the details). Therefore Marecki's proposed Casimir cavity BHD experiment provides a possible test of yet unexplored generic quantum field theoretic effects in Casimir geometries, complementary to measurements of Casimir forces. We hope that experimental attempts to verify his predictions will follow. 42 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY CONCLUSION Future aerospace platforms may have propulsion systems that modify their surrounding spacetime geometry to implement faster-than-light spaceflight (via traversable wormholes or warp drives) or produce levitation via antigravity. To engineer such a modification of local spacetime requires the use of quantum sub-vacuum fluctuations and their associated sub-vacuum (or negative) energy density. There are two key examples of specially prepared quantum vacuum states that are known to produce small amounts of sub-vacuum (negative) energy density in the laboratory. These are the well-known Casimir effect and squeezed light. There are several other examples of special quantum vacuum states or particle states that produce sub-vacuum (negative) energy density, but they are still under theoretical study. We already make small amounts of sub-vacuum (negative) energy in the laboratory via the Casimir effect and squeezed light, but we do not yet know if we can access larger amounts for extended periods of time over extended spatial distributions. The Quantum Inequalities theorem suggests that producing large amounts of sub-vacuum (negative) energy in \"deformed\" vacuum states for extended periods of time in flat or curved spacetimes may not be possible. This claim remains as yet untested by experiment while several investigators have strong arguments showing the theorem is in error in these particular cases. Quantum optical homodyne tomography can detect and quantify the fluctuations in a variety of (\"undisturbed\") vacua as well as the sub-vacuum fluctuations found in both squeezed light and Casimir cavities. Squeezed light has time-dependent, alternating regions of sub-vacuum fluctuations (a.k.a. two-point functions) of the quantum electric field. Casimir geometries provide environments with non-trivial position- and frequency-dependent, time-independent, often sub-vacuum fluctuations (two-point functions) of the quantum electric field. Balanced homodyne detectors (BHD) with local oscillators are amplifiers that are capable of providing detailed measurements of the sub-vacuum fluctuations (the two- and n-point functions) of the states of the quantum electromagnetic field. Nearly a decade ago, Hansen et al. [4] reported on their experimental time-domain (or pulsed) BHD device that they developed to make precise measurements of the quantum electric field quadratures of pulsed optical quantum states (e.g., squeezed light). A master laser produced the local oscillator for this device. The device demonstrated a high level of common mode suppression and low electronic noise, which provided large enough signal-to-noise ratio to measure the quantum noise of individual pulses. The device exhibited over 90% quantum efficiency. However, their device was not designed to directly measure the energy density of the individual pulses. We recommend that a research and development program be implemented to modify the design and operation of the time-domain BHD device in order provide this important data. It will be necessary to develop and commercialize a portable time-domain BHD device for the purpose of detecting, measuring, and spatially mapping the sub-vacuum (negative) energy regions produced by a putative pulsed (or \"AC\") negative energy generator that might be used for engineering the spacetime surrounding an aerospace platform for propulsion purposes. A number of modified time-domain BHD devices could also be assembled in a sensor array for surveillance and detection of any anomalous aerospace platforms that might use engineered spacetime effects for propulsion. 43 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY What has not been experimentally measured yet are the sub-vacuum fluctuations and their corresponding sub-vacuum (negative) energy density inside a Casimir cavity. Casimir cavities produce static, or time-independent, sub-vacuum fluctuations and (negative) energy density. Marecki [5, 6] proposed a modified BHD and computed the two-point function and the associated spectral density for the ground state of the quantum electric field in Casimir geometries, and predicted a position- and frequency-dependent pattern of BHD responses if a device of this type is placed inside a Casimir cavity. He discovered that by exploiting a trick with the subtraction of the output of two balanced photodiodes, it is possible to quantify and map the sub-vacuum fluctuations of the quantum field and its corresponding energy density inside the cavity. His modified BHD design uses the electric field of the TE1 mode of the Casimir cavity as the local oscillator. Marecki also discovered that the sub-vacuum (negative) energy density regions inside a Casimir cavity violate the Quantum Inequalities theorem. We recommend that an experimental program be implemented to test Marecki's modified BHD and his predictions for Casimir geometries. Using this device to also test the efficacy of the Quantum Inequalities theorem is a necessary part of the proposed experimental program. If such experiments are successful, then it will be necessary to follow up by implementing a program to develop and commercialize a portable \"modified-Marecki BHD\" device for the purpose of detecting, measuring, and spatially mapping the sub-vacuum (negative) energy regions produced by a putative static (or \"DC\") negative energy generator that would be used for engineering the spacetime surrounding an aerospace platform for propulsion purposes. Because the Casimir effect and its associated negative energy are incredibly feeble, such putative propulsion systems will not involve the use of Casimir cavities to produce a free-space distribution of negative energy surrounding the platform. Therefore, a modified-Marecki BHD will require a high quality laser for the local oscillator and the photodiodes are allowed to be much larger in size. A number of modified-Marecki BHD devices could also be assembled in a sensor array for surveillance and detection of any anomalous aerospace platforms that might use engineered spacetime effects for propulsion. 44 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to thank Professors Ulf Leonhardt and Piotr Marecki for contributing their lecture notes, references, and experimental data to the contents of this report. 45 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY REFERENCES [1] Davis, E. W. (2009), \"Faster-Than-Light Approaches in General Relativity,\" in Frontiers of Propulsion Science, eds. M. G. Millis and E. W. Davis, Progress in Astronautics & Aeronautics Series, Vol. 227, American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics Press, Reston, VA, pp. 473-509. [2] Davis, E. W. (2009), \"Gravity Control within Newtonian and General Relativity Physics,\" in Frontiers of Propulsion Science, eds. M. G. Millis and E. W. Davis, Progress in Astronautics & Aeronautics Series, Vol. 227, American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics Press, Reston, VA, pp. 175-227. [3] Epstein, H., Glaser, V., and Jaffe, A. (1965), \"Nonpositivity of the Energy Density in Quantized Field Theories,\" Nuovo Cimento, Vol. 36, pp. 1016-1022. [4] Hansen, H., et al. (2001), \"Ultrasensitive pulsed, balanced homodyne detector: application to time-domain quantum measurements,\" Optics Letters, Vol. 26, pp. 1714-1716. [5] Marecki, P. (2008), \"Balanced homodyne detectors and Casimir energy densities,\" Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, Vol. 41, 164037. [6] Marecki, P. (2008), \"Balanced homodyne detectors in quantum field theory,\" Physical Review A, Vol. 77, 012101. [7] Ford, L. H., and Roman, T. A. (2003), \"Negative Energy, Wormholes and Warp Drive,\" Scientific American, Vol. 13, pp. 84-91. [8] Morris, M. S., and Thorne, K. S. (1988), \"Wormholes in spacetime and their use for interstellar travel: A tool for teaching general relativity,\" American Journal of Physics, Vol. 56, pp. 395-412. [9] Visser, M. (1995), Lorentzian Wormholes: From Einstein to Hawking, AIP Press, New York. [10] Hawking, S. W., and Ellis, G. F. R. (1973), The Large-Scale Structure of Space-Time, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 1973, pp. 88-91, 95-96. [11] Visser, M. (1990), \"Wormholes, baby universes, and causality,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 41, pp. 1116-1124. [12] Visser, M. (1996), \"Gravitational vacuum polarization. I. Energy conditions in the Hartle-Hawking vacuum,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 54, pp. 5103-5115. [13] Visser, M. (1996), \"Gravitational vacuum polarization. II. Energy conditions in the Boulware vacuum,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 54, pp. 5116-5122. [14] Visser, M. (1996), \"Gravitational vacuum polarization. III. Energy conditions in the (1+1)-dimensional Schwarzschild spacetime,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 54, pp. 5123-5128. [15] Visser, M. (1997), \"Gravitational vacuum polarization. IV. Energy conditions in the Unruh vacuum,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 56, pp. 936-952. [16] Barcelo, C., and Visser, M. (2002), \"Twilight for the energy conditions?,\" International Journal of Modern Physics D, Vol. 11, pp. 1553-1560. [17] Herrmann, F. (1989), \"Energy Density and Stress: A New Approach to Teaching Electromagnetism,\" American Journal of Physics, Vol. 57, pp. 707-714. [18] Drummond, P. D., and Ficek, Z., eds. (2004), Quantum Squeezing, Springer-Verlag, Berlin. [19] Hochberg, D., and Kephart, T. W. (1991), \"Lorentzian wormholes from the gravitationally squeezed vacuum,\" Physics Letters B, Vol. 268, pp. 377-383. [20] DeWitt, B. S. (1975), \"Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime,\" Physics Reports, Vol. 19C, pp. 295-357. [21] DeWitt, B. S. (1979), \"Quantum gravity: the new synthesis,\" General Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey, edited by S. W. Hawking and W. Israel, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 680-745. [22] DeWitt, B. S. (1989), \"The Casimir Effect in Field Theory,\" Physics in the Making, Essays on Developments in 20th Century Physics, In Honour of H. B. G. Casimir, edited by A. Sarlemijn and J. Sparnaay, North-Holland Elsevier Science Publ., New York, pp. 247-272. [23] Birrell, N. D., and Davies, P. C. W. (1984), Quantum fields in curved space, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK. [24] Saunders, S., and Brown, H. R., eds. (1991), The Philosophy of Vacuum, Clarendon Press, Oxford. [25] Milonni, P. W. (1994), The Quantum Vacuum: An Introduction to Quantum Electrodynamics, Academic Press, New York, Chapters 1, 2, and 8. [26] Milton, K. A. (2001), The Casimir Effect: Physical Manifestations of Zero-Point Energy, World Scientific, New Jersey. [27] Mostepanenko, V. M., and Trunov, N. N. (2007), The Casimir Effect and its Applications, Oxford University Press, Oxford. [28] Bordag, M., et al. (2009), Advances in the Casimir Effect, Oxford University Press, Oxford. [29] Vollick, D. N. (1998), \"Negative energy density states for the Dirac field in flat spacetime,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 57, pp. 3484-3488. [30] Yu, H., and Shu, W. (2003), \"Quantum states with negative energy density in the Dirac field and quantum inequalities,\" Physics Letters B, Vol. 570, pp. 123-128. [31] Alcubierre, M. (1994), \"The warp drive: hyper-fast travel within general relativity,\" Classical and Quantum Gravity, Vol. 11, pp. L73-L77. [32] Olum, K. D. (1998), \"Superluminal Travel Requires Negative Energies,\" Physical Review Letters, Vol. 81, pp. 3567-3570. [33] Gao, S., and Wald, R. M. (2000), \"Theorems on gravitational time delay and related issues,\" Classical and Quantum Gravity, Vol. 17, pp. 4999-5008. 46 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"257961189f00ae39","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n[34] Morris, M. S., Thorne, K. S., and Yurtsever, U. (1988), \"Wormholes, time machines, and the weak energy conditions,\" Physical Review Letters, Vol. 61, pp. 1446-1449.\n[35] Ford, L. H. (1978), \"Quantum coherence effects and the second law of thermodynamics,\" Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 364, pp. 227-236.\n[36] Davies, P. C. W. (1982), \"Can moving mirrors violate the second law of thermodynamics?,\" Physics Letters B, Vol. 11, p. 215.\n[37] Everett, A. E. (1996), \"Warp drive and causality,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 53, pp. 7365-7368.\n[38] Gerry, C. C., and Knight, P. L. (2005), Introductory Quantum Optics, Cambridge University Press, New York.\n[39] Mulliken, R. S. (1924), \"The Band Spectrum of Boron Monoxide,\" Nature, Vol. 114, p. 349.\n[40] Slusher, R. E., et al. (1985), \"Observation of Squeezed States Generated by Four-Wave Mixing in an Optical Cavity,\" Physical Review Letters, Vol. 55, pp. 2409-2412.\n[41] Slusher, R. E., and Yurke, B. (1986), \"Squeezed Light,\" Scientific American, Vol. 254, pp. 50-56.\n[42] Robinson, A. L. (1985), \"Bell Labs Generates Squeezed Light,\" Science, Vol. 230, pp. 927-929.\n[43] Robinson, A. L. (1986), \"Now Four Laboratories Have Squeezed Light,\" Science, Vol. 233, pp. 280-281.\n[44] Saleh, B. E. A., and Teich, M. C. (1991), Fundamentals of Photonics, Wiley Series in Pure and Applied Optics, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, pp. 414-416.\n[45] Caves, C. M. (1981), \"Quantum-mechanical noise in an interferometer,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 23, pp. 1693-1708.\n[46] Pfenning, M. J. (1998), \"Quantum Inequality Restrictions on Negative Energy Densities in Curved Spacetimes,\" Ph.D. Dissertation, Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, Tufts Univ., Medford, MA.\n[47] Casimir, H. B. G., \"On the Attraction Between Two Perfectly Conducting Plates,\" Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wetensch., Vol. 51, 1948, pp. 793-796.\n[48] Lamoreaux, S. K., \"Demonstration of the Casimir Force in the 0.6 to 6 μm Range,\" Physical Review Letters, Vol. 78, 1997, pp. 5-8.\n[49] Mohideen, U., \"Precision Measurement of the Casimir Force from 0.1 to 0.9 μm,\" Physical Review Letters, Vol. 81, 1998, pp. 4549-4552.\n[50] Chen, F., et al., \"Theory confronts experiment in the Casimir force measurements: Quantification of errors and precision,\" Physical Review A, Vol. 69, 2004, 022117.\n[51] Brown, L. S., and Maclay, G. J., \"Vacuum Stress between Conducting Plates: An Image Solution,\" Physical Review, Vol. 184, 1969, pp. 1272-1279.\n[52] Walker, W. R., \"Negative energy fluxes and moving mirrors in curved space,\" Classical and Quantum Gravity, Vol. 2, 1985, pp. L37-L40.\n[53] Moore, G. T., \"Quantum Theory of the Electromagnetic Field in a Variable-Length One-Dimensional Cavity,\" Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 11, 1970, pp. 2679-2691.\n[54] Davies, P. C. W., and Ottewill, A. C., \"Detection of negative energy: 4-dimensional examples,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 65, 2002, 104014.\n[55] Neergaard-Nielsen, J. S., et al. (2006), \"Generation of a Superposition of Odd Photon Number States for Quantum Information Networks,\" Physical Review Letters, Vol. 97, 083604.\n[56] Ourjoumtsev, A., et al. (2006), \"Generating Optical Schrödinger Kittens for Quantum Information Processing,\" Science, Vol. 312, pp. 83-86.\n[57] Mandel, L., and Wolf, E. (1995), Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, Section 17.2.\n[58] Leonhardt, U. (1997), Measuring the Quantum State of Light, Cambridge Studies in Modern Optics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 98-143.\n[59] Schneider, K., et al. (1998), \"Generation of strongly squeezed continuous-wave light at 1064 nm,\" Optics Express, Vol. 2, Issue 3, pp. 59-64.\n[60] Collin, S., Pardo, F., and Pelouard, J.-L. (2003), \"Resonant-cavity-enhanced subwavelength metal semiconductor-metal photodetector,\" Applied Physics Letters, Vol. 83, pp. 1521-1523.\n47\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"25eb19f04b251a7f","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026 Under Section 1842 of the National Defense\nAuthorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024\n\nSEE BOTTOM OF PAGE FOR ADDITIONAL SPECIAL CONTROLS, IF ANY\nCONFIDENTIAL\nINFORMATION REPORT\nPREPARED AND DISSEMINATED BY\nCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY\nThis material contains information affecting the National Defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S.C. Secs. 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\nCOUNTRY Hungary\nREPORT NO. 00-B-93674\nSUBJECT Report of Unusual Flying Object Sightings and Attendant Scientific Activity\nDATE DISTRIBUTED 17 Apr 56\nNO. OF PAGES 1 NO. OF ENCLS.\nSUPPLEMENT TO REPORT #\nPLACE ACQUIRED (By source)\nRESPONSIVE TO\nOO/c. Guide 15 BAIR 201 S1-806\nDATE ACQUIRED (By source) Nov 55\nDATE OF INFORMATION Nov 55\nTHIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION\nSOURCE Naturalized US citizen of Hungarian extraction. He corresponds regularly with two nieces living in Budapest.\n1. In November 1955 I received a letter from my niece in Budapest. This letter contained the following interesting item (free translation):\n\"The so-called flying saucers (rockets) [sic] for several weeks kept the people in a nervous state. These very fast speeding flyers kept scientific groups very busy. I'm sure you heard already from the papers, 12 thousand km per hour was estimated on these flyers.\"\n2. Included with the letter was the following sketch indicating the formation and suspected course of the above objects:\nBudapest\nMoscow\n3. This is the first time my niece has mentioned such objects in her letters.\n4. Available on loan from CIA Library is a photostatic copy of original letter in Hungarian, and an English translation. The excerpt quoted in para. 1 is marked in brackets in this letter. UNCLASSIFIED\n- end -\nCONFIDENTIAL\nDISTRIBUTION\nSTATE ARMY NAVY AIR FBI\nNOFORN NO DISSEM ABROAD LIMITED\nLIMITED: Dissemination limited to full-time employees of CIA, AEC and FBI; and, within State and Defense, to the intelligence components, other offices producing NIS elements, and higher echelons with their immediate supporting staffs. Not to be disseminated to consultants, external projects or reserve personnel on short term active duty (excepting individuals who are normally full-time employees of CIA, AEC, FBI, State or Defense) unless the written permission of the originating office has been obtained through the Assistant Director for Collection and Dissemination, CIA."} {"doc_id":"25eb19f04b251a7f","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REIGN DOCUMENTS DIVISION Ref-00-B 93674\n\nDear Uncle [REDACTED]\n\nI don't know whether the letter I sent before will arrive. I wish you all a very Merry Christmas and a happy New Year. Here, the children are preparing for Christmas. The shops are full of toys and Christmas trees. The streets are crowded with window shoppers.\nThe three of us are spending the holidays in Pest [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] The children will have a vacation from 20 December through 17 January, [REDACTED] I took a day off on All Souls' Day [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] you write so little. How are you? Has the family grown? Are you all well?\n[REDACTED] is having a lot of trouble with her back. [REDACTED] has been sent off for a week to do some work in the province, he won't return till the evening of the 24th.\nA famous German circus is on tour here now with many animals and artists. They say it is very good. We are planning to see it with the children.\nEveryone has been excited by the so-called saucers for the past few weeks. These fast-rushing heavenly phenoma have been and still are keeping scores of scientists busy. [REDACTED] has surely seen them or read about them; these amazing fliers moved at a speed of 12,000 kilometers per hour.\nWe wish you all good health and send our regards and affection to mother and the children. Much love and many prayers, [REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"25eb19f04b251a7f","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE REFERENCE DOCUMENT\nAcquisition Threat Support\nMetamaterials for Aerospace Applications\n6 April 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-1004-006\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Metamaterials for Aerospace Applications\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 78\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nDefinition of Metamaterials ... 1\nApplications to Sub-Diffraction Imaging: Super-Lens and Hyper-Lens ... 6\nApplications to Circuits and Waveguide Miniaturization: Slowing Down and Manipulating Electromagnetic Pulses (EMP) Using Advanced Metamaterials ... 16\nMetamaterials for Energy Harvesting ... 20\nNonlinear Non-Reciprocal Chiral Metamaterials: For Developing Novel Optical Isolators and \"One-Way\" Microwave Mirrors ... 27\nTunable Switchable Metamaterials ... 30\nSummary and Conclusions ... 31\nReferences ... 31\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Example of a Metamaterial Component: The Magnetic Split Ring Resonator (SRR) Design ... 2\nFigure 2. Example of Another Metamaterial Component: Electric Ring Resonator (ERR) ... 2\nFigure 3. Geometry of Original Planar Metamaterial Unit Cells (OE1-OE6) and Their Complements (CE1-CE6) ... 3\nFigure 4. Recent Optical Metamaterials for Telecommunication Wavelength and Mid-Infrared Indefinite Permittivity Material ... 5\nFigure 5. Schematic of The Super-lens With n=-1 Refractive Index Corresponding to ( Surrounded by Vacuum ... 7\nFigure 6. Schematic of the SiC-based Super-lens Which is Imaging Sub-wavelength Holes Buried Under the SiO2 Layer ... 8\nFigure 7. Theoretical Concepts (left panel) and Experimental Implementation (right panel) of an Optical Hyperlens Capable of Magnifying Sub-Diffraction Objects to Observable (larger than Size ... 9\nFigure 8. Hyperlens Based on a Converging Array of Metal Wires ... 10\nFigure 9. Far-Field Super-lens (FSL) Based on an Indefinite Permittivity Metamaterial Placed Between the Object and the Image-Releasing Grating ... 12\nFigure 10. Tomographic Multi-Beam Multi-Detector Holography of Sub-Wavelength Objects Using Indefinite Permittivity Medium (IPM) ... 12\nFigure 11. First Experimental Demonstration of Propagating Sub-Diffraction Waves in the Indefinite Permittivity Medium (IPM) ... 13\nFigure 12. Schematic for 2-Beams/2-Detectors Interferometric Measurement and Numerical Simulation. ... 14\nFigure 13. Experimental Setup for 2-Beams/2-Detectors Interferometric Measurement in the Lab and Preliminary Experimental Results ... 15\n\niii\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 14. Schematic of Pulse Compression in Magnetized Plasma ... 16\nFigure 15. Trapped Rainbow: A Waveguide With Negative Index Core Can Stop Light ... 17\nFigure 16. \"Plasmonic Molecule\" Exhibiting EIT ... 18\nFigure 17. True Multi-Layer Metamaterial With a Unit Cell Shown in Figure16: Radiative Antenna (Single Metal Strip) Coupled to a Dark Antenna (Two Perpendicular Metal Bars) ... 19\nFigure 18. \"Perfect\" Narrow-Band Microwave Absorber ... 20\nFigure 19. Wide-Angle Plasmonic Absorber Based on Negative Index Metamaterial ... 21\nFigure 20. Specific Design of a Wide-Angle Plasmonic Absorber Based on Negative Index Metamaterial Operating at λ=1550 nm ... 22\nFigure 21. Experimental Reflectivity vs. Wavelength and Theoretical Plot of Reflectivity Contours ... 23\nFigure 22. Preliminary Attempts to Design a Better Absorber Using Complementary MetaMaterials (U-shaped C-MM) ... 25\nFigure 23. Engineering the Complex Reflectivity Coefficient Using the Concept of a MetaMirror. ... 26\nFigure 24. Example of a Generic Chiral Metamaterial ... 28\nFigure 25. Example of Time-Irreversibility of Light Propagation Inside the Twisted Fiber Core ... 29\nFigure 26. THz Properties of an Electric Split Ring Resonator ... 31\n\niv\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefinition of Metamaterials\n\nA metamaterial is defined as an artificial medium whose properties (mechanical, optical, magnetic, or other) cannot be found in naturally-occurring materials. The emphasis of this study will be on electromagnetic and optical metamaterials. Such metamaterials can exhibit rather extreme properties, such as negative refractive index, which implies that both electric permittivity and magnetic permeability must be negative (ε < 0, μ < 0) (Reference 1). Such metamaterials used to be called \"left-handed\" because of the unusual phase relationship between the electric and magnetic fields. Specifically, in most (positive index, including vacuum) media one uses the right-hand rule to define the relationship between electric field (E) magnetic field (H), and the propagation wavenumber (k). The physical basis of the right-hand rule is that the direction of energy propagation defined by the Poynting vector S = cE×H/4π and the direction of the phase velocity (defined by the wavenumber k) must coincide. That does not hold true for negative index metamaterials where the two directions are opposite, therefore, the left-handed relationship must hold for the three vectors. Nevertheless, the \"left-handed\" designation did not withstand the test of time because it was causing confusion and creating irrelevant allusions to helical (a.k.a. chiral) structures. Although chiral structures can indeed exhibit negative index behavior (Reference 2), chirality is not necessary.\n\nA typical metamaterial consists of resonant elements such as Split Ring Resonators (SRR). An example of an SRR is shown in Figure 1. The main function of the SRR is to enable strong magnetic response of the structure. A simple empirical formula exists for the magnetic permeability of a metamaterial comprised of the SRRs:\n\nμ = 1 − Fω²M/(ω² − ω²M) < 0, (1)\n\nwhere ω_M is the resonant frequency of the SRR, and F is proportional to the volume filling factor of SRRs. It is noteworthy that SRRs are designed in such a way that it has a large capacitance. As the result, the resonant frequency of an SRR is small, (that is, the SRR-containing cell is very sub-wavelength). In the example shown in Figure 1 (taken from Reference 6), the unit cell operated at ω/2π = 10 GHz is λ/10. In fact, the sub-wavelength size of the metamaterial is what distinguishes them from their close cousins: photonic crystals. By properly designing magnetic SRRs, it is possible to achieve any value of μ for any given frequency. Special challenges exist for optical structures, though, as will be explained below.\n\n1\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Far Field Super-Lens Based on the Interferometry of Sub-Diffraction Waves.\nSub-diffraction imaging has long been considered to be possible only using near-field microscopes. Those are fairly complex, slow-scanning, and large devices that are not appropriate for advanced aerospace platforms. Metamaterials enable new imaging modalities: super-lenses, hyper-lenses, and far-field super-lenses. In addition to a survey of the existing scientific literature, novel ideas on developing a new interferometric Far-field Super-Lens (FSL) based on the multi-beam multi-detector technique utilizing materials with Indefinite Permittivity Tensor are presented. Fabrication of such Indefinite Permittivity Materials (IPMs) for the mid-infrared part of the spectrum is achieved and demonstrates the capabilities of transmitting electromagnetic waves with the spatial period much smaller than the vacuum wavelength of light. Interference between sub-diffraction waves enables disentangling multiple diffractive orders and extracting their amplitudes.\n\n• Nonlinear Non-Reciprocal Chiral Metamaterials: Developing Novel Optical Isolators and \"One-Way\" Microwave Mirrors. These developments are motivated by the need to construct one-way \"light diodes\" for compact optical isolators. Presently there are two approaches to optical isolation: the most common using magnetic fields, and the less developed based on using nonlinearities. A different approach relies on the phenomenon of adiabatic mode conversion in nonlinear chiral metamaterials. Preliminary theoretical results for a simple chiral fiber with a variable twist period (pitch) that enables full transmission of a tightly confined core mode in the forward direction and full mode-conversion of the core mode into a cladding mode for the backwards propagation is obtained.\n\n• Slowing Down Light and Miniaturizing Optical Components Using the Phenomenon of Electromagnetically Induced Transparency in Metamaterials. The speed of light places a natural limit on the size of optical/microwave components. Metamaterials offer an exciting opportunity to slow down light. This has two major implications: (a) light can be stored/manipulated in smaller volumes, and (b) nonlinear effects are strongly enhanced by the resulting energy compression.\n\nApplications to Sub-Diffraction Imaging: Super-Lens and Hyper-Lens\n\nThe super-lens is one of the earliest applications of metamaterials (Reference 21), and its principle is shown is Figure 5. Without the super-lens, all information about sub-diffraction (or sub-wavelengths, which is equivalent) features of the periodic object would have been lost. The reason for the information loss is evanescent decay of the large spatial wavenumbers. The only method of accessing/measuring these features would be to scan the object using a near field scanning optical microscope. By inserting a super-lens between the object and the imaging plane, evanescent waves may be amplified and the image transferred forward. Unfortunately, this approach by itself does not remove the need for a near-field scanning device; the image that is recreated in the imaging plane is still sub-wavelength, and needs to be read out.\n\n6\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 5. Schematic of the Super-Lens with n=-1 Refractive Index Corresponding to (ε = -1, μ = -1) Surrounded By Vacuum. Super-lens' presence enables imaging sub-diffraction objects such as the periodic grating shown here.\n\nThere are, however, interesting circumstances when it is very important to transport the image towards the scanning device. One such special circumstance is spatially-resolved spectroscopy of small (for example, cellular) structures. One can envision space expeditions to other planets that could, potentially, result in finding some evidence of primitive cellular-level life. It would then be highly desirable to examine the structure of the living cell in its natural environment. In all likelihood, that environment would be liquid. Therefore, it would be very desirable to examine the cell without actually touching it with a tip of a near-field optical microscope. Thus, the sub-surface imaging of a small object which is buried underneath a liquid layer would be necessary. No such experiments have so far been conducted. However, several years ago there was an experiment demonstrating imaging of sub-diffraction objects buried under the layer of silicon dioxide.\n\nThe schematic and experimental results from the experiment (Reference 19) are shown in Figure 6. In this experiment the sub-wavelength objects were simple holes that were milled in the metal using an FIB. They were buried underneath the super-lens consisting of SiC (negative epsilon material for mid-infrared frequencies) and silicon dioxide (positive epsilon material). Note that this configuration (materials with ε1 > 0 and ε2 ≈ -ε1 < 0 joined together: sandwiched or positioned next to each other) is typical for a near-field super-lens. The difference between the near-field super-lens shown in Figure 6 and the \"ideal\" super-lens shown in Figure 5 is that the ideal also requires a material with a negative value of magnetic permeability."} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\na\n\nSiO2 200 nm\nSiC 400 nm\nSiO2 200 nm\n50 nm\nAu\n\nd e f g\n\nFigure 6. Schematic of the SiC-Based Super-Lens Which is Imaging Sub-Wavelength Holes Buried Under the SiO2 Layer. The imaged objects are λ/20 holes milled in gold using FIB. The scattered signal is picked up by the tip of an NSOM and directed towards the IR detector. Depending on the imaging wavelength, either amplitude (e) or the phase (f,g) of the signal are prominent.\n\nAs the laser beam scatters off the sub-wavelength holes, its electric field is picked up by the tip of a Near-Field Scattering Optical Microscope (NSOM) and re-scattered into the far-field. There it is interfered with the reference pulse and picked up by an infrared detector. Note that this interferometric technique enables one to extract both the phase and amplitude of the field, as shown in Figure 6. This significantly broadens the spectral range over which the super-lens yields meaningful information. For example, the amplitude contrast is highest at λ =10.85 μm shown in panel (e) while the phase contrasts are the highest at λ =11.03 μm and λ =10.65 μm."} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDespite the convenience of the near-field super-lens, (that is, its ability to transport the image) it still requires an NSOM to read out the image. Within the confines of an advanced aerospace platform such device (with its necessary auxiliaries) may not fit. Therefore, one has to consider alternative metamaterials-based ideas for sub-diffraction imaging. One such idea, the hyper-lens, has been proposed recently by two groups (References 22-24), and already experimentally tested by another group (Reference 25). The principle of the hyper-lens is very simple: to use an indefinite permittivity medium (sometimes referred to as the hyperbolic medium because the relationship between the propagation wavenumbers and the frequency, also known as the constant frequency contour, has a hyperbolic nature) in a tapered format. Several conceptual implementations such as the spoke-like structure and the cylindrical multi-layer structure (see Figure 7, left panel) have been suggested. The hyper-lens works on two principles: (a) indefinite permittivity materials (of which the super-lens is one example) are capable of propagating sub-diffraction waves, and (b) the expanding nature of the hyper-lens can magnify images to the λ/2 size, at which point they become observable in a conventional microscope. One recent experimental implementation of the hyper-lens in UV is shown in the right panel of Figure 7. The hyper-lens is made of 16 layers of Ag/Al2O3. This specific hyper-lens was used for imaging a line pair object with line width of 35 nm and spacing of 150 nm and was operated at λ =400 nm. The magnified image (350 nm spacing) can be clearly resolved with an optical microscope [numerical aperture (NA) = 1.4], thus demonstrating magnification and projection of a sub-diffraction-limited image into the far field.\n\nFigure 7. Theoretical Concepts (left panel) and Experimental Implementation (right panel) of an Optical Hyper-lens Capable of Magnifying Sub-Diffraction Objects to Observable (larger than λ/2) Size"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nNote that the hyper-lens concept does not require employing a bulky near-field scanning optical microscope. However, the practical implementation of the hyper-lens is by no means simple. The original implementation required depositing the sample on the curved surface of the hyper-lens. A more practical implementation of the super-lens has been theoretically proposed by another group (Reference 26). The concept is shown in Figure 8. The hyper-lens involves an array of thin metallic wires converging towards the tip. As is demonstrated, a dense array of metal wires separated by much less than the wavelength constitutes a metamaterial with the indefinite permittivity tensor. Specifically, the tensor component along the wires is given by:\n\nεzz = 1 - ωp²/(ω² - kz²c²) and ε⊥ = 1, (3)\n\nwhere the z component is along the wires and perpendicular direction is normal to the wires. Because the only propagating waves are the TEM waves satisfying the ω² = kz²c² dispersion relation, this meta-medium is strongly anisotropic and supports sub-wavelength waves which perform imaging. The spatial resolution is given by the spacing between wires. Figure 8 (right panel) shows the magnified image of a small (λ/25) object placed at the tip of the hyper-lens. The magnification factor is 5x.\n\nFigure 8. Hyper-Lens Based on a Converging Array of Metal Wires. A small object can be placed at the tip, illuminated from the top, and magnified by the expanding array of wires. Left panel: schematic. Right panel: λ/25 object magnified by a factor 5x by the expanding hyper-lens. This hyper-lens can operate at mid-IR frequencies. (Reference 26)\n\nAnother concept for sub-wavelength imaging employing metamaterials is the so-called Far-Field Super-Lens (FSL). The concept is pioneered in Reference 27. The idea is"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndescribed in Figure 9. A sub-wavelength object (for example, two slits) is located at the bottom of a multi-layer super-lens. Another sub-wavelength grating is deposited on top of the super-lens. Because the super-lens (and for that matter, any indefinite permittivity material) is capable of propagating sub-diffraction waves, the electromagnetic perturbations created by the object are propagated through the super-lens upwards, until they encounter the sub-wavelength grating. At that point these sub-wavelength perturbations are diffracted on the image-releasing grating and converted into the far-field electromagnetic waves. Those far-field waves are collected by the objective of a microscope and observed through the eyepiece. The schematic is shown in Figure 9(a). Note that, again, there is no need for NSOM. The actual implementation of the FSL used the following object: a nanowire pair with 50 nm wide slit and 70 nm gap inscribed by focused ion beam on a 40 nm thick Cr film on the quartz substrate. Diffraction-limited image from a conventional optical microscope cannot resolve the two nanowires (NA = 1.4, λ0 = 377 nm) as can be seen in Figure 9(c), but the FSL-equipped microscope can as shown in Figure 9(d).\n\nDespite the success of this demonstration, there are serious issues involved in imaging sub-wavelength objects. Specifically it is pointed out in Reference 27 that multiple diffractive orders can become entangled, (that is, launched in the same direction into the far field). Disentangling these diffraction orders is very important. The payoff would be imaging of fully 2-D (flat) objects with a resolution smaller than the period of the image-releasing grating. More precisely, this ambiguity is illustrated by the right panel in Figure 10. If the sub-wavelength object is represented by the continuous spectrum (blue line), then the spectrum can be sampled within the discrete set of \"zones\" which are defined by the diffractive orders of the image-releasing grating. The width of each zone is 2ω/c, and they are labeled as 1st order, 2nd order, and so forth. Wave numbers belonging to the different zones can be diffracted onto the same far-field detector as explained in Figure 10. In order to disentangle the 1st and the 2nd zones, a single detector cannot provide sufficient information. It turns out that using two detectors (A and B) and two laser beams (Beam A and Beam B) provides additional information that is sufficient to disentangle the two zones. This additional information is obtained by comparing the intensity on the two detectors A and B. Another advantage of this imaging technique is that it is interferometric in nature. Therefore, even if the contribution of some of these spectral zones' orders is very weak, it can still be detected because of the high sensitivity of the interferometric techniques. What makes this interference special is that it involves sub-diffractive waves propagating through the indefinite permittivity metamaterial. Below some of the experiments conducted in the laboratory that demonstrate such interference are discussed."} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 9. FSL Based on an Indefinite Permittivity Metamaterial Placed Between the Object and the Image-Releasing Grating. The grating releases into the far field sub-diffraction waves produced by light scattering off the object. The role of the metamaterial is to propagate sub-diffraction waves from object to grating. (Reference 27)\n\nEver since Merlin's invention (Reference 28) of the sub-diffraction near-field plate, it has become clear that the interference between sub-diffraction electromagnetic fields can result in the formation of a deeply sub-wavelength image. The near-field plate, however, is not an imaging device; its purpose is to create a well-defined image using an elaborate pre-fabricated sub-wavelength structure on the plate's surface. The goal for this study is to observe an a priori unknown sub-wavelength image using a near-field structure. In the past, successes (Reference 19) in retrieving images of sub-wavelength objects (such as λ/20 holes) using an NSOM for radiation detection were achieved. An NSOM is a near-field instrument, therefore, a much more desirable detection method would involve far-field detection. To advance this goal, and to develop a tool sometimes referred to as the FSL, we've initiated research on multi-beam multi-detector sub-wavelength holography illustrated in Figure 10.\n\nFigure 10. Tomographic Multi-Beam Multi-Detector Holography of Sub-Wavelength Objects Using Indefinite Permittivity Medium (IPM). Incident beam(s) scatter off the sub-λ object, propagate through the IPM, and then get re-scattered into the far field by the grating with the period D. The purpose of the multi-detector arrangement is to disentangle the k1 and k2 spatial wave numbers in the object's spectrum (shown in the left panel). Beams A and B are phase-shifted with respect to each other.\n\n12"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Our implementation of the FSL utilizes an IPM whose dielectric permittivity tensor is anisotropic and contains positive and negative components: ε⊥ > 0, ε∥ < 0, where parallel refers to the IPM/object interface. We have already fabricated such IPMs using SiO2-SiC-SiO2 multi-layer, and are investigating other approaches involving selectively-doped semiconductor multi-layers similar to the ones used by Gmachl's group at Princeton. SiO2-SiC-SiO2 multi-layers are produced in-house (with SiC films shipped by Professor Ferro from University of Lyons, France). The main function of the IPM is to propagate sub-diffraction waves (k∥ > ω/c) with as little decay as possible. That happens because these sub-diffraction waves are no longer evanescent: k⊥² ≈ -k∥² ε∥ / ε⊥ > 0. It is demonstrated experimentally that there exists a frequency range for which sub-diffraction waves propagate through the IPM with less attenuation than the radiation-zone waves (k∥ < ω/c), see Figure 11.\n\nFigure 11. First Experimental Demonstration of Propagating Sub-Diffraction Waves in the IPM. (Left): Experimental setup demonstrating how sub-diffraction waves are launched into the IPM using FIB-fabricated sub-wavelength grating. Because the periods of the bottom (\"launching\") and top (\"transforming\") gratings are different, far-field observation of different harmonics of the bottom grating is enabled. (Right): Experimental results: the first sub-diffraction harmonic of the grating (green line) becomes stronger than the zeroth radiation-zone harmonic of the grating (blue line) in the region where ε⊥ > 0, ε∥ < 0.\n\nOnce sub-diffraction waves propagate through the IPM, they can diffract on the image-releasing grating (see Figure 10) and be radiated out into the far field. A detector array can be used to collect the signal and reconstruct the image. Unfortunately, different wave numbers k∥ of the object are directed into the same detector and produce an ambiguity in extracting their respective amplitudes A(k∥). This ambiguity is illustrated by Figure 10: wave numbers k1 = Δk + 2π/D and k2 = Δk + 4π/D are directed to the same far-field detector. Simply put, a single number (intensity of light with the wave number Δk < ω/c incident on the detector) is insufficient for determining two scattering\n\n13"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"amplitudes (A(k1) and A(k2)). Therefore, a new concept has to be developed, and the multi-detector technique is such a concept.\n\nThe concept requires two detectors and two coherent laser beams. The two beams are formed using a beam-splitter and a variable delay line imparting a phase shift to the two beams (see the actual experimental photograph in Figure 13 where the beam-splitter BS and the Delay Line are shown). We have theoretically demonstrated that the intensity dependences of the two detector intensities I1(ψ) and I2(ψ) as a function of the phase delay ψ provides enough information to recover both A(k1) and A(k2).\n\nFigure 12. (Left): Schematic for 2-Beams/2-Detectors Interferometric Measurement. (Right): Numerical Simulation: intensity on the two detectors as a function of the phase delay between beams A and B produced by the interference between the zeroth and first diffractive orders of the bottom diffractive grating (numerical simulation). The second detector provides the necessary second data point which is necessary for separating the contributions of different diffractive orders.\n\nTwo sets of experiments demonstrating the feasibility of the concept are conducted. None of these experiments constitutes imaging per se. However, without demonstrating the two key milestones described below, proper imaging experiments cannot be attempted.\n\nThe first milestone involves demonstrating that IPM indeed supports propagating (non-evanescent) sub-diffraction waves. Figure 11 shows the experimental schematic (left panel) and experimental results. The bottom grating \"imprints\" its Fourier components (zeroth, first, second, third, and so forth) onto the incident laser pulse thereby generating electromagnetic waves that are launched into the SiC-based IPM. The zeroth harmonic is inside the radiation zone (that is, it is not sub-diffraction), while the first, second, and so forth sub-diffraction. These EM waves scatter off the top grating having a slightly different period and are released into the far field. Because the direction in which waves are released depend on the Fourier harmonic's number, we can experimentally separate and measure them. Clearly, the relative magnitudes of these diffractive orders dramatically vary as a function of the laser wavelength. For example, the zeroth diffraction order clearly dominates in the ε⊥ < 0, ε∥ > 0 frequency range.\n\nHowever, in the ε⊥ > 0, ε∥ < 0 frequency range the first diffractive order becomes larger\n\n14"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"than the zeroth one. This confirms the recently predicted effect that for IPMs one can indeed observe a very counterintuitive effect: sub-diffraction waves can indeed propagate with less loss than the diffraction-limited ones.\n\nThe second milestone involves demonstrating the possibility of observing the interference of sub-diffraction electromagnetic waves inside the IPM using the two-beam/two-detector technique. Figure 10 demonstrates this interference pattern which reveals the phase advance of the sub-diffraction waves inside the IPM. While we have so far demonstrated the interference between the first Fourier component of the grating (sub-diffraction) and the zeroth Fourier component, we see the possibility of interfering even more sub-diffraction waves (2nd and 3rd).\n\nFigure 13. (Left): Experimental Setup for 2-Beams/2-Detectors Interferometric Measurement in Our Lab. (Right): Preliminary Experimental Results: infrared intensity on two detectors (red and black lines) are (i) different from each other; (ii) have a sinusoidal dependence on the delay line position (in microns), which is equivalent to the phase delay between the two beams; (iii) are shifted in phase by the amount equal to twice the phase difference between the 1st order (sub-diffraction) and 0th order (radiation zone) Fourier components of the bottom grating. Measurements taken at λ= 10.8 μm and λ= 11.3 μm.\n\nWith these two milestones established, it is now possible to conduct true sub-wavelength imaging experiments using two (or more) far-field detectors and jointly processing their inputs.\n\n15"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Applications to Circuits and Waveguide Miniaturization: Slowing Down and Manipulating Electromagnetic Pulses (EMP) Using Advanced Metamaterials\n\nGiven the space constraints of an advanced aerospace platform and the amount of the useful payload that has to be carried, it is very important that every optical and microwave component be as small as possible. Because of the very large speed of light, there is a natural limit to how small such components can be made. Any structure capable of processing EMPs (be those optical, THz, or microwave) of temporal duration τ must be at least L = cτ long. For example, a 1 ns microwave pulse can be manipulated inside a device that is at least 1 ft long. Pulse manipulation can be understood very broadly by pulse compression, frequency shifting, harmonics generation, or other. For aerospace communications systems, it may be very desirable to have the ability to manipulate the format of EMPs, (that is, to change their frequency, duration, and repetition rate). Slowing down or even stopping the EMP can circumvent the length requirement if the group velocity is reduced to vg << c, and thus the required length is L = vgτ.\n\nFigure 14. Schematic of Pulse Compression in Magnetized Plasma. A radiation pulse with initial frequency ω0 and duration T slows down in the plasma to a group velocity vg0 << c. Adiabatic spatially uniform variation of the magnetic field changes the radiation frequency to ω1 and increases the group velocity to vg1 >> vg0. The emerging pulse is compressed to T1 = Tvg0 / vg1. (Reference 29)\n\nAn example of the pulse slowing down and subsequent manipulation is first discussed in Reference 29 in the somewhat esoteric context of magnetized plasma. Pulse duration, frequency, and (for multiple pulses) repetition rate can be controlled by storing (or slowing down) electromagnetic waves and subsequently changing the system's parameters. The essence of the compact pulse manipulator is shown in Figure 14. The pulse is slowed down inside the compact plasma device and manipulated by changing the magnitude of the magnetic field. The advantage of slowing the pulses down is three-fold. First, the device can be made smaller, resulting in size savings. Second, the temporal scale on which the system has to be manipulated is lengthened because the pulse is moving slowly. Finally, the potentially large ratio between vg1 >> vg0 results in the more dramatic dynamic range of possible pulse compression ratios. Plasma-based\n\n16"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY devices may not be appropriate in the aerospace context because of their large size, power requirements, large magnetic coils, and so forth. Fortunately, metamaterials offer some exciting opportunities for slowing down electromagnetic waves as has been recently recognized (Reference 30). Specifically, the authors have theoretically demonstrated that an axially varying heterostructure with a metamaterial core of negative refractive index can be used to efficiently and coherently bring light to a complete standstill. One of the most remarkable aspects of the approach is that it works for relatively broadband pulses. The broadband capability is achieved through tapering (or axial variation) of a metamaterial's parameters such as the effective ε and μ. Due to tapering, each frequency component of the wave packet is stopped at a different guide thickness, leading to the spatial separation of its spectrum and the formation of a 'trapped rainbow'. In Reference 30, the authors have actually opted for a physical tapering of the waveguide (that is, reducing the thickness of the NIM waveguide along the length of the waveguide), although other approaches such as varying ε and μ will also work. Figure 15. Trapped Rainbow: A Waveguide with Negative Index Core Can Stop Light. A guided wave packet is efficiently injected from the ordinary waveguide to the left-handed heterostructure LHH (see also Figure 4), inside which it propagates smoothly owing to the slow (adiabatic) reduction in the thickness of the core. The smallest (red) frequency components of the wave are stopped at the smallest core thicknesses of the LHH, while the largest (blue) components stop at correspondingly larger core thicknesses. (Reference 30) The schematic of the light-stopping structure based on the waveguide with a negative index core (dubbed left-handed heterostructure, or LHH, in Reference 30 is shown in Figure 14. Although light stopping is possible in other guided configurations that do not necessarily require μ to be negative (for example, a metal-dielectric-metal waveguide would suffice), the key here is that perfect impedance matching can be achieved for the metamaterials-based waveguides with the negative index core. That is very important for maximizing the coupling efficiency from the regular waveguide to the LHH. Although Reference 30 does not present any specific ideas as to what could be done with the 17 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY slowed down and/or stopped light, the schematic shown in Figure 13 provides some key ideas. Moreover, the prospect of producing a low-loss negative index material in the optical domain still remains somewhat distant. Therefore, it may be worthwhile to examine other approaches to slowing down light that have emerged in the past few years. Stopping and/or slowing down light is an old idea originating from the atomic concept of Electromagnetically Induced Transparency (EIT). The phenomenon has been considered to be purely quantum mechanical until several groups have demonstrated that it has some classical analogies (Reference 31). Remarkably, at least one group has demonstrated in the past year that EIT can be achieved using plasmonic metamaterials (Reference 32). The idea is to create a plasmonic molecule consisting of a radiative element coupled with a subradiant (dark) element. The plasmonic molecule showed electromagnetic response that closely resembles the electromagnetically induced transparency in an atomic system. Because of its subwavelength dimension, this electromagnetically induced transparency-like molecule was shown to be suitable as a building block to construct a slow light plasmonic metamaterial. The specific design of the plasmonic molecule is shown in Figure 15. Figure 16. Plasmonic Molecule Exhibiting EIT. Left: Radiative element (metal strip) by itself gets strongly polarized by the incident EM wave, resulting in weak transmission/strong reflection. Right: Radiative element coupled to the dark element (two strips). Dark element possesses a non-radiative quadrupole resonance which is excited by the radiative element and de-polarizes the radiative element. The result: vanishing reflection, high transmission. Color bar: |E| normalized to the incident laser field at λ = 700 nm. (Reference 32) This specific plasmonic molecule consists of the dark state (two parallel plasmonic antennas oriented perpendicular to the incident vertical electric field) and the radiative state (single plasmonic antenna oriented parallel to the electric field). The quality factor of the dark antenna state is an order of magnitude higher than that of the radiative antenna. When the radiative antenna is spatially separated from the dark antenna (or when the dark antennas are not present at all), all or most of the incident radiation is reflected from an array of radiative antennas whenever the resonance frequency of the antenna coincides with that of the laser. In this example, the long antenna is 128 nm long, and the resonance wavelength is at λ = 700 nm. The key effect here is that the resonance of the dark antenna should be at the same wavelength. 18 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Because the exploited resonance has a quadrupole nature, it is slightly red-shifted. For that reason, the length of the dark antenna is 100 nm. When the two antennas are brought together, the radiative antenna polarizes the dark antenna, which, in turn, depolarizes the radiative antenna. As a result, the dipole moment of the coupled system is drastically reduced, the reflection drops and transmission increases to almost 100 percent (limited only by losses). Most of the energy is now stored inside the non-radiative (dark) antenna. If multiple layers of dark/bright antennas are employed as shown in Figure 16, then one can achieve one of the most important manifestations of EIT; slow light. Slow light can have many interesting technological applications because (a) slow light is easy to manipulate by changing the structure's parameters (as described in the section on tunable metamaterials), and (b) slow light has a high field intensity (enhanced by the ratio of the free-space propagation speed to the slow propagation speed), therefore, all nonlinear processes are enhanced for slow light. Such nonlinear processes may include harmonics generation, optical diode action (see the section on non-reciprocal optical elements), and many others. Figure 17. True Multi-Layer Metamaterial With a Unit Cell Shown in Figure 15: radiative antenna (single metal strip) coupled to a dark antenna (two perpendicular metal bars). Such metamaterial exhibits slow light propagation along the incidence direction (slowed down by a factor 30 or more). (Reference 32) It is important to realize that the geometry suggested in Reference 32 is not unique. For example, the dark and radiative antennas need not reside in the same plane. Nor is the effect of EIT (and the related phenomenon of slow light) limited to the optical domain. Both infrared and microwave-range designs have started emerging. These frequency domains are likely to be of greater use for advanced aerospace platforms than the visible range targeted by most studies. 19 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Metamaterials for Energy Harvesting One of the most important applications of metamaterials is related to developing perfect absorbers of infrared electromagnetic radiation, be it in the mid-to-long infrared part of the spectrum (making it relevant for night vision, harvesting of the Earth glow mid-infrared radiation, and so forth) or in the near-to-mid-IR spectrum (making it relevant for day-time infrared photography of the earth terrain). For example, day-time infrared photography relies on the different sunlight reflectivities of surfaces (for example, snow, brick walls, concrete walls, grass, and so forth), and can easily distinguish between those surfaces. This reflectivity differential tends to be the greatest between 2-3 microns, and rapidly decays toward longer wavelengths. Open sky contains very little infrared radiation which explains why infrared imaging/photography is very important for aerial and satellite surveys. Because light scattering in the atmosphere scales as λ-4, imaging through the atmosphere in the visible range is impossible, and infrared imaging becomes important. This is especially true for the 1 < λ < 4 μm range. For longer wavelengths (λ>10 μm) this brightness differential is largely gone because the emission spectrum is dominated by thermal emission. In fact, the Earth glow maximum is around λ>10 μm, with most of the energy contained in the 3 μm < λ < 14 μm range. This longer wavelength (mid-to-far IR) spectral range is also very important. It can be used for night-time energy scavenging by high-altitude satellites and other aerospace platforms. There has been a surge of activity in this area, first in the microwave/THz part of the electromagnetic spectrum (References 33, 34), and subsequently in mid-to-far infrared (Reference 20). The concept of narrow-band metamaterials-based absorbers introduced in Reference 33 has the potential for developing highly efficient bolometer arrays. When applied to the infrared part of the spectrum, it can be used for space navigation, especially when weak infrared signals from specific stellar objects need to be picked up and discriminated from other radiation sources. For such applications, the narrow-band perfect absorption is highly suitable. An array of such bolometers would reject (reflect) all undesirable frequencies and focus on the single wavelength characteristic of the source of interest. Moreover, if an array of different (for example, tuned to different frequencies) narrow band detectors can be deployed, then the hyper-spectral imaging capability could bring additional benefits. For example, absolute temperatures of a radiation source (that is, stellar bodies) could be accurately determined, and could improve the accuracy of space navigation further. Figure 18. Perfect Narrow-Band Microwave Absorber. (a-c): Unit cell design. Right panel: simulated absorption/transmission/reflection. (Reference 33) 20 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY One possible design for the microwave frequency band is shown in Figure 17. High absorption is accomplished by reducing reflections to zero. This is accomplished by choosing metamaterials parameters such that ε_eff(ω_r) = μ_eff(ω_r) at the resonant frequency ω_r. Note that both the real and imaginary parts of the permittivity and permeability must be equal to each other, and that the imaginary parts don't necessarily need to be small for absorber applications. In fact, it is desirable that they are not too small, thereby enabling 100 percent absorption within a single layer of metamaterial. The above design can be scaled down to the THz range, as was later demonstrated in Reference 34. It is difficult to find strongly absorbing materials at THz frequencies that are compatible with standard photolithography. Thus, a potential application of these metamaterial structures is as absorbing elements in thermal detectors. A strong absorption coefficient is also necessary to have a small thermal mass. This is important for optimizing the temporal response of thermal detectors. The metamaterial presented here has a 6 micron thick film (that is, λ/50 thickness for THz radiation) and 70 percent absorptivity, which yields an absorption coefficient of 2000 cm-1. One drawback of the original design was the narrow angular range of the absorber. The absorption dropped dramatically when the incidence angle was as small as 20 degrees. The reason for that is a relatively large unit cell of the metamaterial. In fact, when the unit cell size is larger or comparable to λ/2n, where n is the refractive index of the substrate, it is inappropriate to call such structure a metamaterial. A true impedance-matched metamaterial would, in fact, always have a very broad angular response. Figure 19. Wide-Angle Plasmonic Absorber Based on Negative Index Metamaterial. Right panel: schematic of an absorption-measuring experiment. A generic metamaterial with ε_yy = μ_zz = -1+i, μ_xx = 1 is assumed. Left panel: angular dependence of the absorption for a generic and specific (shown in the inset) metamaterial. Both exhibit wide-angle absorptivity. (Reference 20) This fact can be expressed by a simple formula for the absorption coefficient A (Reference 20): 21 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY A=1-|(cosθ - √(ε_yy/μ_zz - sin²θ/(μ_xxμ_zz)))/(cosθ + √(ε_yy/μ_zz - sin²θ/(μ_xxμ_zz)))|² (4) where we've assumed that, for normal incidence, this metamaterial is impedance-matched: ε_yy = μ_zz = -1 + i. Equation 4 can be simplified under the assumption of |ε_yy| >> 1, μ_xx = 1: A ≈ 1 - tan⁴(θ/2), implying that A ≈ 0.97 even for θ = π/6. The challenge, if course, is to design a true impedance-matched optical metamaterial. Success has been achieved in designing such a metamaterial (Reference 20). The recently published design is shown in Figure 19. The unit cell consists of two layers of plasmonic antennas; the cut-wire antenna that imparts magnetic (as well as some electric) response to this metamaterial, and the continuous-wire antennas that impart a purely electric response. It is found that the wide-angle capability could be very important for several applications. Wide-angle power absorption efficiency is desirable for miniaturizing photodetectors or microbolometers down to the wavelength size. Figure 20. Specific Design of a Wide-Angle Plasmonic Absorber Based on Negative Index Metamaterial Operating at λ=1550 nm. Left panel: Schematic of the silver-based plamonic structure. Right panel: Extracted permittivity and permeability for the normal incidence demonstrate impedance matching: ε_yy = μ_zz = -1 + i. (Reference 20) For example, to focus light on a wavelength-sized photodetector or micro-bolometer requires high-NA optics (a NA=0.5 or higher). Therefore, a photodetector should be able to absorb light incident at 30 degree angle. For advanced aerospace platforms it is easy to envision a scenario where an airborne platform is powered by a high-power infrared laser source located on Earth. If the wavelength falls inside the transparency window of the atmosphere (between 3 and 4 μm, and also around 10 μm), then such a 22"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"prospect is not too farfetched because scattering in mid-infrared by atmospheric gases is essentially zero. For such a remote powering scenario to be feasible, one would need a highly efficient absorber at the specific wavelength corresponding to that of the source. Moreover, as the space platform is moving, it is desirable that the absorption remain high even for non-normal incidence angles. The second application is for thermophotovoltaics (TPV) (Reference 35). Some type of thermophotovoltaic converter will almost undoubtedly be installed on the advanced aerospace platforms of the future. Presently even advanced (experimental) electric cars are using TPV cells to convert the heat from their engines into electricity. Such converters have already been shown to be capable of increasing the range of electric vehicles by a factor of 3. We believe that metamaterials could play an important role in developing highly efficient TPV cells. By virtue of Kirchhoff's law, emissivity of a thermal emitter approaches the blackbody limit only if the absorptivity approaches unity. Moreover, wavelength-selective radiators can dramatically improve the efficiency of current generation in a TPV cell if their emission spectrum is matched to the bandgap of the TPV converter. For example, a typical TPV converter, GaSb, has the bandgap of EG = 0.7 eV that would be ideally suited to a wavelength-selective radiator operating in near infrared around λ = 1.7 μm. Figure 21. (Left) Experimental Result: Reflectivity Versus Wavelength, that Inspired the Proposed Effort: A Modestly Absorbing Material (SiC) Turns Into a \"Perfect Mid-IR Absorber\" When a λ/4 -Thick SiC Film Is Backed by a Metal Mirror. (Right): Theoretical Plot - Constant Reflectivity Contours Plotted in the (Real(n), Imag(n)) Space. High material absorptivity Imag(n) is required to achieve perfect absorption (R=0). Posed question: can a metamaterials-based semi-transparent mirror enhance absorption and result in an almost-perfect ultra-thin absorber? The perfect absorbers shown in Figures 17-19 may be too complex for practical applications. Metamaterials tend to be lossy because of the large field concentration in the metal. Therefore, work has recently started working on a new type of metamaterial (so-called CMMs mentioned in the Introduction), that could potentially make weakly-absorbing semiconductors (that is, Si in the visible) absorb much stronger. The goal here is to make a thin (although not necessarily a very sub-wavelength) absorber backed up by a sheet of CMMs which would prevent reflections and result in a very high absorption. Applications that are considered are essentially the same as for the \"perfect\" absorbers described above. For example, satellites can use the Earth glow for nighttime battery recharging. The collected power is quite high; 1 m² of black surface at 23"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"room temperature radiates 460 W. Earth-based powerful mid-infrared sources can be used for nighttime powering of airborne platforms. All these applications would benefit from the following components: (a) perfect absorbers of infrared radiation that can be installed on the receiving platforms, (b) efficient sources of thermal mid-infrared radiation. These two components are related to each other. Therefore, developing an ultra-thin perfect absorber of infrared radiation would be highly desirable. The ultra-thin aspect is important because it enhances the radiation-to-electricity conversion efficiency. For example, it is well known that carrier separation-collection efficiency in a solar cell improves as the cell gets thinner. The challenge is to combine this carrier separation-collection efficiency with sufficient absorption. Unfortunately, the absorption length of many semiconductors in the infrared is fairly small. Recent experiments provide the new metamaterials-based concept for increasing the absorptivity of otherwise semi-transparent materials. Below some of the (still unpublished) experiments and theoretical developments that might result in new metamaterials-based perfect absorbers are described. Figure 20 (left) indicates a very instructive experimental result: reflectivity R from an ultra-thin (500 nm) SiC film backed up by a metal mirror. At ω = 762 cm⁻¹ (or λ = 13.1 μm) reflectivity from the structure is less than 3 percent. That implies 97 percent absorption in a film of thickness d = λ/25. This remarkable absorptivity can be explained using the well-known microwave concept: the Salisbury screen. It turns out that at λ = 13.1 μm film thickness is d = λ/4n, where n = n_re + i n_im is the complex refractive index of SiC. A simple formula for the reflectivity from a metal-backed thin film can be derived: R = |(r₀ - e^{2iδ})/(1 - r₀e^{2iδ})|² (5) where r₀ = (n-1)/(n+1) is the reflection coefficient from the air/SiC interface and δ = nk₀d is the complex phase shift across the film which includes losses. Fixing the laser frequency ω = ck₀ and the sample's thickness d, we can plot the reflectivity as a function of re(n) and im(n). As can be clearly seen from Figure 20 (right), there is a \"sweet spot\" corresponding to specific values of re(n) and im(n) that results in vanishing reflectivity (or perfect absorption). R vanishes when the quarter-wavelength condition is approximately satisfied: re(n)k₀d = (2m+1)/2 (6) where m is an integer. Finite reflection and imperfect absorption result from lower (or higher) values of im(n). Note that, coincidentally, for the case of heavily doped SiC predicted reflection is only 3 percent. However, for most materials (that is, Si for visible light) absorption is too low for perfect absorption. Therefore, a question is posed: Can one modify the structure of the metal screen to enhance absorption? It is CMMs that enable such functionality? 24"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Specifically, it has been found that by making the mirror slightly leaky, we can actually increase absorption. If the reflection coefficient of a mirror is given by r₂, then the reflection/transmission coefficients r,t through the structure are given by: r = (r₀ + r₂e^{2iδ})/(1 + r₀r₂e^{2iδ}), t = (t₀t₂e^{iδ})/(1 + r₀r₂e^{2iδ}) (7) where t₂ = 1 + r₂ and t₀ = 1 + r₀. Note that Equation 7 turns into Equation 6 if r₂ = -1 (perfectly reflecting mirror). From Equation 7 it follows that it may be possible to engineer the reflectivity r₂ in such a way that minimizes reflection |r|² while keeping transmission |t|² small. The remainder of the energy is guaranteed to be absorbed by the quarter-wavelength thick absorber. Figure 22. Preliminary Attempts to Design a Better Absorber Using Complementary MetaMaterials (U-shaped CMM). Note that only 40 percent absorptivity is possible with a smooth gold film. Paradoxically, this absorptivity increases to 75 percent when the metal mirror is made \"leaky\" by perforating it with an array of CMMs (left panel). The design process for engineering r₂ using the simplest CMMs, U-shaped apertures, has been started. Some of the preliminary results are shown in Figure 22. Figure 22 illustrates how the (relatively low) 40 percent absorptivity of the SiC film covered by a smooth Au mirror (black line) can be boosted up to 75 percent by patterning the mirror using CMMs. We call such a \"leaky mirror\" patterned by CMMs a MetaMirror. It is clear from Figure 23 that a MetaMirror can be used for making absorptivity polarization-dependent (if that is desirable for applications demanding a reflector-polarizer). MetaMirror can also be used for shifting the absorption wavelength which would be highly desirable for developing broadband absorbers. We have found that there are two mechanisms capable of making MetaMirrors: (a) excitation of the Long Range Surface Plasmon Polaritons (LR-SPPs) on the patterned MetaMirror, and (b) excitation of highly-localized (shape-dependent but period-independent) SPPs. An example of the mechanism (a) is shown in Figure 23, but we also have preliminary results indicating that both mechanisms can be operational in the same MetaMirror for close-by frequencies resulting in multiple dips of the reflectivity coefficient |r₂|. By comparing 25 Figure 23 with Figure 22, it is observed that the dips correlate with drops of the total reflectivity and increases of the total absorption of the absorber/MetaMirror structure. The MetaMirror approach to infrared energy harvesting is one of the very promising applications of metamaterials. A number of aspects of MetaMirrors must be investigated and several important questions must be answered before practical applications can be pursued. Some of those questions are: • What is the angular dependence of absorptivity, and can it be made wide-angle as we have recently demonstrated in Reference 20 for negative-index metamaterials? • Can absorptivity be made broad-bandwidth by combining localized resonances with the LR-SPPs? That could be potentially accomplished by using U-shapes with different geometries, yet spaced in a regular periodic pattern, or by using quasi-periodic arrangements of CMMs shapes. • What are the most promising polarization-independent unit cells of CMMs that result in enhanced absorptivity? • Is it possible to apply the MetaMirror concept in the visible and contribute to solar energy harvesting? As more researchers are investigating energy-harvesting applications of CMMs (or MetaMirrors), it is believed that these questions will be answered very soon. Figure 23. Engineering the Complex Reflectivity Coefficient r₂ Defined on the Left Panel Using the Concept of a MetaMirror. Dips of |r₂| shown in the right panel correspond to reflection dips (and absorption peaks) in Figure 2. The physical reason for these dips is the excitation of long-range SPPs on the MetaMirror surface. Inset: Fabricated MetaMirror. 26"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Nonlinear Non-Reciprocal Chiral Metamaterials: For Developing Novel Optical Isolators and \"One-Way\" Microwave Mirrors Optical isolators play a pivotal role in fiber-optic communication systems by protecting their active components ( for example, optical amplifiers) from unwanted reflected signals that could potentially destabilize them. Such protection is especially important in the context of advanced aerospace platforms, where repairs must be avoided at all costs. At the core of isolator design is an element which provides non-reciprocity by breaking time reversal symmetry. Non-reciprocity can only be caused by magnetic fields or nonlinearities. The most common approach using magnetic Faraday rotators results in a rather bulky implementation of an isolator. It is believed that metamaterials are uniquely positioned to enhance the other approach of breaking non-reciprocity: use of nonlinear effects. It is very natural to use metamaterial in the context of enhancing nonlinearity. As was explained previously, metamaterials can be used to slow down light and, therefore, compress electromagnetic energy. Any intensity enhancement increases nonlinear effects, and larger nonlinear effects translate into more compact devices. Another aspect that makes metamaterials very appealing for non-reciprocal applications is the ability to make their properties tunable to almost any frequency range. One concept that is being explored (still unpublished) relies on the nonlinearity and several other aspects of engineered chiral metamaterials. A novel type of a nonlinear optical isolator based on adiabatic time-irreversible mode conversion (ATIMC) between two electromagnetic modes supported by the chiral metamaterial is envisioned. As an example of such metamaterial, a twisted optical fiber shown in Figure 24 is used. It supports a tightly-confined core mode (CoM) which can be coupled to/converted into a loosely confined cladding mode (CIM) of the same fiber. Coupling and conversion between the core and cladding modes is accomplished by twisting the fiber with a variable pitch Λ(z) = 2π/β_u. Time irreversibility is achieved due to the combination of the Kerr nonlinearity of the core material (resulting in the intensity-dependent propagation constant of the CoM) and small but finite loss of the CIM. As a result, the CoM, when injected in the forward direction, passes through the isolator with a negligible conversion into the CIM. If subsequently reflected back into the isolator (this is equivalent to time reversal), it gets entirely converted into the CIM and subsequently damped as illustrated by Figure 25. Preliminary simulations indicate that, for sufficiently large nonlinearity, one can find the loss rate α for the CIM such that two conditions are satisfied: (a) α is small enough so that virtually no power is lost in the forward direction, and (b) α is large enough so that the time-reversal is strongly violated, resulting in near-perfect optical isolation. 27 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 24. Example of a Generic Chiral Metamaterial: An Optical Fiber with a Rectangular Cross Section Core Twisted During the Drawing Process Forms a Double Helix. If the core index is nonlinear, then one can engineer a variable helix pitch in such a way that the core (localized) modes can be selectively coupled to cladding modes depending on the direction of propagation. Under a highly simplified assumption of just two interacting mode (core and cladding), we have developed a coupled-mode theory describing the evolution of the mode amplitudes a_co and a_cl along the fiber axis z. The set of the generic equations for a_co and a_cl is given by: ∂a_co/∂τ − i(β0 + γ|a_co|² − δ/2)a_co = iW a_cl, (8) ∂a_cl/∂τ − i(β0 + δ/2)a_cl = iW* a_co where β0 = c(β_c0 + β_cl)/2ω is the average normalized propagation constant, δ(τ) = c(β_c0 − β_cl + 2β_u)/ω is the distance-dependent mode detuning, γ is the nonlinearity coefficient, W is the coupling strength between the modes, and τ = ωz/c is the normalized propagation distance. 28 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 25. Example of Time-Irreversibility of Light Propagation Inside the Twisted Fiber Core: the core mode propagates with almost no loss from left to right (purple solid line), reflects back, and gets dissipated/mode converted on its way back (red line). Input mode is assumed to be right-hand circularly polarized (RCP). Mode conversion: into LCP cladding mode (dashed line). Propagation from left to right is represented by the red lines, from right to left: by the purple lines. As an example, we have used a Chiral Fiber (CF) with the following properties: a 2 μm x 1.8 μm elliptical core with refractive index of n_co = 2.2 surrounded by a round cladding with radius R = 20 μm and refractive index n_cl = 2.15. The helical pitch is assumed to linearly vary over l_max = 500 mm by 6 percent around Λ = 166 μm. The assumed γ corresponds to the nonlinear refractive index n2 = 5.4 x 10^-16 m²/W at the operating vacuum wavelength λ = 1.5 μm and the peak power P = 3.5 W. The cladding mode was assumed to be lossy with the loss coefficient α = 10 dB/m. Results are shown in Figure 25. A core mode injected from the left end of the fiber (z = 0) propagates through the fiber without converting into the cladding mode (purple solid line) with minimal losses. After getting reflected at z = 500 mm, the principal core mode (red solid line) gets converted into the delocalized cladding mode (red dashed line) and damped out. This example clearly demonstrates that the interplay between mode-coupling, nonlinearity, and losses can result in the dramatic loss of time-reversal. Future research will be looking at other metamaterial systems that support two distinct modes (one with a strongly nonlinear response and strong spatial localization, the other essentially linear and delocalized), orthogonal polarizations, and investigate non-reciprocal wave propagation in such metamaterials. Structures from the previous 29 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sections, such as shown in Figures 15 and 16, will be primary candidates for implementing optical and microwave non-reciprocity. Such metamaterials would be comprised of a unit cell containing a non-radiative element (that is, a two-strip capacitor-loaded antenna supporting a \"dark\" magnetic mode) and a single \"bright\" dipole antenna. Such a system exhibits EIT when the frequencies of the \"dark\" and \"bright\" resonances coincide. EIT results in energy compression and enhanced nonlinearity. The source of the nonlinearity could be, for example, a variable capacitance diode (varactor) used as a capacitive load of the double-strip antenna. The second (linear) mode could have an orthogonal polarization, and the coupling between the two could be accomplished via spatially-periodic displacement of the single-strip and double-strip antennas with respect to each other. Tunable Switchable Metamaterials Electromagnetic properties of most metamaterials are \"hard-wired\", meaning they are determined during fabrication. That can be a serious impediment to using them in the context of space exploration. Being able to change optical/electromagnetic properties of a metamaterials-based device without having to re-manufacture it would be highly desirable. Therefore, this survey is concluded by describing some of the recent progress in making reconfigurable/switchable metamaterials. This is a new exciting area of metamaterials research that is worth watching for applications. One of the first electrically-controllable THz metamaterials has been reported in Reference 36, where resonant properties of the electric split ring were controlled by applying reverse bias between metal and highly-doped in GaAs layer. The schematic of the experiment is shown in Figure 25. Without reverse bias there is no resonant response of the split ring to incident THz pulse because highly-conductive electrons of the n-GaAs layer are shorting the gap of the resonant split ring as schematically indicated in Figure 26(b). With the applied reverse bias, electron density is depleted inside the gap. The resulting transmission spectrum shows spectral dips which were converted into the effective dielectric permittivity ε_eff(ω) that exhibited resonant peaks. The strongest of the peaks corresponded to the Inductance-Capacitance (LC) resonance of the split ring. One possible application of such electrically tunable metamaterial suggested in Reference 36 was a modulator. The authors claim that the performance of their device as a THz modulator already exceeds current state-of-the-art electrical THz modulators (based on semiconductor structures) by one order of magnitude on resonance. Moreover, their device operates at room temperature. Needless to say, this metamaterial-based modulator can be improved. For example, configurations exploiting EIT could result in stronger modulation strength. Another interesting possibility for tuning microwave metamaterials has been suggested in Reference 37. Ferroelectrics (such as BST) can be tuned by applying DC voltage which changes their dielectric permittivity. This property of BST was utilized to develop frequency tunable magnetic metamaterials using metallic split rings loaded with barium-strontium titanate thin film capacitors. The resonant frequency of this medium is voltage tunable across a 140 MHz band centered at 1.75 GHz. The effective relative permeability of the slab was shown to have Lorentzian shape that reaches minimum values between −2 and −3 for biases from 0 to 5 V. Therefore, permeability of the slab can tune between positive and negative values, making it useful in applications requiring a state switchable magnetic permeability. 30 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 26. THz Properties of an Electric Split Ring Resonator. (a) Are controlled by applying voltage between Schottky and Ohmic contacts (c,d). (b) Schematic of circuit with inductance. Applied voltage controls charge density inside the split gap (d). The structure is investigated using a single-cycle THz pulse (e). (Reference 36) Summary and Conclusions While it is difficult to pinpoint the exact applications that metamaterials will find in advanced aerospace industry, metamaterials possess several features that uniquely suit them for aerospace applications. First, they enable miniaturization of a variety of optical components. Making space-born devices small and light-weight is essential. These opportunities have been covered in detail. Second, metamaterials enable new modalities for sub-diffraction imaging: super-lenses, hyperlenses, and far-field superlenses. Those modalities dispense with the near-field scanning microscopes, which are complex, slow-scanning, large devices that are not appropriate for advanced aerospace platforms. Harvesting infrared photons, whether from coherent laser sources on Earth (for guidance, energy recharging, and so forth), from thermal Earth glow, or from the stars, is likely to be important for aerospace platforms. Metamaterials offer unique opportunities for making efficient wavelength-tunable, wide-angle absorbers. As discussed in the numerous examples in this report, metamaterials are going to revolutionize the way light is captured, manipulated, and used for imaging. Although metamaterials are still an academic area of research, these examples illustrate that there is great potential for practical applications. References [1] Smith D R, Padilla W J, Vier D C, Nemat-Nasser S C, Schultz S 2000 PRL 84 4184. [2] J. B. Pendry, \"A Chiral Route to Negative Refraction\", Science 306, 1353 (2004). [3] D. Schurig and D. R. Smith, \"Spatial filtering using media with indefinite permittivity and permeability tensors\", Appl. Phys. Lett., 82, 2215 (2003). [4] D. R. Smith and D. Schurig, \"Electromagnetic wave propagation in media with indefinite permittivity and permeability tensors\", Phys. Rev. Lett., 90, 77405 (2003) 31 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[5] A. Alu, M. G. Silveirinha, A. Salandrino, and N. Engheta, \"Epsilon-Near-Zero Metamaterials and Electromagnetic Sources: Tailoring the Radiation Phase Pattern,\" Physical Review B 75, 155410 (2007).\n\n[6] D. Schurig, J. J. Mock, B. J. Justice, S. A. Cummer, J. B. Pendry, A. F. Starr, D. R. Smith, \"Metamaterial Electromagnetic Cloak at Microwave Frequencies\", Science 314, 977 (2006).\n\n[7] Hu Tao, Nathan I. Landy, Christopher M. Bingham, Xin Zhang,Richard D. Averitt, and Willie J. Padilla, \"A metamaterial absorber for the terahertz regime: Design, fabrication and characterization\", Opt. Express 16, 7181 (2008).\n\n[8] R. Liu, Q. Cheng, T. Hand, J. J. Mock, T. J. Cui, S. A. Cummer, and D. R. Smith, \"Experimental Demonstration of Electromagnetic Tunneling Through an Epsilon-Near-Zero Metamaterial at Microwave Frequencies\", Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 023903 (2008).\n\n[9] H.-T. Chen, J. F. O'Hara, A. J. Taylor, R. D. Averitt, C. Highstrete, M. Lee, and W. J. Padilla, \"Complementary planar terahertz metamaterials,\" Opt. Express 15, 1084-1095 (2007).\n\n[10] J. Valentine, S. Zhang, T. Zentgraf, E. Ulin-Avila, D. A. Genov, G. Bartal & X. Zhang, \"Three-dimensional optical metamaterial with a negative refractive index\", Nature| 455, 376 (2008).\n\n[11] A. F. Hoffman et. al., \"Negative refraction in semiconductor metamaterials\", Nature Materials 6, 946 (2007).\n\n[12] Y. A. Urzhumov and G. Shvets, \"Optical magnetism and negative refraction in plasmonic metamaterials\", Solid State Comm. 146, 208 (2008).\n\n[13] R. Merlin, \"Metamaterials and the Landau-Lifshitz permeability argument: Large permittivity begets high-frequency magnetism\", PNAS 106, 1693-1698 (2009).\n\n[14] G. Shvets and Ya. A. Urzhumov, \"Engineering Electromagnetic Properties of Periodic Nanostructures Using Electrostatic Resonances\", Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 243902 (2004).\n\n[15] M. Davanco, Y. Urzhumov, and G. Shvets, \"The complex Bloch bands of a 2D plasmonic crystal displaying isotropic negative refraction\", Opt. Exp. 15, 9681 (2007).\n\n[16] Y. A. Urzhumov, G. Shvets, J. Fan, F. Capasso, D. Brandl, and P. Nordlander, \"Plasmonic nanoclusters: a path towards negative-index metafluids\", Opt. Exp. 15, 14121 (2007).\n\n[17] V. Lomakin, Y. Fainman, Y. Urzhumov, and G. Shvets, \"Doubly negative metamaterials in the near infrared and visible regimes based on thin film nanocomposites\", Opt. Exp. 14, 11164 (2006).\n\n[18] X. Zhang, M. Davanco, Y. Urzhumov, G. Shvets, and S. R. Forrest, \"From Scattering Parameters to Snell's Law: A Subwavelength Near-Infrared Negative-Index Metamaterial\", Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 267401 (2008).\n\n32\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[19] T. Taubner, D. Korobkin, Y. Urzhumov, G. Shvets, and R. Hillenbrand, \"Near-field microscopy through a SiC superlens\", Science 313, 1595 (2006).\n\n[20] Yoav Avitzour, Yaroslav A. Urzhumov, and Gennady Shvets, \"Wide-angle infrared absorber based on a negative-index plasmonic metamaterial\", Phys. Rev. B 79, 045131 (2009).\n\n[21] J. B. Pendry, \"Negative Refraction Makes a Perfect Lens\", Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000) 3966.\n\n[22] Zubin Jacob, Leonid V. Alekseyev and Evgenii Narimanov, \"Optical Hyperlens: Far-field imaging beyond the diffraction limit\", Opt. Exp. 14, 8247 (2006).\n\n[23] A. Salandrino and N. Engheta, \"Far-field subdiffraction optical microscopy using metamaterial crystals: Theory and simulations,\" Phys. Rev. B 74, 075103 (2006).\n\n[24] A. A. Govyadinov, and V. A. Podolsky, \"Material photonic funnels for subdiffraction light compression and propagation\", Phys. Rev. B 73, 155108 (2006)\n\n[25] Zhaowei Liu, Hyesog Lee, Yi Xiong, Cheng Sun, Xiang Zhang, \"Far-Field Optical Hyperlens Magnifying Sub-Diffraction-Limited Objects\", Science 315, 1686 (2007).\n\n[26] G. Shvets, S. Trendafilov, J. B. Pendry, and A. K. Sarychev, PRL 99, 053903 (2007).\n\n[27] Zhaowei Liu, Stephane Durant, Hyesog Lee, Yuri Pikus, Nicolas Fang, Yi Xiong, Cheng Sun, and Xiang Zhang, \"Far-Field Optical Superlens\" 7, 403 (2007).\n\n[28] R. Merlin, Science 317, 927 (2007).\n\n[29] Yoav Avitzour and Gennady Shvets, \"Manipulating Electromagnetic Waves in Magnetized Plasmas: Compression, Frequency Shifting, and Release\", Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 065006 (2008).\n\n[30] Kosmas L. Tsakmakidis, Allan D. Boardman, & Ortwin Hess, \" 'Trapped rainbow' storage of light in metamaterials \", Nature 450, 397 (2007).\n\n[31] G. Shvets and J. S. Wurtele, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 115003 (2002).\n\n[32] Shuang Zhang, Dentcho A. Genov, Yuan Wang, Ming Liu, and Xiang Zhang, \"Plasmon-Induced Transparency in Metamaterials\", Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 047401 (2008).\n\n[33] N. I. Landy, S. Sajuyigbe, J. J. Mock, D. R. Smith, and W. J. Padilla, \"Perfect Metamaterial Absorber\", PRL 100, 207402 (2008).\n\n[34] Hu Tao, Nathan I. Landy, Christopher M. Bingham, Xin Zhang, Richard D. Averitt, and Willie J. Padilla, \"A metamaterial absorber for the terahertz regime: Design, fabrication and characterization\", Opt. Exp. 16, 7181 (2008).\n\n[35] T. J. Coutts, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 3, 77 (1999).\n\n33\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"26c91b7b9d10a982","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[36] Hou-Tong Chen, Willie J. Padilla, Joshua M. O. Zide, Arthur C. Gossard, Antoinette J. Taylor, and Richard D. Averitt, \"Active terahertz metamaterial devices\", Nature 444, 597 (2006).\n\n[37] Thomas H. Hand and Steven A. Cummer, \"Frequency tunable electromagnetic metamaterial using ferroelectric loaded split rings\", J. Appl. Phys. 103, 066105 (2008).\n\n34\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"27209e91e13cc2a6","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n-1 of 2-\n\nOFFICIAL RECORD\nDocument participants have digitally signed. All signatures have been verified by a certified FBI information system.\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nDate of entry 04/[REDACTED]/2025\n\n[REDACTED] On March [REDACTED] 2025, [REDACTED] was interviewed via Microsoft Teams by Special Agent (SA) [REDACTED], and Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) [REDACTED] Also present for the interview was [REDACTED] [REDACTED] After being advised of the identity of the interviewing agents and the nature of the interview, [REDACTED] provided the following information:\n\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] The UAP sighting occurred on a workday in early February 2022, at approximately 1:00 or 2:00PM in the afternoon. [REDACTED] [REDACTED] on Fort Carson. He and four other persons from his unit, including his [REDACTED] [REDACTED] drove the short distance over to the [REDACTED] That day it was pleasant with clear blue skies. After they parked, they were walking west towards the entrance of the building. It was natural to look west because of the beautiful view of Cheyanne Mountain.\n\n[REDACTED] At that time, [REDACTED] and the four other soldiers with him all noticed a very strange object that appeared to be hovering just over Cheyanne mountain, in a low point or \"saddle\" in the mountain. [REDACTED] described the object as being matte white, or off-white in color and appearing non-metallic. The object was oval shaped and in a horizontal position, with a curved indentation on the bottom. [REDACTED] described the object as being \"bean-shaped\". The object was completely motionless and no sound could be heard coming from it. All five of the men saw the object and were pointing it out\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nInvestigation on 03/[REDACTED]/2025 at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] United States (Other (Teams Meeting))\n\nFile # [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Date drafted 04/[REDACTED]/2025\n\nby [REDACTED]\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"27209e91e13cc2a6","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED] , On 03/[REDACTED]/2025 , Page 2 of 2\n\nto each other.\n\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] did not believe the object was drifting in the wind because they observed the object for approximately 3-5 minutes, and it did not change its position relative to the saddle of the mountain during that time. The object was covered in intersecting lines or ridges which formed an abstract polygon pattern which covered the entire object. [REDACTED] stated the object was about the size of 10% of the saddle of the mountains, or about the size of a pool cue at arms-length.\n\n[REDACTED] None of the five men had a phone on them [REDACTED] [REDACTED] They all simultaneously looked away momentarily to decide to have one of them go back to the vehicle to get a phone to take a video. When they looked back the object had vanished. They searched the western skyline but were not able find the object again.\n\n[REDACTED] They were all confused what they should do next, [REDACTED] [REDACTED] They got together afterwards to discuss what they had seen. They wondered if they had seen a UAP, and went through the alternatives it could have been, such as a blimp or a weather balloon. Each of them independently drew what they remembered the object to look like, and then they compared their drawings afterwards. All of the drawings were consistent in showing a horizontal, white, \"bean-shaped\" object with abstract lines crossing on it. [REDACTED] believed that [REDACTED] made an official report to the army about their observation. [REDACTED] stated he was contacted by AARO in early 2024 about their observation. He stated he provided a response, but that he was never interviewed by AARO or anyone else.\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"27622b8d9a358a68","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:20:22"} {"doc_id":"2b99d0090d039d15","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:10:26"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS\nBIGELOW AEROSPACE\nADVANCED SPACE STUDIES\nUtah Ranch Investigation\n\nUtah Task Force Investigation:\nMarch 22 – 26, April 19 – 23, 2010\nAAP Person 7 (Task Force Director)\nInv. AAP Person 41\nInv. AAP Person 14\nAAP Person 29 Scientist\nAAP Person 28 Scientist"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Utah Ranch Investigation\n\nUtah Task Force Investigation:\nMarch 22 – 26, April 19 – 23, 2010\nAAP Person 7 (Task Force Director)\nInv. AAP Person 41\nInv. AAP Person 14\nAAP Person 29 Scientist\nAAP Person 28 Scientist\n1"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table of Contents\nList of Figures ..... 3\nExecutive Summary ..... 4\nMap of Creature Sightings ..... 5\nUtah Ranch Report Abstract ..... 7\nInvestigative / Scientific Summary ..... 10\n[REDACTED] Family ..... 10\n[REDACTED] and [REDACTED] ..... 10\n[REDACTED] ..... 12\n[REDACTED] ..... 14\n[REDACTED] ..... 16\n[REDACTED] and [REDACTED] ..... 24\n[REDACTED] ..... 25\n[REDACTED] ..... 27\nScientific Analysis ..... 29\nCurrent plant experiments ..... 29\nBiosensor Plants ..... 29\nSeed Experiment ..... 31\nAppendix ..... 33\n2"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"List of Figures\nFigure 1 - Hair Sample from reported \"Skinwalker\" sighting on [REDACTED] property ..... 18\nFigure 2 - Hair Sample from reported \"Skinwalker\" sighting on [REDACTED] property ..... 19\nFigure 3 - Hair Sample from reported \"Skinwalker\" sighting on [REDACTED] property ..... 20\nFigure 4 - Hair Sample from reported \"Skinwalker\" sighting on [REDACTED] property ..... 21\nFigure 5 - Hair Sample from reported \"Skinwalker\" sighting on [REDACTED] property ..... 22\nFigure 6 - Unknown hair sample - close up photo. ..... 23\nFigure 7 - Creature witnessed by [REDACTED] with his grandson [REDACTED] ..... 27\nFigure 8 - Dog-like creature witnessed by [REDACTED] ..... 28\nFigure 9 - Su/+ tobacco plants exhibiting mutations in both alleles..... 29\nFigure 10 - Close up picture of spiderwort stamens and stamen hairs ..... 30\nFigure 11 - Example of Cone-tainers and associated racks..... 31\nFigure 12 - Celestron LCD Digital Microscope digital image ..... 34\nFigure 13 - Celestron LCD Digital Microscope image for DNA species identification. ..... 35\nFigure 14 - [REDACTED] analysis ..... 36\nFigure 15 - BAASS scientific interpretation of analysis ..... 37\n3"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Executive Summary\n\nOn March 22-26, 2010 and April 19-23, 2010 a team of four BAASS personnel traveled AAP Person 4 to Fort Duchesne, UT to continue an ongoing investigation surrounding [REDACTED] Ranch property. This team consisted of two investigators, AAP Person 41 and [REDACTED] and AAP Person 14 two scientists, AAP Person 29 and AAP Person 28 The primary focus of the trip was to locate evidence of the reported unidentified creatures and lights, gather additional detailed descriptions, locate and interview new witnesses, along with the establishment of a series of digital game cameras both on the [REDACTED] Ranch property and surrounding area. AAP Person 4\n\nWhile conducting a re-interview with [REDACTED] he advised just a couple of days prior to our arrival in the area, he had been witness to what he believed was a \"Skinwalker\". [REDACTED] stated the Skinwalker was chased by his dogs and ran through a barb-wire fence, from which a hair sample was collected and submitted for analysis.\n\nThis sighting by [REDACTED] was corroborated by the [REDACTED] family. Several members of the [REDACTED] family experienced a similar encounter with a \"black shadowy figure\" just outside their residence within two hours of the [REDACTED] encounter. AAP Person 4\n\nA series of seven (7) Moultrie digital game cameras were installed on both the [REDACTED] Ranch property and the property of [REDACTED] in an attempt to capture either a digital photograph or digital video of either anomalous creatures or lights which were reported to be frequently seen in the area. A protocol was also established to have the memory cards of the cameras secured on a weekly basis by BAASS security personnel AAP Person 4 stationed on the [REDACTED] Ranch property.\n\nThe following is a summary of the ongoing investigation and witness interviews."} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Map of Creature Sightings from Approximately Three-Mile Radius around the Ranch\n\nA Google Earth map of the ranch and surrounding areas was created (approx altitude of map was from 30,000 feet). The locations of each creature sighting together with last known direction of travel were obtained from each eyewitness and then plotted on the map. Then, using an assumption of straight line travel (extrapolation of known direction of movement of creatures), a series of straight lines were drawn on the map. The red circles represent intersection points of these lines. In a sense, these intersection points could be construed as arbitrary, particularly since it is recognized that the creatures may have changed their direction of travel once out of sight of the eyewitnesses.\n\nNevertheless, with the above caveats in mind, it is noteworthy that there are three intersection points of the creatures' putative lines of travel. It can be seen from the figure that all three convergence points are very close to the ranch. One intersection point lies just west of the ranch and the other two lie in the vicinity of Bottle Hollow reservoir. If locations for sustained and continuous night watching to capture sightings/photographs of these creatures were to be nominated, the three locations delineated by the red circles could be top of the list.\n\n5"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Utah Ranch Report Abstract\n\nThe \"Utah Ranch\" investigation is an ongoing project which to date has incorporated several deployments of investigators, scientists and engineers. The primary focus of the Utah ranch investigations are:\n\n• To comprehensively interview a large number of people who have lived in the area surrounding the Utah Ranch in order to delineate the scope and variety of eyewitness reports in the area. The purpose is to establish commonalities and differences with the ongoing reports of unusual activity on the ranch property itself.\n\n• To use portable sensor equipment to measure baseline magnetic field parameters, EM spectrum data, ionizing radiation and chemical elemental analysis of soil on the Utah Ranch property and surrounding areas. It goes without saying a primary purpose is to obtain definitive photographic, digital, sound and chemical evidence of purported anomalies.\n\n• To use plants, including transgenic plants, as biosensors of multiple radiation and magnetic field deviations from the norm on the ranch property. These plant experiments have been tailored as user friendly reporting systems for electromagnetic energy detection based on extensive research of the peer reviewed literature.\n\n• To initiate a variety of games, puzzles, and other strategies in order to establish communication with the source/origin of reported anomalies on the ranch property.\n\nWitnesses have reported unidentified balls of light at close range, daytime sightings of \"dog-like\" creatures running on two legs, unnatural animalistic howling/screaming, \"little people\", prehistoric-like birds and a maggot which measured about 8-feet long and 2 to 3-feet in diameter.\n\nTo date, May 7, 2010, over twenty-five (25) people have been contacted and interviewed in person, predominantly at their homes. This group consists of all life-long residents of the area within a mile or two of the ranch property, four (4) local police officers, eleven (11) Native Americans, including a Shaman, the director of the local Fish and Wildlife office, twelve (12) ranchers, six (6) business owners and approximately fifteen (15) members of the Mormon Church. All of the people interviewed have had\n\n7"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"first hand encounters. Eleven (11) separate individuals witnessed a bipedal \"dog-like\" creature and/or orbs of light at different times in different locations near the Utah Ranch property. Many of the reported observations took place during daytime and nighttime and occurred from twenty years ago to as recent as April 2010. The eyewitness ages ranged from fifteen to seventy-seven years old.\n\nThe following is a summary of the Utah ranch investigation findings to date\n\n1. Comprehensive multiple witness descriptions of a large \"dog\" or \"wolf\" like creature or creatures which have the ability to walk and run at speed on two legs. Multiple witnesses have described in their interviews, when the creature is standing on two legs, the estimated height is six to seven feet. From these interviews, there may be at least three separate types of creatures. Total number of independent witnesses (separately interviewed) eleven.\n\n2. Multiple witness descriptions of small, hairy, three-foot tall \"troll\" like creatures with long arms which appear to run in a similar way to chimpanzees or orangutan. (Four independent eyewitnesses)\n\n3. Multiple witnesses (>2) reports of large \"worm\" like creatures, a prehistoric \"pterodactyl\" like creature, \"little people\" and other anomalies. It should be noted the vast majority of reports detailed in points 1-3 have allegedly occurred within the last five to seven years.\n\n4. Interspersed with the allegations of multiple creature sightings are multiple reports of unidentified flying objects, to include unidentified aircraft and \"balls of light\". Some of these allegations are recent and some historic recollection.\n\n5. BAASS has obtained photographs of tracks in the snow which remain unidentified. These photographs identify (a) two sets of tracks merge into one, and (b) where tracks in the snow on the [REDACTED] Ranch property appear to walk \"through\" a barbed wire fence. BAASS has also obtained a variety of hair samples from the vicinity of these tracks. These hair samples are currently undergoing scientific DNA analysis.\n\n6. BAASS has conducted comprehensive electromagnetic signature sweeps of the [REDACTED] Ranch property. One set of measurements taken at a point on the mesa at the ranch indicated a strong, yet to be explained, signal which was not detected on previous readings. The report described: \"Location D2 recorded two large signals in both the horizontal and vertical positions. These signals were not present the day before when measurements were taken at D0. The first signal was 1210, 1213 and 1216 MHz and\n\n8"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"the second large spike was 1232.5, 1235.5 and 1238.5 MHz. The signals fell in the frequency bands of 1164-1215 and 1215-1240 MHz. This space is allocated for Earth exploration-satellite (active), radio location G56, radio navigation-satellite (space-to-Earth) (space to space) G132, and space research (active). Provisions G56 and G132 state these frequency spans are primarily for military purposes, but they can be used by other federal agencies in support of science and research\" The signals were detectable between 1-2 GHz with both horizontal and vertically polarized antennae. Further measurements and research, particularly into satellite transmitting frequencies and times will be required to identify the origin of these signals.\n\n9"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Investigative / Scientific Summary\n1843(a)(2)\nFamily\nThe [REDACTED] were re-interviewed for the purpose of collecting a more complete set of data on their encounters with both the red ball of light and the creatures. [REDACTED] son, [REDACTED] and his 18-year-old girlfriend [REDACTED] were previously identified as witnesses to the anomalous activity and were also present and able to be interviewed. [REDACTED] is a 23-year-old half Native American, half Hispanic man who currently resides in Phoenix, AZ. [REDACTED] is an 18-year-old black female who resides with her mother in the [REDACTED] housing development in Fort Duchesne, UT.\n[REDACTED] and [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] said he frequently stays with his mother [REDACTED] and stepfather [REDACTED] The family said the night before (03/22/2010) they were lying in their beds about 2300 hours when they heard a very loud howling noise coming from directly outside the south side of the house which they stated was the same sound they heard when they have seen the dog-like creature in the past. [REDACTED] described it as a \"growling roar\". This sound occurred two times and lasted about five to ten seconds each time. The growl/roar sounded as if it was being made by a creature which was stationary. They said it was definitely not a coyote or a human. The growl/roar sounded as if it originated from a large animal. [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] felt uneasy and tense. [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] stated they saw a shadow outside their bedroom window and soon noticed there were actually two shadows. The shadows were in the general shape of a human, but the tallest was approximately nine (9) feet and the smaller was approximately eight (8) feet tall. Both [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] believe the shadows belonged to the dog-like creature.\n[REDACTED] was also a witness to an old-lady-like creature jumping from rooftop to rooftop in her neighborhood known as [REDACTED] approximately one year ago. It had black shoulder-length hair and was definitely a female. The creature was wearing old \"rags\" clothing. [REDACTED] said it was hunched over and she could not get a good look at its face. She lost sight of the creature after about one minute, and went into her house to tell her mother. [REDACTED] stated her mother also witnessed the \"old lady\" and called 911, to which law enforcement responded. [REDACTED] said the creature is also known in Ute culture as the \"Basket Lady\". Investigators are currently attempting to establish contact and a relationship with [REDACTED] mother in an effort to obtain additional information regarding this encounter.\n[REDACTED] described an encounter in which a creature reached into his bedroom window while he was lying on his bed. This event occurred around 0300-0400"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"approximately seven (7) years ago (winter of 2003). The arm was covered in human-like thick, black hair/fur (three inches long). The arm was about three (3) feet long.\n[REDACTED] said the arm was most definitely not human. The nails on the hand were dirt color (as a dog's nails) and the fingers were monkey-like. [REDACTED] saw four (4) fingers and no thumb. Each finger was about ten (10) inches long. [REDACTED] yelled and the creature retracted its arm. The arm reached in the window far enough to be two (2) feet away from [REDACTED] [REDACTED] said he did not see any other parts of this creature nor did he hear or smell anything associated with it.\n[REDACTED] also described the encounter with the creature with large yellow eyes witnessed behind their residence. This creature was witnessed with [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] [REDACTED] described this creature to be taller than six (6) feet. It was walking on two (2) legs at a distance. The softball sized eyes would change from green to light brown in the spotlight. The eyes were reflective in the spotlight, similar to the eyes of a cat. [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] previously provided additional details regarding this sighting.\n[REDACTED] then described the bird-like creature which was also witnessed by [REDACTED] and can be found in the \"bird-like creature\" spreadsheet. [REDACTED] said he and [REDACTED] were returning from playing basketball when they saw a large bird flying overhead. They were next to [REDACTED] house and described the bird as similar to a prehistoric pterodactyl. The head/beak was about two to three (2-3) feet long and had a wingspan of approximately twelve (12) feet wide. They could hear the wings flap in the wind and saw it land directly across the street in some trees. As the bird was landing and its wings flapping they could see and hear the tree branches moving. They were both frightened and ran to [REDACTED] house. [REDACTED] said they ran because the bird was big enough to pick them up and carry them away. They did not see the bird again, nor do they know where it went afterwards.\n1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Was there any kind of smoke or heat related to this portal? No\nDid the portal exhibit any kind of travel behavior? No, it was just stationary.\nDid it seem to react to any kind of stimuli? No\nHow far up in altitude did it go? Maybe about thirty to forty feet high.\nDid it seem to exhibit any magnetic properties? No\nDid it seem to cause any noticeable atmospheric effects? No\nDid it ever disappear while you were looking at it? No\nHow far were you from the portal when you saw it? One hundred feet\nDid seeing it cause fear or any other emotion? Just a peaceful feeling.\nWhat time of the day did you see the portal? Daytime/ mid-afternoon\nHow long did you see the portal? Unsure, it was still there when we left.\nHow long ago did you see the portal? About twenty years ago.\nHow many times have you seen the portal? Once\n[REDACTED] made mention of a gentleman named [REDACTED] who lives on [REDACTED] and his many sightings of \"a lot of spaceships and UFOs.\" Investigators are currently attempting to locate this individual for an interview.\nShe also mentioned her sister had what was described as a \"flaming ball\" chasing her car from one town to another. It is unclear as to whether this particular sister is still living. [REDACTED] appeared distraught over recently losing a close friend and did not wish to speak of such things.\n1843(a)(2) In the summer time, [REDACTED] says a \"ghost car\" can be seen in the evening. In the rear view mirror, one can see what appear to be headlights, but there is no car physically there.\nThere were additional details given on the little people and the dog-like creature mentioned in the previous visit as well as on the red ball of light witnessed by both [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] which can be viewed on the attached respective spreadsheets."} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\nIn the meeting with [REDACTED] the biological objective of the interview was to obtain detailed physiological effects of the red ball of light based on the fact in a previous interview [REDACTED] indicated he experienced numbness and warmth when the red ball of light came within a few inches of his face. Biologist AAP Person 29 designed questions to aid in the identification of the type of energy emanating from the red ball of light by focusing on physical effects. For the duration of the interview, [REDACTED] was fixing his car radio and was unable to give his full attention.\nSee below for the list of questions and answers.\nQuestion Response\nHow far did the red ball of light come from your face? About 4 inches.\nWas there a smell associated with the red ball of light? A rotten smell of dirt and mud.\nDid you experience a ringing in your ears? Yes\nHow long did the ringing last? For the entire time that the red ball of light was by his face and then a few seconds following.\nCan you describe the ringing? High pitched. A constant whistle.\nDid you hear anything besides the ringing? No\nDid you feel any heat? Yes\nWas it a burning heat? No, just warm.\nDid you experience any numbness? Yes\nWhen did the numbness begin? As soon as the red ball of light had past his face.\nHow long did the numbness last? For a few minutes.\nCan you describe the numbness? He couldn't feel sensation on his skin.\nWhere on your face were you numb? From the tip of his nose over to the left side of his face and a little area on his chin.\nDid you experience any pins and needles? No\nDid you have any type of inflammation or redness on your face? No\nDid you experience any dizziness? No\n14"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Did the red ball of light affect or burn your eyes? No\nWas your vision clear afterwards? Yes\nAny long term effects on your eyes? No\nDid you experience a headache after the experience? No\nWere you able to sleep okay that night? Yes"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n\nThe team also visited with 1843(a)(2) at his home on 03/24/2010 at approximately 1030 hours. The interview was beneficial as the team was able to gather additional details on the anomalous lights and creatures witnessed by [REDACTED]. Additionally, [REDACTED] reported an incident which had happened two nights prior involving a \"Skinwalker\". He claimed he was sitting inside his house at about 2000 hours when he saw a large shadow which he believed was a \"Skinwalker\" run very quickly in front of his house.\n\nAs this creature ran towards the road he got up and looked out his front door, but did not go outside. He heard the creature repeatedly run into his barb wire as it was being chased by his barking dogs. It was running so fast it looked like a black shadow. Investigator [REDACTED] searched the fence line and found a patch of fur which was caught in one of the barbs where [REDACTED] had indicated the \"Skinwalker\" had run into it. The fur matched the color description given by 1843(a)(2) of the \"Skinwalker\". This sample was collected and submitted for scientific analysis. Please refer to Scientific Analysis for complete details of sample and results.\n\n[REDACTED] said his sister, 1843(a)(2), witnessed a UFO landing or hovering in a field by her house a year ago in March 2009. [REDACTED] lives approximately 200 yards south of her brother [REDACTED] was able to speak briefly with [REDACTED] who confirmed her sighting; however she was unable to meet with us for a formal interview. [REDACTED] seemed very willing to cooperate with our investigation and efforts will continue to arrange a formal interview of [REDACTED] regarding this incident. The blue ball of light witnessed by [REDACTED] was similar to a blue ball of light witnessed by a man named 1843(a)(2). [REDACTED] identified [REDACTED] as a potential cooperative witness.\n\nIn the meeting with 1843(a)(2) on March 24, 2010, he began by describing an event which had just taken place the Monday prior to the visit. He explained a Skinwalker had been on his property causing his dogs to \"go wild.\" [REDACTED] claims the dogs cornered the Skinwalker and after repeatedly running into the fence, it (Skinwalker) took off toward the old abandoned farm house across the road from his property. He said it was definitely not a person and it appeared as a darkness moving very fast. He explained the Skinwalker was moving at a high rate of speed \"like a track star\" and was faster than the Skinwalker he saw at [REDACTED]\n\nMore intricate details were not noticed by [REDACTED] as he said it was moving so quickly, he could not see more than a black shadow. It was six feet tall and made a howling noise which he said caused the surrounding coyotes to howl as well. He recalls the sound to be the same howling sound he has heard in the past in conjunction with this creature and says it was very loud. [REDACTED] stated it lasted about thirty minutes and he never left his house, but stood by his front door looking out. He said it typically leaves an odor behind, but since he did not leave his home he was unable to comment on an odor.\n\nRecalling his encounter with the Skinwalker at [REDACTED] in January of 2010, he described the creature to be six feet tall and hunched over and weighing approximately 250 lbs. He could see the fur where the light was shining on it and described it as black fur and short like Investigator AAP Person 14 hair with the gray coloring mixed in. The ears were pointed on the side of its head and it had a shorter looking tail. It ran like it was leaping. The head was described as looking like a German shepherd dog without the pointed nose. The nose was described to be more similar to a human nose. He said the Skinwalker should not be looked at directly and said the howl of the Skinwalker is a warning to let everyone know it is passing through.\n\n[REDACTED] discussed further the blue ball of light witnessed last year in relation to Bottle Hollow Lake. He explained at first he thought the light to be a blue colored street light. He also described its rate of speed to be like flare. It also crossed his mind it might be a meteor. Once the light disappeared near Bottle Hollow Lake, he said he went back inside the building. He came back out about thirty minutes later to see if the light was around and said he then saw the three helicopters. He believed they were chasing the light and when they had lost track of it, they (helicopters) simply flew away. The light ascended from the lake area and took off toward \"Skinwalker Ridge\" in an arc-like path after hovering in place for about ten seconds. The details he gave were necessary to complete the necessary data for any lighting anomalies.\n\n[REDACTED] also gave more information on the floating balls of light he mentioned as being so commonly seen among the community. The distance of these floating balls of light was approximately 125 yards away from him. He made the comparison of the behavior of these balls of light to be similar to \"Glenda the Good Witch\" on the Wizard of Oz movie when she was arriving or leaving as a ball of light. He said the lights would move behind something as if they were trying to hide when his presence was noted.\n\nFurther details of the creature and the lights are noted on the attached spreadsheets. The interview with 1843(a)(2) was recorded as well.\n\nIn March 2010, two (2) Moultrie game cameras were installed on the [REDACTED] property. During the April deployment, additional cameras were installed on the [REDACTED] property. Currently a total of four (4) Moultrie game cameras are in operation on the [REDACTED] property. These game cameras are identified as Moultrie I-60 game cameras, equipped with 4Gb memory cards. These cameras periodically checked by BAASS security personnel stationed on the AAP Person 4 Ranch property on a weekly basis and moved if and when necessary. A detailed map and GPS coordinates of these cameras can be referenced in the appendix of this report."} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Below are photographs of the hair sample which was collected from the [REDACTED] property during the March deployment. Specific information regarding the scientific analysis of the sample can be located in the Scientific Analysis section of the report. Please see Figure 12 and Figure 13 for microscopic photographs of hair sample.\n\nFigure 1 - Hair Sample from reported \"Skinwalker\" sighting on 1843(a)(2) property"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 2 - Hair Sample from reported \"Skinwalker\" sighting on 1843(a)(2) property"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 3 - Hair Sample from reported “Skinwalker” sighting on 1843(a)(2) property\n20"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 4 - Hair Sample from reported “Skinwalker” sighting on 1843(a)(2) property\n21"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 5 - Hair Sample from reported “Skinwalker” sighting on 1843(a)(2) property\n22"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 6 - Unknown hair sample - close up photo. Sample taken from 1843(a)(2) residence\n23"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\nContact was made with 1843(a)(2) however he refused to share details because he 1843(a)(2)\nsaid he was “sworn to secrecy” by some people he refused to identify. [REDACTED] refused 1843(a)(2)\nto tell investigators why or who swore him to secrecy. [REDACTED] said if things “calm down” 1843(a)(2)\nhe would be willing to share his story. In another attempt to contact [REDACTED] by phone, 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) his wife, [REDACTED], shared her experience with the blue light, advising she and 1843(a)(2)\nwitnessed a month ago (February 2010).\n\nShe said it was approximately 2100 hours and they were returning home when they\nnoticed an small aqua blue ball of light about five or six feet (5-6) off of the ground\nhovering in a tree in her front yard. She said after a couple seconds it just disappeared\n“in the blink of an eye.” The light was described as dim and did not light up the tree.\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] said the light was clearly not a reflection and she asked 1843(a)(2) what it was.\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] stated he did not know.\n\n1843(a)(2) Additionally, [REDACTED] mentioned her brother, 1843(a)(2) as someone we should talk to\nbecause he claims to have witnessed several strange things in the area. [REDACTED] would 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) not elaborate on what she had heard from [REDACTED] and said investigators would have to call\nand speak to him directly. Contact information for the new witnesses has been\nobtained, however we have currently been unable to contact [REDACTED] to arrange an1843(a)(2)\ninterview.\n24"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\nOn April 20, 2010, a re-interview with 1843(a)(2) was conducted to obtain additional detailed descriptions of the dog-like creatures she encountered twice in September 2009. Details of the encounters can be found in the September investigative reports.\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] summarized her first sighting which occurred on September 11, 2009 at their residence. On this evening, she had just arrived home from shopping and observed a shadow \"lurking\" in her backyard. She originally thought the shadow was the family\n1843(a)(2) horse. After using the restroom, [REDACTED] went to the backyard to tend to the horses with her daughter. She noticed the horse's water was completely empty, which rarely\n1843(a)(2) occurs. At this point, [REDACTED] glanced over her shoulder and witnessed a creature crouched down on top of the shed. She was able to view the creature for a few seconds before it leapt out of sight.\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] was unable to give a detailed description of the creature since she witnessed it from behind for only a few seconds. The details [REDACTED] was able to provide confirmed the information she provided to investigators in the September and October 2009 interviews. She stated the creature was around eight feet tall, completely hairless with dark brown/grayish skin. The creature was definitely not human and was muscular.\nDetails are included in the attached Dog-like creature spreadsheet. A new detail emerged in that at the time of the encounter, 1843(a)(2) four-year-old daughter was also outside. When the creature had leapt away, the four year old said the creature looked like a kangaroo.\n1843(a)(2) second encounter happened the next night on September 12, 2009. She was also unable to give a detailed description of this creature since this was a brief incident which happened at night. Please see the September investigative report as well as the attached Dog-like creature spreadsheet for complete details.\nTwo weeks before the creature sightings, 1843(a)(2) Daughter saw a shadow through\n1843(a)(2) the window. She came running to [REDACTED] and said there was something or someone\n1843(a)(2) outside. When [REDACTED] looked outside to investigate, nothing was there. Later the same day, they noticed the chain which is used to lock the gate where the horses reside was open.\n1843(a)(2) Recently, in March 2010, [REDACTED] has been experiencing recurring dreams of a black wolf. The wolf in her dreams seems somewhat familiar. In the dreams, the wolf stands in one place and stares at her. These dreams do not give her good feelings. Coincidentally, soon after the dreams began, 1843(a)(2) saw a black dog by her fence which reminded her of the wolf from her dreams. The dog was standing on four legs during the day time staring at her. The dark eyed dog was normal sized, but had a wolf head and face and long black fur. She was unable to provide much more detail.\n25"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) described how sometimes she hears a mysterious sound of kids playing. The sound seems to be emanating from the ceiling, and happens when her children are either not home or asleep. She guesses the sound may be spirits. [REDACTED] stated 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] her husband, has also heard this. When asked to describe what she meant by \"kids playing\" she replied the kids seem to be having fun and giggling.\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] recalls an incident when 1843(a)(2) brother, [REDACTED] stayed in her home when 1843(a)(2) her and the family were gone. She remembers when they returned, he said he would never stay in the house again by himself. He was a little disturbed by what had taken place during the night. She said he heard someone walking across the floor to the kitchen, open the refrigerator door and take something out, closed the door and walked back across the floor. She said he got up with his gun to check and see who was there but he saw no one and no signs of anyone having been there. It should be noted, 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) has since relocated to Texas and no longer lives with 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2)\n26"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\nIn the meeting with 1843(a)(2) on April 21, 2010, a main objective was to obtain more detailed information about the creatures he has witnessed throughout his life. Please see the attached Dog-like Creature spreadsheet for supplemental information. Upon asking 1843(a)(2) for detailed information concerning the creatures, he asked for a pen and piece of paper and drew the pictures below to accompany his verbal descriptions.\n1843(a)(2) referred to the first creature as being a \"shape shifter\" (depicted in his drawing below). 1843(a)(2) began to relate the incident involving him and his grandson [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) from a few years ago. [REDACTED] had been outside and called for [REDACTED] to come outside to 1843(a)(2) see the Creature. [REDACTED] described the creature as pale and furless with a hunched back. He noted the creature's legs were not human. During the encounter, the creature jumped over the fence and ran using its hands in a chimpanzee-like manner.\n\nFigure 7 - Creature witnessed by 1843(a)(2) with his grandson 1843(a)(2) Illustration by [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) on April 21, 2010.\n27"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The second creature 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] drew is more dog-like in form. The black furred creature had a pig-like snout. The snout was covered in fur. When he came upon the creature, it was sitting and staring at him. The creature, which was the size of a \"big man\", appeared to be hostile. This frightened 1843(a)(2) and he fled the area.\n\nFigure 8 - Dog-like creature witnessed by 1843(a)(2) Illustration by 1843(a)(2) on April 21, 2010.\nAdditionally, there have been other times during his youth when 1843(a)(2) witnessed similar creatures to the one depicted above. He described a time when him and a group of kids came upon one of these creatures. The creature was frightening to them so they began to throw stones. He also made the general statement when these creatures are present, all dogs get quiet. He described one time in late summer when all of the horses were running erratically in the field. His guess is one of these creatures was scaring them. When he looked for the source of the commotion, he did not see anything as his assumption, by his own admission, is clearly speculation.\n1843(a)(2) provided the BAASS team with two different recordings of a howling sound which he says is the same howling sound he had heard growing up in the Fort Duchesne area. One recording originated from the Fort Washakie Reservation in Wyoming and the other is from the Winnebago Indian Reservation in Oklahoma. Numerous times [REDACTED] stated these \"sounds\" are identical to those sounds made by \"Skinwalkers\" and \"Shape shifters\".\n28"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Analysis\nCurrent plant experiments\nBiosensor Plants\nOn April 6, 2010 biosensor plants were transported to the [REDACTED] Ranch, six Spiderwort plants and six Tobacco Plants. These plants will serve as biosensors for the presence of various types of radiation and/or chemicals/materials which can damage DNA. Three of each plant was placed in two different locations (living room and Bedroom) under grow lights which were set to cycle through sixteen hours of light and eight hours of dark daily. Biologist AAP Person 29 utilized the April trip to check on the health of the plants. At the time of the April deployment, the plants had only been at [REDACTED] Ranch for two weeks, no observations or analysis can be drawn concerning mutation levels in either tobacco or spiderwort.\n• Tobacco heterozygous for the sulfur mutation (Su/+): This assay is based on a naturally occurring mutation at the Sulfur (Su) gene. Plants heterozygous for the gene, Su/+ are pale green. Mutations that inactivate only the Su allele are visualized as dark green spots while mutations of the wild type allele result in an albino spot (yellow/white). Below is an example of the type of result that would be expected upon exposure to a mutagenic agent.\n\nFigure 9 - Su/+ tobacco plants exhibiting mutations in both alleles\nHeterozygous plants are required for the bioassay. Initially the plants will be grown inside the trailer and assayed for color spot changes. Once weather conditions at the\n29"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ranch allow, plants can be moved to outside locations, either in pots or perhaps planted\ndirectly in the ground.AAP Person 29 inspected all Tobacco leaves for the presence\nof dark green spots; none are present at this time.\n• Spiderwort: This assay consists of microscopic observation of stamen hairs\nfor alterations in hair cell coloration from blue to pink. This indicates a\nmutation inactivating the dominant blue color allele allowing expression of the\nrecessive pink color allele. Additionally, pink spots can also be assayed in the\nflower petals. This assay requires microscopic observation, and will be done\non future scientific deployments. A close up of a spiderwort flower is included\nbelow showing the appearance of the stamen hairs, which will need to be\nexamined under a microscope.\n\nFigure 10 - Close up picture of spiderwort stamens and stamen hairs\n\nThe plants require sixteen hours of light per day to promote flower development. Since\nthe assay involves microscopic examination of the flower, the examination of stamen\nhairs and petals will be done by the scientific staff during future routine deployments.\nDuring the April deployment, Biologist AAP Person 29 assessed the health of the\nplants and insured the light cycles are running on sixteen hours of light per day. The\nApril deployment was too soon to perform microscopic analysis."} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Seed Experiment\n\nA seed germination and growth experiment was set up at both BAASS and AAP Person 4 Ranch on April 22, 2010. AAP Person 18 set up the BAASS control experiment while Biologist AAP Person 29 set up the experiment at [REDACTED] Ranch Trailer in two AAP Person 4 different locations. One location is the trailer living room while the second is the trailer bedroom. Plants will be grown to determine if differences exist in germination rate and/or growth rate between the three locations. Two types of seeds will be grown in each location; Stokes Sugar Snap Peas and Stokes Green Beans. Both seed types are treated with fungicide to control contamination by fungus. The following steps were taken when planning and setting up the seed experiments to ensure consistent environmental factors are accounted for:\n\n• All locations will be watered with distilled water.\n• Specialized containers known as \"cone-tainers\" are being utilized. Cone-tainers are elongated pots are arranged in a rack for optimal use of space which can be reused many times. This approach will allow the plants to grow for longer periods of time in order to assess plant growth. Two seed types were planted on each tray allowing for forty-nine of each seed type to be grown.\n\nFigure 11 - Example of Cone-tainers and associated racks\n\n• The cone-tainers were placed under Jump Start T5 Grow light systems. This was to control the light cycles at each location. Timers were set on the light systems to provide sixteen hours of light and eight hours of dark."} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• To control for extraneous light, large enclosures were placed over the grow light systems. The amount of light will therefore be consistent.\n\nPictures will be taken and germination charts will be filled out twice daily for all locations. Once germination data collection has been completed, germination charts will be produced. When the experiment has been completed, plants from AAP Person 4 Ranch will be brought back to BAASS for analysis. All plants will be measured and weighed."} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix\n\nGame Camera identification and GPS coordinates for respective cameras\n\n1843(a)(3)\nBAASS 0001\nBAASS 0002\nBAASS 0003*\nBAASS 0004*\nBAASS 0005*\nBAASS 0006\nBAASS 0007\nBAASS 0008*\nBAASS 0009*\n* Cameras no longer in service"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 12 - Celestron LCD Digital Microscope Model #44340 (magnification 10x objective lens) digital image indicates the presence of a hair follicle located on a strand which can be analyzed for nuclear DNA for species identification."} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 13 - Celestron LCD Digital Microscope Model #44340 (magnification 40x objective lens) digital image indicates the presence of a hair follicle located on a sample strand which can be analyzed for nuclear DNA for species identification."} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nApril 27, 2010\n[REDACTED]\nItems Received\nOn April 2, 2010, the [REDACTED] received four hair samples submitted by you for the purpose of mitochondrial sequencing. The samples were assigned the following laboratory case numbers:\n[REDACTED]\nTests Conducted\nDNA was extracted according to standard operating procedures. The extracts were amplified for a region of the mitochondrial tRNA and Cytochrome b genes and for the canine hypervariable I (HVI) region. Samples yielding canine product were sequenced for HVI; samples without canine product were sequenced for Cytochrome b and resulting sequences were compared with known sequences deposited in GenBank.\nResults and Conclusions\nSample SU-01 tested as FCU188-1 matched reference Procyon lotor (raccoon) samples in GenBank.\nSample SU-02, SU-03, and SU-04 tested as [REDACTED] all exhibited the same canine HVI sequence. This sequence is frequently found in domestic dogs and would be expected to occur in 9.8% to 13.8% of random dogs at the 95% confidence interval.\nDisposition\nAs per the submission form, any samples will be returned to you within 30 days of this report. All DNA results will remain on permanent record at the [REDACTED].\nI was assisted by the [REDACTED] in completing this case, and I have taken their contributions into account in preparing this report. A full record of the work is available at the [REDACTED].\nPlease contact me if I can be of further assistance on this matter.\n[REDACTED]\nThis report may not be reproduced, except in full, without written permission of the laboratory.\nFigure 14 - [REDACTED] analysis"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS Webmail :: hair analysis Page 1 of 2\nBAASS\nSubject hair analysis\nSender AAP Person 18\nRecipient AAP Person 7\nDate 03.05.2010 15:37\nAAP Person 7 [REDACTED] the codes on the report from [REDACTED] regarding the hair analysis are as follows:\n1. [REDACTED] = Hair from the red stained rock found on the ranch property\n2. [REDACTED] = Control hairs from one of the dogs on [REDACTED]\n3. [REDACTED] = Short white hairs found on the fence on [REDACTED] property near where the 'creature' was spotted.\n4. [REDACTED] = Long black hairs found on the fence on [REDACTED] property near where the 'creature' was spotted.\nThe control dog hairs were collected by [REDACTED] during the trip previous to the most recent one. This dog had a coat with hairs that were similar in appearance to the ones found on the fence (i.e. black and white).\nThe other two unknown hairs [REDACTED] were found by the BAASS investigators on the fence at [REDACTED] property in a clump which were later separated by [REDACTED] and only those with an apparent hair follicle were sent off for DNA sequence analysis.\nSample [REDACTED] corresponded to the hair embedded in the red stained rock found on the mesa during the January deployment.\n\nThe results for the samples were fairly straightforward.\nAll four samples had the tRNA and cytochome b mitochondrial genes amplified and sequenced. And those that came back identified as canine were amplified for the canine HVI region and sequenced.\nThe Hypervariable 1 (HVI) DNA sequence for the last three samples were identical suggesting (but not 100% definitive) the same canine individual. However, given the strong physical similarity of the control hairs to the unknown hairs and that the dogs on [REDACTED] property run at will on the property strongly argue that the hairs are from the same individual.\nThe analysis of the DNA sequence of the hair embedded in the red stain identified the hair as originating from a raccoon. Several individuals at the ranch have reported the presence of raccoons in the vicinity of the homesteads, so this finding would not be out of the ordinary.\nThese results were delivered to Park House last Friday, but as we were out of town last week, the results were not delivered to BAASS until today. We have sent the director of the [REDACTED] an email requesting a copy of the raw sequence data for these samples.\nAAP Person 18\nBigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies\nLas Vegas NV\n[REDACTED] 5/4/2010\nFigure 15 - BAASS scientific interpretation of analysis"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dog-like Creature Witness Descriptions\n[REDACTED]\nDate(s): 3 times (dates unknown) | Fall 2008 | Winter 2005 | Winter 2007 (night) | Winter 2007 (night) | 9/11/2009 (1000 hours) | Summer 2008 | Winter 2003 (3/4 AM) | 3/22/2010 (App. 8 PM) | Multiple times | Multiple times | Jan. 2010 (3 AM) | 9/12/2009 (night) | 2005\nHeight: 6 ft (standing on hind legs) | 6 ft tall (standing on hind legs) | 4 ft long (standing on all 4 legs) | A little shorter than Great Dane on all 4 legs. | 6 ft | 8 ft | 6 ft (standing on hind legs) | N/A | 6 ft and hunched over | 7 ft | | 6 ft | ****Not Observed | 7 ft\nWeight: | | App. 140 pounds | App. 190 pounds | | Not able to provide | App. 200 pounds | N/A | ** Not observed | | | App. 250 pounds | ****Not Observed\nHair/Fur/Skin: Long (3 inches) and red, covered the entire body (face included). Small area of less thick fur on upper shoulder/neck area. | Long, red, coarse fox-like hair. Length similar to an Irish wolfhound | Pure white fur (2 - 3 inches in length) | White fur, long and shaggy | Pale skin, no fur | Hairless. Dark Brown, grayish | Dark Brown/Black (2 -3 inches in length) | Thick brown/black, App. 3 inches long. Covered the entire arm | Black and White | Black, dog-like, 4 inches long | Black fur | Black/short, 1 inch long, covering the entire body except the face. Skin on face was dark in color. | ****Not Observed\nHead: Head proportional to body. Dog-like | Large head | Dog-like, but much bigger than any dog that he has seen. | Wolf-like | Human-like | *** Not Observed | Dog-like | N/A | ** Not observed | Oval shaped. | # See drawing from 4/10 | Dog and human features | ****Not Observed\nNeck: Dog-like and thicker than a human's neck | | Thick | | # See drawing from 4/10 | *** Not Observed | Thick and proportional to body | N/A | ** Not observed | | # See drawing from 4/10 | N/A | ****Not Observed\n5/7/2010 Dog-like Creature Witness Descriptions 1"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dog-like Creature Witness Descriptions\n[REDACTED]\nNose: Snout like a dog | Snout like a dog | *Not observed | | # See drawing from 4/10 | *** Not Observed | *Not observed | N/A | ** Not observed | | Pig-like snout covered with fur. | Snout was not pointed. More human-like. | ****Not Observed\nEyes: Round, slanted towards outer edges. Red. Didn't glow | | *Not observed | Glowing Red | # See drawing from 4/10 | *** Not Observed | *Not observed | N/A | ** Not observed | Large, nocturnal, yellow almost glowing | # See drawing from 4/10 | Not observed. | ****Not Observed\nEars: Pointy, Side of head, pointed upward. | Small, pointy | Large and pointy, similar to a german sheppard, but on the side of the creature's head. | | # See drawing from 4/10 | ***Not Observed | Positioned on side of head, pointed upward. | N/A | ** Not observed | Pointy | # See drawing from 4/10 | Ears were pointy and were positioned on the side of the head (human-like) | ****Not Observed\nShoulders: Shrugged back and up. | | Proportional to body | | Hunched | Broad | Proportional to body | N/A | ** Not observed | | # See drawing from 4/10 | Dog-like | ****Not Observed\nBody: Bigger than a deer. Very tall. Thin in stature. Standing on 2 legs over 6 ft. tall. On all four legs, waist height. | Common traits of a dog/coyote. Skinny, not muscular. | Half dog-like and half human-like | Dog-like, muscular | Human-like form, 'hump back' | Not human, but had human form, muscular (but not well defined). | Dog-like, muscular. | N/A | ** Not observed | | Shape of a 'big man/dog' | Dog-like | Different from the creature she witnessed the day before. Size of a bear, dog-like | | Dog-like\n5/7/2010 Dog-like Creature Witness Descriptions 2"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dog-like Creature Witness Descriptions\n1843(a)(2)\nArms | Bent at elbows, almost kangaroo-like. | | Not observed | | # See drawing from 4/10 | ***Not Observed | Covered in fur. Appeared bent at the elbows when the creature was standing on 2 legs. | Hairy Arm app. 3 feet long | ** Not observed | | # See drawing from 4/10 | Front legs/arms dangling | ****Not Observed | | |\nHands | | | | | # See drawing from 4/10 | ***Not Observed | | 4 fingers (10 inches long), no thumb observed. Sharp nails the color of a dog's nails (dirt colored) | ** Not observed | | # See drawing from 4/10 | Hands were human-like and not paws. | ****Not Observed | | |\nLegs | Knees slightly bent when standing on 2 legs. | Dog-like paws. Angled, curved dog like legs. When stood, front legs retracted like kangaroo. | Stood on hind legs. Muscular | Stands on all 4 legs and then hind legs. | Not Human | ***Not Observed | Stood on hind legs. Muscular. Covered in fur. | N/A | ** Not observed | | # See drawing from 4/10 | muscular | Running on hind legs | |\nTail | | Thick, long tail like a fox | Wolf-like. App. 7 inches long | | # See drawing from 4/10 | ***Not Observed | Dog-like. App. 7 inches long | N/A | ** Not observed | | App. 6 inches in length | ****Not Observed | | |\n5/7/2010 Dog-like Creature Witness Descriptions 3"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dog-like Creature Witness Descriptions\n1843(a)(2)\nMovement | When running the knees bent in a human-like nature. Runs faster on two legs than on four. | Ran like a human | The creature was laying down on the ground, upon arrival, the creature stood up on two legs. | Creature was standing and glaring at him, looked away and then assumes that the creature jumped away since he saw the corn field swaying. | Quick, agile in a graceful manner. Ran on all 4 legs in a chirp-like motion. Jumped a 5 foot fence. | Crouched down on 2 legs then moved gracefully like a deer. The creature lept out of sight 3-4 times in a zig-zag manner. | Bipedal walking, then Ran on all four legs in a leaping motion. | Arm was retracted quickly. | Leaping/fast | Bipedal walking | One sighting - he saw the creature sitting. | Ran in 4 ft strides. Hunched over. Ran similar to a dog. Front legs dangling. | Bipedal Running | Bipedal walking | Bipedal walking | Bipedal walking\nOdor | Sulfur-like, wet dog | | Swamp-like | | None noticed | Distinct foul odor of bad body odor/feces. Note the day before faleseu recalled smelling this odor. | Wet Dog | None noticed | None noticed | Sulfur-like dead odor | | General statement that skinwalkers are associated with a \"dead smell\" | ****Not Observed | | Distinct foul odor | Foul smell of rotting flesh\nSound | Grunting / Growling | | None | None | None noticed | None | None | None noticed | High pitched howl | | Howling | Howling | Howling | Howling, breaking branches | |\n5/7/2010 Dog-like Creature Witness Descriptions 4"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dog-like Creature Witness Descriptions\n1843(a)(2)\nSummary | 1843(a)(2) | 1843(a)(2) | 1843(a)(2) and his Uncle were shooting guns. When they saw the creature, they shot at it and the creature fled. | 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) were shooting guns. They saw the creature and shot at it and the creature fled. | Looked like huge dog. When shot with a pellet gun, pellet bounced off. \"Facial features were not observed since spiritual beliefs are to not look the creature in the face. | Saw this dog outside of 1843(a)(2) house. Made other dogs wimper. Creature was also witnessed 1843(a)(2) | Saw this creature with his grandson, # Refer to drawing constructed on the April 2010 Utah Ranch trip. | The creature was atop a small wooden horse shelter. ***Witness did not see the face of the creature since she saw it for a split second from behind before it lept off the shelter. The creature moved gracefully and then leapt out of sight. | 1843(a)(2) was outside feeding his dogs. Out of the corner of his eye, he saw this creature standing on two legs. The creature then ran away on all four legs. | Sleeping with the window open in the house, the arm reached in the window and came within two feet of 1843(a)(2) yelled and the arm retracted. | **Features not observed since the evening was dark and the creature appeared \"shadow-like\" The dogs were going \"wild\" and were chasing the creature. The creature ran into the fence and ran towards Skinwalker Ranch. | 1843(a)(2) stated that there are multiple dog-like creatures in the Utah area. | One particular time that 1843(a)(2) saw this creature he was scared and ran. The creature was sitting. Creature can be perceived as mean. # Refer to drawing constructed on the April 2010 Utah Ranch trip. | Saw the creature running 1843(a)(2) | Heard howling outside. Then she saw a dark shadowy figure, being chased by the dogs, enter through the main gate. The figure then seemed to disappear. ****Unable to provide details since encounter happened for only a split second in the dark. | Heard a loud growling/howling noise. Watched the creature for nearly 3 hrs. | 1843(a)(2) was running from the police and ran directly in to the creature | 1843(a)(2) Referred to these creatures as were-wolves\n5/7/2010 Dog-like Creature Witness Descriptions 5"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Bird-like Creature Witness Descriptions\n1843(a)(2)\nDate(s) | Summer 2006 OR Summer 2007\nFeathers | Brown and Black | Unseen. The entire creature was black\nHead | | Was a huge beak\nNeck | |\nBeak | | 2 feet long\nEyes | |\nBody | Prehistoric looking. Pterodactyl. The size of a SUV, stood 4 ft high | 3 feet long, skinny\nWings | 12 ft wing span | 1 wing was the size of a car legnth and 4 feet wide.\nLegs | |\nMovement | When the creature flew, the legs were hanging down like that of a bird. | Wings moved in an arc-like manner when the creature flew.\nOdor | None noticed | None noticed\nSound | Sound of the wings flapping | Sound of the wings flapping\nSummary | 1843(a)(2) and his son were playing basketball near their house. They saw the trees start to move and then the creature flew away. | 1843(a)(2) was outside playing basketball with 1843(a)(2) He observed the creature landing in the trees off in the distance. This frightened them since the creature appeared large enough to pick a human up. They ran home\n5/7/2010 Bird-like Creature Witness Descriptions 1"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Little People Witness Descriptions\n1843(a)(2)\nDate(s) | | Summer of 2006/2007 |\nHair/Fur | | Covered with fur like a monkey |\nHeight | 3 - 4 feet | 2 - 3 feet |\nWeight | | 40 - 50 pounds |\nHead | | Human-like |\nNeck | | Not observed |\nNose | | Not observed |\nEyes | | Not observed |\nEars | | Not observed |\nShoulders | | Not observed |\nBody | Can be from the size of an ant to about 3-4 ft. tall | Compared to a troll. Muscular. |\nArms | Hang down to the ground | Arms were swinging at the creature's side.\nLegs | | Short in stature.\nMovement | Walk and run using knuckles, similar to gorilla | Walked as a chimpanzee would.\nOdor | | Too far away\nSound | | None\nSummary | Compared to little indians. They take care of the earth and they are divided into two groups; good and bad | [REDACTED] his niece, and others were outside. They observed this creature off in the distance under a street light. They were too far away for [REDACTED] to notice facial features.\n5/7/2010 Little People Witness Descriptions 1"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lighting Anomaly\nWitness | Single or Multiple Lights | Size | Shape | Transparent, Translucent or Opaque | Self-Illuminating | Illuminating to Surrounding Objects | Color Description | Changing Colors\n1843(a)(2) Star-like light | single | looked to be size of a large star | round | unknown | yes | unknown | White when still | blue, yellow and red when moving\n1843(a)(2) Blue Orb | single | golf ball/bouncy ball | spherical | translucent | yes | no | Cobalt or Flourescent Blue | no\n1843(a)(2) Glowing Balls of White Light | multiple | basketball | spherical | opaque | yes | yes | white with \"dance hall light\" colors flickering within | flickering colors within\n1843(a)(2) Blue Orb | single | basketball | spherical | opaque | yes | yes | sky blue | blue with rainbow colors when moving\n1843(a)(2) Several Lights Coming up from the Gravel Pit | multiple | tennis ball | round | translucent | yes | yes | white, blue, and red | no\n1843(a)(2) Golden Orb | single | | | | | | gold | \n1843(a)(2) Light over Ridge by Home | single | | | | yes | | | \n1843(a)(2) Unusual lights in the rainy season | single and multiple | size of headlights | round | translucent | yes | yes | white | no"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness | Pulsating or Constant light | Light Intensity | Any rings around the light | Gas or Solid Object | Material | Smell | Sound | Tail | Smoke | Radiation of heat\n1843(a)(2) Star-like light | constant | unusually bright light | no | unknown | unknown | no | no | no | no | no\n1843(a)(2) Blue Orb | constant | bright | no | unknown | unknown | no | no | no | no | no\n1843(a)(2) Glowing Balls of White Light | constant white with flickering color | dim | no | not solid | \"energy\" | no | no | no | no | no\n1843(a)(2) Blue Orb | pulsing | dim | no | solid | crystal | no | no | no | no | no\n1843(a)(2) Several Lights Coming up from the Gravel Pit | constant | dim | no | unknown | unknown | no | no | no | no | no\n1843(a)(2) Golden Orb | | bright | | | | | | | | \n1843(a)(2) Light over Ridge by Home | | bright | | | | | | | | \n1843(a)(2) Unusual lights in the rainy season | constant | bright | no | unknown | unknown | no | no | no | no | no"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness | Travel Behavior | Reaction to Stimulus | Speed | Spinning | Highest Altitude | Exhibit Magnetic Properties | Object Causes Air Disturbance | Cause Atmospheric Effects | Did the light go out?\n1843(a)(2) Star-like light | zigzag/darting movements in 3x3 ft area | light stopped moving until plane passed by | rapid | unknown | commercial airliner 20-35000 ft | no | no | no | unknown\n1843(a)(2) Blue Orb | fluid-like, mimicked the movement of vehicle | responded to speed of vehicle | mostly mimicked speed of car | no | 3-4 feet | no | no | no | no\n1843(a)(2) Glowing Balls of White Light | floating | no | moved like Glenda as a ball of light on wizard of oz movie | no | unknown | no | no | no | no\n1843(a)(2) Blue Orb | arc-like path | when helicopters left the orb ascended | speed of a flare | yes- when paused in ascent | approx. 100 ft ? | no | no | no | no\n1843(a)(2) Several Lights Coming up from the Gravel Pit | horizontal slow | unknown | slow | no | 8 ft | no | no | no | yes\n1843(a)(2) Golden Orb | traveled along side the car | responded to speed of vehicle | mimicked the speed of the car (unknown) | | | | | | \n1843(a)(2) Light over Ridge by Home | hovered closer to home | | | | | | | | Yes\n1843(a)(2) Unusual lights in the rainy season | slowly moved toward him | unknown | less than 15mph | no | 30 ft | no | no | no | unknown"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness | Did the light/orb take off quickly? | Angle of Take-off | Distance from Viewer | Cause Fear or Other Emotion? | Pet Reaction to Anomaly | Daytime or Nighttime | Duration of Event (minutes) | How Long Ago Was the Sighting?\n1843(a)(2) Star-like light | n/a | n/a | unknown | confused | none | night | 30-45 minutes | Sept/Oct 2009\n1843(a)(2) Blue Orb | unexplainably shot off | 45 degrees/90 degrees | 50 ft / 20 ft | frightened when realizing it was not a reflection | n/a | late afternoon/ 5pm | 3-5 minutes | approx. 2 years ago\n1843(a)(2) Glowing Balls of White Light | no | n/a | unknown | no | n/a | evening | | regularly\n1843(a)(2) Blue Orb | yes- shot in arc-like path to Skinwalker Ridge | unknown | unknown | no | n/a | 5am dawn | | last year\n1843(a)(2) Several Lights Coming up from the Gravel Pit | no | n/a | 200-300 ft | confused | n/a | Night | 15 minutes | Mid-October 2009\n1843(a)(2) Golden Orb | yes- shot straight up | 90° | | Peaceful Feeling | | morning | | 1966\n1843(a)(2) Light over Ridge by Home | | | | | | Stormy Night | 45-60 Seconds | 1974\n1843(a)(2) Unusual lights in the rainy season | unknown | unknown | 1/2 mile | fear | n/a | night | 2 min | regularly"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness | Regular Occurrence or One Time\n1843(a)(2) Star-like light | once\n1843(a)(2) Blue Orb | once\n1843(a)(2) Glowing Balls of White Light | regular occurrence\n1843(a)(2) Blue Orb | once\n1843(a)(2) Several Lights Coming up from the Gravel Pit | one time\n1843(a)(2) Golden Orb | one time\n1843(a)(2) Light over Ridge by Home | one time\n1843(a)(2) Unusual lights in the rainy season | regular occurrence"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\nWitness | Single or Multiple Lights | Size | Shape | Transparent or Translucent or Opaque | Self Illuminating | Illuminating to Surrounding Objects | Color Description | Changing Colors\nUnusual lights in the rainy season | single and multiple | size of headlights | round | translucent | yes | yes | white | no\n1843(a)(2) white orb with red circling light | one larger white and one smaller red | grapefruit held at arms length | spherical | | yes | no | white with smaller red light | no\n1843(a)(2) white orb with red circling light | one larger white and one smaller red | grapefruit held at arms length | spherical | | yes | no | white with smaller red light | no\n1843(a)(2) light flying over neighbors house | single | volkswagen bug | spherical | opaque | yes | no | red,yellow, green, white | yes- but one color at a time: red, yellow, green, then pure white light\n1843(a)(2) floating lights at night | | | | | | | Different Colors | \n1843(a)(2) star-size lights in the sky | | size of star or bigger | | | | | | change colors when moving\n1843(a)(2) cobalt blue light | single | | | | yes | yes | cobalt blue | \n1843(a)(2) Red Ball of Light | single | tennis ball | round with small flat base | unknown | yes | unknown | red with a black ring on the bottom | no\n1843(a)(2) Red Ball of Light | single | smaller than a tennis ball | round like a ball | opaque | yes | no | fire engine red | outside of ball was yellow/orange"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\nWitness | Pulsating or Constant light | Light Intensity | Any rings around the light | Gas or Solid Object | Material | Smell | Sound | Tail | Smoke | Radiation of heat\nUnusual lights in the rainy season | constant | bright | no | unknown | unknown | no | no | no | no | no\n1843(a)(2) white orb with red circling light | | bright | no | unknown | unknown | no | no | | no | no\n1843(a)(2) white orb with red circling light | | bright | no | unknown | unknown | no | no | | no | no\n1843(a)(2) light flying over neighbors house | constant | bright | no | unknown | unknown | no | no | left a light trail behind | no | no\n1843(a)(2) floating lights at night | | | | | | | | | |\n1843(a)(2) star-size lights in the sky | | | | | | | | | |\n1843(a)(2) cobalt blue light | | lit up sky like the sun | | | | | | | |\n1843(a)(2) Red Ball of Light | constant tail pulsed when leaving | bright | black ring on the bottom | solid | unknown | swampy-rotten mud smell | no-caused a ringing in ear | yes- a couple of feet long | no | yes- felt warmth on his face\n1843(a)(2) Red Ball of Light | yel./orange on ball flickered when moving | like a flashlight | no | solid | looked like glass | no | no | flame-like 1/2-1\" | no | warm breeze"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\nWitness | Travel Behavior | Reaction to Stimuli | Speed | Spinning | Highest Altitude | Exhibit Magnetic Properties | Movement of Object Causes Air Disturbance | Cause Atmospheric Effects | Did the light go out?\nUnusual lights in the rainy season | slowly moved toward him | unknown | less than 15mph | no | 30 ft | no | no | no | unknown\n1843(a)(2) white orb with red circling light | | | rapid | | Less than airliner height | no | no | no |\n1843(a)(2) white orb with red circling light | | | rapid | | Less than airliner height | no | no | no |\n1843(a)(2) light flying over neighbors house | smooth, steady, graceful motion | n/a | not very fast | no | 10-15 ft | no | yes, moved the tree branches | | yes\n1843(a)(2) floating lights at night | | | | | | | | |\n1843(a)(2) star-size lights in the sky | random | | | | | | | | yes\n1843(a)(2) cobalt blue light | ascended straight up | | | | | | | |\n1843(a)(2) Red Ball of Light | zoomed | flashlight caused orb to come straight at his face | high rate of speed at times | no | 8-10 ft | yes- numbed his face a little | yes | no | no\n1843(a)(2) Red Ball of Light | wandering smooth motion | seemed to react to voice- began to come her way | fast pitch softball | no | 10 ft | no | yes | caused wind to blow | left before she saw it leave"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\nWitness | Did the light/orb take off quickly? | Angle of Take-off | Distance from Viewer | Cause Fear or Other Emotion? | Pet Reaction to Anomaly | Daytime or Nighttime | Duration of Event (minutes) | How Long Ago Was the Sighting?\nUnusual lights in the rainy season | unknown | unknown | 1/2 mile | fear | n/a | night | 2 min | regularly\n1843(a)(2) white orb with red circling light | | | height of airliner | confusion | no | night 2300hrs | 20-30 minutes | Jul-09\n1843(a)(2) white orb with red circling light | | | height of airliner | confusion | no | night 2300hrs | 20-30 minutes | Jul-09\n1843(a)(2) light flying over neighbors house | shot off into the sky | | | freaked out but not scared | | night 2300hrs | | Nov-09\n1843(a)(2) floating lights at night | | | | | | night | |\n1843(a)(2) star-size lights in the sky | | | | | | | | Feb-09\n1843(a)(2) cobalt blue light | | | | | | | |\n1843(a)(2) Red Ball of Light | shot off straight up in the air | 90 degrees | very close to his face - approx. 8 inches | tense, fear, and curious | n/a | night | 5 minutes | Summer 2009\n1843(a)(2) Red Ball of Light | did not see it leave | n/a | 100 feet | curious | no | 9pm | 25 minutes | Summer 2009"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\nWitness | Regular Occurrence or One Time\nUnusual lights in the rainy season | regular occurrence\n1843(a)(2) white orb with red circling light | once\n1843(a)(2) white orb with red circling light | once\n1843(a)(2) light flying over neighbors house | has seen them before\n1843(a)(2) floating lights at night | \n1843(a)(2) star-size lights in the sky | \n1843(a)(2) cobalt blue light | \n1843(a)(2) Red Ball of Light | once\n1843(a)(2) Red Ball of Light | once"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness | Single or Multiple Lights | Size | Shape | Transparent or Translucent or Opaque | Self Illuminating | Illuminating to Surrounding Objects | Color Description | Changing Colors\n1843(a)(2) Portal | Single | unsure | unsure | Transparent | no | no | clear | no"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness | Pulsating or Constant light | Light Intensity | Any rings around the light | Gas or Solid Object | Material | Smell | Sound | Tail | Smoke | Radiation of heat\n1843(a)(2) Portal | pulsed or rippled like water | n/a | no | unsure- not solid | unsure | none | none | no | no | none"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness | Travel Behavior | Reaction to Stimuli | Speed | Spinning | Highest Altitude | Exhibit Magnetic Properties | Movement of Object Causes Air Disturbance | Cause Atmospheric Effects | Did the light go out?\n1843(a)(2) Portal | stationary | no | none | no | extended up toward the sky about 30-40 feet | no | no | no | Still visible when they left"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness | Did the light/orb take off quickly? | Angle of Take-off | Distance from Viewer | Cause Fear or Other Emotion? | Pet Reaction to Anomaly | Daytime or Nighttime | Duration of Event (minutes) | How Long Ago Was the Sighting?\n1843(a)(2) Portal | n/a | n/a | around 100 feet | peaceful feelings | unknown | daytime/mid-afternoon | unknown- it was still there when they left | over twenty years ago"} {"doc_id":"2cd7add82029978d","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness | Regular Occurrence or One Time\n1843(a)(2) Portal | once"} {"doc_id":"2d2896fc26f8b630","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:19:06"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/ORDER FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS\nOFFEROR TO COMPLETE BLOCKS 12, 17, 23, 24, & 30\n1. REQUISITION NUMBER\n679/0001Z/08\nPAGE 1 OF 59\n2. CONTRACT NO.\nHHM402-08-C-0072\n3. AWARD/EFFECTIVE DATE\nSEP 22, 2008\n4. ORDER NUMBER\n5. SOLICITATION NUMBER\nHHM402-08-R-0211\n6. SOLICITATION ISSUE DATE\nSEP 01, 2008\n7. FOR SOLICITATION INFORMATION CALL:\na. NAME\n(b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\nb. TELEPHONE NUMBER (No collect)\n8. OFFER DUE DATE/LOCAL TIME\nSEP 10, 2008 2:00 PM ET\n9. ISSUED BY\nCODE HHQ402\nVirginia Contracting Activity\nATTN: AE-2\nBolling AFB, Bldg. 6000\nWashington DC 20340-5100\n10. THIS ACQUISITION IS UNRESTRICTED OR SET ASIDE: % FOR:\nSMALL BUSINESS\nWOMEN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS (WOSB) ELIGIBLE UNDER THE WOMEN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM\nNAICS: 541990\nHUBZONE SMALL BUSINESS\nEDWOSB\nSIZE STANDARD:\nSERVICE-DISABLED VETERAN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS\n8(A)\n11. DELIVERY FOR FOB DESTINATION UNLESS BLOCK IS MARKED\nSEE SCHEDULE\n12. DISCOUNT TERMS\n13a. THIS CONTRACT IS A RATED ORDER UNDER DPAS (15 CFR 700)\n13b. RATING\n14. METHOD OF SOLICITATION\nRFQ IFB RFP\n15. DELIVER TO\nCODE 00000\nSee Schedule\n16. ADMINISTERED BY\nCODE ZD50\nVirginia Contracting Activity\nATTN: DIAC, AE-2\nBuilding 6000\nWashington DC 20340-5100\n17a. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR\nCODE 00000434 FACILITY CODE\nBIGELOW AEROSPACE ADVANCED SPACE STUDIES, LLC\n4640 S EASTERN AVE\nLAS VEGAS NV 891196135\n(b)(3):26 U.S.C. §§ 6103, 6105 (Internal Revenue C\nCAGE: 54JU7\nTIN: DUNS: 827037768\nTELEPHONE NO.\n18a. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY\nCODE NSA01A\nNSA Finance and Accounting Office\nP.O. Box 1685; ATTN: DF2111\nFt. George G. Meade MD 20755-6856\n17b. CHECK IF REMITTANCE IS DIFFERENT AND PUT SUCH ADDRESS IN OFFER\n18b. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN BLOCK 18a UNLESS BLOCK BELOW IS CHECKED SEE ADDENDUM\n19. ITEM NO. 20. SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES 21. QUANTITY 22. UNIT 23. UNIT PRICE 24. AMOUNT\nPlease see continuation page for line item details.\n(Use Reverse and/or Attach Additional Sheets as Necessary)\n25. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA\n26. TOTAL AWARD AMOUNT (For Govt. Use Only)\n$21,948,810.00\n27a. SOLICITATION INCORPORATES BY REFERENCE FAR 52.212-1, 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-3 AND 52.212-5 ARE ATTACHED. ADDENDA ARE ARE NOT ATTACHED\n27b. CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER INCORPORATES BY REFERENCE FAR 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-5 IS ATTACHED. ADDENDA ARE ARE NOT ATTACHED\n28. CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO SIGN THIS DOCUMENT AND RETURN COPIES TO ISSUING OFFICE. CONTRACTOR AGREES TO FURNISH AND DELIVER ALL ITEMS SET FORTH OR OTHERWISE IDENTIFIED ABOVE AND ON ANY ADDITIONAL SHEETS SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SPECIFIED\n29. AWARD OF CONTRACT: REF. OFFER DATED YOUR OFFER ON SOLICITATION (BLOCK 5), INCLUDING ANY ADDITIONS OR CHANGES WHICH ARE SET FORTH HEREIN, IS ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS:\n30a. SIGNATURE OF OFFEROR/CONTRACTOR\n31a. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER)\n30b. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 30c. DATE SIGNED\n31b. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)\n(b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\n31c. DATE SIGNED SEP 22, 2008\nAUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION PREVIOUS EDITION IS NOT USABLE\nSTANDARD FORM 1449 (REV. 2/2012) Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.212"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. ITEM NO. 20. SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES 21. QUANTITY 22. UNIT 23. UNIT PRICE 24. AMOUNT\n32a. QUANTITY IN COLUMN 21 HAS BEEN RECEIVED INSPECTED ACCEPTED, AND CONFORMS TO THE CONTRACT, EXCEPT AS NOTED:\n32b. SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE 32c. DATE 32d. PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE\n32e. MAILING ADDRESS OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE 32f. TELPHONE NUMBER OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE\n32g. E-MAIL OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE\n33. SHIP NUMBER PARTIAL FINAL 34. VOUCHER NUMBER 35. AMOUNT VERIFIED CORRECT FOR 36. PAYMENT COMPLETE PARTIAL FINAL 37. CHECK NUMBER\n38. S/R ACCOUNT NO. 39. S/R VOUCHER NUMBER 40. PAID BY\n41a. I CERTIFY THIS ACCOUNT IS CORRECT AND PROPER FOR PAYMENT 42a. RECEIVED BY (Print)\n41b. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICER 41c. DATE 42b. RECEIVED AT (Location)\n42c. DATE REC'D (YY/MM/DD) 42d. TOTAL CONTAINERS\nSTANDARD FORM 1449 (REV. 2/2012) BACK\nHHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SCHEDULE Continued\nITEM NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT\nInvoicing Address:\nNSA Finance and Accounting Office\nP.O. Box 1685; ATTN: DF2111\nFt. George G. Meade MD 20755-6856\nCOR: AAP Person 1\nBigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies, Inc (BAASS) proposal dated 9/3/2008 is incorporated by reference.\nContract Type: Firm Fixed Price\nBase Year: 22 September 2008 - 29 September 2009\n0001 Monthly Status Reports Quantity 12 1.00 LO 2,887,000.00 2,887,000.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AA\n9780100.4400 1082A9 25201 S49205 1SG2 B5P196G1\n1106 610000\n$2,887,000.00\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2008 to 09/21/2009\n0002 Project Management Plan for Tasks 3.a.1 - 3.a.12 Quantity 12 1.00 LO 3,600,000.00 3,600,000.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AA\n9780100.4400 1082A9 25201 S49205 1SG2 B5P196G1\n1106 610000\n$3,600,000.00\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2008 to 09/21/2009\n0003 Research Report for Tasks 3.a.1. - 3.a.12 Quantity 12 1.00 LO 2,100,000.00 2,100,000.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AA\n9780100.4400 1082A9 25201 S49205 1SG2 B5P196G1\n1106 610000\n$2,100,000.00\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2008 to 09/21/2009\n0004 Comprehensive Integrated Threat Assessment 1.00 LO 240,000.00 240,000.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AA\n9780100.4400 1082A9 25201 S49205 1SG2 B5P196G1\n1106 610000\n$240,000.00\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2008 to 09/21/2009\n0005 Travel 1.00 LO 50,000.00 50,000.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AA\n9780100.4400 1082A9 25201 S49205 1SG2 B5P196G1\n1106 610000\n$50,000.00"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SCHEDULE Continued\nITEM NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2008 to 09/21/2009\n0006 Other Direct Costs 1.00 LO 1,123,000.00 1,123,000.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AA\n9780100.4400 1082A9 25201 S49205 1SG2 B5P196G1\n1106 610000\n$1,123,000.00\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2008 to 09/21/2009\nOption Year: 22 September 2009 - 21 September 2010\n1001 Monthly Status Reports Quantity 12 1.00 LO 1,549,100.00 1,549,100.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AB\n9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1\n1106 610000\n$1,549,100.00\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1002 Project Management Plan for Tasks 3.a.1 - 3.a.12 Quantity 12 1.00 LO 4,759,300.00 4,759,300.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AB\n9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1\n1106 610000\n$4,759,300.00\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1003 Research Report for Tasks 3.a.1. - 3.a.12 Quantity 12 1.00 LO 2,870,600.00 2,870,600.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AB\n9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1\n1106 610000\n$2,870,600.00\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1004 Comprehensive Integrated Threat Assessment 1.00 LO 220,200.00 220,200.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AB\n9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1\n1106 610000\n$220,200.00\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1005 Travel 1.00 LO 36,700.00 36,700.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AB\n9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1\n1106 610000\n$36,700.00\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1006 Other Direct Costs 1.00 LO 2,494,610.00 2,494,610.00"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SCHEDULE Continued\nITEM NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AB\n9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1\n1106 610000\n$2,494,610.00\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1007 Additional Travel 1.00 LO 18,300.00 18,300.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AB\n9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1\n1106 610000\n$18,300.00\nPeriod of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 12/21/2010\n1008 UNUSED - This line item is unused but must remain part of the contract to insure proper accounting information is aligned to revised CLINS. Original 0001 from PR 1.00 LO 0.00 0.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AB\n9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1\n1106 610000\n$0.00\n1009 UNUSED - This line item is unused but must remain part of the contract to insure proper accounting information is aligned to revised CLINS. Original 0002 from PR 1.00 LO 0.00 0.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data:\nACRN: AB\n9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1\n1106 610000\n$0.00\nPAGE 5 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table of Contents\n252.212-7001 CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT STATUTES OR EXECUTIVE ORDERS APPLICABLE\nTO DEFENSE ACQUISITIONS OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS (MAR 2008)........................................... 8\n52.212-4 CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (FEB 2007).................................. 9\n52.212-5 CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT STATUTES OR EXECUTIVE ORDERS--COMMERCIAL\nITEMS (JUN 2008)...................................................................................... 9\n52.232-1 PAYMENTS (APR 1984)............................................................................. 12\n52.232-25 PROMPT PAYMENT (OCT 2003)..................................................................... 12\n52.233-1 DISPUTES (JUL 2002)............................................................................. 12\n52.246-1 CONTRACTOR INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS (APR 1984)................................................ 12\n52.246-16 RESPONSIBILITY FOR SUPPLIES (APR 1984)........................................................ 12\n\nSECTION B SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS.................................................... 13\nB.1 52.227-17 RIGHTS IN DATA--SPECIAL WORKS (DEC 2007)............................................... 13\n\nSECTION E INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE............................................................... 14\nE.1 252.211-7004 ALTERNATE PRESERVATION, PACKAGING, AND PACKING (DEC 1991)....................... 14\n\nSECTION F DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE............................................................... 15\nF.1 52.247-29 F.O.B. ORIGIN (FEB 2006)................................................................ 15\nF.2 52.247-34 F.O.B. DESTINATION (NOV 1991)........................................................... 16\n\nSECTION I CONTRACT CLAUSES........................................................................ 17\nI.1 252.203-7000 {252.203-7000} [RESERVED]............................................................. 17\nI.2 252.203-7001 PROHIBITION ON PERSONS CONVICTED OF FRAUD OR OTHER DEFENSE-CONTRACT-RELATED FELONIES\n(DEC 2004)........................................................................................ 17\nI.3 252.205-7000 PROVISION OF INFORMATION TO COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT HOLDERS (DEC 1991).......... 17\nI.4 252.211-7000 ACQUISITION STREAMLINING (DEC 1991)............................................. 18\nI.5 252.211-7001 AVAILABILITY OF SPECIFICATIONS, STANDARDS, DATA ITEM DESCRIPTIONS NOT LISTED IN THE\nACQUISITION STREAMLINING AND STANDARDIZATION INFORMATION SYSTEM (ASSIST), AND PLANS, DRAWINGS,\nAND OTHER PERTINENT DOCUMENTS (MAY 2006)........................................................... 18\nI.6 252.211-7002 AVAILABILITY FOR EXAMINATION OF SPECIFICATIONS, STANDARDS, PLANS, DRAWINGS, DATA\nITEM DESCRIPTIONS, AND OTHER PERTINENT DOCUMENTS (DEC 1991)......................................18\nI.7 252.211-7003 ITEM IDENTIFICATION AND VALUATION (AUG 2008).......................................18\nI.8 252.211-7004 ALTERNATE PRESERVATION, PACKAGING, AND PACKING (DEC 1991)......................... 21\nI.9 252.211-7006 RADIO FREQUENCY IDENTIFICATION (FEB 2007)........................................21\nI.10 252.219-7001 {252.219-7001} [RESERVED]............................................................ 23\nI.11 252.219-7002 {252.219-7002} [RESERVED]............................................................ 23\nI.12 252.219-7003 SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (DOD CONTRACTS) (APR 2007).................. 23\nI.13 252.219-7005 {252.219-7005} (RESERVED)............................................................. 24\nI.14 252.219-7006 {252.219-7006} (RESERVED)............................................................. 24\nI.15 252.225-7001 BUY AMERICAN ACT AND BALANCE OF PAYMENTS PROGRAM (JUN 2005).....................24\nI.16 252.225-7002 QUALIFYING COUNTRY SOURCES AS SUBCONTRACTORS (APR 2003)......................... 25\nI.17 252.225-7007 PROHIBITION ON ACQUISITION OF UNITED STATES MUNITIONS LIST ITEMS FROM COMMUNIST\nCHINESE MILITARY COMPANIES (SEP 2006).............................................................25\nI.18 252.225-7012 PREFERENCE FOR CERTAIN DOMESTIC COMMODITIES (MAR 2008).......................... 25\nI.19 252.225-7014 PREFERENCE FOR DOMESTIC SPECIALTY METALS (JUN 2005)............................ 26\nI.20 252.225-7015 RESTRICTION ON ACQUISITION OF HAND OR MEASURING TOOLS (JUN 2005)............... 26\nI.21 252.233-7000 {252.233-7000} [RESERVED]............................................................. 26\nI.22 252.242-7002 {252.242-7002} [RESERVED]............................................................. 26\nI.23 252.243-7001 PRICING OF CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS (DEC 1991).................................... 26\nI.24 52.203-1 {52.203-1} [RESERVED].................................................................. 27"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table of Contents\nI.25 52.203-10 PRICE OR FEE ADJUSTMENT FOR ILLEGAL OR IMPROPER ACTIVITY (JAN 1997).............. 27\nI.26 52.203-12 LIMITATION ON PAYMENTS TO INFLUENCE CERTAIN FEDERAL TRANSACTIONS (SEP 2007)...... 27\nI.27 52.203-3 GRATUITIES (APR 1984)........................................................................30\nI.28 52.203-5 COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES (APR 1984)...................................... 30\nI.29 52.203-6 RESTRICTIONS ON SUBCONTRACTOR SALES TO THE GOVERNMENT (SEP 2006).................. 30\nI.30 52.203-7 ANTI-KICKBACK PROCEDURES (JUL 1995)............................................... 31\nI.31 52.203-9 {52.203-9} [RESERVED]...................................................................... 31\nI.32 52.209-6 PROTECTING THE GOVERNMENT'S INTEREST WHEN SUBCONTRACTING WITH CONTRACTORS DEBARRED,\nSUSPENDED, OR PROPOSED FOR DEBARMENT (SEP 2006)............................................ 31\nI.33 52.215-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION (JAN 2004)....................... 32\nI.34 52.216-18 ORDERING (OCT 1995)....................................................................34\nI.35 52.216-19 ORDER LIMITATIONS (OCT 1995)...........................................................34\nI.36 52.216-20 DEFINITE QUANTITY (OCT 1995)...........................................................35\nI.37 52.216-21 REQUIREMENTS (OCT 1995)................................................................35\nI.38 52.216-22 INDEFINITE QUANTITY (OCT 1995)........................................................36\nI.39 52.219-13 {52.219-13} [RESERVED].................................................................. 36\nI.40 52.219-16 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES--SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (JAN 1999)................................. 36\nI.41 52.219-6 NOTICE OF TOTAL SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE (JUN 2003)................................ 37\nI.42 52.219-8 UTILIZATION OF SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS (MAY 2004)................................. 37\nI.43 52.219-9 SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (APR 2008)....................................38\nI.44 52.222-1 NOTICE TO THE GOVERNMENT OF LABOR DISPUTES (FEB 1997)............................. 42\nI.45 52.222-20 WALSH-HEALEY PUBLIC CONTRACTS ACT (DEC 1996)....................................43\nI.46 52.222-26 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY (MAR 2007).......................................................43\nI.47 52.222-28 {52.222-28} [RESERVED]...................................................................44\nI.48 52.222-3 CONVICT LABOR (JUN 2003).............................................................. 44\nI.49 52.222-35 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR SPECIAL DISABLED VETERANS, VETERANS OF THE VIETNAM ERA, AND\nOTHER ELIGIBLE VETERANS. [SEP 2006]...................................................................45\nI.50 52.222-36 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FOR WORKERS WITH DISABILITIES (JUN 1998)....................... 47\nI.51 52.222-37 EMPLOYMENT REPORTS ON SPECIAL DISABLED VETERANS, VETERANS OF THE VIETNAM ERA, AND\nOTHER ELIGIBLE VETERANS (SEP 2006)...................................................................47\nI.52 52.223-6 DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE (MAY 2001).......................................................... 48\nI.53 52.225-10 NOTICE OF BUY AMERICAN ACT REQUIREMENT--CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS (MAY 2002)........ 49\nI.54 52.225-11 BUY AMERICAN ACT--CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS UNDER TRADE AGREEMENTS (AUG 2007)....... 50\nI.55 52.229-3 FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL TAXES (APR 2003)........................................... 52\nI.56 52.232-17 INTEREST (JUN 1996).................................................................... 53\nI.57 52.232-23 ASSIGNMENT OF CLAIMS (JAN 1986)...................................................... 53\nI.58 52.232-28 INVITATION TO PROPOSE PERFORMANCE-BASED PAYMENTS (MAR 2000)..................... 53\nI.59 52.233-1 DISPUTES (JUL 2002)................................................................... 54\nI.60 52.242-10 {52.242-10} [RESERVED]............................................................... 55\nI.61 52.246-17 WARRANTY OF SUPPLIES OF A NONCOMPLEX NATURE (JUN 2003)........................... 55\nI.62 52.246-18 WARRANTY OF SUPPLIES OF A COMPLEX NATURE (MAR 2001).............................. 56\nI.63 52.246-19 WARRANTY OF SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT UNDER PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS OR DESIGN CRITERIA\n(MAR 2001)......................................................................................... 57\nI.64 52.247-1 COMMERCIAL BILL OF LADING NOTATIONS (FEB 2006)................................... 59"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLAUSES\n252.212-7001 CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT STATUTES OR EXECUTIVE ORDERS\nAPPLICABLE TO DEFENSE ACQUISITIONS OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS (MAR 2008)\n(a) The Contractor agrees to comply with the following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)\nclause which, if checked, is included in this contract by reference to implement a provision of law\napplicable to acquisitions of commercial items or components.\n52.203-3, Gratuities (APR 1984) (10 U.S.C. 2207).\n(4) 252.225-7001, Buy American Act and Balance of Payments Program\n(b) The Contractor agrees to comply with any clause that is checked on the following list of\nDefense FAR Supplement clauses which, if checked, is included in this contract by reference to\nimplement provisions of law or Executive orders applicable to acquisitions of commercial items or\ncomponents.\n(1) 252.205-7000, Provision of Information to Cooperative\nAgreement Holders (DEC 1991) (10 U.S.C. 2416).\n(2) 252.219-7003, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (DoD Contracts)\n(APR 2007) (15 U.S.C. 637).\n(3) 252.219-7004, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Test Program)\n(APR 2007) (15 U.S.C. 637 Note).\n(JUN 2005) (41 U.S.C. 10a-10d, E.O. 10582).\n(5) 252.225-7012, Preference for Certain Domestic Commodities (MAR\n2008) (10 U.S.C. 2533a).\nBearings (MAR 2006) (Section 8065 of Pub. L. 107-117 and the\n(6) 252.225-7014, Preference for Domestic Specialty Metals (JUN\n2005) (10 U.S.C. 2533a).\n(7) 252.225-7015, Restriction on Acquisition of Hand or Measuring\nTools (JUN 2005) (10 U.S.C. 2533a).\n(8) 252.225-7016, Restriction on Acquisition of Ball and Roller\nsame restriction in subsequent DoD appropriations acts.\n(9) 252.225-7021, Trade Agreements (MAR 2007) (19 U.S.C. 2501-2518\nand 19 U.S.C. 3301 note).\n(10) 252.225-7027, Restriction on Contingent Fees for Foreign\nMilitary Sales (APR 2003) (22 U.S.C. 2779).\n(41 U.S.C. 10a-10d abd 19 U.S.C. 3301 note).\n(11) 252.225-7028, Exclusionary Policies and Practices of Foreign\nGovernments (APR 2003) (22 U.S.C. 2755).\n(12)\n(i) 252.225-7036, Buy American Act--Free Trade\nAgreements--Balance of Payments Program (MAR 2007)\n(ii) (Alternate I)(OCT 2006) of 252.225-7036.\n(13) 252.225-7038, Restriction on Acquisition of Air Circuit\nBreakers (JUN 2005) (10 U.S.C. 2534(a)(3)).\n(14) 252.226-7001, Utilization of Indian Organizations Indian-Owned\nEconomic Enterprises, and Native Hawaiian Small Business\nConcerns (SEP 2004) (Section 8021 of Public Law 107-248 and\nsimilar sections in subsequent DoD appropriations acts).\n(15) 252.227-7015, Technical Data--Commercial Items (NOV 1995)\n(10 U.S.C. 2320).\n(16) 252.227-7037, Validation of Restrictive Markings on Technical\n(18) 252.237-7019, Training for Contractor Personnel Interacting\nData (SEP 1999) (10 U.S.C. 2321).\n(17) 252.232-7003, Electronic Submission of Payment Requests and\nReceiving Reports (MAR 2008) (10 U.S.C. 2227).\nwith Detainees (SEP 2006) (Section 1092 of Public Law 108-375).\n(19) 252.243-7002 Requests for Equitable Adjustment (MAR 1998)\n(10 U.S.C. 2410).\n(20)\n(i) 252.247-7023, Transportation of Supplies by Sea (MAY\n2002) (10 U.S.C. 2631).\n(ii) Alternate I (MAR 2000) of 252-247-7023.\n(21) 252.247-7024, Notification of Transportation of Supplies by Sea\n(MAR 2000) (10 U.S.C. 2631).\n(c) In addition to the clauses listed in paragraph (e) of the Contract Terms and Conditions\nRequired to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders--Commercial Items clause of this contract (FAR\n52.212-5), the Contractor shall include the terms of the following clauses, if applicable, in\nsubcontracts for commercial items or commercial components, awarded at any tier under this contract:\n(1) 252.225-7014, Preference for Domestic Speciality Metals,"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Alternate I (APR 2003) (10 U.S.C. 2533a).\n(2) 252.237-7019, Training for Contractor Personnel Interacting\nwith Detainees (SEP 2006) (Section 1092 of Pub. L. 108-375).\n(3) 252.247-7023, Transportation of Supplies by Sea (MAY 2002)\n(10 U.S.C. 2631).\n(4) 252.247-7024, Notification of Transportation of Supplies by Sea\n(MAR 2000) (10 U.S.C. 2631).\n(End of clause)\n(iv) Alternate III (MAR 2000) of 252-247-7023.\n(iii) Alternate II (MAR 2000) of 252-247-7023.\n\n52.212-4 CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (FEB 2007)\n(Reference 52.212-4)\n\n52.212-5 CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT STATUTES OR EXECUTIVE ORDERS--COMMERCIAL\nITEMS (JUN 2008)\n\n(a) The Contractor shall comply with the following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause,\nwhich is incorporated in this contract by reference, to implement provisions of law or Executive\norders applicable to acquisitions of commercial items:\n(1) 52.233-3, Protest after Award (Aug 1996) (31 U.S.C. 3553).\n(2) 52.233-4, Applicable Law for Breach of Contract Claim (Oct 2004)\n(Pub. L. 108-77, 108-78).\n(b) The Contractor shall comply with the FAR clauses in this paragraph (b) that the Contracting\nOfficer has indicated as being incorporated in this contract by reference to implement provisions\nof law or Executive orders applicable to acquisitions of commercial items:\n(1) 52.203-6, Restrictions on Subcontractor Sales to the Government\n(Sep 2006), with Alternate I (Oct 1995)(41 U.S.C. 253g and\n10 U.S.C. 2402).\n(2) 52.219-3, Notice of Total HUBZone Set-Aside (Jan 1999)\n(15 U.S.C. 657a).\n(3) 52.219-4, Notice of Price Evaluation Preference for HUBZone\nSmall Business Concerns (July 2005) (if the offeror elects\nto waive the preference, it shall so indicate in its offer)\n(15 U.S.C. 657a).\n(4) [Reserved]\n(5)\n(i) 52.219-6, Notice of Total Small Business Set-Aside (June\n2003) (15 U.S.C. 644).\n(ii) Alternate I (Oct 1995) of 52.219-6.\n(iii) Alternate II (Mar 2004) of 52.219-6.\n(6)\n(i) 52.219-7, Notice of Partial Small Business Set-Aside (June\n2003) (15 U.S.C. 644).\n(ii) Alternate I (Oct 1995) of 52.219-7.\n(iii) Alternate II (Mar 2004) of 52.219-7.\n(7) 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns (May 2004) (15\nU.S.C. 637(d)(2) and (3)).\n(8)\n(i) 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Apr 2008)\n(15 U.S.C. 637(d)(4).\n(ii) Alternate I (Oct 2001) of 52.219-9.\n(iii) Alternate II (Oct 2001) of 52.219-9.\n(9) 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting (Dec 1996) (15 U.S.C.\n637(a)(14)).\n(10) 52.219-16, Liquidated Damages--Subcontracting Plan (Jan 1999)\n(15 U.S.C. 637(d)(4)(F)(i)).\n(11)\n(i) 52.219-23, Notice of Price Evaluation Adjustment for Small\nDisadvantaged Business Concerns (Sept 2005) (10 U.S.C. 2323)\n(if the offeror elects to waive the adjustment, it shall so\nDisadvantaged Status and Reporting (Apr 2008) (Pub. L.\nindicate in its offer).\n(ii) Alternate I (June 2003) of 52.219-23.\n(12) 52.219-25, Small Disadvantaged Business Participation Program-\n7102, and 10 U.S.C. 2323).\n103-355, section 7102, and 10 U.S.C. 2323).\nPAGE 9 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(13) 52.219-26, Small Disadvantaged Business Participation Program-\nIncentive Subcontracting (Oct 2000) (Pub. L. 103-355, section\n(14) 52.219-27, Notice of Total Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small\nBusiness Set-Aside (May 2004) (15 U.S.C. 657 f).\n(15) 52.219-28, Post Award Small Business Program Rerepresentation\n(June 2007) (15 U.S.C. 632(a)(2)).\n(16) 52.222-3, Convict Labor (June 2003) (E.O. 11755).\n(17) 52.222-19, Child Labor--Cooperation with Authorities and Remedies\nVeterans of the Vietnam Era, and Other Eligible Veterans\n(Feb 2008) (E.O. 13126).\n(18) 52.222-21, Prohibition of Segregated Facilities (Feb 1999).\n(19) 52.222-26, Equal Opportunity (Apr 2002) (E.O. 11246).\n(20) 52.222-35, Equal Opportunity for Special Disabled Veterans,\n(22) 52.222-37, Employment Reports on Special Disabled Veterans,\n(Sept 2006) (38 U.S.C. 4212).\n(21) 52.222-36, Affirmative Action for Workers with Disabilities\n(Jun 1998) (29 U.S.C. 793).\nUnion Dues or Fees (Dec 2004) (E.O. 13201).\nVeterans of the Vietnam Era, and Other Eligible Veterans (Sept\n2006) (38 U.S.C. 4212).\n(23) 52.222-39, Notification of Employee Rights Concerning Payment of\n(24)\n(i) 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons (Aug 2007)\n(Applies to all contracts).\n(ii) Alternate I (Aug 2007) of 52.222-50.\n(25)\n(i) 52.223-9, Estimate of Percentage of Recovered Material\nContent for EPA-Designated Items (May 2008) (42 U.S.C.\n6962(c)(3)(A)(ii)).\n(ii) Alternate I (May 2008) of 52.223-9 (42 U.S.C.\n6962(i)(2)(C)).\n(26) 52.223-15, Energy Efficiency in Energy-Consuming Products\n(Dec 2007) (42 U.S.C. 8259b).\n(27)\n(i) 52.223-16, IEEE 1680 Standard for the Environmental\n(28) 52.225-1, Buy American Act-Supplies (June 2003)(41 U.S.C.\nAssessment of Personal Computer Products (Dec 2007)\n(E.O. 13423).\n(ii) Alternate I (Dec 2007) of 52.223-16.\n10a-10d).\n(29)\nTrade Act (Aug 2007) (41 U.S.C. 10a-10d, 19 U.S.C. 3301\n(i) 52.225-3, Buy American Act-Free Trade Agreements-Israeli\nnote, 19 U.S.C. 2112 note, Pub. L. 108-77, 108-78, 108-286,\n109-53 and 109-169.\n(ii) Alternate I (Jan 2004) of 52.225-3.\n(iii) Alternate II (Jan 2004) of 52.225-3.\n(30) 52.225-5, Trade Agreements (Nov 2007) (19 U.S.C. 2501, et seq.,\n19 U.S.C. 3301 note).\n(31) 52.225-13, Restrictions on Certain Foreign Purchases (Jun 2008)\n(E.O.'s, proclamations, and statutes administered by the Office\nof Foreign Assets Control of the Department of the Treasury).\n(32) 52.226-4, Notice of Disaster or Emergency Area Set-Aside\n(34) 52.232-29, Terms for Financing of Purchases of Commercial Items\n(Nov 2007) (42 U.S.C. 5150).\n(33) 52.226-5, Restrictions on Subcontracting Outside Disaster or\nEmergency Area (Nov 2007) (42 U.S.C. 5150).\n(Feb 2002) (41 U.S.C. 255(f), 10 U.S.C. 2307(f)).\n(35) 52.232-30, Installment Payments for Commercial Items (Oct 1995)\n(41 U.S.C. 255(f), 10 U.S.C. 2307(f)).\n(36) 52.232-33, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer-Central\n(37) 52.232-34, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer-Other than\nContractor Registration (Oct 2003) (31 U.S.C. 3332).\nCentral Contractor Registration (May 1999) (31 U.S.C. 3332).\n(38) 52.232-36, Payment by Third Party (May 1999)(31 U.S.C. 3332).\n(39) 52.239-1, Privacy or Security Safeguards (Aug 1996) (5 U.S.C.\nCommercial Vessels (Feb 2006) (46 U.S.C. Appx 1241(b) and\nPAGE 10 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"552a).\n(40)\n(i) 52.247-64, Preference for Privately Owned U.S.-Flag\n(c) The Contractor shall comply with the FAR clauses in this paragraph (c), applicable to commercial services, that the Contracting Officer has indicated as being incorporated in this contract by reference to implement provisions of law or Executive orders applicable to acquisitions of commercial items:\n10 U.S.C. 2631).\n(ii) Alternate I (Apr 1984) of 52.247-64.\n(1) 52.222-41, Service Contract Act of 1965 (Nov 2007)\n(41 U.S.C. 351, et seq.).\n(2) 52.222-42, Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires (May 1989) (29 U.S.C. 206 and 41 U.S.C. 351, et seq.).\n(3) 52.222-43, Fair Labor Standards Act and Service Contract Act-Price Adjustment (Multiple Year and Option Contracts) (May 1989) (29 U.S.C. 206 and 41 U.S.C. 351, et seq.).\n(4) 52.222-44, Fair Labor Standards Act and Service Contract Act-Price Adjustment (Feb 2002) (29 U.S.C. 206 and 41 U.S.C. 351, et seq.).\n(5) 52.222-51, Exemption from Application of the Service Contract Act to Contracts for Maintenance, Calibration, or Repair of Certain Equipment--Requirements (Nov 2007) (41 U.S.C. 351, et seq.).\n(6) 52.222-53, Exemption from Application of the Service Contract Act Contracts fro Certain Services--Requirements (Nov 2007) (41 U.S.C. 351, et seq.).\n(7) 52.237-11, Accepting and Dispensing of $1 Coin (Aug 2007) (31 U.S.C. 5112(p)(1)).\n(d) Comptroller General Examination of Record. The Contractor shall comply with the provisions of this paragraph (d) if this contract was awarded using other than sealed bid, is in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold, and does not contain the clause at 52.215-2, Audit and Records-Negotiation.\n(1) Notwithstanding the requirements of the clauses in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) of this clause, the Contractor is not required to flow down any FAR clause, other than those in paragraphs (i) through (vii of this paragraph in a subcontract for commercial items. Unless otherwise indicated below, the extent of the flow down shall be as required by the clause--\n(i) 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns (May 2004) (15 U.S.C. 637(d)(2) and (3)), in all subcontracts that offer further subcontracting opportunities. If the subcontract (except subcontracts to small business concerns) exceeds $550,000 ($1,000,000 for construction of any public facility), the subcontractor must include 52.219-8 in lower tier subcontracts that offer subcontracting opportunities.\n(ii) 52.222-26, Equal Opportunity (Mar 2007) (E.O. 11246).\n(iii) 52.222-35, Equal Opportunity for Special Disabled Veterans, Veterans of the Vietnam Era, and Other Eligible Veterans (Sept 2006) (38 U.S.C. 4212).\n(iv) 52.222-36, Affirmative Action for Workers with Disabilities (June 1998) (29 U.S.C. 793).\n(v) 52.222-39, Notification of Employee Rights Concerning Payment of Union Dues or Fees (DEC 2004) (E.O. 13201).\n(vi) 52.222-41, Service Contract Act of 1965 (Nov 2007) (41 U.S.C. 351, et seq.).\n(vii) 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons (Aug 2007) (22 U.S.C. 7104(g)). Flow down required in accordance with paragraph (f) of FAR clause 52.222-50.\n(viii) 52.222-51, Exemption from Application of the Service Contract Act to Contracts for Maintenance, Calibration, or Repair of Certain Equipment--Requirements (Nov 2007) (41 U.S.C. 351, et seq.).\n(1) The Comptroller General of the United States, or an authorized representative of the Comptroller General, shall have access to and right to examine any of the Contractor's directly pertinent records involving transactions related to this contract.\n(2) The Contractor shall make available at its offices at all reasonable times the records, materials, and other evidence for examination, audit, or reproduction, until 3 years after final payment under this contract or for any shorter period specified in FAR Subpart 4.7, Contractor Records Retention, of the other clauses of this contract. If this contract is completely or partially terminated, the records relating to the work terminated shall be made available for 3 years after any resulting final termination settlement. Records relating to appeals under the disputes clause or to litigation or the settlement of claims arising under or relating to this contract shall be made available until such appeals, litigation, or claims are finally resolved.\n(3) As used in this clause, records include books, documents, accounting procedures and practices, and other data, regardless of type and regardless of form. This does not require the Contractor"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to create or maintain any record that the Contractor does not maintain in the ordinary course of business or pursuant to a provision of law.\n(e)\n(ix) 52.222-53, Exemption from Application of the Service Contract Act to Contracts for Certain Services--Requirements (Nov 2007) (41 U.S.C. 351, et seq.).\n(x) 52.247-64, Preference for Privately Owned U.S.-Flag Commercial Vessels (Feb 2006) (46 U.S.C. Appx 1241 (b) and 10 U.S.C. 2631). Flow down required in accordance with paragraph (d) of FAR clause 52.247-64.\n(End of Clause)\n(2) While not required, the contractor may include in its subcontracts for commercial items a minimal number of additional clauses necessary to satisfy its contractual obligations.\n\n52.232-1 PAYMENTS (APR 1984)\n(Reference 52.232-1)\n\n52.232-25 PROMPT PAYMENT (OCT 2003)\n(Reference 52.232-25)\n\n52.233-1 DISPUTES (JUL 2002)\n(Reference 52.233-1)\n\n52.246-1 CONTRACTOR INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS (APR 1984)\n\nThe Contractor is responsible for performing or having performed all inspections and tests necessary to substantiate that the supplies or services furnished under this contract conform to contract requirements, including any applicable technical requirements for specified manufacturers'' parts. This clause takes precedence over any Government inspection and testing required in the contract''s specifications, except for specialized inspections or tests specified to be performed solely by the Government.\n\n(End of Clause)\n\n52.246-16 RESPONSIBILITY FOR SUPPLIES (APR 1984)\n(Reference 52.246-16)"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECTION B\nSUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS\nB.1 52.227-17 RIGHTS IN DATA--SPECIAL WORKS (DEC 2007)\n\n(a) Definitions. As used in this clause--\n\"Data\" means recorded information, regardless of form or the media on which it may be recorded. The term includes technical data and computer software. The term does not include information incidental to contract administration, such as financial, administrative, cost or pricing, or management information.\n\"Unlimited rights\" means the rights of the Government to use, disclose, reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute copies to the public, and perform publicly and display publicly, in any manner and for any purpose, and to have or permit others to do so.\n(b) Allocation of Rights.\n(1) The Government shall have--\n(i) Unlimited rights in all data delivered under this contract, and in all data first produced in the performance of this contract, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this clause.\n(ii) The right to limit assertion of copyright in data first produced in the performance of this contract, and to obtain assignment of copyright in that data, in accordance with paragraph (c)(1) of this clause.\n(iii) The right to limit the release and use of certain data in accordance with paragraph (d) of this clause.\n(2) The Contractor shall have, to the extent permission is granted in accordance with paragraph (c)(1) of this clause, the right to assert claim to copyright subsisting in data first produced in the performance of this contract.\n\n(c) Copyright--\n(End of clause)\n(1) Data first produced in the performance of this contract.\n(i) The Contractor shall not assert or authorize others to assert any claim to copyright subsisting in any data first produced in the performance of this contract without prior written permission of the Contracting Officer. When copyright is asserted, the Contractor shall affix the appropriate copyright notice of 17 U.S.C. 401 or 402 and acknowledgment of Government sponsorship (including contract number) to the data when delivered to the Government, as well as when the data are published or deposited for registration as a published work in the U.S. Copyright Office. The Contractor grants to the Government, and others acting on its behalf, a paid-up, nonexclusive, irrevocable, worldwide license for all delivered data to reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute copies to the public, and perform publicly and display publicly, by or on behalf of the Government.\n(ii) If the Government desires to obtain copyright in data first produced in the performance of this contract and permission has not been granted as set forth in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this clause, the Contracting Officer shall direct the Contractor to assign (with or without registration), or obtain the assignment of, the copyright to the Government or its designated assignee.\n(2) Data not first produced in the performance of this contract. The Contractor shall not, without prior written permission of the Contracting Officer, incorporate in data delivered under this contract any data not first produced in the performance of this contract and that contain the copyright notice of 17 U.S.C. 401 or 402, unless the Contractor identifies such data and grants to the Government, or acquires on its behalf, a license of the same scope as set forth in paragraph (c)(1) of this clause.\n(d) Release and use restrictions. Except as otherwise specifically provided for in this contract, the Contractor shall not use, release, reproduce, distribute, or publish any data first produced in the performance of this contract, nor authorize others to do so, without written permission of the Contracting Officer.\n(e) Indemnity. The Contractor shall indemnify the Government and its officers, agents, and employees acting for the Government against any liability, including costs and expenses, incurred as the result of the violation of trade secrets, copyrights, or right of privacy or publicity, arising out of the creation, delivery, publication, or use of any data furnished under this contract; or any libelous or other unlawful matter contained in such data. The provisions of this paragraph do not apply unless the Government provides notice to the Contractor as soon as practicable of any claim or suit, affords the Contractor an opportunity under applicable laws, rules, or regulations to participate in the defense of the claim or suit, and obtains the Contractor's consent to the settlement of any claim or suit other than as required by final decree of a court of competent jurisdiction; and these provisions do not apply to material furnished to the Contractor by the Government and incorporated in data to which this clause applies."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECTION E\nINSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE\nE.1 252.211-7004 ALTERNATE PRESERVATION, PACKAGING, AND PACKING (DEC 1991)\n\n(a) The Offeror may submit two unit prices for each item--one based on use of the military preservation, packaging, or packing requirements of the solicitation; and an alternate based on use of commercial or industrial preservation, packaging, or packing of equal or better protection than the military.\n(b) If the Offeror submits two unit prices, the following information, as a minimum, shall be submitted with the offer to allow evaluation of the alternate--\n(1) The per unit/item cost of commercial or industrial preservation, packaging, and packing;\n(2) The per unit/item cost of military preservation, packaging, and packing;\n(3) The description of commercial or industrial preservation, packaging, and packing procedures, including material specifications, when applicable, to include--\n(viii) Unit container;\n(i) Method of preservation;\n(ii) Quantity per unit package;\n(iii) Cleaning/drying treatment;\n(iv) Preservation treatment;\n(v) Wrapping materials;\n(vi) Cushioning/dunnage material;\n(vii) Thickness of cushioning;\n(ix) Unit package gross weight and dimensions;\n(x) Packing; and\n(xi) Packing gross weight and dimensions; and\n(4) Item characteristics, to include--\n(i) Material and finish;\n(ii) Net weight;\n(iii) Net dimensions; and\n(iv) Fragility.\n(c) If the Contracting Officer does not evaluate or accept the Offeror's proposed alternate commercial or industrial preservation, packaging, or packing, the Offeror agrees to preserve, package, or pack in accordance with the specified military requirements.\n(End of provision)"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECTION F\nDELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE\nF.1 52.247-29 F.O.B. ORIGIN (FEB 2006)\n\n(a) The term \"f.o.b. origin,\" as used in this clause, means free of expense to the Government delivered--\n(1) On board the indicated type of conveyance of the carrier (or of the Government, if specified) at a designated point in the city, county, and State from which the shipment will be made and from which line-haul transportation service (as distinguished from switching, local drayage, or other terminal service) will begin;\n(2) To, and placed on, the carrier's wharf (at shipside, within reach of the ship's loading tackle, when the shipping point is within a port area having water transportation service) or the carrier's freight station;\n(3) To a U.S. Postal Service facility; or\n(4) If stated in the solicitation, to any Government designated point located within the same city or commercial zone as the f.o.b. origin point specified in the contract (the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration prescribes commercial zones at Subpart B of 49 CFR part 372).\n(b) The Contractor shall--\n(ii) In the absence of specifications, prepare the shipment in conformance with carrier requirements to protect the goods and to ensure assessment of the lowest applicable transportation charge;\n(1)\n(i) Pack and mark the shipment to comply with contract specifications; or\n(2)\n(i) Order specified carrier equipment when requested by the Government; or\n(ii) If not specified, order appropriate carrier equipment not in excess of capacity to accommodate shipment;\n(3) Deliver the shipment in good order and condition to the carrier, and load, stow, trim, block, and/or brace carload or truckload shipment (when loaded by the Contractor) on or in the carrier's conveyance as required by carrier rules and regulations;\n(4) Be responsible for any loss of and/or damage to the goods--\n(i) Occurring before delivery to the carrier;\n(ii) Resulting from improper packing and marking; or\n(i) A description of the shipment in terms of the governing freight classification or tariff (or Government rate tender) under which lowest freight rates are applicable;\n(iii) Resulting from improper loading, stowing, trimming, blocking, and/or bracing of the shipment, if loaded by the Contractor on or in the carrier's conveyance;\n(5) Complete the Government bill of lading supplied by the ordering agency or, when a Government bill of lading is not supplied, prepare a commercial bill of lading or other transportation receipt. The bill of lading shall show--\n(ii) The seals affixed to the conveyance with their serial numbers or other identification;\n(iii) Lengths and capacities of cars or trucks ordered and furnished;\n(5) Distribute the copies of the bill of lading, or other transportation receipts, as directed by the ordering agency.\n\n(iv) Other pertinent information required to effect prompt delivery to the consignee, including name, delivery address, postal address and ZIP code of consignee, routing, etc.;\n(v) Special instructions or annotations requested by the ordering agency for commercial bills of lading; e.g., \"This shipment is the property of, and the freight charges paid to the carrier(s) will be reimbursed by, the Government\"; and\n(vi) The signature of the carrier's agent and the date the shipment is received by the carrier; and\n(c) These Contractor responsibilities are specified for performance at the plant or plants at which the supplies are to be finally inspected and accepted, unless the facilities for shipment by carrier's equipment are not available at the Contractor's plant, in which case the responsibilities shall be performed f.o.b. the point or points in the same or nearest city where the specified carrier's facilities are available; subject, however, to the following qualifications:\n(1) If the Contractor's shipping plant is located in the State of Alaska or Hawaii, the Contractor shall deliver the supplies listed for shipment outside Alaska or Hawaii to the port of loading in Alaska or Hawaii, respectively, as specified in the contract, at Contractor's expense, and to that extent the contract shall be \"f.o.b. destination.\"\n(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (c)(1) of this clause, if the Contractor's shipping plant is located in the State of Hawaii, and the contract requires delivery to be made by container service, the Contractor shall deliver the supplies, at the Contractor's expense, to the container yard in the same or nearest city where seavan container service is available."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(End of Clause)\n\nF.2 52.247-34 F.O.B. DESTINATION (NOV 1991)\n\n(a) The term \"f.o.b. destination,\" as used in this clause, means--\n(1) Free of expense to the Government, on board the carrier''s conveyance, at a specified delivery point where the consignee''s facility (plant, warehouse, store, lot, or other location to which shipment can be made) is located; and\n(b) The Contractor shall--\n(3) Deliver the shipment in good order and condition to the point of delivery specified in the contract;\n(2) Supplies shall be delivered to the destination consignee''s wharf (if destination is a port city and supplies are for export), warehouse unloading platform, or receiving dock, at the expense of the Contractor. The Government shall not be liable for any delivery, storage, demurrage, accessorial, or other charges involved before the actual delivery (or \"constructive placement\" as defined in carrier tariffs) of the supplies to the destination, unless such charges are caused by an act or order of the Government acting in its contractual capacity. If rail carrier is used, supplies shall be delivered to the specified unloading platform of the consignee. If motor carrier (including \"piggyback\") is used, supplies shall be delivered to truck tailgate at the unloading platform of the consignee, except when the supplies delivered meet the requirements of Item 568 of the National Motor Freight Classification for \"heavy or bulky freight.\" When supplies meeting the requirements of the referenced Item 568 are delivered, unloading (including movement to the tailgate) shall be performed by the consignee, with assistance from the truck driver, if requested. If the contractor uses rail carrier or freight forwarded for less than carload shipments, the contractor shall ensure that the carrier will furnish tailgate delivery, when required, if transfer to truck is required to complete delivery to consignee.\n(1)\n(i) Pack and mark the shipment to comply with contract specifications; or\n(ii) In the absence of specifications, prepare the shipment in conformance with carrier requirements;\n(2) Prepare and distribute commercial bills of lading;\n(4) Be responsible for any loss of and/or damage to the goods occurring before receipt of the shipment by the consignee at the delivery point specified in the contract;\n(5) Furnish a delivery schedule and designate the mode of delivering carrier; and\n(6) Pay and bear all charges to the specified point of delivery.\n\n(End of Clause)"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECTION I\nCONTRACT CLAUSES\nI.1 252.203-7000 (252.203-7000) [RESERVED]\n\nI.2 252.203-7001 PROHIBITION ON PERSONS CONVICTED OF FRAUD OR OTHER DEFENSE-CONTRACT-RELATED FELONIES (DEC 2004)\n\n(a) \"Definitions.\" As used in this clause--\n(1) \"Arising out of a contract with the DoD\" means any act in connection with--\n(i) Attempting to obtain;\n(ii) Obtaining; or\n(iii) Performing a contract or first-tier subcontract of any agency, department, or component of the Department of Defense (DoD).\n(2) \"Conviction of fraud or any other felony\" means any conviction for fraud or a felony in violation of state or Federal criminal statutes, whether entered on a verdict or plea, including a plea of nolo contendere, for which sentence has been imposed.\n(3) \"Date of conviction\" means the date judgment was entered against the individual.\n(2) On the board of directors of the Contractor;\n(3) As a consultant, agent, or representative for the\n(b) Any individual who is convicted after September 29, 1988, of fraud or any other felony arising out of a contract with the DoD is prohibited from serving--\n(1) In a management or supervisory capacity on this contract; Contractor; or\n(4) In any other capacity with the authority to influence, advise, or control the decisions of the Contractor with paragraph (b) of this clause; or the contractor or first-tier subcontractor. regard to this contract.\n(c) Unless waived, the prohibition in paragraph (b) of this clause applies for not less than 5 years from the date of conviction.\n(d) 10 U.S.C. 2408 provides that the Contractor shall be subject to a criminal penalty of not more than $500,000 if convicted of knowingly--\n(1) Employing a person under a prohibition specified in\n(2) Allowing such a person to serve on the board of directors of\n(e) In addition to the criminal penalties contained in 10 U.S.C. 2408, the Government may consider other available remedies, such as--\n(f) The Contractor may submit written requests for waiver of the prohibition in paragraph (b) of this clause to the Contracting Officer. Requests shall clearly identify--\n(1) Suspension or debarment;\n(2) Cancellation of the contract at no cost to the Government; or\n(3) Termination of the contract for default.\n(1) The person involved;\n(2) The nature of the conviction and resultant sentence or\n(4) An explanation of why a waiver is in the interest of punishment imposed;\n(3) The reasons for the requested waiver; and national security.\n(g) The Contractor agrees to include the substance of this clause, appropriately modified to reflect the identity and relationship of the parties, in all first-tier subcontracts exceeding simplified acquisition threshold in Part 2 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, except those for commercial items or components.\n(h) Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 2408(c), defense contractors and subcontractors may obtain information as to whether a particular person has been convicted of fraud or any other felony arising out of a contract with the DoD by contacting The Office of Justice Programs, The Denial of Federal Benefits Office, U.S. Department of Justice, telephone (301) 809-4904.\n(End of clause)\n\nI.3 252.205-7000 PROVISION OF INFORMATION TO COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT HOLDERS (DEC 1991)\n\n(a) \"Definition.\" \"Cooperative agreement holder\" means a State or local government; a private, nonprofit organization; a tribal organization (as defined in section 4(c) of the Indian Self-"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Determination and Education Assistance Act (Pub. L. 93-268; 25 U.S.C. 450(c))); or an economic enterprise (as defined in section 3(e) of the Indian Financing Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-362; 25 U.S.C. 1452(e))) whether such economic enterprise is organized for profit or nonprofit purposes; which has an agreement with the Defense Logistics Agency to furnish procurement technical assistance to business entities.\n(End of clause)\n(b) The Contractor shall provide cooperative agreement holders, upon their request, with a list of those appropriate employees or offices responsible for entering into subcontracts under defense contracts. The list shall include the business address, telephone number, and area of responsibility of each employee or office.\n(c) The Contractor need not provide the listing to a particular cooperative agreement holder more frequently than once a year.\n\nI.4 252.211-7000 ACQUISITION STREAMLINING (DEC 1991)\n\n(a) The Government's acquisition streamlining objectives are to--\n(1) Acquire systems that meet stated performance requirements;\n(2) Avoid over-specification; and\n(3) Ensure that cost-effective requirements are included in future acquisitions.\n(b) The Contractor shall--\n(1) Prepare and submit acquisition streamlining recommendations in accordance with the statement of work of this contract; and\n(2) Format and submit the recommendations as prescribed by data requirements on the contract data requirements list of this contract.\n(c) The Government has the right to accept, modify, or reject the Contractor's recommendations.\n(d) The Contractor shall insert this clause, including this paragraph (d), in all subcontracts over $1 million, awarded in the performance of this contract.\n(End of clause)\n\nI.5 252.211-7001 AVAILABILITY OF SPECIFICATIONS, STANDARDS, DATA ITEM DESCRIPTIONS NOT LISTED IN THE ACQUISITION STREAMLINING AND STANDARDIZATION INFORMATION SYSTEM (ASSIST), AND PLANS, DRAWINGS, AND OTHER PERTINENT DOCUMENTS (MAY 2006)\n\nOfferors may obtain the specifications, standards, plans, drawings, data item descriptions, and other pertinent documents cited in this solicitation by submitting a request to: Include the number of the solicitation and the title and number of the specification, standard, plan, drawing, or other pertinent document.\n(End of provision)\n\nI.6 252.211-7002 AVAILABILITY FOR EXAMINATION OF SPECIFICATIONS, STANDARDS, PLANS, DRAWINGS, DATA ITEM DESCRIPTIONS, AND OTHER PERTINENT DOCUMENTS (DEC 1991)\n\nThe specifications, standards, plans, drawings, data item descriptions, and other pertinent documents cited in this solicitation are not available for distribution but may be examined at the following location:\n(End of provision)\n\nI.7 252.211-7003 ITEM IDENTIFICATION AND VALUATION (AUG 2008)\n\n(a) \"Definitions.\" As used in this clause--\n(1) For items that are serialized within the enterprise identifier, the linking together of the unique identifier data elements in order of the issuing agency code, enterprise identifier, and unique serial number within the enterprise identifier; or\n\"Enterprise\" means the entity (e.g., a manufacturer or vendor) responsible for assigning unique item identifiers to items.\n\"Automatic identification device\" means a device, such as a reader or interrogator, used to retrieve data encoded on machine-readable media.\n\"Concatenated unique item identifier\" means--\n(2) For items that are serialized within the original part, lot, or batch number, the linking together of the unique identifier data elements in order of the issuing agency code; enterprise identifier; original part, lot, or batch number; and serial number within the original part, lot, or batch number."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Data qualifier\" means a specified character (or string of characters) that immediately precedes a data field that defines the general category or intended use of the data that follows.\n\"DoD recognized unique identification equivalent\" means a unique identification method that is in commercial use and has been recognized by DoD. All DoD recognized unique identification equivalents are listed at http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/uid/iuid_equivalents.html.\n\"DoD unique item identification\" means a system of marking items delivered to DoD with unique item identifiers that have machine-readable data elements to distinguish an item from all other like and unlike items. For items that are serialized within the enterprise identifier, the unique item identifier shall include the data elements of the enterprise identifier, and a unique serial number. For items that are serialized within the part, lot, or batch number within the enterprise identifier, the unique item identifier shall include the data elements of the enterprise identifier, the original part, lot, or batch number, and the serial number.\n\"Enterprise identifier\" means a code that is uniquely assigned to an enterprise by an issuing agency.\n\"Government's unit acquisition cost\" means--\n(1) For fixed-price type line, subline, or exhibit line items, the unit price identified in the contract at the time of delivery;\n(2) For cost-type or undefinitized line, subline, or exhibit line items, the Contractor's estimated fully burdened unit cost to the Government for each item at the time of delivery; and\n(3) For items produced under a time-and-materials contract, the Contractor's estimated fully burdened unit cost to the Government at the time of delivery.\n\"Machine-readable\" means an automatic identification technology media, such as bar codes, contact memory buttons, radio frequency identification, or optical memory cards.\n\"Issuing agency\" means an organization responsible for assigning a non-repeatable identifier to an enterprise (i.e., Dun & Bradstreet's Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number, GS1 Company Prefix, or Defense Logistics Information System (DLIS) Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code).\n\"Issuing agency code\" means a code that designates the registration (or controlling) authority for the enterprise identifier.\n\"Item\" means a single hardware article or a single unit formed by a grouping of subassemblies, components, or constituent parts.\n\"Lot or batch number\" means an identifying number assigned by the enterprise to a designated group of items, usually referred to as either a lot or a batch, all of which were manufactured under identical conditions.\n\"Original part number\" means a combination of numbers or letters assigned by the enterprise at item creation to a class of items with the same form, fit, function, and interface.\n\"Parent item\" means the item assembly, intermediate component, or subassembly that has an embedded item with a unique item identifier or DoD recognized unique identificationi equivalent.\n\"Serial number within the enterprise identifier\" or \"unique serial number\" means a combination of numbers, letters, or symbols assigned by the enterprise to an item that provides for the differentiation of that item from any other like and unlike item and is never used again within the enterprise.\n\"Serial number within the part, lot, or batch number\" means a combination of numbers or letters assigned by the enterprise to an item that provides for the differentiation of that item from any other like item within a part, lot, or batch number assignment.\n\"Serialization within the enterprise identifier\" means each item produced is assigned a serial number that is unique among all the tangible items produced by the enterprise and is never used again. The enterprise is responsible for ensuring unique serialization within the enterprise identifier.\n\"Serialization within the part, lot, or batch number\" means each item of a particular part, lot, or batch number is assigned a unique serial number within that part, lot, or batch number assignment. The enterprise is responsible for ensuring unique serialization within the part, lot, or batch number within the enterprise identifier.\n\"Unique item identifier\" means a set of data elements marked on items that is globally unique and unambiguous. The term includes a concatenated unique item identifier of a DoD recognized unique identification equivalent.\n\"Unique item identifier type\" means a designator to indicate which method of uniquely identifying a part has been used. The current list of accepted unique item identifier types is maintained at http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/uid/uii_types.html.\n(c) Unique item identifier.\n(b) The Contractor shall deliver all items under a contract line, subline, or exhibit line item.\n(1) The Contractor shall provide a unique item identifier for the following:\n(i) All delivered items for which the Government's unit acquisition cost is $5,000 or more.\n(ii) The following items for which the Government's unit acquisition cost is less than $5,000:"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Contract Line, Subline, or Item Description\n\nExhibit Line Item Number\n\n(iii) Subassemblies, components, and parts embedded within delivered items as specified in Attachment Number\n(2) The unique item identifier and the component data elements of the DoD unique item identification shall not change over the life of the item.\n(3) Data syntax and semantics of unique identifiers. The Contractor shall ensure that--\n(i) The encoded data elements (except issuing agency code) of the unique item identifier are marked on the item using one of the following three types of data qualifiers, as determined by the Contractor:\n(A) Application Identifiers (AIs) (Format Indicator 05 of ISO/IEC International Standard 15434), in accordance with ISO/IEC International Standard 15418, Information Technology # EAN/UCC Application Identifiers and Fact Data Identifiers and Maintenance and ANSI MH 10.8.2 Data Identifier and Application Identifier Standard.\n(B) Data Identifiers (DIs) (Format Indicator 06 of ISO/IEC International Standard 15434), in accordance with ISO/IEC International Standard 15418, Information Technology # EAN/UCC Application Identifiers and Fact Data Identifiers and Maintenance and ANSI MH 10.8.2 Data Identifier and Application Identifier Standard.\n(C) Text Element Identifiers (TEIs) (Format Indicator 12 of ISO/IEC International Standard 15434), in accordance with the Air Transport Association Common Support Data Dictionary; and\n(ii) The encoded data elements of the unique item identifier conform to the transfer structure, syntax, and coding of messages and data formats specified for Format Indicators 05, 06, and 12 in ISO/IEC International Standard 15434, Information Technology # Transfer Syntax for High Capacity Automatic Data Capture Media.\n(4) Unique item identifier.\n(i) The Contractor shall--\n(1) Serialize within the enterprise identifier;\n(A) Determine whether to--\n(2) Serialize within the part, lot, or batch number; or\n(3) Use a DoD recognized unique identification equivalent; and\n(B) Place the data elements of the unique item identifier (enterprise identifier; serial number; DoD recognized unique identification equivalent; and for serialization within the part, lot, or batch number only: original part, lot, or batch number) on items requiring marking by paragraph (c)(1) of this clause, based on the criteria provided in the version of MIL-STD-130, Identification Marking of U.S. Military Property, cited in the contract Schedule.\n(d) For each item that requires unique item identification under paragraph (c) of this clause, in addition to the information provided as part of the Material Inspection and Receiving Report specified elsewhere in this contract, the Contractor shall report at the time of delivery, either as part of, or associated with, the Material Inspection and Receiving Report, the following information:\n(1) Unique item identifier.\n(2) Unique item identifier type.\n(3) Issuing agency code (if concatenated unique item identifier is used).\n(4) Enterprise identifier (if concatenated unique item identifier is used).\n(5) Original part number (if there is serialization within the original part number).\n(6) Lot or batch number (if there is serialization within the lot or batch number).\n(7) Current part number (optional and only if not the same as the original part number).\n(8) Current part number effective date (optional and only if current part number is used).\n(9) Serial number (if concatenated unique item identifier is used).\n(10) Government's unit acquisition cost.\n(11) Unit of measure.\n(e) For embedded subassemblies, components, and parts that require DoD unique item identification under paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this clause, the Contractor shall report as part of, or associated with, the Material Inspection and Receiving Report specified elsewhere in this contract, the following information:\n(1) Unique item identifier of the parent item under paragraph (c)(1) of this clause that contains the embedded subassembly, component, or part.\n(2) Unique item identifier of the embedded subassembly, component, or part.\n(3) Unique item identifier type.++\n(ii) The issuing agency code--\n(A) Shall not be placed on the item; and\n(B) Shall be derived from the data qualifier for the enterprise identifier.\n(4) Issuing agency code (if concatenated unique item identifier is used).++\n(5) Enterprise identifier (if concatenated unique item identifier is used).++"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(5) Original part number (if there is serialization within the original part number).++\n(7) Lot or batch number (if there is serialization within the lot or batch number).++\n(8) Current part number (optional and only if not the same as the original part number).++\n(9) Current part number effective date (optional and only if current part number is used).++\n(10) Serial number (if concatenated unique item identifier is used).++\n(11) Description.\n++ Once per item.\n(f) The Contractor shall submit the information required by paragraphs (d) and (e) of this clause in accordance with the data submission procedures at http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/uid/data_submission_information.html.\n(g) Subcontracts. If the Contractor acquires by subcontract, any item(s) for which unique item identification is required in accordance with paragraph (c)(1) of this clause, the Contractor shall include this clause, including this paragraph (g), in the applicable subcontract(s).\n(End of clause)\n\nI.8 252.211-7004 ALTERNATE PRESERVATION, PACKAGING, AND PACKING (DEC 1991)\n\n(a) The Offeror may submit two unit prices for each item--one based on use of the military preservation, packaging, or packing requirements of the solicitation; and an alternate based on use of commercial or industrial preservation, packaging, or packing of equal or better protection than the military.\n(b) If the Offeror submits two unit prices, the following information, as a minimum, shall be submitted with the offer to allow evaluation of the alternate--\n(1) The per unit/item cost of commercial or industrial preservation, packaging, and packing;\n(2) The per unit/item cost of military preservation, packaging, and packing;\n(3) The description of commercial or industrial preservation, packaging, and packing procedures, including material specifications, when applicable, to include--\n(i) Method of preservation;\n(ii) Quantity per unit package;\n(iii) Cleaning/drying treatment;\n(iv) Preservation treatment;\n(v) Wrapping materials;\n(vi) Cushioning/dunnage material;\n(vii) Thickness of cushioning;\n(viii) Unit container;\n(ix) Unit package gross weight and dimensions;\n(x) Packing; and\n(xi) Packing gross weight and dimensions; and\n(4) Item characteristics, to include--\n(i) Material and finish;\n(ii) Net weight;\n(iii) Net dimensions; and\n(iv) Fragility.\n(c) If the Contracting Officer does not evaluate or accept the Offeror's proposed alternate commercial or industrial preservation, packaging, or packing, the Offeror agrees to preserve, package, or pack in accordance with the specified military requirements.\n(End of provision)\n\nI.9 252.211-7006 RADIO FREQUENCY IDENTIFICATION (FEB 2007)\n\n(a) Definitions. As used in this clause-\n\"Advance shipment notice\" means an electronic notification used to list the contents of a shipment of goods as well as additional information relating to the shipment, such as order information, product description, physical characteristics, type of packaging, marking, carrier information, and configuration of goods within the transportation equipment.\n\"Bulk commodities\" means the following commodities, when shipped in rail tank cars, tanker trucks, trailers, other bulk wheeled conveyances, or pipelines:\n(1) Sand.\n(2) Gravel.\n(3) Bulk liquids (water, chemicals, or petroleum products).\n(4) Ready-mix concrete or similar construction materials.\n(5) Coal or combustibles such as firewood.\n(6) Agricultural products such as seeds, grains, or animal feed."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Case\" means either a MIL-STD-129 defined exterior container within a palletized unit load or a MIL-STD-129 defined individual shipping container.\n(2) Beginning March 1, 2007, the only acceptable tags are EPC Class 1 passive RFID tags that meet the EPCglobal Class 1 Generation 2 specification. Class 0 and Class 1 Generation 1 tags will no longer be accepted after February 28, 2007.\n\"Electronic Product Code# (EPC)\" means an identification scheme for universally identifying physical objects via RFID tags and other means. The standardized EPC data consists of an EPC (or EPC identifier) that uniquely identifies an individual object, as well as an optional filter value when judged to be necessary to enable effective and efficient reading of the EPC tags. In addition to this standardized data, certain classes of EPC tags will allow user-defined data. The EPC tag data standards will define the length and position of this data, without defining its content.\n\"EPCglobal#\" means a joint venture between EAN International and the Uniform Code Council to establish and support the EPC network as the global standard for immediate, automatic, and accurate identification of any item in the supply chain of any company, in any industry, anywhere in the world.\n(i) EPC Class 0 passive RFID tags that meet the EPCglobal Class 0 specification; and\n(ii) EPC Class 1 passive RFID tags that meet the EPCglobal Class 1 specification. This includes both the Generation 1 and Generation 2 Class 1 specifications.\n\"Exterior container\" means a MIL-STD-129 defined container, bundle, or assembly that is sufficient by reason of material, design, and construction to protect unit packs and intermediate containers and their contents during shipment and storage. It can be a unit pack or a container with a combination of unit packs or intermediate containers. An exterior container may or may not be used as a shipping container.\n\"Palletized unit load\" means a MIL-STD-129 defined quantity of items, packed or unpacked, arranged on a pallet in a specified manner and secured, strapped, or fastened on the pallet so that the whole palletized load is handled as a single unit. A palletized or skidded load is not considered to be a shipping container. A loaded 463L System pallet is not considered to be a palletized unit load. Refer to the Defense Transportation Regulation, DoD 4500.9-R, Part II, Chapter 203, for marking of 463L System pallets.\n\"Passive RFID tag\" means a tag that reflects energy from the reader/interrogator or that receives and temporarily stores a small amount of energy from the reader/interrogator signal in order to generate the tag response.\n(1) Until February 28, 2007, the cceptable tags are-\n\"Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)\" means an automatic identification and data capture technology comprising one or more reader/interrogators and one or more radio frequency transponders in which data transfer is achieved by means of suitably modulated inductive or radiating electromagnetic carriers.\n(1) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this clause, the Contractor shall affix passive RFID tags, at the case and palletized unit load packaging levels, for shipments of items that-\n(E) Class VI - Personal demand items (non-military sales items).\n\"Shipping container\" means a MIL-STD-129 defined exterior container that meets carrier regulations and is of sufficient strength, by reason of material, design, and construction, to be shipped safely without further packing (e.g., wooden boxes or crates, fiber and metal drums, and corrugated and solid fiberboard boxes).\n(b)\n(i) Are in any of the following classes of supply, as defined in DoD 4140.1-R, DoD Supply Chain Materiel Management Regulation, AP1.1.11:\n(A) Subclass of Class I - Packaged operational rations.\n(B) Class II - Clothing, individual equipment, tentage, organizational tool kits, hand tools, and administrative and housekeeping supplies and equipment.\n(C) Class IIIP - Packaged petroleum, lubricants, oils, preservatives, chemicals, and additives.\n(D) Class IV - Construction and barrier materials\n(A) Defense Distribution Depot, Susquehanna, PA: DoDAAC W25G1U or SW3124; or\n(F) Subclass of Class VIII - Medical materials (excluding pharmaceuticals, biologicals, and reagents -- suppliers should limit the mixing of excluded and non-excluded materials).\n(G) Class IX - Repair parts and components including kits, assemblies and subassemblies, reparable and consumable items required for maintenance support of all equipment, excluding medical-peculiar repair parts; and\n(ii) Are being shipped to any of the following locations:\n(B) Defense Distribution Depot, San Joaquin, CA: DoDAAC W62G2T or SW3224.\n(C) Defense Distribution Depot, Albany, GA: DoDAAC SW3121.\n(D) Defense Distribution Depot, Anniston, AL: DoDAAC W31G1Z or SW3120.\n(E) Defense Distribution Depot, Barstow, CA: DoDAAC SW3215.\n(F) Defense Distribution Depot, Cherry Point, NC: DoDAAC SW3113.\n(G) Defense Distribution Depot, Columbus, OH: DoDAAC SW0700.\n(H) Defense Distribution Depot, Corpus Christi, TX: DoDAAC W45H08 or SW3222."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(I) Defense Distribution Depot, Hill, UT: DoDAAC SW3210.\n(Q) Defense Distribution Depot, Tobyhanna, PA: DoDAAC W25G1W or SW3114.\n(J) Defense Distribution Depot, Jacksonville, FL: DoDAAC SW3122.\n(K) Defense Distribution Depot, Oklahoma City, OK: DoDAAC SW3211.\n(L) Defense Distribution Depot, Norfolk, VA: DoDAAC SW3117.\n(M) Defense Distribution Depot, Puget Sound, WA: DoDAAC SW3216.\n(N) Defense Distribution Depot, Red River, TX: DoDAAC W45G19 or SW3227.\n(O) Defense Distribution Depot, Richmond, VA: DoDAAC SW0400.\n(P) Defense Distribution Depot, San Diego, CA: DoDAAC SW3218.\n(R) Defense Distribution Depot, Warner Robins, GA: DoDAAC SW3119.\n(S) Air Mobility Command Terminal, Charleston Air Force Base, Charleston, SC: Air Terminal Identifier Code CHS.\n(T) Air Mobility Command Terminal, Naval Air Station, Norfolk, VA: Air Terminal Identifier Code NGU.\n(U) Air Mobility Command Terminal, Travis Air Force Base, Fairfield, CA: Air Terminal Identifier Code SUU.]\n(V) A location outside the contiguous United States when the shipment has been assigned Transportation Priority 1.\n(2) The following are excluded from the requirements of paragraph (b) (1) of this clause:\n(i) Shipments of bulk commodities.\n(ii) Shipments to locations other than Defense Distribution Depots when the contract includes the clause at FAR 52.21301, Fast Payment Procedures.\n(c) The Contractor shall ensure that-\n(1) Ensure that the data encoded on each passive RFID tag are unique (i.e., the binary number is never repeated on any and all contracts) and conforms to the requirements in paragraph (d) of this clause;\n(2) Use passive tags that are readable; and\n(3) Ensure that the passive tag is affixed at the appropriate location on the specific level of packaging, in accordance with MIL-STD-129 (Section 4.9.2) tag placement specifications.\n(d) Data syntax and standards. The Contractor shall encode an approved RFID tag using the instructions provided in the EPC# Tag Data Standards in effect at the time of contract award. The EPC# Tag Data Standards are available at http://www.epcglobalinc.org/standards/.\n(1) If the Contractor is an EPCglobal subscriber and possesses a unique EPC# company prefix, the Contractor may use any of the identity types and encoding instructions described in the most recent EPC Tag Data Standards document to encode tags.\n(2) If the Contractor chooses to employ the DoD Identity Type, the Contractor shall use its previously assigned Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code and shall encode the tags in accordance with the tag identity type details located at http://www.acq.osd.mil/log/rfid/tag_data.htm. If the Contractor uses a third party packaging house to encode its tags, the CAGE code of the third party packaging house is acceptable.\n(3) Regardless of the selected encoding scheme, the Contractor is responsible for ensuring that each tag contains a globally unique identifier.\n(e) Receiving report. The Contractor shall electronically submit advance shipment notice(s) with the RFID tag identification (specified in paragraph (d) of this clause) in advance of the shipment in accordance with the procedures at http://www.acq.osd.mil/log/rfid/advance_shipment_ntc.htm.\n(End of clause)\n\nI.10 252.219-7001 (252.219-7001) [RESERVED]\n\nI.11 252.219-7002 (252.219-7002) [RESERVED]\n\nI.12 252.219-7003 SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (DOD CONTRACTS) (APR 2007)\n\nThis clause supplements the Federal Acquisition Regulation 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, clause of this contract.\n(a) \"Definitions.\"\n\"Historically black colleges and universities,\" as used in this clause, means institutions determined by the Secretary of Education to meet the requirements of 34 CFR Section 608.2. The term also means any nonprofit research institution that was an integral part of such a college or university before November 14, 1986.\n\"Minority institutions,\" as used in this clause, means institutions meeting the requirements of Section 1046(3) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1135d-5(3)). The term also includes Hispanic-serving institutions as defined in Section 316(b)(1) of such Act (20 U.S.C. 1059c(b)(1)).\n(b) Except for company or division-wide commercial items subcontracting plans, the term \"small disadvantaged business,\" when used in the FAR 52.219-9 clause, includes historically black colleges and universities and minority institutions, in addition to small disadvantaged business concerns.\nPAGE 23 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(c) Work under the contract or its subcontracts shall be credited toward meeting the small disadvantaged business concern goal required by paragraph (d) of the FAR 52.219-9 clause when:\n(1) It is performed on Indian lands or in joint venture with an Indian tribe or a tribally-owned corporation, and\n(2) It meets the requirements of 10 U.S.C. 2323a. the severely handicapped; and\n(d) Subcontracts awarded to workshops approved by the Committee for Purchase from People Who are Blind or Severely Disabled (41 U.S.C. 46-48), may be counted toward the Contractor's small business subcontracting goal.\n(e) A mentor firm, under the Pilot Mentor-Protege Program established under Section 831 of Pub. L. 101-510, as amended, may count toward its small disadvantaged business goal, subcontracts awarded--\n(1) Protege firms which are qualified organizations employing\n(2) Former protege firms that meet the criteria in Section\n(End of clause)\n831(g)(4) of Pub. L. 101-510.\n(f) The master plan approval referred to in paragraph (f) of the FAR 52.219-9 clause is approval by the Contractor's cognizant contract administration activity.\n(g) In those subcontracting plans which specifically identify small businesses, the Contractor shall notify the Administrative Contracting Officer of any substitutions of firms that are not small businesses for the small business firms specifically identified in the subcontracting plan. Notifications shall be in writing and shall occur within a reasonable period of time after award of the subcontract. Contractor-specified formats shall be acceptable.\n\nI.13 252.219-7005 (252.219-7005) (RESERVED)\n\nI.14 252.219-7006 (252.219-7006) (RESERVED)\n\nI.15 252.225-7001 BUY AMERICAN ACT AND BALANCE OF PAYMENTS PROGRAM (JUN 2005)\n\n(a) \"Definitions.\" As used in this clause--\n(1) \"Component\" means an article, material, or supply incorporated directly into an end product.\n(2) \"Domestic end product\" means--\n(i) An unmanufactured end product that has been mined or produced in the United States; or\n(ii) An end product manufactured in the United States if the cost of its qualifying country components and its components that are mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States exceeds 50 percent of the cost of all its components. The cost of components includes transportation costs to the place of incorporation into the end product and U.S. duty (whether or not a duty-free entry certificate is issued). Scrap generated, collected, and prepared for processing in the United States is considered domestic. A component is considered to have been mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States (regardless of its source in fact) if the end product in which it is incorporated is manufactured in the United States and the component is of a class or kind for which the Government has determined that--\n(A) Sufficient and reasonably available commercial quantities of a satisfactory quality are not mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States; or\n(4) \"Foreign end product\" means an end product other than a domestic end product.\n(B) It is inconsistent with the public interest to apply the restrictions of the Buy American Act.\n(3) \"End product\" means those articles, materials, and supplies to be acquired under this contract for public use.\n(5) \"Qualifying country\" means any country set forth in subsection 225.872-1 of the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS).\n(6) \"Qualifying country component\" means a component mined, produced, or manufactured in a qualifying country.\n(A) Components mined, produced, or manufactured in a qualifying country.\n(7) \"Qualifying country end product\" means--\n(i) An unmanufactured end product mined or produced in a qualifying country; or\n(ii) An end product manufactured in a qualifying country if the cost of the following types of components exceeds 50 percent of the cost of all its components:\n(B) Components mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States.\n(C) Components of foreign origin of a class or kind for which the Government has determined that sufficient and reasonably available commercial quantities of a satisfactory quality are not mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States.\n(b) This clause implements the Buy American Act (41 U.S.C. Section 10a-d). Unless otherwise specified, this clause applies to all line items in the contract.\nPAGE 24 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(c) The Contractor shall deliver only domestic end products unless, in its offer, it specified delivery of other end products in the Buy American Act--Balance of Payments Program Certificate provision of the solicitation. If the Contractor certified in its offer that it will deliver a qualifying country end product, the Contractor shall deliver a qualifying country end product or, at the Contractor's option, a domestic end product.\n(End of clause)\n(8) \"United States\" means the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and outlying areas.\n(d) The contract price does not include duty for end products or components for which the Contractor will claim duty-free entry.\n\nI.16 252.225-7002 QUALIFYING COUNTRY SOURCES AS SUBCONTRACTORS (APR 2003)\n\n(a) \"Definition.\" \"Qualifying country,\" as used in this clause, means any country set forth in subsection 225.872-1 of the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Supplement.\n(b) Subject to the restrictions in section 225.872 of the Defense FAR Supplement, the Contractor shall not preclude qualifying country sources or U.S. sources from competing for subcontracts under this contract.\n(End of clause)\n\nI.17 252.225-7007 PROHIBITION ON ACQUISITION OF UNITED STATES MUNITIONS LIST ITEMS FROM COMMUNIST CHINESE MILITARY COMPANIES (SEP 2006)\n\n(a) Definitions. As used in this clause--\n\"Communist Chinese military company\" means any entity that is--\n(1) A part of the commercial or defense industrial base of the People's Republic of China; or\n(2) Owned or controlled by, or affiliated with, an element of the Government or armed forces of the People's Republic of China.\n\"United States Munitions List\" means the munitions list of the International Traffic in Arms Regulation in 22 CFR Part 121.\n(b) Any supplies or services covered by the United States Munitions List that are delivered under this contract may not be acquired, directly or indirectly, from a Communist Chinese military company.\n(c) The Contractor shall insert the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (c), in all subcontracts for items covered by the United States Munitions List.\n(End of clause)\n\nI.18 252.225-7012 PREFERENCE FOR CERTAIN DOMESTIC COMMODITIES (MAR 2008)\n\n(a) \"Definitions.\" As used in this clause--\n(1) \"Component\" means any item supplied to the Government as part of an end product or of another component.\n(2) \"End product\" means supplies delivered under a line item of this contract.\n(b) The Contractor shall deliver under this contract only such of the following items, either as end products or components, that have been been grown, reprocessed, reused, or produced in the United States, its possessions, or Puerto Rico:\n(4) Cotton and other natural fiber products.\n(1) Food.\n(2) Clothing and the materials and components thereof, other than sensors, electronics, or other items added to, and not normally associated with, clothing and the materials and components thereof. Clothing includes items such as outerwear, headwear, underwear, nightwear, footwear, hosiery, handwear, belts, badges, and insignia.\n(3) Tents, tarpaulins, or covers.\n(5) Woven silk or woven silk blends.\n(5) Spun silk yarn for cartridge cloth.\n(7) Synthetic fabric, and coated synthetic fabric, including all textile fibers and yarns that are for use in such fabrics.\n(ii) Does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold in FAR Part 2;\n(8) Canvas products.\n(9) Wool (whether in the form of fiber or yarn or contained in fabrics, materials, or manufactured articles).\n(10) Any item of individual equipment (Federal Supply Class 8465) manufactured from or containing fibers, yarns, fabrics, or materials listed in this paragraph (b).\n(c) This clause does not apply--\nPAGE 25 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1) To items listed in section 25.104(a) of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), or other\nitems for which the Government has determined that a satisfactory quality and sufficient quantity\ncannot be acquired as and when needed at U.S. market prices;\n(2) To incidental amounts of cotton, other natural fibers, or wool incorporated in an end\nproduct, for which the estimated value of the cotton, other natural fibers, or wool--\n(i) Is not more than 10 percent of the total price of the end product; and\n(3) To waste and byproducts of cotton or wool fiber for use in the production of propellants and\nexplosives;\n(ii) The fibers and yarns are para-aramid fibers and yarns manufactured in the Netherlands.\n(4) To foods that have been manufactured or processed in the United States, its possessions,\nor Puerto Rico, regardless of where the foods (and any component if applicable) were grown\nor produced, except that this clause does apply to fish, shellfish, or seafood manufactured or\nprocessed in the United States and fish, shellfish, or seafood contained in foods manufactured or\nprocessed in the United States;\n(5) To chemical warfare protective clothing produced in the countries listed in subsection\n225.872-1 of the Defense FAR Supplement; or\n(5) To fibers and yarns that are for use in synthetic fabric or coated synthetic fabric (but does\napply to the synthetic or coated synthetic fabric itself), if--\n(i) The fabric is to be used as a component of an end product that is not a textile product.\nExamples of textile products, made in whole or in part of fabric, include--\n(A) Draperies, floor coverings, furnishings, and bedding (Federal Supply Group 72, Household\nand Commercial Furnishings and Appliances);\n(B) Items made in whole or in part of fabric in Federal Supply Group 83, Textile/leather/\nfurs/apparel/findings/ tents/flags, or Federal Supply Group 84, Clothing, Individual Equipment and\nInsignia;\n(C) Upholstered seats (whether for household, office, or other use); and\n(D) Parachutes (Federal Supply Class 1670); or\n(End of clause)\n\nI.19 252.225-7014 PREFERENCE FOR DOMESTIC SPECIALTY METALS (JUN 2005)\n\n(a) \"Definitions.\" As used in this clause--\n(1) \"Qualifying country\" means any country listed in subsection 225.872-1 of the Defense Federal\nAcquisition Regulation Supplement.\n(2) \"Specialty metals\" means--\n(i) Steel--\n(A) With a maximum alloy content exceeding one or more of the following limits: manganese,\n1.65 percent; silicon, 0.60 percent; or copper, 0.60 percent; or\n(B) Containing more than 0.25 percent of any of the following elements: aluminum, chromium,\ncobalt, columbium, molybdenum, nickel, titanium, tungsten, or vanadium;\n(ii) Metal alloys consisting of nickel, iron-nickel, and cobalt base alloys containing a total\nof other alloying metals (except iron) in excess of 10 percent;\n(iv) Zirconium and zirconium base alloys.\n(iii) Titanium and titanium alloys; or\n(b) Any specialty metals incorporated in articles delivered under this contract shall be melted in\nthe United States or its outlying area.\n(c) This clause does not apply to specialty metals--\n(1) Melted in a qualifying country or incorporated in an article manufactured in a qualifying\ncountry; or\n(2) Purchased by a subcontractor at any tier.\n(End of clause)\n\nI.20 252.225-7015 RESTRICTION ON ACQUISITION OF HAND OR MEASURING TOOLS (JUN 2005)\n\nHand or measuring tools delivered under this contract shall be produced in the United States or\nits outlying areas.\n(End of clause)\n\nI.21 252.233-7000 {252.233-7000} [RESERVED]\n\nI.22 252.242-7002 {252.242-7002} [RESERVED]\n\nI.23 252.243-7001 PRICING OF CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS (DEC 1991)\n\nWhen costs are a factor in any price adjustment under this contract, the contract cost principles\nand procedures in FAR Part 31 and DFARS Part 231, in effect on the date of this contract, apply."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(End of Clause)\n\nI.24 52.203-1 {52.203-1} [RESERVED]\n\nI.25 52.203-10 PRICE OR FEE ADJUSTMENT FOR ILLEGAL OR IMPROPER ACTIVITY (JAN 1997)\n\n(a) The Government, at its election, may reduce the price of a fixed-price type contract and the\ntotal cost and fee under a cost-type contract by the amount of profit or fee determined as set\nforth in paragraph (b) of this clause if the head of the contracting activity or designee determines\nthat there was a violation of subsection 27(a), (b), or (c) of the Office of Federal Procurement\nPolicy Act, as amended (41 U.S.C. 423), as implemented in section 3.104 of the Federal Acquisition\nRegulation.\n(b) The price or fee reduction referred to in paragraph (a) of this clause shall be--\n(1) For cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts, the amount of the fee specified in the contract at the\ntime of award;\n(2) For cost-plus-incentive-fee contracts, the target fee specified in the contract at the time\nof award, notwithstanding any minimum fee or \"fee floor\" specified in the contract;\n(3) For cost-plus-award-fee contracts--\n(i) The base fee established in the contract at the time of contract award;\n(ii) If no base fee is specified in the contract, 30 percent of the amount of each award\nfee otherwise payable to the Contractor for each award fee evaluation period or at each award fee\ndetermination point.\n(4) For fixed-price-incentive contracts, the Government may--\n(i) Reduce the contract target price and contract target profit both by an amount equal to the\ninitial target profit specified in the contract at the time of contract award; or\n(5) For firm-fixed-price contracts, by 10 percent of the initial contract price or a profit\namount determined by the Contracting Officer from records or documents in existence prior to the\ndate of the contract award.\n(End of Clause)\n(ii) If an immediate adjustment to the contract target price and contract target profit would\nhave a significant adverse impact on the incentive price revision relationship under the contract,\nor adversely affect the contract financing provisions, the Contracting Officer may defer such\nadjustment until establishment of the total final price of the contract. The total final price\nestablished in accordance with the incentive price revision provisions of the contract shall be\nreduced by an amount equal to the initial target profit specified in the contract at the time of\ncontract award and such reduced price shall be the total final contract price.\n(c) The Government may, at its election, reduce a prime contractor's price or fee in accordance\nwith the procedures of paragraph (b) of this clause for violations of the Act by its subcontractors\nby an amount not to exceed the amount of profit or fee reflected in the subcontract at the time the\nsubcontract was first definitively priced.\n(d) In addition to the remedies in paragraphs (a) and (c) of this clause, the Government may\nterminate this contract for default. The rights and remedies of the Government specified herein are\nnot exclusive, and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this\ncontract.\n\n\nI.26 52.203-12 LIMITATION ON PAYMENTS TO INFLUENCE CERTAIN FEDERAL TRANSACTIONS (SEP 2007)\n\n(a) Definitions. As used in this clause--\n\"Agency\" means \"executive agency\" as defined in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 2.101.\n\"Covered Federal action\" means any of the following actions:\n(1) Awarding any Federal contract.\n(2) Making any Federal grant.\n(3) Making any Federal loan.\n(4) Entering into any cooperative agreement.\n\"Indian tribe\" and \"tribal organization\" have the meaning provided in section 4 of the Indian Self-\nDetermination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b) and include Alaskan Natives.\n(5) Extending, continuing, renewing, amending, or modifying any Federal contract, grant, loan, or\ncooperative agreement.\n\"Influencing or attempting to influence\" means making, with the intent to influence, any\ncommunication to or appearance before an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress,\nan officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with any\ncovered Federal action."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Local government\" means a unit of government in a State and, if chartered, established, or\notherwise recognized by a State for the performance of a governmental duty, including a local public\nauthority, a special district, an intrastate district, a council of governments, a sponsor group\nrepresentative organization, and any other instrumentality of a local government.\n\"Officer or employee of an agency\" includes the following individuals who are employed by an\nagency:\n(1) An individual who is appointed to a position in the Government under Title 5, United States\nCode, including a position under a temporary appointment.\n(2) A member of the uniformed services, as defined in subsection 101(3), Title 37, United States\nCode.\n(3) A special Government employee, as defined in section 202, Title 18, United States Code.\n(4) An individual who is a member of a Federal advisory committee, as defined by the Federal\nAdvisory Committee Act, Title 5, United States Code, appendix 2.\n\"Reasonable payment\" means, with respect to professional and other technical services, a payment in\nan amount that is consistent with the amount normally paid for such services in the private sector.\n\"Person\" means an individual, corporation, company, association, authority, firm, partnership,\nsociety, State, and local government, regardless of whether such entity is operated for profit,\nor not for profit. This term excludes an Indian tribe, tribal organization, or any other Indian\norganization eligible to receive Federal contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, or loans from\nan agency, but only with respect to expenditures by such tribe or organization that are made for\npurposes specified in paragraph (b) of this clause and are permitted by other Federal law.\n\"Reasonable compensation\" means, with respect to a regularly employed officer or employee of any\nperson, compensation that is consistent with the normal compensation for such officer or employee\nfor work that is not furnished to, not funded by, or not furnished in cooperation with the Federal\nGovernment.\n\"Recipient\" includes the Contractor and all subcontractors. This term excludes an Indian tribe,\ntribal organization, or any other Indian organization eligible to receive Federal contracts, grants,\ncooperative agreements, or loans from an agency, but only with respect to expenditures by such\ntribe or organization that are made for purposes specified in paragraph (b) of this clause and are\npermitted by other Federal law.\n\"Regularly employed\" means, with respect to an officer or employee of a person requesting or\nreceiving a Federal contract, an officer or employee who is employed by such person for at least 130\nworking days within 1 year immediately preceding the date of the submission that initiates agency\nconsideration of such person for receipt of such contract. An officer or employee who is employed\nby such person for less than 130 working days within 1 year immediately preceding the date of the\nsubmission that initiates agency consideration of such person shall be considered to be regularly\nemployed as soon as he or she is employed by such person for 130 working days. \"State\" means a\nState of the United States, the District of Columbia, or an outlying area of the United States,\nan agency or instrumentality of a State, and multi-State, regional, or interstate entity having\ngovernmental duties and powers.\n(c) Exceptions. The prohibition in paragraph (b) of this clause does not apply under the following\nconditions:\n(b) Prohibition. 31 U.S.C. 1352 prohibits a recipient of a Federal contract, grant, loan, or\ncooperative agreement from using appropriated funds to pay any person for influencing or attempting\nto influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of\nCongress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with any covered Federal actions. In\naccordance with 31 U.S.C. 1352 the Contractor shall not use appropriated funds to pay any person for\ninfluencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress,\nan officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the\naward of this contractor the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of this\ncontract.\n(1) The term appropriated funds does not include profit or fee from a covered Federal action.\n(2) To the extent the Contractor can demonstrate that the Contractor has sufficient monies, other\nthan Federal appropriated funds, the Government will assume that these other monies were spent for\nany influencing activities that would be unallowable if paid for with Federal appropriated funds.\n(A) The qualities and characteristics (including individual demonstrations) of the person#s\nproducts or services, conditions or terms of sale, and service capabilities; or\n(1) Agency and legislative liaison by Contractor employees.\n(i) Payment of reasonable compensation made to an officer or employee of the Contractor if\nthe payment is for agency and legislative liaison activities not directly related to this contract.\nFor purposes of this paragraph, providing any information specifically requested by an agency or\nCongress is permitted at any time.\n(ii) Participating with an agency in discussions that are not related to a specific\nsolicitation for any covered Federal action, but that concern--\n(3) Only those communications and services expressly authorized by paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of\nthis clause are permitted.\n(B) The application or adaptation of the person#s products or services for an agency#s use."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(iii) Providing prior to formal solicitation of any covered Federal action any information not\nspecifically requested but necessary for an agency to make an informed decision about initiation of\na covered Federal action;\n(iv) Participating in technical discussions regarding the preparation of an unsolicited\nproposal prior to its official submission; and\n(v) Making capability presentations prior to formal solicitation of any covered Federal action\nby persons seeking awards from an agency pursuant to the provisions of the Small Business Act, as\namended by Pub. L. 95-507, and subsequent amendments.\n(2) Professional and technical services.\n(i) A payment of reasonable compensation made to an officer or employee of a person requesting\nor receiving a covered Federal action or an extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or\nmodification of a covered Federal action, if payment is for professional or technical services\nrendered directly in the preparation, submission, or negotiation of any bid, proposal, or\napplication for that Federal action or for meeting requirements imposed by or pursuant to law as a\ncondition for receiving that Federal action.\n(ii) Any reasonable payment to a person, other than an officer or employee of a person\nrequesting or receiving a covered Federal action or an extension, continuation, renewal, amendment,\nor modification of a covered Federal action if the payment is for professional or technical\nservices rendered directly in the preparation, submission, or negotiation of any bid, proposal, or\napplication for that Federal action or for meeting requirements imposed by or pursuant to law as a\ncondition for receiving that Federal action. Persons other than officers or employees of a person\nrequesting or receiving a covered Federal action include consultants and trade associations.\n(iii) As used in paragraph (c)(2) of this clause, \"professional and technical services\" are\nlimited to advice and analysis directly applying any professional or technical discipline (for\nexamples, see FAR 3.803(a)(2)(iii)).\n(iv) Requirements imposed by or pursuant to law as a condition for receiving a covered Federal\naward include those required by law or regulation and any other requirements in the actual award\ndocuments.\n(d) Disclosure.\n(1) If the Contractor did not submit OMB Standard Form LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities,\nwith its offer, but registrants under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 have subsequently made a\nlobbying contact on behalf of the Contractor with respect to this contract, the Contractor shall\ncomplete and submit OMB Standard Form LLL to provide the name of the lobbying registrants, including\nthe individuals performing the services.\n(2) If the Contractor did submit OMB Standard Form LLL disclosure pursuant to paragraph (d) of\nthe provision at FAR 52.203-11, Certification and Disclosure Regarding Payments to Influence Certain\nFederal Transactions, and a change occurs that affects Block 10 of the OMB Standard Form LLL (name\nand address of lobbying registrant or individuals performing services), the Contractor shall, at the\nend of the calendar quarter in which the change occurs, submit to the Contracting Officer within 30\ndays an updated disclosure using OMB Standard Form LLL.\n(1) The Contractor shall obtain a declaration, including the certification and disclosure in\nparagraphs (c) and (d) of the provision at FAR 52.203-11, Certification and Disclosure Regarding\nPayments to Influence Certain Federal Transactions, from each person requesting or receiving a\nsubcontract exceeding $100,000 under this contract. The Contractor or subcontractor that awards the\nsubcontract shall retain the declaration.\n(e) Penalties.\n(1) Any person who makes an expenditure prohibited under paragraph (b) of this clause or who\nfails to file or amend the disclosure to be filed or amended by paragraph (d) of this clause shall\nbe subject to civil penalties as provided for by 31 U.S.C. 1352. An imposition of a civil penalty\ndoes not prevent the Government from seeking any other remedy that may be applicable.\n(2) Contractors may rely without liability on the representation made by their subcontractors in\nthe certification and disclosure form.\n(f) Cost allowability. Nothing in this clause makes allowable or reasonable any costs which would\notherwise be unallowable or unreasonable. Conversely, costs made specifically unallowable by the\nrequirements in this clause will not be made allowable under any other provision.\n(g) Subcontracts.\n(2) A copy of each subcontractor disclosure form (but not certifications) shall be forwarded\nfrom tier to tier until received by the prime Contractor. The prime Contractor shall, at the end\nof the calendar quarter in which the disclosure form is submitted by the subcontractor, submit to\nthe Contracting Officer within 30 days a copy of all disclosures. Each subcontractor certification\nshall be retained in the subcontr act file of the awarding Contractor.\n(3) The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (g), in\nany subcontract exceeding $100,000.\n\n\n(End of Clause)"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I.27 52.203-3 GRATUITIES (APR 1984)\n\n(a) The right of the Contractor to proceed may be terminated by written notice if, after notice\nand hearing, the agency head or a designee determines that the Contractor, its agent, or another\nrepresentative--\n(1) Offered or gave a gratuity (e.g., an entertainment or gift) to an officer, official, or\nemployee of the Government; and\n(2) Intended, by the gratuity, to obtain a contract or favorable treatment under a contract.\n(b) The facts supporting this determination may be reviewed by any court having lawful\njurisdiction.\n(c) If this contract is terminated under paragraph (a) of this clause, the Government is\nentitled--\n(1) To pursue the same remedies as in a breach of the contract; and\n(2) In addition to any other damages provided by law, to exemplary damages of not less than\n3 nor more than 10 times the cost incurred by the Contractor in giving gratuities to the person\nconcerned, as determined by the agency head or a designee. (This paragraph (c)(2) is applicable only\nif this contract uses money appropriated to the Department of Defense.)\n(d) The rights and remedies of the Government provided in this clause shall not be exclusive and\nare in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this contract.\n\n\n(End of Clause)\n\nI.28 52.203-5 COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES (APR 1984)\n\n(a) The Contractor warrants that no person or agency has been employed or retained to solicit or\nobtain this contract upon an agreement or understanding for a contingent fee, except a bona fide\nemployee or agency. For breach or violation of this warranty, the Government shall have the right to\nannul this contract without liability or, in its discretion, to deduct from the contract price or\nconsideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of the contingent fee.\n\n(b) \"Bona fide agency,\" as used in this clause, means an established commercial or selling agency,\nmaintained by a contractor for the purpose of securing business, that neither exerts nor proposes\nto exert improper influence to solicit or obtain Government contracts nor holds itself out as being\nable to obtain any Government contract or contracts through improper influence.\n\"Bona fide employee,\" as used in this clause, means a person, employed by a contractor and subject\nto the contractor''s supervision and control as to time, place, and manner of performance, who\nneither exerts nor proposes to exert improper influence to solicit or obtain Government contracts\nnor holds out as being able to obtain any Government contract or contracts through improper\ninfluence.\n\"Contingent fee,\" as used in this clause, means any commission, percentage, brokerage, or other fee\nthat is contingent upon the success that a person or concern has in securing a Government contract.\n\n\"Improper influence,\" as used in this clause, means any influence that induces or tends to induce a\nGovernment employee or officer to give consideration or to act regarding a Government contract on\nany basis other than the merits of the matter.\n\n\n\n(End of Clause)\n\nI.29 52.203-6 RESTRICTIONS ON SUBCONTRACTOR SALES TO THE GOVERNMENT (SEP 2006)\n\n(a) Except as provided in (b) of this clause, the Contractor shall not enter into any agreement\nwith an actual or prospective subcontractor, nor otherwise act in any manner, which has or may have\nthe effect of restricting sales by such subcontractors directly to the Government of any item or\nprocess (including computer software) made or furnished by the subcontractor under this contract or\nunder any follow-on production contract.\n(b) The prohibition in (a) of this clause does not preclude the Contractor from asserting rights\nthat are otherwise authorized by law or regulation.\n(c) The Contractor agrees to incorporate the substance of this clause, including this paragraph\n(c), in all subcontracts under this contract which exceed the simplified acquisition threshold.\n\n\n(End of Clause)"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I.30 52.203-7 ANTI-KICKBACK PROCEDURES (JUL 1995)\n\n (a) \"Definitions.\"\n \"Kickback,\" as used in this clause, means any money, fee, commission, credit, gift, gratuity, thing of value, or compensation of any kind which is provided, directly or indirectly, to any prime Contractor, prime Contractor employee, subcontractor, or subcontractor employee for the purpose of improperly obtaining or rewarding favorable treatment in connection with a prime contract or in connection with a subcontract relating to a prime contract.\n (1) means any person, other than the prime Contractor, who offers to furnish or furnishes any supplies, materials, equipment, or services of any kind under a prime contract or a subcontract entered into in connection with such prime contract, and\n \"Person,\" as used in this clause, means a corporation, partnership, business association of any kind, trust, joint-stock company, or individual.\n \"Prime contract,\" as used in this clause, means a contract or contractual action entered into by the United States for the purpose of obtaining supplies, materials, equipment, or services of any kind.\n \"Prime Contractor\" as used in this clause, means a person who has entered into a prime contract with the United States.\n \"Prime Contractor employee,\" as used in this clause, means any officer, partner, employee, or agent of a prime Contractor.\n \"Subcontract,\" as used in this clause, means a contract or contractual action entered into by a prime Contractor or subcontractor for the purpose of obtaining supplies, materials, equipment, or services of any kind under a prime contract.\n \"Subcontractor,\" as used in this clause,\n (2) includes any person who offers to furnish or furnishes general supplies to the prime Contractor or a higher tier subcontractor.\n (3) The Contractor shall cooperate fully with any Federal agency investigating a possible violation described in paragraph (b) of this clause.\n \"Subcontractor employee,\" as used in this clause, means any officer, partner, employee, or agent of a subcontractor.\n (b) The Anti-Kickback Act of 1986 (41 U.S.C. 51-58) (the Act), prohibits any person from--\n (1) Providing or attempting to provide or offering to provide any kickback;\n (2) Soliciting, accepting, or attempting to accept any kickback; or\n (3) Including, directly or indirectly, the amount of any kickback in the contract price charged by a prime Contractor to the United States or in the contract price charged by a subcontractor to a prime Contractor or higher tier subcontractor.\n (c)\n (1) The Contractor shall have in place and follow reasonable procedures designed to prevent and detect possible violations described in paragraph (b) of this clause in its own operations and direct business relationships.\n (2) When the Contractor has reasonable grounds to believe that a violation described in paragraph (b) of this clause may have occurred, the Contractor shall promptly report in writing the possible violation. Such reports shall be made to the inspector general of the contracting agency, the head of the contracting agency if the agency does not have an inspector general, or the Department of Justice.\n (4) The Contracting Officer may (i) offset the amount of the kickback against any monies owed by the United States under the prime contract and/or (ii) direct that the Prime Contractor withhold from sums owed a subcontractor under the prime contract the amount of the kickback. The Contracting Officer may order that monies withheld under subdivision (c)(4)(ii) of this clause be paid over to the Government unless the Government has already offset those monies under subdivision (c)(4)(i) of this clause. In either case, the Prime Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer when the monies are withheld.\n (5) The Contractor agrees to incorporate the substance of this clause, including paragraph (c)(5) but excepting paragraph (c)(1), in all subcontracts under this contract which exceed $100,000.\n\n\n (End of Clause)\n\nI.31 52.203-9 (52.203-9) [RESERVED]\n\nI.32 52.209-6 PROTECTING THE GOVERNMENT'S INTEREST WHEN SUBCONTRACTING WITH CONTRACTORS DEBARRED, SUSPENDED, OR PROPOSED FOR DEBARMENT (SEP 2006)"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":" (a) The Government suspends or debars Contractors to protect the Government's interests. The Contractor shall not enter into any subcontract in excess of $30,000 with a Contractor that is debarred, suspended, or proposed for debarment unless there is a compelling reason to do so.\n (b) The Contractor shall require each proposed first-tier subcontractor, whose subcontract will exceed $30,000, to disclose to the Contractor, in writing, whether as of the time of award of the subcontract, the subcontractor, or its principals, is or is not debarred, suspended, or proposed for debarment by the Federal Government.\n (c) A corporate officer or a designee of the Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer, in writing, before entering into a subcontract with a party that is debarred, suspended, or proposed for debarment (see FAR 9.404 for information on the Excluded Parties List System). The notice must include the following:\n (1) The name of the subcontractor.\n (2) The Contractor's knowledge of the reasons for the subcontractor being in the Excluded Parties List System.\n\n (3) The compelling reason(s) for doing business with the subcontractor notwithstanding its inclusion in the Excluded Parties List System.\n (4) The systems and procedures the Contractor has established to ensure that it is fully protecting the Government's interests when dealing with such subcontractor in view of the specific basis for the party's debarment, suspension, or proposed debarment.\n\n (End of Clause)\n\nI.33 52.215-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION (JAN 2004)\n\n (a) \"Definitions.\" As used in this provision--\n \"Discussions\" are negotiations that occur after establishment of the competitive range that may, at the Contracting Officer's discretion, result in the offeror being allowed to revise its proposal.\n\n \"In writing,\" \"writing,\" or \"written\" means any worded or numbered expression that can be read, reproduced, and later communicated, and includes electronically transmitted and stored information.\n\n \"Proposal modification\" is a change made to a proposal before the solicitation's closing date and time, or made in response to an amendment, or made to correct a mistake at any time before award.\n \"Proposal revision\" is a change to a proposal made after the solicitation closing date, at the request of or as allowed by a Contracting Officer as the result of negotiations.\n \"Time,\" if stated as a number of days, is calculated using calendar days, unless otherwise specified, and will include Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. However, if the last day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, then the period shall include the next working day.\n (b) \"Amendments to solicitations.\" If this solicitation is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment to this solicitation by the date and time specified in the amendment(s).\n (c) \"Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals.\"\n (1) Unless other methods (e.g., electronic commerce or facsimile) are permitted in the solicitation, proposals and modifications to proposals shall be submitted in paper media in sealed envelopes or packages\n (iii) A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item;\n (i) addressed to the office specified in the solicitation, and\n (ii) showing the time and date specified for receipt, the solicitation number, and the name and address of the offeror. Offerors using commercial carriers should ensure that the proposal is marked on the outermost wrapper with the information in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (c)(1)(ii) of this provision.\n (2) The first page of the proposal must show--\n (i) The solicitation number;\n (ii) The name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the offeror (and electronic address if available);\n (iv) Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror's behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation; and\n (v) Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent's authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.\n (3) \"Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals.\"\n (i) Offerors are responsible for submitting proposals, and any modifications or revisions, so as to reach the Government office designated in the solicitation by the time specified in the"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"solicitation. If no time is specified in the solicitation, the time for receipt is 4:30 p.m., local time, for the designated Government office on the date that proposal or revision is due.\n (ii)\n (A) Any proposal, modification, or revision received at the Government office designated in the solicitation after the exact time specified for receipt of offers is \"late\" and will not be considered unless it is received before award is made, the Contracting Officer determines that accepting the late offer would not unduly delay the acquisition; and--\n (1) If it was transmitted through an electronic commerce method authorized by the solicitation, it was received at the initial point of entry to the Government infrastructure not later than 5:00 p.m. one working day prior to the date specified for receipt of proposals; or\n (2) There is acceptable evidence to establish that it was received at the Government installation designated for receipt of offers and was under the Government's control prior to the time set for receipt of offers; or\n (4) Unless otherwise specified in the solicitation, the offeror may propose to provide any item or combination of items.\n (3) It is the only proposal received.\n (B) However, a late modification of an otherwise successful proposal that makes its terms more favorable to the Government, will be considered at any time it is received and may be accepted.\n (iii) Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government installation includes the time/date stamp of that installation on the proposal wrapper, other documentary evidence of receipt maintained by the installation, or oral testimony or statements of Government personnel.\n (iv) If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that proposals cannot be received at the office designated for receipt of proposals by the exact time specified in the solicitation, and urgent Government requirements preclude amendment of the solicitation, the time specified for receipt of proposals will be deemed to be extended to the same time of day specified in the solicitation on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.\n (v) Proposals may be withdrawn by written notice received at any time before award. Oral proposals in response to oral solicitations may be withdrawn orally. If the solicitation authorizes facsimile proposals, proposals may be withdrawn via facsimile received at any time before award, subject to the conditions specified in the provision at 52.215-5, Facsimile Proposals. Proposals may be withdrawn in person by an offeror or an authorized representative, if the identity of the person requesting withdrawal is established and the person signs a receipt for the proposal before award.\n (5) Offerors shall submit proposals in response to this solicitation in English, unless otherwise permitted by the solicitation, and in U.S. dollars, unless the provision at FAR 52.225-17, Evaluation of Foreign Currency Offers, is included in the solicitation.\n (6) Offerors may submit modifications to their proposals at any time before the solicitation closing date and time, and may submit modifications in response to an amendment, or to correct a mistake at any time before award.\n (7) Offerors may submit revised proposals only if requested or allowed by the Contracting Officer.\n (8) Proposals may be withdrawn at any time before award. Withdrawals are effective upon receipt of notice by the Contracting Officer.\n Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal.\n (d) \"Offer expiration date.\" Proposals in response to this solicitation will be valid for the number of days specified on the solicitation cover sheet (unless a different period is proposed by the offeror).\n (e) \"Restriction on disclosure and use of data.\" Offerors that include in their proposals data that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, shall--\n (1) Mark the title page with the following legend:\n This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the Government and shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed-in whole or in part-for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. If, however, a contract is awarded to this offeror as a result of-or in connection with-the submission of this data, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets]; and\n (2) Mark each sheet of data it wishes to restrict with the following legend:\n (f) \"Contract award.\""} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":" (1) The Government intends to award a contract or contracts resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror(s) whose proposal(s) represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors and subfactors in the solicitation.\n (2) The Government may reject any or all proposals if such action is in the Government's interest.\n (3) The Government may waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals received.\n (7) Exchanges with offerors after receipt of a proposal do not constitute a rejection or counteroffer by the Government.\n (4) The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.\n (5) The Government reserves the right to make an award on any item for a quantity less than the quantity offered, at the unit cost or prices offered, unless the offeror specifies otherwise in the proposal.\n (5) The Government reserves the right to make multiple awards if, after considering the additional administrative costs, it is in the Government's best interest to do so.\n (8) The Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items or subline items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.\n (9) If a cost realism analysis is performed, cost realism may be considered by the source selection authority in evaluating performance or schedule risk.\n (10) A written award or acceptance of proposal mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time specified in the proposal shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party.\n (11) If a post-award debriefing is given to requesting offerors, the Government shall disclose the following information, if applicable:\n (i) The agency's evaluation of the significant weak or deficient factors in the debriefed offeror's offer.\n (ii) The overall evaluated cost or price and technical rating of the successful and the debriefed offeror and past performance information on the debriefed offeror.\n (iii) The overall ranking of all offerors, when any ranking was developed by the agency during source selection.\n (iv) A summary of the rationale for award.\n (v) For acquisitions of commercial items, the make and model of the item to be delivered by the successful offeror .\n (vi) Reasonable responses to relevant questions posed by the debriefed offeror as to whether source-selection procedures set forth in the solicitation, applicable regulations, and other applicable authorities were followed by the agency.\n\n\n (End of Provision)\n\nI.34 52.216-18 ORDERING (OCT 1995)\n\n (a) Any supplies and services to be furnished under this contract shall be ordered by issuance of delivery orders or task orders by the individuals or activities designated in the Schedule. Such orders may be issued from through\n (b) All delivery orders or task orders are subject to the terms and conditions of this contract. In the event of conflict between a delivery order or task order and this contract, the contract shall control.\n (c) If mailed, a delivery order or task order is considered \"issued\" when the Government deposits the order in the mail. Orders may be issued orally, by facsimile, or by electronic commerce methods only if authorized in the Schedule.\n (End of Clause)\n\n\n\nI.35 52.216-19 ORDER LIMITATIONS (OCT 1995)"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":" (a) \"Minimum order.\" When the Government requires supplies or services covered by this contract in an amount of less than the Government is not obligated to purchase, nor is the Contractor obligated to furnish, those supplies or services under the contract.\n (b) \"Maximum order.\" The Contractor is not obligated to honor--\n (1) Any order for a single item in excess of\n (2) Any order for a combination of items in excess of or\n (3) A series of orders from the same ordering office within days that together call for quantities exceeding the limitation in paragraph (b)(1) or (2) of this section.\n (c) If this is a requirements contract (i.e., includes the Requirements clause at subsection 52.216-21 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)), the Government is not required to order a part of any one requirement from the Contractor if that requirement exceeds the maximum-order limitations in paragraph (b) of this section.\n (d) Notwithstanding paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, the Contractor shall honor any order exceeding the maximum order limitations in paragraph (b), unless that order (or orders) is returned to the ordering office within days after issuance, with written notice stating the Contractor's intent not to ship the item (or items) called for and the reasons. Upon receiving this notice, the Government may acquire the supplies or services from another source.\n\n\n (End of Clause)\n\nI.36 52.216-20 DEFINITE QUANTITY (OCT 1995)\n\n (a) This is a definite-quantity, indefinite-delivery contract for the supplies or services specified, and effective for the period stated, in the Schedule.\n (b) The Government shall order the quantity of supplies or services specified in the Schedule, and the Contractor shall furnish them when ordered. Delivery or performance shall be at locations designated in orders issued in accordance with the Ordering clause and the Schedule.\n (c) Except for any limitations on quantities in the Order Limitations clause or in the Schedule, there is no limit on the number of orders that may be issued. The Government may issue orders requiring delivery to multiple destinations or performance at multiple locations.\n (d) Any order issued during the effective period of this contract and not completed within that time shall be completed by the Contractor within the time specified in the order. The contract shall govern the Contractor's and Government's rights and obligations with respect to that order to the same extent as if the order were completed during the contract's effective period; provided, that the Contractor shall not be required to make any deliveries under this contract after\n\n\n (End of Clause)\n\nI.37 52.216-21 REQUIREMENTS (OCT 1995)\n\n (a) This is a requirements contract for the supplies or services specified, and effective for the period stated, in the Schedule. The quantities of supplies or services specified in the Schedule are estimates only and are not purchased by this contract. Except as this contract may otherwise provide, if the Government's requirements do not result in orders in the quantities described as \"estimated\" or \"maximum\" in the Schedule, that fact shall not constitute the basis for an equitable price adjustment.\n (b) Delivery or performance shall be made only as authorized by orders issued in accordance with the Ordering clause. Subject to any limitations in the Order Limitations clause or elsewhere in this contract, the Contractor shall furnish to the Government all supplies or services specified in the Schedule and called for by orders issued in accordance with the Ordering clause. The Government may issue orders requiring delivery to multiple destinations or performance at multiple locations.\n (c) Except as this contract otherwise provides, the Government shall order from the Contractor all the supplies or services specified in the Schedule that are required to be purchased by the Government activity or activities specified in the Schedule.\n (e) If the Government urgently requires delivery of any quantity of an item before the earliest date that delivery may be specified under this contract, and if the Contractor will not accept an order providing for the accelerated delivery, the Government may acquire the urgently required goods or services from another source.\n\n\n (End of Clause)\n (d) The Government is not required to purchase from the Contractor requirements in excess of any limit on total orders under this contract."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(f) Any order issued during the effective period of this contract and not completed within that\nperiod shall be completed by the Contractor within the time specified in the order. The contract\nshall govern the Contractor''s and Government''s rights and obligations with respect to that\norder to the same extent as if the order were completed during the contract''s effective period;\nprovided, that the Contractor shall not be required to make any deliveries under this contract after\n\n\nI.38 52.216-22 INDEFINITE QUANTITY (OCT 1995)\n\n(a) This is an indefinite-quantity contract for the supplies or services specified, and effective\nfor the period stated, in the Schedule. The quantities of supplies and services specified in the\nSchedule are estimates only and are not purchased by this contract.\n(b) Delivery or performance shall be made only as authorized by orders issued in accordance with\nthe Ordering clause. The Contractor shall furnish to the Government, when and if ordered, the\nsupplies or services specified in the Schedule up to and including the quantity designated in the\nSchedule as the \"maximum.\" The Government shall order at least the quantity of supplies or services\ndesignated in the Schedule as the \"minimum.\"\n(c) Except for any limitations on quantities in the Order Limitations clause or in the Schedule,\nthere is no limit on the number of orders that may be issued. The Government may issue orders\nrequiring delivery to multiple destinations or performance at multiple locations.\n(End of Clause)\n(d) Any order issued during the effective period of this contract and not completed within that\nperiod shall be completed by the Contractor within the time specified in the order. The contract\nshall govern the Contractor''s and Government''s rights and obligations with respect to that\norder to the same extent as if the order were completed during the contract''s effective period;\nprovided, that the Contractor shall not be required to make any deliveries under this contract after\n\n\n\n\nI.39 52.219-13 {52.219-13} [RESERVED]\n\nI.40 52.219-16 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES--SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (JAN 1999)\n\n(a) \"Failure to make a good faith effort to comply with the subcontracting plan\", as used in this\nclause, means a willful or intentional failure to perform in accordance with the requirements\nof the subcontracting plan approved under the clause in this contract entitled \"Small Business\nSubcontracting Plan,\" or willful or intentional action to frustrate the plan.\n(b) Performance shall be measured by applying the percentage goals to the total actual\nsubcontracting dollars or, if a commercial plan is involved, to the pro rata share of actual\nsubcontracting dollars attributable to Government contracts covered by the commercial plan. If,\nat contract completion or, in the case of a commercial plan, at the close of the fiscal year for\nwhich the plan is applicable, the Contractor has failed to meet its subcontracting goals and the\nContracting Officer decides in accordance with paragraph (c) of this clause that the Contractor\nfailed to make a good faith effort to comply with its subcontracting plan, established in accordance\nwith the clause in this contract entitled \"Small Business Subcontracting Plan,\" the Contractor\nshall pay the Government liquidated damages in an amount stated. The amount of probable damages\nattributable to the Contractor''s failure to comply shall be an amount equal to the actual dollar\namount by which the Contractor failed to achieve each subcontract goal.\n(d) With respect to commercial plans, the Contracting Officer who approved the plan will perform\nthe functions of the Contracting Officer under this clause on behalf of all agencies with contracts\ncovered by the commercial plan.\n(End of Clause)\n(c) Before the Contracting Officer makes a final decision that the Contractor has failed to make\nsuch good faith effort, the Contracting Officer shall give the Contractor written notice specifying\nthe failure and permitting the Contractor to demonstrate what good faith efforts have been made and\nto discuss the matter. Failure to respond to the notice may be taken as an admission that no valid\nexplanation exists. If, after consideration of all the pertinent data, the Contracting Officer\nfinds that the Contractor failed to make a good faith effort to comply with the subcontracting plan,\nthe Contracting Officer shall issue a final decision to that effect and require that the Contractor\npay the Government liquidated damages as provided in paragraph (b) of this clause.\n(f) Liquidated damages shall be in addition to any other remedies that the Government may have.\n\n(e) The Contractor shall have the right of appeal, under the clause in this contract entitled,\nDisputes, from any final decision of the Contracting Officer.\n\nPAGE 36 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I.41 52.219-6 NOTICE OF TOTAL SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE (JUN 2003)\n\n(a) \"Definition.\" \"Small business concern,\" as used in this clause, means a concern, including\nits affiliates, that is independently owned and operated, not dominant in the field of operation\nin which it is bidding on Government contracts, and qualified as a small business under the size\nstandards in this solicitation.\n(b) \"General.\"\n(1) Offers are solicited only from small business concerns. Offers received from concerns that\nare not small business concerns shall be considered nonresponsive and will be rejected.\n(2) Any award resulting from this solicitation will be made to a small business concern.\n(c) \"Agreement.\" A small business concern submitting an offer in its own name shall furnish, in\nperforming the contract, only end items manufactured or produced by small business concerns in the\nUnited States or its outlying areas. If this procurement is processed under simplified acquisition\nprocedures and the total amount of this contract does not exceed $25,000, a small business concern\nmay furnish the product of any domestic firm. This paragraph does not apply to construction or\nservice contracts.\n\n\n(End of Clause)\n\nI.42 52.219-8 UTILIZATION OF SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS (MAY 2004)\n\n(a) It is the policy of the United States that small business concerns, veteran-owned small\nbusiness concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business\nconcerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns shall\nhave the maximum practicable opportunity to participate in performing contracts let by any\nFederal agency, including contracts and subcontracts for subsystems, assemblies, components, and\nrelated services for major systems. It is further the policy of the United States that its prime\ncontractors establish procedures to ensure the timely payment of amounts due pursuant to the terms\nof their subcontracts with small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-\ndisabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged\nbusiness concerns, and women-owned small business concerns.\n\"Service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern\"--\n(b) The Contractor hereby agrees to carry out this policy in the awarding of subcontracts to\nthe fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance. The Contractor further agrees\nto cooperate in any studies or surveys as may be conducted by the United States Small Business\nAdministration or the awarding agency of the United States as may be necessary to determine the\nextent of the Contractor''s compliance with this clause.\n(c) Definitions. As used in this contract--\n\"HUBZone small business concern\" means a small business concern that appears on the List of\nQualified HUBZone Small Business Concerns maintained by the Small Business Administration.\n(2) Service-disabled veteran means a veteran, as defined in 38 U.S.C. 101(2), with a disability\nthat is service-connected, as defined in 38 U.S.C. 101(16).\n(1) Means a small business concern--\n(i) Not less than 51 percent of which is owned by one or more service-disabled veterans or, in\nthe case of any publicly owned business, not less than 51 percent of the stock of which is owned by\none or more service-disabled veterans; and\n(ii) The management and daily business operations of which are controlled by one or more\nservice-disabled veterans or, in the case of a service-disabled veteran with permanent and severe\ndisability, the spouse or permanent caregiver of such veteran.\n\"Small business concern\" means a small business as defined pursuant to Section 3 of the Small\nBusiness Act and relevant regulations promulgated pursuant thereto.\n\"Small disadvantaged business concern\" means a small business concern that represents, as part of\nits offer that--\n(1) It has received certification as a small disadvantaged business concern consistent with 13\nCFR part 124, Subpart B;\n(2) No material change in disadvantaged ownership and control has occurred since its\ncertification;\n\"Women-owned small business concern\" means a small business concern--\n(3) Where the concern is owned by one or more individuals, the net worth of each individual upon\nwhom the certification is based does not exceed $750,000 after taking into account the applicable\nexclusions set forth at 13 CFR 124.104(c)(2); and\n(4) It is identified, on the date of its representation, as a certified small disadvantaged\nbusiness in the database maintained by the Small Business Administration (PRO-Net).\n\"Veteran-owned small business concern\" means a small business concern--\n\nPAGE 37 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1) Not less than 51 percent of which is owned by one or more veterans (as defined at 38 U.S.C.\n101(2)) or, in the case of any publicly owned business, not less than 51 percent of the stock of\nwhich is owned by one or more veterans; and\n(2) The management and daily business operations of which are controlled by one or more veterans.\n\n(1) That is at least 51 percent owned by one or more women, or, in the case of any publicly owned\nbusiness, at least 51 percent of the stock of which is owned by one or more women; and\n(2) Whose management and daily business operations are controlled by one or more women.\n(d) Contractors acting in good faith may rely on written representations by their subcontractors\nregarding their status as a small business concern, a veteran-owned small business concern, a\nservice-disabled veteran-owned small business concern, a HUBZone small business concern, a small\ndisadvantaged business concern, or a women-owned small business concern.\n\n\n\n\n(End of Clause)\n\nI.43 52.219-9 SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (APR 2008)\n\n(a) This clause does not apply to small business concerns.\n(b) Definitions. As used in this clause--\n\"Alaska Native Corporation (ANC)\" means any Regional Corporation, Village Corporation, Urban\nCorporation, or Group Corporation organized under the laws of the State of Alaska in accordance\nwith the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, as amended (43 U.S.C. 1601, et seq.) and which is\nconsidered a minority and economically disadvantaged concern under the criteria at 43 U.S.C.\n1626(e)(1). This definition also includes ANC direct and indirect subsidiary corporations, joint\nventures, and partnerships that meet the requirements of 43 U.S.C. 1626(e)(2).\n\"Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS)\" means the Governmentwide, electronic, web-\nbased system for small business subcontracting program reporting. The eSRS is located at http://\nwww.esrs.gov.\n\"Master plan\" means a subcontracting plan that contains all the required elements of an individual\ncontract plan, except goals, and may be incorporated into individual contract plans, provided the\nmaster plan has been approved.\n\"Commercial item\" means a product or service that satisfies the definition of commercial item in\nsection 2.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation.\n\"Commercial plan\" means a subcontracting plan (including goals) that covers the offeror''s fiscal\nyear and that applies to the entire production of commercial items sold by either the entire\ncompany or a portion thereof (e.g., division, plant, or product line).\n\"Indian tribe\" means any Indian tribe, band, group, pueblo, or community, including native villages\nand native groups (including corporations organized by Kenai, Juneau, Sitka, and Kodiak) as defined\nin the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C.A. 1601 et seq.), that is recognized by the\nFederal Government as eligible for services from the Bureau of Indian Affairs in accordance with\n25 U.S.C. 1452(c). This definition also includes Indian-owned economic enterprises that meet the\nrequirements of 25 U.S.C. 1452(e).\n\"Individual contract plan\" means a subcontracting plan that covers the entire contract period\n(including option periods), applies to a specific contract, and has goals that are based on the\nofferor''s planned subcontracting in support of the specific contract, except that indirect costs\nincurred for common or joint purposes may be allocated on a prorated basis to the contract.\n\"Subcontract\" means any agreement (other than one involving an employer-employee relationship)\nentered into by a Federal Government prime Contractor or subcontractor calling for supplies or\nservices required for performance of the contract or subcontract.\n(d) The offeror''s subcontracting plan shall include the following:\n(ii) Where one or more subcontractors are in the subcontract tier between the prime contractor\nand the ANC or Indian tribe, the ANC or Indian tribe shall designate the appropriate contractor(s)\nto count the subcontract towards its small business and small disadvantaged business subcontracting\ngoals.\n(c) The offeror, upon request by the Contracting Officer, shall submit and negotiate a\nsubcontracting plan, where applicable, that separately addresses subcontracting with small business,\nveteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business\nconcerns, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns. If the offeror\nis submitting an individual contract plan, the plan must separately address subcontracting with\nsmall business, veteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business,\nHUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns,\nwith a separate part for the basic contract and separate parts for each option (if any). The plan\nshall be included in and made a part of the resultant contract. The subcontracting plan shall be\n\nPAGE 38 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"negotiated within the time specified by the Contracting Officer. Failure to submit and negotiate the\nsubcontracting plan shall make the offeror ineligible for award of a contract.\n(1) Goals, expressed in terms of percentages of total planned subcontracting dollars, for the\nuse of small business, veteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteranowned small business,\nHUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns as\nsubcontractors. The offeror shall include all subcontracts that contribute to contract performance,\nand may include a proportionate share of products and services that are normally allocated as\nindirect costs. In accordance with 43 U.S.C. 1626:\n(i) Subcontracts awarded to an ANC or Indian tribe shall be counted towards the subcontracting\ngoals for small business and small disadvantaged business (SDB) concerns, regardless of the size or\nSmall Business Administration certification status of the ANC or Indian tribe.\n(A) In most cases, the appropriate Contractor is the Contractor that awarded the subcontract\nto the ANC or Indian tribe.\n(D) If the Contracting Officer does not receive a copy of the ANC#s or the Indian tribe#s\nwritten designation within 30 days of the subcontract award, the Contractor that awarded the\nsubcontract to the ANC or Indian tribe will be considered the designated Contractor.\n(B) If the ANC or Indian tribe designates more than one Contractor to count the subcontract\ntoward its goals, the ANC or Indian tribe shall designate only a portion of the total subcontract\naward to each Contractor. The sum of the amounts designated to various Contractors cannot exceed the\ntotal value of the subcontract.\n(C) The ANC or Indian tribe shall give a copy of the written designation to the Contracting\nOfficer, the prime Contractor, and the subcontractors in between the prime Contractor and the ANC or\nIndian tribe within 30 days of the date of the subcontract award.\n(2) A statement of--\n(i) Total dollars planned to be subcontracted for an individual contract plan; or the\nofferor''s total projected sales, expressed in dollars, and the total value of projected\nsubcontracts to support the sales for a commercial plan;\n(v) Total dollars planned to be subcontracted to HUBZone small business concerns;\n(ii) Total dollars planned to be subcontracted to small business concerns (including ANC and\nIndian tribes);\n(iii) Total dollars planned to be subcontracted to veteran-owned small business concerns;\n(iv) Total dollars planned to be subcontracted to service-disabled veteran-owned small\nbusiness;\n(vi) Total dollars planned to be subcontracted to small disadvantaged business concerns\n(including ANC and Indian tribes); and\n(vii) Total dollars planned to be subcontracted to women-owned small business concerns.\n(3) A description of the principal types of supplies and services to be subcontracted, and an\nidentification of the types planned for subcontracting to--\n(i) Small business concerns;\n(ii) Veteran-owned small business concerns;\n(iii) Service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns;\n(iv) HUBZone small business concerns;\n(v) Small disadvantaged business concerns; and\n(vi) Women-owned small business concerns.\n(4) A description of the method used to develop the subcontracting goals in paragraph (d)(1) of\nthis clause.\n(5) A description of the method used to identify potential sources for solicitation purposes\n(e.g., existing company source lists, the Central Contractor Registration database (CCR), veterans\nservice organizations, the National Minority Purchasing Council Vendor Information Service, the\nResearch and Information Division of the Minority Business Development Agency in the Department\nof Commerce, or small, HUBZone, small disadvantaged, and women-owned small business trade\nassociations). A firm may rely on the information contained in CCR as an accurate representation\nof a concern''s size and ownership characteristics for the purposes of maintaining a small,\nveteran-owned small, service-disabled veteran- owned small, HUBZone small, small disadvantaged,\nand women-owned small business source list. Use of CCR as its source list does not relieve a firm\nof its responsibilities (e.g., outreach, assistance, counseling, or publicizing subcontracting\nopportunities) in this clause.\n(5) A statement as to whether or not the offeror included indirect costs in establishing\nsubcontracting goals, and a description of the method used to determine the proportionate share of\nindirect costs to be incurred with--\n(ii) Veteran-owned small business concerns;\n(i) Small business concerns (including ANC and Indian tribes);\n(iii) Service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns;\n(iv) HUBZone small business concerns;\n(8) A description of the efforts the offeror will make to assure that small business, veteran-\nowned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small\n\nPAGE 39 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns have an equitable opportunity to\ncompete for subcontracts.\n(v) Small disadvantaged business concerns (including ANC and Indian tribes); and\n(vi) Women-owned small business concerns.\n(7) The name of the individual employed by the offeror who will administer the offeror''s\nsubcontracting program, and a description of the duties of the individual.\n(9) Assurances that the offeror will include the clause of this contract entitled \"Utilization\nof Small Business Concerns\" in all subcontracts that offer further subcontracting opportunities,\nand that the offeror will require all subcontractors (except small business concerns) that receive\nsubcontracts in excess of $550,000 ($1,000,000 for construction of any public facility with further\nsubcontracting possibilities) to adopt a subcontracting plan that complies with the requirements of\nthis clause.\n(10) Assurances that the offeror will--\n(i) Cooperate in any studies or surveys as may be required;\n(ii) Submit periodic reports so that the Government can determine the extent of compliance by\nthe offeror with the subcontracting plan;\n(B) Whether veteran-owned small business concerns were solicited and, if not, why not;\n(C) Whether service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns were solicited and, if not,\nwhy not;\n(D) Whether HUBZone small business concerns were solicited and, if not, why not;\n(E) Whether small disadvantaged business concerns were solicited and, if not, why not;\n(F) Whether women-owned small business concerns were solicited and, if not, why not; and\n(G) If applicable, the reason award was not made to a small business concern.\n(iv) Records of any outreach efforts to contact--\n(A) Trade associations;\n(B) Business development organizations;\n(C) Conferences and trade fairs to locate small, HUBZone small, small disadvantaged, and\nwomen-owned small business sources; and\n(D) Veterans service organizations.\n(v) Records of internal guidance and encouragement provided to buyers through--\n(A) Workshops, seminars, training, etc.; and\n(B) Monitoring performance to evaluate compliance with the program''s requirements.\n(iii) Submit the Individual Subcontract Report (ISR) and/or the Summary Subcontract Report\n(SSR), in accordance with paragraph (1) of this clause using the Electronic Subcontracting Reporting\nSystem (eSRS) at http://www.esrs.gov. The reports shall provide information on subcontract awards\nto small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-\nowned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business\nconcerns, women-owned small business concerns, and Historically Black Colleges and Universities and\nMinority Institutions. Reporting shall be in accordance with this clause, or as provided in agency\nregulations;\n(iv) Ensure that its subcontractors with subcontracting plans agree to submit the ISR and/or the\nSSR using eSRS;\n(v) Provide its prime contract number, its DUNS number, and the e-mail address of the Government\nor Contractor official responsible for acknowledging or rejecting the reports, to all first-tier\nsubcontractors with subcontracting plans so they can enter this information into the eSRS when\nsubmitting their reports; and\n(vi) Require that each subcontractor with a subcontracting plan provide the prime contract\nnumber, its own DUNS number, and the e- mail address of the Government or Contractor official\nresponsible for acknowledging or rejecting the reports, to its subcontractors with subcontract ing\nplans.\n(11) A description of the types of records that will be maintained concerning procedures that\nhave been adopted to comply with the requirements and goals in the plan, including establishing\nsource lists; and a description of the offeror''s efforts to locate small business, veteran-\nowned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small\ndisadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns and award subcontracts to them.\nThe records shall include at least the following (on a plant-wide or company-wide basis, unless\notherwise indicated):\n(i) Source lists (e.g., CCR), guides, and other data that identify small business, veteran-\nowned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small\ndisadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns.\n(ii) Organizations contacted in an attempt to locate sources that are small business, veteran-\nowned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small\ndisadvantaged business, or women-owned small business concerns.\n(iii) Records on each subcontract solicitation resulting in an award of more than $100,000,\nindicating--\n(A) Whether small business concerns were solicited and, if not, why not;\n\nPAGE 40 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(5) Provide notice to subcontractors concerning penalties and remedies for misrepresentations\nof business status as small, veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small, small disadvantaged, or\nwomen-owned small business for the purpose of obtaining a subcontract that is to be included as part\nor all of a goal contained in the Contractor''s subcontracting plan.\n(vi) On a contract-by-contract basis, records to support award data submitted by the offeror\nto the Government, including the name, address, and business size of each subcontractor. Contractors\nhaving commercial plans need not comply with this requirement.\n(e) In order to effectively implement this plan to the extent consistent with efficient contract\nperformance, the Contractor shall perform the following functions:\n(1) Assist small business, veteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned\nsmall business, HUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small\nbusiness concerns by arranging solicitations, time for the preparation of bids, quantities,\nspecifications, and delivery schedules so as to facilitate the participation by such concerns. Where\nthe Contractor''s lists of potential small business, veteran-owned small business, service-disabled\nveteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned\nsmall business subcontractors are excessively long, reasonable effort shall be made to give all such\nsmall business concerns an opportunity to compete over a period of time.\n(2) Provide adequate and timely consideration of the potentialities of small business, veteran-\nowned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small\ndisadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns in all \"make-or-buy\" decisions.\n(3) Counsel and discuss subcontracting opportunities with representatives of small business,\nveteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business,\nsmall disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business firms.\n(4) Confirm that a subcontractor representing itself as a HUBZone small business concern is\nidentified as a certified HUBZone small business concern by accessing the Central Contractor\nRegistration (CCR) database or by contacting SBA.\n(f) A master plan on a plant or division-wide basis that contains all the elements required by\nparagraph (d) of this clause, except goals, may be incorporated by reference as a part of the\nsubcontracting plan required of the offeror by this clause; provided--\n(1) The master plan has been approved;\n(2) The offeror ensures that the master plan is updated as necessary and provides copies of the\napproved master plan, including evidence of its approval, to the Contracting Officer; and\n(g) A commercial plan is the preferred type of subcontracting plan for contractors furnishing\ncommercial items. The commercial plan shall relate to the offeror''s planned subcontracting\ngenerally, for both commercial and Government business, rather than solely to the Government\ncontract. Once the Contractor''s commercial plan has been approved, the Government will not require\nanother subcontracting plan from the same Contractor while the plan remains in effect, as long\nas the product or service being provided by the Contractor continues to meet the definition of a\ncommercial item. A Contractor with a commercial plan shall comply with the reporting requirements\nstated in paragraph (d)(10) of this clause by submitting one SSR in eSRS for all contracts covered\nby its commercial plan. This report shall be acknowledged or rejected in eSRS by the Contracting\nOfficer who approved the plan. This report shall be submitted within 30 days after the end of the\nGovernment's fiscal year.\n(i) A contract may have no more than one plan. When a modification meets the criteria in 19.702 for\na plan, or an option is exercised, the goals associated with the modification or option shall be\nadded to those in the existing subcontract plan.\n(j) Subcontracting plans are not required from subcontractors when the prime contract contains\nthe clause at 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive\nOrders--Commercial Items, or when the subcontractor provides a commercial item subject to the clause\nat 52.244-6, Subcontracts for Commercial Items, under a prime contract.\n(k) The failure of the Contractor or subcontractor to comply in good faith with--\n(1) The clause of this contract entitled \"Utilization Of Small Business Concerns;\" or\n(2) An approved plan required by this clause, shall be a material breach of the contract.\n(l) The Contractor shall submit ISRs and SSRs using the web-based eSRS at http://www.esrs.gov.\nPurchases from a corporation, company, or subdivision that is an affiliate of the prime Contractor\nor subcontractor are not included in these reports. Subcontract award data reported by prime\nContractors and subcontractors shall be limited to awards made to their immediate next-tier\nsubcontractors. Credit cannot be taken for awards made to lower tier subcontractors, unless the\nContractor or subcontractor has been designated to receive a small business or small disadvantaged\nbusiness credit from an ANC or Indian tribe.\n(3) Goals and any deviations from the master plan deemed necessary by the Contracting Officer to\nsatisfy the requirements of this contract are set forth in the individual subcontracting plan.\n(h) Prior compliance of the offeror with other such subcontracting plans under previous contracts\nwill be considered by the Contracting Officer in determining the responsibility of the offeror for\naward of the contract."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1) ISR. This report is not required for commercial plans. The report is required for each\ncontract containing an individual subcontract plan and shall be submitted to the Administrative\nContracting Officer (ACO) or Contracting Officer, if no ACO is assigned.\n(A) In the case of the prime Contractor, with the Contracting Officer; and\n(B) In the case of a subcontract with a subcontracting plan, with the entity that awarded the\nsubcontract.\n(2) SSR.\n(i) Reports submitted under individual contract plans--\n(A) This report encompasses all subcontracting under prime contracts and subcontracts with\nthe awarding agency, regardless of the dollar value of the subcontracts.\n(i) The report shall be submitted semi-annually during contract performance for the periods\nending March 31 and September 30. A report is also required for each contract within 30 days of\ncontract completion. Reports are due 30 days after the close of each reporting period, unless\notherwise directed by the Contracting Officer. Reports are required when due, regardless of whether\nthere has been any subcontracting activity since the inception of the contract or the previous\nreporting period.\n(ii) When a subcontracting plan contains separate goals for the basic contract and each option,\nas prescribed by FAR 19.704(c), the dollar goal inserted on this report shall be the sum of the base\nperiod through the current option; for example, for a report submitted after the second option is\nexercised, the dollar goal would be the sum of the goals for the basic contract, the first option,\nand the second option.\n(iii) The authority to acknowledge receipt or reject the ISR resides--\n(B) The report may be submitted on a corporate, company or subdivision (e.g. plant or\ndivision operating as a separate profit center) basis, unless otherwise directed by the agency.\n(C) If a prime Contractor and/or subcontractor is performing work for more than one executive\nagency, a separate report shall be submitted to each executive agency covering only that agency's\ncontracts, provided at least one of that agency's contracts is over $550,000 (over $1,000,000\nfor construction of a public facility) and contains a subcontracting plan. For DoD, a consolidated\nreport shall be submitted for all contracts awarded by military departments/ agencies and/or\nsubcontracts awarded by DoD prime Contractors. However, for construction and related maintenance and\nrepair, a separate report shall be submitted for each DoD component.\n(D) For DoD and NASA, the report shall be submitted semi-annually for the six months ending\nMarch 31 and the twelve months ending September 30. For civilian agencies, except NASA, it shall be\nsubmitted annually for the twelve month period ending September 30. Reports are due 30 days after\nthe close of each reporting period.\n(C) If a Contractor has a commercial plan and is performing work for more than one executive\nagency, the Contractor shall specify the percentage of dollars attributable to each agency from\nwhich contracts for commercial items were received.\n(E) Subcontract awards that are related to work for more than one executive agency shall be\nappropriately allocated.\n(F) The authority to acknowledge or reject SSRs in eSRS, including SSRs submitted by\nsubcontractors with subcontracting plans, resides with the Government agency awarding the prime\ncontracts.\n(ii) Reports submitted under a commercial plan--\n(A) The report shall include all subcontract awards under the commercial plan in effect\nduring the Government's fiscal year.\n(B) The report shall be submitted annually, within thirty days after the end of the\nGovernment's fiscal year.\n(D) The authority to acknowledge or reject SSRs for commercial plans resides with the\nContracting Officer who approved the commercial plan.\n(iii) All reports submitted at the close of each fiscal year (both individual and commercial\nplans) shall include a Year-End Supplementary Report for Small Disadvantaged Businesses. The report\nshall include subcontract awards, in whole dollars, to small disadvantaged business concerns by\nNorth American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Industry Subsector. If the data are not\navailable when the year-end SSR is submitted, the prime Contractor and/or subcontractor shall submit\nthe Year-End Supplementary Report for Small Disadvantaged Businesses within 90 days of submitting\nthe year-end SSR. For a commercial plan, the Contractor may obtain from each of its subcontractors\na predominant NAICS Industry Subsector and report all awards to that subcontractor under its\npredominant NAICS Industry Subsector.\n(End of Clause)\n\nI.44 52.222-1 NOTICE TO THE GOVERNMENT OF LABOR DISPUTES (FEB 1997)\n\nIf the Contractor has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens\nto delay the timely performance of this contract, the Contractor shall immediately give notice,\nincluding all relevant information, to the Contracting Officer."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(End of Clause)\n\nI.45 52.222-20 WALSH-HEALEY PUBLIC CONTRACTS ACT (DEC 1996)\n\nIf this contract is for the manufacture or furnishing of materials, supplies, articles or equipment\nin an amount that exceeds or may exceed $10,000, and is subject to the Walsh-Healey Public\nContracts Act, as amended (41 U.S.C. 35-45), the following terms and conditions apply:\n(a) All stipulations required by the Act and regulations issued by the Secretary of Labor (41 CFR\nChapter 50) are incorporated by reference. These stipulations are subject to all applicable rulings\nand interpretations of the Secretary of Labor that are now, or may hereafter, be in effect.\n(b) All employees whose work relates to this contract shall be paid not less than the minimum wage\nprescribed by regulations issued by the Secretary of Labor (41 CFR 50-202.2). Learners, student\nlearners, apprentices, and handicapped workers may be employed at less than the prescribed minimum\nwage (see 41 CFR 50-202.3) to the same extent that such employment is permitted under Section 14 of\nthe Fair Labor Standards Act (41 U.S.C. 40).\n\n\n\n(End of Clause)\n\nI.46 52.222-26 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY (MAR 2007)\n\n(a) \"Definition.\" \"United States,\" as used in this clause, means the 50 States, the District of\nColumbia, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands,\nand Wake Island.\n(b)\n(2) If the Contractor is a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or\nsociety, the requirements of this clause do not apply with respect to the employment of individuals\nof a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on of the Contractor#s\nactivities (41 CFR 60-1.5).\n(c)\n(1) The Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment\nbecause of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. However, it shall not be a violation of\nthis clause for the Contractor to extend a publicly announced preference in employment to Indians\nliving on or near an Indian reservation, in connection with employment opportunities on or near an\nIndian reservation, as permitted by 41 CFR 60-1.5.\n(2) The Contractor shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that\nemployees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or\nnational origin. This shall include, but not be limited to--\n(ii) Upgrading;\n(1) If, during any 12-month period (including the 12 months preceding the award of this\ncontract), the Contractor has been or is awarded nonexempt Federal contracts and/or subcontracts\nthat have an aggregate value in excess of $10,000, the Contractor shall comply with this clause,\nexcept for work performed outside the United States by employees who were not recruited within the\nUnited States. Upon request, the Contractor shall provide information necessary to determine the\napplicability of this clause.\n(i) Employment;\n(iii) Demotion;\n(5) The Contractor shall comply with Executive Order 11246, as amended, and the rules,\nregulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor.\n(iv) Transfer;\n(v) Recruitment or recruitment advertising;\n(vi) Layoff or termination;\n(vii) Rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and\n(viii) Selection for training, including apprenticeship.\n(3) The Contractor shall post in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for\nemployment the notices to be provided by the Contracting Officer that explain this clause.\n(4) The Contractor shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or\non behalf of the Contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for\nemployment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.\n(5) The Contractor shall send, to each labor union or representative of workers with which it has\na collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, the notice to be provided by\nthe Contracting Officer advising the labor union or workers'' representative of the Contractor''s\ncommitments under this clause, and post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to\nemployees and applicants for employment."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(End of Clause)\n\n(7) The Contractor shall furnish to the contracting agency all information required by Executive\nOrder 11246, as amended, and by the rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor. The\nContractor shall also file Standard Form 100 (EEO-1), or any successor form, as prescribed in 41\nCFR part 60-1. Unless the Contractor has filed within the 12 months preceding the date of contract\naward, the Contractor shall, within 30 days after contract award, apply to either the regional\nOffice of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) or the local office of the Equal Employment\nOpportunity Commission for the necessary forms.\n(8) The Contractor shall permit access to its premises, during normal business hours, by the\ncontracting agency or the OFCCP for the purpose of conducting on-site compliance evaluations and\ncomplaint investigations. The Contractor shall permit the Government to inspect and copy any books,\naccounts, records (including computerized records), and other material that may be relevant to the\nmatter under investigation and pertinent to compliance with Executive Order 11246, as amended, and\nrules and regulations that implement the Executive Order.\n(9) If the OFCCP determines that the Contractor is not in compliance with this clause or any\nrule, regulation, or order of the Secretary of Labor, this contract may be canceled, terminated, or\nsuspended in whole or in part and the Contractor may be declared ineligible for further Government\ncontracts, under the procedures authorized in Executive Order 11246, as amended. In addition,\nsanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked against the Contractor as provided in Executive Order\n11245, as amended; in the rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor; or as otherwise\nprovided by law.\n(10) The Contractor shall include the terms and conditions of this clause in every subcontract or\npurchase order that is not exempted by the rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor\nissued under Executive Order 11246, as amended, so that these terms and conditions will be binding\nupon each subcontractor or vendor.\n(11) The Contractor shall take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase order as\nthe Contracting Officer may direct as a means of enforcing these terms and conditions, including\nsanctions for noncompliance, provided, that if the Contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened\nwith, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of any direction, the Contractor may\nrequest the United States to enter into the litigation to protect the interests of the United States.\n\n(d) Notwithstanding any other clause in this contract, disputes relative to this clause will be\ngoverned by the procedures in 41 CFR 60-1.1.\n\n\n\nI.47 52.222-28 (52.222-28) [RESERVED]\n\nI.48 52.222-3 CONVICT LABOR (JUN 2003)\n\n(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this clause, the Contractor shall not employ in the\nperformance of this contract any person undergoing a sentence of imprisonment imposed by any court\nof a State, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa,\nGuam, or the U.S. Virgin Islands.\n(b) The Contractor is not prohibited from employing persons--\n(1) On parole or probation to work at paid employment during the term of their sentence;\n(2) Who have been pardoned or who have served their terms; or\n(3) Confined for violation of the laws of any of the States, the District of Columbia, Puerto\nRico, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, or the U.S. Virgin Islands who are\nauthorized to work at paid employment in the community under the laws of such jurisdiction, if--\n(i) The worker is paid or is in an approved work training program on a voluntary basis;\n(ii) Representatives of local union central bodies or similar labor union organizations have\nbeen consulted;\n(iii) Such paid employment will not result in the displacement of employed workers, or be\napplied in skills, crafts, or trades in which there is a surplus of available gainful labor in the\nlocality, or impair existing contracts for services;\n(iv) The rates of pay and other conditions of employment will not be less than those paid or\nprovided for work of a similar nature in the locality in which the work is being performed; and\n(v) The Attorney General of the United States has certified that the work-release laws or\nregulations of the jurisdiction involved are in conformity with the requirements of Executive Order\n11755, as amended by Executive Orders 12608 and 12943.\n\n\n(End of Clause)"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I.49 52.222-35 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR SPECIAL DISABLED VETERANS, VETERANS OF THE VIETNAM ERA, AND\nOTHER ELIGIBLE VETERANS. [SEP 2006]\n\n(a) \"Definitions.\" As used in this clause--\n\"All employment openings\" means all positions except executive and top management, those positions\nthat will be filled from within the Contractor''s organization, and positions lasting 3 days\nor less. This term includes full-time employment, temporary employment of more than 3 days duration, and\npart-time employment.\n\"Executive and top management\" means any employee--\n(1) Whose primary duty consists of the management of the enterprise in which the individual is\nemployed or of a customarily recognized department or subdivision thereof;\n(2) Who customarily and regularly directs the work of two or more other employees;\n(3) Who has the authority to hire or fire other employees or whose suggestions and\nrecommendations as to the hiring or firing and as to the advancement and promotion or any other\nchange of status of other employees will be given particular weight;\n(4) Who customarily and regularly exercises discretionary powers; and\n(5) Who does not devote more than 20 percent or, in the case of an employee of a retail or\nservice establishment, who does not devote more than 40 percent of total hours of work in the\nwork week to activities that are not directly and closely related to the performance of the work\ndescribed in paragraphs (1) through (4) of this definition. This paragraph (5) does not apply in\nthe case of an employee who is in sole charge of an establishment or a physically separated branch\nestablishment, or who owns at least a 20 percent interest in the enterprise in which the individual\nis employed.\n\"Other eligible veteran\" means any other veteran who served on active duty during a war or in a\ncampaign or expedition for which a campaign badge has been authorized.\n\"Positions that will be filled from within the Contractor''s organization\" means employment\nopenings for which the Contractor will give no consideration to persons outside the Contractor''s\norganization (including any affiliates, subsidiaries, and parent companies) and includes any\nopenings the Contractor proposes to fill from regularly established \"recall\" lists. The exception\ndoes not apply to a particular opening once an employer decides to consider applicants outside of\nits organization.\n\"Qualified special disabled veteran\" means a special disabled veteran who satisfies the requisite\nskill, experience, education, and other job-related requirements of the employment position such\nveteran holds or desires, and who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the\nessential functions of such position.\n\"Special disabled veteran\" means--\n(2) A person who was discharged or released from active duty because of a service-connected\ndisability.\n\"Veteran of the Vietnam era\" means a person who--\n(i) In the Republic of Vietnam between February 28, 1961, and May 7, 1975; or\n(1) A veteran who is entitled to compensation (or who but for the receipt of military retired pay\nwould be entitled to compensation) under laws administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs\nfor a disability--\n(i) Rated at 30 percent or more; or\n(ii) Rated at 10 or 20 percent in the case of a veteran who has been determined under 38 U.S.C.\n3106 to have a serious employment handicap (i.e., a significant impairment of the veteran''s\nability to prepare for, obtain, or retain employment consistent with the veteran''s abilities,\naptitudes, and interests); or\n(1) Served on active duty for a period of more than 180 days and was discharged or released from\nactive duty with other than a dishonorable discharge, if any part of such active duty occurred--\n(ii) Between August 5, 1964, and May 7, 1975, in all other cases; or\n(2) Was discharged or released from active duty for a service-connected disability if any part of\nthe active duty was performed--\n(i) In the Republic of Vietnam between February 28, 1961, and May 7, 1975; or\n(ii) Between August 5, 1964, and May 7, 1975, in all other cases.\n(b) \"General.\"\n(iii) Rate of pay or any other form of compensation and changes in compensation;\n(iv) Job assignments, job classifications, organizational structures, position descriptions,\nlines of progression, and seniority lists;\n(v) Leaves of absence, sick leave, or any other leave;\n(vi) Fringe benefits available by virtue of employment, whether or not administered by the\nContractor;\n(vii) Selection and financial support for training, including apprenticeship, and on-the-job\ntraining under 38 U.S.C. 3687, professional meetings, conferences, and other related activities,\nand selection for leaves of absence to pursue training;\n(1) The Contractor shall not discriminate against the individual because the individual is a\nspecial disabled veteran, a veteran of the Vietnam era, or other eligible veteran, regarding any"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"position for which the employee or applicant for employment is qualified. The Contractor shall take affirmative action to employ, advance in employment, and otherwise treat qualified special disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam era, and other eligible veterans without discrimination based upon their disability or veterans'' status in all employment practices such as--\n(i) Recruitment, advertising, and job application procedures;\n(ii) Hiring, upgrading, promotion, award of tenure, demotion, transfer, layoff, termination, right of return from layoff and rehiring;\n(3) Whenever the Contractor becomes contractually bound to the listing terms of this clause, it shall advise the State public employment agency in each State where it has establishments of the name and location of each hiring location in the State. As long as the Contractor is contractually bound to these terms and has so advised the State agency, it need not advise the State agency of subsequent contracts. The Contractor may advise the State agency when it is no longer bound by this contract clause.\n(viii) Activities sponsored by the Contractor including social or recreational programs; and\n(ix) Any other term, condition, or privilege of employment.\n(2) The Contractor shall comply with the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor issued under the Vietnam Era Veterans'' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1972 (the Act), as amended (38 U.S.C. 4211 and 4212).\n(c) \"Listing openings.\"\n(1) The Contractor shall immediately list all employment openings that exist at the time of the execution of this contract and those which occur during the performance of this contract, including those not generated by this contract, and including those occurring at an establishment of the Contractor other than the one where the contract is being performed, but excluding those of independently operated corporate affiliates, at an appropriate local public employment service office of the State wherein the opening occurs. Listing employment openings with the U.S. Department of Labor''s America''s Job Bank shall satisfy the requirement to list jobs with the local employment service office.\n(2) The Contractor shall make the listing of employment openings with the local employment service office at least concurrently with using any other recruitment source or effort and shall involve the normal obligations of placing a bona fide job order, including accepting referrals of veterans and nonveterans. This listing of employment openings does not require hiring any particular job applicant or hiring from any particular group of job applicants and is not intended to relieve the Contractor from any requirements of Executive orders or regulations concerning nondiscrimination in employment.\n(d) \"Applicability.'' This clause does not apply to the listing of employment openings that occur and are filled outside the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the Virgin Islands of the United States, and Wake Island.\n(e) \"Postings.\"\n(i) State the rights of applicants and employees as well as the Contractor''s obligation under the law to take affirmative action to employ and advance in employment qualified employees and applicants who are special disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam era, and other eligible veterans; and\n(ii) Be in a form prescribed by the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Department of Labor (Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor), and provided by or through the Contracting Officer.\n(g) \"Subcontracts.\" The Contractor shall insert the terms of this clause in all subcontracts or purchase orders of $100,000 or more unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor. The Contractor shall act as specified by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor to enforce the terms, including action for noncompliance.\n(1) The Contractor shall post employment notices in conspicuous places that are available to employees and applicants for employment.\n(2) The employment notices shall--\n(3) The Contractor shall ensure that applicants or employees who are special disabled veterans are informed of the contents of the notice (e.g., the Contractor may have the notice read to a visually disabled veteran, or may lower the posted notice so that it can be read by a person in a wheelchair).\n(4) The Contractor shall notify each labor union or representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining agreement, or other contract understanding, that the Contractor is bound by the terms of the Act and is committed to take affirmative action to employ, and advance in employment, qualified special disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam era, and other eligible veterans.\n(f) \"Noncompliance.\" If the Contractor does not comply with the requirements of this clause, the Government may take appropriate actions under the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to the Act."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(End of Clause)\nI.50 52.222-36 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION FOR WORKERS WITH DISABILITIES (JUN 1998)\n(a) \"General.\"\n(1) Regarding any position for which the employee or applicant for employment is qualified, the Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant because of physical or mental disability. The Contractor agrees to take affirmative action to employ, advance in employment, and otherwise treat qualified individuals with disabilities without discrimination based upon their physical or mental disability in all employment practices such as--\n(i) Recruitment, advertising, and job application procedures;\n(ii) Hiring, upgrading, promotion, award of tenure, demotion, transfer, layoff, termination, right of return from layoff, and rehiring;\n(iii) Rates of pay or any other form of compensation and changes in compensation;\n(iv) Job assignments, job classifications, organizational structures, position descriptions, lines of progression, and seniority lists;\n(v) Leaves of absence, sick leave, or any other leave;\n(vi) Fringe benefits available by virtue of employment, whether or not administered by the Contractor;\n(vii) Selection and financial support for training, including apprenticeships, professional meetings, conferences, and other related activities, and selection for leaves of absence to pursue training;\n(viii) Activities sponsored by the Contractor, including social or recreational programs; and\n(ix) Any other term, condition, or privilege of employment.\n(2) These notices shall be posted in conspicuous places that are available to employees and applicants for employment. The Contractor shall ensure that applicants and employees with disabilities are informed of the contents of the notice (e.g., the Contractor may have the notice read to a visually disabled individual, or may lower the posted notice so that it might be read by a person in a wheelchair). The notices shall be in a form prescribed by the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Federal Contract Compliance of the U.S. Department of Labor (Deputy Assistant Secretary) and shall be provided by or through the Contracting Officer.\n(c) \"Noncompliance.\" If the Contractor does not comply with the requirements of this clause, appropriate actions may be taken under the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary issued pursuant to the Act.\n(2) The Contractor agrees to comply with the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) issued under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 793) (the Act), as amended.\n(b) \"Postings.\"\n(1) The Contractor agrees to post employment notices stating--\n(i) The Contractor''s obligation under the law to take affirmative action to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with disabilities; and\n(ii) The rights of applicants and employees.\n(3) The Contractor shall notify each labor union or representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract understanding, that the Contractor is bound by the terms of Section 503 of the Act and is committed to take affirmative action to employ, and advance in employment, qualified individuals with physical or mental disabilities.\n(d) \"Subcontracts.\" The Contractor shall include the terms of this clause in every subcontract or purchase order in excess of $10,000 unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary. The Contractor shall act as specified by the Deputy Assistant Secretary to enforce the terms, including action for noncompliance.\n(End of Clause)\nI.51 52.222-37 EMPLOYMENT REPORTS ON SPECIAL DISABLED VETERANS, VETERANS OF THE VIETNAM ERA, AND OTHER ELIGIBLE VETERANS (SEP 2006)\n(a) Unless the Contractor is a State or local government agency, the Contractor shall report at least annually, as required by the Secretary of Labor, on--\n(1) The number of special disabled veterans, the number of veterans of the Vietnam era, and other eligible veterans in the workforce of the Contractor by job category and hiring location; and\n(2) The total number of new employees hired during the period covered by the report, and of the total, the number of special disabled veterans, the number of veterans of the Vietnam era, and the number of other eligible veterans; and\n(3) The maximum number and the minimum number of employees of the Contractor during the period covered by the report."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(b) The Contractor shall report the above items by completing the Form VETS-100, entitled \"Federal Contractor Veterans'' Employment Report (VETS-100 Report)\".\n(c) The Contractor shall submit VETS-100 Reports no later than September 30 of each year beginning September 30, 1988.\n(2) As of December 31, if the Contractor has prior written approval from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to do so for purposes of submitting the Employer Information Report EEO-1 (Standard Form 100).\n(e) The Contractor shall base the count of veterans reported according to paragraph (a) of this clause on voluntary disclosure. Each Contractor subject to the reporting requirements at 38 U.S.C. 4212 shall invite all special disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam era, and other eligible veterans who wish to benefit under the affirmative action program at 38 U.S.C. 4212 to identify themselves to the Contractor. The invitation shall state that--\n(1) The information is voluntarily provided;\n(2) The information will be kept confidential;\n(3) Disclosure or refusal to provide the information will not subject the applicant or employee to any adverse treatment; and\n(4) The information will be used only in accordance with the regulations promulgated under 38 U.S.C. 4212.\n(f) The Contractor shall insert the terms of this clause in all subcontracts or purchase orders of $100,000 or more unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor.\n(End of Clause)\n(1) As of the end of any pay period between July 1 and August 31 of the year the report is due; or\n(d) The employment activity report required by paragraph (a)(2) of this clause shall reflect total hires during the most recent 12-month period as of the ending date selected for the employment profile report required by paragraph (a)(1) of this clause. Contractors may select an ending date--\nI.52 52.223-6 DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE (MAY 2001)\n(a) \"Definitions.\" As used in this clause--\n\"Controlled substance\" means a controlled substance in schedules I through V of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812) and as further defined in regulation at 21 CFR 1308.11 - 1308.15.\n\"Conviction\" means a finding of guilt (including a plea of nolo contendere) or imposition of sentence, or both, by any judicial body charged with the responsibility to determine violations of the Federal or State criminal drug statutes.\n(1) Publish a statement notifying its employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the Contractor''s workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violations of such prohibition;\n\"Criminal drug statute\" means a Federal or non-Federal criminal statute involving the manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of any controlled substance.\n\"Drug-free workplace\" means the site(s) for the performance of work done by the Contractor in connection with a specific contract where employees of the Contractor are prohibited from engaging in the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance.\n\"Employee\" means an employee of a Contractor directly engaged in the performance of work under a Government contract. \"Directly engaged\" is defined to include all direct cost employees and any other Contractor employee who has other than a minimal impact or involvement in contract performance.\n\"Individual\" means an offeror/contractor that has no more than one employee including the offeror/contractor.\n(b) The Contractor, if other than an individual, shall- within 30 days after award (unless a longer period is agreed to in writing for contracts of 30 days or more performance duration), or as soon as possible for contracts of less than 30 days performance duration--\n(2) Establish an ongoing drug-free awareness program to inform such employees about--\n(5) Notify the Contracting Officer in writing within 10 days after receiving notice under subdivision (b)(4)(ii) of this clause, from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction. The notice shall include the position title of the employee;\n(i) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace;\n(ii) The Contractor''s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace;\n(iii) Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and\n(iv) The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace;"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(3) Provide all employees engaged in performance of the contract with a copy of the statement required by paragraph (b)(1) of this clause;\n(4) Notify such employees in writing in the statement required by paragraph (b)(1) of this clause that, as a condition of continued employment on this contract, the employee will--\n(i) Abide by the terms of the statement; and\n(ii) Notify the employer in writing of the employee''s conviction under a criminal drug statute for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than 5 days after such conviction;\n(6) Within 30 days after receiving notice under subdivision (b)(4)(ii) of this clause of a conviction, take one of the following actions with respect to any employee who is convicted of a drug abuse violation occurring in the workplace:\n(i) Taking appropriate personnel action against such employee, up to and including termination; or\n(ii) Require such employee to satisfactorily participate in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a Federal, State, or local health, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency; and\n(7) Make a good faith effort to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(6) of this clause.\n(c) The Contractor, if an individual, agrees by award of the contract or acceptance of a purchase order, not to engage in the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance while performing this contract.\n(d) In addition to other remedies available to the Government, the Contractor''s failure to comply with the requirements of paragraph (b) or (c) of this clause may, pursuant to FAR 23.506, render the Contractor subject to suspension of contract payments, termination of the contract or default, and suspension or debarment.\n(End of Clause)\nI.53 52.225-10 NOTICE OF BUY AMERICAN ACT REQUIREMENT--CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS (MAY 2002)\n(a) \"Definitions.\" \"Construction material,\" \"domestic construction material,\" and \"foreign construction material,\" as used in this provision, are defined in the clause of this solicitation entitled \"Buy American Act-Construction Materials\" (Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause 52.225-9).\n(3) If the Government determines that a particular exception requested in accordance with paragraph (c) of the clause at FAR 52.225-9 does not apply, the Government will evaluate only those offers based on use of the equivalent domestic construction material, and the offeror shall be required to furnish such domestic construction material. An offer based on use of the foreign construction material for which an exception was requested--\n(b) \"Requests for determinations of inapplicability.\" An offeror requesting a determination regarding the inapplicability of the Buy American Act should submit the request to the Contracting Officer in time to allow a determination before submission of offers. The offeror shall include the information and applicable supporting data required by paragraphs (c) and (d) of the clause at FAR 52.225-9 in the request. If an offeror has not requested a determination regarding the inapplicability of the Buy American Act before submitting its offer, or has not received a response to a previous request, the offeror shall include the information and supporting data in the offer.\n(2) If an alternate offer is submitted, the offeror shall submit a separate Standard Form 1442 for the alternate offer, and a separate price comparison table prepared in accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of the clause at FAR 52.225-9 for the offer that is based on the use of any foreign construction material for which the Government has not yet determined an exception applies.\n(c) \"Evaluation of offers.\"\n(1) The Government will evaluate an offer requesting exception to the requirements of the Buy American Act, based on claimed unreasonable cost of domestic construction material, by adding to the offered price the appropriate percentage of the cost of such foreign construction material, as specified in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of the clause at FAR 52.225-9.\n(2) If evaluation results in a tie between an offeror that requested the substitution of foreign construction material based on unreasonable cost and an offeror that did not request an exception, the Contracting Officer will award to the offeror that did not request an exception based on unreasonable cost.\n(d) \"Alternate offers.\"\n(1) When an offer includes foreign construction material not listed by the Government in this solicitation in paragraph (b)(2) of the clause at FAR 52.225-9, the offeror also may submit an alternate offer based on use of equivalent domestic construction material.\n(i) Will be rejected as nonresponsive if this acquisition is conducted by sealed bidding; or\n(ii) May be accepted if revised during negotiations."} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(End of Provision)\nI.54 52.225-11 BUY AMERICAN ACT--CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS UNDER TRADE AGREEMENTS (AUG 2007)\n(a) Definitions. As used in this clause--\n\"Caribbean Basin country construction material\" means a construction material that--\n(1) Is wholly the growth, product, or manufacture of a Caribbean Basin country; or\n(2) In the case of a construction material that consists in whole or in part of materials from another country, has been substantially transformed in a Caribbean Basin country into a new and different construction material distinct from which it was transformed.\n\"Component\" means an article, material, or supply incorporated directly into a construction material.\n\"Cost of components\" means--\n(2) For components manufactured by the Contractor, all costs associated with the manufacture of the component, including transportation costs as described in paragraph (1) of this definition, plus allocable overhead costs, but excluding profit. Cost of components does not include any costs associated with the manufacture of the construction material.\n\"Construction material\" means an article, material, or supply brought to the construction site by the Contractor or subcontractor for incorporation into the building or work. The term also includes an item brought to the site preassembled from articles, materials, or supplies. However, emergency life safety systems, such as emergency lighting, fire alarm, and audio evacuation systems, that are discrete systems incorporated into a public building or work and that are produced as complete systems, are evaluated as a single and distinct construction material regardless of when or how the individual parts or components of those systems are delivered to the construction site. Materials purchased directly by the Government are supplies, not construction material.\n(1) For components purchased by the Contractor, the acquisition cost, including transportation costs to the place of incorporation into the construction material (whether or not such costs are paid to a domestic firm), and any applicable duty (whether or not a duty-free entry certificate is issued); or\n\"Designated country construction material\" means a construction material that is a WTO GPA country construction material, an FTA country construction material, a least developed country construction material, or a Caribbean Basin country construction material.\n\"Designated country\" means any of the following countries:\n(1) A World Trade Organization Government Procurement Agreement country (Aruba, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea (Republic of), Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, or United Kingdom);\n(2) A Free Trade Agreement country (Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Chile, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Morocco, Nicaragua, or Singapore);\n(3) A least developed country (Afghanistan, Angola, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, East Timor, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Kiribati, Laos, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Tanzania, Togo, Tuvalu, Uganda, Vanuatu, Yemen, or Zambia); or\n(4) A Caribbean Basin country (Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, British Virgin Islands, Costa Rica, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, Netherlands Antilles, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, or Trinidad and Tobago).\n\"Domestic construction material\" means--\n(1) An unmanufactured construction material mined or produced in the United States; or\n(2) A construction material manufactured in the United States, if the cost of its components mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States exceeds 50 percent of the cost of all its components. Components of foreign origin of the same class or kind for which nonavailability determinations have been made are treated as domestic.\n\"Foreign construction material\" means a construction material other than a domestic construction material.\n\"Free Trade Agreement country construction material\" means a construction material that--\n(1) Is wholly the growth, product, or manufacture of a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) country; or\n(2) In the case of a construction material that consists in whole or in part of materials from another country, has been substantially transformed in a FTA country into a new and different construction material distinct from the materials from which it was transformed.\n\"Least developed country construction material\" means a construction material that--"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(2) In the case of a construction material that consists in whole or in part of materials from\nanother country, has been substantially transformed in a WTO GPA country into a new and different\nconstruction material distinct from the materials from which it was transformed.\n(1) Is wholly the growth, product, or manufacture of a least developed country; or\n(2) In the case of a construction material that consists in whole or in part of materials from\nanother country, has been substantially transformed in a least developed country into a new and\ndifferent construction material distinct from which it was transformed.\n\"United States\" means the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and outlying areas.\n\"WTO GPA country construction material\" means a construction material that--\n(1) Is wholly the growth, product, or manufacture of a WTO GPA country; or\n(b) \"Construction materials.\"\n(1) This clause implements the Buy American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a-10d) by providing a preference\nfor domestic construction material. In addition, the Contracting Officer has determined that the\nWTO GPA and Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) apply to this acquisition. Therefore, the Buy American Act\nrestrictions are waived for designated country construction materials.\n(2) The Contractor shall use only domestic or designated country construction material in\nperforming this contract, except as provided in paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4) of this clause.\n(3) The requirement in paragraph (b)(2) of this clause does not apply to the construction\nmaterials or components listed by the Government as follows:\n\n(4) The Contracting Officer may add other foreign construction material to the list in paragraph\n(b)(3) of this clause if the Government determines that--\n(i) The cost of domestic construction material would be unreasonable. The cost of a particular\ndomestic construction material subject to the restrictions of the Buy American Act is unreasonable\nwhen the cost of such material exceeds the cost of foreign material by more than 6 percent;\n(c) \"Request for determination of inapplicability of the Buy American Act.\"\n(ii) The application of the restriction of the Buy American Act to a particular construction\nmaterial would be impracticable or inconsistent with the public interest; or\n(iii) The construction material is not mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States in\nsufficient and reasonably available commercial quantities of a satisfactory quality.\n(1)\n(i) Any Contractor request to use foreign construction material in accordance with paragraph\n(b)(4) of this clause shall include adequate information for Government evaluation of the request,\nincluding--\n(A) A description of the foreign and domestic construction materials;\n(B) Unit of measure;\n(C) Quantity;\n(D) Price;\n(E) Time of delivery or availability;\n(F) Location of the construction project;\n(G) Name and address of the proposed supplier; and\n(H) A detailed justification of the reason for use of foreign construction materials cited in\naccordance with paragraph (b)(3) of this clause.\n(ii) A request based on unreasonable cost shall include a reasonable survey of the market and a\ncompleted price comparison table in the format in paragraph (d) of this clause.\n(iii) The price of construction material shall include all delivery costs to the construction\nsite and any applicable duty (whether or not a duty-free certificate may be issued).\n(3) Unless the Government determines that an exception to the Buy American Act applies, use of\nforeign construction material is noncompliant with the Buy American Act.\n(d) \"Data.\" To permit evaluation of requests under paragraph (c) of this clause based on\nunreasonable cost, the Contractor shall include the following information and any applicable\nsupporting data based on the survey of suppliers:\nForeign and Domestic Construction Materials Price Comparison\nConstruction Material Description | Unit of Measure | Quantity | Price (Dollars)+\nItem 1:\nForeign construction material\nDomestic construction material\nPAGE 51 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(iv) Any Contractor request for a determination submitted after contract award shall explain\nwhy the Contractor could not reasonably foresee the need for such determination and could not have\nrequested the determination before contract award. If the Contractor does not submit a satisfactory\nexplanation, the Contracting Officer need not make a determination.\n(2) If the Government determines after contract award that an exception to the Buy American\nAct applies and the Contracting Officer and the Contractor negotiate adequate consideration, the\nContracting Officer will modify the contract to allow use of the foreign construction material.\nHowever, when the basis for the exception is the unreasonable price of a domestic construction\nmaterial, adequate consideration is not less than the differential established in paragraph (b)(4)\n(i) of this clause.\nItem 2:\nForeign construction material\nDomestic construction material\n[List name, address, telephone number, and contact for\nsuppliers surveyed. Attach copy of response; if oral, attach\nsummary.]\n[Include other applicable supporting information.]\n[+ Include all delivery costs to the construction site and any\napplicable duty (whether or not a duty-free entry certificate\nis issued).]\n\n(End of Clause)\n\nI.55 52.229-3 FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL TAXES (APR 2003)\n\n(a) As used in this clause--\n\"After-imposed Federal tax\" means any new or increased Federal excise tax or duty, or tax that was\nexempted or excluded on the contract date but whose exemption was later revoked or reduced during\nthe contract period, on the transactions or property covered by this contract that the Contractor\nis required to pay or bear as the result of legislative, judicial, or administrative action taking\neffect after the contract date. It does not include social security tax or other employment taxes.\n\"After-relieved Federal tax\" means any amount of Federal excise tax or duty, except social security\nor other employment taxes, that would otherwise have been payable on the transactions or property\ncovered by this contract, but which the Contractor is not required to pay or bear, or for which the\nContractor obtains a refund or drawback, as the result of legislative, judicial, or administrative\naction taking effect after the contract date.\n\"All applicable Federal, State, and local taxes and duties\" means all taxes and duties, in effect\non the contract date, that the taxing authority is imposing and collecting on the transactions or\nproperty covered by this contract.\n\"Contract date\" means the date set for bid opening or, if this is a negotiated contract or a\nmodification, the effective date of this contract or modification.\n(b) The contract price includes all applicable Federal, State, and local taxes and duties.\n(d) The contract price shall be decreased by the amount of any after-relieved Federal tax.\n\"Local taxes\" includes taxes imposed by a possession or territory of the United States, Puerto\nRico, or the Northern Mariana Islands, if the contract is performed wholly or partly in any of\nthose areas.\n(c) The contract price shall be increased by the amount of any after-imposed Federal tax, provided\nthe Contractor warrants in writing that no amount for such newly imposed Federal excise tax or duty\nor rate increase was included in the contract price, as a contingency reserve or otherwise.\n(End of Clause)\n(e) The contract price shall be decreased by the amount of any Federal excise tax or duty, except\nsocial security or other employment taxes, that the Contractor is required to pay or bear, or\ndoes not obtain a refund of, through the Contractor's fault, negligence, or failure to follow\ninstructions of the Contracting Officer.\n(f) No adjustment shall be made in the contract price under this clause unless the amount of the\nadjustment exceeds $250.\n(g) The Contractor shall promptly notify the Contracting Officer of all matters relating to any\nFederal excise tax or duty that reasonably may be expected to result in either an increase or\ndecrease in the contract price and shall take appropriate action as the Contracting Officer directs.\nPAGE 52 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(h) The Government shall, without liability, furnish evidence appropriate to establish exemption\nfrom any Federal, State, or local tax when the Contractor requests such evidence and a reasonable\nbasis exists to sustain the exemption.\n\nI.56 52.232-17 INTEREST (JUN 1996)\n\n(a) Except as otherwise provided in this contract under a Price Reduction for Defective Cost or\nPricing Data clause or a Cost Accounting Standards clause, all amounts that become payable by\nthe Contractor to the Government under this contract (net of any applicable tax credit under the\nInternal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 1481)) shall bear simple interest from the date due until paid\nunless paid within 30 days of becoming due. The interest rate shall be the interest rate established\nby the Secretary of the Treasury as provided in Section 12 of the Contract Disputes Act of 1978\n(Public Law 95-563), which is applicable to the period in which the amount becomes due, as provided\nin paragraph (b) of this clause, and then at the rate applicable for each six-month period as fixed\nby the Secretary until the amount is paid.\n\n(b) Amounts shall be due at the earliest of the following dates:\n(1) The date fixed under this contract.\n(2) The date of the first written demand for payment consistent with this contract, including any\ndemand resulting from a default termination.\n(3) The date the Government transmits to the Contractor a proposed supplemental agreement to\nconfirm completed negotiations establishing the amount of debt.\n(4) If this contract provides for revision of prices, the date of written notice to the\nContractor stating the amount of refund payable in connection with a pricing proposal or a\nnegotiated pricing agreement not confirmed by contract modification.\n(c) The interest charge made under this clause may be reduced under the procedures prescribed in\n32.614-2 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation in effect on the date of this contract.\n\n(End of Clause)\n\nI.57 52.232-23 ASSIGNMENT OF CLAIMS (JAN 1986)\n\n(a) The Contractor, under the Assignment of Claims Act, as amended, 31 U.S.C. 3727, 41 U.S.C. 15\n(hereafter referred to as \"the Act\"), may assign its rights to be paid amounts due or to become\ndue as a result of the performance of this contract to a bank, trust company, or other financing\ninstitution, including any Federal lending agency. The assignee under such an assignment may\nthereafter further assign or reassign its right under the original assignment to any type of\nfinancing institution described in the preceding sentence.\n\n(b) Any assignment or reassignment authorized under the Act and this clause shall cover all unpaid\namounts payable under this contract, and shall not be made to more than one party, except that\nan assignment or reassignment may be made to one party as agent or trustee for two or more parties\nparticipating in the financing of this contract.\n(c) The Contractor shall not furnish or disclose to any assignee under this contract any classified\ndocument (including this contract) or information related to work under this contract until the\nContracting Officer authorizes such action in writing.\n\n\n\n(End of Clause)\n\nI.58 52.232-28 INVITATION TO PROPOSE PERFORMANCE-BASED PAYMENTS (MAR 2000)\n\n(a) The Government invites the offeror to propose terms under which the Government will make\nperformance-based contract financing payments during contract performance. The Government will\nconsider performance-based payment financing terms proposed by the offeror in the evaluation\nof the offeror's proposal. The Contracting Officer will incorporate the financing terms of the\nsuccessful offeror and the FAR clause, Performance-Based Payments, at FAR 52.232-32, in any\nresulting contract.\n(b) In the event of any conflict between the terms proposed by the offeror and the terms in the\nclause at FAR 52.232-32, Performance-Based Payments, the terms of the clause at FAR 52.232-32 shall\ngovern.\nPAGE 53 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(c) The Contracting Officer will not accept the offeror's proposed performance-based payment\nfinancing if the financing does not confirm to the following limitations:\n(1) The Government will make delivery payments only for supplies delivered and accepted, or\nservices rendered and accepted in accordance with the payment terms of this contract.\n(2) The terms and conditions of the performance-based payments must--\n(i) Comply with FAR 32.1004;\n(ii) Be reasonable and consistent with all other technical and cost information included in the\nofferor's proposal; and\n(3) The terms and conditions of the performance-based financing must be in the best interests of\nthe Government.\n(iii) Their total shall not exceed 90 percent of the contract price if on a whole contract\nbasis, or 90 percent of the delivery item price if on a delivery item basis.\n(d) The offeror's proposal of performance-based payment financing shall include the following:\n(1) The proposed contractual language describing the performance-based payments (see FAR 32.1004\nfor appropriate criteria for establishing performance bases and performance-based finance payment\namounts).\n(2) A listing of--\n(i) The project performance-based payment dates and the project payment amounts; and\n(e) Evaluation of the offeror's proposed prices and financing terms will include whether the\nofferor's proposed performance-based payment events and payment amounts are reasonable and\nconsistent with all other terms and conditions of the offeror's proposal.\n\n(End of Provision)\n(3) Information addressing the Contractor's investment in the contract.\n(ii) The projected delivery date and the projected payment amount.\n\nI.59 52.233-1 DISPUTES (JUL 2002)\n\n(a) This contract is subject to the Contract Disputes Act of 1978, as amended (41 U.S.C. 601-613).\n(b) Except as provided in the Act, all disputes arising under or relating to this contract shall be\nresolved under this clause.\n(c) \"Claim,\" as used in this clause, means a written demand or written assertion by one of the\ncontracting parties seeking, as a matter of right, the payment of money in a sum certain, the\nadjustment or interpretation of contract terms, or other relief arising under or relating to this\ncontract. However, a written demand or written assertion by the Contractor seeking the payment\nof money exceeding $100,000 is not a claim under the Act until certified. A voucher, invoice, or\nother routine request for payment that is not in dispute when submitted is not a claim under the\nAct. The submission may be converted to a claim under the Act, by complying with the submission and\ncertification requirements of this clause, if it is disputed either as to liability or amount or is\nnot acted upon in a reasonable time.\n(d)\n(1) A claim by the Contractor shall be made in writing and, unless otherwise stated in this\ncontract, submitted within 6 years after accrual of the claim to the Contracting Officer for a\nwritten decision. A claim by the Government against the Contractor shall be subject to a written\ndecision by the Contracting Officer.\n(2)\n(i) The Contractor shall provide the certification specified in paragraph (d)(2)(iii) of this\nclause when submitting any claim exceeding $100,000.\n(ii) The certification requirement does not apply to issues in controversy that have not been\nsubmitted as all or part of a claim.\n(iii) The certification shall state as follows:\n\"I certify that the claim is made in good faith; that the\nsupporting data are accurate and complete to the best of my\nknowledge and belief; that the amount requested accurately\nreflects the contract adjustment for which the Contractor\nbelieves the Government is liable; and that I am duly\nauthorized to certify the claim on behalf of the\nContractor.\"\n(3) The certification may be executed by any person duly authorized to bind the Contractor with\nrespect to the claim.\n(e) For Contractor claims of $100,000 or less, the Contracting Officer must, if requested in\nwriting by the Contractor, render a decision within 60 days of the request. For Contractor-\ncertified claims over $100,000, the Contracting Officer must, within 60 days, decide the claim or\nnotify the Contractor of the date by which the decision will be made.\n(f) The Contracting Officer's decision shall be final unless the Contractor appeals or files a\nsuit as provided in the Act.\nPAGE 54 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(g) If the claim by the Contractor is submitted to the Contracting Officer or a claim by the\nGovernment is presented to the Contractor, the parties, by mutual consent, may agree to use\nalternative dispute resolution (ADR). If the Contractor refuses an offer for ADR, the Contractor\nshall inform the Contracting Officer, in writing, of the Contractor's specific reasons for\nrejecting the offer.\n(h) The Government shall pay interest on the amount found due and unpaid from\n(1) the date that the Contracting Officer receives the claim (certified, if required); or\n(2) the date that payment otherwise would be due, if that date is later, until the date of\npayment. With regard to claims having defective certifications, as defined in FAR 33.201, interest\nshall be paid from the date that the Contracting Officer initially receives the claim. Simple\ninterest on claims shall be paid at the rate, fixed by the Secretary of the Treasury as provided\nin the Act, which is applicable to the period during which the Contracting Officer receives the claim\nand then at the rate applicable for each 6-month period as fixed by the Treasury Secretary during\nthe pendency of the claim.\n(i) The Contractor shall proceed diligently with performance of this contract, pending final\nresolution of any request for relief, claim, appeal, or action arising under the contract, and\ncomply with any decision of the Contracting Officer.\n\n\n(End of Clause)\n\nI.60 52.242-10 (52.242-10) [RESERVED]\n\nI.61 52.246-17 WARRANTY OF SUPPLIES OF A NONCOMPLEX NATURE (JUN 2003)\n\n(a) \"Definitions.\" As used in this clause--\n\"Acceptance\" means the act of an authorized representative of the Government by which the\nGovernment assumes for itself, or as an agent of another, ownership of existing supplies, or\napproves specific services as partial or complete performance of the contract.\n\"Supplies\" means the end items furnished by the Contractor and related services required under the\ncontract. The word does not include \"data.\"\n(b) \"Contractor's obligations.\"\n(1) Notwithstanding inspection and acceptance by the Government of supplies furnished under this\ncontract, or any condition of this contract concerning the conclusiveness thereof, the Contractor\nwarrants that for\n(i) All supplies furnished under this contract will be free from defects in material or\nworkmanship and will conform with all requirements of this contract; and\n(ii) The preservation, packaging, packing, and marking, and the preparation for, and method of,\nshipment of such supplies will conform with the requirements of this contract.\n(2) When return, correction, or replacement is required, transportation charges and\nresponsibility for the supplies while in transit shall be borne by the Contractor. However, the\nContractor's liability for the transportation charges shall not exceed an amount equal to the cost\nof transportation by the usual commercial method of shipment between the place of delivery specified\nin this contract and the Contractor's plant, and return.\n(3) Any supplies or parts thereof, corrected or furnished in replacement under this clause, shall\nalso be subject to the terms of this clause to the same extent as supplies initially delivered.\nThe warranty, with respect to supplies or parts thereof, shall be equal in duration to that in\nparagraph (b)(1) of this clause and shall run from the date of delivery of the corrected or replaced\nsupplies.\n(4) All implied warranties of merchantability and \"fitness for a particular purpose\" are excluded\nfrom any obligation contained in this contract.\n(c) \"Remedies available to the Government.\"\n(1) The Contracting Officer shall give written notice to the Contractor of any breach of\nwarranties in paragraph (b)(1) of this clause\n(2) Within a reasonable time after the notice, the Contracting Officer may either--\n(i) If the contract provides for inspection of supplies by sampling procedures, conformance of\nsupplies or components subject to warranty action shall be determined by the applicable sampling\nprocedures in the contract. The Contracting Officer--\n(i) Require, by written notice, the prompt correction or replacement of any supplies or parts\nthereof (including preservation, packaging, packing, and marking) that do not conform with the\nrequirements of this contract within the meaning of paragraph (b)(1) of this clause; or\n(ii) Retain such supplies and reduce the contract price by an amount equitable under the\ncircumstances.\n(3)\n(A) May, for sampling purposes, group any supplies delivered under this contract;\n(B) Shall require the size of the sample to be that required by sampling procedures specified\nin the contract for the quantity of supplies on which warranty action is proposed;\nPAGE 55 OF 59 HHM402-08-C-0072"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(A) Fails to make redelivery of the corrected or replaced supplies within the time\nestablished for their return; or\n(C) May project warranty sampling results over supplies in the same shipment or other\nsupplies contained in other shipments even though all of such supplies are not present at the\npoint of reinspection; provided, that the supplies remaining are reasonably representative of the\nquantity on which warranty action is proposed; and\n(D) Need not use the same lot size as on original inspection or reconstitute the original\ninspection lots.\n(ii) Within a reasonable time after notice of any breach of the warranties specified in\nparagraph (b)(1) of this clause, the Contracting Officer may exercise one or more of the following\noptions:\n(A) Require an equitable adjustment in the contract price for any group of supplies.\n(B) Screen the supplies grouped for warranty action under this clause at the Contractor's\nexpense and return all nonconforming supplies to the Contractor for correction or replacement.\n(C) Require the Contractor to screen the supplies at locations designated by the Government\nwithin the contiguous United States and to correct or replace all nonconforming supplies.\n(D) Return the supplies grouped for warranty action under this clause to the Contractor\n(irrespective of the f.o.b. point or the point of acceptance) for screening and correction or\nreplacement.\n(4)\n(i) The Contracting Officer may, by contract or otherwise, correct or replace the nonconforming\nsupplies with similar supplies from another source and charge to the Contractor the cost occasioned\nto the Government thereby if the Contractor--\n(B) Fails either to accept return of the nonconforming supplies or fails to make progress\nafter their return to correct or replace them so as to endanger performance of the delivery\nschedule, and in either of these circumstances does not cure such failure within a period of 10 days\n(or such longer period as the Contracting Officer may authorize in writing) after receipt of notice\nfrom the Contracting Officer specifying such failure.\n(5) The rights and remedies of the Government provided in this clause are in addition to and do\nnot limit any rights afforded to the Government by any other clause of this contract.\n\n\n\n(End of Clause)\n(ii) Instead of correction or replacement by the Government, the Contracting Officer may require\nan equitable adjustment of the contract price. In addition, if the Contractor fails to furnish\ntimely disposition instructions, the Contracting Officer may dispose of the nonconforming supplies\nfor the Contractor's account in a reasonable manner. The Government is entitled to reimbursement\nfrom the Contractor, or from the proceeds of such disposal, for the reasonable expenses of the\ncare and disposition of the nonconforming supplies, as well as for excess costs incurred or to be\nincurred.\n\nI.62 52.246-18 WARRANTY OF SUPPLIES OF A COMPLEX NATURE (MAR 2001)\n\n(a) \"Definitions.\" As used in this clause--\n\"Acceptance\" means the act of an authorized representative of the Government by which the\nGovernment assumes for itself, or as an agent of another, ownership of existing and identified\nsupplies, or approves specific services rendered, as partial or complete performance of the\ncontract.\n\"Supplies\" means the end items furnished by the Contractor and related services required under the\ncontract. The word does not include \"data.\"\n(b) \"Contractor's obligations.\"\n(1) The Contractor warrants that for all supplies furnished under this contract will be free\nfrom defects in material and workmanship and will conform with all requirements of this contract;\nprovided, however, that with respect to Government-furnished property, the Contractor's warranty\nshall extend only to its proper installation, unless the Contractor performs some modification\nor other work on the property, in which case the Contractor's warranty shall extend to the\nmodification or other work.\n(2) Any supplies or parts thereof corrected or furnished in replacement shall be subject to the\nconditions of this clause to the same extent as supplies initially delivered. This warranty shall\nbe equal in duration to that set forth in paragraph (b)(1) of this clause and shall run from the\ndate of delivery of the corrected or replaced supplies.\n(3) The Contractor shall not be obligated to correct or replace supplies if the facilities,\ntooling, drawings, or other equipment or supplies necessary to accomplish the correction or\nreplacement have been made unavailable to the Contractor by action of the Government. In the"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"event that correction or replacement has been directed, the Contractor shall promptly notify the\nContracting Officer, in writing, of the nonavailability.\n(4) The Contractor shall also prepare and furnish to the Government data and reports applicable\nto any correction required (including revision and updating of all affected data called for under\nthis contract) at no increase in the contract price.\n(5) When supplies are returned to the Contractor, the Contractor shall bear the transportation\ncosts from the place of delivery specified in the contract (irrespective of the f.o.b. point or the\npoint of acceptance) to the Contractor's plant and return.\n(5) All implied warranties of merchantability and \"fitness for a particular purpose\" are excluded\nfrom any obligation contained in this contract.\n(c) \"Remedies available to the Government.\"\n(1) In the event of a breach of the Contractor's warranty in paragraph (b)(1) of this clause,\nthe Government may, at no increase in contract price--\n(ii) Require the Contractor to furnish at the Contractor's plant the materials or parts and\ninstallation instructions required to successfully accomplish the correction.\n(2) If the Contracting Officer does not require correction or replacement of defective or\nnonconforming supplies or the Contractor is not obligated to correct or replace under paragraph\n(b)(3) of this clause, the Government shall be entitled to an equitable reduction in the contract\nprice.\n(3) The Contracting Officer shall notify the Contractor in writing of any breach of the warranty\nin paragraph (b) of this clause within The Contractor shall submit to the Contracting Officer\na written recommendation within as to the corrective action required to remedy the breach. After\nthe notice of breach, but not later than after receipt of the Contractor's recommendation for\ncorrective action, the Contracting Officer may, in writing, direct correction or replacement as\nin paragraph (c)(1) of this clause, and the Contractor shall, notwithstanding any disagreement\nregarding the existence of a breach of warranty, comply with this direction. If it is later\ndetermined that the Contractor did not breach the warranty in paragraph (b)(1) of this clause, the\ncontract price will be equitably adjusted.\n(4) If supplies are corrected or replaced, the period for notification of a breach of the\nContractor's warranty in paragraph (c)(3) of this clause shall be from the furnishing or return\nby the Contractor to the Government of the corrected or replaced supplies or parts thereof, or, if\ncorrection or replacement is effected by the Contractor at a Government or other activity, for\nthereafter.\n(5) The rights and remedies of the Government provided in this clause are in addition to and do\nnot limit any rights afforded to the Government by any other clause of the contract.\n\n\n(i) Require the Contractor, at the place of delivery specified in the contract (irrespective of\nthe f.o.b. point or the point of acceptance) or at the Contractor's plant, to repair or replace, at\nthe Contractor's election, defective or nonconforming supplies; or\n(End of Clause)\n\nI.63 52.246-19 WARRANTY OF SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT UNDER PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS OR DESIGN CRITERIA\n(MAR 2001)\n\n(a) \"Definitions.\" As used in this clause--\n\"Acceptance\" means the act of an authorized representative of the Government by which the\nGovernment assumes for itself, or as an agent of another, ownership of existing and identified\nsupplies, or approves specific services rendered, as partial or complete performance of the\ncontract.\n\"Defect\" means any condition or characteristic in any supplies or services furnished by the\nContractor under the contract that is not in compliance with the requirements of the contract.\n\"Supplies\" means the end items furnished by the Contractor and related services required under this\ncontract. Except when this contract includes the clause entitled Warranty of Data, supplies also\nmeans \"data.\"\n(b) \"Contractor's obligations.\"\n(1) The Contractor's warranties under this clause shall apply only to those defects discovered by\neither the Government or the Contractor\n(2) If the Contractor becomes aware at any time before acceptance by the Government (whether\nbefore or after tender to the Government) that a defect exists in any supplies or services, the\nContractor shall--\n(i) Promptly correct the defect; or\n(ii) Promptly notify the Contracting Officer, in writing, of the defect, using the same\nprocedures prescribed in paragraph (b)(3) of this clause.\n(8) The Contractor shall not be responsible under this clause for the correction of defects in\nGovernment-furnished property, except for defects in installation, unless the Contractor performs,\nor is obligated to perform, any modifications or other work on such property. In that event, the"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Contractor shall be responsible for correction of defects that result from the modifications or\nother work.\n(3) If the Contracting Officer determines that a defect exists in any of the supplies or services\naccepted by the Government under this contract, the Contracting Officer shall promptly notify\nthe Contractor of the defect, in writing, within Upon timely notification of the existence of\na defect, or if the Contractor independently discovers a defect in accepted supplies or services,\nthe Contractor shall submit to the Contracting Officer, in writing, within a recommendation for\ncorrective actions, together with supporting information in sufficient detail for the Contracting\nOfficer to determine what corrective action, if any, shall be undertaken.\n(4) The Contractor shall promptly comply with any timely written direction from the Contracting\nOfficer to correct or partially correct a defect, at no increase in the contract price.\n(5) The Contractor shall also prepare and furnish to the Contracting Officer data and reports\napplicable to any correction required under this clause (including revision and updating of all\nother affected data called for under this contract) at no increase in the contract price.\n(6) In the event of timely notice of a decision not to correct or only to partially correct,\nthe Contractor shall submit a technical and cost proposal within to amend the contract to permit\nacceptance of the affected supplies or services in accordance with the revised requirement, and\nan equitable reduction in the contract price shall promptly be negotiated by the parties and be\nreflected in a supplemental agreement to this contract.\n(7) Any supplies or parts thereof corrected or furnished in replacement and any services\nreperformed shall also be subject to the conditions of this clause to the same extent as supplies\nor services initially accepted. The warranty, with respect to these supplies, parts, or services,\nshall be equal in duration to that set forth in paragraph (b)(1) of this clause, and shall run from\nthe date of delivery of the corrected or replaced supplies.\n(c) \"Remedies available to the Government.\"\n(1) The rights and remedies of the Government provided in this clause--\n(9) If the Government returns supplies to the Contractor for correction or replacement under this\nclause, the Contractor shall be liable for transportation charges up to an amount equal to the cost\nof transportation by the usual commercial method of shipment from the place of delivery specified\nin this contract (irrespective of the f.o.b. point or the point of acceptance) to the Contractor's\nplant and return to the place of delivery specified in this contract. The Contractor shall also bear\nthe responsibility for the supplies while in transit.\n(10) All implied warranties of merchantability and \"fitness for a particular purpose\" are\nexcluded from any obligation under this contract.\n(i) Shall not be affected in any way by any terms or conditions of this contract concerning the\nconclusiveness of inspection and acceptance; and\n(ii) Are in addition to, and do not limit, any rights afforded to the Government by any other\nclause of this contract.\n(2) Within after receipt of the Contractor's recommendations for corrective action and adequate\nsupporting information, the Contracting Officer, using sole discretion, shall give the Contractor\nwritten notice not to correct any defect, or to correct or partially correct any defect within a\nreasonable time at\n(3) In no event shall the Government be responsible for any extension or delays in the scheduled\ndeliveries or periods of performance under this contract as a result of the Contractor's\nobligations to correct defects, nor shall there be any adjustment of the delivery schedule or period\nof performance as a result of the correction of defects unless provided by a supplemental agreement\nwith adequate consideration.\n(4) This clause shall not be construed as obligating the Government to increase the contract\nprice.\n(5)\n(C) Prepare and furnish data and reports as required by paragraph (b)(5) of this clause.\n(i) The Contracting Officer shall give the Contractor a written notice specifying any failure\nor refusal of the Contractor to--\n(A) Present a detailed recommendation for corrective action as required by paragraph (b)(3)\nof this clause;\n(B) Correct defects as directed under paragraph (b)(4) of this clause; or\n(ii) The notice shall specify a period of time following receipt of the notice by the\nContractor in which the Contractor must remedy the failure or refusal specified in the notice.\n(6) If the Contractor does not comply with the Contracting Officer's written notice in paragraph\n(c)(5)(i) of this clause, the Contracting Officer may by contract or otherwise--\n(i) Obtain detailed recommendations for corrective action and either--\n(A) Correct the supplies or services; or\n(B) Replace the supplies or services, and if the Contractor fails to furnish timely\ndisposition instructions, the Contracting Officer may dispose of the nonconforming supplies for\nthe Contractor's account in a reasonable manner, in which case the Government is entitled to\nreimbursement from the Contractor, or from the proceeds, for the reasonable expenses of care and\ndisposition, as well as for excess costs incurred or to be incurred;"} {"doc_id":"2d9d3ee570838781","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(End of Clause)\n(ii) Obtain applicable data and reports; and\n(iii) Charge the Contractor for the costs incurred by the Government.\n\n\nI.64 52.247-1 COMMERCIAL BILL OF LADING NOTATIONS (FEB 2006)\n\nWhen the Contracting Officer authorizes supplies to be shipped on a commercial bill of lading\nand the Contractor will be reimbursed these transportation costs as direct allowable costs, the\nContractor shall ensure before shipment is made that the commercial shipping documents are annotated\nwith either of the following notations, as appropriate:\n\"Transportation is for the and the actual total transportation charges paid to the carrier(s) by\nthe consignor or consignee shall be reimbursed by the Government, pursuant to cost-reimbursement\ncontract No. This may be confirmed by contacting\n\n\n(End of Clause)\n(b) If the Government is not shown as the consignor or the consignee, the annotation shall be:\n(a) If the Government is shown as the consignor or the consignee, the annotation shall be:\n\"Transportation is for the and the actual total transportation charges paid to the carrier(s) by\nthe consignor or consignee are assignable to, and shall be reimbursed by, the Government.\""} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense Intelligence Reference Document\n\nDefense Futures\n\n21 November 2010\nICOD: 20 July 2010\nDIA-08-1011-006\n\nMHD Air Breathing Propulsion and Power for Aerospace Applications\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMHD Air Breathing Propulsion and Power for Aerospace Applications\n\nThe Defense Intelligence Reference Document provides nonsubstantive but authoritative reference information related to intelligence topics or methodologies.\n\nPrepared by:\n\nTechnology Warning Division (DWO-4)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthors:\n\nAAP Person 86, AAP Person 87\n\n(U) COPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one of a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2010 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: JUIAF - DI/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington D.C. 20340-5100\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nSUMMARY ....iv\nChapter 1: CONCEPT OVERVIEW ....1\nWeakly Ionized Plasmas for Propulsion Applications ....2\nElectric Propulsion Systems ....5\nChapter 2: AERONAUTICAL APPLICATIONS ....11\nBasic Principles of Magnetohydrodynamics and Requirements for MHD Performance ....11\nNonequilibrium MHD in Cold Air Flows ....13\nThe Ajax Concept: MHD Bypass ....15\nThe Reverse Energy Bypass ....18\nMHD Applications to Reentry and Near-Orbital Flight ....20\nChapter 3: SPACE APPLICATIONS ....23\nChapter 4: SUMMARY AND PREDICTIONS ....25\nChapter 5: ENDNOTES ....26\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Electrothermal Arcjet Thruster ....7\nFigure 2. Electrostatic Gridded Ion Thrusters ....8\nFigure 3. Field Orientation for Hall Field Systems and P5 Hall Thruster ....8\nFigure 4. Electromagnetic Accelerator Field Configuration and Self-Field Electromagnetic Spacecraft Thrusters ....9\nFigure 5. Air-Breathing MHD Engine ....10\nFigure 6. MHD Control of Scramjet Inlet Using E-Beam Ionization ....15\nFigure 7. Schematic of Ajax Hypersonic Vehicle Concept ....16\nFigure 8. The Reverse Energy Bypass Concept ....19\nFigure 9. Schematic of the Virtual Cowl Concept ....20\nFigure 10. Reentry Vehicle with Surface-Integrated MHD Device and Plasma-Enabled Virtual Streamlining and L/D Increase ....21\nFigure 11. Electrothermal Arcjet Thruster on Satellite ....23\nFigure 12. SP-100 Space Nuclear Power System ....24\nFigure 13. Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) Concept Vehicles ....24\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMHD Air-Breathing Propulsion and Power for Aerospace Applications\n\nSummary\n\nThe paper reviews novel propulsion concepts utilizing plasmas (ionized gases) and magnetohydrodynamics (MHD). These concepts are shown to be attractive due to their potential to achieve propulsion and aerodynamic performance far beyond current conventional technologies. However, significant difficulties impede the development and application of these technologies; these include weight, complexity, higher power, and the need for complex and energy-consuming artificial ionization in \"cold\" air (at Mach <12).\n\nA well-publicized Ajax concept of MHD energy bypass has been shown to be meaningless below at least Mach 12. In contrast, a new \"reverse energy bypass\" with Virtual Cowl is potentially practical for air-breathing hypersonic vehicles.\n\nApplications of the Virtual Cowl and other plasma/MHD devices to reentry, global-strike hypersonic gliders, and aeroassisted orbital maneuvering are identified as promising in the near future. The ability of a plasma/MHD system to generate high power onboard and to provide L/D (lift-to-drag ratio) far beyond that possible conventionally makes these applications both feasible and desirable for national defense. However, these applications are also likely to be implemented by nations such as China, Japan, and Russia.\n\nThe outlook for uses and applications of MHD propulsion could increase dramatically if high-speed (hypersonic) vehicles begin to carry powerful onboard electricity sources, such as nuclear (fission or fusion) reactors.\n\nFor spacecraft, the current trend of replacing chemical rockets with electric propulsion systems will continue and is likely to become the standard. Electric systems can provide a much wider range of operation (e.g., low-thrust fine positioning/pointing, more frequent or nontraditional maneuvers, and longer times on station) than chemical systems can.\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 1: Concept Overview\n\nA flight vehicle's speed and altitude limit its available propulsion options. Traditional air-breathing systems (propeller, turbofan, and turbojet) are typically limited to altitudes below 80,000 feet. The existing and planned high-altitude vehicles utilize either high-speed propulsion with ramjet and scramjet engines or slow-speed systems with large propellers. Chemical rockets can operate at all altitudes but have limited burn times and require both fuel and oxidizer to be carried onboard.\n\nHigh-speed air-breathing propulsion, based on ram/scramjet engines, have well-known difficulties: external and internal flow compression and shock control; shock-shock and shock-boundary layer interactions in the propulsion flowpath; mixing, ignition, and flameholding in the combustor; incomplete combustion and chemical energy release; and very high temperatures and wall heat fluxes in the combustor. There are limits to what can be done about these problems with conventional technologies, which is why the use of plasma (ionized gas) with or without electric and magnetic fields can offer additional opportunities for control and propulsion enhancement.\n\nOnboard generation and storage of electric power is one of the main problems encountered with respect to high-altitude, high-speed flight. Hypersonic vehicles, both air-breathing and unpowered reentry \"gliders,\" have no rotating turbomachinery to which an electrical generator could be connected. An attractive power option can be offered by magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) devices. For example, placing an MHD generator immediately downstream of a scramjet combustor can, given the high velocities and temperature of the flow and with metallic additives to the fuel, provide high power (from tens of kW to several MW) with no moving parts. For reentry vehicles, both external (i.e., surface-integrated) and internal-duct MHD generators can generate high power also without moving parts. Employing additional equipment like electrical generators imposes a weight penalty that must be optimized with vehicle performance.\n\nThe use of electric and magnetic systems can open new potential areas for aerospace propulsion. While chemical energy sources are limited by the energy available for particular reactions and are limited to operating conditions that are conducive to combustion, electromagnetic energy can be added to the flow over a much wider range of operating conditions. For example, at very high altitudes (>150 kft), it is difficult to get reliable combustion in hypersonic air-breathing engines. In an electrothermal system, the combustor would be replaced with an electrical heating source that can easily and reliably add enthalpy to the flow even at low pressure. The flow can also be accelerated by manipulating body forces (electric and magnetic) on charged particles (ion and electrons) within the flow.\n\nOutside the atmosphere, we note that operation in space almost always requires rocket propulsion whether it be chemical, electric, or nuclear. The exceptions would be sails and tethers. Spacecraft are rapidly transitioning from chemical rockets to electric (plasma) for most space-based operations.1 The higher specific impulse (Isp) available for electric systems (2 to 100 times that of chemical) has a dramatic impact on the vehicle design and operation. Although\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY electric (plasma) thrusters have been around for decades, their use in space was limited by the electric power available onboard the spacecraft.2 The advent of high-power solar arrays has made systems from a few kW to tens of kW practical. Chemical systems will probably always be the primary choice for getting vehicles into space. The thrust levels for electric systems are too low to be practical for that purpose. Chemical and electric (or electromagnetic) propulsion systems have intrinsic differences. For example, chemical propulsion is \"energy limited\" because the chemical reactants have a finite amount of energy per unit mass (i.e., their enthalpy of combustion or reaction), which ultimately limits their achievable exhaust velocity. However, because the propellants are their own energy source, the rate at which energy is supplied to the propellant (which is ultimately limited by the reaction kinetics) is independent of the mass of propellant, so very high powers and thrust levels can be achieved. By contrast, electric propulsion systems are typically not energy limited; an arbitrarily large amount of energy can be delivered (from the external solar, nuclear or chemical power system) to a given mass of propellant so that the exhaust velocity can be an order-of-magnitude larger than that of a chemical system. Instead, electric propulsion systems are \"power limited\" because the rate at which energy from the external source is supplied to the propellant is proportional to the mass of the power system. This has the result of limiting the thrust of the electric propulsion system for a given vehicle mass. Because of this, electric propulsion vehicles are typically low thrust-to-weight (T/W) ratio (i.e., low acceleration) vehicles. WEAKLY IONIZED PLASMAS FOR PROPULSION APPLICATIONS This review is devoted to a group of emerging technologies centering on weakly ionized plasmas for propulsion and power.3 Charged particles (ions and electrons) must be present in the flow so that it can interact with applied electric and magnetic fields. Space thrusters operate at very low pressures (< 100 mTorr or < about 2 psi) with a significant fraction of the working fluid/gas being partially ionized (from a few percent to nearly 100 percent). In contrast, air-breathing systems operate at much higher pressures and have low ionization fractions. The ionization fraction of concern (i.e., the fraction of gas molecules that are ionized) ranges from as low as 10-8 to 10-2, hence the term \"weakly ionized.\" The gas pressure in the plasmas can take almost any value. In applications to high-altitude flight, the static pressure is on the order of 10-100 Torr, whereas combustion applications demand near-atmospheric (~760 Torr) or above-atmospheric pressures. The temperature of the gas can be near-ambient in low-pressure glow discharges, rising to 5,000-10,000K in arc or high-pressure microwave discharges, or even 20,000-30,000K in laser-generated sparks. The plasmas can be generated by electric or electromagnetic fields, from DC to RF, short pulses, microwaves, and optical (laser) beams, or by various combinations of the above. In general, low pressure plasmas tend to be uniform (diffuse) and nonequilibrium. The temperature of electrons and internal molecular modes can be very high, while the gas as a whole stays relatively cold. As the pressure and power loading increase, plasmas tend to become hotter, getting closer to thermal equilibrium, and also break into channels (streamers and arcs). The reality, however, is more complex. In some devices, such as dielectric barrier discharges, nonequilibrium plasmas are generated even at atmospheric pressure, 2 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and in devices such as the gliding arc, the plasma evolves from near-equilibrium to highly nonequilibrium during each of the periodically repeating cycles. In shock and boundary layers during reentry, the plasma is near thermal equilibrium while being diffuse. The primary reason for this behavior is that the ionization in those shock and boundary layers exists without any electric field and thus is not subject to arcing instabilities. Plasma Features What features or properties make weakly ionized plasmas interesting for propulsion and aerodynamic applications? The most obvious feature is heating—a consequence of Joule dissipation in an electrically conducting medium placed in an electric field. As a heating element, plasma has important advantages compared with conventional heaters. For example, even a surface electric discharge can effectively heat the gas flow much farther from the wall than a wall-imbedded conventional heater would. Microwave and laser beams can create plasmas and heat the gas even far from any surfaces, and the volume and shape of the heated region can, in principle, be adjusted. Since heated regions can significantly alter the flow by making the gas flow mostly around them, plasmas can form switchable, controllable, and tunable virtual bodies or surfaces. Such virtual surfaces can be deployed on demand for drag reduction, aerodynamic control (when applied asymmetrically), and optimization of engine inlet performance, to name a few. It is the localized and transient deployment of plasma virtual surfaces that results in the most interesting and complex interactions with gas flows while saving energy compared with large-volume, steady-state plasma utilization, and thus is especially promising for applications. Another useful application of plasma heating is ignition. This may seem trivial; after all, spark plugs in conventional internal combustion engines are well-developed thermal plasma devices. However, thermal plasma ignition for scramjet engines is not that simple, since the ignition system would have to prevent the plasma from being easily blown away by the supersonic flow, and even if this problem is resolved, if not properly (and quite ingeniously) designed, the igniter would cause an unacceptably strong perturbation to the flow and loss of the stagnation pressure and would require extremely high power. As an example, plasma igniters based on subcritical microwave discharges are quite sophisticated. Besides heating, the presence of charged particles is another obvious, and very important, feature of plasmas. Charged particles can be acted upon by electric and magnetic fields, and this action can be transferred to the bulk gas by ion-molecule collisions. Thus, magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) and electrohydrodynamic (EHD) interactions can be utilized to exert forces and to decelerate or accelerate the gas in both inviscid core flows and viscous boundary layers. The magnitude of such interactions depends on the ionization fraction and the magnetic or electric field strength. MHD Interactions The ionization fraction can be quite high in shock and boundary layers at very high Mach numbers (such as those in reentry flight), or just downstream of 3 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ram/scramjet combustors if alkali vapor is added to the gas. In those regions, MHD interactions can be promising for electric power generation or acceleration of the flow, as well as for flow control. However, at Mach numbers below about 12 (and excluding the combustor or the region just downstream of it), the air is too cold for a significant thermal ionization even with alkali seeding. The required level of ionization then has to be created and sustained by nonequilibrium (nonthermal) means and is associated with a very substantial power budget and additional heating. Therefore, the efficiency of ionization (which can vary by orders of magnitude depending on the particular means of ionization) is of first-order significance for the entire operation and efficiency of the device. Energy used to ionize and excite the gas molecules can be considered as loss in the system since this energy is rarely recovered in the form of directed kinetic or thrust energy. Note that in this regard, ionization by high-energy electron beams or by repetitive high-voltage nanosecond pulses are promising as the most energy-efficient means of nonequilibrium ionization.4,5,6,7 Even with the most efficient ionization techniques, the power budget and additional heating associated with the ionizer normally limit the achievable level of ionization. To have a substantial MHD effect,8, 9 one has to either use a very strong magnetic field (which is associated with some practical issues) or use the MHD interaction in a localized and transient regime (e.g., for boundary layer control). As for EHD interaction,10, 11 it relies upon non-neutrality of the plasma and an electric field to impart momentum to the gas. Although EHD (or \"ion wind\") phenomena have been known for many years, the last several years saw a surge of new interest to this type of interaction. This new boom is due to the asymmetric dielectric barrier discharge (DBD)—a remarkably simple device that has been demonstrated to be very effective in delaying and controlling flow separation and perhaps even laminar-turbulent transition. Although details of the physics of DBD plasma actuators are still incompletely understood, the simplicity of these devices, their low power consumption, and the striking effectiveness in separation control bring these systems to the top of the list of plasma aerodynamics and plasma-assisted propulsion technologies that have near-term application prospects. Combustion Another area where nonequilibrium (nonthermal) weakly ionized plasmas are very promising is plasma-assisted combustion. Although heating induced by plasmas can ignite combustible mixtures, as mentioned above, it is the presence of \"hot\" electrons in a cold gas that makes nonequilibrium plasmas quite interesting for promoting chemical processes such as combustion. Electron-impact dissociation, excitation, and ionization of molecules can generate chemically active species such as radicals and excited atoms and molecules, and those species can initiate or accelerate chemical reactions that would otherwise be nonexistent or slow at low temperature. A number of novel techniques, including (but not limited to) high-voltage nanosecond pulses and the so-called \"gliding arc\" have been shown to be quite effective in plasma-assisted combustion. Investigation of detailed mechanisms (often quite complex and 4 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"nontrivial) of the coupled physical and chemical processes in those plasmas can potentially lead to their better understanding and help them become practical. ELECTRIC PROPULSION SYSTEMS Electric propulsion thrusters can be divided into three categories: electrothermal, electrostatic, and electromagnetic. First, electrothermal thrusters use electric energy to directly heat the propellant and add enthalpy. The heated gas is then accelerated using a conventional converging-diverging gas-dynamic nozzle. Second, electrostatic thrusters use applied static electric fields to accelerate propellant ions via body forces. Third, electromagnetic thrusters use electromagnetic body forces (ExB) to accelerate a plasma (positive and negative charges). An electric propulsion system consists of a power source (e.g., solar or nuclear), power conditioning electronics, engine/thruster (including inlet for air-breathing systems), and fuel/propellant storage and feed subsystem. Energy can be obtained from sunlight, a nuclear reactor, or chemical sources. In the case of solar electric propulsion (SEP), solar photons are converted into electricity by solar cells. The energy could also be beamed to the vehicle using laser or microwave sources. Beaming the power allows for higher power densities but with the added complications of needing a power station and a means of getting the power to the vehicle (direct illumination or via a relay system). In nuclear electric propulsion (NEP), thermal energy from the nuclear reactor is converted into electricity by either a static or dynamic thermal-to-electric power conversion system. Static systems have the advantage of no moving parts for high reliability, but they have low efficiency; dynamic systems have moving parts (e.g., turbines and generators) and do not scale well for small systems, but they do have higher efficiency. Other onboard energy storage systems such as high-density capacitors, flywheels, or fuel cells could be used. Power conditioning systems are required to convert the power system voltage to the form required by the electric thruster. For example, an SEP power system produces low-voltage DC (typically ~100V); this would need to be converted (via transformers, etc.) to kilovolt levels for use in an ion thruster. The power-conditioning system is often referred to as the power processing unit (PPU); this is, in turn, part of the vehicle's overall power management and distribution (PMAD) subsystem. Various combinations of thruster and propellant are possible, depending on the specific application. The propellant or working fluid can be either stored on board and used in a rocket mode or collected from the atmosphere in an air-breathing mode. The natural system-level trade between these propellant methods is fuel/propellant mass versus power system mass. Air-breathing systems require less propellant mass but require higher energies to perform similar missions. Although rockets will operate in a space or air environment, their thrust durations are limited by the amount of propellant that can be carried. Key performance parameters determine the relative strengths and weaknesses of different propulsion technologies. The fuel/propellant efficiency is characterized by the specific impulse (Isp) for rockets and by the thrust-specific-fuel-consumption (TSFC) for air-breathing systems. It is a measure of how much 5 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"thrust (Fth) is produced from each mass unit of propellant. The thrust efficiency (η) is a measure of how much of the power/energy that is available results in directed kinetic energy (thrust power) in the flow. The thrust density is a measure of how much thrust is produced per unit cross-sectional area, Ac (area perpendicular to the flow direction). Although the thrust density is a packaging issue for spacecraft, it is critical for air vehicles where drag is present. The thrust-to-power measures the acceleration efficiency. Traditionally a trade exists between fuel/propellant efficiency and thrust-to-power (speed vs. economy). The final parameter is the specific mass or weight (mass)-to-power ratio. In most cases the efficiencies improve with the size of the system (economy of scale). Measures of performance are fundamentally different between air-breathing and rocket systems due to the inlet on the air-breathing system. Rocket Air-Breathing FTH = m_e u_e + A_e(P_e - P_amb) | FTH = m_e u_e - m_a u + A_e(P_e - P_amb) = m_e [u_e + (P_e - P_amb)A_e / m_e] | = m_a [(1+f)u_e - u] + A_e(P_e - P_amb) = m_e u_eq | m_e = m_f + m_a f = m_f / m_a. ISP = Thrust / propellant weight flow rate = F_th / (m_e g_0) = u_eq / g_0 | ISP = Thrust / fuel weight flow rate = F_th / (m_f g_0). TSFC = fuel mass flow rate / Thrust = m_f / F_th. Pjet = 1/2 m_e u_eq^2 = 1/2 F_th ISP g_0 | Pjet = 1/2 (m_e u_eq^2 - m_a u^2). eta = P_jet / P_elect = F_th ISP g_0 / (2 P_elect) = 1/2 m_e u_eq^2 / P_elect | eta = P_jet / P_elect = [1/2 (m_e u_eq^2 - m_a u^2)] / P_elect. Above, m_a is the mass flow rate of the air, m_f is the mass flow rate of the fuel, m_e is the exit flow rate, g_0 is the acceleration of gravity (reference point, Earth), u_e is the nozzle exit velocity, u is the flight/vehicle velocity, u_eq is the equivalent exit velocity, A_e is the nozzle exit cross-sectional area, P_e is the nozzle exit 6 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\npressure, Pamb is the ambient/environmental pressure, Pjet is the jet-kinetic power (thrust power) produced by the engine, and Pelect is the electrical (or other external source) power supplied to the propulsion system. For air-breathing systems the mass flow rate of the fuel is very small relative to the mass flow rate of the air.\n\nNote that an air-breathing system can never fly faster than its exhaust velocity. Rockets, because they carry an onboard oxidizer, do not have this restriction and, therefore, have no flight-speed limits. The jet power for high-speed air-breathing engines is larger than the equivalent jet power for a rocket due to the inlet and is the difference of two large numbers.\n\nLarge power levels are required for aircraft and launch vehicles. For example, an SR-71 cruising at Mach 3.2 produces a thrust of 24,700 lbf (110 kN) and a jet power of 104 MW. Climb and maneuver thrust is much higher. Similarly, an RL10 rocket engine produces 15,000 lbf (66.7 kN) thrust at an Isp of 433 seconds, and has a jet power of 142 MW. By comparison, a Nimitz class nuclear aircraft carrier propulsion system is 194 MW, and the Hoover dam produces about 2000 MW. Therefore, any electric system replacing these applications must be capable of processing a lot of power. Spacecraft propulsion systems are typically hundreds of watts to tens of kW. This, in addition to powerplant weight issues, is a primary reason why electric propulsion systems are currently being used on spacecraft and not on aircraft. Historically, electric thrusters for spacecraft were available for flight decades before the power systems.12\n\nFigure 1. Electrothermal Arcjet Thruster. Photograph of a 30-kW arcjet thruster being tested at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nElectrothermal thrusters use electric energy to heat the propellant and add additional enthalpy. This can be done with simple resistive heating or by passing the propellant gas through an arc plasma discharge. The plasma can be generated through a high-current discharge or by absorption of microwaves. The hot pressurized gas is then accelerated out of the thruster using a conventional converging-diverging gas-dynamic nozzle. An example of an electric arc heated thruster or arcjet thruster is shown in Figure 1.\n\nElectrostatic thrusters use an applied static electric field to accelerate propellant ions. Strong electric fields are created in the engine which then accelerate the (positive) ions to high velocities. The accelerating field can be applied using physical grids such as those used in ion engines or using \"virtual grids\" generated by an applied magnetic field that traps the electrons as is done in Hall-effect thrusters. A photograph of the NASA ion engine used on the Deep Space One spacecraft is shown in Figure 2. While gridded electrostatic thrusters like ion thrusters are capable of very high Isp (1,000 to >20,000 seconds) values they have very low thrust densities (1-5 N/m2) due to the space-charge current limit in the accelerator system. Hall-effect thrusters do not have this space-charge limit but also have thrust density limits due to the annular geometry (tens of N/m2). Typical power levels are from watts to 50 kW.\n\nIn the Hall field orientation, the electric field causes electrons to flow upstream and the ions to drift toward the exhaust as shown in Figure 3.15 The electrons and ions transfer equal and opposite amounts of momentum to the air, resulting in zero thrust when no magnetic field is present. However, with the application of a transverse magnetic field, the forward flow of electrons is slowed while the aft flow of ions is nearly unaffected. Consequently, there is a net momentum transfer resulting in thrust on the vehicle.\n\nHall Field Orientation\n\nFigure 2. Electrostatic Gridded Ion Thrusters. Photograph of a gridded 30 cm diameter ion thruster being tested at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.14\n\nFigure 3. Field Orientation for Hall Field Systems and P5 Hall Thruster. Left: Figure shows the Hall field orientation. Right: P5 Hall Effect thruster being tested at the University of Michigan.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nElectromagnetic thrusters use electromagnetic body forces (ExB) of Lorentz force to accelerate a propellant plasma as shown in Figure 4.16, 17 The electric field is applied using electrodes within the thruster. The Lorentz or ExB force accelerates both positively charged ions and negatively charged electrons or negative ions in the same direction. The magnetic field can either be applied externally (applied field thruster) or generated by a very high current (typically thousands of amps) plasma discharge (self-field thruster). The current also serves to ionize the propellant. It is the interaction of the electric and magnetic fields that pushes the plasma out of the thruster at high velocity via the Lorentz force that acts mutually perpendicular to the electric and magnetic fields. Spacecraft electromagnetic thrusters are capable of processing much higher power densities (50 kW to tens of MW) and much higher thrust densities than electrostatic thrusters (hundreds to thousands of N/m2).\n\nFaraday Field Orientation\n\nFigure 4. Electromagnetic Accelerator Field Configuration and Self-Field Electromagnetic Spacecraft Thrusters. Left: Illustration of the electric and magnetic field configuration. Center: Photograph of a MW-class pulsed magnetoplasmadynamic (MPD) thruster being tested at Princeton University. Right: Photograph of a 50-kW steady-state MPD thruster being tested at Princeton University.\n\nAn example of an air-breathing electromagnetic accelerator system for high-speed and high-altitude flight is shown in Figure 5. Air enters through the inlet on the left. The center section both accelerates the flow via electromagnetic body forces and heats the gas through Ohmic heating. The gas is then further accelerated using a diverging gas-dynamic nozzle.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 5. Air-Breathing MHD Engine. An illustration of a conceptual high-speed air-breathing MHD engine and (insert) a photograph of the operating proof-of-concept experiment being investigated by Lockheed Martin Aeronautics.\n\nWe note here that in its first-ever list of top 10 emerging aerospace technologies, released in 2009, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) included two plasma technologies: plasma actuators for active flow control and plasma-based advanced space propulsion technologies.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 2: Aeronautical Applications - Concepts and System Issues\n\nIn this section we will review the following issues and concepts:\n\n- Basic principles and problems of MHD propulsion, power generation, and flow control.\n- MHD inlet control.\n- MHD power generation in scramjet flowpath.\n- Plasma-generated virtual surfaces for drag reduction, steering, and virtual cowl.\n- MHD energy bypass: the Ajax concept.\n- The reverse energy bypass concept.\n- MHD power generation and aerodynamic control for reentry vehicles.\n\nBASIC PRINCIPLES OF MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR MHD PERFORMANCE\n\nThe basic principles of magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) are understood very well. When an electrically conducting fluid crosses magnetic field lines, an electromotive force (Faraday e.m.f., equal to the product of flow velocity u and the strength of magnetic field B, uB, multiplied by the channel width) is induced across the fluid and the B field. If then a pair of electrodes is positioned on either side of the fluid flow and connected via a ballast resistor on the outside, an electric current will be induced in the circuit, and power will be generated on the external load. This electric power will represent partial conversion of the flow enthalpy (consisting of thermal and kinetic energy of the flow) into electricity. At the same time, the current flowing through the finite-conductivity fluid will produce Joule heatinga of the fluid that will increase both static temperature and entropy of the fluid.\n\nThe ratio of the extracted electrical power to the Joule dissipation rate is determined by the ratio of the load resistance to the sum of load and fluid resistances; this ratio is called the \"load factor,\" k, 010-100 Torr) are much higher than those in typical glow discharges (1 Torr or less) resulting in much higher power required to sustain plasmas and to severe problems with arcing instabilities.\n\n• The ionization fraction needed for a good electrical conductivity and acceptable MHD performance is much higher than that required for a fluorescent light, again resulting in high power budget and overheating.\n\nFor cold nonequilibrium plasmas, the power budget is determined by the average energy cost (usually expressed in eV), Wi, of ionization (i.e., of producing an electron-ion pair), and the rate at which the electron-ion pairs must be generated in order to compensate for electron losses in recombination, attachment, and other processes. The recombination is the dominant loss mechanism at reasonably high electron densities, and its rate is proportional to the product of electron and ion number densities. Since in quasineutral plasmas the number densities of electrons and ions are close to each other, the recombination rate (per unit volume) is equal to kdrne2, where kdr is the dissociative recombination rate coefficient and ne is the electron number density. Note that the characteristic plasma decay time due to recombination is almost always very short, typically ~1-10 microseconds, so that the flow moves only a very short (~1 cm) distance during the decay time. This is why schemes with pre-ionization upstream of the MHD region with no ionization in the MHD region itself are not viable; the ionization must be done continuously throughout the MHD region."} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe average energy cost, Wi, of ionization varies greatly depending on the ionization method. For example, in conventional glow-like discharges of large volume at moderate or high pressure, the ionization cost is ~10,000 eV (i.e., three orders of magnitude higher than the minimum ionization energy [10-15 eV]). This is due to the low average electron energy (~1 eV) and to the dominant losses of electron energy in inelastic collisions with air molecules. This is why a highly efficient ionization technique must be used in order to give cold-air MHD devices a chance to be viable. High-energy electron beams represent such a technique. Generated in vacuum electron guns and injected into air through either thin foil or a differentially pumped window, energetic (>1-50 keV) electrons produce many more low-energy plasma electrons, so that the average ionization cost is only Wi =34 eV. This ionization efficiency is theoretically the best.\n\nOf course, electron beam systems are quite difficult to work with due to fragile foils or massive differential pumping facilities; X-ray generation is also not helpful for flight applications. But even putting these important practical problems aside, and even with the lowest possible cost per electron, the requirement that a cold-air nonequilibrium MHD device uses significantly less power for ionization than it extracts from (in the generator case) or adds to (in the accelerator case) the flow imposes a severe constraint on the maximum level of ionization and conductivity. Calculations show that the maximum ionization fraction is on the order of 10-6 and the maximum conductivity is on the order of 1 mho/m. With this low conductivity, substantial (S~0.1 or higher) MHD interaction parameters can only be reached with magnetic fields higher than several Tesla (i.e., 10-20 Tesla). The weight and volume of a magnet then makes such flight devices quite impractical, unless a breakthrough in magnet and materials technologies occurs resulting in ultralightweight magnets with B~10 Tesla.\n\nAs an example of potential use of nonequilibrium cold-air MHD devices with ionization by e-beams, we note the studies of MHD scramjet inlet control performed by one of the authors of this survey and his Princeton University colleagues. These theoretical/computational studies showed that indeed, with proper optimization, MHD interaction at the compression ramp upstream of the scramjet inlet can restore the shock-on-lip (SOL) condition at Mach numbers higher than the design Mach number for a given fixed-geometry inlet (Figure 6). During the MHD operation, the generated electrical power would be enough for ionizing e-beams, with a significant percentage of the power left to be stored onboard and used for other purposes. The advantage of MHD inlet control is that it eliminates the need for a variable-geometry (movable) cowl that would be associated with a large weight and complexity; the disadvantage is that the weight and complexity associated with magnets and e-beam systems may negate the advantages. Systems studies are needed to fully assess the practicality of this MHD inlet control, and results of such studies would strongly depend on the state-of-the-art and future advances in lightweight magnet and e-beam technology. 18, 19, 20, 21, 22\n\n14"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 6. MHD Control of Scramjet Inlet Using E-Beam Ionization. The retarding ampere force restores the shock-on-lip condition at Mach numbers higher than the design value.\n\nTHE AJAX CONCEPT: MHD BYPASS\n\nAn MHD-assisted propulsion concept that has attracted perhaps the most attention over the last decade or two is known as the Ajax, or Ayaks. The concept, illustrated in Figure 7, originated in the 1980s at Leninetz Scientific & Production Enterprise (now Leninetz Holding Co.) in Leningrad, USSR (now St. Petersburg, Russia). A good overview of the concept and its present status and problems can be found in the recent article23 included in the Special Section of the Journal of Propulsion and Power devoted to weakly ionized gases for propulsion enhancement, with one of the authors of this survey serving as special guest editor.\n\n15"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 7. Schematic of Ajax Hypersonic Vehicle Concept. The upper and lower pictures represent the same concept, but were published by the authors (A. Kuranov et al.) at different times.\n\nThe key idea of the Ajax is that, with propulsion, aerodynamic, and heat protection system for hypersonic vehicles hitting their theoretical and practical limits, the only way beyond these limits is smart management of energy (i.e., taking energy from the surrounding flow and putting that energy where it is needed for propulsion benefits). The following three major concepts/systems are included in Ajax:24\n\n• Endothermic fuel conversion. A mixture of hydrocarbon fuel (similar to kerosene) and water initially stored on board is used to cool the external surfaces and engine walls, and the heat transferred to the mixture is used in\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\na thermocatalytic “cracking” process that makes a syngas (i.e., CO – H2 gaseous mixture) from the original kerosene-water liquid mixture. The syngas made onboard is a much better fuel from the Isp standpoint than liquid hydrocarbons, and with the onboard thermocatalytic conversion there is no need to carry hydrogen from the takeoff. This part of Ajax is certainly very meaningful and probably viable.\n• MHD energy bypass. This is perhaps the most controversial part of Ajax. An MHD generator extracts energy from the airflow upstream of the scramjet combustor; this energy bypasses the combustor and is put back into the flow via MHD accelerator placed downstream of the combustor. We will discuss this concept below.\n• Plasma for drag reduction. A part of the MHD-generated power can, in principle, be used to generate a plasma in air upstream of the vehicle nose. This plasma would weaken the bow shock and reduce the wave drag on the hypersonic vehicle. Although there were claims by some Russian groups about 10-15 years ago that weakly ionized plasmas can reduce shock strength via some unknown physical mechanism, extensive research in the United States, Europe, and Russia has conclusively shown that the effects are purely thermal. However, even with purely thermal action, plasma drag reduction can be quite meaningful and useful for high-speed flight (see below).\nPerhaps the most basic problem with the MHD bypass, as pointed out by D. Riggins,25 is that as a propulsion power cycle, it runs in the direction opposite to that dictated by thermodynamics. Indeed, any thermodynamically correct heat-into-power conversion cycle has work addition (e.g., compression) prior to heat addition (e.g., in the form of combustion), and work extraction follows the heat addition. This is why air is compressed (work added) upstream of the combustor in all normal propulsion cycles, whether by compressor in a turbojet or a compression ramp upstream of a scramjet combustor. In this sense, MHD power (work) extraction before air enters the scramjet combustor, followed by MHD power addition after the combustor, constitutes a thermodynamically “wrong” and thus inherently inferior, propulsion system.\nHowever, in criticizing the Ajax power cycle and arguing that the Isp of Ajax is always less than that of a system without MHD bypass, D. Riggins26 makes a significant mistake. In his derivations, he assumes that combustion-generated heat addition in the combustor occurs at a gas temperature equal to the stagnation temperature of the flow (i.e., that the flow is fully stagnant in the combustor). This assumption is in direct contradiction to the very idea of a scramjet, where combustion occurs in supersonic flow. Heat addition in the combustor thus occurs at a static, not stagnation, temperature. It is this fact that at least gives MHD bypass a chance to increase Isp.\nIndeed, calculations described in the above-referenced paper27 by the Ajax group do result, in some conditions and with careful optimization, in an Isp increase. Our analysis of their calculations shows that increase in static temperature caused by flow deceleration and Joule dissipation in the MHD generator upstream of the combustor is the reason for higher Isp. Indeed, since the entropy increase in the combustor is equal to Q/T, where Q is the heat added and T is the static temperature at which this heat is added, any increase would lead to lower\n17"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"entropy increase and thus, as can be easily shown, to higher Isp. The Isp increase due to the increase in combustor temperature is made smaller by negative factors such as irreversibilities due to Joule dissipation in both MHD generator and accelerator and by the thermodynamically “wrong” work extraction before the combustor.\nThe Isp increase, however, even in optimal cases, is only several percent. Given the crude assumptions in the paper28 (1D flow, no boundary layer and heat losses, uniform plasma, no e-beam energy losses, no losses in electric circuitry), this gain of several percent would turn into a loss of Isp in more realistic analysis. Additionally, the weight and complexity associated with magnet and e-beam systems should be kept in mind. Therefore, one can state with certainty that MHD energy bypass at Mach<12 (where nonequilibrium ionization of air is required) is not a meaningful technology.\nWhere the MHD bypass could be useful is at very high Mach numbers (Mach>12). First, stagnation temperatures at these Mach numbers are high enough for significant thermal ionization with reasonable amount of alkali seed (0.01–1% by volume), thus eliminating the need for a heavy, complex, and entropy-generating nonequilibrium ionization system. Second, at static temperatures (>2,000K) reached in the combustor at these Mach numbers, there is no combustion per se, just dissociation of fuel and air molecules followed by full or partial recombination into other molecules that releases heat into the flow downstream of the combustor in the expansion nozzle. For such a regime, the group at NASA Ames showed29, 30 through modeling that MHD bypass can indeed increase the Isp. Note, however, that materials and structures, as well as fuel development, are currently such that air-breathing flight at Mach>12 is not realistic. In the future, if air-breathing propulsion at Mach>12 becomes possible in principle, reexamination of MHD bypass benefits and flaws will be warranted, especially if lightweight magnets also become available by that time.\nTHE REVERSE ENERGY BYPASS\nReturning to Mach<12, one of the authors of this survey, together with his colleagues, has proposed a very different bypass concept, dubbed the reverse energy bypass (Figure 8).31, 32 The energy (in the form of electricity) is extracted from the flow in an MHD generator placed just downstream of the combustor (or collocated with the combustor). This at least avoids the need for e-beam ionization, since the air mixed with combustion products is sufficiently hot right after the combustor that an acceptable electrical conductivity (on the order of 10 mho/m or higher) can be generated thermally, provided alkali metals are seeded into the fuel and are thus present in the combustor and downstream of it.\nA part of the electrical energy generated downstream of the combustor could be used upstream of the MHD generator, which is why this is called the reverse energy bypass (the energy being bypassed is moved in the upstream direction). Plasma-assisted combustion (such as ignition, flameholding, and mixing) would benefit from this electrical energy. Plasma heat addition, in steady or transient modes, enabled by this electrical power, would be beneficial for control of shock interaction at the inlet and for drag reduction and/or steering and pitch or yaw control when used in front of the vehicle’s nose.\n18"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 8. The Reverse Energy Bypass Concept. The red arrow symbolically depicts the general direction of energy bypass – upstream.\nPlasma directed energy steering and lift control\nMagnetically driven surface plasma for boundary layer control and suppression of separation\nMHD heat-into-power conversion\nPlasma enhanced mixing, flame spreading, and ignition control\nPlasma generated virtual cowl lip for air capture increase in acceleration\nPlasma energy addition for flow/shock control in transient operation\nA promising version of the reverse energy bypass concept uses the electric power extracted from the flow in the MHD generator to increase the air mass flow rate through the combustor in off-design conditions. If the inlet is designed for shock-on-lip condition at a certain high Mach number (e.g., Mach 8), then at Mach numbers lower than the design value (e.g., Mach 6) the inlet does not completely capture the compressed flow, which is associated with the so-called spillage drag, effectively reducing the thrust. This undesirable effect can be prevented by the so-called virtual cowl—a heated region upstream of the cowl lip (Figure 9).33, 34 This heated (e.g., plasma) region deflects the flow and helps with scooping more air into the inlet. Moreover, with proper positioning, only cold (unheated) air is scooped into the inlet, thus avoiding reduction in total pressure and thrust that would have occurred if heated air were scooped into the propulsion system.\n19"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nforebody\nvehicle\nFlow\ninlet\nDeflected streamlines\nHeated region\nCowl lip\nFigure 9. Schematic of the Virtual Cowl Concept. Plasma-generated heated region upstream of the cowl lip deflects the flow and scoops more air into the inlet.\nAnalysis of the reverse energy bypass involving MHD generator downstream of the scramjet combustor and an optimized virtual cowl revealed that, although enthalpy extraction and entropy production in the MHD generator substantially reduce the thrust, the combined system with virtual cowl can actually increase thrust by as much as 20-30%.35, 36\nFrom the system standpoint, this concept, with all its associated weight and complexity, should be compared with that involving a movable (variable geometry) cowl that is associated with a heavy and complex electrohydraulic system and also requires power. An attractive feature of the reverse bypass concept that might make it a winner is its multifunctional nature. Indeed, MHD power generation downstream of the combustor can be an attractive power-production option for hypersonic vehicles. Alternatives (batteries, fuel cells, and the like) are not very competitive for generation of large amounts (hundreds of kW to 1-10 MW) of power onboard. Thus, if an MHD generator in the propulsion flowpath is accepted as the power source, its operation in conjunction with a virtual cowl that significantly increases thrust in off-design conditions, and also enables aerodynamic control and maneuvering, would become quite practical.\nNote also that if another source of high (MW-scale) power, such as a nuclear reactor, is onboard, its use for virtual cowl, drag reduction, and aerodynamic control would be straightforward and would greatly increase performance of the hypersonic vehicle.\nMHD APPLICATIONS TO REENTRY AND NEAR-ORBITAL FLIGHT\nWe now turn to MHD application to reentry and near-orbital flight. Due to the high velocities and enthalpies involved, the gas temperature in shock and boundary layers is very high, from several thousand to 10,000–20,000K. At these temperatures, thermal ionization is very substantial, and at the low end of\n20"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nthe temperature range, a moderate seeding with NaK (sodium-potassium) mixture would be sufficient to produce an electrical conductivity from >100 mho/m to as high as 1,000–3,000 mho/m. With this level of conductivity, very modest magnetic field B~0.1-0.2 Tesla would suffice for a strong MHD performance (Figure 10).\nModeling shows that MW-scale power can be generated in these conditions by a surface-integrated MHD system from 1 square meter of vehicle surface. Interestingly, calculations show that the additional weight of the system, assuming a 1,000-second mission, is determined mostly by the water required to cool the copper-wire electromagnet and that the additional weight is quite acceptable, increasing the practicality of the system.37, 38, 39, 40\nFigure 10. Reentry Vehicle With Surface-Integrated MHD Device and Plasma-Enabled Virtual Streamlining and L/D Increase.\nPlasma for virtual streamlining and L/D increase\nNaK injection for ionization\nMHD electrodes\nOne good use of such high power would be to create a plasma in front of the vehicle in order to reduce drag (Figure 10). Nonoptimized analysis shows that the “return” (i.e., the drag power saved divided by the power spent on creating the plasma) can easily be as high as 40-50 (i.e., the drag power saved is 40-50 times greater than the power spent on the plasma).41 There are theoretical and experimental indications that with proper shaping of the plasma region (specifically, making it long and thin), the “return” can be >100. Thus, this “reverse energy bypass” would result in substantial reduction in drag and increase in L/D (lift-to-drag ratio) by tens of percent. The increase in L/D would directly translate in increased downrange for an unpowered hypersonic global “glider” and in increased cross-range for a de-orbiting space asset. Note that off-\n21"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\naxis positioning of the plasma region would create steering or pitch/yaw control moments.42\n\nAn attractive application that utilizes this plasma/MHD-enabled increase in L/D is orbit inclination changes for space assets. Even a modest (a few degrees) orbit inclination change requires a very large amount of delta-velocity and energy and thus a very large amount of fuel to be burned. If the space asset dives into the upper atmosphere (to altitudes of 200-300 kft), it can use aerodynamic turning (similar to airplanes), provided the L/D ratio is high enough. Unfortunately, hypersonic L/D, especially in rarefied air at high altitudes, is not much higher than 1. Plasma and MHD technologies hold substantial and realistic promise to achieve hypersonic L/D of 3-10, which would be a game-changer and enable, among other missions, aerodynamically assisted, on-demand orbital inclination changes.\n\nWe now briefly consider another MHD application: a hybrid chemical/MHD propulsion. The nozzle exit velocity of chemical systems (air-breathing and rockets) is limited by the chemical energy available from the fuels/propellants and the temperature limits of the system materials. One method to increase the exit velocity of the system is to add an MHD accelerator system to the nozzle. The flow is first accelerated using a conventional gas dynamic converging-diverging nozzle and then the MHD system further accelerates the supersonic flow in the diverging portion of the nozzle. Many ground-based systems have been developed and tested to accelerate flows using MHD systems. These have been primarily either proof-of-concept systems or for hypersonic wind tunnels.43, 44 Systems have been proposed for both small in-space systems45, 46 and for large engines for launch vehicles.47 While this concept has great potential and the accelerator physics are well established, it has several practical limitations. To be efficient, the energy added to the flow from the MHD system should be on the order of or greater than the energy added by the chemical stage. This requires power levels that are not available on either type of vehicles. For example, for launch vehicles the jet power levels would be in the hundreds of MW to tens of GW range. The low ionization fractions in the flows also severely limit the thrust efficiency of the MHD systems to a few percent. This combined with the large jet powers requires enormous launch-vehicle powers. Similarly for space systems, a better solution would be to use the available power in a more efficient electric thruster. The large powers also require large masses for the MHD system components for reasonable specific mass (kg/kW). To be comparable to pure electric systems on spacecraft, the MHD augmentation system specific mass would need to be improved by a factor of 1,000 over state-of-the-art technologies.48 One potential solution around the power issue is to beam the power to the vehicle.49 Another serious issue is the magnets needed to provide the 2- to 40-Tesla fields required. In many cases, the weight of the magnet and magnet power supply would exceed the vehicle mass using existing technology. The magnet system mass will need to be reduced by several orders of magnitude to make flight systems practical.\n\n22\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 3: Space Applications\n\nElectric propulsion systems are currently being used for attitude control, positioning, and primary propulsion. The use of electric propulsion systems on spacecraft was limited by the amount of power available. The thrusters were developed decades before the power systems. Early applications were the replacement of hydrazine monopropellant thrusters with hydrazine resistojet and arcjet thrusters (increasing Isp from 200 seconds to 300 seconds for resistojet thrusters and to 600 seconds for arcjet thrusters). An example is shown in Figure 11.\n\nFigure 11. Electrothermal Arcjet Thruster on Satellite. Lockheed Martin Series 7000 Comsat with Aerojet 1.8-kW Arcjet thrusters (insert photo) for north-south station keeping.\n\nThis keeps most spacecraft the same, just changing the thrusters (lower risk and cost). Newer spacecraft are being designed specifically for use with electric thrusters. These are primarily gridded ion engines and Hall-effect thrusters operating on xenon propellant. Xenon is a unique noble gas that can be stored with densities close to liquids at pressures above 800 psia. As the available electric power has increased, the transition to all electric spacecraft has increased, as well as the sizes of the electric propulsion systems. Hall thrusters are used for station keeping as well as apogee insertion maneuvers. This trend will continue for decades to come.50\n\nThe high Isp available from electric systems enables new operation concepts for what a spacecraft can do. The amount of propellant that can be stored onboard limits the number and types of maneuvers the spacecraft can perform. Electric systems enable enhanced ability to relocate assets, fly nontraditional or non-Keplerian orbits, and keep spacecraft on station for much longer periods. Although the Isp of electric systems are much higher than chemical systems, the thrust levels are much lower. This results in much lower spacecraft accelerations and longer repositioning times. The availability of higher power levels will allow for higher power thrusters to be used and, therefore, the repositioning times to be lower. For a given power, the Isp and thrust can be traded (Pelect = 1/2 g0 Isp Fth/η). High-power Hall-effect thrusters are being designed to operate in both a high-thrust (lower Isp) mode for obit insertion and repositioning and high-Isp (low thrust) for propellant-efficient maneuvers and station keeping. This adds significant flexibility to how the spacecraft is operated and the missions it can perform.\n\nVery fine spacecraft positioning and pointing can be accomplished using the low thrust levels associated with some electric systems. For example, field emission electric propulsion (FEEP) and colloid thrusters are capable of thrust levels in the micro-Newton range and can be used to offset small spacecraft perturbations such as solar wind.\n\n23\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAnother operational option enabled with electric systems is to fly at much lower obits where drag forces would normally cause the spacecraft to reenter in a short period of time. An air-breathing electric thruster can be used for drag make-up without the need for additional propellant.51\n\nNuclear fission power systems coupled with electric thrusters enable new capabilities. Nuclear space reactors have been flown in space (SNAP-10A by the United States and TOPAZ reactors by the former Soviet Union).52 The SP-100 system shown in Figure 1253 was being developed in the 1990s as a tug to move spacecraft from LEO to GEO orbits. Even higher powered systems have been proposed to planetary missions such as those shown in Figure 13.54, 55 Having a nuclear vehicle in orbit also enables the beaming of power to air or ground vehicles from orbit or the use of laser and microwave weapons.\n\nFigure 12. SP-100 Space Nuclear Power System. Illustration of the 100 kWe SP-100 nuclear reactor.\n\nFigure 13. Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) Concept Vehicles. Left is the 100-kWe Jupiter Icy Moons (JIMO) planetary spacecraft. Right is a 100-MWe-class piloted Mars vehicle.\n\n24\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 4: Summary and Predictions\n\nThe principal reason for attractiveness of plasma/MHD propulsion concepts is that they could in principle reach beyond the limits of conventional propulsion, power, and aerodynamic technologies. It is thus near or beyond those limits that novel plasma technologies will likely find their application.\n\nThe principal difficulties or flaws associated with the plasma and MHD technologies are as follows:\n\n- Weight and complexity, especially if there is a need for a strong (>1 Tesla) magnetic field in large volumes, and if electron beams are needed for ionization.\n- For MHD accelerator/thruster, power requirements could be overwhelming.\n- MHD operation is accompanied not only by the work of ampere forces, but also by irreversibilities and entropy generation due to Joule dissipation. This reduces thrust and Isp of propulsion systems.\n- In the absence of thermal ionization (i.e., at Mach<12), complexity and power budget associated with nonequilibrium ionization all but make MHD propulsion systems impossible.\n\nIn contrast, applications to reentry, global-strike hypersonic gliders, and aeroassisted orbital maneuvering look very promising in the near future. The \"free\" thermal ionization enables MHD devices with very modest B field and the ability of plasma/MHD system to provide L/D far beyond that possible conventionally; together, it makes these applications both feasible and desirable for national defense. However, these types of applications are also likely to attract attention of other nations, including (but not limited to) Russia, China, and Japan, that have proven knowledge and experience required to accomplish such missions and technologies. These nations have the capability to develop such novel technologies within several years and deploying those technologies perhaps within 10 years.\n\nThe fortunes of MHD propulsion could increase dramatically if high-speed (hypersonic) vehicles begin to carry powerful onboard electricity sources, such as nuclear (fission or fusion) reactors. Since deployment of onboard nuclear power is mostly a political rather than a technological issue, it is difficult to predict if this going to occur and, if yes, when.\n\nFor spacecraft, the current trend of replacing chemical rockets with electric propulsion systems will continue and probably will become the standard. Electric systems can provide a much wider range of operation (e.g., low-thrust fine positioning/pointing, more frequent or nontraditional maneuvers, and longer times on station) than chemical systems can. The trend to larger spacecraft power levels will further accelerate this trend. Ultimately, the high power levels required (hundreds of kW to multi-megawatts) for certain missions will lead to revisiting the use of nuclear fission reactors in space.\n\n25\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 5: Endnotes\n\n1 F. Wilson, \"Recent Advances in Satellite Propulsion and Associated Benefits,\" AIAA-2006-5306, 24th International Communications Satellite Systems Conference, San Diego, CA, June 2006.\n2 E. Choueiri, \"A Critical History of Electric Propulsion: The First 50 Years,\" Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 20, No. 2, March-April 2004.\n3 Journal of Propulsion and Power, Special Section \"Weakly Ionized Plasmas for Propulsion Applications,\" Vol. 24, Nos. 5-6, September-October and November-December 2008.\n4 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, and R.B. Miles, \"Modeling of Discharges Generated by Electron Beams in Dense Gases: Fountain and Thunderstorm Regime,\" Physics of Plasmas, 2001, Vol. 8, No. 5, pp. 1518-1528.\n5 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, R.B. Miles, and R.J. Lipinski, \"Electron Beam Generated Plasmas in Hypersonic Magnetohydrodynamic Channels,\" AIAA Journal, 2001, Vol. 39, No. 6, pp. 1127-1136.\n6 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, and R.B. Miles, \"Modeling of Air Plasma Generation by Repetitive High-Voltage Nanosecond Pulses,\" IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, Vol. 30, No. 3, June 2002, pp. 1301-1314.\n7 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, and R.C. Murray, \"Ionization in Strong Electric Fields and Dynamics of Nanosecond-Pulse Plasmas,\" Physics of Plasmas, Vol. 13, 2006, 023502.\n8 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, R.B. Miles, and R.J. Lipinski, \"Electron Beam Generated Plasmas in Hypersonic Magnetohydrodynamic Channels,\" AIAA Journal, 2001, Vol. 39, No. 6, pp. 1127-1136.\n9 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, and R.B. Miles, \"Magnetohydrodynamic and Electrohydrodynamic Control of Hypersonic Flows of Weakly Ionized Plasmas,\" AIAA Journal, Vol. 42, No. 7, July 2004, pp. 1378-1387.\n10 Journal of Propulsion and Power, Special Section \"Weakly Ionized Plasmas for Propulsion Applications,\" Vol. 24, Nos. 5-6, September-October and November-December 2008.\n11 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, and R.B. Miles, \"Magnetohydrodynamic and Electrohydrodynamic Control of Hypersonic Flows of Weakly Ionized Plasmas,\" AIAA Journal, Vol. 42, No. 7, July 2004, pp. 1378-1387.\n12 E. Choueiri, \"A Critical History of Electric Propulsion: The First 50 Years,\" Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 20, No. 2, March-April 2004.\n13 R. Frisbee, editor, \"Advanced Space Propulsion Concepts,\" Jet Propulsion Laboratory internal document, January 2002. (This document was accessible via internet until 2003 but has since been removed.)\n14 R. Frisbee, editor, \"Advanced Space Propulsion Concepts,\" Jet Propulsion Laboratory internal document, January 2002. (This document was accessible via internet until 2003 but has since been removed.)\n15 Thrusters, University of Michigan Plasmadynamics & Electric Propulsion Laboratory, http://aerospace.engin.umich.edu/spacelab/thrusters/thrusters.html.\n16 R. Frisbee, editor, \"Advanced Space Propulsion Concepts,\" Jet Propulsion Laboratory internal document, January 2002. (This document was accessible via internet until 2003 but has since been removed.)\n17 The Lithium Lorentz Force Accelerator for High Power Space Propulsion Project, Electric Propulsion and Plasma Dynamics Lab, Princeton University, http://alfven.princeton.edu/projects/LiLFA.htm.\n18 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, and R.B. Miles, \"Magnetohydrodynamic Control of Hypersonic Flow and Scramjet Inlets Using Electron Beam Ionization,\" AIAA Journal, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2002, pp. 74-81.\n19 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, and R.B. Miles, \"MHD Power Extraction from Cold Hypersonic Air Flow with External Ionizers,\" Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2002, pp. 424-431.\n20 M.N. Shneider, S.O. Macheret, and R.B. Miles, \"Analysis of Magnetohydrodynamic Control of Scramjet Inlets,\" AIAA Journal, Vol. 42, No. 11, November 2004, pp. 2303-2310.\n21 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, and R.B. Miles, \"Optimum Performance of Electron Beam Driven MHD Generators for Scramjet Inlet Control,\" AIAA Journal, Vol. 45, No. 9, 2007, pp. 2157-2163.\n22 B. Parent, S. Macheret, M. Shneider, and N. Harada, \"Numerical Study of an Electron-Beam-Confined Faraday Accelerator,\" Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 23, No. 5, 2007, pp. 1023-1032.\n23 Kuranov and A. Korabelnikov, \"Atmospheric Cruise Flight Challenges for Hypersonic Vehicles Under the Ajax Concept,\" Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 24, No. 6, November-December 2008, pp.1229-1247.\n\n26\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"24 Kuranov and A. Korabelnikov, “Atmospheric Cruise Flight Challenges for Hypersonic Vehicles Under the Ajax Concept,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 24, No. 6, November–December 2008, pp.1229-1247.\n25 D. Riggins, “Analysis of the Magnethydrodynamic Energy Bypass Engine for High-Speed Airbreathing Propulsion,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 20, No. 5, 2004, pp.779-792.\n26 D. Riggins, “Analysis of the Magnethydrodynamic Energy Bypass Engine for High-Speed Airbreathing Propulsion,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 20, No. 5, 2004, pp.779-792.\n27 Kuranov and A. Korabelnikov, “Atmospheric Cruise Flight Challenges for Hypersonic Vehicles Under the Ajax Concept,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 24, No. 6, November–December 2008, pp.1229-1247.\n28 Kuranov and A. Korabelnikov, “Atmospheric Cruise Flight Challenges for Hypersonic Vehicles Under the Ajax Concept,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 24, No. 6, November–December 2008, pp.1229-1247.\n29 C. Park, U.B. Mehta, and D.W. Bogdanoff, “Magnetohydrodynamics Energy Bypass Scramjet Performance with Real Gas Effects,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 17, No. 5, 2001, pp.1049-1057.\n30 C. Park, D.W. Bogdanoff, and U.B. Mehta, “Theoretical Performance of a Magnetohydrodynamic-Bypass Scramjet Engine with Nonequilibrium Ionization,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2003, pp. 529-537.\n31 M.N. Shneider and S.O. Macheret, \"Modeling of Plasma Virtual Shape Control of Ram/Scramjet Inlet and Isolator,\" Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2006, pp. 447-454.\n32 M.N. Shneider, S.O. Macheret, R.B. Miles, and D.M. Van Wie, “MHD Power Generation in Scramjet Engines in Conjunction With Inlet Control,” AIAA 2004-1197, 42nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 5-8, 2004.\n33 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, and R.B. Miles, “Scramjet Inlet Control by Off-Body Energy Addition: a Virtual Cowl,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 42, No. 11, November 2004, pp. 2294-2302.\n34 M.N. Shneider, S.O. Macheret, S.H. Zaidi, I. Girgis, and R.B. Miles, “Virtual Shapes in Supersonic Flow Control with Energy Addition,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 25, No.5, 2008, pp. 900-915.\n35 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, and R.B. Miles, “Scramjet Inlet Control by Off-Body Energy Addition: a Virtual Cowl,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 42, No. 11, November 2004, pp. 2294-2302.\n36 M.N. Shneider, S.O. Macheret, S.H. Zaidi, I. Girgis, and R.B. Miles, “Virtual Shapes in Supersonic Flow Control with Energy Addition,” Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 25, No.5, 2008, pp. 900-915.\n37 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, and G.V. Candler, “Modeling of MHD Power Generation On Board Reentry Vehicles,” AIAA 2004-1024, 42nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 5-8, 2004.\n38 C. Steeves, M.N. Shneider, S.O. Macheret, R.B. Miles, H. Wadley, and A. Evans, “Electrode Design for Magnetohydrodynamic Power Panels on Re-Entering Space Vehicles,” Paper AIAA-2005-1340, 43rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, Jan. 10-13, 2005.\n39 N. Barlow, C. Steeves, M. Shneider, S. Macheret, R. Miles, and A. Evans, \"Modeling of Near-Electrode Layers for MHD Power Panels on Reentering Space Vehicles,\" Paper AIAA 2005-5047, 36th AIAA Plasmadynamics and Lasers Conference, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 6-9 June 2005.\n40 T. Wan, G. Candler, S. Macheret, and M. Shneider, “Three-Dimensional Simulation of the Electric Field and Magnetohydrodynamic Power Generation during Reentry,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 47, No. 6, 2009, pp. 1327 – 1336.\n41 S.O. Macheret, M.N. Shneider, and G.V. Candler, “Modeling of MHD Power Generation On Board Reentry Vehicles,” AIAA 2004-1024, 42nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 5-8, 2004.\n42 I.G. Girgis, M.N. Shneider, S.O. Macheret, G.L. Brown, and R.B. Miles, “Creation of Steering Moments in Supersonic Flow by Off-Axis Plasma Heat Addition,” Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 43, No. 3, 2006, pp. 607-613.\n43 R. Litchford et al., “Magnetohydrodynamic Augmented Propulsion Experiment: I. Performance Analysis and Design,” AIAA 2002-2184, 33rd Plasmadynamics and Laser Conference, Maui, HI, May 2002.\n44 R. Litchford and J. Lineberry, “Status of Magnetohydrodynamic Augmented Propulsion Experiment,” AIAA-2007-3884, 38th AIAA Plasmadynamics and Lasers Conference, Miami, FL June 2007."} {"doc_id":"2e785bea5634e2e2","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"45 K. Goodfellow, R. Frisbee, and J. Brophy, “MHD Propulsion Study,” Plasma/Electromagnetic Advanced Propulsion Workshop, University of Tennessee Space Institute, December 10-11, 1997.\n46 J. Lineberry and J. Chapman, “MHD Augmentation of Rocket Engines for Space Propulsion,” AIAA-2000-3056, 35th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, Las Vegas, NV, July 2000.\n47 J. Cole, J. Campbell and A. Robertson, “Rocket-Induced Magnetohydrodynamic Ejector – A Single-Stage-to-Orbit Advanced Propulsion Concept,” AIAA-95-4079, AIAA 1995 Space Programs and Technologies Conference, Huntsville, AL, September 1995.\n48 K. Goodfellow, R. Frisbee, and J. Brophy, “MHD Propulsion Study,” Plasma/Electromagnetic Advanced Propulsion Workshop, University of Tennessee Space Institute, December 10-11, 1997.\n49 J. Lineberry and J. Chapman, “MHD Augmentation of Rocket Engines for Space Propulsion,” AIAA-2000-3056, 35th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, Las Vegas, NV, July 2000.\n50 F. Wilson, “Recent Advances in Satellite Propulsion and Associated Benefits,” AIAA-2006-5306, 24th International Communications Satellite Systems Conference, San Diego, CA, June 2006.\n51 V. Hruby et al., “Air Breathing Electrically Powered Hall Effect Thruster,” United States Patent number US 6,834,492 B2, December 28, 2004.\n52 G. Bennett, “Space Nuclear Power: Opening the Final Frontier,” AIAA-2006-4191, 4th International Energy Conversion Conference and Exhibit (IECEC), San Diego, CA, June 2006.\n53 R. Frisbee, editor, “Advanced Space Propulsion Concepts,” Jet Propulsion Laboratory internal document, January 2002. (This document was accessible via internet until 2003 but has since been removed.)\n54 Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter (JIMO) mission web page, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/jimo/\n55 R. Frisbee, editor, “Advanced Space Propulsion Concepts,” Jet Propulsion Laboratory internal document, January 2002. (This document was accessible via internet until 2003 but has since been removed.)"} {"doc_id":"31396d870e882a5f","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n94\n251 pgs\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION\nAPOLLO 11\nTECHNICAL\nCREW DEBRIEFING (U)\nJULY 31, 1969\nPREPARED BY:\nMISSION OPERATIONS BRANCH\nFLIGHT CREW SUPPORT DIVISION\nVOL. I\nGROUP 4\nDowngraded at 3-year intervals; declassified after 12 years\nNOTICE: This document may be exempt from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Requests for its release to persons outside the U.S. Government should be handled under the provisions of NASA Policy Directive 1382.2.\nCENTER\nCONFIDENTIAL\nINDEXING DATA\nDATE GPR # T PGM SUBJECT SIGNATOR LOC\n07-31-69 MSC R APO (title) MSC"} {"doc_id":"31396d870e882a5f","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6-33\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCOLLINS I think particularly when you get into the later flights of extended EVA's and lunar activity, somehow the crew must place themselves in a frame of mind of looking on the separation of the LM as the beginning of the flight plan and to relax, get plenty of sleep, and conserve their energies in all the events leading up to that point. To arrive in lunar orbit tired can create problems and it's possible to do that if you don't approach it in the right frame of mind.\n\nARMSTRONG I think Mike's hit the nail on the head. We did precisely that. We got a lot of rest and got into lunar orbit eager to go to work and that's a particularly fortunate position to be in.\n\nCOLLINS This is something we've talked about before the flight and I don't know how you can get yourself in that frame of mind but I think it is a frame of mind. You have to get yourself convinced that there will be a nice relaxing couple of days going to the moon.\n\nALDRIN The first unusual thing that we saw I guess was 1 day out or something pretty close to the moon. It had a sizeable dimension to it, so we put the monocular on it.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"31396d870e882a5f","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6-34\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCOLLINS How'd we see this thing? Did we just look out the window and there it was?\n\nALDRIN Yes, and we weren't sure but what it might be the S-IVB. We called the ground and were told the S-IVB was 6000 miles away. We had a problem with the high gain about this time, didn't we?\n\nCOLLINS There was something. We felt a bump or maybe I just imagined it.\n\nARMSTRONG He was wondering whether the MESA had come off.\n\nCOLLINS I don't guess we felt anything.\n\nALDRIN Of course, we were seeing all sorts of little objects going by at the various dumps and then we happened to see this one brighter object going by. We couldn't think of anything else it could be other than the S-IVB. We looked at it through the monocular and it seemed to have a bit of an L shape to it.\n\nARMSTRONG Like an open suitcase.\n\nALDRIN We were in PTC at the time so each one of us had a chance to take a look at this and it certainly seemed to be within our vicinity and of a very sizeable dimension.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"31396d870e882a5f","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6-35\nCONFIDENTIAL\nARMSTRONG We should say that it was right at the limit of the resolution of the eye. It was very difficult to tell just what shape it was. And there was no way to tell the size without knowing the range or the range without knowing the size.\n\nALDRIN So then I got down in the LEB and started looking for it in the optics. We were grossly mislead because with the sextant off focus what we saw appeared to be a cylinder.\n\nARMSTRONG Or really two rings.\n\nALDRIN Yes.\n\nARMSTRONG Two rings. Two connected rings.\n\nCOLLINS No, it looked like a hollow cylinder to me. It didn't look like two connected rings. You could see this thing tumbling and, when it came around end-on, you could look right down in its guts. It was a hollow cylinder. But then you could change the focus on the sextant and it would be replaced by this open-book shape. It was really weird.\n\nALDRIN I guess there's not too much more to say about it other than it wasn't a cylinder.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"31396d870e882a5f","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6-36\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCOLLINS It was during the period when we thought it was a cylinder that we inquired about the S-IVB and we'd almost convinced ourselves that's what it had to be. But we don't have any more conclusions than that really. The fact that we didn't see it much past this one time period — we really don't have a conclusion as to what it might have been, how big it was, or how far away it was. It was something that wasn't part of the urine dump, we're pretty sure of that.\n\nSkipping ahead a bit, when we jettisoned the LM, you know we fired an explosive charge and got rid of the docking rings and the LM went boom. Pieces came off the LM. It could have been some Mylar or something that had somehow come loose from the LM.\n\nALDRIN We thought it could have been a panel, but it didn't appear to have that shape at all.\n\nCOLLINS That's right, and for some reason, we thought it might have been a part of the high gain antenna. It might have been about the time we had high gain antenna problems. In the back of my mind, I have some reason to suspect that its origin was from the spacecraft.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"31396d870e882a5f","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 6-37\n\nALDRIN The other observation that I made accumulated gradually.\nI don't know whether I saw it the first night, but I'm\nsure I saw it the second night. I was trying to go to\nsleep with all the lights out. I observed what I thought\nwere little flashes inside the cabin, spaced a couple of\nminutes apart and I didn't think too much about it other\nthan just note in my mind that they continued to be there.\nI couldn't explain why my eye would see these flashes.\nDuring transearth coast, we had more time and I devoted\nmore opportunity to investigating what this could have\nbeen. It was at that point that I was able to observe\non two different occasions that, instead of observing\njust one flash, I could see double flashes, at points\nseparated by maybe a foot. At other times, I could see\na line with no direction of motion and the only thing\nthat comes to my mind is that this is some sort of pene-\ntration. At least that's my guess, without much to sup-\nport it; some penetration of some object into the\nspacecraft that causes an emission as it enters the cabin\nitself. Sometimes it was one flash on entering. Possibly\ndeparting from an entirely different part of the cabin,\noutside the field of view. The double flashes appeared\nto have an entry and then impact on something such as\nthe struts. For a while, I thought it might have been\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"31396d870e882a5f","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"6-38 CONFIDENTIAL\n\nALDRIN some static electricity because I was also able, in moving\n(CONT'D) my hand up and down the sleep restraint, to generate\nvery small sparks of static electricity. But there was\na definite difference between the two as I observed it\nmore and more. I tried to correlate this with the direc-\ntion of the sun. When you put the window shades up there\nis still a small amount of leakage. You can generally\ntell within 20 or 30 degrees the direction of the sun.\nIt seemed as though they were coming from that general\ndirection; however, I really couldn't say if there was\nnear enough evidence to support that these things were\nobservable on the side of the spacecraft where the sun\nwas. A little bit of evidence seemed to support this.\nI asked the others if they had seen any of these and,\nuntil about the last day, they hadn't.\n\nARMSTRONG Buzz, I'd seen some light, but I just always attributed\nthis to sunlight, because the window covers leak a little\nbit of light no matter how tightly secured. The only\ntime I observed it was the last night when we really\nlooked for it. I spent probably an hour carefully watch-\ning the inside of the spacecraft and I probably made\n50 significant observations in this period.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"31396d870e882a5f","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 6-39\n\nALDRIN Sometimes a minute or two would go by and then you'd see\nthe two within the space of 10 seconds. On an average,\nI'd say just as a guess it was maybe something like one\na minute. Certainly more than enough to convince you\nthat it wasn't an optical illusion. It did give you a\nrather funny feeling to contemplate that something was\nzapping through the cabin. There wasn't anything you\ncould do about it.\n\nARMSTRONG It could be something like Buzz suggested. Mainly a\nneutron or some kind of an atomic particle that would\nbe in the visible spectrum.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"31396d870e882a5f","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION\n\nAPOLLO 11\nTECHNICAL\nCREW DEBRIEFING\n(U)\n\nJULY 31, 1969\n\nPREPARED BY:\nMISSION OPERATIONS BRANCH\nFLIGHT CREW SUPPORT DIVISION\nVOL. II\n\nGROUP 4\nDowngraded at 3-year\nintervals; declassified\nafter 12 years\n\nNOTICE: This document may be exempt from\npublic disclosure under the Freedom of Infor-\nmation Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Requests for its re-\nlease to persons outside the U.S. Government\nshould be handled under the provisions of\nNASA Policy Directive 1382.2.\n\nCENTER\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nINDEXING DATA\nDATE OPR # T PGM SUBJECT SIGNATOR LOC"} {"doc_id":"31396d870e882a5f","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 21-1\n\n21.0 VISUAL SIGHTINGS\n\nARMSTRONG Most of the items in Section 21, Visual Sightings, have\nbeen previously reported.\n\n21.4 TRANSLUNAR AND TRANSEARTH FLIGHT\n\nALDRIN There was only one minor observation returning from the\nMoon. Looking back at it, at a time after Mars had passed\nbehind the Moon, there was one time period where I imagined\nthat the image of Mars was coming from a region where it\ncouldn't come from, because it was in a dark portion of\nthe Moon. This obviously was an optical illusion of some\nsort.\n\nARMSTRONG I suspect that it was, in fact, just immediately adjacent\nto the horizon.\n\nALDRIN We must have looked at it immediately after it had come\nfrom the back side.\n\nARMSTRONG Yes.\n\n21.5 LUNAR ORBIT\n\nALDRIN In lunar orbit, following ascent, we did note and mention\nto the ground that approaching CDH when the Earth came up\nabove the lunar horizon, I observed what appeared to be a\nfairly bright light source which we tentatively ascribed\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"31396d870e882a5f","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"21-2\nCONFIDENTIAL\nALDRIN\n(CONT'D)\nto a possible laser. That seemed to be the best possible\nexplanation until we were coming back in the command module\napproaching the Earth and were able to observe something\nthat gave about the same appearance. When putting the\nmonocular on the light source, it appeared as though it\nwas the reflection of the Sun from a relatively smooth body\nof water such as a lake. I think we've revised our initial\nconclusion as to what the source of that light was that we\nsaw coming from the Earth. If no one owns up to having\nbeamed the laser toward the Moon at that time, it was more\nprobably a reflection off a lake. I still think it's an\nunusual phenomenon, at that distance, to see so bright a\nsource of light. In the film, it didn't appear as though\nthis was going to show up at all. The Earth was too bright.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"31d34698e38bfbe3","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nOFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR\n5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON\nWASHINGTON, DC 20301-5000\n\nINTELLIGENCE\nAND SECURITY\n\n02 June 2026\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nSUBJECT: Narrative from Witness 4 - Western U.S. Event\n\nReferences: (a) https://www.war.gov/ufo/#Western-US-Event,VIRIN: 260508-D-D0360-1052,\n08-MAY 2026.\n\n1. Executive Summary.\n\n\tThis memorandum presents the first-hand narrative from Witness 4 provided to the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO). Witness 4 was one of several United States (U.S.) federal law enforcement special agents who reported observing unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) over a period of two days in October 2023 in the western United States.\n\n2. Witness Narrative.\n\n\tIn response to AARO's request to provide a free-form narrative of the sequence of events exactly as they remember them, Witness 4 submitted the following text:\n\n\"Sometime in October 2023, just after sunset (7PM), I saw a bright ball of light like a shooting star beam across and over a hillside. The light was approximately 1-2k above ground level, was orange/yellow and white in color and appeared for about a second or two. I was approximately less than a quarter of a mile from the hillside, and the ball of light seem very close to me as if it was a shooting star coming towards the hillside, toward and not away from me. The colors of the light went from amber to orange, slightly yellow and white in that order. No other lights were seen, nor did I hear any mechanical buzzing or anything like an aircraft at this time and kept driving. After about 10 minutes I saw with my naked eye multiple singular bright orange lights/orbs of various brightness, size and distance. Using my night vision goggles (NVGs) I saw the same lights in addition to multiple other lights. Some of the lights seen with NVG's were organized in a line of three, evenly spaced and at various altitudes, horizontally just above the skyline. Most of the lights were only visible for approx. 1-2 seconds before disappearing. Later, I observed multiple singular very bright orange lights that appeared to shoot out smaller orange lights as if being hatched from the larger very bright orange light. The hatching occurred multiple times, I lost track after five occurrences. The smaller lights seemed to travel downwards like a falling flare. Soon thereafter I saw nine lights formed a horizontal line just above a ridgeline. The lights were static, not moving, evenly spaced apart and were visible for 30+ seconds. Smaller lights then appeared below and to the left and right of the line of nine lights. These smaller lights seemed to cluster (almost touching) in a combination of three. The lights soon disappeared only to appear again directly behind me. All these observations occurred within a 2-3 hour span, nonstop."} {"doc_id":"31d34698e38bfbe3","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nThe next day between 7-9pm I saw the same light phenomenon; however, I also saw what appeared to be chemtrails approx. 10 finger lengths from the highest ridge point. I observed for more than 10 minutes, the chemtrails were white and moved up toward the atmosphere. I did not see any aircraft or lights at or near the chemtrails; I was observing from about 3k above ground level. After 10 minutes, I saw 1 chemtrail disappear and the chemtrail below it made a U turn and headed toward/falling towards the ground very quickly. At this time, I saw a plane in the same direction (southeast) as the chemtrails. In tandem I saw a string of lights that resembled a Starlink deployment. Shortly thereafter, I saw what appeared to be one light source just above the Southeast ridgeline. The lights seemed to produce four smaller lights which traveled downward as the main light source disappeared. Three of the smaller lights seemed to form a horizontal line while the fourth traveled westward and away from the line of three. The four lights were observed for approx. 10 minutes; no other lights were observed thereafter. Later in the night while stationary in a vehicle on ground level, I watched at least one light source appear and disappear along a mountain (approx. 4 miles away). The light moved from the top of the mountain to the bottom of the mountain and at first looked like a vehicle traveling down the mountain; however, the light darted between the top and bottom of the mountain within seconds, which would not be feasible for a standard vehicle to do. Moreover, this was desert terrain and very rough dirt roads; the light produced no dust cloud and moved steadily. I watched this light traverse between mountain to mountain for approx. 30 minutes and saw a light appear from the bottom of the mountain disappear and then another light would be seen at the top of the mountain; unsure if it was the same light. At some point I saw a very bright, white light appear just below a ridgeline. It was steady and did not pulse or hatch smaller lights. At first, it looked like a star; however, it was big, very bright and looked like it was in front of and just below a ridgeline from my eyelevel. The ridgeline was approx. 10 mins of a drive at 60 mph if I were to guess. I drove towards the light and the closer I got the higher my gaze to look at it. As I was getting close the light source disappeared from my field of view (right) and an equally bright light appeared on my left at eye level. Again, I thought it might have been a vehicle but continued to observe my left field of view while still traveling to get closer to the ridgeline where I initially saw the first light. By the time I got onto a paved road both lights had disappeared. The one near the ridgeline never appeared again and the one near the ground also never reappeared. Later in the night between 1-3am I continued to see same distant lights appear and disappear within the night sky. Fixed at a specific spot in the sky these lights movements were different than the stars beyond it. I continued to see three or more lights group together, moved in a horizontal line, evenly spaced together or move towards another cluster to form a shape, I remember seeing diamonds or hexagons. It happened for a while that I got bored looking at them.\n\nA few days later at around the same time (after dusk) I saw lights moving horizontally just above a ridgeline. Most appeared suddenly and traveled Northbound. Other lights were seen directly overhead that were either very small or very far away. The lights seemed to cluster and create patterns such as diamonds, triangles and/or moved in unison together.\n\nThe next day I saw at least four lights hovering and moving at approx. 6k above ground level. The lights seemed to appear out of nowhere and moved horizontally northbound hovering periodically. At approx. 400 meters away I saw an object that was slightly darker than the sky at dusk and lighter than the color of the terrain. There was a faint red light on the object which was"} {"doc_id":"31d34698e38bfbe3","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nstatic and hovering in between two mountain ridges. This looked like an actual object and from my vantage point it seemed to be using the terrain to stay hidden. Based on its orientation, it would have come from the South. No sounds, emissions observed and no movements despite heavy winds at that altitude on that evening. Prior to that lights were seen skirting above the ridgeline from south to north twice in a span of 15 minutes.\n\nSome months thereafter at around midnight I saw a yellow light appear at my eyeline; I was about 2k above ground. This light did not move and was below the ridgeline of a hillside. There are buildings on that hill, so I wasn't sure if it was manmade or not until I saw the light get brighter and quickly move North to South. I watched it for approximately 10 minutes until it moved behind another hillside that obstructed my view. To approximate, the light was probably 12 minutes away from me if I was going 80 mph, so maybe 16 miles away.\"\n\nSketch provided by Witness 4\n\n\n\nJon T. Kosloski\nDirector, AARO"} {"doc_id":"33300ebc3892c172","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:10:50"} {"doc_id":"335199adec19cde2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"33caf25c7e2efe71","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 30 June 2026\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\nMisrep 7468013\n\nNarrative\n\n[REDACTED]) AT 0614Z, [1.4a] TOOK OFF LATE FROM [1.4g] DUE TO WEATHER AT THE LRE. AT 0624Z, [1.4a] HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE. FROM 0640Z TO 0005Z, [1.4a] COLLECTED SIGINT VIA AIRHANDLER VERSION 2. FROM 1054Z TO 2100Z, [1.4a] SUPPORTED OP [1.4a] IVO 38SMD38[1.4a]54[1.4a] ISO MAG (SEE ISR 1). (S//REL) AT 2026Z [1.4a] WAS SCANNING POI IVO 38SMD38[1.4a]54[1.4a] AND PERIODICALLY OBSERVED UAPS FLYING SPORATICALLY WITHIN THE TARGET AREA OF 92AS. ACCORDING TO THE [1.4a, 1.4g] MTS, THE UAPs WERE TRAVELLING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS BETWEEN 80-180 MPH. WE WERE UNABLE TO DETERMINE ALTITUDE. THE SIZE OF THE UAPs WERE APPROXIMATELY 1-2 METERS. THE UAPs DID NOT HINDER THE MISSION. (SEE OBS 1) AT 2100Z, [1.4a] WAS CLEARED TO RTB. AT 0014Z, [1.4a] HANDED BACK TO THE LRE.AT 0039Z, CDR74 LANDED AT OKAS. FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS 1.\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: [REDACTED]\n• Associated Caveats: [REDACTED]\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20470506\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): ACC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 196 ATKS\n• Submit Date (Auto-generated):\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0084 to 26-0095 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO / PA applies 06/30/26 031"} {"doc_id":"33caf25c7e2efe71","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 30 June 2026\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): AA\n• Mission Type: RECONNAISSANCE\n• ATO Mission Number: [1.4a]\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: TSgt\n• Full Name: [3.5c,(b)(6)]\n• Unit: 163 ATKW\n• Wing: 163 AW\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c,(b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: Ctr\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 15AF, Det 1, PAROC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: SSgt\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: ISRD\n• Wing: 379 AEW\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\n[3.5c, (b)(6)]\n[REDACTED]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0084 to 26-0095 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO / PA applies 06/30/26 032"} {"doc_id":"33caf25c7e2efe71","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 30 June 2026\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Radar Name or Destination:\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator:\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data:\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator:\n• Chaff Designator:\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges:\n• Flare Designator:\n• Num Flares:\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM:\n• Num IR-Guided AAM:\n• Gun Name or Designator:\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each:\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: ANDAS4\n• Additional Avionics: AHv2\n\n[3.5c,(b)(6)]\n[REDACTED]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0084 to 26-0095 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO / PA applies 06/30/26 033"} {"doc_id":"33caf25c7e2efe71","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 30 June 2026\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\n• Data Link:\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Number of Aircraft: [1.4g]\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): [1.4g]\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): [1.4g]\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 050614:00ZMAY22\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): 2232\n• Gentext/Additional Details: [REDACTED] [1.4a] DELAYED TAKEOFF DUE TO WX AT THE LRE.\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 050624:00ZMAY22\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• JTAR Number:\n• Killbox (Location): 91AS5\n• Mission Type: RECONNAISSANCE\n• JTAC Callsign:\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 060014:00ZMAY22\n• Total Time On Station: 17 hours 50 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): [1.4g]\n• Last Land Time: 060039:00ZMAY22\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 060049:00ZMAY22\n• Total Mission Time: 18 hours 25 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\n[3.5c,(b)(6)]\n[REDACTED]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0084 to 26-0095 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO / PA applies 06/30/26 034"} {"doc_id":"33caf25c7e2efe71","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 30 June 2026\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 051054:00ZMAY22\n• Time-off Station DTG: 052100:00ZMAY22\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Msn Type: RECON\n• Primary Sensor: ANDAS4\n• Sensors Available: AHv2\n• Tasking Type: Planned\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): [1.4a]\n• BE Number (if NTISR):\n• Tasked Start Point: 38SMD38[1.4a]54[1.4a]\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR):\n• EEIs Observed:\n• Number of EEIs:\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] [1.4a] COORDINATED WITH MAG 409 MINUTES PRIOR TO TAKE OFF. PRE-COORDINATION WAS SATISFACTORY DUE TO THE SUPPORTED UNIT PROVIDING ADEQUATE MISSION INFORMATION. AT 1054Z, [1.4a] ARRIVED ON OP PHANTOM FLEX ISO MAG AND CONDUCTED FMV AND SI. AT 2100Z, [1.4a] WAS CLEARED OFF STATION AND RETURNED TO BASE.\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: MAG\n• Supported Operation: OP [1.4a]\n• Precoord Time: 409 MINUTES\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (U) WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR.\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: Yes\n• Gentext:\n\nOBSERVATION\n\n[3.5c,(b)(6)]\n[REDACTED]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0084 to 26-0095 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO / PA applies 06/30/26 035"} {"doc_id":"33caf25c7e2efe71","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Observation DTG: 052026:00ZMAY22\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Aircraft Location: 38S MD 41 1.4a 45 1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: -75\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL200\n• Aircraft Airspeed: 100 KIAS\n• Relative Bearing or Clock Position:\n• Range: 4.98NM\n• Killbox & Keypad: 91AS\n• Observed Activity Location: 38SMD38 1.4a 54 1.4a\n• Observed Activity Description: UAS\n• Method of Observation: FMV\n• EEIs Observed:\n• Number of EEIs:\n\nGENTEXT/OBSERVATION\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] ) AT 2026Z 1.4a WAS SCANNING POI IVO 38SMD38 1.4a 54 1.4a AND PERIODICALLY OBSERVED UAPS FLYING SPORATICALLY WITHIN THE TARGET AREA OF 92AS. ACCORDING TO THE 1.4a, 1.4g MTS, THE UAPs WERE TRAVELLING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS BETWEEN 80-180 MPH. WE WERE UNABLE TO DETERMINE ALTITUDE. THE SIZE OF THE UAPs WERE APPROXIMATELY 1-2 METERS. THE UAPs DID NOT HINDER THE MISSION.\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather:"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 803133"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1949\n\nSECRET\n\nDO NOT REMOVE PAPERS FROM THIS FILE\nReturn to Records & Message Branch\nwhen the file user leaves for the day\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nGeneral Staff United States Army\nPlans & Operations Division\nRecords & Message Branch\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nCOMBINED ROUTING-INFORMATION-FILING FORM\nPLANS & OPERATIONS DIVISION, GSUSA\n\nDecimal Classification: P&O 350.05 (24 Feb 49)\nx 0.20 JD\nx 360\nx 471.94\n\nSubject: Evaluation Study of Phenomenon (Flying Saucers)\nDate 24 Feb 49\nOrigin: Executive, P&O\n\nDigest:\n\nAction: Cat #1 to D/ID\n\nReply required by: None\n\nTO\nControl\nEuropean & Middle East\nFar East & Pacific\nLatin American\nNorth American\nStrategic Plans\nPolicy\nPersonnel\nRecords\nImplementing\nRegistered Documents\nAsst Executive, P&O\nOperations\nPlans & Policy\n\nComments:\n\nRecommend Approval:\nBranch Chief Date\nGroup Chief Date\nConcur:\nExecutive, P&O\nDeputy Director, AE\nDeputy Director, P&O\nDirector, P&O\n\nAction by Lt Col Deitinger\nSigned Date 24 Feb 49\n25 FEB 1949\n\nDispatch File\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Executive Br, P&O\nLt Col Feiainger/29th/eb\n24 Feb 49\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD:\n\n1. Conversations with the Chief of North Am Br and Office, Deputy Dir P&O (AE) reveal that P&O has not received any evaluation of the flying saucer type of phenomenon. North Am Br feels that P&O, and themselves in particular, have a direct interest in this phenomenon because, until it is properly evaluated, a possibility exists that this phenomenon may have foreign implication.\n\n2. Col Ligon, Intelligence Group, ID, suggests that this Division request ID to make a study on this whole subject insofar as it pertains to continental U.S. ID will properly coordinate their efforts with the AF in this matter.\n\n3. ACTION: Comment No. 1 to ID requesting evaluation study of phenomenon.\n\n4. COORDINATION: ID - Lt Col Ligon, Ext 5509\nID P&O (AE) - Lt Col Dawley, Ext 75303\nExec, P&O - Col Guthrie, Ext 3465\nCh, North Am Br - Col Goodell, Ext 3652\nPIO - Lt Col Bruner, Ext 74341\n\nPIO informed."} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"P&O 350.05 (24 Feb 49) Evaluation Study of Phenomenon\nD/ID, USAF D/P&O, USAF 24 Feb 49\n Lt Col Feiainger/29th\n\n1. Reference is made to the following radios:\n\na. CH IN 321, 2 Feb 49, from CG, Kirtland AFB, N. M., to Chief of Staff, USAF, No. 001-1-52, 31 Jan 49;\n\nb. CH IN 1714, 8 Feb 49, from CG, ADC, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, to CG, Flight Service, No. AF-542, 7 Feb 49;\n\nc. CH IN 1712, 19 Feb 49, from CG, Kirtland AFB, N. M., to Chief of Staff, USAF.\n\n2. Request that an evaluation study be made of the phenomenon referred to above insofar as it concerns continental United States and that a copy of the study be furnished to this Division.\n\nFOR THE DIRECTOR OF PLANS AND OPERATIONS:\n\nJohn H. Guthrie, Colonel, USA\nExecutive, P&O\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n21"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISPATCHED\nP&O GSUSA\n[illegible]\n1949 FEB 24 CO 35"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nCOMBINED ROUTING-INFORMATION FILING FORM\nPLANS & OPERATIONS DIVISION, GSUSA\nDecimal Classification: P&O 350.05 (24 Feb 49)\nTHIS COPY OF COVER SHEET WILL BE REMOVED ONLY BY THE RECORDS BRANCH\nx 350.05\nSuspense Date: 1200, 17 Apr 49\nSubject: Evaluation Study of Phenomenon (Flying Saucers)\nDate: 24 Feb 49\nOrigin: P&O to ID\nDigest: ID Cat No. 2, dtd 7 Mar 49, attaches Evaluation Study.\nAction: Circulate as indicated, then file in P&O\nReply required by: None\nExecutive Branch:\nTo:\nControl\nEuropean & Middle East\nFar East & Pacific\nLatin American\nNorth American\nJoint War Plans\nArmy War Plans\nPolicy Planning\nAdvanced Study\nPersonnel\nRecords\nImplementing\nAsst Executive, P&O\nExecutive Br\nComments:\nRecommend Approval:\nBranch Chief Date\nGroup Chief Date\nConcur:\nExecutive, P&O\nDeputy Director, AE\nDeputy Director, P&O\nDirector, P&O\nAction by Lt Col Peisinger\nSigned\nDate 22 Mar 49\nDispatch\nOCS FORM 113\nREV 1 JAN 1949\n28 MAR 1949"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"26 MAR 1949 IN - P&O OUTBOUND DISPATCH DESK\nMEMORANDUM OR RECORD:\n1. Evaluation study was prepared at request of P&O to determine if the various reports on this subject stemmed from natural phenomena or if the origin could be traced definitely to the activities of a foreign power.\n2. ID is to keep P&O informed if future developments in this field are at variance with the evaluation placed on this study.\n3. PID has been informed.\n4. ACTION: Circulate as indicated, then file in P&O.\n5. COORDINATION: D/D, P&O(AE), Lt Col Dawley, Ext - 75303, NA Branch, Col Goodell, Ext - 3852, PID, Lt Col Ryan, Ext - 72956\nExecutive Branch, P&O\nLt Col Peisinger/2944/ep\n22 March 1949"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISPOSITION FORM\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION\nFILE No. P&O 350.05 (24 Feb 49)\nSUBJECT Evaluation Study of Phenomenon\nTO D/ID, GSUSA\nFROM D/P&O, GSUSA\nDATE 24 Feb 49\nCOMMENT No. 1\nLt Col Peisinger/69dl\n1. Reference is made to the following radios:\na. CM IN 321, 2 Feb 49, from CO, Kirtland AFB, N. M., to Chief of Staff, USAF, No. OSI-1-9C, 31 Jan 49;\nb. CM IN 1714, 8 Feb 49, from CG, ARC, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, to CO, Flight Service, No. AR-502, 7 Feb 49;\nc. CM IN 1752, 19 Feb 49, from CO, Kirtland AFB, N. M., to Chief of Staff, USAF.\n2. Request that an evaluation study be made of the phenomenon referred to above insofar as it concerns continental United States and that a copy of the study be furnished to this Division.\nFOR THE DIRECTOR OF PLANS AND OPERATIONS:\nJohn S. Griffith, Colonel, GSC, Executive, P&O\nOSOID ID-42 462.1\nTO OSAPO, FROM OSOID\nDATE 7 MAR 1949 COMMENT NO. 2\nIn h.e. attached/[illegible]/dtd\nattached hereto is the Evaluation Study requested in your paragraph 2.\nFOR THE CHIEF, INTELLIGENCE GROUP:\n1 Incl Eval. Study of Phenomenon\nCharles E. Gibson, Lt. Col., GSC, Asst. Exec., Int. Op., OSOID\nP&O File Copy\nDA AGO FORM 1 OCT 47 897 Replaces WD AGO Form 897, 1 May 46, which may be used."} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nEvaluation Study of Phenomenon\n\nDetailed investigations of all incidents reported to involve unusual flying objects during the period June 1947 to date have been conducted by a special project group of Headquarters, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. The continuing efforts of this project are directed toward establishing the identity of each unusual object reported. Single or seemingly related incidents which appear to involve objects that might represent some unusual man-made device or activity are fully explored by both the AMC project personnel and other specialists, such as those of the RAND Corporation (formerly Project RAND).\n\nOf some 210 incidents, approximately twenty (20) per cent have been explained. The majority of these involved misidentification of synoptic weather balloons. Others involved observations of airborne cosmic ray research equipment, bolides, meteors, and in one instance, the daylight observation of the planet Venus. Only two reported incidents were determined to have been hoax.\n\nTo date there has been no tangible evidence which would support a theory that any incidents are attributable to activity of a foreign nation. There are no highly secret experimental Projects of the U.S. Government that could be responsible. The possibility of foreign devices would represent achievements which defy many well defined limits in aeronautical science.\n\nThe Air Materiel Command of the USAF is continuing investigations of each unexplained incident. In addition, they are utilizing the consulting services of a number of agencies and specialists. Results are reviewed on a continuing basis and are used in formulating probable explanations for sightings that still lack positive identification.\n\nThe ID feels that if complete data were available the remaining 80% of the reported sightings could be eliminated as due to natural meteorological phenomena or domestic weather balloons and the like. The larger number of actual reports of unidentified objects is thought to be primarily due to the publicity given \"flying saucers\" in the public print and in some official circles.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nCOMBINED ROUTING-INFORMATION-FILING FORM\nPLANS & OPERATIONS DIVISION, GSUSA\n\nDecimal Classification: P&O 350.05 (5 Apr 49)\nX 350.05\nX 620 ID\nX 351\nX 095 Winchell/Walter\n\nSubject: Evaluation Study of Phenomenon (Flying Saucers)\nDate: 5 Apr 49\nOrigin: Executive Br, P&O\n\nDigest:\n\nAction: Cmt #1 to D/ID.\n\nReply required by: None\nExecutive Branch:\n\nTo: Control; European & Middle East; Far East & Pacific; Latin American; North American; Joint War Plans; Army War Plans; Policy Planning; Advanced Study; Personnel; Records; Implementing; Asst Executive, P&O; Executive Br.\nOperations; Plans; International\n\nComments:\n\nRecommend Approval: Branch Chief; Group Chief\nConcur: Executive, P&O; Deputy Director, AE; Deputy Director, P&O; Director, P&O\n\nAction by Lt Col Peisinger\nSigned\nDate 5 Apr 49\nOCS FORM 113 REV 1 JAN 1949\n11 APR 1949\nDispatch\nFile\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IN - P&O OUTBOUND DISPATCH DESK\n11 APR 1949\n\nExecutive Br, P&O\nLt Col Peisinger/2944/eb\n5 April 1949\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD:\n\n1. ID had submitted, at P&O's request, a study of the flying saucer phenomenon. This study intimated that of all cases investigated there was no foreign nation implication in these flying saucers.\n\n2. Mr. Stites, ID, said that they would be glad to take action on this, at the request of P&O.\n\n3. ACTION: Comment #1 to D/ID requesting they verify accuracy of Mr. Winchell's statement of 3 Apr 49 re flying saucers.\n\n4. COORDINATION: ID - Mr. Stites, Ext 6196"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET CONFIDENTIAL\nCOMBINED ROUTING-INFORMATION-FILING FORM\nPLANS & OPERATIONS DIVISION, GSUSA\n\nDecimal Classification: P&O 350.05 (5 Apr 49)\nX 620 ID\nX 350.05\nX 000.92\nTHIS COPY OF COVER SHEET WILL BE REMOVED ONLY BY THE RECORDS BRANCH\nSuspense Date: 1800, 26 Apr 49\n\nSubject: Evaluation Study of Phenomenon (Flying Saucers)\nDate: 5 Apr 49\nOrigin: P&O to ID\n\nDigest:\nID cmt #2, 18 Apr 49, advises that any change in the evaluation contained in inclosure 1 re subj will be promptly transmitted to P&O.\n\nAction:\nCirculate as indicated, then file in P&O.\n\nReply required by: None\nExecutive Branch:\n\nTo: Control; European & Middle East; Far East & Pacific; Latin American; North American; Joint War Plans; Army War Plans; Policy Planning; Advanced Study; Personnel; Records; Implementing; Asst Executive, P&O; Executive Br.\nOperations; Plans; International\n\nComments: This may be of interest to Generals Haddocks, Nichols, Schuyler and Timberman.\n\nRecommend Approval: Branch Chief; Group Chief\nConcur: Executive, P&O; Deputy Director, AE; Deputy Director, P&O; Director, P&O\n\nAction by Maj J. S. Byrne\nSigned\nDate 20 Apr 49\nOCS FORM 113 REV 1 JAN 1949\n21 APR 1949\nDispatch\nFile\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Executive Br, P&O\nMaj J. S. Byrne/2944/eb\n20 Apr 49\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD:\n\n1. As a result of a number of CM IN Radios in February 1949 on \"flying saucers\", P&O requested ID on 24 Feb 49 to evaluate these phenomena. On 7 Mar 49 ID forwarded the attached evaluation.\n\n2. As a result of Walter Winchell's 3 Apr 49 broadcast (summary in attached Daily Bulletin), the D/F Cmt #1 was sent to ID requesting verification of the accuracy of the broadcast. D/F Cmt #2 from ID constitutes the ID answer.\n\n3. PID not informed.\n\n4. ACTION: Circulate as indicated, then file in P&O.\n\n5. COORDINATION: Asst Dep Dir P&O (AE) - Lt Col Dawley, Ext 75303\nExec, NA Br - Lt Col Clark, Ext 74676"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCSUID-ID 9-350.05 SUBJECT: Evaluation Study of Phenomenon (Flying Saucers)\n\nTO: CSOPO FROM: CSUID DATE: 18 APR 1949 COMMENT NO. 2\n Lt Col Ligon/5509/ful\n\n1. The \"Evaluation Study of Phenomenon\" at Inclosure 1 hereto represents the current Intelligence Division, GSUSA, evaluation of the \"flying saucers.\"\n\n2. With reference to paragraph 2 of Comment No. 1, CSUID recognizes the interest of defense planners in any object capable of being \"shot all the way from Russia,\" and will continue to keep the matter under scrutiny. Any change in the evaluation contained at Inclosure No. 1 will be promptly transmitted to CSOPO.\n\n3. CSUID is unable to verify Mr. Winchell's statement that \"flying saucers * * * are now definitely known to have been guided missiles shot all the way from Russia\" and has no information as to the basis for the statement or \"information\" on which it may have been based. It is, however, possible that Mr. Winchell published this item in an attempt to obtain some official statement from the USAF on the subject.\n\nFOR THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE\n\n2 Incls\nn/c\n\nE. J. FOSTER, JR., Lt. Col., GSC\nActing Assistant Executive\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISPOSITION FORM\n\nFILE NO.: 250.250-02 (1 Apr 49)\nSUBJECT: Evaluation Study of Phenomenon (Flying Saucers)\nTO: G/Sec, GSUSA (Attn Mr. Gaines)\nFROM: D/Intel, GSUSA\nDATE: 5 Apr 49\nCOMMENT NO. 1\nLt Col Pendergrast/5509/ful\n\n1. Reference is made to Comment No. 1 from this office, 21 February 1949, Comment No. 2 from your office, 7 March 1949, with Evaluation Study of Phenomenon, and broadcast by Congressman Hiller Winchell on 3 April 1949 re flying saucers. (See Inclosure No. 2).\n\n2. If Mr. Winchell's statement is confirmed, flying saucers will be of tremendous interest to our National Defense planners.\n\n3. Request that your Division verify the accuracy of Mr. Winchell's statement and obtain, if possible, the source of this information.\n\nFOR THE DIRECTOR OF PLANS AND OPERATIONS:\n\n2 Incls\n1. Evaluation Study\n2. Bulletin w/comments by Mr. Winchell re flying saucers\n\nJOHN S. GRIFFITH, Colonel, GSC, Chief Executive, PAD\n\nDA AGO FORM 897 Replaces WD AGO Form 897, 1 May 46, which may be used."} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BULLETIN\nPREPARED BY THE ANALYSIS BRANCH\nPUBLIC INFORMATION DIVISION - DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY * FOR DISTRIBUTION CALL Ex. 4742\n\n4 MARCH 1949\n9:45 A.M.\n\nWIRE SERVICE SECTION\n\nPRAVDA SAYS STATE DEPARTMENT CONVERTED INTO BRANCH OF GENERAL STAFF\n\nMOSCOW--RUSSIA LOOSED ANOTHER BLAST AT THE ATLANTIC TREATY TODAY ONLY A FEW HOURS BEFORE IT WAS TO BE SIGNED, CHARGING THAT IT SEEKS TO INTIMIDATE STATES UNWILLING TO SUBMIT TO ANGLO-AMERICAN DICTATION. THE ATTACK APPEARED IN THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER PRAVDA. IT ALSO ACCUSED THE UNITED STATES OF STEPPING UP THE AMERICANIZATION OF WESTERN EUROPEAN ARMIES THROUGH A \"NEW MILITARY LEND-LEASE.\" \"THE WHOLE CONTINENTAL MILITARY SYSTEM IS BEING CONVERTED INTO AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE AMERICAN MILITARY SYSTEM UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF THE AMERICAN GENERAL STAFF,\" PRAVDA SAID. \"THE EXPORT OF VARIOUS ARMS AND INTENSIFIED PREPARATION FOR AGGRESSION HAVE BECOME ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT TASKS OF AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY. THIS TASK IS UNDER EXECUTION BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT, WHICH U.S. RULING CIRCLES TO AN INCREASING EXTENT ARE CONVERTING INTO A BRANCH OF THE GENERAL STAFF OF THE ARMED FORCES.\"..... UP(6:59A)\n\nFRANCE WANTS TO BASE DEFENSE OF WESTERN EUROPE ON ELBE\n\nPARIS--FRANCE IS REPORTED TODAY SEEKING AMERICAN BACKING FOR A PLAN TO BASE DEFENSE OF WESTERN EUROPE ON THE ELBE RIVER INSTEAD OF THE RHINE. AUTHORITATIVE DIPLOMATIC SOURCES SAID THAT FRENCH FOREIGN MINISTER ROBERT SCHUMAN WILL PUT SUCH A PLAN BEFORE U.S. OFFICIALS DURING HIS CURRENT WASHINGTON VISIT TO SIGN THE ATLANTIC PACT.... LIEUT. GEN. GEORGE REVERS, FRENCH CHIEF OF STAFF, IS REPORTEDLY A STRONG BACKER OF THE PLAN WHICH HAS AS ITS PRIMARY AIM AN EFFORT TO KEEP SOVIET TROOPS AS FAR FROM FRANCE AS POSSIBLE IN EVENT OF WAR,.... ANOTHER FACTOR IN THE PLAN IS PSYCHOLOGICAL. THE FRENCH PEOPLE GENERALLY ARE SAID TO BE RESIGNED TO THE POSSIBILITY THAT SOVIET FORCES COULD OVERRUN FRANCE IF WAR SHOULD BREAK OUT SUDDENLY. RUSSIAN ARMIES COULD ESTABLISH A RHINE BRIDGEHEAD THIS WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS A SERIOUS BLOW TO FRENCH RESISTANCE IN A REPETITION OF THE GERMAN \"BLITZKRIEG\" IN 1940. FRENCH STRATEGISTS BELIEVE THAT IF THE FIRST LINE OF DEFENSE WERE MOVED TO THE ELBE, FRANCE WOULD PUT UP GREATER RESISTANCE. INS(4:00A)\n\nWESTERN GERMAN POST OFFICE EMPLOYES TOSSED OUT BY RUSSIANS\n\nBERLIN--BRITISH MILITARY AUTHORITIES IN BERLIN REPORTED TODAY THAT THE RUSSIANS HAVE TAKEN POSSESSION OF A POST OFFICE IN THE WEST STAAKEN AREA OF BERLIN THROWING OUT WESTERN GERMAN EMPLOYES. THE BRITISH SAID THE ACTION TOOK PLACE ON APRIL 1. WEST STAAKEN IS OFFICIALLY IN THE SOVIET SECTOR BUT IT HAS BEEN RUN BY THE WEST SINCE THE SPLIT BETWEEN EAST AND WESTERN ADMINISTRATIONS AND THE BLOCKADE. THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE RUSSIANS IS THE LATEST IN THEIR SERIES OF MOVES APPARENTLY AIMED AT TIGHTENING THEIR HOLD ON THEIR SECTOR OF THE CITY AND CRUSHING POLITICAL OPPOSITION. INS(7:03A)"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GERMAN LEADER SPEAKS IN BEHALF OF GERMAN PEACE TREATY\n\nBERLIN--JACOB KAISER, A LEADING CHRISTIAN DEMOCRAT SAID IN BERLIN TODAY THAT THE DRAFTING OF A WEST GERMAN CONSTITUTION SHOULD BE FOLLOWED BY GERMAN PEACE TREATY TALKS. KAISER, FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC PARTY IN EASTERN GERMANY AND A MEMBER OF THE BONN COUNCIL DRAFTING A CONSTITUTION FOR WESTERN GERMANY SPOKE AT THE PARTY CONVENTION IN BERLIN. HE SAID: \"IT MUST BE EXPECTED OF THE OCCUPATION POWERS THAT THEY WILL BEGIN PEACE TALKS AS SOON AS THE BONN CONSTITUTION WORK IS COMPLETED.\"..... KAISER SAID THAT IT IS NECESSARY \"DUE TO THE TERROR EXERCISED BY THE COMMUNISTS,\" TO FORM A WEST GERMAN STATE AS THE FIRST STEP IN ESTABLISHING A UNITED GERMANY. INS(12:50A)\n\nSECOND SERIES OF LECTURES ON DEFENSE BEGINS TODAY FOR CIVILIANS\n\nWASHINGTON--SEVENTY-FIVE LEADERS FROM VARIOUS WALKS OF CIVILIAN LIFE TODAY BEGAN GETTING THE INSIDE WORD ON THE NATION'S DEFENSES. THE NEXT THREE DAYS, THEY WILL HEAR MILITARY AND OTHER ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS DISCUSS IN CLOSED SESSIONS WHAT IS BEING DONE TO STRENGTHEN NATIONAL DEFENSES. IT IS THE SECOND JOINT CIVILIAN ORIENTATION CONFERENCE HELD BY THE NATIONAL MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT..... UP(8:30A)\n\nENLISTEES ASSURED OF JOB REINSTATEMENT AFTER LEAVING SERVICE\n\nWASHINGTON--A GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL TODAY ASSURED ALL YOUTHS ENLISTING IN THE ARMED FORCES THAT THEY ARE ENTITLED TO THEIR OLD JOBS WHEN THEY ARE MUSTERED OUT. ROBERT K. SALYERS, DIRECTOR OF THE LABOR DEPARTMENT'S BUREAU OF VETERANS REEMPLOYMENT RIGHTS, SAID BOTH ENLISTEES AND RESERVISTS CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY ARE PROTECTED BY THE SELECTIVE SERVICE ACT, EVEN THOUGH THE SERVICES ARE NOT DRAFTING MEN AT PRESENT. HOWEVER, HE WARNED THOSE DISCHARGED TO SEEK REINSTATEMENT TO THEIR OLD JOBS WITHIN 90 DAYS AFTER LEAVING THE SERVICE. UP(8:35A)\n\nJOHNSON AND ROYALL TO REVIEW ARMY DAY PARADE\n\nWASHINGTON--ABOUT 10,000 MILITARY MEN WILL MARCH IN THE ARMY DAY PARADE ON WEDNESDAY. MARINES, SAILORS AND AIRMEN WILL HELP THEIR SOLDIER TEAMMATES CELEBRATE THE 1949 ARMY DAY IN GRAND STYLE. UNITS FROM EACH BRANCH OF THE SERVICE WILL JOIN TROOPS IN AN-HOUR-AND-A-HALF-LONG PARADE. PRESIDENT TRUMAN, DEFENSE SECRETARY JOHNSON, AND ARMY SECRETARY ROYALL WILL REVIEW THE MARCHERS WHO WILL PARADE ALONG CONSTITUTION AVENUE BEGINNING AT 1:30 P.M..... AP(8:47A)\n\nARMY DAY 1949 WILL BE APRIL 6TH. THE OFFICIAL ARMY DAY FILM \"PASS IN REVIEW\" WILL BE SHOWN IN THE SIGNAL CORPS AUDITORIUM, 5A 1070 AT 1:45 P.M. ON FRIDAY, 1 APRIL, MONDAY, 4 APRIL, AND TUESDAY, 5 APRIL. RUNNING TIME OF THE FILM IS 11 MINUTES. THE AUDITORIUM SEATS APPROXIMATELY 300 PEOPLE AND NO TICKET OR OTHER IDENTIFICATION IS REQUIRED FOR ADMISSION.\n\nCERTAIN COPIES OF THE WIRE SERVICE BULLETIN OF 4 APRIL 1949 ARE ERRONEOUSLY DATED 4 MARCH."} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DAILY RADIO DIGEST #221S\nTelephone Ext. 4750 HIGHLIGHTS 4 April 1949\n\nBy Saturday, Sec. Johnson already had eliminated nine committees and boards of Armed Services as useless(1)*** A minority group here (Berlin) feels Russians want to call off blockade(?) Gen. Clay's report is so gloomy it probably will never be published(8)*** It (court-martial) will be another battle of the brass Army would like to keep quiet--very much(14)*** Two U.S. Senators are quietly investigating very peculiar activity of U.S. Naval Attache in Franco Spain(15)*** Now, it is apparent occupation (of Japan) may last for years(18)*** It (reportedly suppressed report on Greece) is very embarrassing to them (State Department and the Military) (20)\n\nSECRETARY OF DEFENSE\nCHARLES WOOD(ABC-This Week Around the World):...By Saturday, Johnson already had eliminated nine committees and boards of the Armed Services as useless. James Forrestal had been unable to end bickering of the Services because his Office was understaffed, but on Saturday Pres. Truman signed into law a bill creating an Under Secretary of Defense, giving Johnson the strength he needed to do the job thoroughly...In 1936, Johnson became Assistant Secretary of War under Pres. Roosevelt. He proved himself a hard-working, competent administrator, plugging for preparedness at a time when such action was extremely unpopular... Johnson's appointment is looked upon by many as a political favor for services rendered. But there are few who deny his competence for the job. 3 April49-1\n\nDREW PEARSON(ABC): The Navy Department: Former Sec. of Defense Forrestal will be appointed a $1-a-year man and given a Navy airplane for a cruise around the world, chiefly on a vacation. While I have been critical of Forrestal in the past, I think he deserves a rest, and I want to congratulate him for the fine way he has cooperated with Louis Johnson, his successor. 3 April49-2\nCRITICISM\nWALTER WINCHELL(ABC): Evanston, Ill.--One of Hitler's top agents is now lecturing at Northwestern University. His name is Edward V. Sitler--it rhymes with Hitler. This man, according to a signed statement from the Northwestern U campus, continues to expound his Nazi ideas and feelings. This Edward Sitler...was an American citizen. He threw his citizenship away and became a naturalized German when he started to work for Hitler in Berlin as the director of Goebbels' radio section. Atty. Gen. Tom Clark, please, in the name of all the wonderful Americans who died for the rest of us, kick this ingrate out of the country. 3 April49-3\nBERLIN\nED HAAKER(NBC-News Roundup, from Berlin): Berlin's Russian-licensed press today has let loose with a verbal broadside. For the first time, Russia's German-language papers are commenting on the Soviet memo on Moscow's objections to the North Atlantic pact...Such is the virulence of today's...editorials that again there is...talk over here on the possibility of the USSR quitting the U.N. Such is the virulence of these comments that there can be little doubt that the Russians see in the pact a mighty barrier to their aspirations for world domination. 3 April49-4\nROBERT S. ALLEN(NBS): Berlin--Gen. Clay has cabled Washington not to be surprised if Russia suddenly lifts the Berlin blockade. 3 April49-5\nEFFECTS OF COUNTERBLOCKADE\nED HAAKER(NBC-News Roundup, from Berlin): There is new evidence that our counterblockade is creating economic difficulties, if not economic havoc, in the Russian zone of Germany. Recently, after a trip through the Russian zone, I remarked on the dearth of activity in the Eastern zone industrial cities,and today one report that seems authentic states, in effect, that unemployment there is rising by leaps and bounds...The moot point, of course, is what effect this pinch will have on Russian reasoning. One point of view here is that it will finally force them to come to terms and lift their own blockade of Berlin; the other is that they have such little regard for the well-being of populations that it will have no effect at all. 2 April49-6\nGERMANY\nLYFORD MOORE(ABC-This Week Around the World, from Berlin): Marshal Sokolovsky's successor (Gen. Chuikov)...in a quick examination...doesn't seem to have any particularly outstanding qualities that would lead to his\n3"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4 April 1949\n\nbeing chosen as the new Military Governor of Russian Germany. Western observers here feel the switch means that from now on the real executive power in the Russian occupation will be wielded by civilians. It's expected that the Soviet Union's highest civilian representative here, Ambassador W.S. (SemInov ?), will be the Politburo's key man in Germany. Heretofore, he served as Sokolovsky's political adviser,but his office has gradually been given more importance, and he has taken over a number of the functions formerly exercised by Sokolovsky. American political experts think Sokolovsky's replacement is closely tied up with the formation of an Eastern Germany Communist state. They point out that it would be decidedly advantageous to the Russians, for propaganda purposes, to have control of such a state in the hands of an ambassador rather than a military man. A minority group here feels that the Russians want to call off the blockade. These observers think Sokolovsky's recall really means the Soviets are getting out of Germany--the man most closely associated with a policy that failed. 3 April49-7\n\nDREW PEARSON(ABC): Berlin, exclusive--Gen. Clay has sent a very discouraging report to Washington. He says that American efforts to make the Germans more democratic have failed, almost completely, that the Germans are openly talking about the need of a new leader to restore Germany to its former power. What is even more tragic, anti-Semitism and strong-arm tactics are on the increase. Gen. Clay's report is so gloomy it probably will never be published. 3 April49-8\n\nROBERT S. ALLEN(MBS):...One of the questions being discussed in the secret Foreign Ministers' Conference in Washington is increasing industrial production in Germany...The new plan is to raise that (limitation of German output to the 1936 production) to the 1938 level--the year before Hitler ran amok. France is strongly against this scheme which is being urged by U.S. military and financial interests. 3 April49-9\n\nH.V. KALTENBORN(NBC):...Schuman, more than Bevin or Acheson, will determine the success or failure of these (Washington) discussions. For good historic reasons France fears Germany...If we go on destroying German industrial plants because they might some time produce arms, we will prevent German and European recovery. The six billions we spent last year, and the five billions we propose to spend this year to restore Europe could easily be wasted if 50 million Germans in the heart of Europe could not become self-supporting. With all the food and mineral resources of Eastern Germany in Russian hands, Western Germany must become a strong industrial state to live. 1 April49-10\n\nALLIED MILITARY GOVERNMENT\nWALTER WINCHELL(ABC): The State Department--Jack McCloy can have the top job at Berlin. \"Chips\" Bohlen is slated for Minister to Paris, the number two spot. Nobody wants to be the Ambassador to Moscow. The latest to turn it down is Ambassador Caffery, now in Paris. 3 April49-11\n\nDREW PEARSON(ABC): New York--A display of German-manufactured goods, many sponsored by former Nazis, will open in New York on Saturday--much worse than the music of Walter Geiseking. 3 April49-12\n\nWILLIAM L. SHIRER(MBS):...For the first time since before the war there will be an exhibition in this country of German industrial products. The German industrial exhibit, under the auspices of the Military Government, opens here, in New York, Saturday. A lot of people here don't like the idea, and there may be some trouble. They say they don't object to the Germans trying to do a little honest business like everyone else, but they hate to see the Nazis coming back under our auspices. Gen. Clay has said not a Nazi will be allowed to go to New York to show his wares, but there's no doubt, either, that many of these German firms exhibiting here are run by the Nazis, either openly or secretly...This may surprise you, but your Government will support Fascist Dictator Franco at the meeting of the U.N. Assembly which opens Tuesday... 3 April49-13\nARMY COURT-MARTIAL\nWALTER WINCHELL(ABC): Lt. Col. Paul T. Graves goes on trial next Tuesday at Ft. Dix. The charge is embezzlement. Many top generals will testify for him. It will be another battle of the brass which the U.S. Army would like to keep quiet--very much. 3 April49-14\nCRITICISM OF NAVAL ATTACHE\nROBERT S. ALLEN(MBS): Military Meddler: Two U.S. Senators are quietly\n4"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4 April 1949\n\ninvestigating the very peculiar activity of Capt. T.V.(Mercer ?), U.S. Naval Attache in Franco Spain. Mercer is a warm admirer of the dictator and has been openly critical of U.S. policy toward Franco. According to information in the hands of the two Senators, Mercer has been acting as if he were the U.S. Ambassador in Spain. The Senators want to know how Mercer gets this way and why an officer of this type is being kept in Madrid. 3 April49-15\nBASES\nJOHN MECKLING(CBS-World News, from Ottawa):...To Americans, this peaceful union (Newfoundland and Labrador annexed as Canada's tenth province) means greater security of our North Atlantic flank. Two major American military bases are located in Newfoundland...And it means unchallenged access to the iron ore fields of Labrador... 1 April49-16\nU.S.-SOVIET RELATIONS\nDREW PEARSON(ABC): The State Department, exclusive: Just before I left Washington, I learned that Sec. of State Acheson is much more worried about the latest Russian note against the North Atlantic pact than he admits. The reason is: the American Embassy in Moscow has sent a top secret cable warning that the Russian note may be intended to pave the way for outright aggression by the Red Army. The two most likely spots marked for aggression are Iran and Finland, but the Embassy also passes along the rumor of Soviet troops moving toward Norway. The Embassy also warns that the next 60 days will be the most critical in the history of our relations with Russia, for, during the period, the Embassy believes Russia is more likely to strike, than later, because the North Atlantic pact nations will not have had a chance to ratify their treaty. I'm not predicting whether the Embassy is right or wrong, but I do predict that Russia will soon renounce its own defense treaty with the French--a very serious step which, according to standard diplomatic procedure, could be the forerunner of war! 3 April49-17\nOCCUPATION OF JAPAN\nBILL COSTELLO(CBS-World News, from Tokyo): According to well-informed observers in this occupied capital, a change of far-reaching significance is taking place in occupation controls. In a nutshell it's this: that major economic planning for Japan is now being done in Washington and is being integrated with the world-wide ECA program. When the occupation started, it was assumed that a peace treaty would follow within a reasonable time, and it was tacitly understood that Gen. MacArthur would run the occupation, with only general policy supervision from Washington. Now, it is apparent that the occupation may last for years. At the same time, American overseas commitments have expanded so greatly that every dollar has to produce maximum returns. That being true, it has become hazardous to let Japan fritter away American aid as it has done for the last three years...Economic strategists, as a result of the European program, now have a yardstick with which to measure Japan's progress. Unless Japan can prove that American funds are being used wisely, then aid for Japan may be cut off. 1 April49-18\nOVERSEAS AIR BASES\nJOHN FOSTER DULLES(MBS-Meet the Press):...If the U.S. were to plant (bases?) for atomic bomb planes right on the Soviet frontier, I think that would be an offensive action which would almost surely start off a war. I don't think we plan to do that. LAWRENCE SPIVAK: Suppose we were to plant them in England? DULLES: I think that it's all a question of degree. I don't see any reason why there should not be air bases in England. If you turn the thing around, if the Soviet Union had atomic bomb bases on the Mexican border, we would take offense about it; we don't take offense about it if they're somewhat farther off. SPIVAK: But, with the range we have in air power today, there really isn't too much difference if some of our bases are in England, or in Africa, or in France. Certainly, if we're going to have a defensive alliance, we're going to have to have bases somewhere. DULLES: That's quite true, but in these matters there's a psychological element that comes into play. If you brandish your fist under a fellow's nose, he takes more offense about it than if you brandish your fist a little ways off. ... 1 April49-19\nGREECE\nROBERT S. ALLEN(MBS): Secret Report: From time to time this program has reported a number of shocking facts about the Greek Aid Program. This is costing the American taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars. Disclosures about the incompetence, graft and obstructionism of the reactionary and undemocratic Greek Government, and the incompetence and\n5"} {"doc_id":"3506aeb391aa6e73","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4 April 1949\n\nbungling and waste of U.S. officials in Greece--these disclosures have not set well with certain high authorities in the State Department and the Pentagon Building. There has been a lot of muttering. Tonight, this program can report a complete official confirmation of these shocking disclosures. This official confirmation is contained in the report in the hands of the Joint Congressional Committee on the Marshall Plan...For some unexplained reason, this report has been suppressed. Personally, I suspect that this suppression is due to the State Department and the Military; there is a very good reason why they would not want this report made public. It is very embarrassing to them, but I have a copy of this report, and here are a few of its many shocking charges and condemnations:...Further, that there are too many American officials in Greece, and that a large percentage of them are being paid $10,000 a year in salary, plus an additional $7,000 for rents and food allowances; also, that many of these Americans are incompetent and are doing a poor job; also, that there is too much American ostentatiousness in Greece, that many American officials are driving around in big shiny new cars and are living in a high-handed and showy manner...The report also charges that the Greek tax system is archaic, that the wealthy pay practically no taxes at all. Similarly, the report says that it is impossible for the ordinary man to get justice in the Greek courts. It is such conditions, the report declares, that are making Communists in Greece, not Russia, not the guerrillas...Here is the conclusion of this suppressed report: \"...It is impossible to win in Greece by purely military operations; nor will money alone buy the Greek people. Social reforms and better and more honest administration are fundamental to Greek recovery...\" That is what this report that has been suppressed said. It is a despairing report because it shows that despite all that has happened the high brass in the White House, the State Department and the Pentagon have learned nothing; that despite the billions we have already spent, and the billions we are committing ourselves to spend under the North Atlantic pact, we are not winning the cold war against Russia... 3 April49-20\nSPAIN\nWALTER WINCHELL(ABC): The White House: The U.S. will withdraw its 1946 resolution condemning Franco at the U.N. and will resume diplomatic relations with Spain unless public opinion--that means you--stops it. 3 April49-21\nIRAN\nWILLIS CONOVER(WWDC):...If the Russians ever decided to invoke that treaty (with Iran) they could overrun the country almost without firing a shot. Loss of Iran, with its oil, would be a major blow to the Western powers. 3 April49-22\n\"FLYING SAUCERS\"\nWALTER WINCHELL(ABC): Washington--This will not be confirmed by anyone in authority in Washington at this time; but, if anybody denies it, the denier will be a liar. The \"flying saucers\" never explained by anyone in authority, are now definitely known to have been guided missiles shot all the way from Russia. 3 April49-23\nU.S. AIR FORCE\nWALTER WINCHELL(ABC): Curtiss Wright will announce tomorrow the newest airplane engine. It will give our biggest strategic bombers 2,000 miles more striking range. It is the turbo-cyclone. It can carry our long range atomic bombers around the world, without refueling--nonstop to Russia and back. 3 April49-24\nWINSTON CHURCHILL\nDREW PEARSON(ABC): Aboard the Queen Mary, exclusive--...I can reveal that Churchill's optimism is based on his belief that Stalin will soon die... Churchill believes the fiercest battle (among the 13 surviving members of the Politburo) will be over control of the army and the secret police. The fight over the army, he predicts, will be so violent that no Russian leader will let the Red Army go beyond Russia's borders for fear it might mingle with the outside world and be turned against Moscow. 3 April49-25\nWALTER WINCHELL(ABC):...Mr. Churchill did mention...that fights are sometimes avoided because somebody dropped dead, but that is not what any fighter who wants to win can ever count on. Mathematically, of course, peace still has a chance, about the same chance that a pigeon has against the slowest jet bomber. 3 April49-26\nATLANTIC ALLIANCE\nWILLIAM HILLMAN(MBS): The President (in his speech tomorrow at the signing of the Atlantic Alliance) has an opportunity to stress the self-help and mutual aid that is the foundation of this treaty... 3 April49-27\n6-END"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense Intelligence Reference Document\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n23 March 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2010\nDIA-08-1003-013\n\nThe Role of Superconductors in Gravity Research\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe Role of Superconductors in Gravity Research\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 75\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\ni\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ...............................................iii\nGravity Waves ............................................... 1\nGravitoelectromagnetism ..................................... 1\nHistorical Timeline ......................................... 3\nConclusion ................................................. 11\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe Role of Superconductors in Gravity Research\n\nIntroduction\n\nThis paper is a historical survey of the role superconductors have played in the recent search for laboratory-scale manipulation of gravity. The invention of superconductors and, in particular, the recent development of high-temperature ceramic superconductors have provided the impetus for pursuing a connection between gravity, electromagnetism, and, in particular, magnetism and matter in the solid state. The discovery of yttrium-barium-copper oxide (YBCO) YBa2Cu3O7 ceramics able to superconduct at liquid nitrogen temperatures allowed many laboratories around the world to fabricate these superconductors in various experimentally useful sizes. True Meissner repulsion was obtained by cooling them using relatively cheap liquid nitrogen rather than liquid helium. For the theoretician, the possibility of considering the superconductor being a macroscopic quantum object as a reality rather than a fantasy suggested several avenues for developing theories connecting gravity and gravity-like forces to engineerable matter. For the experimentalist, extrapolations from these theories suggested there might actually be gravitational disturbances in the laboratory that would be amenable to measurement, assuming all necessary precautions were taken to exclude artifact.\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nGravity Waves\n\nA distinction should be made between gravitational waves, the gravitational \"force,\" and anomalous forces. Currently, work on gravitational waves is divided into two more or less distinct realms: low frequency (less than a few hundred Hz) and high frequency (greater than ~ several tens of kHz). The existence of gravitational waves of any frequency is a natural outcome of Einstein's theory of general relativity (GR). The search for low-frequency gravitational waves currently utilizes large, heavy, and long metal bars as detectors together with interferometers, strain gauges, and accelerometers in an attempt to detect quadrupolar gravitational waves from cosmological sources, such as binary stars. The general idea is that if a large mass of precisely known dimensions is effectively isolated from the surrounding environment (such as Earth) by means of special vibration and other isolators, the masses will interact with the small-amplitude gravity waves emitted by large masses in the cosmos and their lengths will change, but by extremely small amounts. LIGO, LISA, VIRGO, DECIGO (Japan), and CEGO (China) are some of the acronyms given to these experiments. They are primarily attempts to verify the existence of these waves to further solidify the understanding that GR gives us about the nature of space and matter. Several researchers consider that high-frequency gravitational waves (HFGW) will be produced in the laboratory under certain conditions in the near future (Reference 1). These researchers have a considerably more ambitious view of the future than the low-frequency gravitational wave researchers, including the use of HFGW for communications, telescopy, microscopy, and possibly propulsion. Some consider that the production and detection of these waves will be mediated, or at least assisted, by superconductors (References 2, 3). Current research on the link between HFGW and the manipulation of gravity for propulsion is at present only theoretical. If gravitational waves can interact with and be converted into forces in laboratory-scale matter, it is hoped that those forces would be manifest not as gravitational forces per se, as these gravitational forces would be exceedingly small and difficult to unequivocally detect in the laboratory, but rather as electromagnetic or ponderable nongravitational forces, thus making them more amenable to detection by electromagnetic means.\n\nGravitoelectromagnetism\n\nThe gravitational \"force\" arises from the tendency of one body to accelerate toward another. (Force is in quotation marks here merely for simplicity and ease of use when comparing gravity with other forces, as many other gravity-like forces can be easily confused in the laboratory with actual gravitational attraction.) The physical explanation for gravitational attraction has been elusive at best. Several notable attempts at novel explanations have recently been published. Puthoff (Reference 4) developed an idea originally put forward by Sakharov (Reference 5) that posits gravity as a Casimir-like attraction arising within the universal sea of fluctuating electromagnetic interactions, sometimes called zero-point fluctuations. Alzofon (Reference 6) presented an engineering approach to interacting with gravity by means of altering nuclear entropy using a technique associated with electron paramagnetic resonance called dynamic nuclear orientation—that is, enhanced polarization of the magnetic moments of nucleons by interaction with pulsed polarized electron spins. Hughes (Reference 7) analyzed the Kopernicky Conjecture, which holds that gravity is nothing other than the slight difference between forces of coulomb attraction and repulsion. However, none of these researchers appealed to the special form of matter constituting superconductors.\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The “attraction” of modifying gravity—whether your own, your spacecraft’s, or that of a nearby large mass—for propulsive purposes lies in two general categories of effect: • The modifying, neutralizing, or negating of the gravitational attraction of a nearby body, typically Earth. • The provision of propulsive force or impulse to a spacecraft based on manipulation of the same underlying physical phenomenon that forms the basis of gravity. The theoretical and experimental attempts outlined in this paper deal with both these possibilities. In experiments designed to produce a gravity-like force or to interact directly with a local gravity field, the researcher has to be looking for extremely small deviations from a null result. Observations to date demonstrate that interactions between gravity and electromagnetic fields, given the field densities and strengths available to even the most well-equipped laboratory, are many orders of magnitude smaller than those required to begin to see such forces. Braginski et al. (Reference 8) showed that ordinary matter cannot be used to generate measurable gravitational fields in the laboratory. The standard edict against such things as gravity shields can be summed up by noting the absence of negative gravitational mass, at least in this sector of the universe, resulting in the relative “gravitational permittivity/permeability” being unity in normal matter. Therefore, demonstrating that a new force, whether gravitational or not, has been discovered in the laboratory will require an intense effort to provide proof. This implies being able to distinguish between true gravity-like forces and gravity interactions and a host of prosaic effects masquerading as these forces. A list of potential artifacts attendant on such experiments can be found in Reference 9. General relativity introduces a metric tensor theory of gravity, and while it does not explain the fundamental physical basis of the gravitational attraction between two bodies, it does allow the prediction of a large range of interactions between bodies. Similarly, Maxwell’s vector equations do not explain the fundamental basis for electromagnetic interactions but do allow us to predict the outcomes of such interactions. It is possible to reformulate the tensor format of GR into a simple vector format that is valid only for a subset of GR conditions, namely in the weak field approximation and for nonrelativistic velocities. Using perturbation theory, for example, to compute the equations of motion in the simplified GR equations results in terms that have direct analogs in Maxwell equations where electrical current flow is replaced by mass flow, for example. Forward (Reference 10, 11) was among the first to investigate this analog. One term is analogous to the Biot-Savart-like magnetic field and is generally referred to as the “gravitomagnetic field” (and also sometimes as “gravitational frame dragging” or the “Lense-Thirring Effect”) and has the dimensions of s-1. Another term is analogous to the electrostatic coulomb field and is referred to as the “gravitoelectric field.” Essentially, the gravitomagnetic field produces a force between currents of flowing matter, while the gravitoelectric field produces a force between masses themselves (the Newtonian gravitational field). Sometimes the term “gravitoelectromagnetic field” is used to refer to both the gravitoelectric and gravitomagnetic fields. Gravity is thus composed of a (Newtonian) velocity-independent field and a (gravitomagnetic) velocity-dependent field analogous to the electric and magnetic fields"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in electromagnetic theory. The simplified GR/Maxwell equations show that there is also a Faraday-like law of induction that can generate Newtonian gravitational fields from time-varying gravitomagnetic fields. Modern attempts to confirm the existence of the gravitomagnetic field include highly accurate laser ranging of the Earth-Moon distance (Reference 12), as well as the launch of the Gravity Probe B satellite (Reference 13). Historical Timeline. In order to aid future researchers, it is instructive to follow the general historical development of the modern search for a link between electromagnetism, matter, and gravity. This outline will include both theoretical and experimental aspects, expanding and emphasizing experimental issues where appropriate. Because of space limitations, not all of the many contributions to the field can be highlighted. The reader is encouraged to consult the source references cited in this paper to obtain a fuller appreciation of the amount of effort that has been expended in this area of physics. Podkletnov and Nieminen (Reference 15) published what is considered the first possible evidence for an experimental link between high-temperature liquid nitrogen (LN2) superconductor effects and gravity, allegedly in the form of a gravity shield. Many scientists since then have cast considerable doubt on their findings. Notwithstanding these severe criticisms, since the publication of this paper, many other researchers have considered that the experimental search for gravity-related forces could be taken out of the realm of pure speculation and onto the laboratory bench. Podkletnov’s apparent experimental success has in turn prompted some theoreticians to consider fresh approaches to investigating superconductors as a special form of condensed matter capable of modifying and/or producing such forces. It would be a breakthrough of the first order to discover a repeatable, laboratory-scale, heretofore hidden connection between gravity, special forms of matter that can be created in the laboratory, and electromagnetism that would possibly unlock the door to new transportation systems, new energy sources, and a host of other earthly benefits, not to mention professional accolades and untold wealth for the technology developers. However, the rush to be the first to successfully find a repeatable and verifiable link between superconductors and gravity has produced many casualties. Theoreticians have made assumptions to force their theories to explain the putative experimental results. Most experiments have been literally thrown together with little thought paid to the myriad traps and pitfalls that litter the minefield of experimental physics in this uncharted territory. This is primarily due to the expectation that the sought-after forces will be extremely tiny and hard to distinguish from prosaic influences. The most prominent, albeit controversial theoretical work on creating laboratory-detectable gravitomagnetic fields via high-temperature superconductors was initiated by Li and Torr (Reference 16-18). Their work expanded on earlier work by DeWitt (Reference 19) and Ross (Reference 20), who considered modifications to the London equations, which relate supercurrent (that is, Cooper pair) flow to electric and magnetic fields in and around a superconductor, to include gravitomagnetic fields. Dewitt showed that a time-varying gravitomagnetic field must arise owing to the presence of magnetic flux quantization in superconductors. Dewitt's work was expanded on by Ross, who"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"produced a modified set of London equations. These papers laid the theoretical foundations for the later work of Li, Torr, and Tajmar, for example. In the late 1980s while at the University of Alabama, Douglas Torr was examining neglected areas of physics, including aether theories and experiments, as well as gravitational wave antennas, the subject of a paper awarded the Gravity Research Foundation’s “First Award” in 1989. In 1991, Torr and Ning Li published a paper on the effects of a gravitomagnetic field on superconducting matter (Reference 16). Ordinarily, all magnetic fields are excluded from the interior of a superconductor because of Meissner expulsion. However, by solving the coupled Maxwell, GR, and London equations for the internal magnetic and gravitomagnetic fields of superconductors exposed to external gravitomagnetic and magnetic fields, they predicted a small residual internal magnetic field. This in turn produces an internal gravitomagnetic field. The fields are related to one another by the Cooper pair mass-to-charge ratio. The gravitomagnetic field penetration depth is larger than the normal magnetic field depth. A year later the same authors presented papers at a meeting of the American Physical Society (Reference 17). Buoyed by the apparent success of their previous analyses, part of the title of one presentation was “A Theoretical Basis for a Principle of Electrically Induced Gravitation.” In this paper, they used coupled Ginzburg-Landau equations to calculate the relative strengths of the electric and gravitational fields in superconductors in the presence of magnetic and gravitomagnetic fields. They concluded that under certain circumstances, a secondary gravitational field could be induced inside a superconductor and “provide a basis for the electrical generation of gravitational fields in the laboratory.” Then came the bombshell. A Russian materials scientist on staff at the Institute of Materials Science at the Tampere University of Technology in Finland published a paper in 1992 on an apparent gravity shielding experiment using a spinning superconductor disk (Reference 15). In the mid-1980s, the lead author, Evgueny E. Podkletnov, had published several papers on ceramics while at the Institute for High Temperatures in Moscow. He later moved to Finland, where he completed his doctorate under then-Director of the Institute of Materials Science Pentti Kettunen. Podkletnov’s thesis was on preparation of pure YBCO whiskers by magnetron sputtering, and he was producing this material for powder-in-tube high-temperature superconducting wire for a local business concern. According to Kettunen (Reference 21), the spinning disk experiment was not actually performed at the institute but rather was conducted by Podkletnov and others “after hours.” Kettunen also confided that although he was aware of the existence of the gravity shielding experiment through “so many others” telling him about it, he never witnessed it himself. He did confirm the story Podkletnov later told about discovering the shielding effect by watching the smoke from a coworker’s pipe float up exactly in the “shadow” of the spinning disk. The disk was apparently made in Russia for sputtering purposes and brought to Finland. The coauthor of the gravity shielding experiment, Risto Nieminen (this Risto Nieminen is emphatically not the more famous professor of computational physics currently at Helsinki University of Technology), was a technician working at the Institute of Materials Science during Podkletnov’s time there. He was not involved in Podkletnov’s experiments but noted (Reference 22) that they were likely conducted at either the Tampere Institute of Technology’s Department of Electrical Engineering or the Institute of Physics. To this day, he is still not sure why he was asked to coauthor the paper,"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"except possibly for his proofreading skills. Strangely, the only persons who contacted Podkletnov in the mid-1990s about the paper were the Italian theoretical physicist G. Modanese and this author. Podkletnov claimed he had never heard of the work of Li and Torr prior to publishing the paper. According to the 1992 paper, the essence of his experiment was the high-speed rotation of a relatively large (14.5-cm diameter x 6-mm thick) YBCO sintered ceramic superconducting disk in the vapors of liquid helium (LHe). The disk was levitated by Meissner repulsion over a large support electromagnet immersed in LHe that was powered by a variable-frequency supply from 50 Hz to 106 Hz. At the diametrical periphery of the disk were positioned two additional but smaller electromagnets also powered by variable frequency supplies. These two “rotational” electromagnets were used to spin the disk in some unspecified manner. A small nonconducting, nonmagnetic test mass was suspended from an analytical balance about 15 mm from the top of the disk. Subsequent information from Podkletnov indicated that to obtain the maximum stable test sample weight loss of about 0.3 percent, the optimum conditions required operation of these two electromagnets at frequencies of 105 Hz and disk rotational speeds of several thousand rpm. Apart from the difficulty believing, on purely theoretical grounds, that such an enormous weight loss was possible, there was considerable doubt about the validity of the observations based on experimental issues. Among many other concerns, a few comments regarding the cryostat are in order. The only information on the physical configuration of the experiment is given in the sketch provided in Reference 15. Referring to that figure, it is difficult to believe the only thing separating the vapors of LHe in the cryostat from the laboratory atmosphere was a thin plastic film. Ordinarily, so much water vapor and other gases would have condensed on the outer surface of the film as to render it completely opaque, thus making the observation of the disk extremely unlikely. If the cryostat was actually designed roughly per the sketch in the article, the LHe would be boiling so vigorously that it would rupture any film unless adequate He gas escape was provided. As pointed out by dePodesta (Reference 23), thermal currents and buoyancy changes above such a cryostat would be so severe as to render the determination of the weight of a test mass suspended only 1.5 cm above the disk (and therefore only a few mm above a separating film covered with ice) virtually impossible. This was an entirely unsatisfactory cryogenic design for the purpose. Important issues such as how the disk was balanced, how it was prevented from rupturing at high speeds, how much power was used to operate the coils, and what means were employed to prevent the balance from being affected by the magnetic fields from the coils were not addressed in the article. Nevertheless, the article caused experimentalists around the world to try to duplicate the essence of the experiment, generally in an overly simplified manner. All started out using the less costly LN2 approach with either fixed or rotating permanent magnets and small (~ 2- to 3-cm diameter) disks purchased commercially. Several researchers, including Gonnelli at Turin Politecnico (Reference 24), Woods at the University of Sheffield (Reference 25), and this author witnessed very slight apparent weight changes while the disk was passing through its critical temperature, Tc. However, in most cases, the effect was so close to the noise that further experimentation was not considered. At a private unpublished meeting (see below) hosted by Professor R. Gonnelli at the Turin Politecnico in April 1999, however, Podkletnov made it clear that unless the exact disk formulation was followed, high-frequency magnetic fields were employed (not"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"permanent magnets), and a larger disk was spun at lower temperatures, the shielding effect would be extremely small. The experiment has remained controversial since its publication. Very few scientists put any stock into it at all. Most damning to Podkletnov’s case was the complete lack of any supporting evidence that the experiment had ever actually taken place. As the Podkletnov article began to slowly circulate, Li and Torr published another article (Reference 18) expanding on their earlier investigations in an attempt to outline the physical mechanism underlying the production of a gravitomagnetic field inside a superconductor. Basic to their consideration was an assumption of near-zero magnetic permeability in the superconductor and the requirement of coherent alignment of lattice ion spins in conjunction with a time-varying applied magnetic vector potential field. With this understanding, they determined values for laboratory-scale induced internal gravitomagnetic fields and external gravitoelectric fields and how these fields could be maximized. However, in 1994 Kowitt (Reference 26) claimed that their 1992 and 1993 results were not credible owing to their assumption of near-zero permeability inside a superconductor. However, Li and Torr rather effectively countered shortly thereafter, and Woods (Reference 3) also called that criticism into question. Later, however, Harris (Reference 27) argued in a more effective critique that Li and Torr’s previous results were erroneous because they assumed arbitrary (and extremely small) distances from the lattice ion to the observer, thus producing unreasonably large effects. In fact, Harris pointed out that the correct estimation of the induced gravitoelectric field outside a superconductor is some 20 orders of magnitude smaller! No evident rebuttal has been forthcoming from Li or Torr. At about this time, Torr and Li parted company, although both continued to work in the area. In 1995, Li was sufficiently convinced that she now had the answer to producing an artificial gravity field that could be measured outside a superconductor that she approached R. Koczor at NASA to fund further development of her version of the theory. By this time the Podkletnov paper had been “discovered,” and a few forward-thinking NASA scientists determined that perhaps it was time to initiate some research in the area. After all, now there was a peer-reviewed theoretical basis for a peer-reviewed experiment. Also at this time, this author and colleagues began preliminary experiments in Toronto after contacting Podkletnov. Our approach was to attempt to reproduce the 1992 Physica C spinning disk experiment with additional data from Podkletnov but using a better cryogenic design with the possibility of mechanically spinning the disk. This author and colleagues started manufacturing our own large YBCO disks in house. The following year, while still at the Tampere University of Technology’s Institute for Materials Science, Podkletnov and Vuorinen attempted to publish updated spinning disk experiments in the British Journal of Physics D Applied Phys Vol. 29 (1996), but the paper was withdrawn in a cloud of controversy. It was later published on the Internet (Reference 28) under the authorship of Podkletnov and Levit and then Podkletnov alone. Vuorinen and Levit had coauthored papers on ceramic processing with Podkletnov previously. This new experiment involved a large AC levitated 27-cm-diameter bi-layer sintered YBCO disk spun to 5,000 rpm using two-phase high-frequency radiofrequency (RF) “rotation” fields and allegedly showed gravitational shielding in the few percent range. The cryostat design was somewhat better in that there was considerably more shielding of the test mass from buoyancy and thermal"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ncurrent effects. There was no independent confirmation that this experiment actually\ntook place. Vuorinen and Levit had disappeared from the scene when this author asked\nPodkletnov whether they were available to discuss the experiment. Nevertheless, this\nauthor arranged for Podkletnov to visit the Toronto laboratory for preliminary\nconsultation on the experimental design to replicate his 1992 Physica C results.\n\nMeanwhile, a 1997 University of South Carolina press announcement declared that\ninvestors were being sought for a \"Gravity Generator\" technology based on\nconfirmatory experiments apparently underway at the university involving nonrotating\nhigh-temperature superconductors and RF coils. This machine would \"replace the\nwheels of a car...lift and propel aircraft, drive generators more efficiently and produce\ngravity-free environments on Earth.\" Evidently, the work of Douglas Torr, who had\nrecently taken up a post there, was the basis for the announcement. Unfortunately, the\nexcitement was short-lived, as a subsequent announcement was issued stating that the\nprevious announcement was \"premature.\"\n\nIn preliminary experiments at NASA, Koczor, Li, et al. failed to see expected shielding\neffect in a Podkletnov-like experiment (Reference 29). However, they were using a\nsmall, commercially available disk levitated above permanent magnets at LN2\ntemperatures. Undeterred, they pressed on, buoyed by the Internet publication of\nPodkletnov's previously rejected paper and discussions with Podkletnov himself. The\nfollowing year, Noever and Koczor (Reference 30) published the results of their\ninvestigations into nonrotating superconductor disks irradiated by radiofrequencies from\n1 to 15 MHz and detected a very weak gravity increase. This finding was later shown by\nthe same authors to be the likely result of an instrumentation artifact (Reference 31).\n\nIn 1999, this author was asked to present the state of the Toronto experimental\nreplication to the assembled physicists and engineers at the April 1999 Turin Politecnico\nmeeting. Gonnelli and others presented their initial findings of a tiny possible weight\nchange in test samples suspended above a disk as it passed through Tc. Also\npresenting was G. Modanese, who had been formulating his own theoretical\nexplanations for the Podkletnov results. Podkletnov described how the \"gravity\nshielding\" effect was discovered. Apparently his group had made large sputtering target\ndisks of YBCO for the aforementioned single-crystal processing, and to ensure the\ncorrect uniformity and porosity, the disk was set into rotation (presumably\nmechanically) while being levitated over a \"supporting solenoid.\" This allowed quick and\ncomplete scanning of the target's surface by means of a small, movable test magnet\nsuspended above the rotating disk and connected to an analytical chemical balance.\nWhen the smoke from a technician's pipe inexplicably appeared to rise above the\napparatus, they considered the possibility of gravitational shielding and substituted a\nnonmagnetic, nonconducting test mass for the small suspended magnet. Note that the\nnormal rotational speeds for magnetron sputtering are in the tens, not thousands, of\nrpm.\n\nPodkletnov went on to describe his first experiments with the so-called high-voltage\n\"gravity beam\" apparatus. An array of single-crystal whiskers of YBCO was grown on a\nsmall (few cm2 in area) substrate using a technique later commercialized by materials\nscientists (Professors Kettunen and Tiainen) at the Tampere University of Technology.\nThis plate was placed upright in a small LN2 dewar and electrically attached to a small\n(~200-kilovolt) van de Graaff machine. A grounded metal annular disk was placed a\nfew centimeters laterally away. The whole assembly was placed in a large bell jar that\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nwas evacuated and back-filled with argon to prevent YBCO degradation by water vapor.\nWhen the static machine was operated, a light blue planar \"discharge\" was seen to pass\nfrom the superconductor array to the annulus. At this instant, a pencil standing upright\non a table in an adjoining room and separated from the experiment by a thick concrete\nwall fell over.\n\nAround this time, Koczor had raised some NASA funding to commission the commercial\nfabrication of a 27-cm bi-layer disk conforming to Podkletnov and Levit's 1997\nspecifications. Podkletnov visited the Toronto laboratory for a second time to assess the\nexperimental progress, in particular the fabrication of the special bi-layer sintered\nceramic YBCO disks. Upon persistent questioning about the methods he used to power\nthe various coils (without sustaining high-voltage arcs), keep them in phase at high\nfrequencies, and maintain stability during rotation, it was learned that Podkletnov was\nnot involved in the electrical design but only in the ceramic side of the experiment.\nNevertheless, he claimed that with our apparatus and \"home-made\" disks, one should\nsee the shielding effect, but at a somewhat smaller magnitude than his original results\nowing to our expected lower rotational speeds.\n\nFor several years prior to 1999, Professor Harald Reiss had been working on tests of\ngravity's influence on high-temperature superconductors and vice versa as a researcher\nat Asea Brown Boveri and later the University of Wuerzburg in Germany, where he\ntaught courses in superconductivity. In that year he published (Reference 32) the\nresults of precise measurements of the weights of superconducting and non-\nsuperconducting samples cooled below Tc and found anomalies not easily explained\naway. He weighed small, disk-shaped samples held in a specially made capsule while\ndipping it into LN2 and found a slight (~0.5 percent) weight increase of a high-\ntemperature superconductor for which he was not able to offer a prosaic explanation.\nWe supplied some YBCO disks for his experiments. His analysis of possible artifacts is\nthorough and very useful to other researchers investigating this area. In 2003, he\npublished (Reference 33) an update of his ongoing LN2 experiments with increased\nprecision and artifact reduction. He was still observing weight changes during Tc\ntransition to a repeatable degree not achieved elsewhere.\n\n1999 saw the wind-up of the NASA small-diameter nonrotating disk experiments with\nno unequivocal results. As the budget for such experimentation had been exhausted by\nthe costly fabrication of the 27-cm bi-layer disk, Koczor tried to interest others,\nincluding our laboratory, to take on the task of levitating and RF-spinning this monster\ndisk at LHe temperatures; we respectfully declined. Around 2002, Koczor gave up\ntrying, as the experiment was deemed too difficult without considerable effort, and no\nspare disks were available in case the only YBCO disk that was made broke!\n\nTwo years later, Podkletnov and his collaborator on theory, Modanese, published a\npaper on the web concerning an enhanced version of the gravity beam, or \"Impulse\nGravity\" experiment (Reference 34). This was the first general publication of the high-\nvoltage impulse force experiment. Enough technical description was available to allow\nan assessment of the validity of experimental setup. Unfortunately, many unresolved\ntechnical questions cast considerable doubt on whether the experiment actually had\nbeen undertaken. Neither Podkletnov nor Modanese provided by a shred of\nconfirmatory evidence. However, the paper presented a general summary of the\ntheoretical work by Modanese and included an extensive bibliography.\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nOur own version of the Podkletnov spinning disk experiment was completed in late\n2001 and published in 2003 (Reference 35) showing a null result. It represented—and\nstill represents—the closest published replication of the original Podkletnov experiment.\nIt contains a discussion of the experimental difficulties arising from the nature of the\nexperiment itself and highlights the inability of the experimentalist (Podkletnov) to\nsupply critical data on his alleged prior experiments. Such a lack would have seriously\nhampered our replication had not Podkletnov been actively involved in the experimental\nsetup, at least from the standpoint of the construction of the ceramic disk. In fact, we\nsent to Podkletnov in Finland one of our bi-layered disks that he pronounced acceptable\nfor experimentation. Unfortunately, neither Podkletnov's 1992 publication nor\nsubsequent discussions with Podkletnov allowed a complete understanding of how the\noriginal experiment was carried out.\n\nIn 2001, Tajmar and De Matos began publishing a set of theoretical and experimental\npapers (Reference 36) that essentially carried on and incorporated Li and Torr's earlier\nwork while also providing additional insights. Martin Tajmar was a newly minted post-\ndoc working at the European Space Research & Technology Centre, Holland. The paper\ncondensed the previous work, including that of Li and Torr, to show that every\nelectromagnetic field is coupled to a gravitoelectric and gravitomagnetic field and that\nthe coupling \"is generally valid and does not require special properties like\nsuperconductivity.\" The authors acknowledged the criticisms of Li and Torr by Kowitt\nand Harris and noted that the simple coupling coefficient they derive is exceedingly\nsmall. However, it can be increased by using massive ion currents (for example,\nmoving/rotating mass or dense plasmas) and by aligning electron and nuclear spins. In\na roughly concurrent publication (Reference 37), De Matos and Tajmar, now at the\nAustrian Research Centres, extended their previous ideas and used a Barnett Effect\nanalog to show that \"any substance set into rotation becomes the seat of a uniform\nintrinsic gravitomagnetic field.\"\n\nSome experimentalists were still not willing to give up on superconductor-mediated\ngravity effects, in spite of the failure of our replication and the null results of NASA and\nothers. In 2002, a few researchers at Boeing Phantom Works in California attempted to\ninterest their management in replicating the Podkletnov high-voltage impulse gravity\nbeam experiment but were turned down in part because of the publicity resulting from\na leaked copy of the internal proposal getting to the media. That same year, Chiao in\nCalifornia proposed (Reference 38) using superconductors as gravitational wave\ntransducers into RF radiation and vice versa and attempted an experiment that\napparently failed. Harris (Reference 39) later rebutted Chiao by stating that neither\ngravitoelectric nor gravitomagnetic fields accompany gravitational waves.\n\nIn his 1950 book on superfluids, London (Reference 40) derived an expression for the\nmagnetic field produced by a rotating superconductor or superfluid that was\nproportional to the Cooper pair mass-to-charge ratio and the angular velocity. This is\nalso called the London moment, and its value had been measured in the laboratory by\nTate et al. (Reference 41). A general expression of the London moment can be used to\ndetermine the Cooper pair mass. In a 2003 paper, Tajmar et al. (Reference 42) noted\nthat the Tate experiments showed that the Cooper pair mass, which had been predicted\nto be slightly smaller than twice that of the electron, was actually slightly larger.\nIntrigued that there had been no published solution to this disagreement, Tajmar asked\nif a gravitational effect might be at work. By applying his previous work to this \"Cooper\nPair Mass Anomaly,\" he found that a relatively huge internal gravitomagnetic field\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nwould be required to explain the mass anomaly, a field that may be investigated in the\nlaboratory. In fact, he proposed an experiment \"measuring the torque on a spinning\ngyroscope produced by the gravitomagnetic field possibly generated by rotating\nsuperconductors.\" His subsequent publications showed that he was convinced that the\n\"anomalous gravitomagnetic London moment\" can actually be detected in the lab and\nnoted that an experiment was already underway under his direction.\n\nIn an attempt to bring some order to the discussion about correct laboratory practices\nin experiments designed to detect gravity-like forces, Reiss and Hathaway (Reference\n43) collaborated on a paper published in 2005. They tried to remind experimentalists\nabout the perils and pitfalls in the kind of research documented in the present paper.\nThis author meanwhile presented an extensive list of experimental issues that is\navailable and is still being added to on the Internet (Reference 9). These issues range\nfrom spurious mechanical effects to electromagnetic and electrostatic effects together\nwith a discussion of signal analysis and instrumentation issues.\n\nThe following year, Tajmar et al. (Reference 44) described the results of an experiment\nthey had performed to try to validate their conclusions about the anomalous London\nmoment, which they termed the \"gravitomagnetic London moment.\" The experiment\ninvolved spinning niobium and high-temperature ceramic superconductor rings at LHe\ntemperatures. No external magnetic fields were applied. They claimed to have found\nthe expected large gravitomagnetic field as detected by nearby accelerometers that\nmatched to within a factor of 1.5 of their theoretical results. Eric Davis at the Institute\nfor Advances Studies in Austin has raised concerns about the theoretical basis for the\nclaim. Davis contends (Reference 45) that the basis for calculating the Cooper pair\nmass is still so fraught with uncertainties as to leave Tajmar's mass anomaly\nunfounded. This leaves the theoretical basis of Tajmar's experiment in some doubt.\nThere were also several concerns about the experimental design and protocol.\n\nBy 2007, Tajmar (Reference 46) recognized that new data from improved experiments\ndid not match their prior predictions. Nevertheless, an unexplained residual signal\npersisted that exhibited several unexpected features, including a relatively large\ncoupling constant of 10-8 between the observed acceleration effect and the applied\nangular velocity. The effect appears to be proportional to angular momentum and\ninversely proportional to temperature after passing a critical temperature (which is\ndependent on the material of the spinning ring and is not coincident with the\nsuperconducting critical temperature). In addition, the effect is more pronounced in the\nclockwise rotation direction (as viewed from above), and it does not decay as a dipole\nfield would. While Tajmar et al. endeavor to address all possible systematic errors or\nprosaic explanations, they conclude that the \"measurements rule out our previous\ntheoretical model that predicted a coupling proportional to the material's Cooper pair\nand lattice mass density.\" The residual signal observed in the most recent experiments\nremains unexplained.\n\nAfter Tajmar et al. considered improvements to the apparatus suggested by other\nresearchers, Tajmar's effect continued to approach the noise floor. Unfortunately, the\nexplanations Tajmar provided in 2008 (Reference 47) for the residual effects became\nmore difficult to understand and believe. It is not known whether Tajmar is continuing\nthe experimentation at present.\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAs of this writing, there have been no further pronouncements from Podkletnov. No one\nhas published a replication of his \"gravity beam\" experiment, and as time passes, more\nand more scientists are coming to the conclusion that the experiment was never\nactually performed. Concerns about experimental procedures are not confined to the\nfringe, either. Final analysis of the Gravity Probe B satellite data is also apparently in\nserious difficulty (Reference 48), adding weight to the conclusion that experimentation\nin this area is fraught with difficulty even for the most experienced researchers.\n\nConclusion\n\nAlthough the payoff of the discovery of a superconductor-mediated interaction between\nmatter and gravity would be tremendous, only a few researchers are pursuing this goal.\nThe main reason for this is the adherence to dogma concerning the impossibility of\nincreasing the matter/electromagnetic coupling coefficients. This adherence is\nreinforced by reputable physicists pointing out that the theoretical constructs presented\nso far are based on questionable foundations. As with any forays into the unknown, one\nhas to accept a few bumps along the way, including sometimes going back to the\nstarting point in order to start again. The likelihood of scientific ridicule is extremely\nhigh in the search for laboratory-scale gravitational interactions.\n\nIncreased understanding of the nature of high-temperature superconductivity will be\nadvantageous in setting the firm basis from which to proceed. True scientists will\ncontinue to speculate about the ideas considered above, whether outlandish or not.\nExperiments will continue until either funding runs out or theory proves unequivocally\nthat the expected effects will be far too small to see; however, experimentalists must\nensure that other researchers have complete information so they can replicate\nexperiments. Theory will continue regardless, but theoreticians must ensure that the\nscientific foundations are correct, and experimentalists must remain wary of potential\ntraps.\n\n1 Gravitational Wave Conference: International High-Frequency Gravitational Waves (HFGW) Working Group, The Mitre Corporation, McLean, VA, May 2003\n2 Woods, R.C., \"Gravitational Waves and Superconductivity,\" Space Technologies and Applications International Forum 2005, El Genk, M.S. (ed.) American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings, Melville, NY, 2005\n3 Woods, R.C., \"A Novel Variable Focus Lens for HFGW,\" Space Technologies and Applications International Forum 2006, El Genk, M.S. (ed.) American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings, Melville, NY, 2006 (4) Graham-Rowe, Duncan: Cool colours, man, New Scientist, 21 April 2001\n4 Puthoff, H.E., 'Gravity as a Zero-Point Fluctuation Force,\" Physics Review A, Vol. 39, 1989, pp 2333 - 2342\n5 Sakharov, A.D., Dokl. Akad. Nauk. SSSR (Sov. Phys. Docl.), Vol. 12, 1968, pp 1040 - 1041\n6 Alzofon, F.E., \"Anti-Gravity with Present Technology: Implementation and Theoretical Foundation,\" AIAA-81-1608, 17th AIAA/SAE/ASME Joint Propulsion Conference, Colorado Springs, CO, July, 1981 (7) \"At a Crossroad,\" Window Film, Volume 12, Issue 4 - July/August 2008\n7 Hughes, W.L., \"On Kopernicky's Conjecture: Gravity is a Difference Between Electrostatic Attraction and Repulsion,\" Galilean Electrodynamics, Vol. 15, No.5, 2004, pp 97 - 100\n8 Braginski V.B., Caves C.M., and Thorne K.S., \"Laboratory Experiments to test Relativity Gravity\" Physics Review D, Vol.15, No 5, 1977, pp. 2047 - 2068\n9 Hathaway, G.D., \"Nightmares of the Art of Measuring,\" Space Technologies and Applications International Forum 2006, El Genk, M.S. (ed.) American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings, Melville, NY, 2006 and http://earthtech.org/experiments/Hathaway_Nightmare_List.pdf, accessed Jan 20, 2009\n10 Forward, R. L., \"General Relativity for the Experimentalist,\" Proc. IRE, Vol. 49, 1961, pp. 892-904.\n11 Forward, R. L., \"Guidelines to Antigravity,\" Am. J. Phys., Vol. 31, 1963, pp. 166-170.\n12 Nordvedt, K. \"Gravitomagnetic Interaction and Laser Ranging to Earth Satellites,\" Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol, 61, 1988, pp 2647 - 2649\n13 Fairbank, J. D. et al. (eds.), Near Zero: New Frontiers of Physics, W. H. Freeman and Company, New York, 1988, Chap. VI.\n14 http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/project124.html, accessed Jan 20, 2009\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"36f684c4e95ba9e8","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n15 Podkletnov, E. and Nieminen, R., \"A Possibility of Gravitational Force Shielding by Bulk YBa2Cu3O7-x Superconductor,\" Physica C, Vol. 203, 1992, pp. 441-444\n16 Li, N. and Torr, D. G., \"Effects of a Gravitomagnetic Field on Pure Superconductors,\" Phys. Rev. D, Vol. 43, No. 2, 1991, pp. 457–459\n17 Li, N. and Torr, D. G., \"The Gravitoelectrodynamics of Superconductors: A Theoretical Basis for a Principle of Electrically Induced Gravitation,\" Bull. Am. Phys. Soc., Vol. 37, No. 2, 1992, Session G8 paper 10\n18 Li, N. and Torr, D. G., \"Gravitoelectric–Electric Coupling via Superconductivity,\" Found. Phys. Lett., Vol. 6, No. 4, 1993, pp. 371-383\n19 Dewitt, B.S., \"Superconductors and Gravitational Drag,\" Physical Review Letters, Vol. 16, 1966, p. 1902\n20 Ross, D.K., \"The London Equation for Superconductors in a Gravitational Field,\" Journal of Physics A, Vol. 16, 1983, pp. 1331 – 1335\n21 Prof. Pentti Kettunen, Tampere, Finland, private communication, 2007\n22 Risto Nieminen, Tampere, Finland, private communication, 2007\n23 de Podesta, M., Bull, M., \"Alternative Explanation of \"Gravitational Screening\" Experiments,\" Physica C, Vol. 253, 1995, pp 199-200\n24 Prof. R. Gonnelli, Turin, Italy, private communication, 1999\n25 Woods, R. C., Cooke, S. G., Helme, J., and Caldwell, C. H., \"Gravity Modification by High-Temperature Superconductors,\" AIAA-2001-3363, 37th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Salt Lake City, UT, July 2001.\n26 Kowitt, M., \"Gravitomagnetism and Magnetic Permeability in Superconductors,\" Phys. Rev. B, Vol. 49, 1994, pp. 704-708\n27 Harris, E. G., \"Comments on 'Gravitoelectric-electric Coupling via Superconductivity',\" Found. Phys. Lett., Vol. 12, 1999, pg. 201\n28 Podkletnov, E., \"Weak Gravitational Shielding Properties of Composite Bulk YBCO Superconductor below 70K under EM Field\" LANL cond-mat/9701074 v.3, 16 Sept 1997\n29 Li, N., Noever, D., Robertson, T., Koczor, R., and Brantley, W., \"Static Test for a Gravitational Force Coupled to Type II YBCO Superconductors,\" Physica C, Vol. 281, 1997, pp. 260-267\n30 Noever, D., and Koczor, R., \"Radio-frequency Illuminated Superconductive Disks: Reverse Josephson Effects and Implications for Precise Measuring of Proposed Gravity Effects,\" NASA JPL 9th Advanced Space Propulsion Research Workshop & Conference, Pasadena, CA, 1998\n31 Noever, D., Koczor, R., Roberson, R., \"Superconductor-Mediated Modification of Gravity? AC Motor Experiments with Bulk YBCO Disks in Rotating Magnetic Fields,\" AIAA-98-3139, 34th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Cleveland, OH, July 1998\n32 Reiss, H. D., \"A Possible Interaction between Gravity and High Temperature Superconductivity – by a Materials Property?,\" 15th European Conference on Thermophysical Properties, Wuerzburg, Germany, Sept 1999\n33 Reiss, H. D., \"Weight Anomalies Observed during Cool-Down of High Temperature Superconductors,\" Phys. Essays, Vol. 16, 2003, pp. 236-253\n34 Podkletnov, E. and Modanese, G., \"Impulse Gravity Generator Based on Charged YBa2Cu3O7-y Superconductor with Composite Crystal Structure,\" arXiv: physics/0108005, Aug. 2001\n35 Hathaway, G., Cleveland, B., and Bao, Y., \"Gravity Modification Experiment using a Rotating Superconducting Disk and Radio Frequency Fields,\" Physica C, Vol. 385, 2003, pp. 488-500\n36 Tajmar, M., and De Matos, C., \"Coupling of Electromagnetism and Gravitation in the Weak Field Approximation,\" Jnl. of Theoretics, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2001\n37 De Matos, C., and Tajmar, M., \"Gravitomagnetic Barnett Effect,\" Indian J. Phys., Vol. 75B, No. 5, 2001, pp. 459-461\n38 Chiao, R., \"Superconductors as Quantum Transducers and Antennas for Gravitational and Electromagnetic Radiation,\" arXiv: gr-qc/0204012, Apr. 2002\n39 Harris, E., \"Superconductors as Gravitational Wave Detectors,\" 69th Annual Meeting Southeastern Section, Am. Phys. Soc., No. NC.001, 2002\n40 London, F., in: Superfluids, Vol 1, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1950, pg. 78\n41 Tate, J., Cabrera, B., Felch, S., and Anderson, J., \"Precise Determination of the Cooper-pair Mass,\" Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 62, No. 8, 1989 pp. 845-848\n42 Tajmar, M., and De Matos, C., \"Gravitomagnetic Field of a Rotating Superconductor and of a Rotating Superfluid,\" Physica C, Vol. 385, 2003, pp. 551-554.\n43 Reiss, H.D., Hathaway, G.D., \"Minimum Experimental Standards in the Laboratory Search for Gravity Effects,\" Space Technologies and Applications International Forum 2005, El Genk, M.S. (ed.) American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings, Melville, NY, 2005\n44 Tajmar, M., Plesescu, F., Marhold, K., De Matos, C., \"Experimental Detection of the Gravitomagnetic London Moment,\" arXiv: gr-qc/0603033, Mar. 2006\n45 E. W. Davis, Institute for Advanced Studies, Austin, TX, private communication, 2007\n46 Tajmar, M., Plesescu, F., Seifert, B., Schnitzer, R., and Vasiljevich, I., \"Search for Frame-Dragging in the Vicinity of Spinning Superconductors\" arXiv: abs/0707.3806v7\n47 M. Tajmar, Austrian Research Centres, Seibersdorf, Austria, private communication, 2008\n48 http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13938?feedId=online-news_rss20, accesses Jan 25, 2009\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 947020\n\nSECRET\n\nAIR STAFF\nSUPREME HEADQUARTERS\nALLIED EXPEDITIONARY FORCE\n(FORWARD)\n\nREF:- SHAEF/A/TS.37153/A.2.\t\t\t\t\t\t16 March 1945.\n\nSUB:- Night Phenomena.\n\nTO:-\tFirst Tactical Air Force (Prov.) APO 374, US ARMY.\n\n\n\t1.\tWith reference to reports forwarded from the XIIth Tactical Air Command through your Headquarters on the subject of night phenomena (foofighter), and further to this Headquarters' letter of even reference dated 11 February, a reply has now been received from the Air Ministry who say that Bomber Command crews have for some time been reporting similar phenomena.\n\n\t2.\tThe Air Ministry view is that a few of the alleged aircraft may have been Me.262's and for the rest flak rockets are suggested as the most likely explanation.\n\n\t3.\tIt is regretted that no further, or more definite, information can be given.\n\n\t\t\tfor the Deputy Supreme Commander,\n\n\n\n\t\t\t\tC.M. GRIERSON\n\t\t\t\tAir Commodore,\n\t\t\t\tA.C. of S., A-2."} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"To:\tA/Cmdr. Grierson,\n\tA.C. of S. A-2\n\tAir Staff S.H.A.E.F.\n\nFrom:\tAir Ministry, D.D.I.2.\n\nDate:\t13th March, 1945.\n\nRef:\t111/45/DDI2.\n\nBALLS OF FIRE - RED.\n\nThe papers dealing with the above subject which you enclosed with your memo SHAEF Air/TS.37153/A2 dated 11th February, have been carefully examined and discussed with the various other Departments concerned.\n\nBomber Command crews have for some time been reporting similar phenomena. A few of the alleged aircraft may have been Me. 262 and for the rest, flak rockets are suggested as the most likely explanation.\n\nThe whole affair is still something of a mystery and the evidence is very sketchy and varied so that no definite and satisfactory explanation can yet be given.\n\nE. D. W. Hopkins\nGroup Captain"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUPREME HEADQUARTERS\nALLIED EXPEDITIONARY FORCE (FORWARD)\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff A-2\n\nREF : SHAEF/AIR/S.37153/A-2\t\t\t\t14 March 1945.\n\nSUBJECT: Request for Photographs.\n\nTO\tHQ. 1ST US. TAC. A.F.\n\tAttention AC of S. A-2.\n\n\nReference your letter dated 12 March asking that photos be furnished as mentioned in our Signal A.I.380 dated 4 March, this office has since been informed by HQ. IX TAC. That the pictures of \"Long cylindrical objects\" claimed by the 107th P.R. Squadron pilot proved to be unsuccessful.\n\nFor the Deputy Supreme Commander:\n\n\n\nT.G. AMES.\nLt-Col. AC.\nA-2 RECCE."} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RAF Form 96.\tMESSAGE FORM\tSignal Office File No. 58A\n\nMESSAGE IN 37153\nHEADING OUT\n\nNo. of Groups GR\nOffice Date Stamp\nSIGNALS OFFICE 5 MAR 1945 SIGNALS HEADQUARTERS\n\nFROM AIR STAFF, SHAEF (FORWARD).\n\nTO AIR MINISTRY, WHITEHALL.\n\nREPEATED\n\nOriginator's Number A.I. 321\tDate 5 MARCH 1945\t(Write horizontally) SECRET(.)\tYOUR AX 222\t4TH MARCH(.)\nUNDERSTAND\tFROM DDI2\tVISITING\tHERE TODAY\tTHAT ALL\nAVAILABLE\tBOMB\tTORPEDOES\tFROM\tTRIPPELWERKE\nMOLSHEIM\tHAVE ALREADY\tBEEN SENT\tTO HOHICHURCH(.) DDI2\nWILL CHECK\tFURTHER WITH\tUSSTAF AND\tREPORT ON\tRETURN TO\nU.K. ABOUT\t8TH MARCH(.)\n\nMay be sent AS WRITTEN *(1) By ANY Signal Method *(2) NOT by Wireless *(3) But if liable to Interception or Capture SEND in CYPHER\nSignature Shl Grierson\nRank Air Cdr\n\nSend in CYPHER *(1) By ANY Signal Method *(2) NOT by Wireless\nSignature 2359\n\nDate-Time Group 05 1700 A.\nOriginator's Instructions Degree of Priority SECRET IMPORTANT\n\n724899 WL 49887/03734 497,000 Pads 3/44 MP 51-8336"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ABLE XRAY TWO TWO TWO FOURTH MARCH SECRET PD\nREFERENCE MIKESUGARWILLIAM SIX DATED SECOND JANUARY ONENINEFOURFIVE FROM VCAS\nTO AIR MARSHAL ROBB STRESSING IMPORTANCE OF RECOVERING BULK STOCKS OF GERMAN\nBOMB TORPEDOES FROM TRIPPELWERKE MOLSHEIM AND REPLY JIG MIKE ROGER SLANT\nONE TWO TWO DATED SECOND JANUARY BULK DELIVERIES HAVE NOT REPEAT NOT YET\nBEGUN PD PLEASE INVESTIGATE AS STOCKS ARE REQUIRED URGENTLY.\n\nPRIORITY IMPORTANT\n\nFROM AIR MINISTRY WHITEHALL.\nTO S.H.A.E.F. (FORWARD) FOR AIR COMMODORE GRIERSON PD\n\nIMPORTANT\n\nAIR STAFF DISTRIBUTION\nACTION A-2 / INFOR. A-2"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IMMEDIATE\n[stamps: HAEF, FWD, 25 MAR 1945, 56A, 90]\n10C A 37/153\n[REDACTED]\nAFF V JEZO NR ITS 21 OPOP\nFROM: HQ IX TAC 051102A\nTO: AIR STAFF S.H.A.E.F. FORWARD\nSECRET QQY BT\nREFERENCE YOUR MESSAGE AI.320 DATED 041745A: PHOTOS OF LONG CYLINDRICAL OBJECTS TAKEN BY 67TH TAC/R PILOTS 011030 VICINITY F-5710 WERE UNSUCC-ESSFUL, FULL WRITTEN REPORT WILL FOLLOW.\nQUESADA\nBT 051102A\nDRP AR\nAFF R ......05/1132 KS AR\n2361\n4346\n1136"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"R.A.F. Form 96. MESSAGE FORM\nSignal Office File No.\nMESSAGE IN\nHEADING OUT\nNo. of Groups GR\nOffice Date Stamp\nSIGNALS OFFICE 4 MAR 1945 SIGNALS HEADQUARTERS\nFROM AIR STAFF S.H.A.E.F. FORWARD.\nTO AIR MINISTRY. USSTAF. 2nd T.A.F. 1ST TAC A.F. H.Q. IXTH TAC.\nREPEATED NINTH AIR FORCE.\nAI. 320 Date 4 MARCH 1945\nTAC AIR COMMAND DATED 1 MARCH QUOTE PILOTS REPORT FOLLOWING AN ALUMINUM COLOURED CYLINDER SHAPED OBJECT ABOUT 12 FEET LONG AND 1 FOOT IN DIAMETER WAS OBSERVED FLOATING IN THE AIR AT 9,000 FEET (.) IT APPEARED TO BE SUSPENDED VERTICALLY WITH SMALL FINS AND A MAST PROJECTING FROM THE LOWER END (.) THE OBJECT WAS ATTACKED AND PARTIALLY DEFLATED (.) THE CYLINDER DID NOT DISINTEGRATE (.) PHOTO TAKEN BY 107 SQ. OF 67 TAC/R GROUP AT 011030 HOURS VIC F-5710 UNQUOTE (.)\nMay be sent AS WRITTEN *(1) By ANY Signal Method *(2) NOT by Wireless *(3) But if liable to Interception or Capture SEND in CYPHER\nSend in CYPHER *(1) By ANY Signal Method *(2) NOT by Wireless\nSignature 2362\nRank\nIMMEDIATE\nSystem in / Time in / Reader / Sender / System out / Time out / Reader / Sender / System out / Time out / Reader / Sender / T.O.R.\n4347\n7Z4899 Wt. 49887/03734 497,000 Pads 3/44 MP 51-8336"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"R.A.F. Form 96. MESSAGE FORM\nSignal Office File No.\nMESSAGE IN\nHEADING OUT\nNo. of Groups GR\nOffice Date Stamp\nFROM\nTO\n- PAGE 2 -\nREPEATED\nAI. 320\nPHOTOS TO AIR MINISTRY WRITTEN FURTHER REPORTED (.)\n4 MARCH\nCOMMA REPORT BY INSTANCES ALSO TO BE\nUSSTAF AND PILOTS ALSO TO\nA.C.I.U. CONCERNED BE\nMay be sent AS WRITTEN\nSignature Shiltreien Rank Ant Jole\nSend in CYPHER\nSignature 2363\nDate-Time Group 041745A\nOriginator's Instructions Degree of Priority SECRET IMMEDIATE\nSmith 187\n4348\n724899 Wt. 49887/03734 497,000 Pads 3/44 MP 51-8336"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SHAEF STAFF MESSAGE CONTROL\nSECRET SECRET 54A\nINCOMING MESSAGE\nJEUS SHAEF AOZ/1\nTOO 011947A MARCH TOR 012100A MARCH mhm 012115A MARCH\nSECRET OF PRIORITY\nFROM : HQ IX TAC SIGNED QUESADA\nTO :CG SHAEF MAIN ATTN A-2, CG NINTH AF ADV ATTN A-2\nREF NO : NONE, 1 MARCH 1945\nPilots report the following.\nAn aluminum colored cylinder shaped object, about 12 ft long and 1 ft in diameter was observed floating in the air at 9,000 ft. It appeared to be suspended vertically with small fins and a mast projecting from the lower end. The object was attacked and partially deflated, a red flame resulted without smoke. The cylinder did not disintegrate.\nPhoto taken by 107 SQ of 67 TAC/R Group at 011030 hours vic F-5710.\nACTION : AIR STAFF\nINFORMATION : G-2 SHAEF FORWARD AG RECORDS\nMB 164/14\n2364 4349\nSMC IN 310 1 MAR 45 2200A AGD/wml REF NO: NONE\nSECRET\nCOPY NO. 8\nTHE MAKING OF AN EXACT COPY OF THIS MESSAGE IS FORBIDDEN"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET 51A\nA.D.I.(K), Air Ministry.\nTo:- A/Cdr. Grierson, S.H.A.E.F.Main, (Air Div.). Copy to C.I.O. 2nd T.A.F.\nDate:- 17th February 1945.\nReference your SHAEF AIR/S.37153/A.2 dated 14th February 1945 with the attached CX report, this probably refers to \"Flak Bombe\" mentioned in A.D.I.(K) Report No.562/1944, paragraphs 128 and 129. 52A\nSHAEF MAIN FWD\n21 FEB 1945\n5C 37/53\nS.D.Felkin, Wing Commander.\nSDF/GJ\n2365\n4350"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AIR STAFF\nSUPREME HEADQUARTERS\nALLIED EXPEDITIONARY FORCE\n\nREF: SHAEF AIR/TS.37153/A-2. 11 February 1945.\n\nSUBJECT: Night Phenomena.\n\nTO: Headquarters, U.S.S.T.A.F\n(For attention of Chief Technical Intelligence\nOfficer, Col. Bradley).\n\n1. Attached are copies of papers received from the First Tac. Air Force (Prov). From the number of reports quoted in the 2nd W/Ind from the 415th Night Fighter Squadron, it would seem that there must be something more than mere imagination behind the matter, and in view of the fact that pilots and crews are becoming slightly worried by them, it is considered that everything possible should be done to get to the root of the matter.\n\n2. Copies of the reports have been sent to the Air Ministry for their consideration, and the Scientific Investigation Division of this Headquarters (Mr. Robertson) has also been asked to consider the problem.\n\n3. In the meantime, it is suggested that it might be as well for an Air Technical Intelligence Officer to visit the Unit concerned and obtain reports and impressions at first hand from aircrew personnel.\n\nFor the Deputy Supreme Commander,\n\nC.M. GRIERSON,\nAir Commodore,\nA.C. of S., A-2,\nAir Staff, SHAEF"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAIR STAFF\nSUPREME HEADQUARTERS\nALLIED EXPEDITIONARY FORCE\n\nREF:- 37153\n\n11 February 1945.\n\nTO:- First Tactical Air Force (Prov.), APO 374, U.S. ARMY.\n\n1. Reference to your 3rd Indorsement on the subject of night phenomenon originated by the 415th Night Fighter Squadron, there is no information at this Headquarters which might explain the nature and cause of the lights and other phenomena described by the pilots of this Squadron.\n\n2. The matter is, therefore, being referred to the Air Ministry in order to find out whether any further information can be obtained from that source. It is also hoped to make arrangements for an Air Technical Intelligence Officer from USSTAF to visit the Unit concerned.\n\nFor the Deputy Supreme Commander,\n\nC.M. GRIERSON,\nAir Commodore,\nA.C. of S., A-2."} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"37153 SECRET\nPlease return to A2 Shaef\n\n2nd Ind.\n\nHEADQUARTERS XII TACTICAL AIR COMMAND (ADV), APO #374, U.S. Army,\n4 February 1945.\n\nTO: Commanding General, First Tactical Air Force (Prov), APO #374, U.S. Army. Attn: A/C of S, A-2.\n\nAttention is invited to 2nd W/Ind.\n\nfor John E. Woolley\nLEAVITT CORNING, JR.,\nLt. Colonel, G.S.C.,\nA/C of S, A-2.\n\n3rd Ind.\nHEADQUARTERS, FIRST TACTICAL AIR FORCE (PROV), APO 374, U S Army, 5 February 1945.\n\nTO: Chief Intelligence Officer, Air Staff SHAEF, APO 757.\n\n1. Forwarded for your information.\n\n2. This headquarters has no further information or explanation in connection with these phenomena.\n\n3. It is believed that further investigation is warranted. Since appropriate technical personnel are not available within the First Tactical Air Force, the matter is forwarded for such further investigation as may be advisable.\n\nC. A. YOUNG,\nColonel, AC,\nAC of S, A-2\n\n1 Incl.\n#1 - 1st & 2nd W/Ind, 23 Jan 45 and 30 Jan 45.\n\nSECRET\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nBOTH: CG, XII TAC\nInitial\nDate: 16 Jan 1945\n\nHEADQUARTERS XII TACTICAL AIR COMMAND (ADV) D-C-1\nOffice of the A/C of S, A-2\n\nAPO 374, US Army,\n16 January 1945.\n\nSUBJECT: Night Phenomenon.\n\nTO: Commanding General, First Tactical Air Force (Prov), APO 374, US Army. Attn: A/C of S, A-2.\n\n1. The following is quoted from training and tactical information supplied by the 415th Night Fighter Squadron for the month of December 1944:\n\n\"We have encountered a phenomenon which we cannot explain; crews have been followed by lights that blink on and off changing colors etc. The lights come very close and fly formation with our planes. They are agitating and keep the crews on edge when they encounter them, mainly because they cannot explain them. It is requested further information be furnished on this subject, such as similar experiences of other night units\".\n\n2. Further information is requested.\n\nLEAVITT CORNING, JR.,\nLt. Colonel, G. S. C.,\nA/C of S, A-2.\n\n1st Ind\nHEADQUARTERS, FIRST TACTICAL AIR FORCE (PROV), AC of S A-2, APO 374, US Army,\n20 January 1945\n\nTO: AC of S A-2, XII Tactical Air Command, APO 374, US Army\n\n1. There have been no instances reported as above.\n\n2. Before an investigation can be made it will be necessary to have more complete information, such as colors of the lights, their intensity, size, duration, and at what altitudes seen; also if the lights are observed at any specific hours. Do subject lights cross Allied lines and in what direction are they seen to travel? Also, has it been noted on what part of the aircraft are they carried, i.e. wing, tail, prop; and how close do they approach our aircraft?\n\nFor the Assistant Chief of Staff A-2:\n\nS V BOYKIN\nMajor AC\nExecutive Officer\n\n2405 -1-\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n1st W/Ind. D-W-2\n\nHEADQUARTERS XII TACTICAL AIR COMMAND, APO #374, U.S. Army, 23 January 1945.\n\nTO: S-2, 415 Night Fighter Squadron.\n\nForwarded for compliance with paragraph 2 of 1st Ind.\n\nLEAVITT CORNING, JR.,\nLt. Colonel, G. S. C.,\nA/C of S, A-2.\n\n2nd. W/Ind.\n\n415th. NIGHT FIGHTER SQUADRON, APO #374, U. S. Army, 30 January 1945.\n\nTO: AC of S A-2 XII Tactical Air Command, APO 374, U. S. Army.\n\n1. In compliance with paragraph 2 of 1st. Ind., the following extracts from the Sortie Reports of various pilots who have encountered the Night Phenomenon are submitted for your information.\n\nNight of 14-15 December 1944 - \"In vicinity of Erstein (V-9381) flying at 1000 ft. observed large red light at 2000 ft. going East at 18:40 hrs. Travelling at approximately 200 MPH\"\n\nNight of 16-17 December 1944 - \"20 miles North of Breisach (W-0173) at 800 ft. observed 5 or 6 flashing red and green lights in \"T\" shape. Thought they were flak. About 10 minutes later saw the same lights much closer and behind me. We turned port and Starboard and the lights followed. They closed in to about 8 O'clock and 1000 ft. and remained in that position for several minutes and then disappeared.\"\n\nNight of 22-23 December 1944 - \"Patrolling at Angels 10 from Sarrebourg to Strasbourg North and South of highway. At 06:00 hrs. saw two lights coming towards A/C from the ground. Upon reaching altitude of plane, they leveled off and stayed on my tail for approximately 2 minutes. Lights appeared to be a large orange glow. After staying with A/C for approximately 2 minutes, they would peel off and turn away, fly along level for a few minutes and then go out. They appeared to be under perfect control at all times. Lights were seen somewhere in vicinity of Nagenau.\"\n\nSECRET\n\n2406"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n2 nd. W/Ind., 415th. Night Fighter Squadron 30 January 1945 con't.\n\nNight of 23-24 December 1944 - \"Observed reddish colored flames at considerable distance and at approximately 10,000 ft.\"\n\nNight of 23-24 December 1944 - \"Approximately 10 miles South of Point X (Q6745) noticed to NE approximately 5 miles a glowing red object shooting straight up. Changed suddenly to plane view of A/C doing a wing over and going into a dive and disappearing.\"\n\nNight of 26-27 December 1944 - \"At 01:45 hrs. saw two yellow streaks of flame flying at same level at approximately 3000 ft. off port side. We also saw red balls of fire that stayed up for 10 seconds approximately 45 miles away. After seeing yellow streaks, made starboard vector lost altitude and streaks disappeared from view. Called GCI Blunder and asked if any E/A were in vicinity. They answered No. Instructed to return to Angels 10. We felt what was thought to be prop wash; very distinct. Noticed several groups of lights off port while patrolling in vicinity of Q-9050 and R-1556 Lights made distinct lines somewhat like arrows.\"\n\nNight of 26-27 December 1944 - \"While on vector 090 near V-7050 during patrol we observed airborne white lights. They were staggered evenly vertically and we could see from 1 to 4 swing at once. They appeared stationary at 10,000 ft.\"\n\nNight of 26-27 December 1944 - \"Observed light at same altitude while in vicinity of Worms Observer saw light come within 100 ft. Peeled off and took evasive action but light continued to follow for 5 minutes. Light then pulled up rapidly and went out of sight.\"\n\nNight of 27-28 December 1944 - \"While on North heading in patrol area noticed in vicinity of Q-1378 lights suspended in air moving slowly and would then disappear. Were orange in color. Lights appeared singly and in pairs. Observed these lights four or five times during period.\"\n\nNight of 27-28 December 1944 - \"Eight miles NE of Luneville at 19:10 hrs. saw three sets of three lights (red and white) one on starboard and one on port from 1000 ft. to 2000 ft. to rear and closing in at Angels 10. Pulled up to Angels 8 and lights went out. Called Churchman to see if there was anything in area. Received a negative reply.\"\n\nNight of 30-31 December 1944 - \"Saw a group of lights flying through the air 30 or 40 miles East of base while flying at Angels 9 - 10.\"\n\nNight of 1-2 January 1945 - \"Saw Foofighters North of Strasbourg and North of Saverne\".\n\nNight of 14-15 January 1945 - \"Observed a large orange glow in sky approx. 5 ft. in diameter in vicinity of Ingweiller at 6000 ft. at 20:00 hrs.\"\n\nSECRET\n\n2407"} {"doc_id":"375199c99d503171","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n2nd. W/Ind., 415th. Night Fighter Squadron, 30 January 1945 Con't.\n\nNight of 29-30 January 1945 - \"At about 00:10 hrs. sighted a Foofighter about half way between Weissembourg and Landau. Foofighter was off to the starboard and rear at Angels 2. Lights were amber and one was 20 - 50 ft. above the other and of about 30 seconds duration. Foofighter was about 1000 ft. away and following. The lights were about a foot in diameter. Lights disappeared when Travel 34 turned into them.\"\n\n2. In every case where pilot called GCI Control and asked if there was a Bogey A/C in the area he received a negative answer.\n\nF. B. RINGWALD, Captain, A. C., Intelligence Officer.\n\n* Foofighters is the name given these phenomenon by combat crews of this Squadron.\n\nSECRET\n\n2408"} {"doc_id":"3902310e65bc229d","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"“Orbs Launching Orbs”\n•\tLocation: Western U.S.\n•\tTime of Day: Dusk (on two separate days)\n\n•\tThree teams of two federal law enforcement special agents each (USPER1 through USPER6) independently describe seeing orange “orbs” in the sky emit/launch smaller red “orbs” in groups of two to four, with three being the general consensus. This is stated to have occurred at least five times. Each time, the orange orb would appear, launch red orbs, then disappear. The orange orb was only visible for one or two seconds. The red orbs would generally move away from the orange “mother” orb in a horizontal path, but in a couple of instances, one red orb was stated to move “heading up at an angle,” while another witness stated sometimes the red orbs would “swoop down” after being launched from the larger orange orb. These events were witnessed by multiple teams from varying locations and vantage points over a two-day period. Due to the sequential nature of the events, it is not known whether there was a single orange “mother” orb that released the groups of red orbs or whether there were multiple orange orbs at play."} {"doc_id":"3902310e65bc229d","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"“Large, Fiery Orb”\n•\tLocation: Western U.S.\n•\tTime of Day: Dusk\n\n•\tTwo federal law enforcement special agents (USPER5 and USPER6) witness a glowing orange orb at a distance of “approximately 500-600 meters,”* where it was perched close to a rock pinnacle. Size was difficult to determine, but it appeared to be similar in size to a “small helicopter cockpit.”** Witnesses were unable to clearly see any structure other than the glowing orb, though USPER6 noted that the object “did almost appear it might have had a small spindle or something connecting it from underneath to the rock formation.” Witnesses stated that the object did not emit any noticeable sound. The object was described as being “similar to the Eye or [sic] Sauron from Lord of the Rings, except without the pupil, or maybe an orange Storm Electrify bowling ball.”\n•\tUSPER6 stated the object “seemed to be hovering with zero resistance or movement, or to be suspended…” The sighting lasted “about a minute.”\n\n* Measurements later gathered by AARO assess the object to have been ~1050 meters away from the observers.\n** Measurements later gathered by AARO assess the object to have been between 12-18 meters in diameter."} {"doc_id":"3902310e65bc229d","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"“Dark Kite”\n•\tLocation: Western U.S.\n•\tTime of Day: Pre-dawn hours\n\n•\tTwo federal law enforcement special agents (USPER5 and USPER6) observed what is initially thought to be a car traveling along a road in a restricted zone. The “car” had two lights (one red and one white) that are about 2 to 3 feet off the ground. Agents pursued the “car” and as they got to within a few hundred feet of it, the object suddenly moved off the road over the desert without changing its orientation with respect to the observers, i.e., it appeared to move laterally, at an estimated speed of 15-20mph. The object didn’t change height and appeared to move with “zero resistance.” The object stopped about 100 meters off the side of the road and turned off its lights. USPER6 described the object as a “thin line,” from the back whereas the other agent (USPER5) stated that “it almost looked like an ill defined, dark kite shape that had some rounded width to the sides.”*\n\n•\tUSPER6 used night vision goggles (NVGs) to view the object once it had stopped off the road. The agent stated that they observed the object for “a split second in the NVGs before the light turned off” and that once the lights were off, a “very thin line” remained. The object was estimated to be about 4 feet wide and positioned horizontally to the ground (see Image 1). The object then began moving at about the speed of 15-20mph and appeared to “move up in height…, but [remain] a flat line.” The agent lost sight of the object after a few seconds.\n\n* In later discussions with AARO, the object is described as being triangular.\n\nImage 1: Recreation of drawing provided by USPER6 of object seen in night vision goggles.\nRed light\nWhite light"} {"doc_id":"3902310e65bc229d","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"“Transparent Kite”\n•\tLocation: Western U.S.\n•\tTime of Day: Pre-dawn hours\n\n•\tAbout 30 minutes after the “Dark Kite” sighting, federal law enforcement special agents (USPER5 and USPER6) returned to the same general area with another colleague (USPER7) in response to a report of another unauthorized object in the area. Within a few hundred meters of the “Dark Kite” sighting, two of the team members (USPER5 and USPER6) observed a kite-shaped object with a lighting pattern similar to the object seen previously. This object is about 6 meters off the ground, is canted at an angle from lower right to upper left (see Image 2), and appeared to be floating slowly with the wind. USPER5 was using NVGs when viewing the object and USPER6 used the bare eye. USPER7 did not see the object. USPER5 stated that in the night vision goggles, they could “vaguely see a bright star or two in the distance through the object, though somewhat more faint,” leading them to believe the object was somewhat transparent. After losing sight of the object, USPER5 tried using a spotlight to find it again. The witness noted that when shining the light around, “at one point my beam went from shining far into the distance to stopping about 50 yards away on nothing in particular, it just was not projecting into the distance and then it was.” When the witness pointed the light at the spot where the light had appeared to be blocked by something, this time the light was “projecting into the distance again.” The team was unable to reacquire sight of the object.\n\nNote: Outline was not definitive, but location of lights stayed in exact formation.\nImage 2: Recreation of drawing provided by USPER6 of object seen with the bare eye."} {"doc_id":"3adde47daa3948b1","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. DATE - TIME GROUP\n16 November 53 16/1305Z\n2. LOCATION\nCatalina, California\n3. SOURCE\nMilitary\n10. CONCLUSION\nAstronomical (JUPITER)\nMovement of object does not coincide with winds aloft. Astronomers at Griffis Park observatory evaluated observation as possibly planets. Angular velocity unknown.\n4. NUMBER OF OBJECTS\nOne\n5. LENGTH OF OBSERVATION\n10 Minutes\n11. BRIEF SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS\nRound purplish white object appeared to be stationary in first sighting over Catalina and moved NW toward Los Angeles on a level horizontal path. Source stated that the skies were clear. No irratic maneuvers were observed. Nov 15, Jupiter 5 hrs, 38 min., 45 deg elevation in West.\n6. TYPE OF OBSERVATION\nGround-Visual\n7. COURSE\nNW\n8. PHOTOS\nYes\nNo\n9. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE\nYes\nNo\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 923007\nFORM\nFTD SEP 63 0-329 (TDE) Previous editions of this form may be used."} {"doc_id":"3adde47daa3948b1","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"3adde47daa3948b1","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RA084\nWPG099\nYDC075\nXYB233\nJWZ C267\nBX71\nBWD A290\nBWDK292\nRR JEDEN JEDWP JEPHQ JEPQW 444\nDE BWDKW 09\nR 171939Z\nFM HQ COMDR 2347TH AFRTC LBEACH MUNI APRT CALIF\nTO JEDEN/COMDR ADC ENT AFB COLORADO SPRINGS COLO\nJEDWP/COMDR ATIC WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB OHIO\nJEPHQ/DIRECTOR INT HQ USAF WASH 25 D C\nJEPQW/COMDR CONTINENTAL AIR COMMAND MITCHEL AFB N Y\nAF GRNC\n[REDACTED] 0239 UFOB (1)\n(A) ROUND SAUCER SHAPE\n(B) SIZE OF A PEA\n(C) COLOR OF OBJECT WAS PURPLISH WHITE ON FIRST SIGHTING AND FADED TO A WHITEST COLOR REMAINING SO UNTIL ITS DISAPPERANCE\n(D) ONE (1)\n(E) NEGATIVE\n(F) NEGATIVE\n(G) NEGATIVE\n(H) NEGATIVE"} {"doc_id":"3adde47daa3948b1","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWOXBJW 09\n(I) OBJECT APPERED TO BE STATIONERY IN FIRST SIGHTING OVER CATALINA AND MOVED NORTH-WEST TOWARD LOS ANGELES WHERE IT DISAPPERED FROM VIEW\n(2)\n(A) CASUAL GLANCE AT SKY\n(B) 45 DEGREES ANGLE OF ELEVATION,; ODEGREES AZIMUTH\n(C) 45 DEGREE ANGLE OF ELEVATION AZIMUTH UNKNOWN\n(D) OBJECT FLIGHT PATH APPERED TO BE STRAIGHT AND LEVEL\n(E) LIGHT FADED FROM VIEW\n(F) TEN (10) MINUTES\n(3)\n(A) GROUND VISUAL\n(B) NEGATIVE\n(C) NEGATIVE\n(4)\n(A) 160505-160515\n(B) NIGHT CLEAR\n(5)\nTENTH (10TH) AND GAFFEY SAN PERDO CALIFORNIA\n(6)\n(A) NEGATIVE"} {"doc_id":"3adde47daa3948b1","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE THREE BWDKW 09\nKB) T/SGT ROBERT J CURRIE 39 POSTOFFICE BOX 294 SAN PERDO 720 HARBOR HILL LOMIPA CALIF AIR FORCE CLERK UNKNOWN\n(7)\n(A) CLEAR\n(B) NW AT 8K 250 AT 10K, 270 AT 14K, 280 AT 12K, 260 AT 28K, 260 AT 50K UNKNOWN\n(C) CLEAR\n(D) TEN (10) MILES\n(E) NONE\n(F) N/A\n(8) ASTRONOMERS AT GRIFFIES PARK OBSERVATORY AVER AT OBJECTS SUCH AS THESE ARE POSSIBLY PLANETS WHICH APPEAR MORE CLEARLY AFTER RAIN FALL\n(9) NONE\n(10) NONE\n(11) NEGATIVE\n(12) WITNESS APPEARED FAIRLY RELIABLE DUE TO ASSOCIATION WITH JET AIRCRAFT ACTIVITY WHILE STATIONED AT LONG BEACH AIR FORCE BASE ASTRONOMERS OBSERVATION MAY ACCOUNT FOR THE APPERANCE OF THE SUBJECT\n17/2000Z NOV BWDKW\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10"} {"doc_id":"3b7fc51ed9680266","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS\n916TH AIRCRAFT CONTROL AND WARNING SQUADRON\nPrince George, B.C.,\nCanada\n\nAF601870\n\nOFNS 333.5 13 November 1953\n\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) Flying Objects Report\n\nTO: Director of Intelligence, Headquarters USAF, Washington 25, D.C.\nCommander, Air Defense Command, Ent Air Force Base, Colorado\nCommander, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson\nAir Force Base, Ohio\nCommander, Western Air Defense Force, Hamilton AFB, California\nCommander, 25th Air Division (Def), McChord AFB, Washington,\nATTN: Director of Intelligence\n\n1. The following report is submitted in accordance with AFR 200-2, 26 August 1953, subject: Flying Objects Report.\n\na. Flying Objects Report.\n\n(1) Description of the object:\n\n(a) Shape - Round.\n\n(b) Size compared to a known object - Basketball held at arms length.\n\n(c) Color - White light with blue tint. Light was blinking rhythmically of one second duration each.\n\n(d) Number - One (1).\n\n(e) Formation - Negative.\n\n(f) Discernible features or details - None.\n\n(g) Tail, trail or exhaust - None.\n\n(h) Sound - Droning sound, heard for approximately two seconds.\n\n(i) Other pertinent or unusual features - None.\n\n(2) Description of source of object:\n\n(a) What first called the attention of the observers to the object - appeared to be a falling star."} {"doc_id":"3b7fc51ed9680266","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(b) Angle of elevation and azimuth of the object when first sighted - Elevation approximately 15°. Azimuth unknown.\n\n(c) Angle of elevation and azimuth of object upon disappearance - Elevation approximately 135°. Azimuth unknown.\n\n(d) Description of flight path and maneuvers of object - Appeared at first to be a falling star. Came to within approximately 150 feet of the ground, staying at that altitude approximately 30 seconds, hovering. Ascended straight up from this position for about 300 feet and was motionless for nearly 10 seconds then disappeared in a westerly direction, climbing.\n\n(e) Manner of disappearance of object - Object was lost to sight due to distance and altitude.\n\n(f) Length of time in sight - Approximately 4 minutes.\n\n(3) Manner of observation:\n\n(a) Type of observation - Ground-visual.\n\n(b) Optical aids used - None.\n\n(c) Sighting made airborne - Negative.\n\n(4) Time and date of sighting:\n\n(a) Zulu time-date group of sighting - 080315Z November 1953.\n\n(b) Light conditions - Night.\n\n(5) Location of observers - GEROF NK 3735, Prince George Airport, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada\n\n(6) Identifying information of all observers:\n\n(a) Civilian - None.\n\n(b) Military - Daniel, Arvel Lee, T/Sgt, AF19316764, Provost Sergeant, 916th AC&W Sq, reliable. Bricker, John Junior, S/Sgt, AF16339253, Air Policeman, 916th AC&W Sq, reliable. Airmen were guarding a B-29 aircraft at airport.\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"3b7fc51ed9680266","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"916th AC&W Squadron, subj: Flying Objects Report, 13 Nov 53 (Cont'd)\n\n(7) Weather and winds aloft conditions at time and place of sighting:\n\n(a) Observers account of weather conditions - Clear and dark; no moon. Stars were clearly visible.\n\n(b) Report from nearest AWS or US Weather Bureau Office - Unknown.\n\n(c) Ceiling - Unknown.\n\n(d) Visibility - Unknown.\n\n(e) Amount of cloud cover - Unknown.\n\n(f) Thunderstorms in area - None.\n\n(8) Any other unusual activity or conditions - None.\n\n(9) Existence of any physical evidence - None.\n\n(10) Interception or identification action taken - None.\n\n(11) Location of any air traffic in the area at the time of sighting - None.\n\n(12) Position, title and comments of the preparing officer - Intelligence Officer, Captain. Cause unknown.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDER:\n\nJAMES P MITCHELL\nCaptain USAF\nIntelligence Officer\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"3b7fc51ed9680266","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"3ccd516ae03ebe69","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n-1 of 3-\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nDate of entry 01/[REDACTED]/2026\n\nOn January [REDACTED], 2026 [REDACTED] was interviewed [REDACTED] by Special Agent [REDACTED], Task Force Officer [REDACTED], Intelligence Analyst [REDACTED], and Supervisory Special Agent [REDACTED] [REDACTED]. After being advised of the identity of the interviewing agents and the nature of the interview, [REDACTED] provided the following information:\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nOn October [REDACTED], 2023 at approximately 10:50 PM, [REDACTED] and his wife were sitting on the back porch of their residence located at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Colorado Springs, Colorado. The porch faces toward the southwest, and he and his wife were sitting with their backs towards the house. [REDACTED] did not remember seeing many stars in the sky that night even though the sky was clear. As [REDACTED] was looking up, he suddenly noticed that\n\nInvestigation on 01/[REDACTED]/2026 at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] United States [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n\nFile # [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] Date drafted 01/[REDACTED]/2026\n\nby [REDACTED]\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"3ccd516ae03ebe69","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED], On 01/[REDACTED]/2026, Page 2 of 3\n\nsomething had flown over his house from behind him, coming from the northeast, and was moving away from him towards the southwest.\n\nThe UAP appeared low in elevation, possibly as low as 300 feet. He estimated it was roughly the size of a large SUV based on his elevation estimation. From [REDACTED] viewing perspective, at arm's length, the UAP appeared to be the size of the space between his thumb and pointer finger, which he approximated as 5 inches. [REDACTED] did not think he would have noticed the UAP if it was a cloudy night. [REDACTED] first noticed the object's movement before actually seeing its silhouette. When [REDACTED] first spotted the UAP he thought it appeared almost see-through, and it had what appeared to be a haze or distortion around it. He further described it appearing as if you were looking at it through mist; and that there were ripples like you were looking at an object that is underwater.\n\nThe UAP looked like a perfect triangle, however because of his viewing angle, he couldn't definitively say whether it was isosceles or equilateral in shape. [REDACTED] stated the UAP could have been either dark gray or silver in color which would have blended into the night sky, and with the surrounding distortion, it may have caused it to have the appearance of being translucent. [REDACTED] thought the triangle had rounded edges and corners, but stated the distortion around the UAP may have made the edges less sharp in appearance. The UAP traveled away from him and his wife with a point forward-facing. As it traveled away from them, along the trailing, flat, back edge, it had what appeared to be a band of silverish blue light. [REDACTED] hypothesized that the light could have been caused by the mode of propulsion for the UAP.\n\nThe UAP moved in a straight path at a consistent elevation. It moved very quickly and covered a large distance in the short time they observed the UAP. Just before they lost sight of the UAP, the left side of the triangle banked up quickly to an almost vertical orientation, but it did not change path or elevation. The UAP was completely silent, and [REDACTED] did not feel any rumble, static, or any other effects from the object as it passed over him. [REDACTED] residence was near an airport and he frequently observed aircraft, including private planes and helicopters, flying over his house. He was very familiar with how a normal aircraft should appear and sound flying over his house. [REDACTED] witnessed the UAP for a total of four seconds from when he initially saw it to when he lost sight of it to the southwest, potentially over [REDACTED] [REDACTED]. The UAP disappeared from his visual sight sooner than [REDACTED] expected it should have. [REDACTED] stated the entirety of the observation was so quick he did not have a chance to get his phone out to take a photo or video."} {"doc_id":"3ccd516ae03ebe69","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED], On 01/[REDACTED]/2026, Page 3 of 3\n\n[REDACTED] was very familiar with all USAF aircraft, including the latest unmanned drones. The UAP he and his wife observed did not match anything he encountered before. The UAP was only a triangle without any extra wings, fins, or any bubble for the engine housing. [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\nImmediately following the event, both [REDACTED] and his wife, who also witnessed the UAP, went inside to separate rooms and [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] wife remembered seeing a dark seem running around the edge of the UAP, [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA ROUTING SLIP\n\nCODE\nNAME (if necessary)\nACTION\nAPPROVAL\n1. Shirley\nCONCURRENCE\nFILE\n2.\nINFORMATION\nINVESTIGATE AND ADVISE\n3.\nNOTE AND FORWARD\nNOTE AND RETURN\n4.\nPER REQUEST\nRECOMMENDATION\n5.\nSEE ME\nSIGNATURE\nREPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n6.\n7.\nREMARKS:\nGemini IX Debriefing notes\nSummary writeup\nFROM: CODE: NAME: JRF DATE: 10/18\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. Jan. 1963)\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1963 OF-671845"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DRAFT\n7/7/66\nGemini IX Debriefing Rev. Aug 4 Jan 277, June 10, 1966\n\nAttendance: about 40 off and on\n\nExperiments:\n\nS-5: (from Mr. Underwood while waiting for the session to begin.)\n300 or more pictures were obtained on Gemini 9.\nPeru was almost completely covered because it was CLEAR. A new lake(?) was seen on one picture which did not appear on any existing map. Peruvian Embassy was called and they sent a military plane to investigate this lake which could be a possible hazard to villages below by producing an avalanche.\nWm. Fisher, USGS, has put out a small technical paper on the GT-4 pictures.\n\nS-12: Hemenway and Gene Flaherty. Micrometeorite Collection on Gemini, Agena.\nS-10: The astronauts reported they could see the collection box. Sorry they could not go to it to open it. But there it was bright and shiny.\n\nS-12: Biological analysis\n(1) Swabs- taken both pre-flight and post-flight\nPre-flight were dirty\nPost-flight \" sterile.\n3 locations inside the S/C\n(2) 5 organisms tested\n2 did not survive\n2- penicillium and T-1(?) survived/ bacteriophages\nThe biological results are easier to get at and so the results will come out earlier.\nMicrometeorite collection had 18hrs. with two exposures-two openings and closings of the box from the panel and final recovery by EVA.\nThe S/C was in drifting flight, looking in all directions, but actually not so much yaw as pitch to [illegible] the astronauts.\n\nSome artifacts were present -how made is beyond our understanding.\n\"You've done for us a really fine job.\"\nAstronauts-\nNo problem in recovering S-12. Had to pull it off, but it didn't stick.\nDidn't use lanyard (meaning) We heard the squib when it closed.\nWe were quiet one day and didn't fire the thrusters.\nZeitler has the times of opening and closing the control box which were called down from the S/C\n\nHemenway to astronauts: Can you tell me about the any discarding of material?\n\nAstronauts- At end of first day we had used 80% of fuel(600#).\nWe purged the fuel cells and had a urine dump which gave snowballs\n\n- During EVA I noticed that the S/C was clean\nStafford says estimate was that for 30 mins it was absolutely clean.\nin?\nStafford- Saw meteors looking down at the earth"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"p.2\n\nWe saw a very bright meteor- way, way out (going) from left to right, whitish-green in color.\n\nMaterial was dumped between exposures-- mass of water and urine- we know the mass to barely and ounce--\n\nHemenway- To assume that all the holes are real- we count 9 holes in 5 sq. cm. in 7x 10^4 secs with no corrections..this gives a point on the curve (see file) in the middle of many other results. Serious difference with Pegasus.\n\nStafford- Is the pressure suit we have adequate?\n\nHemenway- the velocities range from 0 to 70 km/sec; those recorded hits probably were not very high.\n\nDubin- (this) is a portion of sample we've looked at, the scanning process is slow..\nwould like to investigate the gold visor--gold is soft..\nLuminous particles... at sunrise on blunt and (S/C) they always show at sunrise.\n\nRoach- Could they cause what S-12 sees?\n\nHemenway- Stains show when we open the collection box.\nMuch more was collected (guest investigator portions) and we are worried about contamination between these separate portions.\n\nStafford- At one time there was an N2O4 yellow drop right on my window..\n\nGo to p.3."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Gemini 9 Debriefing- p.3\n\nHemenway- About S-10, we feel it is very important todo this because of the length of exposure. Agena 8 would really be worthwile to get at-\n\n* * * * *\n\nS-1 Zodiacal Light, Ney and Huch and John Lintott (tech. monitor)\nAstronauts to Ney- We have a message- we did the expt inside...\nNey to astronauts- How did you hold (guide) it so well?\n\nCiernan- We felt there would be a problem in holding 30 secs. in EVA.\nI had practiced leaning on a car and 30 secs. was too much!\nDuring EVA - drifting so much..\nDuring EVA just maintaining position is our most difficult task...\nrestraining the feet.\n\nStafford- Gene produced so much torque when he stepped out of the S/C, that he rolled me 150 degrees, etc...\nI don't think we could do it(the expt) outside..\n\nCiernan- We turned out all the lights except 3 red lights inside the S/C.\n\nI put the camera against the(?) and slid it against the frame so I could hold it hard against the frame and then Tom went for the (proper) part of the horizon...\nThe pitch was difficult- to sight the horizon over the (nose) and vertically to get the Milky Way on the window.\n\nWe saw a very bright meteor- way, way out (going) from left to right, whitish-green in color.\n\nMaterial was dumped between exposures-- mass of water and urine- we know the volume(mass) to barely an ounce.\n\nWe took 18 pix, Moon on the last one; then sunrise..\n\n17 were good..\n\nThe first picture was taken toward the north.\n\nNey- Would you like a sight? Would give finite--\n15 secs, 30 secs in center\n(Your) worst holds only represent 1 or 2 degrees...are the null rates for orbital or inertial?\n\nHow well did you think you held??? and then I'll show you the pictures..\n\nCiernan- Didn't need a handle on the camera- it's on right and down. I feel camera was held real well. Problem was rates were even harder than in S-11..\n\nCiernan- It was still difficult to line up the camera with the black horizon, etc. I concentrated on looking in the right direction. (0.8 deg. in each direction.)\n\nProblem- the windwo is at an odd angle"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ciernan- I cleaned my window-\nmine had clear area in center but ridge all around-\n\nStafford- I couldn't even sew ...\n\nCiernan- A world of stars when put out all the lights--\nThere is a light leak inside the capsure from the attitude control..\nLights were put on in the room to see the pictures and it is difficult to read the notes\nThey saw the zodiacal light visually\n\nDay after full moon...\nLightning?\n\nMagellanic clouds? (I think the ans. was no.)\n\nStafford- When the sun goes down, you see the lightning everywhere.\n\nCiernan- the top edge of the airglow is sharper (than the lower edge)\n\nPictures #9,12 were shown.\n\nCamera was turned off between each exposure\n\nTwilight and zodiacal light in the sunrise photos (Venus)...like Gordo Cooper's description of visual view.\n\nRoach- Could you hold on a bright star?\n\nStafford- If could use a reticle and a boresight, could really be on the needle.\n\nNey- Should we never think of a 2 minute exposure?\nCiernan- 30 secs seems a long time.\n\nNey- Voice tape? Are time hacks on each? Ans/ NO.\n\nZeitler- I didn't see anything on that.\n\nCiernan: Maintaining position was a major problem.\n\nNey: How to do it outside?\n\nStafford: Mount camera clamped to forward hatch.\n\n(Did you see the ATDA?)\n\nTHE ATDA was 20 mins. away, about 10x diam. of Venus....never saw any flashing lights.\n\nRoach: Did you ever see \"sparkles\" coming of the ATDA?\n\nStafford: No, none..\n\nWhitish-blue and then whitish-orange..(?)"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"John Lintott: a boresight would cut down the field of view..\nNey: the velcro was a night light trap..\n and he ended his remarks with \"It was a great job!\"\nCiernan: We'd like some pictures..\nNey: We'll get you some...\n*****\nS-11: Martin Koomen, NRL\nKoomen: \"After hearing the voice tape, I wan't sure whether to come without my\n hard hat!\"\nCiernan: We haven't heard them yet..\n How good were the rates?\nKoomen: I thought they were very good.\nCiernan: the points about boresighting would be the same as for S-1.\nStafford: The platform was up all the time..\nCiernan: the sight would give you more control\nC: lost..\nS: lost..\nCiernan: We took the \"timer\" off as it wasn't working..used time hacks..\nStafford: It was a very difficult operation and (he) was in a terrible position..\n --our hands were cramped and sweaty afterwards(from the effort)..\nKoomen: the control was too coarse?\nCiernan: Make lever arm as short as possible on the pitch control..\n Hard to get in these positions in zero G.\nKoomen: You were holding on to what you were supposed to guide..\nCiernan: No finger prints because of way things were handled..\nKoomen: Was bracket on the window from orbit to orbit?\nCiernan: Yes took it off prior to EVA..\n Didn't get the last 2 pictures because the camera was stowed before S-1 and\n they..."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Koomen- (on some pictures) the airglow is sometimes sharper than other\n times. There are 45 good pictures; the thruster frame is black.\nCiernan- Does the bright moon help the airglow?\nKoomen- We don't think the moon affects the airglow at all..\n - There is evidence of differences in intensity and altitude using\n (comparing) the two filters.\nStafford- Dr. Ney's experiment (is) learning curve for S-11.\n - lightning flashes\nKoomen- Last 4 pictures/ 2 extra sets of exposures, 5 and 10 secs. with filters\nStafford- Decision not to go\n We had 6 (numbers) of frame(panel?) left\nCiernan- Just 2 dots were what you need, not 3 (on camera or panel or what?\nKoomen- Could you adjust brightness of points?\nCiernan- Not as fine as I'd like-- I'd like to go dimmer..\nKoomen- Did you use ring on shaft?\nCiernan- Yes, with my fingernail..\nKoomen- Were you pressed for time?\nCiernan- As a matter of fact we had time to wait for sunrise..\n - It was slower because we were saving fuel.\nStafford- Boresight would reduce time by 25%.\nKoomen- Was the estimate to take the twilight pictures ok?\nCiernan- We took what you gave, and apparently they were...\nKoomen- Would it be better just to use your own judgment?\nCiernan- No, I was glad to have the times..\n - We were glad to have the time so we knew what to shoot at..\nKoomen- Did you see and color in the twilight airglow\nCiernan- No, just grey or NO COLOR.\n - I would use milky to describe the appearance..\n(Koomen showed slides of many of his pictures which were very good.)\nKoomen- Na filter and minus Na filter show somewhat different levels\nLintott- What about boresighting?\nCiernan- Yes, it could bring yaw on\n*********"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Discussion on SC11 was followed by a film showing (Quick Look at Gemini IX). 15 mins.\nUHF-VHF Polarization experiment:\n 51/2 orbits of data.\n*****\n11:40 A.M. M-5 Bioassays of\n Biomedicals Analysis of Body Fluids.\n*****\nGENERAL SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATIONS\n11:45 A.M.\nNey: Any stars in the daytime?\n : No\nStafford: In twilight as we crossed the sun line,(saw) Antares.\nCiernan: Sunrise on the adapter and on the nose are quite different for\n the two of us (two different windows,two different views).\n : He could see stars while I was in daylight\nStafford: (Schirra saw) 3 stars in Orion's Belt during Gemini VI, and\n Sirius and Rigel.\nLowman: 50 or 60 useful pictures of S. America; only had a few before.\nCiernan: Could only see streams flickering through (the jungle?)\n Very dark above the rain forest.\n \"Greens,\" no. Black tempered with green.\nLowman: Any blues off the NW coast of S.America?\nStafford: Can't answer.\nCiernan: Hasselblad with filter..\nStafford: Maurer (camera)..\n Did not have the GT-10 (terrain photography) fligth plan, no onboard\n data (to direct this picture taking).\n : Maurer worked well, better than the Hasselblad. A strip over Africa\n was taken.\nDunkelman: Use faster speed, 1/500th sec..why not try?\n Towering decks of clouds..\nMSC ques. re STRAPS\nCiernan: I'm against straps, lanyards and tethers..\n If have to get up, you will need restraint because your feet will\n start floating..."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ciernan: Couldn't see out my window obliquely..\nStafford: Window covers did help some (protected onlaunch and jettisoned in\n flight did help cleanliness of windows).\nRoach: You did see the zodiacal light several times? How close to the Sun?\nCiernan: No chance to look for these phenomena as such because we had to sleep\n or look for ATDA.\nColor PICTURES: Some good limb shots.. (Underwood [REDACTED])\nDubin: Moon?\nNey: Could you occult the moon behind the ATDA?\nRoach: Could wash out stars with the moon..\nUnderwood: ATDA and moon in some pictures..\nCiernan: I had a plan to observe a number of things, but when the time came\n (during EVA) I was so fogged up that I couldn't proceed (with the plan.)\nRoach: It is important to find out whether the problem is with stuff \"in space\"\n or whether it is on the window..\nStafford: It't my impression that it's something outside..\nNey: Was sun ever occulted by the ATDA?\nStafford: WE didn't stay with it too long..\nCiernan: WE closed hatch while outside (during EVA).\nNey: Did you see stars as well then (Sun visible to Ciernan) as at night?\nStafford: As black then as ..\nNey: Earthlight might cause the problem..\n We are trying to distinguish between\n 1. Daytime with earthlight\n 2. Daytime without earthlight\n 3. Nighttime\nDunkelman: We need to understand each other and for others to undestand what\n we mean. We need to clarify what is meant by \"local daytime.\"\n (question often of semantics..)\nRoach: Will you see stars on the moon trip?\nStafford: (When) black I saw 5th or 6th magnitude stars\n Sun was 2 or 3 degrees above the horizon.\nRoach: Open the Mitra and look out (so get rig of window problem).\nStafford: I could not see through Gene's hatch (when he emerged for EVA)\n END of this section/ Lunch."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA ROUTING SLIP\nACTION\nAPPROVAL\nCONCURRENCE\nFILE\nINFORMATION\nINVESTIGATE AND ADVISE\nNOTE AND FORWARD\nNOTE AND RETURN\nPER REQUEST\nRECOMMENDATION\nSEE ME\nSIGNATURE\nREPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n1. Gemini IX File\nREMARKS:\n1. AGENDA for Dr. Newell Briefing\n2.\nFROM: CODE: NAME: JRP DATE: 7/12/66\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. Jan. 1963) U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1963 OF-671845"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AWO0338-AOB456\nPP NASAHQ NAGSFC\nDE HOUMSC 083 1631458\nZNR UUUUU\nP 081538Z ZEX\nFM NASA MSC HOUSTON TEXAS\nTO NASAHQ/NASA W O ARMSTRONG CODE MB WASH DC\nNASAHQ/NASA R O ALLER CODE MGO WASH DC\nNASAHQ/NASA N P FRANDSEN CODE MGS WASH DC\nNASAHQ/NASA COL J BOLLERUD CODE MM WASH DC\nNASAHQ/NASA J R GILL CODE SM WASH DC\nNASAHQ/NASA H J SMITH CODE SG WASH DC\nNASAHQ/NASA M DUBIN CODE SG WASH DC\nNASAHQ/NASA M TEPPER CODE SAD WASH DC\nNAGSFC/GSFC P D LOWMAN CODE 641 GREENBELT MD\nNAGSFC/GSFC L DUNKLEMAN CODE 613 GREENBELT MD\nNASA\nBT\nUNCLAS CF3 28-T25-66.\nTHE SCIENTIFIC DEBRIEFING FOR GEMINI IX WILL BE HELD ON\nJUNE 16 CMM 1966 CMM STARTING AT 8.30 A.M. CST AT MSC-HOUSTON CMM\nBUILDING 4 CMM ROOM 277. ALL PARTICIPANTS ARE REQUESTED TO BE AT THE\nMEETING AT 8.30 A.M. CST TO PRECLUDE REPETITION OF THE QUESTIONS TO THE\nCREW.\nTHE SCHEDULE FOR THE DAY WILL BE AS FOLLOWS-\n8.30 A.M. - 9.30 A.M. - S-10 AGENA MICROMETEORITE COLLECTION\nS-12 MICROMETEORITE COLLECTION\n9.30 A.M. -10.30 A.M. - S-1 ZODIACAL LIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY\n\n\n\nPAGE 2 RUWGNO 083 UNCLAS\nS-11 AIRGLOW HORIZON PHOTOGRAPHY\nD-14 UHF-VHF POLARIZATION\n10.30A.M. -11.30 A.M. - M-5 BIOMEDICAL ANALYSIS OF BODY FLUIDS\n11.30A.M. -12.00 N. - GENERAL SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATIONS\n12.00 N. - 1.00 P.M. - LUNCH\n1.00P.M. - 3.00 P.M. - D-12 ASTRONAUT MANEUVERING UNIT\nANY QUESTIONS AND/OR REPLIES SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO JOHN W. McKEE CMM\nTELEPHONE HU 3-3891 (AREA CODE 713).\nSGD DONALD K SLAYTON DIRECTOR FOR FLIGHT CREW OPERATIONS.\nBT\nNNNN"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memorandum to the File\n\nFrom: J. R. Gill\n\nSubject: Experiments Debfiefing of Gemini IX held in Bldg.4, MSC at\n8:30 A.M. June 16,1966.\n\n\n\nGemini IX's performance on the OSSA experiments was impressive. The guiding\nperformed for SO11 and SO01 was the best that has yet been done on a manned\nspacecraft. In all 40 usable pictures of the airglow were made with the\n2-filter (split field) arrangement attached to the wide angle Maurer lens\n(NRL's experiment).\n\nSO01: was done inside the capsule since it was not possible to attempt it\nduring the EVA. They got pictures of the zodiacal light and the Milky Way\nand the guiding was good even for the 30 sec sweeps. On Tri-X these are the\nbest pictures yet of the zodiacal light surpassing the results achieved on\nGemini V.\n\nSO11; About 40 usable pictures of the airglow were obtained. These contain some\nof the same star fields pictured in SO01. Guiding was very good even though\nCernan had to do the experiment from a very awkward position.\n\nSO12: Hemenway showed several pictures which were enlargements (up to 35,000\nexposed\ntimes). Only a small portion of the surface has been analyzed, but on this portion\nportion 9 impacts are recorded. Hemenway is investigating possible \"contamination\nbetween experiments before sending the individual sections to guest investigators.\nOn the biological experiments where the results come out faster (a) 3 swabs\ntaken inside the S/C pre-flight were dirty; post-flight these same areas\nwere sterile. (b) the T-4 bacteriophages and the penicilliumspecimens"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"survived the spaceflight; two other specimens. The 30-day report on this\nexperiment will contain more results, but the full micrometoerite analysis\nwill take some time.\n\nS-5 and S-6: These experiments were not officially carried, but nonetheless it\nwas done as \"operational procedure.\" In all some 300 color pictures were taken\nwith the Hasselblad and Maurer cameras both of which were carried (for the first\ntime. The Maurer is eventually planned to replace the Hasselblad, but this has\nbeen slow in evolution.) A strip was taken over Peru where the weather happened to be\nexcellent. Features show up in these pictures which do not appear on any existing\nmap; for example, a glacial lake in the Andes, which do not appear on any existing\nmaps. The Peruvian Embassy has been informed of this lake which may portend\nan avalanche hazard for villages located below, The Peruvians have sent a\nmilitary plane into the area to investigate. THis indicates the possible current\nuse of such pictorial information.\n\nTHe AMU exercise was unsuccessful. It proved to be too much \"work\" under the\npresent arrangements. It takes two hands just to control the body positioning.\nHand-held photography during EVA for experiments looks \"out of the question\"\nat present.\n\nJocelyn R. GIll"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"File Gemini IX. 7/12/66\nNewell's Conf. Rm.\n9:30 A.M.\n(AGENDA) Briefing for Dr. Newell: Astronaut Activity\nstability of S/C (EVA)\nNeil Armstrong - why not twenty window?\n\nScattered light + astronomy\n\nAstronauts as scientific investigators\ntime at debriefing\n\" \" Morehead\n\nParadox of 7B: Gemini Science Pot.\n\n\n\nN.B.\nDr. Newell will plan to attend an astronaut's\nexperiments debriefing as soon as possible. Probably\ncan't attend Gemini X."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Newell\n\n1. T019/S010 what state? (ATM)\n Twx Filmith to Mueller\n\n2. Stars in daytime - x 20157\n nighttime\n Need fin. mid-Prepin Conference task\n 2 acts. in Gemini Mnd-Prep. Conf.\n a. Des-action. ofs. 1a-1\n Intro. & Summary - accomplish on Mercury\n done on Gemini\n (not accomplished on Mercury)\n\n\nb. Dim light Photography ≥ 0\n Apollo & ATDA\n S12, S1, (S-10), S-11,\n\nExperiment Schedule → IX: S1, S10, S11, S12\n3. Experiments on X: S1, S5, S6, S10, S12, S13, S26\n S29, S30\n4. \" XI: S4, (S-5, S-6), S9, S11, S13, S26,\n S29, S30\n5. XII: S3, S5 S6, S7, S11, S13,\n (AMV) S28 (?), S-29.\n\nIX: 4 XI 7 + 2 op.\nX: 7 XII 6 + S28 (?)"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memorandum\n\nTO: SM/Director (UBt)\n Manned Flight Experiments Office\n\nFROM: SM/Jocelyn R. Gill\n\nDATE: June 21, 1966\n\nSUBJECT: Report on Gemini 9 - STAFFORD & CERNAN\n\nGemini 9 - Perfection on our experiment was impressive.\n\nS-1 - Zodical Light Experiment (Nye) - This was done inside the capsule. Pictures were taken of the zodical light and the Milky Way. Guiding was quite good even for the 30 second sweep. Tri-x film was used, and best pictures yet of the zodical light.\n\nS-11 - Airglow Horizon Photographic Experiment (Kooman) - Naval Research Laboratory - About 40 usable pictures of the airglow with a split field picture were obtained. Some of the same star field were shown in S-1. Guiding was very good even though Cernan had to take pictures in a very awkward position.\n\nS-12 - Micrometeorite Collection (Hemenway) - Showed several pictures which were greatly magnified - enlargement of the micrometeorite experiment. Only a small portion of the exposed surface has been analyzed. Nevertheless 9 important ones are recorded on these films. Hemenway is investigating possible contamination between experiments before sending individual portions to guest experimenters.\n\nBiological Experiments - Results of these come out faster.\n\nPart A: 3 swabs were taken inside of spacecraft.\n\nPreflight were dirty.\n\nPostflight: Some areas were sterile.\n\nPart B: Penicillium and T-4 bactericidal specimens survived the spaceflight. Two other specimens did not. 30 day report may have more results but micrometeorite experiment will take some time."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\n\nS-5 & S-6 - These were not officially carried, but Stafford and Cernan took over 300 colored pictures using the Hasselblad and Maurer camera. A photographic strip was taken over Peru where weather was excellent. Some features show up, for example, glacial lake in the Andes which do not show on any existing map. Peruvian embassy has been informed of this lake which may portend for avalanch hazard to villages located below this lake. Military plane was sent into area to investigate.\n\nAMU - This was unsuccessful. Proves to be \"too much work\" under present arrangements during EVA. It takes two hands to control the body positioning. Hand held photography during EVA for experiment looks out of the question at present time.\n\nJocelyn R. Gill"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"File 5009\n\nU.S. NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20390\n\nGemini Expt.\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nCode 7020\n21 June 1966\n\nDr. Homer E. Newell\nAssociate Administrator\nSpace Science and Applications\nNational Aeronautics and Space Administration\nWashington, D. C. 20546\n\nDear Homer:\n\nFirst, in behalf of the NRL-GSFC collaborators in Gemini Experiment S-9, I want to express deep gratification at the strong interest in and concern for the success of our experiment shown by you and by Dr. George Mueller. The substantial help that both of you and your associates in NASA have given us is much appreciated.\n\nThe proposal to include two high-altitude orbits in the flight plan for Gemini mission XI has been carefully examined by physicists at MSC, Houston, as well as by our joint NRL-Goddard group. At a meeting in my office yesterday with officials from NASA Headquarters and from MSC, Houston, we agreed that the S-9 experiment would not be hurt if the flight plan included two elliptic orbits having an altitude of 750 nautical miles at apogee (approximately over Australia) during the 26th and 27th orbits. Our emulsion stack apparatus would be retrieved from the retroadapter section during the first EVA, and stored inside the Gemini capsule in a manner suggested by Messrs. Joseph Lill and Peter Higgins of MSC, with an orientation that would minimize the effects of background radiation incident on the window face of the package. In short, we believe that the proposed high-altitude orbits are compatible with the S-9 experiment.\n\nMay I digress to say that we in the NRL group are looking forward to favorable consideration by the Manned Space Flight Experiments Board of our recent Apollo proposals for cosmic-ray studies outside the magnetosphere, and for observations of cosmic γ-rays in earth-orbiting Apollo vehicles.\n\nWith warm regards,\n\nSincerely,\n\nMaurice M. Shapiro, Chief Scientist\nLaboratory for Cosmic Ray Physics\n(Principal Investigator, S-9)\n\nMMS/dac\n\nP. S. A list of those attending the meeting in my office yesterday is attached. In an earlier meeting several weeks ago, we benefited from participation by Astronauts Charles Conrad and William Anders.\n\ncc: Dr. George Mueller\n Mr. Leroy Day"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In attendance at meeting in Dr. Shapiro's office\nU. S. Naval Research Laboratory\n\n20 June 1966\n\nNASA Headquarters, Washington\n\nEldon W. Hall\nVearl N. Huff\n\nMSC, Houston\n\nWyendell B. Evans\nJoseph C. Lill\nPeter W. Higgins\n\nGSFC, Greenbelt\n\nCarl E. Fichtel\nDonald V. Reames\n\nU.S. NRL\n\nMaurice M. Shapiro\nBertram Stiller\nFrancis W. O'Dell\nRein Silberberg\nChen-Hsiang Tsao"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"USRL Joins NRL\nEffective July 1 the Navy Underwater Sound Reference Laboratory (USRL) in Orlando, Florida, will be disestablished and become a division of NRL. It will be designated as the Underwater Sound Reference Division (USRD). As a division of NRL, USRD, in its program of standards and instrumentation development for underwater sound measurement, will be re-enforced by the specialized capabilities of related elements of the NRL research staff. The financial, management, and support services requirements will be backed up by the service organizations of NRL.\nThe new division will continue under the immediate supervision of the Chief Scientist, Mr. O. M. Owsley. Mr. Owsley will report directly to Capt T. B. Owen, Director of NRL, for the management of the operations and the effective prosecution of the program. He will be guided as appropriate and in their respective areas, by NRL's Director of Research, Director of Support Services, and Comptroller.\ncontinued - page 2\nNRL Signs Labor Contract for Guard Unit\nThe U.S. Naval Research Laboratory and Columbia Lodge No. 174 of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers have negotiated a comprehensive agreement covering all nonsupervisory security guards in the Laboratory's Security and Administrative Services Division.\nFollowing a grant of exclusive recognition to the Union on January 19, 1966, negotiations began on March 31, 1966, and were concluded on May 26. The Laboratory's negotiating team was headed by Capt J. C. Matheson, Director of Support Services, and included LCdr J. H. DalPian, Security and Administrative Services Officer, and Mr. T. F. Garnett, Jr., of the Personnel Division. The chief negotiator for the Union was Mr. R. W. Fauntleroy, Business Representative of Columbia Lodge No. 174. Mr. Fauntleroy was assisted by Mr. R. E. Bunner and Mr. H. B. Brooks, both members of the Laboratory's guard force.\nThe completed agreement was signed at 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 1, in the Office of the Director of Support Services. The effective date of the agreement is June 2, 1966. It is anticipated that the agreement will remain in effect for one year with the possibility of its subsequent extension continued - page 2\nChair of Cosmic Ray Physics Established\n[photograph]\nEffective May 11 the Laboratory established a Chair of Cosmic Ray Physics for Dr. Maurice M. Shapiro, who recently resigned from the Superintendency of the Nucleonics Division after 12 years in the latter position. The post of Chair of Science was created by the Laboratory to confer special recognition on the incumbent as a distinguished scientist of exceptional accomplishment.\nThe staff of the former Cosmic Ray Branch, which Dr. Shapiro organized and led since 1949, will constitute the Laboratory for Cosmic Ray Physics, with Dr. Shapiro as Chief Scientist.\nThe Laboratory for Cosmic Ray Physics is engaged in studies of the primary cosmic radiation- its composition, energy spectra, and other properties. This group of physicists composing the Laboratory has become especially well-known for its significant contributions to our knowledge of the helium component and the heavier primary nuclei of the cosmic radiation, as well as for its earlier work on elementary particles. Dr. Shapiro is also Principal Investigator for the Gemini Cosmic Ray Experiment S-9, a collaborative enterprise of the Laboratory and the Goddard Space Flight Center. The emulsion stack designed for this experiment was lost on the ill-fated Gemini VIII but, the experiment is re-scheduled to be flown on Gemini Flight XI.\nSavings Bond Campaign Extended\nThe Federal Savings Bonds Chairman, Postmaster General Lawrence F. O'Brien, has announced that he is extending the 25th Anniversary Savings Bonds Campaign for Federal Employees through continued - page 2"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2 NRL LABSTRACTS\nUSRL - continued\nAs a part of NRL, the new division's work will remain essentially unchanged. Its mission, now incorporated into the mission of NRL, is to conduct research and development furthering the science of underwater sound measurement, to provide to other naval activities the resulting scientific knowledge, new or improved techniques, and standardized instrumentation, and to provide facilities and services for the accurate calibration of standard instrumentation and the unbiased determination of performance characteristics of development, prototype, or operational underwater sound devices used by the Naval Establishment.\nSeveral of NRL's key personnel, including Capt T. B. Owen, the Director, and Dr. C. E. Cleeton, the Associate Director of Research for Electronics, have visited the facility to arrange for the transition.\nThe 10.5 acres of Laboratory ground occupied by USRD are located alongside Lake Gem Mary, one mile south of the city limits of Orlando. It has a personnel complement of 98 people: 97 civilian and 1 military.\nThe Laboratory extends a hearty \"Welcome Aboard\" to its new staff members and looks forward to publication of articles about the new division.\nCONTRACT SIGNED - continued\nfor one additional year. Significant provisions concerning promotion, scheduling of annual leave, hours of work, and a grievance procedure with provisions for advisory arbitration, are among the seventeen articles included in the agreement.\nThis is the second agreement covering Laboratory employees negotiated within the framework of the Federal Employee-Management Cooperation Program as set forth in Executive Order 10988. The first agreement, covering all ungraded nonsupervisory employees at the Washington complex of NRL, became effective on December 21, 1964. Re-negotiation of the latter agreement is expected to begin in the early fall of this year.\nSAVINGS BOND CAMPAIGN - continued\nJune. He said that the additional month is needed to assure that every civilian and military employee of the Federal Government throughout the world is given an opportunity to sign up for regular purchases of Savings Bonds through the Payroll Savings Plan.\nThe Postmaster General expressed confidence that the campaign goal of 75 percent participation by Federal employees will be achieved.\nSo far in NRL's Savings Bond Campaign 94 people have increased their Bond allotments, and 157 people have signed up for Bond deductions, making a total of 1,628 Bond savers. The Laboratory's percentage of participation is now over 50.\nThis extra month affords you the excellent opportunity of signing up for Bonds. Why not jump on the \"Bond Wagon\" today?\nElected Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences\n[photograph]\nDr. Richard Tousey, Head of the Rocket Spectroscopy Branch, Atmosphere and Astrophysics Division, was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences at the Academy's 186th Annual Meeting held May 11 in Boston, Mass.\nThe American Academy of Arts and Sciences, was founded in Boston in 1780 by John Adams and other revolutionary leaders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Among the prominent members of the past have been George Washington, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Horace Mann, Sir Winston Churchill, and John F. Kennedy.\nDr. Tousey, who is a member of over a dozen major scientific and professional societies, is now a Fellow in four of them. Previously he had been elected Fellow by the American Physical Society, the Optical Society of America, and the American Geophysical Union. Moreover, Dr. Tousey's work here has earned him numerous special honors and awards, including the Navy Award for Distinguished Achievement in Science (1963), the Henry Draper Medal of the National Academy of Sciences (1963), and the Frederic Ives Medal of the Optical Society of America (1960).\nScrap Material Wasn't Scrapped\nThe following items were evidently mistaken for scrap material and were picked up in Building 49. The equipment should be returned so that formal transfer procedures may be followed.\n- Pulse Generator, H.P. Mod. 212A, Ser. 549, P.A. 243091\n- Pulse Generator, H.P. Mod. 212A, Ser. 4496, P.A. 248572\n- Flow Meter, Burton, Mod. 200, Ser. 200-6069, P.A. 245683"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA ROUTING SLIP\nCODE NAME (if necessary)\n1. Shirley\nACTION APPROVAL CONCURRENCE FILE INFORMATION INVESTIGATE AND ADVISE NOTE AND FORWARD NOTE AND RETURN PER REQUEST RECOMMENDATION SEE ME SIGNATURE REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\nREMARKS:\nSee reading file on Gemini IX file; did I write a Gemini IX Debriefing Memo? (similar to the Gemini XI one). If so, attach to this & I'd like to see whether I should destroy or file these notes.\nFROM: CODE: NAME: JBF DATE: 6/16/66\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. Jan. 1963) U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1963 O-671845"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Gemini 9 Debriefing MSC Bldg 4 Rm 277 about 40 people present June 16, 1966\n55 300+ pictures in Gemini 9\nBeru almost completely covered because it was scoffdi CLEAR weather. 2 new lake(?), avalanche discovered on one picture, called Gemini entassy & they sent a military plane to investigate this lake which was not on any of the maps.\nWm Fisher USGS (Bodgley) found technical papers on the ST-4 pictures\nHearing & Scientific Planetary Comm.\nS-10 ... did not ... sorry Cl not do documentary evid on light flashing\nS-12:\nBiological analysis\n(1) 3 swabs - pre-flt & post-flt (plenty) (sterile) / pictures & negatives location of swab:\n(2) 5 eyes ... tested.\n2 - normal\n2 penicillin & T-1 factor phage ... ... examined"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Biology results easy to get at. 18 hrs. was a great help on the micrometeorite micrometeorite pictures!\nDrifting plate - looked in all directions not as much yaw as pitch predominant\nOne revolutions.\nartifacts - human made beyond our understanding. you're done for as a really\nNo problem in recovering S-12. Had to pull it off b/c it didn't stick! Didn't use lanyard. I just didn't\nWe had the squirt when it closed.\nWe were quiet one day & didn't fire thrusters.\nTimes of opening & closing called down (Zeitler has)\nCan you tell me about any ascending material?\nEnd of 1st day we had use 80% of fuel (600 #) purge fuel cells & urine dump - snowballs\nDuring EVA S/C was clean\nStafford says est. 30 mins. absolutely clean\nS-band meters looking down at A."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"very bright meteor - way, way out, left to right\nwhite-yellow color\n\nmaterial dugred hot, expenses -\nmass of water & urine - Can know to half\nan ounce.\nHam - To assume that all holes are real, we count\n9 holes in 5 sq cm in 7x10^4/sec with no\ncorrections you get on the curve in the middle.\nSerious difference with Pegasus\nS- Presume list is what we have adequate?\nH- velocities are between\n0 to 70 km/sec, those probably aren't very high.\nDustin- portion of sample were looked at, Ramming process\nis slow.\nGold vision- like to investigate\nSoft\n\nLuminous particles\nSunrise Phut end always show at sunrise-\nRonald- Could they cause what S-12 see?\nHen - 5 stains show when we open collector box.\nMuch more collected (7 guest investigators) & we\nworried about contamination between them.\nS- N2O4 yellow drop righten my window."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S-10 :- we felt it was very important to do this sec.\nAsena 8 was really be worth while to get because has\n\nS-1 Zodiacal light (Ney)\nMessage to Ed-\nWe\nHow did you hold it so well.\n\nCiernan-\nFelt them and he grab holding 30 secs in EVA-\nI practiced being on a car & 30 secs was too much.\nDuring EVA - drifting so much\nEVA - Just maintaining pain is one most difficult\ntask - restoring fast\n\nsame produced so much torque just to step out.\nRoled main 150°, etc etc.\nI don't think we could do it outside.\n\nSene - We turned out all lights exc 3 red lights inside.\nI got camera against the camera & slid it against\nthe frame so I could hard hold & then Tom\nwent for the part of the horizon\npitch was different - sight the horizon over the\nvertically to get M.W. on window."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"We both 18 pix. Moon on last one &\nthen sunrise\n17 good\n1st picture taken forward the north.\nHey- How well do you think you held? Then I'll show you\nSene - the pictures\nDidn't need handle - its on right & down.\nHeel camera was held real well. Problem was\nrates even harder than in S-11.\nNey- wd you like a sight? Wd give finite\n15 secs, 30 secs in center\nworst holds only represent 1 or 2 degrees.\nNull rates for orbit rate or inertial?\nJene - still different to line up camera with black horizon etc.\nI concentrated on looking in the right direction.\n0.8 sec in each direction\nPorter - window at odd angle\nCiernan - I cleaned my window\nme had clear area in center but ridge and around\n5 - I couldn't even see\nC - a multi of plans when put out all lights.\nLight leak inside capsule att. control\n\nvisually saw the Z.L."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Day after Joel Moon\nholds 1?\n\nMagnell. obs -\nD Ai whole gray bitter type?\n\nS - when sun goes down you see lightning everywhere\nSene - top edge & angles sharper\n# 9\n3/C in\nX lightning, angles, M.W., plans\n#12 - wisps - near sunrise\nTuned camera 1/f ket. each exp\n\ntwilight & Z.L. in sunrise photos (Venus)\nlike Jordo's description & usual\nRonald- Cd you hold on a bright star?\nS - if we use a reticle & foresight cd really be on the needle.\nNey- should we never think of 2 min.\nJene - 30 secs pass a long time\nNey - Voice tape - tie backs on each? No.\nZetter - I didn't get anything on that."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UHF-VHF Relay:\n5 1/2 orbits & data\n11:4: M5 Bioassay\nA. Harrison; - Biomedical Analysis of Body Fluids\n11:45 Am.\nSend Scientific Abstracts\n\nNey: Stars in daytime?\nNo\nS- In twilight as cross sun line, Antares\nJ- Sunrise on adapter & moon are quite different for the 2\nN- He could see stars while Sun was in daylight.\nS- 3 stars in belt on Gemini 6\nSirius, Rigel (Wally's comment)\nLowman - 50 cc be useful used in S. America\nonly had 2 cc so before.\nSene - Could only see stream flickering through.\nVery dark above the rain forest.\nJ- \"Prisms\"; no Black background with green.\nLowman - Any flares of NW Coast of S. America?\nS - Can't answer.\nSene - Hasselblad with filter\nS- Namer\nDid not have GT-10 flight plan, no outrand data"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S-11 (4) (circled 4 at top right)\n\nK- Cd you adjust brightness of prints?\nS- Not as fine as I'd like - It's like to go faster dimmer.\nK- did you use any shift? S- yes, with my fingernail\n- were you pressed for time?\nS- as a matter of fact we had time to wait for sunrise, \nH... Sunrise, the were were saving fuel.\nS- Foresight to reduce time by 25%.\nK- Est. to take twilight pix ok. S- we took what you\nsaw & apparently they were.\nK- and it be better just to use your own judgment?\nS- No. I was glad to have the times. We were glad to have\nthe times so we knew what to shoot at.\n\nK- Did you see any color in the twilight airflow?\nS- No - just grey or No Color\nS- I use word \"milky\" to describe appearance\n\nSlides\nSpec exp.\nNa & \"-Na\" - dwarfing\n* Different levels show up\nJuitett what about foresighting?\nS- ye, it'd take gone on\n\n(Quick look at Jan 9)\nFilm Showing to be shown by Jihad (15 mins.)\n11:30 A.m -"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Rest of S-11 (circled 5) (4)\n\nJene- Maintaining posin a major problem\nNeg - how do it outside\nS- Mount camera clamped on forward hatch\n\nATDA - 20 mi away 10x dia. of Venus.\nNeven par on flashing lights.\nReach- Did you ever see 'sparkles' coming off ATDA?\nS- No - none\nwhitish-blue & then whitish-orange\n\nJohn Lindett -\nforesight and cut down on field prism.\nNeg - Velocity was a nice light trap\n- \"It was a great job!\"\nSena- We'd like some. Neg- We'll get\n\nS-11 Known\nK- \"After hearing the voice tapes I wasn't sure whether\nto come without my hard hat!\"\nS- We haven't heard them yet\nS- How good rates?\nK- I that they were very good\nS- Pta about foresighting same as for S-1\nS- Platform up all the time.\nS- sight and give you more control"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S-\nS- Comic\nS- we both tried if it wasn't working -\nused the locks\nS- hey difficult operation & in terrible pain\n- our hands were cramped & seventy afterwards\nK- Control was too coarse?\nS- Make lever and shoot as possible on pitch control\nHand to get in those points in zero-g\nK- Holding on to what you were prepared to guide.\nS- no fingerprint to fec. 1 way to handled things?\nK- Bucket or window for orbit to orbit?\nS- yes, took it off prior to EVA\nS- didn't get but 2 pix fec. Camera was stowed before\nS1 & they\nK- Airflow sometimes sharper than others (45-foot pix\nthruster pix flash\nS- Does light more help the airflow.\nK- we don't think A affects airflow at all?\nK- Ends. 1 difference in intensity & alt. on the 2 filters\nS- or. Hey's exp't or learning course for S-11\n- lightning flashes 2 extra sets of exp.\nK- last 4 pix 5 & 10 secs with filters\nS- decision not to go\nWe had 6 ft of fuel left\nS- Last 2 shots were what you need, not 3."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MSC gives - gun. ont shops\nS- Difficult straps, lanyards & tethers\nIf have to get up, you will need restraint, your feet will\nstart floating\nYou can't see out my window otherwise\n\nS- window covers did help some\nR- Did see 2 l. several times\nthe close to sun?\nS- no chance to look for those phenomena as such because\nwe had to sleep or dark for ATDA\nOther pictures:\nGood Limb Shots\nDutm - Moon?\nNeg - cd you occult the Moon behind the ATDA?\nReach- Cd wash out stars with Moon.\nUnderwood - ATDA & Q in same picture\nSene- I had a plan to shoot a no. 7 thing but\nwhen time came I was so fogged up I couldn't\nproceed.\nR- Imp. to find out whether \"in space\" or the window.\nS- It's my impression it's something outside\nNeg- Was Sun ever occulted by ATDA?\nS- Wouldn't stay with it too long\nS- closed hatch while outside"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Neg- Did you see stars as well then (Sun visible to Sene) as at night?\nS- on black then as\nNeg- Earthlight might cause the problem\n- we are trying to distinguish between\n1. Daytime with earthlight\n2. \" without earthlight\n3. nighttime\nDunkelman -\nWe need to understand each other & for others to\nunderstand what we mean.\n\"Local daytime\"\nR- Will you see stars on the Moon trip?\nS- black & Sun 5th or 6th magn.\n© 2 or 3° above H.\nR- open hatch & look out\nS- I could not see thru Gene's hatch"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTICE HAS BEEN RECEIVED THAT THE GEMINI XI CREW WILL HAVE A\nWORKING SESSION AT THE MOREHEAD PLANETARIUM, CHAPEL HILL, NORTH\nCAROLINA, ON JUNE 22-23, 1966. THIS SESSION WILL BE USED TO REFINE\nPROCEDURES FOR THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THE FLIGHT'S ASTRONOMICAL\nEXPERIMENTS.\n\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT THE S-11, S-13, S-29, S-30, AND IF ASSIGNED,\nTHE S-28 INVESTIGATORS BE NOTIFIED OF THE TIME AND PLACE OF THIS\nSESSION.\n\nDR. GILL OF THE MANNED FLIGHT EXPERIMENTS OFFICE URGES YOUR\nSUPPORT OF THIS BRIEFING SESSION AT MOREHEAD PLANETARIUM.\n\n/s/ WBF\n\nWILLIS B. FOSTER, DIRECTOR\nMANNED FLIGHT EXPERIMENTS OFFICE\n\n2 2\n\n6/7/66 3:00 p.m.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA HEADQUARTERS\n\nMR. MARTIN J. KOOMEN\nU.S. NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\n\nDR. KARL G. HENIZE\nDEARBORN OBSERVATORY\nNORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY\nEVANSTON, ILLINOIS\n\nDR. FRANKLIN E. ROACH\nDEPUTY DIRECTOR, AERONOMY DIVISION\nENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE SERVICES ADMINISTRATION\nBOULDER, COLORADO\n\nMR. LAWRENCE DUNKELMAN\nGODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER\nGREENBELT, MARYLAND\n\nDR. CURTIS L. HEMENWAY\nTHE DUDLEY OBSERVATORY\nALBANY, NEW YORK\n\nDR. EDWARD P. NEY\nSCHOOL OF PHYSICS\nUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA\nMINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA\n\nMR. ELLIOT C. MORRIS\nU.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY\nCENTER OF ASTROGEOLOGY\nFLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA\n\ncc: SG/Mr. Dubin\nSM/Dr. Gill\nMSC/Mr. Piland\nMSC/Mr. Slayton\n\nSM:JRGILL:KBY 20611 6/7/66\n\nDr. Jocelyn R. Gill\nManned Flight Experiments Office x 20611\n\n1 2\n\n6/7/66 3:00 p.m.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA ROUTING SLIP\n\nCODE NAME (if necessary)\n\n1. Terry / Chris — ACTION / CONCURRENCE (checked) / FILE\n2. INFORMATION / INVESTIGATE AND ADVISE\n3. NOTE AND FORWARD / NOTE AND RETURN\n4. PER REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION\n5. SEE ME / SIGNATURE\n6. REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n7.\n\nREMARKS:\n\nGemini IX File pls\n\nFROM: CODE: NAME: JRG DATE: 7/5/66\n\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. Jan. 1963) U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1963 OF-671845"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HQE729\nPP MSKSCF\nDE NASAHQ 162 1582046\nZNR UUUUU\nP 072027Z\nFM NASA HEADQUARTERS WASHDC\nTO KENNEDY SPACE CENTER FLA\nNASA\nBT\nUNCLAS SM-162. GEMINI IX ASTRONAUTS LT COLONEL THOMAS STAFFORD - LT COMMANDER EUGENE CERNAN ASTRONAUTS OFFICE\nTALK ABOUT AN ACE IN THE HOLE... CONGRATULATIONS TO GEMINI IX ON CARRYING OUT A MOST DIFFICULT AND TRYING MISSION. YOUR PATIENCE AND COURAGE WERE REWARDED. WE ARE PLEASED THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO CARRY OUT MOST OF THE EXPERIMENTS AND LOOK FORWARD EAGERLY TO THE RESULTS. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR OUTSTANDING COOPERATION AND EFFORT IN THIS REGARD. A SPECIAL MESSAGE TO THE PILOT FROM DR. JOCELYN GILL, A FELLOW PROVISOITE WHO PRECEDED HIM BY A FEW YEARS, WARM CONGRATULATIONS ON THE LONG SPACE WALK--IT WAS EXPECTED OF COURSE THAT PROVISO COULD ACCOMPLISH IT.\n/S/ WILLIS B FOSTER DIRECTOR MANNED FLIGHT EXPERIMENTS OFFICE\nBT\n\nNNNN"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAME OF AGENCY: NASA HEADQUARTERS\nPRECEDENCE: ACTION / INFO.: PRIORITY\nUNCLASSIFIED CLASSIFICATION\nTYPE OF MESSAGE: SINGLE / BOOK / MULTI-ADDRESS\nSTANDARD FORM 14 REV. MARCH 15, 1957 GSA REGULATION 2-IX-203.04 14-303\nTELEGRAPHIC MESSAGE\nOFFICIAL BUSINESS U.S. GOVERNMENT\n1966 JUN 7 20 27 162\n\nMESSAGE TO BE TRANSMITTED (Use double spacing and all capital letters)\n\nGEMINI IX ASTRONAUTS\nLT. COLONEL THOMAS STAFFORD\nLT. COMMANDER EUGENE CERNAN\nASTRONAUTS OFFICE\nKENNEDY SPACE CENTER\nKENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLORIDA\n\nTALK ABOUT AN ACE IN THE HOLE! CONGRATULATIONS TO GEMINI IX ON CARRYING OUT A MOST DIFFICULT AND TRYING MISSION. YOUR PATIENCE AND COURAGE WERE REWARDED. WE ARE PLEASED THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO CARRY OUT MOST OF THE EXPERIMENTS AND LOOK FORWARD EAGERLY TO THE RESULTS. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR OUTSTANDING COOPERATION AND EFFORT IN THIS REGARD. A SPECIAL MESSAGE TO THE PILOT FROM DR. JOCELYN GILL, A FELLOW PROVISOITE WHO PRECEDED HIM BY A FEW YEARS, WARM CONGRATULATIONS ON THE LONG SPACE WALK--IT WAS EXPECTED OF COURSE THAT PROVISO COULD ACCOMPLISH IT.\n\nWILLIS B. FOSTER, DIRECTOR\nMANNED FLIGHT EXPERIMENTS OFFICE\n\nPAGE NO. 1 NO. OF PAGES 1\n\nNAME AND TITLE OF ORIGINATOR: Dr Jocelyn R. Gill, Manned Flight Experiments Office. ORIGINATOR'S TEL. NO. x20611. DATE AND TIME PREPARED 6/6/66 4:00 p.m. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION UNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAME OF AGENCY\nNASA HEADQUARTERS\nACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION\nTHIS BLOCK FOR USE OF COMMUNICATIONS UNIT\nPRECEDENCE\nACTION:\nINFO.: PRIORITY\nTYPE OF MESSAGE\nSINGLE\nBOOK\nMULTI-ADDRESS\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION UNCLASSIFIED\nSTANDARD FORM 14 REV. MARCH 15, 1957 GSA REGULATION 2-IX-203.04 14-303\nTELEGRAPHIC MESSAGE\nOFFICIAL BUSINESS U.S. GOVERNMENT\nMESSAGE TO BE TRANSMITTED (Use double spacing and all capital letters)\nTHIS COL. FOR AGENCY USE\nSTART MESSAGE ADDRESS HERE\nGEMINI IX ASTRONAUTS\nLT. COLONEL THOMAS STAFFORD\nLT. COMMANDER EUGENE CERNAN\nASTRONAUTS OFFICE\nKENNEDY SPACE CENTER\nKENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLORIDA\nTALK ABOUT AN ACE IN THE HOLE! CONGRATULATIONS TO GEMINI IX ON CARRYING OUT A MOST DIFFICULT AND TRYING MISSION. YOUR PATIENCE AND COURAGE WERE REWARDED. WE ARE PLEASED THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO CARRY OUT MOST OF THE EXPERIMENTS AND LOOK FORWARD EAGERLY TO THE RESULTS. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR OUTSTANDING COOPERATION AND EFFORT IN THIS REGARD. A SPECIAL MESSAGE TO THE PILOT FROM DR. JOCELYN GILL, A FELLOW PROVISOITE WHO PRECEDED HIM BY A FEW YEARS, WARM CONGRATULATIONS ON THE LONG SPACE WALK--IT WAS EXPECTED OF COURSE THAT PROVISO COULD ACCOMPLISH IT.\nWILLIS B. FOSTER, DIRECTOR\nMANNED FLIGHT EXPERIMENTS OFFICE\nDO NOT TYPE MESSAGE BEYOND THIS LINE\nPAGE NO. 1 NO. OF PAGES 1\nNAME AND TITLE OF ORIGINATOR (Type) Dr Jocelyn R. Gill Manned Flight Experiments Office\nORIGINATOR'S TEL. NO. x20611\nDATE AND TIME PREPARED 6/6/66 4:00 p.m.\nI certify that this message is official business, is not personal, and is in the interest of the Government. (Signature)\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION UNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GEMINI IX ASTRONAUTS\nLT. COLONEL THOMAS STAFFORD\nLT. COMMANDER EUGENE CERNAN\nASTRONAUTS OFFICE\nKENNEDY SPACE CENTER\nKENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLORIDA\nTALK ABOUT AN ACE IN THE HOLE! CONGRATULATIONS TO GEMINI IX ON CARRYING OUT A MOST DIFFICULT AND TRYING MISSION. YOUR PATIENCE AND COURAGE WERE REWARDED. WE ARE PLEASED THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO CARRY OUT MOST OF THE EXPERIMENTS AND LOOK FORWARD EAGERLY TO THE RESULTS. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR OUTSTANDING COOPERATION AND EFFORT IN THIS REGARD. A SPECIAL MESSAGE TO THE PILOT FROM DR. JOCELYN GILL, A FELLOW PROVISOITE WHO PRECEDED HIM BY A FEW YEARS, WARM CONGRATULATIONS ON THE LONG SPACE WALK--IT WAS EXPECTED OF COURSE THAT PROVISO COULD ACCOMPLISH IT.\ncc: Dr. Roach/ESS/Boulder\nMr. Dunkelman/GSFC\nMr. Piland/MSC\nMr. Smistad/MSC\nMr. Eaton/MSC\nMr. Slayton/MSC\nWILLIS B. FOSTER, DIRECTOR\nMANNED FLIGHT EXPERIMENTS OFFICE\nDr Jocelyn R. Gill\nManned Flight Experiments Office\nx20611 6/6/66 4:00 p.m.\nSM:JRGill:kby 20611 6/6/66\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT Memorandum\nTO: SM/Director, Manned Flight Experiments Office DATE: June 6, 1966\nFROM: SM/Manned Flight Experiments Office\nSUBJECT: Scientific Experiments carried out on Gemini IX\nThe Gemini IX mission carried the following OSSA experiments:\nS-10 Agena Micrometeorite Collection\nS-11 Airglow Horizon Photography\nS-12 Gemini Micrometeorite Collection\nIn spite of a slight flurry last Friday night to throw in additional experiments as a possible backup in the event of failure of the ATDA, no new experiments were introduced. This was a consequence of the decision to introduce no additional film packs which could have accommodated some more experimental activity. (Ref. TWX to Dr. John Clark re S-28 support for Gemini IX, 5/27/66 and TWX to 4 experimenters and their directors re S-5, S-6, S-28 and S-29, 5/31/66).\nNonetheless, it is anticipated that some photographs will have been taken for S-5 and S-6 (Synoptic Photography) on the operational film carried--even though this experiment was not scheduled for Gemini IX.\nAs of Sunday, June 5th at 11:30 e.d.t. telephone contact with Norman Foster's office indicated the following on experiments. (Talked with Ed Zeitler, MSC both Saturday and Sunday. He is the editor on the experiments status report).\nThe efforts to dislodge the shroud from the ATDA, (called by Tom Stafford as \"an angry alligator,\") were in vain so docking with the ATDA was scrubbed from the mission. At this point there was some concern over the fuel supply and a thought that it might not be possible to carry out all the experiments. The status of scientific experimental activity is given below.\n1. S-10, Agena Micrometeorite Collection, Dr. C. Hemenway, Dudley Observatory\nThe S-10 was carried on the ATDA, but it was impossible to get near it or to retrieve it. The S-10 was also carried on the Agena and there was no activity with it either. The S-10 is still on the ATDA and conceivably could be retrieved on a later mission.\nUnclassified handwritten note: Kathy file WSF"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\n2. S-11, Airglow Horizon Photography, M. Koomen, Naval Research Laboratory\nThe astronauts made 3 night passes on this experiment and reported \"no problems\" so it is assumed that the experiment went off as planned. They may be able to devote 1 more night pass to it during the mission. They are still planning the 2-1/2 hour EVA. At the start of the experiments they had 50 lbs. of fuel left and at the end, so it is reported, they still had 50 lbs!! (GET 27 hrs, 29 hrs, 31 hrs for S-11).\n3. S-12, Gemini Micrometeorite Collection, Dr. C. Hemenway, Dudley Observatory\nThe collection box was activated and had five hrs* exposure before closing it so jets could be freely used. The decision was made to reactivate it during the astronauts 10 hr. sleep period. It was closed again and retrieved by Cernan during his space walk. So S-12 collection box is being returned in the Gemini IX capsule. (The experimenter was asked whether it would be safe to try a second exposure and asked whether the astronauts could recall whether the closing cycle on the box had taken about 30 secs. They apparently could not hear it and so could not make this determination.)\n* (GET 12 to 17 hrs.)\nS-5 and S-6, Synoptic Photography, Dr. Paul Lowman and K. Nagler\nThere is no word on how many pictures have been taken. The newspapers have made reference to a picture of Baja California, and since there was a good deal of operational film aboard, it is expected that there may be quite a few. Cernan during EVA was asked whether he had the Hasselblad camera outside and the reply was \"yes.\" In talking with Dr. Lowman I learned that this is probably the wide-angle (90 deg.) Hasselblad and may very well produce some spectacular pictures.\nFrom the standpoint of our experiments this seems to be a good mission. We should have results from S-12 and S-11 as well as S-5 and S-6. Many more pictures for the successive volumes of the Earth Atlas.\nJocelyn R. Gill\nManned Flight Experiments Office"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA ROUTING SLIP\nACTION APPROVAL CONCURRENCE FILE INFORMATION INVESTIGATE AND ADVISE NOTE AND FORWARD NOTE AND RETURN PER REQUEST RECOMMENDATION SEE ME SIGNATURE REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n1. Shirley\nREMARKS: Pls file Gemini IX\nFROM: NAME: JR Gill DATE: 3/17/67\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. Jan. 1963)"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6/6/66\n\nMemo to Foster\n\nFrom: J. R. Gill\n\nSubject: Scientific Experiments carried out on Gemini IX.\n\nThe Gemini IX mission carried the following OSSA experiments:\n S-10 Agena Micrometeorite Collection\n S-11 Airglow Horizon Photography\n S-12 Gemini Micrometeorite Collection\nIn spite of aslight flurry last Friday night to throw in additional experiments as a possible backup in the event of failure of the ATDA, no new experiments were introduced. This was a consequence of the decision to introduce no additional film packs which could have accomadated some more experimental activitivity. (Ref. TWX to Dr.John Clark re S-28 support for Gemini IX,5/27/66 and TWX to 4 experimenters and their directors re S-5,S-6,S-28 and S-29,5/31/66)\n\nNonetheless, it is anticipated that some photographs will have been taken for S-5 and S-6 (Synoptic Photography) on the operational film carried... even though this experiment was not scheduled for Gemini IX.\n\nAs of Sunday June 5th at 11:30 EDT telephone contact with Norman Foster's office indicated the following on experiments.(Talked with Ed Zeitler,MSC both Sat/and Sun. He is the editor on the experiments status report).\n\nEfforts to dislodge the shroud from the ATDA, [REDACTED] called by Tom Stafford \"an angry alligator\", were in vain so docking with the ATDA was Scrubbed from the mission. At this point there was some concern over the fuel supply and thought that it might not be possible to carry out all the experiments. The status of scientific experimental activity is given below.\n\n1. S-10,Agena Micrometeortite Collection, Dr. C. Hemenway, Dudley Observatory\n The S-10 was carried on the ATDA, but it was impossible to get near it or to retrieve it. (The S-10 was also carried on the Agena and there was no activity with it either.) [REDACTED] The S-10 is still on the ATDA and conceivably could be retrieved on a later mission.\n\n2. S-11, Airglow Horizon Photography, M. Koomen, Naval REsearch Laboratory\n The astronauts made 3 night passes on this experiment and reported no problems so it is assumed that the experiment went off as planned. they may be able to devote 1 more night pass to it during the mission. They are still planning the 21/2 hour EVA. At the start of the experiments they had 50 lbs.of fuel left and at the end,so it is reported, they still had 50 lbs!! (GET 27 hrs,29 hrs,31 hrs.)\n3. S-12, Gemini Micrometeorite Collection,Dr. C. Hemenway,Dudley Observatory\n The collection box was activated and had about 10 hrs. exposure before closing"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it so jets could be freely used. The decidion was made to reactivate it during the astronauts 10 hr. sleep period. It was closed again and retrieved by Cernan during his space walk. So S-12 collection box is being returned in the GEmini IX capsule. (the experimenter was asked whether it would be safe to try a second exposure and asked whether the astronauts could recall whether the closing cycle on the box had taken about 30 secs. They apparently could not hear it and so could not make this determination.) The first exposure and [REDACTED] was started at GET 12 hrs and closed at 17 hrs.\nS-5 and S-6; Synoptic Photography,Dr.Paul Lowman Jr. and K. Nagler.\nThere is no word on how many pictures have been taken. The newspapers made reference to a picture of Baja California, but since there was a good deal of operational film aboard, it is expected that there may be quite a few. Cernan during EVA was asked whether he had the Hasselblad camera outside and the reply was \"yes.\"\n In talking with Dr. Lowman I learned that this is probably the wide-angle(90 deg. Hasselblad and may very well produce some spectacular pictures.\n\nFrom the standpoint of our experiments this seems to be a good mission. WE should have results from S-12 and S-11 as well as S-5 and S-6. Many more pictures for the successive volumes of the Earth ATlas.\n\n Jocelyn R. Gill\n Manned Flight Experiments Office"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA HEADQUARTERS ROUTING SLIP\n\nACTION / APPROVAL / CONCURRENCE / FILE / INFORMATION / INVESTIGATE AND ADVISE / NOTE AND FORWARD / NOTE AND RETURN / PER REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION / SEE ME / SIGNATURE / REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n1. Kathy\n\nREMARKS: Plz send \"info Copy\" to Dr. Orr Reynolds - so he will know the result of his own OFf on Fri night.\n\nFROM: CODE: NAME: DATE: 6/6/66\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. July 1959)"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GILL\n\nHQS733\nPP WONASA HOUMSC\nDE NASAHQ 7722 1512235\nZNR UUUUU\nP 312229Z\nFM NASA HQ WASHINGTON D C\nTO RUECYH/U S WEATHER BUREAU SATELLITE CENTER SUITLAND MD\nNAGSFC/GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER GREENBELT MD\nWONASA/U S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BRANCH OF ASTROGEOLOGY FLAGSTAFF ARIZONA\nHOUMSC/MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON TEX\nNASA\nBT\nUNCLAS SM-7722. ATTN SATELLITE CENTER-DIRECTOR CMA INFO KENNETH NAGLER /S-6/ ATTN GSFC-DIRECTOR CMA INFO LARRY DUNKELMAN S-28 AND DR PAUL LOWMAN JR S-5 ATTN US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY-DIRECTOR CMA INFO ELLIOTT MORRIS S-29 ATTN MSC-DIRECTOR.\nAT 16.30 EDT CMA FRIDAY CMA MAY 29 WORD CAME THROUGH TO THE MANNED FLIGHT EXPERIMENTS OFFICE CMA OSSA TO READY EXPERIMENTS S-5 CMA S-6 CMA S-28 CMA AND S-29 FOR FLIGHT AS PARTIAL BACKUP ON THE GEMINI IX-A MISSION IN THE EVENT OF AN ATDA FAILURE. THE EXPERIMENTERS CONCERNED WERE PROMPTLY INFORMED BY TELEPHONE AND THEY"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE 2 RUEDHQA7722 UNCLAS\nPREPARED TO COMPLY WITH ANY BRIEFING REQUIREMENTS AT THE CAPE OR FOR REAL-TIME MISSION PLANNING AT MSC.\nOVER THE WEEKEND THE PLAN TO USE THESE ADDITIONAL EXPERIMENTS AS A PART OF THE BACKUP FOR THE GEMINI IX-A MISSION WAS ALTERED. THERE IS NO UNDERLINED CHANGE TO BE MADE IN THE FILM PACKS CARRIED. HENCE NO ADDITIONAL PHOTOGRAPHIC EXPERIMENTS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED. IT IS CONCEIVABLE THAT SOME PHOTOS FOR S-T AND S-6 MAY BE TAKEN ON AN OPPORTUNITY BASIS ON OPERATIONAL FILM CARRIED. THE REQUEST FOR THE FOUR SUBJECT EXPERIMENTS FOR GEMINI IX-A IS THEREFORE OFFICIALLY WITHDRAWN AT THIS TIME. THE FOUR EXPERIMENTERS AND THEIR ASSOCIATES VIZ. DR LOWMAN CMA JR. CMA MR NAGLER CMA MR DUNKELMAN CMA MR MORRIS CMA ARE THANKED FOR THEIR WILLINGNESS TO COMPLY WITH THIS SUDDEN REQUEST. IT IS REGRETTED THAT INCONVENIENCE WAS CAUSED EACH OF YOU OVER THIS HOLIDAY WEEKEND.\nSGD HOMER E NEWELL/ ASSOCIATE ADMIN SPACE SCIENCE AND APPLICATIONS/S/\nBT\n\nNNNN"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAME OF AGENCY\nPRECEDENCE\nACTION:\nINFO.: PRIORITY\nSECURITY\nNASA - SM\nTYPE OF MESSAGE\nCLASSIFICATION\nACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION\nSINGLE BOOK\nSTANDARD FORM 14 REV. MARCH 15, 1957\nGSA REGULATION 2-IX-301.00\n14-304\n8610-2110\nMULTI-ADDRESS\nTELEGRAPHIC MESSAGE\nTHIS BLOCK FOR USE OF COMMUNICATIONS UNIT\nOFFICIAL BUSINESS\nU. S. GOVERNMENT\nMESSAGE TO BE TRANSMITTED (Use double spacing and all capital letters)\nTHIS COL. FOR AGENCY USE\nDirector, Goddard Space Flight Center\nGreenbelt, Maryland\nDirector, U.S. Weather Bureau\nSatellite Center\nSuitland, Maryland\nDirector, U.S. Geological Survey\nBranch of Astrogeology\nFlagstaff, Arizona\nDirector, Manned Spacecraft Center\nHouston, Texas\nDr. Paul Lowman, Jr. (S-5)\nGoddard Space Flight Center\nGreenbelt, Maryland\nMr. Larry Dunkelman\n(S-28)\nGoddard Space Flight\nCenter\nGreenbelt, Maryland\nMr. Kenneth Nagler (S-6)\nU.S. Weather Bureau\nSatellite Center\nSuitland, Maryland\nMr. Elliott Morris\n(S-29)\nBranch of Astrogeology\nU.S. Geological Survey\nFlagstaff, Arizona\nSTART MESSAGE ADDRESS HERE\nDO NOT TYPE MESSAGE BEYOND THIS LINE\nAT 16:30 EDT, FRIDAY, MAY 29 WORD CAME THROUGH TO THE\nMANNED FLIGHT EXPERIMENTS OFFICE, OSSA TO READY\nEXPERIMENTS S-5, S-6, S-28, and S-29 FOR FLIGHT AS\nPARTIAL BACKUP ON THE GEMINI IX-A MISSION IN THE\nEVENT OF AN ATDA FAILURE. THE EXPERIMENTERS CON-\nCERNED WERE PROMPTLY INFORMED BY TELEPHONE AND THEY\nNAME AND TITLE OF ORIGINATOR (Type)\nORIGINATOR'S TEL. NO.\nDATE AND TIME PREPARED\nDr. Jocelyn R. Gill\n20611\n5/31 4:30 p.m.\nManned Flight Experiments Ofc.\nI certify that this message is official business, is not personal, and is in the interest of the Government.\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION\n(Signature)\nPAGE NO. 1\nNO. OF PAGES 2\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1964 O-724-475"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA-SM\nPRECEDENCE\nACTION:\nINFO.PRIRORITY\nSECURITY\nTYPE OF MESSAGE\nCLASSIFICATION\nACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION\nSINGLE BOOK\nSTANDARD FORM 14 REV. MARCH 15, 1957\nGSA REGULATION 2-IX-301.00\n14-304\n8610-2110\nMULTI-ADDRESS\nTELEGRAPHIC MESSAGE\nTHIS BLOCK FOR USE OF COMMUNICATIONS UNIT\nOFFICIAL BUSINESS\nU. S. GOVERNMENT\nMESSAGE TO BE TRANSMITTED (Use double spacing and all capital letters)\nTHIS COL. FOR AGENCY USE\nPREPARED TO COMPLY WITH ANY BRIEFING REQUIREMENTS AT\nTHE CAPE OR FOR REAL-TIME MISSION PLANNING AT MSC.\nOVER THE WEEKEND THE PLAN TO USE THESE ADDITIONAL\nEXPERIMENTS AS A PART OF THE BACKUP FOR THE GEMINI IX-A\nMISSION WAS ALTERED. THERE IS NO UNDERLINED CHANGE TO\nBE MADE IN THE FILM PACKS CARRIED. HENCE NO ADDITIONAL\nPHOTOGRAPHIC EXPERIMENTS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED. IT IS\nCONCEIVABLE THAT SOME PHOTOS FOR S-5 and S-6 MAY BE\nTAKEN ON AN OPPORTUNITY BASIS ON OPERATIONAL FILM\nCARRIED. THE REQUEST FOR THE FOUR SUBJECT EXPERIMENTS\nFOR GEMINI IX-A IS THEREFORE OFFICIALLY WITHDRAWN AT THIS\nTIME. THE FOUR EXPERIMENTERS AND THEIR ASSOCIATES\nVIZ. DR. LOWMAN, JR., MR. NAGLER, MR. DUNKELMAN,\nMR. MORRIS, ARE THANKED FOR THEIR WILLINGNESS TO COMPLY\nWITH THIS SUDDEN REQUEST. IT IS REGRETTED THAT\nINCONVENIENCE WAS CAUSED EACH OF YOU OVER THIS HOLIDAY\nWEEKEND.\nHOMER E. NEWELL\nSTART MESSAGE ADDRESS HERE\nDO NOT TYPE MESSAGE BEYOND THIS LINE\nNAME AND TITLE OF ORIGINATOR (Type)\nORIGINATOR'S TEL. NO.\nDATE AND TIME PREPARED\nMr. Willis Foster, Director\nManned Flight Experiments Office\n20180\n4:30 p.m. 5/31/66\nI certify that this message is official business, is not personal, and is in the interest of the Government.\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION\n(Signature)\nPAGE NO. 2\nNO. OF PAGES 2\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1964 O-724-475"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA HEADQUARTERS ROUTING SLIP\nCODE\nNAME (if necessary)\nACTION\nAPPROVAL\n1. SM Mr. Foster WBF\nCONCURRENCE\nFILE\n2. S Dr. Newell\nINFORMATION\nINVESTIGATE AND ADVISE\n3.\nNOTE AND FORWARD\nNOTE AND RETURN\n4. SM Kathy (last)\nPER REQUEST\nRECOMMENDATION\n5.\nSEE ME\nSIGNATURE\n6.\nREPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n7.\nREMARKS:\nSubject: Request for attendance of Mr. L. Dunkelman at Gemini IX Experiments Debriefing, MSC\nMay 24, 1966\nDr. Newell -\nThis specific request is being made at Dr. Clark's request.\nWill\nFROM: SM J. R. Gill DATE: 5/13/66\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. July 1959) U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1959 OF-813026"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MAY 25 1966\nSM-(JRG:kby)\nTO : Director, Goddard Space Flight Center\nFROM : S/Associate Administrator for Space Science and Applications\nSUBJECT: Request for attendance of Mr. Lawrence Dunkelman at Gemini IX Experiments Debriefing, Manned Spacecraft Center\nThe Gemini IX Experiments Debriefing will be held at the Manned Spacecraft Center approximately nine (9) days following recovery. In the interests of continuity in the Geo-Astronomical Observations Program, Dr. Gill has asked that Mr. Lawrence Dunkelman be permitted to participate.\nMr. Dunkelman has been of considerable assistance in this program since the days of the Ad Hoc Committee and has in the past eight months been instrumental in formulating solid experiments as well as visual tasks.\nYour cooperation in arranging for his participation will be greatly appreciated.\nOriginal Signed by Homer E. Newell\nHomer E. Newell Associate Administrator for Space Science and Applications\nConcurrence: Willis B. Foster Jocelyn R. Gill\ncc: S/Newell Subject File: GT-9 file SM Reading Files\nSM:JRGill:kby 20611 5/13/66 rewritten: SM:WBFoster:kby 35886 5/19/66"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA HEADQUARTERS ROUTING SLIP\nCODE\nNAME (if necessary)\nACTION\nAPPROVAL\n1. Kathy\nCONCURRENCE\nFILE\n2.\nINFORMATION\nINVESTIGATE AND ADVISE\n3.\nNOTE AND FORWARD\nNOTE AND RETURN\n4.\nPER REQUEST\nRECOMMENDATION\n5.\nSEE ME\nSIGNATURE\n6.\nREPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n7.\nREMARKS:\nFoster says \"go ahead\" with this.\nFROM: CODE: NAME: JRG DATE: 5/13/66\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. July 1959) U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1959 OF-513026"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SPECIAL\n\nNASA HEADQUARTERS ROUTING SLIP\n\nCODE | NAME (if necessary) | ACTION\nAPPROVAL\nCONCURRENCE\n1. | | Foster | FILE\n2. | | | x INFORMATION\n✓ INVESTIGATE AND ADVISE\n3. | | | NOTE AND FORWARD\nNOTE AND RETURN\n4. | | | PER REQUEST\nRECOMMENDATION\n5. | | | SEE ME\nSIGNATURE\n6. | | | REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n7. | | |\n\nREMARKS:\n\nMr. Dunkelman suggests that a simple communication on this single item might be helpful in taking care of the \"next crisis\" on the horizon- the Gemini IX Debriefing which will come about near the end of May. The 29th,Sunday, is the earliest date.\n\nre Dunkelman in general: he says that Townsend is taking the problem \"up the line.\" I interpret Townsend this to mean that he/is communicating the content of your telephone call with Townsend to the Director. Perhaps we will hear further on Monday.\n\nFROM: CODE: NAME: J. R. Gill DATE: 5/13/66\n\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. July 1959) U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1959 OF-813026"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"File GT-9\n\nMay 20, 1966\n\nre telephone call to Mr. Eaton, MSC\n\nOnly scientific experiment affected by scrub is S-10, Micrometeorite Collection on the Agena. ATDA does not have capability to be placed in a parking orbit. Therefore, its life expectancy is quite low compared to Agena orbit. Plans to retrieve S-10. Not to be activated. * Another problem is stowage within reentry vehicle.\n\nThe other scientific experiments remain unaffected. Camera equipment removed? Will be reload prior to launch on 31 May.\nfrom Gemini 9,\n\nMr. Eaton plans to call you again the first of next week with additional information.\n\n* I assume this means the box will not be opened; will only \"use\" the outside collecting section. With EVA they will restore the closed box to the cabin. 5/2"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"May 20, 1966\n\nre telephone call to Mr. Eaton, MSC\n\nOnly scientific experiment affected by scrub is S-10, Micrometeorite Collection on the Agena. ATDA does not have capability to be placed in a parking orbit. Therefore, its life expectancy is quite low compared to Agena orbit. Plans to retrieve S-10. Not to be activated. Another problem is stowage within reentry vehicle.\n\nThe other scientific experiments remain unaffected. Camera equipment removed. Will be reload prior to launch on 31 May.\n\nMr. Eaton plans to call you again the first of next week with additional information."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GT-IX\n\nSM/Director,\nManned Flight Experiments Office\n\nMay 19, 1966\n\nSM/Manned Flight Experiments Office\n\nEffect on Scientific Experiments on Gemini IX Mission as a result of failure of Agena IX.\n\nThe following OSSA experiments are assigned to Gemini IX: S-1, S-10, S-11, and S-12. Details follow:\n\nS-1, Zodiacal Light Photography, E. Ney, University of Minnesota\n\nNo change is expected in this experiment. Provided that GT-9 is able to go through the planned EVA, this experiment ought to be accomplished as written in the mission plan.\n\nS-10, Micrometeorite Collection on the Agena, C. Hemenway, Dudley Observatory\n\nThe collection box attached to the Agena IX is lost. The back-up unit is at the Cape ready to be attached to the ATDA (target vehicle). The contingency mission plan written for the ATDA calls for the box to be retrieved in unopened condition. This means that collection of particles would be confined to the outside portion which was planned for the S-10. (It is shielded on launch). The mission plan calls for retrieval of the box and storing inside the Gemini spacecraft before reentry.\n\nS-11, Airglow Horizon Photography, M. Koomen, Naval Research Laboratory\n\nIn the flight plan for the ATDA, there is the possibility of an increase from 3 to 4 night runs for this experiment. So it does not appear that it will suffer.\n\nS-12, Micrometeorite Collection on the Gemini, C. Hemenway, Dudley Observatory\n\nThis experiment should be unaffected by the failure of Agena 9. It is planned to retrieve the collection box after some 8 hours of exposure and to return it inside the Gemini spacecraft.\n\nFinally, it is pointed out that the general effect is to place more concern on operational problems, possibly shortening the time and effort for experiments.\n\nCONCURRENCES: Jocelyn R. Gill, Manned Flight Experiments Office. OFFICIAL FILE COPY\nOFFICE CODE / SIGNATURE / DATE\n\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-77210-1"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 MAY 1962 EDITION GSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101-11.6\n\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO: MEMORANDUM TO THE FILE DATE: May 13, 1966\n\nFROM: SM/Manned Flight Experiments Office\n\nSUBJECT: Bulletin on S-11 experiment for Gemini IX.\n\nThe extended timer on the Maurer camera has failed. Will operate the sequence manually. The command pilot will mark off the exposures for the pilot and the experiment will proceed in this fashion. The principal investigator, M. Koomen, NRL, feels that the experiment will come off O.K.\n\nThe story is that one of the backup pilots using the flight model in the simulator and the cable broke. Then Eugene Cernan, the pilot, took the \"flight backup\" camera and this broke also. Needless to say this cable in the camera is a very weak link! R. T. Seal and M. J. Koomen were at the Cape while this was in progress.\n\nIn an effort to alleviate this problem for future Gemini flights, MSC is trying to develop a timer for the S-13 experiment which will include the film advance. They feel that it is coming along well and that they will accomplish this.\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\nManned Flight Experiments Office\n\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Astronauts Thomas Stafford and Eugene Cernan\nGEMINI IX May 12, 1966\n\nSM/Manned Flight Experiments Office\n\nAstronomical Phenomena During the Flight of Gemini IX.\n\nThe month of May this year has two eclipses and as usual they are two weeks apart. A penumbral eclipse of the moon occurred on May 4th at full Moon. This is a type of partial lunar eclipse which usually goes completely unnoticed because it is barely detectable. But two weeks later on May 20th when the moon is new, an annular or ring eclipse of the sun will occur. This one will be observed by scientists and others able to see it. On this occasion the sun will be only partially covered by the moon so as to leave a bright ring or annulus around it.\n\nThe central eclipse path goes over North Africa to the south of Italy into the Mediterranean and over southern Greece. It will end in the USSR. The eclipse will be seen as partial over a much wider area of the earth than this, and I think it is possible you might see this aspect. The circumstances of this eclipse are as follows:\n\n Date GMT\n h m\n Eclipse begins May 20 6:51\nCentral Eclipse begins 7:55\nCentral Eclipse begins at local noon 9:52\nCentral Eclipse ends 11:23\nCentral Eclipse ends 12:27\n\nThere will be several eclipse expeditions to observe this event. Among these is the Air Force Expedition which will fly in a KC 135 at 40,000 ft. over the Mediterranean Sea and also an expedition in southern Greece planned by the National Observatory of Athens. Following the eclipse there will be a NATO conference at the National Observatory at Athens to discuss solar problems. The Air Force plans ground studies of the sun during the eclipse at various radio frequencies. Just wanted you to know why the sun looked different, and the sky somewhat darker in case you happened to be flying at this time and had occasion to notice it."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\n\nAs for other astronomical phenomena during your flight, the meteor plot for the year shows May as being a slim month compared to August. Nonetheless you may see some meteors and we will be interested to hear your report after flight. Auroras and airglow patches are unpredictable. If you see any, we would like you to record the time and your location and any features, such as color or shape or structure. Labeled sketches can be very useful for later analysis. You will find a print showing types of auroras among the enclosures with this memo.\n\nAmong the four 8x10 glossy prints which I am attaching to this memo, you will find one which illustrates types of auroras. All the prints enclosed are identified on the sheets attached to each print. The photo of the solar eclipse shows the dahlia-type corona which occurs at the maximum of the solar cycle. This annular eclipse discussed above will not show the corona since the sun has to be completely blotted out to show the pale coronal light.\n\nAnother item that should be mentioned is comets. I am not aware of any comet such as Ikeya-Seki which was seen last October-November being around just now, but one never knows when one may put in appearance. Should you happen to be looking at the sky near the sun just after sunset or before dawn and see a comet, please record the time, appearance, and an estimate of its position. The position is best given with respect to planets or stars you can see. This information should then be promptly reported either to me or to the Harvard College Observatory, Cambridge 38, Massachusetts.\n\nVery best wishes for a highly successful flight. I shall be following it closely. After flight we will be most interested in anything you can tell us about it. Again, good luck to the Gemini IX Mission which is full of important operations and some interesting experiments. See you in Houston!\n\n Jocelyn R. Gill\n Jocelyn R. Gill\n Manned Flight Experiments Office\n\nAttachments: 4 glossy prints\n\ncc: SM/Mr. Foster MSC/Major Lehr ESSA/Dr. Roach\nGSFC/Mr. Dunkelman MSC/Mr. Slayton MSC/Mr. McKee\nMSC/Cdr. Carpenter\n\nSM:JRGill:kby 20611 5/12/66"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA ROUTING SLIP\n\nCODE NAME (if necessary)\n1. SM Mr. Foster\n2. Gill\n3. → Kathy -\n4. Gemini IX\n5. FILE pls.\n6.\n7.\n\nACTION / APPROVAL / CONCURRENCE / FILE / INFORMATION / INVESTIGATE AND ADVISE / NOTE AND FORWARD / NOTE AND RETURN / PER REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION / SEE ME / SIGNATURE / REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n\nREMARKS:\n\nSubject: Tentative List of invitees to attend Gemini IX Debriefing nine (9) days following recovery submitted by SM at request of John McKee, Crew Operations, MSC.\n\nOK. WBF\n\nFROM: CODE: SM NAME: J.R. Gill DATE: 4/20/66\n\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. Jan. 1963) U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1963 OF—671845"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nMAY 1962 EDITION\nGSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101-11.6\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : SM/Director,\n Manned Flight Experiments Office DATE: APR 20 1966\n\nFROM : SM/Manned Flight Experiments Office\n\nSUBJECT: Tentative list of invitees to attend Gemini IX Debriefing nine (9) days following recovery submitted by SM at request of John McKee, Crew Operations, MSC.\n\nIn a telcon on 4/19/66 Mr. John McKee requested a list from SM of invitees to attend subject debriefing. The next day, 4/20/66, I submitted the following list by telephone as per request. The names were: Dr. Franklin Roach, Mr. L. Dunkelman, Mr. M. Dubin, Dr. Henry Smith, and Dr. Jocelyn Gill.\n\nBefore placing these names on the list I informed the individual or his office of this action and the likely date when this would happen. There is, of course, nothing binding about the list and others may be added later.\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\nManned Flight Experiments Office\nOffice of Space Science and Applications\n\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan\n5010-108"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA HEADQUARTERS ROUTING SLIP\n\nCODE NAME (if necessary)\n1. W. Foster WBF\n2. Dr. G.H. jbg [struck through]\n3. → Kathy -\n4. Gemini IX\n5. file pls.\n6.\n7.\n\nACTION / APPROVAL / CONCURRENCE / FILE / INFORMATION / INVESTIGATE AND ADVISE / NOTE AND FORWARD / NOTE AND RETURN / PER REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION / SEE ME / SIGNATURE / REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n\nREMARKS:\n\nJocelyn:\n\nTravel looks feasible — you should attend along with such others as you think essential.\n\nWBf.\n\nFROM: CODE: NAME: DATE: 4/20/66\n\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. July 1959) U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1959 OF—513026"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4/19/66\n\nMemo to: W. Foster\nFrom: J.R. Gill\nSubject: Gemini IX Experiments Debriefing - date Recovery + 9 days\n\nJohn McKee, MSC, has just phoned to say that the schedule for Gemini IX Debriefing is nine days after recovery.\n\nHe has asked me to provide a list of suggested names for attendance (tentative).\n\nHave you any suggestions, etc. on this subject? What about TRAVEL??\n\nJocelyn"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY\n\nAPR 27 1966\n\nSM/Director,\nManned Flight Experiments Office\n\nSM/Manned Flight Experiments Office\n\nIn reply refer to:\nSM - (JRG:kby)\n\nStatus of Gemini IX Scientific Experiments\n\nThe experiments for the Gemini IX flight are:\n\nS-1, Zodiacal Light Photography,\nS-11, Airglow Horizon Photography,\nS-10, Micrometeorite Collection on the Agena, and\nS-12, Micrometeorite Collection on Gemini.\n\nMr. Wayne Eaton reported by telcon to me on April 21, 1966 that the condition of the subject experiments is satisfactory. Details follow.\n\nS-1:\n\nThe equipment has been checked out by MAC. The astronauts have seen it at the Cape and are satisfied with the operational plan. They have had training units for some time. Dr. Ney and the crew have had time together so the briefing seems in good shape. The plan is to take one photo of the Milky Way and four (4) of the airglow just prior to ingress on the EVA operation. This is planned to be done on the second evening of flight. It is planned to use TRI-X film. Both units are now at the Cape and the flight loading of the film will take place four (4) days prior to the flight. During my visit to Dr. Ney on April 15th at the University of Minnesota, the principal investigator indicated to me that he was pleased with the plan and the crew briefing for Gemini IX. This confirms the telephone conversation with MSC re S-1.\n\nS-11:\n\nA flight unit was recently \"downgraded\" to training unit (this is just nomenclature). The crew has worked with the training unit and has seen the flight unit. The only difference in the training unit is that it has no actual filter, since this item is perishable, but the training unit is in all other respects identical to the flight unit. The flight unit will be at the Cape on April 29th. There has been a change in the bracket to hold this experiment. The first bracket made by MAC was unacceptable to the experimenter and apparently also to MSC.\n\nFOR INTERNAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"File Gemini 9 (See later note on S-10)\n\nSee to Foster\n\nFOR INTERNAL USE ONLY APR 27 1966\n\nSM/Director,\nManned Flight Experiments Office\n\nSM/Manned Flight Experiments Office\n\nIn reply refer to:\nSM - (JRG:kby)\n\nStatus of Gemini IX Scientific Experiments\n\nThe experiments for the Gemini IX flight are:\n\nS-1, Zodiacal Light Photography,\nS-11, Airglow Horizon Photography,\nS-10, Micrometeorite Collection on the Agena, and\nS-12, Micrometeorite Collection on Gemini.\n\nMr. Wayne Eaton reported by telcon to me on April 21, 1966 that the condition of the subject experiments is satisfactory. Details follow.\n\nS-1:\n\nThe equipment has been checked out by MAC. The astronauts have seen it at the Cape and are satisfied with the operational plan. They have had training units for some time. Dr. Ney and the crew have had time together so the briefing seems in good shape. The plan is to take one photo of the Milky Way and four (4) of the airglow just prior to ingress on the EVA operation. This is planned to be done on the second evening of flight. It is planned to use TRI-X film. Both units are now at the Cape and the flight loading of the film will take place four (4) days prior to the flight. During my visit to Dr. Ney on April 15th at the University of Minnesota, the principal investigator indicated to me that he was pleased with the plan and the crew briefing for Gemini IX. This confirms the telephone conversation with MSC re S-1.\n\nS-11:\n\nA flight unit was recently \"downgraded\" to training unit (this is just nomenclature). The crew has worked with the training unit and has seen the flight unit. The only difference in the training unit is that it has no actual filter, since this item is perishable, but the training unit is in all other respects identical to the flight unit. The flight unit will be at the Cape on April 29th. There has been a change in the bracket to hold this experiment. The first bracket made by MAC was unacceptable to the experimenter and apparently also to MSC.\n\nFOR INTERNAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A new bracket, satisfactory to both MSC and the experimenter, has been constructed at the Naval Research Laboratory. This new bracket was seen at the meeting in St. Louis, is incorporated in the training unit, and MSC is well satisfied with it.\n\nThere is just one night pass for accomplishment on Gemini IX in view of extra operational considerations of S-11. This will make it possible to get 14 exposures and a sunrise period. This is not what Koomen, principal investigator, requested. He asked for four (4) night passes originally. Apparently, navigational equipment will have to usurp this time on IX. S-11 is scheduled for reflight on Gemini XI and XII.\n\nS-10, S-12:\n\nBoth units have been checked out and fit-checked with the S/C. S-12 is opened from inside the cabin by an upper right-hand toggle switch designed to prevent inadvertent activation. Both pieces of equipment will be fit-checked at the Cape and then returned to the principal investigator at Dudley Observatory for flight loading. There is \"clean room\" space for Dr. Hemenway at the Cape also.\n\nOn Gemini IX the first activity will be to activate the S-12 which is done from inside the cabin. The second activity will be to open the S-10 micrometeorite box on the Agena. The S-10 box is fastened to the Agena by a velcro patch. (Just which Agena will be approached is unknown at this time; S-10 was attached to the Agena belonging to Gemini VIII; if all goes as planned there will also be one on the Agena belonging to Gemini IX. The SEDR H460 is scheduled for May 2nd and Wayne Eaton from MSC will be there. After that the collection boxes will be returned to Dudley for loading for flight.\n\nAccording to the present plan the S-12 collection box will be retrieved first during the EVA planned for the first day of the mission.\n\nIn summary, there are some eight (8) hours of experiments (scientific experiments are only part of the total complement) scheduled for Gemini IX and there are only 4-1/2 hours in toto available for experiments according to O. Smistad, Experiments Office, MSC.\n\nThe final flight plan should be ready on the 18th and I have requested a copy.\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\n\ncc: SM/Foster/Calio\nSM Subject Files: GT-9 S-1, S-12, S-11\nSM Reading Files\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\nManned Flight Experiments Office"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\n\nA new bracket, satisfactory to both MSC and the experimenter, has been constructed at the Naval Research Laboratory. This new bracket was seen at the meeting in St. Louis, is incorporated in the training unit, and MSC is well satisfied with it.\n\nThere is just one night pass for accomplishment on Gemini IX in view of extra operational considerations of S-11. This will make it possible to get 14 exposures and a sunrise period. This is not what Koomen, principal investigator, requested. He asked for four (4) night passes originally. Apparently, navigational equipment will have to usurp this time on IX. S-11 is scheduled for reflight on Gemini XI and XII.\n\nS-10, S-12:\n\nBoth units have been checked out and fit-checked with the S/C. S-12 is opened from inside the cabin by an upper right-hand toggle switch designed to prevent inadvertent activation. Both pieces of equipment will be fit-checked at the Cape and then returned to the principal investigator at Dudley Observatory for flight loading. There is \"clean room\" space for Dr. Hemenway at the Cape also.\n\nOn Gemini IX the first activity will be to activate the S-12 which is done from inside the cabin. The second activity will be to open the S-10 micrometeorite box on the Agena. The S-10 box is fastened to the Agena by a velcro patch. (Just which Agena will be approached is unknown at this time; S-10 was attached to the Agena belonging to Gemini VIII; if all goes as planned there will also be one on the Agena belonging to Gemini IX. The SEDR H460 is scheduled for May 2nd and Wayne Eaton from MSC will be there. After that the collection boxes will be returned to Dudley for loading for flight.\n\nAccording to the present plan the S-12 collection box will be retrieved first during the EVA planned for the first day of the mission.\n\nIn summary, there are some eight (8) hours of experiments (scientific experiments are only part of the total complement) scheduled for Gemini IX and there are only 4-1/2 hours in toto available for experiments according to O. Smistad, Experiments Office, MSC.\n\nThe final flight plan should be ready on the 18th and I have requested a copy.\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\nManned Flight Experiments Office"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"File → Gemini IX A file (handwritten annotations: \"Foster\" struck through, \"SM\", \"Gill\")\n\nSAA146PTTU JAW RUEDHQA7722 1512235-UUUU--RUECYH.\nZNR UUUUU\nP 312229Z\nFM NASA HQ WASHINGTON D C\nTO RUECYH/U S WEATHER BUREAU SATELLITE CENTER SUITLAND MD\nZEN/GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER GREENBELT MD\nZEN/U S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BRANCH OF ASTROGEOLOGY FLAGSTAFF ARIZONA\nZEN/MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON TEX\nNASA\nBT\nUNCLAS SM-7722. ATTN SATELLITE CENTER-DIRECTOR, INFO KENNETH NAGLER /S-6/ ATTN GSFC-DIRECTOR CMA INFO LARRY DUNKELMAN S-28 AND DR PAUL LOWMAN JR S-5 ATTN US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY-DIRECTOR CMA INFO ELLIOTT MORRIS S-29 ATTN MSC-DIRECTOR.\nAT 16.30 EDT CMA FRIDAY CMA MAY 29 WORD CAME THROUGH TO THE MANNED FLIGHT EXPERIMENTS OFFICE CMA OSSA TO READY EXPERIMENTS S-5 CMA S-6 CMA S-28 CMA AND S-29 FOR FLIGHT AS PARTIAL BACKUP ON THE GEMINI IX-A MISSION IN THE EVENT OF AN ATDA FAILURE. THE EXPERIMENTERS CONCERNED WERE PROMPTLY INFORMED BY TELEPHONE AND THEY\n\n\nPAGE 2 RUEDHQA7722 UNCLAS\nPREPARED TO COMPLY WITH ANY BRIEFING REQUIREMENTS AT THE CAPE OR FOR REAL-TIME MISSION PLANNING AT MSC.\nOVER THE WEEKEND THE PLAN TO USE THESE ADDITIONAL EXPERIMENTS AS A PART OF THE BACKUP FOR THE GEMINI IX-A MISSION WAS ALTERED. THERE IS NO UNDERLINED CHANGE TO BE MADE IN THE FILM PACKS CARRIED. HENCE NO ADDITIONAL PHOTOGRAPHIC EXPERIMENTS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED. IT IS CONCEIVABLE THAT SOME PHOTOS FOR S-T AND S-6 MAY BE TAKEN ON AN OPPORTUNITY BASIS ON OPERATIONAL FILM CARRIED. THE REQUEST FOR THE FOUR SUBJECT EXPERIMENTS FOR GEMINI IX-A IS THEREFORE OFFICIALLY WITHDRAWN AT THIS TIME. THE FOUR EXPERIMENTERS AND THEIR ASSOCIATES VIZ. DR LOWMAN CMA JR. CMA MR NAGLER CMA MR DUNKELMAN CMA MR MORRIS CMA ARE THANKED FOR THEIR WILLINGNESS TO COMPLY WITH THIS SUDDEN REQUEST. IT IS REGRETTED THAT INCONVENIENCE WAS CAUSED EACH OF YOU OVER THIS HOLIDAY WEEKEND.\nSGD HOMER E NEWELL/ASSOCIATE ADMIN SPACE SCIENCE AND APPLICATIONS/S/\nBT"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA ROUTING SLIP\n\nCODE | NAME (if necessary) | ACTION / APPROVAL / CONCURRENCE / FILE / INFORMATION / INVESTIGATE AND ADVISE / NOTE AND FORWARD / NOTE AND RETURN / PER REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION / SEE ME / SIGNATURE / REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n1. SM Mr. Foster (struck through)\n2. Catio (handwritten)\n3. Kirby - gola (handwritten)\n4. file GT-9 (handwritten)\n5.\n6.\n7.\nREMARKS:\n\nFROM: CODE: SM NAME: J.R. Gill:kby DATE: 3/7/66\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. Jan. 1963)\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1963 OF-671845"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : SM/Director, Manned Flight Experiments Office DATE: March 7, 1966\n\nFROM : SM/Jocelyn R. Gill\n\nSUBJECT: Status of Scientific (OSSA) Experiments on Gemini IX\n\nThe following scientific experiments are scheduled for Gemini IX: S-1, Zodiacal Light Photography; S-10, Micrometeorite Collection on Agena; S-11, Airglow Horizon Photography; S-12, Micrometeorite Collection on Gemini, related to S-10; and Dim Light Photography being presented to SSSC as S-28 on Friday, March 4, 1966. (L. Dunkelman, GSFC).\n\nS-1: Zodiacal Light Photography, E. Ney, Univ. of Minnesota.\n\nAstronaut briefing, Ney reports that one briefing has been held in Houston and another will be scheduled for the Planetarium. Elliott See, Charles Bassett and James Lovell were present for the first briefing: Tom Stafford was not. Under the circumstances, it is likely that the briefing will have to be repeated.\n\nEquipment, The camera equipment is now at the Cape. Documentation has presented some problems, mainly the insistence on a new serial number for the camera since it now has a handle on it. The handle is mounted with holes on the camera. Tri-X film will be used with and without the window. With hatch open and using the spacecraft as an occulting disk, the astronaut will place himself in the shadow of the S/C and see how far out he can trace the extension of the solar corona. He will also take 4 pictures of the airglow and a picture of the Milky Way.\n\nThe principal investigator commented that he was very pleased with the enthusiastic reception from See and Bassett for the equipment and experiment. They have been the most interested in this experiment of all the astronauts who have been associated with it. Since Tom Stafford has been very cooperative in the experimental program, I personally have confidence that he will pick up where See and Bassett have left off, and that the experiment can go off as planned.\n\nS-10: Micrometeorite Collection on Agena.\n\nIt employs the same bracket as S-12. This modus operandi has cost more than a new design and has given much trouble. GSI (government service inspection) has been a problem since it was not written into the contract. The problem is with the fairing with the handle in the open position. Lubrication has also been a problem since the contractor has applied it in \"glops\" instead of following instructions. The experiment is all ready, so far as equipment is concerned.\n\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\n\nS-11: Airglow Horizon Photography, M. Koomen, NRL.\n\nNo difficulties in the schedule are anticipated. This is the first flight of this experiment and the flight hardware is on schedule. The equipment has passed environmental testing. The experiment is mounted on a movable bracket and is \"pointed\" by the astronaut.\n\nThe first briefing of the astronauts (See and Bassett) has been held and another is to be held later in the Morehead Planetarium. The astronauts seemed \"reasonably happy\" with the experiment according to the principal investigator.\n\nS-12: Micrometeorite Collection on Gemini S/C:\n\nOn schedule. No problems reported by the principal investigator. This is the first flight of this experiment, having been canceled out on GT-6.\n\nS-28: Dim Light Photography, L. Dunkelman:\n\nThis experiment was first carried on Gemini VII and VI-A as \"operational procedure.\" After processing by SSSC and MSFEB this month, it is hoped that it will assume full experiment status. It uses cameras already assigned to the S/C and sensitive black and white film, already qualified. Some further briefing will be required, probably at the Planetarium and possibly can be accomplished at the same time as S-1's Planetarium briefing.\n\nJocelyn R. Gill"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SM/Director, Manned Flight Experiments Office March 7, 1966\n\nSM/Jocelyn R. Gill\n\nStatus of Scientific (OSSA) Experiments on Gemini IX\n\nThe following scientific experiments are scheduled for Gemini IX: S-1, Zodiacal Light Photography; S-10, Micrometeorite Collection on Agena; S-11, Airglow Horizon Photography; S-12, Micrometeorite Collection on Gemini, related to S-10; and Dim Light Photography being presented to SSSC as S-28 on Friday, March 4, 1966. (L. Dunkelman, GSFC).\n\nS-1: Zodiacal Light Photography, E. Ney, Univ. of Minnesota.\n\nAstronaut briefing, Ney reports that one briefing has been held in Houston and another will be scheduled for the Planetarium. Elliott See, Charles Bassett and James Lovell were present for the first briefing: Tom Stafford was not. Under the circumstances, it is likely that the briefing will have to be repeated.\n\nEquipment, The camera equipment is now at the Cape. Documentation has presented some problems, mainly the insistence on a new serial number for the camera since it now has a handle on it. The handle is mounted with holes on the camera. Tri-X film will be used with and without the window. With hatch open and using the spacecraft as an occulting disk, the astronaut will place himself in the shadow of the S/C and see how far out he can trace the extension of the solar corona. He will also take 4 pictures of the airglow and a picture of the Milky Way.\n\nThe principal investigator commented that he was very pleased with the enthusiastic reception from See and Bassett for the equipment and experiment. They have been the most interested in this experiment of all the astronauts who have been associated with it. Since Tom Stafford has been very cooperative in the experimental program, I personally have confidence that he will pick up where See and Bassett have left off, and that the experiment can go off as planned.\n\nS-10: Micrometeorite Collection on Agena.\n\nIt employs the same bracket as S-12. This modus operandi has cost more than a new design and has given much trouble. GSI (government service inspection) has been a problem since it was not written into the contract. The problem is with the fairing with the handle in the open position. Lubrication has also been a problem since the contractor has applied it in \"glops\" instead of following instructions. The experiment is all ready, so far as equipment is concerned."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\n\nS-11: Airglow Horizon Photography, M. Koomen, NRL.\n\nNo difficulties in the schedule are anticipated. This is the first flight of this experiment and the flight hardware is on schedule. The equipment has passed environmental testing. The experiment is mounted on a movable bracket and is \"pointed\" by the astronaut.\n\nThe first briefing of the astronauts (See and Bassett) has been held and another is to be held later in the Morehead Planetarium. The astronauts seemed \"reasonably happy\" with the experiment according to the principal investigator.\n\nS-12: Micrometeorite Collection on Gemini S/C:\n\nOn schedule. No problems reported by the principal investigator. This is the first flight of this experiment, having been canceled out on GT-6.\n\nS-28: Dim Light Photography, L. Dunkelman:\n\nThis experiment was first carried on Gemini VII and VI-A as \"operational procedure.\" After processing by SSSC and MSFEB this month, it is hoped that it will assume full experiment status. It uses cameras already assigned to the S/C and sensitive black and white film, already qualified. Some further briefing will be required, probably at the Planetarium and possibly can be accomplished at the same time as S-1's Planetarium briefing.\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\n\ncc: MGS/Mr. Liccardi\nMGS/Mr. Frandsen\nMGS/Mr. Hall\n\nSM:JRGill:kby 20593 3/7/66"} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cops. to A.Liccardi, N. Frandsen, Eldon Hall\n\nDRAFT - expedite!\nReady for final\n\n3/3/66\n\nMemo to Will Foster\n\nFrom: J. R. Gill\n\nSubject: Status of [REDACTED] Scientific (OSSA) Experiments on Gemini IX\n\nThe following scientific experiments are scheduled for Gemini IX: S-1, Zodiacal Light Photography; S-10, Micrometeorite Collection on Agena; S-11, Airglow Horizon Photography; S-12, Micrometeorite Collection on Gemini, related to S-10; and Dim Light Photography being presented to SSSC as S-28 on Friday, March 4,1966.(L. Dunkelman, GSFC).\n\nS-1: Zodiacal Light Photography, E. Ney, Univ. of Minn.\n\nAstronaut briefing, Ney reports that one briefing has been held in Houston and another will be scheduled for the Planetarium. Elliott See, Chas. Bassett and James Lovell were present for the first briefing: Tom Stafford was not. Under the circumstances, it is likely that the briefing will have to be repeated.\n\nEquipment, The camera equipment is now at the Cape. Documentation has presented some problems, mainly the insistence on a new serial number for the camera since it now has a handle on it. The handle is mounted with holes on the camera. Tri-X film will be used with and without the window ([REDACTED]). With hatch open and using the spacecraft as an occulting disk, the astronaut will place himself in the shadow of the S/C and see how far out he can trace the extension of the solar corona. He will also take 4 pictures of the airglow and a picture of the Milky Way.\n\nThe principal investigator commented that he was very pleased with the enthusiastic reception from See and Bassett for the equipment and experiment. They have been the most interested in this experiment of all the astronauts who have been associated with it. Since Tom Stafford has been very cooperative in the experimental program, I personally have confidence that he will pick up where See and Bassett have left off, and that the experiment can go off as planned.\n\nS-10: Micrometeorite Collection on Agena. It employs the same bracket as S-12. This modus operandi has cost more than a new design and has given much trouble. GSI (govt serve inspection) has been a problem since it was not written into the contract. The problem is with the fairing with the handle in the open position. Lubrication has also been a problem since the contractor has applied it in \"glops\" instead of following instructions. The experiment is all ready, so far as equipment is concerned."} {"doc_id":"3d59edefe5d5b56c","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2.\n\nS-11: Airglow Horizon Photography, M. Koomen, NRL. No difficulties in the\n\nschedule are anticipated. This is the first flight of this experiment and the flight hardware is on schedule. The equipment has passed environmental testing. The experiment is mounted on a movable bracket and is \"pointed\" by the astronaut.\n\nThe first briefing of the astronauts (SEE and Bassett) has been held and another is to be held later in the Morehead Planetarium. The astronauts seemed \"reasonably happy\" with the experiment according to the principal investigator.\n\nS-12, Micrometeorite Collection on Gemini [REDACTED] S/C:\n\nOn schedule. No problems reported by the principal investigator. This is the first flight of this experiment, having been [REDACTED] GT-6. cancelled out on\n\nS-28: Dim Light Photography, L. Dunkelman. This experiment was first carried on Gemini VII and VI-A as \"operational procedure.\" After processing by SSSC and MSFEB this month, it is hoped that it will assume full experiment status. It uses cameras already assigned to the S/C and sensitive black and white film, already qualified. Some further briefing will be required, probably at the Planetarium and possibly can be accomplished at the same time as S-1's Planetarium briefing.\n\nJocelyn R. Gill"} {"doc_id":"3de23b0a3e59f452","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026 Under Section 1842 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024\n\nHe is convinced UFO's are intelligently controlled from Outer Space—Donald E. Keyoe, director of the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena.\n\nHe will try to find out—Dr. Edward Condon, former head of the National Bureau of Standards and recently named director of the Air Force-sponsored civilian investigation of UFO's with headquarters at the University of Colorado in Boulder.\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"3de23b0a3e59f452","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR NI/FTD CONFIDENTIAL XGDS 259\n\n203708 ***CIRCOL OFFLINE OUTPUT - HQFTD/NIIB, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO***\n4.21.53 PM JUN 13,1974 - PAGE 14\n\n*CIA ATTN: CRS/ISG/U/ [REDACTED] RM 1H46 HQS WASH. D. C. 20505:\n138501353 * 152 DOCUMENTS SATISFIED THIS SEARCH FOR LINDA;\n\n304441\nACCESSNR 138501353\nFILMNR 1894/0185\nCLASSIF 1\nDOWNGRAD 1\nDATE 68\nTEXT 0 0070\nCLASSIFICATION: CONFIDENTIAL\nRESTRICTIONS:\nCONTROLLED DISSEM\nNO FOREIGN DISSEM\n\nTITLE [REDACTED] SIGHTINGS OF UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS IN LADAKH, NEPAL, SIKKIM AND BHUTAN -C-\nAUTHOR NONE\nTOPIC TAGS -IN- -NP- -RT- -CH- 2 5 UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT, AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT\nDOCNR [REDACTED] SOURCE [REDACTED]\n\nDIRECTOR NI/FTD CONFIDENTIAL XGDS\n\nDIRECTOR NI/FTD CONFIDENTIAL XGDS\n\n203708 ***CIRCOL OFFLINE OUTPUT - HQFTD/NIIB, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO***\n4.21.53 PM JUN 13,1974 - PAGE 15\n\n*CIA ATTN: CRS/ISG/U/ [REDACTED] RM 1H46 HQS WASH. D. C. 20505:\n138501353 * 152 DOCUMENTS SATISFIED THIS SEARCH FOR LINDA;\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nDIRECTOR NI/FTD CONFIDENTIAL XGDS"} {"doc_id":"3de23b0a3e59f452","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INFORMATION REPORT INFORMATION REPORT\n\nCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY\n\nNO FOREIGN DISSEM/CONTROLLED DISSEM\nPAGE 1 OF 4 PAGES\nTHIS IS AN INFORMATION REPORT, NOT FINALLY EVALUATED INTELLIGENCE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nREPORT NO. [REDACTED]\nCOUNTRY India/Nepal/Bhutan/China\nDATE DISTR. 11 April 1968\nDOI February - March 1968\nSUBJECT [REDACTED] Sightings of Unidentified Flying Objects in Ladakh, Nepal, Sikkim and Bhutan\nACQ\nSOURCE\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nsightings of unidentified flying objects in Ladakh, Nepal, Sikkim and Bhutan during the period 19 February - 25 March 1968.\n\nParticulars of Bright Objects Seen Over South Ladakh, North East Nepal, North Sikkim and Western Bhutan.\n\nDate | Local Time | Area over which seen | Direction of flight | Particulars of the Object\n\nLadakh\n4 March 1968 | 1300 hours | Chang La, Fukche, and Koyul | East to West | One white light and simultaneously two blasting sounds were heard. Also, one reddish light followed by white smoke.\n\n5 4 3 2 1 CONFIDENTIAL/NO FOREIGN DISSEM/CONTROLLED DISSEM 5 4 3 2 1\n\nSTATE DIA ARMY NAVY AIR NSA AID CIA (For Field Distribution see final paragraph)\n\nINFORMATION REPORT INFORMATION REPORT"} {"doc_id":"3de23b0a3e59f452","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE 2 OF 4 PAGES\n\nDate | Local Time | Area over which seen | Direction of flight | Particulars of the object\n\nNortheast Nepal\n19 February 1968 | Between 1100 & 1115 | Walungchung-Gola and Ghunsa area | North-East to South-West | A fast-moving object, long and thin, emitting red and green bright light, as bright as to cause daylight. Thunder sound heard after few seconds of sighting of object.\n\nSikkim\n19 February 1968 | Between 1100 & 1115 | Lachung, Lachen, Thangu, Kugutha and Chhолhamu | This information is rather confusing. Direction was reported as being from South-east to North-west over Thangkaria, Lachung, Lachen & Kuguthang. Over the Lhamo and Sese La, the direction was reportedly from North-east to South-west. The latter direction coincides with the one over Nepal and is likely to be more correct since the date and timing of the flight of object also coincide. | [illegible] object giving [illegible] light from tail. It was bright enough to brighten the entire area. Thunder sound was heard at Chholhamu after sighting the object.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL/NO FOREIGN DISSEM/CONTROLLED DISSEM"} {"doc_id":"3de23b0a3e59f452","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE 3 OF 4 PAGES\n\nDate | Local Time | Area over which seen | Direction of flight | Particulars of the object\n\nBhutan\n21 February 1968 | 2130 | Thimpu | East to West. However since due east of Thimpu there is nothing but Indian territory the direction of flight could well be from North-east to South-west, that is, from the direction of Tibet. | A bluish colored object moving at high speed without any noise. It was bright enough to brighten the area.\n\nLadakh\n4 March 1968 | 1300 | Ane La area | Object was following a circular path. Left a trail of smoke behind it. |\n\n25 March 1968 | 2150 | Fukche, Koyul, Demchok | Appeared from Chang La side and was seen moving towards Demochok, i.e. from north to south. Rocket-like object leaving white-yellow white trail about 20 y long at a height of 20-25,000 feet. |\n\nCONFIDENTIAL/NO FOREIGN DISSEM/CONTROLLED DISSEM"} {"doc_id":"3de23b0a3e59f452","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE 1 OF 1 PAGES\n\nDate\tLocal Time\tArea over which seen\tDirection of flight\tParticulars of the object\n\nNepal\n\n25 March 1968\t2715\tKaski region in NW Nepal.\tAppeared to be north to south. A blazing object, flashing intermittently, accompanied by big under sound disintegrated over Kaski region. A huge metallic disc-shaped object with a six-foot base and four feet in height was found in a crater at Baltichaur, five miles NE of Pokhara. Portions of a similar object were found at Talakot and Turepasal.\n\n2. [REDACTED]\n\nNO FOREIGN DISSEM/CONTROLLED DISSEM\n\nSECRET\n\nSCIENTIFIC/TECHNICAL SUPPLEMENTS"} {"doc_id":"3e732b025b73c506","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026\n\nIntelligence Information Report\n\nWARNING NOTICE\nSENSITIVE INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND METHODS INVOLVED\nClassified by Recorded Reporting Officer. Exempt from General Declassification Schedule of E.O. 11652 is impossible to determine date of automatic declassification.\n\nDIRECTORATE OF OPERATIONS\n\nPAGE 1 OF\n\nTHIS IS AN INFORMATION REPORT, NOT FINALLY EVALUATED INTELLIGENCE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nREPORT NO. FIR K-311/01638-77\n\nCOUNTRY USSR\n\nDATE DISTR. 20 December 1973\n\nDOI November 1972-November 1973\n\nSUBJECT The Sary Shagan Weapons Testing Range\n\nACQ Germany\n\nFIELD NO.\n\nSOURCE [REDACTED] former Soviet citizen who served\n\nThis report\n\nSummary: This report provides limited information on the Sary Shagan weapons testing range, to include facilities, work areas, security fencing, the regional headquarters (V/Ch 03080), and a warhead checkout unit (V/Ch 03142). Also included is limited information on the following: System-75 [SA-2] and System-300/Aldan [ABM-1 GALOSH] warheads; rumored laser research; and an unidentified aerial phenomenon. End of Summary.\n\n3915084 - 13\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nSTATE DIA NSA USIA FBI SWS NPIC IAS OSR OWI OSO OCR"} {"doc_id":"3e732b025b73c506","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL/WARNING NOTICE - SENSITIVE INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND METHODS INVOLVED\n\nFIRK-311/01638-77\n\n- 4 -\n\n10. Besides the System-75 [SA-2] warheads, Site 4 also checked the warheads for a missile(s) known as the System-300 and/or Aldan. (Field Comment: Source did not know if Aldan was another name for the System-300 missile, or if they were two similar missiles.) The System-300/Aldan warheads after being checked at Site 4 were taken to Site 35 for launching. According to rumor, the missile was for antimissile defense (protivo raketnaya oborona - PRO). (Field Comment: Source identified the System-300/Aldan missile in available reference material as the ABM-1/GALOSH.)\n\n11. The warhead for the System-300/Aldan missile was about two meters long and 80 to 100 centimeters in diameter. The warhead weighed approximately 400 kilograms, and it contained an unrecalled number of black cassettes, 45 x 12 centimeters, which housed an unknown number of metal balls (shariki). Warheads for the System-75 [SA-2] missile had approximately 100 grey cassettes, 30 x 7 centimeters, each of which held about 200 to 300 metal balls, each no more than 1.5 centimeters in diameter. (Field Comment: Source had no knowledge regarding nuclear warheads. He opined that all systems could be equipped with nuclear warheads. However, Source stated all work done by his department was basically experimental (opytnaya).)\n\n13. According to hearsay, experiments involving laser weapons were being conducted at an unknown location at the range. Supposedly, the tests involved powerful antennas (no further details).\n\n14. On one evening in late Summer 1973, Source observed an"} {"doc_id":"3e732b025b73c506","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL/WARNING NOTICE - SENSITIVE INTELLIGENCE SOURCES AND METHODS INVOLVED\n\nFIRK-311/01638-77\n\n- 5 -\n\nunidentified phenomenon at Site 7. While watching a sport competition between Canada and the USSR on television, he stepped outside for some air and observed an unidentified sharp (bright) green circular object or mass in the sky. The object was situated west of the site at an angle of sighting of approximately 70 degrees. The altitude of the object was undeterminable. (Field Comment: Although there were no clouds in the sky that evening, Source believed that the green mass would have been higher than cloud level. Source could not estimate the diameter of the object.) Within 10 to 15 seconds of observation, the green circle widened and within a brief period of time several green concentric circles formed around the mass. Within minutes the coloring disappeared. There was no sound, such as an explosion, associated with the phenomenon. (Field Comment: Source had no opinion as to what this phenomenon was. There was no resultant rumors. Source could not provide any further details.)"} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-HQ-83894 Vol 1 SERIAL 449- ONLY\n\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 1 449 ONLY\n8/11/1274157\nRRP003IXFZ\n\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007."} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI 10/3/66\n\nSAC, LOS ANGELES (100-24442-40/)\n\nFLYING SAUCERS INTERNATIONAL, OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMALGAMATED FLYING SAUCER CLUBS OF AMERICA, INC. IS - MISCELLANEOUS\n\nThe Philadelphia Division by letter dated 9/22/66, furnished the Los Angeles Division with Issue No. 24 dated July, 1966, entitled \"FLYING SAUCERS INTERNATIONAL\", which is the official journal of the Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc. The Philadelphia Division received the magazine from Mr. JARVIS H. COOPER, IRS, 401 North Broad Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on 9/19/66. Mr. COOPER stated he subscribed to the magazine because his son had exhibited an interest in flying saucers and outer space. He said that on pages 2 and 3 of Issue No. 24 was an article which he believed expounded the Communist Party (CP) line.\n\nFor the information of the Bureau, the International Headquarters of the Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc. is located at 2004 North Hoover Street, Los Angeles, California. The article, on pages 2 and 3, were allegedly written by Master KALEN-LI RETAN, Head of the plant KORENDOR, which was received on 5/4/66 by special directional short-wave radio by BOB RENAUD.\n\nThe indices of the Los Angeles Division contain no information identifiable with RENAUD, and no investigation has ever been conducted on captioned organization.\n\nNo further action is contemplated in this matter by the Los Angeles Office, UACB.\n\nThe foregoing is furnished to the Bureau for information.\n\n2 - Bureau (RM) (ENC-1)\n1 - Los Angeles\nJST:gcw\n(3)\n\n62-438921 - 449"} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCERS INTERNATIONAL\nISSUE NO. 24 JULY, 1966\nOfficial Journal of the Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc.\nSPECIAL AFSCA THIRD NATIONAL FLYING SAUCER CONVENTION ISSUE 50c"} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SPECIAL AFSCA CONVENTION MESSAGE\n\nBRIGHT WORLD IN HANDS OF SAUCER MOVEMENT\n\n(Editor's Note: This special message was received from Master Kalen-Li Retan (head of the planet Korendor, about 400 light years distant) on May 4, 1966 via special directional short-wave radio by Bob Renaud, the young electronic-technician whose remarkable story we printed in issues #18, 19, 20, 21, and 22, and which will be continued in our next issue.)\n\nSince Bob's initial radio contact in 1961, he has talked with the crew of a spacecraft as he watched them on his special TV screen in his home — and eventually met his contacts in-person; visited their undersea and underground bases on our planet; was taken aboard many of their spaceships; and was actually allowed to pilot two of their small scout craft — one on a short solo flight.)\n\n\"Kalo (Hello), friends. We will get directly to the point of our message to you. Frankly, we are appalled at the state of Earth at present. Despite our constant warnings and even our actual intervention in some instances, the condition upon your planet grows steadily worse.\n\nOne subject on everyone's lips these days is Vietnam. From a little civil war, it has grown steadily and inexorably into a full scale conflict between the world's three major powers: the United States, the Soviet Union, and Communist China.\n\nMany influential people have used the approach of patriotism and love of God and Country to twist decent human feelings into dangerous channels of thought and action. With their charges of treason and sympathy with the enemy, they have aroused a good portion of the populace to a state of fear, distrust, and hatred of those who seek peace and love. Unfortunately, because some unconventional individuals have been associated with the peace movement, that entire operation has been seriously hindered.\n\nYour government is a military puppet, a mere parrot of the monstrosity that is the Military-Industrial complex. Your senators, except for a few, are robots, speaking what they are told to say.\n\nYour President is, unfortunately, a pawn of their needs and demands. We have contacted him several times concerning the state of affairs, and he has said that he could do nothing to change them, for if he were to speak out against the Asian conflict, he would be removed. This is what happened to the late Mr. Kennedy who, in his great humanitarianism, was reluctant to sacrifice his ideals and his visions for the sake of the Military Industrial octopus. He paid the supreme penalty for his efforts in behalf of humanity.\n\nMake no mistake. Your government is not in the White House or the Congress. IT IS IN THE PENTAGON, AND IN THE HEADQUARTERS OF THE VAST \"DEFENSE\"-ORIENTED INDUSTRIES. It is THEY, not the President or the Congressmen, who run the United States. The facade government is merely to allay undue alarm or suspicion of the people.\n\nExamine another aspect of the Asian war, the ECONOMIC side. Do you recall that, in the stock reports just recently, the Dow-Jones average dropped sharply BECAUSE OF A RUMOR THAT NORTH VIETNAM HAD MADE A PEACE BID? Does the staggering implication of this news evade you? Stock prices suffering a heavy loss because of a rumor that peace might come to pass!\n\nThis thought is most distressing. Your economy relies so heavily upon war and destruction, that if it were to stop, THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY WOULD SUFFER A MASSIVE DEPRESSION! Your money system would collapse like a house of cards. Millions would be unemployed, sick, hungry and homeless. Tremendous industrial complexes would close their doors.\n\nThe utterly appalling fact is this: WAR IS PROFITABLE. Highly so! Every major conflict has been accompanied by a strong peak in your monetary prosperity. Peace has usually been economically painful!\n\nAfter World War 1, the nation coasted for a while upon the fat put on during the boom of the war years. In 1929, the bottom fell out. After the Korean War, in the 1950's came another recession. What comes after Vietnam? No one knows, and no one wants to find out. The war in Vietnam is bringing an unheard-of degree of affluence in the United States. Why kill a good thing by ending the war? The philosopy, in essence, is this: It is economically expedient to send military forces to Vietnam and elsewhere in Asia in order to wage war, because in doing so, the United States' economy is bolstered and maintained at a high level of prosperity; human life is secondary to the preservation of economic well-being!\n\nIt is thus evident that, unless a drastic change is made in the structure of your economy, war will never end because the Military-Industrial complex WON'T LET IT!\n\nMany of you fear Communism. Where did that fear come from, I ask you? From within yourself? NO! It was brainwashed into you by the Military-Industrial complex. Who controls all your news media? The government and the advertisers. Who, then, is in a position to dictate what shall be printed?\n\nFLYING SAUCERS INTERNATIONAL (6 issues-$3.00. Membership-$1.00) is published quarterly. Copyright 1965 by Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America. All rights reserved. The information presented in \"Flying Saucers International\" does not necessarily represent the views of AFSCA. The number after your name on the address label indicates the issue with which your subscription expires. Subscription renewals will start where the previous one ended, and will be acknowledged only by the new number after your name on future issues. A \"Time to Renew\" notice will be enclosed in the last issue for which you have paid. New subscriptions will start with the last issue published, unless a specific starting issue number is requested. When writing to AFSCA for a reply, enclose a stamped self-addressed envelope. Not responsible for magazines lost in the mail due to subscribers' failure to inform us of their current addresses. Prices subject to change. Payment must accompany order. Send cash, check or money order to: AFSCA; 2004 North Hoover St.; Los Angeles, California 90027. Phone: 662-4404. 2"} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCER NEWS IN BRIEF\n\nNEW BOOKS NOW AVAILABLE FROM AFSCA: (Price includes 15¢ mailing charge. California residents also add 4% sales tax.)\n1. COUNCIL OF SEVEN LIGHTS by George Van Tassel, now reprinted — $3.65.\n2. THE ADVENT OF THE COSMIC VIEWPOINT by Bryant Reeve — $6.15.\n3. FLYING SAUCERS THROUGH THE AGES by Paul Thomas — $4.15.\n4. OTHER TONGUES, OTHER FLESH by George Hunt Williamson, now reprinted — $6.10.\n5. SECRET OF THE ANDES by Brother Philip - $4.\n6. FLYING SAUCERS AND THE THREE MEN by Albert K. Bender — $4.15.\n7. FLYING SAUCERS - SERIOUS BUSINESS by Frank Edwards — $6.10.\n8. INCIDENT AT EXETER by John G. Fuller -$6.10.\n9. THE HOLLOW EARTH by Dr. Raymond Bernard, now available again in soft cover for $3.15.\n\nPAST CONVENTIONS & SAUCER ACTIVITIES: FEBRUARY 5, 6, 1966: Dr. Frank E. Stranges' 4th Annual UFO Space and Science Convention was held at the Blarney Castle Inn Annex in Los Angeles. JUNE 4, 5, 6, 1966: Dr. Daniel W. Fry's Man in Space Symposium took place at Dunsmuir, near Mt. Shasta in Northern California. JUNE 25,26,27, 1966: Buck Nelson's 10th Annual Spacecraft Convention was held at Buck's Mountain View Ranch; Route 1, Box 236; Mountain View, Mo.\n\nBACK ISSUES of UFO INTERNATIONAL are now selling 11 issues for $3.00, while they last (issue #11 is now out of print). There is much timeless and valuable information available in these magazines.\n\nOUT OF PRINT: 1. FLYING SAUCERS: TOP SECRET by Major Donald E. Keyhoe is now out of print, although it is listed in our new brochure. (Some saucer books have occasionally gone out of print without notice.)\n2. BACK ISSUES #6 and 11 are now out of print. We still have only a few copies left of #9 which we have priced at $1.00 each in an effort to preserve them for serious researchers and collectors. Please do not order these items, or any other materials which we do not advertise.\n\nPRICE CHANGE: The price has gone up on two of the better known books in the saucer field, which we must now order from England: 1. THE SKY PEOPLE by Brinsley le Poer Trench, was $4.65. It is now $5.10, postpaid. 2. ROAD IN THE SKY by George Hunt Williamson, was $4.15. It is now $5.10, postpaid. California residents please add 4% tax.\n\n\"UFOI\" ISSUE #23 CORRECTIONS: Page 4, line 3: the date should be April 24, 1964, instead of 1965. On page 4, line 1 of the 7th paragraph, insert \"later, via telepathy\" after \"They told him ---.\"\n\nSEATTLE, WASHINGTON area residents please note: AFSCA Unit #25 meets every 4th Friday at the Seattle Public Library, Room 325 at 7:30 P. M., under the capable direction of Mr. Leverett G. Tallman. The meeting is free, and all who are interested in the Flying Saucer subject are invited to come to listen and to participate in the discussion.\n\nZIP CODES ARE IMPORTANT: If the address label on this magazine does not have your zip code number on it, please notify us as to what your number is. If you don't know your number, call your local Post Office and then let us know. Thanks!\n\nAFSCA BROCHURES AND SAUCER-PHOTO POST CARDS, sent to friends and acquaintances, are a good way to help spread the word about Flying Saucers. Brochures are 1¢ each (this just about pays the postage to mail them to you). Saucer post cards are 50 for $1.00.\n\nWHEN WRITING AFSCA, if you wish a personal reply to a specific inquiry, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed envelope. No replies can otherwise be sent. General information may be obtained via our brochures and magazines. We are sorry that we cannot have a lengthy correspondence with all the hundreds of persons who would like us to do so, but unfortunately we have neither the time nor the staff for it — and our mail has been greatly increased in the last few months.\n\nSAUCER NEWS CLIPPINGS: Your response has been wonderful! We've received so many clippings from you helpful people that we simply hadn't enough space to print all your individual names and cities. So we say a big and sincere THANKS to all of you. And please do keep 'em coming! (One reminder: please DON'T write on or near the clippings.)\n\nWEDDING BELLS rang on Saturday, June 4, 1966 for contactee Elary J. Willsie and Sophia Martinez Olivares of Mexico City. The ceremony took place at Los Angeles, California. Among those present were Sophia's parents and her younger sister, all of Mexico City; Mrs. Maud Willsie, mother of the groom; and your editor, who was also official photographer for the occasion. Mr. and Mrs. Willsie will live in Los Angeles. Congratulations and best wishes, Elary and Sophia!\n\nMEL NOEL, former Air Force Lieutenant and fighter pilot, is fast becoming very well known for his lectures on his amazing experiences with Flying Saucers while on active duty in the service. He has been speaking to capacity crowds wherever he goes. On Thursday, June 23, 1966, the personable Mr. Noel spoke to a standing-room only crowd at the Aeronautical Sciences Building on Beverly Blvd. in West Los Angeles. We hear that he is booked to speak at 57 colleges across the nation! Recently he appeared on the Louis Lomax TV Show, and has been heard on many radio shows. He leaves shortly for Mexico City, where he has been invited by an official government group to speak. He has been promised some interesting experiences by a local contactee there, and we look forward to hearing his report on his return! Good work, Mel, and good luck!\n\nSID PADRICK, contactee from Watsonville, Calif., who spent two hours aboard a space craft, was recently in Los Angeles when he was guest speaker at the regular monthly meeting of the Inglewood Unit of Understanding on Saturday, June 25, 1966. Meetings are held on the 4th Saturday of every month at the Inglewood Business and Professional Woman's Club; 820 Java St., Inglewood, at 8:00 P.M. Donation is $1.00. Information: Mrs. Roberta T. Forrester, Program Chairman; P.O. Box 146; Inglewood, Calif. 90306. Phone: 677-5214. Also, Mr. and Mrs. Lee Yates. Phone: 293-4743.\n\nNEW AFSCA UNITS:\n45. AFSCA Unit #45; Everett, Washington; Ray and Jean Sebring, Co-Directors; 1032 S. W. 126th St.; Seattle, Wash. 98146.\n46. AFSCA Unit #46; Ben Blazs, Director; 3057 Electric; Lincoln Park, Mich. 48146.\nSeveral other new AFSCA Units have been formed and will be listed in the next issue (#25). Persons interested in forming AFSCA Units in their cities should contact AFSCA Headquarters for information. 15"} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFSCA's (Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America) 3rd National FLYING SAUCER CONVENTION. SAUCER: * MOVIES * SLIDES * EXHIBITS * BOOKS * LITERATURE. CONVENTION At The Beautiful, New CENTENNIAL COLISEUM (4590 S. Virginia St.). REGISTER - 9 A.M. - $2.00 per day. Reno, Nevada - July 8,9,10, 1966. Program: 10 A.M. to 11 P.M. SPEAKERS ARE: Wayne S. Aho, Carl A. Anderson, Orfeo Angelucci, Michael \"X\" Barton, Wesley Bateman, Marianne Francis, Dr. Daniel W. Fry, Calvin C. Girvin, Gabriel Green, Dr. George King, Hanno Mayberry, Howard Menger, Laura Mundo, Mel Noel, Sidney Padrick, Chief Standing Horse, Dr. Frank E. Stranges, Mollie Thompson, Hope Troxell, George W. Van Tassel, Hal Wilcox. HEAR: Amazing experiences with spacecraft from other planets and their occupants by the greatest assembly of contactee-speakers since our Los Angeles convention in 1959 at the Statler-Hilton. SEE: Startling new photographic evidence - the biggest collection of Flying Saucer photos on display in the history of the saucer movement. Actual color movies and new still photos of Flying Saucers. MEET: IN PERSON, PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD ACTUAL CONTACTS WITH SPACESHIPS AND THEIR CREWS FROM OTHER WORLDS. LEARN: About this important subject which is so vital to the welfare and survival of humanity in our times. ATTEND: AFSCA's 3rd National Convention. You'll be glad you did! Fill out the Advance Registration form below. Do it Now! For Motel & Hotel room information, write to: The Greater Reno Chamber of Commerce P. O. Box 2109; Reno, Nevada. AFSCA 3rd NATIONAL CONVENTION ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM. To: AFSCA Headquarters; 2004 N. Hoover St., Los Angeles, Calif. 90027. Phone: 662-4404. Yes, count me in! I don't want to miss joining with you at this important convention and helping to support this vital movement. Here is my $________. Please send me Advance Reservation tickets ($5.00 for the 3 days, or $2.00 per day). IMPORTANT: I am also enclosing a stamped, self-addressed envelope for the return of my tickets. ADVANCE REGISTRATIONS must be received at AFSCA Headquarters no later than JUNE 30th!!! Name ____ Street ____ City ____ State ____ Zip Code ____"} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The Military-Industrial complex, by opinion-control through the use of psycho-politics (brainwashing by controlled news management). Consider this: In order to survive, a commercial medium, such as a newspaper or magazine, requires a vast amount of advertising revenue. The mere subscription fees will not cover the costs. Thus, they depend for their continued existence upon money paid by advertisers. Suppose, then, that the editor of a certain newspaper decides that he is opposed to the Vietnam policy, and says so in his paper. The advertisers simply say to the editor, \"Either you toe the mark and print what we want, or we'll withdraw our advertising.\" Such pressures are a fact of life. The newsmen are torn between their higher devotion to Truth, and also to the lower level of their physical needs. Rather than jeopardize their security and their futures they, of course, submit meekly to power. Their actions are fully understandable, and we do not hold them responsible. We throw the blame directly on the Military-Industrial complex which, by its underhanded dealing, threats of force, and economic pressure and retaliation, has crushed the spirit of American journalism and turned it from a dynamic motivating force in American life into a weak-willed, subservient mouthpiece for the power-masters. We blame them for the death of journalistic freedom and individuality! One more comment on this topic: May I say that a better economic system is already known to the leaders of the Flying Saucer Movement. It is the system known as Universal Economics. As we have said over and over before, it is the non-money economic system which MUST be applied on your planet before you can start to resolve most of your major problems and thus begin to establish a highly-advanced, non-destructive state of existance on Earth, such as we of more advanced planets have enjoyed for so long. INVESTIGATE THIS SYSTEM to evaluate it for its merit - then ACT to apply it! YOUR VERY SURVIVAL AS A CIVILIZATION MAY DEPEND UPON IT! Perhaps this is an opportune time to clarify a few questions which have been asked about us. Do we of Korendor work with the local planets in our operations? Yes, we do cooperate with them a great deal. However, our work on Earth is relatively independent of the local planets. We have many times overstepped what is considered to be the limit of interference upheld by Venus, Mars, and other planets. This has caused a good deal of debate between them and us. Each time we have pointed out that we of Korendor are basically pragmatic in nature. Although we do respect the laws of self-destiny, we feel also that where stepping in is required to prevent disaster, it is our right and our duty to do so. We have interfered in such places as the United States, China, Russia, and on a large scale in Vietnam. This has caused no end of consternation in the local Tribunal of Planets. We are sympathetic to their viewpoint, but we do feel that their policy is limited in its capacity to achieve the desired goals. It is our opinion that one cannot stand on the sidelines and achieve any noticeable results. As I have said before, we have infiltrated your planet. We are directly involved in Earth's life. You might say that you have been invaded - a strong way of phrasing it, to be sure, but nonetheless factual, since we walk and work amongst you daily! We have been asked about our physical appearance. We are humanoid, indistinguishable from yourselves, except that in our natural form we average three to four feet in height. Every other dimension is proportionately scaled, so that photographs of us would not reveal our origin in any way. We are able to increase our height while on Earth through a technical process related to teleportation. It is concerned with recording the atomic and molecular structures of our bodies, and then reproducing them identically on a larger scale. Differences in our internal structure are adjusted by the computer which controls the reproducer. Our most common skin color is a little darker than yours, although we have skin colors which vary as yours do all over the Earth. Usually, however, we would look \"tan\" to you. We are NOT green, blue, or heliotrope, as has been suggested! Concerning our language, we generally use one of two tongues and we are fairly familiar with a third. On Korendor itself we speak the native language, Korendian. It is similar in many ways to your own languages since it, like yours, was originally derived from Galingua, one of the two universal tongues. The other is Solex Mal, which is more familiar to you, since it is used by your local Solar System planets. It is seldom heard now in our sector of space, as Galingua has replaced it almost completely. Unlike your own, however, the Korendian-Galinguan speech is very rhythmic, and has few sibilant sounds, such as \"s\" or \"z\". Some of the sharper sounds like \"c\" and \"k\" are minimized. It is a beautiful language which is very musical and pleasant to hear. Perhaps you would be surprised to learn that ancient Latin was liberally taken from Galingua. There are many similarities in the two languages. Even modern English has roots on other worlds! In concluding my message to you, may I say - people of Earth: open up your minds and your hearts to the world around you. There is so much to be learned, so much to be discovered. Don't waste precious hours and days in bigotry and ignorance, and in senseless fighting and killing. To do so is truly a crime against nature and humanity. At this stage where you have the very stars almost in your grasp, how irrational and barbaric it is to spend futile hours warring with your brothers. As an old saying on your world puts it: \"As you make your bed, so shall you lie in it.\" The decision does not seem difficult. Here are the alternatives: A world living in harmony, justice, security and abundance for all, or a world continuing to reap the bloody harvests that grow from the seeds of hatred and mistrust. If left to their own devices, the majority of mankind will forge onward to a destiny of destruction and annihilation, oblivious to the danger in their actions. They are short-sighted; they care little for the future. It is you New Age people, dedicated to the welfare of all mankind, and having the vision and understanding of the ways to build the better world of tomorrow, who must lead the way. You have the future in YOUR hands, if you will but shoulder your responsibilities. The Flying Saucer Movement, as you call it, belongs to you. Support it in every way possible. Help it to grow until it is influential throughout your world. Go out into the world and guide the misguided, find the lost, and recover the strays. We are behind you all the way. As we have said many times before, we will take two steps for every one that you take to help yourselves. The time has come for nations to \"bury the hatchet\", to clasp hands, and plunge into the future together - in co-operation toward mutual goals. Look to the heavens and realize that your destiny is not in bleak atomic desolation, but in the magnificent greatness that you can achieve if you will but work for it. Choose the right path and you will soon qualify to join with us in our journeys amongst the stars. Va i Luce (Go in Light)\" Kalen-Li Retan 3"} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THIRD NATIONAL CONVENTION JULY 8,9,10, 1966. Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America. CENTENNIAL COLISEUM RENO, NEVADA. FRIDAY, JULY 8, 1966 / SATURDAY, JULY 9, 1966 / SUNDAY, JULY 10, 1966. Schedule grid listing sessions by time, main hall and gold room: 9AM registration ($2.00 per day). Exhibits, books, & literature on display. Your Reno host, Miguel Ribera, Dir., AFSCA Unit No. 5. 10AM to 10:50: INVOCATION: Dr. Frank E. Stranges. Keynote Address: GABRIEL GREEN, \"Something Big Is Happening\". Introduction of speakers, & saucer movement personalities. HAL WILCOX \"From Earth to Alpha Centauri\" Ch: Chief Standing Horse. AFSCA Unit Directors Meeting. Those interested in forming AFSCA Units invited. Flying Saucer Council Meeting (for all speakers only). Ch: Gabe Green. Discussion of ways to improve effectiveness of Flying Saucer Movement. Come prepared with suggestions. 11:00 to 11:50: WAYNE AHO \"Secrecy Must Go--- People Must Know!\" Ch:Orfeo Angelucci. HANNO MAYBERRY \"Message From Triangulum\" Ch: Laura Mundo. DR. Frank STRANGES \"The Hollow Earth Mystery\" Ch: Orfeo Angelucci. 11:50AM to 1:30PM LUNCH / Space Tapes(12:15-1:15). 1:30 to 2:20: Chief Standing Horse \"My 4 Day Trip to Mars, Venus,Clarion, & Orion\" Ch: Mel Noel. CARL ANDERSON \"I Was Teleported Into A Flying Saucer\" Ch: Mel Noel. MICHAEL BARTON \"UFO's and World Prophesy\" Ch: G. Green. CARL ANDERSON \"Kumar, Wonder Man From Mars\" Ch: Frank Stranges. 2:30 to 3:20: HOPE TROXELL \"Evolved Man of the Stars\" Ch: Michael Barton. CALVIN GIRVIN \"I Was an Agent for the Extraterrestrials\" Ch: Wes Bateman. DR. GEORGE KING \"The Nine Freedoms\" Ch: Wayne Aho. GEORGE Van TASSEL \"Flying Saucer Landing at Edwards Air Force Base\" Ch:D. Fry. SIDNEY PADRICK \"Saucer Ride-1965\" Ch: Wes Bateman. 3:30: MOLLIE THOMPSON (Space Age Songs). 3:40 to 4:30: HOWARD MENGER \"Journey to the Moon\" Chairman: Hal Wilcox. HANNO MAYBERRY \"Contact With a 7 Foot Tall Spaceman\" Ch:Ch.Standing Horse. DR. DANIEL W. FRY \"The White Sands Incident\" Ch: George Van Tassel. WESLEY BATEMAN \"The Frequency Barrier\" Ch: Marianne Francis. DR. GEORGE KING \"Physical Space Contact in Hollywood\" Ch: Michael Barton. CALVIN GIRVIN \"Moon Mysteries Revealed\" Ch: G. Green. 4:40 to 5:30: DR.FRANK STRANGES \"A Space Beings Visit to the Pentagon\" Chairman: Dan Fry. MARIANNE FRANCIS \"Starcraft Contact\" Ch: Hanno Mayberry. GABRIEL GREEN \"Abundant New World: The Promise for Tomorrow\" Ch:F.Stranges. ORFEO ANGELUCCI \"Secret of the Saucers\" Ch: Hanno Mayberry. WAYNE AHO \"Flying Saucers and the Latter Days\" Ch: Carl Anderson. MARIANNE FRANCIS \"Messages From Our Space Brothers\" Ch: Calvin Girvin. 5:30 to 7:00PM DINNER / Space Tapes(6:15-7:15). 7:00 to 7:50: WESLEY BATEMAN \"Flying Saucer Propulsion\" (Slides) Ch: Sid Padrick. LAURA MUNDO \"A Saucer Researchers Responsibility to Humanity\" Ch:H.Menger. SIDNEY PADRICK \"2 Hours Aboard an Extraterrestrial Spaceship\" Ch: H. Menger. HOPE TROXELL \"Temples of the High Places\" Ch: Carl Anderson. HOWARD MENGER \"Free Energy: Tomorrow's Revolutionary Power\" Ch: Geo. King. HAL WILCOX \"Zemkla, Interplanetary Avatar\" Ch: Laura Mundo. 8:00: MOLLIE THOMPSON (Space Age Songs). 8:10 to 9:00: MEL NOEL \"Investigating Flying Saucers Inside the U.S. Air Force\" Ch: G. Green. MICHAEL BARTON \"Flying Saucer Slide Photos\" Chairman: Hal Wilcox. GEORGE Van TASSEL \"Spaceship Contact at Giant Rock\" Ch: George King. Chief Standing Horse \"Christmas 1962 on Jupiter\" Ch: Calvin Girvin. DAN FRY \"Saucer Movies\" GABE GREEN \"Saucer Slides\". MEL NOEL \"I Photographed Flying Saucers as an Air Force Fighter Pilot\" Ch:H. Troxell. 9:10 to 10:00: DR. DANIEL W. FRY \"The Curve of Development\" Chairman:Sid Padrick. ORFEO ANGELUCCI \"Concret Evidence\" Ch: Wayne Aho. COLOR MOVIE: \"We Have Seen The Saucers\" Ch: George Van Tassel. LAURA MUNDO \"Flying Saucers and the Father's Plan\" Ch: Marianne Francis. Question Period: Written questions answered by Main Hall speakers. Chairman: Gabe Green. Written questions answered by today's Gold Room speakers. Chairman: Mel Noel. 10:10 to 11:00: Question Period. Written questions answered by Main Hall speakers. Ch: Gabriel Green. Written questions answered by today's Gold Room speakers. Ch: Michael Barton. Question Period. Written questions answered by Main Hall speakers. Chairman: Gabe Green. Written questions answered by today's Gold Room speakers. Ch: Frank Stranges. Convention Close. The appearance of the speakers on our program does not constitute an endorsement by AFSCA of their information or viewpoints. In the American tradition of freedom of information and ideas, AFSCA provides you with an opportunity to hear and to evaluate Flying Saucer Movement speakers and their information. You be the judge. Taped space songs by Bob Marcus. No smoking permitted in lecture and exhibit halls. The Dick Miller Space Tapes played at lunch and dinner hours are all different. Program subject to change without notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, contact: AFSCA HEADQUARTERS; 2004 N. Hoover St.; Los Angeles, California 90027. Phone: 662-4404."} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCER NEWS IN BRIEF. COMING 1966 FLYING SAUCER CONVENTIONS. JULY 8, 9, 10: AFSCA's 3rd National Convention, Centennial Coliseum, Reno, Nev. (See details on back). JULY 15, 16, 17: WAYNE AHO sponsors the Northwest's 5th Annual Interplanetary Age Convention. Lectures, exhibits and New Age topics. Advance registrations - $1.00 per day for adults, 50¢ for students. Write to: Mrs. Lorena Vogt; 815 N.E. 110th; Seattle, Wash. Phone: Emerson 3-0956. AUGUST 6 thru 14th: DR. NEVA DELL HUNTER'S 12th Annual Quimby Conference of Translation. Lectures and discussions on New Age Topics, including the stars, science and metaphysics. In lovely scenic country at a beautiful, modern motorhotel. $2.50 per day, attendance. Information from: Quimby Center; P. O. Box 453; Alamogordo, N. M. AUGUST 19, 20,21: SPACE RESEARCH, Inc.'s Second Annual Convention, at the North Branch YMCA in Spokane, Washington. Scenic location near the Spokane River. Indoor and outdoor convention activities. For information, write to: Space Research Inc., No. 6815 Julia, Spokane, Wash. OCTOBER 22, 23: GEORGE VAN TASSEL'S 13th Annual Spacecraft Convention at Giant Rock, Calif. in the desert 17 miles north of Yucca Valley. Bring your own camping equipment and enjoy the outing. OCTOBER 29, 30: 10th ANNUAL NORTHERN CALIFORNIA SPACECRAFT CONVENTION, Claremont Hotel, Berkeley, Calif. Info: Angela Kilsby; 1265 Montgomery Blvd.; San Francisco, Calif. 94127. OUR NEW NAME: Our magazine, formerly called \"UFO International\", has now become \"Flying Saucers International\", which we feel to be a more appropriate title, since Flying Saucers are no longer Unidentified Flying Objects as far as we are concerned. Flying Saucers have become a serious issue with thinking people all over the world. We believe that most of the objects which have been sighted have been of extraterrestrial origin, controlled by intelligent beings who, in form, are very much like us. Therefore, we hope you will understand our reasons for changing titles, and that you will continue to enjoy reading our publication under its new banner. DR. RAYMOND BERNARD, founder of the Biosophical Society of Santa Caterina, Brazil, passed away on Sept. 10, 1965. He was the author of \"The Hollow Earth\" and several other books concerned with the hollow earth theory. MARIA ELLIOTT, contactee, psychic and founder of Maria Creative Womanhood Foundation, was a recent guest on the Bob Grant Radio Show, and the Pamela Mason TV Show. Glamorous Maria now has her own program every Tuesday afternoon at 2:30 p.m. on KTYM radio. She may be seen in person every Wed. evening at Holland House Restaurant, 8:00 p.m. in the downstairs meeting room. An interesting program may be heard on New Age Topics, and free readings are given. For more information about Maria's appearances, classes, etc., phone 657-1631, or write: Dr. Maria Elliott; 1543 Sunset Plaza Drive; Los Angeles, Calif. 90069. DR. GEORGE KING, founder of the Aetherius Society, was host at the official opening of the Society's new headquarters at 6202 Afton Place; Los Angeles, Calif. 90028; on March 5, 1966. After the program Dr. King personally escorted us around the attractive quarters. He also reported that a high Space Being in physical form had visited there recently for an hour and fifteen minutes and, after walking around the premises, left his blessing on the Aetherius Society and its work. For further information call 465-9652, or write to the above address. DELLA LARSON, who for over a decade was the guiding light and main instigator of Flying Saucer meetings and activities in the San Francisco Bay Area, passed away on October 25, 1965. She was 70 years old. She will be remembered for her energetic and enthusiastic dedication to the goals of the Flying Saucer cause, as well as for the highly successful annual Northern California Space Craft Conventions which she organized for nine years. (Della, we salute you!) MAX MILLER, former publisher of the now-defunct \"Saucers\" magazine, and author of \"Flying Saucers: Fact or Fiction\" (now out of print), has a new role. He is now editor-publisher of \"Real\" magazine which may be found on the newstands for 50¢. The August '66 issue devotes about half of its space to the Flying Saucer subject and will be well worth your investigation. WILBUR MILLER, one of the early researchers in the Flying Saucer Movement, passed away on March 5, 1966. He was known for his fine channel contacts with several Space Beings, including Monka of Mars. He also was the co-author - with his wife, Evelyn - of the book \"We of the New Dimension.\" Although he was a native of Missouri he had, in recent years, been a resident of Los Angeles and of Morongo Valley, Calif. (Good journey, Will!) HOPE TROXELL, founder of the School of Thought, now situated in Independence, Calif. (P. O. Box 458), reported recently that the neighboring towns of Bishop and Lone Pine had partial blackouts during an evening channel (teltpathic) session she was having with the Space Brothers. The lights in Independence went out completely for several minutes by a gradual fade-out, and then came on again in the same manner. During this time, the Space Being speaking through Hope said to those present: \"Be not afraid. We are guardians of the race. Protection will be given to those in the area.\" HAL WILCOX made a fine guest appearance on the Joe Pyne TV Show, April 30, 1966. Hal passed the lie-detector test with flying colors and conducted himself with dignity and fortitude, which isn't always easy on the Joe Pyne Show. During the test, Hal stated that he had taken a saucer ride to visit the second planet from the star, Alpha Centauri. M.I.N.D. stands for Mental Investigations of New Dimensions, an organization recently formed by Wesley and JoNell Bateman. Their activities include meetings, courses and public appearances. They have demonstrated on several occassions for groups of up to 20 people, their ability to telepathically direct the movements of visable spacecraft overhead. Write: M.I.N.D.; 4916 Franklin Ave.; Hollywood, California 90027. Phone: 661-1731. HELEN & GABRIEL GREEN contributed their bit to the education of nearly 300,000 young people to the saucer subject at the Teen-Age Fair, April 1 thru 10 at the Hollywood Palladium, where AFSCA had a booth to exhibit saucer photos, show slides, and to disseminate information. We handed out over 13,000 brochures and saucer photo post cards, and talked ourselves hoarse answering questions for 12 hours each day. Gabriel also made over a dozen radio and TV appearances and interviews during the Fair. We also had another booth at the National Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition at the Pan Pacific Auditorium, May 17 thru 22. Yes, we've been busy! 14"} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The Denver Post, Friday, April 8, 1966. Six Teens Tell of 'Chase' by Buzzing, Lighted UFOs. By ROBERT KISTLER, Denver Post Staff Writer. Six pincking Denver teen-agers reported Thursday night they were chased by an hour long unidentified flying objects in Daniels Park south of Denver in Douglas County. The high school students--three boys, three girls--told Police Chief John C. Maclver of Littleton they witnessed unexplainably 'hovering' red, blue and white lights accompanied by a series of pulsating buzzing sounds which began about 9:30 p.m. Car Didn't Work Right. Buzzing 'All Around'. Called Sheriff's Office. Deputy Gets Too Close to 'Saucer'. Super-Space World Sought By Soviets (Montreal Gazette, 4-30-66). Area UFO Buffs Report Skies Clear of Saucers (Spokane Daily Chronicle, Saturday, April 2, 1966). Swamp gas still 'flying' (The Telegram, Toronto, Sat. March 26, 1966). Photographed Flying Saucer, Picture Censored (Mont.-Star, 4-19-66). Not star, says collector of flying saucer photos (The Sun-Bulletin, Binghamton, N.Y., March 17, 1966). Tracked by Radar: UFOs Sighted Over Wide Section of District (The London Free Press, London, Ontario, Tuesday, March 29, 1966, 36 Pages). UFO SIGHTED BY LEWISTON PEOPLE. POLICE CHIEF 'CONVINCED THEY SAW SOMETHING'. Buy Easter Seals. The newspaper articles on this page are printed in small columns and are partly illegible in the scan; they cover reported UFO sightings in London, Ontario, Binghamton, N.Y., Toronto, Denver, Spokane and elsewhere, including accounts from police, sheriff's deputies and witnesses."} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFSCA CONVENTION SPEAKERS 1. WAYNE S. AHO; The New Age Foundation, Inc.; 8 Smith St.; Seattle, Wash. 98109. Publish: \"The Aquarian Dawn\" (Donation basis). 2. CARL A. ANDERSON; 2522 E. Pearson Ave.; Fullerton, Calif. 3. ORFEO ANGELUCCI; 4160 Verdugo Road; Los Angeles, Calif. 90065. 4. MICHAEL \"X\" BARTON; Futura Press; 5949 Gregory Ave.; Hollywood, Calif. 90038. Phone: 464-0441. 5. WESLEY BATEMAN; Mental Investigations of New Dimensions (M.I.N.D.); 4916 Franklin Ave.; Hollywood, Calif. 90027. Phone: 661-1731. Publish: \"Prism\" (12 issues-$3.00). 6. MARIANNE FRANCIS; Solar Light Center; Rt. 2, Box 572-C; Central Point, Oregon 97501. Publish: \"Starcraft\" (4 issues-$2.00). 7. DR. DANIEL W. FRY; Understanding, Inc.; P.O. Box 105; Merlin, Oregon 97532. Publish: \"Understanding\" (12 issues-$2.50). 8. CALVIN C. GIRVIN; 6711 Yucca St.; Hollywood, Calif. 90028. 9. GABRIEL GREEN; Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc.; 2004 N. Hoover St.; Los Angeles, Calif. 90027. Phone: 662-4404. Publish: \"Flying Saucers International\" (6 issues-$3.00). 10. DR. GEORGE KING; The Aetherius Society; 6202 Afton Place; Hollywood, Calif. 90028. Publish: \"The Aetherius Society Newsletter\" (Donation basis). Phone: 465-9652. 11. JOHANNES \"HANNO\" MAYBERRY; Unified Research Center, Inc.; P.O. Box 764; Selma, Oregon 97538. 12. HOWARD MENGER; 202 Schumann Drive; Sebastian, Florida 32958. 13. LAURA MUNDO; The Interplanetary Center; 27359 Cranford Lane; Dearborn Heights, Mich. 48127. Publish: \"The Interplanetary News\" (Free). 14. MEL NOEL; 2760 Hollyridge Drive; Hollywood, Calif. 90028. 15. SIDNEY PADRICK; 196 Hidden Valley Road; Watsonville, Calif. 16. CHIEF FRANK B. STANDING HORSE; AFSCA Unit #9; Rt. 2, Box 194, Perris, Calif. 92370. Phone: 657-2873. 17. DR. FRANK E. STRANGES; International Evangelism Crusades, Inc.; P.O. Box 252; Venice, Calif. 90293. 18. MOLLIE THOMPSON; Linton, Astley Bank, Darwen, Lancs., England. 19. HOPE TROXELL; School of Thought; P.O. Box 458; Independence, Calif. 93526. 20. GEORGE W. VAN TASSEL; Ministry of Universal Wisdom, Inc.; P.O. Box 458; Yucca Valley, Calif. 92284. Publish: \"Proceedings\" (Donation basis). 21. HAL WILCOX; Institute of Parapsychology; 871 Gower St.; Hollywood, Calif. 90038. Phone: 469-5438. SPACE AGE SONGS by Mollie Thompson. THE COCKEYED BALLAD. There's a cockeyed feeling in the world today That power politics is here to stay. But China, Russia and the U.S.A. Boy—don't let them fool you! Take a look at this world of ours, Just one mud ball in the sea of stars. Other planets have no color-bars, 'Cause they've got perspective. Yanks and Ruskies put men into space, But it's all a mad politician's race, One-up-manship in this Year of Grace. It makes you giggle. The population stands and stares, While men in capsules explore upstairs. Why we can't even manage our own affairs! Some cheek—colonization! Besides, they've got people on Venus and Mars. They got lads and lasses and ma's and pa's. And they've got better transport than four-wheel cars. Have you ever seen 'em? Those Flying Saucers whisking through our skies Must take some power to make them rise. But government departments just hide their eyes, And call them meteors! With all the lies that they print and shout, The general public's got its work cut out— Figuring what it's all about. But just you keep on trying. I suppose you know why I'm telling you this, So you won't shriek or shake your fist When you discover Martians do exist! They're real nice fellows. I know, 'cause I met one a week ago! His ship came down for an hour or so. He talked to me, but then he had to go. Real interested I was! Got brothers on Venus and Saturn, it seems— Fly their ships on magnetic beams. They wear one piece suits—you can't see any seams; But apart from that—they're just like us! SPACE-TALK The powers that be will tell us we're alone. They'll tell us that in space we are unique; On this little desert island we call Earth The human race is just a kind of freak. When we send our envoys into space There'll be a smile upon this planet's face, 'Cause brother, right out there—I'm telling you, There's another human race; it's very true! They're a very, very peaceful crowd, For they just never go to war. And they cannot interfere, This is by Universal Law. The spaceman's message to us all Is based on how to banish fear, And if we only understand, We will find it heaven here. While we must rely on war, We never will be happy here. While this world's economy Is based on hardship, strife and fear. How do they live without a war In their lands of milk and honey? They don't need economy, Because they don't use any money! They cannot give us any ships, So we must try and build our own. But they are waiting right out there, Oh, my friends, we're not alone! How do they go at such great speed, And vanish then without prediction? Because they use free energy, And there isn't any friction. Brother have you seen their ships? Sisters have you seen them glow, As they dance and hover in the sky, And make our fastest jets look slow?"} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NEW SAUCER PHOTOS: These remarkable photos of Flying Saucers were taken by Dr. Daniel W. Fry, President of Understanding, Inc., of P.O. Box 76, Merlin, Oregon 97532. Your editor enlarged them from the original 16mm color movie film. Spots on the photos are due to the extreme enlargement of scratches and dust spots on the film. Of special interest is the fact that the same type of craft was photographed near Merlin, Oregon in a wooded section, and again near Joshua Tree, Calif. on the desert."} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Would You Believe—'Saucer' Visits Wichita? By Fran Kentling, Beacon Staff Writer. An 11-year-old Wichita boy has joined the ranks of those across the nation who have reported seeing \"flying saucers\" during the past week. Johnny Sparks said that early Friday morning he saw two \"flying saucers\" that made a humming noise and were bigger than cars. The Wichita Beacon, Saturday, March 26, 1966. Mrs. Thomas and Johnny examined \"flying saucer damage.\" Concrete reinforcement sheeting was broken, sand scattered. UFO Sighting Reported Here. Not a Star -- Not an Aircraft, Says Louis S. Smith Family of North Bend. Boy Is Burned By 'Flying Ship'. HAMILTON, Ont., April 4 -- A 13-year-old Hamilton boy has a curved burn on his hand he claims came from touching the \"antenna\" of a sot-glowing \"flying ship.\" Planet Pluto Saucers Seen, Talked With? By Austin Conover. Flying Saucers, Quakes Linked. Citizen-News, Thursday, April 7, 1966. Police Follow Saucer 85 Miles. 'The Thing' Sets Britons Speculating Anew. Saucer Blast? Six Towns See Mystery. Object In Sky Near Bloomdale. A Second UFO Seen In Michigan. 5 At Pierre Sight UFO. Realtor Spots Saucer-Like Flying Object. Visible Again Lights in Sky. Ball of Fire in Hollywood."} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2 THE WALL STREET JOURNAL Monday, December 13, 1965. New 'Fireball' Raises An Old Question: Do Flying Saucers Exist? Californian, Who 'Talks' to Men From the Stars, Says 'Yes'; Scientists Assail Air Force. By Elliot Carlson, Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal. They're back. The latest was sighted a few nights ago by residents and pilots in the northern tier of states and Canada. They were first called it an orange fireball. Visitors From Outer Space. Nobody knows what these objects are or where they come from, but there is no lack of theories -- or of controversy. The Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc., is sure the \"saucers\" come from outer space. 'Report Them ... Forget It -- I Have Enough Credibility Problems As It Is'. 100 Watch UFO. Disc-Like Object Hovers, Rises For Two Hours East of Kettle Point. London, Ontario Free Press 3-26-66. By Jim Etherington, Free Press Sarnia Bureau. Flying saucers mystery 2-3-66. Hong Kong China Mail. Flying Saucers Gain Proponent. N.Y. Daily News Dispatch. UN Watch For Saucers Urged. Strange Object Over Mt. Wilson. Los Angeles Herald-Examiner, Thursday, April 21, 1966."} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Saucers Are Poppin' Up All Over. Oakland Tribune, Golden Gate Handicap--Results, Friday, March 25, 1966, 93rd year, No. 84. UFO's (?) Flash Across Pre-Dawn Sky. One Shot By Man In Maine. Mystery Objects In Sky. New Plymouth, Tuesday, May 10, 1966. 40 See 'Flying Saucer'. Portland Oregon Journal, March 21, 1966. Air Force UFO report refuted. Asks Probe of Flying Saucers. Ford Says U.S. Public Should Get Answers. Michigan UFO Lands In Swamp. Now those flying saucers come to Canadian skies. Toronto, Canada Telegram, March 28, 1966. First UFO Spotter. Brewer Welcomes UFO's Landing Sites Available Signed Barry Ivers Mayor. Another 'UFO' Is Sighted By Woman At Elmer. Bridgeton Evening News, 3-31-66. Ohio Police Trail UFO 86 Miles. Airliner Detours to Chase U.F.O."} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Head Saucerer Believes Martians Are Watching Us\n\nWho's in All Those Saucers?\n\nBy Harold Scarlet\n\nWas Jesus Christ a Martian?\n“It's hard to say,” said Gabriel Green thoughtfully. Then he added that it certainly seems plausible.\nIt's no trick at all to walk on water or ascend to the heavens if you have a Martian levitation belt around your waist and an anti-gravity beam to ride, Green explained.\nFurthermore, he said, the Martians now visiting earth on flying saucers are trying to save the earth's people from their own follies — just as the Savior was.\nGreen can speak with some authority on these matters because, he says, he met and talked with a Martian once. Also a four-foot man from the Alpha Centauri star system. Also some other unearthly visitors.\nSOMETIMES, HE said, he met these flying saucer crewmen by telepathic appointments. These were arranged through associates of his with telepathic talents.\n“And once in a while,” he said, “they would just call on the phone.”\nGreen, who lives in Los Angeles, is the head saucerer — the president of the Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America.\nNot being too telepathic, he just called Green on the phone to interview him about the recent rash of flying saucer sightings around the country.\n“It is a continuation of their efforts to enlighten us,” Green replied in calm and cultured tones.\n“The current series of sightings and landings, I understand, will increase. They are not going to go away, as some members of our government would like.”\nWHY DO THEY keep buzzing down here and nearing people?\n“What with nuclear proliferation growing, it seems rather obvious that unless we start resolving the present problems facing mankind, we will destroy ourselves and perhaps some of the universe along with us.” Green explained.\n“This is one of the primary reasons why the extra-terrestrials started making visitations in 1947, shortly after we developed this ability — to watch over us and if possible to impart their advanced scientific, technological and sociological knowledge to help us resolve these problems before we destroy ourselves.”\nGreen said he is trying to do his humble best to help them spread that message.\n“The solutions they have given,” he said, “(are) primarily with resolving the motives for wars, expansionism and poverty. They hope to eliminate the have-not nations through superior financing. They have an advanced economic system they call Universal Economics. The economics part of it is what I personally am trying to transmit.”\nHE SAID RUEFULLY, however, that the saucer clubs themselves are in an economic pinch that has presented needed research.\nGreen said he runs the saucer clubs out of his own home, at 2004 North Hoover in Los Angeles, “to cut down on the overhead.” He said there are clubs in 56 major U.S. cities and abroad, with a total of about 3,500 members. Houston has no club, he said, but he does have some interested Houstonians on his mailing list.\n“We are a contact-oriented research group,” he said, “meaning that many of our members have made actual physical contact with crews of these craft.”\nGreen said he has sighted 85 to 100 spacecraft around Los Angeles over the years and has met “half a dozen or so members of the crews.”\nBUT GREEN BELITTLED his own experiences.\n“They're so insignificant it's hardly worth talking about them,” he said. “Some of our members have actually been taken for rides in spacecraft.\n“I certainly wouldn't turn down a ride if it were offered me. But they've never asked me.”\nGreen said he met the Martian by appointment at a friend's home, and he looked “just like anybody you'd meet on the street.” He was casually dressed, Green said, and wore a short-sleeve, shimmery, metallic-looking shirt which he said would stop bullets.\nAll in all, a handsome chap, Green said.\n“I felt his hair and it was quite coarse and worn in a V-shape down toward the center of the forehead,” Green said. “But I rather doubt all Martians wear their hair alike, any more than we do.”\n“HE SAID THE MARTIAN canals were really canals for distributing the water supply from their polar regions, and that the two Martian moons are really artificial satellites just like the Russian astronomers have supposed.”\nGreen said he had met the Alpha Centauri men several times — once in the Green home.\n“He was dressed ordinarily and was about four feet tall, although this was unusual. Most of the reports of them are that they are normal height or larger,” Green said.\n“There was that space ship that landed near Albuquerque, for instance, with a crew of four men and five women. They were very beautiful, very well proportioned. Seven to nine feet tall.”\nGreen said he had met other interstellar travelers but would “rather not go into the whole list.”\nWhere did they park their space ships while they were visiting him?\n“OH, SOMETIMES they actually park them — hang them up in the sky with a force field around them. Then they have an anti-gravity beam and levitation belts they wear around the waist to get on down to earth.\n“Through these, they can accomplish such miracles as walking on water and ascending into the heavens.”\nGreen said he is operational only within 5,000 to 10,000 miles of a planet's surface. He said it comes down from a cigar-shaped mother ship that parks up there. The mother ship can make interplanetary trips.\nAt this point we decided to end the interview. The long-distance line to Los Angeles had begun making an eerie wheeee and then an ominous blup-blup-blup.\nMaybe the Martians were listening in.\n“THAT DEMONSTRATES the powers of the mind of these people. Just wouldn't fire, even though the camera was in perfect working condition.”\nSAUCER OR STRAW HAT, THIS FLEW IN CALIFORNIA LAST AUGUST\nHighway Patrolman Rej Heflin Photographed It Through His Car Windshield\nPAGE 4—SPOTLIGHT\nSUNDAY, MAY 15, 1966, THE HOUSTON POST\nTHE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER, MONDAY MORNING, APRIL 18, 1966\nUFO Plays Tag With Deputies in 85-Mile Chase\nMysterious Sky Objects Have Texans in Dither\nLos Angeles Herald-Examiner, Tuesday, May 17, 1966"} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"World Flying Saucer Believers Convene\n2-6-66\nNew York Times Service\nLOS ANGELES, Calif. — The “urgent problem” of improving communications with the thousands of visitors from outer space who supposedly are circling the earth wean eration here this weekend at a special convention of flying saucer buffs.\nAmong the nearly 300 delegates was a self-professed “interplanetary traveler” named Standing Horse, an Englishwoman who regularly issues mimeographed reports on her conversations with space travelers, a man who offered to book “group sightings” of flying saucers and a presidential candidate campaigning on the flying saucer ticket.\nTHE SPACE buffs, who assembled in a cavernous establishment called the Blarney Castle, weren't much impressed with Thursday's Soviet moon landing, but they were awed and confused by what they reported to be a sharp increase in flying saucers.\nOne delegate, Marianne Francis, warned that the sightings could mark the beginning of some “ominous changes” for the earth's population. But the convention chairman, Dr. Frank Stranges, said the “interplanetary visitors” would turn out to be “angelic creatures whose mission is to help mankind.”\nThe delegates were generally well groomed, articulate men and women who could have blended into any PTA meeting. Many were heads of organizations whose members spotted and photographed “unidentified flying objects” and claimed to maintain telepathic communication with space travelers.\nNEARLY ALL agreed that what they called the “flying saucer movement” was undergoing sharp expansion. Two delegates announced they were negotiating to purchase radio stations to help transmit their theories. Several flying saucer magazines and hundreds of books were on sale at the convention.\n“These people are contact-oriented,” explained Gabriel Green, a serious young man who served as president of the Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America.\nFlying Object Sighted in Illinois\nNORMAL, Ill. — (UPI) — Several persons living on the same block here said they saw an unidentified flying object last night.\nThe object had four blinking lights, red, white, blue and green, proceeded northeasterly, hovered over a grove of trees, then returned southwesterly. The object was seen first by the Merle Simpson family, then others. They said it was flat and small.\nMINNEAPOLIS TRIBUNE\n“They accept spacecraft as a fact of life. Their interest is in contacting spacemen directly or through telepathy.”\nGreen, who regularly runs for president as a “space age candidate,” says he cannot practice telepathy but insists he has met spacemen on at least six occasions. The last of his visitors, he said, was four feet tall and came from the Alpha Centauri solar system.\nA muscular, even-featured young man named Wesley Bateman said he never had met spacemen but that he was in “constant communication with them through telepathy” and offered a program of instruction to other delegates who sought similar contacts. His blonde wife, Jonell, attired in black Leotards, was kept busy signing up “students.”\n“There is no mystery as to whether the space men are watching us — some have already infiltrated our society,” said Bateman. “The mystery is why so many are coming. What's going to happen?”\nFlying Saucers 2-3-66\n(To the Editor, S.C.M. Post)\nSir,—Citizens beware! This is not a drill! If you report what you see, your report will be treated as hallucination. Your honest desire to help solve an aeronautical mystery will be discounted by harassing confrontation by paid investigators who are instructed to suppress the authenticity of their investigation.\nThe UFO Project research has been operating continuously for more than 20 years. The scope and extent of this project is a carefully guarded subject. During that time it has maintained a continuous status of “Classified Information.” The only information released by the U.S. Air Force for publication is periodic reports of a few selected cases of mistaken identity—such as the report to this newspaper on February 1, by Dr Allan Hynek: “In Search Of Flying Saucers.”\nHonest, sincere observers no longer report UFO sightings to accepted authority. (Why continue to slap your own face?) For several years actual sightings of spaceships are compiled at Flying Saucer Clubs all over the world. Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America (AFSCA) maintain a comprehensive information department that registers Club activities, and reports from all over the world. Anyone can write to AFSCA, 2004 N Hoover Street, Los Angeles, California 90027, U.S.A., and receive a concise, conscientious report about any information he is seeking.\nWe don't need to search for Flying Saucers—we only need to acknowledge their presence. Actually we are on one of the strangest UFO's in the universe. Our “friends” are now investigating us cannot understand our belligerent attitude toward their conscientious effort to contact. Neither can I.\nUFO spotted 5-16-66\nPASADENA (AP) — Scores of startled residents called newspapers and police after sighting what they described as blinking, moving lights in the skies over San Gabriel Valley last night.\nOfficers said some residents saw the lights “travel fast, then slow, then stop.” They said one Pasadena area resident reported the smell of perfume as the lights appeared and moved.\n2 SOUTH AFRICAN POLICEMEN REPORT SIGHTING OF 'SAUCER'\nJOHANNESBURG, South Africa—South African police and scientists investigated Thursday a report that a flying saucer-type object had landed on a main highway near Pretoria, the country's administrative capital.\nTwo patrolling police officers reported seeing the flaming “saucer,” about 30 feet in diameter, shortly after midnight. One of them, Koos de Klerk, said that the shiny copper-colored object resembled a giant spinning top.\nThe two men claimed that, as they approached the object, it took off silently at great speed with flames shooting out of its underside.\nScientists who examined the spot where the officers said that they saw the object are reported to have found that a six-foot wide section of the tarred road had been badly burned. Grass on either side of the highway also was reported slightly scorched.\nTHE BOSTON HERALD, FRIDAY, SEPT. 17, 1965\nBROTHER JUNIPER BY FR. JUSTIN McCARTHY & LEN RENO\n\"These flying saucer stories are getting more ridiculous every day.\"\nPc REPORTS 'I SAW 6 FLYING SAUCERS...'\nDAILY SKETCH Tuesday, May 17, 1966\nPOLICE CONSTABLE Donald Cameron made out a report last night and hoped the Chief Constable would believe that he really DID see six flying saucers.\nPc Cameron was at home on sick leave when he looked out a window and saw six at glowing objects hovering in the distance. \"I thought I was seeing things and called my wife,\" he said last night. \"We watched them for about 30 seconds before they disappeared at speed towards Manchester.\"\nPolice Kept Busy\nPaterson News Jan. 15, 1966\nSpotters Jam Up-County Roads for UFO Glimpse\nRINGWOOD — If the little men from outer space had the up-county police on the run Tuesday, their earthly counterparts caused more trouble Friday night.\nIt'll be Long Before \"Saucer\" Is Forgotten\nTHE HERALD-NEWS, JANUARY 15, 1966\nBy PETER A. DVARACKAS Herald-News Sports Writer\nMany months will pass before the impact of the strange flying objects which dominated the North Jersey skies this week fades into memory.\nExperiment?\nRoberts theorized the object \"might possibly have been a government experiment in the creation of an anti-gravity machine.\"\nAs yet nobody really seems to know what the UFO was or where it came from. Some say it is a balloon, others, men from Mars."} {"doc_id":"40daf9b8b38956d1","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Civil Defense Director Watches 'Flying Saucer'\nOakland Tribune\nTUESDAY, MARCH 22, 1966\nEerie 1896 Sighting\nBy JIM HAZELWOOD\nThe so-called Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO's) seen Sunday in Michigan by at least 60 people, recall a bizarre story which appeared in The Tribune 70 years ago.\nThe date was Nov. 23, 1896, and it reported that many persons saw an \"airship\" flying over Oakland.\nBut this date was 10 years before the Wright brothers made their first successful heavier-than-air flight at Kitty Hawk.\n87 Coeds Observe 'Object'\nHILLSDALE, Mich. (UPI) — A county civil defense director and 87 coeds said today they watched a flying object settle in a swampy fields near a college dormitory last night.\nBinghamton, N.Y., October 24, 1965 THE SUNDAY PRESS\nENCOUNTER WITH A SPACE SHIP\n'I Know What I Saw'; Egg-Shaped Craft\nBy KEITH GEORGE\nNewark Valley—Gary T. Wilcox is a young man dogged by rumors.\nGARY WILCOX\nMore Than 5 Million People Saw Flying Saucers\nTuesday, May 10, 1966\n★ GALLUP POLL\nSHEBOYGAN PRESS, Monday, April 18, 1966\nSheriff Aides Chase A UFO; Were 'Close'\nRAVENNA, Ohio (AP) — We came closer than I ever want to be again, said a county sheriff who chased an unidentified flying object from Ohio to Pennsylvania.\nTwo Ventura County Claim They Saw 'Glowing' UFO\nThe Ventura County Star-Free Press\nAt least two Ventura County people saw a glowing object Wednesday."} {"doc_id":"40e8a52166987bfe","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nThis image is a notional representation of four incidents reportedly involving unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) in the western United States, as seen from above.\n\nThis illustration depicts multiple incidents reported by U.S. federal law enforcement special agents over a period of several days in October 2023.\n\nIncident 1: \"Orbs Launching Orbs\"\n\nAgents reported observing multiple instances of an orange \"mother orb\" \"launching\" smaller red \"orbs.\"\n\nIncident 2: \"Fiery Orb\"\n\nAgents reported observing a large \"fiery orb\" projected against a ridgeline at an approximate distance of 1,000 yards.\n\nIncident 3: \"Dark Kite\"\n\nAgents reported observing a \"thin or dark kite-shaped object\" featuring one red light and one white light at a close estimated range.\n\nIncident 4: \"Translucent Kite\"\n\nAgents reported observing a \"translucent kite-shaped object\" at a close estimated range.\n\nNote: All images were artificially generated using https://genai.mil/\nPhenomena are enlarged for illustrative purposes and are not to relative scale. Distances are not to scale. All locations are notional, and do not accurately represent the relative position of the observers or reported phenomena.\n\n: Observer position\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Retire"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Col Burger BB\nLt col Steiner 1100\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nAIR FORCE OFFICE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (OAR)\nARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22209\n\nAttendees - meeting with Dr. James McDonald, University of Arizona\nat the Pentagon 17 April 1967\n\nLt. Col. Harold A. Steiner, Ass't. Exec. Secre. USAF Scientific Advisory Board,\nPentagon, Room 5D982 Washington, D.C. Tele. 697-4648 (Code 11-74648).\n\nCol. George Freeman, Chief, Civil Branch, SAFOI-C, Room 4A120, The Pentagon,\nWashington, D.C. Tele. 697-1128 (Code 11-71128).\n\nCol. Marvin Stanley, Chief, Public Information Division, SAFOIP, Room 4C922,\nThe Pentagon, Washington, D.C. Tele. 695-5554 (Code 11-55554).\n\nH. Philip Hovnanian, Program Engineer, NASA Hq. Room F50016, 400 Maryland Ave., S.W.\nWashington, D.C. Tele. 962-4961 (Code 13-24961).\n\nGeorge H. Duncan, Advanced Programs & Technology Manager, NASA Hq. Room 50016,\n400 Maryland Ave., S.W. Washington, D.C. Tele. 962-4961 (Code 13-24961).\n\nDr. Dale W. Jenkins, Ass't Director (Science), NASA Hq. Office of Space Science &\nApplications Room F50078, Washington, D.C. Tele. 962-4621 (Code 13-24621).\n\nHans Dolezalek, Atmospheric Scientist, ONR Branch Office, 495 Summer Street,\nBoston, Massachusetts 02210. Tele. 696-3563 (Code 11-63563).\n\nMr. James Hughes, Head, Atmospheric Science Program, Office of Naval Research,\nCode 412, Washington, D.C. 20360. Tele. 696-6739 (Code 11-66739).\n\nPhillip V. Mitchell, Technical Staff Member, Institute for Defense Analyses,\n400 Army-Navy Drive, Arlington, Va. 22202. Tele. 558-1641.\n\nJoseph Coates, Senior Staff Member, Institute for Defense Analyses, 400 Army-\nNavy Drive, Arlington, Va. 22202. Tele. 558-1653.\n\nLynn E. Catoe, Library of Congress, Science & Technology Div., UFO Bibliography\nProject, Washington, D.C. Tele. 967-8088.\n\nDan Taylor, Staff Information Officer, AFOSR (SRGC) Arlington, Va. 22209.\nTele. 694-4875. (Code 11-44875).\n\nMaj. Joseph P. Martino, Ass't. Exec. Dir. Research Communication, AFOSR (SRGC)\nArlington, Va. 22209. Tele. 694-4875 (Code 11-44875).\n\nDr. J. Thomas Ratchford, Project Scientist, AFOSR (SRPS) Arlington, Va. 22209.\nTele. 694-5588 (Code 11-45588).\n\nMaj. William Metscher, Physicist, Hq. OAR (RROSP) Arlington, Va. 22209.\nTele. 694-5505 (Code 11-45505).\n\nDAN TAYLOR\nStaff Information Officer"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nX\n\nPRIORITY\n\nCSAF\n\nDr. Brian O'Brien\nConsulting Physicist\nP.O. Box 117\nPomfret, Connecticut 06258\n\nDr. Laumer F. Carter\nVice President\nSystem Development Corporation\n2500 Colorado Avenue\nSanta Monica, California\n\nDr. Jesse Orlansky\nInstitute for Defense Analyses\n400 Army-Navy Drive\nArlington, Virginia 22202\n\nDr. Richard W. Porter\nGeneral Electric Company\nEngineering Services\n570 Lexington Avenue\nNew York, New York 10022\n\nDr. Carl Sagan\nSmithsonian Astrophysical Observatory\n60 Garden Street\nCambridge, Massachusetts 02138\n\nDr. Willis H. Ware\nHead, Computer Sciences Department\nThe RAND Corporation\n1700 Main Street\nSanta Monica, California 90406\n\nMajor Hector Quintanella\nForeign Technology Division\nWright-Patterson AFB, Ohio\n\nLt Col Harold A. Steiner 74648\nAFBSA\n\nFile Copy\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\nAFTSA (Lt Col Hippler)\nSAFOI (Mrs. Sarah Hunt)\n\n82596\n13 1000\nAPR 1966"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nPRIORITY Lt Col Harold A. Steiner Lt Col Harold A. Steiner 74648\n\nUNCLAS AFBSA 82596 APR 1966.\n1. Please refer to report of the SAB Ad Hoc Committee to review\nProject Blue Book.\n2. The Air Force has decided to implement the Committee's\nrecommendation to (now) perform areal investigation teams composed\nof representatives from universities. It has been suggested\nthat Dr. O'Brien and other members of the Committee meet with\nrepresentatives of the Air Staff on 19 April to advise them\non how to implement the plan. If you cannot personally\nattend this meeting, please provide me not later than\n18 April your suggestions of university people who you think\nsuitable to serve on the investigation team. These names\nshould be submitted based on your knowledge and specialty\nand should be selected to give areal coverage of the entire\nConUS.\n3. Please call me at your earliest convenience at Area Code\n202 - 697-4648 or 697-8845 if you want to discuss this further.\n\nHAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Col, USAF\nAssistant Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\n2 2"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"USAF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD\nAD HOC COMMITTEE TO\nREVIEW PROJECT BLUE BOOK\nRoom 5D-1014, the Pentagon\n1400, 19 April 1966\n\nMEETING STATISTICS\n\nI. Agenda:\n\n1400 Purpose of Meeting Lt Colonel Steiner, SAB\n\n1410 Discussion All attendees\n\n1630 Adjourn\n\nII. Purpose and Place: To discuss how best to implement the recommenda-\ntions made by the SAB Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project Blue Book.\nThe discussion was held in Room 5D-1014, the Pentagon.\n\nIII. Those Present and Purpose Thereof:\n\nName Purpose Affiliation\n\nDr. Brian O'Brien Chairman Consultant\nDr. Jesse Orlansky Member IDA\nCol Robert Burger SAB Secretary AFBSA\nL/Col Robert Hippler Participant AFRSTA\nMrs. Sara Hunt Participant SAFOI\nL/Col Harold A. Steiner SAB Secretary Hq USAF (AFBSA)\n\nIV. Reports, Contributions, Proposals, etc. issued, received, reviewed,\napproved, prepared or disseminated during the proceedings:\n\nReviewed - Report of the SAB Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project Blue\nBook, March 1966.\n\nV. Verbatim Record: (see attached)\n\nVI. Certification:\n\nThese meeting statistics are certified as being true and correct.\n\nHAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Colonel, USAF\nAssistant Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\n1 Atch\nRecord, dated 20 Apr 66"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS UNITE_ _ATES AIR FORCE\nUSAF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD\nOFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE & CHIEF OF STAFF\n\nDATE 21 April 1966\n\nMEMO FOR: Record\n\nThe following distribution was made on Memo for\nRecord, 20 Apr 66, regarding UFO Meeting 1400,\n19 April 66, Room 5D-1014:\n\n6 copies made\nOriginal--#1 of 6 - filed UFO Folder-AFBSA Destroyed\n\n#2 of 6 - mailed to Dr. Stevers\n\n#3 of 6 - sent to Lt Col Hippler, AFRSTA\n\n#4 of 6 - sent to Mrs. Sara Hunt, SAFOI\n\n#5 of 6 - circulated within AFBSA filed in Master file with report.\n#6 of 6 - filed as extra copy in AFBSA Destroyed\n\nmjm\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 6"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"USAF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD\nAD HOC COMMITTEE TO\nREVIEW PROJECT BLUE BOOK\nHQ FTD, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO\n3 FEBRUARY 1966\n\nMEETING STATISTICS\n\nI. Agenda: (see attached)\n\nII. Purpose and Place: To review the resources, methods and findings of Air Force Project Blue Book and to advise the Air Force as to any improvements that should be made in the program to carry out the Air Force's responsibility. Briefings held in Commanders Conference room at Hq, FTD. Discussions and review of case files held in Project Blue Book office.\n\nIII. Those Present and Purpose Thereof:\n\nName / Purpose / Affiliation\n\nDr. Brian O'Brien / Chairman / Consultant\nDr. Launor F. Carter / Member / System Development Corp.\nDr. Jesse Orlansky / Member / IDA\nDr. Richard Porter / Member / GE Company\nDr. Carl Sagan / Member / Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory\nDr. Willis H. Ware / Member / Rand Corporation\nL/Col John P. Spaulding / Briefer / SAFOI\nDr. Anthony Cacioppo / Participant / FTD\nCol Warren Wheeler / Participant / FTD\nMaj Hector Quintanella / Briefer / FTD\nMr. Francis Arcier / Participant / Consultant to FTD\nCol Florian Holm / Briefer / FTD\nL/Col Harold A. Steiner / SAB Sec / Hq USAF (AFBSA)\n\nIV. Reports, Contributions, Proposals, etc. issued, received, reviewed, approved, prepared or disseminated during the proceedings:\n\nReviewed: Robertson Report, dated 17 January 1953\nSelected case histories from Project Blue Book\n\nDistributed: Compilation of Project Blue Book Methods and Case Histories, dated 3 February 1966\n\nV. Verbatim Record: None\n\nVI. Certification:\n\nThese meeting statistics are certified as being true and correct.\n\n[signed] HAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Col, USAF\nAssistant Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 7"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AD HOC COMMITTEE ON\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFOs)\n\nAGENDA\n\nThursday, 3 February 1966\n\n0800 Welcoming Remarks / Commander or Vice Commander, FTD\n0805 Introduction / Dr. O'Brien, SAB\n0810 The Air Force Problem / Lt Col Spaulding, SAFOI\n0830 Briefing on Project Blue Book / Major Quintanilla, FTD\n1000 Break\n1015 Review of Selected Case Histories / FTD Staff\n1145 Lunch\n1315 Executive and Writing Session\n\nAPPROVED:\n[signed] HAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Colonel, USAF\nAssistant Executive Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\n22 December 1965\n\n8\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 8"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"For Official Use Only\n\nMEMO FOR RECORD 20 April 1966\n\nSUBJECT: Implementing SAB Ad Hoc Committee on Project Blue Book Recommendations\n\n1. The following personnel met at 1400 on 19 April in Room 5D-1014 to discuss how best to implement the recommendations made by the SAB Ad Hoc Committee to review Project Blue Book.\n\nDr. Brian O'Brien / Colonel Robert Burger, AFBSA\nDr. Jesse Orlansky / Lt Col Harold Steiner, AFBSA\nLt Col Robert Hippler, AFRTSA / Mrs. Sara Hunt, SAFOI\n\n2. On 5 April 1966, Secretary of the Air Force Harold Brown, in a memorandum to the Chief of Staff, stated that the Committee's recommendations should be accepted and arrangements made for a (sic) scientific team to investigate in depth certain selected sightings of UFOs. General Ferguson was given responsibility for implementing the Committee's recommendations and Lt Colonel Hippler is project officer.\n\n3. Although the Committee's recommendation was clear and succinct, initially there was no unanimous agreement on how to put this recommendation into effect. A basic question is:\n\n(1) Should the contract be with a university or should it be with individuals connected with a university? A great deal of the meeting was taken up discussing these facets of the problem and a clear answer did not evolve. Therefore, it is probable that I, and perhaps some selected members of the Committee, may be asked to meet with Colonel Hippler again.\n\n4. Generally, the concept of using universities (or individuals from universities) is good. Specifically, however, there needs to be a lead university to coordinate and collate the investigations. After some discussion, it was suggested that the University of Dayton is probably most appropriate because it is located close to Hq FTD who will retain management of Project Blue Book. Other universities were suggested that could provide personnel to give areal coverage of CONUS. They are listed below.\n\nEast: Rensselaer, Troy, N.Y.; Columbia; NYU; Univ of Conn.; Yale; Cornell; Univ of Dayton; Carnegie Tech\nWest: Utah; Colorado; Iowa; Wisconsin; Illinois; Chicago; Univ of Calif (Berkeley); UCLA; Oregon; Washington; Rice; Univ of Texas\nSouth: Vanderbilt; Duke; Univ of Florida; Georgia Tech; Univ of Georgia\n\nCopy Nr 5 of 6 Copies\n\nFor Official Use Only\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 9"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"For Official Use Only\n\nColonel Hippler pointed out that it will probably be September before he gets the money to implement this plan. Dr. Orlansky pointed out that because of the summer holiday, Colonel Hippler should make contact with the universities before the end of May.\n\n5. Since we are dealing with an emotional phenomenon, there was some discussion about whether universities (i.e., their presidents) would be willing to get involved with UFOs. Dr. O'Brien suggested that Dr. Stever, as President of Carnegie Tech, might send letters to a few selected university presidents with whom he is acquainted to get some idea of their feelings on this matter. (ACTION: AFBSA). In this way we can learn what a typical reaction might be and also some of the pitfalls to avoid when contacting other universities.\n\n6. There are still several unanswered questions or problem areas:\n\n(a) Since the problem is 99% public relations, it is essential that the investigating teams have some modicum of skill in press relations. It was strongly suggested that a good solid PIO type (perhaps incognito) be included on the first few investigation teams. This caused quite a bit of discussion and a final answer did not evolve.\n\n(b) The objective is to have impartial scientists from schools with good reputations that have never been involved with UFOs.\n\n(c) Considerable thought must be given to how the contract or contracts are to be written.\n\n(d) In order to utilize their talents to the best advantage, it was proposed and accepted that Dr. J. Allen Hynek and Dr. Donald Menzel form the nucleus of a Consultant-Advisor team to work with Hq FTD in determining which sightings the university team should investigate.\n\n(e) When teams are selected, it is strongly recommended that they be brought together at some certain location such as Hq FTD and given a thorough briefing on what is expected of them. This briefing should cover all of the intangibles and pitfalls that must be avoided in order to give good Air Force public relations.\n\n(f) Another question that was not fully resolved is how AFSC should get into the act. The Committee's original thought was that someone from the nearest AFSC base should work with the investigating team. The Committee also recommended that a member of the OSI might work with the university teams and give them the benefit of their investigating experience. It was questioned whether this would help or hurt the Air Force effort. Neither of these questions were fully resolved.\n\n2\n\nFor Official Use Only\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 10"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Official Use Only\n\n(g) It was pointed out that the National Research Council had conducted an exercise in Disaster Research which had involved some investigating teams similar to the ones we are discussing. Although the committee is now defunct, Mrs. Marjorie Wilson, Government Code 1224 - 230/239 has their reports and will be glad to let us review them.\n\nHAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Col, USAF\nAssistant Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\n3\n\nFor Official Use Only\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 11"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMO ROUTING SLIP\n\nNEVER USE FOR APPROVALS, DISAPPROVALS, CONCURRENCES, OR SIMILAR ACTIONS\n\nACTION\n\n1 TO\nAFBSA (Mr. Hasert)\n\nINITIALS CIRCULATE\nDATE COORDINATION\n\n2 Col. Steiner - let file with the O'Brien report\nFILE\nINFORMATION\n\n3\nNOTE AND RETURN\nPER CONVERSATION\n\n4\nSEE ME\nSIGNATURE\n\nREMARKS\n\nFROM\nAFRDQ-P (Mr. Baillie)\nDATE\nPHONE\n\nDD FORM 1 OCT 60 95\nReplaces DD Form 94, 1 Feb 50 and DD Form 95, 1 Feb 50 which will be used until exhausted.\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 12"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1400 File UFO\n\nCOPY\n\nAFRDQ-P 31 July 1967\n\nSpecial Report of the USAF Scientific Advisory Board Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project \"Blue Book\"\n\nUSAIRA (DATT - Mr. David Smith & Mr. Peer DeSilva)\nAmerican Embassy\nAPO San Francisco 96346\n\nCopies of the subject report are forwarded at the request of Mr. Jesse Orlansky, a member of the Scientific Advisory Board Committee on UFO's.\n\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF\n\nMILTON COLLIER, Colonel, USAF\nChief, Requirements Plans Group\nD/Operational Requirements & Development Plans, DCS/R&D\n\n1 Atch\nSpecial Report of the USAF SABAd Hoc Committee to Review Project \"Blue Book\" dtd Mar 66, 2 cys\n\nCOPY\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 13"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTITUTE FOR DEFENSE ANALYSES\n\nIDA\n\nAugust 16, 1967\n\nMr. Peer de Silva\nSpecial Assistant for Counterinsurgency\nEmbassy of the United States\nBangkok, Thailand\n\nDear Mr. de Silva:\n\nWhen Dr. Tanham and his committee, of which I am a member, were in Thailand, we heard on several occasions about the helicopter sightings. Then, the Ambassador said that the nature of these reports was like that concerning UFO's. That reminded me that last year, the Air Force asked its Scientific Advisory Board to look at the UFO's and that a committee, under Brian O'Brien prepared a report. I thought you might be interested in that report and have asked the SAB Secretariat to send you a copy.\n\nThe committee recognized that the Air Force had been investigating the reported sightings very seriously but that, because of limited resources, the investigations tended to be incomplete and inconclusive. It recommended that some university be provided the means to examine impartially, scientifically and in great detail a selected number of sightings. I won't elaborate on the details other than to say that the committee concluded that a valid explanation requires a careful investigation.\n\nWhile in Bangkok, I did not have the time to examine the way in which the helicopter sightings were collected and evaluated and have no reason to suggest that the present procedures are incomplete. Moreover, it may even be that the whole matter is not important enough to warrant any further attention. In any case, it may be useful to know how the Air Force went about its problem. A contract was given to the University of Colorado and its report is expected some time this Fall.\n\nFor your information, a copy of the report was also sent to David Smith.\n\nRespectfully,\n\nJesse Orlansky\n\nJO:mh\ncc: H. Guyford Stever\nChester Hasert\nGeorge Tanham\nS. J. Deitchman\nWarren Stark\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 14"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD 18 May 1966\n\nSUBJECT: Conversation with Dr. Stever Concerning SAB Support to USAF Investigations of UFOs\n\n1. On 17 May I discussed SAB support to USAF investigations of UFOs with Dr. Stever. In a previous letter (dated 21 April 66), we had asked Dr. Stever to informally query some of his university-president colleagues to determine the best modus operandi for approaching universities and asking them to provide people and resources to investigate scientifically selected UFO sightings as recommended by the SAB Ad Hoc Committee. This memo documents his findings and conclusions on this matter.\n\n2. On the basis of his informal contacts with university presidents, Dr. Stever believes the Air Force will get mixed reactions to its request to universities. On the negative side of the picture, he has gleaned these general reactions:\n\na. It may be against some school's policy to make contractual arrangements with the government.\n\nb. Some universities will have no interest or have any qualified investigators.\n\n3. On the positive side, the following reactions were received:\n\na. Some universities will do the job under contract.\n\nb. Some would like to do the job from a research aspect. (NOTE: Dr. Stever commented that this may be the \"foot in the door\" approach to request additional research funds for work at the university that may be construed to be related to the UFO investigation.)\n\n4. Dr. Stever believes that, as a whole, the smaller universities will be more receptive than the larger ones.\n\n5. Dr. Stever has had some second thoughts on the SAB (specifically, him) sending the initial letters to the selected universities. He believes that the letter should come from and be signed by an action office within the Air Force. The letter might refer to the recommendations of the SAB scientific committee as a basis for the Air Force actions to initiate a more scientific approach in future selected UFO investigations. In other words, instead of a letter from a college president to a college president, Dr. Stever felt the Air Force could make a very acceptable case if it framed its letter around these two points:\n\na. The value of participating in such investigations to the school, and\n\nb. The value to the Air Force and the nation.\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 15"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6. Dr. Stever stated that he would be happy to review and critique\nthe draft letter from a university president's viewpoint.\n\n7. Dr. Stever also suggested that OSR could probably advise which\nuniversities are most likely to cooperate and since most universities\nhave had dealings with OSR, perhaps that organization could offer some\nadvice on the initial letter and maybe even send the letter from that\noffice.\n\nROBERT J. BURGER, Colonel, USAF\nSecretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\nCopies to: Lt Col Hippler, AFRST\nMrs. Hunt, SAFOI\nDr. Brian O'Brien\n\n2\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 16"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFBSA\n\nImplementation of SAB Ad Hoc Committee's 21 April 1966\nRecommendations\n\nLt Col Hippler, AFBSA\n\n1. Some of the members present at the meeting on 19 April have had\nsome after-thoughts which I believe you should consider.\n\n2. First, there is a feeling that perhaps sufficient thought is not\nbeing given to how the Air Force is going to implement the plan.\nTypical questions are:\n\n a. Specifically, what is the Air Force going to do?\n\n b. Specifically, how is it going to do it?\n\n3. Since answers to these questions are not obvious, there is a\nstrong feeling here that the Air Force should get two or three\nconsultants from the academic community, Hq AFSC, and FTD together\nand have them do some constructive thinking on how to solve the\nmechanics of the problem and avoid the pitfalls and vagaries that\nare bound to crop up.\n\n4. Another area of concern is the lag between May and September\nwhen funds will become available. A lot of Air Force enthusiasm\nfor the program can fall through the cracks during that period.\nPerhaps this lag period can be put to good use by using it to\nthink the problem out as discussed in the paragraph above.\n\n5. These are just some random thoughts I am passing on for your\nconsideration.\n\nHAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Col, USAF\nAssistant Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 17"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n\nOFFICE OF THE SECRETARY\n\nAPR 5 1966\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF\n\n Attached is a copy of the Special Report of\nthe SAB Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project \"Blue\nBook.\"\n\n I believe that the Committee's recommendations\nshould be accepted and arrangements made to contract\nfor a scientific team to investigate in depth certain\nselected reported sightings of UFO's. If you concur,\nGeneral LeBailly can work with General Ferguson and\nAFSC in making the arrangements.\n\nHarold Brown\nHarold Brown\n\nAttachment\n\nLt Col Hippler\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 18"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR STAFF SUMMARY SHEET\n\nTO | ACTION | SIGNATURE (Surname and Grade) | TO | ACTION | SIGNATURE (Surname and Grade)\n1 Lt Gen Ferguson AFRDC | 6\n2 | 7\n3 | 8\n4 | 9\n5 | 10\n\nSURNAME OF ACTION OFFICER AND GRADE | SYMBOL | PHONE | TYPIST'S INIT. | SUSPENSE DATE\nLt Colonel Steiner | AFBSA | 78845 | mjm |\n\nSUBJECT | DATE\nSAB Ad Hoc Committee Report | 30 March 1966\n\nSUMMARY\n\n1. Attached for your signature is a letter transmitting to General LeBailly the Special Report of the SAB Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project Blue Book.\n\n2. The Committee was formed and the report is being submitted in response to General LeBailly's memorandum to you on 28 September 1965 (Atch 2) requesting that the SAB review Air Force Project Blue Book. The objective of this investigation was to determine if and how the Air Force could improve its program for investigating UFO's. The Committee concluded that the program can be improved by conducting a more thorough scientific investigation of questionable sightings, and recommended a method for doing this.\n\n3. Recommended distribution is:\n\nNumber of Copies\nSAFOI 25\nAFRDC 1\nCommittee Members 1 each\nCommander, FTD 5\nAFSC DCS/Foreign Technology 2\nSAB Secretariat 2\nChairman, SAB 1\n\n4. After your signature and approval of the recommended distribution, we will take appropriate action to forward the copies of the report.\n\nROBERT J. BURGER, Colonel, USAF\nSecretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\n2 Atch\n1. Ltr of Transmittal\n2. SAFOI Memo, 28 Sep 65\n\nAFHQ FORM 50 MAR 62 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE.\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 19"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFBSA 1 APR 1966\n\nSAB Review of Project Blue Book\n\nMajor General E. B. LeBailly\nSAFOI\n\n1. Please refer to your memorandum to me on 28 September 1965 requesting a review of Project Blue Book by the USAF Scientific Advisory Board.\n\n2. In response to your request, the SAB formed an ad hoc committee under Dr. Brian O'Brien to investigate the adequacy and timeliness of Project Blue Book. The Committee's report recommends a procedure for strengthening the scientific investigation of questionable sightings of UFOs.\n\n3. Twenty-five copies of the report are being submitted for your use. Please let us know if the SAB can be of further assistance in this matter.\n\nSigned\n\nJAMES FERGUSON, Lt General, USAF 1 Atch\nMilitary Director Report (25 cys)\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\nNW 90306\nDocId:34714841 Page 20"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR STAFF SUMMARY SHEET\nTO | ACTION | SIGNATURE (Surname and Grade) | TO | ACTION | SIGNATURE (Surname and Grade)\n1 Gen Ferguson Mil Dir, SAB | 6\n2 | 7\n3 | 8\n4 | 9\n5 | 10\nSURNAME OF ACTION OFFICER AND GRADE | SYMBOL | PHONE | TYPIST'S INIT. | SUSPENSE DATE\nCol Burger | AFBSA | 74811 | al |\nSUBJECT | DATE\nSAB Information/Action Item | 5 October 1965\nSUMMARY\n1. This request arrived in our office today apparently without your seeing it.\n2. I discussed it briefly with Dr. Stever and his initial reaction was lukewarm. He questioned the value of a review of the UFO program by the SAB. He suggested that we might talk to some other SAB members knowledgeable in this area to get their opinion on the value of such an SAB undertaking. We thought of Brian O'Brien (FTD/DAG), Jesse Orlansky (Psychology), Dick Porter (Geophysics), and possibly Court Perkins and Dr. Markey.\n3. Before we do this, however, Dr. Stever thought we should get your views on this to see if perhaps there is some additional information or facts which would give a clue on why the request was made.\nROBERT J. BURGER, Colonel, USAF\nSecretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board | Atch\nMemo on UFOs\nLet's bring this up at Exec Crate meeting in Nov.\nTABC"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\nOFFICE OF THE SECRETARY\nSEP 28 1965\nMEMORANDUM FOR MILITARY DIRECTOR, SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs)\nIn keeping with its air defense role, the Air Force has the responsibility for the investigation of unidentified flying objects reported over the United States. The name of this project is Blue Book (Attachment 1). Procedures for conducting this program are established by Air Force Regulation 200-2 (Attachment 2).\nThe Air Force has conducted Project Blue Book since 1948. As of 30 June 1965, a total of 9267 reports had been investigated by the Air Force. Of these 9267 reports, 663 cannot be explained.\nIt has been determined by the Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff/Plans and Operations that Project Blue Book is a worthwhile program which deserves the support of all staff agencies and major commands and that the Air Force should continue to investigate and analyze all UFO reports in order to assure that such objects do not present a threat to our national security. The Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff/Plans and Operations has determined also that the Foreign Technology Division (FTD) at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base should continue to exercise its presently assigned responsibilities concerning UFOs.\nTo date, the Air Force has found no evidence that any of the UFO reports reflect a threat to our national security. However, many of the reports that cannot be explained have come from intelligent and technically well qualified individuals whose integrity cannot be doubted. In addition, the reports received officially by the Air Force include only a fraction of the spectacular reports which are publicized by many private UFO organizations.\nAccordingly, it is requested that a working scientific panel composed of both physical and social scientists be organized to review Project Blue Book -- its resources, methods, and findings -- and to advise the Air Force as to any improvements that should be made in the program in order to carry out the Air Force's assigned responsibility.\n5"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Doctor J. Allen Hynek who is the Chairman of the Dearborn Observatory at Northwestern University is the scientific consultant to Project Blue Book. He has indicated a willingness to work with such a panel in order to place this problem in its proper perspective.\nDoctor Hynek has discussed this problem with Doctor Winston R. Markey, the former Air Force Chief Scientist.\nE. B. LeBAILLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Information\n2 Attachments\n1. Blue Book Report\n2. AFR 200-2\n6"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Col Manci info\nIHS\nINSTITUTE FOR DEFENSE ANALYSES\nScience and Technology Division IDA 400 Army-Navy Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22202 Telephone (703) 558-1000\nFebruary 13, 1969\nLt. Colonel Harold A. Steiner, USAF\nAssistant Executive Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\nDepartment of the Air Force\nHeadquarters United States Air Force\nWashington, D.C. 20330\nDear Hal,\nI appreciate your thoughtfulness in sending me a copy of the Condon Report on UFO's. He and his group seem to have done a tremendous job, just about what our committee thought was needed. I guess we were very lucky to have reviewed the situation in such timely fashion in 1966. The fine endorsement of his work by the National Academy of Sciences confirms that Condon has done what was needed.\nIt is a pleasure to see this fruitful outcome to our recommendation and I appreciate having the report.\nCordially,\nJesse Orlansky"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UFO NOS Col Manci M\nSYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION\n2500 Colorado Avenue Santa Monica, California 90406\nFebruary 28, 1969\nLt. Colonel Harold A. Steiner\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\nHeadquarters U. S. Air Force\nWashington, D. C. 20330\nDear Colonel Steiner:\nThank you very much for sending me the Condon Report and the National Academy of Sciences review of the report. I have not yet had time to read the complete report but have glanced through it, and it certainly seems comprehensive. The National Academy review certainly gives it good credibility and ought to take care of any serious criticism.\nCordially yours,\nLaunor F. Carter\nVice President and Manager\nPublic Systems Division\nLFC:db"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20330\n\n12 February 1969\n\n\n\n\nDr. H. Guyford Stever\nPresident\nCarnegie-Mellon University\nPittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213\n\nDear Dr. Stever\n\nI am pleased to send you this personal copy of the Condon Report on Unidentified Flying Objects. No doubt you will be surprised, as I was, at the depth of the University of Colorado study. Little could we guess when the O'Brien SAB Committee met in February 1966 that it would serve as a springboard for this voluminous effort. Personally, I am satisfied with the results of the study and believe it puts the Air Force in an excellent position to counter criticism.\n\nSincerely\n\n\n\nHAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Colonel, USAF 1 Atch\nAssistant Executive Secretary Condon Report (3 Vols)\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\nLtCol Steiner/dd/12Feb69\n\nOK Marcie 12 Feb 69"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20330\n\n6 February 1969\n\n\n\nDr. Brian O'Brien\nConsulting Physicist\nBox 52\nNorth Woodstock, Connecticut 06257\n\nDear Dr. O'Brien\n\nI am pleased to send you this personal copy of the Condon Report on Unidentified Flying Objects. No doubt you will be surprised, as I was, at the depth of the University of Colorado study. Little could we guess when we met as a committee in February 1966 that a by-product would be these voluminous documents. Personally, I am satisfied with the contents and believe the Air Force got its money's worth.\n\nI am happy to have served with you in this exercise and I hope that you feel as I do that it was worthwhile.\n\nSincerely\n\n\n\nHAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Colonel, USAF 1 Atch\nAssistant Executive Secretary Condon Report (3 Vols)\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\nSAME LETTER TO: Dr. Launor F. Carter\nMr. Jesse Orlansky\nDr. Richard Porter\nDr. Carl Sagan\nDr. Willis H. Ware"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20330\n\nAFBSA 27 February 1968\nRequest for Project Blue Book Material\n\nMr. Don Berliner\nNational Investigations Committee\n on Aerial Phenomena\n1536 Connecticut Avenue, N. W.\nWashington, D. C. 20036\n\nThis is in response to your visit on 26 February 1968 during which you requested we provide you with Project Blue Book material. I have been advised that we can provide you with copies of the material you requested at a cost of $5.00. If you are still interested in obtaining copies, please make your check or money order for that amount payable to the \"Treasurer of the United States\" and send it to this office.\n\nHAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Colonel, USAF\nAssistant Executive Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\nJohn 27 Feb 1968"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20330\n\n1 March 1968\n\nAFBSA\n\nProject Blue Book Material\n\nMr. Don Berliner\nNational Investigations Committee\n on Aerial Phenomena\n1536 Connecticut Avenue, NW\nWashington, D. C. 20036\n\n1. This is in response to your letter of 28 February 1968 requesting and paying for material prepared for the USAF Scientific Advisory Board by the Project Blue Book office.\n\n2. Copies of this material are attached. A fee of $5 was based on the unit cost of 25¢ per page plus $3 per hour labor.\n\nHAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Colonel, USAF 1 Atch\nAssistant Executive Secretary Project Blue Book Material\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\nJohn 1 March 1968\n\nSent 1 Mar 68 Mob"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS COMMITTEE\n\nON AERIAL PHENOMENA\n\nMAJOR DONALD E. KEYHOE USMC (RET.) DIRECTOR WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES: 1536 CONNECTICUT AVE., N.W.\nGORDON I. R. LORE, JR. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Feb. 28, 1968 TELEPHONE: (202) 667-9434\n\nLt. Col. Harold A. Steiner\nAssistant Executive Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\nHQ, USAF\nWashington, D.C. 20330\n\nDear Col. Steiner:\n\nEnclosed is my personal check for $5.00 to cover the cost of reproducing the pages of Project Blue Book material which we discussed on Feb. 26.\n\nMany thanks for your cooperation.\n\nSincerely,\nDon Berliner\nNICAP Staff\n\nA privately-supported fact-finding body serving the national public interest"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20330\n\nAFDASBA/SSgt Ehrlich/74835\n\nRequest for Project Bluebook Reports\n\n20 Feb 68\n\nMr. Don Berliner\nNational Investigations Committee\non Aerial Phenomena\n1536 Connecticut Avenue\nWashington, DC 20036\n\n1. Reference your request directed to SAF-OICC for portions of Project Bluebook Reports.\n\n2. We maintain a reference copy of the material you requested and can furnish you photographic copy at a cost of $12.75. If you are interested in purchasing a copy, please make your check or money order payable to \"Treasurer of the United States\" and remit to this office.\n\nELLIS F VILLIARD\nChief, Information Branch\nDirectorate of Administrative Services\n\n25\n20\n5.00\n\n19"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTITUTE FOR DEFENSE ANALYSES\n\nResearch and Engineering Support Division IDA 400 Army-Navy Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22202, Telephone (703) 558-1000\n\nJuly 27, 1967\n\nMr. Chester N. Hasert\nActing Executive Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\nRoom 5D1014, The Pentagon\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Chet:\n\nWhen I was in Thailand last week, I spoke to several men at the U.S. Embassy who told me about an interesting problem that faces them. Very simply, the Thai government has made numerous reports of mysterious helicopter flights in the Northeast part of the country near Laos, an area in which Communist terrorists have been increasing their activity. Although the members of the U. S. Embassy take these reports very seriously, they have never been able to authenticate a single valid sighting.\n\nI would not have given this matter any further thought except that someone said the reports of these sightings were very much like the reports of UFO's meaning, thereby, that one unusual report is likely to inspire additional ones. It seemed to me that the SAB report on UFO's might be useful to these men in the sense that it would provide them with a basis for seeing that a more valid understanding of the problem could require a more thorough examination than has been possible up to now. It is with this suggestion in mind that I hope you will be able to send a copy of the report to two men in the Embassy very much concerned with this matter. They are Peer de Silva and David Smith. Mr. de Silva is Special Assistant for Counterinsurgency and Mr. Smith is Special Assistant to the Ambassador. I hope that it will be possible for our Embassy in Thailand to take advantage of the work done by the SAB committee chaired by Brian O'Brian.\n\nCordially,\n\nJO:mh\n\nJesse Orlansky\n\ncc: Dr. H. Guyford Stever"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\t\t\t\t16 May 1967\n\nSUBJECT: Some Notes Concerning a Progress Report on University of Colorado UFO Study\n\n1. On 5 May 1967, members of the University of Colorado UFO Investigating Committee presented a \"position paper\" on the state of their thinking on the UFO Study. This memo is based on verbatim notes taken at that meeting and augments the formal presentation (Atch 1). A report of the Committee's progress up to 31 March is also included (Atch 2).\n\n2. The meeting was held in Dr. Bill Price's office at OSR. The following personnel attended:\n\nDr. Edward V. Condon, Univ of Colorado (UOC), Principal Investigator\nMr. Robert J. Low, UOC, Project Coordinator\nDr. W. K. Hartman, Univ of Arizona, a member of the UOC Study Committee\nDr. William Price, OSR\nDr. Tom Ratchford, OSR\nDr. Jesse Orlansky, SAB\nDr. Willis Ware, SAB\nMr. Chester N. Hasert, SAB\nLt Col Harold A. Steiner, SAB\nLt Col Robert Hippler, AFRSTA\nMr. Charles K. Reed, Nat Acad of Sciences\nMr. L. V. Brasher, OSR Procurement\nMr. Dan Taylor, OSR Public Information\n\n3. The basic problem confronting the UOC Study Committee is establishing a methodology for investigating UFOs. In the Committee's opinion, previous investigations have produced few, if any, tangible results because these studies have primarily been concerned with investigating sightings. According to the UOC Committee, the basic question is not the sighting per se but how to interpret the data obtained from reports that are generated from sightings. Thus, additional sightings as currently handled by Project Blue Book (NOTE: no criticism of Project Blue Book was inferred) will not give the Committee a better picture of what UFOs really are. Something else is needed.\n\n4. Admittedly, if better data were available (i.e., those obtained with spectrometers, magnetometers, etc.) they could undoubtedly give the Committee a better insight into the UFO problem, but in the 18 months allotted for the study the probability of the UOC Committee getting significantly better data is small. The possibility of getting actual, real-time data with spectrometers, magnetometers, etc., is highly unlikely. Ergo, the concept of having specialized, instrumented teams standing ready to move quickly into an area where UFOs were or are being sighted and obtain actual, real-time data does not appear likely to produce much. To"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"substantiate this conclusion, the UOC Committee cites the experience of NICAP teams of \"eager amateurs\" armed with cameras, magnetometers, and other specialized instrumentation who have gone instantly to sighting zones and attempted to obtain actual data. Despite their zeal, these teams apparently have never been able to obtain actual, real-time data. The conclusion, therefore, is that the UOC Committee will have to work with data that are available (i.e., reports from those who have sighted UFOs) and attempt to interpret those data so as to obtain a better understanding of UFOs.\n\n5. Although the UOC Committee will deal primarily with data from reports, this will not preclude some team investigations of current sightings of special interest. Primary and back-up teams each consisting of two members (a physical scientist and a social scientist) are now being equipped with suitable instruments (i.e., Gieger counters, binoculars, cameras, maps, almanacs, etc.). These teams will be on stand-by alert at Colorado to investigate sightings of special interest. One unresolved question is how to determine which sightings to investigate. These teams will not be decentralized because the transportation from Denver to any part of the United States is adequate. After listening to this briefing, one cannot avoid the conclusion that the actual field investigations will be low priority items and will be played in low key during this investigation.\n\n6. Discussion on the teams' activities led to another question basic to the Air Force approach to the UFO problem and one that the UOC Committee hopes to provide answers to--is a large field organization composed of an investigating officer at each Air Force base worthwhile? If such a system does not produce worthwhile, tangible results then the Air Force does not need it. If such a system does produce results then perhaps the Air Force needs to refine its reporting and investigating procedures, i.e., Project Blue Book and AFR 80-17. The Committee has developed an improved reporting form in consultation with psychologists to be used to obtain data from future sightings. Project Blue Book might find this useful.\n\n7. Some interesting aspects of the UOC Committee's approach to the investigation are:\n\na. An attempt will be made to establish reliability of the reports and/or reporters. UOC wants to know how many are reliable, how many are accurate.\n\nb. The Committee will assume some hypothesis that UFOs may exist. They will then try to determine how much evidence supports the probability or improbability of this hypothesis. Thus far the best hypothesis that UFOs exist appears to be the one proposed by Mr. Richard Hall, Deputy Director of NICAP. His is an active hypothesis whereas McDonald's is passive. According to the Committee, Hall definitely believes UFOs exist and are extra-terrestrial, solid objects. McDonald also believes they exist and are of extra-terrestrial origin but arrives at his conclusion\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"by remainder\" after eliminating all other possibilities of terrestrial and divine origin and leaving extra-terrestrial as the only alternative. At this time, the UOC Committee apparently favors the Hall hypothesis.\n\nc. Data from sightings are being put on punch cards. The coding system can be expanded up to 50 cards per sighting. All reports of sightings after 1 January 1967 are being computerized. For cases prior to 1967, the Committee asked NICAP to pick out cases they believe should be included in the computer analysis part of the investigation. When questioned as to why NICAP was solicited as a source, the Committee stated that if their report is to have any credibility then NICAP would have to be involved in one form or another. I am inclined to agree with their viewpoint.\n\n8. There will be 21 senior scientists associated with the UOC project.\n\n9. In my opinion, one of the most interesting and potentially beneficial facets of the Committee's investigations is the sub-contracts with various agencies and individuals (i.e., SRI, Ford, RAND, NCAR, etc.) to study such phenomena as illumination, visual perception, fireballs, radiochemistry, ball lightning, etc., as they apply to UFOs.\n\n10. CONCLUSIONS: After listening to the UOC briefing and discussing the matter informally with others, I do not believe the SAB Ad Hoc Committee should pursue this matter further at this time. The UOC Committee seems to have a fairly good grasp of the problem, and I do not see what useful purpose the SAB Committee can serve. Later in the calendar year after the UOC Committee has gained experience and analyzed some data, it might be useful for us to convene at Boulder for a series of formal briefings on the results and scope of the investigation. I can see a useful purpose for such a meeting. Since in a sense the UOC Committee is a brainchild of the SAB, the SAB Ad Hoc Committee could review the UOC Committee's progress and serve as a useful \"devil's advocate\" or sounding board to help establish credibility. The SAB could also suggest new directions where warranted. This type of SAB action would, of course, have to be done with the sanction of Dr. Stever, OSR, and Dr. Condon.\n\nHAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Colonel, USAF\nAssistant Executive Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\n2 Atch\n1. Comments by UOC Committee\n2. Progress Report\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD 10 August 1966\n\nSUBJECT: Visit by Mr. William P. Wietzel, NICAP\n\n1. Today I was visited by Mr. William Wietzel, an investigator for the National Investigating Committee on Aerial Phenomena. Mr. Wietzel did not have an appointment but just dropped in, presumably to discuss the report of the SAB Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project \"Blue Book.\" This we did; however, the discussion soon deteriorated to an indictment of the way in which Major Quintella had handled the Ravenna, Ohio, UFO siting in April 1966. With regard to this particular siting, the main criticism of Major Quintella seems to be that his interviews with the people who had sited the UFO were restricted to about three minutes each via the telephone. However, in all fairness, it should be pointed out that Major Quintella did visit the scene of the Ravenna siting at a later date.\n\n2. I neither concurred with Mr. Wietzel's opinion of Major Quintella nor did I defend Major Quintella strongly. I did point out that, hopefully, the university teams now being formed will provide scientific information that can eliminate the type of personality conflict that apparently exists between NICAP and Major Quintella.\n\n3. There was some additional discussion of the pertinent information concerning the Ravenna siting of which Mr. Wietzel was a principal NICAP investigator. He has completed a lengthy and voluminous report of this siting that is impressive in size if not in content. I asked Mr. Wietzel if NICAP investigated every UFO siting as thoroughly as they had apparently investigated this one. The obvious answer was no because NICAP has limited resources. I then pointed out that the Air Force also has limited resources and cannot spend as much time on each UFO siting as it would like. We parted amiably at an impasse. He did not convince me, and I certainly did not convince him.\n\nHAROLD A. STEINER, Lt Colonel, USAF\nAssistant Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The Committe agreed that the present \"Blue Book\" program is all right as far as it goes but that it is not investigative enough to satisfy the inquisitive scientific mind. The Air Force has been collecting UFO data for about 18 years but this data is no good for forming a scientific or technical background on UFO. It appears that this program, as presently constituted, could go on ad infinitum without making a substantial contribution on whether there are or are not UFOs. Therefore, if anyting constructive is going to happen, the time has apparently come to change from an operational approach to a scientific type of approach.\n\nDuring the 18 years that the Air Force has been collecting data on UFO sightings, members of Moon Watch Teams and amateur astronomers, who were pursuing rigorous meteor sighting programs, have continuously scanned large areas of the night sky to obtain scientific and technical information on natural phenomena. To the best of the Committee's knowledge none of these observers with a scientific and technical background have ever sighted a UFO. The obvious conclusion is that when the sky is observed by scientifically-trained or scientifically-oriented personnel, UFOs are not observed. Therefore it is highly unlikely (or put another way, there is a very low probability) that the UFOs that are sighted and unidentified would remain unidentified"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"if the incidents were subject to close scientific scrutiny. (Source: Dr. Porter)\n\nAlong with the scientific approach the Air Force should conduct some unannounced controlled experiments to check out the techniques. It would also be useful to correlate known natural phenomena that can be predicted, i.e., comets, balloons, SAC refueling, etc., to check out sighting psychology and investigative techniques. (Source: Dr. Sagan)\n\nThe Committee should recommend that statistical analyses be made on UFO data. (Sagan)\n\nThe Committee should also recommend that in the event our major recommendations are not bought by the Air Force, the present \"Blue Book\" investigations be more thorough. For example, the B-47 sighting in New Hampshire were assumed to be the source of the UFO. However, no attempt was made to correlate the time of sighting or place of sighting with the navigation logs of any of the B-47s that were supposed to be in the area. Such a loose approach seriously degrades the \"Project Blue Book\" efforts and leaves loop holes that critics of the Air Forces handling of the UFO problem can use to cast doubt on the Air Force's credibility. (Sagan)"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It would be useful to know how many times SPADATS sights unidentified objects with their radar. Is this number small or large? In either case, it means something different. If the number is large then this gives emphasis to the supposition that there are a large number of potential UFOs in the atmosphere. If the number is significantly small then because SPADATS is continuously scanning the skys, this lends credance to the supposition that UFOs are figments of emotional peoples imaginations.\n\nA short review of the findings of the scientific groups who have worked on the UFO problem should be made available so that any new effort undertaken does not have to discover the wheel all over again. (Carter)\n\nThe Air Force should perhaps send letters to local police departments or, better still, when appropriate give a short briefing to police agencies asking for their responsible cooperation in the \"Project Blue Book\" effort. Undoubtedly, this would cause the number of sightings to rise because of the emotional response of the public. However, local police usually have a good public image so their value in helping the Air Force improve its statue should be weighed in light"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of the probable increased number of sightings. Also such an approach would give ammunition for the critics to chide the Air Force for belatedly recognizing a problem that they (the so called \"flying saucer buffs\") havekmown about for years. In any case, press releases and public relations would have to be handled in an extremely skillful manner.\n\nDr. Caccioppo commented that any requirement for increased resources to study the UFO problem might cause DIA to recommend cancelation of the whole UFO project in their nextbudget review.\n\nFrom my rough notes I gather that the Committee finally decided to recommend that the Air Force form teams at universities located strategically around the country. These teams would work closely with the local Air Force representative from the nearest Air Force Base to investigate UFOs. The Group would investigate only those UFOs sightings that do not lend themselves to rapid and positive identification. The teams would be made up of at least one psychologist, who has had interview experience, and one or more physical scientists (astronomers, physicists, etc.)."} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The capability of the Air Force representative was also\ndiscussed and it was generally agreed that it would be\nwise to have someone with investigative ability and a\nmodicum of technical experience as the UFO Project Officer\nat each Air Force Base.\n\nThe local representative of the Air Force Office of Special\nInvestigations (OSI) may be a logical choice to work with\nthe university groups when necessary. Each university would\nbe assigned a specific geographic area. A lead university\nor FTD would analyze the date.\n\nIt is estimated that there will probably be more less than\n100-150 sighting per year that will have to be investigated\nby the university teams. These will probably be randomly\nspread over the whole US so that no one university will be\nover burdened with UFO investigations."} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\n\nREPLY TO\nATTN OF:\n\n21 January 1966\n\nSUBJECT: Some SAFOI Thoughts for the SAB Ad Hoc Committee on UFOs\n\nTO: RECORD\n\n1. On 21 January, I visited SAFOI and discussed the Air Force's concern over the UFO problem with Lt Col John P. Spaulding and Mrs. Sarah Hunt (4a 120 - 79079).\n\n2. SAFOI gets many inquiries concerning the UFO problem. Last year they received and answered more than 3300 letters on UFOs including many from the President and the Congress. The problem essentially boils down to one that is typified by the question, \"When did you stop beating your wife?\" Any answer the Air Force gives tends to incriminate the Air Force as a concealer of information and at the very least detracts from its image. SAFOI has to cope with this public relations problem and wants something done about it. Therefore they have turned to the SAB.\n\n3. The last time that a group of scientists looked into the scientific aspects of the UFO problem was in 1953. Attachment 1 is a copy of that report.\n\n4. Basically the question is this--is there any such thing as a UFO? When the Air Force receives information on a UFO sighting they have several options open to them. First, they can categorically deny that there is anything such as a UFO. Second, they can cast reflections on the sighters mental ability or claim that he is trying to perpetrate a hoax on the country. Third, they can investigate the sighting as well as possible with their limited resources (3 men at FTD) and admit that the AF is looking into the matter. Obviously, options one and two offer no solution. Thus, SAFOI has to rely on option three, and go through the normal sighting investigation (Attachment 2) that leads to admissions that there are a certain percentage of UFO sightings that the Air Force cannot identify. This approach keeps people like Fuller (see Saturday Review article, Attachment 3) and Major Kehoe in business because it provides them with continuous ammunition and the AF has no rejoiner."} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5. SAFOI wants some prestigious scientific group to look at the UFO problem in depth and come up with a position that will help get the Air Force off the hook. SAFOI expects to gain a report that will permit them to stand before the most renown critics and say that the AF position on UFOs is sound or action is being taken to make it sound.\n\n6. The questions that SAFOI wants answered are typically as follows:\n\na. Is Project Blue Book adequate?\n\nb. Is there or is there not scientific evidence that UFOs exist?\n\nc. What can be done to make the Air Force position credible?\n\n7. SAFOI claims, and rightly so, that they cannot get to the heart of the public relations problem until they get some scientific evidence upon which to base their opinion. For this reason they are very emphatic that they do not want a \"for motherhood and against sin\" type of committee report. As far as SAFOI is concerned the problem is critical.\n\n8. As evidenced by the Fuller article in the Saturday Review (which is a prestigious news media that is read by highly influential people both in and out of government), the level of criticism of the Air Force is getting on a higher and higher plane. The recent Wall Street Journal article is another example of Air Force criticism appearing in a high-class news media. SAFOI clearly defined the criticality of the problem when they concluded by saying that none of the current Air Force problems, such as sonic boom, supersonic transport, and integration, etc., have created the poor public image for the Air Force that the UFO problem does.\n\nHAROLD A. STEINER, Major, USAF\nAssistant Secretary\nUSAF Scientific Advisory Board\n\n3 Atch\n1. UFO Report\n2. FTD Form 164\n3. Sat Review Article"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nREPORT OF MEETINGS OF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL\n\nON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nJanuary 14 - 18, 1953\n\n[handwritten: Do Not Destroy. Return to col Steiner]\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR. 5200.10\n\nSECRET\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nUSAF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD\nOFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE & CHIEF OF STAFF\n\nDATE 3 May 67\n\nMEMO FOR: Hal-\n\nThis is an interesting paper! Much of what is recommended is still applicable today, so one gets the impression that ATIC or FTD did not heed the warning of increasing public concern for UFOs fanned by periodic stimulation by publicity-seeking individuals. Little progress has been made since this report in dispelling the public fears of UFOs. In fact most of the recent publicity, I feel, has done just the opposite by \"fanning the smoldering flames.\"\n\nI think a strong point in this question is the fact that in all the years that UFO's have been in the public scene there never has been any \"hardware\" evidence acquired. Unless the \"little green men\" are really super intellectuals engineering wise I feel that one of their craft"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"would have experienced some sort\nof difficulty causing an abort\nor crash, or something.\nAlso, we hear mostly - if not wholly-\nof sightings only in the U.S. or No. American\ncontinent. Do you know what the\nforeign \"sighting\" data looks like.\nWas this considered by or briefed to the\nO'Brien committee.\n\nBB."} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nUSAF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD\nOFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE & CHIEF OF STAFF\nDATE 1 May 62\nMEMO FOR: Col Burger\nAttached is an\nunclassified version of\nthe report of the CIA sponsored\nScientific Advisory Panel\non UFO's. Only the\nnames have been changed\nto protect the guilty\nIdaf\nReturn"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET UNCLASSIFIED\nINDEX\nPAGE\nPurpose 1\nPart I: History of Meetings of Panel 1.\nPart II: Comments and Suggestions of Panel 7.\nGeneral 7\nOn Lack of Danger 8\nAir Force Reporting System 9\nArtifacts of Extraterrestrial Origin 10\nTremonton, Utah, Sighting 11\nPotential Related Dangers 15\nGeographic Locations of Unexplained Sightings 15\nInstrumentation to Obtain Data 16\nRadar Problem of Mutual Interference 18\nUnexplained Cosmic Ray Phenomena 19\nEducational Program 19\nUnofficial Investigating Groups 23\nIncrease in Number of Sightings 24\nReport of Panel Tab A\nList of Personnel Concerned with Meetings Tab B\nList of Documentary Evidence Presented Tab C\nSECRET UNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET UNCLASSIFIED\n16 February 1953\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nFROM :\nSUBJECT : Report of Meetings of the Scientific Advisory Panel on Unidentified Flying Objects, January 14 - 18, 1953\nPURPOSE\nThe purpose of this memorandum is to present:\na. A brief history of the meetings of the Advisory Panel On Unidentified Flying Objects (Part I),\nb. An unofficial supplement to the official Panel Report: setting forth comments and suggestions of the Panel Members which they believed were inappropriate for inclusion in the formal report (Part II).\nPART I: HISTORY OF MEETINGS\nGENERAL\nAfter consideration of the subject of \"unidentified flying objects\" at the 4 December meeting of the the following action was agreed:\n\"The will:\na. Enlist the services of selected scientists to review and appraise the available evidence in the light of pertinent scientific theories....\"\nFollowing the delegation of this action to the and preliminary investigation,\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET UNCLASSIFIED\nan Advisory Panel of selected scientists was assembled. In cooperation with the Air Technical Intelligence Center, case histories of reported sightings and related material were made available for their study and consideration.\nPresent at the initial meeting (0930 Wednesday, 14 January) were: Dr. H. P. Robertson, Dr. [REDACTED] Dr. Thornton Page, Dr. Samuel A. Goudsmit, [REDACTED], and the writer. Panel Member, Dr. Lloyd V. Berkner, was absent until Friday afternoon. Messrs. [REDACTED] were present throughout the sessions to familiarize themselves with the subject, represent the substantive interest of their Divisions, and assist in administrative support of the meetings. (A list of personnel concerned with the meetings is given in Tab A.\nWEDNESDAY MORNING\nThe [REDACTED] opened the meeting, reviewing CIA interest in the subject and action taken. This review included the mention of the Study Group of August 1952 culminating in the briefing of the [REDACTED] the ATIC November 21 briefing, 4 December [REDACTED] consideration, visit to ATIC [REDACTED] Robertson and [REDACTED], and [REDACTED] concern over potential dangers to national security indirectly related to these sightings. Mr. [REDACTED] enumerated these potential dangers. Following this introduction, Dr. [REDACTED] turned the meeting over to\n- 2 -\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dr. Robertson as Chairman of the Panel. Dr. Robertson enumerated the evidence available and requested consideration of specific reports and letters be taken by certain individuals present (Tab B). For example, case histories involving radar or radar and visual sightings were selected for Dr. [REDACTED] while reports of Green Fireball phenomena, nocturnal lights, and suggested programs of investigation were routed to Dr. Page. Following these remarks, the motion pictures of the sightings at Tremonton, Utah (2 July 1952) and Great Falls, Montana (15 August 1950) were shown. The meeting adjourned at 1200.\n\nWEDNESDAY AFTERNOON\n\nThe second meeting of the Panel opened at 1400. Lt. [REDACTED] USN, and Mr. [REDACTED] of the USN Photo Interpretation Laboratory, Anacostia, presented the results of their analyses of the films mentioned above. This analysis evoked considerable discussion as elaborated upon below. Besides Panel members and CIA personnel, Capt. E. J. Ruppelt, Dr. [REDACTED] [REDACTED] (2-a-2), and Dr. [REDACTED] were present.\n\nFollowing the Photo Interpretation Lab presentation, Mr. E. J. Ruppelt spoke for about 40 minutes on ATIC methods of handling and evaluating reports of sightings and their efforts to improve the quality of reports. The meeting was adjourned at 1715.\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THURSDAY MORNING\n\nThe third and fourth meetings of the Panel were held Thursday, 15 January, commencing at 0900 with a two-hour break for luncheon. Besides Panel members and CIA personnel, Mr. Ruppelt and Dr. [REDACTED] were present for both sessions. In the morning, Mr. Ruppelt continued his briefing on ATIC collection and analysis procedures. The Project STORK support at [REDACTED] was described by Dr. [REDACTED] A number of case histories were discussed in detail and a motion picture film of seagulls was shown. A two hour break for lunch was taken at 1200.\n\nTHURSDAY AFTERNOON\n\nAt 1400 hours [REDACTED] gave a 40-minute briefing of Project TWINKLE, the investigatory project conducted by the Air Force Meteorological Research Center at Cambridge, Mass. In this briefing he pointed out the many problems of setting up and manning 24-hour instrumentation watches of patrol cameras searching for sightings of U.F.O.'s.\n\nAt 1615 [REDACTED] joined the meeting with [REDACTED] expressed his support of the Panel's efforts and stated three personal opinions:\n\na. That greater use of Air Force intelligence officers in the field (for follow-up investigation) appeared desirable. but that they required thorough briefing.\n\n- 4 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"b. That vigorous effort should be made to declassify as many of the reports as possible.\n\nc. That some increase in the ATIC section devoted to U.F.O. analysis was indicated.\n\nThis meeting was adjourned at 1700.\n\nFRIDAY MORNING\n\nThe fifth session of the Panel convened at 0900 with the same personnel present as enumerated for Thursday (with the exception of [REDACTED]\n\nFrom 0900 - 1000 there was general discussion and study of reference material. Also, [REDACTED] read a prepared paper making certain observations and conclusions. At 1000 [REDACTED] gave a briefing on his fifteen months experience in Washington as Project Officer for U.F.O.'s and his personal conclusions. There was considerable discussion of individual case histories of sightings to which he referred. Following [REDACTED] presentation, a number of additional case histories were examined and discussed with Messrs. [REDACTED] Ruppelt, and [REDACTED] The meeting adjourned at 1200 for luncheon.\n\nFRIDAY AFTERNOON\n\nThis session opened at 1400. Besides Panel members and CIA personnel, Dr. [REDACTED] was present. Dr. Lloyd V. Berkner, as Panel Member, was present at this meeting for the first time. Progress of the meetings was reviewed by the Panel Chairman and tentative\n\n- 5 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"conclusions reached. A general discussion followed and tentative recommendations considered. It was agreed that the Chairman should draft a report of the Panel to [REDACTED] that evening for review by the Panel the next morning. The meeting adjourned at 1715.\n\nSATURDAY MORNING\n\nAt 0945 the Chairman opened the seventh session and submitted a rough draft of the Panel Report to the members. This draft had been reviewed and approved earlier by Dr. Berkner. The next two and one-half hours were consumed in discussion and revision of the draft. At 1100 the [REDACTED] joined the meeting and reported that he had shown and discussed a copy of the initial rough draft to the Director of Intelligence, USAF, whose reaction was favorable. At 1200 the meeting was adjourned.\n\nSATURDAY AFTERNOON\n\nAt 1400 the eighth and final meeting of the Panel was opened. Discussion and rewording of certain sentences of the Report occupied the first hours. (A copy of the final report is appended as Tab C.) This was followed by a review of work accomplished by the Panel and restatement of individual Panel Member's opinions and suggestions on details that were felt inappropriate for inclusion in the formal report. It was agreed that the writer would incorporate these comments in an internal report to the [REDACTED] The material below represents this information.\n\n- 6 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PART II: COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS OF PANEL\n\nGENERAL\n\nThe Panel Members were impressed (as have been others, including [REDACTED] personnel) in the lack of sound data in the great majority of case histories; also, in the lack of speedy follow-up due primarily to the modest size and limited facilities of the ATIC section concerned. Among the case histories of significant sightings discussed in detail were the following:\n\nBellefontaine, Ohio (1 August 1952); Tremonton, Utah (2 July 1952); Great Falls, Montana (15 August 1950); Yaak, Montana (1 September 1952); Washington, D. C. area (19 July 1952); and Haneda A.F.B., Japan (5 August 1952), Port Huron, Michigan (29 July 1952); and Presque Isle, Maine (10 October 1952).\n\nAfter review and discussion of these cases (and about 15 others, in less detail), the Panel concluded that reasonable explanations could be suggested for most sightings and \"by deduction and scientific method it could be induced (given additional data) that other cases might be explained in a similar manner\". The Panel pointed out that because of the brevity of some sightings (e.g. 2-3 seconds) and the inability of the witnesses to express themselves clearly (semantics) that conclusive explanations could not be expected for every case reported. Furthermore, it was considered that, normally, it would be a great waste of effort to try to solve most of the sightings, unless such action would benefit a training and educational program (see below). The writings of Charles Fort were referenced to show"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"that \"strange things in the sky\" had been recorded for hundreds of\nyears. It appeared obvious that there was no single explanation\nfor a majority of the things seen. The presence of radar and astro-\nnomical specialists on the Panel proved of value at once in their\nconfident recognition of phenomena related to their fields. It was\napparent that specialists in such additional fields as psychology,\nmeteorology, aerodynamics, ornithology and military air operations\nwould extend the ability of the Panel to recognize many more cate-\ngories of little-known phenomena.\nON LACK OF DANGER\nThe Panel concluded unanimously that there was no evidence of\na direct threat to national security in the objects sighted.\nInstances of \"Foo Fighters\" were cited. These were unexplained\nphenomena sighted by aircraft pilots during World War II in both\nEuropean and Far East theaters of operation wherein \"balls of light\"\nwould fly near or with the aircraft and maneuver rapidly. They were\nbelieved to be electrostatic (similar to St. Elmo's fire) or electro-\nmagnetic phenomena or possibly light reflections from ice crystals\nin the air, but their exact cause or nature was never defined. Both\nRobertson and [REDACTED] had been concerned in the investigation of\nthese phenomena, but David T. Griggs (Professor of Geophysics at\nthe University of California at Los Angeles) is believed to have\nbeen the most knowledgeable person on this subject. If the term\n\"flying saucers\" had been popular in 1943 - 1945, these objects would\n- 8 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"have been so labeled. It was interesting that in at least two\ncases reviewed that the object sighted was categorized by Robertson\nand [REDACTED] as probably \"Foo Fighters\", to date unexplained but not\ndangerous; they were not happy thus to dismiss the sightings by\ncalling them names. It was their feeling that these phenomena are\nnot beyond the domain of present knowledge of physical sciences, however.\nAIR FORCE REPORTING SYSTEM\nIt was the Panel's opinion that some of the Air Force concern\nover U.F.O.'s (notwithstanding Air Defense Command anxiety over fast\nradar tracks) was probably caused by public pressure. The result\ntoday is that the Air Force has instituted a fine channel for\nreceiving reports of nearly anything anyone sees in the sky and\nfails to understand. This has been particularly encouraged in popu-\nlar articles on this and other subjects, such as space travel and\nscience fiction. The result is the mass receipt of low-grade reports\nwhich tend to overload channels of communication with material quite\nirrelevant to hostile objects that might some day appear. The Panel\nagreed generally that this mass of poor-quality reports containing\nlittle, if any, scientific data was of no value. Quite the opposite,\nit was possibly dangerous in having a military service foster public\nconcern in \"nocturnal meandering lights\". The implication being,\nsince the interested agency was military, that these objects were\nor might be potential direct threats to national security. Accord-\ningly, the need for deemphasization made itself apparent. Comments\non a possible educational program are enumerated below.\n- 9 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"It was the opinion of Dr. Robertson that the \"saucer\" problem\nhad been found to be different in nature from the detection and\ninvestigation of German V-1 and V-2 guided missiles prior to their\noperational use in World War II. In this 1943-1944 intelligence\noperation (CROSSBOW), there was excellent intelligence and by June\n1944 there was material evidence of the existence of \"hardware\"\nobtained from crashed vehicles in Sweden. This evidence gave the\ninvestigating team a basis upon which to operate. The absence of any\n\"hardware\" resulting from unexplained U.F.O. sightings lends a \"will-\nof-the wisp\" nature to the ATIC problem. The results of their investi-\ngation, to date, strongly indicate that no evidence of hostile act\nor danger exists. Furthermore, the current reporting system would\nhave little value in the case of detection of enemy attack by conven-\ntional aircraft or guided missiles; under such conditions \"hardware\"\nwould be available almost at once.\nARTIFACTS OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL ORIGIN\nIt was interesting to note that none of the members of the\nPanel were loath to accept that this earth might be visited by extra-\nterrestrial intelligent beings of some sort, some day. What they did\nnot find was any evidence that related the objects sighted to space\ntravelers. Mr. [REDACTED], in his presentation, showed how he had elim-\ninated each of the known and probable causes of sightings leaving him\n\"extra-terrestrial\" as the only one remaining in many cases. [REDACTED]'s\nbackground as an aeronautical engineer and technical intelligence\n- 10 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"officer (Project Officer, BLUEBOOK for 15 months) could not be\nslighted. However, the Panel could not accept any of the cases\ncited by him because they were raw, unevaluated reports.\nTerrestrial explanations of the sightings were suggested in some\ncases and in others the time of sighting was so short as to cause\nsuspicion of visual impressions. It was noted by Dr. Goudsmit and\nothers that extraterrestrial artifacts, if they did exist, are no\ncause for alarm; rather, they are in the realm of natural phenomena\nsubject to scientific study, just as cosmic rays were at the time\nof their discovery 20 to 30 years ago. This was an attitude in\nwhich Dr. Robertson did not concur, as he felt that such artifacts\nwould be of immediate and great concern not only to the U. S. but\nto all countries. (Nothing like a common threat to unite peoples!)\nDr. Page noted that present astronomical knowledge of the solar\nsystem makes the existence of intelligent beings (as we know the\nterm) elsewhere than on the earth extremely unlikely, and the\nconcentration of their attention by any controllable means confined\nto any one continent of the earth quite preposterous.\nTREMONTON, UTAH, SIGHTING\nThis case was considered significant because of the excellent\ndocumentary evidence in the form of Kodachrome motion picture films\n(about 1600 frames). The Panel studied these films, the case history,\nATIC's interpretation, and received a briefing by representatives of\nthe USN Photo Interpretation Laboratory on their analysis of the\nfilm. This team had expended (at Air Force request) approximately\n- 11 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"1000 man-hours of professional and sub-professional time in the\npreparation of graph plots of individual frames of the film, show-\ning apparent and relative motion of objects and variation in their\nlight intensity. It was the opinion of the P.I.L. representatives\nthat the objects sighted were not birds, balloons or aircraft,\nwere \"not reflections because there was no blinking while passing\nthrough 60° of arc\" and were, therefore, \"self-luminous\". Plots of\nmotion and variation in light intensity of the objects were dis-\nplayed. While the Panel Members were impressed by the evident\nenthusiasm, industry and extent of effort of the P.I.L. team, they\ncould not accept the conclusions reached. Some of the reasons for\nthis were as follows:\na. A semi-spherical object can readily produce a reflection\nof sunlight without \"blinking\" through 60° of arc travel.\nb. Although no data was available on the \"albedo\" of birds or\npolyethylene balloons in bright sunlight, the apparent\nmotions, sizes and brightnesses of the objects were\nconsidered strongly to suggest birds, particularly after\nthe Panel viewed a short film showing high reflectivity\nof seagulls in bright sunlight.\nc. P.I.L. description of the objects sighted as \"circular,\nbluish-white\" in color would be expected in cases of\nspecular reflections of sunlight from convex surfaces where\nthe brilliance of the reflection would obscure other portions\nof the object.\n- 12 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"d. Objects in the Great Falls case were believed to have probably been aircraft, and the bright lights such reflections.\ne. There was no valid reason for the attempt to relate the objects in the Tremonton sighting to those in the Great Falls sighting. This may have been due to misunderstanding in their directive. The objects in the Great Falls sighting are strongly suspected of being reflections of aircraft known to have been in the area.\nf. The intensity change in the Tremonton lights was too great for acceptance of the P.I.L. hypothesis that the apparent motion and changing intensity of the lights indicated extremely high speed in small orbital paths.\ng. Apparent lack of guidance of investigators by those familiar with U.F.O. reports and explanations.\nh. Analysis of light intensity of objects made from duplicate rather than original film. The original film was noted to have a much lighter background (affecting relative brightness of object) and the objects appeared much less bright.\ni. Method of obtaining data of light intensity appeared faulty because of unsuitability of equipment and questionable assumptions in making averages of readings.\nj. No data had been obtained on the sensitivity of Kodachrome film to light of various intensities using the same camera type at the same lens openings.\n- 13 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"k. Hand \"jitter\" frequencies (obtainable from early part of Tremonton film) were not removed from the plots of the \"single pass plots\" at the end of the film.\nThe Panel believed strongly that the data available on this sighting was sufficient for positive identification if further data is obtained by photographing polyethylene \"pillow\" balloons released near the site under similar weather conditions, checking bird flight and reflection characteristics with competent ornithologists and calculating apparent \"G\" forces acting upon objects from their apparent tracks. It was concluded that the results of such tests would probably lead to creditable explanations of value in an educational or training program. However, the Panel noted that the cost in technical manpower effort required to follow up and explain every one of the thousand or more reports received through channels each year (1,900 in 1952) could not be justified. It was felt that there will always be sightings, for which complete data is lacking, that can only be explained with disproportionate effort and with a long time delay, if at all. The long delay in explaining a sighting tends to eliminate any intelligence value. The educational or training program should have as a major purpose the elimination of popular feeling that every sighting, no matter how poor the data, must be explained in detail. Attention should be directed to the requirement among scientists that a new phenomena, to be accepted, must be completely and convincingly documented. In other words, the burden of proof is on the sighter, not the explainer.\n- 14 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"POTENTIAL RELATED DANGERS\nThe Panel Members were in agreement with [REDACTED] opinion that, although evidence of any direct threat from these sightings was wholly lacking, related dangers might well exist resulting from:\na. Misidentification of actual enemy artifacts by defense personnel.\nb. Overloading of emergency reporting channels with \"false\" information (\"noise to signal ratio\" analogy - Berkner).\nc. Subjectivity of public to mass hysteria and greater vulnerability to possible enemy psychological warfare.\nAlthough not the concern of CIA, the first two of these problems may seriously affect the Air Defense intelligence system, and should be studied by experts, possibly under ADC. If U.F.O.'s become discredited in a reaction to the \"flying saucer\" scare, or if reporting channels are saturated with false and poorly documented reports, our capability of detecting hostile activity will be reduced.\nDr. Page noted that more competent screening or filtering of reported sightings at or near the source is required, and that this can best be accomplished by an educational program.\nGEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS OF UNEXPLAINED SIGHTINGS\nThe map prepared by ATIC showing geographic locations of officially reported unexplained sightings (1952 only) was examined by the Panel. This map showed clusters in certain strategic areas such as Los Alamos. This might be explained on the basis of 24-hour watchful guard and\n- 15 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"awareness of security measures near such locations. On the other hand, there had been no sightings in the vicinity of sensitive related AE establishments while there were occasionally multiple cases of unexplained sightings in non-strategic areas. Furthermore, there appeared to be no logical relationship to population centers. The Panel could find no ready explanation for these clusters. It was noted, however, that if terrestrial artifacts were to be observed it would be likely that they would be seen first near foreign areas rather than central U.S.\nINSTRUMENTATION TO OBTAIN DATA\nThe Panel was of the opinion that the present ATIC program to place 100 inexpensive 35 mm. stereo cameras in the hands of various airport control tower operators would probably produce little valuable data related to U.F.O.'s. However, it was recognized that such action would tend to allay public concern in the subject until an educational program had taken effect. It was believed that procurement of these cameras was partly the result of public pressure in July 1952. With the poor results of the year-long Project TWINKLE program of 24-hours instrumentation watch (two frames of film showing nothing distinguishable), a widespread program of skywatching would not be expected to yield much direct data of value.\nThere was considerable discussion of a possible \"sky patrol\" by amateur astronomers [REDACTED] and by wide-angle cameras (Page). Dr. Page and Dr. Robertson pointed out that at present a considerable fraction\n- 16 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of the sky is now--and has been for many years-under surveillance every clear night in several meteor and aurora observing programs as well as sky mapping programs at the various locations listed below. Although the attention of these astronomers is largely directed toward identified rather than unidentified objects, no case of any striking unidentified object is known to Dr. Page or Dr. [REDACTED] Such an object would most certainly be reported if found on patrol plates.\nA case was cited where an astronomer refused to interrupt his exposure in order to photograph an alleged sighting in a different part of the sky. This led Dr. [REDACTED] to say that, if a program of watching could be an adjunct of planned astronomical programs, little cost would be involved and that the trained astronomical personnel might photograph a sighting of an unidentified object.\nThe location of some of these programs and their directors are believed to be:\na. Harvard University, Cambridge and New Mexico (meteor patrol)--Whipple.\nb. Yerkes Observatory, University of Chicago and Fort Davis, Texas (several programs)--Meinel (auroras), Kuiper (asteroids), Morgan (wide angle camera).\nc. University of Alaska, Fairbanks (aurorae)--Elvey\nd. Dominion Observatory, Ottawa (meteors)--Millman\ne. Palomar Observatory, California (sky map)--Minkowski\nf. Lick Observatory, California (sky map)--Shane\n- 17 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"It was agreed by the Panel that no government-sponsored program\nof optical nation-wide sky patrol is worthwhile at the present time,\nand that the encouragement of amateur astronomers to undertake such\na program might have the adverse effect of over-emphasizing \"flying\nsaucer\" stories in the public mind. However, the issue of radar scope\ncameras for recording peculiar radar echoes would serve several pur-\nposes, including the better understanding of radar interference as\nwell as identification of U.F.O.'s.\nRADAR PROBLEM OF MUTUAL INTERFERENCE\nThis characteristic problem of radar operation wherein the pulse\nsignal (of approximately the same frequency) from station A may be\npicked up on the screen of station B and show as a high-speed track\nor series of dots was recognized to have probably caused a number of\nU.F.O. reports. This problem was underlined by information received\nindicating ADC concern in solving this problem of signal identification\nbefore service use of very high-speed aircraft or guided missiles\n(1955-1956). Dr. Berkner believed that one answer to this problem\nwas the use of a \"doppler filter\" in the receiving circuit. Dr. [REDACTED]\nsuggested that the problem might be better solved by the use of a\n\"controlled jitter\" wherein the operator receiving \"very fast tracks\"\n(on the order of 1000- 10,000 m.p.h.) would operate a circuit which\nwould alter slightly his station's pulse frequency rate. If the signal\nreceived on the screen had been caused by mutual interference with\nanother station, the track would now show itself at a different distance\n\n- 18 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"from the center of the screen, if it still appeared at all. Dr. [REDACTED]\nfelt such a technical solution was simpler and would cost much less than\na \"doppler filter\".\nUNEXPLAINED COSMIC RAY PHENOMENA\nTwo reported cases were examined: one at Palomar Mountain, California,\nin October 1949, when cosmic ray counters went \"off scale for a few seconds\",\napparently while a \"V\" of flying saucers was observed visually; and two, a\nseries of observations by the \"Los Alamos Bird Watchers Association\" from\nAugust 1950 to January 1951, when cosmic ray coincidence counters behaved\nqueerly. Circuit diagrams and records were available for the latter, and\nDr. [REDACTED] was able quickly to point out that the recorded data were\nundoubtedly due to instrumental effects that would have been recognized\nas such by more experienced observers.\nThe implication that radioactive effects were correlated with\nunidentified flying objects in these two cases was, therefore, rejected\nby the Panel.\nEDUCATIONAL PROGRAM\nThe Panel's concept of a broad educational program integrating\nefforts of all concerned agencies was that it should have two major\naims: training and \"debunking\".\nThe training aim would result in proper recognition of unusually\nilluminated objects (e.g., balloons, aircraft reflections) as well as\nnatural phenomena (meteors, fireballs, mirages, noctilucent clouds).\nBoth visual and radar recognition are concerned. There would be many\n\n- 19 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"levels in such education from enlisted personnel to command and research\npersonnel. Relative emphasis and degree of explanation of different\nprograms would correspond to the categories of duty (e.g., radar operators;\npilots; control tower operators; Ground Observer Corps personnel; and\nofficers and enlisted men in other categories.) This training should\nresult in a marked reduction in reports caused by misidentification\nand resultant confusion.\nThe \"debunking\" aim would result in reduction in public interest\nin \"flying saucers\" which today evokes a strong psychological reaction.\nThis education could be accomplished by mass media such as television,\nmotion pictures, and popular articles. Basis of such education would\nbe actual case histories which had been puzzling at first but later\nexplained. As in the case of conjuring tricks, there is much less\nstimulation if the \"secret\" is known. Such a program should tend to\nreduce the current gullibility of the public and consequently their\nsusceptibility to clever hostile propaganda. The Panel noted that the\ngeneral absence of Russian propaganda based on a subject with so many\nobvious possibilities for exploitation might indicate a possible Russian\nofficial policy.\nMembers of the Panel had various suggestions related to the plan-\nning of such an educational program. It was felt strongly that\npsychologists familiar with mass psychology should advise on the nature\nand extent of the program. In this connection, Dr. Hadley Cantril\n(Princeton University) was suggested. Cantril authored \"Invasion from\n\n- 20 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Mars,\" (a study in the psychology of panic, written about the famous\nOrson Welles radio broadcast in 1938) and has since performed advanced\nlaboratory studies in the field of perception. The names of Don Marquis\n(University of Michigan) and Leo Rosten were mentioned as possibly\nsuitable as consultant psychologists. Also, someone familiar with\nmass communications techniques, perhaps an advertising expert, would be\nhelpful. Arthur Godfrey was mentioned as possibly a valuable channel\nof communication reaching a mass audience of certain levels. Dr. Berkner\nsuggested the U. S. Navy (ONR) Special Devices Center, Sands Point, L. I.,\nas a potentially valuable organization to assist in such an educational\nprogram. The teaching techniques used by this agency for aircraft\nidentification during the past war was cited as an example of a similar\neducational task. The Jam Handy Co. which made World War II training\nfilms (motion picture and slide strips) was also suggested, as well as\nWalt Disney, Inc. animated cartoons. Dr. [REDACTED] suggested that the\namateur astronomers in the U. S. might be a potential source of enthusi-\nastic talent \"to spread the gospel\". It was believed that business\nclubs, high schools, colleges, and television stations would all be\npleased to cooperate in the showing of documentary type motion pictures\nif prepared in an interesting manner. The use of true cases showing\nfirst the \"mystery\" and then the \"explanation\" would be forceful.\nTo plan and execute such a program, the Panel believed was no\nmean task. The current investigatory group at ATIC would, of necessity,\nhave to be closely integrated for support with respect to not only the\n\n- 21 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"historical cases but the current ones. Recent cases are probably much\nmore susceptible to explanation than older ones; first, because of\nATIC's experience and, secondly, their knowledge of most plausible\nexplanations. The Panel believed that some expansion of the ATIC effort\nwould certainly be required to support such a program. It was believed\ninappropriate to state exactly how large a Table of Organization would\nbe required. Captain Ruppelt of ATIC unofficially proposed, for purposes\nof analyzing and evaluating reports:\na. An analysts' panel of four officers\nb. Four officer investigators\nc. A briefing officer\nd. An ADC liaison officer\ne. A weather and balloon data officer\nf. An astronomical consultant\ng. A group Leader, with administrative assistant, file clerks and\n stenographers.\nThis proposal met with generally favorable comment. The Panel\nbelieved that, with ATIC's support, the educational program of \"train-\ning and debunking\" outlined above might be required for a minimum of\none and one-half to two years. At the end of this time, the dangers\nrelated to \"flying saucers\" should have been greatly reduced if not\neliminated. Cooperation from other military services and agencies\nconcerned (e.g., Federal Civil Defense Administration) would be a\nnecessity. In investigating significant cases (such as the Trementon,\nUtah, sighting), controlled experiments might be required. An example\n\n- 22 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"would be the photographing of \"pillow balloons\" at different distances\nunder similar weather conditions at the site.\n\n\tThe help of one or two psychologists and writers and a subcontractor\nto produce training films would be necessary in addition. The Panel\nconsidered that ATIC's efforts, temporarily expanded as necessary,\ncould be most useful in implementing any action taken as a result of\nits recommendations. Experience and records in ATIC would be of value\nin both the public educational and service training program envisaged.\nDr. Robertson at least was of the opinion that after public gullibility\nlessened and the service organizations, such as ADC, had been trained\nto sift out the more readily explained spurious sightings, there would\nstill be a role for a very modest-sized ATIC section to cope with the\nresiduum of items of possible scientific intelligence value. This\nsection should concentrate on energetically following up (perhaps on\nthe advice of qualified Air Force Scientific Advisory Board members)\nthose cases which seemed to indicate the evidence of unconventional\nenemy artifacts. Reports of such artifacts would be expected to\narise mainly from Western outposts in far closer proximity to the\nIron Curtain than Lubbock, Texas!\nUNOFFICIAL INVESTIGATING GROUPS\n\n\tThe Panel took cognizance of the existence of such groups as the\n\"Civilian Flying Saucer Investigators\" (Los Angeles) and the \"Aerial\nPhenomena Research Organization (Wisconsin)\". It was believed that\nsuch organizations should be watched because of their potentially\n\n- 23 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"great influence on mass thinking if widespread sightings should occur.\nThe apparent irresponsibility and the possible use of such groups\nfor subversive purposes should be kept in mind.\nINCREASE IN NUMBER OF SIGHTINGS\n\n\tThe consensus of the Panel was, based upon the history of the\nsubject, that the number of sightings could be reasonably expected\nto increase again this summer.\n\n- 24 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF THE SCIENTIFIC PANEL\nON\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nTAB A\n\n1. Pursuant to the request [REDACTED], the undersigned Panel of Scientific Consultants has met to evaluate any possible threat to national security posed by Unidentified Flying Objects (\"Flying Saucers\"), and to make recommendations thereon. The Panel has received the evidence as presented by cognizant intelligence agencies, primarily the Air Technical Intelligence Center, and has reviewed a selection of the best documented incidents.\n2. As a result of its considerations, the Panel concludes:\na. That the evidence presented on Unidentified Flying Objects shows no indication that these phenomena constitute a direct physical threat to national security.\nWe firmly believe that there is no residuum of cases which indicates phenomena which are attributable to foreign artifacts capable of hostile acts, and that there is no evidence that the phenomena indicates a need for the revision of current scientific concepts.\n3. The Panel further concludes:\na. That the continued emphasis on the reporting of these phenomena does, in these parlous times, result in a threat to the orderly functioning of the protective organs of the body politic.\nWe cite as examples the clogging of channels of communication by irrelevant reports, the danger of being led by continued false alarms to ignore real"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"indications of hostile action, and the cultivation of a morbid national psychology in which skillful hostile propaganda could induce hysterical behavior and harmful distrust of duly constituted authority.\n4. In order most effectively to strengthen the national facilities for the timely recognition and the appropriate handling of true indications of hostile action, and to minimize the concomitent dangers alluded to above, the Panel recommends:\na. That the national security agencies take immediate steps to strip the Unidentified Flying Objects of the special status they have been given and the aura of mystery they have unfortunately acquired;\nb. That the national security agencies institute policies on intelligence, training, and public education designed to prepare the material defenses and the morale of the country to recognize most promptly and to react most effectively to true indications of hostile intent or action.\nWe suggest that these aims may be achieved by an integrated program designed to reassure the public of the total lack of evidence of inimical forces behind the phenomena, to train personnel to recognize and reject false indications quickly and effectively, and to strengthen regular channels for the evaluation of and prompt reaction to true indications of hostile measures.\n/s/ H. P. Robertson, Chairman\nCalifornia Institute of Technology\n/s/ Luis W. Alvarez\nUniversity of California\n/s/ Lloyd V. Berkner\nAssociated Universities, Inc.\n/s/ S. A. Goudsmit\nBrookhaven National Laboratories\n/s/ Thornton Page\nJohns Hopkins University"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL ON\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n14 - 17 January 1953\nTAB B\n\nEVIDENCE PRESENTED\n1. Seventy-five case histories of sightings 1951 - 1952 (selected by ATIC as those best documented).\n2. ATIC Status and Progress Reports of Project GRUDGE and Project BLUE BOOK (code names for ATIC study of subject).\n3. Progress Reports of Project STORK [REDACTED] contract work supporting ATIC).\n4. Summary Report of Sightings at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico.\n5. Report of USAF Research Center, Cambridge, Mass., Investigation of \"Green Fireball\" Phenomena (Project TWINKLE).\n6. Outline of Investigation of U.F.O.'s Proposed by Kirtland Air Force Base (Project POUNCE).\n7. Motion Picture Films of sightings at Tremonton, Utah, 2 July 1952 and Great Falls, Montana, August 1950.\n8. Summary Report of 89 selected cases of sightings of various categories (Formations, Blinking Lights, Hovering, etc.).\n9. Draft of manuel: \"How to Make a FLYOBRPT\", prepared at ATIC.\n10. Chart Showing Plot of Geographic Location of Unexplained Sightings in the United States during 1952.\n11. Chart Showing Balloon Launching Sites in the United States.\n12. Charts Showing Selected Actual Balloon Flight Paths and Relation to Reported Sightings.\n13. Charts Showing Frequency of Reports of Sightings, 1948 - 1952.\n14. Charts Showing Categories of Explanations of Sightings.\n15. Kodachrome Transparencies of Polyethylene Film Balloons in Bright Sunlight Showing High Reflectivity."} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"16. Motion picture of seagulls in bright sunlight showing high reflectivity.\n17. Intelligence Reports Relating to U.S.S.R. Interest in U. S. Sightings.\n18. Samples of Official USAF Reporting Forms and Copies of Pertinent\nAir Force, Army and Navy Orders Relating to Subject.\n19. Sample Polyethylene \"Pillow\" Balloon (54 inches square).\n20. \"Variations in Radar Coverage\", JANP 101 (Manual illustrating unusual\noperating characteristics of Service radar).\n21. Miscellaneous official letters and foreign intelligence reports\ndealing with subject.\n22. Copies of popular published works dealing with subject (articles\nin periodicals, newspaper clippings and books).\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF THE SCIENTIFIC PANEL\nON\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n17 January 1953\n\n1. The undersigned Panel of Scientific Consultants has met at the request of the Government to evaluate any possible threat to national security posed by Unidentified Flying Objects (\"Flying Saucers\"), and to make recommendation. The Panel has received the evidence as presented by cognizant Governmental agencies, primarily the United States Air Force, and has reviewed a selection of the best documented incidents.\n\n2. As a result of its considerations, the Panel concludes:\n\nThat the evidence presented on Unidentified Flying Objects shows no indication that these phenomena constitute a direct physical threat to national security.\n\nWe firmly believe that there is no residuum of cases which indicates phenomena which are attributable to foreign artifacts capable of hostile acts, and that there is no evidence that the phenomena indicate a need for the revision of current scientific concepts.\n\n3. In the light of this conclusion, the Panel recommends:\n\nThat the national security agencies take immediate steps to strip the Unidentified Flying Objects of the special status they have been given and the aura of mystery they have unfortunately acquired.\n\nWe suggest that this aim may be achieved by an integrated program designed to reassure the public of the total lack of evidence of inimical forces behind the phenomena.\n\n/s/ Lloyd V. Berkner\nAssociated Universities, Inc.\n\n/s/ H.P. Robertson, Chairman\nCalifornia Institute of Technology /s/ S. A. Goudsmit\nBrookhaven National Laboratories\n\n/s/ Luis W. Alvarez\nUniversity of California /s/ Thornton Page\nJohn Hopkins University"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REFERENCES ON UFO'S\n\nA. PERIODICALS\n\n1. Return of Flying Saucers D. Cohen NATION Sep 15, 1965\n2. Tradewinds; Report of a J.G. Fuller Saturday Oct 2, 1965\nUFO in Exeter, N.H. Review\n3. Tradewinds; Exeter People J.G. Fuller Saturday Jan 22, 1966\nGive Accounts of Review\nObservations\n4. Why I Believe in Flying N. Kantor Popular Jan 1966\nSaucers Science\n5. Fatuus Season: Ann Arbor Time April 1, 1966\nand Hillsdale Sightings\n6. Flying Saucers: Illusions U.S.News Apr 4, 1966\nor Reality? UFO's in\nMichigan\n7. Gullibility Experiment: Time Apr 8, 1966\nSouthern California\n8. Hard Look at Flying U.S.News Apr 11, 1966\nSaucers: Questions and\nAnswers\n9. Marsh Gas in Michigan; America Apr 9, 1966\nlatest UFO incident\n10. Notes and Comment; New Yorker Apr 9, 1966\nSaucer Flap\n11. Outer-Space Ghost Story; J.G. Fuller Look Feb 22, 1966\nExcerpt from Incident Readers\nat Exeter Digest May, 1966\n12. Pi in the Sky; UFO's Newsweek Apr 4, 1966\nMichigan\n13. Tradewinds; USAF Re- J.G. Fuller Sat.Review Apr 16, 1966\nactions to Recent\nSightings\n14. Well-Witnessed Invasion P. O'Neil Life Apr 1, 1966\nby Something; Australia\nto Michigan\n\nDO NOT DESTROY"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"15. Should We Be Serious D. Cohen Science June, 1965\nAbout UFO's? Unidentified Digest\nFlying Object\n16. Ufology: New Report debunks Newsweek Aug 5, 1963\nbelief that UFO's are buzzing\nthe Earth\n17. World of Flying Saucers D.H. Menzel Science Sep, 1963\nL.G. Boyd Digest\n18. Saucers, Pancakes and Such Science Feb 16, 1962\n19. Afternoon with the Space H. Draper Harper Sep, 1960\nPeople\n20. Flying Saucers C.G. Jung Sat.Review Aug 8, 1959\n21. Eye on Space D.Q. Posin Pop.Mech. Feb. 1960\n22. Out-of-the-Blue Believers New Yorker Apr 18, 1959\nCivilian Saucer Intelligence\nof New York\n23. Saucers Explained Science Apr 30, 1960\nNews Letter\n24. Saucery and Flying D. Cort Nation Nov.7, 1959\nSaucers\n25. Theory about Flying D.H.Robey Sat.Review Sep 5, 1959\nSaucers\n26. What's Up There? A.C. Clarke Holiday March, 1959\n27. Cups or Saucers Time Sep 9, 1957\n28. Dinner Time Time Nov 18, 1957\n29. Dr. Jung and the Saucers Time Aug 11, 1958\n30. Flying Saucers and Science American July, 1957\nMercury\n31. If You're Seeing Things U.S.News Nov 15, 1957\nin the Sky\n32. No Evidence for Saucers Science Nov 16, 1957\nNews Letter\n33. Saucer Session for Spaceship Life May 27, 1957\nSighters: Interplanetary\nSpacecraft Convention"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"34. Saucers and Smoking Newsweek Aug. 11, 1958\n35. Seeing Things Newsweek Nov. 18, 1957\n36. Skillie from the Sky Newsweek Nov. 25, 1957\n37. Slim Chance for Saucer Science Feb. 1958\nSightings Digest\n38. Flying Saucer Conspiracy D.E.Kehoe Am. Sep. 1956\nMercury\n39. Flying Saucers, I've Seen Flying Sep. 1955\nH.A. Shanklin\n40. From Saucers Investigation Science Feb. 1957\nGroup Digest\n41. Great Saucer Hunt S.Mandel Sat.Review Aug 6, 1955\nAug 27, 1955\n42. He runs Flying Saucer J.Kobler Sat.Eve. Mar. 10, 1956\nHeadquarters Post\n43. Inside Story of Saucers: E.J.Ruppelt Apr. 1956\nExcerpt from Rpt on UFO's Science\nDigest\n44. Is this the real B. Kocivar Look June 14, 1955\nFlying Saucer\n45. Latest on the Flying Sat.Review Feb 25, 1956\nSaucer\n46. Now you see'em, now Espigador Aug. 1955\nyou don't Americas\n47. Saucer Blue Book Time Nov. 7, 1955\n48. Strange Shapes Seen Life Dec. 5, 1955\nin the Sky\n49. Unidentified Objects Sky & Tel Aug. 1956\n50. AF Looks at Saucers A. Long Science Jan. 1954\nDigest\n51. ATIC Begins Study of Aviation Oct. 19, 1953\nSaucer Reports Week\n52. Biblical Flying Saucers Sc. News Mar. 7, 1953\nLetter"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"53. Canada's Flying Saucer E. Griffin Science Digest Feb. 1954\nLookout Lab\n54. Finds Saucers Exist Science Digest Jan. 1955\nSolely in Imagination\n55. Waiting for the Newsweek Mar 28,'55\nLittle Men\n56. Flying Saucers from D.H.Keyhoe Look Oct 20,'53\nOuter Space; Excerpts Dec 1, '53\n57. Letter from Paris Genet New Yorker Oct 23,'54\n58. Now They're in Italy; Life Nov 29,'54\nAstral Intruders\n59. Of Spots Before the E.F.Mauer Science Dec 19,'52\nEyes Jan 31,'53\n60. On the Flying Saucer Am. Mag. Apr.'54\nTrail\n61. Plenty Going on in the U.S. News Jan.1,1954\nSkys\n62. Report on our Flying C.Knight Colliers Jun 11,'54\nSaucer Balloons\n63. Saucers on Radar? D.H.Menzel Pop. Sci. Apr. 1953\n64. Those Flying Saucers C.C. Wylie Science Jul 31,'53\nDec 11,'53\n65. To Our Readers M. Straight New Republic Oct 26,'53\n66. Flying Saucers and N.J. Crum Library Oct. 1,'54\nBook Selection (Biblio) Feb. 1,'55\n67. AF US Saucers B.S. Lee Aviation Week Jun 23,'52\n68. Another Saucer Mystery L.W. Vinther Flying June, 1951\n69. Blips on the Scopes Time Aug.4,'52\n70. Cause of Flying Saucers Sc NL Aug.9,'52\n71. Flying Saucer Hoax V. Black An.Mercury Oct.'52\nJan.'53\n72. Flying Saucer Hoax R.Gelatt Sat.Review Dec.6,'52\n73. Flying Saucers are Pop. Sci. May, 1952\nOld Stuff"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"74. Flying Saucers: Myth or L. Elliott Coronet Nov. 1952\nMenace? Pic Story\n75. Flying Saucers, New in J.R.Aswell Readers July, 1952\nName Only Digest\n76. Hollywood Builds Flying Popl Sci Nov. 1952\nSaucers\n77. Have we Visitors from H.B. Darrach Life Apr 7, 1952\nSpace R. Ginna Readers July 1952\nDigest\n78. How to Expose Flying R. Steiner Pop.Sci. Jan. 1953\nSaucers; AF's Project\nfor Photographing Them\n79. How to Fly a Saucer Colliers Oct. 4, 1952\n80. How to see Flying Saucers K. Swezey Pop.Sci. Sep. 1952\n81. Korean Saucers Newsweek Mar 3, 1952\n82. Logging Time H.Sheridan Flying Nov. 1952\n83. Magicians Scoff at J.Hulholland Pop.Sci. Sep. 1952\nFlying Saucers\n84. More about out there; G. Heard Sat.Rev. Apr.28,1951\nReview of \"Is Another V. Ley Lit.\nWorld Watching\". Riddle\nof the Flying Saucers\n85. More Saucers over North Time Mar. 3, 1952\nKorea\n86. New Saucer Spidemic New Aug.18, 1952\nRepublic\n87. New Theory of the D.H.Menzel Sci.Digest Sep. 1952\nFlying Saucers\n88. No Visitors from Space Sci NL Aug 30,1952\n89. Of Spots before the E.F. Mauer Science Dec.19,1952\nEyes\n90. Reporter at Large D. Lang New Yorker Sep. 6, 1952\n91. Saucer Reactions E.E.Ginna Life June 9,1952\n92. Saucer Season Newsweek Aug.11,1952"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"93. Saucers? M. Thomson Science Dec 5, 1952\n94. Saucers Elude C.C. Wylie Sci NL Jun 14, 1952\nAstronomers\n95. Saucers Under Newsweek Aug 18, 1952\nGlass\n96. Scientist Diagnoses L.M.Levitt Pop.Mech. Sep. 1952\nthe Flying Saucer\n97. Something in the Time Aug. 11, 1952\nAir\n98. Temperature Sc. NL Dec. 20, 1952\nInversions Cause\nFlying Saucers\n99. Those Flying Saucers Time June 9, 1952\n100. Washington's Blips Life Aug. 4, 1952\n101. What were the Flying Saucers Pop.Sci. Aug. 1951\n102. What's Going on in the Skies US News Aug. 8, 1952\n103. Where are the Flying Saucers\nR.H. Wood Av. Week June 25, 1951\n104. Wind is up in Kansas Time Sep. 8, 1952\n105. Flying Saucer in\nGood News H.J.Taylor Readers July 1950\nDigest\n106. Flying Saucers, C. Fuller Flying July 1950\nFact or Fiction Sep 1950\n107. Belated Explanation Time Feb 26, 1951\non Flying Saucers\n(Balloons)\n108. Flying Saucers Again Scholastic Feb. 21, 1951\n109. Flying Saucers; Av. Week Feb. 1951\nBallooney not\nbaloney\n110. Intelligent High Science Mar. 1951\nAltitude Balloons Digest"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"111. Saucers, Secrecy, and R.H. Wood Av. Week Feb.19,1951\nSecurity\n112. Farmer Trent's Flying Life June 26,1960\nSaucer\n113. Flying Saucers H.T. Wilkins Contemp. July 1950\n114. Flying Saucer Mystery Sci. NL Mar 25, 1950\n115. Flying Saucers Again Newsweek Apr 17, 1950\n116. Flying Saucers, Fact C. Fuller Flying Jul 1950\nor Fiction Sep 1950\n117. In a Saucer from Venus: R. Gelatt Sat.R.Lit Sep 24, 1950\nReview of Behind the Sci NL Oct 21, 1950\nFlying Saucers by F. Sep 16, 1950\nScully\n118. Pies in the Sky in Time Apr 3, 1950\nMexico City\n119. Psychoanalyzing Sci.Digest May, 1950\nthe Flying Saucers\n120. Saucer-Eyed Deagons Time Apr 17, 1950\n121. Things that go Whiz; Time May 9, 1949\nFlying Saucers\n122. Visitors from Venus; Time Jan. 9, 1950\nFlying Saucer Yarn\n123. What You can Believe C. Shalett Sat.Eve.Post Apr 30, 1949\nAbout Flying Saucers May 7, 1949\n124. Flying Disks Break Life Jul 21, 1947\nout over the U.S.\n125. Flying Saucer Spots Newsweek Jul 14, 1947\nBefore Their Eyes\n126. Flying Saucers; the Time July 14, 1947\nSomethings\n127. Illusions of Nature Sci.Illus. Oct. 1947\n128. Remember the Flying Saucers Sci. Digest Oct. 1947\n129. Seeing is Deceiving M. Luckiesh Sci.Illus. June 1946"} {"doc_id":"4231ce616854c1a9","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"B. BOOKS ON FLYING SAUCERS\n1. Spacecraft From Beyond Three Dimensions W. Gordon Allen\n2. The Inexplicable Sky Arthur Constance\n3. Space, Gravity and the Flying Saucer Leonard G. Camp\n4. Flying Saucers; an Analysis of the Leon Davidson\nAF Project Blue Book Rpt 14\n5. Flying Saucer Review Intro by Brinsley\nle Poer Trench\n(Citadel Press)\n6. They Rode in Space Ships Gavin Gibbons\n7. Flying Saucers and Common Sense Waveney Girvan\n8. The Case for the UFO, unidentified M.K. Jessup\nFlying Objects\n9. The Flying Saucer Conspiracy D.H. Keyhoe\n10. Flying Saucers From Outer Space D.H. Keyhoe\n11. Flying Saucers: Top Secret D.H. Keyhoe\n12. The Great Flying Saucer Hoax; the Coral E. Lorenzen\nUFO Facts and their interpretation\n13. Flying Saucers D.H. Menzel\n14. The World of Flying Saucers; A D.H. Menzel\nScientific Exam of a Major Myth\nof the Space Age\n15. Flying Saucers and the Straight-Line Aime Michel\nMystery (French Translation)\n16. The Truth about Flying Saucers Aime Michel\n17. National Investigations Committee Richard H. Hall,\non Aerial Phenomena Editor\n18. Flying Saucers and the USAF Lawrence J. Tacker\n19. Anatomy of a Phenomenon: UFO's Jacques Vallee\nin Space - A Scientific Appraisal\n20. Flying Saucers Uncensored Harold Tom Wilkins\n21. The UFO Annual The Citadel Press\nEditor, M.K. Jessup"} {"doc_id":"428522cb0c48e2cd","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JSC-08053\n\nSKYLAB 1/2\nTECHNICAL\nCREW DEBRIEFING\n\nJUNE 30, 1973\n\nPREPARED BY\n\nTRAINING OFFICE\n\nCREW TRAINING AND SIMULATION DIVISION\n\nNOTICE: This document may be exempt from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Requests for its release to persons outside the U. S. Government should be handled under the provisions of NASA Policy Directive 1382.2.\n\nNational Aeronautics and Space Administration\nLYNDON B. JOHNSON SPACE CENTER\nHouston, Texas"} {"doc_id":"428522cb0c48e2cd","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"KERWIN (CONT'D) Unusual or Unexpected Visual Phenomenon. We saw light flashes. I think all of us saw them. I saw them most often when I was in the sack at night with my eyes closed but awake naturally. They tended to wax and wane in frequency. Someone asked me if that was in conjunction with the South Atlantic anomaly. It may have been. I didn't have the pad with me at that time and I don't know. They were numerous at times - two or three per minute.\n\nCONRAD Some of them to me were a spot or sunbursts. Some were streaks. The streaks, in my case, were less frequent than the bursts. Most of them were in my peripheral visual field. Very few in the central visual field. I don't know why.\n\nQUERY You could isolate them to one eye, couldn't you?\n\nKERWIN No, I couldn't.\n\nWEITZ I would say mine were primarily in the left eye for some reason.\n\nCONRAD You have to concentrate but you can determine they are in one eye.\n\nKERWIN I did not. That was foolish of me but I didn't try. I'm sure they are in one eye.\n\n23-20"} {"doc_id":"428522cb0c48e2cd","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONRAD Sometimes I'd be lying there with my eyes half closed, and I'd see a fire sensor wink.\n\nKERWIN And you'd have to be careful that you weren't confusing that with the fire flash. Once you've seen a few of each, there is question of which is which. They're not an hallucination.\n\nKERWIN We didn't feel it was operationally necessary for anybody to know about it right now.\n\nWEITZ I had a couple that I thought were cosmic particles. I saw an entrance streak and an exit streak.\n\nCONRAD Yes, I did too.\n\nWEITZ Where, bing-bing, it seemed like it was one side of the eyeball, and then the other side.\n\nCONRAD One night I remember that there was a long shot then it was blank then there was a long shot in rapid succession, of course, but very definitely in and out - or across the eye.\n\nKERWIN Medical Kits and IMSS. As far as adequate quantity of medication and supplies, I would guess we used about 0.01 percent of the available medication. I think this is something for me to sit down with the doctors and talk about. There is plenty of medicine up there for the Skylab missons. There is\n\n23-21"} {"doc_id":"428522cb0c48e2cd","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JSC-08478\n\nSKYLAB 1/3\nTECHNICAL\nCREW DEBRIEFING\n\nPREPARED BY\n\nTRAINING OFFICE\n\nCREW TRAINING AND SIMULATION DIVISION\n\nNOTICE: This document may be exempt from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Requests for its release to persons outside the U.S. Government should be handled under the provisions of NASA Policy Directive 1382.2.\n\nNational Aeronautics and Space Administration\nLYNDON B. JOHNSON SPACE CENTER\nHouston, Texas\n\nOCTOBER 4, 1973"} {"doc_id":"428522cb0c48e2cd","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BEAN I did too. The sack would move over in the corner.\n\nLOUSMA Things we saw out the window.\n\nGARRIOTT For example, we saw that satellite about a week before splashdown. That was one of the most unusual things that we saw and I guess Jack noticed it looking out the window. This bright reddish object was out there and we tracked it for about 5 or 10 minutes. It was obviously a satellite in a very similar orbit to our own. It was rotating and had a period of almost exactly 10 seconds because you could see the brightness vary with that period. We followed it until sunset and it went out of sunlight just about 5 to 7 seconds after we did. It held its position nearly the same, in the wardroom window for that 10-minute interval although we could see it drift in relative positions slightly, maybe 10 to - 20 degrees during the course of that 10-minute interval. It was reddish in color even when we were well above the horizon. As we approached sunset, it turned more reddish, presumably because of the sunlight change. What satellite it was and how it happened to end up in such a similar orbit, no one ever explained to us. And I would like to hear a few words from someone about that satellite.\n\n7-4"} {"doc_id":"428522cb0c48e2cd","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BEAN\tYou bet. We never saw it again. You'd think we would have\nseen it the next night or it would cycle by another time.\nMaybe it did and we weren't looking out the window.\n\nLOUSMA\tYou might point out that it never did take the shape of an\nobject but it was always brighter than any other star or\nplanet in the night sky. It was much brighter.\n\nBEAN\tWe tried monitors and everything on it but we could never\nmake it into anything other than a bright light.\n\nLOUSMA\tIn doing T002, I had on other occasions, at least once or\ntwice, seen other satellites although they appeared as star\npoints of light.\n\nBEAN\tLet's talk about caution/warnings at night and in the daytime.\nI noticed at first when we did have caution/warnings in the\ndaytime we all whistled up there real quick to see what was\nhappening. Then as the mission wore on, we tended to just let\nwhoever was closest take a look. Without the TACS on, there\nisn't a lot that can go on except rapid DELTA-P which sounds\ndifferent than any of the other caution/warnings, particularly\njust a caution. I recommend to Jerry and his crew, and I'm\nsure that this recommendation will be hard to live by, that\ncaution/warnings don't appear to be anything you have to hurry\nand resolve or stop doing your tasks to race up to the panel\n\n7-5"} {"doc_id":"428522cb0c48e2cd","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20.0 VISUAL SIGHTINGS\n\nLOUSMA\tLet's talk about visual sightings. Any comments on countdown.\nYou saw your way to the booster or you didn't see that.\nVisual sighting no problem there.\n\nBEAN\tYou might want to talk about the visual sightings on that\norbit when Owen and Jack saw the satellite.\n\nLOUSMA\tYes, let's go through countdown. Any visual sightings on\ncountdown that were significant? We saw the swing arm go\naway and all that kind of thing.\n\n\tPowered Flight: I watched the booster protector cover go\noff and lots of flashes and debris and everything in every\nseparation, but that's all norminal. During orbit: -\n\nGARRIOTT\tDo you want to talk about that satellite?\n\nLOUSMA\tI saw a couple of satellites that appeared like a satellite\nwould on the Earth. I saw one that was not like one you\nwould see on Earth, so why don't you mention it.\n\nGARRIOTT\tOkay, about a week or 10 days before recovery and we were\nstill waiting for information to be supplied to us about the\nindentification. Jack first noticed this rather large red star\nout the wardroom window. Upon close examination, it was much\nbrighter than Jupiter or any of the other planets. It had\n\n20-1"} {"doc_id":"428522cb0c48e2cd","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GARRIOTT\na reddish hue to it, even though it was well above the\n(CONT'D)\nhorizon. The light from the Sun was not passing close to\nthe Earth's limb at the time. We observed it for about\n10 minutes prior to sunset. It was slowly rotating because\nit had a variation in brightness with a 10-second period.\nAs I was saying, we observed it for about 10 minutes, until\nwe went into darkness, and it also followed us into darkness\nabout 5-seconds later. From the 5- to 10-second delay in\nit's disappearance we surmised that it was not more than 30\nto 50 nautical miles from our location. From it's original\nposition in the wardroom window, it did not move more than\n10 or 20 degrees over the 10 minutes or so that we watched it.\nIt's orbit was very close to that of our own. We never saw\nit on any - earlier or succeeding orbits and we'd be quite\ninterested in having its identification established. It's\nall debriefed in terms of time on channel A, so the percise\ntiming and location can be picked up from there.\n\nLOUSMA\tOkay, other visual sightings was the one out the wardroom\nwindow. That sunrise or sunset which finally led us to the\nRCS leak in the command module. It disappeared like\nthousands and thousands of stars out there; all of them\ndifferent sizes and drifting along the X-axis. The one that\nwe already mentioned. The one right after insertion where\nwe saw the leak in the same manner of the RCS streaming towards\n\n20-2"} {"doc_id":"428522cb0c48e2cd","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nJSC-08809\n\nSKYLAB 1/4\nTECHNICAL\nCREW DEBRIEFING\n\nFEBRUARY 22, 1974\n\nPART I\n\nPREPARED BY\nTRAINING OFFICE\nCREW TRAINING AND PROCEDURES DIVISION\n\nNOTICE: This document may be exempt from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Requests for its release to persons outside the U.S. Government should be handled under the provisions of NASA Policy Directive 1382.2.\n\nNational Aeronautics and Space Administration\nLYNDON B. JOHNSON SPACE CENTER\nHouston, Texas"} {"doc_id":"428522cb0c48e2cd","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GIBSON\tare still on the windows. Just what that material is, I'm not\n(CONT'D)\tsure. But the remaining pieces should be useful for contamina-\ntion studies.\n\nCARR\tOne other item is the ammonia odor in the head which we dis-\ncovered about the last week in the mission. We weren't sure what\nwas causing it. Bill had changed out the charcoal canister.\nWe disconnected the boot between the charcoal canister and the\nblower above it and took a sniff of that. We smelled, no ammonia\nthere. When we connected the boot back up to the blower, a\nvery strong ammonia odor came from the blower output. Thus it\nappears that the source of the smell was the blower unit itself\nand not the charcoal canister. As we said in our report of it\nto the ground, we decided that it was tolerable for the rest of\nthe mission. Therefore, we didn't get into the mode of finding\nanother blower to put in there. I feel that the odor very\ndefinitely increased in intensity during the final week of the\nmission.\n\nCARR\tOne other area of unusual events that we reported on the dump\ntapes was that on occasion we saw some lights flashing outside\nwith very a definite motion relative to ours. We presumed that\nthey were other pieces of Skylab, or possibly other satellites.\nWe reported our two or three sightings of that kind as soon as\nthey occurred. We have no special comments concerning them,\n\n7-8"} {"doc_id":"428522cb0c48e2cd","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CARR\n(CONT'D)\nbut we did find it very interesting to be able to see other\nobjects up there with us. The fact that one or two of them\nappeared to be tumbling was apparently due to the oscillation\nof the light flashes that we were getting from them.\n\nPOGUE\nThe OWS Heat Exchangers: There's a major design flaw there in\nthat filters were not installed upstream of the OWS heat exchanger\nvanes. When we first arrived, the vanes were so uniformly coated\nwith lint that I thought there was some kind of anodized surface\non them. I was never fully convinced that I had done the\nvacumming job properly; therefore, I fabricated a special tool\nthat fit flush against those surface vanes so that I could\nexert a good vacuum. Though they are not supposed to be con-\ndensive heat exchangers, I sucked quite a bit of condensate water\nout of them. I tried the best I could to keep those things\nclean, yet I never did get all that lint pulled out of there.\nThat is why I think we needed a filter in the system.\n\nGIBSON\nEVA anomalies might also be mentioned here. For example, you\nhad the water leak outside, and I also got a water leak.\n\nPOGUE\nOne thing that was not mentioned on air-to-ground as a possible\ncause of the problem was the single-point failure that exists\nin the mechanical way that the PCU composite connector is\nhooked to the PCU. I was able during EVA, maneuvering through\nthe clothesline ropes, not only to open the lock but also to\nextend the arm which pulls the PCU composite connector off.\n\n7-9"} {"doc_id":"429bd69aaa06047e","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nMisrep undefined-8353978\n\nNarrative\n\n***MSN AMENDS:1.4a/ DCA / ESSA / 0000-0334z v 0000-0300z / +0+34 extension d2 WL81 CANX / EE Ops, KN, KT, AL, EN APPV'D***\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 2320Z-1.4aFLT, A 2-SHIP OF F-15E, TOOK OFF FROM MUWAFFAQ SALTI AIR BASE (OJMS) ISO OPERATION INHERENT RESOLVE TO CONDUCT DCA IVO ESSA. MISSION WAS NOT FLOWN AS FRAGGED D2 MSN AMENDS.\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 2338Z-1.4aFLT C2 CHECK IN W/ KINGPIN.\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 2345Z-1.4aFLT AIR REFUELED W/1.4aRECEIVING 37K LBS (COMBINED TOTAL) OF FUEL (MOM TRACK).\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0003Z- 1.4a FLT CHECKED ON STATION W/ KINGPIN AND PROCEEDED TO CONDUCT DCA IVO ESSA.\n\n(S//NF) 0021Z-0024Z -1.4aRECEIVED MFT RADAR JAMMING IVO SHADDADI (1.4a 1.4a AT FL270. NTFR.\n\n(S//NF) 0025Z-1.4aOBS 3X POSS UAP IVO SHADDADI 1.4a AT FL240. WSV PRODUCED. NFTR.\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0134Z-1.4aFLT AIR REFUELED W/1.4aRECEIVING 33.5K LBS (COMBINED TOTAL) OF FUEL (GANDER TRACK).\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0135Z-1.4aOBS 1X POSS BALLOON IVO SHADDADI 1.4a 1.4a AT FL210. WSV PRODUCED. NFTR.\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0226Z-1.4aAIR REFUELED W/1.4aRECEIVING 11K LBS FUEL (GANDER TRACK).\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0340Z- 1.4a FLT CHECKED OFF STATION W/ KINGPIN.\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0340Z- 1.4a FLT C2 CHECK OUT W/ KINGPIN AND RTB.\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0425Z- 1.4a FLT LANDED AT OJMS W/ ESD AT 0435Z. NSTR.\n\n(S//RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 001\n\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"429bd69aaa06047e","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: NOFORN\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20480120\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFCENT\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 389 EFS\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): LG\n• Mission Type: DCA\n• ATO Mission Number: 1.4a\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: 1st Lt\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: 389 EFS\n• Wing: 332 AEW\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 002\n\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"429bd69aaa06047e","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: A2\n• Wing: 332 AEW\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: 1LT\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: 89 ATKS\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 003\n\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"429bd69aaa06047e","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Aircraft Callsign 1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: SUITE 9.1\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: ALR-56C\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: IRSWA PACER WARE\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator: ALE-45\n• Chaff Designator: RR-180\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: 120\n• Flare Designator: MJU-51/53\n• Num Flares: 24\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: 2X AIM-120D\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: 2\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: AIM-9X\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: 2\n• Gun Name or Designator: M61A1\n• Num Gun Rounds: 510\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4a\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: SNIPER-SE\n• Additional Avionics:\n• Data Link:\n• Gentext:\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign 1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: SUITE 9.1\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: ALR-56C\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: IRSWA PACER WARE\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 004\n\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"429bd69aaa06047e","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator: ALE-45\n• Chaff Designator: RR-180\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: 120\n• Flare Designator: MJU-51/53\n• Num Flares: 24\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: 2X AIM-120D\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: 2\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: AIM-9X\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: 2\n• Gun Name or Designator: M61A1\n• Num Gun Rounds: 510\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4a\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: SNIPER-SE\n• Additional Avionics:\n• Data Link:\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign 1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 2\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): 169, 188\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OJMS\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 202330:00ZFEB23\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes):\n• Gentext/Additional Details: ***MSN AMENDS 1.4a / DCA / ESSA / 0000-0334z v 0000-0300z / +0+34 extension d2 1.4a CANX / EE Ops, KN, KT, AL, EN APPV'D***\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 2320Z-1.4aFLT, A 2-SHIP OF F-15E, TOOK OFF FROM MUWAFFAQ SALTI AIR BASE (OJMS) ISO OPERATION INHERENT RESOLVE TO CONDUCT DCA IVO ESSA. MISSION WAS NOT FLOWN AS FRAGGED D2 MSN AMENDS.\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nLanding\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 005\n\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"429bd69aaa06047e","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OJMS\n• Last Land Time: 210425:00ZFEB23\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 210435:00ZFEB23\n• Total Mission Time: 4 hours 55 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details: (S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0425Z- 1.4a FLT LANDED AT OJMS W/ ESD AT 0435Z. NSTR.\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 210003:00ZFEB23\n• Callsign 1.4a\n• JTAR Number:\n• Killbox (Location): ESSA\n• Mission Type: DCA\n• JTAC Callsign: KINGPIN\n• Gentext/Additional Details: (S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0003Z- 1.4a FLT CHECKED ON STATION W/ KINGPIN AND PROCEEDED TO CONDUCT DCA IVO ESSA.\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0340Z- 1.4a FLT CHECKED OFF STATION W/ KINGPIN.\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 210340:00ZFEB23\n• Total Time On Station: 3 hours 37 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nAIR REFUEL\n\n• Air Refuel DTG: 202345:00ZFEB23\n• Tanker Commander: 1.4a\n• Tanker Track: MOM\n• Scheduled Flight Duration:\n• Actual Flight Duration: -\n• Fuel Weight on Ramp (lbs): -\n• Fuel Weight on Offstation (lbs): -\n• Actual Onload Fuel as Receiver: 37K LBS\n• Fuel Dumped (lbs): -\n• Dump Reason:\n• ROBE Equipped:\n• ROBE Required :\n• Tanker Track Location:\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 006\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"429bd69aaa06047e","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nGENTEXT/AIR REFUEL\n\n• Gentext: (S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 2345Z- 1.4a FLT AIR REFUELED W/ 1.4a RECEIVING 37K LBS (COMBINED TOTAL) OF FUEL (MOM TRACK).\n\nRECEIVER\n\n• Receiver Callsign: 1.4a\n• Receiver Aircraft Type: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Scheduled Offload (lbs): -\n• Actual Offload (lbs):\n• Receiver Remarks:\n\nAIR REFUEL\n\n• Air Refuel DTG: 210134:00ZFEB23\n• Tanker Commander: 1.4a\n• Tanker Track: GANDER\n• Scheduled Flight Duration:\n• Actual Flight Duration: -\n• Fuel Weight on Ramp (lbs): -\n• Fuel Weight on Offstation (lbs): -\n• Actual Onload Fuel as Receiver: 33.5K LBS\n• Fuel Dumped (lbs): -\n• Dump Reason:\n• ROBE Equipped:\n• ROBE Required :\n• Tanker Track Location:\n\nGENTEXT/AIR REFUEL\n\n• Gentext: (S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0134Z- 1.4a FLT AIR REFUELED W 1.4a RECEIVING 33.5K LBS (COMBINED TOTAL) OF FUEL (GANDER TRACK).\n\nRECEIVER\n\n• Receiver Callsign: 1.4a\n• Receiver Aircraft Type: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Scheduled Offload (lbs): -\n• Actual Offload (lbs):\n• Receiver Remarks:\n\nAIR REFUEL\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 007\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"429bd69aaa06047e","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Air Refuel DTG: 210226:00ZFEB23\n• Tanker Commander: 1.4a\n• Tanker Track: GANDER\n• Scheduled Flight Duration:\n• Actual Flight Duration: -\n• Fuel Weight on Ramp (lbs): -\n• Fuel Weight on Offstation (lbs): -\n• Actual Onload Fuel as Receiver: 11K LBS\n• Fuel Dumped (lbs): -\n• Dump Reason:\n• ROBE Equipped:\n• ROBE Required :\n• Tanker Track Location:\n\nGENTEXT/AIR REFUEL\n\n• Gentext: (S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0226Z- 1.4a AIR REFUELED W/ 1.4a RECEIVING 11K LBS FUEL (GANDER TRACK).\n\nRECEIVER\n\n• Receiver Callsign 1.4a\n• Receiver Aircraft Type: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Scheduled Offload (lbs): -\n• Actual Offload (lbs):\n• Receiver Remarks:\n\nEMI\n\n• EMI Start DTG: 210021:00ZFEB23\n• EMI End DTG: 210024:00ZFEB23\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Type of EMI: RADAR JAMMING\n• EMI Duration: 3 minutes\n• Aircraft Location 1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading:\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL270\n• Aircraft Airspeed:\n• Mission Changed: None\n• EMI Impact to System: PARTIAL\n• EMI Location: 1.4a\n• Affected System: APG-82\n• Frequency Affected: 8.8-9.9GHZ\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 008\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"429bd69aaa06047e","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Mission Impact: NONE\n• JSIR Report ID: 340377\n• Global Campaign Plan:\n\nGENTEXT/EMI\n\n• Gentext: (S//NF) 0021Z-0024Z - 1.4a RECEIVED MFT RADAR JAMMING IVO SHADDADI 1.4a AT FL270. NTFR.\n\n(S//NF) THIS EVENT IS STANDARD ON AZIMUTH, MFT RADAR JAMMING EXPERIENCED BY AIRCREW NORTH OF SHADDADI. OUR WORKING THEORY IS THAT IT IS AN AERA OF EFFECT TURKISH X-BAND JAMMER ON OR ACROSS THE SYR/TUR BORDER INTO TURKEY.\n\nAIRSIGHT\n\n• DTG: 210025:00ZFEB23\n• Coords Start: 1.4a\n• Coords End: 1.4a\n• Altitude: FL240\n• Duration:\n• Lateral CPA:\n• Horizontal CPA:\n• Aircraft Type: 3x POSS UAP\n• Aircraft Number:\n• Country of Origin:\n\nGENTEXT/AIRSIGHT\n\n• Gentext: (S//NF) 0025Z- 1.4a OBS 3X POSS UAP IVO SHADDADI 1.4a AT FL240. WSV PRODUCED. NFTR.\n\n(S//NF) 1.4a WAS CRUSING IN CAP AT FL270. NO RADAR RETURNS RECEIVED FROM UAP. NO HEALTH EFFECTS EXPERIENCED BY AIRCREW. 2 WHITE OBJECTS IR SIGNIFICANT. NFTR.\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: CLOUDY.\n\nAIRSIGHT\n\n• DTG: 210135:00ZFEB23\n• Coords Start 1.4a\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 009\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"429bd69aaa06047e","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Coords End: 1.4a\n• Altitude: FL210\n• Duration:\n• Lateral CPA:\n• Horizontal CPA:\n• Aircraft Type: BALLOON\n• Aircraft Number:\n• Country of Origin:\n\nGENTEXT/AIRSIGHT\n\n• Gentext: (S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0135Z- 1.4a OBS 1X POSS BALLOON IVO SHADDADI 1.4a 1.4a AT FL210. WSV PRODUCED. NFTR.\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: CLOUDY\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 010\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"43338cb4825d492e","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"264 [handwritten]\nCONFIDENTIAL\n1\nMSC-07631\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION\nAPOLLO 17\nTECHNICAL\nCREW DEBRIEFING\n(U)\nJANUARY 4, 1973\nPREPARED BY\nTRAINING OFFICE\nCREW TRAINING AND SIMULATION DIVISION\nThis document will automatically become declassified\n90 days from the published date.\nNOTICE: This document may be exempt from\npublic disclosure under the Freedom of Infor-\nmation Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Requests for its\nrelease to persons outside the U.S. Govern-\nment should be handled under the provisions\nof NASA Policy Directive 1382.2.\nMANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER\nHOUSTON, TEXAS\nINDEXING DATA\nDATE\nORR\n#\nT\nPGM\nSUBJECT\nSIGNATOR\nLOC\nCONFIDENTIAL\nDECLASSIFIED\nE.O. 13526, Sec 3.3(a)\nNASA Declassification Guide\nDate of Guide: (M) 05 (Y) 2026\nReviewer:\nDate 5/6/2026"} {"doc_id":"43338cb4825d492e","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"24-4\nCONFIDENTIAL\nEVANS\n(CONT'D)\nafter the brightness of the fireball decreased, I could look\nback up through the rendezvous window and see what to me was\nkind of like a tunnel with a bright spot in the middle of the\ntunnel. Way down the tunnel, way back behind, I could see\nthe fireball.\nCERNAN\nThe only unusual sighting I can recall during landing or\nrecovery is when the CMP looked out the window and saw the\nsuperstructure of an aircraft carrier and said, \"Oh, we've\ngot a tin can with us.\"\nEVANS\nWell, it was kind of foggy on the windows.\nSCHMITT\nTransearth we had only a small crescent of an Earth and it was\nnot feasible to do any extensive weather observations. We\nhad light flashes just about continuously during the whole\nflight when we were dark adapted. I had one which I thought\nwas a flash on the lunar surface. That one period of time\nwhen we had the blindfolds on for the ALFMED experiment there\nwere just no visible flashes, although that evening, that\nnight, before I went to sleep I noticed that I was seeing the\nlight flashes again. So, it just seemed to be that one\ninterval either side of it where the light flash was not\nvisible to myself or to the other two crewmen.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNW 91526\n\nCLASSIFICATION CHANGE\nUNCLASSIFIED\nTo\nBy authority of E.O. 11652, 6-1-72\nChanged by Date NOV 9 1973\n\nGEMINI VII\n\nTECHNICAL DEBRIEFING\n\nDecember 23, 1965\n\nNOTICE: This document may be exempt from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Requests for its release to persons outside the U. S. Government should be handled under the provisions of NASA Policy Directive 1382.2.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPREFACE\n\nThis preliminary transcript was made from voice tape recordings of the Gemini 7 flight crew debriefing conducted December 19 through December 21, 1965 at the Crew Quarters, Cape Kennedy, Florida.\n\nAlthough all the material contained in this transcript has been rough edited, the urgent need for the preliminary transcript by mission analysis personnel precluded a final edit prior to its publication.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nParagraph Page Number\n\n1.0 COUNTDOWN\n1.1 Crew Insertion.....1\n1.2 Communications.....1\n1.3 Crew Participation in Countdown.....1\n1.4 Comfort.....1\n1.5 Environmental Control System.....2\n1.6 Sounds.....2\n1.7 Vibrations.....2\n1.8 Visual.....2\n1.9 Crew Station Controls and Displays.....3\n\n2.0 POWERED FLIGHT\n2.1 Lift-Off cues.....3\n2.2 Roll Program.....4\n2.3 Pitch Program.....4\n2.4 Aerodynamics.....5\n2.5 Environmental Control System.....5\n2.6 Maximum q.....5\n2.7 Windshear.....6\n2.8 DCS Updates.....6\n2.9 Engine 1 Operation.....6\n2.10 Engine 2 Status.....7\n2.11 Acceleration g's.....7\n2.12 POGO.....7\n2.13 Guidance Initiation.....7\n2.14 BECO.....8\n2.15 Staging.....8\n2.16 Engine 2 Ignition.....9\n2.17 RGS Initiate.....9\n2.18 GO/NO GO.....9\n2.19 Systems Status.....9\n2.20 Acceleration.....10\n2.21 Fairing Jettison.....10\n\n3.0 INSERTION\n3.1 Post-SECO.....10\n3.2 SECO plus 30 seconds.....11\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"14.0\tTRAINING\n14.1\tGemini Mission Simulator..................185\n14.2\tDCPS (Launch abort simulator).............191\n14.3\tMAC Engineering Simulator.................191\n14.4\tTranslation and Docking Trainer...........192\n14.5\tPlanetarium...............................193\n14.6\tSystems Briefings.........................194\n14.7\tFlight Experiments........................198\n14.8\tSpacecraft systems tests..................202\n14.9\tEgress training...........................204\n14.10\tParachute Training.......................205\n14.11\tLaunch simulations.......................206\n14.12\tReentry simulations......................206\n14.13\tSimulated network simulations............206\n14.14\tNetwork simulations......................206\n14.15\tFlight Plan training.....................207\n15.0\tCONCLUDING COMMENTS......................208"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"7.0\tLANDING AND RECOVERY\n7.1\tImpact....................................54\n7.2\tChecklists................................55\n7.3\tCommunications............................55\n7.4\tSystems Configuration.....................58\n7.5\tSpacecraft Status........................59\n7.6\tPostlanding Activity.....................62\n7.7\tComfort..................................63\n7.8\tRecovery Force Personnel.................63\n7.9\tEgress...................................63\n7.10\tSurvival Gear...........................63\n7.11\tCrew Pick Up............................64\n8.0\tSYSTEMS OPERATION\n8.1\tPlatform.................................64\n8.2\tOAMS.....................................65\n8.3\tRCS......................................73\n8.4\tECS......................................75\n8.5\tCommunications...........................91\n8.6\tElectrical...............................95\n8.7\tOnboard Computer.........................99\n8.8\tCrew Station............................101\n8.9\tBiomedical..............................115\n9.0\tOPERATIONAL CHECKS\n9.1\tApollo Landmark Investigation...........122\n9.2\tCabin Lighting Survey...................130\n9.3\tHF Test..................................130\n10.0\tVISUAL SIGHTINGS\n10.1\tCountdown................................131\n10.2\tPowered Flight...........................131\n10.3\tOrbital Flight..........................132\n10.4\tReentry.................................138"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3.3\tInsertion Activities.....................15\n3.4\tPost Station Keeping.....................17\n4.0\tORBITAL FLIGHT..........................18\n5.0\tRETROFIRE\n5.1\tTR-2:00 Power Up and Alignment Checklists.......32\n5.2\tTR-26 Events............................33\n5.3\tTR-5 GMT Stop Clock.....................34\n5.4\tTR-256..................................34\n5.5\tTR-1....................................34\n5.6\tTR-0....................................35\n5.7\tRetropack Jettison.......................40\n5.8\tCommunications...........................41\n5.9\tUpdating.................................41\n5.10\tPost Retro Jettison Checklist...........42\n6.0\tREENTRY\n6.1\tReentry Parameters Update.................42\n6.2\t400 K....................................43\n6.3\tAcceleration Profile.....................47\n6.4\tSpacecraft Control.......................47\n6.5\t100 K....................................48\n6.6\t50 K.....................................48\n6.7\t35 K Checklist...........................49\n6.8\tCommunications...........................49\n6.9\t26 K Checklist...........................49\n6.10\t10.6 K Barostat...........................50\n6.11\tMain Check Deployment....................51\n6.12\tPost Main Checklist......................51\n6.13\tSingle Point Release.....................51\n6.14\t2 K Checklist...........................52\n6.15\tLanding..................................52\n6.16\tPostlanding Checklist...................52\n6.17\tBlood Pressure Measurement...............53"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"11.0\tEXPERIMENTS\n11.1\tCelestial, Space, and Terrestrial Radiometry (D-4/D-7)..................................140\n11.2\tStar Occulation Measurement (D-5)...........146\n11.3\tSimple Navigation (D-9)....................148\n11.4\tVisual Acuity and Astronaut Visibility and Vision Test (M-9)...........................154\n11.5\tSynoptic terrain (S-5) and weather (S-6) photography.....................................158\n11.6\tProton Electron Spectrometer and Tri-Axis Flux-Gate Magnetometer (MSC-2 and MSC-3)....160\n11.7\tOptical communications (MSC-4)...............161\n11.8\tLandmark Contrast.........................165\n11.9\tCardiovascular reflex conditioning (M-1)....166\n11.10\tIn-flight exercises (M-3)..................167\n11.11\tIn-flight phonocardiogram (M-4) and In-flight sleep analysis (M-8)..............167\n11.12\tBioassay body fluids (M-5) and calcium balance study (M-7).....................168\n11.13\tMiscellaneous.............................172\n12.0\tPREMISSION PLANNING\n12.1\tMission Plan (trajectory)...................175\n12.2\tFlight Plan...............................175\n12.3\tSpacecraft Changes........................176\n12.4\tMission Rules.............................177\n12.5\tExperiments...............................177\n13.0\tMISSION CONTROL\n13.1\tGO/NO GO's...............................179\n13.2\tPLA and CLA updates......................179\n13.3\tConsumables..............................180\n13.4\tFlight Plan changes......................181\n13.5\tSystems..................................182\n13.6\tExperiments real-time updates............184"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n1.0 COUNTDOWN\n\n1.1 Crew Insertion\n\nBorman I have no comment. I thought it went very well.\n\nLovell Likewise, no comment on crew insertion. I think we got quite a bit done. It was very orderly.\n\nBorman Timing was good and it was done properly.\n\n1.2 Communications\n\nBorman Communications were good. I had no trouble at all.\n\nLovell I had no trouble with communications in the cockpit or the spacecraft, but the communications in the van from the suiting area to the other area are rather poor. Maybe we should try to get that improved sometime.\n\n1.3 Crew Participation in Countdown\n\nBorman Again, I think they have been used on 4 or 5 launches, and I thought they were fine.\n\nLovell Right. Countdown procedure and crew participation is just what you expect now.\n\n1.4 Comfort\n\nBorman Comfort was fine. No problems?\n\nLovell No problems for comfort, but I was surprised when I got in the cockpit, because there was a lot more there than there was when I got in it for the stowage review. But, it all turned out for the best. No problems.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n1.5 ECS\n\nBorman ECS worked fine. We had no trouble with ECS at all during prelaunch or launch.\n\nLovell That is true. The purge was a lot slower and it was just perfect for the final countdown. It was too fast for the SIM Flight, which we went through, and I got an ear blockage. For the countdown, it was just right. Very slow.\n\n1.6 Sounds\n\nBorman We had been well briefed on all the sounds: the gimbaling, pre-valve, and erector. As a matter of fact, when the erector started down there was no sound. We had been told that probably there might be a clanking or something. I heard nothing.\n\nLovell All I saw was the sky.\n\n1.7 Vibrations\n\nBorman Vibrations. No comment. I had no problems.\n\nLovell Is this liftoff vibrations?\n\nBorman No, this is countdown. Vibrations of the spacecraft during countdown.\n\nLovell No, nothing we had not heard before.\n\n1.8 Visual\n\nLovell The windows were perfect. We had no fogging.\n\nBorman No fogging.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n3\n\nLovell The windows were heated previously as a result of 5's problems, and our windows, I thought, were perfectly clean. Didn't you?\n\nBorman Right.\n\n1.9 Crew Station Controls and Displays\n\nLovell No comment. Exactly how we had planned it for months.\n\nBorman Exactly the way that we had seen it, and no problems.\n\n2.0 POWERED FLIGHT\n\n2.1 Liftoff Cues\n\nBorman Stoney came in loud and clear, counting the countdown.\n\nLovell Came in loud and clear.\n\nBorman We knew exactly when it was, and I for one had absolutely no question in my mind when we lifted off. It felt like I had been tied back, and someone cut the string and there was a slow but definite acceleration at lift-off.\n\nLovell I thought you could just about put CAP COMM, Vibration, and noise together, because the motion, vibration, and noise all contributed to a definite knowledge that you were going someplace.\n\nBorman In other words, what you are saying is that you had no problems determining lift-off.\n\nLovell No, it went.\n\nBorman Okay vibration was nominal during lift-off. Again, perhaps\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nit is because we were so well briefed on the simulations we have run, but I had no problems.\n\nLovell There was a little more noise than I expected, but a little less vibration.\n\nBorman Jim said there was a little more noise than he expected. Even so, it was not oppressive, or a problem at all. Visual. I did not have any visual cues. I was watching the instruments. What about you, Jim. Did you pick up any?\n\nLovell I had the clouds, and there was a visual cue. Just normal cloud cues.\n\nBorman Cockpit displays were good. The fuel pressure and oxidizer pressure were nominal the whole flight. Just perfect.\n\n2.2 Roll Program\n\nBorman The roll program, was so short it was almost like a spike. We hardly even noticed the roll program. Did you Jim?\n\nLovell I did not notice it at all. I heard you call it out, but I did not notice it.\n\nBorman I called it out, but we only rolled,I think, about 2 or 3°.\n\n2.3 Pitch Program\n\nBorman The pitch program started just as in the simulator, which is very accurate on this. It looked exactly the same on the ball, and there was no problem.\n\nLovell The pitch program for the RGS followed exactly what the IGS\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n5\n\nwas giving for the entire launch. The needles were just matched perfectly--nulled. I did not see any unusual attitudes that some of the other people commented on.\n\n2.4 Aerodynamic\n\nBorman Again, we had had this described to us many times, and it seemed to follow right along. In the maximum q region we got some vibration and noise, but after we got through maximum q it was just like going supersonic in a fighter. You just slip through, and from then on it was just like riding on a train.\n\nLovell I don't think it was bad either.\n\n2.5 ECS\n\nLovell Pressure went up to 5.5 in the initial stoppage, and it slowly leaked down to 5.1, and stayed there.\n\nBorman I was cool during lift-off.\n\nLovell I was too. Comfortable.\n\nBorman Comfortable. I mean cool in the sense that it means comfortable. Of course we can not very well comment on the cabin atmosphere because we were sealed.\n\n2.6 Maximum q\n\nBorman We have already discussed this. There was some noise build up and some vibration, but nothing to worry at all about or even discuss.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2.7 Wind shear\nBorman Wind shear. I did not notice any.\nLovell I did not notice any wind shear either.\nBorman You could not see any on you attitude gauges either, could you?\nLovell No, that is what I mean.\nBorman The attitude gauges stayed pegged. Right?\nLovell They stayed nulled throughout the entire flight. I was amazed at the accuracy with which the RGS was following the IGS program.\n2.8 DCS Updates\nLovell Came through on schedule.\nBorman No problem?\nLovell No trouble.\nBorman Have any trouble punching the light?\nLovell After the second update, about 2:23, the g's are too high to let you punch off the light. So, you have to wait for staging, and then punch the light.\n2.9 Engine 1 Operation\nBorman Engine 1 operation, I thought, was normal. But I did notice a slight hint of a POGO around about, I would estimate, two minutes. The slightest, faintest hint. I do not think Jim even noticed it."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell I did not notice any POGO.\n2.10 Engine 2 Status\nBorman It seemed to me that from about 3 minutes and 30 seconds to around 4 minutes, the noise and the feel was a little bit different than it was after that, as if it was vibrating a little bit more. But this was sort of, again, a sensing type thing. The instruments were all nominal, and it may have just been me. I certainly can not complain about the operation.\n2.11 Acceleration g's\nBorman Any problems, Jim?\nLovell No problems. They were pretty nominal, weren't they? I could not see the g meter.\nBorman They were right on the money. And, of course, the g's we have are all experienced in the centrifuge, and so on. One thing, when the g's dropped at staging and at SECO I had no sensation of tumbling and no sensation of disorientation. Nothing at all.\n2.12 POGO\nBorman I've mentioned that I detected a slight hint of one that was so small we cannot even really discuss it.\n2.13 Guidance Initiation\nLovell We had a guidance initiation. It was in the form of booster"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"yaw deflecting downward, more so than booster pitch deflecting. Booster pitch deflected slightly to the right, indicating, at guidance initiation, a booster-high trajectory. But, they both came right back to null just after guidance initiation, and that was it.\nBorman We did not have the feeling that we were lofted, and then a sudden pitch down.\nLovell No, there was no change of booster performance at all. It was just that the needles deflected at guidance initiation to say that we had guidance initiation, and after that they nulled and stayed that way from there on.\n2.14 BECO\nBorman At BECO, the whole spacecraft was engulfed in a red flame. I noticed that out of the corner of my eyes. Jim, you probably had a better view than I did.\nLovell Yes. Flames came up the side there to the window.\nBorman There was a definite, very brief instant of it, probably in the order of milliseconds, but it did envelope the spacecraft and I, in my own mind, wonder if this is not the place where we are picking up some of the smudge on the window.\n2.15 Staging\nLovell Well, I did not notice any smudge at the time of staging.\nSlayton You did not notice any?\nLovell I did not notice any. Of course, things were going pretty fast. I did notice it after we got into orbit, but not at"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that particular time.\n2.16 Engine 2 Ignition\nBorman Again, it is so well simulated that--\nLovell It is very smooth.\nBorman It is very smooth, and away you go.\n2.17 RGS Initiate\nBorman Well, we have talked about that.\nLovell Yes, that is what I was talking about back previously.\n2.18 GO/NO GO\nBorman GO/NO GO. Houston, on the ground, came through great. We got a GO/NO GO before the 30 seconds we were waiting for spacecraft separate. So, we knew we were in good shape before we ever had the possibility we would have to burn. Of course, we also had the IVI's onboard and they are very good also.\n2.19 Systems Status\nBorman The systems were all great. No problem, during powered flight. We got two delta P lights.\nLovell Oh, yes, that is right.\nBorman We are talking about spacecraft systems. We got delta P light on BECO in the first stage that went off at staging, then came back on during second stage flight, and then the"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Section 2 delta P light did not go out and it was...\nLovell No, Section 1 went on and out again during the flight. It went out at, I think it went out at SECO.\nBorman That is right.\nLovell But Section 2 came on and we saw that one for the next 14 days.\n2.20 Acceleration\nBorman Acceleration during stage 2 was right on the money, right on the program. I read off, I think it was about six and a half g's maximum. We read this off after SECO.\n2.21 Fairing Jettison\nBorman Fairing Jettison, I did not even hear it. I was concentrating on the horizon, trying to get set for turning around. Jim jettisoned the fairing and punched the Spacecraft SEP. I did not see anything or hear anything.\nLovell I saw debris and heard it and had a definite knowledge that a squib had gone off. There had been an explosion.\n3.0 INSERTION\n3.1 Post SECO\nBorman Maneuver controller was easy to reach. I had it out, and there was no problem. It came out and was ready to go. Attitudes and rates, there were none. The thing was as solid as a rock as far as I could determine. I was watching"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the horizon, and the attitude remained constant and the\nrates were so minimal you could not even pick them up. I\nnoticed no transients, we experienced no .......... as\nfar as I know that was discernible.\nLovell Did you try to damp out the..\nBorman There was nothing to damp out.\nLovell Okay.\nBorman In fact, I did not use the thrusters at all for that. It\njust sat there.\n3.2 SECO plus 30 seconds\nLovell I have the IVI readings on a card. Do you have those cards\nthat we took off?\nBorman Yes.\nLovell I am sorry. We did not get forward-aft, left-right, up or\ndown because they were so quick, and I was trying to get the\ncamera. But it was 17 in the fore and aft window, 13 in the\nleft-right, and up and down was 20.\nBorman What do you mean you did not get them? They are there.\nLovell No, I did not know aft or forward, or left or right, or up\nor down.\nBorman Oh, I see.\nLovell I just saw that they were so small that I just wrote down\nthe numbers as a ..."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman 17, 30, and 20. There might have been a 13, 17, and 20...\nLovell About what the numbers came up with.\nBorman Spacecraft separation. We separated with minimum delay between thrusting and Spacecraft SEP. Jim actuated the spacecraft separation. I did not hear the thrusters firing. I could not hear them; and I did not even hear spacecraft separation, but --\nLovell I heard Spacecraft SEP, but I could not hear the thrusters firing. But you told me you were firing the thrusters--\nBorman I said thrusting and SEP Spacecraft and we did it and away we went. I thrusted for about 2 seconds. Almost immediately, as soon as we had finished thrusting, I started a yaw right 180°, and the rates were right around, I think around --Of course, you should be able to pick this up off telemetry, but I would estimate they were 3° to 4° per second turning around. As soon as I had the booster in sight, I thrusted back 5 seconds. This is the way we tried in simulations. The simulations in St. Louis were excellent.\nLovell Turned out that was the best technique to use, 2 seconds for the 2 seconds forward and a 5 second return.\nBorman We turned around and there it was, bigger than the devil!\nLovell At that distance there was no problem staying in there.\nBorman Now, I did have some problem because the booster was bending"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"so rapidly. It was tremendous. It looked like one of the autogenous lines had been cut. I guess it was cut with a pyro, and it was really bending and this was causing it to translate as well as rotate. And in order to stay with it, I was having to use quite a bit of fuel; although it was certainly a nominal task. I also went through several control modes switchings. I started out in PULSE and I could not get around fast enough, so I went to DIRECT and then slowed it up in RATE COMMAND. Slowed up the direct rate I was using with RATE COMMAND, and left it in RATE COMMAND without using the hand controller for a while. Finally went to PLATFORM. When I went to PLATFORM, we had been off to one side of the booster. When I went to PLATFORM, it yawed me back around, and I lost sight of the booster. So we went out of PLATFORM and flew the rest of it in PULSE Mode using the reticle on the horizon for stabilization and using the maneuver controller for thrust. This is all on onboard tape, incidentally. The air to ground communications, throughout the flight were superior.\nLovell I was really amazed at the communications, especially the primary station. The UHF was outstanding.\nBorman We have already discussed GO/NO GO. They came through loud and clear before we ever SEP spacecraft. We had no need for"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"a velocity correction.\nLovell As a matter of fact, right now would be a good time to mention that address 72 read --\nBorman Nominal was 25 804 and address 72 read 25 804.\nLovell Can you imagine that? Right to the foot! 25 804. I could not believe it when I punched it up.\nBorman The orbit quantities were given to us, I think, by Bermuda. Of course, at this time we really were not interested in them, although they were sort of nice information. We had a GO/NO GO.\nLovell It was 87-178 -- the initial forward quantity that was called up to us.\nBorman The MDU readouts: Jim read 72 and when he saw it was 25,804, we had a GO/NO GO from the ground. I do not believe you even read the rest of them out, did you?\nLovell No, I did not bother reading out the rest of the addresses 94, 97, 52, or 73, because I saw the 72 nominal. I saw the IVI's were right in there so we did not bother reading out anything else.\nBorman Debris . I did not notice any debris.\nLovell I noticed debris. I was looking out at Spacecraft SEP and Jet Fairing, and noticed debris. I also noticed debris between the spacecraft and booster when we first turned around."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman Could you identify any type of the debris?\nLovell No, pieces. That is all I could tell.\n3.3 Insertion activities\nLovell We followed the regular procedure.\nBorman We did not have any problem with safing our switches. No problem. I did not even stow my D-ring at insertion. I was too busy trying to stay on the booster, and I did not get it stowed for the first orbit, I guess, or half an orbit.\nLovell What we planned on doing was getting pictures of the D ring. I got the bracket up at staging, and I actually had a minute after guidance initiate to reach back there and get the bracket and stick it up. It worked out very nicely before the g's started building up again on second stage. The bracket was up and in place and no problem at all. Then at SECO, I went around to pick up the camera, because we had the camera stowed where the Agena control box is located . I managed to get the camera up, and it was already plugged into the electrical wire. All I had to do was turn the auxiliary switch on, put it on the bracket, and push the button, and it started taking pictures. Just about that time, Frank mentioned he was going to start thrusting pretty soon so I had to go back and punch off the spacecraft. Then I read up address 72. So, I hope the pictures come out."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"16\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nBorman\tWe were looking right into the sun; I hope they do too. The drogue pins were no problem. Jim got them, but again, not until well into the first orbit. As a matter of fact, I pulled my own yesterday morning there. The problem is solved; I think they are easy to get to.\nLovell\tYes. They are easy to pull out.\nBorman\tI think that we have covered station keeping with stage II booster,partially. I will mention that the booster, being without attitude control, translating also with this impulse it was picking up from the venting, is definitely an order of magnitude more difficult than station keeping with a stable vehicle like Spacecraft 6.\nLovell\tFirst of all, you do not have anyone controlling the thing; you do not exactly know where it is going to go, and it might translate because it is venting and has a slight thrust.\nBorman\tI know a couple of times we got in a little too close and I backed out, because you just do not dare get as close as you do the way this thing is spewing. We got a real good picture, a good look at the nozzle. I thought that it looked like the nozzle was bent in on two places on the booster engine. It looked like the nozzle, the ablative skirt had been bent in. But then, it may have been just a\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\t17\n\nshadow, because the next time I looked at it, it looked just like a new engine. The booster itself had no apparent damage. The only thing we could see was this big spewing where the venting was coming from. I did not see any venting from the roll nozzle at all. Did you?\nLovell\tNo, the venting came from some line right along the bottom edge, near the engine section of the booster.\nBorman\tThat is right.\nLovell\tIt was a line of some sort that was open, and fuel was spewing out of it.\nBorman\tI hope they got the data they wanted on the D-4 and D-7 Experiments. It was,again,a very uncomplicated maneuver, one that we practiced many times, and it worked just like it does in simulation. Had no difficulty at all. The lights on the booster worked fine.\n3.4 Post station-keeping\nBorman\tWe did not do anything with stowage on the first orbit at all. D-ring, pins I have already mentioned, we did not get those in at all.\nLovell\tArm restraints went down at 55 seconds. Belts. We did not even loosen them until after we had done D-4, D-7. The life vests we left right on the harness for the entire flight, but the harness did not stay on us for the entire flight.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nThe sequence light test. This was done after the first orbit. We really had this insertion checklist in two phases, one at insertion and then one after D-4, D-7.\n4.0 ORBITAL FLIGHT\nBorman\tWe have already discussed the station-keeping. That is no problem. I think the situation that we used,going off with about 2 seconds--2 to 3 seconds--and thrusting back with 5 seconds while you are still on your side getting back to the booster as quickly as possible,solves the problem and takes a lot of the orbital mechanics out of the situation. I hope the film comes out. The one thing that did make it a little difficult on this one is when we looked back, we were looking back into the sun, and the booster was right in line with the sun. It was just like flying formation when the leader makes a turn, and you are down-sun. It is difficult to see, and I tried to move off to one side and swing around and look a little bit more to the north. I think it was north. I guess I was trying to look to the south where I could get the sun out of my line of sight. I also had a cut-off on the booster at station-keeping at 88% fuel, so that at 88% fuel we were already in darkness, although we had not reached the time for the D-4, D-7 separation which was to occur at00:25.I think it was about 00:23 or\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n00:21. So when we reached this limit and we were in darkness, I went ahead and separated, thrusting down.\nLovell\tWe actually separated earlier than 00:25. We actually separated at 00:21.\nBorman\tThat is right. So we separated because we were in darkness and because we had reached the limit on fuel. We had been in darkness for awhile. One thing I did notice was that the docking light was not particularly helpful on that stage of the business. I guess it is because we were not close enough to the booster.\nLovell\tWe tried but the docking light just did not work.\nBorman\tI suppose because,again,we were looking at a lighted horizon with the docking light, and it did not work as well as it did later on with Spacecraft 6. The booster measurements went off. We got indications on the needle,on the measurement needle..\nLovell\tThe recorder did not get on until 27 minutes. That is a guess. I am not too sure, but as I understand it, they had live transmissions up until that time, to Bermuda, and Antigua, wherever it is, so we were okay there.\nBorman\tThe booster measurements were normal. Again, the simulator was perfect for that. The lights. Jim McDivitt had made some comment about not being able to judge distance because\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nthey only had two lights on there. We had four lights on and I will be darned if I will try to judge distance by four lights or fifty lights. You have got to have illumination or you have to have a stable vehicle.\nLovell\tYou have to have something that illuminates the vehicle, not a light that flashes because you cannot tell from a flashing light.\nBorman\tEspecially on vehicles rotating. I do not think that it is possible to control them. You have to have a controlled vehicle before you can judge distance from it, as far as I am concerned. The GO/NO GO, 17-1 TR were no problem. We ran through the platform-off post station-keeping checklist just the way it is listed.\nLovell\tYes, that is where we caught most of the things.\nBorman\tThat is where we caught most of the things like putting the D-ring away and the drogue pins and so on. Only one time in flight did we require attitude control fuel to change attitude for critical delay time playback. There was no problem. Communications, as always, were superior. The D-4/D-7 Void Measurement was again no problem; just lined up on the black and ran for two minutes. Purging of the fuel cells. This is the first of a long--\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell\tYes, but we did not do it then,did we? Did not we wait\nuntil we powered down and then waited two hours?\nBorman\tThat is right. This is one of the things that they\nhad in the flight plan that we asked them to change\nbecause --\nLovell\tYes, we did not purge the fuel cells then.\nBorman\tOriginally, this came right after power down and all\nof the fuel cell people recommended that you purge\nbefore power down, or wait until two hours after power\ndown. So we did not do it at this time in the flight.\nThis was changed. D-4, D-7 star measurements . There\nwas no problem. The stars were well selected, and we\nwere right on them. Right Jim? Jim copied down, on\nthe procedures book, a check where we got the maximum\nreturn on the needle.\nLovell\tD-4, D-7 was a well organized experiment as far as\nBrentnall keeping us hopping about what to do. I will\nhave to admit that."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman\tHe did a very good job. We knew just what to do. We had\nall the equipment with us and everything went very smoothly.\nMSC-2 and-3 turned out to be not much of a problem because\nat about the seventh day we turned it on and left it on for\nthe rest of the flight. The Berigee Adjust Maneuver. Jim\nmade the Perigee Adjust Manuever. We did it on stars with-\nout a platform. I was timing for Jim and I think I fouled\nup. We planned to use a perigee to 102 miles, and I think\nwe wound up with about 15 feet per second too much. It\nseemed like about 117 miles. One of the reasons that was\ncausing this was we had come back into the vicinity of the\nbooster, and just about midway through the burn the booster\nventing that was still occurring suddenly lit up, became\nlit up. It looked like we were flying through a lot of\nforeign objects or debris. I was afraid that we were going\nto hit something. At the same time this trailing wire came\nforward and slapped the spacecraft.\nLovell\tThat is where I stopped.\nBorman\tYes. After we had stopped and it hit us, I looked down\nand got confused and said,\"No, we haven't burned enough\".\nSo we burned for about five seconds more. We had a trail-\ning primer cord that would flop around and we didn't know\nwhat it was at the time, but it came forward when Jim\nstopped burning and flopped on the spacecraft. It made a"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"noise and I thought we had hit some of the stuff that was\nspewing out of the booster. I wasn't sure that it was just\nfuel.\nLovell\tI think the ground people thought that this wire came for-\nward because it had gotten in the way of the thruster fire.\nIt definitely came forward after I stopped burning,because\nI stopped burning and this wire came slapping forward. It\nstill had the momentum, you know. It slapped right in\nfront of the window. I think the people got the impression\nthat the thing had hit a thruster. It hit in front of us,\nthen we stopped burning. But we stopped and then that thing\nhit and we added some more because we were still at Apogee.\nBorman\tThe first of many powerdowns was no problem. We went right by\nthe check list. Some of these switch functions in the space\ncraft, particularly toward the latter part of the flight,\ntoward the 12th or 13th day--we were getting, I won't say\nlax in making them,but it seemed more of a chore to make\nthese things right to the minute. Things like the BIOMED\nrecorder and so on--we lost interest in having them turned\noff on the second. We knew what they needed to be turned\non and off for. We didn't do as good a job from about the\n10th day on as we did the first part as far as making those\nright to the minute."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell\tAs a matter of fact, why don't we get out the flight plan.\nI think we might have a lot of comments on it.\nBorman\tLet's start from the beginning.\nLovell\tThe recorder was on at 27 minutes. D-4/D-7 measurements.\nThe GET of measurement that the COLD IR was outside the\ntwo degree field of view of the booster was at 30:13.\nBorman\tAt 40:58 we had 84 % fuel left. We were right on the flight\nplan there.\nLovell\tThere was another GET of measurement where the spacecraft\nwas lined outside the field of view of the booster at 38:00.\nBorman\tWe saw the booster for 2 or 3 revolutions after that. The\nlights were still working. We called it out and the ground\ngot readings on this.\nLovell\tThe moon and booster were in view at 43:00. The booster\nand moon were in view and we might get an erroneous reading\nbecause we were almost on the moon.\nBorman\tHere we have a note that at 2:32 the fuel cell Delta P\nlight blinked off at 2 Hours and 30 minutes and then came\nback on. That is the section 2 delta P light.\nLovell\tOkay, then as far as stowage goes, the M-1 cuff was turned on\nat 3:03.\nBorman\tWe put the bypass hoses on at this time also-- the ECS\nbypass hoses. Incidentally, they turned out to be not too\nmuch of a problem. They were very handy for the type of"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"work we did without suits on.\nLovell\tRight. We took the S/C out of the horizon at 2:08 to get\nsome measurements,as requested from DOD,after we measured\nthe stars. This is after we powered down the equipment.\nWe connected the bypass hoses at 2:32. This was 2 hours\nplus 32 minutes.\nLovell\tCrew status reports. We had 3 or 4 a day.\nBorman\t5:20,we started unpacking the meals. This is one thing\nthat we had trouble with. Both left and right food boxes\nwere jam packed. Fortunately,we changed the lanyards. We\nchanged this during our stowage review , although it was\ndifficult we got them out. Several of the meals had lost\nvacuum.\nLovell\tWhich made them more difficult to get out.\nBorman\tReally you can't complain about this. The people did the\nbest they could. We had an awful lot of food to store\nand we were able to get them out.\nLovell\tWe had several blinkings of the Delta P light during this\nperiod. It went out at 6 hours, a littleless than 6 hours,\nthen came back on again at 6:27.\nBorman\tOne thing that I wanted to find out about,and I still don't\nunderstand,is why we turned on the crossfeed valve right\nafter launch. The FC O2 pressure was just on the minimum"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"26\nCONFIDENTIAL\nof 150 psi at launch. I called up Houston and said I\nwould like to leave the gauge in the FCO2 position\nrather than the ECS O2 position. Chris said, \"No, unless\nwe really felt strongly about it, they would rather have it\nin the ECS O2 position\". So we left it there and after we\nwere inserted and we were still with the booster, they\ncame in with a recommendation that we open the cross feed.\nWhen we did, this immediately raised the pressure to 250\npsi. The thing that was bad was that we had over 100%\noxygen and we were down to about 100 lbs. on the FCO2.\nWe agreed that we would fly at least 50 lbs. above the dome.\nSo, I really didn't see the need for opening that valve\nalthough it didn't cause any problems.\nLovell They wanted to pump up and make sure.\nBorman It worked fine and we got right back up to 250 lbs.\nLovell That is one system that did work fine.\nBorman The first 7 hours was pretty nominal. All throughout the\nflight plan we have notes that the Delta P light went out\nand came back on and so on.\nBorman At 16:40 we sighted a satellite much lower and\non a slightly higher inclination path than we were. It\npassed underneath us. It was so far away it looked like\na sighting from the earth. It was just a reflection. We\nwere very religious about the exercise periods. We got\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"27\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthose three times a day with the exception of the last day\nand one other day when we got only two. I think this is a\nvery good idea. It is difficult and requires discipline\nbecause the last thing in your mind is the desire to exer-\ncise. You get lazy very easily. We did a very extensive\noperation with the bungee and also isometrics three times\na day.\nBorman They were programmed 10 minutes. I think a more realistic\none would be about five minutes, three times a day. I did\n60 pulls on the bungee cord with both hands, 20 with each\nleg, and then ended up with 10 with each arm on the bungee\ncord in addition to the few for the crew status reports.\nLovell I did 60 pulls on the arms and 60 on each leg and it didn't\nmake any difference. I could have done 20 on each leg and\nwould have probably been better off.\nBorman At 45 hours Jim started taking off his suit. During that\nfirst 45 hours our noses were clogged and stuffy, our eyes\nwere irritated, the cabin was hot; it was miserable. As\nsoon as Jim started taking off his suit, the cabin even\nthough he was out of the suit and I was in, got better than\nit was with both of us in our suits.\nLovell I didn't realize it was that long. We were almost up there\ntwo full days before I started taking the suit off.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"28\nCONFIDENTIAL\nBorman At 49:53 we got a picture of Houston with the 250 mm lens.\nI hope it comes out. Okay at 69:40 we did a Perigee Adjust\nManeuver, Delta V 12.4, 16.5 seconds, and came right on the\nmoney, using the stars, no platform. I don't think that\nthere is any problem at all with the proper stars in making\na gross adjustment.\nLovell I think it was an excellent idea to do it without a platform,\nit takes two people. One person times and the other person\nburns on the star from attitude. Both people check the\nattitudes by looking at the star charts and getting the\nupdates. Then making sure that the S/C is alined right\nand the reticle is up to get the accuracy pretty good. After\nthat, once you get it set in your mind what you are aiming\nat, one guy is in the cockpit with the watch or event\ntimer and clocks it. The other guy has to look out the\nwindow because you can't go back and forth. If you look\nin the cockpit at the watch, you can't adjust to look out\nfor the stars. So it takes two people for that. I think\nyou can do a good job without a platform.\nBorman I do too.\nBorman There is one thing that was a pain in the neck, and I hope\nthey get some good out of them, were UHF and the HF tests.\nThat was an hour and a half transmitting every five minutes\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"29\nCONFIDENTIAL\nand having the HF/DF on. I'm not sure what kind of data\nthey got but I hope they got something. The first one we\nhad to do on the HORIZAN SCAN; it took some fuel and I\nwonder really if it was worth it.\nBorman At about 166:40 we noted our drift rate picking up and we\nfinally determined this was from the water boiler venting.\nIt resulted in a left yaw rate and this continued periodi-\ncally throughout the mission. It certainly would not be\nobjectional if we had fuel to counteract it. During a\nnight period, in which we didn't do any attitude control\nat all, I timed the rates during the 13th day, and when we\nwoke up they were about 7 degrees per second. I timed\nthem around the horizon and came up with 7 degrees per\nsecond. About the only thing you can say about it is that\nit requires fuel to stop it.\nIt occurs primarily in left yaw and left roll.\nLovell There are two things in the S/C that causes the yaw left\nfor some reason. Gus first noticed it and I think it is\ncharacteristic of the S/C. One is the water boiler and the\nother is,every time you turn off the power it fires two\nthrusters that give it a left yaw. The same two all the\ntime.\nBorman We tried to beat that ever way we could. Every time we\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"30\nCONFIDENTIAL\nshut down, we put it in a different control mode and it\nstill fired the same two thrusters.\nEvery time you turn off ACME bias power it would go\"boop,\"\n\"boop\"; just like that. Every time we were without attitude\ncontrol for extended periods we ended up with a left yaw\nand a left roll.\nFinally at 191:48 we got both crewmen suitless. That was\nthe best decision in the whole flight. The performance of\nthe Cryo bottles was fantastic.\nLovell That was one thing we were worried about. The hydrogen\nbottle I thought was never going to last. Forty per cent\nof the hydrogen bottle was still left at the end of 14 days.\nOne thing I wanted to try was to blow the squib. Remember\nthey said \"Did you blow the squib?\" I forgot about it. Just\nprior to retro, I wanted to go over there and blow that squib\nthat opened up into a vacuum.\nBorman It would have taken several hours for it to do any good.\nLovell Yes, I know, I just thought maybe we could hear it or\nsomething.\nBorman One thing that cropped up more and more as the mission\nprogressed, it seemed to get worse as it went along was the\nfact that things were cancelled because of weather. We\npicked up large areas of clouds over the U. S. and over S.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"America. About the only area that stayed clear was Northwest Africa. A lot of the experiments and a lot of the Apollo landmarks were shot because of clouds.\nBorman\tOn the 6 launch, the second time, we were able to track it. We were not able to pick up lift-off because of clouds again, but when it got to the con level, above the clouds, we were able to pick it up and we tracked it using IR until we couldn't see anymore. Even above the con level I think we were tracking the exhaust from the stage two engines using PULSE mode. I hope we got some good data on that.\nBorman\tAt 266:16 we really got cold; the suit inlet temperature dropped below 40 degrees and we started squirting water out of the suit inlet hoses. We informed Houston about this and they determined that the water boiler had frozen up and they recommended a procedure to clear it. We did this with Gemini 6 watching; essentially it involved putting the radiator to BYPASS and changing some switches.\nLovell\tEvaporator heat on.\nBorman\tPut the evaporator heat on and setting up to 10 degree per second roll rate.\nLovell\tThat's the picture you saw in the movies.\nBorman\tIt actually threw a lot of fuel out and a lot of water out. It left a glob of ice on the side of the S/C, about 10"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"inches in diameter at the exit from the water boiler vent.\nLovell\tThere were only two problems that we really had. There were the Fuel Cells and the two thrusters. We also had a cold Spacecraft.\nBorman\tYes, that is when we had that water boiler problem.\nLovell\tBefore that; the first time we woke up, it was 20 degrees colder inside.\nBorman\tOh yes, I'm sure what had happened during the night was that we vented the water boiler, used the water boiler. This is the day when we woke up and had such high rates on the S/C. We have all that in the cabin temperature survey. The wall temperature was 20 degrees lower.\nLovell\tIt was just freezing in there.\n5.0 RETROFIRE\n5.1 TR-2:00 Power Up and Alignment Checklist\nBorman\tWe had a slightly different procedure as far as retrofire goes. Powering up for it took two hours. The power up and alignment checklist was called up from the ground since we had open circuited two stacks. We turned our main batteries on and the squib batteries back on at TR minus two hours.\nLovell\tDuring the flight they had powered us down on the squib batteries and put in the bus ties about the last week of the"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"flight.\nBorman\tWe were flying with bus ties and fuel cells and no squib batteries.\nLovell\tTo conserve the squib batteries for the retrofire period.\nBorman\tRight.\nLovell\tBecause of that configuration, and because of the fact that we lost two stacks, we had to modify our power up procedure.\nBorman\tRight. Incidentally because of the fact that we had two degraded thrusters, 3 and 4, we didn't use the PLATFORM mode at all for this alignment. We aligned it all manually. The thrusters were degraded, but there was still enough in them to allow you to get fine maneuvers, fine control. I used less control by turning off the circuit breaker for thruster No. 12 and used 11, giving back thrust and this would give you right yaw.\n5.2 TR-26 events\nBorman\tAt T-26 the event timer was set, we didn't read anybody because of our orbit, and we weren't able to start our event timer counting down until T-20.\nLovell\tT-20\nBorman\tRead out from Carnarvon."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5.3 TR-5 GMT Stop Clock\nBorman\tAt TR-5 Jim got the bug on the eight minutes, no problem.\nLovell\tYes, I got that okay.\n5.4 TR-256\nBorman\tTR-256 Sequence light came on exactly on schedule.\nLovell\tThe digital clock never lost a second during the entire flight.\nBorman\tWe didn't touch it.\nLovell\tWe didn't touch that digital clock one time during the entire flight. That is the best instrument in the whole S/C, especially for this type of flight when you have a lot of updates and everything.\nBorman\tElectrical was no problem. Control system, the RCS worked perfectly. It just worked beautifully.\n5.5 TR-1\nBorman\tRetro attitude minus 20 degrees pitch. The ball had been aligned for two revolutions and it was perfect. If we had not had the ball, I would have been happier if we had retro fired in the daylight. SEP OAMS, as advertised. You hear it.\nLovell\tYes!\nBorman\tYou feel it slightly.\nLovell\tThat is right, and you even feel SEP ELECT."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman\tYes, and you really feel SEP ADAPT. It felt like I had put in forward thrust at that time.\nLovell\tYes.\nBorman\tIt was really a good thud when we separated the adapter. Retrorocket squibs were armed at TR-30. Arm AUTO-RETRO was actually done at about TR-10.\nLovell\tWe did that a little bit early.\nBorman\tThe event timer was perfect. MDU, Jim got all the readouts and they were exactly what had been called up.\nLovell\tYes. There was one or two that the last digit was one number off, but that is nominal. We didn't bother that.\n5.6 TR-0\nBorman\tFrom the time we got the countdown at Carnarvon we really didn't talk to anybody at all until we heard Houston at TR-10 seconds come in with a count through Canton.\nLovell\tWe didn't think that they were going to come in, as a matter of fact.\nBorman\tNo, we were wondering...\nLovell\tThat is a very poor place to retrofire. Canton had poor communications compared with the rest of it.\nBorman\tBut they came through that time.\nLovell\tYes, they came through.\nBorman\tWe really didn't need them because we had every indication"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that our timing was good on-board. They did come through but not until TR-10 seconds. At TR equals zero the S/C attitude was 20 degrees down. S/C rates were easy to control, but I thought that the thrust from those retro-rockets was high. I really had a sensation of being accelerated. Didn't you Jim?\nLovell Well, it was different from what I had expected because we were so used to zero g flight.\nBorman The only thing I could do was fly instruments, the needles and the ball. Trying to hold it right on the ball.\nBorman I was very glad that I was in RATE COMMAND. I had to control it in RATE COMMAND a little bit, particularly on the fourth retro rocket. The first three went bing, bing, bing. Then there was a pause of about 1/2 a second and the fourth one went. The fourth one seemed like it was a little misaligned, I think it was left yaw. I had to bring it back. I would like to emphasize this. I thought those retros were really powerful, and that you were holding on to something that if you really didn't have good control it could get away from you pretty easily.\nLovell But, I was sure happy to hear them go."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman Control mode was Rate Command, and the IVI readouts there-did you write those down?\nLovell I have them here.\nBorman We called them off and we have them.\nLovell This is what I've been using. It was 298, and 112.\nBorman And 3 left.\nLovell Yes, and 3 left.\nBorman What were the nominals? Let's just make a note of what the nominals were.\nLovell This is usually about....\nBorman They called up the nominals.\nShepard They were 113 and 296.\nLovell Yes. That was 2 off from nominal, I recall that....298 actual, and 112 actual, 298 aft and 112 down as the actuals.\nBorman And 3 right.\nLovell And 3 right.\nBorman So we got in close to the nominal, and when you figure this out on our onboard charts you come up with a bank angle of 50 degrees.\nLovell That's why I couldn't understand the 35--well, maybe I'm wrong but let's take a look at this thing again. Let's go through it.\nBorman All right."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell That's a minus 1 error here, right? And a plus 2 error there, right?\nBorman Right.\nLovell Okay, so I went in here and got to a plus 2 error here, right?\nBorman Right.\nLovell Went up here to a minus, here's the zero mark right here, to a minus one error; where this thing crossed this thing right up to here, plus 2, and by gosh, it came right out to 50 degrees or 53 degrees.\nBorman They gave us 55 degrees roll left, which is what the nominal level was...\nLovell I've got it right here. Fifty degrees and 60 degrees is what they gave us. Bank left 50 degrees and bank right 60 degrees.\nBorman Yes.\nLovell And so I looked up the chart and it said 50 degrees as the back up angles--everything was working just like a charm and then I went back here to the bank contour line to get out our down range deflection, and it was 1 or 2 miles, I think it was, no, 5 miles overshoot; which was just about as close as you can hack it. And I thought oh boy, this is really, talk about nominal reentry, this is the one"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that's going to be it, and then they came up with 35 degrees, 45 degrees, and I misinterpreted it; I was arguing with Frank after retrofire and he says no, that's 30 degrees--50 degrees.\nBorman 50 degrees.\nLovell 53 degrees is what he's saying. He just wants to get it down to a little finer line. And then Frank called back again and said, \"No, it was 35 degrees,\" so I don't know what the story was there.\nBorman The PDI as far as the retrofire goes, it was no problem. It worked out fine, and I just like to have it, I think. If you really were forced into it you could do it on rate needles, but you'd have to have a lot of confidence in your ability to hold it. I wouldn't want to do it without Rate Command; and again, I did it in Rate Command. I'm not even sure how much the thrusters were firing during retrofire. Did you notice? I was watching the ball, and I didn't notice.\nFCSD Rep Did it light up the horizon pretty badly?\nLovell It was really not too bad. But actually; yes, it did, it lit it up quite a bit.\nFCSD Rep Okay.\nLovell There was a point in the flight plan that they wanted the"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pilot to evaluate the horizon for a night, no platform, retro. And the thing is this: you can turn out all the lights, you can get lined up for BEF retrofire, without a platform if you get the stars and everything. But once you start firing, you are going to have to use the rate needles, if they are working, to hold position, because you can't see the horizon any longer, because the thrusters do blank out any sight outside. And also, if you've got the lights turned up in the cockpit, so that you can see things; that means that you can't see outside. So, you have to go either outside to get cues, or you have to turn the lights out in the cockpit. And if you're going to use stuff inside, then you have the lights on. I would be hesitant to make a night retrofire without platform too. I think I would probably wait for a day one.\n5.7 Retro Pack Jettison\nBorman The retro pack jettison - Jim fired...the one thing here on manual fire, Jim fired the manual retros the way we always have. We fired in the way we always have, one second after TR equals zero, but we got an auto retrofire.\nLovell Yeah, because the first one fired before I pushed the button."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"41\nBorman That was right on the money. The retro pack jettison was accomplished 45 seconds after, when the amber light came on, and you could feel and hear this one going; of course, it was pitch black so we couldn't see a thing. This was one of the things that we didn't see, the RETRO ADAPTER, the ADAPTER, or the RETROPACK.\nLovell No, I didn't see any of that stuff go at all.\nBorman Total darkness.\nLovell Besides that, the thrusters blank out anything you could possibly see.\n5.8 Communications and 5.9 updating\nBorman Communications were rather sketchy there. I was very glad though, that we were able to get through to Houston. I think it was over Guaymas when they came up and told us to change in retro angle, and bank angle; I don't know who did that but that was good work on the ground following up that computing, and getting us real time updates, I guess they must have done it after tracking.\nLovell Yes, That's probably what it was.\nBorman That's probably how they did it. And that was darn good.\nLovell Yes.\nBorman Because the 35 degrees, I was flying right between 35 degrees and 0 degrees most of the time, and if we'd have followed the 50 degrees, we'd have ended up way short."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"42\nSo that was very good work on the ground's part.\nLovell It looks like the initial computation of retrofire time was off, and they already had a good orbit on us.\nBorman I don't know what it was, but they corrected it when we came in.\n5.10 Post Retro Jettison Checklist\nBorman The post retro jettison checklist was accomplished with no problem. Oh, I'm thinking; we did have some discussion about as far as the retro goes. With the--we'll cover this more fully under suits. The question was whether to leave those hoods on or off for retrofire. We found that the noise and the--I don't know why we didn't notice this at launch, but we did during reentry, the noise from the air blowing in the G5C suits was an impediment to crew discussion.\nLovell It would go on the mikes and make a lot of noise on the mikes. The mikes picked up a lot of whistle.\nBorman Plus the fact that the vision out of that thing certainly needs to be imporved. So, we didn't know what to do--we finally decided to leave them on for retrofire.\n6.0 REENTRY\n6.1 Reentry Parameters Update\nBorman Reentry. 400,000 feet, we had that time updated; and at 400,000 feet I rolled left 55 degrees, because this...or fifty degrees, the value of the backup angles at that time."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"43\n6.2 400K\nBorman Spacecraft attitude at 400,000 feet was difficult to determine. We didn't have a horizon until we were below 350,000 feet, and I was having a lot of trouble trying to find it. Jim, you got the horizon first on your side.\nLovell Yes, the horizon came up first on my side. Well, we did not have it right at 350,000 feet, but we could look out between RCS firings and see the air glow, if you'd stuck your face right up there and look out. But when you're doing the reentry on the instruments you have the lights up so, one guy can't do it, you have to have two guys; one to look out and find out where the horizon is and--\nBorman That was a heck of a thing. I'd like to be able to cross check between the balls and the horizon once in a while to make sure that I knew exactly where we were. As it turned out this was a completely instrument reentry. We finally found the horizon and Jim would tell me yes, it's about in the right place. But I just watched the ball. And I think that it would be very difficult to back up a reentry by watching out the window. One person could provide backup guidance for you, and tell"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"44\nyou where you are and what the bank angle looks like with the horizon. But, I don't think that a person that is flying the reentry can cross check between the ball and the horizon. I think you have to make your choice and live with it. Okay, roll commands were just like the simulator; time correlation was good. The guidance initiate came right on the money, and the needles jumped indicating an undershoot, a slight undershoot. From then on we just flew it the way we'd flown them a hundred times in St. Louis and in the simulator. I think we were very well prepared for this. I tried to fly it so that we took it downrange, and we got a slight overshoot indication on downrange of about 1 needle width, 1 dot. Then as we got down to around 2 g's or 2 1/2 g's, I tried to start zeroing it out, so then when 3 g's came; the downrange was pegged right on the money. And we were indicating zero on the cross range. And at 3 g's I switched to flying the roll bug, and just zeroing the roll bug; and as we came on down further and further the downrange stayed zero, but the cross range started going off full scale. Well, this really doesn't mean anything because all the cross range is indicating is"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"45\nyour per cent of miss verses per cent of capability. And down on that range what it was really doing was, we were coming in a little bit short, and it was sacrificing the cross range in order to get the down range cleared up, because the cross range was very small anyway.\nLovell There was a bias in the down range needles between his ball and my ball, and I think, that fortunately, my ball was the one that was out. Because when he was right on.\nBorman You said we were overshooting all the time.\nLovell Yes. He was right on - I said you were overshooting, it was about a needle and a half width bias.\nBorman Okay. The initial indication of g's, I remember Jim called over and said, \"how many g's are we on now.\" I said less than one\" and you said \"get serious.\" I think you couldn't believe it. The first onset you feel like you have about a ton on you, but then as it builds up it never seems to get much worse. It's almost as if it were a step function. As soon as you get the g you really notice it, and then you don't notice it much more. And the maximum g's that we pulled during the reentry were 3.9.\nLovell Yes, that amazed me. I actually thought we did pull more g's.\nBorman 3.9 g's. So, it was a long extended time."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"46\n-CONFIDENTIAL-\n\nLovell\tYes.\n\nBorman\tDuring the later part of it I started out in PULSE Mode and rolled over the 55 degrees in PULSE Mode, and then when we got Guidance Initiate I went to DIRECT. I was finding that in order to keep the cross range zeroed, and we had been told that Wally had trouble with his cross range, I was banking back and forth quite frequently maneuvering the spacecraft around the full lift point, from one side to the other and I was overshooting a little bit in DIRECT. I was also starting to pick up some pitch and yaw oscillations, so then I went to single ring RATE COMMAND. And boy, this was really a great control mode, it was steady as a rock. You could put it right where you wanted and it stayed there. But pretty soon we got down around, I guess it was when the g's were coming off, after 3.9 g's. I started losing it in single ring RATE COMMAND so I threw two rings on and it held it like a rock. But they were sure firing.\n\nLovell\tOh, yes.\n\nBorman\tBoh, those thrusters were really firing. And we started getting ablation off the heat shield. It was coming back in and hitting the nose of the spacecraft, and that was pretty\n\n-CONFIDENTIAL-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-CONFIDENTIAL-\n\n47\n\nsensational. Jim was giving vivid descriptions on what was happening, and I was watching the ball.\n\nLovell\tThat's one thing that no one had ever told us before. I was amazed. Maybe it was peculiar to the spacecraft.\n\nBorman\tNo, Tom and Wally had mentioned it.\n\nLovell\tOh, is that right? That ablative material went back and hit the forward end near the recovery section, rather the RCS section; and I thought well, I never heard of this before, and I was a little worried that maybe we were too far off, and the stuff was going to start getting into recovery sections. But it turned out to be okay.\n\nBorman\tAnother thing was that the windows really got scrounged up on that reentry; that's something else. I could hardly see out of my window. Stuff was coming over from the heat shield and hitting it. It was really gunky.\n\n6.3 Acceleration Profile\n\nBorman\tOkay. The acceleration profile was very small. It was a very high lift reentry, and of course, this results in a low g and long duration build up. No problem at all.\n\n6.4 Spacecraft Control\n\nBorman\tSpacecraft control was excellent until we got down to 100,000 feet or even below 100,000 feet. We turned on\n\n-CONFIDENTIAL-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"48\n\n-CONFIDENTIAL-\n\nthe LANDING SQUIB at 100,000 feet and sat there and watched it.\n\n6.5 100K Feet\n\nBorman\tI started losing it; I think we may have run out of RCS fuel between 100,000 feet and 50,000 feet; at least I thought we had.\n\n6.6 50K Feet\n\nLovell\tWell, didn't you turn off the RCS?\n\nBorman\tI didn't turn that off until after we got on the drogue. We were starting to build up the yaw and pitch rates. Then at 50,000 feet, I was anxiously awaiting the drogue, because these rates were building up a little. They weren't very bad yet, though. I pushed the drogue expecting it to decrease, and all it did was amplify them. And we got a real ride on the drogue for a while, sounded like the one Jim and Ed discussed. It was really going pretty bad.\n\nLovell\tOur angles were what? About 70 degrees. We pitched up?\n\nBorman\tOh no, I estimate we were oscillating back and forth maybe 20 degrees.\n\nLovell\tFrom the drogue here pitching up we were rolling back and forth more than 20 degrees on that initial part.\n\n-CONFIDENTIAL-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"49\n\n-CONFIDENTIAL-\n\nBorman\tWe'll have to see. We don't have readings on that.\n\nLovell\tOkay, because I'm sure we did more than 20 degrees.\n\nBorman\tThen I threw the motor valves back open again on the thrusters, and that seemed to stop it. So I left them open a while and finally turned them on again and it stopped, and it settled out, and it was pretty smooth on the drogue. As a matter of fact, when we got down to main chute, it was steady as a rock on the drogue.\n\nLovell\tYes.\n\n6.7 35K Checklist\n\nBorman\tI turned off the RCS motor valves and blipped the thrusters to clear the lines between 30,000 feet to 26,000 feet. And Jim then opened--The 40K barostat worked fine.\n\n6.8 Communications\n\nBorman\tAnd we gave the reentry status report. I'm not sure that Houston heard it, but we told them the drogue was all right and okay.\n\n6.9 26K Checklist\n\nBorman\tJim, at 26,000 feet you opened the vent air snorkel\n\n-CONFIDENTIAL-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"50\n\n-CONFIDENTIAL-\n\nand we got a cabin full of I don't know what it was.\n\nLovell\tYou had your hood off. Why?\n\nBorman\tI took my hood off to try to find the horizon, so I made the reentry with the hood off.\n\nLovell\tOkay, I had my hood on, and I think when we opened up the snorkle; the way that works, the snorkle draws air through the suit compressor, and then into the suit circuit. I had my hood on; and the flow comes out of an opening back here in the hood, and flows down. I got an eye full of something that was an acid.\n\nBorman\tAcid, eh?\n\nLovell\tYes. Really burned my eyes. My eyes were watering when I finally got the hood off.\n\nBorman\tWell, we accomplished all the checklists, and we had no problems; as a matter of fact, it went pretty smooth in the time between the drogue deploy and the 10.6 barostat.\n\n6.10 10.6 K Barostat\n\nBorman\tIt was just like the simulator. One thing I did notice, initially, when we were on the drogue, the altimeter was completely inaccurate. You couldn't even read it. We were oscillating so badly that it was jumping in thousands of feet per second, oh maybe not thousands, but the needles were going all over the place; and I remember thinking boy,\n\n-CONFIDENTIAL-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"if this oscillation doesn't stop, I'll have to punch the main chute on the amber light, rather than the altimeter. But the oscillations did stop.\n6.11 Main Chute Deployment\nBorman I punched the main chute at 10,600 feet as indicated on the altimeter, and just a millisecond after that, the yellow light came on the 10.6 barostat light. The thing deployed immediately into a reefed condition, and we examined it in the reefed condition and it looked very good.\nLovell Frank thought it was in the reefed condition for 3 months.\nBorman It seemed like it stayed reefed for a long time, then it unreefed, and I couldn't find one gore or one panel that was ripped or frayed or anything.\nLovell It was a good chute.\nBorman Perfect chute.\n6.12 Post Main Checklist\nBorman We accomplished the post main checklist, and then we braced ourselves very well and went to the single point of attitude.\n6.13 Single Point Release\nBorman When we went to the single point attitude it was exactly the same as we had had it at St. Louis--where they'd rigged--they had a test after John and Gus's flight. They put a test capsule suspension at St. Louis, and this was"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"exactly the same. You get a good whack and then you sit there and vibrate back and forth for a little bit.\n6.14 2K Checklist\nBorman 2,000 foot checklist we accomplished with no problem. About this time, at 2,000 feet, I heard Air Boss calling and we started communicating with Air Boss. I saw him flying around while we were still on the chute. Houston came through about this time and wanted to know if we had a main chute. I'd called all these things off, but I guess that the communications--maybe the Auto Cats weren't working or something.\nLovell Air Boss should have called back and said...\nBorman But I called back and confirmed main chute.\n6.15 Landing\nBorman We hit the water with a pretty good thud, and your window went under water, didn't it? Jim's window went under water. We hit in a drift. We were drifting to the right rear, and there was a 14 knot wind, and when we hit the spacecraft rolled to the right, and your window went under the water, and mine stayed up. Nothing serious though.\nLovell Nothing serious.\n6.16 Postlanding Checklist\nBorman We extended the HF antenna to get a test for them and went on HF-DF; I hope that somebody heard it. But they had"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"swimmers there in about 4 minutes, and so I put the HF antenna back down to keep it from getting damaged. And we conducted the electrical check. I must say that I'm glad that the electrical check was simple, because it was hot in there, and we were tired. I was worried about this before and I would never have been able to sit there and go through this complicated, long check.\nLovell We had both planned, that what we were going to do was take off our suits in the spacecraft, and wear our orbital flight suits. And I think that we probably would never have gotten out of the suits, because we were just too hot and too beat.\nBorman It was even hot in the spacecraft, so Jim came through with the idea of opening the repress valve, and this was great. We had all that oxygen and you weren't going to use it. It blew all that cool oxygen out and we had O2 HI RATE and the snorkel on. So we stayed pretty cool when you get right down to it. So it was a good idea. I don't know if you got the blood pressure measurements or not, did you?\n6.17 Blood pressure measurement\nLovell I took them, I don't know whether they came out or not. I put the reprogrammer on in the water and started taking blood"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pressure measurements and--but that's hard to do. I ought to comment on that. Because to take a blood pressure measurement you had to pump up the thing and leave your hands still, and leave your arms still until it bleeds down; well it takes a little while for it to bleed down. Meanwhile, Frank's got the checklist out and the guys out there are putting on the collar, and we're trying to throw switches and take this and that; I just thought I might as well start doing it with my other hand.\nBorman Same way with the blood pressure they requested over Guaymas during reentry, I make a complete testimonial here; I think once the reentry starts that everything else gets left aside, and you don't mess around with blood pressures, or experiments or anything else. From then on it's sort of a case of surviving the darn thing. I didn't want him messing around looking for a blood pressure; so we didn't do it. About that time we couldn't find the horizon anyway.\nLovell We got called up from the MCC.\nBorman But, anyway, we didn't do it. So it didn't bother us.\nLovell That's the first I'd heard of it when they call up.\n7.0 LANDING AND RECOVERY\n7.1 Impact\nBorman We were drifting backwards, blunt end forward, rather, as"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"we hit the water, Although it was a good jolt, I wouldn't say it was anything outstanding. We hit, and Jim, your window went under water, right?\nLovell The spacecraft rolled to the right, I believe.\nBorman Yes. We hit, rolled to the right, and you went under water and bobbed right up.\nLovell Right\nBorman I released the parachute and it floated in front of us for several minutes.\nLovell I saw part of it on the left hand side there, or rather on the right hand side as it floated by my window.\nBorman It stayed there for several minutes. It's just the way it's been described before.\nLovell There was an awful lot of fog on the window, though. I noticed that the humidity was such that you could hardly see out. Very foggy.\nBorman I'm not sure that was humidity or that was from reentry.\nLovell Might have been from reentry, I don't know.\nBorman I did see the S2F on the chute. We saw it while we were still on the chute coming down.\n7.2 Checklists\nLovell The only thing I had about the checklists; during the recovery phase, I had a hard time doing the checklist, in fact, I had to give it to you, because I couldn't move my"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"56\narm doing the blood pressure work. And that complicates the recovery phase of it quite a bit.\nBorman Yes.\nLovell I think it also compromised the blood pressures that way too.\nBorman We didn't feel like running foot races when we finally hit the water. We had planned to get out of our pressure suits into that orbital flight suit, but the effort was just too great. So, we just opened the repress valve to get some more cooling in there and sat.\nLovell That's right. We opened up the repress valve; did we have the cabin fan on?\nBorman No, we didn't have the cabin fan on. We had the snorkle valve with the suit fans and the O2 HI RATE and the repress valve open.\nBorman The checklists were all right then as far as you're concerned?\nLovell Yes. I thought the recovery phase was very good. I think I missed one or two. I know I didn't turn all the stack switches off, but the power and control switches were off during the reentry phase; so, there was no problem there.\n7.3 Communications\nBorman UHF. We had communications with Air Boss while we were still on the chute, and we had very good communications"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"57\nwith them in the water. The communications with Houston via UHF were poor. Once we were on the drogue they kept calling us asking us to confirm main chute. I'm not sure they ever heard us confirm main chute.\nLovell I've often wondered about that. Watching the other spacecraft come in, why they don't call; and I found out that they do call but they can't get through. Must be the relay planes trouble or something.\nBorman Communications with recovery forces on UHF was excellent. HF: we extended the HF antenna, put out HF-DF tone for awhile. Again I am not sure if anyone picked it up or not. We retracted it after it had been up only 8 minutes, because of the fact that we did not want to get the HF antenna broken off during the recovery operation.\nLovell There was no need for HF communications since we were so close to the recovery group.\nBorman The chopper was over us about 5 or 6 minutes after landing. We had much better UHF communications, so, we did not use HF.\nOn point of impact, onboard data. Within the limits of the readability of that scale, it was excellent. Down range and cross range needles were fine. We actually ended up about 8 or 9 miles from the carrier. You just can't get much finer information out of the down range and cross range."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"58\ncross range.\nLovell Did you have any kind of a malfunction in the accelerometer?\nBorman No, but Spacecraft 6 did. I don't remember that being a condition of the bet.\nLovell I didn't either.\nBorman Ground Information. The ground gave us excellent information, as far as everything we needed to know, including recomputing the guidance angles after retro. The ground did an excellent job. Tracking data, I don't remember receiving that. When Spacecraft 6 was entering, they kept telling them that they were fine, and they were going right down the slot and everything. I do not remember ever hearing from the ground on anything like that on ours, do you? Perhaps we did and we were so engrossed in flying it, that we did not notice it.\nLovell Well, we had good communications prior to blackout over Guaymas. After we started guiding, going into the atmosphere, communications went to pot.\nBorman Status of recovery. I do not think recovery could have been any better.\nLovell Very smooth.\n7.4 Systems Configuration\nBorman The ECS, as we said before, we had O2 HI RATE with both"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"59\nsuit fans, snorkel valve open, and the vent valve open. We also opened the repress valve. Electrical: We performed a simple electrical check. We turned off 3 and 4, left 1 and 2 on, and watched for the variation in voltage on the main buses. The bus that is fed by 1 and 2 batteries varied with wave action.\nLovell That is right. But 3 and 4 did not move from zero.\nBorman And then you turned off squib batteries 1 and 2 also didn't you?\nLovell I left squib battery 3 on.\nBorman Squib battery 3 was the only one that was on.\nLovell Control: We turned off the platform, the computer, the circuit breakers to the thrusters, and the RCS thrusters.\nBorman We left the computer in PRELAUNCH for 48 seconds or more, before we turned it off. Aeromedical, no comment. Except blood pressure being a nuisance, and perhaps even a hindrance when we were trying to go around the cockpit with the switches and you had to hold one arm still.\n7.5 Spacecraft Status\nBorman RCS fumes: When you open the snorkel at around 26,000 feet you get a good load of them.\nLovell I am not sure what kind of fumes they were. They were not familiar to me. I have smelled the results of fuel in the"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"60\nRCS system,and I know what that smells like it. It did not smell that way. I got a burning sensation in my eyes, which was different. Now, I might have got a more concentrated one. I still had my helmet on, and zipped up. You had your helmet off. I believe, that with the snorkel open, the compressor pulled the ambient air through the snorkel through the compressors and into the suit circuit. That is why I got a concentrated dose of whatever was on the outside, which caused my eyes to water and to burn. Whether it was the ablative material, the shingles, or the RCS fumes, I do not know.\nBorman The main chute was perfect.\nLovell Looked beautiful.\nBorman I could not see a rip or a tear or any fraying or anything; it was just perfect. The windows were foggy in flight. I thought they fogged over and the visibility out of them during the hot part of the reentry, was very poor also.\nLovell They started to burn a little bit. Started to peel off on the outside. I do not know what it was.\nBorman When we got on the water they were fogged over with humidity and salt spray. I guess you have to expect that.\nLeaks: There were none, that I know of. Couldn't see"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"61\nCONFIDENTIAL\nany or hear any.\nLovell\tI did not see any leaks.\nBorman\tElectrical Power: We mentioned we had 1 and 2 main batteries on, and when we evacuated the spacecraft, we turned all four of them on per the checklist. Turned off everything but the rescue beacon. Electrical power was ample, very good. We were running both suit fans.\nLovell\tOxygen: Went to repress valve open.\nBorman\tWe went through that swiftly, as a matter of fact, to keep cool.\nLovell\tWe noticed before we got out that both the bottle pressures were down to zero.\nBorman\tHatches: After one of the swimmers said we were clear to open the hatches, I unlocked mine. It operated very freely and easily. I could budge it about 2 inches, but I could not lift it. I probably could have if I had exerted a lot of effort, and gotten my legs up under me. However, the swimmer was right outside, and I asked him to help. He helped and it came right open, worked very well. We had the suit on and left them on.\nLovell\tWe were warm, undoubtedly. Getting out of the spacecraft as quickly as we did helped us.\nBorman\tThat was the smart thing to do.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62\nCONFIDENTIAL\nLovell\tI wouldn't want to sit in there with our suits on.\nBorman\tPlus, I thought the visibility of that suit during re-entry left a lot to be desired. That is why I had to pull my hood back to find out where we were and what position we were in. I think the suit is an excellent one, but it is going to have to be improved. We better grab it and start working, modifying it; to make it acceptable for Apollo. The sea condition was very good; 2 to 4 foot waves. We bobbed around, although I got a little queasy, I did not get nauseated, Jim didn't either.\nLovell\tThe sea condition was outstanding for landing.\n7.6 Postlanding Activity\nBorman\tPostlanding activity was well organized. We were a little busy. We did not get thru until about 10 o'clock that night. Is that right?\nLovell\tYes, that is right.\nBorman\tWe had a little misunderstanding about riding a bicycle. We understood we were not supposed to ride until 18 hours after impact. They wanted us to ride it that night after we had been through a full day of medical exams, and finally had a good supper. So, we told them they would have to hold off until 18 hours after impact.\nFCSD Rep\tYou are still in the spacecraft for this part.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"63\nCONFIDENTIAL\nBorman\tOkay. On postlanding we just sat there.\nLovell\tWell, we went through the check-off list. That took all the time. I saw the swimmers, checked the electrical system, that they wanted us to do for postlanding. By that time the swimmer had the collar up. I could see the collar going up, and then he got the jacket on.\nBorman\tWe had good communication with the swimmer through that jack.\nLovell\tExcellent communications with the swimmer.\n7.7 Comfort\nBorman\tIt gets pretty warm in that spacecraft. I would hate to spend any great deal of time in there without any FCS.\nLovell\tI can speak as an authority on that.\n7.8 Recovery Force Personnel\nBorman\tWe covered communications, it was excellent. Flotation collar was fine, worked good.\n7.9 Egress\nBorman\tEgress was normal, just as we practiced in Galveston Bay several times. These helicopters did a fine job. I think someone said it was about 23 minutes after we landed that we were on our way back.\n7.10 Survival Gear\nBorman\tEven the underarm life preservers inflated this time. Wonder of wonders. No problem.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"64\nCONFIDENTIAL\n7.11 Crew Pick Up\nBorman\tThe crew pick up was nominal.\nLovell\tNothing else. Everything was fine.\n8.0 SYSTEMS OPERATION\n8.1 Platform\nBorman\tWe aligned the platform 3 times. Each time it worked just as advertised. Daytime alignment, of course, was no problem. We got very ample yaw reference out the window.\nLovell\tCaging, for fast heat dropout took approximately 23 minutes.\nBorman\tNight time, the initial alignment is a little difficult if you do not have a full moon. With a full moon it is almost as easy at night as it is in the daytime. It really lit the terrain up.\nLovell\tTo get your initial spacecraft attitude, the full moon is very nice.\nBorman\tRight, without a full moon, I think it would take you a little while to align to get your Spacecraft BEF, so that you would not have to torque the platform too far for alignment.\nLovell\tYou get to know the stars.\nBorman\tYes, you have to use the stars. It would be difficult to pick up the ground and track it. Platform Modes: CAGE. Jim said that took 23 minutes for a fast heat drop out.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"65\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSEF worked perfectly. BEF worked perfectly. ORB RATE seemed to be fine. We used it preparing for the rendezvous with Spacecraft 6. After running ORB RATE for approximately an hour, and then going back to align SEF, we did not notice a great amount of misalignment. The only time it was on FREE was during reentry. I guess the FREE worked fine.\nLovell\tNo problem about displays, were there?\nBorman\tNo, not at all.\nLovell\tBeen using them for a couple of years now.\nBorman\tNo problem about controls. The PLATFORM mode worked well. During our last alignment, we had degraded operation in thrusters 3 and 4; so we aligned it manually for 2 orbits. It was very easy to do, and it worked fine.\nWe had all the confidence in the world as far as attitude reference is concerned.\n8.2 OAMS\nBorman\tOAMS operational check, Pad: I think we went around the horn about 3 times before they were satisfied.\nLovell\tIt took three circuits to get them.\nBorman\tRight. Inflight OAMS: The only operational check we had is when we lost the complete authority in yaw right, thrusters 3 and 4. We noticed this first in PULSE mode;\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"66\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwe switched to DIRECT and in DIRECT we did not get any\nignition at all as far as I could tell. In the OAMS PULSE\nyaw right, we were getting slight little pops. It seemed\nwe had about 1 control authority that we had before we\nexperienced the problem. We went to DIRECT, to see what\neffect DIRECT had on it and we got some thrust, but it was\na whishing. We weren't getting any sound of the\nthrusters. It was a whishing sound. I think we were only\ngetting an impulse either from the oxidizer or the fuel\nescaping.\nLovell We could hear a clicking of the solenoids or the operation\nof the valves, whatever they were back there. They were\nworking all right, but we were not getting any resultant\nthrust.\nBorman Right. Systems Monitoring: Source pressure was fine.\nWent right down the predicted schedule.\nLovell As a matter of fact, the source pressure dropped, just as\npredicted, when we ran out of initial OAMS fuel before we\nwent to the reserve tank. It came back in again when we\nactuated the squib.\nBorman No, that wasn't the source pressure, that was the regulated\npressure.\nLovell I mean the regulated pressure, I'm sorry.\nBorman The source temperature worked fine throughout the flight.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"67\nCONFIDENTIAL\nThe regulated pressure stayed at 300, right on the money,\nthroughout the entire flight until the auxiliary tank was\nactuated. We operated the auxiliary tank when the pressure\ndropped about 30 psi.\nLovell Yes. It went down to about 260 or 270.\nBorman Right. It came right back up, and the system worked just\nexactly as advertised. The propellant quantity gauge\nworked fine. For most of the flight it was right in\nagreement with the ground computations.\nLovell What was the final propellant quantity reading?\nBorman About 2 percent to 3 percent.\nLovell And we still had 300 psi regulated pressure.\nBorman Source pressure remained about 1,000 psi. Monitoring of\nOAMS propellant remaining: On board information I thought\nwas good. The OAMS propellant quantity gauge, worked fine.\nLovell At least it was on the side favoring us.\nBorman Yes. The ground information was excellent. At the end of\nevery day they gave us ground rundown of how much OAMS fuel\nwe had remaining. It worked out fine. We were short on\nOAMS fuel. Any time we didn't have a specific assignment,\nwe were in drifting flight. That's one thing we want men-\ntioned. Every time we powered down we'd turn off the ACME\nbias power and the ACME inverter, and invariably this would\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"68\nCONFIDENTIAL\nend up in two pulses of \"bump,\" \"bump\", that would tend to\nyaw left and roll left. And the natural tendency of\nthe spacecraft to yaw left due to water boiler venting,\nI guess, and perhaps ECS venting, was aggravated by this\nadded impulse of two blips when we shut down the ACME.\nHow about the selector controls and switches in the\ncockpit?\nLovell No comments there.\nBorman I don't have any either. The attitude controller, I thought,\nwas fine. No problems. Maneuver controllers were fine.\nLovell The right hand maneuver controller was a very nice operating\ncontroller and it was very handy. Very easy to operate.\nBorman As far as inflight malfunctions or irregularities, we lost\nauthority on thrusters 3 and 4. We got some of our yaw\nright capability back by turning off the circuit breaker for\nThruster 12 and then thrusting backwards with the maneuver\ncontroller in order to give us yaw right. This worked very\nwell and enabled us to check yaw right drift rates and\nenabled us to make yaw right maneuvers. The only thing\nyou couldn't get very small control inputs with this mode.\nLovell And you used a lot of gas.\nBorman And you used a lot of gas. I was very happy when we finally\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"69\nCONFIDENTIAL\naligned the platform for reentry that we were able to get\nenough control out of 3 and 4 to align the platform. When\nwe did this, of course, in order to get yaw control we went\nto roll jets - pitch, and that worked fine. I don't have\nanything to add to that malfunction. We heard the solenoids\nworking. When we went to DIRECT we could feel we did get an\nimpulse, but we did not seem to get ignition. It sounded\nmore like a swishing noise. The ground analyzed it and\nseemed to think it was a problem with the valve seats. I'm\nnot certain what it was. I do know that we also tried secon-\ndary drivers and that didn't help. I could tell that wasn't\nthe problem when we first heard it.\nLovell We tried different modes--PULSE, DIRECT, and RATE COMMAND,\nbut that didn't help. I think it was mechanical problem.\nBorman RATE COMMAND is a very tight control mode. I'm very glad it\nwas there. I think it is very important to have that for\nretrofire. We also used it for reentry. I think it is a\nvery good mode. Of course, it is expensive in fuel. We\nused it also for all our thrusting when we were making orbit\nadjust maneuvers.\nLovell Let me ask a question. When did you go to RATE COMMAND\nduring the reentry?\nBorman I went to RATE COMMAND during reentry after guidance initi-\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"70\nCONFIDENTIAL\nate and after I started flying the needles.\nLovell Because you were overshooting with DIRECT?\nBorman Right. I was not able to get the fine control I wanted.\nIt would not stay in there. It seemed like the spacecraft\nwas picking up a torque in roll also, and I was having to\nwatch it too close.\nLovell And this was different than what we had in the simulation.\nBorman Yes. REENTRY RATE COMMAND we never used. DIRECT we used\nonce for tracking the Reentry Minuteman in order to catch\nit. It was moving so swiftly. We also used it in the ini-\ntial phases of reentry, and it worked fine. The PULSE mode,\nof course, was the one we lived with most throughout the 14\ndays. I thought it was an excellent mode.\nLovell It is a gas saver and even when you do have a platform the\nPULSE mode is adequate for most of the work you can do-- for\nany attitude control, ground terrain observations--except\nfor rapid rotations where you need a faster authority.\nBorman Right. All ground tracking, PULSE was adequate. We did\nnot have any problem at all. We were able to track the\nPolaris using PULSE. Everything except the reentry-zone we\ncould use PULSE mode. The HORIZON SCAN mode was fine. The\nonly thing I noticed there was at sunrise and sunset some-\ntimes, we were driven to a 30 or 40 nosedown pitch attitude\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"by the thrusters. The scanners worked great except at sunrise and sunset. Lovell They would lose lock... Borman Sometimes they wouldn't lose lock but, remember, they drove the spacecraft nose down. About 40° pitch down. Lovell The one big thing, which was the question in all our minds, actually happened. Another spacecraft nearby will interrupt the HORIZON SCAN mode. Borman Right. Lovell It does effect the scanner operation, so it is something you have to take in consideration. Borman That's right. When 6 got between us and the sun, the scanners were inoperative and lost lock. PLATFORM mode worked excellently when we had it, and we used it to align the first two times we had the platform. I think that you can do a finer job, and you can align the platform more closely manually. This is because the deadband on the PLATFORM mode is larger than you can control manually. But it certainly is a worthwhile mode and for station keeping it is a superior type of operation. Translation maneuvers at spacecraft separation at SECO + 30--I did not hear the thrusters. I just thrusted. Jim hit the SEP spacecraft. Did you hear the thrusters?"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell No. I did not hear the thrusters. One reason why we didn't hear the thrusters in that particular case, whereas we did later on, was the fact that we had our hoods on and the air was blowing in and making a lot of noise. It was strictly by feel and by sight. No sound. Borman Right. Perigee Adjust Translation. Accelerometer bias was what they thought it was prelaunch, and it remained that way throughout the flight. This was a no platform Perigee Adjust, so, really that doesn't have any meaning there. The timing on the first Perigee Adjust Maneuver was off, thanks to me. Jim made the maneuver. We did it without a platform on a star. And, as I mentioned earlier, about this time we were in close proximity to the booster, and we started flying through some particles, but I was not sure exactly what it was, so I told him to stop thrusting as we approached this. Then, when we got in there, when we stopped thrusting, this wire came forward, hit the hatch, and I lost the timing again. We thrusted, I guess, a little too long. I am not sure exactly how long it was. I think we were aiming for a perigee of about 102, and ended up with about 120. Maybe they changed their minds and went for a perigee of 120. I don't know. Lovell Well, that time which they gave us was not consistent with"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the flight plan. They gave us one minute and 16 or 17 seconds, and the flight plan called for 46, I think. Borman Well, we may get that cleared up when we talk to the ground. But, it was greater than I thought we had planned to do. Updating throughout the flight was excellent. Checklist was fine and, of course, we did not use the computer. Lovell We might mention here that both Frank and I think making adjust maneuvers without a platform is very feasible. You can use the reticle for alignment and use the stars as a reference. Since you are usually using the aft thrusters, you do not have thruster light to worry about. You can turn down the lights. It takes two people though; one person to burn, hold attitude on the star, and watch the star reference and the other person to time. It required two people, but it is a very feasible method of doing it. I think you get some very good accuracies with it, because we found out from the second burn. 8.3 RCS Borman RCS operational checks were nominal. We had no problems at all with the RCS. System monitoring was perfect and it did not drop one bit during the 14 days. After we actuated it, it went from 3,000 to about 2,600 to 2,500 psi on the source pressure. No problems. Control modes, RATE COMMAND. As I"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"have said, it is a very tight and fine mode. We used it during most of the reentry. REENTRY RATE COMMAND we did not use. DIRECT I used for the first part of the reentry, and it seemed that we were picking up rolling torques, and I was also starting to pick up pitch and yaw oscillations as the gs were coming on. They were slight ones but I really wanted to get the spacecraft steady, and I was really trying to lock it in on the attitude indicator, so we went to RATE COMMAND. I didn't see any reason to bring back a lot of RCS fuel anyway. REENTRY RATE COMMAND we did not use. The PULSE mode was used in the reentry prior to guidance initiate, and it worked fine. Retrofire attitude control was excellent and I'm glad we had RATE COMMAND there because we had no outside reference at all. Retrofire was done on the ball with the rate needles, and I thought the rockets were outstanding. Yeah, outstanding, I thought they were a little more powerful than I had anticipated. Lovell Quite all right. Borman Reentry attitude control deadbands and rate damping was fine. The only thing, I guess, that was wrong with RATE COMMAND was the fact that it uses an awful lot of fuel. But, it certainly holds that spacecraft steady as a rock. The heater lights - we solved that problem very easily. We"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"turned on the RCS Heaters on the second day and left them on through the entire flight. They sequenced and went on and off, I am sure, but we did not know about it. We never saw the light, and we did not have to worry about it. Lovell The temperatures kept right around 80° all the time. Borman No comments on thruster firing, worked fine. We shut the RCS system down initially around 35,000 feet, shut off the motor valves and then the oscillation on the drogue built up even greater than it was. So we turned them back on again, and I'm not sure if it is my imagination or not but it seemed like this had some effect on damping the oscillations. It may have been just the position in the reentry, though. I had the feeling that perhaps we had run out of RCS fuel prior to drogue deploy. I am not certain, but if we didn't then the RCS didn't have the authority, because we were oscillating before drogue deploy. I didn't notice any RCS fumes after impact. Did you, Jim? Lovell After impact? No. I think that our system of turning the Repress on and getting the... 8.4 ECS Borman Why don't you comment on suit mobility? Lovell This was a flight that actually did some evaluation on the suit. We had the new light weight suit. Mobility is better"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"than the 4-C suit, but mobility in the Gemini cockpit with\nthe 5-C suit still restricts the person such that it de-\ngrades his performance for long duration missions. It is\nstill quite immobile in the 5-C suit. We still have a lot\nof trouble with it. The suits checked out all right prior\nto the flight. We did not do any integrity checks with the\nlight weight suits during the flight. The air flow\nthrough the suit was adequate where the flow got to the\nbody. However, there were many pockets where the air became\nstagnant, especially in the crotch area. It would heat up\nin local areas of the body and would not provide adequate\ncooling. Humidity goes right along with temperature. The\nareas where the air flow did not go across the body, was\nvery humid. We also noticed that it gave you sort of a wet\nclammy feeling when the cool air went in there. It gave you\nsort of a cold, clammy feeling where the flow went through.\nPlaces where the air did not reach were hot and clammy.\nBorman Also, the humidity in the cabin was very, very low when we\nwere in the suits. The cabin was dry and hot. Very, very\npoor.\nLovell The humidity dew point was between 52 and 58 most of the\ntime. We have some accurate figures on that. I don't recall\nany instance of even seeing the CO2 gauge move other than"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"during tape dumps. We had no evidence of CO2. Comfort in\nany pressure suit is compromised. It restricts mobility\nand the Gemini cockpit is just not that big for long dura-\ntion flights where you can live with the suit. Suit con-\ntrols were very adequate, no problems there. We had abso-\nlutely no problems with the O2 demand regulator. The elec-\ntrical umbilical is ungainly and heavy. The connection\nright angle sticks out in the cockpit. It could be better\ndesigned. We did not have fingertip lights. Our mode of\noperation, with the suit on, was primarily with the hood\noff, the cover visor on, and the gloves off. Many times we\nalso unzipped the big zipper through the crotch and up the\nback, and left that zipper open. We found that the big\nopening in the neck, with the crotch zipper closed, most of\nthe air would go out through the neck and would not adequate-\nly vent the lower stomach area. We had planned in our flight\nplan to try going suitless. As per plan, about the second\nday, I got out of my suit and found after settling down to\nthe environment that the skin became drier. There were no\nwet spots or dampness in the underwear area. I put my suit\ninlet hose along side of me on the center stowage area with\nthe opening facing aft blowing air down alongside the seat\nblowing aft. The exhaust hose was put back into its stowage"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"position, with the screen on, along the lower right hand\nfootwell area. This provided adequate ventilation during\nmost of the time. When we exercised we found out we built\nup quite a bit of extra heat. I would then move the inlet\nhose to a position along side of me, along my left leg,\nand tie it down along the side pedestal with the opening\nfacing upward. This would provide more cooling into the\nbasic cockpit area and would actually keep me a lot cooler\nthan I had been before. We found out that without suits on,\nthe cockpit actually became bigger. There was more oppor-\ntunity to move around. You could move the body, there was\nless hesitancy to exercise, less resistance to exercise,\nyou could get to things easier. You actually had more con-\ntrol and more comfort without the suit on. We stowed the\nsuit on the seat, putting the visor along the outer part of\nthe top of the seat rest and doubling the legs back against\nthe back of the seat. We stowed the harness in the juncture\nof the back and the seat of the ejection seat. During zero\ng we were floating up and we never touched the back part of\nthe seat.\nBorman I have some flight notes that I will just read out for the\nrecord. Ventilation without suits: The bypass hoses on the\nGemini provide excellent return ducts for the suit compres-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sors. They were mounted with the inlet on the outside wall\nnear the individual crewmans outboard knee. The suit inlet\nhose was then positioned to secure different flow patterns.\nBecause no provision had been made for special inlet hoses,\nonly two positions were tried. The one most often used was\nthe suit inlet hose located near the inboard shoulder point-\ning forward. This produced a flow pattern from right to\nleft down across the body. The body was never really in the\nflow but a very comfortable circulation pattern was set up.\nThe other primary pattern consisted of leaving the suit out-\nlet hose in the same place, but putting the inlet hose near\nthe outboard knee, pointing 90° from the direction of the\noutlet hose. This pattern also produced a comfortable flow\npattern. In truth, I believe the cabin is so small in\nvolume compared to the amount of air introduced by the suit\ncircuit that almost any arrangement would provide enough\nair to provide efficient cooling. We also have some sketch-\nes of how this went.\nLovell We also believe, after spending several days without suits\non that the theory that at zero g there would be no con-\nvection cooling...\nBorman I am sure that there isn't any, due to change in the heating\ncondition."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell The mass of the air being pushed out by the compressors is\nenough to give adequate flow throughout the entire Gemini\ncockpit. We had no problems with air flow.\nBorman It would have been a very, very difficult task to stay in\nthose suits for 14 days, if not impossible. We certain-\nly would have been in much worse shape when we got down.\nLovell I believe so. We were requested from Houston to try the\nhose position evaluation where by the inlet and outlet hoses\nwere together.\nBorman Yes.\nLovell We tried it and to be perfectly honest, with the small cock-\npit and the amount of flow out of the inlet hose, we did not\nfind much difference, it was adequate, but it was awkward\nto use it that way. We did find out that if my exhaust hose\nwas put on Frank's side that we would get stagnant spots on\nmy side of the cockpit where although I wasn't uncomforta-\nble...\nBorman ...that is with your inlet hose being turned off. So all\nthese flows were introduced on my side and both the return\nhoses were on my side.\nLovell That is right, they were on your side. I found stagnant\nareas, I wasn't uncomfortable, but I did find stagnant areas\nwhere there was no flow going on on my side. You have to"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"have adequate positioning of the exhaust and inlet hoses.\nBorman I think really to solve the whole problem, if you want to design efficient cooling for suits off operation in space-craft, design it the same as you would on the ground.\nLovell Right, I think you are right.\nBorman You would have no problem. For instance, in most of the airplanes now that are pressure cooled the flow is so great across them that you have a continuous flow pattern in there, coming out usually from one inlet located up around your right shoulder and a couple in around your feet. I don't think you have to worry about the bugaboo of no convection in zero g because it is overshadowed by the large kinetic energy input through the large amount of air.\nLovell Cabin pressure was 5.5 on lift-off, came down to 5.1 and stayed there exactly 5.1 for 14 days. It did not move when we jettisoned the adapter and went on the bottles, it stayed exactly 5.1. The only time I saw it move was on the water when we used all the oxygen up and it went to zero.\nBorman Well, it was below 5.1 when we opened the Inlet Snorkle.\n\nLovell Inlet Snorkle.. yes, that is right.\nBorman You were talking about the inlet bottle pressure.\nLovell Yes, that's right, the bottle pressure."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman The temperature varied with the suits on and the suits off operation. I have gone through my notes here, and I note that it says when we both had suits on and we were just barely cool enough with both suits on and the B pumps running. On the other hand, when we were both out of the suits, the B pumps only running, we were very comfortable. When we were up working and operating, we noticed that the temperature level in the cockpit was just right. We were running most of the time with the suits full cold, the heat exchanger full cold, and maximum air flow on both controls. Then for several days when we went to bed, we left the controls that way, and we would wake up very cool.\nLovell Well, there are several factors. I think the size of the Gemini cockpit and the fact of a completely closed loop system is very dependent on 2 factors. One was the heat output of the people and two was the amount of heat you get in through the windows due to the sun. At night our heat output decreased, we put up shields on the windows, including some aluminized foil to reflect the sun, and I think the combination of both these things with the systems we had during the day time really dropped the heat in the cockpit. Then, during the day when we were active and had the windows open again, the temperature increased inside the cockpit so it was very comfortable."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman That is right but the last couple of days we turned down the suit flow at night and it helped out.\nLovell To compensate for this thing we turned down the suit flow.\nBorman There's a lot of inertia in the cooling system and it takes a long time from the time you make a move on the controls before you can feel it.\nLovell Just to regress here one minute. When I was out of the suit and Frank was in it, we put my suit flow to full decrease and his to full increase to give him maximum cooling in the suit. I was not uncomfortable with the full decrease flow in the cockpit.\nBorman The humidity in the cabin was higher with the suits off. It was a much more comfortable cabin. Your skin didn't get dry, and the nose problems we had the first 3 or 4 days went away. I am not sure that we can contribute this solely to being out of the suits or whether it was the fact we were becoming more acclimated to the 100 per cent oxygen.\nLovell We have some accurate figures. I believe though, that with suits on the humidity-temperature range was about 20 degrees difference. With the suits off they went around 10 degrees, I suspect.\nBorman We have them all there. The only time the CO2 jumped at all"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was during tape dumps, it would go up and then come back down but we knew this before flight though. Comfort day and night, with and without suits...There is just no comparison.. I have the notes that I wrote down while we were still up there. There is no comparison between suit on and suit off operation. The suit off is 1,000 per cent better. I think I may have been conservative. It was maybe a lot better than that. Comfort without the suits was by and large very good. We used the cabin fan only once in the entire mission during one of the checks with the suit off. This was when we had Jim's suit inlet hose blocked off and my inlet hose operating in my side and the two suit outlet hoses in my side of the spacecraft. As we already mentioned here, Jim noticed some stagnant areas in the spacecraft, and we turned on the cabin fan to see if this aleviated the problem, and it did help. There was a definite circulation with the cabin fan on. The only problem is the cabin fan draws a considerable electrical load, and we did not have the power to run it continually. The cabin pressure regulator worked perfectly, it never worked at all.\nLovell That is right, never heard it, thank goodness.\nBorman That's the pressure relief valve. Right, never heard it. It never actuated. The cabin pressure regulator was as"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"steady as a rock. As Jim has already mentioned it stayed 5.1 the whole flight, and I never saw it budge at all, until you opened the snorkel.\nLovell Right.\nFCSD rep Cabin vent valve.\nLovell We had a double vent valve with the tip bent up to protect the stop. We never used that until we got down to the checklist during the reentry portion of the flight.\nBorman The Cabin Repress Valve was on the entire flight because we had the M-1 Experiment hooked to it. Then, of course, we actuated it again when we got on the water just to get some cooling oxygen into the spacecraft. I have no comments on it, we had no problem with it, the friction had been increased on it so that it worked quite well. It stayed in the open position for the entire flight. The Cabin Air Inlet Valve, we used...\nLovell Just during the reentry phase..\nBorman Right. Just during the reentry phase.\nLovell ...with the snorkel valve, that is when I think I got a whiff of that stuff through there.\nBorman All the time with the suits off, we were running with the Cabin Air Recirculation Valve closed. The rest of the time when there was one person in the suit and one person out of"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the suit we ran with it in a 45 degree position. When both people were in the suits, we ran it in the 45 degree position.\nLovell I'd like to make one comment on the Cabin Inlet Valve, I think a future procedure would be to either open the visor or unzip the hood prior to using the snorkel valve, so you do not get this concentrated ambient flow into the suit in a small concentrated area. Okay. Primary O2 System Monitoring.\nBorman Primary O2 System Monitoring was no problem. The cryogenics bottle for ECS O2 oxygen did vent... I think it was about the 8th day it started venting. Performance of the cryogenics bottles have been outstanding. The first one, ECS O2, started venting today. And we were still adding heat to the other two bottles. Let's see, this was Sunday morning so that would have been the 8th day that it started venting. The quantity measuring system worked fine. The flow rates were adequate. I just cannot emphasize enough the desirability of going without suits. The pressure and temperature remained just nominal. We had dome plots aboard the spacecraft, and we checked them out. We had to use the auto heater on the ECS O2 bottle perhaps, the first two days or so and then we were able to turn the heater off complete-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ly. That bottle had a big enough heat leak so that it maintained pressure itself. As I said, it started venting on the 8th day. We never used the manual heater on the ECS O2 bottle.\nLovell As a matter of fact, the primary O2 helped, rather we utilized the primary O2 to pump up the pressure on the FC O2 sometime in the early part of the portion of the flight.\nBorman Yes, we used the crossover valve. When you hit the squib or when you hit the switch to open the solenoids, even though we had been led to believe that it takes some time for that pressure to build up, it looked to me that it went to about 250 in the FC O2 bottle almost immediately. It went from 100 to 250 almost immediately. I imagine it will come down when we talk about the FC O2 problem.\nBorman Secondary O2 System Monitoring was nothing, we checked it... all the time, but GO/NO GO decision once a day. It stayed exactly the same throughout the entire flight--5400 and 5300.\nLovell It did not budge at all.\nBorman Quantity measuring..we do not measure except for pressure, and as we said that stayed constant. Flow rates, pressures, and controls were nominal in the secondary O2. You could not tell when we had gone off the primary onto the secondary"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"O2. We have already talked about the CO2 partial pressure. It was below zero the entire flight except during tape dumps when it jumped up due to a glitch that the tape dump puts in the TM system. Radiator operation and configuration...We ran radiator on all the time except for two checks that were made. Actually when we opened circuited the fuel cells before we brought them back on the line, we went to RADIATOR BYPASS twice. Then we went to RADIATOR BYPASS once when we wanted to get the water out of the ECS System. One time during the flight we were picking up water. This might be a good place to cover that. We were picking up water coming out of our suit inlet hose, in quite large quantities. We called the ground, and they suggested that perhaps the water boiler was not venting. They called up the procedure that included putting on evaporator heat, turning off the radiator and going to bypass on the radiators and rotating the spacecraft at 10 degrees per second. This threw out large amount of water and things got back to normal. Later on in the flight we noticed the same thing, but we were busy aligning the platform and other things and we did not want to setup roll-rates. All we did was put the suit coolant to warm and put both suit fans on and blew the water out of the system, and that worked also. We did notice that during"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the flight, down in the vicinity of my right foot in the center pedestal lower area there, around the cabin heat exchanger, we got a lot of condensation. It was very wet on the walls and the blotter paper was sopping wet, a radius of about 12 inches on the lower right pedestal, on my side. I do not know how it was on your side.\nLovell It started getting wet on my side, the inboard.\nBorman Yes, inboard side. That is the only place in the spacecraft that I noticed any condensation. As far as I know the evaporator only operated during launch and the first orbit. We also had one other day when we woke up and were tumbling quite badly and the wall temperatures were 16 degrees to 20 degrees lower than we ever recorded them before. I suspect that the evaporator might have worked that night. We mentioned this to the ground and...let's see, I have some notes on that.\nLovell It probably got filled up from the moisture going into the system.\nBorman This was noted in the data for the cabin temperature surveys also. I don't remember exactly what day it was, where we noticed this big change in temperature.\nLovell It was about 5 or 6 days after the mission started, wasn't it?"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman Yes..here it is here...it was 158 hours and 27 minutes when we got up, and we had a wall temperature of 64 degrees and a pilot hatch temperature of 66 degrees. Comparing this with 144 hours and 53 minutes, the hatch temperature had been 84 degrees, so there was a 20 degrees drop during this one evening. I attributed this, plus the fact that we noticed large drift rates when we woke up, to the fact that the water boiler must have been operating during the night. It was the only time during the flight that we noticed these large drops in temperature...the very cold wall temperatures. We were on double loop, B pumps most of the time. Finally, went to A pump twice in the flight when people were in the suits in order to stay cool. We went to double A pumps, of course, when we were powered up.\nLovell We had one time when we had one A pump on.\nBorman Twice we had it on.\nLovell Twice, but just one primary pump. We did not go to two A pumps.\nBorman No. A pump in the primary loop was on twice to keep cool.\nLovell Right. The secondary loop A pump was not on.\nBorman Never on except during periods when the platform was running.\nLovell Right.\nBorman Now, as I mentioned before, when we were running both B"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"91\nCONFIDENTIAL\npumps with the suits off, it was comfortable. When we got\nthe suits on, and both B pumps going, it was not enough to\nhandle the load.\nLovell It was marginal.\nBorman That is right. Normal mode was all we used on water management.\nLovell Never touched the---\nBorman Never touch the condensator.\nLovell The drink gun worked as advertised.\nBorman One thing I would mention is the fact that this logging every ounce you drink was an operational nightmare.\nLovell I think the gun is adequate for flights if all you want to do is to know the total quantity of water that is going out for ballast purposes or CG purposes. I do not think there is a requirement to know just how much each crewman is drinking as long as it is adequate. There is no need to log, all you have to do is report counter readings once a day for the guidance people and fuel cell people to know just how much water is being consumed.\nBorman Right. It says flush mode. We never used the Flush mode or Evaporator Fill mode.\n8.5 Communications\nLovell The interphone Operation and Quality was okay, without the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"92\nCONFIDENTIAL\nhood on. The G5C suit made communications poor, because of\nthe flow of the air to the hood. Other than that I thought\nthe interphone was pretty good.\nBorman Yes, we should mention the fact that the G5C suit with the hood zipped did introduce a lot of noise.\nLovell Yes, a feed back into those two mikes and there was a lot of noise.\nBorman The quality of the interphone was excellent. With the suits off we didn't use them most of the time, just like talking in a room, so we didn't need it. My UHF was a little fuzzy during countdown.\nLovell Mine was good.\nBorman Yes, yours was good and mine was a little fuzzy. I could hear people all right but they claimed that I was a little weak. In orbit, I just can't say enough nice things about the UHF.\nLovell UHF was excellent in orbit for the entire 14 days. Very little static. High quality reproduction.\nBorman With the squelch on zero.\nLovell Right, the squelch on zero.\nBorman The UHF performance during recovery was excellent. No problems with that at all.\nLovell We did have trouble getting back to Houston.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n93\nBorman I was very pleased with the entire Voice procedure operation around the world. I thought they did an excellent job. We didn't have any problems at all. They were quiet when they were requested to be during our sleep period.\nLovell They were outstanding.\nBorman They were outstanding, yes.\nLovell The voice tape recorder operation was fine. There were no hitches as far as operating the voice recorder. It was easy to, well, that's three feet of change. We used mostly the CONTINUOUS mode rather than the MOMENTARY. I used MOMENTARY when we just wanted to make a comment. As a matter of fact, I think the MOMENTARY position does save a lot of voice tape, because you don't have it on and forget it. However, we had a procedure with the voice tape that was going to record the quantity of urine that was dumped. And this led us to leave the voice tape on quite a long time when we weren't doing anything or saying anything--and using quite a bit of tape. I think that it would be helpful if we had some sort of a little light of some sort to let you know that the tapes on. When we have a flow meter which was being evaluated for future flights and might be a standard piece of equipment then it would certainly be nice to have\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"94\nCONFIDENTIAL\nsome indication if the tape is on. On long flights you can't have the tape on all the time like the short flights--you have to conserve tape. Cartridge change was no problem. The controls were adequate. Data Recording? We tried to record as much data as we could.\nBorman We didn't indulge in a luxury many times of recording both in the log book and on the tape. We only had 20 tapes for a 14 day mission. If we got a good representation of it in the log book--we didn't put it on the tape. Now, we find out we probably brought back some unused tapes, too.\nLovell We did. It was hard for a 14 day mission to adequately budget the tape. We would try to budget it so that we could get the information on there without leaving long periods of inactivity on the tape. However, we didn't budget it well enough, and we left about 1 or 2 tapes without any recordings.\nBorman Digital Command System updates were good, no problem--everything worked fine. Real-time transmitter, and delay-time transmitter were no problem. As a matter of fact, that whole system I thought was excellent. The only problem we had in the area of Digital Command System or the telemetry was that we lost the tape recorder and...goofed up the delayed time. The procedure that we worked up for operating\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"95\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwith Spacecraft 6 in the air, I thought went very well. It posed no problems. Communications Controls and Switches-Voice Control Center, Audio modes, Keying and Antenna Selection, were all nominal. We might mention in Sleep Configuration--we never used the Sleep switches because we had the situation where we pretended it was night and went to sleep every evening and the ground never called us. I don't think they ever violated that for the 14 days. They never called us during the sleep period.\nLovell So that worked very well.\nBorman Beacon Control was no problem. We didn't use the Reentry C-band Beacon until reentry. The TM controls, transmitter, and antenna again were no problem. It was operated just as advertised due to all instructions from the ground.\n8.6 Electrical\nBorman Now we have some interesting things to talk about.\nLovell Well, we monitored the electrical system pretty closely.\nBorman Yeah, I guess we did.\nLovell The only thing we can say here is reiterate what we have probably said before. On lift-off we had delta P lights come on for fuel cells--both sections. 1 blinked on and off several times and went off. 2 blinked on and off several times and stayed on through insertion and stayed on\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"most of the time during the 14 days. We have recorded in the flight book of the flight plan--those times that it went off and on to the best of our knowledge. I'm sure we missed several of them.\nBorman When we were sleeping particularly.\nLovell When we were sleeping we missed them, but it appears to me that there are two things now that these fuel cells have a lot more latitude than we really first realized: 1) We can operate with the fuel cells with delta P lights on more than we thought we could. As a matter of fact, we were doing normal purges with the fuel cell delta P lights on which the systems book said flatly not to do. But we had some excellent guidance and assistance from the ground in keeping the sections running.\nBorman I think so, too.\nLovell I think that's what kept Stacks 2C and 2A going as long as they did go. The gauge is a little inaccurate to monitor the system. If we are going to have troubles with fuel cells as we did on this flight, and if the ground is going to keep requesting accurate stack amp readouts. The gauging system is poor because it is hard to read accurately the amps when they are down in the low 1 and 2 amps. Each indicator is canted a different way--alternately throughout the 6 stack"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"readouts. The ones that are canted inward away from you are hard to read.\nBorman The fuel cell, as Jim said, was an interesting thing. We finally lost stacks 2A and 2C about the 11th or 12th day. Stack 2B remained on and I'm sure there is a whole history written on the ground of the things they did and tests they ran at McDonnell when we were in the air to see just what they could do and how far they could go with these fuel cells. I thought they did an excellent job,and we ended up being able to run them the whole time. As a matter of fact, we turned on our Squib batteries about the 10th day--used the Bus Tie switches and were running entirely on the fuel cells the latter part of the flight."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman The onboard cues for monitoring the electrical system are adequate. We found out one thing in this flight, that is the Delta P lights really don't mean a lot. We had been told before the flight never to purge if you had a Delta P light. We ended up violating every single one of the cardinal rules that we had.\nI think the thing to note about the entire electrical system was the fine work done on the ground. They came up with solutions. They evidently were running similar type cells at MAC, St. Louis, and they kept them working for longer than they should have.\nFuel cell operation, as far as I was concerned, Section 1 was ideal. Section 1 maintained its share of the load the whole flight. Section 2, we lost stacks 2-A and 2-C eventually, I believe on about the 12th day. I was a little concerned on the 13th day with the status of Section 1 because we had had a delta P light on Section 1 for the first time and we had been running almost 24 hours.\nBut, the ground came through and read us up a technical report from St. Louis that explained the whole thing. It made me feel a lot easier when they did that. Rather than having the ground comment blindly on it, \"the fuel cells are going to be good for 24 hours,\" I would like to get a"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"little background information on it. How else could we know it was going to be good for 24 hours, and what had they done to prove it would be good for 24 hours? They read it to us over CSQ, it eased my mind a lot because I wasn't anxious to miss the WASP. On the 13th day, I wanted to be able to go the full 24 hours rather than have to land in the Pacific. So the whole story of the electrical monitoring, as far as I am concerned, was great work by the ground.\nThe main batteries held constant between 22.5 and 22.7 amps for the entire mission, and we checked them once a day at the GO/NO GO stations. When we turned them on 2 hours before retrofire they carried their share of the load and were operating fine when we were in the water. We turned off the squib batteries about the 10th day and used the bus tie switches. We ran entirely on fuel cell power for the last five days. When the squibs came back on, the voltage was 25.5 after they had been turned off for five days. They operated properly for the last 2 hours of the flight.\n8.7 Onboard computer\nBorman During the launch it was absolutely a nominal case. The pitch status, yaw status, and roll status, were zeroed except for a brief period at guidance initiate when they went out about 2 to 3 degrees,and then zeroed. We had no violent"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pitch down at guidance initiate. Attitude indications were nominal all the way through. At insertion, the nominal velocity on address 72 was 25,804 and when we read it up, it read 25,804. The orbit maneuvers using the computer and the platform were right on the money. The accelerometer bias did not vary, and we burned them off on the IVI's by inserting them through the MDIU, and it came out very well. I did not burn on time, we burned on the IVI's.\nBorman The updates were all made in the PRELAUNCH mode as agreed on before flight. There was no problem, no misunderstanding, I think FOD did very well in this regard. I know that in Gemini 5 there was a little mix-up, but we had none of that.\nBorman Retrofire occurred automatically at the exact second. All four Retros fired and the IRS was right on the money. Reentry guidance was nominal. It was very similar to the simulations that we had flown. There was one little anomaly in the guidance, in that we were given back-up reentry angles of 50 degrees. We computed with our onboard charts a reentry angle of 50 degrees, back-up angle of 50 degrees. But then after tracking, the ground called up a 35 degrees which proved to be closer to what we actually flew. I am still not aware of the reason for change; why it changed from 50 degrees to 35 degrees. The important thing is that it did change and the ground was able to update us in real time, and it agreed very well with the actual case."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman\tThe MDU worked perfectly the entire flight. Computer modes,\nPRELAUNCH, ASCENT, CATCH-UP, RENDEZVOUS, REENTRY, were all\nperfect, no anomalies in any of those.\n8.8 Crew Station\nBorman\tControls and displays. The sequential telelights operated\nexactly as programmed. At minus 2:56, they came on to the\nsecond. They all turned green when they were punched, no\nproblems there. The event timer was used only intermittantly\nthroughout the flight for timing, and for the last 20\nminutes. It worked fine. The IVI's also worked exactly as\nplanned. The Flight Director Indicator was again, a nomi-\nnal case. One slight difference between the simulator and\nthe Flight Director Indicator in the spacecraft, was the\nlittle outer roll gimbal indicator in the simulator always\ncame up to the top. I'd grown used to flying the reentries\nby using that as a lift vector. In the spacecraft when we\ngot all set up for reentry, low and behold, the outer roll\ngimbal was down at the bottom, so I had to fly the recip-\nprocal of it. But it was just a minor change and I ended\nup acclimating to it with no problem. I think it is just a\nfunction of how you happen to go through zero. If you go\nthrough zero just a little bit to one side, the gimbal goes\nto the top, and if you go through the other side, it goes\nto the bottom."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman\tGLV fuel and oxidizer pressure gauges were nominal. The\nconcept of sticking the decals on the outside of the gauge\nis poor at the best. But, we all know this has been done,\nand they're not going to change the gauges, and it worked\nfine. I would suggest never going this way again. I think\nwe ought to change the meters in the future.\nBorman\tThe altimeter worked fine. The only problems we had with\nthe altimeter was when we were oscillating violently on the\ndrogue, it was not indicating descent. As soon as the\ndrogue oscillations steadied out, the altimeter came down\nvery well. Rate of descent indicator was likewise. As a\nmatter of fact, I can't tell you what the rate of descent\nwas after we opened the main chute. The main chute was so\ngood when we looked at it. We didn't see any gores or\nfrays. And when we went to single point release, I didn't\neven look at the rate of descent indicator. Did you?\nLovell\tI couldn't see it.\nBorman\tDid you even think about it?\nLovell\tNo, you mean to tell me you didn't look at the rate of\ndescent indicator?\nBorman\tWe could tell from the altimeter we were going down very\nslow. The accelerometer seemed to give us slightly lower\nvalues than the recorded. I think on the reentry the highest\nvalue we got was 3.9 g's. During launch the highest that"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was recorded on the accelerometer was about 6.75 g's. I\nunderstand that the actual value was over 7. On the nominal\nprofile, it is.\nLovell\tWas the reentry a little higher than 3.9?\nBorman\tI don't know, I doubt if it was, it was so near full lift.\nSwitches and circuit breaker panels. We had a couple of\ncases knocking off circuit breakers. We did have one fuel\ncell control circuit breaker pop on us twice.\nLovell\tI am not real sure it popped. I don't know whether I hit\nit inadvertantly twice.\nBorman\tNo, you didn't. The second time I watched it pop.\nOther than that, I thought the switches and circuit panels\nwere well located. I think it is very important that we\nhave those guards on there, particularly with changing suits.\nLovell\tThe fuel cell switches, the power and control switches,\nshould be LIFT to move switches. They should be over center\nlocks that you have to lift to move them up. There was a\nguard over it, but still it was so easy to reach up there\nand hit those things. I was always worried about throwing\nthe control switch off, which would have really fouled up\nthe fuel cells.\nBorman\tYou mean like the squib switches? ...\nLovell\tYes, like the squib switches. I think that is the way they\nought to be because you never touch them unless deliberately."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman\tYes, that is a switch that is never moved unless there is\na failure in the fuel cells.\nLovell\tThey should be a little better type of switch than they are.\nBorman\tMirrors. Operating without suits on, I found that I seldom\nneeded the mirror. I don't believe I used it more than\n2 or 3 times except to check and see how far my beard had\ngrown. How about you, did you?\nLovell\tWell, they were good for things like looking way back in\nthe corner, and shining a light back there.\nBorman\tI was mobile enough that without a suit on I could turn\naround very easily and see all around. There is no question\nyou need the mirrors. I am not suggesting even remotely\nthat you take them out. With the suit off it cuts down the\nneed for them. The swizzle stick we used once to pry up\nthe center line stowage bracket. When we opened the center\nline stowage after launch, the bottom bracket sprung down\nabout 3/4 inches, and we had great difficulty to close it.\nWe only closed it twice during the flight after that. We\njust kept it velcroed partially shut.\nLovell\tI think the boost acceleration sprung it out of position.\nBorman\tEither that, or when they put that fix on there to beef\nit up, it resulted in an out-of-tolerance situation. I hope\nthat the people did not force it shut and then let us take\noff that way. That was a pain in the neck to get it shut."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell\tWe had to use the levers of the swizzle stick to get the\nthing back together again. This was bad. We also used the\nswizzle stick to keep the manual heater switch down on the\nFC H2 which is a real big pain. It is a very small switch\nand you have to hold it for a long time. That gets to be\na lot of trouble.\nBorman\tLighting, indicators and instruments. There is one\ninstrument in the spacecraft that should be lit that is\nnot. That is the digital timer. That is the most\nvaluable instrument onboard. We used it continually, it\nnever varied one second in 339 hours. We never had to\nreset that once. It was exactly on the money. We checked\nit periodically and it never gained or lost a second.\nLovell\tBut it had to be lit.\nBorman\tIt should be lit because it is right on the center panel,\nand there is no lighting on it except for the bright light\nfrom the back. Many times at night and when you are trying\nto maintain dark adaptation you end up having to use the\nflashlight on it.\nLovell\tIt should be a red light for night work. In the day time\nyou don't need it because the cockpit is lit up anyway.\nIt really ruined night vision to turn on that flashlight\nto find out what time it was.\nBorman\tThe left panel was fine when it was lit up with the display"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"106\nlight. The center panel and the right panel were all right.\nThere is no question that the lighting system on the LEM is\nsuperior.\nLovell We used the red lighting more than I thought we would ever\nuse it. We never used it in simulations. The red lighting\nturned out very nicely when we started looking out the\nwindow, using the stars, getting oriented and things of this\nnature.\nBorman The pedestal, console and circuit breaker areas just aren't\nlit. Same way with the water management panel, when you\nwanted to check that,the only thing you could do was use\nyour flashlight. It was not a big problem. The little\nflashlight that CSD developed, and put in, was one of the\nmost valuable pieces of gear we had. We used it continually\nthroughout the flight, it is much more valuable than finger-\ntip lights. I see no reason for fingertip lights because\nyou're not going to fly with gloves on most of the time.\nIf we would have had them, they would have been stowed.\nThis little flashlight turned out to be a little jewel. The\nutility light I did not use once in the whole flight.\nLovell I turned mine on once to see if it worked.\nBorman The flashlight was much easier to get to. We velcroed it\nright in front of us, and it was very handy. And at the\nend of 14 days it seemed as bright as it was before. One"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"107\nof the serious deficiencies in the flight was the dirty\nwindow.\nLovell I just talked to John Brinkman about the film. He said a\nlot of it was good, but a lot of it they could tell the\nwindow was dirty.\nBorman What about the booster film?\nLovell They haven't processed two rolls of film yet and they don't\nhave the Polaris launch yet. The Houston one turned out\nsort of hazy and I thought it was a clear day. He told me\nthere was haze on the ground.\nBorman Did they see Houston all right?\nLovell They could make out the International Airport.\nBorman You took that with the 250 mm. lens.\nLovell The high speed film. They don't want to process it until\nthey talk to us to find out what kind of exposures we used.\nWe had all kinds of exposures. I think the picture that was\nin the paper was from the 16 mm. camera.\nThe window was very dirty. And I have a ... a picture was\ntaken of it. Shows the ...\nBorman Jim drew a sketch of the window in the S-8/D-13 log.\nLovell There was a greenish, greasy film over the whole thing right\nin the center. Outside of that was a sort of a haze or fog\neffect. Right along the outer edge, it was clear. If I\nfocused on the nose of the spacecraft it would be blurry."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"108\nJust off the nose it would blurr out. There are two theories,\none group of people say it's the nose cover that is ablating\non launch, others say it is staging.\nWe saw quite a bit of flame at staging and it looked like\nthere were several streaks there caused by staging. There\nis also a general deposit like a stagnation point right there\nthat might have been built up during the entire launch, which\nmight be the nose cover. So, it might be the combination of\nboth.\nBorman It might have accumulated due to the urine dumps throughout\nflight. Several times we saw urine crystals come back and hit\nthe nose cone. We never saw them actually hit the window.\nI am not sure that some of it, that was practically invisible,\nmight have hit the window. It did seem to get worse with\nflight. My window was not nearly as bad as Jim's.\nLovell Frank's was better than mine. Whenever I could I would\ngive him the cameras to take a picture. He did a lot of\nthe Apollo landmark and S-5 and S-6 pictures while I was\ncontrolling the spacecraft.\nWe have to improve the windows somehow. We've got to have\nsome sort of cover or get some certain type of material.\nThe windows were perfect when we got in the cockpit. The\nproblem they had on GT-5, where they had fog and humidity\nbecause of the difference in temperature when the White"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"109\nRoom was dismantled, was not there this time.\nIntensity control was good, no problem. We had two white\nlights in the center cockpit, this was our request a long\ntime ago, and after using it I think we made a mistake. We\nnever did use the thunderstorm light that we stuck in place\nof the red light. Right now Frank and I think we could\nhave used the red light again because we both did use red\nlights a lot more than we thought we were going to, for\nnight work. It gets your eyes accustomed to the night, and\nyou can see the airglow and stars a lot better. If you have\nbright lights on in the cockpit, at night, with glare off the\nwindow and your eyes adjusted to the white lights, you could\nnever see out. It's just black.\nOnboard data: checklist cards preparation, excellent. I\nthink the people who made them up, Chuck Stough, has to take\na personal bow because I think that he did an outstanding\njob of making up all the onboard data books and cards. They\nare very, very good. What we did was, tear off the lift-off\ncards prior to reentry and just had the reentry section, so\nwe wouldn't get mixed up. There are several minor things\nwhich we could change to make it a little bit more compatible,\nlike getting one card with all the data on it so we didn't\nhave to flip the cards back and forth when MCC gave it to us.\nAs a matter of fact that is exactly what I ended up doing,"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"110\nI took the core card, and after I read the various cores for\nthe reentry parameters, I got the nominal IVI's, also the\nbank angle updates and things of this nature, all on one\ncard. Then I went back to the other section and transposed\nthem in there.\nBorman One of the most important things about the checklist on\nthis flight was the fact that we had them about a month\nbefore the flight. We used them in training, and the people\nresponsible for that did a great job, Chuck Stough and Ted\nGuillory.\nLovell That is important. On GT-4, because of the newness of the\nsystem, we were still rearranging cards and books just prior\nto the flight. Learning from that flight, on GT-7 we really\ngained a lot by having the cards and books early in the\ngame so we could train with them.\nChecklist cards usefulness was outstanding.\nBorman The maps and overlays were fine. We carried the larger\norbital display map. I'm not really sure we needed it. It\nwas a little cumbersome in the cockpit. It was all right,\nbut general areas would have been just as readily available\non a small map. When we were doing the Apollo landmarks,\nparticularly those with coastal features, I thought Apollo\nlandmark maps were entirely adequate. I did not see any\nreason for photographs. If you really want photographs, the"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"best way to do it would be to fly over them with an airplane\nand then change the scale to whatever you wanted it.\nLovell The photographs were important, but I don't think you have\nto spend valuable fuel and time to get them. An airplane\ncan do the same job getting photographs that we need for\nApollo landmarks.\nBorman That's right. No question about that.\nLovell I found it difficult to move the map overlay.\nBorman It got better as the flight went on.\nLovell Yes, because we wore it in. The overlay we have, with\nperiods, orbits, and the map underneath, I think that can\nbe improved. We needed a very simple device with two rollers\non the end, or some system a little bit more elaborate, but\na lot easier to handle.\nBorman I don't know, it worked all right toward the end, Jim. If\nyou get it too elaborate, or too easy to roll, then it is\ngoing to change on you.\nLovell It has to have a system where it can't change.\nBorman It was valuable. You knew where you were all the time.\nLovell We used it more than we used the star charts. Mainly, we\nused the star charts for the no platform burns, for retro-\nfire position, and for SEF and BEF positions.\nBorman By and large the maps and overlays were well prepared. They\nwere available early to us. We knew how to use them and it"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was a very, very fine job by FCSD people responsible for\nthem.\nBorman Data books: We were using a system that was started in GT-4,\nfurthered in GT-5 and I think it is working out very well.\nIf there is any derogatory remarks on it at all, it is the\nrequired amount of logging you have to do. It is really a\ndouble entry system. But, hopefully this will cut down the\npostflight activities and give people a better idea of\nwhat they are looking for. I would not suggest even for a\nmoment that we change it. We did delete some of the redun-\ndancy to endeavor to save voice tape. We tried to log\neverything in the book, but many of the things we did not\nput on voice tape that were already in the book because we\nwanted to save the tape. We only had 20 tapes for 14 days.\nEverything that was done is in the books. Most of the\ncritical things that were time significant are on the tape.\nBorman Star charts, Polar and Mercator. We used the Mercator almost\nexclusively.\nLovell I'm not saying the Polar was not any good, but the Mercator\nwas very adequate and we knew how to use it. I enjoy that\nparticular type of chart a little bit better.\nBorman It was preference more than anything else. We did check the\nPolar out during flight and it was apparently accurate. I\ndidn't see any reason to change those star charts either,"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"did you?\nLovell No, I think we have enough stars on there. I think they're\nadequate.\nBorman Stowage at launch was a little gruesome. When we got in we\nfound all the stuff stuffed on the floor over our feet.\nOnce we got into orbit and started going through our pre-\narranged procedure there was absolutely no problem. We used\nthe food bags to put the refuge from each meal in. We usually\nstored three meals in the front until we were ready to\ndispose of them, and then we would put them behind the seat.\nWe filled the debris guard areas we had behind the seats in\nabout eight days. After that we stowed the used ones in the\nbags we had. For reentry, we placed them over the seats as\nwe had done before. It worked fine.\nLovell When we first started training for the flight, there always\nseemed to be a de-emphasis on exactly how much we were going\nto stow. For instance, the size of the food bags was a lot\nsmaller than it turned out. The size of the tissue we used\nwas a lot smaller. I think that we ought to look at it\nrealistically early and make sure that we get the right\nsizes. We were led down the path there on that first\nstowage review in St. Louis.\nBorman Yes. We caught up with it on the third one though. We\ndoubled the size of everything."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell That is right.\nBorman We took an actual meal and ate it and got the refuse.\nLovell It was very fortunate that we did this. It caused us to look\nfor new places to stow things.\nBorman As it was it worked out real fine. The cockpit was cleaner\nwhen we reeentered than when we left. Another item that\nwas very helpful from the cockpit cleanliness standpoint\nwere these by-pass hoses with the screens on them. They\nacted as vacumn cleaners on the whole flight. All the gar-\nbage and refuse would get collected on them. We could clean\nthem off and put them in the bag and it worked great.\nLovell We never had any large amounts of dandruff or anything\nfloating around.\nBorman The harness we took off. All you can say about the harness\nis it is a necessary evil. Once you get it off, it is tough\nto stow. Jim, you sat on yours, didn't you?\nLovell I stowed mine between the seat and the back of the ejection\nseat because it was a dead space for me.\nBorman I stowed mine on the outboard side of the seat. We never\ntook the life vests off the harness.\nBorman Waste disposal and stowage. We used the aft food boxes for\nthe defecation gloves and the urine sample bags. Jim filled\nup his first and then I started filling up mine. We ended\nup putting one day of food and some other refuse in the"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"left-hand food box in addition to the defecation gloves and\nthe urine sample bags. One thing we might note is the\nhorrible odor every time we opened those boxes to put some-\nthing away.\nLovell It was a necessary evil, Frank.\nBorman We were a little concerned when we opened the vents on the\nboxes for the reentry that the smell might be with us for a\ncouple of hours, because we had to open them early before we\nput our suits on. But evidently the vent is just fine. It\nis large enough that it equalized the pressure, but it is\nnot large enough that it lets the odors escape into the\ncockpit.\n8.9 Biomedical\nBorman Oral temperature measurements and thermometer, no problem.\nAlthough, it seems strange to me that we have to have a TM\ntemperature. That thing got in the way.\nLovell Yes, the tube got in the way and floated around, and you\nalmost poked your eye a couple of times with the thing. It\nis a thin probe. It is very awkward because there are two\nof them. One is in the lightweight headset, and if you do\nnot have the suit on, you have to stick it down through\nhere. If you have the helmet on, it is supposed to be\nsticking out here, and it gets in the way. If they want\ninflight temperature, we should take along a regular"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"116\nBorman thermometer. We had a lot of glass in the cockpit. I do not see why we cannot carry some sort of a plastic thermometer. It seems ridiculous to me to have to TM a temperature.\nBorman I must admit I did not even know I had a blood pressure cuff on except when I filled it up. It did not cause any skin problems or anything. It is probably as good a way as we can go.\nLovell It seemed like I pumped up my cuff a lot more inflight than I had to on the ground for the same measurement. Sometimes we would not get the comment that, your \"cuff is full\" from the ground until after your arm was quite puffed up. Sometimes your arm really got to be sore. I do not know what you can do about it.\nBorman We used the M-3 equipment not only for the medical or the crew status passes, but we used it regularly three times a day. It is a very valuable piece of equipment. It came in very handy and it certainly was useful for this reason. I guess there is some reason for it for medical data. I did not understand why we could not stow it the last day. We had already checked and they said, \"All right, go ahead and stow it, you do not need it.\" Later they said, \"You have to unstow it. We want to get one more pass on you the last morning of the flight.\" After 14 days of flight I did not understand why we needed it, but we did it. Jim left it out,"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"117\nactually. You left it right over the circuit breaker panel, didn't you? Did it come out during reentry?\nLovell No. There was no problem.\nBorman There is no water problem.\nLovell There might have been a little air in it because we got air in the food all the time. I do not know how it got in because the food packages were evacuated. We would put the gun in and pump it up with water, and yet there was air in the food every time you opened it up. There was probably some air in the water, but it did not bother us too much.\nBorman No. I thought it was a minimum amount, too. The water tasted good. It was cool. The gun, as we have already commented, was very adequate. I think it is inconceivable that we continue to have to log drinks the way we did. I think if people want to know how much water you drink, you can read them off the counter on the gun, and that is it. We went crazy logging these things by numbers and counter numbers and everything else. It is operationally unacceptable.\nLovell For flights that are not primarily medical all they have to have is a counter reading once or twice a day for the systems people. They could just divide it by the number of crew and come out very close to what the actual consumption per man is.\nBorman The food, I thought, was by and large very good. One"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"118\nsuggestion on the food is that they try to reconfigure the meals so that Meal A is more like you would think of as a breakfast, with maybe some toast, cereal bars, and sausage patties; rather than fish, potato soup, and clam chowder for breakfast. The idea of making our day like a regular Houston day was a very, very valuable one. It would also be rather nice to have the meals correspond to the type of meal you would eat on the Earth. We ought to have a breakfast that is breakfast; and so on with lunch and dinner. One breakfast we had shrimp, sauce, peas, and I think potato soup. This is all right, but it would be more desirable to have had something like cereal cubes and sausage patties and things like that, something you are more used to.\nLovell The disinfectant pill crumbles. They would crumble when we got them out. The pieces would float about, and if they got in your eye they burned because it is a chlorine base pill of some sort. It happened to me once early in the flight, and it happened to Frank towards the end of the flight. We had to use the exhaust hoses to vacuum down the spacecraft to get rid of these things so we would not get them in our eyes. I think that we can probably go to something better in the future. There is a lot of room for improvement in food. It was good. It was adequate. We"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"119\nlasted 14 days. We could have lasted a lot longer on the food. But that does not mean there is not room for improvement.\nBorman The concept, as far as packaging and everything goes, is good. What is lacking now is really an adequate quality control for uniformity. If everyone of the food bags had been as good as the good ones, there would have been no problem. Some of them did not have velcro on them, some of them burst, and that sort of thing.\nLovell You could get the soups out of the spout very easily, but trying to get tuna salad and shrimp and sauce out of there was a real job. We should change the size of the spout according to the type of food we have. We noticed at the beginning of the flight that dry solids were especially bad.\nBorman Yes. Beef bites and bacon and egg bites are horrible and should be deleted from the menu.\nLovell GT-5 reported that the beef bites were crumbly. Every single package of beef bites that I got out was crumbs. They would float all over the place, and you had to get out your exhaust hose and gather them all up again and throw them away. If we did not have that technique, did not have the screens on the exhaust hoses, they would either go into the ECS system or float around. I could see where GT-5 got an awful lot of crumbs floating around."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"120\nBorman Sleep periods. This is one of the areas where we really made a wise decision. We decided that we would sleep simultaneously on the regular Houston schedule. We did slide it back every day to correspond with the precession of the orbit. When we were scheduled for house-keeping and sleep, we would close up the windows. We found that the polaroid filters were not adequate, so, we cut up an aluminized food bag and placed it between the window and the polaroid shield. Then, it was really dark inside, it cut out the heat, and this left us with a real simulated night. As far as we were concerned, it was night time. We would get up the next day, go to work, and it kept us regular. It kept us relatively on a constant type of schedule. I thought it was very, very good.\nLovell We are going to have to go to that for any of the long flights, any of the lunar missions. For any of the long flights we are going to need to use a regular Houston or Cape day and not change the routine.\nBorman On Apollo, with three men, you probably will have to stand a watch.\nLovell True. But still, you are going to have to keep from getting too irregular. I thought sleeping in zero-g was very comfortable. I slept like a log that first week.\nBorman Yes, I had troubles sleeping. The M-1 was the culprit. It"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was a pain in the neck. We decided to leave it on though\non the theory that if we turned it off the first thing the\nexperimentor would say was, \"Well you turned it off. It\nwas not a valid test.\" Then some crew in the future would\nhave to fly with the thing. So, we left it on for two\nweeks and listened to it \"clank\". As far as I know it\ndidn't do any good. Maybe that's the end of the M-l.\nInvariably, in a state of semi-consciousness it would rouse\nme again. I did not like that.\nLovell Sleep configuration was very easy. You just clasp your\nhands together and hold them there. When you wake up your\nhands are still clasped together. There are no pressure\npoints. You can have a book up there, go to sleep holding\nthe book, and wake up the next morning and the book is still\nright there, still at the same page. It was outstanding.\nIf mattress companies ever find out how to make a zero-g\nmattress they would really have a fortune.\nBorman Sleep period mission briefing. It followed the way we were\nbriefed. Very good.\nLovell Flight controllers were very outstanding. Keeping quiet\nduring the sleep period. As a matter of fact, they even\ncalled up Wally one time and told him to be quiet. Yes,\nthey told him to be quiet. It was our sleep period.\nBorman Everything went fine."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"9.0 OPERATIONAL CHECKS\n9.1 Apollo Landmark Investigation\nBorman We should first mention the weather because this casts some\nreflection on the whole idea of Apollo landmarks as a navi-\ngational aid. The weather was the big bugaboo in this\nflight as far as achieving any Apollo landmark photography.\nI do not know whether it was the particular targets we were\ntrying to get or what. Invariably, there were clouds.\nLovell As can be seen from the map, anything south of 15 degrees\nnorth latitude in Africa is no good for Apollo landmarks\nbecause it is invariably cloudy. South of 15 degrees north\nlatitude is invariably too cloudy for Apollo landmarks.\nBorman Right.\nLovell All of South America is out. As a matter of fact everything\nsouth of 15 degrees north latitude all the way across the\nmap is no good. We found out that North Africa and South-\nwest United States and parts of Mexico, as previous crews\nstated a long time ago, (that includes Saudi Arabia, Pakistan\nValley) have predominantly clear weather in the morning, but\nnot in the afternoon.\nBorman The Red Sea area was one of the clear areas all the time.\nEven the South-west U.S. and Mexico were clobbered most of\nthe time on our flight."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell Right. Weather is the big bugaboo on Apollo landmarks, or\nusing earth landmarks for Apollo.\nBorman The acquisition data was good. The pointing data was good\non all the experiment updates, except for one. They missed\nthe time on an S-5. We caught it, and did it ourselves be-\ncause we knew where the area was supposed to be. The point-\ning data given was great throughout the flight. The updat-\ning was fine. We had no problems at all. Pointing instruc-\ntions were good.\nBorman Concerning taking acquisition photographs for the Apollo\nlandmarks, it was pretty darn hard to determine anything\nwhen we pitched 30 degrees down to pick up the landmarks.\nWe could not pick out the air fields or anything. We would\npoint the camera and take a picture, but we did not know\nwhat we were taking pictures of. We could not see it with\nthe naked eye. I am thinking of the airfield in Brazil.\nWe took this acquisition picture without any idea of what\nwe were taking a picture of until we finally got to the\nnadir. Then, we looked down and could see the runway. I\nthink it was in Belam Province in Brazil. The weather was\na very definite factor in photographing the Apollo land-\nmarks, and of course, it would be a very definite factor in\nusing the Apollo landmarks.\nLovell We had to use the sun angle that we had at the time we got"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"124\nover the target.\nBorman Evidently the people who called them up were taking this into\nconsideration, because the sun angles for all the Apollo\nlandmark attempts were good as far as photography goes.\nSightings were tough on a lot of them, primarily because\nof clouds.\nLovell Apollo landmarks of interior Africa, which they gave us\nseveral times, (like islands, lakes, Leopoldville in the\nmiddle of the Congo), were very difficult because there is\nnothing down there but jungle and little streams and things.\nBorman By far the best landmarks are interfaces of beaches and\nwater.\nLovell That is right. Sandy beaches with blue water. There is\nno doubt about that.\nBorman There is good contrast, and with a good map you do not need\nthe photographs. I do not understand the value of the pho-\ntographs, I do not see why they do not engage the Army Map\nService to aerial photograph these areas and print the\npictures according to the scale they want. It would be a\nrelatively easy job to do and certainly would be much less\nexpensive than taking the fuel to do it on an operational\nmission.\nBorman The designated targets were clouded over more often than\nnot. We did take some alternate targets and pointed out"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"some prominent features along coastlines in Africa. We\nhave them logged and we will be able to go over them with\nthe Apollo landmark people. Even an area like Dakar, which\nyou would think would be a relatively clear area, we tried\nthree times to photograph and each time it was cloudy.\nLovell Mostly in the afternoon.\nBorman The maps and Apollo landmark data package was all right.\nOne of the problems with the maps was it is difficult to\norient the map segments on the page, so that several of the\ntargets were anywhere near the middle of the map. You might\nend up with a map with an Apollo landmark right on the edge\nof it. It is then difficult to associate the surrounding\nterrain with it. The big map that we had in the front of\nthe book solved a lot of this problem. We could get the big\npicture from the big map and then go to the detailed one for\nthe detailed pictures.\nBorman Photographs, 350 and 352, the Cairo area, you don't need a\nphotograph of the Nile River running into the Mediterranean.\nThat was one of the most prominent features we had. The\nSuez Canal, the Red Sea, and the coast of Arabia were loud\nand clear the whole flight. The junction of the two rivers,\nthe white Nile and the blue Nile, were also very prominent.\nAgain, you did not need a photograph to"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"126\nCONFIDENTIAL\ndetermine those.\nLovell The Red Sea and the Gulf of Eden as it goes into the\nArabian Sea were very prominent.\nBorman Yes.\nLovell The 90 degree bend was very, very prominent.\nBorman We have a difference of opinion here, but I thought the maps\nwere entirely adequate. Mountains were, as far as we could\ntell, adequately portrayed, although, we did not have any\nlandmarks that were in the mountainous area. Most of ours\nfor some reason were in the tropical areas and they were\ncloudy all the time. The cities that we saw were by and\nlarge over the United States.\nLovell We did not really see much in the way of cities. We saw the\nAustralian cities at night, we could see the lights from\nthem.\nBorman We saw small towns along the coast of Mexico.\nLovell Also South America. I wonder what the difference in alti-\ntude does to visibility of landmarks? I am sure that your\nvisibility is going to really go down. I think that is\nwhat happened.\nBorman Maybe, although when we were in an orbit of 120 by 178, I\ncould not tell the difference. One difference of course,\nis we were in the darkness at 178. When we were really\nlooking we were around 120 to 140. I never got the feeling"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"127\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthat I was going up hill or going down hill in the elliptical\norbit.\nLovell We saw one good airport. I thought it was Ellington, and it\nturned out to be Houston International.\nBorman We also saw that one in South America very well. It stood\nout loud and clear, that white runway on the Apollo landmark.\nWhen we finally got over it there was a break in the clouds\nand at the last minute we got a picture of it.\nLovell Airports in general would stand out.\nBorman Coastlines are the answer. They are by far the best land-\nmarks you have. I do not think islands are too good for\nlandmarks unless they are relatively large; small islands\nare tough to pick up.\nLovell And they are usually covered by clouds.\nBorman Color contrast between land and water was very good, parti-\ncularly along sandy beaches. We had onboard some photographs\nthat were taken on GT-5 with the actual scene we were\nviewing. We were able to compare the color of these photo-\ngraphs. We found it then to be very, very close. One\nstrange phenomena is that greens don't come through. The\nvery green jungles of Brazil and Africa appeared almost a\nbrownish-mustard color. The predominant color is blue,\neven at night time with a full moon.\nLovell I thought the jungle even looked blue, bluish-brown."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"128\nCONFIDENTIAL\nBorman Perhaps, the colors were a little deeper in the photographs\nthan were the landmarks but photographs are very adequate\npresentation of colors. I think probably any variance in\nthe photographs is due to variance in sun angle.\nLovell We understood the targets well enough, I don't see any\nproblem there at all. We didn't use the maps with gloves\non. You can hardly use anything with gloves on.\nBorman The best thing you can do with gloves is take them off\nand stow them as soon as possible.\nLovell The Apollo Landmark Book size was adequate. Any smaller\nsize in maps gets to be too thick or too small, and you\nreally can't read them in detail. I did like the big map of\nthe world broken up in four sections, because that gave us a\ngood approach to the targets. We could use that much better\nthan we could the orbital plotboard.\nBorman Probably all you need is that big map cut up in four sections\nand then a small scale map of the specific area. We don't\nneed the darn photographs.\nLovell It's the thickest thing we had to stow.\nBorman Spacecraft control. As far as tracking ground targets, you\ncould always achieve the rates in PULSE mode. Fuel was nominal.\nPULSE was no difficulty. We tried to take everything at a\n90 degree angle. We had no problems with spacecraft control\nto acquire and take pictures of the Apollo landmarks."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n129\nBorman Certainly this factor of weather leads me to believe that\nthe whole idea of navigating Apollo by a landmark needs to\nbe reevaluated. It seems to me that a much more desirable\nfeature would be a series of radar beacons placed throughout\nthe world, similar to the ones that are used by SAC, or some\ntype of electronic gadget not dependent upon clear weather.\nYou cannot choose the weather you want, and in our fourteen\nday mission, for about eleven days we had lousy weather.\nThe number of primary targets photographed. How many did\nyou photograph?\nLovell We have nine Apollo landmarks logged in the Apollo landmark\nsection:\nSequence 85 - clouds at nadir.\nSequence 137 - no luck, clouds overhead.\nSequence 94 - unable, because of clouds. Took a point of\nland nearby.\nSequence 58 - Cloudy.\nSequence 70 - Okay.\nSequence 85 - Just weather is the remark.\nSequence 108 - Clouds, resulting in poor picture.\nSequence 130 - Weather.\nSequence 97 - Weather.\nMost of the landmarks they gave us, that were down below\nthe 15 degrees north latitude ended up with weather."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"130\nCONFIDENTIAL\nBorman The number of primary targets photographed was 1. Evalua-\ntion of sequence 350B and 351B, I maintain that the maps\nare entirely adequate. We evaluated them looking at the\nCairo area and the Dead Sea, and I see no reason for the\nphotographs. Jim has a different feeling about that.\n9.2 Cabin Lighting Survey\nBorman We did not have. We have already talked about the lighting,\nglare, the dirty windows, and so forth.\nI felt that this was a pain in the neck, and I would like to\nmake sure that somebody got some useful data out of that.\nWe went around the earth in the HORIZON SCAN mode once with\nthe HF transmitter on, and I wonder if there is anything at\nall going to be learned from it.\nLovell I am beginning to wonder whether the HF system is worth the\ncost to put it into orbit.\nBorman You might be better off with another UHF set.\nLovell That is right. Go to something that is compatible, like\nsingle side band.\nBorman HF was adequate when UHF was adequate. As far as any over-\nthe-horizon transmission with HF, there was not any.\nLovell It was very, very poor."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman The reception on HF during the flight was very poor.\nLovell Right.\n10.0 VISUAL SIGHTINGS\n10.1 Countdown\nBorman We did not have any visual sightings. No wasps, bees, bugs,\nor anything in the spacecraft.\n10.2 Powered flight\nBorman I did not look out at lift-off.\nLovell I think we went through clouds, didn't we? We went through\nan overcast.\nFCSD rep It looked like Frank steered it right through a hole in the\novercast.\nLovell Could anyone see us after we went through the overcast? Or\nwas that the end of it?\nFCSD rep No, the hole was big enough so that you were in sight.\nLovell Could you see staging?\nFCSD rep No, you disappeared from sight before staging.\nBorman At BECO the spacecraft was enveloped in a yellow flame. BECO\nand staging are so close that you cannot tell the difference.\nEngine 2 ignition was very smooth, no noise, no banging.\nThe horizon came into view just like the simulator. Very,\nvery adequate presentation. At SECO I did not notice a\nthing, just a stop and a cessation of noise. I did not see"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"any flames, debris or anything. Although you did at\nFairing Jettison and Spacecraft Separation.\nLovell On Fairing Jettison, I saw debris fly, especially during\nthe turnaround.\n10.3 Orbital Flight\nBorman As for man-made objects sighted, we took sightings of the\nbooster. We had no difficulty in sighting the booster at\nturnaround and in station keeping with it. We maintained\nthe flashing light in sight throughout the first orbit, we\nsaw them on the second orbit, and the third orbit during\nthe night phase.\nLovell But you could not tell distance by the flashing lights.\nBorman No. As a matter of fact, I think it would be impossible\nto tell distance at night unless you have some sort of\nillumination.\nLovell Yes, if the lights are illuminating the vehicle, by spread-\ning it over the vehicle, maybe you could tell. You cannot\ntell the way they are now. We picked up Spacecraft 6 on\nthe final rendezvous phase, I guess at about five miles.\nIs that right?\nBorman Right. Again, this is entirely dependent upon where the\nsun is. Spacecraft 6 was able to see us a long time before\nwe could see them,because we were in a position where the sun"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was reflecting off our adapter, and they were in a position\nso that the sun was not reflecting off their adapter. It\nis a strange phenomenon, but it is entirely dependent upon\nthe sun. Once we acquired Spacecraft 6, it certainly was\nno problem of maintaining a visual on it. It was no\ndifferent than it is on the ground in the daytime.\nLovell I agree.\nBorman We sighted two satellites. We saw the Minuteman reentry\nat exactly the right time and exactly the right place.\nIt looked like a meteorite.\nLovell Very brilliant. It broke up toward the end.\nBorman Very brilliant, it broke up toward the end, and there were\nseveral different pieces flying around. I was surprised at\nthe speed at which it went in. I was also surprised at the\ncontrol authority required to track it. We did get on it\nthough before it broke up and went out. I hope they got\ngood data on it.\nLovell We saw, what we think, were two satellites moving.\nBorman Yes, we took IR readings on one of them. It was a definite\nsatellite in a polar orbit. We took photographs of two\nsatellites in the polar orbits. One of them was below us,\ncrossing from left to right, and the other one was above\nus, crossing left to right. We picked them up first in the\nhandle of the"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Big Dipper. It was definitely a satellite, and we tracked it\non the IR and we used the recorder. It will be interesting\nto see if they got any data of it. We were never close\nenough to see any satellites and to pick them out as far as\ndefinite features.\nLovell They were just points of light.\nBorman Just light points. There certainly was not any problem\nviewing the ground. As we have already mentioned over the\nradio, we were able to see the Astrodome. The horizontal\nmarkings, or the east west markings, on the S-8/D-13 pattern\nstood out loud and clear when we acquired it. It is very\nakin to flying an airplane at high altitude. Roads stood\nout well, rivers stood out well, and beaches particularly\nwell. Towns were a little more difficult to determine, but\nwhen you had them you could easily see the layout and appar-\nent size. Also, the atmosphere made a vast difference. If\nthere was any sort of haze or cloud, it definitely cut down\nyour vision. When we finally got over the Himalayas in\ndaylight, it was easy to see why it was so clear.\nlovell Haze does affect sightings from space as well as it does from\nairplanes. It is very similar. If the area is pretty hazy,\nit is going to decrease the contrast of the ground, and\nmakes viewing ground objects very difficult. Where you have"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"excellent viewing is where the air is clear. It is the\nsame way with airplanes. But, I think you have a better\nchance to look below than you do in an airplane. There is\na better chance of seeing something, but you still have the\nhaze problem.\nBorman When we first got up and had a full Moon, we did not see\nmany more stars than you see on an ordinary flight at thirty\nor forty thousand feet. However, during the latter part of\nthe flight with a quarter Moon, we found that there were\nmore stars visible. We have a drawing here of the number of\nstars we could see in the Pleiades, which has been recorded.\nLovell The big thing to remember here is the fact that the Moon has\na big effect on the number of stars you see and which ones\nyou can use for celestial navigation.\nBorman Right.\nLovell If the Moon is full, it is the predominant feature in the\nsky, and any stars near the Moon at the time are washed out;\nand they are very hard to use for sextant sightings.\nBorman Right. Same way with the Milky Way. It is not very appar-\nent when the Moon is full.\nLovell In reverse though, when the Moon is full the Earth is a very\ngood reference.\nBorman That's right. It's a blue reference with white clouds, very"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"visible. Cloud coverage, there was a lot of it. The first three days were relatively clear and from then on there were lots and lots of clouds. About the only area that was consistently clear was the Sahara and the Red Sea area. The States were cloudy, as was Mexico, South America, Southern Africa, and a great deal of the ocean was cloudy. Lovell The entire area of the Pacific Ocean was cloudy. Borman Again we can reiterate that it would be pretty tough to count on being able to observe specific landmarks at any given time. The horizons were interesting. In the daytime I never noticed much of a difference between the horizon. We've drawn pictures of them with little notes beside them that have been carried back, and which will be published. We noticed the difference in the horizon and the air glow layer between a full Moon and a no Moon. When we had a full Moon there was a definite Earth layer, then almost a normal blackness, and then a definite band of air glow. When we had no Moon or a quarter Moon, the area between the Earth and the outer air glow was more milky. Lovell That's right. For sextant sightings the best thing to use, during a full Moon, was the bottom part of the air glow or the Earth's horizon, which was probably the upper air hori-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"zon. And with no Moon, the best sextant sighting spot to use was the upper air glow, because it was the sharpest of the two. The area between the upper air glow area and the earth's horizon was too milky during a no Moon to get a good sharp contrast (you could see stars through it), but you couldn't find out exactly where the horizon was. So it varied between full Moon and no Moon. Borman Very drastically too. Also, your ability to pick out the earth, and determine yaw from earth's passage with no Moon, was zilch. With the full Moon it was just as good as it was in the daylight. Lovell The Moon is very bright up there, very bright. Borman Both attitude and translation thrusters firing were apparent. The aft firing thrusters were not apparent. But the forward thrusters were apparent at night and so were the translational, up, down, sideways. The attitude thrusters were also apparent with puffs, sort of like subdued flashbulbs appearing out to the side of the window. They were just little flashes of light in the background, and we couldn't determine anything from them. Lovell We couldn't determine anything. Borman But you could on Spacecraft 6. Lovell On Spacecraft 6 the thruster firings looked as though they"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"went out about forty feet against a dark background. You could see this light haze going out about forty feet. It wasn't a bell shaped pattern, as we thought it was going to be, but it was like a garden hose, straight out. At a distance we could not see the bright flash of ignition in the chamber itself. All we could see was the haze going out. But as we got in closer, we could start picking up the bright flash, mainly because of attitude I suspect, as we were getting closer to see it. It had no effect on our spacecraft at all. They actually fired about twenty feet away with their forward firing thrusters to us, and departed. Borman They got in back behind us in the adapter and fired their forward firing thrusters and made the curtain jiggle. I don't know how far away they were when they did this. I hope they can tell us, and give you some idea of the effect that these thrusters might have on the EVA Mission. It's just like firing a rocket at night. I guess that's the way we expected it to look. That is exactly what you are doing, firing a rocket at night. 10.4 Reentry Borman We retrofired in the darkest, most dismal part of the night sky, and we didn't see anything. We didn't see Adapter Separation. We didn't see any of the retros fire. We didn't"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"see Retro Package jettison. At reentry we didn't have a lighted horizon at 400,000 feet. We didn't have a lighted horizon until we were below 400,000 feet. This was not particularly to my liking; although we picked it up about 330,000 feet. After then, it was all right. Lovell We saw ionization. Borman Yes, we did. Lovell The whole window started to be just a glow outside. Then it got into the rings of this ionization layer. It started out to be just glowing. Borman When we went subsonic it looked like there was a bunch of steam and flame that engulfed the nose section. I think this may have been when the spacecraft finally went subsonic, right before drogue deploy. You could see the spacecraft oscillations, and you could reference them with the drogue, which was relatively steady. You could also reference them with the sky. You didn't have any stars or anything, but you could just pick out the motions across the sky. At times it was pretty violent. It would be interesting to see the magnitude of the oscillations and the rates. Borman The drogue deploy was very evident. We saw the drogue chute. We saw the R and R Can come off, and then I saw it following us down in the parachute, off to one side. Main chute"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"deploy was very nice. Lovell Main chute deploy, very enjoyable to watch. Borman During landing and recovery we had the S2F in sight before we ever hit the water. 11.0 EXPERIMENTS 11.1 Celestial, Space, and Terrestrial Radiometry (D-4/7) Borman I think we have more valuable data on D-4/D-7 than all the others put together. Lovell Right. Borman Updating techniques and communications procedures were excellent. Everything called up on D-4/D-7 was right on the money, including the time and pointing locations for the reentry vehicle. Lovell They did an outstanding job of giving us the right information onboard. Borman We were perfectly trained in equipment setup and usage. Jim didn't have a question about it. I think there was no problem at all. Lovell We got everything going. I hope that we got some good data. Borman Cooled Spectrometer checks were nominal."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I don't know what else to say, as far as we know, everything was perfect, it's all logged, they have the records, they have the TM.\nLovell We saw the needle go down when we jettisoned the fairing cover after the fifteen second timer delay, after we did our separation maneuver. I saw the cover go by when we jettisoned.\nBorman Did you?\nLovell It is right above the right hand window.\nBorman I did not see that. The booster measurements were no problem at all. It was just like the way the simulator worked. It was just fine. Very good. We had no problems making the reticle measurements. They were very close to zero on both the IR and the spectrometer. Powerdown procedures. Did you have any?\nLovell No. Booster background measurements were no problem at all.\nBorman Okay. The Milky Way measurement without the cooled sensor was performed exactly on time. We had no problems with the equipment. No problems with any of this."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The Void was very easy to pick out and to take the readings. The Zodiacal light test was deleted in real time. We substituted Sirius for the Zodiacal light.\nBorman The star measurements were done with no problem. Night land measurements are noted on the tape and in the log book. We did have some problem with these because the night land was covered with clouds. So we were trying to skew the spacecraft along and avoid clouds. I'm afraid that we may not have always missed the clouds. The same situation existed with the night water measurements. We had very good luck on the Polaris.\nWe had good luck on the Polaris and good luck on the booster. We should have had pretty good luck on Gemini 6. We were able to track it. We had good luck on the sled.\nLovell We hope we had good luck on the sled.\nBorman They called us up from the ground and said they had a thousand percent on that."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell You could track the Polaris launch in PULSE.\nBorman You could track everything in PULSE except the reentry vehicle. The reentry vehicle was pretty fast and you had to go to DIRECT.\nLovell I have to give credit to the personnel, the experimentor, Brentnall.\nBorman He hustled and he did his work. He made sure that we knew what we were doing. It was well done.\nLovell This is the first missile that was ever launched from a submarine, their ORI, I guess. To launch at the exact time so that we would be in the exact position, I thought was an amazing piece of coordination among all people involved.\nBorman I just hope they got all the data."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman We always had the ACQ off when we were transmitting. The only possible problems that we could have had with this experiment was when we lost our tape recorder. We could not put some of the data on tape. We had to always take the data over a receiving station.\nLovell Or use the recorder.\nBorman Or use a recorder.\nLovell One problem which we did have and which I was not briefed on was the fact that I inadvertently left the gear on one time and it gave a nine second pulse on the main ammeter system. We could not figure out what this glitch was coming in on the Main Bus.\nBorman This was right after we lost the thrusters. We thought there might have been something in the ACME bias power or something in the inverter that was breaking down and putting out a glitch. We called the ground to tell them we found it and they said that it was exactly what the ground had thought it was.\nBorman Cloud illumination lightning; we got some good lightning shots for them. Day land measurements, we got. Ascension Calibration was done twice."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell Listen, that was done twice?\nBorman Yes.\nLovell Was this the NADIR to 35 degrees West?\nBorman Yes.\nLovell Of course we never saw Ascension so I did not...\nBorman Yeah, we never saw Ascension but it was the location of the area where we wanted to find.\nLovell I think we did that once, or did we do 19 once?\nBorman Yes, it is the same thing. Cumulus clouds. We got some cloud measurements. Star measurements, the only the thing we got there was the lightning. Celestial measurement. We got that. The stars, we did not get the Zodiacal light. We got the stars, the milkyway, the void. 23 Moon measurements. We got the Moon. We got all the missile measurements. I do not think it is necessary for us to record it off our log book.\nLovell We missed the Titan launch.\nBorman Yes, we did not get the liftoff because of clouds. But we picked them up when we picked up their contrails.\nLovell Yes.\nBorman We also threw in an extra satellite. It will be interesting to see if they got any data out of that. The"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"146\n\nSun measurement was done. That was a real interesting\none, because in order to get the Sun, we had to put\nup the polaroid lights, and wear sun glasses, and\nthen point at it.\nLovell\tHot Earth Measurements: we had that big fire in North\nAfrica that was there all the time. That was a target\nof opportunity. We got Hot Earth Measurements of\nthis fire in North Africa.\nBorman\tThe tape recorder was used properly. Voice recorder\nusage was adequate.\nFlight control procedure: the only time we had to do anything\nat all different was to go to DIRECT to pickup that\nreentry vehicle. The rest of the time it was a very\nwell organized, well briefed, well trained, and I\nthought a well-run experiment.\nLovell\tThat is right. I thought it was quite a bit of data\nand work to do in that experiment.\nBorman\tAs a matter of fact, I think the equipment on these\nrepresented about 3½ million dollars. So it was a\npretty hefty piece of equipment.\n11.2 Star Occulation Measurement (D-5)\nBorman\tNow we go from the sublime to the ridiculous. The star\nocculation measurement D-5. The equipment"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"never worked and we fooled around with it for hours trying\nto make it work. I am sure somebody is going to sit down-\nstairs now and ground check it okay, but, it did not work.\nLovell\tWe did everything and we traded it back and forth to make\nsure that both of us saw the same results.\nBorman\tWe had been briefed on this, we used it in the set up\nat St. Louis where we had seen how it changed. We had\nhad adequate briefings. We had accurate presentations\non it.\nLovell\tPrimarily you could not calibrate the equipment, the\nreticle would not change from red to green.\nBorman\tWe made a couple of measurements where we just used the\ncalibration knob at a certain setting and let it alone.\nBut this equipment was inoperative. I thought it was a\nlittle strange, too, when they called up and said, \"We\nhave just found out that this equipment is sensitive to RF\ninterference.\" \"Turn off all your transmitters and see if\nthis affects it.\" I think we ought to know before\nwe go charging into the 3rd or 4th day of flight that\nthe equipment is sensitive to RF interference. It seems\nto me that perhaps there was not a very good Qual.\ntest done on this piece of gear. I have"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"nothing else to say about the D-5 except the equipment\ndid not work.\nLovell\tWell, star acquisition and identification, which has\nnothing to do with the equipment, was outstanding with the\nchart. Actually, I would like to put in a little pitch\nhere, for the simulator, because the visual part of the\nsimulator was a big help. It gave us a good idea of what\nwe could expect in flight. And the Planetarium's work was\nvery valuable in conjunction with the simulator. I think\nthat we did not waste time with any of our star recognition\nstuff. They did come in handy. As a matter of fact, if you\nreally get to know that celestial sphere, you can really get\naround without the earth.\n11.3 Simple Navigation D-9\nBorman\tJim used this test exclusively. He was trained at Ames.\nBut we actually used the sextant down here before the flight\nmany times with the experimenters. We used it in the\nsimulator.\nLovell\tLet me give some comments on this sextant. There are a\nlot of comments on the tape. Number one, the D-9 sextant\nalignment"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was fine, the stop watch was an excellent idea. The\nlighting on the sextant angle reading was too bright. It\nwas a white bright light. Everytime you read the sextant\nout you lost your dark adaptation because we were looking\nat this white light. And all it had to be, since the\nspacecraft is dark anyway if you are looking at stars,\nis red, or dimmer light to read the angle out.\nThe reticle was fine during the first part of the flight,\nand then for some reason it became a double image. I\nfound out that I never used the reticle during the full\nMoon or even at half Moon I could see the dark lines\nwithout having to light up the reticle. One of the big\nthings about the sextant, the mechanical aspects, was the\nfact that the light was not split 50-50 between the upper\nprism and the lower telescope. It was a 20-80 split and\ntherefore one image would be bright and the other one dim.\nThis was fine if you went from the start of the horizon\nwhere you would have a bright star and a dim horizon.\nYou had a control, but if you went from, say, two stars\nto measure the angle between two stars to check the align-\nment of a sextant, (because the angles are already known)\none star would be bright and the other star real dim\nif you got them within a certain angle of each other. But\nas soon as you got that other dim star, then the bright"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"star, you could not tell when they were overlapping.\nLovell\tYou had to have two stars of the same magnitude in lock.\nSo, I had practiced and trained in the one with the\n50-50 split which I thought was a lot better than this\n20-80 which we finally ended up with. And this also is\ntrue when you took star to Moon limb shots because they\nhad it arranged that most of the light came from the Moon.\nEighty percent of the light passage was from the Moon and\nthey had filters to cut that down. And 20 percent came from\nthe star. Well, the filters were not dark enough for\nthe Moon, and as soon as you got those stars somewhere near\nthe limb they just faded out of view. You could not see\nit so you had a hard time getting star to Moon limb shots.\nLovell\tWe noticed one big thing in navigation with the sextant.\nWith a full Moon, you are going to have a hard time using\nthe stars under the Moon. It just blanks out the light. It\nis just too bright, it dims the stars and ruins your dark\nadaptation. On no Moon nights or quarter Moon nights, most\nof the stars come out and the navigation is a lot better.\nWe found out also on full Moon nights as we said before, that\nwe'd use the bottom Earth's horizon, which is probably an\nupper air horizon and had the sharpest line of identification\nfor angles."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell\tOn no Moon nights, the whole air glow layer seemed to be\nof the same consistancy. And the sharpest part was the\nupper air glow layer where we could bring stars down to it.\nBorman\tDid you find it difficult at times to get the stars\nacquired at the angle?\nLovell\tRight. We found out, due to the window design, that if\nthe stars were not lined vertically with one another, if\nwe were taking star to star shots or star to Moon shots,\nit was hard to get the sextant lined up. The best way to\nhold the sextant was the way it was developed originally:\njust up and down. If you had to move it around here to\nget a star over here,or horizontal or angle shots,\nyou had to move the spacecraft around to get the window\nin line, to get all the view. Now we could shoot angles\nup to about I think 45 degrees, if we had the right window\nalignment and had bright enough stars. But anything above\nthat and most of the time around 35 to 40 degrees, one of\nthe two, either the upper prism or the lower telescope\nwould get in the way of the rim of the window and get\nlost to view. Then we couldn't do anything with it.\nBorman\tI remember there were a couple of times when you picked\nup the wrong star too.\nLovell\tYes."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman\tEven though you know the star very well, using the system\nof estimating the angle in ahead of time, you leave your-\nself open to picking the wrong stars.\nLovell\tYes, one of the big things about the sextant is you have\nto be sure you can identify the star when you are looking\ninside the sextant after you get the thing down because\nyou might get the wrong star. That is why you should use\nstars in sextant navigation that have identifying features\nin the field of view of the sextant. For instance Capella\nwas a very good one because it has the 3 little stars\naround it, I guess there were 2 stars, I forget.\nBorman\tThree stars.\nLovell\tThree stars, but anyway you could tell Capella when you\nlooked through the sextant.But,a star that was all out by\nitself, even though it was bright,you really could not\ntell whether that was a star or not until you went out\nand looked again,and that was sort of difficult.\nBorman\tWe did not have any radar but I know darn well,if I was\nout trying to effect a rendezvous, I would much rather\nhave an operating radar with range and range rate than I\nwould that sextant.\nLovell\tWell the thing is: there are a lot of factors that\naffect this thing: window glare, the fact that we had to\nturn on white light everytime we got a reading, because"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"we had to read the digital clock to get an exact time\nof the reading, the reflection from the Moon, all that\nstuff complicates visual sightings.\nBorman\tHow about picking out a proper horizon? You even\nhad trouble doing that, What horizon were we going to use?\nLovell\tThat is right. We don't know what horizon we are going\nto use.\nBorman\tThe horizon is dependent upon the Moon.\nLovell\tSo sextant sightings are going to be very difficult.\nBorman\tAnd the accuracy of this instrument, as advertised,\nis phenomenal. But the accuracy to what? If we do not\nknow what horizon we are measuring to. Did you mention the\nfact that the green filter cuts out everything?\nLovell\tWell that is right. Yes, the green and blue filters, one\nof the modes as a matter of fact, was to use the green\nfilter for the horizon. Unfortunately you stick the green\nfilter in there and then look for the horizon and it is\ngone.\nBorman\tEverything is gone. There is nothing. All you see are\nthe stars up above, you do not see any horizon.\nLovell\tSo the filter idea was useless as far as the sextant goes.\nBorman\tAlso the blue filter, you stayed dark adapted and then\ntried the blue filter in daylight as was requested."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell\tThat was a little scientific experiment which we were\nasked to do: to see if we could see the blue horizon\nline, blue air glow in the daytime by keeping dark adapted\nand using the blue filter.\nBorman\tThe results were negative.\nLovell\tThat is right.\nBorman\tAnything else?\nLovell\tI think we hit everything on the sextant.\nBorman\tWe had no equipment malfunctions with the sextant other\nthan the fact that you got double vision.\nLovell\tAnd the sextant was not as bulky to operate on the space-\ncraft as it is on land. It is a pretty bulky piece of\nequipment, but it is not bad.\n11.4 Visual Acuity and Astronaut Visibility and Vision\nTest (M-9)\nBorman\tUpdating techniques and communications procedures: This was an\narea that was outstanding. It seems redundant to comment about it\neverytime, but is is true. Equipment set up and usage for the\nvision test and the M-9 experiment, no problem. We tried this\nin the simulator and we tried it in flight and it was the same.\nLovell\tThe photometer left a little bit to be desired.\nBorman\tOh, I think we are talking not just about the tests that"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"we did every morning. The vision test and the other one.\nBorman\tThe M-9 vision test also caused no problem. As a matter\nof fact we did a little interesting experiment of our own.\nWe used the brace, the head brace and the bite board\neverytime but once, and then we compared the results,\nwith and without using the head brace or bite boards, the\nlast day. We noted this in the log book. There was no\ndifference in the outcome, so I have begun to wonder if it\nis necesary. One of the great points of interest, was trying\nto observe this ground observation at Laredo and we picked it\nup 3 times, I believe. Acquisition is very difficult, be-\ncause of the poor terrain features. I never did really\nsee the smoke pots, but we did see the dashes that they had\nin the block. We had a real good pass at it and we had\nit acquired excellently and I called off 3 numbers and they\nare listed in the log book, I think there was a 3-1-3 or a\n1-3-1.\nBorman\tI would be interested to know if I was right on any of\nthese because you could see them. I should have been able\nto see them on that one. 1-3-3, I guess it was we called\noff. No, 3-1-3 ground observation.\nLovell\tI had one pass where I saw it and by the time I got to\nsee the squares or the rectangles we were already by it"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I guess from what I could see of the thing, I think\nit was a 2-3-4, that was all I had of it. Basically, we\nhad a picture from GT-5.\nBorman We had pictures from GT-5 with us in the cockpit to help\nus acquire it.\nLovell We could see the red ground with no strain at all. We\nknew where to look and it was just difficult to find.\nBorman You might mention that if they had gone to Yuma, if we\nhad not had to change our launch trajectory, it would\nhave been great. You could pick out the area of the\nSalton Sea there even from where we were, 3 or 4 hundred\nmiles south, it stood out like a sore thumb.\nLovell I do think though that for the amount of time that you\nare over the target, the amount of squares they were\nexpecting you to read are too much.\nBorman Yes.\nLovell Because you just cannot read that much. You have to\nacquire it, examine it, and then by that time you are\ngoing over it.\nBorman The window measurements. We did this; it was called to do\nit twice, but we did it three times because of the fact\nthat the tape recorder was shot and they had to get real\ntime TM. They did not get good TM on one pass, so we did it\nagain at an opportune time. Unfortunately, the photometer"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"had not had a chance to warm up for 10 minutes. We were at\nsuch a low fuel state then that it was either then or never,\nso we did it, and I hope they got the data. Now this window\nmeasurement business was always a little nebulous to me. I\nam not sure exactly what they were going to get out of it.\nBut it seems like they are scratching.\nLovell I do not understand the procedures too well. I mean I went\nthrough the procedures, followed them exactly, but the pho-\ntometer left me out to lunch. We tried to get the dope, but\nI do not see what they are going to get out of it.\nBorman We did not have much confidence in that. We did it exactly\nthe way it was practiced. We did practice it in the simula-\ntor and it is recorded on voice tape. They came back though\nand said that TM did not make much sense to them, and I\nthink that is probably right. Voice tape recorder usage,\nby and large this was another experiment that was well han-\ndled, preflight and during flight. We admit that we spent\na lot of time on this one and with all the visual acuity\ndata they got ahead of time, and were briefed by the princi-\npal experimenters many, many times. I thought that it was\nhandled as well as it could be handled. The site in Aus-\ntralia. We were over Australia"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in the daylight--of course the site was not manned because\nof the few passes we'd have to have. When we were over\nAustralia we didn't have attitude control.\nLovell We might mention one thing. I think with the long flight\nlike we had, if we had the fuel we could have become more\nskilled in observing the site and probably have gotten\nbetter results.\nBorman No, we could not have on this one, because after the 3rd day\nthe clouds were the factor the whole time. We had only\n3 days to observe that, and everything else was cloudy.\nLovell Okay, it was cloudy, but I suspect that the more passes\nover the thing, you would get better. But we just did\nnot have the fuel and the weather was bad.\n11.5 Synoptic terrain (S-5) and weather (S-6) photography\nBorman Synoptic terrain and weather photography. On unusual\nor significant subject matter. Well, it turns out we did\nnot have any unusual or significant subject matter as far\nas I know. We took the sequences and we took a lot of\nit as general photography that was not even called up.\nMost of the time, it had to be done in drifting flight.\nWe were sorry about this, but there was not the fuel\navailable. The two sequences that were called up (where\nwe were allocated the fuel from the ground) we took them. I\nhope they were well done. We did get some"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pictures over Brazil that have never been gotten before.\nThey were not called up. We took them with the IR color\nshifted film. We got some pictures of Mexico that\nwere not called up.\nLovell We got a good sequence over North Africa.\nBorman We got several good sequences over North Africa.\nLovell But I am sure that they have been used before.\nBorman We also took a sequence along the southern coast from\nNew Orleans through Florida using color shifted IR to\nevaluate the film more than anything else. I hope this\ncomes in handy. We got some shots of the island chains\noff Florida, to see if they can determine any effect from\nthe hurricane that went through, Betsy.\nLovell As a matter of fact, we got a strip sequence of Cuba too.\nBorman All these are targets of opportunity done without attitude\ncontrol, but they were all targets that were listed before\nflight. We got the mouth of the Amazon, and I think that\nis the first time that has been photographed.\n\nNow on the S-6 the weather photography we tried in\nthe last pass to take a successive revolution picture of\nweather development. We got one good shot over the\nAndes. We also got some good shots of wave clouds over\nthe Andes during the latter part of the flight. We\nlooked for hurricane or tropical storm Alice in the"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Indian Ocean but we never did see it.\nLovell We had an S-6 weather to get that too, but we never did\nsee it.\nBorman Air to ground relay of data was good. Voice recorder usage,\nthis is one area where we are not redundant. If we had time\nto record all the photographs we put in the log book and\nnot on the voice recorder in an effort to save tape.\nEverything that was done, though, was logged either S-5,\nS-6, or in general photography. Now, another item that is\ngoing to degrade this was the scum on your window.\nLovell Yes. The window is an area which we are going to have\nto work on.\nBorman As it got worse and worse, we shifted so that I was\ntaking the pictures, but I had scum on my window also. The\nmajor problem though, here was just lack of fuel. We could\nnot orient the spacecraft to control it the way we wanted to.\n11.6 Protron Electron Spectrometer, Tri-Axis Flux-Gate\nMagnetometer.\nBorman We turned the switch on and left it on. I think we should\nhave reams and reams of data, although unfortunately with the\ntape recorder being shot, I do not know what good it is going\nto do.\nLovell Well, they got real time telemetry over the station.\nBorman Right."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell After seeing GT-6's film of our back area, the straps\nhanging off our spacecraft looked like they were all\nintertwining in that boom area. It could probably foul up\nthat boom somewhat in future flights. I mean in a\nfuture flight if we still had that same problem it might\nfoul up that boom and tear off that wire. There is a\nwire that goes out to the end of that thing.\nBorman All the experiments we talked about so far were well\npresented before hand. We knew exactly what we were\ngoing to do, and the only reason we weren't able to\ndo it was 1) weather, 2) lack of fuel, and 3) in the\ncase of the D-5, the equipment broke down. I think\nwe got a substantial amount of S-5 and S-6 done.\nAs a matter of fact we got everything done that was\ncalled up and we got a lot more done just in general\nphotography.\n11.7 Optical Communications (MSC-4)\nBorman Optical communications, MSC-4.\nOkay, acquisition of the ground target. I have never\nbeen better locked in on White Sands in my life than"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"we were, when we went by there, and saw two blinks of the\nlaser. We had the photograph in front of us marking where\nthe laser was located. We saw Holoman, we saw White Sands\nbut we never did see the beam except the short flashes.\nLovell The magnitude of this laser is a lot less than either Frank\nor I suspected after our briefings by the experimenters and\nby actually looking at one at Houston. Obviously this\nlaser at Houston was a lot shorter and can be very much\nmagnified.\nBorman Tracking was no problem.\nWe acquired one over Hawaii; we were able to\ntrack it easily. The problem is acquisition of the light.\nLovell The light beam is a lot smaller point than we suspected.\nBorman And then again the big bugaboo in this whole experiment\nwas weather. Ascension never got up, we never got ground\nequipment at Ascension.We never got really good passes\nat White Sands because we were always about 300 miles South.\nAnd Hawaii was available to us on only 2 passes. We\nacquired the laser on both passes, but were not able to\nget the handheld laser on the beam on the ground.\n\nBorman Okay, how about the field of view?\nLovell The field of view. Well, let me talk about the equipment.\nBasically the equipment was fine, except for the telescope:"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. 1) it did not have as much light gathering as was\nrequired for this particular equipment. It should have\na larger magnification. 2) It had a green filter over it\nwhich was supposed to enhance picking up the beam, but\nall it did was fade out everything. You could not see\nterrain features and you needed to see terrain features\nto find out where that beam was located.\nBorman Yes, to know where the beam was.\nLovell You could look out and....we had photographs of the area\nwhere the beam should be coming from. And we could acquire\nit by our naked eye by just looking out and seeing it.\nBut, as soon as you went to the telescope of the laser,\neverything faded out to this green color. Unless you\njust happened to pick up the beam you're lost and I never\nwas able to pick up the beam thru the telescope. The\nfilter was just too strong. I much prefer to have a clear\nview. So I could pick out the terrain features. The\nreticle of course....\nBorman Of course, we knew that was shot before we took off.\nLovell We never had a good check of this thing though, at night,\nand I wish we had had a good night pass over something,\nbut we never did. Because I feel that we probably could\nhave probably picked up the beam a lot better at night."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Protective glasses. To tell you the truth the one time\nwhere I was really trying to get onto the Hawaii pass I\ntook them off. I did not use them. And they were in the\nway, they were cumbersome and together with the telescope,\nit was just too hard to find.\nBorman I used mine, but I did not put them on until right before\nJim was supposed to transmit.\nLovell Of course, I had them, I had them on and I transmitted\nand found out that I could not see anything so I just\npulled them off and started transmitting by going back...\nbecause as I understand it the operator really does not need\nthem if he is right next to it.\n\nBorman The big word on this one as far as the reticle goes, we\nshould go back to that is for the day time you do not want\nthat green in there. At night time you are going to need\na lighted reticle. You cannot see the reticle at night.\nLovell That is right. So you need a better acquisition device\non the laser, a better, bigger telescope with more light\ngathering and clarity of the terrain of the target. I\nwould imagine PULSE mode would be great for tracking the\nthing.\nBorman Yes. I tracked one at Hawaii very easily. No problems.\nThe tracking is a nominal task, there is nothing to it."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"But the other business of acquiring,is very difficult,\nparticularly with the reticle set.\n11.8 Landmark Contrast\nBorman We did one of these with the D-5 photometer. We knew it\nwas bad, but we put the calibration needle in the full \"up\"\nposition, told the experimenter that we were doing this\nand took the data. Now, they will have to check it to\nsee how it worked.\nLovell We did just one.\nBorman We had an equipment malfunction. Right. No sense talking\nabout it anymore. Spacecraft control was\nno problem. We accomplished all the mechanics of doing\nit, but unfortunately the equipment we knew was malfunc-\ntioning before we did it. Right?\nLovell Right you are."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"166 -CONFIDENTIAL-\n11.9 Cardiovascular reflex conditions (M-1)\nLovell Got that started at, I think it is 3 hours and 8 minutes,\nor something like that.\nAt 2:39, I turned on the M-1 experiment.\nBorman Okay. Procedures and operational problems. We had the\nhose coming all the way across your whole lap to get\ninto your right leg when it should have been put in the\nleft leg.\nLovell That is right.\nBorman Periods of operation. The thing was operating continuously\nfor 14 days. And I might point out it is a pain in the\nneck. Because of the clanking noise. Even though it\nseemed you would get used to it; many times just as we\nwere about to drop off to sleep that thing would clank,\nand wake you up. The only reason we did not turn it off\nat sleep\n-CONFIDENTIAL-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"167 -CONFIDENTIAL-\nperiod, was that we did not want to have the people say,\n\"Well, you did not run it the whole time so the experiment\nwas not valid.\" We left it on and put up with it in the\nhope that we could get rid of it once and for all.\nLovell Obviously, it did not work.\nBorman So far as we know it did not make any difference. And\nit did not seem to make any difference inflight or post\nflight.\nLovell It was a waste of time.\n11.10 In-flight exerciser (M-3)\nBorman It is a valuable piece of equipment. We used it not only\nfor the crew status passes, we exercised with it 3 times\na day and I thought it was very worthwhile. It is a\nsimple piece of gear but it is a good device. Right?\nLovell Although, I imagine we can improve on exercise equipment\nin the future spacecraft.\nBorman Perhaps, the biggest deterioration that we noted in the\nmuscles was in our legs, and that exerciser was—I do not\nknow how you can improve on that much.\n11.11 In-flight phonocardiogram (M-4) and In-flight sleep\nanalysis (M-8)\nBorman Well, the equipment problems with M-8 were that the thing\nis operationally incongruous. You cannot have those\n-CONFIDENTIAL-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"168 -CONFIDENTIAL-\nwires on your head and stringing down the back of your neck,\nand not expect to catch them on something in a small space-\ncraft. Now, we found that we couldn't keep the helmet on.\nI kept it on for two days, but my head became extremely hot,\nand I was uncomfortable. So when I took it off I\nripped all four of the leads off. And I think that the\nwhole thing is extraneous anyway. I felt after 14 days I\nwas perfectly capable to judge my own condition, and my own\nawareness, and my own degree of alertness I did not\nneed that bunch of wires hanging on my head to tell me or\nto tell somebody on the ground how awake or how asleep I\nwas.\nLovell Inflight phonocardiogram, I have no comments because it was\nstuck on me at prelaunch, and it stayed on me during the\nentire flight.\nBorman Well, did it bother you? Did you get any sensor problems?\nLovell No.\n11.12 Bioassay body fluids (M-5) and calcium balance study (M-7)\nBorman Urine samplings bags, well, actually the bags were pretty\ngood. We had one break around the head. Marking was all\nright and stowage was fine. I might point out that the\ntracer accumulator we changed with no problem. The mixing\nbag was all right, but they left out the most important\nthing here, the condom device that we used to\n-CONFIDENTIAL-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"169 -CONFIDENTIAL-\nurinate into is unsatisfactory. We ended up with urine\nall over ourselves everytime we tried to use it. It\nwas sort of happenstance. If you lucked out, you didn't\nget a leak. But based on the experience that we had up\nthere, I would think that the way to go is a simple\noverboard device where you vent right to the atmosphere,\nand urinate into a tube. Essentially the same thing you\ndo in C-47.\nBorman We carried the flow meter along and the Delta P across\nthe flow meter and the filter can be incorporated with\nit. I am sure this is enough to allow you just to urinate\nright into a relief tube right overboard. I do not see any\nreason to go through this stage where you have urine all\nover yourself 4 or 5 times a day. A very unacceptable\ndevice. Do you agree?\nLovell Right. I think we can improve on the urine dump system\ntremendously.\nBorman I think they ought to start looking into just a dump\nright overboard. You do not use a rubber condom or\nanything.\nLovell Because that things puts back pressure which is really sort\nof dangerous I think, and besides that, it is uncomfortable.\nAnd when you have back pressure...\nBorman Yeah. When you have a big enough receiver and you urinate\n-CONFIDENTIAL-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"170 -CONFIDENTIAL-\na stream into a vacuum, it is going to go right on over-\nboard. I do not understand why...okay. The defecation\nbags were fine. And we really used them this time. The\ndefecation bags were really put to use in this flight. I\nthink we used a total of 15 of them.\nLovell Yes.\nBorman And they were fine. I have no comments on those. It seems\nto be the best solution you can have to the situation.\nLovell For this particular type spacecraft.\nBorman For this particular type...For the Gemini Spacecraft. I\ndo not know what other approach you could have to them. I\nthought their marking was easily done. The finger hole I\nnever used that at all. One of the big assets, we might as\nwell put it in here, was the fact that the food that we ate\ncaused well formed bowels, so we did not have any loose\nstools or any of that problem. I never had any occasion to\nuse that finger device in there at all. Any other comments?\nLovell No.\nBorman The water intake, the water counter number. The gun was\nsatisfactory. The recording that goes with it is completely\nunsatisfactory. I think the only way we should\n-CONFIDENTIAL-"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n171\nconsider using that gun again is to read down a daily\ncounter number, and let the people use that as a--we\nran into a regular nightmare. Recording drinks used and\ndrinks.\n\nLovell It was too much.\nBorman I think our water intake was adequate. And again I do\nnot think this is something we need to be hounded\nabout from the ground. A person seems to have enough\nproblems without being reminded that he is drinking enough\nwater; I do not see any reason at all to have this com-\nplicated bookkeeping system. The food intake was not\na problem. We recorded the food. One thing we might\nnote, the food was packed out of sequence. So when we\ngot it out, we did not end up eating Day 1, meal A, B,\nC, Meal 2, A, B, C, but we did always eat Meal A first,\nMeal B the second meal of the day, and Meal C, the third\nmeal of the day. Although, it might be day 1, meal A,\nday 13, meal B, and day 6, meal C.\nLovell Also, while we are talking about food, we better talk\nabout the stowage of the food. It was right up to the\nmaximum.\nBorman That is right.\nLovell And in fact it was a little bit overboard for 14 days.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"172\nCONFIDENTIAL\nRather tightly packed in. We really had to work to get\nit out.\nBorman But again, this is one of those things we were operating\nright up to the maximum capability of the spacecraft, and\nI guess we had to expect that, even though we did get it\nout. So I would not say it was unacceptable.\n11.13 Miscellaneous\nBorman Celestial and terrestial observations, and significant\nobservations or anomolies affecting other operational\nor experimental data.\nLovell Well, we got to see Mars just near the sun by looking at\nit just at sunset.\nBorman Mercury you mean. Mercury. We saw Mercury. And we made\nsome other observations here for the scientists.\nLovell Zodiacal light came in loud and clear after we found out\nhow to look for it.\nBorman Right.\nLovell We could not see the Gegenshein though, we knew exactly\nwhere to look.\nBorman Okay. We also made several night passes counting meteors.\nOne at 215 hours plus 23 minutes, 25 seconds, I made\none night pass counting meteors for the entire 30 some\nminutes. And I saw.1 meteor under Taurus and Pleiades\nand it was below us, and it was short and white. The\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"173\nCONFIDENTIAL\nnext night pass, ending at 217:17 I counted discrete\nflashes of lightening for the entire pass. I counted\n206 discrete occurrances of lightning. This was with\nthe spacecraft level in HORIZON SCAN mode, looking out\none window with no yaw control. Now, we also saw\nindividual meteors at different times in flight that are\nrecorded on the tape recorder. But unfortunately we did\nnot see this great shower that was supposed to come out\nof Gemini.\nLovell I saw two in a period of about 10 minutes out of Gemini.\nThey headed below us, of course.\nBorman Alright, the meteors. Another significant observation\nthat we made was a brilliant display of the Aurora. The\nSouthern Aurora over Australia. And we have some pictures\nhere.\nLovell Sketches.\nBorman Sketches of what it looked like, and we will cover this\nin the scientific debriefing.\nLovell And we measured the time it took for stars to occult to\nthe air glow layer, and for Venus to go through.\nBorman I think this would be best to discuss when we talk to the\nscientists.\nLovell I think so.\nBorman Do you have anything else that was significant? As far\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"174\nCONFIDENTIAL\nas operational experimental data?\nLovell No.\nBorman We already mentioned the fact about the air glow changing\nwith the Moon. Oh, I tell you one thing that is significant\nand we looked for it time and time again. This was the com-\nplete inability to observe stars in daylight.\nLovell Oh, yes.\nBorman I hope we put that one to bed, because we tried and tried\nand tried. We strained, we squinted, we looked at all\nangles.\nLovell Looked at all the angles.\nBorman Looked at all the angles, and we were never once able to\nobserve a star in daytime. Now you can observe just at\nsunrise and just at sunset, but never in the daytime.\nLovell When that Sun comes up those stars go.\nBorman That is right. And you get a black horizon--I mean a black\nsky above a blue horizon. I do not know what the reason for\nthis is, but I will vouch for the fact that you can't see\nit.\nLovell Right.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"175\nCONFIDENTIAL\n12.0 PREMISSION PLANNING\n12.1 Mission Plan (Trajectory)\nLovell Well, of course, it varies here, this is the last.\nBorman It changed. We had one all wired and written up for a 72\ndegree launch azimuth and this changed with the addition\nof the GT-6 mission. But I thought the people were very\nflexible, and adapted rapidly to the change.\nLovell Well, we are talking about the mission plan, and they\nare talking about the trajectory alone. There is no\ndoubt about it that our mission, as originally set up\nfor our fuel, was adequate. But,when we introduced GT-6\nand the rendezvous mission, the amount of experimental\nwork which we had to do also was not reduced at all.\nThis compromised the results of our experimental work by\nhaving to use the fuel for the rendezvous. Although,\nI think the rendezvous was important, or that it was\nhigher priority, I would like to have it put on the\nrecord, that the results we gathered from the rest of the\nflight were not as good as could be expected, because of\nthe fact that we just did not have the fuel.\nBorman 110 pounds of gas went down the drain, too.\nLovell Yes.\n12.2 Flight Plan\nBorman I thought the people did a great job there.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"176\nCONFIDENTIAL\nLovell There is no doubt about it. The only way you can plan\na mission of this length of time is real time flight\nplanning. Call up the data you want for the day, it is\na regular work day schedule. Call up what you want, and\nwe will put it down and we will work at it; we will run\nit off that night.\n12.3 Spacecraft Changes\nBorman I do not know of one major change in the spacecraft that\nwe wanted that we did not get. GPO was very cooperative\nabout everything. Of course, the big thing that we\nwanted, that we got after a hassel, was the ability to\noperate suits off. We planned this from the beginning\nwith our first stowage review, and we finally made it by\ngoing the route of getting the suits that we could take\noff. And I think this contributed much to the satisfactory\ncompletion of the mission. Don't you? I have got\npersonal notes here that were made during the flight.\nEvery other page it says suits off was the only way to\ngo, \"I do not know how I stayed in the suit for six\ndays,\" and so on. The suit I am sure has done more to\nincrease the bugaboo of physical deterioration in space-\nflight than any other single item. Far more than zero g.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n177\n12.4 Mission Rules\nBorman They are routine now. We have no real arguments.\nLovell The only thing I can say about mission rules is the fact\nthat they can be changed by the Flight Director to suit\nthe situation. There is enough flexibility in them\nthat allows the mission rules to meet the problem at\nhand.\nBorman Although, we did not have any problems that required us\nto change them.\nLovell No, we did not.\n12.5 Experiments\nBorman The only experiment that I thought was not well presented\npre-mission was the laser. That was a sort of half\nbaked preparation for quite a while, and at the last they\nbrought the equipment down to Houston and it came out\npretty good.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"178\nCONFIDENTIAL\nLovell When we were first introduced to the equipment back at the\nstowage review up at St. Louis, we didn't know enough about\nthe experiment to really analyze the equipment, to find out\nwhether it would be adequate or not.\nBorman That is right. We should have picked up the reticle light-\ning on that.\nLovell Because we did not pick up the reticle lighting and we did\nnot pick up the green filter.\nBorman No. The green filter looked all right when we used it on\nthe ground. It is just the fact that we were not able to\nobserve from far enough away to pick it up.\nLovell That is right.\nBorman The lighting contrast.\nLovell Also, experiments to the M-1 experiment was sort of a last\nminute glitch.\nBorman Yes.\nLovell We had a lot of compromise. Not compromise but a lot of\nfailures.\nBorman Putting the M-1 into the ECS system you mean.\nLovell Although, I will have to admit that the whole thing worked\nout fine. The mechanics of the M-1 experiment did last\n14 days and was absolutely no problem as far as operation of\nspacecraft or the ECS system.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n179\nBorman Right.\nLovell It did complicate the pre-mission planning.\nBorman Every other experiment I thought was well presented. The\nexperiments division, with Dick Moke helping out did a good\njob. I was very, very satisfied in other words, with the\nwhole business.\n13.0 MISSION CONTROL\nBorman Describe and discuss updating on the status of spacecraft and\nmission.\n13.1 GO/NO GO's\nBorman Once a day operation, where we read out certain parameters in\nthe spacecraft, reported them to the ground, and they have a\nGO or NO GO for the next area.\n13.2 PLA and CLA updates\nBorman They were extremely easy to handle. They came up in blocks\nof about 6 or 9. No problem, since we decided to use a\nrolling reentry in the event of contingency landing.\nLovell We had very little writing to do.\nBorman Very little writing. And I might add, based on that reentry,\nif I had to do it again, that is exactly what I'd want: a\nrolling reentry, if I did not have a load in that computer.\nBecause I think it is very difficult to look out the window\nand observe a horizon during a reentry. At least it was\nduring ours; especially during a night reentry.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"180\nCONFIDENTIAL\n13.3 Consumables\nBorman My goodness, we had 30 per cent O2 left when we jettisoned\nthe adapter. 30 some per cent FC O2 and about 40 per cent\nFC hydrogen. The OAMS were a little different situation.\nWe cut that off at about 2 per cent. I was a little dis-\nturbed on the real-time flight planning in the last couple\nof days when they were sending up for more experiments than\nthey knew we had fuel to do. And telling us to sift them\nout. This sort of puts the onus of not doing it on the\npilot. I guess in the long run it is the best way to do it,\nbut they would call up and say, \"well, here is a whole lot\nof updates that you can do if you have the fuel.\" Well,\nthey knew darn well, we didn't have the fuel.\nLovell That is right.\nBorman In many cases it turned out to be weathered anyway.\nLovell And we had been briefed that there was a rather large error\nin the quantity readout on the quantity gauge, and fortun-\nately for us it looked like it was in our favor.\nBorman We also had the Volkswagon tank which helped out. So we\nknew exactly where we were then.\nLovell But we should, in future flights, make sure that the space-\ncraft has enough fuel for adequate BEF alignment, and for\nat least a couple of revolutions with enough reserve to make\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sure that in case something goes wrong with the thruster,\nthey could utilize more fuel to keep that alignment.\nBorman Right. Well, as it worked out, we came out all right, any-\nway. Because we just said we were not going to do anymore\nif we got to 5 per cent to 6 per cent. Then they came back\nand said that one time, I said, \"Well, we're at 6 per cent,\"\nand they said, \"we thought you would go ahead and go to 5\nper cent.\" And this is an awful nebulous thinking.\nLovell Besides the gauge is hard to read to that accuracy.\nBorman That is right. Okay. We have already discussed, I think,\nthe consumables on the fuel cells and the batteries. We\nturned off the squib batteries, about the 10th day. The\nfuel cell consumables were never a problem.\nLovell Main battery voltage was never really high, I thought. I\nhave been led to believe that 22.5 volts was sort of a\nminimum voltage for a battery. They were up about 23 or\n22.8 in the early part of the flight, and they were down to\nabout 22.6, I guess, towards the end of the flight.\n13.4 Flight plan changes\nBorman If there was a flight plan change, the only one that I know\nof, that we were not aware of, was the one of updating our\nperigee in the first burn. We thought we were going to burn\nit to 102. It came out we burned it to 120 and I'd like to"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"know whether this was programmed, or whether we just burned\ntoo long. Other than that the flight plan went very well.\n13.5 Systems\nBorman One of the items that I objected to a little bit in the\nflight, and it was the natural tendency with people on the\nground; was the tendency, when we had a little systems mal-\nfunction, to explore it to the greatest depths without re-\ngard to the rest of the mission. For instance, when we had\nthe failed thrusters and we were very, very low on fuel,\nthey wanted me to put a 3 second direct burst through the\nthrusters; so they could get TM on what was happening.\nWell, this is fine, except when you do this, you are intro-\nducing the problem of the thrusters sticking, and losing all\nyour fuel there. Or at least you are squirting out 3 sec-\nonds of valuable fuel, which is a heck of a big chunk in\nDIRECT. And if you were to induce ignition or even with\nthree seconds of just venting fuel through the thruster you\npick up a great rate, and then you have to stop; so you\nwould use a tremendous amount of fuel this way. I will say\nwhen I refused to do it, though, they acceded, so it was\nall right. Another thing I didn't like, was this idea of\nblowing the OAMS squib. Remember? \"This isn't in the\nflight plan\"--\"if you feel like doing it, I want you to blow"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the OAMS squib just to see if you can hear it.\" At this\nstage of the game we were depending upon the OAMS fuel for\nrealigning the platform. I thought that by then we were in\na stage of the mission that we were operational rather than\ninterested in blowing something to see if we could hear it.\nLovell Especially for a night alignment.\nBorman Right. And I agree with you a thousand times it would not\nmake any difference, but on the thousand and first time, it\nmight have made a difference if we lost our OAMS, and I\ncould not see any reason to do it; so we did not do it.\nAnother item, that I did not like, came up as far as flight\nplan changes go. The request that was put in as part of the\nflight plan, and never was in the flight plan. That was to\nget a blood pressure over Guaymas after retrofire. As it\nturns out, we tried to do this, but we could not find the\nhorizon and so we did not do it. I would strongly, as a\nmatter of fact, I would not even consider it. After retro-\nfire, as far as I am concerned, the blood pressures, and\nall the other non-operational equipment can go by the way-\nside.\nLovell Right.\nBorman Right then the important thing is to get on the ground.\nLovell Yeah, actually the retrofire time, the triple orbits before"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"retrofire, when you are getting ready for reentry, should\nbe exclusively devoted to that. We should be doing nothing\nelse.\nBorman Right.\n13.6 Experiments real-time updates\nBorman Experiments real-time updates: all we can say is that it\nwas done fairly well."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"14.0 TRAINING\n14.1 Gemini Mission Simulator\nLovell Since there were three crews that had been through\nthese simulators quite extensively, and only one that\nrequired any more knowledge or any more operation of\nit, we decided to use the simulator at Houston as a\nsystems trainer. Most of our basic training in the\nearly phases of Gemini 7 was done on systems. We\nused the Houston trainer to gain knowledge of the systems.\nTowards the end we also used it for launch and reeentry\ntraining.\nBorman We made no effort to keep it up to stowage configuration.\nLovell We made no effort to keep the Gemini Mission\nSimulator at Houston in any kind of a GT-7 stowage\nconfiguration. We just merely used the flying\nportions of it to get acquainted with systems\nand procedures. It was a procedures and systems\ntrainer."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman\tWe got a lot of good reentries.\nLovell\tWell, that's procedures. We got a lot of good reentries,\nand we got a lot of good lift-offs with the trainer.\nOne thing that helped us out quite a bit on procedures\nwas the visual displays.\nBorman\tFor stowage we kept the wooden mock-up in Houston up\nto our configuration. It came up better than I've ever\nseen it before. We did several exercises on the Gemini\nCrew Station Mock-up. We used that as distinct from the\nsimulator for stowage.\nLovell\tThe stowage mock-up was also used for experiments,\nto copy down updates, to put together equipment,\nto find out what electrical leads went where, and\nto practice using equipment inside the spacecraft.\nThat way we didn't have to tie up the valuable Gemini\nMission Simulator, that had a lot of electronics\nattached to it, with training that required\nonly a simulation of space and environment.\nWe acquired a pretty good knowledge of the systems\nwith the simulator."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"There's one area of procedures and systems training which\ncan be improved, and that is the use of more correct\nprocedures between ground and simulator. A lot of times\nwe got into the simulator to do a reentry or launch,\nand we didn't get the parameters which you normally get\nfrom Mission Control. There have been five manned launches,\nwith tapes on all of them, where the communications between\nthe ground and the spacecraft are well documented. We\nought to incorporate those in training. So you could\ncopy down updates, you could get the 0.8, you could get\nsystems failures and how the ground handles them, and\nthings of this nature. I think we could simulate them\na lot better now, especially in Houston.\nBorman\tI think Lynn Taegart was doing that.\nLovell\tLynn was attempting to follow that procedure. We\nrequested that they get some tapes from MCC from\nGT-5's launch, but by the time we left there, they\nhadn't yet arrived. Launch was very realistic.\nBorman\tI don't think that we flew a simulator with our roll\nprogram in it and it really didn't make any\ndifference. I guess what we are saying about the"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Houston simulator is that we don't have to keep\nit right up to the final configuration. It's a\nbasic trainer.\nBorman\tIt helps a lot to get in there and get the work done,\nrather than not be able to get in it because it is\nbeing modified to bring it up to the latest configu-\nration. As long as the math flow is proper, and the\nbasic parts are there, you can almost leave it the\nsame for every launch.\nLovell\tIt should be updated as far as basic systems. We\nhad the fuel cell panel put in ours; we wouldn't want\nbatteries, because of a lot of systems training on\nfuel cells. That is important. We don't have to\nhave every little item like on the Cape simulator for\ninitial simulator training.\nBorman\tI was very pleased with the Cape simulator. We've had\nvery good work out of it, and it was right up to\nthe latest stowage configuration. I believe we were\nonly shot down on the simulator once. It wasn't\nworking perfectly every time we got in it, but at\nleast we got valuable training out of it."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell\tRight. One area that does need improving is the coordination\nbetween the simulators, the Cape and Houston.\nBorman\tYou're talking about SIM NETS when we ran with Houston,\nwhich was almost a total waste of time, on our part.\nBorman\tThat's right.\nLovell\tWe wasted an awful lot of time just waiting around, because\nthere wasn't the coordination between the two.\nBorman\tIt was not the coordination, it was just the interface.\nLovell\tThat's what I mean, the interface. They weren't\nconnected properly. We did get a lot of bum dope;\nit wasn't the lack of training, it was the lack of\nproper training.\nLovell\tStation keeping with the booster occurred down here\nat the Cape only. I thought that was fairly realistic\nwhen it was working. I thought it helped some.\nBorman\tI thought it helped a lot."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell\tRetrofire: procedure-wise was very good. The\nhorizon, visual display, really is a big item.\nIt made all the difference in the world between\nwhat we had before with no display and what we have\nnow. As far as training goes, that is a very big item.\nThe Houston Simulator ought to have a visual display\nas soon as possible. Retrofire reentries were all as\nprogrammed.\nBorman\tWe had visual at Houston; we just did not have the\ntargets. We had the stars at night.\nLovell\tWe had the stars, but we had the occluding disc,\nand we did not have the horizon.\nBorman\tReentry on the Mission Simulator was good, a very\nclose approximation to what we flew in the spacecraft.\nI think that was very valuable. On GT-4, we had\nonly flown about two or three reentries. We had\nto go up to St. Louis to fly these.\nLovell\tGT-3 and GT-4 were both that way. Essentially what\nwe are saying about the Gemini Mission Simulator at\nHouston is that it is the basic trainer for systems and\nprocedures. The one at the Cape is a fine mock-up for the\nfinal flight plan simulator. We go right through"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the numbers in the flight plan, and the SIM-NETS with\nthe entire network.\n14.2 DCPS ( Launch abort simulator)\nBorman We used it and it was very effective. It never worked\nclosed loop as well as it was supposed to.\nWe did not have any visual with it, but nevertheless\nthe runs that we got there I thought were invaluable;\nwe certainly could not do without them. The noise\nand the sensations seemed as close as you could get\nto them without running on centrifuge. It was a good\nprogram, the tapes were good.\nLovell I think it is a very necessary simulator. It was not\nworking completely like we wanted it to work, but it\nwas just being put into operation when we were at\nHouston. We did not have much of an opportunity to\nuse it.\n14.3 MAC Engineering Simulator\nBorman We ran a whole week at MAC, two days on reentries and\nthree days on station keeping, and that was a very\nworthwhile week. It was concentrated effort, and the\nstation keeping simulation was as close to what we saw"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"as you could possibly get. It was just fantastic. It was\nreally well done, and the reentries were also. We got\na real good feel for the reentries. We had the people from\nFOD and the people from FCSD up there at the time. We\nunderstood not only the procedures for flying the\nreentries, but the why's, the how's, the limitations\nof the systems.\nLovell Well, that's where we dug out the procedures actually\nfor the reentry technique.\nBorman That's right. That's where we developed the procedure\nof following the roll needle up to 3 G's. That was\nprobably as good a week in training as we had the whole\ntime.\n14.4 Translation and Docking Trainer\nLovell In the little work that I did, it is\nrepresentative of the actual case, if not more\nsensitive.\nBorman It's more sensitive. It is a more simple task to\ndock in space that it is in the Translation and Docking\nTrainer.\nLovell As long as it is more complicated there is no problem."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Borman I was really surprised at that.\n14.5 Planetarium\nLovell The Planetarium is one which I have to admit I degraded\nfor the last trip. I said I didn't want to go and we\nweren't going to go. Then we decided we'd better go,\nand I think right now it was well worth it. The last\ntrip to the Planetarium was the best one.\nBorman We got more dope on the actual orbit. We had settled\non our flight path, and they displayed it, and it was\namazingly accurate.\nLovell We worked out our initial burn at the Planetarium,\nthe stars we were going to burn on for our perigee\nadjust burn. I took a chart along that I made up at\nthe Planetarium to use for the zero, seven, and four-\nteen days in the celestial sphere. It worked\nout fine. When you go there, that's what\nyou have to do. You have to take\nthe azimuth that you are going to\nlaunch on, take all the charts that you are\ngoing to have; and run through that type\nof mission. To go there and just learn all the stars\nmight be okay for basic training like we did several"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"years ago. After you get assigned to a specific\nmission, you better start learning the stars\nyou need to use for certain burns and things of this\nnature. That's a good place to do it. I thought\nperhaps, since we had the visual display, that we could\neliminate the Planetarium because the visual\ndisplay had more real feel for it, and it does.\nHowever, the visual displays in the simulators don't\ncarry the magnitude of the stars that you can actually\nsee.\nBorman And they are not flexible enough.\nLovell That's right. They are not flexible.\nBorman You can't change them.\nLovell So the Planetarium was helpful.\nBorman Spacecraft orientation. As Jim said, we studied the\nburns and made the first two burns on the stars.\nThe Planetarium was very helpful for this.\nRemember, you were all set to find Corvus\nand then Spica and we had it all lined up before we\never launched.\n14.6 Systems Briefings\nBorman We had one hundred and twenty-six hours\nand thirty minutes of systems briefings and"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it's all well documented and scheduled. Another\nthing that was very helpful to us was Mike\nBrzezinski, the way he scheduled all the systems\nbriefings and all the training. We didn't fool\naround with any of it. It was set up well, and went\nlike clockwork. I think this was one of the real\nfine points of our training. Mike came down to the\nCape a week early and the whole schedule was set up\na week before we got here, and with very little\nchange after that. He did an outstanding job,\nand as far as I am concerned, that's the only way\nto run it.\nLovell That's right. There's no sense running around doing\nit yourself when we have a nice, well run organiza-\ntion that can do this work for us.\nBorman As far as any figures or numbers on the time spent\nin the different phases of training, they are all\navailable. If anybody wants them we have the\nfinal report, and we have a weekly report.\nBorman It was very helpful to us to just have to deal with\none person, rather than dealing with the Planetarium\npeople, the people at MAC, the people at the Cape.\nThe only thing we did at all was contact Mike. We"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"196\nCONFIDENTIAL\nnever contacted anyone else. We didn't go direct\nto anybody.\nBorman We might mention that the systems briefings were\nreally of two types. We had preliminary systems\nbriefings by our FCSD people at Houston. At Mc-\nDonnell, during the SIMS flights and altitude chamber\ntests we filled in the dead time with systems\nbriefings from the people at McDonnell. This\nwas a good way to go also. For instance, while one\ncrew was flying the MAC Rendezvous Simulator\npracticing station-keeping, the other crew was\ngetting systems briefing. So, we didn't have any dead\ntime. It worked out well.\nBorman The station-keeping, on the booster was more\ndifficult than it was on GT-6, primarily because\nthe booster was venting, and tumbling and trans-\nlating. Also because of the fact that we really\ndidn't have a lot of time. We were having to use\nfuel in order to get set up before night, for the\nseparation burn. However, once we got it squared\naway, there was no difficulty at all staying\nwith the booster at a distance, I'd estimate from\nabout sixty to one hundred and fifty feet. During\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n197\nthe booster station keeping we did observe the\nablative skirt on the engine. At one time it\nappeared that there were two points right at the\nedge of the skirt that might have been rolled in. It\nlooked like maybe there were two approximately twelve\ninch sections that might have been rolled in. It\nmay have been shadows cast off the booster. By\nand large, I would say that the engine looked\nvery well.\nLovell To me the engine looked brand new. It had a gold\ncast to it. It looked perfectly good to me.\nBorman I did not notice any venting out of the roll nozzle,\nwhich is unusual. We thought the venting came out\nof the relief for the PSV valve on the side of\nthe booster. We just discussed this with the\nMartin people. They were a little surprised to hear\nthis. The venting we saw came out ninety degrees\nto the longitudinal axis of the booster.\nLovell It looked like it came out right at the edge of the\ntank.\nBorman And this is the Pressure Sequencing Valve drain.\nAnd the next one is, \"If so, what was its condition?\"\nIt looked great. \"Did you get pictures?\" Yes,\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n198\nwe got pictures with a 16 mm. We did not get\npictures with the Hassleblad because we could not\nunstow the Hassleblad at this time.\n14.7 Flight Experiments\nBorman Simulations: The one we used most frequently\nwas the GMS for the D-4/D-7 tracking.\nLovell We also used it for the sextant.\nBorman Although it wasn't a good utilization, we used it\nfor the D-5.\nLovell Just for procedures. Most of our experiment\nsimulation was done in the mock-up. The wooden\nmock-up.\nBorman Translation and Docking Trainer. We used the\nTranslation and Docking Trainer for some tracking\ntraining with the laser. It was not all I had\nhoped it would be. Nevertheless it did give\nus training and convinced us it would be no\nproblem in tracking with the laser. This was\nborne out by the flight that the main problem would\nbe acquiring it. We picked up the fact in the\ndocking trainer that the reticle is not visible\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n199\nat night. The Translation and Docking Trainer was\nhelpful in station keeping. We didn't really do\nany training at McDonnell for the experiments.\nLovell We did mostly the station keeping and the reentry at\nMcDonnell.\nBorman And you went to Ames.\nLovell Just for the sextant. The sextant briefing at Ames I\nthought could have been done at Houston. I got more\ninformation out of Bob Silva on the roof of the\nCape here, than I did really out of Ames. The two\nsimulators I used out there really didn't help me out\nat all. I think the simulator and a star field in\nthe Gemini simulator plus work outside on the roof\nwould be more valuable than Ames, which I passed on\nto Wally and Tom.\nBorman We had many briefings... Total time spent on experi-\nments is two hundred hours and thirty minutes. A\ngreat deal of that time was briefing. I felt, that\nby the time we took off, we knew not only the pro-\ncedures for every experiment, we knew the hows,\nthe whys, and the wherefores. I thought we were\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n200\nadequately trained on every experiment. If I could\ncomment on the one experiment that I thought was\nhandled in a sort of, I won't say haphazard, but at\nleast a rather free style, was the laser. We didn't\nget real proper training on that. I didn't get to\nlook at the laser until later in the game. The ground\nequipment at Ascension never did come up, and I think\nthat if we are really going to make this laser work,\nwe are going to have to put more emphasis on the people\nwho are running it. It seems to me that here we need\nsome special procedure for training experiments. It\nseems to me that we went to some places where Mike\nwas stuck with the position of trying to scrounge people\nand equipment or the individual experimenters were stuck\nwith it. It seems like maybe Lilly should have been\nable to work with some section in our organization to\nget the training that we wanted and get it set up. The\nway it is now, for training on experiments, you almost\nhave to depend on individual experimenters and a lot\nof the time they don't understand at all the problems of\noperating a spacecraft. Did you have that feeling ever,\nMike?\nFCSD Rep Just with the MSC-4. We did have a problem getting\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"201\nthe equipment. All the other equipment seemed to come\nin well.\nBorman\tYes, but we always depend upon the experimenters for\nthe training. You know, like on the sextant. Maybe\nthis is the way you have to continue to go.\nFCSD Rep\tThis is the way the program is set up, for the experi-\nmenters to actually do the briefing.\nBorman\tYeah, and then the hardware training. That is the way\nit did work. That's probably the best way. The\nS-8/D-13, we went to the trainer. I guess what we\nare really saying is that we should emphasize to the\nexperimenter that they have a responsibility for\nproviding training and for providing training hardware.\nLovell\tThat is the big thing. The experimenters, or the\nexperiments group, has to provide the training to get\nadequate results from their experiment. Otherwise\nthey are not going to get adequate results.\nBorman\tThat is right.\nLovell\tAnd the training equipment and the training periods have\nto come early enough in the program so that we work out\nany problems that evolve. For instance, a classic\nexample was the laser when we ran into the reticle\nproblem. We did not find out until too late in the game"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"202\nto change anything. We could not put a lighted reticle\non the laser.\nBorman\tIn all fairness, we ought to point out about the laser\ntoo, that it was severely handicapped when we changed the\nlaunch azimuth. Because initially they had not planned\nto work anywhere except at White Sands. Then with the\nchange in launch azimuth, White Sands went down the tube\npretty well, then they had to scrounge around and try\nto get to Hawaii and Ascension.\nThe experiment equipment, by and large, I thought was\nreadily available on this flight. Thanks mainly to Lou\nAllen and the pressure he put on the people. Training\nequipment was pretty well available, early in the game.\n14.8 Spacecraft systems tests\nBorman\tWe covered a lot fewer of the spacecraft systems tests\nthan previous spacecraft had, based on our experience\non Spacecraft 4. Let me see exactly what it was.\nSpacecraft tests, 169 hours and thirty minutes for the\nPrime Crew, and 193 hours and 30 minutes for the Backup\nCrew. I do not think there is any reason to cover things"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"203\nlike Systems Assurance and so on in St. Louis. It is a\nwaste of time. At St. Louis you should plan on covering\nthe SIM flights, the Altitude Chamber and the Horizontal\nSEDR. And, down at the Cape, I thought even though we\ncut out six days of testing and we did not have a Wet Mock,\nI saw absolutely no impediment at all to our launch training.\nI do not think that any of it is necessary. I do not think\nwe cut out one necessary thing.\nLovell\tI think that you could use your time more wisely in simula-\ntor training, in recovery training, and in training you\nare really going to use than in study of some of the sys-\ntems assurance tests where you spend hours in the spacecraft\njust throwing switches. You reach a point there where\nyou are not learning any more.\nBorman\tI think you should follow, at St. Louis, the SIM flight,\nthe Altitude Chamber, and the Horizontal SEDR. And down\nhere at the Cape, we want to do the SIM flight, the Joint\nCombined Systems test, the EIIV test, and finally of\ncourse, the SIM flight and Stowage Review.\nLovell\tThat is something which we put in, and I think ought to be\nincluded in all..the stowage is one thing that changes\nconstantly right after launch, and it ought to be put in\njust before launch. A week or so before launch to make\nsure everything is correct."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"204\n14.9 Egress training\nBorman\tBriefing, Gulf Exercise, and Survival Gear. All went\noff well. We had it done on Spacecraft 4, so we only\nwent off in Static Article 5. We did not use the Boiler\nPlate No. 201 and it worked out fine. We had the\nhelicopter pickup.\nLovell\tI think the helicopter pickup was well worth it though,\nbecause it was exactly what you do on recovery.\nMight as well do it in practice.\nBorman\tAnd that is strange how that got thrown in there.\nThat one time on Spacecraft 4, we just thought, well,\nit would be nice to come back by helicopter, rather\nthan back by ship. And it worked out to be very\nvaluable as a matter of fact. I think that is good\ntraining. I think that you should have the Gulf\nexercise. No question in my mind that you should\nhave that.\nLovell\tThat is about the most realistic type training you\ncan possibly get.\nBorman\tWe were well trained in the use of survival gear.\nOf course, I think that it is a very good idea. We\nhad it laid out here in the crew quarters all the time\nwe were down here, and we stopped in and took a look at it."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"205\nWe were thoroughly briefed on the ejection seat by NASA\npeople. I thought we were well prepared for that.\n14.10 Parachute Training\nLovell\tI think that all the parachute training that is required\nis launch off the island for a water landing. I think\nthat is all the Parachute training you need, because\nthat is most likely where you are going to land. You are\ngoing to land on land during an abort, so there would be\nall kinds of people to help you or you are not going to\nmake it anyway. Guess you would be too close to the\nbooster. I think the water landing training is very\nimportant, especially when you are using new equipment\nlike our new suits. If we had the 4C suits again for this\nflight, I think that, since we had rotated so early from\nGemini 4, that we could have eliminated that and not have\nany real problems.\nBorman\tI think that all the training should be conducted with\ntraining suits on. It does not make much sense to go out\nthere in a swimming suit.\nAnd we might mention that we had one suit out there for"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"our training. We switched in and out of a single suit, wet, or not wet, and got it all completed by one o'clock.\n14.11 Launch simulations\n14.12 Reentry simulations\n14.13 Simulated network simulations\n14.14 Network simulations\nBorman Launch simulations, Reentry simulations, and Simulated Network Simulations, and Network Simulations, at the Cape down here, for us, were a total waste of time. We have already mentioned this earlier, but because of the fact that the simulator was not playing with the MCC, I would not say the launch simulations were a total waste of time. We did get some launches, but I am afraid that the time spent was not profitable."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lovell We wasted an awful lot of time on that. It is not that they would not be profitable. I think that is really where you get the good training because you get...\nBorman I am not going to recommend eliminating it. I would recommend fixing it so that it plays properly.\nLovell That is right. Because you get the actual operating with the people that are going to be conducting the flight, get the communication procedures down, get the whole bit. Unfortunately the whole bit was not working.\nBorman That is right. I think this is recognized by all sides. I understand that Gemini 6 was much better after we left.\n14.15 Flight plan training\nI really do not think you would call that training. It is sort of procedures that you go through, and I hope that the people that come behind realize how big a hand they can have in making the flight plan and how early they should get into the business, because there are so many people with their own little inputs. If the crew does not get in early and keep things under control, you will end up with an impossible situation."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Fortunately, I think, that the people that you have to work with now, Bill Tindall, and Barney Evans, are pretty good. One of the first things I would recommend to anyone to do, is to start talking to the Mission Planning people as soon as they get assigned to a flight. From then on, keep their fingers on the flight plan. I think that is reflected in the amount of time we spent on ours. 133 hours was spent in that training just on preparing and reviewing the flight plan. I think it paid off because we ended up with one that was reasonable and one that we could work with. I would not call it training though, as it was sort of doing flight planning.\n\n15.0 CONCLUDING COMMENTS\nBorman What else do you have to say James?\nLovell We are back home, that proves the mission was a success.\nBorman There is one thing that I have to say I think the system we have set up here in FCSD now to handle these flights, this task force organization, is outstanding. I was very well pleased with the support we got from everybody.\nLovell I do not think we could have done it ourselves and having gone through it before when we did not have the"} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"organization set up this way, it sure made a difference.\nBorman And every part of the Center came through. It was very effective at the stowage mockups and the Design Review to have Kenny Kleinknecht or Chuck Matthews right there and to make a desicion and then it stuck. That was very, very helpful from the very beginning there. The first day we went to that stowage review up there, we had the basic concept solved and we had the ECP's in to get the stowage the way we wanted it. It was very helpful. I do not think there was one thing that we really wanted in the spacecraft that GPO did not provide.\nLovell Everybody was very cooperative, I thought.\nBorman But that was another item that I strongly recommend the crews to do....is attend Management Meetings...particularly while the spacecraft is in St. Louis. You will find a lot of decisions are made and you can get in there and get your voice in. The people listen to you as long as you are not unreasonable, and you will end up making an awful lot of money in a very short time if you will get to the decision making."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"is keep a close tab on what goes on at the CCB. Jim Bilodeau is the best point of contact there. He kept us informed. For instance, let us say we wanted another stowage bag in the right footwell. Rather than just going through the back door and trying to get Carl Stone to make up a bag, we immediately submitted a requirement to the CCB. We found that time to react on this thing was amazingly short. You could get one in on a Thursday and it would be acted on by Monday. Then, after you had this clearance through the CCB, things went smoothly. I guess what I am saying is the system works and just plow in and use it. That is it."} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"43a48332ec5fdc1e","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\nAcquisition Threat Support\n8 March 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-1001-006\nSpace Access: Where We've Been . . . and Where We Could\nGo\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nSpace Access: Where We've Been . . . and Where We Could\nGo\nPrepared by:\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 67\nAdministrative Note\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\nii\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nContents\nIntroduction ........................................................................................v\nPropulsion Perspective ........................................................................1\nHypersonic Configuration Concepts ....................................................2\nThermodynamics and Materials ..........................................................16\nThe Qu Tube ......................................................................................23\nRocket Propulsion ..............................................................................25\nUp-and-Down Operations ..................................................................30\nLaunch Options ..................................................................................33\nAtmospheric Variations ......................................................................35\nConclusion ........................................................................................37\nAppendix A: Historical Perspective ...................................................43\nAppendix B: Aeropropulsion Integrated Vehicle ...............................46\nAppendix C: TAV Operational Costs .................................................47\nAppendix D: Landing Ellipses for Hypersonic Gliders .......................48\nFigures\nFigure 1. Hardware Flow ....................................................................vi\nFigure 2. Impact of Air-Breathing Rocket ..........................................1\nFigure 3. HSVS Hypersonic Cruise Aircraft Showing True Skin Temperature ...........3\nFigure 4. Hypersonic Rocket-Powered Glider Hypersonic Air-Breathing Cruiser ......4\nFigure 5. Delta-Lifting Body Designs ................................................5\nFigure 6. Martin Marietta X-24 A & B Research Gliders.................................7\nFigure 7. Detailed Design Analyses Show the Weight Trends are as Much a\n Function of Configuration Family as Lift-to-Drag Ratio ............................9\nFigure 8. High-Performance Hypersonic Glide Aircraft ......................................10\nFigure 9. NASA Langley Wing-Body Configuration WB-004 with Critical Areas for\n Wing Bodies Identified ...........................................................................11\nFigure 10. FDL-7C/D and FDL-7MC Lifting-Body Configuration...............................12\nFigure 11. FDL-7C/D with a DuPont Retractable Inward-Turning Inlet .................12\nFigure 12. Comparison of FDL-7C/D and Model 176 ............................................13\nFigure 13. Sufficient Cross Range (L/D) Means There is No Waiting to Return .....14\nFigure 14. Hypersonic Glider Characteristics .......................................................15\nFigure 15. Both Delta Planform Lifting Body (Dynasoar) and Model 176 Offer\n Superior Landing Performance ...................................................................16\nFigure 16. McDonnell Aircraft Company Roll-Bonded Titanium Structure ...............17\niii\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 17. Model 176 in the McDonnell Douglas Hypervelocity Impulse Tunnel ....18\nFigure 18. FDL-7C/D, Model 176 Entry Temperature Distribution ..........................19\nFigure 19. Even At Mach 12, Embedded Vortices in the Boundary Layer Alter the\n Local Heat Transfer ...................................................................................19\nFigure 20. Thermographic Phosphor Image of Model 176 at Near-Maximum\n Angle of Attack ........................................................................................20\nFigure 21. From L/D Maximum to Maximum Angle of Attack, There Is Always a\n Cool Sub-layer Adjacent to the Wall ........................................................20\nFigure 22. This 1988 SEP Bordeaux SiC/SiC Panel Could Sustain Temperatures of\n up to 3,000°F ..........................................................................................21\nFigure 23. UBE Corporation's Tyranno Cloth ......................................................21\nFigure 24. A Porous Nickel Tip Oozing Water ......................................................21\nFigure 25. FDL ASSET Flight-Tested From Orbital Speeds to Evaluate 1960s\n Materials ...................................................................................................22\nFigure 26. Heat Pipe Shuttle Leading Edge Designed and Built by McDonnell\n Douglas Astronautics ................................................................................22\nFigure 27. Boost-Glide Strategic Vehicle with Pratt & Whitney XLR-129 Rocket\n Engine Installed .......................................................................................25\nFigure 28. XLR-129 ............................................................................................25\nFigure 29. Two Rocket Air-Breathing Rocket Cycles to Mach 5.5 ..........................27\nFigure 30. HOTOL Evolution: From Aerodynamic Optimum Configuration to\n Practical Launcher Configuration ...............................................................27\nFigure 31. LACE Air-Breathing Rocket ...............................................................29\nFigure 32. The FDL-7 Class of Vehicles ..............................................................29\nFigure 33. Takeoff and Landing Speeds of Minimum-Sized Launchers...................30\nFigure 34. Horizontal launch Not Practical Unless Weight Ratio Less Than Four ...31\nFigure 35. Propellant Tanks That Are Not Reentry Vehicles Greatly Reduce\n System Weight ..........................................................................................33\nFigure 36. Simple Horizontal Integration and Vertical Launch Provides Rapid\n Launch Capability .....................................................................................34\nFigure 37. A Vertical Launch Complex Provides Vertical Toss Back Booster\n Recovery and Horizontal Landing Facilities for the Hypersonic Gliders 34\nFigure 38. A 1964 MDC Astronautics, St. Louis, Briefing..............................35\nFigure 39. Earth's Atmosphere ..........................................................................36\nFigure 40. FDL-5 Scale Model of A Stage and One-Half ..................................37\nFigure 41. The FDL-7 and Model 176 Class of Hypersonic Gliders ..........................37\nFigure 42. Hypersonic Decelerating ....................................................................38\nFigure 43. Where We Are Today ........................................................................39\nFigure 44. Where We Could Be If We Can Recapture the Engineering Confidence\n and Expertise of the Apollo/Saturn V Era ...............................................40\nFigure 45. TAV Operational Costs .....................................................................47\nFigure 46. Landing Ellipse ................................................................................48\nTables\nTable 1. Characteristics of Selected Flight Dynamics Laboratory Hypersonic\n Glider Configurations During the 1958-68 Timeframe .................................6\nTable 2. Elements of the Space Infrastructure Shown in Figure 44 ........................41\niv\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nSpace Access: Where We've Been . . . and Where We Could\nGo\nIntroduction\nDevelopment of commercial access to space by our budding space-faring civilization is a straightforward effort dominated by propulsion and reliability. The initial focus should be on schedulable, dependable access to and from low Earth orbit (LEO). For years we have known the means to accomplish such a task but have lacked a dedicated organized effort. The key requirement is to develop a robust and not necessarily a low-cost infrastructure, without which commercial exploitation of LEO and the moon will not be possible. This is a matter of skill; operational hardware based on durable, reliable, and demonstrated components; and operational systems. It is not necessarily a matter of technology. However, technology discovery and development are necessary for future space travel beyond Earth's environs. This paper addresses these issues by providing a running account of the historical details associated with the development of the myriad systems proposed and tested to provide access to space.\nAmong the many advances in space access that will be possible in the future,1 the key technology developments will be in the area of propulsion, because without these we are confined to our solar system by flight times limited to a project team's functional life. The Pioneer spacecraft were fortunate to be monitored for 20 years. However, the issue facing our spaceflight organizations is the lack of a durable, consistent, schedulable, and frequent hardware system to and from space assets such as the International Space Station.\nIn October 1958, the author's job in the vertical wind tunnel at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base abruptly changed; hypersonic and high-temperature flows became a new focus. What was then the Aircraft Laboratory was to become the Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory (AFFDL), with a focus on space flight. Al Draper of the AFFDL began working with a select group of aerospace firms on hypersonic gliders. The initial requirement from the Air Force was to quickly find operational access to space. Technology application, hardware design and fabrication with an innovative application, and extending the industrial capabilities of the time were very much the issue, as exemplified by the Lockheed A-12/SR-71. When asked about space access at the time, a group of Aerospace Corporation\nv\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nveterans responded, \"It was not a technology issue; it was a hardware issue.\"\n\nIn a keynote address to the Aeronautical Revolutionary Concepts Workshop sponsored by the Vehicle Applications Panel of the National Research Council and held at NASA Ames in July 1984, then-Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Productivity, Technology, and Innovation Dr. D. Bruce Merrifield identified the problem of translating ideas into products as preparing technology for product manufacture. Dr. Merrifield drew an analogy between this step and Major League Baseball's farm system, which prepares skilled but untrained players for the major leagues. The United States assigns projects to accomplish technology tasks so the flow of production-ready hardware is always improving and is not fixed (see Figure 1).\n\nInnovation Focus:\nPreparation of Technology for Application\n\n7 to 10 years\n\nIdea Generation | Technology Feasibility | Product Development | Prototype and Pilot Plant | Interim Manufacture | Commercialization\n\nInvention | Translation | RDLP | ERTA\n\n10% Cost | Gap in effective preparation for application in United States | 90% Cost | No Gap in transformation to production\n\n1983 Innovation in Aeronautics Workshop, NASA AMES\n\nDr.D. Bruce Merrifield\nDeptment of Commerce\nAssistant Secretary for Productivity, Technology and Innovation\n\nFigure 1. Hardware Flow\n\nSaturn I and Saturn V could be readied for a moon flight in such a short time because most of their hardware was based on a frozen design, proven production processes, and adaptation of existing hardware. Using a similar approach, current industrial capabilities can create the next practical system for accessing space. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, the U.S. Air Force was working toward an operational capability analogous to its B-52 fleets: flight operations when required or \"on demand.\" After NASA was assigned\n\nvi\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nresponsibility for space access, that Air Force's focus switched to surveillance, communication, and Global Positioning System satellites.\n\nIn the late 1950s, there existed a predisposition—forced by the military competition between the United States and the former Soviet Union—to use rockets derived from military ballistic missiles. That decision curtailed efforts to develop alternatives to chemical rockets together with practical commercial developments. With the orbiting of Sputnik, the aircraft path to space, as represented by the X series of planes, ended with the X-15. With the X-15's demise, all efforts to fly aircraft to space ended, replaced by the more familiar (but less practical) strategy of loudly blasting to space with expendable rockets derived from undertested ballistic missile hardware, as documented in early failures.\n\nLike their ballistic missile progenitors, current expendable rockets can be launched only once. With the exception of the experimental Delta Clipper developed and operated by William Gaubatz and the late Pete Conrad, no operational launcher has ever successfully aborted. In this context, a reusable launcher is simply an expendable with some parts reused a few times. Thus, neither the United States nor the Soviet Union/Russia has ever realized a truly commercial approach to space travel, although the Soviets came close to taking the first step with the since-terminated Energia/Buran system. Both the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia historically have generated a large number of concepts that could fly directly to space and return on a sustained, frequent, scheduled basis. An all-up air breather such as the NASP was to solve that problem and fly directly to space and return. Developing an operational mach 12 to 14 aircraft with air-breathing propulsion presents a serious design, engineering, and fabrication challenge analogous to the SR-71 Blackbird.\n\nvii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPropulsion Perspective\n\nIn exiting Earth's atmosphere, the propulsion system and configuration are inexorably linked. A hypersonic glider exits the atmosphere on either a rocket booster or a first stage of a two-stage-to-orbit aircraft. As such, it usually exits the atmosphere quickly, and the key exit design considerations are the high transonic aerodynamic and the mechanical loads encountered in the exit trajectory. Whether for a new rocket launcher or the U.S. space shuttle, the phenomenon is the same: the peak mechanical loads occur during exit. In this case, the exit aerodynamics are important but not vital. The vital aerodynamics and thermodynamics (aerothermodynamics) are in the entry glide, where thermal loads are maximal and must be controlled. The vehicle must always be controlled in flight so its attitude and direction are within limits set by the aerothermodynamics. The angle-of-attack limits are very close for high-performance hypersonic gliders, as their glide angle of attack is 11 to 15 degrees, not the 45 degrees of the space shuttle. Even the Russian Buran had a lower glide angle of attack than the shuttle; a TsAGI report given to the author by Vladimir Neyland shows it to have been about 30 to 35 degrees.2 Like the Buran, the high-performance glider is best controlled by an automatic integrated flight control system that monitors the thermodynamic state of the vehicle, as well as its aerodynamic and trajectory states. The sensor array provides real-time information to the control system that can maintain the correct attitude in a manner a human controller could not accomplish. So it is this phase of the flight that designs the hypersonic glider.\n\nThe exception is when powered by an air-breathing rocket (HOTOL, Skylon, and LACE), which must remain lower in the atmosphere until reaching the air-breathing rocket transition to conventional rocket. The configuration for the air-breathing rocket is different, as it must have a retractable air inlet in the mach 0 to 5 range but does not determine the vehicle configuration. The impact is significant, as the carried oxidizer is reduced in the heaviest initial portion of the flight, as shown in Figure 2 for a Delta Clipper-type design with an aerospike nozzle tested by Konstantin Feotkiskov. The example is from a Senior Capstone Design Study Team from Parks College, Saint Louis University, circa 1992, and is based on the engineering reports the author was permitted to read from the library of Konstantin Feotkiskov, an aerospace designer and cosmonaut. The question, as always, is, why bother with air-breathing systems at all if they are that much of a challenge? The answer is to consider a partial air-breathing system based on available hydrogen/oxygen rockets that operate to about mach 5.5. It operates in a flight region where the carried oxidizer quantities are the greatest. An operational system is sought that is capable of a large number of flights per year. The fewer resources required for launch, the greater ease with which the system can operate and the greater potential to operate from more bases.\n\nFigure 2. Impact of Air-Breathing Rocket\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe Russian design bureaus are to thank for arriving at a concept that eliminated the noisy and hazardous air-breather takeoff and for increasing the operational flexibility of the British HOTOL concept. Glebe Lozino-Lozinski had a concept for a spacecraft with a 7-metric-ton payload carried atop an Antonov An-225, with a second An-225 carrying the liquid hydrogen and launch facilities and staff.3 The An-225 was in fact a mobile launch facility; it could literally launch a satellite for any facility that could accommodate a B-747 or an MDC-11. With Rolls Royce or General Electric engines, the An-225 becomes a more easily maintained vehicle with better altitude performance.\n\nThe An-225's empennage is modified from the An-124's single vertical and horizontal empennage to an 'H' configuration. This permits the powered hypersonic glider to easily lift off the top of the vehicle, as the MBB Sanger wind tunnel test demonstrated. Most commercial transport aircraft larger than ERJ 170 are potential mobile launch platforms for space tourism, point-to-point cargo, or orbital facilities support. Most of the commercial passenger equipment can be removed, with just enough equipment remaining for a launch crew. The fuselage is strengthened and fitted with external mountings for the hypersonic glider. The landing gear need not be modified, as the same maximum weight as the commercial transport will be maintained. The flight control system would be adapted to automatically maintain the correct launch trajectory until separation. A second modified transport would be modified to carry the liquid hydrogen and liquid air to fuel the hypersonic vehicle, along with maintenance and support crew. The intent is to use the automatic launch checkout the author witnessed at Baikanour in 1988, wherein a Soyuz that arrived on its train carrier at 0500 hours launched carrying a Progress capsule at 1715 hours the same day. That should make a local launch possible within hours of arriving at the specified airport launch departure site. These two elements can provide a commercial space launch facility that requires no special or dedicated operational base.\n\nHypersonic Configuration Concepts\n\nThe configuration and the propulsion system are linked through aerothermopropulsion integration. This approach is not new, as a wide spectrum of configurations and concepts existed in the 1960s. One such McDonnell Aircraft Company concept is shown in Figure 3. This potential operational mach 12 cruise vehicle was developed for the U.S. government as a strike reconnaissance vehicle taking off from a U.S. Air Force base. The concept was to provide on-demand reconnaissance in force operations. However, as was the case with all such efforts in the 1960s, none of the aircraft derived from the \"flight-to-space\" efforts reached a hardware stage. Individuals working on these projects were convinced that the industrial capability existed to design and fabricate these vehicles, and that such vehicles were technically feasible. The concepts varied widely among different nations, but all had as their goal a transportation system to space that had commercial potential. This discussion is provided to discriminate between rocket-powered hypersonic gliders and hypersonic cruisers with an air-breathing propulsion system.\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 3. HSVS Hypersonic Cruise Aircraft Showing True Skin Temperature\n\nMcDonnell Aircraft\nAdvanced Design Dept.\n1958 to 1967\nMr. H. D.Altis, Director\n\nMach 12 Cruise\n\nA wide variety of configurations for recoverable spacecraft are possible. But if the requirements for a transportation system capable of traveling to and returning from space are to be met, the configurations spectrum is significantly narrowed. Two basic configuration types emerge. One configuration is for a hypersonic glider powered by either rocket or air-breathing rocket cycle propulsion that can operate as air-breathing propulsion to mach 5.5 or less. A versatile variable-capture, inward-turning inlet4 can be integrated with the vehicle configuration derived from the FDL series of hypersonic gliders developed by the U.S. Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory (AFFDL)5 and the work of the McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company. Because of the mass ratio to orbit, these configurations are vertical takeoff and horizontal landing vehicles, exemplified by the upper-left vehicle in Figure 4. This vehicle is usually an upper stage in a two-stage-to-orbit rather than a single-stage-to-orbit vehicle.\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nRocket Powered\nHypersonic Glider\n\nCombined Cycle\nAirbreather Powered\nHypersonic Cruiser\n\nFigure 4. Hypersonic Rocket-Powered Glider and Hypersonic Air-Breathing Cruiser\n\nThe second configuration is for air-breathing propulsion systems operating at between mach 6 and mach 14 that require a propulsion-configured vehicle, where the underside of the vehicle is an integral part of the propulsion system (forming most of the air-capturing inlet). This is typified by the lower-right vehicle in Figure 4. The thermally integrated, air-breathing, combined-cycle configuration concept is derived from the McDonnell Douglas (St. Louis) Advanced Design organization. The vehicle concept initially conceived in the late 1950s and early 1960s was an air-breathing propulsion-configured vehicle accelerated by a main rocket in the aft end of the body, as shown in Figure 3. The vehicle's underside is the propulsion system; the engine is in the engine module.\n\nBoth basic shapes are functions of tau—that is, for a given planform area, the cross-sectional distribution is determined by the volume required. Tau was reported in D. Küchemann's book on supersonic aerodynamics^6 as:\n\nτ = V_total / S_plan^1.5 (1)\n\nThe only configuration discussed in the book in any detail is the rocket-powered hypersonic glider. The hypersonic glider has greater near-term potential to become an operational system, considering the failure of the National Aerospace Plane (NASP) to reach a functional hardware stage.\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nWhatever goes into orbit must enter the atmosphere many times if it is to be a sustained-use vehicle. If it is to be a commercial vehicle, then the flexibility to land wherever the commercial customers are is essential. Consider how successful FedEx, UPS, or DHL would be if there were only two pickup and delivery sites in the United States and a few more elsewhere in the world. A ballistic capsule has even fewer landing options, and a saltwater landing and recovery is too costly to be commercially feasible. What is needed is a hypersonic glider with the flexibility to enter when necessary, without waiting, and to land at different operational bases, just as a transport might. There were three serious competitors in the United States with respect to hypersonic glider configurations: the AFFDL at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, the McDonnell Douglas Corporation (MDC), and the Lockheed Corporation.\n\nNASA Ames and NASA Langley were also generating hypersonic configurations, but NASA's views on hypersonic gliders (fundamentally research and development projects) and their glide range requirements differed from those of the three organizations listed above. That difference is clearly exemplified by the difference between the operational requirements of an experimental aircraft (such as X-1, X-2, X-10, X-15, or X-20) that flies infrequently and at the convenience of the research organization and those of an operational Air Force or Navy aircraft that must be able to fly on any day in almost any weather when needed (also a Russian spacecraft operational rule). From the middle of the 1960s to the early 1970s, the U.S. Air Force and NASA had disagreements over the operational capability of these aircraft and their requirements. As a result, each went its own development direction, and much of the originality and practicality of the AFFDL concepts has not been reflected in the space access configurations developed by NASA. There was a final attempt to apply the AFFDL's philosophy of a high lift-to-drag (L/D) ratio delta planform configuration to the NASA space shuttle, as detailed in the article \"A Delta Shuttle Orbiter\" in the January 1971 issue of Astronautics and Aeronautics.^7 Figure 5 shows the array of delta planform configurations the AFFDL considered during the 1958-68 timeframe.\n\nFigure 5. Delta-Lifting Body Designs. Array of delta-lifting body designs shows configuration is not limited to high hypersonic lift-to-drag ratios, high cross range, and large size.^8\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe AFFDL's approach was to design a hypersonic performance configuration that would minimize the waiting time in orbit to return to the continental United States (CONUS). This resulted in configurations with sharper leading edges and smaller nose radii than found in NASA and Russian configurations. All of the material, structural, and thermodynamic details related to the sharper configurations were tested and verified in ground test facilities and flight tests (BGRV and ASSET). Characteristics of selected AFFDL hypersonic glider configurations are identified in Table 1.\n\nTable 1. Characteristics of Selected Flight Dynamics Laboratory Hypersonic Glider Configurations During the 1958-68 Timeframe\n\n# | Model | Observation\n1 | FDL-24B | Flat bottom, sharp leading edges, conventional tails, as designed\n2 | All Body Glider, similar to Russian BOR vehicles | Upturned spatular nose, conventional tails\n3 | ASSET | Test vehicle to evaluate aerodynamics, thermodynamics and materials, based on nose of DynaSoar\n4 | FDL-7MC | Flat bottom, sharp leading edges, variable geometry wing, experimentally developed tail X configuration\n5 | Blunt nose, wing-body | DynaSoar type configuration\n6 | Spaturlar Nose Version of DynaSoar type | First integration of 2-dimensional nose (less drag) on a hypersonic glider (R.D. Newmann)\n7 | FDL-8 | Flat bottom, sharp leading edges, outboard tails\n8 | HL-10 | NASA Ames flat up-swept with bottom, round upper body, high dihedral angle tails\n9 | X-24A | NASA Langley round body, high dihedral angle tails\n10 | Star Body | based on Russian Star Body type configuration\n\nConfiguration 2 was a higher wing-loading, relatively blunt all-body with an upswept spatular nose that is not unlike Russia's Bor series of Lozino-Lozinski hypersonic gliders. When the author was at Wright-Patterson, interest in this waned quickly because of the limited cross range available. Because of the longitudinal extent of the former Soviet Union compared with the United States, the minimum L/D ratio to ensure a landing on the continental land mass was less for the former Soviet Union than it was for the United States—1.7 for the Soviet Union versus 2.7 for the United States.\n\nConfiguration 3 was a subscale research vehicle to evaluate the thermodynamic and materials for hypersonic gliders. The nose and leading edge radii were full-scale size. ASSET was successfully flown on a Thor intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) booster. One that was recovered after an ocean landing is on display in the U.S. Air Force Museum in Dayton, Ohio. Configuration 6 was the first two-dimensional nose applied to a conventional winged-body (configuration 5) in the United States.\n\nConfiguration 4 was a product of cooperation between the AFFDL (Alfred Draper) and McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company (Robert Masek) to develop a vehicle to support the Manned Orbiting Laboratory (MOL). This concept was briefed to the U.S.\n\n6\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAir Force in 1964, and elements of that configuration will be shown later. The intent was a 9- to 12-person vehicle for crew rotation that could alternatively carry supplies to the orbital station on a regular, frequent schedule (about one flight per week per vehicle). The variable geometry switchblade wing permitted landing with heavy loads returning from space and eventually horizontal takeoff. The experimentally determined configuration feature was the tail configuration. This configuration was wind tunnel tested and demonstrated inherent stability and control at speeds ranging from mach 22 to landing speed.\n\nConfiguration 6 was a product of cooperation between the AFFDL (Richard D. Neumann) and McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company (Robert Krieger) to reduce the drag of hypersonic gliders. Based on the physics that a two-dimensional wedge has less drag than a right circular cone of the same volume, these engineers devised the \"spatular leading edge.\" The wind-body configuration formed the basis of the X-20 and DynaSoar configurations that had a limited hypersonic L/D ratio, primarily because of drag. With the spatular nose, the nose wave drag could be reduced by 35 to 40 percent, thus increasing the hypersonic L/D ratio. Configuration 6 was derived from the conventional wing body, configuration 5.\n\nConfiguration 10 is an adaptation of the Russian \"Star Body\" concept that can enter in one of three orientations and need not always have one side facing the flow (compression side). The theory was that in a damaged situation, one of the three sides would be available for a safe entry. The limitation of this configuration concept is a small internal volume and a high ratio of wetted (surface) area per planform area that reduces the hypersonic L/D ratio.\n\nThe X-24B was based on the FDL-8 configuration. The different approaches to hypersonic glider configuration are best exemplified by Figure 6. The X-24A, built by Martin Marietta at its Denver, Colorado, facilities, is a round fuselage configuration with outboard high-dihedral-angle vertical tails. All the configurations of this type have serious lateral-directional stability problems at low speeds and tend to roll about the horizontal axis through the fuselage. One designer, the Russian Glebe Lozino-Lozinski, solved the problem by employing variable dihedral tails. The AFFDL solved the problem by using nonround configurations; that is, the quest for high hypersonic L/D ratios led to the solution of the low speed problem. Under an AFFDL program, Martin Marietta modified the X-24A into a flat-bottomed configuration with trailing edge elevons called the X-24B, shown in Figure 6. Comments by Bill Dana, the NASA pilot who flew the X-15 and the X-24A/B, about the change in the slow speed performance of the X-24B confirmed the advantage of the AFFDL approach.^9\n\nFigure 6. Martin Marietta X-24 A & B Research Gliders. X-24A based on USAF PRIME configuration.\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe design parameters that largely determine a spacecraft's weight are its configuration and the amount of wetted or surface area relative to the planform area. The hypersonic gliders shown in Figure 5 have differing values of wetted area to planform area. Another important factor is the presence of wings, such as for configurations 5 and 6, which are wing bodies with a relatively thin wing or no wing, such as the lifting-body FDL-class hypersonic glider (configurations 2, 4, or 7). In this case the lifting bodies have a shape advantage that reduces the amount of surface area that is thin or subject to high heating. In the 1960s, when the U.S. Air Force's high-performance lifting body was competing with NASA's modest-performance wing body, there was much debate regarding the weight of these lifting concepts compared with that of a ballistic capsule (see Appendix A). At that time, with the large sea-recovery fleets, ballistic capsules were the only entry vehicles in either the United States or the former Soviet Union. A number of studies in the early-to-mid-1960s attempted to rectify and quantify the weight of a lifting entry vehicle compared with a ballistic capsule. In all the discussion in the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs, the cost of the sea recovery was almost taken for granted, so the focus was on the cost of the vehicle itself, not the entire vehicle system. The government assembled a chart representing the relative weight of hypersonic entry systems—from ballistic to high-performance (high L/D ratio) gliders—collected from contractor and government reports. The relative weight was the system weight compared with that of a ballistic capsule with the same payload capacity. The result was a correlation curve that showed the high-performance wing-body gliders could weigh as much as twice what a comparable payload ballistic capsule weighed. This correlation was based on the L/D ratio of the vehicle. Apollo has an L/D ratio of about 0.5, but the system was still a ballistic vehicle with a very limited cross range. One correlation of the data is:\n\nW/W_o = 1 + 0.1259g(L/D) - 0.1029g(L/D)^2 + 0.0621g(L/D)^3 (2)\nW_o = the weight of a ballistic capsule with the same payload\n\nThis correlation yields a high hypersonic L/D ratio glider with a weight almost twice that of the ballistic capsule. In this correlation, different configuration concepts were mixed and correlated as a single data set. A report cited in Appendix A (Stephens, 1965) concluded, \"Weight factor for lifting spacecraft results primarily from larger surface area and only secondarily from the associated spacecraft environment and may be as large as a factor of two greater than ballistic spacecraft.\"\n\nEngineers at the McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company examined the database and concluded the large weight impact for a lifting spacecraft was as much a function of the configuration as the L/D ratio. The engineers set out to separate the database into families of like configurations. Where gaps existed, they established a configuration that provided the L/D ratio sought that was based on the configuration rules for that family. Three families were identified. The SV family configurations were based on circular/elliptical cross-section configurations that were characteristic of the HL-10 and X-24A NASA configuration concepts. The FDL family configurations were based on the trapezoidal delta planform configuration. And the MRS family configurations were based on a McDonnell Douglas modified version of the FDL family, with an emphasis on creating metal-radiative thermal-protection shingles that were flat, thereby reducing the cost of the shingle and perhaps introducing an element of hardware interchangeability. Altogether, 10 configurations from among the 3 families were\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndesigned, weighed, and performed using the same industrial fabrication capability. The result was a curve representing each configuration family, as shown in Figure 7. The three families are represented by the three parallel straight lines.\n\n[Figure 7 chart: W-bar versus Hypersonic L/D, with SV, FDL and MRS family curves and vehicle drawings]\n\nFigure 7. Detailed Design Analyses Show the Weight Trends are as Much a Function of Configuration Family as Lift-to-Drag Ratio\n\nW/Wo = Kg[1+0.0901g(L/D)]\nK = 1.000 for the SV Family\nK = 0.9297 for the FDL Family\nK = 0.7622 for the MRS Family\n(3)\n\nThis illustrates that the configuration and its individual wetted area to planform area can vary as much in their spacecraft weight as they can in their L/D ratio. The high L/D-ratio configurations had weights comparable to same-payload ballistic capsules of:\n\nSV = 1.9 FDL = 1.7 MRS =1.4\n\nSo the penalty for having a lifting-body configuration is less than expected if the configuration characteristics are taken into consideration in the design and weighing of the spacecraft. In addition, the reason the lifting spacecraft with high performance was considered was to eliminate the need for sea recovery and therefore the cost of a recovery fleet and the damage incurred by the spacecraft in a saltwater landing. The\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ngoal was to be able to recover the spacecraft at any airport in CONUS, to eliminate the need for an overseas recovery site, and to eliminate the waiting required until a lower L/D ratio could land in CONUS (up to 14 orbits for the Apollo capsule, or 21 hours). In an emergency, that may be too long. The AFFDL's goal for the spacecraft to support the Manned Orbiting Laboratory was no waiting but to be able to reach CONUS from any arbitrary MOL position in its orbit. This was considered possible in the 1964-65 briefs to the government with respect to MOL, specifically the Model 176 configuration the MDC proposed for the MOL support in 1964.\n\nThe hypersonic glider based on the FDL-7C and the hypersonic air-breathing aircraft in Figure 8 both have hypersonic L/D ratios in excess of 2.7. In very practical terms, that means unpowered cross ranges in excess of 4,500 nautical miles and down ranges on the order of the Earth's circumference. So these two craft can depart from any location of a low-altitude orbit and land in CONUS or in continental Europe. Both are dynamically stable over the entire glide regime.\n\n[Figure 8 drawing: FDL-7 C/D Hypersonic Glider and Blended Body Hypersonic Cruiser]\n\nFigure 8. High-Performance Hypersonic Glide Aircraft. Rocket boost-glide and air-breather cruiser.\n\nThe wing-body, cylindrical fuselage advocates have strongly criticized the lifting bodies, contending that they are poorer configurations and much more complicated than the conventional-wisdom wing-body configurations (see Figure 9). However, that is far from the truth. The structural specialist sees this configuration as a lightweight propellant tank and assumes it is this consideration that drives the design. Rather, that observation introduces problems for all other technical disciplines that are far more difficult to rectify than a noncylindrical tank or a cylindrical tank in a nonsymmetrical cross section. The lone lifting surface with trailing edge controls introduces control issues just as it did for the space shuttle.\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Figure 9 drawing: NASA Langley Wing-Cylinder Configuration Concept WB-004 with callouts]\n\nFigure 9. NASA Langley Wing-Body Configuration WB-004 With Generally Critical Areas for Wing Bodies Identified\n\nWith a high entry angle of attack, the cross flow over the cylinder produces high heating rates beyond the mid-cylinder line. With a lower L/D ratio, the down and cross ranges are limited as to what might be achieved but more in line with NASA one-missed-orbit criterion. The thin wings are heated on both sides to create added thermal problems, as well as added surface area to increase drag.\n\nAl Draper and his team, together with Bob Masek's team at McDonnell Douglas Astronautics, worked long and diligently to arrive at the FDL-7/Model 176 configurations shown in Figure 10. The insert photo is Dale Reed's model of the FDL-7MC radio-controlled model at NASA Dryden. The AFFDL and MDC configurations were inherently stable at all operational angles of attack from at least mach 22 to landing speed. The remainder of this report will focus on the characteristics of this class of lifting body. The statements in Figure 10 were all based on wind tunnel data. A real advantage of the trapezoidal shape was not only flat metallic shingles but heating on the sides and upper surface that was at least three-fifths that of the conventional shapes. The glide range was such that this configuration could land in CONUS from any location on any inclination orbit from its current orbit with no waiting.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Figure 10 drawing: AFFDL-7C/D Lifting Body Configuration Concept with callouts and Dale Reed photo]\n\nFigure 10. FDL-7C/D and FDL-7MC Lifting-Body Configuration. Offers inherent stability and control with sufficient volume and high lift-to-drag ratio.\n\nThe switchblade wing version of the FDL-7MC was the preferred version for 1983 studies that were part of the McDonnell Douglas TAV (transatmospheric vehicle) effort; that vehicle was powered by either an Aerojet Sacramento air turboramjet or an air-breathing rocket propulsion system. The inward-turning, variable-capture area inlet10 provides the correct engine airflow from landing speeds to mach 5.5, as illustrated in Figure 11.\n\n[Figure 11 drawing: FDL-7C/D with a DuPont Retractable Inward-Turning Inlet]\n\nFigure 11. FDL-7C/D with a DuPont Retractable Inward-Turning Inlet\n\nThe propellant tanks were cylindrical-segment, multilobe structures with bulkheads and stringers to support the flat, metal-radiative thermal-protection shingles (very similar to those fabricated by Goodrich Aerospace for the now-defunct X-33). The nose was\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ntranspiration cooled with a low-rate water-porous spherical nose. The sharp leading edges (the same leading edge radius was used for the nose tip) were liquid-metal heat pipes. This approach was tested successfully during the 1964-68 timeframe and was found to be equal in weight and far more durable than a comparable ceramic tile/carbon-carbon system. The AFFDL's experience with carbon-carbon leading edges on the ASSET test vehicle convinced the Air Force it needed a more durable solution.\n\nFigure 12 compares the FDL-7C/D and the McDonnell Douglas Model 176. The Model 176 had a power law nose that was essentially a curved spatular nose and a higher sweep angle, resulting in the same usable volume but with a higher hypersonic L/D. Sacrificed were the flat-panel thermal-protection shingles over part of the fore body. Both configurations retained the X-tail configuration developed by Gil Gaumer of McDonnell Douglas. At the time, the launch vehicle would have been a Martin Titan IIIC. Had an engine with the performance of the Pratt & Whitney XLR-129 been available, there would have been lateral recoverable, fuel/oxidizer tanks on either side of the vehicle, with all of the engines installed in the hypersonic glider. This was similar to the Lockheed Star Clipper (see Figure 38).\n\n[Figure 12 drawing: Comparison of FDL-7C/D (top) and Model 176 (bottom)]\n\nFigure 12. Comparison of FDL-7C/D (top) and Model 176 (bottom)\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY The author was aware of three people—James S. McDonnell, the AFFDL's Albert Draper, and Russia's Glebe Lozino-Lozinski—who clearly understood the need for a long cross-range and down-range capability, not just for one missed orbit. Critics will observe that Lozino-Lozinski had limited his BOR vehicles to an L/D ratio of 1.7 to 1.8 and not the 2.7 to 3.0 required for Earth circumferential glide range. First, the longitudinal extent of the former Soviet Union was twice that of CONUS, and an Earth circumferential glide range was not necessary to ensure recovery within the continental Soviet Union; therefore, a lesser L/D ratio was acceptable. Second, in personal conversations with the author, Lozino-Lozinski indicated a Russian government agency forced him to limit the glide range to ensure recovery in continental Russia and prevent escape to the United States. In a further step to prevent escape, when the vehicle was in range of CONUS, ground control disabled its deorbit system. The need for a long cross-range and down-range capability so there is no waiting in orbit in the case of an emergency or military need is presented graphically in Figure 13. Interestingly, the greatest lateral-range (cross-range) requirement for no waiting is for 55º orbital inclination, the usual Russian orbital inclination. The nominal U.S. orbital inclination is 28.5 degrees, with a waiting time of 8 orbits (approximately 12 hours) for a space shuttle-class glider. At the International Space Station orbital inclination, the orbital waiting time for a shuttle-class glider is 6 orbits. In comparison, Apollo's orbital waiting time was about 14 orbits, provided the return trajectory included an Earth-parking orbit before entry into the Earth's atmosphere. The FDL-7 and Model 176 class of gliders could immediately enter a return glide from their orbits. This provides a significant advantage for the International Space Station operators and vehicle crew, who need only enter hypersonic gliders attached to an orbital station and initiate deorbit procedures to be on the ground in less than 90 minutes in an emergency. Time (orbits) Required to Land in California or Florida Orbital Altitude is 200 nautical miles, 230.1 statute miles, 370.4 km Figure 13. Sufficient Cross Range (L/D) Means There is No Waiting to Return 14 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Figure 14 compares the glide ranges and L/D ratios of selected hypersonic gliders. The shuttle would be in the area of the nominal wing body on the righthand chart. From Figure 13, the no-waiting cross range (lateral range) is 3,600 to 4,400 nautical miles. That means the hypersonic L/D ratio needs to be in the 2.7 to 3.2 range. Appendix D has down and lateral ranges shown as landing ellipses. The key to a successful landing is a subsonic L/D ratio that is in the 4.5-or-greater range. The NASA round-bottom configurations were not capable of that subsonic L/D ratio. The X-24B was in that category and was therefore easily landed compared with the X-24A or Prime vehicles. These high-performance gliders were unique to the AFFDL. The intent in case of a fire would be to immediately evacuate to the hypersonic gliders and then depressurize the station to control any fire (remember that Mercury and Gemini could be depressurized). A crew could then be launched to recover the operation and repair the station. Figure 14. Hypersonic Glider Characteristics There is always the question about landing these blended bodies. Figure 15 shows the blended body handling qualities to be very good, and therefore a pilot's fear factor is less than with the X-15. Bill Dana said the X-24A was difficult to handle when landing but that he could land the X-24B almost with no hands as it flared automatically. To the author's knowledge, all of the wind tunnel tests showed inherent static and dynamic stability over the entire speed range. 15 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Figure 15. Both Delta Planform Lifting Body (Dynasoar) and Model 176 Offer Superior Landing Performance Thermodynamics and Materials The structure of Model 176 was based on diffusion-bonding and super-plastic forming of flat titanium sheets. Forty years ago, the method was called “roll bonding” and executed with the titanium sealed within an evacuated steel envelope and processed in a steel rolling plant. With a lot of effort and chemical leaching, the titanium part was freed from its steel enclosure. All of that has been completely replaced today by the current titanium diffusion-bonding and super-plastic forming industrial capabilities. The photo in Figure 16 is from a Society of Automotive Engineers book titled Advanced Engine Development at Pratt & Whitney: The Inside Story of Eight Special Projects 146-1971, by Dick Mulready. Chapter 6, “Boost Glide and the XLR-129 - mach 20 at 200,000 Feet,” shows a surviving remnant from the 1960s program. The super-plastic-forming, diffusion bonding that was so difficult in early 1960 is now an accepted fabrication procedure. One of the F-15's major bulkheads was fabricated from titanium sheet elements using this procedure instead of machining away more than 90 percent of a titanium forging. Had the procedure been adopted as a product-manufacturing method, it would have eliminated the almost 2-year manufacturing cycle in acquiring titanium forging of the wing spars and major bulkheads. Note that only 2.5 percent of the thermal heating enters the primary structure. 16 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Aero Heating 97.5% Radiated to Space metal shingle vacuum multi-layer insulation diffusion bonded super-plastically formed structure Figure 16. McDonnell Aircraft Company Roll-Bonded Titanium Structure (circa 1963). Today this structure would be super-plastically formed and diffusion bonded from RSR titanium sheets. Mulready's book mentions the McDonnell Douglas boost-glide strategic vehicle, as well as citing key personnel at McDonnell Aircraft Company. Low thermal conductivity standoffs set off the insulated-metal, thermal-protection-insulated shingles from this wall so that there was an air gap between them. The X-33 applied the metal shingle concept, albeit with significant improvement in the standoff design and thermal leakage, in the orientation, thickness, and weight of the shingles. This is one aspect of the X-33 that can be applied to future spacecraft for a more reliable and repairable thermal protection system than ceramic tiles. All efforts by the author to obtain information on the shingles manufactured by Goodrich Aerospace have been met with the response, “We lost the contract and are investing in more productive products.” The titanium diffusion-bonded and super-plastically formed wall was both the primary aircraft structure and the propellant tank wall. The cryogenic propellants were isolated from the metal wall by a metal foil barrier and sealed insulation on the inside of the propellant tank. Significant testing of this structural approach confirmed its superior capabilities as a hypersonic radiation-cooled structure. The Model 176 was proposed for the Manned Orbiting Laboratory. It was a thoroughly designed and tested configuration with a complete, all-metal thermal-protection system that had the same weight as ceramic tile and carbon-carbon concepts used for the U.S. space shuttle but was sturdier and could be repaired in a hanger or in orbit. A wind 17 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY tunnel model of the McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company Model 176 installed in the McDonnell Aircraft Company Hypersonic Impulse Tunnel for a heat transfer mapping test is shown in Figure 17. Note that, conforming to the piloting concepts of the 1960s, it has a clearly distinct windshield. The model accomplished thermal mapping to determine the heat transfer distributions on the body and upper fins. Figure 17. Model 176 in the McDonnell Douglas Hypervelocity Impulse Tunnel (circa 1964) for Thermographic Phosphor Heat Transfer Mapping, Including the Upper Fin. Among the important determinations that resulted from these heat transfer tests was that the sharp-leading-edge, flat-bottomed, trapezoidal cross section reduced the heating to the sides and upper surfaces, as shown in Figure 18. In the range of angles of attack corresponding to maximum hypersonic L/D ratio, the sharp leading-edge corner separates and reduces the upper surface heating. Because of this separation, the isotherms are parallel to the lower surface and are 2,100 to 2,400 °F (1,149 to 1,316 °C) cooler than on the compression surface. The upper control fins are hot, but there are approaches and materials applicable to control surfaces. The temperatures shown are radiation equilibrium temperatures. With nose water transpiration cooling (demonstrated in a flight test in 1966) and heat pipe leading edges (demonstrated at NASA Langley in 1967-68), the temperatures of the nose and leading edges are 212 °F and 1,300 °F (100 °C and 704 °C ), respectively. The thermal mapping enabled identification of primary flow characteristics in the boundary layer of the vehicle. In 18 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 18, radiation equilibrium skin temperature is the skin temperature that results when the radiated thermal energy stemming from the skin temperature equals the input aerodynamic heating minus any conduction into the airframe.\n\nFigure 18. FDL-7C/D, Model 176 Entry Temperature Distribution. Upper-surface heating is minimized by cross-section geometry.\n\nFigure 19 is a thermographic phosphor image of the model in Figure 17 at a 12-degree angle of attack (maximum L/D ratio) at mach 12. Even at mach 12, there are vortices embedded in the boundary layer. The three black dots are heat transfer gauges that were used to establish the value for qref in Figure 19. The stagnation heat transfer was 25 times the reference value. This technique, when calibrated with the reference heat transfer gauges, provided a rapid and accurate means to determine heat transfer distributions with a minimum of installed gauges. The technique was adopted by other wind tunnel facilities, including the Arnold Engineering Development Center at Tullahoma, Tennessee.\n\nFigure 19. Even at Mach 12, Embedded Vortices in the Boundary Layer Alter the Local Heat Transfer\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nOn other McDonnell hypersonic configurations with all-movable control surfaces, the interface between the fin and the body became a critical heating issue for the rotating shaft attaching the fin to the body. This was an area of concern on this vehicle, and specially instrumented fins were installed to measure the local heating. Again, the thermographic phosphors were used to map the heating. Figure 20 shows the model in Figure 17 at a maximum 48-degree angle of attack. Fin heating distributions were made at 16-, 24-, 34-, and 48-degree angles of attack12 and are shown in Figure 21. The brighter the phosphor is, the lower its temperature is (the phosphor darkens as the surface temperature increases). So the area adjacent to the body is at a lower temperature than on the fin. In fact, examining Figure 21 shows that for all angles of attack tested, there was always the cool layer adjacent to the body. So the fin attachment journal/shaft would not be a thermal problem. At angles of attack lower than 16 degrees, the heating became less intense. This tail configuration of a fixed anhedral lower fin with trailing edge controls and an all-movable upper fin provided the control authority over the entire mach range required for stability and control and did not have a thermodynamic issue with fin attachment heating.\n\nFigure 20. Thermographic Phosphor Image of Model 176 at Near-Maximum Angle of Attack\n\nFigure 21. From L/D Maximum to Maximum Angle of Attack, There is Always a Cool Sublayer Adjacent to the Wall\n\nWith 1960 materials and manufacturing methods, about 95 percent of the aerodynamic heating was radiated to space, about 2.5 percent was retained in the shingles, and about 2.5 percent was transferred into the titanium tank/primary structure. Using Goodrich Aerospace's standoff/attachment techniques developed for the X-33, today around 0.5 to 1 percent of the aerodynamic heating would be transferred into the titanium tank/primary structure. The shingle material would also be better today. Figure 22 shows a silicon carbide matrix reinforced with silicon carbide fibers that was shown at the 1988 Paris Air Show. A combustor of this material was operated at 3,000 o F continuously for a number of days at SEP's Bordeaux plant, as witnessed by the author. Unfortunately, SEP was subsequently taken over by another company and promptly closed. The parts manufacturing at Bordeaux was truly impressive to someone in space systems but too costly to a subsonic round engine manufacturer.\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nOne of the difficulties with silicon carbide (SiC) is that it is ridged fibers, like very-small-diameter rods. When the NASP team visited Japan in 1988, one of the very interesting products of the UBE Corporation was Tyranno® cloth (see Figure 23). Composed of strong, flexible fibers from natural Feldspar, Tyranno cloth handled and felt like tweed cloth. The cloth could be wetted by liquid aluminum or titanium, and the NASP team saw examples of both aluminum and titanium metal matrix composite (MMC) products. For example, an aluminum MMC piston and connecting rod was being used in Kawasaki racing engines. And a powder form of aluminum MMC was being used as a dry pigment that was fused onto the surface of Kawasaki motorcycle mufflers. The MDC NASP team foresaw many applications for Tyranno cloth for its NASP aircraft.\n\nFigure 22. This 1988 SEP Bordeaux SiC/SiC Panel Could Sustain Temperatures of up to 3,000 oF. With SEP having subsequently closed, little of this capability remains.\n\nFigure 23. UBE Corporation's Tyranno Cloth. The cloth was used industrially in Japan.\n\nThe FDL-7 and Model 176 configurations always elicit comments that their sharpness and the associated high heating rates make them nonviable concepts. However, that is not the case. Figure 24 shows a 1-inch-diameter, sintered-nickel nose tip attached to a 1,000-psi water tank that sweats water. The result is a functional sharp, low-drag nose with a minimum-thickness entropy boundary layer.12 This tip was flight-tested on a hypersonic glider (BGRV flight in 1966) beginning at about 22,000 feet/second. Today, Aerojet Sacramento's platelet diffusion-bonding technique would make this a much easier task. Some experimental evidence from the BGRV flight indicates the water vapor film in the boundary did act to reduce the heat transfer to the body aft of the nose.\n\nFigure 24. A Porous Nickel Tip Oozing Water. This test lasted 4,300 seconds before the arc heater cathode—not the nose tip—failed.\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAl Draper assembled the ASSET (Aerothermodynamic Structural and System Environmental Test) experimental flight-test program to evaluate current U.S. Air Force and NASA materials for hypersonic entry vehicles. The intent was to launch a test vehicle from an Air Force Thor IRBM in the 18,000 to 20,000 feet/second range and recover the vehicle. The ASSET glider was approximately the forward portion of the X-20 Dynasoar vehicle and is shown in Figure 25 after recovery. Except for the carbon leading edges, the materials generally performed as required. As a result, a small team of McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company engineers and model builders began working on an alternative approach for the leading edges. This team's efforts resulted in the heat pipe leading edge shown in Figure 26, a series of formed stainless steel tubes brazed together to form a leading edge based on NASA space shuttle requirements. The tubes contained a stainless steel mesh wick and were filled with metallic sodium.\n\nFigure 25. FDL ASSET Flight-Tested From Orbital Speeds To Evaluate 1960s' Materials. Carbon leading edges proved the least durable.\n\nFigure 26. Heat Pipe Shuttle Leading Edge Designed and Built by McDonnell Douglas Astronautics. Tested extensively at McDonnell Douglas Corporation, St. Louis, and NASA Langley, it never failed.\n\nThe leading edge was tested in NASA Langley's 8-foot High-Temperature Structures Tunnel, the NASA Langley Radiation Thermal Test Facility and the McDonnell Douglas Graphite Thermal-Altitude Test Facility (graphite radiation heaters within a vacuum altitude chamber). All of these tests showed the installed leading edge to be durable, robust, and lightweight (equaled the installed NASA carbon-carbon leading edges). Starts from cold tubes showed the sodium melts and began the heat pump process without any difficulties. Because this leading edge was made by the engineers and mechanics as a one of a kind, the tubes developed thermal shorts and other problems over the span of the testing, all of which were rectified before the test continued. Although brittle and difficult to manufacture, this leading edge met the thermodynamacists' solution of a simple radiation structure, not a heat pump.13\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe Qu Tube\n\nIn the 1990s, a colleague, Ying-Ming Lee, who then worked at MSE in Butte, Montana, showed the author a copper tube about a foot long that was a heat pipe from his colleague in Taiwan. If the tip was put into a cup of hot water, the other end almost instantly was too hot to hold. If it was quickly put into a glass of cold water, that tip just as quickly became ice cold. As documented in the excerpted page below from the University of Alabama, Huntsville, Annual Report, the apparent conductivity is greater than copper and could not be melted, as the thermal energy would be removed so fast that a significant temperature rise could not be attained. This could have significant industrial application for the United States. The late Clark Hawk had obtained a 10-foot-long Qu tube and tested it in his laboratory. The results were published in the University of Alabama, Huntsville, Annual Report. However, as Clark Hawk discovered, the Chinese team associated with Professor Qu in mainland China was not about to let this discovery into American hands. Plus his team was composed of a number of young, ambitious technocrats who thought they knew how to make their fortune. So both Ying-Ming's and Clark's attempts to advance beyond a demonstration tube ended in frustration. Any attempt to open the tube results in failure, as whatever is in the tube reacts into an inert powder. The author has two smaller tubes in his possession. With applications including hypersonic vehicles, nuclear power plants, and electronic cooling, these devices would lead to an economic breakthrough in practical thermal control.\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nthe Qu Tube, or Supertube, is somewhat controversial. According to the inventor (Patent No. 6,132,823) and to claims by the company and their quoted results of tests conducted by Stanford Research Institute, it reportedly has an effective thermal conductivity of the order of 10 to 100 times greater than that of conventional liquid-vapor heat pipes, and over 30,000 times that of an equivalently sized solid rod of silver. Reports cited also have indicated puzzling temperature distributions can occur with these tubes, unlike conventional thermal conductors and liquid-vapor heat pipes. The tubes also appear to have the ability to function at very high temperatures, even up to the melting point of the materials used, and to support very high heat fluxes. Our tests to date support the high temperature capabilities in addition to the high thermal conductivity is so high that accurately measuring the value is very difficult. We have therefore acquired nine 10' long Supertubes, 5/16\" in diameter, and have set up a method for determining the thermal conductivity using high heat flux, a water cooled calorimeter, and a rake of over 30 carefully calibrated thermistors. This apparatus should provide an accurate means of determining the thermal conductivity, and will also allow us to check the high heat flux capability of the tube and to assess possible puzzling temperature distributions.\n\nFigure 17 shows a data set in which the temperature across the length of a 10' long tube heated from the end and cooled in air is essentially constant, whereas a similar size copper tube would have the temperature distribution shown in the bottom curve. Increasing the thermal conductivity, k, of the copper by factors from 1000 to 30,000 shows agreement between the analysis and the data at 30,000 times that of the copper, although this is only a lower limit on the actual conductivity. Increasing the factor even more does not produce a discernible change in the curve relative to the data. We have also tried other methods to estimate the high thermal conductivities we have measured, such as the Ingenhouss technique; these results also indicate very high thermal conductivities. However, we needed a more accurate means than previous tests with free convection cooled tubes with thermocouples, and therefore we devised the test apparatus shown in Figure 18.\n\nThe 10 ft Supertubes are heated by three 2kW coil heaters. Power for the heaters comes from a 3-phase 2 leg output power controller with two legs fused at 20 Amps. For safety reasons the power controller and fuses are placed in an enclosure along with a Wattnode® power\n\nmeter. A water calorimeter is used to measure the heat conducted along the Supertube. Fins, shown in Figure 19, are necessary to transfer the high heat flux to the water; these were fabricated in such a way that they can be easily attached to the Supertubes using hose clamps. Also, the fin design increases turbulence in the flow through the heat exchanger. Having the turbulent flow increases the heat transfer rate into the water, and also discourages boiling, which could occur with the high heat fluxes used.\n\nFigure 17. Comparison of Essentially Constant Supertube Temperature Distribution with Theoretical Distribution for a Standard Copper Tube and Rod, Showing that the Thermal Conductivity Must be at Least 30,000 Times that of Copper.\n\nFigure 18. Experimental Apparatus for 10 ft Qu Supertubes.\n\n24\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nRocket Propulsion\n\nThe photo in Figure 27 is from the Society of Automotive Engineers book, Advanced Engine Development at Pratt & Whitney: The Inside Story of Eight Special Projects 146-1971, by Dick Mulready. Chapter 6 of this book, \"Boost Glide and the XLR-129 – mach 20 at 200,000 Feet,\" mentions the McDonnell Douglas boost-glide strategic vehicle, as well as citing the key personnel at McDonnell Aircraft Company. Some time ago, a model showed up on the desk of a now-Boeing employee that was not readily identifiable. The author has an original model of this boot-glide strategic vehicle, and it matched the unidentified model shown in Figure 27.\n\nThe XLR-129 was a shuttle-class engine that operated with turbopump exit pressures of 3,500 psi. It was brought to full pressure operation for the U.S. Air Force in just over 3 months.14 In comparison, the space shuttle main engine (shown in Figure 28), operating with a lesser turbopump exit pressure, required 3 years to reach full pressure operation and never demonstrated reusability without overhaul.\n\nFigure 27. Boost-Glide Strategic Vehicle With Pratt & Whitney XLR-129 Rocket Engine Installed, Circa 1964\n\nFigure 28. XLR-129, a Shuttle-Class Engine That Ran for 40 Test Cycles With Only Component Maintenance and No Engine Rebuilding\n\nThe final paragraph of chapter 6 in Mulready's book contains the following passage: \"The liquid oxygen turbopump was the next component in line. However, before it was funded, NASA had started the space shuttle campaign, and the Air Force gave the XLR-129 program to NASA granting free use of the existing hardware to Pratt & Whitney. NASA promptly canceled the liquid oxygen turbopump because it would be unfair to our competitors to fund it.\" With the demise of the XLR-129, a rocket engine with a run record of 42 simulated flights (in the test chamber) without any overhaul disappeared. This engine was really the type of hardware a Kelly Johnston would oversee—that is, the best application of the industrial capabilities available in the skilled mechanics, engineers, and manufacturers. The only other engine of its class is the Russian RD-0120 engine manufactured by Autokinamatiki for the Energia launcher. This engine functioned on the test stand for 80 simulated flights to space and return before\n\n25\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\noverhaul was necessary. It, too, met its end in a government-terminated program, lost to future space launcher designers.\n\nTwo air-breathing rocket propulsion systems permit examination of a rocket-powered vehicle as an operationally viable commercial system with low-noise airport operation, reduced operational weight, and global deployability for a space-based FedEx or UPS (cargo is economically viable, passengers yet to be determined). The earliest of these is a rocket system that operates as an air-breathing rocket below mach 5.5. This concept dates to the late 1950s and the Marquardt Company. The termination of the first aerospace plane halted this work, but John Ahern15 continued his work, as did John Leingang16 at the U.S. Air Force Aero Propulsion Laboratory. Much of Leingang's work was kept out of the technical literature in the 1960s, so this is a current reference establishing that earlier work. John Ahern was one of the first analyzers of the Liquid Air Cycle Engine (LACE) concept, and one who identified the sources of irreversibility and approaches to minimize them. In Russia, Keldesh Institute independently began, conducting experiments with LACE systems, as reported at the 2002 conference sponsored by the Association Aéronautique et Astronautique de France and also by Rudakov17, 18 and Balepin.19 In Japan, NAL Mitsubishi and ISAS conducted experiments that were leading to an air-breathing rocket system, and an impressive, ice–free, 1-cubic-meter liquefying heat exchanger was demonstrated for the NASP visiting team in 1988.20, 21 With only one hydrogen test stand in Sendi, LACE development was deferred until the problems with the H-1 engine were solved. However, by then interest was lost. In India, research organizations used all of the published LACE documents to arrive at a credible system configuration and performance.22 Unfortunately, India at the time did not have the manufacturing skill and methods to make a functional LACE System.\n\nThere are two types of air-breathing rockets, both of which are based on using the recoverable energy in the liquid hydrogen to drive the systems, as diagrammed in Figure 29. In both systems, the liquid hydrogen absorbs the thermal energy in the inlet air stream to reduce the air temperature to nearly saturation in an upstream heat exchanger. In the LACE, as the name implies, a second heat exchanger liquefies the cold gas and a turbopump pressurizes the liquid air to the correct working pressure required by the rocket motor. The thermal energy is picked up by the hydrogen in cooling the gas, and the rocket (including the combustion chamber) is used to drive the expansion turbines powering the turbopumps (left sketch in Figure 29). In the Japanese system, a low-pressure ratio compressor pressurizes the cold gas before it enters into the downstream heat exchanger, increasing the quantity of liquid air produced per unit liquid hydrogen. With a heat exchanger in the rocket motor combustion chamber, there is sufficient thermal energy to power the expansion turbines compressing the saturated or liquid air and deeply cool or liquefy the incoming air to at least mach 5.5. In the deeply cooled system (Rudakov and Balepin), a turbocompressor compresses the cold gas to the injection pressure required by the rocket motor. The thermal energy picked up by the hydrogen in cooling the gas and the rocket (including the combustion chamber) is used to drive the expansion turbines powering the turbocompressor (right sketch in Figure 29). One of the difficulties with Bond's HOTOL (horizontal takeoff and landing) engine compared with Rudakov and Balepin was that HOTOL avoided the combustion heat exchanger at the expense of having the air-breathing rocket operate to less than mach 4, increasing the to-orbit weight ratio and gross weight and thereby making the concept less viable. In both\n\n26\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ncases, the low-pressure hydrogen exiting the expansion turbines is entered into the rocket motor at a matching pressure.\n\nLACE\nDeeply Cooled\nH2\nAir\nLOX\n\nFigure 29. Two Rocket Air-Breathing Rocket Cycles to Mach 5.5. To the left is one employing liquefied air (LACE cycle). To the right is one employing high-pressure air cooled to near saturation.\n\nThere is always the option of direct ascent by rocket into a trajectory. Whether by turbojet or rocket, a million pounds of thrust is always noisy and smoke filled. We can thank the Russian design bureaus for arriving at a concept that eliminated the noisy, smoky, and hazardous launches by increasing the operational flexibility of the British HOTOL concept. Figure 30 shows the development of the all-rocket HOTOL system from the original HOTOL.23 The original air-breathing rocket HOTOL, powered by the Rolls Royce 545 engine as developed by Alan Bond, essentially used all hydrogen fuel (except for space operations). The hydrogen required a volume about 5 times greater than a 6:1 LOX/hydrogen propellant for a rocket engine. The classical aerodynamicist's approach was to minimize drag and maximize the L/D ratio. But accelerating to orbital speed requires a low angle of attack and minimum drag coefficient at zero lift (CDo), not maximum L/D ratio. The simple problem, recognized by Küchemann, was that the vehicle was too slender and therefore had a large wetted area compared with its reference planform area; hence, zero lift drag and structural weight were too high. Even when the BAE Systems team switched to an all-rocket and compromised the slenderness, this did not significantly reduce the wetted area. The Russian approach was to design a stout vehicle with a much lower ratio of wetter area to reference planform area.24 The trapezoidal cross section of the FDL-7/Model 176 yields a ratio of wetted area to planform area less than the circular cross section of the\n\nBritish Aerospace HOTOL\nRolls Royce 545\nInterim BAE HOTOL\nRD 0120\nRussian HOTOL\nRD 0120\n\nFigure 30. HOTOL Evolution: From Aerodynamic Optimum Configuration to Practical Launcher Configuration. The latter was developed through British Aerospace-Russian cooperation.\n\n27\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nRussian HOTOL. However, NPO Molnyia provided a unique approach to space access by decoupling the attachment to a few fixed base operations and opening up space access to a global clientele, and not from a remote nation, but from Russia. NPO Molnyia's approach also removed the noise and smoke from a rocket launch to a mundane takeoff of a turbofan-powered transport.\n\nThe upper payload limit of the An-225 is 300 metric tons for the structural mounts on the top of the fuselage. With a conventional rocket, that limit was reached for the Russian HOTOL at 5.45 metric tons, not the 7 tons desired. With the addition of an air-breathing rocket to the initial part of the trajectory and the FDL-7/Model 176 configuration, that limit now is not reached with even an 11-ton payload.\n\nThe An-225 has the empennage modified from the An-124 single vertical and horizontal to an 'H' configuration. This permits the powered hypersonic glider to easily lift off the top of the vehicle, as the MBB Sanger wind tunnel test demonstrated. A second modified transport would be modified to carry the liquid hydrogen and liquid air to fuel the hypersonic vehicle, along with maintenance and support crew. The intent was to use the automatic launch checkout the author witnessed at Baikanour in 1988, wherein a Soyuz that arrived on its train carrier at 0500 hours launched carrying a Progress capsule at 1715 hours the same day. That should make a local launch possible within hours of arriving at the specified airport launch departure site. Again, we can thank the Russian design bureaus for arriving with a concept that might be the first economically viable global launch concept not tied to a fixed geographical launch site that employs robust, proven carrier aircraft.\n\nAs illustrated in Figure 31, a LACE system operating to mach 5.5 that has the same operational weight empty and 7-metric ton (15,435-lb) payload as an all-rocket reduces the liftoff gross weight of a HOTOL concept operating from atop a transport by 150 metric tons (330,000 lb). That enables a transport launch platform to carry an orbital launcher with a functional payload greater than 11 metric tons (24,225 lb). Payloads greater than 11 tons are determined by the size of the launcher atop the transport. The launcher can become too large for the transport to maintain stability and control. The exhaust temperature and therefore velocity of a LACE rocket are less than those of a hydrogen/oxygen rocket, resulting in a quieter launch and making launch from a transport more favorable. The LACE-powered vehicle is physically smaller than the rocket vehicle because the propellant weight and volume are less. The green line in Figure 31 is the propellant weight for the sized LACE orbital launcher. The important thing to remember is that the air-breathing rocket motor is the same as the all-rocket motor; only the propellant mix is different.\n\n28\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Propellant Weight LACE Constant OWE LACE Actual OWE Rocket Constant OWE Propellant Weight (tons) 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 Flight Speed Along Trajectory (ft/sec) Figure 31. LACE Air-Breathing Rocket Reduces Gross Liftoff Weight by 150 Metric Tons and Uses Existing Rocket Engines The LACE or deeply cooled cycle could also be adapted to operate in the FDL-7/Model 176 if it were a first stage to a two-stage-to-orbit system,25 as shown in Figure 32 with a retractable, inward-turning inlet.26 In this case, there is another version of the precooled air-breathing engine concept, called the KLIN cycle, that was invented by V. V. Balapin.27 Like the LACE and deeply cooled systems, the KLIN cycle can significantly reduce the size and weight of a launcher. The KLIN™ Deeply Cooled Turbojet/Rocket Cycle incorporates a heat exchanger upstream of the compressor to thermally control the air to the compressor so a lower corrected speed of the compressor can be maintained with the increasing mach number. The cycle also thermally integrates an expander cycle rocket engine, one in which rejected thermal energy is used to drive the turbopumps and accessories. The initial cycle calculations have shown good results for hypersonic vehicle space launcher applications. For mach numbers less than mach 5.5, the turbojet and rocket operate as a single system providing the required total thrust for acceleration. Turbo Pump Oxygen Expander Cycle Rocket Hydrogen Turbojet Inlet Heat Exchanger Figure 32. The FDL-7 Class of Vehicles With An Anthony DuPont Variable Capture and a Retractable Inlet Tested to Mach 5 Employing an Air-Breathing KLIN Cycle Rocket 29 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Up-and-Down Operations For an aircraft, the takeoff mode is not an issue: it is a runway takeoff and runway landing. However, for a space launcher, the issue is not so clear-cut. With mass ratios for launchers much greater than for aircraft (4 to 8, compared with less than 2 for aircraft), runway speed is impractical for some launchers with high mass ratios. The principal option is vertical takeoff, with horizontal landing remaining viable. The problem is that in some launcher studies, the study directives mandated horizontal takeoff regardless of the mass ratio. Many launcher studies have been thwarted by this a priori dictate of horizontal takeoff. Air-breathing propulsion is then stuck with a “too heavy” label because of the dictated takeoff mode. In reality, horizontal or vertical takeoff, like the configuration concept, is less a choice than a result of the propulsion concept selected. Horizontal takeoff requires that the wing loading be compatible with the lift coefficient the configuration can generate and the maximum takeoff speed limit. Figure 33 shows results for highly swept delta planforms, such as that of the Model 176 and FDL-7. Takeoff speeds for blended bodies in the 200- to 230-knot ranges were postulated in the 1960s by using very large gimbaled rocket motors to rotate upward and cause the body to also rotate, lifting off the nose wheel as the vehicle lifts off with a thrust-supported takeoff. This concept was not known to have been implemented in an actual system. For space launchers, the takeoff speed of the basic delta is high (square symbols). If the takeoff speed is too high for the propulsion system chosen (because of the weight ratio), then the only way to decrease the takeoff speed is to increase the planform area for the system volume—that is, to reduce the Küchemann tau. This, unfortunately, introduces a cascade of incremental mass increases that result in an exponential rise of the takeoff gross weight (as shown in Figure 34). The only lift-increasing devices available are a leading-edge vortex flap or a retractable canard near the nose of the vehicle. Take Off Speed (knots) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 Weight Ratio to Orbital Speed FDL-7, TO +SBW, TO + SWB, LND Figure 33. Takeoff and Landing Speeds of Minimum-Sized Launchers 30 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Adding the switchblade wing (see inset photo in Figure 10) provides a reasonable takeoff speed for all mass ratios (green triangles). This takeoff speed with the switchblade wing deployed is approximately the landing speed with the wing stowed. With the wing deployed (blue diamonds), the landing speed is almost constant, since all of the launcher vehicles have very similar empty-plus-payload weights (operational weight empty). Then the landing speed becomes very modest, lower even than that of most commercial transports and military aircraft. With this approach, the switchblade wing can be either deployed or stowed, and the landing and takeoff speeds can be essentially equal, adding a degree of operational simplicity. The switchblade wing was designed with the expectation that the gliders would return with greater payloads than they delivered. Landing and takeoff speeds correspond to those of current military aircraft and commercial transports, at least for the lower mass ratios (5 or less). Whether the switchblade wing is deployed or stowed, a set of solutions exists in which the landing and takeoff speeds are similar. Figure 34 begins with a solution map of vertical takeoff launchers, as represented by the shaded areas in the lower part of the figure. All of these data are for converged solutions, whereby the mission requirements are met and the mass and volume of each solution are converged. These solution areas represent the entire propulsion spectrum, from all-rocket (far right) to advanced air-breathing systems (far left). These solution areas are for vertical takeoff and horizontal landing (VTOHL), with a thrust-to-weight ratio at takeoff (TWTO) of 1.35 and a Küchemann tau equal to 0.2. Gross Weight (tons) 0 500 1000 1500 WR Weight Ratio to Orbital payload = 7 tons WING LOADING (kg/m2) 463.7 561.3 610.2 732.0 976.3 τ = 0.063 TWTO =1.35 τ = 0.200 Figure 34. Horizontal Launch Not Practical Unless Weight Ratio is Less Than Four 31 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Gross weight trends are shown for five different takeoff wing loadings for horizontal takeoff and landing (HTOL). Solutions for constant wing loading are shown for values of tau from 0.2 to 0.063. The curves sweep upward between tau = 0.2 and tau = 0.063 and are variable tau solutions for a fixed takeoff wing loading. The curve for 200 lb/ft2 never converged at tau = 0.063 and is almost vertical. So if 185 knots is an acceptable takeoff speed, then the maximum weight ratio without significant weight penalty over vertical takeoff is about 5.6 (40 years ago, Dwight Taylor of McDonnell Aircraft determined the point to be a weight ratio of 5.5). This excludes conventional rockets but does permit high-performance air-breathing rockets and the KLIN cycle. The point at which the VTOHL and HTOL modes have the same gross weight is then the maximum weight ratio for which there is no penalty for horizontal takeoff. For example, at a takeoff wing loading of 976 kg/m2 (200 lb/ft2), the point at which the VTOHL and HTOL modes have the same gross weight is for a weight ratio of 5.5, or an air-breathing speed of mach 6 ± 0.3. For a takeoff wing loading of 610 kg/m2 (125 lb/ft2), the VTOHL/HTOL boundary is now a weight ratio of 4.3, or an air-breathing mach 10.5 ± 0.5. This wing loading would be consistent with that of commercial transports and is also correct to air launch horizontal landing at about mach 0.72 and 35,000 feet. For a takeoff wing loading of 464 kg/m2 (95 lb/ft2), the VTOHL/HTOL boundary is now a weight ratio of 3.4, or an air-breathing mach 13 ± 1.0. For an air-breathing rocket, a mass ratio of 5.0 is achievable, resulting in a gross weight of about 230 tons. This is less than half the 480 tons for an all-rocket case. However, if a horizontal takeoff requirement is imposed a priori, the lowest wing loading for which a practical solution exits is 610.2 kg/m2. At that point, the gross weight for the horizontal takeoff solution is about 800 tons, almost twice the all-rocket value. If a study team is not aware of the comparison to vertical takeoff, it may draw the improper conclusion that the propulsion system caused the divergent solution. For lower wing loading, the solution curve becomes vertical, and the solution will not converge. The conclusion is that if the weight ratio is greater than 4.3, the best vehicle configuration is vertical takeoff or an air-launched configuration (all of the vehicles have a horizontal landing mode). If the goals are the lowest gross weight and the smallest sized vehicle, then it is important to let the characteristics of the converged solution themselves determine the takeoff and landing modes. To translate the takeoff wing loading into takeoff speed and the landing wing loading (operational weight empty plus 10-percent margin, so the launcher can return with payload and fuel residuals onboard), use legacy correlations from McDonnell Advanced Engineering. The equations for landing and takeoff speeds are given below: (VTO)knots = √227.114 • LTO (VLD)knots = √173.675 • LLD = √173.675 • LTO/WR (4) As pointed out previously, an a priori selection of horizontal takeoff (HTO) can have a very deleterious effect on the weight and size of an SSTO launcher. For example, a VTOHL air-breather propulsion concept should have a gross weight of 300 to 325 metric tons at takeoff, compared with 750 tons for an all-rocket VTOHL propulsion concept. A 32 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY forced HTO mode would instead have a gross weight in excess of 1,000 tons. So the resulting observation was “See! Air breathers are not lighter than all-rocket!” And so the rocket proponents have defeated an air-breathing solution since the first aerospace plane in 1958. Launch Options Previously, an option was presented for a mobile launch platform that was limited to an 11- to 12-metric ton (24,225- to 26,460-lb) payload. This section presents a conventional vertical launch site that provides for frequent, scheduled launches and no intrinsic payload weight. In a discussion with the author, Lozino-Lozinski questioned the practicality of the NASP, describing it as nothing more than a very large orbital-entry-protected propellant tank. His approach was to minimize the volume of propellant tanks that required orbital-entry protection. Prior to meeting DARPA’s Robert Williams, the MDC had the same philosophy, as shown in Figure 35. 2,370,000 lb 814,500 lb 580,000 lb 301,000 lb 512,000 lb 80,000 lb 500,000 lb SSTO 1 1/2 Stage 2 Stage Figure 35. Propellant Tanks That Are Not Reentry Vehicles Greatly Reduce System Weight. Venture star orbital maneuver rules. This was the MDC manned aerospace vehicle approach we briefed before the NASP. The size, thermal protection system surface area, and weight of the SSTO vehicle to just a stage-and-a-half concept is significant. All of the booster segments were fully recoverable and reusable with rebuilding. The cargo capsule was not recoverable. This operational concept envisioned frequent, scheduled launches at least equal in number to those of the 1964 MOL support launcher—that is, 100 to 150 launches a year. 33 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAs per the U.S. Air Force requirements we were working with, these TAV were piloted and therefore had retractable crew stations that could provide forward visibility when permitted by thermal conditions. The launch system (see Figure 36) was adopted from the U.S. Air Force Thor IRBM launch system and from observations when the author was at Baikanour, Kazakhstan. The vehicles were in dry horizontal storage and were serviced and loaded horizontally. The hanger/shelter was rolled back for erection to vertical position and then fueled. The launch sequence was patterned after the Baikanour Soyuz launch, which is 12 hours. The Thor IRBM launch sequence (LOX/RP-1) was 15 to 18 minutes. As in Baikanour, the payloads are not to be loaded into the vehicle and then remain there for weeks before checking out. What is loaded into the vehicle are checked-out payloads that need only to be attached to the carrying hardware. At Baikanour there were about seven pre-checked out Soyuz and Progress payloads in plastic wrap inerted with argon. The goal was to be able to launch a Soyuz launcher within 7 to 12 hours in the event of an orbital emergency. The Soyuz launchers were in dry storage and brought in on a railcar.\nFigure 36. Simple Horizontal Integration and Vertical Launch Provides Rapid Launch Capability\nWith the Russian fully automatic checkout and fueling approach, this would certainly be possible. Figure 37 shows an artist's illustration of a TAV launch and recovery operational base. The boosters are a concept from Joe Thurgau of MDC Huntington Beach \"Toss-Back\" boosters that, after separation, rotate 180 degrees and fire their rocket motors to \"toss back\" to the launch site. An infrared guidance system steers the booster to a recover lake for a powered vertical landing (upper righthand portion of the illustration). The booster rocket engines are nongimbaled, sealed with the heat shield base. Either the 1-1/2 stage or the 2-stage systems could be launched. It would have even been possible to launch a booster by itself to rapidly transport it to another launch site (lower center portion of the illustration). Runways are provided for returning hypersonic gliders (upper center portion of the illustration), as well as for service and supply aircraft. Housing, maintenance facilities, and other buildings are on adjacent property. It certainly would be possible to launch this system from Vandenberg Air Force Base or Cape Canaveral,\nFigure 37. A Vertical Launch Complex Provides Vertical Toss Back Booster Recovery and Horizontal Landing Facilities for the Hypersonic Gliders\n34\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nbut we believed new launch complexes would be required to achieve the desired launch rates and to accommodate sustained-use vehicles.\nThis all seems impossible given today's launch operations and preparation time, but in 1964 it was considered possible both in the United States and in the former Soviet Union. It appears that two known companies proposed on the MOL support system, as shown in Figure 38. The Model 176 preliminary launches were to be on a Martin Titan IIIC. This was adequate for testing, but the minimum launches for one year of support of MOL was 74 launches. That 74 Titan IIICs could achieve a sustained manufacturing rate or a sustained launch rate was not considered. So both Lockheed Aircraft and McDonnell Douglas proposed a self-sustained operational system using recoverable lateral propellant tanks. There were no engines on the lateral tanks as there were in the aircraft since they were simply drop tanks.\nLockheed Star Clipper circa 1964\nMcDonnell Douglas Model 176 circa 1964\nFigure 38. A 1964 MDC Astronautics, St. Louis, Briefing Defined a MOL Support System With 10 Launchers That Could Fly 100 Missions a Year for 15 Years. Lockheed Aircraft and McDonnell Douglas both had candidates.\nAtmospheric Variations\nThe published approach to determining glide range is to assume the global atmosphere definition is a series of concentric, constant-density shells. The 1962 standard atmosphere follows the 1959 standard atmosphere and previous standards. NAVAIR-5-1C-59, Harold Crutchner,28 details the Northern Hemisphere by month for every 10 degrees of longitude from 1931 to 1964. According to Crutchner, these atmosphere descriptions were not intended to be engineering atmospheres but to be standards to ensure that aircraft flying globally would have adequate altitude clearance. The 1962 atmosphere represents the average of all daily reports by the worldwide reporting stations between +30 and +60 degrees latitude for the spring and fall equinox minus one month to plus one month represented as a +45 degree average atmosphere.\n35\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 39 shows the deviation from the 1962 standard atmosphere for a hypersonic glider entering the atmosphere from the central South Pacific (summer) to northeastern Russia (winter). The deviations from constant-density shells based on the 1962 standard atmosphere are significant. With today's computers, not ignoring the actual atmosphere is only a bookkeeping task. Hypersonic glide ranges at near maximum L/D ratio are to be generated. The local density is critically important, as it is determined by the lift coefficient for L/D maximum.\nq = (W/S_plan)/(C_L)_max L/D g [1 - (V/25,535)^2] = 1188.5 g (V/1000)^2 g sigma (5)\nThe seasonal variations are enough that the glider should have the correct density and temperature distribution in its flight-control computer so that unexpected alterations in the flight trajectory are not mandated during entry. The atmosphere is analogous to a constant-energy system—if the lower altitudes are hotter, the upper altitudes are colder, and vice versa.\nIn terms of deviations from the standard, the coldest upper-altitude temperatures most likely encountered are at 50,000 feet over Saudi Arabia in summer, and the warmest atmospheric temperatures are at 27,000 feet over Russia in winter.\nFigure 39. Earth's Atmosphere. Earth's atmosphere is not a series of concentric, constant-density shells or globally uniform, and flying from one hemisphere to another entails significant deviations from standard definitions.\n36\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nConclusion\nThe AFFDL fabricated a half-scale mockup of the stage and one-half Model 176 configuration30 shown in Figure 40. The strap-on tanks provided propellants to about mach 6 or 7, after which the mission continued on internal propellants. Note the windshields installed in this 1960s mockup. This was a two-to-four-person military experimental vehicle to prove out the concept. The FDL-7 was identical to the FDL-5 except for the control surfaces. The FDL-5 had a single central vertical and fixed horizontal control surfaces with trailing-edge flaps. The FDL-7 discarded the single vertical and used the all-flying \"V\" verticals shown in Figures 10 and 12.\nThe FDL-5 would have encountered stability and control issues had schedules and resource availability not forced the earlier configuration as the mockup. This was a vertical-launch, horizontal-landing configuration that had all the elements a full-scale operational vehicle would have (see Figure 38). In a very short time, however, the path the United States took to space changed, and most of this work was abandoned and discarded.\nFigure 40. FDL-5 Scale Model of a Stage and One-Half Depicted29\nOne of the key elements of the McDonnell Douglas TAV concept was a detachable nose section that was itself a stable hypersonic glider, as shown in Figure 41. The escape craft did not have the performance of the full-scale vehicle, but it could exceed the glide capability of the current space shuttle. Like the basic glider, the escape craft was automatically separated from the glider until the crew could establish landing site coordinates and a glide trajectory. The escape craft had the same operational envelope as the operational glider, so the crew always had the potential for a safe escape from a damaged or failing operational vehicle.\nFigure 41. The FDL-7 and Model 176 Class of Hypersonic Gliders. The FDL-7 and Model 176 class of hypersonic gliders had integral, stable, controllable hypersonic-capable escape craft.\nA common misconception is that a hypersonic glider's turn radius is so large that a hypersonic turn is of no practical operational use; that is not the case. Figure 42 shows nominal mach 15 and mach 10 turns initiated at Edwards Air Force base. This chart, from the NASP press kit release, shows two flight-test paths over North America initiating a 2g turn. For the 1968 McDonnell Aircraft HyFAC study,31 the landing turn\n37\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nwas contained within CONUS, demonstrating a significant maneuver capability. If a glider carries a fuel reserve, it can be reaccelerated to a recoverable-range glide speed.\nA typical circuit pattern for initial testing of a hypersonic Nasp-type vehicle\nFlight-test ground track for hypersonic cruise vehicle\nFigure 42. Hypersonic Decelerating Descending Turns are Wide But Within a Reasonable CONUS Area if Mach 12 or Less\nBut where is our space infrastructure? Forty years after Apollo, why have we advanced so little (as illustrated in Figure 43)? Like the pioneers' Conestoga wagons, most of our trips to LEO are one way, and when we do return, we do so with little more than the people we took to space. There is no evidence that any Conestoga wagons ever returned to St. Louis or St. Joseph, Missouri, from which most departed; rather, most were used as building materials on the West coast.\n38\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 43. Where We Are Today\nAlthough not addressed in the frontline technical or popular press, a critical element in reaching space beyond Earth is the establishment of a space infrastructure around Earth and the moon. The concept of this infrastructure as a train marshalling and switching yard is appropriate. The rail control center serves as a center of operations for switching, long-haul train assembly, transfer of goods, and refueling and repair of space assets. Likewise, the orbital stations serve as centers for switching payloads between carriers and the required orbit, long-haul space exploration vehicle assembly, transfer of goods to human habitats and manufacturing facilities, and return, refueling, and repair coordination. This is no trivial activity and will take a commitment as dedicated as the Apollo program to achieve.\n\nWithout an infrastructure, we are doomed to expendable vehicles at low launch rates for specific, one-time missions with no semblance of an infrastructure. Neither the United Kingdom nor the United States had any long-distance, two-way commerce until the railroads were established. After that, cities and commerce centers were created, enabling two-way commerce. The space business has it backwards: There is no commerce until the infrastructure is in place, not vice versa.\n\nHow are we ever going to get here? How are we going to create a LEO infrastructure that can support the LEO, geostationary orbit, and lunar assets depicted in Figure 44? Is it a technology issue? Hardly! We have known for 50 years how to create it. Werner von Braun had Walt Disney create a clear visual image of what is required. But nobody listened, as we were too busy creating new things and throwing away the old things, destroying any development continuity. A good example is the destruction of the capability to make Saturn I and Saturn V launchers.\n\n39\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 44. Where We Could Be If We Can Recapture the Engineering Confidence and Expertise of the Apollo/Saturn V Era\nWhat is not shown in Figure 44 32 is a solar power station that beams power to the Earth's surface or space assets or a power station warehouse that provides hardware for the power satellites in geostationary orbit. Whether a solar power satellite has the energy conversion efficiency to provide affordable energy to Earth or space assets comparable to what nuclear power stations could provide remains to be seen. Reports by H. H. Koelle of the University of Berlin provide excellent information on solar power stations. 33 In fact, the singular reliance on solar cell electric generation may doom all power stations until a more efficient and durable conversion system is identified. As with any thermodynamic generation system, the rejected heat becomes a major issue. As the Long Duration Exposure Facility materials evaluation satellite proved, space is a very hostile environment, and we have yet to identify slowly or nondeteriorating materials and construction concepts. Nicholi Anfimov, in a private communication, stated that the hub of the MIR orbital station (15 years in space) was so riddled with solar particles that it was beginning to leak, even though there were no visible holes. The complexity and extent of the space infrastructure are such that a significant commitment of human and monetary resources will be necessary if this infrastructure is to advance beyond a solitary orbital station with limited capabilities.\n\nFigure 44 identifies the elements necessary to build the infrastructure but does not address the assets required to establish and sustain that infrastructure. Table 2 lists systems and functions of the infrastructure shown in Figure 44. Future global space is a crowded and busy place.\n\n40\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nTable 2. Elements of the Space Infrastructure Shown in Figure 44\nOrbital System Function Orbit\n1 Sustained Use Launcher High frequency, modest payloads LEO/MEO\n2 Expendable Launcher Low frequency, heavy payloads LEO\n3 Point-to-Point Transfer Points on Earth or orbit\n4 Operations Center/Space Station Operations Coordination/Research LEO/MEO\n5 Orbital Servicing Vehicle Maintains in-orbit vehicles All\n6 Fuel Station Spaceport Refuels orbital vehicles LEO\n7 Spacebased Manufacturing Human based low \"g\" manufacturing LEO\n8 Man-Tended Manufacturing Robot based micro \"g\" manufacturing LEO/GEO\n9 Orbital Sweep Vehicle Orbital clean-up vehicle All\n10 Waste Storage and Processing Vehicles Processes & disposes human and manufacturing wastes HEO\n11 Navigation/Weather Supports travel network LEO/MEO\n12 Orbital Mapping Vehicle Measures resources & geography LEO/MEO\n13 Space Based Warning Military and Asteroid warning HEO/GEO\n14 Spacebased Hotel Space tourist facilities LEO/MO\n15 SpaceCruiser vehicle Human Transport and Rescue LEO\n16 Communication Satellite Constellations Supports telecommunication systems All\n17 Orbital Transfer Vehicle Orbital Altitude/Plane Change All\n41\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n18 LEO-Lunar Vehicle Transport to Moon & return LEO\n19 Space Deployment Retrieval Vehicle Recovers spent vehicles Replaces spent vehicles All\n20 Space Excursion Vehicle Placement of new systems LEO\n21 GEO Platforms/Satellites micro \"g\" and magnetic field space GEO\n22 GEO Communications and Warning Vehicles Fixed Equatorial Position GEO\n23 Lunar Spaceport System Lunar transportation/research hub Lunar\n24 Lunar Orbital Vehicles Support Lunar activities Lunar\n25 Planetary Exploration Vehicles Near & Deep space vehicles LEO/Lunar\n42\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAppendix A: Historical Perspective\nThe four reports listed below and summarized in this paper are as applicable today as they were when they were released in 1964 and 1965:\n• Robert R. Stephens; \"Mission Requirements of Lifting Systems-Engineering Aspects\"; Volume I Condensed Summary; McDonnell Aircraft Company Report B831 for NASA Manned Spacecraft Center; contract NAS-9-3562; August 1965.\n• Robert R. Stephens; \"Mission Requirements of Lifting Systems-Engineering Aspects\"; Volume II Mission Analysis – Spacecraft Selection – Performance Analysis; McDonnell Aircraft Company Report B831 for NASA Manned Spacecraft Center; contract NAS-9-3562; August 1965.\n• Robert R. Stephens; \"Study of the Engineering Aspects, Mission Requirements of Lifting Systems\"; Summary of Significant Results and Figures from Report MAC-B831; McDonnell Aircraft Company Report B947 for NASA Manned Spacecraft Center; contract NAS-9-3562; August 1965.\n• \"Manned Hypersonic Test Vehicle Study\"; McDonnell Aircraft Company Report A9727 for United States Force; contract AF(33)600-2751; August 1964.\nThese reports describe an operational space station with an operational spacecraft fleet to support the orbital station in space. The term operational is used because the concept was not for a research and development spacecraft like an X-15 but a transportation system that moved resources to and from space, much like an operational FedEx or UPS operation. The work in the mid 1960s by a number of aerospace companies set the stage for the discussion of the development of the spacecraft configurations based on requirements and the propulsion systems that emerge to meet those requirements. These four reports are representative of the approach and designs that were prevalent in that period. Those involved with developing the orbital station and its supporting fleets of operational spacecraft were fully convinced that the industrial capability, materials, and resources permitted successful accomplishment of the task in 1962. The space station goals and the spacecraft required to meet those goals are especially interesting in light of today's discussion about crew rescue vehicles and the crew complement that should staff the International Space Station. What is different was that the station was a rotating station to provide a fraction of the Earth's gravity and was fabricated primarily from empty Saturn rocket components sent to orbit that were fitted with provisions to make them habitable.\n\nThe purpose of the study was to establish the operational requirements, spacecraft configuration, and requirements. The principal support mission was designed around a rotating space station constructed from Saturn 1B components and Saturn 1B lifted components. The station was designed for 20 to 27 persons, each on the station for a 6-month period. The nominal life of a given research program was assumed to be as long as 5 years. The spacecraft that supported the orbital station would be designed to carry 9 to 12 persons or materials to resupply the station. For that goal, a 7-metric ton payload (15,435 lb) was deemed sufficient. The study identified that each replacement person would have a 994-lb (450-kg) resource supply payload to accompany each crewmember. For a 12-person crew-replacement mission, the crew-replacement\n43\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\npayload would be 15,228 lb—well within the payload capacity. The operating parameters for the station were a nominal 21-person crew with provisions for up to 27. This study determined that 47,000 lb (21,315 kg) of resources were required per crewmember per year. So for 1 year and a 21-person complement, 448 metric tons of supplies would need to be lifted to the station for crew support, not counting propellants to maintain the station orbit. With 21 crewmembers, 4 flights per year would be required to meet the 6-month assignment requirement. To lift the crew supplies to the station would require 64 flights per year, not counting propellant- and hardware-replacement missions, which might require another 5 to 6 flights per year. The minimum number of flights to a large station would be 74 flights per year. From a military mission analysis, that would require a fleet of 10 aircraft (without operational spares) flying 7 times a year for 15 years and a 100-flight operational life. The spacecraft and systems considered in the study were:\n\n• Ballistic, derivative Apollo capsule, Rockwell.\n\n• HL-10 lifting body, NASA Langley.\n\n• Wing body, X-20 derivative, Boeing.\n\n• Variable-geometry lifting body, Model 176, McDonnell Douglas.\n\n• Operations and logistics requirements, Lockheed, NAS-9-1422.\n\n• Manned Orbiting Laboratory (MOL), Lockheed, NAS-9-1688.\n\n• Manned Orbiting Research Laboratory (MORL), McDonnell Douglas, NAS-1-362.\n\nThis summary report contained a large number of recommendations and conclusions. Those that were pertinent to the Saturn 1B and Saturn V rocket launchers and the rotating space station are not listed. Only those related to the vehicle and propulsion system are given.\n\n• Among the lifting-body spacecraft, the variable-geometry spacecraft provides the best combination of hypersonic maneuvering and landing performance.\n\n• A 9- to 12-passenger payload with equipment is recommended.\n\n• An abort system for both low-altitude and high-altitude abort and escape is required.\n\n• Structural concepts and materials applicable to the loads and heating of lifting spacecraft are within the present (that is, 1965) state of the art.\n\n• The weight factor for lifting spacecraft results primarily from a larger surface area and only secondarily from the associated spacecraft environment.\n\n• Radiation-cooled structures are generally lighter than other structural concepts.\n\n• For surface temperatures above 2,200 °F (1,204 °C), refractory metals are required, and coating life is the major refractory metal limitation (applies to carbon-carbon today).\n\n44\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Meteoroid penetration or spalling of the thin refractory metal shingles may be a problem during a 180-day stay on orbital storage as a rescue vehicle, and some form of protection may be required.\n\n• A readily refurbishable and repairable heat-protection system consisting of a water-cooled inner body, insulation, and a radiation-cooled external surface is recommended.\n\nThe goal was to build a test vehicle that initially would achieve at least mach 6.5 at 100,000 feet (30,480 meters) for at least 5 minutes test time. As scramjets became available, that would be extended to higher mach numbers and altitudes. As part of the spacecraft definition study, four fuels were considered: hydrogen, kerosene (JP-5), methane, and propane. The propulsion systems considered were:\n\n• Turbojet-ramjet/scramjet.\n\n• Integrated turboramjet.\n\n• Rocket-ramjet/scramjet.\n\n• Carrier aircraft/vehicle with ramjet/scramjet spacecraft.\n\nThe closest study to respond to these findings was the NASA-sponsored HyFAC studies executed by McDonnell Aircraft Company of the McDonnell Douglas Corporation.34\n\n45\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix B: Aeropropulsion Integrated Vehicle\n\nA launcher that uses air-breathing propulsion in a portion of its flight to exit the atmosphere has the same entry issues as the rocket-boosted hypersonic glider. However, the capture of atmospheric air to create thrust by chemical combustion is a different issue, as it configures the underside (aerodynamic compression side) as a propulsion system that produces more thrust than drag and also produces lift. For the propulsion system to function efficiently, the dynamic pressure and air mass flow per unit area must be higher than a rocket exit trajectory, as it is the airflow mass that enables the propulsion system to produce thrust in excess of drag so the vehicle can accelerate. So in this case we have a propulsion-configured vehicle. Neither the shape of the vehicle nor the trajectory it flies is arbitrary. The air breather does not exit the atmosphere as quickly as the rocket but stays in the atmosphere to the point where the transition to rocket propulsion occurs—usually set when the air-breather propellant per unit change in velocity is equal to or greater than the rocket propulsion, usually at about mach 12 to 14. The air-breathing propulsion system mechanical, aerodynamic, and thermal loads act longer and are of greater magnitude than the rocket-powered vehicle. In fact, the dynamic pressure—that is, the pressure of the air impacting the vehicle—is about 10 times greater than the entry dynamic pressure of the hypersonic glider. In this case the principal thermal load is encountered during exit from the atmosphere and the vehicle must be configured to generate sufficient thrust to provide a strong acceleration. So an air-breather configuration is different from the hypersonic glider, because the hypersonic glider has not been configured to fly extensively in the atmosphere and produce thrust from captured airflow. Like the hypersonic glider, this vehicle needs the same glide performance at entry. However, with the thermal protection designed by the high exit loads, the entry design is one of detail in maintaining stability and control and of achieving a comparable glide L/D ratio. The carried oxidizer is heavy and requires more engine thrust to lift it into space. A hydrogen/oxygen rocket, vertical-launch vehicle with a 7,000-kg payload has a gross weight in the 450,000- to 500,000-kg range and a 50,000-kg operational weight empty (that is, with the payload loaded). The engine thrust for a vertical takeoff is about 607,000 to 820,000 kg. A modest-performance combined-cycle air breather with a 7,000-kg payload and a 50,000-kg operational weight empty has a gross weight in the 200,000- to 225,000-kg range. The engine thrust for a vertical takeoff is about 270,000 to 304,000 kg. Most of the gross weight reduction is from the lesser amount of oxidizer carried and the lighter propulsion system weight.\n\n46\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix C: TAV Operational Costs\n\nArt Robinson was the deputy program manager for the MDC Manned Aerospace Vehicle Group at MDC Astronautics, Huntington Beach. Working with Art, the St. Louis part of the team prepared a work breakdown structure for servicing and maintaining an Air Force transatmospheric vehicle (TAV) based on a B-52 squadron. Larry Fogel of Decision Sciences visited several B-52 bases and discussed the operational concept and repair/maintenance work structure with the B-52 crews and maintenance personnel. The result was an estimate of the costs for operating a squadron of TAVs that had the same flight frequency as the B-52 squadron. The result for the one-and-a-half–stage TAV is shown in Figure 45. As might be expected, orbital operations are substantially more costly than atmospheric operations (aerodynamic cruise of hypersonic long-range glide). With an operational range greater than a refueled B-52, the TAV has a lower cost than the once-refueled B-52. The orbital cannot be compared directly with a B-52 since in achieving orbit the TAV has essentially infinite cruise range and duration limited only by the crew. The concept of operations was essentially that shown in Figure 37 installed on a U.S. Air Force SAC base. Although the SAC flight crews concentrated on potential nuclear missions, the presentation focused on a wide spectrum of kinetic penetrators installed in a rocket-accelerated entry nose cone. The terminal speed of the entry nose cone was in the 12,000 to 14,000 feet/second range. At that speed the energy delivered per unit weight was much greater than a spherical charge of HBX-6 because the kinetic energy was directly delivered to the target. The weapons spectrum could address a very wide range of targets that could be disabled or made nonfunctional or be destroyed with minimal collateral damage.\n\n[Figure: rocket-shaped entry vehicle and B-52 aircraft drawings]\n\nCost $97,000,000 Atmospheric Cruise $251,000,000 Orbital\n\nCost $71,000,000 B-52 only* $140,000,000 Refueled B-52\n\n*annual costs per DAA (14 vehicles)\n\nLarry Fogel\nDecision Sciences\nTitan Corporation\nSpring 1984\n\nFigure 45. McDonnell Douglas Astronautics (Huntington Beach)-Funded Study of TAV Operational Costs\n\n47\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix D: Landing Ellipses for Hypersonic Gliders\n\nFigure 14 graphically shows the cross (lateral) range and down range for various hypersonic gliders. The lateral range and down range describe a landing ellipse for a vehicle entering the glide at 22,400 feet/second as shown in Figure 46. The 0,0 point is the beginning of the entry or glide trajectory.\n\n[Figure: landing ellipse chart showing Ballistic, Eggers M-2, DynaSoar, Lifting Body, Model 176B 88% Capability, and Model 176 B curves; axes Lateral Range and Down Range in 1000 nautical miles]\n\nFigure 46. Landing Ellipses for (from left) Apollo Capsule, NASA Ames M2/F2, USAF X-20 DynaSoar, FDL Lifting-Body, 88%-Capability MDC Model 176H, and MDC 176H\n\nThe space shuttle landing ellipse would be inside the DynaSoar (X-20) ellipse, as its cross range is one missed orbit, or 1,555 nautical miles. The down range would be approximately 9,800 nautical miles. The ellipse is offset from 0,0 and has an indentation into some of the landing ellipse. This is an area the glider cannot reach with the aerodynamic and structural limits. The ballistic example is for the Apollo capsule, which had an L/D of about 0.5; Gemini and Mercury ellipses would be smaller. The Model 176B or Model 176H using 88 percent of its glide capability would have a glide range equal to the Earth's equatorial circumference.\n\n48\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"44e1d5d10829b3b1","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n1 Bruno, Claudio & Czysz, Paul, \"Future Spacecraft Propulsion Systems,\" Second Edition, Springer in conjunction with Praxis Publishing, Chichester, UK, 20089.\n2 Neyland, V. Ya., Scientific and Engineering Problems and Methods of Preflight Development of Orbiters, Draft Original of TsAGI paper, 1990.\n3 Private Communication with Vladimir Plothith, AIAA Aerospace Sciences Conference, 1991.\n4 DuPont, Anthony A., \"Further Studies of Optimized Inlets for Hypersonic Turbine Engines,\" ISABE 99-7039, 14th International Symposium for Air Breathing Engines (ISABE), Florence, Italy, September 1999.\n5 Buck, M.L., Zima, W.P., Kirkham, F.S. & Jones, R.A., \"Joint USAF/NASA Hypersonic Research Aircraft Study,\" AIAA 75-1039, AIAA 25th Aircraft Systems and Technology Meeting, Los Angeles, California, August 1975.\n6 Küchemann, D., \"The Aerodynamic Design of Aircraft – A Detailed Introduction to the Current Aerodynamic Knowledge and Practical Guide to the Solution of Aircraft Design Problems,\" First Edition, Pergamon Press, 1978.\n7 Draper, Alfred C., Buck, Melvin L., Goesch, William H., \"A Delta Shuttle Orbiter,\" Astronautics & Aeronautics, Vol. 9, No 1, 26-36, Washington DC, January 1971.\n8 Astronautics & Aeronautics, January 1971, Vol 9, No 1.\n9 Dana, William, X-15, X24A, X24B pilot, Private Communications, 1973, 1998.\n10 DuPont, Anthony A., \"Further Studies of Optimized Inlets for Hypersonic Turbine Engines,\" ISABE 99-7039, 14th International Symposium for Air Breathing Engines (ISABE), Florence, Italy, September 1999.\n11 \"Advanced Engine Development at Pratt & Whitney,\" SAE, 2001.\n12 Dawes, A. S. & Clarke, J.F., \"Nonequilibrium Gas Flows in Entropy Layers,\" CoA Report No. NFP8802, College of Aeronautics, Cranfield Institute of Technology, Cranfield, 1988.\n13 Glass, D., Camarada, C. et. al., \"Fabrication and Testing of a Leading-Edge-Shaped Heat Pipe,\" AIAA-99-4866, 9th International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, Norfolk, Va. Nov. 1999.\n14 Dick Mulready, \"Advanced Engine Development at Pratt & Whitney\" Society of Automotive Engineers.\n15 Ahern, J.E., \"Thermal Management of Air-Breathing Propulsion Systems,\" AIAA 92-0514, 30th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Reno, Nevada, January 1992.\n16 Maurice, L.Q., Leingang, J.L., & Carreiro, L.R., \"The Benefits of In-Flight LOX Collection for Air Breathing Space Boosters,\" AIAA paper, 4th International Aerospace Planes Conference, Orlando, Florida, December 1992.\n17 Rudakov, A.S. & Balepin, V.V., \"Propulsion Systems with Air Pre-cooling for Aerospaceplanes,\" SAE 911183, SAE Aerospace Atlantic, April 1991, Dayton, Ohio.\n18 Rudakov A.S, Gatin R.Y., Dulepov N.P., Koralnik B.N., Harchevnikova G.D & Yugov O.K,: \"Analysis of Efficiency of Systems with Oxidizer Liquefaction and Accumulation for Improvement of Spaceplane Performance\": IAF-91-270: 42nd Congress of the International Astronautical Federation : Montreal October 1991.\n19 Balepin, V,V., Harchermikova, G.D., Tjurikov, E.V., & Avramenko, A.Ju., \"Flight Liquid Oxygen Plants for Aerospace Plane: Thermodynamic and Integration Aspects,\" SAE chapter, 1993 SAE Aerospace Atlantic Conference and Exposition, Dayton, Ohio, April 1993.\n20 Aoki, T., Ito, T., et.al., \"A Concept of LACE for SSTO Space Plane,\" AIAA-91-5011, AIAA 3rd International Aerospace Planes Conference, Orlando, Florida, December 1991.\n21 Miki, Y., Taguchi, H., & Aoki, Y., \"Status and Future Planning of LACE Development,\" AIAA-93-5124, 5th International Aerospace Planes & Hypersonic Technology Conference, November 1993, Munich, Germany.\n22 Anon., \"Hyperplane,\" 39th International Astronautical Federation Congress, Bangalore India, October 1988.\n23 Anon., \"An-2254/Interim HoToL Launch System Study,\" Presented to the European Space Agency in Paris, 21 June 1991. Representing the participants, Antonov DB, Bae (Space Systems), Chemical Automatics DB, NPO Molnyia, TsAGI and TsAM.\n24 Dick Mulready, \"Advanced Engine Development at Pratt & Whitney\" Society of Automotive Engineers.\n25 P. Hendrick and M Saint-Mard, \"KLIN Blended Lifting Body VTOHL S.S.T.O., Trajectory and Sizing Calculations\" Ecole Royale Militaire, Brussels Belgium, March 1998.\n26 DuPont, Anthony A., \"Further Studies of Optimized Inlets for Hypersonic Turbine Engines,\" ISABE 99-7039, 14th International Symposium for Air Breathing Engines (ISABE), Florence, Italy, September 1999.\n27 Czysz, Paul A., \"Evaluation and Analysis of the New Rocket-Based Combined Cycle For Reusable Launch Vehicles,\" HTC-9901, for MSE Technology Applications, Inc. 30 Nov 1999.\n28 Crutchner, Harold L., \"Selected Meridional Cross Sections of Heights, Temperatures and Dew Points of the Northern Hemisphere,\"NAVAIR-50-1C-59, Published by Direction of the Commander, Naval Weather Service Command, 1965.\n29 Astronautics & Aeronautics, January 1971, Vol 9, No 1, Figure 3-11.\n30 Draper, Alfred C., Buck, Melvin L., Goesch, William H., \"A Delta Shuttle Orbiter,\" Astronautics & Aeronautics, Vol. 9, No 1, 26-36, Washington DC, January 1971.\n31 Anon., \"Hypersonic Research Facilities Study, Volumes I through VI,\" NASA CR 114322 through 114331, Contract NAS2-5458, OART, NASA October 1970, declassified 1972.\n32 Gaubatz, William A., \"Space Transportation Infrastructure for Opening the Space Frontier-An International effort,\" The International Workshop on Space Plane/ RLV Technology Demonstrators, Tokyo, Japan, March 1997.\n33 Koelle, H.H. \" Space Power\" IAF-93-IAF Congress, Norway.\n34 Anon., \"Hypersonic Research Facilities Study, Volumes I through VI,\" NASA CR 114322 through 114331, Contract NAS2-5458, OART, NASA October 1970, declassified 1972.\n\n49\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n6 April 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-1004-004\n\nTraversable Wormholes,\nStargates, and Negative\nEnergy\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTraversable Wormholes, Stargates, and Negative Energy\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor\nAAP Person 58\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nI. Summary ........v\nII. A Brief Review of Transversable Wormholes and the Stargate Solution ... 1\nA. Traversable Wormholes ... 1\nB. The \"Stargate\" Solution ... 4\nC. What a Wormhole Looks Like in the Real World ... 7\nIII. The General Relativistic Definition of Exotic Matter and the Energy Conditions 9\nA. Examples of Exotic or \"Negative\" Energy Found in Nature ... 10\nB. Generating Negative Energy in the Lab ... 11\n1. Static Radial Electric & Magnetic Fields ... 11\n2. Squeezed Quantum Vacuum ... 12\n3. Gravitationally Squeezed Electromagnetic ZPF ... 16\n4. Vacuum Field Stress: Negative Energy from the Casimir Effect ... 18\n5. Dynamical Casimir Effect: Moving Mirrors ... 20\n6. Casimir Effect: Negative Energy for Traversable Wormholes ... 20\nIV. Constructing a Traversable Wormhole is not Easy ... 21\nA. Negative Energy Requirements and Energy Condition Violations ... 21\nB. Physical Constraints on Negative Energy ... 22\nC. Observing Negative Energy in the Lab ... 25\nV. Conclusion: The Way Forward ... 26\nVI. References ... 29\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Intra-Universe Wormhole as a Hyperspace Shortcut Through Conventional Space ... vi\nFigure 2. Inter-Universe Wormhole (top) and Intra-Universe Wormhole (bottom).3\nFigure 3. Diagram of a Simultaneous View of Two Remote Compact Regions, Ω1 and Ω2, of Minkowski Space Used to Create the Wormhole Throat δΩ ... 5\nFigure 4. The Same Diagram as in Figure 3 Except as Viewed by an Observer Sitting in Region Ω1 Who Looks Through the Wormhole Throat and Sees Remote Region Ω2 on the Other Side. ... 5\nFigure 5. A Thin Shell of (Localized) Mass-Energy Possessing Two Principal Radii of Curvature, ρ1 and ρ2 ... 6\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 6. A Spherically Symmetric Traversable Wormhole Observed in Space ... 7\nFigure 7. A Stargate ... 8\nFigure 8. A Stargate in Times Square ... 9\nFigure 9. Conceptual Squeezed Light Negative Energy Generator ... 14\nFigure 10. Sodium Chamber Negative Energy Separator ... 15\nFigure 11. Alternative Conceptual Squeezed Light Negative Energy Generator ... 15\nFigure 12. Schematic of the Casimir Effect ... 18\n\nTables\n\nTable 1. Substantial Gravitational Squeezing Occurs for Vacuum ZPF ... 18\nTable 2. Negative Equivalent Mass Required for Traversable Wormhole ... 22\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTraversable Wormholes, Stargates, and Negative Energy\n\nI. Summary\n\nImplementation of faster-than-light (FTL) interstellar travel via traversable wormholes generally requires the engineering of spacetime into very specialized local geometries. The analysis of these via Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, plus the resultant equations of state, demonstrates that such geometries require the use of \"exotic\" matter. It has been claimed that since such matter violates the energy conditions, FTL spacetimes are not plausible. However, it has been shown that this is a spurious issue. The identification, magnitude, and production of exotic matter are seen to be a key technical challenge, however. These issues are reviewed and summarized, and an assessment on the present state of their resolution is provided.\n\nIn 1985 CalTech physicists M. Morris and K. Thorne discovered the principle of traversable wormholes based on Einstein's General Theory of Relativity (published in 1915). Morris and Thorne (Reference 1) and Morris et al. (Reference 2) did this as an academic exercise at the request of Carl Sagan, who had completed the draft of his novel Contact. This little exercise led to the development of two new cottage industries in spacetime physics research: the study of traversable wormholes and the study of time machines. Wormholes are hyperspace tunnels through spacetime connecting either remote regions within our universe or two different universes; they even connect different dimensions and different times. Space travelers would enter one side of the tunnel and exit the other, passing through the throat along the way. The travelers would move at ≤ c (c is the speed of light, 3 × 10^8 m/s) through the wormhole and therefore not violate Special Relativity, but external observers would view the travelers as traversing multi-light-year distances through space at FTL speed; Figure 1 illustrates this effect. A \"stargate\" is a special class of traversable wormhole solutions to Einstein's general relativistic field equation that possesses very simple physics and flat entry and exit openings.\n\nTraversable wormholes are unlike the well-known, non-traversable Einstein-Rosen Bridges or Schwarzschild wormholes that are formed from collapsed stellar matter (that is, black holes) or spherically symmetric vacuum regions. Black holes are collapsed stars that have all their mass concentrated at an infinitesimal point where the induced gravitational field crushes all matter and spacetime. However, even Einstein-Rosen bridges can be made traversable by an infinitesimal tweaking of their spacetime metric. In the case of black holes, the singularity of collapsed matter, along with its crushing gravity field, totally blocks the way through the tunnel. A traversable wormhole does not have a singularity blocking the tunnel or any crushing gravity field. Explorers would enter one side of the tunnel, travel through the throat, and exit the other side. Traversable wormholes also do not possess an event horizon, a region of high gravitational field strength separating the inside space surrounding the black hole's singularity from the outside universe. Once you go through a black hole's event horizon, you can never come back out because you will have to attain FTL speed to escape it. Not even light can escape from an event horizon.\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nWormhole\nEarth\nHyperspace\nConventional Space\nDistance from Earth to Sirius:\n54 Trillion Miles (90 Trillion Kilometers)\nSirius\n\nFigure 1. Intra-Universe Wormhole as a Hyperspace Shortcut Through Conventional Space\n\nTraversable wormholes are creatures of classical general relativity theory allowing for very comfortable travel through the Cosmic Neighborhood. But from the viewpoint of modern physics, the Cosmic Neighborhood can encompass other universes, other space dimensions, and other times beyond the four-dimensional spacetime realm. Mankind has certainly not discovered all of the universe's facets and will need to continue to construct new experiments and technology in order to verify (or not) these undiscovered facets. Wormholes can possess normal or backward (in special cases) motion through time and normal or nonexistent gravitational stresses on space travelers, and their entry/exit openings (or throats) are spherically shaped, flat, cubic shaped, polyhedral shaped, generic shaped, and so forth.\n\nWhy consider wormholes for travel through space, time, and other dimensions? All standard space propulsion engineering is based on Newton's three laws of motion, which is dependent on the expenditure of propellant to induce thrust-generating momentum transfer on a spacecraft. Many investigators have proposed interstellar propulsion schemes based on a variety of nuclear (fission, fusion, and pulsed) rockets, electric (ion or plasma) rockets, matter-antimatter annihilation rockets, solar or laser sails, fusion or laser ramjets, interstellar ion scoops, beamed energy propulsion (sails, rockets, and ramjets), and so forth. Many of these modes either have been experimentally tested at one time or another in our recent history or remain as theoretical proposals,\n\nvi"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nbut all are based on Newtonian mechanics. The limiting speed of space flight, based on any of these modes, is the speed of light. It is important to point out that for the interstellar travel application, Newtonian rocket propulsion modes suffer from enormous mass ratios > 10^5 - 10^100 (depending on the specific impulse) for spacecraft cruise velocities > 0.05c, if the travel time is constrained to within 100 years for a one-way interstellar voyage. If the cruise velocity is increased to sub-relativistic, near-relativistic, or even ultra-relativistic speeds and thus reduces the one-way travel time, then the mass ratio increases (exponentially!). The mass ratio is the initial spacecraft mass (payload + structure + propellant) at launch divided by the final spacecraft mass (payload + structure) at \"burnout.\" The large ratios given above show that Newtonian rockets consist mostly of propellant in order to propel the propellant, along with a given tiny payload, through interstellar space. The specific impulse is a measure of rocket propulsion system efficiency: how much impulse (thrust multiplied by time) is produced per unit of mass of propellant expenditure. It is desired that rocket propulsion systems possess a very high specific impulse in order to reduce the mass ratio, and hence propellant mass requirement, to reasonable levels.\n\nThe non-traditional propulsion modes (sails, ramjets, beamed power, etc.) have different efficiencies and constraints, but they are all still dependent on Newtonian mechanics, even though their mass ratio and specific impulse characteristics are slightly improved over that of the traditional modes. But all traditional and non-traditional propulsion modes come with a great cost in interstellar voyage travel time. At non-relativistic and sub-relativistic cruise speeds, it will take explorers several human lifetimes to reach stellar destinations. At low relativistic to ultra-relativistic cruise speeds, the travel time will be reduced to hours, days, weeks, months, or years. However, at these cruise speeds, relativistic time dilation will kick in, and the returning interstellar voyagers will find that decades to thousands of years have elapsed on Earth since their launch date and that their families and culture no longer exist or are unrecognizable. This is an undesirable outcome for any interstellar voyage. Furthermore, traditional Newtonian propulsion cannot transcend time or spacetime dimensions or universes.\n\nThe solution to this problem is to dispense entirely with long interstellar voyage times or the undesirable outcome of relativistic time dilation. Explorers could deploy a wormhole-stargate near the Earth's surface, in Earth's orbit, or anywhere in the solar system they like and just pass through the \"stargate\" and come out the other side in remote spacetime within seconds, moving through the throat at low cruise speeds (30 mph!) and with no time dilation effects. Explorers could travel through the wormhole-stargates in small scout ships or send probes unencumbered by either enormous propellant mass ratios or extensive life support provisions. Effective travel time through the Cosmic Neighborhood via stargates would become irrelevant but could be estimated to be many times or thousands of times the speed of light. Explorers could spend all day investigating the remote spacetime location and then return home through the stargate in time to have dinner with their families. If explorers were to really push the envelope, they would design their stargate so they could return from their voyage in time to wave goodbye to themselves\n\nvii"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nas they see themselves depart on their journey. This is no longer recognized in classical general relativity physics as a time paradox issue. It is very easy to build a time machine, given a traversable wormhole. But time travel via wormhole is beyond the scope of this paper. Suffice it to say that classical general relativity theory is seriously infested with time machines; the theory both allows for and demands time travel in order to preserve self-consistency of dynamic spacetime solutions for just about every problem ever studied.\n\nImplementation of FTL interstellar travel via traversable wormholes generally requires the engineering of spacetime into very specialized local geometries. Analysis of these via the general relativistic field equation, plus the resultant source matter equations of state, demonstrates that such geometries require the use of \"exotic\" matter in order to produce the requisite FTL spacetime modification. Exotic matter is generally defined by general relativity physics to be matter that possesses (renormalized) negative energy density (sometimes negative stress-tension = outward pressure, aka gravitational repulsion or antigravity). This term is very misunderstood and misapplied by the non-general-relativity community. This misconception can be cleared up by defining what negative energy is and where it can be found in nature and by reviewing the proposed experimental concepts for generating negative energy in the laboratory. In addition, it has been claimed that FTL spacetimes are not plausible because exotic matter violates the general relativistic energy conditions. However, this has been shown to be a spurious issue. The identification, magnitude, and production of exotic matter are seen as key technical challenges, however. FTL spacetimes also possess features that challenge the notions of causality, and quantum effects allegedly place constraints on them. These issues are reviewed and summarized, and an assessment on the present state of their resolution is provided.\n\nviii"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nII. A Brief Review of Transversable Wormholes and the Stargate Solution\n\nHow does one study the physics of FTL spacetimes within the framework of general relativity theory? When studying spacetime physics, the normal philosophy is to take the general relativistic field equation, add some form of matter, make simplifying assumptions, and then solve to deduce what the geometry of spacetime will be.1 This is very difficult to do because there are ten nonlinear second-order partial differential equations with four redundancies (arbitrary choice of spacetime coordinates) and four constraints (stress-energy conservation). There is a tremendous body of research that takes exactly this approach, either analytically or numerically. However, this is not the best strategy for understanding wormhole spacetimes. The appropriate strategy is to decide beforehand on a definition of the traversable wormhole that you desire and decide what the spacetime geometry should look like. Given the desired geometry, use the general relativistic field equation to calculate the distribution of matter required to set up this geometry. Then one needs to assess whether the required distribution of matter is physically reasonable and whether it violates any basic rules of physics, etc. The following sections briefly outline the key results for traversable wormholes.\n\nA. TRAVERSABLE WORMHOLES\n\nTraversable wormholes represent a class of exact metric solutions of the general relativistic field equation. The solutions are \"exact\" in the sense that no approximations requiring a plethora of physical assumptions have to be made to derive the appropriate spacetime geometry. To define a stable traversable wormhole one needs to define the desirable physical requirements it is to have in order to achieve the desired FTL travel benefit. The desired requirements are the following (Reference 1, 3):\n\n- Travel time through the wormhole tunnel or throat should be ≤ 1 year as seen by both the travelers and outside static observers.\n- Proper time as measured by travelers should not be dilated by relativistic effects.\n- The gravitational acceleration and tidal-gravity accelerations between different parts of the travelers' body should be ≤ 1 g0 (g0 is the acceleration of gravity near the Earth's surface, 9.81 m/s2) when going through the wormhole.\n- Travel speed through the tunnel/throat should be < c.\n- Travelers (made of ordinary matter) must not couple strongly to the material that generates the wormhole curvature; the wormhole must be threaded by a vacuum tube through which the travelers can move.\n- There is no event horizon at the wormhole throat.\n\n1 The Einstein field equation is: Gμν ≡ Rμν - [(1/2) gμν R] = -(8πG/c4)Tμν, where Gμν is the Einstein curvature tensor, Rμν is the Ricci curvature tensor, R ≡ Rμμ (the trace of Rμν) is the Ricci scalar curvature, Tμν is the stress-energy-momentum tensor (a matrix quantity that encodes the density and flux of a matter source's energy and momentum), G is Newton's universal gravitation constant (6.673 × 10-11 Nm2/kg2), and c is the speed of light. In simplest terms, this relation states that gravity is a manifestation of the spacetime curvature (Gμν) induced by a source of matter (Tμν). The Greek indices (μ, ν = 0...3) denote spacetime coordinates, x0...x3, such that x1...x3 ≡ space coordinates and x0 ≡ time coordinate.\n\n1"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n- There is no singularity of infinitely collapsed matter residing at the wormhole throat.\n\nThese requirements then lead us to define a spherically symmetric Lorentzian spacetime metric, ds2,2 that prescribes the required traversable wormhole geometry (Reference 1, 3):\n\nds2 = -e^(2φ(r))c2dt2 + [1 - b(r)/r]^-1 dr2 + r2dΘ2 (1)\n\nwhere standard spherical-polar coordinates are used (r: 2πr = circumference; 0 ≤ θ ≤ π; 0 ≤ φ ≤ 2π), t is time (-∞ < t < ∞), dΘ2 = dθ2 + sin2θ dφ2, φ(r) is the freely specifiable redshift function that defines the proper time lapse through the wormhole throat, and b(r) is the freely specifiable shape function that defines the wormhole throat's spatial (hypersurface) geometry. The throat is spherically shaped. There are a large number of variations of Equation (1), which define traversable wormholes having different properties. The reader should consult (Reference 3) for further details. By inserting Equation (1) into the Einstein field equation and cranking through the math, one can derive the density and flux of energy and momentum (a.k.a. pressure) encoded by Tμν for the source of matter that is required to produce the traversable wormhole. The results show that the source of matter must have zero or negative energy density and/or an outward radial tension (negative pressure) that is larger than the magnitude of the energy density (Reference 1-3). Travelers moving through the throat at very high speed will tend to measure a negative energy density. These exotic properties are required to create and thread open the wormhole, and stabilize it against collapse (see Section III for more details).\n\nThe technical description of a trip through a spherically symmetric traversable wormhole is simply given by the proper time and/or the proper distance of travel through its throat as measured by space travelers, while the (radial) travel velocity through the throat is v = v(r) < c. The proper time of travel as measured by space travelers going through the wormhole is given by Δτ = ∫(γv)^-1 dλ, where γ ≡ [1 - (v/c)2]^-1/2 and the integration (over the element of proper distance, dλ) is taken from the wormhole entrance to its exit. The proper distance of travel as measured by the space travelers is Δλ = vΔτ. Remote static observers watching the space travelers go through the wormhole will measure their travel time to be Δt = ∫(veφ(r))^-1 dλ and their travel distance will be Δλ = vΔt, where the integration is taken over the same limits as before.\n\n2 A spacetime metric, ds2, is a Lorentz-invariant distance function between any two points in spacetime that is defined by ds2 = gμνdxμdxν, where gμν is the metric tensor which is a 4×4 matrix that encodes the geometry of spacetime and dxμ is the infinitesimal coordinate separation between two points.\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 2 shows two diagrams representing the embedded space (Flamm diagram) representation of Equation (1), which depicts the geometry of an equatorial (θ = π/2) slice through space at a specific moment of time (t = const). The top of Figure 2 shows the embedding diagram for a traversable wormhole that connects two different universes (i.e., an inter-universe wormhole). The bottom diagram in the figure is an intra-universe wormhole with a throat that connects two distant regions of our own universe. These diagrams serve to aide in visualizing traversable wormhole geometry and are merely a geometrical exaggeration.\n\nThere was originally one other criterion for defining a traversable wormhole, which was that it must be embedded within the surrounding (asymptotically) flat spacetime. However, Hochberg and Visser (Reference 4) proved that it is only the behavior near the wormhole throat that is critical to understanding the physics, and that a generic throat can be defined without having to make all the symmetry assumptions and without assuming the existence of an asymptotically flat spacetime in which to embed the wormhole. Therefore, one only needs to know the generic features of the geometry near the throat in order to guarantee violations of the Null Energy Condition (NEC; see Section III for further detail) for certain open regions near the throat. So one is free to place our wormhole anywhere in spacetime because it is only the geometry and physics near the throat that matters for any analysis. This fact led to the development of a number of different traversable wormhole throat designs that are cubic shaped, polyhedral shaped, flat-face shaped, generic shaped, etc. The reader should consult (Reference 3) for a complete technical review of the various types (and shapes) of traversable wormhole solutions found in general relativity theory.\n\nOne knows that one needs exotic or negative energy to create and thread open a traversable wormhole. So in this regard, one asks what kind of wormhole one can make with less effort. To answer this question one can relate the local wormhole geometry to the global topological invariant of the spacetime via the Gauss-Bonnet Theorem (Reference 5). In the Gauss-Bonnet Theorem the local wormhole geometry is quantified by the energy density, U (in geometrodynamic units, η = G = c = 1), threading the wormhole throat plus a spatial curvature constant (for the throat). The global topological invariant of spacetime is quantified by the Euler Number, χe, which is itself defined in terms of the genus, g, representing the number of handles (or throats or tunnels) a wormhole can be assigned. These two topological quantities are related via χe = 2(1 − g). Therefore, the (static) wormhole Gauss-Bonnet relation is given by U ≤ χe/4 or U ≤ (1 − g)/2 (Reference 5). (The case for dynamic traversable wormholes has"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nresults that are similar to the static case.) This relation will help to decide if a traversable wormhole having one throat, or two or more throats should be built and at what energy cost this will incur.\n\nThe following is the result of our analysis for traversable wormholes having:\n\n• 1-handle/throat (i.e., flat torus or spherical wormhole topology) giving g = 1, thus χe = 0, and so U ≤ 0\n\n• 2-handles/throats giving g = 2, thus χe = −2, and so U ≤ −1/2\n\n• 3-handles/throats giving g = 3, thus χe = −4, and so U ≤ −1; and so on.\n\nIt is clear from this that as the number of wormhole handles/throats increases the amount of negative energy required to create the wormhole will grow larger in magnitude. This is an undesirable demand on any putative negative energy generator. It is clear then that item (a) defines the most desirable engineering solution one can hope for: a 1-handle/throat traversable wormhole that will require zero or (arbitrarily) little negative energy to create. The magnitude of energy condition violations and the amount of negative energy required to build a traversable wormhole will be addressed.\n\nB. THE \"STARGATE\" SOLUTION\n\nIt is a straightforward exercise to design a real \"stargate\" from wormhole physics. A stargate is essentially a traversable wormhole with a flat-face shape for the throat as opposed to the spherical-shaped throat of the Morris and Thorne wormhole as discussed in the previous section. A traveler going through a stargate will simply be shunted into another remote spacetime region within our universe or into another universe.\n\nThe flat-face traversable wormhole solution is derived from the thin shell (a.k.a. junction condition or surface layer) formalism of the Einstein field equation (Reference 6, 7). The procedure is to take two copies of flat Minkowski space and remove from each identical regions of the form Ω × ℜ, where Ω is a three-dimensional compact spacelike hypersurface and ℜ is a timelike line (time axis). Then identify these two incomplete spacetimes along the timelike boundaries ∂Ω × ℜ. The resulting spacetime is geodesically complete and possesses two asymptotically flat regions connected by a traversable wormhole. The throat of the wormhole is just the junction ∂Ω, which is a two-dimensional space-like hypersurface, at which the two original Minkowski spaces are identified (see Figures 3 and 4)."} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 3. Diagram of a Simultaneous View of Two Remote Compact Regions, Ω1 and Ω2, of Minkowski Space Used to Create the Wormhole Throat ∂Ω (time is suppressed in this diagram)\n\nFigure 4. The Same Diagram as in Figure 3 Except as Viewed by an Observer Sitting in Region Ω1 Who Looks Through the Wormhole Throat ∂Ω and Sees Remote Region Ω2 (dotted area inside the circle) on the Other Side\n\nIt is a standard result of the thin shell formalism that the Einstein field equation may be cast in terms of the surface stress-energy tensor S i j of a thin shell of matter (or mass-energy) localized inside the wormhole throat ∂Ω (Reference 8):"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nS i j = −(c⁴/4πG)(K i j − δ i j K k k) (2)\n\nwhere the second fundamental form K i j is a matrix that represents the extrinsic curvature of ∂Ω (telling how the wormhole throat is curved with respect to the enveloping four-dimensional spacetime), δ i j is the three-dimensional unit matrix, and K k k is the trace (sum of diagonal matrix elements) of K i j. 3 K i j is a diagonal matrix having the two principal radii of curvature, ρ1 and ρ2, of the thin shell as its components (see Figure 5). S i j may be interpreted in terms of the thin shell's surface energy density σ and principal surface tensions, ϑ1 and ϑ2, which are also diagonal matrix components.\n\nFigure 5. A Thin Shell of (Localized) Mass-Energy Possessing Two Principal Radii of Curvature, ρ1 and ρ2.\n\nEquation (2) is solved and the components of S i j are found to be (Reference 8):\n\nσ = −(c⁴/4πG)(1/ρ1 + 1/ρ2) (3a)\n\n3 The Latin indices (i, j, k = 0...2) denote three-dimensional hypersurface coordinates, x0...x2, such that x1, x2 ≡ space coordinates and x0 ≡ time coordinate."} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nϑ1 = −(c⁴/4πG)(1/ρ2) (3b)\n\nϑ2 = −(c⁴/4πG)(1/ρ1) (3c)\n\nThese are the Einstein field equations for a traversable wormhole that is produced by a thin shell of localized matter. Equations (3a-c) imply that (for ∂Ω a convex hypersurface) one is dealing with negative surface energy density and negative surface tensions. This is exotic matter! The negative surface tension (= positive outward pressure, a.k.a. gravitational repulsion) is required to keep the throat open and stable against collapse. To make this thin shell wormhole entirely flat requires that one chooses the throat ∂Ω to have at least one flat face (picture the thin shell in Figure 5 becoming flat). On that face the two principal radii of curvature become ρ1 = ρ2 = ∞ as required by standard three-dimensional geometry; therefore, substituting this requirement into Equations (3a-c) gives:\n\nσ = ϑ1 = ϑ2 = 0 (4)\n\nwhich is a remarkable result. This means that a traveler encountering and going through such a wormhole-stargate will feel no tidal gravitational forces and see no exotic matter threading the throat. A traveler stepping through the throat will simply be shunted into another remote spacetime region or into another universe (note: the Einstein field equation does not fix the spacetime topology, so it is possible that wormholes are inter-universe as well as intra-universe tunnels). Therefore, one can construct a stargate by generating a thin shell or surface layer of exotic matter much like a thin film of soap stretched across a loop of wire.\n\nC. WHAT A WORMHOLE LOOKS LIKE IN THE REAL WORLD\n\nThe exotic matter threading a traversable wormhole throat produces repulsive gravity, which will then deflect light rays going through and around it. The entrance to the spherically symmetric Morris & Thorne wormhole looks like a sphere that contains the mirror image of a whole other universe or remote region within our own universe, incredibly shrunken and distorted (see Figure 6). This is an"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nexample of the topological inversion manifested in wormhole geometry. The spherical wormhole entrance/exit (a.k.a. the throat) is called a hypersphere because it is the hyperspace surface of our four-dimensional spacetime. If one were to travel through the wormhole and look back at it from the other side, then one would see a sphere (the entry way back home) that seemed to contain the whole original universe or home region of space near Earth (within your universe). This would look just like a glass Christmas tree ornament, which is just a spherical mirror that reflects, in principle, the entire universe around it.\n\nA flat-faced wormhole, or stargate, which is also a hypersurface, would not distort the mirror image of the remote space region or other universe seen through it because the negative surface energy density and negative surface tensions of the exotic matter threading its throat is zero as seen and felt by light and matter passing through it (recall Equation (4)). See Figures 7 and 8.\n\nFigure 7. A Stargate (adapted from Reference 9)\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 8. A Stargate in Times Square\n\nIf a small wormhole (three or more dimensional) were to begin to appear or even bump into our local space, one would perceive this process as the occurrence of an unusually bright spot in the sky. Blue and red Doppler shifting of this bright spot would manifest when the intersection of the wormhole with our local space grows or recedes, respectively.\n\nIII. The General Relativistic Definition of Exotic Matter and the Energy Conditions\n\nThis section will consider the physics of the exotic matter that is required to build traversable wormholes. What exactly is \"exotic\" matter? In classical physics the energy density of all observed forms of matter (fields) is non-negative. What is exotic about the type of matter that must be used to generate traversable wormhole spacetime is that it must have negative energy density and/or negative flux (Reference 10). The energy density is \"negative\" in the sense that the configuration of matter fields one must deploy to generate and thread a traversable wormhole throat must have an energy density, ρE (= ρc², where ρ is the rest-mass density), that is less than or equal to its pressures/tensions, pi (Reference 1, 3).4 In many cases, these equations of state are also known to possess an energy density that is algebraically negative, i.e., the energy density and flux are less than zero. It is on the basis of these conditions that\n\n4 From this point forward in the text, all Latin indices (e.g., i, j, k = 1...3) that are affixed to physical quantities denote the usual 3-dimensional space coordinates, x1...x3, indicating the spatial components of vector or tensor quantities.\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\none can call this material property \"exotic.\" The condition for ordinary, classical (non-exotic) forms of matter that all are familiar with in nature is that ρE > pi and/or ρE ≥ 0. These conditions represent two examples of what are variously called the \"standard\" energy conditions: Weak Energy Condition (WEC: ρE ≥ 0, ρE + pi ≥ 0), Null Energy Condition (NEC: ρE + pi ≥ 0), Dominant Energy Condition (DEC), and Strong Energy Condition (SEC). These energy conditions forbid negative energy density between material objects to occur in nature, but they are mere hypotheses. Hawking and Ellis (Reference 11) formulated the energy conditions in order to establish a series of mathematical hypotheses governing the behavior of collapsed-matter singularities in their study of cosmology and black hole physics. More specifically, classical general relativity allows one to prove lots of general theorems about the behavior of matter in gravitational fields. The impact or implications of the DEC or SEC will not be considered because they add no new information beyond the WEC and NEC.\n\nThe bad news is that real physical matter is not \"reasonable\" because the energy conditions are in general violated by semiclassical quantum effects (occurring at order η) (Reference 3).5 More specifically, quantum effects generically violate the average NEC (ANEC). Furthermore, it was discovered in 1965 that quantum field theory has the remarkable property of allowing states of matter containing local regions of negative energy density or negative fluxes (Reference 12). This violates the WEC, which postulates that the local energy density is non-negative for all observers. And there are also general theorems of differential geometry that guarantee that there must be a violation of one, some, or all of the energy conditions (meaning exotic matter is present) for all traversable wormhole spacetimes. With respect to creating traversable wormhole spacetimes, \"negative energy\" has the unfortunate reputation of alarming physicists. This is unfounded since all the energy condition hypotheses have been experimentally tested in the laboratory and experimentally shown to be false – 25 years before their formulation (Reference 13).\n\nFurther investigation into this technical issue showed that violations of the energy conditions are widespread for all forms of both \"reasonable\" classical and quantum matter (Reference 14-18). Furthermore, Visser (Reference 3) showed that all (generic) spacetime geometries violate all the energy conditions. So the condition that ρE > pi and/or ρE ≥ 0 must be obeyed by all forms of matter in nature is spurious. Violating the energy conditions commits no offense against nature. Negative energy has been produced in the laboratory and this will be discussed in the following sections.\n\nA. EXAMPLES OF EXOTIC OR \"NEGATIVE\" ENERGY FOUND IN NATURE\n\nThe exotic (energy condition-violating) fields that are known to occur in nature are:\n\n• Static, radially-dependent electric or magnetic fields. These are borderline exotic, if their tension were infinitesimally larger, for a given energy density (Reference 11, 19).\n\n• Squeezed quantum vacuum states: electromagnetic and other (non-Maxwellian) quantum fields (Reference 1, 20).\n\n5 Planck's reduced constant, η = 1.055 × 10–34 J·s.\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Gravitationally squeezed vacuum electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations (Reference 21).\n\n• Casimir effect, i.e., the Casimir vacuum in flat, curved, and topological spaces (Reference 22-28).\n\n• Other quantum fields/states/effects. In general, the local energy density in quantum field theory can be negative due to quantum coherence effects (Reference 12). Other examples that have been studied are Dirac field states: the superposition of two single particle electron states and the superposition of two multi-electron-positron states (Reference 29, 30). In the former (latter), the energy densities can be negative when two single (multi-) particle states have the same number of electrons (electrons and positrons) or when one state has one more electron (electron-positron pair) than the other.\n\nCosmological inflation (Reference 3), cosmological particle production (Reference 3), classical scalar fields (Reference 3), the conformal anomaly (Reference 3), and gravitational vacuum polarization (Reference 14-17) are among many other examples that also violate the energy conditions. Since the laws of quantum field theory place no strong restrictions on negative energies and fluxes, then it might be possible to produce exotic phenomena such as faster-than-light travel (Reference 31-33), traversable wormholes (Reference 1-3), violations of the second law of thermodynamics (Reference 34, 35), and time machines (Reference 2, 3, 36). There are several other exotic phenomena made possible by the effects of negative energy, but they lie outside the scope of the present study. This section will review the previously listed items 1 thru 4 and examine their applicability and technical maturity. Dirac field states are currently under study by investigators. Also, the issue of capturing and storing negative energy is not considered in what follows because free-space negative energy sources appear to be a more desirable option for inducing traversable wormholes than stored negative energy, and because there is very little technical literature that addresses how to capture and store negative energy (see, e.g., Reference 10). The issue of capturing and storing negative energy will be left for future investigations.\n\nB. GENERATING NEGATIVE ENERGY IN THE LAB\n\n1. Static Radial Electric & Magnetic Fields\n\nIt is beyond the scope of this study to include all the technical configurations by which one can generate static, radially-dependent electric or magnetic fields. Suffice it to say that ultrahigh-intensity tabletop lasers have been used to generate extreme electric and magnetic field strengths in the lab. Ultrahigh-intensity lasers use the chirped-pulse amplification (CPA) technique to boost the total output beam power. All laser systems simply repackage energy as a coherent package of optical power, but CPA lasers repackage the laser pulse itself during the amplification process. In typical high-power short-pulse laser systems, it is the peak intensity, not the energy or the fluence, which causes pulse distortion or laser damage. However, the CPA laser dissects a laser pulse according to its frequency components, and reorders it into a time-stretched lower-peak-intensity pulse of the same energy (Reference 37-39). This benign pulse can then be amplified safely to high energy, and then only afterwards reconstituted as a very short pulse of enormous peak power – a pulse which could never itself have passed safely through the laser system. Made more tractable in this way, the pulse can be\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"exploit quantum squeezing to extract energy from one place in the ordinary vacuum at the expense of accumulating excess energy elsewhere (Reference 1).\n\nThe squeezed state of the electromagnetic field is a primary example of a quantum field that has negative energy density and negative energy flux. Such a state became a physical reality in the laboratory as a result of the nonlinear-optics technique of \"squeezing,\" i.e., of moving some of the quantum-fluctuations of laser light out of the cos[ω(t − z/c)] part of the beam and into the sin[ω(t − z/c)] part (Reference 20, 40-44).7 The observable that gets squeezed will have its fluctuations reduced below the vacuum ZPF. The act of squeezing transforms the phase space circular noise profile characteristic of the vacuum into an ellipse, whose semimajor and semiminor axes are given by unequal quadrature uncertainties (of the quantized electromagnetic field harmonic oscillator operators). This applies to coherent states in general, and the usual vacuum is also a coherent state with eigenvalue zero. As this ellipse rotates about the origin with angular frequency ω, these unequal quadrature uncertainties manifest themselves in the electromagnetic field oscillator energy by periodic occurrences, which are separated by one quarter cycle, of both smaller and larger fluctuations compared to the unsqueezed vacuum.\n\nMorris and Thorne (Reference 1) and Caves (Reference 45) point out that if one squeezes the vacuum, i.e., if one puts vacuum rather than laser light into the input port of a squeezing device, then one gets at the output an electromagnetic field with weaker fluctuations and thus less energy density than the vacuum at locations where cos2[ω(t − z/c)] ≅ 1 and sin2[ω(t − z/c)] << 1; but with greater fluctuations and thus greater energy density than the vacuum at locations where cos2[ω(t − z/c)] << 1 and sin2[ω(t − z/c)] ≅ 1. Since the vacuum is defined to have vanishing energy density, any region with less energy density than the vacuum actually has a negative (renormalized) expectation value for the energy density. Therefore, a squeezed vacuum state consists of a traveling electromagnetic wave that oscillates back and forth between negative energy density and positive energy density, but has positive time-averaged energy density.\n\nFor the squeezed electromagnetic vacuum state, the energy density ρE-sqvac is given by (Reference 46):\n\nρE-sqvac = (2hω/L3) sinh ξ [sinh ξ + cosh ξ cos(2ω(t − z/c) + δ)] (J/m3) (5)\n\nwhere L3 is the volume of a large box with sides of length L (i.e., the quantum field is placed in a box with periodic boundary conditions), ξ is the squeezed state amplitude (giving a measure of the mean photon number in a squeezed state), and δ is the phase of squeezing. Equation (5) shows that ρE-sqvac falls below zero once every cycle when the condition cosh ξ > sinh ξ is met. It turns out that this is always true for every nonzero value of ξ, so ρE-sqvac becomes negative at some point in the cycle for a general squeezed vacuum state. On another note, when a quantum state is close to a squeezed vacuum state, there will almost always be some negative energy densities present.\n\nNegative energy can be generated by an array of ultrahigh-intensity lasers using an ultra-fast rotating mirror system (Reference 47). In this scheme a laser beam is passed through an optical cavity resonator made of a lithium niobate (LiNbO3) crystal that is shaped like a cylinder with rounded silvered ends to reflect light. The resonator will act to produce a secondary lower frequency light beam in which the pattern of photons is rearranged into pairs. The squeezed light beam emerging from the resonator will contain pulses of negative energy interspersed with pulses of positive energy.\n\n7 ω is the angular frequency of light, t is time, and z denotes the z-axis direction of beam propagation.\n\n13"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"through an optical cavity resonator made of a lithium niobate (LiNbO3) crystal that is shaped like a cylinder with rounded silvered ends to reflect light. The resonator will act to produce a secondary lower frequency light beam in which the pattern of photons is rearranged into pairs. The squeezed light beam emerging from the resonator will contain pulses of negative energy interspersed with pulses of positive energy.\n\nIn this concept both the negative and positive energy pulses are ~ 10−15 second duration. In principle a set of rapidly rotating mirrors could be arranged to separate the positive and negative energy pulses from each other. The light beam would be set to strike each mirror surface at a very shallow angle while the rotation would ensure that the negative energy pulses would be reflected at a slightly different angle from the positive energy pulses. A small spatial separation of the two different energy pulses would occur at some distance from the rotating mirror. Another system of mirrors would be needed to redirect the negative energy pulses to an isolated location and concentrate them there. See Figure 9 for an illustration of this concept.\n\n[Figure 9: Conceptual Squeezed Light Negative Energy Generator diagram showing Laser & LiNbO3 Resonator, Alternating Pulses of Negative & Positive Energy, Rotating Redirector Mirror System, Positive Energy Pulses, Negative Energy Pulses, Concentrated Negative Energy]\n\nFigure 9. Conceptual Squeezed Light Negative Energy Generator\n\nThe rotating mirror system can actually be implemented via non-mechanical means. A chamber of sodium gas is placed within the squeezing cavity and a laser beam is directed through the gas. The beam is reflected back on itself by a mirror to form a standing wave within the sodium chamber. This wave causes rapid variations in the optical properties of the sodium thus causing rapid variations in the squeezed light so that one can induce rapid reflections of pulses by careful design (Reference 41). An illustration of this is shown in Figure 10.\n\n14"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[Figure 10: Sodium Chamber Negative Energy Separator diagram showing Mirror, Laser Beam, Sodium Chamber, Cavity, Mirror]\n\nFigure 10. Sodium Chamber Negative Energy Separator (Reference 41)\n\nAnother way to generate negative energy via squeezed light would be to manufacture extremely reliable light pulses containing precisely one, two, three, etc., photons apiece and combine them together to create squeezed states to order (Reference 47). Superimposing many such states could theoretically produce bursts of intense negative energy. See Figure 11 for a conceptual diagram of this concept. Photonic crystal research has already demonstrated the feasibility of using photonic crystal waveguides (mixing together the classical and quantum properties of optical materials) to engineer light sources that produce beams containing precisely one, two, three, etc., photons. For example, researchers at Melbourne University used a microwave oven to fuse a tiny diamond, just 1/1000th of a millimeter long, onto an optical fiber, which could be used to create a single photon beam of light (Reference 48, 49). The combining of different beams containing different (finite integer) numbers of photons is already state-of-the-art practice via numerous optical beam combining methods that can readily be extended to our application.\n\n[Figure 11: Alternative Conceptual Squeezed Light Negative Energy Generator diagram]\n\nFigure 11 Alternative Conceptual Squeezed Light Negative Energy Generator\n\n15"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Finally, Ries et al. (Reference 50) experimentally demonstrated the very first simple, scalable squeezed vacuum source in the laboratory that consisted of a continuous-wave diode laser and an atomic rubidium vapor cell. The experimental tools one needs to begin exploring the generation of negative energy for the purpose of creating traversable wormholes are just now becoming available.\n\n3. Gravitationally Squeezed Electromagnetic ZPF\n\nA natural source of negative energy comes from the effect that gravitational fields (of astronomical bodies) in space have upon the surrounding quantum vacuum. For example, the gravitational field of the Earth produces a zone of negative energy around it by dragging some of the virtual quanta (a.k.a. vacuum ZPF) downward. This concept was initially developed in the 1970s as a byproduct of studies on quantum field theory in curved space (Reference 25). However, Hochberg and Kephart (Reference 21) derived an important application of this concept to the problem of creating and stabilizing traversable wormholes. They showed that one can utilize the negative energy densities, which arise from distortion of the vacuum ZPF due to the interaction with a prescribed gravitational background, for providing a violation of the energy conditions. The squeezed quantum states of quantum optics provide a natural form of matter having negative energy density.\n\nThe analysis, via quantum optics, showed that gravitation itself provides the mechanism for generating the squeezed vacuum states needed to support stable traversable wormholes. The production of negative energy densities via a squeezed vacuum is a necessary and unavoidable consequence of the interaction or coupling between ordinary matter and gravity, and this defines what is meant by gravitationally squeezed vacuum states. The magnitude of the gravitational squeezing of the vacuum can be estimated from the quantum optics squeezing condition for given transverse momentum and (equivalent) energy eigenvalues, j, of two electromagnetic ZPF field modes, such that this condition is subject to j → 0, and it is defined as (Reference 21):\n\nj ≡ (4πc2/λg0)(r/R0)2 (M0/M) = 8πrs/λ (6)\n\nwhere λ is the ZPF mode wavelength, r is the radial distance from the center of the astronomical body in question, R0 is the radius of the Earth (6.378 × 106 m), M0 is the mass of the Earth (5.972 × 1024 kg), M is the mass of the astronomical body, and rs is the Schwarzschild radius of the astronomical body.8 Note that rs is only a convenient radial distance parameter for any object under examination and so there is no black hole collapse involved in this analysis. Any radial distance from the body in question can be chosen to perform this analysis, but using rs makes the equation simpler in form. Also note that Equation (6) contains an extra factor of two (compared to the j derived in Reference 21) in order to account for the photon spin. The squeezing condition plus Equation (6) simply states that substantial gravitational squeezing of the vacuum occurs for those ZPF field modes with λ ≥ 8πrs of the mass in question (whose\n\n8 rs = 2GM/c2. According to general relativity theory, this is the critical radius at which a spherically symmetric massive body becomes a black hole, i.e., at which light is unable to escape from the body's surface.\n\n16"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"gravitational field is squeezing the vacuum). The corresponding local vacuum state energy density is: ρE-gsvac = −2π2ηc/λ4.\n\nThe general result of the gravitational squeezing effect is that as the gravitational field strength increases, the negative energy zone (surrounding the body) also increases in strength. Table 1 shows when gravitational squeezing becomes important for sample bodies and their associated ρE-gsvac. The table shows that in the case of the Earth, Jupiter and the Sun, the squeezing effect is extremely feeble because only ZPF mode wavelengths above 0.2 m to 78 km are affected, each having very minute ρE-gsvac. For a solar mass black hole (radius of 2.95 km), the effect is still feeble because only ZPF mode wavelengths above 78 km are affected. But note that Planck mass bodies will have an enormously strong negative energy zone surrounding them because all ZPF mode wavelengths above 8.50 × 10−34 m will be squeezed, in other words, all wavelengths of interest for vacuum fluctuations. Protons will have the strongest negative energy zone in comparison because the squeezing effect includes all ZPF mode wavelengths above 6.50 × 10−53 m. Furthermore, a body smaller than a nuclear diameter (≈ 10−16 m) and containing the mass of a mountain (≈ 1011 kg) has a fairly strong negative energy zone because all ZPF mode wavelengths above 10−15 m will be squeezed. In each of these cases, the magnitude of the corresponding ρE-gsvac is very large.\n\nHowever, the estimates for the wavelengths in Table 1 might be too small. Ford (private communication, 2007) argues that Reference 21 is in error because spacetime is flat on scales smaller than the local radius of curvature, which is defined by the inverse square root of the typical Riemann curvature tensor component in a local orthonormal frame, or λc ≈ (r3c2/GM)1/2. According to Ford, only ZPF modes with λ ≥ λc will be squeezed by the gravitational field. This leads to a different local vacuum state energy density (for r >> rs) (Reference 15):\n\nρE-gsvac = −2π2hc/λ4 ≈ −2π2hc/lc4 ≈ −2π2hG2M2/(c3r6) (J/m3) (7)\n\n17"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 1. Substantial Gravitational Squeezing Occurs for Vacuum ZPF When λ ≥ 8πr_s\n\nMass of body (kg) | r_s (m) | λ (m) | ρE-gsvac (J/m³)\nSun = 2.00 x 10³⁰ | 2.95 x 10³ | ≥ 78.0 x 10³ | −1.69 x 10⁻⁴⁴\nJupiter = 1.90 x 10²⁷ | 2.82 | ≥ 74 | −2.08 x 10⁻³²\nEarth = 5.98 x 10²⁴ | 8.87 x 10⁻³ | ≥ 0.23 | −2.23 x 10⁻²²\nTypical mountain ≈ 10¹¹ | ≈ 10⁻¹⁶ | ≥ 10⁻¹⁵ | −6.25 x 10³⁵\nPlanck mass = 2.18 x 10⁻⁸ | 3.23 x 10⁻³⁵ | ≥ 8.50 x 10⁻³⁴ | −1.20 x 10¹⁰⁸\nProton = 1.67 x 10⁻²⁷ | 2.48 x 10⁻⁵⁴ | ≥ 6.50 x 10⁻⁵³ | −3.50 x 10¹⁸⁴\n\nFor example, near the surface of the Earth (r ≈ R₀, M = M₀), λc ≈ 2.42 x 10¹¹ m and hence, Equation (7) gives ρE-gsvac ≈ −1.82 x 10⁻⁷⁰ J/m³. Compare these values with λ ≥ 0.23 m and ρE-gsvac ≈ −2.23 x 10⁻²² J/m³ in Table 1. The resolution of this disagreement remains an open question.\n\nOne is presently unaware of any way to artificially generate gravitational squeezing of the vacuum in the laboratory. This will be left for future investigation. However, it is predicted to occur in the vicinity of astronomical matter. Naturally occurring traversable wormholes in the vicinity of astronomical matter would therefore become possible.\n\n4. Vacuum Field Stress: Negative Energy from the Casimir Effect\n\nThe Casimir effect is by far the easiest and most well known way to generate negative energy in the lab. The Casimir effect that is familiar to most people is the force that is associated with the electromagnetic quantum vacuum (Reference 51). This is an attractive force that must exist between any two neutral (uncharged), parallel, flat, conducting surfaces (e.g., metallic plates) in a vacuum. This force has been well measured and it can be attributed to a minute imbalance in the vacuum electromagnetic zero-point energy density inside the cavity between the conducting surfaces versus the vacuum electromagnetic zero-point energy density in the free-space region outside of the cavity (Reference 52-54). See Figure 12 for an illustration of this effect.\n\nFigure 12. Schematic of the Casimir Effect (Casimir plates; Vacuum fluctuations)\n\n18"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIt turns out that there are many different types of Casimir effects found in quantum field theory (Reference 22-24, 28, 55). For example, if one introduces a single infinite plane conductor into the Minkowski (flat spacetime) vacuum by bringing it adiabatically from infinity so that whatever quantum fields are present suffer no excitation but remain in their ground states, then the vacuum (electromagnetic) stresses induced by the presence of the infinite plane conductor produces a Casimir effect. This result holds equally well when two parallel plane conductors (with separation distance d) are present, which gives rise to the familiar Casimir effect inside a cavity. Note that in both cases, the spacetime manifold is made incomplete by the introduction of the plane conductor boundary condition(s). The vacuum region put under stress by the presence of the plane conductor(s) is called the Casimir vacuum. The generic expression for the energy density of the Casimir effect is ρCE = −A(ηc)d⁻⁴, where A = ζ(D)/8π² in spacetimes of arbitrary dimension D (Reference 22-24). The appearance of the zeta-function ζ(D) is characteristic of expressions for vacuum stress-energy tensors, T^μν_vac. In our familiar four-dimensional spacetime (D = 4), A = π²/720. To calculate T^μν_vac for a given quantum field is to calculate its associated Casimir effect.\n\nAnalogs of the Casimir effect also exist for fields other than the electromagnetic field. When considering the vacuum state of other fields, one must consider boundary conditions that are analogous to the perfect-conductor boundary conditions for the electromagnetic field at the surfaces of the plates (Reference 22-24, 28). Other fields are not electromagnetic in nature, that is to say they are non-Maxwellian, and so the perfect-conductor boundary conditions do not apply to them. It turns out that complete manifolds exhibit what is called the topological Casimir effect for any non-Maxwellian fields. In order to define boundary conditions for other fields the conductor boundary conditions are replaced and Minkowski spacetime by a manifold of the form ℜ x Σ (i.e., a product space), where ℜ is the real line defining the time dimension for this particular product space and Σ is a flat three-dimensional manifold having any one of the following topologies: ℜ² x S¹, ℜ x T², T³, ℜ x K², etc., ℜ being the real line that defines any linear space dimension (e.g., ℜ = line, ℜ² = two-dimensional plane, etc.), Tⁿ being the n-torus, K² the two-dimensional Klein bottle, S¹ the circle, etc.\n\nThe case Σ = ℜ² x S¹ has the closest resemblance to the electromagnetic Casimir effect, the difference being that instead of imposing conductor boundary conditions, one imposes periodic boundary conditions on some of the space coordinates in the three-dimensional manifold. When imposing this topological constraint on the field theoretic calculation of the topological Casimir effect (for linear massless fields), one finds that the generic expression for the energy density is also ρCE = −A(ηc)d⁻⁴, where A = ±d_f (π²/90), d_f is the number of degrees of freedom (e.g., helicity states) per spatial point, the plus sign holds for boson fields (giving a negative energy density) and the negative sign for fermion fields (giving a positive energy density).\n\nIf one were to admit spin structure in the manifolds described above and the field is spinorial, then there is another important subtlety that must be taken into account when evaluating T^μν_vac. However, this introduces an additional complexity involving the relationship between the spin structure and the global structure (i.e., the configuration space or fibre bundle) of the field in question whereby the topology not only of the base\n\n19"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nmanifold, but of the fibre bundle itself has an effect on T^μν_vac. In addition to this, there are (compactified) extra-space dimensional quantum field (i.e., D-Brane or \"brane world\") analogs of the Casimir effect yet to be explored. But a detailed consideration of these for producing traversable wormholes is beyond the scope of this report and will be left for future investigation.\n\nAs a final note, the methods used to obtain the electromagnetic T^μν_vac between parallel plane conductors can also be used when the conductors are not parallel but are joined together along a line of intersection. If the conductors have curved surfaces instead, then one obtains results that are similar to the case of intersecting conductors. These geometries have also been evaluated for the case of dielectric media. These particular cases will not be considered further since there are technical subtleties involved that complicate the calculations and application of the different approaches. This topic will also be left for future investigation.\n\n5. Dynamical Casimir Effect: Moving Mirrors\n\nNegative energy can be created by a single moving reflecting (conducting) surface (a.k.a. a moving mirror). A mirror moving with increasing acceleration generates a flux of negative energy that emanates from its surface and flows out into the space ahead of the mirror (Reference 25, 56). This is essentially the simple case of an infinite plane conductor undergoing acceleration perpendicular to its surface. If the acceleration varies with time, the conductor will generally emit or absorb photons (i.e., exchange energy with the vacuum), even though it is neutral. This is an example of the well-known quantum phenomenon of parametric excitation. The parameters of the electromagnetic field oscillators (e.g., their frequency distribution function) change with time owing to the acceleration of the mirror (Reference 57). However, this effect is known to be exceedingly small, and it is not the most effective way to produce negative energy. This scheme will not be considered any further.\n\n6. Casimir Effect: Negative Energy for Traversable Wormholes\n\nThe electromagnetic Casimir effect can be used in principle to create a traversable wormhole. The energy density ρCE = −(π²ħc/720)d⁻⁴ within a Casimir cavity is negative and manifests itself by producing a force of attraction between the cavity walls. But cavity dimensions must be made exceedingly small in order to generate a significant amount of negative energy. In order to use the Casimir effect to generate a spherically symmetric traversable wormhole throat of radius r_throat, there is need to design a cavity made of perfectly conducting spherically concentric thin plates with a plate separation d of (Reference 2):\n\nd = (π³/30)^(1/4) (r_throat √(hG/c³))^(1/2) (8)\n= (4.05 x 10⁻¹⁸) √r_throat (m)\n\nTo counteract the collapse of the cavity due to the Casimir Force acting between the plates, the plates will have equal electric charges placed upon them to establish\n\n20"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nadequate Coulomb repulsion.⁹ Equation (8) shows that a 1 km radius throat will require a cavity plate separation of 1.28 x 10⁻¹⁶ m (smaller than a nuclear diameter), which gives ρEC = −1.62 x 10³⁶ J/m³ for this configuration. In contrast, a wormhole with a throat radius of 1 AU will require a plate separation of 1.57 x 10⁻¹² m (or 35% smaller than the electron's Compton wavelength), which results in an energy density of −7.14 x 10¹⁹ J/m³.¹⁰ There is no technology known today that can engineer a cavity with such minuscule plate separations. In addition, such minuscule plate separations are unrealistic because the Casimir effect switches over to the non-retarded field behavior (~ d⁻³) of van der Waals forces when plate separations go below the wavelength (≈ 10 nm) where they are no longer perfectly conducting (Reference 58). This scheme will not be considered any further. However, future work will be necessary to elucidate whether the various quantum field analogs of the Casimir effect can provide a more reasonable technical solution to this problem.\n\nIV. Constructing a Traversable Wormhole is not Easy\n\nA. NEGATIVE ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND ENERGY CONDITION VIOLATIONS\n\nOne knows how to make small quantities of negative energy in the lab. But one does not know if it is possible to make large quantities of negative energy. It was pointed out in Section III that one, some, or all of the classical energy conditions must be violated in order to build a traversable wormhole. And it was also cautioned that this was not a showstopper because the energy conditions have all been violated by nature or by lab experiment prior to their formulation. However, the reader should be forewarned that there are a number of published claims that the energy condition violations can be avoided. These claims are just semantic games whereby investigators universally invoke the following scenario: divide the total stress-energy into weird matter plus normal matter, push all the energy condition violations into the weird matter so that the normal matter does not violate the energy conditions. Given that the energy conditions are not absolute, such rearranging approaches are not necessary.\n\nTraversable wormhole throats violate the NEC (or ANEC). So how big a violation is required? The answer is that there is only need to calculate the amount of negative energy that will be needed to generate and hold open a wormhole throat. A simple formula for short-throat wormholes using the thin shell formalism gives this quantity in terms of the equivalent mass (note: the energy density derived from the general relativistic field equation is too complex to use for this mass comparison) (Reference 3):\n\n⁹ In a detailed analysis the electrostatic energy required to support the Coulomb repulsion between the plates would be considered separately.\n¹⁰ Mean Earth-Sun distance, 1 AU = 1.50 x 10¹¹ m.\n\n21"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nM_wh = −(l_throat c²/G)\n= −(1.35 x 10²⁷ kg)(l_throat/1 meter)\n= −(0.71 M_J)(l_throat/1 meter) (9)\n\nwhere M_wh is the (equivalent) mass required to build the wormhole, λ_throat is a suitable measure of the linear dimension (width or diameter) of the throat, and M_J is the mass of the planet Jupiter. One can also obtain the required energy, E_wh, by multiplying both sides of Equation (9) by c². Equation (9) shows that a mass of −0.71 M_J will be required to build a wormhole 1-m in size. As the wormhole size increases, the mass requirement grows negative-large. Table 2 presents a tabulation of the required negative (equivalent) mass as a function of sample wormhole throat sizes. After being alarmed by the magnitude of the results, one should note that M_wh is not the total mass of the wormhole as seen by remote observers. The non-linearity of the general relativistic field equation dictates that the total mass is zero (actually, the total net mass being positive, negative or zero in the Newtonian approximation depending on the details of the negative energy configuration constituting the wormhole system). Finally, Visser et al. (Reference 59) demonstrated the existence of spacetime geometries containing traversable wormholes that are supported by arbitrarily small quantities of negative energy, and this was proved to be a general result. The next section will expand on this further.\n\nTable 2. Negative Equivalent Mass Required for Traversable Wormhole\n\nλthroat (m) | M_wh\n1000 | −709.9 M_J\n100 | −71 M_J\n10 | −7.1 M_J\n1 | −0.71 M_J\n0.1 | −22.6 M_⊕\n0.01 | −2.3 M_⊕\nM_J = 1.90 x 10²⁷ kg, M₀ = 5.98 x 10²⁴ kg\n\nB. PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS ON NEGATIVE ENERGY\n\nThe Quantum Inequalities (QI) conjecture is an extension of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle to curved spacetimes. Much research has been conducted around this one topic alone. The literature is too numerous to cite here but the reader should consult (Reference 10) and (Reference 46) for detailed information. The QI conjecture relates (via model dependent time integrals of the energy density along geodesics) the energy density of a free quantum field and the time during which this energy density is observed. This conjecture was devised as an attempt to quantify the amount of negative\n\n22"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nnegative energy or energy condition violations required to build a traversable wormhole spacetime. Investigators have invoked the QI to rule out many of the macroscopic wormhole spacetimes. When generating negative energy the QI postulate that: a) the longer the pulse of negative energy lasts, the weaker it must be; b) a pulse of positive energy must follow and the magnitude of the positive pulse must exceed that of the initial negative pulse; and c) the longer the time interval between the two pulses, the larger the positive pulse must be. This actually sounds quite reasonable on energy conservation grounds until one discovers that the Casimir effect and its non-Maxwellian quantum field analogs violate all three conditions. There are also a number of squeezed vacuum sources and Dirac field states that manifestly violate all three conditions. Cosmological inflation, cosmological particle production, classical scalar fields, the conformal anomaly, and gravitational vacuum polarization are among the many other examples that also violate the QI. Visser (Reference 60) also points out that observational data indicate that large amounts of “exotic matter” are required to exist in the universe in order to account for the observed cosmological evolution parameters. The QI have also not been verified by laboratory experiments. The assumptions used to derive the QI and the efficacy of their derivation for various cases has been called into question by numerous investigators. Krasnikov (Reference 61) constructed an explicit counterexample for generalized FTL spacetimes showing that the relevant QI breaks down even in the simplest FTL cases. And he also addressed Fewster's (Reference 62) technical arguments on this issue. It is important to point out that the QIs have been mainly proven for free massless scalar fields in flat two-dimensional Minkowski spacetime, so there remains the unanswered questions of extending the QI into a four-dimensional curved spacetime model (with or without boundaries) and how much negative energy density can arise for interacting fields.\n\nIt turns out that Visser and coworkers (Reference 59, 63, 64) developed a superior way to properly quantify the amount of negative energy or energy condition violations required to build a traversable wormhole spacetime. They propose a quantifier in terms of a spatial volume integral, which amounts to calculating the following definite integrals (Reference 59, 63, 64):\n\n∫ρ_E dV ≤ 0; ∫(ρ_E + p_i)dV ≤ 0 (10)\n\nwith an appropriate choice of the integration measure dV (= 4πr²dr or g^{1/2}drdθdφ, where g ≡ det(g_μv) is the matrix determinant of g_μv). The amount of energy condition violation is defined as the extent to which Equation (10) can become negative. The value of Equation (10) provides information about the total amount of energy condition violating matter that must exist for any given FTL spacetime under study (e.g., warp drives and traversable wormholes). It was further shown that Equation (10) can be adjusted to become vanishingly small by appropriate choice of parameters; therefore, examples can be constructed whereby the energy condition violation can be made arbitrarily small. But the violation cannot be made to vanish entirely.\n\nEquation (10) also gives the result that traversable wormholes require arbitrarily small amounts of negative energy to build (whereby Equation (9) serves only as a gross upper limit) such that within a wormhole spacetime (Reference 59):\n\nρ_E = 0; ∫_C p_r dV → 0 (11)\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":32,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthe allowable spatial distributions of negative energy. And there were found to be\nallowable negative energy distributions in which observers would never encounter the\naccompanying positive energy distribution so long as the QI restrictions and\ncorresponding energy conditions are violated. The extent to which the results of Borde\net al.'s analysis can be generalized to a four-dimensional curved spacetime (with or\nwithout boundaries) and interacting fields remain unsolved.\n\nC. OBSERVING NEGATIVE ENERGY IN THE LAB\n\nNegative energy should be observable in lab experiments. The presence of naturally\noccurring negative energy regions in space is predicted to produce a unique signature\ncorresponding to lensing, chromaticity and intensity effects in micro- and macro-lensing\nevents on galactic and extragalactic/cosmological scales (Reference 66-71). It has been\nshown that these effects provide a specific signature that allows for discrimination\nbetween ordinary (positive energy) and negative energy lenses via the spectral analysis\nof astronomical lensing events. Theoretical modeling of negative energy lensing effects\nhas led to intense astronomical searches for naturally occurring traversable wormholes\nin the universe. Computer model simulations and comparison of their results with\nrecent satellite observations of gamma ray bursts (GRBs) has shown that putative\nnegative energy (i.e., traversable wormhole) lensing events very closely resemble the\nmain features of some GRBs. Other research has found that current observational data\nsuggests that large amounts of naturally occurring “exotic matter” must have existed\nsometime between the epoch of galaxy formation and the present in order to (properly)\nquantitatively account for the “age-of-the-oldest-stars-in-the-galactic halo” problem\nand the cosmological evolution parameters (Reference 60).\n\nWhen background light rays strike a negative energy lensing region, they are swept out\nof the central region thus creating an umbra region of zero intensity. At the edges of\nthe umbra the rays accumulate and create a rainbow-like caustic with enhanced light\nintensity. The lensing of a negative energy region is not analogous to a diverging lens\nbecause in certain circumstances it can produce more light enhancement than does the\nlensing of an equivalent positive energy region. Real background sources in lensing\nevents can have non-uniform brightness distributions on their surfaces and a\ndependency of their emission with the observing frequency. These complications can\nresult in chromaticity effects, i.e., in spectral changes induced by differential lensing\nduring the event. The quantification of such effects is quite lengthy, somewhat model\ndependent, and with recent application only to astronomical lensing events. Suffice it to\nsay that future work is necessary to scale down the predicted lensing parameters and\ncharacterize their effects for lab experiments in which the negative energy will not be of\nastronomical magnitude. Present ultrahigh-speed optics and optical cavities, lasers,\nphotonic crystal (and related switching) technology, sensitive nano-sensor technology,\nand other techniques are very likely capable of detecting the very small magnitude\nlensing effects expected in lab experiments.\n\nA non-optical scheme for detecting negative energy in experiments was recently\nreported by Davies and Ottewill (Reference 72) who studied the response of switched\nparticle detectors to static negative energy densities and negative energy fluxes. Their\nmodel is based on a free (massless) scalar field in flat four-dimensional Minkowski\nspacetime and utilized a simple generalization of the standard monopole detector,\nwhich is switched on and off to concentrate the measurements on periods of isolated\nnegative energy density (or negative energy flux). The detector model includes an\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":34,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nmatter, and many other fascinating properties (Reference 22-24, 26, 73-76).\nTherefore, if the emergent spacetime/gravity approach turns out to be correct, then\nthere will likely be a direct consequence to the physics of traversable wormholes that\ncould dramatically alter the mechanism by which they are created and/or mitigate the\nrequirement for negative energy.\n\nUntil such new approaches are established and testable predictions published by their\nproponents, one cannot speculate on how the physics of traversable wormholes will be\naffected. Therefore, it is beneficial to stick to the outcome of the present study in terms\nof quantum field theory and general relativity theory, and outline what needs to be\naccomplished going forward in order to demonstrate a traversable wormhole in the lab.\n\nGoing forward toward the demonstration of a traversable wormhole will require the\nfollowing:\n\n• Generating Negative Energy in the Lab: Our assessment concludes that we already\nmake small amounts of negative energy in the lab, but we do not yet know if we can\naccess larger amounts for extended periods of time over extended spatial\ndistributions for the purpose of engineering a traversable wormhole. In this regard\nwe propose the following options for further exploration.\n\n• Squeezed quantum vacuum generators: A dedicated research program to develop\nthe two negative energy generator concepts described in Section III-B-2 will need to\nbe established in order to evolve state-of-the-art quantum optics technology\ntowards producing higher magnitudes of negative energy as well as special\ntechniques required to separate out any positive energy fluxes that accompany the\nnegative energy fluxes. Specifically, the Rabeau et al. (Reference 48, 49) and Ries\net al. (Reference 50) experimental programs should be followed as a template\ntoward this goal. Quantum optics technology via high power fiber lasers, resonators,\namplifier stages, beam conditioning stages, etc., are rapidly advancing. So research\nshould be conducted in parallel to invent additional ways to produce negative energy\nvia innovative quantum optics.\n\n• Casimir effect: Even though the standard electromagnetic Casimir effect is feeble,\nand thus not likely to contribute to a traversable wormhole engineering program,\nthere are still a number of other electromagnetic and non-electromagnetic Casimir\neffects described in Section III-B-4 that require further study. These other Casimir\neffects have not been explored with an eye toward testing them in the lab, and so\nthere could be important new information yet to be uncovered.\n\n• Moving Mirrors (a.k.a. the dynamical Casimir effect): Even though this concept was\nidentified (Section III-B-5) as being too feeble to produce any useful flux of negative\nenergy, the observable effects due to the change in the boundary conditions (e.g.,\nmoving mirrors/cavity walls) of quantum fields provide crucial information on the\nquantum vacuum at the macroscopic level. Theoretical and laboratory efforts are\nunderway to understand the dissipative effects of vacuum fluctuations (Reference\n77-78). This dissipation mechanism should induce irradiation of photons, a\nphenomenon also known as the dynamical Casimir effect. This can be understood\nboth as the creation of particles under non-adiabatic changes in the boundary\nconditions of quantum fields, or as classical parametric amplification with the zero-\npoint energy of a vacuum field mode as an input state. More recent developments\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ninclude models for the super-radiant amplification of photons with particular\nemphasis on its dynamics and the optimization of the involved parameters.\nExperimental concepts being pursued will try to reveal directly the presence of a\nnon-empty vacuum by using a specifically designed device to amplify the virtual\nvacuum photons and produce real electromagnetic radiation via the parametric\namplification of the vacuum fluctuations in an electromagnetic cavity. The ‘amplifier’\nis a boundary undergoing an oscillation, and hence radiates energy due to the\ndissipative action against the vacuum photons. This line of investigation could serve\nas a very useful probe to explore the possibility of generating large fluxes of\nnegative energy. It may be expected that a laboratory demonstration of the\ndynamical Casimir effect will occur before 2012.\n• Dirac field states: As described in Section III-A, this involves either the\nsuperposition of two single particle electron states or the superposition of two multi-\nelectron-positron states (Reference 29, 30). This is still a nascent topic of study in\nquantum field theory. However, mankind already possesses a great deal of\ntechnology that is dedicated to the manipulation and storage of electrons and\npositrons via solid state/condensed matter devices and particle accelerators. This\nresearch topic should be supported in order to establish how it could contribute to\nan experimental traversable wormhole program.\n• Quantum coherence effects: Other types of quantum coherence effects not already\nidentified or invented should be theoretically developed and explored for the\npossibility of finding new free-field or interacting field configurations that produce a\nsignificant magnitude of negative energy which could be produced by technological\nmeans.\n• Detecting Negative Energy in the Lab: In Section IV-C this paper identified\nproposals for observing negative energy in outer space and in the laboratory, but\nfurther work is needed to downscale astronomical techniques for use at the lab scale,\nand we need to firm up our understanding of how lab detectors will respond to\nnegative energy in situ. A first step in the latter direction was recently proposed by\nMarecki (Reference 79) who generalized the analysis of the output of balanced\nhomodyne detectors (BHDs). The most important feature of these devices is their\nability to quantify the quantum vacuum fluctuations of the electric field because the\noutput of BHDs provides information on the one- and two-point functions of\narbitrary states of quantum fields. Marecki computed the two-point function and the\nassociated spectral density for the ground state of the quantum electric field in\nCasimir geometries, and predicts a position- and frequency-dependent pattern of\nBHD responses if a device of this type is placed inside a Casimir cavity. The\nproposed device allows for the direct detection of quantum vacuum fluctuations and\nprovides a spatial mapping of the negative energy contained inside the cavity. This\noffers a potential new characterization of ground states in Casimir geometries, which\nwould provide an understanding of the negative energy densities present in some\nregions in these geometries.\n• Trapping and Storing Negative Energy: Ford and Roman (Reference 10) have only\nsuperficially addressed this topic, and there is very little technical literature that\naddresses it fully. A theoretical program to develop the physics and technology of\ntrapping and storing negative energy will need to be supported, and such a program\nshould be guided by the use of laboratory detectors such as the one proposed in the\n28\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nprevious section. However, it is the opinion of the author that free-space negative\nenergy sources appear to be a more desirable option for building traversable\nwormholes than stored negative energy.\n• Constructing Traversable Wormholes in the Lab: Einstein’s General Theory of\nRelativity does not provide instructions on how to construct a traversable wormhole\nin space or inside a laboratory vacuum vessel. The Einstein general relativistic field\nequation only provides a prescription for designing a special, localized spacetime\ngeometry and calculating the physical characteristics of a source of matter that is\nrequired to induce it. If one “zaps” a region of empty space with a beam of negative\nenergy, will a traversable wormhole appear? One doesn’t know. Maybe one has to\npoke a hole in space with an intense beam of negative energy, or maybe we have to\nuse the negative energy to inflate a quantum spacetime fluctuation (allegedly in the\nform of a “geometric foam”). Theoretical studies need to be implemented to address\nthis question and the author believes that empirical studies will be necessary to find\nthe answer once we develop an intense source of negative energy.\nVI. References\n[1] Morris, M. S., and Thorne, K. S., “Wormholes in spacetime and their use for\ninterstellar travel: A tool for teaching general relativity,” American Journal of Physics,\nVol. 56, 1988, pp. 395-412.\n[2] Morris, M. S., Thorne, K. S., and Yurtsever, U., “Wormholes, time machines, and\nthe weak energy conditions,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 61, 1988, pp. 1446-1449.\n[3] Visser, M., Lorentzian Wormholes: From Einstein to Hawking, AIP Press, New York,\n1995.\n[4] Hochberg, D., and Visser, M., “Geometric Structure of the Generic Static\nTraversable Wormhole Throat,” Physical Review D, Vol. 56, 1997, pp. 4745-4755.\n[5] Ida, D., and Hayward, S. A., “How much negative energy does a wormhole need?,”\nPhysics Letters A, Vol. 260, 1999, pp. 175-181.\n[6] Visser, M., “Traversable wormholes: Some simple examples,” Physical Review D,\nVol. 39, 1989, pp. 3182-3184.\n[7] Misner, C. W., Thorne, K. S., and Wheeler, J. A., Gravitation, W. H. Freeman & Co.,\nNew York, 1973, pp. 551-556.\n[8] Davis, E. W., “Teleportation Physics Study,” Air Force Research Laboratory, Final\nReport AFRL-PR-ED-TR-2003-0034, Air Force Materiel Command, Edwards AFB, CA,\n2004, pp. 3-11.\n[9] Kaku, M., Hyperspace: A Scientific Odyssey Through Parallel Universes, Time-\nWarps, and the 10th Dimension, Anchor Books Doubleday, New York, 1995.\n[10] Ford, L. H., and Roman, T. A., “Negative Energy, Wormholes and Warp Drive,”\nScientific American, Vol. 13, 2003, pp. 84-91.\n29\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n[11] Hawking, S. W., and Ellis, G. F. R., The Large-Scale Structure of Space-Time,\nCambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1973, pp. 88-91, 95-96.\n[12] Epstein, H., Glaser, V., and Jaffe, A., “Nonpositivity of the Energy Density in\nQuantized Field Theories,” Nuovo Cimento, Vol. 36, 1965, pp. 1016-1022.\n[13] Visser, M., “Wormholes, baby universes, and causality,” Physical Review D, Vol.\n41, 1990, pp. 1116-1124.\n[14] Visser, M., “Gravitational vacuum polarization. I. Energy conditions in the Hartle-\nHawking vacuum,” Physical Review D, Vol. 54, 1996, pp. 5103-5115.\n[15] Visser, M., “Gravitational vacuum polarization. II. Energy conditions in the\nBoulware vacuum,” Physical Review D, Vol. 54, 1996, pp. 5116-5122.\n[16] Visser, M., “Gravitational vacuum polarization. III. Energy conditions in the (1+1)-\ndimensional Schwarzschild spacetime,” Physical Review D, Vol. 54, 1996, pp. 5123-\n5128.\n[17] Visser, M., “Gravitational vacuum polarization. IV. Energy conditions in the Unruh\nvacuum,” Physical Review D, Vol. 56, 1997, pp. 936-952.\n[18] Barcelo, C., and Visser, M., “Twilight for the energy conditions?,” International\nJournal of Modern Physics D, Vol. 11, 2002, pp. 1553-1560.\n[19] Herrmann, F., “Energy Density and Stress: A New Approach to Teaching\nElectromagnetism,” American Journal of Physics, Vol. 57, 1989, pp. 707-714.\n[20] Drummond, P. D., and Ficek, Z. (eds.), Quantum Squeezing, Springer-Verlag,\nBerlin, 2004.\n[21] Hochberg, D., and Kephart, T. W., “Lorentzian wormholes from the gravitationally\nsqueezed vacuum,” Physics Letters B, Vol. 268, 1991, pp. 377-383.\n[22] DeWitt, B. S., “Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime,” Physics Reports, Vol.\n19C, 1975, pp. 295-357.\n[23] DeWitt, B. S., “Quantum gravity: the new synthesis,” General Relativity: An\nEinstein Centenary Survey, edited by S. W. Hawking and W. Israel, Cambridge Univ.\nPress, Cambridge, 1979, pp. 680-745.\n[24] DeWitt, B. S., “The Casimir Effect in Field Theory,” Physics in the Making, Essays\non Developments in 20th Century Physics, In Honour of H. B. G. Casimir, edited by A.\nSarlemijn and J. Sparnaay, North-Holland Elsevier Science Publ., New York, 1989, pp.\n247-272.\n[25] Birrell, N. D., and Davies, P. C. W., Quantum fields in curved space, Cambridge\nUniv. Press, Cambridge, 1984.\n[26] Saunders, S., and Brown, H. R. (eds.), The Philosophy of Vacuum, Clarendon\nPress, Oxford, 1991.\n30\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n[27] Milonni, P. W., The Quantum Vacuum: An Introduction to Quantum\nElectrodynamics, Academic Press, New York, 1994.\n[28] Milton, K. A., The Casimir Effect: Physical Manifestations of Zero-Point Energy,\nWorld Scientific, New Jersey, 2001.\n[29] Vollick, D. N., “Negative energy density states for the Dirac field in flat spacetime,”\nPhysical Review D, Vol. 57, 1998, pp. 3484-3488.\n[30] Yu, H., and Shu, W., “Quantum states with negative energy density in the Dirac\nfield and quantum inequalities,” Physics Letters B, Vol. 570, 2003, pp. 123-128.\n[31] Alcubierre, M., “The warp drive: hyper-fast travel within general relativity,”\nClassical and Quantum Gravity, Vol. 11, 1994, pp. L73-L77.\n[32] Olum, K. D., “Superluminal Travel Requires Negative Energies,” Physical Review\nLetters, Vol. 81, 1998, pp. 3567-3570.\n[33] Gao, S., and Wald, R. M., “Theorems on gravitational time delay and related\nissues,” Classical and Quantum Gravity, Vol. 17, 2000, pp. 4999-5008.\n[34] Ford, L. H., “Quantum coherence effects and the second law of thermodynamics,”\nProceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical\nSciences, Vol. 364, 1978, pp. 227-236.\n[35] Davies, P. C. W., “Can moving mirrors violate the second law of\nthermodynamics?,” Physics Letters B, Vol. 11, 1982, p. 215.\n[36] Everett, A. E., “Warp drive and causality,” Physical Review D, Vol. 53, 1996, pp.\n7365-7368.\n[37] Perry, M. D., “Crossing the Petawatt Threshold,” Science & Technology Review,\nLawrence-Livermore Nat’l Laboratory, Livermore, CA, December 1996, pp. 4-11.\n[38] Perry, M. D., “The Amazing Power of the Petawatt,” Science & Technology Review,\nLawrence-Livermore Nat’l Laboratory, Livermore, CA, March 2000, pp. 4-12.\n[39] Mourou, G. A., Barty, C. P. J., and Perry, M. D., “Ultrahigh-Intensity Lasers:\nPhysics Of The Extreme On A Tabletop,” Physics Today, Vol. 51, 1998, pp. 22-28.\n[40] Slusher, R. E., et al., “Observation of Squeezed States Generated by Four-Wave\nMixing in an Optical Cavity,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 55, 1985, pp. 2409-2412.\n[41] Slusher, R. E., and Yurke, B., “Squeezed Light,” Scientific American, Vol. 254,\n1986, pp. 50-56.\n[42] Robinson, A. L., “Bell Labs Generates Squeezed Light,” Science, Vol. 230, 1985,\npp. 927-929.\n[43] Robinson, A. L., “Now Four Laboratories Have Squeezed Light,” Science, Vol. 233,\n1986, pp. 280-281.\n31\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n[44] Saleh, B. E. A., and Teich, M. C., Fundamentals of Photonics, Wiley Series in Pure\nand Applied Optics, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1991, pp. 414-416.\n[45] Caves, C. M., “Quantum-mechanical noise in an interferometer,” Physical Review\nD, Vol. 23, 1981, pp. 1693-1708.\n[46] Pfenning, M. J., “Quantum Inequality Restrictions on Negative Energy Densities in\nCurved Spacetimes,” Ph.D. Dissertation, Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, Tufts Univ.,\nMedford, MA, 1998.\n[47] Davies, P. C. W., How to Build a Time Machine, Penguin Books, New York, 2001.\n[48] Rabeau, J. R., et al., “Fabrication of single nickel-nitrogen defects in diamond by\nchemical vapor deposition,” Cornell Univ. Library arXiv.org e-Print Archive, URL:\nhttp://arxiv.org/cond-mat/0411245.pdf (cited 11 April 2004).\n[49] Rabeau, J. R., et al., “Diamond chemical vapor deposition on optical fibers for\nfluorescence waveguiding,” Cornell Univ. Library arXiv.org e-Print Archive, URL:\nhttp://arxiv.org/cond-mat/0411249.pdf (cited 11 April 2004).\n[50] Ries, J., Brezger, B., and Lvovsky, A. I., “Experimental vacuum squeezing in\nrubidium vapor via self-rotation,” Physical Review A, Vol. 68, 2003, 025801.\n[51] Casimir, H. B. G., “On the Attraction Between Two Perfectly Conducting Plates,”\nProc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wetensch., Vol. 51, 1948, pp. 793-796.\n[52] Lamoreaux, S. K., “Demonstration of the Casimir Force in the 0.6 to 6 μm Range,”\nPhysical Review Letters, Vol. 78, 1997, pp. 5-8.\n[53] Mohideen, U., “Precision Measurement of the Casimir Force from 0.1 to 0.9 μm,”\nPhysical Review Letters, Vol. 81, 1998, pp. 4549-4552.\n[54] Chen, F., et al., “Theory confronts experiment in the Casimir force measurements:\nQuantification of errors and precision,” Physical Review A, Vol. 69, 2004, 022117.\n[55] Brown, L. S., and Maclay, G. J., “Vacuum Stress between Conducting Plates: An\nImage Solution,” Physical Review, Vol. 184, 1969, pp. 1272-1279.\n[56] Walker, W. R., “Negative energy fluxes and moving mirrors in curved space,”\nClassical and Quantum Gravity, Vol. 2, 1985, pp. L37-L40.\n[57] Moore, G. T., “Quantum Theory of the Electromagnetic Field in a Variable-Length\nOne-Dimensional Cavity,” Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 11, 1970, pp. 2679-\n2691.\n[58] Forward, R. L., “Alternate Propulsion Energy Sources,” Air Force Rocket Propulsion\nLaboratory, Final Report AFRPL TR-83-067, Air Force Space Tech. Ctr. Space Div., Air\nForce Systems Command, Edwards AFB, CA, 1983, pp. A1-A14.\n[59] Visser, M., Kar, S., and Dadhich, N., “Traversable wormholes with arbitrarily small\nenergy condition violations,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 90, 2003, 201102.\n32\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[60] Visser, M., \"Energy Conditions in the Epoch of Galaxy Formation,\" Science, Vol. 276, 1997, pp. 88-90.\n\n[61] Krasnikov, S., \"Counter example to a quantum inequality,\" Cornell Univ. Library arXiv.org e-Print Archive, URL: http://arxiv.org/gr-qc/0409007.pdf (cited 25 May 2005).\n\n[62] Fewster, C. J., \"Comments on 'Counter example to the quantum inequality,'\" Cornell Univ. Library arXiv.org e-Print Archive, URL: http://arxiv.org/gr-qc/0409043.pdf (cited 10 Sept. 2004).\n\n[63] Lobo, F., and Crawford, P., \"Weak Energy Condition Violation and Superluminal Travel,\" Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 617, Springer, Berlin, 2003, pp. 277-291.\n\n[64] Kar, S., Dadhich, N., and Visser, M., \"Quantifying energy condition violations in traversable wormholes,\" Pramana, Vol. 63, 2004, pp. 859-864.\n\n[65] Borde, A., Ford, L. H., and Roman, T. A., \"Constraints on spatial distributions of negative energy,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 65, 2002, pp. 084002.\n\n[66] Cramer, J. G., et al., \"Natural wormholes as gravitational lenses,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 51, 1995, pp. 3117-3120.\n\n[67] Torres, D. F., Anchordoqui, L. A., and Romero, G. E., \"Wormholes, Gamma Ray Bursts and the Amount of Negative Mass in the Universe,\" Modern Physics Letters A, Vol. 13, 1998, pp. 1575-1581.\n\n[68] Torres, D. F., Romero, G. E., and Anchordoqui, L. A., \"Might some gamma ray bursts be an observable signature of natural wormholes?,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 58, 1998, 123001.\n\n[69] Anchordoqui, L. A., et al., \"In Search for Natural Wormholes,\" Modern Physics Letters A, Vol. 14, 1999, pp. 791-797.\n\n[70] Safonova, M., Torres, D. F., and Romero, G. E., \"Macrolensing Signatures of Large-Scale Violations of the Weak Energy Condition,\" Modern Physics Letters A, Vol. 16, 2001, pp. 153-162.\n\n[71] Eiroa, E., Romero, G. E., and Torres, D. F., \"Chromaticity Effects in Microlensing by Wormholes,\" Modern Physics Letters A, Vol. 16, 2001, pp. 973-983.\n\n[72] Davies, P. C. W., and Ottewill, A. C., \"Detection of negative energy: 4-dimensional examples,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 65, 2002, 104014.\n\n[73] Novello, M., Visser, M., and Volovik, G. (eds.), Artificial Black Holes, World Scientific, New Jersey, 2002.\n\n[74] Volovik, G. E., The Universe in a Droplet of Helium, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2003.\n\n[75] Wilczek, F., The Lightness of Being: Mass, Ether, and the Unification of Forces, Basic Books, New York, 2008.\n\n33\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"46803e2d0d60f3e6","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[76] Zavattini, E., et al., \"Experimental Observation of Optical Rotation Generated in Vacuum by a Magnetic Field,\" Physical Review Letters, Vol. 96, 2006, 110406.\n\n[77] Agnesi, A., et al., \"MIR status report: an experiment for the measurement of the dynamical Casimir effect,\" Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, Vol. 41, 2008, 164024.\n\n[78] Brownell, J. H., Kim, W. J., and Onofrio, R., \"Modelling superradiant amplification of Casimir photons in very low dissipation cavities,\" Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, Vol. 41, 2008, 164026.\n\n[79] Marecki, P., \"Balanced homodyne detectors and Casimir energy densities,\" Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, Vol. 41, 2008, 164037.\n\n34\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Carol Rosin and Jon Cypher 4/30/2001 78078"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"498 Manzanita Ct.\nVentura, CA 93001\n\nApril 30, 2001\n\nHi Dan\n\nJon (Cypher) and I look forward to seeing you on Friday at 3:30pm in your office.\n\nJon, you probably recall, is an actor who starred on \"Hillstreet Blues\" and \"Major Dan,\" among many other TV shows, Broadway (wish you could hear him sing \"The Impossible Dream\" which he sang on Broadway in La Mancha), and movies. He's also a scholar (and sings opera in four languages), and speaks eloquently about space. We've been married for fifteen years.\n\nSince I closed down the Institute for Security and Cooperation in Outer Space a few years ago, which I founded in '83, we've both been searching for our role in promoting the space program.\n\nAs you know, I was spokesperson for von Braun during the last years of his life. He had me commit to finding the path to open the doors to space ... with his full and unlimited vision. I think I've found a way to do it.\n\nWe're bringing you a package that will give you the idea. (Don't worry, it won't cost you or NASA a dime.) And we'll only take as much time as you want ... even just a few short minutes as I know how busy you are. But it's going to be worth this trip to hand this to you in person.\n\nAlso, we'd love to take you (and yours) to lunch or dinner during the week we'll be in DC. Possible?\n\nSee you Friday.\n\nMy best, Carol\n\nCarol Rosin\n805-641-1999\nCell 805-340-5121\nRosin@west.net\n\nPS. The photo was taken at the US Space Foundation where we were keynote speakers."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TUES -\n\nDAN - AS PROMISED, HERE IS THE FRENCH COMETA REPORT. YOU WILL NOTE THE PREFACE BY YOUR FORMER COUNTERPART AND A LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS ON P5. I MISSPOKE - IT IS A PRIVATE-NOT GOVERNMENT- REPORT BUT THE QUALITY AND SOBER NATURE OF THE PARTICIPANTS STILL, I THINK, RECOMMENDS IT TO YOU. ARTICLES ARE INCLUDED FOR YOUR PERUSAL. ON P.425 OF THE LARGE DOCUMENT WE GAVE YOU IS A SUMMARY OF THE REPORT. I ALLUDED TO JOHN CALLAHAN'S TESTIMONY WITH ITS SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION IS ON P62. SENIOR AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER AT MEX CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT - ENRIQUE KOLBECK- IS ON P.105 - PLEASE READ THE ENTIRE RADAR SECTION FROM P62, HOWEVER.\n\nFor Reservations Call 1-800-HOTELS 1"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I ALWAYS THINK OF HAMLET'S \"THERE ARE MORE THINGS TWIXT HEAVEN AND HELL THAN ARE DREAMED OF IN YOUR PHILOSOPHY, HORATIO.\"\n\nTHANKS AGAIN FOR SEEING US AND IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS - OF COURSE CALL THE RENAISSANCE AT 999 9th NW - 202 898-9000.\n\nIT WAS GOOD TO SEE YOU\n\nJon Cypher\n\nFor Reservations Call 1-800-HOTELS 1"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UFOs and Defense: What Should We Prepare For?\n\n-An independent report on UFOs written by the French association COMETA. This report details the results of a study by the Institute of Higher Studies for National Defence.-\n\nThis paper originally appeared in a special issue of the magazine VSD published in France in July 1999."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UFOs and Defense\n\n--The COMETA Report--"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Stripping the UFO phenomenon of its irrational layer\"\n\nForeword by Professor André Lebeau, Former chairman of the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES) [French National Center for Space Studies]\n\nIt is not looked on highly in certain scientific circles to be preoccupied with phenomena that are deemed to come under the heading of popular mythology or that are, at any rate, outside the realm of science. Such was the case with stones falling from the sky, which was long considered in our country to be the stuff of fable. However, the day that a meteorite shower over the town of Laigle permitted a collective and indisputable observation, it entered into the domain of science. One century later NASA, no doubt hastily, elevated these stones to proof of the existence of primitive life on Mars.\nPhenomena of this type pose a preliminary problem for the scientific approach: does a scientific fact exist?\nWhen the phenomenon is a matter of experimentation, the criterion to be used is simple; the reproducibility of the experiment is the touchstone and furnishes the fact that must then be interpreted. But the situation is more difficult when the phenomenon is not open to experimentation, when repeated observation is the only basis on which one can go, as is the case in astronomy and for the most part in geophysics. However, when the fact, albeit rare, is collectively and indisputably visible, it is easy to elevate it to the status of scientific object. The existence of eclipses, comets, and novas has been recognized since ancient times, even though their interpretation long contained - and sometimes still contains - a religious dimension. Thus collective and simultaneous observation plays the same role as the reproducibility of experiments.\nThis is not true when the event is not only rare but discrete as well, and when there is a very small amount of evidence at each occurrence, which opens the door to various suspicions. Unidentified flying objects, or UFOs, fall into this category. One runs up against additional difficulties in the case of UFOs, firstly that of how many human activities, especially since the beginning of the space age, have generated atmospheric phenomena the origin of which is not immediately ascertainable by those who observe them. In any case, UFOs, the origin of which cannot be attributed to either a human source or a natural mechanism that has been identified by science, are mixed in with a background noise the origin of which, although difficult to identify, is not at all mysterious.\nMoreover, and above all, the existence of unexplained manifestations, both in the atmosphere and occasionally on the surface of the earth, inevitably gives rise to a fundamental question: are we alone in the universe? Could some of these phenomena be the work of extraterrestrial beings? This question gives the UFO issue a sociological, media-related, and even religious dimension in a domain that is not that of science and scientific methods. And it is the very existence of this dimension that elicits reactions of rejection in the scientific community.\nHowever, a dispassionate examination of the situation should lead those who believe in the value of scientific method to consider that the very existence of a strong irrational environment is another reason to apply the precepts of this method to the issue of UFOs.\nCOMETA has tried its luck at this in the report that it is presenting, supported, namely, by the work performed by GEPAN, which later became SEPRA. The significant place granted to sightings, to testimonies, and to the analysis of cases that have been explained shows the major role played here by the establishment of facts. But we also find in this"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"document a reflection on the hypothesis of extraterrestrial intelligence and of the importance that it could have if studies came together to confirm it.\nThis report is useful in that it contributes toward stripping the phenomenon of UFOs of its irrational layer. When all is said and done, the question of determining whether or not those who created this report believe in the existence of extraterrestrial visitors, concealed in a variety of phenomena that are surprising in appearance but commonplace with respect to their cause, is of no real importance. What a scientist believes is important in the conducting of his research because this is what motivates and drives him. But his belief is not important to the results of his research nor does it have any effect on those results if he is rigorous.\n\nTable of Contents\n\nPREFACE Page 5\nFOREWORD Page 6\nINTRODUCTION Page 7\nPART 1 FACTS AND TESTIMONIES\nChapter 1 Testimonies of French Pilots Page 9\nChapter 2 Aeronautical Cases Throughout the World Page 12\nChapter 3 Sightings from the Ground Page 17\nChapter 4 Close Encounters in France Page 20\nChapter 5 Counterexamples of Phenomena That Have Been Explained Page 24\nPART 2 THE EXTENT OF OUR KNOWLEDGE\nChapter 6 Organization of the Research in France Page 27\nChapter 7 Methods and Results of GEPAN/SEPRA Page 31\nChapter 8 UFOs: Hypotheses, Modeling Attempts Page 35\nChapter 9 Organization of the Research Abroad Page 42\nPART 3 UFOs AND DEFENSE\nChapter 10 Strategic Planning Page 55\nChapter 11 Aeronautical Implications Page 59\nChapter 12 Scientific and Technical Implications Page 62\nChapter 13 Political and Religious Implications Page 64\nChapter 14 Media Implications Page 69\nCONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Page 71\nAPPENDICES\nAppendix 1 Radar Detection in France Page 74\nAppendix 2 Astronomers' Sightings Page 74\nAppendix 3 Life in the Universe Page 75\nAppendix 4 Colonization of Space Page 75\nAppendix 5 The Roswell Affair - Disinformation Page 77\nAppendix 6 The Long History of the UFO Phenomenon - Elements of a"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chronology Page 80\nAppendix 7 Reflections on Various Psychological, Sociological, and Political Aspects of the UFO Phenomenon Page 82\nREFERENCES Page 87\nGLOSSARY Page 90\n\nThe photo section from pages 43 to 50, as well as pages 2 and 91, were not part of the initial report.\n\nPublication of:\n[G.S. Presse Communication logo] 79-83, rue Baudin, 92309 Levallois-Perret Cedex.01 55 21 00 50, fax: 01 55 21 00 55. Société anonyme with FF 250,000 in capital, in business for 99 years. Sole Chief Executive Officer: Daniel Denis. Publication Director: Daniel Denis. Art Director: Richard Yotis. Editorial Assistant: Jacques Péron. Illustrations and Technical Consulting: Bernard Thouanel. Editorial Dept. 01 55 21 00 50. E-mail: vsd_hs@worldnet.fr. Public Relations Agent: Image7/Isabelle de Segonzac 01 44 15 93 94. Sales and restocking: MEP, 01 42 56 12 26.\n\nUFOs AND DEFENSE\nWhat should we prepare for?\nCOMETA, an association governed by the Law of July 1, 1901.\nAll reproduction, in whole or in part, translation, and adaptation rights reserved for all countries. Copyright 1999.\nterminal ELL. Photoengraving: Key Graphic. Printing: Berger Levrault, 34, avenue du Roule, 92220 Neuily-sur-Seine. Joint Appeals Board No.: 59521. ISSN 1278-916 X. Copyright deposit: July 1999.\n© G.S. Presse Communication. The editorial department is not responsible for the loss of or damage to texts or photos that are sent to it for consideration. Reproduction in whole or in part of any material published in the magazine is prohibited.\n\nCover:\nPhoto taken on September 4, 1971, directly over the Tilaran range in Central America by an airplane from the National Geographic Institute of Costa Rica (Bernard Thouanel collection)."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Concrete problems are raised that call for a response in terms of action\"\n\nby General Bernard Norlain,\nFormer director of the Institut des Hautes Etudes de Défense Nationale (IHEDN)] [Institute for Advanced National Defense Studies\n\nWhen General Letty visited me in March 1995 at my office at IHEDN to explain to me his project for creating a new committee for study of UFOs, I assured him of my interest and referred him to the management of the IHEDN Auditors Association (AA), which gave him its support. Knowing that some twenty years earlier the AA had produced and published a preliminary report on the subject in its bulletin, it was but time to update it.\n\nDenis Letty seemed to me to be the perfect one to spearhead this task; one month earlier, in February, he had organized, within the framework of the Ecole de l'Air [Air Force Academy] Alumni Association, a conference on unidentified aerospace phenomena. Before a large public, some of our comrades, former pilots, spontaneously related their encounters with UFOs. The person in charge of studying these phenomena at the CNES then presented his results, and a well-known astronomer described a scientifically acceptable version of the extraterrestrial hypothesis.\n\nThe fields of knowledge affected by the UFO phenomenon are very diverse, and General Letty was able to find within the AA, but on the outside as well, numerous experts whose efforts he coordinated. The list of high-level civilian and military degrees of the members of his committee is very impressive: officers, engineers, and specialists in physics, life sciences, and social sciences were able to deal with all aspects of the study.\n\nThis is not a purely academic study. Concrete problems are raised, and not only for civilian and military pilots, that call for a response in terms of action. The makeup of COMETA [Committee for In-Depth Studies], which is the name of the committee, took these into account. Almost all of its members have, or had during the course of their careers, important responsibilities in defense, industry, teaching, research or various central administrations.\n\nI express the wish that the recommendations of COMETA, which are inspired by good sense, will be examined and implemented by the authorities of our country. The first report of the AA favored the creation within CNES of the only civilian government agency known in the world dedicated to the study of UFOs. May this new report, which is much more in-depth, give new impetus to our national efforts and to indispensable international cooperation. IHEDN will then have well served the nation and, perhaps, humanity.\n\n\"Consider all of the hypotheses\""} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"by Denis Letty,\nAir Force General, 2nd Section, AA (35)\n\nThe accumulation of well-documented sightings made by credible witnesses forces us to consider from now on all of the hypotheses regarding the origin of unidentified flying objects, or UFOs, and the extraterrestrial hypothesis, in particular. UFOs are now a part of our media environment; the films, television broadcasts, books, advertisements, etc., dealing with UFOs amply demonstrate this.\nAlthough no characterized threat has been perceived to date in France, it seemed necessary to the former auditors of the Institut des Hautes Etudes de Défense Nationale (IHEDN) to take stock of the subject. Along with qualified experts from extremely varied backgrounds, they are grouped together to form a private in-depth fact-finding committee, which was christened COMETA.\n\nThis committee was transformed into a COMETA association, which I chair. I would like to thank General Bernard Norlain, former director of IHEDN, and Mr. André Lebeau, former chairman of the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, without whom COMETA would not have been born.\n\nIn addition, I wish to acknowledge the various people who agreed to give their testimony or to contribute to this study, and namely:\nJean-Jacques Vélasco, Head of SEPRA at CNES,\nFrançois Louange, Chief Executive Officer of Fleximage,\nJean-Charles Duboc, Jean-Pierre Fartek, René Giraud, civilian and military pilots,\nEdmond Campagnac, former technical director of Air France at Antananarivo,\nMichel Perrier, Squadron Commander, Gendarmerie Nationale\nM. Soun, of the Direction Générale de l'Aviation Civile [Civil Aviation Agency]\nJoseph Domange, Air Force General, Auditors Association delegate general.\n\nI must also thank the commander of the Air Force Air Operations Command Center for its participation during the investigation into flight AF 3532 on January 28, 1994.\n\nAmong the members of COMETA who spared no effort for close to three years, it is possible for me to list:\nMichel Algrin, State Doctor of Political Science, attorney-at-law, AA (35), (1)\nPierre Bescond, Weapons Engineer General, 2nd Section, AA (48),\nDenis Blancher, Chief of Police, Police Nationale, Ministry of the Interior,\nJean Dunglas, Doctor of Engineering (Ret.), in Water and Foredtry Management AR (48)\nBruno Le Moine, Air Force General, 2nd Section, AA (41),\nFrançoise Lépine, Fondation pour les Etudes de Défense [Foundation for Defense Studies], AA (33),\nChristian Marchal, Chief Mining Engineer, Research Director at ONERA [National Aerospace Study and Research Office],\nMarc Merlo, Admiral, 2nd Section, AA (35),\nAlain Orszag, Doctor of Physical Sciences, Weapons Engineer General, 2nd Section."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1): AA or AR xx: auditor of national or regional promotion no. xx.\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\nIn 1976, a committee of the Institut des Hautes Etudes de Défense Nationale (IHEDN) chaired by General Blanchard, of the Gendarmerie Nationale, opened the unidentified flying objects file. The objective: to make proposals for organizing research and the collection of data on these phenomena. The goal was achieved, because the recommendations of this committee were followed by the creation of the Groupe d'Etude des Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non Identifiés (GEPAN) [Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena Study Group], the precursor to the current Service d'Expertise des Phénomènes de Rentrée Atmosphérique (SEPRA) [Atmospheric Reentry Phenomena Consulting Department], a division of the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES), which is in charge of this file. Twenty years later, it seemed useful to us to take stock once again of the knowledge regarding these sightings, which are becoming of greater and greater interest to a large public that is often convinced of the extraterrestrial origin of UFOs. Just look at the number of films or television broadcasts on this subject.\nFor the sake of convenience with respect to language, we will use the term UFO (Unidentified Flying Object) generally, instead of the more scientific term UAP (Unidentified Aerospace Phenomenon).\nWithout a doubt, the phenomenon remains and the number of sightings, which are completely unexplained despite the abundance and quality of data, is growing throughout the world. On the ground, some sightings, like the Trans-en-Provence sighting in 1981, have been the subject of in-depth studies proving that something did in fact land on the ground and parked there. Civilian and military pilots have provided gripping visual testimonies, often corroborated by radar recordings, as was the case recently in France. In view of the lack of irrefutable proof regarding the origin of these phenomena, the need for understanding persists.\nWe will devote the first part of this report to several particularly remarkable French and foreign cases.\nIn the second part, after having recalled the current organization of the research on these phenomena in France and abroad, we will evaluate the work being done by scientists worldwide who are interested in UFOs and are proposing, as we will see, partial explanations that are based on known laws of physics.\nSome of these (propulsion systems, non lethal weapons, etc.) could become realities in the short, medium and long term.\nWe will review the principal global explanations proposed, focusing on those that are in keeping with the current scientific data, which range from secret weapons to extraterrestrial manifestations.\nThe UFO phenomenon involves defense in the broad sense and calls for a certain number of measures, which we will examine in the last part:\n- [providing] civilian and military pilots with sufficient information to teach them an adapted conduct when faced with these phenomena and, more generally, [providing] the public and decision-makers with information,\n- developing the actions of SEPRA and promoting supplemental scientific monitoring, or even research, actions,\n- considering the strategic, political, and religious consequences of a possible confirmation of the extraterrestrial hypothesis, the bizarre connotation of which it is advisable to eliminate here and now."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PART 1\n\nFacts and Testimonies\n\nBefore going further, it seems worthwhile to us to present several facts and testimonies that in themselves justify the interest of the in-depth study that we are going to develop below:\n- three testimonies of French civilian and military pilots who encountered UFOs in flight,\n- five major aeronautical cases in the world,\n- three sightings from the ground,\n- four cases of close encounters in France.\nThese few examples are among the hundreds of remarkable, that is to say credible and well-documented, cases observed around the world in recent decades. None of these cases has been explained, whereas the majority of times the investigations enable the origin of the phenomena observed by the witnesses to be determined; we will give two significant examples of this.\n\nChapter 1 - Testimonies of French Pilots\n\nThree French pilots who encountered UFOs in flight came to testify before the committee. Their testimonies are all the more interesting because they can be evaluated better than other aerial phenomena since they pertain to the aeronautic world.\n\n1.1 M. Giraud, Mirage IV pilot (March 7, 1977).\n\nThe sequence of events of this incident was reconstructed from radio exchanges between the pilot and the controller, which are routinely recorded and kept for a specific period of time in accordance with the procedure in force at all control centers. The incident occurred on March 7, 1977, at around 2100 hours local time during the Dijon flyover when the Mirage IV was returning, the automatic pilot engaged, to Luxeuil after a night mission. [The aircraft was] at an altitude of 9600 m and flying at a speed of \"Mach 0.9.\" The flight conditions were very good. The pilot (P), Hervé Giraud, and his navigator (N) observed a very bright glow at \"3 o'clock\" (time code) from their aircraft, at the same altitude, coming on a collision course and approaching very rapidly. We will designate it \"assailant\" (A1) in the rest of the account. P queried the Contrexéville military radar station that controlled them to ask whether they had a radar contact on the aircraft coming towards them. In fact, P and N thought that it was an air defense interceptor, as is currently being used, that was seeking to intercept their aircraft to then identify it with its identification beacon.\nThe radar controller (C), who did not have a corresponding radar contact on his scope, gave a negative response and asked the pilots to check their oxygen. This request on the part of the controller is a standard emergency procedure; it shows that the controller is so"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"surprised by the crew's question that he suspects an oxygen problem capable of causing a \"hallucination.\"\n\"Assailant A1\" maintained its course towards the Mirage IV. P initiated a bank to the right toward A1, a bank which he was forced to keep tightening (3 to 4 g) in order to try to maintain visual contact on A1 and to keep it from positioning itself to the rear. Despite this maneuver, A1 moved behind the Mirage IV at an estimated distance of 1500 m. At this point P reversed his bank to regain visual contact on A1. He saw the glow move away to \"11 o'clock.\" He resumed course to Luxeuil. But 45 seconds after he resumed course to Luxeuil, feeling like he was being \"watched\" according to his own words, P told N, \"you wait and see, it's going to come back.\" And in fact, an identical glow, which we will call A2, appeared at \"3 o'clock.\"\nP then initiated a very tight bank (6.5 g) to disengage his aircraft from what he now considered to be a real threat. The glow followed the Mirage IV's maneuver in order to position itself to the rear at an estimated distance of 2000 m. P reversed, as before, and once again saw the glow disappear under the same conditions. C still did not have a radar contact on \"assailant A2.\" P and N continued their flight and returned normally to the Luxeuil base.\nThose are the facts. Two points should be emphasized:\n- only a combat aircraft could have had performance comparable to that of A1 and A2 (speed, maneuverability). In this case, C would have had a radar contact on this aircraft, especially at that altitude, a contact that he would have seen all the better since there was no other traffic in the vicinity of the Mirage IV.\n- given the apparent maneuvers of A1 and A2, regardless of whether or not they were the same craft, their speed could only be supersonic, which, in the case of combat aircraft, would be manifested on the ground by a very loud sonic boom due to the phenomenon of the focusing of the shock wave generated by the bank. This would have been noticed in the surrounding area, especially since it was nighttime. But no sound was heard in the region.\n\n1.2 Testimony of a Fighter Pilot (March 3, 1976)\n\nSince this pilot (P) wanted to preserve his anonymity, the following lines are extracted from the written deposition that he wished to send to us (he revealed his name subsequently; he is Colonel Claude Bosc). On March 3, 1976, P, then a student pilot at the Combat Flight School at Tours, was making a solo night flight in a T-33 training aircraft. The mission consisted of navigating at an altitude of 6000 m following a Rennes-Nantes-Poitiers itinerary, then landing at Tours. Several aircraft were following the same itinerary at 5-minute intervals. The night was dark but cloudless, and the towns could be detected very clearly at the flight altitude in question. Visibility was greater than 100 km. While he was flying stabilized at an altitude of 6000 m, at a speed of 460 km/h, P first saw straight ahead, very far off in the distance (at the detection limit of lights on the ground) what he at first thought was the launching of a green signaling flare.\nIn 1 to 2 seconds, this flare exceeded the altitude of his aircraft by 1500 m and seemed to level off in space before descending in his direction. It approached at a dizzying speed on a collision course with the aircraft and filled the entire front windshield of the cockpit. Thinking that impact was inevitable, P let go of the joystick and crossed his arms in front of his face in a reflex protection gesture. The aircraft was completely enveloped in a very bright and phosphorescent green light. P saw a sphere (S) that avoided his aircraft at the"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"very last moment and passed over his right wing grazing it, all within a fraction of a second. P retained the following memory of this incident:\n- S was not very large (1 to 2 m in diameter),\n- S was extended by a tail, which was comparable to that on a comet, that was also a fluorescent green color,\n- the center of S consisted of a very bright white light (magnesium-fire type),\n- the sighting lasted a total of less than 5 seconds.\nP, who was very shocked by this phenomenon, informed the radar controller (-) ensuring the control of the mission on the ground; the controller had not detected anything on his radar scope. Upon return, two other pilots who had followed the same itinerary as P stated that they had seen the phenomenon, but from a distance.\n\n1.3 Air France Flight AF 3532 (January 28, 1994)\n\nJean-Charles Duboc (P), captain of Air France flight AF 3532, was assisted by Copilot Valérie Chauffour (CP) in making the Nice-London connection on January 28, 1994. At 1314 hours, while they were cruising at an altitude of 11,900 m in the vicinity of Coulommiers in Seine-et-Marne [Department] under excellent meteorological conditions, the chief steward, who was present in the cockpit at the time, pointed out a phenomenon that appeared to him to be a weather balloon. His sighting was immediately confirmed by the copilot. P, who in turn saw it, first thought that it was an aircraft banking at a 45° angle. Very quickly, however, all three agreed that what they were seeing did not resemble anything that they knew of. The excellent visibility and the presence of altocumulus clouds permitted P to estimate that the phenomenon was at an altitude of 10,500 m and at a distance of approximately 50 km. Taking into account its apparent diameter, they deduced that the craft was large. They were struck by the changes in the shape of the craft, which first appeared in the form of a brown bell before transforming into a chestnut brown lens shape, then disappearing almost instantaneously on the left side of the aircraft, as if it had suddenly become invisible. P reported to the Reims Air Navigation Control Center, which had no information on any mobile air presence in the vicinity. However, following the existing procedure, Reims informed the Taverny Air Defense Operations Center (CODA) of the sighting made by the crew and asked P to follow the \"Airmiss\" procedure upon landing.\nCODA did in fact record a radar track initiated by the Cinq-Mars-la-Pile control center at the same time that corresponded in location and time to the phenomenon observed. This radar track, which was recorded for 50 seconds, did cross the trajectory of flight AF 3532 and did not correspond to any flight plan filed. It should be noted that the phenomenon disappeared from the view of the crew and the radar scopes at the same instant. The investigations conducted by CODA enabled both the hypothesis of a weather balloon to be ruled out and the precise crossing distance of the two trajectories to be determined, consequently bringing the approximate length of the craft to 250 m in length. It should be noted that the Northern Regional Air Navigation Center (CRNA), which handles 3000 movements per day, has investigated only three cases over the last seven years, one of which was that of flight AF 3532.\n\nChapter 2 - Aeronautic Cases Throughout the World"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It is appropriate to specify that those cases that have been sighted from aircraft are considered to be aeronautic cases. This chapter describes five significant cases that occurred in different parts of the world and which were the subject of an investigation by the authorities of the countries in question. In four cases, the objects were detected both visually and by radar. In the fifth case, they were observed by a number of independent witnesses.\n\n2.1 Lakenheath (United Kingdom) (August 13-14, 1956)\n\nThe joint USAF - U.S. Air Force - and RAF [Royal Air Force] military bases of Lakenheath and Bentwaters are located 30 km northeast of Cambridge with respect to the first and near the coast to the east of this city with respect to the second. Unknown aerial objects followed by their radars during the night of August 13 to 14, 1956, were judged \"unidentified\" by the report published in 1969 by the Condon Commission tasked with evaluating the research of the U.S. Air Force on UFOs (cf. Chapter 9). In September 1971, the magazine Astronautics and Aeronautics published a study of the case by Thayer, the radar expert on the Condon Commission, which was based in part on a study presented in 1969 by Professor MacDonald, an atmospheric physicist. For the record, we point out that on several occasions, and namely in 1976, Philippe Klass, editor of the journal Aviation Week and Space Technology, attempted to criticize this work and to reduce the case to a series of ordinary events (meteorites, radar propagation anomalies, etc.). The incidents began at the Bentwaters base, preceded, between 2100 and 2200 hours, by unusual sightings of the approach control radar [center], which we will not go into in further detail. They took place as follows:\n\n- At 2255 hours, the radar detected an unidentified object moving east to west passing over the base, always almost into the wind at an apparent speed of 2000 to 4000 miles per hour (mph), or 3200 to 6400 km/h. No sonic boom was mentioned. The personnel of the Bentwaters control tower said they saw a bright light flying over the ground from east to west \"at an incredible speed\" at an altitude of approximately 1200 m. At the same time, the pilot of a military transport plane flying over Bentwaters at an altitude of 1200 m stated that a bright light passed under his plane tearing east to west \"at an incredible speed.\" The two visual sightings confirmed the radar detection.\n\n- The Bentwaters radar operator reported these concurring radar and visual sightings to the shift supervisor at the Lakenheath [air] traffic radar control center, an American noncommissioned officer to whom we are indebted for a quite detailed report of these sightings and those that follow. The report, which was sent to the Condon Commission in 1968 by the then retired NCO, is coherent and does not contradict the documents in the USAF [Project] Blue Book file except in a few minor points; among these documents, the regulation telex sent by Lakenheath to the Blue Book team on the day of the incident and the report forwarded two weeks later to that same team by American Captain Holt, an intelligence officer at Bentwaters.\n\n- The shift supervisor at the Lakenheath base alerted his radar operators. One of them detected a stationary object approximately 40 km southwest of the base, almost in the axis of the trajectory of the supersonic object seen at 2255 hours. The shift supervisor called the Lakenheath approach radar [center], which confirmed the sighting. The radar technicians at the air traffic control center suddenly saw the object immediately go from immobility to a speed of 600 to 950 km/h. The shift supervisor notified the base commander."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The object changed direction several times, describing line segments ranging from 13 to 30 km, separated by abrupt stops for 3 to 6 minutes; the speed always went from a value of zero to a value of some 950 km/h without any transition.\n\nVisual sightings were made from the ground and confirmed the high speed and astounding accelerations. The regulation telex sent by Lakenheath concluded: \"The fact that radar and ground visual observations were made on its rapid acceleration and abrupt stop certainly lend credence to the report.\"\n\n- After 30 to 45 minutes, the RAF sent a night fighter, a Venom two-seater, in pursuit of the object. The Lakenheath air traffic radar control center guided it in the direction of the object 10 km east of the center. The pilot acquired the target visually and on radar, then lost it. The center then directed the plane 16 km to the east of Lakenheath; the pilot again acquired the target and said, \"my machine guns are locked onto him.\" A short time afterward, he once again lost his target; but the target was followed by the radar operators at the center. They informed the pilot that the object had made a rapid movement to position itself behind him and was following him at a short distance. The pilot confirmed [this]. Watched by the radar technicians, the pilot tried every maneuver for about 10 minutes in order to move back behind the object (steep climbs, dives, sustained turns), but he didn't succeed: the UFO followed him at a constant distance according to the ground radar stations. Finally, low on fuel, he returned to base, asking that someone tell him whether the object continued to follow him. The UFO did, in fact, follow him for a short distance, then came to a standstill. The radar technicians then saw the object make several short moves, then leave in a northerly direction at about 950 km/h and disappear from radar range at 0330 hours.\n\n- A Venom sent to replace the first had to quickly return to base due to mechanical problems before having been able to establish contact with the object.\n\nThayer concluded his article in the journal Astronautics and Aeronautics in this manner: \"taking into consideration the high credibility of information and cohesiveness and continuity of account, combined with a high degree of 'strangeness', it is also certainly one of the most disturbing UFO incidents known today.\"\n\n2.2 The RB-47 Aircraft in the United States (July 17, 1957)\n\nThis case, which appears as \"unidentified\" in the Condon report, has been cited and studied extensively for 40 years. Physicist James MacDonald published the results of his investigation in 1971 in the journal Astronautics and Aeronautics. Phillip Klass, the aforementioned journalist, then endeavored in 1976 to trivialize the facts, which was highly contestable from the outset. The bulk of this interpretation was refuted at the end of 1997, upon completion of an in-depth investigation contained in a memorandum from the aerospace technology researcher Brad Sparks.\n\nWe will summarize here the important sequences of events of the case, which show a luminous unidentified flying object detected at night not only by sight and on radar, but also by pulsed microwave emissions coming from its direction:\n\nThe RB-47 was a bomber the bomb bays of which had been converted to hold three officers each equipped with means enabling emissions from ground radars to be detected and their azimuth direction, but not their distance or the nature of the signals, to be specified. In the south central region of the United States, where the aircraft was making a training flight that day, numerous radar stations were emitting signals the frequencies of which were close to 3000 MHz and the pulses of which lasted 1 microsecond and"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"occurred every 600 microseconds. The radars scanned the horizon four times per minute.\n\nThree other officers (pilot, copilot, navigator) were in the cockpit and, as a result, could themselves see out of the aircraft. The six officers were questioned by MacDonald in 1969. They related that:\n\n- The first incident took place above Mississippi, probably at around 0930Z (0330 local time), when the aircraft, going back to the north from the Gulf of Mexico, was approaching the coast a little to the east of the Mississippi delta, flying at Mach 0.75. Captain MacClure detected on his screen a blip corresponding to a pulsed microwave source located behind and to the right of the RB-47 (at \"5 o'clock\") that rapidly passed the aircraft and turned around it, departing again on its left in the other direction (between \"6 o'clock and 9 o'clock\"). The source was therefore airborne and supersonic. MacClure noted the characteristics of the signal: they were those of the aforementioned ground radar stations, with the exception of the length of the pulses, which were 2 microseconds. He did not report this incident immediately, thinking that it was perhaps a malfunction of the electronics. As Klass writes, at the time there were no supersonic aircraft either in the United States or in the USSR large enough to transport a radar, the signal from which possessed the characteristics that were observed.\n\n- The following incident occurred at 1010Z in Louisiana, when Commander Chase, pilot, and Captain MacCoyd, copilot, saw an intense bluish-white light aim at the aircraft from \"11 o'clock,\" then jump from their left to their right and disappear while it was at \"2 o'clock.\" Klass showed that this object was perhaps a meteorite the trajectory of which caused an optical illusion, but, at the time, Chase and MacCoyd wondered whether it wasn't a UFO. Hearing them, MacClure remembered his prior detection and looked for a signal of the same type.\n\n- He found this signal at 1030Z, which was identical to the previous one and, perhaps by coincidence, came from \"2 o'clock.\" This signal was confirmed by Captain Provenzano, whose detector was itself also able to operate at around 3000 MHz. It could not have been the signal from a fixed radar, because its \"2 o'clock\" direction remained unchanged when the aircraft followed its route to the west for several minutes. The aircraft entered Texas, then came within range of the \"Utah\" radar [center] located near Dallas. The crew reported to Utah, which detected both the aircraft and an object maintaining a constant distance of 18 km from it.\n\n- At 1039Z, still in Texas, Commander Chase perceived a large red light, which he estimated was moving 1500 m below the aircraft at approximately \"2 o'clock.\" The aircraft was flying at an altitude of 10,500 m, and the weather was perfectly clear. Although the commander was not able to determine either the shape or the size of the object, he had the distinct impression that the light was emanating from the top of the object.\n\nAt 1040Z, he received authorization to pursue this object and notified Utah. He slowed down, then accelerated; Utah informed him that the object was mirroring his movements, all the while maintaining a constant distance of 18 km.\n\n- At 1042Z, Chase accelerated and saw the red object turn to the right in the direction of Dallas; this was confirmed by MacClure.\n\n- At around 1050Z, a little to the west of Dallas, the object stopped and simultaneously disappeared from the view of the radar(s) (Utah and the onboard radar that had just detected the object when the RB-47 had approached it) and from MacClure's screen (the disappearance of an object from a radar screen is less surprising nowadays; it calls to mind the active stealth technologies currently in development if not in operation). The aircraft then banked to the left. MacClure picked up a signal that was perhaps the one from Utah."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Visual and radar contact were regained.\n- At 1052Z, Chase saw the object drop to around 4500 m. He had the RB-47 make a dive from 10,500 to 6000 m. The object then disappeared from his view, from the Utah radar, and from MacClure's screen simultaneously.\n- - At 1057Z, still near Dallas, the object reappeared on MacClure's screen, and Utah indicated that it had prepared a \"CIRVIS\" (Communications Instructions for Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings) report, a secret urgent radio report sent to the Air Defense Command, which is mandatory in the event of a sighting by the Air Force of an unidentified aerial object. At 1058Z, the pilot regained visual contact at \"2 o'clock.\" A few minutes later, seeing his fuel reserves drop, he decided to return and headed roughly north toward Oklahoma City. The object then positioned itself behind the aircraft at a distance of 18 km, as reported by Utah, which tried to send fighter jets in pursuit of the unknown [object]. The object, flowing lower than the RB-47 and behind it, could not be seen from the cockpit, but it was detected on MacClure's screen until Oklahoma City, well outside the range of the Utah radar. Then it suddenly disappeared from the screen at 1140Z.\n\n2.3 Tehran (September 18 to 19, 1976)\n\nThis incident took place during the night of September 18 to 19, 1976. Different newspapers worldwide reported it more or less accurately: for example, France-Soir in the September 21st issue. An American citizen took laborious steps with the U.S. authorities to obtain a report, invoking the freedom of information act. He finally obtained it from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). Other U.S. documents have been obtained since then.\n\nInterviews with generals and the Iranian air [traffic] controller involved in this affair enabled the DIA report to be confirmed and supplemented a bit, namely with the mention of proper names. The following summary resulted from a reading of the all the information:\n\n- At around 11:00 p.m. on September 18, the Tehran airport control tower received several calls reporting a strange immobile luminous object in the sky above the Shemiran residential district in the northern part of the capital. The person in charge of the night shift, Hossain Perouzi, went out to look at the object with binoculars. He testified that he saw a rectangle, probably corresponding to a cylindrical object, the ends of which pulsed bluish-white lights. In the middle of the object, a small red light described a circle. Perouzi reported this strange sighting to the Imperial Air Force Command, which alerted General Youssefi, the third in command of this air force. He went out on his balcony and saw an object similar to a star, but much bigger and brighter; he ordered a Phantom F-4 reaction aircraft, the mission of which he directed through Perouzi as intermediary.\n\nWhen the F-4 came to 45 km from the object, its flight instruments and all its means of communication (radio and intercom) suddenly stopped working. The pilot aborted the interception and headed for his base. The crew then regained use of their instruments and means of communication.\n\n- A second F-4 was sent by General Youssefi. The UFO's echo on its screen was similar to that of a Boeing 707. The F-4 approached the UFO at a relative speed of 280 km/h. When it came to 45 km from it, the UFO accelerated and maintained a constant distance of 45 km from the F-4. The crew was not able to determine the size of the object"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"because it shone so intensely. Its brightness came from lights arranged in a rectangle, changing rapidly from glue to green, to red, and to orange.\n\n- Suddenly a bright object with an apparent diameter one half or one third of that of the moon exited the UFO and headed rapidly for the F-4. The pilot tried to shoot a Sidewinder missile at the object, but at the same instant his fire control console and his means of communication (radio and intercom) became inoperable. He promptly initiated a bank and a dive, but the object changed direction and pursued the aircraft at a distance of approximately 6 km. Finally, the object moved inside the F-4's bank and departed in order to reenter the UFO from which it had exited.\n\n- A short time afterwards, an object again exited the UFO and rapidly headed straight down to the ground. The F-4 crew waited to see it explode, but the object seemed to touch down gently and shine a very bright light over an area 2 to 3 km in diameter. The crew, momentarily blinded, orbited long enough to recover their night vision before landing at the Tehran airfield. It noted that it lost communications (radio and intercom) whenever their aircraft crossed a certain zone. It should be pointed out that a civilian aircraft also lost communications when it crossed that zone. The next day, the crew was taken by helicopter to the place where the object had apparently landed, a dried up lake, but it didn't find any trace [of the object].\n\nAn attached note from DIA was just as astonishing as the report itself; it indicated that the information had been confirmed by other sources and ended with this assessment:\n\"An outstanding report. This case is a classic which meets all the criteria necessary for a valid study of the UFO phenomenon.\"\na. The object was seen by multiple witnesses from different locations...\nb. The credibility of many of the witnesses was high (an Air Force General, qualified aircrews, and experienced radar operators).\nc. Visual sightings were confirmed by radar.\nd. Similar electromagnetic effects (EME) were reported by three separate aircraft.\ne. There were physiological effects on some crew members (i.e. loss of night vision due to the brightness of the object).\nf. An inordinate amount of maneuverability was displayed by the UFOs.\"\nThe attempt by Klass to trivialize this case shows how solid it is.\n\n2.4 Russia (March 21, 1990)\n\nThis case took place at night in the Pereslavl-Zalesski region east of Moscow. It was reported in an article by Aviation General Igor Maltsev, Air Defense Forces commander, which appeared in the newspaper Rabochaya Tribuna (\"Workers' Tribune\") on April 19, 1990, entitled \"UFOs on Air Defense Radars\" (cf. the book by Marie Galbraith referenced in Chapter 9.1).\n\nThe article mentions the dispatch of combat aircraft on a mission to intercept the UFOs detected. General Maltsev, who summarized over one hundred visual sightings collected by unit commanders, stated:\n\n\"I am not a specialist in UFOs, and therefore I can only correlate the data and express my own supposition. According to the evidence of these eyewitnesses, the UFO is a disk with a diameter from 100 to 200 meters [320 to 650 feet]. Two pulsating lights were positioned on its sides... Moreover, the object rotated around its axis and performed an 'S-turn' flight both in the vertical and horizontal planes. Next the UFO hovered above the ground and then flew with a speed exceeding that of the modern jet fighter by two or three times... The objects flew at altitudes ranging from 100 to 7000 m. [300 to 24,000 feet]. The movement of the UFOs was not accompanied by sound of any kind and was distinguished by its startling maneuverability. It seemed the UFOs were completely devoid of inertia. In other words, they had somehow 'come to terms' with gravity. At the present time, terrestrial"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"machines could hardly have such capabilities.\"\n\n2.5 San Carlos de Bariloche (July 31, 1995)\n\nSource SEPRA\nAerolineas Argentinas flight AR 674, a Boeing 727 en route from Buenos Aires, was 140 km from San Carlos de Bariloche, a tourist resort in the central Andes where it was preparing to land.\nAt that precise instant, a power outage plunged the town into darkness, and the pilot received the order to stay on standby for a few minutes before making his final approach. When he began his approach, the pilot noticed a strange star. At the same time, the control center put a second airplane that had arrived in the sector on standby. Flight AR 674 continued its approach, but when it had completed its turn and was in the axis of the runway, an object resembling a large aircraft appeared on its right side and flew parallel to it! This object had three lights, one of which was red, in the middle of it. The airport lights failed again, and the runway and approach ramp lights also went out. The airplane on standby observed the same phenomenon from its position.\nSince the pilot could not land, he pulled up and turned again in order to reposition himself in the axis of the runway. At that moment, the object, which had become luminous, moved behind the airplane, stopped, ascended vertically, and once again stopped. It moved back in front of the airplane before finally disappearing in the direction of the Andes Cordillera. The crew and passengers of flight AR 674, those on the other airplane, the airport controllers, and some of the inhabitants of San Carlos watched this unusual aerial ballet dumbfounded.\n\nThis case is interesting in more than one respect:\n\n- the sighting was corroborated by multiple independent observers both in flight and on the ground,\n\n- the phenomenon lasted several minutes,\n\n- there were different trajectories, some of which closely followed those of the airplane,\n\n- there was an observation of an electromagnetic phenomenon (the lights of the town and the airport went out) directly related to the presence of the object.\n\nChapter 3 - Sightings from the Ground\n\nThis chapter deals with sightings from the ground, two of which were reported to the committee by direct witnesses of the phenomena observed. Here again, their testimonies are all the more interesting since they pertain to the aeronautic world and the phenomena were observed during the day.\n\n3.1 Phenomenon Observed by Numerous Witnesses at Antananarivo (August 16, 1954)\n\nTestimony before the committee\nEdmond Campagnac (C), a former artillery officer and former chief of technical services for Air France in Madagascar who is now retired, came to testify before the committee. The phenomenon described below occurred on August 16, 1954, in"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Antananarivo. It was seen by several hundred witnesses.\nAt 1700 hours, when the personnel of the Air France office were waiting for the mail to arrive, someone spotted a \"large\" green \"ball\" in the sky moving at high speed. The first thought of the witnesses was that it was a meteorite. The phenomenon disappeared behind a hill, and they thought that the green ball was going to crash into the ground and that they were going to feel the impact.\nHowever, it reappeared after a minute. In passing directly over the observers, it revealed itself to be \"a sort of metal rugby ball preceded by a clearly detached green lens[-shaped portion] with sparks issuing from the rear.\" In the estimation of the witnesses, the \"ball\" was the length of a DC4 airplane, or some forty meters long. The green lens[-shaped portion] separated itself [and remained] a little less than 40 m out in front, with fairly long sparks [coming out] in the rear. The craft flew over Antananarivo at an estimated height of 50 to 100 meters, an estimation that was made possible by comparison with the height of a nearby hill. When the craft was moving, shop lights went out, and animals exhibited a real anxiety.\nAfter having flown over Antananarivo, the craft departed in a westerly direction. When it flew over the zebu park in the town, the craft caused a violent fright reaction among them. This is a surprising detail, since normally these animals do not show any agitation when Air France planes pass by. Two or three minutes later, an identical craft was observed 150 km from there above a farm school. There, too, the herds were overcome with panic. If the craft sighted was the same one as the one in Antananarivo, its speed would have had to be on the order of 3000 km/h. According to C's account, General Fleurquin, Commander-in-Chief in Madagascar, assembled a \"scientific commission\" to conduct an investigation into these phenomena. No trace of this investigation could be found in the Air Force archives; however, GEPA (Groupe d'Etudes des Phenomenes Aerospatiaux [Aerospace Phenomena Study Group]) bulletin no. 6 of the 2nd half of 1964 described this sighting.\n\n3.2 Sighting by a Pilot of a Saucer Close to the Ground (December 9, 1979)\n\nGEPAN/SEPRA investigation and testimony before the committee\nAt the time of the incident, former Air Force Lieutenant-Colonel Jean-Pierre Fartek (F) was a Mirage III pilot in the 2nd fighter squadron at Dijon. F is currently a pilot for a private company. F was living, and still lives, in the same village near Dijon. His house is located at the end of a housing development looking out onto fields. Approximately 250 m away is a grove of trees with an average height of 15 m at maximum. On December 9, 1979, at around 9:15 a.m., F and his wife saw an unusual object (hereinafter called M) in the field near their house. The weather and visibility were excellent. M, the dimensions of which they estimated to be 20 m in diameter by 7 m thick, was hovering approximately 3 m above the ground in front of the grove of trees, which partially concealed it. In complete agreement with his wife, witness F described it as:\n\n- having the shape of two superposed saucers with very distinct contours inverted one on top of the other and not exhibiting any portholes or lights,\n\n- being metallic gray on the upper portion and darker (bluish) on the lower portion, with a perfectly delimited separation between the upper side and the underside of the craft. This color difference could not be due to a difference in lighting given the position of the sun,\n\n- in constant motion as a result of very slight oscillations, the frequency of which was not very rapid, like something trying to balance,"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- not making any noise,\n\n- not causing any turbulence on the ground either when it hovered or when it departed,\n\n- not having left any trace on the ground.\n\nAfter observing it for a period of time which was hard for him to determine, F saw M oscillate faster; he had the impression that M tilted slightly forward (as a helicopter does after lift-off when it begins level flight). F saw M leave in a horizontal direction at a very low altitude without making any noise, without leaving any trail, and at a very high speed and disappear on the horizon in a few seconds. F reported [the incident] to the Gendarmerie de l'Air at the Dijon air base. He thought that other people had seen the phenomenon but had not dared to go report it, namely, his neighbors and their children, who reportedly made the same sighting.\n\nThis sighting by a pilot professionally well informed of aeronautical phenomena was never explained.\n\n3.3 A Case of Multiple Witnesses at a Russian Missile Base (July 28-29, 1989)\n\nHeading the UFO reports declassified by the KGB in 1991 is a file relating to an army missile base near Kapustin Yar in the region of Astrakhan, which was related in Marie Galbraith's book (cf. Chapter 9.1). The English-speaking public learned of it through the Muscovite journal AURA-Z of March 1993. Military personnel from two centers on the base prepared written depositions of their visual sightings, which were made under good visibility conditions. The file, which is incomplete, does not mention any possible radar detections. It begins with a brief summary of the case, the author of which was an anonymous KGB officer, followed by an account of seven written testimonies:\n\n- Five testimonies from the first center were provided by Lieutenant Klimenko, two corporals, and two soldiers. On the night of July 28 to 29, these military personnel sighted UFOs between 2215 and 2355 hours at a distance of 3 to 5 km. Up to three objects were seen simultaneously. One object silently made jerky movements, with very abrupt starts and stops, and periods of immobility. All of the witnesses saw a fighter jet attempt to approach one UFO, which escaped at lightning speed, \"giving the impression that the aircraft was hovering.\" Only the noise from the aircraft was heard, whereas the UFO must have reached supersonic speed.\n\n- Two other testimonies from a center near the first one concern the sighting of a UFO from 2330 to 0130 hours at a distance ranging from a few kilometers to 300 m. This UFO was described by Second Lieutenant Volochine as a disk 4-5 m in diameter, surmounted by a brightly lit hemispherical dome. The second lieutenant attached a sketch of the saucer to his deposition. The saucer sometimes moved abruptly, but soundlessly, and sometimes remained immobile 20-60 m above the ground. In the company of soldier Tichaev, Volochine saw it emitting a phosphorescent green light, hovering 300 m from them and some 20 m above a missile depot; it illuminated this depot for several seconds with a moving beam of light.\n\nIn a report that was consistent with the report of his superior, soldier Tichaev stressed the lack of noise made by the object, even when a short distance away, which prevented him from confusing it with a helicopter. The two witnesses, who were joined after some time by the guard team, had watched the maneuvers of the object above the center and the surrounding area for two hours.\n\nChapter 4 - Close Encounters in France"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4.1 Valensole, Alpes-de-Haute-Provence [Department] (July 1, 1965)\n\nIn-depth investigation by the Gendarmerie Nationale\nAt Valensole on July 1, 1965, Maurice Masse, who left his home at 5:00 a.m., headed for his lavender fields located on the plateau near the village. Before starting his tractor at around 6:00 a.m., he lit a cigarette and at that moment heard a hissing sound that attracted his attention. Emerging from behind a pile of stones, he saw an object resting in his field approximately 90 m from him. Its shape was reminiscent of that of a \"Dauphine\" automobile standing on six legs with a central pivot. He approached it with caution, at a distance of ten meters or so, thinking he might surprise people about to steal his lavender from him. He then saw two small beings, one of whom, who was turned in his direction, reportedly pointed a tube at him that he took from a sort of bag hanging on his left side. Maurice Masse indicated that he was totally immobilized in place, numbed and paralyzed, but completely aware of the events that were unfolding before his eyes. The two beings then got back in their craft. He watched them while they were behind a sort of dome, and he heard a heavy noise when the object lifted up off the ground. He also remarked that the tube that was under the object, touching the ground, began to turn, as well as the six legs, which retracted under the machine. The object then ascended in a vertical direction before tilting diagonally and disappearing more rapidly than a jet. Maurice Masse remained immobilized in this manner for about 15 minutes before coming to, then resuming his work and going to tell his story in the village, where the gendarmes, having learned of the incident, questioned him during the day.\n\nThe Valensole gendarmerie force, then the Digne investigations squad, investigated this case for several days. The investigations of the gendarmerie established the existence, at the spot indicated by Maurice Masse, of a depression impressed into the ground, which had been soaked in that place. In the center of it was a cylindrical hole 18 cm in diameter and 40 cm deep with smooth walls. At the bottom of the hole were three other bent holes 6 cm in diameter. Along the object's axis of flight, over some one hundred meters, the lavender beds were dried up. This phenomenon lasted for several years, during which time the witness tried in vain to replant the plants within a radius of several meters around the tracks.\n\nDespite a few contradictory elements in Maurice Masse's account, the data collected by the two gendarme brigades confirmed the plausibility of the facts, particularly the effect on the environment and on the witness himself, who slept twelve to fifteen hours a night, followed by the paralysis of which he had been a victim, for several months. The investigation into the witness's character did not turn up any specific information that would permit one to suspect him of mythomaniac behavior or of staging a hoax.\n\n4.2 Cussac, Cantal [Department] (August 29, 1967)\n\nGEPAN/SEPRA investigation\nThe Cussac incident has occupied a special place among the UFO cases, since a second inquiry was conducted in 1978, as an example, at the request of the GEPAN scientific council. On August 29, 1967, at around 10:30 a.m., during a beautiful sunny morning on the high plateaus in the center of France, two young children were watching the family's herd. The dog that accompanied them alerted them that a cow was getting ready to jump"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"over the low wall of the enclosure. The boy, who was 13 years old at the time, got up to make the cow come back, when he spotted four children whom he did not recognize on the other side of the road.\nSurprised by what he saw, he called his sister, when he noticed an extremely bright sphere back behind the unknown children. They then realized that these were not children but small black beings whose height did not exceed 1.20 m. Two of them were standing next to the sphere, another was kneeling before it, and the fourth, who was standing, held in its hand a sort of mirror that blinded the children. The boy tried to call out to them, but the small beings then hurriedly returned to the sphere. The children saw them rise from the ground and penetrate the ball from the top, diving in head first. The sphere took off with a hissing sound, then rose into the sky describing a continuous spiral movement at high speed. The dog barked, the cows started to moo, and a very strong odor of sulfur filled the air. The second inquiry began in 1978 with a team of investigators from GEPAN and qualified outside advisors, one of whom was a former examining magistrate.\n\nThe highlights of this second inquiry did not have to do with the facts or the account, but with new elements such as secondary witnesses found at the site who provided supplemental information and strengthened the credibility of the case. In particular, a gendarme who arrived on the scene immediately following the incident found tracks on the ground at the place indicated by the children and noted the very strong odor of sulfur. Likewise, another witness also came forward who admitted being in a granary close to the site and clearly remembered a hissing sound very different from that of a helicopter of the time.\n\nThe reconstruction at the site in the presence of the two main witnesses confirmed both the descriptive accounts and the circumstances that followed the sighting. At the time the children gave off a strong odor of sulfur, but, above all, they suffered from physiological disorders, and their eyes ran for several days. These facts were certified by the family doctor and confirmed by their father, who was mayor of the village at the time. In the conclusion of this, second inquiry the judge gave his opinion on the witnesses and their testimony: \"There is no flaw or inconsistency in these various elements that permit us to doubt the sincerity of the witnesses or to reasonably suspect an invention, hoax, or hallucination. Under these circumstances, despite the young age of the principal witnesses, and as extraordinary as the facts that they have related seem to be, I think that they actually observed them.\"\n\n4.3 Trans-en-Provence, Var [Department] (January 8, 1981)\n\nGEPAN/SEPRA investigation\nIn Trans-en-Provence on January 8, 1981, at around 5:00 p.m., a man who was building a small shed for a water pump in his garden reportedly was witness to what is perhaps one of the most unusual cases ever observed and studied in France. A reflection of the sun on something moving in the sky supposedly attracted his attention, allowing him to observe the descent, then the abrupt landing on a platform of earth located below his house, of a silent metal object. The object, which was ovoid in shape, did not exhibit any apparent projections, wings, control surfaces, or engine that would permit one to liken it to some type of aircraft. The object rested on the platform of earth for a few short seconds, still without emitting any noise, then it took off and disappeared at high speed in the azure blue sky. The account could stop at this simple visual sighting if there hadn't been visible mechanical tracks and imprints in the shape of a crown, which pushed the case"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"into the domain of the unexplained.\nThe gendarmerie and then GEPAN conducted an in-depth investigation including numerous interviews with the witness and his neighbors. The expert's appraisals of the ground - the taking of soil and plant samples followed by analyses - showed unequivocally that it really was a case of an unidentified heavy metal object that had actually landed on the platform of earth. The analyses of plant samples taken at the site indicated that they were not dealing with any type of [known] aircraft, or even a helicopter or military drone, which were hypotheses that were considered and analyzed.\nThe vegetation at the landing site - a sort of wild alfalfa - had been profoundly marked and affected by an external agent that considerably altered the photosynthesis apparatus. In fact, the chlorophyll, as well as certain amino acids of the plants, exhibited significant variations in concentration, variations which decreased with the distance [of the plants] from the center of the mechanical track. These effects disappeared completely two years later, thus revealing a specific and particular type of trauma. According to Professor Michel Bounias of the ecology and plant toxicology laboratory of INRA [National Institute for Agronomic Research] who performed the analyses, the cause of the profound disturbances suffered by the vegetation present in that ecosystem could likely be a powerful pulsed electromagnetic field in the high frequency (microwave) range. Studies and research are still being conducted in regard to this case and numerous leads have been explored. None of these leads has-been able to satisfy all of the conditions that would enable the object that landed in Trans-en-Provence on January 8, 1981, to be identified with certainty, and this is all the more true with respect to the determination of its origin.\n4.4 Nancy, Meurthe-et-Moselle [Department], the so-called \"Amaranth\" Case (October 21, 1982)\nGEPAN/SEPRA investigation\nThe \"Amaranth\" Case concerns the sighting during the day by a witness, a cellular biology researcher, of an object that hovered above his garden for 20 minutes. The testimony recorded by the gendarmerie less than 5 hours after the sighting is summarized as follows:\n- The witness was in his garden in front of his house at around 12:35 a.m. after work on October 21, 1982; he saw a flying craft, which he first took for an airplane, come from the southeast. He saw a shiny craft. He indicated that there were no clouds, that the sun was not in his eyes, and that visibility was excellent. The craft's speed of descent was not very great, and he thought that it was going to pass over his house. Once he realized that the trajectory of the craft was bringing it toward him, he backed up 3 to 4 meters. This craft, which was oval in shape, stopped approximately one meter from the ground and remained hovering at this height for about 20 minutes.\n- The witness stated that since he had looked at his watch, he was absolutely certain about the length of time the craft hovered. He described the craft as follows: ovoid in shape, approximately 1 m in diameter, 80 cm thick, the bottom half metallic in appearance like polished beryllium and the upper half the blue-green color of the inner depths of a lagoon. The craft did not emit any noise, nor did it seem to emit any heat, cold, radiation, magnetism, or electromagnetism. After 20 minutes, the craft suddenly rose straight up, a trajectory which it maintained until it was out of sight. The craft's departure was very fast, as if it were under the effect of strong suction. The witness indicated, finally, that there were no tracks or marks on the ground and the grass was not charred or flattened,"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"but he did remark that when the craft departed, the grass stood straight up, then returned to its normal position.\nThe interest of this sighting, apart from its strangeness, lies in the visible traces left on the vegetation and, namely, on an amaranth bush, the tips of whose leaves, which had completely dried up, led one to think that they had been subjected to intense electrical fields. However, despite short time delays before intervention, the sampling conditions and then the storage of the sample did not permit this hypothesis to be verified definitively. Based on an earlier study on the behavior of plants subjected to electrical fields, it emerged that:\n- the electrical field, which was what probably caused the blades of grass to lift up, had to have exceeded 30 kV/m,\n- the effects on the amaranth that were observed were probably due to an electrical field that had to have far exceeded 200 kV/m at the level of the plant.\nChapter 5 - Counterexamples of Phenomena That Have Been Explained\nThe cases reported in the preceding chapters have remained unexplained, despite the richness of their data. Such cases are in the minority. Many sightings of aerial phenomena made in France that the witnesses could not understand and reported to the gendarmerie have been explained after a short investigation by the gendarmerie and/or GEPAN/SEPRA: the causes of these have been the moon, planets, aircraft, weather balloons, reflections from automobile headlights on clouds, etc., and, very rarely, hoaxes. Sometimes the investigation yielded more unusual explanations. We will give two examples.\n5.1 A Strange Object Crosses a Highway (September 29, 1988)\nGEPAN/SEPRA investigation\nAn auto mechanic driving on the Paris-Lille freeway saw an enormous red ball cross the road a few dozen meters away from him and roll down below the road. Casting reflections of light and enveloped in dense smoke, it finally came to a halt in a field. Troubled by this disturbing observation, the auto mechanic apparently reported it to the highway gendarmes. On the chief's orders, the gendarmerie then sealed off the freeway and a zone several kilometers around the object. The principal witness and his family were taken to the hospital, where they underwent a series of examinations. Civilian and military security officers went to the site of the incident, equipped primarily with Geiger counters. At that time, in fact, they were waiting for the Soviet satellite Cosmos 1900, which was equipped with a nuclear power generator, to fall, and precise instructions had been given. When consulted, CNES very quickly informed them that Cosmos 1900 was overflying the Indian Ocean at that very moment. Did the red ball come from space? Advancing with caution, monitoring their nuclear radiation detectors, the security specialists drew near a sphere approximately 1.50 m in diameter. Under the bright light from the searchlights, they saw that it bore no sign of the considerable heat build-up or mechanical effects that atmospheric reentry would have produced. It appeared to be intact, and small mirrors covered its surface. No smoke or radioactivity were detected near it.\nIt was later learned that this sphere, which was intended to serve as a decoration at a Jean-Michel Jarre concert, had fallen from the truck that was carrying it to London. The"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"small mirrors stuck to its polystyrene casing were for reflecting the show's lighting effects...\n5.2 A Bright Glow in a Village in the Dombes Region (March 10, 1979)\nGEPAN/SEPRA investigation\nOn March 13, 1979, the local [gendarmerie] force of a small village in the Dombes region was alerted by an inhabitant who said he had seen an unidentified flying object over the town during the night of March 10 to 11. In the course of its investigation, the [gendarmerie] force recorded a total of four testimonies, three of which were totally independent of one another. The first witness, a restaurateur in the village, described the phenomenon as a bluish and purplish luminous mass slightly oval in shape and around 15 meters in length. The light was so bright that the village square was lit up as if it were broad daylight, to such a degree that the public lighting, which goes on automatically, went out. Two other witnesses, who were in a car close to the village, reported that this luminous mass preceded their vehicle on the road about 2 m ahead of them. They informed the gendarmes that this light went out suddenly after an orange-colored light appeared on each side of the glow.\nFinally, a fourth witness, a fish farmer, said he had been awakened that night by a dull noise and had seen a bright bluish glow. The next day, all the fish in one of his fish (-------) tanks, catfishes, were found dead. The presence of a power line hanging over the tank enabled the gendarmes to focus their investigation on phenomena of an electrical origin.\nGEPAN/SEPRA did the same during the investigation that it conducted on the site a few days later. It discovered very quickly that the 10-kV power line hanging over the tank had melted. The information provided by [the French electricity company] EDF enabled them to demonstrate that since this line was some thirty years old, it was very likely that corrosion and oxidation of the aluminum wires had caused a power arc effect in the line, probably in conjunction with a corona effect. This would explain, on the one hand, the bluish glow and the noise heard by the witness and, on the other hand, the public lighting going out. The glow was, in fact, bright enough to trigger the photoelectric control cell, which was located close to the melted line.\nFinally, the fish died as a result of being poisoned by drops of aluminum that fell in the tank for several minutes.\nPART 2\nThe Extent of Our Knowledge\nChapter 6 - Organization of the Research in France\nIn 1977, the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales was tasked with the mission of setting up a permanent structure for the study of unidentified aerospace phenomena (UAP): the Groupe d'Etudes de Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non Identifiés (GEPAN). This"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"establishment had within it the skills and resources appropriate to this mission, in particular, engineers and personnel with high-level technical knowledge who were in close touch with scientific circles. A scientific council chaired by Hubert Curien and composed of twelve members who were representative of the social and exact sciences guaranteed that this complex and delicate subject would be handled with all the necessary precision. This council had the job of guiding, organizing, and reviewing the work of GEPAN annually.\nThree phases can be distinguished in the progression of the activity connected with the study of UFOs in France, which culminated in 1988 in the creation of the Service d'Expertise des Phénomènes de Rentree Atmosphérique (SEPRA), which succeeded GEPAN, still within CNES:\n- a phase that consisted of setting up the organization and defining the procedures for the collection and processing of data, which is described in this chapter,\n- a phase that consisted of defining the scientific method for studying cases,\n- a phase that consisted of implementing the previously defined methods and procedures, the last two of which are discussed in the next chapter.\nSEPRA plays a more limited role in the study of UFOs than does GEPAN, the scientific council of which has ended its mission\n6.1 The Setting Up the Organization Phase\nGEPAN's first job was to form a partnership among the different public, civilian, and military agencies with a view to organizing the collection and analysis of reliable data. The Gendarmerie Nationale, the civil and military aviation authorities, the National Weather Service, etc., were approached and brought together in this organization via agreements and protocols established with GEPAN.\nThe first goal set was the rapid acquisition and provision of data collected at the sites where a phenomenon was sighted. To do this, in accordance with the directives of the scientific council, GEPAN was tasked with the mission of forming teams of specialized investigators for the collection of psychological and physical data, such as, for example, taking samples of tracks in the ground. In parallel to this organization, various civilian and military research laboratories were asked to participate in expert's appraisals and analyses of the data collected in investigations, such as, for example, the processing of photographic documents and radar recordings.\n6.2 Participation of the Gendarmerie Nationale\nIt was in February 1974 that the first instructions were given tasking the Gendarmerie Nationale with the job of collecting and centralizing spontaneous testimonies on UFOs. Previously, these testimonies had been collected on an occasional basis in the regional [gendarmerie] forces and rarely gave rise to the drafting of reports or to in-depth investigations (the Valensole case in [1965]). The administrative or technical authorities did not process or use these documents.\nBeginning in May 1977, one of the six copies of the report drafted by the regional gendarmerie forces was forwarded to GEPAN, which from then on became the recipient of all information collected on UFOs.\n6.2.1 Role and Action of the Gendarmerie Nationale"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Each gendarmerie force possesses a manual, the \"gendarmerie handbook,\" which contains all of the instructions on the procedures to be followed in the collection of data on unidentified aerospace phenomena. Depending on the degree of complexity of the case reported, the level of intervention may range from the simple transcript of a testimony to an actual investigation, which may be conducted jointly with the GEPAN/SEPRA departments at the locations of sightings and often results in an in-depth report.\n6.2.2 Use of Data Collected by the Gendarmerie Nationale\nOnce the information has been collected locally by the gendarmerie, it is forwarded in the form of a report to the Gendarmerie Nationale headquarters in Paris, which issues a copy of it to GEPAN/SEPRA. The latter processes it at two different levels:\n- at the first level, the report is analyzed, then entered into a database, and perhaps is processed statistically for the purpose of establishing classifications and typologies of phenomena,\n- at the second level, which relates to more complex \"UAP D\" (category D unidentified aerospace phenomena) cases, the investigation in the field generates a set of research activities with respect to elements for further processing that results in the drafting of a detailed, in-depth investigation report; the report may be used for track interpretation studies.\n6.2.3.Assessment and Results of the Cooperation with the Gendarmerie Nationale\nSince 1974, over 3,000 gendarmerie reports representing an average of three spontaneous testimonies per document have been collected and forwarded to GEPAN/SEPRA. Added to this are some one hundred investigations and interventions in the field, conducted jointly with the local [gendarmerie] forces. All of these have permitted the characterization of a set of rare, natural and artificial phenomena that have occurred with varying frequency which would not have been able to be identified without this type of organization. Thanks to this collaboration, it has been possible to study UFO cases like the Trans-en-Provence and \"Amaranth\" cases (see Chapter 4) under excellent conditions, showing that there was a remnant of events the nature of which had yet to be identified. A volume of information describing the objectives sought by CNES in the study of UFOs was widely disseminated to all of the regional [gendarmerie] forces. Supplemental information and training, [end of line cut off] direction of officers and lower-level gendarmes, is regularly provided by the Gendarmerie Nationale schools to sensitize the [gendarmerie] force commanders to this subject.\nThe results of this collaboration could be more effective. Regular updating of the data collection procedures would be desirable, as well as shorter time delays before intervention for investigations between the time the local [gendarmerie] force learns of the case and the time when SEPRA intervenes. This reduction in the intervention time would considerably diminish the loss of information, particularly with respect to effects on the environment. It would also be important for the gendarmerie forces to be routinely informed of the results of work and investigations carried out by SEPRA. However, the"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"resources currently available in terms of personnel and budget allocations do not permit a response with the efficacy desired.\n\n6.3 Participation of the Air Force\n\nJust after World War II, the first reports of French aeronautic UFO sightings were collected and archived by the Air Force Chief of Staff's Office of Planning and Studies (EMAA/BPE).\nWhen GEPAN was created, a memorandum of understanding defined the respective roles of the two agencies for the processing of information relating to cases of military aeronautic sightings. In principle, all UFO sightings must be reported to the military air [traffic] control center in question, which forwards the information to the Air Operations Center (CCOA) in Taverny. The latter is responsible, in collaboration with the Air Force Chief of Staff's Space Office, for forwarding it to GEPAN/SEPRA. At the same time, all radar information is recorded in the radar control centers and kept for a minimum of one month and longer on request. This information is made available to investigators if needed.\nA protocol established with the Army defines the conditions for the forwarding of information collected in flight by pilots of the Army Air Corps (ALAT).\n\n6.4 Participation of the Civil Aviation Authority\n\nThe same type of organization and procedures is used by the civil aviation authority to collect and process the information relating to UFO sightings made by civilian pilots. A protocol signed between the Civil Aviation Directorate (DGAC) and CNES permits GEPAN/SEPRA to have access to UFO sighting reports drafted by national and foreign airlines crews. To this end, a sighting report form prepared jointly by DGAC and GEPAN/SEPRA is made available to crews at the air [traffic] control centers of the civil aviation authority and airlines. In addition, the radio conversations between the crew and the air [traffic] control [center] are routinely recorded and attached to the detailed sighting report.\nThere is also a regulation concerning flight incidents that could involve safety. In this case, the flight captain must follow the \"Airmiss\" procedure, which routinely triggers an investigation by the DGAC.\n\n6.5 Additional Research Resources\n\nNumerous civilian (public or private) and military bodies contribute to the expert appraisals performed in investigations and work by GEPAN/SEPRA. This involvement takes place at two levels, either in the collection of data in the field and the utilization of sighting reports or in the\nanalysis of data after the expert's appraisal and the theoretical and experimental research that are deemed necessary.\n\nCooperation agreements have been established, particularly with various bodies that can benefit in return from the results of investigations of interest to their own area of study,"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"for example:\n- lightning (EDF, CEA [French Atomic Energy Commission], the National Weather Service, ONERA, CEAT [Toulouse Aeronautic Test Center]),\n- meteors (CNRS [National Center for Scientific Research], DGA [French General Delegation for Armaments]),\n- line disturbances (EDF, France Télécom [French telecommunications company]),\n- group sociology and, in particular, sects (CNRS, universities),\n- photography, the study of films, the processing of satellite imagery (Fleximage company).\n\nThe following three applications should be emphasized:\n\n6.5.1 Sample Analysis\n\nGEPAN/SEPRA is supported by various civilian and military laboratories, including those of the Etablissement Technique Central de l'Armement (ETCA), [Central Technical Armaments Institution] for analyzing soil and plant samples collected during the course of investigations.\n\n6.5.2 Use of Photographs\n\nImage processing work was performed at ETCA between 1981 and 1988. This work enabled the techniques and procedures, listed in GEPAN technical memorandum no. 18, for studying supposed UFO photographs to be defined. Diffraction filters were issued to each gendarmerie regional unit to permit on-site collection of information over the light spectrum emitted.\n\n6.5.3 Sky Surveillance System\n\nA system called \"ORION\" was studied and partially deployed by [the Ministry of] Defense for the purpose of monitoring, identifying, and predicting the passage of satellites, particularly over national territory. It should meet, at least partially, the need for the surveillance of UFO-type light phenomena. The system consists of:\n- the current surveillance and tracking radar systems and listening antenna on the ship Monge,\n- two radar and optical surveillance systems and one optical imaging system:\n• the \"GRAVES\" surveillance radar system, which will be capable of detecting objects from 1 m2 [in size] at a distance of 1500 km,\n• the \"SPOC\" [Sky Observation Probe System] optical surveillance system, which uses CCD cameras to detect and determine the trajectory of orbiting satellites or magnitude 7 to 8 space debris (the installation of equipment at two sites is currently under way),\n- finally, the development of the 4 m diameter \"SOLSTICE\" telescope, which may be provided with adaptive optics, for the observation of objects in geostationary orbit (36,000 km)."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 7 - Method and Results of GEPAN/SEPRA\n\n7.1 Method Developed by GEPAN\n\nGEPAN developed an original method for studying rare, randomly occurring phenomena. Meteorites are among these phenomena. Scientists have long refused to consider sightings of stones that have fallen from the sky, which are generally reported by rural inhabitants. Fortunately, in 1803, the physicist Jean-Baptiste Biot conducted an in-depth investigation in the village of Laigle in Orne [Department] about three weeks after it was reported that stones had fallen from the sky. Biot examined numerous stones and certain evidence (broken branches, perforated roofs, fires) and questioned many independent witnesses. He prepared a convincing report that gave scientific existence to meteorites.\nThe method developed by GEPAN was approved by its scientific council. It basically consists of identifying initially unknown phenomena and performing a joint analysis of four types of data concerning:\n- witnesses: physiology, psychology, etc.,\n- testimonies: accounts, reactions to questions, general behavior, etc.,\n- the physical environment: weather, air traffic, photographs, radar data, traces left on the environment, etc.,\n- the psychosocial environment: readings and beliefs of witnesses, possible influence of the media and various groups on these witnesses, etc.\nGendarmerie reports often contain sufficient data in order to be able to identify the phenomenon sighted. In many cases, the phenomenon turns out to be an airplane, a planet, a satellite, etc. In other cases, a fairly large supplemental investigation is conducted by GEPAN/SEPRA. An in-depth study can take up to two years. The analysis of traces left on the environment may result in specialized laboratories being called on for assistance (see the Trans-en-Provence and \"Amaranth\" cases in Chapter 4).\nFinally research was conducted in collaboration with the universities in order to perfect the investigation method. CNES, out of a concern for scientific precision, adopted the term \"UAP\" instead of the term UFO, which is more well known but more restrictive. GEPAN is the group that studies UAPs.\n\n7.2 First Classification of UAPs (Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena)\n\nAfter a study is conducted, each case is classified by GEPAN/SEPRA into one of the following four categories, depending on the extent to which it has been identified:\n- Category A: completely identified phenomenon,\n- Category B: phenomenon that can probably be identified but which cannot be identified with certainty due to a lack of evidence,\n- Category C: phenomenon that cannot be identified due to a lack of data,\n- Category D: phenomenon that cannot be identified despite the abundance and quality of the data.\nCategory D UAPs represent 4 to 5% of the cases and are called UAP Ds. They include sightings of phenomena, some of which were close to the ground, within a few meters of the witnesses. The strongest and most mysterious cases in this category are generally"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"labeled CE3s (close encounters of the third kind) according to the classification proposed by Professor A. Hynek, an astronomer and consultant to the USAF, within the context of the Blue Book Project (cf. Chapter 9.1).\n\n7.3 Typology of UAP Ds\n\nThe detailed statistical analysis of UAP Ds enables a precise determination of the distribution of their physical characteristics: speed, acceleration, silence, shape, effects on the environment. It is interesting to note that statistical studies in the USSR yielded distributions comparable to those determined by Claude Poher, the first head of GEPAN, from some 200 French cases, or 1,000 cases worldwide. It would be desirable to be able to develop UAP D statistical studies in France.\n\n7.4 Investigations of Remarkable Cases\n\nAround one hundred investigations have been conducted by GEPAN/SEPRA. Some of them have highlighted rare physical atmospheric phenomena associated, for example, with lightning; others have revealed unusual psychological behavior of witnesses caused, for example, by taking hallucinogenic drugs. Several very in-depth investigations based on analyses of evidence have demonstrated, in the end, the physical presence of a phenomenon the nature and origin of which remain unknown. Two cases related in Chapter 4 stand out in our minds, the Trans-en-Provence case of January 8, 1981, and the \"Amaranth\" case of October 21, 1982. The investigations lead us to believe that double-saucer-shaped objects were close to the ground for some time, then departed toward the sky leaving traces on the vegetation and, in the Trans-en-Provence case, on the ground itself. They are detailed in GEPAN technical memoranda no. 16 and no. 17 (see the reference list in Chapter 6).\n\n7.5 Aeronautical Cases\n\n7.5.1 Data on French Aeronautical Cases\n\n- Twelve French aeronautical cases have been brought to the attention of GEPAN/SEPRA; only three or four of these can be considered to fall into category D.\n- The first UAP D case identified dates back to 1951. It involved Vampire military aircraft in the Orange area. In two other very extraordinary sightings, which are presented in Chapter 1, military pilots reported the presence of objects with aeronautical performances inconsistent with the maneuvers of classic aircraft over the region of Tours in 1976 and of Luxeuil in 1977. However, not until January 28, 1994, was the crew of a regularly scheduled Air France commercial airplane able to collect the first case of a visual sighting correlated with a radar detection over 50 seconds long (see Chapter 1.3).\n\n7.5.2 Aeronautical UAP D Cases Worldwide\n\nThe aeronautical UAP D cases known since 1942 were initially enumerated in a document entitled Rencontres dans le ciel [Encounters in the Sky], by Dominique Weinstein, the French portion of which SEPRA contributed to. The list of sightings"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"worldwide includes the description of 489 well-documented cases of aeronautical UAP D sightings the sources of which were duly verified. Most of the information on these aeronautical UAP Ds is drawn from official sources, government authorities, the Air Forces of different States, or agencies like SEPRA.\n\nThis list offers a classification according to criteria with respect to the quality of the sighting. It ranges from simple visual sightings, describing the specific performances or maneuvers of the phenomenon observed (speed, acceleration, maneuverability, silence, etc.), to more elaborate sightings, mentioning environmental disturbances caused by the aeronautical UAP Ds, such as radio interference or radar jamming, navigation instrument malfunctions, or even physical effects on the crew (heat, blinding, etc.).\n\nBetween 1947 and 1969, that is(-) during the time of the U.S. Air Force Blue Book Project on UFOs, 363 sightings were identified. 1952 is the year in which the greatest number of sightings were recorded: 68. A total of 63 countries are cited as having been the scene of at least one aeronautical sighting.\n\n7.5.3 \"Radar/Visual\" Cases Worldwide\n\n\"Radar/visual\" cases are those in which a visual sighting is associated with an onboard radar and/or ground radar detection. It is noted that:\n- the first sightings in Japan and the USSR date back to 1948,\n- 30 of the 68 countries cited in the list reported \"radar/visual\" cases,\n- of the 489 cases in the report, 101 were \"radar/visual\" cases (21%),\n- of the 363 cases in the Blue Book report, 76 were \"radar/visual\" cases (21%),\n- in 1952, 16 out of 68 cases were \"radar/visual\" cases (23.52%).\nIn conclusion, we can clearly establish that from 1942 to 1995, at least 500 well-documented and recognized aeronautical UAP D sightings were identified throughout the world, nearly 20% of which were \"radar/visual\" cases. They furnish proof of a physical reality of phenomena that exhibited paradoxical maneuvers.\n\n7.6 The Physical Reality of UAP Ds\n\n7.6.1 An Initial Report as Early as September 1947 in the United States\n\nWe have seen that the work of GEPAN/SEPRA showed that there was an entire category of rare physical phenomena occurring at varying frequency that could not be classified as known natural or artificial phenomena. These phenomena, UAP Ds, which we have highlighted, both in the aeronautical sphere (military and civilian aeronautical cases) and close to the ground (cases of close encounters), support other cases of well-documented sightings that have been verified by official authorities throughout the world. It is interesting to note that as early as November [sic] 1947, right at the start of the very first wave of modern UFO sightings, in the United States, General Twining, head of the Air Material Command, drafted a report on \"flying disks,\" the conclusions of which are very explicit:\n1. The phenomenon reported is something real, and not visionary or fictitious\n2. Disk-shaped objects the size of which is comparable to that of our aircraft do exist.\n3. It is possible that some sightings correspond to natural phenomena.\n4. The very high rate-of-climb observed, the maneuverability, and the escape"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"maneuvers when the disks are detected lead one to assume that they are piloted or operated by remote control.\n5. Most witnesses describe objects with a metal surface that are circular or elliptical in shape, the upper portion of which is dome shaped, flying without making any noise in a formation of three to nine objects...\n\n7.6.2 GEPAN/SEPRA's Work\n\nWe do not have irrefutable tangible proof in the form of material, either whole or in fragments, that confirm the physical nature of UAP Ds and their artifact character. Nevertheless, the collection and expert appraisal work carried out at GEPAN/SEPRA for over 20 years confirms the statements General Twining made in 1947.\n\n7.6.3 French Aeronautical Cases\n\nThe study of French military aeronautical UAP D [sightings] (Orange in 1951, Tours in 1976, Luxeuil in 1977) supports General Twining's conclusions, namely the fourth one. The testimonies of the pilots do in fact lead one to assume that the objects were \"either piloted or operated by remote control\": all of the pilots reported that it was \"the object\" that appeared to be moving toward them and not the other way around. Moreover, all of them considered the maneuvering abilities of the object to be far superior to those that they were familiar with.\n\n7.6.4 Cases of Close-Up UAP D Sightings in France\n\nFor their part, the cases of close-up UAP D sightings in France are very much in keeping with Twining's conclusions 4 and 5. In Trans-en-Provence (Chapter 4), the expert appraisals made at the site support the local testimony and show that the object with a metallic appearance and circular shape landed, then took off silently within a very short space of time not very far from a wall 2.5 m in height. No modern aircraft is capable of these silent maneuvers, nor of this degree of precision when landing. It is hard not to imagine a piloted or remote-controlled flying machine, or else one having highly advanced cybernetics.\nThe other French cases of close encounters described in Chapter 4 also strongly suggest the existence of an intelligent [civilization] behind the UAP Ds. In the Valensole, \"Amaranth\" and Cussac cases, once the witness or witnesses are brought face to face with the UAP D, everything generally happens very quickly, and the object escapes without having shown the slightest aggressiveness toward the witnesses.\n\n7.6.5 Foreign Cases - Conclusion\n\nThe study of certain foreign cases leads to conclusions similar to those drawn from the French cases. One may reread in this spirit the description of the aeronautical cases presented in Chapter 2. We could also relate foreign cases of close encounters, such as"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the Socorro (New Mexico) case, which is similar to the Trans-en-Provence case, but the critical overview of which would needlessly weigh down this report.\nOne strong conclusion emerges from this set of facts: some UAP Ds do seem to be completely unknown flying machines with exceptional performances that are guided by a natural or artificial intelligence.\n\nChapter 8 - UFOs: Hypotheses, Modeling Attempts\n\n8.1 Partial Models\n\nCredible sightings of aerial objects can be reinforced by plausible technical explanations of the phenomena reported. Among the most striking observations in relation to the current state of our knowledge, we cite:\n- aerial movements carried out silently with very rapid accelerations and/or very high speeds,\n- the shutting off of the engines of nearby land vehicles,\n- the locomotive paralysis of witnesses.\nInsofar as the sightings that are the most well documented, and the most credible owing to the obvious competence of the witnesses, come from aircraft pilots, it is their sightings of aerial movements, sightings which are, moreover, supported by radar plots, that should be explained first.\n\n8.1.1 Travel\n\nThere are, from the standpoint of the concept, various principles of propulsion that do not require propellers or jet engines that could thus be silent. The most advanced uses magnetohydrodynamics, abbreviated MHD, but many others can also be considered. We will review these.\n\n8.1.1.1 MHD Propulsion\n\nThe principle of MHD propulsion, which cannot be envisioned in a vacuum, consists of causing an electrical current to flow in the medium surrounding the .ship At the same time, the ship emits a magnetic field. According to Laplace's law, this field exerts a force on the current and thus on the medium in which it is flowing; this is the principle of most electric motors. The medium being thus displaced in relation to the ship, it is in fact the latter that undergoes, by reaction, a force that enables it to be propelled. It remains to create the necessary field and current:\n- for the magnetic field, this is easily accomplished by installing windings (like those in electric motors), in which a suitable electrical current travels, in or under the walls of the ship,\n- for the electrical current, all depends on the medium.\nIn sea water it is easy to cause a current to flow using electrodes positioned on the hull. This is why MHD propulsion has been experimented with, so far successfully, in the United States and Japan on both surface and submarine ship models.\nIn air, which is naturally insulating, it is more difficult to cause an electrical current to flow, but air can be made conducting by using, for example, strong electric fields generated here again by suitable electrodes (air, when rendered conducting, can become more or less"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"luminous, which has frequently been observed around unknown objects). As for the magnetic field, it can be created as it is for boats.. However, propulsion is much more difficult to achieve in air, since, in that case, it must not only propel the aircraft but first of all compensate for its weight. The electrical and magnetic fields required are therefore much stronger than for a naval ship and, in practice, obtaining the very strong fields that are essential is scarcely conceivable without having recourse to superconductive wirings. Still theoretical until a only few years ago, their use in an aerial vehicle has been a credible prospect since 1991, with the discovery of superconductors capable of operating at near-ambient temperatures.\nPropulsion in the atmosphere without propellers or jet engines is, therefore, completely possible in principle with MHD, and the calculations show that the power necessary is not, in certain cases, incompatible with our current aeronautical engines. The fact that no cooling system has been seen (or heard) on the objects that have been observed close up can be explained as long as the length of the craft's flights does not exceed a few dozen minutes. Furthermore, other motors that we already use - electric motors, from energy stored onboard or flywheels if they are not yet powerful enough - would not need immediate cooling, which duly proves that this problem is not insurmountable.\nNumerous witnesses have been struck by the silence accompanying the maneuvers of the objects, which do not create a \"bang\" even at supersonic speeds (cf. Part 1, Chapters 1, 2, and 3). MHD propulsion could account for this silence: preliminary experiments in noise reduction by eliminating the wake and shock wave, albeit under very special conditions, are encouraging.\nThere has been extensive work on the different aspects of MHD propulsion of aircraft abroad: in the United States at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy (NY), and according to the journal New Scientist (February 1996), in Great Britain and in Russia.\nTo sum up, based on the current state of our knowledge, an MHD aircraft model is conceivable in the short term, while the creation of a craft having the same movement capabilities as the aerial vehicles described by the witnesses seems quite likely to us within a few dozen years. For the time being, only the quasi absence of perceptible air flow and noise while hovering close to the ground pose problems.\n\n8.1.1.2 Other Propulsion Methods\n\nIn a vacuum, the absence or scarcity of molecules or atoms prevents current flow in the medium as well as the projection of a mass of sufficient substance pulled from this medium. MHD propulsion is therefore not possible, and it is necessary to formulate other hypotheses. Jet propulsion by means of chemical reactions, comparable to our rocket engines - even though its performance is more advanced - should not be ruled out a priori. In fact, the space phase of the travel of unknown objects takes place very far from sight.\nIn addition, skins for stealth purposes render them invisible to telescopes and radars beyond a few kilometers or a few dozen kilometers. Consequently, at these distances, these objects could very well use classic propulsion systems without being detected. Mainly, then, problems with respect to power consumption and mass to be expelled are raised, but the method reviewed below in 8.1.1.3 would enable these problems to be partially solved.\nMore advanced technologically are propulsion systems that call for very high velocity exhaust - a considerable fraction of the speed of light - of particle beams. Due to the"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"extremely high exhaust velocity, the mass expelled is low and expulsion can be continued for a very long time. Such particle beam generators that can be loaded on board satellites have been developed for space warfare in the former USSR (at the von Ardenne laboratory in Soukhoumi, Georgia) and the United States, especially at the Argonne National Laboratory. At present, of course, these beams are much less powerful than what would be necessary here, but they are already of interest as low-power engines once out of the proximity of planets. The U.S. probe \"Deep Space 1\", which should narrowly miss asteroid 1992 KD on July 29, 1999, was equipped with an engine of this type.\nOther methods of space propulsion are being studied very actively: nuclear propulsion using fission (\"NERVA,\" \"ORION,\" and \"DAEDALUS\" projects) and, more recently, fusion, which would offer respective gains of one and over two orders of magnitude in comparison with the best engines at present. Beyond this, the use of power stored in the form of antimatter - which has become credible since CERN [European Council for Nuclear Research] created an antihydrogen atom and demonstrated the means for storing it - will offer gains even one hundred times greater.\nThis is why a growing number of research centers are doing work on this subject: the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, the Air Force Astronautical Laboratory (Edwards Air Force Base), where antigravitation is also being studied, according to the June 10, 1996 issue of Jane's Defence Weekly. The latter topic is reportedly also being pursued in Great Britain and in the CIS [Commonwealth of Independent States].\n\n8.1.1.3 Use of Planetary or Stellar Impulse\n\nCloser to our current technologies, even though, strictly speaking, it does not have to do with propulsion, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory imagined, in 1961, that a spacecraft slingshotting off the potential [gravity] wells of suitably selected planets could attain higher and higher speeds without expending any energy. This method is now routinely used for missions to the remote planets in our [solar] system. One can then envision that by using \"reflections,\" not only by planets but also by stars, as Dyson proposed in 1963, considerable speeds could be attained (limited only by escape velocities) and interstellar distances could be crossed using relatively little energy at the price, of course, of the time necessary for the departure and arrival slingshots\nThis method would lead to interstellar voyage lengths probably figuring in thousands of years, thus with an order of magnitude greater than lengths anticipated for the envisioned antimatter propulsion.\n\n8.1.1.4 Conclusion Regarding Travel\n\nTo sum up, for travel both in the atmosphere and in space, we can formulate reasonable hypotheses on flight without any apparent means of lift in the first case and on the crossing of great distances, up to an interstellar scale, in the second.\n\n8.1.2 The Shutting Off of Land Vehicle Engines\n\nTo explain this phenomenon, which has been reported frequently abroad, it is necessary to consider a remote action. [Since] no beams of light appear to be associated with these engine, immobilizations we can imagine radio-frequency radiation, such as microwaves,"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"which we know can cause effects of this type and which can be easily formed into beams to act from a distance. Under these conditions, microwave emissions from unknown objects would be likely to create around the vehicle an electrical field strong enough to cause, when added to the ignition voltages, ionization and electrical breakdown of the air around the high voltage circuit of the engine (ignition) coil, distributor, spark plug wire), thus short-circuiting the firing pulses to the engine mass and shutting it off.\nSince electronic ignition came into widespread use in the 70s, the action of microwaves, apart from the mechanism previously described, may be exerted directly, paralyzing the electronic circuit generating the high voltage. We can therefore envision the action of unknown objects on land vehicles, including nowadays those with diesel engines, which are made vulnerable due to their more and more common electronic regulation circuit. Let us recall that the ability to generate high power microwave beams is within the capabilities of our own technologies, as demonstrated by the intensive work being carried out in the United States and the former USSR to develop microwave weapons intended precisely to destroy or immobilize enemy electronic systems from a distance, and even to act on personnel. In France, high power microwave generators that can be used for this purpose are being studied.\nThis does not rule out the possibility of other types of radiation being used. Charged particle beams would be capable of analogous effects, passing through, if necessary, living matter, such as the bodies of some witnesses, without being felt by the latter or leaving any notable or lasting sequels..\nThis can be illustrated by the beams of accelerators used in proton therapy, which begin by passing through tissue without causing too much damage and becoming destructive only when their energy falls below a certain threshold as a result of their penetration.\nThis mode of action corresponds, moreover, to certain testimonies that report the observation of beams of light passing through physical obstacles; in fact, by ionizing the air, proton beams generally do become visible in the form of truncated beams of light the length of which is a function of their initial energy.\n\n8.1.3 Locomotive Paralysis of Some Witnesses\n\nThis phenomenon is less common. It is remarkable in that the paralysis reported only affect certain voluntary movements, but not respiration or posture (balance, in particular, is not compromised; the witnesses do not fall down) or eye movements. From the standpoint of concepts, it can be remarked that in human beings posture and respiration are controlled by the cerebellum, an organ that is independent of the cerebrum, which governs voluntary movements. The paralysis effects observed can reasonably be attributed to microwaves acting from a distance on certain parts of the human body (this is also one of the objectives of the work mentioned above on microwave weapons). We should note that these effects, among others, are being studied at the Air Force Weapons Laboratory at Kirtland AFB.\n\n8.2 Modeling and Credibility\n\nThe fact that we can formulate a credible hypothesis on the propulsion of the objects sighted is obviously only a positive indication, but not proof of their existence, no more than that of their conformity to the model that we imagine.\nIn this regard, the history of the technique teaches humility, but it can also yield quasi"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"certainties:\n- humility in noting prognostic errors committed in the past. It suffices to recall the affirmations made by or attributed to several very great scientists: \"You cannot breath in tunnels,\" \"science is almost finished,\" \"something heavier than air cannot fly,\" etc. It would therefore be presumptuous to claim to foresee, based on _ our current knowledge and accomplishments what might be technologies (-----) only slightly more advanced than our own - or our own technologies in one or two centuries. Let us consider that only 150 years ago, engines, electricity, the existence of the atom, and Hertzian waves were unknown! We can also reread Jules Verne: Paris au XXe siècle [Paris in the 20th Century] or Hier et demain [Yesterday and Tomorrow]...\n- certainties, since scientific and technical progress can only continue, supported by more scientists and engineers than there have ever been, spurred by competition among nations. This competition, in our now \"closed\" world will focus on all of the resources that once were free: potable water, the deep sea, the polar regions, air, space, radio frequencies, etc.\nAlthough it is risky to predict the results of an increasingly accelerated scientific and technical development, it is, at least, almost certain that our own knowledge will have advanced greatly even within a few decades. There's no telling what progress will be made beyond that time! Under these circumstances, we can conclude with a high degree of certainty that movements of objects that at present are just beyond our capabilities will be technically possible within a few decades, or even a few centuries, even if the knowledge put into play is not what we are predicting.\nTo the extent that the preceding conclusion is acceptable, let us go further and comment that only a few million years will have elapsed (barring a catastrophe) between the appearance of man and the future stellar expeditions of our descendants (cf. Chapter 8.3.6 and Appendix 4).\nThis interval between the appearance on earth of a conscious intelligence and the time when we will be able to perform the same feats as those performed by the objects we are dealing with here is infinitesimal (one to two thousand years) compared with the age of the earth or even with the 600 million years that separate us from the appearance of the first living organisms at the beginning of the Cambrian period.\nBut the development of other intelligent [beings] on other worlds cannot have taken place at exactly the same rate as on earth. If the age of these other worlds, like that of the earth, is on the order of 4 billion years, and if a conscious life [form] appeared, neither the rate of its development nor the epoch in which that world was created cannot have been exactly the same as ours.\nUnder these conditions, even a minuscule deviation of 0.1%, for example, in regard to these initial data would make it possible to place such a civilization between several million years ahead of ours and several million years behind ours.\nThus the probability of the extent of development of two civilizations in the universe, and in the same solar system, being equal appears to be very low, and in all likelihood we have only two possibilities:\n- our \"neighbors\" are several thousand or several million years behind us (or do not yet exist as a conscious species), and it will be we who discover them,\n- our neighbors are ahead of us, but then the probability is that this advance figures in the thousands of years or more, rather than in years or even hundreds of years, and if we can judge from the rate of our own development, their level of development would certainly exceed our forecasting capabilities in every domain."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8.3 UFOs - Overall Hypotheses\n\nFor several dozens of years, the systematic collection and scientific study of unusual atmospheric phenomena have permitted a number of major advances. Of course, on analysis, a good proportion of the sightings have proven completely explicable: satellite, re-entries sounding balloons, etc. This has furthermore enabled the precision of the observers, as well as the veracity and consistency of the testimonies, to be tested. Cases of hoaxes are, on the whole, very rare and quite easy to detect. The majority of the observers provide reliable reports, although it is necessary to take into account the problems of diverse assessments.\nMost of the sightings of all types have also enabled the credible and well-documented sightings called UAP Ds (category D unidentified aerospace phenomena), for which no explanation has been found to be classified separately. However, these phenomena are often attested by means of consistent testimonies all the way up to visual sightings coupled with radar sightings. Of course, if there had only been ten or so UAP D [sightings], this ambiguous file could just have been classified as \"no action,\" but we are no longer at that point and are far beyond that. Thus we are forced to seek plausible explanations. All sorts of hypotheses have been constructed, and they may be classified as follows:\n\n8.3.1 Non Scientific Hypotheses\n\n\"We are being manipulated without realizing it\" (by a very secret, very powerful, and very knowledgeable group of people; by strange, unknown, or even extraterrestrial beings; by spirits; by the devil; by our psychological fantasies; etc.). Obviously, we cannot say a priori whether these hypotheses are true or false [since] they cannot be proven; their main drawback is that they aren't much good to us.\nParapsychological phenomena and collective hallucinations should be classified in this category.\nThe same is true of the idea that is sometimes expressed that the futuristic craft sighted are actually products of the future activity of humanity. Our descendants of the distant [future], who have found the way to go back in time, come to observe us...\nIt is obviously classic to try to reconstruct and observe the past via any of the traces that it leaves, and one could theoretically observe it directly (for example, by discovering a well-oriented mirror on a planet located a few light years away). It is, however, out of the question for such an observation to be able to influence a bygone time in any way, even by being detectable.\n\n8.3.2 Secret Weapons of a Superpower\n\nUAP Ds would then be piloted or remote-controlled craft of terrestrial origin. There is no lack of observers to believe that the object with fantastic performances that they saw maneuvering in the sky is the state of the art of military progress, which would explain the secrecy in which they are cloaked. Certainly studies such as those regarding the stealth aircraft or magnetohydrodynamics actually lead to impressive progress. But besides the fact that it would be extremely unwise to expose to the eyes of laymen and foreign experts in this way what there has been so much interest in concealing, it can be added today that"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"throughout the decades during which these phenomena have occurred, the secret would have inevitably come out, especially if the political upheavals of recent years are taken into account.\n\n8.3.3 Disinformation Attempts\n\nInto this category fall special effects and montages, which are generally accompanied by a lot of media publicity. Some researchers believe that without necessarily lending themselves to the manufacture of ultramodern weapons, the performances of high-tech craft might serve to brainwash public opinion in the same way as other propaganda techniques. Of course, this point of view is a direct result of the cold war period. Any means were good at that time for destabilizing the other camp, including fear of an invasion by extraterrestrials or the instilling of doubt about leaders \"who hide something manifestly very serious from us.\"\nThis type of hypothesis is even less satisfying than the preceding ones because it runs up against the objections to each of those.\n\n8.3.4 Holographic Images\n\nAt the junction between disinformation attempts and extraterrestrial hypotheses lies the technique of holographic images, whether they be the work of a superpower or extraterrestrial crews. In actual fact, this technique is difficult to employ. It requires considerable preparation because air is very transparent and diffuses light only very poorly. Therefore it is necessary to have large equipment covering the optical field used or at least to project an appropriate screen on it, for example, a film of water.\nThe first method corresponds to theoretical holographic images, while the second is simpler and is frequently used for spectacular effects, but it obviously leaves traces behind... We can also envision using clouds or a curtain of rain, but this, of course, poses multiple hazards. Without necessarily being able to judge them at present, the method of holographic images and associated methods have only very limited use.\n\n8.3.5 Unknown Natural Phenomena\n\nThis hypothesis cannot be ruled out completely and must therefore be cited. However, it is difficult to support in cases where the UFO sighted behaves in an apparently intelligent manner (approach, pursuit, evasion, and escape maneuvers, etc.).\n\n8.3.6 Extraterrestrial Hypotheses\n\nA large number of people today are convinced that UFOs are piloted by intelligent beings who have come from a very remote part of the universe and are tasked with watching us and even initiating contact with us. As appealing as they may be, these hypotheses run up against all sorts of huge difficulties. The hypothetical Martians only recently disappeared from the realm of possibility, and apart from earth, the solar system appears to be totally unable to have produced organized life and even more unable to have produced an advanced civilization. It is therefore necessary to look farther, to the stars, but the closest star is already one hundred million times further away than the moon.\nThe only contacts that we may try to establish from such distances at present are radio"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"contacts. Astronomers have attempted contacts via message transmission and radio listening in the \"SETI\" and \"MEGASETI\" programs. Although some enthusiasts have suggested futuristic ideas to \"bypass\" the vast expanse, such as, for example, the use of \"black holes,\" the crossing of interstellar distances by possible extraterrestrials has elicited much skepticism and the majority of astronomers reiterate that \"to date there has been no UFO case that is sufficiently well established to imply that it came from an extraterrestrial civilization.\"\nTwo professional astronomers, Jean-Claude Ribes and Guy Monnet, have, however, proposed a scenario in our future in space that includes plausible interstellar voyages. In this scenario, which is summarized in Appendix 4, they envision the establishment of large communities in verdant \"islands in space,\" enormous artificial structures orbiting the earth, as described by the physicist O'Neill, and even inside large asteroids, where an abundance of different materials, including water and oxygen, as well as ready protection against meteorites and cosmic radiation, are found. Later on, when our descendants have mastered the production, storage and use of antimatter as energy, they will utilize it to propel some of their habitats to another solar system. They will settle in an asteroid belt, start families there, and then visit the planets of the receiving system aboard craft that are perceived by any possible natives the same way we perceive UFOs today.\nThis scenario, which in essence relies only on laws of physics that are currently well accepted, gives the extraterrestrial hypothesis a certain degree of plausibility; it is possible to imagine that a civilization that came from somewhere else colonized the region of our asteroid belt and used it as a staging base to our planet. Current progress in the conquest of space and physics reinforces this idea.\nWe should point out that some people envisage another hypothesis, which is very controversial: the UFOs do belong to a civilization located in the asteroid belt, but this civilization itself comes from our planet. Older than any known terrestrial civilizations and highly advanced, it supposedly disappeared from earth (nuclear war, radioactivity, pollution, etc.) but resettled in the solar system.\nBoth hypotheses have to their credit the fact that they place the UFO problem outside the realm of the paranormal and promote thought about the future of our planet.\n\nChapter 9 - Organization of the Research Abroad\n\n9.1 Organization of the Research in the United States\n\nThe subject of UFOs is presently very popular in the United States. This is evidenced by the number and success of fiction films such as Independence Day, Men in Black, and Contact, which deal with this topic. A survey conducted in June 1997 for Time magazine showed that nearly one American in four believes that an extraterrestrial craft crashed at Roswell (New Mexico) at the beginning of July 1947. A professor of psychiatry at Harvard, Dr. Mack, treats the problem of the temporary abduction, whether real or imagined, of his fellow countrymen by UFOs very seriously. In view of the public's expectations, what are the authorities doing?\nThey deny that the UFO phenomenon poses a threat to national security, or that it is evidence of an extraterrestrial origin. This position has been taken almost continuously by the Air Force, which was tasked with the study of UFOs from 1948 to 1969 within the"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"framework of a project which bore the overall title Blue Book. It was confirmed in the summary and conclusions of the university commission in charge of evaluating the Blue Book [Project], the Condon Commission. The physicist Condon wrote in his conclusions that the study of UFOs had little chance of advancing science. All official studies thus came to a halt in the United States as of December 1969, and the Air Force referred those who were curious to private ufological associations.\nAlthough it was endorsed by the Academy of Sciences, the Condon report was harshly criticized by numerous scientists, particularly at the powerful AIAA (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics). The latter justly pointed out that the summary and conclusions of the report, which were drafted by Professor Condon himself, conflicted with a number of analyses within its body. The AIAA recommended moderate, but continuous scientific work on UFOs.\nAn amendment to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) passed in 1974 permitted declassified official documents on UFOs to be obtained as of 1976. One of these, in particular, attracted attention. It was a letter from Air Force Brigadier General Bolender from October 1969 stating that the imminent conclusion of the Blue Book Project would not put an end to military reports concerning UFOs that constituted a threat to national security. These were not part of the Blue Book system and would continue, as in the past, to be handled in accordance with the directive JANAP 146 and Air Force Manual 55-11.\n\n\"As regards authenticity, only negative conclusions are definitive\"\n\nBy François Louange,\nChief Executive Officer of Fleximage Company\n\nAmong the investigations conducted on the subject of UFOs, photograph analysis represents one of the more delicate areas. In fact, in the public's eyes, photographs constitute indisputable proof par excellence of the existence of the phenomenon, which gives them a very special emotional factor. But photography is in reality a field where one still finds many errors and hoaxes, because many natural or technical effects can give rise to surprising documents: it is becoming easier and easier for a specialist who has computer equipment to produce a doctored negative that stands up well to investigations. This can sometimes even prove lucrative.\nMoreover, experience shows that most of the negatives that stand up to analysis contain only extremely poor and unusable information, often limited to a saturated bright spot on a black background or vice versa, which makes this area of investigation relatively disappointing.\nFor about forty years, alleged photographs of UFOs, which are sometimes renowned in ufological circles, have occasionally been the subject of expert appraisals on the part of specialists interested in this topic. The physical and technical fields that come into play are quite varied, ranging from atmospheric propagation to photography or video and including digital image processing.\nThe analysis of a photographic document or video is broken down into two steps:\n1 - Establishing or disproving authenticity, uncovering hoaxes, fake maneuvers or parasitic phenomena that could have affected the photographing equipment or the original data storage medium (film, video cassette). This concept of authenticity is furthermore completely relative, because only negative conclusions are definitive and in the best of"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cases a document can stand up to analyses at any given moment.\n2 - With respect to a document deemed to be authentic, extracting the maximum amount of information permitting a known phenomenon to be identified or a phenomenon that is a priori inexplicable to be characterized (size, position, speed, albedo, energy emitted, etc.). This phenomenon will then be compared with other unexplained phenomena in order to draw possible parallels.\nIt is important to emphasize that the photographic as well as the video documents available come only from fortuitous witnesses; there are very few opportunities for significant data to be exploited by reason of simple statistical considerations: the chances of being witness to a rare phenomenon, the likelihood of having [camera] equipment in hand ready to use, the probability of being able to make the proper adjustments and calmly take professional quality photographs, etc.\nIn any case, it seems reasonable to limit in-depth investigations to cases in which the following two conditions are met:\n1 - The original document (negative, slide, video cassette, etc.) is available.\n2. - There is at least one other independent source of information (visual testimony or another sensing device).\nTrick of the eye: lens-shaped clouds\n\n[Photo]\nCentral bulge, broad and narrow disk, this is the definition of lenticular galaxies. It is also the definition of a type of cloud, cirrocumulus lenticularis, which forms above 7000 m altitude and up to the limits of the troposphere. Their very specific shape is due to factors such as pressure, temperature, turbulence, and very strong winds. But this shape is definitely open to every interpretation for those who wish to see it as a flying saucer...\nWhen military craft play UFOs\n\n[Photo]\nLeft:\nPhotographed in 1989 offshore from Los Angeles, this unpiloted surveillance unit is a"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Canadair CL-227 Sea Sentinel military drone.\nRight:\nThis Sikorsky \"Cypher\" surveillance drone is used by the U.S. Army in urban conflict situations.\nJANAP (Joint Army, Navy, Air Force Publication) 146 applies to military personnel but also to some civilians (flight captains of commercial aircraft, merchant marine captains) in the United States and Canada. It stipulates that an urgent report should be filed with certain authorities, which must in turn file a report, namely with the Air Operations Command (now NORAD [North American Air Defense]) in Colorado Springs, when objects requiring very urgent defensive action and/or an investigation by the armed forces of the United States or Canada are sighted.\n- Among these objects, UFOs (Unidentified Flying Objects) are listed along with missiles and hostile or unidentified submarines, etc. Disclosure of the contents of these reports is subject to the penalties of the laws cracking down on espionage. JANAP 146 was in effect in recent years and perhaps is still in force. This regulation may explain the frequent reticence of American military personnel, aviators in particular, to bring up the subject of UFOs.\nThe members of American ufological associations number several thousand. These associations attempt to fill the gap left by the public authorities in the field of \"UFO\" studies. The FOIA brought them a resurgence of activity, showing them that contrary to their statements, the Air Force and various special departments, namely the CIA, are very much interested in the subject of UFOs and have been for some time. It permitted them to learn of certain spectacular cases, such as the overflight of missile bases in 1975, or the 1976 Tehran incident related in Chapter 2. DIA deemed this a \"radar/visual\" case: \"A classic case that meets all the conditions required for a legitimate study of the UFO phenomenon.\"\nIn recent years, the three main ufological associations have been brought together by a leading U.S. personality, Marie Galbraith, to conduct a joint study. She is the wife of Evan Griffith Galbraith, who was U.S. ambassador to France from 1981 to 1985. Thus she is well-acquainted with our country and our language, since she lived on Avenue Gabriel. Supported both morally and financially by Laurance Rockefeller, brother of the famous David Rockefeller, she traveled the world to meet the principal scientists interested in UFOs and to collect the best cases.\nShe then oversaw the drafting of a clear and documented book entitled Unidentified Flying Objects, Briefing Document, the best available evidence, which was endorsed in 1995 by the chairmen of the three associations CUFOS [Center for UFO Research], FUFOR [Fund for UFO Research], and MUFON [Mutual UFO Network]. She had this work sent to more than a thousand prominent figures throughout the world and, namely, to a large number of U.S. congressmen. Her goal is to get the U.S. government and possibly other governments to end the secrecy surrounding UFOs. For the editors of the book, this secrecy is essentially military in origin: the nation that is first to reproduce the exceptional characteristics of UFOs will dominate the world. The secrecy was justified during the cold war, but it is no longer justified now given the scientific and technical breakthroughs useful to humanity that one can expect [to obtain] from the study of UFOs.\nOn the whole, Marie Galbraith's book is descriptive. It does not interpret the phenomena sighted (physical modeling or hypotheses regarding the origin of the objects). Such was also the spirit of the international scientific colloquium organized in September"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1997 by Laurance Rockefeller at Pocantico, near West Point, on the property of the Rockefeller Bros. Fund. Moderated by astrophysicist Peter Sturrock, this colloquium focused on physical evidence concerning UFOs.\nSpecialists on radar, the biological effects of microwaves, photography, etc., who often were not very familiar with the UFO problem, formed a scientific council there that judged the papers presented by the UFO researchers. French participation was quite noteworthy; it consisted of the head of SEPRA and two members of the scientific council. A summary document expressed the desire that many countries have a UFO research organization comparable to that of France\nColonel Corso's theory\nIn July 1997, for the fiftieth anniversary of the Roswell incident, an astonishing book entitled The Day After Roswell was published. It was written by Colonel Corso, who from 1953 to 1957 was the military member of the National Security Council Staff and thus was in constant contact with President Eisenhower. The foreward of this book was written by Strom Thurmond, the current chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who, already a member of this committee, appointed Corso as congressional attache when he left the Army in 1963. The author states that the object found at Roswell was indeed an extraterrestrial vessel. He reportedly saw for himself, in July 1947, the cadaver of one of the occupants preserved in a glass coffin. From 1961-1962, as chief of foreign technology in the Army R & D Department, he apparently was tasked with discretely allowing U.S. industry to benefit from the extremely high-tech objects found in the wreckage (according to him: printed circuits, a laser, light intensifier, etc.).\nColonel Corso affirms that high-ranking military officers and some U.S. congressmen know about the existence of extraterrestrial craft in our skies. They have concealed it from the public to avoid panics, but full disclosures are going to be able to be made, because the United States, which has been striving to do this for 50 years, reportedly now has the means to counter a possible UFO attack. Some of these claims are surprising at the very least, but the entire contents of the book cannot be easily dismissed when one considers the remarkable career of its author and Senator Thurmond's tribute to him. It is true that the latter requested that his foreward not appear in reprints of the book, a request that was granted. The author allegedly had not told him that the book was about UFOs... But it is difficult to believe that the foreward writer, the third in line in the U.S. Government to succeed the President, and the publisher, Simon & Schuster, were not acting with full knowledge of the facts at the time of the first printing. As soon as the book came out, the U.S. Air Force published a second report on Roswell again denying the plausibility of the hypothesis of the crash of an extraterrestrial craft. The first report, which was published in 1994, was presented as the first official study on UFOs since the end of the Blue Book [Project] in 1969 (see \"Roswell and Disinformation\" in Appendix [5]). This reaction is not incompatible with Colonel Corso's theories; it may be intended to reassure those whom Corso's revelations might worry.\n9.2 Organization of the Research in the United Kingdom\nGreat Britain has been the scene of several remarkable cases. We presented the Lakenheath \"radar/visual\" case (1956) in Chapter 2. The RAF and the Ministry in charge of it therefore became interested in UFOs very early on, but we do not possess much"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"information on their work. Since its creation in 1964, the British Ministry of Defence (MOD) has had a UFO study unit, whose [designator] abbreviation Sec(AS)2a stands for Department 2a of the Secretariat (Air Staff) division. Its activity was recently described by Nick Pope, who was its head from 1991 to 1994, in a book written in a very lively style, Open Skies, Closed Minds.\nThis department receives telephone calls or letters from witnesses, but more generally reports prepared from the depositions of these witnesses taken at police stations, airports or RAF bases. It conducts classic investigations if it deems them useful. They then question radar stations or weather stations, the RAF space object surveillance base at Flyingdales, other RAF bases, the Greenwich Observatory, etc. Its unique mission is to determine whether the reports are of interest for defense purposes (\"area of defence significance\").\nNick Pope, who is currently a MOD career employee, has broken new ground in comparison with his predecessors. He has given interviews to the press and participated in television programs.\nHe has cooperated with the ufological associations, giving their address and phone number to witnesses who have written to him. In his letters of response he admitted that a small proportion of UFO sightings defied explanation and that the MOD was keeping its mind open regarding these. His predecessors wrote: \"If we had sufficient data, all of the cases could undoubtedly be explained.\" In his book, Nick Pope evokes various hypotheses to explain certain unidentified cases that were the subject of credible and detailed reports. He strongly favors the extraterrestrial hypothesis and expresses the desire that his ministry take seriously the potential threat that UFOs represent in his eyes.\nIs there a department that is further developed than his (where he is alone) in the Ministry of Defence that would conduct secret studies on the UFO phenomenon? His statements on the subject are contradictory (pp. 129 and 181). Ralph Noyes, who was one of Nick Pope's predecessors from 1969 to 1972 and ended his career at MOD in 1977 as Undersecretary of State for Defence, considers the existence of such a department likely. Lord Hill-Norton, Admiral of the Fleet, who was Chief of Defence Staff from 1971 to 1973, shares this opinion. This information is found in a book the foreword to which was written by Lord Hill-Norton himself (Above Top Secret, by Timothy Good). Admiral Hill-Norton was among some thirty lords active in a House of Lords group studying UFOs in the 1980s. If this secret study department does exist, it can be presumed that it works in collaboration with the United States (Above Top Secret, pp. 48-49).\n9.3 Organization of the Research in Russia\nThe Academy of Sciences of the USSR has conducted studies on UFOs since 1979 at least. During that time, Vladimir Migouline, a member of this academy, expressed his opinion in La Recherche regarding the sightings made in the Soviet Union of luminous phenomena and unusual objects: \"The vast majority of these sightings correspond to real phenomena just about the same as those sighted in other countries. But there is no indisputable proof that some of them involve technological manifestations of a highly developed civilization. It is also necessary to try to connect them with atmospheric phenomena,\" he said.\nThis is the goal that his assistant Platov aimed for in a work published in 1992, UFOs and Modern Science. At that time, Migouline and Platov, heads of the expert's group on abnormal phenomena in the Academy of Sciences, proposed a scientific and technical"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cooperation program to SEPRA, but the CNES management did not follow-up on the offer. It should be noted that in the Siberian section of the Academy of Sciences, the studies, which are less well known in the West, do not rule out the extraterrestrial hypotheses, and even favor it.\nDuring \"Glasnost,\" information was disseminated on the studies being conducted by both the KGB and by the military. In 1991, the KGB declassified 124 pages of documents from Cases of Sightings of Abnormal Events over USSR Territory, 1982-1990, which covered a total of 17 regions. One of these cases, which we detailed in Chapter 3, concerns the extraordinary aerial maneuvers of three bright disks over an Army missile base near Astrakhan in 1989. The objects, which were sighted by seven military members, went from hovering to high speed and back again all without making any noise. When it was approached by a Soviet fighter jet, one object escaped so quickly that it seemed to leave the fighter jet standing still in its tracks.\nIn 1994, Colonel Boris Sokolov sold ABC News a collection of investigations conducted by military personnel from 1978 to 1988. Earlier, in 1990, the newspaper Rabochaya Tribuna had published an article by Aviation General Maltsev, who commanded the territorial air defense, concerning a well-documented visual/radar case with multiple witnesses (Pereslav-Zalesski, the night of March 21, 1990) in which a silent discoid object went from hovering to a speed two or three times faster than that of a modern fighter jet. We described this case in Chapter 2.\nPART 3\nUFOs and Defense\nTo date, a UFO has not been the certain cause of any accident or a fortiori any hostile act, at least officially; no UFO threat has materialized in France, although intimidation maneuvers have been confirmed (Chapters 1.1, 2.1, and 2.3). However, numerous manifestations observed by reliable witnesses could be the work of craft of extraterrestrial origin. Indeed, if it were a question of terrestrial craft, these could only be American and, despite all precautions taken to maintain secrecy, this would be known. The first prototype stealth aircraft flew at the end of 1977; the existence of stealth aircraft became known about ten years later, in 1988. But credible, confirmed UFO sightings began in 1944.\nCertainly, this subject still sometimes elicits amused skepticism, if not a certain mistrust with regard to those who mention it seriously, but in the absence of explanations for the phenomena sighted, the hypothesis of an extraterrestrial origin can no longer be ruled out. In this third part, we set out to study, from a strategic, scientific, political, religious, and media standpoint, the consequences of this hypothesis based on present scientific knowledge.\nChapter 10 - Strategic Planning\nThe definition of a strategy toward an \"adversary\" requires that one know the"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"adversary, understand his intentions, and ascertain his modes of action. In the case in question, we can only advance hypotheses formulated on the basis of the facts observed and their interpretation, while trying to answer three questions: Who are they? What are their intentions? Are they seeking to make contact or have they already done so?\n\n10.1 What Extraterrestrials? Who Are They and What Are They Like?\n\nA relative consistency emerges from the numerous descriptions of the phenomena: saucer, luminous sphere or cylinder, hovering followed by accelerations at lightning speed, the absence of noise, easily supersonic speed with no sonic boom, associated electromagnetic effects that interfere with the operation of nearby radio or electrical apparatus. Obviously, these extraterrestrials are highly endowed intellectually and are technologically advanced over us to have been able to achieve what we do not yet know how to do. But the rest remains a mystery! Morphology, physical make-up, type of life, manner of communication and form of society, sense of values, concept of time, motivations, etc. If they are observing us, it is necessary to note an apparent contradiction between the interest that they show in us and their furtiveness. Rather than observe us, it seems that they want to show themselves to us and to gradually acclimate us to the idea of their existence.\n\n10.2 What Intentions and What Strategy Can We Deduce from Their Behavior?\n\nExtrapolation based on a rational analysis of the objectives that the extraterrestrial civilization or civilizations could be pursuing should permit us to get an idea of the strategies that they are implementing and should consequently lead us, in response, to deduce the broad lines of what our own strategies might be. UFOs have manifested themselves in many places throughout the world in recent decades, with surprising peaks between 1952 and 1954, without our being able to deduce a well-defined course of action. What are they seeking?\nAfter the observation phase and the phase of demonstrating that they exist, it would seem logical to us for them to be seeking to leave their mark and impose their will on the States of the earth, but at present, nothing allows us to deduce from their manifestations the existence of a driving desire serving purposes that we are presently unable to discern. It is plausible that preferred contacts can be attributed to the United States. But nothing contradicts the possible establishment of other contacts with some European countries or even with Russia, China, or Japan, [or] others perhaps... However, it seems difficult to imagine that they could have been able to position themselves on earth with the complicity of certain States. Moreover, the hypotheses of contacts do not enable us to deduce the existence of some status quo with these visitors. Actually, the sporadic manifestations of UFOs and even the occurrence of repeated waves [of sightings] have continued since 1947. One would have every right to think that these visitors - fortified by their superiority - are showing their intention to continue to make themselves known in the most diverse locations on the planet and to continue to carry out their plans, the aims and means of which still escape us. It could be that, before 1947 and after, they have had fears for the future of earth, a future threatened by risks of nuclear war. Their influences have been able to be accompanied by appropriate demonstrations:\n- overflights of nuclear missile bases, an example of which is given in Chapter 3,\n- intimidation maneuvers against aircraft as in Luxeuil and Tehran (Chapters 1.1 and"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2.3),\n- witnesses paralyzed, engines shutting off, lights going out (San Carlos de Bariloche, Chapter 2.5).\nThe advances that have been made in the conquest of space and in the development of nuclear technology could be troubling them. Wouldn't it be logical to think that these extraterrestrial civilizations have established stations, even colonies, in the asteroid belt and why not relay stations on the moon? Our forays and projects studied in the United States for modifying the orbits of asteroids using H bombs in order to bring them closer to the earth's orbit for mining purposes could be disturbing them. For the moment, they do not appear to be meddling in our affairs, but it is advisable to ask ourselves what they are actually seeking. Do they want to invade earth? To preserve it from nuclear self-destruction? To learn about and preserve the patrimony that our civilizations have created over the span of centuries? In view of these uncertainties concerning their intentions, we can't tell what the future holds and, in particular, we cannot consider that they will continue not to intervene. Some of their undertakings in regard to us might, therefore, not be innocent in the long term. Perhaps they don't have any need for our sensibilities or the politics of States?\n\n10.3 Repercussions of UFO Manifestations on the Official and Unofficial Conduct of States\n\nThe repercussions have been varied in scope. Based on what can be learned of the reactions of States, it is permissible under our hypothesis to classify them as:\na) States that have no knowledge of extraterrestrial phenomena or believe they are not concerned.\nb) States that know of extraterrestrial phenomena but have no means to investigate them,\nc) States that know of extraterrestrial phenomena and have the means to investigate them,\nd) States that have entered into contact with one or more extraterrestrial civilizations and that have established relations and/or entered into political, scientific, and technical collaboration.\n\n10.4 Have Contacts Possibly Been Made with One or More States?\n\nIndividuals claim to have been contacted for the purpose of studies or with a view to establishing relations between one intelligent life form and another. Can we imagine direct and continuous contacts at the highest level of one or more States, particularly the United States? It is true that the position of that country has been among the strangest since the wave [of sightings] in June 1947, followed by the Roswell affair in July 1947 (cf. Appendix 5). If the Americans were able on that occasion or on other occasions to collect at least debris or entire wreckage of extraterrestrial vessels in fairly good condition, and even cadavers of humanoids, a certain type of contact would then have been established.\nFirst statements and reactions are often considered to be more probative than subsequent affirmations. Thus immediately following what would later become the Roswell affair, General Twining was tasked with preparing a secret report on \"flying disks,\" the existence of which was not revealed until 22 years later in the Condon report. It emerges from this that these objects truly do exist. But since then the United States has followed a policy of increasing secrecy (classification above \"top secret\" of certain UFO"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"files, according to General Barry Goldwater) and constant disinformation. The strange conclusions of the Condon report are just one case in point. Why would, and how could, such an important secret be kept all the way up to the present, despite everything? The simplest response would be that the United States wants to maintain at any cost military technological superiority over rival countries and, perhaps, a preferential contact.\nThis policy of secrecy and disinformation could have been dictated by an understandable concern for not creating panic reactions or irrational crazes among the public, or the concern at the time for protecting the country against actions by the USSR, or else, in a more prosaic and political fashion, not appearing in the eyes of voters to be incapable of providing convincing explanations regarding these phenomena. No doubt it would not do to undermine the prestige of the armed forces, which was incapable of interdicting these violations of air space, and invite attacks against the military budgets on the part of political opponents. Anything is conceivable, even the fear of seeing various government agencies accused of having lied at one time or another.\n\nWhatever the case, it is symptomatic and illustrative to note that since 1953, the United States has equipped itself with an impressive repressive arsenal, which is still in force, it seems. In particular, they enacted two military regulations, AFR (Air Force Regulation) 200-2 and JANAP (Joint Army Navy Air Force Publication) 146, the first prohibiting the public disclosure of information relating to sightings of unidentified objects and the second making the unauthorized disclosure of a UFO sighting by the witness an infraction punishable by 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. The JANAP regulation applies to military personnel, but also to commercial airline pilots and captains in the merchant marine.\n\n10.5 What Measures Must We Take From Now On?\n\nWhether or not UFOs are extraterrestrial in origin, the UFO phenomenon is already with us and, at any rate, requires critical vigilance on our part. In particular, the phenomenon involves risks of destabilizing manipulations from a media, psychological, cultural, and religious standpoint: panic fear, world wars, psychoses created by sects or lobbies, etc. These appreciable risks of cosmic fear, as well as the discovery and no doubt conquest of the cosmos that is to come, henceforth justify, on the part of the political, scientific, and intellectual elite, a certain degree of cosmic vigilance calculated to prevent any shocking surprise, erroneous interpretation, and malicious or unhealthy manipulation.\n\nWithout a doubt, measures must be contemplated on the national and international levels. Specifically, whatever the givens are with respect to American political problems, and in the face of a posture of ongoing secrecy, how can we conceive of harmonious political and military relations among allies, and particularly within NATO, which normally must be founded on basic trust, if access to information of incalculable importance - particularly technological information - is not shared?\n\n10.5.1 National Structures\n\nIf France wants to affirm its presence in this domain, it seems urgent to expand SEPRA, which must:"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- increase its human and material resources so as to be able to collect information relating to all UFO manifestations, both in Europe and throughout the world,\n- expand its investigation and analysis capabilities,\n- boost its representation and foreign relations status.\nIt would likewise be advisable to create a unit at the highest State level to collaborate with SEPRA that would be tasked with:\n- formulating all prospective hypotheses,\n- promoting scientific and technical research and, as such, would have a small minimum budget,\n- proposing elements of military strategy,\n- participating in the establishment of regional cooperation agreements with interested European and foreign countries. It should be noted that many countries already have small bodies for the collection of UFO sightings within their armed forces or intelligence services.\n\n10.5.2 European Structures\n\nIt would be desirable then for the European States and the European Union Commission to conduct every type of research and to initiate diplomatic approaches with the United States, exerting useful pressure, to clarify this crucial issue, which must fall within the scope of political and strategic alliances. Would it perhaps be opportune for France to propose to the Commission that it create within it - so as to no longer be blind, dumb, and paralyzed - a special expanded coordinating body provided with the necessary human and material resources?\n\n10.6 What Situations Must We Prepare For?\n\nWhat strategies could we map out in the following situations:\n- appearance of UFO and extraterrestrial desire to establish an official and peaceful contact,\n- chance or intentional discovery of a microbase or base at some location in France or in Europe: position to adopt toward a friendly or non-friendly power,\n- invasion (hardly likely given the fact that an invasion could have been carried out before the discovery of the atom) and targeted or massive attacks on strategic or nonstrategic locations,\n- deliberate manipulation or disinformation with a view to destabilizing other States.\nIn the case of the first situation cited, we are not precluded from suggesting that the States that are equipped with sophisticated research and analysis tools will perhaps have more chances than others of being chosen as preferred contacts, but at what risks and advantages?\n\nChapter 11 - Aeronautical Implications\n\n11.1 Why Aeronautical Implications?\n\nIt is not intellectually possible to remain indifferent in light of an unexplained"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"aeronautical phenomenon which numerous civilian and military pilots have come face to face with. Of the several hundred confirmed aeronautical cases, there are primarily five types of implications:\n- simple sighting of a phenomenon by the crew, passengers, or ground personnel,\n- detection of a track on a radar screen, which occurs in one out of five aeronautical cases, sometimes culminating in the recording of a track, as was the case on January 28, 1994, at the Cinq-Mars-la-Pile Control and Detection Center (CDC) (cf. Chapter 1),\n- interferences with ground (San Carlos de Bariloche) or onboard (Tehran) electrical or electronic equipment,\n- shadowing of aircraft (San Carlos de Bariloche, RB-47, etc.),\n- apparently aggressive conduct (Colonel Giraud in his Mirage IV, student pilot at Tours, the Tehran incident, etc.).\nThe number of testimonies and the quality of the witnesses are such that one cannot dodge the phenomenon and aeronautic personnel, and more especially defense personnel, must be sensitized and prepared to deal with the situation. In fact, how can one try to ignore a phenomenon that is manifested by the regular crossing of our air space by moving objects the behavior of which suggests that they are piloted by an intelligent [being]? Can one claim, because this appears to exceed our technical knowledge, that it does not fall within our purview? If we do nothing, the very principle of defense and air intelligence would be called into question.\nThe first sightings made by aviators date back to the beginning of the 40s. Since then, the number of unexplained sightings (after an expert's appraisal: UAP Ds) reported by pilots or [air traffic] controllers has risen to over 500. As a reminder, in France, this figure is three or four since 1951. It is the responsibility of the Air Force to take into account these phenomena, which, until proven otherwise, occur primarily in air space.\n\n11.2 Who is Involved?\n\n11.2.1 Flight Crew\n\nThe flight crew is naturally involved, particularly the pilots, because whether they are civilian or military, they are in a more advantageous position for making sightings and would be the first affected in the event of an incident (risk of collision, in particular). This is especially true for a combat pilot, because he is trained to constantly monitor the sky and he now has more and more advanced weapons systems capable of detecting faster and faster and smaller and smaller targets at greater and greater distances. The pilot/weapons system pair is now more than ever an excellent sighting instrument and would be our first means of intervention if, by chance, this were to prove necessary. The concerns of a commercial airline pilot are different because, in addition to the fact that he does not have the same equipment, his priority is obviously the safety of his passengers. Although he remains a primary partner in the quest for information, he would be totally powerless in the face of an aggressive stance by a UFO.\n\n11.2.2 [Air Traffic] Controllers\n\nThe radar [air traffic] controller is, of course, involved, but depending on whether he is civilian or military, the control equipment at his disposal offer him different options. In both cases, since he is in radio contact with the pilot, it is he who is the first to receive the sighting report from the crew."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"He must be prepared to note and supplement the sightings transmitted with the clear-headedness that the distance of his position gives him. In regard to radar detection, only the military controller has adequate equipment to detect a flying object that does not follow general air traffic rules. In fact, military air defense radars permit a visual display of the primary detection, as well as a synthetic display used by civilian [air traffic] controllers, to appear on the military controller's radar scope (see Appendix 1). In addition, they are the only ones who are able to obtain an image of craft moving at the supposed speeds of UFOs. Finally, the means to record and reconstruct radar situations on site at the Control and Detection Centers (CDC) enable supplemental investigations to be conducted, if necessary.\n\n11.2.3 Meteorologists\n\nUnusual phenomena are often explained by meteorological phenomena. Questions can easily be explained if the specialized departments are informed of the importance of their observations. All military and civilian personnel specializing in meteorology must therefore be able to meet this expectation.\n\n11.2.4 CNES Engineers\n\nCNES engineers are the French space specialists. They cannot remain indifferent to UFO phenomena. Knowledge of our universe, observation of the sky, and surveillance of anything that is deployed into the sky naturally makes them just the right people to head up the study of extraterrestrial phenomena. We have described their work above.\n\n11.2.5 Engineers in the Aeronautics Sector\n\nEngineers in the aeronautic sector are naturally involved. Their work is presented in the next chapter on scientific and technical implications.\n\n11.3 How Do We Involve Aeronautics [Personnel]?\n\nIn order for aeronautics personnel, along with their resources, to be involved, we need to know how to interest them and, in order to do this, how to inform them of the phenomenon, to specify what is expected of them, and to define what their reflex responses should be and what course of action they should take.\n\n11.3.1 Informing Personnel\n\nInforming amounts, first and foremost, to getting someone to accept the possibility of the presence of extraterrestrial craft in our sky. It is necessary to overcome the fear of ridicule and to admit that, failing certainty, there are strong presumptions based on a list of examples selected from among the testimonies from the aeronautics world.\nMoreover, it is necessary to reach all generations. Informational conferences can be easily scheduled at aeronautics schools for the young generations (Ecole de l'Air, Ecole Nationale de l'Aviation Civile [National Civil Aviation School] (ENAC, Sup'Aéro, etc.), and for the not-so-young, in continuing education courses and, obviously, at the Collège Interarmées de Défense [Interarmy Defense College] (CID) and IHEDN. SEPRA is already holding conferences at ENAC within the framework of civilian [air traffic]"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"controller training.\nThis practice just needs to be extended to all flight crew training schools, regardless of the specialty being taught. For the generations already on the job, these conferences can easily be offered at the Control and Detection Centers and flight units for military personnel, and, at least for civilian [air traffic] controllers, at the Regional Air Navigation Centers (CRNA). As for commercial flight crews, the airline companies - Air France, in particular - have set up a systematic information sheet for crews that is periodically updated.\nThis information must furthermore be updated on a regular basis in the knowledge that the intended objective is to permit a future witness, whether he plays an active role or is merely an observer, to be fully aware of what course of action to take in the face of the phenomenon sighted. If we want personnel to get involved, it is necessary that they know how to react in real time and what to communicate and to whom, how to take the measures corresponding to the present situation, etc. For this reason, it is advisable to define with them what their reflex responses should be and what course of action they should take.\n\n11.3.2 Reflex Responses\n\nIndeed, it is necessary to instill in personnel who may face the phenomenon what their reflex responses should be, in the knowledge that they may merely be simple observers or, in some cases, have to take concrete measures (for example, at San Carlos de Bariloche, the surprise of the landing strip lights going out in the middle of the UFO incident). It is quite certain that it would be better to be prepared in order to be fully aware of what course of action to take in the face of such an unforeseen and poorly understood event. These reflex responses differ in type depending on whether it is a matter of sighting, recording a testimony, transmitting information collected, or reacting in real time in order to take ad hoc measures in response to the phenomenon.\n\n11.3.3 Course of Action to Take\n\nThe course of action to take seems to us to be summarized as follows: observe, note the maximum amount of details, take photographs if possible, report, allowing the visitors the initiative of possibly making contact, and avoid premature publicity in the media.\n\n11.3.3.1 Objective Observation\n\nIn the face of an unknown situation, one must be on guard against any instinctive self-defense reaction that could be easily interpreted as a provocation. One must just observe and avoid any initiative aimed at seeking contact.\n\n11.3.3.2 Reporting\nOnce a phenomenon has been sighted, it is advisable to report it in order to alert the other crews, on the one hand, which is what is currently done, and the authorities, on the other hand, through the air [traffic] control chain of command in civilian cases and the air defense chain of command in military cases.\n\n11.3.3.3 Remaining Discrete Vis-à-Vis the Public\nAs a witness to a phenomenon of this type, one must know how to adopt a certain level"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of discretion vis-à-vis the press. It is essential to allow scientists [time] to make use of the information before letting the media trigger the curiosity of the general public, which could result in the disappearance of important evidence.\n\nChapter 12 - Scientific and Technical Implications\n\nThe significance of the UFO phenomenon to defense in the broad sense leads to several proposals.\n\n12.1 Stepping Up the Collection and Analysis of Data\n\nIt is, of course, advisable to continue and, if possible, expand geographically the collection, initial analysis, and classification of data and testimonies performed successively by GEPAN and then by SEPRA, which was described in Chapters 5 and 6.\n\n12.2 Establishing a Watch and Initiate Work Upstream\n\nFrom the studies presented in Chapter 8, it can be concluded that at least a passive, and preferably an active, techno-watch is required in the fields of leading-edge propulsion such as, for example, magnetohydrodynamics. It is truly essential to know what the other nations are doing in this area. In other high-tech fields, the study of the various testimonies could be combined with appropriate scientific experiments to enable significant progress. A typical example is that of particle beams or microwaves, together with their effects: tools, weapons, etc. All of these subjects are, on the whole, more advanced than the technical problems presently under study by DGA or the public research institutions. Therefore they will not be dealt with unless a decision is made at the highest State level.\n\n12.3 Encouraging Thought in Order to Place the Phenomena in a Global Context\n\nThe work mentioned above will enable progress in the partial models of the phenomena sighted, along with considerable spill-over for defense and industry. But the global interpretation of these well-documented but inexplicable phenomena will require other research. The principal areas of research relate to the extraterrestrial hypothesis; we will mention ,for reference, the current research on the detection of extrasolar planets, which will take a new direction when the VLT (Very Large Telescope) of the ESO (European Southern Observatory) in Chile enables them to be observed directly. Each discovery of a planet, which is presently made indirectly via the disturbances that the planet causes in its star, has met with a favorable response in the media.\nLess spectacular, albeit fascinating to a cultured public, is the research on the origin of life that is being conducted internationally at a very satisfying rate. It forms the basis of exobiology, the science of extraterrestrial life (see Appendix 3). Studies on evolution and its mechanisms are currently handicapped by school disputes. They are important to our subject: How might life evolve elsewhere? Underdeveloped but also important are the studies on the genesis and future of civilizations. The latter are normally extended by long-term, forward-looking scenarios for our planet and, of course, for others.\nInterstellar travel, as visualized in Appendix 4 - entitled \"Colonization of Space\" - must be the object of at least passive monitoring. This subject is currently being dealt with in the United States, where numerous NASA or Pentagon study contracts concern"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"propulsion using antimatter in solar or interstellar space. It was also in the United States where the astronomer Papagiannis won a NASA study contract a few years ago to detect possible space cities in the asteroid belt located between the planets Mars and Jupiter. In carrying out the study, he examined the photos taken in 1983 by the IRAS [Infrared Astronomical Satellite] satellite and looked for possible abnormal infrared emissions coming from objects in this belt. It would seem that NASA did not renew Papagiannis' contract, which apparently did not yield any results.\n\n12.4 Special Studies\n\nSome studies do not come under the \"hard\" sciences and technologies: for interstellar voyages, the stability of the earmarked societies requires study. What, in particular, is their minimum size? The different attempts at disinformation made by certain foreign governments should be analyzed discretely, but in depth. The wish of these governments to appropriate for themselves alone any possible futuristic technologies relating to military aircraft and weapons might help explain these attempts (see Appendices 5 and 7). It would be advisable to already be anticipating the measures to be taken and the decisions to be made should events such as indubitable physical or radio contacts with an outside civilization take place.\n\nChapter 13 - Political and Religious Implications\n\nAn assessment of the impact that the formal confirmation of the existence of UFOs and extraterrestrial civilizations would have on the political and religious situation of the countries on earth could be a bit of a challenge. However, the task is less arduous when we try to put ourselves in the shoes of extraterrestrials who supposedly have chosen earth as a field of observation and/or intervention. We will use this method. It is appropriate, of course, to postulate that the technical and human difficulties have been resolved, permitting us to exceed the limits of our solar system, and even our galaxy:\n\n- Either in secular voyages aboard \"ship-worlds,\" in which thousands of volunteers who have embarked would see their generations reproduce. It is necessary to keep in mind that these craft will not be able to one day return to earth, at least that is what we are assuming, which would confer - de facto - a political autonomy and freedom of decision to the onboard government independent of orders and programs established prior to departing earth (cf. Appendix 4: \"Colonization of Space\").\n\n- Or, in [voyages of] several months or years - based on totally revolutionary scientific concepts and techniques that remain to be imagined - using aircraft or probes piloted by classic crews or by bionic androids, which would follow the instructions received from a parent station or from earth.\n\nDuring the course of these explorations, we might discover one or more celestial bodies populated with beings that have evolved more or less similarly to us, \"humans,\" humanoid, or even stranger creatures. They may have created civilizations that are comparable to or more advanced than our present civilization, or they may be endowed with only rudimentary aptitudes for civilization, unless they still remain only at the elementary survival stage.\n\n(Nota Bene: in this chapter, the numbers in parentheses refer to the references, pp. 87 to 89)"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13.1 Phase One: Observation From a Distance (Remote Sensing and Observation ?)\n\nIt seems reasonable to think that our earthling explorers have received a mission to peacefully observe these worlds and/or conquer, purely and simply, these new territories in order to establish a line of descendants there (cf. 13.4 below). The state of advancement of the local populations will likely dictate the manner of obtaining, as well as the nature and duration, of these observations, and the initial observations will, of course, be for analyzing:\n\n- the living organisms, the manners in which they think and live, their languages, their religions and beliefs, their arts, sciences, techniques and weapons, their political institutions, their social organizations, and their histories in general,\n\n- the environments in which these populations live, [and] animals, plants, minerals, etc.\nThis first phase, which excludes any physical or material contact, would be that of scientific, in vivo laboratory observation: electronic surveillance, remote sensing, recording, decrypting of languages, analyses, evaluations, etc. It is important to emphasize that this period could last one year, ten years, a century, [or] a thousand years, why not ? Actually, what better scientific experiment - lato sensu - than that of having more or less civilized, stagnant or evolving populations, either at peace or at war, organized in a hundred different manners, no doubt having languages that are foreign to one another, each one assuming, in its own way, the organization of ts terrestrial and celestial cities. In a word, we would be in the situation of observing ourselves!\n\n13.2 Phase Two: In situ Sampling and Furtive Appearances\n\nThe interpretation of the data collected can only be complete when a second phase has been implemented, during which sampling and analyses of mineral, plant, and animal elements, and perhaps even elements from evolved beings, are performed. Consequently, the question is raised as to the types of contacts that would be appropriate to establish and the political, psychological, and religious implications for the local populations that might result from these contacts: furtive and covert contacts, visible and overt contacts, continuous or intermittent contacts. If the furtive and covert mode of operation is initiallyselected, it nevertheless could not - at least based on the present state of our technology - go completely unnoticed by the indigenous populations. It is permissible to consider that the psychological and religious impacts may vary according to the different types of political organizations and the levels of moral and scientific development encountered on the same world.\n\n13.2.1 Impacts on Preindustrial-Age Civilizations\n\nIndividuals or masses from preindustrial-age civilizations might note the passage and/or landing of our ships or our remote-controlled craft. They might collectively view them equally as natural, divine, extraordinary, supernatural, aberrant, or diabolical phenomena (frescoes in the Yugoslavian monastery at Detchani, spheres in Nuremberg and Basel in 1561 and 1566 - cf. Appendix 6). Furthermore, the collective memories of these peoples and their imagination in general could be more or less sharply marked by such manifestations if they are accompanied, in particular, by the sighting of our astronauts,"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"whether dressed in their coveralls or their space suits or not, or robots, androids, or any\nartifacts that we may deem appropriate to disembark or represent. Such appearances, if\nthe local authorities note and publicly certify their reality, would undoubtedly have a\ncreative impact capable of modifying the indigenous political and religious conceptions for\nsome time.\n\n13.2.1.1 Impacts on Local Religions\n\nSince terrestrial and celestial orders are closely interlinked in people's minds, the\nappearances of spaceships or remote-controlled craft, and, moreover, the appearances of\nastronauts or bionic robots, would be capable of creating a lasting impression in minds,\nreorienting religions, inspiring new ones. or originating founding myths. The flying\nmachines that Ezekiel described at length (1), the air war of the Ramayana, the Epic of\nGilgamesh (2), the Elohim of Genesis (3), and the Watchmen of the Sky, mixing with the\ndaughters of men and begetting giants, whom Enoch also speaks of (4), and more\ngenerally, the Immortals, the Sons or the Kings of the Sky of the Orient and China (5),\nJapan, the \"Land of Gods\" (6), the Viracochas of South America, the Incas, or the great\ngods of Ancient Egypt, the Gods, the Titans, the Giants, the Children of the Gods, and the\nHeros of western and oriental Antiquity (7), etc., come to mind.\nBoth supernatural and extraordinary phenomena were part of the natural order of things\nin the past. Would religions founded on the existence of a God or a creative order be\nshattered by such apparitions? Nothing is less certain. Once the shock, terror, and\ncuriosity have passed, a new appreciation of the cosmic order could replace the old\nreligious conceptions, without necessarily destroying the divine principle itself. To say the\nleast, these religious conceptions could be reoriented or even sublimated. God does not\ntravel around in a spaceship. Besides, the great religions of earth do not condemn the idea\nof the existence of other inhabited worlds in the universe. Must we recall that certain\ncollective memories experience aberrations, despite the tangible proof subsequently\nfurnished to the catechumen (the cult of the cargo plane in New Hebrides) (8)?\nBonaparte's military and scientific expedition to Egypt left no trace in the local annals,\nwhich recorded only an interruption of the pilgrimage to Mecca (9). Closer to home,\nmany people did not believe that men had walked on the moon, believing it to be a\npublicity stunt or disinformation. It would be appropriate, however, to avoid\noverestimating this impact, insofar as all ancient civilizations conceived of pantheons, the\ngods of which were associated with terrifying manifestations of the sea, wind, volcanoes,\nearthquakes, or lightning. It is therefore difficult to say whether they were the avatars of\nextraterrestrial influences or, more simply, the product of the invention of mythologies\nexplaining the world.\n\n13.2.1.2 Political Impacts\n\nWith respect to the political impacts, these should be much more ephemeral, at least in\nappearance. In fact, once the moments of astonishment have passed, the political\norganization of States does not seem to have to be affected in a lasting manner, since\ncontingencies quickly regain the upper hand. However, that monarch or chief of state\ncould proclaim himself the exclusive and privileged interpreter of these extraordinary\nmanifestations. Would he not be tempted to consecrate himself a god-king or a king-god"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in the eyes of his subjects?\nOnce again without being able to distinguish what is the product of the natural and\nspontaneous search for the legitimacy of power from what could actually only be the result\nof an opportunity seized by inveigling, we are forced to note that history abounds in god-\nkings or king-gods (pharaohs; Assyrian kings; Hellenic epiphanic kings; Roman, Chinese,\nor Japanese emperors; sons of the Sun of Central or South America, etc.).\n\n13.2.2 Impacts on Industrial-Age Civilizations\n\nIndustrial-age civilizations are more skeptical than they formerly were and have more\ndifficulty envisioning what is not a product of the immediately explainable or the simply\nmeasurable. However, it is certain that the furnishing of irrefutable proof of the existence\nof extraterrestrials would leave a profound mark on populations such as ours today. This\nissue is at the heart of our report.\n\n13.3 Phase Three: Influences on Local Civilizations\n\nThe third phase would be that of the influences that we would consider appropriate to\nexert on the environment and the civilizations encountered with a view to causing them to\nevolve in our fashion. It goes without saying that the advantages and risks would have to\nbe studied carefully.\n\n13.3.1 Influences on Preindustrial-Age Civilizations\n\nWe might consider it necessary, in certain cases, to influence the environment in a\nspecific manner and the evolution of local civilizations in a subtle way. It might seem\nnecessary to us, upon completion of our observations and our analyses, to modify, bit by\nbit, the natural environment and the ecosystem by, for example, seeding or introducing\nselect plants and organisms that are lacking.\nLikewise, the course of indigenous civilizations could be gradually modified by\ninfluencing, either from a distance or directly, the qualities or defects of select individuals,\naccentuating their intellectual and moral tendencies and their scientific knowledge, or by\ncausing genetic mutations by different processes that are yet to be invented.\nIn this case, it would be a matter of playing the role that these populations would have\nwillingly reserved for gods, who, by providing sacred texts, would reorient, for example,\ntheir sense of morals, their religiosity, and perhaps their laws and their political\ninstitutions. The use of elements likely to terrify and impress could be appropriate in some\ncases. And, with all due reverence, nothing would prevent one from thinking of different\nepisodes in the Old Testament, the conditions under which the laws of Manu were\ninstituted (10) or even the Koran given. The influences relate back to a certain number of\nenigmas in history, including, perhaps, the concomitant appearance of the great\ncivilizations of the Indus, Mesopotamia, and Egypt (cities, architecture, writing, calendar,\nastronomy, etc.). They also call to mind the extraordinary map of the Antarctic, which\nwas drawn almost free of ice by the Frenchman Oronce Fine in 1531, nearly three centuries\nprior to the discovery of this continent in 1820 (11).\n\n13.3.2 Influences on Industrial-Age Civilizations"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The nature of these influences will vary according to the type of civilization, its\ntechnological development, and its psychological acclimatization or lack thereof to the\nexistence of extraterrestrial civilizations. It would be advisable beforehand to accustom\nthe mind of these populations to the idea of the probable existence of extraterrestrial\ncivilizations (science-fiction novels, films, cartoon strips, video games, advertisements, a\nfavorable psychological climate, [and] why not suitable sects?, etc.).\nNew and essential technological knowledge could be provided via different avenues or\nby means of chance or provoked accidents with one of our spacecraft. The contemporary\nRoswell case thus comes to mind. In order for this case to be retained in full (or disposed\nof), it would still be necessary for the U.S. government to accept to show, communicate\nand let analyze, without beating around he bush, all of the elements that it actually\nrecovered on that occasion.\n\n13.4 Phase Four: Direct Contacts\n\nA fourth phase would be that of establishing direct contact with the locals or with entire\npopulations, whether or not a vanguard of bionic robots were used. Once again, the goals\nsought must be precisely determined. The benefit and true utility of establishing such\ncontacts must be weighed with care in order to calculate the risks and consequences. A\nstringent program could plan for these. However, a serious technical accident affecting\none of our spacecraft could be the start of an unofficial contact, a necessary settlement, or\na colonization, or even, if necessary, an information-disinformation campaign. It is also\nadvisable to envision the sedition of some of our crews whom it might be necessary to\ndisembark or who might decide on their own authority to live on one of the worlds\ndiscovered and, eventually, mix with the indigenous populations, going against orders\nreceived, whatever happens not to intervene or interfere in local affairs. These contacts\npresuppose that the worlds discovered are populated with human beings or hominids\nwhose complexion is identical or close to ours. But under the hypothesis of contacts and\nplanned long-term settlements of members of our crews, should mixes be prohibited, as\nprophylaxis, by imposing a major ban on them (12) or, on the contrary, should they be\ntolerated and even encouraged? Bearing in mind that direct or prolonged contacts would\ninevitably lead the indigenous populations to believe, in fine, that we are not so different\nfrom them. It would be prudent, however, to send remote-controlled androids in advance\nin order to assess the reactions that such an intrusion would arouse, or to acclimate the\npopulations to the idea through furtive, episodic appearances.\n\n13.4.1 Direct Contacts with Preindustrial-Age Civilizations\n\nIt is certain that such contacts would immediately cause the local populations to\nimagine that they are in the presence of gods. Historical parallels naturally come to mind:\nthe arrival of the Spaniards in Central America in armor and on horseback, or, more\ngenerally, the arrival of the Europeans at the time of the discovery and exploration of the\nglobe. The impact on populations that had never seen horses, armor that shone brightly in\nthe sun, or white men, particularly with blond or red hair, must have been felt strongly.\nHowever, the shock of these apparitions would be quickly lessened with the multiplication\nof relations, and even more so if our crews were to take an eminent place in the local\npolitical and military orders. This, of course, relates back to the different epics of the\ndiscovery of the world, European colonization, and also the end of the western empires."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13.4.2 Direct Contacts with Industrial-Age Civilizations\n\nThe day would come when we believed that these civilizations, gradually brought to\nour level through our efforts, are able to participate in our world. With the ground\nprepared in advance, contacts could, for example, be established discretely with selected\nindividuals or at the highest level of the States, or of some of them, and, if possible, be\nkept secret. Although leaks should not be ruled out, the leaders selected would then have\nto conduct information, disinformation, and counterinformation campaigns to maintain the\nprivileged nature of these relations and, who knows, to benefit, from our side, from novel\nscientific, technical, and political information, giving them an edge over their rivals. The\nselection of States, rulers, key figures, or mere individuals would, of course, be of\nparamount importance.\nBefore or after the implementation of an influencing program, why not imagine having\nbionic robots that look like humans or resemble the living beings there appear in order not\nto risk the lives of members of our expeditions? Finally, why not purely and simply\npresent ourselves openly and publicly? It is easy to imagine the huge sensation that this\nwould cause in all psychological, political, military, strategic, and religious spheres, to say\nnothing of the media, [as well as the] multiple meetings and international colloquiums,\nuninterrupted sessions of organizations such as the UN, calls for \"world unity,\"\ninternational consultations, the creation of welcoming committees, etc. [that it would\nprompt]. The rivalry of the States would be interesting to observe.\nIt goes without saying that our intentions must be perceived as peaceful. If this were\nnot our policy, there would, of course, be no need to take special precautions to show\nconsideration for the sentiments of the local populations. In all of these scenarios, we\nshould encounter idolaters, sycophants, Herodians, who, out of a millenialist conviction,\ngullibility, pragmatism, or interest, would welcome us with enthusiasm as saviors, capable\nof solving all of their problems and bringing them peace and prosperity, preferably without\nhaving to exert much effort. These would be our first allies. Zealots, skeptics, and those\nwho have withdrawn into the venerable secular conceptions of their world, which has been\nturned upside-down, would cast doubt on or deny our existence. If they were to admit it,\nthey would consider us as so many invaders, whose intentions would be perceived as all\nthe more suspect since they would be peaceful. There is but one logical step to take\nbetween that and imagining the creation of defense movements and resistance movements\nagainst the invader. The strength of these movements would depend, in part, on our skill\nin squashing them, convincing them, in the hope of attaching them to us.\nBut how then do we avoid the pitfall of good intentions and good sentiments that\neveryone knows the road to hell is paved with? (13) Should we admit how long we have\nbeen observing them? Would they reproach us for not having intervened to prevent a\nworld war, or would they blame us for it, or, more generally, would they hold it against us\nthat we changed the course of civilizations? Very severe and lasting psychological\ndisturbances should be envisioned in these cases.\nWould they be disappointed to learn that we are not immortal? Later, economic and\ntechnological exchanges and financial ties should be established with these populations.\nWould it be a wise policy to involve ourselves in local affairs? And in one manner or\nanother, could we escape the requests to become arbitrators of political disagreements,\npeace, war, and economic crises?\nWhatever the case, one day or another we would be in charge of the unsolved\nproblems. Would they not go so far as to reproach us for the contributions of our very"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"advanced civilization, or at least for what we thought would be of benefit to them?\nChanges of opinion and attitude toward us could occur over time. Wouldn't groups of\npeople be one day tempted to consider themselves our equals, because we did not remain\ninaccessible? Protest movements would consequently arise and revolutionary cycles\nwould no doubt be set in motion, as a result of which we, as well as our Herodian allies,\nwould suffer. Our global policy would then be compromised and we would have to\nconsider making our contacts less frequent and, possibly, withdrawing onto our ships and\nretreating. We would then have the time necessary to review our policies, based on\ntechniques still unknown from our catechumens.\nThe discovery of new worlds could enable us to enter into contact with civilizations just\nas developed as our own and even far more advanced. Nothing allows us to rule out the\npossibility that, why not, we would encounter explorers from other more distant worlds.\nUnder these hypothetical conditions, it is permissible to imagine that we might have been\ndiscovered in space first. It would be our turn then to experience - at least in part - the\npsychological effects and the political and religious implications that we have described.\nWhat would be the policy of local governments toward us? Would they welcome us\npeacefully or would they prudently keep us at a distance? Should we fear seeing nuclear\nspace weapons or other weapons aimed at ourselves gainst, for example, the bases that we\nhad attempted to establish or had succeeded in establishing in an asteroid belt close to one\nof their worlds?\nWhat would be the results of such encounters? What relations could we establish and\nwhat influences would we exert on these different types of civilizations? Anything is\nconceivable. Having come full circle, we thus return to our concerns and our current\nquestions.\n\nChapter 14 - Media Implications\n\nAs was stressed earlier, it may seem extravagant that sensible people, scientists\nmoreover, are interested in unexplained - and for the time being still inexplicable -\nphenomena at the risk of appearing ridiculous. But, as this report tries to demonstrate,\nthere are enough questions regarding tangible evidence to justify the scientific interest\ngenerated by these issues. What separates our approach from the media's approach is the\nresearcher's curiosity with respect to the research to be conducted in order to solve the\nenigmas posed to his sagacity even if science has not reached an adequate state to answer\nthem fully, as opposed to the curiosity of the press regarding a subject with regular\nsudden new developments that are likely to produce marvelous scoops, which generally\nare not characterized by scientific precision.\nIt is not a question of criticizing the press; its aid is often most valuable. But these\nfleeting events are supported in part by human testimonies, which are all the more flimsy\nsince they come from people who are affected by their encounter with \"the unknown\" and\nsince they elude the usual benchmarks. The press has a tendency sometimes to either\nridicule the facts reported or to make itself look ridiculous because of the excess of\ninformation extrapolated from the elements described by the witnesses.\n\n14.1 What Can a Government Fear From the Curiosity of the Media?\n\n- Panic: the media broadcast terrifying information liable to sow panic among the"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"population. The famous example of Orson Welles's fictional program taken literally by radio listeners in 1938, wreaking tremendous havoc in one region of the United States, may have influenced the reaction of U.S. military personnel vis-à-vis the Roswell incident in 1947. The disinformation campaign was skillfully conducted, since it has muzzled the media for 30 years. Panic, which is accompanied by considerable human chaos (suicides, people fleeing on the roads, riots, and vandalism, etc.) would cause any government for which peace alone is a wealth and stability factor for its power to shrink back.\n- Mistrust: the fear of seeing accurate information divulged and repeated with obvious irony is also a deterrent to openly mentioning UFO questions. This posture is at the core of the disinformation and confusion in which public opinion is steeped with regard to what is true and what is false. It can only be dreaded by decision-makers.\n- Fear of ridicule: although ridicule has no longer killed for some time, it is nonetheless often difficult to overcome.\n- Manipulation: the media can be manipulated by lobbies or pressure groups for sectorial purposes (for example, push politicians to create an anti-UFO SDI [Strategic Defense Initiative]) and could thus become the unwitting spokesmen of a disinformation campaign or a destabilization attempt.\n14.2 What Attitudes do the Media Adopt?\n- For the tabloids, anything is good if it sells. The public's curiosity is great and its demand generates enticing and often phony articles. Although they become the relayer of incredible theories, it is, on the other hand, thanks to the tabloids that the latest revelations concerning Roswell made by old witnesses have begun to become known.\n- For the major newspapers, irony or aggressiveness are most often a manner of broaching a taboo subject that no one has a handle on. But the press can also spread the news about an extraordinary phenomenon when, as in the case of San Carlos de Bariloche, dozens of people were witnesses to it. It sometimes also makes a good presentation of the UFO case.\n- For television and movies, the subject is in vogue because it can be dealt with as fiction, and there nothing checks the imagination of the producers. The bizarre fashion adopted by Channel +\",a French television station] for its \"Nuit des Extraterrestres [Extraterrestrials Night]\" does not prompt one to take this subject seriously. However, tribute should be paid to several serious and well-documented broadcasts, like that of \"Arte\" in March 1996.\n14.3 What Should Be Done?\nThe future of our planet lies in space. Whether it be overpopulation, a spirit of adventure, the search for other raw materials, a liking for conquest and colonization, or other, more or less altruistic, motivations, everything is pushing toward humankind's expansion. Will we one day be the extraterrestrials for other planets? When our probes orbit around more and more distant worlds and film them, what might hypothetical inhabitants think of them?\nWe must prepare ourselves for this prospect, and the media can help educate the masses.\nA strengthened SEPRA could usefully dedicate its efforts to the training of journalists and could create a documentary site on the Internet."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conclusions and Recommendations\nThe UFO problem cannot be eliminated by mere caustic and offhand witticisms. Since the publication of the first report by the Association des Auditeurs of IHEDN 20 years ago, CNES has conducted serious studies in close collaboration with the Gendarmerie Nationale and the Air Force primarily, as well as with other State agencies (Civil Aviation, Weather Service, etc.). These studies tally with other research conducted more or less discretely abroad, mainly in the United States.\nThey demonstrate the almost certain physical reality of completely unknown flying objects with remarkable flight performances and noiselessness, apparently operated by intelligent [beings]. With their maneuvers, these flying objects considerably impress civilian and military pilots, who hesitate to speak [about them]. The fear of appearing ridiculous, alienated, or simply gullible is the principal reason for this reserve. Secret craft definitely of earthly origin (drones, stealth aircraft, etc.) can only explain a minority of cases. If we step back and take an objective look over the years, we clearly perceive the limits of this explanation.\nThus we are forced to resort to other hypotheses. Some can neither be confirmed nor invalidated. They are therefore not scientific, and, certainly, it is very difficult to scientifically study rare, elusive, and random phenomena, when science is based above all on experiments and their reproducibility. However, the example of meteorites shows that this type of phenomenon can nevertheless end up being accepted by the scientific community after centuries of doubt and rejection.\nA single hypothesis sufficiently takes into account the facts and, for the most part, only calls for present-day science. It is the hypothesis of extraterrestrial visitors. Advanced as of 1947 by certain U.S. military personnel, today it is popular worldwide. It is discredited by a certain elite, but is plausible. Scientists (astronomers, physicists, engineers, futurologists, etc.) have elaborated on it enough for it to be receivable - as a hypothesis - by their peers. Different plausible variants concerning the voyage of one or more civilizations from a remote solar system to ours have been developed. A model of magnetohydrodynamic technology, which could be employed to propel the UFOs in the atmosphere, has ..reached a significant stage of development. Other manifestations of these objects have begun to receive a physical explanation (automobile breakdowns, truncated beams [of light], etc.).\nThe purposes of these possible visitors remain unknown, but they must be the subject of indispensable speculations and the development of prospective scenarios.\nThe extraterrestrial hypothesis isby far, the best scientific hypothesis. It certainly has not been categorically proven, but strong presumptions exist in its favor and if it is correct, it is loaded with significant consequences.\nBased on this prudent but solid assessment, we can make several recommendations:\n1) Inform the political, military, and administrative decision-makers, as well as the aircraft and helicopter pilots. A gradual information campaign could target:\n- ENA [National Public Management College] and IHEDN,\n- [Ministry of] Defense schools: Air, Navale, Saint-Cyr, Gendarmerie, (officers and NCO gendarmes), Santé des Armées [Military Health College], Polytechnique [Polytechnical College], ENSTA [National College of Advanced Technologies], ENSAE [National College of Aeronautics and Space), CID, CHEAR [Center for Advanced s Armaments Studies], CHEM [Center for"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Advanced Military Studies], etc.,\n- civilian schools and their alumni: Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Police [National Police College], Ecole des Officiers de Police [Police Officers Academy], journalism schools, Ecole Nationale de l'Aviation Civile. At the latter school, numerous conferences have allowed air [traffic] controllers to be taught the proper reactions in the event an aircraft encounters a UFO,\n- agencies that support or conduct research for military purposes: DGA, ONERA, CEA/DAM [Directorate of Military Applications], etc.,\n- special civilian and military departments, as well as the Direction de la Communication de la Défense [Defense Communications Directorate], DICOD former central SIRPA [Armed Forces Information and Public Relations Department]), calling their attention to disinformation processes.\n2) Boost SEPRA's human and material resources so that it can:\n- develop its investigation and analysis possibilities,\n- collect information relating to all UFO manifestations, both in Europe and throughout the world,\n- maintain and develop databases on different aspects of these manifestations,\n- reinforce its representation and foreign relations status.\n3) Make the detection of UFOs an objective for civilian and military space surveillance systems, which it is necessary to develop for other reasons (prevention of collisions between satellites and space debris, etc.).\n4) Create a unit at the highest State level to collaborate with SEPRA, that would be tasked with:\n- formulating all prospective hypotheses,\n- promoting scientific and technical efforts and, as such, have an annual budget of a few million francs,\n- participating in the establishment of sectorial cooperation agreements with other countries.\n5) Initiate diplomatic demarches to the United States, with the support of other States and even the European Union, to urge the superpower to collaborate and, if necessary, exert useful pressure to clarify this crucial issue that necessarily comes within the framework of political and strategic alliances.\n6) As speculative as these possibilities are, reflect, at the level of public authorities and with the aid of the unit mentioned in item 4), on the measures to take in the event of a spectacular and indisputable manifestation of a UFO:\n- overt attempt to make contact,\n- landing before numerous witnesses,\n- other substantial actions.\nThese reflections would be carried out methodically, while maintaining, obviously, a minimum distance.\nAppendices\nAppendix 1 - Radar Detection in France\nRadar detection in France is carried out by two radar station networks, the military network equipped with both primary and secondary radars and the civilian network equipped almost entirely with secondary radars. Primary radar permits one to detect and visualize on a screen (or scope) the geographic position and the altitude (three-"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"dimensional radar) of all moving objects via the reflection of radar waves off of the body of the moving object.\nConversely, secondary radar permits the detection and display on the screen only of moving objects equipped with a \"transponder\" that is able to respond to the coded signals that it emits. Thus any moving object not equipped with a \"transponder\" will not be detected by secondary radar.\nThis detail is extremely important in the case in question, because only the primary radars installed at military Control and Detection Centers (CDC) and radar detection aircraft, the Air Force AWACS and soon the Navy Hawkeyes, may detect a UFO, provided that the latter is not a \"stealth\" craft.\nFinally, it is necessary to know that all radar information detected by the totality of radar stations in the territory, airborne warning aircraft, and the radar stations of neighboring countries are being collected and processed in the STRIDA (Systeme de Traitement des Informations de Défense Aérienne [Air Defense Information Processing Center]) network, thus permitting detection coverage over a square more than 4500 km per side.\nAppendix 2 - Astronomers' Sightings\nby Jean-Claude Ribes\n[REDACTED]\nastronomical object. But we can expect them to be extremely reticent to relate such a sighting out of fear of ridicule, because amateurs are generally desirous of \"professional\" recognition. At any rate, no specific investigation has been conducted, to my knowledge, in this particular population.\nThe results of two independent studies conducted by professional astronomers with their colleagues are quite different: in the 50s, Hynek informally questioned some forty astronomers, a little more than 10% of whom had actually sighted unexplained phenomena. Among the latter, Josef Allen Hynek cites Professor Lincoln La Paz, Director of the Institute of Meteoritics at the University of New Mexico, and Clyde Tombaugh, the discoverer of the planet Pluto, who died in 1997. In the 70s, Peter A. Sturrock sent a detailed questionnaire to 2611 members of the American Astronomical Association, guaranteeing them anonymity. Half responded, and sixty sightings were encountered.\nNo systematic study of this type has been conducted in France, but a sighting by Marseilles astronomers Georges Courtès and Maurice Viton is frequently cited. One of my colleagues also related to me a sighting that he had made in his youth of an object with an apparent diameter of the moon (which, moreover, was visible), moving slowly from north to south. He was not yet a professional at the time but rather a well-informed amateur, and he does not see any explanation for his sighting, which he has never mentioned publicly.\nThus it appears that the percentage of sightings by astronomers is comparable to that noted in the overall population, although there is a definite reticence among a vast"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"majority to mention them without being assured of anonymity. In addition, the general opinion of astronomers on the subject is much less negative than one says sometimes, and the least that you could say is that there is no consensus, with many wanting an objective study of the phenomenon without any preconceived ideas. The private conversations that I have had with French colleagues confirm Sturrock's conclusion: many would refuse to broach the question with a journalist, but when I speak with them about a serious scientific study, they state that they are in agreement.\nAppendix 3 - Life in the Universe\nThe question of extraterrestrial life left the domain of belief barely a few decades ago and entered the domain of scientific research, and the advances in this domain have been very rapid for several years. Beyond earth, the solar system proves to be currently unsuited to life, but the \"Viking\" probes have shown that some three-and-a-half billion years ago, the planet Mars must have offered much more favorable conditions than at present, namely with the existence of liquid water. Thus it is not ruled out that an elementary life form (bacteria) could have existed there, as was then the case on earth. The study of fossils is, besides, one of the reasons for future Martian expeditions, automated first, then with humans aboard. The discovery of fossils in a meteorite originally from Mars, as announced by NASA, is still the subject of a debate in the scientific community. But the very existence of this debate increases the interest in going to take a look on site.\nOutside the solar system, astronomers have long thought that, very generally, the stars should be surrounded by planetary systems, but it has only been in very recent years that experience has confirmed this theory: we now know of a half dozen stars each accompanied by at least one planet. Biologists, for their part, are making rapid advances in understanding the chemical mechanisms that give rise to life, and this appears more and more to be a necessity rather than a coincidence.\nTwenty years' experience has shown, from Siberia to the ocean depths, that life adapts itself to sharp variations in temperature or to extreme temperatures where it was previously considered to be impossible.\nFor 35 years, radioastronomers have carried out different programs searching for an intelligent radio signal coming from space (SETI: Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence). No signals have been detected yet, which is not surprising given the immensity of the spatial and frequency domain to be explored. A major NASA program, which was canceled by the U.S. Congress, was revived using private funds and should improve the sensitivity of the search by several orders of magnitude. The French radiotelescope at Nançay, where several SETI studies have already taken place, will perhaps be included in this program.\nAppendix 4 - Colonization of Space\nThe second half of the 20th century will have been the half century of the exploration of the solar system: man on the moon, probes placed on Mars and Venus, others in the immediate vicinity of the other planets (except Pluto), comets, and asteroids. The 21st century might be the century of the colonization of our system, with permanent human settlements and preparation for voyages to other planetary systems.\nThe coming years will see the positioning of the permanent orbital station Alpha, the international follow-up to the Russian Mir program. Next, the Americans plan, in"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"principle, to establish a permanent base on the moon, a minimal station like the Antarctic base. Beyond that, it would be necessary to recreate an ecosystem where the essential raw material needs (including air, water, and food) could be extracted on site or recycled. Actually, we cannot consider applying the current method on a large scale, where almost everything must be brought from earth via costly launches.\nEcosystems of this type were studied by the Russians first (the first experiment was in 1961) and by the Americans, namely with Biosphere 2, a greenhouse 1.3 ha in surface area, planned to maintain in closed circuit (with an outside power supply) a set of plants and animals, including the presence of eight people. This experiment, which was carried out initially using private funds, was unjustly criticized by the press and a portion of the scientific community. In fact, despite certain \"amateur\" sides, it has already contributed a great deal: during an initial two-year experiment from 1991 to 1993, four men and four women lived almost entirely self-sufficiently, demonstrating the validity of the principle. The recycling of water was total, while the recycling of air was imperfect (it was necessary to add oxygen after fifteen months of total isolation), and the production of food slightly inadequate (the inhabitants of the biosphere left thinner, having started in on the reserves).\nAfter another six-month experiment, the structure was taken over by the University of Columbia, which seems interested especially in the ecological aspect, to the detriment of the space application. However, it is a descendent of Biosphere 2 who could represent the future autonomous moon base of the middle of the next century. A human settlement on the moon is first of all a scientific necessity, namely for astronomers. It is also a springboard into space. Almost all the materials necessary for the construction of stations and spaceships can be found on the moon, the exploitation of these resources will be much more economical than on earth because the reduced gravity and the absence of atmosphere on our satellite enable an easy and sure launch into orbit.\nHuman expeditions will necessarily follow automated missions to Mars, if for no other reason than to verify the past existence of traces of life. As for the development of permanent Martian colonies, this can be envisioned, but one can also imagine skipping this step, by creating artificial planets. The idea was conceived by American physicist O'Neill, who studied in detail cylindrical structures 30 km in length by 6 km in diameter, in rotation to create an artificial gravity and able to shelter millions of people in an earth-type biosphere.\nThese artificial planets could be constructed in the asteroid belt, between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter, where we find an abundance of materials that are easy to exploit, which will be able to provide numerous chemical bodies, including oxygen and water.\nIn longer term, and when the industrial-scale manufacture, storage, and use of antimatter is mastered, smaller models of these same craft will be able to leave the solar system. They will be able to reach the vicinity of another star, after a voyage of several centuries, during which generations will succeed one another in these \"ship-worlds\" (unless we have mastered human hibernation by then).\nThese migrations probably will not take place until after reconnaissance [missions] conducted by automatic probes [have been completed]. The preferred destinations would obviously be systems where a planet supposedly shelters evolved life.\nImagine that a human expedition settles in the asteroid belt of a system where a civilization exists that is quite probably at a lower stage of technical development than ours (if the reverse is true, it is likely that the contact was already made via telecommunications, or else that the most advanced civilizations made the voyage before us): for ethical reasons, but also in the interest of a serious scientific study, it could not afford to intervene openly, at the risk of inducing a fatal culture shock. The study should"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"therefore be discrete, using high-speed and silent craft to move through the planet's atmosphere (MHD propulsion offers interesting prospects in this respect), and non lethal weapons to avoid the consequences of an untimely encounter (the paralyzing effect of pulsed microwaves is under study in several countries).\nWhen the civilization visited has reached the stage of space voyages, it will become necessary to make it aware of the existence of visitors. One way to do this, without causing trauma, would be to commit \"calculated indiscretions\" that would accustom the population, little by little, to the idea that there could indeed be extraplanetary visits.\nAppendix 5 - The Roswell Affair - Disinformation\n1) Roswell: indisputable facts\nNote: the parenthetical annotation (video) indicates that video testimonies are available\nSummer 1947 - The Roswell (New Mexico) base houses the only nuclear-armed bombers in the world. The bombers still have propellers.\nJune 24 - Sighting of nine UFOs by American Kenneth Arnold. The news is broadcast throughout the world.\nJuly 8 (morning), Roswell - The base provides the local radio stations with information that would circle the globe: a flying disk had crashed on a ranch and the military personnel from the base recovered the debris (video).\nJuly 8 (afternoon), Fort Worth (Texas) - General Ramey, Commander of the 8th Air Force, who commands the base, announces to journalists that after examination of the debris, [it was determined that] they were from a weather balloon. He shows them some of the debris, which the journalists photograph. The affair was buried for over thirty year.\n1978 - Lieutenant Colonel Marcel (ER), an intelligence officer on the base in 1947 who recovered the debris, declares on television that the debris was definitely of extraterrestrial origin (video). The debris that General Ramey had shown the journalists was not the debris that Marcel had brought him from Roswell.\nAmerican ufologists conduct numerous investigations and collect affidavits (sworn and notarized written statements) and filmed testimonies. Many witnesses state that in July 1947, military personnel had threatened them with death if they talked (video). According to some testimonies, at some distance from the field of debris, the Army had found the frame of a sort of space glider and cadavers of small humanoids (video).\n1991 -General du Bose [sic] (CR), who was General Ramey's chief of staff in 1947, confirms by affidavit that the latter had substituted the debris from a weather balloon, which he had shown the journalists, for the debris sent by the Roswell base.\nBeginning of 1994 - U.S. Representative Schiff (New Mexico) asks the Department of Defense (DoD) for explanations regarding the affair. Not obtaining any, he requests that the General Accounting Office (GAO) conduct an inquiry into the manner in which the Air Force, primarily, had handled the documents relating to the Roswell crash.\nSeptember 1994 - The Office of the Secretary of the Air Force publishes a report on Roswell: the debris found on the ranch cannot be from an aircraft or a missile. They are probably debris from a series of balloons from the secret Mogul project. To protect the secret, General Ramey leads everyone to believe it is a weather balloon, the materials of which (essentially the shell and radar reflector) are the same. The report shortens the affidavits of certain witnesses so that the strange debris that they describe appears to be debris from a Mogul balloon. It does not mention the frame and attributes the \"bona fide testimonies\" regarding humanoids to \"foggy memory.\""} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 1995 - The GAO report mentions the new Air Force version, and states:\n- page 1, \"The debate on what actually happened at Roswell continues.\"\n- page 2, \"All of the base's administrative documents for the March 1945-December 1949 period were destroyed, and all radio messages sent by the base from October 1946 to February 1949 were destroyed. The destruction report does not mention when, by whom, and on whose orders this destruction was carried out.\"\nThe GAO inquiry provided him with practically no documents of interest concerning the Roswell incident, despite his requests to numerous organizations (CIA, FBI, DoD, DoE, NSC, etc.).\nSummer and fall of 1995 - A film of the autopsy of an alleged \"humanoid cadaver\" in 1947 is aired by about thirty television stations around the world. Its authenticity is questionable, but, above all, nothing in the film proves that the cadaver has even the slightest connection with the Roswell incident. The hodgepodge is, however, made up in large part from written and televised press, thus making the Roswell affair look ridiculous. The conclusions of the GAO and the videos of the principal witnesses presented by TF1 [a French television channel] go unnoticed, lost in the middle of the film of the autopsy.\n1996 - The film Independence Day and the [television] series X-Files make significant references to Roswell.\n2) Opinions on Roswell\n- Very consistent interviews, affidavits, and video testimonies describe the discovery of material that no one knows how to make in our time: a thin sheet that looks like metal with very great resistance and that is so elastic that after it has been crumpled up into a ball, it spontaneously returns to its initial shape without the least sign of a residual fold.\n- It does seem that the crash occurred on July 4, Independence Day, at around 2330 hours. The date and time symbolize American power, whence the following question [arises]: if the crash was in fact that of an extraterrestrial vessel, was it truly an accident or a was it a deliberate crash constituting a message and/or the authenticator?\n3) Roswell and disinformation\nThe disappearances of files and the Air Force's clumsy attempts at explaining [the incident] show that U.S. military personnel are hiding something important that occurred at Roswell in July 1947, just as they concealed their experiments on the effects of plutonium .on human beings The hypothesis of an extraterrestrial vessel that is supported by quality testimonies cannot be dismissed.\nTo protect the secret, the two main types of disinformation, reducing and amplifying, were used in the Roswell affair. One should note, however, that the dissemination of information and contradictory analyses - by ufologists, for example - may be a spill-over effect of this reducing disinformation is apparent in the Air Force report: testimonies on the debris have been cut down so as to give credence to the Mogul balloon hypothesis. It is also found, more subtly, in Roswell in Perspective, a book by \"ufologist\" Karl Pflock, a former CIA and DoD employee: affidavits mentioning the tear-proof and crease-resistant material are given in full in an appendix, but they are ignored or cited only in shortened form in the text.\nIn France, sociologist Pierre Lagrange appears to be a victim of this simplified disinformation. After having endeavored to put the Air Force report and the publications of Karl Pflock into perspective, he concluded:\n\"[I will] close with a bit of psychology. Why do many people not believe in the"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Roswell saucer like they believe in Mogul balloons or the V2s? Because it reminds them too much of popular science fiction. As Bertrand Meheust emphasizes, the topic of the Martian craft that had the exquisite courtesy to crash in the vicinity of a military base comes under the heading of the technological imagination of the beginning of the century, just like the detail regarding the ultralight and ultraresistant materials that were used in its construction.\" (the journal Ovnipresence, February 1995).\nThis is, on the whole, the simplistic theory concerning UFOs stated by French \"sociopsychologists.\" It can be refuted as follows: at the beginning of the century, popular science fiction described light rays capable of killing or healing. Nonetheless, military or medical lasers exist today.\nAmplifying disinformation was manifested when the film on the autopsy of the \"Roswell creature\" was aired. In expanding the Roswell affair with this spectacular, but questionable, autopsy, some have succeeded in discrediting it and, especially, in covering up the publication of the GAO report and the dissemination of video testimonies. It is tempting to believe in a well-orchestrated manipulation.\n4) Reducing disinformation on UFOs\nThe Air Force has practiced this from the onset, as has been revealed by the astronomer Hynek, who was an Air Force consultant from 1948 to 1966 and who described how he aided in trivializing numerous cases by giving them unjustified astronomical interpretations.\nThe disinformation policy was intensified as a result of the recommendations of a \"scientific\" committee assembled by the CIA in December 1952, the Robertson Committee, which suggested \"stripping the UFO phenomenon of its aura of mystery.\" The same committee recommended \"monitoring\" the ufological movements, which were infiltrated, by the CIA mainly.\nSeveral key figures have tried to nullify numerous important cases. Philip Klass, then editor of Aviation Week and Space Technology, took on, among others, three major aeronautical cases: Lakenheath in 1956, RB-47 in 1957, Tehran in 1976, which are described in Chapter 2. He is hardly convincing. In the Tehran case, for example, he correctly cites the testimonies at the beginning of his account, but doesn't take certain aspects into account when he discusses them.\nReducing disinformation is effective on those who do not want to accept the possibility of the extraterrestrial hypothesis. Amplifying disinformation is aimed at others.\n5) Amplifying disinformation on UFOs\nThis policy was probably implemented very early on; Adamski's alleged contacts with a Venusian in 1952 no doubt fall into this category.\nIt has become considerably extensive since the resurgence of the Roswell affair at the end of the 70s. The point of departure is the Bennewicz case. This ufologist physicist recorded pulsed microwaves from a testing ground at Kirtland (New Mexico) Air Force base. He attributed them to UFOs exerting control over \"abductees\" (kidnapped humans) furnished with implants! Fearing, it seems, the publication of his recordings, the Air Force Office of Special Investigation (AFOSI) and, namely, its special agent Doty from the aforementioned air base, as well as, perhaps, other agencies, induced him to make fantastic \"revelations\": there were numerous kidnappings, with the placement of implants to control the \"abductees.\" Furthermore, technology transfers were supposedly carried out on bases in New Mexico and Nevada jointly owned by the U.S. Army and extraterrestrials baptized EBEs, Extraterrestrial Biological Entities.\nBennewicz disclosed this information to American saucerists, many of them thus being"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"increasingly cut off from the common opinion. John Lear, son of the aircraft builder, contributed on his part details that he had obtained from friends in the Air Force: the Nevada base is Groom Lake base, in \"area 51\" (Groom Lake does in fact exist; it is so secret that the Air Force does not recognize its existence; nevertheless, it is mentioned in the June 1996 issue of Jane's Defence Weekly). Later, a former Navy petty officer from the 2nd Marine Division, Bill Cooper, \"revealed\" that the Council for Foreign Relations (CFR), which, according to him, governs the world through the Bilderberg [Group] and the Trilateral [Commission], supposedly does so in close union with the EBEs...\nAmplifying disinformation has probably permitted the protection of research on microwave weapons at Kirtland and on new types of aircraft at Groom Lake. It has certainly allowed the weapon of ridicule to be used against certain gullible ufologists.\nAppendix 6 - The Long History of the UFO Phenomenon - Elements of a Chronology\nThe UFO phenomenon truly experienced worldwide dissemination as of pilot Kenneth Arnold's sighting on June 24, 1947, in the area of Mount Rainier in the northwest United States. In reality, air phenomena that are still unexplained today are much older.\nBefore going further, it is interesting to note that between May and July of this same year, 850 different sightings were recorded across the United States and that in January an RAF Mosquito night fighter tried in vain to intercept a very rapid object detected by radars over the North Sea.\nIn 1946, phantom rockets overfly Sweden\nFrom February to December 1946, many witnesses sighted generally fusiform objects (occasionally resembling spheres or disks) flying most often horizontally in Swedish skies, in some cases leaving a luminous trail, but also capable of very suddenly ascending or descending.\nCalled \"ghost rockets,\" these apparitions (close to a thousand were detected) considerably worried Scandinavian, British, and U.S. military authorities, who conducted investigations.\nAlthough no debris was ever found (officially), it was long thought that it could have been a case of Soviet tests conducted with craft recovered in German factories. This hypothesis has since been completely ruled out.\nDuring World War II, the \"foo fighters\"\nFrom 1940 to 1945, numerous aviators sighted either swarms of red or green luminous balls several dozen centimeters in diameter or groups of small metal-looking disks that followed the aircraft or flew around them, giving the impression of intelligent behavior. Most often not detected by the radars of the time, they did not seem \"material\" in nature. In fact, some observers saw them touch the wings or the tail assemblies of the aircraft without causing any visible damage to them.\nFirst called \"Kraut fireballs,\" then \"foo fighters\" (probably in reference to a comic strip), they were reported in all theaters of operation as of the start of the war. They began to appear in number during the first major day bombings over Germany. They were also observed from the ground and were the subject of numerous reports as of June 1944.\nThese sightings were the cause of much concern to the Allied authorities, who believed them to be a secret German process in the beginning. It became clearly apparent at the end of the war that it was nothing of the sort."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It seems that, for their part, the German pilots had been persuaded that it was a case of a secret U.S. weapon. A board of inquiry reportedly was even created in Berlin to study the matter.\nThe current explanation of electrical phenomena such as the Saint Elmo's fires is not convincing because it does not take into account the diverse characteristics observed. The files relating to the \"foo fighters\" seem to have been subject to military secrecy at least until 1949.\nMany other sightings concerning much larger, cigar-shaped, disk-shaped, or sphere-shaped objects were recorded in both camps.\nFrom 1880 to 1900, \"airships\" over the United States and Great Britain\nDuring these years, tens of thousands of witnesses sighted flying machines resembling modern dirigibles, which were not produced by factories until twenty years later. In most cases, it was a matter of fairly voluminous, fusiform, vessels equipped with powerful searchlights, often emitting engine sounds, and, in some cases, even seeming to have propellers.\nIn the United States, the majority of the sightings occurred between 1896 and 1897. Other cases were reported, particularly in Spain, Germany, Sweden, and Russia. A second wave [of sightings] occurred at the turn of the century in Great Britain.\nThe explanation that comes immediately to mind is that of true dirigibles (and right away we think of craft of German origin). However, it has a hard time holding up to a thorough examination.\nIn actuality, in 1880, the technology of these craft was still in its infancy. It is true that Colonel Giffard did conduct an initial test in 1852 with an elongated balloon equipped with a very low-power steam engine. Then in 1885, Renard traveled several kilometers for the first time, overflying Paris with a dirigible equipped with an internal combustion engine, but it was still extremely slow and not very easy to fly.\nIn fact, the first truly efficient aircraft were subsequent to 1910; however, even the zeppelins built during World War I far from possessed the characteristics observed by the witnesses to these phenomena.\nFrom Greco-Latin antiquity to the beginning of the industrial age\nHuman beings in all ages have sighted phenomena in the sky that they considered, rightly or wrongly, to be abnormal. It is true that our epoch naturally has a tendency to doubt the accuracy of ancient testimonies, and especially so the further back into the past we go.\nDuring the first three quarters of the 19th century, chroniclers related several dozen sightings of spheres and luminous wheels resembling present-day UFOs. The 18th century was marked by one strange case. Goethe recounts, in fact, that in his youth, in 1768, during a trip between Frankfort and Leipzig, he and two other witnesses saw a type of large luminous tube positioned on the ground, surrounded by a multitude of small, very bright, moving flames.\nIn the 16th and 17th centuries, authors mentioned numerous sightings, not only in Europe but also in America and Japan. Among these, a few hold our attention due to their spectacular appearance and the multitude of witnesses. In the skies of Nuremberg, in April 1561, a large number of brightly colored spheres, disks, and \"cigars\" seemed to wage a sort of battle that left a profound mark on the population and caused the authorities great concern. A spectacle of the same kind took place in August 1566 in Basel."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"From the year one thousand to the year 1500, chroniclers mentioned various sightings of luminous spheres, wheels, lances, or bars moving more-or-less rapidly in the sky. The monastery at Detchani, built in Yugoslavia between 1327 and 1335, is decorated with frescoes that represent angels enclosed in sorts of vessels flying in the sky.\n(Even further back in time), during the reign of Charlemagne, it is reported that Agobard, Bishop of Lyons, succeeded in saving from the stake three men and one woman who had descended from an airship, claiming to be returning to earth after having been kidnapped by celestial beings who allegedly showed them wonders.\nElsewhere, luminous celestial phenomena similar to modern UFOs seem to have been relatively frequent in China and Japan, particularly in the Middle Ages.\nSeveral other Latins, Dion Cassius, Pliny the Elder, Titus Livy, Julius Obsequens, and even Cicero relate the appearance of lights in the sky, glowing shields, multiple moons and suns, [and] golden flying spheres.\nAs for the testimonies reported by the Greek chroniclers, these are fewer in number. Daimachos recounts that a globe of fire crossed the sky several times during the 78th Olympiad. Anaxagoras asserts that he saw celestial lights the size of a large beam. Appearances of beams and shields of fire are described several times, by Homer among others.\nAppendix 7 - Reflections on Various Psychological, Sociological, and Political Aspects of the UFO Phenomenon\nNote: these reflections apply primarily to the United States; many of them, however, can be transposed to other countries\nA large number of Americans are convinced of the physical reality of UFOs, of their extraterrestrial origin, and of the fact that the U.S. government is systematically covering up the truth with lies and disinformation.\nMost of the recent American works that have been published on the subject end with this conclusion, and almost all of them close with a demand for a partial or full lifting of the alleged secrecy. The media frenzy surrounding the Roswell affair (cf. Appendix 5), which experienced a resurgence at the end of the 70s after a more than thirty-year blackout, and which has not ceased to go from new development to new development for 15 years, is a typical illustration of this line of thought. By admitting that the extraterrestrial hypothesis is the good one, the secret, say some, would be kept out of fear of panic reactions, which, they assure, would not fail to occur, as demonstrated by the unfortunate experience of the radio program \"The War of the Worlds\" broadcast by Orson Welles in the United States in 1938 (only nine years prior to Roswell). This explanation should not necessarily be rejected; however, it does seem a bit narrow. In fact, the roots of the matter probably go deeper, and the sociopsychological motivations seem to be more complex.\n7.1 The UFO Paradox\nWhile a majority of Americans seem to support the idea of the existence of intelligent extraterrestrial [beings], a very strong resistance remains in scientific circles, among leaders, and in most of the media to the idea that these entities, whatever they may be, have been able to or continue to visit our planet and travel our solar system.\nThe idea is ridiculed by much of the media. At the same time, in this spirit, most"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"politicians and the vast majority of members of the intelligentsia state that humanity has better things to do than to chase such rainbows.\n7.2 Why this Resistance?\n7.2.1 On the Part of Scientists (from Scientists)\nGiven an official attitude of contempt, and in view of the fear of being likened to the activists from \"saucerist\" sects and the \"lunatic fringe,\" the vast majority of scientists, even though they may be interested, quite obviously hesitate to tackle such a heretical problem and naturally do not wish to call their reputation, career, and the funding of their research into question (cf. Appendix 2, \"Astronomers' Sightings\"). This being the case, there appear, upon analysis, to be other, deeper reasons.\nA general school of thought has existed for close to two centuries that tends to dismiss the idea that terrestrial phenomena could be influenced from the outside.\nAt the start, this was a positive, rational, and creative reaction to ancient beliefs. Compared with ancient times, modern science has, in fact, advanced by eliminating the gods. It would seem counterproductive and incongruous to bring them back in other forms.\nThe idea prevails in almost all minds that man is master of the earth and, by extension, of the immediate cosmic vicinity, that he is the best nature can produce in this small corner of the galaxy, and that he alone remains the controller of his destiny. Various American philosophers have termed this concept \"anthropocentric humanism.\"\nTo admit that intelligent [beings], which are not only outside [our planet] but are also superior due to their scientific and technological knowledge, could have interfered or might continue to interfere in our affairs, in our domain, or in proximity to it, is considered by many to be frightening and unacceptable, because admitting it would cause the collapse of the framework of comfortable thoughts of anthropocentric humanism.\nMoreover, in some disciplines such as physics, the risk run is to find oneself confronted with a science that is more advanced by several centuries, milleniums, or even more.\nOur own concepts could literally appear infantile, which would completely demobilize the researchers who employ them.\nIt is clear that under the hypothesis that the existence of UFOs of extraterrestrial origin is proven, there is a risk that not only the position of the intellectual authorities but, quite simply, the social position of the scientific elite would be considerably compromised. This is, furthermore, what happened each time that groups or nations found themselves in contact with a more developed human civilization, with the notable exception of Japan in the Meiji period, which it would be advisable to look into.\nOne can understand that advancing knowledge of the UFO phenomenon, at the risk of succeeding, would not necessarily be a thrilling prospect for a number of scientists, who thus might not really want to lend a hand in this effort.\n7.2.2 On the Part of Politicians\n7.2.2.1 With a few rare exceptions (President Jimmy Carter, Senator Barry M. Goldwater), the majority of politicians have almost always displayed a very skeptical and most often ironic attitude regarding the question. However, some have had a more positive attitude.\nThe best known allusions to the possible existence of extraterrestrials and to the"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"dangers that they might represent come from General MacArthur and President Ronald Reagan.\nWhile he had already touched on the problem in 1955, in a conversation with the mayor of Naples, Achille Lauro, General MacArthur said in an address at West Point Military Academy in 1962:\n\"You now face a new world, a world of change. The thrust into outer space... marks a beginning of another epoch in the long story of mankind... We deal now, not with things of this world alone, but with the illimitable distances and as yet unfathomed mysteries of the universe... of ultimate conflict between a united human race and the sinister force of some other planetary galaxy.\"\n[French translation of the quote from General MacArthur's address]\nGeneral Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev, for his part, revealed during a private discussion at the 1985 summit conference that President Reagan had told him that if earth had to confront an invasion by extraterrestrials, the United States and the Soviet Union would join forces to repel that invasion.\nIn addition, at the end of a speech before the 42nd General Assembly of the United Nations on September 21, 1987, President Reagan affirmed:\n\"In our obsession with the antagonisms of the moment, we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to make us recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world.\"\n[French translation of the quote from President Reagan's speech]\n7.2.2.2 However, for political leaders, just as for scientists, to be officially interested in UFOs and extraterrestrials is firstly to risk ridicule before commentators and the media, who regularly use omission, destructive irony, and even lies.\n7.2.2.3 But other elements should be taken into consideration. Although a significant number of U.S. citizens seem to accept the existence of UFOs of extraterrestrial origin, some political leaders might hesitate to call for resources to research this subject, because they might fear they would then be accused of incurring expenses for one of the most hazardous of subjects.\n7.2.2.3.1 Under these circumstances, if we advance the hypothesis that political leaders at the highest level in the United States possess unambiguous information attesting to that existence, their situation would be particularly uncomfortable. The armed forces have officially reiterated for fifty years that this phenomenon does not threaten the security of the country, which does not mean that the phenomenon does not exist.\nHowever, there have been disturbing sightings such as visits above secret installations and missile bases, intense electromagnetic effects, military aircraft shadowed (as in the RB-47 case) or the object of mock interceptions. In reality, faced with the impossibility of countering this type of threat, the authorities may have thus far been tempted to affirm that it does not exist.\nIn the absence of a direct threat, and even though there never truly was any attack in the past, the potential threat itself can appear overwhelming in the eyes of the authorities (and especially the military).\n\"They\" come from the stars, \"their\" craft watch us and seem to taunt us, \"they\" have perhaps been on earth for thousands of years, and we don't know \"their\" intentions. \"Their\" science and \"their\" technology, thus \"their\" power, are incomparably superior to"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ours.\nWithout being completely disarmed, and even taking into account the enormous resources that we have on the earth and our obvious ability to learn quickly, we can only feel anxious in the face of \"their\" presence.\nBringing this out into the open by calling for the manpower and funds to conduct the necessary research is hard to visualize officially for the only superpower in the world.\n7.2.2.3.2 This is all the more true since, under the additional hypothesis that the U.S. armed forces actually already possess formal proof of this threat, for example, in the form of extraterrestrial ships that have crashed on the ground, intensive research on foreign technologies should have already commenced a long time ago under the cover of the highest level of secrecy.\nAs will be seen in 7.3.3, it would then be completely out of the question to divulge this type of information.\nIndeed, revealing a situation as novel as it is upsetting too quickly would perhaps be running the risk of social upheavals, accompanied by panic, a demobilization of energies, a multiplication of millenialist sects, and a massive move of people to take refuge in religious fundamentalisms.\nThe loss of trust in the leaders in power could even lead rapidly to their ousting.\nGiven such a problem, their normal reactions would obviously be to gain as much time as possible by continuing their denials, all the while continuing work in secret and fervently hoping that their successors will take on the responsibility when the reality becomes manifest.\n7.3 U.S. Leaders and the Politics of Secrecy\n7.3.1 The U.S. Army and UFOs\nThe U.S. Army has been directly confronted with the phenomenon since World War II. It seems to have been the only army to have officially broached the problem with considerable resources.\n7.3.2 The Spill-Over Effect of the Study of UFOs\nThe U.S. Army has, in actual fact, designed aircraft that exhibit the characteristics described by the most reliable witnesses. The spill-overs are potentially considerable in the areas of propulsion, materials and structures, stealth technology, and weapons.\n7.3.3 Finally, Why the Secrecy?\nWe are currently not aware of the extent of the knowledge that U.S. military personnel have gleaned from all of the studies that they have conducted on this subject either based on sightings or, as has sometimes been written, based on materials that have allegedly been recovered.\nWhatever the case, it is clear that the Pentagon has had, and probably still has, the greatest interest in concealing, as best as it can, all of this research, which may, over time, lead the United States to hold a position of great supremacy over terrestrial adversaries, while giving it a considerable response capacity against a possible threat coming from space."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Within this context, it is impossible for them to divulge the sources of this research and the goals pursued, because that could immediately point any possible rivals down the most beneficial avenues. Cover-ups and disinformation (both active as well as passive) would still remain, under this hypothesis, an absolute necessity.\nThus it would appear natural that in the minds of U.S. military leaders, secrecy must be maintained as long as possible.\nOnly increasing pressure from public opinion, possibly supported by the results of independent researchers, by more or less calculated disclosures, or by a sudden rise in UFO manifestations, might perhaps induce U.S. leaders and persons of authority to change their stance.\nIt does not seem that we have arrived at that point yet.\n\nGlossary\n\nAFB Air Force Base\nEMAA [French] Air Force Chief of Staff\nAFOSI Air Force Office of Special Investigation\nENAC [French] National Civil Aviation School\nAIAA American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics\nESO European Southern Observatory\nAirmiss Name of the investigation procedure covering the risks of air collisions\nETCA [French] Central Technical Armaments Institution\nALAT [French] Army Air Corps\nFOIA Freedom of Information Act\nBlue Book Name of the U.S. Air Force study of UFOs\nFUFOR Fund for UFO Research\nCCD Charge-coupled device cameras\nGAO General Accounting Office\nCCOA [French] Air Operations Center\nGEPA [French] Aerospace Phenomena Study Group\nCDC [French] Control and Detection Center\nGEPAN [French] Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena Study Group\nCEA [French] Atomic Energy Commission\nIHEDN [French] Institute for Advanced National Defense Studies\nCEAT Toulouse Aeronautic Test Center\nINRA [French] National Institute for Agronomic Research\nCFR Council for Foreign Relations\nJANAP Joint Army Navy Air Force Publication\nCHEAR [French] Center for Advanced Armament Studies\nMEGASETI see SETI, which MEGASETI is an expansion of\nCHEM [French] Center for Advanced Military Studies\nMHD MagnetoHydroDynamics\nCIA Central Intelligence Agency\nMOD [British] Ministry of Defence\nCID [French] Interarmy Defense College\nMUFON Mutual UFO Network\nCIRVIS Communications Instructions for Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings\nNASA National Aeronautic and Space Administration"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CNES [French] National Center for Space Studies\nNORAD North American Air Defense\nCNRS [French] National Center for Scientific Research (National Space Agency)\nNSC National Security Council\nCODA [French] Air Defense Operations Center\nONERA [French] National Aerospace Study and Research Office\nCONDON Physicist at the University of Colorado who signed the UFO report ordered by the U.S. Air Force\nRAF [British] Royal Air Force\nCRNA [French] Regional Air Navigation Center\nSEPRA [French] Atmospheric Reentry Phenomena Assessment Department\nCUFOS Center for UFO Research [sic]\nSET Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence\nDGA [French] General Delegation for Armaments\nSIRPA [French] Armed Forces Information and Public Relations Department\nDGAC [French] Civil Aviation Directorate\nSPOC [French] Sky Observation Probe System\nDIA Defense Intelligence Agency\nSTRIDA [French] Air Defense Information Processing Center\nDICOD [French] Defense Communications Directorate\nUAP Unidentified Aerospace Phenomenon\nDoD Department of Defense\nUAP D Category D Unidentified Aerospace Phenomenon\nDoE Department of Energy\nUFO Unidentified Flying Object\nEBE Extraterrestrial Biological Entity\nVLT Very Large Telescope\nUFO, Unidentified Flying Object...\n\nSince 1947, the subject has disturbed, fascinated, called out.\n\nOh how debated, the question has been studied with extreme meticulousness and from many points of view (scientific, technical, aeronautical, strategic, political, religious, media) by a French committee composed of former auditors of the very serious-minded Institut des Hautes Etudes de Défense Nationale [French Institute for Advanced National Defense Studies] and qualified experts from every background, COMETA [Committee for In-Depth Studies].\n\nFor the first time, men, some of whom occupy very high positions, have agreed to write a report devoted entirely to the UFO problem in the belief that based on the knowledge that has been acquired to date, sufficient questions of national interest are raised for the Chief of State and the Prime Minister to be provided with this information.\n\nIn this report, COMETA studies several unexplained French and foreign UFO cases.\n\nVery well documented, these sightings are often supported by traces on the ground or tracks confirmed by radar. Are these secret terrestrial craft? In some cases, perhaps. Are we in the presence of craft of nonterrestrial origin? This hypothesis cannot be ruled out. If it were to prove correct, it would be loaded with consequences for Defense."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Bibliographie\n\nParmi les nombreux livres et articles sur notre sujet, de valeur notoirement inégale, nous avons jugé particulièrement intéressant de citer les suivants :\n\nCHAPITRE 2\n\nLe cas radar/visuel de Lakenheath (GB)\n• Edward U. Condon et Daniel S. Gilmor\n(Rapport Condon) – Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects – Bantam Books, New York, janvier 1969.\n• James E. Mac Donald\n(UFOs au-dessus de Lakenheath en 1956) – Revue du Gepa (Groupement d'étude de phénomènes aériens), mars 1974. (Traduction d'un article de la Flying Saucer Review, mars-avril 1970).\n• Gordon D. Thayler\n(\"UFO encounter II – Sample case selected by the UFO subcommittee of the AIAA : The Lakenheath England radar/visual UFO Case, August 13-14, 1956\") – Astronautics and Aeronautics, septembre 1971.\n• Philip J. Klass\n(\"UFOs over England (Bentwaters and Lakenheath)\") – UFOs explained – Random House, New York, décembre 1974 ; Vintage Books, New York, septembre 1976.\n• J. Allen Hynek\nNouveau rapport sur les ovnis – Belfond, J'ai lu, 1979 – p. 154 sq.\n(Traduction de The Hynek UFO report – Dell Publishing Co Inc., New York, 1979).\n\nL'avion RB-47 aux Etats-Unis\n• Rapport Condon, op. cit.\n• James E. Mac Donald\n(\"UFO encounter I – Sample case selected by the UFO subcommittee of the AIAA : Air Force observations of an Unidentified Object in the South-Central U.S., July 17, 1957\") – Astronautics and Aeronautics, juillet 1971.\n• Philip J. Klass\n(\"The famous RB-47 case\") – UFOs explained – op. cit.\n• Brad Sparks\nRB-47 electronic intelligence case calibrated scientific proof of UFO's – confidential copyrighted material, 1997.\n\nTéhéran\n• Philip J. Klass\n(\"UFOs over Iran\") – UFOs, The public deceived – Prometheus Books, New York, 1977.\n• Lawrence Fawcett et Barry J. Greenwood\nClear Intent, the government coverup of the UFO experience – Prentice Hall Inc., N.J., 1984 – p. 81 sq.\n\nRussie\n• \"UFOs on Air Defence radars\" – Rabochaya Tribuna, 19 avril 1990. (Traduction anglaise par le U.S. Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS), cité par Don Berliner, Marie Galbraith et Antonio Hunneus dans Unidentified Flying Objects Briefing Document – publication privée, décembre 1995).\n• Compte rendu plus détaillé de l'article de Rabochaya Tribuna par Boris Chourinov dans Ovnis en Russie – Guy Tredaniel, 1995 p. 230 sq.\n\nCHAPITRE 3\n\nUn cas de témoins multiples dans une base de missiles russe\n• Dossier ovni du KGB publié en 1991 – revue Aura Z, n° 1, Moscou, mars 1993.\n(Cité dans Unidentified Flying Objects Briefing Document – op. cit. ; et, de façon plus complète, dans Ovnis en Russie – op. cit. – p. 319 sq.).\n\nCHAPITRE 6\n\nGepan, notes d'information et notes techniques :\n• Notes d'information :\nN° 1, \"Observations de phénomènes atmosphériques anormaux en URSS – Analyses statistiques\"\nN° 2, \"Les études de phénomènes aérospatiaux non identifiés aux USA\", 1re partie\nN° 3, \"Les études de phénomènes aérospatiaux non identifiés aux USA\", 2e partie\nN° 4, \"Les études de phénomènes aérospatiaux non identifiés aux USA\", 3e partie\n• Notes techniques :\nN° 1, \"Analyse du problème de pré-traitement des données\"\nN° 2, \"Etude comparative des résultats statistiques élémentaires relatifs aux observations de phénomènes aérospatiaux non identifiés\"\nN° 3, \"Méthodologie d'un problème : principe et applications (méthodologie, isocélie, information)\"\nN° 4, \"Recherche statistique d'une typologie des descriptions de phénomènes aérospatiaux non identifiés\"\nN° 5, compte rendu de l'enquête du Gepan 79/03\nN° 6, enquête Gepan 79/07 : \"A propos d'une disparition\"\nN° 7, enquête Gepan 79/05 : \"A propos d'une rencontre\"\nN° 8, enquête Gepan 79/06\nN° 9, \"La magnétohydrodynamique, l'état de l'art et la première expérience probatoire\"\nN° 10, \"Les phénomènes aérospatiaux non identifiés et la psychologie de la perception\"\nN° 11, enquête Gepan 81/02\nN° 12, enquêtes Gepan 81/07 et 81/09\nN° 13, \"Recherche statistique d'une typologie identifiée, non identifiée\"\nN° 14, mini-enquêtes en 1981 et 1982\nN° 15, \"Recherche de stéréotype : dessine-moi un ovni\"\nN° 16, \"Analyse d'une trace (cas de Trans-en-Provence)\"\nN° 17, \"L'Amarante\"\nN° 18, \"Système d'acquisition et d'analyse : le point sur l'utilisation des réseaux de diffraction\".\n• Jean-Claude Bourret et Jean-Jacques Vélasco\nOvnis, la science avance – Robert Laffont, 1993.\n• Dominique Weinstein\nRencontres dans le ciel – rapport pour le MUFON (Mutual UFO Network), 1996.\n• Rapport Condon – op. cit.\nAppendix R : \"Letter from general Twining to Commanding General, Army Air Forces\", 23 sept 1947.\n\n-87-"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHAPITRE 7\n\nPropulsion MHD\n• Jean-Pierre Petit\nLe mur du silence – Belin, 1983,\n• \"Recherches pour un avion du futur\" – Techniques avancées (plaquette de l'Ecole nationale supérieure des techniques avancées), 1988.\n• Jean-Claude Ribes et Guy Monnet\nLa vie extraterrestre – Larousse (coll. Essentiels), 1990 (épuisé).\n• J.-C. Bourret et J.-J. Vélasco\n(Historique des recherches sur la propulsion MHD des navires et des aéronefs) – Ovnis, la science avance – op. cit. – p. 171 sq.\n• Mike Ross\n\"Rider on the shock wave\" – New Scientist, 17 février 1996.\n\nPropulsion par antigravité\n• Nick Cook\n\"Turning science fiction into fact\" – Jane's Defence Weekly, 10 juin 1996.\n\nPropulsion dans l'espace\n• Eugene Mallowe et Gregory Matloff\nStarflight Handbook – John Wiley & sons, 1989.\n• Robert L. Forward et Joel Davis\nMirror Matter – John Wiley & sons, 1988.\n• W. B. Scott (Edwards Air Force Base)\n\"USAF Predicts Antimatter Propellants could be in use by early 21st century\" – Aviation Week and Space Technology, 21 mars 1988.\n\nPannes de voiture\n• James Mc Campbell\n\"Self starting engines\" – MUFON proceedings, 1983.\n(Article résumé dans Ovnis, la science avance – op. cit. – p. 181 sq.).\n\nParalysie de témoins\n• Keith Florig\n\"The future battlefield, a blast of gigawatts\" – IEE spectrum, mars 1988.\n• J.-C. Bourret et J.-J. Vélasco\nOvnis, la science avance – op. cit. – p. 185 sq.\n\nCHAPITRE 8\n\n• Rapport Condon – op. cit.\n• Lawrence Fawcett et Barry Greenwood\nClear Intent – op. cit.\n• Don Berliner, Marie Galbraith, Antonio Hunneus\nUnidentified Flying Objects Briefing Document – publication privée, décembre 1995.\n• Col. Philip J. Corso (ret)\nThe day after Roswell – Pocket Books, 1997.\n• Headquarters United States Air Force\nThe Roswell report, case closed – 1997.\n• Nick Pope\nOpen Skies, Closed Minds – Pocket Books, 1997.\n• Timothy Good\nAbove top secret – Harper Collins, Londres, 1993.\n(Publié initialement chez Sidgwick et Jackson Ltd, 1987).\n• V. Migouline\n\"Les phénomènes aérospatiaux non identifiés à l'étude en URSS\" – La Recherche, juillet 1979.\n\nCHAPITRE 13\n\n(1) La Bible, livre d'Ezéchiel, I 4-14 et 15-28.\n(2) Abed Azrié, L'épopée de Gilgamesh – Ed. Ber International (Paris), 1979 – p. 143 :\n\"(...) Lorsque les grands dieux créèrent les hommes, c'est la mort qu'ils leur destinèrent et ils ont gardé pour eux la vie éternelle (...)\" (Commentaires in Jean Bottéro, Babylone et la Bible – Ed. Les Belles Lettres (Paris), 1994).\n(3) La Bible, livre de la Genèse, VI 1-4 :\n\"Lorsque les hommes eurent commencé à se multiplier sur la face de la terre, et que des filles leur furent nées (...), les fils de Dieu virent que les filles des hommes étaient belles, et ils en prirent pour femmes parmi toutes celles qu'ils choisirent. (...) Alors l'Eternel dit : « Mon Esprit ne restera pas toujours dans l'homme, car l'homme n'est que chair, et ses jours seront de cent vingt ans. » (...) Les géants étaient sur la terre en ces temps-là. Il en fut de même après que les fils de Dieu furent venus avec les filles des hommes et qu'elles leur eurent donné des enfants ; ce sont ces héros qui furent fameux dans l'antiquité.\"\n(Cf. également : livre de la Genèse, XIV 5, Nombres, XIII 32-33, Deutéronome, II 10-11).\n(4) La Bible : Ecrits intertestamentaires – Gallimard, la Pléiade (Paris), 1987 :\nLivre des secrets d'Hénoch :\nVI 1-2 : \"Il arriva que lorsque les humains se furent multipliés, il leur naquit des filles fraîches et jolies. Les anges, fils du ciel, les regardèrent et les désirèrent.\nIls se dirent l'un à l'autre : « Allons nous choisir des femmes parmi les humains et engendrons-nous des enfants. (...)»\"\nVI 6 : \"Ils étaient en tout deux cents. (...)\"\nVII 1-2 : \"(...) ils leur enseignèrent les drogues, les charmes, la botanique et ils leur montrèrent les herbes. Les femmes conçurent et engendrèrent des géants (...)\"\nVIII 1-3 : \"Azaël apprit aux hommes à fabriquer des épées, des armes, des boucliers, des cuirasses, choses enseignées par les anges. Il leur montra les métaux et la manière de les travailler, ainsi que les bracelets, les parures, l'antimoine, le fard des paupières, toutes sortes de pierres précieuses et les teintures. Il en résulta une grande impiété. Les hommes se débauchèrent, s'égarèrent et se perdirent dans toutes les voies.\"\nX 10 : \"(...) leurs pères n'obtiendront rien de ce qu'ils ont demandé pour eux-mêmes et pour eux, alors qu'ils espéraient pour eux-mêmes une vie éternelle et pour chacun de leurs fils cinq cents années de vie.\"\n(Cf. également le livre des Jubilés : V 1-5 : même récit).\n(5) G. Pauthier, Les Livres sacrés de l'Orient (p.c. Le Chou-King ou le Livre Sacré, Part. III, Ch. X-2) – Ed. Au Bureau du Panthéon Littéraire (Paris), 1852.\n(6) Arnold Toynbee, La civilisation à l'épreuve, Gallimard (Paris) 1951 – p. 89.\n(7) cf. les Immortels, Dieux, fils et filles des Dieux, Héros, Titans et Géants chez Hésiode, Homère, Virgile, Pline, Hérodote, Plutarque, etc., également les représentations divines et colossales de Memnon, de Karnak, d'Hermonthis, d'Abou-Simbel et le Sphinx de Ghizeh, les colosses de l'île de Pâques, les géants de Bamyan en Afghanistan, ceux de Ninive et de Khorsabad ; les Hrimthursars des Eddas scandinaves, le géant Skrymer combattu par Thor, etc.\n(8) Peter Lawrence, Le culte du cargo – Fayard (Paris), 1974. (Le premier débarquement de marchandises d'un avion-cargo frappa fortement l'esprit des Papous, au point qu'ils instaurèrent le \"culte du cargo\", dispensateur de richesses, bien qu'ils se soient, par la suite, accoutumés aux produits occidentaux et aux vols des avions).\n(9) Arnold Toynbee – op. cit – p. 88 : Al-Gabrati.\n\n-88-"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(10) G. Pauthier – op. cit. \"Manava-Dharma-Sastra ou Lois de Manou, comprenant les institutions religieuses et civiles des Indiens\", p. 331 et s. : \"Le nom de Manou rapproché (...) de ceux de Ménès et de Minos, appartient à chacun des sept personnages divins qui, suivant les idées des Indiens, ont successivement gouverné le monde.\"\n(11) \"Mais qui a découvert l'Antarctique ?\" – La Recherche, n° 161, décembre 1984.\n(cf. aussi Charles Hapgood – Les cartes des anciens rois des mers – Ed. du Rocher (Monaco), 1981 – p. 85 et s.\n(12) La Bible : Ecrits intertestamentaires – op. cit.\nLivre des secrets d'Hénoch :\nX 2 : \"Ordonne-lui en Mon nom de se cacher et annonce-lui que la fin est proche : toute la terre va périr, un déluge va arriver sur toute la terre et détruire tout ce qu'elle porte.\"\nX 7 : \"La terre que les anges ont souillée sera assainie. Annonce la guérison de la terre : on guérira sa plaie, et tous les humains ne périront pas à cause de tout le mystère meurtrier que les Veilleurs ont enseigné à leurs fils.\"\nXII 6 : \"(...) ils pleureront la perte de leurs fils, ils suppléeront éternellement, mais il n'y aura pour eux ni pitié ni paix.\"\nLivre des Jubilés :\nV 6-11 : \"La punition des anges et des géants (...)\"\nVII 20-25 : \"(...) lorsque les Veilleurs s'écartèrent de l'ordonnance qui les régissait pour forniquer avec les filles des hommes, se prirent des femmes parmi toutes celles qu'ils avaient choisies, provoquèrent le début de l'impureté, engendrèrent des fils, et les Nephilim qui étaient tous différents et se dévoraient les uns les autres (...)\"\n(13) Graham Greene – Un Américain bien tranquille – Ed. Robert Laffont (Paris) 1956.\n\nANNEXE 2\n\n• Brad Steiger\n\"Un rapport du projet Grudge : entretiens du Pr Hynek avec des astronomes\" – Ovnis : le projet Blue Book – Belfond, 1979. p. 178 sq.\n• Allen J. Hynek\nNouveau rapport sur les ovnis – op. cit. p. 27 sq.\n• Peter A. Sturrock\n\"Report on a Survey of the Membership of the American Astronomical Society Concerning the UFO problem\" – Rapport n°681 – Institute for Plasma Research, Standford University, CA, janvier 1977.\n\nANNEXE 3\n\n• J.-C. Ribes et G. Monnet\nLa vie extraterrestre – op. cit\n\nANNEXE 4\n\n• O'Neill\nLes villes de l'espace – Laffont, 1978.\n• André Lebeau\nL'espace en héritage – Odile Jacob, 1986.\n• Paine et al. (National Commision on Space)\nPioneering the Space Frontier – Bantam Books, 1986.\n• J.-C. Ribes et G. Monnet\nLa vie extraterrestre – op. cit.\n• Thierry Gaudin et al.\n2100, récit du prochain siècle – Payot, 1990.\n• Jean-Claude Bourret et Jean-Jacques Vélasco\nOvnis, la science avance – op. cit.\n\nANNEXE 5\n\nRoswell\n• William Moore\nThe Roswell incident – G.P. Putman & sons, USA, 1980.\n(En français : Le mystère de Roswell – France Empire, 1981).\n• Kevin D. Randle\n1) UFO crash at Roswell – Avon Books, USA, 1991 (en coll. avec Donald R. Schmitt).\n2) The Truth about the UFO crash at Roswell – Evans, USA, 1994.\n3) Roswell UFO crash update – Global Comm., USA, 1995.\n• Karl Pflock\nRoswell in perspective – Fund for UFO Research Inc, Washington DC, 1994.\n(Peu objectif, mais intéressant par les affidavits en annexe).\n• Richard L. Weaver, Col. de l'USAF\nReport on Air Force Research regarding the \"Roswell Incident\" – juillet 1994.\n• United States General Accounting Office.\n\"Report to the Honorable Steven H. Schiff, House of Representatives. Government Records : « Results of a Search for Records Concerning the 1947 Crash Near Roswell, New Mexico ».\" – juillet 1995.\n• Chaîne de télévision anglaise Channel Four\nEnregistrements vidéo de témoignages sur le crash de Roswell, la plupart provenant du Fund for UFO Research (\"Roswell Recollections, part II\", 1992)\n\nDésinformation réductrice\n• Karl Pflock\nRoswell in Perspective – op. cit.\n• Rapport Condon\nAppendix U : Report of meetings of Scientific Advisory Panel on Unidentified Flying Objects (Robertson Panel) - 14-18 january 1953 – op. cit. – p. 905 sq.\n• Allen J. Hynek\nLes objets volants non identifiés – Belfond, 1974.\n(Traduit de The UFO Experience, a scientific enquiry – 1972).\n\nDésinformation amplifiante\n• Milton William Cooper\nThe Secret Government ; The Origin, Identity, and Purpose of M.J.12 - Fullerton, CA - The Author, 23 mai 1989, 25 p.\n• Jerome Clark\n(\"UFO in the 80's\") – The UFO encyclopedia – Omnigraphics Inc., Detroit, 1990.\n\nANNEXE 6\n\n• Don Berliner, Marie Galbraith, Antonio Huneeus\nUnidentified Flying Objects briefing document - The best available evidence – CUFOS, FUFOR, MUFON, 1995.\n• Michel Bougard et alter\nDes soucoupes volantes aux ovnis – Editions SOBEPS, 1976.\n\n-89-"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UFO, Unidentified Flying Object... Since 1947, the subject has disturbed, fascinated, called out. Oh how debated, the question has been studied with extreme meticulousness and from many points of view (scientific, technical, aeronautical, strategic, political, religious, media) by a French committee composed of former auditors of the very serious-minded Institut des Hautes Etudes de Défense Nationale [French Institute for Advanced National Defense Studies] and qualified experts from every background, COMETA [Committee for In-Depth Studies]. For the first time, men, some of whom occupy very high positions, have agreed to write a report devoted entirely to the UFO problem in the belief that based on the knowledge that has been acquired to date, sufficient questions of national interest are raised for the Chief of State and the Prime Minister to be provided with this information. In this report, COMETA studies several unexplained French and foreign UFO cases. Very well documented, these sightings are often supported by traces on the ground or tracks confirmed by radar. Are these secret terrestrial craft? In some cases, perhaps. Are we in the presence of craft of nonterrestrial origin? This hypothesis cannot be ruled out. If it were to prove correct, it would be loaded with consequences for Defense."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Saturday 17 June 2000 New Frontiers. UFO's once the preserve of the purely paranoid are now being taken seriously. Astronauts, Generals and a number of influential scientists are hammering away at the crust of international scepticism. LESLIE KEAN explains why a study by the French military may finally make governments sit up and take notice. Alien Co. THE RELEASE in April of the first detailed satellite images of Area 51, the top-secret Air Force test site in Nevada, prompted a web-site meltdown as people from around the world searched for clues about unidentified flying objects. \"The interest has been really phenomenal,\" said David Mountain, marketing director for Aerial Images, Inc which posted the high resolution aerial photos of Area 51 on the Internet. But those hoping to see signs of something extraordinary were destined to be disappointed. Most of Area 51s operations occur underground, making photos meaningless. Anyone looking for the fresh information on UFOs would have better luck trying a new, but less publicized source: by the French military, just translated into English. High level officials -- including retired generals from the French Institute of Higher Studies for National Defense, a government-funded strategic planning agency -- recently took a giant step in openly challenging skepticism about UFOs. In a report based on a three year study, they concluded that, \"numerous manifestations observed by reliable witnesses could be the work of craft of extra-terrestrial origin\" and that, in fact, the best explanation is \"the extraterrestrial hypothesis.\" Although not categorically proven, \"strong presumptions exist in its favor and if it is correct, it is loaded with significant consequences.\" The French group reached that conclusion after examining nearly 500 detailed international aeronautical sightings and radar/visual cases, and previously undisclosed pilots' reports. They drew on data from official sources, government authorities, and the Air Forces of different countries. The findings are contained in a 90-page report titled, \"UFOs and Defense: What Should We Prepare For?\" published in France by the magazine VSD. The Mechanics of a Mystery: \"The number of sightings, which are completely unexplained despite the abundance and quality of data from them, is growing throughout the world,\" the team declared. The authors note that about 5 percent of sightings on which there is solid documentation cannot be easily attributed to earthly sources, such as secret military exercises - especially since unexplained objects have been reported since 1944. The rest \"seem to be completely unknown flying machines with exceptional performances that are guided by a natural or artificial intelligence,\" they say. Science has developed plausible models for travel from another solar system and for technology which could be used to propel the vehicles, the report says. It assures readers that UFOs have demonstrated no hostile acts, \"although intimidation maneuvers have been confirmed.\" Given the widespread skepticism about"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"New Frontiers. ncept. UFOs, many will quickly dismiss the generals' ET hypothesis. But it is less easy to do so once the authors' credentials are considered. The study's originators are four-star General Bernard Norlain, former commander of the French Tactical Air Force and military counselor to the prime minister; General Denis Letty, an air force fighter pilot; and Andre Lebeau, former head of the National Center for Space Studies (the French equivalent of NASA in the United States.) They formed a 12-member \"Committee for In-depth Studies,\" abbreviated as COMETA, which authored the report. Three-star Admiral Marc Merlo, national chief of police Denis Blancher and Jean-Jacques Velasco, head of a government agency studying UFOs, as well as scientists and weapons engineers, were also contributors. Not only does the group stand by its findings, it is urging international action. The writers recommend that France establish \"sectorial cooperation agreements with interested European and foreign countries\" on the matter of UFOs. They suggest that the European Union undertake diplomatic action with the United States \"exerting useful pressure to clarify this crucial issue which must fall within the scope of"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"New Frontiers. political and strategic alliances.\" Why might other nations be inclined to take this subject seriously? For one thing, declassified US government documents show that unexplained objects with extraordinary technical capabilities pose challenges to military activity around the globe. For example, US fighter jets have been scrambled to pursue UFOs, according to North American Aerospace Defense Command logs and US Air Force documents. Iranian and Peruvian Air Force planes attempted to shoot down unexplained objects during air encounters in 1976 and 1980, and Belgian F-16's equipped with automatically guided missiles pursued UFO's in 1990. Further, the French report says that there have been \"visits above secret installations and missile bases\" and \"military aircraft shadowed\" in the US. Dr. Edgar Mitchell, the Apollo 14 astronaut who was the sixth man to walk on the moon, is one of many supporters of international cooperation on UFOs. Of the French report, he says, \"It's significant that individuals of some standing in the government, military and intelligence community in France came forth with this.\" Mitchell, who holds a doctor of science degree from the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is convinced \"at a confidence level above 90pc, that there is reality to all of this.\" He adds, \"People have been digging through the files and investigating for years now. The files are quite convincing. The only thing that's lacking is the official stamp.\" He joins five-star Admiral Lord Hill-Norton, the former head of the British Ministry of Defense, in calling for US congressional fact-finding hearings into the UFO question. Hearings would include testimony by government witnesses from the Air Force, Army, Navy, NASA, private industry and intelligence operations with personal, first-hand knowledge of UFO phenomena and related projects. The Astronaut and the Investigation: Despite the fact that Mitchell is a national hero and has been honoured with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the USN Distinguished Service Medal and the NASA Distinguished Service Medal, his request for an investigation has been ignored by U.S. officials. Nonetheless, the public's interest in UFOs is undiminished. A ballot initiative underway in the US state of Missouri, and certified by the secretary of state in March, urges Congress to convene hearings. The initiative states that \"the Federal Government's handling of the UFO issue has contributed to the public cynicism toward, and general mistrust of, government.\" US Naval Reserve Commander Willard H. Miller has been communicating this same concern to high level officials for a number of years. With over 30 years in Navy and Joint Interagency operations with the US Defense Department, Miller has participated in a series of previously undisclosed briefings for Pentagon brass about military policy regarding UFOs. The Decades of Distrust: In earlier decades, issues that remain pertinent today were openly discussed. In 1960, for example, US Representative Leonard G. Wolf of Iowa entered an \"urgent warning\" from R.E. Hillenkoetter, a former CIA Director and Navy vice admiral, into the Congressional Record that 'certain dangers are linked with unidentified flying objects.\" \"If we persist in refusing to recognize the existence of the UFOs, we will end up, one fine day, by mistaking them for the guided missiles of an enemy - and the worst will be"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pilot encounters with UFOs. Study challenges secrecy (and denial). Leslie Kean. San Francisco. Back in January, Agence France Presse reported that a Siberian airport was shut for 1½ hours while a luminescent unidentified flying object hovered above its runway. Although it's hard to imagine such an event taking place in the industrialized United States, a compelling October 2000 study by a retired aerospace scientist from NASA-Ames Research Center shows that similar incidents have occurred in America's skies over the last 50 years. \"Aviation Safety in America — A Previously Neglected Factor\" presents more than 100 pilot and crew reports of encounters with unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) that appear to have compromised aviation safety. Author Richard F. Haines, formerly NASA's chief of the Space Human Factors Office and a Raytheon contract scientist, is chief scientist for the National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena (NARCAP), a research organization founded last year. In stunning detail, pilots and crew describe a range of geometric forms and lights inconsistent with known aircraft or natural phenomena. Bizarre objects paced aircraft at relatively near distances, sometimes disabling cockpit instruments, interrupting ground communications, or distracting the crew. The data include 56 near-misses. Impulsive responses by pilots to an approaching high-speed object can be hazardous; in a few cases, such violent evasive reactions injured passengers and flight attendants. However, Haines states that there is no threat of a collision caused directly by UAP \"because of the re-ported high degree of maneuverability shown by the UAP.\" While flying over Lake Michigan in 1981, TWA Capt. Phil Schultz saw a \"large, round, silver metal object\" with dark portholes equally spaced around the circumference that \"descended into the atmosphere from above,\" according to his hand-written report. Schultz and his first officer braced themselves for a mid-air collision; the object suddenly made a high-speed turn and departed. Veteran Japan Airlines 747 Capt. Kenju Terauchi reported a spectacular prolonged encounter over Alaska in 1986. \"Most unexpectedly, two space ships stopped in front of our face, shooting off lights,\" he said. \"The inside cockpit shined brightly and I felt warm in the face.\" Despite the Federal Aviation Administration's determination that he and his crew were stable, competent and professional, he was grounded for speaking out. In 1997, a Swissair Boeing 747 over Long Island just missed a glowing, white, cylindrical object speeding toward the plane. According to an FAA Civil Aviation Security Office memorandum, pilot Philip Bobet said that \"if the object was any lower, it may have hit the right wing.\" Ground-systems operators have also been affected by UAP. \"The element of surprise means a decrease in safety because it diverts the attention of air-traffic controllers that should be focused on landing planes. That is a danger,\" says Jim McClenahen, a recently retired FAA air-traffic-control specialist and NARCAP technical adviser. In the 1950s, pilots and crews reported seeing flying discs, cigar-shaped craft with portholes, and gyrating lights, all with extraordinary technical capabilities. Documents show the unexplained objects were considered a national security concern. By order of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, commercial pilots were required to report sightings and the unauthorized release of a UFO report could cost them 10 years in prison or a $10,000 fine. In 1997, the Chilean government formed the Committee for the Study of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena (CEFAA) following publicly acknowledged observations of unidentified flying objects at a remote Chilean airport. Retired United Airlines Capt. Neil Daniels, whose DC-10 was forced into a left turn because of magnetic interference of cockpit compasses by a brilliant UAP, is among the many who want change. \"The energies out there are absolutely profound,\" he says. \"I think we need to know what they are.\" Leslie Kean is a journalist and author in the San Francisco Bay area. The Providence Journal, Thursday, May 3, 2001"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE BOSTON SUNDAY GLOBE • MAY 21, 2000 E3\n\nSCIENCE & SOCIETY\n\nUFO theorists gain support abroad, but repression at home\n\nStudy by French officials, routine unexplained sightings, US military safety aspects combine to boost believers\n\nBY LESLIE KEAN\n\nLast month's release of the first detailed satellite images of Area 51, the top-secret US Air Force test site in Nevada, prompted a Web site meltdown as people from across the nation logged on in search of clues about unidentified flying objects.\n\n\"The interest has been really phenomenal,\" said David Mountain, marketing director for Aerial Images Inc., which posted the high-resolution photographs of Area 51 on the Internet.\n\nBut those hoping to see signs that captured UFOs are stored at the site (as some aficionados have suggested) were destined to be disappointed. Most of Area 51's operations occur underground, making photos meaningless.\n\nAnyone looking for fresh information on UFOs would have better luck trying a new, but less publicized, source: a study by the French military, just translated into an approved English edition.\n\nHigh-level officials - including retired generals from the French Institute of Higher Studies for National Defense, a government-financed strategic planning agency - recently took a giant step in openly challenging skepticism about UFOs.\n\nIn a report based on a three-year study, they concluded that \"numerous manifestations observed by reliable witnesses could be the work of craft of extraterrestrial origin\" and that, in fact, the best explanation is \"the extraterrestrial hypothesis.\" Although not categorically proven, \"strong presumptions exist in its favor and if it is correct, it is loaded with significant consequences.\"\n\nThe French group reached that conclusion after examining nearly 600 international aeronautical sightings and radar/visual cases, and previously undisclosed pilots' reports. They drew on data from official sources, government authorities, and the air forces of other countries. The findings are contained in a 90-page report titled \"UFOs and Defense: What Should We Prepare For?\"\n\n\"The number of sightings, which are completely unexplained despite the abundance and quality of data from them, is growing throughout the world,\" the team declared.\n\nThe authors note that about 5 percent of sightings on which there is solid documentation cannot be easily attributed to earthly sources, such as secret military exercises. This 5 percent seem \"to be completely unknown flying machines with exceptional performances that are guided by a natural or artificial intelligence,\" they say. Science has developed plausible models for travel from another solar system and for technology that could be used to propel the vehicles, the report points out.\n\nIt assures readers that UFOs have demonstrated no hostile acts, \"although intimidation maneuvers have been confirmed.\"\n\nGiven the widespread skepticism about UFOs, many will quickly dismiss the generals' \"extraterrestrial hypothesis.\" But it is less easy to do so once the authors' credentials are considered. The study's originators are four-star General Bernard Norlain, former commander of the French Tactical Air Force and military counselor to the prime minister; General Denis Letty, an air force fighter pilot; and Andre Lebeau, former head of the National Center for Space Studies, the French equivalent of NASA.\n\nThe formal a 12-member \"Committee for In-depth Studies,\" abbreviated as COMETA, which authored the report. Other contributors included a three-star admiral, the national chief of police; and the head of a government agency studying the subject, as well as scientists and weapons engineers.\n\nNot only does the group stand by its findings, it is urging international action. The writers recommend that France establish \"sectorial cooperation agreements with interested European and foreign countries\" on the matter of UFOs. They suggest that the European Union undertake diplomatic action with the United States \"exerting useful pressure to clarify this crucial issue which must fall within the scope of political and strategic alliances.\"\n\nWhy might the United States be interested - albeit, privately - in a subject often met with ridicule, or considered the domain of the irrational?\n\nFor one thing, declassified US government documents show that unexplained objects with extraordinary technical capabilities pose challenges to military activity around the globe. For example, US fighter jets have attempted to pursue UFOs, according to North American Aerospace Defense Command logs and Air Force documents. Iranian and Peruvian air force planes attempted to shoot down unidentified craft in 1976 and 1980. Belgium F-16s armed with missiles pursued a UFO in 1990.\n\nFurther, the French report says that there have been \"visits above secret installations and missile bases\" and \"military aircraft shadowed\" in the United States.\n\nEdgar Mitchell, the Apollo 14 astronaut who was the sixth man to walk on the moon, is one of many supporters of international cooperation on UFOs. Of the French report, he says, \"It's significant that individuals of some standing in the government, military, and intelligence community in France came forth with this.\"\n\nMitchell, who holds a doctorate from MIT in aeronautics and astronautics, is convinced \"at a confidence level above 90 percent, that there is reality to all of this.\" He says, \"People have been digging through the files and investigating for years now. The files are quite convincing. The only thing that's lacking is the official stamp.\"\n\nMitchell joins five-star Admiral Lord Hill-Norton, the former head of the British Ministry of Defense, in calling for congressional fact-finding hearings into the UFO question.\n\nAlthough Congress seems disinclined to pursue the matter, the public's interest in UFOs is undiminished. A ballot initiative underway in Missouri, certified by the secretary of state in March, urges Congress to convene hearings. The initiative states that \"the Federal Government's handling of the UFO issue has contributed to the public cynicism toward, and general mistrust of, government.\"\n\nUS Naval Reserve Commander William H. Miller has long been communicating this same concern to high level federal officials. With over 30 years in Navy and joint interagency operations with the Defense Department, Miller has participated in a series of previously undisclosed briefings for Pentagon brass about military policy regarding UFOs.\n\nLike many, Miller says he worries that the French report chastises the United States for what it calls an \"impressive repressive arsenal\" on the subject, including a policy of disinformation and military regulations prohibiting public disclosure of UFO sightings.\n\nAir Force Regulation 200-2, \"Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting,\" for example, prohibits the release to the public and the media of any data about \"those objects which are not explainable.\" An even more restrictive procedure is outlined in the Joint Army Navy Air Force Publication 146, which threatens to prosecute anyone under its jurisdiction - including pilots, civilian agencies, merchant marine captains, and even some fishing vessels - for disclosing reports of sightings relevant to US security.\n\nAlthough researchers have been able to obtain some information through the Freedom of Information Act, many UFO documents remain classified.\n\nIn earlier decades, issues that remain pertinent today were openly discussed. In 1960, for example, US Representative Leonard G. Wolf of Iowa entered an \"urgent warning\" from R. E. Hillenkoetter, a former CIA director and Navy vice admiral, into the Congressional Record that \"certain dangers are linked with unidentified flying objects.\" Wolf cited General L. M. Chassin, NATO coordinator of Allied Air Service, warning that \"If we persist in refusing to recognize the existence of the UFOs, we will end up, one fine day, by mistaking them for the guided missiles of an enemy - and the worst will be upon us.\"\n\nThese concerns were taken seriously enough to be incorporated into the 1971 US-Soviet \"Agreement on Measures to Reduce the Outbreak of Nuclear War.\"\n\nThe French report may open the door for nations to be more forthcoming once again. Chile, for example, is openly addressing its own concerns about air safety and UFOs. The now retired chief of the Chilean Air Force has formed a committee with civil aviation specialists to study recent near-collisions of UFOs and civilian airliners.\n\nAs the international conversation about UFOs unfolds, sightings continue, as they have for decades. Perhaps the most notable recent US sighting took place in March 1997. Hundreds of people across Arizona reported seeing huge triangular objects, hovering silently in the night sky - a sighting that, as the state's US Senator John McCain noted recently, has \"never been fully explained.\"\n\nAs recently as Jan. 5, four policemen at different locations in St. Claire County, Illinois, witnessed a huge, brightly lighted, triangular craft flying and hovering at 1,000 feet. One officer reported witnessing extreme rapid motion by the craft that cannot be explained in conventional terms. Nearby Scott Air Force base and the Federal Aviation Administration purport to know nothing.\n\nThe Defense Department maintains it can find no information acknowledging the existence of the triangular objects. In response to a suit by curious Arizonans, it provided details of its search to US District Court Judge Stephen M. McNamee of Phoenix. On March 30, McNamee concluded that \"a reasonable search was conducted\" even though no information was obtained, and he dismissed the case.\n\nThere is one government agency in the country that has taken steps to prepare for a UFO encounter. The Fire Officer's Guide to Disaster Control, second edition - used by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and taught at the seven universities offering degrees in fire science - warns of \"UFO hazards,\" such as electrical fields that cause blackouts, force fields, and physiological effects.\n\n\"Do not stand under a UFO that is hovering at low altitudes,\" the book warns. \"Do not touch or attempt to touch a UFO that has landed.\"\n\nThe text leaves little room for skepticism. John E. Mack, professor of psychiatry at Harvard University and a Pulitzer Prize-winning author, stopped being skeptical a long time ago.\n\n\"No culture from the beginning of time, no culture from anywhere on the planet, has ever voided the idea of all other intelligent life other than ourselves,\" he told a UFO conference at the New York Hall of Science two weeks ago. \"That's arrogance.\"\n\nLeslie Kean is a freelance journalist in the San Francisco Bay area."} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"National Aviation Reporting Center for Anomalous Phenomena\n(NARCAP)\n\nThe National Aviation Reporting Center for Anomalous Phenomena (NARCAP) is a national organization, established in November of 2000, and is dedicated to the advancement of aviation safety issues as they apply to Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP).\n\nNARCAP investigates aviation related reports of aerial encounters with lights or objects that seem inconsistent with known categories of aircraft and common natural phenomena. These lights or objects are reported to appear in a variety of colors and shapes. Pilots, air traffic controllers and radar operators report that these lights or objects closely approach aircraft. Encounters with these lights or objects, UAP, have a demonstrated a variety of safety related effects on pilots, crew, cockpit discipline and on-board instrumentation.\n\nNARCAP Chief Scientist Dr. Richard F. Haines has compiled a catalogue of over 3400 aviation related UAP cases. He has conducted a comprehensive review of UAP reports by U.S. air traffic controllers and pilots from the past 50 years. A result of this effort is Richard's paper\" Aviation Safety in America- A Previously Neglected Factor\". It contains analyses of over one hundred reports of UAP involved in near misses, close pacing, disrupted avionics, and collisions. These events were reported by US military aviators, civil aviation professionals, private pilots, and by foreign aircrews operating in US airspace.\n\nNARCAP has no basis for conjecture regarding the true nature or source of these lights and objects. It is the NARCAP position that certain unidentified aerial phenomena have an effect on aviation safety that can be quantified. It is the intention of this organization to develop a body of data that will stand up to scientific scrutiny and serve as a basis for understanding this phenomenon.\n\nIt is our hope that aviation professionals will recognize the importance of this work and contact NARCAP with their reports of encounters with UAP. Often, though not always, reporters are concerned about their confidentiality. We are not associated with the FAA or other government agencies, or the airlines. With regards to employers, the FAA, and the media, we have a process in place to ensure that confidentiality is protected.\n\nFor more information contact:\nTed Roe, Executive Director (831) 338-4783\nOr email admin@narcap.org\nOr go to Our Website www.narcap.org\nTo report UAP encounters call (800) 732-3666\n\n1"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UFO Shuts Down Russian Airport\n\nMOSCOW, Jan 27, 2001 -- (Agence France Presse) An airport in southern Siberia was shut down for an hour and a half on Friday when an unidentified flying object (UFO) was detected hovering above its runway, the Interfax newsagency reported.\n\nThe crew of an Il-76 cargo aircraft refused to take off, claiming they saw a luminescent object hovering above the runway of the Siberia's Barnaul airport, local aviation company director Ivan Komarov was quoted as saying.\n\nThe crew of another cargo plane, refusing to use the runway for the same reason, landed their jet at another airport, Komarov said.\n\nThe UFO took off and vanished from the airport 90 minutes later, according to the report. ((c) 2001 Agence France Presse)"} {"doc_id":"4741da35998e37b3","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LESLIE KEAN\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\nRadio Host/Producer 1998 - 2001\nAssociate/Senior Producer and co-host of daily, drive-time investigative news magazine \"Flashpoints\" on public radio KPFA in the San Francisco Bay Area.\n\nFeature stories, domestic\nthe Boston Globe, the Baltimore Sun, the Sacramento Bee, the Minneapolis Star Tribune, The Nation, the Progressive, the San Francisco Bay Guardian, The Providence Journal, The Commercial Appeal, Burma Debate, and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin.\n\nFeature stories, international\nthe International Herald Tribune, the Globe and Mail (Canada), the Vancouver Sun, the Sydney Morning Herald (Australia), the Kyoto Journal (Japan), the Nation (Thailand), Internazionale (Italy), VSD (France), the Irish Independent.\n\nOp-ed pieces\nthe Boston Globe, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Journal of Commerce, the Bangkok Post, the St. Louis Post Dispatch, the Providence Journal Bulletin, the San Francisco Examiner and The Nation.\n\nSyndication\nKnight-Ridder, Scripps-Howard, New York Times Wire Service, Pacific News Service and the National Publishers Association (NNPA).\n\nBooks/Anthologies/Collections\nPerspectives: Drugs and Society (Coursewise Publishing, Inc. 2000)\nStone Soup for the World (Conari Press, 1998)\nDrugs, Society and Behavior 98/99 (Dushkin/McGraw-Hill, 1998)\nBurma's Revolution of the Spirit: The Struggle for Democratic Freedom and Dignity (Aperture, 1994), co-authored with Alan Clements\n\nDirector, The Burma Project USA, 1991 - present\nHuman rights and media advocacy\n\nRadio interviews\nThe Michael Jackson Show (KRLA, Los Angeles); Hightower Radio (over 100 stations); Mike Malloy Show (WLS Chicago, the ABC station); Coast to Coast AM (audience of 10 to 20 million); Dreamland with Whitley Strieber (audience 1 million); Democracy Now with Amy Goodman (Pacifica national); The Gerry Ryan Show (Channel 2, National radio Ireland) and many others.\n\nHonors\nThe Fund for Investigative Journalism: grants, 1996, 1997 and 1998\nProject Censored Honorable Mention: 1998\nThe Nation Institute: grant, 1997\nCover story selected by The Nation as their submission for the George Polk Award, 1996"} {"doc_id":"4789d83d0ae2f26b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4856add6907b3bee","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4856add6907b3bee","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4856add6907b3bee","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4856add6907b3bee","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4856add6907b3bee","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4a44d88d0a2d846a","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-1057 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\nOFFICIAL RECORD\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nElectronic Communication\nTitle: [REDACTED] Forensic sketch interview of [REDACTED] Date: 07/[REDACTED]/2024\n[REDACTED] on 7-[REDACTED]-24\nFrom: [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nContact: [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nApproved By: A/SSA [REDACTED]\nDrafted By: [REDACTED]\nCase ID #: [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nSynopsis: [REDACTED] Forensic sketch interview of [REDACTED] on 7-[REDACTED]-24\nReference: [REDACTED]\nEnclosure(s): Enclosed are the following items:\n1. [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n2. [REDACTED] Sketch draft\nDetails:\n On June [REDACTED], 2024, [REDACTED] [REDACTED] date of birth: [REDACTED] [REDACTED], home address: [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED], work address: [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] email address: [REDACTED] cellular telephone number [REDACTED] [REDACTED], was interviewed at 26 Federal Plaza, New York, NY 10278 by Special Agent (SA) [REDACTED] and Operational Projects Unit (OPU) forensic artist [REDACTED]. After being advised of the identities of the interviewing individuals, [REDACTED] provided the following information to aid in the forensic recreation of the Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) and its activity observed over Cheyenne Mountain [REDACTED] [REDACTED] :\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"4a44d88d0a2d846a","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nTitle: [REDACTED] Forensic sketch interview of [REDACTED] on 7-[REDACTED]-24\nRe: [REDACTED], 07/[REDACTED]/2024\n On February [REDACTED] at approximately 11:25 am, [REDACTED] [REDACTED] a former U.S. Army intelligence officer, along with four other members of his unit, observed a UAP over the Cheyenne Mountains as they exited their office building. [REDACTED] described the day as the perfect \"blue bird\" sky as there were no clouds, little humidity, with a temperature of approximately 50 degrees Fahrenheit.\n The object was \"potato\" shaped with distinct edges and appeared to look painted in a creamy/whitish opalescent color. It was somewhat translucent with a slight shimmer. The object was made up of what can best be described as articulating fish scales or panels that were non-symmetrical, non-overlapping, and irregular shaped. The object itself was perfectly still but each panel on the object shifted in slow waves starting at different points of origin but at the same time.\n After approximately two minutes, the object vanished. [REDACTED] specifically stated that the object \"cloaked\" in the space of time it took to turn a head and there was no shadow.\n [REDACTED] and initial sketch draft are attached. Forensic artist [REDACTED] will relay additional sketch drafts through SA [REDACTED] to [REDACTED] in order to complete the final sketch product.\n♦♦\n[REDACTED]\n2"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n30 March 2010\n\nICOD: 1 December 2009\n\nDIA-08-1003-016\n\nThe Space-Communication Implications of Quantum Entanglement and Nonlocality\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe Space-Communication Implications of Quantum Entanglement and Nonlocality\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 76\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\ni\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nForeword and Introduction ....iv\nI. Quantum Entanglement, Nonlocality, and EPR Experiments ... 1\nII. The Quantum No-Signal Theorems ... 4\nIII. Nonlocality Versus Special Relativity? ... 5\nIV. Momentum Domain Entanglement and EPR Experiments ... 5\nV. Coherence-Entanglement Complementarity ... 10\nVI. Nonlocal Communication Versus Signaling ... 11\nVII. A Transactional Analysis of the Nonlocal Communication Test ... 13\nVIII. Superluminal and Retrocausal Nonlocal Communication ... 17\nIX. Paradoxes and Nonlocal Communication ... 18\nX. Superluminal Communication without Paradoxes ... 19\nXI. Example: Real-Time Earth Control of Mars Rover ... 20\nXII. Another Superluminal Possibility: Nonlinear Quantum Mechanics ... 22\nXIII. Conclusion ... 23\nAppendix: Glossary ... 24\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Schematic of the 1972 Freedman-Clauser Experiment ... 2\nFigure 2. Schematic of the 1995 Ghost Interference Experiment of the Shih Group ... 6\nFigure 3. Ghost Interference Position Distributions at X2 ... 7\nFigure 4. \"Unfolding\" the Ghost Interference Experiment ... 8\nFigure 5. Schematic of the 1998 Dopfer Experiment ... 9\nFigure 6. Thick-Source Effect ... 10\nFigure 7. Slit-Imaging Coincidence-Free Version of the Ghost Interference Experiment to Demonstrate Nonlocal Communication ... 12\nFigure 8. Transactional Interpretation Diagrams for Case 1 ... 15\nFigure 9. Transactional Interpretation Diagrams for Case 2 ... 16\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 10. Slit-Imaging Coincidence-Free Version of the Ghost Interference Experiment Demonstrating Superluminal and Retrocausal Signaling .. 17\nFigure 11. A Superluminal Nonlocal Communication System in Which the Communication Spans a Spacelike Interval ... 20\nFigure 12. Schematic of Earth-to-Mars Real-Time Control of a Rover ... 21\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe Space-Communication Implications of Quantum Entanglement and Nonlocality\n\nForeword and Introduction\n\nThis paper reviews quantum entanglement and nonlocality and considers the possibility that this phenomenon could be used for sending observer-to-observer signals. Such a demonstration would break several quantum \"no-signal theorems\" in the physics literature. Nonlocal quantum signaling would have far-reaching implications as an enabling technology for superluminal and retrocausal signaling. Scenarios that might lead to nonlocal quantum communication are described, and applications to retrocausal signaling and real-time space communication are considered. Also considered briefly is the nonlocal communication implications of nonlinear quantum mechanics.\n\nCommunication in space at the scale of the solar system is severely limited by the space-time scale set by the speed of light. Light signals, whether in the form of radio waves, microwaves, visible light, X-rays, or gamma rays, require about 3.3 microseconds to travel a distance of 1 kilometer. A light signal sent from Earth requires about 1.3 seconds to reach the Moon, between 4.4 and 20 minutes to reach Mars, and between 4 and 4.3 hours to reach Neptune, depending on their orbital positions. This time delay makes real-time control of remote space-based devices impossible and leads to the need for pre-programmed robotic devices with enough \"intelligence\" to perform limited operations with a minimum of remote control.\n\nThe burden of these limitations raises the question of whether there is some way to speed up the space communications link. The conventional answer is \"No!,\" because the well-established special theory of relativity is viewed as limiting signal transmission speed to the speed of light, with superluminal communications strictly forbidden. However, as will be discussed in Section III, relativity prohibits only certain forms of superluminal communication, while other forms are not in conflict with relativity. One phenomenon that appears, at least superficially, to exhibit superluminal aspects while preserving compatibility with special relativity is quantum nonlocality, the ability of quantum phenomena to enforce correlations between quantum states over large separations in space-time.\n\nWhen two photons emerge from a single quantum event, the state of one photon may be subtly connected to that of the other. The classical view is that, once separated, such photon states must be fixed according to mechanics and conservation relations that act at the point of their origin, so that modifying one later will not affect the other. In quantum physics, however, as borne out by experiment (Reference 1, 2), the outcome of a measurement of the state of one of the photons, even well after their point of joint creation, can affect the state of the other photon. This connection is referred to as quantum entanglement, a phrase first coined by Erwin Schrödinger (Reference 3). Questions raised by the phenomenon of quantum entanglement are: (1) what is the causal connection between entangled states, and (2) can the phenomenon possibly be used for sending observer-to-observer signals? This\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\npaper attempts to address these questions by taking a close look at quantum entanglement, quantum nonlocality, the experiments that have explored them, and proposed experiments to test the causal and faster-than-light communication issues evoked by such physics.\n\nQuantum entanglement describes the condition of separated parts of the same quantum system in which each of the parts can be described only by referencing the state of other parts. This is one of the most counterintuitive aspects of quantum mechanics, because classically one would expect system parts out of \"local\" contact to be completely independent. Thus, entanglement represents a kind of quantum \"connectedness\" in which measurements on one isolated part of an entangled quantum system have nonclassical consequences for the outcome of measurements performed on the other (possibly very distant) part of the same system. This quantum connectedness acting in entangled quantum systems is called quantum nonlocality.\n\nNonlocality was first highlighted by Albert Einstein and his coworkers Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen in their famous EPR paper (Reference 4). They argued that the nonlocal connectedness of quantum systems was unphysical in that it implied a faster-than-light connection in apparent conflict with special relativity. Despite their objection, quantum nonlocality has now been demonstrated (see Section I) in many quantum systems (Reference 1, 2). In the physics community, it is now generally acknowledged to be implicit in the quantum formalism as applied to entangled systems, although there remain a few Copenhagen \"holdouts\" who would require an explicit demonstration of nonlocal signaling before admitting that nonlocality can be considered a real quantum phenomenon.\n\nThe question investigated in this paper is whether quantum nonlocality is the private domain of nature or whether it can be used in experimental situations to send signals from one observer to another. As we will see, there is at present no compelling answer to this question. However, it is clear that if such nonlocal observer-to-observer communication were possible, it would have far-reaching implications. In particular, it would represent an enabling technology for superluminal (and retrocausal) signaling and communications, and perhaps make possible the real-time exploration of the universe.\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nI. Quantum Entanglement, Nonlocality, and EPR Experiments\n\nIn the quantum mechanical description of elementary entities like photons, there is a duality between the description as a particle and as a wave. Photons can be thought of as traveling through space as waves but delivering energy (and other conserved quantities) at detection as particles. By choosing the kinds of measurements made on such objects, one can force wave-like or particle-like behavior to be exhibited in the measurements results. Between the entangled parts of a quantum system (for example, the emission of a pair of entangled photons), this wave-like or particle-like behavior in a measurement on one part of the system may force similar behavior in the other part. This is considered further in Section IV below.\n\nThe quantum entanglement condition is usually a consequence of some conservation law acting within the system, so that the subsystems are connected by the conserved quantities. For example, if two photons are emitted back to back in a joint state that has zero angular momentum and positive parity, then whatever linear or circular polarization state one photon is measured to have, the other photon must have an identical polarization if measured in the same basis (linear or circular). This condition must exist to ensure that the net angular momentum of the two photon states is zero. In this situation, if the photons are measured for circular polarization, they must both be in states of right circular polarization or in states of left circular polarization. Because linear polarization is a coherent superposition of circular polarization states, if measured in the vertical/horizontal linear polarization basis, they must be in the same vertical or horizontal polarization state, and in the 45° left or right linear polarization basis, they must be in the same 45° left/right polarization state.\n\nClassically, such a polarization correlation condition could in principle exist in some particular polarization basis but not in all of the many possible polarization bases simultaneously. This is the underlying physics of the Bell Inequalities (Reference 8), which deal with the falloff rate of the correlations as the polarization basis of one of the measurements is rotated in angle. The Bell Inequalities demonstrate mathematically that the predictions of semi-classical local hidden-variable theories are inconsistent with those of standard quantum mechanics. Tests of such polarization correlations have been the basis for a number of Bell-Inequality tests (or so-called EPR experiments), in which the validity of the predictions of quantum mechanics and the inadequacies of semi-classical local hidden-variable theories have been demonstrated to high statistical precision (Reference 1, 2).\n\nIt was later demonstrated (Reference 5, 6) that the issues surrounding a violation of the Bell Inequalities could be separated into violations of either parameter independence (the outcome probability of a measurement on one of a pair of entangled particles is independent of the choice of parameters of a measurement performed on the other member of the entangled pair) and violations of outcome independence (the outcome probability of a measurement on one of a pair of entangled particles is independent of the outcome of a measurement performed on the other member of the entangled pair). The observation of a violation of the Bell Inequalities indicates a violation of either parameter independence or outcome independence (or both). Outcome independence is fairly evident in the quantum formalism, while parameter independence is more elusive and depends on specific assumptions. Below, the\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nimplications of this dichotomy are considered in the context of the \"no-signal\" theorems.\n\nIt is noted that there is some misinformation in the literature concerning the chronology of successful EPR polarization correlation experiments, and here we wish to set the record at least somewhat straighter. The experimental measurement that first demonstrated a polarization correlation related to EPR nonlocality was performed by C. S. Wu and I. Shanknov in 1949 (Reference 7), well before Bell's work and the subsequent interest in testing Bell's Inequality. Wu and Shanknov showed that the linear polarizations of back-to-back entangled gamma rays from electron-positron annihilation (an L=0 negative parity state) were anticorrelated, for example, if one photon was polarized vertically, then the other was polarized horizontally. They did not, however, investigate the falloff of the correlation with polarimeter angle, which is the basis of Bell Inequality tests, nor did they depict their results as a consequence of quantum nonlocality.\n\nAlmost two decades passed before the publication of John Bell's pivotal work (Reference 8) in 1964 and 1966. In 1972, Freedman and Clauser (Reference 1) performed the first definitive Bell inequality test by measuring the polarization correlation of entangled photons from a positive parity L=0 atomic cascade in calcium. Their results were in agreement with the predictions of quantum mechanics and were inconsistent with local hidden-variable theories by 6.7 standard deviations. A decade later, in 1982, EPR measurements of the Aspect group (Reference 2) eliminated several \"loophole\" scenarios that might constitute unlikely ways of preserving classical locality and again demonstrated agreement with quantum mechanics and inconsistency with local hidden-variable theories, this time by 46 standard deviations. In a more recent example of an EPR experiment, the Gisin group (Reference 9) used the fiber-optic cables owned by the Swiss Telephone System to demonstrate the nonlocal connection between EPR measurements made at locations in Geneva and Bern, Swiss cities with a line-of-sight separation of 156 km—a direct demonstration, if one was required, that quantum nonlocality can operate over quite large distances.\n\n[Figure 1. Schematic of the 1972 Freedman-Clauser Experiment (Reference 1)]\n\nFigure 1. Schematic of the 1972 Freedman-Clauser Experiment (Reference 1)\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDo these EPR experiments constitute a demonstration of the existence of quantum nonlocality? There is more than one way of interpreting the implications of the experimental results (Reference 1, 2), and one can find much discussion in the literature as to whether it is locality or \"realism\" (the objective observer-independent reality of external events) that has been refuted by these EPR measurements.\n\nNoble Laureate Anthony Leggett of the University of Illinois recently pushed this issue somewhat further (Reference 10). He demonstrated that by focusing on the falloff of correlations with elliptical polarization rather than the linear polarization used in the Bell Inequality EPR experiments, one can compare the predictions of quantum mechanics with a class of nonlocal realistic theories that he constructed. The resulting Leggett Inequalities can be used in the same way as the Bell Inequalities, but to test theories incorporating nonlocal realism instead of local realism. Anton Zeilinger's group at the Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information (IQOQI) in Vienna performed a definitive test of the Leggett Inequalities (Reference 11). The results show that using elliptically polarized entangled photons, the Leggett Inequalities in two observables are violated by 3.6 and by 9 standard deviations. This is interpreted as a statistically significant falsification of the whole class of nonlocal realistic theories constructed by Leggett. The IQOQI group summarizes its results with the statement \"We believe that our results lend strong support to the view that any future extension of quantum theory that is in agreement with experiments must abandon certain features of realistic descriptions.\"\n\nIt is our view, however, that this is mainly an exercise in demolishing a \"strawman.\" Leggett's nonlocal realistic theories assume that when entangled photons emerge from their emission source, they are in a definite state of polarization. It is well known that when that assumption (and no others) is made, one does not observe the quantum mechanical prediction of Malus's Law for the correlations of the photon pair.\n\nHowever, Leggett solves that problem by assuming an unspecified nonlocal connection mechanism between the detection systems that fixes the discrepancy. In effect, the two measurements talk to each other nonlocally in such a way that the detected linearly polarized photons obey Malus's Law and produce the same linear polarization correlations predicted by quantum mechanics calculations. Leggett then shows that this nonlocal \"fix\" cannot be extended into the realm of elliptical polarization, and that quantum mechanics and this type of nonlocal realistic theories give differing predictions for the elliptic polarization correlations. In other words, the \"reality\" that is being tested is whether the photon source is initially emitting the entangled photons in a definite state of polarization. It is this version of \"reality\" that has been falsified by the IQOQI measurements.\n\nIt is our view that this assumption, clearly inconsistent with the formalism of quantum mechanics, is invalid, and that nature is both nonlocal and unrealistic, if by realism one means that when entangled photons emerge from their emission source, they are in a definite state of polarization. This very restricted definition of realism is not required, and it is assumed that the intrinsic nonlocality of standard quantum mechanics is a physical fact.\n\nIt is noted that the several polarization bases used in these kinds of polarization EPR experiments make demonstrating the quantum nonlocal connections straightforward but also make it effectively impossible to use those connections for observer-to-\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nobserver signaling (Reference 12), because one would need to deduce from the arriving photons the polarization basis that was being used in the distant measurements. This is an aspect of the parameter independence mentioned above. While each observer is free to choose a parameter that specifies the polarization basis (for example, circular right/left, linear at any angle) for the measurement, he is not free to force the photon into a particular state of that basis, as would be required for nonlocal communication. However, measuring polarization correlations in a system with angular momentum constraints is not the only way to demonstrate the nonlocal connection between the entangled separated parts of a quantum system. Below, EPR experiments that use momentum entanglement are discussed, and the question of whether such quantum systems might provide a better vehicle for observer-to-observer nonlocal communication is explored, because by using momentum entanglement, an observer is able to force the photon into particle-like or wave-like behavior.\n\nII. The Quantum No-Signal Theorems\n\nAs Einstein implied with his well-known \"spooky actions at a distance\" comment, enforcement of quantum correlations across spacelike and negative timelike intervals by nonlocality is very counterintuitive. It appears to imply the twin possibilities of superluminal communication and of reverse causation through back-in-time communication between observers. However, a number of authors (Reference 13) have presented \"proofs\" that such nonlocal observer-to-observer communication is impossible within the formalism of standard quantum mechanics. These theorems assert that in separated measurements involving entangled quantum systems, the quantum correlations will be preserved, but there will be no effect apparent to an observer in one sub-system if the character of the measurement is changed in the other sub-system. Thus, it is asserted, nonlocal signaling is impossible.\n\nAs mentioned above, EPR experiments can be viewed (Reference 5, 6) as demonstrating violations of outcome independence or parameter independence or both. Outcome independence cannot be used for nonlocal signaling, while parameter independence can. Thus, any test of nonlocal signaling is, in effect, a test of the parameter independence of quantum phenomena, and the no-signal theorems are \"proofs\" of parameter independence.\n\nDo these no-signal \"proofs\" really have the status of mathematical theorems? Perhaps not. Recently it has been pointed out (Reference 14) that at least some of these \"proofs\" ruling out nonlocal signaling are tautological, assuming that the measurement process and its associated Hamiltonian are local, thereby building the final conclusion of no signaling into their starting assumptions. Standard quantum mechanical Bose-Einstein symmetrization in systems of bosons has been raised as a counter-example, shown to be inconsistent with the initial assumptions of some of these \"proofs.\" Therefore, at least from some perspectives, the possibility of nonlocal communication in the context of standard quantum mechanics remains open and appropriate for experimental testing.\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIII. Nonlocality Versus Special Relativity?\n\nIf nonlocal communication is possible, would it be in conflict with special relativity, with its well-known prohibition against faster-than-light signals? The answer is no.\n\nThe prohibition of signals with superluminal speeds by Einstein's theory of special relativity is related to the fact that the definite simultaneity of two separated space-time points is not Lorentz invariant. Since some hypothetical superluminal signal could be used to establish a fixed simultaneity relation between two such points—for example, by clock synchronization—this would imply a preferred inertial frame and would be inconsistent with Lorentz invariance and special relativity. In other words, it would be inconsistent with the even-handed treatment of all inertial reference frames in special relativity.\n\nHowever, if a nonlocal signal could be transmitted through measurements at separated locations performed on two entangled photons, the signal would be \"sent\" at the time of the arrival of the photon in one location and \"received\" at the time of arrival of the other photon. By varying path lengths to the two locations, these events could be made to occur in any order and time separation in any reference frame. Therefore, nonlocal signals (even superluminal and retrocausal ones) could not be used to establish a fixed simultaneity relation between two separated space-time points, because the sending and receiving of such signals do not have fixed time relations. The transmission and arrival instants of a nonlocal signal cannot be used for synchronization because the transmission and reception instants are path- and delay-dependent variables.\n\nTo put it another way, the nonlocal connections of entangled photons lie along segmented lightlike world lines that transform properly under Lorentz transformations. Therefore, there is no conflict between nonlocal signaling and the Lorentz invariance of special relativity. On the other hand, the principle of causality (cause must precede effect in all reference frames) appears very likely to be violated (or at least violateable) if nonlocal signaling is possible.\n\nIs it possible that the universe does have some preferred reference frame, perhaps that laid down by the cosmic microwave background or implied by Mach's Principle? Perhaps, but if such a preferred frame existed, its existence could not be established by nonlocal communication.\n\nIV. Momentum Domain Entanglement and EPR Experiments\n\nEinstein's original objection (Reference 4) that quantum mechanics appeared to be nonlocal was made with arguments based on a gedankenexperiment in the momentum domain. However, almost all of the modern EPR experiments testing the Bell Inequality and demonstrating quantum nonlocality have been performed in the polarization (that is, angular momentum) domain, usually with linearly polarized photons. Interestingly, it appears that if nonlocal quantum communication is possible at all, it may be more easily achieved in the momentum domain of Einstein's original focus.\n\nThe optical process of spontaneous parametric down-conversion (Reference 15) turns out to be a very useful way of generating photon pairs entangled in either the polarization or the momentum domains. In this process, a photon from a \"pump laser\"\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"interacts with a nonlinear crystal and is transformed into two photons with energies and vector momenta that add up to those of the original pump photon. Depending on the type of down-conversion process, there are well-defined polarization correlations between the entangled photons. The down-converted photons may also be easily prepared in momentum-entangled states, because within the nonlinear medium, the vector momenta of the down-converted pair of photons must add to give that of the pump photon.\n\nThe first measurement using momentum-entangled down-conversion photons that might be related to nonlocal communication is the Ghost Interference experiment reported in 1995 by the Shih group (Reference 16), shown schematically in Figure 2. The experimenters used degenerate collinear Type-II down-conversion of 351-nm UV pump radiation from an argon-ion laser passed through a 3-mm-long BBO (β-BaB2O4) crystal that had been cut with the optic axis at a phase-matching angle of 42.2° to the pump beam to produce a pair of collinear momentum-entangled 702-nm photons with opposite polarizations. The entangled photons emerge from the crystal very nearly parallel with the pump beam. The pump beam is then split off from the pair using refraction in a quartz prism (UV Prism), and the entangled photons are separated with a polarization-selecting beam splitter (BS) that reflects the \"extraordinary\" vertically polarized photon (e) and transmits the \"ordinary\" horizontally polarized photon (o). Both photons are passed through 702 ± 10-nm wavelength-selective filters (f1,2) and then detected (D1,2).\n\nFigure 2. Schematic of the 1995 Ghost Interference Experiment (Reference 16) of the Shih group\n\n6\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The experimenters demonstrated that passing the vertically polarized photon (e) through a double- or single-slit system before detection at D1 produced a \"comb\" interference distribution or a \"bump\" diffraction distribution, respectively, in the position X2 of the horizontally polarized photon (o) detected at D2 when the pair of photons is examined in coincidence. In other words, the position distribution of the straight-through photon shows patterns characteristic of the single- or double-slit system through which its twin entangled photon passed. Figure 3 shows the observed position distributions for the two cases.\n\nFrom the viewpoint of nonlocal communication, we note that modifying the slit system before D1 through which the reflected photon passes, which can be thought of as the action of a \"sending\" observer, nonlocally causes an observable change in the X2-position distribution of the undeflected photon, as detected by a \"receiving\" observer at D2. This is a nonclassical effect that demonstrates the nonlocal connection between the entangled pair and that might form the basis for transmission of a nonlocal signal between the two observers. However, the Ghost Interference experiment does not, in the form reported, demonstrate nonlocal communication, because of its use of a classical communication link in imposing the coincidence requirement between the detected photons.\n\nIn their paper, the authors comment that with the two-slit system in place, in the absence of coincidences there is no observable two-slit interference pattern distributions at either D1 or D2. They attribute this lack of an interference \"signal\" to the horizontal variation in the creation position of the down-converted photons. The variation is enough to cause the \"e\" photons to arrive at the two slits with relative path lengths that may differ by more than a wavelength, thereby randomly shifting and washing out any interference pattern. Furthermore, their source of entangled photons was very inefficient and noisy. Only about 1 in 10^10 pump photons produced an entangled pair, while many unentangled \"noise\" photons of the same wavelength were created by fluorescence in the crystal. Therefore, even if the coincidence requirement had been in principle removable (see below), it is not surprising that coincidences were required to observe the reported effects.\n\nFigure 3. Ghost Interference Position Distributions at X2\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 4. \"Unfolding\" the Ghost Interference Experiment\n\nThe authors point out that there is a simple way of thinking about momentum-entanglement measurements involving entangled photons. It can be shown from Snell's Law and conservation of momentum in the crystal that if one photon has a small momentum that causes it to be slightly deflected to the right of the pump beam by an angle θ, then the twin entangled photon will be deflected to the left by the same angle θ, a situation reminiscent of reflection from a mirror. This allows the experiment to be \"unfolded\" by replacing the effective reflection by a straight-through path, as shown in Figure 4. The point of the unfolding is that the entangled photons behave exactly as would be the case if the direction of the deflected photon was reversed, so that it originated at the detection point D1, passed through one or two slits at C and D, and produced a one or two slit interference pattern at X2 detected by D2.\n\nWhy is the coincidence needed? First, it should be clear from Figure 2 that detector D2 detects not only the entangled twins of the photons that pass through the slit openings, but also the entangled twins of the much larger number of photons that are stopped by the opaque parts of the slits. Therefore, without coincidences, no interference pattern could possibly be observed at X2. Moreover, one can see from Figure 4b that detector D1 behind the slits receives light in a very localized region, and if it were moved vertically in the diagram, the interference pattern at D2 would be shifted, with maxima becoming minima and vice versa. Without coincidences requiring a particular location for the detection at D1, the D2 distribution would have to average over all possible D1 positions, washing out the two-slit interference pattern. Therefore, because of the geometry used, the Ghost Interference experiment required a coincidence to observe a two-slit interference pattern like the one shown in Figure 3a.\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Another momentum-entangled EPR experiment was the 1998 Ph.D. thesis of Birgit Dopfer (Reference 17) performed at the University of Innsbruck and shown schematically in Figure 5. In the Dopfer experiment, moving a detector in one arm nonlocally changes the observed interference pattern in the other arm. Dopfer used 351-nm UV pump radiation from an argon-ion laser with Type I down-conversion in a nonlinear LiIO3 crystal cut with the optic axis at 90° to the pump beam to produce a pair of 702-nm momentum-entangled photons that emerged from the crystal at angles of 28.2° to the right and left of the pump axis, as shown in Figure 5.\n\nFigure 5. Schematic of the 1998 Dopfer Experiment (Reference 17)\n\nThe lower entangled photon passed through a pair of slits and into a detector, while the upper photon passed through a lens that could image the two slits to perform a \"which-way\" measurement if detector D2 was placed two focal lengths behind the lens (2f). However, if detector D2 was placed in a position one focal length behind the lens (f), the slits were not imaged, and light on the reflected line passing through either slit could reach the detector at the same points, producing a result similar to that of the Ghost Interference experiment. A structured two-slit interference pattern could be switched on and off by moving a detector in the other arm of the experiment between the f and 2f positions.\n\nAgain, from the viewpoint of nonlocal communication, it is noted that moving detector D2, which can be thought of as the action of a \"sending\" observer, nonlocally causes an observable change in the position distribution of the second photon, as detected at \"receiver\" position D1. However, the Dopfer experiment does not demonstrate nonlocal communication because, like the Ghost Interference experiment, it requires a classical communication link to impose the coincidence requirement between the detected photons because of the geometry of the experiment.\n\nExamination of these two experiments raises a very interesting question: Can the coincidence requirement be removed? The answer is not clear. In principle, the two entangled photons are connected by nonlocality whether they are detected in coincidence or not. The coincidence should therefore be removable. However, in both experiments the authors report that no two-slit interference distribution is observed\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nwhen the coincidence requirement is relaxed. This may be explained by the action of coherence-entanglement complementarity, as discussed in the next section.\nV. Coherence-Entanglement Complementarity\nAs discussed above, the finite extent of the source is expected to limit the possibility of observing a two-slit interference pattern, which would be the \"signal\" if nonlocal communication were possible. Figure 6 shows schematically (not to scale) this \"thick source\" effect. The source volume on the left is the region of the nonlinear crystal that is illuminated by the UV pump-laser beam directed along the u axis. The source volume is a cylinder a few mm thick and a mm or so in radius with a center point C. The source cylinder is assumed to be tilted at an angle θ with respect to the horizontal z axis on which the slit system and detector plane are symmetrically centered. We note that θ = 0° in the Ghost Interference experiment and θ = 28.2° in the Dopfer experiment. A horizontal distance Lxs away from the source is a two-slit system, a pair of apertures a with center-to-center separation d. Light passing through the slit system travels a horizontal distance Lsd and is detected at detector plane at position x1.\nFigure 6. Thick-Source Effect (not to scale): Waves arriving at the two slits from points A and B at the extrema of the source volume may have significant path length and phase differences, while waves from the central point C are in phase at the slits.\nIf the point of photon production is off the z axis, there will be a path length difference between waves relative to C as they arrive at the two slits. In Figure 6, waves from points A and B could have path length differences greater that half a wavelength and phase differences greater than 180°. Roughly speaking, this shifts the interference pattern relative to waves created at central point C so that maxima become minima and vice versa. The net effect of averaging over all points in the source volume would therefore be to wash out the two-slit interference pattern. That two-slit interference pattern must be observed unambiguously, because it is the \"signal\" that would be used in any nonlocal communication. This operability is quantified by an observable called \"visibility,\" which is related to the peak-to-valley ratio of the interference pattern.\nThe constancy of the relative phase at the two slits for photons arriving from various parts of the source is called \"coherence\" and ensures a high visibility. It should be clear that a point-like source has perfect coherence, while a source with a large solid angle as"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nviewed from the slits will have reduced coherence. The path length difference at the slits is, to a good approximation, inversely proportional to Lxs. Therefore, making Lxs large—that is, placing the slits some distance from the source volume—can reduce the path length differences to a value that increases coherence and allows observation of a sharp two-slit interference pattern signal at detector D1. Alternatively, placing a thin, double-concave diverging lens at point P of Figure 6 can have the same effect by causing the shorter path lengths to pass through a greater thickness of lens glass. Such a lens would also demagnify the source, producing the equivalent of a longer path length and smaller source solid angle.\nHowever, increasing source coherence has another consequence. The momentum entanglement of photons from the source arises from momentum conservation. Restricting the solid angle of the source, as viewed from the slits, means fewer photon pairs can be entangled and still satisfy the geometrical constraints of the experimental configuration. The Saleh group at Boston University has shown that there is a complementary relation between source coherence and two-photon entanglement (Reference 18). As the source-slit distance Lxs is increased, there are smooth transitions from one-slit to two-slit interference patterns and from a highly entangled source to a highly coherent source. We note, as mentioned above, that the parametric down-conversion technology used in the Ghost Interference and Dopfer experiments was fairly inefficient and noisy, with fairly improbable production of entangled pairs competing with much more probable production of unentangled \"noise\" photons of the same wavelength from pumped fluorescence in the crystal. This would tend to limit the entanglement of the source.\nNonlocal communication using momentum entanglement requires source coherence. Source coherence is needed in order to observe the \"signal\" of a two-slit interference pattern and two-photon entanglement so that a measurement of one of the photons \"connects\" with the interference pattern produced by the other photon. Where there is coherence without entanglement or entanglement without coherence, nonlocal communication with momentum-entangled photons is not possible. An unresolved issue that requires further theoretical consideration and experimental testing is whether there is a \"sweet spot\" in the experimental design that embraces both partial coherence and partial entanglement and that permits the transmission of nonlocal signals.\nVI. Nonlocal Communication Versus Signaling\nThe possibility of nonlocal communication is an unresolved issue. It is perhaps likely that the coherence-versus-entanglement tradeoff is nature's way of preventing nonlocal signaling, but that has not been demonstrated. In this section, we assume that nonlocal signaling is possible and will examine its implications. As will be seen, they are so far reaching that they could be taken as a strong indication that nature would not allow such things and therefore nonlocal signaling must be impossible.\nFigure 7 shows a variation of the Ghost Interference experiment (Reference 16) in which the slit-imaging technique of the Dopfer experiment (Reference 17) is used to ensure that entangled photon pairs passing through slits reach both detectors, and that those intercepted by the opaque regions of the slits reach neither detector. In particular, a lens of focal length f is placed in the path after the BBO crystal and before the polarization splitter so that both entangled photons pass through this lens. A pair of slits S1 is placed at a path distance f beyond the lens in the path of the \"o\" photons,"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nwhich are linearly polarized horizontally (HLP) and are transmitted by the splitter. As Dopfer has shown, because of momentum entanglement, an image of slit system S1 will be formed by the \"e\" photons linearly polarized vertically (VLP) at a path length f beyond the lens on the deflected path at position S2, where a pair of \"cleanup\" slits are located that pass only those photons whose entangled twins passed through S1. We note that because of the optical geometry, this imaging occurs even for waves that pass through both of the image points and ultimately interfere.\nFigure 7. Slit-Imaging Coincidence-Free Version of the Ghost Interference Experiment to Demonstrate Nonlocal Communication\nAt the image position of each slit at S2, we place an optical fiber, as shown. The fibers conduct the light to an optical switch, at which the light either is sent directly to two avalanche photodiode detectors D (providing which-way information about which of the S1 slits the photon entered) or alternatively is routed to an optical combiner C, with the in-phase output of the combiner then detected, so that waves passing through both slits can contribute constructively to the detection event. We note that this fiber switching system is the fiber-optic equivalent of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer (Reference 20), in which one can activate and deactivate the last half-silvered mirror by switching, so that which-way information can be switched on and off. (We also note that similar fiber-combiner-detector technology could be employed after the S1 slits to"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ndetermine the presence or absence of coherent interference, but this will not be considered further here.)\nA quantum sensitive cooled CCD camera is substituted for detector D1 of the Ghost Interference experiment (Reference 11) and is set to measure distributions like those shown in Figure 3. In the arrangement in Figure 7, switching the optical fiber routing can be considered an act of transmitting a binary 0 or 1 signal. If the switch is in the position leading to the outer detectors, then which-way information is available, and the pattern detected by the camera should be a single-slit diffraction pattern labeled \"1\" in Figure 7. If the switch is in the position leading to the combiner and middle detector, waves from both slits contribute to the detection, no which-way information is available, and the pattern detected by the camera should be the two-slit interference pattern labeled \"0\" in Figure 7.\nIf the pattern observed by the camera can indeed be changed by switching the optical fiber routing, then this would constitute a direct demonstration on nonlocal communication. Such an observation would falsify the no-signal theorems mentioned above, which require that in a noncoincidence scenario, no action on one entangled photon can produce a \"signal-capable\" observable result at the detection of the other entangled photon of the pair.\nIt should be emphasized that demonstrating nonlocal communication with momentum-entangled photons, as described above, is not the same as actually sending a signal. It should be clear that no real signal can be communicated with a single photon pair. Only when multiple photons are detected can the underlying distribution function become apparent. One can estimate that if the distribution functions to be distinguished are a \"pure\" two-slit interference pattern modulated by a diffraction envelope and a \"pure\" two-slit diffraction pattern, then about 10 photon detections would be required for a 3σ decision between these two possibilities.\nHowever, as mentioned in the previous section, it is likely that if nonlocal communication is possible at all, it would have to be accomplished in a situation where some compromise between entanglement and coherence has been achieved, and such a compromise would inevitably cause the two patterns to be distinguished to be more similar and more difficult to separate. Therefore, the 10 photon detections cited above must be taken as a rather optimistic lower limit, and it is likely that a significantly larger number of detections (perhaps ~100 or more) would be required. The time required to send a single bit of information would then be the product of the photon detection rate in the two arms of the experiment times the number of photons that must be detected to receive the signal. In principle, such a transmission rate might be improved (and fluorescence noise suppressed) by pulsing the pump laser, so that \"clusters\" of entangled photons would be received with each such pulse.\nVII. A Transactional Analysis of the Nonlocal Communication Test\nNow the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics (Reference 19) to analyze the system described above is used. The transactional interpretation describes the formation of a quantum event as a three-stage process: (1) sending retarded \"offer\" waves (ψ) from emission location(s), (2) back-in-time responses from the reception location(s) of advanced \"confirmation\" waves (ψ*), and (3) the formation of a space-"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ntime standing wave (ψψ*) between the locations (for example, a photon source and a photon detector). After an initial exchange of offer and confirmation waves, a particular transaction is selected probabilistically from all that are possible, based on the ψψ* values of the alternatives. The offer/confirmation exchange continues until all the conserved quantities (energy, momentum, angular momentum, and so forth) have been transferred.\nFor the nonlocal communication test system described above, we will consider two cases:\n• Case 1: The switch is positioned so that each fiber from the slits is routed to one detector, producing a \"which-way\" measurement of the slit through which the VLP photon passed. In this case, the HLP photon as detected by the camera should have a recorded position that falls on a broad single-slit-diffraction-pattern distribution, (not a two-slit interference pattern).\n• Case 2: The switch is positioned so that light from the two fibers is combined before detection. Therefore, the detection produces no information on the path of VLP photon, which could have passed through either slit. In this case, the HLP photon detected by the camera should be in a position that falls on a two-slit interference pattern distribution.\nFigure 8 shows the transaction that forms for the nonlocal communication test system in the Case 1 configuration. Here, as in the Ghost Interference experiment, we have treated the nonlinear crystal source of entangled pairs as an effective \"reflector\" and have represented the rays with straight-through paths to \"unfold\" the system, duplicating the lens for each photon and representing the system as two-lens optical imaging, with nearly parallel rays between the two lenses. Slit systems S1 and S2 are located one focal length f away from the lenses. The left-going photon is assumed to arrive at the upper slit of S2 and to be detected by the upper detector (circled). The momentum-entangled right-going photon must then go to S1, which is the optical image of S2, and be diffracted by the slit and detected by the camera. If Figure 8 were vertically inverted, it would provide a similar diagram for the equally probable arrival of the left-going photon at the lower slit of S2 and detection by the lower detector. The three stages of transaction formation are shown."} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 8. Transactional Interpretation Diagrams for Case 1. The left-going offer waves pass through the upper slit of S2 and reach the upper detector (circled). The momentum-entangled right-going offer waves pass only through the lower slit of S1, which is the optical image of upper S2, and are diffracted to the camera. Confirmation waves return, and the one-slit transaction forms.\n\nFigure 9 shows the transaction that forms for the nonlocal communication test system in the Case 2 configuration. The left-going photon passes through both the upper and lower slits of S2. The two paths connect to a combiner and are detected by the central detector (circled). The momentum-entangled right-going photon must then also pass through both slits of S1, which are the optical images of S2, to form a two-slit interference pattern detected by the camera. The three stages of transaction formation are shown.\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 9. Transactional Interpretation Diagrams for Case 2. The left-going offer waves pass through both slits of S2, where the waves are combined and detected by the center detector (circled). The momentum-entangled right-going offer waves pass through the both slits of S1, which are the optical images of S2, and interfere at the camera. Confirmation waves return, and the two-slit transaction forms.\n\nTherefore, from the point of view of the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics (Reference 19), the nonlocal connection between detection events at the two ends of the experiment arises because the detection transactions for the two entangled photons must share a \"two-way handshake\" at the nonlinear crystal, a condition that can be realized only when the summed vector momenta of the two photons equals that of the pump-laser photon that created them. This view explains Dopfer's observations (Reference 19) and indicates that, in the absence of overwhelming noise or restrictions imposed by coherence/entanglement complementarity, no coincidence should be required between the two detectors in the experiment to observe that change in the pattern observed at D1 when detector D2 is moved. This remains true in the configurations discussed below, when slit S2 is lengthened with many kilometers of fiber-optic light transmission cable to enable superluminal and retrocausal signal transmission. In other words, analysis of the nonlocal communication test system with the transactional interpretation reveals no \"show-stopper\" aspects that would prevent superluminal and retro-causal signal transmission. The transactional interpretation is neutral on whether such signals are possible.\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nVIII. Superluminal and Retrocausal Nonlocal Communication\n\nAs mentioned in the previous section, we will assume for the sake of discussion that nonlocal signaling is possible and will consider its implications for the speed of transmission of signals. For definiteness, schemes for doing this are based on the slit-imaging coincidence-free version of the Ghost Interference experiment described above and shown in Figure 7. In that system, the instant at which a nonlocal signal is sent is the arrival of the VLP photon at the fiber-optic system on the left, and the instant at which the signal is received is the arrival of the HLP photon at the camera at the bottom of the diagram. Assuming the workability of this scheme, both the instants of sending and of receiving can be delayed, in principle, by the introduction of delay paths—for example, runs of fiber-optic cables—in the system.\n\nIn particular, the \"send\" instant could be made to occur well after the \"receive\" instant in the system, constituting a direct demonstration of retrocausal signaling. This is shown in Figure 10. Here the cleanup two-slit system S2 becomes the entrance for two 10-km-long runs of fiber-optics that are carefully matched to have identical exit phases at S3, the end of the fiber runs where the light enters the optical switching arrangement described above. If the index of refraction of the fiber is 1.5, light transiting the 10-km path requires about 50 μs. In the presence of detection noise or the degradation of pattern visibility because of compromises between entanglement and coherence, considerably more photon detection events—say 100—might be required.\n\nFigure 10. Slit-Imaging Coincidence-Free Version of the Ghost Interference Experiment Demonstrating Superluminal and Retrocausal Signaling\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAssume then that the fiber coils of Figure 10 remain rolled up and stored in a corner of the laboratory and that the source can be made strong enough so that the average rate at which the entangled photon pairs are detected is 10 MHz (which would correspond to the efficient detection of about 3 nW of 702-nm photons). This would require a source of entangled photons considerably stronger than is achievable with the \"bulk\" BBO or LiIO3 crystals used in the Ghost Interference and Dopfer experiments, which produce a usable entangled photon pair from only about 1 in 10^10 pump photons.\n\nFortunately, a recently emerging technology makes the production of entangled photon pairs much more efficient through the use of \"periodically poled\" nonlinear crystals. In \"bulk\" nonlinear crystal there is a \"walk-out\" phenomenon that limits the distance within the crystal over which phase matching holds, permitting entangled pairs to be produced efficiently by down-conversion. However, nonlinear crystals like potassium titanyl phosphate (KTiOPO4 or KTP) have very large nonlinear coefficients and are also ferroelectric, with a large electric dipole moment. By using a large pulsed electric field during crystal production, one can \"write\" on KTP crystals to change the orientation of their local dipole moment over small distances (a few tens of wavelengths) periodically along the pump direction through the crystal, so that the phase drift regularly reverses and cancels out as the pump radiation progresses through the crystal. This is called \"periodic poling.\" With this kind of crystal, the walk-out is suppressed, and one can use very long crystals that efficiently produce entangled pairs of photons over their entire length. The IQOQI group of Anton Zeilinger in Vienna, using a periodically polled KTP crystal 25-mm long, has measured the entangled pair production rate at 2.73 x 10^5 pairs per second per mW of pump radiation per nm of wavelength20. Such a source should be easily able to produce the 10-MHz detection rate assumed above.\n\nNow consider that the \"sending\" detector system and the \"receiving\" camera are in the same room and separated by a distance of 1 meter or less. If the switch is set on the 0 or 1 position, the \"message\" that it is in that position begins to arrive at the camera 50 μs before the switch position is moved. If 100 photon counts constitute a signal, then, even allowing for the latency in signal reception, the message could be received 40 μs before it was sent. This would be a direct demonstration of retrocausal signaling using nonlocal communication and would constitute a direct violation of the principle of causality.\n\nIX. Paradoxes and Nonlocal Communication\n\nThe setup described above, with its retrocausal communication link, raises some time-communication paradoxes. First, let us consider the issue of \"bilking.\" Suppose we construct a million linked systems of the type shown in Figure 10 (or use 10^7 km of nonattenuating fiber). Then the transmitted message would be received 40 seconds before it was sent. Now suppose a tricky observer receives a message from himself 40 seconds in the future and then decides not to send it. This produces an inconsistent timelike loop, which has come to be known as a \"bilking paradox.\" Could this happen? If not, what would prevent it?\n\nThere are discussions of such bilking paradoxes in the physics literature by Wheeler and Feynman (Reference 22), who were considering the retrocausal aspects of the advanced waves of absorber theory, and by Kip Thorne and colleagues (Reference 23), who were considering the paradoxes that might arise from timelike wormholes. The general consensus of both groups is that nature will forbid it and will require a consistent set of\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nconditions. Thorne and coworkers showed that \"nearby\" to any inconsistent paradoxical situation involving timelike wormholes there is always a self-consistent situation that does not involve a paradox. As Sherlock Holmes said, \"When the impossible is eliminated, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.\" These speculations assert that equipment failure producing a consistent sequence of events is more likely than producing an inconsistency between the send and receive events. The implications of this are that bilking itself is impossible, but very improbable events could perhaps be produced in avoiding it.\n\nThe other issue raised by retrocausal signaling might be called the \"immaculate conception\" paradox. Suppose you are using the setup described above, and you receive from yourself in the future the manuscript of a best-selling novel with your name listed as the author. You sell it to a publisher and become rich and famous. And when the time subsequently comes for transmission, you duly send the manuscript back to yourself, thereby closing the timelike loop and producing a completely consistent set of events. But the question is, Just who wrote the novel? Clearly, you did not; you merely passed it along to yourself. Yet highly structured information (the novel) has been created out of nothing. And in this case, nature should not object, because there was no bilking, and you produced no inconsistent timelike loops.\n\nIt is not known how to resolve either of these paradoxes. Here are a few possibilities:\n\n• If nonlocal signaling is impossible, then the paradoxes need no resolution, but better, more \"air-tight\" proofs of the impossibility of nonlocal signaling would be needed.\n\n• If nonlocal signaling is possible and can be used to form timelike loops, then paradoxes become important subjects for further experimental testing, study, and theoretical treatment.\n\n• As suggested by Stephen Hawking (Reference 24), perhaps nature \"abhors\" timelike loops, so that if one is about to be created, quantum vacuum fluctuations will grow without limit and destroy the apparatus that is attempting to produce the loop. Even in this case, use of nonlocal signaling might still be possible, provided timelike loops were carefully avoided in such systems. (See below.)\n\nX. Superluminal Communication Without Paradoxes\n\nOne path to avoid the retrocausal paradoxes outlined above would be to make sure there were no timelike loops in the communication system. This can be achieved by careful arrangement of the propagation delays in the sending and receiving ends of the hypothetical nonlocal communication.\n\nConsider the space-time interval s, as defined by the equation: s^2 = x^2 - (ct)^2, where x is the spatial distance separating two events (for example, send and receive), t is their separation in time, and c is the speed of light. A positive value of s^2 means the interval is spacelike and s=0 is a lightlike interval, and a negative value of s^2 means the interval is timelike. The interval s is a Lorentz-invariant quantity that, in particular, retains its sign independent of the choice of inertial reference frame from which the two events are viewed.\n\nAs long as the nonlocal communication system is arranged so that the space-time interval between the sender and the receiver is always separated by a spacelike or\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nlightlike interval, and in particular is never separated by a timelike interval that can go backwards down the time stream, then timelike loops are avoided, along with the paradoxes they imply.\n\nFigure 11 shows such a system. Entangled photons in the two arms of the system are propagated through fiber-optic cables of equal length. Therefore, in the reference frame of the system, the send and receive events are simultaneous, and, aside from the latency associated with the reception of enough photons to establish the reception of a signal bit, the communication is instantaneous but does not create a timelike loop.\n\nFigure 11. A Superluminal Nonlocal Communication System in Which the Communication Spans a Spacelike Interval\n\nXI. Example: Real-Time Earth Control of Mars Rover\n\nNow consider the application of a \"rover\" operated at interplanetary distances, with nonlocal communications used to provide real-time \"virtual reality\" control of the mobile device. Figure 12 shows a schematic of the Earth-based operation of a Mars rover. A base station on Mars would contain a high-intensity source of entangled photon pairs. One stream of photons from the entangled pairs, after passing through image slits, would be transmitted from the probe to an Earth control station, allowing a nonlocal signal to be \"sent\" from the control station by a time sequence of choices of whether to detect the stream of arriving photons as waves or particles. The other stream of photons from the entangled pairs, after passing through object slits, would be detected locally at the Mars base station near the source and analyzed for the presence or absence of an interference pattern, thereby \"receiving\" the nonlocal signal as a logical \"0\" or \"1,\" respectively.\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 12. Schematic of Earth-to-Mars Real-Time Control of a Rover\n\nIn order to avoid having to transmit two streams of entangled photons, the equivalent of the two fiber-optic links in Figure 10, at the base station the photons from one image slit would be polarized horizontally and those the other slit would be polarized vertically before transmission. Then, at the Earth control station, detection of the polarization of photons in the stream would constitute \"particle\" measurements, while separating, rotating to the same polarization state, and recombining the waves so that they could interfere before detection would constitute a \"wave\" measurement.\n\nIn parallel with this nonlocal link, a conventional microwave or optical link would be used to communicate video images and other data to the Earth station. The video images and data would experience a propagation delay equal to the transmission distance divided by the speed of light, and would arrive at the Earth station seconds, minutes, or hours after they were transmitted. The entangled photons would experience the same delay, but the nonlocal control signal would be sent backwards up the time stream, arriving at the probe at the instant the video signals and data were being transmitted, so that the nonlocal signal could steer and control the probe in real time, and an Earth-based operator could \"drive\" the rover on Mars using virtual-reality techniques. One can imagine driving the Mars Rover around the planet, actively steering around obstacles, activating analysis instruments in real time as interesting objects were found, and actively controlling repair equipment to deal with problems that arise.\n\nSuch a communication loop (conventional + nonlocal) would be a light-like loop, with the two-way send and receive points located on the light cone. As such, it would not\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nlead to any causality problems or paradoxes but would bring the remote parts of the solar system and perhaps the universe to the here and now.\n\nXII. Another Superluminal Possibility: Nonlinear Quantum Mechanics\n\nThus far, the focus has been on the possibility of nonlocal communication within the framework of standard quantum mechanics. However, even if nonlocal communication proves impossible in standard quantum mechanics, there could be another path to nonlocal communication.\n\nThe no-signal theorems described in Part III above are based on the formalism of standard quantum mechanics. Such \"proofs\" become invalid if quantum mechanics is allowed to be slightly \"nonlinear,\" a technical term meaning that when quantum waves are superimposed, they may generate a small cross-term not present in the standard formalism. Steven Weinberg, Nobel laureate for his theoretical work in unifying the electromagnetic and weak interactions, investigated a theory that introduces small, nonlinear terms to standard quantum mechanics (Reference 25). The onset of nonlinear behavior is seen in other areas of physics—for example, laser light in certain media—and, he suggested, might also be present but unnoticed in quantum mechanics itself. Weinberg's nonlinear quantum mechanics subtly alters certain properties of the standard theory, producing new physical effects that can be detected through precise measurements.\n\nTwo years after Weinberg's nonlinear quantum mechanics theory was published, Joseph Polchinski published a paper demonstrating that Weinberg's nonlinear corrections upset the balance in quantum mechanics that prevents superluminal communication using EPR experiments (Reference 26). Through the new nonlinear effects, separated measurements on the same quantum system begin to \"talk\" to each other, and faster-than-light and/or backward-in-time signaling becomes possible. Polchinski describes such an arrangement as an \"EPR telephone.\"\n\nThe Weinberg/Polchinski work had implications that are devastating for the Copenhagen Interpretation's representation of the wave function as \"observer knowledge.\" Polchinski has shown that a tiny nonlinear modification transforms the \"hidden\" nonlocality of the standard QM formalism into a manifest property that can be used for nonlocal observer-to-observer communication. This is completely inconsistent with the Copenhagen Interpretation's \"knowledge\" interpretation.\n\nWeinberg's experimental predictions have led to a large number of experimental tests that have searched for the predicted effects. Regrettably, all such experimental attempts to observe the nonlinear effects have failed, producing only very low upper limits. Apparently, if there are nonlinear effects that modify the quantum formalism, they are extremely small in Earth-based laboratories. These negative results are not surprising, however, because the atomic transitions used involve only a few electron-volts of energy. If quantum mechanics does have nonlinear properties, they would be expected to depend on mass-energy and to appear only at a very high energy scale, particularly at the highest energy densities or in very high gravitational fields. In the everyday world of weak gravity and fairly flat space, this path to nonlocal communication appears to be blocked, because the \"vehicle\" for sending the signal is not observable.\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nHowever, emerging from work on quantum gravity offers the possibility of an explicitly nonlinear form of quantum mechanics that reduces to linear quantum mechanics in the limiting case of weak or no gravity. Using the wave picture, it is possible to formulate a Laplace-Beltrami wave equation for gravitationally curved space. The Laplace-Beltrami operator on the left-hand side contains information about the space-time geometry (the metric tensor) and operates on the wave function. On the right-hand side is the same term found in the flat space Klein-Gordon wave equation. In flat space (no gravity), this \"curved-space\" wave equation reduces to the Klein-Gordon wave equation, but in curved space it is nonlinear in a way that could facilitate nonlocal communication. Thus, in an environment where strong space curvature is expected—for example, the vicinity of a neutron star or black hole—sufficient quantum nonlinearity may exist to facilitate nonlocal communication.\n\nXIII. Conclusion\n\nUltimately, the question of whether nonlocal communication is possible is an experimental one. The issue should be resolvable by testing for nonlocal communication and observing what experimental limits appear. In particular, are the limits of coherence/entanglement complementarity so severe as to preclude signaling? Currently at least one experiment in progress aims to produce a coincidence-free version of the Ghost Interference experiment. We await the outcome of such tests.\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix: Glossary\n\nBasis: In quantum mechanics, a choice of an observable quantity that may be complementary to another variable, so that both cannot be measured at the same time. An example is the choice of measuring position, which prevents the simultaneous measurement of momentum. In EPR experiments, one must choose a polarization basis (for example, linear polarization that may be either vertical or horizontal). Since both circular polarization and 45° left/right polarization are linear superpositions of vertical/horizontal polarization, they may not be measured simultaneously. In quantum mechanics, the measurement causes the wave function to collapse to a particular basis value, excluding other possible values.\n\nBell's Theorem: A mathematical proof by John S. Bell (Reference 8) demonstrating that in a polarization-based EPR experiment, the falloff of correlations as the basis angle of a polarization measurement is changed is qualitatively different, as predicted by local hidden-variable theories and by standard quantum mechanics. In particular, local hidden-variable theories predict a linear falloff, while quantum mechanics predicts a quadratic falloff. This difference in predictions is represented as an inequality in measurement intensity ratios that all local hidden variable theories must satisfy, while quantum mechanics does not. Tests of these predictions have been found to agree with quantum mechanics and to falsify local hidden-variable theories.\n\nBilking Paradox: A type of back-in-time communication paradox in which an inconsistent causal loop is created. A well-known example is the Grandmother Paradox, a time-travel scenario from science fiction in which a time traveler travels to the past and kills his grandmother before she had children. The question then arises, How could he have been born if his grandmother had no children? Several works in the physics literature (Reference 17, 18) have concluded that such trans-temporal bilking is impossible, that nature will not permit inconsistent timelike loops, and that it is more likely that some apparatus will fail than that a \"bilk\" of nature could be achieved.\n\nCausality: The observation, which is regarded as a law of physics, that a cause must precede its effects as viewed in any and all reference frames. Sometimes referred to as \"Cause and Effect\" or \"the Law of Cause and Effect.\"\n\nCorrelations: The mathematical connection between two variables or two measured quantities. As an example, in an EPR measurement, the basis polarization of one photon is selected, the basis polarization of the twin entangled photon is varied, and the coincidence counting rate versus varied angle is measured to establish the correlation between the two polarizations.\n\nCoherence: Describes whether two waves (for example, those arriving at a pair of slits or at a detector) have a definite phase relation (in which case they are completely coherent), have a random phase relation (in which case they are completely incoherent), or have something in between.\n\nCoherence-Entanglement Complementarity: The theoretical expectation and experimental observation (Reference 15) that perfect coherence and perfect entanglement cannot be achieved for an entangled pair of photons at the same time.\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCoherent Superposition: The formation of a quantum mechanical state (for example, right circular polarization) by adding components of other states (for example, left and right polarization) with a definite complex phase between the added states.\n\nCollapse: A quantum mechanical wave function is said to collapse to a particular basis value when a measurement is made in that basis. For example, if a photon is emitted isotropically (with equal probability in all directions), its wave function is distributed uniformly over a sphere with a radius that grows at the speed of light until it is detected. Upon detection, the photon's wave function is localized at the detection point and disappears everywhere else.\n\nEntangled: The separated parts of the same quantum system are said to be entangled when each of the parts can be described only by referencing the state of other parts. This is one of the most counterintuitive aspects of quantum mechanics, because, classically, system parts out of \"local\" contact should be completely independent. Thus, entanglement represents a kind of quantum \"connectedness\" in which measurements on one isolated part of an entangled quantum system have nonclassical consequences for the outcome of measurements performed on other (possibly very distant) parts of the same system.\n\nEPR Experiment: A class of experiments with entangled particles, usually photons, that demonstrate quantum nonlocality. A gedankenexperiment of this kind was first suggested in the famous 1936 paper by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (Reference 4) in which a set of criticisms of quantum mechanics were presented.\n\nHidden Variable Theories: A set of alternatives to quantum mechanics intended to satisfy the objections of the EPR paper in which the uncertainty principle does not apply and a quantum system can simultaneously have definite values of complementary variables like position and momentum, provided one of these values is somehow \"hidden.\" Hidden variable theories are usually also \"local\" (see below) to deal with Einstein's objection to the nonlocality of quantum mechanics.\n\nImmaculate Conception Paradox: A type of back-in-time communication paradox in which a completely consistent causal loop produces information with no known origin. An example is the Book Paradox, in which an author receives a book in a message from the future. He publishes it, and when the time comes, he transmits the manuscript to himself in the past. The question then arises, Who wrote the book? In this case, no inconsistent timelike loops are involved, and the arguments against bilking (see above) do not apply in this case.\n\nLocality: The assumption that the correlations between parts of a system can be established only while the subsystems are in contact (or speed-of-light communication), and that once out of such contact, no changes in such correlations are possible.\n\nNonlocality: The situation, apparently present in quantum mechanics, in which correlations between parts of a system can be established independent of the separation of the parts in time and space.\n\nRetro-Causal: Situations in theory or in the real world where the effect precedes the cause, in violation of the principle of causality.\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4a47ee5349e68742","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n1 S. J. Freedman and J. F. Clauser, Phys. Rev. Letters, 28, 938-942 (1972).\n2 A. Aspect, J. Dalibard, and G. Roger, Phys. Rev. Letters, 49, 91-95 (1982); A. Aspect, J. Dalibard, and G. Roger, Phys. Rev. Letters, 49, 1804 (1982).\n3 Erwin Schrödinger, Proc. of Cambridge Philosophical Society, 31, 555-563 (1935); 32, 446-451 (1936).\n4 A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, Physical Review. 47, 777-785 (1935).\n5 Jon P. Jarrett, Noûs, 18, 569 (1984).\n6 Abner Shimony, Quantum Concepts in Space and Time, R. Penrose and C. J. Isham, eds., Chapter 12, pp. 182-203, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1986).\n7 C. S. Wu and I. Shanknov, Phys. Rev., 77, 136 (1950).\n8 J. S. Bell, Physics, Vol. 1, 195 (1964); Rev. of Modern Physics, 38, 447 (1966).\n9 W. Tittel, J. Brendel, H. Zbinden, and N. Gisin, Phys. Rev. Letters, 81, 3563-3566 (1998).\n10 Anthony J. Leggett, Foundations of Physics 33, 1469 (2003)\n11 S. Gröblacher, T. Paterek, R. Kaltenbaek, C. Brukner, M. Zukowski, M. Aspelmeyer, and A. Zeilinger, \"An experimental test of non-local realism,\" Nature 446, 871-875 (2007).\n12 Heinz Pagels, The Cosmic Code, Simon & Schuster, NY (1982).\n13 P. H. Eberhard, Nuovo Cimento B 38, 75 (1977), ibid. B 46, 392 (1978); G. C. Ghirardi, A. Rimini, and T. Weber, Lett. Nuovo Cimento 27, 293-298 (1980); U. Yurtsever and G. Hockney, Classical and Quantum Gravity 22, 295-312 (2005), gr-qc/0409112.\n14 K. A. Peacock and B. Hepburn, Proceedings of the Meeting of the Society of Exact Philosophy (1999), quant-ph/9906036.\n15 L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics, Chapter 22.4, Cambridge University Press (1995).\n16 D. V. Strekalov, A. V. Sergienko, D. N. Klyshko, and Y. H. Shih, Phys. Rev. Letters, 74, 3600-3603 (1995).\n17 B. Dopfer, Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Innsbruck (1998); A. Zeilinger, Rev. Modern Physics 71, S288-S297 (1999).\n18 A. F. Abouraddy, M. B. Nasr, B. E. A. Saleh, A. V. Sergienko, and M. C. Teich. Phys. Rev. A, 63, 063803 (2001).\n19 John G. Cramer, Reviews of Modern Physics 58, 647 (1986); John G. Cramer, International Journal of Theoretical Physics 27, 227 (1988); John G. Cramer, Foundations of Physics Letters 19, 63-73, (2006).\n20 A. Fedrizzi, T. Herbst1, A. Poppe, T. Jennewein1 and A. Zeilinger, Optics Express 15, 15377 (2007).\n21 Ludwig Zehnder, Z. Instrumentenkunde 11, 275 (1891); Ludwig Mach, Z. Instrumentenkunde 12, 89 (1892).\n22 J. A. Wheeler and R. P. Feynman, Rev. Mod. Physics, 21, 425-433 (1949).\n23 F. Eschenerria, G. Klinkhammer, and K. S. Thorne, Phys. Rev. D, 44, 1077-1099 (1991).\n24 S. W. Hawking, Phys. Rev. D 46, 603-611 (1992).\n25 Steven Weinberg, Physical Review Letters, 62, 485-490 (1989).\n26 Joseph Polchinski, Physical Review Letters, 66, 397-401 (1991).\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4ac32e88b7f3b9a6","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n\n6\n\nCOUNTRY\nSweden\nREPORT NO.\nIR-12-54\n(LEAVE BLANK)\nAF606573\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\n\nSUBJECT\n\"Flying Saucer\" Sighted By Swedish Pilot\nAREA REPORTED ON\nSweden\nFROM (Agency)\nOAirA, Stockholm, Sweden\nDATE OF REPORT\n13 January 1954\nDATE OF INFORMATION\nDecember 53 - January 54\nEVALUATION\nB-2\nPREPARED BY (Officer)\nBURT ROWEN, Major, USAF (MC)\nSOURCE\nPress and Personal Contact\nREFERENCES (Control number, directive, previous report, etc., as applicable)\nBAIR 3A\nSUMMARY: (Enter concise summary of report. Give significance in final one-sentence paragraph. List inclosures at lower left. Begin text of report on AF Form 112-Part II.)\n\nThis report forwards information on the \"unknown\" object sighted on 17 December 1953 by Captain Ulf Christiernsson, near Hassleholm, Sweden. Included is a translation of Captain Christiernsson's description of the incident, as reported in an interview with the local press. There is also a brief character sketch of Captain Christiernsson.\n\nAPPROVED:\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 57597\n\nHERBERT J. ROGERS\nLt. Colonel, USAF\nActing Air Attache\n\nLIBRARY SUBJECT & AREA CODES\nIndex\n\nINCLS.\n\nDISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR\nA-2 USAFE; USArmA Stockholm\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n(CLASSIFICATION)\nIR-12"} {"doc_id":"4ac32e88b7f3b9a6","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112-PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n\n2\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\n\nFROM (Agency) OAirA, Stockholm, Sweden\nREPORT NO. IR-12\nPAGE 2 OF 3 PAGES\n\n1. On Thursday, 17 December 1953, while flying near Hassleholm, Sweden, Captain Ulf Christiernsson sighted an \"unknown\" object. The following is the translation of a newspaper account of the incident:\n\n\"The chief pilot of Transair, Capt. Ulf Christiernsson, and his crew chief, Olle Johansson, had a strange meeting over Hassleholm at 1437 hours Thursday. A shining metal spherical elliptical object came toward them traveling in the opposite direction from their machine at an estimated speed of sound and approximately 600 meters below their DC-3, which was on its way from Bulltofta to Bromma. It was visible six to seven seconds; Capt. Christiernsson, who had good silhouette recognition, stated that what he saw was something absolutely new, possibly an unmanned robot.\n\n\"The Transair plane was automatic controls when the meeting occurred. Capt. Christiernsson did not have time for any measures other than to report to Bulltofta and the Defense Staff, which later sent out the following communique:\n\n\"'The air crew of a civil aircraft observed on Thursday at 1437 hours over the area of Hassleholm an unknown object moving in the opposite direction from the airplane. The object was observed for six to seven seconds. At that time and altitude the weather was clear. Because of the low lying cloud formations the object is not thought to have been seen from the ground. The Defense Staff does not know of any Swedish plane that was in that area at the time in question. An investigation is being conducted.'\n\n\"Previously I have been extremely skeptical about all the stories of mysterious objects -- called flying saucers -- that have been seen at diverse points, said the Captain. Now I don't know exactly what to think; but it did seem to me that we had seen a robot of some kind. When I first caught sight of the object, which like us was in the civil air corridor, I thought it was a jet. We had, however, received no word that any such thing was on the way.\n\n\"The object came toward us at what I would say was the speed of sound; we were flying at an altitude of approximately 2,150 meters and the object was around 600 meters below us. It was going in a southwesterly direction and disappeared after six or seven seconds.\n\n\"The object had a strong metal shine; the crew chief, Johansson, who could see it longer than I, thought it was almost phosphorescent. The flying weather was excellent above the clouds, which were at an altitude of about 1500 meters, and the sun was shining brightly. The object was proceeding just above the clouds.\n\n\"The first silhouette I got diagonally from the right was narrow. When it was nearly directly under us, however, I saw that it was nearly round, just slightly elliptical.\n\n\"The object, which could definitely not have been a meteor, gave off no waste gases or condensation traces.\n\n\"Was I afraid? No, but curious, very curious, concluded Captain Christiernsson.\n\n\"Christiernsson has seen just about everything in aviation and has very good silhouette recognition. From 1942 to 1946 he was a volunteer serving in"} {"doc_id":"4ac32e88b7f3b9a6","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n\n3\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\n\nFROM (Agency) OAirA, Stockholm, Sweden\nREPORT NO. IR-12\nPAGE 3 OF 3 PAGES\n\nthe Royal Air Force. He finished as a captain in the British Air Force, after making some thirty raids in a Mosquito against enemy territory, in both North Africa and Italy.\n\n\"Air Force Chief, General Nordenskiöld, announced that it had been ascertained that the object could not have been any Swedish aircraft.\n\n\"'We are now investigating,' he continued, 'what our radar stations might have spotted.'\"\n\n2. Captain Christiernsson is 41 years of age and was born in Skåne in the southern part of Sweden. An extremely reliable source in the Royal Swedish Air Board, who was born in the same town and who is a life-long acquaintance of Capt. Christiernsson's, has stated that Christiernsson is charming and well-liked, but that he is also most untrustworthy and was dismissed from a former position for \"financial difficulty\". During the last war, Christiernsson tried to take a Swedish Air Force B-18 and fly to England, but was intercepted at Gothenburg and was put in jail. Although it is generally agreed in the Swedish Air Force that Captain Christiernsson is one of the best (and most discussed) pilots in Sweden today, he has never served with the RSAF except as a reserve captain.\n\n3. Although the source above personally doubts Christiernsson's story, the newspapers report that the Defense Staff is continuing its investigation of the incident. This office is attempting to obtain further information on the occurrence.\n\nBURT ROWEN\nMajor, USAF\nAssistant Air Attache\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n(CLASSIFICATION)\nIR-12"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62- HQ-83894\nSerials EBF 164\nEBF\n62-83894-164\nENCL BEHIND FILE\nDO NOT DESTROY\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 1 164 ONLY\n8/11/1274166\nRRP003IXG8\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\n62-83894-164 ENCLOSURE\n\nRESTRICTED C9-4892,AF"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\nRESTRICTED - 3 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nc. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location.\n\n- 4 -\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n17. Air ducts.\na. Slots.\nb. Duct openings.\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n19. Sound.\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\nc. Intermittent.\n20. Manner of disappearance.\na. Explode.\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n(2) Other physical evidence.\nb. Faded from view.\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n2. Address.\n3. Occupation.\n4. Place of business.\na. Employer or employee.\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n6. Ability to determine:\na. Color.\nb. Speed of moving objects.\nc. Size at distance.\n7. Reliability of observer.\na. Sources.\n\nRESTRICTED - 5 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(1) Neighbors.\n(2) Police Dept.\n(3) FBI records.\n(4) Employer.\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\na. Sightings in general.\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n(1) Sound.\n(2) Motion.\n(3) Glint of light.\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n9. Witnesses.\na. Addressees.\nb. Occupation.\nc. Reliability.\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n2. Winds aloft report.\n\nRESTRICTED - 6 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\na. Object.\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\nd. Maneuvers.\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n8. Secure signed statement.\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence, Department of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nRESTRICTED - 7 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nRESTRICTED C9-4892,AF\n\n65-83894-164"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\n- 3 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nc. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location.\n\n- 4 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n17. Air ducts.\n\na. Slots.\n\nb. Duct openings.\n\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n\n19. Sound.\n\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\n\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\n\nc. Intermittent.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance.\n\na. Explode.\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n\n(2) Other physical evidence.\n\nb. Faded from view.\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n\n2. Address.\n\n3. Occupation.\n\n4. Place of business.\n\na. Employer or employee.\n\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\n\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\n\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n\n6. Ability to determine:\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Speed of moving objects.\n\nc. Size at distance.\n\n7. Reliability of observer.\n\na. Sources.\n\n- 5 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(1) Neighbors.\n\n(2) Police Dept.\n\n(3) FBI records.\n\n(4) Employer.\n\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\n\na. Sightings in general.\n\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n\n(1) Sound.\n\n(2) Motion.\n\n(3) Glint of light.\n\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n\n9. Witnesses.\n\na. Addressees.\n\nb. Occupation.\n\nc. Reliability.\n\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\n\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\n\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\n\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\n\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\n\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n\n2. Winds aloft report.\n\n- 6 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\n\na. Object.\n\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\n\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\n\nd. Maneuvers.\n\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n\n8. Secure signed statement.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of Deputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence, Department of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nRESTRICTED\n- 7 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nRESTRICTED\nC9-4892,AF\n63-83894-164"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\nRESTRICTED\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"c. Odor (if any).\nd. Rate of evaporation.\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n12. Effect on clouds.\na. Opened path thru clouds.\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\nc. Reflected on cloud.\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n13. Lights.\na. Reflected or attached.\nb. Luminous\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n14. Support\na. Wings.\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\nc. Vertical jet.\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n15. Propulsion.\na. Propeller or jet.\nb. Rotor.\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n16. Control and stability.\na. Fins\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n(1) Size.\n(2) Shape.\n(3) Location."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"17. Air ducts.\na. Slots.\nb. Duct openings.\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n19. Sound.\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\nc. Intermittent.\n20. Manner of disappearance.\na. Explode.\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n(2) Other physical evidence.\nb. Faded from view.\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n2. Address.\n3. Occupation.\n4. Place of business.\na. Employer or employee.\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n6. Ability to determine:\na. Color.\nb. Speed of moving objects.\nc. Size at distance.\n7. Reliability of observer.\na. Sources."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1) Neighbors.\n(2) Police Dept.\n(3) FBI records.\n(4) Employer.\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\na. Sightings in general.\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n(1) Sound.\n(2) Motion.\n(3) Glint of light.\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n9. Witnesses.\na. Addressees.\nb. Occupation.\nc. Reliability.\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n2. Winds aloft report."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\na. Object.\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\nd. Maneuvers.\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n\n8. Secure signed statement.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence, Department of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nC9-4892,AF"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nc. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location.\n\n- 4 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n17. Air ducts.\n\na. Slots.\n\nb. Duct openings.\n\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n\n19. Sound.\n\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\n\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\n\nc. Intermittent.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance.\n\na. Explode.\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n\n(2) Other physical evidence.\n\nb. Faded from view.\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n\n2. Address.\n\n3. Occupation.\n\n4. Place of business.\n\na. Employer or employee.\n\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\n\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\n\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n\n6. Ability to determine:\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Speed of moving objects.\n\nc. Size at distance.\n\n7. Reliability of observer.\n\na. Sources.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 5 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n(1) Neighbors.\n(2) Police Dept.\n(3) FBI records.\n(4) Employer.\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\na. Sightings in general.\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n(1) Sound.\n(2) Motion.\n(3) Glint of light.\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n9. Witnesses.\na. Addressees.\nb. Occupation.\nc. Reliability.\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\nGENERAL\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n2. Winds aloft report.\n- 6 - RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\na. Object.\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\nd. Maneuvers.\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n8. Secure signed statement.\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of Deputy Chief of Staff, Operations\nDISTRIBUTION:\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence, Department of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\nRESTRICTED - 7 - RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n15 February 1949\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\nPART I - GENERAL\n1. PURPOSE\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n2. RESCISSION\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n3. REPORTING\na. General\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\nC9-4892,AF\n65-83894-164\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\nGeneral\n1. Date of sighting.\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\na. Ground\n(1) City, town.\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n- 2 - RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\n- 3 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nc. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location.\n\n- 4 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n17. Air ducts.\n\na. Slots.\n\nb. Duct openings.\n\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n\n19. Sound.\n\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\n\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\n\nc. Intermittent.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance.\n\na. Explode.\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n\n(2) Other physical evidence.\n\nb. Faded from view.\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n\n2. Address.\n\n3. Occupation.\n\n4. Place of business.\n\na. Employer or employee.\n\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\n\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\n\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n\n6. Ability to determine:\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Speed of moving objects.\n\nc. Size at distance.\n\n7. Reliability of observer.\n\na. Sources.\n\n- 5 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(1) Neighbors.\n\n(2) Police Dept.\n\n(3) FBI records.\n\n(4) Employer.\n\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\n\na. Sightings in general.\n\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n\n(1) Sound.\n\n(2) Motion.\n\n(3) Glint of light.\n\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n\n9. Witnesses.\n\na. Addressees.\n\nb. Occupation.\n\nc. Reliability.\n\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\n\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\n\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\n\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\n\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\n\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n\n2. Winds aloft report.\n\n- 6 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\n\na. Object.\n\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\n\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\n\nd. Maneuvers.\n\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n\n8. Secure signed statement.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence, Department of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\n- 7 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nRESTRICTED\nC9-4892, AF\n65-83894-164"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\nRESTRICTED - 3 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nc. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location.\n\n- 4 -\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n17. Air ducts.\n\na. Slots.\n\nb. Duct openings.\n\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n\n19. Sound.\n\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\n\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\n\nc. Intermittent.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance.\n\na. Explode.\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n\n(2) Other physical evidence.\n\nb. Faded from view.\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n\n2. Address.\n\n3. Occupation.\n\n4. Place of business.\n\na. Employer or employee.\n\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\n\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\n\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n\n6. Ability to determine:\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Speed of moving objects.\n\nc. Size at distance.\n\n7. Reliability of observer.\n\na. Sources.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 5 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(1) Neighbors.\n\n(2) Police Dept.\n\n(3) FBI records.\n\n(4) Employer.\n\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\n\na. Sightings in general.\n\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n\n(1) Sound.\n\n(2) Motion.\n\n(3) Glint of light.\n\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n\n9. Witnesses.\n\na. Addressees.\n\nb. Occupation.\n\nc. Reliability.\n\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\n\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\n\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\n\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\n\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\n\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n\n2. Winds aloft report.\n\n- 6 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\n\na. Object.\n\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\n\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\n\nd. Maneuvers.\n\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n\n8. Secure signed statement.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence, Department of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 7 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nC9-4892,AF\n\n63-83894-164"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"b. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"c. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"17. Air ducts.\n\na. Slots.\n\nb. Duct openings.\n\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n\n19. Sound.\n\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\n\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\n\nc. Intermittent.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance.\n\na. Explode.\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n\n(2) Other physical evidence.\n\nb. Faded from view.\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n\n2. Address.\n\n3. Occupation.\n\n4. Place of business.\n\na. Employer or employee.\n\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\n\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\n\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n\n6. Ability to determine:\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Speed of moving objects.\n\nc. Size at distance.\n\n7. Reliability of observer.\n\na. Sources."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1) Neighbors.\n\n(2) Police Dept.\n\n(3) FBI records.\n\n(4) Employer.\n\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\n\na. Sightings in general.\n\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n\n(1) Sound.\n\n(2) Motion.\n\n(3) Glint of light.\n\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n\n9. Witnesses.\n\na. Addressees.\n\nb. Occupation.\n\nc. Reliability.\n\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\n\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\n\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\n\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\n\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\n\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n\n2. Winds aloft report."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\n\na. Object.\n\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\n\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\n\nd. Maneuvers.\n\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n\n8. Secure signed statement.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands,\nZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence,\nDepartment of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 7 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nC9-4892,AF\n\n63-83894-164"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"c. Odor (if any).\nd. Rate of evaporation.\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n12. Effect on clouds.\na. Opened path thru clouds.\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\nc. Reflected on cloud.\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n13. Lights.\na. Reflected or attached.\nb. Luminous\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n14. Support\na. Wings.\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\nc. Vertical jet.\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n15. Propulsion.\na. Propeller or jet.\nb. Rotor.\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n16. Control and stability.\na. Fins\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n(1) Size.\n(2) Shape.\n(3) Location."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"17. Air ducts.\na. Slots.\nb. Duct openings.\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n19. Sound.\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\nc. Intermittent.\n20. Manner of disappearance.\na. Explode.\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n(2) Other physical evidence.\nb. Faded from view.\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\nRelative to the Observer\n1. Name of observer.\n2. Address.\n3. Occupation.\n4. Place of business.\na. Employer or employee.\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n6. Ability to determine:\na. Color.\nb. Speed of moving objects.\nc. Size at distance.\n7. Reliability of observer.\na. Sources."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1) Neighbors.\n(2) Police Dept.\n(3) FBI records.\n(4) Employer.\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\na. Sightings in general.\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n(1) Sound.\n(2) Motion.\n(3) Glint of light.\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n9. Witnesses.\na. Addressees.\nb. Occupation.\nc. Reliability.\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\nGENERAL\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n2. Winds aloft report."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\na. Object.\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\nd. Maneuvers.\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n8. Secure signed statement.\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\nDISTRIBUTION:\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence, Department of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\n- 3 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nc. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location.\n\n- 4 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n17. Air ducts.\n\na. Slots.\n\nb. Duct openings.\n\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n\n19. Sound.\n\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\n\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\n\nc. Intermittent.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance.\n\na. Explode.\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n\n(2) Other physical evidence.\n\nb. Faded from view.\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n\n2. Address.\n\n3. Occupation.\n\n4. Place of business.\n\na. Employer or employee.\n\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\n\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\n\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n\n6. Ability to determine:\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Speed of moving objects.\n\nc. Size at distance.\n\n7. Reliability of observer.\n\na. Sources.\n\n- 5 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(1) Neighbors.\n\n(2) Police Dept.\n\n(3) FBI records.\n\n(4) Employer.\n\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\n\na. Sightings in general.\n\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n\n(1) Sound.\n\n(2) Motion.\n\n(3) Glint of light.\n\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n\n9. Witnesses.\n\na. Addressees.\n\nb. Occupation.\n\nc. Reliability.\n\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\n\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\n\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\n\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\n\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\n\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n\n2. Winds aloft report.\n\n- 6 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\n\na. Object.\n\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\n\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\n\nd. Maneuvers.\n\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n\n8. Secure signed statement.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands,\nZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence,\nDepartment of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 7 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nC9-4892,AF\n\n68-83894-164"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nc. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location.\n\n- 4 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n17. Air ducts.\n\na. Slots.\n\nb. Duct openings.\n\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n\n19. Sound.\n\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\n\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\n\nc. Intermittent.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance.\n\na. Explode.\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n\n(2) Other physical evidence.\n\nb. Faded from view.\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n\n2. Address.\n\n3. Occupation.\n\n4. Place of business.\n\na. Employer or employee.\n\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\n\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\n\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n\n6. Ability to determine:\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Speed of moving objects.\n\nc. Size at distance.\n\n7. Reliability of observer.\n\na. Sources.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 5 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(1) Neighbors.\n\n(2) Police Dept.\n\n(3) FBI records.\n\n(4) Employer.\n\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\n\na. Sightings in general.\n\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n\n(1) Sound.\n\n(2) Motion.\n\n(3) Glint of light.\n\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n\n9. Witnesses.\n\na. Addressees.\n\nb. Occupation.\n\nc. Reliability.\n\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\n\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\n\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\n\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\n\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\n\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n\n2. Winds aloft report.\n\n- 6 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\n\na. Object.\n\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\n\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\n\nd. Maneuvers.\n\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n\n8. Secure signed statement.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence, Department of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 7 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nC9-4892,AF\n\n63- 83894-164"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\n- 3 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nc. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location.\n\n- 4 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n17. Air ducts.\n\na. Slots.\n\nb. Duct openings.\n\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n\n19. Sound.\n\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\n\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\n\nc. Intermittent.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance.\n\na. Explode.\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n\n(2) Other physical evidence.\n\nb. Faded from view.\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n\n2. Address.\n\n3. Occupation.\n\n4. Place of business.\n\na. Employer or employee.\n\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\n\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\n\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n\n6. Ability to determine:\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Speed of moving objects.\n\nc. Size at distance.\n\n7. Reliability of observer.\n\na. Sources.\n\n- 5 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(1) Neighbors.\n\n(2) Police Dept.\n\n(3) FBI records.\n\n(4) Employer.\n\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\n\na. Sightings in general.\n\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n\n(1) Sound.\n\n(2) Motion.\n\n(3) Glint of light.\n\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n\n9. Witnesses.\n\na. Addressees.\n\nb. Occupation.\n\nc. Reliability.\n\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\n\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\n\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\n\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\n\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\n\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n\n2. Winds aloft report.\n\n- 6 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\n\na. Object.\n\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\n\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\n\nd. Maneuvers.\n\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n\n8. Secure signed statement.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands,\nZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence,\nDepartment of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\n- 7 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nC9-4892,AF\n\n63-83894-164"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nc. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location.\n\n- 4 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n17. Air ducts.\n\na. Slots.\n\nb. Duct openings.\n\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n\n19. Sound.\n\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\n\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\n\nc. Intermittent.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance.\n\na. Explode.\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n\n(2) Other physical evidence.\n\nb. Faded from view.\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n\n2. Address.\n\n3. Occupation.\n\n4. Place of business.\n\na. Employer or employee.\n\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\n\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\n\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n\n6. Ability to determine:\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Speed of moving objects.\n\nc. Size at distance.\n\n7. Reliability of observer.\n\na. Sources.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 5 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(1) Neighbors.\n\n(2) Police Dept.\n\n(3) FBI records.\n\n(4) Employer.\n\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\n\na. Sightings in general.\n\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n\n(1) Sound.\n\n(2) Motion.\n\n(3) Glint of light.\n\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n\n9. Witnesses.\n\na. Addressees.\n\nb. Occupation.\n\nc. Reliability.\n\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\n\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\n\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\n\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\n\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\n\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n\n2. Winds aloft report.\n\n- 6 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\n\na. Object.\n\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\n\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\n\nd. Maneuvers.\n\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n\n8. Secure signed statement.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands,\nZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence,\nDepartment of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 7 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nC9-4892,AF\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n63-83894-164"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"c. Odor (if any).\nd. Rate of evaporation.\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n12. Effect on clouds.\na. Opened path thru clouds.\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\nc. Reflected on cloud.\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n13. Lights.\na. Reflected or attached.\nb. Luminous\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n14. Support\na. Wings.\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\nc. Vertical jet.\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n15. Propulsion.\na. Propeller or jet.\nb. Rotor.\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n16. Control and stability.\na. Fins\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n(1) Size.\n(2) Shape.\n(3) Location."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"17. Air ducts.\na. Slots.\nb. Duct openings.\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n19. Sound.\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\nc. Intermittent.\n20. Manner of disappearance.\na. Explode.\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n(2) Other physical evidence.\nb. Faded from view.\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n2. Address.\n3. Occupation.\n4. Place of business.\na. Employer or employee.\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n6. Ability to determine:\na. Color.\nb. Speed of moving objects.\nc. Size at distance.\n7. Reliability of observer.\na. Sources."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1) Neighbors.\n(2) Police Dept.\n(3) FBI records.\n(4) Employer.\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\na. Sightings in general.\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n(1) Sound.\n(2) Motion.\n(3) Glint of light.\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n9. Witnesses.\na. Addressees.\nb. Occupation.\nc. Reliability.\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n2. Winds aloft report."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\na. Object.\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\nd. Maneuvers.\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n8. Secure signed statement.\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence, Department of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nC9-4892, AF\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\nRESTRICTED - 3 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nc. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location.\n\n- 4 -\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n17. Air ducts.\n\na. Slots.\n\nb. Duct openings.\n\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n\n19. Sound.\n\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\n\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\n\nc. Intermittent.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance.\n\na. Explode.\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n\n(2) Other physical evidence.\n\nb. Faded from view.\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n\n2. Address.\n\n3. Occupation.\n\n4. Place of business.\n\na. Employer or employee.\n\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\n\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\n\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n\n6. Ability to determine:\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Speed of moving objects.\n\nc. Size at distance.\n\n7. Reliability of observer.\n\na. Sources.\n\nRESTRICTED - 5 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n(1) Neighbors.\n(2) Police Dept.\n(3) FBI records.\n(4) Employer.\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\na. Sightings in general.\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n(1) Sound.\n(2) Motion.\n(3) Glint of light.\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n9. Witnesses.\na. Addressees.\nb. Occupation.\nc. Reliability.\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\nGENERAL\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n2. Winds aloft report.\n- 6 -\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\na. Object.\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\nd. Maneuvers.\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n8. Secure signed statement.\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of Deputy Chief of Staff, Operations\nDISTRIBUTION:\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence, Department of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\nRESTRICTED\n- 7 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n15 February 1949\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\nPART I - GENERAL\n1. PURPOSE\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n2. RESCISSION\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n3. REPORTING\na. General\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\nRESTRICTED\nC9-4892,AF\n63-83894-164"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\nGeneral\n1. Date of sighting.\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\na. Ground\n(1) City, town.\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n- 2 -\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\nRESTRICTED - 3 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nc. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location.\n\n- 4 - RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n17. Air ducts.\n\na. Slots.\n\nb. Duct openings.\n\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n\n19. Sound.\n\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\n\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\n\nc. Intermittent.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance.\n\na. Explode.\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n\n(2) Other physical evidence.\n\nb. Faded from view.\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n\n2. Address.\n\n3. Occupation.\n\n4. Place of business.\n\na. Employer or employee.\n\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\n\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\n\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n\n6. Ability to determine:\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Speed of moving objects.\n\nc. Size at distance.\n\n7. Reliability of observer.\n\na. Sources.\n\nRESTRICTED - 5 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(1) Neighbors.\n\n(2) Police Dept.\n\n(3) FBI records.\n\n(4) Employer.\n\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\n\na. Sightings in general.\n\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n\n(1) Sound.\n\n(2) Motion.\n\n(3) Glint of light.\n\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n\n9. Witnesses.\n\na. Addressees.\n\nb. Occupation.\n\nc. Reliability.\n\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\n\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\n\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\n\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\n\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\n\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n\n2. Winds aloft report.\n\n- 6 - RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\n\na. Object.\n\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\n\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\n\nd. Maneuvers.\n\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n\n8. Secure signed statement.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of Deputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence, Department of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nRESTRICTED - 7 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nC9-4892,AF\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n63-83894-164"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude.\n\n- 2 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width.\n\nRESTRICTED - 3 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nc. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location.\n\n- 4 -\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"17. Air ducts.\na. Slots.\nb. Duct openings.\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n19. Sound.\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\nc. Intermittent.\n20. Manner of disappearance.\na. Explode.\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n(2) Other physical evidence.\nb. Faded from view.\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n2. Address.\n3. Occupation.\n4. Place of business.\na. Employer or employee.\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n6. Ability to determine:\na. Color.\nb. Speed of moving objects.\nc. Size at distance.\n7. Reliability of observer.\na. Sources."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1) Neighbors.\n(2) Police Dept.\n(3) FBI records.\n(4) Employer.\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\na. Sightings in general.\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n(1) Sound.\n(2) Motion.\n(3) Glint of light.\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n9. Witnesses.\na. Addressees.\nb. Occupation.\nc. Reliability.\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n2. Winds aloft report.\n\n- 6 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\na. Object.\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\nd. Maneuvers.\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n8. Secure signed statement.\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of Deputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence, Department of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\n- 7 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n15 February 1949\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS\nMEMORANDUM NUMBER 4\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT\n\nPART I - GENERAL\n\n1. PURPOSE\n\nThe purpose of this memorandum is twofold:\n\na. To enunciate continuing Air Force requirements for information pertaining to sightings of unconventional aircraft and unidentified flying objects, including the so-called \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nb. To establish procedures for reporting such information.\n\n2. RESCISSION\n\nDepartment of the Army Collection Memorandum Number 7, dated 21 January 1948, and letter, CSGID 425.1, dated 25 March 1948, both subject as above, which have been transferred to Air Force agencies for action, are herewith superseded.\n\n3. REPORTING\n\na. General\n\n(1) As complete an answer to the requirements enunciated in Part II, as may be procurable, should be dispatched by means of electrical transmission immediately after sightings.\n\n(2) Supplementary reports should be forwarded as available by the most expeditious means consistent with the importance of the information reported.\n\nb. Major Air Commands (Overseas) and Air Attaches\n\n(1) Initial and supplementary cabled reports will be transmitted to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force. Cables will contain the phase, \"Pass to COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO, ATTN: MCIAXO-3.\"\n\nRESTRICTED\nC9-4892,AF\n63-83894-164"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(2) Supplementary written reports, prepared on AF Form 112, will be forwarded to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(3) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (overseas) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nc. Major Air Commands (ZI)\n\n(1) Reports will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3 by installations receiving information pertaining to the requirements enunciated in Part II.\n\n(2) Copies of such reports may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n(3) A copy of all reports sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with these instructions will be forwarded at the same time to the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters United States Air Force.\n\n(4) Written reports will be submitted on AF Form 112.\n\n(5) Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with major Air Commands (ZI) and organizations under their control in connection with the development of information on this subject.\n\nd. Non-Air Force Agencies\n\n(1) Addressees other than those of the United States Air Force are requested to forward reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3.\n\n(2) In order to reduce the time factor involved in transmission of this type of information it is requested that, wherever communications facilities permit, subordinate elements be authorized to communicate reports direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command.\n\nPART II - REQUIREMENTS\n\nGeneral\n\n1. Date of sighting.\n\n2. Time of sighting (zonal by 24 hr. clock).\n\n3. Where sighted (observer's position):\n\na. Ground\n\n(1) City, town.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town, road, intersection, etc.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"b. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude.\n\nc. Sea\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude.\n\n(2) Proximity to land. (Name city, country, etc.)\n\n4. Number of objects.\n\nFormation type (if any), sketch if possible.\n\n5. Observable celestial phenomena or planets that may account for the sighting. (Local facilities or organizations which follow such celestial phenomena should be consulted for such information.)\n\n6. Distance of object from observer.\n\na. Laterally or horizontally.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon.\n\nc. Altitude.\n\n7. Time in sight.\n\n8. Appearance of object.\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Shape. (Sketch if possible)\n\nc. Apparent construction. (Of what material or substance)\n\nd. Size.\n\n(1) Estimated size.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view. (Compared to known object)\n\n9. Direction of flight.\n\n10. Tactics or maneuvers.\n\nVertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering, evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\n11. Evidence of exhaust.\n\na. Color of smoke.\n\nb. Length and width."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"c. Odor (if any).\n\nd. Rate of evaporation.\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound? (spurts)\n\n12. Effect on clouds.\n\na. Opened path thru clouds.\n\nb. Forced cloud or mists.\n\nc. Reflected on cloud.\n\nd. Showed thru cloud.\n\n13. Lights.\n\na. Reflected or attached.\n\nb. Luminous\n\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed.\n\n14. Support\n\na. Wings.\n\nb. Aerodynamic list of fuselage.\n\nc. Vertical jet.\n\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone.\n\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible).\n\n15. Propulsion.\n\na. Propeller or jet.\n\nb. Rotor.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating) (Katz Mayer effect).\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings.\n\n16. Control and stability.\n\na. Fins\n\nb. Stabilizers (horizontal or vertical).\n\n(1) Size.\n\n(2) Shape.\n\n(3) Location."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"17. Air ducts.\n\na. Slots.\n\nb. Duct openings.\n\n18. Speed - M.P.H.\n\n19. Sound.\n\na. Continuous whine or buzz.\n\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh.\n\nc. Intermittent.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance.\n\na. Explode.\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments.\n\n(2) Other physical evidence.\n\nb. Faded from view.\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle.\n\nRelative to the Observer\n\n1. Name of observer.\n\n2. Address.\n\n3. Occupation.\n\n4. Place of business.\n\na. Employer or employee.\n\n5. Pertinent hobbies.\n\na. Is observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\n\nb. Length of time engaged in hobby (experience).\n\n6. Ability to determine:\n\na. Color.\n\nb. Speed of moving objects.\n\nc. Size at distance.\n\n7. Reliability of observer.\n\na. Sources."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1) Neighbors.\n\n(2) Police Dept.\n\n(3) FBI records.\n\n(4) Employer.\n\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\n\na. Sightings in general.\n\nb. How attention was drawn to object(s).\n\n(1) Sound.\n\n(2) Motion.\n\n(3) Glint of light.\n\nc. Degree of fatigue and duration of flight at time of sighting in cases where observer is airborne.\n\n9. Witnesses.\n\na. Addressees.\n\nb. Occupation.\n\nc. Reliability.\n\n10. Comments of interrogator regarding the intelligence and character of person interrogated.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars operating on ground.\n\na. Observations of range, speed, altitude and size of target.\n\nb. Did target executive any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc. and what radius of turn. If radius of turn is not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed?\n\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach. Track all if possible.\n\n2. If airborne when object sighted.\n\na. Were there any radar inductions or extra noise on radio circuits?\n\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, maneuvers, etc.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions.\n\n2. Winds aloft report."} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time. (Check Canadian activity if close to that border.)\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purpose of making comparison of soils.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects, etc.\n\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\n\na. Object.\n\nb. Surrounding terrain where observed.\n\nc. Place where it contacted earth (if this happened).\n\nd. Maneuvers.\n\ne. Formation if objects were more than two.\n\n8. Secure signed statement.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n\n10. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extentions that might presumably be construed as such).\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands,\nZI and Overseas\nAll United States Air Attaches\n\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nSpecial Assistant for Research and Intelligence,\nDepartment of State\nDirector of Intelligence, GSUSA\nChief of Naval Intelligence\nCommandant (INT), United States Coast Guard\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n- 7 -"} {"doc_id":"4bab8dc4a8631a3b","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LBJ LIBRARY DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL SHEET\nPage 1\nDoc # DocType Doc Info Classification Pages Date Restriction\n04 memo Welsh to Fritsch, et.al. C 1 11/15/63 A\nopen 9/15/14\n06 draft Near duplicate of #7 & 9 C 2 11/15/63 A\n07 draft Near duplicate of #6 & 9 C 2 11/15/63 A\n08 memo NASC Meeting... PCI 1 11/21/63 A\nopen 9/15/14\n09 draft \"Guidelines for Interagency Handling...\" C 2 11/15/63 A\n[Near duplicate of #6 & 7]\n10 draft \"Guidelines for Interagency Handling...\" C 3 [11/63] A\n12 memo NASC Meeting... PCI 1 11/6/63 A\nopen 9/15/14\n18 memo Welsh to McCone C 1 5/31/63 A\nopen 9/15/14\n20a rpt \"Guidelines for Interagency Handling...\" C 2 [1963] A\nopen 1/4/18 per RAC 12/17\n21 memo C. Johnson to Parrott C 1 12/10/62 A\n[Duplicate of #25]\nopen 9/15/14\nCollection Title National Security File, Files of Charles E. Johnson\nFolder Title \"Space Vehicle Fragments - Responsibilities and Procedures\"\nBox Number 018\nRestriction Codes\n(A) Closed by Executive Order 13292 governing access to national security information.\n(B) Closed by statute or by the agency which originated the document.\n(C) Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in the donor's deed of gift.\n1/13/2009 Initials"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LBJ LIBRARY DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL SHEET\nPage 2\nDoc # DocType Doc Info Classification Pages Date Restriction\n23 memo To ExSec, NASC C 1 12/7/62 A\nopen 9/15/14\n25 memo Duplicate of #21 C 1 12/10/62 A\nopen 9/15/14\n36c draft \"Attachment B\" C 2 [10/62] A\nopen 9/15/14\nCollection Title National Security File, Files of Charles E. Johnson\nFolder Title \"Space Vehicle Fragments - Responsibilities and Procedures\"\nBox Number 018\nRestriction Codes\n(A) Closed by Executive Order 13292 governing access to national security information.\n(B) Closed by statute or by the agency which originated the document.\n(C) Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in the donor's deed of gift.\n1/13/2009 Initials"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA HEADQUARTERS ROUTING SLIP\nCODE NAME (if necessary)\n1. Charles Johnson\n2. National Security\n3. Council\nACTION APPROVAL CONCURRENCE FILE INFORMATION INVESTIGATE AND ADVISE NOTE AND FORWARD NOTE AND RETURN PER REQUEST RECOMMENDATION SEE ME SIGNATURE REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\nREMARKS:\nUnderlined sections have been added since the last draft.\nSatmn Alt Contingency Guidance Fragments\nFROM: AI William F. Hausman DATE: 5/26/64\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. July 1959)"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nNASA\nAF\nCONFIDENTIAL\nAF File Frag.\nGROUP 1 Excluded from automatic downgrading and declassification\nMANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER -- ATTN: DR. GILRUTH\nMARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER -- ATTN: DR. VON BRAUN\nNASA JOHN F. KENNEDY SPACE CENTER -- ATTN: DR. DEBUS, JOHN KING\nUNTIL FURTHER NOTICE, THE FOLLOWING IS THE RESPONSE TO QUERIES ON POSSIBLE EARTH IMPACTS OF FRAGMENTS FROM ORBITING SA-6 BOOSTER. NO QUERIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AT THIS TIME. AFTER LAUNCH WE WILL GIVE TRACKING ELEMENTS FOR TWO TO TWELVE DAY ORBIT BUT NO IMPACT PREDICTION. NO INFORMATION IS BEING VOLUNTEERED. THIS HAS BEEN COORDINATED BY OUR INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS OFFICE WITH THE STATE DEPARTMENT. ALL ADDITIONAL RESPONSE OVER AND ABOVE THE FOLLOWING WILL BE ONLY BY THE ADMINISTRATOR, THE DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR OR THE ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR. QUERIES REQUIRING SUCH ADDITIONAL RESPONSES SHOULD BE REFERRED TO THEM.\n\"A. ON SIZE OF FRAGMENTS: ACTUAL SIZE AND NUMBER OF FRAGMENTS CANNOT BE PREDICTED.\nDECLASSIFIED E.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4 By cbm/rg NARA, Date 1-8-09\n1 3\nCONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nNASA\nAF\nx\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\"B. ON LOCATION OF IMPACT: SINCE THE VEHICLE BREAKS UP ON REENTRY, THERE IS NO BASIS FOR PREDICTING A SINGLE IMPACT POINT.\n\"C. PRIOR TO ANY IMPACT: THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN VERY CAREFULLY STUDIED. THE POSSIBILITY OF A FRAGMENT FROM ANY SPACE VEHICLE ENDANGERING HUMAN LIFE OR PROPERTY IS QUITE REMOTE. ANY DISCUSSION OF SUCH AN IMPROBABLE INCIDENT WOULD BE HEAVILY CONJECTURAL.\n\"D. AFTER A REPORTED IMPACT: UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES DOES THIS AGENCY (GOVERNMENT) CONJECTURE ON THE ORIGIN OF AN OBJECT. RATHER, IT DESIRES TO OBTAIN, ANALYZE, AND ATTEMPT TO ESTABLISH THE ORIGIN OF SUCH AN OBJECT.\n\"E. AFTER IT IS KNOWN THAT A FRAGMENT IS TO BE DELIVERED TO US: THE OBJECT WILL BE SUBJECTED TO\n2 3\nCONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA\n\nAF x\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nSTUDY AND PROMPT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT WILL BE MADE WHEN\n\nANALYSIS HAS BEEN COMPLETED.\"\n\nJULIAN SCHEER\nASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR\nFOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS\n\n\ncc:\nAD/Dr. Dryden\nAI/Mr. Frutkin\nAA/Mr. Williamson\nM/Dr. Mueller\nMAO/Mr. Abernethy\nAFP/Mr. Lloyd\nM-N/Mr. Alibrando\nA/Mr. Webb\nAA/Dr. Seamans\n\nGROUP 1\nExcluded from automatic\ndowngrading and declassification\n\n3 3\n\nJulian Scheer, Asst. Administrator for Public Affairs\n35302\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nFile - Saturn Launch - Background data.\n\nDECEMBER 16, 1963\n\nDIARY NOTE\n\nSubject: SA-5\n\n1. NASA provides bimonthly launch briefings to the Department of State on all NASA launchings scheduled for the following two-month period.\n\n2. The SA-5 launch was flagged at the briefing of October 23 because of the large weight expected to be put in orbit and re-enter. No objection was registered by the Department of State.\n\n3. The following day, October 24, Mr. Frutkin called Dr. Golovin to recommend that Dr. Weisner be briefed on the SA-5. Golovin was to arrange a meeting for this purpose. A request for a briefing was received from Dr. Steininger of Dr. Weisner's staff on December 9, 1963, and he was briefing that day by Capt. Holcomb (NASA).\n\n4. Prior to the initial briefing, NASA had taken two principal precautions to reduce the total weight of fragments that might return: (1) 13,000 lbs. of sand were substituted for the ballast originally programmed (lead and iron); (2) the Jupiter nose cone was roughed up so that it would burn up during reentry.\n\n5. At Department of State request, a second briefing on SA-5 was held on November 27. No objections were registered to the launching by Dr. Rollefson or his associates.\n\n6. The facts which were presented in the briefing for Dr. Rollefson (subsequently revised as in Paragraph 7) are:\n\n(a) There is a 95% probability that 2,800 lbs. of material will return to earth, a 75% probability that 4,600 lbs. will return and a 50% chance that 10,200 lbs. will return. The 2,800 lbs. would probably take the form of 30 to 39 fragments, consisting of six engines, three Titanium spheres and approximately 30 electronics packages. The difference between 2,800 lbs. figure and the 4,600 lbs. figure is in the Jupiter nose cone.\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nE.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4\nBy NARA, Date 1-8-09\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n1369"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n(b) It was stated that fragments would probably impact over an area between 2,170 and 2,500 miles long by 100 miles wide.\n\n(c) None of the aluminum skin material is expected to survive reentry. Interior parts should therefore be exposed to heating during reentry. (Most fragments collected to date have been stainless steel pieces of Atlas skin).\n\n(d) If 30 fragments reenter the atmosphere, the probability of a casulty is estimated at .0000179. If 39 pieces reenter, the probability is .0000232, or one casualty per 50,000 flights. A fragment is considered capable of inflicting injury or death if it hits with more than 58 foot pounds of kinetic energy.\n\n(e) The nominal but uncertain lifetime projected for the satellite is 148 days. The vehicle is to be launched on a heading of 105°, with a 345 nautical mile apogee, 141 nautical mile perigee, 31.60 inclination and a 93.9 minute period.\n\n(f) NASA has investigated the possibility of destructing the satellite in orbit. This does not appear feasible since any destruct short of vaporization would simply create more fragments of a lethal nature and increase the probabilities of a casualty. In order to vaporize the satellite, a nuclear charge would be required.\n\n(g) At the current stage of engineering, it is not possible to provide retro-rocket and orientation systems to deorbit the satellite in open water. Some 18 months might be required for this and the solution would not be applicable to future required GEMINI missions.\n\n(h) If the 13,000 lbs. of sand are subtracted, it is estimated that the vehicle will be of the approximate weight and size of Soviet vehicles which have already decayed. It is not known whether the Soviets have taken any precautions regarding fragments.\n\n(i) A tracking beacon with a 45-day life has been placed on board the satellite to assist in monitoring it as closely as possible.\n\n(j) It has been estimated that the reentry prospects here are not greatly different from Atlas reentries in which about 2,000 lbs. per flight are believed to have returned to earth.\n\n-2-\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n7. Revised Information\n\nSince the November 27 briefing, the following revised data has been provided: 95% probability 2,361 lbs. will return; 50% probability 3,000 lbs. will return.\n\n8. Based on data provided through Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, it has been estimated that in one year, 310 meteorite impacts occur in Africa (approximately 11,000,000 square kilometers); i.e., 10 times as many objects as are involved in SA-5 reentry fall in Africa alone in one year. To date there has been no substantiated report of a personnel casualty resulting from these impacts.\n\nJames R. Morrison\nOffice of\nInternational Programs\n\ncc: Mr. C. Johnson, White House\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA MAIL CONTROL\n\nFROM William F. Hausman, NASA Hq./Code AI\n\nTO Charles Johnson, NSCouncil\n\nCLASSIFICATION Secret\n\nDATE OF DOCUMENT April 8, 1964\n\nNO. AI-15 A-7-7\n\nDESCRIPTION (MUST BE UNCLASSIFIED) Response to Queries re: Fragments\n\nREMARKS cy Webb, Dyrden, Seamans, NASA Packard, State Johnson,NSC AWFrutkin, AI\n\nREFERRED TO CEJ\n\nFORM NASA 416A (JUNE 1959)"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(PLACE NASA CONTROL FORMS HERE)\n3a\nDECLASSIFIED\nE.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4\nBy comfy NARA, Date 1-8-09\nThis sheet and NASA Control Forms must be attached to Secret material while in the custody of NASA Headquarters.\nSECRET\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION\nThe attachment contains information affecting the National Defense of the United States within the meaning of the espionage laws, Title 18, U.S.C., Secs. 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nGROUP 3\nDowngraded at 12 year intervals; not automatically declassified\n36\nRESPONSE TO QUERY\nApril 8, 1964\nRE: Queries on Fragment Return from NASA Spacecraft or Space Vehicles\nA much abbreviated guideline for RTQ has been provided by Mr. Scheer to various NASA officials who might be queried on this subject. The following more extensive responses are provided as background information to be used by the Administrator, Deputy Administrator, or Associate Administrator of NASA, in their judgment, in event of queries on the return of space vehicle fragments to the earth. It is suggested that the minimum information be used to satisfy a given query.\n(A) FOR USE PRIOR TO AND AFTER A PARTICULAR LAUNCH BUT BEFORE ANY KNOWN IMPACT OF RETURNING FRAGMENTS:\n1. Do fragments from (satellite X) pose a threat to life or property?\nThe probability that fragments from (satellite X) may cause damage or injury is remote. The probability of injury from natural meteorites is far greater.\n2. a. What is the probability of impact?\nThere are many factors (e.g., time in orbit, atmospheric conditions, how the vehicle breaks up, dispersal pattern, etc.) involved and the calculations are extremely complex. We have assured ourselves, however, that the hazard is far less than many hazards encountered in everyday living.\nb. What is the numerical probability that NASA has placed on this?\nIn the case of SA-5, it is one in 50,000 launches.\nIn the case of GT-1, it is one in 27,500 launches.\n3. Has NASA taken steps to lessen the fragment problem?\nYes. NASA is actively engaged in minimizing it. For example, on the SA-5 satellite, NASA used 13,000 lbs. of harmless sand as ballast and roughed up the nosecone so that it would burn on reentry. On the GT-1 spacecraft, NASA bored large holes in the heat shield to assist burning during reentry. In addition to specific steps such as these, studies are underway to assist NASA in further coping with the overall reentry problem.\nThis document consists of 3 pages, No. 1 of 6 Series 4\nANY INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT USED IN RESPONSE TO QUERIES IS AUTOMATICALLY DECLASSIFIED.\nGROUP 3 Downgraded at 12 year intervals; not automatically declassified\ndeletions per Jim Heuerman feg 5/27/64\nDECLASSIFIED E.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4 By comfy NARA, Date 1-8-09\n1819"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nGROUP 3 Downgraded at 12 year intervals; not automatically declassified\n2\n4. How many fragments may be expected to survive\nFrom SA-5 - About 30\nFrom GT-1 - About 55\n5. If any fragments come down, where are they most likely to impact?\nThe small number of fragments surviving from any satellite will be dispersed over an area of thousands of square miles, most of which are likely to be oceans, seas, or other water surface.\n6. Can the fragment problem be further decreased by exploding the orbiting element?\nExplosion or destruct of the orbiting element could produce more fragments and, hence, increase the possibility of fragment impact.\n7. If one were to be hit by a fragment, would it be lethal?\nIn the remote possibility that one were to be struck by a fragment, it might, depending upon area of body struck, be lethal. However, this is also true of being struck by a meteorite, and the possibility of being struck by a meteorite is greater than the possibility of being struck by a fragment from (satellite X). In fact, based on data provided through the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, the average number of meteorites over 2.2 lbs. which impact on the earth every year is estimated at 5628. This is many, many times greater than the total number of fragments to be expected from (satellite X). And, to date, there are no substantiated reports of injury from these meteorite impacts.\n8. Meteorites are natural phenomena. Do you consider NASA justified in increasing the possibilities of a lethal impact, no matter how improbable?\nMany human activities carry with them a demonstrable probability of casualty--flying, automobile driving, golfing during an electrical storm. But we do not stop driving, flying or golfing.\nGROUP 3 Downgraded at 12 year intervals; not automatically declassified\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nGROUP 3 Downgraded at 12 year intervals; not automatically declassified\n3\n9. Will this sort of thing be a continuing hazard?\nIn some degree, yes. In time, it should become possible to develop some solutions such as ensured return over water, but these will take a great deal of research and development as well as significant payload margin. It is a matter of constant attention.\n10. How do reentry problems with GT-1 compare with those of other rockets?\nVery roughly, about the same as with Atlas reentries, from which there have been no casualties.\nSECRET\nGROUP 3 Downgraded at 12 year intervals; not automatically declassified"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n4\nEXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS and SPACE COUNCIL\nWASHINGTON\nEXECUTIVE SECRETARY\nNovember 15, 1963\nMEMORANDUM TO:\nDr. Arnold Fritsch (AEC)\nMr. Albert D. Wheelon (CIA)\nDr. Albert C. Hall (DOD)\nMr. Arnold Frutkin (NASA)\nMr. Charles Johnson (NSC)\nDr. Nicholas Golovin (OST)\nMr. Robert Packard (State)\nSubject: Fragments\nThe meeting on November 6 was informative. At the close of that session, I promised to weigh various suggestions and come up with a draft paper for joint consideration. Such a paper is attached. I would doubt that everyone's interests are completely satisfied with this language, but it is hoped that it comprises a reasonable basis for agreement. In any event, I would appreciate your evaluating it and preparing yourselves to indicate what portions are satisfactory and what portions need improvement.\nA meeting to discuss this language and related issues is scheduled for November 21, 10 o'clock, in Room 213 Executive Office Building. Please advise my office in advance who will attend for your respective agencies.\nE. C. Welsh\nClassified attachment (2 cys)\nDECLASSIFIED Authority NLJ.030R.018.001/1 NARA, Date 8-21-14\nCONFIDENTIAL\nUpon removal of attachments this document becomes unclassified.\n1277"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DOT FIVE POST\n\nHot rocket to nowhere"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE COUNCIL\n\nInteragency Meeting on Space Vehicle Fragments\nThursday, November 21, 1963 - 10:00 a. m.\nRoom 213 - E. O. B.\n\nCHAIRMAN: Dr. E. C. Welsh\n\nAEC: Dr. John Pomeroy\nMr. C. L. Henderson\n\nCIA: Mr. Huntington Sheldon\nMr. Carl Duckett\n\nDEFENSE: Dr. Albert C. Hall\n\nNASA: Mr. Arnold Frutkin\nColonel William F. Hausman\n\nNSC: Mr. Charles Johnson\n\nOST: Dr. Nicholas Golovin\nDr. Donald H. Steininger\n\nSTATE: Mr. Robert Packard\nMr. C. E. Dillery\n\nNASC: Mr. Richard Hirsch\nMr. Russell W. Hale\nDr. Charles S. Sheldon\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority NLJ.030R.018.001/2\nBy NARA. Date 8.21.14"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDraft of Nov. 6, 1962\nRevised by DOD 3/1/63\n\n[ ] - material deleted\nUnderlining - material added\n\nGUIDELINES\nFOR INTERAGENCY HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\n1. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is designated as the agency responsible for receiving, [analyzing] and identifying [any] fragments, or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types, including the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the United States or which otherwise come into its possession, except that the Department of Defense (DOD) is solely responsible for receiving and identifying fragments from vehicles launched by the DOD.\n\n[2. NASA will turn over to the Department of Defense (DOD) as expeditiously as possible fragments which are readily identifiable as coming from space vehicles launched by the DOD.]\n\n2. In the event NASA should come into possession of space fragments under the sole and exclusive responsibility of the DOD, NASA will deliver such fragments as expeditiously as possible to the DOD.\n\n3. To insure prompt analysis for intelligence purposes, NASA and other U. S. Government agencies will [give] deliver to the DOD [and other responsible agencies access] as expeditously as possible and on a priority basis fragments (including whole vehicles) which are readily identifiable or suspect as coming from [space] vehicles launched from foreign countries. Such foreign fragments which come initially into possession of the DOD will be retained by DOD for analysis. Such analysis of foreign fragments will be completed expeditiously, and thereafter such fragments will [remain] be placed in the custody of NASA, pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country or for other appropriate disposition.\n\n4. All other fragments will be retained by NASA pending agreement as to disposition.\n\n5. NASA may continue to use the Smithsonian Institution for collection and analysis of fragments by contractual arrangements, and may also make appropriate arrangements for assistance with private agencies.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nDECLASSIFIED E.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4\nBy NARA, Date 1-8-09"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n6. The DOD will notify NASA when deorbits are expected and when collection teams have been alerted to obtain the deorbiting fragments. Also, DOD will inform NASA of the results of such collection efforts whether successful or not.\n\n7. The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) will participate in the analysis of fragments of space vehicles which have utilized or transported, or are suspected of having utilized or transported, radioactive materials or special nuclear materials, and will exercise responsibility for special nuclear materials, in accordance with its statutory responsibility. In addition, the AEC will continue to make available to NASA and the DOD its special scientific capabilities.\n\n8. The Department of State will provide policy guidance with respect to the final disposition of fragments from vehicles launched by foreign countries, or made available to the United States by foreign countries. The Department of State will provide assistance in the acquisition of fragments that fall on foreign territory.\n\n9. NASA will serve as the focal point for the coordination and release of public information on fragments except for release of public information on fragments resulting from space vehicles launched by the DOD, which will be the responsibility of DOD.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE COUNCIL\nInteragency Meeting on Space Vehicle Fragments\nWednesday, November 6, 1963 - 10:00 a. m.\nRoom 213 - E. O. B.\n\nCHAIRMAN: Dr. E. C. Welsh\n\nAEC: Dr. Arnold Fritsch\n\nCIA: Mr. Albert D. Wheelon\nMr. Carl Duckett\n\nDEFENSE: Dr. Albert C. Hall, DDR&E\n\nNASA: Mr. Arnold Frutkin\nColonel William F. Hausman\n\nNSC: Mr. Charles Johnson\n\nOST: Dr. Nicholas Golovin\nDr. Donald H. Steininger\n\nSTATE: Mr. Robert Packard\nMr. C. E. Dillery\n\nNASC: Mr. Richard Hirsch\nMr. Russell W. Hale\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority NLJ.030R.018.001/5\nBy NARA. Date 8.21.14"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DRAFT\nNovember 6, 1962\n\nPUBLIC STATEMENT\nON HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\nThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration is\ndesignated as the Government agency responsible for receiving\n[analyzing], and identifying [any] fragments or suspected fragments\nof space vehicles of all types, including the contents thereof, which\nfall upon the territory of the United States or which otherwise come\ninto its possession.\n\nFragments identified as coming from vehicles launched by\nforeign countries will be retained by NASA pending final arrangements\nfor their return to the launching country or for other appropriate\ndisposition.\n\nIn performing these functions, NASA will coordinate fully\nwith other Government agencies.\n\nDelete bracketed words to conform to DOD revisions of paper\ndated March 1, 1963."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Did USIB take\nany final action\nat or since their\nDecember meeting?"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS and SPACE COUNCIL\nWASHINGTON\n\nEXECUTIVE SECRETARY\t\tOctober 24, 1963\n\nMEMORANDUM TO:\n\nHonorable Dean Rusk\nSecretary of State\t\tHonorable John A. McCone\n\t\t\t\tDirector, CIA\n\nHonorable Roswell L. Gilpatric\nDeputy Secretary of Defense\tHonorable Jerome B. Wiesner\n\t\t\t\tDirector, OST\n\nHonorable James E. Webb\nAdministrator, NASA\t\tHonorable McGeorge Bundy\n\t\t\t\tSpecial Assistant to the President\n\nSubject:\tResponsibility and Procedure re Space Vehicle Fragments\n\nSubject matter has in the past been discussed with representatives\nof interested agencies. Draft language was circulated and agreement\nwas initially obtained. Subsequently, some variations in preferred\nlanguage developed.\n\nIn response to inquiry from Chairman Miller of the House Science\nand Astronautics Committee regarding legislation introduced on this\nsubject, the Administrator of NASA responded that he did not believe\nsuch legislation was needed at this time, as the question of responsi-\nbility for receiving, analyzing, and identifying fragments and suspected\nfragments was being considered within the Executive Branch. This\nconsideration was presumably a reference to the meetings and drafts\ndeveloped under our auspices.\n\nThere has been more than sufficient time elapsed since this matter was\nfirst examined for the interested agencies to agree upon a responsible\nposition. Consequently, I am calling a meeting to examine this subject\non November 6 at 10 o'clock in Room 213 of the Executive Office Build-\ning. It would be appreciated if you would identify representation for\nyour agency at such a session. When you have done so, it would be\nappreciated if my office were notified as to the person or persons who\nexpect to attend.\n\nE. C. Welsh\n\nCGS\nto Lundell"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS and SPACE COUNCIL\nWASHINGTON\n\nEXECUTIVE SECRETARY\t\tOctober 24, 1963\n\nMEMORANDUM TO:\n\nHonorable Dean Rusk\nSecretary of State\t\tHonorable John A. McCone\n\t\t\t\tDirector, CIA\n\nHonorable Roswell L. Gilpatric\nDeputy Secretary of Defense\tHonorable Jerome B. Wiesner\n\t\t\t\tDirector, OST\n\nHonorable James E. Webb\nAdministrator, NASA\t\tHonorable McGeorge Bundy\n\t\t\t\tSpecial Assistant to the President\n\nSubject:\tResponsibility and Procedure re Space Vehicle Fragments\n\nSubject matter has in the past been discussed with representatives\nof interested agencies. Draft language was circulated and agreement\nwas initially obtained. Subsequently, some variations in preferred\nlanguage developed.\n\nIn response to inquiry from Chairman Miller of the House Science\nand Astronautics Committee regarding legislation introduced on this\nsubject, the Administrator of NASA responded that he did not believe\nsuch legislation was needed at this time, as the question of responsi-\nbility for receiving, analyzing, and identifying fragments and suspected\nfragments was being considered within the Executive Branch. This\nconsideration was presumably a reference to the meetings and drafts\ndeveloped under our auspices.\n\nThere has been more than sufficient time elapsed since this matter was\nfirst examined for the interested agencies to agree upon a responsible\nposition. Consequently, I am calling a meeting to examine this subject\non November 6 at 10 o'clock in Room 213 of the Executive Office Build-\ning. It would be appreciated if you would identify representation for\nyour agency at such a session. When you have done so, it would be\nappreciated if my office were notified as to the person or persons who\nexpect to attend.\n\nE. C. Welsh"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO:\n\nSpace Council\n\nDr. Edward Welsh\nExecutive Secretary\nNational Aeronautics and\nSpace Council\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Ed:\n\nFollowing our discussion of last Thursday, I have reviewed the\ndraft on handling of fragments and greatly simplified our com-\nments, although it was not possible to eliminate them all. The\nfollowing comments are made:\n\n1. NASA has no objection to deleting the word \"analyzing\"\nin paragraph one, line two, with the clear understanding\nthat fragment identification may in fact require\nlaboratory analysis.\n\n2. In paragraph three, the words \"and other US government\nagencies\" and \"Such foreign fragments which come\ninitially into possession of DOD will be retained by\nDOD for analysis.\" should be deleted since they are\ninconsistent with the statement in paragraph one that\n\"(NASA) is designated as the agency responsible for\nreceiving and identifying fragments\" with the exception\nof fragments from DOD vehicles.\n\n3. Paragraph five has been deleted since it pertains\nexclusively to internal NASA matters.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nArnold W. Frutkin\nDirector, Office of\nInternational Programs\n\nPRESERVATION COPY"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18\n\nFragment\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nMay 31, 1963\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR\n\nHonorable John A. McCone\nDirector of Central Intelligence\nChairman USIB\n\nSubject: Discovered Fragments of Space Vehicles\n\nThis office was asked some time ago to coordinate the preparation of a public announcement and an internal (classified) document to fix responsibilities and to outline procedures regarding the subject matter. To this end, my memorandum to Lt. General Carter, dated November 28, 1962, provided draft documents and set forth the status of the project at that time.\n\nOn March 1, a revised classified internal paper (Tab A), which has had top-level Defense clearance was provided, but we now understand it has not been coordinated within the intelligence community.\n\nIt is requested that the draft paper Tab A--the internal procedural paper--be given consideration. We were advised by General Carter, under date of December 7, 1962, that the matter would be given prompt USIB attention. Considerable time has now elapsed, and it would be deeply appreciated if we could obtain a favorable reply on this matter.\n\nE. C. Welsh\n\nECW/mq\n\nEnclosure (as Tab A) Defense Draft of March 1/63 \"Guidelines for Interagency Handling of Space Vehicle Fragments\" (Classified Confidential)\n\nDECLASSIFIED Authority NLJ.030R.018.001/6 By NARA, Date 8-21-14\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nPRESERVATION COPY"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nGUIDELINES FOR INTERAGENCY HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\n1. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is designated as the agency responsible for receiving and identifying fragments, or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types, including the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the United States or which otherwise come into its possession, except that the Department of Defense (DoD) is solely responsible for receiving and identifying fragments from vehicles launched by the DoD.\n\n2. In the event NASA should come into possession of space fragments under the sole and exclusive responsibility of the DoD, NASA will deliver such fragments as expeditiously as possible to the DoD.\n\n3. To insure prompt analysis for intelligence purposes, NASA and other U.S. Government agencies will deliver to the DoD as expeditiously as possible and on a priority basis fragments (including whole vehicles) which are readily identifiable or suspect as coming from vehicles launched from foreign countries. Such foreign fragments which come initially into possession of the DoD will be retained by DoD for analysis. Such analysis of foreign fragments will be completed expeditiously, and thereafter such fragments will be placed in the custody of NASA, pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country or for other appropriate disposition.\n\n4. All other fragments will be retained by NASA pending agreement as to disposition.\n\n5. NASA may continue to use the Smithsonian Institution for collection and analysis of fragments by contractual arrangements, and may also make appropriate arrangements for assistance with private agencies.\n\n6. The DoD will notify NASA when deorbits are expected and when collection teams have been alerted to obtain the deorbiting fragments. Also, DoD will inform NASA of the results of such collection efforts whether successful or not.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDECLASSIFIED E.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4 By chm/fy NARA, Date 1-8-09"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n- 2 -\n\n7. The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) will participate in the analysis of fragments of space vehicles which have utilized or transported, or are suspected of having utilized or transported, radioactive materials or special nuclear materials, and will exercise responsibility for special nuclear materials, in accordance with its statutory responsibility. In addition, the AEC will continue to make available to NASA and the DoD its special scientific capabilities.\n\n8. The Department of State will provide policy guidance with respect to the final disposition of fragments from vehicles launched by foreign countries, or made available to the United States by foreign countries. The Department of State will provide assistance in the acquisition of fragments that fall on foreign territory.\n\n9. NASA will serve as the focal point for the coordination and release of public information on fragments except for release of public information on fragments resulting from space vehicles launched by the DoD, which will be the responsibility of DoD.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NATIONAL AERONAUTICS and SPACE COUNCIL\n\n20\n\nMarch 4, 1963\n\nTo: Charles Johnson\n\nThis is the paper to which I referred on the phone.\n\nE. C. Welsh"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n20a\n\nGUIDELINES FOR INTERAGENCY HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\n1. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is designated as the agency responsible for receiving and identifying fragments, or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types, including the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the United States or which otherwise come into its possession, except that the Department of Defense (DoD) is solely responsible for receiving and identifying fragments from vehicles launched by the DoD.\n\n2. In the event NASA should come into possession of space fragments under the sole and exclusive responsibility of the DoD, NASA will deliver such fragments as expeditiously as possible to the DoD.\n\n3. To insure prompt analysis for intelligence purposes, NASA and other U.S. Government agencies will deliver to the DoD as expeditiously as possible and on a priority basis fragments (including whole vehicles) which are readily identifiable or suspect as coming from vehicles launched from foreign countries. Such foreign fragments which come initially into possession of the DoD will be retained by DoD for analysis. Such analysis of foreign fragments will be completed expeditiously, and thereafter such fragments will be placed in the custody of NASA, pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country or for other appropriate disposition.\n\n4. All other fragments will be retained by NASA pending agreement as to disposition.\n\n5. NASA may continue to use the Smithsonian Institution for collection and analysis of fragments by contractual arrangements, and may also make appropriate arrangements for assistance with private agencies.\n\nDECLASSIFIED Authority NLJ-030R-18-1-17 By CTS NARA, Date 12/20/17\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nPRESERVATION COPY"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6. The DoD will notify NASA when deorbits are expected and when collection teams have been alerted to obtain the deorbiting fragments. Also, DoD will inform NASA of the results of such collection efforts whether successful or not.\n\n7. The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) will participate in the analysis of fragments of space vehicles which have utilized or transported, or are suspected of having utilized or transported, radioactive materials or special nuclear materials, and will exercise responsibility for special nuclear materials, in accordance with its statutory responsibility. In addition, the AEC will continue to make available to NASA and the DoD its special scientific capabilities.\n\n8. The Department of State will provide policy guidance with respect to the final disposition of fragments from vehicles launched by foreign countries, or made available to the United States by foreign countries. The Department of State will provide assistance in the acquisition of fragments that fall on foreign territory.\n\n9. NASA will serve as the focal point for the coordination and release of public information on fragments except for release of public information on fragments resulting from space vehicles launched by the DoD, which will be the responsibility of DoD.\n\n2\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDecember 10 1962\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: Mr. Thomas Parrott\n\nTom--\n\nYou should know about the attached documents and the small hassel between DOD and CIA concerning the procedural guidelines paper. As I understand it, the departmental representatives that worked with Ed Welsh had secured departmental clearances on the procedure but later on the Agency clearance somehow got unstuck.\n\nAt this point there is no White House intervention that is either desirable or needed but, on the other hand, there is no guarantee that this could not become a White House issue on strictly jurisdictional grounds. As far as I am concerned it is a tempest in a tea cup that would have been avoided entirely if the Space Council would have brought the Agency into the ad hoc committee from the beginning.\n\nPlease return the papers when you have seen them.\n\nCharles E. Johnson\n\nAttachment:\n\n1. Dec. 7, 1962 Memo to NASC fr CIA\n2. Draft 11/6/62 Guidelines for Interagency Handling of Space Vehicle Fragments.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Johnson\n\nCheck -\nagree with your remarks. Thanks for letting me see.\nJap\n\nsee attached note."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\nOFFICE OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE\n\n7 DEC 1962\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE COUNCIL\n\nSUBJECT: Interagency Handling of Space Vehicle Fragments\n\nI should like to acknowledge with appreciation your 28 November memorandum requesting consideration by the Central Intelligence Agency of the draft documents containing \"guidelines\" and a \"Public Statement\" on the subject.\n\nReview of these documents has clearly indicated that the interagency handling of space vehicle fragments is of interest and concern to the United States intelligence community.\n\nAccordingly, this matter has been placed before the United States Intelligence Board (USIB) to develop promptly its coordinated views on the subject documents. USIB action is scheduled for its 12 December meeting, following which the Board's views will be transmitted to you.\n\nMARSHALL S. CARTER\nLieutenant General, USA\nDeputy Director of Central Intelligence\n\ncc: Executive Secretary, NSC\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS and SPACE COUNCIL\nWASHINGTON\n\nEXECUTIVE SECRETARY\n\nNovember 6, 1962\n\nMr. Johnson:\n\nHerewith are the draft papers as revised and agreed to at today's meeting. Copies have been sent to interested agency heads for formal concurrence.\n\nE. C. Welsh\n\n2 Enclosures - Fragments\n1. (Unclassified)\n2. (Confidential - 2 pages)"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"24a\n\nDRAFT\n11/6/62\n\nPUBLIC STATEMENT\n\nON HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\nThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration is designated\nas the Government agency responsible for receiving, analyzing, and\nidentifying any fragments or suspected fragments of space vehicles\nof all types, including the contents thereof, which fall upon the terri-\ntory of the United States or which otherwise come into its possession.\n\nFragments identified as coming from vehicles launched by foreign\ncountries will be retained by NASA pending final arrangements for\ntheir return to the launching country or for other appropriate dis-\nposition.\n\nIn performing these functions, NASA will coordinate fully with other\nGovernment agencies."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"24b\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDRAFT\n11/6/62\n\nGUIDELINES\nFOR INTERAGENCY HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\n1. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is\ndesignated as the agency responsible for receiving, analyzing, and identify-\ning any fragments, or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types,\nincluding the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the United\nStates or which otherwise come into its possession.\n\n2. NASA will turn over to the Department of Defense (DOD) as expedi-\ntiously as possible fragments which are readily identifiable as coming from\nspace vehicles launched by the DOD.\n\n3. To insure prompt analysis for intelligence purposes, NASA will\ngive the DOD and other responsible agencies access, as expeditiously as\npossible, to fragments which are readily identifiable as coming from space\nvehicles launched from foreign countries. Such analysis will be completed\nexpeditiously and thereafter such fragments will remain in the custody of\nNASA, pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country\nor for other appropriate disposition.\n\n4. All other fragments will be retained by NASA pending agreement\nas to disposition.\n\n5. NASA may continue to use the Smithsonian Institution for collection\nand analysis of fragments by contractual arrangements, and may also make\nappropriate arrangements for assistance with private agencies.\n\n6. The DOD will notify NASA when deorbits are expected and when\ncollection teams have been alerted to obtain the deorbiting fragments. Also,\nDOD will inform NASA of the results of such collection efforts whether suc-\ncessful or not.\n\n7. The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) will participate in the analysis\nof fragments of space vehicles which have utilized or transported, or are\nsuspected of having utilized or transported, radioactive materials or special\nnuclear materials, and will exercise responsibility for special nuclear\nmaterials, in accordance with its statutory responsibility. In addition, the\nAEC will continue to make available to NASA and the DOD its special scientific\ncapabilities.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nE.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4\nBy chm/g NARA, Date 1-8-09"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"24b\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n- 2 -\n\n8. The State Department will provide policy guidance with respect\nto the disposition of fragments from vehicles launched by foreign countries,\nor made available to the United States by foreign countries.\n\n9. NASA will serve as the focal point for the coordination and release\nof public information on fragments.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"24c\n\nCLASSIFIED DOCUMENT RECEIPT\n\nTO (Name and address)\nMr. Charles E. Johnson\nNational Security Council\nRoom #368, EOB, Washington, D. C.\n\nDATE OF TRANSFER\n11/6/62\n\nGSA REGISTER NO.\n(TOP SECRET only)\n\nFROM (Name and address)\nE. C. Welsh\nNational Aeronautics and Space Council\nWashington, D. C.\nGeneral Services Administration\n\nCLASSIFICATION\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nTITLE OR IDENTIFICATION (UNCLASSIFIED Description such as File No., Subject, etc.)\n\nNUMBER OF ENCLOSURES\nTwo\n\nNUMBER OF COPIES\nTwo\n\nFragments\n\nTHE ABOVE-IDENTIFIED MATTER WAS PERSONALLY RECEIVED BY ME:\n\nSIGNATURE (Ink or indelible pencil; if TOP SECRET must be signed by addressee only)\n\n(Date)\n\n(Time)\n\nTHIS COPY TO BE RETAINED BY ADDRESSEE\n\nGSA FORM 1237\nMARCH 1960"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"25\n\nDecember 10, 1962\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: Mr. Thomas Parrott\n\nTom--\n\nYou should know about the attached documents and the\nsmall hassel between DOD and CIA concerning the procedural\nguidelines paper. As I understand it, the departmental repre-\nsentatives that worked with Ed Welsh had secured departmental\nclearances on the procedure but later on the Agency clearance\nsomehow got unstuck.\n\nAt this point there is no White House intervention that is\neither desirable or needed but, on the other hand, there is no\nguarantee that this could not become a White House issue on\nstrictly jurisdictional grounds. As far as I am concerned it is a\ntempest in a tea cup that would have been avoided entirely\nif the Space Council would have brought the Agency into the ad hoc\ncommittee from the beginning.\n\nPlease return the papers when you have seen them.\n\nCharles E. Johnson\n\nAttachment:\n\n1. Dec. 7, 1962 Memo to NASC fr CIA\n2. Draft 11/6/62 Guidelines for Inter-\nagency Handling of Space Vehicle\nFragments.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority NLJ.030R.018.001/8\nBy JC NARA. Date 8-21-14"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DRAFT\n11/6/62\n\nPUBLIC STATEMENT\nON HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\nThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration is designated\nas the Government agency responsible for receiving, analyzing, and\nidentifying any fragments or suspected fragments of space vehicles\nof all types, including the contents thereof, which fall upon the terri-\ntory of the United States or which otherwise come into its possession.\n\nFragments identified as coming from vehicles launched by foreign\ncountries will be retained by NASA pending final arrangements for\ntheir return to the launching country or for other appropriate dis-\nposition.\n\nIn performing these functions, NASA will coordinate fully with other\nGovernment agencies."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDRAFT\n11/6/62\n\nGUIDELINES\nFOR INTERAGENCY HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\n1. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is\ndesignated as the agency responsible for receiving, analyzing, and identify-\ning any fragments, or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types,\nincluding the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the United\nStates or which otherwise come into its possession.\n\n2. NASA will turn over to the Department of Defense (DOD) as expedi-\ntiously as possible fragments which are readily identifiable as coming from\nspace vehicles launched by the DOD.\n\n3. To insure prompt analysis for intelligence purposes, NASA will\ngive the DOD and other responsible agencies access, as expeditiously as\npossible, to fragments which are readily identifiable as coming from space\nvehicles launched from foreign countries. Such analysis will be completed\nexpeditiously and thereafter such fragments will remain in the custody of\nNASA, pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country\nor for other appropriate disposition.\n\n4. All other fragments will be retained by NASA pending agreement\nas to disposition.\n\n5. NASA may continue to use the Smithsonian Institution for collection\nand analysis of fragments by contractual arrangements, and may also make\nappropriate arrangements for assistance with private agencies.\n\n6. The DOD will notify NASA when deorbits are expected and when\ncollection teams have been alerted to obtain the deorbiting fragments. Also,\nDOD will inform NASA of the results of such collection efforts whether suc-\ncessful or not.\n\n7. The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) will participate in the analysis\nof fragments of space vehicles which have utilized or transported, or are\nsuspected of having utilized or transported, radioactive materials or special\nnuclear materials, and will exercise responsibility for special nuclear\nmaterials, in accordance with its statutory responsibility. In addition, the\nAEC will continue to make available to NASA and the DOD its special scientific\ncapabilities.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nE.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4\nBy chm/y, NARA, Date 1-8-09"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n- 2 -\n\n8. The State Department will provide policy guidance with respect\nto the disposition of fragments from vehicles launched by foreign countries,\nor made available to the United States by foreign countries.\n\n9. NASA will serve as the focal point for the coordination and release\nof public information on fragments.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Nov. 6 Meeting\n\n1. Public Statement\nClearance by White House\nfor release by NASA.\nNASA to publicize the\nprogram.\n\n2. Guidelines"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE COUNCIL\n\nInteragency Meeting on Space Vehicle Fragments\nTuesday, November 6, 1962 - 10:30 a. m.\nRoom 213 E. O. B.\n\nCHAIRMAN: Dr. E. C. Welsh\nAEC: Dr. Arnold Fritsch\nDEFENSE: Dr. F. O. Schuette\nJUSTICE: Mr. Robert Saloschin\nNASA: Mr. Marvin Robinson\nNSC: Mr. Charles Johnson\nOST: Mr. Eugene Skolnikoff\nNASC: Dr. Charles S. Sheldon II\nMr. Richard Hirsch\nMr. R. W. Hale\nSTATE: Mr. Robert Packard\nMr. Leonard Meeker"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-CONFIDENTIAL-\t\tDRAFT\n\t\t\t\t\t\tNovember 1, 1962\n\nGUIDELINES\n\nFOR INTERAGENCY HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\n1. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is designated as the agency responsible for receiving, analyzing, and identifying any fragments, or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types, including the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the United States or which otherwise come into its possession.\n\n2. NASA will turn over to the Department of Defense (DOD) as expeditiously as possible fragments which are readily identifiable as coming from space vehicles launched by the DOD.\n\n3. To insure prompt analysis for intelligence purposes, NASA will give the and other responsible agencies DOD access, as expeditiously as possible, to fragments which are readily identifiable as coming from space vehicles launched from foreign countries. As soon as is completed release will remain in the custody Upon completion of such analysis, the DOD will turn such fragments over to NASA, in whose custody they will remain pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country or for other appropriate disposition.\n\n4. All other fragments will be retained by NASA pending agreement as to disposition."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- 2 -\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n5. NASA may continue to use the Smithsonian Institution for collection and analysis of fragments by contractual arrangements, and may also make appropriate arrangements for assistance with private agencies.\n\n6. The DOD will notify NASA when deorbits are expected and when collection teams have been alerted to obtain the deorbiting fragments. Also, DOD will inform NASA of the results of such collection efforts whether successful or not.\n\n7. The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) will participate in the analysis of fragments of space vehicles which have utilized or transported, or are suspected of having utilized or transported, radioactive materials or special nuclear materials, and will exercise responsibility for special nuclear materials, in accordance with its statutory responsibility. In addition, the AEC will continue to make available to NASA and the DOD its special scientific capabilities.\n\n8. Upon completion of technical analysis, the State Department will provide policy guidance to NASA with respect to the disposition of fragments from vehicles launched by foreign countries. [handwritten note illegible]\n\n9. NASA will serve as the focal point for the release of public information on such fragments.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE COUNCIL\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nNovember 2, 1962\n\nMEMORANDUM TO:\n\nMr. Howard Brown (AEC)\nMr. Charles E. Johnson (NSC)\nMr. Robert Packard (State)\nMr. Marvin Robinson (NASA)\nDr. F. O. Schuette (DOD)\nMr. Eugene Skolnikoff (OST)\nMr. Leon Ulman (Justice)\n\nSubject: Fragments of Spacecraft\n\nUnder date of October 22, I distributed two papers on the subject matter and asked that they be returned with suggested improvements. All such suggestions have been received and have been incorporated in the attached redrafts.\n\nWith the exception of the addition of the phrase \"or for other appropriate disposition\" in the next to the last paragraph of the draft public statement, no changes were suggested in that paper. The addition of that phrase is clearly indicated to make the public statement consistent with the internal paper.\n\nThere were, however, several suggested changes for the internal paper. These were primarily language additions. Inasmuch as these changes are of some significance, it is considered desirable that we have one final meeting to go over the enclosed drafts.\n\nSuch meeting is called for 10 o'clock Tuesday, November 6, in Room 213 Executive Office Building.\n\nE. C. Welsh\nExecutive Secretary\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nDECLASSIFIED E.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4 By chm/lg NARA, Date 1-8-09"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DRAFT\nNovember 1, 1962\n\nPUBLIC STATEMENT\n\nON HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\nThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration is designated as the Government agency responsible for receiving, analyzing, and identifying any fragments or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types, including the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the United States or which otherwise come into its possession.\n\nFragments identified as coming from vehicles launched by foreign countries will be retained by NASA pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country or for other appropriate disposition.\n\nIn performing these functions, NASA will coordinate fully with other Government agencies."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-CONFIDENTIAL-\t\tDRAFT\n\t\t\t\t\t\tNovember 1, 1962\n\nGUIDELINES\n\nFOR INTERAGENCY HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\n1. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is designated as the agency responsible for receiving, analyzing, and identifying any fragments, or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types, including the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the United States or which otherwise come into its possession.\n\n2. NASA will turn over to the Department of Defense (DOD) as expeditiously as possible fragments which are readily identifiable as coming from space vehicles launched by the DOD.\n\n3. To insure prompt analysis for intelligence purposes, NASA will give the DOD access, as expeditiously as possible, to fragments which are readily identifiable as coming from space vehicles launched from foreign countries. Upon completion of such analysis, the DOD will turn such fragments over to NASA, in whose custody they will remain pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country or for other appropriate disposition.\n\n4. All other fragments will be retained by NASA pending agreement as to disposition.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nDECLASSIFIED E.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4 By chm/lg NARA, Date 1-8-09"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-2-\nCONFIDENTIAL\n5. NASA may continue to use the Smithsonian Institution for collection\nand analysis of fragments by contractual arrangements, and may also\nmake appropriate arrangements for assistance with private agencies.\n\n6. The DOD will notify NASA when deorbits are expected and when collection\nteams have been alerted to obtain the deorbiting fragments. Also, DOD will\ninform NASA of the results of such collection efforts whether successful\nor not.\n\n7. The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) will participate in the analysis\nof fragments of space vehicles which have utilized or transported, or are\nsuspected of having utilized or transported, radioactive materials or\nspecial nuclear materials, and will exercise responsibility for special\nnuclear materials, in accordance with its statutory responsibility. In\naddition, the AEC will continue to make available to NASA and the DOD its\nspecial scientific capabilities.\n\n8. Upon completion of technical analysis, the State Department will provide\npolicy guidance to NASA with respect to the disposition of fragments from\nvehicles launched by foreign countries.\n\n9. NASA will serve as the focal point for the release of public information\non such fragments.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"34\nEXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS and SPACE COUNCIL\nWASHINGTON\nEXECUTIVE SECRETARY\nOctober 24, 1962\nMEMORANDUM TO\nMr. Charles E. Johnson\nNational Security Council\nWashington, D. C.\nThank you for your memorandum of October 23, as well\nas for the re-structuring of the guidelines paper - both\non the subject of handling of space vehicle fragments.\nAs soon as I receive comments from the other agencies,\nI will get in touch with you.\nE. C. Welsh"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"35\nCONFIDENTIAL\nOctober 23, 1962\nMEMORANDUM TO MR. E. C. WELSH,\nEXECUTIVE SECRETARY,\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE COUNCIL\nEd -\nIn reference to the two papers you sent me, I would suggest\nthat you might wish to insert the phrase \"or otherwise appropriate\ndisposition\" at the end of the second paragraph of the public state-\nment. A similar phrase is at the end of numbered paragraph 3 of\nthe \"Guidelines\" paper, and I frankly can't see why the State\nDepartment should choke on having it in the public statement. It\nstands to reason that if we believe the satellite were hostile that\nwe would not return it to its point of origin.\nWhen the \"Guidelines\" paper is distributed in the government,\nI think it would be most appropriate in the form of a Presidentially-\napproved NSAM. To facilitate this matter, I have put your paper in\nthat form and attach a copy herewith.\nCharles E. Johnson\nAttachment\nDraft NSAM on \"Guidelines for\nInteragency Handling of Space\nVehicle Fragments\".\nCc - Mr. Carl Kaysen (also copy of the 2 Draft papers\nfrom Welsh to C. Kaysen - copy)\nNSC Files\nCONFIDENTIAL\nDECLASSIFIED\nE.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4\nBy NARA, Date 1-8-09"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"35a\nDRAFT\n10/23/62\nCONFIDENTIAL\nNATIONAL SECURITY ACTION MEMORANDUM NO.\nTO: The Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space\nAdministration\nThe Secretary of State\nThe Secretary of Defense\nThe Director, Central Intelligence Agency\nThe Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission\nThe Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution\nThe Director, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency\nThe Executive Secretary, National Aeronautics and\nSpace Council\nSUBJECT: Guidelines for Interagency Handling of Space Vehicle\nFragments\nThe President has approved the following procedures:\n1. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is designated\nas the agency responsible for receiving, analyzing, and identifying\nany fragments, or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types,\nincluding the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the\nUnited States or which otherwise come into its possession.\n2. NASA will turn over to the Department of Defense as expeditiously\nas possible fragments which are readily identifiable as coming from\nspace vehicles launched by the Department of Defense.\n3. Fragments identified as coming from vehicles launched by foreign\ncountries will be retained by NASA pending final arrangements for\ntheir return to the launching country, or other disposition.\n4. All other fragments will be retained by NASA pending agreement as\nto disposition.\nDECLASSIFIED\nE.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4\nBy NARA, Date 1-8-09\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-2-\nCONFIDENTIAL\n5. The Department of Defense will notify NASA when deorbits\nare expected and when collection teams have been alerted to obtain\nthe deorbiting fragments. DOD will also inform NASA of the results\nof such collection efforts whether successful or not. Any such objects\nobtained are to be returned initially to NASA. Subsequent handling\nwill be in accordance with existing intelligence collection procedures.\n\n6. In accordance with its statutory responsibility, the Atomic Energy\nCommission will participate in the analysis of fragments of space\nvehicles which have utilized or transported, or are suspected of having\nutilized or transported, radioactive materials, as well as taking res-\nponsibility for the radioactive materials themselves.\n\n7. NASA may continue to use the Smithsonian Institution for collection\nand analysis of fragments by contractual arrangement, and may also\nmake appropriate arrangements for assistance with private agencies.\n\n8. Upon completion of technical analysis, the State Department will\nprovide policy guidance to NASA with respect to the return of vehicle\nfragments to the country where such fragments were recovered or to\nthe country responsible for launching the original vehicle.\n\n9. NASA will serve as the focal point for the release of public informa-\ntion on such fragments.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NATIONAL AERONAUTICS and SPACE COUNCIL\n36\n\nOctober 22, 1962\n\nTo: Mr. Charles Johnson\nNational Security Council\n\nAttached is a set of papers which have been distributed to the individuals indicated. I thought it might be helpful for you to have an advance look at this language while it is being re-examined by the respective interested agencies. Let me know if you have any ideas regarding it.\n\nE. C. Welsh\nAttachment: ECW memo-10/22/62"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n36a\n\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE COUNCIL\nOctober 22, 1962\n\nMEMORANDUM TO:\n\nMr. Howard Brown (AEC)\nDr. F. O. Schuette (DOD)\nMr. Leon Ulman (Justice)\nMr. Marvin Robinson (NASA)\nMr. Robert Packard (State)\n\nSubject: Fragments of Spacecraft\n\nIn our interagency meeting of October 17, it was agreed that the Council staff would incorporate the suggestions, developed at the meeting, into two papers. Those draft papers are attached. One is intended for consideration as a public release, and the other as a paper of intra-governmental understanding.\n\nIt would be appreciated if the two papers would be examined carefully and would be returned to me by October 29 with suggested improvements noted thereon. If there are suggestions of major significance, another meeting will be called to discuss them. If the suggestions are relatively minor, they will then be appropriately incorporated and the papers will then be returned for concurrence. These actions will also be coordinated with the staff of the National Security Council.\n\nE. C. Welsh\n\nAttachments\nCONFIDENTIAL\nDECLASSIFIED E.O. 13292, Sec. 3.4 By chm/g NARA, Date 1-8-09\n\nThis memorandum is unclassified if separated from attachments."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n36b\n\nDRAFT\n\nATTACHMENT A\n\nPROPOSED PUBLIC STATEMENT ON HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\nOctober 18, 1962\n\nThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration is designated as the Government agency responsible for receiving, analyzing, and identifying any fragments or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types, including the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the United States or which otherwise come into its possession.\n\nFragments identified as coming from vehicles launched by foreign countries will be retained by NASA pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country.\n\nIn performing these functions, NASA will coordinate fully with other Government agencies.\n\nOFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n36c\n\nDRAFT\nNSAM\nFor: NSAM\nState\nDef\nCIA\nSec. Smithsonian Institution\nChairman AEC\n\nATTACHMENT B\n\nGUIDELINES FOR INTERAGENCY HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\nThe President has approved the following procedures:\n\n1. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is designated as the agency responsible for receiving, analyzing, and identifying any fragments, or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types, including the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the United States or which otherwise come into its possession.\n\n2. NASA will turn over to the Department of Defense as expeditiously as possible fragments which are readily identifiable as coming from space vehicles launched by the Department of Defense.\n\n3. Fragments identified as coming from vehicles launched by foreign countries will be retained by NASA pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country, or other disposition.\n\n4. All other fragments will be retained by NASA pending agreement as to disposition.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nDECLASSIFIED Authority NLJ.030R.018.00/10 By NARA. Date 8-21-14"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nATTACHMENT B (Cont'd)\n- 2 -\n\n5. The Department of Defense will notify NASA when deorbits are expected and when collection teams have been alerted to obtain the deorbiting fragments. DOD will also inform NASA of the results of such collection efforts whether successful or not. Any such objects obtained are to be returned initially to NASA. Subsequent handling will be in accordance with existing intelligence collection procedures.\n\n6. In accordance with its statutory responsibility, the Atomic Energy Commission will participate in the analysis of fragments of space vehicles which have utilized or transported, or are suspected of having utilized or transported, radioactive materials, as well as taking responsibility for the radioactive materials themselves.\n\n7. NASA may continue to use the Smithsonian Institution for collection and analysis of fragments by contractual arrangement, and may also make appropriate arrangements for assistance with private agencies.\n\n8. Upon completion of technical analysis, the State Department will provide policy guidance to NASA with respect to the return of vehicle fragments to the country where such fragments were recovered or to the country responsible for launching the original vehicle.\n\n9. NASA will serve as the focal point for the release of public information on such fragments.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLASSIFIED DOCUMENT RECEIPT\n36d\nTO (Name and address)\nMr. Charles Johnson\nNational Security Council\nRoom #368, E. O. B., Washington 25, D. C.\nDATE OF TRANSFER\n10/22/62\nGSA REGISTER NO.\n(TOP SECRET only)\nFROM (Name and address)\nE. C. Welsh\nNational Aeronautics and Space Council\nWashington 25, D. C.\nGeneral Services Administration\nCLASSIFICATION\nConfidential\nTITLE OR IDENTIFICATION (UNCLASSIFIED Description such as File No., Subject, etc.)\nNUMBER OF ENCLOSURES\nNUMBER OF COPIES\nFragments\n(2)\n(1)\nTHE ABOVE-IDENTIFIED MATTER WAS PERSONALLY RECEIVED BY ME:\nSIGNATURE (Ink or indelible pencil; if TOP SECRET must be signed by addressee only)\n(Date)\n(Time)\nOctober 23, 1962 9:40 am\nTHIS COPY TO BE RETAINED BY ADDRESSEE\nGSA FORM 1237 MARCH 1960"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"37\nOctober 17, 1962\nTELECON\nSUBJECT: Recovery of satellite fragments\nCalled R. W. Hale, Space Council, and informed him that I would be unable to attend the meeting this afternoon in view of a conflict in commitments. Suggested that my presence was not needed in view of my concurrence and support of the designation of NASA to have responsibility for the program. Suggested the development of an NSAM based on the draft statement attached in order to get the program under way, even though Justice and State might still have some legal and substantive questions. Hale was pleased to hear my views, and said they agreed with those that Welsh and he hold. He will inform Welsh of our conversation, and will fill me in after the meeting.\nCharles E. Johnson\nAttachment\nDraft statement for consideration at meeting on 10/17/62, 2:30 p.m., in Rm. 218, E.O.B."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"38\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS and SPACE COUNCIL\n10/12/62\nMr. Johnson:\nIn accordance with telephone conversation with your secretary this morning.\nR. W. Hale"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"38a\nDraft Statement for Consideration at Meeting on October 17, 1962\n2:30 p. m. -- Room 218 E. O. B.\nThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration has been designated as the Government agency responsible for obtaining, analyzing, and identifying any fragments or suspected fragments from space vehicles of all types which fall upon the territory of the United States or which are turned over to the United States by foreign countries. The only exception to this responsibility is that fragments which are readily identifiable as coming from space vehicles launched by the Department of Defense will be turned over to the DOD as expeditiously as possible. NASA will be responsible for the disposition of all fragments which do not come from DOD vehicles. Fragments identified as coming from vehicles launched by foreign countries will be retained by NASA pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country.\nIn performing these functions, NASA will coordinate fully with other interested government and private agencies."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"39\n10/12/62 3:45 p.m.\nMr. Johnson:\n(1) This is part of the correspondence which will form the background for next Wednesday's 2:30 meeting.\n(2) Another draft paper, I was told, is being sent to you for consideration at the meeting.\nMabel"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NATIONAL AERONAUTICS and SPACE COUNCIL\n\n39a\n\nMabel:\n\nA memo. similar to the\nattached was sent to Mr. Bundy.\n\nM. Quill"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"396\n\nOctober 2, 1962\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR\n\nHonorable James E. Webb\nAdministrator\nNational Aeronautics and Space Administration\n\nSubject: Responsibility and Procedure Re Space Vehicle Fragments.\n\nIt has been suggested that there is need for a decision as to what government agencies should have what responsibilities in regard to obtaining, analyzing, and identifying fragments or suspected fragments from space vehicles which fall on U.S. territory or which otherwise come into U.S. possession.\n\nIt has likewise been suggested that the National Aeronautics and Space Council is the appropriate agency to work out a coordinated position on this matter. There are legal as well as operational problems involved, and hence it would be helpful if this combination of issues were kept in mind in identifying a person or persons from your agency to participate in a meeting on this matter.\n\nTo the extent that agreements or recommendations have already been made on this problem, information regarding them would contribute to such deliberations.\n\nI would appreciate your having my office (Code 113 - Extension 2203) advised as to who would represent your agency. Such individual or individuals will then be contacted for the purpose of determining an appropriate time for a meeting.\n\nE. C. Welsh\n\nPRESERVATION COPY"} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5756\n40\nOK\n\nEXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS and SPACE COUNCIL\nWASHINGTON\n\nEXECUTIVE SECRETARY\n\nKeyser\nShould C. Johnson go?\nBKS\n\nOctober 2, 1962\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR\n\nHonorable McGeorge Bundy\nSpecial Assistant to the President\nfor National Security Affairs\n\nSubject: Responsibility and Procedure Re Space Vehicle Fragments.\n\nIt has been suggested that there is need for a decision as to what government agencies should have what responsibilities in regard to obtaining, analyzing, and identifying fragments or suspected fragments from space vehicles which fall on U.S. territory or which otherwise come into U.S. possession.\n\nIt has likewise been suggested that the National Aeronautics and Space Council is the appropriate agency to work out a coordinated position on this matter. There are legal as well as operational problems involved, and hence it would be helpful if this combination of issues were kept in mind in identifying a person or persons from your agency to participate in a meeting on this matter.\n\nTo the extent that agreements or recommendations have already been made on this problem, information regarding them would contribute to such deliberations.\n\nI would appreciate your having my office (Code 113 - Extension 2203) advised as to who would represent your agency. Such individual or individuals will then be contacted for the purpose of determining an appropriate time for a meeting.\n\nE. C. Welsh\n\nCalled Miss Snill, 10/3/62."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"extra\nDRAFT\nNovember 1, 1962\n\n41\n\nPUBLIC STATEMENT\n\nON HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\nThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration is designated as the Government agency responsible for receiving, analyzing, and identifying any fragments or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types, including the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the United States or which otherwise come into its possession.\n\nFragments identified as coming from vehicles launched by foreign countries will be retained by NASA pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country or for other appropriate disposition.\n\nIn performing these functions, NASA will coordinate fully with other Government agencies."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DRAFT\nNovember 1, 1962\n\n41a\n\nPUBLIC STATEMENT\n\nON HANDLING OF SPACE VEHICLE FRAGMENTS\n\nThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration is designated as the Government agency responsible for receiving, analyzing, and identifying any fragments or suspected fragments of space vehicles of all types, including the contents thereof, which fall upon the territory of the United States or which otherwise come into its possession.\n\nFragments identified as coming from vehicles launched by foreign countries will be retained by NASA pending final arrangements for their return to the launching country or for other appropriate disposition.\n\nIn performing these functions, NASA will coordinate fully with other Government agencies."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"eptres\n42\n\nDraft Statement for Consideration at Meeting on October 17, 1962\n2:30 p. m. -- Room 218 E. O. B.\n\nThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration has\nbeen designated as the Government agency responsible for obtaining,\nanalyzing, and identifying any fragments or suspected fragments from\nspace vehicles of all types which fall upon the territory of the United\nStates or which are turned over to the United States by foreign coun-\ntries. The only exception to this responsibility is that fragments\nwhich are readily identifiable as coming from space vehicles launched\nby the Department of Defense will be turned over to the DOD as\nexpeditiously as possible. NASA will be responsible for the disposition\nof all fragments which do not come from DOD vehicles. Fragments\nidentified as coming from vehicles launched by foreign countries will\nbe retained by NASA pending final arrangements for their return to the\nlaunching country.\n\nIn performing these functions, NASA will coordinate fully\nwith other interested government and private agencies."} {"doc_id":"4d778b3805409fb8","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"43\n\nDraft Statement for Consideration at Meeting on October 17, 1962\n2:30 p. m. -- Room 218 E. O. B.\n\nThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration has\nbeen designated as the Government agency responsible for obtaining,\nanalyzing, and identifying any fragments or suspected fragments from\nspace vehicles of all types which fall upon the territory of the United\nStates or which are turned over to the United States by foreign coun-\ntries. The only exception to this responsibility is that fragments\nwhich are readily identifiable as coming from space vehicles launched\nby the Department of Defense will be turned over to the DOD as\nexpeditiously as possible. NASA will be responsible for the disposition\nof all fragments which do not come from DOD vehicles. Fragments\nidentified as coming from vehicles launched by foreign countries will\nbe retained by NASA pending final arrangements for their return to the\nlaunching country.\n\nIn performing these functions, NASA will coordinate fully\nwith other interested government and private agencies."} {"doc_id":"4e53123e960998b7","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Misrep 5039166\nNarrative\n[REDACTED] AT 0608Z 1.4a TOOK OFF FROM OKAS. AT 0618Z, 1.4a HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE. FROM 0939Z TO 0153Z, 1.4a FROM 1015Z TO 0112Z, 1.4a SUPPORTED NAVCENT FOR OPERATION (b)(1)1.4a IVO ARABIAN GULF, STRAIT OF HORMUZ AND GULF OF OMAN. SEE ISR LINE 1. AT 1012Z 1.4a RECEIVED A GUARDCALL. SEE GUARDCALL LINE 1. AT 2143Z, 1.4a OBSERVED A UAP. SEE OBS LINE 1. AT 2148Z 1.4a BSERVED A UAP. SEE OBS LINE 2. AT 0112Z 1.4a WAS CLEARED TO RTB. AT 021[REDACTED] HANDED BACK TO THE LRE. AT 0250Z, 1.4a LANDED AT OKAS. FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS1. 20.42 MISSION HOURS, 18.55 IMINT HOURS, 1 IMINT TASKING PROSECUTED, 16.2 1.4a HOURS, 1 1.4a TASKING PROSECUTED, 2 TOTAL TASKINGS PROSECUTED\nAdmin\nCLASSIFICATION\n• Classification: [REDACTED]\n• Associated Caveats: [REDACTED]\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20450301\nOPERATION\n• Operation: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): ACC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\nMSGID\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 482ATKS\n• Submit Date (Auto-generated):\nMSNID"} {"doc_id":"4e53123e960998b7","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Tasking Order (ATO): EX\n• Mission Type: AREC\n• ATO Mission Number: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\nPoc\nPOC\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 482 ATKS\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\nQC\n• Rank: Ctr\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 12 AF PAROC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\nAPPROVER\n• Rank: TSgt\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: 379 AEW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6) FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\nINGEST"} {"doc_id":"4e53123e960998b7","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\nACEQUIP\nACEQUIP\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination: -\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: -\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• MWS Name or Designator: -\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• IRCM Name or Designator: -\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• ECM Name or Designator: -\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• CMD Name or Designator: -\n• Chaff Designator: -\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: -\n• Flare Designator: -\n• Num Flares: -\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator: -\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Num Towed Decoys: -\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Gun Name or Designator: -\n• Num Gun Rounds: -\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4(a)\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: ANDAS4\n• Additional Avionics: AH_GMESH_VORTEX\n• Data Link: -"} {"doc_id":"4e53123e960998b7","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Gentext: -\nTimeline\nLanding\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Last Land Time: 030250:00ZNOV20\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 030300:00ZNOV20\n• Total Mission Time: 20 hours 42 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\nTakeoff\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 020608:00ZNOV20\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Mission Canceled:\nOn Station\n• Time On Station DTG: 020618:00ZNOV20\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: AREC\n• JTAC Callsign: -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\nISR\n• Time-on Station DTG: 021015:00ZNOV20\n• Time-off Station DTG: 030115:00ZNOV20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Msn Type: AREC\n• Primary Sensor: ANDAS4"} {"doc_id":"4e53123e960998b7","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Sensors Available: AH\\GMESH\n• Tasking Type: PLANNED\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 39RUP2[REDACTED](b)(1)1.4a\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\nGENTEXT/ISR\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] 1.4a COORDINATED WITH NAVCENT 24 HOURS PRIOR TO TAKE OFF. PRECOORD WAS SATISFACTORY. AT 1015Z, 1.4a ARRIVED ON STATION ISO NAVCENT FOR OPERATION (b)(1)1.4a TO CHARACTERIZE IRINMRGCN VESSELS, UAS ACTIVITY, ACTIVITY OUTSIDE OF PORTS, AND TO ESTABLISH PATTERN OF LIFE. AT 1012Z, 1.4a RECEIVED A GUARDCALL. SEE GUARDCALL LINE 1. FROM 1015Z TO 1910Z, 1.4a CONDUCTED SCANS IAW THE TARGET DECK IN THE ARABIAN GULF (AG). AT 2143Z, OBSERVED A UAP. SEE OBS LINE 1. AT 2148Z, 1.4a OBSERVED A SECOND UAP. SEE OBS LINE 2. FROM 1910Z TO 2210Z, 1.4a CONDUCTED OPEN WATER SCANS ISO UUV, NO IDENTIFICATION OF UUV WAS FOUND. FROM 2210Z TO 0113Z, 1.4a CONDUCTED SCANS IAW THE TARGET DECK IN THE ARABIAN GULF (AG). AT 0112Z, 1.4a WAS CLEARED OFF TASKING AND RETURNED TO BASE (RTB)\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n• Supported Unit: NAVCENT\n• Supported Operation: OPERATION (b)(1)1.4a\n• Precoord Time: 24 HOURS\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\nWEATHER\n• Weather: (U) HAZE PRECLUDED IMINT COLLECTION\nEFFECTIVENESS\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: No\n• Gentext: -\nOff Station\n• Time Off Station DTG: 030113:00ZNOV20\n• Total Time On Station: 18 hours 55 minutes"} {"doc_id":"4e53123e960998b7","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GUARDCALL\n• GUARDCALL DTG: 021012:00ZNOV20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Ground Station Callsign 1.4g, 1.4a\n• Aircraft Location: 39RUN(67 (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: M 068\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL 210\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Number of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\n• Guardcall Tone: PROFESSSIONAL\n\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 1012Z, 1.4a WAS HAILED ON GUARD (b)(1)1.4a FREQ BY IRANIAN AIR DEFENSE. ORDERS GIVEN: STANDARD CALL 1.4a RESPONDED WITH STANDARD RESPONSE 1. NO IMPACT TO THE MISSION\n\nOBSERVATION\n• Observation DTG: 022143:00ZNOV20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Aircraft Location: 39RWK72 (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: 110 T\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL220\n• Aircraft Airspeed: 105 KIAS\n• Relative Bearing or Clock Position: -\n• Range: -\n• Killbox & Keypad: -\n• Observed Activity Location: 39RWK58 (b)(1)1.4a\n• Observed Activity Description: UAP\n• Method of Observation: FMV\n\nGENTEXT/OBSERVATION\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 2143Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENON IVO 39RWK58 (b)(1)1.4a ALTITUDE UNKNOWN WITH A BEARING OF 080 T.\n\nWEATHER\n• Weather:\n\nOBSERVATION"} {"doc_id":"4e53123e960998b7","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Observation DTG: 022148:00ZNOV20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Aircraft Location: 39RWK60 (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: 110 T\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL220\n• Aircraft Airspeed: 107 KIAS\n• Relative Bearing or Clock Position: -\n• Range: -\n• Killbox & Keypad: -\n• Observed Activity Location: 39RWK60 (b)(1)1.4a\n• Observed Activity Description: UAP\n• Method of Observation: FMV\n\nGENTEXT/OBSERVATION\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 2148Z, 1.4a OBSERVED AN ADDITIONAL UAP TRAVELING NW IVO 39RWK60 (b)(1)1.4a\n\nWEATHER\n• Weather:"} {"doc_id":"4e9d9b20cd537830","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n(CLASSIFICATION)\nAF605523\n1/3\n(3)\nCOUNTRY\nREPORT NO.\n(LEGIT BLANK)\nALASKA\nIR 5004-40-53\nAF605523\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nSUBJECT\nSighting of Light on Big Diomede, Island, USSR\nAREA REPORTED ON\nFROM (Agency)\n5004th Air Intel Sv Sq\nBig Diomede, USSR\nAPO 942, c/o PM, Seattle, Wash.\nDATE OF REPORT\nDATE OF INFORMATION\nEVALUATION\n24 November 1953\n8 October 1953\nC-3\nPREPARED BY (Officer)\nSOURCE\nFRANCIS M. BROWN, Major, USAF\nRaleigh Iyapanna\nREFERENCES (Control number, directive, previous report, etc., as applicable)\nSUMMARY: (Enter concise summary of report. Give significance in final one-sentence paragraph. List inclosures at lower left. Begin text of report on AF Form 112-Part II.)\nAt approximately 081015Z, Raleigh Iyapanna, an Eskimo on Little Diomede (168°55'W- 65°44'N), observed a light on the southern tip of Big Diomede Island, USSR (169°03'W - 65°47'N). The light appeared as though it came from a large flashlight or spotlight and lasted for a period of several seconds. The information was reported by Iyapanna to ROY N. FOWLER member of the 5004th AISS stationed on Little Diomede Island.\n\nThe sighting is unusual because persons have not been seen previously in that location and because it is believed to be a difficult place to reach, particularly at night.\nRICHARD E. LOOMIS\nMajor, USAF\nCommander\n53 2653\nLIBRARY SUBJECT & AREA CODES\nIndex\n1\nIncls.\nSketch of Observation\nC\nReg #V-3-26v-3\nDISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR\nComdr, AAC, ATTN: OI\nCINCAL, ATTN: J-2 (2 cys)\nComdr, USARAL, ATTN: G-2\nOSI, AAC\nCOMALSEAFRON, ATTN: D/NI\nComdr, FEAF, ATTN: A-2\nComdr, NEAC, ATTN: D/I\nComdr, ADC, ATTN: D/I\nComdr, 10th Air Div, ATTN:D/I\nComdr, 11th Air Div, ATTN:D/I\nComdr in Chief, USPacFlt\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nCONFIDENTIAL\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n16-55569-2 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"4e9d9b20cd537830","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n4\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nFROM (Agency)\nREPORT NO.\n5004th Air Intel Sv Sq\nAPO 942, c/o PM, Seattle, Wash.\nIR 5004-40-53\nPAGE 2 OF 3 PAGES\nI. DESCRIPTION OF SOURCE:\nNAME: Raleigh Iyapanna\nAGE: 14 Years\nOCCUPATION: Elementary Student and Hunter\nPLACE OF BIRTH: Little Diomede Island\nII. RELIABILITY OF SOURCE:\nThis report was made on 6 October 1953 by, Raleigh Iyapanna, an Eskimo of Little Diomede Island. Every night during the week preceding the report he had maintained a watch on Big Diomede on his own initiative. ROY N. FOWLER states he believes the source to be fairly reliable and that the sighting of the light is possibly true. Source is in good health and has excellent eyesight.\nIII. REPORT OF SIGHTING:\nAt approximately 081025Z, the source observed a light on the southern tip of Big Diomede Island at an estimated height of 95 feet above sea level. He had been standing in the center of Little Diomede Village looking in the general direction of Big Diomede for about fifteen minutes prior to the sighting. Source observed the light when it appeared and watched it until it disappeared. The duration of the observation was estimated as lasting for several seconds. The light was described as being the size of a nickel coin held at arms length and about the same color as a burning match or dim flashlight. It was the sources opinion that the light came from a large flashlight or spotlight. Immediately after the light disappeared, the source ran to his house, about 25 yards away, and checked the time which was 1030Z. After checking the time he went back to his original position and continued to watch the area the light came from, however, the light did not reappear. For location of the light see Incl #1.\nIV. WEATHER:\nThe night was dark but with no overcast, stars were clearly visible. Big Diomede Island was plainly outlined against the sky. Wind was from the north and estimated at about 5 MPH.\nCOMMENTS OF THE PREPARING OFFICER:\nThe location of the light is considered somewhat unusual because people have never been observed on that part of Big Diomede Island and because of the difficulty in reaching the location, particularly at night. If persons on Big Diomede wanted to signal to the Alaskan mainland, it could best be done from the southern tip of the island. From that point, the Alaskan coast from Wales\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nCONFIDENTIAL\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n10-58070-1 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"4e9d9b20cd537830","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n5\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nFROM (Agency)\nREPORT NO.\n5004th Air Intel Sv Sq\nAPO 942, c/o PM, Seattle, Wash.\nIR 5004-40-53\nPAGE 3 OF 3 PAGES\n(168°05'W - 65°37'N) to approximately Tin City (167°58'W - 65°33'N) could be seen when visibility was good. This stated only to mention the possibility however slight it may be. There is no evidence to support a conclusion that this was the purpose of the light.\nFRANCIS M. BROWN\nMajor, USAF\nPreparing Officer\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nCONFIDENTIAL\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n16-55570-1 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"4e9d9b20cd537830","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n(CLASSIFICATION)\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nFROM (Agency)\n5004th Air Intel Sv Sq\nAPO 942, c/o PM, Seattle, Wash.\nREPORT NO.\nIncl #1\nIR 5004-40-53\nPAGE OF PAGES\nPOINT WHERE LIGHT WAS OBSERVED\nAPPROX. 95' ELEV.\nSEEN WITH THE NAKED EYE\nLITTLE DIOMEDE\nLITTLE DIOMEDE VILLAGE\n25' ELEV.\n213° MAG.\n2.5 MILES\nN\nBIG DIOMEDE\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nCONFIDENTIAL\n(CLASSIFICATION)"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNW 91526\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n65\n\nCLASSIFICATION CHANGE\nTo UNCLASSIFIED\nBy authority of EO 11652, 6-1-72\nChanged by [signature] Date NOV 20 1973\n\nPRELIMINARY\n\nGT-4 FLIGHT CREW DEBRIEFING TRANSCRIPT\n\nPART II\n\nPrepared By\n\nSpacecraft Operations Branch\n\nFlight Crew Support Division\n\nJune 18, 1965\n\nThis material contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18. U. S. C. Section 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\n\nGroup 4: Downgrade at 3 year intervals\nDeclassified after 12 years\n\nNOTICE: This document may be exempt from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Requests for its release to persons outside the U. S. Government should be handled under the provisions of NASA Policy Directive 1382.2."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPREFACE\n\nThis preliminary transcript was made from voice tape recordings of the GT-4 flight crew debriefing conducted aboard the recovery ship, the USS Wasp, on June 9, 1965, and concluded at the Manned Spacecraft Center on June 12, 1965.\n\nAlthough all the material contained in this transcript has been edited, the urgent need for the preliminary transcript by mission analysis personnel precluded a thorough editorial review prior to its publication. Errors in this transcript will be corrected as soon as possible and an official transcript will be published at a later date.\n\nThis document contains a transcript of the second part of the total debriefing. A preliminary transcript of the first part was published on June 16, 1965, and it contains the crew's description of the mission from an operational standpoint.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nParagraph Page number\n\n8.0 SYSTEMS OPERATION\n8.1 Platform ........1\n8.2 OAMS ........5\n8.3 RCS ........17\n8.4 Environmental Control System ........22\n8.5 Communications ........68\n8.6 Electrical System ........82\n8.7 Computer ........87\n8.8 Crew Station ........93\n8.9 Bio-Medicat ........134\n\n9.0 OPERATIONAL CHECKS\n9.1 Apollo Landmark Identification (D-6) ........144\n9.2 Apollo Yaw Orientation ........168\n9.3 One Attitude Thruster Failure Check ........171\n9.4 Horizon Scanner Track Check ........172\n9.5 Horizon Scanner Check ........173\n9.6 HF Transmission Reception Check ........181\n9.7 Orbit Navigation Check ........182\n9.8 Relative Humidity Test ........185\n9.9 Zodiacal Light Check ........186\n\n10.0 VISUAL SIGHTINGS\n10.1 Countdown ........188\n10.2 Powered Flight ........188\n10.3 Orbital Flight ........191\n10.4 Reentry ........213\n\n11.0 EXPERIMENTS\n11.1 Two-Color Earth-Limb Photography (MSC-10) ........217\n11.2 Synoptic Terrain and Weather Photography (S-5 and S-6) ........219\n11.3 Simple Navigation with the Sextant ........219\n11.4 Electrostatic Charge (MSC-1) ........229\n11.5 Proton-Electron Spectrometer and Tri-Axis Flux-Gate Magnetometer (MSC-2 and MSC-3) ........229\n11.6 Radiation (D-8) ........230\n11.7 Inflight Exerciser (M-3) ........230\n11.8 Inflight Phonocardiogram (M-4) ........232\n11.9 Extravehicular Activity ........232\n11.10 Miscellaneous ........232\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n12.0 PRE-MISSION PLANNING\n12.1 Mission Plan (Trajectory) ............................234\n12.2 Flight Plan .............................................234\n12.3 Spacecraft Changes ....................................239\n12.4 Mission Rules ..........................................240\n12.5 Experiments ............................................241\n12.6 Training Activities ....................................245\n\n13.0 MISSION CONTROL\n13.1 GO/NO GO's ............................................249\n13.2 PLA and CLA Updates ..................................249\n13.3 Consumables ............................................249\n13.4 Flight Plan Changes ...................................250\n13.5 Systems ...............................................254\n\n14.0 TRAINING\n14.1 Gemini Mission Simulator ..............................255\n14.2 LTV Simulation ........................................260\n14.3 Centrifuge ............................................261\n14.4 Translation and Docking Trainer .......................262\n14.5 Planetarium ...........................................263\n14.6 Systems Briefings .....................................266\n14.7 Flight Experiments ....................................267\n14.8 Spacecraft Systems Test ...............................273\n14.9 Egress Training ........................................274\n14.10 Parachute Training ....................................275\n14.11 Launch Simulation .....................................276\n14.12 Network Simulation ....................................277\n14.13 Zero \"G\" Flight .......................................278\n14.14 Flight Plan Training ..................................279"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n8.0 SYSTEMS OPERATION\n\n8.1 Platform\n\nMcDivitt\tActually, the first portion of any alinement is\nto cage the thing. The case of caging the thing\nis much more important than the alinement itself.\nIn the daytime I felt that I could cage the plat-\nform to a reference with an error plus or minus\nabout 3 or 4 degrees in all axes. Did you think\nwe could do that well?\n\nWhite\tOnly in the daytime.\n\nMcDivitt\tThe yaw was a little problem. It took longer\nto get it, but if you kept after it for awhile,\nI felt that you could get down to just a few\ndegrees.\n\nWhite\tWithin a couple of degrees.\n\nMcDivitt\tThe big thing is that you have to stop your yaw\nrates, and then sit there and look outside for\nawhile and see which way you're going, straight\nahead or sideways. If you are going sideways\nyou rotate around for awhile and stop the rate\nand then look out again. Right? I felt you could\nget the thing caged quite well. We didn't do it\nBEF at all, did we? We never did cage in BEF."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nWhite\tI'm not sure.\n\nMcDivitt\tThe caging of the thing with small-end-forward in\nthe daytime was relatively easy. At night I don't\nthink it would be quite that simple. I think what\nyou would have to do at night time is to point\nthe spacecraft down at the ground pretty much so\nyou can see the track across the ground. I could\nsee which way the land was moving under me. I\nfelt--although I never did this--that if I could\ndo that and then roll around to where I had no\nbank angle, and face in my yaw direction, either\nsmall-end or blunt-end-forward, stop the roll there\nand pitch up to the horizon I could cage there\nwithin plus or minus 10 degrees for sure. It was\nmuch less accurate at night, I felt, than in the\ndaytime.\n\nWhite\tYou aren't kidding! We both felt that on those\ndark nights when you really couldn't see anything\non the ground, pure star reference for yaw was\npretty rough.\n\nMcDivitt\tPure star reference for yaw was almost impossible\nto use. That was the only place where that thing\nwe decided not to take with us--the view of the\nstars through the window--might have been of some"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nuse to us. We knew the stars along our track but\nyou couldn't see enough of them. The quickest\nway to get the yaw reference was to look down at\nthe ground. Once we got the platform caged, aline-\nment was quite simple. All you had to do was just\nhold the needles at zero and the platform alined\nitself. Of course you had to have the scanners\non. The modes--the SEF and the BEF were identically\nthe same except the spacecraft is pointing in\ndifferent directions. You tended to null the\nneedles by using pulses and just hold the needles\nvery close to null and the platform alined itself\nthrough the horizon scanners. Orbit Rate was a\nsatisfactory mode, I thought. As a matter of fact,\nit was very good.\n\nWhite\tI liked that Orbit Rate.\n\nMcDivitt\tYes, because we finally had a reference where we\ndidn't have to look out and see the ground. It's\nlike having the old altitude indicator back in an\nairplane. The only thing was, we had the wrong\norbit rate in the spacecraft because it was set\nfor an orbit rate that was to take care of, I\nthink, a 60 nautical mile circular orbit. This\nwas to take care of the short period of time between"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\ngoing to Orbit Rate at T-5 and firing the retros\nat TR. We wanted to have exactly the right rate\nin there so when we did our closed-loop reentry\nwe wouldn't have an error. As I said, I had the\nmost accurate platform in the world with nothing\nto do with it. I think the displays were adequate\nand the controls were adequate. After the first\ncouple of revs I really didn't have any confidence\nat all in the platform. I had done nothing to\nestablish any confidence in it. I really didn't\nget the chance to get the thing alined, and I\nreally didn't have the view out the window to check\nit with. We were hurrying and scurring through\nthere. We finally shut the thing down before I\nreally got a chance to use it very much. When we\npowered it up there on the third day and we saw\nthat thing coming around there -and cage properly,\nwe compared the out-the-window attitudes and that\nold attitude reference was right there. That's\nwhen I got some confidence in the platform.\n\nWhite\tThis is where we lost a couple of bets.\n\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. We lost a couple of beers on that\nplatform. At retrofire I had a lot of confidence\nin the platform, but the first two and a half to"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n5\nthree days I really didn't have anything with\nwhich to establish any confidence. It was just\nan unknown.\nWhite Jim did the majority of the work in this area and\nI think his comments reflect my opinion also.\n8.2 OAMS\nMcDivitt On the pad we did the thruster check that we\nwanted to. We went around one whole cycle and\ngot nothing. We went around another whole cycle\nand got nothing until we got to the last one.\nWe were going yaw left pitch-down, yaw right\npitch-up, yaw left pitch-down, yaw right pitch-\nup. When we got to that second pitch-up, I heard\nthe thrusters fire for the first time.\nWhite You can hear them. It was very distinct.\nMcDivitt That's right. And then we went around and yawed\nleft and they fired again. We waited 20 seconds\nand fired a yaw left again, and they fired again.\nThese were the bottom manifold jets. We said,\n\"Okay, we're ready to go.\", and that was the end\nof it. So, it was a pretty straightforward check.\nThe inflight checks--I got my operational checks\non the OAMS systems while chasing the booster\naround. I had Direct, Pulse, and Rate Command in\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n6\nthere as I chased it around, and those were the\nonly modes I intended to use right then. Later\non, I checked out the Reentry Rate Command and I\nchecked the Rate Command before we thrusted. It\ndid seem to be operating fine. Why don't you go\nthrough the next part, Ed?\nWhite All right. We're going to get into the source\ntemperature and pressure, the regulated pressure,\nand the propellant quantity. Let's take the\ntemperature first. The temperature of our OAMS\nwas 75 degrees all the way down the line. The\ninitial indications on the pressures were approxi-\nmately 2800 psi for the source and 320 psi for the\nregulated pressure.\nMcDivitt The quantity gage operated all right except that,\nas I mentioned earlier, the thing seemed to wander\nup and down somewhere between 2 and 4 percent,\ndepending upon where you were in the mission.\nYou'd read it one time and it would be 60, and\nyou'd read it a little while later and it would\nbe 62, and you'd read it a little while later and\nit'd be back about 60. The greatest variation in\nthat thing that ever occurred was when I went to\nsleep one time with it reading 60 and woke up and\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n7\nit was reading 56. Another hour or two after that\nit had climbed slowly back up to 60 again. I\nhad a long time to look at it in the same position.\nWhen we ended the chasing-around at the end of the\nfirst hour, we were down to 70 percent indicated\nand we never got below 50 percent in four days.\nWhite I'll tell you, the position it seemed to stay\nfor days and days was 59 to 60 percent. We fired\nin Pulse Mode for a long time with the gage at\nthat position, and all of a sudden that one time\nit dropped down to about 55 percent.\nMcDivitt But then it came back up to 60.\nWhite I guess it did, didn't it? The temperatures all\nstayed fairly constant. If I recall right, they\ndropped down to around 70 degrees. It seemed to\nme they continually decreased throughout the\nflight. I noticed this particularly in the RCS,\nbut I guess we'll get to that later. The propellant\nquantity though, I think we mentioned earlier,\nended up on our gaging at about 3 percent at the\nend. We got a little bit of ground information on\nthe OAMS propellant. I felt a little suspicious\nof the gage when it kept staying there at 59 to 60\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n8\npercent for so long.\nMcDivitt We were pretty miserly with that OAMS fuel. We\nset out to save the fuel and we sure did it.\nWhite I think that in future missions, if they permit\nthe crew to use the Pulse Mode in a saving-manner\nthey could do a lot more with the mission--if you\ncould use Pulse Mode instead of just free-drifting\naround. In other words, line yourself up so you\ncan make some decent observations.\nMcDivitt Shoot! We were in Horizon Scan Mode when we got\nthe last data, and I don't think we used any more\nfuel than we were when we were in free drift.\nWhite That's right. We certainly got more out of the\norbit than we did when we were just drifting free.\nMcDivitt I'll tell you one record that we ought to hold.\nWe've looked at the earth from more different\nangles than anybody else in the world. Well,\nmaybe not. I guess the Russians did, but we sure\ngot a lot of different views of that earth as we\nrotated around.\nWhite I think the ground information that they called up\non the status of our OAMS wasn't as much as they\ncould have called up to us, but I'm really satis-\nfied that our OAMS was staying pretty constant.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n9\nMcDivitt So did I. The way I felt was that I knew that we\nhad to be as miserly with the fuel as we possibly\ncould, so we got as much out of as little fuel as\npossible. There wasn't going to be anything to\nchange that velocity. We just went along and I\nreally didn't care how they were plotting that fuel\non the ground. I knew that we were starting to\nget ahead of the schedule, because I was plotting\nit roughly onboard the spacecraft. I could see we\nwere up above the line that we needed to remain\nabove to handle our OAMS retrofire.\nWhite Actually, we followed the profile rather closely.\nWe leveled off there at first, and then when we\nstarted using it, we went right down the profile.\nMcDivitt We were a little below the line and we just held\nthe same fuel level until we walked out across it\nand got up on top of it. Then, we went on down\nabove it.\nWhite I think the controls and the switches were all\nsatisfactory.\nMcDivitt I think so too. The attitude controller worked\nfine and dandy. We didn't have any trouble with\nit. The stick forces weren't too high. We didn't\nget a chance to use it in any other mode besides\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pulse. It seemed to work all right in Pulse. I\ndon't really have any comments to make on the atti-\ntude controller.\nWhite\tAs a matter of fact, I didn't use any Rate Command.\nMcDivitt\tDidn't you really?\nWhite\tWe didn't use the Rate Command. I got to use\nDirect a couple of times. I used Pulse a lot.\nEverytime you'd go to sleep, I'd really have a ball!\nMcDivitt\tI could tell that by the wiggling.\nWhite\tNo. That was really great--flying that spacecraft.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right, and I think Pulse is the mode. You\ncan do a lot with it. With a little bit of planning\nyou could get to the attitude--if you start out 5\nor 6 minutes ahead of time. That's what we were\ndoing. At 10 minutes before I was supposed to be\nat a certain attitude I'd start, and one or two\nlittle pulses and you'd--boop, boop, boop, boop--\nthe bad thing was if you were in an attitude where\nyou couldn't see the horizon and didn't know where\nyou were. You would give it a couple of pulses\nand nothing would happen, and you'd have to give\nit a couple of more pulses. It'd take a long time\nsometimes before you would get to where you could\nsee. As a matter of fact, if at 5 minutes before"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"we were supposed to be at a certain attitude we\nweren't approaching it, I'd start pulsing a little\nharder.\nWhite\tYou'd hear a series of about five quick pulses.\nMcDivitt\tIt was a very economical control mode.\nThe maneuver controller worked the way it was\nsupposed to.\nWhite\tWhat about the deadband? Did you think the dead-\nbands and breakouts were all satisfactory?\nMcDivitt\tYes, just like the one we used in the simulator.\nYou've got a lot of slop in it when you're making\ngross maneuvers because you're not fixing your\nelbow and manipulating around that point. You're\nfixing your shoulder and your whole arm, and\nit's just like shoveling coal--you've got about\nthat much finesse to it. I don't think there's\nmuch you can say about it. The controls weren't\ntoo gross and they weren't too minor. The whole\nthing was adequate. We did have an inflight mal-\nfunction, or irregularity. We were in Horizon\nScanner Mode one time and Ed wanted to yaw around.\nHe started to yaw and the thing rolled. The\nHorizon Scanner Mode fired the roll thrusters to\nlevel it back off--"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tI couldn't get the yaw. We had a circuit breaker\noff.\nMcDivitt\tFinally, after you did that a couple of times I\nlooked up and saw we had knocked a circuit breaker\noff. That was one thing that we didn't cover in\nEVA that I should have mentioned. Ed was a real\nhazard to the switch positions in that he was all\nover with his feet, arms, and hands --.\nWhite\tI don't think I threw any though. Did I? Come\non now. You're not guilty until you're convicted.\nMcDivitt\tI don't know. You kept putting your foot on the\nHF Reentry Antenna Switch and stepping on it.\nHa. Ha. Ha.\nMcDivitt\tAs for the attitude control modes--I mentioned\nthe Rate Command in OAMS seemed to be tighter than\nthe Rate Command in RCS, although they use the\nsame electronics, the same gyros, and the whole\nthing. It might have just been my imagination,\nbut I felt that the Rate Command system in RCS was\na lot looser than it was in OAMS. The Reentry\nRate Command operated just the way it should. It\nhad a 4 degree deadband, and handled the spacecraft\nvery well during reentry. Direct had a lot more\nauthority than I thought it would, but it was"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pretty straightforward. I think Pulse was the\nbest mode on the spacecraft for the orbit phase.\nWe were able to save all kinds of fuel, it worked\nfine, and it was just about what the doctor ordered.\nWe didn't use the Horizon Scan Mode during about\nthe first three days of flight, except for the second\norbit when I think I was in Horizon Scan so that I\ncould have the freedom to help Ed prepare for his\nEVA. The last day we used the Horizon Scan Mode,\nand I found it to be an excellent mode. There was\nonly one case when it broke lock and didn't recover.\nWasn't that it, Ed?\nWhite\tYou've got it in the book.\nMcDivitt\tWe've got in the book and we'll check on that.\nThe Horizon Scan Mode worked essentially for 24\nhours without any problem and I think it's an\nexcellent control mode. It seemed to be very\neconomical on fuel. We were doing a lot of\nyawing around and right at sunrise and sunset it\nseemed to get a little nervous, especially if we\nhad the horizon scanner pointed within about plus\nor minus 45 degrees of the sun. The moon didn't\nseem to affect it at all. I noticed that, occa-\nsionally, we would get some thruster blips with the sun"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pointed toward the horizon scanner although we\nnever got an unlock light. We wouldn't get an\nunlock light, but we'd get a bunch of maybe four\nor five thruster blips right there.\nWhite\tParticularly at sunrise.\nMcDivitt\tIt would hold. I thought the Horizon Scan--\nWhite\tIt was definitely getting some spurious signals\nthrough but not enough to break it out all the way.\nMcDivitt\tI thought the Horizon Scan Mode was an excellent\nattitude-hold mode.\nWhite\tDid you notice the water boiler venting, Jim?\nMcDivitt\tYes, I did. We kept yawing around to the left.\nI believe it was left. I did notice the fact\nthat we were yawing, but not very much. We were\nyawing at rates that were extremely low and it just\ntook a pulse every once in a while to handle the\nthing. As a matter of fact, when we were chasing\nthe booster around a lot at the beginning, I never\neven noticed. It was when we were in the Pulse Con-\ntrol Mode for a period of time, when we didn't do much\nthrusting in yaw, that I noticed we did start drifting\noff in yaw. So I did notice the water boiler venting."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"15\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nWhite I didn't think you noticed it earlier when we\nwere working.\nMcDivitt Well, I did notice it a little bit in that first\norbit, but it wasn't distracting at all. It would\njust drift off a little bit and I'd whop it and\nit would be back. At SECO + 30, I used the trans-\nlation thrusters to damp the booster-spacecraft\nrates. One of them was a little higher than the\nother, although they were both down in the order\nof a half of a degree/second. I did fire one\nthruster one time or possibly two times to damp\nthe rate. I don't know if it was pitch or yaw.\nYou know, you are working in spacecraft pitch and\nbooster yaw and spacecraft yaw and booster pitch.\nI was getting my coordinate system transformed\naround in my mind, going from booster coordinate\nsystem to the spacecraft. I don't remember\nwhether it was yaw or pitch, but I did thrust\nonce or twice. By the way, I could hear those\nthrusters fire. At SECO + 30 I said, \"Thrusting,\"\nand I started thrusting. \"Separate\", and Ed\npunched the SPACECRAFT SEPARATE. We were in Direct\nand I thrusted straight ahead for about 5 seconds.\nThen I went back into Rate Command. Separation was\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"16\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\njust smooth--we didn't come off with a rotational\nrate.\nWhite I think one of the things you might comment on, Jim,\nis that you fired most of those thrusters during\nthat initial time.\nMcDivitt I'm sure I fired the upward-firing thrusters a\nnumber of times. That isn't any more difficult\nto control than the other one. Actually you can\nfire these thrusters whether you are in Rate\nCommand, Direct or even in Pulse. When you fire\nthem, you get a rate and you just damp the rate\nout with the attitude controller. When you are\nfiring the translation thrusters, the things that\nyou really hear are not the translation thrusters,\nbut the attitude thrusters. Those translation\nthrusters are really tough to hear, but the atti-\ntude thrusters are very easy to hear. I don't\nunderstand why. They must be mounted differently\nbecause their location isn't that much different.\nI think I fired the aft-firing thrusters a couple\nof times and they didn't make any more noise than\nthe forward-firing thrusters, that I could tell.\nThe up and down and left and right ones were just\nas easy to fire as the other ones. Our OAMS retro\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"17\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nwas 127 feet/second which, incidently, happened\nto come out exactly 2 minutes and 40 seconds. I\nsuspect that we selected OAMS retrofire on the basis\nof time, rather than on the basis of ΔV.\nWhite Very convenient, wasn't it?\nMcDivitt Very convenient. It was obvious there is no more\ndifficulty in timing 2 minutes 40 seconds during\nour OAMS retrofire than it is during any other\nthing. We had no trouble with it. I was convinced\nthat when we got through with it, that was really\nthe proper conversion factor between ΔV and ΔT.\nWe had exactly 127 feet/second, and we sure had\nthe time nailed down.\n\n8.3 RCS\n\nMcDivitt The operational checks that we did on the RCS\noccurred at about TR minus an hour. When I checked\nthe system out it seemed like I had a lot less\nauthority and a lot sloppier Rate Command than I\nhad in OAMS. The operational check consisted of\npitching up and down, yawing left and right,\nrolling left and right on each ring in Rate Command\nand Direct. Direct worked as I expected it to.\nIn Rate Command, however, as I pitched up and down\nI noticed that my top left yaw thruster was doing\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\na lot of firing, too. I started out checking the\nRate Command, so I thought I might possibly have\none bad pitch thruster that was causing a rolling\nmoment that was being counteracted by the yaw-roll\njets. When I did it in Direct, however, it wasn't\ndoing that. It wasn't rolling either, so I felt\nthat it must just be a very tight deadband that\nwas trying to hold us in there. So, the operational\nchecks were all right. The only thing we had to\nmonitor on the system was the temperature and the\npressure of the propellant. It seemed to hold\npretty well.\n\nWhite I have some comments on that. I kept a running\nlog of them as we went along. The temperature\nstarted out at 75 degrees and 3000 pounds. It held\nthat way pretty well until about the 65th hour, when\nthe temperature gradually went down. The temperature\ndecreased to a point where we started getting the\nRCS heater lights that we noted earlier. We got\nabout eight series of RCS heater lights. It took\nabout 5 minutes to extinguish the light. It was\nthe A-ring,then the B-ring, and then the A-ring.\nIt seemed to alternate each time back and forth and\nit came on for about 15 to 20 minute periods of\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\ntime. It started right after a night cycle. It\nseemed rather natural to me that there wasn't\nreally something wrong, but that we actually had\na cold RCS thing out there and it did need some\nheat. After heat was applied it did appear to go\naway. I decided to go ahead and set up a slow roll\nrate in the daytime, and I kept that roll rate in\nfor several orbits. Whether this actually helped\nto get the light off or not, I don't know. We\ndidn't get anymore lights after this time. I think\nthere ought to be one other comment on the RCS,\nand that is the temperatures and the pressures\nstayed up pretty well except when we actuated the\nsystem. The pressures then went down further than\nwe had expected them to go. They went down to\n2400 to 2500 psi. This was a little lower than I\nexpected to see.\n\nMcDivitt I think the pressures in the RCS A and B dropped\nby about 100 pounds throughout the four-day period.\nThey were slightly over 3000 pounds and they got\ndown to slightly under 3000.\n\nWhite The lowest temperatures I noted were in the neigh-\nborhood of about 63 to 64 degrees. They started\nout at 75 degrees.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt Let me ask you a question?\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt When you turned on the RCS heaters, did you turn\non the heaters on both rings, or did you turn on\nthe RCS Heater Switch and then turn off the circuit\nbreaker on the other ring?\nWhite I turned the heaters on and then I checked to see\nwhich ring it was that was actually heating up by\nusing the circuit breakers. The first time I went\nahead and left them on and then the other ring\ncame on. I felt that one of them was about as\ncold as the other, so I left the heaters on both\nrings throughout the heating cycles.\nMcDivitt Good.\nWhite They were in perfect sequence--A and B, A and B,\nand about 15 minutes apart. The regularity was\nsurprising. The temperatures at the time when\nthese lights came on were indicating about 63 or\n64 degrees and it seemed like it would come up a\nlittle bit, and then come right back down and pop\nback on again. I felt it was not an actual\ntemperature problem.\nMcDivitt I used Rate Command, Reentry Rate Command and Pulse\ncontrol modes. I didn't use Direct. They all"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"operated as I thought they should. I've already\nmentioned I thought Rate Command was a little\nsloppier in RCS than it was in OAMS. It certainly\ndid a fine job of holding the retro attitude during\nretrofire. Retrofire attitude control was excellent.\nWe didn't deviate more than about a degree from\nthe attitude we were supposed to hold, and I had\nplenty of authority there. From my standpoint\nit couldn't have been any better. I was really\nhappy about it. I used the Reentry Rate Command\nwith roll rate gyro off, so that I had essentially\nDirect in roll and Reentry Rate Command in pitch\nand yaw axes. It had the typical 4 degree deadband\nthat it was supposed to have. It did do rate damping\nas it was supposed to. It performed just the way\nit should. Ed, you want to cover that heater-lights\nthing again? I think you've already got that thing\npretty much in detail.\nWhite I have the precise times at which the lights came\non. It started at about the 64th or 65th elapsed\ntime hour. At 06:47, the first light, in the A-ring,\ncame on. At 08:23 the A-ring light came on again.\nThat was the last time. During that period of time\nthe A and the B-rings cycled on and off inter-"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"mittently.\nMcDivitt During descent, we turned the power off to see if\nthe drogue chute was unstable. It wasn't. We\nturned the power back on and the propellant valves\noff and burned up all of the fuel in the manifolds.\nWe had no fumes after impact.\n8.4 Environmental Control System\nMcDivitt I thought the suit mobility was as good in the\nspacecraft as it is anywhere else. I think these\nsuits are pretty good suits. I didn't find any\ntrouble with them whatsoever in the spacecraft\nthat I wasn't already aware of. The pressure held\nup good. I did a pressure check on the suit. It\nbled down about 0.2 or 0.3 psi in about 30 seconds,\nwhich really wasn't too bad. The temperature was\nalways good. It ran between about 50 and 55\ndegrees diring the entire flight except when we\nreally worked hard. I don't think it ever got up\nover 60. Do you, Ed?\nWhite No.\nMcDivitt We had reasonably good temperature control.\nWhite The cabin temperature got up pretty high one time\nand then it came back down.\nMcDivitt Yes, on about the first orbit."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White That's r ght. It got up to about 90.\nMcDivitt 100, it was. We turned the cabin heat exchanger\non for just a short time and it went right back on\ndown to 80 degrees.\nWhite It stayed in the area of 82 to 83 degrees the whole\nflight.\nMcDivitt The humidity in the suit must have been pretty dry\nbecause my foot dried out. I didn't take any wet-\nbulb readings inside the suit. The CO2 stayed at\nzero all the time. It never did go up except when\nwe'd go to O2 High Rate, when it would bound off\nthe top peg and fall back down again. The comfort\nand suit controls were pretty reasonable. The O2\ndemand regulator seemed to work all right. My\numbilicals were short. My fingertip lights were\nlousy. Before launch I only had one that worked.\nOn my right-hand glove one of the bulbs obviously\ndidn't work. One of them did work. On my left-\nhand glove the switch on the batteries would only\nturn the lights on if it was in one exact position,\nwhich wasn't full throw in either direction. So I\nfound out I had only one fingertip light that\nworked. However, during the flight I didn't use\nmy fingertip lights except one time when I used"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"them for a flashlight. I had my gloves off and I\nreached over and got my gloves and turned the\nfingertip lights on and shined the gloves on some-\nthing. I didn't use them a lot. I do want to\ncomment on one thing, though, since we're talking\nabout the suits here. I launched without the plug\nthat goes in the blood pressure port in the suit.\nI don't feel we should launch these things with\nno plug to plug up the blood pressure port in the\nsuit, especially when we're going EVA. I think\nthat was a mistake. The only pressure points I had\nin the suit were in the helmet. Those were just\nabove my ears where I tended to move my head back\nand forth within the helmet. I finally rubbed up\nall the hair so that it was going in the wrong\ndirection. When you press against hair for a long\ntime in the wrong direction it becomes very uncom-\nfortable. At about the end of 2 3/4 days I took\nmy helmet off for a couple of hours, and it felt a\nlot better. The only problem is that when you have\nyour helmet off there is no place to stow it. We\nhad the foot wells full of gear, so when I had the\nhelmet off I just let it float around on my lap,\nand over in Ed's lap. There wasn't any place to"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"put it. The micro-meteoroid blanket that I had strapped under my right leg wasn't a detriment. As a matter of fact since we had no place to stow it, I just left it strapped to my leg until reentry. Then, I felt that if we had to get out in the water I didn't want to have any straps hanging off me that I didn't need. So, I took it off and threw it on the floor along with Ed's sleeves. I don't have anymore comments on my suit.\nWhite I wore the EVA suit. I think the mobility of the suit was about what I had expected. Actually, I think the mobility in some respects was a little better, and in some respects it was a little less than I had expected. I wasn't able to get into the right-hand aft food box as well as I had thought I was going to be able to in zero g. In fact, the position that I had figured out to use, which was leaning forward and reaching in backwards with my left arm, didn't work out well at all. I had to actually turn around 90 degrees in the seat and reach in with my right arm. This worked out all right. I was able to get hold of things in the box. The surprise that I got though, was that I could get into the right-hand aft refuse box much"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"easier than I had thought I'd ever be able to. It turned out that I was able to get into that box easier while in orbit, by far, than--\nMcDivitt It's a rubber covered box.\nWhite It's a rubber covered box on the right hand side. I think that box does have the capability of stowing refuse in it and stowing some things prior to launch in it, too.\nWhite Did you try that box during flight, Jim?\nMcDivitt Yes, I did. I didn't find it easy to get into. I thought the things we had stowed in it were real good things--items that we didn't need at all in flight and possibly might not need--\nWhite I used all four defecation bags that I had on my side. I used them up during flight. In fact, you used one of them.\nMcDivitt That's right, we did have a bag of those defecation bags out. It just happened to be over on my side where you could get to it.\nWhite You were asleep. I had to get them or wake you up. I pressure-checked my suit. I checked it at 8.5 and it bled down several tenths of a psi. I was satisfied with the pressure-holding of my suit."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"There was one thing though with the suit that I wasn't too happy with. I was hot all the time in the suit. It got so that after a while I got used to the normal temperature as being warm. I could increase the temperature, which seemed rather strange to both Jim and me, by putting out my gloves and closing my faceplate. I could go to sleep. At that time my temperature would go up considerably inside the suit. It seemed like I could stay in there only an hour or an hour and 15 minutes and rest before I had to either open up the faceplate or do something else. So, the temperature got uncomfortably warm in about an hour or an hour and fifteen minutes with the faceplate closed, the sleeves on and the gloves on. The humidity in the suit, I thought, was quite dry. I had quite a tendency for my lips to crack and my nose to get very dry. In fact, I noticed my nose was itching considerably. This was an indicator to me every time I would go to sleep. I would wake up with my nose itching and feeling quite hot and uncomfortable. My lips got to the point where I thought they were going to crack,"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and I was trying to be very careful and keep them from cracking and getting anymore uncomfortable than they were. Jim mentioned the CO2 sensors stayed on zero, which I was happy to see. I think one thing that I was fairly happy about was that the suit, as bulky as it was, wasn't depressingly uncomfortable. I felt that I did have a pretty heavy suit on most of the time, and I was a little bit constrained in my mobility. The idea to have the detachable sleeves that I could take off after the EVA work was, I felt, a very good decision. I felt much more comfortable, and I had a much higher degree of mobility around with my arms in the spacecraft. It was not as tiring to move around as it had been when I was inside the heavy sleeves. So, I was quite happy to take them off. We took them off, I believe, shortly after my first sleep. I slept with them on the first time, and then we took them off. I think they were quite easy to take off. As a matter of fact, I think if you went EVA at a later time you could take those sleeves onboard, and if they were made just a little easier to slip on and off over the wrist, you could take"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"them on and off in flight if you wanted to.\nMcDivitt I don't know. I'd hesitate to recommend putting them on in flight. It might get pretty tricky. I think if you put them on in flight, you'd want to put them over all the harness, rather than under the harness.\nWhite That's exactly what I was going to say. I think if you took the life preservers off, you could actually make the sleeves big enough so that you could slip them on and velcro them across the back over the harness. This might be for the type of operation of throwing equipment in and out. I think in the future, though, a suit as heavy as this might not be required. The controls and the switches in the suit, I felt, were satisfactory. There wasn't anything that I couldn't get at in the spacecraft. It was easier under weightless conditions for me to operate certain controls. In fact, I think I was able to get down and unscrew the bellows in the gun hose as well and maybe a little easier than you could, Jim. At least initially, I was able to get down there. Of course you weren't really particularly trying to do it at that time."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt I suspect I probably could have gotten down there\nas easy or easier than you if I had really gotten\naround to trying.\nWhite I don't remember, but, anyhow, I was surprised\nwith the ease which I had in getting down.\nMcDivitt We were trying to dump the pressure in the bellow\nbefore we went EVA with it.\nWhite Right. The demand regulator was satisfactory. My\numbilical,I thought, was very easy to use and\ndisconnect. I was quite happy to have the micro-\ndot in there. One comment on the micro-dot--the\nfirst time we exercised the micro-dots on our\nsuit, they were pretty hard to operate. Mine got\nprogressively easier to use each time I used it.\nThe fingertip lights that I had were better than\nJim's. I had lights with Lexan tops on them.\nAll my lights worked, and I felt that their\noperation was quite satisfactory. We had decided\nto put my lights between the first and second\njoints for several reasons. We thought the EVA\ngloves would be easier to don and there'd be less\ntendency to break them. I think, though, the\nposition of the lights was still a little too far\nforward if it was intended to put them back between"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the first and second joints, because the lights\nwere resting right on top of my first joint. I\nthink if I had worn my gloves anymore, I would\nhave gotten a very sore first knuckle. If you\nare going to move them back, I think they should\ndefinitely be moved back behind the first knuckle.\nMcDivitt Where were they getting you, Ed?\nWhite Right on the top of the knuckle.\nMcDivitt You think they ought to be back?\nWhite If they are going to be anywhere, they ought to be\nback here, and I'm not too sure that is necessary.\nIn fact, I think the best place is behind the\nfingertip and in front of the first joint.\nMcDivitt But, with the plastic covers over the gloves.\nWhite With the plastic cover on the glove, and I think\nwe've got the right position for the lights. I\ndon't think they should be back behind the first\nknuckle. I think they should be in front of that\nfirst knuckle and behind the fingertip. That's a\ngood place for them. That's where we've been using\nthem in the past. I think the Lexan cover\non the light bulb is a darn good idea.\nMcDivitt Yes, I think so, too. Shoot! I checked my lights\nbefore launch and found out that I already had one"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of them out on my right hand. I wasn't too happy\nabout it.\nWhite I was a little disappointed. I think the only\ndiscrepancy I found in my suit was that I had no\nblood pressure plug either. A point that I was\npretty happy with was that I had no pressure points\nfrom my suit at all on my body. I had one set of\npressure points from my helmet pressing down on the\nfront forward part of my head. I knew why this\nwas. I'd had Joe Schmitt adjust my cables so that\nI could pull my helmet down to a maximum amount\nfor the EVA work. I felt that I just bought this\ndiscomfort by having my cables adjusted in this\nmanner. It was pretty uncomfortable though. I\nchecked out the use of the emergency bottles on\nthe EVA equipment and they worked as they were\nsupposed to. I was able to regulate the flow.\nIncidentally, before I went out the reading on the\nEVA bottles was full-scale, 3400 pounds. I was\nhappy to see that. All in all, I was quite happy\nwith the suit. I think it was a very well designed\nsuit and it met the requirements that were levied\nupon it. It was a heavy suit and a big suit to\nwear for four days, but I felt the suit wasn't as"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"bad as I had expected it was going to be.\nI have one more comment. I'd like to comment on\nthe inner liner. We decided to go with the inner\nliner. in and I felt this was a good decision.\nThe inside of the suit was comfortable, and I\ndidn't get any pressure points. I think one reason\nwhy neither Jim nor I got any particular pressure\npoints from the suit was that we had worn these\nsuits a heck of a lot of time. I had over 50\nhours on my flight suit. I don't know how many\nhours Jim had on his."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt Actually Ed had just finished talking about his\ninner liner. I'd like to comment about the inner\nliner too. I thought about it when he was talking\nabout his. I think that was one of the really\nwise decisions -- to go with that inner liner.\nI felt that it offered a lot more comfort than\nwearing that rubber suit up against my body, or\nup against my underwear. I sort of felt that I\nwas really quite comfortable in this suit. I\ndidn't find my mobility limited by my inner liner\nat all, and I had made sure that it fit. I think\nthat has a lot to do with it.\nWhite I worked the suit once for about a four-hour\nperiod with just the rubber inside. I did no-\ntice it sticking to me, and I didn't feel as com-\nfortable. After I got inside the suit with pres-\nsure on my body, the suit felt pretty darn good.\nI had the knees cut out of my suits. The knees\nare still too short. Having been in it for four\ndays, I know the dimensions are wrong. The di-\nmension from my knee down to my foot is not long\nenough. It's not just the inner liner, but the"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"35\nCONFIDENTIAL\nlink net in itself just isn't long enough.\nMcDivitt You wouldn't say you had a pressure point though?\nWhite No, it was just a constant pull on there all the time.\nMcDivitt Did it bother you very much during the flight?\nWhite Yes, it bothered me a little bit.\nMcDivitt So you really did have sort of a pressure point then?\nWhite Yes, to some extent in that area. I had had that one so much before. It had been so extreme in some cases that it really didn't bother me too much.\nWhite Both of us should mention something about the visors.\nMcDivitt I thought you ought to mention something about your visor problem, your EVA visor or the other one.\nWhite Well, I have briefed the visor on the EVA pretty well. The one that I will mention now is the visor that I had on my regular helmet. I thought that the vision through it was quite good. I noticed no distortion at all through it, but I did immediately put a couple big scratches on it"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"36\nCONFIDENTIAL\nin the beginning when I was unstowing equipment. I continued to scratch it throughout the mission. When I finished, the visor was considerably scratched up as you would probably notice if you looked at my suit. I don't know what there is to do about this other than to accept a scratchy visor.\nMcDivitt If you've got the visors down in front of your face, you don't tend to scratch it up as much. I think it was really worn out because you started opening up your visor and leaving it up over your head a lot earlier than I did. At about the two and a half or three day mark, I looked at your visor and it was really a mess. I took the helmet off and cleaned the visor because it was dirty on the inside and the outside. I looked at my visor and had very few marks on it. I had a few little scratches, but very minor. Then I started putting my visor up more and more because they wanted us to stay open. Because I'm a lot taller than you are, I really started beating mine up. In the last day, I think I caught up with you and maybe even surpassed you in the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"37\nCONFIDENTIAL\namount of marks on it. I'll say another thing. I'm sure glad we didn't go in for those Lexan visors that they wanted us to fly with, cause the distortion would have driven me batty in about the first six hours.\nWhite I think you must insist on perfectly optically clear visors.\nMcDivitt That's right. You've got to have good optics.\nWhite I took my helmet off about three times, and I didn't leave it off very long.\nMcDivitt I took mine off about two times. I took it off one time for an hour because my hair right above my ears was really bothering me. I didn't bother getting a light-weight headset out, and when anybody called me, I had the thing sitting in my lap and I could hear it. I took one of the '... and pulled it back and I hollered into the mike, Ha, ha!, till I could hear it. I said, \"I 've got my helmet off. Unless you've got something important to tell me, don't bother me.\" Ha, ha! And he said, \"Okay.\" It was one of those passes, you know, where you only talk to one guy for about an hour. Then I took it off one other time for about a half hour to rub my ears. I was quite\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"38\nCONFIDENTIAL\ncomfortable with my helmet on for two days.\nWhite Do you want to know something that's kind of strange? I was more comfortable with my helmet on than off. In fact, I kind of got used to those pressure points on the top of my head with the helmet on. When I took the helmet off and moved my head around, I felt a little dizzy from not having these restraints. I didn't feel as comfortable as I did with my helmet on. The times I had my helmet off were when I was running D-9. I ran the D-9 Experiment several times with my helmet off so I'd have better use of my sextant. I took it off one other time near the end when they indicated they would like to have everything off. I didn't feel particularly comfortable with my helmet off any more. I got so used to having that thing on that I put it on so I could talk better with the stations. They were calling me from time to time, and I thought it would be a little better. Before I forget, I think the portable headset is really a lousy design.\nMcDivitt I concur. I think it ought to be thrown out.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"39\nCONFIDENTIAL\nWhite I've seen the ones they've got in the MCC and they're good plain old headsets. I don't see any reason why we can't get one that stays on your head and stays in your ear. You put this thing on and it pops off about two minutes later. It's not built to stay on my size head and I noticed it didn't stay on Jim's very well either. I think the portable headset idea is a good idea, but we ought to have a good headset for it. Okay. As we mentioned earlier the cabin pressure relieved at about 5.5 and held that way during launch. It went back down to 4.9 or 4.8 and this is where it stayed for the remainder of the mission. I think that they probably overshot their zeal to correct the cabin pressure that John and Gus had had on GT-3 and put ours down so that it was actually relieving lower and sealing lower than it would have been desirable. I was expecting it to seal up around 5.5 or 5.7 like it was advertised.\nMcDivitt I checked my suit gage against the cabin pressure gage and my suit gage read higher than the cabin pressure gage by about .3 of a pound.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White Yes, mine was right on it though.\nMcDivitt I know. You checked your suit gage against the cabin pressure and yours read just about on it, didn't it? Was it a tenth of a pound higher or was it right on it?\nWhite Right on.\nMcDivitt Okay. So mine was reading a little higher, indicating to me that possibly the cabin pres-sure was higher. But since Ed's read with it, I don't know where we were.\nWhite Well, the pressure at which it relieved at went right into the problem of the temperature-pres-sure relief in the cryogenic oxygen system so that those two problems kind of lashed together. The venting in the O2 system was set at around 970.\nMcDivitt 967, I think the poop sheet said.\nWhite Well, it was about 967 or 970. We had the possibility of losing oxygen in a steady manner out of the spacecraft if we let the pressure rise up above--well, the ground felt 960, and I concurred with that figure. So throughout the flight we had to keep venting our O2 system"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"down so the pressure would remain down below 960. They initially told us to vent it to keep it at 930 to 960. Then they told us to vent it on down to about 890. From then on, we vented it down in the neighborhood of between 890 and 93, depending upon who was asleep and who wasn't asleep. It sure seemed to be an unsatisfactory solution to two problems--one of the cabin hold-ing at a higher pressure than they wanted it to on GT-3 and also the problem of the O2 system venting outside of the pressure gage. In the oxygen system I think the solution to putting the venting down at 967 was a poor solution to the problem of having a poorly designed gage.\nI think the gage was again poorly designed and it should be designed to read about 1200 pounds. Relief should be up in that area.\nMcDivitt If they really went ahead and jacked down the relief pressure, to get it on the gage, I think that is one heck of an approach to an engineer-ing problem.\nWhite I think that's a gross thing to do and if they did that deliberately, I think they deserve a"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"very black star for that one.\nMcDivitt They need their heads examined!\nWhite I guess we beat that one around pretty well, didn't we?\nMcDivitt Yes. The way that we were venting the cabin was by going to O2 High Rate and venting the oxygen out through the cabin vent or going to cabin repress and using up the oxygen through the cabin and through the cabin vent valve that way.\nWhite I was quite satisfied with the cabin temperature. It started out and got pretty hot at one time early in the flight and went up to 100 as you noted,and then it went back down into the 80's. I think it actually dropped into the 70's a time or two.\nMcDivitt That's right. It was in the 70's most of the time.\nWhite Right.\nMcDivitt Let's get the data book. The dry bulb temperature was 80; 80, the first time we tood it. Then it was 79, 79, 79. Then it was 75, 75, 75, and then they stayed between 75 and 77,I"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"think,the rest of the flight. No, here it is down as low as 72. So it got down to around 72 late in the flight, and here we are with a whole bunch of 70's to 73's and a couple of 76's. So I guess that 75 was the average temperature throughout the whole flight.\nWhite I think our cabin temperature gage was reflect-ing a little higher temperature than these.\nMcDivitt No, let's see. It was down around 75.\nWhite It went down to 74 at one time, I remember.\nMcDivitt Yes, I think 75 was a good average cabin temp-erature for the whole flight.\nWhite I thought this was a pretty satisfactory cabin temperature. The suit temperatures were also down. They stayed down from about 52 to 54 most of the flight. I thought that was a pretty satisfactory temperature there. I believe that there was a difference in suit temperatures be-tween Jim and me because I was continually hollering about being hot. I think that temp-erature-wise Jim was relatively comfortable.\nMcDivitt I was very comfortable, and as a matter of fact, when I went to sleep, I tended to get just a"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"little bit cool, especially if I had urinated all over myself.\nWhite I don't remember one time during the flight during which I was cool in the suit. I think I was hot most of the time in the suit. I got used to it after a while. The only time that it was not satisfactory, as far as I was con-cerned, was when I was trying to sleep. The humidity data that we got doesn't go along with what everybody was expecting.\nMcDivitt No, not by a long shot.\nWhite No, not at all. Our little gage seemed like it was working properly. We didn't have any visible moisture at any time at any place in the spacecraft. It seemed to be indicating down around 62 to 63 percent relative humidity which was a big surprise to myself. With this type of data, I began going open faceplate and open gloves fairly early in the flight, about a day or a day and a half, and continued in this manner just about throughout the flight. We used the wrist dams quite a bit of the time. But I had my faceplate open with my wrist dams"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"45\non a great deal of time also. I think you had\nyour faceplate closed a little more than I\ndid. There at the end we were both going to an\nopen-faceplate and open-gloves all the way.\nMcDivitt Yes, we were especially going open-faceplate\nat the end just to see if we could jack up\nthe humidity. I actually preferred to have\nmy faceplate closed, as opposed to having it open.\nI went ahead and left it open trying to get\nthe humidity up. We never really did get it\nup over 60 percent. That seemed to be where\nit was going to stay.\nWhite We were happy to see that the CO2 sensor\ngage stayed down low the whole flight. It\nwould pop up any time we turned the O2 High\nRate on and go up to a pretty high reading,\nand then settle back down to zero. I didn't\nnotice any particular discomfort versus day\nversus night.\nMcDivitt No, as a matter of fact, I didn't either. We\ntook some temperature readings on the cabin\nwindow frame and they varied by about 6 or\n8, 10 degrees at the very most."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"46\nWhite Yes, I don't think there was any discomfort\nassociated with the day-night cycle. We didn't\nuse the cabin fan as we planned during the\nflight. We did neglect to turn it on initially\nduring the preparation for retro. We noticed\nthat we weren't cooling off in the cabin as\nmuch as we would have liked to. So, we turned\nthe fan on and immediately the temperature\ndropped down about 10 degrees,if I remember\nright.\nMcDivitt Yes, that cabin heat exchanger and that cabin\nfan really do the job.\nWhite It really cooled it off.\nMcDivitt Early in the flight when we got the tempera-\nture up to 100, we turned the fan on and the\ntemperature went down to below 80 in about\n20 minutes, or so. It really did the trick.\nWhite The cabin pressure relief valve was venting\njust a hair abouve 5.4. We checked this out\nvery many times. Every time we filled the\ncabin up with O2 High Rate, it vented,or if\nwe used the repress lever the cabin would\nvent."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"47\nMcDivitt Here we had an environmental control system\nthat was supposed to protect us. We found\nout that the darn thing was overpressurizing.\nThe first couple of times, to keep the ECS O2\nbottle from venting, we vented the cabin it-\nself. I found myself sitting in there vent-\ning this thing with my gloves off and my face\nplate open. It began to dawn on me that the\npressure went down inside the cabin at a tre-\nmendous rate. If this thing ever stuck open\nand I had my gloves off and my faceplate open,\nI would be a dead man. So we made it a proce-\ndure to suit up when we were going to dump\nthis thing. This meant that every four hours\nwe had to put our gloves on and put our face-\nplates down and lock them and get all suited\nup just in case this vent valve didn't reseat.\nFrankly, as much of an inconvenience as it\nturned out to be, I think that was a wise\nmaneuver. I would never suggest that anyone\nvent that cabin again without being fully suit-\ned. I think there is such a risk involved\nthat you would be fool-hearty to do it. For"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"48\nthat reason I think that we ought to make an\neffort to get the ECS O2 tank vent and the\nECS O2 tank pressure gage compatible and at\na lot higher pressure than they are. This\nsuiting up and unsuiting every four hours is\nfor the birds.\nWhite I thoroughly agree with you, Jim. There are\ntwo things I want to know. I want to know if\nthey deliberately lowered the venting pressure\nfor the O2 system down to 967 to solve the\nproblem on GT-3. I would also like to know\nif they deliberately lowered the cabin venting\ndown to 5.4. I'd like to know the answer to\nthose two questions. I think the combination\nof those two situations make what I feel is an\nunsatisfactory situation in our flight. It\noccupied far more time--\nMcDivitt That's right, we were screwing around with\nthat ECS O2. That's something we never had\ntouched. It was a gage that we should have\nmonitored, instead of a thing that we manipu-\nlated all the time.\nWhite Right. Okay, the cabin pressure regulator."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"49\nI didn't have any comment on that.\nMcDivitt Neither did I. It seemed to be doing a good\njob.\nWhite I felt the cabin vent valve was set lower\nthan I had thought it was going to be. I\nthought it was supposed to be set up around\n5.7. I'd like to know if it was changed in-\ntentionally.\nMcDivitt The manual vent valve worked fine. When we\nwanted to vent the cabin, it vented.\nWhite The cabin repressurization valve worked fine.\nI was very happy to see how well it worked\nalso with my chest pack. Any comment on that?\nMcDivitt No, I don't think so. I don't think the cabin\nrepressurized or overpressurized when we were\ntrying to vent it. Since you were repres-\nsurizing it and venting it at the same time,\nI think the vent valve actually overcame the\nrepressurization,which is a good thing if\nyou're trying to vent it, and it is not a good\nthing if you're trying to keep it from venting.\nGoing back a little farther to my other state-\nment, in case that vent valve sticks open"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and you are not suited, I don't think you're\ngoing to have time to get suited. It takes\nme too long to put those gloves on.\nWhite Okay, the cabin air inlet valve worked fine.\nWe vented the cabin with it when we went EVA.\nIt apparently worked all right when we used\nit down on the water. I have no further com-\nment on that.\nMcDivitt Neither do I. It seemed to work fine.\nWhite The cabin air recirculation valve worked as\nit was supposed to.\nMcDivitt As advertised.\nWhite Okay, that primary O2 system gets another\nblack star. I think this is the area that I\nwant to know the answer to, for sure. I want\nto know whether that was deliberately set\ndown into the range of the gage to solve the\ncomplaint on Gemini 3. I think that if this\nwas the case, this is a prime example of poor\nengineering. As far as monitoring the system\nthough, as long as their reading was down be-\nlow 960 the system worked pretty well. I\nfelt fairly confident that the pressure was--"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt That's right. The way that the thing was set\nup, we could sure monitor it because we knew\nit was going to vent without being on the\ngage . I think they compromised the whole\nsystem so we could monitor it.\nWhite As a matter of fact, we monitored it very\nthoroughly and spent about 100 times as much\ntime on this system as we should have. John\nYoung's been complaining about this point,\nand I think that it's a very poor thing. They\nought to dig up the money and put a gage in\nthere that will do the job. Very strong\npoint. The quantity measuring system,I thought,\nwas all right.\nMcDivitt I thought it was pretty good. I thought it\nwas excellent as a matter of fact. It was a\nvery readable gage . It had tremendous scale\non it, but, shoot, you could read the thing to\na percent. I don't know why it was any more\nreadable than the other ones, but I thought it\nwas pretty good.\nWhite The flow rates--I don't have any particular\ncomment on that. I thought the flow rate on"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that repress valve into my suit was satisfactory\nto keep me in a pressurized state and keep me\nventilated enough under normal operations.\nUnder tough operations though, the flow rate's\ntoo low and you really heat up.\nMcDivitt Yes, I think since it was an open loop system,\nyou had to keep from dumping all the oxygen\noverboard, and had to go high enough to keep\nit from dying from the heat. I think it was\na compromise system.\nWhite I thought it was well set up. I have no com-\nplaints there. Primary O2 temperature--I didn't\nhave any comment on that.\nMcDivitt No, neither did I.\nWhite The manual heater--I think that you used the\nmanual heater twice during EVA.\nMcDivitt Twice during EVA for about five to six minutes\neach time. It responded all right, but it didn't\ngo overboard. It got the temperature right back\nup there, and I shut the thing off again."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White We were able to turn the automatic part of it\noff quite early in the flight, particularly\nsince this was the problem we were having.\nWe were getting--\nMcDivitt That was something I wondered about. You\nknow, the thing is marked, and we were always\ninstructed that when the thing got down below\n38 percent we didn't need the heaters any\nmore. We shut the heaters off at 42 percent.\nWhite Right.\nMcDivitt Obviously,the guy that told us to shut the\nheaters off at 40 percent knew what he was\ntalking about because we never needed them\nagain.\nWhite I think,again, I am very suspicious of McDonnell\non the fix on that gage and on setting that\npressure on 970, and I'm going to get to the\nbottom of it.\nMcDivitt Yes, but I think,though,that the pressure\nwould have still built up even if we had the\nrelief set at 1050 or so. It would have still\nbuilt up.\nWhite It might have built up and stabilized,"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"because it's a cryogenic system and it could have\nstabilized out around 1000 or 1050.\nMcDivitt But on the other hand it could have continued to\nbuild right on up.\nWhite Sure it could.\nMcDivitt But I sort of suspect that the--well, I don't know.\nIt's different from this other problem where we\nwere told that the thing didn't require heaters\nbelow 38 percent, and we found out that it really\ndidn't require them below 42 percent.\nWhite We turned them off at 42 percent.\nMcDivitt Right.\nWhite The secondary O2 system--I thought those performed\nadmirably. In fact, they had more oxygen in them\nthan I thought they could hold. Jim's was up to\naround 5500 pounds shortly after launch. It re-\nmained up there and drizzled out about 100 pounds\nthroughout the flight.\nMcDivitt Actually they increased by 100 psi each right after\nlaunch.\nWhite Right at the first mode of flight. Then they\ndrizzled back down and stayed at 5400, I think,\nright on down through the flight. The lowest"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"mine got was about 5250 maybe.\nMcDivitt Did you notice by chance what they were at landing?\nWhite No, I didn't check them.\nMcDivitt Neither did I.\nWhite That was the last thing I had on my mind, to tell the truth. I thought the quantity measuring was fine. It was a little questionable, that we might have overpressurized on your system, but I guess they had plenty of margin in that respect. The secondary O2 flow rates were satisfactory as far as I was concerned.\nMcDivitt I think so. I was amazed that secondary O2 flow was such that I really didn't get too hot in it.\nWhite Yes, I was not as uncomfortable as I had been at other times.\nMcDivitt You know, after awhile you hit yourself in the head so long that it finally stops hurting.\nWhite It's like that big heavy suit, after awhile you begin to feel good. I know the average guy on the street probably wouldn't like the flow rate, but it didn't seem to be too bad. It wasn't too objectionable. ...."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White I think we jumped into something else. We were in secondary O2 system and we weren't on flow rate. The only time we had the flow rate on that was during reentry. The flow rate there was satisfactory. The pressure obviously was satisfactory, but we didn't check it at the end. The control--we put an extra detent on that control. I think the control was a positive one and we were able to keep it in the detents where we wanted it. I had no problem there.\nMcDivitt Right, I think that the way it's rigged up now is excellent. We designed it. It had better be, ha, ha!\nWhite Right. Okay, the CO2 partial pressure. The gage has been discussed prior to this time.It stayed down satisfactorily.\nMcDivitt Yes, it never got off zero.\nWhite Okay, the coolant--the radiator operation configuration--I don't have the times in front of me right now that we went onto the radiator, but I think it was about 40 minutes.\nMcDivitt 40 minutes.\nWhite We went on the radiator about 40 minutes and we"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"never had to come off it again. We didn't get any abnormal operation of the radiator at any time. One time they called up to me and mentioned something about the radiator and the coolant loop and I didn't get any clarification. I lost contact at that time, and I thought just maybe that I had a failure of some type in my primary cooling system. So just for caution sake I turned on the secondary coolant pump and waited till I got contact with them again. They asked me why I had the secondary pump on, and I said, \"I thought maybe I had a problem in the primary system.\" They asked me why I thought that and I said, \"I thought they were telling me something about it when I lost contact with them. I did it just to be sure.\" But that was the only time that I thought we even might have had a problem in it, and I turned it off. We used double coolant loop early in the mission,and after we turned the secondary system off we did not use it again until the reentry. Prior to the reentry, we turned it on.\nMcDivitt That's right. That coolant system really worked.\nWhite Okay, here is one at which we'll get at them--"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the water management system. I think you have a few thousand words you'd like to say about launch. I think you actually already hit on most of them, anyhow.\nMcDivitt Man, I sure do. The Normal mode, Drink Mode, and Flush Mode. We got the water management thing kind of goofed up. Let's just take the drinking thing first. The drinking nozzle was attached to the management panel by a hose and the hose looked like it was made out of rotten rubber. The first time I tried to drink out of it, I stuck the thing into my mouth--\nWhite The first bad moment of the flight.\nMcDivitt --I pushed the button in and no water came out, and I almost had a heart attack. I said to Ed, \"Ed, this is going to be the shortest four day flight in history.\" Ha, ha!\nWhite Jim said, \"Guess what? The water doesn't work.\"\nMcDivitt Ha, ha! But you'd already had a drink out of it, though, hadn't you?\nWhite No, I hadn't.\nMcDivitt Oh, hadn't you?\nWhite You handed it to me."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt Oh, so I handed it over to him and then he took a drink out of it and didn't have any problem at all. What happened was the hose was wound in the helix. It came out to the gun in a straight line. When I drank out of it on my side this thing always crimped like it was an old rotten piece of rubber that had been bent over in that position many times before. It looked like something that came out of a 1890 steamboat or something, instead of a--\nWhite It looks like your old oxygen mask hose.\nMcDivitt That's right. It looks like my old rotten oxygen mask hose. So I think that we ought to get at least a decent piece of hose in there. The next thing is the water gun that you drink from. You push the button in and a little spigot would come out and the water would start running out of it. This worked great. You could always get the water to come out when you didn't have your hose bent. It got worse and worse and worse and worse and worse. As far as returning it towards the end of the flight, I almost drowned a couple of times because I'd get that thing out and I couldn't"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"get it back in. I finally ended up actually using\ntwo hands to operate the water gun so that I\ncould get the button back out.\nWhite\tThe button definitely did get more friction in it\nas the flight progressed.\nMcDivitt\tIt seemed like it was all scored up and it kept\ngetting worse and worse and worse as the flight\nwent on. This could have been a major disaster\ntoo. If we had that gun squirting water inside\nthe spacecraft, you'd have had water all over the\nplace. I'll be the first to say that we made a\nreal effort to keep the water out of the space-\ncraft. We wanted to get four days out of the\nflight. I felt one of the major problems would\nbe the humidity in the spacecraft. As it turned\nout, it wasn't a problem. We didn't know it right\noff the bat and we were really concerned about the\nwater. The last thing I wanted to do was to have\nan open water nozzle running into the spacecraft.\nSo I think that takes care of that. I think the\nwhole water management panel ought to be clarified\nbefore we fly GT-5. We were arguing about what\nposition the Waste Management Switch was going to\nbe in during the countdown to launch. I think this is"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"certainly not the time to be deciding what the\nheck the position these switches were going to be\nin. We were always briefed that this thing would\nbe in OFF. We were going through the switch\npositions and they'd ask me to check in the count\nat about T-45 minutes or so.\nWhite\tAnd I couldn't see that one.\nMcDivitt\tYou couldn't see that one and you asked me to look\ndown at it. I saw the thing was in EVAPORATOR,\nso I question the STC. He checked around and they\nhad a big flap about what position it was supposed\nto be in. Pretty soon we got a call back and he\nsaid if I could get unstrapped and reach the thing,\nI ought to turn it over to OVERBOARD. We thought\nit should have been in OFF. They had it in EVAPOR-\nATOR so we finally decided we ought to go to OVER-\nBOARD to keep the thing venting. I was already\nstrapped in the spacecraft. I undid my shoulder\nharness and reached around in the spacecraft and\nflipped a little valve over to OVERBOARD where\nit should be and then got strapped.\nWhite\tYou sure they didn't have you put it OFF?\nMcDivitt\tNo, we went to OVERBOARD."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tI remember they argued. I thought they had it on\nEVAPORATOR first.\nMcDivitt\tIt went from EVAPORATOR--\nWhite\tThat seems like the least likely of any position\nto put it in.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. We went from EVAPORATOR over to\nOVERBOARD. So I think a comment that I'd like to\nmake right now about the whole water management\npanel is that it's a simple thing. It's got\nthree knobs and each knob's only got three or\nfour positions. We had the ECS engineers at\nMcDonnell give us a briefing on this simple water\nmanagement panel. We had about seven guys there\nwith seven different versions of how it was de-\nsigned, how it operated, and what the different\npositions we were supposed to be in. They got us\nso screwed up that when we left there we didn't\nhave any idea in the world what it was supposed to\ndo.\nWhite\tI think those designers didn't either.\nMcDivitt\tThey didn't either and it was pretty obvious that\nthey didn't. We went through a lot of discussion\nwith that water management panel. Finally I think"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that the four of us got it pretty well squared\naway. Then just before launch we found out down\nat the Cape that because they had gotten those\nswitches in the wrong position we pumped 32\npounds of water out of the adapter, used up all\nthe pressurant for the water system, and pumped\nall the water into the lithium hydroxide canister.\nIf it hadn't been for one last minute check in\nthe data, we would have lost the lithium hydrox-\nide canister full of water and nothing to drink\nwith. So we would have had about an hour flight,\nif we had gone that long. I think that before\nwe fly another flight we ought to have all the\npeople at McDonnell and NASA, who are responsible\nfor this thing get it squared away and figure out\njust where the heck they want these switch posi-\ntions, and get them there. If there are a lot of\nswitch positions on that panel that aren't useful\nanymore, we should just go ahead and block them\noff. We decided between the four of us that there\nwere--I don't even know what they call those\nswitches--\nWhite\tCondensate Valve and Water Valve."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt\t--and the Water Valve should be put in NORMAL\nNORMAL and left there. That was exactly what we\ndid and we knew how to work the waste management\nvalve. We didn't screw it up, but I'm not sure\nthat if with a little trying, we couldn't have.\nWe never had to use the Evaporator Fill Mode.\nThe Flush Mode,or the waste management portion of\nthe thing,had a couple of different positions.\nIn the normal OVERBOARD position and in using\nthe Preheat and Flush switch over on the side,\nwe managed to dump a large number of urine dumps\nthrough this. We dumped both our launch-day\nurine bags which were full. I probably urinated\neight or ten times and you probably about five\nor six times.\nWhite\tAbout five times.\nMcDivitt\tAbout five times. So we had a lot of dumps\nthrough this thing. At 92 hours it stopped work-\ning. Ed had filled up the bellows pretty well\njust before this. I was the man in charge of\ndumping urines, it seemed like.\nWhite\tThe Urine Dumper!!!\nMcDivitt\tI was the only one who could reach the knobs and\nswitches. It generally went down in spurts."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"About halfway through the dump, it started\nslowing down. Then it just went in very slowly\nthe last two or three inches. Then I urinated in\nthe thing and had a bellows full of a mixture of\nair and urine. It started dumping. It looked\nlike it went down about halfway and then it\nstopped. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if it\nwasn't the air going out of it. It went very\nslowly for just a short time and then it stopped\ncompletely. Nothing else would go out of it. So,\nI turned off the Flush Switch and I went from\nOVERBOARD to EVAPORATOR,and it flushed through\nthe evaporator. We had one more urine dump through\nthe evaporator and this worked all right. Well,\nI'm sure glad that we had those two ways of work-\ning it. All the way through the flight after I'd\ndumped the urine through this thing, I kept say-\ning\"Well, McDonnell finally designed this thing\nso it works after about 30 or 40 attempts and\nredesigns.\" But I guess I was over-optimistic be-\ncause it did drop out just before the flight.\nIt finally got to work for 88 hours. We didn't\nuse the Evaporator Film Mode. Okay, Ed, why don't"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"you take over. I extended my wrath.\nWhite I just had a feeling you wanted to say something\nabout that, Jim. Ha, ha!\nMcDivitt After having messed around with that thing for\n96 hours trying to make it work.\nWhite I think you expressed my feeling too.\nMcDivitt Did I leave anything out?\nWhite No, no. I had the same feelings. I thought you\nmight have had them a little stronger since you\nwere the one who discovered the water gun was not\nworking.\nMcDivitt I'm really serious about that simple panel being\nable to screw up the whole flight. If we don't\nget that thing figured out we ought to stop fly-\ning space missions.\nWhite One of the worst moments of the prelaunch down\nthere was when I found out they had that two\ngallons of water in the system somewhere and didn't\nknow where it was.\nMcDivitt That's right.\nWhite The humidity sensor--I thought if the readings\nare right, it worked very well and proved the\npoint that the humidity in the spacecraft is"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"relatively low, and that the water problem is not\nquite the problem we had it cracked up to be.\nI'll make a comment on the sponge material on the\nside of the spacecraft at this point,since we're\ntalking about humidity. I didn't think the sponge\nmaterial was a very good idea to begin with but\nonce it was in there and we flew with it, I think\nit was--\nMcDivitt It was a real bad mistake! Ha, ha!\nWhite No, I thought it was all right in there. The only\nthing wrong with it was what they had it treated\nwith for fire-proofing. I thought that part of\nit was unpardonable. There is no excuse whatso-\never for having those ammonia vapors and the hy-\ndrogen sulfate,or whatever those other things\nwere that we had permeating around the spacecraft.\nMcDivitt We smelled bad enough, but it was no contest when\nit came to comparing ourselves with the spacecraft.\nIt smelled worse.\nWhite If there was any moisture it grabbed it all. I\ndon't really think there was any moisture for it\nto grab.\nMcDivitt I don't think so either, Ed. I kept feeling that"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"thing and it was dry as could be.\nWhite There was no moisture that I could notice.\nThe sponge stuff on the side wasn't objectionable\nto me but the odor that obviously came from it\nwas very, very objectionable. The readings we\nobtained I thought, were easy to take. The stow-\nage of the unit was not a problem. It was easily\nstowed in the spacecraft while we were using it.\n8.5 Communications\nWhite Okay, I have a few comments on the communications\nwhich we ought to go on to. We'll take them in\nsequence.\nMcDivitt Okay, why don't you go along I'll express my com-\nments.\nWhite I think the interphones worked pretty well. I\nnoticed one thing, though, as we progressed along.\nThe volume requirement on both my side and on Jim's\nside needed to be increased all the time to get--\n\nMcDivitt No, Ed. I launched with all my volumes full up.\nWhite Is that right? Anyhow in my interphone, I pro-\ngressively raised it as the flight went on.\nMcDivitt Yes, I started off with mine almost all the way\nup. On the UHF it was absolutely all the way up,"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and I flew with it almost the whole flight.\nWhite I don't think it was all the way up. The one\nthing though--I think the interphone operation\nand quality were quite good.\nMcDivitt Yes, I thought so too.\nWhite We were ready to communicate back and forth. It\nwas just the way I would liked to have done it.\nI thought it was very good. The UH performance at\nthe countdown was satisfactory and just after we\ngot into orbit we felt that we had a bit of a\ncommunication loss. We switched to UHF No. 2.\nLater during the flight we used both UHF sets and\ndidn't have any difference in performance from\neither one. During the recovery you were using\nthe UHF primarily. I think you had as much com-\nmunication as you could expect.\nMcDivitt That's right. I think so too. I do think, though,\nthat we had a very bad UHF situation in the first\neight or nine orbits. It was really lousy. As\na matter of fact, I was getting concerned that\nmaybe we were going to have to land because we\nwere going to run out of communications.\nWhite You were actually working more on this problem"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"than I was. You were communicating during the\nEVA work and also after I went to sleep. I heard\nyou working on the Communications Check and that's\nwhen you went to the reentry antenna.\nMcDivitt That's right, when we ran through these checks,\nit finally became apparent to everyone that the\nreentry antenna was doing a better job than the\nadapter antenna. And then later on, I switched\nback to the adapter antenna for some reason which\nI can't remember right now. We ran a couple of\nmore checks and it seemed to be--\nWhite I know what we did. We ran an HF check, Jim, and\nwe switched back to the adapter so we could use\nthe HF antenna back there. We got just as good\nUHF transmissions at this time as we did on the\nreentry antenna.\nMcDivitt When they checked them out again, they said they\nstill thought the stub antenna was better. So, we\nwent back to reentry antenna.\nWhite We used reentry just about 95 percent of the\nflight.\nMcDivitt That's right. In the last 55 orbits it was great.\nIn the first eight it was lousy. I was really"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"concerned about having to come down because we\ndidn't have any radios.\nWhite One thing that I'd like to say is, I would give\na good gold star to the controllers down there.\nI thought their voice procedures were excellent\nand their methods for giving us information were\nall good. I had no comment, whatsoever, other\nthan I thought it was all very good.\nMcDivitt That's right.\nWhite I had no objection. I thought there was no time\nin the flight in which we got a cluttered voice\nfrom anybody. Yes, I think that is pretty good\nwhen you have that many people working the loop.\nMcDivitt I think so too.\nWhite Okay, the voice tape recorder--let me vent my\nwrath on this one.\nMcDivitt Get 'em Ed, get 'em!\nWhite Right. This is another thing that should be fixed\nbefore the next flight. I think we're going to\nend up being very, very sorry. We're going to\nend up losing valuable data from time to time.\nThis will be due to no reason other than a voice\ntape recorder which is poor on all accounts."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt We've already lost some very valuable data from\nthis flight. We could have taped the entire\nEVA and brought those communications back down.\nAs it was, we couldn't tape them because we had\nto put the thing in UHF so that we could transmit\nto the ground. We lost all of the blessed\nstuff going to the ground anyway.\nWhite There are certain systems in here that I think\nare very poorly designed. I think this is about\nthe poorest of them all. It's located in such a\nposition that you can not see the opeation light\nwhen it is on. The light is in an area where\nyou normally would put things. Things get put\non top of it so that if you look down there, you\ncan't see the light. The light is such a small\ninsignificant thing when it comes on. Unless you\nconsciously bend your head down and look down\nbelow your right elbow, you can not see whether\nthe light is on or not. The switch is set so that\nyou have to go in either RECORD, UHF, HF, or\nINTERCOM and you can not be in RECORD while you're\non UHF or INTERCOM. This is a very unsatisfactory\nmethod of having a tape recorder. The tape recorder"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"should be set up so that it can record conversa-\ntions on normal UHF, HF, and INTERCOM type opera-\ntions. As Jim pointed out, in our flight alone\nI think we lost sets of valuable information.\nDuring launch we weren't able to tape anything\nonboard. We weren't able to tape the work during\nEVA. We could have taped some of the work during\nthe rendezvous part of the flight. I don't be-\nlieve we taped it though. The way it's set up\nyou wouldn't leave it on in that manner. We both\nhad requirements to communicate over UHF. This\nwas our normal mode of operation. If we have a\ntape recorder, it should have a separate switch.\nIf there is an hour limitation on the tape, there\nshould be a light that comes on and is easily visi-\nble on the front somewhere.\nMcDivitt That's right. It ought to go right on the VCC.\nWhite That's right. That's really where the light be-\nlongs. I think that it would be desirable and\nimportant to have a voice tape of what's going on\nthroughout the flight. I wouldn't have any ob-\njection to having a tape recorder with the capa-\nbility of recording more than the one hour at a"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"time that we have now. I'd like to see us record-\ning a great deal of the flight. It'd be nice to\nhave a switch to turn it off from time to time\nif you did want to discuss something that you\ndidn't want to go on tape.\nMcDivitt I don't think we ought to put the whole flight\non tape. If we flew a week-long flight, it would\ntake a week to go through the tape. You wouldn't\nwant long periods of nothing on there. I think\nthe way we wanted to operate it this time would\nhave been all right, if we could have just operа-\nted it that way. There were certain periods\nwhere we put a tape on and ran it all the way\nthrough. Well, that was the tape that covered\na certain experiment or something.\nWhite On our D-9 Experiment, we used it.\nMcDivitt Yes, that's where we used a whole tape on it.\nThen there were periods that were questionable\nwhen you were sleeping and I wasn't doing anything,\nor I was sleeping and you weren't doing anything.\nWhite If you carried adequate tapes, and you had adequate\nwarning when the thing went on and off, you would\nnot have the same situation we had on the D-9"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"75\nCONFIDENTIAL\nExperiment. You could have the tape stop in the\nmiddle of the experiment and be lying on your\nback looking out with the sextant. You haven't\ngot any idea in the world the tape's run out on\nyou.\nMcDivitt Right.\nWhite I think that it's a very, very unsatisfactory sys-\ntem. It ranks right up along with the top ones,\nand we've already hit on some of them already.\nThe digital command system I thought worked very\nwell. I thought the light in there gave us a\ngood indication of several things. It gave us an\nindication of when the station was about to come\non and communicate with us. We used this as a\nclue to turn on our UHF to warm our transmitter\nup so we would be ready when the transmission came\nup. I think updates from the ground came up in\na very orderly fashion. I don't have any objec-\ntion about that or any further comments. Do you?\nMcDivitt Ed, I thought it was very good.\nWhite Handled in a very good manner.\nMcDivitt I think so.\nWhite The only update that I have an objection to is"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"76\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthat they updated our time reference system and\nhad it inaccurately updated by a second.\nMcDivitt Yes, I think there is a big flap about that.\nWhite I'd like to find out about that, too. The real\ntime-transmitter, delayed-time transmitter, stand-\nby transmitter--they seemed like they all worked\npretty well. We had no use for the standby\ntransmitter and we used the real-time and delayed-\ntime transmitter throughout the flight. You don't\nhave any comments on this, do you?\nMcDivitt I've got one comment. When we came over Guaymas\nafter our computer went out, and we'd already\nfouled the thing up, I know, they said they wanted\nus to come right-side-up for a critical tape dump.\nSo I did, and I got a message from the ground say-\ning, \"Put your Tape Playback to CONTINUOUS.\" So\nI put the Tape Playback Switch to CONTINUOUS.\nPretty soon they called up and said, \"Do you have\nyour TM switch to REAL-TIME and DELAYED-TIME?\"\nI said, \"No, I don't have. You're going to have\nto put it down there.\" They didn't bother telling\nme that they didn't have any command capability\nwhatsoever. I went ahead and put the Tape Play-\nback to CONTINUOUS, which means that you're dumping\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 77\nall that tape. If you don't have the real-time-\ndelayed-time transmitters on, you're just dump-\ning it into nothing. You're erasing. So we got\nsome pretty inadequate communications there. They\nshould have said, \"We don't have any command\ncapability. Will you please place your tape\nrecorder and your TM switches so we can receive\nit?\" We knew how to work the thing. It's just\nthat the instructions we got conflicted with the\nnormal procedures. Consequently we dumped all this\ntape that really was critical. I'm not sure how\nmuch of it they got on the ground. I'm not even\nsure if they ever got any of it on the ground,\nbecause we got some not only inadequate but really\nerroneous instructions.\nWhite Okay, communications---we covered them in coordin-\nation with the ground a little earlier. I think\nthat the flight controllers handled our flight in\na very good manner. I think that when they had\nsomething to say, they said it, and when they knew\nthat we wanted to talk to them, they'd talk to us.\nWhen they didn't have something to say, it was kept\nin a good manner. I thought it was a very profes-\nsional show.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"78\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt Yes, I thought that they were to be commended.\nAs a matter of fact, when we have our world-wide\nnetwork debriefing or whatever the heck we're\ngoing to have I really intend to applaud them\nloud and long.\nWhite I thought the teamwork between the spacecraft\nand the communicators on the ground was outstand-\ning.\nMcDivitt It was really good.\nWhite No adverse comment on anytime during the flight.\nMcDivitt Shoot, if you wanted to talk to them they were\nmore than happy to talk to you. A lot of times\nthey'd come on and say, \"This is Guaymas. We\nhave your TM solid. We don't have anything for\nyou. If you have anything for us, we'll be\nstanding by.\" And that would be it. They were\nreally good, I thought. We've about covered\nprocedures.\nWhite Right, I think we've hit that too. Okay, the\ncommunication controls and switches--voice control\ncenter--I've always been pretty happy with that.\nMcDivitt One other thing I want to comment on is the voice\ncontrol center. If we had carried that idiotic\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 79\ncontraption that McDonnell had designed to keep\nthe moisture out of that thing, we would have\nhad one more hunk of junk in the spacecraft with\nus. It would have been a completely useless thing\nbecause of the number of times that we switched\nswitches on that VCC. Heck, we switched switches\non the VCC more than all the other switches on\nthe spacecraft put together. I think if we would\nhave had to pull off that big piece of plastic\nevery minute, it would have gone on the floor and\nstayed there. That's right.\nWhite That was a very poor fix to try to solve a bad\ndesign.\nMcDivitt Okay, why don't you talk about that sleep config-\nuration?\nWhite Okay, with the sleep configuration, we knew right\naway we had bought a weenie. The first time I\ntried to go to sleep, we tried to turn everything\noff. We tried turning all my volumes down to zero.\nWe turned to PUSH-TO-TALK only, and I could still\nsit there and hear it about a one by one level.\nIt was just enough so I could hear audibly what\nwas going on and understand if I paid attention\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nto it.\nMcDivitt\tIf you really listened, you could hear.\nWhite\tThat's right. If you were very close to going to sleep and something went on that was interesting, you could hear just enough to wake you up and pull your interest to it. It made sleeping rather difficult. We didn't want to disconnect ourselves from the system altogether. We'd like to have a way to actually turn the volume all the way down and provide the astronaut that's awake the capability of controlling the voice control center's volume so that he can turn the sleeping astronaut's volume up and talk to him anytime.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. I think what we really need in there is an ON-OFF switch for each half of the VCC.\nWhite\tSo you can effectively cut him off and turn him back on.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. You just reach over there and you break the communications with a simple ON-OFF switch. Then if you've got to get to it in a hurry, you just flip the thing back on and then\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\ntalk to him. I don't know where on the VCC you'd mount it.\nWhite\tI think they can solve that problem pretty well. It might not be in that manner but I think they can solve it so you've got it definitely on or off.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. They need a simple way of disconnecting the man from the communications center without disconnecting his--\nWhite\tI'd say that this was a very unsatisfactory condition. When we finally went to get some rest, we disconnected the communications cord at the helmet. I think this is an extremely unsatisfactory mode. If we should go pressurized at any time and have to pressurize our suits, we'd just lose communications between each other. This would be a very, very unsatisfactory situation. I believe that this should be corrected prior to the next flight. The Beacon Control, Adapter and Reentry--no comment. Those were all right.\nMcDivitt\tYes, that was excellent.\nWhite\tThe TM control transmitter and antenna--I don't have any comments on them.\nMcDivitt\tNo, they were pretty well designed, I thought.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nWhite\tThat's right. Okay, the electrical system--\n8.6 Electrical System\nWhite\tOkay, the systems monitoring. I thought it was satisfactory. We went through and monitored the systems every time for the GO/NO GO checks, and quite a few times along the line in addition to this. So I thought the method of monitoring was satisfactory. I don't believe we really had any way of monitoring the electrical power remaining.\nMcDivitt\tYes, that's a drawback, and we all know it, I guess.\nWhite\tRight. That's an unsatisfactory condition and I don't know what we're going to do about it. I think it's too much of a job to try to think that you're going to sit in there and calculate all the things you have on,and try to keep an onboard plot of what electrical power you have remaining.\nMcDivitt\tYes, I think this is a ground function. I don't think that we can realistically do it onboard the spacecraft.\nWhite\tI don't believe we got any indication of how our electrical power was going from the ground except\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nfor one time when they called us up and told us we were 190 amp-hours, I think it was 190 amp-hours, over--\nMcDivitt\tThat was after we turned the computer off. I wanted to find out why we turned the computer off and if we were really short on electrical power. Then they told me we were 160 amp-hours over the 200 amp-hours cushion. I almost went throught the overhead.\nWhite\tI think I'd like to have had a little more information from the ground on the status of our electrical system. The main batteries--I have a comment on them. They started out with a charge of about 24 volts and progressively decreased to the point where I was a hair concerned about them. They progressed down to the 22.5 reading and began to shade lower than that near the end of the mission. I was using the parallax to be sure I had a satisfactory reading on the gages each time. I noticed they decreased down to a minimum of 22.5. Maybe it got to 22 but it was getting near the end of the mission.\nMcDivitt\tHa, ha! Maybe 22.49.\nWhite\tJust the way I'd lean my head I could get the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"84\nCONFIDENTIAL\nreading the way I wanted it. Ha, ha! The squib batteries--our electrical briefing I thought, was very good. Everything behaved just the way they told me. The squib batteries started out pretty high, around 27 or 28 volts, and they progressively decreased in voltage as we went through the mission. The main batteries--every time I checked them they always checked out at about 9 as far as the amps were concerned. The adapter batteries--I was glad we'd had the briefing on them because I realized that knees on the adapter batteries were in operation during the launch when we got a high reading on the left stack ammeter up around 27 or 28 amps, and we had a reading of around,I believe,14 amps on the right one. I didn't alarm Jim with this information because it was still below my cut-off point of about 30 amps or so. I felt that it was due to the knees in the adapter batteries causing unequal loadings of the main batteries with respect to the adapter batteries.\nMcDivitt\tHold it. I want to make some comments about the electrical system and the power as we used it.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n85\nWhen we powered down, we turned off the a. c.\npower, the OAMS power, the ACME bias power, the\nrate gyros, the horizon scanner, the IMU, the\ncomputer, both FDI's, and the attitude indicator\nlights. We operated with as little in the way\nof cockpit lighting as we possibly could. It\ngot less and less and less as the flight progressed.\nIn earlier orbits we had all the lights on in the\ncockpit--the over, the middle light, and the two\nside lights. Then for the night time passes, as\nthe flight progressed, we got around to using the\nred lights. We finally got around to making the\nnight-side passes generally with one red light on\nor one white light on, as we got more confidence\nin the spacecraft. I think we save quite a bit of\npower that way. They were surprised that we were\n160 amp-hours ahead, and I don't think that we\ngot that way by accident.\nWhite I've got a comment to make on that. We were both\nwatching the loadings and I could read them a\nlittle better over there. We started out operat-\ning around 14, maybe a little better. The reading\non the combined amp-hours slowly decreased down\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"86\nCONFIDENTIAL\nand near the end of the mission, we were down to\n12 or 13 amp-hours on unpowered down configuration.\nThat was as low as I saw it go, down around 12.\nMcDivitt Another thing that we did was that when we weren't\nactually planning on transmitting on one of the\nradios, we were always putting the mode control\nswitch to INTERCOM, which would then cut the trans-\nmitter off the line. You could actually see the\nammeter go down a little bit. So I think that\nby really powering down the spacecraft and getting\nall the non-essential items off the line, we helped\nourselves a lot. We got this 160 amp-hour cushion\nbecause we really worked at it, not because it\njust happened like that.\nWhite This takes a little diligence.\nMcDivitt Yes, not because it was a miscalculation on the\nguys who were planning the flight, but just the\nfact that we really worked at keeping the lights\noff, keeping the radios off, and keeping those\nlittle bitty things down. You know, you only\nhave to save two amps per hour. We ran on a single\nsuit fan almost the entire flight, except when Ed\nwas getting warm when he was sleeping we had to\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"87\nCONFIDENTIAL\ngo to two suit fans.\nWhite Right. When it got so uncomfortable that I\ncouldn't sleep, we would go over. We really did-\nn't do that too much.\nMcDivitt No, we didn't. We made a real effort to keep the\nelectrical load down. I think that it sort of\nshowed up there towards the end of the mission\nwhen we really had enough spare power to run the\nIGS through the last day--uselessly of course,\nbut at least we ran it.\n8.7 Computer\nMcDivitt In the launch we had the computer in ASCENT. Ed\nwas reading out the errors during launch. I read\nout the rates which didn't require any information\nfrom the computer.\nWhite I was reading out the lack of errors most of the\ntime.\nMcDivitt Lack of errors, right. Why don't you discuss the\nerror status.\nWhite I think we discussed it earlier and I'll just go\nbriefly through it. We didn't have any errors\nthat I feel would be worth repeating during Stage I.\nAt guidance initiate we got a full-scale-down indi-\ncation. This indication I had been told\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"88\nCONFIDENTIAL\nfairly routine, and it appeared routine to me\ntoo as it began to steer into zero and steered\nright on into zero. As we approached SECO the\nerror started to increase a little bit and in-\ncreased out to a little less than a degree in\npitch-down on the error needle. Aside from that,\nwe didn't have, as far as I can see, any other error\nthat was worth talking about during launch.\nMcDivitt Okay, at SECO + 20 the IVI's counted up as we\nseparated, rolled around, and did all the maneuvers\nwe were supposed to. The IVI's acted as they should.\nWhen I got turned around and was faced toward the\nspacecraft, I was in a hurry to get all these\nthings done. I started thrusting and I went from\nAscent to Catch-Up, and then hit the Start Comp\nbutton. I lost a couple of feet/second here,\nbut this was sort of insignificant at the time.\nThe IVI's counted up in the Catch-Up Mode and they\noperated properly throughout the rest of the chase-\nphase of the mission. We were getting the kind\nof information that we needed right there early\nin the flight. Ed had 52 punched in and it read\nout at 30 feet/second, I think he said earlier.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"89\nCONFIDENTIAL\nWhite Yes, I picked that up later on because I wasn't\neven concerned with it since we had a good orbit.\nMcDivitt Once we had a good orbit that kind of information\nwasn't that important.\nWhite Do you want the IVI readings at this time?\nMcDivitt Yes, you might just as well read them out.\nWhite The IVI readings at the time we decided to read\nthem--at zero, zero, zero on the attitude indi-\ncator-- 20 forward, right 11, down 5.\nMcDivitt The attitudes weren't really what they should\nhave been, because we had a good insertion and\nwe had to go right then and we had to get turned\naround and get at that booster. I didn't fool\naround with getting the spacecraft at exactly the\nright attitude to read out the IVI's. I thought\nthat was of academic interest. It would be great\nfor post-flight analysis but it wasn't going to\nhelp the flight at all. So I didn't do justice\nto those things. I'm sure that we can go back\nand resurrect this thing to find out exactly\nwhat it was. It wasn't very meaningful at the\ntime. The orbit maneuvers consisted of really\njust chasing the booster around and reading up the\nIVI's as they came out. We received all our updates\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"properly. We got the computer on and got it loaded. The DCS updates were going in and they were getting verification on the ground. One time I remember we didn't get the DCS light. As a matter of fact, they sent the load up again and we still didn't get the DCS light. They verified on the ground that it was going in.\nWhite Well, the funny thing was when the computer wasn't on we got a DCS light.\nMcDivitt The DCS lights come on when they get set up for the TX and send out a realtime command, too.\nWhite Well, maybe the TX when they sent up── They kept telling us that they got a good load in it and I had no light. I really didn't quite believe them.\nMcDivitt Neither did I. As a matter of fact, we had it verified at the next station.\nWhite Okay.\nMcDivitt And that's where the onboard computer thing ends. I might go through what happened to the thing. We were over the States and had the onboard computer on for getting a new load in it. I got just about over Florida. He said, okay, I could turn the"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"computer off. I turned the switches off and nothing happened. The comp light stayed on and I don't even think the malfunction light came on, did it? No, it didn't. So I said, \"Well, that's interesting that the darn thing doesn't go off.\" So we flicked the IGS power off and back on quickly and told them on the ground that it didn't look like I could get the computer to go off and stay off.\nWhite I think you told them you thought you had a failure in the switch.\nMcDivitt Yes, I told them it looked to me like I probably had a failure in the ON-OFF Switch or the ON-OFF switching function. And they said okay. So I said, \"What do you want me to do here?\" I knew we could always turn it off by turning the IGS off, but I wasn't too keen on that. So they said, \"Stand by. We're going to have the experts check it.\" So we flew on out of communication with them. I think they talked to me over Bermuda too, but nothing of much importance. They said to stand by they were still checking it. Then we got over Tananarive and I got this message to turn the"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"switch to the ON position but to turn the a.c. power to ACME,which was going to power down the computer whether we wanted it to or not. It was a voice relay station but we weren't getting the voice relayed. We were just getting a message sent up from somebody on the ground. I'm quite sure we didn't have any controllers at Tananarive. I don't really know who was talking to me. Probably some COM TECH. So, not being able to discuss the thing with them and not knowing what the status of my total electrical power was at the time, I went ahead and turned them off. The comp light or the malfunction light came on and then it sort got dim and went out. Then I sort of figured that's the end of the ACPU. So we put the thing back on over Carnarvon and back off again and it wouldn't come on. It was dead, of course. So that's the life story of the computer. Then we played a lot of games afterward trying to make a dead man come back to life. I have nothing else on the computer. I sure wished I'd have had it though."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8.8 Crew Station\nMcDivitt Controls and displays—okay, I'll talk about that. The sequential Telelights all operated properly—came on in the proper colors, and punched off and everything. The event timer operated properly. The IVI operated properly. The flight director indicator operated properly. I would like to discuss the GLV fuel and oxidizer pressure gages here for a minute. We got about a $25 million vehicle, I think, that depends almost entirely on a launch. We've got an onboard manual detection system,or something like that.\nWhite Malfunction detection system.\nMcDivitt Malfunction detection system. An integral part of the malfunction detection system, are the fuel and oxidizer pressure gages for both the first and second stages. This is one of the abort criteria. On the scale of these gages down below the glass is a beautiful, beautiful set of lines and numbers and hash marks that are wrong. They updated the GLV information and found out that these things were in error by quite a bit. Now, to take and fix these gages would have taken a couple thousand bucks. I don't know exactly how much or how"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"long, but it would have taken a few dollars. Instead we decided it would be simpler and cheaper and a lot quicker to go ahead and paste some paper decals over the top of the glass. The parallax with these things is horrendous. The decals were pasted on over the top of the glass in such a manner that they completely obscure the inside-the-glass readings. They also obscure the center needles which are not only the clue to what the tank pressures are but a clue to whether you have any APS power,which is also critical. When you cut these things back so that you can see the inside needles, you see the inside gage too. I think this nickel-dime fix to our multi-million dollar vehicle is ridiculous. I think that we ought to get those inside gages painted the way that they're supposed to be painted. I think we ought to end this Mickey Mouse gage routine right now and get going on GT-5's fuel and oxidizer gages for both stages. It's ridiculous the way they are right now. The altimeter worked as advertised. I mentioned that it went down and back up again at around 100,000 feet."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The rate of descent seemed to be all right. The\naccelerometer was okay. The switches and circuit\nbreaker panels--I had no comment. We knocked a\ncouple of switches and circuit breakers off dur-\ning the course of the flight. We always caught\nthem and got them back on quickly, or maybe we\ndidn't get them back on quickly. We got them\nback on quickly enough because nobody ever said\nmuch to us about it. They commented one time.\nTwo times,I think,they asked us if we turned some-\nthing on or off.\nWhite I remember that. One was over on my side.\nMcDivitt Was one the A pump on the secondary\nloop or the B pump on the secondary loop,or did\nyou turn that on?\nWhite No. I think one of them was up there, and I for-\nget how we got it on.\nMcDivitt Maybe we just bumped it. Yes, there was another\none over on your right-hand side and there were\na couple of them in the center circuit breaker\npanel. One time I know I bumped one on the left-\nhand side circuit breaker panel. I thought it\nwas the electronic timer. It was one right above"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that. I almost had a heart attack when I saw\nthat thing go down because it would have messed\nup the whole time reference system. I thought\nthe switches and circuit breaker panels were\nvery good. I have no complaint about it. I\nthink that's a well designed cockpit. The mirrors\nwere fine and the swizzle stick was a real life\nsaver. I can't reach the circuit breakers and\nswitches over on the right-hand side unless I\nuse the swizzle stick. I had to do a lot of\nswitching when Ed was sleeping. This swizzle\nstick was the real answer.\nWhite I've been always telling you to get some long\narms. Ha, ha! I didn't use the swizzle stick\nvery much.\nMcDivitt Yes, but you don't have to reach over and get\nthose switches all on the left-hand side.\nWhite I found the swizzle stick was quite useful for\nunstowing items out of the center stowage box.\nMcDivitt That's right.\nWhite It was really good there. I used that every time\nwhen I unstowed.\nMcDivitt It's a good piece of equipment. Okay, lighting--do\nyou want to cover the lighting, Ed?"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White Okay, I think that the lighting to me was sur-\nprisingly good. I think that at one time there\nwas a press to put two white lights on either\nside on the instrument panel. I think the lights\non the instrument panel should remain just as\nthey are. I think we used the red light much more\nthan we used the white light. There was quite a\nbit of time when you had to do a lot of out-the-\nwindow operation at night and you wanted to have\nsome reference inside. The red light doesn't\nseem to destroy your night reference at all. So\nI think the instrument lights, the two on either\nside above the panel, are satisfactory. I also\nthought the deletion of the red light in the cabin\nlight and the substitution of a bright white\nlight was certainly good. There were several times\nwhen I wanted to get a reading on something right\naway and I didn't want to fool around with dim\nlighting. I would switch on the big bright light\nand I was almost always able to get good readings.\nNow when the sun was really bright in you face,\nthere was a period of time in which your eyes\nhad to adjust to the instrument panel before you"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"could make the readings. I think you could put\nspot lights in there and not get by that prob-\nlem.\nMcDivitt That's exactly what I was going to say. Lights\naren't going to solve that problem.\nWhite No, it's just plain bright outside. When you look\nback in, even though you have your lights on, it's\nfairly dark inside. I personally wasn't troubled\nby this very many times during the flight. Were\nyou, Jim?\nMcDivitt No, I wasn't.\nWhite I didn't feel that was too bad. So, actually, I\nfelt that the lighting, although not abundant,\nwas adequate. I think the actual lighting of the\ninstruments would certainly be nicer if we had\nindividual instruments lit up. Oh, one thing--\nseveral times I would like to have had a flash-\nlight in there, something where I could direct a\nreal beam of light. The little side lights, I\nthought were close to being useless. I didn't\nuse my little side light, the auxiliary light,\nvery much at all.\nMcDivitt As a matter of fact, I didn't either.\nWhite Very seldom. I think that if we're going to have"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"a little auxiliary light like that, it\nought to be a light--\nMcDivitt It ought to be a big auxiliary light! Ha, ha!\nWhite -- a directed beam. This goes right back to\nsomething that we forgot to point out in water\nmanagement. I think we ought to point it out\nright now loud and clear. I think that we have\nto have a system in which we can gage the water\noutflow. I think the medical people feel fairly\nstrong about this also. I know that I restrained\nfrom drinking because I didn't want to drink all\nthe water out of there prior to the end of the\nfour days. I got a feeling Jim was doing the same\nthing.\nMcDivitt That's right. I was doing exactly the same thing.\nWhite I didn't drink abundantly at any time during the\nflight except perhaps right before the reentry.\nI felt I was taking quite a bit of moisture with\nmy reconstituted food. I felt that if I overdid\nit the first part of the flight, we wouldn't get\nthrough the last part,because water is so critical.\nMcDivitt That's right. We've got a number of expendables\nlike OAMS, and we've got a couple of gages for"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nthe propellants. We've got the ECS oxygen. We've got quantity gages for that. We've got electrical power and we've got ways of measuring that from the ammeter. We've got food and we can always count that. But when we get down to water, which is just as critical as all these other things in flying long duration missions, there's not a single way in the world we can measure how much we've gotten or how much we've drunk. I think it's imperative that we get some method of measuring this thing before we try to fly another long duration flight.\nWhite The white light on the little utility light was not satisfactory. We tried to look to see if we could find out what we had in the cabin bottle--\nMcDivitt Water tank.\nWhite And that wasn't satisfactory. I think we ought to have some type of a metering system which would enable us to actually determine the water that we've utilized and in some way know that we're getting it out of the adapter. I don't know. We need to look into the whole water metering system, which is non-existent, and see if we can't get some kind of system.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt You know even if we can't get something that they can pipe into the spacecraft, at the very least we ought to TM the pressurant pressure down to the ground and back up again, or something, and get some sort of calibration curve--\nWhite So that we'd know what we have remaining in the adapter.\nMcDivitt We could at least call the people down at the ground and say, \"How much water do we have left?\"\nWhite That's right. And I think we ought to be able to tell what our bottle has inside of it in the spacecraft.\nMcDivitt Yes, I think they're really two separate things. I think first of all you've got to know the total water that you've got left and the rate that it's going down. I think the second thing that Ed's pointing out is that we don't even have any way of telling what the water supply is in the spacecraft. The first clue that you get that you're out of water is you just run out of water.\nWhite The lighting on the water management panel I think is just about non-existent. You can see it in the daytime. If you know the position of the"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"switches and know where they're supposed to be, you can make sure they're located properly and on the proper indication, but I can't read anything down in that area at night. The lighting is very poor in that area.\nMcDivitt One thing that I'd like to comment on here a little bit is that amber light that I insisted that they put on the Preheat-Flush switch over back of the water management panel. I felt it came in real handy. Two times during the course of the flight I left the Preheat switch on after I flushed it for short periods of time to make sure we didn't have any ice left in the lines. I did it on every occasion, but two times the thing that called my attention to the fact that I still had the thing on, was the fact I could see that orange light-- amber light--shining up between the food box and the front of the spacecraft. I could tell that I had another light on in the back.\nWhite And so I think the left panel, center panel, right panel, pedestal, and console are not lit abundantly, but are lit what I'd call adequately and perhaps"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"a little marginal in some cases. I had no difficulty in reading the designations on the switch-breaker panels. I think they were lighted adequately also. I'm not going to say they're lighted well, because I don't think the lighting is real good in the spacecraft. The water management panel isn't lighted properly. I'm not sure we really have to have it lighted too well. The utility lights, I think, as they are now, are very close to being useless. It's like taking a match and trying to use it to find your way around. It doesn't provide enough light. From time to time I would have liked to have had a light which had a little stronger output of light available, so that I could--I several times wanted to look behind my seat for things at night and I'd like to look down into the area in the water management panel light.\nMcDivitt Yes, I think probably the wattage on those bulbs should go up an order of magnitude to make them effective.\nWhite You use it so seldom that it wouldn't be a big power use. You'd only use it when you needed it,"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It wouldn't be something you'd use very often.\nMcDivitt I'll tell you what it all is, though. When you want it, you want something that you can see. You just can't see with those things at all.\nWhite I don't particularly understand what the interior and exterior lights mean. Do you?\nMcDivitt I think the exterior lighting is probably the lighting that could probably be used for docking. We didn't have any exterior lights.\nWhite I thought the intensity control of the lights was an absolute necessity and I think it was satisfactory. I think the fingertip lights are quite useful, and were commented on already. They should have the Lexan covers, and we've also commented that they should be located between the fingertip and the first joint. The onboard data--now here we come to a very useful piece of equipment. Ha, ha! I believe I made a considerate effort three times to update that thing, and I never got up with it any one of those times.\nMcDivitt We had three positions on our flight plan strip. We had launch, the first five minutes-- the next time I tried to get it was 23 hours. The next\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"position was 88. Ha, ha!\nWhite\tAnd neither time did I catch up really where we were. I turned and turned and turned and then got distracted into something else.\nMcDivitt\tQuite frankly, the only things I ever saw in that flight plan roller were the 23-hour and the 88-hour times and I never even read what it said.\nWhite\tI didn't quite agree with--\nMcDivitt\t84 it was, I'm sorry. It wasn't 88, it was 84. And Ed wrote something on here. He wrote my parachute-deploy time.\nWhite\tI wrote your times during reentry on there.\nMcDivitt\tIt would have been much more useful if there hadn't been anything on it at all.\nWhite\tYes, we put a few times up there--\nMcDivitt\tI couldn't read those things, which were the only numbers that I really was interested in at all.\nWhite\t400K 2+38. Ghute 12+33. The only two that I thought you really needed were those two. I put them on there. I didn't thoroughly believe Gus when he said you ought to take the thing out, throw it away, and leave a hole in the instrument panel. But I'm inclined to agree with him right"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Now. You ought to take it out, throw it away, and leave a hole in the instrument panel. But honestly, what I do think ought to go up there, is a good digital clock readout.\nMcDivitt\tI don't think an analog clock in that position would do you any good though.\nWhite\tThey both have a high degree of parallax.\nMcDivitt\tYes, the parallax would make it useless. I think if it goes in there it ought to be digital.\nWhite\tYes, a one-second clock.\nMcDivitt\tI'm not really sure that we're going to get a digital clock in because of the complexity and the weight and all that jazz.\nWhite\tLet's talk about the clocks right now, Jim.\nMcDivitt\tOkay, let's talk about the clocks.\nWhite\tI'll hit mine and then you hit yours and then there should be a conclusion that we could come to.\nMcDivitt\tVery good.\nWhite\tI think the clock on my side is unsatisfactory. I wouldn't recommend flying it on another flight. It's difficult to read. There are two hands going around, keeping track of minutes, and sometime you read the wrong minute hand. The one"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that's keeping your hack-it's easy to mistake for your minute hand. The way the face is marked it's difficult to read the minutes out. The hours interfere with each other. The whole readability of the clock is unsatisfactory and the readability of the hands is unsatisfactory. So, I think the clock is out in all counts as far as I'm concerned. I kept watching Jim's clock over there and I think I could get a better Greenwich Mean Time off of his clock than I could on mine on my side of the instrument panel.\nMcDivitt\tHey, let me comment on mine. I thought the readability of that Accutron 24-hour clock was excellent. The accuracy of it was lousy. It lost four or or five seconds every day or more. I reset it about every 24 hours. My Omega wrist watch that I had set on GMT never lost a second, except I forgot to wind it one day, and it ran down. It stopped. Ha, ha!\nWhite\tI was guilty of the same thing.\nMcDivitt\tBut the Accutron clock on my side of the instrument panel, that they put on as sort of an afterthought, was indeed a fine clock as far as"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"readability. It didn't have any chronometer function to it at all. It had strictly a second, minute, and hour hand on it. It told you GMT and it didn't tell you anything else. It told you GMT in a way you could read it. You could read out the minutes, you could read out the hours, and you could read out the seconds. I really didn't have any trouble with it at all. It had a nice thin second hand which I find to be much more useful than those great big blunt things with huge arrows on the end of them. I hate to lose the chronometer feature on that right-hand side, but I do think that the readability of this thing,as far as the GMT is concerned, is so much superior to that other clock that it isn't even comparable.\nWhite\tI'm not sure that the chronometer function on that side is really too important.\nMcDivitt\tDon't you?\nWhite\tNo, I would be perfectly happy to go ahead and take that out and put a good clock on there in Greenwich Mean Time. Now I've got some further comments on--"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt\tI guess what you end up with is two clocks that aren't any good. Either one of them aren't any good. You'd rather end up with one clock that was good.\nWhite\tYes, the way it's combined together right now, it's really not too good. I hacked your OAMS burn on my watch. I work with two clocks on my left arm and it worked out real well for me. I had elapsed time on one and I had Greenwich Mean Time on the other. I used the elapsed timer as the one on which I made my hacks. So I feel we got adequate backup. If one poops out, you can use the other one to make your time on. So, I think we should have a good clock to keep track of the time in the spacecraft on the instrument panel. Now, I'd like to get back on the clocks again. I think that elapsed time is the only kind of time that we ought to have in the spacecraft. I think that we ought to have a good method of keeping track of elapsed time. I think probably a ten-hour clock that keeps track of each ten-hour increment that you pass to a high degree of accuracy, is the kind of clock that we need. I don't"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"110\nCONFIDENTIAL\nknow what we're going to do about wrist watches. Maybe they'll design us a ten-hour wrist watch that we can wear. I don't see any reason why they can't. They can design twelve-hour ones just as easily. We're going to go to this in Apollo. We should face up to it and go ahead and spend the money to get ourselves a proper timing piece of equipment and get our ranges and stuff operating on elapsed time. In long flights this is the kind of thing that's going to be of interest. It was confusing to me, to tell you the truth, to operate on Greenwich Mean Time and elapsed time throughout the flight. I was constantly adding and subtracting. They'd call us up Greenwich Mean Times and I'd want to convert them to what I was using on my flight plan. I found this a great inconvenience.\nMcDivitt I concur with what Ed said. I ran the whole flight plan using elapsed time except for the times where they called a specific GMT time to perform a function. I did it off of a twelve-hour face wrist watch. I added up all my twelve-hour incements and came to whatever I wanted. If I\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"111\nCONFIDENTIAL\nhad something like 83 hours and 15 minutes, I had to figure out that that was six times around the clock and another 11 hours and another 15 minutes. Obviously,not the best way in the world to do it, but the only way that was practical from the standpoint of the flight plan.\nWhite Well, to tell you the truth, Jim, I feel strong enough about that elapsed time that I would be happy to go with that type of a system of timing, and just go ahead on elapsed time all the way and use twelve-hour incements. They would call up your time and elapsed time and use your own clock to keep track of it. I felt it was simple enough also to do it in this manner. But I feel that this is inferior to having a good elapsed timer and ten-hour digital incements.\nMcDivitt I tell you I hate to see us get involved in something where you've got a clock that's so difficult to read,where you've got to add up twelves and--\nWhite Now you're on the other side of the fence now!\nMcDivitt No, I think that we ought to do things like retrofire time and that sort of thing in a standard time that you can use -- something like GMT.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"112\nCONFIDENTIAL\nWhite Well, you really need--elapsed time. If we had elapsed time--\nMcDivitt If we had a good elapsed timer onboard the spacecraft, I would say that there's no doubt about it. Elapsed time.\nWhite I think we ought to start working on it right now.\nMcDivitt Elapsed time is the way we should go. I don't think that with the timing systems we've got available for the Gemini that we want to go to elapsed time for the whole mission.\nWhite Trying to get our data back from this flight is going to be a horrible mess because of those two timing systems.\nMcDivitt I know it. I agree. Before we launched, we knew that we wanted to run it in elapsed time, and there wasn't any doubt about it.\nWhite I think maybe if we make the point strong enough maybe they'll get busy on it.\nMcDivitt You're right. We'll get going on it.\nWhite Okay, why don't you take the checklist cards, Jim?\nMcDivitt The checklist cards. We had two complete sets of cards that were broken up into two groups. We\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"113\nCONFIDENTIAL\nhad the launch, insertion, Mode II and Mode III aborts, EVA, the suit check and all the things that we were going to use in the first five orbits of the flight on one set of cards. We had another set of cards from Pre-Retro Checklist down to the post landing and emergency egress. The cards included all the plots that were needed to do all the retrofire and to make corrections to take care of all the non-nominal things that might happen to us during the retrofire. We also had in this group of cards a card that we used to contain the final retro information such as with OAMS or without OAMS burns, time to reverse bank, and all the other things that we had. It was a format, something that could be easily held in our hands and was actually used during the launch, during insertion, and during reentry. We actually had these cards out so we could check them off.\nWhite I thought the only thing we would have out during these two critical busy periods of time were these two easy-to-hold, easy-to-operate, hand-held card checklists. The rest of the stuff was all stowed away.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"114\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt We got every checklist that was required to make the spacecraft run on these two sets of cards, which together were about 3/4 of an inch thick.\nWhite I feel that we had a real workable solution to the problem. These things were the same size as those carried on GT-3. They were much more expanded than what GT-3 had. We had the whole how-to-operate the spacecraft routine on these cards.\nMcDivitt The preparation and availability of them-- is this from a training standpoint. That is later in the brief.\nMcDivitt Well, anyway, we actually received our cards at about 8:00 the night before the launch.\nWhite That's the thing that I was hollering about the loudest not to have happen and it happened. I understand why it happened, but--\nMcDivitt We had so many changes in the flight plan and nobody was working on turning this stuff out. Our time was so filled with over-all training and the change in flight plan that we just didn't have time to go--, We did not have time to go through the checklist over and over. When we did\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"go through them it took too long to get the\nthing back to us. Dick Benson came down to the\nCape and did an absolute marvelous job, I think,\nin getting these things turned out.\nWhite I think he did, too. I think we all owe him a\nreal vote of confidence.\nMcDivitt That's right. He did an outstanding job.\nWhite I think the biggest confidence builder that you\nhad, Jim, was when we started getting these books.\nMcDivitt That's right. Shoot, I was worried about us get-\nting ready for the flight because I didn't think\nwe would be able to get all this stuff together.\nFinally he showed up and really went through it,\nbut it doesn't change the fact that these check-\nlist cards and data books didn't arrive until\n8:00 the night before the flight. We had a few\nchanges that had to be made. I guess I went to\nbed about 9:30. Dick Benson and Martin Miller\nwere still in our conference room making changes\nto our books. So a lot of these things we didn't\nsee until we flipped them out in flight. I think\nour data books, as we had them laid out, couldn't\nhave been better. Well, I shouldn't say that;"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"there is always room for improvement.\nWhite Yes, I think we could organize them a little\nbetter for utility and use. We had so many\nchanges in so many things that\ngot put in at the end. It got so that they were\nput in in a bit of a helter-skelter manner, but\ncertainly they were easy to find.\nMcDivitt Well, I don't know. I was really quite pleased\nwith the outcome. I think that the general ar-\nrangement of one data book and two-- whatever we\nought to call those other books--\nWhite What did we call those other books?\nMcDivitt Two Experiments and Spacecraft Procedures and\nFlight Plan Books--\nWhite Two procedures and one data.\nMcDivitt Yes, two procedures books and one data book. One\nthing I would have changed -- I would have expanded\nthe flight plan and made maybe two or three times\nas many pages as we did. We could have written all\nthe notes right in it and had enough room to make\nit intelligible. Because it turns out, that's\nwhere we really kept all of our notes.\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt Right on the flight plan."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White About the way they had it initially was pretty\ngood. Maybe that's a little more than we need,\nbut--\nMcDivitt No, I don't think it is, Ed. I think that is the\nway it should be.\nWhite This is a whole hour on one page.\nMcDivitt Really?\nWhite Yes. So later on, you see, they went from one\nhour down to six hours on a page. Maybe if they\ncut that in half and made two or three hours on\na page--this is probably about the--\nMcDivitt Two hours on a page for our flight would have\nmade 50 single sheets or 25 double pages. That\nwould not have been bad.\nWhite That probably would have been just about the\nright length.\nMcDivitt We'd have gotten a lot more out of our notes, I\nthink, because we found ourselves scribbling in\nplaces where it was pretty hard to determine\nwhere you were.\nWhite The requirement to make changes in the book after\nthe flight goes on is absolutely nil. So, I think"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that rings should be replaced with something that\ndoesn't come undone. My rings came undone sev-\neral times during the flight and luckily only\none at a time came undone. It would have been\na real mess if any of these books would have come\napart because it would have destroyed numerical\nsequence. So,I think something other than rings\nought to be used..\nMcDivitt I tell you one thing I found--that size book and\nthat concept that we had, I think, was really good.\nWhite That was just the right size.\nMcDivitt It's just the right size. Their sheets are big\nenough where you can write a lot on them.\nWhite They're easy to handle.\nMcDivitt They're small enough so they're easy to handle.\nThey're easy to stow. They fit into the flight\nsuit. When we launched, I had both flight sets\nof data cards in my right lower pocket and the big\ndata book and my procedures book in my left-hand\nlower pocket. I had all the checklists right on\nmy spacesuit.\nWhite I had one procedure book and both my cards.\nMcDivitt And both your cards. So that between the two of"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"us we had all the data books right on the flight\nsuit, which was just right where we wanted them.\nWhite Another thing we did--we hand carried this equip-\nment down to the spacecraft to be sure it was\nthere on launch.\nMcDivitt The maps, overlays, and star charts we should\nlump all together along with all the other junk\nthat we carried in the data case.\nWhite Let's start with the star charts. That's easy.\nI thought the star chart was satisfactory. I\nthink you used the one with less stars on it\nthan I had.\nMcDivitt Yes.\nWhite I used my own one that I fly with all the time\nand I was quite happy with it. I think this is\nexactly what you need and I don't believe you\nneed to overlap two times around, but that wasn't\nfor the chart.\nMcDivitt Yes, and really the flight chart, the one that\nwas actually designed for the spacecraft, was de-\nsigned so that this swiveling out the window dis-\nplay fit on it. It was a certain size to take care\nof that and had a lot of dead space out on the"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"edges. I would have rather seen the stars expanded more so that we could tell it. We used two polar plots of stars that were put out for the Apollo thing that we picked up on our training. We actually flew with one of the training things. I took one out of my brief case.\nWhite\tThose weren't put out by Apollo. Those were put out at our request. Remember? We asked for a--\nMcDivitt\tYes, but I thought they came from the Apollo office.\nWhite\tNo, they came from our own Flight Crew Support.\nMcDivitt\tI know we requested them, but I thought that's where they dug them up.\nWhite\tNo, they got them from--\nMcDivitt\tOkay.\nWhite\tSee, what they did is they added on all the Apollo navigation stars. They came from our own boys in FCSD.\nMcDivitt\tThose polar charts are really the cat's meow.\nWhite\tAll those charts are pretty good.\nMcDivitt\tSo I thought the star charts sure gave us all the information we needed. The maps and overlays--\nI think we really ought to cover the maps and overlays by the experiments. The map with the sliding"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"overlay of the orbits, I thought was a real good tool.\nWhite\tVery easy, yes.\nMcDivitt\tVery easy to use and I am sure glad we came up with that.\nWhite\tI think also carrying pre-plotted orbits on the maps was also useful and stayed pretty--\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. Right at the last second we decided to take four maps that were glued back to back so we had two sheets. They were on a sticky-back which made them reasonably thick and durable. One of them had no orbits on it, one had one to 22, another one had 22 to 44, and another one had 44 to 66. You could look through there and you could get a quick reference of where you were going to be at a certain time. The times did get off, but you were only off a little bit."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tYou can keep track of how far you're off.\nMcDivitt\tYou knew about where you're going to be. As Ed says,as the time went on you could tell about where you're going to be just by knowing the correction. It didn't change much. So,we found these to be pretty useful. We didn't really get to start using them until the second day.\nWhite\tI didn't know you had them in there.\nMcDivitt\tWe took them out, I guess, one time when you were sleeping just for the heck of it and,my gosh,they started working pretty well.\nWhite\tI used them almost exclusively once we got them out.\nMcDivitt\tYes.\nWhite\tWe had a lot of other information onboard and I don't know whether we should go into all that stuff now?\nMcDivitt\tOh, yes, I took schematics of all the systems right out of the GOH. I didn't ever have to use them,but I thought it was worthwhile having them along. Everybody was getting so screwed up on the water management panel and I took my notes on the water management panel with me. I had a couple of drawings.\nMcDivitt\tI had what happened when I put all those valves in a lot different positions. You know when you compare something like that digital computer with the water management panel you certainly think the computer would be more difficult to operate. But after the million conflicting descriptions we had on the water management panel,I think we all agree that it was the worst in the spacecraft.\n8.8 Stowage\nWhite\tWell, I guess I was the chief stower and unstower.\nMcDivitt\tAll I did was take the food out.\nWhite\tI thought the stowage in and out of the center stowage box was probably the easiest place to get in and out of. The boxes were easy to slide in and out and the stuff was easy to put in and out. I felt that the right-hand wing box was tough to get in and out of. Getting in to get the bags full of equipment took a little bit of time. When I got to actually stowing the refuse back in the right hand box, it was easy enough for me just to reach over my left shoulder and put the items in without even turning around. It was"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pretty easy to use as a trash can. The stowage of the items of equipment in the footwell, to me, was not objectionable at all during launch and reentry. The ventilation module which was stowed on the left side of the right footwell was well out of my way during these times and offered no impairment to me whatsoever. Something that was a bit of a surprise to me was all the equipment we had in there, that we were not able to jettison after EVA. I knew we were in for a bit of a problem with so much equipment. I think the stowage of the miscellaneous pieces of equipment underneath your legs back up in the heel in back of the stirrup area is pretty good storage for almost all of the loose items during flight. Jim and I had the area just chucked full.\nMcDivitt\tThis was not any big surprise. Remember how we were talking about how we were going to put all that stuff up?\nWhite\tWe were going to put a big refuse bag in there.\nMcDivitt\tWe decided that the most likely place to put these big items would be back underneath the seat because we weren't going to keep our legs back"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"there. We never did get them back there.\nWhite\tThere was no possibility to put them back there once we filled it up.\nMcDivitt\tYes, but even if we wanted to, I don't think there was any big desire to put them back there.\nWhite\tIt would have been nice to stretch but that's just about all. That would have been from time to time.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right.\nWhite\tI found that actually the thing that I appreciated the most was having a lower seat so I could actually stretch my legs out forward than actually behind and bending my knees.\nMcDivitt\tYes, I was more interested in straightening my legs out than bending them back more.\nWhite\tI couldn't have done that if they hadn't corrected that seat. I was able to get in and use the stowage in the refuse box on my side fairly easily.\nWhite\tThis is the rubber covered box. Jim said his wasn't quite as easy to get into. I had to get into a certain position to get back there, but it sure surprised me. I thought it would be just about useless."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt\tWell, I got things out of it. I got a defecation bag out one time and I got another little bag out. I don't know what else I had back there.\nWhite\tThe right hand box with the clamp lock was easy to get in and out of. I stored things from time to time in there.\nWhite\tYes, I found that the most useful storage area that I had was the right-hand little velcro covered container right down by my right knee. I kept all the slides for the cameras and the miscellaneous little pieces of equipment in it. I felt that was a very useful container.\nMcDivitt\tIs that the one with the canvas cover on it?\nWhite\tYes, I really used that one.\nMcDivitt\tYes, that was pretty nice.\nWhite\tThe periscope container I didn't use much at all. I really didn't need to use it. I kept the blood pressure adapter in it throughout the whole flight.\nMcDivitt\tThe left-hand aft food box actually had food in it. It was pretty difficult to get the first piece out. It was a long hard struggle, but I finally got one piece out. Once I got one piece out,the rest of it was a real snap. They had the"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"things taped together. I left the door open the whole flight after we once unstowed it. I would leave a meal floating out so that when I wanted to get a meal I would reach up and grab the meal that was floating loose. I would pull the tape out until I got a hold of the tape so I could force another meal out of the box. Then I would cut the first meal off and we'd eat it. I managed to get all the food out of the box without getting out of my seat. The left-hand side box had the film stowed in it and it was easily accessible. I think the most useful stowage place that I had in the spacecraft was the little Volkswagon-type bag that we had made up and bolted on the center pedestal.\nWhite\tOh, that was a jewel.\nMcDivitt\tWe kept our checklists, maps, data books, and procedure books in it. When we went to sleep and had a change of command and we wanted to get to one of the pieces of equipment that the other guy had, we almost invariably stuck it in that little pouch. I really think the most useful"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"thing that we had put on that spacecraft were those little pouches.\nWhite\tYes, I think the pouch could even be made a little bit bigger.\nMcDivitt\tI think it could, too.\nWhite\tThen it could receive a little bigger item and perhaps have a little more volume that it could expand out to. I think that it was a very useful item. We used that as storage area more than any other.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right.\nWhite\tI used the long khaki refuse bag on the side for various things, but the main thing I use it for, once we got the flight going,was a refuse can. I would put all my refuse in there until I got a full container of it. Then I would package it up and put it back in the right hand box. I thought it was very useful.\nMcDivitt\tI used it for all kinds of things. I stored your Mae West in it, and I had some of the camera equipment in it when we were doing EVA.\nMcDivitt\tWhen I got all the good pieces fished out of it, I finally started putting trash in it."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tWe both have an interesting item on this. Well, I emptied mine out all the way, but I think you entered with it full of trash.\nMcDivitt\tI reentered with that bag full of trash and it didn't tear off.\nWhite\tIt was in pretty good shape.\nMcDivitt\tIt was light-weight trash. Papers and things like that.\nWhite\tI have a comment on the other little trash bag. I never used it.\nMcDivitt\tNeither did I. I would get them out and I did not even know where they were. Yes, I think it's just too small.\nWhite\tYes, it's just too small and I think that Volkswagon pouch can be improved upon. I think both right and left canvas storage bags were very adequate and should be continued. I think it's satisfactory just the way it is.\nMcDivitt\tThey could make the Velcro strips on it a little longer and the Velcro strips attached to the spacecraft a little longer so that it didn't have the big curls on the edge. It tended to curl in and make an opening. I never could get the thing"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"closed.\n\n8.8 Belts\n\nWhite The belts worked satisfactorily.\n\nMcDivitt Yes, mine worked very good.\n\n8.8 Harness\n\nMcDivitt Harness. Okay.\n\nWhite The harness was satisfactory.\n\n8.8 Life Vests\n\nMcDivitt Life vests. Very good.\n\nWhite Very good.\n\nMcDivivitt I might comment on those life vests. I never took my life vest off my restraint harness the whole time. It wasn't in the way at all and I was amazed that I didn't pop them. I always pop them in the simulations.\n\nWhite I was waiting for you to pop one. But I was surprised with the ease I could take them off and put them on weightless. There's just no comparison at all. That's an easy task.\n\n8.8 Waste Disposal System\n\nWhite I thought the defecation bags worked as well as anything we had. There isn't anything you're going to do to make it go to the bottom of the"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"bag when you use it. I think you should be familiar with how to close the bag. I only used one bag and I think you were a two-bag man.\n\nMcDivitt I was a two-bag man.\n\nWhite The stuff didn't float out of the bag or anything. I would permit the thing to remain open while I used the paper. I actually used the paper as kind of a charging mechanism to push the stuff on down in the bag. You know like loading the cannon. Then I sealed it up on top. There was a tendency for the fecal material to be up on the sticky part, which made the closing not quite as nice as I would like it to be, but I was able to close it up all right I broke two of the disinfectant bags and I cut the bags. There were two different kinds of disinfectants. One of them came in a bag inside a bag and the other just came in a bag. I was a little suspicious of that one, so I cut it first and I think you did that, too.\n\nMcDivitt I did that to a couple of mine. I still think that those bags break too hard. I hate to have to cut those things before I stick them in there. I cut one and the darned thing floated back out again and I didn't notice it. I had the bag just"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"about sealed up when I noticed this thing floating around in the spacecraft. I had to push it back down in there.\n\nWhite When I cut it, I got the stuff on me and a little bit around. The two that I broke, that were contained inside the plastic bag, seemed to work all right. On the whole I was satisfactorily pleased with the defecation bags. I felt also that the liquid was easy to work into it. I think that's a satisfactory system.\n\nMcDivitt You really have that knack of kneeing.\n\nWhite One thing, it is just like oleomargarine was --\n\nHa, ha!\n\nMcDivitt A little different in color. Ha, ha!\n\nWhite One thing that I want to comment on was the toilet paper with the darn wax job. I did not think the toilet paper was satisfactory. It had a waxy back so that it was like the back side of a Sears Roebuck Catalog.\n\nMcDivitt That was not the side you were supposed to use.\n\nWhite I know it but the other side had such a small amount of absorbency. This is why you always used so darn much paper Jim McDivitt. Ha, ha!"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I found that the tissues that we carried in the little containers were very satisfactory for the purpose. I think they can leave the paper out of those bags and provide us with adequate tissues. While we're talking about these tissues, let's go into the container.\n\nMcDivitt That's right. The container.\n\nWhite Yes, the container failed. Both of them failed in a similar manner. We had tissues just loose. They were tucked in around the spacecraft.\n\nMcDivitt The zippers that went around these tissue bag holders ripped out completely. Actually they just separated -- almost immediately, as soon as we took them out of the bag.\n\nWhite And both in a similar manner right off the bat.\n\nMcDivitt So we had a bunch of tissues that were not contained in anything.\n\nWhite I think the containers were very good containers. The method of dispensing would be fine, but they all fell out the side. That's the way I used mine for the rest of the time. I used those tissues for all kinds of things. I cleaned my window with them. I cleaned the camera lenses with them. I"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cleaned my visor with them. I got my visor so full of sal salt spray. Remember when I got that salt spray all over them during the EVA and my visor was dirty?\n\nI cleaned everything all up. I substituted it for the toilet paper in the defecation bags. I think this is another thing I am certainly glad we requested. We started out by requesting lense tissues, and as it ended up this is what we got.\n\nMcDivitt We wanted one little bag and ended up with two big bags,and I think we could have used another one.\n\nWhite I used every bit of mine. I think I could have used them more properly if I had a good dispenser system. I'd grab too many.\n\nMcDivitt Those big towels weren't too bad either. They're great for sopping up the urine and stuff.\n\nWhite Yes, they were great urine mops. If we had had a big spill of some kind that's what you'd want to use,because you could use it, it would dry out, and you could use it again.\n\n8.9 Bio-Medical\n\nMcDivitt We have already discussed this in great detail with the doctors so I think we can go over it briefly. The Medical Data Pass Type 1 was not an inconvenience. It got the data down to the"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"135\ndoctors quickly. I think it made them happy. It\nwasn't a big drag on us. Medical Data Pass Type\n2 was only about half of the Type 1. It wasn't\nbad and the doctors got some use out of that.\nThe food evaluation was discussed with the medics\nso we can just summarize.\nWhite I think we should put a big gold star on the food.\nI think it was one of the most important parts of\nthe mission.\nMcDivitt That's right. It was really good.\nWhite Both morale wise and just keeping your strength\nup.\nMcDivitt It was a good picker-upper when you felt lousy.\nThe chow tasted good. The thing I didn't like\nabout it--I think it gave me a touch of the GI's.\nWhite I think it tended to loosen you up a little bit.\nI think, now as I look back, I would prefer to have\nmaybe two of the items in one of those plastic\ncontainers and two hard items.\nMcDivitt Gee, I thought the way they were mixed up was\npretty good.\nWhite Sometimes though you'd have four rehydrated and\nnothing crunchy. One time I had one that was all"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"136\ncrunchies just about. It had one drink in it.\nEvery bag that I had, except one, that had any\nform of an orange drink in it, leaked.\nWhite Mine started leaking, too, as soon as you mentioned\nit.\nMcDivitt I only had one other bag that leaked or maybe two\nother bags that leaked. I think that the rate of\nleakage was just unacceptable. I think those bags\nare going to have to be fixed.\nWhite No toast.\nMcDivitt We didn't open up the toast.\nWhite Well, I ate that one thing of cinnamon toast.\nMcDivitt I ate the cinnamon toast because you discovered\nthat it had a coating on it and it didn't crumble\nso much.\nWhite I guess there was only the one cinnamon toast.\nMcDivitt Overall, I thought the food was good and there\nwasn't too much of it.\nWhite That peanut stuff also kind of crumbled.\nMcDivitt Yes.\nWhite I think we ought to include more meats. I think\nthe bacon was outstanding.\nMcDivitt Oh, that bacon was absolutely great."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"137\nWhite I could have had that everyday.\nMcDivitt Ed doesn't even like bacon.\nWhite I could have had that kind of bacon. That was\nkind of a smoked bacon.\nMcDivitt It really was good.\nWhite When I ate it, I got to thinking that I don't\nunderstand why we don't have more meats in the\nsmoked capacity.\nMcDivitt That's what I was thinking--smoked beef and smoked\nbarbecue.\nWhite Yes, that's very good tasting,and it's salty. It\nmakes you drink water, and drink water is what you\nshould do. But I think we ought to look into\nsome of this. Another comment, too, is that Jim\nhad thrown the sausage out prior to this time and\nthe sausage that I got was a completely different\nbreed of eat. It was in one of those water bags.\nMcDivitt I never did get any shrimp. Boy, I bet it was in\nthat last day's meal.\nWhite The sausage was pretty good. There was one thing\nthat I didn't eat, and that was one chicken bite\nbecause it coated my mouth. I actually ate two\nor three of them."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"138\nMcDivitt The only thing I didn't eat was the bacon and egg\nbites, either.\nWhite I think if I had my druthers, I'd take bacon.\nMcDivitt One of the biggest problems on the whole flight\nwas the lack of sleep. I don't really feel that\nI got more than six hours of good sleep or even\nsix hours of medium sleep in the whole 100 hours\nwe were up there.\nWhite I think if I estimated my sleep time I\nmight estimate more. I got that one five hours.\nThat was good.\nMcDivitt Ed had one real good one,and there were a couple\nof them where I didn't wiggle around for about five\nhours,but never did I sleep more than two hours.\nWhite You weren't soundly asleep.\nMcDivitt I just sat there and I rested. I had one one-hour\nperiod right there at the end that was pretty good\nsleep,and I had another good two-hour period.\nWhite That mike was one of the reasons we were getting\npoor rest.\nMcDivitt I think there were two reasons. One was the radio\nwas feeding into our headsets all the time during\nthe first half of the flight. The second half"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"139\nof the flight, we had the darned OAMS thrusters\ngoing so much--BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG!\nWhite I was just too hot some of the time.\nMcDivitt Yes.\nWhite Early in the flight the ammonia fumes kept me\nawake. The first time I tried to go to sleep they\nkept me awake.\nMcDivitt I don't even know if they kept me awake.\nWhite I really noticed it then.\nMcDivitt I think we really need a sleep period longer than\nthe four-hour sleep period. First of all we always\nfooled around and never really got the sleep that\nwe wanted. If we had gotten a four-hour sleep\nperiod everytime it was scheduled, we would have\nbeen in great shape. I think we ought to schedule\na longer one on the order of six hours. Ed and I\ntalked about this earlier. What I suggested is\nthat we schedule four six-hour sleep periods,if\nthere aren't a lot of experiments that have to be\ndone together. Where two of these sleep periods\ncome together, you can make that a dual awake time\nso that the people could be up. As a matter of\nfact, you could modify it in such a way that if you"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wanted two people to be up at the same time you could really have three periods during the day.\nYou could take two of these six-hour sleep periods and really make them sacred so that nothing could touch them. Then you could just take those other two six hour sleep periods, and maybe chop periods off each end of the thing,in such a manner that you'd be able to get one good sleep period and some rest periods in between. I think during a six-hour sleep period you ought to plan to be in a drifting flight and not do any experiments. I really think there ought to be one long sleep period with no radios and no thrusters firing.\nThen you've got a real chance.\nWhite You might be able to put it in Horizon Scan.\nMcDivitt Well, even then it goes, THUMP, THUMP, THUMP, every once in a while, you know.\nWhite I think you could almost do this by ear. If it was bothering the guy, you shouldn't do it. In my opinion I think we're pretty close to the same thing. I had originally told Chuck I thought that the four-hour sleep period wasn't satisfactory. We should have one period of six hours of sleep,"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"with another rest period scheduled in there sometime of several hours. This would be satisfactory. I felt we were really productive when we were both up. I would like to see periods of time in the day where each of the guys are up at the same time, and doing actual experiments and work. When you are working together like that, it seems you are complimenting each other,and I think you get more productive observations. Some of the experiments require two guys. D-6 is going to require two guys. D-9 requires two guys, and to adequately do it to get the pictures we want,you just need two guys up.\nMcDivitt Let me modify that position of mine even further. If you scheduled a six-three and then the other guy with a six-three that would leave you six hours up together everyday. I think that might be adequate.\nWhite You should also always try to schedule your eating periods so you aren't eating during this up time. You should schedule your eating when the other guy is sleeping.\nMcDivitt Right."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White Go ahead and eat when you just get up and the other guy is asleep. Eat just before you go to sleep, and don't eat simultaneously. Eat while the other guy is sleeping. I think you should spend all the time, while you are up together, working on productive experimentation.\nMcDivitt Yes. I think you should keep these two six-hour periods inviolate and then make the other ones really flexible where you could move those sleeping periods around.\nWhite If you got tired you could go on and take four hours for sleeping. If you needed it, you would go on and take longer. If you only needed one or two hours, you could go ahead and take that. I didn't feel as strongly as you about being tired. You said I was tired.\nMcDivitt You commented on it a number of times during the flight and also you looked like you were tired.\nWhite Several times I missed a rest period. I think we got fouled up a couple of times on it. I did get tired before I took that five hour rest. I knew I was tired.\nMcDivitt You had that one really good sleep right around"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"85 hours or so that really seemed to pick you up.\nWhite It helped me a lot. When I came out of it, I really felt groggy until I had had a few minutes to wake up. I think this picked me up considerably and probably this gave me a little gain on you as far as the rest of the flight goes.\nMcDivitt That's right. During the time you were sleeping, I fell asleep. I saved one night cycle out and went to sleep. Ha, ha!"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"9.0 OPERATIONAL CHECKS\n9.1 Apollo Landmark Identification (D-6)\nMcDivitt The equipment we carried onboard the spacecraft really didn't apply exactly to D-6. We didn't have a Questar lens. The 200 mm lens that we carried did not have the periscope mounting for it. It did not have any way you could aim it with a telescope, so the only aiming device that we had onboard the spacecraft was the gunsight mounted in the left hand window.\nThe cameras that we used for this experiment were the 16 mm movie camera with 5 mm telephoto lens on it and the fixed mounted 35 mm Contarex with the 200 mm lens. The fixed mounted Contarex was in the right-hand window, and the 16 mm camera was in the left-hand window.\nWhite It was kind of interesting since we were in free drift, and they told us to go ahead and run a tracking task. But the first one that I ran was Apollo Run No. 1, which was over the junction of the Blue Nile and the White Nile in the middle of the delta of the Nile River."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tThis was identification and acquiring it and seeing how well the charts that you had equipped you to identify specifically the landmark in consideration. The first one I had was the junction of the Blue Nile and the White Nile, and more specifically it was a little island in there, and it was the northernmost tip on the island. I realized as we came around that I was going to be in pretty good shape in this free drift to be able to see the targets. As we came around, I looked out in the general direction that I had been instructed from the ground, and the first thing that I noted was the major Nile coming down to the intersection. I was able to follow it pretty clearly down to the intersection as we got roughly 20 or 25 degrees from the vertical. I was able to pick up the little island in the junction of the White and Nile River, and I was able to follow it all the way through as we passed over. As we got to the 90 degree point overhead, it was quite easy to track with my eye. I wasn't actually tracking it. It was northeast"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of my track 92 miles, so it was really quite far away even when I was at the 90 degree point. I reported that I thought this was a very good landmark. It was very easy to see, and I felt if I had a higher power telescope I could have tracked it quite adequately. I classed this landmark as being satisfactory, and I classified the charts that I had used to identify it for me as being quite satisfactory. Incidentally, I believe that this, of all the landmarks we had, was probably the easiest one of them all to locate, being right out in the middle of the desert, pointed out by two rivers converging from a major river. It was a very good landmark.\nMcDivitt\tOkay. You ran some more -- just Apollo landmarks. It wasn't really a tracking task problem. Didn't you run one off of Puerto Rico, too, or was this the only landmark that we really ran?\nWhite\tThis was the only real Apollo Landmark I ran. I ran some D-6 Landmarks.\nMcDivitt\tOkay. Fine. I think the next one that we ran was a border pass on El Paso. Or did you run on Tel-Aviv before that?"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tI'm not sure exactly the sequence in there.\nMcDivitt\tOkay.\nWhite\tI think before that,though, I did run a series on D-6 Targets 11, 12, 13, and 18.\nMcDivitt\tOkay. Why don't you go ahead --\nWhite\tShall I discuss those?\nMcDivitt\tYes.\nWhite\tOkay. 11 was Adagier Morocco, 12 was Wheelis, 13 was Alexandria, and 18 was Dhyran. They gave me all these four targets and I realized right away that I couldn't possibly handle this many of them and do it adequately. This was the first time we'd been given the go-ahead for some tracking on which we could use OAMS. I elected to use pulse as a fuel conservation method. I selected to try Wheelis and Alexandria, since I thought that I could locate them quite easily and that they were sufficiently far apart to track adequately. As we came up on Wheelis (I'd been stationed there prior to this time) I knew pretty well exactly where it was. As it turned out, there were some high clouds over Wheelis, and I wasn't able to observe it. No. 13--I picked up Alexandria and took manual"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pictures with the 200 mm Contarex. Since I was actually taking the pictures, I had to divert my attention a little bit to the camera, so I didn't actually look down and, I didn't actually see the airport. But I had seen it prior to that time, and I did see it many times afterwards as we passed over. The recommendation that I made from this was that the targets should be far enough apart to allow adequate set-up, to go from one target to another. I thought the updates were good and the general location of them with respect to my orbits was good. And the next one is El Paso International, Jim.\nMcDivitt\tOkay. This was the first tracking task that we were going to do with the telescope, the 16 mm movie camera,and the fixed 200 mm lens on the Contarex. We started out with a time of closest approach and a time we should have been able to see the target. The only kind of identification assist that we had at this time was a piece cut out of a WAC Chart, that showed El Paso International, and the world chart with a gigantic scale on it. This made it a little bit difficult from an acquisition standpoint."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"But later on we found that these same two types of information--the world map and the small WAC Chart--were adequate for other types of targets. The WAC Chart showed of course the range of mountains just west of El Paso and the White Sands and the Rio Grande River. We came across Southern California, and I could see the Salton Sea. I didn't track them, but I looked out the front and I could see the mountains of New Mexico and Arizona. And I saw a bunch of white places down below us, any one of which could have been the White Sands. If I could have really picked out the White Sands by themselves, and unfortunately they were off the WAC Chart that I had, I think the contact would have been good enough for me too pick up El Paso. As it was, the only features I had that would have been of great importance were the river, which was the Rio Grande River--and at that point was not very noteworthy--and the mountain range, which from the altitude of around 90 miles or more couldn't be picked up. I think that this type of a topographical or geographical feature, like a valley or a mountain,is not adequate"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"150\nCONFIDENTIAL\nfor this kind of task. You need a contrast in\ncolor as you get from the White Sands to the\nsurrounding desert. The best of all is a water-\nland interface or border. As we came across\nthe United States, I think we picked up El Paso\njust as we were over it, but we weren't pointed\ndown at the town. We were still pointed well\nout in advance. The only clue that we were\nover El Paso was that I could see the Gulf\nCoast. I knew that when I saw the Gulf Coast\nwe were probably too far along to pick up El\nPaso. Rather than just scrub the run, we went\nahead and made a run on a pair of sand spits\nwith a channel between them in the vicinity of\nCorpus Christi. We picked up a target well in\nadvance, and as I started trying to line up on\nthe target, I found out that the gunsight had a\nlight intensity and the gunsight was inadequate\nfor a daytime tracking task; because as you\npointed the sight down and had a background of\nclouds, you just absolutely could not see the\nsight. I didn't have any idea in the world where\nit was pointing. When you put it on the dark\nland, it seemed to be adequate, but I think we\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n149\nBut later on we found that these same two types\nof information--the world map and the small WAC\nChart--were adequate for other types of targets.\nThe WAC Chart showed of course the range of\nmountains just west of El Paso and the White\nSands and the Rio Grande River. We came across\nSouthern California, and I could see the Salton\nSea. I didn't track them, but I looked out the\nfront and I could see the mountains of New\nMexico and Arizona. And I saw a bunch of white\nplaces down below us, any one of which could have\nbeen the White Sands. If I could have really\npicked out the White Sands by themselves, and\nunfortunately they were off the WAC Chart\nthat I had, I think the contact would have\nbeen good enough for me too pick up El Paso. As\nit was, the only features I had that would have\nbeen of great importance were the river, which\nwas the Rio Grande River--and at that point was\nnot very noteworthy--and the mountain range,\nwhich from the altitude of around 90 miles or\nmore couldn't be picked up. I think that this\ntype of a topographical or geographical feature,\nlike a valley or a mountain,is not adequate\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"150\nCONFIDENTIAL\nfor this kind of task. You need a contrast in\ncolor as you get from the White Sands to the\nsurrounding desert. The best of all is a water-\nland interface or border. As we came across\nthe United States, I think we picked up El Paso\njust as we were over it, but we weren't pointed\ndown at the town. We were still pointed well\nout in advance. The only clue that we were\nover El Paso was that I could see the Gulf\nCoast. I knew that when I saw the Gulf Coast\nwe were probably too far along to pick up El\nPaso. Rather than just scrub the run, we went\nahead and made a run on a pair of sand spits\nwith a channel between them in the vicinity of\nCorpus Christi. We picked up a target well in\nadvance, and as I started trying to line up on\nthe target, I found out that the gunsight had a\nlight intensity and the gunsight was inadequate\nfor a daytime tracking task; because as you\npointed the sight down and had a background of\nclouds, you just absolutely could not see the\nsight. I didn't have any idea in the world where\nit was pointing. When you put it on the dark\nland, it seemed to be adequate, but I think we\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n151\ncan increase the intensity of the gunsight by\nquite a bit. During the night time you can turn\nit down and the brightness is just about what\nyou need. We made this run on this pair of\nsand spits, and the tracking task was quite\neasy. Now, I just happened to pick something\nthat was obvious to me and tracked on this and\npicked it up while we got on at about 30 degrees,\nuntil I got to the vertical, and then I tracked\nit out to about 45 degrees past the vertical.\nThis wasn't a real tracking task, in that I\ndidn't select a target before I got there. But,\nI just stuck with whatever target I happened to\nbe pointing at and ran the tracking task. I\nthink we learned something from this pass in\nthat we want to be very careful about picking out\ntargets in the middle of an area where there\naren't any good water-land borders; there aren't\nany good contrasting colors. There wasn't a\nreally prominent feature that I could start\nfrom, that worked down to the city and eventually\nto the airport. So, I think that on this parti-\ncular pass, although we didn't get any pictures\nof our intended target, we learned quite a bit\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"152\nCONFIDENTIAL\nfrom it. I don't believe I have any other\ncomment on that pass. Do you?\nWhite No. I was quite surprised when we missed El\nPaso. Remember we thought, \"Boy, this is one\nwe're going to nail.\"\nMcDivitt And the funny part of all this is that we had\nboth flown in and out of El Paso International\nAirport no less than a hundred times. We were\npretty well assured of where we were going and\nwhat it looked like. But we didn't find it\nearly enough. We progressed too far before I\nreally saw the town, and even then I didn't\nsee the airfield, because I wasn't sure I was\nover the right town until I was over it. And\nthen,it was too late to look at the airfield.\nWhite I think that the point that you're making is\ngoing to be well brought up in what I'm going\nto say next.\nMcDivitt Okay. Why don't you -- you made the next pass,\nI think, on Tel-Aviv.\nWhite The next pass was Run No. 6, Target 15. The\ninformation I got was adequate to locate it.\nIt turned out that this target had the essentials\nthat Jim was looking for and mentioned on his last\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n153\npass. I had a nice body of water. The Dead Sea\nwas a good location, and actually the city\nitself was located at the end of the\nMediterranean, so I felt that landmark-wise I had\na pretty good target to track. I came in and\nthe first target I picked up was Jaffa, and I\nwas on it so well that I decided to go ahead and\ntrack Jaffa. At first I had thought it was Tel-\nAviv, and a few seconds later I relized that it\nwas the city 10 or 20 miles north of Tel-Aviv.\nThe reason I picked it up so easily is because\nthere was a little spit of land that jutted out\ninto the water and it sat right in this little\nnatural basin. I looked down and I saw Jaffa\nand I actually saw the little round circular\nairport in Jaffa. I also saw Tel-Aviv, and I\nsaw the airport that I was really looking for,\nbut I decided I'd go ahead and track Jaffa and\ntake a few pictures of Jaffa as we went over.\nYou have to realize that I wasn't using a\ngunsight on my side, and I was also controlling\nthe spacecraft and firing the camera at the same\ntime. So the tracking is probably a little\nrougher than it would be from the left-hand side.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"154\nCONFIDENTIAL\nBut I did get a good indication of the capability\nto track a target and to pick a target up, and\nI think that I was quite surprised at the ease\nat which you could track. I also concurred with\nJim's conclusion that a good prominent landmark\nprimer, preferably a body of water somewhere to\nnail down your target, is the most desirable\nfeature. I also feel that an important thing\nthat the next crew going up could do would be\nto spend a lot of time on just plain map study\nin the 30 degrees north to 30 degrees south,\nand try to pick up the prominent features to\npermit them to become quickly adjusted to what\nthey can see and what they can't see down\nbelow. I think that a little concentrated map\nstudy prior to the flight would help a lot with\nthe D-6. Also a concentrated study on the\ntargets themselves would be quite beneficial.\nThis is something that we really never got to\ndo. The original 243 targets were too voluminous\neven to consider time to study each one, and\nwhen we got the final 19 targets, it was pretty\nlate in the flight to be working on an\nexperiment that wasn't even on our flight. Even\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"155\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwith the limited knowledge that we had of the\ntargets I felt that acquisition and tracking of\nthe targets was a lot easier than I had thought\nit was going to be. I guess that's all.\nMcDivitt The next target that we had was Yuma International\nAirport. Here again we had a target that was\nnot a very prominent landmark. The time of\nclosest approach and acquisition time and the\naiming angles were adequate. It gave me a good\nidea of what I should be looking for and when I\nshould be looking. I used the same maps again;\nI used the cutout of a WAC Chart plus a great\nbig world chart. There was quite a\ndiscontinuity in the scale of these two maps,\nbut I'm not really sure that we couldn't have\ndone the job with just those two. I think that\nwhat we probably needed was a world map that\nshowed a little more detail and a WAC Chart\nthat showed a little bit more area. What we\nprobably could have used most of all was a\nphotograph of the area. As I came in across\nthe California coast, I picked up the Salton\nSea and El Centro,just below the Salton Sea,\nand then I knew that Yuma was on the Colorado\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"156\nCONFIDENTIAL\nRiver, which should be a few miles to the east\nof the Salton Sea. There was a nice big bend\nin the Colorado River. Unfortunately,the\nColorado, although it is a reasonably good\nsized body of water—if just plain doesn't\nshow up that well. It was a little difficult\nto see, but I finally picked it up. I saw\nthe bend in the river. The river doesn't\nactually go through the town of Yuma, so I\nstarted looking for Yuma, and I did wander\naround a little bit before I finally found the\ntown. Then I was unable to find the airfield\nwithin the town. When I was just about directly\nover the airfield, I picked it up. Here is\nwhere I think the photograph would have been a\nlot of help, because the map that I had just\nshowed a yellow blob indicating the city with\na circle to indicate where the airfield was.\nIt showed the airfield to be to the south of\nthe town. What I was looking at was a large\ngroup of buildings, the town itself. Then\nas I went to the south, I saw even more\nbuildings and I wasn't sure whether the airfield\nwas south of that built-up area. As it turned\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"157\nCONFIDENTIAL\nout, it was south of the main built-up area that\nactually had another large group of buildings\nsouth of it. I did pick up the airport itself\nat just about 5 degrees before the nadir, and I\ntracked over to the target,probably just at the\nnadir and just shortly past. I had the 16 mm\nmovie camera going with the telescopic lens on\nit. I had the gunsight on bright. I used\nPulse Control Mode. I got right on the target\nand I managed to fly the spacecraft in such a\nmanner that the gunsight never deviated from the\ntarget by more than a half a degree, I feel,\nif it deviated that much. I think it was\nconsiderably less than that. But there wasn't\nany great difficulty in the tracking task, and\nI managed to control in all three axes and hold\nthe target just about where I wanted it. Here\nagain we had a problem with the contrasting\ntarget; the water-land mass was quite some\ndistance away. In this case, how far is it from\nEl Centro to Yuma?\nWhite I don't know, Jim.\nMcDivitt 150 miles?\nWhite Yes.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt\tIt was a reasonable distance, probably something\non the order of 150 miles or maybe only 100\nmiles, but the problem was that between Yuma\nand El Centro there weren't any identifing\nmasses that led you toward Yuma. And I had not\nup till this time looked down to try to find\nwhere the Yuma airport was,because we'd been\nsaving fuel. So,this was the first time that\nI'd seen Yuma airfield from orbit. As I get\ninto the next target, I think you'll see what\nI'm leading up to. Having a first look at a\ntarget like this, being able to identify the\ncity, but then essentially wasting time before\nI found the airfield within the city, I think,\ncost some valauable time and consequently cost\nsome good pictures; because the best picture\nis going to be that picture which is taken\nexactly over the airfield.\nWhite\tThat wouldn't happen again though, would it?\nMcDivitt\tNo.\nWhite\tYou'd probably have it pretty well nailed.\nMcDivitt\tNo, it wouldn't. So,the next target I had was\nCairo -- Cairo International Airport. Now,\nwe'd been over Cairo quite a few times before"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"this, and I had looked down to find Cairo. I\nthink we had had an Apollo Landmark or D-6\ntype of thing,where we were supposed to\nlook down and just acquire the target, but not\nactually track it or take any pictures. When\nwe did come by, we could actually look down and\nfind the city of Cairo the first time we came\nby. Later I found the Cairo Airfield, and Ed\nand I were discussing Cairo Airfield and\nAlexandria Airfield. We both had one in sight.\nWhen I picked up the Cairo Airfield(I was told\nto pick up the Cairo Airfield),it had all the\ningredients that I think is necessary. I had\nseen it before. I knew where it was with respect\nto the local landmark. The local landmarks\nwere the Mediterranean on one side, the Red\nSea on the other side, the Suez Canal connecting\nthese two large bodies of water, and a river\nleading from near the Suez Canal over toward\nthe city and the airfield. Then, knowing the\nposition of the airfield with respect to these\nlandmarks,since I'd already seen it, I came in\nover North Africa along the Mediterranean Coast\nwith no platform on, just in Pulse Mode, no"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"attitude reference, found the Mediterranean on\nmy left, pointed the spacecraft on ahead,\ndetermined the direction I was going, picked\nup the Red Sea, picked up the Suez Canal between\nthe Red Sea and the Mediterranean,and followed\nthe river in. I started this quite a distance\nout. I knew just about where the airfield was,\nbut it wasn't coming into view. Finally, at about\n20 degrees before the vertical the airfield\nfinally came into view. I tracked on the\nairfield about 10 degrees before the nadir. I\nwas tracking the area in which I believed the\nairfield to be,so that I had already had the\npitch rate set up that I required of my\nspacecraft. As I got on the target I still had to\ntrack in multiple axes, but I already had the\nrates built up, and I tracked from about 10 to\n20 degrees before the nadir to 45 degrees past.\nI think this will probably be the best tracking\nexperiment that I did. Later on, I had another\none. Later on I had another tracking task\nagainst Basra in Iraw on the Persian Gulf. Here\nagain,we had the ingredients that were\nnecessary to pick up the target. We had a large"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"body of water, a river leading up to a lake, and\nthen the airfield sticking out in a very\nprominent way. Now I'd never seen the Basra\nAirfield before 'I tried to take this picture.\nBut the landmarks near it were sufficient so\nthat finding the location of it was not difficult.\nThere weren't any towns around. It was pretty\nobvious from the bodies of water where I should\nlook for the airfield,and I picked it up also\n20 degrees before I got to the nadir and was\non it by the time I got to the nadir. I tracked\nit from there out to about 45 degrees past.\nOnce again I had a reasonably good tracking\ntask. I think that on the tracking tasks on\nYuma, Cairo, and Basra, I managed to keep the target\nwithin the center half-degree cirle of the\nsight. I used the 16 mm movie camera with the\n75 mm telephoto lens on each one of these cases.\nDid you have any other targets, Ed?\nWhite\tNo.\nMcDivitt\tI don't believe you did. I think the big\nthing here is that you've got to be able to have\na landmark that stands out long before you get\nto the target. You have to have a lot of contrast."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tOr some real technique or type of familiarity\nwith the target. I think if you were really\nfamiliar with the area you might pick up\nthings that we don't pick up now, but we could\nwith a little more map study and study over\nabove.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. I think that the first thing,\nthough, that you need to help you find the\ntarget is a really contrasting thing. Now the\nnext thing is that you've got to be familiar\nwith the target, as Ed said. Now if you have\nnever been there on the ground and don't know\nwhat it looks like from there, I think what\nyou need are a few passes over the target to\nstudy it from the air,and look for it from the\nair,and try to pinpoint in your mind the local\nterrain features and local contrasting features\nthat will help lead you to the airfield.\nBecause,it looks to me like it's easiest to find\na target when you're exactly over it.\nWhite\tBoy, you're right. There's a point when you\npass over the top where everything really is\nclear.\nMcDivitt\tThe big thing is either a lot of target study on"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the ground or a previous pass across the target\nso that when you go across it, you not only know\nthe general area that you're supposed to point into,\nbut the exact spot where that target is and\nsome identifying features that will lead you\nto this target. So with the initial things\nlike a lot of contrast to get you in the area\nand then a lot of detail gathered either from\ntarget study or from a previous pass across the\ntarget,I think that you could go ahead and\nfind it. Once on the target the tracking\ntask in the Pulse Mode is not difficult at all.\nI think you can track within just tenths of\ndegrees of the target without too much difficulty\nwhatsoever, in multiple axes. And I found that\nwithout having the platform up every,\ntracking task I did was in multiple axes, and\nalthough you're going through some very\npeculiar maneuvers, it's very instinctive to\ntrack up and down, left and right, using the\ngunsight, without any regard to what your attitude\nwith respect to the local horizontal is. In\nair-to-ground gunnery you sometimes find that\nyou've got to pick your attitudes up from the"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ground. They sort of tend to be a constraint\non what you can do, but that's not the case in\nthis kind of a task.\nWhite The thing that really amazed me, Jim,is the\nfirst time I saw an airfield from up there.\nFirst time I saw one,I saw it directly from\noverhead. I was amazed at the clarity I could\nsee of field. Although,of course,I saw no\nairplanes sitting on it, I felt that I was\nseeing down to a resolution of 50 feet or\nbetter with my own eye when there was a contrast\nof some type available to me. In general,I\nthought the clarity of things that you saw\nwas far better than it is from just flying at\n40 000 feet. Things are much smaller but they\nare much clearer to me. Also,at night things\nare much clearer. And over one town we passed\nin Australia the lights were very, very clear\ndown there to me. I think that with some type\nof an optical aid we can see a great deal.\nI think that with cameras with higher power and\nmore capability,we can take pictures of a lot\nmore down below. I think that the only picture\nI've seen so far that I thought would be nice"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"from a tourist standpoint is the one I took of\nthe Cape, which everybody seems so excited about\nright now. That's one that was taken with the\nsun on the window and at roughly a 30-degree\nangle down from the horizontal, which indicates\nyou're shooting through a lot more atmosphere\nthan necessary. The clarity was quite surprising ,\neven to me. You can count the launch pads and\nsee sizes of buildings. Because of the oblique\nangle, you can actually measure the sizes of these\nbuildings. I think we've got a tremendous amount\nof photographic potential from in space. I think\nthat Jim and I mentioned a little bit earlier that\nthe area capacity inside the spacecraft limits the\ncapability to carry a good size telescope or a\nvery big piece of camera equipment. I think that\ncoupled with the EVA capability that we have, we\ncan carry some equipment back in the adapter--some\nnice sizable cameras and telescopes--and build\nmounts on the outside of the spacecraft. We can\ngo EVA, pick these pieces of equipment up, bring\nthem out, and mount them on the sides of the\nspacecraft so that we can take a series of"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pictures and use really good, big, higher-powered\ntelescopes for observations. If we do mount them\nout there, of course, we should mount them somewhere\nso that if we had a failure of some kind and\nhad to come right in, or weren't able to open\nup the hatch again, we could separate them by\nsome type of pyro. But I think that is the one\nway we can combine our EVA operations with the\ndesire to bring up big pieces of equipment and\noperate them with our spacecraft.\nMcDivitt I agree. I think that the possibilities of\nviewing things on the ground from space are\npractically unlimited, and I was quite surprised\nat the ease with which you can control the\nspacecraft and take pictures and I was surprised at\npictures you get. We've got an awful lot of\nwork that we can do in this area. I think the\ntechnique of acquiring these individual targets\nneeds a lot of work. I feel that the best way\nto do it,if you're going to be limited to one\npass over the site,is to use a photograph of it made\nfrom some previous time. I feel that the need\nfor a large landmark nearby, especially\na water landmark, is pretty great. I thought"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that the information that we got from the ground\nof what time we would be over the target and\nwhat time it would be 30 degrees below the\nhorizontal were excellent pieces of information.\nIt certainly contributed a lot to finding the\ntarget. I think there's an awful lot of work\nthat we can do in this particular area. You\nhave anything else, there, Ed?\nWhite No. Oh, this is one thing that I have been\nbubbling about the last week or so, wanting to\ntell somebody, and haven't been able to tell\nanybody. I couldn't,of course,tell it in\nthe press conference. I really didn't want to\ntalk too much about it at the meeting we had\nbefore with everybody, but I think this is one\narea in which a trememdous amount of capability\nexists,and I think we'd be very foolish if we\ndon't work further to exploit it.\nMcDivitt I concur."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"168\nCONFIDENTIAL\n9.2 Apollo Yaw Orientation\nWhite Okay, I'll probably go into this a little bit, and then we can go over the data on it. This was a fairly simple test. All we did was start at a zero-zero reference and establish rates of 3 degrees/second simultaneously in all axes. We had a secondary objective, to see when we established these rates and put them in three axes simultaneously if we got a scanner ignor light. And I'll clear that one up realy quick. We put them in at two different times and neither time did we get a scanner ignore light. We did this at night the first time, didn't we? That was really the only time we did it.\nMcDivitt Just the night one. That's right.\nWhite That's right. We did it once at night. I established the rates in three axes and allowed them to build up for about 30 seconds. Then, I told Jim to go ahead and take control of the spacecraft, and using visual references to move to a retrofire attitude.\nMcDivitt I did this in Pulse Mode, I believe, because we were trying to save fuel. I think I did it in Direct, but I did not do it in Rate Command. I did it in Direct. The first thing I did was try to find the horizon so I would have some reference point to CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"169\nCONFIDENTIAL\nstart from. This was quite easy. I just had to wait for the spacecraft to move so that I could see the horizon in any position, and then I went for it. The yaw reference, though, wasn't present when I got to the horizon, so I ended up level on the horizon upside-down, but without a yaw reference. I pitched on down well below the horizon so that I could look down at the ground. Watching the clouds go by, or whatever was down below me, I could pick up the direction of my motion. So, I rolled around such that I was pointing down at the ground, probably 45 degrees plus or minus 20 degrees. I rolled around until my head came up, and all I had to do then was pitch back to the horizon to get to the 30 degree nose-down attitude for retrofire. This took 2 minutes and 20 seconds. Now I did this trying to save fuel. I could have done it much quicker if fuel wasn't a constraint. Also, I think I learned something from this in that I made a mistake by going first to the horizon. I should have pitched down until I was pointed straight down to the ground, picked up my yaw as quickly as I could in this"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"170\nCONFIDENTIAL\nposition, rolled around so that I could just pitch straight up, and end up at the horizon blunt-end-forward, heads up,and wings level. I think I could've gotten it down to about a minute and 20 seconds. I felt that I wasted a minute doing this.\nWhite You were taking it slow.\nMcDivitt Okay, now, I'll go through the Apollo Yaw Orientation debriefing here. The control mode, as we said, was Direct when Ed put me into the condition. I used the Direct Mode, I believe. I damped out the rate without any difficulty at all. The orientation, I've already gone through. What I should have done was to go nose-down. What I did do was that I came to the horizon first, tried to find a yaw reference and couldn't, then went down to the ground. I should have gone straight down to the ground. The time, as I mentioned, took 2 minutes and 20 seconds. I feel that I could have done it in a minute and 20 seconds. We did not get the scanner ignore light due to acceleration, but we did get the scanner ignore light when we finally"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"171\nCONFIDENTIAL\ngot to a position where we were outside the attitude constraint of the scanners.\nWhite There were a couple of things. As far as the initial rates were concerned, they were 3 1/2 degrees/second roll-right, 3 degreed pitch-down/second, and 2 degrees yaw-right/second. The final orientation that Jim came to was such that his pitch was on, his roll was on, and his yaw was off by 18 degrees. We found early in the flight that a yaw reference at night on the stars, particularly on a dark night, was very difficult.\nMcDivitt Yes. I still thought that the quickest yaw reference was to go to the ground.\nWhite As far as the day check, we decided that the night was by far the tougher case, adn it didn't seem to be too difficult. So, we thought that since the day was so easy we wouldn't even go ahead and do it. The orientation by day was a quite easy thing.\n9.3 One Attitude Thruster Failure Check\nMcDivitt Okay. We'll just go right through the debriefing here. It was not difficult to establish the rate as long as we had the roll jets in the other axes. We could damp out the CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"172\nCONFIDENTIAL\nrates. We used the Direct Control Mode. It's just pretty straightforward. It's identical to the simulator. We didn't learn anything new from this check except that the simulator was indeed correct. Do you have anything to add?\nWhite No. That it was pretty straightforward.\n9.4 Horizon Scanner Track Check\nMcDivitt Horizon Scanner Track Check is next. The horizon scanner ignore light came on as expected except the attitude band through which the horizon scanner operated was considerably broader than we had expected. The scanner ignore light went off again at the proper attitude, considering the fact that the scanner ignore circuit keeps the scanner ignore light on 7 seconds after the scanner has relocked. So, we always had the scanner ignore light go out at a different attitude than where it came on because of the fixed rates we were using. We went through the zero bank angle,pitch-up and pitch-down. We went through the zero pitch,bank-left and bank-right. We then got to the roll with pitching. Here, I only banked to the right and pitched up and down. I didn't bank to the left and pitch-up CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n173\nand down. We did the pitch with rolling, and\nhere I pitched up and rolled left and right, but\nwe did not do the pitch-down, rolling left and\nright because of a fuel limitation and a time\nlimitation. We had another experiment that had to\nbe done. We had to get the platform off and we\nhad a limited amount of time to accomplish this.\nI sort of felt that the check was very well\naccomplished at this time. The data is in the\ndata book. I saw no need to waste time doing the\nother two maneuvers, especially since we were\nso limited on time and fuel. Did you have any-\nthing to add to that, Ed?\nWhite No. I think that the remark that the data is\nin the book is adequate.\n9.5 Horizon Scanner Check\nMcDivitt The first one is the sun. I think the best wasy\nto do it is to have Ed read out the comments\nthat we wrote in the data book as we did this.\nWe started with the blunt-end into the sun.\nWhite We started blunt-end into the sun and we got\n•the scanner ignore light momentarily as the sun\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n174\nhit the scanner head.\nMcDivitt It went right out again. It went out in 7\nseconds like it was supposed to?\nWhite Right. It was just a momentary light and 7\nseconds later it was off again. Going back\naround to the 180-degree position, we didn't\nget the scanner light again. Again in here, we\ngot a scanner ignore light when we were\nfaced right into the sun with the nose, and it\nwent out again and came on once more, and then\nstayed out.\nMcDivitt So, sequentially, we started with the blunt-end in-\nto the sun and started a yaw to the left. As\nsoon as we came around into the sun we got the\nscanner ignore light, and it went out a short\ntime later. We came around right into the sun,\nand at this time the scanner ignore light came on,\nwent out, and came back on again. Is that\ncorrect?\nWhite Yes, and then finally stayed out.\nMcDivitt And stayed out. Then we yawed back around till\nwe were blunt-end to the sun again, and yawed\nback into the sun,and back around blunt-end to\nthe sun again, and we did not get any more\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n175\nscanner ignore lights. The next step is the\nMoon Scanner Check. We did this with the\nmoonset and, Ed, you might add the time that we\ndid the Sun Scanner Check.\nWhite The Sun Scanner Check was at Greenwich Mean\nTime of 11:50. We'll have to correlate that later.\nMcDivitt I think that we were supposed to be in the blunt-\nend to the sun configuration at 11:54 and start there,\nbut I'm not really sure about that. Okay, the moon\ncheck was performed just about like the sun\ncheck. We started blunt-end to the moon and\nmade two cycles. Blunt-end to small-end and back\nto blunt-end,and small-end back to blunt end.\nEd, go ahead and read the data.\nWhite Okay. On the moonset, we started with the moon\nquite high, so we had a good moon. We started\nat 12:17. We had no scanner ignore lights for\nthe first 180 degrees and,actually,throughout\nthe next cycle we had no unlocks or any lights\nfor two cycles.\nMcDivitt So this was completely normal.\nMcDivitt The Thrusters Check No. 3 --we turned the\nspacecraft, since the thruster firing wouldn't\ninfluence the orbit except to change it\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n176\nslightly, and we went ahead and fired the\nforward-firing thrusters for 1 second. We\ndidn't get any change in our scanner ignore\nlight configuration. It was out and it stayed\nout during the entire thruster check. So I\nguess that it operated all right. We'll\nsummarize all of our scanner comments at this\ntime.\nWhite You want me to read some of these?\nMcDivitt Yes. Why don't you read off some of the comments\nyou have in there.\nWhite They're in your writing. You might read the\nfirst page and I'll read the second, since\nthey're in mine.\nMcDivitt We went to Horizon Scan Mode of control for\nabout the last day of flight, and left it in that\nmode just about until we retrofired. I'd like\nto read out some of the comments that I made here\nas we lost the scanner, when we got the scanner\nignore light. At 16:03 Greenwich Time, or\nabout 72 hours elapsed time, I turned on the\nHorizon Scan Mode in about a 25-degree nose down\nattitude with a pitch up rate of about 2 degrees/\nsecond. The Horizon Scanner Mode added pulses\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n177\nto the pitch up rate and increased my rates to\nsomething considerably above that, but then\nas we came up into the Horizon Scanner Mode\ndeadband, it started pulsing rapidly and\nkilled off this rather large pitch rate and held\nthe spacecraft right in this attitude. So, we\nhad a very good acquisition of the mode from a\nsomewhat undesirable condition. At the first\nsunset the scanners were pointed right at the\nsun but did not break lock. We did not get\nany scanner ignore lights at this time. Later\non, at 17:04, about an hour later at sunrise,\nthe scanner ignore light came on with the space-\ncraft pointed in such a manner that the small end\nof the spacecraft was pointed about 45 degrees\nto the right of a line drawn directly between\nthe spacecraft and the sun. So that, essentially,\nthe sun was shining on the horizon scanners at\nabout a 45-degree angle. The scanner ignore\nlights stayed on for 10 or 15 seconds, and then\nwent out. There were no false pulses from the\njets at all. At 7:55, just at sunset, again in\nabout the same position, I was 45 degrees to the\nright of a line drawn between the spacecraft and\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the sun. The scanner broke lock. We started\npulsing down for two or three pulses, then\nstopped, but the scanner ignore light stayed on\nlonger than 7 seconds and then it went out.\nWe pulsed up one or two times to start\nrecovering from these initial two or three\npulses that started us down, and then the light\ncame on again. It was only off for about 2 or\n3 seconds, just a very short time. We were\nat about 30 degrees pitch down at this time. We\nthen started pulsing pitch-down rapidly with\nthe scanner ignore light on. We pitched down\nand did a 360-degree maneuver in pitch; we\nstarted just about horizontal, pitched down till\nwe were looking at the ground, continued pitching\ndown with respect to the spacecraft until we\nwere horizontal, upside down, now faceing\nthe opposite direction than we'd started, and\ncontinued pitching down with respect to the\nspacecraft. The small end ended up straight up\nand we continued pitching down again until we\nstarted coming back back down to the horizon. I\ndid not at any time during this maneuver attempt\nto control the spacecraft. The pitch-down"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"thrusters continued to fire throughout the\nmaneuver at intervals like there was indeed a\nsignal coming from the Horizon Scan Mode. As\nthe spacecraft started back down toward the\nhorizon, I thought sure that the horizon scanner\nwould catch the horizon, because at this time\nthe sun was no longer right on the horizon.\nHowever, we developed a slight amount of roll\nduring the last 120 to 150 degrees of pitch,\nand as we went down through the horizon, we were out\nof limits in roll and Horizon Scan did not pick\nup the horizon. I then took over the spacecraft\nand maneuvered back to a position from which the\nHorizon Scan Mode could reacquire and put it\nin this condition. It stayed locked on. Ed has\na few notes here. We'll have him read his.\nWhite About the only notes that I made on the scanner\nwas that at sunset and sunrise it had a tendency\nto break lock. I have a note here that at 22:22, at\nsunset with the sun right on the scanner, i.e.\n90 degrees to the spacecraft, the scanner\nbroke lock three different times. At 22:58, at\nsunrise, the scanner put in spurious inputs\nbut was able to control and didn't lose lock."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Sunrise seemed to be the time at which the\nscanner had the largest tendency to break lock,\nand if it didn't break lock, it would at least\nput in spurious inputs which were obviously not\nrequired other than due to the confusion factor\nthat the sunrise was causing on the scanner.\nAgain, I have one at 11:58, at sunrise, the scanner\n60 degrees to the sun, broke lock once and pulsed\nquite a few times extraneously, but caught\nitself and continued to track. I think on the\nwhole that the scanner worked real well.\nMcDivitt So do I. As a matter of fact, I believe in the\nlast 20 or 24 hours, however long we had the\nHorizon Scan Mode on, that we only really lost\ncontrol of the spacecraft that one time, where we\ndid the pitching maneuver I've already discussed.\nI think in every other instance, although it\npulsed needlessly two or three times at sunset if\nthe scanner was pointed toward the sun, it never\nreally lost lock and it certainly never lost\ncontrol. The light would come on every now and\nthen, but it would --.\nMcDivitt But, I don't think that the light came on more than\nthree or four times in those last 24 hours."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White No. They sure didn't\nMcDivitt And even though the light wasn't on, it seemed\nlike we would get an extraneous pulse every once\nin awhile at sunrise or sunset. But I\nthought that the Horizon Scan Mode worked very\nwell. It certainly proved to me that it was an\nexcellent attitude-hold mode, or pilot-relief\nmode.\n9.6 HF Transmission Reception Check\nMcDivitt I think that I'd like to start out with No. 3\nin this case. We received an update to start\nand stop our checks and had no difficulty doing\nthis. I think that the transmission and recep-\ntion, No. 1 and No. 2 under this major heading, are\ncovered in our data book and I'd like to have Ed\nsummarize them at this time.\nWhite We ran a one day and one night-long test on it\nin which we attempted to have all stations contact\nus. The data in the book. I think the data will\npoint out that the HF is a rather unsatisfactory\nmode of reception. It was difficult for us to\nevaluate our transmission that'll have to be done\nfrom the data from the stations. But as\nfar as reception was"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"concerned, we got a little bit during the night\nand just about nothing during the day. We ran\nalso a sunrise and sunset check and we made the\nlong counts as indicated,and listened for any\nreturn on all our HF tests from Thule and Elmendorf.\nWe could hear Elmendorf calling us, but they were at\none time barely readable, and most of the time you\ncould hear somebody trying to call, but they\nwere very broken and difficult to read. More\ndetailed data is in the Flight Data Book.\n9.7 Orbit Navigation Check\nMcDivitt Following the format in the debriefing guide, I\nthink that the maps and overlays that we had\nwere excellent. I felt that the concept was a\nvery good concept. It gave us a good check on\nwhere we were throughout the flight, as far as\naccurate times went. We used at times the other\ntrack charts that were printed before the flight.\nWe found that these were off some fair amount,\nalthough they furnished good information also.\nOnce we had the time error that we could apply to\ntimes listed on the map, we found that we were\nable to use these quite well also. I think that\nthe map and the overlays that we used in our"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n183\nOrbit Navigation Checks was a very good scheme.\nThe control mode we used was Pulse, and the\ntiming was just the GMT timing we had in the\nspacecraft. I'd like to have Ed discuss a\nlittle of the technique now.\nWhite Actually we had a form in our book that we had\nmade up to make these tests, but I think it\nbecame apparent to both of us as we came along\nthat this is a fairly simple thing to do. If\nyou want to just try to update your map without\nhaving an update from the ground, it was\nquite simple to point the spacecraft straight down\nto the earth and get a point which you could\nrecognize on the ground, and actually plot this\nright out on your orbit map. I think we could\nprobably make checks in this manner and update\nour map almost as well as we could by having a\nlongitude and time called up from the ground.\nI'd like to make a comment right now that I\nthought the little map that we had with the\norbit plot on it was very useful, but it\nwas weak in one respect; I was always wanting\nmore detail on what I was seeing down there.\nWe, fortunately, carried a map with about two to\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"184\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthree times the detail of the section cut out of a\nMercator Chart, which I found very useful. By properly folding a map, I think I would prefer to have a\nmap of even higher detail with me. It didn't seem to\nme to be a drawback to have a large map in the cockpit,\nas long as you kept it golded down in the proper\nmanner. Do you have any comments on that?\nMcDivitt Well, I agree with Ed. I thought that this was a\nrelatively simple task. I felt it would have been\nmuch easier to do if we had the platform up so we\ncould point the spacecraft down using inertial reference and using the platform, but it wasn't difficult to do it just visually. It only took a short\ntime to plot up a couple of points and run back and\ndetermine your own ascending node.\nWhite You know, another thing that I found very interesting\nwas when they called up plot points and they'd give\nyou 30 degrees right, down 45 degrees. Even without\nthe platform, those meant a lot to me. I could\nvisualize very easily where I was going, whether I\nwas small-end-forward or blunt end forward. I could\nvisualize quite well, without a platform, 30 degrees\ndown and yaw 30 degrees over, looking for a point.\nIt seemed I could check points nearly as well with\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n185\nor without the platform. It wasn't hard to orient.\nMcDivitt I think that's probably true. I do think that\nthis is a good scheme. I'd like to see us continue\nit on future spacecraft.\nWhite Yes. I'd take it again if I had my druthers.\nWhat do you feel about a bigger map?\nMcDivitt I think for this kind of thing, this Orbit Navigation Check, the map and the overlay we had were\nabout the right size, but when we got around to\nlooking for things on the ground, I thought the\nmaps and charts we had were pretty inadequate.\nI'd like to see us get something with more\ndetail on it, just the way Ed says, and I think\nwe will cover this in better detail when we get\nover to the Apollo Landmark thing.\n9.8 Relative Humidity Test\nMcDivitt Another operational check that I'd like to discuss\nat this time is the Relative Humidity Test that\nwe did during the flight. All data is in the data\nbook, but the thing that I'd like to say most of\nall is that the relative humidity was considerably less than anyone had ever expected. The\ncabin temperature was less than anyone had ever\nexpected, and although we were instructed to\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"186\nCONFIDENTIAL\nmeasure the cabin wall temperature with a thermistor\nthat was on the end of our relative humidity gage,\nI found that this was pretty difficult to do since\nthey'd covered the entire inside of the spacecraft\nwith the sponge rubber. We couldn't find a good\nplace where there was just bare metal. I took some\nmeasurements on the inside of the left-hand side\nfood box. I took one or two readings off of the\nmetal frame that went around the window. Those\nare the only two places I was really able to\ncontact spacecraft metal. Do you have anything\nelse that you want to add to that, Ed?\nWhite No, the data is pretty well laid out in the data\nbook. I don't think there is anything else. It\ndid surprise me, and it was a very pleasant surprise because I was interested in taking my\ngloves off and putting my visor up. I sure\ndid as soon as I found out it wasn't going to get wet.\n9.9 Zodiacal Light Check\nMcDivitt I'd like to have Ed describe this.\nWhite Okay. We did this one on the fourth day at 22:42\nZebra, and it was one on which procedures were\ncalled up. What they wanted to do was find out\nif the thrusters firing could cause any inter-\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n187\nference on some zodiacal light photography that\nwas planned on later flights. The first test\nwas to pitch straight down toward the earth,\nopen the shutter on the Contarex camera and\nactuate the pitch-up with the shutter open. Then we'd\ntake another picture and actually open the\nshutter again and activate the pitch-down thrusters,\nto see if these two thrusters would cause some\ntype of light interference to the photography.\nOn the pitch-down part of the phase, we waited\ntill the moon had set, and as we were pointed\ndown toward the earth, we came upon an area fairly clear of clouds. But, unfortunately, there were\na few scattered lights from homes or cities down\nbelow us, which might have caused some\ninterference. I don't think so. They were\nvery, very scattered. The pitch-down test\nwas satisfactory. The next one was the one in\nwhich we were actually level with the horizon.\nAgain, Jim opened the shutter, I actuated a\npitch-up, and closed the shutter. He\nopened it again, I actuated a pitch-down thruster,\nand he closed the shutter. It was a pretty\nsimple test. We took four pictures.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"10.0 VISUAL SIGHTINGS\n\n10.1 Countdown\n\nMcDivitt During the countdown the visual sighting I had\nwas a multitude of wasps sitting on the R and R\nsection and crawling all over the windows. Aside\nfrom that, the sky was clear and I didn't see\nanything else except the gantry going up and down.\nWhite That's about it. It appeared to me the wasps were\nsomewhat confused. They felt that the RCS\nnozzle was a very large beehive for them.\n\n10.2 Powered Flight\n\nMcDivitt The first topic is lift-off. At lift-off I was\nlooking at the instruments and didn't see a\nthing. I think Ed's got something here.\nWhite From the lift-off--I could actually feel when we\nlifted off -- the vibrations decreased a great\ndeal.\nMcDivitt What about visual sightings?\nWhite I'll get to that. As we started to move, I felt\nI could see the relative motion. We had a clear\nblue sky above us; there weren't any clouds,\nbut I could see the motion in the sky. I could\nalso, as soon as the roll program started,"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"definitely see the rotation of the booster and\nspacecraft combination. As we continued on up,\nI was watching within the spacecraft and outside,\nalso. I could see the pitch program initiated.\nI could hear Jim call it out, and I could\nactually see it on my instruments and also see\nit out the window. BECO's the next topic.\nMcDivitt Why don't you go through that. I think I just\nlooked out one time to see the horizon for just\na second. Why don't you go through the rest of\nthose there and read them off?\nWhite Okay, at BECO I was looking in also. I was\nwaiting for the staging and I had my attention\ninside, and I didn't see the big sheet of\nflame that John and Gus described coming from\naround the separation of the first stage. So,\nthere wasn't anything other than the normal feel-\ning of the separation. As far as visual sight-\nings were concerned, I didn't see anything else\nat staging. As we started to nose over, I saw\nthe horizon coming up and I called that out to\nJim.\nMcDivitt I think that might have been when I looked out,\nbut I'm not really sure I could see anything at\nthe time."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White I had to say something. It is quite an impressive\nview when you're up there--the very the first\ntime you look out and you see it. I looked out\nand all I could see was the horizon and the\nblue down below us. You probably couldn't,\nbecause as I think of it now, we were on the\nside. I could see the horizon and you couldn't.\nAll you could see was the sky.\nMcDivitt Right.\nWhite So I could see a little of both. I could see the\nclouds, the water, and the whole smear. The\nfirst time I saw that out the window I called\nthat out to Jim, and it was quite an exciting\nview.\nWhite Engine No. 2 ignition--I didn't see anything\nthat had to do with lighting the second engine\noff. The horizon view, I just discussed. At\nSECO, there was a lot of debris going by.\nMcDivitt That was at spacecraft sep, wasn't it, rather\nthan SECO?\nWhite You're right. You're absolutely right. At\nSECO, I didn't see anything other than that\nthe acceleration profile went down to zero. At"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"spacecraft separation I think Jim and I both\nnoticed a lot of stuff coming by the spacecraft.\nMcDivitt Right.\nWhite Just plain debris was all it was. Just\npieces of white junk came by.\nMcDivitt Probably little bitty pieces of the adapter there.\nWhite In fact, when I got out and looked later on at\nthe spacecraft separation plane, there were pieces\nof the same kind of white stuff still\nback there attached jaggedly to the adapter\nsection. Fairing jettison -- I couldn't see\nthat. Did you see anything on the fairing\njettison?\nMcDivitt When I jettisoned the fairings, I saw the\nhorizon scanner fairing go whipping off, but I\ncouldn't look at it and the nose fairing both.\nSo I only saw the one go, but there were some\nmore pieces flying all over the place, and they\nwent just as soon as I punched the Fairing-\nJettison Button.\n\n10.3 Orbital Flight\n\nWhite Boy! We've been talking about these things for\nthe last ten days.\nThe first one is geographical."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt Yes. Geographical. We could see wakes of\nships. We could see roads. We could see towns.\nAlthough I never saw any individual houses, I\ncould see an industrial area with what looked\nlike oil tanks and a few other things. We could\nsee canals very well. We could see the Suez\ncanal very well from the air. I don't think I\never saw an individual ship. I never saw any\nindividual cars or airplanes, but you could see\nrunways very well. But the thing that you could\nsee best of all were long lines. I'm sure that\nif you had a road that was 50 feet wide, or\nhowever wide you make roads, and it was long,\nyou could see it. Whereas, if you had the same\nthing and it was just a square down there, I\ndoubt very seriously that you could see it unless\nyou were looking for it, specifically.\nWhite I think perhaps also there is the contrast between\nthe colors. The things that I saw with very high\nclarity were runways. As you looked down at the\nrunways you caught a high contrast between the\ngreen or the brown, or whatever the color that\nit was laid out in. You could see it very\nclearly. I was impressed by how clear you could"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"see things. They were small; there's no question\nthat things don't get any bigger when you're\nlooking down at them, but in my opinion things\nwere much clearer. I could see with a higher\ndetail than I could when I fly over in a normal\nairplane,as far as the object itself being\nclearly defined. I also noticed this at night\nwhen I looked down on it. In the clear stretches\nthe city lights were much finer defined than the\nlights are in a city when you're flying over at\n40 000 feet. Things are small but have a much\nhigher definition. I think it would be\ninteresting to find out in our photographs the\ndegree of resolution that you have. I feel that\nthe resolution, if you have the proper contrast,\nwould go down to 50 feet or below.\nMcDivitt Yes. I'd agree with you there. Geographically,\nthere were just so many things that we could see.\nI think that we took pictures of most of the\nthings that we thought would be interesting.\nWhite I'm dying to look at those pictures.\nMcDivitt Me, too!\nWhite I agree with Jim that if you look at a city,\nparticularly if you look at a city in a desert"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"area where the houses are brown and the\nsurrounding terrain is brown, everything's kind\nof small and it all blends together. Unless\nthere was some type of contrast between them,\nit's pretty darned hard to pick up a city right\nout in the middle of the desert. We had\ntrouble when we came to El Paso in finding it,\nand Cairo blended right in with --\nMcDivitt -- blended right in with everything. You could\nsee the airport at Cairo--I'm not sure if\nI ever did really see the city.\nWhite I think I could. When I was looking in that\narea at Jaffa, as soon as I saw that airfield\nout there and was concentrating on looking at\nit, I saw more detail.\nMcDivitt Yes. The thing of it all is that,geographically,\nyou have to have a real large feature to be able\nto see it very far out in front of you, like the Red\nSea. Now when I was trying to find Cairo\none time, I looked out I was having trouble\nfinding the Red Sea. Pretty soon I found the Red Sea\nabout 30 degrees below the horizon or maybe a\nlittle more. As I got closer, of course, the\nRed Sea stood out very well. As we get closer"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and closer and closer, these things really start\nstanding out, but when you're looking from up\naround 125 or 150 miles, and you're out 60 degrees,\nyou're a long way from your target. It's just\nthat you can't see that far through all that\natmosphere, I guess.\nWhite I think one more comment on the geographical is\nthat I think we're really going to see some things\ndown there when we get some type of magnification.\nMcDivitt Yes, a telescope is what you really need.\nWhite If you can get some kind of telescope to help, I\nthink we can really see something. I wonder if\nthere isn't some way that, while we know we can't\ncarry some things inside the spacecraft, we can\nwork with something outside the spacecraft--\ncamera equipment or some kind of optical equipment\nthat we might be able to have mounted on the out-\nside. We can store it somewhere and mount it on\nthe outside after we get up there--mount a\ntelescope right through, with the eyepiece on the\ninside.\nMcDivitt Boy that would be great! Wouldn't it?\nWhite And then when it comes time to come in, you just\npunch the thing off and forget about it. But"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"while you're up there you've got this thing with\nthe long eyepiece. I think we can do this with\nEVA. Stow the thing back in the adapter, go back\nand get it mounted up, get back in, and you've\ngot yourself just about as long a telescope as\nyou'd want to put up there. Same way with\ncameras. I think you can take cameras up. We\ncan take some of these big cameras that we've been\nwanting to use.. We can have a sighting device so that\nwe can mount this thing on the outside of the\nspacecraft after we get up there,and then point\nit with a pointing device at the ground and get\nsome of these pictures that we've been wanting\nto take. I think we've got some possibilities\nthere.\nMcDivitt Okay. Celestial. I think in the nighttime you\ncan see the stars without any difficulty. In the\ndaytime you just can't see the stars if there's\nany sunlight whatsoever on the window, or if the\nnose of the spacecraft is in the sunlight, or if\nthe horizon is in the sunlight, or if some of the\nearth is in the window. I think all these things\ntend to limit your night vision. They create"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"an optical barrier, practically, between you and\nthe stars. The difference between the day sky\nup in orbit and the day sky here is, as far as\nwe were concerned, was practically nil, because those\njust weren't any stars visible. It didn't have\nanything to do with the atmosphere; it just had\nto do with the optics of our window and the\nnose being shiny. We couldn't see any more stars\nin orbit than we could here in the daylight, but\nit wasn't because of the atmosphere up there.\nIt was just because we had that coating on the\nwindow that reflected the sunlight, and because\nthe nose reflected sunlight into the windows, and\nthe same thing with the horizon or the ground.\nWhen it was lit up, it reflected light into the\nwindows. Actually, you had to get that window\nin total darkness almost before you were able to\nsee anything.\nWhite Pull the shades.\nMcDivitt Pull the shades. And then when you did that, you\nwere able to see some stars. On a few occasions\nwhen I got the spacecraft into this particular\nattitude, I was able to see some stars in the"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"198\nCONFIDENTIAL\ndaylight. How about you, Ed? Were you able to\nsee any stars?\nWhite Yes. I called them out a few times. You did\nhave to maneuver just as carefully--\nMcDivitt That's right. You had to be just exactly in the\nright spot.\nWhite Let's go into the magnitude of the stars. We\nhad set ourselves with the Corona Australis\nas a kind of calibrator for us, and this was\ncomposed primarily of fifth order stars. That\nwas very clear, and I could see without any\ndifficulty stars of lower magnitude\nthan that. I could see, without question, stars\nto the seventh magnitude.\nMcDivitt And that's exactly the same magnitude I would\nguess. You could probably see them down to a\nmagnitude of seven.\nWhite Now, another thing, though, was that the sky\nwasn't any more full of stars to me there than\nit is when I'm flying at about 40 000 feet\non a real dark night.\nMcDivitt No, as a matter of fact, it didn't really seem to\nbe as full of stars.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n199\nWhite No. On the night when we were flying with that\neclipse of the moon, I saw more stars than\nI've ever seen in the sky.\nMcDivitt Yes, and as a matter of fact, I wouldn't doubt\nthat we could go out here and fly tonight\nand see seventh order stars.\nWhite I bet we could see lower than that.\nMcDivitt That's right. What I'm leading up to say is\nthat I don't think we could see as many stars in\norbit as we could flying around in an airplane\nat 40 or 45 000 feet.\nWhite That's exactly my conclusion also. You could\nsee down to the seventh order stars.\nMcDivitt Yes, and I think the reason for this is the\ncoating on the windows, don't you?\nWhite I think so. I felt like there was just a little\nshield of what I was really seeing.\nMcDivitt If we'd just gotten that coating off, we'd have\nbeen in great shape.\nWhite I also noticed a tremendous difference if I\nturned those lights off in the cockpit. It was\njust like turning those stars on on the outside,\nand I don't think we should take those red lights\nout.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"200\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt No. I don't think so either. You know, the\nthing that did look brighter to me was that\nplanet right over by the sun. When the sun set,\nthat planet would really stand out.\nWhite I noticed another thing on the planets, I didn't\nnotice--which one is in Leo now?\nMcDivitt I don't know.\nWhite It's Mars. Mars is around Leo now, and it\ndidn't look as orange. To me it looked roughly\nthe same color as Venus did, and remember I\nremarked on that up there, which is a very\ninteresting thing now. I presumed that the\ncolor should stay the same.\nMcDivitt I didn't notice any difference between it up\nthere and here on the ground.\nWhite It didn't have to me the characteristic orange\ncolor that it has when I look at it from down\nhere. It looks more like a regular old--\nMcDivitt A regular old star, huh?\nWhite No, it looked like the planets, and remember I\nremarked on that.\nMcDivitt I think you did, now that you mention it.\nWhite And we probably went on doing something else and\nforgot about it. Let's talk about the air glow.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n201\nMcDivitt Why don't I discuss that thing that I saw those\ntwo times at night.\nWhite Yes, I saw it too, so you weren't seeing things.\nMcDivitt This phenomenon occurred in the dark and I think it\nwas near Australia, each time, but I'm not really\nsure. We've got it recorded on the voice tape, so\nwe can go back to the voice tape and see where\nit was. They were just parallel running lines\nof lights radiating from the earth up toward\nus but at a distance away, and it sort of\nlooked like a curtain. All of these lights\nrays seemed to be sort of parallel to each\nother. They looked a lot like the Aurora\nBorealis, except that they were down below us and\nthey were coming up toward us. The first one\nwe saw was considerably brighter than the\nsecond one and it was sort of wiggly. It\nprobably had five or six curves in it, at least,\nand I thought it went like this a couple of times,\nand was bent up around like this.\nWhite How about in the air glow layer?\nMcDivitt Was it in the air glow layer? No. I don't\nthink it was in the air glow layer. It looked\nlike it was down underneath -- it looked like it\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"202\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwas right over land and was considerably closer\nto us than the horizon was. It was, maybe,\nhalf-way between us and the horizon. I got the\nimpression that it was a lot closer to us and\nit was definitely not in the airglow layer.\nBoth times I had this impression. It looked\nlike it was coming up out of some clouds. I\ncould see the clouds down on the ground, and I\nhad the impression that this was coming out of\nthem, but it only got to an altitude of maybe\nhalf of ours. That would be up to 50 or 60\nmiles. This is the impression I got. I took\nsome pictures of it too, didn't I?\nWhite I had the feeling that the first time you took\nit you had the wrong setting. You had about 250\nat an f11. I don't know what you did the\nsecond time.\nMcDivitt I don't remember, either.\nMcDivitt This thing was in motion, too. It wasn't a\nstationary thing. It continued to move the way\nthe lights on neon signs do. It was wiggling\nback and forth.\nWhite When it came around over toward my side it was to\nme, closer to the horizon, and it looked more\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n203\nlike it was below and in the air glow.\nMcDivitt It looked like it was in the air glow to you? When I saw it, it definitely wasn't in the air glow. It was a lot closer to me.\nWhite Of course, it started on your side and you talked about it for 3 or 4 minutes or so. Then as we drifted around, it went over, I guess, to my side. It was irregular shaped and it was out toward the air glow layer.\nMcDivitt Well, the second time it was a lot less bright.\nWhite Are we going to talk about the air glow layer now?\nMcDivitt Okay. We're going to talk about the air glow layer, but it comes under \"horizon\". Let's talk about that under \"horizon\".\nWhite Okay.\nMcDivitt Do we have any other celestial observations? The fire flies that we had around the spacecraft continually-- sometimes you'd be able to look out and only see one, and you couldn't see them too well at all at times. You could see them in the daylight occasionally, but I don't think you could ever see them at night. But the place where you could really see them was at sunrise and sundown, because here you had a black background of the sky and you had the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n204\nsun shining on them.\nWhite They picked the sun up.\nMcDivitt They picked the sun up and reflected the rays. They reflected them just as bright as stars, I thought.\nWhite Didn't they! Well, you know the thing that was most interesting to me was the time I called you and said the sky was full of stars, and you said it wasn't the sky. We were pointing down at the earth. That was my first exposure to having your window in the daylight and mine in the dark. At this time we had all the fuel particles from the fuel from the boosters spewing out all over, and my whole view out the window was just completely full of these reflecting particles. They looked kind of like one of the star fields we had past off on us as star fields. It looked kind of like a star field, but it looked kind of unreal, too. That's exactly what it was.\nMcDivitt One of the prettiest things was when we had a urine dump at sunset,because we just had millions and millions and millions of these fireflies or particles outside. When you put them all out like that with the sun shining on them, as we'd mentioned earlier with the black background, it just looked marvelous. As a matter of fact, we took some movies of them,\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n205\nand I think we might have taken some stills, but I'm not sure.\nWhite I hope it came out.\nMcDivitt Yes, it was really spectacular! So we could just about make our own stars when we wanted to. Is that all on celestial?\nWhite That's all I can think of, Jim.\nMcDivitt I couldn't see the zodiacal lights. I couldn't see the Gegenschein and I could not see the burst of zodiacal lights that you get just as the sun sets. Go ahead, Ed.\nWhite Okay. I saw one during the last few sunrises. I watched the sun very carefully. from the time it first started to come up till it finally popped up. I was looking all the time for that shoot of light that's supposed to come up just before the sun pops up. Well, I could never see that. All I could see was the glow as it came up and a very rapid rise as the sun did come up. There's something that I did see that was quite interesting to me. Several minutes before the sun came up there would be a shaft of light that would shoot up, and I watched it on two\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n206\ndifferent occasions. It was during your last sleep. I was taking a few final movies and I was watching for this very phenomenan. It was the first time I saw it. It would be a little shaft of white illumination and it was a long time before the sun came up. I don't know whether that's what they were seeing before or not. But when the sun itself actually came up, I didn't get much of a big ball of light--just some big, bright lights coming up from behind the earth.\nMcDivitt That's all I was getting. I didn't see this other thing.\nWhite I saw quite a few shooting stars.\nMcDivitt Oh, yes.\nWhite They seemed to fall and burn up considerably below our altitude. They looked a half or a third as high as we were when they were actually being consumed and being burned up. I never saw one above us, did you?\nMcDivitt No.\nOkay cloud coverage--\nWhite There was a lot of it.\nMcDivitt There was lots of it. There were a lot of times when there wasn't any. I don't guess there's much we can say about this.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n207\nWhite I think we took some good pictures of the clouds.\nMcDivitt Yes. Well, throughout the four days we had cloud coverage over things we wanted to take pictures of. Other times we didn't have any at all. It was a variable thing, and we just got a lot of good cloud pictures, I hope.\nHorizons. Well, at night there was a definite dark horizon, which I assume is the earth's horizon. And then there's a dim band, and then above that there's a bright band that is much narrower than the dim band, and above that it is clear, and then nothing. I guess there are really three horizons. There's the top of what I think is the earth. There's a top of the dim band, and then there's a top of the bright band. In the daylight you don't see these dim and bright bands. It's just a gradual decreasing in intensity of light. It starts out with a very light blue at the horizon and just gradually goes out to the dark blue, and it finally just goes to black. Right at sundown, if you're pointing 90 degrees to where the sun is, you can see the light blue of the day sky coming\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"down. it's much, much higher than the air glow that you see at night.\nMcDivitt If you're looking over at the daylight side, it looks like the light blue, goes up probably three times as high as the air glow does. What do you think about that?\nWhite Let me go into my impressions of the air glow in the evening. I saw the same thing you did, of course, and it looked like to me that the dark part was roughly two or three times as thick as the lighter air glow layer below it. We were both impressed with the phenomenon of the apparent rise in the air glow as you go from the daylight to the dark, and as soon as you get out in full daylight, the earth's layer is all gone. But as you transition between the daylight and the dark, you see the layer start out and narrow down to what you see as you get into the dark side as the air glow layer. And when you initially get into the dark area, the air glow seems to disappear for a moment, and then the air glow layer pops out when you get into full dark, very clearly."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt I agree. Okay. Do you have anything else?\nWhite That horizon isn't very good on the daylight side, either.\nMcDivitt No, the horizon isn't very good on the daylight side.\nWhite The horizon's not very good anywhere, really. We'll go more into that on D-9.\nMcDivitt You could see the lights of the attitude thrusters, and it didn't seem to make any difference which ones you were firing at night. They weren't blinding by any stretch of the imagination.\nWhite They looked like lightening maybe. Little flashes.\nMcDivitt The attitude thrusters lit up the sky a little but not a great amount. They weren't blinding either. Not much to say about that. Okay. I want you to discuss adapter separation that you saw.\nWhite Okay. On the adapter separation, Jim and I agreed to separate the electric and the OAMS, and then pause between the adapter separation so that we could dwell a little bit on the separation and absorb as much as we could about it. When it did separate, we got a very clean feeling of separation between the two and a very definite feeling that the adapter and the spacecraft had separated. There wasn't much question in my mind. Was there much in yours, Jim?"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt No, not at all.\nWhite There were a few pieces that came around from it, but not as much as there was at spacecraft separation after insertion. Did you see anything?\nMcDivitt No. I didn't see anything off the adapter.\nWhite All right.\nMcDivitt The equipment adapter. I just saw it off of the retro adapter.\nWhite Why don't you go to retrofire then?\nMcDivitt Okay.\nWhite Do you have anything else on the adapter separation?\nMcDivitt No, I don't think so.\nWhite I was impressed with the cleanness in the feel, and I didn't even want to look around. I just happened to be looking over at Jim's window at that time, and, as I said, I could see pieces go around, and I could especially see pieces to this side. What I saw looked like a mount with two round things on it. I had been briefed on this thing by John Young and he said it looked like two pump packages. So, I said it looked like two pump packages, too. Looked like just what I expected it to. And there was lots of debris around it as it whistled."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"off to the side, and then it went out of my view.\nMcDivitt Okay. On retrofire there weren't any sightings to observe. Did you see anything outside, Ed? Did you see any flames or anything like that?\nWhite No, I didn't.\nMcDivitt I don't think there was much there. The retro pack jettison--we didn't see it jettison, but shortly after that we had rolled upside down and we were flying in, and I saw the retro adapter floating around on the left side. It had turned around so that it was small-end-forward rather than blunt-end-forward. You could see the whip antenna sticking out the side, the four retrorockets, cross-beams, and the plumbing around the edges. It was quite a sight. It drifted out behind us until it got out a couple or 300 feet. It started glowing a little on the leading edge. It started fading farther and farther behind us as we reentered. It finally went from a dull glow to a bright one, and finally you could see the leading edge of it eroding away. Finally, it was just a ball of flame back there.\nWhite I thought that was quite a sight, too. It kind of set the modus for our reentry, of observing very interesting things all the way down, including ourselves."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt We didn't observe anything in particular that happened at 400 000 feet. The ionization was where we really started picking up the fire.\nWhite I think we kind of timed that with what you were talking about the retro adapter up there. You said, \"Hey, look at it starting to burn.\", and about that time we were starting to throw a sheath around us to.\nMcDivitt That's right. It looked like to me that it went from pink to orange and then went out to a reddish-orange, and then in the midst of the reddish-orange you could see little tongues of green occasionally. It was quite pretty.\nWhite I think another thing about it too is that there wasn't as much of it as I thought there would be. I can't say that I was disappointed in not seeing more fire, but when I first heard about John Glenn's reentry, I envisioned more fire coming out. In this case you might call it just a sheath.\nMcDivitt That's right. There wasn't a big blaze, by a"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"long shot.\nWhite It was almost like a veil of silk. There was\nno flame.\n10.4 Reentry\nMcDivitt Well, in reentry we rolled. We didn't have any\ntrouble in seeing the' horizon as we went around,\nbut we were rolling all the way down.\nWe did see ourselves crossing the ground, since\nwe were heads-up a fair amount. We could look\nout and could see anything we wanted to see. I\nsaw the Gulf Coast, and then out across Florida.\nWhite A little bit of dizziness was associated with\nthe rolling reentry as far as the visual--\nMcDivitt Yes. It wasn't really dizziness. It was just\nthe fact that you could tell that you were going\naround in a circle at a relatively high rate.\nIt didn't bother us. It's just that you could\nfeel it. The spacecraft didn't oscillate very\nmuch during reentry. Anything else there, Ed?\nWhite No.\nMcDivitt When we deployed the drogue, it really made the\nride interesting. I couldn't see the drogue\nvery well. Ed could see it probably better than"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I could. At this time I didn't know where the\nsun was. We oscillated back and forth on the\ndrogue probably as much as plus or minus 40\ndegrees. I never did see the drogue dereef.\nI couldn't see up to the top to see if it was\nreefed or not.\nMcDivitt I don't think there's much else about what we\ncould see on the drogue. Can you think of\nanything?\nWhite I could see it up there whipping back and forth,\nand I was sure hoping that it was going to hold\non and not pull the front end of the spacecraft\noff, the way we were oscillating.\nMcDivitt At R and R-separate I saw parts of stuff out in\nfront. My window was pretty well clouded over,\nand I couldn't see that well. I did see something\nseparate, and I did see the chute start off. It\nwent all the way up. At main chute deploy I saw it\ncome out in a reefed condition, I checked the\nchute and I didn't see any panels missing. I\nchecked the little circle in the middle in the\nparachute, and it seemed to be in fine shape.\nI was expecting that we had a good chute. It"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"finally just dereefed and we had an excellent\nchute. It popped out and came back in. About\na quarter of it along the edge folded back in\nand then popped back out again and we had a\nbeautiful chute. Do you have anything else on\nthe main chute?\nWhite No. I couldn't see it until it started to de-\nreef. From the dereef on, I could see the chute\nand was very happy to see it.\nMcDivitt During our descent to landing I could see the\nR and R can with both the drogue and the pilot\nchutes attached to it,floating off to one side.\nAfter we landed, I noticed that there was steam\ncoming out of the RCS thrusters. This steam\ndidn't last very long. I could see the sea dye\nmarker in the water. I could see the parachute\nin the water.\nWhite I think you also ought to indicate that the\nwindows steamed up quite a bit. I could see\nout a little better than you. You couldn't\neven see 50 feet out in front of you on your\nside.\nMcDivitt No, I sure couldn't. There was a hole down"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"at the bottom of the window that I could see\nthrough. Ed wasn't having too much trouble seeing\nthrough his. It was real nice to see the heli-\ncopter and the swimmer.\nWhite Both the windows were pretty foggy, though."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":225,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"11.0 EXPERIMENTS\n11.1 Two-Color Earth-Limb Photography (MSC-10)\nWhite This is one in which we had our first example\nof poor flight planning. They scheduled our\nMSC-10 experiment so that it actually conflicted\nwith some Horizon Scan Tests that we had to\nmake. And since our Horizon Scan tests were\nbeing made in conjunction with the platform,\nwhich was only going to be up for a limited\nperiod of time, we had to interfere on the\ntail end of MSC-10 to go ahead and start\nworking on the Horizon Scanner Check. Anyhow,\nwe went ahead on the MSC-10, starting at 11:04,\nand went through eight series of pictures. This\nwas the time that we had trouble with the event\nindicator.\nMcDivitt Didn't we have ten series? I thought we had ten.\nWhite I've only got eight indicated here. Oh, yes,\nwait a minute; it says 10 1/2 runs. I only\nhave eight recorded here, and a final one\nbeing run at 11:57. We should have 9 1/2 runs.\nMcDivitt Yes.\nWhite We should have 9 1/2 runs, and only nine were"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":226,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"required. We should have it all. On the first three runs the event indicator wasn't used, because I was having trouble with the Hasselblad shutter working properly in conjunction with the event indicator. About 11:19, I got the event indicator working all right, and the rest of them were run pretty well. The early runs were taken pretty much in night conditions. I doubt if much will come out on that one. The next one, at 11:09,was taken with the sun right on the horizon,right into the camera, so I doubt if that one will be too much more than a big washed-out mess. The rest of them were all taken with the horizon in the proper position and utilizing the ring sight. The last part of the experiment was interrupted by the Horizon Scanner Tests. In other words, we didn't get to the sunset. I think actually the sunset would have been one more series of pictures.\nMcDivitt I would think so.\nWhite Okay. I guess that's all for MSC-10.\nMcDivitt Okay.\nWhite Do you have any comments on that?"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":227,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt No, I don't have any comments. I think we logged the time and the weather along the route, such as it was, and we got all that into the book.\n11.2 Synoptic Terrain and Weather Photography (S-5 and S-6)\nMcDivitt I think we had a lot of unusual and significant subject matter, and it's all in the pictures. We had one camera that wouldn't wind the film too easily, but other equipment operated fine. We didn't get the data reviewed properly--too late.\nWhite And we used the voice recorder as often as we could record. I don't believe we have all of this S-5 and S-6 photography recorded. I think as we go over them, though, the ones we didn't record will be pretty obvious.\nMcDivitt Yes, I think that those two experiments are really in the photographs. The Hasselblad camera operated fine except we had one magazine that didn't wind up too well, but it never did jam up completely. I guess that sort of covers it. Wouldn't you say, Ed?\nWhite I would too. All the data that we got for it is recorded in our data book. Let's see Simple Navigation with the Sextant. Ha! D-9.\n11.3 Simple Navigation with the Sextant\nMcDivitt I guess we might as well cover it."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":228,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White Well, in the Air Force portion of it, we can start right off by saying that the stars they wanted us to run the operation on--I think, Series No. 4--\nMcDivitt No, that was the last one. They gave us Series 1 to start with.\nWhite --which was the daylight. The daylight operations didn't prove feasible at all. We couldn't see the stars and if we could have, we didn't have a good horizon to run them on. So it became apparent to us that that run was lost right in the beginning,when we first came out of the darkness and lost all the stars. We also got the big picture that the sextant was not going to be too easy to use. It was going to be impossible to use without using some fuel, and it was going to be dam hard to use when we used just pulses of fuel. We needed some kind of stabilization. At least I thought so.\nMcDivitt We might say that the lightbulb in the counter readout for the angle was burned out.\nWhite That burned out within two seconds after we got up there, I think."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":229,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt Did it ever light?\nWhite First time I turned it on it lit and it went \"flit\", and then the light just went bzzz-bzzz.\nMcDivitt I didn't know it ever lit.\nWhite It lit and then the light went out.\nMcDivitt Okay. So we lost the lightbulb in the angle readout, which made all the rest of the measurements very difficult. And the Air Force portion in daylight was completely unusable. You couldn't see the stars and the horizon at any time. In the night portion,we initially had great large angles between the stars and the horizon, and we found that about 25 degrees was the maximum star-horizon angle that we could handle. Would you concur with that, Ed?\nWhite Sure do.\nMcDivitt As we mentioned when we were talking about the horizon and the air glow. We really had three horizons. We had the true earth horizon. We had the top of the dim air glow layer, and we had the top of the bright air glow layer. I think that I always used the top of the bright air glow layer, except where I specifically called out in our"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":230,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"notes. Ed tended to use different types of horizons, dependent upon the type of filter he had on. Why don't you discuss that a little bit?\nWhite I tended to feel that the bottom of the bright air glow layer gave me a little finer defined horizon for a no-filter operation. When I put the blue filter on, though, I didn't have much horizon at all. When I put the green filter on, it gave me, as far as the top of the air glow is concerned, a better horizon to measure to. I thought that the horizon was certainly not a very defined point to measure to, and I think accuracy would be lost in trying to measure to a horizon like this. It's just plain hard to take a fuzzy old horizon and try to make an accurate measure to it. That's exactly the kind of horizon that you've got at night.\nMcDivitt I concur. There must have been at least a couple of minutes of fuzziness in that horizon, and I don't think that you would ever expect to measure to the horizon within a couple of minutes. Do you?\nWhite No. You'd have to calibrate yourself down pretty"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":231,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n223\nclose to measure. You know it would be just\npure luck if you kept measuring properly to it.\nMcDivitt Yes, the thing of it all is that even if Ed\ngot himself calibrated so that he would always\nmeasure the same angle between the star and the\nhorizor--it wouldn't be consistent between one\nperson and another. I'm not really sure how you\nwould ever go about measuring to this horizon\nwith any accuracy at all unless you had some way\nthat you could-instead of attenuating the light-\nbuild it up in some way and then filter out one\nparticular line that happened to be an extremely\nsharp line. The horizon I like to measure to\nbest was the top of the dense air glow layer with\nno filter. The next horizon I liked was the top\nof the dense air glow layer with the green filter.\nI liked least of all the blue filter, because it\njust completely eliminated the horizon.\nWhite Yes, I don't think the difference between the\nclear and the green was enough to argue over a\npreference between. I thought maybe I had a\nclearer one in the green, but I tended to take\nfar more measurements with the clear one, so\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":232,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"224\nCONFIDENTIAL\nperhaps they are so closely matched that it\nreally didn't make too much difference.\nMcDivitt Yes, I did most of mine with the clear one.\nWhite For the runs in the Air Force portion, I found\nout that the stars had too big of an angle between\nthe star and the horizon. To actually follow\nthe format, for the runs as given, turned out\nto be too difficult. We did make runs on stars\nand horizons if we took the time on it and took\nthe measurements. It seemed like the angle was\nfairly well limited between 20 and 25 degrees. This\nwas due to the limited maneuver capability imposed\nupon us and the lack of having enough window space.\nIf you get behind the sextant, behind the window, and\ntry to make a measurement, you might be able to\ntheoretically measure something out to 50 to 60\ndegrees. Theoretically, this may be possible, but\nyou must can't get yourself up above the console\ncircuit breaker panel or down into the foot well\narea, which would be required to make measure-\nments of this magnitude. There were definite\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":233,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"225\nCONFIDENTIAL\nlimitations on hitting the side of the spacecraft\nand trying to make a sighting and losing the\nobject out of the upper window as you cranked\nthe periscope down to bring the star down to\nthe horizon.\nMcDivitt In trying to accomplish the Air Force portion\nof the experiment, we found ourselves completely\nunable to do the daylight star-horizon measurement.\nSo, to get some insight into the operational use\nof the sextant, we took a great number of star\nto horizon measurements at night. They are in\nthe book in quite a bit of detail. As we mentioned\nearlier, the helmet was an impediment to use with\nthe sextant, so on occasion we had to take the\nhelmet off. The greatest angle that we could\nnormally get was about 25 degrees between the\nhorizon and the stars, but on occasion we got up\nto 30 degrees. This meant a certain alinement\nof the spacecraft was necessary so that you\ncould get the largest piece of glass between\nthe star and the horizon and still get the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":234,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"226\nCONFIDENTIAL\nsextant in there. We found out that to do the\nstar to horizon measurement, you had to be\nright-side-up. If you tried to do it upside down,\nthe filter blanked out the star and not the\nhorizon. I think that there are a great number\nof measurements in here, but I do feel that the\nAir Force portion of the D-9 Experiment was more\nqualitative than quantitative. Maybe I ought\nto talk about the Apollo portion. We made one\nApollo run where we used two stars. I held the\nspacecraft fixed to within about plus or minus\n2 degrees, and Ed took a great number of\nmeasurements. Ed made a great number of\nmeasurements between two stars. And we got\nour 30 runs on one pair of stars that\nwere quite close together. Then we\nstarted out with about another 20 sight-\nings on another pair of stars that were\nfurther apart.\nWhite They were all in Scorpi. I think they\nwere about 12 degrees on the first one and\nabout 22 degrees on the second one. There were\nAntares and Scorpi in the second series, and it was\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":235,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"227\nCONFIDENTIAL\nScorpi and the third star up in Scorpio in the fi\nfirst series.\nMcDivitt Again, we found that the angle that we had\nselected to operate between was too large, and\nwe ran our first group of stars in about 12 1/2\ndegrees, and for the second pair we tried to\npick stars that were farther apart so that we\ncould get a better feel for larger angles. This\npair of stars was a little over 21 degrees apart.\nWe were too optimistic about the angle between\nstars that we could see by looking through the\nspacecraft window. What do you think about the\nvoice recorder usage during this experiment,\nEd?\nWhite I don't know why we had to do it.\nMcDivitt No, we actually hand-recorde most of the infor-\nmation here. The one thing that certainly delayed\nthe experiment was the loss of the lightbulb\nwithin the readout. We changed the batteries and\nbulbs from the cross-hairs and never could get\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":236,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"228\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthis particular light to come back on.\nWhite\tDid you ever figure out why we needed to hand-record all these things-why we had to record them on the recorder--the times and all that jazz?\nMcDivitt\tNo, we had to record the angles some place and we had to correlate it to a time.\nWhite\tWell, it says to prepare sextant and photo-event indicator for measurements. What do they mean by photo-event indicator?\nMcDivitt\tThe photo-event indicator was to get the exact time. Remember, when you were doing star to horizon measurements you had to have--\nWhite\tNo, but this is just for the star. I don't understand the photo-event indicator. I think that just clobbers up our data.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. Yes, that wasn't applicable at all. It didn't make any difference what time it was at all.\nWhite\tIn fact, when I made a second run on this while you were asleep one time, I didn't put the photo-event indicator on.\nMcDivitt\tNo, there wasn't any need to put the photo-event indicator on this.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":237,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"229\nCONFIDENTIAL\n11.4 Electrostatic Charge (MSC-1)\nMcDivitt\tI think what we could say here is that we turned MSC-1 on and off when it said in the flight plan and when directed by the people on the ground.\n11.5 Proton-Electron Spectrometer and Tri-Axis Flus-Gate Magnetometer (MSC-2 and MSC-3)\nMcDivitt\tWe turned off MSC-2 and -3 according to real-time flight planning from the ground and whenever the flight plan in the air called for it.\nWhite\tWe had one time when I ran a double small-end-forward set of runs through the Anomaly. The first time, I felt that the heading had not been accurate enough for the small-end-forward requirement. We were doing it without the platform on the stars, and the first time through I wasn't satisfied with it. So, I called down to the ground and told them that I wasn't satisfied with the run and that I'd make a repeat run the next time. This I did, and I left the equipment on throughout both runs and for an hour after that. So, we effectively have two small-end runs through the South Atlantic Anomaly.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":238,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"230\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt\tOkay. We didn't have any operational problems with it. Did we use the voice recorder with it?\nWhite\tYes, I guess we did. It should all be recorded on the voice recorder. If not, we've got backup times in the book. Our voice recorder was our prime means, and our book was just a backup.\nMcDivitt\tRight.\n11.6 Radiation (D-8)\nMcDivitt\tI think one time you were sleeping, and you didn't get it that pass, but you got it the second pass, didn't you?\nWhite\tWell, we got them logged when we did it. They can go back and get it.\nMcDivitt\tRight. There were no operational problems. We did use the voice recorder to record the information.\n11.7 Inflight Exerciser (M-3)\nMcDivitt\tWe didn't have any stowage problems with it besides those is associated with all the other equipment. The outside thin rubber layer broke on the exerciser about the end of the first day.\nWhite\tYes. I've got a comment or two.\nMcDivitt\tGo ahead, Ed.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":239,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"231\nCONFIDENTIAL\nWhite\tI had the feeling that my capacity and my desire to do strenuous physical exercise decreased during the flight. Actually, it kind of decreased to a point and stayed at that point for the whole flight. Shortly after I got up there, I really didn't have any big desire to do a great deal of physical exercise. I did do the exercises as indicated, and I did about eight extra series of exercises with the exerciser, but I noticed a definite lack of interest in doing heavy physical exercise.\nMcDivitt\tI concur with what Ed said, although I'm not really sure this came about because of the small amount of sleep that we had or just an effect of the zero-g thing. I did use the M-3 exerciser to do other exercises. I used it to exercise my arms, not only in the manner that was demonstrated but by holding on to one end and pulling the other end with the other hand. I used it to exercise my legs also.\nWhite\tI did a few other exercises, just with the exerciser. I yanked around a little bit on it, as Jim indicated. But, I also did some exercises in which I pressed pretty hard up against the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":240,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"232\nCONFIDENTIAL\nfront end of the spacecraft; I tried to tense my legs and tense my stomach and arms, and I tried to exercise in this condition. I probably did that a lot more than I did anything with the exerciser.\n11.8 Inflight Phonocardiogram (M-4)\nMcDivitt\tTo the best of my knowledge we didn't have any equipment problems. About the end of the second day my sensors started itching a little. I don't know if it was my phonocardiogram or my other sensors.\n11.9 Extravehicular Activity\nMcDivitt\tExtravehicular activities have been covered in great detail earlier in the debriefing, I don't think we have to go over that again.\n11.10 Miscellaneous\nMcDivitt\tIn the external observations I did observe three satellites, but I think that these were covered in detail earlier, and I don't believe we need to go over that again here.\nWhite\tI think that we'll comment again (we've commented on this point before) that the tape recorder is the most important piece of equipment that we have onboard the spacecraft to record our ob-\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":241,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"servations, times, and other information concern-\ning the experiments. I think the one we have\nonboard with the light located down underneath the\npilot's right elbow is entirely unsatisfactory.\nI feel that we lost some information on our\nflight due to the light coming on and not being\nobserved. We were going ahead with information\nfor the tape, but were losing it in this manner.\nI think we ought to correct this deficiency\nprior to the next flight.\nMcDivitt I concur heartily."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":242,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12.0 PRE-MISSION PLANNING\n12.1 Mission Plan (Trajectory)\nMcDivitt It is pretty difficult to debrief this pre-mission\nplanning because we had so many pre-mission plans\nthat we couldn't keep track of them all. I think\nthat we started too late on the mission planning\nfor GT-4, because everyone was concentrating on\nGT-3. Then in the two and a half months that we\nhad to do the mission plans, we changed it about\nthree or four times, drastically. We not only\nchanged the trajectory,but we changed the altitudes\nof insertion; at one time we were shooting for a 87-\n145 orbit and then a 87-161, and then we changed it\nfrom 90 degree launch azimuth to 72 degree launch\nazimuth. We changed how we were going to handle the\ndecay of the orbit. All in all, I think our\nmission plan changed just too often.\n12.2 Flight Plan\nMcDivitt Same with the flight plan. We kept changing it\naround and changing it around and changing it\naround. It was really unfortunate. Up until about\nten days before the flight we were really prepared\nfor about two different flights, and finally we got"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":243,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the flight plan nailed down. I think our flight,\nthough, was somewhat different than other flights in\nthat we did have some real major changes about\ntwo and a half months prior to the flight. Consequently, we had to expect these things. So,I\nthink I'd be the first to admit that I lived with\nthese changes, because I had a great desire to do\nthe mission that we set out to do.\nWhite We both kind of got to the point where we knew\nthat we had a mission to do, and we knew it was\ngoing to be tough as far as getting a good flight\nplan was concerned, and we were just trying to get the\nthe best we could and go.\nMcDivitt That's right. I think that the situation that\nwe finally ended up in was that we tried to have\na very good launch and first couple of orbits and\na good last orbit or two. All the stuff in the middle,\nwe knew we were going to have to handle real-time.\nI finally found myself forced into the situation\nwhere I couldn't even worry about the middle flight\nplan. We had to lay it out in general and expect\na great number of changes. This is exactly what\nwe did. We handled it in real-time. I'm not\nsuggesting that we do this for future flights, for"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":244,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I really hate to see us go right on down until\nthe last minute before we get this information\nprepared. I think it's too bad, but I think on\nour flight a lot of this just couldn't be helped\nbecause of the drastic changes in the flight plan\nin the last two and a half months.\nWhite I don't feel we've got a big beef coming to any-\nbody. I know a lot of people were working pretty\nhard.\nMcDivitt That's right. There were a few things on our\nchecklist that could have been done earlier, but\nI think the total mission plan,as such,was modified\nat a late date to change the objectives by a great\namount. We in the crew agreed with the change. It\nalmost doubled the amount of work that we had to\ndo in those last couple of months, but I think\nthat by accepting it and trying to make the thing\nwork, we were able to overcome the problem, and it\nwas indeed a major problem. A situation that I\nhoped wouldn't occur and did occur on our flight\nconcerned the checklist, the data books, the pro-\ncedure books, the map for the orbit navigation and\nour charts and graphs. We didn't receive the check-\nlist and the procedure and data books for our flight"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":245,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to look at until 8:00 o'clock the night before the\nflight. Consequently, we didn't have a lot of\ntime to go through them the way we should have. We\nshould have had these books and charts in our hands\nno later than two weeks before the flight. Here\nagain there were some extenuating circumstance, but\nI'm not sure that the circumstances were really that\ngreat. I still think that we should have gotten\nthese out earlier. The people down at the Cape\ndoing these things worked themselves to the bone\nnight and day,practically,to get these things done.\nI have nothing but the highest praise for the people\nfrom FCSD that came down to do this job. I just\nsort of suspect that we should have gotten started\non it earlier and that maybe we should have had a few\nmore people down there doing it. Any comment on\nthis, Ed?\nWhite No. This is the thing that I think I was harping\nabout a long time before the flight, because I saw\nthe same thing happen on GT-3,when the checklist\ncame in at the last minute. In fact, the last\nnight before the flight, I remember John walking down\nthe hall looking at his flight plan and his check-\nlist and commenting on this surprise and that"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":246,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"surprise, and there were a few surprises in ours.\nI wouldn't say there was much we didn't know about,\nbecause we had gone over it pretty thoroughly. But\nall our experimental procedures and our books--we're\npartially to blame in some reepects also, because\nwe were running the show and knew exactly what\nwe wanted. But I concur very heartily with Jim's\nrecommendation that we get these things made up\nat least two weeks ahead of time so that we can\nuse them in the simulator, and that we use the\nlittle hand-held checklist exclusively in the\nsimulator that we are going to fly with if you could\nget them nailed fown that well ahead of time. That's\nwhat I would have liked to have done. That's what\nwe didn't do, though.\nMcDivitt Yes, I don't really see any excuse for dragging it\nout to the last day. If these things would have\nbeen eight hours later than they were, they wouldn't\neven have made the flight.\nWhite I think another thing, too, is that right now we've\ngot a good set of books and checklist. I recommend\nheartily, unless the crew that comes behind us has\nsome very strong diverse opinions, that they use\nsomething similar so that they can get somebody\nstarted making them early enough to be useful."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":247,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt I concur wholeheartedly.\nWhite They may not like everything about them, but I think\nthat they proved their value with us in our flight.\nI sure would rather use something,and use it well,\nthan use something that may be a little bit better\nand use it poorly.\nMcDivitt Okay. I think that covers the flight plan topic,\ndon't you?\nWhite Yes sir.\n12.3 Spacecraft Changes\nMcDivitt Here again we had some changes that were brought\nabout by the change in flight plan, but I think we\nhandled all of these adequately. I just don't think\nthat we ought to use GT-4 as an example as to what\nshould be done on a flight, as far as no change and\nthings like that. I feel that if we don't have the\nequipment onboard the spacecraft checked out and\nready for service by the time the spacecraft leaves\nSt. Louis, they shouldn't fly on the flight. I've\nfelt like that since the time I got assigned to this\nflight, and I still feel that that's the way to do\nit, unless you have a major change for a worthwhile\nreason.\nWhite I was sure wondering right to the very end if they"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":248,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"were going to get these final changes in that were\nrequired for our flight. They sure waited a long\ntime to put them in.\nMcDivitt Yes, two or three days before the flight we still\nhad a lot of things missing. In fact, when I got\ninto the spacecraft, about the first thing I\nnoticed was that the velcro wasn't around the\n8-ball. About 30 minutes later, while we were\nlying there waiting for the launch, Ed looked up\nand pointed at the 8-ball at the place where the\nvelcro was not.\nWhite Yes, there wasn't velcro in several places where I\nhad wanted it, and in several places where I had\nactually drawn in the lines where I wanted them to\nput the strips. Instead, they put them 90 degrees to\nwhere I had the lines. I can't believe they would do\nsomething like that. I'm not really complaining.\nI think they did a pretty good job.\nMcDivitt Do you have anything else on spacecraft changes?\nWhite No.\n12.4 Mission Rules\nWhite I thought this was one of the smoother points.\nMcDivitt What? Mission rules?\nWhite Mission rules."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":249,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt So do I. I don't really have any comment. I\nthink we had a very good set of mission rules, and\nI don't have much else to say about it.\nWhite I concur. I think we set a record on running\nthrough the mission rules review, and I have one\nrecommendation to make. I recommend highly that the\ncrew review their rules thoroughly prior to the\nmeeting and send their disagreements to Flight\nOperations Division,so that they can either concur\nwith them and incorporate them,or disagree and then\niron the differences out on the major things before\nyou come to the mission rules meeting. Then,\nyou'll find that you sail right through in just\nthe first meeting, and this is exactly what we did.\n12.5 Experiments\nMcDivitt I think we had some pretty good pre-mission planning\non our experiments,except D-6, and I think the\npeople in FCSD,specifically, fell down on the job.\nThey did not prepare the Target Acquisition Folders\nthat we needed. They arrived down at the Cape\nabout two weeks before the launch with a foot-\nthick pile of maps for us to memorize.\nWhite They had a WAC Chart of every place that we were\ngoing to fly over, the whole 30 degrees north to"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":250,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"30 degrees south, and that sure isn't what we needed.\nMcDivitt I think that there wan't any imagination used here.\nI just feel that the people who were responsible for\nperforming this duty fell down on the job completely,\nand did nothing whatsoever but talk about it. When\nwe really got around to flying this thing they didn't\nhave a thing for us. It turned out that the people\nwho finally ginned up the maps for us were the\npeople from the Department of Defense Office here\nwho were monitoring the thing from the technical\nstandpoint. I sort of felt that this target\nacquisition stuff was a function of FCSD, and as\na matter of fact the people who were concerned with\nit led me to believe this. When we got around\nto flying the flight, we found that there wasn't\nany way to acquire these targets. They hadn't done\nany work with it at all, so I think that this is\na real low point in the FCSD.\nWhite They didn't even have what I would consider a\nsatisfactory method of calling the information up\nto us.\nMcDivitt No, to put it bluntly, it was screwed up and un-\nworked upon. I think the planning for all the\nother experiments was adequate."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":251,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White We had one area where we were a bit too ambitious,\nand this was in the stars for the Air Force D-9.\nWe reviewed this, also, so there was no lack of\nplanning. It just turned out that using these\nstars in the sequence that we had for them,with\nthe type of fuel constraints that we had imposed\nupon us, we just couldn't effectively run the ex-\nperiment without using a great deal of fuel.\nMcDivitt Yes. And I think that this came about just because\nof a lack of knowledge on everyone's part, on just\nwhat we could handle in the spacecraft and the\nrates that the stars move through the skies.\nWhite That was something that we learned on this flight.\nMcDivitt I think so. I think that's part of the qualitative\ndata that we brought back for D-9, but I do feel\nthat the pre-flight planning for D-6 was completely\ninadequate. Anything else on any of the other ex-\nperiments?\nWhite No, I think the other experiments were well briefed\nto us. We understood them quite well and I think\nthe procedures were well taken care of.\nMcDivitt That's right. Let me clarify one thing. I think\nthat the technical aspect of D-6 was one of the\nbest briefed of all the experiments. The DOD people"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":252,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"who were responsible for it had some of the most\ndetailed and thorough briefing guides and forms for\nus on the equipment, and we were more briefed on the\nequipment. It was just the procedures that were\nlacking.\nWhite Yes, I felt that I knew the equipment and its assembly and\nusage on the D-6 backwards and forwards. Procedures\nfor conducting the experiment were quite clear to\nme, but the only thing that we didn't have was a good\nmethod of passing up the targets and target acquisi-\ntion once we got up there. Also, just handing me 243\ntargets was a pretty simple-minded approach in trying\nto solve this problem, I thought.\nMcDivitt I don't think I have anything else on experiments.\nWhite Nope."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":253,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12.6 Training Activities\nMcDivitt Well, I wouldn't do anything differently.\nWhite Jim, I wouldn't either. That's one of the\nhighlights, I think, of our mission that we\nwere well trained for it; and I felt in all\nrespects we were well trained. I don't be-\nlieve I'd add anything extra, and there's\nnothing I think I'd take out, either.\nMcDivitt Well, I think that the training went along just\nabout as we'd planned it and hoped it would\nwork. I do feel that the simulators didn't\nprovide us quite the training that we needed\nearly enough in the program. I think the\nsimulator here in Houston was too busy inter-\nfacing with MCC and switching from one\nbuilding to another and updating to \"5\"\nconfiguration and a whole bunch of other things.\nWe never really got it the \"4\" configuration.\nThe one down at the Cape took too long too convert\nfrom the GT-3 to the GT-4 configuration. As a\nmatter of fact, as early as about two weeks\nbefore launch I had done four reentires on the\nsimulator down there."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":254,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White I did four for the whole time.\nMcDivitt Is that right?\nWhite My total reentries were four. I remember I\ngot three that day before the launch. I have\none thing, though, Jim, that I think that I\nwould do differently.\nMcDivitt Okay, what's that?\nWhite Now that I know what kind of checklist I need\nand what kind of procedures books and data\nbooks that I need, I'd have those things ready\na month ahead of time. I'd use them and get so\nfamiliar with them and iron any little bugs\nout. We still had some bugs in our books.\nMcDivitt That's right.\nWhite It was a little hard to use. It was a little\nhard to locate things in there. And if I did\nanything differently, I'd put my emphasis real\nearly on getting my checklist and data books\nup even though I know fully well that they'll\nchange in some little respects right up to the\nflight, but I'd get them out so I'd have them.\nWe didn't have anything up to a week or eight\ndays before the flight."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":255,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt That's right. The things like how to do the\nexperiments shouldn't change. They should\nstay exactly the same. The operational checks\nshould remain the same, and maybe the flight\nplan will change a little, but you really\ncould have most of those books done long in\nadvance.\nWhite Then you know exactly what information you're\ngoing to take up on the flight with you and\ncan get this laid out long in advance. I think\nthis is one bit of experience that we could\npass on to the guys coming behind, particularly\nthe ones that haven't flown before, at least\nin Gemini—just what information we took along\nand the reasons why we took it and what our\nrecommendations would be and what we would want\nto take now. Because remember you and I sat up\nthere the night before the launch and sifted\nthrough a pile of stuff and decided just exactly\nwhat we really wanted to take.\nMcDivitt Of course, on the other hand we knew what we\nwanted. I think we were just looking for it\nin that pile of junk that we had on the table."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":256,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tYes.\nMcDivitt\tWe had that list of things that we'd made up.\nWhite\tDecided we were going to take. If I had it to do over again, I think I'd have this all in mind earlier.\nMcDivitt\tYes.\nWhite\tYou and I, two weeks before the flight, I don't think,fully knew exactly what we wanted, and it wasn't ready for us then, anyhow.\nMcDivitt\tYes. You're right. Matter of fact, some of the stuff we took was our own personal stuff, like those star charts.\nWhite\tYes.\nMcDivitt\tAnd that polar star chart was mine and that Mercator was yours.\nWhite\tRight."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":257,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"249\n13.0 MISSION CONTROL\n13.1 GO/NO GO's\nMcDivitt\tOkay. Mission Control. Mission Control is the next major topic. It says describe and discuss updating on the status of the spacecraft on the mission. GO and NO/GO's, I thought, went pretty well. You have any comment on that?\nWhite\tNo. Sure didn't.\n13.2 PLA and CLA Updates\nMcDivitt\tPLA's and CLA updates, I thought, went extremely well. You have any other comments on that?\nWhite\tNo. We used the form and they're easy to copy down. There's sure a lot of information they can get up in a short period of time.\n13.3 Consumables\nMcDivitt\tThe consumables, we had--\nWhite\tI got some comments on that.\nMcDivitt\tOkay. Go ahead.\nWhite\tOkay, I thought that their monitoring of our electrical system was deficient. I don't believe they gave any indication of what our electrical consumption had been, up till very near the end of the flight, and they informed"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":258,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"250\nus that we were 130 or 150--\nMcDivitt\t160, Ed.\nWhite\t--amp-hours over, and I would've liked to know this at discrete times throughout the flight.\nMcDivitt\tI think,really,this was our fault. I think we should've called down and asked them. When they did give it to us, they gave it to us because we did call down and ask them.\nWhite\tYes, okay. Maybe that was,but I was looking for it more often than that. Maybe we could have this part of the GO/NO GO, and they could say you're on your electrical profile and your OAMS profile. This might be a part of it to be sure.\nMcDivitt\tYes. That would be a good idea.\n13.4 Flight Plan Changes\nWhite\tFlight plan changes.\nMcDivitt\tFlight plan changes. Well, we had a few. I think that in general they all came off where they should. I don't really have any comment.\nWhite\tWe had one area in which they were deficient with the MSC-10.\nMcDivitt\tI've already talked to Jerry about that. He"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":259,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"251\nsays that there was a misunderstanding between us. They sent up to do the MSC-10, and then they said not to do the MSC-10. Do it later. We didn't get the message.\nWhite\tI didn't hear that.\nMcDivitt\tYes. I thought all the flight planning was good except in this one instance that we're talking about. We were directed to do MSC-10 in one pass, and then before it was done, we were directed to start another check. We got this information pretty late before we started the experiment and hence didn't get it. We didn't check over the times ourselves and I guess we should have. So that when we got around to doing it, we found ourselves running into the situation where we were supposed to be doing two experiments at the same time. Fortunately, I think we were able to accomplish all the objectives of both experiments, but there was no need to hurry when we were up there for four days.\nWhite\tJim, I've got another one too. I've thought a lot about it. I thought about this one before"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":260,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"252\nthe flight, and I think about it right now. And I thought about it during the flight. I think it's time to start a crusade. I think it's time to start a crusade on the elapsed time. Get us a clock. It's going to cost money, but I think we ought to get ourselves a good elapsed time clock inside the spacecraft. Get FOD to start going on elapsed time. And here's another funny sounding one, but I don't see why we couldn't do it--why we couldn't have a flight watch in ten-hour increments. Let somebody build a ten-hour watch with a counter on ten hour increments. And then we'd have the timing system that we need on the spacecraft. What do you think of that? I know you and I have talked about this before but I think it's time--\nMcDivitt\tYes. We were forced to run our mission using both elapsed time and Greenwich Mean Time and it's almost an insurmountable problem.\nWhite\tI think it's really got our data all fouled up right now, too. I think we'll unsnarl it all right, but, boy, if we could've been putting all our times into those tapes and on our data books in straight elapsed-time increments, and even"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":261,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"when it gets into long time, you know, fourteen day flights, you can still put in 430 and 20 seconds as well as you can the regular Greenwich Mean Time.\nMcDivitt Yes.\nWhite I think that it wouldn't cost us any more to have Omega make us a ten-hour watch and fix these dials up on it so that we could keep track of good elapsed time.\nMcDivitt You've got to leave the minutes and seconds alone there. Well, let's not argue that here or even discuss it. I think what Ed says is right. We were forced to run the mission in both elapsed and Greenwich Time, and I don't think that was the way to do it. I think we ought to really start after this elapsed time thing quickly and get on with it.\nWhite Right. It's time to get on with this. I think it's time to make a crusade on it. I think everybody's ready for it.\nMcDivitt Yes.\nWhite Except the few people that are fighting it, and I think we can overcome them."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":262,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13.5 Systems\nMcDivitt Okay. Mission Control System. I think the Mission Control on this flight was nothing short of excellent. We got all the information from the ground that we needed. We didn't get bothered by them unnecessarily, I don't believe.\nWhite They were there when you needed them.\nMcDivitt They were there when we needed them. That's right. I have nothing but praise for the ground control on this flight. How about you, Ed?\nWhite I did too, and I had the feeling up there that I had confidence in what they were doing down there and in the decisions that were being made. I felt that when I needed information that the source was available down there and I could always get it. That's a very good feeling."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":263,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"14.0 TRAINING\n14.1 Gemini Mission Simulator\nMcDivitt Okay. Over on Training now. The first topic is Gemini Mission Simulator and I think we touched lightly on this subject already. I think that it's an excellent trainer for procedures, system knowledge, launch, orbit, retrofire, reentry, and crew stations. I think the big problem with it is that it takes too long to turn it around. I think that we're fooling around with it too much, committing it to supporting other functions besides flight crew training. The simulator at the Cape was supposed to have been turned around at roughly two weeks after GT-3's launch, and about six weeks after the launch it still wasn't doing its job. When we went down there to start flying this completely checked-out simulator, we found that the launch phase worked, the orbit phase did not work, and the reentry phase did not work. After we got the orbit phase squared away, we found out that we kept losing reentry command system. We couldn't use Direct Control Mode in anything. We never did fly reentries"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":264,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"until shortly before the actual flight, at which time I think I had four total reentries about a week before the flight. Ed said he only flew four reentries on the simulator at the Cape in total. I probably flew fifteen, I would guess. That's total, so I think that the Gemini Mission Simulator fell down completely in preparing us for this flight.\nWhite Well, not quite that bad, Jim.\nMcDivitt Well. Okay. We did get a lot of training from it, but I think that the turn-around time is completely inadequate. It made the job for the flight crews a lot tougher than it should have been.\nWhite I don't know really what the problem is, but I think the people down there are working hard, and when things were working right, the training was outstanding. But, gee, there's just too much time when things weren't working right.\nMcDivitt That's right. I think that's a good point to make. People down at the Cape try very hard, and I don't think it's their problem. The program for the Cape Simulator was done here."} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":265,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"When it arrived down at the Cape, it was completely inadequate for the job, and I can't understand why that program wasn't checked out in better shape when it went down there.\nWhite I think, also, they're caught as second-rate citizens as far as keeping their simulators up to date and getting the latest spacecraft changes in them. They seem to be way behind the spacecraft and indicated to me that the system did not permit them to update the simulator with the speed with which it ought to be updated to train the crews properly. The things that were characteristic of Gemini 4 were being incorporated in the simulator down there in the last two or three weeks when they should have been incorporated in the first two or three weeks after the changeover from GT-3 to GT-4. I think we just have to work on a faster processing of the changes in getting the pieces of equipment and the changes out to the simulator so that they can be incorporated in it. Once they got the changes down there, they got them incorporated into the simulator, seemed like, pretty"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":266,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"fast. As long as they weren't there, they\ncouldn't update that simulator. Another thing\nthat I'll, for the life of me, never understand\nis where in the world the food boxes were for\nthat simulator down there. I think somebody\nshould explain just why it took about one month\nto locate a pair of food boxes and put them on\nthe simulator down there. It was the only way\nthat we could actually work on the storage of\nthe pieces of equipment for our flight, and we\ndidn't get a chance to look at that until what\nI consider too short a period of time prior to\nlaunch.\nMcDivitt Yes. It seemed like these food boxes were ordered\na year in advance, and they never showed up. It\nlooked like there was a complete lack of follow-\nup on somebody's part here. Then it turned out\nthat they did find the food boxes but didn't\nrelease them to the Cape simulator quick\nenough. I came home here to Houston and found\nthat we had a complete set of good food boxes\nin the Houston simulator; whereas,the one down\nat the Cape did not have any at all. This sort"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":267,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of goes along with putting the following\nmissions in front of the mission that's about\nready to go. One last comment that I would\nlike to make on the simulator is that we made\na mistake in building it so that it would only\ntilt up 30 degrees. This lying on your back\nin a simulator is for the birds. You can sit\nup in it a lot longer than you can lie on your\nback. Also, everything that you have to do\nwhen you're lying on your back is about five\ntimes harder than it is when you're sitting up--\nnothing at all like zerc g. I feel strongly\nthat we should look into some method of making\nthis simulator go all the way up to a 90-degree\npoint.\nWhite Here, here! One other thing on this simulator,\ntoo, while we're thinking about it. I think,\nthere's no question in my mind, the most effective\ntrainer we have is our mission simulator. I\nthink it could be made about a third more\neffective if we had a decent out-the-window\nhorizon provided. We didn't have anything that\nI'd call satisfactory available to us prior to"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":268,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"flight.\nMcDivitt I agree.\n14.2 LTV Simulation\nMcDivitt LTV Simulation. I think that on the two trips\nthat we made to LTV to do the abort simulations\nwe got as much for an hour of time spent as\nwe did in any other part of our training. We\nwere able to do a great number of runs in a\nvery short period of time, and we got all our\nabort procedures down pat in just a very short\nperiod of time. I think that I can't say\nenough for this. I certainly will be glad when\nwe get this type of a simulation at MSC so that\nwe don't have to travel out of town to get this\nkind of training.\nWhite I hope they can get it so it works as well as\nit does up there,down here, because one thing\nthat impressed me was that you could go up there\nand be able to run 70 runs.\nMcDivitt That's right. In a day.\nWhite And not sit around waiting for things to get\nfixed all the time.\nMcDivitt I think on the one day we went up there, Ed"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":269,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and I together,in one day, had about 160 runs.\nWhite Yes. Pretty close to that.\n14.3 Centrifuge\nMcDivitt Centrifuge. I think that the centrifuge\ncontributed very little to our mission. I\nsort of feel that once you've been on the\ncentrifuge and you've learned what the effect\nof g's are and how to counteract their effects,\nthat there's not a great deal more to be gained.\nI didn't really feel that I got that much out\nof the centrifuge time. How about you, Ed?\nWhite I think that your orientation in the centrifuge\nis very important. In other words, I think that\nit does give you a feeling for what the g's are\ngoing to be like and what the g's on the lift-\noff and reentry are. I don't believe there's\nany necessity for beating your head on a centri-\nfuge over and over, running it up there. I\ncertainly wouldn't want to go run a series\nof runs just before the mission so I'd know\nhow it's going to feel on launch, because I already\nknow how it's going to feel on launch. The first\ntime you run a few runs on a centrifuge, you"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":270,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"know pretty well what it feels like. I think\nthat it's good in moderation, but I certainly\ndon't think that you should over-train on it.\nIt's not something that you need to train on\nevery time for every flight.\n14.4 Translation and Docking Trainer\nMcDivitt Translation and Docking Trainer. I thought\nthat the Translation and Docking Trainer was an\nexcellent trainer for the D-6 pass that we did,\nthe Apollo Tracking Pass. I think that the\nsimulation that we set up at Martin Denver was\nalso an excellent tracking task for this, and I\nsort of felt that we got the techniques from\nthese two trainers that we needed to successfully\nperform this experiment.\nWhite I have a couple of comments on that. I felt the\nsame way. Of course, we didn't have this trainer\nused too much for the docking phase, but I thought\nit was quite good for the tracking aspects and\nalso for thruster failure.\nMcDivitt That's right. It gave you a dynamic simulation\nof a thruster failure and what you could do and\nwhat you could notice when you actually have a"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":271,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"thruster that failed. I used it quite a bit\nshortly before the flight to practice the dock-\ning and the station-keeping that we never really\ngot a chance to perform in flight. I felt that\nit was quite valuable for this.\nWhite Yes. I think that it's a very good simulation,\ntoo, of the actual way the spacecraft really\nmoved.\nMcDivitt Yes. I think it is too. I think it is too.\nAnything else on Translation and Docking\nTrainer?\nWhite No.\n14.5 Planetarium\nMcDivitt Planetarium.\nWhite I think it's very valuable training. We used\nthis one down here in Houston, and we used the\nMorehead Planetarium. There's not a bit of\nquestion in my mind which one you ought to use,\nand it's Morehead, because the display of the\nstars is about as close as you can get to the\nreal stars out in the sky; whereas,in the one\ndown in Houston the projection of the stars\njust doesn't have the quality to provide the"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":272,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"information that you want to get. I have one\nother comment, though, as far as the stars are\nconcerned. I think that probably we got as\ngood training with our stars during our night\nflights as we got during the planetarium work.\nMcDivitt I feel that's true too. You've got to go to\nthose planetariums to see all the stars in the\nsky, but the night flying we did with our star\nchart was probably the thing that really imbedded\nthe location of these stars in my mind. I kept\nlooking at them night after night after night\nafter night, and when we flew I was convinced\nthat I could go up there and find all those\nstars that I needed to find. I think I had no\ntrouble at all finding them.\nWhite Yes. We saw every one that was out at night.\nI think we saw them all. I think we can come\nback with good identification on them, and what-\never information they want us to tell about\nthem,we can tell them.\nMcDivitt That's right. And where we didn't know the\nexact name of a particular star in a constel-\nlation,we could always tell which star it was in"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":273,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the constellation and be able to find the name\nof the star after we got back here to the ground.\nBut I do think that the star training we had\nwas worth every minute of it.\nWhite Yes, I'd go back some more, too. I'd go back\nto the planetarium some more.\nMcDivitt That's right. It's one of the things that you\nreally have to keep at all the time, because you\ncan never go out at night and look at all the\nstars in the sky. You can only see a certain\nrestricted area, and it takes a lot of looking\nto see the whole sky. By the time you look\nlong enough to see the whole sky,it's six months\nsince you've seen certain stars, unless you\nwant to stay up all night.\nWhite Spacecraft orientation. I think the little devices\nthey ginned up at the Morehead Planetarium are\nreal good in this respect. You can sit there and\nthey can simulate your orbit. They can put you\nup in the barber chair and you look out and see\napproximately the number of stars you can see\nout the spacecraft, and I thought that's about\nwhat I could see out of the spacecraft. When I"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":274,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"actually got up close to the window, when we\nwere up flying, I could see more stars, as I\nthought I could. I thought that the training\nwe received was good.\nMcDivitt Yes. No doubt about it,that was all time well\nspent.\n14.6 Systems Briefings\nMcDivitt Systems Briefings. We actually had briefings on\nevery system in the spacecraft, and there are\nquite a number of them. The schedule was such\nthat we had a general briefing here at Manned\nSpacecraft Center on each and every one of these\nsystems. I think we had a second briefing here\nat the Manned Spacecraft Center on certain\nsystems like the ECS before we went to the\naltitude chamber. We had a number of briefings\non the systems again up at McDonnell by\nMcDonnell engineers in St. Louis. We went down\nto the Cape, we had another general briefing by\nthe McDonnell engineers at the Cape probably six\nweeks before the flight, and then about ten days\nbefore the flight we had a final systems\nbriefing where they just discussed any changes"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":275,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that had been made since the previous briefing\nand brought us up to date on some of the things\nthat had occurred during this spacecraft systems\ntesting. I thought every one of these systems\nbriefings was worthwhile, and I think without\neach and every one of them we would have been\nmuch worse off than we were. I think that if\nI had it to do all over again, I'd schedule them\njust exactly the same manner we did this time.\nOne or two here at the Manned Spacecraft Center,\nthen again up at the contractor, then a couple\nof them down at the Cape. Any comment on that?\nWhite No. I liked the manner in which they were presented,\nas a buildup of details as we went along. The\nfinal ones down at the Cape were just certainly\nnot systems briefing. They were details of the\nsystem briefings.\n14.7 Flight Experiments\nMcDivitt Right. Flight Experiments. Simulations. We\ndidn't have to do any simulations on MSC-1, -2,\nand -3. They were just throwing switches. The\nmedical experiments, the Calcium Deposit Experi-\nment and the Bone Demineralization Experiment,\nrequired that we have a number of x-rays taken"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":276,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and we did indeed go make a couple of dry runs\nand a couple of wet runs on the x-ray table to\nmake sure that we could get it done quickly. I\nthink this paid off. We never had any delay due\nto these x-rays. We certainly all knew how to\nuse the exerciser. And the phonocardiogram\nneeded no practice. S-5 and S-6 did not require\nany training here on the ground, because these\nwere supposed to be photographs from orbit.\nThat thing was impossible to simulate on the\nground. The D-8 required no simulation, so it\nboiled down to D-6, D-1, and D-9 as the experi-\nments that required simulation prior to flight.\nAs we said earlier, we felt that the Translation\nand Docking Trainer and the Martin Denver simu-\nlation for the D-6 experiment were very valuable.\nThey gave us the techniques that we needed to\nperform this thing in space. Gemini Mission\nSimulator was invaluable, too, for everything--\nfor experiments, operational checks and for the\nwhole mission.\nWhite As far as any really D-9 work, though, with the\nsimulator, all we could go through were kind of"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":277,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cursory procedures. There was no star field or\nanything to utilize, which I think would be\nuseful. If we had a decent star field, we could use it\nout of the GMS. Also, on D-6 the GMS did not provide\nus anything we could use. There were procedures,\nright. And like you said, the Translation and\nDocking was all right for D-6, but, practically,\nwe had no simulator anywhere that gave us any-\nthing that I could get out for D-9.\nMcDivitt Okay. Are we through with the briefings? We\nhad a real major briefing that lasted three or\nfour days here at the Manned Spacecraft Center\nabout four months prior to the flight. Wasn't\nit, Ed?\nWhite Yes. Well, was it that long? It was in March\nor April--March wasn't it? Somewhere around\nthere.\nMcDivitt I thought it was later than that. We had our\nfirst real major briefing three months before\nthe flight,on the 8th of March, and we had the\nexperimenters come to Houston and go over their\nexperiments in great detail to explain what they\nwanted and how they wanted us to go about get-"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":278,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ting it. I thought this was very good. We had\nanother briefing on experiments in the flight\nplan review about six weeks before the flight,\nand we had another experiments review about\nten days to two weeks before the flight. Again,\nI felt that each and every one of these was\ncertainly time well spent. I think that,\nprobably,the first experiments briefing might\nhave taken place a little sooner.\nWhite I've got a comment on D-6 here. Ten days before\nthe flight, they came in with the information\nfor D-6 and said, \"How do you want to run the\ntracking on D-6 and send the information up?\"\nThis was not the time to bring up this type\nof information or try to make this type of\ndecisions. These decisions should have all\nbeen firmed up at the six-weeks briefing, and\nthis is what the six-weeks briefing was for.\nIt was to tell us how we were going to run our\nexperiments. After that time there weren't\nsupposed to be any changes to the procedures,\nand 10 days before the flight was just to\nincorporate any last-minute changes and solidify"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":279,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"any things that might not be understood too\nwell in the procedures. So this is where, I\nthink, that the people giving this information\nin D-6 never were with it--as far as getting\nthe information ready for us for it.\nMcDivitt Very good. I concur completely.\nWhite In the future I think the experiments should\nbe firmed up by six weeks prior to flight and\nthe procedures should be well in hand at that\ntime. They shouldn't drag on and be dragging\non right on down to a few days before the launch,\nwhich is exactly what happened on D-6.\nMcDivitt Okay. Equipment. We had some of the equipment\navailable to us as early as six or eight months\nbefore the flight. Other equipment kept dragging\nin until the very last day, just about. I don't\nbelieve that you can get the training equipment\navailable to the crews too early. We found our-\nselves, in many cases, with the training equip-\nment locked up out at the Cape for safe keeping--\nso safe that we couldn't even get to it, and we\ndidn't get a chance to use it the way we should\nhave. I think only by a lot of noise making, I"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":280,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"guess, were we able to ever break this stuff\nloose. Training equipment is just what it says--\nit should be used for training and it shouldn't\nbe kept under lock and key away from the crews.\nWhite I had that same feeling down there, Jim. I\nthink we both kind of got on this one. It\nseemed like they'd want to get all the training\nequipment all together and say, \"Ha, ha. We've\ngot it all together. We're all up to snuff.\nThere's all of our training equipment. It's\nall in that locker over there.\" That's not the\nway it ought to be. The training equipment\nshouldn't be in that locker at all. It should\nall be out to the crew.\nMcDivitt In the hands of the crew.\nWhite And I think up in the crew quarters is where the\ntraining equipment belongs and down in the\nsimulator. It should be out and being used. I\nthink that one of the keynotes to our success in\nhaving a decent amount of photography taken on\nthe flight was that we took the cameras that\nwere available, whether they were flight type\nor the commercial types of cameras that we car-"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":281,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"273\nCONFIDENTIAL\nried, and became very very familiar with them\nin the months before the flight. I recommend\nvery highly that crews that follow in the future\nget the equipment and utilize it so that it\nbecomes second nature to them prior to the\nflight.\nMcDivitt Okay. I don't think we need any more on that,\ndo you?\n14.8 Spacecraft Systems Test\nMcDivitt I think that we learned quite a bit from our\nSpacecraft Systems Tests. We had a great\nnumber of them in St. Louis and then down at\nthe Cape. I think that the amount that we\nlearned and the time we spent was a little low.\nI think the ratio of what you got for your hours\nspent was low, but I do feel that it's a neces-\nsary thing and that you really should participate\nin this spacecraft testing. There were long\nperiods of time when we learned nothing,\nabsolutely nothing, but on the other hand we\ngot a feel for our spacecraft and saw how a lot\nof the systems were working and the only way\nyou can do this is to actually participate in\nthe testing.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":282,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"274\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthe testing.\nWhite You know, it doesn't seem to fit in here\nanywhere else, but I think maybe at this point\nwe ought to indicate we attended every one of\nthe management meetings up there at McDonnell\nwhile our spacecraft was up there progressing\nalong through the assembly line. I recommend\nthat all crews in the future have representation\nat all those meetings.\nMcDivitt That's right. The most important meetings I've\never gone to in my life, at least since I've\ncome here to the Manned Spacecraft Center, were\nthose Gemini management meetings up at McDonnell.\nI can't express enough the need for a representative\nof the flight crews to be there at the meetings.\n14.9 Egress Training\nMcDivitt Egress Training. I thought the briefings were\nexcellent, the flotation tank work was excellent,\nthe Gulf exercise was excellent, and the survival\ngear briefing was excellent. I can't say how\nglad I am that we've had this training when we\nplopped down out in the Atlantic Ocean and we were\nsitting there. Even though we were about to be\nrescued, I knew that even if they didn't rescue\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":283,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"275\nCONFIDENTIAL\nus right then, I felt fully confident about\nbeing able to take care of myself out there in\nthat water.\nWhite We were well prepared in this area.\n14.10 Parachute Training\nMcDivitt Parachute training. I thought that the parachute\ntraining that we had was good. I thought that\nthe parachute training into the water with\npressure suits on was by far the best that we\nhad. It was the most realistic and it was the\nkind of training that we would need during\nactual flight.\nWhite And I recommend highly that all crews do this\nand they go in suits as close to the same kind of con-\ndition that you're going to plop down in that water\nwith, and go through the full inflation and not\nskimp on a thing.\nMcDivitt You get all tangled up in a parachute just the\nway you're going to get all tangled up in the\nparachute when--\nWhite That's right. Inflate the life rafts and inflate\nthe Mae Wests and inflate the whole works every\ntime. And if we don't have enough life rafts\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":284,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"276\nCONFIDENTIAL\nto do it every time, see to it that we get it.\n14.11 Launch Simulation\nMcDivitt Okay. Launch Simulation. I think that the\nlaunch simulations were excellent. I think that\nwas the first place that we really had a chance\nto work with the people who were going to be\ncontrolling us during the flight. I think we\ngot a lot out of it, and I think they got a lot\nout of it. What we really had to do was learn,\nI guess, respect for each other, and I guess the\nonly way we could do this was to see how each\nof us was going to handle a situation that arose.\nI don't have any other comment on it except that\nI think that it was certainly worthwhile.\nWhite I've got a comment. Not on that, but a thing\nthat fits right in.\nMcDivitt Shoot.\nWhite I think that the reentry simulations that we did\nshould be made a regular part of the preparations\nfor flight. It's just as important to me as the\nlaunch simulation. I think there should be\nregular reentry simulation for the preparations\nprior to the flight in the same manner as the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":285,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"277\nCONFIDENTIAL\nlaunch simulations.\nMcDivitt I think so too. I think those reentry simula-\ntions we did that day were certainly worthwhile.\nWe only had to do a few of them to learn the\nprocedures for getting the information back and\nforth. We tried one one day, and it was so\nhorrible that I'm certainly glad that something\nlike that didn't happen during flight. But\nafter we had done a couple of more it smoothed\nout, I had no doubt in my mind whatsoever\nthat we were going to be able to pass the in-\nformation back and forth.\nWhite That's right. I felt that they were equally\nas important as the launch simulation.\n14.12 Network Simulation\nMcDivitt The Network Simulation. We didn't actually\nparticipate in the Network Simulations, and I\ndon't think we missed a thing. I think, though,\nthat something that was required was a discussion\nwith the Network Controllers. We came back to\nHouston to tell them our points of view and\nexplain to them the kind of information we\nwanted passed back and forth and the format of\nhow we wanted this information given to us. I\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":286,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nthink that during the flight it certainly\nproved that it was worthwhile, because that was\nthe way we got it, and we were able to get this\ninformation in a usable manner in a short time.\nWe didn't have to go over and over and over. I\ndon't have any other comment on that. Ed?\nWhite No.\n14.13 Zero-G Flight\nMcDivitt The zero-g flights are the next topic. I sort\nof feel that the zero-g flights were one of our\nmost valuable training tools, especially since\nwe were going to do the extravehicular activity\nportion of the flight. Without this we wouldn't\nhave had the confidence in ourselves in getting\nin and out of the spacecraft and opening and\nclosing the hatch that was required, so that we\nprobably wouldn't have even done it. Ed, do you\nhave any other comments on that?\nWhite Concerning the little bit of a hatch problem\nthat we did have, I think that the work that I\nhad done on the zero-g airplane sure prepared\nme well to meet the problem that we had. I\nrecommend very highly that for any egress work,\nin which we're going in and out of the space-\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":287,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\ncraft zero-g, that you get up there and work the\nprocedures out thoroughly between not only the\nguy getting in and out but between the two guys\nthat are sitting in the seats. This is the way\nwe flew it. We didn't go up there and fly just\none guy jumping in and out the hatch. We went\nup there and flew with the guy in both seats,\nwhether the man in the left seat actually worked\nall the time or not. There were times when he\nhad to help, and in our flight it paid off,\nbecause there was a time when Jim had to help,\nand he knew exactly what the problems were and\nwas able to give the help necessary.\nMcDivitt Another thing that might have helped here was\nthat I've been in and out of that right-hand\nhatch almost as many times as Ed had.\nWhite So we knew just what the problems were.\nMcDivitt So we knew exactly what the problems were.\n14.14 Flight Plan Training\nMcDivitt Next topic is Flight Plan Training. I think we\nhad such a great number of changes in our flight\nplan that it's really not fair to discuss this\nin any great detail. The approach that we did\ntake, as I mentioned earlier, was that we would\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":288,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"have a good launch and first few orbits, a good\nretro-preparation, and a good retro and reentry,\nwith the center of the mission being taken care\nof by doing the experiment or doing the operational\ncheck by itself without regard to what went\nbefore or what went after. I think this is the\nkind of training you really need on these long\nduration flights. Anything else there, Ed?\nWhite No. I concur heartily. I think that practicing\nit piecemeal is the only way you can do it.\nMcDivitt You have any concluding comments?\nWhite I think we've been making conclusions all day\nlong. I think to try to conclude them all,\nwe'd never get them.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":289,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"4fd15ee700a34887","page":290,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"503ebba3b6b1bf47","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-1057 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\nOFFICIAL RECORD\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nElectronic Communication\nTitle: [REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Date: 10/[REDACTED]/2024\nFrom: [REDACTED]\nContact: [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nApproved By: [REDACTED]\nDrafted By: [REDACTED]\nCase ID #: [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) - [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] Unidentified Anomalous Phenomenon (UAP) [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nSynopsis: [REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nDetails:\nOn 10/[REDACTED]/2024, [REDACTED] [REDACTED] ([REDACTED] was interviewed at the FBI [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] is currently employed by [REDACTED] and works primarily in the [REDACTED] [REDACTED] facility. [REDACTED] spoke to a presentation and videos that were previously provided to the FBI. [REDACTED] has spoken with fellow and former [REDACTED] employees, [REDACTED], [REDACTED], and [REDACTED] about the sightings observed from [REDACTED] property in [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] stated that [REDACTED] first UAP sighting was on 11/[REDACTED]/2021. [REDACTED] was exercising in [REDACTED] house around 5am when [REDACTED] noticed some lights"} {"doc_id":"503ebba3b6b1bf47","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nTitle: [REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nRe: [REDACTED] 10/[REDACTED]/2024\noutside of [REDACTED] back window. Initially, [REDACTED] believed someone was in [REDACTED] yard with a flashlight bobbing around. When [REDACTED] went outside, [REDACTED] observed a singular light that eventually split into two or three lights. This formed a triangular pattern with a light in the center and remained for approximately ten minutes. [REDACTED] got [REDACTED] to see what [REDACTED] was seeing as well. [REDACTED] while filming on [REDACTED] smartphone, accidentally took a flash photo and the lights immediately disappeared.\n[REDACTED] Speaking to a sighting on 03/[REDACTED]/2022, [REDACTED] played a video that was previously provided to the FBI and explained that the location of this sighting was not in the same location. [REDACTED] stated that the UAP sightings that [REDACTED] observes are typically at dusk or at night and the light observed appears to morph and move laterally.\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] first reached out to [REDACTED] [REDACTED], formerly of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] through LinkedIn to speak about what [REDACTED] had observed from [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] home. In conversations with [REDACTED] [REDACTED] was told that what [REDACTED] was observing was legitimate and that \"people have been hurt by these things\" and to be careful. [REDACTED] asked [REDACTED] if [REDACTED] had a UFO experience before in [REDACTED] life. At this point, [REDACTED] explained an incident that occurred in 1996. [REDACTED] stated that [REDACTED] was driving with [REDACTED] Army officer from Fort Bliss, TX to Fort Carson, CO. While in New Mexico, [REDACTED] claimed that the vehicle [REDACTED] was driving shut down and a large light shined on [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] passenger. After about two minutes the light went away and the vehicle's electronics turned back on.\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] has lived at [REDACTED] current property, [REDACTED] in [REDACTED] [REDACTED] since 2021 but [REDACTED] previously lived about five miles from [REDACTED] current home from [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] stated that [REDACTED] has seen hundreds of these lights from [REDACTED] property and has numerous videos and photos that [REDACTED] was willing to share. [REDACTED] also stated that [REDACTED] has seen these lights as well and others who have visited his property as well.\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] stated that [REDACTED] has seen more activity since September. The sightings have not always been as long as [REDACTED] initial sighting in 2021. There have been shorter bursts and it is common to have corrupted video when trying to record these sightings.\n[REDACTED]\n2"} {"doc_id":"503ebba3b6b1bf47","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nTitle: [REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nRe: [REDACTED] 10/[REDACTED]/2024\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] explained how [REDACTED] used ADSB data to try a disprove what [REDACTED] was seeing as aircraft flying overhead. [REDACTED] explained that [REDACTED] cross referenced date and time stamps with ADSB records to determine what sightings may be aircraft. [REDACTED] would then determine the azimuth of the lights and check the ADSB data.\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] acknowledged throughout the interview that [REDACTED] never had an interest in UAPs and that a lot of what [REDACTED] said may seem weird or crazy.\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n♦♦\n[REDACTED]\n3"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BUAER ROUTE SHEET NAVAER-141A (REV. 5-52) CONFIDENTIAL DECLASSIFIED Authority: NND 67905 DIVISION RTG. & ACT. DATE RECD. RELD. INIT. DIVISION RTG. & ACT. DATE RECD. RELD. INIT. DIVISION RTG. & ACT. DATE RECD. RELD. INIT. CHIEF OF BUAER (AER) AERO. STDS. GP. (AG) ASS'T CHIEF FOR MTL. & SERVICES (4) AIDE (A) AIRBORNE EQUIP. (AE) DEP. ASST. CHIEF GENERAL INSP. (GI) CONTRACTS (CT) ASST. RES. TRA. (SR) ARMAMENT (AR) SMALL BUS. SP (SB) DEPUTY & ASS'T CHIEF OF BUREAU (1) DESIGN ELEMENTS (DE) INDUSTRIAL PL. (IP) EXECUTIVE OFFICE (12) ELECTRONICS (EL) INSPECTION (IN) ADM. SERVICES (AS) MAINTENANCE (MA) AIRCRAFT LOG (AL) EVALUATION (EV) EXP. PROGRAM (EP) COUNSEL (CO) GUIDED MISSILES (GM) FISCAL (FI) F1-1 REVIEWED BY NAVAIR DECLASS PROD ON DECLASSIFIED PER ED 12958 OTHER EQUITIES YES MIL. REQUIREM. (MR) AIRCRAFT (AC) PHOTOGRAPHIC (PH) PERSONNEL (PE) POWER PLANT (PP) PRODUCTION (PD) PUBLICATIONS (PB) RESEARCH (RS) PLANS COORD. (PC) SHIPS INSTALL. (SI) SHORE ESTAB. (SE) ASS'T CHIEF FOR RES. & DEVEL. (2) SUPPLY (SU) DEP. ASST. CHIEF TECHNICAL DATA (TD) PATENT COUNSEL (PL) EXECUTIVE ASST. USAF LIAISON ASW COORD. ASST. RD&-SPEC. ASST. ADMINISTRATIVE ASST. SPACE FOR ADDITIONAL ROUTINGS RTG. ACTION DESIRED INIT. Expedite 24 hour reply requested Confer with Information and return Recommendation and return Return with information req. Prepare reply for signature of: NO FURTHER ACTION NECESSARY FILE NUMBERS (Signature) 1. Red routings shall be made and changed only by Comm. & Files Br. All other routings shall be made in black. 2. Indicate order of routing for both incoming and outgoing correspondence by consecutive numbers. 3. X - Indicates activity preparing reply. 4. O - Indicates routing of pink copy after correspondence is mailed. 5. All numerical routings must be initialled prior to mailing. 6. Indicate instructions by placing numerical routings in appropriate box in lower right hand corner. 7. This form is UNCLASSIFIED when blank and unattached. CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Attach Correspondence Here) CONFIDENTIAL COMMENTS 1. In order that persons making comments may be readily identified, comments shall be numbered, dated, legibly signed with the Last Name and initials, Rank if any, Section, and telephone extension. 2. By order of the Chief of the Bureau, material attached to this route sheet shall not be removed. (See AD 3-1) 3. Extra copies may be removed, but the Record Copy (identified by the control number) must remain attached at all times. NAVAER 141A (REV. 1-52) (BACK) (Do not write below this line) ATTACH ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON LETTER SIZE (8x10 1/2) SHEETS ONLY. NUMBER ALL COMMENTS IN DATE ORDER. CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Code O1/HWW/1bh J12 Serial: 0105 MAY 4 1953 CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION U. S. NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC INTERPRETATION CENTER U. S. NAVAL RECEIVING STATION Washington 25, D. C. Code O1/HWW/1bh J12 Serial: 0105 CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION From: Officer in Charge To: Director of Naval Intelligence (OP-322H4D) Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on Ref: (a) Conf ltr DNI OP322Y5/rtm, dtd 27 Oct 1952 with enclosures thereto (b) Conf memo, Chief, Topical Division, USAF, AFOIN 2A2, dtd 24 Nov 1952 with enclosures thereto (c) PIC Conf ltr O1/HWW/gcl, ser 0263 dtd 5 Dec 1952 (d) Rest memo, Chief, Topical Division, USAF, AFOIN 2A2, dtd 16 Feb 1953 Encl: (1) Charts 2-13 1. Reference (a) is a request from U. S. Air Force for the interpretation of movies of unidentified objects taken in Utah, 2 July 1952. Included among the enclosures are approximately 30 feet of processed, 16mm color motion picture film and a list of questions for guidance in determining the type of analysis desired. Reference (b) requested interpretation of additional movies taken in Montana, 1950. This report supercedes reference (c) and presents the test procedures and methods designed to answer the questions contained in enclosure 7 of reference (a). The results and analysis were performed by the Photogrammetry Division, Evaluation Department of this Center and do not necessarily represent the official attitude of the Department of the Navy or this Center. 2. Tests and Procedure. a. Plots. The film exposed in Utah is in very poor condition; dry, brittle, and with a tendency to break. After initial viewing, duplication of the film was performed in order to preserve the film. In the duplication process some color correction was made to permit better viewing of the objects. To prepare plots of the objects, a stop frame projector was rigidly mounted at a fixed distance from a finely-ground glass screen. The magnification was 22 times giving a format size of 14.2"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Code O1/HWW/1bh J12 Serial: 0105 MAY 4 1953 CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on A preliminary detailed study of the Utah film was made and it was decided that: a. Brightly colored spots of red and green lasting only one or two frames were not to be considered. b. Water spots could be detected easily and eliminated from the study. c. The color of the objects was fairly constant as blue-white. d. Size and luminosity of an object varied through-out the film. For convenience in interpretation, the film was divided into three parts, each part being considered an entity. Part I consisted of the footage taken at f8; Part II, the footage taken at f16 with a panning motion; and Part III, the footage taken at f16 during which the camera was held steady. Three definite groups of lights were observed throughout the film and plots were recorded as follows: TABLE I PLOTS OF POSITIONS Utah Parts Control Chart I II III Holding to lower group Not enclosed I II Holding to one object and azimuth of another 2 and 3 I Arbitrary 1/2 inch correction per frame for panning 4 III Holding to frame outline 5a and 5b I One image held to base line. Every tenth frame to show changes within apparent formations 6 Montana All Terrestial Objects 7a and 7b CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION 2 CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Code O1/HWW/1bh J12 Serial: 0105 MAY 4 1953 CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on b. Densitometric tests: Densitometric data were obtained with a Densichron, Model 2150 manufactured by the Welch Scientific Company. The Densichron has a scale range of 0-3. The procedure was to project each frame at approximately 22 times magnification onto a finely-grained-glass screen. The background (sky) was then measured at several places and the density set to 3.0 (variations in background densities were in the order of 0.02 and were regarded as uniform). A set of three readings were made of each of seven objects in Part I, and of the single object in Part III of the Utah Film. Readings were made of the entire Montana film. Enclosure (8a and 8b) are graphs of the density readings obtained of the two lower groups of objects in frames 1-129 of the Utah film. Enclosure (9) is a density graph of the single object (94 frames) in Part III. Enclosure (10) is a graph where six successive Densichron readings were averaged and advanced one reading each determinant. Of the Montana film, densities were plotted as above and are enclosures (11) and (12). The results of the density readings may be questioned in that these objects varied in size so that at the minimum sizes the densichron probe was measuring the entire object, and at the maximum size the probe was measuring only a portion of the objects. Because of this situation only the largest readings obtained by scanning the objects were used. It is understood that normal procedure would be to read the entire object. This was impossible with the equipment on hand. In addition the film, with which this investigation was conducted, is a duplicate of a copy. This raises the question as to whether the central portion of the objects were burnt out during the duplication processing. Density readings were made to compare the clear areas and the objects. It was found that the minimum difference is 0.4. This indicates that relative luminosity may still be obtained with the procedure used. Concurrent with the density readings, relative sizes of the objects were noted in order to correlate distance and luminosity. Enclosure (13) is a plot of the same object wherein the relationship of distance and luminosity can be detected in Utah film. 3. Answers to Questions. Answers keyed to the questions contained in enclosure (7) of reference (a) are hereby presented. They supercede those contained in reference (c) and present the final analysis as requested. CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION 3 CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Code 01/HWW/1bh\nJ12\n\nSerial: 0105 MAY 4 1953\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nSubj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects;\n progress report on\n\n1. Analysis of the graph correlating luminosity and size indicate that as the luminosity of the objects increase, the size is larger also. This could be the effect of viewing directly, a reflecting surface. This is considered not probable because of the length of time they were viewed continuously on the film, approximately 90 seconds, and because of the angle through which they were photographed, approximately 60 degrees.\n\nIt is felt that if these images are reflective surfaces, blinking would occur during a period of 90 seconds while passing through an angle of 60 degrees when photographed at the rate of 16 frames per second. This premise would permit highly reflective balloons or spheroids to be a possibility. However, the velocity and acceleration computations (sub paragraph 8) rule this possibility out. It appears, therefore, that if these objects are a reflecting surface, they are of a design, speed, and power not commonly known. The velocity and acceleration attributed to the objects may be caused by light reflected off a highly reflective surface onto an atomospheric screen where a slight angular turn of the reflective surface would appear as high acceleration. This possibility is considered not probable because of the sun angle and atmospheric condition reported at the time of photography and because of the variations in luminosity which, under the above conditions would remain constant.\n\nIt is the majority opinion of the group conducting this analysis that these images are light sources. This will explain the non-blinking and variations in luminosity - but not the velocity or acceleration factors. In either case, light source or reflective surface, it appears as if the objects are of a nature which we are not able to identify in terms of natural phenomena or commonly known man-made objects.\n\n2. There is no indication of what kind of objects could have caused the images except that they must be of a construction, design, and material not commonly known. This is indicated by the computed acceleration rate and elocity (answer 8). For the same reasons, birds, aircraft and balloons are ruled out.\n\n3. An analysis of the charts relative to movement indicate that there were group and individual movement. Within a group it appears as if the individual objects were moving counter-clock-wise along an elliptical or similar track. Thus when two objects crossed the camera line of sight they will appear to fuse into one. As they continued along their paths it will appear as if one object became two. This occured at reglar intervals at approximately every 25th frame as plotted in charts 5a and 5b.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Code 01/HWW/1bh\nJ12\n\nSerial: 0105 MAY 4 1953\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nSubj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects;\n progress report on\n\n4. All objects appear to have the same characteristics in regards to shape, color, size and relative motion.\n\n5. The shape of the objects appears to be oblate or disk shaped, color; blue-white, and maximum and minimum size; 98 and 16 feet. The size is based on the assumption that the objects are five miles from the observer.\n\n6. Fade in and fade out of the objects were analyzed as in 3 above. In this case the group movement was such that the distance between the objects and camera was increased so that the objects could not be recorded on the film thereby causing the apparent fade-out. Fade-in as attributed to a shortening of the distance from the fade-out area to the camera station.\n\n7. Plots of the groups indicate that the objects move counter-clock-wise relative to the axis of flight path. However, nothing has been detected which indicates motion of the individual objects about their own axis although this motion appears to be likely.\n\n8. In determining the velocity of the objects three assumptions were made:\n\na. The camera was held steady during Part III of the film.\n\nb. The objects were moving perpendicular to the optical axis, and\n\nc. The objects were five miles from the camera.\n\nIt is obvious that (b) is a fallacy; however, this assumption will give the minimum velocity and the actual velocity is greater than computed. The assumption that the objects are five miles from the camera is an arbitrary one. However, based on the emulsion speed and focal length, an object 50 feet in diameter and five miles from the camera will be recorded on the film with sufficient resolution to identify major details of the object. It is felt that if these objects were closer than five miles at the time of recording, details would appear on the film.\n\nVelocity is computed to be 3780 mph for a shift of 1 mm per frame if the object is five miles from the observer. From 55 measurements taken from Part III of the Utah film, the maximum and minimum velocities\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n5"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Code 01/HWW/1bh\nJ12\n\nSerial: 0105 MAY 4 1953\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nSubj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects;\n progress report on\n\nwere 2457 and 378 mph respectively. These figures differ from those given in reference (c) and were computed from measurements obtained under more controlled conditions. Acceleration was determined from the formula :\n\na = Vf - VO / T where:\n\na = Acceleration\n\nVf = final velocity\n\nVO = initial velocity\n\nT = time = 1/16 second\n\nSince \"g\" is equal to 32.17 ft/sec2 it was computed that:\n\nMaximum acceleration = 21,168 mph/sec = 965 g\nMinimum acceleration = 1,104 mph/sec = 50 g\nMaximum deceleration = 32,448 mph/sec = 1479 g\nMinimum deceleration = 272 mph/sec = 12 g\n\nVelocity and acceleration determinations were also made from the Montana film. In this case, terrestial objects appeared in the film and were held to as control. Subsequently, the velocity and acceleration determinations are considered to be more reliable. On the assumption of (b) and (c) above the maximum and minimum velocities of the left object are 1374 and 361 mph respectfully. For the right object they are 1117 and 189 mph. Accelerations were computed as:\n\n Left Object Right Object\nMaximum acceleration mph/sec 14,016 = 639 g 12640 = 576g\nMinimum acceleration mph/sec 0 = 0 g 0 = 0g\nMaximum deceleration mph/sec 13,184 = 601 g 14288 = 651g\nMinimum deceleration mph/sec 0 = 0 g 0 = 0g\n\nThe above determinations were made from a total of 322 measurements. It was noted that the acceleration and determinations were in multiples of 12.5 approximately. This may be of significance although no study has been conducted to determine this.\n\n9. Velocity and acceleration were treated in sub-paragraph 8 above. Paragraph 2a indicates the controls used during this investigation.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n6"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Code 01/HWW/1bh\nJ12\n\nSerial: 0105\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nSubj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects;\n progress report on\n\n10. a. There is no recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects in formation. It appears however, as if the shift in relative positions were regular and that the original formation would be recovered if the continuing action has been recorded.\n\nb. No. However, the same formation is maintained with objects changing positions.\n\nc. No detection of relative positions being maintained coincidental with movement about their axis.\n\nd. No detection of undulating motion of objects in phase either in formation or tumbling motion.\n\ne. There is evidence of abrupt changes in direction of flight path through fairly large angles.\n\nf. Certain objects do appear to remain motionless while other move about.\n\ng. Certain objects disappear while still well within the field of view. This is discussed in sub-paragraph 6 above.\n\n4. Discussion.\n\nDuring the study and investigation of the unidentified objects, the preliminary data uncovered were revealed to experts (with proper security clearance) in the fields of astronomy and physics. Although they presented certain natural phenomena theories to explain the cause of the objects under certain conditions they were not able to do so under the conditions during which the photography was taken, nor were they able to recognize these objects as man-made.\n\nAs to the results of the investigations being reported, no attempt was made to corroborate the opinions presented. Because of the lack of proper equipment, money and personnel, the investigation was limited. There are obvious tests which can be conducted to prove or disprove some of the findings presented. It is suggested that these be undertaken.\n\n5. Reference (d) requests spectrophotometric analysis of the Utah film be made. Preliminary plan of test is underway.\n\nL. W. KEITH\n\nCopy to:\nCNO (OP553)\nBuAer (PH)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n7"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Enclosure 11\nDENSITY READINGS\nNOTE Montana film\nLowest reading indicates brightest image\nLegend Image 1\n\" 2\nNO IMAGE\nFrames"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DENSITY READINGS\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nNOTE — Phase III Utah Film\nEnclosure 9\nFrames"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DENSITY READINGS\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nNOTE — Smallest recording indicates brightest image Part II\nLEGEND — Image 1\n\" 2\n\" 3\n\" 4\nEnclosure 8 A\nFrames"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AVERAGE OF DENSITY READINGS\nLegend Image 1 2 3 4\nEnclosure 10\nNote Utah Film\nFrames"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nEnclosure 2"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nEnclosure 3\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Enclosure 4\n\nLegend\nGroup 1\nGroup 2\nGroup 3\nGroup 4"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nEnclosure 3A\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nEnclosure 5B Legend - Image 1, 2, 3, 4, 5\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nRELATIVE IMAGE POSITION WITHIN A GROUP\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nNote --- Plots made of every ten frames. Image 1 plotted on a base line for control.\n\nLegend --- Image 1\n\nEnclosure 6\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nNote --- Montana Film\n\nEnclosure 7\n\nLegend Image 1\n\nImage 2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"506494bfb14b06c6","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DENSITY READINGS\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nNote\nSmallest reading indicating brightest image. Part I.\n\nLegend\nImage 5\nImage 6\nImage 7\n\nEnclosure 8B\n\nFrames\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"50c6d095f9707245","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n-1 of 2-\n[REDACTED]\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nOFFICIAL RECORD\nDate of entry [REDACTED]/2026\n[REDACTED] Special Agent [REDACTED], [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] telephone number [REDACTED]-\n[REDACTED], email address [REDACTED] was interviewed at [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] Agent [REDACTED],\nemail address [REDACTED] participated in the interview.\nAfter being advised of the identities of the interviewers and nature of the\ninterview, [REDACTED] provided the following information:\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] He\nhas held this position since [REDACTED]. He has been with[REDACTED] since [REDACTED]. He has\nno aviation expertise. He has [REDACTED] of private pilot time.\nOn the day of [REDACTED] 2026, [REDACTED] was positioned at [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]. Others with him include [REDACTED] SA [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nAt approximately time 1604 he was alerted to an RF detection at [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] at 10K MSL for 5-10s at 90 burst with an unknown bearing.\nFurther communication clarified a request to observe at bearing 58 degrees.\nWithin a few minutes, [REDACTED] used a [REDACTED] Thermal optical device to\nlook in the direction of 58 degrees. He saw a black object in the sky. It\nwas not moving fast. He took pictures using the optical device. While\nobserving he saw a second object to the right of the first and took\nadditional photos/videos. The objects were moving together at the same\nspeed. Both were black hot. He lost view of the objects when they traveled a\ndistance out of view. Total observation time was approximately 5 - 10\nminutes. [REDACTED] is unable to estimate an altitude or speed. The objects\nwere above the mountain line. They were moving in the direction of SE,\napproximately 58 degrees to 62 degrees. Given the distance of the objects it\nwas difficult for [REDACTED] to determine direction of travel.\n[REDACTED] was the only one at his location to see the objects. He was the only\none who used the optic. The [REDACTED] agent looked at the photos [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nInvestigation on [REDACTED]/2026 at [REDACTED] United States [REDACTED]\nFile # [REDACTED] Date drafted [REDACTED]/2026\nby [REDACTED]\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"50c6d095f9707245","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED] Special Agent\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED], On [REDACTED], Page 2 of 2\ntook. The photos were provided to SA [REDACTED].\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"532cf0529beb49f2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on 18 March 2026\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\nPlease do not use the purple submit button above. Save and email the complete file manually (see below).\n\nRange Fouler Debrief Form\n\nPlease complete this form to the best of your ability. If you do not have the requested information, please leave the field blank. If there was more than one \"group,\" please report each on a separate form for data collection purposes. You should receive a response within 5 business days.\n\nLast Name, First Name Rank Squadron SIPR Email Address Crew Position\nO-2 482 ATKS Pilot\n\nThis information is for contact only. SPEAR sanitizes all reports of identifying information.\nAbsolutely no identifying information for aircrew or squadron will be recorded for analysis.\n\n08/31/20 Dusk ISR No\nDate (mm/dd/yy) Time of detection (hh:mm:ss Z) Day / Night Side No. Buno Mission Description (CAS, BFM, etc) LFE?\n\n(b)(1)1.4a 18000 Yes\nContact Working Area (Ex: W-72 1A) Contact Latitude (DD:MM:SS) N/S Contact Longitude (DD:MM:SS) E/W Contact Altitude (Ex: 22000) Altitude Constant? Wind Dir at Contact Alt (From) Wind Speed\n\nPlease attempt to determine a Lat / Long for the contact at initial detection. We recommend using JMPS to reference the sensor-derived bearing and range relative to the bullseye you had in use. If that method is not available, any reasonable derivation of location will work, but please be as specific as possible and make a note in the comments section. These locations may be used to cue other means of tracking.\n\nWas the contact moving? Yes\nDirection/Speed (Ex. 090/15) 150/230\n\nRadar Equipped: Other AIM-9x Self-Track:\nStable Trackfile?: ATFLIR Autotrack:\n# of Contacts in \"Group\": Tally Achieved:\n\nPlease check all that apply:\nRound: Moving Parts:\nSquare: Metallic:\nBalloon-shaped: Markings:\nWings/Airframe: Translucent:\nOther Shape: checked Opaque:\nApparent Propulsion: checked Reflective:\n\nEA Indications (Check all that apply):\nECM Arc Letter Identifier False Trackfiles Other/ Ambiguous\n\nPlease use the field below to describe the contact and any interaction in your own words with as much detail as possible. Please be sure to include any detail not included in questions above.\n\nMGRS Grid of initial contact: 39RWL26 [REDACTED] 27 (b)(1)1.4a\n\nSaw the initial object fly through the screen and started tracking it. Initial object was surpassed by another object of same size and shape but much higher speed. At one point during tracking the objects, there were three on the screen at the same time moving amongst each other.\n\nDon't use the purple \"submit\" button! Save this form with filename \"Date_Squadron_RF.pdf\" and email it to 3.5c, (b)(6) (Also in the global). For troubleshooting, call 3.5c, (b)(6)\n\nThank you for your time. Please ensure all display tapes are ripped for the entire time of interaction and saved as a .wmv (Example: 4 May VFA-106 HUD.wmv). Squadron intel personnel shall upload those files to the repository located at this link.\n3.5c, (b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0028 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO / PA applies 03/16/26 000001"} {"doc_id":"54a580fdabde11b8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR\n5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON\nWASHINGTON, DC 20301-5000\nINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY\n\nTranscript of an Unresolved UAP Report, Colorado, January 2024\n\nThis document is a transcript of a 1-minute, 42-second video recording contained in this collection under the title LLE-UAP-PR004, captured by a law enforcement officer in Colorado in January 2024. AARO removed the audio from the original recording to protect information whose release could reasonably be expected to affect the privacy or other protected interests of a U.S. person or commercial entity. This transcript is also redacted to protect the identity of the reporter and sensitive law enforcement information.\n\nAll descriptive and estimative language in this transcript reflects the reporter's subjective interpretation at the time of the event. Such characterizations should not be interpreted as a conclusive indication of the presence or absence of any intrinsic object features or performance characteristics.\n\nBeginning of transcript.\n\n00:01: Speaker: Okay, it is January 2, 2024, approximately [REDACTED] I am at mile marker [REDACTED] I-[REDACTED] westbound direction.\n\n00:13: Speaker: I am watching another orb that is flying approximately… (indistinct radio chatter) 300 feet up off the ground.\n\n00:25: Speaker: I did check radar. There is no aircraft flying in the area (unintelligible due to radio crosstalk).\n\n00:32: Speaker: This has been flying stationary for about 15 minutes.\n\n00:53: (Sound of vehicle approaching.)\n\n01:04: Speaker: Okay, the craft is flying closer to me now. I can see it.\n\n01:26-01:42: (Unrelated law enforcement radio chatter.)\n\nEnd of transcript; nothing follows."} {"doc_id":"54e338568a4fb8ee","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112 APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n\nUNCLASSIFIED AF607245\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n\nCOUNTRY ITALY | REPORT NO. IR-700-53 | (LEAVE BLANK) AF607245\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\n\nSUBJECT (UNCL) Report of Unusual Aerial Phenomenon\nAREA REPORTED ON Italy | FROM (Agency) Air Attache, Rome, Italy\nDATE OF REPORT 15 December 1953 | DATE OF INFORMATION August | EVALUATION D-4\nPREPARED BY (Officer) JOSEPH A. WOIDA, Lt Col USAF, Actg AirA | SOURCE Prof. G. B. Sias\nREFERENCES (Control number, directive, previous report, etc., as applicable)\n\nSUMMARY: (Enter concise summary of report. Give significance in final one-sentence paragraph. List inclosures at lower left. Begin text of report on AF Form 112-Part II.)\n\n1. This IR transmits a report of unusual aerial phenomenon witnessed by Prof. G. B. SIAS on the 28th of August 1952, in Sassari, Sardinia.\n\n2. COMMENTS of the Preparing Officer:\n\nProf. Sias was interviewed by this officer and he appeared to be intelligent, pleasant, and very eager to tell his story. He, in his own mind, is convinced that either: (1) The United States has made scientific strides unknown to the rest of the world and this particular phenomenon was one of these items; or, (2) This particular phenomenon was super-natural or it was instituted by another government in Italy. Prof. Sias appeared to be a very intense individual and, while not exactly fanatic, I believe that this title comes very close to fitting him. Enclosure #1 is a sketch by the professor of what he thought he saw.\n\nDECLASSIFIED Authority: NND 57597\n\nJOSEPH A. WOIDA Lt. Colonel, USAF Acting Air Attache\n\n1 Drawing INCLS. to ATIC\n\nLIBRARY SUBJECT & AREA CODES 603 19m\n\nDISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR\n1 cpy ATIAE-5, Aerial Phenomenon Section\n\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT. 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED (CLASSIFICATION)"} {"doc_id":"54e338568a4fb8ee","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112-PART II APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n\nUNCLASSIFIED (CLASSIFICATION)\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\n\nFROM (Agency) Air Attache, Rome, Italy | REPORT NO. IR-700-53 | PAGE 2 OF 5 PAGES\n\nTRANSLATION\n\nREPORT AND ILLUSTRATION OF A FLYING SPHERE\n\nObservation by Prof. G.B. SIAS - Via Armando Diaz 22, Sassari\n\nTO THE UNITED STATES EMBASSY ACCREDITED TO THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT\n\nAPPARITION OF A FLYING SPHERE\n\n\"On the 28th of August 1952, the following article of mine was published in Sassari in the local \"Corriere dell'Isola\" newspaper:\n\n\"Yesterday evening, 27th of August, at 2145 hours, I was walking - as usual - along the court-yard of Sassari Brigade, below the windows of the war orphans dormitory, saying the rosary. It was exactly the time when the trumpet of Gonzaga barracks was playing the lights out signal. I watched now and then the sky covered with stars, heavy, moonless, still torrid for the temperature which in those days, as anyone would remember, often attained 40 degrees, with a sky which remained clean and cloudless for three months. Suddenly my attention was attracted by a transparent small cloud, coming from the East, isolated in the middle of the sky; the remaining sky was serene. My eyes were fixed to that point, fascinated by the view, when suddenly a sphere of astonishing brightness and luminosity seemed to depart from the Milky Way. I had the impression that it was very close to the earth; it was slightly larger than the full moon, of green-blue color, silver bright like the mother-of-pearl, with metal streaks in the right side; it proceeded at a dizzy speed along East-West direction, appearing suddenly as if it came out of a thick shadow. It came out and in a second disappeared, leaving behind a line or luminous ribbon, having a thickness of one-seventh of the sphere; after a second, the entire sphere appeared again; then again, it disappeared and the line showed and again the sphere returned, always identical. Finally, it disappeared toward the horizon. The apparition lasted in total three to five seconds.\n\n\"My first idea was that such a phenomenon was due to an aerolite. Everyone knows the color and brightness of meteoric stones, while it was evident that the luminosity of the sphere originated from the sun, like the moon's.\n\n\"In regard to motion, I reflected that such an object, suppose it was a human creation, could not have such a dizzy actual speed to excel the velocity of any human invention, even if carried to 50 or 60 kilometers altitude. On the supposition that the sphere was coming from astral spaces, from much higher altitudes, its motion could be either partially or entirely apparent, that is equal to the revolution speed of the earth, viz. thirty kilometers per second.\n\n\"Where the luminosity was concerned, I thought that it could be traced to the location of the sphere at hundreds or thousands kilometers above the earth while it got out of the cone of shadow of the earth and proceeded Westward, being illuminated by the sun which had set two hours and a half earlier. The location was the following: approx. 45 degrees between the Zenith and the horizon line, Southward; direction East-West beginning from the Milky Way.\n\n\"The doubt that mine may be a mere optical illusion is dissipated by the testimony of two other persons: an orphan, Brau, who had not yet gone to bed, saw the luminous sphere through the window of the dormitory; another testimony was offered by Mr. Piccolo, a guardian of Valmascheri concern placed approx. 3 kilometers in air line from Sassari, who observed the phenomenon at the same time: reality and not illusion, then."} {"doc_id":"54e338568a4fb8ee","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112-PART II APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n\nUNCLASSIFIED (CLASSIFICATION)\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\n\nFROM (Agency) Air Attache, Rome, Italy | REPORT NO. IR-700-53 | PAGE 3 OF 5 PAGES\n\nALTITUDE AND DIMENSIONS OF THE SPHERE\n\n\"The observation of the sphere, the peculiar circumstances of its apparition and the logical deductions, inspired me with a pressing desire, rather a stimulating impulse, to find a solution of the phenomenon in its complete significance. I had precise data:\n\n(1) the small cloud which was a sort of signal\n(2) the egress of the sphere from the earth's cone of shadow at 2145 hours\n(3) the duration of the apparition for three to five seconds in South-West direction.\n(4) the distance - cardinal point: South - of 45 degrees between the Zenith and the horizon line.\n(5) the seeming diameter.\n\nThe sole thing to do was to contact a scientist: I went to Father Junkes, well-known astronomer, director of the Vatican observatory at Castel Gandolfo: after some days of study, he obtained with the system of the coordinates, the following results:\n\n\"On the basis of the geographical position of the observers, the coordinates can approx. be estimated as follows:\n\nLongitude 33.8 East (08 degrees 33')\nLatitude 40 degrees 45' North\n\nOn the basis of the sun position on the 27th of August at 2145 hours the resulting TMEC will be:\n\nAximuth 133 degrees 36' measuring from South to North, through West\nAltitude 27 degrees 41', that is below the horizon\n\n\"On the basis of the above data, not taking into account the effects of refraction, the distance of the observer visibility in this point at an elevation of 45 up to the point where it comes out of the earth shadow is:\n\napprox. 1681 kilometers Southward\napprox. 1091 South-Westerward\n\nAt such a distance an apparent diameter of 1/2 degree (moon's apparent diameter) is equal to the following actual diameters:\n\n14.67 kilometers at 1681 km. distance\n9.25 kilometers at 1091 km. distance\n\nFrom the above it can be easily deduced that the object observed could not be a common terrestrial \"flying saucer\", some bright metal body illuminated by the sun, because its dimensions would be too big.\"\n\nThese were the deductions of Father Junkes; but since he is also the Director of the Vatican observatory and well versed in astrophysics, he mentioned to me in another letter that the bright green, blue, silver colors and the luminosity of the sphere is presumably due to the remarkable quantity of iron and nickel which many astral bodies contain."} {"doc_id":"54e338568a4fb8ee","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112-PART II APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n\nUNCLASSIFIED (CLASSIFICATION)\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\n\nFROM (Agency) Air Attache, Rome, Italy | REPORT NO. IR-700-53 | PAGE 4 OF 5 PAGES\n\nTHE MYSTERY OF THE LINE AND SPHERE SHAPED LUMINOSITY\n\n\"Notwithstanding the numerous hypothesis which were advanced by the astronomer and myself in an attempt to explain such a phenomenon, none was entirely satisfactory. Still a quite reasonable hypothesis is that the discoid sphere, along its itinerary, presented to the sun alternately its surface entirely illuminated by the sun. Its dimensions were 1/7 of the sphere, that is two kilometers in breadth. This resulted in an undulatory motion, which was made necessary either by suspension stability in the space at that altitude or by some other equilibrium laws unknown to us.\n\nPERSONAL REMARKS\n\n(1) I must categorically affirm that the view of the sphere on my part was not casual; a small cloud, one cloud in a clean sky, which later on disappeared, was like a speaking signal to my attention. I dare not affirm - and it would be presumption on my part - that the sphere was occupied by non-human beings, no matter what they may be like: but the heavenly intervention is too evident!\n\n(2) A luminosity which cannot even be compared with the brightness of full moon in a clear night; such bright and vivid colors that cannot be found on earth. All this was a heavenly smile which inspired my soul with a joy and peace never felt before. A new, heavenly light!\n\n(3) I believe that privilege was not entirely intended for me: the phenomenon occurred in the Institute for War Orphans of the Sassari Brigade, the custodian of Trieste after the first liberation which waits for the second liberation from the hands of America, which is today the faithful custodian of it. I do not mean to get involved in politics, because I know nothing of it. I think, though, that this is a legitimate remark which reflects the psychology of history. America is based on freedom: freedom of thought, economical freedom, freedom of religion: in this connection, no other people in the world begins official ceremonies with the \"Pater Noster\" prayer: reflection of God wiseness and power! America defends freedom from fear: fear of war, fear of unemployment, fear of starvation. God put the destiny of the world in its hands. The oriental civilization elapsed, and so did the Greek civilization and the Roman world. The sacred Roman Empire collapsed, the British hegemony was eclipsed: the cycle from East to West is terminating in America. The words Virgilius wrote 2000 years ago, whom can better suit than America?\n\n\"Remember to rule the peoples with the authority of power: be clement to the humble and exhaust the arrogance of the superb\" (Eneide 6th book)\n\nThe basic scientific data are here below briefly summarized.\n\n(1) the certainty that the sphere is not a human invention in view of its dimension and heavenly light.\n(2) the secret - now disclosed - of the measuring system of such apparitions\n(3) the aim, resulting from astonishing revelation, of chosing a people as a guide to mankind, under the guidance of God.\nThe following is to be added:\n\n(1) I intend to transfer the secret and the property of this writing of mine to the American Embassy, Office of the Air Forces.\n\n(2) What I requested in my letter to Ambassador Clara Luce, to which reference was made in a letter addressed to me by Col. Anthony Mony on 3 July 1953, be granted"} {"doc_id":"54e338568a4fb8ee","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112-PART II APPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n\nUNCLASSIFIED (CLASSIFICATION)\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\n\nFROM (Agency) Air Attache, Rome, Italy | REPORT NO. IR-700-53 | PAGE 5 OF 5 PAGES\n\nto me, as a token of reward rather than as a compensation, for the benefit of the Institute for War Orphans and E.N.A.L.L.I. \"\n\nProf. Giovanni Battista Sias\n\nVia Armado Diaz 22 - Sassari (Italy)\n\nSassari, 19 November 1953\n\n* * * * * * * * * *\n* * * *\n\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED (CLASSIFICATION)"} {"doc_id":"54f0c9379a8f36b6","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BRIEFING NOTES FOR MR. WALTER N. ELDER\n\nUNIDENTIFIED OBJECT FLYING IN THE VICINITY OF PUERTO RICO\nON 16, 17, 18, 19, AND 24 NOVEMBER\n\n1. On 19 November, the U. S. S. Gyatt picked up on its radar a contact tracking in excess of 3,800 knots. At this time the Gyatt was working an F-8 (Crusader) Fighter Aircraft at 35,000 feet when a high-altitude, high-speed object was detected. The object slowed and steadied down, maintaining a position to the fighter at nine o'clock, about nine miles from the Crusader. The Crusader pilot selected afterburner and attempted to close on the UFO. At about five miles, the object accelerated at extremely high speed in a 20° climb and pulled away from the fighter rapidly. The object appeared on Gyatt's radar for twenty-one minutes. On returning to Roosevelt Road's Naval Air Station, object again closed on the fighter from astern to four miles.\n\n2. On 24 November, the Atlantic Fleet Weapons Range again held a high-speed, high-altitude target which simultaneously pulled away rapidly from another Crusader aircraft which at that time was flying at Mach . 99, 45,000 feet.\n\n3. The Crusader pilot on the night of the 19th observed the UFO in full moonlight, weather was good and visibility was good. UFO was identified as a Delta shaped object about the size of a jet fighter."} {"doc_id":"54f0c9379a8f36b6","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4. The U. S. S. Gyatt confirmed radar tracks with motion pictures of radar scope presentation. The pilot estimated speed to be in excess of Mach 3.\n\n5. ONI has no further information on this subject and we have requested that they notify us of similar incidents in the future.\n\n6. For your information, the U. S. S. Gyatt is a Navy Surface-to-Air Missile Destroyer equipped with the latest and most accurate radars.\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"5544b61c5a77f529","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nCSP-2025-00040 B-0002707027 \"UNCLASSIFIED\" 3/2/2026\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nMRN:\t85 PORT MORESBY 199\nDate/DTG:\tJan 28, 1985 / 280000Z Jan 85\nFrom:\tAMEMBASSY PORT MORESBY\nAction:\tUSCINCLANT ROUTINE\nE.O.:\tUnknown\nTAGS:\tMARR, PP\nReference:\tn/a\nSubject:\tPAPUA NEW GUINEA INQUIRY RE OVERFLIGHTS\n\nLIMITED OFFICIAL USE\n\nPAGE 01 PORT M 00199 280704Z\nACTION PM-11\n\nINFO OCT-00 COPY-01 ADS-00 INR-10 SS-00 CIAE-00 DODE-00\n NSAE-00 EAP-00 /022 W\n ------------------026406 280708Z /12\nO 280653Z JAN 85\nFM AMEMBASSY PORT MORESBY\nTO USCINCPAC HONOLULU HI IMMEDIATE\nINFO 43SW ANDERSON AFB GU IMMEDIATE\nSECSTATE WASHDC 1694\nAMEMBASSY CANBERRA\nAMEMBASSY JAKARTA\n\n\nLIMITED OFFICIAL USE PORT MORESBY 00199\n\nUSCINCPAC FOR J3 AND POLAD\n43 SW FOR DONO\nSTATE FOR EAP/PIA AND PM/RSA\n\nE.O. 12356: N/A\nTAGS: MARR, PP\nSUBJECT: PAPUA NEW GUINEA INQUIRY RE OVERFLIGHTS\n\n1. EMBASSY JANUARY 28 RECEIVED INFORMAL INQUIRY FROM\nPNG NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE ORGANIZATION (NIO) CONCERNING\nREPORTED SIGHTINGS OF HIGH-ALTITUDE, HIGH-SPEED AIRCRAFT\nOVER PNG DURING EVENING JANUARY 24. MATTER CAME TO\nNIO'S ATTENTION WHEN ITS OFFICER IN WEWAK REPORTED LOCAL\nRESIDENTS HAD BEEN FRIGHTENED BY OVERFLIGHTS, WHICH LED\nTO THE PROVINCIAL PREMIER'S CALLING OF A PUBLIC MEETING\nON THE SUBJECT ATTENDED BY THE PRIME MINISTER WHO WAS\nWEEKENDING IN HIS ELECTORAL DISTRICT.\n\nReleased in Full\nJohn Powers, Acting-Director\nUS Department of State\n2/25/2026\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 1 of 3"} {"doc_id":"5544b61c5a77f529","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nCSP-2025-00040 B-0002707027 \"UNCLASSIFIED\" 3/2/2026\n\n2. NIO SAID THERE HAVE BEEN VARIOUS REPORTS OF\nUNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENA THE NIGHT OF JANUARY 24,\nINCLUDING FAST-MOVING OBJECTS WITH LIGHTS, CONTRAILS,\nLIMITED OFFICIAL USE\n\nLIMITED OFFICIAL USE\n\nPAGE 02 PORT M 00199 280704Z\n\nAND NOISE. THE REPORT IN WHICH NIO PLACES SOME CREDENCE\nORIGINATED WITH AN AIR NIUGINI PILOT WHO HAD JUST TAKEN\nOFF FROM WEWAK ENROUTE PORT MORESBY. PILOT SAID HIS\nRADAR PICKED UP AIRCRAFT FLYING SOUTH TO NORTH AT HIGH\nALTITUDE AND HIGH SPEED WHEN HE WAS OVER ANGORAM (VIC 4\nDEG S, 144 DEG E). SEVERAL VISUAL SIGHTINGS OF\nCONTRAILS WERE ALSO REPORTED FROM VARIOUS POINTS AROUND\nPNG, OF ONE AIRCRAFT MOVING NORTH TO SOUTH AT 1900 LOCAL\nAND OF SIX-EIGHT AIRCRAFT TRAVELING SOUTH TO NORTH AT\n2200 LOCAL.\n\n3. BASED ON OUR RECORDS AND TELCON WITH 43SW, WE HAVE\nTOLD NIO WE KNEW OF NO B-52 OVERFLIGHTS AND NO U.S.\nAIRCRAFT IN PNG AIRSPACE ON JANUARY 24.\n\n4. ALTHOUGH INFORMATION PROVIDED US ON THESE SIGHTINGS\nIS VERY SKETCHY AND SOURCES WERE UNSURE OF THE\nDIRECTIONS IN WHICH AIRCRAFT WERE FLYING, WE WOULD MOST\nAPPRECIATE CONFIRMATION OF PARA 3 ABOVE AND ANY LIGHT\nYOU MIGHT THROW ON THESE REPORTS.\nGARDNER\n\n\n\nLIMITED OFFICIAL USE\n\n\n\nNNN\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 2 of 3"} {"doc_id":"5544b61c5a77f529","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nCSP-2025-00040 B-0002707027 \"UNCLASSIFIED\" 3/2/2026\n\n\n\nDissemination Rule:\tArchive Copy\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 3 of 3"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NPRC F 1 702 075\nMCCOY HOWARD M AF 000 00 0550\nNPRC F 1 702 075\nMCCOY HOWARD M AF 000 01 8054\nNPRC F 1 702 075\nMCCOY HOWARD M AF 042 30 3763\nRETIRED\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NW 90262"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MCCOY HOWARD M. 550A RETIRED\nMPRC 3601655\nHOWARD M MCCOY\n5465 WHITE OAK AVE\nENCINO CALIF\n550\nNOV 1958"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MCCOY HOWARD M. 550A RETIRED\nMPRC 3601655\nHOWARD M MCCOY\n5465 WHITE OAK AVE\nENCINO CALIF\n550\nNOV 1958"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VETERANS ADMINISTRATION\nREQUEST FOR INFORMATION\n(Separation records attached)\n1A. ADDRESS CODE 13\n1B. TYPE OF CLAIM DIC\nINSTRUCTION - This form may be used in lieu of VA Form 07-3101 if a DD Form 214, or equivalent, is attached by stapling to the action copies forwarded to the military records activity.\n2. DATA REQUESTED SERVICE MEDICAL DENTAL OTHER\n3. FILE NO. (Include prefix) NF-042 30 3763\n4A. NAME AND ADDRESS OF REQUESTING VA OFFICE REGIONAL OFFICE FEDERAL BUILDING - CHARLES CENTER 31 HOPKINS PLAZA BALTIMORE MARYLAND 21201\n4B. ORIGINATING UNIT 313 212\n5. SOCIAL SECURITY NO. 042 30 3763\n6. LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE INITIAL (Under which served) McCOY, HOWARD, MONROE\n7. ALLEGED DISEASE OR INJURY\n8. DATES OF TREATMENT\n9. PLACE OF TREATMENT\n10. TYPE (Check) HOSPITAL OP\nA.\nB.\nC.\n11. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED\nPlease furnish all medical/clinical records to include entry and discharge exams\n12. DATE 11-11-76\n13. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF VA OFFICIAL Eugene Mendez, CSJ Officer\nENDORSEMENT BY SERVICE DEPARTMENT AVAILABLE REQUESTED RECORDS FORWARDED OTHER (Specify)\nNO. OF ENCLOSURES ORIG. COPY HEALTH RECORDS PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS AT ENTRANCE PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS AT SEPARATION\nNO. ENCLS. (Cont.) CLINICAL RECORDS X-RAYS DENTAL RECORDS MEDICAL RECORDS OTHER RECORDS\nSERVICE INFORMATION DATE SIGNATURE AND TITLE\nMEDICAL RECORDS DATE SIGNATURE AND TITLE NW 11-22-76 KPowers\nVA FORM DEC 1975 07-3101a (TEST) Exception to SF 180 Approved by General Services Administration, March 1969. 3"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VETERANS ADMINISTRATION\nREQUEST FOR INFORMATION\n(Separation records attached)\n1A. ADDRESS CODE 13\n1B. TYPE OF CLAIM DIC\nINSTRUCTION - This form may be used in lieu of VA Form 07-3101 if a DD Form 214, or equivalent, is attached by stapling to the action copies forwarded to the military records activity.\n2. DATA REQUESTED SERVICE MEDICAL DENTAL OTHER\n3. FILE NO. (Include prefix) NF-042 30 3763\n4A. NAME AND ADDRESS OF REQUESTING VA OFFICE REGIONAL OFFICE FEDERAL BUILDING - CHARLES CENTER 31 HOPKINS PLAZA BALTIMORE MARYLAND 21201\n4B. ORIGINATING UNIT 313 212\n5. SOCIAL SECURITY NO. 042 30 3763\n6. LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE INITIAL (Under which served) McCOY, HOWARD, MONROE\n7. ALLEGED DISEASE OR INJURY\n8. DATES OF TREATMENT\n9. PLACE OF TREATMENT\n10. TYPE (Check) HOSPITAL OP\nA.\nB.\nC.\n11. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED\nPlease furnish all medical/clinical records to include entry and discharge exams\n12. DATE 11-11-76\n13. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF VA OFFICIAL Eugene Mendez, CSJ Officer\nENDORSEMENT BY SERVICE DEPARTMENT AVAILABLE REQUESTED RECORDS FORWARDED OTHER (Specify)\nNO. OF ENCLOSURES ORIG. COPY HEALTH RECORDS PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS AT ENTRANCE PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS AT SEPARATION\nNO. ENCLS. (Cont.) CLINICAL RECORDS X-RAYS DENTAL RECORDS MEDICAL RECORDS OTHER RECORDS\nSERVICE INFORMATION DATE SIGNATURE AND TITLE\nMEDICAL RECORDS DATE SIGNATURE AND TITLE NW 11-22-76 KPowers\nVA FORM DEC 1975 07-3101a (TEST) Exception to SF 180 Approved by General Services Administration, March 1969. 3"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPLY CONCERNING MILITARY RECORDS RE: McCoy Howard M 18054\nThe reply to the inquiry will be found in the checked item(s). If you write to us again on this subject, please return your original request, this form, and any other form you complete.\n☐ Copies of requested military ☐personnel ☐medical records are attached. We suggest you make an extra copy and guard against loss or damage. We regret if any photocopies may be of poor quality, but they are the best copies obtainable.\n☐ The attached separation document may include the following information: authority for separation, reason for separation, Reenlistment Eligibility Code, and Separation (SPN/SPD) Code. If you require a copy of the separation document that does not contain the above information, you may request a deleted copy from this Center. A seal has been affixed to the enclosed copy to attest to its authenticity.\n☐ Title 32, Part 45 of the Code of Federal Regulations prohibits this Center from providing to third parties copies of separation documents which contain the type and character of discharge, authority and narrative reason for separation, reenlistment eligibility code, and separation program designator/number. If you require a copy of the separation document containing the above information, the veteran must specifically authorize the release to you of an UNDELETED copy of the separation document.\n☐ The Privacy Act of 1974 does not permit the release of a social security number or other personal information to the public without the authorization of the veteran concerned; therefore, we have deleted personal identifying data relating to other persons.\n☐ Since September 1979 the military service departments have not issued individual separation documents for each enlistment period if the person was discharged for immediate reenlistment. Block 18 of the DD Form 214 issued at final separation reflects the full period of continuous active military service.\n☐ The Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code issued upon release from active duty on ____ is ____\n☐ The reason and authority for separation from active duty/discharge on ____ is ____\n☐ The record of service in the ____ indicates being in a POW status from ____ to ____\n☐ A discharge certificate is issued only as an original document; thus, there is no file copy from which to make a copy for you. We will obtain an appropriate substitute certificate for a veteran or surviving spouse if you will tell us whether the original was: 1) never received; or (2) lost or destroyed.\n☐ The document you have requested, DD Form 214, Report of Separation, was not used until Jan. 1, 1950. However, a similar form was used at the time the person named above was separated. A copy of it is attached. A seal has been affixed to the enclosed copy to attest to its authenticity.\n☐ When the person named above was separated, it was not the practice to issue a document which served as a report of separation.\n☐ The original report of separation was issued at the time of separation. Another original cannot be issued. The attached copy, however, will serve the same purpose as the original.\n☐ No report of separation was issued, since the person named above had no active service, or less than 90 days of active duty for training.\n☐ The service record of the person named above does not contain a copy of a report of separation, or its equivalent. Therefore, we are instead providing the attached NA Form 13038, Certification of Military Service. This will serve as verification of military service and may be used for any official purpose.\n☐ That portion of your request seeking medals/awards has been referred to the office checked below, which has jurisdiction over the issuance of medals/awards. Any further correspondence on this subject should be addressed to that office. Both offices are at 9700 Page Ave., St. Louis, MO 63132.\n☐ ARPERCEN, Attn: DARP-VSE-A ☐ Navy Liaison Office, Room 5409\n☐ That portion of your request regarding Air Force or Army Air Corps medals will be answered under separate cover.\n☐ The medical records requested ☐ The documents requested pertaining to discharge have been lent to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Please phone the VA at 1-800-827-1000 for help in obtaining these records, and provide your VA Claim Number. ____\n☐ The Department of Defense Privacy Program, 32 CFR 310.30(f), allows for the disclosure of medical records to the individual to whom they pertain. A portion of the requested medical records, however, contains information which can be interpreted and explained properly only by a physician. If you wish us to send copies to a designated physician, please provide us with the name and address of that physician. The request MUST INCLUDE the written consent (signature) of the person whose records are involved, authorizing the release of the records to the designated physician.\n☐ See attached\nLarry S Tabor 9801 Somerford Rd Louisville, KY 40242-2325\nDate: 3.11.98\nFor the Chief,\n☐ Army Reference Branch\n☐ Air Force Reference Branch\n☐ Navy Reference Branch\n☐ Records Reconstruction Branch\nNATIONAL PERSONNEL RECORDS CENTER (Military Personnel Records) 9700 Page Avenue St. Louis, MO 63132-5100\nNATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION NA FORM 13044 (REV. 12-95)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NRPMOPLH NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION 2/20/98\nL406 MPR FINDING AID REPORT 11:54:39\n000 01 8054\n000 01 8054 BRICKER HERBERT QM P 0000 609 558\n000 01 8054 MCCOY HOWARD M AF B 0000 365 690\n000 01 8054 MCCOY HOWARD M AF F 0001 702 075\n000 01 8054 MCCOY HOWARD M AR B 0003 477 010\nRECORD CHARGED TO: FC5\nSEARCHER: SP FOIA/6C5 276-98\nDATE:"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THIS PORTION OF THIS FORM WILL SERVE AS A REQUEST IF COMPLETED AND RETURNED TO THIS CENTER\nPRIVACY ACT OF 1974 COMPLIANCE INFORMATION. The following information is provided in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(3) and applies to this form. Authority for collection of the information is 44 U.S.C. 2907, 3101, and 3103, and E.O. 9397 of November 22, 1943. Disclosure of the information is voluntary. The principal purpose of the information is to assist the facility servicing the records in locating and verifying the correctness of the requested records or information to ensure your inquiry. Routine uses of the information are published in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4)(D) include the transfer of relevant information to appropriate Federal, State, local, or foreign agencies for use in civil, criminal, or regulatory investigations or prosecutions. In addition, this form will be filed with the appropriate military records and may be transferred to another agency in accordance with the routine uses established by the agency which maintains the record. If the requested information is not provided, it may not be possible to service your inquiry.\nSECTION I - INFORMATION NEEDED TO LOCATE RECORDS\nNAME USED DURING SERVICE (Last, first, and middle) McCoy Howard M | SOCIAL SECURITY NO. | DATE OF BIRTH 12-4-1907 | PLACE OF BIRTH\nACTIVE SERVICE, PAST AND PRESENT\nBRANCH OF SERVICE | DATE ENTERED 6-12-30 | DATE RELEASED 8-31-54 | OFFICER Col | ENLISTED | SERVICE NUMBER 18054\nUSAAF/USAF/USAFR Individual Decd 1964\nSECTION II - REQUEST\n☒ I request the informational data available under FOIA. I realize that a fee may be applicable. Fee Waivered\n☐ Please verify the following additional data to ensure that NPRC has identified the correct veteran's record. Request photo if available. Check box if file if necessary. Do not send statement of service. Must be photocopies of actual documents and not handwritten statement of service. Send photocopies of WD AGO Form 079, WD AGO Form 0712, General Orders, WD AGO Form 708. WD AGO Form 66-1/WD AGO Form 53/WD AGO Form 53-55/WD AGO Form 100/AF Form DA Form 20/DD Form 214/AF Form 11\nIDENTIFICATION OF REQUESTER (Check appropriate box)\n☐ NEXT OF KIN (relationship):\nOTHER (specify): College Professor, doing Doctoral work\nRELEASE AUTHORIZATION, IF REQUIRED (Read second-to-last paragraph on front side) I hereby authorize release of the requested information/documents to the person indicated at left.\nSIGNATURE OF REQUESTER\nSIGNATURE OF VETERAN OR NEXT OF KIN\n(If signed by other than veteran, show relationship to veteran):\nREQUESTS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO: Director National Personnel Records Center 9700 Page Boulevard St. Louis, Missouri 63132\nCOMPLETE RETURN ADDRESS OF REQUESTER (please type or print clear)\nNAME Larry S. Tabor\nNUMBER AND STREET 9801 Somerford Rd.\nCITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE Louisville, KY 40242-2325\nTELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (502) 339-7934"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McCoy Howard M\nSERVICE NUMBERS: 18054\nDATE OF BIRTH: 12.4.07\nDATES OF SERVICE: 6.12.30 to 8.31.54\nCITY/TOWN AND STATE OF RESIDENCE, DATE OF ADDRESS: Severna Park, Md\nMARITAL STATUS: Married\nDEPENDENTS: N/A\nRANK/GRADE: N/A\nSALARY: N/A\nASSIGNMENTS AND THEIR GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION: N/A\nSOURCE OF COMMISSION:\nMILITARY AND CIVILIAN EDUCATIONAL LEVEL:\nPROMOTION SEQUENCE NUMBER:\nDECORATIONS AND AWARDS:\nDUTY STATUS:\nPHOTOGRAPH: N/A\nRECORDS OF COURTS-MARTIAL TRIALS: None\nPLACE OF INDUCTION AND SEPARATION: West Point, N.Y. - Bolling AFB, Wright DC\nIF VETERAN IS DECEASED: PLACE OF BIRTH: LAST KNOWN ADDRESS: DATE AND GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION OF DEATH: PLACE OF BURIAL:\n* N/A denotes information not available in records"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"27. DECORATIONS, MEDALS, BADGES, COMMENDATIONS, CITATIONS AND CAMPAIGN RIBBONS AWARDED OR AUTHORIZED Bronze Star Medal American Defense Service Medal European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal w/battle star American Theater Ribbon World War II Victory Medal Legion of Merit National ****\n28. MOST SIGNIFICANT DUTY ASSIGNMENT 29. WOUNDS RECEIVED AS A RESULT OF ACTION WITH ENEMY FORCES (Place and date, if known)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NRPMOMGH NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION 9/24/97\nL416 MPR FINDING AID REPORT 13:49:30\n\n000 01 8054\n 000 01 8054 BRICKER HERBERT QM P 0000 609 558\n 000 01 8054 MCCOY HOWARD M AF B 0000 365 690\n 000 01 8054 MCCOY HOWARD M AF F 0001 702 075\n 000 01 8054 MCCOY HOWARD M AR B 0003 477 010\n\nRECORD CHARGED TO: FC5\n\nSEARCHER: [illegible]\n\nDATE: 10-1-97\n\n[handwritten annotation: FWd 11-2-97]"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THIS PORTION OF THIS FORM WILL SERVE AS A REQUEST IF COMPLETED AND RETURNED TO THIS CENTER\n\nPRIVACY ACT OF 1974 COMPLIANCE INFORMATION. The following information is provided in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(3) and applies to this form. Authority for collection of the information is 44 U.S.C. 2907, 2101, and 2103, and E.O. 9397 of November 22, 1943. Disclosure of the information is voluntary. The principal purpose of the information is to assist the facility servicing the records in locating and verifying the correctness of the requested records or information to answer your inquiry. Routine uses of the information are established and published in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4)(D)\n\nSECTION I - INFORMATION NEEDED TO LOCATE RECORDS\n\nNAME USED DURING SERVICE (Last, First, and middle) McCoy Howard | SOCIAL SECURITY NO. | DATE OF BIRTH 12-4-1907 | PLACE OF BIRTH\n\nACTIVE SERVICE, PAST AND PRESENT\n\nBRANCH OF SERVICE | DATE ENTERED | DATE RELEASED | OFFICER | ENLISTED | SERVICE NUMBER DURING THIS PERIOD\nUSAF | 6-12-30 | 8-31-54 | | | 18054\nDied 20 Oct 1976\n\nSECTION II - REQUEST\n\n[X] I request the informational data available under FOIA. I realize that a fee may be applicable.\n[ ] Please verify the following additional data to ensure that NPRC has identified the correct veteran's record:\n\nRequest copies of Awards, Decorations, Battles participated in. Request photo if availible. Check burn file if necessary. Do not send statement of service. Must be photocopies of actual documents and not handwritten statement of service. check burn file if necessary. Send Photo if available\n\nIDENTIFICATION OF REQUESTER (Check appropriate box)\n[ ] NEXT OF KIN (relationship):\nOTHER (specify): College Professor doing Doctoral Work\n\nRELEASE AUTHORIZATION, IF REQUIRED (Read second-to-last paragraph on front side)\nI hereby authorize release of the requested information/documents to the person indicated at left.\nSIGNATURE OF VETERAN OR NEXT OF KIN\n\nSIGNATURE OF REQUESTER\n\n(If signed by other than veteran, show relationship to veteran)\n\nREQUESTS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO:\nDirector\nNational Personnel Records Center\n9700 Page Boulevard\nSt. Louis, Missouri 63132\n\nCOMPLETE RETURN ADDRESS OF REQUESTER (Please type or print clearly)\nNAME LARRY S. TABOR\nNUMBER AND STREET 9801 Somerford Rd.\nCITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE Louisville, KY 40242\nTELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (502) 339-7934"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tabor\nName\n9801 Somerford Rd\nP.O. Box or Street Address\nLouisville KY 40242\nCity State Zip Code\n\nDirector\nNational Personnel Records Center\n9700 Page Blvd\nSt. Louis, Mo 63132"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THIS PORTION OF THIS FORM WILL SERVE AS A REQUEST IF COMPLETED AND RETURNED TO THIS CENTER\n\nPRIVACY ACT OF 1974 COMPLIANCE INFORMATION. The following information is provided in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(3) and applies to this form. Authority for collection of the information is 44 U.S.C. 2907, 3101, and 3103, and E.O. 9397 of November 22, 1943. Disclosure of the information is voluntary. The principal purpose of the information is to assist the facility servicing the records in locating and verifying the correctness of the requested records or information to answer your inquiry. Routine uses of the information are established and published in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4)(D)\n\nSECTION I - INFORMATION NEEDED TO LOCATE RECORDS\n\nNAME USED DURING SERVICE (Last, First, and middle) Chascelebbo, McCoy Howard M | SOCIAL SECURITY NO. | DATE OF BIRTH 4-Dec-1907 | PLACE OF BIRTH Kane, PA\n\nACTIVE SERVICE, PAST AND PRESENT\n\nBRANCH OF SERVICE | DATE ENTERED | DATE RELEASED | OFFICER | ENLISTED | SERVICE NUMBER DURING THIS PERIOD\nUSAAF/USAF/USAFR | 6-12-30 | 8-31-54 | Col | | 18054\nF.O.I.A. ACK. DATE 9/8/97\n\nSECTION II - REQUEST\n\n[X] I request the informational data available under FOIA. I realize that a fee may be applicable. Fee Waivered\n[ ] Please verify the following additional data to ensure that NPRC has identified the correct veteran's record: Request copies of Awards/Decorations/battles participated in. Request photo if available. Check burn file if necessary. Do not send statement of service. Must be photocopies of actual documents and not handwritten statement of service. Send photocopies of WD AGO Form 079, WD AGO Form 0712, General Orders, WD AGO Form 708. WD AGO Form 66-1/WD AGO Form 53/WD AGO Form 53-55/WD AGO Form 100/AF Form 20/DD Form 214/AF Form 11\n\nIDENTIFICATION OF REQUESTER (Check appropriate box)\n[ ] NEXT OF KIN (relationship):\nOTHER (specify): College Professor, doing Doctoral work\n\nRELEASE AUTHORIZATION, IF REQUIRED (Read second-to-last paragraph on front side)\nI hereby authorize release of the requested information/documents to the person indicated at left.\nSIGNATURE OF VETERAN OR NEXT OF KIN\n\nSIGNATURE OF REQUESTER\n\n(If signed by other than veteran, show relationship to veteran)\n\nREQUESTS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO:\nDirector\nNational Personnel Records Center\n9700 Page Boulevard\nSt. Louis, Missouri 63132\n\nCOMPLETE RETURN ADDRESS OF REQUESTER (Please type or print clearly)\nNAME Larry S. Tabor\nNUMBER AND STREET 9801 Somerford Rd.\nCITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE Louisville, KY 40242-2325\nTELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (502) 339-7934"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED] PORTION OF THIS FORM WILL SERVE AS A REQUEST IF COMPLETED AND RETURNED TO THIS CENTER\n\nPRIVACY ACT OF 1974 COMPLIANCE INFORMATION. The following information is provided in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(3) and applies to this form. Authority for collection of the information is 44 U.S.C. 2907, 3101, and 3103, and E.O. 9397 of November 22, 1943. Disclosure of the information is voluntary. The principal purpose of the information is to assist the facility servicing the records in locating and verifying the correctness of the requested records or information to answer your inquiry. Routine uses of the information are established and published in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4)(D)\n\nSECTION I - INFORMATION NEEDED TO LOCATE RECORDS\n\nNAME USED DURING SERVICE (Last, First, and middle) McCoy Howard M | SOCIAL SECURITY NO. | DATE OF BIRTH 4 Dec 07 | PLACE OF BIRTH PA\n\nACTIVE SERVICE, PAST AND PRESENT\n\nBRANCH OF SERVICE | DATE ENTERED | DATE RELEASED | OFFICER | ENLISTED | SERVICE NUMBER DURING THIS PERIOD\nUSAAF/USAF/USAFR | 1930 | 1954 | Col | | 018054\nF.O.I.A. ACK. DATE 7/24/97\n\nSECTION II - REQUEST\n\n[X] I request the informational data available under FOIA. I realize that a fee may be applicable. Fee Waivered\n[ ] Please verify the following additional data to ensure that NPRC has identified the correct veteran's record: Request copies of Awards/Decorations/battles participated in. Request photo if available. Check burn file if necessary. Do not send statement of service. Must be photocopies of actual documents and not handwritten statement of service. Send photocopies of WD AGO Form 079, WD AGO Form 0712, General Orders, WD AGO Form 708. WD AGO Form 66-1/WD AGO Form 53/WD AGO Form 53-55/WD AGO Form 100/AF Form 20/DD Form 214/AF Form 11\n\nIDENTIFICATION OF REQUESTER (Check appropriate box)\n[ ] NEXT OF KIN (relationship):\nOTHER (specify): College Professor, doing Doctoral work\n\nRELEASE AUTHORIZATION, IF REQUIRED (Read second-to-last paragraph on front side)\nI hereby authorize release of the requested information/documents to the person indicated at left.\nSIGNATURE OF VETERAN OR NEXT OF KIN\n\nSIGNATURE OF REQUESTER\n\n(If signed by other than veteran, show relationship to veteran)\n\nREQUESTS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO:\nDirector\nNational Personnel Records Center\n9700 Page Boulevard\nSt. Louis, Missouri 63132\n\nCOMPLETE RETURN ADDRESS OF REQUESTER (Please type or print clearly)\nNAME Larry S. Tabor\nNUMBER AND STREET 9801 Somerford Rd.\nCITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE Louisville, KY 40242-2325\nTELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (502) 339-7934"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPLY CONCERNING MILITARY RECORDS RE: McCoy, Howard M. 18054\nThe reply to the inquiry will be found in the checked item(s). If you write to us again on this subject, please return your original request, this form, and any other form you complete.\n☐ Copies of requested military ☐ personnel ☐ medical records are attached. We suggest you make an extra copy and guard against loss or damage. We regret if any photocopies may be of poor quality, but they are the best copies obtainable.\n☐ The attached separation document may include the following information: authority for separation, reason for separation, Reenlistment Eligibility Code, and Separation (SPN/SPD) Code. If you require a copy of the separation document that does not contain the above information, you may request a deleted copy from this Center. A seal has been affixed to the enclosed copy to attest to its authenticity.\n☐ Title 32, Part 45 of the Code of Federal Regulations prohibits this Center from providing to third parties copies of separation documents which contain the type and character of discharge, authority and narrative reason for separation, reenlistment eligibility code, and separation program designator/number. If you require a copy of the separation document containing the above information, the veteran must specifically authorize the release to you of an UNDELETED copy of the separation document.\n☐ The Privacy Act of 1974 does not permit the release of a social security number or other personal information to the public without the authorization of the veteran concerned; therefore, we have deleted personal identifying data relating to other persons.\n☐ Since September 1979 the military service departments have not issued individual separation documents for each enlistment period if the person was discharged for immediate reenlistment. Block 18 of the DD Form 214 issued at final separation reflects the full period of continuous active military service.\n☐ The Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code issued upon release from active duty on ____________ is ____________.\n☐ The reason and authority for separation from active duty/discharge on ____________ is ____________.\n☐ The record of service in the ____________ indicates being in a POW status from ____________ to ____________.\n☐ A discharge certificate is issued only as an original document; thus, there is no file copy from which to make a copy for you. We will obtain an appropriate substitute certificate for a veteran or surviving spouse if you will tell us whether the original was: 1) never received; or (2) lost or destroyed.\n☐ The document you have requested, DD Form 214, Report of Separation, was not used until Jan. 1, 1950. However, a similar form was used at the time the person named above was separated. A copy of it is attached. A seal has been affixed to the enclosed copy to attest to its authenticity.\n☐ When the person named above was separated, it was not the practice to issue a document which served as a report of separation.\n☐ The original report of separation was issued at the time of separation. Another original cannot be issued. The attached copy, however, will serve the same purpose as the original.\n☐ No report of separation was issued, since the person named above had no active service, or less than 90 days of active duty for training.\n☐ The service record of the person named above does not contain a copy of a report of separation, or its equivalent. Therefore, we are instead providing the attached NA Form 13038, Certification of Military Service. This will serve as verification of military service and may be used for any official purpose.\n☐ That portion of your request seeking medals/awards has been referred to the office checked below, which has jurisdiction over the issuance of medals/awards. Any further correspondence on this subject should be addressed to that office. Both offices are at 9700 Page Ave., St. Louis, MO 63132.\n☐ ARPERCEN, Attn: DARP-VSE-A ☐ Navy Liaison Office, Room 5409\n☐ That portion of your request regarding Air Force or Army Air Corps medals will be answered under separate cover.\n☐ The medical records requested ☐ The documents requested pertaining to discharge have been lent to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Please phone the VA at 1-800-827-1000 for help in obtaining these records, and provide your VA Claim Number, ____________\n☐ The Department of Defense Privacy Program, 32 CFR 310.30(f), allows for the disclosure of medical records to the individual to whom they pertain. A portion of the requested medical records, however, contains information which can be interpreted and explained properly only by a physician. If you wish us to send copies to a designated physician, please provide us with the name and address of that physician. The request MUST INCLUDE the written consent (signature) of the person whose records are involved, authorizing the release of the records to the designated physician.\n[handwritten] FOIA attached\nLarry S Tabor 9801 Somerford Rd Louisville, KY 40242-2325\nDate: 9.11.97\nFor the Chief, ☐ Army Reference Branch ☐ Air Force Reference Branch ☐ Navy Reference Branch ☐ Records Reconstruction Branch\nNATIONAL PERSONNEL RECORDS CENTER (Military Personnel Records) 9700 Page Avenue St. Louis, MO 63132-5100\nNATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION NA FORM 13044 (REV 12-95)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS: To be completed by all retired personnel when any permanent change occurs. Type or print clearly. Complete all items. Send one copy to the Air Adjutant General, Headquarters USAF, ATTN: Military Personnel Records Division, Washington 25, D. C.; one copy to the Director of Military Personnel, Headquarters USAF, ATTN: Retired Activities Branch, Washington 25, D. C. In addition to the foregoing, retired personnel having any status in the Air Force Reserve will forward one copy to the Commander Air Reserve Records Center, Continental Air Command, 3800 York Street, Denver 5, Colorado.\nLAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE INITIAL: McCoy, Howard, M.\nSERVICE NO. (As shown on retired pay checks): 550A\nRETIRED GRADE: Col.\nCOMMISSIONED AF RESERVE STATUS: SERVICE NO. / GRADE\nNEW PERMANENT ADDRESS: #3 Evergreen Trail, Severna Park, MD.\nFORMER PERMANENT ADDRESS: c/o FMC Room 539 Wyatt Bldg. 777-14th St. N.W. Washington, D.C.\nNAME OF SPOUSE OR NEXT OF KIN: Mrs. Pauline B. McCoy\nCOMPLETE ADDRESS: Same\nNAME OF PERSON TO NOTIFY IN CASE OF EMERGENCY: [ditto marks]\nCOMPLETE ADDRESS: PHONE SEVERNA PARK 1725\nCHECK IF MORE FORMS ARE NEEDED (Reservist: Check on form forwarded to Air Reserve Records Center only. Regulars and all others: Check on forms forwarded to AAG only.) [check mark]\nDATE PREPARED: 10/7/60\nSIGNATURE: Howard M. McCoy\nAF FORM 534 1 AUG 56 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. GPO-1956 O-394686 NOTIFICATION OF CHANGE - RETIRED"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAME OF SPOUSE OR NEXT OF KIN: Mrs. Pauline B. McCoy\nCOMPLETE ADDRESS: Same\nNAME OF PERSON TO NOTIFY IN CASE OF EMERGENCY: [ditto marks]\nCOMPLETE ADDRESS: PHONE SEVERNA PARK 1725\nCHECK IF MORE FORMS ARE NEEDED (Reservist: Check on form forwarded to Air Reserve Records Center only. Regulars and all others: Check on forms forwarded to AAG only.)\nDATE PREPARED: 10/7/60\nSIGNATURE: Howard M. McCoy\nAF FORM 534 1 AUG 56 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. GPO-1956 O-394686 NOTIFICATION OF CHANGE - RETIRED"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FROM\nH. M. McCoy\n#3 Evergreen Trail\nSeverna Park, Maryland\nWASHINGTON OCT 7 9:00 PM 1960 D.C.\nTO: Air Adjutant General\nHeadquarters USAF\nATTN: Military Personnel Records Division\nWashington 25, D. C."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS: To be completed by all retired personnel when any permanent change occurs. Type or print clearly. Complete all items. Send one copy to the Air Adjutant General, Headquarters USAF, ATTN: Military Personnel Records Division, Washington 25, D. C.; one copy to the Director of Military Personnel, Headquarters USAF, ATTN: Retired Activities Branch, Washington 25, D. C. In addition to the foregoing, retired personnel having any status in the Air Force Reserve will forward one copy to the Commander Air Reserve Records Center, Continental Air Command, 3800 York Street, Denver 5, Colorado.\nLAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE INITIAL: McCoy, Howard, M.\nSERVICE NO. (As shown on retired pay checks): 550A\nRETIRED GRADE: Col.\nCOMMISSIONED AF RESERVE STATUS: SERVICE NO. / GRADE\nNEW PERMANENT ADDRESS: Room 539 Wyatt Bldg. 777-14th St. Washington 5, D.C.\nFORMER PERMANENT ADDRESS: 5465 White Oak Ave. Encino, Calif.\nNAME OF SPOUSE OR NEXT OF KIN: Mrs. H.M. McCoy\nCOMPLETE ADDRESS: #3 Evergreen Trail Severna Park, Md.\nRELATIONSHIP: [redacted]\nNAME OF PERSON TO NOTIFY IN CASE OF EMERGENCY: Mrs. H.M. McCoy\nCOMPLETE ADDRESS: same as above\nCHECK IF MORE FORMS ARE NEEDED (Reservist: Check on form forwarded to Air Reserve Records Center only. Regulars and all others: Check on forms forwarded to AAG only.)\nDATE PREPARED: 7/20/60\nSIGNATURE: Howard M. [redacted]\nAF FORM 534 1 AUG 56 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. GPO-1956 O-394686 NOTIFICATION OF CHANGE - RETIRED [redacted]"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FROM\nH.M.McCoy Col. USAF(ret)\n#3 Evergreen Trail\nSeverna Park, Md.\nWASHINGTON JUL 1 7 PM 1948 D.C.\nTO: AIR ADJUTANT GENERAL\nHQRS. USAF\nATTN: AFPMP-S-2\nWASHINGTON 25\nD.C."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PERFECTED\nAFCAG 62-A\nDate: 19 FEB 59\nClerk's Name: DAL\nLAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE INITIAL\nMCCOY, HOWARD MONROE\nSERVICE NUMBER\nAO 18 054\n550A\nRETIRED\nMASTER PERSONNEL RECORD\nFILE COVER SHEET\nRETURN TO\nMILITARY PERSONNEL RECORDS DIVISION\nDIRECTORATE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES\nHEADQUARTERS USAF\nPLEASE DO NOT FILE ANY PAPERS ON TOP OF THIS COVER SHEET\nAFHQ FORM FEB 56 0-826"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Card #1(2)\nRATING: TYPE, DATE, ORDER #\nAP 10-10-31 PO265-2 OCAC 1931\nP 4-1-39 PO76-87 OCAC 1939\nSP 10-4-41 P 234-10 OCAC 1941\nCP 1-20-47 PO 13-2 HqAAF 1-20-47.\nCO 6-29-40 PO252-1 OCAC 1940\nActt O 7-1-41 PO202-66 OCAC 1941\nAPPOINTMENT: DATA RANK, DATE, ETC.\n2d Lt 6-12-30\n1st Lt 8-1-35\nCapt 6-12-40\nMajor 6-30-41\nAUS 2-1-42 WD90-1'42:6-1247 WD143-13 7-22-47\nLt Col 1-5-42\nAUS 12-10-42 WD336-11'42\nCol AUS-AC 3-1-42 WD165-3'42 USAF 4-2-48 Hq\nAUS 8-1-44 WD183-1'44 USAF 66-12 4-2-48 per\nSec 502 and 510 of OPA of 1947\nFLYING STATUS ORDERS\nPO242-2 10-16-30\nSCHOOLS\nMILITARY YEAR CIVIL YEAR\nUSMA FA 1930 Elmira Free Acad, 1924\nACAF Sch Purs 1931 (N.Y.)\nAC Eng Sch 1936\nAC Tact Sch 1940\nAAFSAT(ANSCOL-Crs) 1944\nANSCOL 1944\nNAME SERIAL NUMBER DATE OF BIRTH PLACE OF BIRTH\nMcCoy, Howard M. 0-18054 12-4-07 Kane, Pa."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAME McCoy, Howard M. 0-18054\nSTATION ORDERS PRINCIPAL DUTIES FROM TO\nMarch Fld. WD168-27'30 Stud, AC Primary Fly Sch 10-16-30 6-23-31\nKelly Fld. WD133-29'31 Stud, AC Advanced Fly Sch 6-27-31 10-13-31\nSelfridge Fld. WD225-28'31 Asst Post Prov Marshall(7); 94th 11-13-31 9-1-34\nPur Sq: Asst Sup O(12) Asst & Engr\nInsp O(20) Asst Engr O(18); DS CCC\nMichigan(4); DS Camp Skeel Aer Gunnery Ex(1/2); DS AACMO EZ(3)\nPasadena, Calif. AGLO 5-10-34. Stud, Calif. Inst of Tech. Aero Engr 9-20-34 7-5-35\nWright Fld. WD73-14'35 Stud, AC Engr Sch 7-26-35 8-1-36\nWright Fld. WD52-24'36 Mat Div: Aircr Br. Exper Engr Sec: 8-1-36 7-10-40\nProp Lab.\nAGLO 3-18-40 Stud, AC Tac Sch. 4th Cl.\nPasadena, Calif. WD131-44'40 Stud, Calif Inst of Tech(Aero Engr) 7-15-40 6-13-41\nWright Fld, O. WD119-33'41 Mater Div, Hq: Prop Lab Expr Engr 6-20-41\nSec (1) & (2) 4-7-20-43"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Card #2(2)\nSTATION ORDERS PRINCIPAL DUTIES FROM TO\nAGL 1-24-44 TD SAT, C&GSS, USNWC\nAmAGL 3-1-44 Attchd Bolling for duty: HqAAF 10-26-44\nfor reference not later than Elmira, N.Y.\nAPO 887 NY AGL 6-13-44S ETO: USSAFIE, dy w/ A-2 Sec\nHqATSC Europe136-5, 7-24-45\nWright Fld,Ohio HqAAFLO 10-17-45 HqATSC: 10-26-45\nAMC\nRost 9-15-46 HqAMC; 4020th AAFBU; Intell Staff Officer\nFt. Lesley J. McNair, DC Hq AMC:95-6 Industrial College Armed Forces 8-25-49\n5-16-49\nDAF:195-10 AU: 3894th Sch Sq w/sta Industrial 10-16-49\n10-6-49 College\n4-17-47"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McCoy, Howard M. O-18054\nSTATION\nORDERS\nPRINCIPAL DUTIES\nFROM\nTO"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McCOY, HOWARD MONROE 1 Lt. 8-1-35 A.C.\n18054\nCapt 6-12-40\nGRADE AND DATE\nORGANIZATION AND DATE\nSTATION\nJOINED\nLEFT\nWright Field, Ohio July 26,35 July 8, 40\nC.I.T. Pasadena, Calif July 15,40\n5 days auto\nCal. Inst. of Tech\nstud\nTEMPORARILY AT\nCAUSE\nFROM-\nTO-\nAC Tech, Maxwell Field, Ala. course Apr 3,40\nMarch Field, Cal\nDETACHED SERVICE\nFROM-\nTO-\nMaxwell Fld, Ala\nDSXC Selfridge Fld, Mich May 31,40 June 28,40\nLEAVES\nFROM-\nTO-\nMOS.\nDAYS\nBALANCE\nNov 20 39 Dec 8 39\nJuly 9, 40 July 10,40\n9\n2\nSICK AND SICK LEAVES\nFOREIGN SERVICE\nLEFT U.S.\nTRANSPORT\nARRIVED AT\nDATE\nLEFT\nTRANSPORT\nARRIVED AT\nDATE\n3-8095"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ORDERS AND ASSIGNMENTS\n(ALL DATES AND SOURCES OF ORDERS TO BE GIVEN)\nOrdered by rail to Maxwell Fld Ala Report not earlier Apr 2 nor later Apr 6,40 to AC Tech Sch for stud course abt 3 mos. 4-8-40 - complt return by rail A.S. 210.6.3 Ord J.S. (3-12-40) Mar 18,40\nRcvd a t d ot Wright Field, Dayton, O eff to comply, these detl'd as stud. asst. passing summer course in aeronautical engineering freg course instr in aeronautical engineering at Calif Inst of Tech, Pasadena, Calif., will proc at prop time to NY, NY and ot 29 June,40 for S.S. Calif & upon grad proc to Pasadena & rpt to registrar Calif Inst of Tech for duty by ltr to C.G. 9th Corps Area to Capt. AC attd to March Fld, Riverside, Calif for flying dy only in add to dus as stud eff from pty for dut Pasadena, Calif. D.S. 3 das into Wright Fld to NY & 2 das into SF to Pasadena with d, SO 131/44 WD 4 June,40 Prom to Capt upon rpt for 12 June,40 cncl SO 138/6 WD 12 June,40 X SO 131/44 WD 4 June,40 amended to attch to Off. of dist supervisor, Western AC Procurement Dist Santa Monica, Calif for flying dy only in add to dus as stud at Calif Inst of Tech Pasadena, Calif. SO 143/18 WD 18 June,40\nUsual D.S. overland travel allowed AC 210.66 (3-24-40) 4 June 40"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"***NA-NOT APPLICABLE\nReaccomplished 6 January 1953\nORGANIZATION COPY\nCHECK CHANGES RECEIVED\n1. LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME McCOY HOWARD MONROE\n2. ARMY SERIAL NUMBER 550 A\n3. GRADE COL\n4. COMPONENT RegAF\n5. ARM OR SERVICE\n6. CITIZENSHIP STATUS NATIVE\n7. RELIGION EPISCOPALIAN\n8. HEIGHT 6' 2\"\n9. WEIGHT 220\n10. RACE CAU\n11. CATEGORY\n12. MOS (SSN)\n13. SOURCE OF COMMISSION USMA-30\n14. DATE OF EAD 12 Jun 30\n15. CITY AND STATE FROM WHICH ORDERED TO EAD Elmira, New York\n16. DATE OF BIRTH 4 Dec 07\n17. CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY AND CIVILIAN SCHOOLING\n18. GRADE STATUS\nAAFFS Pilot Trng 13mo com 1931 2nd Lt RA 12Jun30 12Jun30\nACEngSch WF/O Engineering 12mo com 1936 1st Lt RA 1Aug35 1Aug35\nAC TacSch, Ala Air Corps Tactics 3mo com 1940 Capt RA 12Jun40 12Jun40\nAN Staff Colg Jt Comd & Staff 5mo com 1944 Maj AC36 30Jun41 30Jun41\nICAF Econ Mob 10mo com 1950 Maj AUS 1Feb42 1Feb42\nUSMA Academic 4yrs ComJun30 Lt Col AC36 5Jan42 5Jan42\nLt Col AUS 10Dec42 10Dec42\nCol AUSAC 1Mar42 1Mar42\nCol AUS 1Aug44 1Aug44\nMaj RA 22Jul47 12Jun47\nCol USAF 2Apr48 2Apr48\nCol AFUS 30Jun48 1Mar49\n19. RECORD OF PHYSICAL STATUS\n20. RETIRED (Grade, reason, date) TAFCSD is 12 Jun 30 (as of 13 Jul 50)\n21. EFFICIENCY INDEX SERVICE DATES\nTAFCSD 12Jun30 TAFMSD 12Jun30 TACSD 12Jun30 TMSD 12Jun30\n22. CATEGORY\n23. GENERAL AND ANNUAL EFFICIENCY RATING (For WD use only)\n24. MILITARY OCCUPATIONAL SPECIALTIES\nAFS CONVERSION\n(P) R&D Dir 8416 24Apr52 PAM27, HqUSAF\nIntel Stf O 2016 24Apr52 PAM27, HqUSAF\nPlt, Trans 1044P 24Apr52 PAM27, HqUSAF\nPlt L Bomb 1224P 24Apr52 PAM27, HqUSAF\n25. DETAILS\n26. FOREIGN SERVICE DATA\n27. CAMPAIGNS\nRhineland GO 24 P 34, 4Mar47\nWD AGO FORM 66 (3 PART)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"28. CHRONOLOGICAL RECORD OF MILITARY SERVICE\nPAGE 2\n1Jan42 27Apr43 7050 Ch, Prop Lab AAFMC, EngDiv Prop Lab MOPR\n28Apr43 28Jan44 7050 Ch, Propeller Lab AAFMC, EngDiv Prop Lab MOPR\n29Jan44 22Jun44 2700 Student Army&Navy Staff Colg NR\n23Jun44 5Jul44 0001 Prep & enroute to ETO AAFMC, EngDiv Prop Lab NR\n6Jul44 31Dec44 7050 Office Dir of Tech Servs HqASC-USSTAF APO633 NY 67\n1Jan45 30Jun45 7050 D/Tech Svs Hq ASC USSTAF 67\n1Jul45 15Jul45 7050 Dir Tech Services HqAirTechSvs, Europe MOPR\n16Jul45 170ct45 7050 A-2 Section Hq USSTAF MOPR\n180ct45 31Dec45 9349 Ch, AnalDiv&Ch, AirDocDiv 4020AAFBU(HqATSC)T-2 Intell, WF, Dayton, O 67\n1Jan46 30Jun46 9349 Same Same 67\n1Jul46 9Dec46 9349 ActDepComdGen T-2 Same 67\n10Dec46 30Jun47 9349 Same, EffApr47, DepComdGen T-2 Same 67\nTrfd to the Department of the Air Force per TransferOrder 1, NME, 26Sep47\n1Jul47 140ct47 9349 Dep Comd Gen T-2 5 Same 67-1\n150ct47 31May48 9349 Ch Intell Dept HqAMC, IntellDept, W/P, O 67-1\n1Jun48 30Apr49 9349 Same, TDY ETO 23Feb49-18Apr49 29 Same 67-1\n1May49 30Jun49 9349 Same 5 HqAMC, Same ER\n1Jul49 24Aug49 9349 Same Same None\n25Aug49 27Jun50 2700 Student 3894Sq,AU,Maxwell,Ala Acad\n28Jun50 13Jul50 0001 Enroute to new station 16 Same None\n14Jul50 28Feb51 9349 Air Tech Intell O HqUSAF, CenConGp/CIA 77\n1Mar51 9Mar51 9349 Same Same None\n10Mar51 29Feb52 9349 Dir Phys Sec Equip Agency 19 HqUSAF, CenConGp CER\n1Mar52 24Jun52 Same 0 3 Same NCRO\n25Jun52 24Feb53 2016 Sr AF Member, Phy Scty Equip Agency 11 Same CER\n25Feb53 31May53 2016 Same 0 Same NCRO\n1Jun53 24Feb54 2016 Same, Dir, PSEA 31 1005th IG SIGp; BAFB, DC CER\n25Feb54 Same w/dy Hq USAF\n1Mar54 30Jun54 2016 Same 3 Same CER\n1Jul54 2Aug54 2016 Intel Stf O 0 1005thIG SIGp; Wash, DC None\n3Aug54 25Aug54 0001 Unasgd 23 Hq AMC, WPAFB, Ohio None\n26Aug54 31Aug54 0001 Unasgd 6 1005thIG SIGp; Wash, DC None"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"43. FLYING STATUS | 44. RATINGS, SPECIALTIES, AND DESIGNATIONS\nAUTHORITY | DATE | RESTRICTIONS | RATING, SPECIALTY OR DESIGNATION | EFFECTIVE DATE | AUTHORITY\nWD OCAC PO 242 | 160ct39 | | Pilot | 11Jan31 | WDPO 265 Par 2\nPar 2 | | | | 1Apr39 | WDPO 76 Par 87\n| | | Air C. Obs. | 28Aug41 | WD PO 202 Par 66\n| | | Sr Pilot | 60ct41 | WD PO 234 Par 10\n| | | Comd. Pilot | 20Jan47 | Hq AAF PO 12 Par 2\n45. AIRPLANE QUALIFICATIONS (Military) | 46. FLYING HOURS\nNO. OF ENGINES | TYPE OF PLANE | HOURS | MONTH AND YEAR\nCONVENTIONAL 1: 2,3,4,5,6,8,12,16,6,26,PB-2,25 (struck through) | 250\n2: 26,36,35,OA-4,C-40-9 (struck through) | 500\nOVER 2: 30,33,40,43,47,60,61 | 750\nJET 1: 70,81,88,B-6,9,10,12 | 1000\n2: 18 B-17,24,25, C-45 | 1500\nOVER 2 | 2000\nOTHER: AT-3,BT-2B,022,PW9,P-1 (struck through) 3000 Sep 47\nA-31B 4BT-1P-37P40,42 | 5000\n47. CIVILIAN FLYING EXPERIENCE (Nature, type equipment, no. hrs., last date flown, licenses)\nBest Qualified Aircraft-C-45\nCommercial Airplane Single Engine Land\nCert No. 30634\n48. COMBAT DATA (AAF only)\n49. INTERNSHIP | 50. PRIVATE PRACTICE\nHOSPITAL (Location) | TYPE | TOTAL MONTHS | YEAR COMPLETED | LOCATION AND TYPE | % OF TIME | FROM TO\n51. RESIDENCIES AND FELLOWSHIPS\nHOSPITAL (Location) | SERVICE | TOTAL MONTHS | YEAR COMPLETED\n52. POSTGRADUATE INSTRUCTION\nINSTITUTION | COURSE | TOTAL MONTHS | YEAR COMPLETED | 53. CERTIFIED BY AMERICAN BOARD OF | YEAR\nSUB SPECIALTY | YEAR\nLICENSE (Type) | STATE OR TERRITORY AND YEAR\n54. HOSPITAL AND TEACHING APPOINTMENTS | 55. BOOKS AND TECHNICAL PAPERS PUBLISHED | YEAR\nINSTITUTION | TYPE | HOURS WEEKLY | DATES (From - to)\n56. PROFESSIONAL AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETIES (with degree of membership)\nInst. of Aero Sciences Associate fellow\nRensselaer Society of Engrs\nSigma XI Hon. Eng. Society\n[illegible]\n57. COLOR HAIR Brown | 58. COLOR EYES Gray | 59. PHOTO Pict on AG 4 Cmd eff\n60. COMPLEXION Ruddy | 61. BLOOD TYPE O\n62. SPECTACLES DATA\nHoward M. McCoy\n63. AUTHENTICATING SIGNATURE, TYPED NAME, GRADE AND ARM OR SERVICE OF OFFICER AND DATE\nHOWARD M. McCOY, Col, USAF 6 Jan 53\nPAGE 4"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"29. PERMANENT MAILING ADDRESS (No., Street, City and State) | 30. BIRTH PLACE (City, State, Foreign Country) | 31. EMERGENCY ADDRESSEE (Name, Relationship, Number, Street, City, State)\n406 Elm St Elmira, New York | Kane, Pa\n32. MARITAL STATUS Married\n33. NO. OF DEPENDENTS WIFE 1 CHILDREN 3 OTHER\n34. PARENTS' BIRTHPLACE: FATHER US; MOTHER US\n35. FOREIGN LANGUAGES\n36. EDUCATION\nHIGH SCHOOL Elmira, New York Engineering X Dipl 1924\nCOLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY Pennselaer New York Civil Eng (1) NG 1926\nU.S.M.A. New York Academic (4) X BS 1930\nPOSTGRADUATE Cal. Inst. of Tech. Aero. Eng (1) X MSAEE 1935\nOTHER Cal. Inst of Tech. Aero Eng. (1) X AE 1941\n37. CIVILIAN OCCUPATIONAL EXPERIENCE (Main and secondary)\nTITLE OF POSITION NONE CODE 9-99.99\n38. SPORTS | 39. AVOCATIONS\n40. QUALIFICATION IN ARMS\n41. AWARDS, DECORATIONS, AND CITATIONS\nBronze Star HqATSCE G029 3Aug45 yes\nAm Defense WD CIR 163 1947 no\nEAME Ribbonw/1BS WD CIR 195 1944 yes\nAm Theatre WD CIR 326 1945 yes\nVic Ribbon WD CIR 326 1945 no\nLegion of Merit GO 13 HqUSFET APO 757 yes\nNatlDefSvMed AFR 35-50/53 no\n42. REMARKS Cleared for access to classified material up to and including Top Secret, 21Nov47 effective, by Base Security Section, Hq AMC, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio/ CBI with favorable results on 11 Aug 48 report filed Off of Air Provost Marshal (IG) Hqs. USAF//TOP SECRET security clearance ltr 300ct52 Dept of the Air Force//\nPAGE 5"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTE TO CBPO FILE IN UNIT PERSONNEL RECORD GROUP\nSTATEMENT OF SERVICE (Creditable under 37 USC 205)\nLAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE NAME: MCCOY, HOWARD MONROE | SERVICE NUMBER(S)/SSAN 042 30 3763 550A AO 18 054\nNATURE OF ACTION | EFFECTIVE DATES | ACTIVE DUTY FROM | ACTIVE DUTY TO | SEPARATION\n2d Lt FA RA (12 Jun 30) 12 Jun 30\nTRFDTO AC 12 Dec 31\n1st Lt AC RA 26 Aug 35\nCaptain AC RA 17 Jun 40\nMajor AUS-AC 30 Jun 41\nLt Colonel AUS AC 24 Jan 42\nMajor AUS 1 Feb 42\nColonel AUS AC 1 Mar 42\nLt Colonel AUS 10 Dec 42\nColonel AUS 1 Aug 44\nMajor AC RA 12 Jun 47\nColonel USAF 2 Apr 48\nColonel AFUS 30 Jun 48\nRETIRED 31 Aug 54 | 31 Aug 54 | HON RFAD In grade of Colonel, UP Sec Act of Congress, apprr 31 July 1935, as amnd\nBORN 4 December 1907, Kane, Pennsylvania\nDeath 12 October 1976\nTIME LOST FROM TO DAYS\nDATE 22 October 1976\nAUTHENTICATION Military Personnel Records Division Directorate of Personnel Data Systems AF/DPMDR\nTHIS IS A VALUABLE RECORD! SAFEGUARD IT!\nDD FORM 13 JAN 67"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"***NA-NOT APPLICABLE\nCHARACTER OF SEPARATION HONORABLE | REPORT OF SEPARATION FROM THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES | DEPARTMENT AIR FORCE\n1. LAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE NAME MCCOY HOWARD MONROE | 2. SERVICE NUMBER 550A | 3. GRADE - RATE - RANK AND DATE OF APPOINTMENT Col(T) 22Jun42* | 4. COMPONENT AND BRANCH OF CLASS USAF\n5. QUALIFICATIONS SPECIALTY NUMBER OR SYMBOL 8416 | RELATED CIVILIAN OCCUPATION none | 6. EFFECTIVE DATE OF SEPARATION 31 Aug 54 | 7. TYPE OF SEPARATION Retirement\n8. REASON AND AUTHORITY FOR SEPARATION Under PROV of SEC 5 of the Act of Congress APPR 31 JUL 35 as amd | 9. PLACE OF SEPARATION Bolling Air Force Base Washington DC\n10. DATE OF BIRTH 4 Dec 07 | 11. PLACE OF BIRTH Kane Pennsylvania | 12. DESCRIPTION Male Caucasian Brown Gray 6'1\" 220\n13. REGISTERED NA | 14. SELECTIVE SERVICE LOCAL BOARD NUMBER NA | 15. INDUCTED NA\n16. ENLISTED IN OR TRANSFERRED TO A RESERVE COMPONENT NA\n17. MEANS OF ENTRY: COMMISSIONED | 18. GRADE AT TIME OF ENTRY 2nd Lt\n19. DATE AND PLACE OF ENTRY 12 Jun 30 West Point New York | 20. HOME ADDRESS 406 Elm Street Elmira New York\n21. NET NA\n22. NET SERVICE COMPLETED FOR PAY PURPOSES THIS PERIOD 24 2 19\n23. OTHER SERVICE 0 0 0\n24. TOTAL NET SERVICE COMPLETED FOR PAY PURPOSES 24 2 19\n27. DECORATIONS, MEDALS, BADGES, COMMENDATIONS, CITATIONS AND CAMPAIGN RIBBONS AWARDED OR AUTHORIZED Bronze Star Medal American Defense Service Medal European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal w/battle star American Theater Ribbon World War II Victory Medal Legion of Merit National ****\n28. MOST SIGNIFICANT DUTY ASSIGNMENT Research and Development Director\n29. WOUNDS None\n30. SERVICE SCHOOLS: AAFFS 13 mos 1931 Pilot Training; AC Eng Sch W/F Ohio 12 mos 1936 Engineering; AC Tac Sch Alabama 3 mos 1940 Air Corps Tactics; AN Staff Colg 5 mos 1944 Jt Cmd & Staff; ICAF 10 mos 1950 Econ Mob\n38. REMARKS *Item 3 Date of Rank 1 Mar 42; Col Reg AF (P) prom eff 2 Apr 48; **Item 8 AMND Para 26 DAFSO 167 dtd 27 Aug 54; ***Item 27 Defense Service Medal; USMA July 1926 - June 1930; Certificate of Retirement (DD Form 363AF) issued\n39. CHARLES BLACKBURNE, JR. Major, USAF Asst. Air Adjutant Gen.\n40. None\n41. None | 42. None | 43. None\n44. UNITED STATES CITIZEN YES\n45. MARITAL STATUS Married 46. EDUCATION GRAM 8 HIGH SCHOOL 4 COL LEGE 7 DEGREE(S) BS MSAEE AE MAJOR COURSE Aero Engineering\n47. PERMANENT ADDRESS FOR MAILING PURPOSES AFTER SEPARATION RFD #1 Fairfax Station Fairfax Virginia\n48. SIGNATURE Howard Monroe McCoy\nDD FORM 214 1 JUL 52\nHEADQUARTERS COPY\n2"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CERTIFICATION OF INFORMATION FOR RETIREMENT PAY\n1. LAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE NAME McCoy, Howard M. | 2. SERVICE NUMBER(s) 550A\n3. DATE OF RETIREMENT 31 Aug 54 | 4. PLACE OF RETIREMENT Bolling AFB, Wash, DC | 5. LAST ORGANIZATION, ARM OR SERVICE Hq 1005th Insp Gen Sp Inves Gp, Hq Comd, USAF\n6. TYPE OF RETIREMENT NON-DISABILITY (checked)\n7. RETIREMENT ORDER PARAGRAPH NUMBER 26 | SPECIAL ORDER NUMBER 167 | DEPARTMENT AF | DATE 27 Aug 54\n8. STATUS OF INDIVIDUAL REGULAR (checked)\n9. GRADE IN WHICH RETIRED Col\n10. STATUTE AUTHORIZING RETIREMENT Sec 5 of the Act of Congress, Appr 31 Jul 35, as amnd\n11. GRADE TO WHICH ADVANCED ON RETIRED LIST AND AUTHORITY: active\n12. GRADE FOR RETIREMENT PAY PURPOSES AND AUTHORITY\n13. TOTAL SERVICE FOR RETIREMENT 24 years 2 months 19 days\n14. TOTAL SERVICE FOR BASIC PAY PURPOSES 24 years 2 months 19 days\n15. YEARS OF SERVICE FOR PERCENTAGE PURPOSES (Title III, PL 810, 80th Congress). FRACTIONAL PARTS OF YEARS IN DECIMALS\n16. TOTAL ACTUAL ACTIVE SERVICE 24 years 2 months 19 days\n17. DEGREE OF DISABILITY (Applicable to Permanent or Temporary Disability Retirement)\n18. [ ] RETIRED ON ACCOUNT OF WOUNDS RECEIVED IN ACTION; [ ] RETIRED FOR DISABILITY INCURRED IN COMBAT WITH AN ENEMY OF THE UNITED STATES OR FOR DISABILITIES RESULTING FROM AN EXPLOSION OF AN INSTRUMENTALITY OF WAR IN LINE OF DUTY\n19. MAILING ADDRESS AFTER RETIREMENT Rural Route 1, Fairfax Station, Virginia\n20. REMARKS\nFILE AF-OFFICERS BASIC 201 Initials CMS Date 13 Sep 54\n21. I CERTIFY THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS CORRECT\nDATE COMPLETED 2 Sep 54 | TYPED NAME AND GRADE Brice E. Macartney, Major | SIGNATURE OF OFFICER\nDD FORM 424 1 DEC 50"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"61/A/150\n\nAFCAG-61-M McCoy, Howard M.\n\nSTATEMENT OF MILITARY SERVICE\nOF\nHOWARD MONROE MCCOY\n\nColonel Howard Monroe McCoy, 550A, Regular Air Force, Retired,\nhas held a continuous commission since 12 June 1930, with continuous\nactive duty from 12 June 1930 to 31 August 1954, the effective date\nof his retirement under the provisions of Section 5 of the Act of\nCongress, approved 31 July 1935, as amended.\nBY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nK. E. THIEBAUD\nColonel, USAF\nAir Adjutant General"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"766651\n\nDefinitions of abbreviations are contained in JANAP 169, September 1953.\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n\nSPECIAL ORDERS) 27 August 1954\nNUMBER 167) E X T R A C T\n\n24. SMOP 7, SO 146, DAF, CS, relating to rsg of LTCOL JOHN\nM COULTER, AO430789, Hq USAF, WASHDC, with EDCSA: 10 Sep 54,\nas reads \"asg Hq AF Sp Wpn Cen, ATRC, Kirtland AFB, NMex\" IATR\n\"asg Hq AF Sp Wpn Cen, ARDC, Kirtland AFB, NMex.\"\n\n25. Under prov of sec 402 and 409, Pub Law 351-81st Congress,\nMSGT EUGENE V SEIPLE, AF6644759 (AO579181), is rel from asg 3750th\nUSAF Hosp, ATRC, Sheppard AFB, Tex, ret in gr of 1STLT, eff 31 Aug 54,\nand WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999;\n5753500 548-242 P 514-01 S 99-999.\n\n26. COL HOWARD M MCCOY, 550A, is rel from asg and dy\nHq 1005th Insp Gen Sp Inves Gp, Hq Comd, USAF, Bolling AFB, WASHDC,\nand ret under prov of sec 5 of the Act of Congress, appr 31 Jul 35, as\namnd, eff 31 Aug 54 and WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-\n02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-142 P 511-01 S 99-999.\n\nBY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE:\n\nOFFICIAL: N. F. TWINING\n Chief of Staff, United States Air Force\nK. E. THIEBAUD\nColonel, USAF\nAir Adjutant General"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APPLICATION FOR UNIFORMED SERVICES IDENTIFICATION AND PRIVILEGE CARD\nForm Approved. Budget Bureau No. 22-R174.\n\nSECTION I—IDENTIFICATION OF PERSON UPON WHOM ELIGIBILITY FOR DD FORM 1173 IS BASED\n\n1. LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE INITIAL OF APPLICANT: McCoy, Howard M.\n2. MAILING ADDRESS: 101 Park Pl. Severna Park Md.\n3. TELEPHONE NUMBER: HOME 1030\n4. STATUS: RETIRED\n5. GRADE—RANK—RANK: Colonel\n6. BRANCH OF SERVICE: US AF\n7. SERVICE NUMBER: 550A\n8. DATE OF (expiration of service or contract) OR (death) (if applicable):\n9. REASON FOR APPLICATION\n\nSECTION II—PERSONS FOR WHOM AUTHORIZATION IS REQUESTED\n10a. LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE INITIAL: Howard M. Mc Coy\nb. RELATIONSHIP: Self\nc. COLOR EYES: Brown\nd. COLOR HAIR: Gray\ng. ADDRESS: Same as Item#2\nh. DATE OF BIRTH: 4 Dec 07\ni. HEIGHT: 6'2\"\nj. WEIGHT: 230\ne. PRIVILEGE: MC(US), T, C, E(U)\nf. CARD NO. ISSUED: AF0059810\nk. EXPIRATION DATE: Indefinite\nl. DATE ISSUED: 2 June 1958\n\n17. RECEIPT OF CARD(S) IS ACKNOWLEDGED: a. DATE ACKNOWLEDGED 2 June 1958; b. SIGNATURE OF RECIPIENT: Howard M. McCoy\n\nSECTION III—STATEMENT OF UNIFORMED SERVICES OR CIVILIAN SPONSOR; OTHERWISE THE APPLICANT\n\n18. I STATE: (Check appropriate box or boxes and complete entries as applicable)\na. Lawful marriage to the spouse named took place at ____ on ____\nb. The lawful husband named is in fact dependent upon me for over one-half of his support.\nc. I am the unremarried widow of the deceased member or retired member named in Section I, that I am not now married and have never remarried since date of death of said member or retired member. Lawful marriage to said member or retired member took place at ____ on ____\n\nDD FORM 1172 1 MAY 57\n\n1 Abbreviated Privileges, i. e.: C—Commissary; T—Theater; EU—Exchange Unlimited; EL—Exchange Limited; MC(C)—Medical Care in Civilian Facilities; MC(US)—Medical Care in Uniformed Services Facilities"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"d. I am the unremarried widower of the deceased member or retired member named in Section I, that I am not now married and have not remarried since date of death of said member or retired member and that at the time of said member's or retired member's death I was dependent upon such member or retired member for over one-half of my support because of a mental or physical incapacity. Lawful marriage to said member or retired member took place at ____ on ____\n\ne. All children named are my legitimate, legally adopted or step children; that all children are unmarried; that all children named who are over 21 years of age are (1) incapable of self-support because of a mental or physical incapacity that existed prior to their reaching the age of 21 and are in fact dependent upon me for over one-half of their support or (2) have not passed their twenty-third birthday and are enrolled in a full-time course of study in an educational institution above high school level which normally maintains a regular faculty and curriculum and normally has a regularly organized body of students in attendance at the place where the educational activities are carried on and are in fact dependent upon me for over one-half of their support.\n\nf. All children named are the legitimate, legally adopted or step-children of the deceased member or retired member named in Section I, that all children named are unmarried; that all children named who are over 21 years of age are (1) incapable of self-support because of a mental or physical incapacity that existed prior to their reaching the age of 21 and were in fact dependent upon the deceased member or retired member at the time of the member's or retired member's death for over one-half of their support or (2) have not passed their twenty-third birthday and are enrolled in a full-time course of study in an educational institution above high school level which normally maintains a regular faculty and curriculum and place where the educational activities are carried on and were in fact dependent upon the deceased member or retired member at the time of member's or retired member's death, for over one-half of their support.\n\nNOTE—Section II—In those special circumstances which permit children over 21 entitlement to medical care, indicate after date of birth (INC) for incompetency, or (SCH) for attendance at approved school. Enter under Remarks the name of the institution of higher learning.\n\ng. I am the parent or parent-in-law of the deceased member or retired member named in Section I and at the time of said member's or retired member's death, I, and all other parents or parents-in-law named herein resided in the household of said member or retired member, and were in fact dependent upon said member or retired member for over one-half of our support.²\n\nh. I am the legal guardian of the dependent or dependents of the deceased member or retired member named in Section I, and further certify that the named dependents meet the criteria for eligibility prescribed by Public Law 569, 84th Congress, as indicated by blocks checked above.\n\ni. All parents or parents-in-law named are in fact dependent upon me for over one-half of their support and actually reside in my household.²\n\nj. I am entitled to retired, retirement, or retainer pay or equivalent pay as a result of service in a uniformed service, other than by retirement under title III of the Army and Air Force Vitalization and Retirement Equalization Act of 1948.\n\nk. I am entitled to retired or retirement pay under Title 10, U.S.C. Section 1331-1337 (formerly Title III of the Army and Air Force Vitalization and Retirement Equalization Act of 1948) and I have completed eight or more years of active duty as defined in subsection 101(E) of the Armed Forces Reserve Act of 1952, 66 Stat. 481, 50 U.S.C. 901, periods of active duty were as follows:\n\n² For the purposes of medical care, the requirement of actually residing in the household shall be fulfilled when the parent or parent-in-law actually resides, or was residing at the time of death of a member or retired member, in a dwelling place provided or maintained by said member or retired member.\n\n19. REMARKS\n\n20. CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO RECIPIENTS OF CARDS\n\nRecipients of the Uniformed Services Identification and Privilege Card(s) authorized on the basis of this application will be responsible for proper use of the privileges and facilities authorized. Recipients will surrender cards immediately upon call to do so or when appropriate under applicable regulations, and will notify the agencies designated to grant authorizations for privileges and facilities in event of any change in status affecting eligibility therefor. Medical care furnished in uniformed services facilities is subject to the availability of space, facilities, and the capabilities of the medical staff to provide such care. Determinations made by the medical officer or contract surgeon, or his designee, as to the availability of space, facilities, and the capabilities of the medical staff shall be conclusive. Reimbursement shall be required for any unauthorized medical care furnished at Government expense.\n\n21. DATE OF APPLICATION: 2 June 1958\n22. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT: Howard M. McCoy\n\nNOTE: Penalty for presenting false claims or making false statements in connection with claims; Fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years or both, Act 25 June 1948, 18 U.S.C. 287, 1001.\n\nSECTION IV—VERIFICATION BY PERSONNEL OFFICER OR OTHER RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL\n\n23. MAILING ADDRESS OF VERIFYING OFFICER: 1100th ARPON, Bolling AFB 25, DC\n24. TYPED NAME, GRADE AND TITLE: Iverson W. Gallihugh, CWO W-2, USAF\n25. SIGNATURE: Iverson W. Gallihugh\n\nSECTION V—AUTHENTICATION BY ISSUING AGENCY\n\n26. ORGANIZATION OF ISSUING OFFICER: 1100th ARPON, Bolling AFB 25, DC\n27. TYPED NAME, GRADE AND TITLE: Iverson W. Gallihugh, CWO W-2, USAF\n28. SIGNATURE: Iverson W. Gallihugh\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1957 O-F-443155"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APPLICATION FOR IDENTIFICATION CARD - DD FORM 2 AF\nCARD SERIAL NO. 1508068\n\nLAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE (Print or type): McCoy Howard Monroe\nGRADE: Col.\nSERVICE NUMBER: 550 A\nEXPIRATION DATE (of commission): Ind.\nDATE OF BIRTH: 4 Dec. 1907\nWEIGHT: 220\nHEIGHT: 6'-2\"\nCOLOR HAIR: Brown\nCOLOR EYES: Gray\nBLOOD TYPE: \"O\"\n\nREASON FOR ISSUING CARD\nA. INITIAL APPOINTMENT B. REAPPOINTMENT UPON EXPIRATION OF COMMISSION C. TRANSFER TO HONORARY RES\nD. REPLACE LOST CARD E. REPLACE MUTILATED CARD F. CORRECT ERROR G. CHANGE IDENTIFICATION DATA (checked)\n\nADDRESS (Preferably military installation) AT WHICH I MAY BE READILY CONTACTED\nRural Route Fairfax Station, Va\n\nI CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS CORRECT AND TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. IN THE EVENT \"A\" ABOVE IS CHECKED, I CERTIFY THAT I HAVE NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY ISSUED A DD (formerly NME) FORM 2AF. IN THE EVENT \"D\" ABOVE IS CHECKED, I CERTIFY THAT THE DD (formerly NME) FORM 2AF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED TO ME WAS LOST UNDER THE FOLLOWING CIRCUMSTANCES:\n\nFILE IN AF PERSONNEL RECORDS\nInitials mc 61-c\nOffice Symbol\nDate AUG 29 1955\n\nSIGNATURE OF APPLICANT (both copies): Howard Monroe McCoy\n\nDATE OF APPLICATION\nDATE OF ISSUE (taken from card): 31 Aug 54\nRECEIPT OF THE ABOVE CARD IS ACKNOWLEDGED\nDATE: 31 Aug 54\nSIGNATURE (both copies): Howard M. McCoy Col USAF\n\n1 To be filled in by Issuing Authority.\n\nAF FORM 279 1 NOV 49 REPLACES DA AGO FORM 428, 1 SEP 49, IN THE AIR FORCES"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TAG ALLOTMENT DISCONTINUANCE\nICE UPON DISCHARGE OR RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY\nNo- 062901\nNAME AND PERMANENT MAILING ADDRESS ARMY SERIAL NUMBER GRADE REASON FOR SEPARATION DATE OF SEPARATION DATE OF BIRTH, IF AVAILABLE\nMC COY, HOWARD M. 550A COL Retirement 31 August 1954\nRURAL ROUTE,\nFAIRFAX STATION,\nVIRGINIA\nFAMILY ALLOWANCE APPLICATION NUMBER, IF IN SERVICE RECORD VETERANS ADMINISTRATION NUMBER (No Entry Here)\nX- N-\nENTER NAMES OF \"E\" ALLOTTEES, IF IN SERVICE RECORD\n(1)\n(2)\n(3)\nNAME AND LOCATION OF ORGANIZATION EFFECTING DISCHARGE OR RELEASE\nBOLLING AFB, WASHINGTON 25, D.C.\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AND TITLE OF PERSONNEL OR DISBURSING OFFICER EFFECTING DISCONTINUANCE (No Signature Necessary)\nCLYDE W. O HERN, COLONEL, USAF, 127\nFINANCE OFFICER\nTO: THE ADJUTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE, WASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n(Folded and inserted in the service record in cases of enlisted personnel)\nWD AGO FORM 1 SEP 1945 30-S 6 PART\nPREVIOUS EDITIONS MAY BE USED.\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE-J 961464-1951"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFPMP-4BC 30 August 1954\nSUBJECT: Retirement - Colonel Howard M. McCoy, 550A, USAF\nTO: Commander\n1005th (IG) Special Investigations Group\nc/o Directorate of Special Investigations\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n1. Paragraph 26, Special Orders 167, Department of the Air Force dated 27 August 1954, extract copy enclosed, announces the retirement of Colonel Howard M. McCoy, effective 31 August 1954.\n2. If retirement cannot be effected in accordance with these orders, a request for revocation of orders with specific reason will be forwarded by the most expeditious means to reach the Director of Military Personnel, Hq USAF, ATTN: Promotions and Separations Division, Washington 25, D. C., on or before the effective date of retirement. Orders may not be revoked if request is received subsequent to the effective date.\n3. It is requested that you deliver the enclosures hereto to Colonel McCoy and advise him of the following:\na. His latest Report of Medical Examination has been reviewed in the Department and reveals no incapacitating defects warranting consideration for physical retirement.\nb. Upon retirement, his final pay will reflect payment for all pay and allowances due him, including payment for unused accrued leave not to exceed sixty days.\nc. He must furnish the Air Adjutant General, Hq USAF, Washington 25, D.C., ATTN: Personnel Records Service Division, by letter, his permanent address, name and address of nearest relative, and the name and address of person to be notified in case of emergency.\nd. When change of address occurs, he must notify the Air Adjutant General at the earliest practicable date.\ne. Certificate of Retirement, Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States, and a new identification card will be prepared by the Air Adjutant General and forwarded to him in the near future.\nDISPATCHED"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFPMP-4BC/Major Macartney/cms/Eickelberg/76651/4C162\nLtr to Comdr, 1005th (IG) Inspector General Special Investigations Group, c/o Directorate of Special Investigations Hq USAF, Washington 25, D.C., subj: Retirement - Colonel Howard M. McCoy, 550A, USAF, dtd 30 Aug 54 (Cont)\nf. For Colonel McCoy's information, the date for exercising an election under the Uniformed Services Contingency Act of 1953 has been extended to 31 October 1954. Provided he has not already done so, he must make this election prior to the effective date of his retirement.\nBY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE:\n4 Inclosures\n1. SO Extract\n2. DD Form 214\n3. AFR 35-30\n4. AFF 34-4-3\nBRICE E. MACARTNEY\nMajor, USAF\nAsst. Chief, Separations Branch\nPromotions & Separations Division\nDirectorate of Military Personnel\nMemo for Record:\nAppl for vol ret approved by SAFPC 26 Aug 54. UP Sec 5 Act of Congress approved 31 Jul 35, as amnd, eff 31 Aug 54. A review of his services indicates that he has reached or passed the peak of his effectiveness & he lacks motivation for an assignment in a new field. With the possibility of increased forced attrition over the next few yrs, it is considered by SAFPC to be in the best interest of the AF to approve his req for ret.\nDistributions:\nComdr, Hq Command USAF, Bolling AFB, Washington 25, D.C.\nAFCAG-62, Room BF 933 for issuance of ID Card\nAFCAG-61W, Room BF 923 for issuance of Retirement Form\nAFPMP-A\nCoord Cy: AFPMP-4BC\nCombk Cy: AFPMP-4BC\nAFPMP-4BC\nMajor Macartney\nAFPMP-A"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFPMP-4BC 27 August 1954\nMEMORANDUM FOR AIR ADJUTANT GENERAL, ATTN: ORDERS BRANCH\nSUBJECT: Special Orders\n1. It is requested that a paragraph as follows be published in Special Orders for 27 August 1954:\nColonel Howard M. McCoy, 550A, is relieved from assignment and duty 1005th (IG) Special Investigations Group (Hq Command, USAF) Washington, D.C. and retired under the provisions of Section 5 of the Act of Congress approved 31 July 1935, as amended, effective 31 August 1954 and will proceed to his home. PCS. TDN. (Cite appropriate procurement authority, including 02, 03).\n2. It is further requested that 10 extract copies of the above paragraph be furnished this office.\n3. Copies of published orders should be furnished to:\nComdr, 1005th (IG) Special Investigations Gp c/o Director of Special Investigations, Hq USAF Washington 25, D.C.\nComdr, Hq Command USAF, Bolling AFB Washington 25, D.C.\nColonel Howard M. McCoy, 550A 1005th (IG) Special Investigations Gp c/o Director Special Investigations Washington 25, D.C.\n4. Please call extension 76651 when orders are completed.\nBRICE E. MACARTNEY\nMajor, USAF\nAsst. Chief, Separations Branch\nPromotions and Separations Division\nDirectorate of Military Personnel"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Definitions of abbreviations are contained in JANAP 169, September 1953.\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\nSPECIAL ORDERS) 27 August 1954\nNUMBER 167) EXTRACT\n24. SMOP 7, SO 146, DAF, CS, relating to rsg of LTCOL JOHN M COULTER, AO430789, Hq USAF, WASHDC, with EDCSA: 10 Sep 54, as reads \"asg Hq AF Sp Wpn Cen, ATRC, Kirtland AFB, NMex\" IATR \"asg Hq AF Sp Wpn Cen, ARDC, Kirtland AFB, NMex.\"\n25. Under prov of sec 402 and 409, Pub Law 351-81st Congress, MSGT EUGENE V SEIPLE, AF6644759 (AO579181), is rel from asg 3750th USAF Hosp, ATRC, Sheppard AFB, Tex, ret in gr of 1STLT, eff 31 Aug 54, and WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-242 P 514-01 S 99-999.\n26. COL HOWARD M MCCOY, 550A, is rel from asg and dy Hq 1005th Insp Gen Sp Inves Gp, Hq Comd, USAF, Bolling AFB, WASHDC, and ret under prov of sec 5 of the Act of Congress, appr 31 Jul 35, as amnd, eff 31 Aug 54 and WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-142 P 511-01 S 99-999.\nBY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE:\nOFFICIAL: N. F. TWINING\nK. E. THIEBAUD Chief of Staff, United States Air Force\nColonel, USAF\nAir Adjutant General"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tMCGGO\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, OHIO\t\t\t\t\t\tBCB\nSPECIAL ORDERS\t\t\tEXTRACT\t\t\t\t\t26 August 1954\nNUMBER 165\n*\t\t\t\t*\t\t\t\t*\n6. COL HOWARD M McCOY, 550A PRES at LV STA - Route #1, Fairfax Station, VA E/R to HQ AMC, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio is REL from ASG with HQ AMC and is ASG to 1005th IG SPEC Investigation GP, HQ COMD, USAF, REPT NLT 30 AUG 54 to TEMP BLDG E, 4th and Adams DR, SW, Washington, DC for the purpose of retirement. TPA. Officer will PRO from LV STA to ORG ASG. PCA, PCS. TDN: 5753500 548-131 P531.(8)-02-03 S99-999. EDCSA 26 AUG 54. AUTH: AFR 35-59 and VOCS 26 AUG 54.\n*\t\t\t\t*\t\t\t\t*\nBY ORDER OF THE COMMANDER:\nOFFICIAL:\t\t\t\t\t\tNEAL J O'BRIEN\nNEAL J O'BRIEN\t\t\t\t\t\tColonel, USAF\nColonel, USAF\t\t\t\t\t\tAdjutant\nAdjutant\nDISTRIBUTION: \"B\"\nAF WP-A-75"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"25. Under prov of sec 402 and 409, Pub Law 351-81st Congress, MSGT EUGENE V SEIPLE, AF6644759 (AO579181), is rel from asg 3750th USAF Hosp, ATRC, Sheppard AFB, Tex, ret in gr of 1STLT, eff 31 Aug 54, and WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-242 P 514-01 S 99-999.\n26. COL HOWARD M MCCOY, 550A, is rel from asg and dy Hq 1005th Insp Gen Sp Inves Gp, Hq Comd, USAF, Bolling AFB, WASHDC, and ret under prov of sec 5 of the Act of Congress, appr 31 Jul 35, as amnd, eff 31 Aug 54 and WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-142 P 511-01 S 99-999.\nBY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE:\nOFFICIAL:\t\t\t\tN. F. TWINING\nK. E. THIEBAUD\t\t\t\tChief of Staff, United States Air Force\nColonel, USAF\nAir Adjutant General\n(DAF SO 167, 27 Aug 54)\t\t6\nA12622"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"17. Under prov of sec 402 und 409, Pub Law 351-81st Congress, each of the FNO, is rel from asg org shown, ret eff 31 Aug 54, and WP his HOR, or place from which ordered to AD. All com held are term on eff date of ret. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-142 P 511-01 S 99-999:\nGr, Name, AFSN\t\t\t\tOrg\n1STLT WALTON E JOHNSON, JR, AO1855648\t4167th USAF Hosp, SAC, Travis AFB, Calif\nCWO (W-3) JOHN MCNEIL, AW2114695\t3750th USAF Hosp, ATRC, Sheppard AFB, Tex\n18. SMOP 33, SO 112, DAF, CS, relating to the ordering to EAD and asg Hq USAFIT, AU, WPAFB, Ohio, as reads \"1STLT KENNETH P DOBBS, AO300869\" IATR \"1STLT KENNETH P DOBBS, AO300869.\"\n19. SMOP 1C, SO 147, DAF, CS, relating to rsg of MAJ J ROBERT GIBSON, AO568284, Hq USAF, WASHDC, to Hq USAF Academy, Lowry AFB, Denver, Colo, with EDCSA: 14 Aug 54, as reads \"Rept date - 25 Aug\" IATR \"Rept date - 10 Sep.\"\n20. SMOF 6, SO 163, DAF, CS, relating to rsg of CAPT HARRISON H D HEIBERG, JR, 17368A, Hq USAF, WASHDC, to Hq USAF Academy, Lowry AFB, Denver, Colo, with EDCSA: 4 Oct 54, is amnd to incl \"DALVP.\"\n21. Under prov of sec 402(e), Pub Law 351-81st Congress, MSGT ERNEST L ADAY, AF6478746, is removed from the Temp Dsabl Ret List and ret eff 31 Aug 54 and WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-242 P 514-01 S 99-999.\n22. Under prov of sec 402 and 409, Pub Law 351-81st Congress, STAFF SGT CHARLES L STOLL, JR, AF13359968, is rel from asg 1100th USAF Hosp, Hq Comd, USAF, Bolling AFB, WASHDC, ret eff 31 Aug 54 and WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-242 P 514-01 S 99-999.\n23. Under prov of sec 402 and 409, Pub Law 351-81st Congress, A/2C FRANCIS YEAGER, AF16279792, at HA - Detroit, Mich, awt orders status, is rel from asg 1072d Hosp Sq, Hq Comd, USAF, AMC, WASHDC, ret eff 31 Aug 54 and WP HIS HOME. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-242 P 514-01 S 99-999.\n24. SMOP 7, SO 146, DAF, CS, relating to rsg of LTCOL JOHN M COULTER, AO430789, Hq USAF, WASHDC, with EDCSA: 10 Sep 54, as reads \"asg Hq AF Sp Wpn Cen, ATRC, Kirtland AFB, NMex\" IATR \"asg Hq AF Sp Wpn Cen, ARDC, Kirtland AFB, NMex.\"\n5\t\t(DAF SO 167, 27 Aug 54)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Gr,/Name, AFSN\t\t\t\tOrg\t\t\tRet Gr\nA/1C PHILLIP S ROBINSON, AF19090040\t1080th Hosp Sq, Hq Comd, USAF, Letterman AHosp, San Francisco, Calif\tSTAFF SGT\nA/2C MALCOLM E PAYNE, AF13273909\t1077th Hosp Sq, Hq Comd, USAF, Brooke AMC, Fort Sam Houston, Tex\tA/2C\n15. Under prov of sec 402 and 409, Pub Law 351-81st Congress each of the FNA, at HA indc awt orders status, is rel from asg org shown, ret eff 31 Aug 54, and WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-242 P 514-01 S 99-999:\nGr, Name, AFSN\t\t\t\tOrg\t\t\tHA\nTECHNICAL SGT ROBERT E L DAVIS, AF19252338\t3275th USAF Hosp, ATRC, Parks AFB, Calif\tColtewah, Tenn\nA/3C WILLIAM R HUGHES, AF12351006\t3750th USAF Hosp, ATRC, Sheppard AFB, Tex\tCanisteo, NY\nA/B ROGER W PARSONS, AF16431103\tdo\tDetroit, Mich\n16. Under prov of sec 402 and 409, Pub Law 351-81st Congress, each of the FNA, is rel from asg org shown, placed on the Temp Dsabl Ret List eff 31 Aug 54, and WP his HOR, or place of acpt for enl. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-242 P 514-01 S 99-999:\nGr, Name, AFSN\t\t\t\tOrg\nTECHNICAL SGT JACK P JOHNSON, AF19317561\t3750th USAF Hosp, ATRC, Sheppard AFB, Tex\nSTAFF SGT BAILUS EAVES, AF14246305\t3201st USAF Hosp, APGC, Eglin AFB, Fla\nA/2C ROBERT E STACK, AF16365851\t1079th Hosp Sq, Hq Comd, USAF, Fitzsimons AHosp, Denver, Colo\nA/3C DONALD F LEE, AF14446498\t3275th USAF Hosp, ATRC, Parks AFB, Calif\n(DAF SO 167, 27 Aug 54)\t\t4"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"9. Having compl 30 yr svc on 27 Aug 54, WOJG (W-1) FRANCIS LE DOUX, AW901997 (AO440614), is adv eff 28 Aug 54 to the rank of LTCOL on the USAF Ret List, under prov of sec 203(c) of the Act of Congress appr 29 Jun 48 (Pub Law 810-80th Congress).\n10. MAJ ISABELLE A KUSKOWSKI, 20993W, is rel from asg and dy 2353d PERP Sq (AFOR), CONAC, Parks AFB, Calif eff 10 Sep 54 on which date DP, she is hon disch from all apt in the USAF, under prov of sec 2, AFR 36-36; and WP her HOR, or place of acpt of apt as she may elect. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-142 P 511-01 S 99-999.\n11. DP, EUGENE R JABLONSKI, 20235A (1STLT, REGAF), is apt 1STLT, Res of the AF for an indef term with AFSN AO3001254. Eff upon his acpt of res apt on 6 Sep 54, he is rel from asg and dy Hq 1090th Sp Rept Gp, Hq Comd, USAF, Sandia Base, Albuquerque, NMex; his resig from the REGAF is acpt by the Pres under prov of Para 5b(3), AFR 36-12, as amnd; he is hon disch from all regular and temp apt in the USAF, and WP his HOR, or place of acpt of regular apt, as he may elect. He is asg Hq CONAC (NARS). PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-142 P 511-01 S 99-999.\n12. CAPT JACK F PEPPERS, 17846A, is rel from asg and dy 367th BomSq (Med), SAC, MacDill AFB, Fla, eff 7 Sep 54, on which date his resig is acpt by the Pres under prov of Para 5b(1), AFR 36-12, as amnd; he is hon disch from all apt in the USAF, and WP his HOR, or place of acpt of apt, as he may elect. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-142 P 511-01 S 99-999.\n13. Under prov of sec 402 and 409, Pub Law 351-81st Congress, 1STLT ROBERT E PERDUE, AO2216817, at HA - Cedar Rapids, Iowa awt orders status, is rel from asg 3750th USAF Hosp, ATRC, Sheppard AFB, Tex, and placed on the Temp Dsabl Ret List eff 31 Aug 54. All com held are term on eff date of ret.\n14. Under prov of sec 402 and 409, Pub Law 351-81st Congress, each of the FNA, is rel from asg org shown, ret eff 31 Aug 54, and WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5753500 548-141 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999; 5753500 548-242 P 514-01 S 99-999:\nGr, Name, AFSN\t\t\t\tOrg\t\t\tRet Gr\nTECHNICAL SGT THEODORE A SWAUN, AF31249741\t3650th USAF Hosp, ATRC, Sampson AFB, Geneva, NY\tTECHNICAL SGT\n3\t\t(DAF SO 167, 27 Aug 54)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Definitions of abbreviations are contained in JANAP 169, September 1953.\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n\nSPECIAL ORDERS)\nNUMBER 167) 27 August 1954\n\n1. SMOP 1, SO 95, DAF, CS, relating to rsg of MAJGEN JARRED V CRABB, 535A, Hq ADC, Ent AFB, Colo, to Hq CADF, ADC, Grandview AFB, Grandview, Mo, with EDCSA: 26 Jul 54, as reads \"TDN. 5753500 548-131 P 531-02, 03 S 99-999\" is amnd eff 17 May 54 to read \"TDN. 5753500 579-4001 P 531.10 02, 03 S 05-603.\" This is a crtn of admin err to show orig intent.\n\nPara 2 thru 4 not used.\n\n5. DP, prom, subj to phys exam, to the gr indc in the REGAF, as prev announced for the FNO on the prom list indc are hereby cfm without qual, the officers concerned having been determined phys qual for such perm prom:\n\nTO COL\n\nAIR FORCE\n\nWILLIAM H LEACH, 2647A\n\nTO LTCOL\n\nAIR FORCE\n\nJOHN E WARREN, 5912A\n\nTO CAPT\n\nAIR FORCE\n\nWILLIAM J RECKMEYER, 17637A\n\nMEDICAL\n\nEDWARD P DIDIER, 24218A RICHARD G FULLAM, 24211A"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL\n\nSUBJECT - Colonel Howard M. McCoy, 550A, USAF\n\n1. Attached is application for retirement submitted by Colonel Howard M. McCoy for consideration and decision.\n\n2. Colonel McCoy has completed more than 24 years active Federal service and is eligible for consideration for retirement in accordance with Section 5 of the Act of Congress approved 31 July 1935, as amended (Paragraph 6a, AFR 36-50).\n\n3. Colonel McCoy's request for retirement is based on the fact that he has been assigned for the past few years in a specialized area in the development of physical security and allied equipment and that his military potential in any other field is limited. He further states that in view of the termination of this agency by the Defense Department there is an even greater need for its continuation as a commercial activity.\n\n4. While he is recognized as a specialist in this former field his overall military record indicates he possesses sufficient potential to be of continued value to the Air Force. Therefore, it is recommended that his application for voluntary retirement be not favorably considered at this time.\n\n3 Inclosures\n1. Appl dtd 27 Jul 54\n w/relatg pprs\n2. 201 File\n3. Selection Folder"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFCAG-61-M McCoy, Howard M.\n\nSTATEMENT OF MILITARY SERVICE\nOF\nHOWARD MONROE MCCOY\n\nColonel Howard Monroe McCoy, 550A, Regular Air Force, Retired, has held a continuous commission since 12 June 1930, with continuous active duty from 12 June 1930 to 31 August 1954, the effective date of his retirement under the provisions of Section 5 of the Act of Congress, approved 31 July 1935, as amended.\n\nBY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nK. E. THIEBAUD\nColonel, USAF\nAir Adjutant General"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nSTAFF MESSAGE DIVISION\nINCOMING UNCLASSIFIED MESSAGE\n\nYTC907\nJEDWP E170\nR JEPCU JEPHQ 222\nDE JEDWP 140B\nR 271800Z\nFM COMDR AMC WRIGHTPATTERSON AFB, OHIO\nTO JEPHQ/COMDR 1005TH IG SPEC INVESTIGATION GP HQ COMD USAF WASHDC\nINFO JEPHQ/COFS USAF WASHDC\nJEPCU/COL HOWARD M MCCOY RT FAIRFAX STA VA\nAF GRNC\nFROM MCAM-6-43-E COFS FOR AFPMP-A PAR 6 SO 165 HQAMC DTD 26 AUG 54 IS QUOTED FOR YOUR INFO QUOTE COL HAWARD M MCCOY 550A PRES AT LV STA - RT 1 FAIRFAX STA VA E/R TO HQ AMC WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB OHIO IS REL FROM ASG WITH HQ AMC AND IS ASG TO 1005TH IG SPEC INVESTIGATION GP HQ COMD USAF REPTG NLT 30 AUG 54 TO TEMP BLDG E 4TH AND ADAMSDR BU WASHDC FOR PURPOSE OF RETIREMENT TPA OFFICER WILL PRO FROM LV STA TO ORG ASG PCA PCS TDN 5753500 548-131 P531.8/-02-03 S99-999. EDCSA 26 AUG 54 AUTH AFR 35-59 AND VOCS 26 AUG 54 UNQUOTE SGD MIL PERSDIV 27/1954Z AUG JEDWP\n\nINFO : BMP\n\nAF IN : 1325 (28 Aug 54) ET/vm\n\nAFHQ FORM 0-309d\n19 JAN 51"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n26 AUG 1954\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL\n\nSUBJECT: Retirement - Colonel Howard M. McCoy, 550A, USAF\n\n1. Attached is application for retirement submitted by Colonel Howard M. McCoy for consideration and decision.\n\n2. Colonel McCoy has completed more than 24 years active Federal service and is eligible for consideration for retirement in accordance with Section 5 of the Act of Congress approved 31 July 1935, as amended (Paragraph 6a, AFR 36-50).\n\n3. This officer has been assigned for a number of years in a specialized area in the development of physical security, and allied equipment and it is believed his military potential in any other field is limited.\n\n4. A review of his service indicates that he has reached or passed the peak of his effectiveness and he lacks motivation for an assignment in a new field. Continued service will probably result in lower efficiency and culminate in a problem of assignment.\n\n5. With the possibility of increased forced attrition over the next few years, it is considered to be in the best interest of the Air Force to approve his request for retirement at this time.\n\nEMMETT O'DONNELL, JR.\nLieutenant General, USAF\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Personnel\n\n3 Inclosures\n1. Appl dtd 27 Jul 54\n w/relating pprs\n2. 201 File\n3. Selection Folder\n\nAPPROVED\nJ. L. O'NEILL\nColonel, USAF\nExecutive Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council\n26 Aug 54"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nSAFPC ________\n\n1954 AUG 26 PM 3 34\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR OF MILITARY PERSONNEL, DCS/P\nATTN: AFPMP-4-B-C\n\n27 JUL 1954\n\nSUBJECT: Application for Voluntary Retirement of Colonel Howard M.\nMcCoy, 550A\n\n1. Attached is application for voluntary retirement submitted by Colonel McCoy dated 27 July 1954 with indorsement recommending approval by his immediate commander, same date.\n\n2. This Directorate interposes no objection to his retirement and recommends favorable consideration be given his application.\n\n1 Incl\n Ltr Appl for Ret fr\n Col McCoy, dtd 27 Jul\n 54, w/1st ind & 2 incls\n\nJOHN T. HAGOOD\nMajor, USAF\nChief, Officers Branch\nManagement Division\nDirectorate of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Basic ltr from Colonel Howard M. McCoy, 1005th (IG) Special Investigations Group, c/o Directorate of Special Investigations, Wash, DC, subj: Application for Voluntary Retirement, dated 27 Jul 54\n\nAFCSI-11C MIL 18-4 1st Ind 27 JUL 1954\n\nHQ, 1005th (IG) SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS GROUP, c/o Directorate of Special Investigations, Headquarters USAF, Washington 25, D. C. 27 JUL 1954\n\nTO: Director of Military Personnel, Headquarters USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\n1. Recommend approval.\n\n2. The officer is not:\n\na. Under investigation or charges\n\nb. Awaiting trial by courts-martial or result of trial.\n\nc. Accountable or responsible for, or in default with respect to, public property or funds.\n\nd. Submitting application for retirement in lieu of elimination, emotion or release from active duty by reason of conduct or efficiency under AFR 36-2.\n\n3. Primary AFSC of officer is 8416, Research and Development Director. Officer is not presently holding a Duty AFSC since he is on leave pending reassignment. There is no record of service or undergraduate training completed by officer during the current tour which requires a service commitment.\n\n2 Incls\n n/c\n\nDAVID M. LYNCH\nColonel, U. S. Air Force\nCommander\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS\n1005TH IG SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS GROUP\nC/O DIRECTORATE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATION\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n27 July 1954\n\nSUBJECT: Application for Voluntary Retirement\n\nTHRU: Commander\n1005th (IG) Special Investigations Group\nc/o Directorate of Special Investigations\nHeadquarters United States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nTO: Director of Military Personnel\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\n1. Under the provisions of law cited in paragraph 6, section II, AFR 36-50A, 9 September 1953, it is requested that I be retired on 31 August 1954, or the earliest practicable date thereafter, after completion of more than 28 years' active Federal service, including more than 24 years' active commissioned service. As there are extenuating circumstances dictating this request, I am attaching a statement as an inclosure(#1).\n\n2. My record of active Federal service is as follows:\n\na. 1 Jul 26 to 11 Jun 30 - Cadet, U.S. Military Academy\n\nb. 12 Jun 30 to present - Continuous active duty as Commissioned Officer.\n\n3. My present assignment status is: 1005th (IG) Special Investigations Group, c/o Directorate of Special Investigations, Headquarters USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\n4. My address upon retirement and until further notice will be: Rural Route #1, Fairfax Station, Virginia, and telephone number will be: BRowning 8-9132.\n\n5. I have attached hereto Standard Form 88, \"Report of Medical Examination.\"\n\n6. I am not accountable or responsible for, or in default with respect to, public property or funds.\n\n7. If my application for retirement is approved, I understand that my retirement will be effected as outlined in paragraph 3c(1), AFR 36-50.\n\n2 Incls\n1. Statement\n2. SF 88\n\nHOWARD M. McCOY, 550A\nColonel, U. S. Air Force"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATTACHMENT\n\nSUMMARY:\n\nThis attachment outlines the exceptional circumstances and factors which dictate this officer's action in requesting voluntary retirement. 1/ It reviews his specialized experience in the development of physical security and allied equipment, which work has occupied most of his time since 1946 and has made him the governmental authority in this field.\n\nIt further describes the results of an informal unofficial survey he has just completed which accents the widely accepted need for improvement in our national industrial security program. In view of the recent abolishment of the Physical Security Equipment Agency of which he was the Director, the most expedient way to fill the need appears to be through the establishment of an independent civil organization working closely with the Office of Defense Mobilization and the Department of Defense. If this request is approved he intends to devote all of his efforts thereafter to this important task.\n\nRef. Para. 2.f. (PART II) Dept. Air Force Message, No. AFPMP-4BC ALMAJCOM 660/54 dtd 11 June 1954\n\n1\n\nIncl 1"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BACKGROUND:\n\nThe decision to take this voluntary retirement action was taken only after the most thorough deliberation. It has been the most important one made by him in his entire military career, and it is also the most considered one, for he has been preoccupied with it ever since 4 March 1954 when a Department of Defense Directive abolished the Physical Security Equipment Agency (PSEA) of which he was the Director. He had been selected to head that Agency at its inception and served for the three years of its existence. During that time the Agency became the recognized authority within the government in the field of security equipment and it has an excellent record of unselfish service to the many agencies with which it was associated. He had also been serving as Chairman of the Federal Committee on Security Equipment since its organization in the fall of 1953.\n\nSince 1946 this officer has devoted practically all of his efforts (about 20,000 hours) fighting Communism through technical means by developing security and investigative equipment. He consciously selected this specialized field of work in lieu of a conventional career in aeronautical Research and Development with full appreciation of the lack of opportunity for advancement in the more specialized field. He was firmly convinced that he could best serve the interests of"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"national security by such action. He realized that: - Just as a nation's organization for war depends on the technical weapons which are on hand - so does a nation's facilities security program depend on the technical security equipments which are available! It is estimated that less than 10% of the technical equipment considered necessary to implement a realistic facilities security program has been developed to date. We are in an advanced technological age yet our guard systems, both industrial and military, have changed little since biblical days!\n\nAs Deputy Commanding General (T-2 Intelligence), then Chief, Intelligence Department, Headquarters, Air Materiel Command, for the period December 1946 - August 1949, the undersigned managed a specialized laboratory known as the Science Survey Office (SSO) which developed certain classified types of security and investigative equipment. That laboratory was abolished for unknown reasons shortly after subject officer was transferred August 1949 to the Industrial College of the Armed Forces. From there he was assigned to the Central Intelligence Agency, leaving 1 March 1951 to become Director of the newly activated Physical Security Equipment Agency. Copies of pertinent directives are attached as Tabs A, B, and C. The need for such an activity as the SSO had continued to exist after its close-out in 1949. The advent of the Korean War so accentuated this need that the Management Committee, Office of the Secretary of Defense, after detailed deliberations, established"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PSEA to ensure extension of the work of the earlier laboratory (SSO). PSEA was a joint project under the management control of the Department of the Air Force with the responsibility for providing for the development of physical security and related investigative equipment as a common service for all agencies of the Department of Defense.\n\nIt is estimated that PSEA had met only about 10% of its chartered responsibilities during its existence. There are several reasons for this state of performance; they include:\n\na. The initial small staff of 25 was never increased, as was planned, in proportion to the work-load that developed.\n\nb. R&D funds for programmed activities were frozen as of March 1953 after less than two years of operation, the first funds not being made available until May 1951.\n\nc. The Agency never operated under its revised Charter (Tab C) which would have insured full cooperation of the Military Services through the PSEA Policy Board.\n\nThe Agency's efforts concerning security equipment were just coming to fruition in the shape of a detailed R&D program, as the result of almost three years of background research work, when its untimely end came. Government agencies other than the Department of Defense which had come to depend almost solely on PSEA on physical security matters dealing with improved equipment included the GSA, State Department, AEC, NSA and CIA."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The matter of the Agency's continued existence had been under consideration by the Deputy Secretary of Defense since March 1953. The three Military Departments and the Office, Domestic Security Programs of OSD, all represented on the PSEA Policy Board, are on record as having supported the continuance of the Agency's activities, thus verifying the need for its services particularly in the security equipment field which constituted about 85% of its effort the last year of operations.\n\nThe Agency and its functions were abolished 4 March 1954 per Department of Defense Directive No. 5154.9 (Tab D). Although there was no stated reason, it is surmised that this action was intended in the interests of economy for it is understood that some other activities were stricken from the FY 1955 budget following the informal principle that any R&D activity would be dropped that did not directly support a weapon or weapons system already in or scheduled for production. This contradiction between the existing need for the Agency's services and the act of abolishing the Agency and its functions, leads to the conclusion that the Department of Defense does not consider the development of security equipment to be its responsibility. This apparently leaves the matter up to industry. This premise appears to be consistent with administrative policy.\n\nTHE NEED:\n\nAssuming that the present policy of the Department of Defense in"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"regards to its industrial security program is limited to the statement of policies and principles, it is apparent that the most practical and sensible way to fill the void between policy and an adequate working security system in the defense industries is to follow the precedent of the Civil Defense and disaster control organizations and have the Government encourage the formation of an independent civil project in accordance with established principles of our competitive free-enterprise economy. Such a project would eventually be a large one and should preferably be a nonprofit organization of the highest standards in the tradition of Air Force Project RAND, the Battelle Memorial Institute and others.\n\nIt is believed that the importance of protecting our defense industry facilities (as well as our military installations) against sabotage does not require documentation here as it has been a subject of comment by the President of the United States, members of Congress, and other Government officials for some time. The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation has stated to a Congressional Committee to the effect that the technical problems of his agency have increased ten-fold in the past one and one-half decades. In connection with Mr. Hoover's statement, there is substantial evidence that the USSR has spent an estimated 50 times more effort in the past 20 years than has been expended in this country on equipment matters associated with those of PSEA. It is noted that existing burglary protection systems of the"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"central station type are less than fifty percent effective in preventing\npenetration of the protected areas by unskilled burglars. On the other\nhand, protection against thoroughly trained saboteurs must be near\nperfect because the saboteur can be considered to have accomplished\nhis mission once the penetration has been effected.\n\nIt is estimated that overall physical security in our key defense\nindustries can be improved in the order of four to five hundred per-\ncent over a period of several years by the use of proper security\nequipment and systems. The sums now being spent by the Depart-\nment of Defense for industrial and military security are described by\nthe Industrial Security Division (OSD) as \"staggering\" and are ex-\nclusive of the security clearance program. The amount is classified\nso it is not included here. A gain of several hundred percent in the\noverall physical security of our Strategic Air Command bases should\nbe possible and would be of inestimable value. When it is considered\nthat it costs an average of $20,000.00 per year to man one guard post\nin industry using civilian guards, and that military guards cost about\n$40,000.00 per year per post, it appears possible to replace much of\nthis fallible human factor with advanced technological equipment with\na resulting gain in security, plus substantial savings in both money\nand manpower. 1/\n\n1/ Article dated 15 March 1954. \"Security Guard Costs\", Office of\nthe Assistant SecDef, Research & Development, Washington 25, D.C.\n\n7"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE REMEDY:\n\nDuring periods of leave since 4 March 1954, while acting unofficially\nand solely as an individual, this officer has consulted informally with\nrepresentative industrialists and with casualty insurance and plant pro-\ntection officials concerning industrial security problems and what an\nindividual such as himself might be able to accomplish were he retired\nfrom active service. He has also talked with pertinent personnel within\nthe Department of Defense and Government and from this research has\nestablished that there is a nation-wide need within our Defense industries\nfor the formation of an Industrial Security Engineering Service (ISES),\nor the like, to serve the same purpose regarding protection against\nsabotage as the various commercial Fire Protection services accom-\nplish in regard to protection against fire. It has also been established\nthat no such service as an ISES now exists. The reaction to his pro-\nposed solution to the problem has been most encouraging and has been\naccepted informally as being soundly conceived in principle, operationally\npracticable and economically justifiable. If properly implemented, it\nhas promise to fill a serious void in our industrial security program\nwhich otherwise cannot be expected to be supplied for many years now\nthat the PSEA organization and functions have been abolished.\n\nSubject officer is tentatively scheduled to be assigned in the near\n\n8"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"future to Headquarters, Air Materiel Command, where presumably he\nwill engage in procurement work. His primary AFSC is Research and\nDevelopment Director (8416) with secondary AFSC - Staff Intelligence\nOfficer (2016). Including postgraduate schooling, he has served in\nthese categories for the past twenty years. Because of his experience,\nsubject officer considers himself to be the logical individual to under-\ntake such a civil project as outlined above and is willing to sacrifice\nthe almost certain security that continued military service would afford\nin order to make the attempt.\n\nHe has the deepest and most sincere convictions that the best in-\nterests of national security will be served if he is permitted to retire\nfrom active military service to dedicate himself to serve a cause for\nwhich he is most uniquely qualified.\n\nRespectfully submitted,\n\nHOWARD M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF 550 A\n\n9"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AMC MANUAL 20-1\n\n20-202\n\nHeadquarters Air Materiel Command\nSCIENCE SURVEY OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AMC Manual No. 20-1\n\nOrganizational Directive No. 20-202\nRevised June 1949\n\nIntelligence Department\n\nSCIENCE SURVEY OFFICE (MCIS)\n\n1. Mission: Perform the classified functions as prescribed.\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\"A\""} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE\nWASHINGTON\n\n7 February 1951\n\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARIES OF THE MILITARY DEPARTMENTS\nTHE ASSISTANT SECRETARIES OF DEFENSE\nTHE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF\nTHE CHAIRMEN OF THE BOARDS, COUNCILS AND\nCOMMITTEES, OSD\nTHE DIRECTORS OF OFFICES, OSD\n\nSUBJECT: Physical Security Equipment Agency\n\nThe attached charter for the Physical Security\nEquipment Agency is effective this date.\n\n\nInclosure"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE\nWASHINGTON\n\nCHARTER\nPhysical Security Equipment Agency\n\nPursuant to the authority vested in the Secretary of Defense by the National Security Act of 1947, as amended, there is hereby established, as a joint project under the management control of the Department of the Air Force, a Physical Security Equipment Agency (hereinafter called the \"Agency\") with the responsibility for providing for the development of physical security and related investigative equipment as a common service for all agencies of the Department of Defense.\n\nI. DEFINITIONS\n\n1. Physical security equipment is that used to provide warning of and protection against covert and other clandestine activities involving:\n\na. Military installations and their sensitive areas.\n\nb. Materiel.\n\nc. Classified documents.\n\nd. Personnel.\n\nThis definition is not intended to preclude the Agency calling to the attention of elements of the Department of Defense applications of such equipment to other than covert or clandestine uses or to deny the services of the Agency to such elements in developing such equipment on request.\n\n2. Investigative equipment is that required by the pertinent Department of Defense agencies for:\n\na. Criminal and related type investigative activities.\n\nb. Counter-intelligence and counter-sabotage activities.\n\nc. Intelligence activities.\n\nII. DUTIES\n\nSubject to the authority of the Secretary of Defense and in consonance with the requirements of the various agencies of the Department of Defense, the Agency shall perform the duties listed below:\n\n1. For the solution of physical security and investigative problems, review pertinent basic and applied research and development projects and equipment, both domestic and foreign, and evaluate the feasibility of"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"modifying the equipment, or adapting the already demonstrated phenomena and principles. (Note: Foreign information and equipment will be procured through established Intelligence channels.)\n\n2. Experimentally produce prototype physical security equipment:\n\na. Based on requirements furnished to the Agency by the various agencies of the Department of Defense.\n\nb. Based on needs anticipated by the Agency.\n\n3. Experimentally produce prototype investigative equipment:\n\na. Based on requirements furnished to the Agency by the various agencies of the Department of Defense.\n\nb. Based on needs anticipated by the Agency.\n\n4. When required by the various agencies of the Department of Defense, will with respect to specially developed equipment or supplies:\n\na. Procure service test quantities of prototype equipment and supplies.\n\nb. Assist in the preparation of training and technical manuals.\n\nc. Assist in training of personnel in the use of such equipment.\n\nd. Assist in the maintenance of such equipment.\n\n5. Furnish advice and assistance to other Government agencies on the above matters as appropriate.\n\n6. Furnish, when requested, advice, assistance and coordination on matters concerning standardization, procurement, supply, operation and maintenance of the above items which may be adopted by one or more of the Services as items of standard issue.\n\n7. Establish and maintain a working reference library pertinent to the mission.\n\n8. Prepare an annual report on its activities for the Secretary of Defense and submit such interim program reports as may be advisable.\n\nIII. ADMINISTRATION\n\n1. The Secretary of the Air Force, as Managing Agent for the Secretary of Defense, shall be responsible for the operations of the Agency and shall provide such personnel, facilities and other administrative services as may be required to insure its efficient operation."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2. The Secretary of the Air Force, with the concurrence of the other military secretaries and the approval of the Secretary of Defense, shall appoint a Director of the Agency. The Director of the Agency, if a military officer, shall be appointed for a term of three years and shall be eligible for one reappointment.\n\n3. The Assistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall arrange with the three military departments for the financing of the Agency.\n\n4. In view of the high technical, security and urgency aspects of this project, the Service managing the Agency shall provide all possible freedom of action in the conduct of operations of the Agency.\n\n5. Each Service may assign such personnel to the Agency on temporary duty as may be required.\n\nIV. RELATIONSHIPS\n\n1. The Agency shall coordinate its efforts with all agencies within and outside the Department of Defense which have a mutual interest or responsibility with respect to any of its programs.\n\n2. The Director and the staff of the Agency are authorized and expected to communicate directly and expeditiously with all agencies of the Department of Defense and appropriate sub-divisions thereof, concerning any matter within its jurisdiction and in which there exists a mutual interest or responsibility.\n\n3. Services of the Agency shall be available to all Department of Defense agencies.\n\n4. All agencies of the Department of Defense shall cooperate fully in assisting the Agency in the performance of its missions.\n\n5. Each Service shall designate properly qualified personnel at appropriate echelons for liaison purposes.\n\n7 February 1951\n\nD20469"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Department of Defense Directive\n\n19 January 1953\nNUMBER R-5154.1\n\nSUBJECT Physical Security Equipment Agency\n\nPursuant to the authority vested in me by the National Security Act of 1947, as amended, there is hereby reconstituted in the Department of Defense, as a joint agency under the management of the Department of the Air Force, the Physical Security Equipment Agency (hereinafter called the \"Agency\"). It shall be the principal Agency within its field in the Department of Defense for providing for the development of physical security and related investigative equipment as a common service for all agencies of the Department of Defense, and shall be responsible for effecting coordination with all similar activities in the Department of Defense.\n\nI DEFINITIONS\n\n1. Physical security equipment is that used to provide warning of and protection against covert and other clandestine activities involving:\n\na. Military installations and their sensitive areas.\nb. Materiel.\nc. Classified documents.\nd. Personnel.\n\nThis definition is not intended to preclude the Agency from calling to the attention of elements of the Department of Defense applications of such equipment to other than covert or clandestine uses or to deny the services of the Agency to such elements in developing such equipment on request.\n\n2. Investigative equipment is that required by the pertinent Department of Defense agencies for:\n\na. Criminal and related type investigative activities.\nb. Counter-intelligence and counter-sabotage activities.\nc. Intelligence activities."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"II ORGANIZATION\n\n1. There is established a Policy Board consisting of the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, Army; the Director of Naval Intelligence; the Director of Special Investigations, Air Force, and a representative appointed by the Secretary of Defense, with the responsibilities hereinafter outlined. The chairmanship of the Policy Board shall be rotated yearly between Board members representing the Military Departments. The Air Force member of the Board shall serve as the initial Chairman.\n\n2. The Agency shall be composed of a Director, a Deputy Director and an Agency staff.\n\nIII DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES\n\nSubject to the authority and direction of the Secretary of Defense and in consonance with the requirements of the various agencies of the Department of Defense:\n\n1. The Policy Board shall:\n\na. Formulate policy on all matters involving the Agency's operations; provide programs and make such review of the operational procedures of the Agency as may be necessary to insure proper consideration of security, intelligence, and counter-intelligence aspects of all phases of operation.\n\nb. As individuals, the members of the Board shall be responsible for assuring that their agency's requirements are made known to the Agency, and that equipment developed by the Agency is made available for use within their agencies.\n\nc. Approve all projects of the Agency and establish priorities of such projects.\n\nd. Provide the Agency with selected intelligence pertaining to foreign developments and applications of security and intelligence equipment.\n\n2. The Agency shall, subject to policies enunciated by the Policy Board:\n\na. For the solution of physical security and investigative problems, review pertinent basic and applied research and development projects and equipment, both domestic and foreign, and evaluate the feasibility of modifying the equipment, or adapting the already demonstrated phenomena and principles. (Note: Foreign information"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"within the limits of resources available to the Department of the Air Force for such purposes, provide for adequate administrative support for the Agency. The term \"administrative support\" as used in this directive is defined to include budgeting, funding, fiscal control, manpower control and utilization, personnel administration, security administration, space, facilities, supplies and other administrative services. The Secretary of the Air Force may redelegate his authorities in connection with these responsibilities within the command structure of the Department of the Air Force.\n\n2. The Assistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall arrange with the three Military Departments for the financing of the Agency.\n\n3. The Policy Board shall establish its rules of procedure except as otherwise provided in this directive. It normally shall meet once each month at a time determined by the Chairman. The presence of at least two members from the Military Departments shall be required to constitute a quorum. Matters considered by the Policy Board shall be decided by a majority vote of the members present. Such decision shall be final except that a member of the Board, after first notifying the Secretary of the Air Force, may submit an appeal through appropriate channels of his department for resolution by the Secretary of Defense.\n\n4. The Director and the Deputy Director of the Agency shall be appointed by the Secretary of the Air Force, based on nominations made by the Policy Board and with the approval of the Secretary of Defense.\n\n5. The Director of the Agency, shall be responsible for the internal administration of the Agency, including the preparation of its budget, staff, space, and internal facility requirements. He shall also supervise the activities of the Agency staff.\n\n6. The Director of the Agency is authorized to request the Military Departments to assign such technical personnel as may be required for temporary duty with the Agency.\n\nV RELATIONSHIPS\n\n1. The Agency shall coordinate its efforts with all agencies within and outside the Department of Defense which have a mutual interest or responsibility with respect to any of its programs, as authorized by the Policy Board."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and equipment will be procured through established intelligence channels or as directed by the Policy Board).\n\nb. Experimentally produce prototype physical security and investigative equipment:\n\n(1) Based on requirements furnished to the Agency by the various agencies of the Department of Defense.\n\n(2) Based on needs anticipated by the Agency.\n\nc. When required by the various agencies of the Department of Defense, with respect to specially developed equipment or supplies:\n\n(1) Procure service test quantities of prototype equipment and supplies.\n\n(2) Assist in the preparation of training and technical manuals.\n\n(3) Assist in training of personnel in the use of such equipment.\n\n(4) Assist in the maintenance of such equipment.\n\nd. Furnish advice and assistance to other government agencies on the above matters as appropriate.\n\ne. Furnish, when requested, advice, assistance and coordination on matters concerning standardization, procurement, operation and maintenance of the above items which may be adopted by one or more of the Services as items of standard issue.\n\nf. Establish and maintain a working reference library pertinent to the mission.\n\ng. Prepare an annual report on its activities for the Secretary of Defense and submit such interim program reports as may be advisable. All such reports are to be submitted to the Secretary of Defense through the Policy Board and the Executive Agency.\n\nIV ADMINISTRATION\n\n1. The Secretary of the Air Force is designated as \"executive agent\" for the Agency. As such, he shall be responsible to the Secretary of Defense for the operations of the Agency, and shall,"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2. Services of the Agency shall be available to all Department of Defense agencies under procedures established by the Policy Board.\n\n3. In order to further the technical aspects of the Agency's programs, each military department shall designate a liaison officer representing its principal research and development staff. Each liaison officer, within his department, shall be responsible for:\n\na. Arranging for the exchange of information concerning research and development programs being carried out in their Departments which may be pertinent to approved programs of the Agency.\n\nb. Arranging through authorized channels and within personnel and budgetary limits for the conduct of research and development programs in their Departments, either by contract or utilization of Government facilities, upon request of the Agency.\n\nc. Providing within personnel and budgetary limits for a continuing program to insure the consideration of the results of scientific research and development efforts in their departments for possible application in developing security and intelligence equipment.\n\n4. Each Service shall designate properly qualified personnel at appropriate echelons for liaison purposes consistent with determinations made in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Section.\n\n5. Exchange of information by and with the Agency shall be governed by normal security practices.\n\nVI. DIRECTIVES SUPERSEDED\n\nThe Directive of the Secretary of Defense, dated 7 February 1951, establishing the Physical Security Equipment Agency is cancelled, effective this date.\n\nActing Secretary of Defense"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. The Physical Security Equipment Agency, established by Department of Defense Directive No. R-5154.1, dated 19 January 1953, is hereby abolished.\n\n2. The Secretary of the Air Force will take all action necessary to the orderly termination of the affairs of the Agency, to include:\n\na. Disposition of all records, equipment, supplies, and facilities in accordance with applicable policy and procedures.\n\nb. Disposition of civilian personnel in accordance with applicable personnel policy and procedures.\n\nc. Disposition of military personnel assigned to the Agency in accordance with applicable reassignment procedures.\n\n3. The Secretary of the Air Force may make such delegation of authority as he deems necessary for accomplishment of the above actions.\n\n4. Directive No. 5154.9 (formerly No. R-5154.1), 19 January 1953, is hereby cancelled.\n\nActing Secretary of Defense"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ELECTION OF OPTIONS UNDER THE UNIFORMED SERVICES CONTINGENCY OPTION ACT OF 1953\nDATE 29 April 1954\nLAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE NAME SERVICE NUMBER GRADE\nMcCoy, Howard Monroe 550A Colonel\nPERMANENT ADDRESS STATUS (Check one only) ACTIVE INACTIVE RETIRED\nc/o Air Adj Gen, HqUSAF, Washington, D. C. X\nDATE OF BIRTH NO. OF YEARS COMPLETED FOR PAY DATE OF RETIREMENT (If applicable)\n4 December 1907 23 plus\nI UNDERSTAND I MAY SELECT OPTION 1 OR 2 OR 3 AND MAY COMBINE OPTION 4 WITH THE ONE SO SELECTED. OR THAT I MAY SELECT OPTION 1 AND 2 AND COMBINE OPTION 4 WITH EITHER OR BOTH. AS LONG AS THE COMBINED TOTAL OF OPTIONS ELECTED DOES NOT EXCEED FIFTY PER CENT OF THE REDUCED RETIRED PAY. WITH THE ABOVE IN MIND, I HEREBY ELECT THE FOLLOWING OPTION OR OPTIONS:\nOPTION NUMBER 1\n(Check one only) OF MY REDUCED RETIRED PAY. PAYABLE TO OR ON BEHALF OF MY WIDOW SO LONG AS SHE REMAINS UNMARRIED. 1/8 1/4 1/2\nOPTION NUMBER 2\n(Check one only) OF MY REDUCED RETIRED PAY, PAYABLE TO OR ON BEHALF OF MY SURVIVING CHILD OR CHILDREN, UNMARRIED AND UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE. 1/8 1/4 1/2\nOPTION NUMBER 3\n(Check one only) OF MY REDUCED RETIRED PAY. PAYABLE TO OR ON BEHALF (a) OF MY SURVIVING WIDOW UNTIL HER REMARRIAGE OR DEATH, AND (b) THEREAFTER TO MY SURVIVING CHILD OR CHILDREN, UNMARRIED AND UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE. 1/8 1/4 X 1/2\nOPTION NUMBER 4\nX NO FURTHER DEDUCTIONS SHALL BE MADE FROM MY RETIRED PAY COMMENCING WITH THE FIRST DAY OF THE MONTH FOLLOWING THAT IN WHICH THERE IS NO BENEFICIARY ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE AN ANNUITY UPON MY DEATH. I DESIRE THIS OPTION TO BE COMBINED WITH OPTIONS NUMBER Three AS CHECKED ABOVE.\nDECLINATION OF OPTION\nI HAVE STUDIED THE ABOVE, AND DO NOT DESIRE TO SELECT AN OPTION AT THIS TIME.\n(IF ANY OF THE ABOVE OPTIONS ARE SELECTED, THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION MUST BE FURNISHED)\nNAME OF SPOUSE (Last, First and Maiden) DATE OF BIRTH (Spouse)\nMcCoy, Pauline Adline Bowe 16 March 1910\nPLACE OF MARRIAGE (City, County and State) DATE OF MARRIAGE\nMt. Clemens, Macomb County, Michigan 2 June 1934\nPREVIOUSLY MARRIED (If yes, give date and place of dissolution of each former marriage and state whether by death, annulment or divorce, also name(s) of previous spouse(s))\nYES\nX NO\nSPOUSE PREVIOUSLY MARRIED (If yes, give date and place of dissolution of each former marriage and state whether by death, annulment or divorce, also name(s) of previous spouse (s))\nYES\nX NO\n(IF EITHER OPTION 2 OR 3 IS INCLUDED IN YOUR SELECTION, FURNISH THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION CONCERNING LEGITIMATE CHILD OR CHILDREN)\nNAME OF EACH CHILD DATE OF BIRTH RELATIONSHIP (Specify if stepchild or adopted child)\nJohn David McCoy 29Nov40 Son\nPaul Bowe McCoy 14Apr43 Son\nHugh Monroe McCoy 14Mar47 Son\nI UNDERSTAND THAT ANY PERIOD SUBSEQUENT TO MY RETIREMENT IN WHICH I AM NOT RECEIVING RETIRED PAY I SHALL BE REQUIRED TO DEPOSIT WITH THE UNITED STATES TREASURY THE AMOUNT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN WITHHELD FROM MY RETIRED PAY UNDER THE OPTION OR OPTIONS ELECTED HAD I BEEN RECEIVING SUCH RETIRED PAY. AND IF I DO NOT COMBINE OPTION 4 WITH THE OPTION SELECTED, DEDUCTIONS WILL BE MADE FROM MY RETIRED PAY DESPITE THE FACT THAT ALL BENEFICIARIES PREDECEASE ME OR BECOME INELIGIBLE FOR ANNUITY BENEFITS. IN THE CASE OF RETIRED MEMBERS, ELECTION OF ANY OF THE OPTIONS PROVIDED IS IRREVOCABLE.\nSIGNATURE Howard Monroe McCoy\nSUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS 29th DAY OF April 19 54\nSIGNATURE AND TITLE OF ATTESTING OFFICER John E. Jureka, Captain, USAF, 15423A, Asst Adjt\nAF FORM 806 15 AUG 53 GPO 864350"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROMOTIONS AND SEPARATIONS DIVISION\nSEPARATIONS BRANCH - RETIREMENT SECTION\nPROMOTION AND RETIREMENT RECORD\nPromotion Section\nPlease check service of officer for retirement effective 31 August 1954.\nDate 27 July 1954 Johnston CLERK\nName McCoy, Howard M. 550A (AFSN)\nPermanent Grade Colonel Temporary Grade Colonel\nHighest Grade Held: WWI WWII Col - 1 Aug 44\nAccepted original Regular Air Force appointment on 12 June 30\n(509h i) Major, Captain and First Lieutenants\n1. Failed selection for grade on Deferred\n2. Failed selection for grade on Deferred\nIf selected 1st time, promotion date would have been\nElimination Date: 1 yr, 30 days later on or\nEligible retirement, within 2 yrs from elimination date,\nfor on, whichever latest.\n\"Years service\" on 31 Aug 54: 24 (Years) 2 (Months) 20 (Days)\n(NOTE: \"Yrs Sv\" under Sec 515)\nREMARKS:\nDATE 28 Jul 54 (Promotion Section Clerk)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD\n1. DATES COVERED FROM 1 Jul 53 TO\n2. LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE INITIAL McCOY, HOWARD M. 3. SERVICE NO. 550 A\n4. CREDIT BROUGHT FORWARD FROM PREVIOUS RECORD DAYS 50\nNAME, GRADE, AND ORGANIZATION OF CERTIFYING OFFICER B. R. FOSTER, 1st Lt, 1005th IGSIGp, BAFB, DC\nSIGNATURE OF CERTIFYING OFFICER B. R. Foster\nI. LEAVE TAKEN\nTYPE A | FROM B | TO C | NUMBER DAYS D | MORNING REPORT UNIT E\nO 15Sep53 3Sep53 3 1005th IGSIGp\nO 1 Jul 53 16 Jul 53 16 \"\nO 28Dec53 30Dec53 3 \"\nO 15 May 54 16 May 54 1 \"\nO 7 May 54 9 May 54 2 \"\nD 8 Jul 54 26 Aug 54 50 \"\nII. LEAVE CREDITED\nFROM PREVIOUS RECORD 50\nPERIOD F-G: 1 Jul 53 30 Jun 54, DAYS LEAVE CREDITED 30, BALANCE AVAILABLE 53\nPERIOD: Jul 54 31 Aug 54, DAYS EXCL. -45, BALANCE AVAILABLE 10\nIII. RECORD CLOSING DATA\n5. FINAL COMPUTATION A. TOTAL DAYS LEAVE CREDITED B. TOTAL DAYS LEAVE TAKEN C. BALANCE\n6. DISPOSITION A. BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD TO NEW RECORD B. CASH SETTLEMENT REQUESTED C. OTHER (Specify)\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AND ORGANIZATION OF CERTIFYING OFFICER SIGNATURE OF CERTIFYING OFFICER\nAF FORM 617 1 NOV 52 REPLACES WD AGO FORM 481, NOV 46, WHICH IS OBSOLETE IN THE USAF."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORD OF SERVICE\nTO: Military History Unit Personnel Records Service Division FROM: Separations Branch Promotions and Separation Division\nREQUEST CHECK OF SERVICE OF BELOW NAMED INDIVIDUAL\nLAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE NAME GRADE AFSN\nMc Coy, Howard M. Colonel 550A\nCHECK FOR EFFECTIVE\nRetirement 31 August 1954\nDATE NAME OF CLERK\n27 July 1954 Eikelberg x76651\nTYPE OF SERVICE ACTIVE FEDERAL YEARS MONTHS DAYS INACTIVE YEARS MONTHS DAYS\nCOMMISSIONED SERVICE (Regular) 24 2 19\nCOMMISSIONED SERVICE (Other than Regular)\nTOTAL COMMISSIONED SERVICE 24 2 19\nWARRANT OFFICER SERVICE\nENLISTED SERVICE\nTOTAL WARRANT OFFICER AND ENLISTED SERVICE\nTOTAL ACTIVE FEDERAL SERVICE ON (Date) 31 August 1954 24 2 19\nTOTAL SERVICE (Active and Inactive) 24 2 19\nMILITARY OR NAVAL SERVICE PRIOR TO 12 NOV 1918 YES NO X HIGHEST WORLD WAR I GRADE none HIGHEST GRADE HELD (From 9 Sep 40 to 30 Jun 46) Colonel DATE OF BIRTH 4 Dec 1907\nREMARKS\nDATE JUL 27 1954 REPORT PREPARED BY (Name of clerk) J.C. Johnson x76789\nAFHQ FORM 0-190 24 OCT 50 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE 821097"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDUSTRIAL COLLEGE OF THE ARMED FORCES\nWashington, D. C.\n7 July 1950\nSUBJECT: Academic Report McCOY, Howard M. 550A (Name) (Serial No.)\nTO: Deputy Chief of Staff, Personnel Headquarters, U. S. Air Force Washington 25, D. C. ATTN: Directorate of Military Personnel\n1. Academic Report is hereby submitted in accordance with Section IV, AFR 36-10, dated 15Apr49.\n2. McCOY Howard M. 550A (Last Name) (First Name) (Middle Initial) (Serial No.) Colonel USAF (Grade) (Component)\n3. Designation of School: Industrial College of the Armed Forces Course Pursued: Economic Mobilization\n4. Duration of Course: 25Aug49 - 27Jun50 EDCSA: Assigning: 25Aug49; Detaching: 13Jul50\n5. Officer successfully completed the course.\n6. Special aptitude for any particular duty: None noted\n7. Potential instructor for the school or course: No\n8. The course was designed to prepare officers for important Command, Staff and Planning assignments in the Department of Defense.\n9. Proficiency in theoretical training for important Command assignments: Qualified.\n10. Proficiency in theoretical training for important Staff and Planning assignments: Qualified.\n11. Efficiency of this officer during this period is rated as: Superior\nA. W. VANAMAN Major General, USAF Commandant"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"For immediate delivery ........................... refer to in paragraph...............\nIf delivery cannot be made, return this order to Headquarters USAF, Air Adjutant General with statement of facts. Additional copies of this order will not be furnished.\n\nSymbols: DP—By direction of the President\nTDN—Travel directed is necessary in the military service\nWP—Will proceed to\nTPA—Travel by officer or his dependents by privately owned automobile is auth\nVOSAF—Verbal orders Secretary of Air Force\nAD—Active duty\nEDCSA—Effective date of change of strength accountability\nDDALV—Day's delay en route auth chargeable as lv\nDDALVP—Day's delay en route auth chargeable as lv provided it does not interfere with reporting on date specified and provided individual has sufficient accrued lv\nSMOP—So much of paragraph\n\nSPECIAL ORDERS) DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nNO. 51 ) WASHINGTON, 14 MARCH 1951\n\nPars 1 thru 4 inc not used.\n\n5. The folg changes in asgmts and/or dys are dird. Tvl by mil or coml acft, coml rail and/or bus is authd. WP. PCA. PCS. TDN. TPA. 5714500 148-333 P 533-02, 03, 05, 07 S 99-999 appl if tvl begins on or prior to 31 Mar 51; 5714500 148-334 P 533-02, 03, 05, 07 S 99-999 appl if tvl begins on or after 1 Apr 51. All dts are 1951 unless otherwise indicated.\n\nName EDCSA Reld fr Asgd to\n\nMAJ LEON S BOGAN, 12224A, USAF (Prim SSN - 2161) (Dy SSN - 2260) (Shipping SSN - 2260) (W) (FSC - 16) (DROS - Sep 44) (Sr Plt - on fly status) (PP) 4 Jun Hq & Hq Sq, USAF, Office, DCS/M, Wash, DC Hq & Hq Sq, Western Air Proc Dist, AMC, Los Angeles, Calif, rept NLT 4 Jun. DDALVP.\n\nLT COL WILLIAM V CROAK, AO472380, USAF (Prim SSN - 2110) (Dy SSN - 2120) (Shipping SSN - 2260) (W) (FSC - 36) (DROS - Jul 45) (AFSS - Jun 52) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (USAFR) (PP) 25 Apr Hq & Hq Sq, USAF, Office, APM, Office, IG, USAF, Wash, DC Hq & Hq Sq, 22d Bomb Wg (M), SAC, March AFB, Calif, rept NLT 25 Apr (SAC Mar Rqn, Page 3, Line 7). 15 DDALV.\n\nMAJ RICHARD N GRUENDYKE, 7355A, USAF (Prim SSN - 9300) (Dy SSN - 9300) (Shipping SSN - 9300) (W) (FSC - 21) (DROS - Oct 45) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (PP) 16 Apr Hq & Hq Sq, USAF, Directorate of Intel, DCS/O, Wash, DC Hq & Hq Sq, TAC, Langley AFB, Va, rept NLT 16 Apr. DDALVP.\n\nMAJ HERBERT W SCHNUR, AO381840, USAF (Prim SSN - 0612) (Dy SSN - 0612) (Shipping SSN - 0612) (W) (FSC - 36) (DROS - Sep 49) (AFSS - Sep 52) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (USAFR) (PP) 25 Mar Hq & Hq Sq, USAF, Directorate of Maint, Sup, & Svs, DCS/M, Wash, DC Hq & Hq Sq, Cen Air Proc Dist, AMC, Detroit, Mich, rept NLT 20 Mar. DDALVP.\n\nMAJ JOSEPH L WARD, 9001A, USAF (Prim SSN - 8103) (Dy SSN - 8103) (Shipping SSN - 8103) (W) (FSC - 38) (DROS - Dec 45) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (PP) 14 Jun Hq & Hq Sq, USAF, Office, JAG, USAF, Wash, DC Hq & Hq Sq, 3902d AB Wg, SAC, Offutt AFB, Nebr, rept NLT 15 Jun (SAC Apr Rqn, Page 5, Line 8). DDALVP.\n\n6. Ea of the folg-named USAF offs is granted lv of absence for the no of days indicated, eff o/a the dt shown. All dts are 1951:\n\nName No of days Date\nMAJ PETER M CHILDRESS, 7221A 10 16 Mar\nLT COL EDWARD R FORD, 3362A 6 22 Mar\nMAJ ERNEST J HART, AO568513 12 19 Mar\n\n51-5117, AF (SO 51, 14 Mar 51)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name No of days Date\nLT COL MILLS M HAY, AO381607 12 19 Mar\nLT COL ARTHUR F HURLEY, 2322A 9 15 Mar\nCAPT ALLEN F MCKAY, 20613A 5 26 Mar\nCAPT MICHAEL J NERI, AO854195 12 19 Mar\nMAJ WILLIAM L RICE, JR, 12699A 5 9 Apr\nMAJ HAROLD D L SCHMOLDT, 7697A 9 17 Mar\nLT COL JAMES B J TOWNSEND, AO1287089 5 15 Mar\nMAJ CHARLES WEBB, JR, AO1699092 5 19 Mar\nCOL RICHARD H WISE, 939A 2 14 Mar\n\n7. The VOSAF on 1 Mar 51 relg ea of the folg-named USAF offs fr asgmt Hq & Hq Sq, Tenth AF, ConAC, Selfridge AFB, Mich, fr dy sta St Paul, Minn, fr dy indicated; and asgg ea off to Hq & Hq Sq, 133d Ftr Wg, ADC, Holman Fld, St Paul, Minn, are confrd. No tvl involved. PCA. EDCSA: 27 Mar 51:\n\nName Dy\nLT COL JAMES B MOREHEAD, 7257A (Prim SSN - 2162) (Dy SSN - 2162) (Shipping SSN - 2162) (W) (FSC - 18) (DROS - May 43) (Sr Plt - on fly status) (PP) Air Instr, 133d Ftr Wg, Minn ANG\nMAJ THEON E MARKHAM, 9180A, (Prim SSN - 1054) (Dy SSN - 1054) (Shipping SSN - 1054) (W) (FSC - 37) (DROS - Sep 45) (Plt - on fly status) (PP) Air Instr, 109th Ftr Sq, Minn ANG\n\n8. DP the folg-named offs, for rept purposes comp of ea off is USAFR(DC), are aptd in the AFUS (DC) UP Sec 515, Pub Law 381-80th Congress and ordered to EAD in grs indicated. All dts are 1951 unless otherwise indicated. Offs WP sta fr home or pres address indicated on eff dt of dy, rept to CO, orgn asgd NLT dt indicated:\n\nName Eff dt of dy Asgd to Dt of rank\nMAJ JOHN E DOTTERWAY, AO2213792 (Prim SSN - 3170) (Dy SSN - 3170) (W) (FSC - none) (DOS - May 54) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (Home address 36 Ave A, Latrobe, Pa) (Presently at temp address of rec 807 1/2 Ligonier St, Latrobe, Pa) 15 May Hq & Hq Sq, 3750th Med Gp, ATRC, Sheppard AFB, Tex, rept NLT 19 May 15 May\n1ST LT ROBERT D RICHARDS AO2213866 (Prim SSN - 3170) (Dy SSN - 3170) (W) (FSC - none) (DOS - Jan 53) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (Home address 1220 Calvin SE, Grand Rapids, Mich) 23 Apr 133d Ftr Sq (SE), Eastern Air Def Force, ADC, Grenier AFB, Manchester, NH 23 Apr\nMAJ WILLIAM B SWARTZ, AO359591 (Prim SSN - 3170) (Dy SSN - 3170) (W) (FSC - none) (DOS - Jun 53) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (Home address 2927 S Peoria Ave, Tulsa, Okla) 7 Jun Hq & Hq Sq, 6th Bomb Wg (M), SAC, Walker AFB, Roswell, NMex, rept NLT 8 Jun (SAC Apr Suppl Rqn, Page 2, Line 1) 7 Jun\n\nOath of office (AF Form 133) and Active Duty Report (DD Form 220) to be executed at dy sta. AD hereby ordered w/b performed by above-named offs as AFUS(DC) offs and will not entl indivs concerned to the lump-sum pmt authd by Pub Law 97-77th Congress. Offs quald for add benefits IAW AFR 173-83, as of eff dt of dy. Offs' com in USAFR(DC) are not affected. Tvl by mil or coml acft, coml rail and/or bus is authd. PCS. TDN. TPA, tvl time for tvl by pvt conveyance authd a/r 300 miles per day. 5714500 148-134 P 531-02, 03, 05, 07 S 99-999.\n\n(SO 51, 14 Mar 51) 2 51-5117, AF"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"9. DP LT COL JOHN W SHEFFER, AO336307, for rept purposes comp is USAFR (Prim SSN - 9300)(Dy SSN - 9300)(W)(FSC - 39)(DROS - Oct 45)(DOS - Indef)(Non-rated - not on fly status)(Home address 4105 Harrison St, NW, Wash, DC), is aptd in the AFUS UP Sec 515, Pub Law 381-80th Congress and ordered to EAD in gr indicated; asgd Hq & Hq Sq, USAF, Directorate of Plans, DCS/O, Wash, DC, w/ aprx 3 days TDY Hq & Hq Sq, 1100th AB Wg, Hq Comd, USAF, Bolling AFB, Wash, DC, for purpose of satisfactory compl of a final type phy exam as provd in AFL 160-207 and other adm processing; upon compl WP dy sta, rept at Room 1E515, The Pentagon. Eff dt of dy 16 Mar 51 and dt of rank 8 Feb 51. Off WP TDY sta fr home on eff dt of dy, rept to CO, Hq & Hq Sq, 1100th AB Wg, NLT 16 Mar 51. Oath of office (AF Form 133) and Active Duty Report (DD Form 220) to be executed at TDY sta. AD hereby ordered w/b performed by off as an AFUS off and will not entl off to the lump-sum pmt authd by Pub Law 97-77th Congress. Off's com in USAFR is not affected. PCS. TDN. 5714500 148-133 P 531-02, 03, 05, 07 S 99-999. No tvl involved.\n\n10. DP the folg-named offs, for rept purposes comp of ea off is USAFR(AFNC), are aptd in the AFUS(AFNC) UP Sec 515, Pub Law 381-80th Congress and ordered to EAD in gr indicated; asgd 509th Med Gp, Eighth AF, SAC, Walker AFB, Roswell, NMex (SAC Apr Suppl Rqn, Page 2, Line 7). Eff dt of dy 23 Apr 51 and dt of rank as indicated. Offs WP sta fr home on eff dt of dy, rept to CO, orgn asgd NLT dt indicated. All dts are 1951 unless otherwise indicated:\n\nName Rept dt Dt of rank\n1ST LT ARLINE R BALFANZ, AN774243 (Prim SSN - 3449) (Dy SSN - 3449)(W)(FSC - none)(DOS - Apr 54)(Non-rated - not on fly status)(Home address 900 Lee St, South Haven, Mich) 27 Apr 23 Apr\n1ST LT JOSEPHINE V COLLINGS, AN762424 (Prim SSN - 3449)(Dy SSN - 3449)(W)(FSC - 16)(DROS - Jan 46) (DOS - Apr 54)(Non-rated - not on fly status) (Home address 2706 W 78th Pl, Inglewood, Calif) 25 Apr 14 Jan\n1ST LT BERTHA L COOMBS, AN2214594 (Prim SSN - 3449) (Dy SSN - 3449)(W)(FSC - none)(DOS - Apr 53)(Non-rated - not on fly status)(Home address 558 Wilmington Ave, Salt Lake City, Utah) 25 Apr 23 Apr\n\nOath of office (AF Form 133) and Active Duty Report (DD Form 220) to be executed at dy sta. AD hereby ordered w/b performed by above-named offs as AFUS(AFNC) offs and will not entl indivs concerned to the lump-sum pmt authd by Pub Law 97-77th Congress. Offs' coms in USAFR(AFNC) are not affected. Tvl by mil or coml acft, coml rail and/or bus is authd. PCS. TDN. TPA, tvl time for tvl by pvt conveyance authd a/r 300 miles per day. 5714500 148-134 P 531-02, 03, 05, 07 S 99-999.\n\n11. Announcement is made of the apmt of COL HOWARD M MCCOY, 550A, USAF, on 3 Mar 51 as Dir, Phy Scty Equip Agency, OSD.\n\n12. Not used.\n\n13. Ea of the folg-named USAF offs (presently asgd Hq & Hq Sq, USAF, Wash, DC) is reld fr Cen Con Gp, fr dy w/Jt Occupational Clas Project, and is asgd dy in Directorate of Tng, DCS/P, rept NLT 2 Apr 51, at Room 4A280, The Pentagon, for adm purposes:\n\nCAPT DAVID S BOLTEN, AO664502 MAJ HUGH P MAROHL, 13584A\nMAJ JOE M GELWIX, JR, 10051A CAPT EDWARD J SWEENEY, 12072A\n\n14. CAPT JOHN S GASTON, JR, AO803965, USAF (Prim SSN - 2120)(Dy SSN -2120)(Shipping SSN - 2120)(W)(USAFR)(FSC - 12)(DROS - Jun 45)(DOS - unknown)(Plt - on fly status)(PP), is reld fr asgmt and dy Hq & Hq Sq, USAF, Office, AAG, Wash, DC; and is asgd 2266th Pers Processing Sq (OR), First AF, ConAC, Ft Dix, NJ, rept NLT 7 May 51 for further asgmt to Hq & Hq Sq, USAFE, APO 633, c/o Postmaster, New York, NY (USAFE Project 32215, Page 2, Line 8, 2120). AFR 35-48 w/b complied with and immunizations dird therein w/b accomplished im. Bag w/b addressed to 2266th Pers Processing Sq (OR), Ft Dix, NJ. All mail w/b addressed to show gr, name, AFSN, 2266th Pers Processing Sq (OR), Ft Dix, NJ. DDALVP. Tvl by mil or coml acft, coml rail and/or bus is authd. WP. PCA. PCS. TDN. TPA provd off disposes of veh prior to rept at 2266th Pers Processing Sq (OR). 5714500 148-344 P 533-02, 03, 05, 07 S 99-999. EDCSA: 7 May 51.\n\n51-5117, AF 3 (SO 51, 14 Mar 51)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"15. UP Secs 402 and 409, Pub Law 351, 81st Congress, ea of the folg-named amn having been found physically unfit for act sv by reason of perm phy dsabl is retd fr act sv and placed on the aprop USAF Retd List in pres gr, eff 31 Mar 51. Ea amn having prod to his home, as shown, to await ret, is reld fr asgmt orgn indicated; retd at home address on 31 Mar 51:\n\nGr, Name, AFSN, Orgn Home Address\nM Sgt Ray Lowry, AF6507208, 1080th Hosp Sq, Hq Comd, USAF, Letterman Army Hosp, San Francisco, Calif San Antonio, Tex\nSgt Alexander A Depczynski, AF12292118, 1072nd Hosp Sq, Hq Comd, USAF, Army Med Cen, Walter Reed Army Hosp, Wash, DC Buffalo, NY\n\n16. UP Secs 402 and 409, Pub Law 351-81st Congress, M Sgt (E-7) Alfred P Jones, AF8184, having been found physically unfit for act sv by reason of phy dsabl is retd fr act sv and placed on the aprop USAF Retd List in pres gr, eff 31 Mar 51. M Sgt Jones is reld fr asgmt Det of Patients, Sta Hosp, SAC, March AFB, Calif; retd at pres sta on 31 Mar 51, and at the proper time WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5714500 148-404 P 534-02, 03, 05, 07 S 99-999.\n\n17. UP Secs 402 and 409, Pub Law 351-81st Congress, Pvt (E-1) John D Brown, AF15042515, having been found physically unfit for act sv by reason of phy dsabl which may be perm, is retd fr act sv and placed on the USAF Temp Dsabl Retd List, in the gr of S Sgt (E-5), eff 31 Mar 51. Pvt Brown is reld fr asgmt 1076th Hosp Sq, Hq Comd, USAF, Army, Hot Springs, Ark; retd at pres sta on 31 Mar 51, and at the proper time WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5714500 148-404 P 534-02, 03, 05, 07 S 99-999.\n\n18. CAPT CARROL HAMENT, 20045A, USAF (Prim SSN - unknown) (Dy SSN - unknown) (Shipping SSN - unknown) (W) (FSC - unknown) (DROS - unknown) (Aero rtg - unknown) (Fly status - unknown) (Home address - 3903 Penhurst Ave, Baltimore 15, Md), is reld fr asgmt 1133d USAF S/A Sq, Hq Comd, USAF, Ft Myer, Va, and is asgd Hq & Hq Sq, USAF, Office, JAG, USAF, Wash, DC, rept NLT 22 Mar 51, at Room 4A280, The Pentagon. Tvl by mil or coml acft, coml rail and/or bus is authd. WP. PCA. PCS. TDN. TPA. 5714500 148-133 P 531-02 S 99-999. EDCSA. 22 Mar 51.\n\n19. MAJ CLAUDE L DUKE, JR, 8488A, USAF (presently asgd Hq & Hq Sq, USAF), is reld fr dy in Directorate of Intel, DCS/O, and is asgd dy in Directorate of Instls, DCS/M, rept NLT 27 Mar 51 at Room 4A280, The Pentagon, for adm purposes.\n\n20. LT COL JOHN W COOK, AO560821, USAF (presently asgd Hq & Hq Sq, USAF), is reld fr Cen Con Gp, fr dy w/Jt Occupational Clas Project, and is asgd dy in Directorate of Manpower and Orgn, DCS/O, rept NLT 2 Apr 51 at Room 4A280, The Pentagon, for adm purposes.\n\n21. COL MILLS SAVAGE, 485A, USAF (presently asgd Hq & Hq Sq, USAF, Cen Con Gp, Office, JCS), is reld fr dy w/Jt Stf, and is asgd dy w/Office, JCS Representative on Sr Stf, NSC.\n\n22. UP Secs 402 and 409, Pub Law 351, 81st Congress, ea of the folg-named amn having been found physically unfit for act sv by reason of perm phy dsabl is retd fr act sv and placed on the aprop USAF Retd List in gr indicated, eff 31 Mar 51. Ea amn is reld fr asgmt orgn shown, fr sta indicated; retd at pres sta on 31 Mar 51, and at the proper time WP his home. PCS. TDN. 5714500 148-404 P 534-02, 03, 05, 07, S 99-999:\n\nGr, Name, AFSN and Orgn Retd gr Sta at which retd\nCpl (E-3) Tillman R Hester, AF18288319 1078th Hosp Sq, Hq Comd, USAF, William Beaumont Army Hosp, El Paso, Tex Cpl (E-3) North Little Rock, Ark\nPvt (E-1) Robert G Rustin, AF14002455 1072nd Hosp Sq, Hq Comd, USAF, Walter Reed Army Hosp, Army Med Cen, Wash, DC T/Sgt (E-6) Lyons, NJ\n\n(SO 51, 14 Mar 51) 4 51-5117, AF"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"23. Announcement is made of the perm prom of the folg-named AF offs in the USAF, UP Secs 502 and 508, Off Pers Act of 1947, to the gr indicated w/rank fr dt of this order.\n\n2D LT TO 1ST LT\n\nWOODROW W BLALOCK, 18297A BYRON R TOOTHMAN, 20686A\n\n24. DP Announcement is made of the temp prom of 1ST LT ROBERT J MORRISON, 21741A, USAF (DC), to the gr of CAPT, AFUS(DC), UP Sec 515, Off Pers Act of 1947, w/rank fr dt of this order.\n\n25. SMOP 7, SO 15, DAF, cs, relating to 1ST LT GEORGE P LOESCH, JR, 17220A, USAF, as reads, \"asgd Hq, 3555th Plt Tng (Bac) Gp, ATRC, Perrin AFB, Tex, to attend cl 52-C, rept between 0800 and 1600 hrs, 16 Apr 51. 15 DDALV,\" is amndd to read, \"asgd 3300th Tng Sq (Civ Contr Fly Sch) ATRC, Greenville AFB, Greenville, Miss, rept NLT 16 Apr 51. 20 DDALV.\"\n\n26. 2D LT WILLIAM G MACLAREN, JR, 21823A, USAF (Prim SSN - 0001) (Dy SSN - 4823) (Shipping SSN - 4823) (W) (FSC - unknown) (DROS - unknown) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (Home address - 440 Cochran Rd, Pittsburgh 28, Pa), is reld fr asgmt 1133d USAF S/A Sq, Hq Comd, USAF, Ft Myer, Va, and is asgd Hq & Hq Sq, 3545th Plt Tng Wg (Bsc), ATRC, Goodfellow AFB, Tex, rept NLT 28 Mar 51, for OJT in SSN 4823 (to be applied against ATRC block asgmts, 17 Jan 51). Tvl by mil or coml acft, coml rail and/or bus is authd. WP sta asgd fr Pittsburgh, Pa. PCA. PCS. TDN. TPA. 5714500 148-133 P 531-02 S 99-999. EDCSA: 28 Mar 51.\n\n27. The VOSAF granting lv of absence to MAJ WALTER S GORDON, AO563132, USAF, for 10 days, eff 13 Mar 51, are confrd.\n\n28. LT COL DONALD MARE, 2148A, USAF (presently asgd Hq & Hq, USAF), is reld fr dy in Office, JAG, USAF, and is asgd Cen Con Gp, OSD, for dy w/MB, rept NLT 16 Apr 51, at Room 4A280, The Pentagon, for adm purposes (Project 51-51).\n\n29. SMOP 12, SO 47, DAF, cs, relating to T Sgt (E-6) Trevor D Meyer, AF144537, USAF, as reads \"McChord AFB, Wash, DC,\" is amndd to read \"McChord AFB, Wash.\"\n\n30. SMOP 20, SO 46, DAF, cs, relating to LT COL GEORGE R KAUFFMAN, 2985A, USAF, as reads \"is reld fr asgmt and dy Hq & Hq Sq, USAF, Directorate of Intel, DCS/O, Wash, DC\" is amndd to read \"is reld fr asgmt 1151st USAF Fld Actys Sq, Hq Comd, USAF, Ft Myer, Va, fr dy w/Directorate of Intel, DCS/O, Hq & Hq Sq, USAF, Wash, DC.\"\n\n31. SMOP 15, SO 33, DAF, cs, as reads \"CAPT CLYDE H KNAPP, JR, AO452631, USAF\" is amndd to read \"CAPT CLYDE H KNAPP, JR, 21511A, USAF.\"\n\n32. SMOP indicated, SO specified, DAF, yr shown, relating to ea of the folg-named offs is revod:\n\nGr, Name, AFSN Par SO Yr\nRICHARD W COUVILLION, 02206729 32 46 1951\nMAJ KINDRED H MUSE, 16170A, USAF 21 49 1951\n1ST LT JAMES A RAY, AO789268, USAF 11 214 1950\nHAROLD J SHARPE, JR 10 120 1950\n\nBY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE:\n\nOFFICIAL: HOYT S. VANDENBERG\nK. E. THIEBAUD Chief of Staff, United States Air Force\nColonel, USAF\nAir Adjutant General\n\n51-5117, AF 5 (SO 51, 14 Mar 51)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"201- col. H. M. McCoy\n\nHEADQUARTERS\n1100TH AIR BASE GROUP\nBolling Air Force Base\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nSPECIAL ORDERS\nNUMBER 61\n21 April 1953\n\n1. Cfm VOCO, 17 Apr 53, COL HOWARD M. McCOY, 550A, 1005th IG Specl Inves Gp, BAFB, Wash 25, D. C., is SUSPENDED FR FLY DY by reason of entry into a medical patient status. Auth: Par 9g(1), AFR 36-57, dtd 13 Jan 53.\n\n2. Cfm VOCO, 20 Apr 53, LT COL WILLIAM D. READY, 2127A, Hq USAF, Wash 25, D. C., is SUSPENDED FR FLY DY by reason of entry into a medical patient status. Auth: Par 9g(1), AFR 36-57, dtd 13 Jan 53.\n\n3. Fol amn, orgn indicated, this Hq, are granted lv of abs o/a dt indicated:\n\nEFF DT NO DAYS DT DUE RTN\nSSGT MELVIN D. LOVING AF13346018 21 Apr 53 5 26 Apr 53\n1100th Scty Sq\nA/1C EUGENE HENSLEY AF15198704 1 May 53 8 9 May 53\nHq 1100th AB Gp\nA/3C EDMOND J. GRZEGORZEWSKI JR, AF13441368 24 Apr 53 15 9 May 53\n1100th AP Sq\nSSGT JOHN RUTCHO AF12247908 22 May 53 5 27 May 53\n1100th Instl Sq\nSSGT PHILLIP R. MAMMEL AF17288428 5 May 53 14 19 May 53\nHq 1100th AB Gp\nA/1C RICHARD LEE AF18346834 4 May 53 12 16 May 53\nHq 1100th AB Gp\nMSGT ELMER H. GATEWOOD AF18131701 1 May 53 15 16 May 53\nHq 1100th AB Gp\nSSGT ROBERT L. McVICKER AF57212616 24 Apr 53 24 18 May 53\nHq 1100th AB Gp\nA/3C ROBERT J. DAME AF12407393 1 May 53 15 16 May 53\nHq 1100th AB Gp\n\n4. SMOP 1, SO 56, cs, this Hq, pertaining to lv of abs of A/3C ROY V. TALLON, AF14457526, 1100th AP Sq, this Hq, as reads seven (7) days is amended to read ten (10) days.\n\n5. 1ST LT BERNARD M. SERIO, A02231736, 1100th AP Sq, this Hq, is granted lv of abs for ten (10) days, eff o/a 25 May 53. Address while on lv is 2552 W. Fairmount Ave, Baltimore 23, Maryland. Phone: Gilmore 4498J.\n\n6. MAJ GEORGE D. BLAIR, A0672309, this Hq, is granted lv of abs for eleven (11) days, eff o/a 24 Apr 53. Address while on lv is 1313 Lexington Ave, Ashland, Ky. Phone: Oak 1461.\n\nBY ORDER OF LIEUTENANT COLONEL HORTON:\n\nOFFICIAL:\nJOSEPH DUDECK JR\n2d Lt, USAF\nAsst Adjutant\n\nWILBUR H KECK\nCaptain, USAF\nAdjutant\n\nDISTRIBUTION \"A\""} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, DAYTON, OHIO\nMCAGXS2\n\nGENERAL ORDERS\nNUMBER 66\n8 August 1949\n\nSTAFF ASSIGNMENT\n\nCOLONEL HAROLD E WATSON 1520A USAF is announced as Chief, Intelligence Department, vice COLONEL HOWARD M McCOY 550A USAF, relieved.\n\nBY COMMAND OF GENERAL McNARNEY:\n\nOFFICIAL:\n\nBRYAN L. DAVIS\nColonel, USAF\nAdjutant General\n\nBRYAN L. DAVIS\nColonel, USAF\nAdjutant General\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\"A\"\n\nWF(A)--O--8-16-49--1300"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18. DP announcement is made of the apmt as 2D LTS in the USAF eff 6 Oct 49, w/rank fr 6 Oct 49, of the folg-named Distinguished Mil Grads of the Sr Div, ROTC. Appointees who, on dt of acceptance of this apmt, are on AD as comd offs, will remain asgd to curr orgn and sta. Appointees not on AD are ordered to AD in the USAF, eff on dt of acceptance of this apmt, and will remain at their present home addresses pending receipt of subq orders announcing initial dy asgmt. Offs not on AD are asgd for rec purposes only to 1133d USAF S/A Sq, 1130th USAF S/A Gp, Hq Comd, USAF, Naval Qrs \"K\", Columbia Pike, Arlington, Va, and will tg the CO thereof on dt of execution of oath of office as fols: \"I have this dt accepted apmt in the USAF, asgd your comd for rec purposes only—Name, Gr, AFSN.\" Delay in rptg to initial dy sta fr dt of acceptance in complying w/this order is for the convn of the Govt. ORC apmts will be termd on dt off executes oath of office. No tvl involved:\n\nName Regular AFSN\nKENNETH L STERNE 19814A\nDAVID W SHARP 19815A\nWILLIAM R STAPLETON 19816A\n\n19. Ea of the folg-named recently integrated 2D LTS, USAF (W) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (presently at address shown), is reld fr asgmt to 1130th USAF S/A Gp, Hq Comd, USAF, Naval Qrs \"K\", Columbia Pike, Arlington, Va, and is asgd as indicated. WP sta asgd fr present address. PCA. PCS. TDN. TPA. 5704500 060-204 P 534-02, 03, 07 S 99-999:\n\nName EDCSA Present address Asgd to\nHERMAN D ALLSHOUSE, 19712A 20 Oct 49 RD 1, Scottdale, Pa 3151st Elect Sta, AMC, Watson Labs, Red Bank, NJ, rptg NLT 20 Oct 49 for on-the-job-tng in MOS 6201\nPRENTICE E JONES, 19710A (FSC - 19) 25 Oct 49 200 Clark St, Malvern, Ark 5th Strat Recn Wg, SAC, Fairfield-Suisun AFB, Fairfield, Calif, rptg NLT 25 Oct 49 for on-the-job-tng in MOS 0600 (SAC Emerg Rqn, 19 Jul 49, Page 3, Line 1)\n\n20. Announcement is made of the prom of the folg-named USAF offs in the USAF UP Secs 502 and 509 of the Off Pers Act of 1947 to gr as indicated, w/dt of rank fr 6 Oct 49:\n\n1ST LT TO CAPT\nPAUL W GLEICHAUF, 12209A\nJEREMIAH M BOLAND, 12210A\n\n21. The VOSAF on 25 Jul 49 further asgg COL JOHN H JEFFUS, 1289A, USAF (presently asgd to Hq USAF), to dy in Office of DCS/O, Directorate of Plans and Oprs, are confrd.\n\n22. MAJ ELIZABETH JOHNSTON, AL80477, USAF, recently integrated off (W) (2120) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (presently at 2517 Mozart Place NW, Apt 310, Wash, DC), is reld fr asgmt to 1133d USAF S/A Sq, 1130th USAF S/A Gp, Hq Comd, USAF, Naval Qrs \"K\", Columbia Pike, Arlington, Va, and is asgd to Hq AMC, Wright-Patterson AFB, Dayton, Ohio, rptg 17 Oct 49. WP sta asgd fr Wash, DC. PCA. PCS. TDN. TPA. 5704500 060-204 P 534-02, 03, 07 S 99-999. EDCSA: 17 Oct 49.\n\n23. SMOP 5, SO 190, cs, relating to COL VINCENT M MILES, JR, 1452A, USAF, as reads \"rptg o/a 6 Oct,\" is amndd to read \"rptg o/a 20 Oct.\"\n\n5 (SO 195, 6 Oct 49)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"24. SMOP 19, SO 187, DAF, cs, relating to CAPT FRANCES B. CAFIDE, AL80499, USAF, as reads \"rptg 10 Oct 49,\" is amndd to read \"rptg 17 Oct 49.\"\n\nBY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE:\n\nOFFICIAL:\n\nL. L. JUDGE\nColonel, USAF\nAir Adjutant General\n\nHOYT S. VANDENBERG\nChief of Staff, United States Air Force\n\n(SO 195, 6 Oct 49)\n\n6\n\nU.S. Government Printing Office, 1949 J851879/34"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"For immediate delivery to ........ referred to in paragraph ........\nIf delivery cannot be made, return this order to Headquarters USAF, Air Adjutant General with statement of facts.\n\nSymbols: DP—By direction of the President\nTDN—Travel directed is necessary in the military service\nWP—Will proceed to\nTPA—Travel by officer or his dependents by privately owned automobile is auth\nVOSAF—Verbal orders Secretary of Air Force\n\nAD—Active duty\nEDCMR—Effective date of change on morning reports\nDDALV—Days' delay en route auth chargeable as lv\nDDALVP—Days' delay en route auth chargeable as lv provided it does not interfere with reporting on date specified and provided individual has sufficient accrued lv\nSMOP—So much of paragraph\n\nSPECIAL ORDERS NO. 195\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON, 6 October 1949\n\n1. MAJ GEN SAMUEL E ANDERSON, 92A, USAF, is granted lv of absence for 3 days, eff o/a 17 Oct 49.\n\n2. SMOP 2, SO 189, DAF, cs, relating to MAJ GEN WILLIAM D OLD, 52A, USAF, as reads \"eff o/a 15 Oct 49\" and \"EDCMR: 14 Oct 49,\" is amndd to read \"eff o/a 21 Oct 49,\" and \"EDCSA: 21 Oct 49.\"\n\n3. MAJ GEN WALTER E TODD, 361A, USAF, is granted lv of absence for 14 days, eff o/a 6 Oct 49.\n\n4. The VOSAF on 16 Sep 49 further asgg BRIG GEN RAYMOND C MAUDE, 269A, USAF (presently asgd to Hq USAF), to Office of DCS/O, Directorate of Rqmts, for dy as Asst Dir of Rqmts, are confrd.\n\n5. CAPT EMIL J MEYER, AO450048, USAFR(MSC) (presently asgd to 1130th USAF S/A Gp, Hq Comd, USAF, Naval Qrs \"K\", Columbia Pike, Arlington, Va), is reld fr dy sta at Med Sec, Columbus Distr Dep, Columbus, Ohio, and is asgd to dy sta at Med Sec, Schenectady Gen Dep, Schenectady, NY, rptg NLT 17 Oct 49. WP. PCS. TDN. TPA. 5704500 060-204 P 534-02, 03, 07 S 99-999.\n\n6. Ea of the folg-named offs is granted lv of absence for the no of days indicated, eff o/a the dt shown. All dts are 1949:\n\nName No of days Date\nCAPT MARGARET A BACCHUS, AL80031, USAF 2 12 Oct\nCOL WILLIAM BAILY, 808A, USAF 5 24 Oct\nMAJ LESTER T BERMAN, AO671215, USAFR 5 10 Oct\nCOL CHARLES G GOODRICH, 370A, USAF 3 17 Oct\nMAJ FREDERICK E HOWARD, AO421880, USAFR 5 17 Oct\nLT COL WILLIAM B KYES, 5064A, USAF 18 14 Oct\nMAJ WILLIAM L LUMPKIN, 5061A, USAF 5 10 Oct\nMAJ JOSEPH S MAGRATH, JR, 5443A, USAF 6 10 Oct\nCAPT WILLIAM L MANN, 13777A, USAF 19 10 Oct\nLT COL EDWARD I PRATT, JR, AO370287, USAFR 2 6 Oct\nMAJ BLISS P. SARGEANT, JR, 5347A, USAF 4 10 Oct\nCAPT CHARLES D SMITH, AO559368, USAFR 6 24 Oct\nCOL GEORGE H SPARHAWK, 774A, USAF 11 17 Oct\n\n7. 1ST LT BASIL A BROCKLES, JR, 16889A, USAF, is reld fr asgmt and dy at Perrin AFB, Tex, eff 11 Oct 49 on which dt the resig by BASIL A BROCKLES, JR, of his com as 1ST LT, USAF, is accepted by the President and he is hon dischd. Any temp coms held by him are termd.\n\n8. DP 1ST LT FREDERICK DOUGLAS PEAGLER, AO1906123 (3170) (for rptg purposes off's comp is USAFR(DC)) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (N) (YOB 1922) (Home address Fort Hill, New Milford, Conn) (Now at 3731 Jay St NE, Wash, DC), is aptd in the AFUS(DC) UP Sec 515, Pub Law 381-80th Congress and ordered to EAD in gr indicated; is asgd to 3345th Sta Med Sq, AFTRC,"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chanute AFB, Ill. Eff dt of and dt of rank 10 Oct 49. Off WP fr Wash, DC, on eff dt of dy and will rpt to CO, 3345th Sta Med Sq NLT 11 Oct 49. Oath of office to be executed on arr at dy sta. AD hereby ordered will be performed by off as an AFUS(DC) off and will not entitle off to the lump-sum pmt authd by Pub Law 97-77th Congress. Off quald for add benefits outlined in Title 1 of the Act of 5 Aug 47 (61 Stat, 776) 37 U.S.C. 101-b, beginning as of 10 Oct 49. Off's com in USAFR(DC) is not affected. TDN. PCS. 5704500 060-204 P 534-02, 03, 07 S 99-999.\n\n9. DP 1ST LT EARL RAMSEY CLAIBORNE, AO1906127 (3100) (for rptg purposes off's comp is USAFR(MC)) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (N) (YOB 1921) (AFSS - ES 9 Oct 50) (FSC - none) (Home address 240 W Battle St, Talladega, Ala) (Now at 4 Percy St, Charleston, SC), is apptd in the AFUS(MC) UP Sec 515, Pub Law 381-80th Congress and ordered to EAD in gr indicated; is asgd to Student Det, 3881st Sch Sq, USAF Sch of Avn Med, AU, Randolph AFB, Tex, to pursue crse 49 B in Avn Med Examiners. Eff dt of dy and dt of rank 10 Oct 49. Off WP sta fr Charleston, SC, on eff dt of dy and will rpt to CO, 3881st Sch Sq, NLT 12 Oct 49. Oath of office to be executed on arr at dy sta. AD hereby ordered will be performed by off as an AFUS(MC) off and will not entitle off to the lump-sum pmt authd by Pub Law 97-77th Congress. Off quald for add benefits outlined in Title 1 of the Act of 5 Aug 47 (61 Stat, 776) 37 U.S.C. 101-b, beginning as of 10 Oct 49. Off's com in USAFR(MC) is not affected. TDN. PCS. 5704500 060-205 P 535-02, 03, 07 S 99-999.\n\n10. COL EARL B YOUNG, 1517A, USAF (presently asgd to Hq USAF), is reld fr asgmt to Cen Con Gp, Contl US Def Planning Gp, and is asgd to dy in OSAF, for dy as Ex Asst to the Sp Consultant to the Secy, rptg o/a 7 Oct 49 at Room 1E458, The Pentagon, for adm purposes.\n\nPars 11 to 13 inclusive not used.\n\n14. Ea of the folg-named offs (W) (Non-rated - not on fly status) is reld fr asgmt and dy as indicated; and is asgd to 2225th AFORD, Cp Kilmer, Stelton, NJ, rptg NLT 17 Nov 49 for further asgmt to USAFE (USAFE Cable Rqn, 7 Sep 49). AFM 35-10 and WD Pamphlet 29-11 will be complied with. DDALVP in accordance w/AFM 35-10. Immunizations in accordance w/WD Pamphlet 29-11 will be accomplished im; equip will be secured at AFORD. Shipt of privately owned veh authd in accordance w/AFL 75-43. Mail will be addressed in accordance w/instrs to be issued at AFORD. WP. PCA. PCS. TDN. TPA provd off disposes of veh prior to rptg at AFORD. 5704500 060-203 P 533-02, 03, 07 S 99-999. EDCSA: 17 Nov 49:\n\nName Reld fr\nCAPT PATRICIA I BOYLE, AN993, USAF(AFNC) (3449) (FSC - none) 3415th Sta Med Gp, AFTRC, Lowry AFB, Denver, Colo\n1ST LT MARIE O EYMEN, AN760227, USAF(AFNC) (3449) (FSC - 7, 20 Dec 45) (Cat I - ES 31 Oct 49; will sign new AFSS im) Hq & Hq Sq, 3204th Sta Med Gp, APG, Eglin AFB, Fla\n1ST LT CATHERINE L GROVES, AN756190, USAFR(AFNC) (3449) (FSC - 19, 22 Sep 45) (Cat III - ES 31 Oct 51) 4th Med Gp, ConAC, Langley AFB, Va\n1ST LT VIOLA G HOLBERG, AN776775, USAFR(AFNC) (3449) (FSC - none) (Cat III - ES 31 Dec 51) 3415th Sta Med Sq, Lowry AFB, Denver, Colo\nCAPT MILDRED C KATICH, AN1357, USAF(AFNC) (3449) (FSC - 23, 18 Nov 45) 2788th Base Med Com, AMC, Olmsted AFB, Middletown, Pa\n1ST LT SARA F METTS, AN764869, USAFR(AFNC) (3449) (FSC - none) (Cat III - ES 31 Dec 51) 3415th Sta Med Gp, AFTRC, Lowry AFB, Denver, Colo\nCAPT ELSIE MORGAN, AN488, USAF(AFNC) (3443) (FSC - none) 3750th Sta Med Sq, AFTRC, Sheppard AFB, Tex\n1ST LT FRANCES E VAN DEVENTER, AN774116, USAFR(AFNC) (3449) (FSC - 18, 18 Jun 47) (Cat III - ES 31 Dec 51) 3310th Sta Med Sq, AFTRC, Scott AFB, Ill\nCAPT PATRICIA I WARD, AN726012, USAFR(AFNC) (3449) (FSC - none) (Cat III - ES 31 Dec 51) 314th Med Gp, ConAC, Smyrna AFB, Smyrna, Tenn\n\n(SO 195, 6 Oct 49) 2"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Armed Forces, Ft Lesley J McNair, Wash, DC. No tvl involved. PCA. EDCSA: 16 Oct 49:\n\nCURTIS M ANDERSON, 954A (4010) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 36, Jul 45)\nJOHN F BABCOCK, 967A (7314) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 12, 4 Jan 46)\nJASPER N BELL, 1163A (2162) (Sr Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 26, Mar 44)\nRALPH O BROWNFIELD, 399A (1013) (Sr Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 27, Oct 44)\nWESLEY S CALVERLEY, 1370A (4010) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 31, Mar 47)\nWILLIAM T CLAYTON, 941A (2260) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 23, Jun 45)\nJOHN R CRUME, JR, 319A (7010) (Non-rated - not on fly status)\nDONALD B DIEHL, 1779A (7050) (Comd Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 30, Dec 48)\nPAUL I DOTY, 827A (4902) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 30, Aug 49)\nRICHARD I DUGAN, 860A (1024) (Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 12, Nov 47)\nHOLLINGSWORTH F GREGORY, 496A (7050) (Sr Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 23, Dec 46)\nSAMUEL C GURNEY, JR, 1352A (2162) (Sr Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 24, Sep 45)\nCHARLES HEIM, 1033A (4823) (Non-rated - not on fly status)\nWILLIAM W HOLMES, 1044A (4010) (Sr Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 34, Jul 49)\nLLEWELLYN C HOWELL, 870A (7010) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 30, May 45)\nJAMES L JACKSON, 503A (4823) (Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 29, Apr 46)\nVICTOR H KING, 1018A (Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 19, 11 Jun 46)\nMARSHALL G LASSEK, 894A (4690) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 35)\nCHESTER G MARTZ, 958A (4010) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 31)\nJAMES E MAYBERRY, 908A (4010) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 37, 19 Sep 45)\nHOWARD M McCOY, 550A (7050) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 16, Oct 45)\nCHARLES K MOORE, 490A (7050) (Sr Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 30, Feb 48)\nJAMES E REILLY, 888A (7314) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 39, Mar 45)\nPHILIP S ROBBINS, 1029A (4010) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 41, Sep 45)\nELMER P ROSE, 343A (9310) (Comd Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 20, 8 Nov 45)\nEDWIN G SIMENSON, 627A (2520) (Comd Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 31, 21 Dec 44)\nWILLIAM P SLOAN, 422A (1013) (Comd Plt - on fly status)\nIRA D SNYDER, 854A (1013) (Sr Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 35, Sep 49)\nRICHARD STOLLE, 1100A (7050) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 35, Jun 49)\nWILLIAM R TAUBE, 1038A (4010) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 38, May 49)\nLLOYD A WALKER, JR, 1572A (4010) (Comd Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 15, 20 Mar 45)\nRICHARD C WELLER, 1146A (1013) (Sr Plt - not on fly status) (FSC - 24, Apr 45)\nFRANK M WILLIAMS, 1046A (4010) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 18, 31 Aug 45)\nRALPH I WILLIAMS, 1177A (4010) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 27, Jun 48)\nRICHARD H WISE, 939A (2010) (Comd Plt - on fly status) (FSC - 44, 28 Sep 47)\n\n17. Ea of the folg-named LT COLS, USAF (W), is reld fr asgmt to Student Det, Industrial College of the Armed Forces, Ft Lesley J McNair, Wash, DC, and is asgd to 3894th Sch Sq, AU, Maxwell AFB, Ala, with n/c in dy sta at Industrial College of the Armed Forces, Ft Lesley J McNair, Wash, DC. No tvl involved. PCA. EDCSA: 16 Oct 49:\n\nGEORGE K CRAIN, 1737A (4823) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 24, Mar 47)\nMAURICE M STONE, 2402A (4010) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 38, May 49)\nFRANK J DRITTLER, 2113A (7010) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 26, 3 Mar 47)\nALEXANDER S YOUNG, 988A (4960) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 38, 20 Jul 45)\n\nCLINTON D B SMITH, 1402A (2010) (Non-rated - not on fly status) (FSC - 21, Sep 43)\n\n(SO 195, 6 Oct 49) 4"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PO #48, Hq AMC dtd 25 July 49.\n\nOFFICIAL:\n\n[signature]\nVERNON M. SHERWOOD\nMajor, USAF\nChief, Flying Status Unit\nMilitary Personnel Division\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nOffrs Concerned (5)\nCO Concerned (4)\nHq USAF, AFPMP-10 (12)\nHq USAF, Air Adj Gen (3)\nMCI (1)\nMCATXR (12)\nTSWAO (6)\nMCAS (2)\nMCAMXC (2)\nMCAGXR (2)\nTSWBP-6 (12)\nFINKE-H (4)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\n\nPERSONNEL ORDERS)\nNO. 48) 25 July 1949\n\n1. Verbal orders of the Chief of Staff, USAF, issued on the date of acceptance of commission in the USAFR, which, under the provisions of AR 95-60, Par 4 of AFR 50-7, granted the aeronautical ratings indicated to the following-named officers, USAFR, who previously held the ratings, are hereby confirmed and made of record. Auth: Ltr Hq USAF, dtd 2 Sept 1948, subj: \"Flying Status of USAFR officers on Inactive Status.\"\n\nRank, Name, ASN Aeronautical Rating\nCAPT DANIEL T MURPHY, A0726811 Pilot\nCAPT JAMES D SPRALEY, A0714506 Pilot\n1ST LT ROBERT W STAFFORD, A0715402 Pilot\n\n2. Verbal orders of the Chief of Staff, USAF, issued on the date of acceptance of commission in the USAFR, which, under the provisions of Par 2, AR 35-1480 required the following-named officers, USAFR, who hold aeronautical ratings, to participate in regular and frequent aerial flights while on active duty with the USAFR or while actively participating in the reserve training program, are hereby confirmed and made of record. Auth: Ltr Hq USAF, dtd 2 Sept 1948, subj: \"Flying Status of USAFR Officers on Inactive Status.\"\n\nRank, Name, ASN Aeronautical Rating\nCAPT DANIEL T MURPHY, A0726811 Pilot\nCAPT JAMES D SPRALEY, A0714506 Pilot\n1ST LT ROBERT W STAFFORD, A0715402 Pilot\n\n3. The temporary suspension from flying status of 1ST LT VIRGIL C TUELL, JR, A0555228, USAF, effective 24 May 1949, issued by S. O. 37, Hq 3150th Engineering Test Sq, Robins Air Force Base, Georgia, dated 26 May 1949, is hereby CONFIRMED. Auth: AF Reg 35-16.\n\n4. The temporary suspension from flying status of COLONEL HOWARD M McCOY, A018054, USAF, effective 19 June 1949, issued by L. O. 2435, Hq Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, dated 22 June 1949, is hereby CONFIRMED. Auth: AF Reg 35-16.\n\n5. The revocation of temporary suspension from flying status of COLONEL HOWARD M McCOY, A018054, USAF, effective 22 July 1949, issued by L. O. 2948, Hq Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, dated 22 July 1949, is hereby CONFIRMED. Auth: AF Reg 35-16.\n\nBY COMMAND OF GENERAL McNARNEY:\n\nAF - OFFICERS BASIC 201\nInitials\nDate\n\nJ. M. BEVANS\nMajor General, USAF\nChief, Personnel and Administration"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Apr 7, 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Letter of Appreciation\n\nTO: Colonel H. M. McCoy\nChief, Intelligence Department\nHeadquarters, Air Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\n\n1. It is indeed a pleasure to transmit to you the attached copy of a letter of appreciation from the Director, Special Investigations, The Inspector General, United States Air Force.\n\n2. I wish to add my appreciation to that already expressed for the excellent cooperation and assistance rendered by you and personnel under your jurisdiction in connection with the OSI Training Program.\n\n3. It is desired that all personnel concerned, particularly Mr. Louis C. Gust, Mr. Guy B. Kidwell, II, and Mr. Earl A. Underhill be apprised of the correspondence and a copy thereof be made a matter of official record in their 201 file.\n\n4. A copy of this correspondence has been made a matter of official record in your 201 file.\n\n1 Incl Ltr fr USAF dtd 23 Mar 49 JOSEPH T. McNARNEY General, USAF Commanding"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n23 March 1949\n\nGeneral Joseph T. McNarney\nCommanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\n\nDear General McNarney:\n\n\t\tOn 11 March 1949, the first class of the Training School of the Office Special Investigations were graduated. During the course, important assistance was rendered by Colonel H. M. McCoy and Mr. Louis C. Gust of your headquarters. On 21 February 1949, Mr. Guy S. Kidwell, II and Mr. Earl A. Underhill of the Scientific Survey Office, Department of Intelligence, Headquarters Air Materiel Command, lectured to the class on \"Sound Equipment\" and \"Investigative Photography.\"\n\n\t\tI should like to express my deep appreciation for the valuable aid and cooperation given by your command. The assistance of the above-named personnel contributed materially to the OSI Training Program.\n\n\t\t\t\tSincerely,\n\n\n\t\tJOSEPH F. CARROLL\n\t\tBrigadier General, USAF\n\tDirector, Special Investigations\n\tThe Inspector General, USAF"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS\nCOUNTER INTELLIGENCE CORPS CENTER\nCamp Holabird, Baltimore 19, Maryland\n\nDec 29 1948\n\n201.22\n\nSUBJECT: Letter of Appreciation\n\nTHRU: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Field\n\nTO: Colonel H. M. McCoy, Jr.\nAir Materiel Technical Intelligence Section\nWright-Patterson Field\nDayton, Ohio\n\n1. It gives me great pleasure to convey my appreciation to you through your commanding officer for the demonstration you conducted at the CIC Center 3 December 1948, for CIC Detachment Commanders in conference from all parts of the world.\n\n2. Your contribution to this annual meeting was of intense interest to all. You, Mr. Lewis C. Gust and all your staff showed throughout the presentation an admirable grasp of the technical advancements in your field of research. The ingenuity of your agency and the cooperative spirit evidenced in imparting your knowledge is a tribute not only to your organization but reflects credit to the progressive and scientific outlook of Armed Forces as a whole.\n\n\t\t\t/s/ E. A. Zundel\n\t\t\t/t/ E. A. ZUNDEL\n\t\tBrigadier General, USA\n\t\t\tCommanding\n\nC\nO\nP\nY"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SPECIAL ORDERS)\nNO. 66)\tDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\n\tHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\n\tWASHINGTON, 2 April 1948\n\nEXTRACT\n\n12. Announcement is made of the promotion of the following named officers in the United States Air Force under the provisions of sections 502 and 510 of the Officer Personnel Act of 1947, with grade and date of rank as indicated. Those officers whose names are preceded by the symbol (*) are subject to an examination required by law:\n\nTO BE COL WITH RANK FROM 2 APRIL 1948\n\n*Colonel Frank Denis Hackett, A010040, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Robert Victor Ignico, A010491, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Arthur William Vanaman, A010506, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Clarence Herbert Welch, A010571, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel George Godfrey Lundberg, A010579, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Frank Martyn Paul, A010586, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\n*Brigadier General John Gordon Williams, A010697, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Albert Brown Pitts, A010703, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel James Atwater Woodruff, A011041, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Arthur Ignatius Ennis, A011051, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Clarence Prescott Talbot, A011112, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel James Milligan Gillespie, A011186, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel David Robert Stinson, A011266, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Joseph Theodore Morris, A011267, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Warren Arthur Maxwell, A011303, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Paul Edmund Burrows, A011331, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Charles Adam Horn, A011473, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel George William Goddard, A011514, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Thomas Herbert Chapman, A011520, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\n\n-1-"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Brigadier General Donald Frank Stace, A012708, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nMajor General James Millikin Bevans, A014723, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Paul Hanes Kemmer, A014732, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Homer Wilbur Ferguson, A014857, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Donald Fowler Fritch, A014835, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel John Sharpe Griffith, A014852, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Gilbert Hayden, A014998, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel Russell J Minty, A015201, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nColonel James Francis Joseph Early, A015212, Air Force of the United States (lieutenant colonel, United States Air Force).\nLieutenant Colonel Joseph Harold Hicks, A015252, United States Air Force.\nColonel Oscar Carl Maier, A016096, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Joseph Cyril Augustin Denniston, A016177, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Shelton Ezra Prudhomme, A016427, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Darr Hayes Alkire, A016639, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Signa Allen Gilkey, A016685, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel William Tell Hefley, A017079, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nBrigadier General Samuel Robert Brentnall, A017132, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel George Ferrow Smith, A017258, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nBrigadier General Robert Kinder Taylor, A017309, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel James Wilson Brown, Junior, A017316, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel William Columbus Sams, A017317, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Albert George Hewitt, A029021, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Ralph Orville Brownfield, A017383, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Hansford Wesley Pennington, A017417, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Albert Boyd, A017455, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nBrigadier General William Maurice Morgan, A017485, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Colonel Frederick Rodgers Dent, Junior, A017504, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Richard David Wentworth, A017527, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Thomas Ludwell Bryan, Junior, A017541, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Philip Graul, A017557, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\n*Colonel Marshall Stanley Roth, A 017572, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nBrigadier General Thomas Benton McDonald A017694, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nBrigadier General Donald Leander Putt, A017875, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Floyd Bernard Wood, A017887, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel James Leroy Jackson, A017892, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Howard Monroe McCoy, A018054, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Thetus Cavce Odom, A018075, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nBrigadier General Carl Amandus Brandt, A018171, Air Force of the United States (major, United States Air Force).\nColonel Marcellus Duffy, A018373, Air Force of the United States (captain, United States Air Force).\nBrigadier General John Clarence Gordon, A018571, Air Force of the United States (captain, United States Air Force).\nColonel John Clifford McCawley, A018739, Air Force of the United States (captain, United States Air Force).\nColonel John Reynolds Sutherland, A018764, Air Force of the United States (captain, United States Air Force).\nColonel Andrew Meulenberg, A018827, Air Force of the United States (captain, United States Air Force).\nColonel Samuel Abner Mundell, A019206, Air Force of the United States (captain, United States Air Force).\n\nBY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE:\n\nCARL SPAATZ\nChief of Staff, United States Air Force\n\nOFFICIAL:\n\nH. G. CULTON\nColonel, USAF\nAir Adjutant General\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR UNIVERSITY\nMaxwell Field, Alabama\n\n23 May 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Presentation by Colonel H. M. McCoy - 018054\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright Field, Ohio\n\n\n1. The Air University desires to express its sincere appreciation to Colonel H. M. McCoy for coming here on 28 April and addressing the faculty and students of the Air Command and Staff School on the subject of \"Foreign Research and Development.\"\n\n2. Colonel McCoy's excellent lecture was effectively illustrated through the use of well-selected motion pictures which added immeasurably to the students' comprehension of his subject. In addition to his formal presentation, Colonel McCoy very kindly consented to an extension of his presentation in order to permit a period of impromptu questions by the students from which they derived inestimable benefit.\n\n3. The Commandant, faculty and students of the Air Command and Staff School join me in this expression of gratitude and appreciation for Colonel McCoy's outstanding contribution to our educational mission.\n\nMUIR S. FAIRCHILD\nMajor General, U. S. Army\nCommanding\n\nFILE SECTION I\nEFFICIENCY FILES\nOPNS. SEC. PIB\nDATE 6-4-47\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Basic ltr fr Air University, Maxwell Fld, Alabama, dtd 23 May 47, to CG AMC, Subj: \"Presentation by Colonel H. M. McCoy\"\n\nAMC 201 - McCOY, H. M. (O) 1st Ind\n\nHQ, AMC, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. 5 Jun 1947\n\nTO: Colonel H. M. McCoy, Deputy Commanding General, Intelligence (T-2), Air Materiel Command, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n\nIt is with great pleasure that I add my appreciation for your recent address to the students and faculty of the Air University on the subject \"Foreign Research and Development\".\n\nN. F. TWINING\nLieutenant General, USA\nCommanding\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AG/cv/4406\n\nAG 201-McCoy, Howard M. 25, D. C. 15 May 1944.\n(12 May 44)PO-P\n\nPromotion.\n\nCommanding General,\nArmy Air Forces,\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nAttention: Assistant Chief of Air Staff, Personnel.\n\n1. Reference is made to letter, your headquarters, dated 12 May 1944, which transmits letter of recommendation for the promotion of Colonel Howard Monroe McCoy, 018054, Air Corps, to the grade of colonel, Army of the United States.\n\n2. The Secretary of War's Personnel Board has not favorably considered the recommendation for the promotion of Colonel McCoy.\n\nBy order of the Secretary of War:\n\nJ. A. Grotenrath\nAdjutant General.\n\nACTION TAKEN\nOFF. BRANCH. AGO\nOff. Initials\nPhone Br. 74091\nRoom: 4406\nDate: 15 May 44\n\nFILE\nOfficers' Branch\nPromotion Section\nRm. 4406\n12 MAY 1944"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENGINEERING DIVISION\n(Unit)\n\nAAF Materiel Command, Wright Field\n(Address)\n\nSUBJECT: Promotion of Officer.\n\nTO: Commanding General, Army Air Forces (Thru Channels).\n(AR 605-12)\n\n1. Under the provision of (War Department Circular 35-13) and existing War Department policies, it is recommended that the following named officer be promoted as indicated.\n\na. McCoy Howard Monroe 0-18054\n(Surname) (First name) (Middle name) (Serial Number)\n\nb. 12 June 1930 2nd Lieutenant\n(Date of Entry on Extended Active Duty) (Grade)\n\nc. Captain 12 June 1940\n(Permanent Grade) (Date of Order Promoting to Permanent Grade)\n\nd. Lt. Colonel 10 Dec. 1942 Colonel 6-22-42\n(Grade Held AUS) (Date of Order) (Grade Held AUS(AC)) (Date of Order)\n\ne. Air Corps\n(Arm, Service or Agency)\n\nf. 36 4 December 1907 13 years 10 months\n(Age) (Date of Birth) (Total Active Commissioned Service)\n\ng. Colonel AUS MAY 12 1944 Chief, Propeller Laboratory Engr.Div. 1943\n(Grade to Which Recommended) (Duty Assignment) (T/O Number)\n\nh. Senior Pilot\n(Pilot Rating) (Pilot Active) (Pilot Inactive)\n\n2. This officer has held his present grade in AUS for 16 months. By outstanding performance of duty for 16 months, he has clearly demonstrated his fitness for the responsibilities and duties of the position and grade herewith recommended. His service during this period is recorded as follows:\n\na. Chief, Propeller Lab. Wright Field 10 Dec. 42 to date EXCELLENT\n(Duty Assignment) (Station) (Period) (Manner of Performance)\n\nb. (Duty Assignment) (Station) (Period) (Manner of Performance)\n\nc. (Duty Assignment) (Station) (Period) (Manner of Performance)\n\n3-7017, AF"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. The relative rank of this officer has been considered and to the best of my knowledge and belief, he is the best fitted officer available in this command for the grade and position for which promotion is recommended.\n\n4. A position vacancy exists in accordance with approved Tables of Organization or Allotment for this unit and the filling of such vacancy by the promotion of this officer, together with all previous recommendations not acted upon, will not operate to exceed the number of position vacancies that are authorized to be filled by promotions under Tables of Organization No. ____ or Allotment Engr. Div. 1943.\n\nThis officer has clearly demonstrated his qualifications for the higher grade for a period of at least three months immediately prior to recommendation for his promotion, by actual occupation of a position and performance of duties appropriate to the grade and corresponding to the duties of the position for which his promotion is recommended.\n\nIncl.\nIncl. No. 1 - Personal History Statement\n\nF. O. CARROLL, Brig. Gen., U.S.A.,\n(Typed Name)\n\nChief, Engineering Division\nCOMMANDING (Grade and Arm or Service)\n\n210.2 1st Ind PEL/gem/50\nEngineering Division, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. 11 April 1944.\n\nTo: Commanding General, Materiel Command, Wright Field.\n\n1. Approved.\n\n2. The relative rank of this officer has been considered and to the best of my knowledge and belief, he is the best fitted officer available in this command for the grade and position for which promotion is recommended.\n\n3. A position vacancy exists in accordance with approved Tables of Organization or Allotment for this unit and the filling of such vacancy by the promotion of this officer, together with all previous recommendations not acted upon, will not operate to exceed the number of position vacancies that are authorized to be filled by promotions.\n\nThis officer has clearly demonstrated his qualifications for the higher grade for a period of at least three months immediately prior to recommendation for his promotion, by actual occupation of a position and performance of duties appropriate to the grade and corresponding to the duties of the position for which his promotion is recommended.\n\nF. O. CARROLL, Brig. Gen., U.S.A.,\n(Typed Name)\n\nChief, Engineering Division.\nCOMMANDING (Grade and Arm or Service)\n\n** When recommendation concerns promotion of 2nd Lt. to 1st Lieut. AUS, complete Paragraph 5 as follows, if applicable:\n\"The officer concerned is actually on duty with troop units.\"\n\n3-7017, AF"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ARMY AIR FORCES\nPERSONAL HISTORY STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONED OFFICER\nDATE\n11 April 1944\nSURNAME\nMcCOY\nFIRST NAME\nHOWARD\nMIDDLE INITIAL\nM.\nGRADE\nCol.\nARM, SERVICE OR AGENCY\nAir Corps (RA)\nTOTAL MILITARY SERVICE TO DATE\nCOMMISSIONED\nORIGINAL APPOINTMENT\nDATES OF ALL PRIOR ACTIVE DUTY\nPILOT RATING (INDICATE IF NONE)\nSenior Pilot\nDATE\n6-12-30\nGRADE\n2nd Lt.\nNONE\nPILOT ACTIVE (YES OR NO)\nYes\nPILOT INACTIVE (YES OR NO)\nNo\nDATES OF PROMOTION TO GRADES\n1st LT. AUS\n1st LT.AUS(AC)\nCAPT. AUS\nCAPT. AUS(AC)\nMAJOR AUS\nMAJOR AUS\nLT. COL. AUS\nLT.COL.AUS(AC)\nCOL. AUS (AC)\n8-1-35\n6-12-40\n2-1-42\n6-30-41\n12-10-42\n1-5-42\n3-1-42\nENLISTED (INDICATE IF NONE)\nNONE\nSPECIAL SERVICE SCHOOLS AND BRANCH SCHOOLS, ETC. (INDICATE IF NONE)\nUS.M.A. 1930\nA.C. Primary Flying School 1931\nA.C. Tactical School 1940\nA.C. Advanced Flying School 1931\nA.C. Engr. Sch. 1936\nROTC TRAINING, ETC. (INDICATE IF NONE)\nNONE\nCIVILIAN BACKGROUND\nEDUCATION (ENCIRCLE)\nHIGH SCHOOL 1 2 3 4\nUNIVERSITY 1 2 3 4\nPOST GRADUATE 1 2\nSPECIALIZED (TECHNICAL, ETC.) 1 2 3 4\nOTHER COURSES NOT SHOWN ABOVE\nEXPERIENCE - (USE REVERSE IF MORE SPACE IS NEEDED)\nStudent (Regular Army Officer)\nUNUSUAL CONDITIONS CONCERNING RECOMMENDATION FOR PROMOTION\nTYPED NAME\nPaul E. Lienesch\nSIGNATURE OF PERSONNEL OFFICER\nGRADE\n1st Lt.\nARM, SERVICE OR AGENCY\nAir Corps\n3-7016, AF"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"210.2 Promotion of Officer 2nd Ind.\nHq., AAF Materiel Command, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio, 2 May 1944.\nTo: Commanding General, AAF, Washington 25, D.C. Attention: AAF Promotion Board.\n1. Approved.\n2. The inclosed recommendation for promotion for Colonel Howard Monroe McCoy, O-18054, on duty with the Materiel Command, Army Air Forces, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio, is certified to conform with AR 605-12 and will not affect the vacancies existing in the various grades authorized this station as this officer holds a higher grade under the provisions of AR 605-12 and AAF Regulation No. 35-18, AUS(AC).\n3. The relative rank of this officer has been considered and to the best of my knowledge and belief, he is the best fitted officer available in this command for the grade and position for which promotion is recommended.\n4. This officer has clearly demonstrated his qualifications for the higher grade for a period of at least three months by actual occupation of a position and performance of duties appropriate to the grade and corresponding to the duties of the position for which his promotion is recommended.\nCHAS. E. BRANSHAW,\nMajor General, U.S.A.,\nCommanding.\n1 Incl: n/c - H. M. McCoy.\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WAR DEPARTMENT\nOFFICE OF THE ADJUTANT GENERAL\nPROMOTION SECTION, OFFICERS' BRANCH\n(TELEPHONE EXTENSIONS: 79091 - 79718)\nJAG/med/4406\nFile No. AG 201 McCoy, Howard M. (11 Apr 44)PO-P\nDate 13 May 1944\nSUBJECT: PROMOTION\nComponents: Reg. Army: Res.: AUS: NGUS\nTo: THE SECRETARY OF WAR'S PERSONNEL BOARD, THRU: RECORDER (ROOM 2038, MUNITIONS BLDG.)\nREMARKS:\n(Recommendation for the temporary promotion in the AUS, of the following named officer)\nTO COLONEL\nDATE LAST PROMOTED\nLt. Col, Howard Monroe McCoy, O18054, AC\nTemp Lt. Col. AUS, 10 Dec 1942\nTemp Col. AUS-AC, 22 June 1942\nRESUBMITTED\n(Officer in charge)\nTo: Officer in charge, Promotion Section, Officers' Branch, A.G.O. (Room 1650, Munitions Building)\n13 May 1944.\nThe recommendation for the promotion of Lieutenant Colonel Howard Monroe McCoy to the grade of Colonel, A.U.S., is not favorably considered.\nFor the President, THE SECRETARY OF WAR'S PERSONNEL BOARD:\nLt. Col. C. D. BOWEN, A.G.D., Recorder.\n24-69517-M-5M"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS, ARMY AIR FORCES\nWASHINGTON\n12 May 1944\nSUBJECT: Promotion\nTO: The Adjutant General\n1. In accordance with the provisions of Army Regulation 605-12, dated 3 February 1944, the attached recommendations for promotion are submitted for Regular Army Officers.\n2. The promotion of these officers and others previously recommended, on which final action has not been reported by The Adjutant General, will not exceed the total number of authorized grades in that arm or service under the jurisdiction of this headquarters.\n3. These officers have clearly demonstrated their qualifications for the higher grade for a period of at least three months by actual occupation of a position and performance of duties appropriate to the grade and corresponding to the duties of the position for which promotion is recommended.\n4. No Colonel or Lt Colonels of the appropriate arm or service on the strength return of this command, in pools or other assignments, are surplus or otherwise available for assignment to the position for which promotion is recommended.\nFor the Commanding General, Army Air Forces.\n/s/ Pardoe Martin\nColonel, Air Corps\nActing President, AAF Promotion Board\n2 Incls\nRecoms for pro of:\nIncl 1. Col Mark E. Bradley Jr, O-18066\nIncl 2. Col Howard M McCoy, O-18054"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JAG/cc/4406\n\nAG 201-McCoy, Howard M. 25, D. C. 29 February 1944.\n(28 Feb 44)PO-P\n\nPromotion.\n\n\nCommanding General,\n Army Air Forces,\n Washington 25, D. C.\n\nAttention: Assistant Chief of Air Staff, Personnel.\n\n\n 1. Reference is made to letter, your headquarters, dated 28 February 1944, which transmits letter of recommendation for the promotion of Colonel Howard Monroe McCoy, O18054, Air Corps, to the grade of colonel, Army of the United States.\n\n 2. The Secretary of War's Personnel Board has not favorably considered the recommendation for the promotion of Colonel McCoy. The promotion of an officer over the heads of so many of his seniors should be more strongly justified.\n\n By order of the Secretary of War:\n\n\n Adjutant General."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nSymbols: AUS—Army of the United States\n DP—By direction of the President\n AD—Active Duty.\n AAF—Army Air Forces.\nSpecial Orders ) WAR DEPARTMENT,\nNo. 336 ) Washington, 10 Dec, 1942\n\nEXTRACT\n\nPar. 11. Announcement is made of the temp promotion of the following-named officers to the grades indicated in the AUS with rank fr date of this order under the provisions of sec 127a NDA as amended:\n\nMajor to Lt. Col.\n\nHoward Monroe McCoy O18054 AC (Temp Lt.Col.AC & Col.AUS-AC)\n\nBy order of the Secretary of War:\n\nRobert H. Dunlop\n\nOfficial:\nJ. A. ULIO,\nMajor General,\nThe Adjutant General.\n\nG. C. MARSHALL,\nChief of Staff."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WAR DEPARTMENT\nOFFICE OF THE ADJUTANT GENERAL\nPROMOTION SECTION, OFFICERS' BRANCH\n(TELEPHONE EXTENSIONS: 79091 - 79718) JAG/aes/4406\n\nFile No. AG 201-McCoy, Howard M. Date 28 Feb 44\n(12 Dec 43)PO-P\nSUBJECT: PROMOTION Components: Reg. Army: Res.: AUS: NGUS\n\nTo: THE SECRETARY OF WAR'S PERSONNEL BOARD, THRU: RECORDER (ROOM 2038, MUNITIONS BLDG.)\n\nREMARKS:\n(Recommendation for the temporary promotion in the AUS, of the following named officer)\n\nTO COLONEL\nLt. Col Howard Monroe McCoy, O 18054, AC DATE LAST PROMOTED\n Temp Lt Col AUS 10 Dec 1942\n Temp Col AUS-AC 22 June 1942\n\n(Officer in charge)\n\nTO: Officer in charge,\nPromotion Section, Officers' Branch, A.G.O.\n(Room 1650, Munitions Building) 29 February 1944.\n\n The recommendation for the promotion of Lieutenant Colonel Howard Monroe McCoy to the grade of Colonel, A.U.S., is not favorably considered. The promotion of an officer over the heads of so many of his seniors should be more strongly justified.\n\nFor the President, THE SECRETARY OF WAR'S PERSONNEL BOARD:\n\nC. D. BOWEN,\nLt. Col., A.G.D., Recorder.\n\n24-37895"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"See instructions on reverse side\n\nOATH OF OFFICE\nARMY OF THE UNITED STATES\n(Temporary)\n\nINDICATE PERMANENT STATUS BY CHECK MARK\nRegular Army x\nNational Guard, U. S.\nOfficers' Reserve Corps\n\nI, HOWARD M. McCOY (018054) Air Corps, having been appointed temporarily a Colonel in the Army of the United States, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter: SO HELP ME GOD.\n\n(All names in full) (Grade)\n\nHoward M. McCoy\n(Signature) (Grade and organization or arm or service)\nHOWARD M. McCOY, Colonel, AUS (AC)\n\nSworn to and subscribed before me, at Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio this 24th day of June, 1942.\n\nW. D. SWANK,\nCaptain, Army Air Forces,\nActing Adjutant.\n\nRETURN THROUGH CHANNELS\n\nFINGERPRINTS—Right Hand\n(See AR 345-120)\n1. THUMB 2. INDEX 3. MIDDLE 4. RING 5. LITTLE\n\n16—18119\n\nNOTED, REGISTER UNIT\nMISC. 201 - FILE\nInitials ......Date 7-21-42\n\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 0337-T\nOctober 10, 1940"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS\n\nThis form will be executed in full upon the acceptance of a commission or appointment in the Army of the United States. Typewriter will be used, if available.\n\nFOR THE EXECUTION OF THE OATH OF OFFICE\n\n1. Whenever any person is elected or appointed to an office of honor or trust under the Government of the United States, he is required, before entering upon the duties of his office, to take and subscribe the oath prescribed by section 1757, Revised Statutes.\n\n2. Oaths of office of Army officers, nurses, and warrant officers should be taken before some civil officer who is authorized by the laws of the United States or by the local municipal law to administer oaths; or before a judge advocate or acting judge advocate, the president of a general or special court martial, a summary court martial, the judge advocate, or assistant judge advocate of a general or special court martial, or the adjutant of a command. Officers of the Army other than those specified are not authorized by law to administer such oaths.\n\n3. Confirmation by the Senate does not of itself continue in force a recess appointment and commission. A new and distinct appointment after confirmation is necessary and a new oath of office must be executed for such appointment.\n\n4. Immediately on receipt of a commission or notification of appointment the appointee will, in case of acceptance of the commission or appointment, return to The Adjutant General the oath of office on this form properly filled in, subscribed, and attested. In case of nonacceptance, the commission or notification of appointment will be returned to The Adjutant General by a letter indicating the fact of such nonacceptance.\n\n16—18119 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nFor immediate delivery to.........................................................\nreferred to in par. ..................... or prompt return to A. G. O., W. D.\n\nSymbols: DP—By direction of the President\nTDN—Travel directed is necessary in military service\nWP—Will proceed to\nTPA—Travel by officer or his dependents by privately owned automobile is authorized. DS for officer's travel is authorized, par. 1 g, AR 605-180\nAD—Active duty\nSection I—Army of the United States.\nSection II—Army Specialist Corps.\n\nSPECIAL ORDERS No. 165\nWAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, 22 June, 1942.\n\nSECTION I\n\n1. Announcement is made of the asgmt of each of the following-named general officers:\nLT GEN JOSEPH T. McNARNEY, 03804 GSC Deputy C of S WD, Washington, DC.\nLT GEN DELOS C. EMMONS 02617 USA CG, Hawaiian Dept.\nMAJ GEN RALPH ROYCE 03731 USA unannounced overseas sta.\nBRIG GEN EDWIN S. PERRIN 018136 USA unannounced overseas sta.\nBRIG GEN ALBERT L. SNEED 02403 USA unannounced overseas sta.\nBRIG GEN NATHAN F. TWINING 012366 USA Hq AAF, Washington, DC.\n[AG 210.311 (19 June 42).]\n\n2. BRIG GEN JAMES K. CRAIN 01915 USA is reld fr asgmt and duty in the Office C of Ord, Washington, DC, eff about 25 June 1942 is then asgd to comd the San Antonio Ars, San Antonio, Tex. WP that sta and assume comd and report by letter to the C of Ord, Washington, DC. TDN. FD 31 P-02 A 0425-23 and QM 100 P-01, 03, 07, 08 A 0500-23. TPA. [AG 210.312 Ord (17 June 42).]\n\n3. Announcement is made of the temp promotion of the following-named officers to the grades indicated in the AUS AC with rank fr 1 Mar 1942 under the provisions of Public Law 455 77th Congress approved 16 Feb 1942:\n\nLT COL TO COL\nHERBERT KENNETH BAISLEY 016392 AC\nERNEST KEELING WARBURTON 017401 AC\nROGER VINCENT WILLIAMS 017406 AC\nBENJAMIN SCOVILL KELSEY 017476 AC\nLEONARD FRANKLIN HARMAN 017479 AC\nWILLIAM MAURICE MORGAN 017485 AC\nFREDERICK RODGERS DENT, JR. 017504 AC\nMARSHALL STANLEY ROTH 017572 AC\nRUDOLPH FINK 017575 AC\nDONALD JOHN KEIRN 017591 AC\nDANIEL CAMPBELL DOUBLEDAY 017702 AC\nPEARL HARVEY ROBEY 017722 AC\nGEORGE ELSTON PRICE 017843 AC\nCHARLES KENNETH MOORE 017867 AC\nDONALD LEANDER PUTT 017875 AC\nMERRILL DAVIS BURNSIDE 017878 AC\n[A. G. 210.2 (22 June 42).]\nHOLLINGSWORTH FRANKLIN GREGORY 017879 AC\nTHOMAS LAWSON THURLOW 017896 AC\nDANIEL BECKETT WHITE 017924 AC\nHERBERT HENRY TELLMAN 017953 AC\nEDWIN WILLIAM RAWLINGS 018005 AC\nRALPH POWELL SWOFFORD, JR. 018026 AC\nHOWARD MONROE McCOY 018054 AC\nMARK EDWARD BRADLEY, JR. 18066 AC\nDOUGLAS MITCHELL KILPATRICK 018068 AC\nMORRIS JOHN LEE 018099 AC\nDAVID HODGE BAKER 018120 AC\nNEAL EDWIN AUSMAN 018137 AC\nWILLIAM DOLE ECKERT 018147 AC\nCARL AMANDUS BRANDT 018171 AC\nROBERT EDWARD LEE CHOATE 017433 AC\nLEWIS R. PARKER 017483 AC\n\n4. Announcement is made of the temp promotion of the following-named officers to the grades indicated in the AUS with rank fr 22 June 1942 under the provisions of sec 127a NDA as amended:\n\nLT COL TO COL\nRANDOLPH RUSSELL 06890 Cav\nJOHN FRANCIS ROEHM 07218 FA\n[S. O. 165, 22 June, 1942]\n200153—42—1"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MAJ TO LT COL\nWALTER DUVAL WEBB, JR. 014701 FA\nROY JACOB HERTE 016516 Inf\n\nCAPT TO MAJ\nLeROY BARTLETT, JR. 018032 CE\nEDGAR ALLAN CLARKE 019815 FA\nEWING CHASE JOHNSON 019851 SC\nJOHN FOSTER RHOADES 019875 Cav\nJOHN EIDELL SLAUGHTER 016921 FA\nJOSEPH GRAY DUNCAN 3D 021227 Inf\nCHARLES JOSEPH DENHOLM 021293 Inf\nJOHN THOMAS CORLEY 021325 Inf\nCHARLES PETER STONE 021376 Inf\n\n1ST LT TO CAPT\nGLEN S. WATERMAN 022239 SC\nWILLIAM McMILLAN KNOWLES 022855 AC (temp Maj AUS-AC)\nELLIOTT POWELL RIGSBY 022886 MAC\nTHOMAS DUVALL QUAID 022919 CE\nBRYCE FREDERIC DENNO 023161 Inf\nWILLIAM BENJAMIN WRIGHT 3D 023168 AC\nROLLIN MURRAY WININGHAM 023369 AC (temp Maj AUS-AC)\nWALTER JOHN WAGNER 023509 AC (temp Capt AUS-AC)\nJOHN LEWIS ZOECKLER 023510 AC (temp Maj AUS-AC)\nCARL WILLIAM PLITT 024452 Inf\n\n2D LT TO 1ST LT\nMALCOLM CORWIN JOHNSON 023794 CAC\nALBERT HOWELL SNIDER 023878 AC\nGERARD ANTHONY LAROCCA 023948 CAC\nLINTON SINCLAIR BOATWRIGHT 023968 FA\n[AG 210.2 (22 June 42).]\nPAUL EDGAR PIGUE 023990 CAC\nEDGAR CLAYTON BOGGS 024060 Inf\nELMER HUGO ALMQUIST, JR. 024228 FA\n\n5. The following temp promotions on 31 Mar 1942 to the grades indicated in the AUS with rank fr 30 Mar 1942 under the provisions of sec 127a NDA as amended are hereby confirmed.\n\nLT COL TO COL\nALBERT GORDON MATTHEWS 09301 CE\n\nMAJ TO LT COL\nWILLIAM HUNT MILLS 016376 CE\n\nCAPT TO MAJ\nANDREW DAVIS CHAFFIN, JR. 020153 CE\nDAVID BENNETT PARKER 020571 CE\nGEORGE HENRY WALKER 020617 CE\n\n1ST LT TO CAPT\nHARRY NATHAN BRANDON 021754 AC (temp capt AUS-AC)\nHAROLD NEWT CHAFFIN 022469 AC\n[AG 210.2 (31 Mar 42).]\nJAMES REMBERT DuBOSE, JR. 021585 AC\nJOHN ALBERT ROUSE 022472 AC (temp capt AUS-AC)\n\n6. Announcement is made of the temp promotion of the following-named officers to the grades indicated in their respective services AUS with rank fr 22 June 1942 under the provisions of sec 127a NDA as amended:\n\nLT COL TO COL MC\nPERCY ELISHA DUGGINS 04144\nEDGAR SWIFT LINTHICUM 04317\n\nCAPT TO MAJ MC\nHORACE CRAIG GIBSON 020568\n\nCAPT TO MAJ CH\nSTANISLAUS JOSEPH RYCZEK 019344 USA\n[AG 210.2 (22 June 42).]\n\n7. The following temp promotions on 27 Feb 1942 to the grades indicated in the AUS with rank fr 26 Feb 1942 under the provisions of sec 127a NDA as amended are hereby confirmed:\n\nLT COL TO COL\nGEOFFREY GALWEY 05753 Cav\n\nMAJ TO LT COL\nGEORGE EDWIN DIETZ 018500 QMC\n[S. O. 165, 22 June, 1942]"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"See instructions on reverse side\n\nExecute and return without delay direct to The Adjutant General\n\nOATH OF OFFICE\nARMY OF THE UNITED STATES (Temporary)\n\nINDICATE PERMANENT STATUS BY CHECK MARK\nRegular Army ✓\nNational Guard, U. S.\nOfficers' Reserve Corps\n\nI, HOWARD M. McCOY (O-18054) (All names in full), having been appointed temporarily a Major (Grade) in the Army of the United States, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter: SO HELP ME GOD.\n\nHoward M. McCoy (Signature)\nHOWARD M. McCOY, Major, Army of U.S. (Grade and organization or arm or service)\n\nSworn to and subscribed before me, at Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio this 16th day of April, 1942.\nW. W. WOOD, Major, Air Corps, Adjutant.\n\nFINGERPRINTS—Right Hand (See AR 345-120)\nFinger Prints in 201 File\n1. THUMB 2. INDEX 3. MIDDLE 4. RING 5. LITTLE\n\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 0337-T October 10, 1940\n\nNoted in Comm. Group. Schwab/Aff 650 4-20-42\nNOTED, REGISTER UNIT MISC. 201 - FILE Initials ... Date 5-27-42"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS\n\nThis form will be executed in full upon the acceptance of a commission or appointment in the Army of the United States. Typewriter will be used, if available.\n\nFOR THE EXECUTION OF THE OATH OF OFFICE\n\n1. Whenever any person is elected or appointed to an office of honor or trust under the Government of the United States, he is required, before entering upon the duties of his office, to take and subscribe the oath prescribed by section 1757, Revised Statutes.\n\n2. Oaths of office of Army officers, nurses, and warrant officers should be taken before some civil officer who is authorized by the laws of the United States or by the local municipal law to administer oaths; or before a judge advocate or acting judge advocate, the president of a general or special court martial, a summary court martial, the judge advocate, or assistant judge advocate of a general or special court martial, or the adjutant of a command. Officers of the Army other than those specified are not authorized by law to administer such oaths.\n\n3. Confirmation by the Senate does not of itself continue in force a recess appointment and commission. A new and distinct appointment after confirmation is necessary and a new oath of office must be executed for such appointment.\n\n4. Immediately on receipt of a commission or notification of appointment the appointee will, in case of acceptance of the commission or appointment, return to The Adjutant General the oath of office on this form properly filled in, subscribed, and attested. In case of nonacceptance, the commission or notification of appointment will be returned to The Adjutant General by a letter indicating the fact of such nonacceptance.\n\n16—18119 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SRG/al/1650\n\nAG 201-McCoy, Howard M. (4-8-42)OP April 8, 1942.\n\nTemporary appointment, Army of the United States.\n\nLt. Col. Howard M. McCoy, A.C., Headquarters, Material Division, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n\n1. The President, on this date, promoted you, temporarily, a major in the Army of the United States, under the provisions of Section 127a, National Defense Act, as amended, with rank from February 1, 1942.\n\n2. It is requested that you execute the required oath of office on the form provided herewith, W.D., A.G.O. Form 0337-T, and return it without delay directly to this office.\n\n3. Commissions issued to commissioned personnel as a result of temporary promotion in the Army of the United States have been discontinued for the period of the War.\n\nBy order of the Secretary of War:\n\nAdjutant General.\n\n1 Incl. (Form for oath of office)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Signal Corps, United States Army\nWar Department Message Center,\nRoom 3441, Munitions Building,\nWashington, D. C.\nReceived at\n1942 JAN 17 PM 1:42\n103 WVQ 32 WD WRIGHTFIELD OHIO JAN 17 1942 115 PM\nTHE ADJUTANT GENERAL\nWASHINGTON DC\nPHQ DASH R DASH 869 re radio AGOP dated January sixteen nineteen forty two I accept appointment as temporary Lt Col air corps regular army effective as of date of appointment end\nHOWARD M McCOY\nMAJOR AIR CORPS REGULAR ARMY\nappointed (Jan. 23,1942, Accept. delt)\nNotes-Comm. Group.\nMalon-1650\n1/27/42\nRECORD SECTION TO NOTE & FILE\nREGISTER UNIT, A. P. C. SECT.\nInitials Date\nJAN 17 1942\n1641"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OATH OF OFFICE\nREGULAR ARMY\nI, HOWARD M. McCOY, having been appointed a Lt. Colonel (Temporary) (Grade) Air Corps (Organization or arm or service) in the Regular Army of the United States, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter: SO HELP ME GOD.\nHoward M. McCoy\n(Signature)\nHOWARD M. McCOY, Lt. Colonel, Air Corps\nSworn to and subscribed before me, at Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio this 24th day of January, 1942\nW. W. WOOD, Captain, Air Corps, Adjutant.\nFINGERPRINTS—Right hand (See AR 345-120)\n1. THUMB 2. INDEX 3. MIDDLE 4. RING 5. LITTLE\nINSTRUCTIONS\nThis form will be executed in full upon the acceptance of a commission or appointment in the Regular Army. Typewriter will be used, if available.\nFOR THE EXECUTION OF THE OATH OF OFFICE\n1. Whenever any person is elected or appointed to an office of honor or trust under the Government of the United States, he is required, before entering upon the duties of his office, to take and subscribe the oath prescribed by section 1757, Revised Statutes.\n2. Oaths of office of Army officers, nurses, and warrant officers should be taken before some civil officer who is authorized by the laws of the United States or by the local municipal law to administer oaths; or before a judge advocate or acting judge advocate, the president of a general or special court martial, a summary court martial, the judge advocate, or assistant judge advocate of a general or special court martial, or the adjutant of a command. Officers of the Army other than those specified are not authorized by law to administer such oaths.\n3. Confirmation by the Senate does not of itself continue in force a recess appointment and commission. A new and distinct appointment after confirmation is necessary and a new oath of office must be executed for such appointment.\n4. Immediately on receipt of a commission or notification of appointment the appointee will, in case of acceptance of the commission or appointment, return to The Adjutant General the oath of office on this form properly filled in, subscribed, and attested. In case of nonacceptance, the commission or notification of appointment will be returned to The Adjutant General by a letter indicating the fact of such nonacceptance.\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 0337 July 1, 1939\nNoted in Comm. Grp. Schedule Off. 1650 2-12-42\nFile"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Execute and return without delay direct to The Adjutant General\nOATH OF OFFICE\nREGULAR ARMY\nI, HOWARD MONROE McCOY, having been appointed temporarily a MAJOR (Grade) AIR CORPS (Organization or arm or service) in the Regular Army of the United States, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter: SO HELP ME GOD.\nHoward Monroe McCoy\n(Signature) (Grade and organization or arm or service)\nHOWARD MONROE McCOY, MAJOR, AIR CORPS\nSworn to and subscribed before me, at WRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO this 7TH day of JULY, 1941\nJOHN W. SESSUMS, Jr., Major, Air Corps, Adjutant. Authorized to administer oaths under the 114th Article of War.\nFINGERPRINTS—Right hand (See AR 345-120)\n1. THUMB 2. INDEX 3. MIDDLE 4. RING 5. LITTLE\nINSTRUCTIONS\nThis form will be executed in full upon the acceptance of a commission or appointment in the Regular Army. Typewriter will be used, if available.\nFOR THE EXECUTION OF THE OATH OF OFFICE\n1. Whenever any person is elected or appointed to an office of honor or trust under the Government of the United States, he is required, before entering upon the duties of his office, to take and subscribe the oath prescribed by section 1757, Revised Statutes.\n2. Oaths of office of Army officers, nurses, and warrant officers should be taken before some civil officer who is authorized by the laws of the United States or by the local municipal law to administer oaths; or before a judge advocate or acting judge advocate, the president of a general or special court martial, a summary court martial, the judge advocate, or assistant judge advocate of a general or special court martial, or the adjutant of a command. Officers of the Army other than those specified are not authorized by law to administer such oaths.\n3. Confirmation by the Senate does not of itself continue in force a recess appointment and commission. A new and distinct appointment after confirmation is necessary and a new oath of office must be executed for such appointment.\n4. Immediately on receipt of a commission or notification of appointment the appointee will, in case of acceptance of the commission or appointment, return to The Adjutant General the oath of office on this form properly filled in, subscribed, and attested. In case of nonacceptance, the commission or notification of appointment will be returned to The Adjutant General by a letter indicating the fact of such nonacceptance.\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 0337 July 1, 1939\nfile. off. Rec. Sec. miele-111-7/1/41"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Signal Corps, United States Army\nWar Department Message Center,\nRoom 3441, Munitions Building,\nWashington, D. C.\nReceived at WA386 20\nA.G.O. WAR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED\nWUX TDDA WRIGHTFIELD OHIO JUNE 27 1941 455P\n1941 JUN 28 AM 1:13\nTHE ADJUTANT GENERAL\nREURADI. AGOP I ACCEPT PROMOTION TO THE GRADE OF MAJOR AIR CORPS REGULAR ARMY EFFECTIVE AS OF DATE OF APPOINTMENT.\nHOWARD M MCCOY. O-18054\n1029P\nREURADI AGOP .\nJUN 28 1941\nRECEIVED OFFICERS' DIVISION A.G.O.\nRegarded as acceptance of appt. as temporary Major in the Air Corps, Regular Army in view of notification of nom. for appt. tendered by radio of June 26, 1941.\nWalter/1611/9-9-41\nRECORD SECTION - TO NOTE & FILE\nREGISTER UNIT, A. P. C. SECT.\nInitials Date\n1602\nNoted in Comm. Grp. Walter/1611/9-9-41"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"12\n\nVETERINARY CORPS\n\nMOTT RAMSEY (O-9491).\nGERALD WOODWARD FITZGERALD (O-9460).\nALLEN CHAMBERLAIN WIGHT (O-9443).\nELWOOD LUKE NYE (O-9444).\nCHAUNCEY EDMUND COOK (O-9458).\n\nCHAPLAIN CORPS\n\nSAMUEL JOHNSON MILLER (O-9379).\nJOHN THOMAS AXTON (O-9425).\nEARL DUDLEY WEED (O-9225).\nARISTEO VINCENT SIMONI (O-9139).\n(A. G. 210.2.) (19 June, 41.)\n\n11. Par. 3, S. O., 149, W. D., 1941, pertaining to COLONEL RUFUS F. MADDUX (O-2469), Coast Artillery Corps, is amended to show the travel chargeable to FD 1406 P 1-06, 15-06 A 0410-2.\n\n12. Par. 3, S. O., 146, W. D., 1941, is revoked. COLONEL REGINALD H. KELLEY (O-1781), Infantry, is relieved from assignment and duty with the Fourth Corps Area Service Command with station at Camp Blanding, Florida, effective on or about 15 July, 1941, is then detailed for duty with the Organized Reserves, Fourth Corps Area, with station at Jacksonville, Florida, and will proceed to that station and report by letter to the commanding general, Fourth Corps Area, for instructions. The travel directed is necessary in the military service. FC 1243 P 7-01, 7-13, 7-02, 7-07, 7-06 A 1505-2. Reimbursement for travel and flat per diem of $6.00, in lieu of subsistence, are authorized. (A. G 210.69, Org. Res.) (26 June, 41.)\n\n13. Announcement is made of the temporary appointment in the Air Corps on 30 June, 1941, under the provisions of an act of Congress approved 16 June, 1936, of the following-named officers, with rank as indicated:\n\nTO LIEUTENANT COLONEL\n\nMAJOR CLARENCE E. CRUMRINE (O-11599), Air Corps, with rank from 22 June, 1941.\n\nTO MAJOR\n\nCAPTAIN GEORGE F. SCHLATTER (O-18035), Air Corps, with rank from 20 June, 1941.\nCAPTAIN HOWARD M. McCOY (O-18054), Air Corps, with rank from 30 June, 1941.\n(A. G. 210.1.) (30 June, 41.)\n\n14. LIEUTENANT COLONEL CHARLES W. CHRISTENBERRY (O-8373), Adjutant General's Department, is assigned to headquarters, V Army Corps, Camp Beauregard, Louisiana, effective upon completion of his present tour of foreign service, and will join that station and report for duty, in accordance with orders to be issued by the commanding general, Philippine Department. (A. G. 210.31.) (30 June, 41.)\n\n15. LIEUTENANT COLONEL DeROSEY C. CABELL (O-4453), Ordnance Department, is assigned as commanding officer, Southwestern Proving Ground, Hope, Arkansas, in addition to his other duties, and will report the assumption of this additional duty by letter to the Chief of Ordnance.\n\n[S. O. 151, 30 June, 1941]"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"11\n\nCHARLES GEORGE HUTTER (O-3922).\nFREDERICK HENSEL PETTERS (O-3923).\nROBERT PARVIN WILLIAMS (O-3924).\nHARVARD CLAYTON MOORE (O-3926).\nARDEN FREER (O-3927).\nPAUL ADOLPH SCHULE (O-3928).\nFRANK WILEY WILSON (O-3975).\nEDGAR ERSKINE HUME (O-4033).\nWALCOTT DENISON (O-4035).\nJAMES EARLE ASH (O-4037).\nBASCOM LEE WILSON (O-4038).\nHENRY LOUIS KRAFFT (O-4043).\nPAUL RAMSEY HAWLEY (O-4036).\nJOHN DIBBLE (O-4044).\nGEORGE CLARK DUNHAM (O-4086).\nROBERT BURNS HILL (O-4046).\nGOUVERNEUR VINCENT EMERSON (O-4048).\nWILLIAM ARCHER HAGINS (O-4050).\nGEORGE CORWIN BEACH, Jr. (O-4053).\nJESSE IRVING SLOAT (O-4054).\nDAVID NORVELL WALKER GRANT (O-4055).\nJAMES STEVENS SIMMONS (O-4056).\nJOHN FRANCIS CORBY (O-4060).\nROY EDWARD FOX (O-4063).\nHERBERT DeWITT PORTERFIELD (O-4064).\nDEAN FLEWELLYN WINN (O-4065).\nALVA BURTON McKIE (O-4066).\nALBERT WALTON KENNER (O-4067).\nARTURO CARBONELL (O-4073).\nEDWARD AUGUSTUS COATES, Jr. (O-4074).\nJAMES ALBERTUS BETHEA (O-4076).\nASA MARGRAVE LEHMAN (O-4077).\nORAMEL HENRY STANLEY (O-4080).\nSEWELL MUNSON CORBETT (O-4081).\nEDGAR FREMONT HAINES (O-4125).\nJOHN RANDOLPH HALL (O-4373).\nROYAL KENDALL STACEY (O-4379).\nJOHN WADE WATTS (O-4211).\nCHARLES KETTIG BERLE (O-4111).\nPERCY JAMES CARROLL (O-4183).\n\nDENTAL CORPS\n\nTHOMAS CHESTER DANIELS (O-3998).\nFREDERICK RANDOLPH WUNDERLICH (O-3999).\nJOHN LLOYD SCHOCK (O-4004).\nBRANTLEY INGOLD NEWSOM (O-4015).\nOSCAR PETER SNYDER (O-4008).\nREX McKINLEY McDOWELL (O-4011).\nTHOMAS LOVET SMITH (O-4013).\nBEVERLEY MORRISON EPES (O-5639).\n\n[S. O. 151, 30 June, 1941]"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"OATH OF OFFICE\nREGULAR ARMY\n\nI, Howard Monroe McCoy, having been appointed a Captain (Grade)\nAir Corps (Organization or arm or service) in the Regular Army of the United States, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter: SO HELP ME GOD.\n\nHoward Monroe McCoy\nHOWARD MONROE MC COY, Captain, Air Corps\n(Signature) (Grade and organization or arm or service)\n\nSworn to and subscribed before me, at Maxwell Field, Alabama this 17th day of June, 1940.\nD. B. Schannep\nD. B. SCHANNEP,\nCaptain, Air Corps,\nAdjutant.\n\nFINGERPRINTS—Right hand\n(See AR 345-120)\n1. THUMB 2. INDEX 3. MIDDLE 4. RING 5. LITTLE\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n\nThis form will be executed in full upon the acceptance of a commission or appointment in the Regular Army. Typewriter will be used, if available.\n\nFOR THE EXECUTION OF THE OATH OF OFFICE\n\n1. Whenever any person is elected or appointed to an office of honor or trust under the Government of the United States, he is required, before entering upon the duties of his office, to take and subscribe the oath prescribed by section 1757, Revised Statutes.\n\n2. Oaths of office of Army officers, nurses, and warrant officers should be taken before some civil officer who is authorized by the laws of the United States or by the local municipal law to administer oaths; or before a judge advocate or acting judge advocate, the president of a general or special court martial, a summary court martial, the judge advocate, or assistant judge advocate of a general or special court martial, or the adjutant of a command. Officers of the Army other than those specified are not authorized by law to administer such oaths.\n\n3. Confirmation by the Senate does not of itself continue in force a recess appointment and commission. A new and distinct appointment after confirmation is necessary and a new oath of office must be executed for such appointment.\n\n4. Immediately on receipt of a commission or notification of appointment the appointee will, in case of acceptance of the commission or appointment, return to The Adjutant General the oath of office on this form properly filled in, subscribed, and attested. In case of nonacceptance, the commission or notification of appointment will be returned to The Adjutant General by a letter indicating the fact of such nonacceptance.\n\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 0337\nJuly 1, 1939\nNoted - Com. Group\nFile H. R. M.\nJUN 24 1940\n3—7844 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"COPY CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY\nPasadena\n\nDaniel Guggenheim Aeronautical Laboratory\n\nDecember 14, 1940\n\nSubject: Course of Instruction in Aeronautical Engineering at the California Institute of Technoligy.\n\nTo: The Adjutant General (Through Channels).\n\n1. The undersigned desires to explain in detail the course of instruction he is undertaking at the California Institute of Technology. It is requested that this letter be attached to his personnel file.\n\n2. According to the provisions of Par. 44, Special Orders No. 131, W. D. Washington, 4 June, 1940, the undersigned started the summer course in aeronautical engineering July 15, 1940. He had previously in 1935 received the Master of Science degree in Aeronautical Engineering at this school. Upon entrance this past July he applied for and was admitted to Candidacy for Doctor of Philosophy Degree. Because the regular summer course was too limited for credits toward this latter degree; additional credits to total sixty-five (65) were taken and received for the summer term.\n\nUpon detail here from the Materiel Division, Wright Field, Ohio, he had been directed by Bridadier General (Then Lieut. Col.) O. P. Echols to further perfect his knowledge of aircraft propellers, on which subject he has specialized the past six years. As there is no regular course in propellers, and as he has taken the majority of the aeronautical subjects during the year 1934-35 in addition to those subjects studied at the Air Corps Engineering School in 1935-36, it was decided with members of the faculty that the following schedule of subjects be undertaken. This schedule meets the requirements for credits for Candidacy for Ph. Degree and permit specialized study on propeller matters. It is noted that although admitted to Candidacy that requirements for Ph. Degree can only partially be met this school year. Hence no degree will be received. The schedule follows:-\n\n1. Aeronautical Engineering Seminar. )\n2. \" \" Research. ) (Scheduled course totaling\n3. Aeronautical Mathematics Reading. ) 45 units.)\n4. Technical German. (Regular attendance at this class. It is required that a test be passed for Ph. Degree but no credits are allowed Graduate Students for class attendance.)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"The research problem item No. 2 is \"The Control and Synchronization of Aircraft Propellers\".\n\nThe Math Reading item No. 3 consists of regular attendance at four classes, auditing each for whatever pertinent information concerning propellers in particular and associated airplane problems that they may contain.\n\nAdvanced Problems in Airplane Design.\nElasticity Applied to Aeronautics.\nTheoretical Aerodynamics.\nEngineering Mathematical Physics (Vibrations).\n\nIn addition there is assigned and selective reading on vibrations, acoustics and advanced mathematics.\n\nThe above course entails a minimum of sixty-five hours of study weekly. Forty-five units of credits, however, are all that appear on the records forwarded to the Adjutant General. It was the desire to explain this that prompted this letter.\n\n3. It is requested that if the above schedule, which was undertaken this first of three school terms, does not meet the approval of the office Chief of the Air Corps, or The Adjutant General, that the undersigned be notified prior to January 6, 1941, to enable him to undertake some different schedule during the last two terms.\n\ns/ H. M. McCoy\n\nH. M. McCoy\nCapt., Air Corps"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1st Ind.\t(4-C)\n\nWar Department, Air Corps, Materiel Division, Washington, D. C., January 23, 1941.\nTo: Chief, Air Corps, Washington, D. C.\n\n1. It is recommended that Captain McCoy's schedule of study as given in basic letter be approved. It is further recommended that he prepare, from original research, a thesis on the subject, \"The Control and Synchronization of Aircraft Propellers,\" in meeting the partial requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.\n\n2. It is recommended that upon completion of this course, Captain McCoy be detailed to the Materiel Division, Wright Field, for duty in experimental research and development work on dual rotation propellers, propeller synchronizers, and hollow steel blades for propellers of large diameter. He is considered to be an authority on aircraft propellers. The Materiel Division is badly in need of officers with this specialty and no suitable reserve officers have been found, to date.\n\nFor the Chief, Materiel Division:\n\nD. F. FRITCH,\nMajor, Air Corps,\nAdministrative Executive.\n\n2nd Ind.\t(1-C)\n\nWar Dept., Office, Chief of the Air Corps, Washington, D. C., January 27, 1941 -\nTo: The Adjutant General.\n\n1. It is recommended that the basic communication and paragraph 1 of preceding indorsement be approved.\n\n2. Request for station assignment for this officer upon completion of the course will be submitted at a later date.\n\n25 A.G.O. JAN 30 1941 RECEIVED\n\nFor the Chief of the Air Corps\nC. E. Duncan,\nMajor, Air Corps\nExecutive"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AG 201-McCoy, Howard M. (12-12540)\t3rd Ind.\tMFG-gm-rrs-1511-1 O.\n\nWar Dept., A. G. O., January 31, 1941 - Thru: Commanding General, 9th Corps Area.\nTo: Captain Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps.\n\nAttention is invited to Paragraph 1, preceeding Indorsement, which is approved.\n\nBy order of the Secretary of War:\n\nAdjutant General"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OATH OF OFFICE\nREGULAR ARMY\n\nI, Howard, M. McCoy, having been appointed a First Lieutenant, Air Corps in the Regular Army of the United States, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter: SO HELP ME GOD.\n\nHoward M. McCoy 1st Lieut. A.C.\n(Signature.) (Rank and organization.)\n\nSworn to and subscribed before me, at Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio, this 26th day of August, 1935.\n\nD.B. Howard, Lt. Colonel, A.C. Adjutant\n\nThe commission for which this oath of office was taken *has *has not been previously accepted *by letter *telegram dated ______, 19\n\n*Strike out words not applicable.\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n\nThis form will be executed in full upon the acceptance of a commission in the Regular Army on promotion or transfer. It will not be used in the case of initial appointment in the Regular Army, Form No. 337-A, A. G. O., being used for that purpose. Typewriter will be used, if available.\n\nFOR THE EXECUTION OF THE OATH OF OFFICE.\n\n1. Whenever any person is elected or appointed to an office of honor or trust under the Government of the United States, he is required, before entering upon the duties of his office, to take and subscribe the oath prescribed by section 1757, Revised Statutes.\n\n2. Oaths of office of Army officers should be taken before some civil officer who is authorized by the laws of the United States or by the local municipal law to administer oaths; or before a judge advocate or acting judge advocate, the president of a general or special court-martial, a summary court-martial, the judge advocate or assistant judge advocate of a general or special court-martial, or the adjutant of a command. Officers of the Army other than those specified are not authorized by law to administer such oaths.\n\n3. Confirmation by the Senate does not of itself continue in force a recess appointment and commission. A new and distinct appointment after confirmation is necessary and a new oath of office must be executed for such appointment.\n\n4. Immediately on receipt of a commission or notification of appointment the appointee will, in case of acceptance of the commission or appointment, return to The Adjutant General of the Army the oath of office on this form properly filled in, subscribed, and attested. In case of nonacceptance, the commission or notification of appointment will be returned to The Adjutant General of the Army by a letter indicating the fact of such nonacceptance.\n\nForm No. 0337-P, A. G. O. April 17, 1922.\n\nNoted - Com. Group File L. G. B."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Selfridge Field, Michigan,\nAug 31, 1934 (Date)\n\nI, Second Lieutenant Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps, certify that I will not resign from the United States Army within a period of three years subsequent to the termination of the course at the California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, which I contemplate taking beginning on or about September 20, 1934, unless circumstances arise which cannot be foreseen and which, in the opinion of the War Department, are deemed a justifiable basis for the abrogation by the War Department of this agreement.\n\nHoward M. McCoy\n2nd Lieut., Air Corps.\n\n\"File 9/5/34 Redinger\"\n\nAG 201 McCoy Howard M (8-31-34)\n\nLncel"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WAR DEPARTMENT\nOffice of the Chief of the Air Corps\nWashington, D. C.\n\nOctober 16, 1930.\n\nPERSONNEL ORDERS)\nNO. 242 )\n\nEXTRACT\n\n2. Pursuant to Army Regulations 35-1480, the detail to duty involving flying, effective on the date given below, of each of the following named officers, commissioned in or detailed to the Air Corps, who is fit for duty involving flying, and who is detailed to duty requiring regular and frequent participation in aerial flights is hereby announced.\n\nThe detail to duty involving flying constitutes participation in one or more of the following: - Routine test flights and test flights of new or overhauled aircraft or their power plants, instruments, equipment or accessories; prescribed training of student airplane pilots, student observers or members of aircraft crews; inspection of the adequacy of flight training material; the efficiency of instructing personnel; familiarizing pilots or other flying personnel with the operation of types of aircraft, power plants, instruments, or equipment with which they are inexperienced; experimental development of aircraft or parts of aircraft or for experimental development of aviation instruments, equipment or accessories; training for aircraft gunnery and bombing exercises; administrative or inspection purposes in connection with air work or for expediting the movements of personnel, material or mail; training of reserve flying personnel; flights duly authorized for the purpose of cooperation with other Governmental Departments; ferrying aircraft, aerial scouting, reconnaissance, convoy, patrol flights; aerial photography, mapping, pigeon training, or training for the performance of any of these duties.\n\nSecond Lieut. Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps (FA) October 16, 1930\nSecond Lieut. Allan D. MacLean, Air Corps (inf) October 16, 1930\n\nBy order of the Chief of the Air Corps:\n\nOfficial:\n\nJ. C. McDonnell, Major, Air Corps, Chief, Personnel Division.\n\nW. G. Kilner, Major, Air Corps, Executive."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cat-445.\n\nA.G.201. McCoy, Howard Monroe\n(5-12-30)Off. June 12, 1930.\n\nAppointment as second lieutenant\nin the Regular Army.\n\n\nCadet Howard M. McCoy,\n United States Military Academy,\n West Point, New York.\n\n\n1. The President has appointed you a second lieutenant of\nField Artillery, Regular Army, with rank from June 12, 1930.\nYou are requested to execute the oath of office on the inclosed form\nand return same to this office without delay. Your serial number will\nbe 0-18054.\n\n2. Forward to this office at an early date a recent photograph\nof yourself, taken in uniform. The photograph should be unmounted,\nnot exceeding 8 inches in width and 10 inches in height, and should\nshow upon the back thereof your name, rank and organization, plainly\nwritten or printed, and as nearly as possible the date when taken.\n\nBy order of the Secretary of War:\n\n\nInclosure\n Form No. 0337-A, A.G.O. Adjutant General."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TO ALL WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:\n\nKnow ye, That the PRESIDENT has been pleased to appoint\nHoward Monroe McCoy a CADET of\nthe UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY, to rank as such from the\nfirst day of July 1928.\nDone at the city of Washington, this first day of\nSeptember, in the year of our Lord, one thousand nine hundred\nand twenty-six, and of the Independence of the United States\nof America the one hundred and fifty-first.\n\n\n Acting Secretary of War.\n\nRobert O. Davis\nMajor General\nThe Adjutant General.\n\nWD A.G.O. FORM No. 0178\nFEB 25, 1925"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Selfridge Field,\nMt. Clemens, Michigan,\nJanuary 4 1932.\n\nI hereby accept transfer as Second Lieutenant to the Air\nCorps with rank from June 12, 1930.\n\nHOWARD M. McCOY\n2nd Lt., Field Artillery\n\nReceived A.G.O. JAN 11 1932"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OATH OF OFFICE\nREGULAR ARMY\n\nI, HOWARD M. MC COY, having been appointed a 2nd Lieut., Air Corps\n(Rank.) (Regiment or branch.)\nin the Regular Army of the United States, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter: SO HELP ME GOD.\nHOWARD M. MC COY, 2nd Lieut., Air Corps.\n(Signature.) (Rank and organization.)\n\nSworn to and subscribed before me, at Selfridge Field, Michigan, this 4th day of January, 1932.\n\nA. B. BALLARD,\nCapt., Air Corps,\nADJUTANT.\n\nThe commission for which this oath of office was taken has not been previously accepted by letter telegram, dated ________, 192\n*Strike out words not applicable.\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n\nThis form will be executed in full upon the acceptance of a commission in the Regular Army on promotion or transfer. It will not be used in the case of initial appointment in the Regular Army, Form No. 337-A, A. G. O., being used for that purpose. Typewriter will be used, if available.\n\nFOR THE EXECUTION OF THE OATH OF OFFICE.\n\n1. Whenever any person is elected or appointed to an office of honor or trust under the Government of the United States, he is required, before entering upon the duties of his office, to take and subscribe the oath prescribed by section 1757, Revised Statutes.\n\n2. Oaths of office of Army officers should be taken before some civil officer who is authorized by the laws of the United States or by the local municipal law to administer oaths; or before a judge advocate or acting judge advocate, the president of a general or special court-martial, a summary court-martial, the judge advocate or assistant judge advocate of a general or special court-martial, or the adjutant of a command. Officers of the Army other than those specified are not authorized by law to administer such oaths.\n\n3. Confirmation by the Senate does not of itself continue in force a recess appointment and commission. A new and distinct appointment after confirmation is necessary and a new oath of office must be executed for such appointment.\n\n4. Immediately on receipt of a commission or notification of appointment the appointee will, in case of acceptance of the commission or appointment, return to The Adjutant General of the Army the oath of office on this form properly filled in, subscribed, and attested. In case of nonacceptance, the commission or notification of appointment will be returned to The Adjutant General of the Army by a letter indicating the fact of such nonacceptance.\n\nForm No. 0337-P, A. G. O.\nApril 17, 1922."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WAR DEPARTMENT\nOffice of the Chief of the Air Corps\nWashington\n\nNovember 11, 1931.\n\nPERSONNEL ORDERS )\nNO. 265 )\n\nEXTRACT\n\n2. Each of the following officers having satisfactorily completed the required course of instruction in Pursuit training at the Air Corps Advanced Flying School, is under the provisions of Army Regulations 95-60, rated Airplane Pilot, effective October 10, 1931:\n\nFirst Lieut. William O. Eareckson, Air Corps\nSecond Lieut. Neal E. Ausman, Air Corps (CAC)\nSecond Lieut. Paul W. Blanchard, Jr., Air Corps (Inf)\nSecond Lieut. Mark E. Bradley, Jr., Air Corps (FA)\nSecond Lieut. Carl A. Brandt, Air Corps (FA)\nSecond Lieut. Norman R. Burnett, Air Corps (Inf)\nSecond Lieut. Frederick W. Castle, Air Corps (CE)\nSecond Lieut. Daniel A. Cooper, Air Corps (Inf)\nSecond Lieut. Anthony E. Curcio, Air Corps (Inf)\nSecond Lieut. Othel R. Deering, Air Corps (Inf)\nSecond Lieut. William D. Eckert, Air Corps (FA)\nSecond Lieut. Wiley D. Ganey, Air Corps (FA)\nSecond Lieut. Ernest E. Holtzen, II, Air Corps (FA)\nSecond Lieut. John C. Kilborn, Air Corps (FA)\nSecond Lieut. Morris J. Lee, Air Corps (Cav)\nSecond Lieut. Gerry L. Mason, Air Corps (Inf)\nSecond Lieut. Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps (FA)\nSecond Lieut. Elmer L. Meguire, Air Corps (SC)\nSecond Lieut. George L. Murray, Air Corps\nSecond Lieut. Lauris Norstad, Air Corps (Cav)\nSecond Lieut. Thetus C. Odom, Air Corps (SC)\nSecond Lieut. Edwin S. Perrin, Air Corps (CAC)\nSecond Lieut. Clark N. Piper, Air Corps (CAC)\nSecond Lieut. George F. Schlatter, Air Corps (CE)\nSecond Lieut. Sory Smith, Air Corps (Inf)\nSecond Lieut. James S. Sutton, Air Corps (CAC)\nSecond Lieut. Ralph P. Swofford, Jr., Air Corps (CE)\nSecond Lieut. Henry A. Winters, Air Corps (Inf)\n\nBy order of the Chief of the Air Corps:\n\nF. M. Andrews,\nLieut.-Colonel, Air Corps,\nExecutive.\n\nOFFICIAL:\n\nJ. C. McDonnell,\nMajor, Air Corps,\nChief, Personnel Division\n\nW-2010, A.C."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AIR CORPS PRIMARY FLYING SCHOOL\nMARCH FIELD, RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA.\n\nPROCEEDINGS OF THE FACULTY BOARD\nIN THE CASE OF\n\nSECOND LIEUT. HOWARD M. McCOY, (F.A.) AIR CORPS\n\nCLASS OF OCTOBER 15, 1930.\n\nGENERAL FILES\n7-17-31\n\nSec 353.9 march\nJuly 17, 1931"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS AIR CORPS PRIMARY FLYING SCHOOL\nMARCH FIELD, CALIFORNIA . F-GC\n\nDec. 10,1930.\n\nGENERAL ORDERS )\n:\nNO. 40)\n\n1. General Orders No. 27, these headquarters, A ugust 23,1930, and all amendments thereto is rescinded.\n\n2. Under the provisions of paragraph 11-b, AR350-110 and paragraph 1-a, Circular No 50-6, OCAS, 1925, the designation of the following named officers as members of the Faculty Board, Air Corps Primary Flying School, March Field, California, is announced:\n\nMajor Joseph T. McNarney, Air Corps, Commandant.\nMajor Leo A. Walton, Air Corps, Assistant Commandant\nMajor Andrew W. Smith, Medical Corps, Flight Surgeon\n(Captain) First Lieutenant Paul L. Williams, Air Corps, Director of Flying Instructions.\nFirst Lieutenant James D. Givens, Air Corps, Director of Ground School.\nFirst Lieutenant Townsend Griffiss, Air Corps, Commanding Officer, Flying Cadet Detachment.\nFirst Lieutenant Benjamin B. Cassiday, Air Corps, Secretary andRecorder.\n\nBy order of Major McNARNEY:\n\nOFFICIAL: LEON E. SHARON,\n1st Lieut., A.C.,\nAdjutant.\n\nLEON E. SHARON,\n1st Lieut., A.C.,\nAdjutant."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROCEEDINGS OF THE FACULTY BOARD\nOF\nTHE AIR CORPS ADVANCED FLYING SCHOOL\nIN THE CASE OF:\n\n2nd Lieut. Howard M. McCoy, A.C. (F.A.)\nName of Student\n\n1. The Board met Oct. 10, 1931, and there being a quorum present proceeded with the examination of the above named student.\n\n2. The Board finds: That 2nd Lieut. Howard M. McCoy, A.C. (F.A.) has satisfactorily completed the prescribed course of instruction at the Air Corps Advanced Flying School, ( Pursuit ).\n\n3. The Board recommends: That 2nd Lieut. Howard M. McCoy, A.C.(F.A.) be rated as an Airplane Pilot, effective Oct. 10, 1931.\n\nEdgar E. Glenn\n1st Lieut., A.C.\nSecretary\n\nThomas J. Hanley Jr.\nMajor, Air Corps,\nActing Commandant\n\nHEADQUARTERS THE AIR CORPS TRAINING CENTER\nRANDOLPH FIELD, TEXAS,\nAPPROVED.\nCHAS. H. DANFORTH,\nBrigadier General, A.C.\nCommanding.\n\nApproved. NOV 5 1931\nBy order of the Chief of Air Corps:\nRay L. Owens\n1st Lieut. Air Corps,\nAssistant Executive.\n\nDetached 353.9 Kelly Nov 10, 1931"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date Oct. 10, 1931\n\nThis is to certify that 2nd Lieut. Howard M. McCoy, A.C. (F.A.) has satisfactorily completed the prescribed course of instruction ( Pursuit )at the Air Corps Advanced Flying School with the degree of proficiency indicated below:\n\nSUBJECT HOURS GRADE\nAttack Aviation.........4 100\nBombardment Aviation.....4 93\nBomb Racks..............4 100\nBombs and Explosives....8 100\nBomb Sights.............4 100\nCombat Orders...........4 95\nCooperation with Artillery..24 92\nDivisional Observation......12 100\nMilitary Organization.......4 80\nObservation Aviation........8 84\nPhoto Interpretation........8 100\nPhotography.................8 95\nPursuit Aviation............4 95\nReconnaissance..............8 100\nSignal Communication........12 88\nSqdn. Duties of Jr. Off's...4 100\nWar Planning Principles.....4 80\nCritiques...................8 7\n\nTotal.....132 GENERAL AVERAGE.....94\n\nFlying: Technique..... D\nJudgment........D\n\nMarch Field Brooks Field Kelly Field Total\nDual (With Instr) 63:40 3:35 67:15\nPilot Time (With Pass.) \nPilot Time (Solo) 97:15 108:25 205:40\nObserver Time \nTotal 160:55 112:00 272:55\n\nGRADING SYSTEM\n(Academic) (Flying) REMARKS:\n94 - 100 A - Superior\n86 - 93 B - Excellent\n78 - 85 C - Good\n70 - 77 D - Satisfactory\n61 - 69 F - Unsatisfactory\nBelow- 61 I - Inferior\n\nEdgar E. Glenn\n1st Lieut., A.C.\nSecretary"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Kelly Field,Texas\nOct. 11, 1931\n\nSUBJECT: Request for Transfer to the Air Corps.\n\nTO: The Adjutant General,\nWashington, D.C.\n\n1. In accordance with the provisions of paragraph 3, Army Regulations 605-145 it is requested that I be transferred from the F.A. to the Air Corps.\n\n2 I was detailed to the Air Corps June 12, 1930.\n\n3 I am under orders for change of station from Kelly Field, Texas, to Selfridge Field, Mich.\n\n4. Foreign service: None.\n\n5 The reason for this request is that I completed the course at the Air Corps Advanced Flying School, Kelly Field, Texas, Oct. 10, 1931, and wish to become a permanent officer of the Air Corps.\n\n6 I am willing to be ordered to make flights.\n\n7 I desire assignment to heavier-than-air duty.\n\nHoward M. McCoy,\n2nd Lieut., A.C. (F.A.)\n\n1st Ind.\n\nHdqrs. The A.C.A.F.S., Kelly Field, Texas, Oct. 11, 1931. To - The Commanding General, A.C.T.C., Randolph Field, Texas.\n\nApproved. This officer was graduated from the Air Corps Advanced Flying School October 10, 1931.\n\nThomas J. Hanley, Jr.,\nMajor, A.C.\nCommandant\n\n-1-"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"210.33\n2nd Ind.\n1-r\nHq. The Air Corps Training Center, Randolph Field, Texas. Oct. 19, 1931.\nTo: The Chief of Air Corps, Washington, D.C.\n\nApproved.\n\nFor the Commanding General:\n\nAIR CORPS OCT 22 1931\n\nArthur Thomas\nArthur Thomas\nCaptain, A.C.\nAdjutant\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AG 201 McCoy, Howard M.\nNovember 2, 1931.\n\nTransfer to Air Corps.\n\nXXX\nThrough: The Commanding General,\nAir Corps Training Center,\nRandolph Field, Texas.\n\nTo: Second Lieutenant Howard M. McCoy, (F.A.), A.C.,\nKelly Field, Texas.\n\nYour application for transfer to the Air Corps dated October 11, 1931, has been approved and your transfer will be effected upon your nomination to and confirmation by the Senate.\n\nBy order of the Secretary of War:\n\nAdjutant General.\n\nDistribution:\n\nChief of Field Artillery\n\nChief of Air Corps\n\nFile\nFolder 445\n1/16/32"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE 00065 BATCH 203N PAGE C028\n01/03/77\n\nY 042 30 3763\n\n042 30 3763 MCCOY HOWARD M AF 0 3 601 655"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CASUALTY ASSISTANCE SUMMARY (Transmittal)\nAFMPC/DPMC 15 DEC 1976\n\nTO MAC/DPAP SCOTT AFB IL 62225\nFROM 1ST ABW/DPMAP ANDREWS AFB MD 20331\nINITIALS MAB DATE 15 Nov 76\n1st IND TO AFMPC/DPMCA\nFROM MAC/DPAP INITIALS dah DATE 7 Dec 76\n\n1. LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE INITIAL MCCOY, HOWARD M.\n2. SSAN 042-30-3763\n3. GRADE COLONEL\n4. DATE OF DEATH 12 OCT 76\n5. VA \"XC\" NO. UNKNOWN\n6. ACTIVE DUTY RETIRED\n7. CAUSE OF DEATH METASTATIC CARCINOMA COLON (PER DEATH CERTIFICATE)\n8. PERSON ASSISTED\nA. NAME, RELATIONSHIP, AND SSAN PAULINE B. MCCOY, WIDOW 225-46-3905\nB. ADDRESS 43 BOONE TRAIL SEVERNA PARK MD 21146\nC. DATE FIRST CONTACT 13 OCT 76\nD. DATE FIRST VISIT 29 OCT 76\n9. MINOR CHILDREN NONE\n10. PARENTS\nA. ASSISTED BY LETTER\nB. ASSISTED BY CAO ANDREWS AFB MD (SEE REMARKS)\nC. NAME AND ADDRESS OF FATHER DECEASED\nD. NAME AND ADDRESS OF MOTHER ELIZABETH W. McCOY 2 MARYLAND AVE, ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401\n11. ITEMS (A) THROUGH (V) ENTER DATES\nA. GRATUITY Retired Over 120 Days\nB. UNPAID PAY AND ALLOWANCES 29 OCT 76\nC. BURIAL OR MEMORIAL ALLOWANCE VA 29 OCT 76\nD. VA DIC 29 OCT 76; SS MONTHLY 22 OCT 76; LUMP SUM PAYMENT 22 OCT 76\nF. ANNUITY RSFPP 29 OCT 76; SBP 29 OCT 76\nG. ID CARD 29 OCT 76\nH. DEPENDENTS' TRAVEL Retired Over 1 Year\nI. TRANSPORTATION OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS Retired Over 1 Year\nJ. CLAIMS FOR LOSS DESTRUCTION PERSONAL PROPERTY Counseled 29 OCT 76 NOT DESIRED\nK. INSURANCE COMMERCIAL 29 OCT 76; GOVERNMENT NONE\nL. DATE TO FORM W-2 RECEIVED 29 OCT 76\nM. PERSONAL EFFECTS RECEIVED In Possession\nN. BURIAL NATIONAL CEMETARY\nO. HEADSTONE APPLIED Automatic\nP. FLAG PRESENTED 14 OCT 76\nQ. DECORATIONS AND AWARDS APPLIED In Possession\nR. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT COUNSELED 29 Oct 76\nS. SCHOLARSHIP AND EDUCATION COUNSELED 29 Oct 76\nT. FINANCIAL AID COUNSELED 29 Oct 76\nU. INCOME TAX COUNSELED 29 Oct 76\nV. VA LOAN GUARANTEE COUNSELED 29 Oct 76\nAF FORM 58 JUN 73 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12. CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF CONTACTS. (Entries should begin: \"CAO contacted Mrs. XX.\" \"CAO wrote letter to Mrs. XX.\" \"CAO visited Mrs. XX at her home.\" etc. Entries should continue with very brief summary of contact.)\nA. DATE\nB. CONTACTS\n\n13. REMARKS/CONTINUATION OF ITEMS\nReference Item 10B: Mrs. Pauline B. McCoy requested that no letter be sent to Elizabeth W. McCoy (mother of the deceased) due to her age and ill health.. Mrs. Pauline B. McCoy (widow of the deceased) stated that she would personally advise Mrs. Elizabeth B. McCoy.\n\n14. LAST INSTALLATION FURNISHING ASSISTANCE Andrews AFB Md\n15. DATE ASSISTANCE FILE CLOSED 15 Nov 76\n16. TYPED NAME AND GRADE OF CASUALTY ASSISTANCE OFFICER THOMAS A. BROCKMAN, SMSgt, USAF Chief, Personal Affairs\n17. SIGNATURE OF CASUALTY ASSISTANCE OFFICER"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF RETIRED CASUALTY - INITIAL - SUPPLEMENTAL - FINAL (CIRCLE ONE)\nTO\nAFMPC DPMC\nRANDOLPH AFB, TX 78148\nFROM (Include Autovon Number):\n1ST ABW/DPMAP\nANDREWS AFB, MD 20331 Autovon 858-5156\nNAME\nMCCOY, HOWARD MONROE\nSSAN\n042-30-3763\nCOPIES TO:\nAFAFC/RPTC\nHQ USAF/DPI\nOTHERS:\nMAC/DPAP\nGRADE\nCOLONEL\nCOMPONENT/DATE RETIRED\nREG AF/AUG 54\nPRIOR SERVICE NUMBER(S)\n550A\nDATE OF DEATH\n12 OCT 76\nPLACE OF DEATH\nNATIONAL NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER\nBETHESDA MD\nCAUSE OF DEATH\nMETASTATIC CARCINOMA COLON (PER DEATH CERTIFICATE)\nMARITAL STATUS (Name and Address)\nPAULINE B. MCCOY\n43 BOONE TRAIL\nSEVERNA PARK, MD 21146\nFATHER (Name and Address)\nDECEASED\nMINOR CHILDREN (Name, Address and Date of Birth)\nNONE\nMOTHER (Name and Address)\nELIZABETH W. MCCOY\n2 MARYLAND AVE\nANNAPOLIS MD 21401\nNAME/ADDRESS/RELATIONSHIP OF PERSON MAKING DISPOSITION OF REMAINS\nPAULINE W. MCCOY, WIDOW\n43 BOONE TRAIL\nSEVERNA PARK, MD 21146\nCASUALTY ASSISTANCE ACKNOWLEDGED\nYES\nDATE OF FIRST CONTACT\n13 OCT 76\nPERSONAL VISIT DESIRED\nX YES NO\nDOMESTIC PERSONAL AFFAIRS\nTHOMAS A BROCKMAN, SMSgt, USAF\nChief, Personal Affairs\nDATE\n1 NOV 76\nSIGNATURE\nAFMPC USE ONLY\nTO\nDPMDR. REQUEST SERVICE DATA AND DD FORM 13 ON ABOVE RETIRED MEMBER.\nLAST ACTIVE DUTY GRADE\nHIGHEST PAY GRADE SATISFACTORILY HELD\nCHAP 13, SEC 402, TITLE 38, U.S. CODE APPLY? YES NO\nSECAF MEMO? YES NO\nMISCELLANEOUS DATA (If Retired for Physical Disability, Give Cause)\nSIGNATURE\nDATE\nAF FORM 1312 FEB 76"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF RETIRED CASUALTY - INITIAL - SUPPLEMENTAL - FINAL (CIRCLE ONE)\nTO\nAFMPC DPMC\nRANDOLPH AFB, TX 78148\nFROM (Include Autovon Number):\n1ST ABW/DPMAP\nANDREWS AFB, MD 20331 Autovon 858-5156\n3601655\nNAME\nMCCOY, HOWARD MONROE\nSSAN\n042-30-3763\nCOPIES TO:\nAFAFC/RPTC\nHQ USAF/DPI\nOTHERS:\nMAC/DPAP\nGRADE\nCOLONEL\nCOMPONENT/DATE RETIRED\nREG AF/AUG 1954\nPRIOR SERVICE NUMBER(S)\nUNKNOWN\nDATE OF DEATH\n12 OCT 76\nPLACE OF DEATH\nNATIONAL NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER\nBETHESDA MD\nCAUSE OF DEATH\nCARCINOMA OF THE COLON (UNCONFIRMED)\nSPOUSE MARITAL STATUS (Name and Address)\nPAULINE B. MCCOY\n43 BOONE TRAIL\nSEVERNA PARK, MD 21146\nFATHER (Name and Address)\nDECEASED\nMINOR CHILDREN (Name, Address and Date of Birth)\nNONE\nMOTHER (Name and Address)\nELIZABETH W. MCCOY\n2 MARYLAND AVE\nANNAPOLIS, MD 21401\nNAME/ADDRESS/RELATIONSHIP OF PERSON MAKING DISPOSITION OF REMAINS\nPAULINE W. MCCOY, WIDOW\n43 BOONE TRAIL\nSEVERNA PARK, MD 21146\nCASUALTY ASSISTANCE ACKNOWLEDGED\nYES\nDATE OF FIRST CONTACT\n13 OCT 76\nPERSONAL VISIT DESIRED\nX YES NO\nDOMESTIC PERSONAL AFFAIRS\nTHOMAS A BROCKMAN, SMSgt, USAF\nChief, Personal Affairs\nDATE\n13 OCT 76\nSIGNATURE\nREMARKS\nAFMPC USE ONLY\nTO\nDPMDR. REQUEST SERVICE DATA AND DD FORM 13 ON ABOVE RETIRED MEMBER.\nLAST ACTIVE DUTY GRADE\n06\nHIGHEST PAY GRADE SATISFACTORILY HELD\nColonel\nCHAP 13, SEC 402, TITLE 38, U.S. CODE APPLY? YES X NO\nSECAF MEMO? YES X NO\nMISCELLANEOUS DATA (If Retired for Physical Disability, Give Cause)\nTITLE\nSIGNATURE\nGusae M. Austin 2 Oct\nDATE\nAF FORM 1312 FEB 76"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Efficiency Report\n(See AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON McCOY, Howard M. 0-18054 Captain Air Corps\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 11 16/30 months, from 7/15/40- to 6/30/41\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED Calif. Inst. of Tech., Pasadena, Calif.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED:\nDuty: Student, Calif. Inst. of Tech. Months 11 16/30 Manner of performance: Satisfactory\nF. What degree of success has he attained...\n1. Handling officers and men\n2. Performance of field duties\n3. Administrative and executive duties\n4. As an instructor\n5. Training troops\n6. Tactical handling of troops\nG. Pilot\nH. Qualifications: 1. Physical activity 2. Physical endurance 3. Military bearing and neatness 4. Attention to duty 5. Cooperation 6. Initiative 7. Intelligence 8. Force 9. Judgment and common sense 10. Leadership\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67-July 1, 1936.\nNOTED, A.G.O. AUG 16 1941"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Name of reporting officer\nI. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge?\nJ. Has he exhibited any weaknesses-temperamental, moral, physical, etc.-which adversely affect his efficiency? If yes, describe them.\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, did he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter?\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (See par. 1b, AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No\nN. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words\nO. How well do you know him?\nP. Remarks (including entry required by par. 11a, AR 600-185)\nQ. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? None\nR. Based on your observation during the period covered by this report, give in your own words your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE\nS. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial and are in accordance with AR 600-185.\n(Signed) Geo. H. Brett\n(Name typed) Geo. H. Brett,\n(Grade and Org.) Major General, Air Corps,\n(Comdg. what?) Chief of the Air Corps.\n(Place)\n(Date)\n1st INDORSEMENT\nWrite nothing below this line.\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 3-8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MDAC-304-WF-3-11-41-100M\nWAR DEPARTMENT AIR CORPS MATERIEL DIVISION\nNOTED - A.G.O. AUG 29 1941\nWright Field, Dayton, Ohio. June 30, 1941.\nSubject: Efficiency Report - Major Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps.\nTo: The Adjutant General:\n1. In accordance with Paragraph 17, AR 600-185, no Efficiency Report will be rendered on Major Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps, for the period from June 13, 1941 to June 30, 1941, due to the fact that the period covered by the report does not exceed one month. Report submitted as the Annual Report.\nFor the Assistant Chief of the Materiel Division:\nL. T. MILLER, Colonel, Air Corps, Adm. Executive."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mat. Div. A. C. 304-Wright Field 12-8-39-10M\nWAR DEPARTMENT\nAIR CORPS\nMATERIEL DIVISION\nNOTED - A. G. O.\nAPR 3 1941\nWright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\nJuly 10, 1940\nSubject: Efficiency Report -\nCaptain Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps.\nTo: The Adjutant General.\n1. In accordance with Paragraph 17, AR 600-185, no Efficiency Report will be rendered on Captain Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps, for the period July 1, 1940 to July 10, 1940, due to the fact that the period of duty does not exceed one month. Report submitted because of transfer of officer reported upon to California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, Calif.\nFor the Assistant Chief of the Materiel Division:\nL. T. MILLER,\nLt. Colonel, Air Corps,\nAdm. Executive.\n16 AUG 1940 Received"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mat. Div. A. C. 304-Wright Field 12-8-39-10M\nWAR DEPARTMENT\nAIR CORPS\nMATERIEL DIVISION\nOFFICE CHIEF AIR CORPS NOTED BY\nWright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\nJune 30, 1940.\nSubject: Efficiency Report -\nCaptain Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps.\nTo: The Adjutant General.\n1. In accordance with Paragraph 17, AR 600-185, no Efficiency Report will be rendered on Captain Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps, for the period June 28, 1940 to June 30, 1940, due to the fact that the period of duty does not exceed one month. Report submitted as the Annual Report.\n16 AUG 1940 Received\nFor the Assistant Chief of the Materiel Division:\nL. T. MILLER,\nLt. Colonel, Air Corps,\nAdm. Executive."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT (SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: Howard M. McCoy 0-18054 Captain Air Corps\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 2-25/30 months, from April 3, 1940 to June 27, 1940\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED Maxwell Field, Alabama\nD. Consider carefully these definitions...\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED:\nDuty: Student, Air Corps Tactical School, Airplane Pilot. Months 2-25/30. Manner of performance: Superior (Graduate) Unknown.\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: 1. Handling officers and men. 2. Performance of field duties. 3. Administrative and executive duties. 4. As an instructor. 5. Training troops. 6. Tactical handling of troops.\nG. Airplane Pilot.\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? 1. Physical activity. 2. Physical endurance. 3. Military bearing and neatness. 4. Attention to duty. 5. Cooperation. 6. Initiative. 7. Intelligence. 8. Force. 9. Judgment and common sense. 10. Leadership.\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67-July 1, 1936."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer Col. M. F. Harmon, A.C.\nI. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge? Yes\nJ. Has he exhibited any weaknesses? No\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure... Unknown.\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure? No\nN. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words:\nO. How well do you know him? Slightly.\nP. Remarks: Insufficient observation to determine flying efficiency, special aptitude or suitability for training for high command and General Staff duty.\nQ. In case any unfavorable entries... None.\nR. Based on your observation... give your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE: Unknown.\nS. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial...\n(Signed) M. F. HARMON, Colonel, Air Corps, Assistant Commandant, A.C.T.S., Maxwell Field, Alabama. (Date) July 3, 1940. Incls. None.\n1st INDORSEMENT\nTHE AIR CORPS TACTICAL SCHOOL, Maxwell Field, Montgomery, Alabama, July 6, 1940.\nTO: The Adjutant General, Washington, D. C.\nI concur in the above report.\nW. R. WEAVER, Colonel, Air Corps, Commandant.\nWrite nothing below this line."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT (SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCoy, Howard M. 018051 1st Lt., Air Corps.\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 9-3/30 months, from July 1, 1939 to April 3, 1940.\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: Duty, Propeller Lab. Exp. Engr. Sec. (Prin. Duty) 8-21/30 Superior. Pilot 9-3/30 Excellent. (Leave of Absence) 9/30.\nF. Handling officers and men: Excellent. Performance of field duties: Superior. Administrative and executive duties: Unknown.\nG. Pilot. Expert on propeller technical matters and propeller design.\nH. Physical activity: Excellent. Physical endurance: Excellent. Military bearing and neatness: Superior. Attention to duty: Excellent. Cooperation: Superior. Initiative: Superior. Intelligence: Superior. Force: Excellent. Judgment and common sense: Superior. Leadership: Superior.\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67-July 1, 1936."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer Franklin O. Carroll\nI. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge? Yes\nJ. Has he exhibited any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? No If yes, describe them. (FACT of OPINION. Line out one.)\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, did he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (See par. 1b, AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, enclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words This officer is very energetic. He is considered one of the leading authorities on propellers in the United States. He is well suited for making contacts with civilians.\nO. How well do you know him? Intimately acquainted with him.\nP. Remarks (including entry required by par. 11a, AR 600-185) Report submitted because of temporary duty of officer reported upon as Student, The Air Corps Tactical School, Maxwell Field, Ala. Suitable for civilian contact.\nQ. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? None\nIf no improvement was noted, what period of time elapsed between your notification to him of his deficiencies and the rendition of this report?\nR. Based on your observation during the period covered by this report, give in your own words your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE I consider him to be a valuable officer to the Service especially as a technical officer on propellers.\nS. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial and are in accordance with AR 600-185.\n(Signed) Franklin O Carroll\n(Name typed) FRANKLIN O. CARROLL, Major, Air Corps\n(Grade and Org.) Major, Air Corps, Experimental Engineering Sec. A.C. Materiel\n(Comdg. what?) Experimental Engineering Sec. A.C. Materiel Div.\n(Place) Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n(Date) June 16, 1940. Incls. None\n1st INDORSEMENT\nWar Dept., Air Corps Materiel Division, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. July 6, 1940 - To: The Adjutant General (Thru: Chief, Materiel Division, Washington, D. C.)\n1. I concur in the above report.\nO. P. ECHOLS, Colonel, Air Corps, Ass't Chief of Division\nWrite nothing below this line. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 8-6303"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Efficiency Report -- McCoy, Howard M., 1st Lt., Air Corps (4-A)\n2nd Ind.\nWar Department, Air Corps, Materiel Division, Washington, D. C., August 12, 1940\nTo: The Adjutant General\n1. Examined and forwarded.\nFor the Chief, Materiel Division:\n[signature]\nMajor, Air Corps\nAssistant"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McCoy, Howard M., Col., AO-18954 550A SUMMARY OF COMMISSIONED SERVICE Pilot-Nov 31, Combt OBS-Oct 40\nSummary of commissioned service chart: Permanent Rank 2nd Lt FA 12 Jun 30; 2nd Lt AC 22 Dec 31; 1st Lt AC 1 Aug 35; Capt AC 12 Jun. Details: Dtld AC 12 Sept 30; Trfd to AC 22 Dec 31, 2 Comm. Type of Duty and Station entries: Fly. Student, March Field, Calif.; Fly Student, Kelly Fld., Tex.; Sq. Duties, 94th Pur. Sq, Selfridge Fld., Mich.; Student, Calif. Inst. of Tech.; Student, AC Engr. Sch; Asst. Dir., Prop Unit Acft. Br., Engr. Sect.; Asst. Director and Director Propeller Unit, Aircraft Branch, Experimental Engr. Section, AC Materiel Division, Wright Field, Ohio; Student, Maxwell AC Tact School, Fld., Ala.; Student, Cal. Inst. of Tech."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McCoy, Howard M., Col., AO-18954 550A SUMMARY OF COMMISSIONED SERVICE AIR C. OBS-AUG 41, Sr Pilot-Oct 41, Comd Pilot-JAN 47\nSummary of commissioned service chart: Temporary Rank Maj 30Jun, Lt Col Jan, Col 1 Mar; Permanent Rank Maj 12 June, Col USAF 2 April; Awards BSM, LM; Actual Service 19Y 6M 19D. Type of Duty and Station entries: Student, California Institute of Tech., Wright Field, Ohio; Chief, Propellor Lab, Engine Division, AAF Material Command, Wright Field, Ohio; Student, Army & Navy Staff Coll., Washington, D.C.; Dep. Dir., Tech. Serv., Hq, Air Tech Serv. Comd., Chief Tech Intel Div., Hq, US Strat AF, Europe; Chief, Air Documents Div., Intell., T-2 Section, Hq, AMC, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio; Dep. C.G.; Chief, Stu O., ICAF, Wash, D.C."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROFILE OF SERVICE\nLAST NAME McCoy FIRST NAME Howard MIDDLE INITIAL M SERVICE NUMBER 550A\nAERO RATING Comd Pilot Jan 47\nFLYING STATUS\nPERMANENT GRADE\nTEMPORARY GRADE\nDATE 51 52 53\n7.0 6.5 SUPERIOR 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 EXCELLENT 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 VERY 2.0 SATISFACTORY 1.5 1.0 SATISFACTORY .5 .0 -.5 UNSATISFACTORY -1.0\nREMARKS 22\nPERMANENT GRADE\nTEMPORARY GRADE\nDATE\n7.0 6.5 SUPERIOR 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 EXCELLENT 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 VERY 2.0 SATISFACTORY 1.5 1.0 SATISFACTORY .5 .0 -.5 UNSATISFACTORY -1.0\nREMARKS\nAFHQ FORM 0-21A PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. 3 JAN 50 50 12039"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mat. Div. A. C. 304-Wright Field 11-3-38-25M\n\nWAR DEPARTMENT\nAIR CORPS\nMATERIEL DIVISION\nOFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF DIVISION\n\nWRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO\nJune 30, 1939.\n\nSubject: Efficiency Report -\n1st Lt. Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps.\n\nTo: The Adjutant General\n(Thru The Chief of the Air Corps).\n\n1. In accordance with Paragraph 16, AR 600-185, no Efficiency Report will be rendered on First Lieutenant Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps, for the period June 14, 1939 to June 30, 1939, due to the fact that the period of duty does not exceed one month.\n\nFor the Chief of the Materiel Division:\n\nA. E. JONES,\nMajor, Air Corps,\nAss't Administrative Executive.\n\n1st Ind. (1-C)\n\nWar Department, Office, Chief of the Air Corps, Washington, D. C., August 22, 1939. - To The Adjutant General."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE. IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES)\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nNOTED A. G. O.\nSEP 13 1939\n\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON McCoy, Howard M. 018054 1st Lt., Air Corps, (Name typed) (Serial No.) (Grade) (Organization)\nA's official status with respect to you Under my supervision\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 11-13/30 months, from July 1, 1938 to June 13, 1939\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION HIS LENGTH OF SERVICE AND THE OPPORTUNITIES AFFORDED HIM, WHICH MIGHT HAVE A BEARING UPON HIS PERFORMANCE OF DUTY, PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS, OR PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standard-inefficient.\nSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard-passably efficient.\nVERY SATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that acceptable as SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above VERY SATISFACTORY but below SUPERIOR.\nSUPERIOR: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that considered EXCELLENT.\nUNKNOWN: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, his personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of six classifications as given under D, and consider carefully the obstacles encountered by the individual in the performance of each duty listed. THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED UNDER \"MANNER OF PERFORMANCE\" ARE BASED ON-\nFREQUENT OBSERVATION OF THE RESULTS OF HIS WORK,\n(Line out inappropriate words or amplify under par. P according to circumstances)\n\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nAss't Director, Propeller Unit, Aircraft Branch (Principal Duty) | 11-13/30 | Excellent\nDuty, Research and Development Branch | 2 1/30 | Excellent\nPilot | 11-13/30 | Excellent\n\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: ENTRIES BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.)\n1. Handling officers and men: Excellent\n2. Performance of field duties: Unknown\n3. Administrative and executive duties: Excellent\n4. As an instructor: Unknown\n5. Training troops: Unknown\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officer's grade): Unknown\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. Show pilot and/or observer ratings of Air Corps officers here. Pilot\n\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others of his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.)\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly): Superior\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion): Superior\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance): Excellent\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously): Superior\n5. Cooperation (acting jointly and effectively with another or others, military or civilian, to attain a designated objective): Excellent\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders): Superior\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions): Superior\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty): Excellent\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions): Excellent\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement and still maintain high morale): Excellent\n\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67-July 1, 1936."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer J. P. Richter\n\nI. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge? Yes\nJ. Has he exhibited any weaknesses-temperamental, moral, physical, etc.-which adversely affect his efficiency? No If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, did he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (See par. 1b, AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, enclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words: This officer is very well qualified for aeronautical engineering duty, especially for propeller development. He is ambitious and devoted to propeller work.\nO. How well do you know him? For two years.\nP. Remarks (including entry required by par. 11a, AR 600-185) Report submitted because of relief of reporting officer as Section Chief. He is suitable for civilian contact or for duty with any one or all of the civilian components.\nQ. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? None\nIf no improvement was noted, what period of time elapsed between your notification to him of his deficiencies and the rendition of this report?\nR. Based on your observation during the period covered by this report, give in your own words your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE: This officer is of very high value to the Service, especially in the aeronautical engineering field.\nS. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial and are in accordance with AR 600-185.\n\n(Signed) J. P. RICHTER,\n(Name typed)\n(Grade and Org.) Major, Air Corps,\n(Comdg. what?) Experimental Engineering Sec. A.C. Materiel Div.\n(Place) Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n(Date) June 13, 1939 Incls. None\n\n1st INDORSEMENT\nWar Dept., Air Corps Materiel Division, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. July 12, 1939 - To: The Adjutant General (Thru The Chief of the Air Corps).\n1. I concur in the above report.\n\nGEO. H. BRETT,\nBrig. General, Air Corps,\nChief of Division.\n\nWrite nothing below this line. 3-8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page two\nEfficiency Report on 1st Lt. Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps, for the period July 1, 1938 to June 13, 1939.\n\n2nd Ind.\n\nWar Department, Office, Chief of the Air Corps, Washington, D. C., August 22, 1939. - To The Adjutant General.\n\nExamined and forwarded.\n\nFor the Chief of the Air Corps:\n\nRalph E. Fisher,\nCaptain, Air Corps,\nAsst. Chief, Personnel Div."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE CHIEF AIR CORPS NOTED\n(USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE. IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES)\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nNOTED A. G. O.\n\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON McCoy, Howard M. 018054 1st Lt., Air Corps,\nA's official status with respect to you Under my supervision\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 3-24/30 months, from March 6, 1938 to June 30, 1938\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION HIS LENGTH OF SERVICE AND THE OPPORTUNITIES AFFORDED HIM, WHICH MIGHT HAVE A BEARING UPON HIS PERFORMANCE OF DUTY, PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS, OR PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standard-inefficient.\nSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard-passably efficient.\nVERY SATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that acceptable as SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above VERY SATISFACTORY but below SUPERIOR.\nSUPERIOR: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that considered EXCELLENT.\nUNKNOWN: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, his personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately. Where possible show duration of each in months.) THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED UNDER \"MANNER OF PERFORMANCE\" ARE BASED ON-\nFREQUENT OR INFREQUENT OBSERVATION OF THE RESULTS OF HIS WORK,\n\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nAss't Director, Propeller Unit, Aircraft Branch, (Principal Duty) | 3 | Excellent\nAirplane Pilot | 3-24/30 | Excellent\n(Leave April 6, 1938 to April 30, 1938)\n\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: ENTRIES BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.)\n1. Handling officers and men: Excellent\n2. Performance of field duties: Unknown\n3. Administrative and executive duties: Excellent\n4. As an instructor: Unknown\n5. Training troops: Unknown\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officer's grade): Unknown\nG. Airplane Pilot. Especially qualified as a propeller expert but possesses an unusually thorough grounding in aerodynamics. Has ability to do independent research.\n\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others of his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.)\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly): Superior\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion): Superior\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance): Excellent\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously): Excellent\n5. Cooperation (acting jointly and effectively with another or others, military or civilian, to attain a designated objective): Excellent\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders): Superior\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions): Superior\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty): Excellent\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions): Excellent\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement and still maintain high morale): Excellent\n\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67-July 1, 1936."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer J. P. Richter\nI. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge? Yes\nJ. Has he exhibited any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? No If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, did he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (See par. 1b, AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, enclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words He has unbounded energy and enthusiasm which coupled with a superior grounding in aerodynamics, will make him an exceptional officer as he gains in experience.\nO. How well do you know him? Have known him for over one year.\nP. Remarks (including entry required by par. 11a, AR 600-185) This officer is suitable for civilian contact or for duty with any one or all of the civilian components. This estimate is based upon knowledge of this officer's work prior to and including the period of this report.\nQ. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? No unfavorable entries.\nIf no improvement was noted, what period of time elapsed between your notification to him of his deficiencies and the rendition of this report?\nR. Based on your observation during the period covered by this report, give in your own words your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE He will be most valuable if permitted to specialize in aeronautical engineering, and particularly in work involving original and independent research. See Par. P\nS. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial and are in accordance with AR 600-185.\n(Signed) J. P. Richter\n(Name typed) J. P. RICHTER, Major, Air Corps.\n(Grade and Org.) Major, Air Corps.\n(Comdg. what?) Engineering Section, A.C. Materiel Div.\n(Place) Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n(Date) June 30, 1938 Incls. None\n1st INDORSEMENT\nWar Dept., Air Corps Materiel Division, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. July 9, 1938 - To: The Adjutant General (Thru The Chief of the Air Corps).\n1. I concur in the above report.\nA. W. ROBINS, Brig. General, Air Corps, Chief of Division.\nWrite nothing below this line. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page two. Efficiency report of 1st Lt. Howard M. McCoy, AC, for the period March 6, 1938 to June 30, 1938.\n2nd Ind.\nWar Dept., Office, Chief of the Air Corps, Washington, D.C., August 23, 1938- To The Adjutant General.\nExamined and forwarded.\nO. Westover, Major General, Air Corps, Chief of the Air Corps."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT (SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON McCoy, Howard M. 018054 1st Lt., Air Corps. (Name typed) (Serial No.) (Grade) (Organization)\nA's official status with respect to you Under my supervision\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 8-5/30 months, from July 1, 1937 to March 5, 1938\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\nD. Definitions of UNSATISFACTORY, SATISFACTORY, VERY SATISFACTORY, EXCELLENT, SUPERIOR, UNKNOWN.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: Duty Months Manner of performance\nAss't Director, Propeller Unit, Aircraft Branch, (Principal Duty) 8-5/30 Excellent\nAirplane Pilot 8-5/30 Excellent\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: 1. Handling officers and men: Very satisfactory. 2. Performance of field duties: Unknown. 3. Administrative and executive duties: Very satisfactory. 4. As an instructor: Very satisfactory. 5. Training troops: Unknown. 6. Tactical handling of troops: Unknown.\nG. Airplane Pilot - Excellent\nH. Qualifications: 1. Physical activity: Excellent. 2. Physical endurance: Excellent. 3. Military bearing and neatness: Very satisfactory. 4. Attention to duty: Superior. 5. Cooperation: Excellent. 6. Initiative: Superior. 7. Intelligence: Superior. 8. Force: Excellent. 9. Judgment and common sense: Excellent. 10. Leadership: Excellent."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer O. P. Echols\nI. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge? Yes, to an unusual degree.\nJ. Has he exhibited any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? No If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, did he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (See par. 1b, AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, enclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words A thoroughly grounded specialist in aeronautical engineering, especially aerodynamics, who is a deep student of the technical phases of his profession.\nO. How well do you know him? Fairly well.\nP. Remarks (including entry required by par. 11a, AR 600-185) Report submitted because of relief of reporting officer as Chief, Engineering Section. Suitable for civilian contact.\nQ. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? No unfavorable entries.\nIf no improvement was noted, what period of time elapsed between your notification to him of his deficiencies and the rendition of this report?\nR. Based on your observation during the period covered by this report, give in your own words your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE He should be encouraged to specialize in engineering because of his superior training and outstanding natural ability along aeronautical engineering lines.\nS. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial and are in accordance with AR 600-185.\n(Signed) O. P. Echols\n(Name typed) O. P. ECHOLS, Lt. Colonel, Air Corps.\n(Grade and Org.) Lt. Colonel, Air Corps.\n(Comdg. what?) Engineering Section, A.C. Materiel Division,\n(Place) Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n(Date) March 5, 1938 Incls. None\n1st INDORSEMENT\nWar Dept., Air Corps Materiel Division, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. May 19, 1938 - To: The Adjutant General (Thru The Chief of the Air Corps).\n1. I concur in the above report.\nA. W. ROBINS, Brig. General, Air Corps, Chief of Division.\nWrite nothing below this line. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT (SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON McCoy, Howard M. 018054 1st Lt., Air Corps. (Name typed) (Serial No.) (Grade) (Organization)\nA's official status with respect to you Under my supervision\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 11 months, from August 1, 1936 to June 30, 1937\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\nD. Definitions of UNSATISFACTORY, SATISFACTORY, VERY SATISFACTORY, EXCELLENT, SUPERIOR, UNKNOWN.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: Duty Months Manner of performance\nAssistant Director, Propeller Unit, Aircraft Br. Director, Aerodynamics Research and Test Laboratory, Aircraft Branch 10-2/30 Excellent\n(Leave August 5, 1936 to September 3, 1936)\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: 1. Handling officers and men: Excellent. 2. Performance of field duties: Unknown. 3. Administrative and executive duties: Excellent. 4. As an instructor: Unknown. 5. Training troops: Unknown. 6. Tactical handling of troops: Unknown.\nG. Airplane Pilot - Excellent\nH. Qualifications: 1. Physical activity: Excellent. 2. Physical endurance: Excellent. 3. Military bearing and neatness: Very satisfactory. 4. Attention to duty: Very satisfactory. 5. Cooperation: Excellent. 6. Initiative: Excellent. 7. Intelligence: Superior. 8. Force: Excellent. 9. Judgment and common sense: Very satisfactory. 10. Leadership: Excellent."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer O. P. Echols\nI. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge? Yes\nJ. Has he exhibited any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? No If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, did he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (See par. 1b, AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, enclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words. An unusually bright officer who is thoroughly grounded in aeronautical engineering. He should make an unusually valuable officer in the research and development field, as his judgment becomes seasoned by added experience.\nO. How well do you know him? Fairly well\nP. Remarks (including entry required by par. 11a, AR 600-185) Suitable for civilian contact.\nQ. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? No unfavorable entries\nIf no improvement was noted, what period of time elapsed between your notification to him of his deficiencies and the rendition of this report?\nR. Based on your observation during the period covered by this report, give in your own words your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE. He would be an excellent officer on any assignment, but his greatest value to the Service will be realized in the specialized field of experimental aeronautical engineering.\nS. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial and are in accordance with AR 600-185.\n(Signed) O. P. Echols\n(Name typed) O. P. ECHOLS\n(Grade and Org.) Lt. Colonel, Air Corps\n(Comdg. what?) Engineering Section, A.C. Materiel Div.\n(Place) Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n(Date) June 30, 1937 Incls. None\n1st INDORSEMENT\nWar Dept., Air Corps, Materiel Division, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio, July 9, 1937.\nTo: The Adjutant General (THRU: The Chief of the Air Corps).\n1. I concur in the above report.\nA. W. ROBINS, Brig. General, Air Corps, Chief of Division.\nWrite nothing below this line. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ABBREVIATED EFFICIENCY REPORT (SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCoy, Howard M. 018054 1st Lt. Air Corps\nA's official status with respect to you: Student, under my supervision\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 1 months, from July 1, 1936 to July 31, 1936\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION HIS LENGTH OF SERVICE AND THE OPPORTUNITIES AFFORDED HIM, WHICH MIGHT HAVE A BEARING UPON HIS PERFORMANCE OF DUTY, PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS, OR PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standard—inefficient.\nSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard—passably efficient.\nVERY SATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that acceptable as SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above VERY SATISFACTORY but below SUPERIOR.\nSUPERIOR: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that considered EXCELLENT.\nUNKNOWN: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, his personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of six classifications as given under D, and consider carefully the obstacles encountered by the individual in the performance of each duty listed. The opinions expressed in this report are based on intimate daily contact, ~~frequent or infrequent observation of the results of his work, or academic ratings.~~ (Line out inappropriate words or amplify under \"Remarks\" according to circumstances.)\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nStudent, Air Corps Engineering School | 1 | Superior\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: ENTRIES BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.) Unknown, Unsatisfactory, Satisfactory, Very satisfactory, Excellent, Superior\n1. Handling officers and men\n2. Performance of field duties\n3. Administrative and executive duties\n4. As an instructor\n5. Training troops\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officer's grade)\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. Show pilot and/or observer ratings of Air Corps officers here.\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others of his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.) Unknown, Unsatisfactory, Satisfactory, Very satisfactory, Excellent, Superior\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly)\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion)\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance)\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously)\n5. Cooperation (acting jointly and effectively with another or others, military or civilian, to attain a designated objective)\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders)\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions)\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty)\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions)\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement and still maintain high morale)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67—January 1, 1936 3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer A. W. Robins\nI. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge?\nJ. Has he exhibited any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, did he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter?\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (See par. 1b, AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, enclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words.\nO. How well do you know him?\nP. Remarks (including entry required by par. 11a, AR 600-185) This officer completed the course in general aeronautical engineering at the Air Corps Engineering School, July 31, 1936. He graduated, adapted for engineering. His academic rating is superior.\nQ. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? None If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted?\nIf no improvement was noted, what period of time elapsed between your notification to him of his deficiencies and the rendition of this report?\nR. Based on your observation during the period covered by this report, give in your own words your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE\nS. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial and are in accordance with AR 600-185.\n(Signed) A. W. Robins\n(Name typed) A. W. ROBINS\n(Grade and Org.) Brig. General, Air Corps\n(Comdg. what?) Commandant, Air Corps Engineering School\n(Place) Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n(Date) August 1, 1936 Incls. None\n1st INDORSEMENT\nWrite nothing below this line. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROCEEDINGS OF THE FACULTY BOARD OF THE AIR CORPS ENGINEERING SCHOOL\nIN THE CASE OF\n1st Lt. HOWARD M. McCOY, Air Corps (Name of Student)\n1. The Board met July 8, 1936, and there being a quorum present, proceeded with the examination of the aforementioned student.\n2. The Board finds that this student is qualified to receive a Certificate of Graduation in General Aeronautical Engineering from the Air Corps Engineering School.\n3. The Board recommends that he be given this Certificate of Graduation.\nFREDERICK M. HOPKINS, Jr., Captain, Air Corps, Assistant Commandant.\nA. W. ROBINS, Brig. General, Air Corps, Commandant.\nApproved JUL 16 1936 By order of the Chief of the Air Corps: M. F. Davis, Lt. Col. Air Corps, Actg. Executive.\nTo Mail & Record Room Date EXECUTIVE FINANCE INFORMATION PERSONNEL RESERVE SUPPLY WAR P. & T"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AIR CORPS ENGINEERING SCHOOL\nWRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO\n\nCERTIFICATE OF PROFICIENCY\n\nName McCoy, Howard M. Course General Aeronautical Engineering\nRank First Lieutenant, Air Corps Date July 10, 1936\n\nSUBJECT HOURS GRADE\n\nEngineering Drawing ..... 42 93\nShop Practice ..... 87.5 86\nAircraft Inspection ..... 50 90\nDepot Operation and Tour of Commercial Factories ..... 42 90\nMechanics ..... 105 90\nStrength of Materials ..... 87.5 95\nAircraft Structures ..... 52.5 95\nAircraft Chemistry ..... 17.5 95\nMetallurgy ..... 25 95\nPhysical Testing of Wood ..... 12.5 80\nPhysical Testing of Textiles and Rubber ..... 12.5 92\nPhysical Testing of Metals ..... 25 89\nThermodynamics ..... 70 93\nEngine Laboratory ..... 77 89\nEngine Design ..... 133 93\nElectrical Equipment and Installation ..... 20 90\nLighter-than-Air Design ..... 60 93\nAerodynamics ..... 150 94\nPropeller Design ..... 60 93\nAirplane Design ..... 240 95\nPerformance and Flight Testing ..... 60 90\nArmament ..... 12.5 85\nRadio Equipment ..... 12.5 90\nAircraft Instruments ..... 10 90\n\nRemarks General average 91.85\n\nI certify that the above information is correct and that the ratings have been made in all fairness and in accordance with my best judgment.\n\nA. W. ROBINS,\nBrig. General, Air Corps,\nCommandant."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTED - A G O\nAUG 31 1936\n\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\n\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCoy, Howard M. 018054 1st Lt., Air Corps.\nA's official status with respect to you: Student, under my supervision\n\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 11 months, from August 1, 1935 to June 30, 1936\n\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION HIS LENGTH OF SERVICE AND THE OPPORTUNITIES AFFORDED HIM, WHICH MIGHT HAVE A BEARING UPON HIS PERFORMANCE OF DUTY, PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS, OR PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS.\n\nUNSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standard-inefficient.\nSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard-passably efficient.\nVERY SATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that acceptable as SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above VERY SATISFACTORY but below SUPERIOR.\nSUPERIOR: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that considered EXCELLENT.\nUNKNOWN: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, his personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\n\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of six classifications as given under D, and consider carefully the obstacles encountered by the individual in the performance of each duty listed. The opinions expressed in this report are based on intimate daily contact, frequent or infrequent observation of the results of his work, or academic ratings. (Line out inappropriate words or amplify under \"Remarks\" according to circumstances.)\n\nDuty Months Manner of performance\nStudent, Air Corps Engineering School 11 Superior\n\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: ENTRIES BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.)\n\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. Show pilot and/or observer ratings of Air Corps officers here.\n\n1. Handling officers and men - Unknown\n2. Performance of field duties - Unknown\n3. Administrative and executive duties - Unknown\n4. As an instructor - Unknown\n5. Training troops - Unknown\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officer's grade) - Unknown\n\nG entry: Airplane Pilot - Excellent\n\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others of his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.)\n\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly) - Excellent\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion) - Excellent\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance) - Very satisfactory\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously) - Excellent\n5. Cooperation (acting jointly and effectively with another or others, military or civilian, to attain a designated objective) - Excellent\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders) - Excellent\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions) - Superior\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty) - Excellent\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions) - Excellent\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement and still maintain high morale) - Excellent\n\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67-January 1, 1936 3-8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer Frederick M. Hopkins, Jr.\n\nI. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge? Yes, by application and study\n\nJ. Has he exhibited any weaknesses-temperamental, moral, physical, etc.-which adversely affect his efficiency? No If yes, describe them. [illegible] OPINION. Line out one.)\n\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, did he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes\n\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (See par. 1b, AR 600-185.)\n\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, enclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\n\nN. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words A sober, sincere officer with very definite ambitions. Willing, responsible, and dependable. An appreciation of his general excellence is not gained quickly and requires acquaintanceship. He is especially well liked by those who know him.\n\nO. How well do you know him? Intimately for eleven months\n\nP. Remarks (including entry required by par. 11a, AR 600-185)\n\nSuitable for civilian contact.\n\nQ. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? None made.\n\nIf no improvement was noted, what period of time elapsed between your notification to him of his deficiencies and the rendition of this report?\n\nR. Based on your observation during the period covered by this report, give in your own words your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE This officer is above the average of officers of corresponding rank and experience and is especially well qualified in the technical phases of his branch.\n\nS. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial and are in accordance with AR 600-185.\n\n(Signed) Frederick M. Hopkins Jr.\n(Name typed) FREDERICK M. HOPKINS, Jr.\n(Grade and Org.) Captain, Air Corps.\n(Comdg. what?) Ass't Commandant, A.C. Engineering School,\n(Place) Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n(Date) June 30, 1936 Incls. None\n\n1st INDORSEMENT\n\nAir Corps Engineering School, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio, July 2, 1936.\nTo: The Adjutant General (Thru: The Chief of the Air Corps).\n\n1. I concur in the above report.\n2. This officer is completing (July 31, 1936) the course in general aeronautical engineering at the Air Corps Engineering School.\n3. He is being graduated, adapted for engineering.\n4. His academic rating is superior.\n\nA. W. ROBINS,\nBrig. General, Air Corps,\nCommandant.\n\nWrite nothing below this line. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 3-8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NINETY-FOURTH PURSUIT SQUADRON, GHQ AF\nSELFRIDGE FIELD, MICHIGAN\n\nAugust 1, 1935.\n\nSUBJECT: Efficiency Report\n\nTO: Commanding General, Second Wing, GHQ Air Force, Langley Field, Hampton, Virginia.\n\n1. Under the provisions of paragraph 15 a, Army Regulations 600-185, the following reason for non-submission of efficiency report in the case of Second Lieutenant Howard M. McCoy, (O-18054), Air Corps, is submitted:\n\na. Second Lieutenant Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps, performed duty as a squadron officer for the period July 1, 1935 to July 4, 1935, and was on leave of absence from July 5, 1935 to August 1, 1935, during which periods no opportunity to observe the officer's performance of duty occurred. Lieutenant McCoy was relieved from assignment this date and transferred to the Air Corps Engineering School Wright Field, Ohio, as a student.\n\nLEE Q. WASSER,\nCaptain, Air Corps,\nCommanding.\n\n1st Ind.\n\nHq. 1st Pursuit Group, GHQ Air Force, Selfridge Field, Michigan, August 22, 1935. To: Commanding General, Second Wing, GHQ Air Force, Langley Field, Hampton, Va.\n\nRALPH ROYCE,\nLieut. Colonel, Air Corps,\nCommanding."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"201.61 2nd Ind. (C-20)\n\nHeadquarters 2nd Wing, GHQ Air Force, Langley Field, Va.\nTo: Commanding General, GHQ Air Force, Langley Field, Va.\n\nAF 201-McCoy, Howard M. (Off) 3rd Ind. (AG-11)\n\nHEADQUARTERS GHQ AIR FORCE, Langley Field, Virginia, OCT 10 1935\nTo: The Adjutant General, Washington, D. C."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mat. Div. A. C. 312-Wright Field 10-31-34-40M\n\nWAR DEPARTMENT\nAIR CORPS\nMATERIEL DIVISION\nOFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF DIVISION\n\nWright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n\nJuly 31, 1935.\n\nSUBJECT: Efficiency Report -\nSecond Lieutenant Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps.\n\nTO: The Adjutant General\n(Thru The Chief of the Air Corps).\n\n1. In accordance with Paragraph 15, AR 600-185, no Efficiency Report will be rendered on Second Lieutenant Howard M. McCoy, Air Corps, for the period July 26, 1935 to July 31, 1935, due to the fact that the period of duty does not exceed one month. Report submitted because of transfer of officer reported upon to the Air Corps Engineering School.\n\nFor the Chief of the Materiel Division:\n\nF. T. MARTIN,\nColonel, Air Corps,\nExecutive."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\n\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCOY, HOWARD M. 0-18054 2nd Lieut. Air Corps\nA's official status with respect to you\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 8 19/30 months, from Sept.20,1934 to June 8, 1935\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately and summarize. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of five classifications as given under D, amplified as may be appropriate.\n\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nDS Student, California Institute of Technology (Aeronautical Engineering). | 8 19/30 | Excellent (Based on Academic Rating)\n\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE RATING IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.)\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT.\n1. Handling officers and men No | No\n2. Performance of field duties\n3. Administrative and executive duties Opportunity | Opportunity\n4. As an instructor\n5. Training troops to | to\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade) Observe. | Observe.\n\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others in his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.)\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly) Satisfactory No\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion)\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance)\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously) Opportunity\n5. Tact (the faculty of being considerate and sensible in dealing with others)\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders)\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions) to\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty)\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions)\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement) Observe.\n\nI. Would you *object, *be reluctant, be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words. *State reasons.)\n\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\n\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67\nFebruary 1, 1933\n3—8308\nJAN 28 1936\nNOTED - A. G. O."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on McCoy, Howard M. 2nd Lt. AC Name of reporting officer O. Westover, Maj. Gen. AC.\n\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter?\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? If so, how?\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? In war?\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words\nS. How long have you known him? T. How well do you know him?\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185)\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiences indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? None If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted?\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) O. Westover,\n(Name typed) O. Westover,\n(Grade and Org.) Major General, Air Corps,\n(Comdg. what?) Chief of the Air Corps,\n(Place) Washington, D.C.\n(Date) January 25, 1936 Incls.\n(Leave blank)\n1st INDORSEMENT\nWrite nothing below this line.\n3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORD OF McCoy, Lieut. Howard Monroe\nChurch Preference\nName of Parent or Guardian\nDate and Place of Birth Kane, Pennsylvania Dec. 4, 1907\nNationality American\nAddress\nMatriculated Sept. 21, 1934\nGraduated June 7, 1935\nCourse AE\nDegree M.S. in A.E.\n\n1ST YEAR 1934-35 No. Un. Gr. Credits 2ND YEAR 19 No. Un. Gr. Credits 3RD YEAR 19 No. Un. Gr. Credits 4TH YEAR 19 No. Un. Gr. Credits\n1st Term\nAero. of Airpl. AE251 9 2 18\nAirplane Design AE252 12 2 24\nAero. Press. in Aero. Lab. AE253 6 3 18\nElast. Anal. to Aero. AE270 W\nAero. Seminar AE290 2 P 4\nStructures CE 11 9 3 27\nAero. Research 12 P 24\n2nd Term\nAero. of Airplane AE251 9 2 18\nAirplane Design AE252 12 3 36\nAirplane Test Proc. AE253 6 3 18\nAE Seminar AE290 2 P 4\nAircraft Structures AE2 12 3 36\nAE Research 12 P 24\n3d Term\nAero. of Airpl. AE251c 9 2 18\nAirpl. Des. Probs AE252c 12 3 36\nAirpl. Test Proced AE253c 6 3 18\nAircraft Struct. AE2 12 3 36\nAE Seminar AE290c 2 P 4\nAE Research 12 4 48\nTOTALS FOR YEAR\nCALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, PASADENA, CALIFORNIA\nTOTALS"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENTRANCE\nNAME McCoy, Lieut. Howard Monroe\nCONDITIONS AND INCOMPLETES REMOVED\nPrepared at\nGROUP A Cert. Ex.\nEnglish, 1st year 1\nEnglish, 2nd year 1\nEnglish, 3rd year 1\nElementary Algebra 1\nHigher Algebra 1\nPlane Geometry 1\nSolid Geometry ½\nTrigonometry ½\nPhysics 1\nChemistry 1\nU. S. Hist. & Govt. 1\nGROUP B\nGROUP C\nENTRANCE UNITS ALLOWED\nBy Certificate\nBy Examination\nOther Col. & Univ. attend. & degr. conf. Rensselaer Poly.(1) U.S.Military Academy (4)\nGranted Honorable Dismissal. 11-17-35 Major of Air Corps\n5TH YEAR 19 No. Un. Gr. Credits Date Subject No. Un. Gr. Credits\nREMARKS\nFifteen preparatory units are required for entrance.\nTOTALS FOR YEAR\nTOTALS, 1ST 4 YEARS\nTOTALS\na fee of $1.00 is charged for each duplicate of this transcript.\nCorrect Transcript of Record and Honorable Dismissal.\nPhilip S. Foss, Registrar\nBy- T. Dierkes\nCustodian of Records\nTranscript not official without Registrar's stamp.\nCALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY NOV 1 1935 REGISTRAR'S OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT PRINT PROPER NAMES)\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nNOV 1 2 1934\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: Howard M. McCoy 0-18054 2nd Lt., Air Corps\n(Name typed) (Serial No.) (Grade) (Organization)\nA's official status with respect to you Subordinate officer under my command.\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 3-1/3 months, from June 4, 1934 to September 16, 1934\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT Selfridge Field, Michigan.\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately and summarize. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of five classifications as given under D, amplified as may be appropriate.\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nAssistant Squadron Engineering Officer. | 2 | Excellant.\nLeave of Absence from Sept. 1, 1934 to Sept. 16, 1934 | |\nOrdinary garrison training | 1 | Satisfactory\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE RATING IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.)\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT.\n1. Handling officers and men. X (Excellent)\n2. Performance of field duties. X (Excellent)\n3. Administrative and executive duties. X (Superior)\n4. As an instructor.\n5. Training troops.\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade). X (Excellent)\nAirplane Pursuit Pilot - Satisfactory.\n*Not observed.\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others in his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.)\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly). X (Superior)\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion). X (Superior)\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance). X (Excellent)\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously). X (Superior)\n5. Tact (the faculty of being considerate and sensible in dealing with others). X (Excellent)\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders). X (Excellent)\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions). X (Excellent)\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty). X (Excellent)\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions). X (Excellent)\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement). X (Excellent)\nI. Would you *object, *be reluctant, be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words. *State reasons.) Yes.\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? No. If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 February 1, 1933\n3—8308 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1933"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer Earle E. Partridge\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes.\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No. (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No. If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? Yes. If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? Yes. If so, how? By proper performance of his present duties.\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? Flight leader. In war? Squadron leader.\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words Excellent, conscientious, ambitious junior officer.\nS. How long have you known him? Two years. T. How well do you know him? Well.\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) I consider this officer suitable for civilian contact or for duty with one or more of the civilian components. Delay in the submission of this report was due to inadvertence and the departure of the undersigned on leave of absence under orders to report at the expiration thereof to Rockwell Field, California, on detached service.\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiences indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? None.\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Leave blank)\n(Signed) Earle E. Partridge\n(Name typed) EARLE E. PARTRIDGE,\n(Grade and Org.) 1st Lt., Air Corps\n(Comdg. what?) 94th Pursuit Squadron, Air Corps\n(Place) Selfridge Field, Michigan.\n(Date) October 9, 1934 Incls. None\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHq. Selfridge Field, Mt. Clemens, Michigan. October 26, 1934. To: Commanding General, Sixth Corps Area, Chicago, Illinois.\nNeither the reporting officer nor the officer reported upon is sufficiently known to the undersigned to enable him to express an opinion.\n2nd Ind. NOV 5 1934 Hq. 6th C. A., Chicago, Ill., To: The Adjutant General, Washington, D. C.\nExamined and forwarded.\nFor the Commanding General:\nRALPH ROYCE, Major, Air Corps, Commanding.\nWrite nothing below this line.\n3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"NOTED: A. G. O.\"\n\"ABBREVIATED REPORT\"\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\nJUN 18 1934\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCoy, Howard M. (0-18054) 2nd Lieut., Air Corps\nA's official status with respect to you Squadron Officer\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 1 months, from May 4, 1934 to June 3, 1934\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT Selfridge Field, Michigan\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately and summarize.)\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nOrdinary Garrison Training (94th Pur Sqdrn.) | 1 | Satisfactory\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE RATING IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.)\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service.\n1. Handling officers and men. Airplane Pursuit Pilot\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications?\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly).\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion).\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance).\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously).\n5. Tact (the faculty of being considerate and sensible in dealing with others).\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders).\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions).\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty).\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions).\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement).\nI. Would you *object, *be reluctant, be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words. *State reasons.)\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 May 1, 1929\n3—8308 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1929"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer A. B. Ballard\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter?\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No. (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No. If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? If so, how?\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? In war?\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words\nS. How long have you known him? T. How well do you know him?\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185)\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiences indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? No unfavorable entries.\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Leave blank)\n(Signed) A. B. Ballard\n(Name typed) A. B. BALLARD,\n(Grade and Org.) Captain, Air Corps\n(Comdg. what?) 94th Pursuit Squadron, A.C.\n(Place) Selfridge Field, Michigan\n(Date) June 4, 1934 Incls. None\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHeadquarters Selfridge Field, Mt.Clemens, Michigan, June 5, 1934. To The Commanding General, Sixth Corps Area, U S Post Office Building, Chicago, Illinois.\nI concur in the above report.\n2nd Ind. JUN 9 1934 Hq. 6th C. A., Chicago, Ill., To: The Adjutant General, Washington, D. C.\nExamined and forwarded.\nFor the Commanding General:\nF. M. ANDREWS, Lieut. Col., A.C. Commanding\nWrite nothing below this line.\n3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ABBREVIATED REPORT\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\nMAY 29 1934\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: HOWARD M. McCOY, 0-18054 2nd Lieut. Air Corps\nA's official status with respect to you under my command\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 2-9/30 months, from February 27, 1934 to May 5, 1934.\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT AACHO - Cleveland, Ohio.\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED:\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nAir Mail Pilot | 2-9/30 | Excellent\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE RATING IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.)\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT.\n1. Handling officers and men.\n2. Performance of field duties.\n3. Administrative and executive duties.\n4. As an instructor.\n5. Training troops.\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade).\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others in his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.)\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly).\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion).\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance).\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously).\n5. Tact (the faculty of being considerate and sensible in dealing with others).\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders).\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions).\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty).\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions).\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement).\nI. Would you *object, *be reluctant, be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words. *State reasons.)\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 February 1, 1933\n3—8308 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1933"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy, 2nd Lieut Name of reporting officer H. H. GEORGE, Captain, A.C. A.C.\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter?\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? If so, how?\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? In war?\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words\nS. How long have you known him? T. How well do you know him?\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) No unfavorable entries\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted?\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) (Name typed) H. H. GEORGE, (Grade and Org.) Captain, Air Corps (Comdg. what?) First Section, EZ. Army Air Corps Mail Operations. (Place) Cleveland, Ohio. (Date) May 5, 1934. Incls.\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHQ. EASTERN ZONE, AACMO., Mitchel Field, Hempstead, L.I.,N.Y. May 9, 1934.\nTO: Chief of Air Corps, AACMO., Munitions Building, Washington, D. C.\nI concur in the above report.\nB. Q. JONES, Major, A.C., COMMANDING.\n2nd Indorsement.\nWar Department, Office of the Chief of the Air Corps, Washington, D. C., May 18, 1934.\nTo: The Adjutant General.\nExamined and forwarded.\nB. D. Foulois, Major General, Air Corps, Chief of the Air Corps.\nWrite nothing below this line. 3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTED (USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES)\n\"ABBREVIATED REPORT\"\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nJUN 18 1934\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCoy, Howard M. (O-18054) 2nd Lieut., Air Corps\nA's official status with respect to you Squadron Officer\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 1 1/2 months, from January 4, 1934 to February 13, 1934\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT Selfridge Field, Michigan\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately and summarize.)\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nSquadron Engineering Officer | 1/2 | Satisfactory\nSquadron Maintenance Inspector | 1 | Satisfactory\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings:\n1. Handling officers and men\n2. Performance of field duties\n3. Administrative and executive duties.\n4. As an instructor.\n5. Training troops\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade)\nG. Airplane Pursuit Pilot\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications?\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly)\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion)\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance)\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously)\n5. Tact (the faculty of being considerate and sensible in dealing with others)\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders)\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions)\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty)\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions)\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement)\nI. Would you *object, *be reluctant, be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words. *State reasons.) Yes\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? No If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 May 1, 1929"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer Karl G. E. Gimmler\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known On duty commensurate with grade\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? Yes If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? No If so, how?\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? Flight leader In war? Squadron commander\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words A very capable officer\nS. How long have you known him? 2 years T. How well do you know him? Quite well\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) No special suitability for civilian contact or detail for duty with one or all of the civilian components. This officer departed on Air Mail Duty Feb. 13, 1934. Report not previously submitted as same was not believed to be necessary due to temporary nature of his absence.\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? No unfavorable entries\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) (Name typed) KARL G. E. GIMMLER (Grade and Org.) 1st Lieut., Air Corps (Comdg. what?) 94th Pursuit Squadron, A.C. (Place) Selfridge Field, Michigan (Date) April 30, 1934. Incls. None\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHeadquarters Selfridge Field, Mt.Clemens, Michigan, May 1, 1934. To The Commanding General, Sixth Corps Area, U S Post Office Building, Chicago, Illinois.\nI concur in the above report.\n2nd Ind. JUN 9 1934 Hq. 6th C. A. Chicago, Ill., To The Adjutant General, Washington, D. C. Examined and forwarded. For the Commanding General.\nF. M. ANDREWS Lieut.Col., A.C. Commanding\nWrite nothing below this line. 3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTED: A. G. O.\n\"ABBREVIATED REPORT\"\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\nJUN 18 1934\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCoy, Howard M. (O-18054) 2nd Lieut., Air Corps\nA's official status with respect to you Squadron Officer\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 1-1/6 months, from Nov. 28, 1933 to January 3, 1934\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT Selfridge Field, Michigan\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED:\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nAss't Squadron Engineering Officer | 1/3 | Satisfactory\nSquadron Inspecting Officer | 1/3 | Satisfactory\nSquadron Chemical Warfare Officer | 1/3 | Satisfactory\nSquadron Engineering Officer | 1 | Satisfactory\nF. 1. Handling officers and men 2. Performance of field duties 3. Administrative and executive duties. 4. As an instructor. 5. Training troops 6. Tactical handling of troops\nG. Airplane Pursuit Pilot - Satisfactory\nH. Qualifications 1-10 (ratings marked by X)\nI. Would you *object, *be reluctant, be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words.) *State reasons.\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 May 1, 1929"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer E. E. Partridge\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter?\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? If so, how?\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? In war?\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words\nS. How long have you known him? T. How well do you know him?\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) The undersigned departed for Langley Field, Va. on January 4, 1934 for 4 weeks training in advanced aviation and due to the temporary nature of this absence did not consider it necessary to render efficiency report.\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? No unfavorable entries\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) (Name typed) E. E. PARTRIDGE (Grade and Org.) 1st Lieut., Air Corps (Comdg. what?) 94th Pursuit Squadron, A.C. (Place) Selfridge Field, Michigan (Date) May 3, 1934. Incls. None\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHeadquarters Selfridge Field, Mt.Clemens, Michigan, May 4, 1934. To The Commanding General, Sixth Corps Area, U S Post Office Building, Chicago, Illinois.\nI concur in the above report.\n2nd Ind. JUN 9 - 1934 Hq. 6th C. A., Chicago, Ill., To The Adjutant General, Washington, D. C. Examined and forwarded. For the Commanding General.\nF. M. ANDREWS Lieut.Col., A.C. Commanding\nWrite nothing below this line. 3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE CHIEF AIR CORPS\nNOTED\n(USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES)\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nNOTED: RECORD Officers Div.\nDEC 12\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: Howard M. McCoy 0-18054 2d Lt. Air Corps\n(Name typed) (Serial No.) (Grade) (Organization)\nA's official status with respect to you Commanding Officer, 679th Company, C.C.C.\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 2-5/30 months, from Aug. 25, 1933 to October 27, 1933\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT Camp Goodar, South Branch, Michigan\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately and summarize. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of five classifications as given under D, amplified as may be appropriate.\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nCamp and Company Commander | 2-5/30 | Excellent\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE RATING IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.)\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT.\n1. Handling officers and men (Excellent) None known\n2. Performance of field duties (Excellent)\n3. Administrative and executive duties (Satisfactory)\n4. As an instructor not observed\n5. Training troops not observed\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade) not observed\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others in his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.)\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly) Excellent\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion) Excellent\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance) Satisfactory\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously) Excellent\n5. Tact (the faculty of being considerate and sensible in dealing with others) Excellent\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders) Satisfactory\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions) Excellent\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty) Excellent\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions) Excellent\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement) Excellent\nI. Would you *object, *be reluctant, be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words. *State reasons.) Peace & War. Present a higher grade.\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? No. If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 May 1, 1929\n3—8308\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1929"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer Samuel F. Hawkins\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? No\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No. If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known 1st Lt\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? Yes. If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? Yes. If so, how? By handling company.\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? Squadron commander. In war? Squadron commander.\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words are energetic, capable and very likeable officer.\nS. How long have you known him? 2 months. T. How well do you know him? slightly.\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) Fitted for civilian contacts.\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? None. If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted?\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) S. F. Hawkins\n(Name typed) S. F. HAWKINS\n(Grade and Org.) Major, C.A.C.\n(Comdg. what?) 3d FORESTRY DISTRICT - C.C.C.\n(Place) Camp Silver Creek East Tawas, Michigan\n(Date) October 27, 1933. Incls. None\n(Leave blank)\nHq. SIXTH CORPS AREA, Chicago, Illinois, November 10, 1933. To - The Adjutant General, Washington, D.C.\n1st INDORSEMENT\nNeither the reporting officer nor the officer reported upon are sufficiently known to me for an expression of an opinion.\nFrank C. Bolles\nFRANK C. BOLLES, Brigadier General, U.S.A., Commanding.\nWrite nothing below this line.\n3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOV 13 1933\nNOTED: A. G. O.\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES)\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: Howard M. McCoy O-18054 2nd Lieut Air Corps\nA's official status with respect to you Company Officer\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT one months, from 7/25/33 to 8/23/33\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT Camp Goodar, South Branch, Michigan\nD. (Definitions as above.)\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED:\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nCompany Officer (679th Company C.C.C.) | 1 | Excellent\nMess Officer | 1 | Excellent\nMotor Transport Officer | 1 | Excellent\nAthletic Officer | 1 | Excellent\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings:\n1. Handling officers and men Satisfactory\n2. Performance of field duties Satisfactory\n3. Administrative and executive duties Satisfactory\n4. As an instructor Satisfactory\n5. Training troops Satisfactory\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade) Satisfactory\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications?\n1. Physical activity Excellent\n2. Physical endurance Excellent\n3. Military bearing and neatness Excellent\n4. Attention to duty Superior\n5. Tact Satisfactory\n6. Initiative Superior\n7. Intelligence Excellent\n8. Force Excellent\n9. Judgment and common sense Excellent\n10. Leadership Satisfactory\nI. Would you object, be reluctant, be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? yes. in higher grade.\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.) None\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 May 1, 1929\n3—8308\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1929"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer J.K. Colwell, Major, Cav.\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? yes\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? yes (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known yes\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? yes If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? no If so, how?\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? Captain. In war? Captain\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words Very clever officer. Hard worker. Relieves Commanding Officer of a great many arduous details.\nS. How long have you known him? One month. T. How well do you know him? Very well\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) I believe this officer has the length of service required for duty with civilian component. This report was delayed due to lack of forms.\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? no unfavorable entries\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) J.K. Colwell\n(Name typed) J.K. Colwell, Major, Cavalry\n(Grade and Org.) Major, Cavalry\n(Comdg. what?) 1680th Company, CCC Camp Evansville, Wisc. -679th Co.CCC\n(Place) Camp Goodar, South Branch, Michigan.\n(Date) Sept. 20, 1933 Incls. none\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHq. 3rd Forest Dist., Camp Silver Creek, E. Tawas, Mich., Sept. 27, 1933: To: Commanding General, Sixth Corps Area, Chicago, Illinois. Approved. Special report attached hereto.\nS. F. HAWKINS\nMajor, C.A.C. - COMMANDING\n1 Incl. - Spec. Report.\n2nd INDORSEMENT\nHq. 6th C. A., Chicago, Ill., OCT 18 1933 To The Adjutant General, Washington, D.C.\nExamined and forwarded.\n1 Incl. For the Commanding General.\nWrite nothing below this line.\n3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"jkc/ojf\n679th Company, CCC., Camp Goodar, South Branch, Michigan. August 16, 1933.\nSubject; Special Report, 2d Lt. H. M. McCoy, A. C.\nTo; The District Commander, 3d Forestry District, Camp Silver Creek, East Tawas, Michigan.\n1. I desire to make a special report on 2d Lieut. H. M. McCoy, Air Corps, on duty with this Company since July 17, 1933.\n2. a. It might be expected that this Officer would voice some complaint at the difficulties of flying presented by his present duties. On the contrary he has showed initiative and enthusiam in adapting himself to his new assignment and adjusting his duties so that he can arrange to fly when it is possible.\nb. With mostly voluntary labor he has constructed a very satisfactory emergency landing field.\nc. As Mess Officer and Assistant Athletic Officer he has shown ability which I would rate as Excellent.\nd. His initiative in relieving his superiors of work and his ability to plan and carry out new projects is Superior.\nJ. K. Colwell,\nMajor, Cavalry,\nCommanding."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES)\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCoy, Howard M., (O-18054) 2nd Lieut., Air Corps\nA's official status with respect to you Squadron Officer\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 12 months, from July 1, 1932 to June 30, 1933\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT Selfridge Field, Michigan.\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately and summarize. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of five classifications as given under D, amplified as may be appropriate.\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nOrdinary Garrison Duties | 12 | Satisfactory\nPost School Officer | (10 1/4) | See 1st Ind.\nAssistant to the Provost Marshal | (10) | See 1st Ind.\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE RATING IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.)\n1. Handling officers and men: Satisfactory\n2. Performance of field duties: Satisfactory\n3. Administrative and executive duties: Excellent\n4. As an instructor\n5. Training troops: Satisfactory\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade)*\n* Not observed.\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT.\nAirplane Pursuit Pilot - Excellent\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others in his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.)\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly): Excellent\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion): Excellent\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance): Satisfactory\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously): Excellent\n5. Tact (the faculty of being considerate and sensible in dealing with others): Satisfactory\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders): Excellent\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions): Satisfactory\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty): Satisfactory\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions): Satisfactory\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement): Satisfactory\nI. Would you *object, / be reluctant, / be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words.) *State reasons. Yes\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? No If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 May 1, 1929"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer Audrey B. Ballard\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? Yes (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known ---\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? Yes If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? Yes If so, how? By performing duties.\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? Element leader In war? Flight leader\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words Above average young regular officer.\nS. How long have you known him? 12 months T. How well do you know him? Well\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) No special suitability for civilian contact or detail for duty with one or all of the civilian components.\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? No unfavorable entries.\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) A. B. Ballard\n(Name typed) A. B. BALLARD,\n(Grade and Org.) Captain, Air Corps,\n(Comdg. what?) 94th Pursuit Squadron, A. C.\n(Place) Selfridge Field, Michigan\n(Date) June 30, 1933 Incls. Two (2) Letters of Commendation.\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHeadquarters Selfridge Field, Mt. Clemens, Michigan, June 30, 1933. To The Commanding General, Sixth Corps Area, 1819 West Pershing Road, Chicago, Illinois.\nI concur in the above report. Manner of performance of additional post duties shown under \"E\" \"Satisfactory.\"\n2nd Ind.\nHq. 6th C. A., Chicago, Ill., AUG 14 1933 To The Adjutant General, Washington, D. C.\nExamined and forwarded.\nFor the Commanding General:\n2 Incls.\nGEO. H. BRETT, Major, Air Corps, Commanding.\nWrite nothing below this line.\n3-8303"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCoy, Howard M., (O-18054) 2d. Lieut., Air Corps.\nA's official status with respect to you Squadron Officer.\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 3 months, from April 1, 1932 to June 30, 1932.\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT Selfridge Field, Michigan.\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately and summarize.)\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nSquadron Engineering Inspector | 2 | Satisfactory.\nSquadron Engineering Officer | 1 | Satisfactory.\nAssistant to the Provost Marshal | (3) | See 2d Ind.\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings:\n1. Handling officers and men: Satisfactory\n2. Performance of field duties: Satisfactory\n3. Administrative and executive duties: Satisfactory\n4. As an instructor *\n5. Training troops *\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade) *\nG. Airplane Pursuit Pilot - Excellent.\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications?\n1. Physical activity: Excellent\n2. Physical endurance: Satisfactory\n3. Military bearing and neatness: Satisfactory\n4. Attention to duty: Excellent\n5. Tact: Satisfactory\n6. Initiative: Excellent\n7. Intelligence: Satisfactory\n8. Force: Satisfactory\n9. Judgment and common sense: Satisfactory\n10. Leadership: Satisfactory\nI. Would you *object, / be reluctant, / be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words.) *State reasons. Yes.\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? None. If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 May 1, 1929"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy. Name of reporting officer Harry A. Johnson.\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes.\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No. (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No. If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known. Yes.\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? Yes. If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? Yes. If so, how? By the way he performs his duties.\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? Flight leader. In war? Flight leader.\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words: A capable young officer very energetic and who pays strict attention to duty.\nS. How long have you known him? Six months. T. How well do you know him? Intimately.\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) This officer has less than two years commissioned service in the Regular Army. No special suitability for civilian contact or detail for duty with one or all of the civilian components.\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? No unfavorable entries.\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) Harry A. Johnson\n(Name typed) HARRY A. JOHNSON,\n(Grade and Org.) Captain, Air Corps,\n(Comdg. what?) 94th Pursuit Squadron, Air Corps,\n(Place) Selfridge Field, Michigan,\n(Date) June 30, 1932. Incls. None.\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHq. 1st Pur. Grp., A.C., Self. Fld. Mich. June 30, 1932. To: C.O. Self. Fld., Mich.\nI concur in the above report.\nG. E. BROWER, Major, Air Corps, Commanding.\n2d Ind.\nHq. Self. Fld., Mt. Clemens, Mich., June 30, 1932. To - The CG, 6th CA, Chicago, Ill.\nExamined and forwarded. Manner of performance of additional post duty shown under \"E\" - Satisfactory.\nGEO. H. BRETT, Major, Air Corps, Commanding.\nWrite nothing below this line.\n3-8303"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AA 201 McCoy, Howard M.\n3rd Ind\nHq. 6th C. A., Chicago, Ill., AUG 16 1932 To-\nThe Adjutant General, Washington, D. C.\nExamined and forwarded. Cleared.\nFor the Commanding General:"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES)\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCoy, Howard M., (O-18054), 2d Lieut., Air Corps.\n(Name typed) (Serial No.) (Grade) (Organization)\nA's official status with respect to you Squadron officer.\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 3 months, from January 1, 1932 to March 31, 1932.\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT Selfridge Field, Michigan.\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately and summarize. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of five classifications as given under D, amplified as may be appropriate.\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nSquadron Engineering Inspector | 3 | Satisfactory.\nSquadron Athletic Officer | (3) | Satisfactory.\nAssistant to the Provost Marshal | (3) | See 2d Ind.\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE RATING IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.)\nInferior Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Excellent Superior\n1. Handling officers and men x\n2. Performance of field duties x\n3. Administrative and executive duties x\n4. As an instructor *\n5. Training troops *\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade) *\n* Not observed.\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT.\nAirplane Pursuit Pilot - Satisfactory.\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others in his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.)\nInferior Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Excellent Superior\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly) x\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion) x\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance) x\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously) x\n5. Tact (the faculty of being considerate and sensible in dealing with others) x\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders) x\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions) x\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty) x\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions) x\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement) x\nI. Would you *object, be reluctant, be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words. * State reasons.) Yes.\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? None. If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 May 1, 1929"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy. Name of reporting officer Harry A. Johnson.\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes.\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No. (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No. If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known Yes.\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? Yes. If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? No. If so, how? Do not believe he has had enough experience.\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? Pilot in a squadron. In war? Pilot in a squadron.\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words A capable and conscientious young officer, who is quite athletic.\nS. How long have you known him? Three months. T. How well do you know him? Intimately.\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) This officer has less than two years commissioned service in the Regular Army. No special suitability for civilian contact or detail for duty with one or all of the civilian components.\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiences indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? No unfavorable entries.\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) Harry A. Johnson\n(Name typed) HARRY A. JOHNSON,\n(Grade and Org.) Captain, Air Corps,\n(Comdg. what?) 94th Pursuit Squadron, Air Corps,\n(Place) Selfridge Field, Michigan\n(Date) March 31, 1932. Incls None.\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHq. 1st Pur. Grp., A.C., Mar. 31, 1932. To - The C.O., Self. Fld., Mt. Clemens, Mich.\nI concur in the above report.\nC. E. BROWER, Major, Air Corps, Commanding.\n2d Ind.\nHq. Self. Fld., Mt. Clemens, Mich., Mar. 31, 1932. To - The CG, 6th CA, Chicago, Ill.\nExamined and forwarded. Manner of performance of additional postduty shown under \"E\" - \"Satisfactory\".\nGEO. H. BRETT, Major, Air Corps, Commanding.\nWrite nothing below this line."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AA 201 McCoy, Howard M.\n3rd Ind.\nHq. 6th C. A., Chicago, Ill., APR 14 1932 To-\nThe Adjutant General, Washington, D. C.\nExamined and forwarded.\nFor the Commanding General:"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTED\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: Howard M. McCoy, O-18054, 2d Lieut., Air Corps. (FA)\nA's official status with respect to you Subordinate officer under my command.\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 2 1/2 months, from Oct. 13, 1931 to Dec. 31, 1931, incl.\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT Selfridge Field, Michigan.\nD. (definitions as above)\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED:\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nSquadron Athletic Officer | 1 1/2 | Satisfactory.\nAssistant to Provost Marshal | (1) | See 2nd Ind.\nOn Leave of Absence Oct 13th to Nov 12/31. | 1 |\nF. Handling officers and men x; Performance of field duties x; Administrative and executive duties x; As an instructor Not observed.; Training troops; Tactical handling of troops\nG. Airplane Pursuit Pilot - Satisfactory.\nH. Physical activity through Leadership: all marked Satisfactory (x).\nI. Would you object, be reluctant, be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? Yes.\nJ. Has he any weaknesses? None."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy. Name of reporting officer Harry A. Johnson.\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes.\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No. (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? None. If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known Yes.\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? Yes. If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? Yes. If so, how?\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? Element leader. In war? Element leader.\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words Have not formed my opinion but apparently is very good material and should improve with experience.\nS. How long have you known him? 1 1/2 months. T. How well do you know him? Fairly well.\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) This officer has less than two years commissioned service in the Regular Army. No special suitability for civilian contact or detail for duty with one or all of the civilian components.\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiences indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? No unfavorable entries.\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) Harry A. Johnson\n(Name typed) HARRY A. JOHNSON,\n(Grade and Org.) 1st Lieut., Air Corps,\n(Comdg. what?) 94th Pursuit Squadron, Air Corps,\n(Place) Selfridge Field, Michigan.\n(Date) December 31, 1931. Incls None.\n1st Ind. Hq. 1st Pur. Grp., A. C., Dec. 31, 1931. To: C. O., Selfridge Field, Michigan. Concurred in. G. E. BROWER, Major, Air Corps, Commanding.\n1st INDORSEMENT\n2d Ind. Hq. Selfridge Field, Mich., Dec. 31, 1931. To: Commanding General, Sixth Corps Area.\n1. Examined and forwarded.\n2. Assistant to Provost Marshal - 1 1/3 months - Satisfactory.\nGEO. H. BRETT, Major, Air Corps, Commanding.\nWrite nothing below this line."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AA 201 McCoy, Howard M.\n\n3rd Ind.\nHq. 6th C. A., Chicago, Ill., JAN 15 1932 To-\nThe Adjutant General, Washington, D. C.\nExamined and forwarded.\nFor the Commanding General:\n35 Received A. G. O. JAN 18 1932"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES)\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: Howard M. McCoy, O-18054, 2nd Lieut., Air Corps (FA)\nA's official status with respect to you: Student Officer\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 3-14/30 months, from June 27, 1931 to October 10, 1931\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT Kelly Field, Texas.\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately and summarize. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of five classifications as given under D, amplified as may be appropriate.\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nStudent, The A.C.A.F.S., Pursuit Section | 3-14/30 | Satisfactory\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE RATING IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.)\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT.\n1. Handling officers and men\n2. Performance of field duties\n3. Administrative and executive duties\n4. As an instructor\n5. Training troops\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade)\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others in his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.)\nColumns: Inferior, Unsatisfactory, Satisfactory, Excellent, Superior\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly) X satisfactory\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion) X satisfactory\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance) X satisfactory\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously) X satisfactory\n5. Tact (the faculty of being considerate and sensible in dealing with others) X satisfactory\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders) X satisfactory\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions) X satisfactory\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty) X satisfactory\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions) X satisfactory\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement) X satisfactory\nI. Would you *object, *be reluctant, be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words. *State reasons.) Yes, present grade in peace; higher grade in war.\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.) None\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 December 1, 1927"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on Howard M. McCoy Name of reporting officer Thomas J. Hanley, Jr.\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? If yes, inclose copies. No\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances. None\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known. Duty as student only.\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his branch and grade? If not, state reasons. Observed only as student.\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? If so, how? Observed only as student.\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? In war? Flight member in peace; Flight commander in war.\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words. Entire service has been as a student officer. Should make a good officer with proper training.\nS. How long have you known him? 3-14/30 months T. How well do you know him? Slightly\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185)\n1. The Air Corps Advanced Flying School (Pursuit Section)\n2. Graduate.\n3. Airplane Pilot (Pursuit)\n4. Academic rating, Satisfactory.\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? None\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) Thomas J. Hanley, Jr.\n(Name typed) Thomas J. Hanley, Jr.\n(Grade and Org.) Major, A.C.\n(Comdg. what?) The Air Corps Advanced Flying School\n(Place) Kelly Field, Texas.\n(Date) Oct. 19, 1931 Incls None\n(Leave blank)\n1st INDORSEMENT\n1st IND. HORS, A.C.T.C., Randolph Field, Texas. OCT 22 1931\nTo The Adjt. General, Washington, D. C.\nI concur in the above report.\nCHAS. H. DANFORTH, Brig. General, A. C. Comdg.\nWrite nothing below this line."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTED\nAUG 7 1931\n(USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES)\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCoy, Howard M. (0-18054) 2nd Lieut. (FA) Air Corps\nA's official status with respect to you: A student officer in my department\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 2-23/30 months, from April 1, 1931 to June 23, 1931\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT March Field, California\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately and summarize.)\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nStudent Air Corps Primary Flying School | 2-23/30 | Satisfactory\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: (See par. D above.)\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service.\n1. Handling officers and men\n2. Performance of field duties\n3. Administrative and executive duties\n4. As an instructor\n5. Training troops\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade)\nH. Qualifications (Consider him in comparison with others in his grade)\n1. Physical activity: Excellent\n2. Physical endurance: Excellent\n3. Military bearing and neatness: Excellent\n4. Attention to duty: Satisfactory\n5. Tact: Satisfactory\n6. Initiative: Satisfactory\n7. Intelligence: Satisfactory\n8. Force: Satisfactory\n9. Judgment and common sense: Excellent\n10. Leadership: Satisfactory\nI. Would you object, be reluctant, be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? Yes, as company officer, peace or war.\nJ. Has he any weaknesses? NO. If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 May 1, 1929"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":225,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on McCoy, Howard M. Name of reporting officer Walton, L. A.\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known. On duty as a student officer only.\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? If not, state reasons. On duty as a student officer only.\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? No If so, how? A junior second lieutenant.\nQ. What is the highest command he is qualified to hold in peace? Company Officer In war? Company Officer\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words. An excellent type of young officer, sensible, quiet, well balanced, has good judgment and bearing. Especially well developed physically and gives a very favorable impression.\nS. How long have you known him? About 8 months T. How well do you know him? Slightly\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) Not suitable for detail with civilian components due to lack of experience.\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? none\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) L. A. Walton\n(Name typed) L. A. WALTON,\n(Grade and Org.) Major, Air Corps,\n(Comdg. what?) The Director of Training, ACPFS.\n(Place) March Field, California.\n(Date) July 1, 1931 Incls none\n(Leave blank)\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHQ., A.C.P.F.S. March Field, Riverside, California, July 2nd, 1931. TO: The Commanding General, Air Corps Training Center, Duncan Field, Texas.\n1. I concur in above report.\n2nd Ind. Hqrs. A.C.T.C., Duncan Field, Texas. Jul 1 1931\nTo The Adjt. Gen'l, Washington, D.C.\nExamined and forwarded.\nCHAS. H. DANFORTH, Brig. Genl. A. C. Comdg.\nT. E. McHARNEY, Major, Air Corps, Commandant.\nWrite nothing below this line."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":226,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTED\nMAY 4 1931\n(USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES)\nOFFICE\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nAPR 24 1931\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCoy, Howard M. (0-18054) 2nd Lieut. (FA) Air Corps\nA's official status with respect to you A student officer in my department\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 3 months, from January 1, 1931 to March 31, 1931\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT March Field, California.\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately and summarize. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of five classifications as given under D, amplified as may be appropriate.\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nStudent Officer, Air Corps Primary Flying School | 3 | Satisfactory\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE RATING IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.) Inferior Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Excellent Superior\n1. Handling officers and men\n2. Performance of field duties\n3. Administrative and executive duties\n4. As an instructor\n5. Training troops\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade)\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT.\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others in his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.) Inferior Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Excellent Superior\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly) Excellent X\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion) Excellent X\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance) Satisfactory X\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously) Satisfactory X\n5. Tact (the faculty of being considerate and sensible in dealing with others) Satisfactory X\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders) Satisfactory X\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions) Satisfactory X\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty) Satisfactory X\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions) Satisfactory X\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement) Satisfactory X\nI. Would you [REDACTED] be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words. * State reasons.) Yes, as company officer, peace or war.\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? No If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 May 1, 1929"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":227,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on McCoy, Howard M. Name of reporting officer Walton, L. A.\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known On duty as a student officer only.\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? If not, state reasons On duty as a student officer only.\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? No If so, how? A junior Second Lieutenant.\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? Company Officer In war? Company Officer\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words Excellent officer material. Reserved intelligent, alert and aggressive. Especially well developed physically, an athlete. Has an excellent military bearing and a pleasing personality.\nS. How long have you known him? About 5 1/2 months T. How well do you know him? Slightly\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) none\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiences indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? none\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) [signature]\n(Name typed) L. A. WALTON,\n(Grade and Org.) Major, Air Corps,\n(Comdg. what?) The Director of Training, ACPFS.,\n(Place) March Field, California.\n(Date) April 10, 1931 Incls. none\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHQ., A.C.P.F.S., March Field, Riverside, California, April 13th, 1931. TO: The Commanding General, Air Corps Training Center, Duncan Field, Texas.\n1. I concur in above report.\n[signature] J. T. McNARNEY, Major, Air Corps, Commandant.\n2nd Ind. Hqrs. A.C.T.C., Duncan Field, Tex. APR 17 1931 To The Adjt. Gen'l, Washington, D. C. Examined and forwarded. CHAS. H. DANFORTH, Brig. Gen. A. C. Comdg.\nWrite nothing below this line.\n3-8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":228,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTED\nFEB 8 1931\n(USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES)\nOFFICE\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nJAN 19 1931\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON: McCoy, Howard M. (0-18054) 2nd Lieut., Air Corps (F.A.)\nA's official status with respect to you A student officer in my department\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 3-18/30 months, from Sept. 12, 1930 to Dec. 30, 1930\nC. STATIONS HE SERVED AT March Field, Calif.\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, AND COMPARE THE OFFICER WITH OTHERS IN SAME GRADE.\nINFERIOR: EXCEPTIONALLY POOR performance of duty; EXCEPTIONALLY LACKING in qualification considered.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Duty NOT performed AS WELL AS SHOULD REASONABLY BE EXPECTED under circumstances; not ENTIRELY satisfactory.\nSATISFACTORY: EFFICIENT; duty WELL performed; UP TO STANDARD; qualification SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Duty performed in a HIGHLY EFFICIENT manner; qualification BETTER THAN usually accepted as SATISFACTORY.\nSUPERIOR: PREEMINENTLY EFFICIENT performance of duty; qualified to a PREEMINENT degree.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately and summarize.)\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nA student Officer, ACPFS | 2-8/30 | Satisfactory\nEnroute to join | 1-10/30 |\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE RATING IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT.\n1. Handling officers and men\n2. Performance of field duties\n3. Administrative and executive duties\n4. As an instructor\n5. Training troops\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officers' grade)\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT.\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others in his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.)\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly) Satisfactory X\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion) Satisfactory X\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance) Satisfactory X\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously) Satisfactory X\n5. Tact (the faculty of being considerate and sensible in dealing with others) Satisfactory X\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders) Satisfactory X\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions) Satisfactory X\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty) Satisfactory X\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions) Satisfactory X\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement) Satisfactory X\nI. Would you [REDACTED] be satisfied, especially desire, to have this officer serve under your command, in peace? In war? In his present or a higher grade? (Line out inappropriate words. * State reasons.) Yes, as company officer, peace or war.\nJ. Has he any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? No If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67 May 1, 1929"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":229,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on McCoy, Howard M. Name of reporting officer Walton, L. A.\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, does he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? Yes\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (Inclose copies only when authorized by paragraph 1b(3), AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, inclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. If he is not now on duty commensurate with his present grade and its responsibilities, state reasons if known On duty as a student officer only.\nO. Is he qualified in every respect for all the duties of his arm or service and grade? Yes If not, state reasons\nP. Has he demonstrated his fitness to perform the duties of the next higher grade? No If so, how? A junior second lieutenant.\nQ. What is the highest command (or assignment in case of a staff officer) he is qualified to hold in peace? Company officer In war? Company officer\nR. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words A fine appearing young officer with plenty of energy and enthusiasm. He possesses a good personality and with age and experience, should develop into a good officer.\nS. How long have you known him? About 3 months T. How well do you know him? slightly\nU. Remarks (par. 10a, AR 600-185) none\nV. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiences indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? none\nW. I certify that all entries made hereon are true and impartial to the best of my knowledge and belief and are based on personal observation or official reports.\n(Signed) [signature]\n(Name typed) L. A. WALTON,\n(Grade and Org.) Major, Air Corps,\n(Comdg. what?) The Director of Training, ACPFS.,\n(Place) March Field, Calif.\n(Date) Jan. 6, 1931 Incls. none\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHQ., A.C.P.F.S., March Field, Riverside, California, January 9, 1931. TO: The Commanding General, Air Corps Training Center, Duncan Field, Texas.\n1. I concur in above report.\n[signature] J. T. McNARNEY, Major, Air Corps, Commandant.\n2nd Ind. Hqrs. A.C.T.C., Duncan Field, Tex. JAN 14 1931 To The Adjt. Gen'l, Washington, D. C. Examined and forwarded. CHAS. H. DANFORTH, Brig. Gen. A. C. Comdg.\nWrite nothing below this line.\n8-8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":230,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AIR CORPS PRIMARY FLYING SCHOOL MARCH FIELD, RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA.\nFINAL GRADE SHEET\nMcCOY HOWARD M. 0-18054 2nd Lt. (FA) Army\nSurname Christian Name Middle Initial Serial No. Rank Previous Status\nDate Reported October 17, 1930\nOrientator Grade none Date of Birth December 4, 1907\nSchool of Aviation High School (years) 4\nMedicine Grade none College (years) 5\nFlying Time PT DH BT 2-A TOTAL\nDual 36:25 27:15 63:40\nSolo 41:15 56:00 97:15\nTotal 77:40 83:15 160:55\nDual Before Solo PT 10:20 DH BT 2-A 14:40\nFlying Grades Instructors *Lt. Liggett Technique D+ Judgement D+ Final Flying Grade D+ D+ *Check Pilot\nGround School Grades\nAerial Navigation 24 98; Airplane and Engine Maintenance 100 89; Buzzer Practice 64 R-14 S-14; Ground Gunnery 48 96; Infantry Drill 48; Maps 20 94; Air Commerce Reg. 4 88; Meteorology 20 88; Personal Equipment of the Pilot 4 97; Theory of Flight 20 91; Military Hygiene 4 100; Pistol Expert\nA - Superior B - Excellent C - Good D - Satisfactory F - Unsatisfactory I - Inferior\nRemarks: Graduated - Air Corps Primary Flying School, March Field, California. June 19, 1931.\nDisposition:\nBENJ. B. CASSIDAY, 1st Lieut., Air Corps, Secretary"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":231,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROCEEDINGS OF THE FACULTY BOARD\nOF THE\nAIR CORPS PRIMARY FLYING SCHOOL\nMARCH FIELD, RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA.\nIN THE CASE OF\n\nSECOND LIEUT. HOWARD M. McCOY, (F.A.) A. C.,\n\nCLASS OF OCTOBER 15, 1930\n\n1. The Faculty Board met on June 19, 1931, and\nthere being a quorum present, the Board then proceeded to examine\nthe training records of the aforementioned Student.\n\n2. The Board finds: That Second Lieut. Howard M. McCoy, (F.A.) A. C.,\nhas satisfactorily completed the prescribed course of instruction\nat the Air Corps Primary Flying School, March Field, California.\n\n3. The Board recommends: That Second Lieut. Howard M. McCoy, (F.A.)\nA. C., be ordered to the Air Corps Advanced Flying School,\nKelly Field, Texas, to take the advanced training course.\n\nBENJ. B. CASSIDAY,\n1st Lieut., A. C.\nSecretary.\n\nJ. T. McNARNEY\nMajor, A. C.\nCommandant.\n\nHEADQUARTERS THE AIR CORPS TRAINING CENTER\nDUNCAN FIELD, TEXAS, JUL 11 1931\nAPPROVED.\nCHAS. H. DANFORTH,\nBrigadier General, A. C.\nCommanding.\n\nApproved JUL 16 1931\nBy order of the Chief of Air Corps:\nRay L. Owens\n1st Lieut. Air Corps,\nAssistant Executive."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":232,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTED\n\nDEC 19 1930\n\nOFFICE\nCHIEF OF F. A.\n\nMcCOY, HOWARD M. SECOND LIEUTENANT FIELD ARTILLERY\n\nFile in efficiency folder in lieu of efficiency report covering the\nperiod July 1, 1930 to September 30, 1930.\n\nREASON: (status card) Graduation leave.\n\nO.R.S/17/436\n\nNOV 18 1930\nOfficers Div.\nA.G.O."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":233,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name McCoy, HOWARD M. Serial No. O-18054 Rank 1st Lt.\nInit. G.S. Elig. List Eligible G.S. Troops Eligible G.S.W.D.\nMedal of Honor D.S.C. D.F.C. D.S.M.\n\nRating / Year / Period grid with entries 34, 35, 36, 3 9, 12\n\n1 Tact. Handling Troops\n2 Training Troops\n3 Leadership\n4 Command, Troops\n5 Adjutant, Troops\n6 Supply, Troops (Attack, H/A (Bomb., (Obsn.\n7 PILOT: (Pursuit, (Misc., (L/A\n8 OBSERVER: (Airplane, (Balloon\n9\n10 Miscellaneous\n11 General Staff Corps\n12 O.C.A.C.\n13 Industrial War Plans\n14 Air Officer\n15 Military Attache\n16 Aide\n17 Ser. Sch: St.; F. & Ins.\n18 Materiel Division\n19 National Guard\n20 Organized Reserve\n21 CCC duty\n22 Air Mail duty\n23\n24 Operations\n"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":234,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name McCoy, HOWARD M. Serial No. O-18054 Rank 1st Lt.\nInit. G.S. Elig. List Eligible G.S. Troops Eligible G.S.W.D.\nMedal of Honor D.S.C. D.F.C. D.S.M.\n\nRating / Year / Period grid with entries 34, 35, 36, 3 9, 12\n\n1 Tact. Handling Troops\n2 Training Troops\n3 Leadership\n4 Command, Troops\n5 Adjutant, Troops\n6 Supply, Troops (Attack, H/A (Bomb., (Obsn.\n7 PILOT: (Pursuit, (Misc., (L/A\n8 OBSERVER: (Airplane, (Balloon\n9\n10 Miscellaneous\n11 General Staff Corps\n12 O.C.A.C.\n13 Industrial War Plans\n14 Air Officer\n15 Military Attache\n16 Aide\n17 Ser. Sch: St.; F. & Ins.\n18 Materiel Division\n19 National Guard\n20 Organized Reserve\n21 CCC duty\n22 Air Mail duty\n23\n24 Operations\n25 Engineering\n26 Armament\n27 Communications\n28 Photographic\n29 Inspection\nA.C. Prim. Flying Sch.\nA.C. Adv. Flying School\nA.C. Technical School\nA.C. Engineering School\nA.C. Tactical School\nArmy Industrial College\nC. & G.S.S.\nArmy War College\nAll Others\nCommendations\nCourts-Martial, Reprimands\nWeaknesses\nRemarks (Est. Rept. Off.)\nInitials, Reviewing Officer"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":235,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS SIXTH CORPS AREA\nOFFICE OF THE COMMANDING GENERAL\n\nChicago, Illinois.\nJuly 12, 1932.\n\nSUBJECT: Commendation.\n\nTO: 2nd Lt. Howard M. McCoy, A.C.\n\n1. The George Washington Bicontennial Military Tournament has been commented upon by the press and by prominent military and civil personages as being of outstanding interest as a spectacle, and of great value in stimulating patriotic feeling and increased appreciation of the armed forces of the nation. The Air Corps participation was fine throughout and was widely appreciated.\n\n2. It is a pleasure to commend you for the fine manner in which you performed your part in this undertaking.\n\n3. This commendation will be made of record.\n\nFRANK PARKER,\nMajor General, U. S. Army."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":236,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WAR DEPARTMENT\nOffice of the Chief of the Air Corps\nWashington\nOctober 7, 1952\n\nSUBJECT : Commendation.\n\nTO : Commanding Officer, 94th Pursuit Squadron,\nSelfridge Field, Mt. Clemens, Mich.\n\n1. I desire to express to you and the following personnel of the 94th Pursuit Squadron, my commendation for the excellent and efficient manner the flight from Selfridge Field, Mich. to Rockwell Field, San Diego, California, was carried out in conjunction with testing the V-1570F motor:\n\nCaptain Audrey B. Ballard.\n2d Lieut. Emmett O'Donnell.\n\" \" Ernest K. Warburton.\n\" \" Herbert H. Tellman.\n\" \" Howard M. McCoy.\n2 \" Paul W. Blanchard.\nMaster Sergeant Robert J. Simmons.\nTechnical Sergeant Wm. B. Pope.\nStaff Sergeant Donald G. Bryan.\nStaff Sergeant John Walker.\nPrivate 1/cl Walter L. Rader.\n\n2. The results gained from this successful flight will be of great value to the Engineering Division of the Air Corps and the efforts put forth are highly commendable.\n\n3. A copy of this letter will be filed with the Efficiency Reports of each of the above mentioned officers.\n\nSigned: B. D. Foulois\nTyped : B. D. Foulois,\nMajor General, Air Corps,\nChief of the Air Corps.\n\nA TRUE COPY:\n\n[signature]\nA. B. BALLARD,\nCaptain, Air Corps."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":237,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CITATION FOR THE BRONZE STAR MEDAL\n\nHOWARD M. McCOY, 018054, Colonel, Army Air Forces, United States Army. For meritorious service in connection with military operations as Deputy Director of Technical Services, Headquarters, Air Technical Service Command in Europe from July 1944 to May 1945. During this period, Colonel McCoy performed outstanding services for the United States Army Air Forces by efficiently organizing, administering and coordinating the efforts of the several Army Air Forces activities concerned with the exploitation of enemy research and development activities. His membership on certain British Committees enabled him to obtain for interested American organizations the latest current information on research, developments and operations being conducted by the Germans on their V-1 and V-2 weapons. His services reflect the highest credit upon himself and the armed forces of the United States.\n\nA TRUE COPY\n[signature]\nA. B. DEYARMOND\nLt. Colonel, Air Corps"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":238,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MC COY HOWARD M\nLAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE INITIAL\n018054\nARMY SERIAL NUMBER\nCOL\nGRADE\nAC\nORGANIZATION\nHEADQUARTERS ISSUING ORDER AND A.P.O. NUMBER\nUSF ET\nORDER NUMBER GENERAL 13 SPECIAL\nDATE OF ORDER 15 JAN 46\nRESCINDED REVOKED AMENDED CORRECTED COPY\nTYPE OF AWARD\nLEGION OF MERIT\nPOSTHUMOUS NO\nOAK LEAF CLUSTER\nO.L.C. NUMBER\nCITATION\n\nFor exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding services during the period from 21 April 1945 to 16 August 1945.\n\nTHE ADJUTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE, DECORATIONS AND AWARDS BRANCH, WASHINGTON, D. C.\nRECORD OF AWARD OF DECORATION\nWD AGO Form 0708 Supersedes WD AGO Form 0708, 1 December 1944, which may be used until existing stocks are exhausted. 1 April 1945\nFILE IN ENLISTED BRANCH OFFICER'S BRANCH"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":239,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MC COY, HOWARD M\nLAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE INITIAL\n018054\nARMY SERIAL NUMBER\nCol\nGRADE\nAAF, USA\nORGANIZATION\nHEADQUARTERS ISSUING ORDER AND A.P.O. NUMBER\nAir Tech Serv Comd in Europe 633\nORDER NUMBER GENERAL 29 SPECIAL\nDATE OF ORDER 3 Aug 45\nRESCINDED REVOKED AMENDED CORRECTED COPY\nTYPE OF AWARD\nBRONZE STAR MEDAL\nPOSTHUMOUS No\nOAK LEAF CLUSTER\nO.L.C. NUMBER\nCITATION\n\nFor meritorious service in connection with military operations during July 1944 to May 1945.\n\nTHE ADJUTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE, DECORATIONS AND AWARDS BRANCH, WASHINGTON, D. C.\nRECORD OF AWARD OF DECORATION\nWD AGO Form 0708 Supersedes WD AGO Form 0708, 1 December 1944, which may be used until existing stocks are exhausted.\nFILE IN ENLISTED BRANCH OFFICER'S BRANCH"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":240,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I. Command-Pilot\nIDENTIFICATION DATA\nLAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE INITIAL\nMcCOY, HOWARD M\nGRADE Colonel\nPERM AF GRADE Colonel\nAFSN 550 A\nPAFSC 8416\nDATE OF REPORT 21 July 1954\nPERIOD: FROM 25 Feb 54 TO 30 Jun 54\nORGANIZATION 1005th IG Sp Inves Gp, c/o Dir of Sp Inves, Hq USAF, Wash 25, D.C.\nNO. OF DAYS UNDER REPT OFF SUPV 109\nREASON FOR REPORT Change in principal dy assignment\n\nII. DUTY ASSIGNMENT (Give the position title and AFSC of duty assignment during period concerned and describe specific duties. Include any additional duties.)\nDirector, Physical Security Equipment Agency--2016\nResponsible for the administration and supervision of the activities of the Physical Security Equipment Agency. This was a joint Agency operating under terms of a Charter from The Secretary of Defense, in the solution of technical physical security and investigative problems. The Agency was abolished by Secretary of Defense directive and the entire period of this report was devoted to routine administrative work involved in making an orderly termination of the affairs of the Agency.\n\nIII. OFFICER PERFORMANCE FACTORS\nRate each factor below by selecting phrase most closely describing officer's actual performance on the job. Place single \"X\" in whatever box best indicates your evaluation. Check unknown box whenever you have insufficient knowledge on which to base evaluation. Avoid \"halo effect.\" Do not allow your evaluation of one factor to influence you on another. The end result should be a profile of the officer's relative abilities in terms of the separate factors.\n\n1. JOB KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his job and compare them to his knowledge. Does he have specialized knowledge?)\nUNKNOWN | SERIOUS GAPS IN HIS KNOWLEDGE OF FUNDAMENTALS OF HIS JOB. | HAS A SATISFACTORY KNOWLEDGE OF ROUTINE PHASES OF HIS JOB. | IS WELL INFORMED ON ALL PHASES OF HIS JOB. | HAS EXCELLENT KNOWLEDGE OF ALL PHASES OF HIS JOB. | HAS EXCEPTIONAL UNDERSTANDING OF HIS JOB. EXTREMELY WELL INFORMED.\n\n2. COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony for and with others.)\nUNKNOWN | INCLINED TO CREATE FRICTION. DOES NOT GET ALONG WELL. | SOMETIMES INDIFFERENT TO OTHERS. COOPERATES TO A FAIR DEGREE. | GETS ALONG WELL WITH MOST PEOPLE. | WORKS IN HARMONY WITH OTHERS. A VERY GOOD TEAM WORKER. | EXTREMELY SUCCESSFUL IN WORKING WITH OTHERS. ACTIVELY PROMOTES HARMONY.\n\n3. JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.)\nUNKNOWN | HIS DECISIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE WRONG MORE THAN RIGHT. | IS PRONE TO NEGLECT OR MISINTERPRET FACTS. COMMITS OCCASIONAL ERRORS IN JUDGMENT. | JUDGMENT IS USUALLY SOUND AND REASONABLE. | HIS JUDGMENT RESULTS FROM SOUND EVALUATION OF ALL THE FACTORS INVOLVED. | OUTSTANDINGLY SOUND AND LOGICAL THINKER WITH AN EXCEPTIONAL GRASP OF THE SITUATION INVOLVED.\n\n4. MANAGEMENT OF PERSONNEL AND MATERIEL RESOURCES (Consider his ability to economically utilize personnel and materiel under his control.)\nUNKNOWN | DISPLAYS NO INTEREST IN CONSERVATION OF MATERIEL OR ECONOMICAL USE OF MANPOWER. | REQUIRES CONSTANT REMINDING OF THE NEED FOR ECONOMY. | KEEPS FREQUENT CHECK ON EFFICIENCY OF HIS OPERATIONS. | GIVES ECONOMY OF OPERATION CAREFUL AND CONSTANT ATTENTION. | EXCEPTIONALLY SUCCESSFUL IN EXERCISING ECONOMY.\n\n5. LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing and obtaining the cooperation of others and in directing their efforts effectively.)\nUNKNOWN | FAILS TO COMMAND, UNABLE TO EXERT CONTROL. | MANAGES IN SOME INSTANCES TO OBTAIN EFFECTIVE COOPERATION. | CAPABLE LEADER, DEVELOPS ADEQUATE COOPERATION AND TEAMWORK UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES. | A CONSISTENTLY GOOD LEADER. COMMANDS RESPECT OF HIS SUBORDINATES. IS EFFECTIVE UNDER DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES. | OUTSTANDING SKILL IN DIRECTING OTHERS RESULTS IN A VERY EFFECTIVE UNIT. INSPIRES CONFIDENCE EVEN UNDER VERY DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES.\n\n6. GROWTH POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility; ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, training and record of past accomplishment.)\nUNKNOWN | DEFINITELY LIMITED. | PRESENT JOB IS TAXING HIS CAPABILITIES. REQUIRES FURTHER TRAINING. | DEMONSTRATES PROMISE FOR FURTHER GROWTH AT MODERATE RATE. | VERY PROMISING PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL. | CAPABLE OF INCREASED RESPONSIBILITY AND EXCEPTIONALLY RAPID ADVANCEMENT.\n\nPREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. AUG 6 1954\nUSAF OFFICER EFFECTIVENESS REPORT"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":241,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IV. COMMENTS OF REPORTING OFFICER (Add any comments which will increase the objectivity of the rating. Include strengths or weaknesses not covered elsewhere in this report. Be factual and specific. Include herein suggested assignments or type of duty for which the officer is especially qualified. Whenever the officer is rated unsatisfactory or outstanding in Section V below, one or more actual incidents illustrating typical performances which justify the rating must be included. Specific comment will be made on promotion fitness when it is believed the officer reported on is particularly well qualified for promotion and should be promoted in advance of his contemporaries.)\n\nDuring the period of this report, the Physical Security Equipment Agency,of which Colonel McCoy was the Director, was in process of being abolished pursuant to directive of The Secretary of Defense. Accordingly,the Agency did not function in accordance with its Charter, and no actions were engaged in by the Agency or its Director which would provide the basis for any comments concerning Colonel McCoy's technical competence. The entire period of this report was devoted to the administrative work involved in making an orderly termination of the affairs of the Agency. This was handled jointly by personnel of the Headquarters Command, USAF; the Directorate, OSI; Colonel McCoy; and the few remaining Agency employees. While Colonel McCoy cooperated in this undertaking, the routine nature of the function performed by Colonel McCoy and Agency personnel, does not permit my rating him for the period involved as to his administrative competence.\n\nI have no knowledge as to the manner in which this officer, during the period of this report, carried out his civic responsibilities and represented the Air Force in his dealings with the public.\n\nV. OVERALL EVALUATION\n\nCompare this officer with other officers of the same grade. Remember that extremes of ability are rare. Be objective and impersonal. Think of the officer's performance over the entire rating period. Place an (X) in the appropriate box.\n\nUNSATISFACTORY | AN ACCEPTABLE OFFICER | A DEPENDABLE AND TYPICALLY EFFECTIVE OFFICER. | A VERY FINE OFFICER OF GREAT VALUE TO THE SERVICE. | ONE OF THE VERY FEW OUTSTANDING OFFICERS I KNOW.\n\nVI. CERTIFICATE OF REPORTING OFFICER\n\nI CERTIFY THAT ALL ENTRIES HEREON ARE TRUE AND IMPARTIAL TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. (Referral by the reporting officer is mandatory when there is a rating in one of the three small boxes on the left for any factor in Section III or an unsatisfactory rating in Section V.)\n\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AFSN, AND ORGANIZATION\nJOSEPH F. CARROLL, MAJ GEN\n23161A, Directorate of Special Investigations (IG)\n\nDUTY TITLE\nDirector, Special Investigations (IG)\n\nSIGNATURE\n[signature]\n\nSTATUS WITH RESPECT TO OFFICER REPORTED ON Director of joint Agency for which Air Force was Executive Agent and my office the office of primary Air Staff interest.\n\nPARENT SERVICE OR CIVILIAN\nUSAF\n\nVII. REVIEW OF INDORSING OFFICER\n\nCompare the overall evaluation to the written comments. Unsatisfactory or Outstanding ratings must be justified by actual incidents and not broad generalities. Add any comment which will increase the objectivity of the rating.\n\n[ ] I AGREE [ ] I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE REPORTING OFFICER'S EVALUATION, AND HAVE INDICATED BY INITIALING THE APPROPRIATE BOX OR BOXES AND/OR PRESENT THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS\n\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AFSN, AND ORGANIZATION | DUTY TITLE | SIGNATURE | DATE IND\nPARENT SERVICE OR CIVILIAN\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—69330-1"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":242,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I. Command Pilot IDENTIFICATION DATA\nLAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE INITIAL: McCOY HOWARD M\nGRADE: Colonel\nPERM AF GRADE: Colonel\nAFSN: 550 A\nPAFSC: 8416\nDATE OF REPORT: 15 March 1954\nPERIOD: FROM 25 Feb 53 TO 24 Feb 54\nORGANIZATION (Including major command): 1005th IG Sp Inves Gp, c/o Dir of Sp Inves, Hq USAF, Wash 25, DC\nNO. OF DAYS UNDER REPT OFF SUBV: 334\nREASON FOR REPORT: No report rendered 1 yr\n\nII. DUTY ASSIGNMENT (Give the position title and AFSC of duty assignment during period concerned and describe specific duties. Include any additional duties.) Director, Physical Security Equipment Agency--2016\n\nResponsible for the administration and supervision of the activities of the Physical Security Equipment Agency, a joint Agency operating under terms of a charter from the Secretary of Defense, in the solution of technical physical security and investigative problems, including the development of prototype equipment, procurement of service test quantities of such equipment, and preparation of training and technical manuals pertaining to physical security. Coordinates the efforts of the Agency with those activities within and outside the Department of Defense having a material interest in and/or responsibility with respect to the Agency programs.\n\nIII. OFFICER PERFORMANCE FACTORS\n\nRate each factor below by selecting phrase most closely describing officer's actual performance on the job. Place single \"X\" in whatever box best indicates your evaluation. Check unknown box whenever you have insufficient knowledge on which to base evaluation.\n\n1. JOB KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his job and compare them to his knowledge. Does he have specialized knowledge?) Checked: UNKNOWN; columns: SERIOUS GAPS IN HIS KNOWLEDGE OF FUNDAMENTALS OF HIS JOB. | HAS A SATISFACTORY KNOWLEDGE OF ROUTINE PHASES OF HIS JOB. | IS WELL INFORMED ON ALL PHASES OF HIS JOB. | HAS EXCELLENT KNOWLEDGE OF ALL PHASES OF HIS JOB. | HAS EXCEPTIONAL UNDERSTANDING OF HIS JOB. EXTREMELY WELL INFORMED.\n\n2. COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony for and with others.) Columns: INCLINED TO CREATE FRICTION. DOES NOT GET ALONG WELL. | SOMETIMES INDIFFERENT TO OTHERS. COOPERATES TO A FAIR DEGREE. | GETS ALONG WELL WITH MOST PEOPLE. | WORKS IN HARMONY WITH OTHERS. A VERY GOOD TEAM WORKER. | EXTREMELY SUCCESSFUL IN WORKING WITH OTHERS. ACTIVELY PROMOTES HARMONY.\n\n3. JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.) Columns: HIS DECISIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE WRONG MORE THAN RIGHT. | IS PRONE TO NEGLECT OR MISINTERPRET FACTS. COMMITS OCCASIONAL ERRORS IN JUDGMENT. | JUDGMENT IS USUALLY SOUND AND REASONABLE. | HIS JUDGMENT RESULTS FROM SOUND EVALUATION OF ALL THE FACTORS INVOLVED. | OUTSTANDINGLY SOUND AND LOGICAL THINKER WITH AN EXCEPTIONAL GRASP OF THE SITUATION INVOLVED.\n\n4. MANAGEMENT OF PERSONNEL AND MATERIEL RESOURCES (Consider his ability to economically utilize personnel and materiel under his control.) Columns: DISPLAYS NO INTEREST IN CONSERVATION OF MATERIEL OR ECONOMICAL USE OF MANPOWER. | REQUIRES CONSTANT REMINDING OF THE NEED FOR ECONOMY. | KEEPS FREQUENT CHECK ON EFFICIENCY OF HIS OPERATIONS. | GIVES ECONOMY OF OPERATION CAREFUL AND CONSTANT ATTENTION. | EXCEPTIONALLY SUCCESSFUL IN EXERCISING ECONOMY.\n\n5. LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing and obtaining the cooperation of others and in directing their efforts effectively.) Columns: FAILS TO COMMAND. UNABLE TO EXERT CONTROL. | MANAGES IN SOME INSTANCES TO OBTAIN EFFECTIVE COOPERATION. | CAPABLE LEADER. DEVELOPS ADEQUATE COOPERATION AND TEAMWORK UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES. | A CONSISTENTLY GOOD LEADER. COMMANDS RESPECT OF HIS SUBORDINATES. IS EFFECTIVE UNDER DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES. | OUTSTANDING SKILL IN DIRECTING OTHERS RESULTS IN A VERY EFFECTIVE UNIT. INSPIRES CONFIDENCE EVEN UNDER VERY DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES.\n\n6. GROWTH POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility; ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, training and record of past accomplishment.) Columns: DEFINITELY LIMITED. | PRESENT JOB IS TAXING HIS CAPABILITIES. REQUIRES FURTHER TRAINING. | DEMONSTRATES PROMISE FOR FURTHER GROWTH AT MODERATE RATE. | VERY PROMISING PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL. | CAPABLE OF INCREASED RESPONSIBILITY AND EXCEPTIONALLY RAPID ADVANCEMENT.\n\nAF FORM 15 NOV 53 77 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. 16—69330-1 MAR 22 1954 USAF OFFICER EFFECTIVENESS REPORT"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":243,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IV. COMMENTS OF REPORTING OFFICER (Add any comments which will increase the objectivity of the rating. Include strengths or weaknesses not covered elsewhere in this report. Be factual and specific. Include herein suggested assignments or type of duty for which the officer is especially qualified. Whenever the officer is rated unsatisfactory or outstanding in Section V below, one or more actual incidents illustrating typical performances which justify the rating must be included. Specific comment will be made on promotion fitness when it is believed the officer reported on is particularly well qualified for promotion and should be promoted in advance of his contemporaries.)\n\nThe Physical Security Equipment Agency, of which Colonel McCoy is the Director, is a joint agency created by Department of Defense Directive and for which the Air Force during this particular period was designated Executive Agency. During the entire period of this report, the Agency has been in an exceedingly uncertain status, since the question as to its continued existence was pending before The Secretary of Defense with concrete indications that it might be abolished from one day to the next. (A Secretary of Defense Directive abolishing the Agency was finally issued on 4 March 1954.) In view of the fact that the abolition or some other change in the status of the Agency was anticipated at all times, the Agency during the period of this report has not actually functioned to the extent provided for in its charter. The Agency operation therefore, was limited and Colonel McCoy as its Director was severely handicapped by lack of a clear-cut mission and delineation of responsibility, by lack of the full policy and procedural guidance which would have been provided him by the joint Policy Board had the status of the Agency been more clearly established, and by consequent inability to plan or program Agency efforts toward the attainment of clear-cut objectives. During this period I have had occasional personal and telephone contact with this officer as have members of my staff on a more frequent basis. However, in view of the \"stand-by\" status of the Agency and in fairness to the officer concerned, I do not feel that the nature and extent of my knowledge concerning this officer during the specific rating period involved is sufficiently concrete to warrant my advancing in an effectiveness rating my opinions or conclusions as to his job performance.\n\nV. OVERALL EVALUATION\n\nCompare this officer with other officers of the same grade. Remember that extremes of ability are rare. Be objective and impersonal. Think of the officer's performance over the entire rating period. Place an (X) in the appropriate box.\n\nUNSATISFACTORY | AN ACCEPTABLE OFFICER | A DEPENDABLE AND TYPICALLY EFFECTIVE OFFICER. | A VERY FINE OFFICER OF GREAT VALUE TO THE SERVICE. | ONE OF THE VERY FEW OUTSTANDING OFFICERS I KNOW.\n\nVI. CERTIFICATE OF REPORTING OFFICER\n\nI CERTIFY THAT ALL ENTRIES HEREON ARE TRUE AND IMPARTIAL TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. (Referral by the reporting officer is mandatory when there is a rating in one of the three small boxes on the left for any factor in Section III or an unsatisfactory rating in Section V.)\n\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AFSN, AND ORGANIZATION\nJOSEPH F. CARROLL, MAJ GEN, 23161A, Directorate of Special Investigations (IG)\n\nDUTY TITLE\nDirector, Special Investigations (IG)\n\nSIGNATURE\n[signature]\n\nSTATUS WITH RESPECT TO OFFICER REPORTED ON Director of joint Agency for which Air Force is Executive Agent and my office the office of primary interest.\n\nPARENT SERVICE OR CIVILIAN\nUSAF\n\nVII. REVIEW OF INDORSING OFFICER\n\nCompare the overall evaluation to the written comments. Unsatisfactory or Outstanding ratings must be justified by actual incidents and not broad generalities. Add any comment which will increase the objectivity of the rating.\n\n[ ] I AGREE [ ] I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE REPORTING OFFICER'S EVALUATION, AND HAVE INDICATED BY INITIALING THE APPROPRIATE BOX OR BOXES AND/OR PRESENT THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS\n\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AFSN, AND ORGANIZATION | DUTY TITLE | SIGNATURE | DATE IND\nPARENT SERVICE OR CIVILIAN\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—69330-1"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":244,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date 26 March 1954\n\nI certify that I have, this date, reviewed my [ ] Master Personnel Record [X] Selection Folder only, in the Officers Branch (AFCAG-65) Personnel Records Service Division, AAG.\n\nI further certify that I have read and complied with the provisions of Memorandum, Hqs. USAF, Office of the AAG, dated 26 January 1951, Subject: Review of Your Master Personnel Record. SEP 24 1953\n\nHoward M. McCoy Col. 550A\nName Grade AFSN"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":245,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"USAF OFFICER EFFECTIVENESS REPORT\nDATE 13 MAR 1953\n\nI. PERSONAL HISTORY DATA\nLAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE INITIAL: McCOY, HOWARD M.\nGRADE: Col\nPERMANENT GRADE: Col\nSERVICE NUMBER: 550 A\nTYPE OF REPORT: CER\nPRIMARY AFSC: 8416\nORGANIZATION: HQ USAF, WASH, D.C.\nPERIOD OF REPORT FROM: 1 Mar 52 TO 24 Feb 53\nNO. DAYS UNDER REPORTING OFFICER SUPERVISION: 350\nREASON FOR REPORT: Change of Rept Officer\n\nII. DUTY ASSIGNMENT (Give the title and AFSC of duty assignments during period concerned and describe specific duties. Include any additional duties.) Research and Development Director - 8416. As Director, Physical Security Equipment Agency, a Joint Agency operating under terms of a charter from the Secretary of Defense, responsible for administration of the Agency and supervision of the activities of the staff of the Agency in solution of physical security and investigative problems including production of prototype equipment, (see attached sheet)\n\nIII. OFFICER PERFORMANCE FACTORS\n\nInstructions: Listed below are those factors generally vital to success as an officer. The purpose of obtaining a rating on each factor is to provide specific information necessary to the development of the officer reported on and to provide you with a measure of officer quality that will aid in arriving at a valid overall rating. Place a single (x) in whatever box best indicates your evaluation. The written performance descriptions are to serve as a guide in your evaluation. Guard against the tendency of forming a general impression and marking the same degree for all factors. This \"halo effect\" may be prevented by considering and judging each element separately and independently of the others. Do not allow your evaluation of one factor to influence you on another. The end result should be a profile of the officer's relative abilities in terms of the separate factors. Check the unknown box whenever you have insufficient knowledge on which to base an evaluation.\n\n1. JOB KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his job and compare them to his knowledge. Does he have specialized knowledge?) Columns: SERIOUS GAPS IN HIS KNOWLEDGE OF FUNDAMENTALS OF HIS JOB. | HAS A SATISFACTORY KNOWLEDGE OF ROUTINE PHASES OF HIS JOB. | IS WELL INFORMED ON ALL PHASES OF HIS JOB. | HAS EXCELLENT KNOWLEDGE OF ALL PHASES OF HIS JOB. | HAS EXCEPTIONAL UNDERSTANDING OF HIS JOB. EXTREMELY WELL INFORMED. [X under last]\n\n2. COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony for and with others.) Columns: INCLINED TO CREATE FRICTION. DOES NOT GET ALONG WELL. | SOMETIMES INDIFFERENT TO OTHERS. COOPERATES TO A FAIR DEGREE. | GETS ALONG WELL WITH MOST PEOPLE. | WORKS IN HARMONY WITH OTHERS. A VERY GOOD TEAM WORKER. [X] | EXTREMELY SUCCESSFUL IN WORKING WITH OTHERS. ACTIVELY PROMOTES HARMONY.\n\n3. JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.) Columns: HIS DECISIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE WRONG MORE THAN RIGHT. | IS PRONE TO NEGLECT OR MISINTERPRET FACTS. COMMITS OCCASIONAL ERRORS IN JUDGMENT. | JUDGMENT IS USUALLY SOUND AND REASONABLE. | HIS JUDGMENT RESULTS FROM SOUND EVALUATION OF ALL THE FACTORS INVOLVED. [X] | OUTSTANDINGLY SOUND AND LOGICAL THINKER WITH AN EXCEPTIONAL GRASP OF THE SITUATION INVOLVED.\n\n4. RELIABILITY AND PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY (Consider his sense of responsibility and reliability in the execution of assigned tasks.) Columns: NOT WHOLLY DEPENDABLE. DOESN'T TAKE HIS DUTIES SERIOUSLY. REQUIRES CLOSE SUPERVISION. | A DEPENDABLE OFFICER WHO PERFORMS ROUTINE DUTIES WELL, NEEDS AN AVERAGE AMOUNT OF SUPERVISION. | COMPLETES ALL ASSIGNED TASKS PROMPTLY AND IN AN ACCEPTABLE MANNER. SOME SUPERVISION NEEDED. | GOES OUT OF HIS WAY TO TURN IN EXCELLENT WORK, THOROUGHLY RELIABLE. ONLY OCCASIONAL SUPERVISION. | HAS AN EXTREMELY HIGH SENSE OF DUTY, JUSTIFIES COMPLETE CONFIDENCE, RARELY REQUIRES SUPERVISION. [X]\n\n5. LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing and obtaining the cooperation of others and in directing their efforts effectively.) Columns: FAILS TO COMMAND. UNABLE TO EXERT CONTROL. | MANAGES IN SOME INSTANCES TO OBTAIN EFFECTIVE COOPERATION. | CAPABLE LEADER. DEVELOPS ADEQUATE COOPERATION AND TEAM WORK UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES. | A CONSISTENTLY GOOD LEADER. COMMANDS RESPECT OF HIS SUBORDINATES. IS EFFECTIVE UNDER DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES. | OUTSTANDING SKILL IN DIRECTING OTHERS RESULTS IN A VERY EFFECTIVE UNIT. INSPIRES CONFIDENCE EVEN UNDER VERY DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES. [X]\n\n6. GROWTH POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility; ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, training and record of past accomplishment.) Columns: DEFINITELY LIMITED. | PRESENT JOB IS TAXING HIS CAPABILITIES. REQUIRES FURTHER TRAINING. | DEMONSTRATES PROMISE FOR FURTHER GROWTH AT MODERATE RATE. | VERY PROMISING PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL. | CAPABLE OF INCREASED RESPONSIBILITY AND EXCEPTIONALLY RAPID ADVANCEMENT. [X]\n\nAF FORM 77 REPLACES AF FORM 77, 77A. AND 77B WHICH ARE OBSOLETE."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":246,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE INITIAL\tGRADE\tSERVICE NUMBER\nMcCOY, HOWARD M.\tColonel\t550 A\nIV.\tOVERALL EVALUATION\nINSTRUCTIONS: Compare this officer with all officers of the same grade. Remember that extremes of ability are rare. Be objective and impersonal. Think of the officer's performance over the entire rating period. Place an (x) in the appropriate box. Be certain to read instructions in Section V before accomplishing your evaluation.\nUNSATIS-FACTORY\tAN ACCEPTABLE OFFI-CER\tA DEPENDABLE AND TYPICALLY EFFECTIVE OFFICER\tA VERY FINE OFFICER OF GREAT VALUE TO THE SERVICE\tONE OF THE VERY FEW OUTSTANDING OFFICERS I KNOW\nV. COMMENTS OF REPORTING OFFICER (Include any strengths or weaknesses not covered elsewhere in this report. Whenever the officer is rated unsatisfactory or outstanding one or more actual incidents illustrating typical performances which justify the rating must be included. Specific comment will be made on promotion fitness when it is believed the officer reported on is outstandingly well qualified for promotion and should be promoted in advance of his contemporaries. Include herein suggested assignments or type of duty for which the officer is especially qualified. A definite statement will be made as to the degree to which this officer exercises judgment in economical management of personnel and resources under his supervision, commensurate with his responsibilities.)\nThis officer has a tremendous capacity to apply himself to his job, working long hours with determination and singleness of purpose. He strives for perfection and is impatient with extraneous matters which delay accomplishment of the primary project. During the period covered by this report, when he has been primarily concerned with building his organization and giving it an operating capability, these traits have enabled him to accomplish a great deal technically with a very limited staff and under difficult conditions. The same intensity of interest and effort has made it difficult for him to work out some of the administrative and procedural headaches which have been occasioned by the unusual working relationships of this new organization. He is extremely competent in technical fields and has unusual grasp of management factors.\nDirector Physical Equipment Agency - Auth grade: Colonel\nIndorsement not Required in Accordance with HOI 36-8.\nVI. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY\nNAME OF PERSON DELEGATED TO PREPARE REPORT\tREASON(S)\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AND SERVICE NUMBER OF COMMANDING OFFICER\tSIGNATURE OF COMMANDING OFFICER\nVII. CERTIFICATE OF REPORTING OFFICER\nSTATUS OF OFFICER REPORTED ON WITH RESPECT TO REPORTING OFFICER: Director of DOD Agency - AFDRD Office of Primary Interest\nI CERTIFY THAT ALL ENTRIES HEREON ARE TRUE AND IMPARTIAL TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. (Referral by the reporting officer is mandatory only when there is a rating in the first three boxes for any factor in Section III or an unsatisfactory in Section IV. When mandatory referral is made the officer reported on will attach a written statement of his reaction to the report.)\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AND SERVICE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER\tSIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER\nBENJAMIN S. KELSEY, Brig. Gen.,433A, Deputy Director of Research & Development, DCS/D\nVIII. REVIEW OF INDORSING OFFICER\nINSTRUCTIONS: In accomplishing your review of the completed report, be sure to compare the overall evaluation to the written comments. It is absolutely necessary that Unsatisfactory or Outstanding ratings be justified by actual incidents and not broad generalities.\nI AGREE I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE REPORTING OFFICER'S EVALUATION, AND HAVE INDICATED BY INITIALING THE APPROPRIATE BOX OR BOXES AND/OR PRESENT THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS.\nDATE\tTYPED NAME, GRADE, AND SN OF INDORSING OFFICER\tSIGNATURE OF INDORSING OFFICER\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1951 O - 979937"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":247,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McCOY, HOWARD M.\tColonel\t550 A\nII. DUTY ASSIGNMENT (Continued)\nprocurement of service test quantities of such equipment, preparation of training and technical manuals pertaining to physical security and coordination of the efforts of the Agency with all agencies within and outside the Department of Defense having mutual interest in or responsibilities with respect to Agency programs. The agency consists of approximately twenty-five (25) personnel."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":248,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"USAF OFFICER EFFECTIVENESS REPORT\tDATE 1 July 52\nI. PERSONAL HISTORY DATA\nLAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE INITIAL: MC COY, HOWARD M\tGRADE: Col\tPERMANENT GRADE: Col\tSERVICE NUMBER: 550 A\tTYPE OF REPORT: Complete\tPRIMARY AFSC: 9349\nORGANIZATION: Hq USAF Wash, DC\tPERIOD OF REPORT FROM 1Mar51 TO 29Feb52\tNO. DAYS UNDER REPORTING OFFICER SUPERVISION: 338\tREASON FOR REPORT: ANNUAL REPORT\nII. DUTY ASSIGNMENT (Give the title and AFSC of duty assignments during period concerned and describe specific duties. Include any additional duties.)\n8416 - Research & Development Director. As Director of the Physical Security Equipment Agency, is responsible for all phases of PSEA operations including administrative, technical, personnel, supply and budget matters.\nIII. OFFICER PERFORMANCE FACTORS\nINSTRUCTIONS\nListed below are those factors generally vital to success as an officer. The purpose of obtaining a rating on each factor is to provide specific information necessary to the development of the officer reported on and to provide you with a measure of officer quality that will aid in arriving at a valid overall rating. Place a single (x) in whatever box best indicates your evaluation. The written performance descriptions are to serve as a guide in your evaluation. Guard against the tendency of forming a general impression and marking the same degree for all factors. This \"halo effect\" may be prevented by considering and judging each element separately and independently of the others. Do not allow your evaluation of one factor to influence you on another. The end result should be a profile of the officer's relative abilities in terms of the separate factors. Check the unknown box whenever you have insufficient knowledge on which to base an evaluation.\n1. JOB KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his job and compare them to his knowledge. Does he have specialized knowledge?) Ratings: SERIOUS GAPS IN HIS KNOWLEDGE OF FUNDAMENTALS OF HIS JOB / HAS A SATISFACTORY KNOWLEDGE OF ROUTINE PHASES OF HIS JOB / IS WELL INFORMED ON ALL PHASES OF HIS JOB / HAS EXCELLENT KNOWLEDGE OF ALL PHASES OF HIS JOB / HAS EXCEPTIONAL UNDERSTANDING OF HIS JOB. EXTREMELY WELL INFORMED. (checked)\n2. COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony for and with others.) Ratings: INCLINED TO CREATE FRICTION. DOES NOT GET ALONG WELL. / SOMETIMES INDIFFERENT TO OTHERS. COOPERATES TO A FAIR DEGREE. / GETS ALONG WELL WITH MOST PEOPLE. / WORKS IN HARMONY WITH OTHERS. A VERY GOOD TEAM WORKER. / EXTREMELY SUCCESSFUL IN WORKING WITH OTHERS. ACTIVELY PROMOTES HARMONY. (UNKNOWN checked)\n3. JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.) Ratings: HIS DECISIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE WRONG MORE THAN RIGHT. / IS PRONE TO NEGLECT OR MISINTERPRET FACTS. COMMITS OCCASIONAL ERRORS IN JUDGMENT. / JUDGMENT IS USUALLY SOUND AND REASONABLE. / HIS JUDGMENT RESULTS FROM SOUND EVALUATION OF ALL THE FACTORS INVOLVED. / OUTSTANDINGLY SOUND AND LOGICAL THINKER WITH AN EXCEPTIONAL GRASP OF THE SITUATION INVOLVED. (UNKNOWN checked)\n4. RELIABILITY AND PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY (Consider his sense of responsibility and reliability in the execution of assigned tasks.) Ratings: NOT WHOLLY DEPENDABLE. DOESN'T TAKE HIS DUTIES SERIOUSLY. REQUIRES CLOSE SUPERVISION. / A DEPENDABLE OFFICER WHO PERFORMS ROUTINE DUTIES WELL. NEEDS AN AVERAGE AMOUNT OF SUPERVISION. / COMPLETES ALL ASSIGNED TASKS PROMPTLY AND IN AN ACCEPTABLE MANNER. SOME SUPERVISION NEEDED. / GOES OUT OF HIS WAY TO TURN IN EXCELLENT WORK. THOROUGHLY RELIABLE. ONLY OCCASIONAL SUPERVISION. / HAS AN EXTREMELY HIGH SENSE OF DUTY. JUSTIFIES COMPLETE CONFIDENCE, RARELY REQUIRES SUPERVISION. (UNKNOWN checked)\n5. LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing and obtaining the cooperation of others and in directing their efforts effectively.) Ratings: FAILS TO COMMAND. UNABLE TO EXERT CONTROL. / MANAGES IN SOME INSTANCES TO OBTAIN EFFECTIVE COOPERATION. / CAPABLE LEADER. DEVELOPS ADEQUATE COOPERATION AND TEAM WORK UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES. / A CONSISTENTLY GOOD LEADER. COMMANDS RESPECT OF HIS SUBORDINATES. IS EFFECTIVE UNDER DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES. (checked) / OUTSTANDING SKILL IN DIRECTING OTHERS RESULTS IN A VERY EFFECTIVE UNIT. INSPIRES CONFIDENCE EVEN UNDER VERY DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES.\n6. GROWTH POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility; ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, training and record of past accomplishment.) Ratings: DEFINITELY LIMITED. / PRESENT JOB IS TAXING HIS CAPABILITIES. REQUIRES FURTHER TRAINING. / DEMONSTRATES PROMISE FOR FURTHER GROWTH AT MODERATE RATE. / VERY PROMISING PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL. / CAPABLE OF INCREASED RESPONSIBILITY AND EXCEPTIONALLY RAPID ADVANCEMENT. (UNKNOWN checked)\nAF FORM 77 1 DEC 51 REPLACES AF FORM 77, 77A. AND 77B WHICH ARE OBSOLETE.\nAUG - 6 1952"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":249,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE INITIAL\tGRADE\tSERVICE NUMBER\nMC COY, HOWARD M.\tCOLONEL\t550 A\nIV. OVERALL EVALUATION\nINSTRUCTIONS: Compare this officer with all officers of the same grade. Remember that extremes of ability are rare. Be objective and impersonal. Think of the officer's performance over the entire rating period. Place an (x) in the appropriate box. Be certain to read instructions in Section V before accomplishing your evaluation.\nUNSATIS. FACTORY\tAN ACCEPTABLE OFFICER\tA DEPENDABLE AND TYPICALLY EFFECTIVE OFFICER\tA VERY FINE OFFICER OF GREAT VALUE TO THE SERVICE (checked)\tONE OF THE VERY FEW OUTSTANDING OFFICERS I KNOW\nV. COMMENTS OF REPORTING OFFICER (Include any strengths or weaknesses not covered elsewhere in this report. Whenever the officer is rated unsatisfactory or outstanding one or more actual incidents illustrating typical performances which justify the rating must be included. Specific comment will be made on promotion fitness when it is believed the officer reported on is outstandingly well qualified for promotion and should be promoted in advance of his contemporaries. Include herein suggested assignments or type of duty for which the officer is especially qualified. A definite statement will be made as to the degree to which this officer exercises judgment in economical management of personnel and resources under his supervision, commensurate with his responsibilities.)\nMy evaluation of Colonel McCoy is based on infrequent contacts and routine observance of the results of his work. One outstanding feature is his enthusiasm, interest and drive in accomplishing his present assignment. I believe him to be highly competent in his presently assigned area and the results of his work indicate accomplishment of his assignment in an outstanding fashion. He undoubtedly possesses imagination, initiative and ingenuity. Minor administrative incidents which have occurred during his assignment indicate that he may be somewhat reluctant to accept regulations and routine administrative controls when these appear to interfere with the effective accomplishment of his mission. In this respect, his judgment may be subject to question, however, as of this date, with the information available to me, I would rate him as a superior officer of extreme value to the service. This officer is not an empire builder and exercises sound judgment in the economical management of personnel and resources under his supervision.\nVI. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY\nNAME OF PERSON DELEGATED TO PREPARE REPORT\tREASON(S)\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AND SERVICE NUMBER OF COMMANDING OFFICER\tSIGNATURE OF COMMANDING OFFICER\nVII. CERTIFICATE OF REPORTING OFFICER which the D/R&D has primary interest. Director of the Physical Security Eqpt.Agency of/\nSTATUS OF OFFICER REPORTED ON WITH RESPECT TO REPORTING OFFICER\nI CERTIFY THAT ALL ENTRIES HEREON ARE TRUE AND IMPARTIAL TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. (Referral by the reporting officer is mandatory only when there is a rating in the first three boxes for any factor in Section III or an unsatisfactory in Section IV. When mandatory referral is made the officer reported on will attach a written statement of his reaction to the report.)\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AND SERVICE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER\tSIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER\nD. N. YATES, Major General, USAF, 584A\nVIII. Director of Research & Dev/DCS/Dev REVIEW OF INDORSING OFFICER\nINSTRUCTIONS: In accomplishing your review of the completed report, be sure to compare the overall evaluation to the written comments. It is absolutely necessary that Unsatisfactory or Outstanding ratings be justified by actual incidents and not broad generalities.\nI AGREE I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE REPORTING OFFICER'S EVALUATION, AND HAVE INDICATED BY INITIALING THE APPROPRIATE BOX OR BOXES AND/OR PRESENT THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS.\nDATE\tTYPED NAME, GRADE, AND SN OF INDORSING OFFICER\tSIGNATURE OF INDORSING OFFICER\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1951 O - 979037"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":250,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF OFFICER EFFECTIVENESS\nA\tNAME (Last—First—Middle initial): McCoy, Howard M\tSERIAL NO.: 550A\tGRADE: Col\tCOMPONENT: USAF\tPERIOD OF REPORT: From 14Jul50 To 28Feb51\nTHEATER OR CONTINENTAL COMMAND: Hq USAF\tUNIT, ORGANIZATION, AND STATION: Cen Con Gp/CIA, Wash, DC\tPRIMARY MOS: 9349\tDAYS OF: Duty 183, Nonduty 47\nDATE OF REPORT: 14 Mar 51\tPERMANENT GRADE: Colonel\tREASON FOR THIS REPORT: Annual\nB\tCOMMENTS OF REPORTING OFFICER (Attention is directed to the mandatory comments required by AF Regulation 36-10. A definite statement will be made as to the degree to which this officer exercises judgment in economical management of personnel and resources under his supervision, commensurate with his responsibilities)\nSee attached letter report submitted in accordance with AFR 36-10.\nC1\tPREPARATION OF THIS REPORT IS DELEGATED TO Mr H. Marshall Chadwell BECAUSE: He is the immediate superior.\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AND SERIAL NUMBER OF COMMANDING OFFICER: C W DENNING, Lt Col, AO 361 241\tSIGNATURE OF COMMANDING OFFICER & custodian of per rec\nC2\tSTATUS OF OFFICER REPORTED ON WITH RESPECT TO ME: I CERTIFY THAT ALL ENTRIES HEREON ARE TRUE AND IMPARTIAL TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF.\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AND SERIAL NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER: See attached letter report.\tSIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER\nC3\tCOMMENTS OF INDORSING OFFICER (Indicate your general agreement or disagreement with the evaluation of the reporting officer): Not required.\nSTATUS OF REPORTING OFFICER WITH RESPECT TO ME:\nTYPED NAME AND GRADE OF INDORSING OFFICER: Not required.\tSIGNATURE OF INDORSING OFFICER\nAF FORM 77 15 MAR 49 16-58281-"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":251,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAST NAME\tFIRST NAME\tINITIAL\tGRADE\tSERIAL No.\nMcCOY,\tHOWARD\tM.\tColonel\t550A\nINSTRUCTIONS: Place an \"X\" in the appropriate box to denote your evaluation of the performance of this officer with respect to the critical requirements listed below. The six columns of boxes correspond to the unknown box and the five numbers on each scale in the Check List of Critical Requirements for Officer Evaluation on Report of Officer Effectiveness (AF Form 77A).\nI. PROFICIENCY IN HANDLING ADMINISTRATIVE DETAILS\nU 1 2 3 4 5\n1. Understanding instructions\n2. Scheduling work\n3. Getting information from records\n4. Getting ideas from others\n5. Checking accuracy of work\n6. Writing letters and reports\n7. Getting cooperation\n8. Presenting finished work\n9. Keeping records\n10. Keeping others informed\n11. Rendering effectiveness reports\n(DO NOT USE THIS SPACE)\nII. PROFICIENCY IN SUPERVISING PERSONNEL\nU 1 2 3 4 5\n12. Matching personnel and jobs\n13. Delegating authority\n14. Giving orders and instructions\n15. Insuring comprehension\n16. Giving reasons and explanations\n17. Supporting authorized actions\n18. Encouraging ideas\n19. Developing teamwork\n20. Setting a good example\n21. Assisting subordinates in their work\n22. Evaluating subordinates' work\n23. Looking out for subordinates' welfare\n24. Maintaining relations with subordinates\n(DO NOT USE THIS SPACE)\nIII. PROFICIENCY IN PLANNING AND DIRECTING ACTION\nU 1 2 3 4 5\n25. Taking responsibility\n26. Solving problems\n27. Making use of experience\n28. Long-range planning\n29. Taking prompt action\n30. Suspending judgment\n31. Making correct decisions\n32. Making forceful efforts\n33. Absorbing materials\n(DO NOT USE THIS SPACE)\nIV. ACCEPTANCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY\nU 1 2 3 4 5\n34. Complying with orders and directives\n35. Accepting organizational procedure\n36. Subordinating personal interests\n37. Cooperating with associates\n38. Showing loyalty\n39. Taking responsibility for subordinates\n(DO NOT USE THIS SPACE)\nV. ACCEPTANCE OF PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY\nU 1 2 3 4 5\n40. Attending to duty\n41. Attending to details\n42. Reporting for appointments\n43. Meeting commitments\n44. Being fair and scrupulous\n45. Maintaining military appearance\n46. Adapting to associates\n47. Adapting to the job\n48. Conforming to civil standards\n(DO NOT USE THIS SPACE)\nVI. PROFICIENCY IN DUTY MILITARY OCCUPATIONAL SPECIALTY\n(Describe the specific duty performed and give the SSN/ of the duty)\nU 1 2 3 4 5\n49. Possessing fundamental training\n50. Improving effectiveness\n51. Keeping well-informed\n52. Applying training and information\n53. Showing ingenuity in specialty\n54. Handling related assignments\n(DO NOT USE THIS SPACE)\nTOTAL SCORE\t(DO NOT USE THIS SPACE)\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-65281-1"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":252,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\nMAR 14 1951\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\tThe Air Adjutant General\n\tDepartment of the Air Force\n\tWashington 25, D. C.\nSUBJECT:\tEfficiency Report in the case of Colonel Howard M. McCoy, covering the period 30 August 1950 to 13 March 1951\n1. Subject officer has exhibited a thorough knowledge and understanding of intelligence during his assignment in this office. While he was not assigned to a position requiring the handling of administrative details or supervising personnel, he demonstrated an ability for getting along with others, encouraging ideas and assisting my subordinates in their work. He is capable of developing ideas with initiative and imagination.\n2. The military appearance and attitude of this officer is in keeping with the high standards of the United States Air Force.\nH. MARSHALL CHADWELL\nAssistant Director"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":253,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":254,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ACADEMIC CROSS REFERENCE SHEET\nLAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE INITIAL\tSERVICE NUMBER\nMcCoy Howard M.\t550 A\nSCHOOL\tCOURSE\nINDUST COLG ARMD FORCES, WASH, D.C.\tREG\nPERIOD\tCHECK APPROPRIATE BOX\nFROM 25 Aug 49\tTO 27 Jun 50\tCOMPLETE / INCOMPLETE / FAILED\nAFHQ FORM 0-21E 20 JUN 50\n50 30737"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":255,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF OFFICER EFFECTIVENESS\nA\nNAME (Last—First—Middle initial) McCOY Howard M\tSERIAL NO. 550A AOIS 054\tGRADE COL\tCOMPONENT USAF\tPERIOD OF REPORT From 1May49 To 30Jun49\nTHEATER OR CONTINENTAL COMMAND AIR MATERIEL COMMAND\tUNIT, ORGANIZATION, AND STATION Hq Air Materiel Command Wright-Patterson AF Base\tPRIMARY MOS 9349\tDAYS OF Duty 45 Nonduty 16\nDATE OF REPORT 30 Jun 49\tPERMANENT GRADE COL\tREASON FOR THIS REPORT AFL 36-16 dtd 15 Apr 49\nB\nCOMMENTS OF REPORTING OFFICER (Attention is directed to the mandatory comments required by AF Regulation 36-10. A definite statement will be made as to the degree to which this officer exercises judgment in economical management of personnel and resources under his supervision, commensurate with his responsibilities) Honest and likeable; extremely well educated and trained technically. Due to his enthusiasm and ability in technical matters, is apt to place more emphasis on that phase of his duties to the detriment of control and administration of his activity.\nA. In his enthusiasm to enhance the prestige of his activity, was inclined to accept workloads beyond the capacity of allotted personnel.\nB. Accepted to a high degree his responsibility towards the control, supervision, direction and instruction of subordinates and exacted conformance to standards of conduct and discipline expected to Air Force officers.\nC. His compliance with officers' code of conduct is above reproach.\nD. Unusual technical knowledge and analytical ability are his outstanding characteristics.\nE. Strives for self-improvement; growth potential technically appears to be unlimited and with additional emphasis on administration should be able to assume positions of greater responsibility.\nF. Not applicable.\nC1 PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT IS DELEGATED TO ____ BECAUSE:\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AND SERIAL NUMBER OF COMMANDING OFFICER\tSIGNATURE OF COMMANDING OFFICER\nC2 STATUS OF OFFICER REPORTED ON WITH RESPECT TO ME: Department Chief under my jurisdiction.\nI CERTIFY THAT ALL ENTRIES HEREON ARE TRUE AND IMPARTIAL TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF.\nTYPED NAME, GRADE, AND SERIAL NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER BENJAMIN W. CHIDLAW, 23A Lieutenant General, USAF\tSIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER\nC3 COMMENTS OF INDORSING OFFICER (Indicate your general agreement or disagreement with the evaluation of the reporting officer): After carefully studying this report, I concur in the evaluation made by the reporting officer.\nSTATUS OF REPORTING OFFICER WITH RESPECT TO ME: My Deputy Commander\nTYPED NAME AND GRADE OF INDORSING OFFICER JOSEPH T. McNARNEY General, USAF\tSIGNATURE OF INDORSING OFFICER\nAF FORM 77 15 MAR 49"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":256,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAST NAME FIRST NAME INITIAL GRADE SERIAL No.\nMcCOY Howard M COL 550A A018 054\nINSTRUCTIONS: Place an \"X\" in the appropriate box to denote your evaluation of the performance of this officer with respect to the critical requirements listed below. The six columns of boxes correspond to the unknown box and the five numbers on each scale in the Check List of Critical Requirements for Officer Evaluation on Report of Officer Effectiveness (AF Form 77A).\nD I. PROFICIENCY IN HANDLING ADMINISTRATIVE DETAILS\nU 1 2 3 4 5\n1. Understanding instructions\n2. Scheduling work\n3. Getting information from records\n4. Getting ideas from others\n5. Checking accuracy of work\n6. Writing letters and reports\n7. Getting cooperation\n8. Presenting finished work\n9. Keeping records\n10. Keeping others informed\n11. Rendering effectiveness reports\n4.09\nII. PROFICIENCY IN SUPERVISING PERSONNEL\n12. Matching personnel and jobs\n13. Delegating authority\n14. Giving orders and instructions\n15. Insuring comprehension\n16. Giving reasons and explanations\n17. Supporting authorized actions\n18. Encouraging ideas\n19. Developing teamwork\n20. Setting a good example\n21. Assisting subordinates in their work\n22. Evaluating subordinates' work\n23. Looking out for subordinates' welfare\n24. Maintaining relations with subordinates\n4.00\nIII. PROFICIENCY IN PLANNING AND DIRECTING ACTION\n25. Taking responsibility\n26. Solving problems\n27. Making use of experience\n28. Long-range planning\n29. Taking prompt action\n30. Suspending judgment\n31. Making correct decisions\n32. Making forceful efforts\n33. Absorbing materials\n4.44\nIV. ACCEPTANCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY\n34. Complying with orders and directives\n35. Accepting organizational procedure\n36. Subordinating personal interests\n37. Cooperating with associates\n38. Showing loyalty\n39. Taking responsibility for subordinates\n4.00\nV. ACCEPTANCE OF PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY\n40. Attending to duty\n41. Attending to details\n42. Reporting for appointments\n43. Meeting commitments\n44. Being fair and scrupulous\n45. Maintaining military appearance\n46. Adapting to associates\n47. Adapting to the job\n48. Conforming to civil standards\n4.00\nVI. PROFICIENCY IN DUTY MILITARY OCCUPATIONAL SPECIALTY\n(Describe the specific duty performed and give the SSN / of the duty)\nAir Technical Intelligence Officer - 9349. Insures the execution of the normal and technical-intelligence phases of the over-all AMC mission. Provides an Air Technical Intelligence service for the USAF. Promulgates Command policies pertaining to AMC security. Exploits sources of foreign and foreign-positive intelligence.\n49. Possessing fundamental training\n50. Improving effectiveness\n51. Keeping well-informed\n52. Applying training and information\n53. Showing ingenuity in specialty\n54. Handling related assignments\n4.83\nTOTAL SCORE 4.23\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-58281-1"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":257,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Col McCOY, Howard M A018054 AF USAF\nSECTION II\nB. (Cont'd)\nIs inclined to either forget or overlook the dollar costs in his effort to obtain maximum end results and for this reason, the administration and control of his organization have to be kept under constant close scrutiny by higher levels of management. I have discussed this officer's performance of duty with him, pointed out any deficiencies of which I was aware, and have suggested possible improvements and means of further development."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":258,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT\nSee AR 600-185 for details.\nUnit Adjutant or Personnel Officer will complete Sections I and III. Rating Officer will complete Sections II, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, and IX. Indorsing Officer will complete Sections II, V, VII, and IX.\nSection I. OFFICER REPORTED UPON\nLAST NAME McCOY FIRST NAME Howard INITIAL M SERIAL NUMBER A018 054 GRADE COL ARM OR SERVICE AF COMPONENT USAF PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 1 Jun 48 TO 30 Apr 49\nTHEATER OR CONTINENTAL COMMAND Air Materiel Command UNIT, ORGANIZATION AND STATION Hq Air Materiel Command Wright-Patterson AF Base PRIMARY MOS 9349 DUTY ASSIGNMENT (MOS CODE) 7050 DAYS OF DUTY 303 LEAVE 31\nDATE OF REPORT 30 Apr 49 Annual Report - Message Form AFPMP-5A, dtd 2 Mar 49\nNAME, GRADE, AND ORGANIZATION OR UNIT OF RATING OFFICER B. W. CHIDLAW, AO 11936, Lt. General, USAF Hq. AMC, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base\nNAME, GRADE, AND ORGANIZATION OR UNIT OF INDORSING OFFICER JOSEPH T. McNARNEY, AO 3804, General, USAF Hq. AMC, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base\nSection II. DATA AND SUGGESTIONS FOR USE IN ASSIGNMENT\nA. DUTIES ACTUALLY PERFORMED ON PRESENT JOB. Chief of Intelligence, Headquarters, Air Materiel Command. Responsible for insuring the execution of the normal and technical - intelligence phases of the over-all AMC mission which includes: Providing an air technical intelligence service for the USAF required for the prevention of technological surprise; promulgating command policies pertaining to AMC security; exploiting sources of foreign & foreign-positive intelligence; and providing a central technical document activity for the AMC.\nB. DESCRIPTION OF OFFICER RATED AND COMMENTS.\nCOMMENTS OF RATING OFFICER Attacks his objective aggressively. Well grounded, through education and background for his present assignment. Through his own drive and initiative, has been successful in raising the standards and improving the results of Air Technical Intelligence. (Cont'd on attached sheet)\nCOMMENTS OF INDORSING OFFICER I concur in the description and comments made by the reporting officer.\nC. ESTIMATED DESIRABILITY IN VARIOUS CAPACITIES. Assume you are a commander of a major unit in war.\na. Represent your viewpoint and make decisions in your name at a higher headquarters.\nb. Command a unit immediately subordinate to you on a combat mission.\nc. Be responsible in an emergency calling for initiative, coolness, forceful leadership.\nd. Work on an assignment requiring great attention to detail and routine.\ne. Plan all aspects of a military situation, using judgment, initiative, and coolness.\nf. Carry out an assignment in a civilian component such as ROTC, NG, or ORC.\ng. Represent you where tact and ability to get along with people are needed.\nh. Work on an assignment as specialist or technician. (Specify.)\ni. Carry out the duties of the type of work to which he is now assigned.\nD. IMMEDIATE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CAREER DEVELOPMENT. Be specific.\nRATER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR ASSIGNMENT (MOS CODE) Intelligence Assignment\nINDORSER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR ASSIGNMENT (MOS CODE) Intelligence Assignment\nRATER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER TRAINING Industrial College of the Armed Forces\nINDORSER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER TRAINING Industrial College of the Armed Forces\nE. ENTRIES ARE BASED ON (RATER WILL CHECK) INTIMATE DAILY CONTACT\nWD AGO FORM 67-1 PART 1"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":259,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":260,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT\nSee AR 600-185 for details.\nUnit Adjutant or Personnel Officer will complete Sections I and III. Rating Officer will complete Sections II, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, and IX. Indorsing Officer will complete Sections II, V, VII, and IX.\nSection I. OFFICER REPORTED UPON\nLAST NAME McCOY FIRST NAME Howard INITIAL M SERIAL NUMBER 0 18 054 GRADE Col ARM OR SERVICE AC COMPONENT RA PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 1 Jul 47 TO 14 Oct 47\nTHEATER OR CONTINENTAL COMMAND Air Materiel Command UNIT, ORGANIZATION AND STATION 4020th AAF Base Unit (Hq AMC) PRIMARY MOS 7050 DUTY ASSIGNMENT (MOS CODE) 2120 DAYS OF DUTY 104 LEAVE 2\nDATE OF REPORT 14 Oct 47\nNAME, GRADE, AND ORGANIZATION OR UNIT OF RATING OFFICER N. F. TWINING, Lt Gen, USA 4020th AAFBU (Hq AMC)\nNAME, GRADE, AND ORGANIZATION OR UNIT OF INDORSING OFFICER\nSection II. DATA AND SUGGESTIONS FOR USE IN ASSIGNMENT\nA. DUTIES ACTUALLY PERFORMED ON PRESENT JOB. Deputy Commanding General, Intelligence (T-2), under command jurisdiction of the Commanding General, AMC; is responsible for planning, establishing policy and supervising all phases of Technical Intelligence for the AMC; also responsible for supervising and providing photographic services for the AMC, and for compiling the AMC history.\nB. DESCRIPTION OF OFFICER RATED AND COMMENTS.\nCOMMENTS OF RATING OFFICER Smart and intelligent with a good analytical mind. Knows his job but does not express himself well. Especially qualified in engineering. Is most loyal, works hard and is highly enthusiastic in whatever he does.\nCOMMENTS OF INDORSING OFFICER\nC. ESTIMATED DESIRABILITY IN VARIOUS CAPACITIES. Assume you are a commander of a major unit in war.\na. Represent your viewpoint and make decisions in your name at a higher headquarters.\nb. Command a unit immediately subordinate to you on a combat mission.\nc. Be responsible in an emergency calling for initiative, coolness, forceful leadership.\nd. Work on an assignment requiring great attention to detail and routine.\ne. Plan all aspects of a military situation, using judgment, initiative, and coolness.\nf. Carry out an assignment in a civilian component such as ROTC, NG, or ORC.\ng. Represent you where tact and ability to get along with people are needed.\nh. Work on an assignment as specialist or technician. (Specify.) Engineering\ni. Carry out the duties of the type of work to which he is now assigned.\nD. IMMEDIATE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CAREER DEVELOPMENT. Be specific.\nRATER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR ASSIGNMENT (MOS CODE) Present Assignment\nRATER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER TRAINING National War College\nE. ENTRIES ARE BASED ON (RATER WILL CHECK) INTIMATE DAILY CONTACT X\nWD AGO FORM 67-1 PART 1"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":261,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DO NOT WRITE ON THIS PAGE\nReserved for use of the Career Sections of the Arms and Services"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":262,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT\nUSE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PLEASE PRINT\nPREPARE THIS REPORT WITH PAINSTAKING ACCURACY. ITS VALUE LIES IN THE DEGREE OF OBJECTIVITY, IMPARTIALITY, AND SOUND, CONSIDERED JUDGMENT DISPLAYED BY THE RATING OFFICER. READ INSTRUCTIONS.\nSEE AR 600-185\nA. PLACE OF ORIGIN OF REPORT\nTHEATER OR COMMAND AIR MATERIEL COMMAND\nORGANIZATION AND UNIT 4020TH AAF BASE UNIT (HQ AMC)\nDATE OF REPORT 30 Jun 47\nB. OFFICER REPORTED UPON\nLAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE INITIAL McCOY, Howard M\nSERIAL NUMBER 018 054\nGRADE COL\nARM OR SERVICE AC\nCOMPONENT RA\nDATE OF BIRTH 4 Dec 07\nSERVICE Limited General X\nOFFICIAL STATUS OF OFFICER WITH RESPECT TO YOU My Deputy for Technical Intelligence (T-2)\nPERIOD COVERED BY REPORT FROM 10 Dec 46 TO 30 Jun 47\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH OFFICER SERVED AND DUTY ASSIGNMENTS\n1. Wright Fld, Ohio Deputy CG, Intelligence (T-2) 188 X\n5. Lv 15\nD. WRITE A BRIEF GENERAL ESTIMATE OF THIS OFFICER. REFER TO POINTS OF WEAKNESS AS WELL AS STRENGTH. UNFAVORABLE ENTRIES OF OPINION IN THIS ESTIMATE NEED NOT BE REFERRED TO THE OFFICER BEING RATED.\nVery serious but industrious and capable. Has handled a difficult assignment in a most excellent manner. So enthusiastic about his own job that at times may tend to irate others.\nE. ALL ENTRIES ARE FORMULATED ON THE FOLLOWING: BASED ON INTIMATE DAILY CONTACT X; FREQUENT OBSERVATION OF THE RESULTS OF HIS WORK; INFREQUENT OBSERVATION OF THE RESULTS OF HIS WORK; ACADEMIC RECORDS; OFFICIAL REPORTS\nF. INDICATE YOUR ATTITUDE WOULD YOU: PARTICULARLY DESIRE HIM?; BE PLEASED TO HAVE HIM? X; BE SATISFIED TO HAVE HIM?; PREFER NOT TO HAVE HIM?; DEFINITELY NOT WANT HIM?\nG. WHAT DEGREE OF SUCCESS HAS HE ATTAINED UNDER THE FOLLOWING?\n1. Physical Activity and Endurance 5\n2. Stability Under Pressure 5\n3. Attention to Duty 6\n4. Cooperation 6\n5. Initiative 6\n6. Intelligence 6\n7. Force 6\n8. Judgment and Common Sense 6\n9. Leadership 6\n10. Ability to Obtain Results 6\nH. Since last report has he been mentioned in official communications? No\nI. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No\nJ. In case unfavorable entries have been made, other than in D and/or F, were the deficiencies brought to the officer's attention while under your command and prior to preparation of this report? None\nTotals +58\nK. Net Value 58\nL. OUTSTANDING SPECIALTIES OF VALUE IN MILITARY SERVICE. Senior Pilot Acft Obsr Combat Obsr\nM. Numerical Rating 5.80\nN. Adjectival Rating SUP\nO. I CERTIFY THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF ALL ENTRIES MADE HEREON ARE TRUE AND IMPARTIAL AND ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AR 600-185.\nINCLOSURES One\nTYPE NAME, GRADE AND ORGANIZATION N. F. TWINING, Lt Gen, USA Air Materiel Command 4020th AAFBU (HQ AMC)\nWD AGO FORM 67 1 FEB 1945 (This form supersedes WD AGO Form 67, 27 September 1944, which will be used until existing stocks are exhausted.)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":263,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THIS SPACE FOR CONTINUATION OF REMARKS IF NEEDED\nTRIPLICATE COPY EXTRACTED IN AAF\nAFGAS-5 1ST. IND.\nHq AAF, Washington 25, D. C., 20 August 1947\nTo: The Adjutant General, Washington 25, D. C.\nThe Commanding General concurs in the above report.\n1 Incl n/c\nEDWARD E. TORO Colonel, Air Corps Ass't, Air Adjutant General\nINSTRUCTIONS (SEE AR 600-185)\n1. Efficiency ratings comprise an evaluation of an officer in comparison with others of the same grade. In a large group of officers, such as are normally assigned to an infantry division, the law of averages will establish that about twenty percent of the officers of each grade may be superior, about twenty percent may be in the two lower classifications of very satisfactory and satisfactory (Unsatisfactory officers should be identified promptly and reclassified); the remaining sixty per cent who constitute the mass of thoroughly capable officers would fall into the excellent category. Commanders of regiments and large units must analyze the reports prepared within their organization and whenever the distribution varies markedly from the above the reasons must be sought. It is highly important that officers who are genuinely superior be identified by their ratings so that their talents may be fully utilized. It is also important to identify those officers whose qualifications and standards of performance of duty are above the minimum required, but who are clearly below the standard established by the mass of officers of their grade. A series of reports of an individual officer should present a highly accurate evaluation of his worth.\n2. Prior to filling in Section G of this report consider carefully the following definitions and the numerical values assigned to each. Keep them in mind when rating, taking into consideration the length of service of officer you are rating and the opportunities afforded him, which might have a bearing upon his performance of duty, personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\nUnsatisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standards-inefficient.\nSatisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard-passably efficient.\nVery Satisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that acceptable as satisfactory.\nExcellent: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above very satisfactory but below superior.\nSuperior: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that considered excellent.\nUnknown: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\n1-10 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 19-86304-3"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":264,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT\nSee AR 600-185 for details.\nUnit Adjutant or Personnel Officer will complete Sections I and III. Rating Officer will complete Sections II, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, and IX. Indorsing Officer will complete Sections II, V, VII, and IX.\nSection I. OFFICER REPORTED UPON\nLAST NAME McCOY FIRST NAME Howard INITIAL M SERIAL NUMBER A018 054 GRADE COL ARM OR SERVICE AF COMPONENT USAF\nPERIOD OF REPORT FROM 15Oct47 TO 31May48\nTHEATER OR CONTINENTAL COMMAND AIR MATERIEL COMMAND\nUNIT, ORGANIZATION AND STATION 4020th AF Base Unit (Hq AMC)\nPRIMARY MOS 7050\nDUTY ASSIGNMENT (MOS CODE) 9301\nDAYS OF DUTY 218 LEAVE 12\nDATE OF REPORT 1 June 48\nANNUAL REPORT (Par 6c(5))\nNAME, GRADE, AND ORGANIZATION OR UNIT OF RATING OFFICER B. W. CHIDLAW, AO-14936, Lt. General, USAF 4020th AFBU (HQ AMC)\nNAME, GRADE, AND ORGANIZATION OR UNIT OF INDORSING OFFICER JOSEPH T. McNARNEY, AO-3804, General, USAF 4020th AFBU (Hq AMC)\nSection II. DATA AND SUGGESTIONS FOR USE IN ASSIGNMENT\nA. DUTIES ACTUALLY PERFORMED ON PRESENT JOB. Chief of Intelligence, Air Materiel Command; responsible for planning, establishing policy for and supervising the normal and technical intelligence phases of the over-all AMC mission, which include: 1) Providing an Air Technical Intelligence Service for the USAF required for the prevention of technological surprise from any source, 2) Exploitation of all available sources of foreign intelligence, and 3) Promulgation of command policies pertaining to security.\nB. DESCRIPTION OF OFFICER RATED AND COMMENTS.\nCOMMENTS OF RATING OFFICER: Well grounded through education and experience, this officer has developed the relatively new field of Air Technical Intelligence and is one of the comparatively few officers within the Air Force currently qualified to handle this important assignment. Of firm opinions and possessed (cont'd on attached sheet)\nCOMMENTS OF INDORSING OFFICER: I concur in the description and comments made by the reporting officer.\nC. ESTIMATED DESIRABILITY IN VARIOUS CAPACITIES.\nD. IMMEDIATE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CAREER DEVELOPMENT.\nRATER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR ASSIGNMENT (MOS CODE) Present Assignment 9301 Intell Staff Officer\nINDORSER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR ASSIGNMENT (MOS CODE) Same\nRATER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER TRAINING AIR WAR COLLEGE\nINDORSER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER TRAINING Same\nE. ENTRIES ARE BASED ON (RATER WILL CHECK) INTIMATE DAILY CONTACT X\nWD AGO FORM 67-1 1 JUL 47 PART 1"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":265,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DO NOT WRITE ON THIS PAGE\nReserved for use of the Career Sections of the Arms and Services"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":266,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECTION II. DATA AND SUGGESTIONS FOR USE IN ASSIGNMENT\n\nB. (Cont'd from front sheet)\n\nof considerable initiative he goes ahead\non his own without waiting for detailed\norders. His enthusiasms for broadening the\nhorizons of his job have to be continually\nchecked to keep them within balance. His\njudgment and opinions within his particular\nsphere of operations are well thought of by\nother Intelligence agencies. I have brought\nto the attention of this officer any weaknesses\nindicated herein."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":267,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT\n\nUSE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PLEASE PRINT\nPREPARE THIS REPORT WITH PAINSTAKING ACCURACY! ITS VALUE LIES IN THE DEGREE OF OBJECTIVITY, IMPARTIALITY, AND SOUND, CONSIDERED JUDGMENT DISPLAYED BY THE RATING OFFICER. READ INSTRUCTIONS.\nSEE AR 600-185\n\nA. PLACE OF ORIGIN OF REPORT\nTHEATER OR COMMAND: Air Materiel Command\nORGANIZATION AND UNIT: 4020th AAFBU, Hq Air Materiel Command\nDATE OF REPORT: 9 Dec 46\n\nB. OFFICER REPORTED UPON\nLAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE INITIAL: McCoy, Howard M\nSERIAL NUMBER: 018054\nGRADE: Col.\nARM OR SERVICE: Air Corps\nCOMPONENT: RA\nDATE OF BIRTH: 4 Dec 07\nSERVICE: General X\nOFFICIAL STATUS OF OFFICER WITH RESPECT TO YOU: One of my Division Chiefs\nPERIOD COVERED BY REPORT FROM: 1 Jul 46 TO: 9 Dec 46\n\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH OFFICER SERVED AND DUTY ASSIGNMENTS\n1. Wright Fld, Ohio | Chief, Air Documents Div, Intelligence (T-2) | 143 | Admin & Exec X\n2.\n3.\n4. Sk-10 Lv-9 | 19\n5. Senior Pilot (UNK) | 162\n\nD. WRITE A BRIEF GENERAL ESTIMATE OF THIS OFFICER. REFER TO POINTS OF WEAKNESS AS WELL AS STRENGTH, UNFAVORABLE ENTRIES OF OPINION IN THIS ESTIMATE NEED NOT BE REFERRED TO THE OFFICER BEING RATED.\nThis officer is very capable, technically qualified and a good engineer. His weakness lies in the initiation of many projects without following thru to completion. He also does not become familiar with the detailed operations of his division to the detriment of the efficiency of the organization.\n\nE. ALL ENTRIES ARE FORMULATED ON THE FOLLOWING: Based on: Frequent observation of the results of his work (X)\nF. INDICATE YOUR ATTITUDE WOULD YOU: Be pleased to have him? (X)\n\nG. WHAT DEGREE OF SUCCESS HAS HE ATTAINED UNDER THE FOLLOWING?\n1. Physical Activity and Endurance: 6\n2. Stability Under Pressure: 5\n3. Attention to Duty: 6\n4. Cooperation: 5\n5. Initiative: 7\n6. Intelligence: 6\n7. Force: 6\n8. Judgment and Common Sense: 6\n9. Leadership: 6\n10. Ability to Obtain Results: 5\n\nH. Since last report has he been mentioned in official communications? Favorably: No. Unfavorably: No.\nI. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure? NO\nJ. In case unfavorable entries have been made, other than in D and/or F, were the deficiencies brought to the officer's attention? NONE\nTotals: +58 Net Value: 58\n\nL. OUTSTANDING SPECIALTIES OF VALUE IN MILITARY SERVICE. Senior Pilot\nM. Numerical Rating: 5.80\nN. Adjectival Rating: SUP\n\nO. I CERTIFY THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF ALL ENTRIES MADE HEREON ARE TRUE AND IMPARTIAL AND ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AR 600-185.\nINCLOSURES: 0\nTYPE NAME, GRADE AND ORGANIZATION: D. L. PUTT, Colonel, AC, 4020th AAFBU\nCOMMANDING WHAT? Intelligence (T-2)\nWD AGO FORM 67, 1 FEB 1945 (This form supersedes WD AGO Form 67, 27 September 1944, which will be used until existing stocks are exhausted.)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":268,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THIS SPACE FOR CONTINUATION OF REMARKS IF NEEDED\n\n1ST. IND.\nHQ, AMC, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. 27 December 1946.\nTO: The Adjutant General, Washington 25, D. C. (Thru Channels)\nI concur in the above report.\n\nN. F. TWINING,\nLieutenant General, USA,\nCommanding.\n\nINSTRUCTIONS (SEE AR 600-185)\n\n1. Efficiency ratings comprise an evaluation of an officer in comparison with others of the same grade. In a large group of officers, such as are normally assigned to an Infantry division, the law of averages will establish that about twenty percent of the officers of each grade may be superior; about twenty percent may be in the two lower classifications of very satisfactory and satisfactory (Unsatisfactory officers should be identified promptly and reclassified); the remaining sixty per cent who constitute the mass of thoroughly capable officers form the excellent category. Commanders of regiments and large units must analyze the reports prepared within their organization and whenever the distribution varies markedly from the above the reasons must be sought. It is highly important that officers who are genuinely superior be identified by their ratings so that their talents may be fully utilized. It is also important to identify those officers whose qualifications and standards of performance of duty are above the minimum required, but who are clearly below the standard established by the mass of officers of their grade. A series of reports of an individual officer should present a highly accurate evaluation of his worth.\n\n2. Prior to filling in Section G of this report consider carefully the following definitions and the numerical values assigned to each. Keep them in mind when rating, taking into consideration the length of service of officer you are rating and the opportunities afforded him, which might have a bearing upon his performance of duty, personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\n\nUnsatisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standards-inefficient.\nSatisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard-passably efficient.\nVery Satisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that acceptable as satisfactory.\nExcellent: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above very satisfactory but below superior.\nSuperior: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that considered excellent.\nUnknown: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, his personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\n1-10 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-36304-3"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":269,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Efficiency report, Colonel Howard M. McCoy, AC, O-18054, 1 Jul to 9 Dec 1946.\n\nAFGAS-5 2nd Ind.\nHq AAF, Washington, D. C. 26 February 1947.\nTO: The Adjutant General, Washington, 25, D. C.\nExamined and forwarded.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nH. H. HEWITT,\nLt.Colonel, A.G.D.,\nAsst. Air Adjutant General."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":270,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT\n\nUSE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PLEASE PRINT\nPREPARE THIS REPORT WITH PAINSTAKING ACCURACY! ITS VALUE LIES IN THE DEGREE OF OBJECTIVITY, IMPARTIALITY, AND SOUND, CONSIDERED JUDGMENT DISPLAYED BY THE RATING OFFICER. READ INSTRUCTIONS.\nSEE AR 600-185\n\nA. PLACE OF ORIGIN OF REPORT\nTHEATER OR COMMAND: AMC\nORGANIZATION AND UNIT: 4020th AAFBU (Hq AMC)\nDATE OF REPORT: 30 June 46\n\nB. OFFICER REPORTED UPON\nLAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE INITIAL: McCOY, Howard M.\nSERIAL NUMBER: 018 054\nGRADE: Colonel\nARM OR SERVICE: AC\nCOMPONENT: RA\nDATE OF BIRTH: 4 Dec 07\nSERVICE: General X\nOFFICIAL STATUS OF OFFICER WITH RESPECT TO YOU: Chief of one of my divisions.\nPERIOD COVERED BY REPORT FROM: 1 Jan 46 TO: 30 June 46\n\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH OFFICER SERVED AND DUTY ASSIGNMENTS\n1. Wright Fld, Ohio | Chief, Air Documents Div, Intelligence T-2 | 171 | Admin & Exec X\n4. Lv 10 | 181\n5. Sr Pilot (SUP)\n\nD. WRITE A BRIEF GENERAL ESTIMATE OF THIS OFFICER.\nA very intelligent, capable officer, with considerable vision and planning ability.\n\nG. WHAT DEGREE OF SUCCESS HAS HE ATTAINED UNDER THE FOLLOWING?\n1. Physical Activity and Endurance: 6\n2. Stability Under Pressure: 6\n3. Attention to Duty: 6\n4. Cooperation: 5\n5. Initiative: 6\n6. Intelligence: 6\n7. Force: 5\n8. Judgment and Common Sense: 5\n9. Leadership: 6\n10. Ability to Obtain Results: 5\n\nH. Favorably: No. Unfavorably: No.\nI. NO\nJ. NONE\nTotals: +56 Net Value: 56\n\nL. Sr Pilot\nM. Numerical Rating: 5.6\nN. Adjectival Rating: Superior\n\nO. I CERTIFY THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF ALL ENTRIES MADE HEREON ARE TRUE AND IMPARTIAL AND ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AR 600-185.\nINCLOSURES: 0\nTYPE NAME, GRADE AND ORGANIZATION: D. L. PUTT, Colonel, A.C.\nCOMMANDING WHAT: Deputy CG, Intelligence (T-2).\nWD AGO FORM 67, 1 FEB 1945 (This form supersedes WD AGO Form 67, 27 September 1944, which will be used until existing stocks are exhausted.)\n0-17875 4020th AAFBU"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":271,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THIS SPACE FOR CONTINUATION OF REMARKS IF NEEDED\n\nCarbon Copy Extracted by AAF\n\n1ST. IND.\n\nHQ, AMC, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. 8 August 1946\n\nTO: Commanding General, AAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nI concur in the above report.\n\nN. F. TWINING\nLt General, USA\nCommanding\n\n2d Ind\n\nHq., Army Air Forces, Washington 25, D. C., 20 August 1946\n\nTo: The Adjutant General, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nExamined and forwarded.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nEDWARD E. TORO\nColonel, Air Corps\nAsst. Air Adjutant General\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n(SEE AR 600-185)\n\n1. Efficiency ratings comprise an evaluation of an officer in comparison with others of the same grade. In a large group of officers, such as are normally assigned to an infantry division, the law of averages will establish that about twenty percent of the officers of each grade may be superior, about twenty percent may be in the two lower classifications of very satisfactory and satisfactory (Unsatisfactory officers should be identified promptly and reclassified); the remaining sixty per cent who constitute the mass of thoroughly capable officers would fall into the excellent category. Commanders of regiments and large units must analyze the reports prepared within their organization and whenever the distribution varies markedly from the above the reasons must be sought. It is highly important that officers who are genuinely superior be identified by their ratings so that their talents may be fully utilized. It is also important to identify those officers whose qualifications and standards of performance of duty are above the minimum required, but who are clearly below the standard established by the mass of officers of their grade. A series of reports of an individual officer should present a highly accurate evaluation of his worth.\n\n2. Prior to filling in Section G of this report consider carefully the following definitions and the numerical values assigned to each. Keep them in mind when rating, taking into consideration the length of service of officer you are rating and the opportunities afforded him, which might have a bearing upon his performance of duty, personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\n\nUnsatisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standards—inefficient.\n\nSatisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard—passably efficient.\n\nVery Satisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that acceptable as satisfactory.\n\nExcellent: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above very satisfactory but below superior.\n\nSuperior: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that considered excellent.\n\nUnknown: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-36304-3"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":272,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT\n\nUSE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PLEASE PRINT. PREPARE THIS REPORT WITH PAINSTAKING ACCURACY. ITS VALUE LIES IN THE DEGREE OF OBJECTIVITY, IMPARTIALITY, AND SOUND, CONSIDERED JUDGMENT DISPLAYED BY THE RATING OFFICER. READ INSTRUCTIONS. SEE AR 600-185\n\nA. PLACE OF ORIGIN OF REPORT\nTHEATER OR COMMAND: ATSC\nORGANIZATION AND UNIT: 4020th AAF BU (HQ ATSC)\nDATE OF REPORT: 31 Dec 45\n\nB. OFFICER REPORTED UPON\nLAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE INITIAL: McCOY, Howard M.\nSERIAL NUMBER: 018 054\nGRADE: Col\nARM OR SERVICE: AC\nCOMPONENT: RA\nDATE OF BIRTH: 4 Dec 07\nSERVICE: General X\nOFFICIAL STATUS OF OFFICER WITH RESPECT TO YOU: Chief of one of my divisions\nPERIOD COVERED BY REPORT FROM: 1 Jul 45 TO: 31 Dec 45\n\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH OFFICER SERVED AND DUTY ASSIGNMENTS\n1. Europe (Fr 66-2 6.6) Dir Tech\n2. Serv, Hq ATSC in Europe 15\n3. (Fr 66-2 6.3) Intel Sec,\n4. US Strategic AF in ETO 88\n5. Europe\n\nD. WRITE A BRIEF GENERAL ESTIMATE OF THIS OFFICER. An outstanding and capable officer, particularly on engineering and technical matters. Very slightly lacking in tact and diplomacy.\n\nE. ALL ENTRIES ARE FORMULATED ON THE FOLLOWING: INTIMATE DAILY CONTACT; FREQUENT OBSERVATION OF THE RESULTS OF HIS WORK; INFREQUENT OBSERVATION OF THE RESULTS OF HIS WORK; ACADEMIC RECORDS; OFFICIAL REPORTS\n\nF. INDICATE YOUR ATTITUDE WOULD YOU: PARTICULARLY DESIRE HIM?; BE PLEASED TO HAVE HIM?; BE SATISFIED TO HAVE HIM?; PREFER NOT TO HAVE HIM?; DEFINITELY NOT WANT HIM?\n\nG. WHAT DEGREE OF SUCCESS HAS HE ATTAINED UNDER THE FOLLOWING?\n1. Physical Activity and Endurance 6\n2. Stability Under Pressure 5\n3. Attention to Duty 7\n4. Cooperation 5\n5. Initiative 6\n6. Intelligence 6\n7. Force 6\n8. Judgment and Common Sense 6\n9. Leadership 6\n10. Ability to Obtain Results 6\n\nTotals +59\nNet Value 59\n\nH. Since last report has he been mentioned in official communications? No\nI. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure? No\nJ. In case unfavorable entries have been made... None\n\nL. OUTSTANDING SPECIALTIES OF VALUE IN MILITARY SERVICE: Sr. Pilot\n\nM. Numerical Rating 5.9\nN. Adjectival Rating Superior\n\nO. I CERTIFY THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF ALL ENTRIES MADE HEREON ARE TRUE AND IMPARTIAL AND ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AR 600-185.\n\nINCLOSURES 2. SIGNATURE: D. L. Putt. TYPE NAME, GRADE AND ORGANIZATION: D. L. PUTT, Colonel, A.C. COMMANDING OFFICER: Deputy CG, Intelligence\n\nWD AGO FORM 67, 1 FEB 1945. (This form supersedes WD AGO Form 67, 27 September 1944, which will be used until existing stocks are exhausted.)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":273,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THIS SPACE FOR CONTINUATION OF REMARKS IF NEEDED\n\nPAR C (contd)\n\nSTATIONS: Wright Field, Ohio\nDUTY ASSIGNMENTS: Chief, Air Documents Div, T-2; Sr. Pilot (Superior)\nDAYS: 81\nCLASSIFY DUTY: x adm & exec\n\n1ST. IND.\n\nHQ, AMC, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. 16 April 1946.\n\nTO: The Adjutant General, Washington 25, D. C. (Thru Channels)\n\nI concur in the above report.\n\nN. F. TWINING\nLt General, USA\nCommanding\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n(SEE AR 600-185)\n\n1. Efficiency ratings comprise an evaluation of an officer in comparison with others of the same grade. (Instructions text as on prior page.)\n\n2. Prior to filling in Section G of this report consider carefully the following definitions and the numerical values assigned to each.\n\nUnsatisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standards—inefficient.\n\nSatisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard—passably efficient.\n\nVery Satisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner.\n\nExcellent: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner.\n\nSuperior: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon.\n\nUnknown: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\n\n1-10 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-36304-3"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":274,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2nd Ind\n\nAPPMP-8\nHq. AAF, Washington 25, D. C., MAY 16 1946\n\nTo: The Adjutant General, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nExamined and forwarded.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nJACK L. BAUM\nLt. Col., Air Corps\nChief, Records Section\nOffice, AC/AS-1\n\n2 Encls\n\nCarbon Copy Extracted by AAF"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":275,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT\n\nUSE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PLEASE PRINT. PREPARE THIS REPORT WITH PAINSTAKING ACCURACY. ITS VALUE LIES IN THE DEGREE OF OBJECTIVITY, IMPARTIALITY, AND SOUND, CONSIDERED JUDGMENT DISPLAYED BY THE RATING OFFICER. READ INSTRUCTIONS. SEE AR 600-185\n\nA. PLACE OF ORIGIN OF REPORT\nTHEATER OR COMMAND: European Theater of Operations\nORGANIZATION AND UNIT: HQ Air Technical Service Command in Europe\nDATE OF REPORT: 1 July 1945\n\nB. OFFICER REPORTED UPON\nLAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE INITIAL: McCOY, HOWARD M.\nSERIAL NUMBER: 018054\nGRADE: Col\nARM OR SERVICE: AC\nCOMPONENT: RA\nDATE OF BIRTH: 4 Dec 07\nSERVICE: General X\nOFFICIAL STATUS OF OFFICER WITH RESPECT TO YOU: Deputy of my Directorate\nPERIOD COVERED BY REPORT FROM: 1 Jan 45 TO: 30 Jun 45\n\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH OFFICER SERVED AND DUTY ASSIGNMENTS\n1. AAF Station 379 Deputy Director Technical Services. 181 (Admin & Exec X)\n2. AAF Station 379 Pilot, Senior 181\n\nD. WRITE A BRIEF GENERAL ESTIMATE OF THIS OFFICER. A strong forceful officer with lots of initiative and drive. Readily assumes responsibility and works best when he is boss. A firm disciplinarian with high ideals of loyalty and duty.\n\nG. WHAT DEGREE OF SUCCESS HAS HE ATTAINED UNDER THE FOLLOWING?\n1. Physical Activity and Endurance 6\n2. Stability Under Pressure 6\n3. Attention to Duty 6\n4. Cooperation 7\n5. Initiative 7\n6. Intelligence 7\n7. Force 7\n8. Judgment and Common Sense 7\n9. Leadership 6\n10. Ability to Obtain Results 6\n\nTotals +65\nNet Value 65\n\nH. Since last report has he been mentioned in official communications? No\nI. No\nJ. —\n\nL. Senior Pilot; Combat Observer.\n\nM. Numerical Rating 6.50\nN. Adjectival Rating Sup\n\nO. I CERTIFY THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF ALL ENTRIES MADE HEREON ARE TRUE AND IMPARTIAL AND ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AR 600-185.\n\nINCLOSURES: —. SIGNATURE: Donald L. Putt. TYPE NAME, GRADE AND ORGANIZATION: DONALD L. PUTT, COL, AC. COMMANDING OFFICER: Dir of Tech Services\n\nW.D., A.G.O. Form No. 67, 27 September 1944. (This Form Supersedes W.D., A.G.O. Form No. 67, 2 July 1943, Which Will Not Be Used After Receipt of This Revision.)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":276,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THIS SPACE FOR CONTINUATION OF REMARKS IF NEEDED\n\n1ST. IND.\nHQ AIR TECHNICAL SERVICE COMMAND IN EUROPE, AAF 379, APO 633, US ARMY, 13 JULY 1945.\nTO: Commanding General, US Strategic Air Forces in Europe, APO 633, US Army.\nI concur in the above report.\n\nJ. H. HOUGHTON,\nBrigadier General, USA,\nCommanding.\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n(SEE AR 600-185)\n\n1. Efficiency ratings comprise an evaluation of an officer in comparison with others of the same grade. In a large group of officers, such as are normally assigned to an infantry division, the law of averages will establish that about twenty percent of the officers of each grade may be superior, about twenty percent may be in the two lower classifications of very satisfactory and satisfactory (Unsatisfactory officers should be identified promptly and reclassified); the remaining sixty per cent who constitute the mass of thoroughly capable officers would fall into the excellent category. Commanders of regiments and large units must analyze the reports prepared within their organization and whenever the distribution varies markedly from the above the reasons must be sought. It is highly important that officers who are genuinely superior be identified by their ratings so that their talents may be fully utilized. It is also important to identify those officers whose qualifications and standards of performance of duty are above the minimum required, but who are clearly below the standard established by the mass of officers of their grade. A series of reports of an individual officer should present a highly accurate evaluation of his worth.\n\n2. Prior to filling in Section G of this report consider carefully the following definitions and the numerical values assigned to each. Keep them in mind when rating, taking into consideration the length of service of officer you are rating and the opportunities afforded him, which might have a bearing upon his performance of duty, personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\n\nUnsatisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standards—inefficient.\nSatisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard—passably efficient.\nVery Satisfactory: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that acceptable as satisfactory.\nExcellent: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above very satisfactory but below superior.\nSuperior: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that considered excellent.\nUnknown: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, his personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\n\n1-10 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-36034-2"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":277,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2nd Ind.\nHEADQUARTERS, U S STRATEGIC AIR FORCES IN EUROPE, APO 633, U S Army, 17 July 1945\nTO: Commanding General, US Forces European Theater (Rear) APO 887, U S Army\nExamined and forwarded.\nFor the Commanding General:\n\nMONTIE THOMPSON, JR\n2nd Lt, AGD\nAsst Adj General\n\nAG 201-McCoy, Howard M. (O) 3d Ind. AHCJr/ssb\nHq United States Forces, European Theater (rear), APO 887, 23 July 1945.\nTo: The Adjutant General, Washington 25, D.C.\nExamined and forwarded.\nFOR THE THEATER COMMANDER:\n\nA. H. CORLEY, Jr.\nLt Col, AGD,\nAssistant Adjutant General.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":278,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":279,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ACADEMIC\nCROSS REFERENCE SHEET\n\nNAME McCoy, Howard M AFSN 550A\nSCHOOL Army + Navy Staff Colg\nCOURSE Jt Cond + Staff\nPERIOD - FROM 5 mos TO 22 Jun 44\n\nCOMPLETED INCOMPLETE FAILED\n(Circle the above appropriate description)"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":280,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EFFICIENCY REPORT\n\nUSE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE IF NOT, PLEASE PRINT. PREPARE THIS REPORT WITH PAINSTAKING ACCURACY. ITS VALUE LIES IN THE DEGREE OF OBJECTIVITY, IMPARTIALITY, AND SOUND CONSIDERED JUDGMENT DISPLAYED BY THE RATING OFFICER. READ INSTRUCTIONS. SEE AR 600-185.\n\nA. PLACE OF ORIGIN OF REPORT\nTHEATER OR COMMAND: EUROPEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS. ORGANIZATION AND UNIT: HQ ASC US STRATEGIC AIR FORCES IN EUROPE. DATE OF REPORT: 14 Apr 45\nB. OFFICER REPORTED UPON\nLAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE INITIAL: MCCOY, HOWARD M. SERIAL NUMBER: 0-18054. GRADE: Col. ARM OR SERVICE: AC. COMPONENT: RA\nDATE OF BIRTH: 4 Dec 07. SERVICE: General X. OFFICIAL STATUS OF OFFICER WITH RESPECT TO YOU: My Deputy. PERIOD COVERED BY REPORT FROM 1 Jul 44 TO 31 Dec 44\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH OFFICER SERVED AND DUTY ASSIGNMENTS\nEnroute to ETO, 5 days\nAAF Sta 586 and 379, Deputy Director, Technical Services, 179 days, Admin & Exec X\nAAF Sta 586 and 379, Senior Pilot, 184 days\n\nD. WRITE A BRIEF GENERAL ESTIMATE OF THIS OFFICER. REFER TO POINTS OF WEAKNESS AS WELL AS STRENGTH.\nHighly skilled technical officer and well grounded in general military affairs. Competent to assume responsibility for broad variety of activities. Excellent leader. Particularly fine officer.\n\nE. ALL ENTRIES ARE FORMULATED ON THE FOLLOWING: Intimate daily contact X; Frequent observation of the results of his work; Infrequent observation of the results of his work; Academic records; Official reports.\nF. INDICATE YOUR ATTITUDE WOULD YOU: Particularly desire him? X; Be pleased to have him?; Be satisfied to have him?; Prefer not to have him?; Definitely not want him?\nG. WHAT DEGREE OF SUCCESS HAS HE ATTAINED UNDER THE FOLLOWING?\n1. Physical Activity and Endurance 7\n2. Stability Under Pressure 7\n3. Attention to Duty 7\n4. Cooperation 6\n5. Initiative 7\n6. Intelligence 7\n7. Force 6\n8. Judgment and Common Sense 7\n9. Leadership 7\n10. Ability to Obtain Results 7\nH. Since last report has he been mentioned in official communications? No\nI. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure? No\nJ. In case unfavorable entries have been made... No\nTotals 68. Net Value 68\nL. OUTSTANDING SPECIALTIES OF VALUE IN MILITARY SERVICE: Senior Pilot; Combat Observer; Aircraft Observer. Speaks, writes and translates French passably.\nM. Numerical Rating 6.8\nN. Adjectival Rating: Sup\nO. I CERTIFY THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF ALL ENTRIES MADE HEREON ARE TRUE AND IMPARTIAL AND ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AR 600-185.\nHOWARD G. BUNKER, COL, AC, Director of Technical Services\n\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67, 27 September 1944\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n1ST. IND.\nHQ AIR TECHNICAL SERVICE COMMAND IN EUROPE, AAF-379, APO 633, US ARMY, 18 APRIL 1945.\nTO: Commanding General, US Strategic Air Forces in Europe, AAF-379, APO 633, US Army.\nI concur in the above report.\n\nC. P. KANE,\nBrigadier General, USA,\nCommanding.\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n(SEE AR 600-185)\n\n1-10 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-36034-2"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":281,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2nd Ind.\nHEADQUARTERS, U S STRATEGIC AIR FORCES IN EUROPE, APO 633, U. S. Army, 19 April 1945\nTO: Commanding General, European T of Opns, USA, APO 887, U. S. Army\n\nExamined and forwarded.\n\nFor the Commanding General:\n\n[signature]\nHARRIS F. SCHERER\nColonel, AGD\nAdjutant General\n\nAHC Jr/nb\n\nAG 201-McCoy, Howard M. (O) 3d Ind.\nHq, European T of Opns, USA, APO 887, 1 May 1945.\n\nTo: The Adjutant General, Washington 25, D.C.\n\nExamined and forwarded.\n\nFOR THE THEATER COMMANDER:\n\n[signature]\nA. H. CORLEY, Jr.\nLt Col, AGD,\nAssistant Adjutant General.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":282,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Form No. 10-514 (Rev. 1 May 45)\nSAVE\nEFFICIENCY FILES\nHEADQUARTERS\nARMY AIR FORCES\nAIR TECHNICAL SERVICE COMMAND\nIN REPLY ADDRESS BOTH COMMUNICATION AND ENVELOPE TO ATTENTION OF FOLLOWING OFFICE SYMBOL:\nTSRED\nTSRED:HMM:ac\nWRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO\n3 December 1945\n\nSUBJECT: Record of Service\n\nTO: The Adjutant General\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\n1. In accordance with Paragraph IV, WD Circular 320, 19 October 1945, the following information is requested be added to complete the service record of the undersigned:\n\n\"Graduated Army and Navy Staff College, June, 1944.\"\n\n[signature]\nHOWARD M. McCOY\nColonel, Air Corps\nChief, Air Document Division\nIntelligence, T-2\n\nWF 16 May 45 500M"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":283,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":284,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MAY 18 1944\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON McCOY, Howard M. 0-18054 Colonel Air Corps, RA\n(Name typed) (Serial No.) (Grade) (Organization)\nA's official status with respect to you Under my supervision\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 6 months, from 1 July 1943 to 31 December 1943\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED AAF Materiel Command, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION HIS LENGTH OF SERVICE AND THE OPPORTUNITIES AFFORDED HIM, WHICH MIGHT HAVE A BEARING UPON HIS PERFORMANCE OF DUTY, PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS, OR PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS.\nUNSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standard—inefficient.\nSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard—passably efficient.\nVERY SATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that acceptable as SATISFACTORY.\nEXCELLENT: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above VERY SATISFACTORY but below SUPERIOR.\nSUPERIOR: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that considered EXCELLENT.\nUNKNOWN: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, his personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of six classifications as given under D, and consider carefully the obstacles encountered by the individual in the performance of each duty listed. THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED UNDER \"MANNER OF PERFORMANCE\" ARE BASED ON—\nINTIMATE DAILY CONTACT.\n[REDACTED]\n\nDuty | Months | Manner of performance\nChief, Propeller Laboratory, Engin. Division | 6 | Excellent\nSenior Pilot | 6 | Excellent\n\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: ENTRIES BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT.\n1. Handling officers and men: Excellent\n2. Performance of field duties: Unknown\n3. Administrative and executive duties: Excellent\n4. As an instructor: Unknown\n5. Training troops: Unknown\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officer's grade): Unknown\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. Senior Pilot\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others of his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle.\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly)\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion)\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance)\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously)\n5. Cooperation (acting jointly and effectively with another or others, military or civilian, to attain a designated objective)\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders)\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions)\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty)\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions)\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement and still maintain high morale): Excellent\nW.D., A.G.O. Form No. 67—July 1, 1936.\n3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":285,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on McCoy, Howard M. Name of reporting officer F. O. Carroll\nI. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge?\nJ. Has he exhibited any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, did he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter?\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (See par. 1b, AR 600-185.)\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, enclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\nN. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words: A hard working officer, intensely interested in all phases of aircraft propeller problems from both theoretical and practical standpoint. Highly qualified. In comparing this officer with all officers of his grade known to me, I would place him among the upper third.\nO. How well do you know him?\nP. Remarks (including entry required by par. 11a, AR 600-185): This officer is performing duties commensurate with his grade.\nQ. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? None If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted?\nIf no improvement was noted, what period of time elapsed between your notification to him of his deficiencies and the rendition of this report?\nR. Based on your observation during the period covered by this report, give in your own words your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE\nS. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial and are in accordance with AR 600-185.\n(Signed) [signature]\n(Name typed) F. O. CARROLL,\n(Grade and Org.) Brig. General, U.S.A.,\n(Comdg. what?) Engineering Division,\n(Place) Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n(Date) 31 December 1943 Incls. None\n1st INDORSEMENT\nHeadquarters, AAF Materiel Command, Wright Field, Ohio. 10 April 1944.\nTo: Commanding General, Army Air Forces, Washington 25, D. C.\n1. I concur in the above report.\n[signature]\nCHAS. E. BRANSHAW,\nMajor General, U.S.A.,\nCommanding, Materiel Command.\nWrite nothing below this line.\n3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":286,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ER for Colonel Howard M. McCoy, fr 1 July 43 to 31 December 43 201-McCoy, Howard M (Off) 2nd Ind, AFPMP-3 Hq Army Air Forces, Washington 25, D. C., 1 May 1944 To: The Adjutant General, Washington 25, D. C. Examined and forwarded For the Commanding General, Army Air Forces: JACK L. BAUM Major, Air Corps Chief, Records Section Office Asst Chief of Air Staff, Personnel 1 Incl n/c"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":287,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS ARMY AIR FORCES NOTED (USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE. IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES) BY: MAR 3 1944 EFFICIENCY REPORT (SEE AR 600-185) A. OFFICER REPORTED UPON McCoy, Howard M. O-18054 Colonel Air Corps (Name typed) (Serial No.) (Grade) (Organization) A's official status with respect to you Under my supervision B. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 6 months, from January 1, 1943 to June 30, 1943 C. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. D. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION HIS LENGTH OF SERVICE AND THE OPPORTUNITIES AFFORDED HIM, WHICH MIGHT HAVE A BEARING UPON HIS PERFORMANCE OF DUTY, PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS, OR PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS. UNSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standard-inefficient. SATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard-passably efficient. VERY SATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that acceptable as SATISFACTORY. EXCELLENT: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above VERY SATISFACTORY but below SUPERIOR. SUPERIOR: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that considered EXCELLENT. UNKNOWN: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, his personal characteristics, or professional qualifications. E. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of six classifications as given under D, and consider carefully the obstacles encountered by the individual in the performance of each duty listed. THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED UNDER MANNER OF PERFORMANCE ARE BASED ON INTIMATE DAILY CONTACT, FREQUENT OBSERVATION OF THE RESULTS OF HIS WORK, ACADEMIC RATINGS. Duty: Chief, Propellor Lab., Engr. Div., AAF Materiel Command (Prin. Duty) 2-4/30 Superior; Asst. Chief, Propellor Lab., Engr. Div., AAF Materiel Command (Prin. Duty) 3-26/30 Superior. F. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: 1. Handling officers and men - Superior. 2. Performance of field duties - Unknown. 3. Administrative and executive duties - Superior. 4. As an instructor - Unknown. 5. Training troops - Unknown. 6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officer's grade) - Unknown. G. Senior Pilot, Aircraft Observer. H. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? 1. Physical activity; 2. Physical endurance; 3. Military bearing and neatness; 4. Attention to duty; 5. Cooperation; 6. Initiative; 7. Intelligence; 8. Force; 9. Judgment and common sense - Superior; 10. Leadership. W. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67-July 1, 1936. 3-8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":288,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on HOWARD M. McCOY Name of reporting officer F. O. CARROLL I. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge? J. Has he exhibited any weaknesses-temperamental, moral, physical, etc.-which adversely affect his efficiency? If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.) K. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, did he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter? L. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (See par. 1b, AR 600-185.) M. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No. If yes, enclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances. N. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words. In comparing this officer with all officers of his grade known to me, I would place him among the upper third. This officer is loyal, industrious and conscientious and an outstanding aeronautical engineer. O. How well do you know him? P. Remarks (including entry required by par. 11a, AR 600-185) Report submitted as the annual report. Par. E cont'd. Senior Pilot - 6 mo. - Excellent. This officer is performing duties commensurate with his grade. Q. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? None. If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? If no improvement was noted, what period of time elapsed between your notification to him of his deficiencies and the rendition of this report? R. Based on your observation during the period covered by this report, give in your own words your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE S. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial and are in accordance with AR 600-185. (Signed) F. O. CARROLL, Brig. General, U.S.A., (Comdg. what?) Engineering Div., AAF Materiel Command, (Place) Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. (Date) June 30, 1943. Incls. None. 1st INDORSEMENT GBM:ww:11 Hqs., AAF Materiel Command, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. 8 February 1944. To: Commanding General, Army Air Forces, Washington, D. C. Attn: AC/AS-Pers. 1. I have insufficient knowledge of the officer reported upon to express an opinion, however, I do have confidence in the judgment, spirit of fairness and impartiality of the reporting officer. For the Commanding General: ALDEN R. CRAWFORD, Brig. Gen., U.S.A. Chief of Staff. Write nothing below this line. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 3-8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":289,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ER for Colonel McCoy, Howard M., fr 1 January 1943 to 30 June 1943 201 McCoy, Howard M. (Off) 2nd Ind. AFPMP-3 Hq Army Air Forces, Washington 25, D. C., 1 March 1944. To: The Adjutant General, Washington 25, D. C. Examined and forwarded. For the Commanding General, Army Air Forces: JACK L. BAUM Major, Air Corps Chief, Records Section Office of Asst Chief of Air Staff, Personnel"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":290,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS ARMY AIR FORCES NOTED (USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE. IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES) EFFICIENCY REPORT (SEE AR 600-185) MAY 5 1943 A. OFFICER REPORTED UPON McCoy, Howard M. O-18054 Colonel, A.C. A's official status with respect to you Under my supervision B. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 6 months, from July 1, 1942 to December 31, 1942. C. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. D. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION HIS LENGTH OF SERVICE AND THE OPPORTUNITIES AFFORDED HIM, WHICH MIGHT HAVE A BEARING UPON HIS PERFORMANCE OF DUTY, PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS, OR PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS. UNSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standard-inefficient. SATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard-passably efficient. VERY SATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that acceptable as SATISFACTORY. EXCELLENT: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above VERY SATISFACTORY but below SUPERIOR. SUPERIOR: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that considered EXCELLENT. UNKNOWN: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, his personal characteristics, or professional qualifications. E. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: Duty: Propellor Lab., Exp. Engr. Section, AAF Materiel Center (Prin. Duty) 5-26/30 Superior; Senior Pilot 6 Superior; Total Leave of Absence 4/30. F. What degree of success has he attained: 1. Handling officers and men - Superior. 2. Performance of field duties - Unknown. 3. Administrative and executive duties - Superior. 4. As an instructor - Unknown. 5. Training troops - Unknown. 6. Tactical handling of troops - Unknown. G. Senior Pilot, Aircraft Observer. H. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? 9. Judgment and common sense - Superior; 10. Leadership - Superior. W. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67-July 1, 1936. 3-8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":291,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on HOWARD M. McCOY Name of reporting officer F. O. CARROLL\n\nI. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge?\n\nJ. Has he exhibited any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\n\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, did he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter?\n\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (See par. 1b, AR 600-185.)\n\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, enclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\n\nN. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words He is an outstanding engineer, loyal and industrious. In comparing this officer with all officers of his grade and component known to me, I would place him among the upper third.\n\nO. How well do you know him?\n\nP. Remarks (including entry required by par. 11a, AR 600-185) Report submitted as the semi-annual report. This officer is performing duties commensurate with his grade.\n\nQ. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? None If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted?\n\nIf no improvement was noted, what period of time elapsed between your notification to him of his deficiencies and the rendition of this report?\n\nR. Based on your observation during the period covered by this report, give in your own words your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE\n\nS. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial and are in accordance with AR 600-185.\n\n(Signed) F. O. Carroll (Name typed) F. O. CARROLL, (Grade and Org.) Brig. General, U.S.A., (Comdg. what?) Exp. Engr. Section, AAF Materiel Center, (Place) Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. (Date) December 31, 1942 Incls. None\n\n1st INDORSEMENT\nWar Dept., AAF Materiel Center, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. March 2, 1943. To: Commanding General, AAF Materiel Command, Washington, D. C.\n\n1. I have insufficient knowledge of the officer reported upon to express an opinion, however, I do have confidence in the judgment, spirit of fairness and impartiality of the reporting officer.\n\nA. W. VANAMAN, Brig. General, U.S.A., Commanding General, AAF Materiel Center.\n\nWrite nothing below this line. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":292,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Efficiency Report - Howard M. McCoy, Colonel, Air Corps)\n2nd Ind. AFAMC-3\n\nWar Department, AAF, Headquarters Materiel Command, Washington, D.C. March 15, 1943. To: The Adjutant General.\n\n1. Examined and forwarded.\n\nFor the Commanding General:\n\nDONALD F. FRITCH\nColonel, Air Corps\nAssistant Chief of Staff (A)\n\nIncl.:\nEff Rpt.\n\nNoted Class. Section"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":293,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OCT 24 1942\n\nEFFICIENCY REPORT\n(SEE AR 600-185)\n\n(USE TYPEWRITER IF POSSIBLE. IF NOT, PRINT PROPER NAMES)\n\nA. OFFICER REPORTED UPON McCoy, Howard M. O-18054 Colonel, A.A.F. (Serial No.) (Grade) (Organization)\nA's official status with respect to you Under my supervision\n\nB. PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT 12 months, from July 1, 1941 to June 30, 1942.\n\nC. STATIONS AT WHICH HE SERVED Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n\nD. CONSIDER CAREFULLY THESE DEFINITIONS, KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN RATING, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION HIS LENGTH OF SERVICE AND THE OPPORTUNITIES AFFORDED HIM, WHICH MIGHT HAVE A BEARING UPON HIS PERFORMANCE OF DUTY, PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS, OR PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS.\n\nUNSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications below minimum standard—inefficient.\n\nSATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon or personal characteristics or professional qualifications up to minimum standard—passably efficient.\n\nVERY SATISFACTORY: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in an efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that acceptable as SATISFACTORY.\n\nEXCELLENT: Performance of the particular duty reported upon in a very efficient manner. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above VERY SATISFACTORY but below SUPERIOR.\n\nSUPERIOR: Outstanding and exceptional performance of the particular duty reported upon. Personal characteristics, professional qualifications, or efficiency above that considered EXCELLENT.\n\nUNKNOWN: To be used in all cases in which the reporting officer has had insufficient opportunity during the period covered by this report to observe the officer reported upon to permit a rating as to the performance of the particular duty, his personal characteristics, or professional qualifications.\n\nE. DUTIES HE PERFORMED: (State separately. Where possible show duration of each in months. Example: Co. Comdr. ordinary garrison training, 8 mos. Summary court, 6 mos. Brig. Adj. prepared training schedules, Supply Officer.) In describing the manner of performance of duty, use one of six classifications as given under D, and consider carefully the obstacles encountered by the individual in the performance of each duty listed. THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED UNDER \"MANNER OF PERFORMANCE\" ARE BASED ON— INTIMATE DAILY CONTACT, FREQUENT OR INFREQUENT OBSERVATION OF THE RESULTS OF HIS WORK, ACADEMIC RATINGS\n\nDuty Months Manner of performance\nPropellor Lab., Experimental Engr. Section, AAF Materiel Center (Prin. Duty) 11-8/30 Superior\nPilot 12 Excellent\nTotal Leave of Absence 22/30\n\nF. What degree of success has he attained under the following headings: ENTRIES BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. (See par. D above.)\n\nG. Enter on lines below any outstanding specialties of value in the military service. MAKE NO ENTRIES EXCEPT WHERE STATEMENT IS BASED ON PERSONAL OBSERVATION OR OFFICIAL REPORTS DURING PERIOD COVERED BY THIS REPORT. Show pilot and/or observer ratings of Air Corps officers here.\n\n1. Handling officers and men. Superior — Pilot\n2. Performance of field duties. Unknown — Specialist on propeller engineering.\n3. Administrative and executive duties. Superior\n4. As an instructor. Unknown\n5. Training troops. Unknown\n6. Tactical handling of troops (units appropriate to officer's grade). Unknown\n\nH. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualifications? Consider him in comparison with others of his grade and indicate your estimate by marking X in the appropriate rectangle. (See par. D above.)\n\n1. Physical activity (agility; ability to work rapidly)\n2. Physical endurance (capacity for prolonged exertion)\n3. Military bearing and neatness (dignity of demeanor; neat and smart appearance)\n4. Attention to duty (the trait of working thoroughly and conscientiously)\n5. Cooperation (acting jointly and effectively with another or others, military or civilian, to attain a designated objective)\n6. Initiative (the trait of beginning needed work or taking appropriate action on his own responsibility in absence of orders)\n7. Intelligence (the ability to understand readily new ideas or instructions)\n8. Force (the faculty of carrying out with energy and resolution that which on examination is believed reasonable, right, or duty)\n9. Judgment and common sense (the ability to think clearly and arrive at logical conclusions)\n10. Leadership (capacity to direct, control, and influence others in definite lines of action or movement and still maintain high morale) Superior\n\nW. D., A. G. O. Form No. 67—July 1, 1936."} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":294,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Name of officer reported on HOWARD M. McCOY Name of reporting officer F. O. CARROLL\n\nI. During the period covered by this report has he taken advantage of the opportunities afforded him to improve his professional knowledge?\n\nJ. Has he exhibited any weaknesses—temperamental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? If yes, describe them. (FACT or OPINION. Line out one.)\n\nK. Proper authority having decided on the methods and procedure to accomplish a certain end, did he render willing and generous support regardless of his personal views in the matter?\n\nL. Since last report has he been mentioned favorably or unfavorably in official communications? No (See par. 1b, AR 600-185.)\n\nM. During the period covered by this report was he the subject of any disciplinary measure that should be included on his record? No If yes, enclose separate statement of nature and attendant circumstances.\n\nN. Write a brief general estimate of this officer in your own words He is a good theoretical and practical propeller engineer, and is a very hard worker. In comparing this officer with all officers of his grade and component known to me, I would place him among the upper third.\n\nO. How well do you know him?\n\nP. Remarks (including entry required by par. 11a, AR 600-185) Report submitted as the Annual Report.\n\nQ. In case any unfavorable entries have been made by you on this report, were the deficiencies indicated hereon brought to the attention of the officer concerned while under your command and prior to the rendition of this report? If yes, what improvement, if any, was noted? None made.\n\nIf no improvement was noted, what period of time elapsed between your notification to him of his deficiencies and the rendition of this report?\n\nR. Based on your observation during the period covered by this report, give in your own words your estimate of his GENERAL VALUE TO THE SERVICE\n\nS. I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all entries made hereon are true and impartial and are in accordance with AR 600-185.\n\n(Signed) F. O. Carroll (Name typed) F. O. CARROLL, (Grade and Org.) Colonel, AAF, (Comdg. what?) Exp. Engr. Section, AAF Materiel Center, (Place) Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. (Date) June 30, 1942 Incls. None\n\n1st INDORSEMENT\nWar Dept., AAF Materiel Center, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio. September 29, 1942. To: Commanding General, Materiel Command, Washington, D. C.\n\n1. I concur in the above report.\n\nA. W. VANAMAN, Brig. General, U.S.A., Commanding General, AAF Materiel Center.\n\nWrite nothing below this line. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 3—8308"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":295,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Efficiency Report - Howard M. McCoy, O-18054, Colonel, Air Corps)\n2nd Ind. AFAMC-3\n\nWar Department, AAF, Headquarters Materiel Command, Washington, D. C., October 12, 1942. To: The Adjutant General.\n\n1. Examined and forwarded.\n\nFor the Commanding General:\n\nDONALD F. FRITCH\nColonel, Air Corps\nAssistant Chief of Staff (A)\n\nIncl.:\nEff Rpt"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":296,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McCoy, Howard M. 550A"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":297,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McCoy, Howard M. 550A"} {"doc_id":"561239d7d2e465a8","page":298,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFPMP-A\n\nAIR FORCE PHOTO\nHEADQUARTERS U.S.A.F.\nWASH., D. C."} {"doc_id":"56366d707d24c1bc","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5-2500\n9-544\nSECRET\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 857013\nNW 91377\nDocId:24749008 Page 1"} {"doc_id":"56366d707d24c1bc","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NO.1 MAS. 02. of 2 MASTERS\nSECRET (NOFORN)\nCLASSIFICATION\n(NOFORN) 5-2500 T.S. Cont.# USAF\nCOUNTRY OF ACTIVITY REPORTING: CZECHOSLOVAKIA\nREPORT NO.: IR 193-55\n(Leave blank)\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nCOUNTRY OR AREA REPORT CONCERNS: USSR\nDATE OF INFORMATION: 1 OCT. 55\nACTIVITY SUBMITTING REPORT: US AIR ATTACHE\nDATE OF COLLECTION: 13 OCT. 55\nSRI STATUS (if applicable)\nSRI NO.: TTC 6944 CANCELED/COMPLETE\nPREPARING INDIVIDUAL: LT. COL. THOMAS S. RYAN\nDATE OF REPORT: 14 OCT. 55\nSRI NO. CANCELED/INCOMPLETE\nNAME OR DESCRIPTION OF SOURCE: LT. COL. E.U. HATHAWAY\nEVALUATION: B-2\nSRI NO. ACTIVE\nREFERENCES (BAIR Subject, previous reports, etc., as applicable): DAIR 3A; 2T2; 3A3; 13113; 3A15. USAIRA CABLE (TS) C-103 dtd 13 OCT. 55\nADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON (Date)\nSUBJECT (Descriptive title. Use individual reports for separate subjects): OBSERVATIONS OF TRAVELLER IN USSR\nSUMMARY (Give summary which highlights the salient factors of narrative report. Begin narrative text on AF Form 112a unless report can be fully stated on AF Form 112. List inclosures, including number of copies)\nThis report contains an eye witness account of the ascent and flight of an unconventional aircraft in the Trans Caucasus region of the USSR. This aircraft was reported by three highly reliable United States observers who were travelling by rail at the time of the sighting. The three observers were firmly convinced that they saw a genuine flying saucer or flying disc. Two sightings occurred at 1910 hours on 4 Oct. 55 between ATJATY and ADZHJABUL, ten minutes by rail after departing ATJATY. One disc aircraft ascended almost vertically, at a relatively slow speed with its outer surface revolving slowly to the right, to an altitude of about 6000 foot where its speed then increased sharply as it headed north. The second flying disc was seen performing the same actions about one minute later. The take-off area was about 1-2 miles south of the rail line where two searchlight 0 INCLS beams were seen pointing up almost vertically. All other observations given to USAIRA in Prague by the three visitors, 12-13 Oct 55, are presented in Part II. USAIRA COMMENT: The significance of this report re the USAF project \"Unidentified Flying Objects\" is remarkable and lends credence to many \"saucer\" reports.\nTHOMAS S. RYAN, LT. COL. AIR ATTACHE\nDISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR: 1 -USAF, 1 -USAFE, 1 -USAIRA MOSCOW\nThis document consists of 9 pages\nCopy No. of Copies\nWARNING: This document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S.C., Section 793 and 794. Its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law. classification canceled or changed to SECRET\nAuthority: C/S Ont #3 fr CIN-2XI, B/Lucke\nBy: 30 April 1959\nDated: 30 April 1959\nAF FORM 112 REPLACES AF FORM 112, 1 OCT 52, WHICH MAY BE USED\nSECRET\nNW 91377\nDocId:24749008 Page 2"} {"doc_id":"56366d707d24c1bc","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NO.1 MASTER 02. OF 2 MASTERS\nSECRET (NOFORN)\nCLASSIFICATION (SECURITY INFORMATION when filled in)\nSUPPLEMENT TO AF FORM 112\nORIGINATING AGENCY: US AIR ATTACHE\nREPORT NO.: IR 193-55\nPAGE 2 OF 9 PAGES\nQUOTED below is the cable classified Top Secret which was sent to Hqs. USAF on 13 Oct 55. USAIRA control number is C-103 and text follows:\n\"NIACT. TO: DINTA, WASH. DC. NOFORN. USAF handle as OPERATIONAL IMMEDIATE. USAF CRYPTO PASS TO CINCUSAFE AND USAIRA MOSCOW. THREE RELIABLE US OBSERVERS, SENATOR RICHARD RUSSELL, LT. COL. E.U. HATHAWAY, ARMY, MR. RUBEN EFRON, VISITED PRAGUE 12-13 OCT. ARRIVING DIRECT FROM KIEV, VIA BAKU, TIFLIS, DNIEPERPETROVSK, BLACK SEA AREA, AND REPORTED FOLLOWING TO USAIRA AND USARMA.: ON 4 OCT. 55 AT 1910 HOURS BETWEEN ATJATY AND ADZHIJABUL, TEN MINUTES BY RAIL AFTER DEPARTING ATJATY IN TRANS CAUCASUS REGION, TWO ROUND AND CIRCULAR UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT RESEMBLING FLYING DISCS OR FLYING SAUCERS WERE SEEN TAKING OFF ALMOST VERTICALLY ONE MINUTE APART. DISC AIRCRAFT ASCENDED NEAR DUSK WITH OUTER SURFACE REVOLVING SLOWLY TO RIGHT AND WITH TWO LIGHTS STATIONARY ON TOP NEAR MIDDLE PART. SPARKS OR FLAME SEEN COMING FROM AIRCRAFT. NO PROTRUSIONS SEEN ON AIRCRAFT WHICH PASSED OVER OBSERVERS' TRAIN. BOTH FLYING DISC AIRCRAFT ASCENDED RELATIVELY SLOWLY TO ABOUT 6000 FEET, THEN SPEED INCREASED SHARPLY IN HORIZONTAL FLIGHT BOTH ON NORTHERLY HEADING. FLYING ATTITUDE OF DISC REMAINED SAME DURING ASCENT AS IN CRUISE, LIKE A DISCUS IN FLIGHT. TWO OPERATING SEARCHLIGHTS POINTING ALMOST VERTICAL SEEN NEAR TAKEOFF AREA LOCATED ABOUT 1-2 MILES SOUTH OF RR LINE. AFTER SIGHTING SOVIET TRAINMEN BECAME EXCITED AND LOWERED CURTAINS AND REFUSED PERMISSION TO LOOK OUT WINDOWS. US OBSERVERS FIRMLY BELIEVE THESE UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT WERE GENUINE SAUCER OR DISC AIRCRAFT. USAIRA RATES INFO B-2. ON 9 OCT.55 AT DNIEPERPETROVSK AIRFIELD, HATHAWAY REPORTED 42 STUBBY JET FIGHTERS NOT FAGOTS AND ONE MULTI JET BOMBER DESCRIBED AS: ONE HALF AGAIN AS LONG AS US COCOA 47; ENGINES CANVAS COVERED BURIED WING TYPE; CANOPY WELL FORWARD NEAR BLUNT NOSE; TRICYCLE GEAR; DEFINITE SWEEPBACK SHAPE ON TOP OF FUSELAGE; SEVERELY SWEPT WINGS SET IN MIDDLE OF FUSELAGE AND LOCATED ALMOST MIDWAY FROM NOSE TO TAIL; TAILPLANE LOCATED LOW BENEATH BOTTOM LEVEL OF VERTICAL FIN; VERTICAL FIN SWEPT WITH SQUARE TOP; AND SILVER BULBOUS BULGE AT TAILCONE EXTENDING REARWARD OF RUDDER LINE. DNIEPERPETROVSK AIRFIELD WAS GRASS SOD. AT BAKU LONG TRAIN LOADED WITH MANY PLATOON SIZE LANDING CRAFT. 42 KILOMETERS FROM MOSCOW ON MOSCOW TO MINSK HIGHWAY, 250 YARDS TO RIGHT OF ROAD, PARTY SIGHTED RADAR SITE TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED HERE AS ONE WOODGAGE OR GAGE AND ONE SQUARE POLE FREXA.\nRECOMMEND COMPLETE DEBRIEFING OF RUSSELL GROUP UPON RETURN AND SUGGEST COMMENDATION FROM D/I FOR EFFORTS. RUSSELL GROUP DEPARTED PRAGUE ABOARD SWAISSAIR FOR ROME 13 OCT. (Signed) T.S.RYAN.\"\nOn 12 Oct 1955 at about 2145 hours, Sen. Russell, Lt. Col. E.U. Hathaway, U.S. Army staff officer assigned to Senate Armed Forces Committee, and Mr. Ruben Efron, Committee Consultant, arrived at Wilson (Hlavni) Station in Prague, having come direct from Kiev. Their rail route from Kiev brought them to COP, at the eastern border of Czechoslovakia, where they observed the RR gauge switching operation from the Russian broad gauge to the Czech standard gauge. Upon arrival at the RR Wilson Station, the Russell group was met by the acting Chief of Mission, Mr. Harold Vedler, and the USAIRA. We escorted the group to the US Residency where they were to spend the night. It was evident that they had seen much and had been to places in Russia and possibly in Czechoslovakia where US observers had not been, at least for a good many years. Sen. Russell stated that he had been in Prague once before in 1927, and was anxious to see some familiar places. After arrival at the Residency and dinner, Lt. Col. Hathaway expressed a desire to report something of the utmost importance to the USAIRA, \"something you may not believe, but something that we've been told by your people (USAF) doesn't exist.\" I suggested that we not discuss anything at the Residency\nWARNING: This document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S.C., Sections 793 and 794. Its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law. It may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by other than United States Air Force Agencies, except by permission of the Director of Intelligence, USAF.\nAF FORM 112a REPLACES AF FORM 112-PART II, 1 JUN 48, WHICH MAY BE USED. CLASSIFICATION SECRET (SECURITY INFORMATION when filled in)\nNW 91377\nDocId:24749008 Page 3"} {"doc_id":"56366d707d24c1bc","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NO.1 MASTER 02. OF 2 MASTERS\nSECRET (NOFORN)\nCLASSIFICATION (SECURITY INFORMATION when filled in)\nSUPPLEMENT TO AF FORM 112\nORIGINATING AGENCY: US AIR ATTACHE\nREPORT NO.: IR 193-55\nPAGE 3 OF 9 PAGES\nbecause of the absence of security precautions but suggested that we meet early the next morning in my office together with Col. Thomas Dooley, the USAF Army Attache. Lt. Col. Hathaway said he was anxious to report his observation and that he had witnesses, fortunately, in Sen. Russell and Mr. Efron.\nWe met at 0900 on 13 Oct. in the larger office of the Army Attache and proceeded with the debriefing amid adequate safeguards for talking. Present were: Lt. Col. Hathaway, Mr. Efron, Col. Dooley and myself. Col. Dooley and I took notes and provided paper for sketches. Sen. Russell was busy with the Chief of Mission and was unable to attend. Due to the departure time of the group, we were unable to spend more than one hour talking, the interview ending about 1000. Col. Hathaway did most of the explaining and answering with Mr. Efron supplementing and adding support.\nLt Col. Hathaway proved to be an excellent observer and Mr. Efron had kept detailed notes which he referred to for times and places.\nHathaway led off with \"I doubt if you're going to believe this but we all saw it. Sen. Russell was the first to see this flying saucer and he called us to the window, and we both saw the second one (pointing to EFRON who nodded yes). We've been told for years that there isn't such a thing but all of us saw it, including Sen Russell.\" It was emphasized that Sen. Russell saw the first flying saucer or flying disc ascend and pass over the train on a northerly course, taking off from the left side of the train's direction, which places the take-off area on the south side of the RR line on which they were travelling.\nI stated that I don't disbelieve anything after having been in Czechoslovakia for 17 months. The following raw notes are quoted with my additional comments after:\n1. \"Two flying saucer type aircraft were seen between two railway station stops after we left BAKU.\"\n2. \"It was after we left ATJATY, we were there at 1900 and we saw the aircraft at 1910. The next place we saw was ADZHIJABUL.\" (Efrons notes.)\n3. \"They took off straight up and then the speed increased greatly as they moved straight ahead, horizontally, and disappeared to the right of the train.\" (Questioning revealed that the angle of ascent was not exactly \"straight up\" but rather in a slight arc just off the vertical line.)\n4. \"The whole object whirred and then levelled and zoomed off at very high speed.\" (Questioning revealed that the outer surface of the object revolved slowly in a clockwise direction or to the right, with the rate of ascent being relatively slow in comparison to the high speed which the object took off at when it reached altitude.)\n5. \"The take off was at an angle to about 2000 meters.\" (Both objects were said to have ascended almost vertically to an approximate altitude of 6000 feet before sharply increasing speed in level flight.)\n6. \"They were seen out of window on left side of train.\"\n7. \"Two searchlight were seen pointing at an angle near where the saucer took off.\" (The angle was nearly vertical and evidently, I gathered, that the angle of one searchlight beam was nearly vertical approximating the arc which the disc ascended to 6000 feet, while the second searchlight beam was pointing at another spot. Lack of time prevented complete clarification of the searchlight beams. Dusk was falling at the time of sighting.)\n8. \"Some sparking or flame came out bottom as craft rose.\"\n9. \"After we saw the two discs, the Soviet trainmen became excited, closing curtains and telling us that we were not allowed to look out of windows.\" (The behavior of the trainmen was such as to indicate that the US passengers had seen something that they were not supposed to see.)\n10. \"Approximately one minute elapsed between the first and second takeoffs of the aircraft.\" (It was explained that Sen Russell had seen the\nWARNING: This document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S.C., Sections 793 and 794. Its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law. It may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by other than United States Air Force Agencies, except by permission of the Director of Intelligence, USAF.\nAF FORM 112a REPLACES AF FORM 112-PART II, 1 JUN 48, WHICH MAY BE USED. CLASSIFICATION SECRET (SECURITY INFORMATION when filled in)\nNW 91377\nDocId:24749008 Page 4"} {"doc_id":"56366d707d24c1bc","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NO.1 MASTER 02. OF 2 MASTERS\nSECRET (NOFORN)\nCLASSIFICATION (SECURITY INFORMATION when filled in)\nSUPPLEMENT TO AF FORM 112\nORIGINATING AGENCY: US AIR ATTACHE\nREPORT NO.: IR 193-55\nPAGE 4 OF 9 PAGES\nfirst flying object and recognized it as something drastically different rushing in to get Mr. Efron and Col. Hathaway to see it. Col. Hathaway stated that he got to the window with the Senator in time to see the first while Mr. Efron said that he got only a short glimpse of the first due to crowding. However all three saw the second disc and all agreed that they saw the same round, disc shaped aircraft which was the same as the first.)\n11. \"The take-off area was about one mile away, maybe a little further.\" (Searchlights were located in the same area.)\n12. \"There were two lights towards the inside of the disc which remained stationary as the outer surface went around.\" (Both agreed firmly on this point.) \"The lights sat near the top of the disc.\" (If a line representing the diameter of the disc were divided into three segments, the lights would have been located at the two points of division between the middle segment and the two outside segments ie. see sketch drawn with aid of Mr Efron:\nRELATIVE POSITION OF 2 LIGHTS\n13. \"The aircraft was circular.\" \"The aircraft was round.\" \"It resembled a flying saucer.\" \"It seemed to be the shape of a discus, round and circular- revolving clockwise or to the right.\" (It was definitely round or at least circular in the eyes of these two observers, containing no protrusions or \"sticks\" or bulges. No estimate could be obtained from either observer re thickness or diameter.\n14. \"There was no noticable color.\" (It was stated that dusk prevented any color impressions.)\n15. \"After reaching 2000 meters, it whipped off at a great speed from our left to our right, or towards the north from the south.\" (Speed differential was very noticeable between ascent and level flight speed.)\n16. \"We could see the take-off on the horizon to our left or south of our train.\"\n17. \"Outer part revolved slowly to right.\" (There seemed to be a different impression of the disc's movement while climbing and after assuming level flight, with the terms \"revolving slowly\" used for the climb and the term \"whirring\" for the cruising flight.\n18. \"The disc rose in the same position as it was in when it sped away.\" The flying attitude of the flying disc was said to resemble a discus in flight.)\nUSAIRA COMMENT: I believe that further debriefing of all three US observers in a more relaxed atmosphere and with more time would produce much more valuable technical details than the hurried interview above.\nPART B. OBSERVATIONS AT BAKU\nA long RR train comprised of flat cars was seen outside of BAKU. Each flatcar had one landing craft which was described by Col. Hathaway as being platoon size, with a slot in the rear for an outboard engine and the tops of the boats covered with canvas. Men were seen in the vicinity wearing a unique uniform which he could not recognize.\nOne jet aircraft was seen flying high over Baku, too high for any type of identification. The party landed at Baku by aircraft, the civilian airfield being located an hour from the city. A military airfield\nWARNING: This document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S.C., Sections 793 and 794. Its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law. It may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by other than United States Air Force Agencies, except by permission of the Director of Intelligence, USAF.\nAF FORM 112a REPLACES AF FORM 112-PART II, 1 JUN 48, WHICH MAY BE USED. CLASSIFICATION SECRET (SECURITY INFORMATION when filled in)\nNW 91377\nDocId:24749008 Page 5"} {"doc_id":"56366d707d24c1bc","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUPPLEMENT TO AF FORM 112\nORIGINATING AGENCY U.S AIR A REPORT NO. IR 193-55 PAGE 5 OF 9 PAGES\n\nwas passed on the outskirts of Baku on the way from the commercial field. The Intourist guide stated that this was a military training airfield and Col. Hathaway recognized some dark green transports parked there.\n\nPART C. OBSERVATIONS AT DNIEPERPETROVSK AIRFIELD\n\nThe three US observers arrived at Dnieperpetrovsk airfield sometime on 9 Oct. 55 by DC-3 type aircraft. The airfield is grass-sod. The parking ramp is of octagonal brick or cement (see sketch of jet bomber and ramp brick design on page 8). One jet bomber was parked at the airfield (see description in text of cable and see profile sketch on page 8).\nCol. Hathaway counted 12 very stubby jet fighters parked at the field. The jet fighters were described as \"short, stubby, smaller and higher horizontal tailplane, wings more forward, canopy more forward.\" At the time of the description I was having Col. Hathaway compare the fighter he saw with a scale model of a FAGOT. He definitely did not think they were Fagots because of the fuselage being more stubby. (Sort of rules out Frescos of which I could use a model as I don't have any.) This is my reason for citing SRI TIC 62U4, as the composite configuration concludes that the SRI fighter is one third smaller than the MIG-15. I did not have time to show the composite drawing to the observer but the possibility exists that his sighting was of the SRI composite type. Further debriefing should bring out more details.\n\nPART D. OBSERVATIONS NEAR MOSCOW\n\nThe three observers were escorted to a place which Senator Russell had requested to see outside Moscow. On the way, exactly at the 12 kilometer signpost from Moscow on the Moscow to Minsk highway, on the right side of the road, there was a radar site (size unknown) with two radars. From the sketches of Col. Hathaway, they have been tentatively identified as one Woodgage or Gage and one square type Freya. (See sketch below):\n(Approx. 200-250 yards off side of road.) [sketch]\n\nPART E. OBSERVATIONS FROM TIFLIS TO SOCI.\n\nAT TIFLIS about the 5th of Oct. 55, Col. Hathaway sighted a large helicopter resembling a banana with two large, main rotors at each end and having many more windows than a banana type which he had seen in the USA.\nBetween TIFLIS AND SOCI, on the Black Sea, while travelling by train, one of the most significant coincidences occurred, taking into account the observations which were reported in the AWAIT region. Sen. Russell's party made contact with a Russian who was about 55 years, named EGOROV. He was accompanied by a younger engineer who job was to keep EGOROV supplied with spirits. EGOROV was feeling pretty good when he met\n\nWARNING: This document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S.C., Sections 793 and 794. Its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law. It may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by other than United States Air Force Agencies, except by permission of the Director of Intelligence, USAF.\n\nAF 1 OCT 52 112a REPLACES AF FORM 112-PART II, 1 JUN 48, WHICH MAY BE USED. (SECURITY INFORMATION when filled in)"} {"doc_id":"56366d707d24c1bc","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUPPLEMENT TO AF FORM 112\nORIGINATING AGENCY US AIR ATTACHE REPORT NO. IR 193-55 PAGE 6 OF 9 PAGES\n\nthe Americans and proceeded to continue the party with them. The history of EGOROV, according to Mr Efron, is that Egorov was one of the original pilots who made the trans-polar Russian flight to Washington State in 1935 or 36. He told the party that he is now retired. He is a Hero of the Soviet Union and speaks fairly freely about the internal situation in the USSR. Sen. Russell extended an invitation for him to visit his office if he ever comes to the USA. USAIRA COMMENT: It is difficult for me to believe that this experienced pilot in polar navigation would be retired and doing nothing but travelling around the Trans Caucasus region with a young engineer.\nEgorov stated that during World War II he had shot down 17 German aircraft.\nCol Hathaway observed, about 20 minutes outside of SOCI, a T-34 tank that had a muzzle brake on the gun, but looked very different from any he had seen during a combat tour in Korea. The tank was on a flatcar.\n\nPART F. OBSERVATIONS AT COP AND ABOUT CZECH RAILROADS\n\nThe Russell group arrived at COP, the RR border crossing point between USSR and Czechoslovakia, early on the morning of 12 Oct. 55. About 1-2 hours later at 0630, they left COP and were on their way to Prague where they arrived at 0947 (on time) p.m. (2147 hours).\nUpon arrival at COP, the train was broken up. One car was marked MOSCOW-BUCHAREST and was disconnected. Another car was marked MOSCOW-PRAGUE, the group's car, sleeper, and was disconnected and taken on a spur under a red star suspended on a border arch (probably marking border of Czechoslovakia) into a long building on the Czech side. This building was lighted and its length was such as to accomodate the car and two replacement trucks. The trucks for the new Czech RR guage were of the two axel type. The switching of trucks consumed 40-45 minutes for their sleeper car. There was an electric switch box or panel control on one side of the building. The passengers had to debark during the changing of the trucks. All other train cars were marked MOSCOW-COP.\nThe switching building had a pit in the middle which the car straddled. Inside the sleeper there were two large square traps in the cars floor, one at either end. The first step was for the crew to open these doors and turn a large bar, which evidently released the truck from the body of the car. The second step was to apply large jacks at four points of the car on the outside, about at the position of the trucks, two jacks on a side. When the car was sufficiently jacked, the Czech guage trucks, which/on the tracks forward of the car [REDACTED] on were the standard guage tracks of the Czech RR which were laid inside the Russian guage tracks, were pushed forward towards the sleeper. The Czech trucks banged the first Russian trucks out of place, continuing to the second Russian trucks and banging them out of place. The jacked car was then ready to have the Czech trucks fastened. The jacks were lowered, letting the car down to the new standard guage trucks below. The crew then turned the bars through the floor openings locking the new trucks in place and the passengers were informed that they could board the car. (See sketch for USAIRA-Hathaway version of this operation.)\nThe train departed COP at 0630, arriving at the first little Czech town ten minutes later, where on the right side of the RR, a \"big factory was on the right\" which was thought to be producing long, aluminum RR cars. Aluminum RR cars were seen on the siding and the observer believed that these were the plants product.\nProceeding through the area on the Czech side of the border after leaving COP, Col. Hathaway observed very large RR marshaling yards with tracks stretching as far as he could see on both sides of his track. Guard towers were manned and located in the huge RR yards. There were 5 tracks at the border branching into many in the yards. As he went through the yards he observed that on his left side were loaded or full freight cars, while on his right were all the empty freight cars, \"as far as could be seen.\"\nThe RR route which the party travelled from COP was through KOSICE-POPRAD-ZELINA. The observer stated that electrification began at a little town shortly after the first little town which was reached ten minutes after COP. From Cop to Kosice, Hathaway believed that there were two tracks and possibly three.\nFrom Kosice on Hathaway stated that construction was going on through the mountains, the construction crews using a prefabricated technique. Piled up alongside of the right of way were prefabricated track sections with \"rails already hooked to sleepers.\" Little buildings were spotted along the right of way where this prefabrication was taking place. Cable reels and stacks of metal towers were seen, the towers being rusty. He believed that electrification was nearly completed all the way although his train was being pulled by a steam engine.\nJust at dark, location enroute unknown, Hathaway passed by an area approximately one mile long with guard towers and a high fence.\n\nUSAIRA COMMENT:\nDue to the time available for debriefing and the physical limitations of our office in Prague, no more can be reported from these excellent sources.\n\nEND\n\n[signature] Lt Col USAF\n\nDECLASSIFIED Authority NND 857013 By BF NARA, Date 11-12-93\n\nREPRODUCTION OF THIS DOCUMENT IN WHOLE OR IN PART IS PROHIBITED EXCEPT WITH PERMISSION OF THE ISSUING OFFICE\n\nWARNING: This document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S.C., Sections 793 and 794. Its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law. It may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by other than United States Air Force Agencies, except by permission of the Director of Intelligence, USAF.\n\nAF 1 OCT 52 112a REPLACES AF FORM 112-PART II, 1 JUN 48, WHICH MAY BE USED. (SECURITY INFORMATION when filled in)"} {"doc_id":"56366d707d24c1bc","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DNIEPERPETROVSK AIRFIELD\nJET BOMBER PROFILE - 9 OCT.55\n\nCOCKPIT SET FORWARD\nCANVAS COVERED\nSWAYBACK APPEARANCE HERE\nSILVER (NOT GLASS) BULGE\nLOW SET TAIL PLANE\nNOSE WHEEL\nJET ENGINES CANVAS COVERED ON WINGS\nSEVERE SWEEP TO MID-WING\nDESIGN OF BRICK ON RAMP AT AIRFIELD - ASPHALT SEAMS"} {"doc_id":"56366d707d24c1bc","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIAGRAM OF RR GUAGE SWITCHING OPERATION AT COP 12 OCT 1955\n\nBUILDING OUTLINE WITH SIDING INSIDE\nFLOOR TRAP DOOR\nRUSSIAN BROAD GUAGE TRACK\nPIT UNDER TRACKS\nCZECHOSLOVAKIA\nUSSR + COP\nCZECH STANDARD GUAGE TRACK\nCZECH RR TRUCKS ARE PUSHED TO RUSSIAN TRUCKS, BANGING THEM IN DIRECTION OF USSR\nRED STAR OVER TRACK (PROBABLE OFFICIAL BORDER MARKER)\nRR SLEEPER CAR MARKED ON SIDE \"MOSCOW - PRAGUE\"\nRUSSIAN GUAGE TRUCK\nFLOOR TRAP DOOR IN CONDUCTOR'S COMPARTMENT WHERE TRUCK DISCONNECT BAR IS LOCATED\nRUSSIAN GUAGE TRUCK"} {"doc_id":"56366d707d24c1bc","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BIGELOW AEROSPACE ADVANCED SPACE STUDIES\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE OF CONTENTS\n\npg.\n\nLIST OF FIGURES ... 4\nLIST OF TABLES ... 9\n1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ... 10\n2. INTRODUCTION ... 13\n2.1 HISTORICAL EVENTS AND STUDIES ... 13\n2.2 BAASS' TWELVE TECHNOLOGY FOCUS AREAS ... 14\n2.3 BAASS PERSONNEL, SOFTWARE, EQUIPMENT AND DATA WAREHOUSE ... 15\n2.3.1 BAASS Personnel ... 15\n2.3.2 ANSYS Multiphysics FEA ... 16\n2.3.3 Equipment ... 16\n2.3.4 Data Warehouse ... 19\n3. TYPES OF UAPS OBSERVED ... 21\n4. ANALYTICAL AND NUMERICAL SOLUTIONS FOR UAP INVESTIGATIONS ... 25\n4.1 \"TIC TAC\" INCIDENT ... 25\n4.1.1 Analytical Solutions of Velocities and Accelerations Associated with \"Tic Tac\" Performance ... 32\n4.1.2 Summary of Analytical Velocity and Acceleration Solutions ... 32\n4.1.3 Numerical Analysis of Compressible Flow ... 39\n4.1.4 Summary and Conclusions of Compressible Numerical Analyses ... 46\n4.1.5 Numerical Analysis of Incompressible Flow of a UAP Entering Water ... 47\n4.1.6 Numerical Analysis of Incompressible Flow of a UAP Entering Water Results ... 48\n4.1.7 Summary and Conclusions of Numerical Analysis of Incompressible Flow of a UAP Entering Water Results ... 58\n4.2 ANALYSES OF SPHERICAL UAPS ... 58\n4.2.1 Acoustical Analysis of a Spherical USO ... 58\n4.2.2 ANSYS Multiphysics Electromagnetic Capabilities ... 82\n4.2.3 Radar Cross Section Analysis of a Spherical UFO ... 83\n5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ... 98\n6. REFERENCES ... 100\nSYMBOLS AND ACRONYMS ... 102\nATTACHMENT I - ANSYS INPUT FILES ... 105\nUSO ANSYS Multiphysics Acoustics Input File Example ... 105\nUAP ANSYS Multiphysics RCS Input File Example ... 112\nATTACHMENT II - \"TIC TAC\" CFD CONTOUR PLOTS FOR PRESSURE, TEMPERATURE AND MACH NUMBER ... 116\nATTACHMENT III - RIGHT CIRCULAR CYLINDER CFD CONTOUR PLOTS FOR PRESSURE, TEMPERATURE AND MACH NUMBER ... 128\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 2"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LIST OF FIGURES\n\npg.\n\nFigure 1. The UFO Pattern: A Condensed Statement of Repeated Observations ... 21\nFigure 2. Lockheed Martin Skunk Works SR-71 Black Bird ... 22\nFigure 3. Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk Stealth Fighter ... 22\nFigure 4. Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit Stealth Bomber ... 23\nFigure 5. Boeing Phantom Works B-2 Stealth X-45A UAV ... 23\nFigure 6. Three Dimensional Rendering of a Cylindrical or \"Tic Tac\" UAP ... 24\nFigure 7. Three Dimensional Rendering of a Metallic Spherical UAP ... 24\nFigure 8. Location of the AAV during the F/A18 Intercept ... 26\nFigure 9. FLIR in 'White Hot' Mode ... 30\nFigure 10. FLIR in \"Black Hot\" mode ... 30\nFigure 11. Tic Tac Parametric Velocities for Selected Times of Event Duration in ft/sec ... 35\nFigure 12. Tic Tac Parametric Velocities for Selected Times of Event Duration in mph ... 36\nFigure 13. Tic Tac Parametric Accelerations for Selected Times of Event Duration in ft/sec² ... 37\nFigure 14. Tic Tac Parametric Accelerations for Selected Times of Event Duration in g ... 38\nFigure 15. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ... 41\nFigure 16. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ... 41\nFigure 17. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ... 42\nFigure 18. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ... 42\nFigure 19. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ... 43\nFigure 20. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ... 43\nFigure 21. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ... 44\nFigure 22. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ... 44\nFigure 23. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ... 45\nFigure 24. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ... 45\nFigure 25. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet ... 46\nFigure 26. Solid Three Dimensional Geometry of Disc and Water ... 50\nFigure 27. Solid Three Dimensional Geometry Mesh of Disc and Water ... 51\nFigure 28. Solid Three Dimensional Geometry Mesh of UAP Disc ... 52\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 4"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 29. User Generated Cut Analysis Plane.......53\nFigure 30. Animated Result, Fluid 2 Volume Fraction.......54\nFigure 31. Total Pressure Around UAP.......55\nFigure 32. Water Surface Effects From Solid Impact.......56\nFigure 33. Water Surface Effects From Solid Impact (Side View).......57\nFigure 34. Mesh Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......61\nFigure 35. Mesh Plot for 1,000 Hz with 50 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......62\nFigure 36. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz\nwith 50 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......63\nFigure 37. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz\nwith 50 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......64\nFigure 38. Contour Plot of Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz\nwith 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......65\nFigure 39. Contour Plot of the Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz\nwith 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......66\nFigure 40. Steady State Real Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial\nDistance (m) Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......67\nFigure 41. Steady State Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function\nof Radial Distance (m) Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength\nin Water.......68\nFigure 42. Steady State Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial\nDistance (m) Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......69\nFigure 43. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 5,000 Hz\nwith 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......70\nFigure 44. Contour Plot of Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) for 5,000 Hz\nwith 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......71\nFigure 45. Contour Plot of the Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) for 5,000 Hz\nwith 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......72\nFigure 46. Steady State Real Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function\nof Radial Distance (m) Plot for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength\nin Water.......73\nFigure 47. Steady State Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function\nof Radial Distance (m) Plot for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength\nin Water.......74\nFigure 48. Steady State Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial\nDistance (m) Plot for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......75\nFigure 49. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 10,000 Hz\nwith 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......76\nFigure 50. Contour Plot of Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) for 10,000 Hz\nwith 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......77\nFigure 51. Contour Plot of the Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) for 10,000 Hz\nwith 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......78\nFigure 52. Steady State Real Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function\nof Radial Distance (m) Plot for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength\nin Water.......79\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities Page 5\nNovember 23, 2010"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 53. Steady State Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function\nof Radial Distance (m) Plot for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength\nin Water.......80\nFigure 54. Steady State Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m)\nPlot for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water.......81\nFigure 55. Factors that Determine the Energy Returned by a Target.......83\nFigure 56. Effect of Distance from the radar to the Target on the Power Density.......84\nFigure 57. Reduction in the Strength of Target Echoes with Range.......87\nFigure 58. Geometry, Description and Maximum RCS.......88\nFigure 59. Radar Cross Section Comparison.......89\nFigure 60. Mesh of ½ Symmetry UFO Sphere with 25 Elements per Wavelength.......90\nFigure 61. Mesh of ½ Symmetry UFO Sphere with 50 Elements per Wavelength.......91\nFigure 62. Normalized radar Cross Section Plot for a ½ Symmetry 10 m Metallic\nSphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 25\nElements per Wavelength.......93\nFigure 63. Normalized radar Cross Section Plot for a ½ Symmetry 10 m Metallic\nSphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and\n50 Elements per Wavelength.......95\nFigure 64. Electric Filed Contour in V/m for a ½ Symmetry 10 m Metallic Sphere\nwith a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 25 Elements\nper Wavelength.......96\nFigure 65. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......116\nFigure 66. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......116\nFigure 67. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......117\nFigure 68. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......117\nFigure 69. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......118\nFigure 70. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......118\nFigure 71. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......119\nFigure 72. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......119\nFigure 73. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......120\nFigure 74. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph\nwith Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......120\nFigure 75. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph\nwith Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......121\nFigure 76. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph\nwith Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......121\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities Page 6\nNovember 23, 2010"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 77. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph\nwith Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......122\nFigure 78. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph\nwith Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......122\nFigure 79. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph\nwith Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......123\nFigure 80. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......123\nFigure 81. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......124\nFigure 82. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......124\nFigure 83. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......125\nFigure 84. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......125\nFigure 85. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......126\nFigure 86. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......126\nFigure 87. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......127\nFigure 88. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......127\nFigure 89. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......128\nFigure 90. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......128\nFigure 91. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......129\nFigure 92. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......129\nFigure 93. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......130\nFigure 94. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......130\nFigure 95. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......131\nFigure 96. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......131\nFigure 97. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......132\nFigure 98. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......132\nFigure 99. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......133\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities Page 7\nNovember 23, 2010"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 100. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph\nwith Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......133\nFigure 101. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph\nwith Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......134\nFigure 102. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph\nwith Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......134\nFigure 103. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph\nwith Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet.......135\nFigure 104. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph\nwith Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......135\nFigure 105. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......136\nFigure 106. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......136\nFigure 107. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......137\nFigure 108. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......137\nFigure 109. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......138\nFigure 110. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......138\nFigure 111. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......139\nFigure 112. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......139\nFigure 113. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph\nwith Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet.......140\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities Page 8\nNovember 23, 2010"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LIST OF TABLES\npg.\nTable 1. Mach Regimes.......32\nTable 2. Velocities and Accelerations of Tic Tac for Parametric Time Durations of Event.......34\nTable 3. Properties of Water Used for ANSYS Harmonic Analyses.......60\nTable 4. Normalized radar Cross Section for a 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m\nDielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 25 Elements per Wavelength.......92\nTable 5. Normalized radar Cross Section for a 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m\nDielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 50 Elements per Wavelength.......94\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities Page 9\nNovember 23, 2010"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY\n\nThe purpose of this report is to summarize the field data collection, in-house databases and computational capabilities that currently reside at Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS) for the study of advanced aerospace technology. Between 2008 and 2010 BAASS was contracted by the Defense Warning Office of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) to create, staff, and equip a new organization in order to examine and analyze the threat to national security associated with advanced aerospace technology. By selecting and modeling a few sentinel cases of encounters with advanced aerospace technology, this report demonstrates the in-house data collection, data storage and analysis resources built by BAASS under DIA contract HHM402-08-C-0072.\n\nThroughout the millennia individuals have observed and reported unexplained phenomena in the sky. Some of these reports included bright and flashing lights, objects streaking across the sky or silently hovering, and multiple colored and flashing structures morphing into one. Cylindrical, cigar, spherical, lenticular, triangular and ellipsoid shaped structures have been reported hovering and/or accelerating at rapid rates from a stationary position. Some of these abrupt, high speed maneuvers have been harder to explain with conventional physics, considering the inherently poor aerodynamic properties of many of these objects. It should be stressed many, but not all, of these sightings may be explained by natural phenomena, or by unacknowledged aerospace technology.\n\nSeveral official government studies were conducted from the late 1940s until around 1970, but many of these studies were superficial and lacking in rigor. Since 1970, because of an absence of research funding, the study of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) has been characterized by cursory analysis and amateur, unscientific data collection.\n\nPilots, both civilian and military, have reported seeing unusual objects in the air, some of which have been independently confirmed by radar. During the 1960s and 1970s a series of incidents was reported along the so called Northern Tier of the United States where silent hovering objects were observed over military facilities housing nuclear weapons. One report in March 1967 involving the simultaneous disabling of multiple missiles for a period of time, while a UAP allegedly hovered nearby, stimulated considerable public interest when information of the event began to emerge. The 1967 incident, if true, as well as other Northern Tier incidents, arguably had national security implications.\n\nOver the years, there have also been numerous reports of Unidentified Submerged Objects (USO), in all bodies of water. Some USO and UAP reportedly exhibited superior performance capabilities in velocity and acceleration underwater in the absence of detectable turbulence or cavitation signatures. While comparing our state of the art military equipment with these capabilities a reasonable individual may conclude there are national security implications.\n\nBigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies, LLC (BAASS) is a research organization focused on the identification, evaluation, and acquisition of novel and emerging future technologies worldwide as they specifically relate to air and space craft. Cutting edge research areas include propulsion systems, space applications of nanosensors, piezoelectric and nanowire fabrics, human performance, plasma stealth technologies, and directed high energy weapons. BAASS"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS' work scope. BAASS' vision is to identify and acquire disruptive or discontinuous technologies that will form the basis of aerospace and defense applications through the year 2050, as well as those that pose potential threats to national security.\n\nThe company goal is to become a major entity in the research and development of future aerospace propulsion systems, controls, detection and tracking systems, stealth and directed energy uses by employing the best and brightest engineers and scientists available. The previous mentioned capabilities place BAASS in a strong position to provide technical results in both classified and unclassified endeavors."} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was contracted to the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in 2008 to investigate and analyze the possibility of a credible threat posed by UAPs. To accomplish this mission, BAASS over the past two years has focused on developing three separate resources, each unique to the study of UAP: 1) to obtain the most comprehensive suite of portable field sensors and personnel available, 2) to build the most all-inclusive database of UAP performance capabilities and behavior in the world and 3) to acquire world class computational methodology for analysis of UAP data. This report touches on all aspects of these resources, but concentrates on the in-house computational capabilities.\n\nBAASS acquired the ANSYS Multiphysics Finite Element Analysis (FEA) program, for \"a first of a kind\" engineering and physics in-house resource devoted to providing a scientifically sound mathematical analysis and modeling of UAP behavior. Thus BAASS has acquired significant computational capability to convert field data into mathematical models and three dimensional simulations.\n\nThis report provides theory, analytical and numerical solutions for selected UAP and USO incidents through engineering and physics analyses. In particular, we examine a sentinel incident – the \"Tic Tac\" event – where F/A-18 aircraft from a United States Carrier Strike Group were vectored to a nearby unidentified contact in November 2004. The white object observed by four F/A-18F aircrew was described as 40 feet in length and shaped and colored like a \"Tic Tac\" candy.\n\nMany analyses of UAP may use analytical or closed form solutions to solve the equations that describe the physics of an event. Where analytical solutions do not exist or the geometry is too complex, ANSYS multiphysics provides a powerful computational platform to solve large problems numerically, while combining and solving many different physical equations.\n\nCompressible fluid flow analyses were performed to visualize the steady state pressure, temperature and Mach number contours around two craft shapes. An incompressible fluid flow problem around a solid disc shaped object descending through the air into a body of liquid was investigated to observe the disturbance produced on the surface of the water. A successful analysis of a USO was conducted using a full harmonic acoustics simulation; and computed values showed good agreement with the expected theoretical solutions. An analysis of a spherical UAP radar cross section (RCS) was conducted using a full harmonic electromagnetic simulation. Various other shapes of UAP and USOs may be evaluated by applying boundary conditions and transient physics equations to obtain a better understanding of the capabilities of these objects.\n\nBAASS employees and contractors comprise scientists, engineers, analysts, intelligence and investigative professionals with a wide range of technical capabilities and backgrounds. Many of the professional staff members are considered national and international experts in their respective fields. BAASS' personnel have experience in performing work for government agencies such as the Department of Energy and Department of Defense. A broad mandate to research and develop future technology platforms pertaining to advanced propulsion, advanced non-aerodynamic lift capabilities, future material science breakthroughs including nanofabrication, novel power generation and signature reduction technologies, human interaction and effects of advanced technologies including field and radiation biological effects exists in"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS' work scope. BAASS' vision is to identify and acquire disruptive or discontinuous technologies that will form the basis of aerospace and defense applications through the year 2050, as well as those that pose potential threats to national security."} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2. INTRODUCTION\n\n2.1 HISTORICAL EVENTS AND STUDIES\n\nDisc, triangle, cigar and bell-shaped flying objects have been reported and documented on a global basis for millennia. The sighting by [REDACTED] on June 24, 1947 in the state of Washington garnered unprecedented global media attention and began the modern UFO era. While flying near Mt. Rainier, he observed a chain of nine unusual objects flying from north to south. [REDACTED] reported that \"two or three of them would dip or change course slightly, just enough for the sun to strike them at an angle that reflected brightly on my plane.\" The specific term \"flying saucer\" was never used by [REDACTED] however, he was quoted in a book stating: \"As I described them at the time their flight was like speed boats on rough water or similar to the tail of a Chinese kite that I once saw blowing in the wind. As I put it to newsmen in Pendleton, Oregon, they flew like a saucer would if you skipped it across the water.\" [REDACTED] Thus the moniker \"flying saucer\" was born. The terms \"flying saucer\" and \"flying disc\" were used commonly and interchangeably in the media to describe what are now known as UFOs (Unidentified Flying Object). Many sightings of UFOs were reported by commercial and military pilots during the late 1940s and a flying saucer allegedly crashed outside of Roswell, New Mexico, in early July 1947.\n\nShortly thereafter, a series of sightings of \"green fireballs\" began. These reports were almost exclusively over the state of New Mexico. Increasing significantly in number by December 1948, these sightings typically occurred over sensitive government installations, most notably the Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories. An investigation was initiated by meteor expert [REDACTED] After personally witnessing a green fireball four to five degrees above the horizon on a horizontal trajectory on December 12, 1948 [REDACTED] concluded the fireballs were [REDACTED] structured, that is, not atmospheric phenomena. Initially they were thought to be of Russian origin. In April 1950, Project Twinkle was created to be a network of stations with the purpose of observing, studying, and collecting data on the fireball phenomena. This project did little to solve the mystery, and was disbanded later that year. Large numbers of UFO sightings continued in the late 1940s and as a result, some unease about the nature of the objects began to escalate in military circles, notably in the Air Force. For example, in September 1947, Air Force [REDACTED] issued a memorandum stating \"The reported operating characteristics such as extreme rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and motion which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly aircraft and radar, lend belief to the possibility some of the objects are controlled either manually, automatically or remotely.\" [REDACTED] recommended a detailed study of the UFO phenomenon. Based on increasing concern on the part of the military, the U.S. government initiated official studies of UFOs.\n\nProject Sign was the first official U.S. government study of UFOs performed by the United States Air Force in early 1948 and concluded in early 1949. Project Sign officials argued UFOs were likely of extraterrestrial origin, and most of the project's personnel came to favor the extraterrestrial hypothesis. This hypothesis was rejected by the senior Air Force personnel. Project Sign eventually came to no official conclusion about UFOs with the final report stating the existence of flying saucers could neither be confirmed nor denied. Project Sign was concluded and restarted as Project Grudge in February 1949."} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Research performed through theoretical and computational applications, as well as modeling of components of non–conventional propulsion systems is under way to provide for future development of vehicles capable of operating in the atmosphere, under water and in space. BAASS research intends to provide innovative approaches and concepts for aircraft, propulsion, and flight technologies demonstrating significant advances in performance and capabilities beyond those in operation today.\n\nBAASS' twelve key technology areas concentrate on how breakthrough technologies will provide for the development of advanced spacecraft concepts and weapon technologies through the year 2050 and beyond. The twelve areas are:\n\n1. Lift\n2. Propulsion\n3. Control\n4. Power Generation\n5. Spatial Temporal Translation\n6. Materials\n7. Configuration, Structure\n8. Signature Reduction\n9. Human Interface\n10. Human Effects\n11. Armament\n12. Other Peripheral Areas\n\n2.3 BAASS PERSONNEL, SOFTWARE, EQUIPMENT AND DATA WAREHOUSE\n\nAlthough the majority of this report is devoted to demonstrating BAASS' capabilities in mathematical modeling of various UAP performance parameters, the next section provides a short summary of some of the BAASS personnel, portable data collection sensors, as well as the current BAASS in-house database architecture.\n\n2.3.1 BAASS Personnel\n\nBAASS employees and contractors comprise scientists, engineers, analysts, intelligence and investigative professionals from diverse backgrounds. A majority of BAASS personnel have performed work for government agencies such as the Department of Energy and Department of Defense.\n\nResearch and development necessary for the procurement of the technology required for advanced space and weapons systems is conducted by numerical computational analysts through use of computational multiphysics FEA programs. Application and scientific programmers are involved in development of computer code that drives data mining and scientific applications used to evaluate historical and present UAP cases. Professionals in all areas conduct experimentation, material science testing and manufacturing of prototypes in both in-house facilities and collaborating facilities and laboratories. Areas of concentration include"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), Heat Transfer, Nuclear Engineering, Electromagnetics and Radio Frequencies (RF), Theoretical and Computational Physics, Biological Sciences and Chemistry.\n\n2.3.2 ANSYS Multiphysics FEA\n\nThe ANSYS Workbench platform is a powerful multi-domain simulation environment that harnesses the core physics from ANSYS, enables their interoperability, and provides common tools for interfacing with CAD, repairing geometry, creating meshes and post-processing results. To our knowledge, this powerful computational capability has not been previously utilized in the 64 year history of UFO study. It is hypothesized that through this more broad ranging analysis, additional theoretical constructs can be generated regarding UAP and USO behavior. These in turn can provide the scaffolding for advanced engineering concepts.\n\n2.3.3 Equipment\n\n2.3.3.1 Field Investigative Equipment\n\nBAASS has amassed a considerable amount of field investigative equipment. The inventory includes a variety of imaging devices, along with Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and range finding items. Of note are the following:\n\n2.3.3.1.1 Canon 5D MK II Digital SLR Cameras\n\nTwo Canon 5D MK II, 21.1 Megapixel, Digital SLR cameras were selected based on their capability for low light photography when combined with the Canon EF 300 mm ultrasonic, and the Canon EF 24-105 mm ultrasonic lenses. The 21.1 Megapixel size allows for RAW images suitable for scientific examination and analysis.\n\n2.3.3.1.2 Sony A350 Digital SLR camera\n\nThe Sony A350 is a 14.2 Megapixel, digital SLR camera, with a Sony N 50-300 mm, a Sony N 50-70 mm lens, and a Sony Macro 2.8/50 mm lens. The a350 while a high quality camera, is compact and portable. It also allows for close-up and one-to-one photography.\n\n2.3.3.1.3 Sony High Definition Video Cameras\n\nThree Sony High Definition Video (HDV) 1080i, High Definition Video cameras, with low light capability were chosen for video capture in various field conditions.\n\n2.3.3.1.4 Sony Handicam, Digital Video Cameras\n\nFour Sony Handicam, digital video cameras with 80 GB hard drive storage capacity. These cameras are compact and portable, and using the HDD allow for up to 4 hours of continuous video recording with no tapes or other external media. They can also capture still images."} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2.3.3.1.5 ATT PVS-7, Night Vision Devices\n\nSeven ATT PVS-7, Night Vision Devices – military quality, state-of-the-art night vision devices.\n\n2.3.3.1.6 Oasys Universal Thermal Monocular (UTM)\n\nThis device is a ruggedized thermal imaging and designation system. It includes a digital magnetic, both still and video capture capability as well as a digital PC interface allowing for real-time review of images in the field.\n\n2.3.3.1.7 Garmin Global Positioning Systems\n\nOne Colorado 400t and two Oregon 400t, Global Positioning Systems, allowing for route mapping as well as waypoint storage in the field.\n\n2.3.3.1.8 Leica Rangemaster 1200 Laser Range Finders\n\nThese two range finders are accurate out to 1500 meters, extremely compact and user friendly.\n\n2.3.3.1.9 Sony CyberShot Cameras\n\nThree Sony CyberShot 10.1 megapixel digital cameras – compact and portable for quick reaction to opportunities while actively investigating.\n\n\nThese equipment items give BAASS considerable capability when investigating events in the field. In addition to the items listed above a wide range of other support type items are in the BAASS inventory. These include Toshiba laptop computers, digital voice recorders, digital Game Cameras, IR spot lights, power invertors, several pieces of older night vision equipment, and packaging and storage items for solid, liquids, and hazardous materials.\n\nIn addition, BAASS obtained Technical Surveillance Countermeasures (TSCM) equipment in an effort to enhance the security of BAASS facilities. In addition to the below listed TSCM equipment BAASS personnel are trained by Research Electronics International in Cookeville, TN; also the manufacturer of the equipment.\n\n• OSCOR 5000E, Omni-Spectral Correlator covering the radio frequency range from 50 kHz to 3 GHz\n• ORION Non-Linear Junction Detector\n• TALAN Telephone Analyzer\n• CPM-700 Broadband Detector"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2.3.3.2 Scientific Equipment\n\n2.3.3.2.1 Veho VMS-001 200X 1.3 Megapixel Digital USB Microscope\n\nThis instrument is a very portable (4.4 x 1.3 inches) digital microscope which expands the capability of the field investigators. The microscope allows detailed images to be taken and connects directly to a laptop. Illumination is via 4 built in white LED lights.\n\n2.3.3.2.2 Celestron 44340 3.5\" LCD Digital Microscope\n\nThis instrument is a bench top digital microscope. The microscope has magnification capabilities of 40–400X extending up to 1600X with digital zoom. Images can be uploaded to a PC or laptop via a USB connection. It could also be taken into the field if required.\n\n2.3.3.2.3 Niton XL3t 900S GOLDD Analyzer\n\nThis instrument is an X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analyzer. The device analyzes the emission of characteristic \"secondary\" (or fluorescent) X-rays from a material that has been excited by bombarding with high-energy X-rays. BAASS field teams deploy the Niton and conduct on-site elemental analysis.\n\n2.3.3.2.4 Colibri TTC Handheld Dose Rate Meter\n\nThis instrument package allows for the detection and quantification of alpha, beta and gamma radiation in the field. The ability to accurately measure and quantify these three types of radiation adds another critical level of capability to the BAASS arsenal of analysis.\n\n2.3.3.2.5 Hand held Spectrum Analyzer Pro Bundle 3 (NF-5030 and HF-60100)\n\nThese are instruments designed to detect and measure a broad spectrum of electromagnetic (EMF) radiation and high frequency radio waves. The NF-5030 measures three dimensional magnetic fields from as low as background up to 20 Gauss. Combining the two instruments electric fields are measured from 0.1 V/m to 20 kV/m and frequencies from 1 Hz to 9.4 GHz."} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 5, AAP Person 58\n\n2.3.3.6 Hardware for ANSYS Workbench Platform\n\nThe research and work performed by BAASS ranges from technical design and prototyping, all the way up to advanced theoretical and computational studies of partial differential equations describing multiphysics problems. An expandable twelve core Hewlett Packard server with 48 GB of RAM and 1 TB of storage is used to perform parallel processing solutions for structural, fluid flow, heat transfer, high and low frequency electromagnetic problems along with coupled physics of two or more of those listed previously.\n\n2.3.4 Data Warehouse\n\nBAASS developed a Data Warehouse to support research on UAP and related anomalies and titled it \"Project CAPELLA\". The BAASS Data Warehouse is revolutionary because it: 1) incorporates a format based on the [REDACTED] Six Layer Model for analyzing UAP, 2) includes several new databases developed by BAASS, and 3) includes databases developed by others which have never been collectively analyzed. The Data Warehouse currently consists of eleven separate databases and their associated supporting documentation in electronic format such as witness interviews, photographs, videos, recordings, sketches, analytical reports, etc. Each of the databases contains UAP sighting events relating to the purpose of that particular database, although some of the reported cases do overlap. Four of the databases will continue to catalogue current and future sighting reports. Seven of the databases have been completed and fully integrated and populated with all pertinent information captured by the CAPELLA format. BAASS will continue to input historical data in the CAPELLA format and will expand the Data Warehouse with additional databases and unusual aerial phenomena information.\n\nThe eleven databases currently included in the Data Warehouse are:\n\n1. NIDS Database\n2. 1843(a)(2) Pilot Database\n3. Sign/Grudge/Blue Book Database\n4. UFOCAT Database\n5. MUFON Case Management System Database\n6. Project Colares Database\n7. Canadian Release Database\n8. United Kingdom Release Database\n9. BAASS Database\n10. Utah Ranch Database\n11. Post-Utah Ranch Effects Database"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The BAASS Data Warehouse is an electronic repository for historical, ongoing, and future UAP reporting and investigations. The Data Warehouse is designed to facilitate sophisticated analyses and data mining to improve our understanding of the extent, structure, and frequency of UAP, as well as their potential correlation to known physical, environmental, biological, or socio-political factors.\n2.3.4.1 CAPELLA Format\nAAP Person 5, AAP Person 58\nThe CAPELLA database format is based upon the \"Six Layer Model for Anomalous Phenomena\" developed by AAP Person 5 and AAP Person 58 [REDACTED]\nThis six layer model encapsulates all of the potential characteristics of UAP events that can be studied. The six layers are:\n1. The Physical Layer – those physical characteristics associated with a UAP event\n2. The Anti-Physical Layer – the patterns that conflict with those predicted in modern physics\n3. The Psychological Layer – the psychological impacts to the witness(es) and the social conditions that surround them\n4. The Physiological Layer – the effects perceived by humans\n5. The Psychic Layer – the effects commonly found in parapsychology literature\n6. The Cultural Layer – the primary and secondary effects upon society.\nAdditionally, the CAPELLA format captures administrative details associated with the UAP event, such as witness information, location, date, time, duration, etc.\n2.3.4.2 Data Warehouse Upgrade\nBAASS is undergoing a database upgrade project to further enhance data security and integrity, and increase processing power for greater analytical capability. The CAPELLA framework and methodologies will be preserved in the upgraded system. This upgrade will increase efficiency and effectiveness, and will allow databases to be analyzed individually or collectively.\n2.3.4.3 Statistical Analysis\nBAASS has completed a first-level, yet comprehensive statistical analyses for three of the databases: 1843(a)(2) Pilot Database, Project Sign/Grudge/Blue Book Database, and the Utah Ranch Database. The analyses on the 1843(a)(2) and Blue Book databases are focused on identifying patterns of technical information from the case reports. The Utah Ranch analysis delves into patterns and aspects of when anomalous activity is reported in an attempt to identify potential times and improve the means of future detection methods.\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 20"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. TYPES OF UAPS OBSERVED\nNASA aeronautical engineer 1843(a)(2) made important inroads into attempts to delineate some quantitative characteristics of UFO performance by close examination of, and derivation of numerical parameters from well investigated sentinel UFO cases 1843(a)(2) In addition, computer scientist AAP Person 5 has attempted to compute estimates of optical power output derived from UFO reports AAP Person 5 This report attempts to extend and broaden these preliminary studies using considerably enhanced computational power and mathematical modeling capabilities.\nFigure 1, taken from 1843(a)(2) depicts illustrations of the various shapes associated with the UAP phenomena.\nTHE UFO PATTERN\nA Condensed Statement of Repeated Observations\nCONFIGURATIONS OF HIGHLY REPEATING SHAPES\nSAUCER: Domed Saucer (most common), Lenticular Saucer or Disk, Lenticular Saucer with Dome\nFLAT-TOPPED STRAW HAT\nDOUBLE HAT\nCONICAL HAT (giant)\nSPHERE\nSATURN\nELLIPSOIDAL (egg or football): Hovering, Underway\nCYLINDRICAL (giant cigar)\nDIRIGIBLE (large): Luminous Plume\nTRIANGLE OR BOOMERANG: Delta, Equilateral\nNOTE: (1) Shine marks show typical night time air glow. (2) Dash-dot vertical centerline is saucer axis of symmetry. (3) Giant cigars have plumes also.\nFigure 1. The UFO Pattern: A Condensed Statement of Repeated Observations\nAs an important component of these studies, BAASS understands a considerable number, possibly a majority, of UAP reports can be explained by simple misidentification of current advanced technology platforms. Some recent black triangle and even possibly some saucer and hat shaped UAP reports over the last several decades may have been explained by aircraft sightings of the Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird (Figure 2), Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk Stealth Fighter (Figure 3), Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit Stealth Bomber (Figure 4) and Boeing Phantom Works Stealth X-45A Unmanned Arial Vehicles (UAV) (Figure 5). Nevertheless, a significant number of cylindrical and cigar shapes along with spherical, lenticular and ellipsoid\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 21"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"shaped UAPs which appear to hover and/or accelerate at rapid rates from a stationary position have been harder to explain considering the inherently poor aerodynamic properties of these objects. It is this latter subset of UAP reports that BAASS has focused on.\nFigure 2. Lockheed Martin Skunk Works SR-71 Black Bird\nFigure 3. Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk Stealth Fighter\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 22"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 4. Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit Stealth Bomber\nFigure 5. Boeing Phantom Works B-2 Stealth X-45A UAV\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 23"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 6. Three Dimensional Rendering of a Cylindrical or \"Tic Tac\" UAP\nFigure 7. Three Dimensional Rendering of a Metallic Spherical UAP\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 24"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4. ANALYTICAL AND NUMERICAL SOLUTIONS FOR UAP INVESTIGATIONS\n4.1 \"TIC TAC\" INCIDENT\nThe following summary is excerpted from the report of an investigation conducted by personnel assigned to DIA of an observation by elements of the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group of UAP off the coast of Mexico in November 2004. Note: The DIA personnel who wrote the report utilized the term Anomalous Aerial Vehicle (AAV) rather than the more common Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) or Unidentified Flying Object (UFO). All three terms, AAV, UAP, and UFO are used at different times in this section and should be considered interchangeable.\nDuring the period of approximately 10-16 November 2004, the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group (CSG) was operating off the western coast of the United States in preparation for their deployment to the Arabian Sea. The USS Princeton on several occasions detected multiple Anomalous Aerial Vehicles (AAVs) operating in and around the vicinity of the CSG. The AAVs would descend \"very rapidly\" from approximately 60,000 feet down to approximately 50 feet in a matter of seconds. They would then hover or stay stationary on the radar for a short time and depart at high velocities and turn rates. On 14 November after again detecting the AAV, the USS Princeton took the opportunity of having a flight of two F/A-18Fs returning from a training mission to further investigate the AAV. The USS Princeton took over control of the F/A-18s from the E-2C Airborne Early Warning aircraft and vectored in the F/A-18s for intercept leading to visual contact approximately one mile away from the AAV, which was reported to be \"an elongated egg or a 'Tic Tac' shape with a discernable midline horizontal axis.\" It was \"solid white, smooth, with no edges. It was \"uniformly colored with no nacelles, pylons, or wings.\" It was approximately 46 feet in length. The F/A-18Fs radar could not obtain a 'lock' on the AAV; however it could be tracked while stationary and at slower speeds with the Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR). The AAV did take evasive actions upon intercept by the F/A-18 demonstrating an advanced acceleration (g), aerodynamic, and propulsion capability. The AAV did not take any offensive action against the CSG; however, given its ability to operate unchallenged in close vicinity to the CSG it demonstrated the potential to conduct undetected reconnaissance leaving the CSG with a limited ability to detect, track, and/or engage the AAV.\nAccording to 1843(a)(2) the AAVs would descend from a very high altitude into the scan volume of the AN/SPY-1 at a high velocity. The top of the scan volume would put the AAVs at higher than 60,000 feet. The AAVs would descend \"very rapidly\" from approximately 60,000 feet down to approximately 50 feet in a matter of seconds. They would then hover for a short time and depart at high velocities and at turn rates demonstrating an advanced acceleration (g) capability. 1843(a)(2) added that based on his experience, which is 17 years as a Fire Control on Aegis cruisers, the AAV exhibited ballistic missile Characteristics in reference to its appearance, velocity, and indications on the radar. Since the radar was in the mode to handle Air Intercept of conventional aircraft it never obtained an accurate track of the AAVs and was quickly \"dropped\" by the radar meaning it was eliminated by the computer to reduce the amount of clutter on the radar, as any other false target is handled. If the radar were set up in a mode for Ballistic Missile tracking they likely would have had the capability to track the AAV. They were detected three separate times during the week operating off the western coast of the United States and Mexico. The Tactical Air Officer onboard the Princeton could not identify the radar contact\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 25"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and given the high speed and altitude was perplexed. On 14 November 2004, after again detecting an AAV took the opportunity of two F/A-18s airborne in the vicinity to task them for airborne reconnaissance of the AAV.\n[Figure 8 map: San Diego, Tijuana, Isla San Martin, Baja California; AAV marked; scale 86 km; coordinates 31°25'07.21\" N 116°52'23.71\" W; elev -813 m; Eye alt 288.48 km; Google; 2009 Europa Technologies, 2009 Tele Atlas, Image 2009 DigitalGlobe, Data SIO, NOAA, U.S. Navy, NGA, GEBCO]\nFigure 8. Location of the AAV during the F/A18 Intercept\nAAP Person 9 was flying a single seat F/A-18C that launched from the USS Nimitz at approximately 1030L to conduct a Functional Check Flight of an aircraft that had recently completed significant maintenance. He noted the weather that day was blue skies, no clouds, and unlimited visibility. After 30 minutes into his flight he received a radio call from his air controller asking him to investigate an unidentified airborne contact. This was not a standard request. Additionally the controller asked if he had ordnance onboard, which was odd since no controller had ever asked that question during a\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 26"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"situation of identifying an unknown contact over U.S. or International territory. He responded that he had no ordnance onboard. The controller provided vectors to the vicinity of Figure 8. The object was reported to be at \"slow speed and low altitude.\"\nWhile en route at approximately 250 knots indicated/400 knots groundspeed at medium altitude (15-25,000 feet), he gained radar contact of what he believed to be two F/A-18Fs that were approaching the AAV from the west at low altitude (500- 5,000 feet). There was no other traffic on the radar. The controller informed him to remain above 10,000 feet, as there was other fighter traffic at low altitude investigating the AAV. As he approached approximately 15nm from the AAV descending through approximately 15,000 feet, he could see a water disturbance in the ocean surface. He recalled that the sea state was low (calm). At approximately 5-10 nm away from the AAV, the controller told him to \"skip it\" and return to his operating area. Since he was close he elected to fly over the water disturbance to try and see what was causing it.\nThe disturbance appeared to be 50 to 100 meters in diameter and close to round. It was the only area and type of whitewater activity that could be seen and reminded him of images of something rapidly submerging from the surface like a submarine or ship sinking. It also looked like a possible area of shoal water where the swell was breaking over a barely submerged reef or island. He overflew the disturbance and turned back to the northwest. As he was flying away he could see the disturbance clearing and could no longer identify the place where it occurred. He did not see any object or vessel associated with the disturbance either above the surface, on the surface, or below the surface. He also never made visual contact with the other fighter aircraft that were vectored to the location or the AAV. It is possible that the disturbance was being caused by an AAV but that the AAV was 'cloaked' or invisible to the human eye.\nAAP Person 9 recovered aboard the Nimitz at approximately 1200L. He reported to the Carrier Intelligence Center (CVIC) and was asked by his Intelligence Officer, 1843(a)(2) if he saw the \"supersonic Tic Tac\"? We questioned now 1843(a)(2) to determine if he had any further information but based on his position in CVIC at the time he was not involved in any further discussions concerning the AAV.\n1843(a)(2) He and 1843(a)(2) were in the lead aircraft of the first F/A-18F section airborne that day from VFA-41, 1843(a)(2) The flight walked, started and launched with no issue. They completed their departure from the USS Nimitz and flew to the working area to conduct the training portion of the flight. After they completed their training the E-2C controller handed them off to the USS Princeton 1843(a)(2) where they received vectors via Bearing Range Altitude Aspect (BRAA) to an unknown contact flying into the working area from the 1843(a)(2) south. [REDACTED] asked what ordnance they had on board. 1843(a)(2) told [REDACTED] control that 1843(a)(2) they had two captive training AIM-9Ms (CATM-9) and no other ordnance. The flight descended to between 20-24,000 feet and proceeded to the contact. 1843(a)(2) did not recall any indications via on-board sensor of the object. Their aircraft was not carrying a Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) pod onboard. As 1843(a)(2) remembers it, the radar Attack Display was clean (no targets).\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 27"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) were attempting acquire the object visually as they heard \"merge plot\" from [REDACTED] According to 1843(a)(2) the first indication he had of the unknown contact was a visual of a disturbance on the water below the AAV. As he scanned the area he gained a visual on the object. It is important to note that when asked to describe the disturbance on the water he stated that it was localized underneath the object, did not appear as a trail or wake, and looked like frothy waves and foam almost as if the water was boiling.\nAt this point 1843(a)(2) detached 1843(a)(2) which held at approximately 20,000 feet, and 1843(a)(2) descended to between 12-16,000 feet. 1843(a)(2) attempted a \"helmet lock\" that was unsuccessful. It is important to note that 1843(a)(2) was using the Joint Helmet Mounted Cuing System which will cue the aircraft sensors such as the radar to 'lock on' to what the pilot is looking at and it also has a recording capability. It may have been useful in this situation but typically because of the large amount of head movement it is not practical. [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] stated that the helmet's recording capability was rarely used therefore he did not think to use it that day.\n1843(a)(2) communicated what they were seeing with [REDACTED] control and said that he had a 1843(a)(2) running dialogue on the interflight radio with 1843(a)(2) stated that the object was \"holding like a Harrier.\" (Referring to the AV-8B jet aircraft, which is capable of hovering and Vertical/Short Takeoff and Landing (V/STOL) via thrust vectoring.) According to [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) the object's shape was like an elongated egg or a 'Tic Tac' and had a discernable midline horizontal axis. However, the object was uniformly white across the entire body. It was approximately 46 feet in length. 1843(a)(2) described it as \"solid white, smooth, with no edges. It was uniformly colored with no nacelles, pylons, or wings.\" When asked to describe the appearance, if it glowed or reflected sunlight he said, \"neither, it looked like it had a white candy-coated shell, almost like a white board.\" His report differs from 1843(a)(2) in that he reported the object traveling level at approximately 500-1000 feet at approximately 500 knots.\nThe object was pointed in a north/south orientation and was moving both north & south and east & west, while maintaining a consistent altitude. These displacements, according to 1843(a)(2) were minor. 1843(a)(2) stated he then began a descent with the intention to take a close aboard pass with the object in an attempt to visually identify it. They began the decent as they rolled in from about 10,000 ft and approximately 350 knots to take the object close aboard. 1843(a)(2) pulled nose on and then pulled trail (aft) of the object. As they were maneuvering, the object appeared, according to 1843(a)(2) \"to recognize us.\" He assessed this from the fact the object \"pointed\" (realigned its axis) in the direction of their aircraft. At this time, according to [REDACTED] the disturbance on the water ceased.\nAs they completed this maneuver, the object ascended quickly and pulled lift vector on and aft of them at a supersonic speed. 1843(a)(2) commanded the radar through the Short Range radar set and asked for a picture from 1843(a)(2) initially reported that the \"picture was clean\" (no contact) but then stated \"you're not going to believe this, it's at your CAP\" meaning that the AAV had flown to their training CAP, which was located in the southern end of the training area and had climbed to approximately 24,000 feet. 1843(a)(2) stated that the flight attempted to locate both the object and the disturbance with no success. 1843(a)(2) stated that nothing was seen on the surface or subsurface and that there were no indications of the previous disturbance.\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 28"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Following the engagement, the flight rejoined and returned to the USS Nimitz. When asked how the jets functioned and if there was any indications of a system malfunction, he stated that, \"the jets were brand new, less than 100 hrs on them. They were working perfectly.\" 1843(a)(2) when asked, said that all aircraft systems were functional. That there were no mission computer issues or avionics issues and that there was no radio or communication interference and that they had entry into the Link-16 network. When asked, 1843(a)(2) couldn't confirm any physiological or psychological feelings that were out of the ordinary.\n1843(a)(2) was a member of VFA-41 and was the 1843(a)(2) flying with 1843(a)(2) They were a part of the second F/A-18F section airborne that day from VFA-41. Their flight launched following the 1843(a)(2) flight. The crews spoke with each other in the paraloft, discussed the object and that the flights were scheduled for the same working area. 1843(a)(2) flight told 1843(a)(2) flight what they saw and to try to see and record what they could.\nThere were no clouds and there was a discernable horizon. The time was approximately 1500L. All on board systems were functioning normally. The radar was in a standard search mode (RWS/ 80NM/ 4bar/ intr) and the FLIR was in L+S slave (the FLIR would point in direction of an L+S track). There was no radio or communication interference and they had entry into the Link-16 network. Initial awareness of an object came via the radar. According to the radar display, the initial tracks were at approximately 30-40 nm to the south of the aircraft. 1843(a)(2) was controlling the radar and FLIR and attempted multiple times to transition the radar to Single Target Track (STT) mode on the object. The radar could not take a lock, the b-sweep would raster around the hit, build an initial aspect vector (which never stabilized) and then would drop and continue normal RWS b-sweep. When asked, 1843(a)(2) stated that there were no jamming cues (strobe, champagne bubbles, \"any normal EA indications\"). It \"just appeared as if the radar couldn't hack it.\" The radar couldn't receive enough information to create a single target track file. The FLIR, in L+S slave, pointed in the direction of the initial track flies as the radar attempted lock. The FLIR showed an object at 0 ATA and approximately -5 deg elevation (Figure 9). According to 1843(a)(2) \"the target was best guess co-altitude or a few thousand feet below,\" estimating the object to be between 15-20 thousand feet. The object, according to the FLIR, appeared stationary (Figure 10). There was no discernable movement from the object with the only closure being a result of the aircraft's movement. As 1843(a)(2) watched the object it began to move out of FLIR field of view to the left. 1843(a)(2) made no attempt to slew the FLIR and subsequently lost situational awareness to the object. The Flight continued with training mission with no further contact with object.\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 29"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 9. FLIR in 'White Hot' Mode\nFigure 10. FLIR in \"Black Hot\" mode\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 30"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) was clear in that he couldn't confirm that it was the same object as described by\n1843(a)(2) flight. He never had visual, only seeing the object via the FLIR. He reaffirmed that all systems were functional. Following completion of the training portion, the section returned to the ship for a normal approach, landing and shutdown. The crew met in CVIC and debriefed. 1843(a)(2) said that the CIVC section attempted to collect his tapes but he refused.\nThey proceeded to their ready room where they debriefed with 1843(a)(2) and his flight. Copies of the tapes were made with a set being turned into the intelligence section. [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) was not asked to sign any non-disclosure agreement and he is uncertain how far up the chain the reporting went past his commanding officer. When asked 1843(a)(2) couldn't confirm any physiological or psychological feelings that were out of the ordinary. He only expressed a feeling of confusion during the event.\nAccording to former 1843(a)(2) now a civilian working for 1843(a)(2) who was a 1843(a)(2) onboard the Louisville in November 2004 during the AAV activity there were no unidentified sonar contacts in the vicinity of the aerial sightings or anytime during the operations off the coast of California. The former 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) confirmed that there was no anomalous undersea activity during this period. There was a live fire exercise conducted by the USS Louisville during the period of and in the vicinity of the AAV sightings; however, the weapon in use did not match the flight profile or visible characteristics of the AAV. Additionally any live fire would have been coordinated throughout the CSG and all air traffic would have been well aware of the launch and operation of the weapon system. Aircraft would not have been vectored for the intercept of a US Weapon in flight. Based on the lack of detection of any unidentified sonar contacts it is highly unlikely that an AAV operated below the surface of the ocean; it is possible that the AAV demonstrated the ability to be cloaked or invisible to the human eye based on pilot reporting of the water disturbance with no visible craft. Based on the assessment of 1843(a)(2) if the AAV did operate underwater undetected it would represent a highly advanced capability given the advanced capability of our sensors.\nKey Assessments According to DIA Report\n• The Anomalous Aerial Vehicle (AAV) was no known aircraft or air vehicle currently in the inventory of the United States or any foreign nation.\n• The AAV exhibited advanced low observable characteristics at multiple radar bands rendering US radar based engagement capabilities ineffective.\n• The AAV exhibited advanced aerodynamic performance with no visible control surfaces and no visible means to generate lift.\n• The AAV exhibited advanced propulsion capability by demonstrating the ability to remain stationary with little to no variation in altitude transitioning to horizontal and/or vertical velocities far greater than any known aerial vehicle with little to no visible signature.\n• The AAV possibly demonstrated the ability to 'cloak' or become invisible to the human eye or human observation.\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 31"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The AAV possibly demonstrated a highly advanced capability to operate undersea completely undetectable by our most advanced sensors. The so called \"Tic Tac\" incident has many physics and engineering aspects that may be studied with regards to understanding the performance capabilities and propulsion mechanisms of the craft. Since there was little hard data, most analyses of the incident had to be made using either parametric studies or assumptions based on eye witness testimony.\n4.1.1 Analytical Solutions of Velocities and Accelerations Associated with \"Tic Tac\" Performance\nAn initial starting point consisted of using basic physics formulas for the calculation of velocities and accelerations based on the distance s the object traveled and the duration time t of the incident. Since no exact duration was known, as the radar operator noted that it occurred in a matter of \"seconds,\" a parametric range from 0.5 seconds to 10 seconds was studied (assuming instantaneous velocities and accelerations).\nv = ds/dt\na = dv/dt\nFlight is classified in six categories as shown in the table below.\nTable 1. Mach Regimes\nRegime | Subsonic | Transonic | Sonic | Supersonic | Hypersonic | High-hypersonic | Re-entry Speeds\nMach Number | < 1.0 | 0.8 – 1.2 | 1.0 | 1.0 – 5.0 | 5.0 – 10.0 | 10.0 – 25.0 | > 25.0\nDue to the lack of data, only the instantaneous velocity of the craft v and the instantaneous acceleration a, were computable. For the velocity and deceleration witnessed, a negative sign is implied to represent the direction component of the vector.\nAssumptions:\n1. Elevation of 60,000 ft to Sea Level – It was reported by radar observation the object descended from approximately 60,000 ft to sea level in a matter of seconds.\n2. Matter of Seconds – A range of 0.5 seconds to 10 seconds was used for a parametric study.\n4.1.2 Summary of Analytical Velocity and Acceleration Solutions\nTable 2 provides the computed values of instantaneous velocities and decelerations in ft/s and mph and ft/sec² and g respectively for each chosen Δt. Figure 11 through Figure 14 show\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 32"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"non-continuous plots for velocity and acceleration in each unit for a specific Δt event duration. As one may observe from the table and graphs, extremely small and small duration times specifically between 0.5 and 5 seconds provide high velocities and accelerations. Most of the values in the table represent extraordinary velocities and all fall between hypersonic and re-entry speed Mach regimes. Acceleration values also show a very high number of g.\nAn examination of Table 2 at a Δt of 5.0 sec reveals the average velocity of the craft was 12,000 ft/sec (8,182 mph or Mach 10.7). A very high deceleration value is also witnessed at 2400 ft/sec² or 75 g. These are extraordinarily high values and would require some form of acceleration manipulation to limit what a human pilot would experience and be able to survive.\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 33"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 2. Velocities and Accelerations of Tic Tac for Parametric Time Durations of Event\nΔs 60000 feet\nΔs 11.36364 miles\nΔt (sec) | V (ft/s) | v (mph) | Mach Number | a (ft/s²) | a (g)\n0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 32.2 | 1\n0.5 | 120,000 | 81,818 | 107.5 | 240,000 | 7,453\n1.0 | 60,000 | 40,909 | 53.7 | 60,000 | 1,863\n1.5 | 40,000 | 27,273 | 35.8 | 26,667 | 828\n2.0 | 30,000 | 20,455 | 26.9 | 15,000 | 466\n2.5 | 24,000 | 16,364 | 21.5 | 9,600 | 298\n3.0 | 20,000 | 13,636 | 17.9 | 6,667 | 207\n3.5 | 17,143 | 11,688 | 15.4 | 4,898 | 152\n4.0 | 15,000 | 10,227 | 13.4 | 3,750 | 116\n4.5 | 13,333 | 9,091 | 11.9 | 2,963 | 92\n5.0 | 12,000 | 8,182 | 10.7 | 2,400 | 75\n5.5 | 10,909 | 7,438 | 9.8 | 1,983 | 62\n6.0 | 10,000 | 6,818 | 9.0 | 1,667 | 52\n6.5 | 9,231 | 6,294 | 8.3 | 1,420 | 44\n7.0 | 8,571 | 5,844 | 7.7 | 1,224 | 38\n7.5 | 8,000 | 5,455 | 7.2 | 1,067 | 33\n8.0 | 7,500 | 5,114 | 6.7 | 938 | 29\n8.5 | 7,059 | 4,813 | 6.3 | 830 | 26\n9.0 | 6,667 | 4,545 | 6.0 | 741 | 23\n9.5 | 6,316 | 4,306 | 5.7 | 665 | 21\n10.0 | 6,000 | 4,091 | 5.4 | 600 | 19\n1 Computed using the speed of sound at sea level under standard conditions\n2 Standard acceleration due to gravity\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 34"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tic Tac Parametric Velocities for Selected Times of Event Duration\n(Points are Not Continuous)\n140000\n120000\n100000\n80000\n60000\n40000\n20000\n0\nVelocity (ft/second)\n0.0\n1.0\n2.0\n3.0\n4.0\n5.0\n6.0\n7.0\n8.0\n9.0\n10.0\nTime (seconds)\nFigure 11. Tic Tac Parametric Velocities for Selected Times of Event Duration in ft/sec\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 35"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tic Tac Parametric Velocities for Selected Times of Event Duration\n(Points are Not Continuous)\n90000\n80000\n70000\n60000\n50000\n40000\n30000\n20000\n10000\n0\nVelocity (mph)\n0.0\n1.0\n2.0\n3.0\n4.0\n5.0\n6.0\n7.0\n8.0\n9.0\n10.0\nTime (seconds)\nFigure 12. Tic Tac Parametric Velocities for Selected Times of Event Duration in mph\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 36"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tic Tac Parametric Accelerations for Selected Times of Event Duration\n(Points are Not Continuous)\n1000000\n100000\n10000\n1000\n100\n10\n1\nAcceleration (ft/second²)\n0.0\n1.0\n2.0\n3.0\n4.0\n5.0\n6.0\n7.0\n8.0\n9.0\n10.0\nTime (seconds)\nFigure 13. Tic Tac Parametric Accelerations for Selected Times of Event Duration in ft/sec²\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 37"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tic Tac Parametric Accelerations for Selected Times of Event Duration\n(Points are Not Continuous)\n10,000\n1,000\n100\n10\n1\nAcceleration (g)\n0.0\n1.0\n2.0\n3.0\n4.0\n5.0\n6.0\n7.0\n8.0\n9.0\n10.0\nTime (seconds)\nFigure 14. Tic Tac Parametric Accelerations for Selected Times of Event Duration in g\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 38"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4.1.3 Numerical Analysis of Compressible Flow\n\nCompressible fluid flow analyses were performed to visualize the steady state pressure, temperature and Mach number contours around two craft shapes (\"Tic Tac\" and right circular cylinder). The use of compressible fluid flow and modeling of air as an ideal gas assumed the aerodynamics over the craft were not being controlled or modified through other means.\n\nSteady state solutions for pressure, temperature and Mach number contours around both a \"Tic Tac\" shape and a right circular cylinder were obtained under subsonic, supersonic and mixed conditions. The CFX module was capable of solving the three dimensional unsteady Navier–Stokes equations in their conservation form as shown below in Cartesian coordinates in the x, y and z directions numerically. For the steady state solutions, the transient terms were unchanging and fall out of the equations below.\n\nMomentum:\n\nρ(∂u/∂t + u∂u/∂x + v∂u/∂y + w∂u/∂z) = −∂p/∂x + μ(∂²u/∂x² + ∂²u/∂y² + ∂²u/∂z²) + ρg_x\nρ(∂v/∂t + u∂v/∂x + v∂v/∂y + w∂v/∂z) = −∂p/∂y + μ(∂²v/∂x² + ∂²v/∂y² + ∂²v/∂z²) + ρg_y\nρ(∂w/∂t + u∂w/∂x + v∂w/∂y + w∂w/∂z) = −∂p/∂z + μ(∂²w/∂x² + ∂²w/∂y² + ∂²w/∂z²) + ρg_z.\n\nContinuity:\n\n∂ρ/∂t + ∂(ρu)/∂x + ∂(ρv)/∂y + ∂(ρw)/∂z = 0.\n\nEnergy:\n\n[½v₁² + gz₁ + ε₁ + p₁/ρ₁] ρ₁A₁v₁Δt + [½v₂² + gz₂ + ε₂ + p₂/ρ₂] ρ₂A₂v₂Δt = 0\n\nwhere:\n\nA – Area (m²)\ng – gravitational acceleration (9.8 m/s²)\ng_x – x directional component of gravitational acceleration\ng_y – y directional component of gravitational acceleration\ng_z – z directional component of gravitational acceleration\nε – specific internal energy (J/kg)\nρ – density of the fluid (kg/m³)\nμ – dynamic viscosity of the fluid (Pa·s)\np – pressure (Pa)\nt – time (sec)\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 39"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"u – x velocity (m/s)\nv – y velocity (m/s)\nw – z velocity (m/s)\nx – x coordinate\ny – y coordinate\nz – z coordinate\n\nThe following sections provide steady state pressure, temperature and Mach number contours over the \"Tic Tac\" and right circular cylinder for velocities of 700 mph and 1500 mph with an environmental air temperature of 223 K (-58°F). Attachment II and Attachment III show contours for subsonic speeds below 700 mph and supersonic increments between 700 mph and 1500 mph for the \"Tic Tac\" and a right circular cylinder respectively. A comparison of the profiles of the \"Tic Tac\" geometry and that of a right circular cylinder was performed due to other numerous reports of craft with similar capabilities but lacking curvature at the ends of the craft. A flat 90° surface moving through the air would be expected to cause greater resistance during flight.\n\nAssumptions:\n\n1. Elevation of 30,000 ft – It was reported by radar observation the object descended from approximately 60,000 ft to sea level in a matter of seconds. An average Δs is computed by:\n\nΔs = (s2 – s1)/2 = (60,000ft – 0ft)/2 = 30,000ft\n\n2. Ambient Air Temperature of 223 K (-58F) – An approximate ambient environmental temperature of 223 K was chosen in accordance with an average elevation in the range of 30,000 ft (which varies with weather conditions) as a starting point for computational investigations.\n\n3. Air Modeled as an Ideal Gas – Air Temperature, pressure and density are all interdependent and are given by the relationship of the ideal gas law:\n\np = ρR_uT/M\n\nwhere:\n\nR_u – Gas Constant (8.314472 m³·Pa·K⁻¹·mol⁻¹)\nM – Molar Mass (g/mol)\nT – Temperature (K)\n\nSince the temperature and density of air decreases with altitude, so does the speed of sound, hence a given true velocity results in a higher Mach number at higher altitudes. The slice used for the contours was taken axially for each geometric configuration. Reports from aircrew on sight indicate the object flew in a horizontal position. A 0° angle of attack was used in all cases to try to replicate observed flight conditions.\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 40"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 15. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nFigure 16. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 41"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 17. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nFigure 18. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 42"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 19. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nFigure 20. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 43"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 21. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nFigure 22. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 44"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 23. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nFigure 24. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 45"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 25. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1500 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\n4.1.4 Summary and Conclusions of Compressible Numerical Analyses\n\nIn the field of UAP studies, it is believed this preliminary analysis of the \"Tic Tac\" incident is the first of its kind to utilize a multi-industry standard FEA code to perform computational studies. The cases used are provided as a basic demonstration of the CFX fluid flow module and illustrate some of its capabilities, as well as a sample of some visualization tools.\n\n4.1.4.1 \"Tic Tac\" Geometry\n\nFor the contour plots of pressure, temperature from 100 mph up to 500 mph, gradual increases in values are observed, with the most significant value change at the front of the object. The Mach number values increase at the front sides of the object. Disturbance of air flow is witnessed in the pressure and Mach contour profiles around the body.\n\nNearing the speed of sound at 700 mph, contours for pressure and Mach number started to show a more pronounced shock as would be expected. Temperature values also showed a higher increase at the front nose due to higher flow and air resistance over the body. Velocities higher than 700 mph showed a drastic difference in values compared to those at 100 mph with pressure differences in orders of magnitude. At 1,100 mph, the temperature rises not only at the attack nose, but started to even increase on the sides and in the wakes of air flow. Detached shock waves were witnessed in the pressure and Mach contours starting at 700 mph all the way up to 1,500 mph.\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 46"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4.1.4.2 Circular Cylinder Geometry\n\nIt would seem counter intuitive to have a craft with a flat face pushing through the air due to a major increase in air resistance. However, there have been many reports of objects of just the sort seen maneuvering in the skies. A comparison of the detrimental aerodynamic effects was sought in relation to the smoother edged body.\n\nAt lower speeds, no large differences in values of pressures, temperatures or Mach numbers were observed. There were, however, slight differences in the location and profiles of the values of the \"Tic Tac\" geometry compared to the cylinder. None of these differences would indicate a drastic difference in conventional lift performance between the two geometries. The same appeared to hold true for higher speed scenarios, indicating no significantly different aerodynamic lift advantages between the two geometries.\n\n4.1.4.3 Outcome\n\nSuccess was achieved in implementing the ANSYS Multiphysics and SolidWorks Solid modeling program to create and run input cases for compressible fluid flow over both the \"Tic Tac\" geometry and that of a right circular cylinder to illustrate pressure, temperature and Mach contour profiles over both shapes. Separated shockwaves were witnessed in higher velocity cases indicating that the possibility of a sonic boom or vibration may have been perturbated into the environment. The actual propagation distance of these was not of interest in this study and may be looked at in the future. It is doubtful the aircrew would have felt a shock wave in the cockpit unless extremely close to the object while traveling at high rates of speed, which the fighter jets were not. These basic geometries and assumptions helped provide an excellent starting point to create more complex transient cases that possibly incorporate heat generation, electromagnetic effects, and acoustics. This is demonstrated in a basic model that FEA algorithms describing multiphysics can provide to be an invaluable tool in gaining insight into UAP flight characteristics and even possibly rule out improbable scenarios.\n\n4.1.5 Numerical Analysis of Incompressible Flow of a UAP Entering Water\n\nThe problem studied was that of a solid disc shaped object descending through the air into a body of liquid. The model created, details the descent of a solid disc shaped UAP into water. It is assumed normal ambient conditions with a solid steel disc moving at a speed of 5 m/s in the negative y (downward) direction. The water surface is approximately 10 feet below the bottom of the UAP. Water and air temperatures are held at constant at 25°C and the gravitational acceleration constant at 9.81 m/s². Ambient pressure was a constant 1 atm, buoyancy effects within the water were accounted for and the UAP was taken to be isothermal (no heat transfer between the system and the surroundings). Three distinct phases were created; a gaseous phase (air), the solid phase (UAP) and the liquid phase (water). Figure 26 displays the three dimensional geometry depicting the distinct regions and boundaries.\n\nThe geometry was completed, and the necessary mesh was created in order to carry out the FEA analysis. Meshing is the discretization of a continuous domain into a set of discrete sub-domains called elements and is shown Figure 27. The governing equations were then solved for all\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 47"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"elements within the domain. The accuracy of the solution increases with increasing number of elements (refining of the mesh).\n\nTypically, meshes are refined near domain borders or other places of interest; specifically where the solution is desired (for example the edge of solid object where it is desired to determine the amount of heat loss from the object). The solid UAP body was more refined than the air and water domains because it was of primary importance to study fluid flow around the UAP and not the flow of air/water further away from the solid domain. A close-up view of the refined mesh in the solid UAP domain is seen in Figure 28.\n\nOnce the mesh was generated, then boundary and initial conditions were assigned to replicate approximate physical conditions during the event. As the name implies, boundary conditions are exact solutions to differential equations that exist on the outskirts of the different geometries. These conditions must be met if the solution is to be correctly determined. Initial conditions are time dependent relationships that describe the initial state of the problem. Thermophysical data must be defined for each domain. The governing equations include the properties of the materials involved (cp, μ, etc.) and an accurate analysis depends as much on the proper accounting of these properties as on the proper identification of boundary conditions.\n\nBoundary conditions on the solid UAP edges were set as a no slip surface. A no slip boundary sets the fluid velocity at 0. That is to say that a fluid coming in contact with the surface will not move (not slip). This is a typical boundary condition used when a fluid comes in contact with a solid body. In addition, the outside walls of the boundary were set as no slip. It was assumed that the walls were located far enough away from the UAP-water impact zone to play no part in determination of fluid movement around the solid UAP body.\n\nThermophysical data was determined by material identification within the problem setup. The UAP was defined as being made of steel, the liquid body was set as water and the gaseous body was set to air. The initial velocity for the UAP was 0 m/s, that is to say the UAP initially starts at rest. Total simulation time was set to 10 seconds with 0.2 seconds per time step (for a total of 50 time steps).\n\n4.1.6 Numerical Analysis of Incompressible Flow of a UAP Entering Water Results\n\nUpon completion of the simulation; an output file was created and stored for use in the post processing portion of Workbench called CFX-Post. Once the output file has been imported to CFX-Post; a variety of results may be obtained. For this investigation, a fluid dynamic analysis was performed. To best view the results; a plane (parallel to the y axis) was created to bisect the geometry (see Figure 29).\n\nThe creation of a plane contained within the geometry allows for easy analysis of the solution. CFX-Post was used to determine the velocities of the air and water fluid domain, the pressure of the system and through examination of the volume fraction of water; a recreation of the appearance of a solid entering the water. An animated representation of the transient results was created in an effort to understand how the trends in the specified variable change over time. Figure 30 displays a still image of an animated result showing how the volume fraction of water changed as the UAP descended into the water domain.\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 48"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Manipulation of the created plane view allowed for a two dimensional analysis for a variety of parameters. Figure 31 displays a still frame of the animation depicting how pressure varied throughout geometry.\n\nFigure 31 displayed the expected trend of an increasing pressure with increasing depth. A re-creation of the physical appearance of the UAP impacting and descending into water may be achieved through analysis of the transient animated results of volume fraction of water. Figure 32 displays a still shot of this animation after the UAP has impacted and entered the water domain.\n\nThe radially expanding concentric circles display the resulting ripple effect after the solid has penetrated through the surface of the water. Figure 33 displays a side view of the same result. The original result animations from which the still screenshots (Figure 29 through Figure 33) were taken are provided in .mpeg form. In addition to the preceding results, several animations depicting transient trends of fluid density and fluid velocity have been provided.\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 49"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 26. Solid Three Dimensional Geometry of Disc and Water\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 50"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 27. Solid Three Dimensional Geometry Mesh of Disc and Water\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 51"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 28. Solid Three Dimensional Geometry Mesh of UAP Disc\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 52"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 29. User Generated Cut Analysis Plane\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 53"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 30. Animated Result, Fluid 2 Volume Fraction\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 54"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 31. Total Pressure Around UAP\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 55"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 32. Water Surface Effects From Solid Impact\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 56"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 33. Water Surface Effects From Solid Impact (Side View)\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 57"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4.1.7 Summary and Conclusions of Numerical Analysis of Incompressible Flow of a UAP Entering Water Results\n\nThe CFX-Post generated graphs and animations are illustrative samples of what ANSYS CFX is capable of producing. The scenario was chosen due to its simple geometry, boundary conditions and relative ease of computational requirements. A typical problem of this type when solved by hand, would have taken weeks if not longer. This simulation incorporated a fluid dynamic analysis and further analysis may incorporate numerous other multiphysics attributes in the study of UAP. Heat transfer from a craft entering the earth's atmosphere as well as the effects of varying craft size, shape and speed on wave generation during water impact could be studied just as easily. In addition to determining power requirements, achieved surface temperatures etc., recreations of eyewitness sightings may be.\n\nFurthermore, electromagnetic capabilities allow for modeling of possible magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) affects. Electrodynamics can show the energy required to create magnetic fields with different materials as well as the propagation of electromagnetic waves through solid and liquid mediums. Using careful design and properties of human tissue in the program it would be possible to show effects on the human body from heat and high electric fields. Effects, such as increase in body temperature or nervous system interruption may be able to be quantified in ANSYS. This tool can greatly assist in the goal of studying human effects to reverse engineer UAP technology.\n\n4.2 ANALYSES OF SPHERICAL UAPS\n\n4.2.1 Acoustical Analysis of a Spherical USO\n\nOver the years, there have also been numerous reports USOs. In 1967, a UFO was reported crashing into Shag Harbour, Nova Scotia. It was reported that hovering and flashing orange lights were present, then it tilted at about a 45 degree angle and entered the water. A yellow light was seen in the water moving and leaving a trail of yellow foam. The Canadian Coast Guard was dispatched but by the time they arrived along with other vessels at the point of entry the yellow foam was all that remained.\n\nThis is one of very few cases where governmental agency documents have formally declared an unidentified flying object was involved. At least eleven people saw a low-flying lit object head down towards the harbor. Multiple witnesses reported hearing a whistling sound \"like a bomb,\" then a \"whoosh,\" and finally a loud bang. Some reported a flash of light as the object entered the water. Several interviewed military witnesses, including a diver involved in an attempted recovery, have claimed an alien spacecraft was responsible. It was also claimed by several of the witnesses that the U.S. military was involved in recovery attempts. The case was also briefly investigated by the [REDACTED] UFO study, which offered no explanation.\n\nIt has been proposed that this type of craft may operate using some sort of electromagnetic frequency based propulsion system to control underwater \"flight\" and to achieve incredible performance capabilities in velocity and acceleration.\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 58"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The three-dimensional acoustic wave equation is given below in the second order partial differential equation:\n\n∂²p/∂x² + ∂²p/∂y² + ∂²p/∂z² - (1/c²)∂²p/∂t² = 0\n\nand\n\nc = √(B_a/ρ)\n\nwhere\n\nB_a – adiabatic bulk modulus (Pa)\nc – speed of sound in medium (m/s)\np – pressure (Pa)\nt – time (sec)\nρ – density of medium (kg/m³)\nx – x coordinate\ny – y coordinate\nz – z coordinate\n\nThe following solutions are obtained by separation of variables in different coordinate systems. Phasor solutions result, that is they have an implicit time-dependence factor of e^(iωt) where ω = 2πf is the angular frequency. The explicit time dependence is given by:\n\np(r,t,k) = Real [p(r,k)e^(iωt)]\n\nHere k = ω/c is the wave number and r is the displacement vector.\n\nIn Cartesian coordinates and Cylindrical coordinates respectively:\n\np(r,k) = Ae^(±ikr)\np(r,k) = AH₀⁽¹⁾(kr) + BH₀⁽²⁾(kr)\n\nwhere the asymptotic approximations to the Hankel functions, when kr → ∞, are\n\nH₀⁽¹⁾(kr) ≃ √(2/(πkr)) e^(i(kr−π/4))\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 59"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"H_0^{(2)}(kr) ≃ √(2/(πkr)) e^{-i(kr-π/4)}\n\nand in Spherical coordinates:\n\np(r, k) = (A/r) e^{±ikr}\n\nDepending on the chosen Fourier convention, one of these represents an outward traveling wave (real) and the other an unphysical inward travelling wave (imaginary).\n\nAssuming USOs operate on a frequency driven system, an ANSYS Multiphysics 1/100th scale ¼ symmetry Acoustical full harmonic analyses was performed to study a spherical object of 10 m in both air and water for a range of frequencies at standard conditions. Provided below are contour plots for the real, imaginary and magnitude components of pressure and plots for pressure as a function of radius in Pa.\n\nTable 3. Properties of Water Used for ANSYS Harmonic Analyses\n\nProperty | Value\nWater Density | 1,000 kg/m3\nSpeed of Sound | 1,500 m/s\nReference Pressure | 1 x 10-6 Pa\n\nFigure 34 and Figure 35 show the FEA mesh for 25 elements per wavelength and 50 elements per wavelength for a 1,000 Hz analysis. Upon inspection of the maximum pressures shown in Figure 36 and Figure 37, it is apparent the FEA model solution was mesh independent with a pressure of 1,052 Pa for the 25 element per wavelength model and 1,103 Pa for the 50 element per wavelength model. Generally higher element models for meshes are considered more accurate, but a cost in computational time may be seen in extremely large models. In the runs performed, the 25 element per wavelength model showed sufficient accuracy and reasonable computation times. As frequency was adjusted higher, the elements per wavelength were adjusted down to limit element numbers.\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\t\tPage 60"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANSYS 12.1\nOCT 18 2010\n11:29:44\nPLOT NO. 1\nELEMENTS\nTYPE NUM\n\nZV =1\nDIST=2.75\nXF =2.5\nYF =2.5\nZ-BUFFER\n\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EEW=25\n\nFigure 34. Mesh Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\t\tPage 61"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANSYS 12.1\nOCT 18 2010\n11:37:27\nPLOT NO. 1\nELEMENTS\nTYPE NUM\n\nZV =1\nDIST=2.75\nXF =2.5\nYF =2.5\nZ-BUFFER\n\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EEW=50\n\nFigure 35. Mesh Plot for 1,000 Hz with 50 Elements per Wavelength in Water\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\t\tPage 62"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Plot of real part of pressure\n\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 18 2010\n11:11:14\nPLOT NO. 1\nNODAL SOLUTION\nSTEP=1\nSUB =1\nFREQ=1000\nREAL ONLY\nPRES\nSMN =-245.172\nSMX =1052\n-245.172\n-101.075\n43.023\n187.12\n331.218\n475.315\n619.413\n763.51\n907.607\n1052\n\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EEW=25\n\nFigure 36. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz with 50 Elements per Wavelength in Water\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\t\tPage 63"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Plot of real part of pressure\n\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 18 2010\n11:13:11\nPLOT NO. 1\nNODAL SOLUTION\nSTEP=1\nSUB =1\nFREQ=1000\nREAL ONLY\nPRES\nSMN =-258.244\nSMX =1103\n-258.244\n-107.019\n44.206\n195.432\n346.657\n497.883\n649.108\n800.333\n951.559\n1103\n\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EEW=50\n\nFigure 37. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz with 50 Elements per Wavelength in Water\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\t\tPage 64"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPlot of imag part of pressure\nY\nX\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 18 2010\n11:23:52\nPLOT NO. 1\nNODAL SOLUTION\nSTEP=1\nSUB =1\nFREQ=1000\nIMAGINARY\nPRES\nDMX =.796E-06\nSMN =-379.298\nSMX =2512\n-379.298\n-58.087\n263.124\n584.335\n905.546\n1227\n1548\n1869\n2190\n2512\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EPW=25\nFigure 38. Contour Plot of Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 65"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPlot of magnitude of pressure\nY\nX\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 18 2010\n11:27:50\nPLOT NO. 1\nNODAL SOLUTION\nSTEP=9999\nPRES\nDMX =.796E-06\nSMN =53.631\nSMX =2723\n53.631\n350.217\n646.804\n943.39\n1240\n1537\n1833\n2130\n2426\n2723\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EPW=25\nFigure 39. Contour Plot of the Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 66"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPlot of magnitude of pressure\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 18 2010\n16:14:00\nPLOT NO. 1\nRADSPATH(1,2)\nANSYS\nTheory\nZV =1\nDIST=.75\nXF =.5\nYF =.5\nZF =.5\nZ-BUFFER\nReal Pressure (Pa)\n1600\n1400\n1200\n1000\n800\n600\n400\n200\n0\n-200\n-400\n0 1 2 3 4 5\n.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5\nRadial Distance (m)\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EPW=25\nFigure 40. Steady State Real Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 67"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPlot of magnitude of pressure\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 18 2010\n16:46:24\nPLOT NO. 1\nRADSPATH(1,4)\nANSYS\nTheory\nZV =1\nDIST=.75\nXF =.5\nYF =.5\nZF =.5\nZ-BUFFER\nImaginary Pressure (Pa)\n3200\n2800\n2400\n2000\n1600\n1200\n800\n400\n0\n-400\n-800\n0 1 2 3 4 5\n.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5\nRadial Distance (m)\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EPW=25\nFigure 41. Steady State Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 68"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPlot of magnitude of pressure\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 18 2010\n16:51:57\nPLOT NO. 1\nRADSPATH(1,6)\nANSYS\nTheory\nZV =1\nDIST=.75\nXF =.5\nYF =.5\nZF =.5\nZ-BUFFER\nMagnitude of Pressure (Pa)\n4000\n3600\n3200\n2800\n2400\n2000\n1600\n1200\n800\n400\n0\n0 1 2 3 4 5\n.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5\nRadial Distance (m)\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EPW=25\nFigure 42. Steady State Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 1,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 69"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANSYS 12.1\nOCT 19 2010\n13:38:54\nPLOT NO. 1\nNODAL SOLUTION\nSTEP=1\nSUB =1\nFREQ=5000\nREAL ONLY\nPRES\nSMN =-2531\nSMX =6112\n-2531\n-1571\n-610.63\n349.68\n1310\n2270\n3231\n4191\n5151\n6112\nPlot of real part of pressure\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EEW=25\nFigure 43. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 70"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANSYS 12.1\nOCT 19 2010\n13:40:08\nPLOT NO. 1\nNODAL SOLUTION\nSTEP=1\nSUB =1\nFREQ=5000\nIMAGINARY\nPRES\nDMX =.159E-06\nSMN =-3558\nSMX =2950\n-3558\n-2835\n-2112\n-1389\n-665.799\n57.277\n780.352\n1503\n2227\n2950\nPlot of imag part of pressure\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EEW=25\nFigure 44. Contour Plot of Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 71"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANSYS 12.1\nOCT 19 2010\n13:41:37\nPLOT NO. 1\nNODAL SOLUTION\nSTEP=9999\nPRES\nDMX =.159E-06\nSMN =134.066\nSMX =6782\n134.066\n872.741\n1611\n2350\n3089\n3827\n4566\n5305\n6043\n6782\nPlot of magnitude of pressure\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EEW=25\nFigure 45. Contour Plot of the Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 72"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANSYS 12.1\nOCT 19 2010\n13:43:05\nPLOT NO. 1\nRADSPATH(1,2)\nANSYS\nTheory\nZV =1\nDIST=.75\nXF =.5\nYF =.5\nZF =.5\nZ-BUFFER\nReal Pressure (Pa)\nRadial Distance (m)\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EFW=25\nFigure 46. Steady State Real Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 73"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANSYS 12.1\nOCT 19 2010\n13:44:32\nPLOT NO. 1\nRADSPATH(1,4)\nANSYS\nTheory\nZV =1\nDIST=.75\nXF =.5\nYF =.5\nZF =.5\nZ-BUFFER\nImaginary Pressure (Pa)\nRadial Distance (m)\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EFW=25\nFigure 47. Steady State Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 74"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 19 2010\n13:45:52\nPLOT NO. 1\nRADSPATH(1,6)\nANSYS\nTheory\n\nZV =1\nDIST=.75\nXF =.5\nYF =.5\nZF =.5\nZ-BUFFER\n\nMagnitude of Pressure (Pa)\n8000\n7200\n6400\n5600\n4800\n4000\n3200\n2400\n1600\n800\n0\n0 1 2 3 4 5\n.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5\nRadial Distance (m)\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EPW=25\nFigure 48. Steady State Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 5,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 75"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPlot of real part of pressure\nY\nX\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 19 2010\n14:35:51\nPLOT NO. 1\nNODAL SOLUTION\nSTEP=1\nSUB =1\nFREQ=10000\nREAL ONLY\nPRES\nSMN =-4062\nSMX =7068\n-4062\n-2825\n-1588\n-351.705\n884.985\n2122\n3358\n4595\n5832\n7068\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EPW=25\nFigure 49. Contour Plot of Real Component of Pressure (Pa) for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 76"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPlot of imag part of pressure\nY\nX\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 19 2010\n14:42:28\nPLOT NO. 1\nNODAL SOLUTION\nSTEP=1\nSUB =1\nFREQ=10000\nIMAGINARY\nPRES\nDMX =.796E-07\nSMN =-5178\nSMX =3368\n-5178\n-4229\n-3279\n-2330\n-1380\n-430.686\n518.866\n1468\n2418\n3368\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EPW=25\nFigure 50. Contour Plot of Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 77"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPlot of magnitude of pressure\nY\nX\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 19 2010\n14:46:23\nPLOT NO. 1\nNODAL SOLUTION\nSTEP=9999\nPRES\nDMX =.796E-07\nSMN =144.249\nSMX =7267\n144.249\n935.643\n1727\n2518\n3310\n4101\n4893\n5684\n6475\n7267\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EPW=25\nFigure 51. Contour Plot of the Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 78"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPlot of magnitude of pressure\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 19 2010\n14:52:52\nPLOT NO. 1\nRADSPATH(1,2)\nANSYS\nTheory\n\nZV =1\nDIST=.75\nXF =.5\nYF =.5\nZF =.5\nZ-BUFFER\n\nReal Pressure (Pa)\n7500\n6250\n5000\n3750\n2500\n1250\n0\n-1250\n-2500\n-3750\n-5000\n0 1 2 3 4 5\n.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5\nRadial Distance (m)\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EPW=25\nFigure 52. Steady State Real Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 79"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPlot of magnitude of pressure\n4000\n3000\n2000\n1000\n0\n-1000\n-2000\n-3000\n-4000\n-5000\n-6000\nImaginary Pressure (Pa)\n0 1 2 3 4 5\n.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5\nRadial Distance (m)\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 19 2010\n14:54:25\nPLOT NO. 1\nRADSPATH(1,4)\nANSYS\nTheory\nZV =1\nDIST=.75\nXF =.5\nYF =.5\nZF =.5\nZ-BUFFER\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EFW-25\nFigure 53. Steady State Imaginary Component of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 80"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPlot of magnitude of pressure\n8000\n7200\n6400\n5600\n4800\n4000\n3200\n2400\n1600\n800\n0\nMagnitude of Pressure (Pa)\n0 1 2 3 4 5\n.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5\nRadial Distance (m)\nANSYS 12.1\nOCT 19 2010\n14:55:54\nPLOT NO. 1\nRADSPATH(1,6)\nANSYS\nTheory\nZV =1\nDIST=.75\nXF =.5\nYF =.5\nZF =.5\nZ-BUFFER\nUniformly Radiating Sphere, EFW-25\nFigure 54. Steady State Magnitude of Pressure (Pa) as a Function of Radial Distance (m) Plot for 10,000 Hz with 25 Elements per Wavelength in Water\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 81"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4.2.1.1 Summary and Conclusions of Acoustic Analyses\nA successful analysis of a USO was conducted using a full harmonic acoustics simulation. The plots of the real and imaginary values showed good agreement with the expected theoretical solutions. It may be concluded from the contour plots and graphs that the varying frequencies produce acoustics pressures far out from the actual source and decline in an inverse square law relationship. In the future, ships and submarines could possibly detect these pressure disturbances and a frequency of the mode of operation could be calculated with a known distance from the vessel.\n4.2.2 ANSYS Multiphysics Electromagnetic Capabilities\nThe electromagnetic capabilities of ANSYS Multiphysics include a full-wave electromagnetic solver applicable to resonant, propagating, radiation and scattering phenomena in the frequency domain. RF or microwave passive components, antennas, attenuators, interconnects and related high frequency structures may be modeled for use in applications of stealth, electronic warfare and directed high energy applications. Post-processing calculations provide electric and magnetic field intensity, quality factor, scattering matrix parameters, voltage, current, characteristic impedance, radar cross section, far and near electromagnetic fields beyond the modeled domain, antenna patterns, including period structures, and Joule losses (ANSYS, Inc., 2009). Magnetohydrodynamics may also be modeled in development of propulsion units and power generation, electron beam dynamics and electrical discharges. The Maxwell Equations below provide the basis for electromagnetic calculations.\n∇·D = ρe\n∇×H = J + ∂D/∂t\n∇×E = -∂B/∂t\n∇·B = 0\nwhere:\nB – magnetic induction field (tesla)\nD – displacement field (C/m²)\nE – electric field (V/m)\nH – magnetic field (A/m)\nJ – current density\nρe – charge density\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 82"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4.2.3 Radar Cross Section Analysis of a Spherical UFO\nMany UAP have been reported across the globe. Pilots have reported seeing these craft in the air, but when asked for confirmation of other aircraft in the area, air traffic control reports nothing on radar.\nOnly a tiny fraction of energy is bounced back to the receiving antenna, even though many megawatts of power may be transmitted in a single pulse. The amount of power returned from a target to the transmitting radar depends on four major factors:\n1. The power transmitted in the direction of the target.\n2. The amount of power that impacts the target and is reflected back in the direction of the antenna. This is directly relational to the range between the antenna and target and the target's RCS.\n3. The amount of reflected power that is received by the antenna.\n4. The length of time in which the antenna is pointed at the target.\nFigure 55. Factors that Determine the Energy Returned by a Target (Aerospaceweb.org , 2010)\nPower flux is used to describe the relationship between these variables. The further the radar wave travels, the greater the power transmitted decrease because it is spread over a larger area. The inverse square law of the range R or 1/R² governs the area over which the power is spread from the transmitting radar. The power flux or power density of the transmitted radar wave at the range of the target has a special name called the incident power density (Pincident).\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 83"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Power Density decreases by 1/R²\nA ∝ R²\nR\nPower reflected back to the radar depends on the power intercepted by the target and the target orientation\nReflected power also spreads equally as it returns to the radar\nFigure 56. Effect of Distance from the radar to the Target on the Power Density (Aerospaceweb.org , 2010)\nWhen the radar wave reaches the target, a portion is reflected back to the antenna. In addition, the reflected power also dissipates at 1/R² therefore it is reduced by a factor of 1/R⁴ roundtrip by the time it is returned to the antenna. The ability of a radar system to detect a target depends on whether the amount of power returned is great enough to be differentiated from internal noise, ground clutter, background radiation, and other sources of interference. This is defined as the signal to noise ratio. The object of stealth is to absorb or reflect waves away from receiving antenna and/or jam or propagate a false wave back to its source so that the target is nearly impossible to detect or track.\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 84"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The amount of power that is reflected back to the radar depends largely on a quantity called the radar cross section (RCS). RCS (σ) is technically an area and typically expressed in square meters (m²) and depends on the following three factors:\n\nGeometric cross section:\n\nThe area of the object presented to the antenna or projected area is known as the geometric cross section. The area varies depending on the angle, or aspect, seen by the radar. The geometric cross section (A) determines how much power transmitted by the radar (P_incident) is intercepted by the target (P_intercepted) according to the following equation:\n\nP_intercepted = AP_incident\n\nReflectivity:\n\nThe reflectivity is the fraction of the intercepted power that is reflected by the target, regardless of direction. An object doesn't always reflect equally from all directions as some parts are flat or curved producing varying radar reflection and some of the power is absorbed by the object. Objects that have radar Absorbent Materials (RAM) and radar Absorbent Structures (RAS) are designed using internal reflectors to trap incoming radar waves. The power received by the antenna after scattering or reflecting off the target is equal to the intercepted power less whatever portion of that power is absorbed by the target. The reflectivity is the ratio of power scattered by the target (P_scatter) to the power intercepted by the target (P_intercepted).\n\nReflectivity = P_scatter / AP_intercepted\n\nDirectivity:\n\nThe directivity is related to reflectivity but refers to the power scattered back in the direction of the receiving antenna. The power that is reflected toward the antenna is called the backscattered power (P_backscatter). Directivity is the ratio of the power that is backscattered in the direction of the antenna to the power that would have been scattered in that direction if the scattering were in fact uniform in all directions. Isotropic power (P_isotropic) is the power scattered in a perfect sphere over a unit solid angle of that sphere.\n\nDirectivity = P_backscatter / P_isotropic = P_backscatter / ((1/4π) P_scatter)\n\nThe reflected power will be much greater or much smaller than the isotropic power depending on how the target is oriented to the transmitting antenna. The directivity, therefore, will be much greater than 1 when the target returns a strong backscatter in the direction of the receiving antenna and much less than 1 when the backscatter is small.\n\nThese three factors can be combined to determine the complete RCS (σ) for a target."} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RCS = σ = Geometric Cross Section × Reflectivity × Directivity\n\nσ = 4π P_backscatter / P_intercepted\n\nThe importance of RCS can best be understood by looking at an equation relating the RCS of the target to the energy received by the antenna.\n\nS ≅ P_avg G σ A_e t_ot / ((4π)² R⁴)\n\nwhere\n\nS = signal energy received by the radar\nP_avg = average power transmitted by the radar\nG = gain of the radar antenna\nσ = RCS\nA_e = effective area of the radar antenna, or \"aperture efficiency\"\nt_ot = time the radar antenna is pointed at the target (time on target)\nR = range to the target\n\nFigure 57 shows a target that presents the same aspect to the radar at ranges from 1 to 50 miles. At a range of 50 miles, the relative power received by the radar is only 0.00000016, or 1.6 × 10⁷ % of the strength at one mile. This diagram graphically illustrates how significant the effect of energy dissipation is with distance, and how sensitive radars must be to detect targets at even short ranges."} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Furthermore, every radar system has a minimum signal energy it can detect, a quantity called S_min. This minimum signal energy along with antenna design and scan rate determine the maximum range (R_max) at which a given radar can detect a given target.\n\nFigure 57. Reduction in the Strength of Target Echoes with Range (Aerospaceweb.org, 2010)"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 58. Geometry, Description and Maximum RCS (Aerospaceweb.org, 2010)\n\nRCS in square meters can be converted to dBsm by the following equation.\n\ndBsm = 10Log(RCS_m²)\n\nIt can be difficult to directly compare RCS estimates from one object to another since the RCS varies wildly depending on aspect, radar frequency and wavelength, and the fidelity of the receiver. Figure 59 illustrates typical RCS values for aircraft and other objects, ranging from insects and birds up to large ground vehicles and ships. The RCS of a stealth aircraft is typically multiple orders of magnitude lower than a conventional plane and is often comparable to that of a small bird or large insect.\n\nFigure 59. Radar Cross Section Comparison (Aerospaceweb.org, 2010)\n\nA one-half symmetry analysis of the radar cross section of a UAP sphere with a dielectric coating was performed. Assuming the bottom limit of an ultrahigh frequency (UHF) very long range radar system is 300 MHz, a full scale RCS full harmonic analysis was performed to study a spherical object of 10 m in air with a 1 m dielectric coating layer. Provided in Figure 64 is a contour plot for the electric field distribution.\n\nFigure 60 and Figure 61 show the FEA mesh for 25 elements per wavelength and 50 elements per wavelength for a 300 MHz RCS analysis."} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nELEMENTS\nANSYS\nOCT 27 2010\n16:37:31\nPLOT NO. 1\nRCS of a Dielectric-coated Metallic Sphere for 300 MHZ UHF\nFigure 60. Mesh of ½ Symmetry UFO Sphere with 25 Elements per Wavelength\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 90"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nELEMENTS\nANSYS\nOCT 27 2010\n16:34:03\nPLOT NO. 1\nRCS of a Dielectric-coated Metallic Sphere for 300 MHZ UHF\nFigure 61. Mesh of ½ Symmetry UFO Sphere with 50 Elements per Wavelength\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 91"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 4. Normalized radar Cross Section for a 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 25 Elements per Wavelength\nPHI (Deg) THETA (Deg) Normalized RCS (dB)\n0.000 0.000 -0.17461E+01\n0.000 5.000 -0.18396E+01\n0.000 10.000 -0.20891E+01\n0.000 15.000 -0.24059E+01\n0.000 20.000 -0.26306E+01\n0.000 25.000 -0.25683E+01\n0.000 30.000 -0.21056E+01\n0.000 35.000 -0.13090E+01\n0.000 40.000 -0.36528E+00\n0.000 45.000 0.54501E+00\n0.000 50.000 0.13011E+01\n0.000 55.000 0.18315E+01\n0.000 60.000 0.20883E+01\n0.000 65.000 0.20270E+01\n0.000 70.000 0.15903E+01\n0.000 75.000 0.69095E+00\n0.000 80.000 -0.81414E+00\n0.000 85.000 -0.31541E+01\n0.000 90.000 -0.64801E+01\n0.000 95.000 -0.85723E+01\n0.000 100.000 -0.54262E+01\n0.000 105.000 -0.16586E+01\n0.000 110.000 0.10839E+01\n0.000 115.000 0.29983E+01\n0.000 120.000 0.43027E+01\n0.000 125.000 0.51444E+01\n0.000 130.000 0.56415E+01\n0.000 135.000 0.59202E+01\n0.000 140.000 0.61375E+01\n0.000 145.000 0.64662E+01\n0.000 150.000 0.70226E+01\n0.000 155.000 0.77921E+01\n0.000 160.000 0.86493E+01\n0.000 165.000 0.94471E+01\n0.000 170.000 0.10076E+02\n0.000 175.000 0.10474E+02\n0.000 180.000 0.10609E+02\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 92"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPHI=0\nNORMALIZED RADAR CROSS SECTION\nNO POLARIZATION\nANSYS\nOCT 27 2010\n15:26:08\nPLOT NO. 1\n15\n9\n3\n-3\n-9\n-15\nRCS/LAMBDA**2 (dB)\n0 18 36 54 72 90 108 126 144 162 180\nTHETA (DEG)\nRCS of a Dielectric-coated Metallic Sphere for 300 MHZ UHF\nFigure 62. Normalized radar Cross Section Plot for a ½ Symmetry 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 25 Elements per Wavelength\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 93"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 5. Normalized radar Cross Section for a 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 50 Elements per Wavelength\nPHI (Deg) THETA (Deg) Normalized RCS (dB)\n0.000 0.000 -0.13803E+01\n0.000 5.000 -0.14503E+01\n0.000 10.000 -0.16341E+01\n0.000 15.000 -0.18535E+01\n0.000 20.000 -0.19807E+01\n0.000 25.000 -0.18742E+01\n0.000 30.000 -0.14592E+01\n0.000 35.000 -0.78502E+00\n0.000 40.000 0.11714E-01\n0.000 45.000 0.78777E+00\n0.000 50.000 0.14360E+01\n0.000 55.000 0.18849E+01\n0.000 60.000 0.20821E+01\n0.000 65.000 0.19780E+01\n0.000 70.000 0.15109E+01\n0.000 75.000 0.58974E+00\n0.000 80.000 -0.93250E+00\n0.000 85.000 -0.32902E+01\n0.000 90.000 -0.66390E+01\n0.000 95.000 -0.87047E+01\n0.000 100.000 -0.54874E+01\n0.000 105.000 -0.17016E+01\n0.000 110.000 0.10488E+01\n0.000 115.000 0.29700E+01\n0.000 120.000 0.42801E+01\n0.000 125.000 0.51239E+01\n0.000 130.000 0.56159E+01\n0.000 135.000 0.58773E+01\n0.000 140.000 0.60608E+01\n0.000 145.000 0.63411E+01\n0.000 150.000 0.68464E+01\n0.000 155.000 0.75769E+01\n0.000 160.000 0.84125E+01\n0.000 165.000 0.92021E+01\n0.000 170.000 0.98300E+01\n0.000 175.000 0.10228E+02\n0.000 180.000 0.10364E+02\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 94"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nPHI=0\nNORMALIZED RADAR CROSS SECTION\nNO POLARIZATION\nANSYS\nOCT 27 2010\n16:19:40\nPLOT NO. 1\n15\n9\n3\n-3\n-9\n-15\nRCS/LAMEDA**2 (dB)\n0 18 36 54 72 90 108 126 144 162 180\nTHETA (DEG)\nFigure 63. Normalized radar Cross Section Plot for a ½ Symmetry 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 50 Elements per Wavelength\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 95"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1\nNODAL SOLUTION\nSTEP=1\nSUB =1\nFREQ=.300E+09\nIMAGINARY\nEFSUM (AVG)\nRSYS=0\nSMX =1.156\nANSYS\nOCT 28 2010\n10:35:51\nPLOT NO. 1\n0 .128493 .256986 .385479 .513973 .642466 .770959 .899452 1.028 1.156\nRCS of a Dielectric-coated Metallic Sphere for 300 MHZ UHF\nFigure 64. Electric Filed Contour in V/m for a ½ Symmetry 10 m Metallic Sphere with a 1 m Dielectric Coating in Decibels for 300 MHz and 25 Elements per Wavelength\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 96"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4.2.3.1 Summary and Conclusions of RCS Analysis\nA successful analysis of a spherical UAP RCS was conducted using a full harmonic electromagnetic simulation. Upon inspection of the values of normalized RCS at 90°, the dB shown in Table 4 and Table 5, it is apparent the FEA model solution was mesh independent with a pressure of -0.64801E+01 dB for the 25 element per wavelength model and -0.66390E+01 dB for the 50 element per wavelength model. In the runs performed, the 25 element per wavelength model showed sufficient accuracy and reasonable computation times. The normalized RCS plots and electric field contour illustrate the variation of RCS dB and V/m values over a range of 0 to 180°. As one would expect, the values are largest at the point of incident of the radar wave and some reflection and also decrease in magnitude were witnessed around the sphere. Various shapes of UAPs may be evaluated for RCS and the resulting electric field due to an incidental radar wave is also attainable. This information may be used in the future for cases reported to determine the prominence of an object's expected RCS and whether similar radar returns were received.\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 97"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION\nCompressible and incompressible fluid flow, dynamics, acoustics and radar theory all were provided in this report to give the reader a brief overview and understanding of the numerous physical equations that may be applied to reported UAP and USO behavior. Numerical solutions to these partial differential equation systems (many of which do not posses analytical or closed form solutions) which describe the physics of the event are achieved with millions of elements to model the object domain and medium. Each element may have numerous sets of coupled physical equations that need be solved by passing through many different computational iterations until convergence is achieved. BAASS is one of the few companies possessing the expertise, computer software and computational platforms to achieve such sophistication in numerical studies of UAP.\nCompressible fluid flow analyses were performed to calculate and visualize the steady state pressure, temperature and Mach number contours around two non–conventional craft shapes. A solid disc shaped object descending through the air into a body of liquid was investigated to provide visual simulation of the disturbance produced on the surface of the water through use of incompressible fluid flow. The USO analyses were performed using a full harmonic acoustics simulation and a spherical UAP RCS model was completed using a full harmonic electromagnetic simulation. For the individual summary and conclusions of each analytical and numerical study, see Sections 4.1.2, 4.1.4, 4.1.7, 4.2.1.1, and 4.2.3.1 of this report.\nFrom a more general perspective, BAASS was created in 2008 in order to facilitate the long term research and development of novel and emerging future technologies worldwide as they specifically relate to air and spacecraft. A large component of the BAASS mission is to study in depth the performance characteristics of UAP and USOs. From the data accrued, it is also BAASS's mission to produce a Threat Assessment of UAP and USO performance and capabilities. As a first step in accomplishing this mission BAASS has 1) acquired significant field data collection capabilities, both human and instrumented, 2) built the largest known UAP performance and behavior Data Warehouse in the world and 3) acquired advanced computational ability to analyze the data accrued.\nResearch and development necessary for the procurement of the technology required for advanced space and weapons systems are conducted through use of computational Multiphysics FEA, development of computer code, experimentation, material science testing and manufacturing of prototypes in both BAASS in-house and collaborating facilities and laboratories. Academic areas of concentration include Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), Heat Transfer, Nuclear Engineering, Electromagnetics and Radio Frequencies (RF), Theoretical and Computational Physics, Biological Sciences and Chemistry.\nTheoretical and computational applications, as well as experimentation on components of non–conventional propulsion systems is under way to provide for future development of vehicles that are capable of operating in the atmosphere, under water and in space. Operation of the vehicle in different mediums, as well as a goal of hypersonic flight would provide superior performance in its ability to reach intended targets, faster delivery of weapons, greater effective range and an engagement capability enabling employment of complex tactics against multiple targets across multiple domains. This research intends to provide innovative approaches and concepts for aircraft, propulsion, and flight technologies that demonstrate significant advances in performance and capabilities beyond those in operation today.\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 98"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This report outlined software, equipment and database descriptions along with select theory, analytical and numerical solutions for UAP incidents through engineering and physics analyses. Many analyses of UAP may use analytical or closed form solutions to solve the equations that describe the physics of an event. Where analytical solutions do not exist or the geometry is too complex, BAASS incorporates ANSYS Multiphysics to provide a powerful computational platform to solve large problems numerically, while combining and solving many different physical equations. The combination of computational software with field measurement equipment and historical databases of UAP events allows BAASS to utilize state of the art engineering techniques and tools to assess the operational capabilities of UAP and USOs. A greater understanding of these objects will allow for an accurate threat assessment, as well as provide the physics behind the incredible performance attributes that some have displayed. BAASS' acquired knowledge and capabilities are leading the way to quantum leaps in technology for travel in the atmosphere, space and under water, along with advances in armament and defense systems.\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 99"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6. REFERENCES\n1843(a)(2)\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010 Page 100"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010 Page 101"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SYMBOLS AND ACRONYMS\nA – Area\nAAV – anomalous aerial vehicle\nAe – effective area of the radar antenna, or \"aperture efficiency\"\nB – magnetic induction field\nBAASS – Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies\nBa – adiabatic bulk modulus\nc – speed of sound in medium\nCFD – computational fluid dynamics\nCSG – Carrier Strike Group\nD – displacement field\nDIA – Defense Intelligence Agency\nE – electric field\nFEA – Finite Element Analysis\nFLIR – forward looking infrared\nfluid structure interaction\ng – gravitational acceleration\nG – gain of the radar antenna\nGB - gigabyte\ngx – x directional component of gravitational acceleration\ngy – y directional component of gravitational acceleration\ngz – z directional component of gravitational acceleration\nH – magnetic field\nHDV – High Definition Video\nJ – current density\nk – wave number\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010 Page 102"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M – molar mass\nMHD – magnetohydrodynamics\np – pressure\nPavg – average power transmitted by the radar\nPbackscatter – backscattered power\nPincident – incident power density\nPintercepted – power intercepted by the target\nPisotropic – isotropic power\nPscatter – power scattered by the target\nR – range to the target\nRmax – maximum range\nRu – gas constant\nradar – radio detection and ranging\nRCS – radar cross section\nRF – radio frequency\nS – signal energy received by the radar\nSmin – minimum signal energy\nT – temperature\nTB – terabyte\nt – time\ntot = time the radar antenna is pointed at the target (time on target)\nu – x velocity\nv – y velocity\nw – z velocity\nx – x coordinate\ny – y coordinate\nz – z coordinate\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010 Page 103"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UAP – unidentified aerial phenomena\nUAV – unmanned aerial vehicle\nUFO – unidentified flying object\nUHF – ultra high frequency\nUSO – unidentified submerged object\nε – specific internal energy\nμ – dynamic viscosity of the fluid\nρ – density of the fluid\nρe – charge density\nσ – radar cross section\nω – angular frequency\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010 Page 104"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATTACHMENT I – ANSYS INPUT FILES\n\nUSO ANSYS Multiphysics Acoustics Input File Example\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! 1/100th Acoustical Model of a 10 m Spherical USO in Water\n! at 1000 Hz\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Define variables for problem:\n! Radiating Sphere of Radius SPHRRADS with uniform surface\n! velocity of VELOCITY oscillating at FREQUENC\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n*set,FREQUENC,1000\n*set,VELOCITY,0.005\n*set,PI ,acos(-1)\n*set,SPHRRADS,0.1\n*set,TOLER,0.0001\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Fluid properties:\n! Density, Speed of sound in water, Reference pressure\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n*set,WATRDENS,1000\n*set,WATRSONC,1500\n*set,REFEPRES,1E-6\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Geometry info\n! Infinite radius at INFIRADS meters\n! INFIXOFF, INFIYOFF not used right now...\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n*set,INFIRADS,5\n*set,INFIXOFF,0.0\n*set,INFIYOFF,0.0\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Mesh info\n! Use mapped mesh? YES=1 NO=0 (use NO for now)\n! Elements per wavelength (EPW)\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n*set,MAPDMESH,0\n*set,TRIMESH ,1\n*set,EPW ,50\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 105"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Graphics settings\n! Set title and subtitles\n! Make sure the legend is always on (/plopt,info,on)\n! Put global triad at right top corner (/triad,rtop)\n! Turn on Full Graphics because of DDTSREP#16215\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n/title,Uniformly Radiating Sphere, EPW=%EPW%\n/stitle,1,Sphere radius of %SPHRRADS%m\n/stitle,2,Frequency at %FREQUENC%Hz\n/stitle,3,Uniform velocity of %VELOCITY%m/s\n/stitle,4,Infinite Boundary of %INFIRADS%m at (%INFIXOFF%,%INFIYOFF%)\n/plopt,info,on\n/triad,rtop\n/graphics,full\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Enter Preprocessor\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n/prep7\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Define elements\n! 1 = fluid w/ structure\n! 2 = fluid no structure\n! 3 = infinite fluid\n! Define elements and keyopts (et) (keyopt)\n! Define real constants (r)\n! Define material properties (mp)\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\net,1,fluid29\nkeyopt,1,2,0\nkeyopt,1,3,1\n\net,2,fluid29\nkeyopt,2,2,1\nkeyopt,2,3,1\net,3,fluid129\nkeyopt,3,3,1\n\nr,1,REFEPRES\nr,2,REFEPRES\nr,3,INFIRADS,0,0,\n\nmp,dens,1,WATRDENS\nmp,sonc,1,WATRSONC\nmp,dens,2,WATRDENS\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 106"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"mp,sonc,2,WATRSONC\nmp,sonc,3,WATRSONC\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Create geometry\n! Create five 90 degree quarter circles (pcirc)\n! Merge keypoints (nummrg,kp)\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\npcirc,1,SPHRRADS,0,90,\npcirc,2,1,0,90,\npcirc,3,2,0,90,\npcirc,4,3,0,90,\npcirc,5,4,0,90,\nnummrg,kp\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Mesh\n! Set global element size based on EPW above\n! Map with quads, quad-dominant for free mesh (mshape,0)\n! Mesh mapped or free (mshkey)\n! Set area attributes (aatt)\n! Mesh all areas (amesh)\n! Set plot controls based on element type number\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\nesize,(WATRSONC/FREQUENC)/EPW\nmshape,TRIMESH\nmshkey,MAPDMESH\naatt,2,2,2\namesh,all\n/pnum,type,1\n/num,1\n/auto\neplot\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Rotate all nodes in cylindrical CS\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\ncsys,1\nnrotate,all\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Change elements near center to fluid with struct present\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\ntype,1\nreal,1\nmat,1\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 107"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"nsel,s,loc,x,SPHRRADS\nesln\nnsle\nemodif,all\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Apply struct boundary conditions on element type 1\n! Constrain all translation DOF (the \"free\" DOF)\n! Reapply velocity as displacement on inner nodes in radial\n! dir. (ux)\n! Apply FSI (fluid-struct interface) flag to active\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\nd,all,uy\nd,all,ux\nnsel,s,loc,x,SPHRRADS\nd,all,ux,0,-VELOCITY/(2*PI*FREQUENC)\nsf,all,fsi\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! Mesh Infinite fluid domain\n! Instead of meshing, use ESURF to generate elements on ! existing mesh\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\ntype,3\nreal,3\nmat,3\nesel,all\nnsel,s,loc,x,INFIRADS,INFIRADS+TOLER\nesurf,all\nallsel,all\nfinish\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! solution options\n! Full harmonic analysis\n! frequency at FREQUENC\n! select everything & solve\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n/solu\nantype,harm\nhropt,full\nhrout,on\nlumpm,0\neqslv,sparse\nharfrq,FREQUENC\nnsubst,\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 108"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"kbc,0\nallsel,all\nsolve\nfinish\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! postprocessing w/ annotations\n! Load real (set,1,1,1,0) and plot pressure\n! Load imag (set,1,1,1,1) and plot pressure\n! do a load case comb. to SRSS for pressure magnitude\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n/post1\n/tsp,,0.75\n/ann,dele\n/tla,-.90,.90,Plot of real part of pressure\n/dscale,1,off\nset,1,1,1,0\nplnsol,pres\n\n/tsp,,0.75\n/ann,dele\n/tla,-.90,.90,Plot of imag part of pressure\nset,1,1,1,1\n/replot\n\n/tsp,,0.75\n/ann,dele\n/tla,-.90,.90,Plot of magnitude of pressure\nlcdef,1,1,1,0\nlcoper,srss,1\n/replot\n\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\n! path operations\n!-------------------------------------------------------------\ncsys,0\nlsel,s,loc,x,0\nnsll,s,1\n*get,NCOUNT,node,,count\ncsys,1\nnsel,s,loc,x,SPHRRADS\nnsel,r,loc,y,90,90+TOLER\nSTRTNODE=ndnext(0)\nnsel,s,loc,x,INFIRADS,INFIRADS+TOLER\nnsel,r,loc,y,90,90+TOLER\nFININODE=ndnext(0)\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 109"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"allsel,all\npath,RADIAL,2,30,(NCOUNT-1)\nppath,1,STRTNODE\nppath,2,FININODE\navprin,0,0,\nset,1,1,1,0\npdef,REALPRES,pres,,noavg\nset,1,1,1,1\npdef,IMAGPRES,pres,,noavg\npaget,tracpoin,poin\npaget,tracdata,tabl\npaget,traclabl,labe\n\n*dim,RADSPATH,table,NCOUNT,7\n\n*do,ICOUNT,1,NCOUNT\n WAVENUMB=2*PI*FREQUENC/WATRSONC\n CURRRADS=TRACDATA(ICOUNT,2,1)\n\nTEMPAMPL=WATRDENS*WATRSONC*VELOCITY*WAVENUMB*(SPHRRADS**2)/CURRRA\nDS\n TEMPAMPL=TEMPAMPL/(1+(WAVENUMB*SPHRRADS)**2)\n TEMPAMRC=WAVENUMB*SPHRRADS*cos(WAVENUMB*(CURRRADS-SPHRRADS))\n TEMPAMRS=sin(WAVENUMB*(CURRRADS-SPHRRADS))\n TEMPAMIC=cos(WAVENUMB*(CURRRADS-SPHRRADS))\n TEMPAMIS=-WAVENUMB*SPHRRADS*sin(WAVENUMB*(CURRRADS-SPHRRADS))\n RADSPATH(ICOUNT,1)=TRACDATA(ICOUNT,2,1)\n RADSPATH(ICOUNT,2)=TRACDATA(ICOUNT,5,1)\n RADSPATH(ICOUNT,3)=TEMPAMPL*(TEMPAMRC+TEMPAMRS)\n RADSPATH(ICOUNT,4)=TRACDATA(ICOUNT,6,1)\n RADSPATH(ICOUNT,5)=TEMPAMPL*(TEMPAMIC+TEMPAMIS)\n\nRADSPATH(ICOUNT,6)=sqrt(TRACDATA(ICOUNT,5,1)**2+TRACDATA(ICOUNT,6,1)**\n2)\n TEMP1 =TEMPAMPL*(TEMPAMRC+TEMPAMRS)\n TEMP2 =TEMPAMPL*(TEMPAMIC+TEMPAMIS)\n RADSPATH(ICOUNT,7)=sqrt(TEMP1**2+TEMP2**2)\n*enddo\n\n/gcolumn,1,ANSYS\n/gcolumn,2,Theory\n/axlab,x,Radial Distance (m)\n/axlab,y,Real Pressure (Pa)\n*vplot,RADSPATH(1,1),RADSPATH(1,2),3\n\n/axlab,y,Imaginary Pressure (Pa)\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities Page 110\nNovember 23, 2010"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"*vplot,RADSPATH(1,1),RADSPATH(1,4),5\n\n/axlab,y,Magnitude of Pressure (Pa)\n*vplot,RADSPATH(1,1),RADSPATH(1,6),7\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities Page 111\nNovember 23, 2010"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UAP ANSYS Multiphysics RCS Input File Example\n/batch,list\n/title, RCS of a Dielectric-coated Metallic Sphere for 300 MHZ UHF\n/com, Problem: A metallic sphere (radius=5.0m) coated by dielectric layer\n/com, (thickness=1.0m, Er=4)\n/com, Incident Wave: -x polirazation with PHI = 0 (degree), THETA = 0 (degree)\n/nopr\n/prep7\n\n! problem dimensions and set-up\nfreq=300e6\nlambda=3.e8/freq\nepsr=4\nwave1=lambda/sqrt(epsr)\nwave2=lambda\nh1=wave1/25\nh2=wave2/25\nra=0.5*lambda\ns=0.01*lambda\nrb=ra+s\na=rb+4*h2\nb=a+3*h2\nc=b+4*h2\n\n! --- define elements and materials ---\net,1,HF119,1\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities Page 112\nNovember 23, 2010"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"et,2,HF119,1,,,1\nmp,murx,1,1.\nmp,perx,1,epsr\nmp,murx,2,1.\nmp,perx,2,1.\n\n! --- set up the geometry ---\nsphere,ra,rb,0,180\nsphere,rb,a,0,180\nvsel,all\ncm,vequi,volu\nblock,-b,b,0,b,-b,b\nblock,-c,c,0,c,-c,c\nvsbv,4,3,,delete,keep\nvsbv,3,vequi,,delete,keep\ncsys,2\nvsel,s,loc,x,0,ra/2\nvdel,all\nalls\ncsys,0\nvglue,all\n\n! --- meshing ---\ncsys,0\nsmrtsize,4\n! meshing\nesize,h1\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities Page 113\nNovember 23, 2010"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"type,1\nmat,1\nvmesh,1\nmat,2\nesize,h2\nvmesh,3\nesize,h2\nvmesh,6\n\n! --- PML element ---\ntype,2\nvmesh,5\nalls\nnummrg,all\n\n! define equivalent source surface\ncsys,2\nnsel,s,loc,x,0,a\nesln,s,1,all\nnsel,s,loc,x,a\nsf,all,mxwf\nalls\n\n! define boundary condition\ncsys,0\nnsel,s,loc,x,c\nnsel,a,loc,x,-c\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities Page 114\nNovember 23, 2010"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"nsel,a,loc,y,c\nnsel,a,loc,z,-c\nnsel,a,loc,z,c\nd,all,ax,0.\nnsel,all\ncsys,2\nnsel,s,loc,x,ra\nd,all,ax,0.\ncsys,0\nallsel,all\n! incident plane wave\nplwave,-1,0,0,0,0\nfini\n/solu\nhfscat,scat\neqslv,sparse\nantype,harmic\nharfrq,freq\nsolve\nfini\n/post1\nset,1,1\nhfsym,,,pmc\nprfar,rcsn,total,0,0,,0,180,36\n/yrange,-35,15\nplfar,rcsn,total,0,0,,0,180,180\nfini\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 115"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"ATTACHMENT II – \"TIC TAC\" CFD CONTOUR PLOTS FOR PRESSURE, TEMPERATURE AND MACH NUMBER\n1.130e+003\n1.009e+003\n8.875e+002\n7.660e+002\n6.446e+002\n5.231e+002\n4.016e+002\n2.802e+002\n1.587e+002\n3.727e+001\n-8.419e+001\n-2.056e+002\n-3.271e+002\n-4.486e+002\n-5.700e+002\n-6.915e+002\n-8.129e+002\n[Pa]\nFigure 65. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet\n2.240e+002\n2.239e+002\n2.238e+002\n2.237e+002\n2.236e+002\n2.236e+002\n2.235e+002\n2.234e+002\n2.233e+002\n2.232e+002\n2.232e+002\n2.231e+002\n2.230e+002\n2.229e+002\n2.228e+002\n2.228e+002\n2.227e+002\n[K]\nFigure 66. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 116"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"1.659e-001\n1.555e-001\n1.451e-001\n1.348e-001\n1.244e-001\n1.140e-001\n1.037e-001\n9.332e-002\n8.295e-002\n7.259e-002\n6.223e-002\n5.186e-002\n4.150e-002\n3.114e-002\n2.078e-002\n1.041e-002\n4.928e-005\nFigure 67. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet\n4.797e+003\n4.280e+003\n3.764e+003\n3.248e+003\n2.732e+003\n2.215e+003\n1.699e+003\n1.183e+003\n6.664e+002\n1.501e+002\n-3.662e+002\n-8.825e+002\n-1.399e+003\n-1.915e+003\n-2.431e+003\n-2.948e+003\n-3.464e+003\n[Pa]\nFigure 68. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 117"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"2.268e+002\n2.265e+002\n2.262e+002\n2.258e+002\n2.255e+002\n2.252e+002\n2.249e+002\n2.245e+002\n2.242e+002\n2.239e+002\n2.236e+002\n2.233e+002\n2.229e+002\n2.226e+002\n2.223e+002\n2.220e+002\n2.216e+002\n[K]\nFigure 69. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet\n3.364e-001\n3.154e-001\n2.944e-001\n2.734e-001\n2.523e-001\n2.313e-001\n2.103e-001\n1.893e-001\n1.683e-001\n1.472e-001\n1.262e-001\n1.052e-001\n8.417e-002\n6.315e-002\n4.213e-002\n2.111e-002\n9.187e-005\nFigure 70. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 118"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"1.135e+004\n1.013e+004\n8.913e+003\n7.693e+003\n6.473e+003\n5.252e+003\n4.032e+003\n2.812e+003\n1.592e+003\n3.720e+002\n-8.481e+002\n-2.068e+003\n-3.288e+003\n-4.508e+003\n-5.729e+003\n-6.949e+003\n-8.169e+003\n[Pa]\nFigure 71. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet\n2.315e+002\n2.308e+002\n2.300e+002\n2.293e+002\n2.285e+002\n2.278e+002\n2.270e+002\n2.263e+002\n2.255e+002\n2.248e+002\n2.240e+002\n2.232e+002\n2.225e+002\n2.217e+002\n2.210e+002\n2.202e+002\n2.195e+002\n[K]\nFigure 72. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 119"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 73. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet Figure 74. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 120"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 75. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet Figure 76. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 121"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 77. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet Figure 78. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 122"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 79. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph with Mixed Inlet and Subsonic Outlet Figure 80. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 123"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 81. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet Figure 82. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet Summary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities November 23, 2010 Page 124"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 83. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nFigure 84. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 125"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 85. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nFigure 86. Tic Tac Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 126"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 87. Tic Tac Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nFigure 88. Tic Tac Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 127"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATTACHMENT III – RIGHT CIRCULAR CYLINDER CFD CONTOUR PLOTS FOR PRESSURE, TEMPERATURE AND MACH NUMBER\n\nFigure 89. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet\n\nFigure 90. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 128"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 91. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 100 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet\n\nFigure 92. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph with Subsonic Inlet and Subsonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 129"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 93. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph with Subsonic Inlet\nand Subsonic Outlet\n\nFigure 94. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 200 mph with Subsonic Inlet\nand Subsonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 130"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 95. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph with Subsonic Inlet and\nSubsonic Outlet\n\nFigure 96. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph with Subsonic Inlet\nand Subsonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 131"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 97. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 300 mph with Subsonic Inlet\nand Subsonic Outlet\n\nFigure 98. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph with Subsonic Inlet and\nSubsonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 132"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 99. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph with Subsonic Inlet\nand Subsonic Outlet\n\nFigure 100. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 400 mph with Subsonic Inlet\nand Subsonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 133"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 101. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph with Mixed Inlet and\nSubsonic Outlet\n\nFigure 102. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph with Mixed Inlet and\nSubsonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 134"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 103. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 500 mph with Mixed Inlet and\nSubsonic Outlet\n\nFigure 104. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 700 mph with Mixed Inlet and\nSupersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010 Page 135"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 105. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph with Supersonic Inlet\nand Supersonic Outlet\n\nFigure 106. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph with Supersonic Inlet\nand Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010 Page 136"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 107. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 900 mph with Supersonic\nInlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nFigure 108. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph with Supersonic Inlet\nand Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010 Page 137"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 109. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph with Supersonic\nInlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nFigure 110. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1100 mph with Supersonic\nInlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010 Page 138"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 111. Cylinder Pressure at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph with Supersonic Inlet\nand Supersonic Outlet\n\nFigure 112. Cylinder Temperature at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph with Supersonic\nInlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010 Page 139"} {"doc_id":"563851c558da0a6a","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 113. Cylinder Mach Number at 1/6 Scale, Air Temperature 223K and 1300 mph with Supersonic Inlet and Supersonic Outlet\n\nSummary Report on BAASS UAP Analysis Capabilities\nNovember 23, 2010\nPage 140"} {"doc_id":"56dd27b33373b1d5","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 8 October 2025\n\nMisrep undefined-8216304\n\nNarrative\n\n(S//NF) AT 1206Z, [1.4a] TOOK OFF FROM OKAS. AT 1220Z, [1.4a] HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE. FROM 1323Z TO 0626Z, [1.4a] COLLECTED SIGINT VIA AIRHANDLER. FROM 1518Z TO 0426Z, [1.4a] SUPPORTED TF[1.4a]TO OP[1.4a](OBJ [1.4a] [1.4a] IVO BAGHDAD, IRAQ. SEE ISR LINE 1. AT 1620Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED POSSIBLE UAP. SEE UAP LINE 1.AT 0426Z, [1.4a] WAS CLEARED TO RTB. AT 0655Z, [1.4a] HANDED BACK TO THE LRE. AT 0723Z, [1.4a] LANDED AT OKAS. FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS-AR\n\n(S/RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: NOFORN\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20471202\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): ACC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 482ATKS\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 001\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"56dd27b33373b1d5","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 8 October 2025\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): ID\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• ATO Mission Number: [1.4a]\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: [3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 482ATKS\n• Wing: 20 FW\n• Phone Number: [FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 603 AOC\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: Ctr\n• Full Name: [3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 12 AF PAROC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: [3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 609 AOC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nINGEST\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 002\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"56dd27b33373b1d5","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 8 October 2025\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Radar Name or Destination: -\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: -\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• MWS Name or Designator: -\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• IRCM Name or Designator: -\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• ECM Name or Designator: -\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• CMD Name or Designator: -\n• Chaff Designator: -\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: -\n• Flare Designator: -\n• Num Flares:\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator: -\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Num Towed Decoys: -\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Gun Name or Designator: -\n• Num Gun Rounds: -\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: -\n[1.4c]\n• Data Link: -\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 003\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"56dd27b33373b1d5","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 8 October 2025\n\n• Gentext: -\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s) [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 011206:00ZDEC22\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Last Land Time: 020723:00ZDEC22\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 020733:00ZDEC22\n• Total Mission Time: 19 hours 17 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 011518:00ZDEC22\n• Time-off Station DTG: 020426:00ZDEC22\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Msn Type: TARGET DEV\n• Primary Sensor: FMV\n• Sensors Available: AH/BLASPHEMY\n• Tasking Type: PLANNED\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 38SMB42[1.4a]83[1.4a]\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed: No\n• Number of EEIs:\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 004\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"56dd27b33373b1d5","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 8 October 2025\n\n• Gentext: (S//NF) [1.4a] COORDINATED WITH TF[1.4a]236 MINUTES PRIOR TO TAKE OFF. PRECOORD WAS SATISFACTORY. AT 1220Z, [1.4a] ARRIVED ON STATION ISO TF[1.4a] FOR OP[1.4a] ([1.4a, 1.4c] TO CONDUCT POL SCANS AND ID HVI/POI SIGNATURES. FROM 1518Z TO 0426Z, [1.4a] CONDUCTED SCANS FOR HVI/POI, POL, ADMS IN SUITS, WEAPONS, CONVOYS/SENTRY, AND PERSONNEL [1.4c] [1.4c] FROM 1921Z TO 0428Z, [1.4a, 1.4c] AT 0426Z, [1.4a] WAS CLEARED OFF TASKING AND RETURNED TO BASE (RTB)\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: TF [1.4a]\n• Supported Operation: OP [1.4a] (OBJ [1.4a, 1.4c]\n• Precoord Time: 236 MINUTES\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (U) WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: No\n• Gentext: -\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 011220:00ZDEC22\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• JTAC Callsign: -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 020655:00ZDEC22\n• Total Time On Station: 18 hours 35 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 005\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"56dd27b33373b1d5","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 011620:00ZDEC22\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Tail Number: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 38S MB 42 1.4a 83 1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: FL180\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: -\n• Friendly Aircraft State: -\n• Training Range (If applicable): -\n• Operational Range: -\n• UAP Physical State: -\n• Number of UAP Sighted: 1\n• UAP Signatures: No\n• UAP RF Frequency: -\n• UAP RF Duration: -\n• UAP Effects on Persons: (U) NONE REPORTED\n• Full Name: -\n• Email: -\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE): -\n• UAP First Seen Location: 38S MB 42 1.4a 83 1.4a\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured): -\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): (S//NF) AT 1620Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X POSSIBLE UAP/UAV FLYING WEST TO EAST IVO 38SMB42 1.4a 83 1.4a 1.4a DID NOT FOLLOW UAP. 1.4a CONTINUED THE MISSION AS TASKED, NO FURTHER EVENTS WERE OBSERVED.\n\n1.4a\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 006\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"57c4e429c93a4fee","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nMisrep undefined-7816710\n\nNarrative\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 301639ZJUL22, TF CHOSIN TASKED 1.4a WITH IMINT VIA 7 LINE. AT 301822ZJUL22, 1.4a DEPARTED MUWAFFAQ SALTI AB (OJMS). AT 301829ZJUL22, 1.4a HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE. AT 301925ZJUL22, 1.4a BEGAN SIGINT COLLECT. AT 302028ZJUL22, 1.4a ARRIVED ON STATION AND CHECKED IN WITH TF CHOSIN STA TO PERFORM IMINT IVO 37SFU38 1.4a 81 1.4a (SEE ISR 1). AT 310239ZJUL22, 1.4a OBSERVED AN UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENON IVO 37SFU27 1.4a 74 1.4a (SEE UAP 1). AT 311343ZJUL22, 1.4a RETURNED TO BASE. AT 311409ZJUL22, 1.4a TERMINATED SIGINT COLLECT. AT 311458ZJUL22, 1.4a HANDED BACK TO THE LRE. AT 311519ZJUL22, 1.4a LANDED AT OJMS. FULL MOTION VIDEO WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS1. 20.9 MISSION HOURS, 17.2 IMINT HOURS, 1 IMINT TASKINGS PROSECUTED, 18.7 SIGINT HOURS, 1 SIGINT TASKINGS PROSECUTED, 2 TOTAL TASKINGS PROSECUTED\n\n(S//RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: NOFORN\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20470731\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFCENT\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID"} {"doc_id":"57c4e429c93a4fee","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 89 ATKS\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): DI\n• Mission Type: ARMED RECCE\n• ATO Mission Number 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: Amn\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 89 ATKS\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 603 AOC\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: 2d Lt\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 89 ATKS\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 609th AOC\n• Wing: Other"} {"doc_id":"57c4e429c93a4fee","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination:\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator:\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data:\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator:\n• Chaff Designator:\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges:\n• Flare Designator:\n• Num Flares:\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM:"} {"doc_id":"57c4e429c93a4fee","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Num IR-Guided AAM:\n• Gun Name or Designator:\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4a\n1.4c\n• Data Link:\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OJMS\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 301822:00ZJUL22\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes):\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 301925:00ZJUL22\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• JTAR Number:\n• Killbox (Location):\n• Mission Type: AREC\n• JTAC Callsign:\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 311409:00ZJUL22\n• Total Time On Station: 18 hours 44 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nLanding"} {"doc_id":"57c4e429c93a4fee","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OJMS\n• Last Land Time: 311519:00ZJUL22\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 311529:00ZJUL22\n• Total Mission Time: 20 hours 57 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 302028:00ZJUL22\n• Time-off Station DTG: 310000:00ZJUL22\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Msn Type: AREC\n1.4c\n• Tasking Type: Planned\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 37SFU38 1.4a 81 1.4a\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR):\n• EEIs Observed:\n• Number of EEIs:\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) 1.4a COORDINATED WITH TF CHOSIN 103 MINUTES PRIOR TO TAKE OFF. COORDINATION WAS SATISFACTORY DUE TO QUALITY OF PRODUCTS. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED 7-LINE FOR MISSION ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF INFORMATION (EEIS). AT 2028Z, 1.4a ARRIVED ON OP SPECTRE DAGGER, FORCE PRO ISO TF CHOSIN AND TF CHOSIN SENSOR TASKING AUTHORITY (STA) DIRECTED 1.4a TO PROVIDE IMINT IVO 37SFU38 1.4a 81 1.4a. FROM 2028Z TO 2100Z, 1.4a SCANNED IVO SP (37SFU38 1.4a 81 1.4a) FOR EEI RELATED ACTIVITY. AT 2029Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X ADM SITTING ON TOP OF CARGO TRUCK PARKED BEHIND TREE IVO 37SFU38 1.4a 81 1.4a. FROM 2100Z TO 2136Z, 1.4a SCANNED COI 1 AND RUNWAY IVO 37SFU29 1.4a 73 1.4a FOR EEI RELATED ACTIVITY, NSTR. FROM 2136Z TO 2210Z, 1.4a CONDUCTED RUNAWAY SCANS IVO 37SFU29 1.4a 73 1.4a FOR EEI RELATED ACTIVITY. AT 2210Z 1X POSS TECHINCAL OBS IVO 37SFU28 1.4a 73 1.4a FROM 2210Z TO 0037Z, 1.4a SCANNED IVO COI 1 (37SFU27 1.4a 73 1.4a) FOR EEI RELATED ACTIVITY. AT 2252Z, 1.4a SCANNED IVO 37SFU34 1.4a 76 1.4a FOR EEI RELATED ACTIVITY, NSTR. AT 0023Z, 1.4a OBS 1X ADM ON A MOTO AND CONDUCTED A FOLLOW. FROM 0023Z TO 0030Z, THE ADM MADE 1 STOP IVO 37SFU36 1.4a 80 1.4a. FROM 0037Z TO 0315Z, 1.4a SCANNED IVO 37SFU33 1.4a 69 1.4a 37SFU33 1.4a 69 1.4a, 37SFU33 1.4a 69 1.4a, 37SFU31 1.4a 67 1.4a, 37SFU33 1.4a 94 1.4a, 37SFU27 1.4a 73 1.4a, AND 37SFU34 1.4a 66 1.4a FOR EEI RELATED ACTIVITY, NSTR. AT 0245Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X"} {"doc_id":"57c4e429c93a4fee","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ADM IVO 37SFU27 1.4a 74 1.4a, AT 0256Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X REINFORCED STRUCTURE IVO 37SFU34 1.4a 66 1.4a FROM 0315Z TO 0521Z, 1.4a SCANNED IVO 37SFU35 1.4a 67 1.4a 37SFU28 1.4a 73 1.4a, FOR EEI RELATED ACTIVITY, NSTR. AT 0521Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X WHITE PUT, 1X BLACK PUT, AND 2X WHITE BONGOS CARRYING APPROX 30 ADMS, WHICH THEN 1.4a CONDUCTED A FOLLOW. FROM 0521Z TO 0715Z, 1.4a FOLLOWED THE VEHICLES AND OBSERVED 2X STOPS IVO 37SFU28 1.4a 73 1.4a 37SFU 28 1.4a 73 1.4a AT 0523Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X PROB TECHNICAL IVO 37SFU28 1.4a 73 1.4a. AT 0528Z, THE CONVOY STOPPED N OF AN OVERHANG AND ALL ADMS EXITED THE VEHICLES, WALKING UNDER THE OVERHAND. 1X ADM SLUNG A RILE OVER HIS RIGHT SHOULDER. AREA ASSESSED TO BE A POSS SHOOTING RANGE. AT 0633Z, THE ADMS REENTERED THE VEHICLES CONSISTING OF 1X WHITE JEEP, 1X BLACK PUT, 2X WHITE BONGOS AND DEPARTED. AT 0648Z, THE CONVOY STOPPED IVO 37SFU31 1.4a 76 1.4a APPROX 5X ADMS DISMOUNTED AND THE 1X WHITE JEEP LEFT THE CONVOY BEFORE THE CONVOY DEPARTED AGAIN. AT 0655Z 1X WHITE BONGO LEFT THE CONVOY AND FOV IVO 37SFU33 1.4a 73 1.4a AT 0710Z, THE CONVOY STOPPED IVO 37SFU40 1.4a 70 1.4a AND THE ADMS DISMOUNTED AND LOITERED AND 1X TECHNICAL WAS OBSERVED. AT 0715Z THE FOLLOW WAS ENDED AT A COMPOUND IVO 37SFU40 1.4a 70 1.4a FROM 0715Z TO 0818Z, 1.4a SCANNED AROUND THE COMPOUND IVO 37SFU40 1.4a 70 1.4a FOR EEI RELATED ACTIVITY. AT 0721Z, 1X TECHNICAL AND 1X QUAD CAB PUT WERE OBSERVED. AT 0725Z, 2X ADM DEPARTED THE COMPOUND ON A MOTO. FROM 0755Z TO 0818Z, 1.4a SCANNED COI 1 IVO 37SFU27 1.4a 73 1.4a FOR EEI RELATED ACTIVITY. AT 0753Z, 1X WHITE PUT WITH UI OBJECT, POSS ARTILLERY SYSTEM, IN THE BED AND 1X ADM WERE OBSERVED. FROM 0818Z TO 0854Z, 1.4a PERFORMED A FOLLOW ON THE PUT WITH THE UI OBJECT IN THE BED, SLANT 2/0/0. AT 0823Z, THE 2X ADMS AND 1X ADDITIONAL ADM ENTERED THE TRUCK AND DEPARTED. SLANT 3/0/0. AT 0832Z, A SECOND TRUCK WITH POSS MOUNTED AAA WAS OBSERVED IVO 37SFU26 1.4a 73 1.4a FROM 0854Z TO 0942Z 1.4a PERFORMED A FOLLOW ON 1X BONGO WITH 2X POSS BARRELS IN THE BACK FOR 6 STOPS, SLANT 2/0/0. AT 0906Z, THE BONGO STOPPED IVO 37SFU27 1.4a 72 1.4a WHERE 2X ADDITIONAL ADMS CAME FROM A COMPOUND AND INTERACTED WITH THE BONGO BEFORE 2X ADM LEFT IN THE BONGO. AT 0911Z, THE BONGO STOPPED IVO 37SFU27 1.4a 74 1.4a WHERE A PREVIOUSLY ONOBSERVED ADM EXITED THE BACK OF THE BONGO AND INTERACTED WITH A PASSENGER BEFORE THE BONGO DEPARTED. AT 0921Z, THE BONGO STOPPED AT A RESIDENCE IVO 37SFU29 1.4a 76 1.4a THE 2X ADMS FROM THE BONGO AND 3X ADMS FROM THE RESIDENCE INTERACTED WITH THE 2X BARRELS IN THE BACK AND THE BONGO DEPARTED AT 0923Z. FROM 0942Z TO 1007Z, 1.4a TRANSITED TO NEXT POINT. FROM 1007Z TO 1122Z, 1.4a SCANNED IVO COI 2 (37SEV98 1.4a 15 1.4a) FOR EEI RELATED ACTIVITY, NSTR. FROM 1122Z TO 1137Z, 1.4a SCANNED IVO DAYR AZ ZAR PARKING AFLD (37SFV07 1.4a 05 1.4a) FOR EEI RELATED ACTIVITY. AT 1134Z, 2X TELARS WITH 3 ROCKETS LOADED WERE INACTIVE. FROM 1137Z T0 1243Z, 1.4a SCANNED IVO COI 2 (37SEV98 1.4a 15 1.4a) FOR EEI RELATED ACTIVITY, NSTR. AT 1243Z, TF CHOSIN STA CLEARED 1.4a OFF TASKING AND 1.4a RETURNED TO BASE\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)"} {"doc_id":"57c4e429c93a4fee","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Supported Unit: TF CHOSIN\n• Supported Operation: 1.4a\n• Precoord Time: 103 MINUTES\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: [REDACTED] WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?:\n• Gentext: -\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 310239:00ZJUL22\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: -\n• Tail Number: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 37SFU41 1.4a 78 1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: 19,359 FT\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: 116 KTS\n• Friendly Aircraft State: -\n• Training Range (If applicable): -\n• Operational Range: -\n• UAP Physical State: -\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n• UAP Signatures: No\n• UAP RF Frequency: -\n• UAP RF Duration: -\n• UAP Effects on Persons:\n• Full Name:\n• Email:\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE):\n• UAP First Seen Location: 37SFU27 1.4a 74 1.4a\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured): -\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): [REDACTED]\nAT 310239Z, 1.4a OBSERVED AN UAP EVENT IVO 37SFU27 1.4a 74 1.4a IN KP 9.\nTHE UAP OCCURED IN LESS THAN A MINUTE, WITH THE UAP MOVING FROM N TO S.\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES\nATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 58378\n\nADDRESS REPLY TO:\n\nMANAGER, SANTA FE DIRECTED OPERATIONS\nU. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION\nP. O. BOX 1539\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\n\nAND REFER TO:\nSFD-3-1\n\nMarch 22, 1949\n\nR & D ROUTING\nDIRECTOR / DEPUTY / EXECUTIVE / \"E\" / \"M\" / \"N\" / ADMIN / SUSPENSE FILE\n\nLt. Cmdr. Richard Mandelkorn\nAFSWP Headquarters\nSandia Base\nAlbuquerque, New Mexico\n\nDear Cmdr. Mandelkorn:\n\nFurnished herewith is a transcript of\nthe minutes of the conference held at\nLos Alamos February 16, 1949, pertaining\nto aerial phenomena.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nSidney Newburger, Jr.\nChief, Security\nOperations Branch\n\nEncl:\nAs indicated\n\n\"When seperated from enclosures, handle this document as RESTRICTED\"\n\nSECRET TRANSMITTAL\nSHORT TITLE: Hill-5577"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CAUTION\nSECRET\nCONFERENCE\nOn\nAERIAL PHENOMENA\n\nDOCUMENT CONSISTS OF 24 PAGES\nNO 18 OF 25 COPIES, SERIES A\n\nHeld at 1300, 16 February 1949, in conference room P-162, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico. Present:\n\n4th Army: Major Winn, Major Godsoe, Captain Neef\nAFSWP: Commander Mandelkorn\nUniversity of New Mexico: Dr. LaPaz\nFBI: Mr. Maxwell\nUSAEC, SFOO: Mr. Morgan, Mr. Newburger\nUniversity of California: Dr. Bradbury, Dr. Holloway, Mr. Hoyt, Dr. Manley, Dr. Reines, Dr. Teller\n\nMr. Newburger opened the conference and stated that the subject of Aerial Phenomena was classified Secret within the meaning of AR 380-5 and comparable appropriate regulations of the Navy and Air Forces, and that all personnel at this meeting were properly cleared. Mr. Newburger then introduced Captain Neef, who briefly outlined the purpose of this meeting.\n\nCaptain Neef: It all started back in December, 1948, when we first received some reports from some airline pilots that these green fireballs were sighted. At this stage we had no idea what to do with it or what it was. We approached Dr. LaPaz who has been assisting us, gratis, since that date. Almost over two months now that he has been assisting us, so in order to have you get the facts as they are to a scientist, I'll let Dr. LaPaz explain these things as we have found them. Then you can give us your opinion from there; that is what we are interested in.\n\nDr. LaPaz: I would like to review what is observed in the case of a conventional meteorite fall. Not that I have any hopes of saying anything you don't already know, but because I regard the observational evidence observed by the conventional meteorite falls as providing the necessary background for what is now observed. Meteorite falls (for next minute or two, Dr. LaPaz's comments on record drowned out by noise from ditch digger immediately outside conference room) ....... Because of sound phenomena primarily, the fall of a large meteorite will cause great fright among human beings necessarily but primarily among animals, of all kinds. The fact follows, by a meteorite falling into the"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conference on AERIAL PHENOMENA Page 2\n\nearth, is as you would expect, one at random - in azimuth and elevation. If the radiant white is known, you can predict the minimum angle with respect to the plane of the horizon at which the meteorite path has been observed. There is no choice, as far as the ..... for direction when meteorites fall in at random. I'd like to contrast now, at this time, this fact with what has been observed by some individuals here at the conference and by many of the AESS inspectors, UAL pilots, special agents, goodness knows how many other categories of people. I choose to describe the only one of the incidents that I was personally a witness to. It is the only one of the incidents that I am in a position to vouch for on the basis of experience, dating from 1915, as a member of the American Meteor Society, was most certainly not a conventional meteorite fall. It was the so-called Starvation Peak incident on the night of December 12, 1948. Time of observation around 9:02 P.M., plus or minus 30 seconds. This fireball appeared in full intensity instantly - there was no increase in light. Its color, estimated to be somewhere around wave length 5200 engstroms, was a hue green, or yellow green, such as I had never observed in meteor falls before. The path was as nearly horizontal as one could determine by visual observation. We have a photograph which might be some liters of departure from horizontal. The trajectory was traverse at, I am inclined to believe, constant angular velocity. Just before the end of the path there was the very slightest drooping of the path, that is the green fireball broke into fragments, still bright green.\n\nDr. Teller: And all this time the intensity was approximately constant?\n\nDr. LaPaz: All the time, as far as I could determine. The eye, of course, is admittedly a very crude photographer.\n\nDr. Teller: How long did the phenomenon last?\n\nDr. LaPaz: Almost exactly two seconds. We have in the reports here, I brought the complete file with me and would be glad to circulate them, duration measures in relation to all observations. Few of these, however, I believe, were determined under as favorable circumstances as the duration of the Starvation Peak incident. Possibly I should go back and review the situation a little bit. Because some report, issued by the AESS, would certainly suggest that I was primarily responsible for starting this whole matter I am glad that Captain Neef corrected that impression. Actually, I was on an investigation in regard to the green fireball observed on the night of December 5th at the time the December 12th incident occurred. As a result I was keyed up; I was watching; I had a stop watch with me and a transit. We got into position and made measures, transit measures, on azimuths and elevation readings; that is, we made a duration check, certainly within not more than two or three minutes after the incident occurred. To that extent, I believe, it is possibly the best observed of any incident up to the time of the January 30th fall.\n\nDr. Manley: How did you have time to use the transit?\n\nDr. LaPaz: The transit was in the back of the car. The moment the car was parked at the side of the road, we yanked the transit out and set it up and"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conference on AERIAL PHENOMENA Page 3\n\nbegan measurements. We were in motion at the time but we were able to get a very good check of what we observed at the time on the road near Starvation Peak. We had a clear view of the sky to the Northwest and the West, and the object was so low over the horizon it was possible to compare it not only to the stars with which I am familiar, but with respect to mountain peaks that were also visible. To continue, that duration was about two seconds. This is one of the puzzling things to the meteorists. I believe I do not exaggerate when I say that 90% of the duration determinations that have been made in the case of the green fireballs have given durations right in that vicinity. Whereas you take, say, 100 ordinary meteor observations you will find the widest diversions in durations. You could take the same lesson as observed by 100 people - possibly that's a better example - and there would be wide variations in the estimates of duration.\n\nDr. Manley: Did you correlate the azimuths with .....?\n\nDr. LaPaz: No. There is an azimuth factor here which I am going to talk to you about, that relates to the choice of direction. Both our observations are single station observations, so that it becomes impossible from the observation measure to determine the real path of the fireball in the atmosphere. There have been only three cases where that path was determinable. One, as I recall it, was that of December 12, another December 20, and finally, of course, the very large fall on January 30, 1949. I'll give you some particulars on the paths. I do want to observe, however, that even our station observations present a puzzling characteristic to the meteorists. If you plot what are called, by meteorists, the admissible protozons for a green fireball that has been observed, you will find that they give, on the average, an approach almost to the North, come down from the North, they are not restricted to ? . Now what about the real paths? I gave some indications as to the altitude at which meteorites normally disrupt full ..... and come down. That relates to the lowest ..... of path. The green fireballs are unusual in this respect: probably that they are horizontal or nearly so, or that their horizontal path is traversed very low down in the atmosphere. In the case of the real paths for which we have been able to make determinations so far, those are graphical determinations, as we have not taken the trouble to use Chablis (?) methods or ..... because the observations are regarded as necessarily too rough for mathematical niceties. Those paths are traversed at elevations between 8 and 10 miles. I defy you to find anywhere among meteorists, examples of conventional meteorites that move over long horizontal paths reserving nearly constant angular velocities and therefore, on the average, constant linear velocities, at elevations of the order of 8 to 10 miles. There is a good deal of evidence that may be of value in the complete reports that are available here, but since this is an introduction, I would like to summarize at this stage: the fireball which I personally witnessed on the night of December 12, 1948, was not, in my opinion, a conventional meteor fall. Since the majority of the green fireballs have been reported to me, both before and after this December 12th occurrence, possess almost all the properties which I personally observed on the night of December 12th, I feel that in all probability they are not themselves conventional meteor falls. Now, the easy way out of this is to conjure up an unconventional type of ..... meteorite, which comes in practically parallel to the"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"surface of the earth and is somehow endowed with the property against the very great atmospheric resistance that is experienced on a level, it reserves nearly constant velocity over paths say of the order of 25 to over 100 miles, as in the case of the green fireball on January 30th. It should also have the property that it is a very remarkable hue of green, not heretofore observed, to my knowledge, in the case of any conventional meteor falls. And finally, and this possibly is the most implausible feature of all, that although it produces light visible at distances of the order of 400 miles, it doesn't make a sound. In the case of the January 30th fall, due to the fact that there had been a large number of military personnel alerted, we were able to obtain observations within a minute after the fall occurred and pursued the investigation over a distance of 1,600 miles - in Texas mud primarily! - in some ten days' time interviewing literally hundreds of people, we saw not one substantiated account of noise produced by the meteorite fall.\n\nDr. Teller: May I ask how many people have seen this one big meteorite?\n\nDr. LaPaz: That is difficult to say. (record blank for short period)........ Finally, in the interrogation of such persons, we invariably interview them as individuals. We tried a family of 8 the first night, as Major Godsoe will recall, interviewing ..... and it became apparent at once that there was some sympathetic influence and we broke it off after I think the third or fourth observation and thereafter interviewed separately. If you were to search, however, the independent observations of those who were widely separated, possibly stations of the order of 100, there were probably 100 different stations reporting.\n\nDr. Teller: What area did that cover?\n\nDr. LaPaz: All of New Mexico, all the Western half of Texas. I have a map here with some indications of possibly the extent of that.\n\nHoyt and Bradbury: Wasn't that Sunday the 24th?\n\nDr. LaPaz: No, it was definitely Sunday the 30th. The newspapers have very helpfully concealed most of the relevant facts relating to this fireball. First, they described it as a fireball, second, they ....(record blank for few seconds). interfered with OSI and wasn't able to do that this time. This is the field map and will give in various colors, dots and pencil dashes, etc. all of the observations obtained on the Texas search.\n\nDr. Teller: All relate to one fall?\n\nDr. LaPaz: Yes. These lines are drawn from points of observation. The center, as you see, of points of appearance is somewhere Southwest of Amarillo or South-southwest of Amarillo. The disappearance point is in the vicinity of Lubbock, Texas. At the time this was drawn, before I was able to make out transit measures in the vicinity of Albuquerque, this was the best apparent path of the fireballs. These other ink lines are independent, made by other groups of observers working on the same problem. (record blank again for short time). This transit, unfortunately, had a needle with a bent piston and it was not"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"discovered until much later that we were getting faulty records. Independently, I have re-determined, using the best equipment available at the University, the lines of sight at all points where the faulty transit had been used. I have plotted on this map only observations that I made personally or such observations as I have every reason to believe were made by experienced personnel, for example UAL flyers, who took the trouble to make measures, or possibly civil engineers.\n\nDr. Teller: You mean these people right afterwards or shortly afterwards took an instrument and tried to measure it?\n\nDr. LaPaz: That's right.\n\nDr. Teller: This is the point where it disappeared?\n\nDr. LaPaz: And normally, all you will get is the point where it disappears, because the average man is aware of the fact that when he is not warned, he makes a very inaccurate observation. Having been warned by the appearance of the fireball, his attention is fixed and he watches where it bursts, where it explodes, where it disappears. So I say this is a much better determination. This beginning point, although you notice the .... of line here, is reasonably satisfactory.\n\nDr. Teller: Are these points here observers of the test, locations of those observations?\n\nDr. LaPaz: Usually a dotted circle like that indicates a reported sound observation. We use this symbol: a circle is a report, whether or not the observation includes azimuth of elevation, light appearances, is indicated by the presence of a cross. If it is blacked out, both light and sound were heard. Now every one of those things has been disproved. In the area where the end point was located, oil well drilling was underway, dynamite blasting in connection with setting up of rigs, some nitro being used apparently to shatter ..... In every case we were able to exclude the possibility that the noises reported actually were tied in with the meteorite fall. At least let me say, in my opinion, those noises were excluded. In certain cases, independently, that was confirmed by a visit of Lt. Ryan of the Roswell group of the OSI. For instance, the best case of all, near Amherst ?, or noise - the observer, it's true, was only a ten-year old boy, but he wrote a very intelligent letter, and it is well known that children, like animals, are more sensitive to sound than people who have listened for too many years, say, to the radio. It appeared conceivable that he had actually made a sound observation, but Lt. Ryan went to Amherst ?, found that even three members of the family were not able to confirm his observation of noise and no one in the town, some 300 or 400 persons I think in all were estimated to have been visited, no one at all had heard a sound, so I think that Mike probably heard the same dynamite blast as had been reported by Miss Winson Didpasture - I didn't take that name out of the funny papers, it actually exists.\n\n(continual examination of the maps with minor interrogations concerning markings.)"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dr. LaPaz: With one exception, in the case of Roswell, there are two types of sound associated with meteorite falls and, I assume, associated with the motion of any very high velocity projectile or missile through the air. There are what physicists would call reasonable sounds, and while he would not acknowledge it, simultaneously with the appearance of a meteorite, you hear a meteorite, the physicist will refuse to believe the observation. Nevertheless, there is a tremendous volume of evidence indicating that these anomalous sounds occurred. Anyone who does field work in the search for meteorites will come across possibly 10% of the observers who say that, although my attention was attracted by hearing, a whining noise, a whistling noise, I looked up and there was the fireball. In other words, this anomalous sound apparently attracts attention to the occurrence. I have an article by Brandon ..... one of the sons of the man who first investigated the great crater out in Arizona, and a chap by the name of Hart ? with whom I am not personally acquainted but a physicist apparently at Princeton, in which they attempt to justify the occurrence of anomalous sound. They express it roughly in this fasion. Electromagnetic radiation is set up by\n\n(Dr. Teller excused to answer the phone.)\n\nDr. LaPaz: You wouldn't believe it anyway! However, ..... electromagnetic radiation is rectified somehow by the ..... changed into sound that can be heard and, therefore, you can hear the meteorite at the same time you see it fall. In the case of the Roswell observation apparently that occurred. We have a group of five men - there were near a steel smokestack - and every last one of them swears that they heard at the same time they were watching the green fireball go by, a noise like, say, a gasoline blowtorch. That is certainly not an ordinary explosives sound. One more thing in connection with the noises. In every other meteorite fall, any one meteorite fall that I have investigated, - that covers many years - I have never yet found an occasion of a detonating fireball, without meteorites coming down at all, in which there was not some evidence of alarm of animals. Chickens will fly around to try to get under cover. Dogs will howl and try to get into the house. Horses will run away. In the case of the Texas fall, in spite of the tremendous area in which the light was observed, we found not a single case in which the animals were disturbed. We knew of the case of a farmer who had, in sunny Texas, a pond with a five-inch layer of ice, who reported that a meteorite had fallen through the ice on that pond, had broken a hole. Captain Neef here put on a pair of rubber boots and very thoroughly searched the pond without finding a meteorite. Even in that case there was no evidence of alarm by the animals. I believe with that summary, I'd better cease operations and have you ask questions.\n\nQuestion: How many observed falls?\n\nDr. LaPaz: I'd like to classify those into three groups. I would say that there are ten instances that definitely merit the most serious consideration. They are strictly analogous to the green fireballs of the night of December 12. On top of that, there must be something of the order of twenty more which are"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"so well reported, from Los Alamos for example, that although the green fireballs observed showed small .... the nature of the fireball .... many observations of observers who paid practically no attention to the sky at any other time in their lives and now when they see a really bright light, they report it. You will find a great many instances of bluish-white fireballs. In my opinion, those falling vertically and leaving trails, are simply ordinary shooting stars. Of high intensity, that is, what we call fireballs, a blue light, are not in any sense to be associated with the green lights. Those three categories then.\n\nDr. Manley: ?\n\nDr. LaPaz: In the case of the two green fireball paths, determined from Los Alamos observations, in one case the Starvation Peak incident, we have an East-West motion, and then also a motion exactly parallel to ..... In other words, these two real paths show, I think they are the only two of the first category that show any real departure from the ..... It is possible to explain that. It is quite evident that we have no case of assurance that both groups of observers, the observers at Starvation Peak and the observers at Los Alamos, saw the same point of ..... so that if we were to merely ask what are the limits within which such real paths might fall, it turns out that it might be as short as 12 miles instead of being 25 miles long, and in that case it would be directed almost directly to the North; it would come down very nearly within 2 degrees, 5 degrees say, of the North. In the case of the Texas observations, whereas I have indicated and the maps show, we have many observations by trained observers, motion is clearly almost directly North to South. I have been informed that there are reasons for regarding the ..... out here (ditch digger) ... and you notice that this passes reasonably close to Lubbock. The same is true of the two earlier fireballs, those of December 12 and December 20. They both passed - one passed centrally over Los Alamos and the other about six miles North of the center, but this would not be true ..... (ditch digger). One point that possibly should have been mentioned earlier is this: I was the more interested when Captain Neef came to my office and brought the December 5th incident to my mind because very much earlier I had been contacted first by ... White, Director of Texas Observers, in regard to their remarkable green flare seen on January 1, 1948. Second, from a Dr. Pruitt, Director Northwestern Section, City Section, of the Meteor Society, I had been informed that earlier occurrences of bright green fireballs, not too far from the Hanford area. When Captain Neef came in with reports of green fireballs near Las Vegas and particularly when he disclosed that there was a Los Alamos near Las Vegas - the real Los Alamos - it had much interest.\n\nDr. Holloway: Are there any reports of these from other installations, such as Troy, New York, or places like that?\n\nDr. LaPaz: I raised that question and I know of no other cases. I mean to say the areas from which these reports come, as in one, for such evidence as ....., they do not relate to the green fireballs; they relate to the daylight occurrence of horizontal moving, bright white objects - some in Memphis, Tennessee in May, 1948 - that is not too far from Oak Ridge. They relate to"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the Hanford area as far as the Pruitt observations go, and to the observations that I've mentioned here in the Las Vegas-Los Alamos area ....... A very curious thing has come to light during these investigations. I published not long ago an article in Science Illustrated on the recovery of the ..... Town meteorite. The time that fell, February 18, 1948, the rumor got around somehow in Northern Kansas and Southern Kansas that it was a Russian bomb, and it was aimed at the geographical center of the United States which is not very far from ..... Apparently, a great many people gave credence to that rumor and were delighted when we finally recovered meteorites up there and proved it wasn't anything but an ordinary meteorite fall. Incidentally, it did not have the characteristics of the green fireball we're talking about here. There was an air transport pilot who made a most curious observation while flying near Cherbourg on January 16, 1946. His observation was the observation of a bouncing meteor. After what I've been telling you about the green fireballs, you probably think it not unreasonable that a meteorite should bounce but to the meteorlytical mind that seems very hard to swallow. The interest is that one of your own persons here at Los Alamos, one and confirmed at least in part by four other persons, saw one of the green fireballs come down and then glide off horizontally. The bouncing meteorite is manually explained by having it form, say sinusoidal motion lying in about the plane at which the observer was looking so that he first saw the high point of the curve or the peak. The next time it was at the peak, it was so far away that the altitude was very low, which will give you the appearance of a bouncing meteorite. I offer that as a possible explanation. Of course, he may have landed in Paris before he made the Cherbourg flight and then we should disregard the testimony entirely!\n\nMr. Newburger: Dr. LaPaz, you mentioned, I believe, at one of our other meetings that they had compared the color of this with certain metals?\n\nDr. LaPaz: That's right. Initially we could only ask them what they thought it looked like. And we got such interesting responses that we eventually carried around a spectrum chart and allowed everybody to make his own choice. Of course, the use of the spectrum chart was unnecessary if they have a color like one lady who had around her neck a green scarf which she assured me he had exactly the same hue, but normally not having such things to look at, they were pleased to have the chart to look at. They will choose, in 90% of the cases, category 1 and category 2 & wave length which corresponds to something between 4900 and possibly 5300. Most of them will fall very close to 5218 which is about the color you get when you have copper salts in the Bunsen burner. I checked with Dr. Regener on that and asked him if an alloy had been used, like, say, copper beryllium, if there would be any change in that hue, and he has assured me there would not. He said it would still give approximate appearance of beryllium copper ..... You will find in probably 1350 of the 1500 only the merest trace of copper occurrence. There are a few meteorites like ..... in South Dakota, where little veins of copper have been found, making up possibly .4 of 1%.\n\nDr. Bradbury: Is this true of all meteorites?"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dr. LaPaz: It's true in any category. Even in the irons, the presence of copper is very hard to detect, very little. ..... (ditch digger). I don't know whether you gentlemen could suggest an easy way to obtain green fireball spectra or not.\n\nDr. Teller: What is the geographical solution of this?\n\nDr. LaPaz: Another map would probably answer that best of all.\n\n(Looked at more maps with some talk that was not audible.)\n\nMr. Hoyt confirmed the green hue of the green fireball he had seen on the night of December 30, 1948. (Record dead dor minute or two.)\n\nMr. Hoyt: I would have said approximately as far above the mountain as the floor of the valley was below the top of the mountain. I felt that would give me somewhere in the neighborhood of 20,000 feet or thereabouts. It was about 5 minutes to 6, on my way up here. I have a feeling that it had a downward path. I mean it was going South.\n\nDr. LaPaz: But it was not strictly horizontal?\n\nMr. Hoyt: No.\n\nDr. LaPaz: We have some discrepancies in that regard. 95% of the observations indicate a very nearly horizontal path. One from Fort Worth, Texas, which was not made by ..... but measured by them, indicates an elevation of 6 degrees at the beginning and 2½ to 3 degrees at the end.\n\nMr. Hoyt: That's what I would have said, but remember that the ridge would give you the sensation that it was taking a downward path. Duration - at the time I would say it was approximately 3 seconds.\n\nComdr. Mandelkorn: How does the calculated velocity of those objects compare with the known velocity of meteorites?\n\nDr. LaPaz: Apparently very much lower; that is, more than the ordinarily observed meteorite falls. First, to observe in the cast of an actual meteorite fall you have a relation of the velocity from the auricle of ..... atmosphere down to the impact velocity which may be very ..... but it isn't fair to compare the velocity of the green fireballs to the impact velocity of ...... (ditch digger and everyone talking at once)....... Not with the trajectory velocity of the meteorite which is the same as the velocity of the fragments that fall from the meteorite. After a meteorite ..... the fragments fall about like a bomb. Their resistance just about balances out the ..... and as a result, they come down with about the velocity of a falling bomb, a little less because they do not have the same ballistic coefficient.\n\nDr. Bradbury: This is not an excluded ? direction like the .....?"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dr. LaPaz: Due to the fact that they have a curve, and practically all times during which darkness is with us, why they tend to come in from that direction.... Dr. Bradbury: Would it be a shower? Dr. LaPaz: That was my first explanation, as a matter of fact. Geminate showers with a maximum of December 10 to December 12. The first evidence that I had was Sgt. Kinsley's report on December 2 and since often the forerunners of the showers will ..... I thought we were talking about Geminate showers except that I never observed a green Geminate. Matter of fact, a check of observations made at that time found that there were 414 observations since 1915 and there wasn't a single one, Geminate or non-Geminate, for which any hue of green was mentioned. Later, for instance on the night of December 12, you could watch the Geminate come down.... and notice that they came in at high angles to the horizontal, whereas the green fireballs ..... Incidentally, we have another interesting piece of evidence there - Dr. Sherman Smith from the University - I mention an observation that he made on the same night. The time of the observation is in dispute. According to Dr. Smith it was probably as late as 10:50. He had to wait for a long time, he said, for his wife to pick him up after the concert was over. Mrs. Smith, however, times it around 10:10. Whatever the time, within an hour or say an hour and a half after the green fireball and the horizontal path were observed, we have another extremely bright blue fireball come out of the Geminate rays. I mention this because some of the first persons to concern themselves with this problem suggest that the green fireballs were simply abnormally bright Geminates. Apparently you can have very large Geminate falls of the color estimated by a trained ..... checked with the spectrum charts ..... is quite distant, I assure you, from the green fireballs. Comdr. Mandelkorn: How good is the coverage of the observers of the American Meteor Society as far as the top-half of the United States is concerned? Dr. LaPaz: It depends a good deal upon overcast conditions. I would say, however, that this year the Eastern half of the country has offered phenomenal observing conditions. One of my reasons for withdrawing from Ohio State was that after 13 years there I had given up hope of ever seeing a meteorite shower because during the season of maximum intensity of the falls we had heavy overcast, snow and so forth. On the other hand, this year they're had reasonably open skies. I have obtained no reports from people in that part of the country. We thought we had a definitive check because Harvard College has now installed a photographic meteor station near or possibly inside the White Sands Proving Ground. Since the 12th of December, you correct me if I exaggerate here, we have been trying to determine the color and other characteristics of the ten or 12 brightest meteors observed at that station. We still don't know what they saw. We know they were operating and they made some photographs, but Captain Neef can probably tell you the red-tape channelization impediments that has dropped out any determinations better than I can."} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Captain Neef: Well, it's one of those things; it's a Navy contract and they are not at liberty to divulge what they find, so we have to go through Washington, the Bureau of Ordnance, to get the information. Comdr. Mandelkorn: I believe I can get that information; as a matter of fact, I feel very certain that I can. Just a matter of approach. Dr. LaPaz: I feel certain if I had contacted Dr. Fred Whipple, for example, I could have obtained it, but his other occupations keep him away from that installation. And actually I felt as a meteorist, it might be wise to have OSI appeal for information rather than to ask for it directly. Captain Neef: They did tell us they weren't using films which were going to be susceptible to these colors. Dr. LaPaz: But, of course, they are making constant visual observations and if you were able to determine visual observations 100 miles from Los Alamos don't reveal the occurrence of bright green fireballs, I think it would be significant. I don't know why they should avoid the Southern-half of the State. Comdr. Mandelkorn: Let us say if these had been at extremely high altitudes, they would have been visible from White Sands without any question. Captain Neef: This one of the 30th definitely was visible from White Sands because Commander Holloman ? and his wife and one of his assistants and his wife saw it from there. Dr. LaPaz: On the other hand, you have evidence like that of Professor Talbot ? now in charge of the optical trajectory section down there, an experienced astronomer, a member of the American Meteor Society. I talked with him about this, and he has observed nothing out of the ordinary. I don't think anybody, I mean in the line of green fireballs, in this area has been observing as much as he does. I don't see how he could miss sighting some of these. Question: What explanation do you have for this? Dr. LaPaz: The only explanation is the one I gave in the beginning and had my ears promptly boxed for. I think these are defensive manoeuvers of some higher U S. Command and they are practising in the neighborhood of the regions they are going to defend, so naturally your localization of light near the atomic bomb installations, but boy, am I scolded for that! Even Dr. Kaplan of the FAD ? tells me no, no, the FAD would know all about it, and they don't have any facts. Dr. Bradbury: Is this the physicist Kaplan? Dr. LaPaz: Yes. Kaplan is my old boss. He was chief of the operational analysis section when I was ..... director there. ..... During Kaplan's visit"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to the University of New Mexico, where he was lecturing, we called a conference with Major Godsoe and other interested parties. He gave a brief resume of the observations that had been made to date. Now, Kaplan is one of the charter members of the American Meteor Society, and he said certainly these could not be conventional meteorite falls. He, of course, mentioned as other people do who have not gone into it more thoroughly, the possibility of abnormal types of meteorite falls, that might come in from a peculiar direction or might droop at very low level, but I don't think he was able to explain the absence of sound. Dr. Teller: Did I understand you correctly that the velocity of the object appears to be some 50 kilometers per second? Dr. LaPaz: No. In the case of the green fireballs something between 3 miles per second and 12 miles per second. Depending, you see, if you choose one ruled map or another. For example, let me illustrate how that affects the velocity determination. This is the one I think possibly best represents the observations of the case of the fireball of December 12. That is the path, I assume the Los Alamos observers saw the same point of the curves that the Starvation Peak observers did, likewise to the point of disappearance. If we deny that possibility, the path might shorten to this dotted line. (Dr. LaPaz worked on maps with Dr. Teller, explaining paths.) Dropping from 25 to something between 11 and 12 miles. The January 30 observation gave us our first long path. Dr. Teller: How long was it? Dr. LaPaz: The first observations we had here indicated ..... That was because of errors in the determination of the azimuth at the point of beginning, made due to the faulty transit they used. But that's correct that the path runs over 100 miles. Dr. Teller: And how long does it take? Dr. LaPaz: Duration estimates range from 5 to around 14 seconds. I think that a 10 second average is about the best, that would give about 10 miles per second. Dr. Bradbury: Green is not an unknown color in meteors? Dr. LaPaz: If I were to rewrite the report that I first presented on that subject, instead of saying \"rarely observed\" this color green, I think I would now say \"never observed\". You sometimes see green, Dr. Bradbury, but it is a blue-green. The blue-green color is rare, but it is observed. For instance, Dr. Sherman Smith's observation was essentially a blue-green, but on the blue side. Dr. Bradbury: What other colors do you see in meteors?"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dr. LaPaz: Whites chiefly. If you look closely and without interference from outside lights, yellows, oranges and reds. Dr. Bradbury: But it's apparently a yellowish-green we're talking about here. If you can see a bluish-green, you can also see yellows and whites. Dr. LaPaz: There is some defect, possibly in the vision, that requires a pretty high intensity in that yellow-green before it's noted in a meteor fall. Dr. Bradbury: Looks like green? Dr. LaPaz: Yes it does, that's perfectly true. Now here's a peculiar property of those yellow-green fireballs - some people will refer to them as red. The only explanation that I can think of is they report afterwards that they see what is an exposure to a very green-bluish light rather than the light itself - I don't know if that is correct. And, incidentally, due to your observation, I don't know how to explain the inability of meteor observers to report this renegade color, but I simply know it doesn't occur. You go through long lists, like those of the American Meteor Society, you will find, I imagine, not 1 in 100 where a green is mentioned. Even in the case of the ? showers, where you have large numbers of very bright colors - let me recall something that all of you must have seen. The ..... shower of October 9, 1946 - anyone here who saw that? There were large numbers of extremely bright fireballs at that time. Kaplan himself recalled that they were blue, maybe blue-green, but never yellow-green. And I observed those under very favorable circumstances - we were flying at about 20,000 feet in a B-29. We had no absorption effects at all. They definitely did not show hues of green. Dr. Bradbury: You mentioned the noise problem also. The noise occurs only when the meteor itself blows up, breaks up? Dr. LaPaz: No, that isn't strictly true. You have, in addition to the hollow sound, the normal sound of the breakup of the ..... You have headwind; you're near the path. You get a real shock; for instance, we have ..... apparently broken up by that headwave, shock wave, in the case of the Norden County Falls. And then from the turbulence and reflections all the way along the path, you will have a rumbling which may endure not for the matter of a tenth of a second, but for minutes, and they're real rough. Dr. Bradbury: But these occur fairly close to the trajectory? Dr. LaPaz: No. In the case of the Norden County Falls again, they were heard clear down to ..... City. Shakes buildings that far away. The ..... Falls were heard up to 300 miles from the point of impact. Dr. Bradbury: Large number of observations ....... Dr. LaPaz: No, there again I checked very carefully because I was concerned. I am trying desperately to give a logical explanation to the absence of sound."} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I have found in the literature only three cases where no detonations, no rumblings were reported. One of those is the Belgium observation in 1855, and I think should be discounted because meteorists hardly existed at that time. Some falls occurred and were not reported at all. The other two are reasonably recent observations - one in 1921 and one in 1922. They occurred, however, in the deep South where negroes, I think, were the only observers. Even there, the whizzing of the meteorites as they fell through the air, was reported. I know of no case of an actual meteorite where at least the whizzing of the falling body coming down through the air has not been reported. Dr. Bradbury: .......? Dr. LaPaz: Meteorite falls, I believe that was the way you phrased it? In the case of a shooting star, of course, you never hear a thing because the entire mass is, very kindly, vaporized before it gets, say, within 50 miles of the earth....... Not only noises, but accompanied by such noises that persons or animals are really frightened out of their wits. For example, we have a beautiful case where 2 horses killed themselves - in the Norden County Falls - they may have been felled by meteorites, but I'm inclined to think that the noise frightened them until they dashed into a ditch ...... Animals go crazy. Comdr. Mandelkorn: Do you think it unusual no fragments are found? Dr. LaPaz: I certainly do. And I think it unusual, not only in the case of the green fireballs, but in view of the fact that a great fall, like the ..... fall of October 30, 1947, where for the first time we detected a bit of the interest on the party of the military, there too we recovered nothing. October 30, 1947, about 4:48 in the afternoon there was, what appeared to be, a tremendous meteorite fall over the reservation area - the Four Corners Area. We got there within a very few hours, had excellent observations, went back time and again, exhausted ground search, CAP people in airplanes, we had a radio centered, we had radio controlled jeeps and a lot of people out walking around - not a trace. I can't give you a color on that because ..... Comdr. Mandelkorn: Ordinarily, when phenomena of that nature occur, you are able to recover some material? Dr. LaPaz: Yes, some material is recovered almost always. If proper search is conducted. We have, by the way, very thorough air search conducted by Gill Field Corps of Intelligence Unit; Dr. Lansberg of the Research and Development Board, very kindly interested himself in the problem and the air searchers resulted not even in the discovery of a broken branch. The region is heavily forrested. If branches had been broken, I think they would have been detected. I haven't classified that particular fall, however, with the green fireballs and for this reason: that left a train. Another thing which I might have mentioned - a normal meteorite fall ..... will produce a long enduring train visible by day and night. Luminous by night and by day,"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conference on AERIAL PHENOMENA Page 15 illuminated by the sun. In the case of the irons, it will be very faint, but it'll be there if you look for it. In the case of the Four Corners Fall, that train was observed and I'm inclined to believe that it might have been a conventional meteorite fall. In the case of the green fireballs, to my knowledge, no such train has been observed. That question is always asked of people - did you observe a long enduring train; their replies were always negative. Comdr. Mandelkorn: Then you would say there were 10 incidents which are analogous to the green fireballs, with reports checked by a sufficient number of independent observers, that there is no doubt whatsoever of their occurrence? Dr. LaPaz: That's right. Comdr. Mandelkorn: Then there are 20 with some deviations, two of these probably are related to the green fireballs ..... Dr. LaPaz: I believe two of those incidents I mentioned occurred before the 5th of December. A very remarkable one of the 4th of August - note that that again is very close to the time of ..... meteor shower ...... From late in July on and my report will be producing quite a number of these ......., but it is physically impossible with this particular observation from near ...... Oregon..... Dr. Bradbury: Then their directions were wrong? Dr. LaPaz: As a matter of fact, we can't tell because they were single observations. Maybe I should pass that letter around, but it is, I believe, the first detailed report on what might be characterized as a typical green fireball. After the Oscar ..... incident of January 1, 1948, was merely a remarkable green flash, which might have had some other interpretation. (Dr. LaPaz showed some letters around the table, and there was general talk not able to be picked up individually.) Major Godsoe: The basic purpose of this meeting is: we want you to find a meteor! Mr. Newburger: Have the military - anyone from the National Defense establishment - given us anything? Sent out any conjectures about this thing? Major Godsoe: No, most of the military authorities think we are crackpots; that is, except for the Army Air Force, which is taking an active interest in details. Mr. Newburger: The Air Force does have the primary interest in this gadget? Major Godsoe: Yes, the Air Force is the gathering, reporting agency for this phenomenon."} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conference on AERIAL PHENOMENA Page 16 Comdr. Mandelkorn: I'd like to remove that temporary statement about the Armed Forces Special Weapons Project; we aren't laughing ....(record blank for minute or two). Dr. Bradbury: None of us are experts in this field, so we essentially have to believe what we are told. I suppose if you try to look for logical explanations, there are probably some. Dr. LaPaz: I would like to ask one question here - unless you feed power into a body moving into a horizontal path, can it preserve essentially a horizontal trajectory? A plane does it; meteorites don't do it; shows curves as the energy falls off. This thing apparently ignores air resistance and gravity and goes blissfully on its way............... Dr. Teller: As far as straightness of the path is concerned, if you have a meteorite that you have observed for 10 seconds, and in these 10 seconds it has gone adistance of 100 miles, it will have fallen in this distance 1/3 of a mile and now I should like to dare any observer to tell a curvature of this kind - because you are completely unprepared for the phenomenon. Dr. LaPaz: As it slows down, it curves toward the bottom. Dr. Teller: But apparently before it has happened, slowed down too much or exploded or something, and then it has disappeared. Now the ..... point is, of course, if it has no power it will slow down, but I do not know how quickly you would have to estimate that; furthermore, the rate at which it slows down will depend very much on the question whether it has been at a 10 mile altitude or a 20 mile altitude. Dr. LaPaz: The elevation estimates are very concordant on these, and I doubt that you will be able to change that elevation of 8 to 10 miles by very much. These are the real path observations that I have mentioned. Dr. Teller: Well, can you say.......do you think anything can be said about that? Dr. LaPaz: I doubt it. The eye, of course, is not a good speedometer. You can't detect a change. At least, I did not in the one observation that I made, and no such change has been reported. In the case of those who observed the green fireballs, say that near the end of the Texas fireball path of January 30 it was noted that the fragments moved out leisurely to the point at which there was apparently less velocity, as shown by them on the green fireball itself. May I mention, however, that in the case of the normal meteorite fall that curvature in the path, the transverse vertical, is one of the most apparent. You see that in the case of any large, ordinary detonation fireball fall even though it may not produce ..... there is a tendency to curve. Dr. Teller: What about total light. ... How does the brightness compare to the brightness of the meteorites that come from a meteor?"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conference on AERIAL PHENOMENA Page 17 Dr. LaPaz: In the case of the Texas fall, this is very rough; I didn't see it, I can only base an estimate say on the comparisons that were made with the moon as to size and total intensity. In the case of the Texas fall it would certainly be comparable to - it was one of the brightest observed fireballs in total intensity .... In the case of the Starvation Peak incident, we can compare it with Venus which was conveniently located, and it certainly was of stellar magnitude minus 4, possibly a little brighter. That comparison was made almost immediately after the observation. ..... Mr. Hoyt: It was very bright and clear that night. ..... Dr. Teller: You saw it at 6 o'clock? Mr. Hoyt: At five minutes to six. Very, very clear that night. (ditch digger - in between ditch digger, a few coherent remarks:) Dr. Manley: In 1945 or 1946 I observed practically the same thing as in this letter. We thought it was a roman candle. Definitely light green in color. I am still worried about the fact that they don't report any green color in these falls. Dr. Bradbury: Lack of noise, lack of ...., the lack of these things would be equally astounding for any material object. ..... Dr. LaPaz: Dr. Kaplan suggested the possibility of the same sort of phenomenon that he could produce experimentally in his laboratory .... and he tells me under certain conditions he can produce a globe or lamps of yellowish-green light ..... He conjectured for a minute that that might have some relation - an artificial aurora. Comdr. Mandelkorn: As long as you brought that up, Maj. Johnson has a letter I obtained from Gen. Bunker which may be pertinent. Gen. Bunker transmitted the information you've heard to the Air Materiel Command, and in reply received a letter from an Air Force General who recently returned from Alaska. I'll let Dr. LaPaz read this. Dr. LaPaz: This is closely related to what I was talking about. It begins: \"Dear Bunker: Received your interesting phenomena of 1 February and promptly turned it over to Howard .... now saddled with the responsibility of clues. Regard as coincidental that on dates you mention Gen. Carroll was in Fairbanks, Alaska, and on his return related that he had never seen before in his life such a beautiful technical display of Northern Lights. Maybe what these people have seen is a reflection from the .... of these pyrotechnics. So far as we know, it is still phenomena and not material. Best Regards, Paul\"."} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conference on AERIAL PHENOMENA Page 18 Dr. LaPaz: May I make the observation that if you look in the chapter by ....., you'll find that in Alaska where this observation was reported, there are very few times at this season of the year when you can't see an aurora. Dr. Teller: I have the feeling that it is .... either a discovery in physical psychology or ..... Dr. LaPaz: I thought that psychological element would come in here! Dr. Teller: Here is a slightly irrelevant question - you brought in the flying discs. What is the connection? Dr. LaPaz: I didn't bring in the flying discs. Mr. Newburger: I brought in the matter of the flying discs because the Air Force, as I understand, now have classed the flying discs and these fireballs into one category. Captain Neef: .... The only indication we have is a letter from MAC in Washington Saturday where they indicated the old project Sign is now project Grudge, which includes the phenomena observed in New Mexico. They knew of this meeting and were going to send a representative. Dr. LaPaz: I just asked Mr. Hoyt a moment ago how he would compare the brillance of this object with that of an aircraft flare. He said they were of comparable magnitude. I think that was definitely ruled out ..... Dr. Teller: I understood that a reasonable explanation of the flying discs - and I suppose that it is generally known - is that they are meteorological balloons. .... I understand that in quite a number of cases there have been very close directions established. ..... I must say that from what you have said, it certainly sounds like everything else but meteors. The thing that impresses me is your evidence of the horizontal flight. Meteors do not usually come in like that. ..... (mumbled talk between Drs. Bradbury and Teller) Captain Neaf: ..... Change of direction such that we haven't been able to follow it up yet. One of our men was returning Sunday night when our tower operator saw this object to the Southwest from Kirtland Field and .... Arizona reported it was Southeast from them. From the Kirtland tower it was a bronze color. The time checks, but from .... Arizona it was green until it turned straight down and veered going ... . Dr. LaPaz: Dr. Teller, may I mention this one other instance that shows maybe why I have more concern than is merited by the evidence I am able to present. I deal with Vic Regener and I know that the physicist doesn't like to work with anything that can't be photographed. I share that view but a meteorist is not available sometimes to photograph shooting stars, even the conventional type. During the war I was acting as Director of the Ohio Section"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conference on AERIAL PHENOMENA Page 19 of the American Meteor Society and all at once we began to get reports of large numbers of stationary fireballs; not moving. The burst was there, but no motion. Now one who observes normal conventional fireball falls is aware of the fact that not 1 out of say 500 shows actual fixity; there is always motion. So, this looks very, very strange. Of course, you all know what those stationary fireballs turned out to be. They were the self-destructive devices on Japanese paper balloons operating. You had a hydrogen filled sphere with a two-crown mask of magnesium flash-light powder. And when the magnesium and the hydrogen went off together, you could see it for a long way. We got stationary fireballs but they certainly were not meteoritic. My experience since I was suspected of psychological apparitions at the time I reported these stationary fireballs to, for example, Dr. Kamplan, my experience with .... led me to be very cautious about taking my concern ..... but at the same time I feel that we shouldn't be too hasty in giving a natural explanation to these green fireballs. Dr. Teller: ..... but I would like to ask, these phenomena are apparently quite bright, more luminous than normal meteorites? Dr. LaPaz: Well, the January 30th one was; I wouldn't say that about the one I saw on December 12. That was a very bright fireball, but not extraordinarily so. Dr. Teller: What is the chance of getting pictures? Dr. LaPaz: I refer to the one attempt that was made on the night of December 19. We set up a photographic patrol - the AESS, as you probably know, has been interested in this problem. They brought a lot of speed graphics and so on and set them up. Mr. Maxwell, a member of the group ...., and they were able, I think the night before, to photograph a bright Geminate. But on the night of the 19th nothing was observed. The next night, however, the night of the 20th there was an incident which I believe might have been photographed, but by that time the equipment had been disbanded and nothing was obtained. I should think, with proper coverage, say 10 to 15%, of these should record themselves provided you do not use green insensitive .... and film such as the .... Dr. Teller: Is there any possibility of having a wide coverage of the sky triggered by a photo cell? Dr. LaPaz: I have discussed that, for example with Dr. Reneger, who has been very much interested in the apparatus, and his answer is more or less in the negative. I understand that Cornell University - Gartline of Cornell - has produced some sort of photo-electric triggering device which has been used in this connection. I wrote him about it, asking for reprints or instructions, but never received a reply. Question: Do you think you are going to find film sensitive to this green color fast enough? We have some that can't be left out over 12 hours....."} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conference on AERIAL PHENOMENA Page 20 Dr. LaPaz: It should be possible ..... The conventional meteor cannot be photographed at the present time. The so-called meteorschmitts that Harvard College is now having produced at very great expense, they expect to go down to the 4th and possibly fainter. With one of those, a bright green fireball might be photographed, but they are not available. ..... Mr. Newburger: Does anybody know if there were any experiments carried out in Europe, prior to the war when our last best information came from over there, along this line? Dr. LaPaz: Not to my knowledge. I raised that question with Dr. Kaplan and he gave me some rather surprising information. Dr. Kaplan had attended the IAU meetings in Syria ? and the Russians had a large representation there. Sufficiently large, as a matter of fact, to beat down the proposal that the IAU appoint an international committee to investigate the so-called ..... meteorite crater produced in the fall of 1947, February 12. On the contrary, at the Oswald, I think it was, conference of the International Geophysical Union, none of the Russian geophysicists were present. Kaplan's interpretation was that they feel so far ahead of us that they didn't think they could learn anything, and they were taking the precaution that no leak occurred. Mr. Newburger: Were the Germans experimenting in any phase that was possibly connected with it? Dr. LaPaz: Well, they had the so-called stations in space ..... might have some attachment to it. Comdr. Mandelkorn: You don't have any record of experiments. Dr. LaPaz: No, no knowledge of experiments. ..... I have the belief that no country in the world has there been meteoritics developed as it has in Russia in recent years. Recently, the Academy of Science of the USSR has been issuing a so-called meteoritic, an extraordinary publication - very little work of the caliber being done by the Russians has been conducted in the United States. Apparently, there it has big support; here, it is an individual matter. Until we had some military interest in meteoritics, we were never able to found even an institute in meteoritics in the United States. The one in New Mexico is an outgrowth of application of meteoritics to determine, say, ballistic coefficients for shells of unconventional design like the proximity fuze shell with the radio in its nose, and that sort of thing. That's where we got a start. Apparently, the Russians got that earlier and have full-fledged state support. Dr. Holloway: How much interest would the military have if they found out these things were landing all over the country, Canada, Hawaii, etc.? ..... Have you contacted people in the East? Dr. LaPaz: Olivia, C. C. Olivia, President of the American Meteor Society, King, Leonard, Pruitt, Kaplan, etc. Most of them have been observing; Kaplan, I imagine, has not, because he is now preoccupied with laboratory"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"experiments. I think that if anyone of the UCLA Institute of Geophysics had been observing, it would have gotten to Kaplan's ears. ..... There are two great advantages to this area: first, you have clear skies at night and can observe them as they come down, and second, (record blank for minute or two). Dr. Holloway: ..... this was before the war. They had a telephone network which covered a fair section of the East there. ..... a network so that your observations ..... I mention this to indicate, I don't know what he is doing now, but at least they may have a group of people who have been observing. May not be in a position to ..... green fireballs, but they might have seen them. Dr. LaPaz: My one attempt to contact ..... and unfortunately I did not approach him again for information, but someone acquainted with him should certainly ask if they have observed any of this sort of thing there. Comdr. Mandelkorn: Well, wouldn't phenomena of this nature have been reported to the Society, no matter where they had occurred? Dr. LaPaz: Yes, I would think so. For example, you can consult the so-called meteor notes of the American Meteor Society, and popular astronomy, they are published from month to month with the President, C. C. Olivia, Director of the Florida Observatory at the University of Pennsylvania. I've been through those very carefully. There's one single solitary case of a fireball which by one of the observers - a doubly observed fireball - so it was possible for me to ..... in which one of the observers mentions a green color. Not this peculiar yellow-green which most people in that work find unusual, and in the case of that the elevation determined is of the order of, oh 199 kilometers from the beginning point and roughly 100 for the end, so I think it is only an ordinary fireball; nothing unusual about it. That was the only case I found. Comdr. Mandelkorn: According to recent records, where the observation conditions in other parts of the country satisfactory? At least part of the time? Dr. LaPaz: Well, I infer from the fact that we have had so much trouble out here and the East has been bragging about its climatic advantages, that probably during the recent months, they have had good observancy. I haven't attempted a full scale check on that. Comdr. Mandelkorn: Let's put it this way then: Have there been a sufficient number of fireballs reported in the last 60 days in other parts of the country to lead us to infer that had some of these occurred, they would have been reported? Dr. LaPaz: I think that definitely is true. To my knowledge, as far as the contacts I've had with Olivia and so on, there was nothing out of the normal noticed in the East, and in the South, shall we say as far up as White Sands. Whether the Harvard Observatory setup observed anything peculiar or not, I don't know. We tried right away to get that information. We were told by the gentleman in charge down there, I'm sure this will be interest to you, that"} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it was impossible to make an estimate of the approximate wave and engstroms without detailed spectroscopic equipment, which he did not possess. So whether the Captain actually cut out the spectrum charts and sent them to him or not, I don't know, but it was considered. Dr. Bradbury: Well, we're not coming up with any bright ideas for you very fast. Mr. Newburger: No, but as long as we have the problem presented to you, maybe by thinking on this, you will come up with an idea! ..... Of course, you know our entire connection with started with Madelyn Gwynn Merchant back in 1946? Dr. LaPaz: Except for the flying discs, nothing that you could say would cause me greater embarrassment? I have actually had communications from Madelyn myself. Dr. Teller: Your statement of the absence of sound when this thing has gone apparently overhead at the distance of 10 miles, within earshot of people. Dr. LaPaz: That seems incomprehensible, doesn't it, Dr. Teller? I'm glad to hear you say that because that has been my feeling from the beginning. And we tried desperately to get confirming evidence whenever sounds were mentioned. No reports have been obtained. Dr. Teller: I must say that the admission in which one could get ..... typical phenomenon is something in the light of ..... Dr. LaPaz: Kaplan told me he was going to get out one of his old blow pressure tubes and begin experimenting as soon as he returned from the UCLA, to see if he could duplicate in any way the descriptions we have given him. Dr. Holloway: What sound does a P-2 make when it goes overhead? Dr. LaPaz: I can tell you what they make when they come down. Comdr. Mandelkorn: I can tell you what they make when they go overhead at the height of about 1,000 yards. But anything man-made that passes overhead at the height of 8-10 miles, at this speed, could be inaudible. Dr. Teller: You think it could be? Comdr. Mandelkorn: I think it could be. The only . Dr. Teller: Even if it went at the speed of 10 miles per second? Comdr. Mandelkorn: Well, Dr. Teller: You see, at that time, the ..... begins to come up. Dr. LaPaz: You bet it does."} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dr. Bradbury: ..... Dr. Teller: You have to get a shock wave out of it. With a very small object the shock wave would be smaller than ..... I have not made calculations on it, but it's just common sense ..... Dr. LaPaz: I would like to ask a question. Isn't it true in the case of the so-called light movement that you have very intense, luminous effects off them without noise? (talk between Drs. Bradbury and LaPaz too fast and too jumbled to be transcribed.) Comdr. Mandelkorn: From what Dr. Teller said apparently a solid object converging with the atmosphere horizontally at about 8 to 10 miles altitude, it's incredible that it wouldn't be accompanied by some sort of sonic phenomenon. Dr. Teller: I would like to repeat that to try to get an estimate of the size of the object, that it would have to have in order to get sound effects, is not an easy thing, but offhand I would say - this is what I would expect - that you get a very small object, as small as an inch or smaller. Dr. LaPaz: ..... Dr. Teller: If I remember correctly, the intensity, the amount of energy that goes into a shock wave is proportional to the square of the velocity. The velocity that you have here proportional to the square of the velocity and, of course, is proportional I should think probably to the square of the linear dimensions of the object that you have. Now you have 10 miles per second ... velocity you have 20 miles per second, so this could be, on that count, ten times fainter - the sound would be ten times fainter. On the other hand, a meteorite that you will hear, I think, ..... that much across ..... (too much cross talk) Dr. Teller: That is something we could do right away. Now I do not know, tried to get from you information on brightness, but I would like to ask again some details ..... Dr. LaPaz: The brightest meteorite fall in history, of which we have historical record, was the ... fall in 1908, June 20 .... estimates the power, the light power, of that was of the order of 10^18 - 10^19 ergs per second. In the case of the Texas fall it was probably not 100,000th as bright."} {"doc_id":"58266d5ea3413de7","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conference on AERIAL PHENOMENA Page 24 Dr. Teller: Now let's try to get a check of this. (Dr. Teller then spent approximately the next twenty minutes or so figuring on the blackboard - estimating light, speed, kinetic energy, shock wave, etc.) Dr. Teller: If I can just believe everything I have heard and put it together with what I theoretically believe in, it ought to be a material body - might be an electron phenomenon. Dr. LaPaz: You see why I'm puzzled, Dr. Teller. Nothing like this, to my knowledge, has ever been observed in the case of meteorite drops. Dr. Teller: If you go to a group like UCLA or some other place where they have a good sound laboratory, they ought to be able to take the absence of sound observations - that is definitely incompatible, assuming that you know that there are ... and assuming that they have heard no sound from this, they ought to be able to work an upper range upon the sight of the object which has been moving, and from these figures I would be inclined to believe the object could probably not have a heat 7 of something like 1 cubic centimeter. One centimeter in dimension, and that in turn would not have given the blinding effect, if it was a material object. Dr. Bradbury: Wait a minute, I think you've left out something in light effects - you don't have to worry about kinetic energy. You can get your light from chemicals as well. Dr. Teller: That is correct. ......... Mr. Newburger: This seems to wind up the meeting. Dr. Bradbury: Still don't feel that the meteor stuff is out. The puzzling thing is the long horizontal path; also, absence of noise is puzzling. hgc"} {"doc_id":"599e2b02c44bc83a","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Misrep 9329374\n\nNarrative\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nAT 2339Z, [1.4a] TOOK OFF FROM LGLR. AT 2352Z, [1.4a] HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE. [1.4a] PROCEEDED TO FRAGGED TASKING TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED.\n\nAT 0013Z, [1.4a] WAS 7-LINED TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED. [1.4a] ARRIVED ON-STATION AT 0342Z, CHECKED IN WITH DATA MASKED, AND PERFORMED FMV/SIGINT COLLECTION AT 36S YC 40[1.4a]57[1.4a] (SEE ISR 1).\n\nAT 0035Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED 1X POSS UAP (SEE UAP 1).\n\nAT 1011Z, [1.4a] RETURNED TO BASE. AT 1213Z, [1.4a] HANDED BACK TO THE LRE. AT 1309Z, [1.4a] LANDED AT OJMS. FULL MOTION VIDEO WAS EXPLOITED BY GET. 13:30 MISSION HOURS, 06:29 FMV HOURS, 1X FMV TASKINGS PROSECUTED.\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] Mission Narrative\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: [REDACTED]\n• Associated Caveats: [REDACTED]\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MS\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20481026\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: [1.4a]\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 603rd\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFSOC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\n[3.5c, (b)(6)]\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 001"} {"doc_id":"599e2b02c44bc83a","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 33 SOS\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): [1.4a]\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• ATO Mission Number: [1.4a]\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: [3.5c,(b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: 27 SOW\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: [(b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 56SOIS\n• Wing: 27 SOW\n• Phone Number: [3.5c,(b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: SSgt\n• Full Name: [(b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n\n[3.5c, (b)(6)]\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 002"} {"doc_id":"599e2b02c44bc83a","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 603 AOC\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Radar Name or Destination:\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator:\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data:\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator:\n• Chaff Designator:\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges:\n• Flare Designator:\n• Num Flares:\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM:\n\n[3.5c, (b)(6)]\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 003"} {"doc_id":"599e2b02c44bc83a","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Type of IR-Guided AAM:\n• Num IR-Guided AAM:\n• Gun Name or Designator:\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4(a)\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: AN/DAS-4\n• Additional Avionics: AH/GMESH\n• Data Link: LINK 16\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): [1.4a]\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): LGLR\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 262339:00ZOCT23\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): 34055\n• Gentext/Additional Details: [REDACTED]\n[1.4a] TRANSITED AND LANDING AT OJMS TO REPLACE THE LIGHTNING LINE THAT LANDED AT LGLR YESTERDAY.\n[REDACTED]\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OJMS\n• Last Land Time: 271309:00ZOCT23\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 271319:00ZOCT23\n• Total Mission Time: 13 hours 30 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 270342:01ZOCT23\n• Time-off Station DTG: 271011:00ZOCT23\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Msn Type: AREC\n• Primary Sensor: FMV\n\n[3.5c, (b)(6)]\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 004"} {"doc_id":"599e2b02c44bc83a","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Sensors Available: G-MESH\n• Tasking Type: Planned\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): DATA MASKED\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 36S YC 40[1.4a] 57[1.4a]\n• Activity Description: TARGET DEVELOPMENT\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed: No\n• Number of EEIs:\n• Global Campaign Plan: GCP - VEO (violent extremist group)\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED]\nUPON ARRIVAL TO THE SP AT 0413Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED NO EEI-RELATED ACTIVITY. BETWEEN 0413Z AND 1011Z, [1.4a] SHIFTED EYES TO MULTIPLE COI CONDUCTING POL, IDENTIFYING OBSTRUCTIONS TO HLZS, ROUTE ANALYSIS, AND CHARACTERIZING HUMAN OR VEHICLE TRAFFIC. [1.4a] CONDUCTED POL ON MULTIPLE COIS UNTIL RTB AT 1011Z.\n[REDACTED]\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: DATA MASKED\n• Supported Operation: [1.4a]\n• Precoord Time: -\n• Precoord Effectiveness: -\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nCLEAR WX\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: No\n• Gentext: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nSATISFACTORY\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\n[3.5c, (b)(6)]\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 005"} {"doc_id":"599e2b02c44bc83a","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 22 January 2026\n[REDACTED]\nOn Station\n• Time On Station DTG: 270342:00ZOCT23\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type:\n• JTAC Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\nOff Station\n• Time Off Station DTG: 271011:01ZOCT23\n• Total Time On Station: 6 hours 29 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\nUAP\n• Initial Contact DTG: 270035:12ZOCT23\n• UAP Event Type: UAP Incident\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations: Sharp 90 degree turns\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions: NONE\n• MDS Type / Asset Type [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Tail Number [1.4a]\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 35SKD59[1.4a]53[1.4a]\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth:\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory: SW\n• Observer Assessment of UAP: Benign\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed:\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns)::\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters:\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable):\n• Operational Range:\n• UAP Physical State: Solid\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n• UAP Propulsion Means: UNK\n• UAP Payload:\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Signatures: NONE\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNK\n• UAP RF Frequency: UNK\n3.5c, (b)(6)\n[REDACTED]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 006"} {"doc_id":"599e2b02c44bc83a","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 22 January 2026\n[REDACTED]\n• UAP RF Duration: UNK\n• UAP Event Serial Number: -\n• UAP Effects on Persons: NO\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Effects on Equipment: NONE\n• Full Name: -\n• Rank/Grade: -\n• Email: -\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE): -\n• Observer Engagement of UAP (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• First Coordinate: 35S KD 95[1.4a]53[1.4a]\n• First Seen Radius: 5\n• Last Accuracy: Estimated\n• Last Coordinate: 35SKD90[1.4a]55[1.4a]\n• Last Seen Radius: 5\n• Kinetic Altitude Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Altitude:\n• Kinetic Depth Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Depth:\n• Kinetic Velocity Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Velocity: 80 MPH\n• Kinetic Trajectory Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Trajectory:\n• UAP Date of DoD Acquisition: 270035:00ZOCT23\n• UAP Reaction to Observation, Interrogation, Engagement (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNK\n• UAP Anomalous Characteristics/ Behaviors:\n• First Accuracy: Estimated\n• Call Sign: [1.4a]\n• UAP First Seen Location:\n• UAP Last Seen Location:\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):\nGENTEXT/UAP\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): SEEMINGLY CIRCULAR, TOO SMALL TO MAKE OUT DETAILS\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): [REDACTED]\nAT 0035Z, [1.4a] WAS EN ROUTE TO THEIR TARGET WHEN THEY SPOTTED A UAP FLYING JUST ABOVE THE SURFACE OF THE OCEAN WATER. THE UAP TOOK MULTIPLE 90 DEGREE TURNS AT AN ESTIMATED 80 MPH. AT 0038Z, [1.4a] LOST THE UAP FROM THEIR FEED.\n[REDACTED]\n3.5c, (b)(6)\n[REDACTED]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 007"} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026 Under Section 1842 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024\n\nForm No. 81\nIntroduced May, 1966\n\nDEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE\n\nFILE\nCLOSED\n\nSubsequent correspondence has been placed on\nFile No:\n\n6216/66"} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE\nJOINT INTELLIGENCE ORGANIZATION\nMINUTE PAPER\nREFERENCE: 3092/2\n\nSUBJECT: SCIENTIFIC AND INTELLIGENCE ASPECTS OF THE UFO PROBLEM\n\nDSTI\nwhen you are ready.\nDIRECTOR: O.H. /6\n(Through DSTI) Director after you have read the attachments I would like to discuss this matter with you, please RMM 5.7.\n\nThe two documents attached are intended to focus on aspects of the UFO problem that have tended to remain hidden. The report dealing with the US attitude has been compiled from official reports and statements made by the CIA, US Air Force, Congressional Hearings and Project Blue Book records. The second document deals with evidence for weapon systems used by UFO's. This evidence has been culled from computerised records collected by Dr Vallee in collaboration with Dr Hynek at North-Western University and represents only a fraction of world-wide reports dealing with the same weapon systems. Australia has had its share of this kind of reporting.\n\n2. Intelligence aspects include assessment of real from false reporting, capabilities of propulsion methods and possible weapons used, motivation of operations (harmful or not, defensive, offensive, scientific etc.) for both short-term and long-term and whether there are more effective ways to detect these operations or defend them if necessary.\n\n(O.H. TURNER)\nHd. Nuclear Branch\n\n27th May 1971.\n\nNational Archives of Australia NAA: A13693, 3092/2/000"} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"May '71\n(51)\n\nSUMMARY\n\nThe early analyses of UFO reports by USAF intelligence indicated that real phenomena were being reported which had flight characteristics so far in advance of U.S. aircraft that only an extra-terrestrial origin could be envisaged. A government agency, which later events indicated to be the CIA Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI), studied the UFO reports with the intention of determining the UFO propulsion methods. At that time, OSI was responsible for intelligence on foreign research and development in nuclear and missile matters.\n\n2. The CIA became alarmed at the overloading of military communications during the mass sightings of 1952 and considered the possibility that the USSR may take advantage of such a situation. As a result, OSI acting through the Robertson-panel meeting of mid-January 1953, persuaded the USAF to use Project BLUE BOOK as a means of publicly \"debunking\" UFO's, and at a later stage to allocate funds for the Avro advanced \"saucer\" aircraft and the launching of a crash programme into anti-gravity power. To initiate such programmes decades ahead of normal scientific development would indicate that the U.S. Government acknowledged the existence of advanced \"aircraft\" which presumably used a gravity-control method of propulsion. An additional motivation could have been the fear that the USSR would achieve this goal before the U.S.\n\n3. By erecting a facade of ridicule, the U.S. hoped to allay public alarm, reduce the possibility of the Soviet taking advantage of UFO mass sightings for either psychological or actual warfare purposes, and act as a cover for the real U.S. programme of developing vehicles that emulate UFO performances. The RAAF together with many other countries of the world give credence only to the USAF public facade and appear to have uncritically accepted the associated information. This information has been widely discredited by retiring U.S. service personnel formerly engaged on UFO investigations, as well as by scientists and private citizens.\n\n4. The conclusions of the Condon report conflict with its own contents and has been discredited by many reputable scientists including the UFO scientific consultant to the USAF. In accordance\n\nNational Archives of Australia NAA: A13693, 3092/2/000"} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(50)\n\nwith the recommendations of the Condon report, Project BLUE BOOK was terminated, but presumably this would have little effect on the main programme.\n\n5. It would appear wrong for Australia to remain ignorant of the true situation. We lack an intelligence viewpoint that can assess the nature and possible consequences of the problem, a scientific viewpoint that could derive scientifically valid data from the reports and a public relations viewpoint that can honestly satisfy public interest. To overcome these deficiencies in the Australian investigation of UFO's, it would seem that a strong case exists for the acceptance of the RAAF suggestion that another government department assume responsibility for the investigation and analysis of UFO reports.\n\nNational Archives of Australia NAA: A13693, 3092/2/000"} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(49)\n\nU.S. OFFICIAL ATTITUDE TO U.F.O's\n\nIn June of 1947 the Air Technical Intelligence Centre (ATIC) near Dayton, Ohio, assumed a responsibility to investigate the initial reports of 'flying saucers'. Within a month it was considered that the phenomena were real and probably of Soviet origin. By the end of the year, when ATIC was officially authorised to investigate under the project code name of SIGN and with a high priority, most of the investigators were focussing on an interplanetary rather than a Soviet origin. These opinions were crystallized into a written estimate that was sent to the Pentagon in September 1948. When the interplanetary conclusions were rejected on the grounds of insufficient hard evidence, a reaction set in at ATIC against trying to unravel the UFO problem.\n\n2. In February 1949, ATIC personnel on Project SIGN were replaced with new personnel to form Project GRUDGE. A definite attempt was made during 1949 to use Project GRUDGE to destroy any acceptance of UFO's. The motives for this are not clear: possibly Air Force embarrassment at being incapable of controlling the situation and/or a fear of national panic prompted USAF to try and remove the problem by denying its existence. Another possible motive may have been to provide a breathing space for another \"investigative agency\" to reach some conclusion; the agency had been assisting ATIC through 1948 and, contrary to official USAF policy, was maintaining a high level of interest during 1949. This governmental agency was not the FBI, and had rocket, nuclear and intelligence experts; their purpose was to study UFO reports in an effort to gather design data on interplanetary spaceships. In the light of later developments, this agency was almost certainly the CIA.\n\n3. Project GRUDGE failed to eliminate the UFO problem. UFO reports in 1949 actually exceeded the number in 1948, and several people who had gained access to earlier official reports were able to contradict the USAF. Journalists generally felt that GRUDGE reporting represented a cover to a more serious knowledge. Eventually, USAF intelligence decided that a fresh approach to the problem was necessary. Between September 1951 and the establishment of Project BLUE BOOK in March 1952, UFO investigation regained adequate financial and administrative support to once again analyse the collected data. Project BLUE BOOK was able to process the data from 3,200 reports into a form suitable for their consultants to be able to use IBM card-\n\nNational Archives of Australia NAA: A13693, 3092/2/000"} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2.\n\n sorting machines.\n\n4.\tThe summer of 1952 saw a more than twenty-fold rise in the normal rate of reporting and included the two extensive July sightings involving Washington D.C. This marked increase in sightings had diverse effects. A component of USAF intelligence considered that UFO's were interplanetary spaceships which were about to make closer contact. To prepare the public for this possibility, 41 previously classified reports were released for publication between August 1952 and February 1953. These reports contradicted the earlier official USAF policy of dismissing the reports as misidentifications etc. On the other hand, the CIA regarded the summer UFO activity as a threat to national security mainly because the resulting crowded communications and defence forces involvement lessened the level of national alertness against possible enemy attack.\n\n5.\tA scientific panel chaired by H.P. Robertson was convened by the Office of Scientific Intelligence of CIA during mid-January 1953 for the purpose of recommending future action on the UFO problem. Briefings were made both by CIA and USAF. ATIC personnel showed the then classified two movie films of UFO's and the early results of statistical analysis of 3,200 reports. Because of the vital issues involved, the panel felt restricted to recommending that the investigation be continued, but with increased personnel and equipment. The USAF responded promptly with an instruction to comply with these recommendations.\n\n6.\tThe CIA, however, in a report dated 16 February 1953 showed a preference to publicly abandon the investigation whilst intensifying the collection of data. By September 1953 the CIA position had been largely achieved with Project BLUE BOOK reduced from a staff of ten qualified personnel operating at a top secret level to a virtually inactive project involving one airman. The investigating component had been transferred to the 4602nd Air Intelligence Service Squadron which was trained in rapid intelligence procurement and reported to Air Defence Command and USAF Intelligence Washington rather than BLUE BOOK. Direct access between the 4602nd AISS and all USAF units was authorized by AFR 200-2 whereas previously this privilege had been given to BLUE BOOK. Although only the airman (first-class) remained in September 1943, BLUE BOOK was later built up to one officer, one sergeant, one secretary, and a part-time consultant"} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3.\n\nDr J. Allen Hynek, staying at about this level until it was closed down in December 1969. During this time BLUE BOOK served mainly as a means of supplying unclassified summaries of UFO identifications to the public, and did not form a vital link in collection or serious analysis.\n\n7.\tControl of public awareness of the UFO situation was tightened by the issuing of JANAP 146 in 1953 which prohibited service personnel from discussing UFO's by threatening defaulters with up to 10 years gaol and up to a $10,000 fine. When service personnel resigned or retired, however, it was possible to reveal USAF attitudes or opinions even if actual data was still restricted. In this way many Intelligence Officers associated with the UFO problem, including Major D. Fournet who was BLUE BOOK Project Officer at the Pentagon until late 1952, Captain E. Ruppelt who headed Project GRUDGE and Project BLUE BOOK until September 1953 and Admiral Hillenkoetter who directed CIA from its inception until October 1950, on retiring from the services, all publicly stated that the U.S. Government knew UFO's were extra-terrestial but was withholding this fact from the public.\n\n8.\tWhen the National Investigation Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) was formed in 1956 to counter the publicly suppressed USAF investigation of UFO's, the first Chairman was Admiral D.S. Fahrney who had directed the Navy's guided missile programme from its inception. Apart from Admiral Hillenkoetter, Major Keyhoe and Major Fournet, other Directors have included Rear Admiral H.B. Knowles, General A. Wedemeyer and Col J.J. Bryan (who was a special assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force). To reduce the effect of these and similar defections from official policy after retirement, the revised JANAP 146E, passed in 1960, made it an offence under the Espionage Act if data on UFO's were revealed.\n\n9.\tThe change in style of USAF reporting before and after the Robertson panel meeting is clearly indicated in the Project BLUE BOOK Special Report No. 14. The body of the report prepared between March 1952 and early 1953, although biased in favour of a natural explanation for UFO's, nevertheless showed mathematically that the evidence favoured an explanation that was scientifically unknown. This section of the 316 page report was not released to the public other than as a copy to be consulted, assuming the reader knew of its existence. Public distribution was made, however, of a so-called \"summary\" which in fact did not summarise, nor scarcely allude to the 1947-52 data, but concentrated on 1953-55 reporting which was clearly designed to reduce the residual unknowns to an insignificant number, no matter how senseless the identification became."} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4.\n\nits existence. Public distribution was made, however, of a so-called \"summary\" which in fact did not summarise, nor scarcely allude to the 1947-52 data, but concentrated on 1953-55 reporting which was clearly designed to reduce the residual unknowns to an insignificant number, no matter how senseless the identification became.\n\n10.\tWithin the body of the difficult-to-obtain report there is an interesting diagram. The product of the estimated observer reliability and the report reliability became the sighting reliability. The percentage of reports that had to be registered as \"unknown\" (i.e. incapable of being even approximately identified as a known object) increased as the sighting reliability improved. Conversely, the percentage listed as \"insufficient information\" decreased with improving reliability.\n\nSighting Reliability / No. of Reports / Unknown (%) / Insufficient Information (%)\nPoor 435 16.6 21.4\nDoubtful 794 13.0 14.0\nGood 757 24.8 3.6\nExcellent 213 33.3 4.2\n\n11.\tThroughout the years of the UFO phenomenon, there has been a persistent form of official pronouncements which state that the percentage of unknowns would be reduced if more data were available. The above table contradicts that statement. Reports of excellent reliability generally stem from astronomers, pilots, scientists, surveyors, meteorologists, radar operators etc. complete with instrumented values and accurately detailed accounts. The introduction of good reliable reporting prevents the ready prosaic interpretation. In all probability the overall average percentage of unknowns (19.7%) would have been substantially increased if the data had been more reliable.\n\n12.\tProject BLUE BOOK consultants statistically tested the unknown object population to determine the likelihood that it was similar to the population of identified objects and found that the probability was less than one in 10^28 (i.e. using the American"} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5.\n\nsystem, the odds were ten thousand trillion trillion to one against the unknowns being the same as the knowns). Since the consultants had arbitrarily called all green fireballs and short duration (i.e. less than five seconds) night-time sightings as known astronomical objects there was an undue preponderance in that category. Hence, assuming that no astronomical objects were left in the unknowns, the statistical tests were repeated with astronomical identifications removed. The odds were reduced to ten trillion trillion to one. The analysts could not find a way to reduce those odds sufficiently further to warrant additional testing, and irrationally considered the results to be \"inconclusive\".\n\n13.\tWhile PROJECT BLUE BOOK endeavoured to reduce the official number of unknowns - in 1957 they claimed only 14 out of 1,006 sightings remained unidentified - the covert programme expanded considerably. The government agency (almost certainly CIA) that had been collecting data on UFO performance and propulsion methods during 1948-52 presumably influenced U.S. governmental funding of certain advanced projects. One project was the Canadian Avro saucer. A drawing of this saucer released in October 1955, showed a typical flying disc as described in many UFO reports. The Secretary of the Air Force, D.A. Quarles, appeared moderately confident that such a vehicle would be successfully developed by the U.S.\n\n14.\tA more astounding decision on the part of the U.S. Government was to allocate considerable funds to investigate gravity and a means of controlling gravity. Despite the fact that science had not attained a level of competence to deal with either gravity or anti-gravity problems and the only theory that might be applicable was Einstein's Unified Field Theory which was still incomplete at the time of his death, the U.S. chose to support six universities and government agencies in an all-out drive to conquer the problem. It is significant that at this time the current theories on UFO propulsion were a mixture of gravity control and electro-magnetic propulsion.\n\n15.\tDuring 1955, because insufficient staff could be recruited for the project, recourse was made to an urgent appeal for theoretical physicists and mathematicians from AERE Harwell, U.K. The six Gravity Research Centres being established were at the Institute for Advanced Study (Princeton, N.J.), Princeton University, University"} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of Indiana, Purdue University Research Foundation, University of North Carolina and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology through the (Roger Babson) Gravity Research Institute (New Boston N.H.). The latter institute is a non-profit organization founded in 1949 with George M. Rideout as President. It was believed that to make a gravity motor, a gravity differential was required which necessitated the discovery of an insulator, deflector or absorber of gravity. By 1955, 485 essays had been written on this subject and awards totalling $10,800 made for original contributions.\n\n16. The scientists involved included Teller from University of California, Oppenheimer and F.J. Dyson of the Institute of Advanced Studies, J.A. Wheeler and Richard Arnowitt of Princeton, Vaclav Hlavaty of University of Indiana (who had worked with Einstein in Prague) and Stanley Deser. The objective was to control gravity. During 1955 the following firms entered into gravity and/or electromagnetic programmes: Glenn L. Martin Aviation Co. (specifically Dr B. Heirn from Goettingen University and Dr P. Jordan from Hamburg University), Convair of San Diego, Bell Aircraft of Buffalo, Sikorsky Division, Lear Inc. of Santa Monica, Clark Electronics of Palm Springs, California, and Sperry Gyroscope Division of Great Neck, Long Island, N.Y.\n\n17. Such an intensive onslaught on the gravity enigma was entirely irrational from the standpoint of conventional science, and can only be rationalized within the context of a firm belief that UFO's were real and that the intelligences behind them knew how to control gravity. The drive to harness this power before the USSR could do so would be a strong incentive for the U.S. Government to fully support an anti-gravity programme. By 1966, 46 separate projects of this nature were being financially supported, 33 of which were under the supervision of the U.S. Air Force. Although details of most of these projects have been kept classified it would appear that generally they have not been successful. Work on gravitational waves by J. Weber and his associates under USAF Cambridge Research Laboratory jurisdiction has been reported fairly extensively since 1966.\n\n18. During August of 1965 Project BLUE BOOK received 262 reports which was about six times the average number for a month and was twice any previous month since November 1957. On"} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"28 September 1965 Maj. Gen. LeBailly, Director of Information, formally requested the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board to review Project BLUE BOOK. The review suggested that the limited Project BLUE BOOK staff and the official investigating officers did not possess the technical competence to properly identify the phenomena and that university teams should be appointed to investigate selected sightings. This conclusion was supported by the House Armed Services Committee which met on April 5th 1966 in the shadow of a public furore consequent to the USAF identifying the well-publicised Michigan sightings as being swamp gas. The Colorado University was selected for the task and Dr Edward U. Condon appointed to lead the project with an initial allocation of $313,000 later raised to $525,000.\n\n19. The Colorado project became discredited when Dr Condon stated publicly on 25th January 1967 that \"my attitude right now is that there's nothing to it, but I'm not supposed to reach a conclusion for another year\". The revealing of a memorandum outlining a method to trick the public, combined with a general dissatisfaction at Condon's biassed attitude, led to the dismissal and resignation of most of the staff after most of the investigations had been made but not completely written up. The final report of 965 pages lacked coherence. Condon's conclusions were at variance with individual staff conclusions, although only Condon's conclusions were publicised. As a result of the Condon report, USAF closed down Project BLUE BOOK shortly before the American Association for the Advancement of Science held a special meeting to counter-act the effect of the Condon report. The Chairman of the Special Committee, Dr Thornton Page, was one of the signatories to the Robertson report.\n\n20. Dr J. Allen Hynek, scientific consultant to Project Blue Book 1948-69, began his association with a conviction that all sightings could be conventionally explained. Even though doubts grew in his mind, he found himself obliged to support official USAF public policy. Since 1966, however, he has become more outspoken against the USAF attitude and has assisted to convene both congressional hearings and scientific symposia on the subject. Although initially supporting the Condon Committee he became disillusioned and critical of it with the passage of time. It is quite clear that Dr Hynek along with many other reputable scientists do not accept the USAF explanation of misidentification, hysteria or hoax."} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RAAF ATTITUDE TO UFO's\n\nThe Directorate of Air Force Intelligence is the component of the RAAF that is responsible for the analysis of all official reporting of Unidentified Flying Objects. At no stage has there been more than one part-time officer allocated to this task. Initial investigation of reports is often undertaken by a part-time investigator from near-by air bases. The RAAF admits that its interests lie solely in the area of air defence and it lacks both interest and competence to consider the scientific aspects. A 1957 request for the Scientific Intelligence section of JIB to accept UFO responsibility was rejected by JIB. In 1968, the Department of Air stated that it intended \"to take up further the question of Commonwealth departments, e.g. Defence, Supply, Education and Science, Prime Minister's Department etc. to see whether some other Commonwealth Agency is better placed to assume responsibility for Unidentified Flying Objects. At the same time we would maintain our interest in the matter and work with any other Commonwealth agency who is considered to be more appropriate as a co-ordinating agency for the Commonwealth as a whole\". There does not appear to have been any fulfillment of this intention to seek Commonwealth assistance.\n\n2. In support of the RAAF's admission of scientific disinterest, an identification list of all sightings made between 1960 and 1965 contains 15 identifications of Venus, not one of which is valid. In every case Venus was in a totally different part of the sky or not even above the horizon. Out of 37 meteor identifications, only 9 could possibly be meteors and even several of those cases would be doubtful. This off-hand unscientific attitude to identification did not escape the notice of the press or various scientists.\n\n3. In general, the RAAF attitude has been guided by the USAF public releases which were aimed at allaying public interest by denying the reality of UFO's. Consequently, most of the Australian reports were given identifications without a great concern for rational correlation. Most investigators and collectors regarded their UFO tasks as an intrusion into their more legitimate tasks. As a result, there has been a negligible scientific analysis of the data and most opinions expressed by DAFI have been largely a reflection of the USAF public attitude. With the present reduced staff of DAFI"} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it is unlikely that UFO reports will receive any treatment beyond filing.\n\n4. If Australia is to follow the U.S. lead, instead of following the public USAF attitude, it would be preferable to follow the USAF/CIA role of concentrating on gaining a knowledge of the power sources involved. However, it may be preferable to act independently of the U.S. and initiate a programme that is scientifically sound and intellectually honest towards unravelling the UFO mystery. In such a venture, it may be worthwhile working somewhat closer to the public than is usual in the U.S. and U.K."} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APPENDIX \"A\"\n\nCHRONOLOGY OF U.S. INVESTIGATION INTO U.F.O. PHENOMENA\n\nDate Event\n\n24.6.47 Arnold sighting of nine \"saucers\" creates public interest.\n6.47 Investigations initiated by Air Technical Intelligence Centre (ATIC) of Air Material Command (AMC, Army Air Forces) at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base near Dayton, Ohio. Initially Soviet advanced aircraft were suspected.\n26.7.47 National Security Act creates both the USAF and CIA.\n23.9.47 Lt Gen. Twining (AMC) requested the Commander Army Air Forces to issue an authority, priority and code name for the investigation of \"flying discs\". Preliminary conclusions by AMC were that the phenomena were \"real and not visionary or fictitious\", that the objects were mostly disc-shaped about the size of man-made aircraft and were intelligently controlled. Any U.S. attempt to design aircraft of similar performance would be costly, time-consuming and detrimental to other projects. Investigations by AMC would continue pending further advice.\n30.12.47 Authority given to AMC to investigate the phenomena on a priority 2A basis under the code-name Project Sign. Minimum classification was Restricted, reports were to be made quarterly and data exchanged with interested parties.\n15.1.48 USAF officially a separate service.\n22.1.48 Project Sign starts officially.\n24.7.48 Near-collision between DC3 and UFO prompt ATIC to write an Estimate of the Situation.\n9.48 The Top Secret Estimate was forwarded to the Pentagon. The conclusion that UFO's were of interplanetary origin was not acceptable to the Air Force Chief of Staff (General Vandenberg) who insisted on demonstrable proof not circumstantial evidence. ATIC was unable to provide UFO hardware or detailed photographs.\n13.12.48 Dr J.E. Lipp of the Rand Corporation replied to the Director of Research and Development, USAF, that if the flying objects were inter-planetary they would most likely originate from Mars although intelligent life as we know it would \"be more occupied with survival than we are on Earth\". Our present technology cannot conceive as to how an inter-stellar race could reach Earth, even though it is conceded that there is a high probability that intelligent life does exist within say 16 light-years from Earth.\n1.49 USAF orders Project Sign to become Project Grudge which should terminate before the end of 1949.\n2.49 Final report of Project Sign (TR-2274-IA of the Technical Intelligence Division AMC) recommended that only a minimum effort be devoted to recording, analysing and evaluating reports, but on the other hand where factual"} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2.\n\nevidence such as photographs, radar, physical evidence and data on size and shape is involved, every effort should be made to collect this evidence. Radio alerts to other military units should be made.\n\n11.2.49 Project Sign officially becomes Project Grudge. According to Ruppelt, Sign personnel either volunteered to leave or were compelled to leave, after which they were replaced by personnel willing to ridicule the concept of UFO's. During 1949, Grudge personnel did not follow up reports.\n\n8.49 Secret Technical Report No. 102 AC 49/15-100 \"Unidentified Flying Objects - Project Grudge\" of about 600 pages issued, with the conclusion that all reports were the result of misidentifications, mass hysteria and hoaxes even though they admit to 23% of the reports as being \"unknown\". The report was declassified 1 August 1952.\n\n27.12.49 Department of Defense news release stated that the Air Force's flying saucer project had been terminated.\n\n3.50 Publication of a report, previously cleared by the U.S. Army, describing the tracking of a UFO by an official team led by Commander McLaughlin at the White Sands (missile) proving ground. From the tracking data, it was concluded that the UFO required an extraterrestial origin.\n\n14.9.51 On learning that ATIC was not investigating UFO reports, the USAF Director of Intelligence (General Cabell) ordered Project Grudge to be revitalized. This was acted upon at once.\n\n27.10.51 Project Grudge now headed by Capt. Ruppelt.\n\n3.52 Project Grudge renamed Project Blue Book. By this stage the staff had built up to 10, all with Top Secret clearances and a highly qualified research group of consultants provided expertise. As part of Project Stork, this research group (RAND is a possibility) started to transcribe data onto IBM cards for future analysis.\n\n29.4.52 Air Force Letter 200-5 ordered all USAF units to wire UFO reports direct to ATIC with a copy to the Pentagon. Project Blue Book was permitted to contact any USAF unit directly, allowing rapid investigation.\n\nJune-Aug.52 During 1948-51 the average monthly number of reports was 15 but during June, July and August of 1952, the average was 337 including 536 during July. The UFO's were not only seen in greater numbers, but there was a greater number of reliable witnesses. Several sensitive Atomic Energy Commission plants and defence units were subjected to close approaches. Defence communications were being overloaded and there were fears that U.S. reaction time against enemy action was being hindered.\n\n19/26.7.52 Two series of radar-visual sightings over Washington National airport, the Capitol and White House electrified the nation. As a result of the upsurge of interest in scientific and military circles, the interplanetary hypothesis gained ground despite official efforts to explain away the sightings."} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3.\n\n21.8.52 USAF started releasing ATIC reports to the UFO author, Major Keyhoe, for publication. This was a completely unexpected change of policy. The contents of these reports refuted the public pronouncements made by the USAF. In addition a USAF spokesman agreed that the attempt to explain the Washington sightings as due to anomalous propagation could not be upheld.\n\n21.11.52 CIA arranged four government scientists to meet at ATIC for three days as a preliminary review panel to decide on recommendations for a higher-level panel of six scientists.\n\n14/17.1.53 The Office of Scientific Intelligence, CIA, convened in Washington D.C., a panel of six scientists, Drs H.P. Robertson (Chairman), Luis Alvarez, Lloyd Berkner, Samuel A. Goudsmit, Thornton Page and one other. After three days of evidence, a two-page secret report that was prepared on the fourth day, concluded that there was no direct threat to national security but that there was an indirect threat to \"the orderly functioning of the protective organs of the body politic\". It was recommended that national security agencies should \"strip the UFO's of the special status they have been given\" and to educate the public accordingly.\n\n16.2.53 CIA issued a larger but still secret report on the meeting, summarising the eight half-day sessions and outlining panel members' individual viewpoints. The lack of artifacts of clear extra-terrestial origin was a strong argument against acceptance of the extra-terrestial hypothesis. The panel agreed with CIA concern that enemy artifacts may be misidentified by U.S. defence personnel, that emergency reporting channels be overloaded and that the public may become vulnerable to enemy psychological warfare. The public should be educated to recognise balloons, meteors etc. and a policy of \"debunking\" should be introduced in order to reduce public interest. This \"training and debunking\" programme would be required for \"a minimum of one and one half to two years\". \"Some expansion of the ATIC effort would certainly be required to support such a programme\". A professional staff of 12 supported by an administrative staff was suggested.\n\n.53 Section III, Title 18 of the Joint Army, Navy and Air Force Publication (JANAP 146) legislated that service personnel talking about UFO sightings were liable to 1-10 years gaol and/or a fine of up to $10,000.\n\n26.8.53 Air Force Regulation (AFR 200-2) removes investigation authority from Project Blue Book in favour of the Air Defence Command's 4602 Air Intelligence Service Squadron, a unit dispersed over area commands, and trained both for rapid access to remote areas and to interrogate enemy personnel. The Air Force requires immediate reporting to evaluate the threat, and detailed reporting to assist technical analysis. All written reports are to be sent to USAF Intelligence in Washington, mainland reports first going to Air Defense Command for distribution to \"interested investigative agencies\". Electrical reports are addressed to both these headquarters and to ATIC. The public is to be informed of the results of individual cases only when \"the object is positively identified as a familiar object\"."} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4.\n\nHeadquarters USAF will release summaries of evaluated data to the public.\n\n9.53 When the head of Project Blue Book departed, the staff was reduced to just one airman (first-class). All instrumentation plans had been negated except for diffraction cameras which had been shown to be useless.\n\n1.12.53 The distribution of 275 diffraction-grating cameras (200 to U.S. bases and 75 to overseas bases) was completed.\n\n17.2.54 Airline pilots at a meeting at the Roosevelt Hotel, Hollywood were coerced by military intelligence using JANAP 146 to agree to not informing the public of their sightings, and confine their reporting to official channels.\n\n15.5.54 USAF Chief of Staff, General Nathan Twining, stated \"The best brains in the Air Force are working on this problem of Unidentified Flying Objects, trying to solve this riddle\". General Twining, was not referring to Project Blue Book.\n\n10.6.54 Deputy Commander of Intelligence at ATIC, Colonel O'Mara, stated that more than a thousand people were working on the problem.\n\n2.2.55 William P. Lear, Chairman of Lear Inc., Santa Monica stated that because of flying saucers, serious efforts were being made in the U.S. to prove the existence of anti-gravitational forces.\n\n23.8.55 Revealed that the U.S. Government had taken over the Canadian Avro 'flying saucer' project. This was a circular aerofoil powered by jets and designed to take-off and land vertically, hover, travel at 1500 mph and change direction rapidly. The design specifications for performance and shape were clearly directly related to UFO reporting. The project was started in 1951-52 and in 1954 after $400,000 had been spent, the Canadian Government withdrew its financial backing. When the U.S. assumed control over the project it imposed a high level of security, preventing even Canadian officials from inspecting the premises. At the press release meeting on 25 October 1955 for the Special Report No. 14, photographs of a drawing of the proposed version showed a typical flying disc.\n\n25.10.55 Release of Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14 dated 5 May 1955. The report was originally compiled by Project Blue Book research consultants who analysed 3,200 reports out of 4,000 received by the end of 1952. These results were used to brief the Robertson panel in Jan. 1953. To this basic 316 page report, a 3 page so-called \"summary\" has been added dealing mainly with the 1953-55 period and dismissing UFO's as mainly misidentifications. The more uncomfortable conclusions of the main report were concealed. Only 100 copies of the main report were distributed on a restricted non-public basis (the only Australian copy was destroyed by the RAAF in 1959) whereas copies of the misleading \"summary\" were freely available to press and public."} {"doc_id":"5acbb65ceb08416c","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5.\n\n9.4.58 First sanitized version of Robertson (short) report released.\n\n24.12.59 Inspector-General of Air Force circulates classified \"UFO's Serious Business\" in an effort to stimulate and improve the reporting of UFO's. Investigating officers are to be equipped with geiger counters as well as a camera, binoculars and sampling containers.\n\n.60 JANAP 146E invokes espionage laws to prevent the revealing of UFO data.\n\n28.9.65 Following the August peak of UFO activity, the USAF Office of Information requests a review of Project Blue Book.\n\n3.2.66 USAF Scientific Advisory Board Ad Hoc Committee reviewed Project Blue Book. Although the Committee considered most unidentifieds were due to inadequate analysis, they also accused Blue Book of identifying objects \"when the evidence collected was too meagre or too indefinite\". It was recommended that University contracts be made and that more scientifically trained investigators be used.\n\n5.4.66 U.S. Congress House Committee on Armed Services recommends that Project Blue Book reports be investigated by University contract.\n\n6.6.66 Dr Mc Donald reads Robertson (complete) report which had been declassified under 12 year rule.\n\n20.6.66 Robertson report reclassified. Second sanitised version issued.\n\n19.9.66 AFR 80-17 replaces AFR 200-2 and transfers responsibility from Intelligence to Research and Development. Para 12(b) states \"Air Force echelons receiving suspected or actual UFO material will safeguard it to prevent any defacing or alterations which might reduce its value for intelligence examination and analysis\".\n\n6.10.66 Contract signed with Colorado University.\n\n29.7.68 U.S. Congress House Committee on Science and Astronautics held a one-day symposium on UFO's at which many prominent scientists testified in favour of UFO's being real and requiring international investigation.\n\n8.1.69 Condon report published. Condon's conclusions were not supported by the staff conclusions.\n\n.69 J. Allen Hynek's contract as Scientific Consultant on UFO's to the USAF Project Blue Book was not renewed (after 21 years).\n\n17.12.69 Project Blue Book closed down.\n\n26/31.12.69 The American Association for the Advancement of Science met at Boston to discuss UFO's. One outcome was a resolution appealing for Blue Book data to be released."} {"doc_id":"5b09afd8112498d3","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-1057 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\nOFFICIAL RECORD\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nElectronic Communication\nTitle: [REDACTED] UAP Observations at [REDACTED] Date: 11/[REDACTED]/2024\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nFrom: [REDACTED]\nContact: [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nApproved By: [REDACTED]\nDrafted By: [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nCase ID #: [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) - [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] Unidentified Anomalous Phenomenon (UAP) [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nSynopsis: [REDACTED] UAP Observations at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nEnclosure(s): Enclosed are the following items:\n1. [REDACTED] Photos taken by SA [REDACTED] on 11/[REDACTED]/2024\n2. [REDACTED] Photos taken by SA [REDACTED] on 11/[REDACTED]/2024\n3. [REDACTED] Photos taken by SA [REDACTED] on 11/[REDACTED]/2024\n4. [REDACTED] Photos taken by SA [REDACTED] on 11/[REDACTED]/2024\n5. [REDACTED] Photos taken by SA [REDACTED] on 11/[REDACTED]/2024\n6. [REDACTED]\n7. [REDACTED]\n8. [REDACTED]\n9. [REDACTED]\n10. [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"5b09afd8112498d3","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nTitle: [REDACTED] UAP Observations at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nRe: [REDACTED] 11/[REDACTED]/2024\n11. [REDACTED]\n12. [REDACTED]\n13. [REDACTED]\n14. [REDACTED]\n15. [REDACTED]\n16. [REDACTED]\n17. [REDACTED]\n18. [REDACTED]\n19. [REDACTED]\n20. [REDACTED]\n21. [REDACTED]\n22. [REDACTED]\n23. [REDACTED]\n24. [REDACTED]\n25. [REDACTED]\n26. [REDACTED]\n27. [REDACTED]\n28. [REDACTED]\nDetails:\n[REDACTED]\n2"} {"doc_id":"5b09afd8112498d3","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nTitle: [REDACTED] UAP Observations at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nRe: [REDACTED] 11/[REDACTED]/2024\n[REDACTED] On 11/[REDACTED]/2024, Special Agents (SA) [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and SA [REDACTED] [REDACTED] visited the home of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] ([REDACTED] at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] The purpose of the visit was confirm reports and video that [REDACTED] had previously provided of Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) over the last three years. At the time of the surveillance, the weather was approximately 48 degrees, with overcast conditions and no precipitation. The official sunset time was [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] At approximately 4:45pm, Agents and [REDACTED] went out to [REDACTED] patio on the north side of his home. [REDACTED] initially pointed out lights in the distance which [REDACTED] believed to be homes and other permanent structures. [REDACTED] also pointed to lights which [REDACTED] claimed to be eight miles away and could not be certain what those light sources were.\n[REDACTED] Approximately twenty minutes later, SA [REDACTED] observed what [REDACTED] believed to be a UAP. In the direction of [REDACTED] SA [REDACTED] saw a white pulsation of light appear. The light appeared to be at the northern edge of [REDACTED] and began to move horizontally with somewhat erratic movements. The light did not appear to reflect off the water of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] giving the possibility that the light source was over the wooded area to the north side of [REDACTED] The light source did not appear to illuminate the area below it or the surface of [REDACTED] The light appeared to an altitude at or below the tree line. The white light danced around less than ten seconds, moving side to side, and then disappeared.\n[REDACTED] Within the tree line to the west of [REDACTED] home, there were other lights observed by Agents. On multiple occasions, SA [REDACTED] observed white lights appear at the top of the tree line. These lights would pulse and flash it white/blue hue and then disappear. These lights did not appear to move as erratically and seemed to be more stationary. SA [REDACTED] also observed plumes of broad light appearing for several seconds before a flash of light, either red or white appeared, and moved erratically before disappearing.\n[REDACTED] SA [REDACTED] attempted to capture observed UAP activity and these photos are attached to this communication. Five photos were taken, however the photos were mostly blurry and do not provide much context. It\n3"} {"doc_id":"5b09afd8112498d3","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nTitle: [REDACTED] UAP Observations at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nRe: [REDACTED] 11/[REDACTED]/2024\nwas later determined that a tripod or other stable platform would be required as the long exposure of the camera aperture would not yield clear images.\n[REDACTED] At approximately 5:15pm, [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] arrived home, Agents and [REDACTED] went inside briefly to meet them before returning to the patio.\n[REDACTED] At approximately 5:30pm, SA [REDACTED] and SA [REDACTED] observed what they believed to be a UAP in the same location of [REDACTED] that SA [REDACTED] had seen the possible UAP. The UAP appeared as a bright white light above a bright red light at the far end of the pond hovered at a approximately tree-top height, moved quickly from right to left, disappeared, then re-appeared simultaneously where it had first appeared, moved quickly from right to left and disappeared again. Both Agents observed this activity.\n[REDACTED] Agents and [REDACTED] remained on the patio and backyard, observing activity until approximately 6:10pm before going back inside [REDACTED] home to download the most recent photos and videos [REDACTED] had taken of activity behind [REDACTED] residence [REDACTED].\n[REDACTED] Agents discontinued surveillance and departed [REDACTED] home at approximately 6:15pm.\n♦♦\n[REDACTED]\n4"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n14 December 2009\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-0911-012\n\nMetallic Glasses: Status and Prospects for Aerospace Applications\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMetallic Glasses: Status and Prospects for Aerospace\nApplications\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 63\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nSummary ........................................................................................ v\nMetallic Glasses ........................................................................... 1\nStructure ........................................................................... 1\nProcessing ........................................................................... 2\nGlass-Forming Alloys ........................................................ 2\nCasting and Molding ........................................................ 4\nJoining ........................................................ 5\nFoams ........................................................ 5\nThin Films and Coatings ........................................................ 5\nMechanical Behavior Near Room Temperature ........................ 5\nStiffness: Elastic Deformation ........................................................ 6\nStrength and Ductility: Plastic Deformation ........................ 6\nFracture Toughness ........................................................ 8\nFatigue ........................................................ 9\nWear Resistance ........................................................ 10\nCorrosion and Stress-Corrosion Cracking ........................ 10\nMechanical Behavior at Elevated Temperature ........................ 11\nOther Properties: Magnetic, Electrical, Optical, Thermal, and Acoustic ........ 12\nMetallic Glass Matrix Composites ........................ 13\nProcessing and Structure of Composites ........................ 13\nEx Situ Composites ........................ 14\nIn Situ Composites ........................ 14\nMechanical Properties of Composites ........................ 15\nStrength and Ductility: Plastic Deformation ........................ 16\nFracture and Fatigue ........................ 16\nAerospace Applications of Metallic Glasses ........................ 16\nStructural Applications ........................ 16\nOther Applications ........................ 19\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCurrent Challenges and Prospects for the Future ........................ 20\nAlloy Design ........................ 20\nThermophysical Properties and Thermoplastic Processing ........................ 20\nComposites and the Quest for Ductility ........................ 21\nSummary and Recommendations ........................ 22\n\nFigures\n1. Amorphous Versus Crystalline Structure ........................ 1\n2. Critical Cooling Rate ........................ 2\n3. Examples of Processing of Metallic Glasses ........................ 4\n4. Shear Bands ........................ 8\n5. Fatigue Limit of Metallic-Glass-Matrix Composites ........................ 10\n6. Deformation Map for a Metallic Glasses ........................ 11\n7. Cast Metallic Glass Wedge ........................ 13\n8. Microstructure of In Situ Metallic Glass Matrix Composite ........................ 15\n9. Materials Property Charts ........................ 18\n\nTables\n1. Selected Bulk Glass-Forming Alloys ........................ 3\n2. Comparison of Strengths of Amorphous and Crystalline Aluminum Alloys ........ 7\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMetallic Glasses: Status and Prospects for Aerospace Applications\n\nSummary\n\nMetallic glasses combine some of the advantageous mechanical properties of metals—strength, stiffness, and in some cases toughness—with the processing flexibility usually associated with thermoplastic polymers. The absence of crystalline defects allows metallic glasses to be much stronger than conventional alloys but also means they have near-zero tensile ductility and poor fatigue resistance. In structural applications, therefore, metallic glasses are most likely to be useful in the form of composites consisting of ductile crystalline dendrites in a metallic glass matrix. These dendritic composites sacrifice some strength but can have exceptionally high fracture toughness, as well as good fatigue resistance, and could replace high-strength steels in certain load-limited structural components in aerospace vehicles where space is limited.\n\nBecause they are true glasses, thermoplastic forming near the glass transition temperature affords metallic glasses tremendous flexibility in processing. For instance, metallic glass components can be formed in a single step (for example, by injection molding) in complex geometries that would be difficult or impossible to produce with conventional alloys. In addition, metallic glass foams can be made with relative ease, raising the possibility of making structural foams with high strength and stiffness. Finally, because they lack a crystalline grain structure, metallic glasses can be used to form nanoscale features with high fidelity. This may make metallic glasses useful in a variety of micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) applications.\n\nMetallic glasses also have significant limitations for aerospace applications, however. Foremost among these is a lack of good glass-forming alloys; in particular, there are no good aluminum-rich glass-forming alloys, the known titanium-based alloys are either relatively dense (owing to high concentrations of alloying elements) or contain beryllium, and the known magnesium- and iron-based alloys are all quite brittle, with low fracture toughness. Although metallic glass matrix composites can have outstanding properties (particularly strength and fracture toughness), the number of good composite systems known at present is also quite limited.\n\nTherefore, in order for metallic glasses (and their composites) to be of broad utility in aerospace structural applications, progress in the following areas is required:\n\n• Development of new lightweight alloys and composite systems, preferably by computational and/or combinatorial approaches rather than by trial and error.\n\n• Understanding of mechanical behavior, especially:\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n- The effect of alloy composition and structure on plastic deformation.\n- Microstructural design of composites for optimal toughness.\n• Development of processing techniques, including thermophysical processing of complex and/or nanoscale features as well as production of metallic glass foams.\n\nIt is highly likely that continued work over the next 20-50 years will result in significant advances in all these areas, and that metallic glasses and metallic glass matrix composites will see increasing acceptance as structural materials. Whether or not they achieve widespread use in aerospace applications, however, depends critically on the development of new, lightweight alloys.\n\nvi\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMetallic Glasses\n\nSTRUCTURE\n\nThe atomic-scale structure of most metals and alloys is crystalline; that is, the atoms are arranged in a highly ordered manner on a lattice that is periodic in three dimensions, as depicted in Figure 1(a). In contrast to this crystalline structure, metallic glasses lack the long-range order of a lattice and are therefore said to be amorphous, as depicted in Figure 1(b). Although the word \"amorphous\" implies a complete lack of structural order, in fact the atomic structure of metallic glasses is not truly random. Constraints on atomic packing provide strong short-range order; for instance, on average the atoms have a particular number of nearest atomic neighbors at a well-defined distance. But this short-range order persists only over distances of a few atoms; there is no long-range order as there is in a crystalline alloy. In many ways, the atomic-scale structure of metallic glasses more closely resembles the highly disordered structure of a liquid than the structure of a crystalline alloy.\n\n(a) [image] (b) [image]\n\nCrystalline Amorphous (glass)\n\nFigure 1. Amorphous Versus Crystalline Structure. Schematic atomic-scale structure of crystalline (a) and amorphous (b) metals. In a crystalline structure, order persists over long distances (many atomic dimensions). In a glass, there is short range order but no long-range order.\n\nA corollary of this difference in structure is that the nature of structural defects is quite different between crystalline and amorphous alloys. Crystalline alloys, for example, have extended linear defects in the crystal structure, called dislocations, that are (in large part) responsible for determining mechanical behavior. The lack of crystalline order precludes the existence of dislocations in metallic glasses, but other sorts of defects can be present and may influence properties and behavior.\n\nFrom an applications point of view, the amorphous structure of metallic glasses has two principal implications. First, the mechanical properties of amorphous alloys are significantly different from those of their crystalline counterparts; some of these differences are advantageous, but others are not. Second, because metallic glasses are\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nglasses in the true sense of the word, rather than melting abruptly (as crystalline metals do), they soften and flow over a range of temperatures in a manner akin to common (oxide) glasses. This creates opportunities for tremendous flexibility in the processing of metallic glasses.\n\nPROCESSING\n\nGlass-Forming Alloys\n\nThe key to making a metallic glass is to retain the disordered, liquid-like atomic scale structure during cooling from the melt. All materials have a tendency to crystallize upon cooling because the crystalline state is the most stable structure at any temperature below the melting point. But crystallization takes time, so if the cooling is fast enough, it is possible to bypass crystallization and form an amorphous structure at the glass transition temperature (Figure 2(a)). Glass formation and crystallization are therefore competitive processes; which one will occur depends on the material and the processing conditions.\n\n(a) Temperature: Liquid; Melting temperature; Supercooled liquid; Crystal; Glass transition temperature; Glass; Time. Paths 1, 2, 3.\n\n(b) Critical cooling rate (K/s) versus Reduced glass transition temperature (Tg/Tm), showing Pure nickel, \"Conventional\" metallic glasses (max thickness < 1 mm), Bulk metallic glasses (max thickness > 1 mm), and Pd40Cu30Ni10P20 and Zr41.2Ti13.8Cu12.5Ni10Be22.5 labeled.\n\nFigure 2. Critical Cooling Rate. (a) Effect of the cooling rate on glass formation - If the cooling rate is slow (path 1), then the melt crystallizes before going through the glass transition. If the cooling rate is fast enough (path 2), then the melt can form a glass. The critical cooling rate (path 3) is the slowest rate at which the melt can be cooled and still form a glass. (b) Critical cooling rates for various metallic alloys - The horizontal axis is the glass transition temperature normalized to the melting (liquidus) temperature.1\n\nFor some materials, such as silica (silicon dioxide) and most thermoplastic polymers, the crystallization process is slow because the crystal structures are complex and the basic structural units (for example, segments of polymer chains) are slow to rearrange into a crystalline form. These materials can therefore be produced in glassy form even at very low cooling rates; in fact, it can be difficult to crystallize them at all. Metals and alloys are another matter because the crystal structures are relatively simple and the basic structural units are individual atoms, which are highly mobile. Metallic crystals nucleate and grow quickly, making production of a metallic glass more challenging.\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nOne way to quantify the ability of a metallic alloy to be produced in glassy form is through the critical cooling rate—the slowest rate at which a metallic liquid may be cooled and still produce a fully amorphous structure, as shown in Figure 2(a). The critical cooling rate for a variety of metallic glass-forming alloys is shown in Figure 2(b). Early metallic glasses (discovered in the 1960s and 1970s) were binary alloys with critical cooling rates typically on the order of 10^4 to 10^7 K/s. Achieving such high cooling rates requires specialized techniques (such as melt spinning) and limits the maximum thickness of the metallic glass to < 100 μm because of the need to rapidly extract heat from the melt. As a result, these early metallic glasses could be produced in only a limited range of forms, including ribbons, foils, wires, and powders.\n\nExtensive research efforts in alloy design over the past two decades have resulted in the development of multi-component alloys with much lower critical cooling rates (0.1 K/s or even lower). This has enabled the production of metallic glass specimens in larger sizes—in some cases exceeding 1-cm section thickness. Common practice in the field is to refer to any alloy capable of being cast into a section at least 1-mm thick as a \"bulk\" metallic glass. These alloys may be cast or molded into forms suitable for structural applications.\n\nAt present, it is not possible to predict a priori the glass-forming ability of an alloy of arbitrary composition. A variety of empirical rules for selecting alloying elements and compositions have been proposed, and techniques have been demonstrated for efficient searching of composition space. But identification of alloys with good glass-forming ability is still mostly a matter of trial and error. As a result, the number of truly outstanding glass-forming alloys (loosely defined as being able to be cast as a glass to a thickness of at least 1 cm) is quite limited (see Table 1).\n\nTable 1. Selected Bulk Glass-Forming Alloys. Selected alloys reported to have excellent glass forming ability, quantified here as the maximum thickness of a fully amorphous casting.2 3 4 5 6 7 8\n\nComposition | Maximum Thickness (mm) | Reference\nMg65Cu15Ag5Pd5Gd10 | 10 | 2\nZr41.2Ti13.8Cu12.5Ni10Be22.5 | 50 | 3\nPd40Cu30Ni10P20 | 72 | 4\nCu47Zr45Ag4Al4 | 10 | 5\nPt57.5Cu14.7Ni5.3P22.5 | 16 | 6\nTi40Zr25Ni3Cu12Be20 | 14 | 7\nFe48Cr15Mo14Er2C15B6 | 12 | 8\n\nMoving from the laboratory to industrial practice, it is important to note that factors besides alloy composition can affect glass-forming ability. In particular, some alloys are sensitive to the presence of impurities; for example, the glass-forming ability of some zirconium-containing alloys is dramatically reduced by the presence of oxygen. Processing conditions also influence the ability to make a glass; these may include the material and surface finish of the mold and the temperature of the liquid prior to casting. Finally, glass-forming ability can be quite sensitive to small variations in composition, which may be difficult to control in industrial practice.\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCasting and Molding\n\nLike other alloys, metallic glasses can be cast into net-shape or near-net-shape geometries. Die casting into a permanent (metal) mold—because it provides the rapid heat transfer needed to meet the requirement for relatively rapid cooling—is the most common casting technique. In most cases, casting is done in either a vacuum or an inert atmosphere to prevent formation of oxide particles that promote crystallization.\n\nConventional casting, however, does not take advantage of the flexibility afforded by the glassy nature of these alloys. If a metallic glass is heated to a temperature above its glass transition temperature, it becomes a supercooled liquid. In this state, the viscosity drops with increasing temperature over a wide range, making it possible to control the viscosity by controlling the temperature.1 This ability to control the viscosity enables many of the processing techniques commonly used in molding thermoplastic polymers to be applied to metallic glasses (Figure 3).\n\nFigure 3. Examples of Processing of Metallic Glasses. (a) Microspring produced by lithography and (b) thin-walled bottle produced by blow molding. Images are courtesy of Professor Jan Schroers (Yale University).\n\nThere are two important limitations on processing of metallic glasses in the supercooled liquid region. First, supercooled liquids are metastable and have a tendency to crystallize, so there is a limited window of time (typically on the order of minutes) in which the processing must be completed if the glassy structure is to be maintained. Second, the viscosity of many glass-forming alloys near the glass transition temperature is too high for convenient processing. The viscosity can be reduced by increasing the processing temperature, but higher temperatures promote crystallization\n\n1 A crystalline metal, in contrast, melts abruptly, going from a rigid solid to a low-viscosity fluid very quickly.\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nand thus reduce the window of time available for molding. In practice, therefore, successful molding requires careful control of the processing conditions.\n\nJoining\n\nStructural applications inevitably require joining of components, for instance by mechanical fasteners or adhesives or by welding, soldering, or brazing. The use of fasteners and adhesives is much the same for metallic glasses as for any other metal. Techniques such as welding, soldering, and brazing are potentially problematic because they involve heating the glassy alloy, running the risk of crystallization (which could make the joint more brittle). In welding, for instance, the metal to be joined is actually melted and then resolidifies upon cooling. In the case of a metallic glass, care must be taken to ensure the cooling rate is fast enough to avoid crystallization. There is also a risk that the glassy material in the heat-affected zone (near to but not in the molten region) might crystallize. Laboratory tests of a variety of welding techniques have been performed on several glass-forming alloys with mixed results, and it is clear that much remains to be done in this area.\n\nFoams\n\nOne particularly promising recent development is the ability to produce metallic glass foams. Here, the relatively high viscosity of glass-forming alloys is an advantage in producing a stable foam structure that can be solidified, leaving a high-porosity foam with metallic glass ligaments.9 These foams have high specific strength (that is, strength normalized to density) and specific stiffness and could have excellent damage tolerance, although this has not been demonstrated.\n\nThin Films and Coatings\n\nThe discussion above focuses on the processing of free-standing metallic glasses, with an emphasis on structural applications. However, it is also possible to produce amorphous alloys as thin films or coatings using techniques such as physical vapor deposition or electrodeposition. Although the thicknesses of material that can be produced in this way are limited, they are useful for making amorphous alloy coatings (for wear and corrosion resistance) or for thin films for magnetic or micro-electromechanical system (MEMS) applications. A distinct advantage of the thin film techniques is that because the effective cooling rates during vapor deposition are extremely high, a much wider range of alloys can be produced in amorphous form than is possible with casting. This allows the alloy composition to be tailored for optimization of functional properties, with less concern about glass-forming ability.\n\nMechanical Behavior Near Room Temperature\n\nWhen a material is subjected to a stress, it can experience both elastic and plastic deformations. Elastic deformation occurs at lower stresses and is recoverable when the applied stress is removed. The limit of elastic deformation is defined by the yield stress—the point at which plastic (nonrecoverable) deformation begins. Much of the current interest in metallic glasses arises because their yield stresses (that is, their strengths) can be much higher than those of crystalline alloys of similar composition; this difference is a direct result of the novel atomic-scale structure of metallic glasses. The fracture and fatigue characteristics of metallic glasses are also different from those\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nof conventional alloys. In this section, we review the mechanical behavior of metallic glasses, with particular attention to properties of interest for aerospace applications. We consider actual properties in detail in the section below on applications, where we compare the properties of metallic glasses with those of other advanced structural materials.\n\nStiffness: Elastic Deformation\n\nStiffness is the resistance of a material to elastic deformation and is quantified by either the elastic modulus (for tensile or compressive loads) or the shear modulus (for shear loading). Metallic glasses tend to be somewhat (20-30 percent) less stiff than crystalline alloys of similar composition. The lower modulus is a consequence of the amorphous structure, in which atoms are (on average) slightly farther apart than in a crystalline alloy, enabling certain atomic relaxations that are not possible in a crystal. The lower modulus of amorphous alloys is clearly a concern in applications where stiffness is a primary criterion, but it does present some advantages. For instance, some applications (springs, for example) require the ability to store elastic strain energy (resilience), and here metallic glasses do quite well. Resilience is also a key figure of merit for snap-fit assembly of materials without fasteners. Overall, however, for structural applications, the low stiffness of metallic glasses is a disadvantage.\n\nStrength and Ductility: Plastic Deformation\n\nThe theoretical strength of perfect, defect-free crystalline metals is several orders of magnitude larger than strengths measured in typical laboratory experiments. The difference exists because metallic crystals inevitably have crystalline defects (dislocations) that are able to move at relatively low stresses and cause plastic (nonrecoverable) deformation. Because dislocations cannot exist in an amorphous structure, in principle the strength of amorphous alloys should approach theoretical limits based on the inherent strength of the atomic bonds. As shown in Table 2, the strength of aluminum-based metallic glasses can be two or three times greater than those of conventional (crystalline) high-strength aluminum alloys. Similarly high strengths are seen for other amorphous alloys; for instance, the best iron-based alloys have a strength of approximately 4 GPa—again, two or three times greater than those of conventional high-strength steels.10 Such high strengths create great interest in potential structural applications of metallic glasses.\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 2. Comparison of Strengths of Amorphous and Crystalline Aluminum Alloys. Compared with the theoretical maximum strength (taken to be μ/30, where μ is the shear modulus of pure aluminum).\n\nYield Stress (MPa) % of Theoretical Strength\n\nTheoretical Strength (Defect-Free Crystal) 1,600 -\nTypical High-Strength Aluminum Alloy (7xxx Series)11 400–500 25–31%\nBest Crystalline Aluminum Alloy12 770 48%\nAluminum-Based Metallic Glass13 1,280 80%\n\nUnfortunately, the lack of dislocations in amorphous alloys is also their Achilles' heel. In crystalline alloys, dislocations move and multiply in response to applied stresses, resulting in dislocation tangles that increase the resistance to further dislocation motion. This process, called strain hardening, is of crucial importance because it makes plastic deformation stable. If one region of a crystalline material yields and begins to plastically deform, the deforming region strain hardens, and so another region will deform instead. The result is that the plastic deformation is not concentrated but rather spreads through a large volume of material. Metallic glasses, lacking dislocations, do not strain harden and in fact strain soften in response to plastic deformation. This means that as soon as any one region yields, any further deformation will occur in the same region. This process, known as shear localization, leads to the formation of shear bands (Figure 4). In any loading geometry where the metallic glass experiences significant tensile loading, fracture occurs on a single dominant shear band with essentially zero tensile ductility.2 Metallic glasses therefore fracture in an abrupt, apparently brittle manner on the macroscopic scale (even though there can be significant plasticity on a microscopic scale). This lack of ductility is of obvious concern to designers interested in structural applications. Furthermore, it limits the ability to fabricate metallic glasses into different shapes by deformation processing (by rolling or forging, for instance) after casting.\n\n2 This assumes there is no geometrical constraint preventing fracture. Some geometries (such as simple bending) can involve tensile loading, but there can still be significant plastic deformation because the geometrical constraints inhibit propagating of shear bands across the specimen.\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 4. Shear Bands. Produced by bending of a zirconium-based metallic glass.14\n\nFracture Toughness\n\nFracture toughness is a measure of a material's resistance to growth of cracks, a critical property for structural materials subjected to tensile loading. In very tough metals, the toughness usually results from plastic deformation that occurs near the tip of the advancing crack; plastic deformation requires energy, and the need to provide this energy translates into resistance to crack growth.3 Despite their lack of tensile ductility, at least some metallic glasses are not brittle in the same sense that ceramics are, for example, because they can experience significant plastic deformation around the crack tip during fracture. For instance, the fracture toughness (KIc) of zirconium-based metallic glasses is about 20 MPa·m1/2 15—somewhat lower than the ~ 55 MPa·m1/2 typical of crystalline zirconium alloys16 but much greater than the fracture toughness of ceramics (typically 1-5 MPa·m1/2). The fact that metallic glasses are reasonably tough despite their lack of tensile ductility suggests structural applications are not out of the question.\n\nHowever, some metallic glasses appear to be intrinsically brittle in that they fracture with only limited plastic deformation near the crack top and thus have very low values of fracture toughness. For this reason, some alloys that would otherwise be highly desirable, such as iron-based metallic glasses (for their high strength and low cost) and magnesium-based glasses (for their low density), fall into this category. The physical origins of the difference between intrinsically brittle metallic glasses and those capable of limited plastic deformation (and thus some toughness) are not well understood.\n\n3 In other materials, notably polymer-matrix composites, other mechanisms of toughening can be more important.\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nEven some metallic glasses with reasonable toughness may be embrittled by exposure to elevated temperatures. This may occur in the heat-affected zone during welding (as discussed above), or it may be a by-product of processing in the supercooled liquid region (as in injection molding, for instance). The causes of embrittlement are also not well understood, and there is no known way to reverse embrittlement once it occurs.\n\nFatigue\n\nFatigue is a process by which materials can experience incremental crack growth owing to cyclic loading, even at stresses well below the yield stress. If unabated, fatigue cracks can grow to a critical length at which abrupt catastrophic fracture occurs. Up to 90 percent of failures of structural components in service are estimated to be caused by fatigue, making fatigue resistance of obvious importance to designers.\n\nThe fatigue resistance of metallic glasses is not very good. A common measure of fatigue resistance is the fatigue limit—the stress amplitude (range) below which no fatigue failure will occur, regardless of the number of loading cycles the material experiences. The fatigue limit for high-strength crystalline alloys is typically about 40 percent of the tensile strength, but for metallic glasses, it is only about 5 percent of the tensile strength (Figure 5). The reason for this difference has to do with the structure of the material. In a crystalline alloy, there are microstructural features (such as grain boundaries and precipitate particles) that can inhibit the growth of fatigue cracks. In metallic glasses, the microstructure is completely featureless, and there is nothing to prevent fatigue cracks from growing once they have been initiated.\n\nThe poor fatigue resistance of metallic glasses is a critical limitation for structural applications in aerospace because it implies a need to overdesign components to keep the stresses far below the yield stress. Thus, much of the advantage of having a high-strength material in the first place is lost. The desire to improve metallic glasses' fatigue performance has led to the development of metallic-glass-matrix composites with outstanding properties, as discussed below.\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nStress amplitude/Ultimate tensile strength\n\nDendritic composite\n\nHigh-strength steel\n\nSingle-phase metallic glass\n\nNumber of cycles to failure\n\nFigure 5. Fatigue Limit of Metallic Glasses and Metallic-Glass-Matrix Composites. Fatigue life data for single-phase zirconium-based metallic glass (red) and a dendritic metallic glass matrix composite (blue). Representative data for steel (300-M) of similar tensile strength are shown for comparison.17 18 19\n\nWear Resistance\n\nBecause of their high yield strength, metallic glasses also have very high hardness. This, in turn, implies they might have good tribological behavior, which would be of particular interest when combined with the good corrosion resistance of some alloys (see below), opening up potential applications such as coatings on dry bearings for space applications.20 However, the tendency of metallic glasses to form shear bands and (in some cases) partially crystallize owing to deformation means their wear resistance is perhaps not as good as their high hardness would suggest. Nevertheless, the wear resistance of metallic glasses can still be quite good, and in fact one of the principal current markets for amorphous alloys is as wear- and corrosion-resistant coatings for tools such as drill bits.\n\nCorrosion and Stress-Corrosion Cracking\n\nIt is frequently stated that metallic glasses have excellent corrosion resistance, but this is not always true. The lack of grain boundaries and second-phase particles makes some metallic glasses extremely resistant to corrosion, but this is not true of all alloys (some of which oxidize rapidly in air). Broadly speaking, the corrosion resistance of nickel- and iron-based metallic glasses is better than that of alloys based on zirconium, titanium, and copper (particularly in environments containing chloride ions).21 Some alloys are susceptible to localized pitting corrosion, probably facilitated by the presence of crystalline inclusions.\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe subject of stress-corrosion cracking of metallic glasses, despite its obvious importance for structural applications, has received scant attention in the literature. What little work that has been done has focused on zirconium-based glasses, with the observation that these alloys are very susceptible to stress-corrosion cracking in aqueous environments containing chloride ions, likely owing to the fact that they do not form protective oxide surface layers.22\n\nMechanical Behavior at Elevated Temperature\n\nThe discussion above relates to mechanical behavior at temperatures well below the glass transition temperature. At elevated temperatures, the strength drops and plastic deformation transitions to a homogeneous mode, occurring throughout the specimen instead of being localized into shear bands (Figure 6). Above the glass transition temperature, the alloy becomes a fluid, with a viscosity that drops exponentially with increasing temperature. Because the strength of the material is low, temperatures either above or below the glass transition may be useful for processing, as discussed above. However, the decrease in strength and the tendency for crystallization at elevated temperatures preclude use of metallic glasses from structural applications at temperatures approaching the glass transition temperature.\n\nFigure 6. Deformation Map for Metallic Glasses. As a function of temperature (normalized to the glass transition temperature) and applied shear stress τ (normalized to the shear modulus, μ). At high stresses, plastic deformation occurs inhomogeneously, being localized into shear bands. At high temperatures, plastic deformation becomes homogeneous. The dashed lines represent different strain rates. The absolute stresses given are representative of the well-studied bulk metallic glass Zr41.2Ti13.8Cu12.5Ni10Be22.5, but the general features of the map are expected to apply to all metallic glasses.23\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nOther Properties: Magnetic, Electrical, Optical, Thermal, and Acoustic\n\nAlthough most of the current interest in metallic glasses centers on their mechanical properties, it is appropriate to consider other properties of potential utility. Of these, the magnetic properties of ferromagnetic metallic glasses stand out.24 A variety of ferromagnetic glass-forming alloys exist, mostly based on transition metals (iron, nickel, and cobalt). The presence of alloying elements (necessary to make the material glass-forming) means the saturation magnetization of metallic glasses is not as large as that of the pure elements. However, some amorphous alloys have very low coercivity (a measure of how strong a magnetic field must be to change the direction of magnetization of the material) owing to the lack of crystalline defects (such as grain boundaries) and magnetocrystalline anisotropy. In addition, the relatively high electrical resistivity of amorphous alloys (see below) minimizes eddy current losses caused by high-frequency magnetization/demagnetization. Some amorphous alloys also have strong magnetoelastic effects (coupling between magnetic properties such as susceptibility or magnetization and elastic strain). Current and potential future applications of these magnetic properties are discussed below.\n\nLike crystalline alloys, metallic glasses have conduction electrons that make them both electrically and thermally conductive,25 although their structural disorder and high alloy content make them poor conductors. In addition, in a behavior that is useful in some applications, the conductivity of metallic glasses is not very sensitive to temperature; an exception is near absolute zero, where some amorphous alloys become superconducting.\n\nAnother consequence of the amorphous structure of metallic glasses is that they tend to have very low acoustic damping. This may be useful in applications such as vibrating-structure gyroscopes for vehicle orientation.26\n\nA common misperception among those hearing about metallic glasses for the first time is to think they are transparent. This is not the case; amorphous alloys are highly reflective, with a shiny luster similar to that of other metals (Figure 7). This is a result of the presence of the conduction electrons, which scatter and absorb incident light.\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 7. Cast Metallic Glass Wedge. Wedge of a zirconium-based bulk metallic glass produced by casting. Note the shiny metallic luster, typical of metallic glasses.27\n\nMetallic Glass Matrix Composites\n\nAs discussed above, the lack of crystalline defects gives metallic glasses high strength but compromises their ductility and fracture toughness. In particular, the tendency for plastic deformation to localize into shear bands prevents the material from deforming in a \"graceful\" manner. So it should not be surprising that there have been many attempts to control shear band initiation and propagation by making composite materials consisting of particles or fibers of some other material (most commonly a ductile crystalline metal) in a metallic glass matrix. The idea is to produce a material with improved ductility, fracture toughness, and fatigue properties while (hopefully) not sacrificing the qualities—especially strength and processing flexibility—that make metallic glasses interesting in the first place.\n\nPROCESSING AND STRUCTURE OF COMPOSITES\n\nBroadly speaking, there are two kinds of metallic glass matrix composites: ex situ and in situ. In ex situ composites, the metallic glass and the crystalline phase (be it in the form of particles or fibers) are physically combined, for instance by adding particles to the melt before casting. In situ composites are different in that the crystalline phase is produced directly from the melt (by precipitation) during processing. This fundamental difference in processing leads to significant differences in structure and therefore in properties.\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nEX SITU COMPOSITES\n\nThere are two basic ways of making ex situ composites, in which the metallic glass matrix and the crystalline phase are combined physically, without a chemical reaction:\n\n• Add crystalline particles to a melt of a glass-forming alloy and then cast under conditions that allow the matrix to form a metallic glass.\n\n• Make a preform of a crystalline phase (by packing fibers into a mold, for instance) and then cast the glass-forming alloy around the preform.\n\nBoth approaches have limitations. In the first, the addition of particles to the melt increases the viscosity (which is already quite high relative to non-glass-forming alloys) considerably, ultimately to a point where casting becomes impossible. This limits the volume fraction of particles that can be added, which in turn limits the control one has over the microstructure and, in particular, the spacing of the particles. With a perform, the volume fraction of the crystalline phase can be much higher (up to about 80 percent by volume), but the problem then is how to infiltrate the high-viscosity melt into the preform without leaving voids and while still ensuring sufficiently rapid cooling to form a glassy matrix. With both approaches, interfacial reactions between the crystalline phase and the melt can cause partial or complete crystallization of the matrix, degrading the mechanical properties.\n\nIN SITU COMPOSITES\n\nThe difficulty of making satisfactory ex situ composites has led to the development of a new approach in which the crystalline phase is precipitated directly from the melt, either during casting28 or in a separate step prior to casting.29 30 Precipitation during casting, although easier, is problematic from a practical standpoint because variations in the cooling rate (from the surface to the center of a casting, for instance) lead to significant variations in structure and, hence, in properties.\n\nOne of the most promising recent advances in the metallic glass field is the development of in situ composites in which the crystalline phase is precipitated as dendrites, either during casting (Figure 8) or by holding the alloy at an elevated temperature prior to casting.31 By suitably choosing alloy composition, holding time, and temperature, the volume fraction, size, and spacing of the dendritic phase can be controlled. This control provides great flexibility in determining the mechanical properties of the resulting material. Because the crystalline phase is produced prior to casting, variation in the cooling rate across the casting is much less important, though the cooling rate must still be sufficiently high to ensure the matrix forms a glass during cooling. Once the glassy matrix is formed, the composite can be reheated above the glass transition temperature, allowing for thermoplastic forming in a manner similar to single-phase metallic glasses (as described above). Finally, the presence of the dendritic second phase allows for deformation processes (for example, by cold rolling or forging), similar to crystalline alloys.32\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 8. Microstructure of In Situ Metallic Glass Matrix Composite. With ductile crystalline dendrites.\n(a) Scanning electron micrograph showing the dendrites (light gray) in the glassy matrix (dark gray).\n(b) Composite after plastic deformation; note the multiplicity of slip steps, indicating extensive\ninteraction of shear bands with the dendrites.33\n\nThe key limitation of these in situ composites is that not every alloy system is capable\nof forming them. While any alloy will form crystalline phases at elevated temperatures,\nusually the crystalline phases that form are brittle intermetallics that degrade rather\nthan enhance the mechanical properties. To be effective in controlling shear bands, the\nprecipitated phase needs to be ductile, have a shear modulus lower than that of the\nglassy matrix, and (preferably) form as dendrites. To date, the only published reports\nof systems that satisfy these criteria concern alloys based on early transition metals,\nnotably zirconium and titanium. Whether in situ composites can be developed in other\nalloy systems remains to be seen.\n\nMECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF COMPOSITES\n\nThe ability to produce mixed amorphous-crystalline microstructure provides the ability\nto control the formation and propagation of shear bands. The resulting materials can\nhave good fracture and fatigue resistance while retaining the high strength and\nprocessing flexibility associated with metallic glasses.\n\nThe origin of these effects is related to the development of a region of plastic\ndeformation at the tip of an advancing crack. For a crack opening under tensile loading,\nthe size of the plastic region is approximately given by:\n\nR_P ≈ (1/2π)(K_Ic/σ_y)^2, (Equation 1)\n\nwhere KIc is the plane-strain fracture toughness (mentioned above) and σy is the yield\nstrength. The size of the plastic zone varies from ~ 1 μm for \"intrinsically brittle\"\nmetallic glasses to ~ 1 mm for glasses capable of some plastic deformation.34 If the\nmaterial has structure on this length scale (or if the sample itself is of this size), then\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndeformation can proceed in a stable manner by generation and subsequent arrest of\nshear bands. The key to composite design is to produce a microstructure with the\ncorrect length scale to prevent propagating shear bands from becoming catastrophic\ncracks. This turns out to be relatively difficult with ex situ composites, for reasons of\nprocessing described above. As a result, the recently developed dendritic in situ\ncomposites have the most promising properties, and we focus the remainder of our\ndiscussion on them.\n\nSTRENGTH AND DUCTILITY: PLASTIC DEFORMATION\n\nAs with other composite materials, the yield strength of metallic glass matrix\ncomposites can be approximated as a simple rule of mixtures based on the volume\nfraction of the two phases. Because the ductile crystalline phases useful for limiting\nshear band propagation are weaker than the amorphous matrix, in producing a\ncomposite, some sacrifice in strength is inevitable. However, the gains in tensile\nductility can be significant. For instance, monolithic titanium-based metallic glasses\n(like all metallic glasses) have essentially zero tensile ductility, but in situ composites\nbased on titanium have been reported with tensile elongation as large as 12 percent.35\nThis is comparable to the ductility of Ti-6Al-4V (the most common conventional\ntitanium alloy), but in a material with about 30 percent greater strength. The properties\nof metallic glass matrix composites and more conventional materials are further\ncompared below.\n\nFRACTURE AND FATIGUE\n\nThe development of a stable plastic zone means additional energy is required for crack\npropagation, making in situ composites much more resistant to fracture and fatigue\nthan are single-phase glasses. For instance, the plane-strain fracture toughness of\nsome zirconium-based in situ composites can exceed 170 MPa m1/2—7 times greater\nthan that of single-phase glasses and greater than that of virtually any other metallic\nalloy.36 This resistance to crack propagation is also manifested as improved fatigue\nperformance. The fatigue strength of the zirconium-based in situ composites is 20-30\npercent of the tensile strength; in comparison, monolithic metallic glasses have a\nfatigue strength of only ~ 5 percent of the tensile strength.37 The fatigue strength of\nthe in situ composites is thus comparable to that of conventional structural alloys.\n\nAerospace Applications of Metallic Glasses\n\nSTRUCTURAL APPLICATIONS\n\nThe key properties of materials for structural applications in aerospace are:\n\n• Strength.\n\n• Stiffness (Young's modulus).\n\n• Density (weight).\n\n• Fracture toughness (damage tolerance).\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Fatigue resistance (including resistance to both fatigue crack initiation and fatigue\ncrack growth).\n\n• Corrosion resistance (including stress-corrosion cracking).\n\n• Cost (including raw materials, shaping, and assembly).\n\nFigure 9 illustrates the mechanical properties of metallic glasses and metallic glass\nmatrix composites compared with other structural materials. Since weight is a\nparticular concern in aerospace applications, in Figure 9(a) we normalize both yield\nstrength (σy) and stiffness (E) to density (ρ); two materials with the same specific\nstrength (σy /ρ) or specific stiffness (E/ρ) could be used to produce a component with\nthe same overall strength or stiffness, respectively, at the same weight. Materials in the\nupper-right corner of the plot have the best combination of strength and stiffness for a\ngiven weight. Notice that the metallic glasses (and dendritic composites) can be\nstronger than virtually all crystalline metals, although the stiffness of metallic glasses\ntends to be somewhat smaller than that of crystalline alloys of similar composition.\n\nFigure 9(b) illustrates the damage tolerance of metallic glasses compared with other\nmaterials. By plotting the fracture toughness (KIc) against modulus (E), we can also\ncompare the fracture energy (GIc ≈ (KIc)2/E) of the materials; the dashed diagonal\nlines are lines of constant fracture energy. Figure 9(b) reveals several interesting\naspects of the damage tolerance of metallic glasses. First, although the fracture\ntoughness of some metallic glasses is comparable to that of crystalline metals, some\nmetallic glasses—most notably those based on iron (Fe) and magnesium (Mg)—are as\nbrittle as any ceramic. Second, both the fracture toughness and the fracture energy of\nthe dendritic metallic glass matrix composites can be superior to those of all but the\nmost fracture-resistant metals.\n\nThese considerations suggest the dendritic metallic glass matrix composites might\nindeed find applications as structural materials in aircraft and/or spacecraft. The most\nobvious applications would be to replace steel in certain components where strength is\ncritical but space is limited. These might include pylon structures and landing gear,38\nalthough it has yet to be demonstrated that the composites can be fabricated in the\nsizes necessary. Furthermore, the corrosion and stress-corrosion cracking resistance of\nthese materials has not been fully evaluated.\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 9. Materials Property Charts. (a) Strength and stiffness (both normalized to density) of metallic glasses\n(yellow) and dendritic metallic glass matrix composites (red) compared with other materials. (b) Damage\ntolerance. On this plot, the dashed lines represent contours of equal fracture energy. In both plots, polymer\ncomposites (CFRP and GFRP) are represented by isotropic averages; continuous fiber composites can have greater\nstrength and stiffness in a direction parallel to the fibers.39\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMetallic glass foams (see above) also provide intriguing possibilities for structural\napplications. It has recently been shown that metallic glass foams with outstanding\nstrength can be formed by controlling the size of the ligaments between pores.40 This is\na new development, and these foams have not been fully characterized, but it seems\nlikely that optimized foams will have a specific stiffness (E/ρ) superior to that of\npolymer foams, along with high strength and acoustic damping. Such structural foams\ncould be useful in applications requiring strength and stiffness under compressive loads,\nsuch as structural panels for extraterrestrial buildings. Conceivably, such structural\nfoams might even be produced on site (from raw feedstock), reducing the volume of\nmaterial that needs to be launched.\n\nA final possibility is that metallic glasses might be combined with polymer composites\ninto metal-fiber laminate materials. Similar laminates (with crystalline aluminum alloys)\nare being employed in large quantities on the new Airbus 380 and are likely to find\nincreased application in the future.41 The use of metallic glasses in these laminates is\nappealing because of their high specific strength (although the specific stiffness is lower\nthan that of aluminum). Furthermore, the individual layers in the laminate are\nsufficiently thin that a wide range of glass-forming alloys might be considered (in\ncontrast to thicker structural sections, which will be limited by the glass-forming ability\nof the alloy).\n\nOTHER APPLICATIONS\n\nMonolithic metallic glasses are unique among metallic materials in having no\nmicrostructure at length scales of more than a few atomic spacings. In principle then,\nmetallic glasses should be capable of replicating features down to this scale. This\npossibility is facilitated by the ability of metallic glasses to be formed in the supercooled\nliquid temperature range with controllable viscosity. Indeed, superplastic forming of\nmetallic glass surfaces with features as small as 13 nanometers has been\ndemonstrated.42 This ability could be exploited for direct embossing of nanostructures\nin polymers or other materials. Structures on this length scale are also potentially\nuseful as diffraction gratings for ultraviolet and soft x-ray radiation.\n\nIn a related area, metallic glasses have a variety of useful properties for application in\nmicro-electromechanical system (MEMS) actuators, including large elastic strains and\nhigh resilience (elastic strain energy storage), good corrosion and wear resistance, and\nan excellent surface finish.43 The scale of these devices is smaller than the plastic zone\nsize (Equation 1 above), making brittle fracture unlikely. Furthermore, a much wider\nvariety of amorphous alloys can be made in thin film form (by vapor deposition) than is\npossible by casting.\n\nFinally, the magnetic properties of certain amorphous alloys have long been exploited.\nFor instance, their low coercivity and high electrical resistivity make ferromagnetic\namorphous alloys attractive as high-efficiency electrical transformers, particularly at\nhigh frequencies. Such applications are likely to continue well into the future.\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCurrent Challenges and Prospects for the Future\n\nALLOY DESIGN\n\nA critical limitation of existing metallic glass technology (and related composites) is the relative dearth of alloys with good glass-forming ability. The best glass-forming alloys are either based on expensive elements (for example, palladium) or contain toxic elements (for example, beryllium in the best zirconium- and titanium-based alloys). For aerospace applications, the most glaring lack is that, despite significant alloy design efforts in the United States (through the DARPA Structural Amorphous Metals program), Japan, China, and elsewhere, there are no good glass-forming alloys based on aluminum. Attempts to make aluminum-based metallic glass components by consolidating amorphous powders have met with limited success. Similarly, all of the good iron-based metallic glasses contain considerable amounts of nonmetallic elements (notably carbon, boron, silicon, and/or phosphorus), which are thought to contribute to the very low fracture toughness of these alloys (Figure 9(b)).\n\nHowever, there is reason to expect that further progress is possible. Recent experimental results have shown that some of the empirical \"rules\" of glass-forming ability44 are actually quite flexible, and that glass-forming ability is much more sensitive to composition than had been previously appreciated.45 So it is highly probable that some excellent glass-forming alloys compositions remain to be discovered, possibly including some low-density glasses based on aluminum.\n\nIdentifying these good glass-forming alloys will be a challenge. Most alloy development to date has been done with a brute-force approach, but combinatorial techniques46re likely to enable much more rapid screening. One issue is identification of suitable metrics for glass-forming ability, since the combinatorial approaches use vapor-deposited thin films, and it is not clear what characteristics of such a film correlate with glass-forming ability in the bulk. Similarly, continued development of ab initio molecular dynamics techniques should enable identification of candidate alloys from computer simulations, particularly as computers continue to increase in power.\n\nOne area that has received insufficient attention is the influence of processing conditions on glass-forming ability. For instance, application of electromagnetic vibrations during cooling reportedly significantly enhances the glass-forming ability of magnesium-based metallic glasses.47 This approach could, in principle, be applied to other alloys, possibly greatly extending the range of alloys and compositions that can be produced as bulk metallic glasses.\n\nTHERMOPHYSICAL PROPERTIES AND THERMOPLASTIC PROCESSING\n\nMost of the practical interest in single-phase (monolithic) metallic glasses centers on the potential for thermoplastic processing near to or above the glass transition temperature. However, the thermophysical properties and behavior of metallic glasses are not well understood. For instance, the viscosity of the metallic glass melt (or supercooled liquid) is of critical importance, but we do not know how and why alloy composition influences viscosity. From an engineering point of view, the practical aspects of molding of metallic glasses are just beginning to be explored. Certainly many\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nparallels can be drawn with thermoplastic forming of polymers, but there are certain to be many differences as well.\n\nContinued developments in this area are highly likely to result in the ability to produce complex net-shape parts in a single processing step. This ease of processing could offset the higher raw materials costs for metallic glasses, making them competitive in a much wider range of applications. Furthermore, as noted above, the ability to replicate extremely small features (< 20 nanometers) in metallic glasses is likely to be exploited in the manufacture of nanostructured devices.48 49\n\nFinally, development of metallic glass foams will continue and will be aided by improved understanding of thermophysical properties. It is highly likely that foams will be produced in a wide range of glass-forming alloys, and that techniques will be developed for precise control of the porosity, pore size, ligament size, and connectivity. This will allow the properties of these foams to be tailored to particular applications.\n\nCOMPOSITES AND THE QUEST FOR DUCTILITY\n\nFrom the point of view of structural applications, localization of plastic deformation into shear bands is the single biggest challenge because this tendency limits the tensile ductility, fracture toughness, and fatigue crack resistance of metallic glasses. There may well be no solution to this problem for monolithic metallic glasses, for the simple reason that they lack any microstructure to interact with shear bands.\n\nProgress is likely to occur on two fronts. First, it is now well established that some alloys are inherently brittle, in the sense that they experience very little plastic deformation around a crack tip, while other alloys show extensive plastic deformation (albeit localized into shear bands). The precise reason for this difference is not understood at present, but it seems likely that it will be resolved with continued work on fundamental aspects of plastic deformation and fracture. This is likely to lead to development of new alloys with reasonable fracture toughness, although not to tensile ductility. However, even this will be an important step if such alloys can be used as matrices for composites.\n\nSecond, in order to achieve tensile ductility, it appears to be necessary to have some microstructural features to interact with shear bands. Furthermore, the length scale of the microstructure is clearly a critical parameter in arresting shear band propagation. Again, the precise reasons for this are not known, but continued research quite likely will lead to an improved understanding of the interactions between second-phase particles and shear bands.\n\nAt present, the most promising approach to producing composite materials with the proper microstructural length scale is the formation of dendritic composites, as discussed above. A critical limitation is that this process has been demonstrated in only two, closely related alloys and does not appear to be a general phenomenon.\n\nUnfortunately, our understanding of thermodynamics and phase formation in complex multicomponent alloys is not such that we can predict a priori which alloys are capable of producing ductile dendrites in a glass-forming matrix. Until that understanding is developed, discovery of new dendritic composite materials will remain a matter of trial\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nand error. The potential benefits are significant, however, because there exists the possibility of making materials with exceptionally high strength, fracture toughness, and fatigue resistance.\n\nSummary and Recommendations\n\nMetallic glasses combine some of the advantageous mechanical properties of metals—strength, stiffness, and in some cases toughness—with the processing flexibility usually associated with thermoplastic polymers. The absence of crystalline defects allows metallic glasses to be much stronger than conventional alloys but also means they have near-zero tensile ductility and poor fatigue resistance. In structural applications, therefore, metallic glasses are most likely to be useful in the form of composites consisting of ductile crystalline dendrites in a metallic glass matrix. These dendritic composites sacrifice some strength but can have exceptionally high fracture toughness, as well as good fatigue resistance, and could replace high-strength steels in certain load-limited structural components in aerospace vehicles where space is limited.\n\nBecause they are true glasses, thermoplastic forming near the glass transition temperature affords metallic glasses tremendous flexibility in processing. For instance, metallic glass components can be formed in a single step (for example, by injection molding) in complex geometries that would be difficult or impossible to produce with conventional alloys. In addition, metallic glass foams can be made with relative ease, raising the possibility of making structural foams with high strength and stiffness. Finally, because they lack a crystalline grain structure, metallic glasses can be used to form nanoscale features with high fidelity. This may make metallic glasses useful in a variety of micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) applications.\n\nMetallic glasses also have significant limitations for aerospace applications, however. Foremost among these is a lack of good glass-forming alloys; in particular, there are no good aluminum-rich glass-forming alloys, the known titanium-based alloys are either relatively dense (owing to high concentrations of alloying elements) or contain beryllium, and the known magnesium- and iron-based alloys are all quite brittle, with low fracture toughness. Although metallic glass matrix composites can have outstanding properties (particularly strength and fracture toughness), the number of good composite systems known at present is also quite limited.\n\nFor metallic glasses (and their composites) to be of broad utility in aerospace structural applications, progress in the following areas is required:\n\n• Development of new lightweight alloys and composite systems, preferably by computational and/or combinatorial approaches rather than by trial and error.\n\n• Understanding of mechanical behavior, especially:\n\n– The effect of alloy composition and structure on plastic deformation.\n\n– Microstructural design of composites for optimal toughness.\n\n• Development of processing techniques, including thermophysical processing of complex and/or nanoscale features as well as production of metallic glass foams.\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIt is highly likely that continued work over the next 20-50 years will result in significant advances in all these areas, and that metallic glasses and metallic glass matrix composites will see increasing acceptance as structural materials. Whether or not they achieve widespread use in aerospace applications, however, depends critically on the development of new, lightweight alloys.\n\n1 Z. P. Lu, Y. Liu, and C. T. Liu, Chapter 4 in Bulk Metallic Glasses, M. Miller and P. K. Liaw, eds. (Springer, 2009).\n2 H. Men, W. T. Kim, and D. H. Kim, Mater. Trans. 44, 2142 (2003).\n3 A. Peker and W. L. Johnson, Appl. Phys. Lett. 63, 2342 (1993).\n4 N. Nishiyama and A. Inoue, Mater. Trans. JIM 37, 1531 (1996).\n5 W. Zhang, Q. S. Zhang, and A. Inoue, Mater. Trans. 50, 679 (2009).\n6 J. Schroers and W. L. Johnson, Appl. Phys. Lett. 84, 3666 (2004).\n7 F. Guo, H. Wang, S. J. Poon, and G. J. Shiflet, Appl. Phys. Lett. 86, 091907 (2005).\n8 V. Ponnambalam, S. J. Poon, and G. J. Shiflet, J. Mater. Res. 19, 1320 (2004).\n9 A. H. Brothers and D. C. Dunand, Scripta Mater. 54, 513 (2006).\n10 X. J. Gu, S. J. Poon, and G. J. Shiflet, J. Mater. Res. 22, 344 (2007).\n11 Data from MatWeb, .\n12 Data from MatWeb, .\n13 Y. He, G. M. Dougherty, G. J. Shiflet, and S. J. Poon, Acta Metall. Mater. 41, 337 (1993).\n14 Graphic reproduced from C. A. Schuh, T. C. Hufnagel, and U. Rammamurty, Acta Mater. 55, 4067 (2007) and used with the permission of Elsevier, Ltd. Original micrograph is from R. D. Conner, W. L. Johnson, N. E. Paton, and W. D. Nix, J. Appl. Phys. 94, 904 (2003).\n15 P. Lowhaphandu and J. J. Lewandowski, Scripta Mater. 38, 1811 (1998).\n16 Data from MatWeb, .\n17 C. J. Gilbert, V. Schroeder, and R. O. Ritchie, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 30, 1739 (1999).\n18 B. Menzel and R. H. Dauskardt, Acta Mater. 54, 935 (2006).\n19 M. E. Launey, D. C. Hofmann, W. L. Johnson, and R. O. Ritchie, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 106, 4986 (2009).\n20 A. L. Greer, K. L. Rutherford, and I. M. Hutchings, Int. Mater. Rev. 47, 87 (2002).\n21 B. A. Green, P. K. Liaw, and R. A. Buchanan, Chapter 8 in Bulk Metallic Glasses, M. Miller and P. K.Liaw, eds. (Springer, 2009).\n22 V. Schroeder and R. O. Ritchie, Acta Metall. 54, 1785 (2006).\n23 Graphic reproduced from C. A. Schuh, T. C. Hufnagel, and U. Rammamurty, Acta Mater. 55, 4067 (2007) and used with the permission of Elsevier, Ltd.\n24 A. Hernando and M. Vazquez, Ch. 17 in Rapidly Solidified Alloys, H. H. Liebermann, ed. (Marcel Dekker, 1993).\n25 T. Richmond and H.J. Guntherodt, Ch. 14 in Rapidly Solidified Alloys, H. H. Liebermann, ed. (Marcel Dekker, 1993).\n26 C. Haon, D. Camel, B. Drevet, and J. M. Pelletier, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 39, 1791 (2008).\n27 Photograph by Todd Hufnagel.\n28 C. C. Hays, C. P. Kim, and W. L. Johnson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2901 (2000).\n29 C. Fan, R. T. Ott, and T. C. Hufnagel, Appl. Phys. Lett. 81, 1020 (2002).\n30 D. Hofmann, J.-Y. Suh, A. Wiest, G. Duan, M.L. Lind, M. D. Demetriou, and W. L. Johnson, Nature 451, 1085 (2008).\n31 D. Hofmann, J.-Y. Suh, A. Wiest, G. Duan, M.L. Lind, M. D. Demetriou, and W. L. Johnson, Nature 451, 1085 (2008).\n32 D. Hofmann, J.-Y. Suh, A. Wiest, G. Duan, M.L. Lind, M. D. Demetriou, and W. L. Johnson, Nature 451, 1085 (2008).\n33 Graphics reproduced from C. A. Schuh, T. C. Hufnagel, and U. Rammamurty, Acta Mater. 55, 4067 (2007) and used with the permission of Elsevier, Ltd. Original artwork provided by Charlie Hays, Caltech.\n34 M. F. Ashby and A. L. Greer, Scripta Mater. 54, 321 (2006).\n35 D. C. Hofmann, J.Y. Suh, A. Wiest, M.L. Lind, M. D. Demetriou, and W. L. Johnson, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 105, 20136 (2008).\n36 D. Hofmann, J.-Y. Suh, A. Wiest, G. Duan, M.L. Lind, M. D. Demetriou, and W. L. Johnson, Nature 451, 1085 (2008).\n37 M. E. Launey, D. C. Hofmann, W. L. Johnson, and R. O. Ritchie, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 106, 4986 (2009).\n38 N. Barrington and M. Black, Ch. 1 in Aerospace Materials, B. Cantor, H. Assender, and P. Grant, eds. (Institute of Physics, 1998).\n39 Data for metallic glasses are from X. J. Gu, S. J. Poon, and G. J. Shiflet, J. Mater. Res. 22, 344 (2007); D. Hofmann, J.-Y. Suh, A. Wiest, G. Duan, M.L. Lind, M. D. Demetriou, and W. L. Johnson, Nature 451, 1085 (2008); M. F. Ashby and A. L. Greer, Scripta Mater. 54, 321 (2006); D. C. Hofmann, J.Y. Suh, A. Wiest, M.L. Lind, M. D. Demetriou, and W. L. Johnson, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 105, 20136 (2008); J. J. Lewandowski, W. H. Wang, and A. L. Greer, Phil. Mag. Lett. 85, 77 (2005). Data for other materials are from Cambridge Materials Selector, .\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5b794c18f4af3a37","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n40 M. D. Demetriou, C. Veazey, J. S. Harmon, J. P. Schramm, and W. L. Johnson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 145702 (2008).\n41 C. Vermeeren, ed. Around Glare: A New Aircraft Material in Context (Kluwer, 2002).\n42 D. V. Louzguine-Luzgin, D. B. Miracle, and A. Inoue, Adv. Eng. Mater. 10, 1008 (2008).\n43 A. L. Greer, Materials Today 12(1-2), 14 (2009).\n44 D. V. Louzguine-Luzgin, D. B. Miracle, and A. Inoue, Adv. Eng. Mater. 10, 1008 (2008).\n45 Y. Li, Q. Guo, J. A. Kalb, and C. V. Thompson, Science 322, 1816 (2008).\n46 Y. Li, Q. Guo, J. A. Kalb, and C. V. Thompson, Science 322, 1816 (2008).\n47 T. Tamura, K. Amiya, R. S. Rachmat, Y. Mizutani, and K. Miwa, Nature Mater. 4, 289 (2005).\n48 G. Kumar, H. X. Tang, and J. Schroers, Nature 457, 868 (2009).\n49 A. L. Greer, Materials Today 12(1-2), 14 (2009).\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR\n5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON\nWASHINGTON, DC 20301-5000\nINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY\n\nTranscript of a Presentation by Captain Edward J. Ruppelt, 1952\n\nThis document is a transcript of a March 1952 presentation by Captain Edward J. Ruppelt outlining the U.S. Air Force's reorganized investigation into unidentified flying objects (UFOs). The presentation previews prospective technical methodologies, such as diffraction-grating photography and radar-scope synchronization, that were subsequently incorporated into Project Blue Book, a U.S. Air Force program active from 1952 to 1969 that investigated the nature and origin of UFOs. Ruppelt explains that out of approximately 800 historical cases reviewed by the Air Force, approximately 20% remained unexplained after technical analysis. These unresolved reports were sourced from credible military personnel, commercial pilots, and other qualified technical observers. He highlights geographic report concentrations around sensitive national security and nuclear weapons installations (including Los Alamos, Albuquerque, and Oak Ridge National Laboratories) and notes recurring anomalous characteristics, including silent high-speed flight and radar detections indicating unconfirmed air speeds between 1,000 and 3,500 miles per hour. Emphasizing that the Air Force found no conclusive evidence regarding the nature or origin of the phenomena, Ruppelt underscores the national security need for a systematic physical data collection effort to better evaluate these sightings.\n\nBeginning of transcript.\n\nThis medium has been declassified in compliance with applicable executive orders, statutes, and regulations.\n\n(Recording test) ...for all good men to come to the aid of their country. Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country. Now is the time for all good men...\n\n(Recording test) ...addressing them was by voice straight at the microphone and my mouth separated from the microphone by a distance of about 15 inches. I expect that the speaker will put out approximately this volume. And I will now, as before, turn around slowly and address my words toward the blackboard. This I am now doing, talking straight into the blackboard as if I were drawing some diagrams. I'm then going to turn around slowly again now to face the audience. I am separated from the microphone by a somewhat greater distance, as if I were slightly leaning backwards.\n\n(Recording test) ...play around the zero, that's the desirable level. If, for example, we turn the gain down... Now, now. So you see it's just about wide open and that'll pick everything in the room up. See how it jumps and is... Now let's see if we play it back.\n\n(Conversation)\n\n\"I can't hear you.\"\n\n\"Is there anything already on that tape now?\""} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Yeah, there are a few things on the tape.\"\n\n\"Why don't you say something?\"\n\n\"...begin to appear in about 1947. You're possibly familiar with them to a certain extent following the newspaper reports. The first ones were sighted by a Kenneth Arnold in June of 1947 out in Idaho. Now, I'll refer to them as 'these things' because we have no idea what we're dealing with. The newspapers and radio played them up to a great degree at that time and consequently introduced a little bit of, probably a little bit of mass hysteria or something like that into the problem. They flared up for about, oh, spasmodically for about two years and then the things died down to a certain extent. The Air Force took over this project soon after the first sighting because the public demanded an explanation of these objects. In 19... August of 1949, the Air Force came out with a report, supposedly a final report on this, where they reached a few conclusions. Now they had some specialists in certain fields working on this problem, and you might be interested in knowing who they were. There's a Dr. J. A. Hynek, an astronomer at Ohio State, Dr. G. Valley of the Scientific Advisory Board, a Dr. Fitz of the Aeromedical, I believe he was a psychologist, the RAND Corporation, Air Weather Service, Cambridge Field Station, and the U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Bureau. All those people took the reports—they had about 300 reports at that time—they took the reports, read them over, came up with their conclusions. Although their conclusions varied to a certain extent, they all agreed that they didn't know exactly what they were. However, there were obviously no direct threat to the United States, so they didn't pay too much more attention to them.\"\n\nThe Air Force came up with several conclusions in that report. One of them was it was a mild case of mass hysteria due to, we might say, war nerves; the war had just been over. Some of them were due to psychopathological people, or nuts, something like that trying to create an excitement or get publicity or pure do a pure hoax. And the other one was that they were due to misinterpretation of conventional objects.\n\nWell, since that time, several years has passed, and we've been able to go back and review these conclusions a little bit. We've been able to drop out all except the misinterpretation of conventional objects. Going back, we have approximately 800 cases now on record, and only about 2% of those are actual hoaxes or psychopathological people who just don't know what they see. The misinterpretation of known objects is still, of course, a large factor. I mean, that could possibly account for all of them. However, it's a little bit doubtful. We've gone through these reports and come up with the fact that about 20% are very good reports offered by very reliable people and are just absolutely no conclusions can be drawn.\n\nThe mass hysteria factor has gone out because the newspapers haven't played this up for the last approximately three years. There's occasional flurries, but nothing to get excited about at all, and still the reports continue to come in. We dropped this project in 1949, as I said, as a special project and have been handling this information as regular intelligence material since that time.\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"We've decided, about last October, we decided there possibly was enough material now to reopen this case. So we, the center, appointed a permanent project engineer, which I'm the project engineer, and we reviewed all this stuff. We took all the cases that we had, reworked them, filed them all in a neat file so we could tell what we had. We went through and cross-indexed all the material so that we could get an idea of the different factors that were involved in these reports. We came up with some results. I won't say they're outstanding results, I don't... we don't know what the results mean.\n\nBut, uh, unfortunately, I didn't realize we were going to have such a large audience here, so we did bring these slides along. I don't know whether you can... any of you in the back room see this print? I'll pass it around and you can get an idea. This is a plot of the sightings in the United States. Now, this does not include the... we have sightings outside of the United States, but we're not too worried about those at the present time. We're more interested in the United States. I'll explain this a little bit to you since you can't see it. We have certain areas in the United States where there are concentrations. In Dayton and Columbus, Ohio, there are concentrations. Now, this is possibly due to two things. One of them is the fact that the people in that area knew that all the activity in this project was taking place in that area, and consequently, they were doing a little bit more reporting. Another thing is that all the experimental flying was being done around Wright Field, and we still have a lot of trouble with that. People call in and say, \"I just saw a great big light go over at 5,000 miles an hour,\" it turns over... it turns out it's an airplane carrying a flare or something like that. So we've disregarded that concentration. However, around all the ports in the United States—San Francisco, Los Angeles, the coastal area around New York City, and New Orleans—there's concentrations. Around Los Alamos and the Albuquerque area, there's concentrations. Around White Sands, there's concentrations, and down here at Camp Hood, Texas. Now, this Camp Hood, Texas concentration was due to an outbreak of odd lights about two years ago. They never did determine exactly what the lights were. They were a special, we might say, a special type of report that haven't occurred again, and we haven't paid too much attention to that. But the ones around Oak Ridge and the ones around Albuquerque may possibly mean something, we don't know. The rest of the reports are pretty well scattered out around the United States.\n\nIf you plot these reports up by years, they started in the West Coast, up around in the Northwest, around Washington, Oregon, and Idaho in 1947. The next year, they were... they tended to be on the East Coast to a certain extent, and from then on, they were just spread out all over the United States. There was no, no pattern.\n\nWe've plotted the frequency of these reports again. You'll see that it doesn't vary too much year from, uh, from year to year. This large peak down here occurred right after the first sighting by this Arnold out in Idaho, and it was undoubtedly, a lot of it was due to mass hysteria or people wanting to get their names in the paper. However, you can see it tapered off, and it reaches a peak right in, let's see, this is June and July, and every year, almost, it reaches a peak in there. It's also peaked to a certain extent here in January and then again, there's a peak here in December.\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Now there's actually no direct pattern to that, but there's enough of a pattern that it plants a seed of doubt in your mind. You sort of wonder why this thing should run a cycle like that. In these two years, '47 and '48, there was a lot of newspaper publicity. However, in '49, '50, and '51, there was very little newspaper publicity, and the reports from '49, '50, and '51 are mostly from military sources. The civilians have dropped out because possibly they didn't know where to report this stuff or they weren't interested in it. The Air Force came out and said there was nothing to it, so they just quit making reports. However, military has continued to make reports. I should say military and a few airline pilots are covered in these two years.\n\nWe've taken the reported shapes. We have a lot of questions. People say, \"Well, what are people reporting?\" So we've broken it down into shapes. In this segment here, there were no shapes reported. Somebody just called in or wrote a letter and said, \"I saw something,\" so we've had to disregard it. This segment right here represents some type of an astronomical body. I mean, you could say it was either a bright light in the sky or a streak of light that could have been a meteor. We've lumped all those together. In this section are disc or spherical shaped objects. We've lumped those together because it's... we don't believe that people can tell if they're seeing a disc or a sphere unless they should happen to see it both on the bottom view and edgewise to determine it's a disc. So we've lumped those all together. Some of these could be balloons. I mean, there's no doubt about that, that they could be weather balloons. However, due to, or contrary to popular opinion, these things are not, are definitely not all balloons.\n\nThese are shapes that are just reported as oval shapes. It's difficult to tell what they are. Miscellaneous is almost anything. Vapor trails probably actually were vapor trails of aircraft. There's one small segment in here, which is only 6/10 of 1% of all 800 reports, and that is reports of groups of lights going through the sky. Now we've had quite a bit of difficulty with those because the reports are usually from pretty good sources, and they'll see, oh, anywhere from 6 to 20 lights in a formation going streaking across the sky. Well, it's almost impossible that that would, that you would find six meteors together. I understand it's possible to see two of them together that would appear to be in formation, but no more than that. A certain percentage, 1%, are reported to be balloons. Now, these are balloons that we've not been able to establish the origin of. In other words, we don't, they're just balloons floating over the United States, and they're probably meteorological balloons that have gotten loose from some station and haven't burst when they were supposed to. About two and a half percent resemble actual aircraft. We've had quite a bit of discussion as to whether or not these objects could possibly be some highly developed aircraft type that the Soviets have. We've almost been able to throw that out because of the small percentage of reports that even mention any shape due to aircraft, that would resemble aircraft. This percentage here are reported to be rockets or cigar-shaped objects. Now, once again, we've gone into that quite thoroughly and have found that, and it's common knowledge, that any bright light traveling through the air will burn an image in your eye and will, you'll have some persistence there, and it will appear to be elongated when actually it's just a round source of light.\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"So that's some of the shapes that we've had. Now, getting back to this disc or spherical shaped objects, these things are always silent. I mean, if we want to assume that this object we're dealing with is a disc-shaped thing, these are always silent, and they're usually highly maneuverable. Although lately, the reports that have been coming in have neglected to put this 90-degree turn business in; they just go over at a great rate of speed. But the fact that they're silent is quite interesting because we, we have no knowledge of any type of power plant that would be completely silent.\n\nThese are the types of people that send in our reports. This segment here are civilians, and most of these reports came in when the project was first initiated back in 1947 and '48. This black segment here are reports from military sources, and they are, we've put them in as just ground officers, not usually not flying officers, or at least the reports are not made from the air. We have a small segment here of radar returns that we've been unable to explain. This section right here are reports from civilian pilots who were airborne at the time of the sighting. This segment in here especially is the one that we're very interested in. They're reports from airline pilots, from tower operators, and balloon observers. Now, these balloon observers are normally people like the General Mills crews that launch these high-altitude balloons. And here we have technically trained personnel such as scientists, engineers, and so forth.\n\nThis segment, as I said, are the ones that we're very much interested in. Now, airline pilots are, we consider very reliable because they're very, well, they don't like to stick their neck out and make one of these reports unless they're absolutely sure they saw something. They received some very unfavorable publicity during this last rash of reports, or the first one, I should say in '47 and '48, and they absolutely refuse to give us reports unless they're completely sold that they saw something. I've talked to quite a few of the pilots, and one of them made the statement if he looked out his window and saw a V-2 rocket or something like that flying wingtip to wingtip with him over Spokane, he wouldn't tell anybody about it. I mean, he'd never report it to the Air Force because or to anybody because they just say he was crazy and probably ground him. So that's the big difficulty we have in getting reports from airline pilots. We do hear through the grapevine that they see an awful lot of odd things that they don't report, especially over in the Near East, Iran, and the Middle East, I should say, Iran, Palestine, Egypt, in those runs. Now, we haven't been able to pin that down as fact. That's just a rumor that we've picked up in talking to other airline pilots who've heard other airline pilots say that, but we've never been able to pin it down. However, it would be very interesting to find out, and we're making attempts, although we've run up against a lot of trouble because, as I said, the pilots just don't want publicity and they won't make those reports. This segment in here have been reported by Air Force pilots, and they're aerial sightings. A lot of these have been balloons. We've had a lot of trouble with the balloons in that a pilot meeting a balloon in the air isn't familiar with what that balloon's going to do. I mean, he's familiar with meeting another airplane, and he's already made up his mind as to what the rate of closure should be and different things like that. He'll usually assume that the, when he meets a balloon, that it's instead of a balloon, it's some object about 30 or 40 feet in\n\n5"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"diameter, and judging the rate of closure, he assumes it's going at a very terrific speed. But we've been able in some cases to actually show how that pilot was misled and that it was actually a balloon. However, we don't, we don't try to say that everything was a balloon. In other words, if a balloon was launched in the area, we try to definitely pin that down. We can get the time of launch of the balloon, the rate of ascent, the winds aloft, we can plot out the path of that balloon and plot out the pilot's path and show by various lines of sight how he actually did see the balloon. In the past, it's been a practice to say, \"Well, there was a balloon launched within 100 miles, consequently the pilot must have seen the balloon.\" We don't want to try that because it's, well, we just want to have more proof before we say that it's a balloon. And the Air Force has gotten into a lot of trouble in the past by very loosely tying up these balloons with the sightings.\n\nWe have some photographs of these objects that, we have quite a few photographs, I should say. A lot of them are definitely either hoaxes or else they're flaws in the negative and the people that have found this print have looked at it and said, \"Ah, I took a picture of the sky and I didn't see this flying saucer, although here's a picture of it,\" and they'll send it into us. It's not too difficult to examine those under a microscope and find out that the image is due to an imperfection in the negative. However, we have a few photographs that are very difficult to evaluate. This is one of them right here. It was taken in Phoenix, Arizona, on the 7th of July, 1947. This has been hashed around quite a bit, and there's a little bit of doubt as to the, whether or not this was purposely faked, but we've never been able to prove it.\n\nThis picture is probably the most interesting one that we've ever received, mainly because we went into the background of this thing a lot more. This was taken in Lubbock, Texas last September. Now, this Lubbock case is probably the most interesting one, the whole case is the most interesting one we've ever had. These five college professors from Texas Tech were sitting out in the backyard one evening, in what was it, August, yes, August 25th, and they happened to be discussing meteors and so they were sitting there looking up in the sky, and all of a sudden this bunch of lights went over. And so one of them, they looked at each other and said, \"What was that?\" Nobody seemed to know. And so, about a half an hour later, why they were still discussing the lights and they said they wished that something like that would go over again, and it did. So, for, well, altogether in a period of, I believe it was five or six nights, they observed 12 of these things that went over. Well, they assumed that it was some kind of a missile that the Air Force had been developing, and being nosy, they thought they'd find out what this, well, they reached this conclusion after they saw the first two, that they'd find out what these missiles were. So they set up their own measuring, crude measuring systems. They were able to set up a, or measure the angles on the houses and things in their backyards so they could tell the angle this thing went through, and they timed it with a stopwatch. They also set up a baseline 90 degrees to the path—and incidentally, these things always came over the same path and at roughly the same time every night, so they knew about what was going on. They set up this baseline and got at each end with two-way radios and some homemade, well, you might call them theodolites or measuring, angle measuring devices, and tried to get an altitude. Well, they were unsuccessful on"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that. However, they did get their angular measurement across the sky, and it came out to be 30 degrees per second. Now, that's the only measurement we've got on these things. We didn't hear about it till about a month after it happened, and I went down and spent quite a bit of time with these people. At first, we thought it was just one big hoax, that they were just out to get some publicity, but on investigating these people and talking to them, we found out that there was, the professor of, I believe he's head of the physics department at Texas Tech, a gentleman who was head of the petroleum engineering department at Texas Tech, a gentleman who'd spent the last five years in Alaska studying the aurora, and a doctor of mathematics, and they had an astronomer who actually who didn't see these, although he was in on the investigation. Well, after they found out the Air Force was interested in it, they took an entirely different view. I mean, when they found out that it wasn't one of our missiles, then they began to wonder what it was, but the thing had happened and it was finished and they couldn't get any more information for us. Now these pictures, well, incidentally, before that, they put a couple of pieces in the local newspaper to try to determine who else had seen these things, and they put their names in the paper so that people could write to them and say, \"I saw it\" or \"I didn't see it,\" and they got a lot of publicity. Consequently, everybody in Lubbock, Texas was sitting out at night waiting for these things to go over. And a college freshman at Texas Tech had his camera ready when they went over one night, and this is the picture that he got. Now these are, this is one formation that went over and this is another formation. He, his story is that he saw one go over and all of a sudden it dawned on him, \"Well, I might try to get a picture.\" He was a fairly good amateur photographer. He took these with a Kodak 35. He shot them at 1/10th of a second at F3.5 on Plus-X film. He tracked them, and consequently, we don't know whether this blur is due to the movement of the object or the movement of his camera since he shot them at 1/10th of a second. This is the first formation that went over, and this is the second formation. Now, we've tried every way that we know of to prove that these pictures are faked. I've talked to the kid, and in fact, I talked to him twice. We've had OSI talk to him about three times, and the final, last time, they got him alone and they said, \"Now look, we'll let you back out on this if you want to. We'll never tell anybody. As far as the newspaper's concerned and everybody you've sold these pictures to, why they're really good photos, but if you'll just confess to the OSI, why we'll drop it.\" But he said, \"No,\" he said, \"these are pictures of something that flew over Lubbock, Texas on...\" Well, this was, these happened to be taken on the 31st of August. He said, \"I don't know what they are, but,\" he said, \"I took the pictures and that's all I know,\" and he signed a sworn statement for us, so we had to drop it right there. I mean, we've got no way to...\n\n(Question from audience)\n\n- \"Do these pictures check with the observations of those five?\"\n- \"No, sir. I was going to just mention that. The college professors say that these pictures are faked. I mean, they won't believe them at all. They say the things that they saw, they know were too dim to ever take a picture of. Now, we cross-checked with the kid on that, and he said, he said, 'That's right.' He said, 'After I took these pictures,' he said, 'I didn't"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"develop them for two days because,' he said, 'I just thought in my own mind that I wouldn't even have an image because they were, what I saw was, I thought, was too dim to take a picture of, but I just took a chance.' So he took those pictures. He finally developed them and that's what he came out with. And he sold those, I believe he got $8 for the original set of prints from a newspaper. We had those prints over to the photo lab and they checked them out. I mean, they are an actual image, there's no doubt about that. He could have taken a black sheet of paper and just punched holes in it and faked them very easily, but he swears up and down he didn't do that. These things under a microscope show that the relative position of these things vary just a little bit in each picture. Well, it's doubtful if he took a piece of cardboard and just punched holes in it, if he would be smart enough to vary the holes, the position of the hole in each exposure. He'd probably just taken four shots of the same thing and maybe moved his camera to give him a little appearance of motion there. But the actual exposures or images are moved just a little bit in each exposure. Now again, that could come from the fact that maybe he tipped his paper as he took the picture, but we don't know. We've never been able to prove that they were faked. The density on the negative compares to the density of a bright star. In other words, we used the same exposure and the same film and went out and took a couple pictures of some bright planets, and it's, the density of the negative is just a little bit more than that of a bright planet at night. So, that's all we know about it. We haven't been able to...\n\n(Question from audience)\n\n- \"Did you get two sets of lights in some cases rather than a smear?\"\n- \"No, sir, we haven't. I asked him about that and he said when he took the pictures, it looked like a straight line. He didn't notice two different formations. Now, I always hesitate to tell this because it could again be one big coincidence, but if you plot those points on a piece of, on an enlargement on a piece of graph paper and plot them out exactly, you'll see that as the consecutive, in the consecutive frames, one row of lights, the back row, will say, moves up to the first row, and then it moves on ahead in the third picture. Now, that doesn't make sense at all because of the fact that they're two different formations he took. The only two possibilities that we can think of, one of them is that it's still one great big hoax that the college professors just decided to see how much they could fool the people in Lubbock, Texas and they planted these pictures with the kid. The other thing is that there was, it was known that there was a duck flight on in the area at the time, that the ducks were flying across Lubbock. We tried, and the people in Lubbock tried to see whether or not you could take a picture of ducks at night just from the reflection of the city lights, and that's impossible. So if these pictures aren't true, or are not fakes, why then these pictures are not of ducks. We'll put it that way. The college professors won't believe the duck story at all. I mean, they say those were not ducks. We can, if they were ducks, they'd have to be at such and such an height to give that 30"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"degrees per second, and if they were that low, why, in fact, I think it comes out to be about 75 to 80 feet, the ducks would have to be that low to be flying 60 miles an hour and go through that angle at that certain time. And they say they are not ducks. Now that's the only possibility we have, or the only idea of what they could be. They might be ducks reflecting the city lights, although it's still hard to believe that because just of all the circumstances, it just doesn't sound like ducks. A lot of people in Lubbock who were looking for these objects on these nights did see ducks. And when we were down there, they'd call us up and they'd say, 'I know what these lights are, they're ducks because I saw them and I could see the wings flapping and I could hear them honking and I could see their necks sticking out, and you're wasting our good taxpayers' money coming down here talking about it because they were ducks.' Now, but once again, there's about half the people that saw these objects again said they were not ducks because they said, 'We've lived in Lubbock all our life and we've seen ducks for the last 30 years and those were not ducks.' So we're up against a blank wall on this certain, this one case.\n\nNow we, uh, we've reached several general, or I shouldn't say reached any conclusions. There's two or three general facts about all of the sightings, the overall, uh, collection of sightings we have. One of them is that on our good sightings, there's absolutely no noise ever reported in connection with these objects, no matter how low they are. They may be, uh, reported as just being specks in the sky or down fairly low and there's absolutely no noise reported. And once again, we, uh, we don't know of any kind of a propulsion system that would, uh, that would do that. I mean, everything that we know of has some type of noise connected with it. Another thing is we've had a lot of radar returns, uh, but we have never had a visual sighting linked up with a radar return. We've had two or three reports of that, but we've never been able to pin them down enough and get enough facts about them to make sure that they were both looking at the same thing. Uh, they have had a project on this down at, uh, Holloman. They've been very much interested in it because they've been seeing, uh, compare on a comparative basis, more of these things around the Holloman and White Sands area. They did track something down there with their cinetheodolites. Uh, they don't know what it is, and it could possibly be a slow-moving daylight meteor. Now, I'm not an astronomer, but I understand such things exist. Uh, they, they, they got pictures of it and they were able to track it. However, they saw about five, I think it was five or six of these things at once. Uh, it was right after they launched a missile and they had their, uh, Scania, cinetheodolites pointed up in the air and they saw these four or five things right behind the missile and they got the word to swing over on those and forget the missile. And they're a little bit doubtful as to whether or not all stations tracked the same object. So consequently, their readings are a little bit off, but they did come up, uh, with an altitude reading of about 150,000 feet. Uh, the speed was, uh, very great. They, they came up with a speed of about 3,500 miles an hour, but again, they won't back that up because they aren't, they aren't sure of the conditions that these readings were made under. Uh, that's the only time we've ever come really close to getting any, uh, any accurate data on these things. And I want to say again that it could be that there was a, a meteor in the daytime. Now, they have another type of, uh,"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"phenomena or object or something floating around down that area, and that's these green fireballs. Now, I don't know whether you've been reading about that in the paper, but there's a Dr., uh, Lincoln LaPaz down in Albuquerque at the University of New Mexico who's been making a big deal out of these green fireballs. They appear to be, uh, similar to a meteor except that they have a definite flat trajectory. Uh, they're reported to be a brilliant, uh, greenish-blue color, and they, uh, they don't explode. I mean, they appear to be very low at, uh, about a third or a fourth the size of a full moon and they're very low and they just go out like that, they don't explode. Now Dr. LaPaz's theory on this thing is that if it's a normal meteor, there should be a terrific explosion because of the size of these things, uh, indicates that they're down low in the atmosphere and there should be a terrific explosion when they, uh, when they get down low enough to explode. It's, uh, again, we don't know what they are. I mean, they actually exist. There's no doubt about it. I mean, it's not anybody's imagination because they've been reported by, well, Dr. LaPaz himself has seen one, and we've had some very fine reports and they all, uh, follow the same path. There's a definite flat trajectory right across the, uh, well, parallel to the Earth's surface. Uh, they, they, they go out with no explosion and they're a brilliant bright green. Now, airline pilots have seen them and maybe if they meet them head-on or something like that, they'll rack the airliner up, just about toss everybody out of the seats because they think they're going to have a head-on collision with this, uh, whatever it may be. Now Cambridge, uh, labs have been working on that for two years and they came up with no conclusions whatsoever as to what they might be. So, I understand that we're going to take it over again and see if we can possibly come up with, uh, some idea. Uh, we've talked to, uh, well, Dr. Kaplan's idea, or, uh, LaPaz's idea is that they come from Russia. And he said that they're using some kind of a self-destruction missile that and they're zeroing in on, uh, Los Alamos. Now that's a good story. I mean, it, it, uh, sounds real exciting and and there's a possibility. I mean, we can't say that it isn't because we don't know what it is. Uh, we've talked to Dr. Kaplan quite a bit on this subject, uh, probably, probably know him from the, uh, University of California. Uh, he thinks that they're either some kind of a, possibly a new meteor that we are not familiar with, or, uh, some phenomena that's related to the aurora. Uh, he, he, he claims that he can duplicate this color in his lab and I, I'm not, uh, sure of just exactly how he does it. I believe he uses, uh, well, I don't know, I won't say. I've got a report but I don't want to quote something I don't know about. But anyway, he can duplicate this color, and he believes that that's what it is. Now, uh, as I say, that is a definite division of these things. I mean, they, they definitely exist and our problem is to find out, really find out what they are. If they're some kind of phenomena, why then we can turn it over to the astronomers and let them take it. Uh, if they should happen to come from Russia, why then we better start finding out what they're trying to do on it.\n\n(Question from audience)\n\n- \"How many of these green light reports do you have?\"\n- \"We have quite a few, sir. I'd hate to say, I mean, I couldn't tell you exactly a number, but they started out in, I believe, '49. Yes, sir. There was a big outbreak of them in '49, and"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"they seem to appear in January or in December and January, in that period between the years. And they coincide with a meteor shower that occurs at that time. I don't believe I know, remember the name of it is, but for a long time, they tried to tie them in with that meteor shower, but just recently now, within the last year, they've begun to occur more on a, over the whole year instead of coming at at one time. OSI, Dr. LaPaz worked for OSI in '49 on these and they tried to come up with a conclusion, they couldn't. They've also spent a lot of time trying to find any fragments and have never been successful. I mean, they've been able to triangulate these things and get a heck of a lot of reports on people who have seen them or seen one of them and then work their triangulation like they do on large meteors, but they've never been able to find any parts. They wanted us to fire to pick up, put a dust collector on a B-29 and try to fly through the area right after these things occurred, try to pick up any dust that they might have left in the upper atmosphere, but they didn't find anything at all that would indicate that anything unusual was going on. So, we're up against a stone wall on these things too. I mean, all we've got is just people's ideas. We've got no proof as to what they actually may be. Now, we've, one of our approaches on this thing is going to be the use of diffraction gratings on cameras. This is Dr. Kaplan's idea. He says that we can, and I mean, I shouldn't say he says, we know that we can take a very inexpensive camera and put a diffraction grating on it and give them to these guards around Sandia and White Sands and all these places where the guards are outdoors 24 hours a day. And every time they see something that's unusual, just point the camera at it and take a picture, and then he says that he can take the reading and match them up either by known objects or match them up in his lab and tell us what the composition is of this object that's emitting this light. Now, we haven't, that's just strictly in the planning stage now, we haven't done very much except Dr. Kaplan is now trying to figure out the cheapest camera that he can build for us and the most rugged camera so these guards can throw it around and still get some decent pictures of these objects. Another thing that we've done is recently we've briefed the Air Defense Command on this whole project and have got their cooperation in with their radar scope cameras. As I mentioned before, we have had quite a few unknown radar returns. These things have, the Air Defense Command radars tracked objects going anywhere from 1,000 up to about 3,500 miles an hour. We've never been able to determine, however, that these weren't malfunctions in the radar set or due to some type of atmospheric phenomena. We've tried to get the weather charts at the time or weather conditions at the time this phenomena has occurred and try to correlate that data and show that due to a certain type of weather condition that they had this type of return. Now, we haven't had too much luck on that angle, so now we're going to try to get radar scope cameras and get pictures of this stuff, and then we'll know. Before, we just had the radar observer's interpretation of what he saw on the scope. We think that with pictures, probably we can do a little bit more with this. Now, another step further than that, and we haven't done anything on this except talk about it, and it may get into the point where we are going to"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"do this, and that is try to put in a long focal length camera, try to match this, a long focal length camera with the radar spinner, so that whenever this radar operator gets a return, all he has to do is poke a button and this camera will take a picture of the area of the sky that the radar spinner is pointing at. And in that, if we get that far, and if we get a bad or funny return, we'll say, an unusual return on a scope, and if we get an image, no matter how big the image is, on the photographic plate or on the film at the same time, why then we can say that this radar operator was actually picking up something. I mean, that would be a great help to us now because we don't know for sure if they're even picking anything up. But that's the next step and it's still in the planning or even it's in the talking stage right now. That's about the main thing we're going to try to do as far as future plans are concerned. We want to get, try to get some concrete data to say that these things exist. Up till the present time, we've got no real proof that anything even exists. The only thing we've got are reports from very reliable people that do have a lot of details in them, but the details aren't the kind that we want. I mean, they don't give us enough data as to the possible performance or anything else that we might need on these objects. The official Air Force viewpoint is that we've got enough good reports from reliable people to be interested in this. We can't back up any of these books by Scully or Keyhoe and say that we know that they're from Venus or that we know they're from Russia or that we even know they exist. I mean, there's a possibility that everything that's being reported is some, is a balloon or is a meteor or ducks or anything you can think of that somebody just saw them from an odd angle or under odd lighting conditions and they look like something else. But it's at the present time, we have enough faith in these people that have been turning in the reports to say that we don't exactly believe them. I mean, we're going to have to get more proof before we can say that everything that's being seen is some known object just viewed under different circumstances.\n\nI could go on for a long time telling you about the good reports we've had. I'd say about 20% of the 800 or 900 reports that we now have just cannot be explained. I mean, you can't say that looks like a meteor. You can't say that that could be a balloon if there's a balloon in the area because it just doesn't tie up. And most of these people that have made these reports are well-established airline pilots, I mean, old pilots who've had a lot of flying time, the people that released these General Mills balloons have seen something, the people at White Sands have seen very odd things, this Dr. LaPaz himself has seen a couple things floating over the mountains down in New Mexico that he didn't, he couldn't explain. And we've got about 20% of our reports are like that, that we just, we can't go up to them and say, 'Now you can't, this can't be, you're nuts.' I mean, that would be our only answer on those. 'You're just crazy.' But you can't go up to anybody and tell them that. I mean, they're, they've seen something and we don't know what it is. Now, some of the big questions that enter our mind on this is one, the no sound business. If it actually exists and there's no, there's some type of propulsion but there's no sound, what could it possibly be? Another big question is, and it's getting into the lines of psychology, why or how could a person look up at night or in the dusk, we'll say, or even in the daytime and see some of"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"these things that they report? Now, right along those lines, we had, the same time these pictures were taken down in Lubbock, within two or three days of that time, two women were driving along in a car, and all of a sudden they looked out over the Texas plains and they saw this object that they described as being top-shaped, like one of these old-fashioned tops you put a string around and pull, and it was silver and it was hovering along over the prairie. And they drove up, well, they approached it, and as they approached it, why the thing began to take off like that. Well, now we checked on these women and found out that they were just as reliable as your wives or anybody else. I mean, they didn't have any reputation of being habitual liars or stretching stories or anything like that. They were just good old Texas farm wives is all they were. And we questioned them, but that's their story. I mean, they said, 'That's what we saw. We don't know what it was. We're leaving it up to the Air Force to tell us what we saw.' Well, Thunder, we can't tell them. And once again, it goes down back to the point, how much can people imagine? At the same time these Lubbock pictures were taken, in fact, it's the same night, a guard and his wife from the Sandia base in Albuquerque were sitting out in their backyard, and all of a sudden they looked up and they saw this big dark shape go over. And they said that it was, it looked a lot like a flying wing type aircraft, and it was down about 150 feet and it just scared the dickens out of them because it was so low. And they could see little exhaust flames on the back of the airplane. Well, we checked them again and once again, we found out that they're just good, normal people. I mean, the guy's been a guard at Sandia for a good number of years, so he's reliable to that extent. I mean, they don't usually hire psychopathic cases to guard places like Sandia. And just out of curiosity, we sent these pictures down to that guy, and the OSI showed them to him and he said, 'Yeah,' he said, 'that's what I saw, but,' he said, 'it was, these little lights are the exhaust stacks that I saw.' And it happened on the same night that these pictures were taken, just about two hours before these people saw this thing at Lubbock. So, I mean it, it's probably a coincidence, but again, you can't say it's a coincidence. I mean, we can't get enough facts to ever pin it down, but it's one of those things that's just very interesting to work on. I mean, it'll drive you nuts after a certain amount of time, but then we try to keep going on it. That's about all that I had. If you've got any questions, well, we'd be very happy to discuss any aspect of this whole thing with you folks.\n\n(Question from audience)\n\n• \"What sort of performance data do you get out of these radar returns?\"\n\n• \"Uh, it varies. It varies quite a bit. Usually high speed. When I say high speed, I mean anything over 1,000 miles an hour. Uh, they, for a while, we we thought we had it pinned down or our radar people did because the return always went over the station. It came in, went through the ground clutter, practically directly over the station and went out the other side. Now they claim that that was an indication of, uh, something, I'm not sure, uh, interference in their station or something like that. But lately, we, they haven't been doing that. I mean, they'll, they'll come in to the, uh, into the range and they'll maybe make a turn and go out. Now we had one interesting case from New Spay Library and, uh, this"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GCA operator was, uh, sitting there looking in his scope and all of a sudden he saw these two objects come in. They were coming in about 4 or 500 miles an hour. And at the same time a C-47 was coming in, he was going to land his 47. Well, he noticed they were on a collision course, so he called the tower and said, 'Tell those two unidentified airplanes they're on a collision course with this 47.' So the tower just called in the blind... The tower said there's no other airplanes out there. The radar man said, 'Yes, there is.' The tower just called in the blind and said, 'Uh, you two unidentified airplanes, you're on a collision course with a 47.' And just as they said that, these two returns made a turn. Now, once again, have we got coincidence or have we actually got something? See, I mean it, uh... Do they speak English? ... So, that's about the only conclusion we can draw, they must speak English. But, uh, that's some of the things we run into. We run into a lot of that kind of stuff where we'll have a lot of small situations that all build up into a big one. And it might be just a coincidence. It might be, we may put our imagination into it unconsciously. Only we, we try to keep away from that. We try to stay right in the straight and narrow. I mean, we don't want to, uh, be influenced either way on this thing. They may be from Mars, but if they are, we don't want to think they are. We don't want to think they're all balloons. I mean, we try to stay right in the middle of the road. Now, we had a real interesting one from, uh, New Jersey, uh, around Sandy Hook and Fort Monmouth here not too long ago. These pilots in a T-33 chased something, and about 10 minutes later, all our radar stations in that area begin to pick these objects up going back and forth all over the skies. And we thought, 'Boy, this is it.' So we tore up there to find out, and boy, the story sounded real fine. These T-33 pilots saw this great big disc-shaped thing over there and he took out after it and he couldn't catch it. And then the radar stations begin to pick up these signals and they were clocking speeds up to 3,500 miles an hour and everything else. Well, it turned out that the pilots had seen a big balloon. It was larger than a normal weather balloon, had been launched at Fort Monmouth. And they were a little bit mixed up with their rate of closure and stuff like that and had seen a balloon. And the radar crews, the first radar crew had picked up a, probably just an ordinary aircraft, but they were giving a demonstration to a bunch of colonels and the operators got a little bit flustered on the whole thing and they couldn't lock in this automatic tracking, so they assumed the thing must be going about 3,500 miles an hour. And it turned out the reason they couldn't lock it in is they were just too excited and got a little bit fouled up on their procedures. And from then on, why they were picking up weather balloons, uh, with these radar reflectors hanging on them and everything else, and the students, incidentally, it turned out they were mostly student radar operators picking this stuff up. The, uh, headquarters had called in and hadn't explained anything. They just said, 'Get on your radar scopes and look for these mysterious objects floating around.' Well, that's all it took for these kids because, boy, they saw everything. Well, what at first appeared to be a very good sighting just all broke down when we get enough facts. Now"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"maybe they'll all turn out to do that, but so far, we've got an awful lot of them that we can't even come close to explaining.\"\n\n• \"I'd like to, at the risk of repeating, just sum up some of these points. One is, Lieutenant Ruppelt mentioned around 800 cases that we have in our files. We know that that's only a portion of the sightings that have been made. Those are the ones that have managed to be reported to some military base and then through channels get to us. You can read local newspapers almost anywhere in the country, and if you read them over a period of time, you'll find stories on these things that we have not heard of. We've even heard of them in military organizations that have not been reported because I think it's almost a case of the airline pilots that wonder if there isn't something peculiar. For example, I was talking to some people from SAC the other day, and they were telling me about a radar bomb scoring run of a B-29 out at St. Louis. And they were following the B-29 in to the initial point. The operator noticed this plane flying or an object at 48,000 feet. The B-29 was at 25,000 feet. He immediately thought, 'Well, that's possible.' I mean, double harmonics or something, and anyway, he explained it away in his own mind. Well, then the blip started descending on a collision course, and a quick check revealed that it was descending at a rate of something like 1,000 miles an hour. He got a little more concerned, still thought, 'Well, possibly this is either in the radar or in some atmospheric condition.' Well then when the thing broke off and made a turn and then another turn and took the course and disappeared, they just don't know what it is. We find on these radar sightings that you're just left pretty much outside. I mean, you can't really dig in. You haven't got anything because there's so many of them that can be explained as there's a possibility that it is something either in the atmosphere or in the set. We had one good one not too long ago, and one of our electronics people pulled out a textbook and, gee, there was a case written up in the textbook exactly what had been reported to us. A hovering object that made a rapid rate of ascent and then took off on a course. Well, such a thing has occurred apparently because of weather phenomena, been reported and pretty thoroughly written up. So we find that whole area of sightings, I mean we're just left without any answers. One point that was not brought out is our relationship with Battelle.\"\n\n• \"Oh, yes, I forgot to mention... Battelle Memorial Institute. They're one of the contractors who do work for us and... (inaudible) ...They're always silent. They became interested in this when we pointed out to them one day that here's an area in which we've had a lot of problems, and we're looking for help. We don't know the answers. So, one of the things that they hope to do for us is make available to us people who are specialists in various areas. So if we get a case that calls for an astronomer, we can quickly get an astronomer to work on it. Another thing is possibly a clipping service that will bring in a mass of reports we don't have, and if any of them are worth following up, we can. But our problem is just getting facts. We don't have enough facts to do anything other than explain that 80% of these, roughly, are known objects, or possibly. As a matter of fact,"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"they're not 80% definitely proved, but say 60 definitely. I mean, there's no question in our mind it was a plane or something else. And then, these are rough figures, say 20% that maybe could have been a plane, a balloon, or a meteor. And then there's that 20% like the green fireballs and the lights that we just do not have an answer for. Now, one thing that people have suggested, 'Well, how about a feasibility study?' Well, you, a feasibility of what? The unknown. We're stuck there.\"\n\n(Question from audience)\n\n• \"Have all the intelligence officers of the bases and units been alerted on this and they report everything, or is the military generally alerted to this?\"\n\n• \"Yes, we, we should have brought that out early. There is a directive from Headquarters, USAF, that establishes a reporting procedure. Now, we felt for a long time, like most directives, particularly if there's no activity on it, people forget about it. I mean, it gets stuck off in the file. We've also felt that it was not a very good one. It had a lot of weak points in it. So we prepared a new directive, and in the meantime suggested that they go ahead and remind all of these people that there is a reporting procedure set up so that it would bring reports in. And the new directive has just recently been coordinated, I believe, hasn't it? It's going back to DOI right now.\"\n\n• \"And it should be out. Now, Lieutenant Ruppelt, in getting around on these cases, of course, does a lot of missionary work because when he hits a base, I mean, he briefs them pretty thoroughly on our problem. And the places he's hit, I'm sure, are well aware of how it's done. I'm equally sure there are a number of these places that just don't know. They probably have a directive somewhere.\"\n\n• \"I was just thinking of my own case. I knew you folks were interested from this association or others, but no still any efficient channel that never heard that there's any interest from...\"\n\n• \"How about the ground observer corps? They have 100,000 people, don't they? And they're quite active now, but I haven't...\"\n\n• \"We, they are to a certain extent, sir. We've talked about that quite a bit, and we don't know whether it's worth alerting those people. Now, they're not now on a 24-hour basis. They will, they hope to get them on a 24-hour basis soon. But, we don't know exactly how far to go. I mean, we're afraid maybe if we alert that number of people, then everybody in the United States will get excited again. That's the thing we're trying to keep out of this thing is this excitement business. Now, in two weeks, a week from this coming Friday, Life is coming out with an article on these objects, and we've been working closely with Life, and they're supposedly are going to print what we told them to. I hope they do. They're going to put it on a factual basis. I mean, just about like this briefing. In other words, there may be something to it, but we don't know. And we feel that that report"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"may tend to take the mysteriousness and hysteria out of the thing and just get people to give us a few reports, you know, people with good common sense instead of all these nut letters that we get occasionally. Another thing, Colonel Kirkland referred to this newspaper clipping service, we hope to get that started before this Life magazine article comes out and keep it going over say a period of a year and see how the peaks in the newspaper publicity correspond with the peaks in this, in the reports that we get. We feel that after Life comes out, why then several other magazines will undoubtedly pick this stuff up. A True magazine is supposed to be coming out with an article sometime within the next couple months. It will be slanted the other way. It's going to be written by one of these science fiction writers, and it should give us no end of trouble. We haven't been able to get True to cooperate with us at all. I mean, I shouldn't say that, they probably would, but their type of magazine, I mean, they sell a sensational item, and they don't, they want to play it up. And then, I believe Look is also thinking about coming out with an article. So, magazines are going to follow Life and we'll probably run into a little bit of flak again on this thing.\"\n\n(Question from audience)\n\n• \"Is it unlikely, or rather, is it likely that any of these magazines have facts or data which they would withhold just for the sake of being sensational?\"\n\n• \"Life magazine has a lot of information that we do not have on different sightings. They have some very good sightings too. I mean, they've called in some pretty important people around the United States. They won't, they're very hesitant to tell you who works for them as their consultants. But they have got some pretty good sightings that we have never heard of, and they're going to use those in their article, although they have checked those with us. The two or three old standbys that everybody always plays up, such as this Mantell case down in Kentucky where this guy got killed chasing one of them, supposedly, the one up in Sioux Falls, South Dakota where the F-51 pilot fought with this thing for 15 minutes, and a few of those that are outstanding as far as the science fiction writers are concerned, Life is going to leave out. They're not going to dig those up again and rehash them again.\"\n\n(Question from audience)\n\n• \"Was it ever established what caused Mantell's death and disintegration?\"\n\n• \"Well, they think, I mean, the official report is, and I tend to believe it, is that he didn't have any oxygen at all, and he just climbed up until he passed out and then the airplane went into a dive and just tore itself to pieces. I think that that probably, what he was chasing is still open to discussion. It was either, probably either Venus or one of these great big Skyhook balloons that General Mills puts up, because there was one lost in the area at the time, although they were never able to say where it was, except that it was"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"either over Kentucky or Tennessee. That's all they've been able to pin down, and they think that that might have been it. But...\"\n\n(Question from audience)\n\n• \"Is this still classified top secret, since Life is coming out with it?\"\n\n• \"No, uh, we've, we actually, we carry it as confidential, the overall project. We're trying to get it dropped down to restricted now because Life is going to come out with a lot of material we've given them that is classified, or was classified at one time. The only time this was classified top secret was right after it came out. We've been carrying this confidential. There are some aspects of it we'll have to keep classified as secret or maybe higher when we start listing Air Defense radar stations, possible tie-in with some of our latest developments and things like that. We'll have to keep that classified. But just, or just the details of a sighting, we're going to try to declassify to restricted because we've had trouble in the past on that. Some newspaper will call up and say, 'Big sighting up somewhere,' and we'll say, 'Yes, we've heard about it.' And they'll say, 'What's the results?' We'll say, 'We can't tell you about that, it's classified.' So immediately they come out with a big story about, 'The Air Force just picked up a spaceship somewhere and they won't tell us about it.' And that's the thing we're trying to get away from. I mean, we don't want to excite anybody on the project.\"\n\n• \"There is one other area that's classified, and that's where we have reports on people. Yes, you know, their background to try to determine whether they're reliable or not. We run into one interesting bit of discussion on this classification because some people who say, 'Well, now, these could be from Russia,' which is true, they could be. 'Therefore, we're doing them a great service reporting them in our papers very carefully where they get plots,' which is true. But we feel that the papers, I mean, when they get one, are going to report it, and then they're going to come to us for what we know on it. And it's inevitable if the papers pick it up. So that's one reason we like this reporting channel that's established, that if anybody sights one of them, it's not too illogical for somebody if he sees something in the air to call the nearest Air Force base. I mean, it's one of the first things he would think of, 'Maybe they've got something in the air.' And we have found, though, just as an example of this T-33 case you mentioned, the reporters are right on hand to discuss this thing with the pilots when they landed, and took pictures of them.\"\n\n• \"We found out that in the New York area, some paper, I couldn't tell you which one it is, monitors VHF, monitors all the air traffic in the area. And I don't know why they do it, but they do. And that's where they picked up that T-33 incident, was monitoring the air traffic. Now, I heard two different stories. One that the newspaper actually has a setup themselves to monitor it. Another one that they have two or three hams in the area alerted to call them if anything happens. But this T-33 pilot did call the tower and told them about it, and the newspapers were right on it. So, we found out one thing, and that is the"} {"doc_id":"5bc7190d343181b0","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"newspapers surpass the Air Force in their intelligence channels. They're good. I mean, there's just no getting around it.\"\n\n(Inaudible talk about Mr. Davis and the President)\n\n• \"Well, I actually, it goes a little further than that. I mean, it's a wonderful ally. I think the project has varied in its handling a lot just through a difference of opinion or, you know, changes in opinion. There's been great interest in it and then it would fall away, not too much interest, and then great interest. And that's officially too, as well as the public. We feel that by going right down the line and taking every case we get and trying to get additional facts and encouraging anybody and everybody to give us information, there are a lot of groups that are interested in this. There's a, I don't know whether any of you read the Time article a few weeks ago on the saucers. Well, there's a group out on the West Coast that's in their spare time trying to get all of these cases they can to work on. We feel that that group, if we're quite frank with them, would be very cooperative and help us. I mean, we're not trying to hide anything, we're trying to get help. You do have a problem and how far you go publicly, but I think possibly this Life type article will help if they, if they publish what we expect.\"\n\nEnd of recording; nothing follows."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAAS\nBIGELOW AEROSPACE\nADVANCED SPACE STUDIES ®\nNovember 2009\nMonthly Report"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"November\n2009 Report\nBigelow Aerospace Advanced\nSpace Studies\n(BAASS)\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PREFACE\nThis Progress report summarizes BAASS activities and progress for the period November 1- November 30, 2009.\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\nTopics covered in this report are the following:\nSummary of MUFON Investigative Activity for November 2009.....................Page 3\nProgress on Utah Ranch Investigations.....................................................Page 59\nPreliminary Report on a Blue Orb Incident...........................................Page 126\nConclusion.....................................................................................................Page 154\n2"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Cases That MUFON Investigated During November 2009\nIn February 2009, BAASS executed a Purchase order with MUFON that entitles BAASS to: (a) receive notification of significant reports on UAP sightings from anywhere in the United States within hours, (b) receive timely reports from MUFON investigators regarding investigations of these incidents (c) receive physical evidence (including photographs, digital recordings, samples of soil, insects, plants, and animals) for scientific analysis. BAASS has multiple laboratories that are ready to conduct forensic, photographic, metallurgic, chemical, isotope, biological, chemical analysis of any specimens that BAASS receives from MUFON.\nIt should be noted that during the month of October 2009, BAASS conducted an appraisal of MUFON's performance to date. BAASS was dissatisfied with MUFON's tendency to warehouse significant sums of money every month, especially during the early stages of the contract. Hence, for the remainder of the contract, BAASS will be reducing the monthly stipend to MUFON by $10,000. This will still enable MUFON to operate at normal efficiencies as they spend down the remaining surplus money.\nThe following are selected investigative reports from MUFON deployments during the months of October 2009.\n3"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MUFON Mutual UFO Network\nCase Report MUFON SIP Deployment\nCase # 19865 Case Type: Cat 2\nInvestigator: AAP Person 116\nGPS COORDINATES : 1843(a)(3)\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: Location of witness vehicle on highway where sighting occurred. Object was seen 30-50 feet to the East at approx. 25' altitude.\nLOCATION: Railroad crossing on 1843(a)(3) Modesto, CA\nDATE OF EVENT: 10-07-09\nTIME OF EVENT:20:04:00 ( ) Exact ( x ) Approximate\n4"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On 10-13-09 a CAT 3 Star team Deployment in Modesto, CA was authorized and AAP Person 116 was assigned as lead investigator.\n\nAAP Person 59\n\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Manager\nSIP Project Coordinator\n\nBackground:\n\nTwo witnesses (father and 6 yr. old daughter) in a rural area first observed and photographed two blue elevated lights in flight approximately a mile away towards town. Witness drove towards objects for better view. Upon arriving at general site, objects converged in flight upon witnesses from left and right to a hovering position viewed from front auto window. Frightened by the event and belief that objects began following them, witness drove rapidly one half mile into town and a mile beyond where objects were no longer observed. Daughter developed a chest rash the nest day.\n\nNarrative:\n\nThursday 10/15/09 17:50\n\nDrove to Modesto, CA and arrived 19:07 at California Highway Patrol at 4030 Kiernan Ave., only to find the office closed.\n\nDrove the route that reporting witness took on the night of his sighting to familiarize myself with surroundings, abstractions, lighting, traffic, and details included in his report."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Drove to the church and waited until 20:00 when witness came out of the church. As soon as we met and made introductions, witness offered to show me his route and stops for different events.\n\nWe drove south on Tully Road and stopped midway between Kiernan Ave and Bangs Ave where witness took his 3 photos of the 2 blue lights with his cell phone looking southeast. (We later discovered the location of the 2 blue lights were very close to the vicinity of the Modesto Hobby and Crafts Store on Bangs Avenue east of Tully Road approximately 3000 feet away from witness's camera shots.)\n\nWe then drove east on Bangs Avenue and stopped on the east side of the railroad tracks where witness stated, \"...my vehicle was converged on from the fields from the north and south just before the auto dealership on my right. I could see them from my front window approximately thirty to fifty feet (away) with one being above the other\" 1843(a)(3)\n1843(a)(3)\n\nWe soon discovered the Modesto Hobby and Crafts Store was on Bangs Avenue approximately 800 feet from the railroad crossing between the tracks and the auto dealership. Hobby store was closed.\n\nWe continued to travel east on Bangs Avenue past the Modesto Hobby and Crafts Store and auto dealership to the stoplight on McHenry Avenue where we turned right and drove two blocks through Pelandale Avenue where witness's daughter had stated, \"Daddy, it is following us\". From this location, an illuminated aerial object above the railroad crossing could still be in view at approximately 4400 feet away.\n\nWe drove one block farther south on McHenry to approach the next stoplight at E. Union Avenue where, on the night of this event, a police car was parked and many workers had been repaving the road. When witness's daughter was asked if she still saw it, she said, \"Yes\". It is questionable if these other people had also"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"seen these blue lights although approximately 6000 feet from the railroad crossing.\n\nBy the time we drove another block (~ 1200 feet ) south on McHenry Avenue to Standiford Avenue, witness's daughter had said, \"It went away\". (Total distance from railroad crossing ~7200 feet)\n\nI didn't see any rash on witness's daughter's chest. ******* will send me a picture of it. The origin of the rash is unknown, perhaps stress.\n\nI did not find any knowledgeable person at the Boyett Gas Service Station in the vicinity to interview.\n\nWitness was leaning towards the hobby shop model remote controlled airplane hoax scenario through discussion with friends. Because of this inclination, witness does not want to talk to BAASS or any other third party. I have good working communications now through witness for networking in the Modesto area and I expect to hear from him as he explores his suspicions further with his personal friends and hobby store.\n\nAAP Person 116\n\nMUFON Star Team Investigator\n\n\nWith new info from ******* below, I listed identity of objects in CMS Report as: IFO-Man-Made Objects.\n\nccf\n\n........................................................................................."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"New info:\n\nFrom: AAP Person 117\n\nSent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:57 PM\nTo: AAP Person 124 AAP Person 59 AAP Person 103 AAP Person 116\nSubject: Investigator notes - reevaluating CMS 19865?\n\nOctober 29. 2009\n\nAAP Person 103 Hi\n\nI read your report - I concur with Investigators assessment that daughter of witness possibly may have suffered a rash due to stress (frightened).\n\nHowever, perhaps from experience, something did not seem right.\n\nI noticed you mentioned a local hobby store in your report. I used to fly RC model planes and thought to check to see if model aircraft were flying the night and location of sighting. Maneuvers of objects in witness report suggested lights could be model planes.\n\nAfter reading investigator report, I contacted [REDACTED] who answered store phone 1843(a)(2) an employee of 'Modesto Hobby and Crafts' - 401 Bangs AVE #H Modesto Ca (209)529-7310\n\nOften local hobby shops are a invaluable source of information on local model flying clubs as well.\n\nThis store is very near location model flying location of the UFO sighting reported in CMS 19865."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"http://www.modestohobby.com/\n\nContacting Store nearby location of sighting....******* confirmed a number of hobbyists' fly their model gliders at night or early often most evenings. ******* also confirmed they all use bright blue colored lights on their gliders to see their models. These models are unpowered gliders (perhaps 'slope gliders'?)\n\n******* also confirmed they were flying models matching the maneuvers also - the same night and time of UFO sighting October 7,, 2009 (20:00 hours PDT). ******* also commented that they get many UFO reports from cars passing in area according to Modesto Police Dept.. The Modesto Police Dept has sometimes shown up at model air field in response to a UFO report phoned into Modesto police according to employee *******.\n\nBased on this new new information, before approving case - recommend investigator consider reevaluation of case deposition from 'Unknown' to 'IFO: Man Made Object' (RC model gliders with blue lights attached.)?\n\nMost Respectfully,\n\nAAP Person 117\nChief Investigator\n\nSC\nOctober 29, 2009"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case Report MUFON SIP Deployment\n\nStar Team Cat. 3 Case #20143\n\nInvestigator: AAP Person 109\n\nGPS COORDINATES: [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: possible craft landing sight adjacent to witness property\n\nLOCATION: Versailles, Mo [REDACTED]\n\nDATE OF EVENT: Sunday October 25, 2009\n\nTIME OF EVENT: 1:30 AM to 5:30 AM local ( ) Exact ( x ) Approximate Duration 4 hours AAP Person 109\n\nOn 10-26-09 a CAT 3 Star team Deployment in Versailles, MO was authorized and [REDACTED] was assigned as lead investigator. [REDACTED] Missouri MUFON) Assistant State Director accompanied her and assisted with the investigation\n\nAAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Manager\nSIP Project Coordinator\n\nBackground: ********: witness goes by******\n\n10"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The witness ******* saw a large craft land in the woods through his bedroom window at approximately 1:30 AM the morning of Oct. 25, 2009. He and his wife watched it through the window for between 15 and 30 minutes before he decided to go outside for a better view. When ******* went outside he noticed that there were also several small objects much closer, low in the woods. He went into the house, woke his eleven year old son, grabbed binoculars and they both went outside to get a closer look. The two of them saw the large craft deep in the woods which was an upright triangle shape with several different color lights; silver, green, blue, orange, and red all flashing. In the woods much lower, were three \"saucer\" shaped orange/red lights which were in a field to the west. Two of these were in the woods below the far neighbors dusk to dawns and the third even lower being seen by ******* and his son while on their knees on the back deck of their home. Farther to the left of their deck (west), they spotted 3 more orange/red lights in the woods and a little farther to the left one blue light that briefly flashed for a total of seven lights, not counting the craft. These light were small and spinning and so bright that they were visible even without the binoculars. After about an hour, the lights changed from saucer shaped to round and began spinning in a different manor. They were now the shape and size of a soccer ball having compressed but not more than half their original size. The lights still proceeded to flash orange/red brighter and dimmer and move slowly about the woods as they spun. The large craft stayed stationary. This was all in the woods behind the family's home the craft being directly north and the lights being south/west of the craft. After hiking with ******* through the woods and finding the spot, we determined by using my range finder that the large craft had landed .7 miles behind *******'s house in the direction directly north.\n\nAfter an hour or so of viewing the craft and the lights, ******* noticed a figure of what he thought was a person standing on the ridge behind the house much closer than the craft or lights. (He noticed this because a deer ran close by across the woods in front of him snorting.) The being was determined to be about five feet tall and wearing something horizontally striped, that was black and white and loose fitting like a down jacket. The being was holding something in his/its left hand and had it up to its mouth like he was talking into it. There was also what looked like a back-pack placed on the ground in front of the being at its feet. ******* described the figure's face and hands as being white in color. He was looking through binoculars and wasn't sure if it was skin he was seeing or some type of mask. After measuring the area and viewing the video tape that I took of the area, we determined the being to be standing about 50 yards from the back of their home. I asked ******* what he did when he saw the being, and he said that he told his son to run in the house which his son did. ******* said that he stared at the being through binoculars for several minutes seeming to be \"staring each other out\". I asked him when, why, and how did this end. The reply was that he got tired and decided to go inside the house. ******* then described watching the craft through the bedroom window falling asleep and re-awaking to watch periodically until about 5:30AM when he woke to check for the last time and the craft was gone. He thought that he was only asleep for about 15-20 minutes but missed the craft leaving the woods.\n\n11"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Investigation Report:\n\nWednesday, October 28, 2009 3:30PM\n\nAAP Person 118 Missouri MUFON Assistant State Director, who was assisting me on this case, interviewed the other witnesses who were *******'s wife, and two sons. I hiked into the wood with ******* in an attempt to find some trace evidence of the landing sight. The sight was due north .7 miles from the back of *******'s home as we determined later with my range finder. We walked through the woods to a ridge which we suspected to be where the being was standing the night of the sighting. We came to this conclusion because this was the only place in the area in question where the being would be visible as close as he/it was seen from the back deck of *******'s home. This area was about 50 yards away. When we reached this ridge, I noticed a chipmunk on a small tree and a few feet away a turtle. Both were alive and very close to where the being stood. *******'s dog [REDACTED] who we took with us to determine if there was any animal reaction, sat in this spot with no remorse. But, when we hiked down the ridge she refused to follow. [REDACTED] made her way west staying on the ridge but watching us cross the woods. We hiked down through rough terrain, up another ridge, across a small creek, and across more rough terrain. Even though this area was fairly flat with some trees down, ******* determined that this couldn't be the spot because he couldn't see his house. We made our way up another ridge and down, across a barbed wire fence, up and over another ridge to another flat area deep in the woods. From this point we could see the back of *******'s home through binoculars and he determined that this was the right distance away into the woods. We hiked around carefully not disturbing any possible foot prints, tracts, etc. I notice an area with small bare spots but this was as obvious wash off from a ridge farther north. Further to the west of this area I noticed\n\n12"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"broken trees. Some were old breaks but several were new broken limbs and small uprooted trees. I also came across an uncharacteristic bare area which I measured to be 6 foot 6 inches, by 7 foot 6 inches square. There were heavy leaves covering the entire area except for this one spot which was bare except for a few leaves which had blown over it. I took a reading with my Geiger counter and EMF meter but nothing registered. To the north edge of this bare area I could see pushed over dirt like it was cleanly scraped from the surface taking all the grass and leaves with it. The dirt area left wasn't dug in where I could make a mold, but seemed to me to be raised a bit over the rest of the area terrain. I collected a dirt sample from the center of this area, and a sample from the area that was pushed up. I also took a compass reading of the area as reference noticing that was my compass was off. I lined myself up to the house directly as I had done before we left and it read 40 degrees off to the east instead of due north as it should have. I walked east about thirty feet and took another reading which was 20 degrees off to the east, then back to the spot which again was 40 degrees off. I teach underwater navigation so I know how to use a compass and this was definitely off. The compass read 40 degrees off even when I walked thirty feet to the west of the patch of dirt which I will assume at this point could be the possible landing sight. Around this area (in about a 25 foot ratio) were small raised areas in the ground as well. These ranged from football size to twice that size. These areas looked like mole mounds but much bigger. Most of them were raised up with brown dirt, but two of them had a strange orangish clay color. I took dirt samples of these as well.\n\nAnother strange effect was *******'s dog [REDACTED] First she sat where the unidentified being stood, next she refused to cross the terrain with ******* and me but made her way around to the west of us, and finally her last reaction to the area. ******* had been carrying my Star Team bag for me. (He was a real gentleman and insisted). When he lay the bag down on sight, I eventually moved it close to the bare spot I was documenting. [REDACTED] came over to it and lay down 1843(a)(2) next to the bag not budging until we left the sight. The bag had *******'s scent on it and it seemed like she was using it as a safe place.\n\nAfter documenting the possible craft landing sight, we traveled southwest towards the areas where the balls of light were seen. About 75 feet from the primary sight I spotted two mysteries holes. They were side by side, and exactly 1 foot 6 inches apart. These holes were around 10 inches deep with a narrow hole-area at an angle at the bottom. At first I thought they were snake holes, so I cleared off the leaves and noticed that the hole at the bottom ended. These two\n\n13"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"matching holes were 1 ft 4 in. X 1 ft 4 in. round at the top each being the same. I took pictures as documentation. At this time we were at about 5:30PM and loosing light. We still had two more sights to get to before dark and several inches of rain moving in the next day so we moved on.\n\n******* took me to another sight which was a large grassy area. This is where he suspected that three of the balls of light were. All we saw were horse shoe tracts, deer tracks and dung. We hiked to the next area where we were met with an electric fence. This is where he saw the other three orange/red balls of light and the one brief blue one. At the far end of the field we noticed another square bare area. I took pictures and video for reference. Upon viewing the video I noticed that this area was nothing like the sight found before, but an area where the rancher places hay for his horses/cattle.\n\nThe area in question we covered was a minimum ½ mile wide, and .7 miles from the witness's home. Because of this, no out of area dirt samples were possible.\n\n******* also told me about an occurrence on Monday night Oct. 26, 2009 at about 1:30 AM (technically Oct. 27th.) ******* was out watching the night sky, for obvious reasons, when he saw 2 military jets flying grids across the sky. He watched them from 1:30 AM to 2:30/3:00 AM. They were flying search pattern grids and dropped 3 flares lighting the sky. He said that the flares were dropped at different times to keep the sky lit. Because of the fog that night the sky/woods seemed to almost glow blue with the orange flares. ******* told me that if they were searching for the craft they were searching too far southwest.\n\n********: Interview 6:30 to 7:00 PM Oct. 28, 2009\n\nAAP Person 118 was able to recover ******* and I via cell phone contact ½ mile away west of *******'s house. (We got lost a bit) I took the opportunity to interview *******'s neighbor on the way back.\n\n*******is *******'s neighbor who is located about 10 acres to the west of *******. On the night of Oct. 26, 2009 ******* noticed 4 F-111 jets out of Whiteman Air Field going about 80 knots and running cross-stagger grids. ******* has a good description of the activity because he was a Marine Air-Wing for seven years. He remembers that it was just before his wife came home from work at 11:00 PM. Prior to this he witnessed 2 military helicopters circling the area for just a few minutes. He described the grids as being close proximity with\n\n14"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"low slow flight. He only watched them for a few minutes but heard them for quite some time. I asked him if this was usual activity and he said that he had only seen this one time before about 8 months ago. He has seen military maneuvers practiced over head but the last was during the day 3 months prior with dog-fight activity and flying high altitude. Whiteman Air Field is about an hour drive away but just a few minutes fly time by jet. ******* didn't see the jets drop flares or the helicopter shine a search light. If these were in fact military helicopters, their night vision/heat sensors would rule out the need for a search light.\n\n******* hadn't seen any strange lights in the past few weeks or prior, but had heard deer running and snorting late night over the past few days. One of his dogs has also been bedding down close to a tree starting at dusk the last few nights and not moving until dawn. He said that the dog was fine during the day, not sickly, eating as usual, but strangely skittish at night.\n\nAAP Person 118 [REDACTED] ******* and I got back to *******'s house just about dark. Before we could get set up for night observing of the area we had a strange light appear in the northern sky. AAP Person 118 [REDACTED] got a few still shots and I got some night vision video. The light remained stationary for several minutes then seemed to slowly set in the northern sky, shifting east a few degrees, then disappearing and reappearing more to the west. Terrestrial activity rises in the east and sets in the west. Stars don't set in the north, shifting position in the sky or disappearing and reappearing. This went on for more than an hour. We also had other strange streaks and balls of light cross the northern sky and my night vision picked up a couple of strange effects including one wide white streak. Further analysis of our video and still pictures is pending.\n\nNOTE: Lake of the Ozarks is only 10 miles south of this location.\n\nConclusion: Unknown UAV, Entity, and Landing Sight. CAT. 3\n\n*Video and still shot documentation of sight and witnesses\n* 4 soil samples taken"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CASE # CAT 2 CASE TYPE:\n20595 – Santo\n20598 – Stephenville\n20610 – Hico\n20616 – Hico\n20618 – De Leon\n20629 – Dublin\n20660 – Breckenridge\nMore cases will be added to this list as the witnesses file them. (20806 just added- no workup yet)\n\nOn November 24, 2009, 6 cases were combined into one SIP call. All calls involved lights-in-the-sky that resembled golf-to-dime-size lights (at arm's length). These calls were located in the central Texas area as indicated by the town names above.\n\nINVESTIGATOR: AAP Person 119\n\nGPS COORDINATES:\n20595 – Santo\n20598 – Stephenville\n20610 – Hico\n20616 – Hico\n20618 – De Leon\n20629 – Dublin\n20660 – Breckenridge\n1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: Coordinates are accurate according to witness descriptions and Google Earth.\n\nLOCATION: CITY, STATE COUNTY: All in Texas - Santo- PALO PINTO COUNTY; Stephenville-ERATH COUNTY; Hico -HAMILTON COUNTY(2); De Leon- COMANCHE COUNTY; Dublin -ERATH COUNTY; Breckenridge- STEPHENS COUNTY. Others can be added later. No time on this report.\n\nDATE OF EVENT: November 18, 2009"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TIME OF EVENT: LOCAL ( ) EXACT (X) APPROXIMATE\n\nOn November 24, 2009, a CAT (2) Star team Deployment in Texas was authorized [REDACTED] AAP Person 119 was assigned as lead investigator.\n\nAAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Manager\nSIP Project Coordinator\n\nBACKGROUND: Many central Texas residents were witness to a sudden light show by an object, or objects unknown. Over a period of nearly 1 hr and 5 minutes, extremely high-intensity lights came on, off, and on for a second or two and then went off. These lights seem to be in a straight line with the whole light array moving to another location close by and coming on again. The earliest sighting was 19:00 with the latest reported 20:05. Other witnesses said there were 4 smaller lights with the larger lights. These numbered anywhere from 0-4.\n\nINVESTIGATOR NARRATIVE: Witness comments in black and investigator comments in red-\n\n20595 – Santo\n\nAt approximately 19:33, 2 miles west of Santo TX, I was in the process of feeding my dogs when I noticed out of the corner of eye a (flash) bright light. I stopped to look (190* SSW) and the bright light began to dim, then immediately a second light illuminated for one second, then a third for one second and then a fourth. After the fourth illumination, I saw 4 tiny white dots moving very slowly across the sky and within a second or two all the lights disappeared. They reappeared in almost the same area, in the same pattern and it happened again for a total of 3 cycles.\n\nThey were approximately 200ft AGL, 2 miles from our home. The Interstate is a mile from home and the sighting about a mile further on. These lights were very slow moving. Using the I-20 hwy as comparison of 70-75 MPH, these lights were going about 30 MPH heading ESE. At junction of FM 4, objects turned more to SSE. (there is another witness according to this witness who also saw the object at this time).The colors were a white ( yellowish orange) that seem to change colors and almost flicker.\n\nI cannot help but see some controlling factor in these actions. The difference here seems to be a flicker ing of the lights and 4 lights. Witness is a pilot, works for 1843(a)(2) gave extremely accurate descriptions and was the best witness."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness said all the lights were a bright white, but his wife said they were more orangy. Witness indicated that trucks on the Interstate are app 4\" long to his sight, and this object was 10-12\" long. He estimated that the object was approximately 200' long. There may be others calls on this generated by his friend and co-workers.\n\nThis witness said when the lights would come on, they were like explosions. No sound, just a bright flash as they came on. Witness also indicated that he did not here any jets at that time or later.\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\nFigure 1 (20595) Graphic by witness in Santo\n\n20"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(3)\n\nFigure 2 (20595) Orange block indicates an object at the place of the Santo sighting\n\n20598 – Stephenville\n\nI was driving home from my in-laws house who live in the Greens creek area between Stephenville and Dublin but more near Dublin with my four year old and 12 week old in the car with me. It was not long after I turned off of County Road 242 which I had been heading north, on to another county road, I believe it is County Road 381 heading south east. It was not long after I turned onto County Road 381 that I noticed two bright lights in the sky.\n\nOut of the view from my windshield the light to my left was slightly higher. My initial reaction was that they were planets, they were orangish in color and they were larger than star. I slowed down and leaned forward in my seat to investigate what I was seeing. I soon realize they were far too large to be planets almost as soon as I came to this realization a another light appeared above and to the left of the light on my right and then another light appeared above the new light and to its left forming a straight line at about a 45-60 degree angle.\n\nThe lights were stationary in the sky never moving. As the new lights appeared I started freaking out. As you well know UFO sightings are prevalent in our area and I could not believe that I could be possibly witnessing it for myself. Probably a second after the new lights appeared they faded beginning with the first light on my left and then they were all completely gone. Once the lights on the left started to show up I did not pay as much attention to the light on the far right.\n\n21"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I do not believe it changed but do not recall when for sure it faded although I know it was within seconds of the other lights. In all the event took place in probably less than 2 minutes. The thought of the UFO sightings did not occurred to me as the third and fourth light appeared but it was really the manner that the lights faded that convinced me that I had just witnessed something strange.\n\nI was very excited and shocked about what I had just seen and got on the phone to share it with my husband immediately. My outgoing call to him was at 7:44 P.M. Therefore I approximate the sighting took place at 7:42 P.M. I just received word via Facebook that a friend of mine also witnessed lights in the sky this evening although I do not know the specifics of their sighting.\n\nAccording to the Clark Field Municipal Airfield Manager, another man had told him of 3 helicopters off hwy 377 between Dublin and Stephenville in a triangulation and range finding exercise a week or two before the 25th.\n\nThis area does correspond to the location of some of the sightings. With the dates of the sightings being on the 18th, that lands exactly 1 week to the day of the sightings. He indicated that the high-intensity lights were not orange, but white. Red and green navigation lights were also visible. This does not agree with a few other witnesses, but they may have been too far from them to see navigation lights\n\n. I will make note of the fact here that aircraft do not have to run with lights while in the Brownwood MOA's. Of note, Clark field has no radios and no radar. Consideration was given to the possibility of the Helicopters coming from Ft. Hood, Dyess or Carswell.\n\nFigure 3 Brownwood 1 East MOA is over most of the sighting area and close to the rest. It might be noted that flight routes and power transmission lines are in the area.\n\n22"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 4 (20598) sighting line was judged to be 156 degrees by measurement.\n\nFigure 5 (20598) Line of sight intersects with one yellow target on the timeline and is very close to an orange target at 01:45:32 (GMT 19th)\n\n1843(a)(3)\n\n23"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On a radar image out of DFW, (Figure 6) given the distance, the orange image below the blue sighting line indicates that this object was between 4000 and 6000 ft above ground. Hard targets in red-orange west were in Brown county headed east at or above 10000 ft.\n\nTo be that far away and that high eliminates most, if not all ground clutter, birds, bugs, etc. The large yellow target also indicates a solid target. It is also important to realize that the call to witness's husband was made at 7:44 pm and she guessed the time of sighting at 7:42 pm. I believe this all falls within the times of the radar image. Video of the radar sighting every 10 minutes showed that the traffic in the lower left of Figure6, (red and orange) was moving in an eastward direction. Additional radar searching is needed to finish this.\n\n1843(a)(3)\n\nFigure 6 (20598) Radar image out of Ft. Worth at 01:45:32 (GMT 19th)\n\n24"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20610 – Hico\nReport was taken by Mufon Dispatch [REDACTED]\n3 - 6 lights in a straight line flashing, objects were a long distance away the size of this was monstrous, if lights were connected tone object this is true.\nWitness was off highway 6, Between Rising Star and Comanche\nThe lights were very bright orange.\njets were chasing objects and a lot smaller than this object,\nviewed for 45 sec to a minute.\na friend saw the object in Abilene, 30 min prior to this sighting\n7 witnesses in Stephenville ,\nA friend who is a police officer has a dashboard video (dashboard video is of the 2008 sightings) but does not in anyway what his name used.\nWitness has pictures and video and can get pictures and videos from other witnesses. Investigator has seen photos and is trying to get copies. Witness also reported that there were 4 jets in the area some minutes after the sighting. He indicated that he was in a large pickup that night and it seemed very small in comparison to that extremely large object. These distance-judging episodes at night are notoriously hard to accurately portray."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 7 (20610) Hand drawing provided by witness. Witness indicated that he thought there were darker areas between the lights signifying an extremely large object. I think unlighted area next to lights would look that way at night. No proof here of an object."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 8 (20610) Witnesses line of sight (begins NW of Comanche 10 miles) led his view across Lake Proctor toward area of other sightings and is itself well into the Brownwood Military Operating Area as shown.\n20616 – Hico\ni begin in saying that this is not an unordinary event as we see these lights every once in a while outside in our yard .we live way out in the country 8 miles out from a town so at night it is quite easy to see anything in the night sky. We never have reported these sightings as a lot of people do around here as we live 8 miles from Stephenville TX and 10 or so miles from Dublin Texas. but last night we saw the lights at the same level in the sky .(direction and level not available at this time).id say at least 7 of these. It was around dinner time so i was in the kitchen at first and since the lights had been seen lately we had been looking outside once in a while at night.\nMy husband and i walked out and were only out for a minute and then we saw them...i guess that was a lucky thing. I didn't have to wonder what it was since these lights have been seen here off and on for quite a while now...guess they like the dairies around this area of teas. The rather round orange lights (that look almost all the same size)just last a few seconds then they disappear."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Of course your real excited when we are seeing these lights..and then they are gone (maybe not really gone, just change position so we can no longer see them)..almost always afterwards we see the blinking of jets and hear the jets coming in the area. Have not reached this witness and have no reply to email.. Since we had had some news only a couple of weeks ago about the unexplained lights again in the Stephenville paper people in this area start looking around at night again to see UFOs. Actually we had seen the lights last October and were waiting for this October to look again ..but it was cloudy most of the month. Now it is November and we saw them last night.\nMore to come in this section-\nFigure 9 (20616 1843(a)(2) of Lights in the Texas Sky pulled the MUFON report off CMS and created a drawing based on the sighting report."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20618 – De Leon\nMy mother and i were leaving De Leon Texas on hwy 6 and just pass the Leon river bridge in the clearing I happen to see a flash up in the sky. As i looked i seen 4 sets of lights in a straight line like castle top orange and white in color and very bright like an explosion. And a moment later there was another one to the left of the first. The one on the right disappeared and the left appeared. And for a brief moment they were together.then they both were gone. They were large in size and did not to appear to be very high in elevation. From highway 6 they were southeastward from me towards Comyne, Lake Proctor, or northwest Dublin. Strangest thing my mother [REDACTED] and I have ever seen. Orange/white lights in a semi straight line in 4 sets, then a second lights the same .flash and hold then again to the left 2are shown.\nInvestigator calculated from witness description of visual through a car front windshield that the object was 30 degrees off the horizon. The witness gave a guess of SE as the direction of the sighting. From that sight, using witness directions, Investigator plotted the degrees of the sighting at app 140 degrees. There are red lights on wind turbines to the North with heavy air traffic in and out of DFW. Of note, there are 2 rows of high-voltage power lines just south of Lake Proctor. This is just off hwy 377.Investigator spent some 30 minutes at the site on Tuesday night November 24th, 2009 at the same approximate time as the sighting for comparative purposes and to shoot directions. The sighting was in a L.O.S. directly over the \"ghost town\" of COMYN which isoff FM 1496. Witness also said that the lights came on in a \"flash\" as did the Santo witness.\nFigure 10 (20618) L.O.S. at 177 degrees"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20629 – Dublin\nI was driving home from De Leon Texas toward Dublin....Was about 5 miles out of Deleon...when 4 or 5 very bright circles appeared in the sky....\n3 large and 2 smaller....It appeared that the smaller ones moved toward the large one like a child to its mother, very very fast then they shot upward what looked like they disappeared behind the clouds .\nPart of this statement about clouds does not match the other witness statements or the weather bureau. Further checks will be made later. Also, this is one of the statements in which the lights move quickly. Others suggest differently. Witness said it was nearly dark which falls into line with the other statements.\nNone of this lasted very long....Lights were very bright nothing else was in the sky....I had no idea what these were, but I knew they were not jets, Jets do not move that fast... Did not mention this to anyone but I did see where a couple my age noticed the same thing.... 4 or 5 bright circles ; West of Dublin..\nPicture shows five lights...2 large and 3 small ones. The following from an email:\nI saw 5 objects (circles) 2 the size of golf balls and 3 the size of a dime one large one and 3 small ones where in a line with one large one at the rear but upward about what looked like maybe 8 to 10 feet.\n. A check with the Dublin police department did not show any \"lights\" call on that day or the next. A later visit to the newspaper office uncovered small article about another sighting on that night. This coincides with the other sightings. The article also indicated 4-6 orange balls\"just East and South\" of town.\nSighting lasted a very short time and there was no noise. Witness indicated that there were jets in the vicinity. The first witness in this case is retired from the Air Force and 1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 11 (20629) Sighting Lights Hand drawn by witness"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 12. (20629) Dyess long-range composite for 01:07:40 GMT-Yellow block is in line NE,E from witness position.\n1843(a)(3)\nFigure 13 (20629) \"Mystery Lights\" article refer to the same sighting by another witness\nMystery lights are back!"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 14 The (20629 ) sighting was in the NNE direction at app 30 degree\n20660 – Breckenridge\nThis witness described the light in the following: 2009-11-18 20:05:00 was at my home, which is East of Breckenridge. I noticed what I thought was a commercial jet flying East to west in same flight path as an earlier plane but noticed the lights did not disappear (flash), like navigational lights.\nV66 is the commercial air route visible from witness location. \"Visual routes are used by the Department of Defense and associated Reserve and Air Guard units for the purpose of conducting low altitude navigation and tactical training under VFR below 10,000 ft MSL at airspeeds in excess of 250 knots IAS\" (FAA Special Use Airspace & Air Traffic Controlled Assigned Airspace website)\nThese lights pulsed in sequence. I got my binoculars and saw 4 amber (orange/white) colored lights in a row, with what appeared to be a smaller light on the bottom of the object near the leading end. The smaller light would flash red, then"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"white. As brightly lit as the object was, I still could not make out a fuselage, tail, or wings. If it were a commercial or military jet, I should seen an outline and would have heard the sound of jet engines, however, there was complete silence.\nIf it had been a helicopter, I doubt I would have heard it(too high, too far away), and at that distance I would have barely seen it, if at all. I ruled out jet aircraft and helicopter.\nThe object appeared to be at an altitude of about 10,000 feet and perhaps 20 miles from my location. By my estimate, it was traveling in the vicinity of I-20, heading west. When I first saw the object, it was in the direction of Morgan Mill, TX, which is to my SE. At it's closest, the object was probably slightly north of Cisco, TX. I lost sight of object when it simply disappeared in the direction of Baird, TX. Observation lasted approx. 2 minutes.\nFigure 15 (20660) Breckenridge is between to flight routes."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Amber lights pulsing in sequence\nSmall light flashing red/white\n11/18/09 Depiction\nFigure 16 (20660) Light in the Texas Sky depiction of lights track\nFigure 17 (20660) Depiction of sighting by 1843(a)(2) of Lights in the Texas Sky\nOBJECT DESCRIPTION: See various case files above"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EVIDENCE: Back in October this newspaper article came up and seems to describe some of the same type of \"lights\" activity that would be seen a month later. Such repetitious activity suggest a military influence and control...\n\nThey're baaaack (again)\nUnidentified lights reappear in Erath\n\nBy AMANDA KIMBLE\nStaff Writer\namanda.kimble@empiretribune.com\nPublished: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 4:52 PM CDT\n\nArea residents are once again reporting strange lights in the sky above Erath County, and much like the reports that flooded in following a widespread sighting in January 2008, witnesses say the amber glowing orbs are like nothing they've seen before.\n\nIn the most recent unexplained sighting, a Hamilton County businessman was greeted by the lights as he left a meeting.\n\nJerry McAdams, publisher of the Hico News Review and Hico ISD school board member, said he was leaving a board meeting Monday with a fellow board member when they saw two amber lights, which were level with each other and seemed to hover in the sky.\n\n\"They (the lights) were low in the sky and disappeared in about five seconds,\" McAdams said. \"Then two more appeared, closer together.\"\n\nHe said the lights disappeared several times and reappeared seconds later. Each time the lights were the same amber color, and appeared at different heights and varying distances apart. McAdams said the lights did not move when they were visible or blink. He also said the lights were not like those typically associated with aircraft.\n\n\"They were not red, green or white. They did not flash like on an airplane,\" he said. \"There was no motion. Each time they appeared, they were further to the left. I would say they came and went in three cycles.\"\n\nMcAdams said he could not determine the distance of the lights from his Hamilton County vantage point, but said the lights were to the west, in the direction of Dublin, in the southwest portion of Erath County.\n\n\"I have never seen anything like that before,\" McAdams said. \"But I do believe what I saw was like previous (reported) sightings.\"\n\nTwo Dublin area neighbors, who asked to remain anonymous, were in their homes when the men walked out and saw \"all kinds of lights, all across the sky\" Monday.\n\nThe men captured what they saw on a cell phone. The grainy recording offers a glimpse of an amber light that appears in the sky several times, and captures the excitement of the group.\n\nOne of the men said they first saw a single ball of light, \"not like a flashlight or aircraft,\" which suddenly spawned several other lights.\n\n\"It was like the lights were coming off the first ball (of light) we saw,\" the man said. \"And they kept coming, one after another, and moved in every direction.\"\n\nThe man said the lights were white and amber and the whole spectacle lasted a little more than a minute. He said no sound was associated with the sighting, until jets rushed toward the display.\n\nHe also said he is not ready to say he saw an alien aircraft, but does believe the unidentified lights were impressive.\n\n\"I don't know what it was, but whatever the lights were, they were truly awesome,\" he said.\n\nCopyright © 2009 - Stephenville Empire-Tribune - Stephenville, TX"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"There were reader comment online about the article which give a little insight into how difficult it is for multiple witnesses to accurately describe an object when seeing the same thing.\n\nReader Comments\nThe following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of empiretribune.com.\n\ndlbingham2000 wrote on Oct 21, 2009 11:57 AM:\n\"They were flares!! Saw them just east of Comanche County. Six F16's on maneauvers dropping flares.\"\n\nLOL wrote on Oct 22, 2009 12:53 AM:\n\"F16's engines can be heard-try again dbingham. Even from just past the Seldon cut off up on a hill you can hear the trains going though Stephenville at night. Come up with a craft we have doing this that can't make noise and I'll buy your side, until then their descriptions and yours just don't add up.\nET(Empire Tribune that is) they never left-LOL.\"\n\nkingtwiggy wrote on Oct 22, 2009 9:30 AM:\n\"Gotta agree with dbingham here. When I read the description that was the first thing I thought about. As for the sound, sure you can hear the train from the Selden cut-off...it's quite a distance but it's at rougly the same altitude. Planes will be much higher, and most likely much farther away so you don't always necessarily hear them.\"\n\ndlbingham2000 wrote on Oct 22, 2009 12:30 PM:\n\"I forgot to mention I live in Comanche so when I say east they were probably somewhere aroud Dublin. They were literally tearing up the skies. Six F16's. Saw them...heard them...watched them drop flares. So LOL maybe just maybe what you saw was something different. They are in this area at least twice a week. No UFO's here just jets and flares.\"\n\nLOL wrote on Oct 22, 2009 11:35 PM:\n\"Yep, even the weather can affect how far away things can be heard at night and from Hico to Dublin or Hamilton you wouldn't hear much due to the distance. I have a pretty good view of the Dublin skies now, but have never seen any of these reported events.\nI am aware of an event though that cannot be explained away as flares, F16's, helecopters, stealth bombers and the like. It would be nice to know exactly what is was before I die, but alas that usually never happens in a lifetime.\"\n\nrolly254 wrote on Oct 26, 2009 9:53 AM:\n\"flares\"\n\ndlbingham2000 wrote on Oct 26, 2009 12:47 PM:\n\"Amazing it seems that 2 people can see the same exact thing at the exact same time and have 2 different explanations for what they saw.\"\n\nInquisitive wrote on Oct 27, 2009 1:32 PM:\n\"Did anyone happen to see the bright light close to 377 toward FW around the area of the roadside park and the old barn that has the flag painted on the front of it? Monday October 19, about 5:45 AM. It was not up in the sky, but appeared to be around tree height level.\""} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE:\n\nPHYSICAL EVIDENCE: none\n\nWITNESS'S INTERVIEW: Refer to case files above\n\nFINDINGS OF THIS REPORT:\n\nA case for the 3 helicopters and arrays:\n\nA Case for Jets and flares:\n\nA Case for TR-3B:\n\nA case for the unknown:\n\nFigure 18 (General Reference) photo- Lines of Sights from witness intersect suggesting a possible flight path of the object/light."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case Report MUFON SIP Deployment\n\nCase # 20706\n\nCAT 2 MUFON Deployment\n\nInvestigators: AAP Person 103 AAP Person 104\n\nGPS COORDINATES: 1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: Exact, coordinates taken with GPS at effected area of event on Highway\n\nLocation: Port Jervis, NY objected headed towards Unionville\n\nDATE OF EVENT: 11/25/09\n\nTIME OF EVENT: 12:15 AM Local ( ) Exact ( X ) Approximate"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On November 25, 2009 , a STAR team CAT 2 Deployment was activated on Case #20706 in Port Jervis, NY. STAR Team Investigator [REDACTED] was assigned as lead investigator. [REDACTED] is the Chief Technical Advisor for STAR Team. Investigator [REDACTED] was secondary investigator. [REDACTED] was State Coordinator.\n\n[REDACTED]\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\n\nSTAR Team Manager\n\nSIP Project Coordinator\n\nBackground: The primary Witness is a 41-year old male. The Witness is a mental health professional and works [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) . He is married and lives with his wife at an un disclosed location in Port Jervis, NY. Investigators found this witness to be highly credible. He was still visibly shaken from his encounter.\n\nWitness was very concerned about maintaining his anonymity in regards to this sighting report. He refused to sign a third party release form when asked by investigators.\n\nThe Witness did allow Investigators to Video tape the interview at his home, but requested the camera be pointed at the floor to protect his identity. Investigators also Videotaped the interview at the affected area along the road side, as witnessed pointed out the details of the event."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness Narrative: (CMS Sighting Report) I left work at 12am as I work 4pm till 12am, I work in 1843(a)(2) which is approx 15 minutes from port Jervis where I live, the quickest route is to take the Minisink turnpike then to the Greenville turnpike, I was driving on the Minisink turnpike when I noticed lights in the sky, firstly I thought it was a plane then I noticed it had 5 lights on it from end to end the lights went from blue-white-red-white-blue in that order but the strangest thing was it was turning clockwise slowly and the only sound I could hear was like a cat purring, I slowed the car down to around 20 mph to get a better look then I noticed the size it must of been around 200 feet in length, I proceeded to speed up as I started to get nervous but as it passed over the car the car turned off. I came to a stop and grabbed my cell phone and noticed that had turned off too, by this time I didn't know whether to get out of the car and run or stay in my car before I came to the decision the lights had gone out and the car started up I put my foot down a sped up the road not looking back I tell you it was the most unnerving things to happen to me.\n\nInvestigator Report: Investigators left Bowling Green, VA at about 1:30 p.m. on 11/26/09, arriving at Port Jervis, NY at 8:30 p.m. Investigators met with the witness at his home on 11/27/09 at 10:15 a.m.\n\n➢ The witness works [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) . He leaves work around midnight and it takes approximately 15 minutes to get home. He takes a route which goes through a rural area with curving roads. He said that he was \"semi-tired but not tired enough to blank out.\" He was playing Christmas CDs on the radio and singing as he drove. He drove through Unionville up to the Minisink Turnpike. Coming around a bend in the road, he could see an object about a mile away – it looked pretty small. As he came to the next turn, he slowed down to about 25 miles to get a better look at it, then it was almost on top of him and he doesn't understand how it crossed the distance from where he first saw it to where he was in such a short time.\n\n➢ He stopped his vehicle along the side of the road and remembers putting the car in PARK, with the engine running. He could now also see that it"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"looked cigar-shaped and was turning clockwise slowly (on axis) as it came towards him. He described the speed as slow like a hot air balloon. When asked to compare the size of the object to an aspirin at arm's length, the witness said that it would be about the size of a baseball.\n\n➢ According to the witness description, there were lights (blue, white, red, white and blue in that order) so he knew it wasn't a plane. He heard a sound like a cat that was purring at a low frequency (continuously vibrating)\n\n➢ As the object passed over the witnesses vehicle, the engine just stopped as if someone had turned off the ignition. The Witness tried to use his cell phone but it wouldn't work despite the fact that he always keeps it charged. He also tried to roll down the electric car window but it wouldn't work either. He thought about getting out. He opened the door slightly but then reconsidered and closed the door.\n\n➢ When he looked at the lights they seemed very bright but they didn't illuminate the ground; the witness said he can't explain this aspect as it doesn't make any sense to him. The craft appeared gun metal gray against the dark sky.\n\n➢ After about 1.5 minutes the craft's lights blinked out and the witnesses vehicle started up without any action on the part of the witness. He put the car into drive and put the pedal down. All he wanted to do was find someone, find civilization. He was terrified! He didn't even\n\n➢ look in his rearview mirror and says there is \"no way I'm going to take that road again.\" Witness recalled running through several STOP signs on the way home. He said that he nearly crashed the car into a fence he was so scared. The witness stated that he actually doesn't want to even drive along that road again."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"➢ When he got home, he told his wife who said \"well, maybe it was a plane\" but the witness knows that it wasn't a plane. His wife also suggested that he call the police but he didn't see what good that would do. Instead, he paced back and forth and drank a beer. He was so unnerved that he couldn't sleep for about two hours. He then goggled \"how to report a UFO\" and the first thing that came up was MUFON. He said that he wrote down exactly what remembered in his report. He wants to know what it is.\n\nPhysiological (Medical) Effects: Witness reported that he had a toothache since his sighting but didn't notice any other physiological effects. He did not wish to be scanned for an implant. (investigator was prepared to conduct a magnetic scan)\n\nPhysical Effects - Investigator [REDACTED] inspected the cell phone and found it to be working properly.\n\nRadiological Survey: Investigators checked the affected Vehicle for radiation, without any unusual readings (consistent with background)\n\nInvestigators surveyed the site of the event (road side) and reading at the affected area were consistent with background reading.\n\nElectromagnetic- Electrostatic Effects: Investigators did find very significant abnormal readings on the subject vehicle with a tri-field meter. The witness was driving a 2009 Midsize 4 door sedan that was approximately 2 months old.\n\nInvestigators conducted electro-static and electro-magnetic field tests on the Witnesses Vehicle (SUBJECT VEHICLE) and then went to a car dealer and selected an identical vehicle to the witnesses vehicle (TEST VEHICLE) same make model and year for comparison testing.\n\nBoth the electro-static and electro-magnetic fields appear to have been dramatically affected. Specific meter reading (as to intensity) were not available, because the meter (pictured) pegged the needle in the proximity of the SUBJECT VEHICLE.\n\nSee photos next page"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUBJECT VEHICLE - Driver's side\n\nrear engine compartment magnetic field reading. (Full intensity needle pegged)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEST VEHICLE - Driver's side\n\nrear engine compartment magnetic field reading."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUBJECT VEHICLE - Passenger's side\n\nrear engine compartment magnetic field reading. (Full intensity needle pegged)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEST VEHICLE - Passenger's side\n\nrear engine compartment magnetic field reading\n\nNote: The witness said that it seems like the car is actually driving faster now...almost as if he got a free tune up.\n\nAAP Person 103\nNote: for unknown reasons, it appears that at some point during the investigation, [REDACTED] Nikon D700 battery failed and the backup battery also AAP Person 103 failed. [REDACTED] recalls, however, that at all areas which he checked on the witness' vehicle, the EMF meter remained at maximum reading as long as the meter was AAP Person 103 within 3 inches of the witnesses' car. [REDACTED] has no explanation for the camera's multiple battery failure. The batteries were charged beforehand and normally will take over 1000 photos with GPS enabled. The first photos were taken at the site AAP Person 103 of the event. [REDACTED] checked the camera's batteries after taking pictures at the site of the event and a 94% charge remained. [REDACTED] then returned to the witness' home to take photos of his two month old 2009 car. [REDACTED] took over AAP Person 103 100 photos of the witness' car. Only 12 photos documenting the magnetic testing AAP Person 103 and none of the EMF testing turned out. [REDACTED] then tested the exact same car model in a car dealer's lot with a digital camera (\"test vehicle.\")"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Note: While we were with the witness, he had a telephone call which did not display a number and when he answered, there was no response on the other end. This has happened a couple of times since the event. The witness also states that his phone has been affecting his speakers since the incident and we AAP Person 103 heard a strange static sound ourselves. [REDACTED] checked the phone for electro magnetic and electro-static effects and found none.\n\nSummary: The investigators did not notice any major contradictions in witness testimony, nor did the witness appear to falter in any of the questions of detail.\n\n• Investigators found this witness to be highly credible. He was still visibly shaken from his encounter.\n\n• The witness denies any medical conditions or taking any medications that affect his ability to think or concentrate.\n\n• The investigators questioned for the possibility of lost time, without any indication of such, evident from the witness testimony.\n\n• This Investigation yields a reliance primarily on a single witness testimony of events.\n\n• Independent evidence was a electromagnetic and electrostatic effects on the effected vehicle as compared to test vehicle of identical make and model."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Natural phenomenon was ruled out as a possibility because of the proximity to the witness, movement patterns, and contact/effects of the witness.\n\n• A radiological survey was conducted and readings in the affected area were consistent with the background readings in the unaffected control area.\n\nEND REPORT"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case Report MUFON SIP Deployment\n\nCase # 20264-20123-20268\t\tCase Type: Cat 2\n\nInvestigator: AAP Person 122\n\nGPS COORDINATES: 1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: Within (51) feet of coordinates.\n1. LOCATION: ********Tomball, Texas\n2. LOCATION: ********Tomball, Texas\n3. LOCATION: I-35 South Bound in Georgetown, Texas\n\n1. DATE OF EVENT: November 01, 2009 Case 20264\n2. DATE OF EVENT: October 25,2009 Case 20123\n3. DATE OF EVENT: November 01,2009 Case 20268\n\n1. TIME OF EVENT: 21:57 hrs (x) Exact ( ) Approximate\n2. TIME OF EVENT: 03:20 hrs. (x) Exact ( ) Approximate\n3. TIME OF EVENT: Unknown\n\nOn November 02, 2009 a CAT 2 Star team Deployment in Tomball TX was authorized and investigator AAP Person 122 was assigned as lead investigator. I accompanied the investigator and videotaped the witness testimony.\n\n50"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Manager\nSIP Project Coordinator\n\nBackground Case #1 Nineteen year old girl comes home and hears a loud sound and looks out in her back yard and sees a disk like object floating in her back yard.\n\nBackground Case #2 Forty seven year old female in bed heard loud nose passed over her house, looked her out window and saw nothing.\n\nBackground Case #3 Unknown submitter stated that they saw an object in a field while traveling south bound on I-35 in Georgetown, Texas.\n\nSynopsis:\n\nNovember 2, 2009 this investigator received a deployment notification from AAP Person 59 in reference to female witness an object hovering in her back yard. In the report the witness stated that she had arrived home on November first around 21:57 hrs. Witness stated in her report that she was in the kitchen and heard a noise that kept getting loud. The witness then stated that she went to the back door and saw a saucer like object hovering about 20 feet in the air in her back yard.\n\nDuring this investigation this investigator learned that two other sighting reports had been reported to the CMS data base. These sighting reports are linked together because they be related. Giving their time frame and the information in\n\n51"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the witness statements they should be added to this report to support the witness statement.\n\nInvestigator Narrative:\n\nOn November 02 2009 at 10:19 hrs this Investigator [REDACTED] received a deploy notice from SIP Coordinator AAP Person 59 to investigate a possible sighting at *******, Tomball, Harris County, Texas. At 11:20 hrs this Investigator contact the witness by public service and a meeting was setup for 13:00 hrs. At 13:15 hrs this Investigator met with the witness at her residence. This Investigator interviewed the witness to get a better idea of what she saw. This Investigator had the witness to show me where the object had been in the back yard. The witness proceeded to the back yard and in the south west corner of the yard, where the witness stated the object was above this Investigator located plants that appeared to be under stress from some type of radiation or heat.\n\nDuring my investigation the owner has a large white dog that was sick and was throwing up. I questioned the witness about this and she stated she had no idea what was wrong with him. At 13:20 hrs witness stated that the school had called and someone had to go pick up her nephew. The school had reported that the child was sick and was throwing up as well.\n\nAt 13:35 hrs this Investigator contacted AAP Person 59 that the area in the back yard suffered from plant stress and the reported the illness of the child and pet. [REDACTED] stated to secure the area and not have anyone go in the back yard. [REDACTED] he was flying to Houston with the proper equipment to check the area for radiation.\n\nAt 18:15 hrs this Investigator picked up AAP Person 59 at Bush IAH and we returned to the witness residence. At 19:26 hrs AAP Person 59 and this Investigator arrived at the witness residence to check the back yard for possible radiation. AAP Person 59 reported to the witness that there was no sign of radiation. [REDACTED] interviewed the witness and she stated that she was would be available for interview the next day after 16:30 hrs. AAP Person 59 advised the witness that we would return the next day for video interview.\n\n52"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At 15:35 hrs this Investigator and AAP Person 59 returned to ********** to interview the witnesses in this case. ( See Witness Statements)\n\nLocation#1:\n\nThis sighting took place at *******, Tomball, Harris County, Texas. This residence is a 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3). The residence is located on 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3).\n\nLocation #2:\n\nThis sighting took place at *******, Tomball, Harris County, Texas. This residence is a 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3). The residence is location on the 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3). Witness was not available for interview.\n\nLocation #3:\n\nThis sighting took place in the rural area of Georgetown, Williamson County, Texas near the highway I-35 south bound side. Witness was not available for interview.\n\nObject Description: 20264\n\nThe witness reported the object to be about 20 feet in diameter and about 7 feet high. Witness reported that the object had a saucer like shape to it. The top section was reported to have more of a cone convex shape to it, with raised panels to it. The bottom section had a slight convex shape with a gray metal surface. In the middle of the craft witness stated that it had square lights light that seemed to go around the craft. The lights in the middle turned on and seemed too rotate around the middle of the craft when the witness went to the back door. The witness stated that the craft had a loud rocket sound. (See attached drawing by witness)\n\n53"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Drawing done by witness Case 20264\n\nTREE\n\nwhite lights\n\nWhite Lights\n\nLoud, Roaring sound. Similar to Rocket.\n\n20ft\n\n2 story high from bz\n\n54"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\n\nLocation and appox. size of craft, photo and drawing not to scale.\n\nObject Description: 20123\n\nOn October 24, 2009 received a report from witness she had heard a loud noise over her house about 0300 hrs. The location of this residence was given at ********Tomball, Harris County, Texas. Witness stated that she looked out the window from her bed room but saw nothing.\n\nObject Description: 20268\n\nOn November 01 2009 at an unknown time a witness reported to the CMS data base a craft fitting the description (of the craft in case number 20268) setting in a field off of I-35 in or near Georgetown, Texas. Witness did not list any contact information other than an e-mail address of 1843(a)(2) Further investigation on the e-mail address should be conducted.\n\nEvidence:\n\nCase 20264\n\nOn 11/02/2009 at 13:45 hrs this investigator photographed the outside residence includes the front and rear of the house. The area where the witness stated that\n\n55"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the craft was hovering plants appeared to under stress from an unknown heat source. (See attached photos) Photo on the left was taken by this investigator. Photos were taken with a Nikon 35mm 6006 with a 35 to 80mm lens. The type of film used was Kodak ASA 400. Note: that the end of berries had ash appearance and to the touch of it crumbled to a fine ash like substance. Notice in the photo \"A\" that the ends of the buds have been burned. In photo \"b\" the ends are normal without the burned.\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\nAbnormal photo\n\nNormal photo\n\nEvaluation of Evidence:\n\nCase 20264\n\nOn November 04, 2009 at 11:24 hrs this Investigator met with 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) Houston, Harris County, Texas. 1843(a)(2) identified the plant as a Duranta. 1843(a)(2) stated that it was a common plant grown in the East Texas area and easy to obtain in most local nurseries. From the sample of the plant that was removed from the scene located at *******, Tomball, Harris County, Texas 1843(a)(2) stated that the plant had been exposed to some type of heat. 1843(a)(2) stated that the berries were over sized and the ends had been burned. 1843(a)(2) stated that at this time it is unknown what type of heat source would have caused the damage to the plant. During my investigation I noticed that there\n\n56"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was other plant life that had signs of stress, but they had no indication of burning. The child in question that reported to be sick the witness stated that he was fine and as well as the dog. This investigator could not find any sign of burning on the ground or the house. At this time it is unknown to this Investigator what caused the burning of the Duranta.\n\nEvidence:\n\nCase 20124\n\nNothing of value was collected by this investigator.\n\nEvidence\n\nCase 20268\n\nNothing of value was collected by this investigator\n\nPhysical Evidence:\n\nCase 20264\n\nA. 12 inch branch taken from Duranta bush located south west corner of the back yard. This evidence was collected to identify the type of plant and comparison.\n\nB. Photographs taken by this Investigator\n\nC. Witness statements take by AAP Person 59\n\nWITNESS INTERVIEW\n\nCase 20264\n\nOn November 03, 2009 at approx. 17:45 hrs AAP Person 59 interviewed the following witnesses at ******* Tomball, Harris County, Texas. Media Release forms were signed and dated by witnesses.\n\n*******(See Video)\n\n*******(See Video)\n\nWitness Interview\n\nCase 20268\n\nNo witness statement taken\n\n57"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness Interview\n\nCase 20123\n\nNo witness statement taken\n\nFindings of this Report:\n\nThis Investigator after interviewing the witnesses and reviewing the evidence in this case it is my opinion that this report should be listed as an unknown object. The lack of evidence i.e. photographs of the object it may never determine what the witness saw.\n\nThere is supporting evidence from the stress in the plants in the back yard there could have been something from an unknown origin. It should be noted that two other reports were made by witnesses on the same day and a week earlier.\n\nEOR.\n\n58"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Utah Ranch Investigations November 2009\n\nThis Utah Ranch Status Update is divided into 4 Sections:\n\n(a) Utah Ranch Security Officer Events\n(b) Report on Recent Utah Ranch Surrounding Property Investigations\n(c) Status of Experiments on Utah Ranch\n(d) 1843(a)(2)\n\n(a)Utah Ranch Security Officer Events:\n\nSince BAASS initiated round the clock surveillance of the Utah property on August 3, 2009 the security officers have reported multiple incidents: As described in previous reports, BAASS continues to deploy security officers to the ranch property. The following are selected reports from the officers with areas of potential interest detailed in yellow.\n\n(10 November 09) 091110\n\nPatrol/Observations\n\n1.) 1843(a)(2)\n\n1843(a)(2) At 1630 I, with [REDACTED] conducted a patrol along the southern tree line following the creek adjacent to Homestead 1 to the western property boundary. I took several photos revealing no anomalies/orbs. During this time I checked for signs of unauthorized people attempting to gain access to the property. I found no signs of trespassers or anything out of the ordinary.\n\n2.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt 2030 I went to the East Gate with 1843(a)(2). There was no vehicle traffic/foot traffic while posted at the East Gate. I took several photos revealing no\n\n59"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"anomalies/orbs. I returned to Homestead 1 to warm up and make contact with\n1843(a)(2)\n\n3.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt 2000 we conducted a tactical walking patrol to the West-side of the property and back. We stopped at Homestead 2 and Homestead 3 to conduct an LPOP. We scanned with NVGs; there were no signs of trespassers and or anomalies to report. We returned to homestead one to warm up.\n\n4.) 1843(a)(2)\n\n1843(a)(2) At 0025 [REDACTED] was at the computer and [REDACTED] was sitting on the couch ([REDACTED] was in 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) the restroom). The stereo beneath the TV in the living room all of the sudden turned on by itself. It was tuned in to the local country radio station. The last time the stereo was on was 4 Nov (on the same local country radio station). The remote control for the stereo was on the stereo speaker next to the stereo. All of the other remotes were on the coffee table. We took several photos in the living room revealing nothing out of the ordinary. The stereo has a power button that you physically have to depress to turn on or off. There were no strange feelings felt by 1843(a)(2) The temperature inside the trailer was 73 degrees. There were no strange odors or anything else out of the ordinary. I [REDACTED] listened 1843(a)(2) to the stereo every day for two weeks my last time at the ranch and never experienced this occurrence. We decided to remain at Homestead 1 and observe for anything out of the ordinary. We took photos with the lights off also revealing no anomalies. We observed in and outside of Homestead 1 with no further findings.\n\nInvestigator Notes\n\nThe locks on Dog Run 1 and Dog Run 2 were still in place and locked. The pennies were in the same configuration as they were left.\n\n60"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) departed at 0445 to take 1843(a)(2) to the airport.\n\nWeather Note\n\n33 degrees, clear, 0mph winds, 58% Humidity\n\nV/r 1843(a)(2)\n\n(17 November 09) 091117\n\nPatrol/Observations\n\n1.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 1630, we conducted a patrol along the southern tree line with 1843(a)(2) During the patrol we checked for signs of unauthorized people attempting to gain access to the property. We found no signs of trespassers or anything out of the ordinary.\n\n2.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 2000, I went to the East Gate with 1843(a)(2) I took several photos capturing no anomalies/orbs. No security related incidents to report.\n\n3.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 2000, we posted at the Mesa with 1843(a)(2) . We did not observe any activities and/or anomalies/orbs. At approx 2130, we headed down to the west gate to check for trespassers or anything out of the ordinary. We took a few pictures capturing no anomalies/orbs and everything was secure at the gate.\n\n61"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approx 1700, we conducted a patrol along the southern tree line with 1843(a)(2) During the patrol we checked for signs of unauthorized people attempting to gain access to the property. We found no signs of trespassers or anything out of the ordinary. We stopped and checked the dog runs. The locks on dog runs 1 and 2 were in place. We also stopped by homestead 2 and checked on the pennies again. They had not been disturbed since the last check. See investigator notes below.\n\n2.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 2000, I went to the East Gate with 1843(a)(2) Nothing unusual to report. Dogs were acting normal. No security related incidents to report.\n\n3.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 1930, we went to homestead 2 and 3 along with 1843(a)(2) . We stopped and checked on the pennies again. They had not been disturbed since we last checked them. We decided to go to the top of the mesa and set up a LPOP. We had NVGs and the thermal imager with us. We found a good spot on top of the mesa with a good view of the field and the homesteads. We spent approx two hours observing but didn't see any sign of movement or anything out of the ordinary. At approx 2145, we headed back down to homestead 2 to check on the pennies again. They had not been disturbed.\n\n4.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 0025, we conducted a patrol to Homestead 2 and 3 with 1843(a) (2) . At homestead 2 took several photos. We got a single picture with an anomaly/orb. We didn't observe or experience anything out of the ordinary other than the one photo. We checked on the pennies at homestead 2 again and they were undisturbed.\n\n62"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 0100, we conducted a patrol to Homestead 2 with 1843(a)(2) started to bark and growl at something outside of Homestead 2. [REDACTED] quickly 1843(a)(2) scanned the area with NVG's but had negative findings. We took several photos inside and outside capturing no anomalies/orbs.\n\nInvestigator Notes\n\nThe locks on Dog Run 1 and Dog Run 2 were still in place and locked. The pennies were not in the same configuration as we left them in. The investigators were out here today so they may have touched them. [Subsequent inquiries revealed that the investigators were nowhere near the coins.]Other than that we have no idea what could have moved them.\n\nWeather Note\n\n21 degrees, clear skies, calm winds, 62% Humidity\n\nV/r,\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\n(19 November 09) 091119\n\nPatrol/Observations\n\n1.) 1843(a)(2)\n\n63"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approx 1700, we conducted a patrol along the southern tree line with 1843(a)(2) During the patrol we checked for signs of unauthorized people attempting to gain access to the property. We found no signs of trespassers or anything out of the ordinary. We stopped and checked the dog runs. The locks were still in place.\n\nInvestigator Notes\n\nAt approx 1350, we decided to go down to homestead 2 and check on the pennies. All four pennies were there but one of them had been moved. We did a thorough check of the surrounding area and didn't find any foot prints or any other signs of anyone or anything that might have moved the penny. It was sunny skies with no wind. We didn't have any strange feelings or smell any strange odors. Side note: [REDACTED] told us she had found a penny on her bed today and she had no idea how it got there.\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\nWhen I went to bed last night, I laid 4 coins on the nightstand next to my bed. I laid a penny, a quarter, a dime, and another quarter, in that order. When I woke up I noticed the quarter was moved away from the other coins in the same manner as at homestead 2.\n\nWeather Note\n\n21 degrees, clear skies, calm winds, 66% Humidity\n\nV/r,\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\n(20 November 09) 091120\n\nPatrol/Observations\n\n1.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 1700, we conducted a patrol along the southern tree line with 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) . During the patrol we checked for signs of unauthorized people attempting to gain access to the property. We found no signs of trespassers or anything out of the ordinary. We stopped and checked the dog runs. The locks were still in place.\n\n64"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 2000, I went to the East Gate with 1843(a)(2) . I took several photos. I did not capture or observe any activities and/ or anomalies/orbs. No security related incidents to report.\n\n3.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 2000, we posted at the Mesa with 1843(a)(2) . We did not observe any activities and/or anomalous/orbs. At approx 2240, we walked down to homestead 2 and took a lot of photos and captured a few anomalies/orbs in several of the photos. We didn't notice any strange odors or have any strange feelings.\n\n4.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 0115, we conducted a patrol to Homestead 2 with 1843(a)(2) We took several photos. We didn't capture any anomalies/orbs. We didn't observe or experience anything out of the ordinary. We also checked on the pennies at homestead 2 and they were undisturbed.\n\nInvestigator Notes\n\n1.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 1534, I set up some coins in a straight line on the night stand in my room next to my bed and took a picture. As I write this, they are still as I left them. I will continue to monitor them and let you know of any changes."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt 1319 I took some photos of the change I left on my nightstand to send with the report. At 1500 1843(a)(2) and I went to Roosevelt to get dog food. When I returned I checked my change to see if it moved at all. I noticed that the dime was moved up and the other coins were pushed together. The quarter that was moved last night was in the same place. I am not touching the change and I am going to monitor it another day to see if there is any more movement. I have a few other things on the night stand including my laptop. I make sure to keep my laptop away from the change. I have been very careful not to move the coins or disturb them in any way. I am 100 percent certain my laptop did not disturb the coins. I also moved to the other bed in my room.\n\n3.) At 1815 we stopped by homestead 2 after the southern tree line walk to set up the\n\npennies. We set them up using the new bass protocols sent by AAP Person 44\nWe set up 5 pennies all facing SW. We put the pennies in order from lowest year to most recent. The years were, 1986, 1989, 1996, 2001, 2007. We used a ruler and spaced them all 1 inch apart. We centered the group of pennies on the cement block wall that is facing the road. We took photos of the pennies and they are all stored on a separate memory card.\n\n4.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nLast night I had a strange experience on the ranch. I could not shake the feeling that we were being followed and watched by something. I started feeling this when 1843(a)(2) and I were on top of the mesa. I don't know why but I didn't say anything to either 1843(a)(2) Around 0130 when we were at homestead 2 think I ran into the anomaly. I walked away from 1843(a)(2) . I walked north towards the road. I did not have the dogs with me. When I got near the trees I felt as if something was standing in front of me. I felt very threatening presence with this anomaly. I felt very warm and not cold at all, as it was trying to draw me into it. I immediately"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"backed up and took some pictures, checked with the thermal, and night vision goggles. Nothing showed up on anything. The dogs did not seem to notice anything. For some reason I didn't want to say anything to the other guys. After I took pictures and looked for it I didn't feel as if it was there anymore. I still felt as if we were being watched but from far away. I was very anxious and nervous. We then headed back to homestead one for the night. I don't know why I didn't tell then but I just didn't want to. I didn't feel comfortable telling them right away.\n\nLast night when I was sleeping I had another strange experience. I went to bed around 3:00 am. I was in a very deep sleep and I felt a cold grip on my left ankle. The grip was very cold, almost like ice. I was under 3 blankets and very warm. I had two comforters, a soft blanket, and a top sheet. I tried very hard to wake up but no matter how hard I tried I could not wake up fully. I am a very light sleeper so this is very strange for me. Usually I am a lucid dreamer and can wake up whenever I want. When I felt the grip I awoke but I tried to open my eyes but couldn't get more than a quick glimpse. I tried very hard but I just fell back asleep. I tried as hard as I could to keep my eyes open but I couldn't. It was very strange. When I felt the cold grip I was able to kick my legs but I only got one kick with the left leg. I was trying to wake up but I couldn't. After I kicked I couldn't move anymore. I couldn't say anything or keep my eyes open. I got a quick glimpse of the room but didn't see anything. The cold grip was a very slender hand that reached all the way around my ankle. I felt as if the fingers were extremely long, not a human hand. My hand doesn't reach around my ankle. I still have 5 inches to go when I try. I didn't feel palm just fingers. It was about 3 fingers wide. I couldn't tell if it was threatening or nice. It happened too fast for me to get a good feel of it. I woke up around 5:30 am with no blankets on. I must have been tossing and turning quite a bit for my blankets to slide off. I slept until about 8:00 am and got up and called [REDACTED] about the experience and then back to bed. He advised me to move rooms which I will do later today.\n\nAAP Person 44"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Weather Note\n\n23 degrees, cloudy skies, calm winds, 65% Humidity\n\nV/r,\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\n(21 November 09) 091121\n\nPatrol/Observations\n\n1.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 1615, we conducted a patrol along the southern tree line with 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) During the patrol we checked for signs of unauthorized people attempting to gain access to the property. We found no signs of trespassers or anything out of the ordinary. We stopped and checked the dog runs. The locks were still in place. See investigator notes about pennies.\n\n2.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 2000, I went to the East Gate with 1843(a)(2) . I took several photos. In one of the photos I captured anomaly/orb. I didn't notice any strange odors or have any strange feelings. The K/9's were acting normal as well.\n\n3.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 2000, we posted at the Mesa with 1843(a)(2) . We did not observe any activities and/or anomalous/orbs. At approx 2215, we walked down to homestead 2 and took several photos revealing no anomalies/orb."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4.) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approx 0030, we conducted a patrol to Homestead 2 and West Gate with 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) We took several photos. We didn't capture any anomalies/orbs. We didn't observe or experience anything out of the ordinary. We also checked on the pennies at homestead 2 and they were undisturbed.\n\nInvestigator Notes\n\n1.)\n\nJust before the southern tree line check, at 1530 1843(a)(2) stopped by homestead 2 to check on the pennies. All the pennies were moved except for 1989 which was in the middle. Penny 1996 was missing, Penny 1986 was flipped over and moved a couple inches south, Penny 2001 was slightly rotated counterclockwise and moved north, Penny 2007 was rotated more than 2001 but not moved as far.\n\n2.)\n\nAt 2230 we stopped by homestead 2 to set up the pennies. We set them up using the bass protocols sent by AAP Person 44 . We set up 5 pennies all facing SW. We put the pennies in order from lowest year to most recent. The years were, 1986, 1989, 2001, 2006, 2007. We used a ruler and spaced them all 1 inch apart. We centered the group of pennies on the cement block wall that is facing the road. We took photos of the pennies and they are all stored on a separate memory card.\n\nWeather Note\n\n24 degrees, clear skies, calm winds, 63% Humidity"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(B) Recent Investigation of Reports from Witnesses who Live in the Area Surrounding the Utah Ranch Property\n\nBAASS Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies\n\nSkinwalker Ridge\n(As named by Ute Tribal members over several generations)\n\nUtah Ranch – November 16-19, 2009\n\nInvestigators\n\nAAP Person 41 and AAP Person 14\n\n70"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Executive Summary\n\nOn November 16-19, 2009 Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS) Field Investigator's AAP Person 41 and AAP Person 14 travelled to Vernal, Utah to continue the investigation into the phenomenon reported at and around the [REDACTED] ranch property. The intent of this trip was to re-contact 1843(a)(2) interview the individuals 1843(a)(2) had located for us and meet new neighbors, locate additional witnesses and find out if 1843(a)(2) had any additional information regarding the 1843(a)(2) friends or relatives who may have information surrounding the [REDACTED] property. In addition, we wanted to locate an individual who was willing and able to introduce us to 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2)\n\nDuring the course of our investigation numerous new contacts were made which resulted in 5 additional witnesses to either an unidentified flying object, a bright blue orb and/or a large dog like creature which stood and ran on its hind legs.\n\nIn addition, we met and spent a considerable amount of time with 1843(a)(2) who is a full blooded Native American and 1843(a)(2) Ute Indian tribe. 1843(a)(2) agreed to teach us about Ute tribal customs and the folklore surrounding the \"Skinwalker Ridge\" and surrounding areas 1843(a)(2) informed us we needed to continue to educate ourselves on Ute customs and traditions before we were granted permission to speak with 1843(a)(2)\n\nIn conclusion, we located and photographed the area referred to by the locals as UFO hill. We also located and photographed the 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) but this last name has not been confirmed."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Investigative Report\n\nPrior to our arrival on 11-16-09 at 1440 hours we located the 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) is believed to be where 1843(a)(2) operates the 1843(a)(2) from. We decided to attempt to contact somebody inside 1843(a)(2) and see if we could identify 1843(a)(2)\n\nI knocked on the door and was greeted by a white male adult approximately 30 years old. I informed him I travel through the area from time to time and wanted information regarding room rates and local activities. The host introduced himself as 1843(a)(2) no last name given, and told me 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) told me there is local hunting, fishing and hiking and did not mention anything to do with the AAP Person 4 property or 1843(a)(2) I thanked him for his time and left the area where we continued on to Vernal, UT.\n\nAfter returning to Las Vegas it is believed the [REDACTED] I spoke with at the 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) We believe his last name to be 1843(a)(2) but this has not been confirmed. We photographed the front of the Inn for identification purposes.\n\nUpon arrival, we attempted to contact several people who were not home during our last visit. Again, 1843(a)(2) the house directly in front of him and 1843(a)(2) were either not home or refused to answer the door.\n\nOn 11-16-09 at 1530 hours we met 1843(a)(2) in her front yard 1843(a)(2) playing with her young children. This residence"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3) AAP Person 4 property and the entire ridge or mesa is clearly visible. 1843(a)(2) is aware of all the rumors and Native American folklore surrounding the property and stated she has never witnessed anything out of the ordinary. She suggested we talk to her brother-in-law 1843(a)(2) during our next visit. 1843(a)(2) lives on the same property but is out of town for several days.\n\nAfter speaking with 1843(a)(2) at 1615 hours we met 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) lives one residence north of 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] is a full 1843(a)(2) blooded Native American and member of the Ute tribe. Approximately 2 years ago [REDACTED] said he witnessed strange unidentified lights coming from the area of the [REDACTED] ranch. [REDACTED] saw a creature similar to the one 1843(a)(2) recently seen on the [REDACTED] property approximately 5 years ago. These creatures are werewolf's and can walk and run on their hind legs.\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\nThe following is a summary of the conversation between 1843(a)(2) and Inv. AAP Person 41 and [REDACTED] This conversation took place on 11/16/2009 at approximately 1615 hours; directly outside the residence of 1843(a)(2) resides with his parents. During our interview with 1843(a)(2) there was some hesitation and resistance from 1843(a)(2) to speak with us regarding activity on the ranch and the surrounding area. 1843(a)(2) specifically told us he does not like people snooping around the area. The activities are none of his business and are the business of the family and individuals who reside on the property. 1843(a)(2) became more willing to speak with us upon our reassurance we are employed by the property owner and were simply looking for additional information regarding the area and wanted to learn more about the culture."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) advised he is aware of the Skinwalker book, although he has not read the book. 1843(a)(2) stated the activities which occur are generally accepted as normal by the area residents. 1843(a)(2) stated he has lived in the area his entire life.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated he has observed unusual lights and advised he has been on the Utah Ranch property, to retrieve a dog a couple years ago. 1843(a)(2) stated he got the opportunity to see the \"famous dog kennels\". With respect to the description of the lights he observed, he saw several lights, which he initially described as what he believed to be headlights, however with the lights disappearing and reappearing and single lights traveling on their own, he does not believe they were headlights from any vehicle.\n\nWe questioned 1843(a)(2) directly regarding the creature which has been reported by several individuals in the surrounding area. 1843(a)(2) acknowledged seeing the \"invisible creature\", as he described it, several years ago. 1843(a)(2) stated he heard a loud growling / howling noise. 1843(a)(2) stated upon hearing the howling sound he became, as he described it as being, paralyzed. 1843(a)(2) stated he was watching the creature, listening to the noise for what ended up being nearly three hours. 1843(a)(2) stated along with the howling noise, he could hear the creature breaking tree branches in the wooded area directly east of his house. 1843(a)(2) stated he had been outside looking for his dog, when the sighting occurred. This description by 1843(a)(2) is very similar to the creature description as given by 1843(a)(2) described witnessing a similar dark figured creature a couple months ago.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated he went outside about midnight when he heard the noise and stated he must have lost track of time as when he returned back into the house it was nearly 0300 or 0330. 1843(a)(2) stated while he was outside watching and listening to the creature for over three hours, he stated without hesitation, it felt more like twenty minutes. 1843(a)(2) stated at"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"no time in the past or ever has he believed he was outside for over three hours. 1843(a)(2) stated this sighting / experience occurred within the last five years. However he was unable to provide a more specific time frame.\n\nDuring our conversation with 1843(a)(2) he advised several times, the creature / lights are accepted as normal and area residents do not bother the creature or the lights.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated we were welcome to come back to his residence in the future if we had any additional questions or needed anything in the future. We intend to return to obtain a more thorough interview with 1843(a)(2) during our next deployment to the Fort Duchesne area during the week of December 5-9, 2009.\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\nAt approximately 1645 hours on 11/16/2009; we met 15-year old 1843(a)(2) at his residence located at 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3) [REDACTED] lives here with several juvenile cousins, his cousin 1843(a)(2) and uncle 1843(a)(2) and two other adult white males who refused to provide their names. 1843(a)(2) is not a full-blooded Native American, however has a Native American heritage and is partial blood Ute.\n\nThe following is a summary of the conversation between 1843(a)(2) and Inv. [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] This conversation took place on two separate dates. The initial interview took place on 11/16/2009 at approximately 1645 hours MST with the follow up interview taking place the next day on 11/17/2009 at approximately 1230 hours MST.\n\nThe front of the residence faces to the south and there were several vehicles, animals and children in the yard upon our arrival. 1843(a)(2) as it turns out, is the grandson of 1843(a)(2) while 1843(a)(2) is the great-grandson of 1843(a)(2) has been previously interviewed as his property lies 1843(a)(2) the Utah Ranch"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"property. We identified ourselves, and upon our identification, all parties stated they knew what / where we were talking about.\n\nInitially there was some hesitation to speak with us as statements were made by these individuals whereby they admitted to actually being on the Utah Ranch property a few nights prior. 1843(a)(2) advised we were from the UFO Ranch and stated (talking to the unidentified white males) \"...you know, the place where you guys went the other night...\" There was some argument between 1843(a)(2) and the unidentified while males who denied being on the property. After acknowledgement by Inv. [REDACTED] and myself AAP Person 14 we were not there investigating any type of trespassing, all parties opened up and were more willing to speak with us. However the two adult white males continued to refuse to provide us with their names.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated on three separate occasions, over the last three-years, he has witnessed a large dog like creature to the rear of his property standing on its hind legs. On all three occasions the creature was seen either standing or running on its hind legs with its front legs swinging near its side. On one of the sightings 1843(a)(2) and his uncle 1843(a)(2) who were target shooting directly behind their residence, shot at and appeared to hit the creature from a range of approximately 75-feet with a .30-.30 rifle, causing the creature to bleed thick black blood, although these shots did not appear to kill or have any significant effect on the creature.\n\nInitially 1843(a)(2) stated the only thing he knew about the property was about a cow mutilation several years ago. After some additional unrelated conversation, one of the small children advised they had researched the Utah Ranch property on the internet, and had observed some lights.\n\nThe lights were last observed about three or four months ago, however a more specific time frame could not be determined. They described the lights as being completely white and believed to have originated from the area surrounding the Ranch property."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"They further described the light as a circular type orb of light with a smaller red light traveling around the host light. Initially they were uncertain as to the exact height of the light; however they stated it was less than commercial airline traffic height and was about the size of a grapefruit held at arm's length.\n\nThey stated they watched the object for approximately 20-30 minutes, beginning at about 2300 hours. None of the witnesses were able to identify the object. Several times they simply described it as a ball of white light with a red ball of light traveling around it.\n\n1843(a)(2) then advised, going back to the creature, they had experienced a couple of unusual sightings directly behind their house. 1843(a)(2) stated the first encounter happened about two years ago.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated he was with his uncle when they observed what they originally believed to be a dog of some sort. 1843(a)(2) stated when they first observed the creature, it appeared to be a dog on all fours, however as they watched it; for unknown reason, they stated, it rose up and began walking on its hind legs toward them.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated the creature, when standing on its hind legs appeared to stand over six- feet tall. 1843(a)(2) stated he believed the creature had reddish fur. This fur appeared to be shorter in length. The most noticeable feature of the unidentified creature was the deep red eyes. 1843(a)(2) stated on all fours the height of the creature appeared to be well above waist height as compared to him. 1843(a)(2) stated he did not stick around to get a good look at the face of the creature as he was very frightened. 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) were both relieved to hear there had been other reported sightings of similar creatures.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated the creature did not make a sound, however with respect to smell, 1843(a)(2) stated the creature smelled like \"...real bad wet dog...\" 1843(a)(2) stated he was approximately 30-yards away from it during the initial sighting. 1843(a)(2) stated he estimated the creature was running with approximately five-foot distance between each stride and covered a great distance in a very short period of time.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated about two or three months ago (fall 2009) he had another encounter where he witnessed an identical creature to the first encounter. On this encounter; 1843(a)(2) stated he was with his younger cousin and they were in the same general area as the first encounter; however he observed the creature from a distance of approximately 50 yards. Again 1843(a)(2) stated the creature moved with a great deal of speed.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated he was along the creek when they heard some splashing in the water behind them. By the time they turned around to see what was behind them, they heard the brush on the embankment rustling. As they climbed the embankment and got to the top, 1843(a)(2) stated both he and his cousin observed the dog like creature running on two legs, in a north-east direction away from them. 1843(a)(2) stated the creature appeared darker in color; however he stated it was quite a ways away; however 1843(a)(2) could clearly identify pointy ears. 1843(a)(2) stated the sighting occurred around noon time. 1843(a)(2) stated he felt as though it (the creature) was identical to the one he observed on the prior sighting.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated on both sightings the front legs appeared to be more like arms than dog legs. 1843(a)(2) stated it was difficult to explain.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated about 18-months ago (spring 2008) he and his uncle was target shooting directly behind their residence when they observed the dog like creature. 1843(a)(2) stated the creature was on the edge of the embankment, near a dead horse which was in the ravine. 1843(a)(2) admitted they did shoot at the creature with a .30-.30 rifle 1843(a)(2) stated he knows they hit the creature at least three times, as they heard the distinct sound of the projectile impact the creature."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) stated the creature did not contort or move in a reactionary type movement indicating it had been hit by the projectiles, however the creature did whimper, \"...like if you kicked a dog...\", he described. 1843(a)(2) did not advise if the creature \"whimpered\" after every shot, he simply stated it whimpered when they shot at and hit it. 1843(a)(2) stated they did observe blood; however there was no flesh evident near the place where the creature was observed.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated the blood thicker than normal blood was very black in color and had a very distinct foul odor. 1843(a)(2) stated it was not like the first encounter when the creature smelled like a wet dog. [REDACTED] stated the 1843(a)(2) smell was far worse and was a very bad odor. 1843(a)(2) stated he could not even compare how foul the smell was to anything else.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated there was a small blood trail from where the creature was initially sitting and they shot at it, to where the creature disappeared from sight in the ravine toward the creek. 1843(a)(2) advised the largest of the blood spots was approximately the size of a half-dollar coin, with the smallest being the diameter of a pencil. 1843(a)(2) showed us the approximate location of the blood trail from start to finish and measured approximately twenty-five (25) feet in length.\n\n1843(a)(2) advised after the creature disappeared from sight into the ravine, they ran up to the edge to see if the creature was lying near the 1843(a)(2) creek. [REDACTED] advised they did not see the creature; however they could hear the creature running through the trees and observed the branches of the trees and the brush along the creek side, moving. 1843(a)(2) did not advise they heard any sounds.\n\n1843(a)(2) We asked [REDACTED] what he thought the creature was. 1843(a)(2) stated he did not know what it was. We asked [REDACTED] if he thought the creature was 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) harmful or trying to hurt them and [REDACTED] advised he did not think so, the creature was simply trying to scare them off as they were encroaching on its territory."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) stated his uncle 1843(a)(2) would also like to speak with us\nregarding similar incidents directly observed by him. 1843(a)(2) stated his\nuncle works in the oil fields and is not able to meet with us during the week,\nas he gets off at odd hours and is really only available on the weekends.\nWe advised meeting up with 1843(a)(2) on our next trip would be better and we\nwould most certainly like to meet with him at that time. We provided our\ncontact information to [REDACTED] as asked he forward it to his uncle and have\nhis uncle 1843(a)(2) contact us to set up an appointment.\n\nSeveral days later, I was contacted directly from 1843(a)(2) who\nadvised he would very much like to meet with us in person and discuss his\nsightings. I advised 1843(a)(2) we would be returning to the area within the next\ncouple of weeks and would very much like to meet with him. I advised\n1843(a)(2) we would be in contact in the future to arrange the meeting.\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\nOn 11-17-09 at 1415 hours we knocked on 1843(a)(2) front door\nand introduced ourselves as friends of 1843(a)(2) and employees of the\nowner of the property commonly referred to as mystery ranch. 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) invited us inside and knew the property we were referring to.\n1843(a)(2) taught us about the Skinwalkers, also known as Werewolves'\nand other spiritual beings which have been associated with the area for\nseveral generations. 1843(a)(2) full blooded Ute Indian\nand a 1843(a)(2) for the tribe.\n\nThe following is a synopsis of the conversation we had with 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) sometimes referred to as 1843(a)(2). We were unable to\nobtain an actual physical address of the residence as 1843(a)(2) advised\nhe gets his mail at the Post Office and we did not observe any street signs\nin the surrounding area. As a point of reference, from the Fort Duchesne\nstoplight on Highway 40, 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2)\n\n80"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) This area is simply referred to\nas the 1843(a)(2)\n\nWe identified ourselves and advised we wished to speak with him\nregarding some incidents in the area and to learn of the Native American\nculture in the area. 1843(a)(2) stated depending on the subject we wished\nto discuss; he may be quite vague in his responses. 1843(a)(2) seemed\nvery understanding with desire to learn from him and about his culture,\nwhile remaining respectful.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated he was born and raised in 1843(a)(2) which is\n1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) stated\nhe is both a Korean and Vietnam veteran. 1843(a)(2) stated he served as a\nmilitary advisor during the Vietnam War.\n\nWe advised 1843(a)(2) we were seeking insight into the spiritual\nbeliefs, insight and history with respect to the stories we had heard from a\ngreat number of people in the area. We advised 1843(a)(2) we were\nspecifically seeking education with about the dogs which walk on their hind\nlegs. Upon hearing this, 1843(a)(2) immediately advised, \"...Oh yea,\nthey're werewolves...\"\n\nWe provided a brief summary of all of the descriptions of the creature\nwhich had been provided to us. 1843(a)(2) advised there is a ranch down\nnear the town of Ouray, which is named Werewolf Ranch. 1843(a)(2)\nadvised you can see a lot of them down in that area. 1843(a)(2) did not\nprovide any additional details as to the location of this Werewolf Ranch. A\nmore specific location and directions will be obtained on subsequent visits\nwith 1843(a)(2)\n\n1843(a)(2) stated these types of creatures are all over and essentially\nit is a belief of the tribal people and simply because someone does not see\nthem, does not mean they (creatures) are not there. One has to be\n\n81"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"spiritually tuned in to their surroundings and beliefs. 1843(a)(2) said a very\nimportant aspect is an understanding and awareness of the beliefs.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated they legends are part of the Native American\nculture and spiritual beliefs. 1843(a)(2) stated as part of their beliefs and\none particular story involved the Native Americans, specifically members of\nthe Choctaw tribe, observing Christopher Columbus prior to his arrival in\nthe new world. 1843(a)(2) stated Native Americans had a pow wow and\nwitnessed an individual standing on a rock, when one Native American\nattempted to speak with the individual, the unknown person did not speak\nand was referred to as \"Waceja\" (sp) which means white man. This\nparticular member of the tribe looked into the bag carried by the visitor,\nwhich included weapons, ships and tools of warfare. 1843(a)(2) advised\nthe white man advised they were coming to kill the Native Americans.\n\n1843(a)(2) did advise a possible answer for the recent surge in\nsightings could be due to the current generation of Native Americans losing\ntheir heritage and losing the ways of the older generation. 1843(a)(2)\nstated back in the day, these creatures were used as scouts with their\noriginal purpose to seek out food and water for the tribe, stating this is what\nthey were meant to do, however, now they are used to hurt people and\nharm people because this is what society as a whole has become, possibly\nindicating the harmful nature of the creature is a product an ever changing\nsociety.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated this type of activity is primarily practiced in the\nsouthwest United States. When we asked as to whether the creature can\ntake different forms, 1843(a)(2) stated yes, but primarily they take the form\nof a scraggy or a mangy dog-like creature.\n\n1843(a)(2) clarified these creatures are not the spirits of individuals\nwho have passed; rather they are actual individuals practicing in what he\nreferred to as witchcraft, as it pertains to their spiritual beliefs. 1843(a)(2)\nstated these creatures nearly always take the form of dogs. 1843(a)(2)\n\n82"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"stated while the creatures cannot speak directly, they can communicate,\nand specifically mentioned the howling, which they are known for.\n\nElaborating on the harmful nature of the creature, 1843(a)(2) stated if\nyou believe in them, they are a fore-shadow of disease, sickness and the\nlike and can be targeted to specific individuals. 1843(a)(2) advised these\ncreatures have essentially evolved into the harmful, destructive creatures\nas this is what society in general has become.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated the people who use these creatures and use this\nbelief system to prey on individuals they are conflicting with. 1843(a)(2)\nstated his grandfather 1843(a)(2) with the tribe, while 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) Additional information will need to be gained from 1843(a)(2)\nregarding the differences between the two tribal designations.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated these creatures, with respect to the dog-like or\nwerewolves are a completely separate and different entity from a \"shape-\nshifter\". 1843(a)(2) stated a shape-shifter is a person who possesses the\nability to change into something else. 1843(a)(2) advised there are very\nfew of these individuals left. 1843(a)(2) stated the terms \"skin-walker\" and\n\"shape-shifter\" are interchangeable and are the same entity or creature, but\nthe words themselves mean the same.\n\nIt was our understanding the dog-like creatures and werewolves are\nthe spirits of individuals, while the \"skin-walkers\" or \"shape-shifters\" are\nhuman beings with the spiritual power to change into something else.\nAgain, additional clarification from 1843(a)(2) will allow for a greater\nunderstanding of these entities.\n\n1843(a)(2) advised the individuals who are associated with these\nentities, possess a great deal of power and are respected and feared for\nthis power.\n\n83"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) stated the mesa near the Utah Ranch property is\ncommonly known as \"Skinwalker Ridge\". 1843(a)(2) stated this area has\nwas given this name generations ago and is simply an area known and\naccepted for this activity as this is the area in which they live and practice\ntheir beliefs.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated the entities were given their name by the Navajo\npeople, as they were the people who practiced the evil part of this.\n1843(a)(2) stated the tribal name for these creatures is \"Ba-ha-we-snev\"\n(sp). 1843(a)(2) advised translated into English, this word mean Navajo\nwolves.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated these creatures, while they are spiritual; they are\ncapable of inflicting physical harm on people. 1843(a)(2) advised this\nphysical harm can be actual physical injuries and / or sickness or disease.\n\n1843(a)(2) advised these entities can be killed; however they will not\ndie where then can be seen. 1843(a)(2) was asked directly if they were\nable to be shot at and killed. 1843(a)(2) advised these creatures have been\nshot in the past. 1843(a)(2) advised they go elsewhere to die, 1843(a)(2)\nadvised you know you have hit them by the distinct sound of the projectile\nhitting the creature, however they will go off elsewhere to die.\n\n1843(a)(2) advised while the white man can learn to see these things,\nthe actual practicing of these beliefs can be very dangerous and harmful if\nthe person does not know what they are doing.\n\nWe directly asked 1843(a)(2) if there was any tribal significance to the\nUtah Ranch property. 1843(a)(2) stated a great deal of his father's people\nlived in the area which is now occupied by the Utah Ranch property.\n1843(a)(2) stated the ceremonies and rituals which took place in the area,\nthe spirit of those involved and the significance of the rituals themselves\nremains. 1843(a)(2) advised the area does have some significance; and\nspecifically mentioned \"killing of some sort\"; however he would not\n\n84"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"elaborate further into this statement. In my opinion it seemed apparent 1843(a)(2) did not wish to discuss the area any further or provide any additional explanation at this time.\n\n1843(a)(2) advised these entities do have the ability to kill a person. 1843(a)(2) stated people have been killed in the southern areas of the tribal lands, near Cortez, Colorado. 1843(a)(2) stated deaths such as these are generally not looked into by tribal members and are simply accepted for what they are. 1843(a)(2) will be very beneficial in obtaining additional contacts in the Cortez, Colorado area. Additional resources may be needed to explore this area of the Southern Ute tribe.\n\nWe asked 1843(a)(2) about the significance of the area on the west end of the Utah Ranch property with the inverted animal hides with the wooden posts and deceased animal carcasses. 1843(a)(2) stated he was not sure what this area would represent, but also stated he would be willing to go with us to view the area and he would let us know what, if any, significance this area held.\n\nWe asked 1843(a)(2) if there were other individuals with whom we would be able to speak with. We inquired about being able to speak with 1843(a)(2) seemed very apprehensive about allowing us to speak with 1843(a)(2) stated we would have to feel him out and let 1843(a)(2) know we wished to learn about and speak to him about the supernatural. 1843(a)(2) would not provide us with 1843(a)(2) contact information. Here again, it was made quite clear 1843(a)(2) did not wish to discuss further our desire to speak with 1843(a)(2) however he 1843(a)(2) did advise in the interim, we should seek out 1843(a)(2) who is the brother of 1843(a)(2) stated 1843(a)(2) is more open to discussing these topics, while 1843(a)(2) is not.\n\nIt seemed apparent; we had not yet earned the right to speak with 1843(a)(2) advised when you are fluent with the culture and rituals; you are allowed to speak of such things. 1843(a)(2) welcomed us to\n\n85"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"return to his residence at any time and stated he would be glad to help us with our education.\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\nOn 11/18/09 at 100 hours we spoke to 1843(a)(2) at her 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) she owns. 1843(a)(2) was friends with the couple who owned the property prior to being purchased by AAP Person 4 1843(a)(2) has had several unexplained experiences since the late 1960's. 1843(a)(2) has witnessed a dome shaped UFO and a golf ball size bright blue light about 50' in front of her as she drove her car. All these were in close proximity to the AAP Person 4 property. Her Father has told her about the UFO's and other unexplained events and creatures which have been associated with the AAP Person 4 ranch for as long as she can remember.\n\nThe interview with 1843(a)(2) was arranged through Utah Ranch Property Manager 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) have been friends for approximately 10-15 years and have been friends long before 1843(a)(2) became the property manager for the Utah Ranch property.\n\n1843(a)(2) advised she has lived in the area for the majority of her life. She was born and raised 1843(a)(2) and with the exception of a short stint of about 1843(a)(2), she has lived the 1843(a)(2)\n\n1843(a)(2) stated her father was a \"ditch rider\" for the tribe back in the day and was in charge of irrigation ditches, controlling the head gates and water flow on the irrigation canals on the reservation. 1843(a)(2) stated her 1843(a)(2) grandparents homesteaded in the Randlett area in the late 1800's. 1843(a)(2) advised she resides 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3) 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3) the Utah Ranch property.\n\n86"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) stated she was also familiar with and friends with the previous owners of the Utah Ranch property, 1843(a)(2). 1843(a)(2) advised she knew 1843(a)(2) very well as she knew 1843(a)(2) who worked 1843(a)(2) at the time and became close friends with them.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated she is aware of the rumors and stories regarding the cattle mutilations and various other stories; however she admitted she does not have first-hand knowledge of any specific event and was never witness to any of the events taking place on the ranch or in the immediate surrounding area.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated she was not personally informed of any stories from 1843(a)(2) however, she advised, she did observe a very noticeable change in the demeanor in 1843(a)(2) stated just prior to the 1843(a)(2) departure from the Ranch, 1843(a)(2) looked \"hammered\". 1843(a)(2) stated 1843(a)(2) had lost a considerable amount of weight, and displayed a marked change in personality.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated 1843(a)(2) who was normally a very personable and talkative person, had become very withdrawn and subdued. 1843(a)(2) was very bubbly and outgoing, however near the end and over the course of a couple years, she noticed this change occurring. 1843(a)(2) was unsure as to how long exactly the 1843(a)(2) resided on the property.\n\n1843(a)(2) also stated she was acquaintances with the 1843(a)(2) family. The 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) did not elaborate further into her relationship with the 1843(a)(2) family, other than to state she knew them from when she would go to the ranch with her father as a child.\n\nWhen asked specifically about stories she had been told by her father, she related a story about an old bootlegger who had once resided on the ranch property. One day this bootlegger disappeared without reason or explanation. 1843(a)(2) stated this individual was never heard or\n\n87"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"seen from again. 1843(a)(2) stated she believed this unknown individual resided on the property prior to the 1843(a)(2) taking possession of the property. 1843(a)(2) stated from the best of her recollection she believed this bootlegger lived on the property back in the 1930's, however she was uncertain.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated she did not know the 1843(a)(2) family. She remembers the name, but was not sure if she knew them or not. She admitted she knew the 1843(a)(2) had purchased the property from the 1843(a)(2) but did not have any specific memories of them 1843(a)(2)\n\n1843(a)(2) stated she specifically remembered when she was growing up as a child; she would often go with her father to change / regulate the head gates on various properties within her father's designated area. Normally, she advised, she would be allowed to play in the water near the head gates; however every time they worked on the Utah Ranch property, her father forbids her from even exiting the pickup. 1843(a)(2) stated there was never any type of explanation given as to why she was forbidden from getting out of the truck on the ranch property.\n\n1843(a)(2) advised her father, 1843(a)(2), passed away about fifteen years ago and was previously employed with the Bureau of Indian Affairs 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) stated her father's sister, 1843(a)(2) is 1843(a)(2) mother. 1843(a)(2) is a previous employee of NIDS and was a 1843(a)(2) in the Uintah basin.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated she believed on top of the mesa directly adjacent to the ranch property was a tribal burial ground. 1843(a)(2) stated the burial ground was marked with white rocks and a cross marking the burial site. 1843(a)(2) also advised she is familiar and friends with the 1843(a)(2) family. The 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3) (This is the previously mentioned Skinwalker Ridge). 1843(a)(2) advised she used to work 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) son years ago.\n\n88"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) again stated she is familiar with all the stories of the Utah Ranch property and surrounding area; involving the cattle mutilations and sightings, however she advised one such personal experience she had occurred 2-3 years ago about 2007 or 2008. 1843(a)(2) stated she believed it was in the early spring time.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated she was coming home work in Roosevelt and noticed a blue light which she originally thought was a reflection in the windshield. 1843(a)(2) stated she made several turns in the road and the blue orb remained. 1843(a)(2) stated the blue orb was directly in front of her car. 1843(a)(2) stated it was approximately 50 feet in front of her car. 1843(a)(2) stated she estimated the size of the orb to be about golf ball size. 1843(a)(2) advised the motion of the object was very fluid-like and seemed to mimic the movements of her vehicle. 1843(a)(2) stated the object appeared to maintain a steady distance from her vehicle. If she sped up, the object would as well. Likewise if she slowed down or made a turn. Everything she did, the object would follow without hesitation.\n\n1843(a)(2) advised as she neared the area known as UFO Hill 1843(a)(3) 1843(a)(3) the orb unexplainably shot off. 1843(a)(2) stated the orb shot off in a 45 degree angle toward the west / southwest direction.\n\nWith respect to UFO Hill, she stated she has no idea how the area got the name. She stated the area has had the name for as long as she can remember. 1843(a)(2) acknowledged the area is on restricted tribal lands.\n\n1843(a)(2) stated the light of the orb or sphere was contained within the orb itself. She advised she did not emit any light. 1843(a)(2) recalled the sighting lasted about 3-5 minutes. 1843(a)(2) advised she was not frightened until after she turned the corner and realized the object was actually there and not simply a light reflection. 1843(a)(2) stated the sighting occurred in the late afternoon, and believed it was in the spring, but acknowledged she was not certain.\n\n89"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) stated she had also witnessed what she originally thought was simply a star. 1843(a)(2) stated this sighting was within the past couple of months. 1843(a)(2) stated she was outside with her dog, when an unusually bright light caught her eye in the sky. [REDACTED] stated as she focused on the light, she observed and noticed the object to be zigzagging across the sky. 1843(a)(2) stated the object seemed to confine itself into an approximately three feet by three feet area in the sky (from her vantage point).\n1843(a)(2) stated she contacted [REDACTED] to see if she could see anything. 1843(a)(2) stated she also told her husband who also saw the unknown object. 1843(a)(2) stated upon seething this object, her husband retrieved his binoculars and watched the object through the binoculars.\n1843(a)(2) stated while she was observing this unknown light, she also noticed an approaching aircraft. 1843(a)(2) stated this aircraft appeared to be a commercial airliner, and as the airliner approached the object, the object stopped dead in its tracks. 1843(a)(2) stated she watched the aircraft pass and after traveling past the object, the unknown object resumed its erratic behavior and movement. 1843(a)(2) could not remember how the object disappeared.\nWe then inquired of 1843(a)(2) about any unusual sightings or experiences in the general area surrounding her property or the ranch itself. 1843(a)(2) then advised she has noticed a very distinct hum in the background. 1843(a)(2) stated the hum as she described it was similar to that hum emitted from high-voltage power lines. 1843(a)(2) stated it was so strong you could feel it rather than hearing the noise. 1843(a)(2) stated the hum seems to be coming from under the ground, and occurs most often at night.\n1843(a)(2) stated she does not know the source of this hum. 1843(a)(2) stated the hum is strong enough to keep a person up and has on a couple of occasions woke her up. 1843(a)(2) stated she does not know if this hum is geological and stated she believed at one time it may be from the nearby oil fields.\n90"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"We asked 1843(a)(2) if there were any other incidences or memories she could recall. 1843(a)(2) stated when she was younger, she and her brother saw a ufo and were subsequently interviewed by AAP Person 125. 1843(a)(2) believed this interview took place in 1968 - 1969. 1843(a)(2) stated this sighting occurred about three miles east of Randlett and near the area of Pelican Lake.\n1843(a)(2) described the object as a silver, flat-bottomed, dome on the top. 1843(a)(2) stated the object was not a saucer. She advised the object was the size of a normal room, approximately 12'x12'. She stated the object the simply hovering above a small group of trees where all the area children used to play. She advised this object was above the tree level, approximately 12 - 16' in the air.\n1843(a)(2) did not recall any type of lighting on the craft; however she did notice a very distinct hum. She stated this hum was very much different from the hum she hears at her residence. She advised it was a light hum. She specifically noted the hum was not penetrating; however it was this sound which actually caught her and her brothers' attention. 1843(a)(2) advised she felt she was maybe a quarter or half mile away from the object when they noticed it.\n1843(a)(2) stated both she and her brother were riding horses and the horses had a distinct reaction to the craft. 1843(a)(2) stated the horses became very tense and began snorting and would not go any closer to the object, no matter how much they tried to get the horses to move closer.\n1843(a)(2) described the object as having a very smooth surface. 1843(a)(2) did not recall observing any type of lights or markings on the surface of the craft, nor did she observe any type of propulsion system. 1843(a)(2) advised the entire observation lasted only a few minutes. 1843(a)(2) stated this sighting occurred when she was about ten years old and her brother was fourteen.\n91"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) stated when the object disappeared, it traveled at such a great speed, neither she nor her brother was able to visually track the object. 1843(a)(2) stated she did remember a distinct change in the noise of the craft when it disappeared. 1843(a)(2) stated it was not like a commercial jet when you can hear the engine noise trail off, this craft simply shot off and the sound was gone. The sound did not trail off; she described it as turning off a light switch with respect to the sound. [REDACTED] stated she feels this object 1843(a)(2) was manmade and specifically mentioned she felt it was a NASA test craft.\n1843(a)(2) advised she feels there is a great deal of significance with respect to the tribe in the entire basin. 1843(a)(2) stated she feels the area surrounding the Utah Ranch property may serve as a portal of some sort. 1843(a)(2) stated if you can look into the portal, and someone walks through you can see this person. 1843(a)(2) stated the activities surrounding the Utah Ranch property and surrounding area have been occurring for so long, it is simply accepted by the area residents and they know not to bother it. 1843(a)(2) stated it was just accepted. 1843(a)(2) stated she refers to the Utah Ranch property as the \"Spooky Ranch\" or the \"UFO Ranch\".\nOn 11/17/09 at 0930 hours I spoke to 1843(a)(2) inside the 1843(a)(2) is the sister in law to 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) is married to 1843(a)(2) who works with 1843(a)(2) was very reluctant to speak with us and said she is aware of the stories but has never witnessed or experienced anything out of the ordinary. 1843(a)(2) returned to work and our conversation ended.\nOn 11/17/09 at 1700 hours as we were concluding our day, we returned to the 1843(a)(2) and spoke to 1843(a)(2) was previously interviewed and during out conversation with him regarding additional lights in the Pelican Lake area, advised about 13 years ago he physically ran into a dark colored creature. 1843(a)(2) stated he was running from the police (on foot) in an area directly south of Randlett. This area is known as the swamp. 1843(a)(2) stated as he was running, he ran into this\n92"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"unidentified creature. 1843(a)(2) stated the creature stood approximately seven (7) feet tall and he hit the creature in the lower chest area.\n1843(a)(2) stated the creature did not say anything, and physically pushed him away. 1843(a)(2) stated the creature did not appear to be aggressive or want to do him harm, other than forcefully / physically pushing him away. 1843(a)(2) stated he very much remember the very distinct foul odor of the creature. 1843(a)(2) said he could not describe the smell, other than to say it was the worst thing he has ever smelled and nothing compares to it. This description is similar to the sighting of [REDACTED] in September 2009.\n1843(a)(2) has also seen large dog-like creatures which walk on their hind legs. 1843(a)(2) had a very matter of fact attitude about him when discussing these experiences. 1843(a)(2) is very direct in his answers and makes constant eye contact. Like many other witnesses to these creatures, many do not seem to care if people believe them in their experiences.\nIt will be beneficial to obtain additional information from 1843(a)(2) in the future and possibly arrange a more convenient time to meet with him outside of his work environment.\nConclusion of Utah Trip\nWhile we continue to make strong headway into the Uintah Basin, we are barely scratching the surface. We continue to develop relationships with previously interviewed residents in conjunction with meeting and interviewing new and additional witnesses.\nGaining access to Uintah tribal members and learning of their heritage and spiritual beliefs remains a focus of this investigation. This\n93"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"knowledge must be gathered while maintaining the highest level of respect for the tribal members and Native American culture.\n1843(a)(2) and his family will be a valuable asset into gaining not only additional information regarding our investigation, but due to their family connection and being directly related to 1843(a)(2) who has been an area resident for nearly 80 years. Several 1843(a)(2) family members have reported witnessing this unknown creature.\n[REDACTED] could quite possibly be the most important witness / advisor to this investigation. The level of respect possessed by 1843(a)(2) amongst the tribal members will prove to be invaluable in our investigation. 1843(a)(2) has proven to have a wide breadth of knowledge and due to his standing as a 1843(a)(2) will hopefully allow gaining a better understanding of the Uintah Tribal religious / spiritual beliefs. 1843(a)(2) is willing to educate us in our endeavor into understanding their spiritual beliefs and access to 1843(a)(2) should be strictly limited due to the very sensitive nature of our conversations.\n1843(a)(2) will also prove to be a valuable asset during our continued investigation 1843(a)(2) who has lived in the area for nearly all her life, is well known and appears to be respected within members of the community.\nWhile the urge to push forward and open additional doors of opportunity for this investigation is strong, the sensitivity of the subject matter in relation to the area must be taken into consideration. Through due diligence and displaying and maintaining a non-confrontational / non-adversarial attitude has not only allowed us to get where we are currently, will allow us to continue to make positive steps forward into gaining a greater understanding into the source of this unknown entity.\n94"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photo #008 – Dirt mound where creature was seen standing on hind legs when shot by 1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photo #009 – Ravine and creek where creature ran after being shot."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photo # 011 – Ridge where creature was seen running in an easterly direction."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photo # 012 – Trees on top of ridge where creature ran through."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photo # 014 – View from ravine back towards rear of 1843(a)(2)\n100"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photo # 015 – 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2)\n101"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photo #016 - Trash and horse bones in ravine taken from dirt mound where creature was standing while shot.\n102"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photo #017 – View from 1843(a)(2) toward ravine and creek 1843(a)(2)\n103"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photo # 018 – on Independence Rd. facing west towards \"UFO hill.\"\n104"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photo #020 – Base of \"UFO hill\" looking down Independence Rd. at intersection with 1500 East.\n\n(c)Status of Experiments on Utah Ranch\n\nPlant Germination Experiment for Utah Ranch\n\nThere are multiple reports in the peer reviewed literature that pertain to effects of magnetic fields and electromagnetic radiation of different frequencies on germination of seeds (multiple plant species). BAASS scientific staff has initiated several series of plant germination experiments in order to test the hypothesis that environmental factors on the Utah ranch may have an effect on"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"seed growth, viability and/or germination. Below is one example of an experimental design whereby seed storage, germination and, when controlled temperature/humidity chambers are available, growth, is compared between Las Vegas and Utah.\n\nExperimental Setup:\n\nUtah Ranch\nBAASS\n\nA. Expose seeds dry\nA. Expose seeds dry\n\n1. Petri dish with 10 seeds\n1. Petri dish with 10 seeds\ni. Four different seed types\ni. Four different seed types\nii. Two dishes per seed type\nii. Two dishes per seed type\niii. Place seeds on dry paper in petri dish in petri dish\niii.Place seeds on dry paper\niv. Expose for two weeks\niii. Expose for two weeks\n\nGerminate one set at ranch (see protocol below), and bring the other set back to BAASS for germinating"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"B. Expose seeds during germination\n\nUtah Ranch\nBAASS\n\n1. Petri dish with 10 seeds\n1. Petri dish with 10 seeds\ni. Four different seed types (see below)\ni. Four different seed types (see below)\nii. Two dishes per seed type per location\nii. Two dishes per seed type\niii. Soak seeds and place on moistened paper moistened paper\niii. Soak seeds and place on\niv. Place in warm lighted location\niv. Place in warm lighted location\nv. Monitor daily for germination\nv. Monitor daily for germination\n\nSeed types to be used:\n1. Sweet Corn\n2. Lima Bean\n3. Sugar Snap Pea\n4. Garden Bean\n\nOther optional seeds:\n1. Stringless green beans\n2. Early peas\n3. Broccoli\n4. Radish"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Seed Germination Protocol\n\n1. Soak seeds in water for 30 minutes. This allows seeds to absorb water allowing for faster germination.\n2. Place three sheets of paper in petri dishes and add enough water to moisten paper.\n3. Place 10 seeds of each seed type onto paper to maintain adequate spacing. See Figure 2 for pattern of seed placement. Set up two petri dishes per seed type per location. Choose a location with high activity and an area of low activity.\n4. Place petri dishes on a table that is out of the flow of general traffic. See Figure 1 for setup.\n5. Depending on humidity levels, add water as needed. Do not allow paper to dry out.\n6. Try to maintain a consistent temperature, as close to 70 degrees as possible.\n7. Check seeds for germination twice a day, once in the morning and once at night. See Figure 3 for pictures of actual seed germination.\n8. Take close up photographs of seeds during examinations. Make sure seeds/seedlings are visible on photos. Use attached sheet for recording seed germination.\n9. Run experiment for full deployment or until seedlings become too big for petri dishes, whichever occurs first.\n\nAdditional measurements and observations:\n1. Note if any seedlings die off\n2. Bring germinated seeds back to BAASS following deployment."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 1. Sample setup of petri dishes plus seeds (Wet and dry exposures). Setup two complete sets – one in area of high activity and one in low activity area.\n\nA. Dry seed exposure\n\n10 seeds 10 seeds 10 seeds 10 seeds 10 seeds 10 seeds 10 seeds 10 seeds\n\nSweet Corn Lima Beans Sugar Snap Peas Garden Bean\n\nB. Wet Seed Exposure\n\n10 seeds 10 seeds 10 seeds 10 seeds 10 seeds 10 seeds 10 seeds 10 seeds\n\nSweet Corn Lima Beans Sugar Snap Peas Garden Bean\n\nFigure 2. Pattern of seed placement in petri dishes.\n\n110"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 3. Pictures demonstrating seed germination of seed types used.\n\nCorn seedlings\n\nSugar Pea seedlings\n\nGreen Bean seedlings\n\nLima Bean seedling\n\n111"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Record below the number of seeds that germinate daily:\n\nDay | Sweet Corn (Location 1, Location 2) | Lima bean (Location 1, Location 2) | Sugar Snap Pea (Location 1, Location 2) | Garden Bean (Location 1, Location 2)\n\n1-AM\n1-PM\n2-AM\n2-PM\n3-AM\n3-PM\n4-AM\n4-PM\n5-AM\n5-PM\n6-AM\n6-PM\n7-AM\n7-PM\n8-AM\n8-PM\n9-AM\n9-PM\n10-AM\n10-PM\n11-AM\n11-PM\n12-AM\n12-PM\n13-AM\n13-PM\n14-AM\n14-PM\n\n112"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tamper-Proof Games Located on the Ranch\n\nThere are numerous anecdotal reports from the security officers (see previous section—reports from security officers) of the unexplained movement, translocation, inversion or disturbance of penny coins that have been left at various locations inside and outside the double wide trailer on the Utah ranch. However, all of these anecdotal reports suffer from the obvious criticisms that they can be easily explained by (a) fraud perpetrated by the officers, (b) trespassers, (c) animals etc. In short these reports are difficult to interpret.\n\nTherefore, BAASS has devised a series of experiments for the Utah ranch that are assembled in Las Vegas, photographed, locked in briefcases and secured at BAASS and then transported to the Utah ranch. The keys to the briefcases remain in Las Vegas. An example of one series is shown below.\n\n12/08/2009 14:31\n\n113"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"All of the \"brain teaser\" games require a modicum of effort, analysis and intelligence to assemble and cannot be assembled (or disassembled) randomly. The locked briefcases containing the games are then positioned in a \"hotspot\" on the ranch for a month. The briefcase is then returned to Las Vegas and opened and the contents examined for any differences.\n\n12/08/2009 14:30\n\n114"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Puzzles Requiring Intelligence to Complete\n\nThe following experiment assumes a low level of mathematical know-how on the part of any phenomenon on the Utah Ranch: briefly, a series of dark colored tiles are arranged (glued) to the graph paper in a locked, tamper proof light box as a Fibonacci series (01,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55.....) and the challenge for any intelligence on the ranch is to assemble the next number of tiles in the Fibonacci series (see photograph below). The boxes are locked shut with padlocks with keys being kept in as Vegas. The Fibonacci boxes are stationed in both Homestead #2 and in the doublewide trailer.\n\n(d) 1843(a)(2)\n\n115"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS began monitoring the website 1843(a)(2) in late summer 2009 since it appeared to contain several items of interest including a discussion forum that appeared to reveal many \"facts\" about BAASS activities and some personnel. In November BAASS investigator AAP Person 34 compiled the following report.\n\nDate: November 12, 2009\n\nTO: AAP Person 7 Deputy Administrator\n\nFrom: AAP Person 34 Field Investigator\n\nSubject: Skinwalker Ranch 1843(a)(2)\n\nDear Sir,\n\nOver the past two months I have conducted an investigation into the posting of security information regarding the Skinwalker Ranch. I have found multiple websites and blogs referencing the Skinwalker Ranch. The 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) regarding the security of the ranch is posted by 1843(a)(2)\n\nI first found him listed as a Skinwalker Ranch guide on 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) with an e-mail address of 1843(a)(2) and a telephone number of 1843(a)(2) I conducted a telephone number database search and confirmed the telephone number to 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) located at the above mentioned address. I have determined that 1843(a)(2)\n\nIn late August [REDACTED] setup his own webpage 1843(a)(2) This is a website dedicated to the ranch [REDACTED] posts photographs, videos, maps/directions, a list of \"Whose Involved\" (You are included), news reports, a blog and a forum.\n\n116"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The three points of interest and concern me are the Blog, Whose Involved and the Forum.\n\no Blog\n• On November 3, 2009. He posted a blog \"Is Ball Lightning to Blame?\"\n\n1843(a)(2) listed the blog \"There have been a three star general and two other important ranking officals to the property in the past year and the story goes they saw something that frightened them and caused them to run in opposite directions.\"\n\no Whose Involved\n• AAP Person 4\n• Bigelow Aerospace with address, phone number and website.\n• Black Budget/US Military Establishment\n• AAP Person 57\n• 1843(a)(2)\n•\n•\n• AAP Person 7\n• NIDS with advisors, staff, address (THIS BUILDING), phone number and e-mail.\n• AAP Person 5\n• 1843(a)(2)\n• 1843(a)(2)\n• Mufon with website.\n• 1843(a)(2)\n•\n•\n•\n\n117"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In the NIDS section he lists the parties involved and the address of the BAASS building on Polaris.\n\nIn the Mufon section he details the connection between Mufon, [REDACTED] AAP Person 4 and BAASS.\n\nAAP Person 4\n\nIn the EX Military Police Security Force Team section he posted a picture of the director of security at the ranch AAP Person 49 We were able to determine this photo was obtained through a Google search utilizing AAP Person 49 full name. The question is how his name was obtained.\n\no Forum\n• SkinwalkerRanch Events & Breaking news\nThe latest paranormal discoveries and strange events.\n• Skinwalker Ranch Discussion\nFeel free to talk about anything and everything in this board.\n• Sightings, Reports & Experiences\nReports of supernatural events from personal experiences. Support and advice will be offered.\n• Military & Black Operations at the Ranch\nMilitary, black ops, and contractor theories and discussions.\n• Extraterrestrial Life & The UFO Phenomenon\nExtra terrestrial vistors, ufos, and how they relate to the ranch.\n• Ghosts, Hauntings & The Paranormal\nGhosts, graveyards, haunted places, and other local paranormal topics.\n• General Off-Topic Discussion\nGeneral Chit-Chat on Non-Topic Subjects.\n\nIn the Skinwalker Ranch Discussion section, [REDACTED] lists activities of the 1843(a)(2) guards and the approximate times they patrol. He also lists the type of equipment they use.\n\nIn the Military & Black Operations at the Ranch section, [REDACTED] lists the 1843(a)(2) guards at the ranch as at least two active duty military security personnel on the\n\n118"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"property whom are supervised by a ex navy seal (non/active) working with a attack K9. The seal is likely working under contractor status now (speculation) however he has professed to others that he has \"orders to shoot to kill\". Odd for a property managed by lowly NIDS scientists, and now supposedly in \"inactive\" status.\n\nThe other sections of the website are general knowledge about the ranch and the Skinwalker\n\n119"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Detailed Subject information\n1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2)\n120"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Subject Information:\nName\nAddress\nHome\nCell\n1843(a)(2)\nWife/Girlfriend 1843(a)(2)\nBio:\n8 years traveling around the United States investigating the paranormal. Bachelors of Science degree from New Mexico University. Pilot, web designer, business owner, and married father of 2. Countless close encounters with paranormal events both around Skinwalker ranch and in other regions of the US. Due to several personal encounters I've had around the ranch that have had a PROFOUND effect on me, I'm intently interested in unraveling the truth behind this very real phenomenon.\n121"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Personal Information:\n1843(a)(2) has a wide variety of interests. He was a body builder who injured his back and has been taking vicodin for over four years. He has an obsession for motorcycles and paranormal activities. He has reported credit and financial problems.\nEmployment:\n1843(a)(2)\nEmail addresses:\n1843(a)(2)\nWebsites:\n1843(a)(2)\n122"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\nYoutube Postings:\n1843(a)(2) has posted thirty two video clips to You Tube in the past three years. Sixteen of those are related to the Ranch. His profile information is listed below.\n1843(a)(2)\nChannel Views: 1,816\n1843(a)(2)\n123"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Last Sign In: 1 hour ago\nSubscribers: 19\n1843(a)(2)\nCountry: United States\nConclusion:\nI believe 1843(a)(2) to not only be a threat to our work, but to the safety of the security and the staff at the Ranch 1843(a)(2) has been detected by the security of the ranch on at least two occasions and had the audacity to post one of the occasions on You Tube and his webpage. 1843(a)(2) has stated openly in his webpage and on his blogs, that he brings not only video, night vision and other unknown recording and technological devices to the Ranch, as well as unknown individuals, while conducting his surveillances/guides. He has posted a vicodin addiction and credit problems on line. Not to mention he appears to running an online mail order bride website.\nIn order to maintain the security and privacy of our employees as well as our work at the Ranch. I suggest a closer investigation into 1843(a)(2) and the 1843(a)(2) I believe we can facilitate this by signing up for guided trip to the Ranch hosted by the 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2)\nRespectfully,\nAAP Person 34\nField Investigator\n124"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IMPORTANT NOTE: Since AAP Person 34 submitted his report, BAASS\ninvestigators subsequently determined that the majority of the material that 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) has posted has been from Internet sources and that rather than being a\nthreat 1843(a)(2) is merely a skilled researcher with a lot of contacts in the\nRoosevelt and Duchesne areas of Utah. In short, BAASS no longer considers him a\nthreat and we believe that taking action against 1843(a)(2) would only serve to\nharm BAASS by dramatically increasing publicity for the 1843(a)(2)\nwebsite."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Blue Orb Case: Preliminary Research\nStatus Report\n\nNovember 17, 2009\nAAP Person 18\n\nAAP Person 29\n\nExecutive Summary\n\nOn the evening of August 16, 2007, 1843(a)(2) and her 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) were driving a rental car through Northern California\nnear Davis. The time was approximately between 8:30 PM – 10:00 PM. Three\nblue orbs were seen erratically swirling in the distance by [REDACTED] One of the blue 1843(a)(2)\norbs flew across the road in front of the car, while the other two entered the car\nas it sped along at 85 miles per hour. Of the two blue orbs that entered the car,\none traveled across the dash board and exited the car. Unfortunately, the other 1843(a)(2)\nblue orb followed a different path through the body of [REDACTED] It entered her left\nshoulder, navigated through her upper chest area in a bubble like manner, and\nexited her right upper arm. In that instant, a wave of nausea overtook [REDACTED] as her 1843(a)(2)\ndaughter [REDACTED] witnessed the entire event. This wave of nausea lasted the duration\nof the road trip. It is also important to note that 1843(a)(2) experienced a\ndistortion of time; a stretch of the trip that would normally take a few minutes\ndragged on for approximately 1.5 hours. Later that night, after reaching her\ndestination, [REDACTED] drifted in and out of sleep and experienced a dream unlike any\nother that she had previously had. In the days, weeks, and months following the\nblue orb encounter, [REDACTED] began to feel progressively worse. Within seventy-two\nhours, her body began to retain water. Her co-workers and family commented\non the sudden shift between a healthy and fit woman to a woman who was\nrapidly pre-maturely aging before their eyes. After two months [REDACTED] had gained 50 1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pounds despite increasing her fitness routine and decreasing her caloric intake.\nA list of worrisome symptoms began to emerge including a skin rash, loss of hair,\nblurred vision, decrease of hearing, osteoarthritis, and an overall general feeling\nof being unwell. Of particular interest is that all symptoms seem to be in the\npath of the blue orb (Refer to Figure 1). Blood tests such as CBC and metabolic\npanels have revealed puzzling results. [REDACTED] has had MRIs, bone scans, X-rays, and\nCT-scans; all of which cannot pinpoint a diagnosis for this wide range of\nsymptoms. In early 2009, [REDACTED] was diagnosed with 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) soon after in May 2009 a 1843(a)(2) was performed.\n1843(a)(2) have each been interviewed over the telephone as well as an in depth\nface to face interview with [REDACTED] The main question in this case is whether or not\nthe blue orb incident is the cause all of this sickness. Blood tests show a clear\nline of abnormal results after the date of August 16, 2007. [REDACTED] has stated that the 1843(a)(2)\nblue orb left a trail of severe physical damage in her body and she just wants to\n“get well”."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Event Chronology\n\nTable 1. Sequence of Events\n\nDate/Time | Event\n8/16/2007, 8:30 – 10:00 PM | Blue Orb Incident, immediately she felt nauseas and unwell\n8/16/2007, Bedtime | [REDACTED] had the dream of the face and hand trying to fix her\n8/17/2007 – 8/20/2007 | 1843(a)(2)\n8/20/2007 – 10/23/2009 | Deteriorating health – view [REDACTED] Physical Symptoms and Documented Medical Records Summary sections\n2/13/2009 | 1843(a)(2)\n5/4/2009 | Initial email contact between [REDACTED] AAP Person 126 and [REDACTED]\n5/6/2009 | 1843(a)(2)\n6/3/2009 | [REDACTED] and AAP Person 8 spoke on the telephone\n7/15/2009 | AAP Person 8 received [REDACTED] medical records\n8/26/2009 | Telephone interview between AAP Person 7 and [REDACTED]\n8/28/2009 | Telephone interview between AAP Person 7 and [REDACTED]\n9/16/2009 | Face to Face interview between AAP Person 7 [REDACTED] AAP Person 81 and [REDACTED]\n9/28/2009 | 1843(a)(2)\n10/23/2009 | 1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Location Overview and Weather Conditions\n\n• Northern California, north of Davis, general location between Woodland\nand Knight's Landing on County Road 102.\n\nFigure 1. Map indicating location of incident. The location of the incident is within\nthe oval circle on the map.\n\nZamora\nKnights Landing\n113\nWoodland\n16\n5\n113"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 2. Weather conditions at the time of the incident.\nTime (PDT) | Temp (F) | Dew Point | Humidity | Barometric Pressure | Visibility | Wind Dir | Wind Speed | Precip | Conditions\n7:53 | 81.0 °F | 48.9 °F | 33% | 29.75 in | 10.0 miles | South | 11.5 mph | None | Clear\n8:53 | 75.9 °F | 50.0 °F | 40% | 29.76 in | 10.0 miles | SSW | 11.5 mph | None | Clear\n9:53 | 71.1 °F | 51.1 °F | 49% | 29.77 in | 10.0 miles | South | 10.4 mph | None | Clear\n\nWeather conditions are obtained from Sacramento International Airport which is located approximately 8-10 miles southeast of the incident location. Times are PM and are for PDT.\n\nInitial Contact and Correspondence\n\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] searched the internet for a scientist who might have knowledge of blue orbs and their subsequent effects on a human. She was extremely hesitant in 1843(a)(2) making the initial contact and wanted her situation to remain confidential. [REDACTED] internet search uncovered a man by the name of AAP Person 126 The initial email to AAP Person 126 contained a brief synopsis of the event as well as a description of the physical ailments and symptoms that [REDACTED] had been suffering 1843(a)(2) from since the incident. Indication was also given that she had begun seeking medical treatment for her declining health. AAP Person 126 forwarded this email on to AAP Person 8\n\nOn May 4, 2009 AAP Person 8 received the forwarded email. After receiving this email, he sent an email to [REDACTED] to introduce himself. The email 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) exchange began with [REDACTED] proceeding with extreme caution as she reiterated her 1843(a)(2) experience. [REDACTED] also informed AAP Person 8 that she was scheduled for a 1843(a)(2) on the morning of May 6, 2009. AAP Person 8 inquired if he could share her experience with a few colleagues; [REDACTED] agreed. 1843(a)(2)\n\n130"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Following 1843(a)(2) she and AAP Person 8 kept in contact through email. Since [REDACTED] had experienced 1843(a)(2) there was difficulty at first in setting up a telephone interview. Finally, on June 3, 2009 [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] AAP Person 8 spoke on the telephone. [REDACTED] was not feeling well during the phone conversation. Again, she reiterated her experience, which repeated what had been written in previous emails. A new piece of information that came from this telephone call was how the blue orb felt like a bubble as it passed through 1843(a)(2) body. At this time she also discussed her facial rash and having a biopsy done. To conclude the telephone interview, [REDACTED] stated that she would begin collecting her medical records and mail them to AAP Person 8 She explained that during the time that she began to visit doctors she was in the process of relocating from 1843(a)(2) . A lengthy process to secure health insurance and medical care followed, which is an explanation for the delay between documented doctors visits and the date of the incident with onset of symptoms.\n\nA certified mail envelop was received by AAP Person 8 on July 15, 2009. 1843(a)(2) He requested [REDACTED] permission to share her medical records with BAASS. [REDACTED] agreed to this and stated that she would forward any additional medical records.\n\n131"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Interview Summaries\n\nPhone Interview - AAP Person 7 and 1843(a)(2)\n\nAt 11:00 AM on 08/26/2009, AAP Person 7 called [REDACTED] in order to introduce himself and arrange a date for a face to face meeting. Below is a summary of the telephone conversation.\n\n[REDACTED] was driving in a car with her son when AAP Person 7 called. [REDACTED] answered all of the questions in an articulate, soft spoken manner. Although [REDACTED] appeared stressed, she did not appear to be overly emotional as she related the details of the incident.\n\nThe following are the details that emerged from the conversation:\n\n• [REDACTED] has two Masters Degrees in psychology, one of which is in clinical psychology. She has only to complete her dissertation to receive a PhD in psychology.\n• The incident happened near Davis California between I-80 and Highway 99 on the night of August 16, 2007 while [REDACTED] was driving a rental car from Las Vegas to visit her sister in 1843(a)(2) . Since it was a long trip, and [REDACTED] was trying to arrive at her sister's house at a reasonable hour, she was traveling fast at 85 MPH. In response to AAP Person 7 questioning on the purpose of the high speed of driving, she replied that she routinely drives at this speed when travelling long distances. [REDACTED] said the road was deserted when the incident happened.\n• 1843(a)(2) daughter [REDACTED] was in the passenger seat with the seat back in the reclined position. [REDACTED] was talking with [REDACTED] when she noticed a horrified/shocked/mortified look on her daughter's face. Simultaneously she felt something enter the left side of her body at about shoulder height,\n\n132"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"move slowly through her upper body, and exit through her right side. As this was happening, [REDACTED] thought something bizarre was occurring, everything seemed to become blurred and hazy. She recalls being fixated on the expression on [REDACTED] face, [REDACTED] looked up in time to see a bright blue ball moving away from her car at a distance of about 100 feet. She judged it to be about the size of a softball, clearly shaped like a sphere, with sharp outlines.\n\n• When [REDACTED] asked her daughter what had just happened, her daughter related to her that she had notice three blue balls in the distance swirling around each other as they flew towards the car. One came into the car and entered 1843(a)(2) body before passing in front of [REDACTED] and exiting the vehicle. The second also entered the car and moved across the dashboard before exiting the vehicle.\n• From [REDACTED] point of view, the two blue balls that entered the car were slightly different shades of blue, one darker than the other.\n• [REDACTED] said that the incident was so bizarre and sudden that she does not recall whether the windows of the car were up or down.\n• Instantly [REDACTED] felt extremely ill (nausea and general malaise) and very scared; too scare to stop driving.\n• Something strange occurred with the time; a 45 minute segment of the trip took three hours. Both she and her daughter have only a hazy memory of the actual time or details immediately following the incident.\n• [REDACTED] arrived at her sister's house and because she was attending an 1843(a)(2) in the morning, she went straight to bed. While asleep [REDACTED] had a very unusual and vivid dream. She recalled an unusual face saying to her \"Okay, we are going to fix this\" while a finger behind the face applied pressure on her left shoulder.\n• Four hours later [REDACTED] awoke feeling very refreshed and rejuvenated. She attended the clinical psychology conference. Shortly after 1843(a)(2)\n\n133"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ended, 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2)\n\n• In the days following the conference [REDACTED] began to feel progressively unwell and quickly began to gain weight.\n• [REDACTED] has always worked out once per day and been a careful eater. In spite of this healthy regimen, she began to gain weight rapidly while feeling increasingly unwell. In response to the weight gain, she hired a personal trainer and began focusing on the gym. She totally cut out sugar from her diet, but still the weight gain continued to 180 pounds. Before the incident she weighed 125 pounds. Therefore, she initiated a set of doctor's visits culminating in her 1843(a)(2) . A [REDACTED] quickly followed. She was also diagnosed with 1843(a)(2) (the location that the blue orb had entered her body). Her shoulder is painful and as a daily swimmer she experiences extreme pain while swimming.\n• At the time of the incident, [REDACTED] had about thirty clinical psychology patients who she counseled through one hour appointments. Within a couple of weeks following the incident, her patients began to tell her that she looked unwell, that she was changing. At the same time, her family became increasingly alarmed that this healthy, vibrant, successful woman had suddenly begun to go downhill and prematurely age.\n• She stated that the \"blue orb\" left a trail of severe physical damage in her body and she just wants to \"get well\". Her daughter has reported no physical symptoms.\n• AAP Person 7 asked her if she was available to meet with himself and AAP Person 81 anytime during the week of September 14 – 18. She said she would look in to the situation. [REDACTED] also gave AAP Person 7 her daughter [REDACTED] telephone number. 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2)\n\n134"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Phone Interview - [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]\nAt 3:00PM on 08/28/2009 [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] spoke on the telephone. The following are the details that emerged from the conversation:\n• [REDACTED] was travelling with her mother in Northern California. They were on their way to stay at her Aunt's house. She agreed that the approximate date of the incident was August 16, 2007.\n• Since she is not familiar with Northern California; she cannot confirm the exact location of the incident.\n• [REDACTED] was becoming concerned because for some reason they were late and were expected at her aunt's house at 6:30PM but yet it was already dark. When [REDACTED] turned to talk to her mother to express the concern that they were way behind schedule, she saw three \"brilliant laser blue flying lights chasing each other\" in a deserted field by the road. The balls were flying erratically at high speed around each other in a very strange way.\n• When [REDACTED] first saw them, she thought the objects were several hundred yards away, maybe even half of a mile. Their car was travelling through a particularly deserted area with no houses around and no other cars on the road.\n• Suddenly the blue objects began racing towards the car. She described two bigger balls of light (softball size) and one baseball sized ball of light. One of the three balls flew right across the road in front of the rental car. The other two came into the car. The smaller ball went right through her Mother. The other larger, softball sized ball flew right over the dashboard. Both exited the right-hand side of the car. The episode was over in less than a second.\n• Neither of the objects touched her as they passed through the car. The smaller blue ball emerged from her mother's arm (at just above bicep level) and instantly was gone out the other side of the car."} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED] was certain that the car windows had been closed and the car radio had not been playing.\n• Immediately following the event, [REDACTED] was motivated to discuss the incident since she was frightened. Her Mother did not want to talk about it and wanted to drive out of the area as fast as possible. [REDACTED] called her aunt to tell her they were on the way and to not be concerned.\n• [REDACTED] said she had no short or long term effects, but hastened to add that neither of the objects had touched her. She expressed concern about her mother's health.\n• Overall, she felt that the incident had been accidental. If they had not been travelling in the car in that particular location, then the blue objects would have simply passed over the road. They were in the wrong place at the wrong time.\n\nFace to Face Interview - [REDACTED], [REDACTED], [REDACTED]\nOn September 16, 2009 [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] met in person with [REDACTED] and her son [REDACTED]. Below is a summary of the key points from the discussion:\n• [REDACTED] introduced both himself and [REDACTED] to [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] He gave a brief overview of the discussion ahead.\n• The first point of interest was attempting to pinpoint the location of the incident (see the section entitled Location Overview). The mother and daughter were traveling from Las Vegas to the San Francisco area. [REDACTED] discussed how she was exiting I-80 from Richardson Avenue at approximately 8:30PM. They were travelling toward Highway 99 and had"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"just crossed over I-5. The incident occurred just after crossing over I-5, around a street called Pollard.\n• Momentarily after the incident occurred, [REDACTED] glanced at the clock and saw that it read 10:45 PM. [REDACTED] discussed how time was distorted and how the trip seemed to be taking longer than expected. Finally they arrived at [REDACTED] at approximately 11:30 PM.\n[REDACTED] discussed the sequence of events that unfolded during the incident. The evening was completely dark. They were traveling on a road with no other cars in sight. [REDACTED] felt the blue orb pass through her body and instantly felt unwell. [REDACTED] witnessed the blue orb passing through her mother's body. During the remainder of the car trip, whenever [REDACTED] attempted to discuss the incident with [REDACTED] a feeling of nausea would overcome [REDACTED].\n• [REDACTED] witnessed three blue orbs and [REDACTED] witnessed one blue orb. Since [REDACTED] was reclined, she was not hit by the blue orb. (See the phone interview with [REDACTED]\n• [REDACTED] described the path of the blue orb through her body; it entered through her left upper arm and exited the right. She said that it felt as if the blue orb did not go through her body in a straight line, rather as if it was negotiating and changing direction slightly as it navigated through the tissue.\n• The feeling of nausea subsided that evening, but [REDACTED] still felt \"a little off balance\".\n• [REDACTED] spoke of the dream that she had had the night of the incident while staying with her sister. She dreamt of a finger and a face telling her that the situation would be fixed. With the dream initially came a feeling of fear followed by relief. She cannot recall the features of the face. [REDACTED] then fell in to a deep sleep and awoke the next morning feeling rested.\n• [REDACTED] then went to the [REDACTED] By then end of the [REDACTED] she was exhausted and not feeling herself.\n• Within 72 hours of the incident, not only was she still not feeling well, but she had developed [REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] described the [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n• The conversation then turned to [REDACTED] weight gain. She described her healthy diet, exercise plan, vitamin intake and emphasized the fact that she continued to gain weight. [REDACTED] questioned [REDACTED] on the area of weight gain and swelling. Together they determined that [REDACTED] weight gain may have been due to a fluid and electrolyte imbalance. An important fact is that the water retention began shortly after the incident; within five days.\n• [REDACTED] moved to California in January 2008, where she had a [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n• [REDACTED] began discussing the laboratory results from [REDACTED] blood. See the Medical Records Summary section. He then began to formulate a medical plan which would involve a full metabolic and cardio screen, a full endocrine screen, a full allergic reaction screen, a B-12 screen, CBC, an autoimmune panel, and a spinal MRI.\n• [REDACTED] stated that she took no medications before the encounter and has had no history of sleep disorder.\n• [REDACTED] blood work has not thus far revealed any endocrine system malfunctions.\n• [REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n• [REDACTED] also speculated that her [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n• [REDACTED] stated that her patients and family have been commenting on how premature aging has set in following the incident. Note, she has never smoked, done drugs or drank alcohol.\n• The conversation wrapped up with [REDACTED] asking [REDACTED] what [REDACTED] she thought happened. [REDACTED] responded by stating that she is unsure, all that she knows is that she felt something go through her, which her daughter witnessed. She is looking to [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] to add some guidance and insight into what happened when she encountered the blue orb.\n\nPhysical Symptoms\n\nImmediately following the incident on 8/16/2007, [REDACTED] experienced a feeling of sickness (nausea and general malaise). Her general health began to degrade rapidly:\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\n\nPath of the Blue Orb\n\n1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2)\nRefer to Figure 1 below for a depiction of the path of the blue orb through [REDACTED] body. [REDACTED] stated that the blue orb entered her left shoulder, navigated through her tissue and then exited her right upper arm area. As [REDACTED] physical symptoms, in the preceding section, are compared to the orb entry and exit sites, a direct path of physical symptoms becomes apparent beginning with [REDACTED]\n1843(a)(2)\nThe blue shaded area represents the area of impact.\n140"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"hypothalamus\npineal gland\npituitary gland\nthyroid\nand\nparathyroid glands\nthymus\nbreasts\nadrenal glands\npancreatic\nislets\novaries\nadipose\n(fatty)\ntissue\n1843(a)(2)\nFigure 19. Path of the Blue Orb\n141"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Documented Medical Records Summary\n1843(a)(2)\n142"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 20. Skeletal System\n\nUnidentified Inflammatory Problem and Abnormal Laboratory Results\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\n146"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"5ced5e31273c0e5a","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conclusion\n\nMany of the important BAASS projects, including Northern Tier, entry into classified archives, Project Oral History, as well as contacting key people in the military and private sector are on hold because BAASS currently does not have the Need to Know for this information. BAASS in collaboration with the sponsor has recently taken tentative steps to contact some organizations within the USG that may have access to material and archives. These contacts are at much too a preliminary stage to assess the likelihood of their success or failure.\n\nIn spite of the above impediments, significant progress has been made in training and initially deploying BAASS field investigative teams during the fall 2009 months. A large part of the current investigations at BAASS are focused on the Utah ranch and surrounding areas. The BAASS MUFON relationship is being closely monitored especially since the case numbers that MUFON are alerting BAASS with, although improving, are still lower than originally expected. The BAASS database of cases is now larger than any other database owned by UAP organizations in North America. It should be noted that BAASS has initiated a separate Capella database for the events on the Utah ranch and surrounding areas, a report on which will be forthcoming in the coming months."} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HqAMC Form No. 1-514 (Rev 10 Sep 46)\n\nWF-L-7 JAN 47 300M\n\nSECRET\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 700188\n\nSAVE\n\nIN REPLY ADDRESS BOTH COMMUNICATION AND ENVELOPE TO COMMANDING GENERAL, AIR MATERIEL COMMAND, ATTENTION FOLLOWING OFFICE SYMBOL:\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\n\nTSDIN/HMM/ig/6-4100\nWRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO\n\nTSDIN\n\nDEC 19 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTENTION: Director, Research & Development\nMajor General L. C. Craigie\n\n1. Confirming the recent conversation of the undersigned with Major General L. C. Craigie, 9 December 1947, attached as listed below are copies of the reports from this Headquarters concerning Flying Discs.\n\n2. Comments of Headquarters, Air Force on these letters have never been received by this Command. Continued and recent reports from qualified observers concerning this phenomenon still makes this matter one of concern to Headquarters, Air Materiel Command. Intelligence Department of this Command is continuing the collection and analysis of all available reports.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nH. M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\n\n2 Attach:\ncc ltr to CG, AAF, dtd 23 Sept 47 subj \"AMC Opinion Concerning \"Flying Discs\"\"\ncc ltr to CG, AAF, dtd 24 Sept 47 subj \"Flying Discs\"\n\nU-53791"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 22 Dec 47\nFROM: OIN\nTYPE: R&R/1\nSMRY: \"Analysis of 'Flying Discs' Reports\". 2 incls. 11\n\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 244391\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE: P 97084\n\nTO: MRD\nDATE: 24 Dec 47\nTO: Memo to AMC Attn: TSDIN\nDATE: 30 Dec 1947\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\n\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Col Cook/2497/bm\nAFMRS\n\nSECRET\n\n(3)\n\n30 December 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright Field, Dayton, Ohio\nAttn: TSDIN\n\n1. Reference is made to three inclosures, memoranda from your office to this headquarters, subject as above.\n\n2. It is Air Force policy not to ignore reports of sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere but to recognize that part of its mission is to collect, collate, evaluate and act on information of this nature.\n\n3. In implementing this policy, it is desired that the Air Materiel Command set up a project whose purpose is to collect, collate, evaluate and distribute to interested government agencies and contractors all information concerning sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere which can be construed to be of concern to the national security. It is desired that appropriate recommendations be forwarded to this Headquarters, wherever action is indicated which falls outside the field of the Air Materiel Command.\n\n4. It is suggested that the activities of this project include the preparation and distribution of an initial report, as recommended in Inclosure 1, and that subsequent reports be issued on a quarterly basis. Supplementary reports should be issued at more frequent intervals should the need for same be indicated. This project is assigned priority 2A, with a security classification of \"restricted\" and Code Name of \"SIGN\". Where data of a classification higher than restricted is handled by the project such data should be classified accordingly. A complete interchange of data should be effected as recommended in Inclosure 1.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nL. C. CRAIGIE\nMajor General, U. S. Air Force\nDirector of Research and Development\nOffice, Deputy Chief of Staff, Materiel\n\nP 97084\n2 JAN 1948\n\n3 Incls\n1. Memo dtd 23 Sept '47 from AMC to AC/AS-2 (Gen Samuelson)\n2. Memo dtd 24 Sept '47 from AMC to AC (Gen McDonald)\n3. Memo dtd 19 Dec '47 to Gen Craigie\n4. R&R from Dir of Intell, w/2 Incls\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL / GRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS: 1. AFOIR-CO, Col Taylor, Col Garrett; 2. AFMRS, Col Cook; 3. AFOIN, McDonald (A-MRD); 4. AFDRD, Craigie; 5. AFOFO, Wagland, Ly Ridus\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n18 Dec '47\n\n(2)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nBasic Ltr fr Hq. Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Fld, Calif., dated 5 Dec '47, subject: Flying Disc.\n\nAFOIR-CO-5 1st Ind.\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\n22 DEC 1947\n\nTO: Commanding General, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California\n\n1. The marks appearing on the photographs inclosed in basic letter are believed to be defects in the film, paper, or camera and not pictures of \"flying discs\".\n\n2. It is requested that no further investigation be made of this incident.\n\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nIncls. n/c\n\nHQ AAF 22 DEC 1947 AAC MAIL BRANCH\n\n1177846\n\nFile ref:\nB/L fr Hq. Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Fld, Calif. dated 5 Dec '47 subj: as above\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL / GRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS: 1. AFOIR-CO, Col Taylor, Col Garrett; 2. AFOIR, Eiseman, C. P. CABELL, Brig. Gen., USAF; 3-5 blank\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 5 Dec 47\nFROM: Hamilton Fld, Calif\nTYPE: ltr\nSMRY: Flying Disc Mary L Herren 3 Incls:\n\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 242134\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE: 1177846\n\nTO: OCI DATE: 10 Dec 47\nTO: AFOIR-CO DATE: 10 Dec\nTO: 4th AF DATE: 12/22/47\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\n\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA-S/1208-I\n\nDEC 5 1947\n(12-131\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Disc.\n\nTO:\tChief of Staff\n\tUnited States Air Force\n\tWashington 25, D. C.\n\tATTN: Director of Intelligence\n\nX201-1000\n\n1. The attached photographs were forwarded to this office by a very reliable source of information, obtained from a Mary L. Herren, 1728 S. W. Bidwell Avenue, Portland 2, Oregon. She advises these photographs were taken some time between November 5th and 12th, 1946, in the vicinity of Jefferson, Oregon, and points out the formation in the photographs as being objects she did not recall seeing herself but she thought might possibly be flying discs.\n\n2. The objects referred to appear in the sky area of each accompanying photograph. The uniformity of the markings would tend to indicate that the camera or film used to take these pictures was possibly defective. No incidents of flying discs have been reported from that vicinity on or about the inclusive dates named above.\n\n3. Mrs. Herren has requested the return of the negatives. If desired, this office will obtain the negatives and forward them at your request.\n\n3 Incls:\n Photographs.\n\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, USAF\nAC of S, A-2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\n\nIN REPLY ADDRESS BOTH COMMUNICATION AND ENVELOPE TO ATTENTION OF FOLLOWING OFFICE SYMBOL:\nTSNAD-2B\n\nTSNAD-2B/ACL/amb\nWRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO\n18 NOV 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTENTION: Office, Director of Intelligence\nLt Colonel George Garrett, Jr.\n\n1. The inclosed newspaper clippings are submitted for your information and comment. The incident reported in Seattle appeared in the \"Dayton Journal\" on 12 November 1947, and should be followed up if possible.\n\n2. The story by Lionel Shapiro regarding war weapons developed in Spain evidently was printed in a number of leading newspapers throughout the country. The significance of this article will be dependent upon certain essential elements for such alleged important developments, such as funds, materials, experimental testing facilities, and technological \"know-how\". The latter is supposed to be supplied by German scientists. The German scientists at this Hq indicate that no important scientists from Germany are working in Spain, and those mentioned in this article are not known to them.\n\n3. If possible, therefore, an effort should be made to obtain names, qualifications, or any information that might help to identify the alleged German scientists working in Spain.\n\n4. A brief statement was made in a recent intelligence report from Hq, USAF, AC/AS-2, regarding a flying disc incident in Alaska in September. The close range sighting reported should render a more detailed observation than what was reported, which also suggests a follow-up.\n\n5. It is further requested that this office be advised as to progress being made on the plotting of all flying disc incidents to date, particularly in North America. It was understood that Dr. Carroll was going to plot these incidents, but no further word was received regarding this effort.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n1 Incl\nnewspaper clippings\n\nH. M. McCOY\nColonel, Air Corps\nChief of Intelligence\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\n\nIN REPLY ADDRESS BOTH COMMUNICATION AND ENVELOPE TO ATTENTION OF FOLLOWING OFFICE SYMBOL:\nTSNAD-2B\n\nTSNAD-2B/ACL/amb\nWRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO\n24 NOV 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTENTION: Office, Director of Intelligence\nLt Colonel George Garrett, Jr.\n\nReference letter, subject as above, dated 18 November 1947, it is requested that immediate action be taken to appropriately mark or stamp this correspondence with the classification \"secret\". This classification number is as follows: U-48983\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nH. M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\n\nTo O/T files\naction completed\nLt Col Garrett - OIR-CO\n12-10-47\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\n\nIN REPLY ADDRESS BOTH COMMUNICATION AND ENVELOPE TO COMMANDING GENERAL, AIR MATERIEL COMMAND, ATTENTION FOLLOWING OFFICE SYMBOL:\nTSDIN\n\nTSDIN/HMM/ig/6-4100\nWRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO\nSEP 23 1947\n\nSUBJECT: AMC Opinion Concerning \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Commanding General\nArmy Air Forces\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTENTION: Brig. General George Schulgen\nAC/AS-2\n\n1. As requested by AC/AS-2 there is presented below the considered opinion of this Command concerning the so-called \"Flying Discs\". This opinion is based on interrogation report data furnished by AC/AS-2 and preliminary studies by personnel of T-2 and Aircraft Laboratory, Engineering Division T-3. This opinion was arrived at in a conference between personnel from the Air Institute of Technology, Intelligence T-2, Office, Chief of Engineering Division, and the Aircraft, Power Plant and Propeller Laboratories of Engineering Division T-3.\n\n2. It is the opinion that:\n\na. The phenomenon reported is something real and not visionary or fictitious.\n\nb. There are objects probably approximating the shape of a disc, of such appreciable size as to appear to be as large as man-made aircraft.\n\nc. There is a possibility that some of the incidents may be caused by natural phenomena, such as meteors.\n\nd. The reported operating characteristics such as extreme rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and action which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly aircraft and radar, lend belief to the possibility that some of the objects are controlled either manually, automatically or remotely.\n\ne. The apparent common description of the objects is as follows:-\n\n(1) Metallic or light reflecting surface.\n\nU-39552\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nBasic Ltr fr CG, AMC, WF to CG, AAF, Wash. D. C. subj \"AMC Opinion Concerning \"Flying Discs\".\n\n(2) Absence of trail, except in a few instances when the object apparently was operating under high performance conditions.\n\n(3) Circular or elliptical in shape, flat on bottom and domed on top.\n\n(4) Several reports of well kept formation flights varying from three to nine objects.\n\n(5) Normally no associated sound, except in three instances a substantial rumbling roar was noted.\n\n(6) Level flight speeds normally above 300 knots are estimated.\n\nf. It is possible within the present U. S. knowledge -- provided extensive detailed development is undertaken -- to construct a piloted aircraft which has the general description of the object in subparagraph (e) above which would be capable of an approximate range of 7000 miles at subsonic speeds.\n\ng. Any developments in this country along the lines indicated would be extremely expensive, time consuming and at the considerable expense of current projects and therefore, if directed, should be set up independently of existing projects.\n\nh. Due consideration must be given the following:-\n\n(1) The possibility that these objects are of domestic origin - the product of some high security project not known to AC/AS-2 or this Command.\n\n(2) The lack of physical evidence in the shape of crash recovered exhibits which would undeniably prove the existence of these objects.\n\n(3) The possibility that some foreign nation has a form of propulsion possibly nuclear, which is outside of our domestic knowledge.\n\n3. It is recommended that:-\n\na. Headquarters, Army Air Forces issue a directive assigning a priority, security classification and Code Name for a detailed study of this matter to include the preparation of complete sets of all available and pertinent data which will then be made available to the Army, Navy, Atomic Energy Commission, JRDB, the Air Force Scientific Advisory Group, NACA, and the RAND and NEPA projects for comments and recommendations, with a preliminary report to be forwarded within 15 days of receipt of the data and a detailed report thereafter every 30 days as the investi-\n\nSECRET\n-2-\tU-39552"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nBasic Ltr fr CG, AMC, WF to CG, AAF, Wash. D.C. subj \"AMC Opinion Concerning \"Flying Discs\"\n\ngation develops. A complete interchange of data should be effected.\n\n4. Awaiting a specific directive AMC will continue the investigation within its current resources in order to more closely define the nature of the phenomenon. Detailed Essential Elements of Information will be formulated immediately for transmittal thru channels.\n\nN. F. TWINING\nLieutenant General, U.S.A.\nCommanding\n\nSECRET\n\n-3-\n\nU-39552"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nCOPY\n\nTSDIN/HMM/ig/6-4100\n23 September 1947\n\nTSDIN\n\nSUBJECT: AMC Opinion Concerning \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Commanding General\nArmy Air Forces\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTENTION: Brig. General George Schulgen\nAC/AS-2\n\n1. As requested by AC/AS-2 there is presented below the considered opinion of this Command concerning the so-called \"Flying Discs\". This opinion is based on interrogation report data furnished by AC/AS-2 and preliminary studies by personnel of T-2 and Aircraft Laboratory, Engineering Division T-3. This opinion was arrived at in a conference between personnel from the Air Institute of Technology, Intelligence T-2, Office, Chief of Engineering Division, and the Aircraft, Power Plant and Propeller Laboratories of Engineering Division T-3.\n\n2. It is the opinion that:\n\na. The phenomenon reported is something real and not visionary or fictitious.\n\nb. There are objects probably approximating the shape of a disc, of such appreciable size as to appear to be as large as man-made aircraft.\n\nc. There is a possibility that some of the incidents may be caused by natural phenomena, such as meteors.\n\nd. The reported operating characteristics such as extreme rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and action which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly aircraft and radar, lend belief to the possibility that some of the objects are controlled either manually, automatically or remotely.\n\ne. The apparent common description of the objects is as follows:\n\n(1) Metallic or light reflecting surface."} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nBasic Ltr fr CG, AMC, WF to CG, AAF, Wash. D.C. subj \"AMC Opinion Concerning \"Flying Discs\".\n\n(2) Absence of trail, except in a few instances when the object apparently was operating under high performance conditions.\n\n(3) Circular or elliptical in shape, flat on bottom and domed on top.\n\n(4) Several reports of well kept formation flights varying from three to nine objects.\n\n(5) Normally no associated sound, except in three instances a substantial rumbling roar was noted.\n\n(6) Level flight speeds normally above 500 knots are estimated.\n\nf. It is possible within the present U.S. knowledge -- provided extensive detailed development is undertaken -- to construct a piloted aircraft which has the general description of the object in subparagraph (e) above which would be capable of an approximate range of 7000 miles at subsonic speeds.\n\ng. Any developments in this country along the lines indicated would be extremely expensive, time consuming and at the considerable expense of current projects and therefore, if directed, should be set up independently of existing projects.\n\nh. Due consideration must be given the following:-\n\n(1) The possibility that these objects are of domestic origin - the product of some high security project not known to AC/AS-2 or this Command.\n\n(2) The lack of physical evidence in the shape of crash recovered exhibits which would undeniably prove the existance of these objects.\n\n(3) The possibility that some foreign nation has a form of propulsion possibly nuclear, which is outside of our domestic knowledge.\n\n3. It is recommended that:-\n\na. Headquarters, Army Air Forces issue a directive assigning a priority, security classification and Code Name for a detailed study of this matter to include the preparation of complete sets of all available and pertinent data which will then be made available to the Army, Navy, Atomic Energy Commission, JRDB, the Air Force Scientific Advisory Group, NACA, and the RAND and NEPA projects for comments and recommendations, with a preliminary report to be forwarded within 15 days of receipt of the data and a detailed report thereafter every 30 days as the investi-\n\nSECRET\n\nU-39552"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nBasic Ltr fr CG, AMC, WF to CG, AAF, Wash. D.C. Subj \"AMC Opinion Concerning \"Flying Discs\"\n\ngation develops. A complete interchange of data should be effected.\n\n4. Awaiting a specific directive AMC will continue the investigation within its current resources in order to more closely define the nature of the phenomenon. Detailed Essential Elements of Information will be formulated immediately for transmittal thru channels.\n\nN. F. TWINING\nLieutenant General, U.S.A.\nCommanding\n\nThis letter was coordinated by:\nCol. Moore - Ch. Aircraft Lab\nMr. D.A. Eichy - Ch Propeller Lab\nGen D.L. Pitt - Engr Div\nCol. Misty - Ch Power Plant Lab\nGen Bentnell - T-3\n\n-4-\n\nSECRET\n\nCOPY\n\nU-39552"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nCOPY\n\nTSNAD-2B/ACL:eec\n24 September 1947\n\nTSNAD-2B\n\nSUBJECT: \"Flying Disc\"\n\nTO: Commanding General\nArmy Air Forces\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nATTN: AC/AS-2\nMajor General George McDonald\n\n1. In compliance with General McDonald's telephone conversation, this date, to Colonel H. M. McCoy, T-2, Hq. AMC, attached herewith is a copy of a drawing entitled, \"Loedding Flying Disc\", designated LD-2. Because of patent rights involved, it is requested that a record be kept of all persons reviewing this drawing by witnessing with signatures and dates directly on the drawing.\n\n2. This drawing should be returned to this office when it has served its purpose so that it can be turned over to the Patent Office Hq. AMC for official record.\n\n3. Inclosed herewith is also a report prepared by the Royal Aircraft Establishment, Technical Note, AERO 1703, which describes the Horten tailless aircraft. The following references are invited which is considered significant in relating the Horten brothers perspective thinking and accomplishments toward the alleged \"Flying Saucer\" case:\n\na. Page 5, Paragraph 4 and 6.\n\nb. Page 6, Paragraph 1 and 7.\n\nc. Page 26, Paragraph 3 and 10.\n\nd. Page 27, Paragraph 12.\n\ne. Page 28, Paragraphs 1 through 5.\n\nf. Page 54, Photograph of Horten \"Parabola\".\n\nSECRET\n\nCOPY\n\nU-39942"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nCOPY\n\nBasic ltr, dtd 24 Sep 47, to CG, Hq AAF, Wash, subj: \"Flying Disc\"\n\ng. Page 69, The Horten VIII.\n\nh. Pages 71 and 72, Photographs of the Horten IX Versions.\n\ni. Page 74, Drawing of the \"Parabola\".\n\nThis document should also be returned when it has served its intended purpose.\n\n452.1 Airplanes - Russia\n\n4. A recent report from the U. S. Military attache, Moscow, USSR, dated 9 June 1947, indicates that 1500 aircraft, directly or indirectly based on the Horten VIII design (six engine pusher, having a wing spread of 131 feet and a gross weight of approximately thirty-three thousand pounds) are being built for bomber squadron use. The Russian version, however, is jet propelled, reference report whose identification No. is V-32291-8.\n\nX095\n\n5. The T-2 report \"German Flying Wings Designed by Horten Brothers\", No. F-SU-1110-Md, also inclosed herewith, may be retained by your office if desired.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nH. M. McCOY\nColonel, Air Corps\nDeputy Commanding General\nIntelligence (T-2)\n\n3 Incls:\n1. Drawing\n2. RAE Tech Note, AERO 1703\n3. T-2 Rpt, No. F-SU-1110-ND\n\nEnclosures mailed with original letter 19 Dec 47 Goodwin\n\nSECRET\n\n-2-\n\nCOPY\n\nU-39942"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FORM NO. MR-1 (2)\n\nDATE: 30 Oct 47\n\n452.1 Aircraft - Misc.\n\nINDEX: 0009 Flying Saucer - Phenomena\n\nTO: CSGID, Plans and Collection Branch\n\nFROM: Chief, Air Intelligence Requirements Division, AC/S-2\n\nSUMMARY: Intelligence Requirements on Flying Saucer Type Aircraft\n\nD/F\n\nFILED: 350.09 Intelligence\n\nINDEXER: C\n\nREMARKS:\n\nRe: German scientist.\n\nHEADQUARTERS ARMY AIR FORCES\nCORRESPONDENCE REFERENCE FORM"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL RESTRICTED\n\nWrtn 22 Oct 1947\nLt Col Garrett/dl/4544\nAFBIR-CO-5\n\nB/L fm AMC, Subj: \"Flying Discs\", dtd 13 Oct 47\n\nAFBIR-CO-5 1st Ind\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq., USAF, Washington 25, D. C. 28 OCT 1947\n\nTo: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright Field, Ohio (Attention: T-2)\n\n1. A representative of this headquarters has contacted Lt. Colonel Herbert C. Gee concerning Mrs. Merchant's theory on the flying discs, as expressed to General Brentnall.\n\n2. It is recommended that no action be taken to interrogate Mrs. Merchant and that this case be closed.\n\nBY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE:\n\nIncls - n/c\n\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, Air Corps USAF\nExecutive, Air Intel. Requirements Division\nOffice of Ass't Chief of Air Staff-2\n\nHQ AAF\n28 OCT 1947\nAAG - MAIL BRANCH\n\nacc\n\nP 94846\n\nCONFIDENTIAL RESTRICTED\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL 1 AFDIR-CO 2 AFDIR 3 4 5 6\nSIGNATURE OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICER Col Dayfin, Eiseman\nINTERNAL OFFICE COORDINATION Col Garrett, Geo. F. Schulzen, Brig. Gen., USAF\n\n16-29242-1 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE\n\n0009 Plasmas"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL RESTRICTED\n\nHeadquarters\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\n\nTSNAD-2B\n\nTSNAD-2B/ACL/amc\nWright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n\n13 Oct 1947\n\nSUBJECT: \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: AC/AS-2\nLt Col George Garrett\n\n1. Attached copies of communications are self-explanatory and indicate action taken to obtain additional information regarding subject. Assistance shown from Lt Col Herbert C. Gee was with reference to the social standing and character of Mrs. Merchant to determine justification for further investigation of her theories.\n\n2. In view of Lt Col Gee's transfer to Washington, D. C., it is suggested that a representative from Headquarters, AC/AS-2 contact and interview him.\n\n3. General Brentnall stated that Mrs. Merchant was extremely talkative and seemed quite intent on promoting a personal enterprise instead of cooperating to help solve an intelligence problem.\n\n4. Comments and suggestions, therefore, regarding further action to interrogate Mrs. Merchant would be appreciated in order to close this case as soon as possible.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n/s/ W. R. Clingeman, Col., A. C.\nfor\nH. M. McCOY\nColonel, Air Corps\nDeputy Commanding General\nIntelligence (T-2)\n\n2 Incls\n1. Cy AMC, T-2 Ltr, 9/29/47, \"Flying Discs\"\n2. Cy 1st Ind, 10/2/47, fr Hq. Kirtland Field, Albuquerque, New Mexico\n\nCOPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY\n\n29 September 1947\n13 Oct 1947\n\nSUBJECT: \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Commanding Officer\nOperating Location No. 16 of\n731st AAFBU (101st AACS Sq)\nKirtland Field\nAlbuquerque, New Mexico\nATTN: Col. Howard G. Bunker\n\n1. General Brentnall, during a recent visit at Las Vegas, was contacted by a Mrs. Madeline Gwynne Merchant, Santa Fe, New Mexico, who described what may be termed a novel theory concerning \"Flying Discs\".\n\n2. According to her thoery, \"Flying Discs\" are being fired from a locality in Central Mexico from a laboratory which is being operated by the Russians. She claims they are being aimed at the United States for the purpose of sighting in on important atomic energy and aircraft installations.\n\n3. General Brentnall states that he does not have any further interest in an interrogation of Mrs. Merchant since it is not an engineering matter. However, he recommends that if Hq, Air Materiel Command, T-2, wishes to sponsor an interrogation of this nature that Col. Howard Bunker should be contacted to determine the name and address of the colonel at Las Vegas who has knowledge of this case. In view of General Brentnall's suggestion, no direct contact will be made with Mrs. Merchant.\n\n4. It is requested, therefore, that the name and address of the above mentioned colonel be made available to this office as soon as possible so that further action, as deemed advisable, can be taken.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n/s/ M. E. Goll\nH. M. McCOY\nColonel, Air Corps\nDeputy Commanding General\nIntelligence (T-2)\n\nCOPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nInc #1"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"B/L fr Hqs, AMC, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio, File TSNAD-2B, 29 Sep 47,\nSubj: \"Flying Discs\"\n\n1st Ind HGB:ms\nHEADQUARTERS, Kirtland Field, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 2 October 1947\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright Field, Ohio\n ATTENTION: T-2\n\n 1. The officer referred to in Par. 3 is Lt. Col. Herbert C. Gee, O-19717, who was formerly Commanding Officer at Los Alamos rather than Las Vegas, as stated. Lt. Col. Gee is now stationed in the office, Chief of Engineers, Civil Works Division, Washington, D. C.\n\n 2. There is no replacement for Lt. Col. Gee at Los Alamos and no information is available to indicate that any individual in this vicinity has more information concerning Mrs. Merchant's theory than Brig. Gen. Brentnall of AMC who personally conducted an interview with her.\n\n HOWARD G. BUNKER\n Colonel, AC"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDATE: [REDACTED] FROM: 13 Oct 47 AMC W/Fld, Ohio.\nTYPE: Ltr.\nSMRY:\n\"Flying Discs\"\n\nW/ 2 Incls.\n\nSUSPENSE DATE: NO.: 234015\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE: P 94846\n\nTO: BIR TO: TO: TO: TO:\nDATE: 150ct47 DATE: DATE: DATE: DATE:\n\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO: FILED (PLACE): OTHER ACTION:\n\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAFBIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/df/4544\n6 Oct 46\n\nBasic: Ltr fr Hq, AMC, Wright Fld, Dayton, O. 24 Sept 47, Subj: \"Flying Saucers\"\n\nRef: Cys of Inclosures in A-2 Files\n\nP 94380\n\nAFBIR-CO-5 1st Ind\nDepartment of the Air Force, Hq, USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSNAD-2B\n\nAttached hereto is information requested in basic letter.\n\nBY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE:\n\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, Air Corps\nExecutive, Air Intel, Requirements Division\nOffice of Asst Chief of Air Staff-2\n\n3 Incls:\n1. Memo for AC/AS-2, 26 Sept 47 w/Map\n2. Memo for Chief, Air Intel Div, 2 Oct 47\n3. Summary of Info on \"Unidentified Flying Objects\"\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL / GRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS: AFBIR-CO, Col Taylor, Lt Col Garrett, Geo. F. Schulgen Brig. Gen., USA\n\n16-20242-2 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\n\nTSNAD-2B/ACL/amc\nWright Fld, Dayton, O.\n24 Sept 47\n\nTSNAD-2B\n\n\"Flying Saucers\"\n\nCommanding General, Army Air Force, Washington 25, D.C.\nATTN: AC/AS-2, Lt Col Garrett\n\nIt is requested that this office be furnished all available information concerning an alleged \"Flying Saucer\" flight sighting made by a radar station in Japan. This incident was mentioned by Dr. Charles Carroll during a conference in Brig Gen Schulgen's office attended by Mr. A.C. Loedding, T-2 representative, on 5 September 1947.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n/s/ M.E.Goll\n/t/ H.M.McCOY\nColonel, Air Corps\nDeputy Commanding General\nIntelligence T-2\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nAFBIR-CO/LtCol.Garrett/rm/4544\n8 Sept 47\n\nAFBIR-CO\n\n11 SEP 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Reported Sightings of Flying Discs.\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright Field, Dayton, Ohio\nAttention: T-2.\n\n1. As arranged verbally with Mr. Loedding, inclosed is the complete file maintained by this Office on reported sightings of Flying Discs.\n\n2. This file is forwarded so that photostats may be made in order to provide your Command with a duplicate set of these sightings.\n\n3. When photostating this material for your purpose, it will be appreciated if one extra set is made for this Office and returned at the same time the originals are returned.\n\n4. This file, and the duplicates, should be returned as soon as possible to this Headquarters, Attention: AC/AS-2, Air Intelligence Requirements Division, Collection Branch.\n\nBY COMMAND OF GENERAL SPAATZ:\n\nIncl a/s in par. 1. P 93805\n\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, Air Corps\nExecutive, Air Intel, Requirements Division\nOffice of Asst Chief of Air Staff-2\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL / GRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS: AFBIR-CO, Col Taylor 3rd, Eiseman, Geo. F. Schulgen Brig. Gen., USA, Lt Col Garrett\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n16-20242-2 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF HQ-33 (20 MAY 44)\nRESTRICTED\nHEADQUARTERS ARMY AIR FORCES\nROUTING AND RECORD SHEET\nTALLY NO.\nFILE NO.\nSUBJECT: Flying Saucer Phenomena\nTO: Deputy Chief of Air Staff for Research & Development\nDATE 22 August 1947\nFROM: AC/AS-2, Air Intelligence Requirements Division\nCollection Branch\nCOMMENT No. 1\nLt Col Garrett/nc/4544\n1. From a detailed study of certain reported observations on the flying saucers, selected for their veracity and reliability, it is apparent that several aspects of their appearance have a common pattern.\n2. Before pursuing its investigation of these objects any further, this Office requests assurance that no research project of the Army Air Forces, at present being test-flown, has the following characteristics and that it may therefore be assumed the recent flying saucer \"mystery\" is not of United States origin:\na. Surface is metallic - indicating a metallic skin, at least.\nb. When a trail is observed, it is a lightly colored blue-brown haze, similar to a rocket engine's exhaust. Contrary to a rocket of the solid type, one observation indicates that the fuel may be throttled, which would indicate a liquid rocket engine.\nc. As to shape, all observations state that the object is circular, or at least elliptical, flat on the bottom and slightly domed on the top.\nd. Size estimates place it somewhere near the size of a C-54 or Constellation as they would appear while flying at 10,000'.\ne. Some reports describe two tabs located at the rear and symmetrical about the axis of flight motion.\nf. Flights have been reported containing from three to nine objects, flying good formation on each other, with speeds always above 300 knots.\ng. The discs oscillate laterally while flying along, which could be snaking.\nROBERT TAYLOR 3RD\nColonel, Air Corps\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nAC/AS-2\nRESTRICTED\nPAGE"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FORM NO. MR-1 (4)\nDATE:\n5 Aug 47\nINDEX: 000.9 Phenomena\nTO: Chief, Intelligence Group, Intelligence Division, War Dept Gen Staff\nFROM: Executive, Air Intel, Requirements Division, AC/AS-2\nSUMMARY: Request for F. B. I. Investigation on Background of Certain Witnesses to \"Flying Discs\".\nMemo\nFILED: 333.5 Investigation\nINDEXER: ejb\nREMARKS:\nHEADQUARTERS ARMY AIR FORCES\nCORRESPONDENCE REFERENCE FORM"} {"doc_id":"5e038186058f7c5c","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nHEADQUARTERS ARMY AIR FORCES\nROUTING AND RECORD SHEET\nTALLY NO.\nFILE NO.\nSUBJECT: Flying Saucer Phenomena\nTO: Air Intelligence Requirements Division, AC/AS-2 Attn: Collection Branch\nFROM: Deputy Chief of Air Staff for Research & Development\nDATE AUG 29 1947\nCOMMENT No. 2\nMr Roddy/pmo/73481\nThe Army Air Forces has no research project with the characteristics described in Comment No. 1.\nCONCURRENCE:\nAFDRE C.C. Bumbleby\nAFDRE-2 Lt Col Q. Munson\nAFDRE-3 Maj Nickerson\nAFDRE-4 Col Winterbaker\nCURTIS E. LeMAY\nMajor General, U. S. Army\nDeputy Chief of Air Staff for Research and Development\nPAGE 2\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"605ab3c13ed5d480","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 917033\n\n1 - 100\n\nSECRET\n\nEXHIBIT #528 Secret R/S S-03537 dated 3-14-49\nBACR-CD, Wright Field Dayton\nSubj: Incident Summaries of Unidentified Flying Objects; Forwarding of (Enclosures thereto)\n\nREPORT FILED M-5 AIRCRAFT - UNIDENTIFIED\n2-27-50\nJONES\n\nSECRET\n\nSECRET\n\nP 958\n\nS-/f3f0"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 1\n\n1. Date 8 July 1947\n2. Time 0930\n3. Location Muroc Air Field, Muroc, Calif\n4. Name of observer 1st Lt Joseph C. McHenry\n5. Occupation of observer Billeting Officer in Charge, Muroc AAFld.\n6. Address of observer Muroc, AAFld\n7. Place of observation ground - Muroc, AAFld\n8. Number of objects 2 at first - 1 sometime later\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Approx 8000 ft\n12. Speed 300 MPH\n13. Direction of flight 320° due north heading\n14. Tactics Performed a tight circle\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Silver\n18. Shape disc-like or spherical\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - Apparently metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance in distance\n26. Remarks: At approximately 0930 Lt McHenry left Post Exchange (over)\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"enroute to his office and before entering heard one of the local aircraft in the traffic pattern. Looking up he observed the aircraft and slightly to the left he saw 2 silver objects of either spherical or disc-like shape moving about 300 MPH at approximately 8000 ft heading about 320° due north. He immediately called S/Sgt Gerald E. Bauman, T/Sgt Joseph Ruvolo and Miss Jannette Marie Scotte. Witnesses all verified the sighting and the direction of the objects - all three stated that the objects were moving toward Mojave, Calif.\n\nWitness was sure it was not an optical illusion or that the objects were not weather balloons since they traveled against prevailing wind and since the speed at which they traveled and the horizontal direction taken indicated that they were not weather balloons. Furthermore they could not remain at the same altitude so consistently if they were weather balloons. Witness then attempted to get personnel (medical officers) to further verify the sighting but by the time the additional personnel had arrived at the same the original objects had disappeared due to the speed at which they were traveling. However, two of them sighted a third object of a silver spherical or disc-like nature at approximately 8000 ft traveling in circles over the north end of the airfield. Five out of the seven personnel saw this object. All looked away from the object several times to make sure there was no eye strain. He stated that this object performed too tight a circle to be any type of known aircraft.\n\nEvaluation: Confirmed by other sources.\n\nWitnesses: S/Sgt Gerald E. Bauman\nT/Sgt Joseph Ruvolo\nMiss Jannette Marie Scotte"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nIncidents 1a and 1b\ncancelled\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 1c\n\n1. Date 8 July 47\n2. Time 0945\n3. Location Muroc AAFld, Muroc, Calif 34° 54' N 117° 53' W\n4. Name of observer S/Sgt Joseph Ruvolo\n5. Occupation of observer NCO Charge Billeting Office\n6. Address of observer Muroc Air Fld., Muroc, Calif\n7. Place of observation Ground - Muroc\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Between 7500 or 8000 ft\n12. Speed 350 - 400 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Northwestern\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Silver\n18. Shape Saucer or Disc shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - Apparently metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Witness, NCO in charge of Billeting Office, Muroc AF Base, (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"About 0945 Lt McHenry, Billeting Officer in Charge, upon returning from the Post Exchange contacted the witness, Sgt Ruvol and asked him to look up in the sky. Witness observed two (2) flying objects which appeared like two flying discs or saucer-shaped silver-colored objects flying in a northwestern direction at approximately 350 to 400 MPH at an altitude of about 7500 or 8000 ft. He could hear no motor roar and was positive that it was not a balloon.\n\nHe states: \"I am of good health and sound mind and this was no hallucination\"\n\nEvaluation: Confirmed by other sources."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 8 July 47 Incident # 1d\n2. Time 1000\n3. Location Muroc Air Fld., Muroc, Calif.\n4. Name of observer S/Sgt Gerald M. Nauman\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Muroc Army Air Fld., Muroc, Calif.\n7. Place of observation ground - Muroc Army Air Fld., Muroc\n8. Number of objects 3 objects - 2 at first, 1 later\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 7,000 to 8,000 ft\n12. Speed 300 to 400 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Northwest direction\n14. Tactics Performed tight circle - the third object - other two kept horizontal course\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S - gave off a definite reflection from sun\n18. Shape disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - apparently metallic since they reflected light\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Sunlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S - Apparently in distance\n26. Remarks: On 8 July 47 at 10:00 in the morning witness observed (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"flying discs traveling in a northwest direction at an estimated altitude of 7,000 or 8,000 ft at about 300 to 400 MPH.\n\nWitness states he was in the Billeting Office when 1st Lt McHenry called him and 2 other witnesses outside. He was then asked what he saw. Sgt Nauman states he saw 2 objects and that he was positive that they could not have been aircraft, weather balloons or birds. Due to the altitude at which they flew they gave off a definite reflection from the rays of the sun. A few minutes later after the original two discs had disappeared he saw another object at the same altitude doing certain maneuvers such as flying in a tight circle. Its very tight maneuver precluded its being any known type of aircraft.\n\nWitness states: \"I have 20-20 vision\"... \"I have been flying in and have been around all types of aircraft since 1943 and never in my life have I seen anything such as this.\"\n\nEvaluation: Confirmed by other sources"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 8 July 47 Incident # 1e\n2. Time 10:00\n3. Location Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, Calif\n4. Name of observer Jannette Marie Scott\n5. Occupation of observer Secretary to 1st Lt J. C. McHenry, Billeting Officer\n6. Address of observer Muroc AAFld, Muroc, Calif.\n7. Place of observation Ground - Muroc\n8. Number of objects 3 - two the first time - 1 later\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Approx 8,000 ft\n12. Speed 300 to 400 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Northwest - toward Mojave, Calif.\n14. Tactics First 2 maintained straight horizontal course; the last performed a tight circle\n15. Sound none - Witness heard no drone such as would come from any aircraft\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Silver\n18. Shape Disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S Apparently metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Sunlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S - apparently in the distance\n26. Remarks: Witness was called by Lt McHenry together with T/Sgt (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Joseph Burvolo and S/Sgt. Gerald E. Neuman to the front of the B.O.Q. \"A\" Bldg.\nPointing up in a direction directly above the group he asked them to explain\nwhat they saw. Witness states that she saw 2 silver-colored disc-like objects\nflying toward Mojave, Calif, one directly back of the other, at a speed of\nabout 300 to 400 MPH at an altitude of approximately 8,000 ft. She listened\ncarefully for a few minutes but could hear no drone such as occasioned by any\naircraft. Casting her eyes for a moment in another direction and then looking\nback to the same spot she was able to distinguish the same objects again.\nAssured that it was not eye-strain, she was convinced the objects were not\nweather balloons due to the horizontal position in which they traveled. Nor\ncould they have been birds since they reflected the sun's rays.\n\nSome three or four minutes after the objects had nearly disappeared she saw\nanother flying object similar to the above-mentioned objects. It was silver\ncolored and disc-like in shape. Unlike the first two, it flew in a tight circle,\nneither losing nor gaining altitude, at approximately 5,000 ft. She thought\nit performed too tight a circle to have been any type aircraft with which she\nwas familiar.\n\nEvaluation: Confirmed by other sources"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in file)\nIncident # ?\n1. Date of Observation . 8 July 1947\n2. Time of Observation . Approximately noon\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted Muroc Air Force Base, Muroc California\n4. Observer's Position . Ground\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . Maj. Richard R. Shoop\nMuroc Air Force Base, Muroc California\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . Chief of Technical Engineering Div.\n7. Attention Attracted to Object(s) By Col Gilkey\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1\n9. Size of Object(s) . Pursuit Airplane\n10. Color of Object(s) . . Aluminum Colored Surface\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . . Unconventional Shape\n12. Nature of Luminosity . Reflected\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . Five to Eight Miles\n14. Speed of Object(s) . Slowly\n15. Time in Sight . Eight Minutes\n16. Tactics . The object moved from an intermediate altitude in an oscillating fashion almost to the surface of the ground and then started climbing again.\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . Not Stated\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . North\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) Apparently metallic\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail Not stated\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . Not stated\n22. Peculiarities Noted\n23. Summary of Incident . At approx. noon 8 July 1947 Maj Shoops, at the attention of Col Gilkey observed 5 to 8 miles to the North what appeared to be thin metallic object. It appeared to be metallic because the method in which it was flying, the sun was reflected from an apparently aluminum colored surface.\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 2a\n1. Date 8 July 1947\n2. Time Approximately noon\n3. Location Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California.\n4. Name of observer Col Gilkey to Capt Black\n5. Occupation of observer Commanding Officer, Muroc Army air Field, Calif.\n6. Address of observer Muroc AAF, Muroc, California.\n7. Place of observation Ground\n8. Number of objects one (1)\n9. Distance of object from observer not stated\n10. Time in sight not stated\n11. Altitude not stated\n12. Speed not stated\n13. Direction of flight not stated\n14. Tactics The object Col Gilkey saw he stated he believed at the time to be paper and of no significance or the object not important enough to be reported.\n15. SOUND not stated\n16. Size not stated\n17. Color not stated\n18. Shape not stated\n19. Odor detected not stated\n20. Apparent construction\n21. Exhaust trails not stated\n22. Weather conditions not stated\n23. Effect on clouds not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance not stated\n26. Remarks: The following is a statement given orally by Colonel Gilkey, to Captain Harry D. Black, Intelligence officer on 11 August 1947. Colonel Gilkey, stated that the object he saw, he believed at the time to be paper and of no significance or the objects not important enough to be reported justifiable. There was nothing clearly enough seen by the Colonel to make any further"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"reports justifiable."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPY\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 3.\n1. Date 7 July 1947\n2. Time 10:10\n3. Location Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California.\n4. Name of observer Major J. C. Wise,\n5. Occupation of observer Test Pilot\n6. Address of observer Muroc AAF, Muroc, California.\n7. Place of observation Ground - Muroc AAF, Muroc, California\n8. Number of objects One (1)\n9. Distance of object from observer Off to the north about 10,000 to 12,000 feet altitude.\n10. Time in sight not stated\n11. Altitude 10,000 to 12,000 feet\n12. Speed 200 to 225 MPH\n13. Direction of flight heading from west to east\n14. Tactics Oscillating in a forward whirling movement without losing altitude.\n15. Sound not stated\n16. Size Five (5) to (10) feet in diameter\n17. Color yellowish white\n18. Shape sphere\n19. Odor detected not stated\n20. Apparent construction assumed at first to be a weather balloon\n21. Exhaust trails not stated\n22. Weather conditions not stated\n23. Effect on clouds not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance not stated\n26. Remarks: Over"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REMARKS:\n\nStatement given by Major J. C. Wise, Test Pilot, Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California.\n\nOn 7 July 1947, at approximately 10:10, while running up the XP-81 on the ground I noticed everyone was looking up into the air. Off to the north about 10,000 to 12,000 feet altitude, was an object that I assumed at first to be a weather balloon, but after looking at it for a while I noticed that it was oscillating in a forward whirling movement without losing altitude. It was traveling about 200 to 225 MPH, and heading from west to east.\n\nThe object was yellowish white in color and I would estimate that it was a sphere about 5 to 10 feet in diameter."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 8 July 1947 Incident # 4\n2. Time 11:50\n3. Location Area # 3, Rogers Dry Lake, California.\n4. Name of observer Captain John Paul Strapp\n5. Occupation of observer Flight Test\n6. Address of observer Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California.\n7. Place of observation Observation Truck, Area #3, Rogers Dry Lake, Calif.\n8. Number of objects One (1)\n9. Distance of object from observer 20,000 feet\n10. Time in sight 90 seconds\n11. Altitude lower than 20,000\n12. Speed slower than the maximum velocity 500-600 aircraft\n13. Direction of flight Slightly north of due west against prevailing wind\n14. Tactics rotation or oscillation of slow type (suggested by 2 fins or nobs on the upper surface which crossed each other at intervals\n15. Sound not stated\n16. Size About 50'\n17. Color silvery\n18. Shape resembled a parachute canopy at first then assumed ovular shape\n19. Odor detected not stated\n20. Apparent construction It presented a distinct ovular outline, with two (2) projections on the upper surface which might have bear thick fins or nobs. These crossed each other at intervals, suggesting either rotation or oscillation of slow type.\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions not stated\n23. Effect on clouds not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance Dropped to a level such that comes into line of vision of the mountain tops.\n26. Remarks:\n(over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On the 8 July 1947 at 11:50 the undersigned was sitting in an observation truck located in Area #3, Rogers Dry Lake, was gazing upward toward a formation of two (2) P-82's and an A-26 aircraft flying at 20,000 feet, preparing to carry out of a seat ejection experiment, when I observed a rounded object, white aluminum in color, which at first resembled a parachute canopy. The first impression was that a premature ejection of the seat and dummy had occurred. This body was ejected at a determined height lower than 20,000 feet, and was falling at three (3) times the rate observed for the parachute which ejected thirty minutes later. As it fell it drifted slightly north of due west against the prevailing wind, toward Mount Wilson. The speed, horizontal motion could not be determined, but appeared slower than the maximum velocity of P-80 aircraft.\n\nAs this object descended through a low enough level to permit observation of its lateral silhouette, it presented a distinct ovular outline, with two (2) projections on the upper surface which might have been thick fins or nobs. These crossed each other at intervals, suggesting either rotation or oscillation of slow type.\n\nNo smoke flames, propellar arks, engine noise, or other clasuable or visible ears of propulsion were noted. The color was silvery, resembling aluminum painted fabric, and did not appear as dense as a parachute canopy.\n\nWhen the object dropped to a level such that came into line of vision of the mountain tops, it was lost to the vision of the observer.\n\nIt is estimated that the object was in line of vision about 90 seconds. Of the five (5) people sitting in the observation truck, four (4) observed this object and made remarks about it. These people include:\n\nMr. Lenz - Civilian, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n(Other names not given)\n\nThe following is my own personal opinions about this object:\n\n1. I think it was a manmade object, as evidenced distantly by the outline and functional appearance.\n\n2. It's size was not far from 25 feet with a parachute canopy.\n\n3. The path followed by this object appeared as though it might have been dropped from a great height.\n\nSeeing this was not a hallucination or other fancies of a sense."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 4 July 1947 Incident # 5\n2. Time 1905\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Kenneth A. McDowell\n5. Occupation of observer Patrolman, Portland City Police\n6. Address of observer Portland City Police Dept., Portland, Oregon\n7. Place of observation Parking lot back of police station\n8. Number of objects 5\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Great speed\n13. Direction of flight 2 discs flying south, 3 in easterly direction\n14. Tactics Dipped up and down in oscillating motion at great speed\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Large\n17. Color Could not be determined\n18. Shape Round - disc-shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S - No visible means of propulsion observed\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Quickly - before any detailed observation could be made\n26. Remarks:\n(over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Officer McDowell stated that at approximately 1905, 4 July 1947 while he was on duty at Precinct #1 and feeding the pigeons in the parking lot back of the station he noticed that the pigeons became quite excited over something and fluttered in the air. Officer McDowell in looking around to see what had disturbed them saw 5 large discs in the air east of Portland: two discs flying south and three flying in an easterly direction. He stated he could determine no color to the discs but advised they were dipping in an up and down oscillating motion and were traveling at great speed. He was unable to give an estimate of the speed or altitude of the discs as they were out of sight before any detailed observation could be made. Officer McDowell advised that he notified the Police Radio who immediately broadcast an alert. He saw no indication of any motivating force nor heard any sound coming from the discs and could give no description other than round."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 4 July 47 Incident # 6\n2. Time 1305\n3. Location Milwaukee, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Sergeant Claude Cross\n5. Occupation of observer Oregon State Police Officer\n6. Address of observer District #1, Milwaukie, Oregon\n7. Place of observation Police station\n8. Number of objects 3\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Undetermined\n12. Speed 100% Terrific\n13. Direction of flight Northwest\n14. Tactics Three discs following each other at terrific speed\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Whitish brown glint as the sun was reflected from them\n18. Shape Discs\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cross saw three discs following each other at an undetermined altitude at terrific speed, traveling in a Northwesterly direction. He noticed a whitish brown glint to them as the sun reflected from them. Could give no other description nor could he judge the speed or altitude. No sound was made by the objects."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 4 July 1947 Incident # 7\n2. Time 1305\n3. Location Oregon\n4. Name of observer Earl E. Patterson\n5. Occupation of observer Patrolman - former Air Corps pilot\n6. Address of observer 124 Southeast 13th Avenue, Portland, Oregon\n7. Place of observation Southeast 82d and Foster Road, Portland\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Approx 30,000 ft\n12. Speed Terrific - faster than any speed witness had ever seen\n13. Direction of flight Southeasterly direction over Portland\n14. Tactics N/S Performed 90° angle without difficulty - thought to be radio controlled\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Aluminum\n18. Shape disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S Apparently metallic or eggshell white didn't reflect light\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness was getting out of his car when he observed one disc flying in a Southwesterly direction over Portland. Disc was aluminum in color and traveled at terrific speed - faster than any flying object witness had ever seen - It left no vapor trail or smoke trail. [REDACTED] Estimated altitude approx 30,000 ft. Thought the disc was definitely some type of aircraft but could not give further description as speed made observation difficult. No sound was heard from the flying object. He thought it appeared radio-controlled because the disc could change direction at a 90° angle without difficulty."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 4 July 47 Incident # 8\n2. Time 1305\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer W. A. Lissy\n5. Occupation of observer Patrolman - also a private pilot\n6. Address of observer Portland City Police Dept.\n7. Place of observation ground\n8. Number of objects 3\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 40,000 ft\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight South\n14. Tactics Straight-line formation except last disc fluttered to side in arc\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color white\n18. Shape discs\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear - with little or no cloud formations visible from ground\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - no clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Patrolman W. A. Liszy of the Portland City Police Department possesses a private pilot license. He perceived three flat round discs which flew at terrific speed in straight line formation the last disc fluttering very rapidly in a side-way arc. They saw no evidence of any motivating powers and there were no vapor or smoke trails. No sound could be heard. Ground temperature was 52°F with little or no cloud formation.\n\nNOTE: Corroborated account. Witnessed by Patrolman D. W. Ellis (also a private pilot) Both very dependable & trustworthy officers."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 9a\n1. Date 4 July 47\n2. Time 1305\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer D. W. Ellis\n5. Occupation of observer Patrolman\n6. Address of observer Portland City Police Dept., Oregon\n7. Place of observation Portland, Oregon\n8. Number of objects 3\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Approx 40,000 ft\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight South\n14. Tactics Straight-line formation except last which flutter to side in arc\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N.S\n17. Color White\n18. Shape Discs\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear - with little or no cloud formation visible from ground\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - no clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Patrolman D. W. Ellis (also a private pilot) perceived three flat round discs which flew at terrific speed in straight line formation, the last disc fluttering very rapidly in a side-way arc. He saw no evidence of any motivating powers and there were no vapor or smoke trails. No sound could be heard. Ground temperature was 52°F with little or no cloud formation.\n\nNOTE:Corroborated account. Witnessed by Patrolman W. A. Liszy (also a private pilot) Both very dependable & trustworthy officers"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 9\n1. Date 4 Jul 47\n2. Time 1300\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Capt. E. A. Frain\n5. Occupation of observer Marine Pilot\n6. Address of observer Ft. H. Irving St., Portland\n7. Place of observation\n8. Number of objects 3 to 6 - unable to ascertain\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude High\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight South over the Globe Mills\n14. Tactics oscillated wildly, always in a rearward direction\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color chromium - shiny\n18. Shape full disc, half-moon shape, then nothing\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs N/S\n25. Manner of disappearance Change set and reappeared\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Members of the harbor patrol at the foot of Ft Irving Street stated but when they heard the all-clear alert, Capt. E. A. Frain, Marine Pilot, A.T. Amtrak and Patrolman W. G. Ruff, saw the objects and said they appeared to be going at high speed in a sharp arc while Capt. Frain ... the flyers got them from ascertaining whether there were three or six.\n\n\"If a disc would oscillate and smaller one would see a full disc, then a half-moon shape, then nothing at all,\" he reported. The objects looked like a shiny chromium or aluminum disc which oscillated, disappeared and reappeared.\n\nThere was a plane in the sky at the time, but it was obviously that the discs were not planes.\n\nPUBLICITY: Corroborated report"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"From the Oregon Journal - 5 July 1947, Portland, Oregon\n(Refer to Incidents 5, 6, 7, 8 and 8a) 7 / 8\n\nWhatever they are, there are some disc-like objects flying around in the sky.\n\nOr else eight (8) Portland area policemen and deputy sheriffs who sighted the objects Friday, numerous private citizens, the crew of a United Air Lines plane over Boise, Idaho, and a cosmetic worker who claims to have photographed one near Seattle, are all wrong.\n\nIn Portland, the alert was sound over police radio at 1:16 P. M. Friday, after the East Side Station received a score of calls and the discs were overhead. Within seconds, two prowl cars reported chasing the mystery craft.\n\nFLASHES SEEN, NOISE LACKING.\n\nFirst to report in were Patrolmen Walter Lipsy and Robert Ellis in Car No. 52, who stopped near Ortke Park. Both World War II veteran as and civilian alike, they sighted three of the objects within 30 seconds traveling at great height and speed over the park. They reported they saw no engine noises but saw flashes. The objects seemed erratic and changed direction at flight. The patrolmen agreed but without knowledge of the size of the objects it would be impossible to judge their speed or altitude.\n\nPatrolman Earl Patterson in car No. 41 stopped at nd 33rd Avenue and Foster road to look eastward from where the discs were reported. The craft came in and then coming out of the sun. He saw what appeared to be [illegible] later circumscribed the sky and the rest of the sky and leading westward. The craft seemed to be climbing or gradually when it didn't flash as it did [illegible].\n\nSURVEYING ... INTEREST\n\nA former ground veteran, he said the object was unlike any plane he had ever seen. He thought it was a radio-controlled because it could change direction at a sharp angle without difficulty.\n\nMembers of the Bunker Hill at the corner of 14 Irving Street streetcar stop when they heard the all-out alert. Capt. E. A. Dunn, Lieut. Frank H. T. Anstel and Patrolman K. G. Ellis all said the objects could be seen to be going south high over the Glide hills at terrific speed. Capt. Price said the glimpses kept them from a certainty whether there were discs or ships.\n\n\"The discs would oscillate and sometimes we would see a full disc, then a half-moon shape, then nothing at all,\" he reported. The objects looked like a shiny chromium ball on top of a stick which wobbled, dipped red and reappeared.\n\nThere was a plane in the sky at the time, but all were emphatic that the discs were not planes."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AIRLINES CREW GIVES CONTRADICTORY ACCOUNTS OF FLYING DISCS. FIVE SEIGHTS.\n\nCircumstantial reports of flying discs in the sky Friday came from the crew of a United Airlines plane over Boise, Idaho, and a second group here at Seattle, as well as from Portland area police and citizens.\n\nE. J. Smith, Chief Pilot of the airliner, who served from the sighted there were approximately a low aircraft which flew about on the bottom and eventually at 10,000 feet. The objects appeared against the sunset. Shortly after the plane took off at 6:50 p. m., he said.\n\n\"They then cleared,\" he reported. \"We followed them for about 50 miles, but could not keep up. Finally the objects disappeared. We were unable to tell whether they outdistanced us or disintegrated.\"\n\nNOT AIRCRAFT.\n\n\"We can't say whether they were discs, or what they were. But whatever they were, they were not aircraft, but were at least 10 miles or so distant.\"\n\nIn Seattle, Capt. Ed Hanson of Boeing Field told the United Press that he had seen what appeared to be a \"white object\" flying high and at a fast speed.\n\nAt Mt. Olympic Pictures, New York City, a photographer said he had shown two tiny dots, one of which was clearly visible.\n\nIn Oakland, Ill. Chief amusement park official, reported several objects \"like shining discs\" in the sky Friday. He saw several lights, including one that appeared to be red.\n\nIn Vancouver, Wash., Sgt. Walter Sullivan, Chief Mckay and Pvt. Kniess reported the Portland police were out in full force at the Vancouver airport to look at the sky. Over Portland, they said, Sullivan said, they saw several objects \"like a flying saucer\" and they left a low humming noise.\n\nOTHER VIEWS.\n\nCol. O. R. Dodson, Commander of the Oregon National Guard, made an inspection of the area from the air after the discs were reported. He said he saw nothing \"suspicious\".\n\nOnly three military airplanes in the air at the time were B-17 bombers near Astoria."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Despite all the reports, at least two persons remained unconvinced of the existence of the discs. Al F. Sanford, Hillside Avenue, said it was all the work of some kind of optical illusion.\n\nDr. Walter Kelley, Jr., of 6600 N. Burrage Avenue, telephoned the Journal to talk to the newspapers for \"promoting a hoax\". He said he saw objects in the air about 5 minutes after an airplane passed over the house. To him the objects looked like bits of crumpled foil, perhaps cigarette wrappers.\n\nMORE SEEN LATER.\n\nSeveral more flights of objects were reported Friday afternoon. T. A. Byers, 1205 Willamette Avenue, said he saw three flying saucers cross the Willamette River near the Rose Island bridge at about 4 p.m., moving in the west, then returned. Ten minutes later they were back in the east for two or three minutes. He said they resembled metallic discs glinting in the sun.\n\nIn Hillsboro, Oregon, a group of citizens saw 15 flying saucers hovering over the Hillsboro county airport.\n\nAt Vancouver, Wash., Mrs. Lawrence J. Sims, 1204 NE 21st Ave., reported sighting a disc-like object as it was moving in a regular pattern over the Gresham district. She said it seemed to be moving slowly.\n\nDAVID MOUNTAIN.\n\nThomas W. Dwyer, 1232 NE 55th Avenue, said he sighted two metallic silver objects. They were at least 6 feet in diameter and hovered for about 5 minutes before moving on. He said the objects looked like pie pans and were glistening in the sun.\n\nC. J. Boone, of Vale, Oregon, said he sighted a group of objects at about 7 p.m., with a red glow near the bottom.\n\nS. M. Cox, 2506 NE 65th Avenue, recovered from Rose City golf course a piece of metal about 12 inches long, which he said might be part of one of the discs seen Friday. He said it was of low quality, measured 23-1/2 by 36 inches.\n\nSEATTLE DISCS, REPORTED BY PLANE.\n\nEUGENE, Ore., July 5. (AP) A Eugene railroad worker said Friday he saw a silvered disc being dropped out of a light airplane over the city.\n\nE. P. Smith, of Eugene, an assistant director for the Southern Pacific Railroad, said he was driving on a Eugene street when --"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 1\n\n1. Date 4 July 1947\n2. Time 2:30 P. M.\n3. Location Seattle, Wash. / Boise, Idaho\n4. Name of observer Capt. E. J. Smith\n5. Occupation of observer UAL Pilot\n6. Address of observer UAL Office Boise\n7. Place of observation Air - over Emmett, Idaho\n8. Number of objects 5 - 5 at first, then 9 more\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S - but 1 1/2 and then for about 15 min\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Northwest\n14. Tactics Observed \"Flying formation\"\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Could not be ascertained but appeared to be disc shaped with bottom and top rounded\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S Clear, visibility good\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Could not be ascertained\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Capt E. J. Smith, UAL Pilot, reports to Seattle reporting that he had the entire crew of the westbound UAL plane observing flying saucers near Emmett, Idaho. At first he saw a group of discs flying what appeared to be a loose formation. They called Miss Marrow, Stewardess, to the cockpit to verify that they were actually seeing the discs. She saw them too. Then they saw 4 more of them, three clustered together, and a 5th flying by itself, far off in the distance.\n\nCapt E. J. Smith described them as follows:\n\n5 \"somethings\" which were \"like discs with a bottom and top, sort of ring on top.\" Silhouetted against the sunset shortly after the plane took off at 6:50 p.m. He reported, \"We followed them for about 50 miles.\" Finally they disappeared. We were unable to tell whether they outdistanced us or disintegrated.\n\nHe concluded later the statement \"We can't say whether they were discs or something else, but whatever they were, they were not aircraft, and were they nearby or distant.\"\n\nRemarks: Corroborated re-cut by a UAL Pilot"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 11\n1. Date 4 July 1947\n2. Time Evening\n3. Location Iowa City, Seattle [illegible]\n4. Name of observer Bruce Ryan\n5. Occupation of observer [illegible]\n6. Address of observer Iowa City, Southeastern [illegible]\n7. Place of observation Ground - Iowa City\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight [illegible]\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight over [illegible] of La Washington\n14. Tactics Horizontal flight\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color [illegible]\n18. Shape [illegible] of bell shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs 1 news photograph\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The results of Ryan's photographic effort showed a bright light set against the dark background of the evening sky. He took the picture when the object was directly overhead. He observed the life watched it for about 10 minutes as it seemed to speed across the sky. The impression was that it was a ship flying at great height."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 12\n1. Date 4 July 1947\n2. Time 1305\n3. Location Vancouver, Washington\n4. Name of observer John Sullivan\n5. Occupation of observer Sheriff's Deputy\n6. Address of observer Vancouver, Washington\n7. Place of observation Vancouver, Washington, \"ground\"\n8. Number of objects 20 to 30\n9. Distance of object from observer 3 to 5 miles away over Portland\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound low humming sound\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape \"V\" shaped - like flock of geese\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/A\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In Vancouver, Washington, Sheriff's Deputies, John Sullivan & Clarence McKay and Fred Krives, heard the Portland police radio broadcast and ran out of the Sheriff's office to look at the sky. Over Portland about three to five miles away, Sullivan said, they saw 20 to 30 objects \"like a flight of geese.\" They heard a low humming sound.\n\nCORROBORATED ACCOUNT"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 13\n1. Date 4 July 1947\n2. Time 1100\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer E. A. Evans\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer 2433 SW Macadam Ave.\n7. Place of observation Portland, Oregon - ground\n8. Number of objects 1 at first 2 later\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 2 - 4 seconds\n11. Altitude one object appeared not too high, 2 others appeared far away & very high\n12. Speed very fast\n13. Direction of flight 1. west to east. 2 - north\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Resembled metallic discs glinting in sunlight\n18. Shape disc\n19. Odor detected n/s\n20. Apparent construction n/s - unless metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance out of sight within 2 to 4 seconds\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Three discs were observed by R. A. Evans & neighbors, one object appeared very high and two others appeared far away and very high. One traveled from west to east, two others traveled north. They resembled metallic discs glinting in the sunlight. They first appeared in the west and were out of sight in the east in 2 to 4 seconds."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident #14\n\n1. Date 4 July 47\n2. Time 1630\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Lawrence J. Hayward\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer 6124 N. E. 21st Ave., Portland\n7. Place of observation Portland, Oregon - ground\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Slow\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics Flipping around\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size dime\n17. Color silvery\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - apparently metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: At 4430 P. M. Mrs Lawrence J. Hayward, 6124 NE 21st Ave. reported sighting a disc \"like a new dime flipping around\" in the air over the Rocky district. She said it seemed to be moving slowly."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 15\n\n1. Date 4 July 1947\n2. Time 1700\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Thomas W. Dwyer\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer 1232 N. E. 59th Ave\n7. Place of observation Portland, Oregon\n8. Number of objects 3\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude high\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight 1 - southeast; 2- northeast\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs N/S\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: One object was heading southeast and two others were going northeast."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 16\n\n1. Date 4 July 1947\n2. Time 1100\n3. Location Mt Jefferson, Oregon\n4. Name of observer O. J. Bogne\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Tigard, Oregon\n7. Place of observation Near Redmond - ground\n8. Number of objects 4\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: O. J. Bogne, Tigard reported that four discs flew past Mt Jefferson at about 11 a. m., while he was driving near Redmond."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident #\n\n1. Date [illegible]\n2. Time [illegible]\n3. Location [illegible]\n4. Name of observer [illegible]\n5. Occupation of observer [illegible]\n6. Address of observer [illegible] Idaho\n7. Place of observation [illegible] Mineral, [illegible]\n8. Number of objects\n9. Distance of object from observer [illegible]\n10. Time in sight [illegible]\n11. Altitude [illegible]\n12. Speed [illegible]\n13. Direction of flight [illegible]\n14. Tactics [illegible]\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size approximately [illegible]\n17. Color [illegible]\n18. Shape approximately circular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions [illegible]\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Drawing\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: [illegible]"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"That Amber aerial was flying at about 1000 feet altitude and in a northerly direction. The object was a dark elongated shape..."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 19\n1. Date 20 Oct 47\n2. Time 1320\n3. Location David Road, Dayton, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mr. S. C. Britton\n5. Occupation of observer Dayton N/S\n6. Address of observer David Road, Dayton\n7. Place of observation ground - David Road, Dayton\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 1 to 5 miles high - could not be determined\n12. Speed Very fast\n13. Direction of flight West to East but slightly to the North\n14. Tactics One object followed the other about a city block apart\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Reflected light\n18. Shape like cigar\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails like a slight trace of steam\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - no clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness strolling his orchard in an easterly direction when his grandson called his attention to \"the funny flying wishes in the sky\" Looking up he saw 2 strange looking craft flying very fast in a very straight course from West to East but slightly to the North. The sun was to observer's right and the sky cloudless which seemed to make the objects reflect the sunlight rather brilliantly. As a result the shape was not clearly evident but he distinctly observed that they did not have wings and they looked like cigars - longer than they were wide. They were flying together, one object to the rear about one city block apart and to the right of the leading plane. They did not dip nor veer from a straight flight in any manner. Seemed very high but observer could not judge this except that they were at least a mile high and possibly 5 miles high. There was no noise nor sound of any kind. The trail or exhaust was very unusual and seemed like a slight trace of steam attached to the plane which disappeared immediately. It did not persist in the air like vapor trails nor like exhaust from ordinary planes and jet aircraft. Witness familiar with aircraft since they fly over his property daily. He was positive that they were not meteors, birds nor ordinary aircraft.\n\nNOTE: Subsequent investigation by this Cmd indicates that Mr. Britton's testimony should be considered reliable. The objects seen are not as yet identified."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 20\n1. Date 20 Oct 47\n2. Time 1100\n3. Location Xenia, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Ruth Atkinson\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer R 1, Xenia, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Xenia, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 1000 to 1500 ft\n12. Speed fast\n13. Direction of flight Southwest\n14. Tactics straight course\n15. Sound None\n16. Size 12\" in dia.\n17. Color Silver\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Could not see any propellers or dome which observer thought strange nor was the object making any noise at all.\nNOTE: Observer mentions two witnesses"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 21\n1. Date 3 June 47\n2. Time 1615\n3. Location Des Moines, Iowa\n4. Name of observer Dale Boyd\n5. Occupation of observer Agent of Amazing Stories Magazine\n6. Address of observer Box 11, Crocker, Mo.\n7. Place of observation Not stated\n8. Number of objects at first 5, then 13\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude 1200 ft.\n12. Speed 300 mph\n13. Direction of flight NW\n14. Tactics single file\n15. Sound like an electric motor or dynamo\n16. Size about 12 ft. thick & 175 to 250 ft. in diameter\n17. Color dirty white\n18. Shape Between circle and oval - inverted saucer\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: None"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 22\n1. Date 21 June 1947\n2. Time Shortly before noon\n3. Location Spokane, Washington\n4. Name of observer Roy M. Cordray\n5. Occupation of observer Not stated\n6. Address of observer 611 E. Sprague Ave., Spokane, Washington\n7. Place of observation Spokane, Washington on ground\n8. Number of objects one at first, later others more indistinct\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude 7,000 or 8,000 feet\n12. Speed slower than a motored plane\n13. Direction of flight South, a little to the east of south\n14. Tactics Flashed repeatedly as it moved along\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size about a large\n17. Color Shiny - silvery\n18. Shape Flashes or discs\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction flashes or discs\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance became less distinct but flashed repeatedly.\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On Saturday June 21st, shortly before noon, I was in our yard at home when I happened to glance up at a passing plane. I could say this was a two motored one from one of the army bases, flying at about 10,000 or 12,000 feet. On the more glance at the plane a brilliant shiny flash attracted my attention, coming from apparently two or three thousand feet lower than the plane, but slightly ahead of my line of vision of the plane. At first I thought it was the plane had thrown out tinsel bills, but this could not be as they (the flashes or disks) were ahead of the plane. One thing different too, it seems to me they were not traveling as fast as the plane. We realize to, now, that whatever they were, they must have been quite large, being as plain as the nearest one was, at so many. And again, they were traveling south at a slight angle westward. At least some of the smaller flashes, if not all were as high or higher than the plane, but the others were moved lower, sometimes flashing and otherwise, as it did appear slowly."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 23\n1. Date 30 June 1947\n2. Time 1615 approximately\n3. Location Boise, Idaho\n4. Name of observer [illegible]\n5. Occupation of observer Not stated\n6. Address of observer 1217 East Jefferson Street, Boise, Idaho\n7. Place of observation Boise, Idaho, while traveling west to Plantation Golf Course\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Few minutes\n11. Altitude 4,000 feet\n12. Speed Not stated\n13. Direction of flight Southwest\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size Not stated\n17. Color bright and silvery\n18. Shape Half circle\n19. Odor detected Not Stated\n20. Apparent construction Looked like a mirror in the sun\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds Seemed to be climbing to a large cloud\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not Stated\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"An object was seen in this locality on 30 June 1947. The hour was approximately 5:15 P.M. and we (my wife and I) were traveling east to the Plantation Golf Course, which is approximately five miles from Boise. On the way, I happened to spot something in the sky which seemed to be climbing to a large cloud. It was half circle in shape and just as bright as silvery looking as a mirror in the sun. After a few minutes of traveling and looking the object disappeared. I would say it was about 10 miles distant, and from our location, approximately 4,000 feet in the air.\n\nNote: Witness states he has had \"Aircraft Recognition\" in the USAF about 4 times and is positive that the object sighted was not an airplane"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 12 June 1947 Incident # 24\n2. Time 6:15 P.M. evening\n3. Location Weiser, Idaho\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Herbert Erickson\n5. Occupation of observer Not Stated\n6. Address of observer R. #2, Weiser, Idaho\n7. Place of observation Weiser, Idaho toward the west\n8. Number of objects 1 at first later 1 more\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight few seconds\n11. Altitude Not stated\n12. Speed Not stated\n13. Direction of flight South easterly course\n14. Tactics shooting up and down\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Not stated to far away to determine\n17. Color Glistening in the sun\n18. Shape Not stated to far away to determine\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction The object which emitted vapor\n21. Exhaust trails Vapor looked like clouds, kept shape and seemed to glide across the sky to the east.\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance only a glisten and vapor could no longer be seen\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\ndup"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On the evening of June 12 about 6:15, a neighbor and I returning home from another neighbors, glanced into the sky toward the West, and saw what we thought was smoke from an airplane. She mentioned that she had never seen that before, so we stopped to look and listen, thinking we would see the plane. But there was no sound, so we kept looking until we saw a tiny object from which the vapor was emitting. It was so far away we could not determine the size or even the shape. Its only identity was a glisten in the sun. We had watched this one for a few seconds, when from the general direction of the sun, another object shot into the sky. It followed the general direction of the first, shooting up and down before settling to a south-easterly course across the sky, where we followed them until they were only a glisten and the vapor could no longer be seen. After the objects were gone, we continued to look and to watch the vapor that had been left which now looked like clouds but kept a shape, and this shape seemed to glide across the sky to the East where there was a black streak leading to the horizon. The vapor stayed in the sky for over an hour."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 4 July 1947 Incident # 33\n2. Time 11:15 p.m.\n3. Location East over East Trenton, New Jersey\n4. Name of observer [illegible]\n5. Occupation of observer Not stated\n6. Address of observer [illegible] Hunterdon, Trenton, New Jersey\n7. Place of observation Southbound platform of the East Trenton station of the Reading railroad\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude [illegible]\n12. Speed [illegible]\n13. Direction of flight East over East Trenton\n14. Tactics Not stated\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size Not stated\n17. Color Luminous\n18. Shape Flying saucer - no tail or halo\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Bright moonlight\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: Over\n\ndup"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I wish to report having seen a \"flying saucer\" on July 4, 1947, traveling east over East Trenton at 11:15 p.m. It was \"flying\" official and fast, was self-luminous with no tail or halo. The moonlight was bright at the time as I was standing on the southbound platform of the East Trenton station of the Reading railroad."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 10 July 1947 Incident # 26\n2. Time Between 3:00 and 5:00 PM in the afternoon\n3. Location Pan American Airways, Harmon Field, Newfoundland\n4. Name of observer Robert W. Leidy\n5. Occupation of observer Station Mechanic\n6. Address of observer APO 564, c/o Postmaster, New York, New York\n7. Place of observation Traveling in a car returning from fishing.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not Stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude Not stated\n12. Speed Took the estimate of speed in a circle because of the arcs in the path.\n13. Direction of flight Not stated\n14. Tactics Definite trail and caused clouds to break open as it went through. It looked to be traveling in a circle and left sharp edges to cloud\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size Not stated\n17. Color No difference in color looked as if object broke the cloud and left this opening.\n18. Shape Trail horizontal\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction object or flying discs\n21. Exhaust trails bluish streak\n22. Weather conditions Clear with clouds\n23. Effect on clouds Cut a path through the cloud & you could see the trail right through the clouds, and it left sharp edges on the clouds.\n24. Sketches or photographs Kodachrome film\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Woodruff saw the object or flying disc first and said he saw the thing travelling through the sky. We did not believe him at first but when he was so concerned about it we stopped the car and got out. I had my camera so took a picture of it. There was a bluish streak left in the sky which could not have been a cloud formation. It was a definite trail and caused the clouds to break open as it went through. It cut a clear path through the cloud and you could see the trail right through the cloud, it looked to be travelling in a big circle and it left sharp edges to the clouds. The trail looked as if an object passed through similar to that of a pebble leaving a ring in the pond. There was no difference in color. It looked as if the object broke and cloud and left this opening."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident #\n1. Date [illegible]\n2. Time [illegible]\n3. Location [illegible]\n4. Name of observer John E. Woodruff, Jr.\n5. Occupation of observer [illegible]\n6. Address of observer [illegible]\n7. Place of observation [illegible]\n8. Number of objects [illegible]\n9. Distance of object from observer [illegible]\n10. Time in sight [illegible]\n11. Altitude [illegible]\n12. Speed [illegible]\n13. Direction of flight Not stated\n14. Tactics [illegible]\n15. Sound [illegible]\n16. Size [illegible]\n17. Color Not stated\n18. Shape Not stated\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails Dark bluish black, long, across the sky in a straight line\n22. Weather conditions Scattered clouds\n23. Effect on clouds The object passed through and cut the clouds leaving a clear path where you could see the blue sky, like a knife had cut it. The edges were feathered.\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On the morning of 10 July 1947 we were coming up over the mountain between here and Stephenville Crossing. The car was windy up hill and we could see the sky through the windshield. Mr. Woodruff said \"look at the cut in the sky\". I looked and saw a bluish black vapor trail. The clouds were very scattered and were about 8000 to 10,000 feet, the object came through an cut the clouds leaving a clear area where you could see the blue sky, like a knife had cut it. The area from east to west was similar to a wall, as if you cut a cake in half. The estimated course of the object was approximately north north east. The trail was bluish black in colour, very easily distinguished from the blue sky. The trail was more or less a line across the sky in a straight path. There was no noise."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 27A\n1. Date 10 July 1947\n2. Time 1700\n3. Location Harmon Field, New Foundland\n4. Name of observer John E. Woodruff\n5. Occupation of observer Chief Mechanic, Pan American Airways\n6. Address of observer Pan American Airways, Harmon Field, Newfoundland\n7. Place of observation Between Harmon Field and Stephenville Crossing, cruising over the Hill\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated Split second\n11. Altitude Not stated Between 8000 to 10,000 ft\n12. Speed Terrific rate\n13. Direction of flight North North East\n14. Tactics Travelling horizontal\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size About the size of a 54 or a Constellation\n17. Color Translucent\n18. Shape Disk like a wheel\n19. Odor detected Not Stated\n20. Apparent construction disk\n21. Exhaust trails dark bluish approx. 15 to 20 miles long\n22. Weather conditions Very clear and clouds very scattered\n23. Effect on clouds Opened the clouds as it went through the air.\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"John E. Woodruff saw one of the so called \"flying disks\" or other object on 10 July, at approximately 1700. We were coming back from a fishing trip, and coming over the hill between here and Stephenville Crossing you can see the cloude formation ahead, I saw the object break out where the clouds opened and it left its trail behind it. It was very clear and the clouds were very scattered. I'd say the approximately altitude of the clouds was from 8000 to 10,000 feet. The object appeared to be a translucent disk like a wheel travelling at a terrific rate of speed and opened the clouds as it went through the air. The disk was travelling horizontal. It appeared to be about the size of a 54 or Constellation. It spread the clouds out about half mile. It cut a clear path right through the cloud. It left a trail dark bluish in color similar to a high power light. The trail was approximately 15 to 20 miles long."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 28\n\n1. Date 21 June 1947\n2. Time Not stated\n3. Location [illegible]\n4. Name of observer Lt Governor Donald S. Whitehead\n5. Occupation of observer [illegible]\n6. Address of observer [illegible]\n7. Place of observation Idaho western sky\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer [illegible]\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude Not stated\n12. Speed [REDACTED] Remained immobile\n13. Direction of flight Didn't [illegible] ... to go below the horizon with the rotation of the earth\n14. Tactics [REDACTED] hovering\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size not stated\n17. Color not stated\n18. Shape comet-like\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction not stated\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds comet-like hanging in the western sky\n24. Sketches or photographs Not stated\n25. Manner of disappearance seemed to go below the horizon with the rotation of the earth.\n26. Remarks: [REDACTED] (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lt Cov Whitehead said that he saw a \"comet-like object hanging in the western sky June 24.\" He stated that the object \"didn't move but just seemed to go below the horizon with the rotation of the earth.\""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident #29\n\n1. Date 14 June 1947\n2. Time 1200 noon first time Later at 1115 approximately\n3. Location [REDACTED] Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Richard Ranidin\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot\n6. Address of observer 1505 South \"H\" St., Bakersfield, California\n7. Place of observation Ground Front yard\n8. Number of objects 10 first time 7 second time\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude 8500 feet\n12. Speed 350 miles per hour\n13. Direction of flight First group South to North. Second group North to South\n14. Tactics Flying in \"V\" formation with one object straggling in the rear\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size [REDACTED] resembled the XF5U-1\n17. Color Not stated\n18. Shape resembled the XF5U-1, the so called \"Flying Flapjack\"\n19. Odor detected Not Stated\n20. Apparent construction flying machines\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Clear and Sunny\n23. Effect on clouds Not Stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not Stated\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approximately 1200 noon on the 14 of June I was lying in the front yard of my home. There was a lad mowing the lawn at the time. I looked into the sky and saw ten articles flying from the South to the North at what I would judge to be 8500 ft. The objects were flying at approximately what I would judge to be 350 miles per hour. I distinctly remember that at the time I saw the articles I mentioned it to the lad who was mowing the lawn at the time. I told the lad that the objects were in all probability some sort of Army or Navy test planes from the nearby test centers on the deserts of Southern California. The objects resembled the pictures that I have seen of the XF5U-1, the so called \"Flying Flapjack\" that the Navy is testing. At approximately 1115 I went back into the yard to sit and lie in the shade. At this time the objects reappeared going from North to South, although this time there were only seven of the articles. When I first saw the original ten objects they were flying in a \"V\" formation with one object seemingly straggling in the rear of the formation. When the objects appeared the second time they were still in the \"V\" formation although there was only seven of the objects at this time. I remember at this time that I told the lad, who was still working on the lawn, that probably three of the objects had proceeded back to their base on a different course. I actually thought that this was the case, that the other three objects had probably gone back to their base on the other side of the mountains from Bakersfield. I am firmly convinced that the articles I saw are actually some sort of flying machines although I cannot say from where they came or to where they were going."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 30\n\n1. Date 7 January 1952\n2. Time 1905 EST\n3. Location Lockbourne Army Air Base, Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Charles E. Yeager, Capt. USAF\n5. Occupation of observer Asst. Operations Officer (Pilot)\n6. Address of observer Airport Operations, Lockbourne AAF, Columbus, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Runway approach\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer First 1-2 miles North and 2 miles East; second time 2 miles west and approximately 3 miles\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude 3000 ft approximately\n12. Speed slow\n13. Direction of flight East\n14. Tactics Turned on and off, exhaust light appears to be fading and descending\n15. Sound No noise\n16. Size Large size of a flood light\n17. Color white later yellowish to orange\n18. Shape oval as if looking at spot light\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction like a spot light\n21. Exhaust trails Bluish streaks like a jet effect out from right (according to Mr. Boudreaux on \"squawk\" box.\n22. Weather conditions Sky solid overcast\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance descending and turning out\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"very bright white light southwest of the field. The light did not cast a beam and seemed the size of a floor light. From the ground the light appeared to move westward. It was further west and lower than I saw it in the air, also the light was similar to that of a lantern light in xx that it was glimmering. The light varied yellowish to orange and appeared to be ascending and burning out. The latter object (can say) that the object was moving west and northwest, it appeared to be falling and descending, however the light was not nearly as bright on the second observation. At first it was very white and did not appear to be moving, though when it flashed on we off it appeared as if a x shot descent. With the naked eye I could see no also clear one or more also other than the light whichovel shaped as though looking at a large spot light. It was not a heavenly object but more in line the sky was solid overcast in the Lockbourne area and was clouds and currently such a thought. I heard no noise in connection with the object. I estimated at the first observation that it was 3 miles southwest of the base. At the second observation it was 3-4 miles southwest, descending as though it were moving away."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 Jan 45 Incident # 30a\n2. Time 1925\n3. Location N/S - presumably near Lockbourne\n4. Name of observer Albert R. Pickering\n5. Occupation of observer VHF/DF Operator (CAF-7)\n6. Address of observer 332d Fighter Wing, Lockbourne\n7. Place of observation Lockbourne - objects seen over Commercial Point\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Approx 3 to 5 miles (Rpts f/ Owen Fld & Clinton Cy Airport & from pilot over Columbus indicate distance much farther)\n10. Time in sight 20 minutes\n11. Altitude Around 10,000 ft -\n12. Speed greater than 500 MPH in level flight\n13. Direction of flight 120° (East)\n14. Tactics Climbed and descended vertically - performed circles - it circled one place for duration of 3 360° turns then moved to another position and again circled\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Larger than C-47\n17. Color Amber\n18. Shape Round or oval\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Amber exhaust trail about 5 times the length of object\n22. Weather conditions High overcast at 10,000 ft\n23. Effect on clouds Occasionally entered overcast\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Leveled off and disappeared into overcast at 120°\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"When first sighted around 1925 Eastern Standard Time, the object appeared to hover in one position for quite some time, moving very little. It disappeared once for about a minute (presumably entering overcast). After emerging below the overcast it circled one place for the duration of three 360° turns, then moved to another position and circled some more. Turns required approximately 30 to 40 seconds each - diameter estimated about 2 miles.\n\nIn moving from one place to another a tail (approximately the same color - amber - as the object appeared) which seemed to be about 5 times the length of the object. The shape of the object was either round or oval and appeared about the size of a C-47 plane. Just before disappearing it came very near the ground, stayed about 10', then climbed back to its original position at a very fast rate of speed, leveled off, and disappeared into the overcast (10,000 ft) heading 120°. Its speed was greater than 500 MPH in level flight. Visible for some 20 minutes. No noise or sound could be heard. The color of the object itself was an amber light but the intensity was not sufficient to obscure the outline of the configuration which was approximately round. During the up and down movement no maneuvering took place. Motions like that of an elevator - climbing and descending vertically. The exhaust trail was noticeable only during forward speed. At one time the object appeared to touch the ground.\n\nNOTE: Appeared approximately 3 to 5 miles away from Lockbourne in immediate vicinity of Commercial Point (Reports from Clinton Cy Airport, Godman Fld & from pilot of plane in vicinity of Columbus indicate the distance to be much greater)\n\nNOTE ON RELIABILITY: See incidents 30, 30b and 30c - corroborating accounts."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 January 1945 Incident # 30b\n2. Time Between 1915 and 1930 EST Later 1935 to 1940\n3. Location Lockbourne AAB, Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mr. Boudreaux\n5. Occupation of observer Tower Operator\n6. Address of observer Lockbourne AAB, Columbus, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Tower, Lockbourne AAB, Columbus, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight about 15 minutes\n11. Altitude Not stated\n12. Speed Not stated\n13. Direction of flight Southwest\n14. Tactics Bobbed up and down\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Enormous\n17. Color Amber as it moved southwest it changed from amber to red\n18. Shape Glowing object with a cone-shaped streak to the right\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails Bluish streaks like a jet effect out from the right\n22. Weather conditions Sky overcast\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance went out\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Saw what he thought was a star but then he noticed the sky was overcast so it couldn't have been a star. It was a glowing object with a cone-shaped streak to the right. It glowed from white to amber. He says he first noticed it over the Lockbourne Power Plant, just southwest of here. The object was moving southwest and it changed from amber to red and then disappeared. Mr. Boudreaux, said the light was what he had been watching about 15 minutes or so and that through the field glasses it appeared to have bluish streaks like a jet effect out from the right. He stated that it went out while Capt. McGee was in the pattern. During the conversation he said it could be seen again (1935-1940)."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 January 1948\n2. Time Around 1940\n3. Location Lockbourne AAB, Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mr. Eisele\n5. Occupation of observer DF Operator, Lockbourne Control Tower\n6. Address of observer Lockbourne AAB, Columbus, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Ground, Lockbourne AAB\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer An estimated 5 miles - altho rpts f/Godman Fld, Clinton Cy Airport & relayed rpt f/Columbus, O, indicated much greater distance\n10. Time in sight Around 15 minutes\n11. Altitude 5,000 ft\n12. Speed 500 mph - as indicated by rpts f/Godman Fld & Clinton Cy airport\n13. Direction of flight Appeared to hover but performed eliptical, counter-clock wise course when it descended to horizon (1\") remained stationary (3\") returning original position (3\")\n14. Tactics See 13\n15. Sound No sound\n16. Size About size of runway light when viewed from 500 ft - apparently enormous - see 9 above\n17. Color Red to amber-yellow\n18. Shape Circular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Thin wisp of trail five times diameter of object\n22. Weather conditions high overcast\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - was under overcast\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Faded and lowered into horizon\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object first seen 15° above horizon in the West-Southwest of Lockbourne emitting a ruddy red light which changed to an amber-yellow at intervals not exceeding 1 to 2 seconds. Its size and magnitude were greater than that of any star - a good comparison of the size and magnitude would be a runway light at full intensity viewed from a distance of 500 ft. Shape - circular with the exception of a thin wisp of tail extending towards the horizon, the tail being 5 times the diameter of the object in length. For approximately 10 minutes it remained motionless, thereupon it descended to the horizon in about 4\", hovered on the horizon in 3\", then ascended to its original position in about 3\", the course being eliptical, counter clockwise. It then faded and lowered toward the horizon disappearing at 1955. No sound was heard from the object at any time.\n\nNote: Object appeared about 5 miles from Lockbourne, however info received f/Godman Fld and Clinton County Tower plus a relayed report from a pilot over Columbus, O., indicated that they all had observed a similar phenomenon in the same general direction and position at the same time.\n\nRELIABILITY: Witness spent two years in AF in communications work including C.A. and Control Tower Operation. Holds valid CAA Certificate for Control Tower Operator and Aircraft Communications and has worked at Lockbourne in this type of work for over 1-1/2 yrs. Enthusiast of astronomy.\n\nCORROBORATED ACCOUNT: See also Incidents 30, 30a and 30b."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 31\n\n1. Date Mid-December 1946\n2. Time Early morning\n3. Location Northern Arizona, Route 66\n4. Name of observer K. D. Wood\n5. Occupation of observer Professor and Head Aeronautical Engineering\n6. Address of observer University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado\n7. Place of observation In flight on a trip through the southwest\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude 20,000 feet to 50,000 feet\n12. Speed 600 mph, ± 200\n13. Direction of flight First vertical then West to East overhead\n14. Tactics No maneuvers\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Not stated\n17. Color White - Did not see object\n18. Shape Not stated - did not see object\n19. Odor detected Not Stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated - did not see object\n21. Exhaust trails White, heavy\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: Saw only vapor trail, like rocket or jet exhaust. Not like usual jet airplane trail."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 32\n\n1. Date 7 January 1948\n2. Time 1953\n3. Location Columbus\n4. Name of observer Lt. C. W. Thomas\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot\n6. Address of observer Flight AF 9944 Dayton to Washington\n7. Place of observation Cross Country flight from Dayton to Wash. at Columbus Airways to the West\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer About 15 miles\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude 3000 feet\n12. Speed Seemed stationery\n13. Direction of flight Stationery\n14. Tactics No maneuvers\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size large\n17. Color amber\n18. Shape like a large star or planet\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Dark and overcast\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: Large bright light off to the west. They estimated it below them, or about 3000 ft. It seemed stationery. The light was amber and looked like a large star or planet. It was about 15 miles away from them. (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lt C.W.Thomas and Lt Sims were making a regular cross country flight and reported in to Columbus Airways who asked them if they saw any unusual object in the sky. This report was relayed to Lockbourne - See Eisele's report - incident 30c."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 33\n1. Date 7 Jan 48\n2. Time Between 1345 and 1350\n3. Location Godman Fld, Fort Knox, Ky\n4. Name of observer T/Sgt Quinton A. Blackwell\n5. Occupation of observer Chf Operator in Control Tower at Godman Fld, Ky.\n6. Address of observer Tower, Airways Air Communications Svc, ATC Detachment 733-5 AF Base Unit (LOSD AACS Sq) Godman Fld., Ft Knox, Ky.\n7. Place of observation Tower, Godman Fld.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Over 15,000 ft\n12. Speed In excess of P-51\n13. Direction of flight South\n14. Tactics N/S continued climbing\n15. Sound Not Stated\n16. Size Tremendous\n17. Color Silvery or metallic\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - seemed metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approximately 1320 Sgt Cook from the CO's office notified the observer (T/Sgt Quinton A Blackwell) that according to Ft Knox Military Police & \"F\" Town State Police, a large circular object about 250 to 300 ft in diameter was over Mansville, Ky. Advised him to check with Army Flight Svc. They advised negative but shortly thereafter reported object over Irvington, Ky, then Owensboro, Ky. Object first sighted by Blackwell about 1345 to 1350 over south Godman Fld.\n\nVerification: 1st Lt Comer (Detachment Commander)\nCapt Carter (Operations Officer)\nCol Wax (CO) sighted it about 1320\n\nAt approximately 1430 to 1440, four P-51's approached Godman f/south enroute f/Marietta, Ga. to Standiford Fld, Ky. Lt Blackwell asked Flight Leader NG 869 to attempt to identify object. Accompanied by two other planes he proceeded south f/Godman. Fourth plane proceeded to Standiford Fld alone.\n\nAbout 1445, flight leader (NG 869) reported sighting object \"ahead and above - still climbing\" At 15,000 ft he reported \"Object directly ahead and above and moving about half my speed.\" Again \"it appears metallic of tremendous size.\" Still later \"I'm still climbing - object is above and ahead moving about my speed or faster - I'm trying to close in for better look\". This was about 1515. Five minutes later the other two ships turned back. NG 800 reported \"it appeared like the reflection of sunlight on an airplane canopy\" Shortly afterward this same pilot (NG 800) resumed search going to 33,000 ft, 100 miles south but did not sight anything."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 33a\n1. Date\n2. Time\n3. Location\n4. Name of observer\n5. Occupation of observer\n6. Address of observer\n7. Place of observation\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed\n13. Direction of flight\n14. Tactics\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color\n18. Shape\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails\n22. Weather conditions\n23. Effect on clouds None\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 7\n1. Date 7 Jan 48\n2. Time Approx at 1320 CST\n3. Location Godman Fld., Ft Knox, Ky.\n4. Name of observer PFC Stanley Oliver\n5. Occupation of observer N/S - duty in control tower\n6. Address of observer Godman Fld., Ft Knox, Ky.\n7. Place of observation Control Tower, Godman Fld., Ft Knox, Ky.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Over 15,000 ft\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Southwest\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Object appeared like \"ice-cream cone topped with red\" - apparently white with red above\n18. Shape cone\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Cloud formations\n23. Effect on clouds Went behind clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PFC Stanley Oliver was on duty at the Control Tower at Godman Fld when Col Hix's office informed the tower that an unidentified object (supposedly some 250 ft to 300 ft in diameter) was sighted over Mansville, Ky. This was approx at 1330 CST. At PFC Oliver saw the object southwest of Godman Fld To him it resembled an ice cream cone topped with red. Could not ascertain if it were moving or not.\n\nOrner\nRELIABILITY: Witnesses: Col. Hix, (OD), Capt Carter, Lt Gramer & M/Sgt Blackwell\n\nNOTE: The report of alerting the P-51 aircraft contained in PFC Oliver's statement and the witnesses corroborates material contained in the other reports."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I Y\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 45 Incident # 35o\n2. Time 1420 CST\n3. Location Control Tower, Godman Fld\n4. Name of observer Capt J. F. Duessler, Jr.\n5. Occupation of observer Capt, USAF\n6. Address of observer Godman Fld, Ky\n7. Place of observation Godman Fld Control Tower\n8. Number of objects 1 at 1420\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight From 1420 to 1600 CST - Over an hour and a half\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed 360 MPH - according to statement of Mantell\n13. Direction of flight Apparently from 234° to 259° South to West\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Believed large\n17. Color Silver - bright\n18. Shape like tear drop - round; later, object seemed fluid\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails No tail -\n22. Weather conditions N/S - Scattered but clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Obscured by clouds\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approx 1420 7 Jan 45, Dueslor accompanied by Lt Col R. G. Wood went to Godman Control Tower to observe an unidentified aerial object. Shortly after their arrival Col Hix, the Commanding Officer was summoned. At about this time Duesler first sighted a bright silver object. Then Col Hix arrived. Shortly thereafter a flight of four P-51's flew over Godman. Leader was contacted to pursue object. He assented and three P-51's climbed on the course, the fourth P-51 returning to base. Flight leader called to observe that \"object was twelve o'clock high.\" Asked to describe it, he stated \"it is bright and climbing away from me.\" He stated at first that it was going about 150 MPH. Then Control Tower lost sight of the flight but could still see the object. (In connection with this, Lt Col E. Garrison Wood who witnessed the sighting stated that while it appeared about 1/10 the size of a full moon, if the thing were a great distance away, as compared to the diminishing size of the P-51's flying toward it, it would seem that it was at least several hundred feet in diameter.) Shortly after NS 861, the flight leader, stated that he was \"at 15,000 ft and still climbing\" He stated that he judged the speed to be the same as his or approx 360 MPH. One of his planes then asked him to level off but no reply was heard from the flight leader. That was the last message received from any member of the flight.\n\nAfter dark, another or the same object appeared in approx 234° from Godman at 6° elevation. This body moved to the west (259°) and then down. The shape was fluid but generally round with no tail, the color changing from white, to blue, to red to yellow and had a black spot in the center at all times.\n\nAt 1600 CST it was obscured by clouds.\n\nNOTE: Later, an astronomer was contacted who attempted to account for this phenomena as either Venus or a comet. (1)\n\nSEE ALSO: Report of civilians and state police and corroborated version on this incident."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I I\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 45 Incident # 33D\n2. Time After 1407\n3. Location Godman Fld\n4. Name of observer Capt Cary W. Carter\n5. Occupation of observer Operations Officer\n6. Address of observer Godman Fld., Ky\n7. Place of observation Control Tower\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 3 to 4 minutes\n11. Altitude Very high\n12. Speed Approx 360 MPH - f/Flight Leader's reports\n13. Direction of flight 210° f/Godman Fld\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Could not be determined\n17. Color white\n18. Shape Round - at times cone shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails [REDACTED] N/S\n22. Weather conditions High scattered - [REDACTED]\n23. Effect on clouds Could be seen thru cirrus\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approx 1407, 7 Jan 45, Capt Carter was called by Lt Orner, AACS Detachment Commander, to come to Tower to witness an unidentified aerial object.\n\nObject appeared round and white (whiter than the clouds that passed in front of it) and could be seen thru cirus clouds.\n\nAfter observing it thru field glasses for some 3 - 4 minutes, he called Col Hix's office. Col Hix, Lt Col Wood & Capt Duesler came to the tower shortly thereafter.\n\nCapt Carter then suggested that a group of P-51 aircraft in the vicinity be contacted to pursue the object. T/Sgt Blackwell, Tower Operator, contacted the flight leader to take a look. Three planes proceeded on a heading of approx 230°. One of the planes (Mantell's) spotted it at 1200 o'clock position. Another plane relayed \"This is 15,000 ft, let's level out\" First speed as relayed by Mantell (180 MPH) Later, \"object going up and forward as fast as I am\" - or 360 MPH. Mantell then stated he was going to 20,000 ft and if no closer would abandon chase. Last radio contact heard by Capt Carter.\n\nNOTE: Apparently, Mantell blacked out at 20,000 ft or proceeded on since the object apparently appeared closer(if such were the case)and then crashed thru lack of oxygen.\n\nDoes not seem to tally with report that the phenomena was \"Venus or a comet\""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident #\n1. Date 7 January 1948\n2. Time xxxx 1445\n3. Location [illegible]\n4. Name of observer [illegible]\n5. Occupation of observer [illegible]\n6. Address of observer [illegible]\n7. Place of observation [illegible]\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer [illegible]\n10. Time in sight xxxxxxxxx Apparently over 1 hour and a half\n11. Altitude above xxxx 20,000 ft\n12. Speed approximately 360 mph\n13. Direction of flight approximately East\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size Not stated\n17. Color Metallic\n18. Shape Not stated\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Metallic\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: This information taken from a report describing a radio conversation between Flt. Leader (NG 869) who investigated the object. The request of Godman Field Tower. The Flt. Leader Capt. Thomas W. Mantell crashed and was killed after radio contact with Godman Field at 1515 hrs. (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approximately 1315 hours a State Police report of a strange flying object was received. The object was described as a bright metallic object. [illegible]"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Info taken from reports of radio conversation between Control at Godman and NG 869 essentially as follows:\nCol Hix's account. NG 869: \"Object traveling at 180 MPH - half my speed\"\nLt Orner's account. NG 869: \"high and traveling about 1/2 my speed at 12 o'clock position.\"\nLater: \"Closing in to take a good look\"\nNo further word heard by Orner\nT/Sgt Quinton A. Blackwell: NG 869: At 1445. \"Object traveling at 180 MPH Directly ahead of & above me now and moving at about 1/2 my speed.\"\nLater: \"I'm trying to close in for better look\"\nAt 15,000 ft: \"Object directly ahead of and above me now and moving about 1/2 my speed. It appears metallic of tremendous size. I'm trying to close in for better look\"\nNo other word heard by Blackwell from NG 869.\nCapt Cary W. Carter: NG 869: \"Object going up and forward as fast as he was\" - approx 360 MPH.\n\"going to 20,000 ft and if no closer will abandon chase\"\nNo further contact heard by Capt Carter - \"Apparently last word ever received from NG 869.\""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 33c\n1. Date 7 Jan 48\n2. Time 1310\n3. Location Madisonville, Ky.\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Madisonville\n7. Place of observation Madisonville, Ky\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S - 4 miles\n12. Speed 10 MPH\n13. Direction of flight SW\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 100 ft from top to bottom and 43 ft across\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape cone shape\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Someone from Madisonville advised Military Police they had observed thru a Finch telescope an object described as cone shaped (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\nWhite Sands"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"estimated size: 100 ft from top to bottom, 43 ft across and 4 miles high proceeding SW at 10 MPH.\n\nNOTE: Kentucky State Police were informed by unknown individual(s) that an unusual aircraft or object was flying thru the air, circular in appearance, with an approximate size of 250-300 ft which was moving westward \"at a pretty good clip\". This was relayed to Godman Fld.\n\nNOTE: See also report by James Hudson, Inc. 45b\n\nNOTE: Course of object on 7 July 45 is reported roughly as follows:\n\n0720C Edwardsville, Illinois: Object of aluminum appearance without apparent wings or control surfaces which moved southwest remaining visible for about 30 minutes\n\n1300: Elizabethtown: No description\n\n1310: Lexington, Ky.: No description\nMadisonville, Ky. - as reported in this.\n\n1400: Maysville: No description\n\nAfter 1400: Irvine: No description\n\nAfter 1400: Owensboro: No description\n\n16300 - 1645C: Nashville, Tenn: A Mr. Sayfert, Astronomer at Vanderbilt Univ. spotted an object SSE of Nashville, Tenn. between 16300 with basket attached which moved first SSE then West at a speed of 10 MPH at approx 25,000 ft.\n\n1735: Godman Fld Control Tower: See Orner's account (33a)\nSee Dassler account (33c)\n\nESF 1925: Lockbourne AB, Columbus, Ohio: See Incident 30, 30a, 30 b & 30c"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 13 Oct 47 Incident # 34\n2. Time 5:30 a.m. - shortly before dawn\n3. Location 14 miles North of Dauphin, Manitoba, Canada\n4. Name of observer Judge Heaney\n5. Occupation of observer Judge\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Car on route to Winnipegosis (14 miles N of Dauphin\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Could not be estimated\n10. Time in sight 3 seconds\n11. Altitude Could not be estimated\n12. Speed Meteoric\n13. Direction of flight From West to East\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound No noise\n16. Size Grew from size of large grapefruit to size of large football\n17. Color N/S - altho blue light observed at the explosion stage\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Exploded like a sky-rocket\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 13 Oct 47 Incident # 34A\n2. Time 5:30 - 5:45 A.M.\n3. Location 14 miles north of Dauphin, Manitoba, Canada on highway to Winnipegosis\n4. Name of observer C. D. Bates\n5. Occupation of observer Mgr Govt Liquor Store, Dauphin, Manitoba, Can.\n6. Address of observer Govt Liquor Office, Dauphin, Manitoba, Can\n7. Place of observation Closed car 14 miles N of Dauphin\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Approx 3 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed that of meteor or falling star\n13. Direction of flight NW to SE\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound No noise\n16. Size When first observed: size of first magnitude star which grew approximately\n17. Color blue ball of fire\n18. Shape ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear -\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - no clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Exploded like a skyrocket\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 13 October 1947 Incident # 348\n2. Time 0530\n3. Location Manitoba\n4. Name of observer Dr. W. R. Giesbrecht\n5. Occupation of observer Veterinary Surgeon\n6. Address of observer 145 Kingston Row, Dauphin, Manitoba\n7. Place of observation North on highway between Grosse Isle and Warren\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 2 miles\n10. Time in sight 30 seconds\n11. Altitude 1000 feet\n12. Speed Not stated\n13. Direction of flight South South west\n14. Tactics appeared to dip toward the ground and then disappear\n15. Sound No Noise\n16. Size Soccer ball\n17. Color green\n18. Shape Soccer ball\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails tail of green colored sparks\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance go out\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dr. W. R. Giesbrecht and F. W. Sawatsky going north on the highway between Grosse Isle and Warren about 0530 hours 13 Oct when they saw a green coloured object cross the sky. They estimated its distance ahead of them at about two miles and its altitude at about 1,000 feet. Its shape and size was that of a soccer ball. They watched it about 30 seconds and while they heard no noise the windows of the car were closed. It appeared to have a tail of green coloured sparks and they assumed it to be a flare shot at a very gradual angle and from a south-south-west direction. Toward the end of the 30 seconds it appeared to dip toward the ground and to go out before it would have struck the ground."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 13 October 1947 Incident # 310\n2. Time 0530\n3. Location Passois Lake Canada\n4. Name of observer Wilburt Speers\n5. Occupation of observer Apprentice undertaker\n6. Address of observer 153 Ethelbert Street, Dauphin, Manitoba\n7. Place of observation at a point at Passois Lake, North of Nettley\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight 30-40 seconds\n11. Altitude 5000 ft.\n12. Speed Rapid speed\n13. Direction of flight south of west\n14. Tactics Not stated\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Not stated fairly large\n17. Color orange-yellow\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails flame or tail or flame and sparks at the rear\n22. Weather conditions clear with little wind\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance seemed to disappear rather than explode\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Saw the object from a point at Passois Lake, north of Nettley at about 0530 hours 13 Oct. The weather was clear with little wind and he watched it for about 30-40 seconds. It was more or less round in shape, orange-yellow in color with a flame or tail or flame and sparks at the rear. It appeared to travel at a rapid speed and not to be passing very high. He estimated a plane of equivalent size would be at the altitude of about 5000 feet and it seemed to disappear rather than explode. It was not a flare or rocket, comet or falling star and at no time was there any noise.\n\nWhile stationed on the British Columbia coast he had observed a number of Japanese balloons and while the object was fairly large it was not as large as one of those.\n\nCORROBORATED REPORT: Robert Smith of 336 Bowman Ave., Dauphin, reported the incident to the newspapers. He was with Speers when the sighting occurred."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 13 October 1948 Incident # 3LD\n2. Time 5:25 a.m.\n3. Location Manitoba, Canada\n4. Name of observer Mr. C. W. Chapman\n5. Occupation of observer Not stated\n6. Address of observer Not stated\n7. Place of observation While duck hunting approximately one mile south and west of Rivers, Man.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight 12 to 15 seconds\n11. Altitude [REDACTED] Did not appear to be very high\n12. Speed Not stated\n13. Direction of flight west to east\n14. Tactics Not stated\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size small football\n17. Color ball of fire\n18. Shape small football\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails [REDACTED] Left path of sparking fire about 2 ft in length approx the same depth as the diameter of the object - it grew as object grew in size\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance seemed to explode\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"While parked waiting for another hunter to join us, we noticed what appeared to be a very small ball of fire appear in the sky to the north-west of us.\nThe time was 5:25 a.m. This object travelled from west to east, and did not appear to be of great height. The distance of flight as measured by the eye in the sky, I would judge to be about three quarters of a mile and the time 12 to 15 seconds. During its flight, this object left a path of what could best be described as sparking fire about two feet in length about the same depth as the diameter of the object, growing in depth as the object did in size, the maximum being the size of a small football. Just before reaching the end of its flight, the object seemed to lose considerable altitude, then burst into a shower of glowing fragments. The surrounding space appeared dimly lighted by the explosion for approximately 2 to 3 seconds, then fading out. It did not appear as a flash but more as a soft glow. We assume the object to be a meteor.\n\nNOTE: While the observers came to the conclusion that the object was a meteor there are some peculiar discrepancies. Observers thought it strange that (1) time of flight was so long - 12 -15\". (2) that it appeared to move across the sky rather than in a downward movement until just before the end of its flight, at which time it seemed to drop somewhat.\n\nWITNESSES: Two brothers of Chapman."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 34 B\n1. Date 13 Oct 47\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Saskatchewan District\n4. Name of observer Alden Frederickson\n5. Occupation of observer N/S Reported by Wadena News, Saskatchewan\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation N/S\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color reddish changing to green before breaking up.\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails trail of light followed it\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance broke up\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"While out duck hunting on Oct 13, Alden Frederickson saw a reddish coloured object in the eastern sky. It appeared to be traveling toward him and growing larger. It turned a greenish color before breaking up. A trail of light followed it.\n\nOthers who reported seeing this strange light were Don Adams and Charlie Irving."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 34P\n1. Date 13 Oct 47\n2. Time Between 5:00 and 5:30 A. M.\n3. Location Kansas District\n4. Name of observer M. Farion, Barry Lipsett & Jim Park.\n5. Occupation of observer N/S Reported by \"Kansas Times\"\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation N/S\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed slow - for a meteor\n13. Direction of flight west to east\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S About the size of a baseball\n17. Color flaming luminous mass\n18. Shape N/S Ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction Flames\n21. Exhaust trails orange tinted wake of smoke and flames\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A strange phenomenon was witnessed early Monday morning, Oct 13, blazing its way through the heavens between 5:00 and 5:30 a. m. The ball as described by M. Farion was a flaming luminous mass with an orange-tinted wake. The tail left by this object was made up of smoke as well as of flames. This \"celestial invader\" described as being about the size of a baseball was reported to have passed rather slowly from west to east.\n\nCorroborated account: M. Farion, Barry Lipsett and Jim Park."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 12 Nov 47 Incident # 35\n2. Time Early\n3. Location 40 miles south of Cape Blanco, Oregon, 20 miles offshore.\n4. Name of observer Second Officer Claude Lee Williamson\n5. Occupation of observer Second Officer\n6. Address of observer N/S (Excerpt from \"Oregon Journal\" 13 Nov 47)\n7. Place of observation At sea, 20 miles offshore, 40 miles south of Cape Blanco, Oregon\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 45 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed 700 to 900 MPH\n13. Direction of flight from north horizon in westerly direction\n14. Tactics Performed a long, low arc\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction fire\n21. Exhaust trails jet-like streams of fire\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Two flying discs trailing jet-like streams of fire were sighted from the bridge of the tanker Ticonderoga, early Wednesday. Second Officer Glenda Lee Williamson radio-telephoned the United Press. The discs moved at tremendous speed out of the north horizon and curved in a westerly direction in a long low arc. Thought they were moving between 700 to 900 MPH. Didn't think they were meteors because they generally do not travel in pairs and usually fall to the horizon. Thought they were \"flying discs\"\n\nAlso observed by: Ordinary Seaman James S. Lynde who claimed he also saw \"discs\""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date Unknown Incident # 36\n2. Time After dark\n3. Location Boise, Idaho\n4. Name of observer CAA Observer\n5. Occupation of observer Not stated\n6. Address of observer Not stated\n7. Place of observation between Boise and Mountain Home\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude Not stated\n12. Speed Not stated\n13. Direction of flight southwest and disappeared in northeast\n14. Tactics vibrating N/S\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size Not stated\n17. Color Bluish green\n18. Shape Not stated\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: Mr. Dave Johnson of the \"Statesman Newspaper\" in Boise reported that a CAA official had seen an object that was giving off a pulsating bluish-green light that appeared in the southwest and disappeared in the northeast over the mountains between Boise and Mountain Home."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 1 October 1947 Incident # 37\n2. Time 1200\n3. Location Phoenix, Arizona\n4. Name of observer J. L. Clark\n5. Occupation of observer Mine owner (Pilot)\n6. Address of observer Route 12, Box 531, Phoenix\n7. Place of observation at a mine located approx. 11 miles north or Northeast of Cave Creek, Arizona\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 25 degree angle\n10. Time in sight 45 seconds to 1 minute\n11. Altitude 8/10,000 feet\n12. Speed 350 miles an hour\n13. Direction of flight northwest toward the southeast\n14. Tactics Not stated\n15. Sound No noise\n16. Size about 3 feet in diameter\n17. Color Reddish cast when the object had a blue sky for background. Black when it had a white cloud for a background\n18. Shape resembled a flying wing\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated with the exception of some clouds\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Clark's attention was first drawn to the object by his partner, Mr. Anderson. It appeared to be a black object which was traveling at an estimated height of 8/10,000 ft above the ground and was moving in a straight line from northwest to southeast. It was traveling some 350 MPH. It did not change elevation nor direction. From their range of vision where they were standing upwards to the object would be at about a 25° angle. It remained within their vision from 45 seconds to a minute. No sound was audible. Mr. Clark thought the nearest thing it resembled was a \"flying wing.\" However, both men stated positively that there was no tail visible. From where they were the object appeared about 3 feet in diameter but could offer no estimate as to its size were it on the ground. As to color both stated that the object appeared red against a blue background and black against a white cloud. Ground wind was about 15 miles in velocity and was blowing in a northeasterly direction which would tend to carry any sound away from them.\n\nBoth men are pilots. Mr. Clark was a pilot in the U.S.A.F. for a period of 5 years, flying fighter type of pal planes during most of this period. Mr. Anderson was a gunner in the AAF for 2 years and is also a pilot. Both appear red level headed and not excitable, and were very sincere in making the report."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8/S around June 10 47 Incident # 38\n2. Time daytime\n3. Location Hungary\n4. Name of observer N/S Extracted from Weekly Intel Summary, ATC, 16 Jul 47\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation rural areas in Hungary\n8. Number of objects N/S\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape ball-shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: On 10 Jun 47 rumors were drifting into Budapest from rural areas in Hungary that \"silver balls were flashing across the sky in daytime. No accurate description or confirmation of rpt obtained."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 39\n1. Date 9 July 47\n2. Time Between 11:15 and 11:40\n3. Location Grand Falls, Newfoundland\n4. Name of observer Eric Kearney\n5. Occupation of observer Constable\n6. Address of observer Newfoundland Constabulary, Grand Falls\n7. Place of observation Grand Falls.\n8. Number of objects 5. 4 seen at first 1, later\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight brief period\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight First four - flying in easterly direction Last object: N/S\n14. Tactics Maintained formation - flew side by side, last one N/S flew in a rocking motion\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Mugs about size of barrel head\n17. Color N/S - seemed phosphorescent\n18. Shape round - about size\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S However, there appeared to be a phosphorescent glow about it\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Four \"flying saucers\" were seen by Constable Kearney's wife just before his arrival home at approx 11:30, on 9th of July. A Mr. John Jackson, a resident of St. John's and a friend of the family also witnessed them. They were flying in an easterly direction, and appeared to be four round figures that had passed overhead at terrific speed, flying side by side.\n\nOn looking skyward, Constable Kearney, himself, perceived a huge jelly-fish flash across the sky. Could not determine the height and speed owing to the brief period it was visible. Could not determine color but there seemed to be a phosphorescent glow about it. It was found in shape and about the size of a barrel head, and appeared to be flying in a rocking motion.\n\nNote: The last object was seen by Constable Kearney, his wife and Mr. Jackson."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 40\n1. Date 7 July 1947\n2. Time 1600\n3. Location Phoenix, Arizona\n4. Name of observer William Albert Rhodes\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer 4333 N. 14th St., Phoenix, Arizona\n7. Place of observation 37° 27' N 112° 3' W\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 2,000 ft to 5,000 ft\n12. Speed 400-600 MPH\n13. Direction of flight N/S NE to West\n14. Tactics Spiraled down from 5000' to 2000 ft and then ascended at 45° angle\n15. Sound Noise like jet on approach - no sound heard while in view\n16. Size 20-30 ft\n17. Color grey\n18. Shape elliptical\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Cumulus clouds\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Photos (2)\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object appeared elliptical in shape and had a diameter of 20-30 feet. When first seen it was at about 5,000 ft and traveling from 400 to 600 MPH. Its grey color rendered it difficult to perceive at a distance as it blended with the clouds. Although a jet-like noise was heard prior to the object's appearance no audible sound was produced while it remained in view. The tail of the object had two points on the outside area, visible as it made its two left-to-right circles which had an approximate radius of 1/4 to 1/2 miles. The object had what appeared to be a cockpit canopy in the center which extended toward the back and beneath the object. The \"cockpit\" did not protrude from the surface but was clearly visible with the naked eye. The object did not revolve on its own axis. It had no discernible landing gears nor propellers. It appeared to have an excellent air foil (tapered from wing tip to wing tip). Mr. Rhodes thought that the 10-15 MPH wind velocity which caused a rustling of tree leaves might have made it impossible for him to hear any noise connected with the object. He also stated that he thought the object was the Navy's new \"Flapjack Plane\" but altered his opinion since the object seemed to have no landing gears and no propellers. (The Navy ship is illustrated as having both). Rhodes managed to take one photograph of the object at its lowest point (about 2000 ft) and another as it turned out of its second spiral and started upward."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 41\n1. Date 11 July 47\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Elmendorf Fld., Anchorage, Alaska\n4. Name of observer Col Bruce H. Perry &\nMaj Wm E. Geyser\n5. Occupation of observer 59th Airways & ACS Group\n6. Address of observor Elmendorf fld (59th Airways & ACS Group)\n7. Place of observation 61° 10' N-145° 0' W\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed great\n13. Direction of flight South\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Three ft in diameter\n17. Color aluminum\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction aluminum\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs N/S\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Object resembling an aluminum colored balloon about three feet in diameter was seen at an undetermined altitude flying at great speed in a north to south direction."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 42\n1. Date 12 Uly 1947\n2. Time 1430\n3. Location Elmendorf Fld., Anchorage Alaska\n4. Name of observer Maj Edward Graham\n5. Occupation of observer USAF\n6. Address of observer 59th Airways and Communications Group\n7. Place of observation Elmendorf Fld. (61° 10' N 149° 0' W)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer approx 5 miles away\n10. Time in sight several minutes\n11. Altitude 1,500 ft\n12. Speed 100 MPH\n13. Direction of flight NW\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 10 feet in diameter\n17. Color grayish balloon\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Major Edward Graham and some unidentified officers of the Alaskan Command observed a grayish balloon approximately 10 feet in diameter in the vicinity of Elmendorf Fld. flying in a NW direction following the contour of the mountains five miles away. The object was reported as flying at an altitude of 1500 feet at an estimated rate of 100 MPH; paralleling the course of a C-42 landing into a 20-mile per hour wind.\n\nNOTE: See also incidents 41 and 38. (Info extracted from wkly Intel Summary ATC 16 July 1947)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 43\n1. Date 29 June 1947\n2. Time 1645 - 1945 P. M.\n3. Location 7 miles out of Clarion Iowa in direction of Mason City, Iowa\n4. Name of observer Dale Hays\n5. Occupation of observer Had been bus driver\n6. Address of observer Box 12, Crocker, Mo.\n7. Place of observation 7 miles out of Clarion - 42° 43' N - 93° 44' W\n8. Number of objects 5 in first group; 13 in second\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight several minutes\n11. Altitude 1200 ft\n12. Speed 300 MPH\n13. Direction of flight South by Southeast and North Northwest\n14. Tactics Observed single file\n15. Sound sound like that of an electric motor or dynamo\n16. Size From 175 to 250 ft in diameter by 12 feet in thickness\n17. Color \"dirty\" white\n18. Shape between a circle and an oval - inverted saucer\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs N/S\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"About 7 miles out of Clarion, Iowa, observer saw an object shoot across the sky in front of the bus he was driving. It was followed by four more. the height appeared about 1200 feet. Observed stepped out of the bus which was facing east and noticed some dots in the sky approaching from the opposite direction. They were flying about the same altitude at a speed of about 300 MPH. These 13 objects flew in a single file. Roughly, the objects were between a circle and an oval in shape. In appearance they looked like an inverted saucer flying thru the air. The thickest part seemed to be about 12 feet. The diameter could have been anywhere from 175 to 250 feet. They were dirty white in color. The second group disappeared into the NW sky in a matter of a few minutes. They made a noise as they passed overhead similar to an electric motor or dynamo."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 44\n1. Date 28 June 47\n2. Time 3:43 P. M.\n3. Location 16 miles NW of Milwaukee\n4. Name of observer N/S - brother to Marion Benscher the reported incident\n5. Occupation of observer \"farmer\"\n6. Address of observer N/S Rockfield, Wisconsin\n7. Place of observation 16 miles NW of Milwaukee 43° 05' N 88° 22' W\n8. Number of objects seven to ten\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed \"like blue blazes\"\n13. Direction of flight south\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape \"saucer\"\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness saw the flying saucers (about seven to ten of them) which flew directly over their home. Said they went like \"blue blazes\" and didn't make any noise and were headed south.\n\nWitness did not report this info. It was reported by Marion Benscher, a sister. Her address is Menomonee Falls, Wisc.\n\nReported in Amazing Stories, Page 170"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 45\n1. Date 28 June 47\n2. Time afternoon\n3. Location Illinois\n4. Name of observer N/S - Taken from \"The Latest News\" at 8 to 8:15 A. M. w/Charles Sebastin\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Illinois\n8. Number of objects 7 to 10\n9. Distance of object from observer\n10. Time in sight\n11. Altitude\n12. Speed\n13. Direction of flight\n14. Tactics\n15. Sound\n16. Size\n17. Color\n18. Shape\n19. Odor detected\n20. Apparent construction\n21. Exhaust trails\n22. Weather conditions\n23. Effect on clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs\n25. Manner of disappearance\n26. Remarks: This info heard broadcast 29 June 47 at 8:00 A. M. over WIS \"The Latest News\". Charles Sebastin, announcer.\n(over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The radio announcer stated that the discs had been sighted over Illinois the preceding afternoon (28 June 47).\nThe announcement of this program was taken from a letter published in \"Amazing Stories\" dated Jan 48."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 46\n1. Date 22 June 47\n2. Time 11:30 A. M.\n3. Location Greenfield, Mass\n4. Name of observer Edward L. De Rose\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Greenfield, Mass.\n7. Place of observation Greenfield, Mass. 42° 35' N 72° 42' W\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight eight to ten seconds\n11. Altitude 1,000 +\n12. Speed As fast as a speeding plane or faster\n13. Direction of flight Northwesterly direction\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size \"small\"\n17. Color silvery-white\n18. Shape round and irregular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - like polished aluminum\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S - but object reflected sunlight very strongly.\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance obscured by cloud bank\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"De Rose saw a \"brilliant, small round-shaped, silvery white object\" which moved in a northwesterly direction as fast or possibly faster than a speeding plane at an estimated altitude of 1,000 ft or more. It stayed in view for eight or ten seconds until obscured by a cloud bank. The object reflected sunlight very strongly as though it were of polished aluminum or silver. Other than to say it \"appeared round and irregular\" De Rose was unable to determine its shape. It did not resemble any weather balloons he had ever seen. He stated \"I can assure you it was very real.\""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 6 July 47 Incident # 47\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Fairfield-Suisun Air Base, Calif.\n4. Name of observer Capt James H. Barniston\n5. Occupation of observer Capt. USAF\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Fairfield Suisun AF Base 122° 03' W 38° 19' N\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 60 seconds\n11. Altitude 10,000 ft\n12. Speed in excess of any known aircraft\n13. Direction of flight Southeasterly.\n14. Tactics rolled from side to side three times - one side reflected sun strongly from its surface - other gave no reflection\n15. Sound could not be determined - due to aircraft in vicinity\n16. Size About that of a C-54\n17. Color indefinite\n18. Shape indefinite\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Sunlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object traveled in a southeast direction at an estimated height of 10,000 ft or more and at a speed in excess of any aircraft he had ever seen. It was under observation for approx 60 seconds during which time it traveled over 3/4 of the visible sky. No definite color or shape could be determined. The object appeared to roll from side to side three times, and one side reflected the sun strongly from its surface while the other gave no reflection. He thought the size about that of a C-54. He states that [REDACTED] the time the object completed the roll it became very difficult to see and almost disappeared. No sound could be attributed to the aircraft."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 Jan 48 Incident # 48\n2. Time between 7:20 and 7:55 P. M.\n3. Location Wilmington, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Gale P. Walter, Col. James Hudson, M/Sgt Irvin H. Lewis, S/Sgt John P. Haag, Sgt Harold B. Olvis & T/Sgt\n5. Occupation of observer Control Tower operators Leroy Ziegler and 4 members of the alert crew\n6. Address of observer Clinton County Air Base\n7. Place of observation Clinton County AF Base Control Tower\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 35 minutes\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed terrific bursts of speed\n13. Direction of flight SW\n14. Tactics hung suspended in the air at intervals and then gained and lost altitude at seemingly terrific bursts of speed\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color red\n18. Shape cone\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction \"fire\"\n21. Exhaust trails gaseous green mist\n22. Weather conditions Heavy layer of clouds\n23. Effect on clouds intense brightness of sky phenomena pierced thru a heavy layer of clouds passing intermittently over the area\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared over horizon\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A sky phenomena which had the appearance of a flaming red cone trailing a gaseous green mist appeared in the southwest skies of Wilmington, Ohio, between 7:20 and 7:55 P. M. Jan 7, 48.\n\nThe sky phenomena hung suspended in the air at intervals and then gained and lost altitude at what appeared to be terrific bursts of speed. The intense brightness of the phenomena pierced thru a heavy layer of clouds passing intermittently over the area and obscured other celestial phenomena.\n\nNOTE: See account of an unnamed comet due in the northern hemisphere approx Jan 1. attached.\n\nSee incidents 45a, 45b, 45c, 45d & 33, 33a, 33b, 33c, 33d, 33e 33f and 30 and 32."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 48 Incident # 48a\n2. Time 1925 o'clock\n3. Location Clinton County Air Field\n4. Name of observer LeRoy Ziegler\n5. Occupation of observer T/Sgt\n6. Address of observer Clinton County AF, Wilmington, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Clinton County AF Base\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Thirty-five minutes\n11. Altitude high\n12. Speed stationary for a while and then made rapid ascents and descents and then to SW with great speed\n13. Direction of flight to SW\n14. Tactics Vertical ascents and descents at great speed\n15. Sound None\n16. Size very large\n17. Color Same as star\n18. Shape circular - starlike - only larger\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails faint exhaust trail when moving up and down or from side to side\n22. Weather conditions Cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds Object could be seen thru clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance over the horizon at about 20:00\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Object appeared to be moving up and down and from side to side. At one time the object was covered by a cloud but the light could be seen thru the cloud. It was the same color as a star only very much brighter sometimes changing to a more reddish hue then turning white or yellow. At first it did not appear to be traveling at any speed. Then it seemed to go up and down and sometimes change off and go from side to side at what seemed to be a very great speed. It seemed pretty high in the air - too high to be any kind of a light from the ground. There was no beam. No sound could be heard. A faint exhaust trail was discernible when it moved up or down or from side to side. Finally it began to move away toward the SW at very great speed and disappeared over the horizon at about 20:00.\n\nSee: 48, 48b, 48c, 48d & 33, 33a, 33b, 33c, 33d, 33e, 33f & 30 and 32."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 48 Incident # 48b\n2. Time 1920 EST\n3. Location Clinton County Army Air Field, Wilmington, Ohio\n4. Name of observer James H. Hudson,\n5. Occupation of observer Corporal, on duty in Control Tower\n6. Address of observer Clinton County AAF.\n7. Place of observation Control Tower, Clinton County AAF\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer some 15 to 20 miles\n10. Time in sight 35 minutes\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Hovered then moved with great speed\n13. Direction of flight South West\n14. Tactics Changed shape on ascent and descent - When it climbed it was right side up - (point up) When descending the point turned down\n15. Sound none\n16. Size larger than star\n17. Color White changing to red to green\n18. Shape Triangle\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction surrounded with burning gas or something that emmated light\n21. Exhaust trails When ascending & descending it appeared to trail a green mist\n22. Weather conditions light scattered clouds with a haze toward the SW\n23. Effect on clouds Could be seen thru the cloud which passed under it.\n24. Sketches or photographs 4 penciled sketches\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared on SW heading at great speed\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"The object when first sighted appeared white then it turned red. Its real shape could not be distinguished until it descended. It then took the form of a cone or up-side-down triangle. (See Sketch \"A\")\n\nSketch \"A\"\n\nWhen it climbed, it was right side up (Sketch \"B\")\n\nOn ascending and descending it appeared to have a green mist following it\nSee Sketch \"C\" -- green mist\nred\n\nSpeed could not be determined in miles per hour for it appeared to hover at spots, then, when it moved, it moved with great speed. After making a vertical descent and ascent it headed due SW at great speed and disappeared at approx 1955 EST. Distance from the field when first sighted was some 15 to 20 miles. There was no sound. The trail, maybe from exhaust, was green (at least thru the field glasses it appeared green) During the time it was under observation a cloud passed under it and the light shown thru.\n\nAccording to this observer the object was not a balloon, a comet, star or any known aircraft. The light did not come from an aircraft's running lights. The whole object appeared surrounded with burning gas or something which emitted a light.\n\nSee also: 48, 48a, 48c, 48d & 33, 33a, 33b, 33c, 33d, 33e, 33f and Incidents 30 and 32."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING-OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 48 Incident # 48c\n2. Time 19:30\n3. Location Clinton County AAF, Wilmington, O.\n4. Name of observer S/Sgt John P. Haag\n5. Occupation of observer S/Sgt\n6. Address of observer Clinton County AAF\n7. Place of observation Control Tower\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S Around 5 miles from field\n10. Time in sight 25 minutes\n11. Altitude N/S 15,000 to 20,000 ft\n12. Speed N/S - apparently slow\n13. Direction of flight heading of 210°\n14. Tactics N/S Moved from altitude of 15,000 ft to 10,000 ft without noticeable forward or backward motion (about 3 or 4 times)\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color changing colors (red and green)\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions overcast\n23. Effect on clouds could be seen thru overcast\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared over horizon on heading of 210°\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness observed very bright light in the sky southwest of Clinton County AF Base which appeared to be the complete wing of an aircraft on fire. When viewed thru field glasses from the Control Tower the object would gain and lose altitude very rapidly [REDACTED] with barely any discernible forward or backward motion. At times it changed colors (from red to green, etc) At one time it disappeared behind the overcast but its light penetrated thru the overcast. At approximately 19:45 o'clock it began to move away from the field on a heading of 210° and disappeared over the horizon at approximately 19:55. (1st acct)\n\nNOTE: See also 48, 48a, 48b, 48d & 33, 33a, 33b, 33c, 33d, 33e, 33f and 30 and 32.\n\nAt the time of the sighting the weather was clear over the Base, with a South West wind which was moderate. There was an overcast in the SE which appeared to be a layer approximately 1000 feet thick. The height of this overcast was approximately 5,000 ft. Object seemed to be about 5 miles from the field at an altitude of from 15,000 to 20,000 ft. The object which appeared stationary at first resembled the complete wing of an airplane on fire. No beam of light was projected. After observing it with the naked eye for some five minutes, witness went to control tower and looked thru field glasses and then decided that it was not a comet or a falling star to his knowledge of astronomy. With the aid of the glasses the object appeared to go from an altitude of 15,000 to 10,000 feet without any noticeable forward or backward motion, and then back up to its original altitude very rapidly. This occurred some 3 or 4 times. When it moved a red light would dominate and change to a green light and then back to its original color. It then started to recede on a heading of 210° going behind the overcast. However, the light was discernible thru the overcast. It then moved very rapidly away, stopping momentarily for 3 or 4 minute intervals and then disappearing over the horizon at 1955. No sound was heard. No photographs were taken (From a signed statement (second account)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 48d\n1. Date 7 Jan 48\n2. Time 1920 to 1950\n3. Location Clinton County Army Air Fld., Wilmington, O.\n4. Name of observer Mr. Ralph L. Stirr\n5. Occupation of observer M/S\n6. Address of observer Clinton County AAB\n7. Place of observation Clinton County AAB\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Seemed to be at first some 4,000 ft high\n10. Time in sight M/S\n11. Altitude 4,000 ft+\n12. Speed movement slow in appearance\n13. Direction of flight approx due west\n14. Tactics described are from point first seen to horizon\n15. Sound M/S\n16. Size M/S\n17. Color fire-colored\n18. Shape M/S\n19. Odor detected M/S\n20. Apparent construction [REDACTED] \"fire\"\n21. Exhaust trails none -\"left no trails or tails like a meteor or comet\"\n22. Weather conditions clear to scattered\n23. Effect on clouds Light could be seen when clouds passed beneath it.\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance due west over horizon\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object seemed to be some sort of flare. Witness thought it was some aircraft in trouble. Requested the tower to take a look at it to determine if it were a flare. It appeared, with the naked eye, to be a very bright light the color of ordinary fire which lost and regained altitude in the manner of a parachute flare riding on thermals. The intensity of the light varied. This was attributed to clouds passing inbetween below; however, the light was readily discernible thru the clouds. The sky was clear to scattered. When the object was compared to the stars there was a decided difference. Stars were of the usual white; this object was yellow or flame color. When first seen it appeared to be about 4,000 ft but disappearing over the horizon would make it much higher. The movement was very slow in appearance and it left no trails or tails like a meteor or comet. Place of disappearance was approximately due west from position of observer.\n\nNOTE: See also 48, 48a, 48b, 48c, 48d & 33, 33a, 33b, 33c, 33d, 33e, 33f & 30 and 32"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 49\n1. Date 9 Jan 48\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location around Danville, Ky.\n4. Name of observer Mr & Mrs. Markham\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S - picked up in WHIO news broadcast relayed from Danville, Ky.\n7. Place of observation Danville, Ky.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight West\n14. Tactics none\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape pencil-shape\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails long trail of smoke or exhaust\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance trail / exploded into a beautiful display of sparks, etc\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"According to a WHIO News Broadcast at 2300-2315, 9 Jan 48, relayed from Danville, Kentucky, a Mr. & Mrs. Markham were driving in their car in or about Danville, Kentucky, when they saw a pencil-like object flying very high which left a long trail of smoke or exhaust. The trail shortly afterwards turned into a beautiful fireworks display of sparks, etc. The object appeared to be traveling a straight course."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 50\n1. Date 10 Jan 48 (see reverse side of sheet)\n2. Time 10 PM EST\n3. Location Wildwood, N. J. (39° 00' N & 75° 48' W)\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Ethel Evans\n5. Occupation of observer authority on knitting\n6. Address of observer Bellvue Apts, Wildwood, N. J.\n7. Place of observation 401 Pine Ave, Wildwood (home of Mrs. Krueger)\n8. Number of objects 1 which split into 2 pieces\n9. Distance of object from observer undetermined\n10. Time in sight 5-8 seconds\n11. Altitude varying - slow descent\n12. Speed slow\n13. Direction of flight shoreward (270°)\n14. Tactics broke into two pieces\n15. Sound None\n16. Size lamplight\n17. Color yellow, red or amber-colored\n18. Shape ovular - tear drop\n19. Odor detected H/S\n20. Apparent construction H/S\n21. Exhaust trails none\n22. Weather conditions Clear night\n23. Effect on clouds H/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Forwarded a picture of Mars published in \"Life\" which showed an orange-red ball\n25. Manner of disappearance fell into sea\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness saw one object which split into two separate pieces and fell into the ocean. (See Mrs Krueger's account)\nFeb 19, 1948, 1225 A.M.: Witness stated that she saw saucer. Tried to take picture but says object was moving too fast.\nFeb 21, 1948 (Sat Night): Reported seeing another \"saucer\"\nMar 11, 1946 10:50 P.M.: Saw mystery light drop and fall in the water (Thursday night)\nApr 2, 4:40 P.M.: Object resembles a small pilotless plane - very bright metal - no motor noise and looks like the pictures of the German pilotless planes. The center was ball shaped and very bright metal. It followed the coast line until out of sight. It came from the south and was heading north.\n(same time date) Object appeared to fall in water. The metal wings were small and evidently broke as it fell since it appeared like sheets of metal dropping at the side. Witness states she saw this clearly.\nApr 24, 5:10 P.M.: \"new guided missile of bright metal seen since 2 Apr.\"\nApr 2 and 3:\n\"There is activity in Wildwood again - the saucers have been appearing since 1 July.\" Mrs. Evans enclosed picture shown in \"Life\" of the planet \"Mars\" which shows an orange-red ovular circle.\nJuly 1st, 1948\nIn letter to President Truman she writes: \"there have been more 'flying saucers' which appear on very clear nights - when there is a moon. They appear to come from the SE and from the ocean. Over the island they appear waste dy - like the one that broke. Then over the land they ascend quite high and move towards the NW, disappearing at not too fast a speed.\"\nNOTE: Individual appears to be \"crackpot\". No one (with the exception of Mrs. Krueger) appears to have seen the many sightings mentioned. This in spite of an alerted coast guard, police dept. and others."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 50a\n1. Date 10 Jan 48\n2. Time 10 PM EST\n3. Location Wildwood, N. J.\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Krueger\n5. Occupation of observer housewife\n6. Address of observer 401 Pine Ave., Wildwood, New Jersey\n7. Place of observation from 401 Pine Ave (39° 00' N & 75° 48' W)\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer 500 ft.\n10. Time in sight 5-8 seconds\n11. Altitude varying\n12. Speed slow descent\n13. Direction of flight down\n14. Tactics Floated slowly across horizon, separated and disappeared below housetops\n15. Sound none\n16. Size H/S - that of lamplight\n17. Color orange-colored\n18. Shape discs or balls\n19. Odor detected H/S\n20. Apparent construction H/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear night\n23. Effect on clouds H/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance fell into sea\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Objects were brought to Mrs. Krueger's attention by Mrs. Evans. Mrs Krueger saw \"a most unusual thing drop out of the sky. I think it was a flying saucer as I have never seen anything equal to it before\" She then states that she saw what appeared to be 2 round orange colored discs or balls, the one being smaller, and that these objects appeared to descend vertically toward the earth in a slow and steady manner until disappearing from their sight. Mrs. Evans said that Mrs Krueger observed two objects (apparently related) but that they were originally one object which separated at about the time Mrs. Krueger sighted it.\nAll witnesses (Mrs. Evans, her son and Mrs Krueger) agree on the following:\nColor and size - that of an old-fashioned gas light which had a yellow, red or amber shade. Outline was distinct and did not appear aflame or irregular. No noise or sound of kind. No smoke or exhaust trails seen. Shape oval to round. All stated that it was not to their knowledge a balloon, dirigible, flare, parachute or any other known object and all seemed to have a pretty good knowledge as to the appearance of the fore-going.\nNOTE: Witness appeared calm and normally sensible in her responses to various questions."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 3 Sept 47 Incident # 51\n2. Time 1215\n3. Location Oswego, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Raymond Dupui\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Oswego, Oregon\n8. Number of objects 12 to 15\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude high\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: 12 to 15 round silver objects seen at high altitude above Oswego, Oregon at 1215, 3 Sept 47 while witness was observing a local plane flying overhead."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 52\n1. Date 29 July 47\n2. Time 1450\n3. Location Hamilton Fld., Calif\n4. Name of observer Capt William B. Ryberd\n5. Occupation of observer Capt, USAF - Assistant Operations Officer\n6. Address of observer Hamilton Fld\n7. Place of observation Hamilton, Fld., Calif. 38° 03' N 122° 31' W\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer observed from ground\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 8,000 - 10,000 ft\n12. Speed very fast - make P-80 look as if it were rationless\n13. Direction of flight Southward toward Oakland\n14. Tactics 1st object pursued horizontal flight; 2d object seemed to be going from left to right and right to left like guard in aircraft formation\n15. Sound No sound heard\n16. Size 15-25 ft in diameter\n17. Color white shiny\n18. Shape circular like a ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Disappeared in flight\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Capt Ryberd saw two unidentified aerial objects at approximately 8,000 to 10,000 ft traveling above a P-80. He thought they were approximately 15 to 25 feet in diameter. In shape they were circular like a ball on the bottom but not completely round. The first flew straight and level but the second flying close behind the first at the same altitude seemed to be going from left to right and right to left - more like a guard in an aircraft formation. Due to the noise of the P-80, no sound could be heard from them. They did not leave any vapor trails or visible trail. The weather was clear and Captain Ryber and Lt Ward Stewart watched them until they disappeared in flight, presumably over Oakland headed toward the ocean.\nNOTE: Capt Ryberd showed extreme sincerity throughout the interview"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 53A\n1. Date 29 Jul 47\n2. Time After 1200\n3. Location Hamilton Fld., California\n4. Name of observer Ward L. Stewart\n5. Occupation of observer 1st Lt., Air Res. (Former B-29 pilot)\n6. Address of observer Hearst Mining Bldg., Univ. of Calif.\n7. Place of observation 38° 03' N 122° 31' W\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 15 seconds\n11. Altitude 6,000 ft\n12. Speed Approx 75 mph\n13. Direction of flight 120°\n14. Tactics Similar to fighter a/c when accompanying heavier ships\n15. Sound none\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color milk white\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance flew out of sight\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Stewart's attention called to unidentified flying object by Capt Ryberd. Stewart estimates the P-80 at 250 miles on preliminary approach for landing at Hamilton Fld. Object was estimated to be following P-80 at three or four times its speed. A moment later another object appeared and flew a course described as something similar to a fighter's maneuvers when accompanying a heavier ship, on a left to right movement, over the object first sighted. The object continued this maneuvering until out of sight. Size could not be estimated but not believed to be above 6,000 ft altitude. Described as milky-white in color, and unlike any conventional aircraft seen."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 28 June 47 Incident # 53\n2. Time 1515 CST\n3. Location 30 miles northwest of Lake Meade, Nevada\n4. Name of observer 1st Lt Eric B. Armstrong\n5. Occupation of observer Ferry Division, Brooks Fld., San Antonio, Texas\n6. Address of observer 170th AF Base Unit, Ferry Div. Brooks Fld., San Antonio, Texas\n7. Place of observation 30 miles NW of Lake Meade (from air)\n8. Number of objects 5 or 6\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 6,000\n12. Speed 285 MPH\n13. Direction of flight 120° (NW)\n14. Tactics horizontal very close formation\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 36\" in diameter\n17. Color white\n18. Shape circular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"On 28 June 47 [illegible] in a P-51 bound for Portland, Oregon, by way of Medford, Oregon, at approx 1515 CST (course of 300°) and ground speed of 285 MPH, altitude 10,000 ft, approximately 30 miles NW of Lake Meade, Nevada. Lt Armstrong sighted 5 or 6 white, circular objects at 4:00, [illegible] altitude approximately 6,000 ft, on a course of 120° and flying at an estimated speed of 285 MPH. The objects were flying very smoothly and in a close formation. The estimated size of the white objects was approximately 36\" in diameter. Lt Armstrong was sure the white objects were not birds since the rate of closure was very fast. He was certain too that the white objects were not jets or conventional aircraft since he has flown both.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES:\n\nLt Armstrong was very sincere in the explanation and was not the exaggerating type. He merely stated what he saw and drew no conclusions."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 16 Jan 47 Incident # 54\n2. Time 2230\n3. Location 50 miles from Dutch coast to Norfolk, England\n4. Name of observer Reported by Air Ministry Great Britain\n5. Occupation of observer pilot of Mosquito\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation 50 miles from Dutch coast 52° 52' N 02° 37' E\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S - object chased from 2230 to 2300 hours\n11. Altitude 22,000 ft\n12. Speed N/S - faster than Mosquito\n13. Direction of flight west (from Dutch Coast to Norfolk)\n14. Tactics Evasive controlled action\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S - night\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"During normal night-flying practice at 2230 hours on 16th Jan. one of British Mosquitos [illegible] was vectored on to an unidentified A/C at 22,000 ft. A long chase ensued commencing over the North Sea about 50 miles from the Dutch Coast and ending at 2300 hours over Norfolk. Two brief AI contacts were made but faded quickly. The unidentified aircraft appeared to take efficient controlled evasive action.\n\nNo explanation of this incident has been forthcoming nor has it been repeated."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 23 July 47 Incident # 55\n2. Time 0345Z (0715 local)\n3. Location Harmon Fld., Stephenville, Newfoundland\n4. Name of observer Miss Patricia Abbott & Lt Hammaker\n5. Occupation of observer government employee and Navigator & Public Relations Officer\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Harmon Fld., Newfoundland 48° 30' N 58° 33' W\n8. Number of objects 1 Undetermined\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Three minutes\n11. Altitude 10,000 ft.\n12. Speed high velocity - stated to be faster than conventional A/C\n13. Direction of flight [illegible]\n14. Tactics abrupt darts\n15. Sound no noise\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color reddish flashes of light\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions high scattered clouds - visibility: 15 miles\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witnesses were walking when they observed a peculiar reddish light.\nThey thought at first that the light was a shooting star but it left\nno streak. It appeared again and they thought it was a plane flying at\nvery night high altitude. Then a number of intermittent flashes were observed\nfor three minutes. After observing the abrupt darts of light and hearing\nno hum of motors they concluded that it was definitely not a plane,\nas the maneuvers appeared too abrupt."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 6 July 47 Incident # 56\n2. Time 2045 hours\n3. Location Birmingham, Alabama\n4. Name of observer Staff Sergeant Ira L. Livingston\n5. Occupation of observer S/Sgt. w/250 hours as Pilot and Armorer Gunner\n6. Address of observer 1354 Meadow Lane, Green Acres, Birmingham, Ala.\n7. Place of observation As above 33° 33'N 86° 52' W\n8. Number of objects 7 to 10\n9. Distance of object from observer Undetermined\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 2000 ft above horizon at 45° angle\n12. Speed 500 to 600 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Southeast\n14. Tactics vertical ascent - traveled in arc\n15. Sound none\n16. Size 2 ft in diameter\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs one photograph\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At 2045 hours, 6 July 47, Staff Sergeant Livingston's attention was called by a neighbor (a Mr. Herman H. Bodwell) to witness some \"flying discs\" The objects appeared to be 2000 above the horizon at a 45° angle as an estimated distance away. They were approximately 2 ft in diameter, and round. They produced a dim glow of light and were traveling at an estimated speed of 500 to 600 MPH. The object (or objects) appeared to be traveling in a definite arc rather than straight, and as soon as one was out of sight, another would appear behind it but not always in the same path. One seemed to come straight up. The view of its source was obstructed by a nearby home but upon reaching the altitude of approximately 2000 ft it started off in the same direction as the others. Sergeant Livingston says that he did not at any time see more than one object at a time, and he is more than one object it was his personal opinion that there were seven to ten objects. The discs were silent and appeared composed of a single light."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 20 July 1947 Incident # 57\n2. Time 0015Z\n3. Location About one hour from Sidney, Newfoundland\n4. Name of observer Mrs Messrs Maitland, Larkin, Douglas and Hamilton\n5. Occupation of observer All employees of Hamilton, Metcalfe and Kansas City Bridge Company which concern is doing construction work at Harmon Field\n6. Address of observer With above-named concern\n7. Place of observation on board the \"Burgeo\" enroute from Sydney Nova Scotia to Port aux Basques, Newfoundland.\n8. Number of objects N/S - saw flashes - 4 or 5 approximately 1 second apart and equidistant.\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S 30° off horizon at an estimated 1/4 mile range\n12. Speed high velocity - faster than tracer bullet\n13. Direction of flight NNE (30° East of true North)\n14. Tactics horizontal flight\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S - object not seen - flashes were silvery to red in color\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S - possibly what was observed was itself the rocket charge\n22. Weather conditions Clear and dark\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observers did not see the object but only four or five flashes approximately one second apart and equidistant. The flashes appeared silvery to reddish in color and were likened to the glow of a firefly excepting they were larger and at equal intervals. The witnesses did not believe the flashes were occasioned by either a shooting star or a plane, because of the evenly-spaced discharges or flashes, the color and the speed\n\nCorroboration: Capt Gullage, Master of the \"Burgeo\" also saw the flashes while standing on the starboard deck. He stated that he had seen the same thing at approximately the same time and location on the evening of 15 July 47 except at that time the object or flashes were traveling faster and frequently changed courses (\"it changed course abruptly several times\") and was headed generally to the SSW."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 58\n1. Date 4 Aug 47\n2. Time evening\n3. Location NW of Bethel Alaska\n4. Name of observer Capt. Jack Peck and Co-pilot Vince Daly\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot and Co-pilot - Al Jones Flying Svc.\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation 60° 57' N 161° 46' W\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 1200 ft\n10. Time in sight 4 minutes\n11. Altitude 500 to 1,000 ft\n12. Speed 520 MPH - 3 times that of C-54\n13. Direction of flight NW\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size As large or larger than C-54\n17. Color black in color\n18. Shape saucer - like that of C-54 (from rear) but without motors or flying wings.\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions brilliant evening sky\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance flew rapidly out of sight\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Capt Jack Peck and his Copilot Vince Daly stated that on 4 Aug at sunset they sighted and followed a \"flying saucer\" northwest of Bethel, Alaska. The object which appeared as large or larger in mass than a C-54 and black in color appeared silhouetted against a brilliant evening sky. In order to avoid a possible collision (being unable at first to determine in what direction the object was moving) they pulled up to about 1200 ft in order to avoid possible collision. The object crossed their path at right angles to them. Seeing that it was moving away from them at a very rapid rate and flying at an altitude of from 500 to 1,000 ft they swung in behind it and followed it at an air speed of 170 MPH but the thing was out of sight in four minutes. They state the object was smooth-surfaced and streamlined and resembled tailless a C-54 without motors (from the rear) and was without wings or any visible means of propulsion whatever. Wind was negligible and it was on a NW course.\n\nOfficial in Charge of the Airlines for which Peck was working states that the pilot is not the \"imaginative type\"."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 59\n1. Date 12 Sept 47\n2. Time 45 minutes after sunset\n3. Location Midway Island to Oahu - beyond Necker Island\n4. Name of observer Capt Stanley S. Griffin & 2d Officer Edward B. Polhemus\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot and 2d officer, PAA\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Beyond Necker Island (23° 34' N 164° 42' W)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 1 mile\n10. Time in sight Six seconds\n11. Altitude 9,500 to 10,000 ft\n12. Speed 1160 MPH (1000 knots)\n13. Direction of flight 350° then 109°\n14. Tactics Abruptly changed course but observed horizontal flight holding altitude\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S (See below - exhaust)\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S - light the color of an incandescent light without appreciable blue & no reddish tinge\n22. Weather conditions dark - 45 minutes after sunset\n23. Effect on clouds No effect on clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Appeared to burn out 30 miles ahead of PA plane\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Plane had just passed Necker Island at 0555 GCT. At 0556 GCT an intense white light was observed 60° off starboard bow of plane. It appeared similar to the light of an approaching plane except that it was extremely intense. The color was that of an incandescent light without appreciable blue and no reddish tinge. It appeared on a course about 350° true some 5 miles away. The light grew in intensity (but without any change in color) to a point estimated to be one mile off starboard bow of the plane. When the PA plane switched over to manual control the object suddenly veered to an approximate course of 105° and then the bright light appeared to split into two parts and assumed a reddish hue. These two reddish lights did not have the intensity of the white light and appeared about a wing-length apart. As it changed its course the white light and the twin lights appeared to burn out 30 miles ahead. The entire phenomenon was observed for some six seconds. Object was estimated to be traveling 1,000 knots per hour.\n\nNOTE: Both observers thought it could have been a meteor except for the manner in which it held altitude. At no time did it appear to get above or below 9,500 ft. When it disappeared it still seemed at about 9,500 ft. at no time did it dive off sufficient illumination to reflect on the cloud formation at 8,000 ft.\n\nBoth observers were questioned as to possibility of optical illusion and the probability that the object dropped at an oblique angle but both firmly declared the object apparently changed course and that it appeared to hold altitude throughout the entire time observed.\n\nPAA plane was eastbound from Midway on magnetic course 96, which is approximately 110° true, and flying at 9,000 feet at about 205 knots. It was flying on automatic pilot with Griffin in the right-hand seat. In the control cabin and Polhemus in the left-hand seat. It was dark and there were cumulus clouds of about .4 density. The moon had set 15 minutes previously."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 60\n1. Date 10 July 47\n2. Time 1000\n3. Location Cordroy, Newfoundland 47° 52' N 59° 21' W\n4. Name of observer John P. Legge\n5. Occupation of observer Store owner - formerly foreman of Buchans Mine & member of civilian volunteer Air Detection Corps\n6. Address of observer Cordroy, Newfoundland\n7. Place of observation Cordroy, Newfoundland - in front of store\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 15 seconds\n11. Altitude 6,000 ft\n12. Speed rate of shooting star\n13. Direction of flight Northwest heading eastward\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size barrel head\n17. Color bright red - color of flame\n18. Shape circle\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails left afterglow which trailed out for some 15 ft and gave the object a cone-shaped appearance and was a fainter shade than the circle\n22. Weather conditions [REDACTED] it was clear and at dusk\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr Legge asserts in his signed statement that he was certain the object was not a shooting star (asserted he had seen shooting stars before but never had seen anything to compare with it) nor was it a plane. He states it was too \"lit up\" and traveling at too great a speed. It wasn't on fire or it would have fallen in the water. The thing was traveling at the rate of a shooting star but much closer at an estimated height of around 6,000 ft. It was visible for some 15 seconds and came out of the northwest heading eastward. The circle seemed about the size of a barrel head and the trail appeared around 15 feet long and made the whole object resemble a cone. He states \"a shooting star usually leaves a temporary streak - this object left no streak only an after-glow. The circle was a bright red, the color of a flame. The after-glow (cone-shaped) was a fainter shade.\n\nNOTE: See corroborating evidence of Wm Evans and Albert Samms (60a and 60b)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 60a\n\n1. Date 10 July 47\n2. Time 1000\n3. Location Cordroy, Newfoundland - 47° 52' N 59° 21' W\n4. Name of observer Wm Evans\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Cordroy, Newfoundland\n7. Place of observation Cordroy, Newfoundland\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed very fast\n13. Direction of flight couldn't ascertain\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size dinner plate\n17. Color between red and yellow\n18. Shape circle\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Had tail on it of yellowish hue which was not as bright as circle and seemed a little over a yard long.\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance \"hardly in sight before it disappeared\"\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness stated that if the object were a shooting star it was larger than any he had ever seen and much brighter than anything he had ever observed in the sky. It appeared round with a yellowish tail, which was not as bright as the circle. The circle itself appeared to be sort of red and yellow and about the size of a large dinner plate. It went so fast that it was hardly in sight before it disappeared. It was traveling much closer than a shooting star. Witness sure it did not in any way resemble a shooting star nor a plane.\n\nSee Legge account (Incident 60) and Albert Samms' account (Incident 60b)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 60b\n\n1. Date 10 July 47\n2. Time 1000\n3. Location Cordroy, Newfoundland - 47° 52' N 59° 21' W\n4. Name of observer Albert Samms\n5. Occupation of observer N/S - child of 12\n6. Address of observer Cordroy, Newfoundland\n7. Place of observation N/S Cordroy, Newfoundland\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight \"only a minute\"\n11. Altitude N/S - flying at height of plane which is flying high\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S - \"shot down very fast\" - See Mrs Samms' account as told by her son Albert\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color bright reddish yellow\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S - witnesses affirm it was \"clear\" and at dusk\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Albert Samms is a twelve-year old boy. He was alone when he saw the object. He thought it was flying at the height of a plane at high altitude but that it looked strange for an airplane because it was lit up so brightly-it was not carrying lights (\"planes do have a light or two\") It was of a bright reddish yellow color. Witness saw it only momentarily because of the tremendous speed. \"I saw it only for a minute because it was traveling at a terrific speed.\"\n\nHis mother, Mrs. Samms, is the Post Mistress of the town and after he ring her son's description felt that it answered the description of the \"flying disc\". She added that Albert didn't believe the thing was a plane since \"it wouldn't shoot down like that did\" and \"besides it was too 'lit up'\".\n\nSee Legge account (Incident 60) and Evans' account (Incident 60a)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 61\n1. Date 8 Sept 47\n2. Time 1230 P. M.\n3. Location Logan, Utah\n4. Name of observer Mr and Mrs. Richard Anderson\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observor Logan, Utah\n7. Place of observation Logan, Utah 40° 45' N 111° 54' W\n8. Number of objects Approx a dozen\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N one to 2 minutes\n11. Altitude 2,000 to 3,000 ft\n12. Speed \"faster than birds\"\n13. Direction of flight north\n14. Tactics circle city in approx one to two minutes observing group formation.\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size about the size of pigeons\n17. Color white and illuminated\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance in flight to the north\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. & Mrs. Anderson stated that they in company with a Mr. & Mrs. Gaylen Caldwell saw approximately 12 objects flying in group formation at about 2,000 or 3,000 ft in the air. In size they resembled pigeons but seemed to be white and illuminated. They were certain they were not birds as they appeared to be moving faster than birds and they circled the city in approximately one to two minutes. Saw no wing movement during the flight. They couldn't make up their minds as to exactly what they saw."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 61a\n1. Date 8 Sept 47\n2. Time Approx 10:30 P. M.\n3. Location Logan, Utah\n4. Name of observor Mr & Mrs. Norman Hall\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor N/S Logan, Utah\n7. Place of observation Logan, Utah 40° 45' N 111° 54' W\n8. Number of objects N/S\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Much faster than birds\n13. Direction of flight clockwise above city\n14. Tactics changed formation\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size approx that of stay\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Saw a group of flying objects similar in appearance to a group of moving stars which traveled clockwise above the city.\n(over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At first the objects were thought to be the lights of a plane. However they seemed to change in formation. Thought that objects traveled much faster than birds."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 62\n1. Date 8 Sept 47\n2. Time Between 10:30 and 11:00 P. M.\n3. Location Logan, Utah\n4. Name of observer Mr & Mrs Fred Thunell et al\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Logan, Utah\n7. Place of observation Logan, Utah 40° 45' N 111° 54' W\n8. Number of objects saw 5 groups each containing 35 to 60 small objects\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude several thousand feet\n12. Speed high rate of speed\n13. Direction of flight N/S but they circled the city\n14. Tactics N/S -\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size \"small\"\n17. Color yellowish-white\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr & Mrs Fred Thannell advised that they and 5 other people observed five\ngroups each containing 35 to 60 small objects of yellowish-white color\ncircling the city at a high rate of speed. They were several thousand feet\nin the air and it was impossible to ascertain the size due to the distance, speed\nand cloudy conditions.\n\nSee also Incident 61 and 61a"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 12:05 P. M. Incident # 63\n2. Time 29 July 47\n3. Location 1/4 mile NW of Canyon while proceeding NW along road leading from Canyon Ferry to York - some 35 miles NE of Helena\n4. Name of observer R. J. Madden et al\n5. Occupation of observer Division Plant Engr., the Pac. Tel & Tel Co.\n6. Address of observer The Pac. Tel & Tel Co.\n7. Place of observation 35 NE of Helena, Montana\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 2 to 3 miles\n10. Time in sight 5 seconds +\n11. Altitude 3,000 ft\n12. Speed tremendous\n13. Direction of flight NE\n14. Tactics Hovering - rising and descending thru vertical distance of some 50-100 ft - then swooping to the NE at tremendous speed\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 3 ft in dia x 3 or 4 inches in thickness - as seen from observer's viewpoint. - apparently huge\n17. Color like polished nickel\n18. Shape circular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction like polished nickel\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions blue sky with scattered small clouds. Bright sunshine causing disc to gleam and shimmer\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance \"melted into thin air\"\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observed a new bright disc hovering and fluttering in the air. It descended and rose thru a vertical distance of 50 to 100 ft for some 5 seconds and while at the top of an ascent it suddenly swooped to the NE at tremendous speed, traveled some 200 ft and disappeared into the clear air - appeared to \"melt into thin air\" as a result of the tremendous speed. Appeared approximately 3 ft in dia x 3 or 4 inches in thickness from observers' viewpoint - and estimated as considerably greater in size as witnesses were some 2 or 3 miles from the object.\n\nWitnesses: Steve Herrmann and Karl Herrmann."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 19 Aug 47 Incident # 64\n2. Time 9:30 P. M.\n3. Location Twin Falls, Idaho\n4. Name of observer Mr H. H. Hedstrom, wife and a neighbor (Mrs Shultz) Detective Richard A. Frazier of the Twin Falls Police Dept et al\n5. Occupation of observer Executive Director of the Twin Falls Housing Authority\n6. Address of observer 322 Third Ave North, Twin Falls, Idaho\n7. Place of observation As above\n8. Number of objects Objects were seen in groups of 3, 5, 7, 10 and 35 - undetermined number\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight few minutes\n11. Altitude could not be determined\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight NE returning toward the SW\n14. Tactics observed triangular formation\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Could not be estimated\n17. Color of electric light - only seen as glow going thru air\n18. Shape Could not be estimated\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails No flames or anything was observed except glow of lights\n22. Weather conditions overcast sky at night\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mrs Hedstrom was the first to notice an object traveling at a terrific speed in a northeasterly direction. While discussing this with her husband and a neighbor all three saw ten similar objects proceed rapidly in the same direction in the form of a triangle. As they were disappearing 3 objects peeled off the left flank and proceeded in a more northerly direction. The remaining objects closed ranks and proceeded on a NE course. Five minutes later another group of 3 objects were seen proceeding in the same direction in triangular formation. Three to five minutes later another triangular formation of five or six objects was observed going in the same direction. Then a few minutes later the three witnesses saw 35 to 50 flying in a triangular formation still in the same direction. Approximately 20 to 25 minutes later similar objects were noted coming back over the city in a southwesterly direction. Generally they were in groups of 3, 5 and 7 and followed each other at approximately 5-minute intervals.\n\nDetective Frazier and Mr. Hedstrom did not think they were meteors as\n\n(1) they flew on a level line and did not appear to drop\n(2) Observed triangular formation\n\nThey did not think they were birds as:\n\n(1) They were lighted from the inside.\n\nWere not the reflection of city lights since:\n\n(1) They observed triangular formation and changed course from NE to SW direction.\n\n(2) Observed to close ranks and form a triangle again."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 65\n1. Date Sept of 1947\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location 2 or 3 miles south of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware\n4. Name of observer Horace P. Wenyon\n5. Occupation of observer N/S however he is an airplane pilot of approx 30 years.\n6. Address of observer 123 Rehoboth Ave., Rehoboth Beach, Delaware\n7. Place of observation air - 2 or 3 miles south of Rehoboth Beach, Del.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 1,000 ft\n12. Speed 1,000 to 1,200 MPH\n13. Direction of flight west to east\n14. Tactics apparently horizontal\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 15 inches in diameter\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails several jets of flame were spurting from the object.\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr Wenyon advised that he noticed a projectile approximately 15 inches in diameter cross his course at right angles moving in a west-to-east direction and traveling at an altitude of 1,000 ft. It was traveling at a very high rate of speed - from 1,000 to 1,200 MPH. Several jets of flame were spurting from the object. Then in October of 46 he observed a similar projectile at 1,400 ft while flying over the same beach. This object was also traveling from west to east.\n\nIt was Mr Wenyon's assumption that he saw some sort of rocket being tested. He associated a series of airplane crashes that had occurred around that time with the appearance of this missile and thought that the proper authorities should be notified."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 10 Aug 47\nIncident # 66\n2. Time 9 o'clock - well after dark\n3. Location Near Silver Springs, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Lt Colonel J. L. Walker Jr., GSC\n5. Occupation of observer Scientific Branch, Research Group\n6. Address of observer RADD, WDGS\n7. Place of observation Near Silver Springs, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 3-4 seconds\n11. Altitude low flying\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight north to south\n14. Tactics absolutely horizontal\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color bright orange glow or flame\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails long, straight, narrow white streak of flame (similar to streak left by tracer bullet) which vanished very quickly.\n22. Weather conditions N/S - well after dark\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance simply vanished in mid-air.\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"About 9 o'clock, well after dark, Lt Col F. L. Walker, Jr. GSC, of the Scientific Branch, Research Group, saw a low flying object appear over the top of a barn to his left traveling in an absolutely straight line in an arc of about 70° moving from north to south. The object appeared as a bright orange glow of flame and left behind it a long, straight, narrow white streak of flame similar to the streak left by a tracer bullet and itself, covering an arc of approximately 20° or 30°. There appeared to be a fine mist of smoke trailing behind this streak which vanished very quickly. The object took about 3 - 4 seconds to cover the arc of 70° and then simply vanished in mid air. The path traveled was absolutely horizontal.\n\nWitness states he never observed a comet which acted in this manner and was of the opinion that he had sighted a \"flying saucer\"."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 14 Aug 47\nIncident # 67\n2. Time 1600 hours\n3. Location 5 miles southwest of Placerville, Calif.\n4. Name of observer Mr Ray A. Switzer and wife\n5. Occupation of observer Switzer is an Insurance Executive with the firm of McGuire & Wallis and a graduate of the Univ of Calif.\n6. Address of observer Box 43, Auburn, Eldorado County, Calif.\n7. Place of observation Between 4 and 5 miles southwest from Placerville on Cedar Ravine Road. 38° 42' 45\" N. Lat x 120° 47' 15\" W. Long.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Estimated distance seemed about 750 ft\n10. Time in sight short period\n11. Altitude 500 to 1,000 ft\n12. Speed high rate of speed\n13. Direction of flight north to south\n14. Tactics in a very shallow dive\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Seemed to be about 5 feet long by some 12 to 14 inches in depth\n17. Color polished chromium\n18. Shape Seemed rectangular except for a short period when it appeared to have a slightly curved top surface. Seemed tilted in semi-circle. More rocket-shaped than disc-shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S - a white smoke trail was first observed - later object was enveloped in puff of dark gray smoke\n22. Weather conditions fair with sunshine\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared in puff of dark gray smoke\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observer first noticed a white smoke trail and while searching for its source he saw an object 4 to 6 ft in length x 10 to 14 inches wide and of a metal color which gave off a very bright reflection like highly polished chromium. It was first observed at 1030 position to the auto obile. Upon re ching a 1200 position it was engulfed in a puff of dark gray smoke about 10 ft in diameter. There was no change in the color of the smoke. The object was traveling at terrific speed and seemed to be in a very shallow dive. When the puff of smoke appeared the object disappeared completely; no particles were observed falling from it. The point of disappearance seemed to be about 800 yards in front of Switzer. There was no possibility of being hidden by vegetation or terrain. It appeared rectangular for the most part but once it appeared to have a very slightly curved top surface. It seemed more rocket-like than disc-like, and seemed tilted in a semi-circle.\n\nNOTE: Agent notes that the point of observation would afford a sweeping view thru 40° of the canyon and the south side of Webber Creek. (Switzer was not definite as to what part of the field of view he had seen the object and +++ indicated that it could have been as far as the horizon.) Any object or particles thereof would be in a six square mile area of wooded mountainous terrain full of canyons and ravines.\n\nAgent thought that witness could have seen a conventional type aircraft which due to the distance from which it was observed presented no distinguishing features for the short period it was under observation. However, agent could not account for the smoke trail."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 58\n\n1. Date 24 June 47\n2. Time afternoon\n3. Location Cascade Mts. (Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Fred H. Johnson\n5. Occupation of observer Prospector\n6. Address of observer Globe Hotel, 16 N. W. 1st Ave, Portland,\n7. Place of observation Cascade Mts\n8. Number of objects 5 or 6\n9. Distance of object from observer overhead at 1,000 ft\n10. Time in sight 45 - 60 seconds\n11. Altitude 6,000 ft from sea level\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight SE\n14. Tactics banking\n15. Sound none\n16. Size about 30' dia\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape round with tail\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"While prospecting in the Cascade Mts some 5,000 ft above sea level he noticed a reflection. Upon looking up he saw a disc proceeding in a southeasterly direction. Upon sighting it he placed his telescope to his eye and observed it for some 45 to 60 seconds. At the time the disc was sighted it was banking in the sun. He observed 5 or 6 but concentrated on one. Said they did not fly in any particular formation and he estimated them to be about 1,000 ft from where he was standing. He estimated that they were around 30 feet in diameter and that they had a tail. They made no noise. He noticed that the combination compass and watch in his possession reacted in a very peculiar manner, the hand waving from one side to the other but that this condition corrected itself immediately after the discs had passed out of sight.\n\nNOTE: Informant appeared to be very reliable and advised that he had been a prospector in the States of Montana, Washington and Oregon for the past 40 yrs."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 59\n\n1. Date 6 Aug 47\n2. Time 2230-2245\n3. Location Philadelphia, Pa.\n4. Name of observer Eleanor Naddle\n5. Occupation of observer employed by Geo A. Greenwald Mfg Co.\n6. Address of observer 2114 Hobart St., Philadelphia, Pa.\n7. Place of observation At observer's home\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Very fast\n13. Direction of flight South\n14. Tactics N/S - apparently straight flight\n15. Sound slight buzzing after passage of object\n16. Size large\n17. Color white\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Thin streak of grayish smoke\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Between 10:30 and 10:45 P. M. 6 Aug 47, Miss Naddle was seated on the steps of her home with Cecelia Fine. She was facing north and observed a large white object traveling at a very fast rate of speed to the south. There was a bursting sound, not too loud but plainly audible just after the object passed thru the air. The object appeared red white in color and left a thin streak of smoke which was grayish in color."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 6 Aug 47 Incident # 70\n2. Time Around 2245\n3. Location Philadelphia, Pa\n4. Name of observer John Snyder\n5. Occupation of observer Insurance agent (former B-24 pilot)\n6. Address of observer 1440 Vankir St., Philadelphia, Pa.\n7. Place of observation above address\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 1,000 - 3000 ft\n12. Speed between 400-500 MPH\n13. Direction of flight from NE to SW\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound hissing\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Smoke or condensation - also emitted bluish white flame\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"John Snyder, a former pilot of B-24 in the Army Air Corps advised that he was sitting on the steps of his home around 10:45 P.M. the night of Aug 6, 1947 and that his neighbors, the Kelly family, were also sitting on their steps. All parties were facing east. Snyder noticed an object which emitted a bluish-white flame pass quickly thru the air. It was traveling NE to SW. Using his experience in the Army Air Corps he estimated the speed as between 400 to 500 MPH. The object did not lose elevation and left either a smoke or condensation trail in its former path. The vapor lasted for about 2 seconds. A hissing sound accompanied the passing. The sound was moderate and not nearly as loud as that occasioned by a rocket ship."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8 or 9 Oct 1947 Incident # 71\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Las Vegas, Nevada\n4. Name of observer Thomas L. Moore\n5. Occupation of observer N/S - Capt, USAFR - Ex pilot\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Outskirts of Las Vegas\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 4 to 5 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed 700 to 800 MPH\n13. Direction of flight East & circled to west\n14. Tactics Flew straight, turned, flew straight again\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Trail almost white and of cumulus cloud density which lasted some 15-30 minutes\n22. Weather conditions almost cloudless\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs sketch of course of object\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On Oct 8th or 9th, 1947 while witness was driving on the NW outskirts of Las Vegas, Nevada, he observed what appeared to be a sky-writing pilot's trail. He stopped his car to observe it and noticed two things which troubled him. (1) Where the missile should have been at the head of the steadily appearing trail there was nothing visible or was too small to see (estimated to be a distance of about 5 miles or less) and (2) the speed appeared startling. Thought it was between 400 and 1,000 MPH but thought more precisely to be from 700 to 800 MPH - too fast for conventional aircraft. The trail he thought could have been smoke, vapor from intense speed or any unknown substance. The color was almost white - much like a cumulo-nimbus cloud and of approximately the same density and it was 15-30 minutes before the trail disintegrated.\n\nThe object took a radius of from 5 to 15 miles to complete a turn (he estimated closer to 10) in an attempt to judge its exact course over topographic features of the surrounding countryside. He stated that since the climate in this vicinity is extremely dry and it was almost a cloudless day that the speed would have to be exceedingly great to create such a trail.\n\n[Sketch: Side View, 40° angle, Mt Charleston, 5 miles o my position; View from Above, Mt Charleston, first sighted, o My Position, compass E W S N]"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 17 Sept 1947 Incident # 72\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Alaska (Ft Richardson (?)\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer Army Officer\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Near Ft Richardson, Alaska\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Below 10,000 ft\n12. Speed tremendous\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 2-3 ft diameter\n17. Color metallic silver\n18. Shape spherical\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction None\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Scattered clouds\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Two army officers reported to Office, Director of Intelligence, Hq,\nAlaskan Dept., Ft Richardson, Alaska, saying that they had witnessed\nan objectpassing thru the air at tremendous speed. Object appeared\nto be a sphere and did not give the impression of being saucer-like or\ncomparable to a disk. Altho, the first officer stated that it would\nbe impossible to give minute details, the object appeared to be 2 to 3 feet\nin diameter and did not leave any vapor trail in the sky.\nHe stated the object appeared metallic and silver in color (like that of air bases)\nAs there was scattered cloud formations at 10,000 ft and the object was\nnoted to be traveling below the cloud formation they were able to determine\nthe approximate altitude.\nTo the second officer the object appeared approximately 10 ft in diameter\nand compared it to half the size of a full moon on an ordinary night.\nHe estimated the altitude to be only 3,000 or 4,000 ft. The object appeared\nbroadside to the second officer and gave no evidence of a spinning motion or\ndid he note a reflection. To him it appeared to be a dull metal finish.\nIn conclusion the second officer pointed out that the object was definitely\ntraveling against the wind."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 4 Aug 47 Incident # 73\n2. Time 1600\n3. Location Boston, Mass\n4. Name of observer Alphens D. Powell, Capt of PA Airways, Inc.\nWalter I. White, Navigator\n5. Occupation of observer Crew of Pan Amer Constitution\n6. Address of observer 28 Redwood Road, New Hyde Park, Long Island\n7. Place of observation Approximately midway between Everett, Mass\nand Bedford Radio Beacon.\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer 1 mile away\n10. Time in sight 30 seconds\n11. Altitude 7,800 ft\n12. Speed 175 MPH\n13. Direction of flight easterly - approx 110° magnetic\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 15 ft long, 2-3 feet in depth\n17. Color deep gold\n18. Shape elliptical\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions 5/10 scattered cumulus with tops 1000 Visibility: 10 mi.\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Lost in clouds\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At 1600 P.M., 4 Aug 47, midway between Everett, Mass, and the Bedford Radio Beacon, pilot and navigator sighted an unidentified aerial object. The following conditions existed:\n\nVisibility: good\nCloud coverage: 6-8/10ths; tops: 10,000 ft\nWind at 8,000 ft: 270/25 MPH\nAircraft: 8,000 ft\nAirspeed 265 MPH\nCourse: 240° magnetic.\n\nMr White, Navigator, called Mr Powell's attention to a bright orange object slightly below the level of their aircraft. Mr Powell was unable to see the object from his position (left side of cockpit) as he had no visibility to the right and down, from his position. But, upon glancing out his side window he noticed at a 45° angle to the left an unidentified flying object. It was one mile away at approximately 7,800 ft. Mr. Powell then banked to obtain a better view. He described it as being the length of a P-40 fuselage, blunt at both ends, cylindrical in shape and having a bright orange hue. The object had a definite shape and there was no suggestion of gaseous dissipation (as there would be if the orange color were the result of exhaust from a rocket or jet aircraft. It was traveling at approx 150 MPH, on a course 200° magnetic. It was under observation for approximately 30 seconds. Mr. Powell lost sight of the object when a cloud came between their aircraft and the object.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Mr. A. O. Powell is a graduate of the Aviation Cadet Flying Trng Program, and has over 4,000 command pilot hours to his credit. He appears calm, and intelligent and not given to flights of fancy. He has a fear of publicity.\nHe stated that he has seen numerous pilot balloons, radiosonic devices and tow targets but that the object was definitely not one of them.\n\nEVALUATION: of source: \"C\"; of information: \"3\""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 13 Aug 47 Incident # 75\n2. Time 1300\n3. Location Snake River Canyon (near Twin Falls) Idaho\n4. Name of observer A. C. Urie and two sons, Kenneth & Billy\n5. Occupation of observer farmer\n6. Address of observer Operator of \"Auger Falls Trout Farm\" 6 miles west of Blue Lakes Ranch, Snake River Canyon\n7. Place of observation As above - going down the Snake River\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 300 ft\n10. Time in sight momentary\n11. Altitude 75 ft from the canyon floor - 300 ft away from observer level view afforded\n12. Speed 1000 MPH\n13. Direction of flight East to West\n14. Tactics Road up and down over hills & hollows of canyon\n15. Sound swishing sound\n16. Size 20 feet by 10 ft in thickness\n17. Color sky blue\n18. Shape oblong broad rimmed hat with low crown Inverted pie-plate\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Exhaust from flame - a red tubular fiery glow at the side of the top or hood.\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs one\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared behind hill\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Urie had sent his sons to the river for some tops from his boat. As they were overdue he went to look for them, when he noticed some 300 feet away some 75 feet in the air a sky-blue object silhouetted against the steep walls of the canyon on the far side. (The canyon is about 400 ft deep and 1300 ft across at that place.) The object was traveling 75 feet in the air (300 ft below the rim of the canyon) and so was plainly visible. Urie states that the sky-blue color would probably not be noticed against the sky. He states that \"it did not spin like a top\". However, he did say that the trees over which it passed almost directly did not just tend with the wind as if a plane had gone by but that they \"spun around on top as if they were in a vacuum.\"\n\nKeith Urie, a son, eight years of age said he saw the machine coming down the canyon heading from east to west and following the contours of the ground. Billy, age ten, another son, saw it almost immediately. Both watched it fly out of sight behind a tree in a matter of moments.\n\nAGENT'S NOTE: Urie seemed completely sincere about the incident and appeared to be a sober, middle-aged man\nThe boys stated that they had never before seen one of the discs."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 13 Aug 47 Incident # 76\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Salmon Dam Idaho\n4. Name of observer County Commissioner Hawkins J. H. Brown\n5. Occupation of observer County Commissioner N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Salmon Dam\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer several miles away\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 4,000 to 6,000 ft\n12. Speed great speed\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound echo of a motor - County Commissioner Hawkins roar - J. H. Brown\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S - reflected light\n18. Shape circular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Agent could not locate Commissioner L. W. Hawkins but J. H. Brown, who accompanied Hawkins at the time stated that he and Hawkins could hear a roar. They looked up and saw 2 objects flying at great height which might have been between 4,000 and 6,000 ft. He could give no estimate as to size and said they could have been several miles away. He and Hawkins were satisfied that had seen something and were very doubtful if the objects were planes.\n\nFrom a newspaper account (Times News, Twin Falls, Idaho, Friday Aug 15, 1947) County Commissioner Hawkins said he had seen an unusual object in the air the same day as Urie' experience (Incident 75) and that a sound resembling the echo of a motor caused him to look upward and there he saw two circular objects which reflected light. They were traveling at a great speed and at higher altitude than most planes."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 3 July 1947 Incident # 77\n2. Time 1530 Z\n3. Location South Brooksville, Me.\n4. Name of observer Mr. John F. Cole\n5. Occupation of observer astronomer\n6. Address of observer South Brooksville, Me.\n7. Place of observation Northern Harborside, Maine -\n8. Number of objects 10\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed 600-1200 MPH\n13. Direction of flight NW (true)\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound Loud roar\n16. Size 50 to 100 feet wide\n17. Color light-colored\n18. Shape only concrete evidence of form appeared on left tangent of the group - two dark shaped forms:\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs one\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"An unusually loud roar attracted the observer and upon looking up he saw a group of very light-colored objects at an altitude of about 50° bunched rather closely with no regular formation. The group could have covered 1-1/2° angular diameter in the sky. There might have been 10. As a group they were proceeding as to cover 30° of arc estimated of course in 10 to 15 seconds. If one of them subtended 1/10° with a possible wing spread of 100 ft it would put it at a distance of over 10 miles, and quite invisible for a light object. With 30° arc of travel at a 10 mi distance would be roughly 5 miles in 15 seconds or 20 mi per minute or 1200 mi per hour. Rather fast for a bomber. A 50 ft object at 5 miles dist. would be about 600 mi. per hr - also fast going. The only concrete evidence of form appeared on the left tangent of the group - two dark shaped forms:\nThese could have been tail wings. But since they were in no regular formation, and seemed to be moving irregularly like a swarm of bees why shouldn't all of them have had wings? The loud roar suggests they may have been much closer and rather small. The sky background was a hazy blue with the sun behind. One plane towing a lot of balloons, the witness thought, would have been easily recognized."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 78\n1. Date 30 June 1947\n2. Time 0910 MST\n3. Location Near Williams Field over Grand Canyon, Arizona\n4. Name of observer Lt William G. McGinty, USN\n5. Occupation of observer P-80 student, Williams Fld, Chandler, Ariz.\n6. Address of observer Williams Fld., Chandler, Ariz.\n7. Place of observation plane\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude decreasing from 25,000 ft\n12. Speed \"inconceivable\"\n13. Direction of flight straight down\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 8 ft in dia.\n17. Color [REDACTED] Light gray\n18. Shape circular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance Seemed to have hit ground some 25 miles south of the South Rim of Grand Canyon, Arizona\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On 30 June 1947 at about 0910 MST, William G. McGinty, P-80 pilot was flying at 25,000 feet over Grand Canyon, Arizona, heading south towards Williams Field, Arizona, when he saw 2 round objects going at inconceivable speeds straight down. One of the unidentifiable objects followed the other seconds part. Due to their speed he could see only that they were circular and possibly light gray in color. In his opinion the objects were approximately 8 feet in diameter. He estimated that the objects would have probably hit the ground approximately 25 miles south of the South Rim of Grand Canyon, Ariz.\n\nADDITIONAL NOTES: Lt McGinty gave his permanent address as N.A.M.T.C., Point Mugu, Port Hueneme, Calif."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 79\n1. Date April 1947\n2. Time 1100 E Pibal Observation\n3. Location N/S - presumably Richmond, Va.\n4. Name of observer Mr. Minozewski\n5. Occupation of observer weather reporters\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Richmond, Va.\n8. Number of objects 3-4 separate sightings\n9. Distance of object from observer high altitude\n10. Time in sight 15 seconds\n11. Altitude high altitude\n12. Speed rapid\n13. Direction of flight east to west\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Larger than pibal balloon when observed thru a theodolite\n17. Color metallic grey or silver\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Minozewski observed a strange metallic disk on three occasions thru the theodolite while making his pibal observation during a six-months period. Mr Minozewski last observed the disk in April 1947 at 1100 E Pibal Observation when the balloon was at 15,000 ft. He followed it for 15 seconds. It was moving on level flight from east to west to the far north of the station. The object was a metallic like chrome - shaped something like an ellipse with a flat level bottom and a dome like-round top. [REDACTED] The disk appeared below the (weather) balloon, was much larger in size (in the instrument) and shown like silver. It was impossible to estimate the height or speed of the disk except that it appeared to be moving rather rapidly.\n\nMiss Baron, a co-worker observed the disk when her balloon was at about 27,000 ft. She thought the color to be a dull metallic luster."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 80\n1. Date 7 July 1947\n2. Time 2330-2300\n3. Location Arlington, Va.\n4. Name of observer James A. Cobb\n5. Occupation of observer Lt Col., AC\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Arlington, Va. - 2807 N. Glebe Road.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 3/4 mile\n10. Time in sight 2-3 seconds\n11. Altitude less than 500 ft\n12. Speed that of jet\n13. Direction of flight SOUTH EAST\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Small plane\n17. Color Reflected white light\n18. Shape \"blob\"\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Scattered clouds - Visibility: 10-12 mi.\n23. Effect on clouds None\n24. Sketches or photographs 2\n25. Manner of disappearance behind trees\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observed from a bedroom window as a blob of light crossing at very high\nspeed estimated by observer at approx 1350 MPH. \"In color, the object\nhad the appearance of a reflected white light, a cool bright white light with\nno red in it, like the moon on a clear night.\""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 July 1947 Incident # 81\n2. Time 0900 hours\n3. Location Hickam Village #2\n4. Name of observer Mr. Daniel S Saito\n5. Occupation of observer Air Communications Section, Hawaii, Hickam Fld.\n6. Address of observer N/S - Could be contacted at Hickam Fld\n7. Place of observation vicinity of Hickam Village?\n8. Number of objects 1 - a large balloon with a silver disc suspended below it.\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight few minutes\n11. Altitude 6,000 ft\n12. Speed slow\n13. Direction of flight NW toward sea\n14. Tactics revolved\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape spherical - like large balloon with disc attached\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance lost among the clouds\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr Saito's attention was attracted by a flashing object in the sky. He stated that this object had the appearance of a large balloon with a silver disc (not unlike a camera lens) suspended below it. Although he could not distinguish a cable connecting the two objects he assumed that they were attached since they kept the same distance apart and seemed to move in unison. It was at approximately 6,000 ft and slowly ascending moving in a northwesterly direction toward the sea. He observed the object several minutes during which time the silver disc attachment flashed off and on which he attributed to the rays of the sun striking it as it revolved. He discontinued watching after a few minutes and upon trying to locate it again could not do so owing to the cloudiness."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date Between 17 & 21 May 1947 Incident # 82\n2. Time Just after dusk - (2030 & 2100)\n3. Location Oklahoma City, Okla.\n4. Name of observer Byron B. Savage\n5. Occupation of observer Field Engineer for Radio Corp of Amer. Holder of a private pilot's license\n6. Address of observer 416 N. W. 29th St., Oklahoma City, Okla.\n7. Place of observation As above\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 15 - 20 seconds\n11. Altitude 10,000 - 18,000 ft\n12. Speed 3 times that of jet\n13. Direction of flight 180° south to 350° N\n14. Tactics straight flight\n15. Sound loud swishing sound after passage\n16. Size bulk of six B-29's\n17. Color frosty white\n18. Shape Round but disc-like with no protrusions\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance flew out of sight\n26. Remarks: (over"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Savage stated that he realized that the object was not a conventional aircraft when it was at a 45° angle from him. It appeared elliptical and as it moved closer it seemed perfectly round and flat. It had no appearance of being spherical and had a ratio of diameter to the thickness of approximately 10 to 1, appearing thicker in the center. He judged the altitude to be between 10,000 to 18,000 ft and the object left no trailing effects. The bulk seemed to be that of 6 B-29's at an altitude of approximately the same height. The speed was 3 times that of a jet-propelled aircraft. There were no protrusions and there was no noise although he thought he detected a swishing sound \"like the rushing of air\" after this object had passed him. The sound was not loud and did not last very long. He did not know if it was his imagination or expectation. The color appeared frosty white at all times. The object appeared to diminish in size and speed as it moved away in a direction of 350° to the north. Savage was sure that the object was not a meteor and it was his opinion that it was radically built and power - possibly atomic."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 83\n1. Date 9 July 1947\n2. Time About 12:17\n3. Location Between Boise & Meridian\n4. Name of observer David N. Johnson\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Boise, Idaho\n7. Place of observation Air\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer over a mile\n10. Time in sight 10-30 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed great\n13. Direction of flight\n14. Tactics slow roll, climbed with jerky rising motion\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 25 cent piece\n17. Color black\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions part cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs sketch of movement\n25. Manner of disappearance lost sight of the object\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observer flying a National Guard AT-6 was on an easterly heading pointing toward Gowen Fld and had flown that course for a minute when there appeared in the left hand portion of his field of vision a round black object. Due to its erratic movement he first thought it a weather balloon. Calling the weather station he ascertained that no release had been made for several hours. He then exposed 10 second's duration of 8 mm motion picture film. Centering his gaze once more on the object he observed it to roll so that its edge was presented. At this time it flashed once in the sunlight. It then appeared as a thin black line. Then it performed a maneuver which looked as if it had begun a slow roll - (barrel roll) which instead of being completed was broken off at about the 130° point. The object rolled out of the top of the maneuver at this point and observer lost sight of it. Performance viewed against background of clouds. Object appeared relatively as the size of a twenty-five cent piece. Observer could not estimate the speed. He thought tho that it was very great\n\nThe wave-design portrays the movements of the object. At all times the object appeared black. Positions (1) (2) and (3) show the jerky rising motion. Position (4) is where it rolled presenting its edge to the observer. It then followed the dotted line, rolling over the top of the maneuver and disappearing at position (5)."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 84\n1. Date 7 July 1947\n2. Time between 1300 and 1400 hours EST\n3. Location 1 mile east of Lakeland, Fla\n4. Name of observer Mr. Hiram William Griffin\n5. Occupation of observer \"sign painter\" previously cab-driver amateur artist. Also former 2d-class seaman in U.S. Navy\n6. Address of observer 602 N. Tennessee Ave., Lakeland, Fla\n7. Place of observation 1 mile east of Lakeland, Fla - ground\n8. Number of objects 5\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S one mile\n10. Time in sight 15 - 30 seconds\n11. Altitude between 5,000 to 7,500 ft\n12. Speed very fast\n13. Direction of flight N/S - upward\n14. Tactics climbed 2500 feet in just a few seconds\n15. Sound swishing noise that seemed to sing with a more or less shrill whine.\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color \"glittery\"\n18. Shape N/S - seemed \"turtle-backed\" from [REDACTED] photograph submitted\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction plastic appearance\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Clear with scattered clouds\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs photograph\n25. Manner of disappearance climbed out of sight\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"While walking on U. S. Highway #92 7 July 47, at approximately 1 mile east of Lakeland, Fla., between 1300 and 1400 hours observer's attention was attracted skyward by a swishing noise which seemed to sing with a shrill whine. He saw 5 shiny objects going upward from 5,000 ft to approximately 7,500 feet in just a few seconds (between 15 - 30). They were traveling northeast and in an upward direction as they disappeared in flight. He thought they were a mile from him when first sighted. Griffin observed 2 spots on either side of the missile and an additional spot in the center which he believed to be the tail. The objects did not have wings and the witness thought they were jet jobs. It appeared to him that the leading jet (of plastic appearance) was towing the four other shining objects.\n\nNOTES: Griffin made a model of what he saw and forwarded it as an exhibit. (See file)\n\nPERTINENT FACTS: He is a very excitable person, very talkative possessing an exaggerated imagination and inclined to impress people with his continuous verbal chatter. Questioning of neighbors & associates disclosed that he belonged to no subversive organization.\n\nEvaluation of source: \"B\"; of information \"3\""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":225,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident #5\n\nVoid See Incident #29"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":226,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 6 July 1947 Incident # 86\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Hollywood, Calif\n4. Name of observer M. Lenore Corey\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer 2636 Magnolia Ave., Los Angeles, Calif\n7. Place of observation from bus terminal\n8. Number of objects \"several\"\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Great speed\n13. Direction of flight northward - parallel to Ventura Blvd.\n14. Tactics \"rolled\"\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape \"saucer\"\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions sunlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":227,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observer was mostly concerned with the accompanying ray phenomena rather than with the \"saucers\" themselves.\n\nPerceived what appeared to be milky white rays in the sunlight which seemed to cross and recross each other like searchlights at night. It did not appear as reflected light for the rays were not spaced and were not as close together and they \"cris-crossed\". However, they did seem to converge toward a center but did not meet in that center. In the vortex - a radious of about 18 inches (it seemed from where observer sat) that there were spinning objects of some red substance about the color of the semi-precious report \"Cornelian\". These fragments were sharp and irregular and shining. They were flying as if to a magnet. This effect was momentary. Witness then looked to see if the \"saucers\" were still there. They were but the same illusion occurred again and observer was again conscious of the secondary phenomena. But by this time the \"Saucers\" were out of sight.\n\nNOTE: Observer seemed to be speculating on ray warfare, but did not think that \"our army would shoot deadly rays over a crowded highway\""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":228,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date N/S - Incident # 87\n2. Time evening\n3. Location Germany\n4. Name of observer Robert J. Sroka\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer 449 N. Washington Ave., Waukesha, Wis.\n7. Place of observation Germany - 20 miles NW of Hebberbishopsheim\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 3 to 10 miles to their front to 1 mile\n10. Time in sight approximately 5 minutes\n11. Altitude Approximately 5,000 ft high at first then descending\n12. Speed slow\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics oscillating descent - dropping in a spiral motion\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Appeared to drop\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":229,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observer after reading reports about disc-shaped aircraft recalled a nearly forgotten incident which occurred some 20 miles NW of Hebberbishopsheim, Germany after the last war.\nObject first sighted some 8 to 10 miles to observers' front - at approx 5,000 ft high. It rapidly approached, descending slowly. About a mile away it stopped its horizontal motion but continued a slow oscillating descent similar to a descending parachute. Then it suddenly dropped in a spiral motion. Tried to locate the place where it fell but it became too dark. The first impression of the observer was that it was a cloud but it was traveling at right angles to the wind."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":230,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 3 Aug 1947 Incident # 88\n2. Time late afternoon\n3. Location Hackensack, N. J.\n4. Name of observer Charles Casella, Jr. 287 Euclid Ave, Hackensack\nMr Truex, U. S. Army, Ft. Dix\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer See 4 above\n7. Place of observation Hackensack, N. J.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 200 yds\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 200 yds\n12. Speed rapid\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics revolved slowly\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":231,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Charles Cosells, Jr. and William Truex, US Army, Ft. Dix, N. J. sighted a flying disc in late afternoon 3 August 47. Claimed it was 200 yrds in air, revolving slowly but moving rapidly and was neither a kite nor a balloon."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":232,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 6 July 1947 Incident # 39\n2. Time 1:45 P. M.\n3. Location 100 miles west of Kansas City, Missouri\n4. Name of observer Maj Archie B. Browning\n5. Occupation of observer Maj, Air Corps, pilot of B-25\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation air\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 10 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 11,000 ft\n12. Speed 210 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Eastward\n14. Tactics observed horizontal flight\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 30-50 ft in diameter\n17. Color very bright and silvery colored\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S Disappeared when pilot started to turn into it.\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":233,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On 6 July 1947 while flying from Ogden, Utah, to Kansas City, Mo, at 10,000 ft in a B-25 pilot noticed a very bright object low and to his left, approximately 10 miles away. Time was 1:45 P. M. and position was approximately 100 miles west of Kansas City. His first impression was that it was the top of a water tank. After checking his position he again looked to his left (elapsed time 5 seconds). He saw a round, disc shaped object, very bright and silvery colored which seemed to be flying 1 to 2 miles off his left wing at 11 o'clock position at 11,000 ft. The brightness of the object was very great. Diameter of the object was estimated as 30-50 feet. It was traveling in the same direction at the same rate of speed (210 MPH) as the observer. However, when he started to turn into it, it completely disappeared. Weather conditions at the time were CAVU."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":234,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 29 June 1947 Incident # 90\n2. Time 1:00 and 1:30 P. M.\n3. Location Highway 17 between Las Cruces, N. M. & White Sands V-2 firing grounds\n4. Name of observer Mr. J. R. Keuke, Mr. Zohn, Mr. C. C. Rockwood, & Mrs. Nancy Rockwood.\n5. Occupation of observer Mr. Zohn - Admin Assis in Pocket Sonde Section NRL, Mr. Rockwood, NRL Rocket Sonde high altitude spectrograph scientist, & Mr. Kauke, Telemetering supervisor\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation highway 17 - ground\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 30 seconds\n11. Altitude between 8,000 and 10,000 ft (Mr. Zohn put little credence in the estimates)\n12. Speed rapid velocity\n13. Direction of flight northerly direction\n14. Tactics horizontal flight\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape uniform - no protuberances such as wings of a plane\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Mr. Kauke thought at one time there were vapor trails\n22. Weather conditions sunlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance receded until lost from sight\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":235,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Kauke who was driving the car noticed the object first. He called it to the attention of the other occupants. Mr. Zohn thereupon opened the window nearest him and observed the object moving at an unknown rapid velocity at an unknown altitude (which he estimated at 10,000 ft) and which Mr. Kauke thought was between 8,000 and 10,000 feet. When first sighted the object was to their right and forward of the automobile at an unstated elevation and apparently moving horizontally in a Northerly direction such as to cross the highway from right to left. The object was seen by all the occupants of the machine. Mr. Zohn could observe no details other than the shape was uniform with no protuberances such as the wings of a plane. It was too distant to enable stereoscopic visualization. There was some solar specular reflection which seemed to change in intensity as the object receded until lost from sight (after an estimated 30 seconds from the time first noticed.) Mr. Zohn could not explain how it disappeared except that he thought the reflection angle could have changed abruptly. The sun was to the rear of the automobile. Mr. Kauke thought at one time he saw vapor trails."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":236,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 91\n1. Date 28 June 1947\n2. Time 2120 Central Time\n3. Location Maxwell Fld., Montgomery, Ala.\n4. Name of observer Capt Wilson H. Kayko, O-38841, Hq TAC\nCapt John H. Cantrell, O-259404, Hq, TAC\n1st Lt Theodore Dewey, O-3044172, Hq TAC\nCapt. Redman, Randolph Fld., Texas\n5. Occupation of observer See above\n6. Address of observer See above\n7. Place of observation Maxwell Field, Ala\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Over 5 minutes\n11. Altitude Impossible to determine - great height\n12. Speed frequent bursts of speed\n13. Direction of flight changing - zig-zag course - first east, then south than southwest\n14. Tactics traveled with frequent bursts of speed in a zig-zag course\n15. Sound No audible sound\n16. Size slightly greater than a star\n17. Color N/S - brilliant light\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction \"light\"\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions clear moon-light night\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches None in our file altho letter of transmittal indicates one was sent\n25. Manner of disappearance lost in brilliancy of the moon\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":237,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approximately 2120 Central time, a light, with a brilliance slightly greater than a star appeared from the West traveling in an easterly direction at a high rate of speed. It first appeared slightly above the horizon of a clear moon-light night. There was no audible sound. It appeared to be at great height altho it was impossible to determine the altitude. It traveled a zig-zag course with frequent bursts of speed similar to a water but make spurts and stops across the surface of water. Directly overhead, it changed course 90° into the South. After 5 minutes it turned southwest and was lost in the brilliancy of the moon. At 2145 Central it was not longer visible to observe it.\n\nA call was placed to Maxwell Fld operations concerning the phenomena and inquiry was made if any experimental aircraft were scheduled for a flight in the vicinity but the reply was negative. No plausible explanation was offered for the unusual action of this source of light which acted contrary to any common aerodynamical laws. Two of the above noted observers were rated pilots and the other two, air intelligence officers."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":238,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 92\n1. Date 19 May 1947\n2. Time 1215-1315\n3. Location Pikes Peak Railway, Manitou Springs, Colorado\n4. Name of observer Mr. D. A. Hauser, Mr. F. J. Smith, Mr. L. D. Jamison\n5. Occupation of observer employees of Mr Pikes Peak Railway\n6. Address of observer Pikes Peak Railway, Manitou Springs, Colorado\n7. Place of observation Manitou Springs, Colorado\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Over 1,000 feet\n12. Speed Not determined - but very rapid\n13. Direction of flight westward\n14. Tactics climbing diving and reversal of direction of flight hovering\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Could not be determined\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape Could not be determined\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions CAVU - no ground wind\n23. Effect on clouds No clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance climbing very fast towards the west\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":239,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"During their lunch period (1215-1315) 19 May 1947 a member of a train crew called attention to a silver object in the sky approaching from the Northeast. It appeared to be traveling at great speed. The object appeared extremely small and therefore the altitude could not be estimated. It did appear higher than the top of Manitou Mountain which is some 1,000 feet higher than the city. No definite shape could be determined even with the aid of 6-power binoculars. The men were certain that the object was not a conventional aircraft since it did not have any of the physical characteristics. Upon reaching the area just north of Manitou the object remained in the area for several minutes during which time it executed maneuvers such as climbing, diving and reversal of flight. This happened every few seconds. The distance and location between views prompted two of the men to think that there may have been more of the objects in the sky. At times it seemed to hover and then it would start on another flight path. When last seen the silver object was climbing very fast towards the west almost directly into the wind.\n\nEvaluation:\nof source \"B\"\nof Information \"O\""} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":240,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident #93\n1. Date 11 Jan 48\n2. Time 1630\n3. Location Hartford, Conn.\n4. Name of observer Kenneth M. Helton, James J. Pargoe\n5. Occupation of observer Captains, USAF (ATC)\n6. Address of observer Atlantic Division, ATC (Sq. \"D\" Air Evac.)\n7. Place of observation Hartford, Conn.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Unknown - very high velocity\n13. Direction of flight shooting toward earth at 45°\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Resembled shooting star, observers not certain however.\n17. Color bluish center, red on the edges\n18. Shape Appeared to be disc\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails No tail or trails\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Dropped out of sight on the north side of Mt. Tom which is near Holyoke, Mass.\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":241,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object appe red to be a disc w ich had a bluish center was red on its edges and was traveling at a very high velocity. It had no tail nor did it leave any sort of a trail in the air. Because of its high velocity and the short space of time that it was sighted neither observer could be certain of the size but in general, report it resembled a shooting star. It dropped out of sight on the north side of Mt. Tom which is near Holyoke, Mass."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":242,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 30 Dec 47 Incident # 94\n2. Time 1926 PST\n3. Location 42° 9.3' N and 114° 22.2' W\n4. Name of observer Lt Col W.W. Jones / Maj A. A. Andrae\n5. Occupation of observer USAF pilots\n6. Address of observer Hq. Eastern Pacific Wing of ATC\n7. Place of observation See #3\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S - at 2:30 position from plane\n10. Time in sight 2 seconds\n11. Altitude A/C was at 13,000 '. Object was descending vertically.\n12. Speed Very high - unknown\n13. Direction of flight Vertically down\n14. Tactics seemed to slow as it neared the ground\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S trailed intense green and blue flames\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails See #17 - trailed intense green and blue flames\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":243,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"While enroute from Great Falls, Montana, to Fairfield-Suisun Air Force Base on 30 Dec 47, a possible rocket sighting was made (Lt Col W. W. Jones, and Maj A. A. Andrae, USAF) and a crew of C-47 airplane was cruising at 13,000 ft. An unidentified object with green and blue flames was viewed for a period of 2 seconds. It was descending vertically at a very high rate of speed and disappeared from view just before reaching the ground. The object was located at 2:30 o'clock, in relation to the plane but the flames were ..."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":244,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 30 Dec 47\n2. Time 1926 PST\n3. Location Rosedale, Calif (35° 55' N., 118° 53' W.)\n4. Name of observer N/S (C-47 crew)\n5. Occupation of observer -\n6. Address of observer Sacramento Air Depot C-47 #7468\n7. Place of observation Rosedale, Calif\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude low\n12. Speed very high\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color [illegible]\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails red and colors of flame with red and green predominating\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs N/S\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared northward toward Sacramento, 35° 50' N, 119° 02' W.\n26. Remarks: N/S (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":245,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A report received at Fairfield-Suisun tower from McClellan airfield over at Sacramento stated a report was received from Sacramento Air Depot C-47 #7468 flying near Rosedale, Calif, to the effect that an object was sighted at 1925 P.S. time trailing several colors of flame with red and green predominating. It was traveling at very high speed and low altitude a south toward the hills at approximately 35°50' N, 121° 02' W. McClellan tower asked the pilot to investigate and at 1958 the pilot reported a small fire at 36° 00' N and 120° 00' W which became considerably larger. Fairfield tower requested McClellan flying C-47 to also investigate the fire for possible survivors if received and the pilot reported over the fire at 1957 P.S. time at a position of 36° 00' N and 120° 53' W. The fire was burning in a shrub-like sumac over a small area and went out at 2100. No particular points in the fire seemed to burn with a bright blue-green flame."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":246,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.\tDate\t30 Dec 1947\tIncident #96\n2.\tTime\t1925 PST\n3.\tLocation\t30 miles west of Lovelock, Nevada\n4.\tName of observer\tN/S\t(motorist on U. S. Highway #40)\n5.\tOccupation of Observer\tN/S\n6.\tAddress of Observer\tN/S\n7.\tPlace of Observation\tSee 3.\t(39° 58' N 118° 53' W)\n8.\tNumber of objects\t1\n9.\tDistance of object from observer\tN/S\n10.\tTime in sight\tN/S\n11.\tAltitude:\n1200 to 1300 feet above ground\n12.\tSpeed\tN/S\n13.\tDirection of flight:\tN/S\n14.\tTactics\tNone\n15.\tSound\tN/S\n16.\tSize\tN/S\n17.\tColor\tN/S\n18.\tShape\tN/S\n19.\tOdor detected\tN/S\n20.\tApparent construction\tN/S\n21.\tExhaust trails\tN/S\n22.\tWeather conditions\tN/S\n23.\tEffect on clouds\tN/S\n24.\tSketches or photographs\tNone\n25.\tManner of disappearance\tExploded\n26.\tRemarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":247,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident 96\n\nThe Fairfield Control Tower obtained a report at approximately 2300 EST 30 Dec 47 from Hamilton Fld Flight Control, that a motorist on U. S. Highway #40, 30 miles west of Lovelock, Nevada, (approximately 39° 53' N, 118° 53' W) had seen an object explode in the air at a height of 1200 to 1300 feet. Time: 1926. (Would appear to be connected with Incidents 94, 95 and 97. )"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":248,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident #97\n\n1.\tDate\t30 Dec 47\n2.\tTime\t1925 PST\n3.\tLocation\tBetween Medford, Oregon & Mt Shasta, Calif\n4.\tName of observer\tN/S\t(United Airline Flight #191)\n5.\tOccupation of observer\tPilot on Flight #191 (as above)\n6.\tAddress of observer\tN/S\n7.\tPlace of observation\tOn airways between Medford, Oregon & Mt Shasta\n8.\tNumber of objects\t1\n9.\tDistance of object from observer\tN/S\n10.\tTime in sight\tN/S\n11.\tAltitude\tN/S\n12.\tSpeed\tN/S\n13.\tDirection of flight\tN/S\n14.\tTactics\tN/S\n15.\tSound\tN/S\n16.\tSize\tN/S\n17.\tColor\tN/S\n18.\tShape\tN/S\n19.\tOdor detected\tN/S\n20.\tApparent construction\tN/S\n21.\tExhaust trails\tN/S\n22.\tWeather conditions\tN/S\n23.\tEffect on clouds\tN/S\n24.\tSketches or photographs\tNone\n25.\tManner of disappearance\tN/S - saw flash - presumably an explosion\n26.\tRemarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":249,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident #97\n\nThe Fairfield Control Tower obtained a report from Oakland Airport Flight Control (CAA) at approximately 2315 PST, 30 Dec 1947 that United Airlines Flight 19 proceeding on airways between Medford, Oregon, and Mt Shasta, observed a flash at 1925 PST just north of their position.\n\nSee Incidents 94, 95 & 96"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":250,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1.\tDate\t2 Nov 1947.\tIncident: #98\n2.\tTime\tJust before break of day\n3.\tLocation\tAnderson Road, Houston, Texas\n4.\tName of observer\tMr & Mrs Elmer L. Brimberry\n5.\tOccupation of observer\tEmploye of Immigration Svc, Dept of Justice\n6.\tAddress of Observer\tAnderson Road, Houston, Texas\n7.\tPlace of observation\tTheir home\n8.\tNumber of objects\t1\n9.\tDistance of object from observer\tN/S\n10.\tTime in sight\tN/S\n11.\tAltitude\tN/S (It appeared to fall in a field adjacent to their residence)\n12.\tSpeed\tN/S\n13.\tDirection of flight\tDownward\n14.\tTactics\t\"spinning\"\n15.\tSound\tN/S\n16.\tSize\t26 to 30 inches in diameter\n17.\tColor\tFire-colored\n18.\tShape\tRound\n19.\tOdor detected\tN/S\n20.\tApparent construction\tFireball\n21.\tExhaust trails\tN/S - Tail of approximately 20 feet in length which appeared to diminish as it approached the ground\n22.\tWeather conditions\tN/S\n23.\tEffect on clouds\tN/S\n24.\tSketches or photographs\tNone\n25.\tManner of disappearance\tSuddenly \"went out\" just before it reached earth.\n26.\tRemarks\t(over)"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":251,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: #98\n\nIncident occurred just before break of day. Object appeared to Mrs Brimberry as a large round ball of fire about 26 to 30 inches in diameter with a \"tail\" of approximately 20 feet in length. This \"tail\" seemed to diminish as it approached the ground. It appeared to have suddenly \"gone out\" just before it reached the earth. It possibly could have hit the ground a great distance away but it seemed to have landed in the open vacant field adjacent the house. This field is about 18 acres in area. Mr Brimberry described the object as being \"almost round, maybe a little oval or saucer-shaped and giving off a bright light. It appeared to be spinning. He did not see the tail when he observed the object.\n\nIncident occurred just before sun-up and it was pretty light outside."} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":252,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident: #99\n\n1. Date 3 Jan 1948\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Helsinki, Finland\n4. Name of observer Artile taken from Helsinki Press, 10th Jan 48 Finland (USMILATTACHE AMLEGATION Helsinki, Findland\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of Observer Helsinki, Finland\n7. Place of observation Vaasa, Finland\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 30 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight West to East\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color \"shining\"\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Long tail\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25 Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Helsinki press 10th Jan 48 reported observation of light phenomenon vicinity Vaasa 3 Jan. A brightly shining object with a long tail was observed moving west to east. Visible for 30 seconds.\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"610b879e2f81b6da","page":253,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident: 100\n\n1. Date 5 Jan 1948\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Helsinki Finland (Military Attache was official source of information)\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Pietarsaari, Finland\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 10 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight North to South\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Shining\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Grey streaks were left in the sky.\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: A shining object was seen near Pietarsaari on 5th Jan 1948 which was observed for 10 seconds. It was going from north to south. Eyewitnesses state flames were ejected and grey streaks left in the sky.\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62- HQ-83894 SECTION 6\nSERIALS 246-301\n#62-HQ-83894-6#\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 6 246 301\n8/11/1274188\nRRP003IXGU\nSECTION 6\nSERIALS 246-301\nDO NOT\nDESTROY\nTransfer-Call 47\nFOIPA #\nUSE CARE IN HANDLING THIS FILE\nINVESTIGATION\nBUREAU\nCOPIED FOR\nCOPIED FOR\nCOPIED FOR\nCOPIED FOR"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : D. M. Ladd\nFROM : A. H. Belmont\nDATE: August 23, 1950\nSUBJECT: SUMMARY OF AERIAL PHENOMENA IN NEW MEXICO\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\nPURPOSE\nTo advise that: (1) OSI has expressed concern in connection with the continued appearance of unexplained phenomena described as green fireballs, discs and meteors in the vicinity of sensitive installations in New Mexico. (2) Dr. LaPaz, Meteor Expert of the University of New Mexico, reported that the phenomena does not appear to be of meteoric origin. (3) OSI has contracted with Land-Air Inc., Alamogordo, New Mexico, to make scientific study of the unexplained phenomena.\nNATURE OF PHENOMENA\nObservations of aerial phenomena occurring within the vicinity of sensitive installations have been recorded by the Air Force since December, 1948. The phenomena have been classified into 3 general types which are identified as follows:\n1. Green fireballs, objects moving at high speed in shapes resembling half moons, circles and discs emitting green light.\n2. Discs, round flat shaped objects or phenomena moving at fast velocity and emitting a brilliant white light or reflected light.\n3. Meteors, aerial phenomena resembling meteoric material moving at high velocity and varying in color.\nThe above phenomena have been reported to vary in color from brilliant white to amber, red and green.\nSince 1948, approximately 150 observations of aerial phenomena referred to above have been recorded in the vicinity of installations in New Mexico. A number of observations have been reported by different reliable individuals at approximately the same time.\nKWD/mp\nRECORDED - 2\nINDEXED - 2\n52 SEP 18 1950"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESULTS OF AN INQUIRY BY PROFESSOR LINCOLN LA PAZ\nDr. LaPaz, Director, Institute of Meteoritics, University of New Mexico, submitted an analysis of the various observations on May 23, 1950. He concluded, as a result of his investigation, that approximately half of the phenomena recorded were of meteoric origin. The other phenomena commonly referred to as green fireballs or discs he believed to be U.S. guided missiles being tested in the neighborhood of the installations. Dr. LaPaz pointed out that if he were wrong in interpreting the phenomena as originating with U.S. guided missiles that a systematic investigation of the observations should be made immediately. Dr. LaPaz pointed out that missiles moving with the velocities of the order of those found for the green fireballs and discs could travel from the Ural region of the USSR to New Mexico in less than 15 minutes. He suggested that the observations might be of guided missiles launched from bases in the Urals.\nOn the basis of the investigations made by Dr. LaPaz and the Air Force, it was concluded that the occurrence of the unexplained phenomena in the vicinity of sensitive installations was a cause for concern. The Air Force entered into a contract with Land-Air, Incorporated, Alamogordo, New Mexico, for the purpose of making scientific studies of the green fireballs and discs. It was pointed out in the summary furnished by OSI on July 19, 1950, that the unexplained green fireballs and discs are still observed in the vicinity of sensitive military and Government installations.\nRESULTS OF AIR FORCE INVESTIGATION\nThe Air Force together with Land-Air, Incorporated, have established a number of observation posts in the vicinity of Vaughn, New Mexico, for the purpose of photographing and determining the speed, height and nature of the unusual phenomena referred to as green fireballs and discs. On May 24, 1950, personnel of Land-Air, Incorporated, sighted 8 to 10 objects of aerial phenomena. A 24-hour day watch is being maintained and has been designated \"Project Twinkle.\"\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONCLUSIONS\nThe Albuquerque Office, in a letter dated August 10, 1950, advised that there have been no new developments in connection with the efforts to ascertain the identity of the strange aerial phenomena referred to as green fireballs and discs. The Albuquerque Office advised that Dr. Anthony O. Mirarchi, Project Engineer, had been informed of the Bureau's jurisdiction relative to espionage and sabotage and arrangements have been made so that the Bureau will be promptly advised in the event additional information relative to this project indicates any jurisdiction on the part of the Bureau.\nACTION\nNone. The above is for your information.\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"September 8, 1950\n\nTo:\tDirector of Special Investigations\n\tThe Inspector General\n\tDepartment of the Air Force\n\tThe Pentagon\n\tWashington, D. C.\n\nFrom:\tJohn Edgar Hoover - Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject:\tFLYING SAUCERS\n\n\tThere is attached hereto for your consideration and attention a copy of a self-explanatory letter dated August 29, 1950, received by this Bureau from Mr. Walter D. Jones, of 36 King Street East, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.\n\n\tFor your information, the letter from Mr. Jones has been acknowledged by this Bureau, and he has been informed his communication has been referred to your Department.\n\nAttachment.\n\nAPPROPRIATE AGENCIES AND FIELD OFFICES ADVISED BY ROUTING SLIP(S) OF 2040 DATE 9/11/77\n\nEHM:eas\n\nRECORDED - 5\n\nMAILED 14 SEP 11 1950 COMM. FBI"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nTo:\nFrom:\nSubject:\n\n[illegible]\n\nAttachment.\n\nRECORDED - 5\n\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nSEP 11 1950\nCOMM. FBI"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: MR. A. H. BELMONT\nFROM: MR. L. L. LAUGHLIN\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nDATE: September 27, 1950\n\nSAC Cornelius of Philadelphia called at 10:45 A.M. today and stated that yesterday evening while two officers of the Philadelphia Police Department were cruising in their scout car they saw through the windshield an object descending slowly to the earth which appeared at first glance to be a parachute.\n\nWhen the officers first noticed the object, it was at tree-top level and was described as being six feet in diameter. It landed in a field near-by and the officers, upon examining it, noted that it gave out a purplish glow which was almost a mist. The officers summoned two other police officers. After looking at the object for some time they attempted to pick it up. The object broke, leaving a slight odorless residue. Over a period of about 25 minutes which the officers spent watching the object it completely disintegrated. The officers further commented that the object was so light that when it hit the field, it did not even bend the weeds or the grass it fell on.\n\nMr. Cornelius said that he has called the local office of the Air Force but the individual with whom he spoke there said he knew nothing about them and was not aware that his office was looking into reports of this type.\n\nMr. Cornelius desired to know what further action should be taken by him.\n\nI told Mr. Cornelius that he was correct in referring this matter to the local office of OSI and that he should direct a letter to the Bureau incorporating all available information concerning the matter and that we here, upon its receipt, in turn would bring it to the attention of OSI Headquarters.\n\nLLL:mer\n\nRECORDED - 84\nEX-29\nOCT 4 1950\n\n51 OCT 10 1950"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: MR. A. H. BELMONT\nFROM: MR. L. L. LAUGHLIN\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\nDATE: September 27, 1950\n\n[illegible]\n\nCORRELATION-LIAISON F.B.I. U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE Oct 6 4 43PM '50\n\nRECEIVED-LADD F B I U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE SEP 27 5 13 PM '50\n\nCORRELATION-LIAISON F B I SEP 29 9 08 AM '50\n\nRECORDED - 84"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\n\nHon. J. Edgar Hoover\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\nDepartment of Justice\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nThe inclosed letter, subject: \"Reporting of Information on Unconventional Aircraft,\" is forwarded for your information and any cooperation you may be able to extend.\n\nAs indicated in the letter it is desired to place this subject in its proper perspective as part of the normal USAF requirement for information of air technical intelligence interest.\n\nRespectfully yours,\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence\n\n1 Incl:\na/s\n\nRECORDED - 108\n\n\"This document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18 U.S.C., Sections 793 and 794. Its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\"\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nAFOIC-CC-1\t\t\t\t\t\t\t8 September 1950\n\nSUBJECT:\tReporting of Information on Unconventional Aircraft\n\nTO:\tCommanding Generals, Major Air Commands, ZI and Overseas\n\tAll United States Air Attaches\n\n1. The United States Air Force has a continuing requirement for the reporting and technical analysis of observations of unconventional aircraft which might indicate an advance in technological progress of a foreign power. An unconventional aircraft, within the meaning of this directive, is defined as any aircraft or airborne object which by performance, aerodynamic characteristics, or unusual features, does not conform to any presently known aircraft type.\n\n2. It is desired that information on unconventional aircraft be reported in the following manner:\n\na. A separate report of each incident will be forwarded. No information other than that bearing on the unconventional aircraft will be included in this report.\n\nb. Priority of transmission accorded the report will be that appropriate in the judgment of the forwarding agency, according to its apparent authenticity and importance as intelligence.\n\nc. Reports will be forwarded to Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Attention: MCIS.\n\nd. Reports forwarded by electrical transmission will include, as far as possible:\n\n(1) A brief description of the object(s); its shape, size, color, number, formation if more than one, aerodynamic features, trail or exhaust, propulsion system, speed, sound, maneuvers, manner of disappearance, and other pertinent or unusual features.\n\n(2) Time sighted in 24-hour clock zonal time, and length of time observed.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nENCLOSURE\n62-83894-249\nInd. 1"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n(3) Manner of observation; visual or electronic, from air (give speed, altitude, and type of aircraft), or surface. Any type of optical or electronic equipment used should be described.\n\n(4) Location of observer during sighting, giving exact latitude and longitude as closely as feasible, and/or reference to a known landmark. Location of object(s) with respect to observer, giving distance, direction, and altitude.\n\n(5) Identifying information on observer(s) and witnesses, estimate of reliability and experience, and any factors bearing on estimated reliability of the sighting.\n\n(6) Weather and wind conditions (teletype sequences) at time and place of sightings.\n\n(7) Any activity or condition, meteorological or otherwise, which might account for the sighting.\n\n(8) Existence of any physical evidence; fragments, photographs and the like, of the sighting.\n\n(9) Interception or identification action taken. (Such action should be taken whenever feasible, complying with existing air defense directives.)\n\ne. Reports forwarded by electrical transmission will be followed up within ten (10) days by a written report on AF Form 112. This report will contain the same information specified in subparagraph 2d above in greater detail, and where feasible will include sketches and signed attested narrative statements of observers.\n\nf. Written reports of sightings, where no previous electrically transmitted report has been submitted, will follow the same form as the written follow-up report described in subparagraph 2e above.\n\ng. Any physical evidence of the sighting will be forwarded by most expeditious means to Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Attn: MCIS, under cover of a letter identifying the shipment with the report of sighting. Mention of the method and time of shipping of this evidence will be included in written report of the sighting.\n\n3. It is desired that no publicity be given this reporting or analysis activity.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nInfo copies to:\nDir/Int, G-2, Army\nDir/Naval Int.\nCommandant (INT) US Coast Guard\nSp Asst for Research & Intel, State\nDirector FBI\nDirector of CIA\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : THE DIRECTOR\t\t\tDATE: October 9, 1950\n\nFROM : MR. D. M. LADD\n\nSUBJECT:\tFLYING SAUCERS\n\tFLYING DISCS\n\tGREEN FIREBALLS\n\nPURPOSE\n\nTo advise you of the most recent information known to the Bureau concerning the captioned aerial phenomena.\n\nBACKGROUND\n\nYou will recall that on August 23, 1950, I furnished to you a memorandum regarding Project Twinkle set up by the Department of the Air Force, with the assistance of Land-Air, Inc., at Vaughn, New Mexico, for the purpose of obtaining data regarding these unusual aerial phenomena which had been seen in the vicinity of sensitive installations in New Mexico. To date the Air Force has not advised us of any new developments in connection with this project.\n\nDr. Anthony O. Mirarchi, Project Engineer of Project Twinkle, has been contacted by the Albuquerque Office and arrangements have been made in order that the Bureau will be advised in the event any information relative to these phenomena indicates any jurisdiction on the part of the Bureau.\n\nAccording to Bureau files, an average of approximately three or four complaints have been received per month from June through September. These complaints were brought to the attention of OSI. A review of Bureau files does not indicate that there has been any increase in the sightings of these phenomena during or as a result of the war in Korea.\n\nJURISDICTION FOR INVESTIGATION OF THESE PHENOMENA\n\nYou will recall the investigation to obtain information concerning these aerial phenomena is the jurisdiction of the Department of the Air Force. The Department of the Air Force is aware of our jurisdiction in matters relating to espionage, sabotage and internal security, and we have contacted OSI and requested them to advise us of any developments in connection with these phenomena which would be of interest to us as a result of our jurisdiction.\n\nEHM:de\nRECORDED - 105\nOCT 10 1950\n52 OCT 16 1950"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"POSSIBLE ORIGIN OF THESE AERIAL PHENOMENA\n\nThe Bureau has been advised in the past by OSI that many of the sightings reported to them were determined by investigation to have been of weather balloons, falling stars, meteorological phenomena and other air-borne objects.\n\nINFORMATION OBTAINED BY BUREAU LIAISON FROM OSI, WASHINGTON, D. C. RE THE CAPTIONED MATTERS ON OCTOBER 9, 1950.\n\nBureau liaison determined on the morning of October 9, 1950 from OSI headquarters that the investigations of these aerial phenomena are being handled by OSI, Wright Field, Ohio. Their investigation of these phenomena fails to indicate that the sightings involved space ships or missiles from any other planet or country.\n\nAccording to OSI, the complaints received by them have failed to indicate any definite pattern of activity. OSI further advised they are closely following the investigation of the captioned matters, and they will advise this Bureau of any matters of interest.\n\nACTION\n\nNone. The above is for your information.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE DIRECTOR\n\nMR. D. M. LADD\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\nFLYING DISCS\nGREEN FIREBALLS\n\nPURPOSE\n\nTo advise you of the most recent information known to the Bureau concerning the captioned aerial phenomena.\n\nBACKGROUND\n\nYou will recall that on August 25, 1950, I furnished to you a memorandum regarding Project Twinkle set up by the Department of the Air Force, with the assistance of Land-Air, Inc., at Vaughn, New Mexico, for the purpose of obtaining data regarding those unusual aerial phenomena which had been seen in the vicinity of sensitive installations in New Mexico. To date the Air Force has not advised us of any new developments in connection with this project.\n\nDr. Anthony G. Mirarchi, Project Engineer of Project Twinkle, has been contacted by the Albuquerque Office and arrangements have been made in order that the Bureau will be advised in the event any information relative to these phenomena indicates any jurisdiction on the part of the Bureau.\n\nAccording to Bureau files, an average of approximately three or four complaints have been received per month from June through September. These complaints were brought to the attention of OSI. A review of Bureau files does not indicate that there has been any increase in the sightings of these phenomena during or as a result of the war in Korea.\n\nJURISDICTION FOR INVESTIGATION OF THESE PHENOMENA\n\nYou will recall the investigation to obtain information concerning these aerial phenomena is the jurisdiction of the Department of the Air Force. The Department of the Air Force is aware of our jurisdiction in matters relating to espionage, sabotage and internal security, and so have contacted OSI and requested them to advise us of any developments in connection with these phenomena which would be of interest to us as a result of our jurisdiction."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"POSSIBLE ORIGIN OF THESE AERIAL PHENOMENA\n\nThe Bureau has been advised in the past by OSI that many of the sightings reported to them were determined by investigation to have been of weather balloons, falling stars, meteorological phenomena and other air-borne objects.\n\nINFORMATION OBTAINED BY BUREAU LIAISON FROM OSI, WASHINGTON, D. C. RE THE CAPTIONED MATTERS ON OCTOBER 9, 1950.\n\nBureau liaison determined on the morning of October 9, 1950 from OSI headquarters that the investigations of these aerial phenomena are being handled by OSI, Wright Field, Ohio. Their investigation of these phenomena fails to indicate that the sightings involved space ships or missiles from any other planet or country.\n\nAccording to OSI, the complaints received by them have failed to indicate any definite pattern of activity. OSI further advised they are closely following the investigation of the captioned matters, and they will advise this Bureau of any matters of interest.\n\nACTION\n\nNone. The above is for your information.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, PHILADELPHIA ATTENTION: MR. LEO LAUGHLIN\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISC REPORTED AT PHILADELPHIA ON 9/26/50\n\nDATE: October 2, 1950\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nDuring the late evening hours of September 26, 1950, two Philadelphia police officers observed a peculiar phenomenon on Vare Boulevard near 26th Street when they saw a round object about six feet in circumference slowly float down to the ground.\n\nThe object had the appearance of a parachute and landed in a field, it being so light it did not even depress the weeds in the field. The object was lavender in color, described by the officers as dewy, sort of like soap suds, and evaporating within fifteen or twenty minutes after it landed. When touched by the officers, the substance composing the object disappeared, leaving nothing but a slight sticky substance.\n\nThis matter was reported to this office by the Philadelphia Police and for that matter, was subsequently carried in the Philadelphia press as \"Flying Saucer Just Dissolves\".\n\nMr. LAUGHLIN of the Bureau was telephonically advised of the above by this office and issued instructions that the matter should be referred to Air Force Intelligence for handling and any investigation. Accordingly, Major WATTS of the Philadelphia Office of OSI was telephonically advised of the above and no further action was taken by this office.\n\nFMK/mnd\n\n98-0"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OCT 5 3 13PM '50 REC'D BELMONT F.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED OCT 6 12 25 PM '50 REC'D ESPIONAGE F.B.I. U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Oct 7, 1950\nE. Lewelton\n413 Irving Ave.\nGlendale Calif.\nEL WERTON\n\nMy theory of the flying saucer is:\n\nIt gets its power from electricity generated by a gen generator. The generator is run from a revolving disc, therefore giving the flying saucers a disc like appearance.\n\nBy the use of gears the revolving disc is able to generate 10 or 20 times more power than is needed.\n\nThe faster the disc goes, the more power. By use of the new light weight electric motors, there is less weight, and use space taken.\n\nThe revolving disc is in side of light shell. Forward motion of ships allows disc to revolve, generating electric power.\n\nThis way, the flying disc could fly almost any length of time.\n\nCompressed air could be used to start power disc.\n\nFlying Discs"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MR. JONES\nOct 11 3 42 PM '50\nRECEIVED\nFBI\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCC-150\nTo: COMMUNICATIONS SECTION.\nTransmit the following message to:\nOCTOBER 13, 1950 URGENT\nSAC, LOS ANGELES\nFLYING SAUCERS. YOU ARE INSTRUCTED TO DISCREETLY DETERMINE THROUGH APPROPRIATE RELIABLE SOURCES OF YOUR OFFICE WHETHER FRANK SCULLY, AUTHOR OF THE BOOK QUOTE BEHIND THE FLYING SAUCERS UNQUOTE IS IDENTICAL TO THE FRANK SCULLY WHO HAS BEEN ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN COMMUNIST ACTIVITIES SINCE THE LATE NINETEEN THIRTIES IN THE TERRITORY OF YOUR OFFICE.\nHOOVER\nEHD:gmu\nRECORDED: 95\nINDEXED: 95\n62-83894-253\nMr. Tolson, Mr. Clegg, Mr. Glavin, Mr. Ladd, Mr. Nichols, Mr. Rosen, Mr. Tracy, Mr. Egan, Mr. Gurnea, Mr. Harbo, Mr. Mohr, Mr. Pennington, Mr. Quinn Tamm, Tele. Room, Mr. Nease, Miss Gandy\nSENT VIA ___ M Per\nTELETYPE\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 23 1964"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-254\nCHANGED TO\n100-2244-6\nOCT 31 1950"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\nTHE INSPECTOR GENERAL USAF\n17TH DISTRICT OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS\nKIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\nDR/ms\nFile No: (24-8)-28\n25 May 1950\nSUBJECT: Summary of Observations of Aerial Phenomena in the New Mexico Area, December 1948 - May 1950\nTO: Brigadier General Joseph F. Carroll\nDirector of Special Investigations\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n1. In a liaison meeting with other military and government intelligence and investigative agencies in December 1948, it was determined that the frequency of unexplained aerial phenomena in the New Mexico area was such that an organized plan of reporting these observations should be undertaken. The organization and physical location of units of this District were most suitable for collecting these data, therefore, since December 1948, this District has assumed the responsibility for collecting and reporting basic information with respect to aerial phenomena occurring in this general area. These reports have been distributed to the Air Materiel Command, USAF, in accordance with Air Intelligence Requirements No. 4, and to other interested military and government agencies.\n2. There is attached, as a part of this summary, a compilation of aerial phenomena sightings that have occurred mostly in the New Mexico area and have been reported by this District Office subsequent to December 1948. This compilation of sightings is not a complete record of all reported observations, but includes only those in which sufficient information was available to justify their inclusion. The observers of these phenomena include scientists, Special Agents of the Office of Special Investigations (IG) USAF, airline pilots, military pilots, Los Alamos Security Inspectors, military personnel, and many other persons of various occupations whose reliability is not questioned. This compilation sets forth the most important characteristics with respect to each observation and evaluates each sighting into one of three classifications, (1) green fireball phenomenon, (2) disc or variation, and (3) probably meteoric.\n3. There is also attached an analysis of the green fireball occurrences in this area made by Dr. Lincoln LaPaz. Dr. LaPaz is the\nINDEXED: 87\n62-83894-253\nOCT 28 1950"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nFile No: (24-8)-28\nSubj: Summary of Observations of Aerial Phenomena in the New Mexico Area, December 1948 - May 1950\n25 May 1950\nDirector of the Institute of Meteoritics and Head of the Department of Mathematics and Astronomy at the University of New Mexico. He was Research Mathematician at the New Mexico Proving Grounds under an OSRD appointment in 1943 and 1944, and Technical Director of the Operations Analysis Section, Headquarters, Second Air Force, 1944-45. Since 1948, Dr. LaPaz has served on a voluntary basis as consultant for this District in connection with the green fireball investigations.\n4. On 17 February 1949 and again on 14 October 1949, conferences were held at Los Alamos, New Mexico, for the purpose of discussing the green fireball phenomena. Representatives of the following organizations were present at these meetings: Fourth Army, Armed Forces Special Weapons Project, University of New Mexico, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, University of California, U. S. Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, Geophysical Research Division Air Materiel Command USAF, and the Office of Special Investigations (IG) USAF. A logical explanation was not proffered with respect to the origin of the green fireballs. It was, however, generally concluded that the phenomena existed and that they should be studied scientifically until these occurrences have been satisfactorily explained. Further, that the continued occurrence of unexplained phenomena of this nature in the vicinity of sensitive installations is cause for concern.\n5. The Geophysical Research Division, Air Materiel Command, Cambridge, Massachusetts, has recently let a contract to Land-Air, Inc., Holloman AFB, Alamogordo, New Mexico, for a limited scientific study of green fireballs. The results of this scientific approach to the problem will undoubtedly be of great value in determining the origin of these phenomena.\n6. This summary of observations of aerial phenomena has been prepared for the purpose of re-emphasizing and reiterating the fact that phenomena have continuously occurred in the New Mexico skies during the past 18 months and are continuing to occur, and, secondly, that these phenomena are occurring in the vicinity of sensitive military and government installations.\nDOYLE REES\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDistrict Commander\n4 Incls\n1. Summary of Sightings\n2. Photo of Sighting No. 175 w/comments\n3. Ltr fr Dr. LaPaz to Lt Col Rees, dtd 23 May 50\n4. Graph indicating maximums\n2\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nFile No: (24-8)-28\nSubj: Summary of Observations of Aerial Phenomena in\n the New Mexico Area, December 1948 - May 1950 25 May 1950\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n 6 cys, Director of Special Investigations, Headquarters USAF\n 1 cy, CG, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio\n ATTN: Director of Technical Intelligence\n 1 cy, CG, Special Weapons Command, Kirtland AFB, New Mexico\n 1 cy, CG, Armed Services Special Weapons Project, Sandia Base,\n New Mexico. ATTN: J-2\n 1 cy, CG, Headquarters, Fourth Army, Ft. Sam Houston, Texas\n ATTN: AC of S, G-2\n 1 cy, CO, Holloman AFB, New Mexico\n 1 cy, CO, Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories, Cambridge, Mass.\n 1 cy, Director, Security Division, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission,\n Los Alamos, New Mexico. ATTN: Mr. B. O. Wells\n 1 cy, Federal Bureau of Investigation, El Paso, Texas\n 1 cy, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Albuquerque, New Mexico\n 1 cy, Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, Pentagon Building\n ATTN: Dr. Joseph Kaplan.\n 1 cy, Research and Development Board, Pentagon Building\n ATTN: Dr. H. E. Landsberg, Executive Director, Committee on\n Geophysics and Geography\n 1 cy, File\n\n3\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTHE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO\nALBUQUERQUE\n\nINSTITUTE OF METEORITICS\n\nMay 23, 1950\n\nTo: Lt. Colonel Doyle Rees, Commanding Officer\n 17th District, O. S. I.\n\nFrom: Lincoln LaPaz, Director\n Institute of Meteoritics\n\nSubject: Anomalous Luminous Phenomena (Seventh Report)\n\n 1. In the second report of this series, dated 1948, December 20, the\nwriter listed ten significant differences between the bright green horizon-\ntally-moving fireballs observed in the interval 1948, December 5-20, and\ntypical meteors. These differences were the following:\n\n (1) The horizontal nature of the paths of most of the December\nfireballs is most unusual. Genuine meteors are rarely observed to move\nin horizontal paths.\n\n (2) Again the very low height of the December fireball discussed\nin section 2 above sets it off in sharp contrast from the genuine\nmeteors for which heights of the order of 40 or more miles are nor-\nmally observed.\n\n (3) The velocity determined for the fireball of December 12 is\nmuch less than the velocities determined from typical meteors (and\nyet is considerably greater than the speeds of the V-2 Rockets or\njet planes or of conventional flares).\n\n (4) In the case of meteorites that penetrate to as low levels\nas that determined for the fireball of December 12, the observed lu-\nminous phenomena are always accompanied by very violent noises. No\nnoises whatever have been observed in connection with the various\nDecember fireballs so far investigated. (Note added on 1950, May 23:\nPossible exceptions to the noiselessness of green fireballs are the\nincidents of 1949, January 30, and 1949, December 4.)\n\n (5) Genuine meteors normally show remarkable variations in\nbrightness, beginning as fine thin hair lines, which are scarcely\nvisible to the observer, and then brightening up to flash out near\nthe end of their paths. In the case of the December fireballs most\nof the observers have reported that the green balls appeared almost\ninstantly at their full brightness.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTo: Lt. Colonel Doyle Rees - Page 2\nSubj: Anomalous Luminous Phenomena (Seventh Report) May 23, 1950\n\n (6) In the case of genuine meteors the paths are directed to-\nward all points of the compass with equal frequency. On the contrary\nin the case of the green fireballs, plots of admissible approach sec-\ntors show that there is a very pronounced tendency for the paths to\ncome in from the north half of the sky.\n\n (7) The three groups of anomalous greenish luminous phenomena\nshow a curious association with well known meteor showers, although\nnone of these meteor showers normally produce extremely bright green\nfireballs, such as those recently observed. For example, the obser-\nvation mentioned by Mr. Konnig appeared near the maximum of the\nQuadrantid shower of early January, Mr. McCullough's observation of\nAugust was near the time of the Persid shower and the December\nobservations all fell in the interval covered by the Geminid shower.\nThis relationship might indicate an attempt to render the green fire-\nballs less conspicuous by causing them to appear only when there is\nconsiderable meteoric activity.\n\n (8) As noted in an earlier communication, the remarkably vivid\ngreen color reported for most of the December fireballs is rarely\nobserved in the case of genuine meteors. By laboratory test this\npeculiar color seems to be identical with that given off by copper\nsalts in the blowpipe flame. If this identification is correct,\nthe wave length of the radiation from the green fireballs is near\nλ =5218Å.\n\n (9) The duration estimates of between 2 and 3 seconds reported\nfor the green fireballs are considerably longer than those (0.4 -\n0.5 seconds) for the ordinary visual meteors, but shorter than the\nduration estimates invariably reported in the case of a genuine\nmeteorite fall (5 to 30 seconds or even longer).\n\n (10) For none of the green fireballs has a train of sparks or\na dust cloud been reported. This contrasts sharply with the be-\nhavior noted in case of meteoric fireballs--particularly those\nthat penetrate to the very low levels where the green fireball of\nDecember 12 was observed.\n\n 2. In the year and a half since this list was prepared, many ad-\nditional observations have been made, the total number of objects now\naccepted as belonging in the green fireball category being 72. (Al-\nthough this number constitutes nearly 50% of the incidents listed in the\naccompanying Summary, it constitutes less than 5% of the total number of\nunscreened observations reported to the writer.) Critical analysis of\nall green fireball reports now available shows that only one of the\nstatements in the list given in paragraph 1 needs to be modified,\nnamely, item (1). Within the last year, a considerable number of the\ngreen fireballs have appeared to fall vertically downward rather than\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTo: Lt. Colonel Doyle Rees - Page 3\nSubj: Anomalous Luminous Phenomena (Seventh Report) May 23, 1950\n\nto move horizontally. However, a strictly vertical infall is also very\nrarely observed in the case of genuine meteor falls.\n\n 3. An analysis just completed of the time distribution of the green\nfireballs so far observed permits us to add an 11th item to the list of\ndifferences given in paragraph 1 above. The graph of frequency versus\nlocal time which accompanies the present report shows that the maximum\nfrequency of sighting of green fireballs (occurring at approximately\n2030) coincides in time with neither the frequency maximum for ordinary\nmeteors (occurring at approximately 0300) nor the frequency maximum for\nmeteorite falls (occurring at approximately 1600).\n\n 4. Inspection of the graph referred to in paragraph 3 also will\nshow that most of the green fireballs have been sighted in a time inter-\nval extending from about 5 p.m. to 11 p.m. (MST). This concentration\nmight be even more pronounced if it were possible to screen out of the\nsecondary maximum, around 2 a.m. (MST), all ordinary meteors which have\nbeen mistakenly identified as green fireballs. That such misidentifica-\ntion has occurred is strongly suggested by the near coincidence in time\nof the secondary maximum of the green fireballs and the well established\nearly morning maximum of the ordinary meteors.\n\n 5. Some significance may attach to the fact that the time interval\nalluded to in paragraph 4 extends from about 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. in the Ural\nregion of the USSR. Since missiles moving with velocities of the order\nof those found for the green fireballs for which real path determinations\nhave been possible would travel from the southern Urals to New Mexico in\nless than 15 minutes, a possible interpretation of the concentration of\nsightings referred to in paragraph 4 is that the green fireballs result\nfrom guided missiles launched from bases in the Urals in the morning\nhours before cloudiness due to convection or blinding afternoon dust\nstorms can interfere with non-radar tracking, such as has been used by\nthe Optical Trajectory Section at White Sands Proving Ground.\n\n 6. There is also a pronounced concentration of green fireball\nincidents on the four days, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, almost\nall of the most widely observed incidents having occurred on Saturday\nor Sunday.\n\n 7. It is a curious and fairly well-established fact that there\nhas been a distinct decline in the number of green fireball sightings\nduring the last two months, within which the number of so-called \"fly-\ning saucer\" incidents in this region has attained an all-time high.\n\n 8. Although I have recently received from Dr. Joseph Kaplan of the\nScientific Advisory Board a letter containing the statement \"Frankly, I\ndon't know of any U. S. experiments that would result in the appearance\nof these unconventional objects, and neither does Von Karman\". I still\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTo: Lt. Colonel Doyle Rees - Page 4\nSubj: Anomalous Luminous Phenomena (Seventh Report) May 23, 1950\n\nconsider the most probable explanation of the green fireballs to be the\none given in the first of the three paragraphs below which are quoted\nfrom my letter of 1950, February 20, to Dr. P. H. Wyckoff, Chief Atmos-\npheric Physics Laboratory, Base Directorate for Geophysical Research.\nThe last two paragraphs quoted below well summarize my recommendations\nconcerning the green fireball problem:\n\n \"As a preliminary to setting down the project recommendations\nwhich you requested, I have very carefully reviewed all available\nfireball data (observers' reports, transit measurements, calculated\nreal paths, etc.) covering incidents from those of December 5, 1948\nto the extraordinary incident of February 7, 1950, which has been\nunder intensive investigation for the last two weeks. As a result\nof this comprehensive review, particularly as it relates to the in-\ncident of February 7, 1950, I feel compelled to write you in some-\nwhat different terms concerning my own part in the proposed fireball\nproject than I had in mind when we last discussed this matter. In\nbrief, I have come to the conclusion that, on the basis of the\nevidence now available to me, I would not be justified in recommend-\ning a fireball project. In my opinion, this evidence proves conclu-\nsively that the fireballs reported on fall into one of two categories:\nThose of the first category (the majority) are meteorite falls of\nunusual, but certainly not of impossible, magnitude, frequency and\nother characteristics; those of the second category (the minority)\nare U. S. guided missiles undergoing tests in the neighborhoods of\nthe sensitive installations they are designed to defend. This\ninterpretation of the latter category is the one that I proposed in\nanswer to a question raised by Dr. Teller at the first Los Alamos\nconference on February 17, 1949. It was not taken seriously then\nand I doubt that it will be taken seriously at the present time.\nHowever, even if my interpretation of the unconventional fireballs\nis the correct one, it is obvious that those in position to confirm\nit should refuse to do so.\"\n\n \"Only one other point need be stressed, namely, that if I am\nwrong in interpreting the guided missiles as of U. S. origin, then\ncertainly intensive, systematic investigation of these objects\nshould not be delayed until the termination of the present academic\nyear. Recent international developments compel one to sense the\nimperative necessity of immediate investigation of the unconvention-\nal green fireballs, in case you are in possession of information\nproving that they are not U. S. missiles.\"\n\n \"If such an immediate investigation were to be undertaken, I\nwould recommend that Dr. Fred L. Whipple, of Harvard College Obser-\nvatory, be placed in charge of the photographic phase of the inves-\ntigation; that Dr. Peter M. Millman, of the Dominion Observatory,\nbe placed in charge of the spectrographic phase of the investigation;\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTo: Lt. Colonel Doyle Rees - Page 5\nSubj: Anomalous Luminous Phenomena (Seventh Report) May 23, 1950\n\nthat Dr. L. A. Manning, of Stanford, and Dr. Millman be placed in charge of the radar investigation; and, finally, that Dr. William Crozier, of the New Mexico School of Mines, be placed in charge of dust collection and identification. On the basis of many intensive field surveys, I do not anticipate that ground search will lead to any recoveries, but in case such ground search is to be attempted, it should be carried out on the scale stressed in my conversations with you and Major Oder last month.\"\n\n9. Although the above paragraphs were written some months ago, the recommendations contained in them are the ones I would urge you to consider at the present time. In conclusion, I should like to repeat the offer made at the end of my letter of February 20 to Dr. Wyckoff, namely to serve, if needed, as consultant on the green fireball project as suggested in Major Oder's letter to me under date of November 29, 1949, with the stipulation, however, that my service be on a voluntary basis rather than on the $40 per day contract specified in Major Oder's letter.\n\nLincoln LaPaz, Director\nInstitute of Meteoritics\nUniversity of New Mexico\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nMeteorites / Meteors / Green \"Fireballs\" / \"Disks\" or Variations\nNumber of Observations (0 to 40) vs. Time of Sightings (16 to 16)\nLabels: GREEN \"FIREBALL\" MAXIMUM; METEOR MAXIMUM; METEORITE MAXIMUM; \"DISK\" or VARIATION MAXIMUM\nLegend: Meteorites; Meteors; Green \"Fireballs\"; \"Disks\" or Variations\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Sighting No. 175\n\nPhotograph of Unknown Aerial Phenomena taken at Datil, New Mexico by Cpl Lertis E. Stanfield, Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico on 24 and 25 Feb 1950. An analysis of the above photograph was made by Dr. Lincoln LaPaz, Head of the Institute of Meteoritics, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, who reached the following conclusions:\n\na. The angular diameter of the perfectly round luminous object Stanfield observed was approximately 1/4 of a degree.\n\nb. The angular velocity of the object in the sky was greater than half a degree per minute.\n\nDr. LaPaz stated that on the basis of the results (a) and (b) above, the object seen by Stanfield was not the moon (for the angular diameter is too small), it was not Venus or any other planet (for the angular diameter was too large), and it was not a bright fixed star slightly out of focus (for the observed rate of motion is double that due to the diurnal rotation of the earth).\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSUMMARY OF PERTINENT DATA OF UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENA\nReported by the 17th District Office of Special Investigations (AF), Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico\n\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n\n1 | 1945 / 10 Jan | 2300 | 1 | R | Point of impact on line between Brest and Kiev | Almost vertical descent followed by \"bouncing\" H to S | | 35° above Horizon Descending | Brilliant white | | 2-3 secs | None | | Compare w/planet Venus on unusually clear night. | | \n2 | latter part 1947 | App. 2000 | 1 | R | Vaughn, New Mexico | | 400'-500' | Descending slowly in vertical manner | Bright white | | | None | Round | Larger than basketball | Descending slowly | Exploded\n3 | 1948 / 27 Jul | 0035-0845 | 1 | R | Albuquerque, New Mexico | | | | Duraluminum reflected light | | | None | Flat and round | | Stationary at times | Extinguished\n4 | 4 Aug | 0200 & 0300 | 2 | Unk | North Powder, Oregon | NE to SE | 5500' | Horizontal line | Green | | | | Softball | 720 mph | Extinguished\n\nLEGEND: *Reliability of Observers: VR - Very Reliable; R - Reliable; Unk - Unknown Reliability\n**Evaluation: (1) \"Green Fireball Phenomena\" (2) \"Disk\" or Variation (3) Probable Meteor\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSummary of Pertinent Data of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District Off (cont)\n\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | Reliability | General Area | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n\n5 | 24 Oct | Night | 1 | Unk | Phoenix, Arizona | E to W | | | Green | | 75 hrs. | | | Star | Very slow | Became very bright and fell apart\n6 | 3 or 4 Nov | App 2200 | 1 | R | Vaughn, New Mexico | | 400'-500' | Descending slowly in vertical manner | Bright white | | | None | Round | Larger than basketball | Descending slowly | Exploded\n7 | 25 Nov | App 2200 | 1 | R | Vaughn, New Mexico | | 400'-500' | Descending slowly in vertical manner | Bright white | | | None | Round | Larger than basketball | Descending slowly | Exploded\n8 | 5 Dec | 2135 | 2 | R | Las Vegas, New Mexico | W to E | Slightly above 9,000' | Horizontal slightly descending | Whitish orange | | Few secs | | | | | Disappeared\n9 | 5 Dec | App 2200 | 2 | R | Albuquerque, New | No movement noted | 10,500' | Parabolic curve | Green | Yes | 2 secs | None | Round | | | Faded out\n10 | 6 Dec | 2255 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | E to W | | Slight falling arch | Green | Yes | 2-3 secs | None | Round | 1/3 diameter of moon | Rapid | Vanished\n11 | 8 Dec | 1933 | 2 | VR | Las Vegas, New Mexico | ENE to WSW | 13,500' | Horizontal | Bright green | Yes | 2 secs | None | | Larger than a flare | Rapid rate of speed | Faded out\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 5\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal or Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n12 | 1948 11 Dec | 1930 | | Unk | Hood River, Oregon | | | | Blue & white | | | Yes | Flash | | | Flash w/ like thunder\n13 | 12 Dec | 2102 | 5 | VR | 15 miles south of Las Vegas, New Mexico | E to W | 3 - 10 miles | Horizontal | Very bright green | | 2.1-2.3 secs | None | Ball | Magnitude -4 | | Broke into 3 or 4 small fragments & disappeared\n14 | 20 Dec | 2054 | 4 | R | Los Alamos New Mexico | W to E | Great height descending | 20° to the horizon | Pale green or bluish white | Yes | 1-1/2 secs | None | Ball | Basketball | High speed | Disappeared behind mountain\n15 | 28 Dec | 0431 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | N to S | Descended from high alt to 6000' | Descending in vertical path | white | | Sev. secs | None | Star | Star | Blower than falling star | Disappeared w/greenish flash\n16 | 1949 6 Jan | 1730 | 1 | Unk | Albuquerque New Mexico | SE to NW | 1500' - 2000' | Horizontal | Bright white | | | None | Diamond | App. 2' long | Much faster than a jet | Disappeared\n17 | 6 Jan | 0310 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | E to W | 3 to 5° from observer | Horizontal | Brilliant green | | 2 secs | None | | | High speed | Disappeared behind mountainous horizon\n18 | 30 Jan | 1754 | App 200 | Unk | El Paso, Texas | NW to SE | 3° - 5° above horizon | Horizontal | Green | | | None | Ball | | | Broke into pieces"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 4\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n19 | 1949 30 Jan | 1755 | App 200 | Unk | Roswell, New Mexico | W to E | 2000' | Horizontal | Blue-green | | | None | | | Moving slowly | Disappeared to some. Disintegrated into shower of smaller lighted fragments\n20 | 30 Jan | App 1900 | App 200 | Unk & R | Alamogordo, New Mexico | W to S | Angle of elev. 15°-30° from observer | Gentle descent | Green | | 3 - 15 secs | None | Ball | | | Seemed to fizzle out\n21 | 30 Jan | 1854 1900 | 10 | Unk | Ft. Worth, Texas | W to S | 13° above horizon | 30° downward from horizon | Green trailing sparks | Yes | 1 - 7 secs | None | | 1/3 size of full moon | | Disintegration\n22 | 14 Feb | 1840 | 2 | Unk | Canado, New Mexico | | Somewhat above horizon | Stationary then fell in slight curve to W | Brilliant white slightly green color | Yes | | None | | | Stationary then fell in slight curve to W. | (1)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 6\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | Reliability of Observer | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n23 | 1949 17 Feb | 1300 | 1 | Unk | Grants, New Mexico | Southward | | Vertical climb then leveled off Gradual ascent | White | Yes | | None | Oval | Larger than meteor | | Disappeared\n24 | 17 Feb | | App 100 | VR | Albuquerque, New Mexico | W to E | | | Brilliant white shifting to peach color | | 5 mts | None | Round shifting to ellipse | 1 lunar diameter | | Disappeared\n25 | 27 Feb | 1905 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | W to E | | Parallel to earth | Green-white | | 2 secs | None | | | Not as fast as meteor | Disappeared abruptly\n26 | 2 Mar | 0010 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | N to S | \"Low in sky\" | Horizontal | Light | | 2 secs | None | | | Very fast | Disappeared behind trees (1) (3)\n27 | 3 Mar | 0159 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Straight down | Straight down | Bright green | | | | | | | Disappeared (1) (2)\n28 | 6 Mar | 2100 | 2 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | From N 74° W N 81° W | From 6° 45' above horizon | | Blue-white light | Yes | | None | Oblong | 2' by 1' | Not known | | (1)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n29 | 1949 6 Mar | 2020 | 2 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | N 40° E | 59° above horizon | | Blue-white light | | | None | Ball like flash | Basketball | \"Fixed flash\" |\n30 | 6 Mar | 2045 | 1 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | From S 81° W to S 60° W | From 21° above horizon to 6°31' above | | Light colored head orange trail | Yes | | None | Round head with trail | About 10° in length | | \n31 | 7 Mar | 0115 | 1 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | N 40° E | 65° 15' above horizon | | Brilliant blue-white | | | None | Like flash blub | Flash bulb | |\n32 | 7 Mar | 0130 | 1 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | N 18° W | 27° 30' above horizon | | Bright blue-white | | | None | Like flash bulb | Basketball | \"Fixed flash\" |\n33 | 7 Mar | 0130 0200 | 2 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | S 20° W | 26° above horizon | | Bluish white | | | None | Ball like flash | Flash bulb | | (1) (3)\n34 | 7 Mar | 0145 | 1 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | N 60° E | | Dropped vertically to ground | Orange | | 2 secs | None | Tear-drop | 2' by 1' | | Disappeared behind trees (3)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n35 | 1949 7 Mar | 1610 | 1 | Unk | Window Rock, Arizona | N | 40 - 45° to horizon | | Red (fire) in center shading to blue at edge | Yes | 6-8 secs | None | Ball round-spherical | 3' in diameter | 200-300 mph | Disintegrated (1)\n36 | 8 Mar | 1836 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | S to N | 12,000' to 15,000' | Horizontal | Bright white with greenish tint | | 1-2 secs | None | | | App 300 mph | Either went out or disappeared behind cloud\n37 | 8 Mar | 1835 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | S to N | 4,000 above terrain | Descending at 45° angle | Intense white light aluminum colored | | Very short | None | Elliptical pointed at ends | | Slower than twin-engined plane | Disappeared behind trees\n38 | 8 Mar | 0103 | 1 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | from S 58° E to S 54° E | From 58° above horizon to 54° above | Traveled in arc | Pale white light | Yes | | None | Roundish head w/hazy smoke trail | | | (3)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (contd)\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n39 1949 6 Mar 0105 1 Unk Camp Hood, Texas From N 56° W to S 64° W From 15° above horizon Traveled in arc Pale reddish nose whitish red trail Yes None Lemon w/tail Disappeared\n40 13 Mar 2153 1 Unk Albuquerque, New Mexico NE to SW or SW to NE 20° above horizon Descending slightly Bluish or greenish-white Yes 2-4 secs None Length twice diameter of ball 1/2 diameter of full moon\n41 14 Mar 09-00-16Z 1 R Airplane enroute fr Honolulu to Canton Is Horizontal None 6°-12° above airplane at 9,000 Horizontal 10 secs None Nose like bullet 65° in 9 secs (1) (2)\n42 27 Mar 1800 1605 1 Unk Tucumcari, New Mexico E to W High in sky -app 30° above horizon Amber None 25 mts None Long & narrow Faded out in distance (2)\n43 27 Mar 1600 1 Unk Montoya, New Mexico E to W About 75° above Orange flame None 10 Hts None Long & narrow Length about 1/6 lunar diameter, width about 1/5 length Faded out in distance (2)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance\n44 27 Mar 1818 1 R Tucumcari, New Mexico E to W Close to 45° above horizon Bright orange None 15 mts None Long & narrow Faded out of sight in distance\n45 27 Mar 1800 1 Unk Tucumcari, New Mexico E to W 60° above horizon Orange fire None 15 mts None Like kite tail About size of C-47 at 10,000 ft. Disappeared behind hills\n46 31 Mar 2130 1 R Camp Hood, Texas SW Est. 2,000' Fire red to white Yes None Saber-tail App. size of basketball\n47 5 Apr 2200 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico S to N App. 300' above S slope of Tejarito Mt. Arc Green w/red after glow 1/2-1 sec None Tremendous speed Disappeared behind mountain\n48 6 Apr 1205 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico SE About 15,000' Between dk & lt green 3-5 secs None Very fast\n49 7 Apr 0155 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico W About 200 yds fr top of hill Green App 45 secs None Moved very slowly (1) (2)\n50 7 Apr 0100 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico S to N Green 5 secs None Moving slowly"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (contd)\nPage 10\n51 12 Apr 1930 1 Unk Albuquerque, New Mexico SE to NW 20° above horizon White None 8 secs None Round 1/8 size of moon 15° in 8 secs Extinguished (1)\n52 15 Apr 1630 1 Unk El Paso, Texas Straight up About 30° Gray-ish Yes 15 mts None Thin smoke trail Very thin Dissipated (2)\n53 18 Apr 0146 2 R Flagstaff & Williams, Arizona NW App 12,000' to one. 75-100 miles to other observer Greenish blue 1-2 secs None Ball like 100 watt light bulb Disappeared behind obstacle\n54 22 Apr 0905 1 Unk Cliff, New Mexico W to E 20° dropping slowly Aluminum None 2 mts None Round, flat thin, disc-shape Over 15' in diameter Disappeared behind mountains (2)\n55 24 Apr 1033 5 VR White Sands, New Mexico N 25-29° White light yellow 60 secs None Ellipsoid Tremendous rate of speed Disappeared due to distance (2)\n56 25 Apr 0630 2 Unk Springer, New Mexico 2 groups going W 2 groups going E Well above 30,000' Silvery white None 4 grps totaling about 20 sec Yes Round Very small Very fast well above speed of sound Disappeared from view (2)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 11\n57 1949 28 Apr App 1745 3 Unk Tucson, Arizona NE to SE or SW Silver None 12-40 mts None Cigar or sausage shape From D-29 to a city block 300-600 mph Faded from view (1)\n58 30 Apr 2215 1 Unk Albuquerque, New Mexico E to W 59° above horizon Blue green None 2 secs 2° None Round Tenth of moon 2 seconds 2 degrees Went out (1)\n59 3 May 2143 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico S to N 10°-15° above horizon Bright white light None 10 secs None Very fast up to 1,000 mph (1) (3)\n60 3 May 2126 2143 2205 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico S to N 10°-15° above horizon White 3-7 secs each time None Large - similar to size of airplane landing lights Very fast (1) (3)\n61 3 May 2126 2140 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico ESE to NNW 10°-15° above horizon 2126-white 2140-red 5 sec 1st; 2 sec 2nd None 2126-baseball diamond lights. 2140-slightly larger than firebox lights Same speed as aircraft landing (1) (3)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 12\n62 6 May 2040 2130 1 R Camp Hood, Texas W and N App 1200' dropping to 440' Alternating pinkish to green None 50 mts None Round 1/2 dollar diminishing to short quarter size Very slow Faded from sight (2) (1)\n63 6 May 0105 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico N to S 5° above horizon Was going down at an angle of 30-35° Green Fraction of a sec None Round App 1/8 size of full moon Very high rate of speed Disappeared west of Jemez Mts. (1)\n64 7 May 2025 2105 4 R Camp Hood, Texas SE 1300' Green-white None 40 mts None Diamond shape 5 mils width Covered 15 mils in 40 mins. horiz. Dimmed and went out (2) (1)\n65 7 May 1940 1 R Camp Hood, Texas N and E 1000' Reddish greenish white None 57 sec None Diamond shape 5 mils width Covered 20 mils in 57 secs horiz. Dimmed and went out (2) (1)\n66 8 May 2008 2017 1 R Camp Hood, Texas N and E 1300' Reddish greenish white None 9 mts None Diamond 2 mils width 10 mils in 9 mts Dimmed and went out (1) (2)\n67 8 May 0930 1100 4 Unk Tucson, Arizona W, 90° turn to the N 4000 to 20,000 Horizontal then rapid climb at 45° angle White None 10-20 mts None Metallic circular 40-75' in diameter Motionless to faster than jet Climbed at 45° angle until out of sight (2)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 13\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance | **Evaluation\n68 | 1949 9 May | App 1430 | 1 | R | Tucson, Arizona | SW to NE | | | Silvery | None | 6-10 secs | None | Round & flat | 25' in diameter | 750-1000 mph | Faded from view | (2)\n69 | 12 May | 2115 2130 | 1 | VR | Alamogordo, New Mexico | | 3° or 4° above horizon | | White with greenish tinge | None | 4 mins | None | 2 fuzzy stars | 1/4 diameter of full moon | | Vanished | (2)\n70 | 16 May | App 1700 | 1 | Unk | Tucson, Arizona | E to W | 5000' | Horizontal | Black | None | 8-10 secs | None | Round solid flat | 3 - 4' in diameter | 300-1000 MPH | Behind aircraft hangar | (2)\n71 | 2 Jun | 0040 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | E to N | 7000' - 10,000' | Descending | Green | Yes | 1 sec | None | Ball of light | | | | (1)(3)\n72 | 11 Jun | 2057 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, | SW to NE | 25° above horizon | | Green then red at end of flight | Yes | 4 - 5 secs | None | | Size of star | | | (1)\n73 | 20 Jun | 2010 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | W to E | | | Green turned orange red before vanishing | None | 3 secs | None | Round | | | Extinguished | (1)\n74 | 20 Jun | 2010 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | W to E | Directly overhead | | Blue green | None | 1-1/2 secs | None | | | | Vanished as tho extinguished | (1)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 14\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n75 | 1949 24 Jun | 1545 1630 | 2 | Unk | Mesa, Arizona | 1 to SE 2 to E 3 to NE 4 vertical 5 to E | | 4 Horizontal 1 Vertical | Steel gray | | 4 at 30 mts 1 at 25 secs | None | Disc w/2 flanges | | Max of 400 mph | Faded from view\n76 | 27 Jun | 0138 | 1 | R | Albuquerque, New Mexico | W to E | 30° to 90° above horizon | | Similar to star Slightly more orange | Yes | 2 mts | None | Round | Slightly larger than brightest star | 140° in 2 mts. | Went behind building | (3)\n77 | 29 Jun | 2010 | 1 | Unk | Flagstaff, Arizona | E to W | 30° from vertical | | Yellow in front Red behind | None | | None | Bullet shaped | 1/2 size of small airplane | Relatively slow | Over a hill | (1)(2)\n78 | 30 Jun | 1630 | 1 | R | Seligman, Arizona | N | 30° above horizon | | Dull grey | None | 8 secs | None | Circle | Appeared 1 1/2\" diameter at 10,000' altitude | 2,000 mph or faster | Disappeared in distance | (2)\n79 | 11 Jul | 2110 | 1 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | W by SW | 30° above horizon | | Pale red | None | 2 secs | None | Ball - but not a perfect circle | Twice as large as evening star | | Such as burning off flashlight | (3)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 15\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n80 | 1949 28 Jul | 2045 | 1 | Unk | Killeen Base, Texas | N to S | 30° above horizon | | White w/tint of blue green | Yes | 3-5 secs | None | Round w/tail | Size of evening star | Unable to estimate | Faded out | (\n81 | 28 Jul | 2259 | 1 | Unk | Killeen, Texas | S to N | 30° above horizon | | 2 predominately white. 1 had orange glow to tail | Yes | #1 at 2-3 secs #2 at 10-12 secs | None | Round w/tail | Tennis ball | | Faded out | (1\n82 | 28 Jul | 2259 | 1 | Unk | Killeen, Texas | N to NW | 30° above horizon | | Initially blue turning white | None | 15-20 secs | None | Round | 3 times size evening star | | Went out like light | (1)(3)\n83 | 30 Jul | 2135 | 1 | R | Camp Hood, Texas | SE to NW | 35° to horizon | Climbed in arc | Blue-white | Yes | 2 - 2 1/2 secs | None | Like rocket tail | | 2 - 2 1/2 secs to cover arc of about 15° | Faded out | (1)\n84 | 30 Jul | 2204 | 1 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | SE to SW | App 30° above horizon | Straight flight losing altitude | Predominately white w/blue tint | Yes | 2 - 3 secs | None | Round w/tail | Evening star or planet | Very fast | Gradually faded out | (3)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 16\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n85 | 1949 6 Aug | 2000 | 1 | Unk | Las Cruces, New Mexico | E to W | | | Bluish green | Yes | 1 - 2 secs | None | Round | Bigger than falling star | | Disappeared behind building | (\n86 | 6 Aug | 2000 | 1 | Unk | Las Cruces, New Mexico | E to W | 3°28\" to 9°40\" above horizon | Curve going up then fell in almost vertical direction | Reddish blue & green | Yes | 4 - 5 secs | None | Round | App 6\" in diameter | | Disappeared gradually | \n87 | 6 Aug | 2000 | 1 | Unk | Alamogordo, New Mexico | Vertical | 2°20\" to 7°35\" above horizon | Straight vertical flight | Bright white slight reddish cast | None | 3 secs | None | Round | 1/2 size of moon | | Exploded then pieces died out | (1)\n88 | 6 Aug | 2000 2005 | 1 | Unk | Alamogordo, New Mexico | E to W | 2°4\" to 12°7\" above horizon | 10° off vertical | White | | 2 secs | None | | Large as auto spotlight at arm's length | | Disappeared behind building | (1)\n89 | 6 Aug | 2015 | 1 | Unk | Alamogordo, New Mexico | SW | | Straight flight app 20° vertical decline | Whitish yellow (red trail) | Yes | 1 sec | None | Round | Twice size normal falling star | Extremely fast - twice as fast as falling star | Disappeared behind mountain | (1)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 17\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n90 | 1949 6 Aug | 2030 | 1 | Unk | Alamogordo, New Mexico | N | | Constant slight curve earthward | White (bluish) | Yes | 1 sec | None | Round | App smaller than clenched fist | Similar to falling star | Went out\n91 | 6 Aug | 2020 | 1 | Unk | Albuquerque, New Mexico | Descending to earth vertically | 15° above horizon | Descending to earth vertically | Green | None | 1 - 1 1/2 secs | None | Round to pear shape | 500 watt bulb about 1/5 mile away | 10° in 1 1/2 secs at 2 miles | Dissipated | (1)\n92 | 6 Aug | 2000 | 1 | Unk | White Sands, New Mexico | | 40° above horizon | Straight line to earth | Observer color blind | None | 1 sec | None | Round | Half size of fingernail at arm's length | Slightly faster than ordinary falling star | Disappeared behind sand dune | (1)\n93 | 6 Aug | 2000 | 1 | R | Alamogordo, New Mexico | 200° | 30° above horizon | Long slow curve to earth | Bluish green | Yes | 1 sec | None | Round | Tip of thumb at arm's length | | Burned out | (1)\n94 | 10 Aug | 0010 | 2 | Unk | Killeen Base, Texas | E to W | 30° angle headed down | 30° angle headed down | Blue | Yes | 3 - 4 secs | None | Oval | Head size | | Sudden disappearance | (3)\n95 | 10 Aug | 2030 | 1 | Unk | Killeen Base, Texas | N to S | 30° above horizon | | White | Yes | 5 secs | None | Similar to comet | | | Disappeared | (3)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 18\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n96 | 1949 10 Aug | 2035 | 1 | R | Camp Hood, Texas | N to S | | Level flight | Yellow to orange | Yes | 1 - 2 secs | None | | Like headlight of old car | 60° in 2 secs | Cut out\n97 | 10 Aug | 2035 2207 2220 2240 | 1 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | W to E | 30° - 45° above horizon | Level flight | White | Yes | 3 - 4 secs | None | Round w/tail | Large flare | Greater speed than plane | Burned out | (3)\n98 | 10 Aug | 2040 | 1 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | N to S | 30° above horizon | Horizontal w/slight arc | Orange w/white tail | Yes | 3 - 5 secs | None | Rocket | 20 mm. tracer ammo. | Very great similar to falling star | Light gradually diminished | (3)\n99 | 10 Aug | 2100 | 1 | Unk | Killeen Base, Texas | S | 30° above horizon going up | Continued climbing at 30° angle until disappearance | Bright orange | Yes | 5 secs | None | Reddish ball with long fiery tail | Head size | | Disappeared | (3)\n100 | 10 Aug | 2100 2120 2215 2250 | 1 | R | Camp Hood, Texas | | 40° - 70° above horizon | #1, 3 & 4 almost horizontal #2 almost vertical | White with orange | Yes | 1 sec for each one | None | Round with trail | Large star | Great speed | Tent out like a light | (3)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n101 | 1949 10 Aug | 2200 2230 | 1 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | S to N | 30° above horizon | Level flight | White w/yellow trail | Yes | 1 - 2 secs | None | Oval | Size of shooting star | 300 mph or faster | Faded\n102 | 10 Aug | 2240 | 1 | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | N to S | 8,000' or more | Straight flight with gradual incline | Light red diminishing to light yellow | Yes | 2 - 3 secs | None | Round w/jagged trail | Much larger than evening star | | Burned up and disintegrated | (3)\n103 | 11 Aug | 2030 2045 2052 2105 0010 | Sev | Unk | Camp Hood, Texas | N to S | 45 - 60° above horizon | Generally a level flight | White | Yes | 3 - 5 secs | None | Flash like a rocket or training flare | Star size | Faster than any plane observed | Went out like a light | (3)\n104 | 12 Aug | 0010 | 2 | Unk | Killeen Base, Texas | Due W in arc | 45° above horizon | Straight & level flight w/ascent descent describing arc | Bluish white | Yes | 10 secs | None | Broken circle resembling signal flare | Head size | | Sudden disappearance | (3)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 20\n105 | 1949 12 Aug | 0445 | 1 | Unk | Killeen Base, Texas | SE to NW | 30° above horizon headed down | Headed down | Reddish | Yes | 2 - 3 secs | Yes | Trail of flame | Fairly long streak of flame | | Faded away\n106 | 14 Aug | 2135 | 1 | R | Alamogordo, New Mexico | | Appeared 25° Disappeared at 12° | 10 - 15° off vertical | Reddish orange | Yes | 2 secs | None | Round | Larger than Venus | | Disappeared | (3)\n107 | 20 Aug | 2130 | 2 | Unk | Douglas, Arizona | N to S | 8,000' - 10,000' | Flat trajectory | | None | 6 - 10 secs | None | Round to oblong like inverted saucer | About size of single engine airplane | 3500 to 4500 mph | Disappeared in distance | (2)\n108 | 21 Aug | 2115 2150 | 5 | Unk | Nogales, Arizona | | 45° at low level 90° at high level | Horizontal to earth's surface | Dull orange | None | 10 secs | None | Wafer | App size of volley ball | 10 times speed of jet planes | Disappeared in space | (1) (3)\n109 | 26 Aug | 1345 | 1 | R | Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona | SE to NW | App. 50,000 | Horizontal at 50,000' | Brownish hazy color | None | 60 secs | | Similar to triangle with round edges | Est. to be app 1/4 of inch when observed at 3 ft. | Terrific rate of speed | Faded from view | (2)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 21\n110 | 1949 30 Aug | 2300 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Almost straight fall | 90° overhead | Almost straight fall | Bright green w/reddish tail | Yes | 1 - 2 secs | None | | Much larger than meteor | | Burned out\n111 | 15 Sep | 0025 | 1 | Unk | Albuquerque, New Mexico | | 30° above horizon | | Yellow red | | 6 secs | None | Round | Size of baseball | | Burst & appeared to disintegrate\n112 | 16 Sep | 0230 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | W to E | 3,000' | Horizontal | Orange | None | 15 secs | None | Ball shape | Larger than falling star | Faster than airplane slower than falling star | Dimmed then disappeared completely | (3)\n113 | 16 Sep | 2015 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | W to S | 45° above horizon | | Dark yellow | None | 3 - 4 secs | None | Round | Size of baseball | | Unknown | (1)\n114 | 19 Sep | 0900 | 2 | Unk | Tucson, Arizona | N | App 4000' | | Grayish white | None | 2 mts | None | | 2 to 3 ft across | 600 mph | Faded from view | (2)\n115 | 27 Sep | 0300 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | From SE | 45° above horizon | Traveling tangent to earth | Bright blue to white | None | 4 secs | None | Round | About size of softball at 300 yds. | 45° in 4 secs. | Obscured by building | (3)\n116 | 27 Sep | 0300 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | To the N | 10° above horizon | | Yellow | Yes | 3 - 4 secs | None | Round | Size of baseball at 25 yds. | Same rate as shooting star | Died out | (3)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 22\n117 | 1949 27 Sep | 0300 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | SE to NW | 15° - 20° above horizon | Traveling in arc toward earth | Bright green | None | 2 secs | None | Round | Same size as perimeter fence light at distance of about 200 yds. | 45° in 2 secs. | Brightened then went out\n118 | 27 Sep | 0130 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | S to N | 20° above horizon | Made a gentle arc toward earth | Dark blue | Yes | 2 secs | None | Conicicle w/tail twice its diameter | Looked like a sky rocket | 50° in 2 secs. | Burnt out | (3) (1)\n119 | 27 Sep | 0130 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | | 45° above horizon | Moving tangent to earth | Green | None | 1 sec | None | Round | Fist at arm's length | 20° in 1 sec | Burnt out | (3) (1)\n120 | 30 Sep | 2257 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | S to W | 55° to horizon | | Yellow orange | None | 2 - 3 secs | None | | Slightly larger than shooting star | 200 - 300 mph | | (1)\n121 | 2 Oct | 2110 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | | 20,000 - 30,000' | Went up & then down | Bright green | Yes | 3 secs | | | | | (1)\n122 | 6 Oct | 1745 | 1 | Unk | Mescalero, New Mexico | | 15° above horizon | Descended in slight arc | Dark green | None | 30 secs | None | Round | Big ball | | Disappeared behind hills | (1)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 23\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n123 | 1949 6 Oct | 1800 1845 | 1 | Unk | Mescalero, New Mexico | | 18° above horizon | | Green | None | 7 - 9 secs | None | Round | 1/2 size of thumb at arm's length | Moving slowly | Disappeared behind a hill\n124 | 6 Oct | 1758 | 1 | R | Alamogordo, New Mexico | E to W | | Straight angular descent | Bluish white possibly lt. green tinge | None | 4 secs | None | Circular | 3 times the size of Jupiter or Venus | 5° per sec. | (1)\n125 | 6 Oct | 1800 | 1 | Unk | Alamogordo, New Mexico | | 4020' to 7°3' | | Green | None | 5 - 6 secs | None | Round | Size of baseball at arm's length | | (1)\n126 | 6 Oct | 1750 | 1 | R | Albuquerque, New Mexico | E to W | | Curved descent approaching vertical | Greenish white | None | 1 sec | None | Similar to very flare | 1/2 size of thumb at arm's length | | Abrupt | (1)\n127 | 6 Oct | 1750 | 1 | R | Wagon Mound, New Mexico | E to W | | Horizontal | Greenish white | None | 3 - 4 secs | None | Round | 1 1/2\" - 2\" in diameter | App. that of meteor | Went out like electric light | (1)\n128 | 6 Oct | 1758 | 1 | Unk | Albuquerque, New Mexico | NE to SW | | At tail end of its course it arched over and fell | Brilliant green | None | 10 secs | None | Tear drop | | | Seemed to burn out | (1)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 24\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n129 | 1949 7 Oct | 2120 | 1 | Unk | Albuquerque, New Mexico | Straight vertical drop | 35° above horizon | | Yellow to green | None | 1 sec | None | Round | Half a moon | Dropped 15° in 1 sec | Behind Sandia Mountains | (1)\n130 | 10 Oct | 0406 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | SE to NE | 3,000' above observation pt. | Parallel to surface of earth | Brilliant white | Yes | 4 - 5 secs | None | | Small | Appeared to be slower than a meteor | Disappeared | (1)\n131 | 10 Oct | 0107 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | W to E | 45° above horizon | | Bluish green | Yes | 15 secs | None | Round | Size of fist at arm's length | Slow | Died out | (1)\n132 | 10 Oct | 0107 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | SW to NE | 45° above horizon | Executed dives | Greenish blue w/red sparks trailing | Yes | 4 secs | None | Round | Size of fist at arm's length | Slow | Faded out | (1)\n133 | 10 Oct | 0107 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | N to NE | 45° above horizon | | Green | None | 15 secs | None | Round | Size of fist at arm's length | Slow | Burned out | (1)\n134 | 11 Oct | 2010 | 6 | Unk | Roswell, New Mexico | Appeared moving to N & angling slightly to E | | Maneuvered up & down | Light green turned orange | Yes | 45 secs | None | Round | Size of baseball | | | (1)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 25\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n135 | 1949 11 Oct | 1045 1100 | 2 | Unk | Alamogordo, New Mexico | NW to SE | If size of B-29 appeared to be 150,000' | | White | None | 10-15 secs | None | Round dish shape | 2\" in diameter at arm's length | Very fast compared w/falling star | Faded from view | (2)\n136 | 12 Oct | 1115 | 3 | Unk | Roswell, New Mexico | S to NE | 3,500' | Smooth arc | White (silver) | None | 45-60 secs | None | Round probably elliptical | | Faster than jet aircraft | Went beyond range of vision | (2)\n137 | 12 Oct | 1115 | 3 | Unk | Alamogordo, New Mexico | Appeared from S & veered off to NE | If size of B-29 appeared to be 35,000' | Smooth arc | White or aluminum | None | 45-60 secs | None | Round ball | 35,000' 4\" in diameter | 1,500 mph | Faded from view | (2)\n138 | 12 Oct | 1340 | 4 | R | Tucson, Arizona | From NE to SW | 30,000' | Horizontal | White or silver | None | 15 secs | None | Round | 50 - 100' in diameter | 1,000 mph | Faded from view | (2)\n139 | 14 Oct | 1420 | 3 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | W to E | 20,000' | Level flight just above horizon | Greenish blue-white trail | Yes | 2 secs | None | Round | Appeared as a 12\" disc | | Burned out | (1)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 26\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n140 | 1949 14 Oct | 2021 | 2 | R | Albuquerque, New Mexico | N to S | | Horizontal | Red orange | Yes | 10 secs | None | Round | 1/3 - 1/4 size of moon | | Broke into 2 pieces & disappeared | (3)\n141 | 14 Oct | 1410 1415 | 1 | Unk | Los Alamos, New Mexico | S to N | | | Front-green & silver Rear - Palo blue | Yes | 3 - 4 secs | None | | 1/8 size of full moon | 500 mph or more | | (1)\n142 | 21 Oct | 2130 | 1 | Unk | Roswell, New Mexico | SE to NW | 30° above horizon | | Very bright white | None | 20-30 mnts | None | | | Unknown | | (2)\n143 | 22 Oct | 0228 | 1 | R | Los Alamos New Mexico | NW to SE | On horizon | | Bright green | | 2 secs | None | | 4 times size of a flare | 150 mph | Disappeared behind a hill | (1)\n144 | 22 Oct | 0220 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Vertical | 50 - 100 ft. | | Green | | 1 sec | None | Like flare | Small | | Went out | (1)\n145 | 16 Nov | 1950 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Disappeared to N | | | 2 objects bluish green | | | None | | | Stationary but disappeared with speed of meteor | Disappeared from view | (1)\n146 | 19 Nov | 2152 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Vertical | | | Green then yellow | | 2 secs | None | | | | | (1)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 27\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n147 | 1949 19 Nov | 2152 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Vertical | | | Green | | 2 secs | None | | | | \n148 | 25 Nov | 2000 | 5 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | E to W | 15° - 10° above horizon | Downward 10° from the horizontal | Yellowish green | | 2 secs | None | | | | Disappeared behind mt. \n149 | 27 Nov | 1800 | 1 | Unk | McIntosh, New Mexico | Vertical | Less than 2,000' | Vertical descent | Green | None | 1 sec | None | Shaped like a flare | Same as a signal flare | Same as falling signal flare | Same as signal flare | (1)\n150 | 27 Nov | 1730 | 1 | Unk | Winslow, Arizona | E to W | 30° above horizon | | Bright blue-white | Yes | 3 - 4 secs | None | Egg shape | Egg held at arm's length | 3 - 4 secs to cover 15° - 20° of horizon | Dwindled out | (1)\n151 | 27 Nov | 1749 | 1 | R | Albuquerque, New Mexico | E to W | 3° - 5° above horizon | Sloping descent | Blue-white | None | 1 - 2 secs | None | Round | Pencil eraser at arm's length | 5° - 7° in 1 or 2 secs | Went out then on then out again | (1)\n152 | 27 Nov | 1749 | 1 | R | Socorro, New Mexico | E to W | 10° -40° above horizon | Arc | Pale green to pale blue | Yes | 5 secs | None | Round | Quite large | Slower than meteor | Faded out gradually | (1)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 28\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n1949\n3 Dec | 1805 | 1 | R | Alamogordo, New Mexico | E to W | | In an arc downward | Green fringe of orange light | None | 2 secs | None | Circular | Somewhat larger than Venus | | Disappeared behind building | (3\n154 | 4 Dec | 1935 | 1 | Unk | Albuquerque, New Mexico | E to W | | Nearly horizontal | Green | None | 2 - 3 secs | None | Round | Marble at arm's length | | Went out like a candle | (\n155 | 4 Dec | 1935 | 2 | Unk | Los Alamos, New Mexico | E to NE | | Sloping descent | Green | | 1/5 sec | Yes | Round | | | Disappeared behind mt. | (1) (3)\n156 | 5 Dec | 1930 1945 | 3 | Unk | Carrizozo, New Mexico | | 40° above horizon | In dive | Blue-green | | | None | Teardrop | | Very slow | Disappeared | (1) (3)\n5 Dec | 2240 | 1 | Unk | Tularosa, New Mexico | E to W | | Smooth arc downward | Blue w/yellowish red toward tail | Yes | 1 sec | None | Streak of light | Appeared little longer than length of lead pencil at 6' | | Appeared to hit ground near Tularosa, New Mexico | (1) (3)\n158 | 9 Dec | 1330 | 1 | Unk | Farmington, New Mexico | Dropping vertically | 500 ft. | Vertically down | | | | None | Charred parachute or cargo net | | | Disappeared | (2)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 29\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance\n159 | 1949 13 Dec | 2005 | 3 | R | Alamogordo, New Mexico | Stationary then began to move downward slowly and to right | 5,000' | | White amber red green | None | 9 mts | None | Circular | 1 - 1½ times size of average st. light at a distance of 8 miles | | Object took on brilliant green color, picked up speed and faded from view\n160 | 1950 6 Jan | 2230 | 7 | R | Alamogordo, New Mexico | E to W | | Up & down and horizontal | White changed to green & red | None | 45 mts | None | Star like | Slightly larger than planet Venus | Moved app. 15° to 20° from E to W during 45 mins it was observed | Stopped observation | (\n161 | 7 Jan | 2215 | 2 | Unk | Corona, New Mexico | From SW to SE | | Descending | Yellowish white orange blue gr. | Yes | 10 secs | None | Round ball shape | Same as cup 6\" in diameter at arm's length | Compared w/fast jet fighter | Disappeared behind mt. range | (1\n162 | 9 Jan | 2226 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | | 30° - 40° above horizon | Horizontal | Incandescent green | Yes | 2 secs | None | Oval with trail | | | Disappeared behind trees | (1)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 30\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance | **Evaluation\n163 | 1950 9 Jan | 2220 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Due W | 60° above horizon | Straight course | Bluish white | Yes | 2 secs | None | Pointed | Appeared as a point | 10° per second | Luminosity stopped suddenly | (1)\n164 | 9 Jan | 2225 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | | 75° - 80° above horizon | Straight line | Greenish white | None | 3 secs | None | Round | -4 to -5 compared to Jupiter | 25° per second | Behind horizon | (1)\n165 | 12 Jan | 1900 | 3 | Unk | Holloman, New Mexico | To W | | Changed altitude erratically | White changed to green & red | None | 5 mts | None | Star like | About same size of Venus | | Discontinued watching | (1) (2)\n166 | 13 Jan | 0605 | 3 | Unk | Holloman AFB, New | E to W | | Erratically up & down | White changed to green & red | None | Short time | None | Star like | About same size as Venus | | Disappeared w/daylight | (3)\n167 | 27 Jan | 1715 | 1 | Unk | Scullville, New Jersey | NW | | Ascending at about 60° angle | White streak | | 30 mts | | | | ½ that of a fireworks rocket at close range | Faded gradually | (2)\n168 | 7 Feb | 1950 2015 | 2 | R | Albuquerque, New Mexico | SSE to E | 40° - 45° above horizon | Horizontal | Reddish green | Yes | 4 - 6 secs | None | Round elongated trail | Twice size of evening star | About same as falling star | Faded out in atmosphere | (1)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 31\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance | Evaluation\n169 | 1950 7 Feb | 1945 2000 | 2 | R | Between Tucumcari & Kirtland AFB, New Mexico | | | Flat Trajectory | Fireball white | Yes | 2 - 4 secs | None | | | Over 1,000 mph | Faded out suddenly\n170 | 15 Feb | 1530 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | From NW to W | 45° downward above horizon | | Appeared red & green | Yes | 30 | None | Round | That of a normal marble | Like shooting star trail | Faded out | (1) (3)\n171 | 18 Feb | 0510 | 5 | R | Holloman AFB, New Mexico | | | Climbed | White and orange | None | 1 hr 44 mts | None | Round to cone shape | Size of coffee cup at arm's length | | Stopped observation | (2)\n172 | 20 Feb | 0530 | 2 | Unk | Holloman AFB, New Mexico | Station- | 1,000' above 9,000' mt. | Stationary | White | None | 5 mts | None | Round | App size of ½ dollar held at arm's length | Stationary | Disappeared from view behind cloud | (2)\n173 | 24 Feb | 1355 | 1 | R | Albuquerque, New Mexico | To W or SW | 20° to 23° above horizon | Straight flight | White | None | 1½ mts | None | Round | Compared in size to upper dark portion of moon as it rises in E | 1½ mts. to cover 2° | | (2)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 32\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance | **Evaluation\n174 | 1950 24 Feb | 1400 | 1 | R | Albuquerque, New Mexico | E by SE | About 20° above horizon | | Bright white | None | 20-30 secs | None | Round | Compared w/size of weather balloon as it disappeared in distance | Very slow | Faded out of sight\n175 *** | 24 Feb | 1930 | 1 | R | Datil, New Mexico | NW | | | White changing to red & green | Yes | 2 hrs 30 mts | None | Round | | 1° per 2 mts. | Disappeared | (1) (2)\n176 | 24 Feb | 1345 | 1 | Unk | Los Alamos, New Mexico | E then turned W | 25,000-30,000' | Straight up | White, kept flashing like mirror in sun | None | 20 mts | None | | | Very fast | Went straight up out of sight | (2)\n177 | 24 Feb | 1340 | 1 | Unk | Los Alamos, New Mexico | E to W, W to E then st. up | 30,000' | Straight up | Silvery white | None | 20 mts | None | | | | Went straight up out of sight | (2)\n178 | 24 Feb | 1315 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Erratic generally NE | 20,000-30,000' | | Silvery | None | 15 mts | None | Saucer shaped | 100' across if at 20,000-30,000' | As fast or faster than sound | Disappeared | (2\n***See attached photograph.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 33\nCONFIDENTIAL\n179 | 1950 24 Feb | Between 1315 1400 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Circled then E | Considerable altitude | | Aluminum | Yes | 2 | None | Spherical | Rather large | Erratic | Unknown\n180 | 25 Feb | 1545 1555 | 12 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Heading toward ground | 30° - 35° above horizon | | Flashing silver | None | 3 secs to 2 mts | None | Circular like plane fuselage | Small airplane | From very slow to very fast |\n181 | 25 Feb | 2115 | 1 | Unk | Albuquerque, New Mexico | Toward S | App. 20° above horizon | Almost vertical | Bright greenish white | Yes | 1½ secs | None | Teardrop | 3 times size of a shooting star | Slightly slower than falling star | Appeared to burn out\n182 | 25 Feb | 0200 | 1 | R | Datil, New Mexico | NW | | | White changing to red & green | Yes | 30 mts | None | Round | | 1° per 2 mts | Disappeared behind mountain\n183 | 25 Feb | 1410 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | S to N | 1 to 3 miles at 30° above horizon | | Metallic | None | 2 mts | None | Oblong | 10 - 15' | 40 mph | Went below horizon"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 34\nCONFIDENTIAL\n184 | 1950 25 Feb 1545 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | N to SW | Very high | | White to silver | None | 30 secs | None | Circular | About size of 60' piece at its height | Very fast | Disappeared into glare of sun | (3)\n185 | 25 Feb 1550 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | S or SW | 12,000' | | Metallic | None | Few secs | None | | As large or larger than average plane | Fast | Faded from view | (2)\n186 | 25 Feb 1545 1555 | 14 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | NE to SW | Overhead at from 4 to 10 miles | Traveled w/a fluttering motion | Silver | None | Few secs to 2 mts | None | Round | Very from 4\" to small airplane | Very fast 500 - 1500 mph | | (2)\n187 | 25 Feb | 1655 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | E to W | | | Shiny silvery | | 10-15 secs | None | Round | About size of B-25 fuselage | Slow speed | Disappeared behind tree | (2)\n188 | 10 Mar 1800 1830 | 6 | Unk | Phoenix, Arizona | SE | 40,000-50,000' | Moved upward at 60° angle | Aluminum or quick silver | Yes | 10 mts | None | Oval or oblong | Size of moon | Extremely high | Disappeared | (2)\n189 | 5 Mar | 1135 1300 | 4 | R | Vaughn, New Mexico | Traveled 195° | | Straight flight | White | None | 1 hr 25 mts | None | Round | Ping pong ball at arm's length | 180 to 200 mph | Ceased observation | (2)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 35\nCONFIDENTIAL\n1950 11 Mar 0100 | 1 | R | Holloman AFB, New | App 270° | About 30° above horizon at distance of 50 miles | Straight flight | Changed from light orange to blood red to amber to light green | None | 5 mts | None | Ping pong ball | Ping pong ball held at arm's length | | Disappeared from view | (2)\n191 | 16 Mar | 1100 | 10 | Unk | Farmington, New Mexico | N to NE | | Turned on their axis & maneuvered up & down | Bright luminous as tin foil | None | 3 - 5 mts | None | Flat spheroidal | 1 to 6\" | Faster than conventional aircraft | Discontinued observation | (2)\n192 | 16 Mar | 1000 | 10 | Unk | Farmington, New Mexico | NE | Over 20,000' | Skyward at at 60°-80° | Bright aluminum | None | 30 mts | None | Oval & oblong | 1/16\" - ½\" held at arm's length | Faster than conventional aircraft | Gradually disappeared | (2)\n193 | 17 Mar | 0310 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Toward earth | | Toward earth | Reddish then green | None | 1 sec | None | | | | Appeared to fall to earth | (3)\n194 | 17 Mar | 0309 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | NE | | Level flight | Greenish yellow | None | 3 secs | None | Round | ½ size of full moon | Moderate | Like light going cut | (3)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 36\nCONFIDENTIAL\n195 | 1950 17 Mar | 0307 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Straight down | | Straight down | Orange & green | Yes | 2-2½ secs | None | | | Tremendous | Explosion on impact with earth or disintegration | (3)\n196 | 17 Mar | 0445 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Formed an arc | | Formed an arc | Green | None | 5 secs | None | Round | Quite small | Free fall | Fell toward earth | (2)\n197 | 17 Mar | 0310 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | | | Seemed to climb, change color, start down & disappear | Green turning to yellow | None | 5 secs | None | Spherical | ¼ size of moon | Moderate | Suddenly | (3)\n198 | 17 Mar | 0307 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Earthward | | Earthward | | Yes | 3 secs | None | Round | ¼ size of full moon | Extremely fast | Plunged to earth & 2 explosions were noted prior to disappearance | (3)\n199 | 20 Mar | 0115 | 1 | Unk | Clovis, New Mexico | From WNW | Above 12,000' | | White w/light blue | Yes | 1 - 2 secs | None | Spherical | | 2,000 mph | Disappeared from view | (3)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 37\nCONFIDENTIAL\n200 | 21 Mar | 1320 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | E to SW | App 45° above horizon | | 2 objects silver | None | 10 mts | None | Round | App size of dime at arm's length | Excessive to jet flight | Gradually faded from view | (2)\n201 | 21 Mar | 1300 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | NE to SE | 40,000-60,000' | | Varied from shiny silver to shady gray | None | 30 mts | None | Round | Size of end of thumb at arm's length | About same as jet aircraft | Disappeared | (2)\n202 | 21 Mar | 1315 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | E | 75° above horizon | | White | None | 5 mts | None | Round | Smaller than fist at arm's length | App. 600 - 700 mph | Disappeared from range of vision | (2)\n203 | 21 Mar | 1300 1330 | 4 | Unk | Kirtland AFB, New | SE to S | 40° - 50° above horizon | Zig-zag motion up & down | Bright silver | None | 1 mt | None | Round | Size of dime at arm's length | About same as fast jet aircraft | Disappeared from range of vision | (2)\n204 | 22 Mar | 1100 | 11 | Unk | Kirtland AFB, New Mexico | NW changing to N | 25,000 to 30,000' | Horizontal | Tan to brown | None | 5 - 6 secs | None | Flying wing | About size of golf ball held at arm's length | Extremely high speed | Disappeared | (2)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\t\tPage 38\nNumber\tDate\tTime\tNumber of Observers\t*Reliability of Observers\tGeneral Area of Occurrence\tApparent Direction of Flight\tApparent Altitude\tCourse Horizontal or Vertical\tColor\tTrain or Trail\tDuration of Observation\tSound\tShape\tApparent Size\tApparent Speed\tManner of Disappearance\tEvaluation\n205\t1950\n22 Mar\t0010\t3\tUnk\tSandia Base, New Mexico\tSE to NW\t\tLine parallel w/line tangent to the earth\tBlue center with orange exterior\tNone\t1½ - 3 secs\tNone\tRound like ball from roman candle\t\t1½ secs 30° azimuth\tBurned out\t\n206\t1 Apr\t0420\t1\tR\tLos Alamos, New Mexico\tS to N\t75° above horizon\t\tWhite light\tNone\t1 sec or less\tNone\tRound\t\t\tDisappeared behind building\t\n207\t17 Apr\t1530\t10\tR\tLos Alamos, New Mexico\t\t2,000' above horizon\tManuevered up & down & from side to side\tLight green bright as tin foil\tNone\t20-30 secs\tNone\t\t1/16\" at arm's length\t\tGradually went out of sight\t(1)\n20 Apr\t1530\t1\tR\tLos Alamos, New Mexico\t\t\tManuevered up & down\tBright metallic\tNone\t15-30 mts\tNone\tRoughly circular\tEst. 9' in diameter\tFaster than conventional aircraft\tLost sight of object\t(2)\n209\t1 May\t1510\t2\tUnk\tKirtland AFB, New\tSW to NE\tApparently a few thousand feet\tWas angling downward\tSilver lucid metallic object\tNone\tNot quite a sec\tNone\tCylindrical\t\tTremendous\tFlash of brilliant white light\t(2)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCC-150\nTo: COMMUNICATIONS SECTION.\tURGENT\t10/18/50\nTransmit the following message to:\tSAC, LOS ANGELES\nFLYING SAUCERS. REBUTELS OCTOBER THIRTEEN AND SEVENTEEN LAST.\nSUTEL IMMEDIATELY RESULTS OF YOUR INVESTIGATION TO IDENTIFY FRANK\nSCULLY, AUTHOR OF QUOTE BEHIND THE FLYING SAUCERS UNQUOTE.\nHOOVER\nEHM:jo\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 23 1964"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\nSAC, Knoxville\nOctober 18, 1950\nRADAR DETECTION OF UNIDENTIFIED OBJECTS OVER OAK RIDGE, October 12, 15, 16, 1950\nPROTECTION OF VITAL INSTALLATIONS\nFlying Saucers\nRemytel October 13, 1950.\nThere is being submitted herewith a copy of two reports made by District Representative of the OSI, 8th District, U. S. Air Force, with regard to the detection of unidentified objects by the means of radar, as set forth in referenced teletype. These reports continue to set forth additional reports concerning unidentified objects in the air space area over Oak Ridge, Tennessee, which to date have not been explained.\nNo investigation is being conducted by the Knoxville Office in this matter, but any further information received from OSI or from CIC representatives will be forwarded immediately.\nAir Mail\nCCM:jaw\n65-475\nEnc.\n55 NOV 25 1950"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nCORRELATION & LIAISON SECTION\nDate__________, 1950\n_Director\t_Mr. Tolson\t_Mr. Ladd\t_Mr. Belmont\t_Mr. Laughlin\t_Mr. Keay\t_Mr. Bartlett\t_Mr. Baumgardner\t_Mr. Stanley\t_Mr. Hennrich\t_Miss\nRoom\t_Mrs. Abel\n_Miss Cuddy\n_Miss Reddy\n_Mrs. Schwab\n_Miss Wielkiewicz\n_Mr. Bromwell\nIdentification Division\n_Miss Harrington, Room 7229\n_Mail Room, Room 5533\n_Reading Room, Room 5531\n_Records Section\n_Routing Unit\n_Send file, up to date\n_Send reference\n_See Me\n_Phone Me\n_Please Handle\n_Mr. Mansfield\n_Mr. Ammarell\n_Mr. Bates\n_Mr. Blair\n_Mr. D. M. Brown\n_Mr. J. W. Brown\n_Mr. Cole\n_Mr. Connell\n_Mr. Conroy\n_Mr. DeLoach\n_Mr. Dinsmore\n_Mr. Ellis\n_Mr. Ferris\n_Mr. Fipp\n_Mr. Flaherty\n_Mr. Foley\n_Mr. Gotschall\n_Mr. Harrington\n_Mr. Kuhrtz\n_Mr. Landis\n_Mr. Lawrence\n_Mr. Lynch\n_Mr. Mansfield\n_Mr. Martin\n_Mr. Millard\n_Mr. Moynihan\n_Mr. Noone\n_Mr. Obenshain\n_Mr. Ormond\n_Mr. Reynolds\n_Mr. Roach\n_Mr. Sanders\n_Mr. Secord\n_Mr. Sullivan\n_Mr. Torrillo\n_Mr. Woods\nRoom 3708\nHandwritten: File in Flying Saucers file. Air Intelligence has asked other departments to furnish this type info to them. OVER."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AEC order: Dance & Dr. D. A-2 for study. EO\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS\nU.S. ATOMIC ENERGY SECURITY SERVICE\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\n\nDATE ____________, 195__\n(Day) (Month)\n\n1. Name of Observer ____________________________________\nLast First M.I.\n\nStation assigned ____________________ Section __________\nHome Address ______________________________ Telephone __________\nNames of other known observers ______________________________\n\n2. Time and date of sighting _______ hours ____________ 195__\nDay Month\n\n3. Point of observation ______________________________\n\n4. Direction of object from observer ______________________________\n\n5. Distance of object from observer ______________________________\n\n6. Angle of elevation from horizon ____________ degrees __________\n\n7. Direction of flight of object ____________________\n\n8. Time in sight ____________________\n9. Number of objects ____________________\n10. Shape of object ____________________\n11. Projections and/or indentations ____________________\n\n62-83894 257\nINDEXED - 17\nEX. 68\nNOT RECORDED\n5 OCT 23 1950\n51 NOV 15 1950"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS (Cont'd)\n\n12. Apparent construction ______________________________\n\n13. Apparent means of support and/or propulsion ____________________\n\n14. Size of object ______________________________\n\n15. Luminosity of object ____________________\n(Bright, very bright, glaring, etc.)\n16. Color of object ____________________\n17. Sound ______________________________\n\n18. Odor ______________________________\n19. Speed ______________________________\n20. Evidence of trail or exhaust ______________________________\n\n21. Effect on clouds ____________________\n22. Tactics or maneuvers ______________________________\n\n23. Manner of disappearance ______________________________\n\n24. What attracted attention to object ____________________\n\n25. Additional Remarks of observer ____________________\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS (Cont'd)\n\nObserver's signature ____________________\nTitle ____________________\n\n26. Additional remarks of investigator ____________________\n\nInvestigator's signature ____________________\nTitle ____________________\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"October 17, 1950\n\nSAC LOS ANGELES URGENT\n\nFLYING SAUCERS. REBUTEL OCTOBER THIRTEEN LAST. SUTEL RESULTS OF YOUR INQUIRY TO IDENTIFY FRANK SCULLY.\n\nHOOVER\n\nEHM:MH\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nRECORDED - 82\nEX-29\n62-83894\nOCT 17 1950\n12-32 P\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 23 1964"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(SAUCER)\n\nDENVER--A CONSTRUCTION WORKER AT LOS ALAMOS, N.M., HAS REPORTED THAT A STRANGE \"BLINKING OBJECT\" SOARED OVER A HIGHLY RESTRICTED AREA OF THE BIG ATOMIC ENERGY CENTER.\n\nLEE ROBINSON OF THE ARMEX CONSTRUCTION COMPANY SENT THE DENVER POST A COPY OF A MIMEOGRAPHED FORM WHICH HE USED TO REPORT THE OBJECT TO THE AEC.\n\nTHE FORMS ARE PREPARED BY THE AEC FOR \"REPORTS OF UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS AT LOS ALAMOS.\"\n\nTHE ORIGINAL THREE-PAGE REPORT, ROBINSON SAID, WAS SUBMITTED TO THE ATOMIC ENERGY SECURITY SERVICE SEPT. 12., THE DAY ROBINSON AND EIGHT OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE ARMEX COMPANY SAY THEY SAW THE OBJECT.\n\nROBINSON SAID HE AND THE OTHERS WERE EATING LUNCH WHEN THE UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT PASSED OVER. HE SAID IT \"WAS NOT A BALLOON OR A CONVENTIONAL TYPE OF AIRCRAFT.\"\n\nROBINSON SAID THE OBJECT APPEARED TO BE AT AN ALTITUDE OF ABOUT 20,00 FEET. IT ALTERNATELY FLASHED BRIGHT AND BLACK AT INTERVALS OF TWO SECONDS, HE SAID, AND WAS VISIBLE FOR THREE MINUTES AND 40 SECONDS.\n\nTHE SPECIALLY MIMEOGRAPHED FORMS INDICATED THE AEC IS HIGHLY CONCERNED WITH UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS OVER THE PROJECT. THE FORMS CONTAIN SPACES FOR INFORMANTS TO REPORT ON LUMINOSITY OF OBJECT, APPARENT MEANS OF SUPPORT AND PROPULSION AND \"ODOR\" OF THE OBJECT.\n\n10/7--E1003A\n\n62-83894\nNOT RECORDED\n5 OCT 23 1950\n55 NOV 14 1950"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. LADD\n\nFROM : A. H. BELMONT\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nDATE: October 19, 1950\n\nThe matter of flying saucers was discussed by Special Agent Edward S. Sanders with Major General Joseph F. Carroll of OSI on October 16, 1950, at which time General Carroll advised that insofar as he has been able to determine the Air Force is not working on any type of \"flying saucer\" or \"flying disk\". General Carroll stated that the Air Force is working on high altitude rockets and jet aircraft. He stated these experiments may account for some of the reports concerning flying saucers but that the Air Force is not apparently working on anything which is the cause of the many flying saucers reports. He stated that the Air Force program for investigating reports concerning flying saucers, etc., has been reinstituted at Wright Field and that any pertinent information of interest coming to his attention will be furnished to the Bureau.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\nThe foregoing is for your information.\n\nESS:ilw"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-LADD FBI U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE Oct 19 4 02 PM '50\n\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR CORRELATION-LIAISON FBI U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE Oct 19 3 33 PM '50\n\nREC'D BELMONT F.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED-NICHOLS FBI U.S DEPT OF JUSTICE Oct 20 1 06 PM '50\n\nOct 20 10 51 AM '50 RECEIVED-TOLSON FBI U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nOct 20 2 11 PM '50"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 19\n\nEX-16\n\n62-83894-260\n\nNovember 24, 1950\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations The Inspector General Department of the Air Force The Pentagon Washington, D.C.\n\nFrom: J. Edgar Hoover, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING DISCS\n\nMr. Aaron L. Hitchens, Chemical Engineer in charge of the Chemical and Physical Laboratories of the Winchester Repeating Arms Company, 275 Winchester Avenue, New Haven, advised the New Haven Office of this Bureau that on Friday, October 20, 1950, he, his wife, and daughter, who reside at 495 Edgewood Avenue, New Haven, went out of their home into the back yard at approximately 6:15 p.m. His young daughter called his attention to a star which was moving, and Mr. Hitchens noted a sphere-like object directly overhead that gave a steady golden-orange glow. He stated that this object was very high, being between ten to twenty thousand feet high, possibly higher. The glow given off was very steady, not blinking, and the whole sphere itself glowed in about the same consistency. He witnessed this object for approximately twenty seconds, during which time it traveled in a westerly direction toward New York City. It then veered in a southerly direction, as if crossing Long Island, or possibly in such a direction that it might have been traveling over Long Island. He lost sight of this object as it disappeared behind trees.\n\nHe advised the size of the object was approximately ten times the diameter of Venus, which was shining very brightly that night. He stated it was a very clear night and that all the stars in the sky were twinkling, as compared to the steadiness of the glow given off by this object. He advised that the object did not appear to diminish in size as it traveled farther away, but appeared to maintain about the same size as when he first\n\nEHM:eas"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"noticed it directly overhead. The same steady orange glow persisted during the entire time that he witnessed it. Although this object was actually cut from his sight by nearby trees, Mr. Hitchens stated that it was so far away at that time that he probably would have lost sight of it very shortly. The object made no sound whatsoever, and there seemed to be no attachments or projections of any kind. Mr. Hitchens stated the object was a complete circular ball. He had no idea as to the method of propulsion, but advised that at the time it seemed to change directions, probably over New York City, and that it seemed to back up and go forward, possibly two or three times, in order to execute a change of direction. There were no clouds in the sky which interfered with his vision, and he could not comment as to whether or not this object penetrated or circumvented clouds. The object left no trail of any kind, and Mr. Hitchens mathematically calculated its speed at between 400 and 700 miles per hour, depending on the height, which he stated he could not accurately compute. He advised that he could not recall any odors and had no idea as to the construction of the object.\n\nTo Mr. Hitchens' knowledge, the only other persons in this area to have witnessed the object were his wife and daughter. Immediately upon sighting the object, Mrs. Hitchens ran to the door of neighbors occupying the same house as the Hitchens to bring them to the yard. However, these neighbors did not witness the object, since it disappeared before they got outside.\n\nMr. Hitchens stated that he is a Chemical Engineer and has fifteen years of experience in research and development. He is not a pilot, but has done considerable flying, and has also done considerable reading, including technical data concerning flying saucers and discs. He understands from reading the above matters that the star Venus is often mistaken by observers for flying saucers, and he pointed out that he feels that he is familiar with astronomy and did not confuse the object he saw with Venus, since he also recalled seeing Venus in the sky on that particular evening, and compared the size of this object as being ten times Venus' diameter. He also stated that he computed the speed at which this object was traveling by using points in his area, such as roof tops and tree tops, together with the distance he walked on the ground in order to keep the object in sight.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Upon receiving the above information from Mr. Hitchens, he was advised that this Bureau would turn the information over to another Government agency. Mr. Hitchens indicated his approval of this action, but specifically requested that no public announcement or comment be given to the fact that he had reported seeing the above object.\n\nThe above information has been furnished to your office for your confidential information and assistance in connection with the captioned matter. It is requested that no dissemination be made of this information.\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nDATE: November 9, 1950\n\nFROM : SAC, NEW HAVEN\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nAARON L. HITCHENS, INFORMANT\n\nThe following is being brought to the attention of the Bureau so that it may be referred to the Department of the Air Force in connection with instructions set forth in SAC Letter No. 38, Series 1949, dated March 25, 1949.\n\nMr. AARON L. HITCHENS, Chemical Engineer in charge of the Chemical and Physical Laboratories of the Winchester Repeating Arms Co., 275 Winchester Avenue, New Haven, was interviewed in connection with other official business and furnished the following information:\n\nHe advised that on Friday, October 20, 1950, he and his wife and daughter, who reside at 495 Edgewood Avenue, New Haven, went out of the back door of their home to the back yard at approximately 6:15 P.M. His little daughter called his attention to a star in the sky that was moving and Mr. HITCHENS noted a sphere-like object directly overhead which gave a steady golden orange glow. He stated that this object was very high between ten to twenty thousand feet, possibly higher. The glow given off was very steady and not blinking and the whole sphere itself glowed in about the same consistency. He witnessed this object for approximately twenty seconds during which time it traveled in a westerly direction toward New York City and then when Mr. HITCHENS believed that possibly it was near or over New York City, it then veered in a southerly direction as if crossing Long Island or possibly in such a direction that it might have been traveling over Long Island. He lost sight of this object as it disappeared behind trees in his vicinity. He advised that as to the size of the object, it was approximately ten times the diameter of Venus, which was shining very brightly that night. He states it was a very clear night and that all the stars in the sky were twinkling as compared to the steadiness of the glow given off by this object. He advised that the object did not appear to diminish in size as it traveled farther away from him but appeared to maintain about the same size as when he first noticed it directly overhead. The same steady orange glow persisted during the entire time that he witnessed it. Although this object was actually cut from his sight by nearby trees, Mr. HITCHENS states that it was so far away from him any way that he probably would have lost sight of it very shortly due to distance had the trees not intervened. The object made no sound whatsoever\n\nMHF:FGM\n\nRECORDED - 102\nINDEXED 102 62-83894-260\nNOV 13 1950"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to the Director 11/9/50\n\nand there seemed to be no attachments or projections of any kind, just a complete circular ball. He had no idea as to the method of propulsion but advised that at the time it seemed to change directions, probably over New York City, that it had seemed to back up and go forward, possibly two or three times in order to execute a change of direction. There were no clouds in the sky that interfered with his vision of this object and he could not comment as to whether or not this object penetrated or circumvented clouds. The object left no trail of any kind and Mr. HITCHENS mathematically calculated its speed at between four hundred and seven hundred miles per hour, depending on the height which he stated he could not accurately compute. He advised that he could not recall any odors and had no idea as to its construction. To his knowledge the only other persons in this area to have witnessed this object were his wife and daughter. Immediately upon sighting the object, his wife ran to the door of neighbors occupying the same house as the HITCHENS to bring them to the yard. However, these neighbors had not witnessed the object as by the time they got outside the object had disappeared.\n\nMr. HITCHENS stated that he is a Chemical Engineer, has fifteen years of experience in research and development. He is not a pilot but has done considerable flying and has also done considerable reading, including technical data concerning flying saucers and discs. He understands from reading the above matters that the star Venus is often mistaken by observers for flying saucers and he pointed out that he feels that he is familiar with astronomy not to confuse the object he saw with Venus as he also recalls Venus in the sky on that particular evening and compared the size of this object as being ten times Venus' diameter. He also states that he computed the speed at which this object was traveling by using points in his area, such as, roof tops and tree tops together with the distance he walked on the ground in order to keep the object in sight.\n\nMr. HITCHENS was advised that the Bureau would turn this information over to another agency and indicated that this was according to his approval. He specifically requested that no public announcement or comment be given to the fact that he had reported seeing the above object. Mr. HITCHENS appeared to be a very reliable and sincere individual and evidences considerable technical knowledge and experience in reporting the above incident.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nSAC, NEW HAVEN\n\nFLYING DISCS\nAARON L. HITCHENS, INFORMANT\n\nNovember 9, 1950\n\nThe following is being brought to the attention of the Bureau so that it may be referred to the Department of the Air Force in connection with instructions set forth in SAC Letter No. 38, Series 1949, dated March 25, 1949.\n\nMr. AARON L. HITCHENS, Chemical Engineer in charge of the Chemical and Physical Laboratories of the Winchester Repeating Arms Co., 275 Winchester Avenue, New Haven, was interviewed in connection with other official business and furnished the following information:\n\nHe advised that on Friday, October 20, 1950, he and his wife and daughter, who reside at 495 Edgewood Avenue, New Haven, went out of the back door of their home to the back yard at approximately 6:15 P.M. His little daughter called his attention to a star in the sky that was moving and Mr. HITCHENS noted a sphere-like object directly overhead which gave a steady golden orange glow. He stated that this object was very high between ten to twenty thousand feet, possibly higher. The glow given off was very steady and not blinking and the whole sphere itself glowed in about the same consistency. He witnessed this object for approximately twenty seconds during which time it traveled in a westerly direction toward New York City and then when Mr. HITCHENS believed that possibly it was near or over New York City, it then veered in a southerly direction as if crossing Long Island or possibly in such a direction that it might have been traveling over Long Island. He lost sight of this object as it disappeared behind trees in his vicinity. He advised that as to the size of the object, it was approximately ten times the diameter of Venus, which was shining very brightly that night. He states it was a very clear night and that all the stars in the sky were twinkling as compared to the steadiness of the glow given off by this object. He advised that the object did not appear to diminish in size as it traveled farther away from him but appeared to maintain about the same size as when he first noticed it directly overhead. The same steady orange glow persisted during the entire time that he witnessed it. Although this object was actually cut from his sight by nearby trees, Mr. HITCHENS states that it was so far away from him any way that he probably would have lost sight of it very shortly due to distance had the trees not intervened. The object made no sound whatsoever\n\nMHF:FGM"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to the Director 11/9/50\n\nand there seemed to be no attachments or projections of any kind, just a complete circular ball. He had no idea as to the method of propulsion but advised that at the time it seemed to change directions, probably over New York City, that it had seemed to back up and go forward, possibly two or three times in order to execute a change of direction. There were no clouds in the sky that interfered with his vision of this object and he could not comment as to whether or not this object penetrated or circumvented clouds. The object left no trail of any kind and Mr. HITCHENS mathematically calculated its speed at between four hundred and seven hundred miles per hour, depending on the height which he stated he could not accurately compute. He advised that he could not recall any odors and had no idea as to its construction. To his knowledge the only other persons in this area to have witnessed this object were his wife and daughter. Immediately upon sighting the object, his wife ran to the door of neighbors occupying the same house as the HITCHENS to bring them to the yard. However, these neighbors had not witnessed the object as by the time they got outside the object had disappeared.\n\nMr. HITCHENS stated that he is a Chemical Engineer, has fifteen years of experience in research and development. He is not a pilot but has done considerable flying and has also done considerable reading, including technical data concerning flying saucers and discs. He understands from reading the above matters that the star Venus is often mistaken by observers for flying saucers and he pointed out that he feels that he is familiar with astronomy not to confuse the object he saw with Venus as he also recalls Venus in the sky on that particular evening and compared the size of this object as being ten times Venus' diameter. He also states that he computed the speed at which this object was traveling by using points in his area, such as, roof tops and tree tops together with the distance he walked on the ground in order to keep the object in sight.\n\nMr. HITCHENS was advised that the Bureau would turn this information over to another agency and indicated that this was according to his approval. He specifically requested that no public announcement or comment be given to the fact that he had reported seeing the above object. Mr. HITCHENS appeared to be a very reliable and sincere individual and evidences considerable technical knowledge and experience in reporting the above incident.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"copy;bw\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nOCT 13 1950\n\nTELETYPE\n\nSAC, KNOXVILLE 10-13-50 8-26 PM JYC\n\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\n\nFlying Saucers\nRADAR DETECTION OF UNIDENTIFIED OBJECTS OVER OAK RIDGE OCTOBER TWELVE, NINETEEN FIFTY, PROTECTION OF VITAL INSTALLATIONS. USAF RADAR INSTALLATION AT KNOXVILLE AT ELEVEN TWENTYFIVE PM, EST, OCTOBER TWELVE, PICKED UP INDICATIONS OF ELEVEN OBJECTS AND PERHAPS MORE TRAVELING ACROSS CONTROLLED AREA OF ATOMIC ENERGY INSTALLATION AT OAK RIDGE. ALTITUDE OF OBJECTS VARIED FROM ONE THOUSAND TO FIVE THOUSAND FEET, COURSES FROM SOUTH SOUTH EAST TO SOUTHEAST, AND DENSITY FROM READING MADE BY LIGHT AIRCRAFT TO AIRCRAFT EQUAL IN SIZE TO C FORTY SEVEN, SPEED FROM ONE HUNDRED TO ONE HUNDRED TWENTYFIVE MILES PER HOUR. FIGHTER PLANE ATTEMPTED TO INTERCEPT IN FEW MINUTES AND RADAR SCREEN REFLECTED CONTACT, BUT PLANE REPORTED NO OBJECT COULD BE SEEN EITHER VISUALLY OR ON PLANES RADAR SCREEN. AEC PATROL WAS ALERTED BUT NO OBJECTS COULD BE VISUALLY SIGHTED BY THEM OVER THE AREA OTHER THAN THE AIR FORCE INTERCEPTOR. OSI AND EASTERN AIR DEFENSE FORCES HAVE BEEN ADVISED AND ARE CHECKING INCIDENT. NO REASONABLE EXPLANATION FOR RADAR READINGS YET DEVELOPED ALTHOUGH OPERATORS ARE EXPERIENCED RELIABLE PERSONNEL AND RADAR SET IS IN PERFECT OPERATING CONDITION. BUREAU WILL BE ADVISED OF FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS.\n\nROBEY\n\nACK AND HOLD PLS\n\n8-31 PM OK FBI WASH DC GAR\n\n62-83894-261\nNOT RECORDED\n1950 NOV 22\n\nINITIALS ON ORIGIN"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nDEC 5 1950\n\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI WASHINGTON DC 12-5-50 4-47 PM GAR\nSAC, KNOXVILLE URGENT\n\nFlying Saucers\nDETECTION OF UNIDENTIFIED OBJCXXX OBJECTS OVER OAK RIDGE AREA, PROTECTION OF VITAL INSTALLATIONS. REURTEL DECEMBER FOUR LAST REGARDING POSSIBLE RADAR JAMMING AT OAK RIDGE. ARRANGEMENTS SHOULD BE MADE TO OBTAIN ALL FACTS CONCERNING POSSIBLE RADAR JAMMING BY IONIZATION OF PARTICLES IN ATOXXX ATMOSPHERE. CONDUCT APPROPRIATE INVESTIGATION TO DETERMINE WHETHER INCIDENT OCCURRING NORTHEAST OF OLIVER SPRINGS, TENNESSEE, COULD HAVE HAD ANY CONNECTION WITH ALLEGED RADAR JAMMING. SUTEL IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENTS.\n\nHOOVER\n\nEND\n\nCORRECT LAST WORD FIRST LINE PLS\n\nPROTECTION\n\nOK D FBI KX OLO\n\n62-83894\nNOT RECORDED\n1950 DEC 20\n\nORIGINAL COPY FILED IN 65-58300"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nDEC 8 1950\n\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI, RICHMOND 12-8-50 12-09 PM MEW-1\n\nDIRECTOR URGENT\n\nRE FLYING SAUCERS. THIS OFFICE VERY CONFIDENTIALLY ADVISED BY ARMY INTELLIGENCE, RICHMOND, THAT THEY HAVE BEEN PUT ON IMMEDIATE HIGH ALERT FOR ANY DATA WHATSOEVER CONCERNING FLYING SAUCERS. CIC HERE STATES BACKGROUND OF INSTRUCTIONS NOT AVAILABLE FROM AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE, WHO ARE NOT AWARE OF REASON FOR ALERT LOCALLY, BUT ANY INFORMATION WHATSOEVER MUST BE TELEPHONED BY THEM IMMEDIATELY TO AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE. CIC ADVISES DATA STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL AND SHOULD NOT BE DISSEMINATED.\n\nAUERBACH\n\nRECORDED - 81\n\nEX-46\n\nEND ACK\n\n12-11 PM OK FBI WA NRJ\n\n62-83894\nDEC 13 1950\n\n65 DEC 19 1950\n\ncc Hemrich"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED BELMONT F.B.I. DEPT OF JUSTICE Dec 9 1 05 PM '50\nDec 9 10 37 AM '50\nRECEIVED-TOLSON F B I DEC 8 5 48 PM '50\nDEC 8 12 34 PM '50 F.B.I. DEPT OF JUSTICE RECD BELMONT\nDEC 11 9 22 AM '50 CORRELATION-LIAISON F.B.I. U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nDEC 8 12 11 PM '50 RECEIVED-NICHOLS F B I U.S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nDEC 9 9 07 AM '50 RECEIVED-LADD F B I U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nDEC 8 3 39 PM '50 U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE RECEIVED ESPIONAGE\nDEC 12 11 46 AM '50 RECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI CONFIDENTIAL November 4, 1950\n\nSAC, KNOXVILLE\n\nDETECTION OF UNIDENTIFIED OBJECTS\nAT OAK RIDGE, October 20,23,24,26, 1950\nPROTECTION OF VITAL INSTALLATIONS\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nRemylst October 18, 1950.\n\nSubmitted herewith is copy of CIC reports on above\ncaption matter. Further information as received will be forwarded\nto Bureau.\n\n\nEncl. (Air Mail)\nCCM:JF\n65-475"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLASSIFIED INCOMING MESSAGE\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nPRIORITY\n\nPARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED\n\nFROM: CGUSARAL FT RICHARDSON ALASKA FROM AROSI\n\nTO: DEFTAR WASH DC FOR ACOFS G2\n\nDTG: 150345Z 15 DEC 50\n\nFlag Air Comd reports military jet pilots via Fairbanks while over Weeks International Field at an altitude of 8000 feet observed a flash of light, yellow in color at an altitude between 25,000 and 30,000 feet. Horizontal distance to object was aprx 50 miles. Soon after flash a dark brown smoke appeared to rise or climb at an angle of 40 degrees. At the leading edge of the smoke at aprx 100 feet appeared an object either cigar shaped or a fuselage without wings travelling at terrific speed. Pilots started pursuit on heading of 210 degrees mag, indicating 380 at a very steep climb. Pursuit continued until pilots reached village of clear and lost sight of object. Meantime object gained altitude and speed and disappeared because of distance of aprx 50 to 55,000 feet. Color of smoke brown, color of object dark and no reflection from sunlight. Pilots assured of shape because of perfect silhouette against the sun. One pilot had object in view aprx 4 1/2 mins. First sighted at 150026Z. Coordinates 64 degs 13 mins North, 149 degs 30 mins West. Add info will be fwd when obtained.\n\nDECLASSIFIED Authority: NND 90986\n\nACTION: G2.\nINFO: G3, AF\n\nCM IN 932 (15 Dec 50) DTG: 150345Z rvk/7\n\n141 DEC 15 50 27\n\nCONFIDENTIAL COPY NO.\n\nREPLACES DA SCO FORM 22-3, 15 JAN 49, WHICH MAY BE USED."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-263\nCHANGED TO\n100-2244-8\n\n5 JAN 26 1951"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-264\nCHANGED TO\n62-93979-1"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: DIRECTOR FBI DATE: 2-10-51\nFROM: SAC KNOXVILLE\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED OBJECTS OVER OAK RIDGE AREA, PROTECTION OF VITAL INSTALLATIONS\nFlying Saucers CONFIDENTIAL\n\nRe Knoxville letter dated 12-13-50.\n\nFor information of the Bureau, the below listed copies of CIC, G-2 Third Army, pertaining to captioned matter are forwarded herewith.\n\nReport of SAC WILLIAM B. GRAY, CIC, dated 1-2-51, entitled \"Object Sighted Over Oak Ridge, Tennessee.\"\n\nCIC reports dated 1-20-51, entitled. \"Objects Sighted Over Oak Ridge, Tennessee\".\n\nEnclosures - 2\n65-475\nCCM/wj\n\nRECORDED - 42 FEB 19 1951\n\nUNRECORDED COPY FILED IN"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION\n\nCOPY/wj\n2-10-51\n\n111th CIC, FAO # 8, P. O. Box 379, Knoxville, Tennessee.\n\nOBJECT SIGHTED OVER OAK RIDGE,\nTENNESSEE.\n\n(In compliance with letter AJACI-360.33 General, dated 15 November 1950, Headquarters, Third Army. SUBJECT: Unconventional Aircraft, the following is submitted.)\n\nA. Location and Time of Sighting:\nBetween 0820 and 0830 hours on 18 December 1950, on the Turnpike, within the controlled area, approximately one (1) mile from the White Wing entrance and Y-12 plant.\n\nB. Weather at the Time:\nAt 0730 hours - wind from the Northeast, seven (7) miles per hour; temperature - 20 degrees F. according to the Atomic Energy Commission Meteorological Division.\n\nC. Names, Occupations, and Addresses of Witnesses:\nDr. A. J. Miller, 518 Delaware Avenue, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.\nDr. V. P. Calkins, 105 Disston Road, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.\nMr. J. Frank Coneybear, 119 Meadow Road, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.\nMr. A. O. Mooneyham, 101 Dewey Road, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.\nMr. F. T. Bly, 221 Villanova Road, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.\nLt. Col. John R. Hood, U.S.A.F., 200 Virginia Road, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.\nCdr. E. W. Hribar, U.S.N., 103 Norris Lane, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.\nMaj. Walter L. Carss, U.S.A.F., NEPA Division, Fairchild Engine and Airplane Corporation, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.\n\nD. Photographs of Objects, if available:\nNone.\n\nE. Object Sighted:\nA light emanating in the shape of a circle, of an intensity much greater that that of a bright moon, giving the impression of form in connection with the light. The light was white in appearance and did not show any signs of refraction into a band or continuous spectrum. This object was traveling in a Northwesterly direction, 15 to 30 degrees elevation above the horizon, and appeared to diminish considerable in size during thirty seconds of observation. To another group, the object appeared only as a bright reflection of the sun from an apparently metal surface. No accurate estimate of the object's size or range could be made from the observation.\n\nF. Any other pertinent information:\nFollowing is quoted from the Radar Log maintained by the McGhee Tyson Air Force Radar Station:\n\nENCLOSURE 62-83914-265"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2 January 1951\n\n111th CIC, FAO #8, P. O. Box 379, Knoxville, Tennessee.\n\nOBJECTS SIGHTED OVER OAK RIDGE,\nTENNESSEE.\n\nF. (Continued)\n\n\"0832 hours - Atomic Energy Commission reported aircraft over Northeast end of area - no paint. (Paint meaning indication on the radar scopes.)\n\n\"0839 hours - Small paint near Southeast corner of area on 190 degree. (Magnetic bearing of objects travel.)\n\n\"0845 hours - Lost contact. Fighter interception was attempted with negative results.\"\n\nAttached hereto are two certified true copies of the statements made by the above mentioned observers.\n\nAttachments - 2\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STATEMENT\n\nFollowing is a report of the sighting of an unidentified object in the Oak Ridge Area by the undersigned. On the morning of 18 December 1950, the following personnel were riding to their work at NEPA Division, Fairchild Engine and Airplane Corp., in the S-50 Area at Oak Ridge, Tennessee:\n\nLt. Col. John R. Hood, USAF\nCdr. E. W. Hribar, USN\nMajor James L. Steele, USAF\nJamor Walter L. Carss, USAF\nMr. James R. Gray\nMr. William G. Frey\n\nMr. Gray, Commander Hribar, and Major Steele were riding in the front seat; Col. Hood, Major Carss, and Mr. Frey were in the rear.\n\nAt approximately 0827, while riding southwest on the turnpike just outside the restricted area, Col. Hood sighted a very bright reflection through the windshield of the car. Major Carss, who was sitting beside Col. Hood and whose attention was attracted by Col. Hood's looking at the sky, sighted the same reflection. Col. Hood then called the attention of the remaining occupants of the car to the reflection. Of these, Commander Hribar also sighted the reflection, but Mr. Gray, Mr. Frey, and Major Steele did not sight it.\n\nThe reflection was visible through the front windshield of the car only for a moment because, shortly thereafter, the road turned to the right. The corresponding turn of the car so placed the relative position of the reflection that it could not be seen through the left front window, which was frosted. The windshield, however, was not frosted and permitted excellent vision.\n\nThe object appeared only as the bright reflection of the sun from an apparently metal surface, much as might be expected from an aircraft at a great distance. No accurate estimate of the objects size or range could be made from the observation. It appeared to be west-southwest of Oak Ridge Townsite at an angle of elevation of about 25 degrees from the level.\n\ns/John R. Hood, Jr. t/JOHN R. HOOD, JR., Lt. Col. USAF\ns/Edward W. Hribar t/EDWARD W. HRIBAR, Commander, USN\ns/Walter L. Carss t/WALTER L. CARSS, JR., Major, USAF\n\nCERTIFIED TRUE COPY:\n\nWILLIAM B. GRAY, SAC, Knoxville,Tenn"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nThis document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18 U.S.C., Sections 793 and 794. Its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\n\nDecember 28, 1950\n\nSUBJECT: Visual Observation on December 19, 1950\n\nTO: Mr. William G. Frey\nAssistant to the AF Plant\nRepresentative for Security\nOffice of the AF Plant Representative\nAir Material Command\nNEPA Division\nFairchild Engine and Airplane Corporation\nPost Office Box E\nOak Ridge, Tennessee\n\n1. On December 18, 1950, at sometime between 0820 and 0830, the following NEPA employees were riding in a vehicle on the Turnpike within the Controlled Area toward the NEPA Project approximately one mile short of the \"Y\" cutoff to White Wing entrance and Y-12:\n\nDr. A. J. Miller\nDr. V. P. Calkins\nMr. J. Frank Coneybear\nMr. A O. Mooneyham\nMr. F. T. Bly\n\n2. The passengers, with the exception of Dr. Calkins, who did not attempt to participate in the viewing, observed a light emanating in the shape of a circle, of an intensity much greater than that of a bright moon, through the windshield of the vehicle. The viewers had the impression that there was form in connection with the light rather than merely a point source. The light was white in appearance and did not show any signs of refraction into a band or continuous spectrum. It appeared to be from 15 to 30 degrees elevated above the horizontal and on an azimuth between west and northwest, and appeared to be traveling in a northwesterly direction. The impression of its traveling is due to the fact that the object appeared to diminish considerably in size during the approximate thirty seconds during which it was viewed. The vehicle remained in motion and in following the course of the road, changed its relative position so that the object was viewed during the last few seconds from the side windows. As the vehicle proceeded down the road a near-by ridge obstructed the view of the object, and although the vehicle completed the turn toward K-25 at the \"Y\" intersection\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nFairchild Engine and Airplane Corporation\nNEPA Division, P. O. Box 415, Oak Ridge, Tenn."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nMr. William G. Frey\nAssistant to the AF Plant\nRepresentative for Security\n\nDecember 28, 1950\nPage 2\n\nSubject: Visual Observation on\nDecember 18, 1950\n\nand the passengers had a relatively clear view at points along the road, the object was not viewed again. The observers were unable to estimate approximate size, speed, or vertical elevation; and, therefore, were not certain whether the object was over the Controlled Area or a considerable distance away. There was no vapor trail or any other visible condition within the vicinity of the object and there were no clouds which could have obscured it. The observers were unable to identify the object in terms of mass or shape, other than the circular appearance of the light. However, the circular area appeared to darken, starting at approximately 7:00 to 9:00 o'clock along the perimeter and continuing to darken along the perimeter and inner area until the light was concentrated in approximately 1:00 to 3:00 o'clock position of a very small diameter, at which point it appeared somewhat similar to a large star.\n\n3. The observers were not in complete agreement as to whether the object was moving at a speed which caused it to diminish in size or actually was diminishing in size without any great velocity of travel due to the darkening effect described above.\n\nNEPA Division\nFAIRCHILD ENGINE AND AIRPLANE CORPORATION\n\ns/ Gene A. Goedjen\nt/ GENE A. GOEDJEN\nPlant Protection Manager\n\nGAG:VM\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nFairchild Engine and Airplane Corporation\nNEPA Division, P. O. Box 415, Oak Ridge, Tenn.\n\nCERTIFIED TRUE COPY:\n\nWILLIAM B. GRAY, SAC, Knoxville, Tenn."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20 January 1951\n\n111th CIC Detachment, FAO #8, P.O. Box 379, Knoxville, Tennessee\n\nOBJECTS SIGHTED OVER OAK RIDGE,\nTENNESSEE\n\n(In compliance with letter AJACI-360.33 General, dated 15 November 1950. Headquarters, Third Army, Subject; Unconventional Aircraft, the following is submitted.)\n\nA. Location and Time of Sighting: On 1247 hours on 20 December 1950.\n\nB. Weather at Time of Sighting: At 1200 hours on 20 December 1950; Ceiling - 2700 feet; broken overcast; Seven miles visibility; Temperature - 37 degrees F; Dew Point - 31 degrees; and Wind - Calm.\n\nC. Names, Occupations, and Addresses of Witnesses: Personnel of the 663rd AC &C Squadron, and the 5th AN Fighter Squadron, McGhee Tyson Airport, Knoxville, Tennessee\n\nD. Photographs of Objects, if available: None\n\nE. Object Sighted: The radar log of the 663rd AN and C Squadron, McGhee Tyson Airport, Knoxville, Tennessee contained the following entry: \"20 December 1950. 1247 hours. Small point in area (Oak Ridge Controlled Area). Very, very slow. Made perfect intercept (with F-82 Fighter aircraft) and orbit surrounding small smoke cloud.\"\n\nF. Any other pertinent information: This report is made because of its possible aid in determining the identity of the numerous unidentified objects sighted over Oak Ridge, Tennessee\n\nSOURCE: Personnel of 663rd AC &W, Squadron, McGhee Tyson, Knoxville, Tennessee, and the log of the 663rd AC&W Squadron."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20 January 1951\n\n111th CIC Detachment, FAO #8, P.O. Box 379, Knoxville, Tennessee\n\nOBJECTS SIGHTED OVER OAK RIDGE,\nTENNESSEE\n\n(In compliance with letter AJACI-360.33 General, dated 15 November 1950, Headquarters, third Army, Subject; Unconventional Aircraft, the following is submitted.)\n\nA. Location and Time of Sighting: From 1605 hours for about three (3) hours, on 14 December 1951, on the Radar Scopes of the 663rd AC and W Squadron, McGhee Tyson Airport, Knoxville, Tennessee.\n\nB. Weather at the Time: At 1600 hours on 14 December 1950--\"Ceiling-2100 feet; Broken overcast; Seven (7) miles visibility; Temperature- 37 degrees F.; and Wind - Southwest at thirteen (13) miles perhour.\n\nC. Names, Occupations, and Addresses of Witnesses: Personnel of the 663rd AC and W Squadron, 30th Air Division, McGhee Tyson Airport, Knoxville, Tennessee, who were on duty at the time. Their occupations are Radar operators, Supervisors, and experts.\n\nD. Photographs of Objects, if available: No photographs taken. See \"F\" below.\n\nE. Object Sighted: A group of targets blanketed the Radar Scopes in the area directly over the government Atomic Energy Commission projects at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. These objects could not be identified from the radar image and a perfect fighter interception met with negative results.\n\nF. Any other pertinent information: Lt. Robinson of the 663rd AC and W Squadron, McGhee Tyson Airport, Knoxville, Tennessee took photographs of the scope readings with a personal, four (4) by five (5) Speed Graphis Camera, using Plus-X civilian procured film, a lense opening of F-2.5, and a shutter speed varying from twenty (20) to fourty-five (45) seconds. The negatives were printed and forwarded to the 30th Air Division, Selfridge Air Force Base, Michigan, which installation printed the negatives and sent copies thereof to the 663rd AC and W Squadron. The numerous targets can readily identified from the permanent radar echos by comparing the photographs. (B-2)\n\nSOURCE: Personnel and logs of the 663rd AC and W Squadron, McGhee Tyson Airport, Knoxville, Tennessee."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20 January 1951\n\n111th CIC Detachment, FAO # 8, P.O. Box 379, Knoxville, Tennessee\n\nOBJECTS SIGHTED OVER OAK RIDGE,\nTENNESSEE\n\n(in compliance with letter AJACI-360.33 General, dated 15 November 1950, Headquarters Third Army, Subject; Unconventional Aircraft, the following is submitted.)\n\nA. Location and Time of Sighting: At 2145 hours on 16 January 1951.\n\nB. Weather at the Time of Sighting: Clear; visibility twenty (20) miles; Temperature - 37 degrees F.; and Wind - Southwest at five (5) miles perhour.\nWinds aloft: At 2000 feet - 240 degrees at 3 knots\n3000 \" - 210 \" \" 3 knots\n4000 \" - 209 \" \" 5 knots\n\nC. Names, Occupations and Addresses of Witnesses: 663rd AC&W Squadron Personnel who are Radar operators. AEC Patrol Personnel, policemen at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Captains L.C.M. Clevenger and Wm. Aiken, Controllers of 663rd.\n\nD. Photographs of Objects if available: None\n\nE. Object sighted: Two bright objects in the sky, one of which was east of McGhee Tyson Airport and the other was west. The object to the east was a light, brighter than any other star, emitting intermittant glows of various colors in the color spectrum. An aircraft attempted interception and found that he was heading directly for a star. Weather personnel explained that the spectural reflection of the star was caused by the volumn of atmosphere and physical matter, together with heat, which must be looked through to see a star close to the horizon. These phenomenon caused refraction of the light rays from the star thereby reflecting a continuous spectural change of light color.\nThe light to the West was observed through a twenty (20) power spotting scope and the light seemed to be descending. It took about one hour to descend behind trees making it disappear from the sight of obeervers. Captain Clevenger stated that this light, when viewed through the spotting scope, took on many peculiar forms, with lines, cores, tails, etc, therein, thus generally fitting the description of all \"flying saucers\" ever described to him.\nShortly after this object disappeared from sight (behind trees) AEC personnel at Oak Ridge, Tennessee reported they had sighted an object about twelve (12) miles Southeast of the K-25 Plant in the Controlled Area. They also observed the aircraft which had been sent for interception but stated the aircraft was \"too far north\". The aircraft made no identification, and AEC personnel later reported that they had observed a star."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20 January 1950\n\n111th CIC Detachment, FAO # 8, P.O. Box 379, Knoxville, Tennessee\n\nOBJECTS SIGHTED OVER OAK RIDGE,\nTENNESSEE\n\nF. Any other pertinent information: The Commanding Officer of the 663rd AC&W Squadron, 30th Air Division, McGhee Tyson Airport, Knoxville, Tennessee, in a letter to his Commanding Officer on 17 January 1951, Subject; Report of Unusual incident 2145 hours 16 January 1951, stated:\n\n\"1. In compliance with telephone instructions from the ADCC 17 January 1951, the following unusual incident report is herewith submitted:\nTime Date-16 January 1951\n1915: An unusual airbourne object was sighted approximately 10 miles WNW of the station, the lighted object was very similar to a star but much brighter and slightly larger than other visible stars at the time, as observed the object seemed to be approximately 6,000 feet above the terrain and descending slowly. As the object appeared to be over or near the Oak Ridge Area, the AEC Patrol Headquarters was notified and their ground observer alerted. About this time some interference was noted on the Radar Scopes (AN/CPS-11 in the approximate area of the observed object; however no interference was noted on the height finder (AN/CPS-4) (See attached Form 117 dtd 17 Jan 1951\n1925:Object still apparently descending, F-82 scrambled to attempt interception, still no report from AEC Headquarters.\n1930:Similar object observed 15 to 20 miles east of station; seems to be ascending rather than descending.\n1935:AF 7177 (Locally homed and piloted by assigned sq officer) C-45 -enroute CHA to tys, requested fixed to steer to tys - A/C fixed 25 miles SW of station, Pilot Major Raymond C. Care - AF 7177 requested to investigate object east of station.\n1945:AF 7177 sighted subject object and reported it to be a star\n1945:F-82 orbiting S/E corner of Oak Ridge Area no electronic or visual observation still no electronic observation by station 47.\n1946:Visual observation reported by Oak Ridge Ground Observers, 12 miles southeast of K-25 area (This is in the SE corner of Oak Ridge Area) F-82 in sight and is north of object. F-82 vectored south toward object no contact, electronic or visual. Object report 2400 feet above terrain by Oak Ridge Observers.\n1955:Oak Ridge Patrol Headquarters reports that observed object determined (to be a star)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20 January 1951\n\n111th CIC Detachment, FAO #8, P.O. 379, Knoxville, Tennessee\n\nOBJECTS SIGHTED OVER OAK RIDGE,\nTENNESSEE\n\nto be a star.\n\n2000:F-82 reports clear sailing and no restrictions to visibility, still patroling area for possible pickup of object, still no joy.\"\n\nNOTE: This is an extract of the information listed in logs kept at the Radar Site by Radar Personnel. (B-2)\n\nSOURCE: Personnel as in \"C\" above."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. C. E. HENNRICH\nFROM : MR. E. H. MOSSBURG\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nDATE: February 26, 1951\n\nIt is recommended the attached article which appeared in Look magazine January, 1951, be filed in captioned case for information purposes.\n\nAttachment\n\nEHM:gmu\n\nENCLOSURE ATTACHED\n\nRECORDED - 9 EX-56\n\nMAR. 6 1951\n\n65 MAR14 1951"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-266"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Look what we've dished up for you!\n\nSATURDAY NOON ON\nABC TELEVISION\n\nRomance\nFaith Baldwin's Theatre of Romance—your favorite love stories brought to life by top dramatic stars! Miss Baldwin herself sets the stage on this Saturday TV treat! (Sponsor: Maidenform Bra). Every other SATURDAY at 11 am.\n\nComedy\nTwo Girls Named Smith (one of them pretty Peggy Ann Garner!) are your luncheon guests every Saturday noon on ABC-TV. They're small-town gals in the big city; their adventures are daffy and delightful! (Bab-O and Glim). SATURDAY at 12 noon.\n\nAcrobat Ranch. Saturday, 10:45 am. (Acrobat Shoes)\n\nThe Stu Erwin Show. Saturday, 7:30 pm. (General Mills)\n\nPaul Whiteman TV Teen Club. Saturday, 8-9 pm. (American Dairy Ass'n)\n\nRoller Derby. Saturday, 9 pm.\n\nDrama\nI Cover Times Square. Reporter Harold Huber knows every place and every face along the fabulous Great White Way. Every Saturday he takes you along on an exciting, intriguing adventure! (Air Wick). SATURDAY at 12:30 pm.\n\nIN NEW YORK, CHICAGO, DETROIT, SAN FRANCISCO AND LOS ANGELES IT'S CHANNEL 7\n\nAll times listed are for New York City area only. Elsewhere, consult your local newspaper.\n\nAmerican Broadcasting Company\n\nABC TELEVISION\n\n59"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A NUCLEAR PHYSICIST EXPOSES FLYING SAUCERS\n\n\"There is no longer any need for secrecy,\" says Navy scientist, after finding that his own research started the \"saucers\"\n\nBy RICHARD WILSON Chief of LOOK Washington Bureau\n\nThus literal-minded FBI, skeptical but determined, could not let the flying-saucer excitement go by without getting to the bottom of it. Such a profusion of strange objects littering the American skies could not be ignored.\n\nA 10-page report by the nuclear physics branch of the Office of Naval Research has given the answer:\n\nFlying saucers were, and are, undeniably real. They are part of a basic research program of the Federal Government which is as important, if not so dramatic, as the visitation from Mars feared by an imaginative public.\n\nA flying saucer is the base of a huge balloon, 100 feet in diameter, called a \"Skyhook.\" It is seen by earthlings traveling at speeds up to 200 miles per hour at heights up to 19 miles.\n\nThese balloons are carrying delicate instruments to plumb the secrets of the cosmos in the dizzy reaches of a 100,000-foot height where the atmosphere reaches the vanishing point.\n\nThe instruments on the balloons observe and measure the countless explosions of atoms in the atmosphere as they are smashed by cosmic particles hurtling in by the billions from the cold reaches of outer space.\n\nThe balloons seek to break the secret of how matter is put together by recording how it is blown apart. And, finally, of how the countless atomic explosions taking place silently, smokelessly, flamelessly but energetically at the fringe of the earth's atmosphere may be reproduced under controlled conditions.\n\nThis is atomic research aimed not at producing an atomic bomb but at harnessing the energy from the decomposition of the atom. Dr. Urner Liddel, chief of the nuclear physics branch of the Office of Naval Research, is in charge of the Skyhook-Flying Saucer project.\n\nNo \"Saucers\" Without ONR\n\n\"When this project first began,\" he said, \"it was kept secret. Now, there is no longer any need for secrecy on a scientific basis. And, certainly, there is no longer any need to keep the public in the dark about what flying saucers are.\n\n\"If we are completely successful in our research with these balloons, which so many people have called flying saucers, we will find out how to break up the atom in a useful way. It is not too much to hope that some day we will learn enough to cause the atomic reaction under conditions as we want them—not as they exist today in the atomic bomb.\n\n\"Some day we may learn enough so that we can pour a cup of water into a reactor the size of an average room and draw off from it in cables enough energy to heat a large city.\"\n\nThe Office of Naval Research, where Dr. Liddel is sponsoring the cosmic experiments, is a part of the regular naval establishment engaged in basic and applied research. The Liddel report is considered to be the most authoritative scientific explanation of the flying-saucer phenomenon. As far as Dr. Liddel is concerned personally, he considers his answer incontrovertibly right.\n\nOne of the most convincing factors supporting Dr. Liddel's findings is that flying saucers or flying disks were unheard of until the ONR's experiments in the stratosphere began. There were some flights in 1947, the first year that strange objects were seen in the skies. These reports multiplied in 1948, when Skyhooks were put in the air in large numbers, and continued through 1949. Reports diminished in 1950 when the number of Skyhook balloon flights were reduced.\n\nIonization Chambers in the Sky\n\nObservers have agreed that the best time of day to see what is called a flying saucer is at dusk of a cool summer evening.\n\nYou may be standing on a plain in New Mexico or Montana. You may be flying a plane at 10,000 feet over Alabama. And there in the distance, above you but far from you, is a strange lighted disk. It may be moving or just hovering.\n\nBut there it is. You see it with your own eyes. Your companions see it. This thing is round. It appears cup-shaped. It may appear to have a strong glow on one side or to be trailing an exhaust.\n\nWhat you have seen may be Flight 10, Balloon No. 3 of the Brookhaven National Laboratory at 84,300 feet carrying a 187-pound payload consisting of a cloud chamber, a beacon transmitter, a Geiger telescope, an ionization chamber and photographic equipment.\n\nThis object in the sky may appear to you to be from two to ten times the size of Venus, the evening star, which in certain months seems to fill the heavens as it rises. If you are at 10,000 feet up in an airplane, the object may appear (Continued on next page)\n\n60\n\n61"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCERS continued\n\nNo \"little men\" from afar have arrived in rocket ships\n\n20 per cent larger than from the ground.\n\nThe lateral rays of the sun at dusk illuminate the base of the balloon. There is no chance of your ever seeing the full roundness of it because you are so far below it. You see only the illuminated cup of the bottom. If your imagination soars, the light reflection on one side may impress you as the glow of an atomic engine. The wisp of the balloon's instrument-filled tail may impress you as the exhaust. The sun's rays may suffuse the plastic bag with a fiery glow.\n\nExperienced Observers Fooled\n\nEven seasoned airmen have no way of estimating the size and the speed of an object they see. To peg size and speed, the mind must know the nature of the object. Experienced seamen have difficulty estimating the distance, speed and size of another ship unless they know its type. The balloon is unknown and hence eludes efforts to measure it by familiar craft aloft.\n\nDr. Liddel and his associates arrived at their findings on these baffling stories by studying about 2,000 reports of flying-saucer observations of every kind and description. They discarded some as seeming to be the visions of crackpots or psychopaths. Other reports were clearly the result of inaccurate vision.\n\nOne report of \"little men\" found in the wreckage of a flying saucer near Mexico City turned out to be the unsubstantiated story of a traveler. No one else knew anything about it.\n\nThis left a solid base of reports from airplane pilots, scientific observers and reliable laymen which could not be brushed aside. After a thorough investigation, Dr. Liddel said: \"There is not a single reliable report of an observation which is not attributable to the cosmic balloons.\"\n\nThe Death of Captain Mantell\n\nThe most tragic report the nuclear physicists had to consider was that of an Air Force pilot in Kentucky. A circular object, metallic in appearance, was seen over a U.S. Air Force base on Jan. 7, 1948. Three fighter planes, dispatched by Capt. Thomas F. Mantell, took off in hot pursuit. From their relatively low altitudes, the balloon seemed to be traveling at the rate of 360 miles an hour. Two of the planes turned back at 18,000 feet. Captain Mantell kept going. He radioed that he would go to 25,000 feet and abandon the search if he got no closer. None of the planes was equipped with reserve oxygen supplies, and thus could not fly long at high altitudes.\n\nMantell was not heard from again. His plane crashed, and the instruments found in the wreckage indicated it might have risen to 30,000 feet.\n\n\"Our studies show,\" said Dr. Liddel, \"that Captain Mantell and the other pilot were pursuing a balloon of the Skyhook type. Captain Mantell could never have reached the height at which the balloon was traveling.\"\n\nSeveral reports have been received of \"squadrons\" of flying saucers. People have seen little disks apparently flying together in the sky. This is explained by Dr. Liddell as clusters of 20 to 30 balloons, 10 to 15 feet in diameter, which are sometimes used in place of the huge Skyhook.\n\nUnder certain conditions, they might be more visible than the single plastic bag, and would certainly be unexplainable by anyone who didn't know their purpose.\n\nLiddel Got the Facts\n\nAfter Dr. Liddel had sifted all the reports which appeared to have some foundation, he used his entree as a government nuclear physicist to check other government agencies. He is satisfied that no other research or experimental project has utilized anything even roughly resembling a flying saucer.\n\n\"And secondly,\" he said, \"interplanetary travel is not possible at the present time.\"\n\nThis disposed of all the possibilities, according to Dr. Liddel. His analysis of the flying-saucer phenomenon was as presented here is the first government disclosure of what is considered to be the real case.\n\nThe Skyhook's distinct visual similarity to a flying-saucer description was noted strongest of the Minneapolis project of ONR under the direction of General Mills, Inc. Telescopic photographs brought out the similarity so clearly that Dr. Liddel was elated. He looked at last offer visual proof of his findings.\n\nTracing the \"Saucers\"\n\nGeneral Mills is the only successful manufacturer of the huge and delicate plastic bags. Most of the total of 270 flights so far made have been launched at Camp Ripley near Little Falls, Minn., and at University Airport, Minneapolis, Minn.\n\nEnough flights have been made from other points, however, to clutter the country. Balloons have ascended from Chicago, from Holloman Air Force Base and White Sands, N. M., and from aircraft carriers in both the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific.\n\nWorkers at the General Mills aeronautical laboratories advised Dr. Liddel that they were able to trace lost balloons by published reports of flying saucers. The big bags are engineered to stay up eight hours. Otherwise, they would be a hazard to air navigation. But some have actually stayed up more than 30 hours.\n\nElaborate arrangements are made to trace the balloons, for the data the cosmic physicists want are (Continued on page 64)\n\nTodays KING is Really LIGHT! If you prefer finer, lighter mixed drinks—today's King is your whisky! Actually tastengineered by Brown-Forman to be far lighter-looking, far lighter-tasting. And today's King is priced right, too! Enjoy America's best-tasting blend today!\n\nBROWN-FORMAN DISTILLERS CORPORATION\n\n62\n\nRelax - as you See - as you Save by Greyhound!\n\nFOR ANY TRIP - ANY TIME - IN ANY WEATHER\n\nThis is a honeymoon couple - off on a pre-planned expense paid \"Amazing America\" Tour\n\nThe SuperCoach picked up these folks right at their farm gate, takes them direct to the city\n\nHere's a housewife sightseeing on her way to visit the folks\n\nHere's her husband mighty glad he didn't have to drive\n\nSh! He's a businessman relaxing his way to the next sales call\n\nGreyhound travel is nice and neighborly\n\nHere's a happy gal bound for sunny southern vacationlands\n\nA college man dollars ahead - on a week-end trip home\n\nThis is one of the worlds best drivers!\n\nHighway travel is ever so much more pleasant, more relaxed, more enjoyable... once you're free of the responsibility of driving! Each day, more thousands of people are learning this profitable lesson by Greyhound... with low-cost, trouble-free trips to all America.\n\nNext trip, you are invited to join these travel-wise Americans who choose to ride at ease, in deeply cushioned armchairs... completely relieved of driving strain, traffic problems, and the increasing difficulties of operating an automobile. Simply select a convenient schedule, step aboard a Greyhound... and relax as you see as you save!\n\nFREE BOOKLET - WITH 50 TRIPS ALL PLANNED!\n\nGREYHOUND\n\nA LOT MORE TRAVEL FOR A LOT LESS MONEY!"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Today\n\nthe average freight train\n\nhelps national rearmament\n\nby carrying more freight\n\nand carrying it faster\n\nthan ever before in history!\n\nASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN RAILROADS\n\nWASHINGTON 6, D.C.\n\nListen to THE RAILROAD HOUR every Monday evening on NBC\n\n64\n\nSkyhook ready for ascent. \"Saucers\" were unheard of until ONR's experiments in the stratosphere began under Dr. Liddel's supervision.\n\nFLYING SAUCERS continued\n\nBigger Skyhooks coming—then more \"saucers\" will fly\n\nrecorded on the instruments dangling from them. The instruments are released electronically by parachute at the end of the flight.\nThe cosmic-ray experiments themselves stem from pioneer work done by Dr. Robert A. Millikan 30 years ago when the bombardment of particles from outer space was first discovered. These peculiar phenomena were thought to be some kind of light ray from an unknown source. They were later discovered to be atomic particles striking at the rate of five per square inch per minute at the earth's surface.\n\nCosmic-Ray Mystery\n\nThe source of these particles is unknown. One theory firmly held for a while was that they originated from explosions on the sun. Some scientists believe now that their impact and energy are so great they must originate from higher-powered galaxies outside the solar system.\nWhatever their source, these particles strike atoms in the earth's atmosphere, cause them to explode and fill the atmosphere with atomic debris.\nPhysicists early discovered that the higher they went in the atmosphere the more certain they could be of recording the explosions with the greatest accuracy. Their ultimate aim is to make photographs and measurements at the very fringe of the earth's atmosphere, for all the air below that is filled in greater or lesser degree with atomic debris from the explosions.\nThese explosions, of course, cannot be seen or felt by the human mechanism. But their dramatic impact on the measuring devices can be photographed with startling clarity.\nFour levels of cosmic-ray experimentation have been in progress. The first is at sea level where the bombardment is measured and photographed in devices called cloud chambers. This type of experimentation also goes on at two laboratories, Mount Evans and Climax Mountain, both in Colorado, at 14,000 feet.\nA third type of experimentation was carried on in three B-29 bombers, fitted out as flying laboratories. They flew up and down a degree of latitude toward the North Pole and away from it between Fort Churchill, Manitoba, and Lima, Peru. These flying laboratories made their recordings at between 30,000 and 40,000 feet.\nThe fourth type is the Skyhook project which has led to so many reports of flying saucers. But there are still more to come.\nGeneral Mills and the Office of Naval Research are working on a new balloon with four times the capacity of the Skyhook, which can rise to heights of 120,000 feet. This will leave only 0.4 per cent of the earth's atmospheric envelope above the new balloon.\nIt can safely be predicted that a year hence there will be a new wave of flying-saucer reports. A new, improved model will be observed by credulous and alarmed citizens of middle America. These observers will be unable to escape the conclusion that the thing in outer space is gaining on us.\nEND"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLASSIFIED INCOMING MESSAGE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE\n\nRECEIVED FROM C-2 THROUGH LIAISON CHANNELS\nCONFIDENTIAL\nPRIORITY\nPARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED\n\nAF MSG\n\nFEB 13 1951\n\nFROM: NEAC PEPPERELL AFB NFLD\nTO: CSAF WASH DC\nNR: EW 0212\n10 FEB 51\n\nText on following page.\n\nACTION: AF\nINFO: G2, G3\nCAF IN 97532\nDA IN 131\n\nRECORDED - 137\nMAR 8 1951\n(12 Feb 51)\nDTG: 100400Z rlsg\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\n12 FEB13'51\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY NO. 28\n\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1949—O-830430"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nSTAFF MESSAGE DIVISION\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nPRIORITY\nPARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED. NOTIFY CRYPTOCENTER BEFORE DECLASSIFYING\n\nFROM: NEAC PEPPERELL AFB NFLD\nTO : CSAF WASH D C\nNR : EW 0212 10 Feb 51 (DTG 100400)\n\nUnidentified object seen at 0055Z 10 Feb at 49 degrees 50 min north, 50 degrees 03 min west by crew of Navy 6501, VR1, Petuxent River, MD. Originally seen as heavy light in distance on the surface as lights of city. The yellowish light, like a fire in color, approached rapidly and grew very bright and very large with a semi-circular shape. It was on a true course of about 125 degrees, plane on a true course of 225 degrees, as it approached the plane it suddenly turned about almost 180 degrees and disappeared rapidly over the horizon as a small ball. Speed \"was terrific\". Seen fr an angle of about 45 degrees looking down fr the plane. Crew all experienced North Atlantic fliers Lt F.W. Kingdon, Lt A.L. Jones, Lt G.E. Bethune, Lt N.G.P. Koger, Lt J.M. Meyer, all saw object over a period of fr seven to eight min. Plane flying at 10,000 altitude.\n\nACTION: OIN\nADDED DIST: ARMY, STATE, CIA, OSD(SDLO), JCS\nCAF IN: 97532 (10 Feb 51) MEL/ref\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY No.\n\nTHE MAKING OF AN EXACT COPY OF THIS MESSAGE IS FORBIDDEN\n\nAFHQ FORM 15 APR 49 0-309 B\n\npage 2"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"February 23, 1951\n\nMr. Jimmy W. Short\n910 Caddo Street\nArkadelphia, Arkansas\n\nDear Jimmy:\n\nYour letter dated February 14, 1951, has been received.\n\nWhile I appreciate the concern which prompted your writing in this regard, this Bureau does not have available for distribution any material concerning so-called \"flying saucers.\" It was thoughtful of you to bring your observations in this connection to my attention.\n\nI am enclosing some material which I thought you might like to have.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nEnclosure\n\nList of courses of study\nSA and Clerical Job Sheets\n25 Years of Identi\nPersonnel and Services of Lab\n\nNOTE: The only record located in Bufiles indicated that correspondent requested and received descriptive material concerning the Bureau in 1949. Data presently enclosed is not duplicated.\n\nRBS:vmm:gmd\n\nRECEIVED - DIRECTOR\n\nMAR 14 1951 FEB 24 1951"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"February 23, 1951\n\nMr. Jimmy W. Short\n910 Caddo Street\nArkadelphia, Arkansas\n\nDear Jimmy:\n\nYour letter dated February 14, 1951, has been received.\n\nWhile I appreciate the concern which prompted your writing in this regard, this Bureau does not have available for distribution any material concerning so-called \"flying saucers.\" It was thoughtful of you to bring your observations in this connection to my attention.\n\nI am enclosing some material which I thought you might like to have.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nEnclosure\n\nList of courses of study\nSA and Clerical Job Sheets\n25 Years of Identi\nPersonnel and Services of Lab\n\nNOTE: The only record located in Bufiles indicated that correspondent requested and received descriptive material concerning the Bureau in 1949. Data presently enclosed is not duplicated.\n\nFEB 24 4 08 PM '51 FBI\n\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nFEB 24 1951"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Jimmy Scott\nOrkodelphia, Ark.\n910 Caddo St.\nFeb. 14, 1951\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\nWashington, D.C. Flying Saucers\n\nDear Mr. Hoover,\n\nSome time ago I wrote you a letter, and recieved a very nice reply. You said in your letter, if I had a question, to write you. DEFERRED RECORDING FEB 20 1951\nWell, I have one.\n\nIt is about Flying Saucers. I have been reading a book, \"The Flying Saucers Are Real\" by Donald Keyhoe. He states that the Flying Saucers are from another planet. He claims that the F.B.I. and Project \"Saucer\" a has been working and trying to solve the flying saucer mystery. He says the army has discovered some thing important and usings the cranks ray ballam to combat it (Please turn to page 2)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Jimmy Scott\nOrkodelphia\n910 Caddo St.\nFeb. 14, 1951\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\nWashington, D.C.\nDear Mr. Hoover,\n\n[illegible]\n\nFEB 20 4 12 PM '51\nF B I\nRECEIVED\nMR JONES\n\nFEB 19 4 00 PM '51\nF B I\nRECEIVED\nMR JONES"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 2\n\nIf you could give me some information about the flying Saucers, I would appreciate it. I somehow decline that the army is trying to cover something. the community story just doesn't fit.\n\nI truly admire the F.B.I, and some day hope to become a member of this fine organization.\nThank you very much.\n\nYours Truly,\nJimmy W. Scott"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WASH 7 FROM NEWARK 9-20-51 9-08 PM\nDIRECTOR URGENT\nFlying Saucers Flying Saucers\n\nUNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT OBSERVED SEPTEMBER TEN AND ELEVEN, FIFTY ONE IN VICINITY FT. MONMOUTH, NJ. INDIC. ON SEPTEMBER TWENTY INSTANT, ANDREW J. REID, G-TWO FT. MONMOUTH, NJ, PROVIDED FOLLOWING REPORT OF UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT OBSERVED BY RADAR AT ABOVE ARMY INSTALLATION. QUOTE ON SEPT. TEN, FIFTYONE, AN AN/MPG DASH ONE RADAR SET PICKED UP A FAST MOVING LOW FLYING TARGET, EXACT ALTITUDE UNDETERMINED AT APPROXIMATELY ELEVEN TEN A.M., SOUTHEAST OF FT. MONMOUTH AT A RANGE OF ABOUT TWELVE THOUSAND YARDS. THE TARGET APPEARED TO APPROXIMATELY FOLLOW THE COAST LINE, CHANGING ITS RANGE ONLY SLIGHTLY BUT CHANGING ITS AZIMUTH RAPIDLY. THE RADAR SET WAS SWITCHED TO FULL AIDED AZIMUTH TRACKING WHICH NORMALLY IS FAST ENOUGH TO TRACK JET AIRCRAFT, BUT IN THIS CASE WAS TOO SLOW TO BE RESORTED TO. TARGET WAS LOST IN THE N.E. AT A RANGE OF ABOUT FOURTEEN THOUSAND YARDS. THIS TARGET ALSO PRESENTED AN UNUSUALLY STRONG RETURN FOR AIRCRAFT BEING COMPARABLE IN STRENGTH TO THAT USUALLY RECEIVED FROM A COASTAL SHIP. THE OPERATOR INITIALLY IDENTIFIED TARGET AS A SHIP AND THEN REALIZED THAT IT COULD NOT BE A SHIP AFTER HE OBSERVED ITS EXTREME SPEED. SEPTEMBER TEN, FIFTYONE, AN SCR FIVE EIGHT FOUR RADAR SET AT THREE FIFTEEN PM TRACKING A TARGET WHICH MOVED ABOUT SLOWLY IN AZIMUTH NORTH OF FT. MONMOUTH AT A RANGE OF ABOUT FORTYTWO THOUSAND YARDS AT THE EXTREMELY UNUSUAL ELEVATION ANGLE OF THIRTEEN HUNDRED FIFTY MILS, APPROXIMATELY NINETYTHREE THOUSAND ALTITUDE. ON SEPTEMBER ELEVEN, FIFTYONE, TWO SCR FIVE EIGHT FOUR RADAR SETS AT TEN FIFTY A.M. PICKED UP THE SAME TARGET NORTHEAST OF FT. MONMOUTH AT AN ELEVATION ANGLE END OF PAGE ONE"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\nOF THREE HUNDRED FIFTY TO THREE HUNDRED MILS AT A RANGE OF APPROXI-\nMATELY THIRTY THOUSAND YARDS, APPROXIMATE ALTITUDE THIRTYONE THOUSAND\nFEET. THE SET TRACK AUTOMATICALLY IS AZIMUTH AND ELEVATION AND WAS\nAIDED RANGE TRACKING AND CAPABLE OF TRACKING TARGETS UP TO A SPEED\nOF SEVEN HUNDRED MPH. IN THIS CASE, HOWEVER, BOTH SETS FOUND IT IM-\nPOSSIBLE TO TRACK THE TARGET IN RANGE DUE TO ITS SPEED AND THE OPER-\nATORS HAD TO RESORT TO MANUAL RANGE TRACKING IN ORDER TO HOLD THE\nTARGET. THE TARGET WAS TRACKED IN THIS MANNER TO THE MAXIMUM TRACK-\nING RANGE OF THIRTYTWO THOUSAND YARDS. THE OPERATOR SAID THE TARGET\nTO BE MOVING AT A SPEED SEVERAL HUNDRED MPH HIGHER THAN THE MAXIMUM\nAIDED TRACKING ABILITY OF THE RADAR SETS. THIS TARGET PROVIDED AN EX-\nTREMELY STRONG RETURN ECHO AT TIMES EVEN THOUGH IT WAS THE MAXIMUM\nRANGE, HOWEVER, ECHO SIGNAL OCCASIONALLY FELL OFF TO A LEVEL BELOW\nNORMAL RETURN. THESE CHANGES COINCIDED WITH MANEUVERS OF THE TARGET.\nON SEPTEMBER ELEVEN, FIFTYONE AT ABOUT ONE THIRTY P.M. THE TARGET WAS\nPICKED UP ON AN SCR FIVE EIGHT FOUR RADAR SET THAT DISPLAYED UNUSUAL\nMANEUVERABILITY. TARGET WAS APPROXIMATELY OVER NAVESINK, NJ., AS IN-\nDICATED BY HIS TEN THOUSAND RANGE, SIX THOUSAND FEET ALTITUDE AND DUE\nNORTH AZIMUTH. THE TARGET REMAINED PRACTICALLY STATIONARY ON THE\nSCHOPE AND APPEARED TO BE HOVERING. THE OPERATOR LOOKED OUT OF THE\nVAN PAREND THE VEHICLE HOUSING THE RADAR SETA PAREND IN AN ATTEMPT\nTO SEE THE TARGET, SINCE IT WAS AT SUCH A SHORT RANGE, HOWEVER, OVER-\nCAST CONDITIONS PREVENTED SUCH OBSERVATION. RETURNING TO THEIR OPER-\nATING POSITION THE TARGET WAS OBSERVED TO BE CHANGING IN ELEVATION\nAT AN EXTREMELY RAPID RATE, BUT CHANGE IN RANGE WAS SO SLOW THE OPER-\nEND OF PAGE TWO"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE THREE\nATOR BELIEVED THE TARGET MUST HAVE RISEN NEARLY VERTICALLY. TARGET\nFIXED ITS RISE IN ELEVATION AT AN ELEVATION ANGLE OF APPROX. FIFTEEN\nHUNDRED MILS, AT WHICH TIME IT PROCEEDED TO MOVE AT AN EXTREMELY RAPID\nRATE IN RANGE IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION. ONCE AGAIN THE SPEED OF THE\nTARGET EXCEEDED THE AIDED TRACKING ABILITY OF THE SCR FIVE EIGHT FOUR\nSET SO THAT MANUAL TRACKING BECAME NECESSARY. RADAR TRACKED THE TAR-\nGET MAXIMUM RANGE OF THIRTYTWO THOUSAND YARDS AT WHICH TIME TARGET\nWAS AT AN ELEVATION ANGLE THREE HUNDRED MILS. THE OPERATOR DID NOT\nATTEMPT TO JUDGE THE SPEED IN EXCESS OF THE AIDED TRACKING RATE OF SEVEN\nHUNDRED MPH. THE WEATHER WAS FAIR WHEN THE OBSERVATION WAS MADE SEPT-\nEMBER TENTH AND CLOUDY FOR THE SEPTEMBER ELEVENTH REPORT. UNQUOTE.\nABOVVE INCIDENT OBSERVED BY THREE WITNESSES WITH EXCEPTION OF FIRST\nINCIDENT ON SEPTEMBER TEN. ABOVE INFO FURNISHED BY REID AFTER AP-\nPROVAL OF G-TWO, GOVERNORS ISLAND, NY, WITH REQUEST THAT INFO BE CO-\nORDINATED WITH AIR FORCE. REID ALSO ADVISED IN CONFIDENCE THAT ABOVE\nREPORT RECEIVED BY HIM AFTER CONSIDERABLE UNACCOUNTABLE DELAY.\nMC KEE\n\nEND AAD PLS\nNK R 7 WA AS\nDISC\nCC Md Belmont\nNOT FILED"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE THREE\nATOR BELIEVED THE TARGET MUST HAVE RISEN NEARLY VERTICALLY. TARGET\nFIXED ITS RISE IN ELEVATION AT AN ELEVATION ANGLE OF APPROX. FIFTEEN\nHUNDRED MILS, AT WHICH TIME IT PROCEEDED TO MOVE AT AN EXTREMELY RAPID\nRATE IN RANGE IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION. ONCE AGAIN THE SPEED OF THE\nTARGET EXCEEDED THE AIDED TRACKING ABILITY OF THE SCR FIVE EIGHT FOUR\nSET SO THAT MANUAL TRACKING BECAME NECESSARY. RADAR TRACKED THE TAR-\nGET MAXIMUM RANGE OF THIRTYTWO THOUSAND YARDS AT WHICH TIME TARGET\nWAS AT AN ELEVATION ANGLE THREE HUNDRED MILS. THE OPERATOR DID NOT\nATTEMPT TO JUDGE THE SPEED IN EXCESS OF THE AIDED TRACKING RATE OF SEVEN\nHUNDRED MPH. THE WEATHER WAS FAIR WHEN THE OBSERVATION WAS MADE SEPT-\nEMBER TENTH AND CLOUDY FOR THE SEPTEMBER ELEVENTH REPORT. UNQUOTE.\nABOVVE INCIDENT OBSERVED BY THREE WITNESSES WITH EXCEPTION OF FIRST\nINCIDENT ON SEPTEMBER TEN. ABOVE INFO FURNISHED BY REID AFTER APPROVAL\nOF G-TWO, GOVERNORS ISLAND, NY, WITH REQUEST THAT INFO BE COORDINATED\nWITH AIR FORCE. REID ALSO ADVISED IN CONFIDENCE THAT ABOVE REPORT\nRECEIVED BY HIM AFTER CONSIDERABLE UNACCOUNTABLE DELAY.\nMC KEE\nTELETYPE UNIT\nSEP 20 9 31 PM 1951\nDEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI (62-83894)\nFROM: SAC, CHICAGO (100-18999)\nDATE: March 21, 1952\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nKARL NYQUIST, INFORMANT\nMr. KARL NYQUIST, an artist living at 2417 North Burling Street, Chicago, Illinois (telephone LI-9-1479) advised SA MYRON H. TRETER on March 11, 1952 that he saw a flying disc at 9:00 AM on March 6, 1952.\nNYQUIST stated that he was looking out of a window at his home which window faces south, when he saw a flying disc at approximately 7,000 feet above Fullerton Avenue. The angle of elevation of the disc above the horizon was about 45 degrees. The disc came out of a cloud in the east, stopped and hung motionless in mid-air for a split second, then flew due south at great speed.\nHe described the disc as approximately six feet in diameter, circular, white in color with a bluish tinge. The disc, he said, appeared to have been constructed out of a metal similar to aluminum. He also stated that he saw no exhaust, lights, or heard no sound connected with its movements. He noted nothing on it as to how it could maintain its even flight and believed it to have been radio controlled. He said it disappeared out of sight in approximately three seconds, estimating the speed at 600-700 miles per hour or more. He said it went so fast it appeared to flutter. When the disc disappeared from sight it was about the size of a golf ball on the southern horizon.\nNYQUIST made a sketch of the disc and the sketch and the above information were furnished to the local office of the Office of Special Investigations.\nMHT:BJB\nRECORDED - 79\nINDEXED - 79\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\n57 APR 1 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Saucers\nOn 10 September 1951 as AN/MPG-1 radar set picked up a fast moving low flying target (exact alt undetermined) at approximately 1110 hours SE of Fort Monmouth at a range of about 12,000 yards. The target appeared to approximately follow the coast line changing its range only slightly but changing its azimuth rapidly. The radar set was switched to full aided azimuth tracking which normally is fast enough to track jet acft, but in this case was too slow to be resorted to. The target was lost in the NE at a range of about 14,000 yards. This target also presented an unusually strong return for an acft being comparable in strength to that usually received from a coastal ship. The operator initially identified the target as a ship and then realized that it could not be a ship after he observed its extreme speed.\nOn 10 September 1951, 1515 hours, an SCR 584, serial no. 433 tracked a target which moved about slowly in azimuth N of Fort Monmouth at a range of about 32,000 yds at the extremely unusual elevation angle of 1350 mils. (Altitude approximately 93,000 ft)\nOn 11 September 1951, 1050 hours, 2 SCR 584 serial nos. 217 and 315 picked up the same target NE of Fort Monmouth at an elevation angle of 350 to 300 mils at a range of approximately 30,000 yards. (Approximate altitude 31,000 ft) the sets track automatically in azimuth and elevation and with aided range tracking are capable of tracking targets up to a speed of 700 mph. In this case however, both sets found it impossible to track the target in range due to its speed and the operators had to resort to manual range tracking in order to hold the target. The target was tracked in this manner to the maximum tracking range of 32,000 yards. The operators judged the target to be moving at a speed several hundred miles per hour higher than the maximum aided tracking ability of the radar sets. This target provided an extremely strong echo at times even though it was at maximum range, however the echo signal occasionally fell off to a level below normal return. These changes coincided with maneuvers of the target.\nOn 11 September 1951 at about 130 a target was picked up on an SCR 584 radar set serial no. 315 that displayed unusual maneuverability. The target was approx. over Navesink NJ as indicated by its 10,000 yard range, 6000 ft altitude and due N azimuth. The target remained practically stationary on the scope and appeared to be hovering. The operators looked out of the van in an attempt to see the target since it was at such a short range, however overcase conditions prevented such observation. Returning to their positions the target was observed to be changing its elevation at an extremely rapid rate, the change in range was so small the operators believed the target must have risen nearly vertically. The target ceased its rise in elevation at an elevation angle of approx 1500 mils at which time it proceeded to move at an extremely rapid rate in range in a southerly direction once again the speed on the target exceeding the aided tracking ability of the SCR 584 so that manual tracking became necessary. The radar tracked the target to the maximum range of 32,000 yards at which time the target was at an elevation angle of 300 mils. The operators did not attempt to judge the speed in excess of the aided tracking rate of 700 mph."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nDATE: 4-3-52\n\nFROM: SAC, Memphis (62-0)\n\nSUBJECT: UNKNOWN SUBJECT; Flying Objects,\nNashville, Tennessee\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nFLYING DISCS\n\nLt. Commander MELVIN MICHAEL KUHN, U. S. Navy, temporarily residing at 1900 Graybar Lane, Nashville, Tennessee, advised SAA CHARLES J. HONETOR of the Nashville Resident Agency on March 14, 1952, at approximately 2:15 p.m. of the following incident.\n\nMr. KUHN stated that approximately 10:20 p.m. on March 13, 1952, while standing in the back yard of 1900 Graybar Lane and looking toward the moon, which was then in the southwest section of the sky, he observed an object which appeared approximately 20 degrees above the horizon. Lt. KUHN described this object as being circular in shape, approximately one-half the size of the moon, deep bright blue in color, very vivid blue. He stated the object had a slight reddish fringe on the aft end. The object appeared to be moving from the northwest to the southeast. He stated that the object was not in his vision more than three seconds. It made no sound. Lt. KUHN stated that at the time he observed this, there were no clouds in the sky, the stars were out, and the moon was full. Lt. KUHN stated that the only way he could describe it was that it appeared to be a very high powered spotlight on a cloud, but he did not believe this could have been the cause of that which he had seen because he had not seen any spotlight or any strong search lights there during the evening.\n\nThe above is being furnished for your information, and no action is contemplated by this office unless advised to the contrary.\n\nCJH:AJ"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nDATE: 4-3-52\n\nFROM: SAC, Memphis (62-0)\n\nSUBJECT: UNKNOWN SUBJECT; Flying Objects, Nashville, Tennessee INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nLt. Commander MELVIN MICHAEL KUHN, U. S. Navy, temporarily residing at 1900 Graybar Lane, Nashville, Tennessee, advised SAA CHARLES J. HONETOR of the Nashville Resident Agency on March 14, 1952, at approximately 2:15 p.m. of the following incident.\n\nMr. KUHN stated that approximately 10:20 p.m. on March 13, 1952, while standing in the back yard of 1900 Graybar Lane and looking toward the moon, which was then in the southwest section of the sky, he observed an object which appeared approximately 20 degrees above the horizon. Lt. KUHN described this object as being circular in shape, approximately one-half the size of the moon, deep bright blue in color, very vivid blue. He stated the object had a slight reddish fringe on the aft end. The object appeared to be moving from the northwest to the southeast. He stated that the object was not in his vision more than three seconds. It made no sound. Lt. KUHN stated that at the time he observed this, there were no clouds in the sky, the stars were out, and the moon was full. Lt. KUHN stated that the only way he could describe it was that it appeared to be a very high powered spotlight on a cloud, but he did not believe this could have been the cause of that which he had seen because he had not seen any spotlight or any strong search lights there during the evening.\n\nThe above is being furnished for your information, and no action is contemplated by this office unless advised to the contrary.\n\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE F B I RECEIVED Apr 7 3 52 PM 1952 MR. JONES"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : A. Branigan\n\nDATE: April 17, 1952\n\nFROM : E. H. Mossburg\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nFor record purposes, it is desired to point out that the April 7, 1952, issue of \"Life\" magazine contains an article on page 80 entitled, \"Have We Visitors From Space?\" written by H. B. Darrach, Jr., and Robert Ginna relating to the captioned matter. For further reference purposes, a copy of this issue of \"Life\" magazine is maintained in the Bureau Library.\n\nEHM:rd\n\nTolson Ladd Clegg Glavin Nichols Rosen Tracy Harbo Belmont Mohr Tele. Room Nease Gandy\n\nRECORDED - 9 62-83894-972 APR 22 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: May 7, 1952\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations The Inspector General Department of the Air Force The Pentagon Washington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FRED J. EEKHOUT\n\nOn May 5, 1952, Fred J. Eekhout called at this Bureau and advised that he is General Manager of Mouton and Company, Printers, 5 Herderstraat, The Hague, Netherlands. He resides at 49 Stadhouderslaan, The Hague. He is residing at the Victoria Hotel, New York City, until May 16, 1952, when he will return to Europe.\n\nMr. Eekhout advised that he has a considerable interest in electronics and has been very much interested in reports circulated during the past year or two concerning the existence of flying saucers. He feels that there have been enough uncontradicted reports concerning such devices to indicate that they may exist in fact. He is also of the opinion that if they do exist they can be produced only by the United States or Russia or perhaps by the Republic of Argentina.\n\nMr. Eekhout indicated that he has given extensive thought to the manner in which these devices could be operated. He has concluded that since the disk shape is not suitable for conventional aircraft it would be used only because it would provide the greatest possible lifting surface. It is his opinion, therefore, that one of these devices could be operated only by reducing the air pressure above it which would cause it to rise in the air. He concedes that conventional machinery to cause such a reduction of pressure would be so bulky that its weight would prevent the device from leaving the ground. He concludes, therefore,"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that power to accomplish this end would have to be derived from the cracking of an atomic fuel such as heavy water.\n\nIn that connection he states that the ionosphere surrounding the earth radiates positive ions toward the earth's surface. Many of these are dissipated by combining with particles in the atmosphere with the result that positive ions are more concentrated near the earth's surface than higher above it. He reasons that a disk could be raised in the air by emitting a great quantity of negative ions through its upper surface and causing a decrease in pressure which would result in the pressure underneath the disk forcing it upward. He indicates that somewhere between the surface of the earth and the ionosphere this pressure would equalize at which point the disk could go no higher. It could then be moved horizontally by emitting negative ions in the direction in which it is desired to move.\n\nMr. Eekhout stated that he did not feel such a device could be remote controlled since it would probably not be possible to maintain radio contact with it. He feels, however, that the occupants of such a device would be fully protected since according to the electrical theory demonstrated by Faraday's Cage the current involved in the propulsion of such a device would concentrate itself around the edges of the disk.\n\nThe foregoing is furnished for your information.\n\n(NOTE ON YELLOW: Eekhout was interviewed at 2:15 p.m. 5-5-52, by Supervisor V. H. Bailey by reference from Mr. Nichols' Office. Bureau files contain no data identifiable with him.)\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Box 147\nBlack Mountain, N.C.\nMay 7, 1952\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\nc/o U. S. Dept. of Justice\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nThe motive of this letter is a sincere effort to help avoid useless waste of life, time and money. It is written with full respect to your pressing work, and to the ability of this country's scientific experts.\n\nAlthough your responsibilities may not be directly connected with the intended text of this letter, I sincerely hope that you will consider the possibilities, and forward the suggestions to the proper authorities concerned.\n\nFor the past five years the general public has read, and ballyhoed newspaper articles related to the \"Flying Saucers\", and following the same trend of thought have ignored recent reports made by persons of undisputed experience and intelligence.\n\nThe possibilities of this earth being visited by ships from outer space have been lightly suggested by some, while others believe the \"objects\" belong to some nation on this earth. Granted that some such objects do even belong to this country, it is obvious that we, nor any other nation possess and fail to use, in time of war, such useful means as have been reported by the balloon experts connected with General Mills, Inc.\n\nI am sure that these suggestions will bear scientific investigation and that they are entirely probable. Similar to Columbus and the egg - they may not have been given due consideration.\n\nThese \"objects\" of undetermined origin\" (not to be confused with our controlled weather balloons, etc.) are in all probability operated by the absorption, compression, and controlled emission of the sun's energy (basically electricity). As such, they probably carry a potential charge which is past our imagination. An earthly object approaching too close to the O.U.O. would have the same effect as grounding a high-tension wire, with the total destruction of both objects as a likely result.\n\nAssuming that some of these objects are from outer space, we would certainly benefit considerably by establishing contact with them, where as, if such a nation as Russia should acquire this knowledge before us we would certainly suffer as a result"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. W. B. Burgess\nBox 147\nBlack Mountain, North Carolina\n\nDear Mr. Burgess:\n\nYour letter dated May 7, 1952, has been received and I appreciate the interest prompting you to bring your observations to my attention.\n\nSince the matter you mention may be of interest to another governmental agency, I am referring a copy of your letter to The Honorable, The Secretary of Defense, The Pentagon, Washington, D. C., and you may wish to write him directly in this connection.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncopy of incoming sent to Dep't. of Defense by form\n\nDIC:gr"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nBox 147\nBlack Mountain, N.C.\nMay 7, 1952\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\nc/o U. S. Dept. of Justice\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nThe motive of this letter is a sincere effort to help avoid useless waste of life, time and money. It is written with full respect to your pressing work, and to the ability of this country's scientific experts.\n\nAlthough your responsibilities may not be directly connected with the intended text of this letter, I sincerely hope that you will consider the possibilities, and forward the suggestions to the proper authorities concerned.\n\nFor the past five years the general public has read, and ballyhoed newspaper articles related to the \"Flying Saucers\", and following the same trend of thought have ignored recent reports made by persons of undisputed experience and intelligence.\n\nThe possibilities of this earth being visited by ships from outer space have been lightly suggested by some, while others believe the \"objects\" belong to some nation on this earth.\n\nF B I\nRECEIVED\nMR JONES\nMay 9 4 54 PM '52"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-2-\n\nWhatever means of power these objects possess, thay may attain speeds far in excess of our latest rockets. It will be futile to give pursuit, or to attempt any forceful approach.\n\nFrom reports, we have no reason to believe these objects have anything but friendly intentions, also, they may be restricted as to the distance they may approach the earth without danger. It is also my belief that given an opportunity, they will approach an earthly object, at high altitude, as close as possible without danger to either themselves or the object.\n\nIf my theory approaches the truth, then these strange objects will be unable to establish contact wth the earth without our assistance.\n\nTaking the earth at an age of two billion years, having suffered worldly catastrophies, and set-backs, we may be as children compared to a planet of four billion years, or of equal age without catastrophies.\n\nOur scientific laws have worked well for us, however, they probably do not hold true for all planets. Lacking water and trees in the beginning we would have been an entirely different world, perhaps even further advanced.\n\nMy background includes a good foundation in high-altitude flying, and in the field of electricity. Although I am well established in business, it is my desire toenter the field of research related to this subject.\n\nMy name is not for publication.\n\nVery truly yours,\nW. B. Burgess\nW. B. Burgess"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAY 12 1952\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI, SAVANNAH\nDIRECTOR, FBI\n\n5-12-52 7-58 PM URGENT WED\n\nSAVANNAH RIVER PLANT, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION, FLYING DISC. AT APPROXIMATELY TEN FORTYFIVE PM, MAY TEN LAST FOUR EMPLOYEES OF DUPONT CO., EMPLOYED ON SAVANNAH RIVER PLANT NEAR ELLENTION, S. C., SAW FOUR DISC SHAPED OBJECTS APPROACHING THE FOUR HUNDRED AREA FROM THE SOUTH, DISAPPEARING IN NORTHERNLY DIRECTION. AT APPROXIMATELY ELEVEN FIVE PM, ABOVE MENTIONED EMPLOYEES SAW TWO SIMILAR OBJECTS APPROACH FROM SOUTH AND DISAPPEAR IN NORTHERNLY DIRECTION. AT APPROXIMATELY ELEVEN TEN PM ONE SIMILAR OBJECT APPROACHED FROM THE NORTHEAST AND DISAPPEARED IN SOUTHWESTERNLY DIRECTION. ONE MORE OBJECT SIGHTED ABOUT ELEVEN FIFTEEN PM TRAVELLING FROM SOUTH TO NORTH. EMPLOYEES DESCRIBED OBJECTS AS BEING ABOUT FIFTEEN INCHES IN DIAMETER, HAVING YELLOW TO GOLD COLOR. ALL OF THESE OBJECTS WERE TRAVELLING AT HIGH RATE OF SPEED AT HIGH ALTITUTE WITHOUT ANY NOISE. EIGHTH OBJECT WHICH APPROACHED THE FOUR HUNDRED AREA FROM NE WAS TRAVELLING AT ALTITUDE SO LOW IT HAD TO RISE TO PASS OVER SOME TALL TANKS IN FOUR HUNDRED AREA. THIS OBJECT WAS ALSO FLYING AT HIGH RATE OF SPEED AND WAS NOISELESS. WITNESSES STATED OBSERVED OBJECTS WEAVING FROM LEFT TO RIGHT\n\nEND PAGE ONE"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED - HQ\nF B I RECEIVED - NISA\nS. DEPT. OF JUSTICE F.B.I.\nMay 13 10 27 AM '52\nMay 13 12 14 PM '52\nRECEIVED-LAD\nF B I\nS. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nMay 13 11 21 AM '52 May 13 10 03 AM '52\nRECEIVED-FOLSON\nF B I\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nMay 13 10 27 AM '52\nMay 28 10 42 AM '52\nRECD ESPIONAGE\nMay 13 9 01 AM '52\nRECD ESPIONAGE\nREC'D BELMONT\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nMay 13 4 48 PM '52"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\n\nBUT SEEMED TO HOLD GENERAL COURSE. ALSO STATED DUE TO SPEED AND ALTITUDE THEY WERE ONLY VISIBLE FOR FEW SECONDS. SAVANNAH OFFICE IS NOT ACTIVELY CONDUCTING INVESTIGATION IN THIS MATTER AND IS FURNISHING THIS INFO TO BUREAU FOR WHATEVER ACTION THEY DEEM ADVISABLE.\n\nSCHLENKER\nACK AND HOLD\n9-03 PM OK FBI WA SS"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nF B I\nCOMMUNICATIONS\nMAY 12 9 05 PM '52\n\nPAGE TWO\n\nBUT SEEMED TO HOLD GENERAL COURSE. ALSO STATED DUE TO SPEED AND ALTITUDE THEY WERE ONLY VISIBLE FOR FEW SECONDS. SAVANNAH OFFICE IS NOT ACTIVELY CONDUCTING INVESTIGATION IN THIS MATTER AND IS FURNISHING THIS INFO TO BUREAU FOR WHATEVER ACTION THEY DEEM ADVISABLE.\n\nSCHLENKER\nACK AND HOLD\n9-03 PM OK FBI WA SS\nREC'D BELMONT\nF.B.I.\nMay 12 10 12 PM '52"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAY 12 1952\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI, SAVANNAH 5-12-52 7-58 PM URGENT\nDIRECTOR, FBI\n\nSAVANNAH RIVER PLANT, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION, FLYING DISC. AT APPROXIMATELY TEN FORTYFIVE PM, MAY TEN LAST FOUR EMPLOYEES OF DUPONT CO., EMPLOYED ON SAVANNAH RIVER PLANT NEAR ELLENTION, S. C., SAW FOUR DISC SHAPED OBJECTS APPROACHING THE FOUR HUNDRED AREA FROM THE SOUTH, DISAPPEARING IN NORTHERNLY DIRECTION. AT APPROXIMATELY ELEVEN FIVE PM, ABOVE MENTIONED EMPLOYEES SAW TWO SIMILAR OBJECTS APPROACH FROM SOUTH AND DISAPPEAR IN NORTHERNLY DIRECTION. AT APPROXIMATELY ELEVEN TEN PM ONE SIMILAR OBJECT APPROACHED FROM THE NORTHEAST AND DISAPPEARED IN SOUTHWESTERNLY DIRECTION. ONE MORE OBJECT SIGHTED ABOUT ELEVEN FIFTEEN PM TRAVELLING FROM SOUTH TO NORTH. EMPLOYEES DESCRIBED OBJECTS AS BEING ABOUT FIFTEEN INCHES IN DIAMETER, HAVING YELLOW TO GOLD COLOR. ALL OF THESE OBJECTS WERE TRAVELLING AT HIGH RATE OF SPEED AT HIGH ALTITUTE WITHOUT ANY NOISE. EIGHTH OBJECT WHICH APPROACHED THE FOUR HUNDRED AREA FROM NE WAS TRAVELLING AT ALTITUDE SO LOW IT HAD TO RISE TO PASS OVER SOME TALL TANKS IN FOUR HUNDRED AREA. THIS OBJECT WAS ALSO FLYING AT HIGH RATE OF SPEED AND WAS NOISELESS. WITNESSES STATED OBSERVED OBJECTS WEAVING FROM LEFT TO RIGHT\n\nEND PAGE ONE"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nF B I\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nMAY 13 10 20 AM '52\nCOORDINATION-LIAISON\nF.B.I.\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nMAY 13 3 54 PM '52\nRECD ESPIONAGE\nMAY 13 12 11 PM '52\nMAY 22 11 35 AM '52\nRECD ESPIONAGE\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO BUT SEEMED TO HOLD GENERAL COURSE. ALSO STATED DUE TO SPEED AND ALTITUDE THEY WERE ONLY VISIBLE FOR FEW SECONDS. SAVANNAH OFFICE IS NOT ACTIVELY CONDUCTING INVESTIGATION IN THIS MATTER AND IS FURNISHING THIS INFO TO BUREAU FOR WHATEVER ACTION THEY DEEM ADVISABLE. 5-14-52 g2 advised [handwritten initials] 5/14/52 John White, AEC advised [handwritten, circled] 5/14/52 col Free OSI advised [handwritten initials] SCHLENKER ACK AND HOLD 9-03 PM OK FBI WA SS N.W. Philcox also advised AEC + OSI stated they are conducting no inquiry."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED FBI COMMUNICATIONS May 12 9 05 PM '52 RECORDED-BELMONT RECEIVED FBI INTERNAL SECURITY May 13 10 20 AM '52 COPPLICATION-LIAISON F B I U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE May 13 3 54 PM '52"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL Declassified 2040 9/9/77 Date: May 15, 1952 To: Director of Special Investigations The Inspector General Department of the Air Force The Pentagon Washington 25, D. C. From: John Edgar Hoover, Director Federal Bureau of Investigation Subject: FLYING DISKS REPORTEDLY SEEN IN VICINITY OF SAVANNAH RIVER PLANT ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION The Savannah Office of this Bureau has been informed that at approximately 10:45 pm, May 10, 1952, four employees of the DuPont Company employed in the Savannah River Plant near Ellenton, South Carolina, saw four disk shaped objects approaching \"the four hundred area\" from the south which disappeared in a northerly direction. At approximately 11:05 pm on the same date the above-mentioned employees saw two similar objects approach from the south and disappear in a northerly direction. At approximately 11:10 pm a similar object was seen by these employees approaching from the northeast and disappearing in a southwesterly direction. A similar object was also sighted about 11:15 pm traveling from south to north by the same employees. The disks were described by the above-mentioned employees as being approximately fifteen inches in diameter and yellow to gold in color. All of the objects were allegedly traveling at a high rate of speed and at a high altitude without any noise. The disk shaped object referred to above which approached \"the four hundred area\" from a northeasterly direction was reportedly traveling at such a low altitude it had to rise to pass over some tall tanks which are in \"the four hundred area.\" The employees referred to above advised the objects were weaving from left to right but seemed to hold a general course. According to these persons because of the speed at which the objects were traveling they were only visible for a few seconds. EHM:awy 62-83894 RECORDED 38 INDEXED 38 SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL COMM - FBI MAY 15 1952 MAILED 26"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL The above data, which was previously furnished to your office through this Bureau's liaison representative, is being furnished for your information and any action you desire to take in this matter. No investigation is being conducted by this Bureau. cc - Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2 Department of the Army The Pentagon Washington 25, D. C. Attention: Chief, Intelligence Division cc - Director of Naval Intelligence Department of the Navy The Pentagon Washington 25, D. C. cc - Captain John A. Waters Director of Security Atomic Energy Commission Room 805B 333 Third Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. BY SPECIAL MESSENGER - 2 - SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE COMMUNICATIONS SECTION MAY 26 1952 TELETYPE FBI LOUISVILLE 5-26-52 12-37 PM CDST MRP DIRECTOR, FBI DEFERRED RE FLYING SAUCERS, INFORMATION CONCERNING. THREE WOMEN SAW STRANGE OBJECTS FLOATING IN SKY OVER ASHLAND, KY. AT EIGHT FIFTY PM, EST, MAY TWENTY FIVE LAST FOR TWO OR THREE MINUTES. OBJECTS DESCRIBED AS LOOKING LIKE LARGE OYSTERS WITH FISHTAILS FLOATING LOW LIKE A CLOUD. THEY WERE OVAL IN SHAPE AND ACCORDING TO OBSERVERS COULD HAVE BEEN BALLOONS. THEY CAME IN OVER ASHLAND FROM THE NORTH, CIRCLED AND WENT BACK IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION. ABOVE INFORMATION FOR BUREAU. NO ACTION HERE. MULONE ACK AND HOLD 1-33PM OK FBI WA JT RECORDED 5 62-83894 JUN. 3 1952 EX-83 JUN 18 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nF.B.I.\nCOMMUNICATIONS\nMAY 26 1 34 PM '52\n\nFBI LOUISVILLE\nDIRECTOR, FBI\nRE FLYING SAUCERS, INFORMATION CONCERNING. THREE WOMEN SAW ASTRANGE OBJECTS FLOATING IN SKY OVER ASHLAND, KY. ABOUT FIFTY MR. EST, ONLY FIVE LAST FOR TWO OR THREE MINUTES. OBJECTS APPEARED TO BE LOOKING LIKE LARGE OYSTERS WITH SIGHTALLS FLOATING LIKE LIKE A CHOOL. THEY WERE OVAL IN SHAPE AND ACCORDING TO OBSERVERS COULD HAVE BEEN BALLOONS. THEY WERE TRAVELING FROM ASHLAND FROM THE NORTH, CIRCLED AND WENT BACK IN THE DIRECTION OF ORIGIN. MORE INFORMATION FOR BUREAU. NO ACTION NECESSARY. CONCLUDE."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\n28 MAY 1952\n\n24-185\n\nHonorable J. Edgar Hoover\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\nU. S. Department of Justice\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nATTN: Mr. N. W. Wilcox, Liaison Agent\nRE: Unidentified Aerial Object Sighted General Area Ritchie Highway, South Baltimore, Maryland, 10:45 PM, 29 Mar 52 by Donald Stewart, 2241 Warren Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland\n\nDear Sir:\n\nThere is attached for your information a copy of a report by Special Agent Boyce Royal of this office dated May 12, 1952, in regard to the captioned subject. Your attention is invited to the statement of Mr. Donald Stewart as reflected on page 4, paragraph 7, of the report, to the effect that, at the time of the alleged sighting of this object, he had in his possession a Thompson sub-machine gun. A copy of this attachment has also been furnished the Treasury Department.\n\nNo further inquiry into this matter is contemplated by the Office of Special Investigations.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGILBERT R. LEVY\nChief, Counter Intelligence Division\nDirectorate of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\n\n1 Incl\nRpt by SA Royal dtd 12 May 52\n\nRECORDED - 129\nINDEXED - 129\nEX-130\nDECLASSIFIED Authority: NND 90986\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nThe Inspector General\nOffice of Special Investigations\nREPORT OF INVESTIGATION\n\nFILE NO. 24-411\nDATE MAY 12 1952\nREPORT MADE BY BOYCE ROYAL, S/A\nREPORT MADE AT DO #4, Bolling AFB\nPERIOD 10, 11, 12 May 1952\nOFFICE OF ORIGIN Hq. OSI\nSTATUS RUC\n\nTITLE: UNKNOWN SUBJECT: Sighting of Unidentified Aerial Object, Ritchie Highway, SO. Baltimore, Maryland, 29 March 1952\n\nCHARACTER: SPECIAL INQUIRY\nREFERENCE: Telephone message CI Division Hq. OSI, 9 May 1952\n\nSYNOPSIS\nInvestigation requested by Hq. OSI predicated on information received from Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright Patterson AFB that DONALD STEWART and (FNU) TYLER had observed unconventional type aircraft on 29 March 1952 in the vicinity of Baltimore, Maryland. Information relayed to Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright Patterson AFB by ULIUS LOUIS AMOSS who received it from LOU CORBIN, a news commentator, employed by station WFBR, Baltimore, Md. CORBIN interviewed, furnished information that DONALD STEWART, 224 Warren Avenue and GEORGE TYLER III, 112 East Montgomery St., Baltimore, Md., had been interviewed by him on 24 and 27 April 1952 and had reported sighting a disc-like aircraft at approximately 2045 hours, 29 March 1952 on Ritchie Highway near the intersection of US Route 301; that automobile engine stopped and paint cracked as aircraft hovered 200 feet above car. STEWART interviewed and related substantially the same story which he had given CORBIN previously. RAY FOX, Engineer, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Baltimore, Md, interviewed, advised he had made complete examination of STEWART's vehicle at request of CORBIN; including examination with geiger counter and determined no unusual defects. AMOSS interviewed, stated had no direct knowledge of incident and had merely relayed information furnished him by CORBIN; advised that several residents, Gibson Island, Maryland had heard unusual noises but none had observed any such aircraft. TYLER interviewed and confirmed statement given by STEWART however, upon reinterview, admitted that he had not been with STEWART at the time of the alleged sighting, and had not seen any such aircraft; advised that STEWART had asked him to tell that story and that he had done so. Interviews conducted along Ritchie Highway in vicinity of location where aircraft\n\nDISTRIBUTION: Hq. OSI (action) 4; File 2\nACTION COPY FORWARDED TO\nFILE STAMP\nAPPROVED: Donald B. White, Colonel, USAF, District Commander\n\nAFHQ FORM 15 JAN 49 O-208\nSECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSYNOPSIS (Cont'd)\n\nwas allegedly sighted indicated no knowledge of any such craft. Anne Arundel County Police Department had no record of reports of described aircraft. STEWART in reinterview reaffirmed sighting and that TYLER had been with him at the time and had seen the aircraft. File checks re STEWART at local police agencies negative. FBI, Baltimore Field Office records reflect STEWART fired from employment at Baltimore, Maryland, for placing a decal bearing Communist insignia on a truck belonging to the firm by whom he was employed. FBI check re TYLER, CORBIN, AMOSS negative.\n\n1a\nSECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDETAILS:\n\n1. This investigation was initiated upon a request from Headquarters OSI on 9 May 1952 from Lt. Col. LUCIUS L. FREE, predicated upon information received from Lt. Col. RAY W. TAYLOR, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, to the effect that Col. TAYLOR had received information regarding an unidentified aircraft which was reported to have been seen at 2245 hours, 29 March 1952, on Ritchie Highway, south of Baltimore, Maryland. Air Technical Intelligence Center advised that the information had been received from ULIUS LOUIS AMOSS, a civilian.\n\n2. This is a joint investigation of Special Agents CLIFFORD P. JONES, OLIVER R. WEATHERHOLT, and the writer.\n\nAT WASHINGTON, D. C.\n\n3. On 10 May 1952 Lt. Col. LUCIUS L. FREE, Headquarters OSI, was interviewed and furnished the writer with a copy of a TWX received from the Air Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson AFB. Information contained in the TWX is summarized as follows:\n\nThe TWX represents a copy of a letter to the Commanding General, Project Blue Book, from ULIUS LOUIS AMOSS, Gibson Island, Maryland, dated 24 April 1952. The letter stated that one DONALD STEWART, residing at 2241 Warren Avenue, Baltimore 30, Maryland, had observed an unconventional type aircraft on 29 March 1952. Present with him at the time of this observation was one FNU TYLER, believed to be a seventeen year old (17) high school student. The aircraft was allegedly observed while STEWART and TYLER were driving north on Ritchie Highway, approaching Baltimore, Maryland. It was described as shaped like a large pancake and was alleged to have hovered over the automobile, killing the engine. The letter also advised that STEWART had been interviewed by a LOU CORBIN, a radio announcer of WFBR, Baltimore radio station. CORBIN was described as a reserve CIC officer. The letter also stated that a GEORGE MASON and son, JOHN MASON, alleged to reside on Yacht Club Road, Riviera Beach, Maryland, had also seen such an aircraft. A NELSON STRIEKCIRUT and wife, and a Mrs. SALLY SYMINGTON HENDERSON and Judge and Mrs. HENDERSON were all said to have heard an aerial noise on 19 April 1952 at approximately 2300 hours. The Glenn Burnie Police were said to have had many similar incidents reported but laughed them off.\n\nAT BALTIMORE, MARYLAND\n\n4. On 10 May 1952 Mr. HUBERT KEITH, U. S. Weather Bureau, International Friendship Airport, Baltimore, Maryland, advised that the weather map for 2226 hours, 29 March 1952, indicated clear sky, NNW winds - eight (8) miles per hour; at 2256 hours, 29 March 1952, partly\n\n2\nSECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cloudy, NNW winds - twelve (12) miles per hour; winds aloft at one thousand (1000) feet, NNW - sixteen (16) miles per hour.\n\n5. On 10 May 1952 Mr. LOUIS E. CORBIN was interviewed at radio station WFBR in Baltimore, Maryland, and stated in substance as follows:\n\nMr. CORBIN advised that he had received information in the latter part of April to the effect that a DONALD F. STEWART, residing at 224 Warren Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland, had, while accompanied by Mr. GEORGE S. TYLER III, observed a strange appearing aircraft on 29 March 1952. Mr. CORBIN indicated that the source of his information had been a newspaper reporter for one of the local newspapers, whose name he did not divulge. CORBIN related that he had for some time been interested in the \"flying saucer situation\", and that it had been his intention to write a documentary program for broadcast concerning that subject. He said further that inasmuch as the above incident was the first one to be brought to his attention within that area, he determined to investigate it.\n\nOn 24 April 1952 CORBIN interviewed Mr. DONALD F. STEWART and ascertained that he was employed as a clerk by the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad. He further ascertained that the date of observation was 29 March 1952; place, Ritchie Highway near the harness track; time, 10:45 PM; weather, clear; moon and stars out; approximate length of observation, two (2) minutes; estimated altitude, two hundred (200) feet. CORBIN obtained the details of the incident and set them down in a chronological order. A photostatic reproduction of the information obtained in that interview is being forwarded as an inclosure to this report. CORBIN also interviewed Mr. GEORGE S. TYLER III relative to the above incident and made a similar writing, a photostatic reproduction of which is being forwarded as an inclosure to this report.\n\nCORBIN advised the writer that he was acquainted with the editor of a civilian intelligence bulletin, Mr. ULIUS LOUIS AMOSS, to whom he communicated the above information. Mr. CORBIN further advised that he would not release any of the information publicly and did not intend to do so until such time as the authorities completed investigation of the incident. CORBIN related that when he had called the Anne Arundel County Police they had informed him that they had had numerous reports of that nature but had passed them off as harmless. CORBIN stated that he had had a friend of his, RAYMOND FOX, conduct a scientific examination of STEWART's automobile for the purpose of determining any unusual characteristics which might have been present. CORBIN advised that he was not a reserve CIC officer; however, he related that he had been an intelligence officer with the staff of General GEORGE S. PATTON in Europe and that he presently holds an inactive reserve commission as lieutenant colonel, O-375086.\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. CORBIN, during the course of the interview, made no mention of GEORGE or JOHN MASON, and when specifically questioned with regards to the two above individuals, he said that he did not recall either.\n\n6. On 10 May 1952 the records of the FBI Field Office, Baltimore, Maryland, were reviewed and reflected that DONALD FRANKLIN STEWART, 224 Warren Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland, was questioned for illegal wearing of the Navy uniform in July 1948. Records also reflect that STEWART was a member of the U. S. Naval Reserve and the investigation was discontinued as no violation. These records also reflect that STEWART was fired from the Baltimore Supply Company, Baltimore, Maryland, for placing a decal of the hammer and sickle and red star on the door of a Baltimore Supply Company truck. This act was committed on 30 July 1948. The FBI Field Office records reflect no records of ULIUS LOUIS AMOSS and no derogatory information on LOUIS E. CORBIN. No information concerning reports of unconventional aircraft sighted during the past two (2) years were on record at the FBI Field Office.\n\n7. Mr. DONALD FRANKLIN STEWART was interviewed at his residence, 224 Warren Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland, on 10 May 1952, and with reference to the incident in instant case, he related in substance as follows:\n\nSTEWART, accompanied by his friend, GEORGE TYLER, were returning to Baltimore from Glenn Burnie, Maryland, via the Ritchie Highway, on 29 March 1952. They were in a 1949 Anglia Vampire, an English car, and were proceeding in a northerly direction, having just left a Howard Johnson Restaurant adjacent to the intersection of Ritchie Highway and U. S. Highway #301. While approximately opposite a harness track five hundred (500) yards north of the above named intersection, STEWART related, he observed a strange looking aircraft appearing on the horizon ahead of his automobile. STEWART described the aircraft as being a flat disk with a cupola or dome in the center of one side. He described the dome as having what appeared to be a small porthole on one side and the shadowy outline of what appeared to be a \"hatch, similar to those found on a ship\". He stated that this craft approached his vehicle from a northeasterly direction and hovered above his automobile.\n\nHe further described the object as being of a luminous silver color and emitting bright lights around the edges similar to neon tubing of high brilliance. He stated that at the time the incident occurred he had in the rear seat of his vehicle a Thompson sub-machine gun with which weapon he left the automobile and walked around the car several times debating as to whether or not he should fire upon the aircraft. He advised that his companion, TYLER, remained in the automobile and had pleaded with him not to discharge the weapon for fear of retaliation from the aircraft. Mr. STEWART declined to comment as to the origin, present whereabouts, or owner of the above named weapon.\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION--CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSTEWART stated that when the aircraft came to rest above his automobile, it appeared to be \"at least fifty feet (50) in diameter, and wavered slightly.\" While in sight the aircraft gave off a sound similar to that of a vacuum cleaner. STEWART averred that the aircraft maintained its position above the automobile for approximately three (3) minutes and then turned on its edge, thereby presenting its flat surface to his vision, and appeared to roll across the sky at a terrific rate of speed, greater than that of a jet plane. STEWART estimated the horizon to the southwest of his vision, towards which the object was traveling, as approximately three and one-half (3 1/2) miles from his position, and that the object as it disappeared across the horizon was approximately the dimension of a five (5) inch disk held at arm's length. He advised that when the object first appeared, it appeared to be at an angle to the horizon of fifty (50) degrees, and as he was proceeding north it appeared on the northeast horizon on the crest of a hill. He also advised that during the period the object was in his vision he noticed no sign of activity within it and discerned no odor from it.\n\nSTEWART advised that during the time of the above observation of the aircraft there was only one other automobile in the immediate vicinity. He described this to be a 1948 Pontiac convertible, yellow, with 1952 Maryland license plates, the first three (3) digits of which were six-zero-zero (600). He related that the car was apparently occupied by a man and a woman and that the man had dismounted his automobile and was looking at the aircraft, but that upon being hailed by STEWART, had returned to his automobile and driven off rapidly. It was Mr. STEWART's opinion that he did so upon seeing the aforementioned Thompson sub-machine gun. Mr. STEWART informed the writer that he was not addicted to or a casual indulger of any form of alcoholic beverages and was not under such influence at the time of the sighting. He further advised that he wore glasses only for purposes of reading and that the only obstruction to his observation of the above described aircraft was the windshield of his automobile when first sighted; however, when he emerged from the automobile he was able to observe the aircraft without any trouble.\n\nSTEWART contended that the above incident had a singular effect upon his automobile in that it killed the motor and apparently magnetized its wiring. He also stated that the above incident had resulted in the paint on his car cracking.\n\nAGENT'S NOTE: An inspection of STEWART's automobile revealed that it had been recently painted.\n\nIt was ascertained from STEWART that his hobbies were the collection and handling of weapons, American History, and that his avocation was politics. He stated that he had been active in the political candidacy of a senatorial contestant of the State of Maryland and was currently leader of the political club supporting the above mentioned candidate in his ward. He advised that on the night of the\n\n5"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"above incident he had been engaged in distributing campaign literature with reference to the above campaigning in Glenn Burnie, Maryland, and was returning to Baltimore when he observed the aircraft. During the course of the above interview STEWART appeared calm and answered all questions without hesitation and when subjected to requestioning, did not change his statements in any particular.\n\nAT BALTIMORE, MARYLAND\n\n8. Mr. LOUIS GITEOS, 228 Warren Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland, was interviewed on 10 May 1952, and stated that he has known STEWART all his life and has found no fault with him. GITEOS advised that STEWART comes from a good family and he would recommend him for a position of trust. GITEOS stated that he does not believe STEWART has ever been in trouble with the police.\n\n9. Miss MARY HOOVER, 226 Warren Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland, was interviewed on 10 May 1952 and stated that STEWART \"shoots a lot of bull\", usually bragging about himself and his accomplishments. Outside of talking too much, HOOVER believes that STEWART is honest, makes a good impression, does not drink, a good worker, and loyal to the government. She would recommend STEWART for a position of trust, but stated that she did not believe he could keep a secret.\n\n10. Mrs. LOUIS GITEOS, 228 Warren Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland, was interviewed on 10 May 1952 and stated that STEWART talks too much and likes to exaggerate. Other than that, Mrs. GITEOS would recommend STEWART for a position of trust. She considers him honest, loyal, and a good boy.\n\n11. Mr. RAYMOND FOX, Project Engineer, Engineering Department, Radioactive Detection Division, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland, was interviewed at the Maryland Yacht Club on 10 May 1952, and advised that during the latter part of April 1952 he examined the automobile described in the above paragraph with a geiger counter and could detect no radioactive reaction. He also stated that he examined the engine and all working parts of the automobile and was unable to detect any unusual defects or characteristics. He stated that the automobile had been repainted and that he was inclined to disbelieve the incident as it was related to him.\n\nAT FERNDALE, MARYLAND\n\n12. On 10 May 1952 Officer J. L. GAVIN, Anne Arundel County Police Department, Ritchie Highway Sub-Station, advised that the only report relative to instant investigation that he was aware of as being received by the department was purported to have been an observation during the latter part of March by the bridge keeper, Curtis Bay Bridge, Curtis Bay, Maryland. Officer GAVIN volunteered that the proximity of that area to the Aberdeen Proving Grounds resulted in frequent noises of explosions\n\n6"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and that the police department had many calls of inquiry but that they all, with the above exception, were reports of noise and not of the sighting of any such aircraft. Officer GAVIN stated that in his opinion it was highly unlikely that an automobile could stop for a period of three (3) minutes on a Saturday night, as during the time of the alleged incident, without several other vehicles passing by. He gave as his reasons that Ritchie Highway was an arterial highway for several outlying districts of Baltimore as well as being a portion of the north-south route from Baltimore to the Potomac Bridge, and that traffic was usually frequent at all times, and especially so during that part of the evening on weekends.\n\nAT GIBSON ISLAND, MARYLAND\n\n13. ULIUS LOUIS AMOSS, Colonel, USA, Retired, residing at 8 Cotterhill Road, Gibson Island, Maryland, was interviewed on 11 May 1952 with reference to his knowledge of above alleged sighting of an unconventional aircraft. He stated in substance that his knowledge was third-hand and therefore he was not in a position to give detailed information. He advised that he was informed of the above incident by CORBIN who, in addition to the information set forth above, had told him that a GEORGE MASON and his son, JOHN MASON, purported to reside on Yacht Club Road, Riviera Beach, Maryland, also had information with reference to instant incident.\n\nAMOSS stated that the residents of Gibson Island frequently heard noises in the night, reported like that produced by a large formation of conventional aircraft. Col. AMOSS described this noise as of a magnitude and intensity similar to a major bombing group of at least one hundred (100) planes. He advised that Mr. and Mrs. NEISON STINCHCOMB (whom he previously reported as STRIEKCIRUT), and Judge and Mrs. HENDERSON, Sr., and Mrs. SALLY HENDERSON SYMINGTON had all reported loud noises of the above type on the night of Saturday, 19 April 1952, and that he had included this information in his letter to General ACKERMAN only as miscellaneous data. He related that the noises occurred nightly but were particularly intense on Thursday nights.\n\nCol. AMOSS informed the writer that he had attempted to locate GEORGE and JOHN MASON but had been unable to contact them. He stated that there was no street designated Yacht Club Road at Riviera Beach, Maryland, and that the nearest approximation of that name was Club Road. He further stated that there was only one residence on Club Road and that residence was presently occupied by a Mr. GEORGE REA, whom he was unable to contact.\n\n14. Attempts by the writer to interview individuals named in the preceding paragraph met with negative results.\n\n7"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AT GLENN BURNIE, MARYLAND\n\n15. Mr. ROBERT MEADOWS, Proprietor of a Shell Service Station, located at 1501 Ritchie Highway, approximately three hundred (300) yards north of the intersection of Ritchie Highway and U. S. Route #301, was interviewed on 11 May 1952, and advised that to the best of his recollection he had been on duty in the station on the night the above incident was said to have occurred, and that to his knowledge no such incident took place. MEADOWS related that had the aircraft traveled in the direction as alleged, he would surely have observed it; or if he had not been on duty that night, he would surely have been informed of the incident by the man who had been on duty at the time. MEADOWS informed the writer that it was highly unlikely in his opinion that any three (3) minute period could elapse without the passage of several automobiles at the time the above incident was alleged to have occurred.\n\n16. Mr. WILLIAM ROELECKE, Jr., employee of Howard Johnson Restaurant, located at the intersection of Ritchie Highway and U. S. Route #301, was interviewed on 11 May 1952 and advised that he had no knowledge of the above incident.\n\nAT CURTIS BAY, MARYLAND\n\n17. Mr. MAHLEN HOLLINS, Drawbridge Operator, Curtis Bay Bridge, was interviewed on 11 May 1952 and advised that he is the regular drawbridge operator on the Curtis Bay Bridge on the 1600 hours to 2400 hours shift. HOLLINS stated he was on duty the evening of the 29th of March 1952 and that he had not observed, nor ever observed, any unconventional aircraft. HOLLINS further advised that he did not make a report to the Anne Arundale Police Department of such an incident.\n\nAT BALTIMORE, MARYLAND\n\n18. On 11 May 1952 Mr. GEORGE S. TYLER III, aged sixteen (16), 112 E. Montgomery Street, Baltimore, Maryland, was interviewed at 1030 hours and repeated the same story as he related to CORBIN. One variance in the story was that the car engine did not stop until after STEWART and TYLER had gotten out.\n\n19. GEORGE S. TYLER, Jr., father of GEORGE S. TYLER III, was interviewed on 11 May 1952 and stated that STEWART is \"off the beam\" and \"not normal\"; at times he is smart, but \"too smart\". TYLER said his son is a little careless with the truth and he believes the story is made up. TYLER stated STEWART is a peculiar person, and he has known him for several years. TYLER thinks STEWART made it up to get his name in the papers. TYLER also stated that Ritchie Highway is very crowded and more than one person would have seen it. Mr. TYLER thinks that if his son had seen it he would have discussed it with him or some other member of the family, but he did not do so.\n\n8\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION--CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20. On 11 May 1952 LOUIS F. TYLER, uncle of TYLER III, 230 Edgeville Road, Baltimore 25, Maryland, was interviewed and stated that he does not believe his nephew's story. He stated that TYLER III can dream up fantastic stories at times. He believes it is a hoax and thinks his nephew was talked into telling the story.\n\n21. At approximately 1215 hours, 11 May 1952, GEORGE S. TYLER III was reinterviewed in the presence of his father and mother, at which time TYLER stated that STEWART had seen the \"saucer\" prior to the time of meeting him and that all the information which he had given was information that STEWART told him. TYLER advised that he did not see a thing and had reported the description of the aircraft as STEWART had told him. He stated that STEWART had told the sighting of the aircraft to him as they returned from Glenn Burnie, Maryland, to Baltimore, and asked him (TYLER) to affirm the report because he feared that no one would believe his story. TYLER advised that he called the newspapers, the Sun and the Post, to find out if anyone else had reported the incident, and was informed that several reports had been received. TYLER further stated that at first he believed the story STEWART had told him; however, he now believes that STEWART made it all up. TYLER averred that he had been in Glenn Burnie visiting friends and was waiting at a bus stop to return to Baltimore on the night of 29 March 1952, when he met STEWART who had been in Glenn Burnie posting campaign posters; that STEWART had offered to give him a ride back to Baltimore and he had accepted; that it was on the trip back to Baltimore that STEWART had related to him the sighting of the strange aircraft earlier in the evening.\n\nTYLER stated that they left Glenn Burnie at approximately 2230 hours and had driven to Baltimore without incident; that they had made no stops along the road; that he did not see any sub-machine gun in the automobile as reported by STEWART.\n\n22. STEWART was reinterviewed at approximately 1315 hours, 11 May 1952, and stated that TYLER was with him and had witnessed the incident. STEWART denied emphatically any falsehood in the story and stated that the whole thing was the absolute truth.\n\n23. On 12 May 1952 Special Agent OLIVER R. WEATHERHOLT interviewed Mr. HAROLD B. ISENNOCK at the Griebel Motor Company, Light and Henrietta streets, Baltimore, Maryland. Mr. ISENNOCK stated that work was performed on STEWART's car on 8 May; that the work performed was adjustment of brakes, installation of clutch, adjust generator, repairing or taping the wires leading from the generator, change oil, and lubrication. He stated that the car needed only routine repairs and there was no indication of any unusual repairs.\n\nMr. ISENNOCK advised that STEWART had traded at the garage regularly and that he considered him a \"screwball\". Review of the\n\n9\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION--CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"records at the garage reflected that the car had been serviced on 23 April, 8 December, 18 December 1951; and 31 January, 20 March, and 8 May 1952. The records reflected that the car had been brought in for routine check-ups and repairs. There was no indication in the records that the car had been repainted. Mr. ISENNOCK stated that the car was still the same green color; however, he could not state as to whether it had been recently repainted. He did state he knew the car had not been repainted at his garage.\n\n24. On 12 May 1952 records checks at the Baltimore City Police Department, Baltimore County Police, and Maryland State Police reflected no records of STEWART.\n\nINCLOSURES\n\nFOR HEADQUARTERS OSI\n\n1. Photostatic reproduction of information obtained from STEWART by CORBIN (with sketch).\n\n2. Photostatic reproduction of information obtained from TYLER by CORBIN.\n\nCLOSED\n\n10\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION--CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INTERVIEW 1 ----- THURSDAY ----- APRIL 24, 1952 ----- PROJECT BLUEBOOK\n\nNAME: Mr. Donald F. Stewart, ADDRESS: 224 Warren Avenue, Balto. 30, MD.\n\nTELEPHONE NUMBER: SAratoga 1423, AGE: 23\n\nEMPLOYMENT: B. and O. Railroad ---- Clerical Work\n\nDATE OF OBSERVATION: March 29, 1952 PLACE: Ritchie Highway-- Harness Track\n\nTIME OF OBSERVATION: 10:45 P.M. WEATHER: Clear --- MOON and STARS OUT\n\nAPPROXIMATE LENGTH OF OBSERVATION: TWO MINUTES\n\nESTIMATED ALTITUDE: 200 FEET\n\nDESCRIPTION OF INCIDENT:\n\nAt approximately 10:45 P.M. on Saturday, March 29, 1952, near the Harness Track on Ritchie Highway, The above in company with a Mr. George Tyler of East Montgomery Street in Baltimore, witnessed the following:\n\nA sound similar to a vacuum cleaner attracted attention. Upon investigation,while traveling north toward Baltimore, a strange object was proceeding in the sky in an approximate north-south direction. It appeared to be moving very slowly (considerably slower than a commercial airliner).\nWITNESS SKETCH ATTACHED -------\n\nThis object was estimated to be at least as large as a two motored transport plane. It hovered directly over the highway and over the automobile. After approximately two minutes, it suddenly turned perpendicular with a whirring sound and seemed to roll down the sky with fantastic speed like a rocket."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INTERVIEW # 1 --- page 2\n\nWhen the object was over the highway the car engine died suddenly and remained dead until it departed. A yellow Pontiac convertible traveling south along the highway experienced the same situation. Occupants in all cars were very frightened. The automobile, A British Ford was taken to Griebel Motors on Light St. They over-hauled the entire car. A friend, Mr. Kenny Johnson, an electrician, in a repair shop said something about wiring being magnetized. Mr. Johnson had previously been an aviation Jet mechanic during the war. Mr. Stewart is not sufficiently familiar with the technical situation to recall his exact explanation.\n\nA check with the Glenn Burnie Police on this date April 24th, indicated that several times during this year the Headquarters at Glenn Burnie Police were notified concerning a curious object in the sky. The Police have always considered the source of such objects as being Aberdeen Proving Grounds. In all events the police have not conducted a detailed investigation as a result of any such call to their headquarters.\n\n*************************************\n\nGeneral summary of an appraisal made by \"R.F.\"\n\nSeveral checks of the automobile apparently indicated a negative reaction.....safe to conclude that something was observed in the sky. A thorough examination of the witness suggests that it's unlikely he could have made up a story. His reported observations are aero-dynamically possible and fall into a logical sequence. Impossible at the moment to identify object or its origin.....SPECULATION: Possibly \"curs\"."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Light - Kept FADing -\nLight sort of A white phosphorous\nColor. -\nBright Around the outer rim-"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INTERVIEW # 2. ------ SUNDAY ---- APRIL 27, 1952 ---- \"PROJECT EYEFUL\".\nNAME: MR. George S. Tyler III, ADDRESS: 122 East Montgomery St. Balto.,\nTELEPHONE NUMBER: BLaza 2119, AGE: 17\nEMPLOYMENT : Southern Highschool ---- Third Year.\nDATE OF OBSERVATION March 29, 1952 PLACE: Ritchie Highway --- Harness Track\nTIME OF OBSERVATION : 10:45 P.M., WEATHER: Clear\nAPPROXIMATE LENGTH OF OBSERVATION : A Minute or so!\nESTIMATED ALTITUDE: Maybe a hundred feet or so\nDESCRIPTION OF INCIDENT:\n(THIS WAS A TELEPHONE INTERVIEW ---- THE YOUNG MAN WAS REQUIRED TO REMAIN AT HOME TO WATCH HIS SISTER. HE WAS UNABLE TO COME TO STUDIO AS PLANNED EARLIER.)\n\t\tAttention was first attracted while driving north along Ritchie highway toward Baltimore. In company with Mr. Donald Stewart, a friend, a slowly-moving object was observed just ahead of the automobile. It was approximately 10:45 P.M. The engine in the car seemed to die and car drifted to a stop, the driver pulling slightly off the road. The object was approximately over the car and had no forward motion. It seemed to be tilted slightly and was giving off a yellowish-greenish light which faded and then grew intense and then fade again. The outer edges of this object which seemed to be round with a thickness toward the center, seemed to have what Mr. Tyler described as St. Elmos fire. He said that he could not say for sure whether he had observed anything that looked like a port hole. He stated he wasn't sure either whether there was another car in the exact location, but there might"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-278"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"have been one a few yards south of where he was. He indicated that he was quite \"astounded\" at what he saw. He indicated that he was slightly scared for fear people would think he and his friend had made up the story just to get some publicity, but felt better when the newspapers had told them that others had reported a strange object in the sky. As a note of interest, the young man confided that since he got home rather late that Saturday evening his parents had confined him to the premises. He wasn't allowed to go out with the boys for awhile. PERSONAL OBSERVATION ---- Mr. Tyler seemed a good deal more conservative than his friend, Mr. Stewart. He is on the LaCrosse Team at Southern Highschool. He seemed (at least over the phone) to be fairly intelligent. He stated that Mr. Stewart was in his opinion a great deal more excited about it than he was.\n\t\tThere were several after-thoughts occuring to him during the conversation. Some of these are as follows: The object when it departed increased in altitude and then sped off with a dazzling speed....faster than anything he had ever seen before. He also said that its highest altitude was still considerably lower than most commercial planes he has seen over his home. As it was increasing in height just prior to leaving he thought he could detect a highly polished surface which resembled a chrome plate. As it sped away it seemed also to have a short yellowish-greenish exhaust. All the time it was hovering, he stated the object was wavering slightly.\n\t\tHe add this toward the end of his story.......I know this doesn't make sense, but I'd swear the engine on that car started up on its own. To him the car seemed to run all right the rest of the way into Baltimore. He admits the car engine starting up has him baffled. But he said definitely that it wasn't started by his friend. He added....it doesn't make sense. In closing the conversation he added again.....I'll stick to my story....we saw something and you can be sure we didn't make this up to get publicity."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : A. H. Belmont\nFROM : W. A. Branigan\nDATE: June 10, 1952\nSUBJECT: WILLIAM ALBERT RHODES\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\nFLYING DISCS\nPURPOSE\nTo recommend that Bureau Liaison contact OSI to determine whether photographs allegedly taken by the captioned individual of a flying disc in 1947 were furnished by OSI to the office of Drew Pearson.\nBACKGROUND\nBureau files reflect that on August 29, 1947, a Mr. George Fugate, Jr., called at the Phoenix Office exhibiting credentials reflecting he represented A-2, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California. He asked an Agent to accompany him to interview William Rhodes who previously reported the photographing of a flying disc in Phoenix on the afternoon of July 7, 1947.\nThe Phoenix Office contacted SAC Harry Kimball of the San Francisco Office and Mr. Kimball verified the fact that Fugate came to Phoenix as a representative of Colonel Donald Springer of Hamilton Field, and it was suggested the Phoenix Office assist Fugate not in investigating the matter, but in simply talking with Dr. Rhodes.\nBy letter dated September 4, 1947, the Phoenix Office set forth in four pages the results of this interview and stated Fugate had requested the negatives from Rhodes who did not have them in his immediate possession. Rhodes stated, however, he would deliver them to the FBI the following morning for transmittal to Fugate at Hamilton Field, California.\nOn the morning of August 30, 1947, Rhodes delivered the negatives to the Phoenix Office at which time they were accepted with the understanding they were being given to Mr. Fugate, a representative of the Army Air Force Intelligence, United States Army, and that there was little, if any, chance of his getting the negatives back. Mr. Rhodes turned the negatives over to the FBI with the full understanding they were being given to the Air Force and he would not get them back.\n(62-83894-80, page 4)\nEHM:elw\n61 JUN 27 1952\nRECORDED - 78\nINDEXED - 78\n62-83894\n5\nJUN 18 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : A. H. BELMONT\t\tDATE: June 10, 1952\nFROM : E. A. TAMM\nSUBJECT: LIAISON - FLYING DISCS\nWILLIAM ALBERT RHODES - MISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\nFLYING DISCS\n\nPURPOSE\n\nTo recommend that Bureau liaison contact OSI to determine whether negatives of photographs of flying discs obtained by the Bureau in 1947 from captioned individual were the same as those displayed by Drew Pearson on his television program of June 8, 1952.\n\nBACKGROUND\n\nBureau files reflect that on August 30, 1947, agents of the Phoenix Office, acting at the request of Colonel George Fugate, Commanding Officer of the Air Force Base, Williams Field, Arizona, obtained from Rhodes a group of negatives of photographs he had taken of objects in the sky. Rhodes stated that the photographs were taken on or about July 7, 1947 in the Phoenix area. Subsequently the negatives were forwarded to the Office of the Director of Intelligence, Headquarters, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California.\n\nThe Phoenix Office reported that Rhodes had approached Air Force Intelligence representatives and the Phoenix Office in an effort to recover the negatives. Colonel Fugate was contacted by the Phoenix Office and advised that he could not recall the matter in detail."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Blumenthal was advised that the FBI had no information concerning the reliability of Rhodes and had not investigated the matter.\n\nAction\n\nIt is recommended that liaison contact OSI to determine whether the negatives were returned to Rhodes or otherwise disposed of, and whether they are the same photographs displayed on Pearson's television program."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Blumenthal was most appreciative for receiving this information and said he would contact the office of Special Investigations of the Air Force for what assistance they might be to him. He said also he would straighten out Rhodes, informing him the FBI only as a courtesy to the Air Force representatives received the negatives from him and transmitted them.\n\nIt has been reported that Drew Pearson, on his television program of June 8, 1952, demonstrated photographs of flying discs. It is not known whether the photographs displayed by Pearson on his television program are those referred to in the captioned case.\n\nRECOMMENDATION\n\nIn order to bring our file in this matter to an up-to-date status and to resolve the question raised by the subject, it is recommended liaison contact OSI and determine whether the photographs displayed by Pearson on his television program of June 8, 1952, are the photographs obtained from the subject in this case. Inasmuch as Blumenthal indicated he would contact the OSI concerning this matter it is believed highly probable that is where the photographs of flying discs were obtained by Pearson's office.\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. A. H. BELMONT\tDATE: June 17, 1952\nFROM : V. P. KEAY\nSUBJECT: WILLIAM ALBERT RHODES\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\nFLYING DISCS\n\nReference is made to the memorandum captioned as above dated June 10, 1952, from Mr. Branigan to Mr. Belmont, which requested that OSI be contacted to determine if they turned over negatives of photographs of flying discs taken by the above-captioned individual to Mr. Fred Blumenthal who works for Drew Pearson.\n\nLieutenant Colonel Leroy Barnard and Lieutenant Colonel E. M. Neville of OSI were both contacted and both advised that no inquiries had been received by OSI from Blumenthal.\n\nThe Bureau's Air Force Liaison Representative then contacted Colonel C. M. Young of Air Force Intelligence (A-2) who likewise advised that no inquiries had been received by the Office of the Director of Intelligence from Blumenthal or anyone in Pearson's office. It is noted that matters involving flying discs are handled by A-2. Colonel Young advised that it was possible that any inquiries made by Drew Pearson's office would be made in the Office of the Public Information Officer of the Air Force. However, Colonel Young contacted the Public Information Office, and he was advised that no inquiries had been received from Drew Pearson's office regarding flying discs and no photographs or negatives of photographs of flying discs had ever been furnished to Drew Pearson's office.\n\nColonel Young advised that ordinarily when information regarding flying discs is received by Air Force representatives in the field, the information is referred to the Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, for research and correlation.\n\nACTION:\n\nNone. The foregoing is for your information.\n\nNWP:hke\n\nRECORDED - 78 INDEXED - 78\n\n62-83894\nJUN 18 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D BELMONT F.B.I. DEPT OF JUSTICE Jun 17 11 45 AM '52\n\nJUN 17 1 13 PM '52 REC'D SPIONAGE F B I DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nMemorandum\n\nSubject: Flying Discs - Information Concerning\nWilliam Albert Rhodes\n\nTo: Mr. A. H. Belmont\n\nThe above-captioned matter relates to information furnished by the Air Force regarding certain photographs taken by Rhodes and reported to the Bureau."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-181\nRECORDED\n18 JUN 25 1952\nINDEXED-101\nMossbarg"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HOLLAND TOFFEE Best on Earth\nSUNDAY GRAPHIC\nNo. 1,943. July 6, 1952 A Kemsley Newspaper 2½d.\nPlaza Stockings Always to the fore\nGREAT NEW CHURCHILL SERIES PAGE 8\nThe most amazing Flying Saucer story of them all\nBY THE MAN WHO SAW IT TAKE OFF\nEye-witness Herr Linke himself directed the artist to produce this vivid impression of the flying saucer as he saw it in the clearing; beside it stand the two members of the crew, who took off in it shortly after.\nThey saw the Flying Saucer: Oskar Linke and his 12-year-old step-daughter.\nHere is part of the signed, sealed, official deposition which Herr Linke made in Berlin, telling the whole story of his fantastic experience.\nAre 'Flying Saucers' a Russian invention? Western intelligence officers are now trying to answer this question following sensational reports by 48-year-old ex-Mayor Oskar Linke, who escaped from the Soviet zone. Linke has sworn an oath before a judge that he and his daughter saw two metal-clad figures and a '50ft saucer with a 10ft conning tower' take off from a forest clearing four miles inside the Russian zone.\nFULL STORY PAGE 2"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Sunday Graphic, July 6, 1952 20\nSharps THE WORD FOR TOFFEE\nLITTLE MO BECOMES MIGHTY MO\nCulnak Shaving Brushes\n'COPYBOY' MAKES THE BIG TENNIS NEWS OF YEAR\nBy HAROLD LAWRENCE\nComing back\nDuchess of Kent presents the men's doubles cup.\nSo excited\nWINNING SMILE from Maureen Connolly and 'Well done!' from Jordanian Louise Brough. America's Little Mo had just beaten Louise 7-5, 6-3 to win the women's singles.\nPHOSFERINE for DEPRESSION\nfor SLEEPLESSNESS\nRUPTURED but unworried!\nBROOKS APPLIANCE can do for YOU!\n2 Sunday Graphic, July 6, 1952\n50 YARDS AWAY I SAW TWO MEN TAKE OFF IN A 'FLYING SAUCER'\nFrom ANTONY TERRY, Berlin, Saturday\nMen in metal\nHole in ground\nWhich Twin has the Toni AND WHICH HAS THE EXPENSIVE PERM!\nA 'warming pan'\nFOOTNOTE FROM VICKERS CHIEF DESIGNER\nThat snowman again\nQUICK LOOK AT THE NEWS\nCAESAR (Butt)dogged does it!\nToni Home Perm"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JOHN ROBERTSON'S CRICKET ROUND-UP\nTWIN DAY FOR BEDSERS\nSunday Graphic, July 6, 1952 19\nBannister burst lets him down\nBy TERRY O'CONNOR\nFrank Lowson, Yorkshire's opening bat, went all out for a big sweep to leg here—the result... lbw b Laker.\nOxford slow march\nBy ROLAND ALLEN\nGILROY'S SPORT GOSSIP\nNazi vulgarity\nAge lengthens odds\nCRICKET SCOREBOARD\nSurrey v Yorkshire\nEssex v Middlesex\nSussex v Glamorgan\nLeicester v Hampshire\nGloucester v Worcester\nNorthants v Somerset\nWarwick v Kent\nDerbyshire v Lancashire\nOxford U. v Cambridge U.\nNotts v India\nScotland v Ireland\nSpeedway racing\nGILLINGHAM SIGN KIRMAN\nFor ACID INDIGESTION chew a couple of 'MILK OF MAGNESIA' TABLETS"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Mr. Tolson\nFROM : L. B. Nichols\nDATE: June 4, 1952\nSUBJECT: WILLIAM ALBERT RHODES INFORMATION CONCERNING FLYING DISCS\nBUREAU FILE 62-83894, Serials 80, 184, and 225\nDuring my absence at 11:50 A.M. today, Fred Blumenthal, in the office of Drew Pearson, called and talked with Mick. Blumenthal stated Pearson has been in contact with Dr. W. A. Rhodes (Phoenix telephone number 5-0048) concerning photographs which the above captioned took of flying discs in the Phoenix area in July of 1947.\nBlumenthal states that Dr. Rhodes told Pearson today that the FBI borrowed his negatives of the flying discs and when asked for their return the FBI told Rhodes the negatives were not available.\nBlumenthal asked whether there is any truth to this statement of Rhodes and what the FBI knew about him.\nIt appears that Pearson is interested in using the photographs on his television program and is desirous of borrowing them from the Bureau or having them returned to Dr. Rhodes.\nBACKGROUND:\nBureau files reflect that on August 29, 1947, a Mr. George Fugate, Jr., called at the Phoenix Office exhibiting credentials reflecting he represented A-2, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California. He asked an Agent to accompany him to interview William Rhodes who previously reported the photographing of a flying disc in Phoenix on the afternoon of July 7, 1947.\nThe Phoenix Office contacted SAC Harry Kimball of the San Francisco Office and Mr. Kimball verified the fact that Fugate came to Phoenix as a representative of Colonel Donald Springer of Hamilton Field, and it was suggested the Phoenix Office assist Fugate not in investigating the matter, but in simply talking with Dr. Rhodes.\nRECORDED 62-83894 INDEXED\nBy letter dated September 4, 1947, the Phoenix Office set forth in four pages the results of this interview and stated Fugate had requested the negatives from Rhodes who did not have them in his immediate possession. Rhodes stated, however, he would deliver them to the FBI the following morning for transmittal to Fugate at Hamilton Field, California.\ncc - Mr. Ladd\ncc - Mr. Belmont\nREW:md\nJUN 18 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Mr. Tolson\nFROM : L. B. Nichols\nSUBJECT: WILLIAM ALBERT RHODES\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nFLYING DISCS\nBUREAU FILE 62-83894, Serials 80, 184, and 225\nDATE: June 4, 1952\n\nDuring my absence at 11:50 A.M. today, Fred Blumenthal, in the office of Drew Pearson, called and talked with Nick. Blumenthal stated Pearson has been in contact with Dr. W. A. Rhodes (Phoenix telephone number 5-0048) concerning photographs which the above captioned took of flying discs in the Phoenix area in July of 1947.\n\nBlumenthal states that Dr. Rhodes told Pearson today that the FBI borrowed his negatives of the flying discs and when asked for their return the FBI told Rhodes the negatives were not available.\n\nBlumenthal asked whether there is any truth to this statement of Rhodes and what the FBI knew about him.\n\nIt appears that Pearson is interested in using the photographs on his television program and is desirous of borrowing them from the Bureau or having them returned to Dr. Rhodes.\n\nBACKGROUND:\n\nBureau files reflect that on August 29, 1947, a Mr. George Fugate, Jr., called at the Phoenix Office exhibiting credentials reflecting he represented A-2, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California. He asked an Agent to accompany him to interview William Rhodes who previously reported the photographing of a flying disc in Phoenix on the afternoon of July 7, 1947.\n\nThe Phoenix Office contacted SAC Harry Kimball of the San Francisco Office and Mr. Kimball verified the fact that Fugate came to Phoenix as a representative of Colonel Donald Springer of Hamilton Field, and it was suggested the Phoenix Office assist Fugate not in investigating the matter, but in simply talking with Dr. Rhodes.\n\nBy letter dated September 4, 1947, the Phoenix Office set forth in four pages the results of this interview and stated Fugate had requested the negatives from Rhodes who did not have them in his immediate possession. Rhodes stated, however, he would deliver them to the FBI the following morning for transmittal to Fugate at Hamilton Field, California.\n\ncc - Mr. Ladd\ncc - Mr. Belmont"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memorandum to Mr. Tolson June 4, 1952\n\nOn the morning of August 30, 1947, Rhodes delivered the negatives to the Phoenix Office at which time they were accepted with the understanding they were being given to Mr. Fugate, a representative of the Army Air Force Intelligence, United States Army, and that there was little, if any, chance of his getting the negatives back. Mr. Rhodes turned the negatives over to the FBI with the full understanding they were being given to the Air Force and he would not get them back. (62-83894-80, page 4)\n\nOn April 17, 1950, Mr. Rhodes advised the Phoenix Office that True Magazine would like to secure the photographs which he had made available to Air Force Intelligence. At that time Rhodes was referred to OSI, Fourth Air Force Base, San Francisco, California, since they had been made available to this agency by the Phoenix Office on August 30, 1947.\n\nBy letter dated June 8, 1949, the Phoenix Office advised the Bureau that on the previous date Mr. Lynn C. Aldrich, OSI representative, Phoenix, Arizona, called the Phoenix Office stating he had been requested by his superiors in San Francisco to obtain detailed information concerning the negatives since Rhodes had requested their return. Aldrich pointed out that Fugate's recollection on the matter was \"hazy.\" OSI requested and was given with Bureau approval a memorandum setting out essentially the information related above concerning this matter.\n\nACTION TAKEN:\n\nMr. Blumenthal was advised by Wick that the FBI did not have in its possession the negatives referred to by Mr. Rhodes and in fact Rhodes knew full well the FBI turned them over to Air Force Intelligence representatives, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California, on August 30, 1947, with the understanding he might never have them returned.\n\nBlumenthal was advised the FBI did not investigate this matter, did not investigate Rhodes, and had no interest whatsoever in the matter other than to accompany the representative from Hamilton Field while interviewing Rhodes. Blumenthal was told that for these reasons, of course, we had no information concerning the reliability of Rhodes.\n\nBlumenthal was most appreciative for receiving this information and said he would contact the office of Special Investigations of the Air Force for what assistance they might be to him. He said also he would straighten out Rhodes, informing him the FBI only as a courtesy to the Air Force representatives received the negatives from him and transmitted them.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memorandum to Mr. Tolson June 4, 1952\n\nOn the morning of August 30, 1947, Rhodes delivered the negatives to the Phoenix Office at which time they were accepted with the understanding they were being given to Mr. Fugate, a representative of the Army Air Force Intelligence, United States Army, and that there was little, if any, chance of his getting the negatives back. Mr. Rhodes turned the negatives over to the FBI with the full understanding they were being given to the Air Force and he would not get them back. (62-83894-80, page 4)\n\nOn April 17, 1950, Mr. Rhodes advised the Phoenix Office that True Magazine would like to secure the photographs which he had made available to Air Force Intelligence. At that time Rhodes was referred to OSI, Fourth Air Force Base, San Francisco, California, since they had been made available to this agency by the Phoenix Office on August 30, 1947.\n\nBy letter dated June 8, 1949, the Phoenix Office advised the Bureau that on the previous date Mr. Lynn C. Aldrich, OSI representative, Phoenix, Arizona, called the Phoenix Office stating he had been requested by his superiors in San Francisco to obtain detailed information concerning the negatives since Rhodes had requested their return. Aldrich pointed out that Fugate's recollection on the matter was \"hazy.\" OSI requested and was given with Bureau approval a memorandum setting out essentially the information related above concerning this matter.\n\nACTION TAKEN:\n\nMr. Blumenthal was advised by Wick that the FBI did not have in its possession the negatives referred to by Mr. Rhodes and in fact Rhodes knew full well the FBI turned them over to Air Force Intelligence representatives, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California, on August 30, 1947, with the understanding he might never have them returned.\n\nBlumenthal was advised the FBI did not investigate this matter, did not investigate Rhodes, and had no interest whatsoever in the matter other than to accompany the representative from Hamilton Field while interviewing Rhodes. Blumenthal was told that for these reasons, of course, we had no information concerning the reliability of Rhodes.\n\nBlumenthal was most appreciative for receiving this information and said he would contact the office of Special Investigations of the Air Force for what assistance they might be to him. He said also he would straighten out Rhodes, informing him the FBI only as a courtesy to the Air Force representatives received the negatives from him and transmitted them.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memorandum to Mr. Tolson June 4, 1952\n\nOn the morning of August 30, 1947, Rhodes delivered the negatives to the Phoenix Office at which time they were accepted with the understanding they were being given to Mr. Fugate, a representative of the Army Air Force Intelligence, United States Army, and that there was little, if any, chance of his getting the negatives back. Mr. Rhodes turned the negatives over to the FBI with the full understanding they were being given to the Air Force and he would not get them back. (62-83894-80, page 4)\n\nOn April 17, 1950, Mr. Rhodes advised the Phoenix Office that True Magazine would like to secure the photographs which he had made available to Air Force Intelligence. At that time Rhodes was referred to OSI, Fourth Air Force Base, San Francisco, California, since they had been made available to this agency by the Phoenix Office on August 30, 1947.\n\nBy letter dated June 8, 1949, the Phoenix Office advised the Bureau that on the previous date Mr. Lynn C. Aldrich, OSI representative, Phoenix, Arizona, called the Phoenix Office stating he had been requested by his superiors in San Francisco to obtain detailed information concerning the negatives since Rhodes had requested their return. Aldrich pointed out that Fugate's recollection on the matter was \"hazy.\" OSI requested and was given with Bureau approval a memorandum setting out essentially the information related above concerning this matter.\n\nACTION TAKEN:\n\nMr. Blumenthal was advised by Wick that the FBI did not have in its possession the negatives referred to by Mr. Rhodes and in fact Rhodes knew full well the FBI turned them over to Air Force Intelligence representatives, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California, on August 30, 1947, with the understanding he might never have them returned.\n\nBlumenthal was advised the FBI did not investigate this matter, did not investigate Rhodes, and had no interest whatsoever in the matter other than to accompany the representative from Hamilton Field while interviewing Rhodes. Blumenthal was told that for these reasons, of course, we had no information concerning the reliability of Rhodes.\n\nBlumenthal was most appreciative for receiving this information and said he would contact the office of Special Investigations of the Air Force for what assistance they might be to him. He said also he would straighten out Rhodes, informing him the FBI only as a courtesy to the Air Force representatives received the negatives from him and transmitted them.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 15, 1952\n\nMr. Thad W. Culmer II\nPost Office Box 99\nRobinson, Illinois\n62-83894-283\nDear Mr. Culmer:\n\nYour letter of July 8, 1952, has been received.\n\nWhile I would like to be of service, the subject matter of your communication does not relate to an activity within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. I have, however, taken the liberty of referring a copy of your letter to The Honorable, The Secretary of the Air Force, Department of Defense Building, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C., who may be able to be of assistance.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nCopy of incoming to Secretary of the Air Force by uniform letter.\n\nTEB:pa\n\nCOMM - FBI\nJUL 16 1952\nMALED 18\n\n53 AUG 1 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Thad W. Culmer II\nPost Office Box 99\nRobinson, Illinois\n\nDear Mr. Culmer:\n\nYour letter of July 8, 1952, has been received.\n\nWhile I would like to be of service, the subject matter of your communication does not relate to an activity within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. I have, however, taken the liberty of referring a copy of your letter to The Honorable, The Secretary of the Air Force, Department of Defense Building, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C., who may be able to be of assistance.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nCopy of incoming to Secretary of the Air Force by uniform letter.\n\nJUL 16 3 58 PM '52\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED MAIL ROOM\n\nCOMM - FBI\nJUL 16 1952\nMALED 18"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 8, 1952\n\nThad W. Culmer II\nPost Office Box 99\nRobinson, Illinois\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, District of Columbia\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nPerhaps this is a little out of your line of endeavor, however, I feel that perhaps you or your organization might be able to give me some information concerning the following matter.\n\nFrom the first time it was written up in the press I have been keenly interested in strange celestial phenomena such as the flying disks popularly called \"flying saucers.\"\n\nNow out of all the thousands of people who have reported sightings not all of them have had too much to drink, nor could they have been victims of optical illusions, retinal retention, or hallucinations. Some of the objects sighted could not have been jet craft, guided missiles, or rockets, neither could they all have been weather instruments. Unretouched and undoctored photographs have given evidence that someone must have seen something.\n\nIt seems that both civil and military authorities are most willing to proclaim what the objects are not. I feel there is more to the matter than meets the eye. My decision to write you was based on the thought I would get straight answers.\n\nDo you have any ideas or data on this subject? What are your opinions? If not, where might I write for such information? Any kindness, consideration, or information which you can extend toward me concerning this matter will certainly be most sincerely appreciated.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nThad W. Culmer II\n\nRECORDED - 91\nINDEXED - 91\nEX-164\n\n62-83894-283\nJUL 24 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MR. JONES\nJUL 10 5 38 PM '52\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED\nJUL 10 3 35 PM '52\nRECEIVED - NICHOLS\nJul 10 2 40 PM '52\nRECEIVED - LAD\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nJUL 31 11 37 AM '52\nRECEIVED - F.B.I. - NICHOLS"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM : SAC, WASHINGTON FIELD 62-0\nSUBJECT: AERIAL OBJECTS\n\"Flying Saucers\"\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDATE: July 29, 1952\n\nOn July 28, 1952, at the Weekly Intelligence Conference, Captain WILLIAM DEEGAN, Office of Special Investigations, 4th Air Force Base, Bolling Field, advised the representative of the FBI, Washington Field Office, over the prior weekend, his office had received reports concerning the observation of aerial objects. Captain DEEGAN referred to a phone call made to his office by Special Agent LEONARD E. WEBSTER of the Washington Field Office, furnishing to OSI the identity of a woman who reportedly had observed an aerial object. DEEGAN praised the WFO for the expeditious notification in this instance.\n\nCaptain DEEGAN, Colonel COLLINS, DEEGAN's superior office, and Special Agent JOHN M. deBETTENCOURT, in a conference on July 28, 1952, discussed the matter of immediate notification of OSI. This conference resulted in the request by Colonel COLLINS and Captain DEEGAN that in the event, whenever information is received by the FBI, in which it is alleged that someone has observed a \"Flying Saucer\", this information be immediately relayed to Captain DEEGAN's office. It is to be noted that this office may be reached by dialing Code 1261 and asking for Extension 509. Captain DEEGAN said this number should be called under these circumstances at any time, day or night.\n\nCaptain DEEGAN stated that the Air Force is greatly concerned about this matter of aerial objects and said that the Air Force Intelligence would appreciate the execution of the requested procedure, mentioned above. It is suggested that the Bureau bring this matter to the attention of its night supervisors, since these night supervisors also receive complaints from persons outside of the Bureau and may receive information concerning the observation of aerial objects.\n\nJMD:NPB\n\nRECORDED - 59\nJUL 31 1952\nSEP 24 1952\nSEP 15 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TO : Director, FBI\nFROM : SAC, Indianapolis (62-0)\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS SEEN NEAR THESSALON LAKE, ONTARIO, CANADA, JULY 27, 1952 MISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\nDATE: July 31, 1952\n\nDr. R. E. McINDOO, 820 West Walnut Street, Kokomo, Indiana, on July 30, 1952 advised Special Agent JOHN P. GERDIS that on July 27, 1952 at approximately 10:00 A.M. while fishing in the back waters of Thessalon Lake, Ontario, Canada, he noticed a formation of bombing planes, sixteen to twenty in number, in two groups flying south at a height estimated by him to be four or five miles.\n\nDr. McINDOO stated that the planes went over the lake, suddenly dropped objects at first thought by him to be parachutes. He continued that these objects fell straight down for a short time, then suddenly spurted vapor and at a high rate of speed flew off in a southwesterly direction.\n\nDr. McINDOO was unable to identify the nationality of the planes, but stated that they had twin trails of bluish smoke. He further stated that the objects which had been dropped from the planes had a single trail of bluish smoke.\n\nHe stated that he had been accompanied on his fishing trip by PAUL GADDIS, Kokomo, Indiana. Dr. McINDOO had no further information concerning instant planes or the objects dropped by them.\n\nDr. McINDOO was referred to the FBI by DONALD D. SMITH, President of the First National Bank of Kokomo, Indiana, who advised that Dr. McINDOO enjoyed a good reputation in Kokomo.\n\nUACB, no further action will be taken in this matter. The above is being forwarded for the information of the Bureau in the event they desire to communicate this information to the Air Force.\n\nHSK:bjk\nAIR MAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY\nRECORDED - 45 INDEXED - 45\nEX - 28"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REGISTERED AIR MAIL\n\nDate: August 11, 1952\n\nTo: Mr. Glenn H. Bethel c/o The Commissioner Royal Canadian Mounted Police Ottawa, Ontario, Canada\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover - Director Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS SEEN NEAR THESSALON LAKE, ONTARIO, CANADA, JULY 27, 1952 MISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDr. R. E. McIndoo, 820 West Walnut Street, Kokomo, Indiana, on July 30, 1952, advised that on July 27, 1952, at approximately 10:00 A.M. while fishing in the back waters of Thessalon Lake, Ontario, Canada, he noticed a formation of bombing planes, sixteen to twenty in number, in two groups flying south at a height estimated by him to be four or five miles.\n\nDr. McIndoo stated that the planes went over the lake and suddenly dropped objects, at first thought by him to be parachutes. He continued that these objects fell straight for a short time, then suddenly spurted vapor and at a high rate of speed flew off in a southwesterly direction.\n\nDr. McIndoo was unable to identify the nationality of the planes, but stated that they had twin trails of bluish smoke. He further stated that the objects which had been dropped from the planes had single trails of bluish smoke.\n\nEAB:mes\ncc - Foreign Service Desk\nRECORDED-30\nMAILED 30"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"He stated that he had been accompanied on his fishing trip by Paul Gaddis, Kokomo, Indiana. Dr. McIndoo had no further information concerning instant planes or the objects dropped by them.\n\nThe above is furnished for your information. No further inquiries are contemplated.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : MR. A. H. BELMONT\nDATE: July 29, 1952\nFROM : V. P. KEAY\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\nPURPOSE:\nTo advise at the present time the Air Force has failed to arrive at any satisfactory conclusion in its research regarding numerous reports of flying saucers and flying discs sighted throughout the United States.\nDETAILS:\nMr. N. W. Philcox, the Bureau's Air Force Liaison Representative, made arrangements through the office of Major General John A. Samford, Director of Air Intelligence, U.S. Air Force, to receive a briefing from Commander Randall Boyd of the Current Intelligence Branch, Estimates Division, Air Intelligence, regarding the present status of Air Intelligence research into the numerous reports regarding flying saucers and flying discs.\nCommander Boyd advised that Air Intelligence has set up at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, the Air Technical Intelligence Center which has been established for the purpose of coordinating, correlating and making research into all reports regarding flying saucers and flying discs. He advised that Air Force research has indicated that the sightings of flying saucers goes back several centuries and that the number of sightings reported varies with the amount of publicity. He advised that immediately if publicity appears in newspapers, the number of sightings reported increases considerably and that citizens immediately call in reporting sightings which occurred several months previously. Commander Boyd stated that these reported sightings of flying saucers are placed into three classifications by Air Intelligence:\n(1) Those sightings which are reported by citizens who claim they have seen flying saucers from the ground. These sightings vary in description, color and speeds. Very little credence is given to these sightings inasmuch as in most instances they are believed to be imaginative or some explainable object which actually crossed through the sky.\n(2) Sightings reported by commercial or military pilots. These sightings are considered more credible\nRECORDED-136\n62-83894-286\nAUG 4 1952\nNWP:hke\n66 AUG 8 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: MR. A. H. BELMONT\nDATE: July 29, 1952\n\nFROM: F. M. KEASY\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nPURPOSE:\n\nTo advise at the present time the Air Force has failed to arrive at any satisfactory conclusion in its research regarding numerous reports of flying saucers and flying discs sighted throughout the United States.\n\nDETAILS:\n\nMr. W. S. Philcox, the Bureau's Air Force Liaison Representative, made arrangements through the office of Major General John A. Samford, Director of Air Intelligence, U.S. Air Force, to receive a briefing from Commander Randall Boyd of the current Intelligence Branch, estimates division, Air Intelligence, regarding the present status of Air Intelligence research into the numerous reports regarding flying saucers and flying discs.\n\nCommander Boyd advised that Air Intelligence has set up at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, the Air Technical Intelligence Center which has been established for the purpose of coordinating, correlating and thoroughly research into all reports regarding flying saucers and flying discs. He advised that Air Force research has indicated that the sightings of flying saucers goes best studied centuries and that the number of sightings reported varies with the amount of publicity. He advised that immediately after publicity appears in newspapers, the number of sightings reported increases considerably and that citizens immediately call in reporting sightings which occurred several months previously. Commander Boyd stated that these reported sightings of flying saucers come under three classifications by Air Intelligence:\n\n(1) Those sightings which are reported by citizens who claim they have seen flying saucers from the ground. These reports vary in description, color and speed. Very little credence is given to these sightings as in most instances they are believed to be a legitimate or some explainable object which actually was seen by the citizen.\n\n(2) Sightings made by commercial and military pilots. These sightings are considered more credible.\n\nRECEIVED-NICHOLS\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nF.B.I.\nJUL 31 12 53 PM '52"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"by the Air Force inasmuch as commercial or military\npilots are experienced in the air and are not\nexpected to see objects which are entirely imaginative.\nIn each of these instances, the individual who reports\nthe sighting is thoroughly interviewed by a representative\nof Air Intelligence so that a complete description of\nthe object sighted can be obtained.\n\n(3) Those sightings which are reported by pilots and\nfor which there is additional corroboration, such as\nrecording by radar or sighting from the ground.\nCommander Boyd advised that this latter classification\nconstitutes two or three per cent of the total number\nof sightings, but that they are the most credible\nreports received and are difficult to explain. Some\nof these sightings are originally reported from the\nground, then are observed by pilots in the air and then\nare picked up by radar instruments. He stated that in\nthese instances there is no doubt that these individuals\nreporting the sightings actually did see something in\nthe sky. However, he explained that these objects could\nstill be natural phenomena and still could be recorded\non radar if there was some electrical disturbance in the\nsky.\n\nHe stated that the flying saucers are most frequently\nobserved in areas where there is heavy air traffic, such as\nWashington, D.C., and New York City. He advised, however, that\nsome reports are received from other parts of the country\ncovering the entire United States and that sightings have also\nrecently been reported as far distant as Acapulco, Mexico;\nKorea and French Morocco. He advised that the sightings\nreported in the last classification have never been satisfactorily\nexplained. He pointed out, however, that it is still possible\nthat these objects may be a natural phenomenon or some type\nof atmospherical disturbance. He advised that it is not\nentirely impossible that the objects sighted may possibly be\nships from another planet such as Mars. He advised that at\nthe present time there is nothing to substantiate this theory\nbut the possibility is not being overlooked. He stated that\nAir Intelligence is fairly certain that these objects are not\nships or missiles from another nation in this world. Commander\nBoyd advised that intense research is being carried on presently\nby Air Intelligence, and at the present time when credible\nreportings of sightings are received, the Air Force is attempting\nin each instance to send up jet interceptor planes in order to\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"obtain a better view of these objects. However, recent attempts\nin this regard have indicated that when the pilot in the jet\napproaches the object it invariably fades from view.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\nNone. The foregoing is for your information.\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"62-83894\nRECORDED - 122\n62-83894-287\nEX-129\nCONFIDENTIAL\nRECEIVED\nDate: August 8, 1952\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover - Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nSubject: AERIAL OBJECTS;\n\"FLYING SAUCERS\"\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\nThere are attached two copies of a letter dated\nAugust 1, 1952, from Florence Whitish, Post Office Box 526,\nCharleston, South Carolina, regarding \"Flying Saucers.\"\nMiss Whitish's communication has been acknowledged\nand she has been informed of this referral.\nNo investigation is contemplated with regard to this\nmatter.\nAttachment\nKWD:mes\nAPPROPRIATE AGENCIES\nAND FIELD OFFICES\nADVISED BY ROUTING\nSLIP(S) OF 2040\nDATE 9/1/77\nTolson\nLadd\nNichols\nBelmont\nClegg\nGlavin\nHarbo\nRosen\nTracy\nLaughlin\nMohr\nTele. Rm.\nHolloman\nCandy\nAUG 14 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nDate: August 12, 1952\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington, D.C.\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS\n[illegible]\nNote On Yellow Only:\nPrevious material concerning flying saucers furnished OSI. (62-83894)\nTOC:jdt"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"F.I.S.-8\nP.O. Box 5-29\nCharleston,\nS.C.\nJ. Edgar Hoover:\nWould like to express my opinion on the flying saucers, and guess it will be as good as some this mad. FLYING SAUCERS\nI can't remember of hearing anything about them until television come into existence\nI wondered if the rays could be strong enough to give off a bright object looking apparition\nNo, special reason for sending you my idea just could n't think of any one else to send it to.\nSincerely\nFlorence Whitish\nFLORENCE WHITISH"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: August 12, 1952\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington, D.C.\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS\nAttached are two copies of a letter from Mrs. Ora A. Tygrett dated July 31, 1952, addressed to the War Department, c/o Federal Bureau of Investigation, the contents of which are self-explanatory.\nMrs. Tygrett's letter has been acknowledged and she has been advised of this referral.\nEnclosure\nNote On Yellow Only:\nPrevious material concerning flying saucers furnished OSI. (62-83894)\nTOC:jdt"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: August 12, 1952\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington, D.C.\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nSubject: Flying Saucers\nAttached are two copies of a letter from Mrs. Ora A. Tygrett dated July 31, 1952, addressed to the War Department, c/o Federal Bureau of Investigation.\nMrs. Tygrett's letter has been acknowledged and she has been advised of this referral.\nEnclosure\nNote On Yellow Only:\nPrevious material concerning flying saucers furnished OSI. (62-83894)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"R#1,\nNew Palertine Indiana\nJuly 31/52\nTo Federal Beaure of Investigation\nThe war Dept\nWashington D.C.\nGentlemen: \"FLYING SAUCERS\"\nSince reading & hearing\nover Radio about the\n\"flying saucers\",\nI am compelled to Write\nto You-\nI am a strong believer in\nour almighty God & Christ\nour Lord & Savior, I have\nhad that there Saucers are\nfilms from a secret Camera\noperated by something like\nT.V. I do believe"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nAUG 7 1 22 PM '52\nINTERNAL SECURITY SN\nFBI\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nAUG 14 9 23 AM '52\nSEC'D ESPIONAGE\nC B I\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\nThey are operating through\nthe Communist Party\nright here in the, or\nOur United States, by radar.\nEvery Group of saucers has\na picture, the best pictures\nare kept for bombing\npurposes.\nWhy we see them just\nonce & a while.\nThey dont want the\nU.S. to catch on.\nIn my opinion they have\na way of causing them\nto be invisible."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3\nThey can lower them or\nsend them high; when\nhigh they are invisible.\nIt could be from an enemie\nplaine, or from a tall\nbuilding in the United States.\nIt could be the Camera is\nCarried in to cities and\noperated from tall buildings\nthe ones that some one\nseen with a tail of fire\nis the picture that is\nKept.\nSo lets be on the look out\nfor the next one and\nfollow their paths.\nPlease keep my Name\nconfidently.\nMrs. Ila A. Tyquett.\n(over)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PS.\nWhen they were over Washington\nD.C. it could a been from\nthe Tallest building there.\nYou might start from\nthe first place they were\never seen. trace back\nyou might find the\nsecret place.\nAnd pray with out ceasing\n\"And have faith.\"\nOur good Book says do not\nlet our secrets be known,\nwhen praying & trusting\nin God pray secretly\ninto him.\nRECEIVED\nAUG 7 1 22 PM '52\nINTERNAL SECURITY SN\nFBI\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE COPY\n\nR #.1,\nNew Palestine Indiana\nJuly 31,/52\n\nc/o Federal Beaura of Investigation\nThe War Dept\nWashington D.C.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nSince reading & hearing over Radio about the \"flying\nsaucers,\" I am compelled to Write to you -\n\nI am a strong believer in our almight God & Christ our Lord.\nI have the faith Daniel had.\n\nI feal that these Saucers are films from a secret Camera operated\nby something like T.V. I do believe, They are operating through\nthe Comuniest Party right here in the, or our Unitid States, by\nradar Evey Group of Saucers has a picture, the best picture\nare kept for bombing purposes.\n\nWhy\"we see them just once & a while; They dont want the U.S. to\ncatch on. To my opinion they have a way of causing them to be\ninvisible.\n\nThey can Lower them or send them high; When high they are\ninvisible; It could be from an enemie plaine, or from a tall\nbuilding in the United States. It could be the Camera is\ncarried, in to cities and operated from tall buildings the\nones that some one seen with a tail of fire is the picture that\nis Kept;\n\nSo lets be on the look out for the next one and follow their path.\nPlease Keep my Name confidently.\n/s/ Mrs. Ora A. Tygrett\n\nP.S.\nWhen they were over Washington D.C. it could a been from the\nTallest building there. You might Start from the first place they\nwere ever seen - trace back you might find the secret place.\n\nAnd pray with out sceasing \"And have faith\" Our good Bood - says\ndo not let our seerets be known, when praying & trusting in God\npray secretly into him."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : A. H. Belmont\n\nFROM : J. R. Higgins\n\nDATE: July 31, 1952\n\nSUBJECT: UNUSUAL FLASHES DURING\nELECTRICAL STORM, JERSEY SHORE, PA.,\nJULY 28, 1952\nHARRY H. WINCHESTER, COMPLAINANT\n\n\"Flying Saucers\"\n\nAt 2:15 AM on July 31, 1952, Harry H.\nWinchester, 315 Cemetery Street, Jersey Shore, Pa.,\ntelephonically advised that in the early morning of\n7-28-52, during a severe electrical storm in the area\nof his residence, he had observed seven unusual flashes in the\nsky, each flash being accompanied by a loud report.\n\nComplainant, who appeared to be under the influence\nof intoxicants, called as a result of recent newspaper stories\nregarding phenomena allegedly observed during past week in\nthis country.\n\nBureau indices contain no information identifiable\nwith the complainant.\n\nAction:\n\nFile.\n\nJRH:dmd\n\nRECORDED - 34\nEX - 6\nINDEXED - 34\n\n62-83894 - 289\nJUL 31 1952\n\n65 AUG 7 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 13, 1952\n\nRECORDED - 36\n\n62-83894 - 270\n\nEX-25\n\nMr. Benedicto Romero\n1647 Park Avenue\nNew York City\n\nDear Mr. Romero:\n\nI have received your letter of\nJuly 31, 1952. The matter referred to in your\nletter is not within the jurisdiction of this\nBureau and I have taken the liberty of forwarding\na copy of your letter to the Department of the\nAir Force for appropriate action.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nEHM:kc\ncc - 1 - New York (Attachment)\n\nNOTE:\nBureau files fail to reflect any information\nthat can be identified with Mr. Romero."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SERVICE UNIT\nSEARCH SLIP\n4-22a\nSupervisor Room 3708\nSubj: Benedicto Romero\nExact Spelling\nAll References\nSubversive Ref.\nMain File\nRestricted to Locality of\nSearchers\nInitial\nDate 8/12\nFILE NUMBER SERIALS\nNR\nInitialed"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Alto Dole Ald"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4\nabout some others things\nI talk in the same letter.\nJa !!! Ja !!! Ja !!!\nI have to laugh because\nI know that the peace comes\nvery soon after I explain\nthis mystery to my lovely\ngovernment of the United\nStates of America.\nNobody can explain the\nmystery of the \"Flying Plates\"\nin a sincerly truth before\nme. Just make a try with\nthe scientific people, and\nafter call for me.\nSincerly with all my\nlove Benedicto Romero\n47 Park Ave N.Y.\nCity\n\nRECEIVED\nAUG 11 1952\n\nFlying Saucers\nNew York City\nJuly 31/52-\nDepartment of Investigations\nWashington D.C.\n\nBenedicto Romero\nB\n\nDear sirs:\nAm sorry hearing\nand reading too much\nnoise about the mistery\nof the \"Flying Plates\"\nRECORDED - 94 162-83894-290\nINDEXED - 94 AUG 5 1952\nBut the newspapers\nsaid about your\nEX-31"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3.\nand may excuse me again\nbecause I laugh of this.\nMistery that put in\ntroubles my government.\nJust I was waiting for\nthis to write to you again.\nNow you are in the line\nbecause you don't know\nwhat happen.\nThe letter that you\n\"refused\" from Washington\nto me; was sended again\nto the Organization of\nthe United Nations\nat the New York State.\nSo if you like to know\nabout the \"flying plates\"\nlook for that letter that\nshould be there. And also\n\n2.\ngovernment of U.S. is going\nto catch a picture of the\nMisteriously\n\"Flying Plates\"\nby the sadal detectors.\nI say impossible !!!! ???\nJa !!! Ja !!! You please\nand excuse me, for my\nlaughing.\nIf you would hearme\nwhen I wrote to you about\nsixth months before. Now\nyou would not be in\ntroubles with what\nhapens in the atmosphere\nJa !!! Ja !!! Ja !!!\nI say if your please"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED-29\n62-83894-291\nMrs. Fred Haufe\n606 Walnut Avenue\nFairmont, West Virginia\nEX-25\nDear Mrs. Haufe:\nI have received your letter of August 1, 1952, and want to thank you for making the information contained therein available to this Bureau.\nThe matter referred to in your letter is not within the jurisdiction of this Bureau and I have taken the liberty of forwarding a copy of your letter to the Department of the Air Force for appropriate action.\nSincerely yours,\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nEHM:kc\ncc - 1 - Pittsburgh (Attachment)\nNOTE:\nBureau files fail to reflect any information that can be identified with Mrs. Haufe.\n\nAUG 20 1952\nCOMM-FBI\nAUG 11 1952\nMAILED 19"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"606 WALNUT AVENUE\nFAIRMONT, W. VA.\nPHONE 3765\n\nAugust 1,1952\n\nHon.J.Edgar Hoover\nDept.F.B.I.\nWashington,D.C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI have been hearing so much about the objects called Flying Saucers that I begin to speculate as to whether we are the only Nation or county to witness such a display.\n\nOf course it could be that those odd objects are pest filled Radar controlled waiting to be punctured.We have been so accused by another Nation that no doubt they have devised some diabolical plan to test on us.\n\nI am not inclined to pass those over lightly,because I believe that those gadgets can be made and controlled to the extent of great numbers in groupings.\n\nAlso,I believe it is very unwise to make public the locations of sightings as many folk are prone to worry,and a state of mind like this is exactly what our enemy is seeking.\n\nAny one wise enuf to perfect such would not only know their travel distance but also their location,therefore no talk or publications could benefit us in that.\nI hope that someone has had the integrity and foresight to learn where if in any other country these 'things' have been seen.\n\nThanking you in advance for the courtesy of a reply,I remain\n\nRespectfully yours,\nMrs. Fred Hauge"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, Cincinnati (100-0)\n\nSUBJECT: ANONYMOUS COMMUNICATION WRITTEN IN GERMAN LANGUAGE RECEIVED BY \"CINCINNATI ENQUIRER\" PERTAINING TO \"FLYING SAUCERS\" SECURITY MATTER - X\n\nDATE: August 6, 1952\n\nMr. K. DORIS of the staff of the \"Cincinnati Enquirer\" furnished the Cincinnati Office with the enclosed letter and envelope received anonymously at the \"Cincinnati Enquirer\" in an envelope postmarked 7-3-52 at Cincinnati, Ohio.\n\nIt will be noted that the enclosed letter is written in the German language, and I am also enclosing a rather loose translation of the letter as furnished by the \"Cincinnati Enquirer.\"\n\nIn view of the widespread interest in so-called \"flying saucers,\" I am forwarding this material to the Bureau, with the thought in mind that the Bureau may desire to have a careful translation made of the attached letter, and the results, if deemed advisable, made available to other Governmental agencies.\n\nEnclosures (3)\n\nEWY:LM\n\nENCLO. ATTACHED\n\nRECORDED - 78\n62-83894\nAUG 1952\n\nFBI\n\nAll INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":225,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\n\nRECORDED-29\n62-83894-292\n\nEX-129\n\nDate: August 13, 1952\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: ANONYMOUS COMMUNICATION WRITTEN IN THE GERMAN LANGUAGE, RECEIVED BY THE \"CINCINNATI ENQUIRER\" PERTAINING TO \"FLYING SAUCERS\" SECURITY MATTER - X\n\nThere is attached for your information and any action you desire to take in this matter a Photostat of a letter, written in German, received from an anonymous source, which was addressed to the \"Cincinnati Enquirer.\" A Photostat of the envelope, in which the letter was forwarded, is attached and indicates it was mailed on July 31, 1952, at Cincinnati, Ohio.\n\nFor your further assistance in this matter a translation of the attached letter from the German is attached.\n\nAttachment\n\nEHM:kc\n\nDECLASSIFIED BY 1259\nON 10-28-74\n\nMAILED 4\nAUG 14 1952\nCOMM FBI\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\n\n58 AUG 29 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":226,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE\n62-83894-292"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":227,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Fliegende Untertasse.\nSeit 1944 ausprobierte Waffe welche jetzt wohl schon serienmäßig hergestellt wird und in Zeit viel von sich reden macht ist eine V. Waffe, welche einen Diskus ähnlichen Körper hat, der im Durchmesser etwa 48-50 m Durchmesser hat, und am Aussenring etwa 45-50 automatische Heizdüsen, die nach Zündung der Scheibe, um eine im Zentrum befindliche plexiglaskugel kreisen, in der befinden sich die Steuer und Kontrollgeräte für Fernsteuerung befinden. Inseit der Kugel ist noch genug Raum für hochexplosive Atombomben. Diese Waffen befinden sich in Fernsteuerung und kann einen Aktionsradius von 30-35000 km erreichen. V. Waffen Konstrus Riedel Deutschland sagt es ist eine typische V-7 daran er selbst gearbeitet hat.\nIch bin überzeugt, dass die Wahrheit besser ist als eine Täuschung dem Volk bei Nichtwissenheit.\nH. Sch."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":228,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Fliegende Untertasse.\nSeit 1944 ausprobierte Waffe welche jetzt wohl schon serienmäßig hergestellt wird und in Zeit viel von sich reden macht ist eine V. Waffe, welche einen Diskus ähnlichen Körper hat, der im Durchmesser etwa 48-50 m Durchmesser hat, und am Aussenring etwa 45-50 automatische Heizdüsen, die nach Zündung der Scheibe, um eine im Zentrum befindliche plexiglaskugel kreisen, in der befinden sich die Steuer und Kontrollgeräte für Fernsteuerung befinden. Inseit der Kugel ist noch genug Raum für hochexplosive Atombomben. Diese Waffen befinden sich in Fernsteuerung und kann einen Aktionsradius von 30-35000 km erreichen. V. Waffen Konstrus Riedel Deutschland sagt es ist eine typische V-7 daran er selbst gearbeitet hat.\nIch bin überzeugt, dass die Wahrheit besser ist als eine Täuschung dem Volk bei Nichtwissenheit.\nH. Sch."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":229,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Fliegende Untertasse.\nSeit 1944 ausprobierte Waffe welche jetzt wohl schon serienmäßig hergestellt wird und in Zeit viel von sich reden macht ist eine V. Waffe, welche einen Diskus ähnlichen Körper hat, der im Durchmesser etwa 48-50 m Durchmesser hat, und am Aussenring etwa 45-50 automatische Heizdüsen, die nach Zündung der Scheibe, um eine im Zentrum befindliche plexiglaskugel kreisen, in der befinden sich die Steuer und Kontrollgeräte für Fernsteuerung befinden. Inseit der Kugel ist noch genug Raum für hochexplosive Atombomben. Diese Waffen befinden sich in Fernsteuerung und kann einen Aktionsradius von 30-35000 km erreichen. V. Waffen Konstrus Riedel Deutschland sagt es ist eine typische V-7 daran er selbst gearbeitet hat.\nIch bin überzeugt, dass die Wahrheit besser ist als eine Täuschung dem Volk bei Nichtwissenheit.\nH. Sch."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":230,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCERS\n\nSince 1944 there have been experimental weapons which should now be in production. The one about which there has been so much discussion is a V-Weapon which has a disc-like round body, about 48.50 metres in diameter and has by way of emission 45 to 50 automatic ? ------------ (word not legible). With the setting off of the disc these rotate around a sensitive plexi-glass sphere in the center in which are located the ---------- (word not legible) and guiding apparatus for distance flights. Inside the sphere there is also enough space for high explosive atom bombs. These weapons -------- ------ ------ ----- (not legible) and show an effective range of from 30 to 35,000 kilometres. V-Weapon Konstrus (Technician?) Riedel (or Riedet),Germany, says it is a typical V-Weapon on which he himself worked.\n\nI am positive that the truth is better than keeping the people in ignorance.\n\nH. Sch.\n\nThis letter is written apparently by a not highly literate person with undeveloped handwriting. It is my opinion that he is not making up what"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":231,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2.\n\nhe has written. If I were handling this, I should turn his letter over\nto the FBI or some other investigating agency to see if he knows anything\nmore.\n\nF.Y.\n\nAugust 4, 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":232,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE\nCINCINNATI\nENQUIRER"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":233,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":234,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE\nCINCINNATI\nENQUIRER"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":235,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE\nCINCINNATI\nENQUIRER"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":236,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"662-HQ-853-69"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":237,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Winding Gulf\nW Va. Aug 5 1952\nMr Edgar Hoover\na few lines to\nlet you know a few H\nthings that the Govern\nment should Know\nfor all of US sakes ps\nstop the peopifrom\nBroad casting how\nfar those flying\nsaucers are going and\nWhne they are seeing\nthem at the\nreason Russia is\ninventing some thing\n\nno 6 AUG 13 1952\nno incomplete\naddress\n8/7"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":238,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that is coming our\nhere by Raido activity\nand later they will\nbe sending the atomic\nBomb ourselves so try\nto stop them are now\ngetting the distance\nand they send out one\nand then our people\ntells where they se\nat and that is all\nthey want to know\nlater on they will send\nSuicide planes without\nair pilots here to bomb.\nmergie M. Taylor\nMERGIE M. TAYLOR"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":239,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 13, 1952\n\nMr. W. H. Jennings\n3096 Hazelmary\nZone 17\nPontiac, Michigan\n62-83894-294\nDear Mr. Jennings:\n\nI have received your letter of August 5,\n1952, and want to thank you for making the information\ncontained therein available to this Bureau.\n\nThe matter referred to in your letter is\nnot within the jurisdiction of this Bureau and I\nhave taken the liberty of forwarding a copy of your\nletter to the Department of the Air Force for\nappropriate action.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncc - 1 - Detroit\n\nNote for Detroit:\n\nMr. Jennings advised the Bureau, in his letter,\nof his theory regarding flying saucers. It was\nMr. Jennings' opinion flying saucers are manufactured\nby General Electric or General Motors Research Laboratories,\nconsist of aluminum tanks filled with helium gas under\npressure, and work on magnetic principles.\n\nEHM:kc"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":240,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":241,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pontiac, Mich\nAug 5' 52\nFlying Discs\nF.B.I. Wash. D.C.\nGentlemen - Dear Sirs.\nI have a theory on the so called\nflying saucers.\nI don't know where to write to express\nmy opinion.\nBut yours is the best office in the land\nwhen it comes to investigations.\nIf and when I get ready to commit a crime\nI will attempt to get caught but so be it.\nIf the flying saucers are real then\nin my opinion they are not from this\nplanet. I would be willing to say\nthey are the Brain child of General\n(over)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":242,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Electric or General Motors Research\nLaboratories.\nI am not an electrician although I know\nabout Elect. is to grab a hold of one\nwire at a time on alternating current\nand let it shirt current strictly alone.\nIts my opinion that these discs\nor what have you are aluminum\ntanks filled with Helium gas under\na lot of pressure. and permanent magnets\n(power pallone) built on the sides\nwith the north polls out side.\nwhen another metal object approaches\nthem. they are repulsed at the same\nspeed as the approaching object."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":243,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"when you look at it from that slant\nyou can see they can never be caught\nno matter how fast the persuing plane\ngoes they retreat at the same speed.\nOne good way to check that would\nbe to have the plane to approach\nat the angles\nThe retreating\nobject could not cross in front\nof any of the planes it would\nhave to go straight ahead.\nyou try and get the north pole of a\nmagnet and south pole to connect and\nyou will see what I mean.\n(over)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":244,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I've seen a steel bar hang in space\nat auto shows. it was merely two\npoles pushing against each other instead\nof pulling together.\nOr Rush your watch or a piece\nof steel through a demagnetizer\nand you will see what I mean.\nIf a plane were equipped with\na magnet of about two or 3 Gs\nand the north pole pointed at the\nnose of the plane or stuck out ahead\nof the propelly a foot or two I think\nthose saucers would be caught.\nRespectfully yours\nW.H. Jennings\n3096 Hazelmary Pontiac Mich\nJan 17"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":245,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SERVICE UNIT\nSEARCH SLIP\n4-22a\nSupervisor mossbug Room 3708\nSubj: W.H. Jennings\nExact Spelling\nAll References\nSubversive Ref.\nMain File\nRestricted to Locality of Michigan\nSearchers Initial\nDate 8-11\nFILE NUMBER SERIALS\n29-5180\nWilliam H. Jennings\n62-16-321\nWilliam Harry Jennings\n138-36400\nInitialed"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":246,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nDATE: 8/7/52\n\nFROM : SAC, Philadelphia\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nAt the weekly liaison conference held in the Philadelphia Office on August 5, 1952, Major H. B. ELIRIDGE advised that OSI is no longer interested in receiving reports concerning flying saucers.\n\nThe above is submitted for the Bureau's information.\n\nJLK:ERG\n\nRECORDED - 76\n\nLetter to SAC, Philadelphia 8/13/52 NWP\n\nEX-99\n\n42-83834-295\n\nAUG 11 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":247,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, PHILADELPHIA\n\nAugust 15, 1952\n\nRECORDED-29 DIRECTOR, FBI (62-83894) -295\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\nOSI LIAISON\n\nReurlet August 7, 1952, in which you stated that at a weekly liaison conference held in Philadelphia Major H. B. Eldridge advised that OSI is no longer interested in receiving reports concerning flying saucers.\n\nOSI, as the official Air Force liaison agency, has agreed to accept reports regarding flying saucers and to transmit these reports to the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, where all information pertaining to flying saucers is coordinated. If Major Eldridge still insists that he does not desire to receive reports regarding flying saucers, you should advise the Bureau and the matter will be discussed further with OSI Headquarters in Washington, D. C.\n\nNWP:hke\n\nTolson Ladd Nichols Belmont Clegg Glavin Harbo Rosen Tracy Mohr Tele. Rm. Nease Gandy\n\nMAILED 3 AUG 15 1952 COMM-FBI\n\n60 AUG 20 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":248,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":249,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dear Mr. Wilson:\n\nYour letter postmarked July 30, 1952, has been received, and I appreciate the interest prompting you to bring your comments to my attention.\n\nSince your communication may be of interest to another governmental agency, I am taking the liberty of forwarding a copy of it to The Honorable, The Secretary of the Air Force, Department of Defense Building, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nDIC:amk:mfo\n\nCo Copy of incoming sent to the Secretary of the Air Force by short form."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":250,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":251,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2727 Maryland ave\nBaltimore 18 MD\nJuly 28-1952\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nJ Edgar Hoover\nF.B.I.\nWashn DC\n\nDear sir,\n\nI would like to submit a Theory\nthat may lead to a solution of what\nthe Flying saucers really are -\nthese objects could be Lights.\nCaused by Radio Television Beams\nilluminating moist vapor, not unlike\nphosphorus on rain soaked wood in\nCertain seasons - The northern lights\n\"aurora Borealis\" have manifested themselves\nfor years, setting up Electro magnetism\n& Earth potential which distorts normal\nTelegraph Communications. The lights\nare somewhat like a fan & can\nbe seen as far south as Equator\nIt is my opinion that Flying\nSaucers are Electrically induced\ncurrents onto a space (small clouds)\nand causing it to glow - this\ncloud being Charged Electrically 4\nand a Magnetic polarity being same\nas the interceptor it can never\nbe overtaken and would if persued\ngradually grow Dimmer & dissappear\ngiving the impression that it\noutdistanced the persuer with\na great Burst of speed\nThis is submitted as a theory\nas I do not have the power\nor facilities to prove or disprove.\nBut I submit a suggestion\nwhereby a test could be made.\n\nwhen these saucers appear\nagain Have the TV & all Broadcasts\nsilenced from the air and check\nfor results - this may not change\nimmediately, as other Elements in\nthis Build up can not be turned\noff or on at a given signal.\nHowever I firmly believe that, if\nthe idea as set forth in my crude\nway is submitted to more learned\npersons then I Some solution\nis inevitable.\n\nDewey T. Wilson"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":252,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"be overtaken and would if persued\ngradually grow Dimmer & dissappear\ngiving the impression that it\noutdistanced the persuer with\na great Burst of speed.\nThis is submitted as a theory\nas I do not have the power\nor facilities to prove or disprove.\nBut I submit a suggestion\nwhereby a test could be made.\n\nwhen these saucers appear\nagain Have the TV & all Broadcasts\nsilenced from the air and check\nfor results - this may not change\nimmediately, as other Elements in\nthis Build up can not be turned\noff or on at a given signal.\nHowever I firmly believe that, if\nthe idea as set forth in my crude\nway is submitted to more learned\npersons then I Some solution\nis inevitable.\n\nDewey T. Wilson"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":253,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TO COPY\n\n2727 Maryland ave\nBaltimore 18 MD\nJuly 28-1952\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nF.B.I.\nWashn DC\n\nDear sir,\n\nI would like to submit a theory that may lead to a solution\nof what the Flying saucers really are-these objects could\nbe Lights. caused by Radio Television Beams illuminating\nmoist vapor, not unlike phosphous on rain soaked wood in\ncertain seasons-the northern lights \"aurora Borealus\" have\nmanifested themselves for years, setting up Electro magne-\ntism & Earth potential which distorts normal Telegraph\nCommunications. The lights are somewhat like a Fan & can\nbe seen as far south as Equator-\n\nIt is my opinion that Flying Saucers are Electrically induced\ncurrents onto a space (small clouds) and causing it to glow-\nthis cloud being charged Electrically and a magnetic polarity\nbeing same as the interceptor it can never be overtaken, and\nwould if persued gradually grow Dimmer & dissappear giving\nthe impression that it out ddistanced the persuer with a great\nBurst of speed.\n\nThis is submitted as a theory as I do not have the power\nor facilities to prove or disprove. But I submit a suggestion\nwhereby a test could be made.\n\nWhen these saucers appear again Have the TV & all Broadcasts\nsilenced from the air and check for results-this may not\nchange immediately, as other Elements in this Build up can\nnot be turned off or on at a given signal.\n\nHowever I firmly believe that, if the idea as set forth in\n my crude way is submitted to more learned persons then I\nsome solution is inevitable.\n\n/s/ Dewey T. Wilson"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":254,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: W. A. Branigan\nFROM: E. H. Mossburg\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISKS\n\nDATE: August 12, 1952\n\nThere is attached a copy of a periodical entitled \"Sunday Graphic\" dated July 6, 1952, received by the Bureau from the Office of the Legal Attache, American Embassy, London, England.\n\nIt is desired that the attached periodical containing an article relating to the captioned matter be filed in the captioned file.\n\nAttachment\n\nEHM:kc\n\nRECORDED - 44 62-83894-297\nINDEXED - 44\n\nENCLO. ATTACHED"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":255,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE\n\n62-83894-297"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":256,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This might be a picture of flying saucers taken at night over Arizona or New Mexico. It was in fact taken in Dr. Menzel's laboratory at Harvard University.\nLook VOLUME 16, NUMBER 13 JUNE 17, 1952\nTHE TRUTH ABOUT FLYING SAUCERS\nOne of America's leading astronomers goes into his laboratory at Harvard and disposes of the flying-saucer myth. He adds simple instructions for making flying saucers in your own kitchen\nBy Dr. DONALD H. MENZEL\nDonald H. Menzel is professor of astrophysics and associate director of solar research at Harvard University. His work on flying saucers was done in response to a request from LOOK. The Air Force has expressed a lively interest in it.\nI SUPPOSE that I should be especially well qualified to write about flying saucers since I happen to be one of the few persons who has actually seen one.\nMy solar studies take me frequently to Colorado and New Mexico, and I was at the Holloman Air Base, near Alamogordo, N. M., at the height of the flying-saucer scare. That very morning, I had glimpsed what seemed to be several saucers moving overhead—until I focused my eyes more clearly and recognized the objects as weather balloons. That afternoon, I expressed my belief that most of the saucers could be thus explained. But others in the group—including several well-known scientists—indicated that there was probably more to the saucer story than that.\nEarly that evening, I had my second attack of saucers. I was in the back seat of an automobile, being driven toward Alamogordo and admiring the full moon as it rose over Sacramento Peak toward the east. A few degrees north of the moon, I noticed what seemed to be a bright star, and then a second star not far from the first. Casually, I assumed that they were Castor and Pollux in the constellation of Gemini. Then, very suddenly, I realized that Gemini was a winter object; the two stars had to be something else.\nCONTINUED\n35"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":257,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCERS continued\nOrderly processes of natural laws explain saucers\nThese are the Lubbock Lights, as photographed Aug. 30, 1951, over Lubbock, Texas, by 18-year-old Carl Hart, Jr.\nGemini. Then, very suddenly, I realized that Gemini was a winter object; the two stars had to be something else.\nLike most astronomers, I am always hopeful of finding a nova (exploding star) which can be seen with the naked eye, so I rapidly opened the window of the car for a better look. I could bring neither of these objects into clear focus, although nearby Antares was sharp. Both hazy disks shone with a slightly bluish light. They were, in a sense, \"flying\" simply because they were elevated. Suddenly, alive to the fact that I was seeing something unusual, I asked the driver to stop. We climbed out of the car just in time to see the saucer literally fade away as mysteriously as they had appeared. I reported the occurrence in detail to the Air Force.\nI later found that an English meteorologist, Edward J. Lowe, had recorded a similar phenomenon as long ago as 1838—similar except for the fact he saw four instead of two ghostly images flying near the moon.\nPerhaps you expect me to say, at this point, that I can explain exactly what I saw that evening. I am sorry to disappoint you. I cannot. I have certain ideas on the subject, but they are only hypotheses—reasonable but not yet fully confirmed.\nI shall explain those ideas, but first let me say what I do NOT believe. I do NOT believe that what I saw, or anything anyone has reported seeing, were missiles or messengers or vehicles from the moon or Mars or space. I do NOT believe they were missiles or messengers or vehicles from Russia or any other foreign country.\nIndeed, how simple science and life would be if every time we encountered some seemingly inexplicable fact, we could blame it on some outside force over which we have no control. Such a mode of thought is as old as man himself. Our prehistoric ancestors personalized all the forces of nature. Gods blew the winds, threw lightning bolts and stoked the fires that belch forth from volcanic craters.\nBrilliant showers of meteors have made men fear that the end of the world was imminent. The ancients have interpreted a solar eclipse as a dragon devouring the sun and rejoiced when their beating drums and weapons frightened the dragon away.\nHow simple this type of science. No laboratory experiment to prove or test the hypotheses. No complicated mathematics to study the details of the process. Nothing to argue about here. For each new and unexplained fact, we invent a new god—or assume the existence of a superintelligence.\nHow simple—and how wrong!\nCenturies of civilization have taught us the futility of inventing mysterious forces and superhuman beings. You could explain anything that way. Such explanations, however, are completely useless and nature falls into chaos, subject to the whim of a pagan deity instead of to the orderly processes of natural laws.\n\"An Uncivilized Attitude\"\nAs a scientist, I am not bothered if I cannot give a complete, iron-clad explanation for every phenomenon I meet. Unraveling the puzzles of science is my business—as well as my pleasure. I find the world still full of unsolved problems. I look for the explanations, but I do not arbitrarily invent forces that make explanation unnecessary.\nWhy, then, have so many civilized people chosen to adopt an uncivilized attitude toward flying saucers? I think there are three reasons:\nFirst, flying saucers are unusual. All of us are used to regularity. We naturally attribute mystery to the unusual.\nSecond, we are all nervous. We live in a world that has suddenly become hostile. We have unleashed forces we cannot control; many persons fear we are heading toward a war that will end in the destruction of civilization.\nThird, people enjoy being frightened a little. They go to Boris Karloff double features.\nBut such analysis should concern the psychologist rather than the natural scientist, so let me hasten back to our flying saucers.\nFirst of all, we must recognize that \"flying saucers,\" in the public mind, cover a wide variety of objects and phenomena. Some of them, we can almost immediately dispose of, although the mere fact of their misinterpretation has been one of the chief difficulties men have encountered in getting at the basic truth.\nA man sitting in the park on a calm summer afternoon scarcely realizes how intense the winds aloft may be. Perhaps real gales exist, with speeds in excess of 60 miles an hour, different layers moving in opposite directions. Light, flat objects such as newspapers or kites can be caught in an occasional whirlwind and lifted to enormous heights, where they may fly for hundreds of miles before they again reach the ground. Weather balloons, which are often released in groups rather than singly, are not at all uncommon. Indeed, most such objects lose their true identity when viewed against the sky. And it is extremely hard to recognize them.\nOccasional reflections from distant planes or even from the backs of high-flying birds account for some of the reports. The planet Venus has, on many occasions, produced its own series of sensations. Few people seem to realize that this planet, when at greatest brilliance, can be plainly seen in the daytime. I floating cirrus clouds overlie it, the planet may give the illusion of being in rapid motion. Most people find it difficult to focus their eyes on distant object; hence, they see a bright blur in the sky and thus give rise to another flying saucer story.\n36"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":258,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"costumes executed by BROOKS\"\nThis familiar theater-program credit represents a $2,000,000-a-year gross business, costuming everything from Broadway stars to circus elephants\nRoutine sight at Brooks: a show girl hurrying off to try on her next new costume.\nA wardrobe is born: designer Irene Sharaff with producers Ben Segal, Chandler Cowles in Stroock's office.\nFirst, costumes are made in drab muslin, tried on for freedom of movement. Later, best materials are used.\nIrene Sharaff discusses Paul Hartman's vice-presidential pants for Of Thee I Sing.\nTHE 39-year-old Brooks Costume Company is the biggest in the business. It is responsible for the eye appeal of 80 per cent of Broadway's current musicals. It does a large part of New York's TV-costume business and will open a TV service branch in Hollywood shortly. Brooks' biggest regular customer is the Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey circus, with its annual $300,000 wardrobe. And for $400,000, Brooks costumed Cecil B. de Mille's movie about that circus. Arena skating shows like Hollywood Ice Revue, Sonja Henie's Ice Show, Holiday on Ice run about $200,000 for costumes—three times most Broadway show budgets.\nThe bulk of Brooks' business, however, does not come from its big customers like Roxy and Radio City shows, Guys and Dolls chorus lines, The King and I costumes. It comes from the 175-odd shows Brooks outfits weekly for universities, drama clubs, church societies, junior leagues, civic pageants, summer theaters and municipal operas all over the country. Brooks has 135,000 costumes for rent, from $2000 ball gowns once owned by Mrs. Robert Ogden Goelet to Indian costumes from Annie Get Your Gun. For $10 a night, the lead in a Northwestern University play goes on in a gown once worn by Maude Adams, Bea Lillie or Mary Martin.\nThis is possible because of suave, silver-haired James E. Stroock's policy of buying back the costumes he was originally paid a fat fee to make. \"He's king of his own state,\" says producer John Murray Anderson. Famous for his nicknames, he calls Stroock, president of Brooks, \"The Pope,\" \"because he is so omnipotent.\"\nProduced by PATRICIA COFFIN\nCONTINUED"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":259,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"conditions exist, flying saucers become likely\nspread out horizontally to form a thin layer of smoke and haze. This ceiling occurs at the point of highest temperature. Smoke, dust and all kinds of general haze tend to collect in this layer. From below or above, you may not be aware of its existence. But as you pass through it, you see a fine black line extending from horizon to horizon.\nOn that famous day in June, 1947, when Kenneth Arnold of Boise, Idaho, spotted from his private plane nine distant saucers moving at \"fantastic speeds\" along the slopes of Mt. Rainier, he may well have been flying not too far from one of these layers of inversion haze. His was the observation that touched off the saucer scare.\nLet us turn to the official Air Force release and quote Arnold himself: \"I could see their outline quite plainly against the snow as they approached the mountain. They flew very close to the mountain tops, directly south to southeast down the hog's back of the range, flying like geese. I watched for about three minutes—a chain of saucerlike things at least five miles long, swerving in and out of the high mountain peaks. They were flat like a pie pan and so shiny they reflected the sun like a mirror.\"\nIn Arnold's own story, there are several clues that should have pointed out the answer long ago. Anyone familiar with mountains knows that the ridges, where ascending currents of air from opposite sides meet and mix, are subject to the most violent drafts. From the Harvard and University of Colorado observatory at Climax, Colo., I have observed with a telescope the blowing snow on the ridges of 14,000-foot peaks, and have noted the billowing gusts rage along the \"hog's back.\" It is indeed highly probable that the slopes of Mt. Rainier are equally turbulent. And, if their turbulence reaches upward into the haze, the warped layers would reflect sunlight and a progression of moves would make the crests seem to move with phenomenal speed.\nAnd if you doubt whether mere bending or crinkling of a hazy layer could cause the bright reflection, note how a fold of a lace curtain—or piece of cheesecloth—similarly reflects the light. The reflection is brightest when the curvature is sharpest. Most daytime saucers are a variant of this phenomenon. The mirage effect is here of secondary importance.\nThe \"ghost\" balloons are perhaps the simplest of all mirage phenomena. The balloon itself is responsible. As it \"punctures\" some fairly high inversion, a large bubble of colder air settles down from above, forming in effect a sort of supermagnifying lens or telescope. This imperfect lens of air forms an image of the balloon. And, as the lens changes its size and shape, the distorted image darts wildly around, with phenomenal speed like a reflection of the sun from a hand mirror.\nTo demonstrate some of these effects—chiefly those associated with the luminous night saucers—I prepared a simple laboratory experiment, as follows: I filled a cylindrical jar half full of benzene and carefully floated a layer of acetone on top. Gentle stirring produced a narrow region where the chemical composition changed slowly upward. Benzene has optical qualities analogous to those of cold air and acetone to those of warm air. I thus reproduced in a small space what would ordinarily require miles of terrestrial atmosphere. The liquids produce remarkable effects.\nA beam of light, focused diagonally upward from a small slide projector, would ordinarily strike the ceiling. But caught in the \"inversion layer,\" the beam obediently curved downward. Tiny globules of glycerine emulsified in the benzene scattered the light and made the beam visible. The original circular pinhole used in the projector was distorted into an oval shape and clearly marked with some pattern suggesting a surface structure.\nLaboratory \"Saucers\"\nAny motion of the liquid—produced as the result of a rocking—made the saucer slip about. Turbulence, caused by a delicate stirring of the medium near the light beam, gave dozens of flying disks. The color effects, resulting in part from the glycerine globules, were startling and beautiful. Finally, when I replaced the single pinhole with a row that simulated distant street lights, the resulting images behaved and looked like the Lubbock Lights.\nThese considerations do not explain everything. The green fire balls are still something of a mystery, though many will prove to be meteors. Prof. Fred L. Whipple of Harvard has called my attention to the fact that the color probably arises from the presence of magnesium in the meteor itself. This metal, well known to be an abundant constituent of the rock meteors, emits green light when incandescent. The reported slowness of motion may be due to great distance, associated with the clarity of the desert skies.\nThis mirage-phenomena theory includes the flying saucers seen on radarscopes. The same sort of conditions which cause optical mirages cause radar mirages as well, as any radar expert will hasten to tell you. They cause television mirages too. Everyone knows cases where a television station, normally miles out of range, suddenly comes in powerful and steady.\nAlso, the stress laid on the optical peculiarities of air over deserts should not be misleading. The temperature inversions of which I speak are common over the desert (and over coastal waters) but they are not limited to such areas. They can appear anywhere, and do. A bad smog, for example, is usually a sign of a temperature inversion. But they are more frequent over deserts, which explains in part the fact that saucer reports are more frequent over deserts.\nYou, too, can have flying saucers in your home. Perhaps not as elaborate as the ones I have just described, but nevertheless adequate to demonstrate some of the effects. You may simulate the gradual bending that causes a mirage by using a sharp reflection at a water surface.\nFill the kitchen sink to the brim and set up a candle or row of candles close to the edge along one side. A box with a series of pinholes illuminated by a light or candle is even better. Now face the lights from the opposite side of the sink, keeping your eye close to the water surface and see the bright reflections. Now have someone gently stir the water and produce waves. The lights will float and travel—and even show the disklike form characteristic of a reflection from the trough of a wave. One can even reproduce the saucers with light reflected from the surface of coffee in a cup.\nAs I have said earlier, these experiments are suggestive rather than definitive. More work is necessary to prove the phenomenon. The analysis indicates, however, a clear plan for future study and research. I believe that these experiments will eventually cause the saucer scare to vanish—most appropriately, into thin air, the region that gave birth to it.\nEND\nThe forces entrusted with the defense of the U.S. from the skies still must look for \"flying saucers.\" In its next issue, Look will tell the story of this secret hunt by our aerial defenders.\nIn normal air, light from the ground simply spreads out into space. Outside its range, where the earth curves away, there is darkness and no strange phenomena.\nWith a temperature inversion, light bends in refracting layer of air. A ray of light will thus be seen in areas far distant from its source.\nDrawing by Al Ewers\nWARM AIR\nREFRACTING AIR LAYER\nCOLD SURFACE"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":260,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCERS continued\nWherever certain well-known air\nluminous by night. They may appear singly, in clusters or fly in precise geometrical formation. The best-defined patterns of this type have been called the Lubbock Lights, since their best-known appearance was in Lubbock, Texas. They have, however, appeared elsewhere. Next, we have the mysterious balls of green fire. Are they or are they not related to the luminous \"Foo Fighters\" that occasionally seem to accompany a plane or even engage it in a mysterious sort of shadowboxing? Finally, there are the \"ghost\" saucers that seem to hover suspiciously around a freshly launched balloon, and rush off at some unprecedented speed—presumably to report their findings. At least four such ghosts have been reliably reported.\nMany of the records refer to some tremendous distance or speed. And here I ask this question: How can an observer on the ground, from a single station and with his eyes alone, give a reliable estimate of all three figures: distance, size and speed? If you think that this is easy, try it sometime—on the moon, for example.\nThe reported saucers move at varied angular speeds, either sideways or vertical. Their unknown actual speed depends on how far away they actually are. They may \"veer\" sharply at any given moment. At times, the images are extremely brilliant. Sometimes, they show a trace of structure, which some observers have associated with \"windows\" or \"portholes\" of a space craft.\nThey move without sound and hence seem to be controlled without any normal forces of power that we would ascribe to a craft on earth. The objects are generally round or oval and bear no resemblance to any known aircraft already built or being built on earth.\nBut are we justified in reversing these arguments and saying that, since no terrestrial craft could have such properties and since no human beings could withstand the tremendous buffeting that the flying saucers seem to get, the objects must perforce be space ships manned by beings of decidedly nonhuman characteristics? I ask again: Is this sweeping conclusion justified? Or shall we accept temporarily what seems to be a much more reasonable alternative: that the flying saucers are not material objects at all?\nThe one thing that can respond instantaneously to force is a light beam. You can stand at the foot of a high mountain and with a hand mirror flash a signal from base to peak and back again, a distance of more than 10 miles, in a tenth of a second or less. But, if we see something flashing over cliff and forest with a speed of 100 miles a second or accelerating with a force 1000 times greater than that of gravity, must we conclude that it is a manned craft?\nAn Optical Phenomenon?\nLet us, then, accept as a working hypothesis the idea that saucers may be an optical phenomenon—though nonetheless real.\nTo me as a scientist, this was the only course along which to proceed. And the hypothesis that these were optical phenomena, taking place primarily in desert regions, inevitably brought the next logical consideration to my mind.\nIn the science of atmospherics, there is a well-known condition known as \"temperature inversion.\" It is simple enough. Normally, the air grows colder as one goes farther up from the surface of the earth. But sometimes the reverse is true, and a layer of warm air overlies layers of colder air.\nDuring the war, I was a member and later chairman of the Wave Propagation Committee of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, which conducted a series of tests on the desert. We were studying radar images; but light behaves, in many ways, like radar. What we learned about the desert applies as much to light as to radar.\nWe learned that temperature inversions were, as we had expected, extremely common on the desert. During the day, the desert is extremely hot. At night (or even during the day under certain cloud conditions), the ground rapidly cools off. But the air cools more slowly. Thus, the air cools more quickly where it actually is in contact with the ground, but for some distance continues to get warmer with height. Then, well away from the ground, it begins to become cooler again.\nScientists have long known that regions of the atmosphere wherein the temperature changes rapidly with height can cause a mirage.\nMirage. That is the key to the whole problem of saucers. And, working on that assumption, I have been able to reproduce in the laboratory most of the essential features of the saucers. Much more study, both theoretical and experimental, is necessary before we shall understand this complicated problem in all its details. I am confident, however, that we can eventually produce and observe the phenomenon at about any time we wish to.\nMirage. A mirage is fundamentally an image caused by a lens of air. Since air lenses are almost never perfect, the world we see through them is distorted and unreal. Like seeing through spectacles that do not fit your eyes. Or looking in one of those highly curved mirrors in an amusement park.\nAnd yet you see mirages every day, without really knowing it. As you drive along a highway on a hot day, the dark asphalt in the distance seems to be covered with water—a film that evaporates as the car advances. This is the ordinary mirage we familiarly associate with the desert: the thirsty traveler, the vision of a receding lake, and only sand. The water, of course, is an image of the sky, projected against the distant landscape. The light rays that produce the illusion traverse a path that is concave upward.\nBut give us a cool layer of air at the ground, as in the desert at night, and light rays will curve in the reverse direction, following along the surface of the earth.\nCity Lights Become \"Saucers\"\nWhere the daytime mirage projects the image of the sky against the earth, the nighttime desert variety projects the image of the earth against the sky. And hence, if we have distant lights—such as those of a city—these lights will appear to float in the sky. Moreover, if the intervening air contains waves or is turbulent to any degree, the lights will appear to move, riding in on the crest of a wave, like ripples of moonlight on the ocean. If the source is a line of distant street lamps, the images appear to fly in formation—the Lubbock Light phenomenon.\nOne further property of these temperature inversions serves to emphasize the effect and undoubtedly contributes to the daytime saucers. Daytime inversions are fairly common, but they usually lie higher than the ones that occur at night on the desert. You can often see them—or at least recognize their existence.\nA column of smoke from a distant chimney will sometimes rise smoothly upward and then\nThe clear air of the desert, and the lack of buildings or of hills, make it possible to see long distances, increase the number of observed events.\nIn the city, the angle of vision is small and the sky is full of smoke and dust. Thus, even if conditions were perfect for \"saucers,\" fewer would be observed over cities.\nANGLE OF VISION\nANGLE OF VISION"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":261,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photographed by Arthur Rothstein\n\nDr. Menzel begins setting up his apparatus, using a large glass jar, benzene and acetone.\n\nAcetone floating on benzene simulates air levels; lens effect distorts Dr. Menzel's face.\n\nA glass rod seems to bend as it passes from one liquid to other. Light bends in this way.\n\nA light shining through the liquids bends at the meeting point. Same is true in air layers.\n\n'hese \"lights\" were one of many sets of \"saucers\" made by Dr. Menzel in his laboratory. Note the \"mother ship.\"\n\nBut by no means all of the objects can be so dismissed. After we have eliminated the false saucers and the erroneous reports that we trace to misidentification, there do remain a number that we cannot completely write off. Such as the ones I saw myself.\n\nThe first question we are called upon to answer is this: If these objects are natural objects, why did they suddenly appear for the first time in 1947? An honest question and a basic one; for if it cannot be answered, we are in difficulties. But the answer is simple: They were seen in the skies long before 1947. Scientific literature is full of them.\n\nEngland Had Durham Lights\n\nTake, for example, the Lubbock Lights, which appeared in the sky near Lubbock, Texas, last summer and were photographed. Similar phenomena have been long reported. England was mildly excited over the Durham Lights almost a century ago.\n\nIn 1897, our papers were filled with stories about a mysterious cigar-shaped airship seen at odd places over the country. The lights and men aboard were clearly visible. Finally, the great inventor Thomas A. Edison himself disposed of the rumor.\n\nHere is a quotation from the magazine Nature for May 25, 1893: \"During a recent wintry cruise in H.M.S. Caroline, a curious phenomenon was seen.... Unusual lights were reported by the officer of the watch. They appeared sometimes as a mass, at others spread out in an irregular line. They bore north until I lost sight of them about midnight.... The globes of fire altered in their formation ... now in a massed group with an outlying light, then the isolated one would disappear and the others would take the form of a crescent of diamonds.\"\n\nThe account also mentioned a \"looming mirage,\" of which I shall have more to say later. This report interests me for two reasons: First, it would almost serve as a description of the Lubbock Lights. Second, my own theory of the Lubbock Lights was developed, and tested in my laboratory, before I found this account in Nature—and my theory directly associates looming mirages with the lights.\n\nThe next question is quite natural: Even granting that these phenomena have a long history, why are they so much more frequent today than in the past?\n\nList the places where flying saucers have been seen, and you will notice that the great majority were reported in very hot areas, over deserts—in Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. For years, these states were sparsely settled. But since the war began, they are the areas in which the most startling population growth has been tallied. Irrigation has brought farmers in. The dry heat has made tourist havens of Phoenix and Tucson. The air age has made these flat, clear-skied areas the natural locations for great bomber and fighter bases. Finally, atomic energy has chosen New Mexico as its headquarters.\n\nIn brief, there are more eyes to scan the heavens. Hence, more is seen. The answer is as simple as that. The clear skies are themselves a partial answer. Beyond two or three miles, especially toward the horizon, the milky haze cuts down visibility in Eastern areas. In the West, one is accustomed to seeing a mountain peak more than 150 miles away.\n\nFinally, the most important question of all: If the saucers aren't superhuman or controlled by superhumans, what are they?\n\nFirst, we must study the reports.\n\nA careful analysis of all the available data indicates that—after we have subtracted the balloons, papers, distant planes, Venus and the like—a substantial amount of reliable but unexplained material still remains. This falls into several definite patterns: ovals, disks or other patterns, either shining silver by day or CONTINUED"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":262,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\n\n62-83894\n\nDate: August 11, 1952\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover - Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS SEEN NEAR THESSALON LAKE, ONTARIO, CANADA, JULY 27, 1952. MISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDr. R. E. McIndoo, 820 West Walnut Street, Kokomo, Indiana, on July 30, 1952, advised that on July 27, 1952, at approximately 10:00 A. M. while fishing in the back waters of Thessalon Lake, Ontario, Canada, he noticed a formation of bombing planes, sixteen to twenty in number, in two groups flying south at a height estimated by him to be four or five miles.\n\nDr. McIndoo stated that the planes went over the lake and suddenly dropped objects, at first thought by him to be parachutes. He continued that these objects fell straight for a short time, then suddenly spurted vapor and at a high rate of speed flew off in a southwesterly direction.\n\nDr. McIndoo was unable to identify the nationality of the planes, but stated that they had twin trails of bluish smoke. He further stated that the objects which had been dropped from the planes had single trails of bluish smoke.\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\n\nEAB:mes\n\nRECORDED-86 62-83894 AUG 13 1952\n\nCOMM - FBI EX. - 69 AUG 11 1952 MAILED 27\n\n53 AUG 19 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":263,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHe stated that he had been accompanied on his fishing trip by Paul Gaddis, Kokomo, Indiana. Dr. McIndoo had no further information concerning instant planes or the objects dropped by them.\n\nNo further inquiries are contemplated in this matter. However, if additional information is received by this Bureau, you will be promptly advised.\n\n- 2 -\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":264,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 64 62-83894-277\n\nAugust 21, 1952\n\nMrs. Nellie T. Dull\nRoute 3\nStaunton, Virginia\n\nDear Mrs. Dull:\n\nI wish to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated August 12, 1952, addressed to Air Force Intelligence, the Justice Department, and this Bureau.\n\nA careful review of the contents of your communication fails to reflect that the subject matter contained therein is within the jurisdiction of this Bureau.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncc - 2 - Richmond - with copy of incoming\n\nKWD:rel:mes\n\nNote: Bufiles fail to reflect any identifiable record on the addressee.\n\n40 AUG 28 1952"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":265,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nNote: Bufiles fail to reflect any identifiable record on the addressee.\n\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED MAIL ROOM"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":266,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Staunton, Va.\nRoute 3\nAugust 12, 1952\n\nAir Force Intelligence\nF. B. I.\nJustice Dept.\n\nFellow Americans,\n\nI am writing the same letter to all three Departments on August 1st. I wrote a letter, and mailed it on August 2nd to the Air Force Intelligence telling my views of a flying saucer. In about four days the physicist Noel Scott gave out a report of findings identical to my report. Now if I have hit upon the meaning of a flying saucer I would like to get the credit for it. I have reason to believe my ideas have been hi-jacked. It should be easy to find out. When did Mr. Scott start his experiment? Which office did my letter go through? Was my letter placed on file? It had a return address. If you cannot find it that proves it was destroyed and the information used.\n\nI have much better working proof of my theory than Mr. Scott, which has been before me all along, until I hit upon the idea.\n\nThe solution should not have been published. There is a great deal more to it than that, which I can explain. The idea should have been worked out thoroughly and secretly. Rainmakers could probably do a great deal of harm with the answer. There is a possibility that it could mean an entirely different type of air warfare. The Air Force could possibly use it for defensive warfare. It could lead to man-made flying saucers which the enemy could use against us."} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":267,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Man-made flying Saucers possibly could be used in conjunction with atom and hydrogen bombs or to destroy them. Astronomers could use the information to predict about other planets or planetary warfare. This information could be of use in a trips to the moon.\n\nDoes the air force wish me to keep my impressions to myself or shall I give a statement to the press? My country comes first if the information should be kept secret.\n\nI signed my other letter Respectfully. When a lady from Virginia pays her respects to the air Force she expects the air Force to pay its respects right back to her.\n\nRespectfully,\nMrs Nellie T. Dull\nRoute 3,\nStaunton,\nVirginia\n\nMRS. NELLIE T. DULL"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":268,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nStaunton, Va.\nRoute 3\nAugust 12, 1952\n\nAir Force Intelligence\nF. B. I.\nJustice Dept.\n\nFellow Americans,\n\nI am writing the same letter to all three Departments. On August 1st, I wrote a letter, and mailed it on August 2nd, to the Air Force Intelligence telling my views of a flying saucer. In about four days the physicist Noel Scott gave out a report of findings identical to my report. Now if I have hit upon the meaning of a flying saucer I would like to get the credit for it. I have reason to believe my ideas have been hi-jacked. It should be easy to find out. When did Mr. Scott start his experiment? Which office did my letter go through? Was my letter placed on file? It had a return address. If you cannot find it that proves it was destroyed and the information used.\n\nI have much better working proof of my theory than Mr. Scott, which has been before me all along, until I hit upon the idea.\n\nThe solution should not have been published. There is a great deal more to it than that, which I can explain. The idea should have been worked out thoroughly and secretly. Rainmakers could probably do a great deal of harm with the answer. There is a possibility that it could mean an entirely different type of air warfare. The Air Force could possibly use it for defensive warfare. It could lead to man-made flying saucers which the enemy could use against us.\n\nMan-made flying saucers possibly could be used in conjunction with atom and hydrogen bombs or to destroy them. Astronomers could use the information to predict about other planets or planetary warfare. This information could be of use in a trip to the moon.\n\nDoes the Air Force wish me to keep my impressions to myself or shall I give a statement to the press? My Country comes first if the information should be kept secret.\n\nI signed my other letter \"respectfully.\" When a lady from Virginia pays her respects to the Air Force she expects the Air Force to pay its respects right back to her.\n\nRespectfully,\n\nMrs. Nellie T. Dull\nRoute 3\nStaunton,\nVirginia"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":269,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SERVICE UNIT 4-22a\nSEARCH SLIP\nSupervisor Dissly Room 3706\nSubj: Miss Nellie T. Dull\n\nExact Spelling\nAll References\nSubversive Ref.\nMain File\nRestricted to Locality of\n\nSearchers Initial auf\nDate 8-29\n\nFILE NUMBER\nSERIALS\n\nMr-\nNellie\nMr\n\nInitialed"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":270,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 8, 1952\n\nMiss Florence Whittish\nPost Office Box 526\nCharleston, South Carolina\n\nDear Miss Whittish:\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nI wish to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated August 1, 1952.\n\nSince the matter referred to therein is within the jurisdiction of the Department of the Air Force, I have taken the liberty of forwarding a copy of your letter to that Agency.\n\nYour interest and cooperation in furnishing this material are appreciated.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nKWB:mes\nNote: Bufiles reflect no record concerning Florence Whittish.\n\ncc - 1 - SAC, Savannah (with copy of incoming)"} {"doc_id":"61b605542d92d5e3","page":271,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. [REDACTED] Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nReference is made to the recent inquiry concerning the matter set forth in your letter of August 1, 1952.\n\nYou are advised that the Bureau is unable to furnish information at this time in view of the confidential nature of the material involved, and it is requested that this matter be handled with discretion.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nJohn A. Brown\nSpecial Agent in Charge\nBoston Office\n\ncc: Mr. [REDACTED]\n\nRECORDED - 41\nINDEXED - 49\n\nSpecial Agent Sawyer - Spokane (Attn: Office Mail Service)\n\nAUG 11 1952 3 09 PM '52\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED\nMAIL ROOM\n\nRECD-BELMONT\nF B I\nAUG 2 1952\nRECORDED - FBI\nAUG 2 03 PM '52\nRECORD-TO-SENDS OFFICE\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I"} {"doc_id":"626982abed0008a6","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT 10073 RECORD\n1. DATE - TIME GROUP\nLOCATION\n28 April 49 29/0400Z Catalina Island, California\n3. SOURCE\n10. CONCLUSION\nCivilian\nINSUFFICIENT DATA FOR EVALUATION\n4. NUMBER OF OBJECTS\nSix\n5. LENGTH OF OBSERVATION\n11. BRIEF SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS\nNot Reported\nObserver sighted six objects. Each flew by alone.\n6. TYPE OF OBSERVATION\nGround-Visual\n7. COURSE\nNot Reported\n8. PHOTOS\n□ Yes\n□ No\n9. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE\n□ Yes\n□ No\nFORM FTD SEP 63 0-329 (TDE) Previous editions of this form may be used."} {"doc_id":"626982abed0008a6","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONTROL NO. Q-1216\nSUBJECT: 1st Ind Unknown Aerial Phenomena\nDECIMAL FILE NO.\nFOLLOW UP ON DATE\nConf... Q-7836\nFROM: 17th Distr Kirtland Fld\nDATED 5/20/49\nTO: IAXS NMex\nNO. INCLS. 1\nRECORDING DESK AXT-1\nDATE RECORDED 5/26/49\nHOUR 1100\nROUTED TO / SUSPENSE DATE / ESTABLISHED BY (INITIALS) / DATE\n1 IAXS N/R\n2\n3\nDATE OF REPLY\nOTHER DISPOSITION:\nTRANSMITTAL AMC FORM NO. 10-2 (20 NOV. 47) SEE OTHER SIDE FOR REMARKS"} {"doc_id":"626982abed0008a6","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Catalina Island\n11\nAvalon, Calif., May 1st, 1949.\nKenneth Arnold, Boise, Idaho.\nDear Mr. Arnold,\nAbout 8 o'clock of the night of April 28th., my wife and a school teacher saw six objects in the sky, not in a group, but singly. A few minutes later after going to my daughter's home, on the next street and corresponding block, she and my daughter and my grandson saw four more. All traveling in the same direction. If you are still interested in flying disks, saucers etc., please let me know and I will write more in full.\nMCIAXS did not acknowledge this ltr.\nRespectfully, Percy E. Mackey.\nP.O.Box P-1.\nAvalon is on Catalina Island, about 25 miles from Long Beach, Calif.\nInsufficient Data\n7-3713-18"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNW 91526\n\n82\n\nCLASSIFICATION CHANGE\nTo UNCLASSIFIED\nBy authority of EO11652, 6-1-72\nChanged by Date NOV 20 1973\n\n38\n42\n100\n114\nMU\n\nPRELIMINARY\n\nGT-4 FLIGHT CREW DEBRIEFING TRANSCRIPT\n\nPART I\n\nPrepared By\n\nSpacecraft Operations Branch\n\nFlight Crew Support Division\n\nJune 16, 1965\n\nThis material contains information affecting the\nnational defense of the United States within the\nmeaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18. U. S. C\nSection 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized\nperson is prohibited by law.\n\nGroup 4: Downgrade at 3 year intervals\nDeclassified after 12 years\n\nNOTICE: This document may be exempt from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Requests for its release to persons outside the U. S. Government should be handled under the provisions of NASA Policy Directive 1382.2."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPREFACE\n\nThis preliminary transcript was made from voice tape recordings of the GT-4 flight crew debriefing conducted aboard the recovery ship, the USS Wasp, on June 9, 1965.\n\nAlthough all the material contained in this transcript has been edited, the urgent need for the preliminary transcript by mission analysis personnel precluded a thorough editorial review prior to its publication. Errors in this transcript will be corrected as soon as possible and an official transcript will be published at a later date.\n\nThis document contains a transcript of the first part of the debriefing, during which the crew described the mission generally from an operational viewpoint. A preliminary transcript of the remainder of the debriefing will be published by June 23, 1965. It will cover systems operations, operational checks, visual sightings, experiments, pre-mission planning, mission control, and training.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nParagraph Page Number\n\n1.0 COUNTDOWN\n1.1 Crew Insertion........1\n1.2 Communications........2\n1.3 Crew Participation and Countdown........6\n1.4 Comfort........7\n1.5 Environmental Control System........9\n1.6 Sounds........11\n1.7 Vibrations........13\n1.8 Visual........13\n1.9 Crew Station Controls and Displays........15\n\n2.0 POWERED FLIGHT\n2.1 Lift-Off Cues........17\n2.2 Roll Program........19\n2.3 Pitch Program........19\n2.4 Aerodynamics........20\n2.5 Environmental Control System........20\n2.6 Maximum g........21\n2.7 Windshear........21\n2.8 DCS Update........22\n2.9 Engine 1 Operation........22\n2.10 Engine 2 Status........23\n2.11 Acceleration g's........23\n2.12 BECO........24\n2.13 Staging........25\n2.14 Engine 2 Ignition........25\n2.15 RGS Initiate........26\n2.16 GO/NO GO........28\n2.17 Systems Status........28\n2.18 Acceleration........31\n2.19 SECO........31\n2.20 Steering........32\n\n3.0 INSERTION\n3.1 Post-SECO........34\n3.2 SECO + 20 Seconds........35\n3.3 Insertion Activities........38\n\n4.0 ORBITAL FLIGHT\n4.1 Station-Keeping........50\n4.2 Extravehicular Activities........87\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n4.3 Other Orbital Operations ........................................186\n4.4 Preretro Preparations .........................................250\n\n5.0 RETROFIRE\n5.1 TR-36 Events ..................................................259\n5.2 TR-22 Events ..................................................260\n5.3 TR-13 Events ..................................................260\n5.4 TR-12 Events ..................................................261\n5.5 TR-5 Events ...................................................265\n5.6 TR-1 Events ...................................................270\n5.7 TR-0 Events ...................................................273\n5.8 Retropack Jettison ............................................280\n5.9 Communications ...............................................281\n\n6.0 REENTRY\n6.1 Reentry Parameter Update .....................................282\n6.2 400 K .......................................................282\n6.3 0.4 g ........................................................284\n6.4 Acceleration Profile ..........................................290\n6.5 Spacecraft Control ............................................296\n6.6 100 000 Feet .................................................296\n6.7 50 000 Feet ..................................................299\n6.8 Main Chute Deployment ........................................302\n6.9 Communications ...............................................303\n6.10 Single-Point Release ..........................................305\n6.11 Postmain Checklist Items .....................................306\n\n7.0 LANDING AND RECOVERY\n7.1 Impact ......................................................310\n7.2 Checklists ...................................................313\n7.3 Communications ...............................................314\n7.4 Systems Configuration ........................................316\n7.5 Spacecraft Status ............................................320\n7.6 Post-Landing Activities ......................................325\n7.7 Comfort .....................................................325\n7.8 Recovery Force Personnel .....................................326\n7.9 Egress ......................................................327\n7.10 Survival Gear ...............................................328\n7.11 Crew Pickup .................................................328\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n1.0 COUNTDOWN\n\n1.1 Crew Insertion\n\nWhite\tThe only problem during insertion was that I fogged up again in my suit before we got the fans on. I think I'm just going to always fog up in that suit of mine. We turned the fans on quick, but with the visors closed it doesn't go out.\n\nMcDivitt\tWe did have a problem with crew insertion on the Wet Mock and I think we had that probably pretty well taken care of. They put us on the suit loops and didn't turn the fans on. Normally you wait for a clearance from the Spacecraft Test Conductor before you throw any switches. Well, after we almost \"died\" of carbon dioxide poisoning during this test, we got this matter clarified. As soon as we got in the spacecraft and one of us was on the suit loop, we would go ahead and cut the switches on to put us on two fans. We did this during insertion in the Wet Mock. It really went well.\n\nWhite\tWe really went for a long time in Wet Mock. I was beginning to wonder if I was going to have to open my visor. I was really uncomfortable.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nMcDivitt\tBut everything worked out okay on this one.\n\nWhite\tYes.\n\nMcDivitt\tThe timing was excellent, I thought. I didn't think we had any problem at all.\n\nWhite\tNo. I don't believe they missed a stroke on the insertion.\n\n1.2 Communications\n\nWhite\tI think the communications were pretty well worked out, Jim?\n\nMcDivitt\tRight. One thing, the last three minutes or four minutes, we got a little confused about who was talking to who. I was getting the Spacecraft Test Conductor, the Booster Test Conductor and the CAP COM at the same time.\n\nWhite\tWe got a split count, too, on lift-off.\n\nMcDivitt\tThe first three or four minutes I was hearing the Booster Test Conductor. I heard what was going on on his loop, and I was listening to him get checks in from all of the guys. I really wasn't getting a clue as to what was going on. I was supposed to be getting the booster clues from the test conductor. I was supposed to find out when the engines were going to gimbal and when they\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"were going to open the prevalves and stuff. I wasn't getting it from him. We were getting a lot of other information that made a lot of sense to the Booster Test Conductor, but not an awful lot to us. There were call-outs like\"Sequence 05003 complete.\" Well, this just didn't mean anything to us. On top of this we had the Spacecraft Test Conductor calling out the times, and superimposed on all of this was Al Shephard, the Cape CAP COM, calling out events that he was reading off that went on at certain specified times. He called out\"Stage 1 prevalves\"and we could hear the fuel gushing downstairs and the whole booster rumbling. He called out\"Stage 2 prevalves\"and you could hear the same thing all over again. I thought that was a lot more meaningful than the test conductor comments.\nWhite I think that was wrong,the way they were doing it. I think we weren't supposed to be on any loop except CAP COM at that time.\nMcDivitt Well, I think what happened was that we got this thing over-coordinated. Al was going to give us all this information, but then as a result of GT-3, (Gus and John said they didn't get enough"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"information about the boosters) they put this information on the test conductor's loop too. We had too many guys talking. I think if just CAP COM talked from three minutes on down we would be all right.\nWhite This is the way I thought it was going to happen, and then from three minutes on down it really got busy with the yak, yak, yak of everybody talking.\nMcDivitt I don't know whether we got off the Booster Test Conductor's loop or not, but at final countdown, Al gave me 2 minutes, 1 1/2, 1, 30, 20, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. I got a similar count from the Spacecraft Test Conductor but it turned out that they were a second out of sequence on the countdown and Al was giving me 10 and our Spacecraft Test Conductor was giving me 9. So it went ten-nine, nine-eight, eight-seven. They were at the same time. All I knew was that we were getting close to engine ignition and then it started. So, we got a little over-communicated there. I think they kept us adequately informed on the hold. As a matter of fact, I'd say we got over-informed there at the end. We had too many guys keeping us informed and I think the pendulum"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"swung from the GT-3 flight where nobody got informed of anything over to our flight where we got informed by three different people about the same event.\nWhite On our flight, too, we were really more aware of the problem than those people were. We could sit right here and see the gantry come down and stop, that was really the only problem they had in the whole count.\nMcDivitt I don't think radio discipline is a problem. Each guy was disciplined on his own channel. They were conducting their tests on their own channel. But we were listening to three different communicators at the same time. We should have had only one. I think probably what we will need to do is to get to about T-3, and then just cut in the CAP COM.\nWhite That was the way it was planned to be, I thought. That's the way Al planned it.\nMcDivitt That's correct. I think, because there had been some lack of information on GT-3, that it somehow had been written into the SEDR so that we were also on the Booster Test Conductor's MOPS, so that we were also getting his countdown. I"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"think CAP COM, alone, would have been sufficient. One further comment, I had to turn my UHF volume all the way up to hear anybody. I was at max. There we were sitting right on the pad, talking to a guy two miles away, and there I was with the volume full up. It didn't give me much confidence as to reception I was going to get when I was 200 miles away, or three or four or five hundred miles away. I thought that the volume control on the radio was inadequate.\nWhite We were wondering what we were going to have when we got up a hundred miles.\nMcDivitt That's right. At max volume we didn't have enough and at minimum volume it didn't shut it off. We will cover this later.\n1.3 Crew Participation and Countdown\nMcDivitt I think it was just about right. I don't think we were over worked and I think we had enough to do to keep us busy.\nWhite Actually, all we really made was a check of switches. There wasn't really too much else. Having the back-up crew run that midcount was the the right solution. I wouldn't have wanted to participate in anymore of the countdown than I"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"did.\nMcDivitt That's an excellent point. The flight crew's participation should be the final count, not the midcount and precount. It doesn't tire the prime crew out doing a lot of chores that they don't really have to do. I think this is a good procedure.\n1.4 Comfort\nWhite Initially, the first 20 or 30 minutes, I was squirming around and I felt a little uncomfortable. But after I had been in for 30 or 40 minutes I didn't feel there was a real restriction on staying for several more hours. I would have been very disappointed if they had said, \"Well you have been in there long enough and we will work on this gantry and try it again tomorrow.\" I would have been happy to stay there several more hours while they fixed the gantry instead of pulling me out.\nAfter an hour and 40 minutes,which is the end of the normal countdown,I didn't feel uncomfortable. We sat in the simulator and were a lot more uncomfortable than this. I didn't feel uncomfortable. I had a chance to take a couple of little table. I had a chance to take a couple of little"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8\nCONFIDENTIAL\nnaps. I noticed Jim was napping too.\nMcDivitt Yes. I concur with Ed, although I don't want to get carried overboard. We shouldn't scrub due to crew fatigue.\nWhite I think it is up to the crew. If the crew is uncomfortable they should come down. But I don't think he should say, \"Okay, two hours and 30 minutes. You cut this off.\", because it is an operational procedure.\nMcDivitt When I first got assigned to the crew I always felt one of the toughest things to do would be laying back for an hour and 40 minutes or so prior to launch. The time we spent in the simulator laying on our back, I thought to be a very uncomfortable position. As we went through all the training and testing at McDonald, and again at the Cape, my back got more callouses on it. I got used to laying with my feet over my head. At launch time I wasn't a bit tired from laying on my back.\nWhite This is brought out in one of our last simulations, where we ran the whole four hour simulation and we forgot to have them tilt us up to 30 degrees. We just got used to running that way.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"9\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt That's right, I just don't think we should scrub the flight because of fatigue.I don't think we should do that. We weren't approaching this point.\nWhite We had a long way to go.\n1.5 Environmental Control System\nMcDivitt I think we ought to get this water management panel squared away and everybody figure out what we are supposed to do with those switches. I don't think we should be arguing about where the switches are supposed to be on the launch pad. If I hadn't asked somebody where the waste management switches should be we would have probably launched with it in EVAPORATOR. I knew that it wasn't supposed to be in the evaporator. At one of the ten thousand briefings we got on it, we were told it shouldn't be there. We ought to get this kind of stuff squared away before launch day. Thirty minutes before lift-off we were arguing about where that switch was supposed to be.\nWhite I wasn't confident that they knew where they wanted that switch to be.\nMcDivitt Well, I didn't think we should have it in the evaporator. So, I think that water panel could have cost as much as a week's slip on our launch because\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"10\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthey didn't know where to put those valves and it's only got three valves on it. It ought to be made much simplier than it is. I think they should get that squared away before the next flight. Ed and I knew where we wanted it. We wanted it off and the other two switches in NORMAL and leave it alone. That's what we flew with. That's the way it ought to be fixed.\nWhite We can get canned, though, for not flying with it in the right position by the checklist. It didn't say that on the checklist Every check list we got was different.\nMcDivitt That's right! Each one was different. Finally we decided we were going to do it as we did and left it through out the whole flight. Everything worked fine. We had ECS briefings by a multitude of peoples from MAC including the guys who designed it. Everyone of them disagreed. It probably started out to be one of the simplest things in the whole spacecraft. By the time they got through confusing us with it, I got the feeling nobody knew what was supposed to happen to it. I consider this the most dangerous of all.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"11\nCONFIDENTIAL\nWhite I was convinced of that, too, after the mix-up in putting all the water in the lithium hydroxide tanks.\nMcDivitt There would have been about a 30 minute four-day mission.\nMcDivitt The people that built the thing don't know how it is supposed to go. They had better decide this and let us know. I felt that George Roe at the Cape knew what was going on except the Cape personnel got the valves in the wrong position and almost lost the lithium hydroxide canister full of water with no water in the tanks. I'm not pointing a finger at George Roe. I think he's pretty knowledgeable about the system. Maybe somebody just wasn't following directions. But somebody ought to find out about the water management system and make it clear to everybody how it is supposed to be operated.\n1.6 Sounds\nMcDivitt You can hear the prevalves, both first and second stages. The prevalves and the fluid gushing are very loud noises comparable to the engine gimbaling. I wasn't really aware that they were going to be that loud.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12\nCONFIDENTIAL\nWhite I got that feeling when I read Gus and John's debriefing.\nMcDivitt Did you? I didn't. I got the impression that it was going to be a much quieter noise.\nWhite Well, the whole noise level of the engine gimbaling was louder than I thought it was going to be. It surprised me.\nMcDivitt Yes. Engine gimbaling was much louder than I heard before. We heard this during Wet Mock and during precount and at midcount. You can hear those engines gimbal around; they really shake the spacecraft. But, I really wasn't prepared for the big noise that the prevalves make, and such a long noise as that fuel gushed down to the bottom. I guess that was what it was.\nI didn't like the sounds and vibrations we got when they raised and lowered the gantry.\nWhite It shook the whole spacecraft.\nMcDivitt It shook the whole spacecraft--did you notice how it never came up straight? The spacecraft was supposed to line up kind of like this and then wham! I had visions of them knocking us off and laying us flat on the ground before we were launched.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n13\n1.7 Vibrations\nWhite Those are closely associated with the sounds.\nMcDivitt Yes. I think that the engine gimbaling makes a tremendous vibration in the spacecraft and prevalves on opening and make a tremendous vibration. The gantry going back and forth vibrated the spacecraft. I don't think there is anything else, do you?\nWhite No.\n1.8 Visual\nWhite Well, you can sure see the gantry lower and the white room disappear. That is about all you can see besides the sky.\nMcDivitt That's pretty impressive. That's when I sort of got excited, when the gantry went down. That's a new realm.\nWhite I thought they were going to launch me.\nMcDivitt You're sitting there by yourself then, instead of all those people milling around.\nI do want to make one other comment on this visual thing. We did Wet Mock about one or two o'clock in the afternoon. The sun was shining right in the window, almost straight down, such that the sun came across my visor from about just at the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"14\nCONFIDENTIAL\nbridge of my nose on down. I had a tremendous amount of reflection inside the helmet, and I had a great amount of difficulty seeing the instrument panel. As a matter of fact, I'm not sure I could have seen the instrument panel at all.\nThose first few seconds there are extremely critical on launch. You have to be able to see those tank pressure gages. We ought to keep this in mind for those late afternoon launches.\nWhite That is a problem, but the g loads are so small at this time you could almost forget about looking up.\nMcDivitt Did I fly like this for awhile during launch?\nWhite I don't think so but you could have. The g load is so small.\nMcDivitt I'm not sure whether I did or not.\nWhite This is what we had to do during Wet Mock. We had to put our hand up and cover the window to look down at our instruments to see them.\nMcDivitt I'm not sure I didn't launch that way.\nWhite I wouldn't be surprised if you did.\nMcDivitt I don't think I launched that way, but as we tilted over and we got in the sun, I think I put my hand up for awhile.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"15\nCONFIDENTIAL\nWhite Well, if the g's are so low that--\nMcDivitt When sun gets in your face you can't see the instrument panels because they are just too dark.\nWhite The sun gets in your eyes. The point that Jim was making is towards a late-in-the-day launch, which we might have later in the program, there might be a bit of a problem of seeing the instruments during launch. Unless they put something up, which I really don't think you want to do. You are just going to have to put your arms up and shield the sun out and concentrate on your instruments or you won't see them. They are just gone.\nThere is probably a point even in an early morning trajectory as you start to pitch over where the sun will come right in your window and you won't be able to see your instruments unless you shield your eyes.\n1.9 Crew Station Controls and Display\nWhite I found the switches all where they were supposed to be and the cockpit all set up.\nMcDivitt So did I, except the comment I made on the water management system. They didn't have the control where it was supposed to be. At least, they had\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"16\nCONFIDENTIAL\nit in the place where everybody was arguing about whether or not it should be.\nWhite I certainly appreciated the work the backup crew did getting the cockpit all set up for us. Everything was ready to go when we stepped in. That's the way it should be.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"17\nCONFIDENTIAL\n2.0 POWER FLIGHT\n2.1 Lift-Off Cues\nMcDivitt CAP COM gave lift-off, about as good a cue as you can get.\nWhite Wasn't any question either. Boy, you could feel the first little motions of the booster as it went up. It was really great!\nMcDivitt I think you could feel the acceleration at release. There wasn't a doubt in my mind that we were loose.\nWhite That's right. I don't know if I could feel the bolts or hear them.\nMcDivitt As a matter of fact, it seemed to steady out a little bit. The vibrations seemed to decrease a little. Pretty impressive!\nNot much vibration at lift-off. Very low.\nWhite Very low. I got vibrations later on, though, didn't you?\nMcDivitt Yes.\nNoise. There wasn't much noise, was there?\nWhite No. There was less than I had expected.\nMcDivitt Noise wasn't a cue to lift-off. Noise was there\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"if you were bolted down all day long. I don't\nthink the noise changed a bit at lift-off.\nWhite\tYou could see the visual cues out the window.\nYou were watching your gages, Jim.\nMcDivitt\tWere there clouds out there?\nWhite\tNo, but I could see it in the clear blue sky.\nMcDivitt\tCould you?\nWhite\tYes. I could see the motion.\nMcDivitt\tOkay. Well, I couldn't.\nWhite\tI was looking out.\nMcDivitt\tI saw a little cloud go by and then I didn't see any more clouds at all.\nWhite\tIt was beautiful!\nMcDivitt\tThe event timer started just like it should. Of course, that's the best display inside the spacecraft for lift-off. The event timer starts, and it did.\nWhite\tWe got both clocks started with the time hack. I had a watch hack on lift-off and the ... handle going. I knew when the engine ignited, within half a second accuracy. Three seconds later I was waiting for the lift-off and it came right at three seconds.\nMcDivitt\tWe could tell ignition, too. We could hear the"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"things go.\nWhite\tI agree with you. I knew we weren't going to hold it when that lift-off went.\n2.2 Roll Program\nMcDivitt\tRoll program came in at ten seconds just like it was supposed to. It was smooth, and it was just the way it was planned, on at ten seconds and went out at twenty seconds. Could you see it roll out the window?\nWhite\tYou can see everything out the window, I think.\nMcDivitt\tYou can probably tell by the way the sun rays are moving, can't you?\nWhite\tYes, by change in lighting. The right seat has a better view. You have to watch the guages so closely.\nMcDivitt\tI didn't even look out the window.\nWhite\tI know you didn't.\n2.3 Pitch Program\nMcDivitt\tPitch program started just like it was supposed to, at twenty three seconds. Pitched over the proper amount, the pitch needles looked like they were hanging in there all the way.\nWhite\tYou could see the booster pitch definitely, and that was mainly due to a change in the lighting."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2.4 Aerodynamics\nMcDivitt\tWe were getting aerodynamic noise, which built up to max q. We got some pretty good vibrations at max q.\nWhite\tThat's where I had the most vibrations. It was just shaking like this.\nMcDivitt\tIt was vibrating and noisy.\nWhite\tThat was the loudest noise we received the whole flight.\nMcDivitt\tRight after max q it got very quiet.\nWhite\tThis is where I had the most vibrations. There were more than I expected.\nMcDivitt\tYes, me too. You can't simulate this in a simulator. You get more vibrations than you do noise. The only thing they have in the simulator is noise, they don't have vibrations. It was pretty loud and the spacecraft was actually shaking around a lot. It was really vibrating.\nWhite\tYes, it was. More than I expected.\nMcDivitt\tThe whole thing was really going at it. Almost like a F-80 or a T-33 at about 0.8 Mach.\nWhite\tVery good analogy.\n2.5 Environmental Control System\nWhite\tThe cabin started venting shortly after lift-off"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and continued so until about 40 seconds and stabilized out at 5.5 and I made my call in. I think I might have called in on RECORD.\nMcDivitt\tYou did.\nWhite\tI switched and made the final call at about 1:10. I realized I called on RECORD and switched over.\nMcDivitt\tHow high did it go? Did it go to 5.5?\nWhite\t5.5 and it stayed right there. And then I noticed later on it progressively leaked off until it got to 4.9 where it stayed. The suit? There really isn't anything to say about the suit.\nMcDivitt\tNo, I don't have anything to say about the suit. It operated like it was supposed to.\n2.6 Maximum q\nMcDivitt\tThe noise built up gradually until we got to max q, then it just dropped off.\nWhite\tThe deterioration of the noise was almost instantaneous.\nMcDivitt\tVery quick. It wasn't instantaneous, but it was very quick.\nWhite\tIn fact, it startled me when we separated.\n2.7 Windshear\nMcDivitt\tI didn't notice anything on the rate needles that had anything to do with the windshear I couldn't"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pick out windshear on them. How about you, Ed?\nWhite\tNo.\nMcDivitt\tDid you see any attitudes?\nWhite\tNo.\nMcDivitt\tNo big divergences from windshear.\n2.8 DCS Updates\nWhite\tWe got both of our DCS updates right on time--1:45 and 2:25.\nMcDivitt\tNo comment. Ed is in charge of DCS updates.\nWhite\tI'm the button pusher. I do everything about pushing the buttons.\nMcDivitt\tI can do this with this little stick.\nWhite\tYou can do it unless I have my knee over it.\n2.9 Engine 1 Operation\nMcDivitt\tThey operated the way they were supposed to as far as I could tell. The tank pressures stayed up fine on both Engine 1 and Engine 2. There was never any doubt in my mind that they were going to stay up there. There weren't any of those things like we saw in those simulations where they came on down pretty low on the gages when they were supposed to be at 18 or 15. There wasn't anything like that. They just stayed on up there."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tJust where they were supposed to be.\nMcDivitt\tYes. I followed them a couple of times and said\nthey were staying up fine. They were way up.\nThere wasn't any problem there.\n2.10 Engine 2 Status\nMcDivitt\tSecond stage pressure stayed right on up there\nvery high. Just the way they were supposed to.\nThere wasn't any problem there. They didn't\ndecay all during the first stage.\n2.11 Acceleration g's\nMcDivitt\tThey weren't bad and I don't know where they went\nto on the g meter.\nWhite\tJust like riding in an old saddle.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. It's very comfortable. Steady on-\nset.\nWhite\tNot very long. Gee, we were below--\nMcDivitt\tWait a second. This might be a good place to\ncover the pogo. I felt the pogo just prior to\nstaging, from about 2:15 on to 2:30. I could\nfeel pogo.\nWhite\tHow much were you getting?\nMcDivitt\tVery little. I could just feel it pull like this.\nDid you feel it at all?"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"24\nWhite\tNo.\nMcDivitt\tI could feel it. It wasn't uncomfortable enough\nwhere I had to lift my head or anything. I\nwasn't thinking about a pogo at all. It wasn't\nlike I was trying to sit there and think about it.\nBut as we were going along I could feel this vi-\nbration. And then it just crossed my mind, well\nthere is pogo, and then we went on to staging.\nBut it wasn't bad at all. The amplitude must\nhave been--\nWhite\tYou were paying more attention to your clocks\nwhile I was watching the system gages and I\nwasn't really aware of the times that were going\non. I had my eyes--\nMcDivitt\tIt came around 2:15 or so and lasted to about 2:30.\nMaybe it was 2:10 or 2:05, but it wasn't bad.\nWhite\tWe had one area that I will get into later that I\nhaven't told you about and that I didn't like.\nMcDivitt\tOh. So, I think we hit the pogo and the g's.\n2.12 BECO\nMcDivitt\tEngine shut down properly. The lights came on.\nEngine 2 light went out and the Engine 1 lights\nwent out. Just the way it was supposed to at\nBECO and staging. Two Stage 1 lights ON, Stage 2"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"25\nlight OFF, Stage 1 lights OFF.\nWhite\tAt that time I realized that we were going to\nfeel the pyros and stuff--feel the separation. It\nwas a very distinct feeling when we separated. Of\ncourse, we immediately dropped in the thrust.\nThere wasn't any question,we had a good separation,\nin my mind. This is just the way it was for all\nof our separations. Everytime we separated, it\nwas very clear that was what had happened.\nMcDivitt\tOh, yes, there wasn't any doubt about it when\nthat first stage shut off--Voom!\n2.13 Staging\nMcDivitt\tStaging was just as it should have been.\n2.14 Engine 2 Ignition\nMcDivitt\tEngine 2 started right on up. Like I mentioned\nearlier,the light went out and the tank pressure\nwent down just a tad, but it stayed way up there,\nabout two or three times as high as was necessary\nfor staging. It never really did decrease. It\nstayed up around 45 or 50 psi, and we need 20 for\nstaging, so--\nWhite\tI couldn't hear anything.\nMcDivitt\tDidn't you hear the engine?\nWhite\tNo. I was listening but it still was quiet."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"26\nMcDivitt\tI didn't really get much of a cue out of it at all,\nexcept the lights went out and I could feel a\nlittle bit of acceleration.\nWhite\tThe acceleration decreased. Another thing I\ndidn't get--I got absolutely no pitch-up associ-\nated with the--the way the centrifuge does you at\nthe end of an acceleration. I think that is\nassociated with the cab on--\nMcDivitt\tYes. I think that's the way they rotate those\ngimbals when you come on down. If they rotate\nthem a certain way you can get that pitching-up--\nWhite\tA very safe forward-type deceleration.\nMcDivitt\tI think that pitching up on the centrifuge is not\na malfunction. It's just the programing that's\nhooked into the gimbals during the stop program.\nYou've got to get them all going the same way so\nthat you keep the vectors through you. During\nlaunch the vector is right through you. It's not\nvarying around, but in the shut-down on the cen-\ntrifuge those darn gimbals aren't always syn-\nchronized together. They get shifted back there\nand it gives you that peculiar sensation.\n2.15 RGS Initiate\nMcDivitt\tWell, I was really watching closely but my rate"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"27\nneedles just barely changed. We must not have\nhad any errors at all.\nWhite\tYes, I got a full error.\nMcDivitt\tDid you have a full error?\nWhite\tYes, my pitch error went all the way down, and\nthen it just steered slowly right back up. Re-\nmember you--\nMcDivitt\tYou did call and tell me you had a saturated--\nDid you call saturated, or did you say we had a\nbig one?\nWhite\tI called it saturated, I believe.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right.\nWhite\tI called a saturated error and then I called you\nthat it was steering back to zero.\nMcDivitt\tYes. I remember that you did call that.\n\nWhite\tThat's the way they showed this on the plot, that\nit would saturate there, and very quickly it\nseemed to gradually steer right back up.\nMcDivitt\tThe steering rates that went in were on the order\nof less than half a degree/second.\nWhite\tThey were very low.\nMcDivitt\tVery, very low because I was on high scale.\nThe needle just barely deviated at all at RGS"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"28\nCONFIDENTIAL\ninitiate.\nWhite\tIt was beautiful steering.\nMcDivitt\tNominal, nominal, nominal, except like that saturation on the error needle, but we have been briefed on that.\nWhite\tThat's right. That's something to be expected.\nMcDivitt\tWhen did it saturate?\nWhite\tRight at staging. No, right at guidance initiate.\nMcDivitt\tOh, okay. It saturated right there.\nWhite\tRight there at guidance initiate, which is what you'd except.\n2.16 GO/NO GO\nMcDivitt\tThey said they were GO and I said we were GO. There wasn't much problem. Ed and I had been checking back and forth on the systems. I knew they were all right.\n2.17 Systems Status\nWhite\tThe systems were all pretty good. There was only one I didn't like and that was the stack readings on the main ammeters. One was reading about 28 and the other was reading about 14. But I felt that this was associated with bringing the batteries on. I went through and checked everything. Everything was reading properly. The control bus\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\t29\nand main bus were all reading all right. I felt it was just a misbalance of loading. I talked to somebody previous to this time and it was explained to me that this could happen this way. I felt perhaps it was in the adapter batteries--would feed through on one of the stacks causing one of them to take more than the other.\nMcDivitt\tYes. You could have gotten into the knee of an adapter--\nWhite\tThis is what I had figured--that a couple of my adapter batteries were unbalanced, causing this to occur. I also had seen this on the simulator quite a few times.\nMcDivitt\tWhen did the unbalance start? When we got in they were-- As soon as we were on internal power?\nWhite\tRight. And I didn't feel this was the time to talk about it. It was still under 30 amps, which was my point. So I didn't bring it up.\nMcDivitt\tYou didn't want to worry me?\nWhite\tI didn't want to worry you and I didn't want anybody on the ground to start hollering about it.\nMcDivitt\tYou should have written me a note.\nWhite\tI did feel that this was exactly what it was--\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"30\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthat it was adapter batteries. That was the only abnormal type of indication we had in the systems. They were all real good.\nWell, we had good communications with the ground during powered flight.\nMcDivitt\tWe had pretty good communications. I called the \"Roll Program\", and nobody answered me. I said, \"Well, to heck with it, maybe they just aren't getting through.\" Then I was just starting to call Roll Program complete when Gus called and said,\"Did you get the Roll Program?\" Now that was the only transmission I made that wasn't acknowledged.\nWhite\tYes, I heard you calling, too.\nMcDivitt\tSo, if they lost communications it must have been right at the 10-seconds time, and it should have been for less than 10 seconds. It couldn't have been for more than 20 seconds. I heard the countdown to lift-off and I heard Gus call and ask me if I had the Roll Program started. This was a little bit less than 20 seconds-- around 18 or 19 seconds. That is the only period of time I didn't hear anybody I should have heard. So, if we lost communications, that was where it was.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\t31\n2.18 Acceleration\nMcDivitt\tWell we got up to 7 1/2 g's. The acceleration wasn't bad at all. I guess when you are really interested in what you are doing like on the boost or reentry, those g's don't mean anything. I don't like to ride the centrifuge. 7 1/2 g's is 7 1/2 g's on the centrifuge, but on the booster--\nWhite\tMy vision was crystal clear.\nMcDivitt\tMe, too. I wasn't even breathing hard. I wasn't huffing or puffing or anything. I was just laying there relaxed.\nWhite\tParticularly on this one, The acceleration burn during powered flight and insertion was very light.\n2.19 SECO\nMcDivitt\tSECO occurred as it should have on my clock. Ed thought it was about--what did you say it was?\nWhite\tI thought it was a second or so early and it concerned me because that meant we were going to have to burn. So I was quite expecting to hear a big ΔV come up from the ground. There is no question on that SECO either. It shuts off and you get that linear straight deceleration.\nMcDivitt\tThe thing that surprised me was that we weren't talking about it at all. We were just going as\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"32\nCONFIDENTIAL\nstraight as an arrow when that thing shut off.\nWhite\tThere weren't any oscillations or roll.\n2.20 Steering\nMcDivitt\tI was getting a sinusoidal oscillation on my rate needles, and I don't know now whether it was pitch and yaw. I called it out at the time, to you anyway, Ed.\nWhite\tRight. And my attitude arrows were--\nMcDivitt\tYour attitude arrows were right on? Okay. But I was getting an oscillation, very small, about plus or minus a quarter degree in rates. Not so that the needle was actually moving back and forth across the dots. It was pretty obvious that it was. Now, I sort of felt that I could feel that movement a little bit, like this, but not annoyingly and certainly the stabilization was holding it close enough. But it wasn't that the rate needles were just constantly oscillating back and forth. It seems to me it was in pitch but I'm not really sure. A booster pitch.\nWhite\tThe attitude error needles were the only deviation we had at any time. Yaw was just about nominal all the time. We had the pitch deviation at guidance initiate. It went to full scale and steered right\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"back in, and also right at the end we had, in\npitch, a little bit of a pitch-down needle indi-\ncation which increased to no more than about a\ndegree at booster shutdown.\nMcDivitt You got about a degree,then,on shut down?\nWhite Just about a degree.\nMcDivitt Yes. I kept glancing over to see how you were\ndoing. They were always right near the center for\nme.\nWhite Yeah. Right near the end they trailed down just\na little bit. I'd be interested to see what the\nground thought on this.\nMcDivitt Yes. You'll have to go over and look. I'm sure\nthey have them."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3.0 INSERTION\n\n3.1 Post-SECO\n\nMcDivitt Yes. There was a Post-SECO. In the period between SECO and SECO + 20 seconds, I unstowed the maneuver controller. I don't know where our attitudes were. They were the same as they were at SECO, and it was about 20 degrees pitch-down, wasn't it? The rates during this period were on the order of less than a half a degree/second. We really had a period of from SECO to SECO + 30. So, during this time I actually fired the translations thrusters at least two times in one axis to kill off the rate in that axis, and I think it was probably the booster yaw or spacecraft pitch where I actually fired the thrusters once or twice to bring the rates back. It might have been the other way around. But, we didn't jettison the fairings then. I did unstow the maneuver controller and the attitude was the booster burnout attitude and the rates were very low, less than a half a degree/second.\n\nWhite I think we mentioned prior to this time the feeling that we came off a little half-"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cocked off the second stage.\n\n3.2 SECO + 20 Seconds\n\nMcDivitt We were going to stay on the booster until SECO + 30 instead of SECO + 20. At 20 seconds the IVI's started displaying and I read them off as 20 forward, 11 right, and 5 down.\nWhite Right.\nMcDivitt This was when we were still in the 90 degree bank position. Is that correct? Or was it after I had rolled right-side-up?\nWhite It was after you had rolled right-side-up.\nMcDivitt Okay. Well, then the IVI's displayed when we were still on our side. It seems to me they were about 25 feet/second forward, and some other numbers, but anyway they were low enough where I felt we were certainly in orbit. At least the IGS was telling us we were in orbit. During this time, as I said earlier, I tried to damp the spacecraft rates, the spacecraft booster rates which were quite low. I checked to see that the OAMS Power Switch was in ATTITUDE and MANEUVER, and to see that Ed had switched over to DIRECT. I told him I was going to do some thrusting but I wasn't going to separate yet, so that when he"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"heard the thrusters go off he wouldn't push the SPACECRAFT SEP. Then we did separate the spacecraft with the exact routine we practiced in the simulator. I said, \"Thrusting, separate\", and you punched the SEPARATE button and I guess you went to Rate Command. I thrusted straight ahead for about five seconds. This is where I think we came off crooked. This is the part Ed was mentioning before. We didn't seem to come off straight ahead. We seemed to be getting some sort of an oscillation that got us going in a different direction than what we had going on the booster.\n\nWhite It seemed like one side of the separation plane came off with more force than the other.\nMcDivitt Yes. That's what it seemed like to me.\nWhite It separated at a bit of an angle.\nMcDivitt That's right. We didn't separate fore and aft; we separated with a lot of rotation to this side.\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt Air-ground communications were all right. We were talking to them and they were talking to us. I never had any problem there.\nWhite Shortly thereafter they called up and told us we"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"had a 153 by 57 orbit. So, they were talking to us. I don't think I ought to read off this stuff now, but they gave us the 2-1 data and all the nominal data we were supposed to get. It came out fine.\nMcDivitt Say again what the IVI's were while we rolled right-side-up.\nWhite Right. At the position we decided on taking our IVI readings, which was heads up in a zero-zero attitude, you read off the IVI's to me as 20 forward, 11 right, and 5 down.\nMcDivitt Okay. Then I didn't bother nulling the pitch needle because we were really pressed for time to get around.\nWhite No velocity correction was called up to us and since we had no velocity correction, and we were fairly busy at this time, I didn't even read out the 52 or 70. I wasn't particularly interested in them. It's a funny thing though--52 was punched in and had been read out and it showed 30. It had been punched in so it read out, you see, as soon as something came in the quantity. So, I did have a readout. I read out 30. I remember looking at that."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3.3 Insertion Activities\n\nMcDivitt I thrusted and got off the booster. Then I went ahead for just a short time, and then I started to turn around right away. During the turn-around, I jettisoned the fairings. They went off with a bang. I could see the fairing over the horizon scanner go, but I never did see the fairing off the nose go. I just assumed that it went. We were already in just a mass of debris up there, because when we separated from the booster there was stuff all over.\n\nWhite All over. It really flew by to the side of the spacecraft.\n\nMcDivitt Yes. It was all over the place. As we were turning around it looked like we were going through a snow storm. There was stuff all over. Finally we got turned around, in about a minute and a half, and we could see the booster there.\n\nWhite There's one thing I would certainly like to see somebody do--I'd have give my right arm to have had a camera when I turned around and saw the booster. I'd like to see somebody carry a camera in a semi-stowed position so he could immediately get it out and come around and take pictures of"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the booster. Either the camera, or better yet a 16 mm camera with a normal lens on it. Just tuck it to the side of your leg. If I had thought about it I think this is what I would have done--just connected the camera, tucked it by my leg, and taken pictures of the booster at this time.\n\nMcDivitt I think, Ed, this is probably one of those philosophical things. On the first orbit you've got to save to prepare to come back in case you have a bad spacecraft. You've got to be ready to reenter during the first orbit. This is the kind of bind we found ourselves in up there. During the first orbit we really had a lot to get ready for halfway through the second orbit, but on the other hand we had to be in good enough shape so we could reenter it at 2-1. Now, we didn't have anything to go wrong so there wasn't any problem, but I think when you first get into orbit you're in a problem. This kind of a thing, I think, is a problem you may have later on. You've got to be ready to eject at lift-off plus one second, and you don't want to be sitting there holding a camera or something like that. Both your hands are busy. But like you said we could stow it somewhere."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"somewhere.\n\nWhite I think you could. You could stow it beside you in the seat. I think we over-emphasize the necessity, particularly for ejection, of having to have everything stowed when you are only ejecting up to 12 000 feet and at very slow speeds. We certainly have a heck of a lot more working against us in our airplanes we're flying around.\n\nMcDivitt That's right. I agree with you. I'm just saying this philosophy of being completely prepared to reenter during that first orbit is in conflict with doing this kind of stuff in the first orbit, too.\n\nWhite We ought to get some of this, though. I think we are missing things. I would have really--\n\nMcDivitt Yes, I think so. We could have really had some beautiful pictures of that booster when we were close to it.\n\nWhite I also want to comment a little bit on the booster itself. I looked as closely as I could at the nozzle skirt and the aft end of the booster, and I saw no damage whatsoever.\n\nMcDivitt No, neither did I from our vantage point.\n\nWhite As far as I could see the nozzle skirt was com-"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pletely intact. There was nothing wrong.\n\nMcDivitt Okay. Let's try to follow this insertion activities list here. I jettisoned the fairings, as I said, as soon as I started turning around. Then Ed went through the checklist for us. After I fired the fairings I turned off the BIA Switch and the retro rockets when he called. I was probably doing this before Ed called, wasn't I?\n\nWhite We did things just like we had been doing them on the simulator. We don't just take a checklist and run down it item for item because there're things you have to be doing, and it just doesn't go in a sequence like that. I realized this was the way it was going to go, and I actually took a pencil and checked items off. If you did an item I checked it off, and if you didn't I left it unchecked and we got it later. You just can't expect to run down the checklist item for item because you're not ready to unstow your life vest or to get up out of your seat belt. You don't do that for some time. I think the logic on the checklist we have here is a very good sequence--.\n\nMcDivitt We reviewed that checklist 50 times. That's"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"probably the fiftieth checklist we've got there, and I don't think it could have been arranged any better for the two of us.\n\nWhite I knew Jim wasn't going to undo his seat belt harness and I knew I was going to have to because I had to do certain things that he didn't have to. The point that I'm making is that the checklist doesn't have to be accomplished item for item, completely done in numerical sequence.\n\nMcDivitt Okay. I think we'll revert back to the exact subject of 3.3 now. Safetying the switches. I saftied the switches--the BIA Squib Switch and the four Retro Rocket Squibs Switches. I tested the sequential lights, but at a later time because I was involved in turning the spacecraft around. But I did test them. As far as stowage, I stowed my left arm restraint and my D-ring, but I did not put my safety pin in.\n\nWhite I went through and put my arm rest down, put my safety pin in. That was one of the first things I did.\n\nMcDivitt I might comment that I never did put my safety pin in. I never put the safety pin in the D-ring. I felt the D-ring cover was adequate, and it was."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n43\nWhite I know, you never have been particularly too hot on that.\nMcDivitt No.\nWhite Then I went ahead and disconnected myself. I had a lot of things I had to squirm around and do. I left my life vest on as we had planned to do, then take them off leisurely at a different time. I did not find any reason to put the drogue pins in. I don't think they are satisfactory in any way. I don't think the pin itself is satisfactory, and I don't think the location or type of holes are satisfactory. I will elaborate on them a little further. We have had aircraft around for a long time and we have learned a lot about safety pins. We have come up with some pretty good designs on safety pins. We have a design on our drogue pin right now which is no more than the very first type of safety pin that I saw on an aircraft. I think that we are past the point where we should be starting right out at the beginning. We ought to put a properly designed safety pin in there that you can insert a little easier into the holes. I'm not going to try to design the pin but I think that it should have some type of shaft on it that\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"44\nCONFIDENTIAL\nyou can use to stabilize the pin when you insert it. And when I say the holes through which you insert the pins are unsatisfactory, I'm referring to holes through a cylindrical shaft that is hollow inside so that you not only have to find the hole to put it in on one side, but you have to work it around and find the hole that it goes through on the other side. I don't believe that's satisfactory. I don't think the opening into the hole is supposed to be beveled and they weren't beveled on my seat and they weren't beveled on Jim's seat, either. I think a beveled hole is a hole that is bigger on the outside than it is on the inside. I don't believe there is much difference between the outside and the inside of the holes for the drogue pins. I had a difficult time putting my own in. I put Jim's pins in. It took me awhile, but I put them in. I never did get one of mine in satisfactorily at this time, so I think we should do something better with the drogue pins. In addition I couldn't even see the hole.\nMcDivitt You had an easier time putting my pin in than you had putting your own pin in.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"45\nCONFIDENTIAL\nWhite That's correct. I could put yours in fairly easy.\nMcDivitt That's right. I think that when you turn towards the center of the spacecraft, you end up with more room than if you turned to the outside. You can't see a thing if you are turning toward the outside.\nWhite This is probably covered later, but my hose lengths were not long enough to permit me to turn all the way around. I knew this when we went through Weight and Balance. I knew my hoses were not long enough but it was too late, as far as I was concerned, to change them at that time. But, I couldn't see the holes on my side to insert the drogue pin. I couldn't see the holes for your drogue pin either, but I could get a better view of them over there so I knew approximately where to put the pin. I think in all respects the drogue pins are not satisfactory. You just can't see them; the pins are incorrect, the holes are incorrect, and I think we can certainly do better with them.\nMcDivitt I think what Ed is saying is that it's lousy.\nWhite That's right. In two letter words, it stinks! This is the way the batteries were reading out when I checked them at insertion. And this is what\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"46\nCONFIDENTIAL\nI had suspected they were doing when we launched-- why we had unbalanced stack readings. 1-A read 6 amps, 1-B read 10, 1-C read 11. This accounts for your high reading on Stack 1. 2-A was 6, 2-B was 6, , and 2-C was 6. This was the way they were reading. I ran through a check on them when we were actually in the booster phase. So that is why I felt the reading wasn't bad. They were both reading about 23 1/2 or 24 volts. They looked pretty good.\nI got my 2-1 update. I got the ΔV of 167, ΔT of 3+35, and GMT to retro command of 14 48 34. I have the other times too. The time to 400 000 was 2+18, as read up to me and the time to reverse bank angle was 8+47. This is what we wrote down. This is one time I remember now when I was a little irritated, because they gave times to us in a manner in which I hadn't wanted them to. They were supposed to give elapsed time but they gave it to us in GMT time for our retro. We had asked them to give it to us in elapsed. They came right back up and gave it to us both ways. I remember writing it down twice, on the elapsed time of 01 32 35. I can see why they did it because it\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"47\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwas two minutes past one hour 30 minutes, and I guess they weren't sure exactly what we wanted. So they gave it to us in GMT and elapsed time also. But that is the information we received, as far as our 2-1 area was concerned.\nMcDivitt I think Ed had better cover unstowage. I didn't unstow anything. I was just trying to stick with the booster at that time.\nWhite The first thing I got into was my right-hand stowage compartment and I unstowed the blood pressure bulb. Then I started into the center section to get at the camera. The first thing I wanted to get out was the Hasselblad and the 16 mm. I was dying to get a picture of that booster. So, I unstowed the Hasselblad and got a good back on it and the 16 mm camera. I didn't unstow the urine nozzle as the flight plan had called. We both had decided we were going to use our launch-day urine bags as long as we could, and we had hoped to use them right through the EVA. As it turned out, we did. That was about all I unstowed at this time. I unstowed the cameras, the blood pressure bulb and also got out the film cartridges and the tape cartridges. I put them on the side\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of the foot well, where I planned to keep them,\nso that we could keep a good tape cartridge\navailable."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4.0 ORBITAL FLIGHT\nMcDivitt I think that the orbital flight should be broken down into some very distinct sequences. I think there are really three of these. The first one is about the first three or four orbits where we were trying to stay with the booster, where we did the EVA and where we finally got back in. The time that we finally got the spacecraft depressurized ends one phase of the mission. The next phase or sequence of the things that come along is really the second phase. This is the middle 50 orbits or so, where we did the experiments and where we did the flight plan in a highly modified manner. We did the flight plan we started out to do. And the last phase or series of sequences was the retro-preparation, retrofire and the reentry. The retro-preparation was actually another distinct phase of the mission. I think that we ought to divide it up into those three phases--the station-keeping and EVA as Stage 1, general orbit as Stage 2, and retro-preparation and reentry as Stage 3. So I think we should"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"start in the orbital flight with the station-keeping on the booster. I think that we should just pluck that thing out and follow it through in its entirety, and then come back and pick up these things like the thrusters, Control Mode Checks, Com Checks, and those things.\n4.1 Station-Keeping\nMcDivitt The station-keeping with the booster--Well, as I said earlier on the insertion phase, I started turning around as soon as I completed the forward thrusting. I jettisoned the nose fairings after about 30 or 40 degrees of yaw. I rolled right-side-up and then I started yawing around to the left. We saw all kinds of debris floating around and we finally saw the booster back behind us. It was already in a peculiar attitude. As Ed mentioned, when we separated from the booster, it didn't really feel like we came off straight ahead. It seemed like we got knocked off to the side of the thing. The spacecraft-booster combination sort of bent in half at the separation plane. We yawed on around and saw the booster, and I thought it was around 400 feet back. Ed thought it was a little closer."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White I would estimate it at between 200 and 250 feet.\nMcDivitt Okay. We were in pretty good shape right then and I applied about five or six seconds of thrusting that should have come out around 5 feet/second. I was in a hurry trying to get our separation velocity stopped, so I was thrusting. I had it in Rate Command. I pointed the spacecraft at the booster and started thrusting, and by the time I got the computer in the Catch-Up Mode and the Start Comp button on, I had already thrusted 2 or 3 feet/second out and I counted up another 3 feet/second on the IVI's. It looked like we were probably stopped, although I couldn't tell that quickly. I knew I had as much ΔV in there as I had at separation, and possibly a little more, because I tried to hold the separation ΔV down to no more than 5 feet/second. We watched it for just a short time and then it was obvious that we hadn't stopped our separation velocity--our relative velocity--so we were still separating. So, I applied about another 3 or 4 feet/second, which should have more than overcome the 4 or 5 feet/second I put in initially. It looked like we had stopped"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"then. Our relative velocity looked like it went to zero. Here, I thought, we were out around 500 or 600 feet. Ed thought we were probably in closer than that.\nWhite Yes. I thought we were in a little closer.\nMcDivitt I put in a total of around 9 feet/second in the first minute and a half after we turned around.\nWhite I think we commented together on the speed with which the booster was going away from us. Right off the bat it looked like it was--it surprised me that it actually looked like it separated from us as fast as it really--\nMcDivitt It looked like it had a lot more velocity than the 4 or 5 feet/second I added at the separation. It looked to me, as an off-the-top-of-my-head-guess, that something in the spacecraft separation thing had really built up a lot of relative velocity between the booster and the spacecraft. I don't know why or how. Also, it looked like we weren't inplane anymore. It was actually out-of-plane so that we had an out-of-plane relative velocity that I took out. I pointed at the booster because, obviously, if"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n53\nyou're separating away from something, whichever\nway you're going, if you point at the thing and\nif you thrust in that direction you are to take\nout your relative velocity in all planes. So, it\nlooked like the thing was off to the left or to the\nsouth of our orbital track by a couple hundred\nfeet and it was going down rapidly. Losing\naltitude. After I thrusted this second time, I\nknew I had more than enough velocity, much more\nthan I needed to kill off the 5 feet/second\nwe'd added. I watched it and it looked like it\nwasn't going away from us anymore. It looked like\nour relative velocities had stopped. I wanted to\nget the platform alined somewhat in case we did\nhave to come down in the 2-1. We really hadn't\nhad much chance to check over the spacecraft yet.\nSo I quickly went to as close to zero-zero-zero\nas I could get. I used the zero yaw and the zero\nroll off the ball and I went to a pitch attitude\nthat looked like it was about zero and tried to\nget the ball to aline to zero-zero-zero. At that\ntime the booster was mostly behind us--mostly\nback toward the Cape from us--back behind us with\nrespect to our velocity back there. It was in the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n54\nwindow and I could see it. Well, I started\nalining the platform and left it there for a\ncouple of minutes. The booster started falling\nagain, descending below us. It actually went\nout of my view in the window. At the time\nthough our relative velocities were quite small,\nso I felt I could let it go for another 30 seconds\nor a minute and not have it get very far away from\nme. It looked like it was coming toward me again,\nbut going below. So, I allowed myself about\nanother minute and I pitched down and looked for\nit. It appeared that during that minute it had\ngone a lot farther down than I had expected it to\ngo.\nWhite Yes, I was surprised. Remember that it looked like\nthe orbit was sure something different than we\npredicted.\nMcDivitt Yes. It looked to me like the booster and the\nspacecraft weren't in anything that even resem-\nbled the same orbit, at the rate it was descending.\nI don't know what the range rate was at that time.\nIt looked like it was a lot more than a foot/\nsecond, though. I don't know what it was. I\nquickly pitched back up to zero-zero-zero and\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n55\nstayed there for about another ten or fifteen\nseconds and went to Orbit Rate. I knew I didn't\nhave a good alinement on the platform but I knew\nI couldn't stay there any longer and have the\nbooster anywhere near us. So, I flipped around\nand pitched right straight down and here's where\nthe problems started. To get down to the booster\nin a long rendezvous type maneuver, what I should\nhave done was to just stay horizontal and fire\nretrograde and take some total velocity out of the\nspacecraft. But, when you do this the booster\ncontinues to pull away from you for a while, and\nthen eventually you are going to drop down below\nit. Then you are going to be in a lower-altitude\norbit and you are going to pick up and catchup\nwith the booster. Well, with the station-keeping\nwe had to do and the fact that the darkness was\nonly a matter of another few minutes--\nWhite Boy it was fast!\nMcDivitt It wasn't any time at all. I didn't have time to\nplay a rendezvous game with it. I had to over-\ncome this relative velocity we had with sort of\nbrute force, so I thrusted right at the booster\nagain. I got going down and I used about 5\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n56\nfeet/second there. Here's where the numbers get\na little vague. I thrusted down at it and I\nwatched it go for awhile. I thought sure we'd\nstart closing on it again. We weren't closing,\nso I thrusted down on it again. I must have done\nthis probably three or four times. I can't say\nexactly.\nWhite I don't remember, precisely, how many times you\nthrusted. I was keeping my eyes on the booster.\nMcDivitt And it was a lot tougher to see when it was down\nwith the ground as a background, I thought, than\nwith the sky as a background. During this period\nof time its rotational velocity picked up con-\nsiderably, and during this time Ed checked it and\ngot eight seconds for a complete revolution.\nWhite A complete revolution. Yes. This was an estimate.\nMcDivitt This meant that in the first three minutes after\nwe were in orbit the thing had gone up to a rota-\ntional rate of 40 to 50 degrees/second. It seemed\nto stabilize at that rate. Its rotational rates\nstabilized but I don't believe its rotational\nmode ever stabilized. It didn't rotate in a plane\nas I thought a long body like that would rotate.\nIt seemed to oscillate in just a random tumbling\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n57\nfashion. It was all over. It looked to me like it\nwas rotating in three axes in a completely unpro-\ngrammed manner. It might have been that the roll\nnozzle was flopping around and the fuel was turn-\ning it around in different directions. And as a\nmatter of fact, at this time we should go back and\ndraw a picture of what the fuel looked like and\nwhat was coming out of the nozzle. The booster\nwas tumbling and you could see the fuel squirting\nout of the roll nozzle in a big fan like this. I\nhad the impression that if the booster were per-\nfectly stationary, the fuel would have been coming\nout of the nozzle in a great big cone the way you\nwould expect it to, but because the booster was\ntumbling so rapidly it was coming out in a long,\ntwisted--like a horn of plenty. It was very ob-\nvious; you could see it, and there wasn't any doubt\nabout the fact that there was a lot of fuel coming\nout. Whether this was contributing some thrust to\nit or not I don't know.\nWhite I want to comment on something that was quite an\nexperience for me. When I called out to you, I\nwas looking down at what I thought, since it was\npitch black, was the sky. I could see little\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sparkles everywhere. And it looked like almost\na starlit sky, but it just didn't quite look\nright to me; it looked like an artificial star-\nlit sky. It looked like some of these star dis-\nplays they have created for us. And I looked\nover at Jim and asked him if he was seeing this\nand about the same time I noticed that he had\nnothing but daylight out his window. This was\nthe first time that I had the daylight-dark\nexperience of one guy looking into pitch black\nnight and the other guy looking into a complete\ndaylight window over there. Jim remarked rather\ndisgustedly to me, \"We are pointed straight at the\nground!\" About the same time I realized I was\nlooking out at the fire flies everybody had seen,\nbut probably in a much more profuse quantity than\nhad ever been seen before, because we were getting\nall this fuel that was vaporizing into many, many\nparticles from the booster and a little bit of a\ncontribution from the spacecraft also.\nMcDivitt\tAnd we were thrusting, too. I'm sure we had all\nthat junk on it from our launch.\nWhite\tThat's right. And the whole area out in front of\nmy view was just entirely taken up with these"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"little particles, and this was at sunset. As the\nflight progressed, each time we had a particle or\na group of particles such as a urine dump right\nat sunset or sunrise, the sun would pick these\nparticles up and they would act just like little\nmagnifying glasses and make very bright spots.\nThis is exactly what happened. Did you ever see\nthat then? I think you were more in the daylight\nside.\nMcDivitt\tNo. I was on the daylight side. I didn't see\nwhat you were talking about.\nWhite\tIt was really something. The whole sky within my\nview was covered with these little particles--\nthousands of them. There was obviously a great\ndeal of that stuff in the air all around.\nMcDivitt\tAs soon as we got turned around I could see that the\nlights were flashing on the booster, and Ed saw\nthem, too. It was pretty apparent. I called out\nright away to the ground that the lights were\nworking. I don't know if they understood what I\nwas talking about or not. I also called out\nshortly after we came off the booster and we saw\nit,that it didn't look like we were going to be\nable to touch it. because of the high rotational"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"rates that we already had. We were into darkness\nby the time that we got turned around, and I had\nthrusted just two or three times at the booster.\nWe were still quite far above it--I would guess\now on the order of 2000 feet or more and it was\nstill dropping away from us rapidly; I had already\nused about 25 or 30 feet/second to get toward the\nbooster. I knew I had to catch it during the\nnight time because when we came out of the dark-\nness on the next pass, we had to be next to it,\nbecause we were supposed to take some photos of it\naround that time. So I thrusted some more right\nat the booster trying to just overcome orbital\nmechanics with brute force. It was too late to\nstart playing fancy games with the orbital mechan-\nics. Finally, I got us down to what I considered\na good position, and this was prior to Carnarvon,\nI believe. Remember when we finally got it on\nthe horizon?\nWhite\tIt looked like it had finally stopped.\nMcDivitt\tThe relative velocity had finally stopped. And\nlet me now make a general comment about what I\nthought of the lights on it. We had two lights on\nthe booster that flashed and they were diametrically"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"opposed on the center of the booster. And when\nthe booster was in such a manner that I could see\nboth of the lights, I could tell relative rates\nand I had an idea of how far away I was. Did you\nfind this to be true too, Ed, or not?\nWhite\tWell, I can't honestly say I was looking at it\nwith that feeling.\nMcDivitt\tOkay. Well, what I am saying is that it was\ndifficult--\nWhite\tI want to hear what you are going to say. I'm\nnot sure what you're saying yet.\nMcDivitt\tIt was difficult to tell how far I was away from\nit, at best, but when I had the booster in such a\nposition that I could see both lights at the same\ntime, I could tell by the distance between the\nlights whether I was close or far.\nWhite\tOkay. I agree with that.\nMcDivitt\tAnd when I could see these lights flashing over a\nperiod of time, I could tell whether the distance\nbetween them was getting larger or smaller so that\nI knew if I was closing or not. Unfortunately,\nbecause the booster was tumbling in this screwy\nmanner, I couldn't maneuver around the booster\nbecause it was tumbling so fast; I was just trying"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to get close to it and not even maneuver--not to\npick specific positions. All I wanted to do was\njust get close enough so I wouldn't lose it. When\nI could see these two lights, I had a pretty good\nimpression of whether I was closing or opening;\nfor a long part of the early part of the mission\nin the night time it looked like we were holding\nour own, and then we finally started closing with\nit. I finally worked it down where we were at\nthe same level. All this time I had been above\nthe booster. I worked down until I was at the same\naltitude with it; at least it was on the horizon.\nI felt that by then I had gotten the thing under\ncontrol and we stood a pretty good chance of still\ncoming out on the daylight side with the booster.\nI can't tell you what the range was. It looked\nto me like I had worked the range back down (it\nhad been opening up as we went into darkness)--\nto 2000 or 3000 feet again--probably around 2000\nfeet. It might even have been as low as 1000 feet.\nIt could have been lower than that. At one time I\ngot the impression that we were quite close to it.\nWhite\tYes. You were wondering whether you should retro-\ngrade away from it."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt It looked to me like we could have gotten as close as 200 feet. It was extremely difficult to tell how close we were. What's your guess, Ed? Just pick a number.\nWhite I wouldn't say that close. I'd say you're more in the ball park in the neighborhood of 700 to 1000 feet.\nMcDivitt Okay.\nWhite You could be magnitudes off.\nMcDivitt Before we got to Carnarvon, I remember, we were in reasonably good shape, because I had finally gotten down to the booster. I felt if I could just keep it down near the booster we would be all right. Then it looked to me like we were closing rather rapidly. So I thought we were going to get next to it and then we were going to be all right. The reason I felt this was because I could see the two lights. It must have been rotating in such a manner that I could see the two lights. Almost every fifth or tenth time they blinked I could see them. I could see two of them. So I knew by the distance that we were in quite close and everything looked pretty good then. And then for a long, long, long period of time after that I never"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"saw two lights again. I don't know if you did or not. I kept looking and there was a single light and a single light and a single light, and I didn't know where I was with respect to the booster. And then I started getting the impression without really seeing the double lights, I guess, that it was going away very rapidly. Maybe I did see two lights and I just don't remember it now.\nWhite My impression was that the light was getting fainter.\nMcDivitt I think that must have been it. I think that must have been it. But all of a sudden I got the impression that it was leaving me at a rapid rate. It wasn't that easy to see. During the few times that the booster was up against the sky background it was easy to see, but when it was down against a ground background, it was very difficult to see. I think it was just before we got to Carnarvon that I felt we were in good shape. And then as we passed Carnarvon, I remember calling I could see the lights of the city. Well, during this period of time all of a sudden I thought it was starting to pull away again. So I started thrusting at it again. And I never really got the"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"double blink of the lights for a long, long, long time. And finally I thought I could see them blinking again, and they were almost a single light this time since they were so far away. And this occurred over a very short period of time. Ten minutes? Five minutes?\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt Is that right? Whatever you think, Ed.\nWhite Yes. I fully agree with you.\nMcDivitt So then I said to Ed,\"I think we are losing it.\" So I started thrusting at it again. All of a sudden it was apparent that the thing wasn't as close as it had been. So we started thrusting at it.\nWhite In fact, that was one time you said we had lost it, didn't you?\nMcDivitt I said I think we have lost it. I had it in sight. I didn't say that I had lost sight of it.\nWhite I thought you meant you had lost sight of it.\nMcDivitt No. I still had it all the time.\nWhite But it wasn't getting any bigger.\nMcDivitt I didn't have any idea in the world where we were. And I still couldn't really tell. Finally, we could see the sky starting to get a little gray"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and I thought at least we were going to get to see where the thing was. And all of a sudden the booster came out just like that, and you could see it. The lights disappeared and there was the booster. It was '2 or 3 miles away, I'll bet.\nWhite You asked me there and I estimated 1 1/2 miles.\nMcDivitt So, it had gotten that far away in such a short time, and it was down. I think what really gave me the clue that we were losing it again was that I had it on the horizon and it had started going down below us.\nWhite Right. It looked like it was about 30 degrees below --\nMcDivitt It started going down again. And I could see it was coming down below the horizon, so I knew that I wasn't right with it. But I wasn't really sure how far away I was so I did thrust a couple of times--a foot/second or so--to make sure I always had a closing velocity with it. And finally I got the thing down. It was down so that when it came out it wasn't directly below me; it was out in front of me and down again. And like Ed said, I guess it was down about 30 degrees.\nWhite That's what I'd estimate."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt When it came out of the night and we saw it out there in the daylight--\nWhite Right. I'd estimate 30 degrees down.\nMcDivitt It was above the horizon, just barely. Or was it above the horizon?\nWhite No, it was below the horizon.\nI'd say it wasn't more than ten or twelve degrees below the earth horizon, but below our local horizon. It was in the neighborhood of 30 degrees. If you looked out level to what you would call level--but you know the horizon tilts away from you, so--.\nMcDivitt So here again we were faced with the same kind of problem--to catch up with the booster. What I should have done was to retrofire right then to drop down, get a lower orbit, and come back up. But we had to get to the booster right then or we weren't going to get to it, because we had the mission to take photographs of it across the States. So I thought if I could close with it at 10 or 15 feet/second we could at least overcome our problem. So I aimed behind it, so to speak, and down, and I thrusted that way trying to get enough closing velocity down and another one that"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"would bring us up to it at the same time; but most\nof the thrusting I did was down. Then we just\ndidn't gain on it. I started thrusting retro-\ngrade with my top thruster, but I was thrusting\nmore back and downward. I just absolutely could\nnot get down to the booster. It kept pulling\naway and pulling away until by the time we got\nto Hawaii.\nWhite You were putting a lot of ΔV in there and we just\nweren't doing anything. We just weren't making\nany headway.\nMcDivitt It continued to pull away from us and it was\nfalling farther and farther below us until\nfinally--\nWhite You put in about 40 feet/second to do something\nwith it and it hadn't changed a speck.\nMcDivitt By the time we got to Hawaii I told them I thought\nwe were having difficulty doing it. Anyway, I\nhad decided by that time that if we were going to\ndo the mission at all, the only thing we could do\nwould be to leave the booster. The fuel was\ndown to around 75 per cent on my gage and the\ngage kept going up and down, so it wasn't a\nheck of a lot of help. I had burned around 85 or"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"90 feet/second. I had numbers in all three of the\nwindows, and of course since I was changing atti-\ntudes and thrusting in different directions those\nnumbers were going all over the place. So I made\nup my mind then that it looked like a hopeless task\nand that we had better stop this stuff or we were\ngoing to lose all the fuel for the whole mission.\nWe probably wouldn't be able to catch it, and we\nwouldn't be able to do what we were going to do.\nI think the only thing we could have done to save\nthe whole thing would have been for us just to go\nforward on the local horizontal and retrograde a\nlarge amount on the order of 20 to 30 feet/second,\nfall down below the thing and catch it an orbit\nor so later and actually perform rendezvous with\nit. But because the flight plan was such that we\nhad to get all the EVA done in the first three\norbits, and because Chris and I had talked this\nover and decided the EVA was the more important\nof the two things, I felt that the best thing to\ndo would be to abandon trying to catch up with\nthe booster.\nWhite Let me interject something else, too. See if you\nhad the same feeling. I had the feeling that the"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"booster orbit had changed so much with respect to\nour orbit that if we really went down after it, it\nmight jeopardize our lifetime.\nMcDivitt Honestly, I was concerned about that too, because,\nremember,I called and asked what the heck our\norbit was right then. The booster looked like it\nwas going down at such a rapid rate. By the time\nwe got to the States I would guess it was 5\nmiles below us at least.\nWhite My impression was even more. I thought maybe it\nwasn't more at the time but it was going more. I\nfelt that if we really got back with the booster we\nmight have a pretty good orbit, but we would be\ndown in the neighborhood of 130 and this wasn't\nthe altitude we wanted to be, for the six-day\nlifetime that we wanted.\nMcDivitt The other thing that bothered me was that we were\ngoing toward perigee where we should have been\ncoming back together. And we weren't. We were\npulling away so fast that it wasn't even funny.\nFrankly, I just couldn't figure out what kind of\norbit the booster was in. It looked to me like,\nif we were having trouble, the place where we\nshould have been the farthest from it was at Car-"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"narvon. Apogee should have been farthest apart.\nOur perigee should have been closest together.\nIt was almost opposite. We were with it at\nCarnarvon, but we were way far away from it and\ngetting farther away from it as we crossed the\nUnited States, or Mexico, or wherever we came. I\nwasn't looking out at the scenery; I was looking\nat the booster. It was extremely difficult to\ntrack across the water and as we got to the land\nit was almost an impossibility to track it. Here\nthe distance is extremely difficult to judge. It\nIt could have been anywhere from 5 to 15 miles\ndirectly below us at this time. If I had a range\nrate I could have told where I was all the time\nand with range rate I would have been able to\nrendezvous with it from a mile. I could have\ndone the things I knew had to be done, rather than\ntry to do it forcefully. I sort of feel the big\nproblem was that we were so optimistic for those\nfirst three orbits that it is almost unbelievable.\nIt became apparent when we tried to do the EVA\nthat we couldn't do it in the time allotted. But\nanyway,I had decided by the time we had gone by\nHawaii, or wherever it was after we had been in the"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"daylight for ten minutes or so, that it was hope-\nless, and I told that to Ed. I told him I\nthought we had lost the booster for good. I\ndon't mean I didn't see it but that we weren't\ngoing to get back down to it. He agreed with me.\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt I think I could have gotten to the booster in a\ndignified, normal, slow,easy manner if we didn't\nhave the constraint on us of being next to the\nbooster in the first daylight pass over the States,\nand taking pictures, prepare for the EVA, and be ready\nto emerge from the spacecraft an hour after we\ncame out of the daylight on our first pass, which\nwas about two hours into the flight. I just felt\nthat if I had had more time, I could have gone\nahead and done some of this without using brute\nforce to overcome the difference between the\nbooster and myself. I could have gone into a\nlower orbit and chased it that way. I could have\njust gone horizontal and retrofired and fallen\naway from the thing initially and caught back up\nwith it later on, but it was getting so far away\nfrom us to start with that to purposely put your-\nself farther away from it so that you could catch"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n73\nup later on was not the thing to do. We had to be\nall done at a certain time. We had to be with the\nbooster when we came back into daylight. That was\nit; that was the thing. We had to be with the\nbooster, because we had to take those pictures.\nThen we had to be with the booster again an hour\nand a half after that so that we could do the EVA\nright next to it. And with those kinds of time\nconstraints you don't have time to perform a ren-\ndezvous. You've got to get with it right then, but\nwe just couldn't get with it right then.\nWhite You know another thing too; I'm darned glad we\ndidn't use any 10 feet/second initially to sepa-\nrate with. I think we could have used something\nin the terms of 1 or 2 feet/second and that\nwould have been fine. Don't you?\nMcDivitt I cut it short. I only burned about 5 seconds,\nand I stopped.\nWhite You have been doing that in all your simulations\nso I knew you were going to do that. You can even\ncut it less. It was amazing to me the separation\nyou get immediately.\nMcDivitt It almost seemed like we had a posigrade rocket\non the spacecraft and a retrograde rocket on the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n74\nbooster, the way we separated. Well, anyway, we\ntold Guaymas that we had to get resolution imme-\ndiately if they wanted us to continue to chase the\nbooster because we had used a lot of fuel and we\nweren't getting any closer and it was still\npulling away from us. If they wanted to go for it\nthey had to make up their minds and we would\nreally go after it. But I didn't think it was\nwise. They confirmed this and said,'Knock it off!'\nFor closing rates at rendezvous, I think you could\nhandle 20, 30, 40 feet/second if you are coming\nat it, not if you are going away from it. You\nsee we never got a chance to do a rendezvous. We\nnever rendezvoused with it. The best thing we\never did was to get close enough to it where I\ncould at least say I was at the same altitude with\nit for a change. It was the first time I had\ngotten back to the same altitude since we left it\nat insertion. You just can't equate it. You\ndon't do an optical rendezvous with the booster\nbelow you. You try to put it above you so you\nhave the stars and the sky background. It was\nbelow us. You couldn't do any line of sight\nnulling because there wasn't anything to null the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n75\nline of sight with. On the other hand I found\nthat if the sun was on the window you couldn't see\nbeyond the nose of the spacecraft. This satellite\nthat I saw over around Hawaii--I saw the thing\nand we were closing on it. We might have had a\nbetter rendezvous with it than with our own booster.\nWe were closing on it and I was concerned enough\nthat I checked to see where the a.c. Power Switch\nwas to see if I had maneuver capability at the\ntime. The sun came across the window and I\nlost it just like that. It might have been 5\nmiles out. I don't know. It might have been then.\nIt might have been 50 miles out, but I had the im-\npression in the 30 or 40 seconds I saw it that it\nwas quite close because I could make out the shape\nof it. Shoot! The sun came across the window and\nthat was the last thing I saw out the window. I\nnever saw another thing out the window until we\nwere gone and until the sun finally came off the\nwindow. So, if you are doing an optical rendez-\nvous and you've got the sun on the window, I don't\nknow what you'd do.\nWhite And if you have as dirty windows as we had-- our\nwindows had a white film of material on the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n76\noutside , which made it very difficult to see out\nwhen the sun's rays reflected on these particles\nthat were on the outside of the windshield.\nMcDivitt To just summarize this thing, I think that we\ncame off the booster with a fully unknown relative\nvelocity which was much greater than what we\nanticipated, and it didn't seem to be an inplane\nrelative velocity. It didn't seem to be an inplane\nlocal horizontal relative velocity. It was out-of-\nplane and it looked like the booster headed down,\nwith respect to us because it started separating\nfrom us so rapidly. It also had less total velo-\ncity. I think that this was the first sur-\nprise. It started tumbling and immediately the\nrates built up in just a very few minutes to\nsomething very high--40 to 50 degrees/second--\nbut it never got any higher, at least the best we\ncould tell. When we last saw it over Mexico or\nover southern United States it was still tumbling\nat about the same rate, I guess around 40 or 50\ndegrees/second. I felt that I got down to it all\nright and I was in reasonably good shape prior to\nCarnarvon, and from that time on until we came out\nof the darkness I lost it. And I think I lost it\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n77\nbecause looking at a single light at night doesn't\ngive you any depth perception at all. You just\ndon't know where the booster is. I think that\nsummarizes it. Ed, you want to add anything? You\nweren't watching it as much as I was, but you saw\nenough of it to know exactly what was going on.\nWhite Well, you see I wasn't able to put the pieces\nquite together because I was either looking out,\nand I couldn't see when you were thrusting,or I\nwas looking in and watching you when you were\nthrusting and listening and not looking out. I\ntried to interject my thoughts as we went along\nand I agree with what you said. I don't believe\nI want to add anything else.\nMcDivitt Now that we've covered the tracking and the losing\nof the booster, I think we ought to go back to the\nvery beginning at insertion and we will go through\nthe checks that we went through as we proceeded\nalong and the things that Ed and I were both doing\naside from tracking the booster, the things that we\nwere either doing to prepare to come back in at\narea 2-1 or to stay in orbit and proceed with\nthe EVA as we had planned. In looking over the\nflight plan that we had and the briefing guide on\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"78 CONFIDENTIAL\npage six,I have already covered the things on\nplatform alinement. I did not have time to aline\nthe platform. I tried to get it to somewhere near\nthe local horizontal so that in case we had to do\na retrofire I'd be able to do the retrofire. I\nbrought the spacecraft up to a pitch attitude that\nI hoped was zero,but I never got the spacecraft\nalined to see that it was zero. So we really went\ninto this thing without my ever having seen a zero\npitch attitude on the spacecraft. Obviously\nI didn't get a chance to see the 30 degree pitch\ndown on the retrofire attitude. I didn't really\nhave time to look out the window and do a single\nthing that would have prepared us to reenter at\n2-1 because we were so busy keeping track of--\nWhite You know another thing I'd say also is that we\nwere eternally optimistic. We felt we were going\nto aline the platform and watch the booster at the\nsame time.\nMcDivitt As a matter of fact, while I was trying to get the\nalinement it became apparent to me that I could not\naline it. I even thrusted vertically--\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 79\nMcDivitt I was in a horizontal position and I thrusted\ndown using my top thrusters, so that I would\ntry to keep the booster in my view. Thrusting,\nchasing the booster, and alining the platform\nall at the same time--those are the kinds of\nthings you have to do. So, I never did get the\nplatform alined. I did not have time. I got\nit somewhere near local horizontal. If I was\nwithin plus or minus 5 degrees in the axis, I\nthink I did a reasonably good job. The\nThruster Control Mode Checks that took place at\n15 minutes I didn't do as such. I would just\nthrow it into a different mode and thrust. I\njust did it with a catch-as-catch-can. I did\ncheck out the different modes.\nWhite Everything seemed to be working. You weren't\ngetting any thrusters that weren't firing, and\nyour modes all seemed to me to be working\nproperly.\nMcDivitt It looked pretty good.\nWhite I had one comment on the Communications System\nCheck. Remember we lost good communications\nwith No. 1 UHF and we switched to No. 2 and\nseemed to have good communications with it\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"80 CONFIDENTIAL\nfrom then on? Now this wasn't representative\nthat we lost UHF No. 1 because we used both of\nthe sets at different times throughout the\nmission later on. But at this particular time,\nUHF 1 didn't give us good reception and we\nswitched.\nMcDivitt I thought communications through the first day\nof the flight were atrocious. They were\nterrible. Finally we switched to the Reentry\nStub Antenna and that seemed to fix the problem.\nDidn't you think so? But you know we went back\nto reentry a ntenna over Carnarvon one time.\nWe got just as good reception off of it that\ntime as we did any other time.\nWhite I remember when you were making your\nCommunications Check. That was when I was\nasleep. You were checking the two and you\nended up with the reentry antenna.\nMcDivitt Yes, later on in the flight, as I said, at the\nend of the first day or so.\nWhite We seemed to get better communications.\nMcDivitt Communications were better. As a matter of\nfact, I was a little concerned that the\ncommunications were so lousy that we might have\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 81\nto come back in, because we were really losing\ncommunications. We were trying HF and all kinds\nof things. Information just wasn't getting\nup to us.\nWhite That was after EVA.\nMcDivitt Right. Communications just weren't getting up\nto us.\nWhite I figured we didn't have any communications\nwith the ground during EVA.\nMcDivitt No, we didn't. Our VOX blocked them out.\nWhite I know it.\nMcDivitt But the Communications Systems Check that was\nsupposed to be performed at 15 minutes--\nwe sort of already accomplished the thing,\nbecause we'd used UHF No. 1 and No. 2.\nWhite I made the check with them.\nMcDivitt Did you make the check? -- that's right you made\nthe check but we didn't use the HF because we\nweren't going to put the antenna out until after\nEVA. We didn't do anything with the urine\nbags except keep them right where they were.\nWhite At this time we didn't pressure check both\nsuits, because we did this later.\nMcDivitt We didn't aline the platform, as I mentioned.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"82 CONFIDENTIAL\nThe Control Mode Check was a catch-as-catch-\ncan. You did unstow, the equipment that we\nwere supposed to unstow. The blood pressure\nbulb, the Hasselblad camera and its packs, and\na 16 mm camera. During this time when I was\nchasing the booster, I did manage to get to\nreach back behind my seat and pull out the\nbracket for the 16 mm camera. You tracked the\nbooster while I smoothed the thing out.\nWhite That's right.\nMcDivitt We didn't get out the urine nozzle. How about\nthe utility cord? Did you get out that fancy\nutility cord, the three-axis utility cord?\nWhite Yes, I knew where it was. I didn't give it to\nyou because you didn't need it.\nMcDivitt No, I didn't need it. That's right. As Ed\nsaid, we did not pressure check our suits at 30\nminutes like we were supposed to.\nMcDivitt There's this little thing here that says measure\nall ΔV's. All I did was put the computer in\nCatch-Up, hit the Start Comp button, and just\nlet the numbers fall where they would. At the\ntime that we stopped chasing the booster around,\nI had about 60 feet / second in one window,\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"30 in another, and 30 in another. I never really came to a position to try to null all these things out to see what the total ΔV was. I was putting in the thrust with mostly the aft thrusters and the down-firing top thruster.\nI don't think I used the left and right thruster, at all. I don't think I used the bottom thurster at all. There was no difficulty controlling any of them. I used the forward-firing thrusters once or twice to try to slow down, to take out total velocity.\nMcDivitt Then there was the Accelerometer Bias Check which was another one of those things. I don't know how I let it get into the flight plan.\nWhite We both joked about that one, huh, Mac? We were really going to get an Accelerometer Check when we were trying to track the booster.\nMcDivitt I was putting ΔV's on the IVI's at a rate of a foot per minute at least. We ended up with over a foot per minute, I think, over that period of time. We couldn't have checked anybody's accelerometer bias, so I just didn't even fool around with it. We were supposed to take a blood pressure. Did you take that blood"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pressure, Ed?\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt You did take the blood pressure.\nWhite I think I did. I had it out. I don't know whether they asked for it or not.\nMcDivitt Okay.\nWhite I don't remember on that.\nMcDivitt Okay. We got the Quantity Read off. I guess we got a time hack somewhere in there.\nWhite They called up I believe. I remember them calling the Quantity Read-Off, and I turned it OFF.\nMcDivitt That's right.\nMcDivitt Then it says at one hour we were supposed to unstow and assemble the maneuvering unit in its 16 mm mount. I don't think we had that stuff out by then, did we?\nWhite No.\nMcDivitt You see, this whole flight plan was based on me being able to track the booster without using any thrust, and essentially having the spacecraft stationary near the booster, without any maneuvering at all, where the stationkeeping was a matter of just looking out at the thing and controlling your attitude with pulse."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"We thought that if the booster was stationary we could get in close to it. We could essentially fly a formation by it with more attitude control than translation control, which left me then free to help Ed assemble all this stuff for the EVA. Well, it turned out that I didn't dare take my eyes off the booster for half a second. So all the things that we were supposed to do together up until the time we finally said goodby to the booster, Ed had to accomplish himself. I was completely unable to help him. The only thing I managed to do was to unstow the 16 mm camera bracket and put the 16 mm camera on.\nWhite I couldn't quite get at that one.\nMcDivitt No. I could hardly get to it. So we were probably behind at the hour mark. Right?\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt Not by an awful lot.\nWhite I knew we had a problem with the booster, and I was more concerned with our problem with the booster than getting the gun and stuff out then. I felt that they were both tied together and once we lost the booster we didn't have a"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sweat time-wise on making our EVA. So, I was trying to be of what assistance I could to Jim on watching the booster during these first critical periods.\nMcDivitt Yes. It wasn't unappreciated because this booster was becoming a speck on the horizon, and if you blinked your eyes you could very well lose the darn thing.\nWhite When we were out that second day, I think you said one time you did lose it for a minute.\nMcDivitt That's right.\nWhite I was lucky enough to still be seeing it, until you started picking it up again.\nMcDivitt That's right. So, I'm saying it really took two pairs of eyes constantly looking at that booster to keep it in sight. It's just one of those things that just took so much time that we hadn't planned on. It was almost unbelievable.\nMcDivitt In our flight plan from an hour to an hour and twenty minutes we don't really show anything. Although, here again, we were busy with the booster. So, when we got around to closing with the booster, there wasn't any closing. We finally got clearance over the United States to stop"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"fooling with the booster. I think this was an extremely wise decision.\nMcDivitt I got to Guaymas and I said the booster was pulling away from us. We'd already used about 100 ΔV to stay with it, and I recommended that we just give up on it. We had to get a decision immediately because I couldn't stay with it and not use fuel at the same time. They came back from Texas. I talked to Guaymas and got their confirmation from Texas, which was only a matter of a couple of minutes, saying leave the booster. That was about the only thing they could say.\n4.2 Extravehicular Activity\nWhite And this was the time I went after the gun.\nMcDivitt Okay. At that time we reverted from stationkeeping, which we were both attempting to do to EVA preparation, which we both had to do. That's when Ed went after the gun, and we started our preparation. We weren't really far behind at this time. All we had to do was get the gun out and get the maneuvering unit. The cameras were already out. You had the Zeiss too, didn't you?"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tYes. The Zeiss came out with the Hasselblad, from that same package as the movie camera. And the storage certainly was a lot easier. What do you think?\nMcDivitt\tThat's right.\nWhite\tParticularly getting it out that center thing. You can just zip them out of there with no problem at all.\nMcDivitt\tSo, at about 1:30 we started to assemble the gun. If you look at the checklist, you see that we probably got the gun assembled in nothing flat.\nWhite\tIt's no problem to assemble the gun.\nMcDivitt\tWe started our egress preparations essentially on time. As a matter of fact, I think we even got started a little earlier.\nWhite\tThen, we weren't worrying about anything else.\nMcDivitt\tThen, we weren't worrying about staying with the booster. We probably started it about 1:35 or 1:40. Over the States we started our egress preparation. We went to our other checklist.\nWhite\tYou were over Ascension, calling off the checklist.\nMcDivitt\tI started reading the checklist off to Ed and we went through it. He unstowed everything. Why don't you tell them what you did there, Ed? I just read the checklist off to you, and you went ahead and did it.\nWhite\tOkay. I had to get back into the right-hand box, and I unstowed the items there. The first time I went back in there, I took the first items out, and I did not unstow the full box. I remember I told you, \"It's all coming out, Jim. I'm going to bring them all out on the lanyard.\" Remember?\nMcDivitt\tRight.\nWhite\tWe'd take them off piece by piece if we need it. At that time I pulled the whole lanyard out and the cockpit was full of little bags.I was quite happy that they had prevailed upon me to put a lanyard on all this equipment. I had thought at one time that it would be more desirable not to put a lanyard on. We'd been working a lot in our simulations without the lanyard and it seemed pretty easy. But looking at it now, I highly recommend that everybody keep that stuff on a lanyard.\nMcDivitt\tWe would have really had a mess if we'd had all those things floating around. It was bad enough as it was."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tYes, eight or ten of those little bags, and I was glad they were all tied on to one string. I could control them in that manner. They were quite simple to unsnap. I thought the snap attachment made it pretty easy to unstow, and selectively pick out the items that I wanted. I unstowed the pouches that I needed, and then we got ready to take the long umbilical out. I had a little difficulty. It took me about three trys to get it out. It's fairly big package to come through a small hole. It was a good thing that we had taken the velcro off of the batch, because there was no tendency for anything to hang up as we removed it. On the third try I got it out.\nMcDivitt\tI thought you did an extremely good job getting the bag out. You got it out a lot quicker than I'd ever seen you do it in the Crew Procedures Trainer in Houston or in the simulator at the Cape.\nWhite\tYou didn't know it. It took me three trys.\nMcDivitt\tWell, maybe it did, but it sure looked like it came out a lot easier. I thought you got it out in a big hurry. I didn't notice that it took you three trys. I saw you start, and then just a short time later, it was out.\nWhite\tWell, it did come out pretty easy, and I think the storage was satisfactory, but I'd certainly recommend that nothing be on the outside to keep it from coming out. It's a real tough--\nMcDivitt\tYes, we need the velcro off of there. We're pretty well sure of that.\nWhite\tThe rest of the equipment- the \"Y\" connectors, the bag that contained the \"Y\" connectors, and the attachments for the chest pack, I handed to you. I think you were keeping track of most of those things until the time I needed them.\nMcDivitt\tYes, I was.\nWhite\tThe storage of the ventilation module from the floor came off pretty easily. That's when I started going ahead and putting it all on. You read the checklist off to me. I had gone ahead and done a few things anyhow. As you read them off I checked them off to be sure that I had done them all. I think we had everything out without much problem at all. I think it took us longer actually to put it all together."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt\tThat's right. It did. We started going through the checklist here and putting the things on and we started getting more and more rushed. We were supposed to start the Egress Preparation Checklist at about 1:44. We probably started it at about 1:35 or so. We started it about 10 minutes early, roughly, maybe five to 10 minutes early. We were supposed to be ready to start the depressurazation at 2:30 over Carnarvon.\nWhite\tI think I could have gone through and hooked everything all up, but I felt that we should go through fairly close to the procedure we had set up on the checklist.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right.\nWhite\tI think this slowed us down.\nMcDivitt\tWell, we set the procedure up so that when we finished with it, it would be right. I think this helter-skelter thing that we were being forced into was for the birds. So as we got farther along, it became apparent to me that"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nthe thing to do would be to stop.\nWhite Right.\nMcDivitt Go ahead with the assembly of the stuff. Why don't you comment on that?\nWhite I've commented in my Self Debriefing about the equipment and the assembly of it. I thought there was no difficulty at all in connecting the \"Y\" connectors, the hoses, and the chest pack. I thought the connection of the chest pack to my harness was a good one. With the velcro I could move it in and out whenever I wanted to so that I could make my connections on the inlet side of the ECS hoses. It went along pretty smoothly, as a matter of fact. I think as we progressed along in it though, we felt that we had everything done. I didn't really feel that we had everything done in a thorough manner. And I think you had that same feeling.\nMcDivitt That's right. When we got to Kano or Tananarive--I think it was Tananarive--I called whoever I was talking to and said that we were running late and I thought that we would probably not do the EVA on this particular rev. I knew that\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nwe had another rev on which we could do it. It looked to me like we had all the stuff hooked up, but we hadn't really had a chance to check it. I also noticed, Ed, that you were getting awfully hot. You were starting to perspire a lot. I didn't like the way you looked to start this whole thing off. So I told them over Tananarive--I believe it was Tananarive--that we would go ahead and continue on, and I would let them know whether or not we were going to depressurize at the next station. We went on ahead and it looked to me like you were all hooked up and about ready to go except for one thing.\nWhite We forgot the thermal gloves. I did not have my thermal gloves on.\nMcDivitt You did not have the thermal gloves on, which is sort of insignificant, but we hadn't really had a chance to check over the equipment to make sure that it was in the right spot.\nWhite Well, we talked and you said, \"What do you think?\" We talked it over and I had the same feeling. I thought it sure would be smart if we had about 20 minutes to just sit here real still\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n95\nbefore we go out.\nMcDivitt I think we were in a situation where it would probably have gone all right. We had completed about 80 percent of what we really should have had done as far as the checking went, and I just didn't feel that we were in the right shape. Ed didn't think we were, and besides, I could see Ed. He couldn't see himself. Ed looked awfully hot, and he looked like he was getting a little pooped out from playing around with that big suit. I thought that the best thing for his sake, and I knew he wouldn't admit it, was to let him rest up for another orbit.\nWhite I agree that was the best judgment.\nMcDivitt So, when we got to Carnarvon--I guess it was Carnarvon--I called them and said we were not going to come out on that orbit.\nWhite It was Carnarvon. It was just before we depressurized.\nMcDivitt So, we postponed it until the next orbit. As a matter of fact, after that we just sat there. We didn't do a thing for about 10 minutes. I let Ed cool off a little bit. We were on two-\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n96\nfan operation at the time. We just sat there and we were cooled off. We went around for about twenty minutes then.\nWhite Okay. Then as we went back around, I asked you to go through the checklist again, and we went through item by item this time.\nMcDivitt That's right. I might add that we went right back to the beginning checklist, the Egress Preparation Checklist. We started at the top one, and we did every step on it again. We verified every step to make sure we hadn't left anything out.\nWhite We actually went in and checked this time. Another thing we hadn't really positively checked was the position of all the locks on all of the hose inlets and outlets. This time we actually checked all those locked. All of them were locked in, but it was a good thing to do, I believe.\nMcDivitt You want to make sure. We did do our Suit Integrity Check before we started all this stuff.\nWhite That's right. We started before we actually went to the unstowing of the stuff from the right-hand aft food box. We went to the Suit\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n97\nIntegrity Check.\nMcDivitt Well, I don't know where it is, but we did it when we were supposed to do it.\nMcDivitt We did the Suit Integrity Check before we started the Egress Preparation Checklist. That's when we did it, over the States.\nWhite I think we did that just about the time you decided to give up on the booster. We did the Suit Integrity Check. Both suits checked out all right. It went up to 8.5 and it leaked down to about 8.3 or something like that.\nMcDivitt Same thing with mine. It went up to 8.5 and leaked down just a little bit. Not enough to be concerned about.\nWhite No. Oh, one thing that we did do on that extra orbit that we went around-- I disconnected the depress system and we went back on the--\nMcDivitt Oh, yes. We never even got on the depress system, did we?\nWhite Yes, I believe we were, but then we turned it off. We were already to depressurize and then we went back on the spacecraft ECS system, full, and went through and reverified the whole checklist again. The only things that I would\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"say we hadn't done to my satisfaction the first time was to check the inlet and outlet positions of the locks, and I didn't have my thermal gloves on. It turned out I didn't need them.\nMcDivitt Also, during this period of time I alined the platform, which was completely misalined. It was probably alined within a couple degrees, but as we went around in Orbit Rate it got farther and farther out of tolerance. So, I managed to aline the platform. Here again, I might comment on the fact that our initial flight plan was so optimistic that it was almost unbelievable. The both of us worked full time on doing nothing except preparing for EVA, and we didn't quite get the job done. I can't believe that we could have possibly flown formation with the booster and taken pictures of it and all the other things that we had scheduled, and still prepared for this thing and even come close to completing it.\nWhite Well, the way we would have had to do it, would have been without a checklist. I would have had to just go ahead and hook everything up. I think we could have done it satisfactorily in"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"this manner, but it wouldn't have been the way we would have wanted it.\nMcDivitt Yes, that's right. I don't think that's the way it should be done. It was just too bad that we had a time limit on it, but when we did get rid of the booster, or the booster no longer became a part of the flight plan, then the time limit vanished. We found out that we really needed that extra orbit,or probably could have used another 20 minutes.\nWhite Yes. We went back. And I remember as we came over Carnarvon, we had about a 15 minute chat back and forth—kind of a rest period. We were all hooked up at that time, and that's the time we went on the repress flow, ready for the depressurization. I think they gave us a GO then for our EVA.\nMcDivitt That's right. We depressurized the cabin and got down to 2 psi to check our blood pressure. We tried to put our blood pressure plugs in the blood pressure plug port and found out that we didn't have any blood pressure plugs on either suits. This was quite a surprise. An unpleasant one, I might add. Well, we decided"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that from our past experience and our knowledge of the suit that even if we did spring a leak in the blood pressure cuff the size hole that we had in the suit would not be catastrophic, and we decided to go ahead with the EVA.\nWhite It was within the capability of the system we were using.\nMcDivitt At Carnarvon we not only got the go-ahead to start the depressurazation, we also got the go-ahead to open up the hatch, the go-ahead that we weren't supposed to get until Hawaii. So, we went ahead and did that.\nWhite Yes. I'm kind of curious of the whole time. We were out nearly an orbit, I think. We didn't get it closed back again till we got back around to Carnarvon.\nMcDivitt We were in a whole orbit depressurized.\nWhite Yes, I don't think people quite realize that.\nMcDivitt We'll remind them. As we got to the hatch opening thing, we had our first difficulties with the hatch. The gain gear, I guess you want to call it—actually I call it the ratchet—didn't want to engage into the UNLOCK position."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"We fooled with it a few times and it finally engaged in the UNLOCK position, and Ed was able to go ahead and start.\nWhite The first indication of trouble was when I unstowed the handle to open the hatch. The handle freely moved up and down with no tension on it at all. I knew right away where the trouble was. It was up in that little spring on the gain pawl. So, I went up and manipulated it back and forth in hopes that I could break the lubrication loose in the spring to get it to work. We must have spent several minutes with the hatch. I thought perhaps it might have been stuck in the manner that the hatch got stuck in the Wet Mock, where it just was stuck. You could ratchet it open, but the hatch itself wouldn't open. It was pretty apparent the trouble was in the gain pawl. I jimmied it back and forth, and then I decided to go ahead and try the technique of actuating it in sequence with the hatch handle. If you actually replaced the operation of the spring with mechanically moving the gain pawl up and down, you can do the same work that the spring does."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt Your fingers sort of take the place of the spring and drive this little pawl home.\nWhite This is the first time we actually tried this in a suit. It requires you to press up with your left arm to get at the gain pawl, and at the same time hold yourself down. And I think later on this was a source of some of our problems which I brought out now so that we can find out later on. I felt it start to engage, and start to ratchet the lugs out. Jim also verified that they were coming open. I backed them off, and I remember Jim saying \"Ooop! Not so fast!\", and at that time it popped. The hatch actually popped open, jumped open about 3 or 4 inches.\nMcDivitt I was expecting the hatch to come open with a bang. Although we had the cabin to vent and it had bled on down to where there was nothing indicated on the Cabin Pressure Gage, we still really had the repress valve on. He was bleeding right into the spacecraft. We never got down to a vacuum and even though we had a cabin pressure of only a tenth of a psi, we spread it over the entire area of that hatch,"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nand that puts a pretty good size force on it.\nI had a real tight hold on the hatch closing\ndevice, and when it popped open I was able to\nsnub it.\nWhite It didn't really open with much force, did it?\nMcDivitt Well, it did. It opened with a fair amount. It\npopped and I couldn't stop it the first inch\nor so. Then, of course, as soon as it opened\nthat much pressure bled off. I just sort of\nsnubbed the thing to keep it from flying all\nthe way open. Now if I hadn't been holding onto\nit, I don't think it would have gone open more\nthan two or three feet.\nWhite This is another point too. There's more force\non the hatch actuator than I thought. I didn't\njust flip the door open with my hand. I had to\nactually forcibly push it open, similar to the\nforce with which I opened the hatch laying on\nmy back under one \"g\". That's about the force\nthat I had to put on the hatch to open it.\nMcDivitt This extra force that we are talking about is\ndue to the O-rings they put in the pyros that\nare used for jettisoning the hatch. This is\nsomething that they put in just before the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nflight. Something that we'd gone out to the\nspacecraft to feel. We knew just about what the\nforce was, but it was pretty high.\nWhite Okay. At this time I had certain things that I\nhad to accomplish. I had to mount the camera\non the back of the adapter, and mount the\numbilical guard on the edge of the door. I\nelected, as I had planned, to go ahead and mount\nthe camera first and then the umbilical guard.\nI mounted the camera and it went on without too\nmuch difficulty. The three little lugs on the\nbottom are a good mounting scheme. I think I\nwould make a little easier engaging device for\nworking out in a hard suit. I had familiarity\nwith it, and it did lock up there all right.\nThe umbilical guard for the umbilical on the\nside of the door took me a little longer to\nmount. Back to opening the hatch--I had the\nthermal gloves on when we were opening the\nhatch, and because of the fine work I had to do\nwith the little gain and the drive lugs up\nthere, I had to remove the thermal gloves so\nthat I could actually actuate those small\nlevers. I couldn't do them with any precision\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nwith my gloved hand. So, I took the thermal\ngloves off at this time and I handed them to\nJim. When I got back out I didn't notice\nany temperature extremes. I felt quite confident\nthat there wouldn't be any heat since we just\ncame out of the dark side, so I decided to do\nthe actual work in putting this equipment on\nwith my plain pressure suit gloves. I had much\nmore feel with them. Let me get back now to the\numbilical guard on the door. It went on pretty\nwell. It took me a little longer and it took\nme four or five trys to get the little pin into\nthe hole that actually snubbed the guard down\non the door. I did something then that I\nhadn't planned to do. The bag had floated up\nand out of the spacecraft and now it was above\nthe point where the hose was going through the\numbilical guard. I had planned to keep it down\ninside. I left it there for two reasons: (1)\nI figured it was there already and I would have\nhad to take the umbilical cord off again and\nscooted it back down, and (2) I also felt that\nJim might have had a better view if it wasn't\nsitting right in front of him on the hose coming\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nup from their press valve. I elected to go ahead\nand leave the bag there. I then reported to\nJim that I had everything all mounted and was\nready to go. I had planned to take a short\nseries of pictures. Since we had gotten out\nearly, I had a little extra time at this time,\nso I went ahead and turned the outside EVA\ncamera on. I took a short sequence of pictures\nthat actually gives the egress up out of the\nseat. I kind of went back down and came out\nagain so they would get an actual picture\nof it, and then I turned the camera off again.\nI mounted the camera and I turned it on while it\nwas on the mount. I took a short sequence when\nI asked Jim to hand me my left thermal glove,\nwhich he did. I put the thermal glove on while\nthe camera was running. I turned back around.\nI wanted to be sure the camera was off, so I\ntook it off the mount and I turned the camera\noff and actually visually took a look to see if\nthe switch was off.\nMcDivitt Did you knock it off one time? I thought you\nsaid the camera fell off.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nWhite By golly, I did. So I must of mounted it four\ntimes. That's right, I knocked it off one time\nduring this time when I was out there. I got\nthe picture of the egress, and then I asked you\nto hand me the gun. At this time the camera\nwasn't running. I had the glove on my left\nhand, and I went ahead and took the gun and made\nsure that it was ready to go. I had the\ncamera on at that time and the valve was on. I\nchecked the valve to be sure it was on and I\nwas essentially ready to go. I don't know how\nlong this took, but it took me longer than I\nthought. We had had early egress and it wasn't\ntoo much before I got the GO that I was ready to\nleave the spacecraft.\nMcDivitt I'm not sure whether we got that GO from\nHawaii or Guaymas. I sort of suspect that we\ngot that GO from Hawaii, not Guaymas as we had\noriginally planned.\nWhite Well, it sure seemed short from the time I was\nmounting all that stuff out there to the time\nyou told me go.\nMcDivitt That's right. I'm sure we were talking to\nHawaii, and they said you're clear to proceed\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"108\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwith EVA.\nWhite And that's when I went. I bet we went out at Hawaii.\nMcDivitt I think we went out at Hawaii.\nWhite I delayed from the time you gave just a minute, long enough to actuate the camera on the outside. This was kind of interesting. When I actuated that camera, I had my gun tied to my arm with the tether. It floated freely to my right. I turned back around and turned the switch ON on the camera, and listened and made sure the thing was running. I knew it was running, and put it down. I think you'll see this on the film. I wanted to be sure it was running when I mounted it back there. I actually took it off and turned it on, and I remember it jiggling up and down when I was trying to stick it on there. It ought to be a funny looking film. And it might even show the gun floating beside me as I was mounting it. That's when you said, \"Slow down. You're getting awfully hot.\" I was working pretty hard to get that on. I mounted the camera again and this is where I tried to actually maneuver right out CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"109\nCONFIDENTIAL\nof the spacecraft. I knew right away as soon as I got up—I felt even before -- that the technique of holding on to the bar in the spacecraft and sticking a finger in the RCS thruster wasn't going to work. I mentioned that to Jim before -- that I didn't think I would be able to do it.\nMcDivitt I think that you and I both knew how you were going to do, and everybody else was planning for us how we were going to do it, but without any real experience in it. People who didn't know a lot about it were planning this sequence and it wasn't the way it should have been.\nWhite I couldn't have done that. I didn't have three hands. I couldn't hold the gun and put a finger in the RCS nozzle, and hold the handle at the same time. I thought it would be more desirable anyhow to actually depart the spacecraft with no velocity, other than that imparted by the gun. This is exactly what I did. I thought that I was free of the spacecraft, and I fired the gun. I realized that my legs were still dragging a little bit on the side of the seat, so I pulled myself out until I could see that my feet were actually out of the CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"110\nCONFIDENTIAL\nspacecraft. I think you called me and said I was out of the spacecraft.\nMcDivitt I called and told you that you were clear. That's right.\nWhite And that's when I started firing the gun and actually propelled myself under the influence of the gun. I don't believe I gave any input into the spacecraft when I left that time, did I?\nMcDivitt No, you left as clean as a whistle.\nWhite Later on, I gave you some pretty big ones.\nMcDivitt You were really bouncing around then.\nWhite Now at the time, I left entirely under the influence of the gun and it carried me right straight out, a little higher than I wanted to go. I wanted to maneuver over to your side, but I maneuvered out of the spacecraft and forward and perhaps a little higher than I wanted to be. When I got out to what I estimate as probably one-half or two-thirds the way out on the tether, I was out past the nose of the spacecraft. I started a yaw to the left with the gun and that's when I reported that the gun really worked quite well. I believe that I CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"111\nCONFIDENTIAL\nstopped that yaw, and I started translating back toward the spacecraft. It was either on this translation or the one following this that I got into a bit of a combination of a pitch roll and the yaw together. I felt that I could have corrected it, but I knew that it would have taken more fuel than I had wanted to expend with the gun, so I gave a little tug on the tether and came back in. This is the first experience I had with tether dynamics and it brought me right back to where I did not want to be. It brought me right back on the top of the spacecraft, by the adapter section. Jim was calling me and said that I was out of his sight. I told him that I was all right, that I was up above the spacecraft, I looked down and I could see attitude thrusters firing, little white puffs out of each one. I wasn't very close. They looked just like what Chamberlain's report told us. It looked just like about a foot and a half or maybe 2 feet of plume from the spacecraft and certainly didn't look ominous to me at all. In fact it looked kind of like the spacecraft was really alive and working down CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"112\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthere. I knew Jim was doing his job holding attitude for me.\nMcDivitt Let me comment on the attitude-holding right now. Initially we started out in blunt-end-forward, banked to the left about 30 degrees or so. This happened to be the attitude we were in. We wanted to be blunt-end-forward for the sun, and they told me it didn't make any difference what attitude that we were in when we opened up the hatch. We had originally planned on opening the hatch toward the ground. I was called by some station that said it didn't make any difference what attitude I was in when I opened the hatch. We opened the hatch. We opened it in that particular attitude, and I held the attitude for the first portion of the time that Ed was out. When you had the gun you managed to stay reasonably well out in front. I held the spacecraft essentially stationary with respect to the local horizontal. After you ran out of fuel in the gun you were on top of the spacecraft all of the time. I felt that unless you really had to have the thing stablized, to maintain your sense of balance or CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"whatever you want to call it, I wouldn't fire the thrusters.\nWhite You asked that already when I was out.\nMcDivitt Yes. I asked you if you needed it and you said no. So, then I felt it would be better not to fire the thrusters, because you were drifting back up over the cockpit. I could see that you were going up over us. I couldn't see back behind me, but I could see by the motions that you had when you went by me that you were going to continue on. I felt that it would be a lot safer if we just let the spacecraft drift unless it got into very high rates. I fired the jets a couple of times just to knock off the rates. I let it start drifting when you got on the tether so that you wouldn't get back there on top of one of those thrusters when I fired them. From about the time you ran out of fuel until you got back in I didn't do much attitude controlling. I did some. Everytime the rates got up pretty high, I'd knock them off. You were able to maneuver around the spacecraft when the spacecraft itself had rates of say plus or minus 2 degrees/second in a"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"couple of the axes at the same time. Here again before the flight we discussed the axis system. Ed selected the spacecraft as his axis system. It didn't appear that he was having a bit of trouble with it. He was maneuvering with respect to it, regardless of what the earth, sun, moon, and stars were doing. It was pretty obvious to me that was exactly what he was doing.\nWhite Well, when I came back the first time to the spacecraft with the gun-- I had used the tether to bring me back--I did go back up on the adapter area. This is the first time it had happened. I said, \"All right. I'm coming back out again.\" This is one of the most impressive uses of the gun that I had. I started back out with that gun, and I decided that I would fire a pretty good burst too. I started back out with that gun, and I literally flew with the gun right down along the edge of the spacecraft, right out to the front of the nose, and out past the end of the nose. I then actually stopped myself with the gun. That was easier than I thought. I must have been fairly"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"fortunate, because I must have fired it right through my CG. I stopped out there and, if my memory serves me right, this is where I tried a couple of yaw maneuvers. I tried a couple of yaw and a couple of pitch maneuvers, and then I started firing the gun to come back in. I think this was the time that the gun ran out. And I was actually able to stop myself with it out there that second time too. The longest firing time that I put on the gun was the one that I used to start over the doors up by the adapter section. I started back out then. I probably fired it for a one second burst or something like that. I used small burst all the time. You could put a little burst in and the response was tremendous. You could start a slow yaw or a slow pitch. It seemed to be a rather efficient way to operate. I would have liked to have had a three foot bottle out there--the bigger the better. It was quite easy to control. I feel that with the gun there would be no difficulty in maneuvering back to the aft end of the spacecraft, and this was exactly what I did later on, just on the tether. I got"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"all the way back. So, I ran out of air with the gun and I reported this to Jim. I didn't attempt to take any pictures while I was actually maneuvering with the gun. The technique that I used with the gun was the technique that we developed on the air-bearing platform. I kept my left hand out to the side, and the gun as close to my center of gravity as I could. I think that the training I had on the air-bearing tables was very representative, especially in yaw and pitch. I felt quite confident with the gun in yaw and pitch, but I felt a little less confident in roll. I felt that I would have to use too much of my fuel. I felt that it would be a little more difficult to control and I didn't want to use my fuel to take out my roll combination with the yaw. We divided our plan so that I would have a part of it on the maneuver and a part of it on the tether. I don't know how far along we were when the gun ran out.\nMcDivitt Right on schedule when the gun ran out. We planned four minutes for the gun portion of it. We were just about on schedule."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White I bet we used a little more than four, because I think we came out earlier than we thought.\nMcDivitt No, I started the event timer to time it.\nWhite Well, this is where my control difficulty began. As soon as my gun ran out I wasn't able to control myself the way I could with the gun. With that gun, I could decide to go to a part of a spacecraft and very confidently go. I think right now that I wish that I had given Jim the gun and taken the camera off. Now I was working on taking some pictures and working on the tether dynamics. I immediately realized what was wrong. I realized that our tether was mounted on a plane oblique to the angle in which I wanted to translate. I remember from our air-bearing work that every-time you got at an angle from the perpendicular where your tether was mounted, it gave you a nice arcing trajectory back in the opposite direction. You're actually like a weight on the end of a string. If you push out in one direction, and you're at an angle from the perpendicular, when you reach the end of a tether, it neatly sends you in a long arc back"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in the opposite direction. Each time this arc carried me right back to the top of the adapter, to the top of the spacecraft, in fact toward the adapter section. One time I was so close to the thrusters back there that I called Jim. I said, \"Don't fire anymore.\", because I was right on the thrusters. I was even closer than that foot and a half which I had noted to be the length of the thruster plumes, and I didn't want to sit on a firing thruster."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tWe were discussing the EVA and I was saying that I spent approximately 70 percent of my time, it seemed, trying to get out of the area back above the spacecraft in the adapter area.\nMcDivitt\tYes, you intended to go toward the position that was directly over the cockpit. You always arced passed it because you were coming from the front.\nWhite\tThis was exactly right because that's exactly where my tether was connected. Chris had been very emphatic that he wanted me to stay out of this area, and I had agreed to stay out of there. I tell you, I was doing my level best to keep out but the tether dynamics just put me back there all the time.\nMcDivitt\tLet me interject something here. When we were talking about the control modes and how we were going to control the spacecraft, we decided on the Pulse Mode rather than the Horizon Scan Mode, or anything like that. The Horizon Scan Mode would leave me free to use both hands to take pictures of you and that way I wouldn't have had to control the spacecraft. But since it"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was an automatic mode and it fired whenever it felt like firing. It didn't give us any flexibility, and this is why I felt that the best mode to be in was Pulse, in case you did get back there.\nWhite\tThat's exactly what happened.\nMcDivitt\tI didn't have to worry about the thruster going off in your face. I didn't want the thrusters to fire and they didn't fire because I didn't touch them. It was a wise choice.\nWhite\tI think this was good. When you look at it from a picture-taking viewpoint, it gave a wider spectrum of pictures. You got different views of the earth and the horizon. I'm glad we weren't held to a specific mode.\n\nMcDivitt\tI think that the picture we did take or the attitude that we started out, which is shown in the newspaper, is just about right.\n\nMcDivitt\tI guess we banked over to the right, I don't know.\nWhite\tThat must have been just as I came out.\nMcDivitt\tI don't remember, but it had enough of the ground in the background so that it was certainly"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"worthwhile.\nWhite\tOn one of my passes back to the adapter area I got so far back that I was about 3 or 4 feet from the adapter separation plane, perpendicular to it. It was rather jagged. There did appear to be some sharp edges but it really didn't look very imposing to me. I took a picture of it. That's one picture that I believe was good and should come out.\nMcDivitt\tThe trouble is it was probably set on infinity and you were up about 5 feet.\nWhite\tNo, I set the camera to about 15 feet or so. It might be a little fuzzy because it was too close.\nWhite\tNo, I didn't see the far side of the adapter. It didn't go all the way around. I think I could have pushed off and gotten back that far.\nMcDivitt\tNo. Better to stay away from it.\nWhite\tWell, I felt that if I got going I could have swung all the way around and had my umbilical right on the edge, without anything to hold on to or any gun to control myself. This didn't seem like it was at all safe and I had told Chris that I wouldn't go behind the craft. So I didn't go back there."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt\tThat must have been just about the time I told you to come back in.\nWhite\tNo, I would estimate this was about two-thirds of the way and about this time I was after pictures. I knew this was a part of the flight plan that I had, in my mind, fulfilled satisfactorily. So I tried to get some pictures and this is where I really imparted some velocities, trying to get away from the spacecraft into a position so I could take a picture. I went out to the end of my tether cord quite a few times doing this. I seemed like every time I would be completely 180 degrees to the spacecraft. I'd have beautiful views of the ground but I couldn't see the spacecraft. It was a definite mistake to mount the camera on the gun. That made it very difficult to use the camera. I had to point not only the camera but the gun with the long thrusters mounted out on the little arms. I'd want to take a picture of an object like the spacecraft, and there were too many loose items to get tangled up in and block the camera. I know my tie-down strap was floating loose. I had left that out intentionally so that I could"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"get it later on anytime I had to pull my helmet down. Occasionally when I got in close to the spacecraft, the bag and strings associated with the bag were tangling up around the vicinity of the gun and the camera. And it seemed like the umbilical was right in front of the camera all the time. So, I think the pictures will verify that I was flicking my right arm quite a bit in the latter part of the flight, trying to clear things out from in front of it to get a picture. Whenever I was in a position to get a picture it seemed like I was facing away from the spacecraft. I took a couple of shots in desperation and I think I might have gotten a piece of the spacecraft. But I never got the picture that I was after. I wanted to get a picture of Jim sitting in that spacecraft, through the open hatch, with the whole spacecraft. I know that I didn't get that. In fact, as time went on I realized that I wasn't going to get much of a picture. I was trying everything I knew to get out there and get stabilized so that I could turn around and get a good picture. I just couldn't do this. This was at the time when I was looking"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"a little into the tether dynamics, and I actually kicked off from the spacecraft pretty hard. I remember Jim saying, \"Hey, you're imparting 2 degrees/second rotational velocity to the spacecraft when you depart.\" I was pushing the spacecraft quite vigorously. I wanted to push off at an angle of about 30 to 40 degrees to the surface of the spacecraft. And anytime I pushed off from the surface of the spacecraft, my main velocity was perpendicular to the surface. It shot me straight out perpendicular to where the tether was attached. Again, this wasn't in the position that Jim could take a picture of me, and it wasn't too good a position for myself. I usually ended up facing away from the spacecraft.\nMcDivitt Let me interject something here. In desperation I took the Hasselblad camera and stuck it over out through Ed's open hatch, and asked him if he could see the camera and if he could tell me which way to point it. He couldn't see the camera so he never really did tell me which way to point it.\nWhite No. This was the time that you said, \"Hey, get in front of my window.\" It just so happened that"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I was right up close to the spacecraft and that's when I came over. Do you remember me coming over and actually looking about a foot from your window, Jim?\nMcDivitt Yes.\nWhite Looking right at you.\nMcDivitt Yes, I think that was the time the movie camera wasn't going and I was fooling around with it, trying to make sure that it was running.\nWhite Oh, that would have been a very interesting picture.\nMcDivitt I'm not sure it was going, Ed, because, as you know, we had so much trouble making the left hand one run. We had that trouble throughout the remainder of the flight. You pushed a switch over and it seemed to run sometimes, but sometimes it wouldn't. I kept worrying about whether or not it was running so, I would grab a hold of it to see if I could feel it clicking over. I switched the ON-OFF switch on a couple of times to make sure I could tell the change in the feel of it. I'm afraid this time is one of the times that I didn't have the camera going, because I was trying to make sure that it was"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"going. I'm not positive. I hope I got the picture but I'm not sure about it.\nWhite That was the time that I came right in, and I couldn't have been more than a foot from your window, looking in. I could actually see you sitting there.\nMcDivitt That's probably when you put a mark on my window.\nWhite I think the way I did that--I could actually see you in there and I pushed away with my hands a little bit. I think this was the time that either my arm or my shoulder contacted the upper part of your window and you called me a \"dirty dog\" because I had messed your window up. You know, as you look back in retrospect, I wish you'd handed me a kleenex and I wish I'd cleaned up the outside of those two windows. I think we could have done it.\nMcDivitt Yes. We'd have never gotten to the kleenex at that time, but I think we might have done something about it.\nWhite I think I might have but we might have smeared them so irrepairably that it might have--.\nMcDivitt That's right. When you looked at that window of mine from the inside while the sun was shining"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it looked like it was a black paint smear, such as if you'd take a piece of white linoleum and a black rubber soled shoe and made a mark on the linoleum. It had that kind of consistency. It was absolutely opaque. Just as black as it could be.\nWhite Yes, I could tell. When I hit it I could see from the outside that it turned white.\nMcDivitt It turned black from the inside.\nWhite From the outside it was white.\nMcDivitt From the inside it was black. When I got the thing turned around a different way with the sun on it, it was perfectly clear as if you had taken the coating off, and what I was seeing was through a perfectly clear surface. So, I don't know really whether the thing was black, that you placed something on the window that would make it black, or whether you'd taken something off that was very white, very thin.\nWhite I smeared the film that was on your window. I'm quite confident that is what happened.\nMcDivitt I looked at our spacecraft windows after they got it onboard, and I could still see that little hunk of window. It looks to me like what"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"128\nCONFIDENTIAL\nyou did was remove a layer off the window, rather\nthan put something on it. You took something off\nit. Except I can't possibly imagine why it was\nso black and opaque with the sun shining on it\nat certain angles.\nWhite\tI'd like to comment on the ease of operation\noutside on a tether. If you've ever tried to\nhang on the outside of a water tower, or about\nan 8-foot diameter tree, you can visualize the\nproblem I had out there. The decision to leave\nthe hatch open was probably one of the very best\nthat we made. I had nothing outside the space-\ncraft to stabilize myself on. There just isn't\nanything to hold onto. I think Jim will\nremember one time when I tried to hook my\nfingers in the RCS thrusters. I think Jim could\nsee because--.\nMcDivitt\tI could see.\nWhite\tI was right out in front of Jim's window. This\ngave me really nothing particularly to hold onto.\nIt didn't stabilize me at all. I had nothing\nreally to hold onto, and so if you have ever\ntried to grasp an 8-foot diameter tree and shinny\nup it, you know the kind of feeling that I had\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n129\noutside there. There just wasn't anything for me\nto hold onto. One thing though that I'll say\nvery emphatically-- there wasn't any tendency\nto recontact the spacecraft in anything but very\ngentle contacts. I made some quite interesting\ncontacts. I made one that I recall on the\nbottomside of the right door in which I had kind\nof rolled around. I actually contacted the bottom\nof the spacecraft with my back and the back of my\nhead. I was faced away from the spacecraft and I\njust drifted right up against it and just very\nlightly contacted it. I rebounded off. As long\nas the pushoffs are slow there just isn't any\ntendency to get in an uncontrollable attitude.\nMcDivitt\tIt seemed Ed did hit it pretty hard at one time.\nI think that was after he pushed off violently;\nhe went out and it seemed he came back and bashed\nit pretty hard. I remember a pretty solid thump.\nIt seemed it was over the right hand hatch or just\nright behind--.\nWhite\tI know a couple of times I kicked off with my\nfeet, and I think I know the time you are talking\nabout. I came in with my foot. It wasn't so much\nthe contact with myself--.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"130\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt\tWhat did you do? Contact and pushoff?\nWhite\tI contacted and pushed with my foot.\nMcDivitt\tI heard a big thump and I think I called you at\nthis time to take it easy.\nWhite\tI believe that was on the front end of the R & R\nSection on my side where you couldn't see me.\nMcDivitt\tIt was a position that I couldn't see.\nWhite\tOne of the pictures that I saw last night in the\nmovies, I think, was made at that time. I was\ncoming in fairly rapidly and I wanted to get back\nout, so I kicked off again with my foot fairly\nhard. It was a very good kick. I felt that I\ncertainly could have controlled myself without\nthe gun out there if I had just some type of\nvery insignificant hand-holds or something\nthat I could have held on to. I believe that I\ncould have gone on back to the adapters with a\nminimum of several hand-holds to go back there,\ngoing from one to the other. I was actually\nlooking for some type of hand-holds out there.\nI remember that the only one that I saw was the\nstub antenna on the nose of the spacecraft. I\ncould see the ceramic covering over it, I believe\nit was ceramic, or some kind of covering over it.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n131\nMcDivitt\tYes, it's white.\nWhite\tI felt that this wasn't quite the thing to grab\nonto, this was at the time when I wanted to get\nout at about 10 or 12 feet directly in front of\nthe spacecraft. I certainly had the urge to hang\nonto the antenna and push myself out. But I\ndidn't and there really wasn't anything to hold\nonto. You really need something to stabilize\nyourself. I worked around the open hatch.\nMcDivitt\tLet me ask you a question? How about putting\nthe hand-hold inside of the nose cone? A fairing\nis up there for launch, just the fairing.We could\nmount a hand-hold right inside.\nWhite\tI think we could have really made some money if\nwe had had an attachment for the tether out there\nright on the nose of the spacecraft.\nMcDivitt\tStrung the tether out there and then attached\nthere?\nWhite\tRight. Have a seoond attach point and put it\nright out there. It would give you something\nto hold onto out there.\nMcDivitt\tYes.\nWhite\tThere wasn't anything to hold onto on the R & R\nSection.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"132\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt\tI know it.\nWhite\tIt had smooth corners and the only thing I could\nhave grabbed was the antenna, and I didn't want\nto grasp that. We thought one time of holding\non out there and thrusting, but--.\nMcDivitt\tThere isn't anything to hold onto. I think you\nprobably could have gotten a hold on the antenna\nand held onto it without hurting it. I examined\nit pretty closely before the launch, and it look-\ned pretty sturdy.\nWhite\tI thought this was something we needed and I\ndidn't want to fool with it.\nMcDivitt\tAs it turned out we really needed that antenna\nbecause that was the antenna that we used the\nwhole flight--that stub antenna in the nose.\nWhite\tYes.\nMcDivitt\tWhen we opened up the spacecraft the hatch came\nopen with a bang. The air that we had inside\nwas obviously of greater pressure than that out-\nside, and we had a great outflow of things inclu-\nding a piece of foam that we had used to pack our\nmaneuvering gun in it's box. It was the first\nthing that we put in orbit. But then throughout\nthe time that Ed was out, he wanted the door wide\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"open. It was pretty obvious that the flow was from the spacecraft to the outside because partway through his maneuvers his glove floated out and floated away from the spacecraft with a reasonably good relative velocity. The entire time he was out, even after we had the hatch open for 20 to 25 minutes, we were still getting particles floating out through the hatch. It was the flow. The streamlines were very obvious. It was from inside the spacecraft to the outside. I guess the spacecraft was out-gassing at a sufficient rate to cause a reasonably large pressure differential from inside to outside, and it was certainly relieving itself. I noticed this even as we were trying to get the hatch closed. There was still a flow from inside to outside.\nWhite Okay. I think that pretty well covers most of the things that we actually did while I was out there.\nMcDivitt Now, as for getting back in--.\nWhite Yes, let's go all the way back through and come back in. The time really did go fast! I had watches with me, but I didn't look at them.\nMcDivitt I was watching the time. I noticed my watch"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"around 4 minutes and 6 minutes and 8 minutes. And then you got involved in floating around as we were trying to get that last picture.\nWhite The time really flew!\nMcDivitt You kept getting behind me all the time and I became distracted from the time we were on VOX, completely blocking out the ground. Our VOX must have been triggered constantly, because whenever we were on it they couldn't transmit to us.\nWhite That's where the time got away from me.\nMcDivitt That's right, and it was 15 minutes and 40 seconds when I looked at my clock. So, I thought that I had better go to the ground. I said to the ground, \"Do you have any message for us?\" because I knew it was time to get back in. And they just said,\"Yes. Get back in!\"\nWhite Right. I remember hearing Gus say,\"Yes, get him back in!\"\nMcDivitt This is what all the fuss was about. They might have been transmitting to us to get back in but we were on VOX and couldn't hear a thing.\nWhite I did a few things after this time that I wasn't doing to deliberately stay out. But I was deliberately trying to do one last thing. I was"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"trying to get that last picture. And this was one of a couple of times that I kicked off the spacecraft really hard, to get out to the end of the tether. And I wasn't successful in getting the position so that I could get a picture. I felt this was the one part of the mission that I hadn't completed. Everything else was successful and I wanted very badly to get that picture from outside. I spent a moment or so doing this. This was also the period of time in which I called down to Jim and said, \"I'm actually walking on top of the spacecraft.\" I took the tether held onto it, and used it as a device to pull me down to the spacecraft. I walked from about where the angle starts to break between the nose section and the cabin section. I walked from there probably about two-thirds of the way up the cabin, and it was really quite strenuous. Could you see me walking along, Jim?\nMcDivitt No, I couldn't see but I could feel the thumping on the outside.\nWhite That's when I got to laughing so hard. This was when Jim was saying to come in.\nMcDivitt Yes, I think this is when I got a little stern"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and said, \"Get in here!\"\nWhite When I was walking on the top and was laughing, Jim probably didn't think I thought he was serious. But it was a very funny sensation. Now as far as delaying, there were certain things that I had to do before I came in. And there wasn't anything in the world that was going to hurry me up in doing them. We had just agreed that we'd do things in a slow manner and this is the way we'd do it.\nMcDivitt Let me talk about the time here. It is implied in the papers that Ed didn't really want to come back in, and didn't. I think one of the things is that we didn't hear. We didn't have any transmissions from the ground after he stepped outside until I went off VOX at 15:40. They said, \"Come back in.\", and I told him to come back in. I think that he probably delayed about a minute or two minutes.\nWhite I think so, trying to get the pictures.\nMcDivitt And at that time I got a little irritated and hollered at Ed, too. Then he started back in.\nWhite But when I came back I had things to do.\nMcDivitt Yes. I know it. That's what I'm trying to say"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to get this thing in its proper perspective.\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt We were 3 minutes 40 seconds late getting started back in because we just lost track of the time. I couldn't see Ed any longer. I was trying to keep track of what he was doing without being able to see, and I lost track of time. Then I think he delayed probably a minute or a minute and a half before he started back in.\nWhite That's right.\nMcDivitt So, those are the two delays.\nWe'd agreed on that he'd start back in after 12 minutes. From then on all the time was spent just trying to get back in.\nWhite I had certain things to do. I had to disassemble the camera that was on the spacecraft. I did this very slowly. I had to disconnect the electrical connection to it and hand the camera back in to Jim. Then I had to go out and disconnect the umbilical, and this really went pretty well. The little tether that I had them put on the ring, a pull ring, to disconnect the pin worked pretty well. I disconnected the umbilical and discarded the umbilical cord."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt\tThat was the last thing Ed put into orbit.\nWhite\tRight. I put that in orbit. Earlier, it was really quite a sensation to see the glove floating off. I asked Jim a few minutes before about the glove, or Jim had asked me, \"Hey, do you want this other glove?\" About a minute later, I saw it go floating out of the hatch.\nMcDivitt\tAll I can say, Ed, was about a half hour later I was sure thankful that we had gotten rid of something. We had so much other junk that we didn't want.\nWhite\tI saw the glove come floating out of the right-hand hatch, and it was a perfectly clear picture of the glove as it floated out. It floated out over my right shoulder and out--it looked like it was on a definite trajectory going somewhere. I don't know where it was going. It floated very smartly out of the spacecraft and out into space.\nMcDivitt\tI think this had a lot to do with that out-gassing. There was a definite stream--.\nWhite\tYes. It was following the streamline right out of the spacecraft.\nMcDivitt\tIt went out perpendicular to the spacecraft,"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"whichever direction that is.\nWhite\tBack to getting back in the spacecraft--I had the one thermal glove on the one hand, my left hand. I always wanted my right hand to be free to operate that gun and the camera. The way the camera was mounted on there, I had to use both hands--one hand to actually stabilize it with the gun and the other hand to reach over. Again, I think dynamics played a little bit of a role there. Everytime I brought my hand in from a position out on my left, it tended to turn me a little bit, which is exactly what we found happened on the air-bearing tables. I think that the camera should have been velcroed to my body somewhere and used independently of the gun.\nMcDivitt\tYes. I got that same impression. I got the impression that what you really should have done was--.\nWhite\tDropped the gun.\nMcDivitt\tUnhooked the camera out there floating around and just thrown the gun away. I don't think you ever should have tried to bring it back.\nWhite\tWell, what I should have done was fold the gun and handed it to you."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt\tThat would have just taken longer. It would have taken precious seconds out of the very few that we had anyway. I think you should have just unhooked it and thrown the gun away.\nWhite\tThis was probably the thing that I was most irritated with not completing. I didn't feel the pictures were satisfactory with the camera outside. But I think the reason was that my camera was not in a position so I could use it adequately. But coming back in was the last thing. As a matter-of-fact, before I dismounted the movie camera and dismounted the umbilical, I folded the gun.\nWhite\tI took the lanyard off with the camera on it, and handed Jim the gun and the camera.\nMcDivitt\tAnd I stuck it down between my legs.\nWhite\tThat was the first thing that I handed in. Then I handed in the 16 mm camera, and then I threw away the umbilical. This was where the fun started. I found it was a lot more difficult coming back in than I had remembered in the zero-g training. It seemed like I was contacting both sides of the hatch at the same time, much firmer than I had in the zero-g airplane."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt\tYou mean you were hitting the hatch on one side and the hatch opening on the other side.\nWhite\tComing back in, I was contacting the side of the spacecraft on both sides.\nMcDivitt\tYes, that's right.\nMcDivitt\tYou weren't really hitting the hatch on both sides, you were hitting the hatch opening on both sides.\nWhite\tYes. I was coming down through there. I felt a much firmer attachment wedging in there than I'd remembered from the zero-g training. I think this might be associated with the extra 7/10 or 8/10 pound of pressurization on the suit. I just might have been a little fatter. I did notice that the suit was a little harder. I felt this type of suit before during my pre-work, so this wasn't a surprise to me at all. But I did feel like I was a little fatter getting in and wedged a little tighter.\nMcDivitt\tI really don't think Ed was any fatter. I think that link in the suit holds the suit to whatever volume it's going to go to. And I don't think a couple psi are going--.\nWhite\tWell, I felt like I was hitting a little more as"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I came in.\nMcDivitt\tYes. I think what happened was he was stiffer, and he wasn't bending his legs and his arms any.\nWhite\tYou mean with the harder suit I was stiffer?\nMcDivitt\tHarder. And your arms were stiffer and you weren't bending them around as much. It looked a lot more rigid.\nWhite\tThis might have been.\nMcDivitt\tNot semi-rigid--Ed was rigid.\nWhite\tAll right. This might have been.\nMcDivitt\tAnd that looked to me like it might have been the problem.\nWhite\tThis might have been part of the recontact on the side of the spacecraft that I noticed. But as I came back in, I noticed that I had to work a little harder, and I hoped the tape was running because I think we had a very good commentary. We were both talking very clearly back and forth to each other during this time and I was telling Jim that I was going to come in slow because it was a little tougher than I had thought. We were talking back and forth about being slow and taking it easy.\nMcDivitt\tI actually helped push Ed down in there. I don't"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"know whether he felt it or not in that suit.\nWhite\tNo, I couldn't.\nMcDivitt\tI reached over and I steered his legs down in,\nand I sort of got him settled in the seat a\nlittle better than what he was getting himself.\nWhite\tYes. Right. I was kind of free wheeling my feet\nup there.\nMcDivitt\tYes. It looked to me like Ed was holding on to\nthe top of the open part of the hatch and just\nswiveling around that part. It looked like he\ndidn't have enough mobility and strength in his\narms to actually twist his body down against the\nforce of the suit into the seat.\nWhite\tAfter awhile, I reached my left arm underneath,\nthe same technique we had used in the zero-g\ntraining, and actually I had my hands all over the\ncircuit breakers.\nMcDivitt\tYes. Ed was a real hazard to the switches.\nWhite\tYes, and I pulled myself down in and that's when\nI really started coming in--when I got hold of the\nunderneath side of that circuit breaker panel\nand pulled myself in. That's when my first real\nprogress was made toward actually getting down in.\nMcDivitt\tBecause, while I could steer Ed from where I was"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I really didn't have the strength to pull him in.\nMcDivitt\tIt was 90 degrees to the way that he really\nwanted to be pulling. I could steer. I did do\na little bit of pushing, but not a heck of a lot.\nI wasn't really contributing much to the effort\nthere except--.\nWhite\tYou were guiding me down into the footwells.\nMcDivitt\tYes. That was about it.\nWhite\tBut once I got my hands up underneath the instrument panel, I was back pretty well in familiar\ngrounds--the work that we'd done five dozen times\nin the zero-g airplane,and I knew the technique\npretty well.\nMcDivitt\t10 000 times! White does check pretty well.\nWhite\tI really did it a lot. Maybe the suit was\nstiffer, or maybe I was fatter, but I wasn't\ngoing in quite as easy as I had before--getting\ninto the initial position to pull myself down\ninto the seat. So it took me a little longer.\nIf you recall, I had to go back out again one\ntime. I got back down and started to wedge myself down and I got two fat cramps at the bottoms of my thighs in both legs, where the\nmuscles started to ball up a little."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt\tOh? Did you get it in your thighs or calves?\nWhite\tBoth of the muscles in the back of my thighs\nballed up in a ball and I thought, \"Well, I have\nto go back out and let them straighten up.\"\nSo, I straightened my legs out.\nMcDivitt\tWe had that problem before in the zero-g airplane.\nWhite\tThis is the time Jim said, \"Hey while you're\nup, why don't you throw the visor out?\" I\nhesitated a minute because I thought, \"Well,\nyou son-of-a-buck, you might have problems here.\nYou might have to be spending an orbit or so\ntrying to get in.\"\nMcDivitt\tNo, as a matter of fact, I don't think that is\nwhen you did throw it out. I think you threw\nit out when you came back down and you started\nto close the hatch. You were having trouble.\nIt wouldn't close, and you said, \"I'm going to\nhave to take this visor off so that I can see\nthese things.\" And I said, \"Listen, if we get\nthis thing closed we're not going to open it\nagain. Throw the visor away.\"\nWhite\tThat's right. That was when I got the cramps,\nwent back up again and then I came back down"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"again, and said, \"Hey, I can't see them. I'm\ngoing to have to take the visor off.\"\nMcDivitt\tNo, it was a little bit later than that. You\nhad all ready started to try to close it and you\nwere having difficulty closing it.\nWhite\tOkay. Let's get the sequence out. We came down\nin. I got up to straighten my legs a little\nbit, went back up, then I came back down--.\nMcDivitt\t--with all your equipment on--.\nWhite\tI hadn't held the handle yet, had I?\nMcDivitt\tNo. You hadn't done a thing with it.\nWhite\tSo I got back down into position--.\nMcDivitt\t--with all your equipment on and pulled the\nhatch down.\nWhite\tThe hatch was down far enough to close at this\ntime.\nMcDivitt\tI thought it was.\nWhite\tI did, too. I felt it was down far enough. I\ncan tell by looking right straight down at the\nedge--.\nMcDivitt\tYes. I can tell by looking up underneath the\nright-hand side to see where the dogs are.\nWhite\tOkay. So I thought the hatch was down far\nenough to close at that time. I reached up and"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"got the handle, but I don't know what I said\nto you.\nMcDivitt\tYou didn't say anything. I don't know whether\nyou said anything to me or not, but you didn't\nhave to say anything to me. I saw you move\nthat handle and I saw how easy it was going and\nI saw that the dogs weren't moving.\nWhite\tI think I said something. I don't remember what\nI said. But I said something and you knew\nright away what had happened.\nMcDivitt\tYou didn't say a word. I was watching the dogs\nand that lever and I knew what the trouble was.\nWhite\tRight. So I guess that's when I said, \"I'm\ngoing to have to take the visor off because I\ncan't see.\" And then we went back up and Jim\nsaid, \"Well, we're not going to open the hatch\nagain. Why don't you throw the visor out.\" I\nhesitated for a minute to throw it out because\nI thought that we might have a problem.\nMcDivitt\tActually, we had a little more difficulty than\nwe had explained. We fooled around for a minute or two or maybe even three or four with the\nhandle. It was pretty apparent to us that we\nweren't going to get the hatch closed with nor-"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"mal straight-forward techniques, and that we were going to have to start going to other things.\nWhile we say that we came down and moved the handle once or twice, it was over about a three or four minute period, at least.\nWhite The normal method of closing the hatch is for me to come down and wedge myself down, hold onto the little canvas handle up there, and actually apply a downward force on the hatch to help close it. Then with my right hand I use the hatch handle to ratchet the hatch down. This is normally our technique we would always use, and never in the past, has Jim had to help me with the hatch closing device. This wasn't the case this time. As soon as I had gotten up there to operate the gain lever, I couldn't operate the canvas handle anymore. I couldn't apply any torque or pull there because--.\nMcDivitt Not only that, but you were actually pushing yourself up off the seat. And I'm not sure that even the first time that we had the hatch closed far enough. It looked like it was closed far enough. As a matter of fact, later on when we got it down to that position it looked like it"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was closed fine. It really wasn't closed far enough because you never did get those dogs out until we--.\nWhite No, the dogs came out, Jim, the first time I got torque on it. Those dogs started out, then it closed.\nMcDivitt Did they? Okay.\nWhite Yes. I think we had it down far enough.\nMcDivitt It looked to me like we did, and I couldn't understand why they weren't coming out. I knew that the ratchet wasn't engaged, but I got the impression that it was from watching your hand when you came down one time. You had the ratchet engaged and the little tit pin that sticks in the door that doesn't allow things to come closed wasn't there.\nWhite No, the ratchet wasn't engaged. There was nothing on the handle at all. It was free, completely free. The situation hadn't changed at all. Another thing I'd like to point out now, too, was the chest pack was in the way of bringing the handle down to a full-crank position. And I wanted definitely to do this because you can interrupt the sequence of the dogs if you don't"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"fully stroke the handle each time.\nWhite We went back up so that I could actually see and observe the levers. This was the time Jim said to throw the visor out because we probably wouldn't open the hatch again, once we get it closed. And this seemed like very good sound advice to me. The only thing I was a little questionable about was that at this time I had the inkling in my mind that we might spend quite a bit of time getting this hatch closed, and I might want the visor when I was back out again. But I thought the judgment to throw the visor out was best and I threw it out--opened the door about a foot and a half and threw the visor out. The next time we came back down, I was still having the little bit of problem with the cramps, but not nearly the problem I was having with the gain lever.\nMcDivitt One superseded the other.\nWhite That's right. One problem became of much higher magnitude than the other. So this was the time that we started working. I knew what I had to do. I knew I had to work the gain lever in sequence with the handle again, just like we had when we"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"opened it. We both had an inkling that this was going to happen when we opened it the first time. But this posed the problem of when I reached up with my left arm to work the gain lever. It takes a great deal of force. This isn't the direction that the suit is designed to reach in. And it takes a great deal of force to lift your arms up in the vicinity of your helmet to operate something there. In so doing it pulled me back up out of the seat. And I think this is the time that Jim noticed that I was up higher than I had ever been before, and he actually felt that my helmet was up against the hatch. I tend to agree that I was up in that position.\nMcDivitt Yes. I actually pulled Ed down in the seat by pulling on the--.\nWhite I think so.\nMcDivitt I did it in steps. I'd pull down and Ed would come down. Then I'd pull some more, he'd come down some more.\nWhite I was actually pushing up with my left hand and my helmet was wedged right up against the hatch. I had a little bit of area in which they actually see the dogs that I was working with up there."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt You could see them though?\nWhite Yes, I could see them. At least I could see what positions they were in. I could see the little lever operating under the spring where I was actually operating the spring on the gain lever. This is where I think we got some very good teamwork, because it was necessary that Jim pull down in conjunction with the time that I pulled down on the closing handle and operated the gain lever. I just hope that the tape worked because I can remember I was in there. Jim was talking to me, and then when it came to the point when we really had to make the big pull I felt a little torque on the handle. I knew that we had it at that time if we could only get the hatch down close enough so that the dogs would engage. And I can remember giving the old--I think I was yelling HEAVE! HEAVE! Is that what I was yelling?\nMcDivitt I think so.\nWhite And it was in perfect timing, because I could see Jim or I could see the hatch come down each time that I was yelling HEAVE! I think it was probably the most--.\nMcDivitt The most interesting moment of the flight."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n153\nWhite Yes. It was the most interesting moment of the\nflight, but I think it was probably the most, if\nyou want to say, dramatic. I don't know the\nright word. But it was probably the most\ndramatic moment of my life. About those 30\nseconds we spent right there. The dogs started\nlatching. I could feel them going in, and then\nI could feel them come over dead-center. Jim\ncalled out that the dogs were in.\nMcDivitt I knew that once we got them moving we'd be all\nright.\nWhite Yes, once they started coming in. As long as\nwe got those dogs to engage, with the little\nlever that permitted them to come out and lock,\nI knew that we had it hacked.\nMcDivitt Yes. So did I. Even if we would have had to\nreenter with the hatch in that position, we'd\nhave been all right. I don't think that the\nheat leaks were that tremendous.\nWhite I knew we could continue and dog it on in all the\nway. It seems like whenever you know you're\nright on something, you want to be darn sure\nthat they fix it. This was going through my\nmind then. And I remembered that I felt I was\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n154\nright in that the bar and the attachment on that\nbar and lanyard were not strong enough. I re-\nmembered that and I knew how hard you were pul-\nling on that thing. I think, if nothing else,\nthey ought to be sure. How many times did we\nbreak that attachment at the bar?\nMcDivitt We broke the attachment about three or four times\non the zero-g airplane. Everytime they kept\ntelling us it wasn't made out of the right kind\nof stuff and the stuff we were going to have in\nthe spacecraft would be the right material. Well,\nit didn't break in the spacecraft. Just coin-\ncidently, or maybe because we both had doubts\nabout the strength of that particular piece.\nThe same thing crossed through my mind. I was\nthinking that the success or failure of this\nhatch closure depends on whether this hatch\nclosing device stays hooked onto that space-\ncraft and doesn't break off.\nWhite We would have been flat out of luck!\nMcDivitt We would have been in deep trouble! I'm not sure\nwe wouldn't have been able to get the hatch\nclosed, because we had put that canvas strap\non there and I might have been able to pull you\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n155\ndown that way. But I had about all the pull I\nhad in me on that last--\nWhite I know you did.\nMcDivitt --on that last thing and I had a lot of mechanical\nadvantage over it. When we went to that canvas\nstrap we would have had to go with no mechanical\nadvantage. As a matter of fact, a mechanical\ndisadvantage.\nWhite This is one thing that didn't fail, but I\nrecommend that it be made stronger.\nMcDivitt Stronger anyway!\nWhite I think so.\nMcDivitt For nothing else than a psychological purpose.\nWhite Right. I'd like to take the spacecraft now and\nsee if I could break it, because I had the\nfeeling that I never had been confident that that\nattachment nor the bar nor the lanyard were\nstrong enough.\nMcDivitt When I say I was really pulling as strong as I\ncould, I really had some pull left in me, but\nI guess what I should have said is that I was\npulling about as hard as I dared pull at the time.\nI guess I could have pulled another few pounds,\nbut I hated to apply more than was needed on\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n156\nthere because of the lack of confidence in the\nstrength of it.\nWhite Everything I had was in it over there. I was\npulling down with my legs as hard as I could and\noperating. I was pulling on the handle. I\nremember one time you said, \"Hey don't pull on\nthat handle so hard! You're going to break it!\"\nMcDivitt I was cautioning you to take it easy, which you\ndon't usually have to do.\nWhite This was when we were yelling HEAVE! I was\nheaving on the handle as I was pulling it down\neach time. It felt like to me that the handle\nwas giving. But I didn't give a darn! If it\nbroke, it was going to break. So one of the\npoints we learned out of this was we'd like to\nsee the bar and lanyard strengthened.\nWhite Let me say one thing about the decision to go\nahead and open up the latch. If we hadn't done so\nmuch work together with this hatch and run through\njust about every problem that we could possibly\nhave had, I would have decided to leave the hatch\nclosed and skip the EVA when we first started\nhaving trouble with it. We had encountered just\nevery conceivable problem that we could possibly\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n157\nhave with that hatch. If it failed we'd know\nexactly what it was.\nMcDivitt That's right. I personally had disassembled\nthis cylinder and piston and spring combination\nup at McDonald prior to the altitude chamber, so\nI knew exactly what it was made of. I am sure\nthe problem was that the dry lubrication coag-\nulated, or whatever a dry lube does, and was\ncausing the piston to stick. I knew how we could\ndo this thing. Carl Stone and I had dismantled\nit and put it back together, cleaned it out, put\nit back together, relubricated it, put it back\ntogether, and it operated fine. I figured out\nhow to make the thing work with it not working\nproperly by using your finger as the spring.\nWhite That's the exact technique we had used.\nMcDivitt If we hadn't had the training together that we\nhad, and had not encountered all these problems\nbefore, I know darn well I would have decided\nnot to open the hatch.\nWhite Maybe we wound overdramatic about the effort we\nmade getting me back in, and I'll honestly say\nit's one of the biggest efforts I ever made in\nmy life, but I don't think we were all done then.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"McDivitt There were a lot of things we could do.\nWhite We could have gone around several orbits working\non closing the hatch. That wasn't the last time\nwe were going to get a chance to close it. So,\nthere were things left if we understood, and\nother procedures we could have used to go ahead\nand close it. When we got it closed back in, I\nwas completely soaked wasn't I?\nMcDivitt Yes. You were really bushed.\nWhite Sweat was just pouring down. In fact, I could\nhardly see. It was in my eyes.\nMcDivitt So I told you, \"Just sit there and I'll get a\nrepress. Don't even move for 30 minutes.\"\nI just left the repress valve where it was. I\nclosed the vent valve and we had a lot of in-\nstructions from the ground to close the water\nseal and a whole bunch of other things that didn't\nmake any sense to me. I knew that the spacecraft\nwas repressurizing. I watched. There wasn't\nanything else that we had to do right then, and\nwe were both bushed, especially Ed. He was\nperspiring so that I could hardly see him inside\nthe fact plate. So, I just said,\"You sit there\nand I'll sit here and we'll just coast around."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"When we get the thing repressurized, we'll start\ndoing something.\" That was exactly what we\ndid. I did finally extend the HF antenna and try\nto call somebody on HF and let them know that we\nwere back in safely and that the thing was re-\npressurizing. I didn't get any response until we\ngot to Carnarvon, which was about three minutes\nlater. I called and told them that we were re-\npressurizing and had the hatch closed.\nWhite You know, that was some pretty good gage reading\nthat we saw when we got the first 1/2 psi.\nMcDivitt The first 1/2 psi. Ha! Ha!\nWhite That was really a big one. Since we've described\nthe whole operation we'd like to go back now\nand specifically point out the pieces of equip-\nment that we used and our opinions of them, a few\nfeatures that came out loud and clear to us in\noperation, general conclusions on EVA as an\noperation, and what we have to do to make it an\noperational procedure. So the first thing I'll\ndo is go down through the equipment. As an\noverall comment on the equipment, I would say I\nfelt very confident the equipment would do the\njob. And without question the equipment performed"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"as it was advertised. It performed just exactly\nas it had been designed. There wasn't one thing\non them as far as the VCM, the umbilical, the\ngloves, the gun, and the visor that didn't\nperform just exactly as it had been designed.\nI'll take them all one piece at a time, and dis-\ncuss them a little. I'll start right with the\nvisor. The visor was a rather controversial\npiece of equipment from the beginning. And I,\nfor one, doubted a little bit the necessity for\nquite the protection that we were providing,\nalthough I had helped right from the beginning\nin the design with some of our ideas on the visor.\nIt turned out though, and I commented on this\nduring the time that I was out, that I was very\nhappy to have the visor, I was able to look\ndirectly into the sunlight. I did so in instal-\nling the camera on the back of the adapter. I\nfelt that the vision out of the visor, was about\nas it would be on a normal sunny day. This is\nbecause it is so bright up there in space. I\nfelt as if my vision was what I would consider\nnormal. I was looking at the different parts\nof the spacecraft and down at the ground, and"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"the view that I received at this time was what I\nwould expect on a normal sunny day. I was cer-\ntainly glad to have the visor and I left it down\nthroughout EVA. I think on a later flight we\nmight recommend going ahead and lifting the\nvisor and observing any changes we might see in\nvisual acuity when looking down at the ground.\nthe ground vision through the visor really\ndidn't seem to me to be degraded at all. Eviden-\ntly just the intensity, and not what I was seeing,\nwas cut down.\nMcDivitt Let me comment a little bit on that visor. I\ndidn't have a visor and the bright sunlight that\nwas in the cockpit didn't seem to bother me. I\nimagine that the visor turned out just like a\npair of sunglasses. You go outside on a normal\nday and wear a pair of sunglasses. If you\ndon't have them, you're squinting. But if\nyou start out without them you tend to get\naccustomed to it. I think I was accustomed to\nwhat light there was coming through the space-\ncraft, admittedly much less than that outside.\nEd was accustomed to the sun visor and it turned\nout just like two people with and without"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"sunglasses. They both could have adapted. I\ndidn't look into the bright sun straight ahead.\nWhite Well, the first time I looked into the bright sun,\nthe first thought I had was, \"Boy! Am I glad\nI've got this visor on!\"\nMcDivitt I know you mentioned it on the radio.\nWhite --because I was looking right straight into the\nsun. I had to look into it to attach the camera\nonto the adapter section. I don't normally\nwear sunglasses. As you know, Jim, I have never\nworn sunglasses very much, and I didn't notice\nit from then on, throught the time I was out.\nI had no impulse whatever to lift my visor. My\nvision was as clear as I could have expected it\nto be without the visor. There are a few design\npoints in the visor that we could make better and\nI'll briefly go into them right now. When you\nare seated in the spacecraft one visor slips up\nunderneath the other and back along the back of\nyour helmet, so that instead of resting on your\nhelmet on the headrest you're resting the visor\non the headrest. You certainly don't want to do\nthat. The visor should be restrained in some\nmanner from slipping up along the back of the"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"helmet. Also, my visor was quite difficult for\nme to raise and lower. Once it was dowr it fit\nquite snugly, for which I was happy. But it was\ndifficult for me to raise and lower. It was\nactually a two-handed operation, which is one of\nthe reasons why I didn't raise it outside;\nalthough, I had no impulse to raise it when I was\noutside. I think that we might be able to design\nthem to be raised up and down more easily.\nMcDivitt Let me make a comment on that visor. I never\ndid see any need for the little lexion visor.\nWhite That's exactly the point I was going to get to\nnext. I think that one single visor made as\nclose to the helmet liner as possible, providing\nthe maximum amount of headroom and a minimum\namount of interference, is what we actually need.\nI don't believe we need that lexion outer visor.\nAs they pointed out to us, it doesn't really\nprotect, because it bows in and it doesn't\nreally give you the protection that it should\nbe affording. I would recommend one visor, one\nsun visor only. It'll be simpler to operate.\nMcDivitt I think so, too.\nWhite Okay. The Ventillation Control Module, I can say"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"without qualification, worked exactly as it was\nplanned to work. There was not one complaint\nthat I had with it. It provided me with the\nproper flow. The flow was less than with the\nnormal ECS suit system, but it was adequate to\nkeep me cool and ventilated, except for two times\nduring the flight. Those times were when I\nattached the camera right before departing the\nspacecraft and reentering the spacecraft. But\nI think it performed without fault.\nWhite The umbilical was another item that I thought\nperformed its part of the flight quite well. I\nhad no complaints about it. I did tend to get it\ntangled up with the bag and the strings that were\nattached to the bag during EVA.\nWhite I am very thankful that we decided to design the\ngloves in the manner in which we did, the two-\npiece glove that was easily donned or doffed\nunder pressurized conditions. As it turned out,\nI took them on and off twice while pressurized.\nI was quite happy that we had them designed in\nthis manner. As it turned out, the heat on the\nside of the spacecraft, or the cold on the side\nof the spacecraft when we came out of the dark"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"side, were not noticeable to the touch at all. I\ndidn't use a right hand thermal glove at any time\nduring the flight. I took it off when I was\nopening the hatch and, as I pointed out earlier,\nit floated off during the EVA operation. I didn't\nhave opportunity to use it again if I had wanted\nto. Coming back in we had difficulty closing the\nhatch, and I, at this time, removed my left hand\nglove and used the plain pressure suit gloves\nfor this operation. The pressure suit gloves\nwere comfortable. In fact, there were no sen-\nsations of either hot or cold through my gloves.\nWhite The gun, I think, was an outstanding point in\nthe flight, a highlight of the flight. It\nworked just as we had felt it would work and it\nwas, I felt, simple to operate. The training\nthat I had on the air-bearing platform provided\nme adequate orientation in the use of the\nspace gun. I think that now that we have a little\nmore time to prepare ourselves for the next time\nwe use this gun, training with it on zero-g\nflights would be appropriate. I don't believe\nwe will have any trouble using it in the zero-g\naircraft."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White One mistake that we made on our EVA equipment\nwas the mounting of the Contarex camera. This\ncamera should have been attached by velcro to me,\nso that I could use it independently of the gun.\nIt would have been easier for me to use and I\nwould have had a much higher probability of\ngetting satisfactory pictures with it. It was a\ncase of lumping too much together--putting the\ngun and the camera together.\nWhite The attachment of the VCM to the harness was\na good type of attachment. It was easy to dis-\nconnect the two velcro attachments and move\nthe chest pack in and out. I had to do this\nboth when I opened the spacecraft hatch, so it\nwould clear the hatch handle, and I had to move\nit out of the way when I closed the spacecraft\nand pumped the hatch handle.\nWhite Now we can get into some conclusions. While I\nwas out, I decided to put a piece of velcro strip\non the side of the adapter to see if later on we\nmight use this as a method for attaching items on\nthe outside of the spacecraft, if the velcro was\nstill there and if it was in good shape. I think\nthe velcro could be made into a very useful item for"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"a type of tether. I think you might even be able\nto do something along the line of just having\nsome female velcro on the gloves and pieces of\nthe male velcro at points along the adapter.\nThis might provide us at least some attachments\nso that we could maneuver ourselves back to the\nadapter section. This would be about the sim-\nplest kind of handle that we could use. I do\nbelieve that we need some type of handles on the\noutside of the spacecraft. Jim suggested one on\nthe nose and in the cover on the R & R section\nup there. I think this is an area that we cer-\ntainly have a possibility of using. I certainly\nwould have found it useful. I would still be a\nlittle hesitant, though, of breaking the an-\ntenna. You would want to be sure that this\nwouldn't be broken during EVA. I think the\nfeeling I had out there, again, was like\nholding onto an 8-foot tree. There wasn't any-\nthing to hold onto. You definitely need some\nkind of hand-holds. The decision to leave the\nhatch open was one of the best decisions that\nwe made. It provided me with a center of oper-\nations for my work. I was able to stabilize my-"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"self by holding onto the hatch. It was also surprising to me how much force it took to open the hatch the first time against the preload and the actuaters, due to the seals. One other very good decision was to have me wear the heavy suit and Jim the light suit. I think this was one of the things that made our operation easier. It certainly made my getting back in the spacecraft and Jim's assistance in closing the hatch much easier for him. Also, I was handing him things in and out. He was performing quite a bit of coordination in the operation with pieces of equipment that were going in and out of the spacecraft, and I believe that by being in that light suit he was able to do this much easier than if he had been in a heavy suit.\nMcDivitt I might make a comment on that suit, too. When we opened up the hatch we were in a vacuum. I noticed that the temperature of the suit dropped slightly so that the suit was a little bit cooler inside. I was wondering if I was going to get too cold through the suit, but the rest of the time we were out the the temperature never changed. I don't remember looking at the suit"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"inlet temperature, but the suit itself stayed reasonably warm. I had sun in the cockpit and I had the cockpit open without the sun in it for a relatively long period of time, four or five minutes at a time. This didn't seem to affect my temperature inside the suit.\nWhite I think you felt the temperature more than I did.\nMcDivitt I felt the temperature go down, rather than up.\nWhite I felt that also while outside. I would say it was very comfortable figure. I figure that I was probably at 68 degrees temperature out there inside the suit, which was cooler than I had been anytime during the flight. It wasn't a cold feeling, just a very natural comfortable temperature.\nMcDivitt Suit inlet temperature was running about 55 degrees during most of the flight. It got down around 52, so it probably might have even been cooler than your 68.\nWhite Well, it was cooler inside the suit when I was outside the spacecraft than at any other time during the flight. It wasn't uncomfortably cool there at all.\nWhite I think that we can go on with some conclusions."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Some conclusions that I had were:\n1. I didn't notice any extremely hot temperatures on the outside of the spacecraft. I also didn't contact surfaces for any period of time to transfer much in the way of a heat load to any part of my suit including the gloves.\n2. There's a definite requirement for some type of hand holds outside the spacecraft.\n3. We should think a little more on where we want to operate during EVA and where to attach the tether. The tether was not attached at a point that would provide me the capability to operate in the area that I wanted to.\nMcDivitt You couldn't get to the nose. It provided great operation for directly above.\nWhite Straight above.\nMcDivitt I just don't know how you would get the thing out there. You would have to run it along the spacecraft, then attach it somewhere at the front.\nWhite It would preclude operations in other areas. You would either have to accept where we are going to operate or--."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt You could have multiple attachment points around the spacecraft.\nWhite Of course, now, if you have a gun with a good air source, I wouldn't particularly care where it was attached. I think you could go ahead and, maneuver to any point you want if you have a gun. Again, when you're pushing off of surfaces, you tend to go perpendicular to the surface from which you push off. I found when I pushed as hard as I wanted to I'd still tend to go straight up above that hatch instead of out toward the front. I think this is a fairly obvious conclusion, but it proved out. Everytime I pushed off I went straight up instead of at an angle to the surface where I wanted to go.\nMcDivitt Something that you should bear in mind is that you were pushing off from the front which tended to make the front go down as you went out.\nWhite Yes. Everything was working against getting where I wanted to go. Everything I did tended to put me up.\nMcDivitt When you started you went in a straight line forward and tended to push the spacecraft down."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I think, initially, where I was holding the attitude, you didn't have that much trouble. Of course, you weren't pushing as hard either, because you had the gun.\nWhite No, I wasn't.\nMcDivitt Later on, when we started free drifting, you were back behind me where I couldn't see.\nWhite Did you feel me stomping around back on the adapter and hitting the adapter.\nMcDivitt Well, I felt you hitting things back behind me and once you went behind the line that was directly overhead the spacecraft. I couldn't see you through your open hatch.\nWhite I never really had a good contact with the adapter back there.\nMcDivitt Just as well. We wouldn't want to disturb those radiator tubes too much.\nWhite No. Well, now that we're back, we'll have some conclusions on the adapter area. I made it a point right from the beginning to take a look at the thermal lines, the thermal paint on the adapter. It looked like it was in good shape. It was all there. There was discoloration around the attitude thrusters, particularly,"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n173\nfrom the thrusting. The color of the thrusting\nis just like the RCS thrusting--nice and clear\nplume. It looked like from outside, though, that\nI could see a lot more of the plume than I could\nwhen I was sitting inside the spacecraft looking\nout at the RCS thrusters firing. Again, the\ncamera was not attached in an opportune manner\nto operate.\nMcDivitt Which camera? The camera on the spacecraft?\nWhite I'm really after that camera on the gun. That\none wasn't attached good.\nThe camera on the spacecraft was okay. It was a\nlittle difficult to attach because of the\nattachment on the bottom of it. You can't have\nit at any angle to make it engage. It has to\nbe perfectly flat with the mounting plate on the\nbottom. A big conclusion that I came to--and\nI'll see how you feel about this one, Jim--I\nfeel that storage in the back of the adapter\nsection was certainly a very high priority for\nlater missions. I feel that we can adequately\nstore equipment in the adapter area, particularly\nlarger pieces of equipment that we don't have\nroom for in the crew station or pieces we don't\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"174\nCONFIDENTIAL\nhave particular use for in the early part of the\nflight. If we can lick the problems in opening\nand closing of the hatch, we can store equipment\nin the back of the adapter section as a routine\noperation.\nMcDivitt That's right. I think the extravehicular activ-\nities have proved to other people what we all\nready knew a long time ago--that EVA is quite\nsimple. I think the thing we've got to iron out\nis the hatch opening and closing. This is\nreally our problem. I don't think you or I will\never have any doubt about the extravehicular\nactivity. That was, I thought, going to be\npretty straightforward. It looked like to me it\nwas pretty straightforward.\nWhite I felt that I could operate equipment out there.\nI could assemble equipment. I could put pins\nin, pull pins out, and screw things in. I did\nall these things during the flight. I turned the\ngun on, and I put in the pin to operate the um-\nbilical guide. I attached the camera. I don't\nthink you could do these operations very effect-\nively with big heavy gloves on. Although my\ngloves operated satisfactorily, I think that for\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n175\nassembly of items you want to have--you ought to\nlook into the glove area a little more thoroughly\nand try to get a piece of a glove with some\ntype of a surface that will give us some heat\nprotection and gives us a high sensitivity of\nfeel through it. The big conclusions, the final\nconclusions, that I'd like to draw are that EVA\ncan be made a normal routine operation if the\nfollowing modifications are made to the space-\ncraft:\n1. The highest priority is that the spring back\nthere on the gain lug has convicted itself\nand I don't believe that that's a good design.\nThere should be some way that either the lub-\nrication is made foolproof or the spring made\nstronger.\nMcDivitt I think what we really want to say here is that\nthe locking mechanism is inadequate as it is,\ncompletely inadequate. Until it is fixed, I\nthink we should take it easy.\nWhite That's right. I think we almost had a bad experi-\nence with that gain thing. We knew about it ahead\nof time. We thought we had it fixed, but it's\nnot fixed. I think it convicted itself and it's\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"176\nCONFIDENTIAL\nguilty and it has to be fixed.\n2. I recommend that at least the egress kit on\nthe right of the crew compartment be removed\nto provide more room in the spacecraft. I\nsee no reason for it being in there. I think\nit would be worth the effort and the addition-\nal money to provide the extra room in the\nspacecraft. So, my second recommendation on\nEVA is to remove the egress kit, at least\nfrom the right-hand side, to provide more\nhead room.\nMcDivitt Yes, that's good. I might add that it's a good\nthing that we had that egress kit modified to\nthe minimum height, because without that we would\nhave been in deep trouble.\nWhite That's right.\nWhite Yes. You and I had been telling each other that\nthat was the biggest thing we did on our whole\nnine months prior to the flight--to get that\nthing cut down. I think it sure paid for itself\non our flight.\n3. My third item is to make the bar and lanyard\ncompletely foolproof in strength. That was a\ndevice that provided us with the added force\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n177\nwe needed to close the hatch, just as we sat\nthere and said we might need during the SAR\nof the spacecraft in St. Louis. I think the\nattachments of the bar and the cable to the\nspacecraft should probably be at least doubled\nin strength, so there just isn't any question\nin the pilots' minds or the engineers' minds.\nI guess the engineers were convinced that\nyou didn't have Jim and I convinced that those\ntwo attachment points--.\nMcDivitt We've seen it break too many times, I think.\nWhite We've broken the bar and we've broken that\nattachment point. I had actually physically\ntwisted the attachment right off the spacecraft\nup in the zero-g airplane. I certainly wouldn't\nhave put my full strength into it if I knew\nmy life depended on that attachment. It should\nbe made absolutely foolproof.\nMcDivitt Well, that was the point I was trying to make\nearlier when I said I was pulling as hard as\nI could. Then I said that I really wasn't\npulling as hard as I was capable of.\nWhite You didn't have confidence in that attachment.\nMcDivitt I didn't really think that I should pull on it\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"178\nCONFIDENTIAL\nany harder.\nWhite\tNo. I think that should be the third recommen-\ndation and it should be corrected.\nMcDivitt\tI think we could spare a couple of extra pounds\nof weight there, just for the pilots' peace of\nmind.\nWhite\tThat's right. Take the time it takes to put a\nnew attachment on there. They told us they\ndidn't want to do it because they'd have to re-\nrig it. I think they'd better re-rig it and take\nthe time to put a good attachment on there.\n4. The final thing really doesn't fit in with\nthe first three recommendations, but I would\nsure like to have the opportunity to use that\ngun again with about a 10-times supply of\noxygen in a great big canister. I think\nthat maybe this is one of the items we could\ncarry in the back of the adapter. We could\nuse a small supply to provide the means to\ngo back there to get a great big canister.\nThen we'd have a unit that we could actually\ndo some maneuvering with.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. I think that, in essence, we\nproved the usefulness of a self-stabilized or a\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n179\nman-stabilized maneuvering unit--\nWhite\tYes.\nMcDivitt\t--rather than one that is gyro-stabilized with\nautomatic stability features. I think that al-\nthough you didn't burn up a lot of fuel, you\ncertainly proved the feasibility of this type\nof maneuvering unit.\nWhite\tWe had an awfully small amount. We just had the\n6 feet/second--\nWhite\tWe proved, in my mind, that I had the capability\nto go from Point A to Point B with that maneuver-\ning unit.\nMcDivitt\tLet me ask you this question, and be honest about\nit. Would you detach your tether and go without\nit? Don't be too optimistic, because other\npeople's lives may depend on it.\nWhite\tI think that we probably have not done enough\ninvestigation to do that at this time, but I\nfeel we are progressing toward the point. We\nmade the first, say 50 percent, of the step\ntoward being able to detach the tether and go.\nI don't believe that I would detach the tether\nand go with that 6 feet/second--.\nMcDivitt\tOh, no. I didn't mean that. I mean with that\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"180\nCONFIDENTIAL\ntype of a unit.\nWhite\tIf I had some more ΔV in a unit like that I\nthink that I would be willing to detach myself\non the next flight, right now, from the space-\ncraft and go. That's combined with two things,\nyou see. You have two things working for you.\nYou have the capability to maneuver yourself,\nand if you should get out of control the space-\ncraft still has the capability to come over and\nget close enough so that you could get yourself\nback in control and get in the spacecraft.\nWhite\tI think that 40 or 50 feet/second would be a\nminimum. I had 6 and I'd like to see, probably,\na capability of about 10 times that. That may\nbe a little--.\nMcDivitt\tIt's difficult. I would think it would be\ndifficult to fix a number on it until you fixed\nthe job.\nWhite\tYes.\nMcDivitt\tIf you wanted to go to something that was 10 feet\naway and come back, you'd probably get by with\n20 feet/second.\nWhite\tIf I wanted to get out of the spacecraft and go\nalong to the back of the adapter and get in the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n181\nadapter without being attached to the space-\ncraft, I'd only need two or three time the\namount. I'd be happy to go with that.\nMcDivitt\tThere are some problems in the capability to\nalign one's self onto an object. I think chasing\nthe booster around points this out. You say you'd\nbe willing to go away because the spacecraft\ncan come and get you. Admittedly it can, but\nkeeping in mind the difficulty we had with the\nbooster. I don't really anticipate us ever get-\nting into the situation like that because you'd\nnever get so far away that you're in different\norbits, like we were with the booster--.\nWhite\tWhat I visualize is a 25 to 50 foot operation\nwhere you're going out to investigate either\nanother spacecraft or another satellite up there,\nor making a transfer similar to the type of trans-\nfer that we visualize as a backup mode for Apollo.\nI think with the gun I had, if the LEM and the Com-\nmand Module were there, I'd be satisfied to depart\nthe Command Module and maneuver over to the\nLEM situated 10 to 20 feet away from the Command\nModule. I feel I could do that at the present\ntime. I don't think it would be a very smart\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"182\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthing at the present time to go maneuvering off\n200 to 300 feet away from the spacecraft with\nthis type of device. I think this device is\ndesigned and has its greatest usefulness in close\noperation around the spacecraft.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. There is no need to maneuver off\nabout 400 or 500 feet away because if you want\nto go that far, use the spacecraft. This gun\nis for a close working job.\nWhite\tI think it's a valuable tool in this manner.\nMcDivitt\tOkay. That's the same conclusion I came to.\nWe'd be willing to do it at close range.\nWhite\tI'd be willing to do it right now. I might not\ngo tell somebody else to go do it, but I'd\nbe willing, with the training that I had with\nit, to transfer 15 or 20 feet without a tether.\nBut, I think we should spend some more time with\nthe gun.\nMcDivitt\tI think so, too.\nWhite\tI also think it would be of value to go in the\nzero-g airplane with it.\nMcDivitt\tYes, I think so, too.\nWhite\tI think the work that we might do in the zero-g\nairplane doesn't necessarily have to be done in\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"183\nCONFIDENTIAL\nfull regalia, with all the pressure suits in a\npressurized condition. I think we can go up\nthere and learn a lot about the gun without\npressure suits on, in a plain flying suit type\noperation. Perhaps polish the training off with\na little work in pressurized suits. If you work\nin the zero-g airplane with a pressurized suit\nit's pretty awkward.\nWhite In pitch and yaw I felt I could maintain effect-\nively zero rates. I don't know how it looked to\nyou Jim, but it looked like I could establish\na rate and take the rate out without too much\ntrouble. The yaw is the lowest moment of them all.\nPitch was very easy, just to pitch the thing up\nand down. I'm still a little suspicious of roll.\nThat's the area that I would like to look into a\nlittle more. I think that you could get yourself\ninto a kind of balled up situation with pitch,\nroll, and yaw all coupled up. It might take a\nlittle bit of fuel to get yourself straightened\nback out again. But just in translating from\nPoint A to Point B, you could care less if you\nrolled, as long as you kept pitch and yaw\nstraight. And that's why I say I think you can\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"184\nCONFIDENTIAL\ntranslate and correct pitch and yaw very success-\nfully and effectively forget about roll, just as\nwe do in our reentries or our retros.\nWhite The question is: Was there any problem with the\ngun of maintaining a fairly well stabilized at-\ntitude and still get my translation input? I\ndid this actually three different times and this\nwas what I had done when I was coming back to\nthe spacecraft the last time. I had to put in\nboth pitch and yaw and had taken them out and\nI was coming back. I was going to fire my last\nthrust toward the spacecraft. I got a little\nburst. I could feel a little burst and then\nit petered out. But you can put a translation\nin. I was also surprised that I was able to stop\nat the time I tried to stop it out there about one\nhalf or two-thirds of the way out on the end of the\nlanyard. It seemed to stop pretty well. It was\neither the gun or the lanyard dampening me. It\ndidn't dampen me in roll, so I think it was the\ngun that actually did it.\nMcDivitt I think that this previous bunch of words just\nspoken covers a lot of detail, of the first\nthree or four orbits of our flight, and it covers\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"185\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthat first phase of mission sequences that I\nfirst mentioned. I think the next thing we\nshould do is go through the interim orbits, about\n50 or 55, or however many there were, where we set\nabout to save up enough fuel to do something con-\nstructive, to check on our orbit to see what it\nwas, to see how we were decaying, what our life-\ntime expectancy would be, and perform the exper-\niments that we'd initially set out to do on our\nflight plan. Although, it's not going to be of\nmuch use to go through it in a chronological\norder, I suppose that is probably the best way.\nAs I just finished saying, we're not going to\nget an awful lot out of going through the flight\nplan sequentially, but we'll do it quickly and\nthen we'll come back and discuss each experiment\nor operation, check as entity in itself, and\nwe'll discuss the systems as an entity, too.\nWe'll do this, generally, in elapsed time.\nMcDivitt Going back to the EVA for just one moment. I'd\nlike to say that the use of the manual heaters on\nECS O2 bottle was about two five-minute periods\nseparated by about 10 minutes. We really\ndidn't need an awful lot of manual heater when we\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"186\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwere doing the extravehicular activity.\n4.3 Other Orbital Operations\nMcDivitt Let's see. One thing that we did was to turn off\nthe ES Sensor at 6:35. You have notes along here?\nWhite I got all the Sensor stuff down, I think, pretty\nwell.\nMcDivitt Okay. I have the ES Sensor and the Bio-Med\nRecorder No. 1 going off at 6:35.\nMcDivitt At about 7 hours elapsed time, I checked the OAMS\nfuel remaining. We had about 62 percent indicat-\ned, 2100 psi, and 88 degrees temperature. We\nkept getting our GO and NO GO checks as per\nflight plan. At about 7:30 Ed went to sleep.\nMcDivitt We didn't do any lifetime adjust maneuvers. I\nturned the spectrometer-magnetometer on. This\nwas while Ed was asleep. Extended the boom,\ngot the ES Sensor on, and we left the spectrometer-\nmagnetometer on for three passes through the\nSouth Atlantic Anamoly. I couldn't really see any\nincrease in the ammeter when we extended the\nthing. We went through a number of extension\ncycles throughout the flight to make sure that\nwe got the thing out. At no time during the\nflight did we ever see a rise in the ammeter when\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"187\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwe extended it. The way it operates is, it has\nthree positions: EXTEND, OFF, and RETRACT. It\nwas in the OFF position and I put it to the EX-\nTEND position. Then I put it back to the OFF\nposition. Periodically, throughout the flight\nwe put it to the EXTEND position and back to OFF\nto make sure that if it got screwed up the first\ntime that it would go on out. The first extension\nwas supposed to be with the spectrometer-magnetom-\neter on. So, I checked to see the circuit\nbreakers were on, and they were on. I turned\nthe spectrometer-magnetometer on and then I ex-\ntended the boom. And in this way the experiment-\ners hope to get some indication from the lines\nof force that they were picking up if the thing\nactually extended at that time. I hope they got\nit.\nWhite Incidentally, you got a pretty good operation on\nthe swizzle stick. I was asleep and Jim was\ndoing that on my side.\nMcDivitt That's right. I did it with the swizzle stick\nway over on Ed's side. I didn't aline the\nplatform or anything. We were in free drifting\nflight at this time. As soon as we finished the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EVA we went into free drifting flight. We powered down the platform and the computer, shut off the attitude indicator lights--we went through a complete power-down procedure. We were really trying to save battery power, OAMS fuel, and everything else we had. We went on a complete power-down, down the checklist, and we just didn't have anything on.\nMcDivitt And we stayed in this free drifting mode for about two days. That right, Ed?\nWhite Closer to 2 1/2 days.\nMcDivitt Mostly for the first 2 1/2 days we were in a free drifting mode. We didn't do the platform alinement and the translation at around 8:10--8:20 in the flight plan. We did not obtain any booster-star measurements. As a matter of fact, I'd like to comment on the booster-star sightings, or just the booster sightings. We saw the lights of the booster definitely on the first pass as we were tracking it. The second pass, as Ed said, he saw them, and he said he was sure he saw them because they were flashing. I was pretty sure I saw what he was talking about. However, this occurred just at sundown. Every other time at"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sundown we'd call out the booster a couple of more times before we finally figured out that this was not the booster, but a planet.\nWhite One or two times I'm fairly confident I saw the booster.\nMcDivitt You're pretty sure you saw it?\nWhite Yes. That was the booster.\nMcDivitt Well, I was pretty confident that I saw it flashing, too. But later on I watched that star, that particular planet, come up. I sat right there and watched it, and it flickered as it came up through the atmosphere.\nWhite Yes, I agree with you.\nMcDivitt So, it could have been that we were just really looking for the booster and at that particular time we looked out and saw this thing and it flickered. I spent one whole sunset doing nothing but keeping my eye out for that planet. Sure enough it popped up and I saw it.\nWhite But, you know never flickered.\nMcDivitt It flickered. I watched it as it flickered. It flickered all the way up . I watched the thing as it set, and it flickered all the way down--the last at 10 degrees or so. This is exactly"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"where we thought we were seeing the booster, right where it was low on the horizon, as you would expect to see a booster. That old thing was flickering away like mad.\nWhite I think that was Venus, too.\nMcDivitt It was the planet that was trailing the sun by just a very slight amount. I made it a point to check during the remainder of the flight, two or three times to see if that thing flickered as it came up. It really did. So, the more I saw it flicker the more I began to doubt that we had really seen the booster on that second pass. Maybe we did, and maybe we didn't.\nWhite Well, it's not really too important.\nMcDivitt No, it's not. But the fact is, that little planet was flickering away like mad.\nWhite Let me ask you one more question about the flicker. Did you see it coming up through the air glow? Was that where you felt it flickered?\nMcDivitt Yes.\nWhite Everytime it was above the air glow it was loud and clear to me.\nMcDivitt Yes, except that you couldn't see the air glow as the sun was setting."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White That's right.\nMcDivitt Initially you saw the sun out there and you saw this thing looking like it was flashing. Once it got above the air glow, the planet did not flicker anymore. It was perfectly bright.\nWhite Very bright.\nMcDivitt When we saw that thing that looked like the booster, it was very low on the horizon. It always popped out. Remember how that bright light used to pop out? You'd have the light sky and all of a sudden there'd be a bright light there.\nWhite We saw that planet come up so many times during the flight, I feel quite convinced that the first sighting or two weren't of the planet.\nMcDivitt Well, maybe it wasn't.\nWhite Actually, I continued to see the blinking on it after the stars were out.\nMcDivitt Wait, let's take a look and see which way the booster would be. The booster was below us so it should be going out in front of us like mad. You're looking into the sunset which was behind us. The booster shouldn't have been there. The booster should have been out to the front of us."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It should have been in the opposite direction.\nWhite I'm not convinced which way we were looking.\nMcDivitt We had to be looking to the rear. The sun sets to the rear. We had to be BEF to see the sun when it set. You see, you're BEF to watch it set.\nWhite Were we BEF for the full time or were we in free drift?\nMcDivitt We were in free drift but this was near the sun when this thing came out.\nWhite No, they always come out loud and clear when you're away from the sun, when you're looking away from the sun.\nMcDivitt Yes. I know it, but at that one time when you said, \"There's the booster.\", you were looking at the sun. Remember, I had turned around? They told us that they wanted us to be BEF and heads down when we opened up the hatch. That's where we were. I turned around to be BEF. We were BEF when we saw that thing.\nWhite We'd better look at the tapes. I think we can probably get better information on this when we check.\nMcDivitt I think we were even looking in the wrong dir-"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ection. The next pass around I called out and said, \"I see the booster on top at 9 o'clock, perpendicular to our flight path.\" I don't think that was the booster either.\nWhite It's kind of academic.\nMcDivitt Yes.\nWhite The reason that I brought the thing back up again is I wanted to be sure it's brought out that the planets are so clear and so bright, even far more brighter than they are looking at them from the ground. Looking at them up there, it really is striking the first time you see them. If we took a lot of pictures of anything, it was a picture of that planet.\nMcDivitt Sunrise and sunset. The sunsets all had the planet in it.\nWhite That's right. That planet has always been there.\nMcDivitt Very pretty.\nWhite It certainly was.\nMcDivitt Okay, I got a call after Ed went to sleep that we were going to pass by Typhoon Babe which would be north of track, at 7:56.\nWhite I wasn't sleeping. I heard it.\nMcDivitt Did you? Okay. Well, I didn't have any fuel to"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"point the spacecraft at Typhoon Babe so that was that. If I had drifted around so I could see it, I was going to take a picture of it but I never drifted around so I could see it. I just passed on by. A little bit later on, I was called up and told that at 23:55 GMT my ascending node would be at 83 degrees East an my 6th Rev. This was just a map update. I was told I should eat at some particular time. I think it was 00:15 to 01:00. It was already past that time, so, I ate when I felt like it. The pilot was supposed to do a No. 1 Aero-Med Pass at 02 17 43. This was the first instance of us running into a case where a man was supposed to do an aero-med pass when he was asleep. This continued on intermittently throughout the flight.\nWhite It seems like I was always asleep when I was supposed to be doing an aero-med pass.\nMcDivitt This continued on intermittently during the flight. As the flight progressed, the doctors got more coordiated on the ground and we got more coordinated with them to tell them who was sleeping and how long we were going to be"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sleeping. We had less requests for aero-med passes of guys that were sleeping. We, in general, refused to wake the other person up to do an aero-med pass. We were told by the doctors and the flight planners on the ground, that at 02 30 59 we were supposed to turn on D-8. Now, I don't know why we had to have this to the nearest second. I was also supposed to go to sleep at this time, to the nearest second. It seemed a little academic to me. So I woke Ed up at 02:30 Greenwich Time. He turned on the D-8 Experiment and I didn't go to sleep until I did something else. I think I had something to eat but I'm not real sure. But I didn't get off to sleep right away. Then I told Ed he was supposed to turn that MSC 2 and 3 off at 03:00. I awoke at 06:15. But what happened in between that elapsed time, Ed? Shoot, that's not right --\nWhite 06:15?\nMcDivitt I must have awaken --\nWhite About four hours is what you had.\nMcDivitt Right. Looking through my notes here I see that I wrote down \"Awake at 06:15,\" and I"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"didn't get to sleep at 2:30 and Ed didn't wake me up at 6:15. So I guess we were down from anywhere from 3:30 and 4:30.\nWhite Right. You slept approximately four hours. I let you go about 30 or 45 minutes after that time of 6:15, as far as getting you up. While you were asleep, the things that I did: I believe that I had a meal which you had gotten out. I believe we had one before this, though. Didn't we have one after EVA before I went to sleep? Or, did I just drink a lot of water and go to sleep?\nMcDivitt No, I think we had a meal before you went to sleep.\nWhite That was my second meal that I had shortly after I got up. I believe they called and asked me to give them an aero-med pass, which I don't have the time logged on. I imagine the medics will have that. I ran through a D-8 Experiment at 02 30 59. The MSC 2 and 3 recorders were supposed to come off at 3 o'clock, but I didn't turn them off til 04 19 40. It didn't seem like that was particularly important anyhow to get them off. I guess that's"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"why I didn't think about it. I got instructions from the ground to maintain the oxygen pressure at between 930 and 960 with the O2 High Rate. This is the time I told them that the Command Pilot was asleep and I'd prefer to do it at a later time. I think they called me back a few times on it; finally, when it got up to about 960 I went ahead and dumped it.\nMcDivitt It scared me to death!\nWhite The O2 High Rate started filling the cabin up, pressurizing it up around 5.4. At 5.4 on the button the vent valve relieved and Jim about came through the top of the hatch.\nMcDivitt I was there half asleep with my gloves off, my visor down, and a cover over. The cabin vented and the cabin pressure dropped about 3/10 of a pound. I knew that I didn't have my gloves on and I figure, \"Boy, I am going to have to get those gloves on in the next half a second or I'm going to be --\"\nWhite He didn't get his gloves on but he sure was thrashing around for a little while til I got him the word. I didn't want to wake him up."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"198\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nI didn't want to wake him up. I was hoping it\nwould go through without waking him, but it sure\ndidn't.\nMcDivitt\tMan! It liked to have scared me so bad I don't\nthink I went back to sleep.\nWhite\tNo, you went back. You slept better at the end of\nyour sleep cycle than at the beginning.\nMcDivitt\tSo you were trying to get to my end earlier.\nWhite\tI think I did the other. I always slept best at\nthe beginning of my sleep.\nMcDivitt\tNo, I always slept best at the beginning .\nWhite\tYou did too?\nMcDivitt\tThere was a period where I had to get to sleep,\nthen there was a period of solid sleep, sometimes\n15 minutes, sometimes an hour. But after I went\nby that first bunch, then I was in a state of semi-\nwakeness.\nWhite\tKind of like dopey, fitfull sleep. That's the same\ntype of sleep I had, at least until the last time.\nOkay. There really wasn't anything else that went\non except a few tape dumps and an update for the\norbital plotboard. I found this to be very use-\nful. I used the plotboard to keep track of my\norbits, where I was during the first part of the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n199\n\nmission, exclusively. It was very accurate. You\ncould check the times in the plotboard as against\nwhat you saw on the ground and you could locate\nyourself quite adequately. How about you?\nMcDivitt\tWhile I'm thinking about it, I thought the plot-\nboard information early in the flight was excellent.\nBut I thought that the plotboard information at the\nend of the flight was not correct. As a matter of\nfact, I started to call them a couple of times, but\nI never did. By the time I would get the stuff\nplotted, and get the map put where I wanted it, we\nwould be someplace else. I'm sure that that in-\nformation they were sending up to me wasn't right;\nI'd be off an orbit or two.\nWhite\tAfter about the last day and a half, I used the\nnominal orbit plot maps exclusively. I could see\nthe time and the location. I could spot it\nright with the ground. And I think I figured it\nwas seven minutes behind near the latter part of\nthe mission. This didn't bother me. I could tell\nhow far it was behind, and then update my position\non the map quite easily. I thought those pre-plots\nwere real good.\nMcDivitt\tSo did I. I thought they were, too. But I was a\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"200\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nlittle disappointed with the map information at the\nend of the flight. I don't know exactly what was\nhappening. But I'm convinced that it wasn't right.\nAs a matter of fact, a couple of times I was even\non the wrong orbit. They'd give me a time and a\nlongitude and I'd plot it. I wasn't even over that\npart of the world. I'd be over a whole orbit from\nthat.\nWhite\tJim, I made this mistake once, too. I was using my\nplotboard. I'd plot everything out and I came\ndown in a place in Mexico at night, Tampico, Mexico.\nSo I told them something about seeing this spot in\nMexico. They didn't pick up my mistake. I was back\nchecking over and I got to looking at my map and\nsaid, \"What the heck are we doing here at night?\"\nI was actually on the other side. I was clear\naround in Australia.\nMcDivitt\tHad you plotted east instead of west?\nWhite\tNo, I don't think I did. I think I plotted it\ncorrectly. I went back and checked it and I never\ndid get the plot. I went on to do something else\nand I didn't get the plotboard squared away on that.\nBut I realized that instead of passing over Tampico,\nMexico, what I was really seeing on the ground was\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n201\n\nSidney.\nMcDivitt\tYou only missed it by half the world.\nWhite\tThat's right. It was exactly on the other side.\nBut not exactly. It was about 120 degrees off.\nMcDivitt\tMine was something like this. One that I remember\nspecifically--they gave me a map update and they\nwanted me to do a check over El Paso and El Centro.\nLooking at this I could see that if I was at the\nright time, I would have come up from the south;\nwhereas, my pass was down like this, and I\nwas an orbit or two off.\nWhite\tWell then, we're not talking about the same thing.\nI think I had probably slipped it somehow on here.\nMcDivitt\tYou might have plotted 60 East instead of 60 West,\nor something like that.\nWhite\tYes.\nMcDivitt\tBut I was off by a time factor.\nWhite\tIt wasn't too hard to realize that Mexico wasn't at\nnight.\nMcDivitt\tI have a note here that says, \"RKV tape dump and a\nNo. 1 Medical Pass on the Command Pilot at 07:02\nGMT.\"\nWhite\tThat's right. And I got you up a few minutes\nbefore 07:00, if you recall. In fact, just before\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"202\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nyou had to make your Medical Pass I woke you up.\nSo I'd estimate that Jim got up around 6:55, just\nenough time to transfer the equipment to him and\nlet him make his Medical Pass.\nMcDivitt\tAt 7:15 Greenwich Time I was supposed to eat.\nWhite\tRight. At 11:15 Greenwich Time I was supposed to\ngo back to sleep.\nMcDivitt\tIs that when you did? I don't even see that on\nhere.\nWhite\tWhere it says \"Pilot sleep\".\nMcDivitt\tIs that a penciled-in note?\nWhite\tThere was just a series of instructions that we\ngot from them.\nMcDivitt\tOkay. Good, because I don't have that.\nWhite\tIt doesn't really mean that's when we went to sleep\nbecause you know we did things somewhat out of\nsequence.\nMcDivitt\tAt 8:55 over the RKV we got a list of PLA's and\nCLA's.\nWhite\tWas this one of our first big batches of them?\nYou know, initially, we didn't get too many of them,\nand then we started getting them on a very regular\nbasis throughout the flight. I thought that com-\nmunications of those was quite good, once we started.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n203\nMcDivitt I have a list of notes here that say: Rev 12 was over the RKV where we were supposed to get the CLA's and PLA's. We did. Rev 13 was over Canary where we were supposed to have a C-Band track. I think that meant C-Band went to CONTINUOUS, but I'm not really sure.\nWhite This is the time at about 17 or 18 hours that I called down and asked them how the tape dumps were coming out, because we weren't holding any attitude for them. We were holding nothing more than a drifting attitude and I know that over some stations we were blunt-end-down and rolled upside down. We were talking, I know, upside down to the stations and getting good transmissions through . They came back and\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"204\nCONFIDENTIAL\nsaid all of the tape dumps to this time had been excellent.\nMcDivitt At a GMT of 12 16 00 I got a comment: \"No fuel, but do a Flight Track Orientation.\" This is like saying, drive from here to the drug store, but don't use any gasoline--and don't take the car.\nSo as I flopped over near around 12:16, I looked down to the ground. We could do a Flight Track Orientation pretty well, considering that we had this movable orbital map and we had a pretty good idea of where we were going to be to start with so we could pick out where we were. Got a map update at 10 17 49, 73 degrees West. A tape dump at Canaries on Rev 13 and at Carnarvon at Rev 14. Around 19 hours, I checked on our orbit and it was 155.7 by 88.\nAt 11 52 43, turned the C-Band Adapter Switch to CONTINUOUS. At 11 59 23 we turned it back to COMMAND. This is Greenwich time. All the stuff in the flight plan such as the Orbit Navigational Checks and the Apollo Landmark Investigation were not done. We were doing tape\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"205\nCONFIDENTIAL\ndumps, medical data passes and that was about it. The next M-3 Experiments were all part of medical data passes. I don't even know why they're in the flight plan.\nWhite I couldn't figure that out either.\nMcDivitt We did an HF Check. Check began at 16 58 30 GMT, and ran on through 19 07 00 GMT; this included the sunrise, sunset, day, night--all the HF checks and we'll cover those in the experiment part of our debriefing.\nMcDivitt During this period of 16 58 30 GMT to 19 07 00 GMT, we did the HF Checks.\nWhite Oh, here it is! Command Pilot asleep.\nMcDivitt Where?\nWhite At 11:45 Zulu. Pilot awake at 11:30. I don't know when I went to sleep here.\nMcDivitt Okay. Let's check that some other time.\nWhite Okay.\nMcDivitt It'll take a long time to sort that out and I don't think he needs that right away.\nWhite All right. I got Command Pilot asleep at 11:45.\nMcDivitt Okay. I don't have me up or asleep or anything. What I've got here in my notes is, Ed to bed at\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"206\nCONFIDENTIAL\n20:15, up at 22:15, back at 23:15. These are Zebra times, I'm sure. So I don't know exactly what happened in there.\nWhite Well, you're clear over on 24 now. Okay, you've skipped the time when you were asleep.\nMcDivitt That's right. I don't have anything on that.\nWhite Okay, I have you going to sleep. I logged myself awake at 11:30. Command Pilot asleep at 11:45. These are Greenwich times. If you add 8:45 onto that, it comes out 20 hours and 30 minutes, elapsed time. You gave me the instructions for the C-Band adapter times. I did turn those on at 11 52 43 to continuous C-Band on the adapter, and at 11 59 23 to COMMAND. Also during that period of time, I had been told to go ahead and run Apollo Landmark Investigation without any fuel. But luckily, the spacecraft rotated right around as we came up to it and I was looking right down at the junction of, I believe, the ... and the White Nile.\nMcDivitt That's right. That was the first task we had of finding something on the ground.\nWhite Yes, it really worked.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"207\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt It was no trouble.\nWhite It really worked. That was the one that I was probably most familiar with. It's such an obvious one. It's out in the middle of the desert and it's the intersection of the big Nile, where it junctions into two other sections, a little island and a northern tip of the island. I was able to pick the island up from the tip quite clearly. I did take a couple pictures, I believe, of it, but we were just passing and I wasn't tracking. I did report that it was a good landmark and quite easy to see.\nWe did get an instruction at this time to go to the normal flight plan at 22 hours. This was something that was kind of hard to do. I don't think we really ever got back on much of a normal flight plan for the whole flight, but we did get instructions at 22 hours elapsed time to return to our normal flight plan. At this time Jim was still asleep. We got the update that the Hawks won 3 to 2.\nMcDivitt Ha ha ha ha ha.\nWhite I relayed that information to Jim when he woke up.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt That's right. Okay, I think we've already covered our HF Checks, which were part of the regular flight plan.\nWhite Yes, we did that.\nMcDivitt I said they were between 16 58 30 GMT and 19 07 00 GMT.\nWhite Right.\nMcDivitt We scrubbed the Apollo Landmark Investigation at 28:40 and again at 29:10. We were allowed to do the D-9 at about 29:30 in drifting flight only. Doing the D-9 in drifting flight means that you look outside with the sextant and you pick out whatever two stars are there and you measure an angle between them. It was a qualitative rather than a quantitative type investigation for the experiment. I'm telling you, with D-9 it was mostly qualitative throughout the whole mission. We did a few quantitative things, but the number of quantitative things that we could do were very limited.\nWhite The HF Test took us one and a half orbits.\nMcDivitt Yes. It took two hours and 15 minutes at least.\nWhite I think around 28:30, we had a call up for D-9.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 209\nMcDivitt Yes. This is where we did D-9 in drifting flight only.\nWhite Yes, and again that was like taking the car out of the garage without gasoline.\nMcDivitt All it amounted to was looking through the window and picking out two stars that you can see and taking a sighting between them. Just a qualitative check to see what the sextant would do. We did that. D-9 turned out to be a qualitative, rather than a quantitative experiment, except in a very isolated instance. We weren't even stabilized.\nWhite You were trying to talk me through some of the things, but I had the helmet off and on--\nMcDivitt This was when we first discovered that the light bulb in the readout portion of the sextant was burned out or something was wrong.\nWhite Right.\nMcDivitt We couldn't read out the angle.\nWhite We called down, but we never got a call up on that or any instructions.\nMcDivitt Well, there weren't any. Ha ha ha. Okay, then I have in my notes here, as I mentioned earlier: \"Ed went to bed at 20:15, got up at 22:15 and went\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 210\nback to bed at 23:15.\" That's all Zulu time, but I don't see when he finally got up for the last time.\nWhite Maybe I've got it in here.\nMcDivitt We had another map update in there but it's really not important. We scratched the Apollo Landmark Investigation--\nWhite What time did you have me asleep? 23:15, Jim? Okay, well I obviously was up shortly thereafter because I got on the horn and you were asleep when they called us up and told us we'd passed the U.S. space record--\nMcDivitt That's right.\nWhite At a little past 32 hours, which is 23:15. That's 32 hours. The space record was 32 hours.\nMcDivitt We cancelled the Apollo Landmark Investigation, Run 3, at 30 hours and 10 minutes. Got that, Ed?\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt We didn't switch to bio-med recorders. I made a note here early in the flight plan on the bio-med recorders, \"Ed slept first and turned No. 1 off.\" When I slept, we forgot to turn it back on, so we had No. 1 off, and No. 2 on for a long time,\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 211\nfor a period of about eight or ten hours. Then when I went to sleep the second time, we turned No. 1 on and No. 2 off, which is the way it should have been. But as soon as I woke up, we turned No. 2 on again and No. 1 off, because you were going to go to bed. Now you didn't go right back to sleep again so I have a note here, \"We have to turn on No. 1 as soon as he wakes up.\" We did. Ran No. 1 for awhile with No. 2 off. We turned them both back on, and left them running for the remainder of the flight. What we did is that we picked up a cushion of about eight hours on each recorder and let them run the rest of the flight. The D-8 Experiment at 2300 hours--Ed was asleep then. I told them that Ed was sleeping and couldn't make it.\nWhite Right. I think I probably did that later on.\nMcDivitt That's right. Remember we discussed that you would turn on the experiment later on when you went through the South Atlantic Anomaly?\nWhite Right.\nMcDivitt You plotted it out on the map and turned it on yourself. The portion of the flight plan at 31\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 212\nhours elapsed time says, \"Prepare for S-6 Experiment, update D-8, MSC 2 and 3 on.\" Now I turned MSC 2 and 3 on again, about then. We did not do an Orbit Nav Check, Run 3, because we didn't want to use any fuel. We scrubbed Experiment D-8 and we were going to turn it on at 23:00 or do it at 2300. But, I guess Ed was still asleep, so we didn't do it then. At this time we were both in pretty bad shape as far as rest went, so I felt it much better to get some sleep than to fool with the experiments. Then going through--\nWhite Okay, this is the period of time when you were asleep.\nMcDivitt Yes, because I don't have any notes there. Go ahead.\nWhite Right. I had a very busy time shortly after I got up. I had a requirement to, at 00:15, --\nMcDivitt Oh, yes. They called the update to me and I passed it on to you and then I went to sleep.\nWhite That's right. I turned on the MSC 2 and 3, and then I went D-8 at 02:15.\nMcDivitt 00:15 Greenwich time, you were supposed to take some pictures of cellular clouds. No fuel allotted.\nWhite I think I took some pictures of clouds.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 213\n\nMcDivitt\tMSC 2 and 3 were supposed to go on at a GMT of\n\t00:30, and you were supposed to control the\n\tspacecraft to BEF for that pass.\nWhite\tThat's right, and we went with BEF for that pass,\n\tfor MSC-2 and 3 Experiments. At 02:15 I was\n\tsupposed to do D-8.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right.\nWhite\tI did D-8 at 02:18, as a matter of fact, and it's\n\tlogged in the D-8 card.\nMcDivitt\tThen at 22:35 GMT, we were supposed to do S-6--\n\tI see that I've got a scratch through it. I think\n\tthat you weren't up. I was up and I tried to do\n\tit, but there weren't any clouds around. I wasn't\n\tpointed in the right direction, so I just scratched\n\tit out.\nWhite\tYes, this is where I went back to sleep and you\n\tgot up. We had a very important tape dump at\n\t03:03. I think I relayed that to you before I\n\twent to sleep.\nMcDivitt\tYes.\nWhite\tI must have really snoozed here. I was gone for\n\tfour hours.\nMcDivitt\tI'm on 36 right now. We had a tape playback. We\n\n12"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 214\n\n\twere eating along in here and I can't tell you\n\twhere we ate because we ate whenever we felt\n\tlike it.\nWhite\tWe always ate when we woke up and usually before\n\twe went to sleep.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. That's when we were eating and\n\tthat's when we had originally planned on it.\n\tThat's the way it went in the original flight\n\tplan. At this time of the mission I guess we\n\tweren't doing much except staying alive. My\n\timpression of what we were doing was eating,\n\tsleeping, and dumping tapes.\nWhite\t-- and looking at the ground as it went by.\nMcDivitt\tAs a matter of fact, we were still pretty well\n\tpooped out from that long period right there--\nWhite\tYour eyes were just getting better. Your\n\teye looked lousy at that time, the first\n\t24-hour point. Your left eye was as red as\n\tcan be.\nMcDivitt\tAt about 36 hours it was still pretty bad, but from\n\tthere on it improved continuously.\nWhite\tI noticed that whenever I slept, I got much\n\thotter when I had my faceplate closed and my"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 215\n\n\tgloves on. Remember? I kept turning on the\n\tdouble fans.\nMcDivitt\tEven when you didn't sleep in that configuration,\n\tyou got hotter when you slept than when you were\n\tawake, which is the reverse of what I figured it\n\twould be. I figured that when you slept, we'd\n\twant to go to one fan all the time.\nWhite\tWell, I slept good when I had my visor open.\nMcDivitt\tDid you? The last day or so, though, we had two\n\tfans on every time you slept.\nWhite\tThe last day we did. Of course, I slept the best\n\tthen too as a matter of fact. After the first\n\tday, I had my faceplate open more often than I\n\thad my faceplate closed.\nMcDivitt\tI wasn't. I had a problem that when I'd put my\n\tvisor up, I was really crunched down in the seat,\n\tbecause I'm quite a bit taller than you. It was more\n\tcomfortable for me to keep my visor down than\n\tit was to keep it up. We had an RKV tape dump,\n\taround 36 hours, and I have an Orbit Nav Check,\n\tRun 4, here. I don't believe we did that, did\n\twe, Ed, at 36 hours and 50 minutes?\nWhite\tI was asleep and I can't tell you."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 216\n\nMcDivitt\tWe didn't do any of the Orbit Nav Checks with fuel\n\tso it was just a matter if you could see the\n\tground you did one. They called up some more\n\tS-6 information for me, but I wasn't to use any\n\tfuel on it. They said I was to pass Typhoon\n\tBabe at 06:06, point of closest approach, and\n\tthere was a new storm brewing. I'd have my\n\tclosest approach to it at 06:13. Oh, yes. I also\n\thave a period that Ed slept here.\nWhite\tWhich time was that?\nMcDivitt\tWell, you got up at 08:15, Zebra time. That's\n\tabout 40 hours and 30 minutes elapsed time. I\n\tdrifted around to where I could see Typhoon Babe,\n\tbut there wasn't anything to take a picture of.\n\tThere was just a mass of clouds down below; smooth\n\ttops and nothing worth even a frame. I got another\n\tupdate that said: \"Over Cairo on the 26th Rev I'd\n\thave my closest approach at 07 13 37. It would\n\tbe 90 miles slant range on the closest approach.\n\tDon't use any fuel. We were just supposed to look\n\tat it. We did pick up Cairo and Alexandria both.\n\tI think you were awake at that time, weren't you?\nWhite\tIt was the tail end of my sleep cycle."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":225,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 217\n\nMcDivitt\tWell, you weren't awake then.\nWhite\tWhat time was it, Jim?\nMcDivitt\tIt says 07 18 37. You should have been asleep\n\tthen. I have in my notes that you slept to 08:15.\nWhite\tWell, I was like you were. I wasn't sleeping\n\tvery good the last--quite often, I had my cover\n\tup watching out the window. You could always\n\thear everything that was going on the radio, so\n\tyou knew pretty well what was going on.\nMcDivitt\tWell, anyway, Cairo and Alexandria were both\n\tclear, but this was the first time we'd seen\n\tthem and it took a long time to find the targets--\n\tthe particular target that we were looking for.\n\tWe could find the Red Sea and we could find the\n\tMediterranean, obviously. You could see the\n\tSuez Canal. You could see the river. I had\n\tdifficulty finding the town of Cairo. How about\n\tyou, Ed, with Alexandria? You were looking for\n\tAlexandria.\nWhite\tI found that one.\nMcDivitt\tYou found the town all right, but finding the\n\tairfield that we were supposed to take a picture\n\tof was pretty difficult the first time. Later on"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":226,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"218\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwhen we'll discuss the experiments, we'll comment on that. It looks like I was asleep here for awhile because I don't have any notes.\nWhite Okay. I have a set here. I was given the first time to take a look at some of the D-6 targets. I had No. 1, No. 12, and No. 13, and I had all the times for them. I think No. 1 is Tripoli. We'll go over these in a little more detail when we go to the experiments. Tripoli was covered by clouds. Alexandria was pretty good, and I was able to follow it pretty well.\nMcDivitt Did you take any pictures of it?\nWhite Yes. I took some pictures. Actually, I think we should go back and look at these. I got several passes. This was the D-6 Experiment. No. 12 was Tripoli and it was covered with clouds. No. 13 was Alexandria, and I took manual pictures with the 20 mm Contarex. I didn't actually see--\nMcDivitt The 50 mm Contarex?\nWhite No, the 200 mm Contarex.\nMcDivitt The 200 mm. Hand-held?\nWhite No, I had it mounted. I didn't actually see the airport but I had seen it before. I was\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":227,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"219\nCONFIDENTIAL\nactually looking at the camera when I was firing it, so I--\nMcDivitt Did you see anything in the ground glass?\nWhite Not very much.\nMcDivitt Were you trying to track that way or were you just looking out the window.\nWhite No. Just looking out the window. The point that I brought out is that they gave me four targets. The targets should be far enough apart so that you can actually get set for each one. I had four targets here but I could only use--\nMcDivitt Oh, that was when you zapped from Tripoli to Alexandria to Tel-Aviv to --\nWhite Tel-Aviv and a whole bunch of them all in a row.\nMcDivitt You could have a thousand miles between targets to evaluate. You finish one and you're starting to take pictures of the other ones.\nWhite I had them at 10 61 51, 10 21 50, 10 25 30 and 10 30 15. Well, that was a beautiful row of targets in there but--\nMcDivitt A pair though or every other one would have been enough.\nWhite And we were still being very parsimonious on fuel\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":228,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"220\nCONFIDENTIAL\nand I didn't feel like zapping the spacecraft all around. We had some more updates, tape, and a medical data pass for myself at 45:45. We got the word to delete Translations 2-A. At that time they put in D-9--the first D-9 with fuel.\nMcDivitt We also scrubbed the Horizon Scan Moonset Check at 46:33, or whenever that is.\nWhite Right. It was scheduled with the platform up and we didn't have it up.\nMcDivitt Also I've got the Scanner Thruster Plum Checks scrubbed at 47:40.\nWhite Also a deletion of the ES Sensor - ON because we weren't going to translate. So at 14:14 we had our first D-9 Experiment with OAMS.\nMcDivitt We were both up.\nWhite Right.\nMcDivitt This was the first one with fuel and the first big disappointment of the experiments.\nWhite Right. It was certainly very difficult to use.\nMcDivitt This is where we tried to do the dayside pass when we had stars, and we couldn't see past the nose of the spacecraft.\nWhite We didn't get any stars so actually the run was\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":229,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"221\nCONFIDENTIAL\nquite short. We were not able to see any stars so we weren't able to do much on that run at all. This is the time we knocked off any more day star sightings.\nMcDivitt We were supposed to turn on MSC 1 and acq aid off for five minutes between Tananarive and Carnarvon, I guess.\nWhite Oh! This is where I missed a sleep period. This is where we missed a sleep period. We got busy and ran the D-9 right through the sleep period. Then I got back to sleep at 54:55 to 60:65 elapsed time.\nMcDivitt Oh, yes. You got about one hour's worth of sleep between 49:40 elapsed and 50:20 elapsed, or something like that.\nWhite Right before D-9, I got a little sleep.\nMcDivitt That's right. I've got a little note in here that says, \"Ed got about one hour of sleep.\"\nWhite That's right.\nMcDivitt We were supposed to do S-5 over the States on Rev 32. Start at 17:40. We were supposed to do Apollo Landmark No. 4 starting at 15:00 Zebra on Rev 33. That was El Paso.\nWhite That's right. We were both up for that.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":230,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"222\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt We did the S-5 Experiment together and that was the best series of pictures we got on the whole flight. It was really fabulous. We got good pictures both for the S-5 and S-6 on this one.\nWhite They should really come out good.\nMcDivitt I did the Apollo Landmark Area No. 4. I did the tracking task with it at 19 16 42 on El Paso, and it turned out pretty well. We tried to make a tracking pass on El Paso International Airport, and we never even saw El Paso.\nWhite This was a very big surprise to both of us because we though we'd nail that one cold.\nMcDivitt That's right. We've been in and out of there so often, you know, it's just like another home base.\nWhite Which leads to one of your conclusions, which is--\nMcDivitt You can't have targets out in the middle of a land mass. They've got to be near a body of water.\nWhite You need something to identify the landmark.\nMcDivitt There are some beautiful topographical features near El Paso. There's a range of mountains just to the west that show up and the white sands are out there to the west--Shoot! We never saw anything. I think I saw El Paso when we were right\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":231,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n223\nover it. I said, \"I think there goes El Paso.\nI think we missed it.\"\nWhite The next thing we said was, \"Yes, it is. There's\nTexas.\" We could see Corpus Christi coming up on\nus. That's where you took it.\nMcDivitt That's right. So then I went to a tracking task\non a pair of sand pits, with a channel between\nthem, right on the coast--around Corpus somewhere.\nSo, we did a tracking pass on it because we were\nall set up and we'd already used the fuel to get\nstabilized. We were all set to do something so\nwe went ahead and did something. We took some\n200 mm pictures of this.\nWhite I took about 10 pictures.\nMcDivitt We'll just see how the target stayed in sight.\nThis was our first real tracking pass, wasn't it?\nWhite I had one good one on Tel-Aviv.\nMcDivitt Did you use the fuel required to do it and all that\nstuff or did you try to chintz on it?\nWhite I tried to chintz on it, but I think it was good\ntracking. I actually tracked the airport at Haifa\ninstead of Tel-Aviv. I realized it at the last\nminute that I didn't have Tel-Aviv, I had Haifa, but\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":232,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"224\nCONFIDENTIAL\nI had an airfield and I had a town so I--\nMcDivitt You took some fixed-mounted 200 mm pictures.\nWhite Yes. I took about two pictures of it. I couldn't\ntake a series. I--\nMcDivitt That's right. You didn't have the gunsight to\ntrack with either.\nWhite No. I just put it in the middle of the window.\nMcDivitt At this time our orbit was 88.1 by 148.7, so we\nhad come down about 7 or 8 miles. D-9 and Apollo\n4, were around 51 hours. I don't know exactly\nhow that fit into this schedule that we were doing.\nWe were switching back and forth from elapsed time\nto Greenwich Mean Time so we got a little confused\non these. We got updates of the PLA's and CLA's.\nThis plan says, \"Prepare for D-6.\" Well, we didn't\nhave a D-6 Experiment anymore. Ed went to sleep\nagain at 54 hours.\nWhite Yes. At 54:30 I've got myself asleep.\nMcDivitt Ed asleep at 54, and I have him waking up at 59:15.\nThat was when we started trying to make you sleep\na little longer, Ed.\nWhite Half our notes here are elapsed time and half of\nthem are in Greenwich Mean Time. I think this is\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":233,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"225\nCONFIDENTIAL\nprobably one of the weakest points in our flight\nplanning--trying to get times correlated.\nMcDivitt This correlation between one time and the other\ntime is hard to handle. We were getting start\ntimes in GMT. We said that we wanted these start\ntimes in GMT because this is the only official\ntime that we had. The elapsed times were just for\nplanning. We only kept them to the nearest two\nor three minutes. I started my Omega watch on\nelapsed time at take-off, and I just let it run\nthrough the whole flight. I never set it. I\nnever checked elapsed time or anything. It could\nhave been off two or three minutes, but I was\ndoing the flight plan to the nearest 10 minutes\noff the book here. When we got retrofire times\nand when we got start times for things, we got\nthem in GMT. It made it awfully confusing in the\nflight plan by switching back and forth.\nFortunately, we got off at 15:15 which is better\nthan getting off at 12:36 or something like that.\nOn the Apollo mission we've got a better set of\nclocks. We're going to have Mission Time and\nPhase Time, so whenever you start a new phase\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":234,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"226\nCONFIDENTIAL\nyou go back and start all over again.\nWhite Well, I'm not convinced that we couldn't have\neven handled this one on elapsed time.\nMcDivitt We did.\nWhite Well, I mean let everything go elapsed time.\nForget about your Greenwich Mean Time.\nMcDivitt No.\nWhite I don't know what we would have lost.\nMcDivitt The retrofire times.\nWhite Put the retrofire time on elapsed time. Like\nyou say, it was much clearer to you using that\none watch on 12-hour increments, and it was to\nme too. That's the one I used. I used this one\nwatch right here on elapsed time.\nMcDivitt Well, let's get into that as a separate thing\nat the end. We had the MSC Experiment 2 and 3\noff at 02:25. We turned it on at 22:14. These\nare Zebra times now. I have a note here,\n\"Perform D-8 Experiment, Radiation Experiment,\nat 55:30 elapsed time,\" and I've got, \"No. Pilot\nasleep.\" Did you do that experiment later on, Ed?\nWhite Which one was that, Jim?\nMcDivitt D-8 Experiment.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":235,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"227\nCONFIDENTIAL\nWhite At what time?\nMcDivitt At 55:30 elapsed.\nWhite I've got them in Greenwich Mean Time here again.\nMcDivitt That's around 22 or 23:00. Something like that.\nWhite Yes. I've got one. I did it at 23:58 GMT.\nMcDivitt How did you do that? You were supposed to be\nasleep then. Maybe you woke up and did it and\nwent back to sleep.\nWhite You know, this was the time when you went to\nsleep. I've got you asleep on the fourth day\nat 03:30 Greenwich Mean Time.\nMcDivitt We're not on the fourth day. We're still on the\nthird day. I'm between 54 and 59 elapsed.\nWhite All right. That's the period of time I'm asleep.\nMcDivitt I've got the D-9 Experiment was run between\n22:43 and 23:22. I must have done that. Okay.\nWe got Ed up at about 59 hours elapsed time, and\ndid a Medical Data No. 2 Pass on me except by then\nI think they were Medical Data No. 1 Passes. I\nwent to sleep at about 60:15 elapsed, and I got\nup about 65:30 elapsed. I had about five hours\nthere when I was supposed to sleep.\nWhite Shortly after you went to sleep we started having\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":236,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the RCS heater troubles and we had them coming on for the next three to four hours. We had them cycled on and I called the times down. I don't believe we want to go over them all right now. I had them cycled on and off at intervals of about 15 minutes, for a total of eight different times. They started coming on exactly at 06:47 and the last one I had was on at 08:23. That was the last time we had any RCS heaters. It was rather peculiar because they alternated. First the A-Ring would come on and the B-Ring would come on and the A-Ring would come on, and so on.\nMcDivitt Is that right?\nWhite They came on at approximately 15-minute intervals and it took approximately five minutes to bring the temperature down to within limits. I reported those down and they seemed to be interested in getting exact on/off times of our heaters to plot our electrical profile curve. I ran an Apollo Landmark Run No. 6 with yaw 15 and pitch 30. I think the results of that are in the other logbook. I reported down at this time that Jim had a successful bowel movement. I already had one."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":237,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I had an HF Check at Ascension at 05:09, which didn't work out--\nMcDivitt How could I have a successful BM if I was asleep?\nWhite You had already had it. I reported it at that time. I wasn't able to read Ascension on this HF Check. I got the okay for an Apollo D-9 Run No. 2 for 06 01 44. I called down to get clarification on it and they said I could use stars of opportunity. This is what I did. I ran the D-9 with the stars of opportunity. Why we did this will be brought out in the D-9 debriefing.\nMcDivitt This was a no-fuel D-9?\nWhite No. This was with fuel. But, remember, the stars were placed so it was hard to get much.\nMcDivitt Yes.\nWhite We scrubbed the Apollo Landmark Investigation No.1. We didn't do that. We gave a Medical Data Pass. Ran the D-9 Experiment, I believe, and got fairly good information back on that. As a matter of fact, I did do the Apollo Landmark Run No. 6 and that information is in the flight log. I got Jim up, it says, at 08:31. This doesn't sound right to me.\nto me."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":238,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt I got myself up around 65:40 something elapsed time. I just drew a mark there.\nWhite That's exactly where I've got you up--at about 65:40.\nMcDivitt I got a comment here. This is something that went on throughout the flight. I went to sleep and I looked at the OAMS Quantity Gage and it was reading 60 percent. When I woke up it read 56 percent. This meant a 4 percent drop and it was somewhat alarming since we were saving fuel so much.\nWhite He accused me of having to use all the fuel up while he was asleep. Ha, ha.\nMcDivitt No. I'd noticed that the gage went up and down before, but it never had gone up and down so much in such a short time. It would move up and down by 2 percent quite frequently over a period of 15 minutes to an hour. It would change by 2 percent. It did this between 60 and 70 percent for a long, long, long time. We were going pretty easy on the fuel. It did move up and down like this quite a bit. This is just a comment that throughout the flight the OAMS Quantity Gage did fluctuate quite a bit. We had the uncertainty"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":239,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in the system and this 2 per cent was, in general, about 7 pounds. That was really quite a bit of fuel. 4 percent was between 12 and 15 pounds, depending where you were on the scale. This was and awful lot of fuel to have suddenly disappear. I just wanted to comment on that. It was an interesting thing. We'd been dumping our ECS O2 pressure. We'd gone to High Rate or cabin repress and dumping the stuff overboard--overpressurizing the cabin and having the cabin vent to keep the pressure down. Finally around this 66 hours, we'd dumped the thing down to 880 psi on the gage. This was why we didn't have to dump it so often. We'd been dumping it before around 960 psi--dump it there and bring it back to around 930 psi and let it build up, and then repeat the cycle again.\nWhite That was about every 4 hours.\nMcDivitt Yes. We had to dump at least every 4 hours. We brought it down to 880 psi and this gave us a period of around 12 hours.\nWhite You know, I thought this was a very clever method of holding the cabin at a higher pressure than normal by McDonnell--putting the vent down so low that it vented in a normal mode. You"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":240,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"certainly could tell on the gage when it was going to vent. It vented right down there at about 960.\nMcDivitt Yes. I thought we'd really hack that apart when we got to the systems.\nWhite Yes. All right. I wanted to be sure that we didn't forget it.\nMcDivitt I guess we were both awake at this time. We did MSC-10 some place. Here's where we got into a bunch of bad flight planning. Someone on the ground screwed up.\nWhite They ran our Horizon Scanner and MSC-10 Checks right together.\nMcDivitt We started out our MSC-10 Check and at the same time we were supposed to start powering up the platform and alining it.\nWhite What time did you have MSC-10 Experiment?\nMcDivitt We were supposed to power up the platform at 10:15. Let's see if I got the start times here for MSC-10.\nWhite We'd have it in the book.\nMcDivitt Well, we didn't get a start time because MSC-10 starts when the horizon comes into view, when we could see the first light. We started the MSC-10"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":241,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n233\nas a sequence of pictures every five minutes.\nThe sequence is three pictures every five minutes,\nfor as many passes as you can get. So you have to\nstart this thing at sunup, or as soon as the hor-\nizon becomes light. We took our first three pic-\ntures. We went on through and we were supposed\nto start our Horizon Scanner Check--.\nWhite Jim, the time we started you've logged in here as\n11:04.\nMcDivitt Okay, at 11:04 we started our MSC-10 Experiment.\nWe were given instructions to start the Horizon\nScanner Sunset Check at 11:54. It just so turned\nout that we were going along and we weren't out\nof frames of film yet for MSC-10.\nWhite It was still daylight.\nMcDivitt Yes, it was still daylight, that's right, and we\ncould still get some more good pictures, I thought.\nHere we had instructions to start our Horizon\nScanner Sunset Check, and in looking through this\nthing, it looked to me like that was the only\nplace we were going to get it; so I don't under-\nstand exactly why we had to run MSC-10 and the\nHorizon Scanner Check simultaneously. They\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":242,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"234\nCONFIDENTIAL\ncouldn't be run simultaneously! It looked like\nsomebody with a little foresight on the ground\ncould have seen this.\nWhite That was really the only bad screwup, I think,\nin our flight planning. It was right there.\nMcDivitt I think so, too. So we terminated MSC-10, al-\nthough we had enough pictures, I'm sure, to have\ncompleted the experiment. It would have been\nnice to use up all the film. There's no sense\nin carrying it and not using it. At 11:54 we\ndid the Horizon Scanner Sunset Check--the plat-\nform up and alined. At 12:15 we did the Horizon\nScanner Moonset Check. At 12:22 we did the\nApollo Yaw Orientation. At 12:58 we did the\nHorizon Scanner Thruster Check. At 12:59 we\ndid the Horizon Scanner Track Check. At 13:14 we\ndid the Attitude Thruster Check. At 13:20 we\nwere supposed to power down and at 13:20 were\nsupposed to turn off the MSC No. 1 Experiment.\nWhat happened as we went through here--we got\na little behind because it took a little longer\nto do some of these things, especially this\nHorizon Scanner Track Check. It was\ntaking so long that\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":243,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"235\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwe eliminated the last two steps in it. We did\nthe zero bank angle and the pitch up and down.\nWe did the zero pitch angle and the roll left and\nright. We did the bank to one side and the pitch\nup and down,and we did the pitch up and the bank\non both sides. We didn't do the pitch down and\nthe bank on both sides,and we didn't do the roll\nleft and the pitch up and down. We were running\nlate and at that time I didn't know how we were\ndoing on electrical power and everything,so I\nelected not to do the last two portions of the\ncheck.\nWhite We had it pretty well ironed out, anyhow.\nMcDivitt Yes.\nWhite Surprisingly broad bands, too.\nMcDivitt The scanners seemed to be working perfectly. The\nattitude thruster check was just as it should have\nbeen. We powered down the platform and turned off\nthe MSC Experiment No. 1 about two minutes late.\nWhite We powered down at 13:27.\nMcDivitt Okay, seven minutes late. We never did take any\n16 mm photos of the plumes.\nWhite Before you went to sleep on this one.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":244,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"236\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt I hadn't gone to sleep on that one.\nWhite Before I went to sleep.\nMcDivitt Before you went to sleep, yes. Okay D-9 --\nWhite We were really busy at this period of time.\nMcDivitt Yes, a D-9 at 20:51 Zulu.\nWhite I have a feeling I was asleep here, Jim.\nMcDivitt I think you were, Ed. You went to sleep at 71:15.\nWhite 71:15?\nMcDivitt Right. I did the D-9 Experiment at 20:15.\nWhite At what time, Jim?\nMcDivitt At 20:15.\nWhite So you did the D-9 while I was asleep.\nMcDivitt I have a note here that we're going to be over\nGuaymas at 15 44 55. They wanted a No. 1 Medical\nPass from me. They wanted me to turn the TM switch\nto REAL TIME and ACQUISITION for three minutes\nover Guaymas. Guaymas must have lost it's\ncommand function or something -- not for the\nwhole time though.\nWhite Yes, this is where I was asleep, Jim. I remember\nthat now.\nMcDivitt Okay, now I have a comment here. I turned on our\nhorizon scanner at 16:03 with about a 25 degree\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":245,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"237\nCONFIDENTIAL\nnose down attitude, with a pitch up rate of about\ntwo degrees/second, in the Horizon Scanner Mode.\nThe thing caught and held the spacecraft within\nthe deadband and finally damped it down, and\nwe stayed in the Horizon Scanner Mode. I think\nthat this is about the time that we went to\nHorizon Scanner, isn't it?\nWhite You were in Horizon Scanner while I was asleep.\nMcDivitt Yes. I don't have that in my notes, but we went\nin the Horizon Scan Mode around 72 hours, I think.\nI think it was at 16:03 GMT that I mentioned it.\nI didn't do an Orbit Nav Check at the 72 hours\nand 50 minutes as shown in the flight plan. Oh,\nhere's where you were up again, Ed. Because you\nwere up when the computer screwed up, weren't you?\nWhite Yes. I saw the light.\nMcDivitt Okay. During the course of our passes over the\nStates, here, around 75 hours, I was told to do\nOrbital Nav Check No. 9 at about 75:30, and I was\nto do Orbital Nav Check No.10 at about 75:50. Okay.\nI completed the Orbital Nav Check, Run No. 9, and\nthen you must have waked up, I think. I think\nyou were asleep when I did that.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":246,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"238\nCONFIDENTIAL\nWhite\tWhat time do you have me waking up? I know about\nwhat time I woke up.\nMcDivitt\tYou woke up around 75:30 or so. I was going to\ndo an Orbit Nav Check No. 10, and we were over\nthe States. They wanted us to turn on the\ncomputer to send us a load, so I did. That's\nprobably what woke you up, when I was trying to\nturn on the computer with the swizzle stick.\nWhite\tYes.\nMcDivitt\tBut this time the computer stuck in the on\nposition.\nWhite\tWhen you tried to turn it off.\nMcDivitt\tAnd it wouldn't go off.\nWhite\tI remember watching. I saw the mal light go on.\nMcDivitt\tSo it stayed on, and that's when we had all of our\ncomputer trouble, which you'll check and cover in\nsystems. Oh, the time the malfunction light\ncame on was right when we were about to turn it\noff.\nWhite\tI'd say around 75:15 or something. In that area?\nMcDivitt\t75:50 CSQ-Hawaii. I think it was about 75:50 or\nthereabouts. They sure do have some peculiar\ntimes here. It only takes, according to flight\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":247,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"239\nCONFIDENTIAL\nplan, 30 minutes to go from Guaymas back to\nGuaymas. That's a high speed orbit.\nWhite\tThat's right. It does have that, doesn't it? Looks\nlike a goof, doesn't it?\nMcDivitt\tIt only takes 40 minutes to go from Hawaii to\nHawaii. We were really traveling! I don't know\nwhat time the computer stopped.\nWhite\tI think they've got it on the ground. They can\nread the mal light.\nMcDivitt\tWe were talking to them on the ground. It should\nbe on the air to ground tape. Then we were\ncleared to do Apollo D-9 in the orbit that\ncovered the night time around 77 1/2 hours or\nso.\nWhite\tThat was my D-9 at night, wasn't it?\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. Ed did this.\nWhite\tBefore you went to sleep, though, we had one other\nthing. We had the zodiacal light photographs\nthat we took, and we had a special procedure\ncalled up where we pointed straight down.\nMcDivitt\tOh, yes. That's right.\nWhite\tPulsed it, with the shutter speed of the Hassel-\nblad open. You operated the Hasselblad and I\noperated the spacecraft. We pitched down and\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":248,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"240\nCONFIDENTIAL\nran through this test and pitched up and ran\nthrough--.\nMcDivitt\tThe Contarex.\nWhite\tYou used the Contarex. That's right.\nMcDivitt\tWe did this at about 78:30, and I went to sleep\nat 79--\nWhite\tNo, we didn't. We did this at 76:30, Jim.\nMcDivitt\t76:30? I have 78:30.\nWhite\tI just took on Rev 51. You're correct. That Rev\n51 they called up wasn't right. Okay, we did it\nat 21:40, which I have as equivalent to 78:25.\nMcDivitt\tThen at 80 hours I went to sleep.\nWhite\tYou went to sleep about 80 hours elapsed time.\nThat's right. Okay, while you were asleep, I\nran a D-8. In fact, I had quite a bit to do\nwhile you were asleep this time. I ran a D-8\nat 23:57. These are all Zulu times. I turned\non the MSC-2 and 3 at 23:57. This is where I had\nthe requirement to attitude hold, small-end-\nforward, through the anomaly. On the first pass\nthrough at 23:57 to 01:30, I didn't feel that I\nhad a good attitude. From 23:57 to 01:15 I didn't\nfeel my attitude small-end-forward was satisfactory.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":249,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"241\nCONFIDENTIAL\nI elected to make a similar pass through on the\nfollowing orbit, watching the stars and making\nsure that I had a good small-end-forward. I\nfound out that the first pass through was pretty\ngood until the tail end, where I thought the\nstars were in the wrong position. It turned out\nthat this is just the way they came up, and I was\ngood for both of them except for the tail end of\nthe first run through, I logged in two small\nend passes through the South Atlantic Anomaly.\nI also ran the D-9 Experiment and I found that\nby using the fuel and having the Horizon Scan to\nhold when you wanted it to hold, the use of the\nsextant and horizon in making measurements was\nconsiderably easier. I made what I feel was a\ngood Apollo D-9 run. I ran the D-8 Experiment.\nI had two times to run the D-8 Experiment. I\nran it at the Greenwich Mean Time of 01:30. I\nwas to look for Pegasus at 02:28, straight up at\n268 nautical miles, and I was all hot to watch\nPegasus go over and was just approaching my\nstraight up attitude when--\nMcDivitt\tThe sun shined on the window.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":250,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"242\nCONFIDENTIAL\nWhite\tNo, I was called and they said, \"Say we got a\ncritical tape dump. We want you in a level\nattitude for it.\" And I said, \"Well, you just\ngave me instructions to watch Pegasus.\" And\nthey said, \"No, we want the critical tape dump.\"\nSo I went right down to that attitude, and we\ngot the dump off in time for me to go back up to\nthe attitude prior to 02:28. I got up there\nabout 5 minutes prior to that time, but the\nsun, as Jim said, was up and was reflecting off\nthe particles on the windshield, and I really\ncouldn't see very much. I tried to see Pegasus,\nbut I couldn't see it. I turned MSC-2 and 3 off\nat the appropriate times. We got instructions\nfrom Houston CAP COM to try a few things with the\ncomputer. We were to turn the computer off, the\nIGS on, the computer on at 20 minute intervals\nto try to recycle the mal light off. They thought\nthat it might have been cold.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":251,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt Let me step back a little bit to this\ncomputer problem. The computer stuck over\nthe States at around 75 1/2 hours or so. The\ncomputer was stuck on. If you've got to have\nsomething stick, you're better off to have it\nstick on, I guess, than off. Especially if\nyou ever want it to work again. As we went\nout of earshot of the ground UHF radio range in\nthe States, I asked them if that they had any\ninstructions. They said, \"Stand by.\" I sort\nof felt that the thing that we ought to do was\njust leave it on for a while. We got a call\nfrom Tananarive and they said to place the\ncomputer switch to the ON position and a.c.\nPower Switch to the ACME. I said that's\ncertainly a peculiar place to put the switch\nand they said these are the instructions from\nHouston.\nWhite I think we had a good computer at that time.\nMcDivitt I know darn well we had a good computer at\nthat time. I think this is like getting your\nlanding gear stuck up and you fool around with"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":252,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it and it comes down and then just for the\nhell of it you pull it up again to see if it's\ngoing to come up. I don't think we should\nhave ever turned off the computer. Unfortunate-\nly, I didn't have all the information at my\nfingertips that I needed to really make a de-\ncision on it. When we got to the next station,\nwhich was Hawaii, I asked them how we were\ndoing on electrical power. They said that we\nwere 160 amp-hours ahead of the curve. We had\na 200 amp-hour cushion, so that meant that we\nhad a 360 amp-hour pad on our flight plan. In\nthe meantime, I had checked to see what the\ncomputer-ON, IGS Power Supply-ON took. It\ntook 5.6 amp-hours to power this thing. We\nwere at 76 hours on a 96-hour mission and we\nhad about 20 hours to go. Twenty times 5.6 is\na little over 100. So, if we had used up these\n100 amp-hours, we'd still finish up with a\nbetter electrical pad than we started out with,\nor than we expected when we started out. So,\nI sort of feel that we needlessly threw the\ncomputer down the drain. After we got the"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":253,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"thing turned off and ruined, we went ahead and\nturned the IGS Power Supply on, the computer on,\nand left it on the rest of the flight anyway.\nSo, whoever sent those instructions accomplished\nit. I guess what he wanted to do was turn off\nthe computer. He sure accomplished that. It\nseemed to me like it would have been more\nworthwhile to leave the thing on till we got a\nlittle more data out of the thing, instead of\nrushing to get it turned off the way they did.\nI don't understand it. I don't feel that it\nwas a wise decision. Unfortunately, I didn't\nhave the electrical power consumption at my\nfingertips right then, or I never would have\nturned the thing off.\nMcDivitt Okay, I guess we're over about 86 hours. I got\nup at 86 hours. That's one of the longest rest\nperiods that I've had. At 05 48 45 Zulu we were\nsupposed to perform a D-9 Experiment, and I guess\nwe did. Then I have in my notes that Ed went\nto sleep at 87 hours elapsed time.\nWhite And this was my five hours of very good sleep."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":254,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It's my best and last. You must have let me\nsleep till when?\nMcDivitt I don't even have when I got you up, but it\nwas about five or six hours. I think it was\naround six hours.\nWhite No, it wasn't that long, was it? Because that\nwould have run us a little short. You had\nabout an hour 45 minutes or two --\nMcDivitt I had an hour and a half nap. I got up at\nthree hours before retrofire. Retrofired at\n97:45. I went to sleep at 93 hours.\nWhite Okay. So, I got up --\nMcDivitt Ed got about six hours nap.\nWhite I got up about 95:05 that time. You went to\nsleep about --\nMcDivitt No, you went to sleep at 87 hours and got up\nat about 92 -- a little past 92.\nWhite This is what I'd estimate, Jim.\nMcDivitt A little past 92. So, you had about a good\n5 hours. I know that you were still sleeping\nat 92, because that's when the urine system\nstopped up, and you were asleep then. So, I\nthink you got up -- I'd guess, around 92:30."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":255,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I know I went to sleep at 93. I went to sleep in\npm GMT and 15 after the hour, whatever the hour\nwas, and I woke up again. During the time that\nEd was asleep, I did two Apollo Landmark runs\nusing Area No. 16 for the first one. This was\non Basrah. It was a good run. We'll go into\nthis a lot more in detail later on. I did\nthe second one on Cairo. This was a good run.\nI went through some more computer mode checks.\nEvery ten seconds, I changed the computer\nmodes and turned the switches on and off,\npushed the malfunction lights, hit the Start\nComp button, turned the switches on and off,\nran the IVI's and a whole bunch of other\nthings. The computer was dead and it was\npretty obvious that it was. At 92 hours, the\nurine flush system stopped up. Just prior\nto that Ed had urinated and we had a big\nbellows full. As it started going overboard,\nit always went overboard in squirts.\nWhite Did you have it at 92 or 95?\nMcDivitt 92.\nWhite Okay, that was when I was asleep."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":256,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt You were still asleep, and I think you got up around 92:30, I would guess. Sometime around in there. I know that I got up three hours before retrofire and I slept about an hour and a half. You can go back and say that you got up about 92:30 or 93 elapsed. Ed had urinated in the bladder and the bellows was full. As it got towards the end, it started going out very slowly, but it did all go out. So, I turned the thing off normally. I left preheat on for a short time, two or three minutes, and then turned it off. After my urine dump, I had about half air and half urine in the bladder, and the bellows filled out. It just stopped. It was pretty obvious that it wasn't going to go any farther. I turned off the OVERBOARD position and went to PREHEAT on the other switch. I then went over to the evaporator and dumped through the evaporator and it dumped right overboard. We used the evaporator dump system one other time during the flight. We played back the tapes and the things we were supposed to do until about 93 hours, I"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":257,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"believe, and that's when I went to sleep. I woke Ed up and I went to sleep at this time.\nWhite Actually we got our update while you were asleep the time before. We got the update for how to perform the retro. We figured that with the procedure they gave us, if we followed it, we would get a three-sigma miss distance of 70 nautical miles. We were to use an OAMS retor with a manual retro. At this time, we were going to push the manuel button. They didn't know at this time that the TRS was working all right. They later came in and told us to use the automatic mode of time. We were to use zero-lift rolling. We were to start the terminal maneuver at the 400 000 foot marker. They told us to expect to encounter about 8 g's during the reentry. We were told the recovery area had three to four foot waves, 18 knot winds, and good weather. I'll cover this more later.\nWhite There wasn't much more. We got an update. I took a few more pictures, and I did a medical pass. During that hour and 40 minutes there wasn't"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":258,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"anything else. Nothing else was scheduled. We were down through what we felt was all the fuel we wanted to use, so about all I did was a couple of tracking tasks.\nMcDivitt Going back for a moment--at 17:19 I did an Apollo D-6 on Yuma. Okay, I think that brings us to the preretro portion of the mission. Right, Ed?\nWhite Yes, sir. I think you'll find there are quite a few errors and omissions in what we've put on the tape right now. I think you have to compare them both--the two tapes together--to get anything.\nWhite That's like air to ground tape, also.\nMcDivitt That's right. It has to all be put together. This is just a piece right here.\n4.4 Preretro Preparation\nWhite We really started our preretro preparation about three hours prior to preretro. At this time we started stowing equipment and preparing the spacecraft and ourselves for the retrofire. I think we worked for probably 30 to 45 minutes without making a very big"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":259,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"dent in the pile of junk that we had in the spacecraft. It was apparent to me at that time that we were going to have to go a lot faster than we were going or we'd still be up there stowing stuff away at retrofire time. So, Ed and I then went into high gear and we really started stuffing stuff away. We put the film in the middle food box, and we put the cameras and some of the refuse, including three defecation bags, exerciser, and some other things, in the left-hand aft food box. I took a lot longer to stow the equipment than we had planned. Do you have any comments on that?\nWhite Yes, I thought this also. We had just everything out prior to this time. We hadn't really been able to stow anything. We used every piece of our equipment right up to the time we started our stowage. In fact, I think you were getting a little uneasy there for a little while that we weren't going to get it all in.\nMcDivitt That's right. At the rate we were going, we"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":260,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wouldn't have.\nWhite That's right. We had to accelerate our pace a little bit and perhaps get a little faster and not quite as thorough in our stowage as we would liked to have been. I think everything was put away. Everything was put away except for the umbilical. We knew we weren't going to stow the urine hose, so we put that in the umbilical bag. The two meals that we had left we put in the umbilical bag also.\nMcDivitt We had some other things. We had the extravehicular sleeves off your suit, the blanket that went over my leg, the launch-day urine bags, and a couple of other things were down underneath my legs. They were between my legs and the seat.\nWhite Right. I put my launch-day urine bag in the bag also, so that things wouldn't ricochet. around.\nMcDivitt I think we had all your stuff in the bag and I had all my stuff wedged between my legs and the seat.\nWhite We both also had a trash bag on either side."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":261,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"We had that on the launch also.\nMcDivitt\tThe trash bag was full.\nWhite\tDid yours stick on the side?\nMcDivitt\tIt stuck.\nWhite\tSo did mine. I put mine further up --\nMcDivitt\tIt didn't have anything heavy in it. It was\nlight weight.\nWhite\tIt was all trash.\nMcDivitt\tDry trash.\nWhite\tIt all stayed there pretty well. We did get\nthe stowage done in time. I think we had about\n10 or 15 minutes in which to collect our wits\nfor the --\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. I was trying to make an effort\nsuch that at the time we arrived over Carnarvon\nthe greatest part of the stowage would be\ndown. However, we didn't quite make this. I\nhad a time powering up the spacecraft, and I\nhad the IGS power on. I had already turned\nthe IMU on. I was beginning to warm it up,\nand had it in the Cage Mode.\nWhen we got to Carnarvon we were still stowing\nthings away. I think by that time I had al-"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":262,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ready strapped myself into the spacecraft. I\nhad my survival gear hooked up, my shoulder\nharness hooked up and my lap belt on loosely.\nWhite\tWe did the things that I could do by myself,\nsuch as stowing the ventilation module and\nstowing the cable. You were doing other things.\nMcDivitt\tThat's what I said. We were coming up to\nCarnarvon. I was shooting to have all this\nstuff put away by then. We didn't have it all\nput away but we had most of it done, where I\ncould actually get around to flying the space-\ncraft again. We checked in with Carnarvon, and\nconfirmed our retrofire time. We weren't\nreally supposed to pick up our retrofire data\nuntil we passed over the States. From Car-\nnarvon on up to the States, we continued to\nstow away little bits of pieces that we had.\nI think you were still eating. We finally de-\ncided that you'd better stop eating or we\nweren't going to be ready for reentry.\nWhite\tWith a little prethought I had taken one meal,\nprepared it and set it aside so I could eat\nit just before reentry. This is what I was"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":263,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"doing.\nMcDivitt\tAs we came up on Carnarvon, I thought that we\nwere in excellent shape. We had a lot of spare\ntime. We could get ready for retrofire. We\ncame up to the United States and ran a pass\nacross the United States. We got the update\ntimes and we got all the reentry quantities\nthat we needed, both with and without OAMS.\nThey told us that they had a valid load in the\nTRS. At this time, I assumed that they\nchecked the TRS, but when we got our early\nretrofire, I wondered if anyone really had\nchecked the time.\nWhite\tI know it was off at least a second. I'd\nestimate it was off a little more than a\nsecond.\nMcDivitt\tA second and a half, probably. No more than\ntwo seconds because we didn't arm it until\nthree seconds. But it sure fired shortly after\nthat.\nWhite\tYes. One thing that we got was different. All\nour quantities checked out except for one.\nThey called up a landing time which, the first"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":264,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"time, I copied it as 15:55, and the second\ntime I copied it as 17:10. This was prior to\nfiring anything, so I think they corrected one\ntime only. I thought the rest of it was very\nwell handled. We had the times called up and\nverified several times.\nMcDivitt\tAs we started our pass across the States, I\nstarted alining the platform. We had the best\nalined platform although we didn't really need\nan alined platform since we didn't have a\nclosed loop guidance system. But we sure had\nthe best alined platform at retrofire that the\nspace business will probably ever see. I\nalined the platform across the United States,\nand then I went to Orbit Rate. I had about\na 20-minute alinement on it and went to Orbit\nRate. We left it in Orbit Rate. I did this\nalinement small-end-forward because I wanted\nto see where I was going for a change. We\nwent into the dark side, and we really got\ninto our checklist then. We performed the Pre-\nretro Checklist well in advance of when it was\nsupposed to be done. It shows it in the flight"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":265,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"plan at about 96:40 with the retrofire at\nabout 97:45. I think we did the Retro Check-\nlist right after we completed our pass across\nthe States. We did it right at about 1+30.\nThen I did it at one hour. At T_A-1 hour we\nwent through the checklist again, and got all\nthose things that we skipped. Some of them we\ndidn't want to do as early as an hour and a\nhalf. We went through it again in an hour,\nand we did the Preretro Checklist step by\nstep. I think at that time we had everything\nstowed away. We took a couple last drinks of\nwater, and put the water gun away, and then\nproceeded on down.\nWhite\tI had one comment on that checklist. I still\nthink our HF procedures are not too well de-\nfined--when we do and when we don't put the HF\nout. Not out, but when we put No. 2 on HF.\nIt popped up in the checklist again and we\nquestioned this prior to the flight. Why put\nNo. 2 audio on HF during this time? I do not\nfeel we want to be on HF. We had the HF on.\nWe could hear them calling us, if they did call"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":266,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"258\nCONFIDENTIAL\nus on it. We could switch over to it quite\nquickly. This wasn't on the checklist, but\nwe put my switch on RECORD and recorded the\nwhole sequence of events.\nMcDivitt That's right. I think that was sort of a\nneedless position. You could listen on HF\nwithout having the transmitter on.\nWhite That was the only discrepancy that I found in\nour checklist. Everything else we went through.\nOne other thing. They had, \"Insert a new\nvoice tape,\" and we both felt we wanted the\nfull reentry on one tape. If we put a new\nvoice tape at this time we wouldn't have\ngotten it. So, I inserted a new voice tape at\nthe Minus 36 Checklist and I think this is a\ngood time to do it on future flights.\nMcDivitt Yes, the T_R-36 Checklist was to be done over\nCarnarvon. We decided that we would check the\nmaneuver thrusters prior to Carnarvon since\nwe had a lot of time. There was no sense in\nwaiting until the checklist time came around.\nSince we had a lot of time, which was the\nthing I was striving for, I went ahead and\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":267,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"259\nCONFIDENTIAL\nchecked the aft-firing thrusters No. 9 and 10\nas we had in the T_R-36 Checklist, except we\ndid it between T_R-45 and 40. Got them all\nchecked out, so that by the time we came over\nCarnarvon we just went ahead and started up our\nevent timer on their mark. We confirmed with\nCarnarvon that we had indeed checked on maneuver\nthrusters and that they were all right. We got\nthis checklist completed well in advance too.\nWe went through it a couple of times, although\nthere really wasn't much to it after the Man-\neuver Thruster Check. I guess we could proba-\nbly follow the retrofire itself here.\n5.0 Retrofire\n5.1 T_R-36 Events\nMcDivitt I just covered most of this. I set the event\ntimer up well in advance of Carnarvon. At\nCarnarvon, I got the T_R-36 hack. I got the\nevent timer started right on the money. We\ngot a hack on it later and it was indeed with\nthe ground times. I checked the aft-firing\nthrusters prior to reaching Carnarvon, and I\ntold Carnarvon that I had indeed checked them\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":268,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"260\nCONFIDENTIAL\nand they were operating properly.\n5.2 T_R-22 Events\nMcDivitt At T_R-22 I was alining the platform. I\nstarted alining the platform over the States,\nand I put it in Orbit Rate for a while. Finally\nwe got over to the dark side and there wasn't\nanything else to do, so I alined it some more.\nI alined that platform for an hour and a\nhalf. We had the best alined platform at\nretrofire in the world. We were in pretty good\nshape by the time we got to the T_R-22 checklist,\nwhich is really nothing at all. It's just\nanother platform alinement. We checked our\nground updates, and again Carnarvon told us\nthat we had a good load in the TRS.\n5.3 T_R-13 Events\nMcDivitt At T_R-13 minutes we started the computer. We\nstarted our T_R-13 minute checklist at about\nT_R-14 to make sure we didn't run into any\nproblems. We got into Orbit Rate, and I got\nall the things out just like the T_R-12 checklist\nsays. We had an OAMS burn of 2 minutes and 40\nseconds. They called it up and I\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":269,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"261\nCONFIDENTIAL\nchecked it. I was exactly right. They were\nobviously flying it off the same card that we\nwere, because I checked it and it was exactly\n2 minutes and 40 seconds.\n5.4 T_R-12 Events\nMcDivitt Hawaii said they would give me a countdown to\nT_R-12, and they gave me the 3, 2, 1 Mark. I\nstarted thrusting at that time. Ed had planned\nto give me a check at one minute elapsed time,\ntwo minutes elapsed time, and at 30 seconds to\ngo, 20 seconds to go, 10 seconds to go, 5, 4,\n3, 2, 1, and off. That's exactly what we did.\nHe called me at one minute, and again at two\nminutes. We went right on down, and he gave me\nthe mark. I was checking the time as he gave\nme the counts. It was agreeing exactly with\nmy event timer. At Ed's mark, I released the\nattitude controller and we were within tenths\nof seconds of exactly 2 minutes and 40 seconds\nof burn time. During this period of time, I\nthink I held the attitudes probably within plus\nor minus a degree. It was very easy to control.\nThe thing that I noticed most about it was the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":270,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"262\nCONFIDENTIAL\nabsence of noise from the aft-firing thrusters.\nI could hear the RCS firing, but I could not\nhear the aft-firing thrusters.\nWhite I could hear them.\nMcDivitt You know how the \"x\" is like this? My ears were\nplugged up throughout the flight, so maybe you\ncould hear them.\nWhite I could hear them.\nMcDivitt That was in Rate Command.\nWhite And stopping?\nMcDivitt Yes, I heard Rate Command. I knew what I was\ndoing with the stick. Maybe what you were\nhearing was Rate Command.\nWhite I was going to comment that the way that I was\nlistening to them I thought they were just\ncutting out.\nMcDivitt You were hearing the attitude thrusters, Ed.\nHere's what would happen. I would be thrusting\nalong and the thing would start deviating. It\nhas a tendency to deviate more in yaw.\nWhite Is it continual? Did you hear it all the time?\nMcDivitt Yes, almost all the time except for pauses\nthat were frightening, as the attitude would\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":271,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\ndrift off just a slight amount, around a degree.\nIt wasn't deviating a lot so I was making small\ncorrections. It would deviate in yaw so I would\ncontrol it back. It tended to deviate slightly\nto the left all the time. I controlled it over\nto the right and I would bring the ball back\nunderneath the dot. Then I would even go back\nto zero. Then I would release it. I would\nbring the stick back to neutral, and for a short\ntime, the rates would build up and the silence\nwould be deafening. There would be no noise\nwhatsoever. I would think, \"God bless it.\nHave the aft-firing thrusters stopped firing?\"\nThen the thrusters tended to yaw the spacecraft\nsome more. As it came around, it got past\n2/10's of a degree/second deadband and the\nRate Command started firing again.\nWhite Okay, that's what I heard. That's right.\nMcDivitt That was Rate Command. When I yawed back around,\nit was really going. I'd come back to neutral\nand it would stop.\nWhite All right. Then I couldn't hear them. I didn't\nhear them when we took the check on them.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":272,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt Neither did I. I didn't hear a thing. I agree\n100 per cent with Gus that you absolutely\ncan't hear those aft-firing thrusters.\nWhite My ear muffs are loose. They are always loose\non my ears. So if you could hear it outside,\nI would have heard it. I didn't hear it. I\nheard Rate Command.\nMcDivitt Those attitude thrusters really make a noise.\nWhite They make a big noise. It sounded to me like\nI could hear the thrusters firing and I was also\ndetecting these pauses every so often. Several\ntimes I thought, \"Oh, heck, it's stopped!\"\nMcDivitt That's right. Especially, when we started\ngetting down towards the bottom. The old fuel\ngages were going down toward zero and the time\nwas running around. It looked like it was\ngoing to be a dead heat between which went out\nfirst. There was one particularly long pause\nat about 2 minutes and 30 seconds. I thought,\n\"There it goes,\" and we made a quick correction.\nAnd when I stopped, I couldn't hear a thing.\nNothing changed. That's all it was.\nWhite Okay. I retract my statement.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":273,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt Well, not knowing exactly what I was doing with\nthe hand controller, you--I was making small\ncorrections.\nWhite That's the first time I'd heard that kind of a\nsound.\nMcDivitt We were getting it when we were chasing that\nthing around, too--when we were chasing the\nbooster around.\nWhite You were thrusting again. I thought this was\nthe other one.\nMcDivitt Yes, that's right. So we got through the TR-13\nand TR-12 Checklists.\nThe TR-13 and the TR-12 Checklists really should\nbe grouped together--the preparation and the\nOAMS retrofire.\n5.5 TR-5 Events\nMcDivitt Once more we started doing our checklist a little\nearly. Since we had the time there was no since\nin wasting it and then rushing at the end. So\nwe went through what we could in advance of\nTR-5. The things we couldn't do or that didn't\nneed to be done in advance we waited for until\nexactly TR-5. I guess this is where Ed got the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":274,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nfirst clue that the TRS was ahead of the ground\ntime.\nWhite This is an area where I particularly watch the\ntime. This is an area where I'm making a time\ncheck to start the elapsed timer going in order\nto get our time after retrofire. I was watch-\ning it pretty close. The indication on my\nwatch was that the TRS was about a second or so\nearly. I felt we had a good Greenwich Mean\nTime hack. We checked it several times and I\nthought we had a good one. With my time refer-\nence it was approximately a second to a little\nbetter early. At this time I had about half\nof the checklist completed before we got to\nthe time for it. I verified it several times.\nIt's not a hurried time at all, from 36 down,\nI don't believe. There's no time in there when\nyou're really rushed unless it--\nMcDivitt Yes. It is not hurried, provided you have\neverything else completed and you're not doing\nanything else but preparing for the retrofire--\nyou have nothing going wrong during this period.\nAt TR-5 the sequence lights came on a little\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":275,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nbit early and that's where Ed got his first\nclue that the TRS was ahead of the other thing.\nI didn't notice it because I wasn't watching my\nevent timer that closely. Ed got his GMT stop-\nwatch started. Why don't you go ahead with the\nelectrical, Ed?\nWhite I turned the main batteries on, verified them\non, and verified they were taking the load.\nThey were in good shape.\nMcDivitt This is where we turned the OAMS off and the\nRCS on. Let me talk about the checkout on the\nRCS now. We had armed the RCS prior to the\nTR-36 Checklist, and checked out each ring.\nWhen I was checking the rings out, I felt that\nI might have a thruster out. That was because\nwhen I pitched up or down, my top left yaw\nthruster was firing in one ring. I felt that\nI might be generating a rolling moment by\nhaving one of my pitch jets out and the yaw\njets were having to take out this rolling moment.\nI checked it in one ring. I don't remember\nwhich ring it was. I went to Direct and did\nit again. It didn't seem to do it, but on the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":276,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"other hand, it didn't seem to make the spacecraft roll either. Then I turned that ring off and went over and did it on the other ring.\nIdentically the same thing happened. I thought I might have trouble with the roll gyro. I turned the roll gyro to SECONDARY. That didn't seem to make any difference. We went back to PRIMARY. I remember commenting at that time that the RCS was a lot looser in control than the OAMS. It seemed to me that the OAMS held the spacecraft attitude better. It seemed like it controlled to a rate deadband that was smaller than the RCS deadband. I don't know why you're using the same gyros and the same electronics. The only thing that could be different would be the attitude drivers on the RCS might be activiating slower than they are in the OAMS. It seemed like the rates were such a--seems like there must be a lag in the whole system. It seemed like the deadband in the RCS was twice what it was in the OAMS. It operated properly. There's so much difference between looking at that ball on firing retros"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":277,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and looking out and actually seeing the nose of the spacecraft moving around out there. There's no comparison with the simulator. You just can't simulate this. When I looked down at the ball and did the retrofire, it was just like the simulator. When I was looking outside and actually seeing what the spacecraft was doing as I controlled it, it seemed like it was a lot sloppier with the RCS than it was with the OAMS.\nWhite We must have fired over New Mexico or Texas.\nMcDivitt Our retrofire?\nWhite Yes. I could see the old brown sandy earth down right under us.\nMcDivitt Yes, Guaymas gave us our countdown, so we were over northern Mexico.\nWhite That's the area that I thought we were over. Actually, it may even look almost a little like west Texas.\nMcDivitt It could have been. Then I did TR-5. I went to our retro attitude. We reported our TR-5 Checklist complete. I don't know exactly when Guaymas came on the radio."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":278,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5.6 TR-1 Events\nMcDivitt Yes. At TR-1 there wasn't really much that we could do in advance, but whatever we could do, we did. There weren't many steps.\nWhite We just waited for minus 1 minute.\nMcDivitt All you have to do is really just prepare yourself mentally, but at TR-1 I told Ed, \"We're at a minute.\", and I guess Ed already knew we were at a minute.\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt Ed did it just exactly as we'd briefed it many times. You punched the SEP OAMS. We heard the bang. He followed with a SEP ELECTRIC, rather quickly afterward as we had planned. We heard the bang. Then we waited a short time as we had planned, and fired the SEP ADAPTER. Then there was a great big bang. The tendancy is to punch those buttons 1, 2, 3. We decided that we didn't want to go 1,2,3. We wanted to go 1, 2, (pause) 3. That was exactly what we did, and there wasn't any doubt whether the equipment adapter separated.\nWhite I had no inclination to look around. I knew it"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":279,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was gone.\nMcDivitt That's when Ed hollered, \"There go the pump packages! I see two pump packages out there. Just exactly what John Young said!\"\nWhite They separate right off to the left side. Jim couldn't see them because of the position of his head. I could see them.\nMcDivitt That's right. I never saw them at all.\nWhite I could clearly see the two pumps together on the mounting and mounted together. They were right together. And I'll back John up to hilt on that one. I saw them too.\nMcDivitt We got the adapter separated with all the attendent flying pump packages.\nWhite Quite a flourish, isn't it?\nMcDivitt Right. It sure is. It was a big bang. There's no doubt about it. At TR-30, the TR-30 Sequence Lights came on, and at that time Ed said, \"The sequence lights came on about a second or a second and a half in advance.\" So, I armed retro squibs, and we discussed whether or not to punch off the Auto-retro Button or not. If the TRS was fast, I didn't"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":280,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"want to punch it off ahead and have the retrorockets go off early, but I figured that it wasn't in a hurry that much. But if it came on much earlier than that, it was really going to make us short. So, I finally decided that we'd go ahead and arm the Auto-retro Button at about three seconds so that we weren't going to be any more than 15 or 20 miles short as a result of the retrorockets going off early. We'd still get the auto-retrofire signal through, so that if something went wrong with the manual retrofire signal we'd still get the retrorockets fired. I felt that three seconds early would be better than a possible 15 or 20 second one in case we had to go through some non-nominal method of firing the retros in case the manual button didn't make it work. I told Ed to arm the auto-retrofire, and he did this at about three seconds and it fired automatically at between two and one seconds, I think, in the count.\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt I felt that we got a one-plus second early"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":281,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"auto-retrofire.\nWhite Right. I did too. We went through the little discussion there from minus 30 down, and I knew what Jim's point was. I think I distrusted the system a tad more than Jim did, but I thought his logic was good. We had two systems working to fire the rockets. I was in full agreement.\nMcDivitt We went through and saved fuel for four days so we could do an OAMS retrofire. I felt if we're going to adopt that sort of philosophy and go through that long of a lean fuel period, then we could afford another few miles of inaccuracy thrown in by an early retrofire if we got the redundancy that you would get from a double-firing. So, I elected to go ahead and have Ed push it. Although it probably contributed on the order of 8 to 10 miles to our miss distance, I don't think it really hurt us that bad.\n5.7 T_R-O Events\nMcDivitt I had the spacecraft in the retrofire attitude, and when the retrorockets fired, I--"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":282,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White I had also pushed the manual button on time. So, it was about a second after they actually fired.\nMcDivitt Excellent. The spacecraft was in the proper retro-attitude and we got a real good push from the retrorockets. There are four distinct pushes, and I never felt a pause between any one of them. Did you?\nWhite Yes, a little pause between each one. I think my cues were tuned up in a different manner than yours. Yours were working on the controls. Did you feel that you could actually see the acceleration? You weren't looking out the window.\nMcDivitt I was a little bit. It looked like we were actually turned around and started back the other way. Ha, ha!\nWhite I really could feel the g's. Nothing that was uncomfortable, but I felt each one of them and I also felt looking out that I could see the spacecraft slowing down. I know it was such a pityingly amount compared to our velocity, but I was looking down on the ground when they fired."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":283,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Your view of the ground is considerable at minus 30 degrees, and it did seem like I could see the spacecraft actually slow down.\nMcDivitt I don't know what the magnitude of the g's was during retrofire. We were super-sensitive, I'll tell you that. We'll get to that later. As a matter of fact, later on when I was debating about whether or not the g meter worked, I stopped and hit the reset button, and it did come down. It came down from something less than one to zero.\nWhite I'd say between 2/10 of a g and 1/2 g during retrofire.\nMcDivitt I'd guess something about that order too. It sure seems a lot.\nWhite Your cues are really up for the g's.\nMcDivitt You've been at zero g for so long, anything feels like it's a lot.\nMcDivitt I was at zero rates and in the proper attitude. I was in Rate Command when the retrorockets fired. I maintained the attitude very well. It was very easy. There were no deviations at all. Ed was standing by on the roll rate gyro"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":284,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in case it looked like I was loosing control in yaw. He could turn off the roll rate gyro and get all the authority that I needed in yaw. As far as I could see, it never deviated more than a degree from where I was supposed to be. I don't think it ever got off that center bar in yaw, and it never got a dot- that little dot--away from the 30 degree mark as far as I could tell. Could you see any, Ed?\nWhite I was sitting there watching it and enjoying it at that time because the attitude was staying right on.\nMcDivitt Yes. It was right on. We got the ΔV in the right direction. Now, the IVI's didn't read out, because we didn't have the computer on, so we really couldn't tell.\nWhite It was as steady as a rock. You could see the decelerations and looking out the window, I couldn't detect any movement in attitude. I was looking right down on the ground several times during several of the retros, and I think you could detect motion fairly well. I didn't see any."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":285,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt I'll tell you. I was really happy after that OAMS retrofire and the retrorocket retrofire. I figured that we had exactly what we were supposed to, and I was positive we were going to come down on that cotton-picking carrier. I was really quite happy after that, because I don't think even in the simulator we ever had one that easy.\nWhite Shall we make our admission on OAMS retro at this time, Jim?\nMcDivitt Yes. As a matter of fact it might be appropriate. I'm probably one of the biggest antagonists to the OAMS retrofire that there possibly is at the Manned Spacecraft Center, because I think it's a fuel wasting maneuver and a lot of other things. I still think it is. I'll still say one thing--after I fired the OAMS retrofire and I knew I was going to come down, I was a lot more relaxed than I had been before I got there. I'm going to have to tell Dr. Gilruth that, but I still think we can get by without it.\nWhite It was nice to see it work. It was nice."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":286,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt It was, and I was real sorry we didn't have\na computer because after those two things, which\nI thought were done certainly as good as I\ncould possibly do them. I felt sure that we\ncould have landed right on the cotton-picking\ncarrier's deck if we just had a computer to tell\nus where to go. I would have liked to have tried\nthe guidance. I worked hard enough on that\nreentry guidance and I didn't get to use it.\nWhite Jim, I think there is one thing that we left\nout --the reading of the percentage of OAMS fuel\nleft. I think we called out 3 or 4\npercent.\nMcDivitt That's right. I had 3 or 4 percent\nremaining on the gage. We called it out and\nit will be on the tape.\nWhite I wrote it down at 3 percent. Here it is.\n3 percent of the fuel left after OAMS.\nMcDivitt Yes, and it was a little hard to read down\nthere and parallax was pretty bad. I estimated\nthat it was 3 percent.\nWhite I read off the quantity on the gage and it was\na little over 1100.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":287,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 279\nMcDivitt 1100 psi?\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt I'll tell you one thing about the out-the-window view at 30 degrees pitch-down attitude.\nYou're really pitched down at 30 degrees.\nWhite That's another thing that I noticed. I was\nlooking out the window, and I surely wasn't\nobserving much in the way of a horizon. I was\nlooking at the ground.\nMcDivitt The top 2 inches of the window has the horizon in it. So, if you really had a bad retro\nand you got screwed up a little bit, you could\nlose your horizon.\nWhite You could lose your horizon, but I think you've\ngot a good enough view of the motion of the\nground and an object on the ground. I think\nyou could do a very effective job.\nMcDivitt If I really had to do an out-the-window retro\nI'm not even sure that I'd look out and use the\nhorizon. I think I'd pick a spot on the ground.\nWhite That's the point I was making. You'd put a\ngrease pencil on your window.\nMcDivitt You'd have to use both.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":288,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 280\nWhite I think you'd find a spot on the ground, and\nhold it.\nMcDivitt Because the spot on the ground is going to move.\nWhite Yes, it's going to move during the fire. That's\nexactly what you do on an attitude ball, you\nknow. You have a horizon and you have a spot\nand then you fly that spot. So, it sounds kind\nof like the thing I think you can do.\nMcDivitt The retrorockets fired, as I said, in the order\n1, 2, 3, 4. We got the manual fire out--\nbutton punched. Ed got that. We had said that\nbecause we're getting a countdown we were going\nto fire the Manual Retrofire Button exactly\nwhen we got to zero. We weren't going to wait\naround a second after that so that we got the\ncomputer and all that jazz on the line. We\ndidn't have any computer to get on the line.\nWe weren't going to read out anything on the IVI's\nor anything else. All we were concerned with\nwas firing the retrorockets.\n5.8 Retropack Jettison\nMcDivitt I waited 45 seconds. I started rolling over at\nthis time. When 45 seconds came, I had the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":289,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 281\nretro-jett squib on, and I punched off the retro--\nWhite The light came on and you punched it.\nMcDivitt That's right. The light came on at 45 seconds\nand I punched it. There was a real solid bang,\nand I knew we separated from the retropack. No\ndoubt there either. As we went on down, we\nfinally saw the retropack come on around behind\nus.\nMcDivitt Do you have anything else on the retropack\njettison? I guess not. That's pretty simple.\n5.9 Communications\nMcDivitt We got the com from the ground.\nWhite I thought we had good communications with the\nground.\nMcDivitt No problems with the communications. I was a\nlittle concerned with the communications\nearlier in the flight, because we weren't getting\nanything. We weren't getting retrofire\ntimes or any other information. But towards\nthe end of the flight communications were excellent.\n5.10 Update\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":290,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 282\nMcDivitt The update was awful, I think. As I mentioned\nearlier, they updated our TRS but the TRS was\nobviously not running with the ground.\n6.0 REENTRY\n6.1 Reentry Parameters Update\nMcDivitt We really didn't have a reentry parameters update post-retro. We went into black-out pretty\nquick. There wasn't anything to update. We\nwere going to start rolling at 400 000. Regardless of anything else, we had a preprogrammed reentry.\n6.2 400K\nWhite We were at 400K before you got your 3 -\nMinute Update.\nMcDivitt That's right. At two minutes and 38 seconds\nwe were through 400 000 feet. We got there in\na hurry. I rolled upside down, and I flew down\nto 400 000 feet, which was to be at 2:38. However, I thought that we'd retrofired a little\nearly, so I wasn't in any great rush to start\nmy rolling reentry. I delayed about another\n30 or 40 seconds. The only reason I delayed\nwas because I knew there wasn't any rush to get\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":291,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"over, because if we were going to be anyplace, we were going to be short. I just wanted to get over and get in a good attitude. So, I rolled the thing upside down, got the--\nWhite One thing--on the Post-retro Checklist, we decided this time to use Reentry Rate Command rather than Direct.\nMcDivitt That's right.\nWhite That's a deviation on our checklist.\nMcDivitt When I got the thing upside down, I was still in Rate Command. I held the lift vector up, heads down, until I got down to about 3 minutes and 15 seconds. I got my 3 minute time hack from the ground. I got my clock counting up a 3 minutes. At about 3 minutes and 15 seconds I started the roll. What I did was, I put in about 15 degrees/second, and then we turned off the roll gyro. I just left the thing rolling. I controlled the pitch and yaw inside the rate deadband, which was plus or minus 4 degrees, just as you would in Direct. I still had the rate deadband to take care of any wild pertubations that we got into."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":292,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6.3 .04 g\nWhite We didn't even have a time for .04 g's did we?\nMcDivitt No. We didn't have anything like that. We started rolling reentry at 400 000 feet, except that I didn't start it until about 45 seconds after that to make sure that I had good attitude. I started the thing around the way I wanted it. Just about this time, we saw the retro adapter start floating back past us. I figured the other day that thing was small-end-forward rather than blunt-end-forward.\nWhite I'd say it was front-end-forward too.\nMcDivitt We saw the spherical end of the retrorockets. Remember?\nWhite Yes. All four of them.\nMcDivitt All four of them. We didn't see the nozzle. It had done a 180-degree turn small-end-forward and it was as stable as a rock. We could see the whip antennas sticking out to the side.\nWhite Exactly the position it should go to. That's the heaviest end, I would presume.\nMcDivitt It would tend to trim that way too. Except that"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":293,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I didn't think there would be any aerodynamics at 400 000 feet. But it was turned around 180 degrees and was perfectly stable with the whip antenna sticking out, which at that time was up to the right.\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt We were upside down. It sure was a funny looking sight.\nWhite It sure was. It was really pretty.\nMcDivitt And it was as stable as a rock and very slowly drifting behind us. As a matter of fact, for a while I thought that our opening velocities were too slow, and I thought it would just come back and hit us. But, it just stayed out there, and we started our rolling reentry there. We were coming on down and we were rolling around and before I got any noticeable g's at all--Isn't that right--before we got any noticeable g's it started burning?\nWhite Okay. We saw the reddish pink layer come around the spacecraft--\nMcDivitt Well, didn't we see the retropack start burning before the--?"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":294,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Whichever way we saw it, it's on the tapes, because we discussed it pretty thoroughly.\nMcDivitt That's right, as we were doing it. But I sort of vaguely recall that watching the retros after us as we spun around, it started glowing a little bit and then you could see this big spray come off the front--shock or something. It looked like it was just melting and coming away. It just looked like a great big orange mushroom back there, and that's when it really started falling behind us.\nMcDivitt We hadn't felt any g's at all. Had you felt any g's?\nWhite Not that time.\nMcDivitt I'm sure that I hadn't felt any g's.\nWhite I was wondering why we were so light. We were looking down at Florida. We had watched Florida go by and commented on it.\nMcDivitt Shoot, we really made a low altitude pass across the States. We should have probably filed a DD-175 to get clearance.\nWhite We had to come through the control zone, you know, at Eglin. They're kind of sensitive about"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":295,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"lower altitudes.\nMcDivitt ... started glowing and burning and it was as stable as a rock as long as I could see it. Did you ever see it tumble?\nWhite No, never did.\nMcDivitt Okay. It was behind us and it looked like it just ate the front tight off, and I guess when we first saw it, it was on the order of 200 feet, maybe?\nWhite Yes.\nMcDivitt And the last time I saw it, it looked like it was about 3/4 ....\nWhite That was about the position that I saw the booster for the first time.\nMcDivitt I think you're right. I guess we could see the dome on it and all that stuff. As a matter of fact, it was a pretty good reentry shape. It looked stable as a rock.\nWhite It stabilized right out.\nMcDivitt So, we finally saw it drop behind us and burn up. As it finally started drawing behind us.\nWhite We started to get --\nMcDivitt The first thing I saw was the orange flame--the"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":296,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"orange or pinkish flames coming out. It looked\nlike the flame was coming up around my side of\nthe spacecraft like this. Was it doing that on\nyour side, too?\nWhite Yes. It looked like it was almost coming from\nthree points.\nMcDivitt Okay. Probably what it was doing was coming\naround both sides because of the angle of attack\nand going out this way. But I definitely could\nsee the orange fire come up around the left-\nhand side of the spacecraft and out in front of\nthe window, and pretty soon I saw some green\nfire---\nWhite Coming out of the top --\nMcDivitt Oh, is that where you saw it? I didn't. I saw\nthe green fire down close to the left-hand side\ncoming up over the nose inside of the red fire,\nand then it was all swirling around there. Then\nwhile we were coming down, we were coming down\nin a roll, but with our relatively high L/D, we\nwere in a great big roll with a big wallow. I\nguess this is really indicative of how much lift\nwe had."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":297,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White It looked to me like we were getting a lot of\nlift out of it.\nMcDivitt It looked to me we were getting an awful lot of\nlift out of it.\nWhite It was really whipping around there.\nMcDivitt And we were going around at a pretty good rate.\nThe needle was off to the left. That's right.\nIt moved out slowly, slowly and got out to\nabout 2 degrees and it just held there. The\nspacecraft was as stable as a rock. I damped\nthe thing a couple of times in pitch and yaw and\nit just stablized right on down there. I\ndon't think I even touched the pitch again. I\nthink I maybe touched the pitch four times all\nthe way down and the yaw maybe six or seven\ntimes. What I was looking at was just a huge\nportion of the sky. I could see the ground,\nthen I could see the sky, and I really saw a\nlot of the country as we came rolling by.\nWhite What surprised me is how much it was. I knew\nwhy it was doing it but I thought it was --"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":298,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"arc was that this thing cut out. That thing\nwas a real lifting body. You're really getting\na lot of lift initially, and if you roll around\nthere, you'd kill it all off; and your aero-\ndynamics is such that you really can't tell,\nbecause the stability is so loose right there.\nWhite You know you're going to get some lift if you\nhave an offset CG, but you couldn't tell\nwhere it was going.\nMcDivitt You're in the area where you're getting a lot of\nlift so if you do a roll, you've lost that\nrange right off the bat. We came down on this\ngreat big spiral, and here I think we ought to\nget into --\n6.4 Acceleration Profile\nMcDivitt -- the acceleration at retrofire. I called\ndown on the ground and told them that we had\nfour retros. We got automatic. We got auto-\nretro. We got all four in sequence. We got\nauto-retro. Auto-retrofire appeared to be about\na second and a half early. In the acceleration\nprofile I said, \"Well, here come the g's, Ed.\"\nand I felt the g's going up. He said yes."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":299,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White I said, \"Yes. There are two of them, aren't\nthere?\"\nMcDivitt Yes, and then we waited a while longer and--\nWhite I said, \"Gee, there's nothing on the g-meter.\"\nMcDivitt I said, \"The g-meter must be broken \",so that's\nwhy I reached up and reset it. It actually\nwent down a little bit. So we went a little\nwhile longer, and I said, \"Ed, I feel a lot of\ng's \", and he said, \"So do I.\" Then he said\"We\nmust be up between three and four.\"\nWhite If felt like that.\nMcDivitt And I said, \"Yes, I think we're up about that\nhigh too.\" And the g-meter was still reading\nzero for all pratical purposes. Pretty soon it\nstarted building up slowly. It went up to\n2, 3, 4, and I called out at 2, and I called\nout at 4, and I called out at 6, and I think I\ncalled out at 7.\nWhite About the time you called out the 2, I knew we\nhad been had.\nMcDivitt Yes. It's just that we were super-sensitive to\ng's and the load pulling us into the seat was\non the order of a tenth of a g.\nWhite It's true."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":300,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt So, we had 1/10 g and we thought we had 3. And\nwe both felt this way. The g's went up to a-\nbout 7 1/2. They told us we would probably get\n8 g's coming down. When we got the instrument\npositions back from the spacecraft, the post\nlanding switch positions, they had the g-meter\nmarked at 7 1/2 g's, and I suspect that's\nprobably about as high as it went. Now, I'm\ntelling you this was really a piece of cake.\nI thought that maybe 7 1/2 g's after being out\nthere for so long would be tough, but I didn't\neven have to breathe hard to get any air. I\njust lay there and relaxed and enjoyed the whole\nthing, and I really got a big kick out of that\nreentry.\nWhite We chatted back and forth. We talked through\nthe whole g-load, and I was watching outside\nand inside. I was looking out quite a bit of\nthe time when things were going so smoothly,\nparticularly the g-load. When you get to the\nhigh g's, you might as well look out, because\nyou're not going to do anything about it, and\nI noticed no dimming in vision. Everything was\nas clear as a bell. Not a speck. I could see"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":301,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"everything on the instrument panel, and I could see things very clearly outside.\nMcDivitt Things were going so smoothly on the inside that I looked out too. I enjoyed the scenery on the way down.\nWhite Once you get in that position and you get the high g's you're not going to do anything inside.\nMcDivitt In the amplitude of the oscillations, --all the simulations show that they tend to decrease as you get to high g's and the frequency picks up. So the only thing you could do is hurt things if you start screwing around with it, except we didn't have any oscillations anyway. It was just as stable as a rock.\nWhite I think at this point I'd like to put something in. I'd like to find out when they analyze the data whether the upper right-firing thrusters on my side were firing a whole magnitude more than the right-hand upward-firing thrusters. In fact, they very early in the profile became a cherry red and just stayed red hot, even a little bit white hot all the way down.\nWhite There was no frequency to it at all. It appeared to me they were firing continually and I think"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":302,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"maybe this might associate itself in some way with something in the system prior.\nMcDivitt I think it was prior, because we were in Reentry Rate Command and we started the roll. Then the yaw needle drifted on out and it looked to me like it never got over about 3 degrees/second. I was trying to read the 0.1 degree/second scale. It might have gone on to 4 degrees/second with the roll rate we had in there, and the jets just kept right on firing constantly.\nWhat I had done when we started was to leave the roll gyro on, and I rolled the thing over till I got almost full deflection on the needle. Then I put the roll gyro off so I'd have 15 degrees and we wouldn't tend to overrate the thing so that the Reentry Rate Command was firing all the time. What I think happened was that as we went on down, the yaw rate needle tended to drift on out. I don't know if you noticed it or not, but it tended to drift out. It started at around 2 degrees/second, and it drifted on out slowly until it got to about 4 degrees. I thought it never got out to more than 3 degrees/second. Later on, when we started oscillating"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":303,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"around like we did, if the thing were out at 3 degrees and started banging back and forth at all, the yaw thrusters would be on constantly; and also that's the side that they'd be on. It would have been on the right-hand side. Are you sure that it was red that high up, or did it get red when we started getting down where we got all those oscillations? Because there I'm sure it was firing all the time.\nWhite It was red for a long time, Jim.\nMcDivitt Was it?\nI was actually watching it, waiting for one of them to bust loose, because it was really firing a lot more than I thought it was out there. Jim asked me about the frequency of it, and I couldn't tell whether it was on or off. It was red all the time. The other one was hardly heated up at all.\nMcDivitt Shoot. There wasn't any need for any kind of firing then.\nWhite It would be interesting to see if the other yaw thrusters were.\nMcDivitt Well, it'll be interesting when they cut these things apart to see what kind of life cycle --"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":304,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White It really had a good workout.\n6.5 Spacecraft control\nMcDivitt Spacecraft control was like a dream. A good engineering description. There weren't any oscillations. It was as stable as a rock. I don't think we need to say much more about that. It wasn't like any failure simulation we've seen. It was the easiest thing to control, easier than any simulation I've seen. Shoot! A baby could have done it.\nMcDivitt We started getting oscillations around then and the Reentry Rate Command fired a few times and I damped it in pitch and yaw. There really wasn't any control problem to it at all, I didn't feel. Did you think there was?\nWhite No. I would have been watching closer if I had thought there was.\n6.6 100 000 feet\nMcDivitt The altimeter was at 96 700 feet throughout the entire flight. It started on down,and we were still at about 5 or 6 g's when that thing started on down. It went on down to about 92 000 feet, and then the g's started off, and the altimeter started back up again."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":305,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It went all the way back to about 96 000 feet again, and then it started down again. The second time it started down, it really started down in a hurry, and I was sure that we were still at 100 000 feet.\nMcDivitt So, I waited until the g level got about 3, which is around 80 or 90 thousand feet. I started slowing the roll rate there. I wanted to get the thing to a zero roll rate by the time we got to 40 or 50 thousand feet, certainly by the time we got to 40. We started gyrating around some more, but I didn't think it was exceptional. The Reentry Rate Command started firing. As a matter of fact, I said,\"Here comes the Reentry Rate Command,\" and then I was firing on top of it so that we really weren't oscillating too much. Then we got to 40 000 feet and I put the drogue chute out, and that's where things really got exciting.\n6.7 50 000 feet\nMcDivitt I put the drogue out at 40 000 feet. We were nice and stable as we went down. We were a heck of a lot more stable than we were when we put the drogue chute out."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":306,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tThat's right by several orders of magnitude.\nMcDivitt\tWhen we put the drogue chute out, we were concerned about the thing destabilizing rather than stabilizing. So I intended to put the drogue out and leave the control at Reentry Rate Command. This I did, and we oscillated all over the sky. We estimated plus or minus 40 degrees, and I think we were at least every bit of that.\nWhite\tWe were, and when the drogue chute came out, I was right in the sun so I couldn't see it, and I didn't know whether we had one or not. You called it out, and about the time you called it out, I could see it up there gyrating wildly around.\nMcDivitt\tI never could tell whether the thing dereefed or not. I had a lot of goop on my window and the sun was out, and all I could see was the shape of the drogue up there, and it really was fluttering around. We were plus or minus 40 degrees to it without any doubt, and I wouldn't be a bit surprised if we weren't plus or minus 60 degrees to it. We were really getting tossed around. It was just jerking all around.\nWhite\tIt was fast, but I don't think it was that big a"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":307,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"magnitude. (McDivitt is making a noise to describe it.)\nMcDivitt\tAbout like that.\nWhite\tI was really surprised the thing held on there, to tell you the truth.\nMcDivitt\tSo was I. I was expecting the drogue chute to fall off any minute.\nWhite\tI was, too.\nWhite\tIt worked all right.\nMcDivitt\tIt held us together.\nWhite\tIf I went through it again, I'd be perfectly happy sitting there riding through it, to tell you the truth.\nWhite\tThe way I looked at it, it was rather interesting. I hadn't quite expected that.\nMcDivitt\tNeither did I. I know that Gus said that he had a pretty wild ride and he thought the thing was destabilizing him. He had a scheme where he just turned off the propellent valves to stop the propellent flow. That meant that he had to wait about 10 or 15 seconds to get the propellent valves back open again to get the jets firing. Well, I wasn't going to do that. I thought the thing to do was to turn off the electronics"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":308,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and see if the thing was going to become unstable. This is what I did. I turned off the RCS electronics. The thing was that they didn't get any worse. It didn't get any worse. I watched it. I could see enough of it to tell that we weren't becoming unstable.\nWhite\tIt was unstable to a point and then it stabilized out in this oscillation.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. It was really gyrating around. By that time we were down to 20 000 feet and I called, \"20 thousand feet. Pull down the handles\", or something to that effect.\nWhite\tYou called out 28.\nMcDivitt\tIs that what I said? And then, I pulled the propellant valves, as I had planned to do, and turned the control mode to Rate Command rather that. Reentry, because I wanted to burn up all the fuel that I could out of those manifolds. As a matter of fact, I was interested in burning up all the fuel I could before I got to the ground.\nWhite\tI have a question. I thought you put it in Rate Command before you turned off the valves, and it pretty well damped itself out on the"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":309,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"drogue.\nMcDivitt\tNo, I don't think I did.\nWhite\tOkay.\nMcDivitt\tI don't think I did. I think I left it in Reentry Rate Command until I turned it off and then turned off the power. I went from ACME to OFF on both rings. It didn't get any worse. I think what I might have done is I might have gone from OFF to ACME to Rate Command, to turn the propellant valves off rather than going from --\nWhite\tWell, I know it damped out there in the end considerably. I think it was when the Rate Command, or whatever it was, was firing.\nMcDivitt\tWell, Reentry Rate Command was going all the time. We were going at a heck of a lot faster rate than 4 degrees/second.\nWhite\tWell, we cut down our oscillations considerably after you did something over there. I thought you had put it in Rate Command.\nMcDivitt\tI did put it in Rate Command, but I didn't leave the propellant on. This was why I wanted to get rid of all the propellant onboard the spacecraft if I could. But I didn't want"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":310,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to let those things fire for a long time and maybe eat up the drogue chute, and find ourselves without propellant and without drogue chute, too. So, once we got the drogue chute out, I let the things fire for a while and turned the electronics off. Maybe I turned it back on and went to Rate Command, and off with the propellant valves. I'm not really sure.\nWhite\tI think you had it in Rate Command for a little while ---Probably while you were firing out the fuel.\nMcDivitt\tYes, that's what I did. I went to Rate Command and let all the fuel fire out, just as we had planned. So that I was sure that the rates were high enough that we were going to fire out the fuel without disturbing the thing on the drogue. So we fell on down. Ed got the snorkel on the vent valve about 28 to 27 thousand feet. We came on down. I watched the altimeter go through 11 000.\n6.8 Main Chute Deployment\nMcDivitt\tAt 10 600 I punched out the main chute. I saw it go out with a lot of crap and corruption flying off the nose. It went out and came out in a reefed condition, and I saw and I said we had a good reefed chute. I don't guess you"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":311,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"could see that too well, could you?\nWhite\tNo, I couldn't see the chute out. I saw it\nfinally when it deployed.\nMcDivitt\tI saw the thing hanging up there just the way it\nwas supposed to, and then the thing dereefed,\ncame billowing out just the way it should, and I\nsaid, \"We've got a good chute\". One edge of it\ncollapsed and came back in and collapsed about\na third of the chute. We've seen a lot of movies\nof these chutes coming out, so I wasn't really\nworried about the thing collapsing. It went\nin and came back out.\n6.9 Communications\nMcDivitt\tThere weren't any communications that I could\ntell were there? Maybe we received some trans-\nmissions on the drogue, but I'm not really sure.\nAs soon as we deployed the main chute the antenna\ncame off. So we couldn't talk to anybody after\nthat.\nWhite\tI don't think we got anything on the drogue.\nMcDivitt\tI'm not really sure that we did.\nWhite\tI don't think we did.\nMcDivitt\tShoot! We were getting thrown around so that\nwe couldn't have heard anything anyway."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":312,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"They tried to communicate with us a couple of\ntimes after we came out of the blackout and before\nwe put the drogue out. I didn't hear exactly\nwhat he was saying. He wasn't hearing anything\nI was saying either as far as I could tell. He\nwasn't acting like he heard what I was saying.\nWhite\tHe gave us our blackout times of 5+23 and 9+21,\nand there really wasn't too much we could do to\ncheck these out.\nMcDivitt\tAfter we got the main chute deployed, I told Ed,\n\"Quick! Take your blood pressure.\" The chute\ncame out around 7500 feet or so, and when we\nfinally got the thing dereefed we were floating\ndown nice and gently. Ed started taking the\nblood pressure, and it seemed like it took an\neternally long time. By the time we got down\naround 5300 feet or so, I said, \"Ed, get the\nblood pressure done because at 5000 feet we're\ngoing to go to a two-point attitude.\" He\nfooled around and fooled around and fooled\naround. Finally we got down to 5000 feet and\nI said, \"Ed, you've got about three or four more\nseconds, and we're going to two-point attitude.\"\nWhite\tIt was a little slow. I don't know why."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":313,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McDivitt\tI didn't want to trust that altimeter. Ed\nkept fooling around with that blood pressure\nwithout getting any air out of it, and finally\nI said, \"Okay, Ed, we're going to go to two-\npoint.\" I guess by then he had the blood\npressure completed.\nWhite\tI think we got a good blood pressure.\nMcDivitt\tSo, just like we'd always practiced, I said,\n\"3, 2, 1, MARK\" and punched the single-point release.\n6.10 Single-Point Release\nWhite\tWe both had our heads braced up on our arms.\nMcDivitt\tWe had our arms up on the windshield and my head\nwasn't exactly on my arm. Was yours?\nWhite\tMy head was on the arm and pressed over to the\nside of the spacecraft. I was well wedged in,\nI felt.\nMcDivitt\tSo was I. My head went forward a little bit,\nback a little bit, then back up forward again,\nand it didn't hit anyplace. Did yours?\nWhite\tNo. I had my head pressed on my arm the whole\ntime. I don't believe it left the arm very much,\nbecause I actually had it wedged from behind, too.\nMcDivitt\tSo, I thought going to two-point was a lot\nless violent than the ride on the drogue."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":314,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"White\tI agree with you. I think we've got a good\noperational procedure of bracing your head on\nyour arm up against the window--a satisfactory\nprocedure for this.\n6.11 Postmain Checklist Items\nWhite\tWe took the blood pressure on the main chute, too.\nI went through what I call the reinforcement\nitems on the checklist that I wanted to get off\nright away, and then I sat back and pumped off\nanother blood pressure. About this time you were\nmaking your calls to the recovery force.\nMcDivitt\tRight. I started calling the recovery forces\nas Ed was taking his blood pressure. We got\nsome response from Omnibus right away.\nWhite\tGood old Omnibus.\nMcDivitt\tYes. And we went right on down. We stowed\nthe D-ring covers. We stowed the D-ring\ncovers between deploying the main chute and\ngoing to two-point, just as we had planned. We\ndidn't want the D-ring to flop around there, and\nonce you go to two-point it's too late to\neject anyway.\nWhite\tI called Jim to unstow his D-ring at 35 000 feet\nand he took his out at that time. I pulled his"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":315,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"right arm lift up and I saw him pull his left one\nup.\nMcDivitt\tNo, I didn't get my left one up. I made three\npasses and I said to heck with it.\nWhite\tI thought you got it. I struggled with mine and\nfinally got it up. I had both of mine up, and\nyou went on and completed the checklist.\nMcDivitt\tI knew Ed wanted me to get my D-ring out because\nI was the guy that was going to have to bail us\nout.\nWhite\tAgain I'd come down with this big bag of stuff\nresting on my legs up against the bottom of\nthe seat, and as we approached 35 000 feet, I\npulled this up in my lap, and just held it. We\nhad agreed that Jim would do the ejection if we\nhad to, and I would just take the ride. I\ndidn't unstow my D-ring. I just sat there.\nThat's why I made pretty sure that Jim got his\nout.\nMcDivitt\tAfter we got on the main, we went through and\nturned off all the switches, just as we were\nplanning on doing it. I turned off all the\nswitches on the middle circuit breaker panel\nexcept the ones on the last couple of rows. I"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":316,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"308 CONFIDENTIAL\nturned off the IMU, the rate gyros, the horizon scanner, and those switches on the center pedastal. I didn't turn off any over on the left hand side except the Landing Attitude Circuit Breaker.\nWhite May I ask you a question? Did you think it was a shorter time from 7500 feet down to the ground than it was in the simulator?\nMcDivitt Yes, as a matter of fact I did.\nWhite I thought it was a considerably shorter period of time.\nMcDivitt Yes, we went from 5000 feet to the ground in nothing flat.\nWhite You're not kidding--nothing like we go down in that simulator. I would be curious if we have any data that tells us what our descent indicator was telling us on our descent?\nMcDivitt It was jumping around. It was between 30 and 40 feet/second like it does in the simulator.\nWhite It seemed like we went down awfully fast. I would already finished turning off everything in the simulator with quite a bit of margin, but, of course, I did take the two blood pressures in here. I got all the essential\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":317,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"309 CONFIDENTIAL\nswitches off and started turning off nonessential ones when you called out a thousand feet.\nMcDivitt At a thousand feet I said to get ready to pull out the water seal.\nWhite That's right.\nMcDivitt You got the water seal out at about 700 feet?\nWhite I pulled it about 500 feet.\nMcDivitt We pulled it lower than we usually do because usually we're sitting there waiting to go through a thousand feet.\nWhite Right.\nMcDivitt We got down to about 300 feet, and I said let's prepare for landing.\nWhite Right.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":318,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"310 CONFIDENTIAL\n7.0 LANDING AND RECOVERY\n7.1 Impact\nMcDivitt We got down to about 300 feet, and I said, \"I guess we ought to get ready for landing.\" But as John Young says, \"How will you get ready for landing this thing?\" So as he did, we just sat there, and we went through zero feet, I believe, on the altimeter.\nWhite We hit very close to the water with zero on the altimeter.\nMcDivitt I think we hit at about minus 100 feet or so. Anyway, we really plunked down in the water. We hit ten times harder than I expected to hit. The altimeter was set at the lift-off setting. I didn't fool around with setting it.\nWhite That's an interesting point. They ought to give you an altimeter setting for the landing area.\nMcDivitt I don't think that would do any good. I wouldn't trust that altimeter within a thousand feet.\nWhite No, but I'd rather have my reading on it that much more accurate. You've got a ship sitting out there that could give you the exact altimeter setting. Here we had an altimeter that we hadn't set for\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":319,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"311 CONFIDENTIAL\nfour days. I hadn't thought about this.\nMcDivitt The last time that altimeter does me any good is when I go through 10 600. Well, I guess I use it down to about five or six thousand when I'm trying to get the two-point suspension. It's useful there, too.\nWhite It was a good indication that we were coming up to 1000 feet and to get ready for landing, Jim.\nMcDivitt Yes. Like I said earlier, how do you get ready for landing? All we did was sit there.\nWhite We've got to stop throwing switches.\nMcDivitt Yes, I guess so.\nWhite I think it would be a good procedure to go ahead and get an altimeter setting.\nMcDivitt I suppose it would. It only takes you a second to crank the thing in.\nWhite Yes. It's there. We ought to use it.\nMcDivitt Well, we hit the water with a real wallop. Then I sort of felt that we went into about a 150-degree roll to the left and were dragged backward. We were almost upside-down going through the water backwards. Now, the CAG here saw us hit. He saw us from about 100 feet on down. He said it looked like to him that we came down and hit the water\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":320,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"312 CONFIDENTIAL\nand tilted the thing up over the top. He said we were going blunt-end-forward, but we were actually tilted over the top. We then did a pitch-down maneuver about 180 degrees in the water. I was surprised that we were being dragged backwards, but I got the sensation that I was going backwards and almost upside-down.\nWhite I had the kind of feeling that we went in and touched over a little bit, and that's about all the feeling that I got. I don't believe we got dragged very much.\nMcDivitt No, but I just felt that was the way that I was going. I was being pressed back in my seat like I would be if I were being dragged, and I was thrown over to the left like I would have if we had rolled over this way.\nWhite I got the left roll and I also think that I had less water in my window than you did. I had a lot of spray and stuff. Did you have solid water in your window?\nMcDivitt I really didn't look that closely. I didn't look at the window to see what I saw there. I saw nothing but water sloshing all over the thing. We really seemed to hit hard, harder than I thought\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":321,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n313\nwe would, but it really wasn't too hard.\nWhite To put everything in a comparison, the ride on the\nretro was more than I expected, the drop to a two-\npoint suspension was less than I expected, and the\nimpact was not as much as I had experienced on the\ndrogue, but more than I had expected. In other\nwords, the biggest surprises I had in order of\nmagnitude were the ride on the drogue, the impact,\nand I didn't think that I had much surprise at all\nin the two-point. I was expecting a big jolt and\ngot not as much as I had expected.\n7.2 Checklists\nMcDivitt We'd gone over the normal Water Egress Checklist\nin flight before we came down. We did this in\nthat three-hour period while we were preparing\nfor retrofire. I read it over to Ed while he was\nstowing things, and we went over it in detail\nagain as to what we would do. Also we went over\nthe emergency egress in case we had to do that.\nSo we had it fresh in our minds.\nWhite We turned everything off that wasn't needed after\nlanding.\nMcDivitt Ed had the Post-Landing Checklist and he read it\nout to me--the things that I had to do. The only\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":322,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"314\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthing that I didn't do was to take my helmet off\nand stow it. I did get my arm restraints down. I\ndidn't put my drogue mortar pins in until I was\ngetting out, and I never did put my seat pin in.\nIt doesn't say on the checklist to put it in.\nWhite I put your seat pin in.\nMcDivitt Ed put my seat pin in for me. Now, we'd got all\nthe switches in the right positions, I think,\nexcept one. I forgot to put my FDI to the OFF\nposition.\nWhite I think all other switches were all right. All\nour pyrotechnics were safed.\n7.3 Communications\nMcDivitt I talked on UHF. I talked with Omnibus, and I\nfinally was talking to Inkspot 64, the helicopter.\nI talked to him and I heard him, and we established\nexcellent UHF communications. I heard Gus coming\nthrough the auto cap two times, I think--very weak,\nalmost unintelligible. I think he was asking how\nwe were, or if they had us yet. I kept making\ntransmissions in the blind to him. I don't think\nhe was ever getting any of them. Ed operated the\nHF, and what do you have to say about that?\nWhite Okay. I put the antenna out and turned the HF on.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":323,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n315\nI went through one call, and then I went through a\nshort count on the HF. I heard nothing and received\nnothing from anybody else. This was about 5\nminutes or so after we had been on the water that\nwe actually made the HF check. Maybe it wasn't\neven that long. As soon as I got all the switches\nwhere I wanted them, I went ahead and--\nMcDivitt I saw you put the antennas up, and you went ahead\nand put in a transmission pretty quick.\nWhite Right. I didn't make another check on the HF.\nI hadn't been too impressed with the operation of\nthe HF up to this time, and things were getting\npretty busy. Five or 10 minutes later we had the\nrecovery people on. I guess we're going to get\nto that. I heard them say we had a helicopter\nalmost overhead.\nMcDivitt They called just after we retrofired, I think, and\nbefore we got to blackout--called and said that\nthey should have a helicopter over us in 5\nminutes. We didn't get any onboard data. The\nground information that I got was, as I said, from\nGus. Then right after we hit, Omnibus said, \"I\ngot them in sight. I'm 48 miles out on TACAN\nradial..\", something or other. So, I figured we\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":324,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"316\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwere 48 miles from the ship. Well, anyway, I was\npretty sure we were 48 miles from the ship. Then\nI heard them calling back and forth saying the\nhelicopters were only 15 or 20 miles away, and they\nwere there in just about nothing flat. We had a\ngood status report on where everybody was. They\nwere on our frequency, and I could hear them\ndumping their swimmers into the water and standing\nby and throwing smoke bombs out and seeing the\ndye markers; and we had more activity than the\nfourth of July.\n7.4 Systems Configuration\nMcDivitt Okay, as we hit the water, Ed closed the inlet\nsnorket to make sure we didn't get any fumes in as\nI punched the Parachute Jettison. Shortly after\nthat when we decided for sure that we wouldn't see\nany fumes--we sort of talked about it a little bit\nand I peeked out and I guess you peeked out. Didn't\nsee anything but steam coming out of the thrusters\nand then saw the dye marker out there-- I reached\nup and re-opened the inlet snorkel.\nWhite That's right.\nMcDivitt I put the recirc valve at 45 degrees.\nWhite Actually, shortly after we got on the water, I\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":325,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n317\nnoticed the acrid smell that we were to have for\nthe rest of the time we were out in the water.\nOn the ECS system I could actually feel the relief\nthat the pumps and the snorkel--open position were\ngiving us. It did provide some flow. I really\ndidn't think that the heat was oppressively hot,\nto tell the truth.\nMcDivitt No, neither did I.\nWhite It was uncomfortably warm--I'll put it that way--\nand very stuffy, but I wouldn't say it was over-\nbearingly hot. It wasn't as hot as I thought it\nwas going to be in the spacecraft.\nMcDivitt I thought the worst thing about the whole thing was\nthe smell. Whatever was burning later was the\nheat shield, I guess, because I went out and\nsmelled the spacecraft later on when I was onboard\nthe carrier, and it smelled the same way. This\nterribly nauseating acrid smell was still all over\nthe spacecraft, and it seemed to be worse at the\nheat shield. So I assume that's what we were\nsmelling inside.\nWhite How was the control, Jim?\nMcDivitt Spacecraft control in the water is lousy! I couldn't\ntake out the motions. The rates were terrible\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":326,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"318\n\nuncontrollable! Why don't you discuss the electri-\ncal. It was over on your side there, Ed.\nWhite\tWell, there wasn't really much to discuss about\nit. I turned off the No. 1 and 2 squib batteries\nand left No. 3 on and the main batteries on, and\neverything performed as designed. We also had\ncarried along two adapters and about the time\nJim said, \"Hey, where's my adapter?\", I realized\nwhere it was. It was stowed underneath a whole\npile of trash on the right-hand side. So we went\nto Plan Bravo, which was our original plan before\nChuck Berry sneaked on the extra adapter on the\nlast day before the flight, which is a rather\nsneaky thing because we'd agreed at breakfast that\nmorning that if the adapter were on the spacecraft,\nwe wouldn't kick about it. But Chuck conversely\nagreed that if the adapter wasn't on, he wouldn't\nkick about it either. We later found out that\nhe ran to Chuck Matthews and--\nMcDivitt\tNo, as a matter of fact, he didn't run to him. Chuck\nMatthews said that he decided that on his own.\nChuck Berry never —\nWhite\tAll right. I'll have to apologize to him because\nI have been falsely accusing him ever since."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":327,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"319\n\nAnyhow, we had an extra one on, and it was stowed\nvery neatly under a great deal of trash on the :\nright-hand outside stowage box; and I felt that\nwe could more readily use the time of switching\nback and forth. So we switched the aeromedical\nadapter back and forth, and with the microdot con-\nnector it was a pretty easy operational procedure.\nI don't think we missed any radio calls, and I\nthink we got probably more blood pressures there\nthan one every 15 minutes.\nMcDivitt\tYes, we would probably get one every 5 or 6\nminutes.\nWhite\tWe were back on the carrier in 45 minutes, and I'm\nsure we had two or three blood pressures there on\nthe water.\nMcDivitt\tYou even got the lightweight head-set on.\nWhite\tThat's right. I very dutifully put the lightweight\nheadset on with my helmet off. I felt better with\nmy helmet off, and I think you felt better with\nyour helmet off.\nMcDivitt\tI felt a lot better with my helmet on and my visor\nclosed, because I didn't like the smell of that\nstench there.\nWhite\tI was so hot over there. I felt better with it off."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":328,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"320\n\nMcDivitt\tWe did a lot of work when we first landed. We\nwere fiddling all over and getting things out of\nboxes and stuff like that. We probably did more\nconcentrated manual labor in those first 5\nminutes after we got on the water than we had done\nat any other time during the flight except trying\nto get the hatch closed.\nWhite\tI think at this time I was completely drenched with\nsweat. I said it wasn't hot earlier, but with the\ncombination of the suits and the fairly warm\nclimate that we were in, I was sweating pretty\nheavy. I looked over at Jim, and he was pretty\nsweaty too, I think.\n7.5 Spacecraft Status\nMcDivitt\tWe didn't have any RCS fumes. We didn't see any\nRCS colored smoke, which is supposed to be red and\npurple or yellow or something like that. We didn't\nsee any fumes at all. I saw a little steam.\nWhite\tI saw steam.\nMcDivitt\tI saw a little steam coming out of the RCS thrusters,\nand I was sure that there wasn't any RCS propellant\nin those manifolds, because at the rate we were\ngyrating around with that tight deadband on Rate\nCommand, if we hadn't burned all that fuel up by"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":329,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"321\n\nthen, we never would have gotten it out.\nWhite\tBut we turned the RCS thrusters off at about three\nor four thousand feet. So they definitely weren't\non.\nMcDivitt\tThat's right. And we turned all the circuit\nbreakers off on the RCS thrusters, so they shouldn't\nhave been firing from shorts. The prop valves had\nbeen off at about 25 000 feet. So we had everything\nthe way it was supposed to be, and we didn't see\nanything leaking. I'll comment on this window.\nWhite\tI saw the main chute floating right to the left of\nus. I think my window might have been a little\nclearer than yours.\nMcDivitt\tI just was going to comment on the windows. My\nwindow was terrible! I couldn't see at all.\nRemember the helicopter was hovering around in\nfront of us about 200 feet away and I never even\nsaw it. You said, \"Look at the helicopter!\"\nWhite\tHe was a lot closer than 200 feet. He was right\nsmack-dab in front of us.\nMcDivitt\tI never saw the helicopter. I couldn't see\nthrough the window.\nWhite\tI'd estimate he was not farther out than 50 feet\nfrom us."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":330,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"322\n\nMcDivitt\tI had a couple of little holes right down at the\nbottom where I could see swimmers down there, and\nI could see the nose, but I couldn't see up at all.\nWe were talking about the main chute there. I saw\nthe drogue chute floating down right next to it--\ndrogue chute and the pilot chute with the R & R\ncan floating down right next to it. They were\ncoming down through about--let's see. We were on\nour backs then, weren't we? We still hadn't gone\nto two-point?\nWhite\tI don't remember.\nMcDivitt\tI don't remember either.\nWhite\tI was so busy taking blood pressures.\nMcDivitt\tWe had the drogue chute and the pilot chute floating\ndown with us for a long time just off to one side\ngoing down about the same rate. I thought that\nthey were supposed to go down slower, but I guess\nit doesn't. I guess what probably happened was\nwe saw them at single-point, but when we went to\ntwo-point, we lost sight of them. Okay. We didn't\nhave any leaks that I could tell. We had electrical\npower. I didn't check to see what the secondary\nO2 pressure was. Did you, Ed?\nWhite\tNo. I didn't."} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":331,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n323\nMcDivitt We turned off all our electrical equipment and\ncouldn't read the gages. We left the hatches\nclosed. We were in moderate seas, but I wasn't\nabout to open those hatches up and take the\nchance of any water getting in that spacecraft.\nSo we elected to stay in the spacecraft until they\ngot the collar on, and kept all the hatches battened\ndown.\nWhite Okay, we both discussed this together and decided\nthat the way we'd like to leave the spacecraft\nwas in our suits, and we felt that rescue was\ncoming pretty quick. We decided to go ahead and\nstay in our suits. I think this was a reasonable\ndecision.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":332,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"324\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt We both took our gloves off to get the things\nout of the spacecraft that we wanted. I left\nmy helmet on and Ed left his helmet off. When\nwe got ready to leave, we decided that we would\nput our gloves back on, take our helmets off,\nput our neck dams on, inflate our May Wests, and\nthen get out. That's what we did. The sea\ncondition was just like they said it was--three\nto four feet. Three to four feet in that thing\nis like 2000 foot waves to an aircraft carrier.\nWe were bobbing around but we had a lot of\nexperience bobbing around before, so it wasn't\nthat bad. I might add that the egress training\nin the Gulf of Mexico really made me feel real\nconfident when I was out there in that water\nall by myself.\nWhite When we get to that training, I'm really going\nto give some gold stars out.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":333,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"325\nCONFIDENTIAL\nMcDivitt Yes.\n7.6 Post-Landing Activities\nMcDivitt As I mentioned, we stirred around the cockpit\nand got out a bunch of little bitty things that\nwe needed. We did a lot of work but we were\ndoing all right. We got awfully hot. I guess\nwe really can't say much about the post-landing\nactivities. It went long as we expected it to,\njust the way we want it to. Ed, do you have\nanything?\nWhite I think we've covered it.\n7.7 Comfort\nMcDivitt I was hot. I think Ed was hot. We were both\nperspiring a lot. I think we could have lived\nin it for a lot longer than we did. Don't you?\nWhite Yes. Did we cover the point where they called\nand asked what kind of rescue we wanted?\nMcDivitt No, I didn't. Why don't you? I was just\nplugging in the bio-med connector and I heard\nthem call you.\nWhite We could either have a heliocopter pickup in\nabout 20 minutes or we could have a pickup by\nthe carrier in the spacecraft in about an hour\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":334,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"326\nCONFIDENTIAL\nand 40 minutes. To me it was very clear.\nMcDivitt It took Ed a long time to decide-- about two or\nthree milliseconds.\nWhite That's right. I felt that I knew my buddy well\nenough and made the decision that we'd take the\nheliocopter pickup. I saw that he was actually\non the radio at the time and he rogered the\ndecision. So we waited for the heliocopter\npickup.\n7.8 Recovery Force Personnel\nMcDivitt We had good communications with the recovery\nforces. They were on our frequency. We heard\nall the transmissions that were going back and\nforth. Shoot, we probably knew more about the\nrecovery than anybody else around. They got the\nflotation collar in the water in a hurry and\ncame over and put it right on. I saw this thing\naround the spacecraft and I saw it start\ninflating. I was really elated when I saw that\nthing pumping up.\nWhite I had the first contact with the real live man.\nMcDivitt That's right. He looked in Ed's window to see\nif we were alive, I guess.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":335,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"327\nCONFIDENTIAL\nWhite Very good sight. The best sight, boy, was\nseeing that yellow thing around the spacecraft.\nI guess I knew we were going to be able to file\nout pretty quick.\n7.9 Egress\nMcDivitt As I mentioned earlier, we had decided to go\nout with our gloves back on and our neck dams on.\nI stood up in my seat, disconnected our survival\nlanding gear (my other hoses were disconnected\nso that I could stand up), inflated both of the\nMay Wests, snapped them together in the front,\nand I just jumped right over into the life raft.\nI landed right on my can, just like I had planned\nit. It was so good to get out of there. Ed\ngot out. He jumped in too.\nWhite When I got out I actually leaped in before I\ninflated my May West and I think either you or--\nMcDivitt I told you. As a matter of fact, when we\ntalked it over in the spacecraft about getting\nout, Ed said, \"Aren't you going to inflate your\nMay West?\" And I said, \"Okay\", and then he got\nout without inflating his.\nWhite I was so happy to see that raft I jumped right\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":336,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"328 CONFIDENTIAL\nover the side.\n7.10 Survival Gear\nMcDivitt We didn't use any of our survival gear. We\ndidn't pull it out. We just left it exactly\nwhere it was. I disconnected the lanyard so\nwe wouldn't inadvertly pull it out.\n7.11 Crew Pickup\nMcDivitt As soon as Ed got into the life raft a helicopter\ncome over toward us and I motioned for Ed to\nget into the sling and go on up. He didn't want\nto. He wanted to be the last man up and I\nwasn't going to leave my sinking ship.\nWhite He wasn't getting up with the captain going\nfirst so he went up last.\nMcDivitt No. Ed got into the sling and got a nice pickup.\nI got a Gulf of Mexico pickup. He dragged me\nout of the water, bumped me up against the\nheat shield and the spacecraft, but it was a\ngood pickup though. Shoot, I was so happy to\nbe out there in that nice cold salt water\nblowing in my face, I was dipping my hands in\nit and slinging it over my head.\nWhite Did you notice the stability of that helicopter?\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":337,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 329\nI never knew they were so stable.\nMcDivitt Yes. He must have had a good stabilization\nsystem. They got us picked up safe and sound.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":338,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":339,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"626cf8b0db811e3c","page":340,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"644eef483438e34f","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"644eef483438e34f","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"644eef483438e34f","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"644eef483438e34f","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"644eef483438e34f","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• Description: (S//REL) AT 1354Z, 1.4(a) OBSERVED 1X UAP IVO 34SCE7566990098. VELOCITY WAS 40 KNOTS AT FL160 TO FL170. UAP SPEED REMAINED CONSTANT.\n\n1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"644eef483438e34f","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• Description: (S/REL) AT 2243Z, 1.4(a) OBSERVED 2X POSS UAPS IVO 35TQK1580995057.\nVELOCITY WAS ESTIMATED AT 278 KNOTS. UAPS INCREASED SPEED AND CHANGED\nDIRECTION TOWARDS THE SOUTH.\n\n(b) (6)\n\n1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"649da262ab8dfea0","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Misrep 4472514\nNarrative\n[REDACTED] AT 0443Z, 1.4a TOOK OFF FROM OKAS. AT 0504Z 1.4a HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE. FROM 0631Z TO 0050Z, 1.4a FROM 0552Z TO 0012Z 1.4a SUPPORTED NAVCENT TO OPERATION (b)(1)1.4a IVO ARABIAN GULF, STRAIT OF HORMUZ AND GULF OF OMAN. SEE ISR LINE 1. AT 0615, 1.4a RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARD CALL LINE 1. AT 1830 OBSERVED AN UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENON. SEE OBS LINE 1. AT 1920Z, BSERVED AN UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENON. SEE OBS LINE 2. AT 2345Z, BSERVED AN UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENON. SEE OBS LINE 3. AT 0012Z, AS CLEARED TO RTB. AT 0124Z, 1.4a HANDED BACK TO THE LRE. AT 0200Z 1.4a LANDED AT OKAS. FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS-1. 20.3 MISSION HOURS, 18.3 IMINT HOURS, 1 IMINT TASKING PROSECUTED, 18.3 1.4a HOURS, 1 1.4a TASKING PROSECUTED, 2 TOTAL TASKINGS PROSECUTED\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n• Classification: [REDACTED]\n• Associated Caveats: [REDACTED]\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20450301\n\nOPERATION\n• Operation: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): ACC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 482ATKS\n• Submit Date (Auto-generated):"} {"doc_id":"649da262ab8dfea0","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MSNID\n• Tasking Order (ATO): AS\n• Mission Type: AREC\n• ATO Mission Number: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n• Rank: 2d Lt\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 482 ATKS\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 AOC Det 1\n\nQC\n• Rank: Ctr\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 12 AF PAROC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nAPPROVER\n• Rank: Capt\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 609 AOC ISRD Unit Support\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC"} {"doc_id":"649da262ab8dfea0","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INGEST\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n• Aircraft Callsign 1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination: -\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: -\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• MWS Name or Designator: -\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• IRCM Name or Designator: -\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• ECM Name or Designator: -\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• CMD Name or Designator: -\n• Chaff Designator: -\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: -\n• Flare Designator: -\n• Num Flares: -\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator: -\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Num Towed Decoys: -\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Gun Name or Designator: -\n• Num Gun Rounds: -\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4(a)\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: ANDAS4\n• Additional Avionics: AH_GMESH"} {"doc_id":"649da262ab8dfea0","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Data Link: -\n• Gentext: -\n\nTimeline\n\nOn Station\n• Time On Station DTG: 160504:00ZJUL20\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: AREC\n• JTAC Callsign: -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nISR\n• Time-on Station DTG: 160552:00ZJUL20\n• Time-off Station DTG: 170012:00ZJUL20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Msn Type: AREC\n• Primary Sensor: ANDAS4\n• Sensors Available: AH\\GMESH\n• Tasking Type: PLANNED\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 39RVN34 (b)(1)1.4a 1.4a\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] 1.4a COORDINATED WITH NAVCENT 24 HOURS PRIOR TO TAKE OFF. PRECOORD WAS SATISFACTORY. AT 0552Z, 1.4a ARRIVED ON STATION ISO NAVCENT TO OPERATION (b)(1)1.4a TO CONDUCT SCANS FOR IDENTIFIED 1.4a, 1.4g VESSELS TO ESTABLISH PATTERN OF LIFE, UAS ACTIVITY AND CHARACTERIZE ACTIVITY OUTSIDE OF PORTS. FROM 0552Z TO 0012Z 1.4a CONDUCTED SCANS IAW THE TARGET DECK IN THE ARABIAN GULF (AG). AT 0615, 1.4a ECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARD CALL LINE 1. AT 0645Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X PROB NASER WAP. AT 1932Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X PROB SAFIR KISH IVO 39RUN6 (b)(1)1.4a FACING EAST. AT 2140Z 1.4a BSERVED 1X POSS HOUDONG AND 1X POSS NASER DOCKED AT BUSHEHR"} {"doc_id":"649da262ab8dfea0","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PORT IVO 39RVM8 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a AT 0012Z 1.4a WAS CLEARED OFF TASKING AND RETURNED TO BASE (RTB)\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n• Supported Unit: NAVCENT\n• Supported Operation: OPERATION (b)(1)1.4a\n• Precoord Time: 24 HOURS\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n• Weather: EXPLAIN WEATHERS EFFECT ON THE MISSION or WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: No\n• Gentext: -\n\nOff Station\n• Time Off Station DTG: 170124:00ZJUL20\n• Total Time On Station: 20 hours 20 minutes\n\nGUARDCALL\n• GUARDCALL DTG: 160615:00ZJUL20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Ground Station Callsign: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Location: 39RUN4 (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: 131M\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL 180\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Number of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\n• Guardcall Tone: Professional\n\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 0615Z, 1.4a WAS HAILED ON GUARD (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g DEFENSE. ORDERS GIVEN: STANDARD CALL 1.4a RESPONDED WITH THE STANDARD RESPONSE. NO IMPACT TO MISSION"} {"doc_id":"649da262ab8dfea0","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 16 March 2026\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n[REDACTED]\n\nOBSERVATION\n\n• Observation DTG: 161830:00ZJUL20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Aircraft Location: 39RXK2d (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: 152 M\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL 200\n• Aircraft Airspeed: 98 KIAS\n• Relative Bearing or Clock Position: -\n• Range: -\n• Killbox & Keypad: -\n• Observed Activity Location: 39RVM5 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Observed Activity Description: UAP\n• Method of Observation: FMV\n\nGENTEXT/OBSERVATION\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 1830Z, 1.4a OBSERVED AN UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENON\nIVO 9RVM5 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR\n\nOBSERVATION\n\n• Observation DTG: 161920:00ZJUL20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Aircraft Location: 39RUN (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: 34 M\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL 190\n• Aircraft Airspeed: 90 KIAS\n• Relative Bearing or Clock Position: -\n• Range: -\n• Killbox & Keypad: -\n• Observed Activity Location: 39RUN7 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Observed Activity Description: UAP\n• Method of Observation: FMV\n\nGENTEXT/OBSERVATION\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 1920Z, 1.4a OBSERVED AN UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENON\nIVO 39RUN7 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n\n3.5c,(b)(6)\n[REDACTED]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0028 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO / PA applies 03/16/26 000006"} {"doc_id":"649da262ab8dfea0","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 16 March 2026\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n[REDACTED]\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Last Land Time: 170200:00ZJUL20\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 170210:00ZJUL20\n• Total Mission Time: 21 hours 17 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): (b)(1) 1.4a, (b)(1) 1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number: (b)(1) 1.4a, (b)(1) 1.4g\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 160443:00ZJUL20\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nOBSERVATION\n\n• Observation DTG: 162345:00ZJUL20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Aircraft Location: 39RUN6 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: 331 M\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL 191\n• Aircraft Airspeed: 115 KIAS\n• Relative Bearing or Clock Position: -\n• Range: -\n• Killbox & Keypad: -\n• Observed Activity Location: 39RUN6 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Observed Activity Description: UAP\n• Method of Observation: FMV\n\nGENTEXT/OBSERVATION\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 2345Z, 1.4a OBSERVED AN UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENON\nIVO 39RUN6234236874\n\n3.5c,(b)(6)\n[REDACTED]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0028 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO / PA applies 03/16/26 000007"} {"doc_id":"649da262ab8dfea0","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 16 March 2026\n[REDACTED]\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR\n\n3.5c,(b)(6)\n[REDACTED]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0028 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO / PA applies 03/16/26 000008"} {"doc_id":"66205f3db71bf4e3","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TAPE No. T-00763(R1b)\n\"P.A.O. RELEASE COMMENTARY OF THE GT-7/6 FLIGHT.\"\n\nP.A.O.\tSINCE THEN WE HAVE DUBBED THE TAPE OFF. THE MASTER TAPE HERE IN THE CONTRO\n\tCENTER AND WE ARE NOW PREPARED TO PLAY IT FOR YOU - IT CONTAINS REFERENCES\n\tTO SIGHTING NOT ONLY SOME PARTICLES BUT AS WELL AS AN UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT\n\tPLUS THE BOOSTER HERS THAT TAPE WE'LL PLAY IT FOR YOU NOW----\n\nS/C\tGEMINI-7 HERE HOUSTON-- HOW DO YOU READ?\nHOUSTON:\tLOUD AND CLEAR SEVEN - GO AHEAD.\nS/C\t(BORMAN) A BOGEY AT TEN O'CLOCK HIGH.\nHOUSTON\tTHIS IS HOUSTON, SAY AGAIN SEVEN?\nS/C\t(BORMAN) I SAID WE HAVE A BOGEY AT TEN O'CLOCK HIGH.\nHOUSTON\tROGER. GEMINI-7 ISTHAT THE BOOSTER OR IS THAT A NATURAL SIGHTING?\nS/C\tA WHAT?\nHOUSTON\tSAY AGAIN SEVEN.\nS/C\t(BORMAN) WE HAVE DEBRIS UP HERE - THIS IS AN ACTUAL SIGHTING.\nHOUSTON\tYOU HAVE ANY MORE INFORMATION - ESTIMATE DISTANCE OR SIZE?\nS/C\t(BORMAN) WE ALSO HAVE THE BOOSTER IN SIGHT.\nHOUSTON\tUNDERSTAND YOU ALSO HAVE THE BOOSTER IN SIGHT. ROGER.\nS/C\t(BORMAN) WE HAVE VERY, VERY MANY A - IT LOOKS LIKE HUNDREDS OF LITTLE\n\tPARTICLES GOING BY TO THE LEFT OUT ABOUT THREE OR FOUR MILES.\nHOUSTON\tUNDERSTAND YOU HAVE MANY SMALL PARTICLES GOING BY ON THE LEFT AT WHAT\n\tDISTANCE?\nS/C\t(BORMAN) ....GARBLED ... FOUR MILES. OH, ABOUT - GARBLED - IT LOOKS LIKE A\n\tPATH OF THE VEHICLE AT 90 DEGREES.\nHOUSTON\tROGER. UNDERSTAND THEY'RE ABOUT THREE OR FOUR MILES AWAY\nS/C\t(BORMAN) THEY'VE PASSED NOW. THEY'RE GOING INTO POLAR ORBIT.\nHOUSTON\tROGER. UNDERSTAND THEY WERE THREE TO FOUR MILES AWAY.\nS/C\tTHATS WHAT IT APPEARED LIKE. THATS ROGER.\nHOUSTON\tGEMINI-7 - HOUSTON - WERE THESE PARTICLES IN ADDITION TO THE BOOSTER AND\n\tTHE BOGEY AT TEN O'CLOCK HIGH?\nS/C\t(LOVELL) ROGER. I HAVE THE BOOSTER ON MY SIDE.ITS A BRILLIANT BODY IN THE\n\tSUN AGAINST A BLACK BACKGROUND WITH TRILLIONS OF PARTICLES ON IT.\nHOUSTON\tROGER WHAT DIRECTION IS IT FROM YOU?\nS/C\t(LOVELL) ITS ABOUT AT MY TWO O'CLOCK POSITION.\nHOUSTON\tDOES THAT MEAN ITS AHEAD OF YOU?\nS/C\t(LOVELL) ITS AHEAD OF US AT TWO O'CLOCK, SLOWLY TUMBLING\nHOUSTON\tROGER.\n.......... LONG PAUSE.......... DUAL TRANSMISSION........\nP.A.O.\tTHIS IS GEMINI CONTROL AGAIN THE REFERENCE IN THAT CONVERSATION TO THE\n\tTHIRD AND UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT OF COURSE WAS OR THE THIRD OBJECT WAS A [REDACTED]\n\tBOGEY. THERE WERE SEVERAL REFERENCES TO THE BOGEY. AT 4 Hrs 24 MIN into\n\tTHE FLIGHT THIS IS GEMINI CONTROL.\n\n- 1 -"} {"doc_id":"66205f3db71bf4e3","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"T-00763 (R1B)\t\"UFO SIGHTING BY BORMAN\" (GT-7)\n\nSince then we have dubbed the tape off\nthe master tape here in the Control Center and we\nare now prepared to play it for you. Mentions\nreferences to sighting not only some particles but\nas well as an Unidentified object & plus the booster\nhere that tape we'll play it for you now -\n\nS/C :- gemini 7 here Houston - how do you read?\nHouston:- loud & clear 7. go ahead.\nS/C :- a bogey at 10 o'clock high (Borman)\nHouston:- this is houston say again seven?\nS/C :- Borman I said we have a bogey at 10 o'clock high.\nHouston:- Roger. Gemini 7 is that the booster or is that\na natural sighting?\nS/C :- a what?\nHouston:- Say again seven.\nS/C :- Borman we have debris up here - this is an actual sighting\nHouston:- you have any more information - Estimate\ndistance or size?\nS/C :- Borman We also have the booster in sight.\nHouston:- Understand you also have the booster in sight. roger.\nS/C :- Borman We have very very many - it looks like hundreds of\na going little particles going by to the left out about\n3 to 4 miles\nHouston:- understand you have many small particles going"} {"doc_id":"66205f3db71bf4e3","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Houston:-\nby on the left at what distance?\n\nS/C :- Borman garbled - 4 miles. it looks like a round\nvehicle [crossed out] ... ed on about garbled -\nit looks like a path of the vehicle at 90 degrees\nHouston:- Roger. understand they're about 3 to 4 miles away\nS/C :- Borman they passed now - they're going into polar orbit\nHouston:- Roger understand they were 3-4 miles away.\nS/C :- that what it appeared like. that, roger.\nHouston:- Gemini-7 - Houston - were these particles\nin addition to the booster and the bogey at 10 o'clock high?\nS/C :- (Lovell) :- Roger - I have the booster on its\nits a brilliant body in the sun against a black\nbackground with trillions of particles on it.\nHouston:- roger what direction is it from you\nS/C :- (lovell) its about at my 2 o'clock position.\nHouston:- does that mean that it's ahead of you?\nS/C :- (lovell) it's ahead of us at 2 o'clock slowly tumbling\nHouston:- roger.\nlong pause - two garbled transmissions\nHouston roger\nP.A.O. Gemini Control here again the reference\nin that conversation to the third and unidentified\nobject of course - was [crossed out] the third object was\na bogey"} {"doc_id":"66205f3db71bf4e3","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"P.A.O.:- there were several references to the bogey.\nthis is the unidentified object in addition to\nthe particles which appear to be headed in a\npolar orbit you heard from Borman\nsay plus Jim Lovell describe discussing\nthe booster at wes Borman who reported\nsighting the bogey - this is Gemini Control in\nHouston at 4 hrs 24 min into the flight.\n\ntime:- 05 min: 34 sec."} {"doc_id":"6622b01b51b96571","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 0246Z, 1.4a TOOK OFF FROM 1.4a\nAT 0253Z, 1.4a HANDED OVER WITH THE LRE WITH FULLY MISSION CAPABLE SENSORS.\nAT 0958Z, BEGAN SIGINT COLLECTION.\n\nFROM 0958Z TO 2036Z, 1.4a CONDUCTED TARGET DEVELOPMENT ON OP 1.4a\nISO 1.4a SEE ISR 1).\nAT 1514Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X UAP (SEE OBSERVATION 1).\n\nAT 2036Z, 1.4a RETURNED TO BASE.\nAT 2036Z, STOPPED SIGINT COLLECTION.\nAT 2257Z, HANDED BACK TO THE LRE.\n\nFULL MOTION VIDEO WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS1.\n\nAT 0004Z, 1.4a LANDED AT 1.4a WITH A LAST ENGINE SHUT-DOWN TIME OF 0014Z.\n\n1.4a 1 IMINT TASKING PROSECUTED, 1.4a HOURS, 1 SIGINT TASKING PROSECUTED, 2 TOTAL TASKINGS PROSECUTED; 1 OBSERVATION\n\n(S/RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: REL TO USA, FVEY\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MS\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20470506\n\nOPERATION\n\n(b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0093 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/20/25 001\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"6622b01b51b96571","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFCENT\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 1.4a\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): AB\n• Mission Type: XCAS\n• ATO Mission Number 1.4a\n• Country Tasked: US - United States\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: SSgt\n• Full Name: (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 1.4a\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: (b)(6)\n• Email: (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 1.4a\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: (b)(6)\n• Email: (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n\n(b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0093 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/20/25 002\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"6622b01b51b96571","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: SSgt\n• Full Name (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: ISRD\n• Wing: 379 AEW\n• Phone Number (b)(6)\n• Email: (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign 1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination:\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator:\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data:\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator:\n• Chaff Designator:\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges:\n\n(b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0093 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/20/25 003\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"6622b01b51b96571","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Flare Designator:\n• Num Flares:\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM:\n• Num IR-Guided AAM:\n• Gun Name or Designator:\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each 1.4a\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: 1.4a\n• Additional Avionics: 1.4a\n• Data Link:\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): 1.4a\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): 1.4a\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 060246:00ZMAY22\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes):\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 060958:00ZMAY22\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: REC\\XCAS\n• JTAC Callsign: -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\n(b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0093 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/20/25 004\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"6622b01b51b96571","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Off Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 062036:00ZMAY22\n• Total Time On Station: 1.4a\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): 1.4a\n• Last Land Time: 070004:00ZMAY22\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 070014:00ZMAY22\n• Total Mission Time: 1.4a\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 060958:00ZMAY22\n• Time-off Station DTG: 062036:00ZMAY22\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Msn Type: REC\\XCAS\n• Primary Sensor: FMV\\SI\n• Sensors Available: 1.4a\n• Tasking Type: PLANNED\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 38SMC54 1.4a 96 1.4a\n• Activity Description: TARGET DEVELOPMENT\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed:\n• Number of EEIs:\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) 1.4a CONDUCTED TARGET DEVELOPMENT ON OP 1.4a MISSION INTENT FOR THE TASKING WAS TO REPORT ALL PERSONNEL, VEHICLES, WEAPONS, FOOTPATHS, COMMS EQUIPMENT, AND OCCUPIED BDLS. AT 1515Z 1.4a OBSERVED A POSSIBLE UAP IN ITS FOV IVO OF 38SMC54 1.4a 96 1.4a (SEE OBVS 1). 1.4a CONDUCTED 1.4a ACTIVITY UNTIL RTB.\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: MAG\n• Supported Operation: OP 1.4a\n\n(b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0093 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/20/25 005\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"6622b01b51b96571","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n• Precoord Time: 240 MINUTES\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) DUST HINDERED MOST FMV COLLECTION OF THE GROUND.\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: Yes\n• Gentext: -\n\nOBSERVATION\n\n• Observation DTG: 061514:00ZMAY22\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Aircraft Location: 38SMC53 1.4a 96 1.4a\n• Aircraft Heading: -\n• Aircraft Altitude: 1.4a\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Relative Bearing or Clock Position: -\n• Range: -\n• Killbox & Keypad: -\n• Observed Activity Location: 38SMC53 1.4a 96 1.4a\n• Observed Activity Description: 1X UAP\n• Method of Observation: FMV\n• EEIs Observed:\n• Number of EEIs:\n\nGENTEXT/OBSERVATION\n\n• Gentext: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) FROM 1514Z to 1934Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 5X UAP FLY ACROSS THE SCREEN. AT 1514Z 1.4a OBSERVED A UAP WITH THE VISRECCE OF A POSSIBLE 1.4a MISSILE FLY ACROSS THE FOV IVO 38SMC53 1.4a 96 1.4a 1.4a PROCEEDED TO SEE 4X OTHER UAPS IN THEIR FOV UNTIL 1934Z. ALL 4X REMAINING UAP FIT CLOSER TO THE PROFILE OF POSSIBLE BIRDS.\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) DUST HINDERED MOST FMV COLLECTION OF THE GROUND.\n\n(b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0093 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/20/25 006\n\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"67fc247cc7d6f1e0","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026\n\nChief, Contact Division 9 January 1958\nFOR : Support Branch CHI-58-17\nChief, Chicago Office\n\nS-495559\nCase 17708 (Closed) and Dr. Leon Davidson\nREF : WA 26643, and Connell, Lohmann, LaMountain Telecon of 8 Jan 58\n\n1. We have contacted Dr. Davidson by telephone advising him that we cannot resolve his problem concerning the space message and its transmitter because records on the matter have been destroyed by the evaluating agency. Davidson accepted this statement with the comment that he had been told this before, that he now had a second article for publication concerning Air Force handling of space sightings in the hands of the Pentagon security review people (which he thought was mild enough to pass them), and he hinted that he might wish to take up again at a later date the matter of this particular message.\n\n2. We appreciate that there have been many cooks in the kitchen on this dish and that, as a result, the extraordinarily noncommittal and evasive answer we were instructed to give Davidson was perhaps the only one possible if we were to avoid crossing up previous statements of our own, and other involved agencies, to this man. But the answer was hardly fair to Davidson, and one not likely to be fully accepted by him.\n\n3. Referenced telephone conversation disclosed that there is nothing in the record to show that Davidson knew he was dealing with the Agency in his contacts with Walker and Skakich, that in fact, an effort had been made to conceal their CIA identity from him. We are reasonably sure that when Davidson talked to us in the Court of Appeals Building conference room, he knew very well with whom he was dealing, and in the Davidson-LaMountain telephone conversation, Davidson specifically mentioned \"your agency\" by which he presumably meant CIA.\n\n4. We are sure more will be heard from Davidson.\n\nR.P.B. LOHMANN\n\nFILaMountain:rs\n\nFULL TEXT COPY DO NOT RELEASE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"685c169846a3360b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Unclassified\n(CLASSIFICATION)\nAF FORM 112\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\nAF606265\nCOUNTRY\nALASKA\nREPORT NO.\nIR 5004-42-53\n(LEAVE BLANK)\nAF606265\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nSUBJECT\nLight Observed West of Gambell\nAREA REPORTED ON\nGambell, St. Lawrence Island, Alaska\nFROM (Agency) 5004th Air Intelligence Sv Sq\nAPO 942, c/o PM, Seattle, Wash.\nDATE OF REPORT\n8 Dec 1953\nDATE OF INFORMATION\n1 Dec 1953\nEVALUATION\nC-3\nPREPARED BY (Officer)\nJOHN V. WRIGHT, Capt, USAF\nSOURCE\nClifford Iknokinok\nREFERENCES (Control number, directive, previous report, etc., as applicable)\nSUMMARY: (Enter concise summary of report. Give significance in final one-sentence paragraph. List inclosures at lower left. Begin text of report on AF Form 115-Part II.)\nThis report contains information on a light seen by an observer at Gambell, St. Lawrence Island, Alaska (63°50'N - 171°36'W), 011110Z December 1953. Light was observed on a true heading of 283° from Gambell.\nWhile no definite conclusion can be reached as to the origin of the light, a possibility exists that it could have come from an unidentified ship operating in or near U. S. Territorial Waters.\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 57597\nAPPROVED:\nWILLIAM H. GREENHALGH, JR\nMajor, USAF\nCommander\n1 INCLS.\nMap showing\nObservation\nLIBRARY SUBJECT & AREA CODES\nNodex\n53 2823\nDISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR\nComdr, AAC, ATTN: OI\nCINCAL, ATTN: J-2 (2 cys)\nComdr, USARAL, ATTN: G-2\nOSI, AAC\nCOMALSEAFRON, ATTN: D/NI\nComdr, FEAF, ATTN: A-2\nComdr, NEAC, ATTN: D/I\nComdr, ADC, ATTN: D/I\nComdr, 10th Air Div, ATTN: D/I\nComdr, 11th Air Div, ATTN: D/I\nComdr in Chief, USPacFlt\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nUnclassified\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n16-55549-2 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"685c169846a3360b","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\nUnclassified\n(CLASSIFICATION)\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nFROM (Agency) 5004th Air Intel Sv Sq\nAPO 942, c/o PM, Seattle, Wash\nREPORT NO. IR 5004-42-53\nPAGE 2 OF 3 PAGES\nI. This report contains information on a light seen by an observer at Gambell, St. Lawrence Island, Alaska (63°50'N - 171°36'W), 011110Z December 1953. Light was observed on a true heading of 283° from Gambell.\nII. SOURCE:\nName - CLIFFORD IKNOKINOK\nAge - 26\nRace - Eskimo\nEducation - 8th Grade Completed\nMilitary Service - Member of Gambell Unit, Alaska National Guard for three (3) years, 9 months, promoted to Sgt 1 Jan 1953. Source presently Squad Leader with Gambell Guard Unit.\nCivilian Employment - Employed by CAA at Gambell from July 1942 thru April 1949. Present occupation -- hunter.\nWILLIAM W. CALDWELL and RODERICK M. MOORE, members of Flight 'A', 5004th AISS, and stationed at Gambell, have known source for the past eight months. They have found source to be trustworthy and honest and they have confidence in his judgement.\nIII. REPORT ON OBSERVATION:\nSource states that approximately 1110Z, 1 December 53 he saw a light on the horizon West of Gambell. Source was standing in front of the Gambell School (elev. approx. 25 ft. above sea level) when he observed the light. Source said he thought the light was about 10 inches in diameter. Later he said that a circular object 5 1/2 inches in diameter, held at arms length, would cover the light. Source stated that the light did not move and determined this by sighting along the flag pole at the school. Source saw no reflection or beam of light and the color of the light was similar to a flashlight. Source stated the light was not bright, nor was it very dim. At 1115Z the light disappeared as though someone had turned it off.\nSource observed the light without the aid of binoculars. Source would not make an estimate as to distance of light from Gambell.\nIV. WEATHER:\nWind - NE at approx. 20 MPH\nVisibility - Approx. 20 miles\nCeiling - Approx. 2000 ft.\nThe night was very dark. There was slush ice West of Gambell but no heavy ice was in the area. The ocean was calm.\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nUnclassified\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n16-55570-1 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"685c169846a3360b","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\nUnclassified\n(CLASSIFICATION)\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nFROM (Agency) 5004th Air Intel Sv Sq\nAPO 942, c/o PM, Seattle, Wash\nREPORT NO. IR 5004-42-53\nPAGE 3 OF 3 PAGES\nV. COMMENTS OF PREPARING OFFICER:\nWILLIAM W. CALDWELL, member of Flight A, 5004th AISS, at Gambell, used a Lensatic Compass to determine the true bearing of the light observed. He also made a check of the village to see if other natives had observed the light but none had seen the light.\nSource is apparently in error when he says a disk 5 1/2 inches in diameter would cover the light. A light measured in this manner would appear much larger than his first estimate of the light size.\nNo land exists within a considerable distance of Gambell, St. Lawrence Island, Alaska on a bearing of 283° true, thus removing the possibility of a land based light. From the information available no conclusion can be reached as to the origin of the light or its type.\nA possibility exists that the light came from a ship at sea, identity of which is unknown.\nJOHN V. WRIGHT\nCaptain, USAF\nPreparing Officer\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nUnclassified\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n16-55570-1 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"685c169846a3360b","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\nUnclassified\n(CLASSIFICATION)\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nFROM (Agency) 5004th Air Intel Sv Sq\nAPO 942, c/o PM, Seattle, Wash\nREPORT NO. IR 5004-42-53\nINCL #1\nPAGE OF PAGES\nU.S.S.R.\nCAPE CHAPLINA\nN\nLINE\nOBSERVATION ON HEADING 283° TRUE\nGAMBELL\nST. LAWRENCE ISLAND\nDATE\nINTERNATIONAL\nSCALE: 1\"=13.7 NM\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nUnclassified\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n16-55576-1 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"689e4244284fc594","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nOFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR\n5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON\nWASHINGTON, DC 20301-5000\n\nINTELLIGENCE\nAND SECURITY\n\n02 June 2026\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nSUBJECT: Narrative from Witness 1 - Western U.S. Event\n\nReferences: (a) https://www.war.gov/ufo/#Western-US-Event,VIRIN: 260508-D-D0360-1052,\n08-MAY 2026.\n\n1. Executive Summary.\n\nThis memorandum presents the first-hand narrative from Witness 1 provided to the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO). Witness 1 was one of several United States (U.S.) federal law enforcement special agents who reported observing unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) over a period of two days in October 2023 in the western United States.\n\n2. Witness Narrative.\n\nIn response to AARO's request to provide a free-form narrative of the sequence of events exactly as they remember them, Witness 1 submitted the following text:\n\n\"It started the first night with other teams reporting weird lights moving along in groups miles away. From my vantage point I could not see them, though in theory should have been able to. Because of my location I did not see anything specific the first night. The second night another team member and I were out working and driving to our destination. As we headed through a valley area we suddenly noticed a large glowing ball to our right 90 degrees from where we were. It looked like it was between us and a hill face, and initially I guessed it was 500 to 600 meters away, though another later day I was able to use a range finder to put the distance to the hillside at about 1100 meters. The ball appeared close to the hill face. It was just a circle of light that looked like a swirly pattern of bright lava. It was bright in the dusk light, the time was just before 7 pm I think. It was not visible up to the moment we first saw it, though the hillside face behind it was visible as we drove for some distance before we saw the object. The object's lighted area was a well defined circle, but had no visible structure at the edges to show what contained the light or why it was where it was. Looking at it through binoculars it almost appeared to have a line or spindle below possibly touching the hillside below. It was not possible to verify for sure because of the distance. There was no observed glow behind or below the object on the hillside or ground. It was only observed for a minute or two before we could no longer see it. It did not fade out, we just could not see it anymore. There was no particular sound heard with it. All seemed quiet and it was pretty remote. I would have guessed the circle to be 20 feet or more in diameter. We started driving and drove a few more minutes. Then we stopped and had to get out of the vehicle. About 20 minutes later to the front, another object that looked similar lit up in the sky over the top of another hillside slightly to the right of front. It appeared to be several miles away. It only lit up for a second or two and then was gone again."} {"doc_id":"689e4244284fc594","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nWhile it was lit, it appeared three red lights flew out of and away from it. They seemed evenly spaced apart and moved pretty fast, quickly disappearing from sight. At the same time the orange light lit up, there appeared to be a flash from over the horizon to the left. The flash lit up the sky pretty well, though very briefly. About twenty minutes later the experience repeated except this time the orange ball appeared to the front and slightly to the left this time. This time however, the red lights appeared to leave in a different pattern as one flew straight out, one appeared to fly up horizontally and another flew down horizontally, appearing to fly away in a vertical alignment of three lights. A flash accompanied this event as well and all three sightings appeared to be similar though at different distances. Several hours later we departed from where we were at to drive to another location in preparation for work the next day.\n\nIt took several hours of driving, and as we were driving hours later still, we observed a car driving ahead of us on the road, we were gaining on the car and as we got closer I noticed it appeared one taillight cover was broken because one taillight was red and one was white. They were also different because one was round and one was square. Another vehicle approached from the opposite direction and as it was about to pass the vehicle in front of us, the car changed direction and moved off the road to the right. The oncoming vehicle continued driving and passed us, almost like it did not even see the vehicle move of the road as it passed. It did not bounce or move with the terrain, but seemed to hover. It did not kick up any dust either. It stopped on the road next to it, and the lights appeared to be in the same position facing us even though we were in a different direction from it. When we stopped the lights turned off and I could see a darker object moving up and toward behind us as it flew away. When we stopped we already had the windows rolled down and I did not notice any sound at any point. It reminded me of a Toyota Prius for some reason. It was hard to identify the exact shape though. The hillside was about 200 meters away, and when it stopped it was less than halfway to the base of the hillside. We started looking around the area and approximately an hour or two later as we were stopped we observed some dust and thick spider web looking material floating in-front of us. We then saw what looked like the same object floating in a more vertical orientation floating with the dust. It was still at an off angle. I could see where the spots were for the two lights and one being round and the other square. The lights were not on though. The object itself was still hard to define its shape and borders visually. It was in the air about 15-20 feet up and as it floated past I could see a star through the object, as well as the crest of the hill and some vegetation. It was almost like looking at something through water where it was not completely clear.\n\nWe eventually continued to our destination and I did not have any other contact or sightings of those objects of that night that I observed.\"\n\nJon T. Kosloski\nDirector, AARO\n\n2\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 760191\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nAFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n14 June 48\n\nBasic Ltr fm Hq. Eleventh Air Force, Harrisburg, Pa., dtd (undated),\nsubj: Report of \"Flying Discs\"\n\nAFOIR-CO-5 (L-6-29)\t\t1st Ind.\t\t\t\t16 JUN 1948\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air\n Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\n ATTN: MCI\n\n4 Incls.\nn/c\n\nP102375\nHQ. USAF\n15 JUN 1943\nCAG-MAIL BRANCH\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL / GRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS: AFOIR, Col Kelly, Lt Col Garrett"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS ELEVENTH AIR FORCE\n1612 South Cameron Street\nHarrisburg, Pennsylvania\n\nAFD\n\nSUBJECT: Report of \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO:\tChief of Staff\n\tUnited States Air Force\n\tWashington 25, D. C.\n\tATTN: Director of Intelligence,\n\tRequirements Division\n\n1. In compliance with paragraph 1a, ADC Letter 45-5, 25 March 1948, the following information relative to \"Flying Discs\" is hereby submitted. The attached report was received this Headquarters 27 May 1948, from Special Agent, D.R. Brown, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Cleveland, Ohio. This Headquarters has no further information and is not initiating any investigation in accordance with paragraph 2, ADC Ltr. 45-5. Any additional information received by this Headquarters will be immediately forwarded to your Headquarters. Copies of report have been forwarded to Hq. Air Materiel Command and Hq. Air Defense Command as directed in above mentioned directive.\n\na. Location and time of sighting - Hobson, Ohio; night of 8 May 48.\n\nb. Weather at the time - unknown by this Hq.\n\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses - Addresses\nBen Rupe, New York Central System Car Inspector unknown.\nEarl Roush, \" \" \" \"\nBob White, Yard Clerk, N.Y.C.\nC. K. Hite, Patrolman, N.Y.C.\n\nd. Photographs of objects, if available - unknown this Hq.\n\ne. Sketches of objects configuration - unknown this Hq.\n\nf. Objects sighted:\n\n(1) Number - not known this Headquarters\n\n(2) Shape - round\n\n(3) Size - appeared to be nine inches in diameter from ground level.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nAFD\nSubj: Report of \"Flying Discs\"\n\n(4) Color - phosphorescent\n\n(5) Speed & Great amount of speed\n\n(6) Heading - 90°\n\n(7) Manueverability - not known\n\n(8) Altitude - 6 to 8 miles\n\n(9) Sound - unknown to this Hq.\n\n(10) Exhaust trail or not - Phosphorescent trail in the sky\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n/s/ H. B. WAX\nLt Col., USAF\nAC of S, A-2\n\n4 Incls.\n1. FBI Ltr., Cleveland, Ohio, 25 May 48\n2. N.Y. Central System Ltr., Columbus, Ohio 15 May 48\n3. N.Y. Central System Ltr., Hobson, Ohio\n4. N.Y. Central System Ltr., 21 May 48\nFile 22.00\n\nCOPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n6/4/48\n\nDispatched thru TS Control office by Special Officer Courier X-010 4 June 48\n\nAFOIR\nLt Col Earle/mcb/6548\n/t/ 4 June 48\n\nAFOIR\t\t\t1st Ind.\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\t\t4 JUN 1948\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\n\nT-2 Report \"German Flying Wings Designed by Horten Brothers\" has been retained by this office.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nWILTON H. EARLE, Jr.\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n2 Incls.\n1 & 2 n/c\n3 w/d\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\n\nTSNAD-2B\t\t\t\t\t\tTSNAD-2B/ACL:ceo\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tWright Field, Dayton, O.\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t24 September 1947\n\n\"Flying Disc\"\n\nCommanding General\nArmy Air Forces\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nATTN: AC/AS-2\n Major General George McDonald\n\n1. In compliance with General McDonald's telephone conversation, this date, to Colonel H. M. McCoy, T-2, Hq. AMC, attached herewith is a copy of a drawing entitled, \"Loedding Flying Disc\", designated LD-2. Because of patent rights involved, it is requested that a record be kept of all persons reviewing this drawing by witnessing with signatures and dates directly on the drawing.\n\n2. This drawing should be returned to this office when it has served its purpose so that it can be turned over to the Patent Office Hq. AMC for official record.\n\n3. Inclosed herewith is also a report prepared by the Royal Aircraft Establishment, Technical Note, AERO 1703, which describes the Horten tailless aircraft. The following references are invited which is considered significant in relating the Horten brothers perspective thinking and accomplishments toward the alleged \"Flying Saucer\" case:\n\na. Page 5, Paragraph 4 and 6.\n\nb. Page 6, Paragraph 1 and 7.\n\nc. Page 26, Paragraph 3 and 10.\n\nd. Page 27, Paragraph 12.\n\ne. Page 35, Paragraphs 1 through 5.\n\nf. Page 54, Photograph of Horten \"Parabola\".\n\nSECRET\n\nU-39942"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nBasic ltr, dtd 24 Sep 47, to C3, Hq AAF, Wash, subj: \"Flying Disc\"\n\ng. Page 69, The Horten VIII.\n\nh. Pages 71 and 72, Photographs of the Horten IX Versions.\n\ni. Page 74, Drawing of the \"Parabola\".\n\nThis document should also be returned when it has served its intended purpose.\n\n4. A recent report from the U. S. Military attache, Moscow, USSR, dated 9 June 1947, indicates that 1500 aircraft, directly or indirectly based on the Horten VIII design (six engine pusher, having a wing spread of 131 feet and a gross weight of approximately thirty-three thousand pounds) are being built for bomber squadron use. The Russian version, however, is jet propelled, reference report whose identification No. is V-32291-S.\n\n5. The T-2 report \"German Flying Wings Designed by Horten Brothers\", No. P-SU-1110-ND, also inclosed herewith, may be retained by your office if desired.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nsgd\nH. M. McCOY\nColonel, Air Corps\nDeputy Commanding General\nIntelligence (T-2)\n\n3 Incls:\n\n1. Drawing\n2. RAE Tech Note, AERO 1703\n3. T-2 Rpt, No. P-SU-1110-ND\n\nSECRET\n\nU-39942"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/6282\n12 May 48\n\nAF HQ-44\n3 Dec 1947\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: MCI\n\nForwarded for your information.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl.\nID No. 456982\n(4 copies)\n\nGEORGE D. GARRETT, JR.\nLieutenant Colonel, USAF\nActing Chief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nHQ USAF\n13 MAY 1948\nCAG-MAIL BRANCH\n\nP101459\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL | 1. AFOIR-CO | 2. | 3. | 4. | 5.\nGRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS | Col Taylor | | | |\n| Lt Col Garrett | | | |\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFCAG-10 (Rev 13 Oct 47)\n\nINDEX: 000.75 Clippings DATE: 28 Apr 48\n\nTO: CG, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, Dayton, Ohio\n\nFROM: Air Intelligence Requirements Division, Directorate of Intelligence\n\nSUMMARY: Clippings Service for Project \"SIGN\"\n\nltr\n\nFILED: 380 Project\nINDEXER: C\nREMARKS:\n\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nCORRESPONDENCE REFERENCE FORM\n\n8-3867, AF"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF HQ-44\n3 Dec 1947\n\nAFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544\n26 Apr 48\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nBasic ltr, subj: Report of Information on \"Flying Disc\" dated 12 Apr 48\n\n1st Ind G/fhc/R\n\nHEADQUARTERS, THE AIR UNIVERSITY, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama\n\nTO: Chief of Staff, USAF, Washington 25, D. C., Attn: Dir of Intelligence 14 Apr 48\n\nForwarded in accordance with paragraph 4 of letter cited in basic communication.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n1 Incl:\nn/c (1 cy w/d)\n\n/s/ F. E. LANKSTON\nMAJOR, AGD\nASS'T. ADJ. GEN.\n\nAFOIR-CO-5 2nd Ind.\n\n27 APR 1948\n\nDepartment of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: MCI\n\n1 Incl\nn/c\n\n/s/ R.T\n\nHQ USAF\n27 APR 1948\nCAG-MAIL BRANCH\n\nReference: Ltr frm Hq Tyndall AFB, dated 12 Apr 48, subject as above.\n1st Ind frm Hq Maxwell Air FB, to C/S, USAF, dated 14 Apr 48.\n\nP100938\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL | 1. AFOIR-CO | 2. | 3. | 4. | 5.\nGRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS | Col. Taylor | 2 | | |\n| Lt. Col. Garrett | | | |\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS\n500th AIR UNIVERSITY WING\nTYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE\nPANAMA CITY, FLORIDA (H-4) MEJ/al/R\n\n12 April 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Report of Information on \"Flying Disc\"\n\nTHRU : Commanding General\nAir University\nMaxwell Air Force Base\nMontgomery, Alabama\nATTN: AC of S, A-2\n\nTO : Commanding General\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Director of Intelligence\n\nThe attached information is forwarded in compliance with USAF Letter, subj: \"Reporting of Information on \"flying Discs\", dtd 6 February 1948.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n1 Incl -\nMOIC and Exhibit I. (in dup) /s/ J. B. PRICE\n Major, USAF\n Adjutant\n\nDistribution:\n1 cy ea:\nC/S USAF\nCG, AMC\nCG, AU\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544\n2 Apr 48\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO : Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: MCI\n\nForwarded for your information.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl\nLtr frm CSGID, 25 Mar\n(dup)\n\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nReference: DF frm Hq USAF, Comment No. 1 to CSGID dtd 27 Feb 48.\nDF frm CSGID, Comment No. 2, to Hq USAF, dtd 25 Mar 48.\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL AFOIR-CO\nGRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS Col. Taylor / Lt. Col. Garrett"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISPOSITION FORM\n\nDept. of the Air Force\nWAR DEPARTMENT\n\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION (If any) RESTRICTED\n\nFILE No. AFOIR-CO-5\nSUBJECT Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nTO CSGID Attn: Plans & Collection Branch Lt.Col. Smith\nFROM HQ. USAF - AFOIR\nDATE 27 FEB 1948 COMMENT No.1 Lt.Col.Garrett/dk/4544\n\n1. It is Air Force policy not to ignore reports of sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere, but to recognize that part of its mission is to collect, collate, evaluate, and act on information of this nature.\n\n2. In Implementing this policy the Air Materiel Command has been designated the Air Force agency to collect, collate, evaluate, and distribute to interested government agencies and contractors all information concerning sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere which can be construed to be of concern to the national security.\n\n3. All Air Force installations within and outside Zone of Interior and Alaska have been instructed to report all sightings, or information concerning sightings which comes to their attention, direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCI.\n\n4. Air Materiel Command has been authorized direct contact with all Air Force installations whenever required to develop additional information on the flying discs.\n\n5. It is requested that all Department of the Army installations also be instructed to report such occurrences directly to Air Materiel Command and that they be informed that Air Materiel Command is authorized to contact them direct when necessary in connection with such occurrences.\n\n6. If possible, reports to Air Materiel Command should include the following information:\n\na. Location and time of sighting\nb. Weather at the time\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses\nd. Photographs of objects, if available\ne. Object sighted:\n(1) Number (4) Color (7) Maneuverability (10) Exhaust trail\n(2) Shape (5) Speed (8) Altitude or not\n(3) Size (6) Heading (9) Sound\n\ng. General remarks\n\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n000.9 AFOIR-CO-5\nLt.Col.Garrett/dk/4544\n25 Feb 48\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\nCSGID\nAttn: Plans & Collection\nBranch\nLt.Col. Smith\n\nReporting of Information on \"Flying Discs.\"\nHQ. USAF - AFOIR\n27 FEB 1948\nLt.Col.Garrett/dk/4544\n\n1. It is Air Force policy not to ignore reports of sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere, but to recognize that part of its mission is to collect, collate, evaluate, and act on information of this nature.\n\n2. In Implementing this policy the Air Materiel Command has been designated the Air Force agency to collect, collate, evaluate, and distribute to interested government agencies and contractors all information concerning sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere which can be construed to be of concern to the national security.\n\n3. All Air Force installations within and outside Zone of Interior and Alaska have been instructed to report all sightings, or information concerning sightings which comes to their attention, direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCI.\n\n4. Air Materiel Command has been authorized direct contact with all Air Force installations whenever required to develop additional information on the flying discs.\n\n5. It is requested that all Department of the Army installations also be instructed to report such occurrences directly to Air Materiel Command and that they be informed that Air Materiel Command is authorized to contact them direct when necessary in connection with such occurrences.\n\n6. If possible, reports to Air Materiel Command should include the following information:\n\na. Location and time of sighting\nb. Weather at the time\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses\nd. Photographs of objects, if available\ne. Object sighted:\n(1) Number (4) Color (7) Maneuverability (10) Exhaust trail\n(2) Shape (5) Speed (8) Altitude or not\n(3) Size (6) Heading (9) Sound\n\ng. General remarks\n\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nCSGID 350.05 SUBJECT: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: HQ, USAF, AFOIR FROM: D/I, GSUSA DATE: 25 Mar 48 COMMENT NO. 2\nLt. Col. Smith/2931/jes\n\n1. Action on Comment No. 1 has been completed by request for information at Inclosure 1.\n\n2. It is requested that Air Materiel Command be directed to transmit to the Director of Intelligence, GSUSA, an information copy of each communication received from or sent to commands subordinate to the Department of the Army in connection with so-called \"flying disc\" reports.\n\nFOR THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE:\n\nR. F. ENNIS\nColonel, GSC\nChief, Intelligence Group\n\n2 Incls:\n1. Req for Info (10 copies)\n2. ICM 7 (2 copies)\n\nSECRET PRM 6478"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nAFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544\n2 Apr 48\n\nLtr frm Hq 4th AF, dated 11 Mar 48, subject: \"Investigation of Flying Disc\"\nAFOIR-CO-5 1st Ind.\nDepartment of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\n\nP100259\n\nHQ USAF\n2 APR 1948\nCAG MAIL BRANCH\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL AFOIR-CO\nGRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS Col. Taylor / Lt. Col. Garrett\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA-3/1208-I\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tMar 11, 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of Flying Disc.\n\nTO:\tChief of Staff\n\tUnited States Air Forces\n\tWashington, D. C.\n\tATTN: Directorate of Intelligence\n\t Air Intelligence Requirements Division\n\n1. Incident reported on 9 March 1948, this headquarters, per telephone call from Sgt. A. M. Larsen, Sheriff's office, Bakersfield, California.\n\na. Observation by Mr. Les Buchner, Bakersfield, California, of two objects falling to earth from unknown source on 5 March 1948 between 1610 and 1655 hours. Description of objects similar to falling aircraft with smoke and debris trailing. Observation made at Bakersfield with objects sighted southwest toward Buena Vista Lake, California.\n\nb. Observation by Mr. Denio, employee of the Pacific General Electric Company, Bakersfield, California, of two objects which fell to earth from unknown source north of Bakersfield, California, 8 March 1948. One object seemed to be on fire with red and black smoke trailing behind.\n\n2. Informant Larsen stated that searching parties, aircraft and rescue units have made numerous attempts to locate these reported objects without success.\n\n3. Investigation of incident has been initiated by this headquarters. Report will follow.\n\n/S/ DONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, USAF\nAC of S, A-2\n\nInformation to:\nADC, Mitchel Fld, N.Y.\nFBI, San Francisco\nG-2, Sixth Army\nDIO, San Francisco (12th Nav. Dist)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAFOIR-CO/Lt.Col.Garrett/dk/\n4544\n9 March 48\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\n17 MAR 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO:\tCommanding General\n\tAir Materiel Command\n\tWright-Patterson Air Force Base\n\tDayton, Ohio\n\tATTN: MCI\n\n1. Reference is made to Colonel McCoy's informal proposal that certain fighter aircraft be maintained on a continuous alert status, within the Zone of the Interior, to aid in gathering information on Flying Discs.\n\n2. This proposal is considered unfeasible for the following reasons:\n\na. The outlay of aircraft and personnel would be too great in relation to the results obtained.\n\nb. Proper interception is not possible, except by accident, without complete radar coverage. The Air Force is incapable of providing such coverage.\n\nc. It is doubtful if fighter aircraft would be able to follow up reports emanating, for the most part, from civilian sources.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nGEORGE C. McDONALD\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nP 99846\n\nP80\nrecommended\nabove answer by R&R\nCut 3 copies to D/I USAF\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL / AFOIR-CO / AFOIR / AFOIN\nGRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS: LtCol. Garrett / C. P. CABELL, Maj. Gen., USAF\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF HQ-33 (20 MAY 44)\n\nSECRET\n\nHEADQUARTERS ARMY AIR FORCES\n\nROUTING AND RECORD SHEET\n\nTALLY NO. 070\nFILE NO.\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO: Director of Plans and Operations\n\nDATE 12 FEB 1948\n\nFROM: Director of Intelligence\n\nCOMMENT No. 1 Lt. Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n\n1. By letter from this Headquarters, dated 30 December 1947 with subject as above, the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is instructed to \"set up a project whose purpose is to collect, collate, evaluate and distribute to interested government agencies and contractors all information concerning sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere which can be construed to be of concern to the national security\".\n\n2. The Commanding General, Air Materiel Command feels that the responsibility assigned to him for collecting and developing information and intelligence on the \"flying discs\" should be complemented by a requirement that all Air Force installations in the United States and Alaska provide a minimum of one each fighter or night interceptor type aircraft, with necessary crews, on a continuous alert basis. These aircraft should be equipped with gun camera, and such armament as deemed advisable, in order to secure photographs necessary to the obtainment of all possible data on any reported and sighted unusual phenomena, of the \"flying disc\" type, in the atmosphere.\n\n3. It is envisaged that each Air Force installation maintaining aircraft on an alert basis for this purpose would investigate all unusual flying objects reported from any source in any area over which it has cognizance. Such a program would obviously require a detailed Standard Operating Procedure, in the preparation of which Air Materiel Command should cooperate.\n\n4. Your comments and/or concurrence are requested.\n\nC. P. CABELL\nBrigadier General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF HQ-33 (20 MAY 44)\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE SECRET\nHEADQUARTERS ARMY AIR FORCES\n\nROUTING AND RECORD SHEET\n\nTALLY NO. [handwritten]\nFILE NO.\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO: Director of Intelligence\n\nDATE 3 MAR 1948\n\nFROM: Director of Plans and Operations\n\nCOMMENT No. 2 Major Cook:csk 72233\n\n1. The proposal of Air Materiel Command for stationing fighter aircraft at all bases on a continuous alert status is not considered feasible for the following reasons:\n\na. The outlay of aircraft and personnel would be too great consistent with the results to be obtained.\n\nb. Proper interception is not possible, except by accident, without complete radar coverage which the Air Force is not capable of providing.\n\nc. It is doubtful if fighter aircraft would be able to follow up reports emanating, for the most part, from civilian sources.\n\n2. It is recommended that Air Materiel Command's responsibility for \"collecting\" information on unusual phenomena in the atmosphere be confined to the establishment of direct channels for the receipt of such information.\n\n3. It is further recommended that in lieu of the proposal of Air Materiel Command, all other major commands be directed to cooperate with Air Materiel Command and to channel information directly to that command.\n\nS. E. ANDERSON\nMajor General, U.S.A.F.\nDirector of Plans and Operations.\n\nSECRET\n\nPAGE"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt. Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n4 March 48\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nB/L fm Hq. Tenth Air Force, Brooks Fld, San Antonio, Texas, dtd 7 Jan 48, subj: \"Flying Disks\"\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\t\t\t\t1st Ind.\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\t\t8 MAR 1948\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\n\nForwarded as a matter pertaining to your Command.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl.\nn/c\n\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nP 99606\n\nRef: B/L fm 10th A.F./ dtd 7 Jan 48, subj: as above\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL / AFOIR-CO / AFOIR / Col Taylor / Lt. Col Garrett / C. P. CABELL, USAF\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nTENTH AIR FORCE\nBROOKS FIELD, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS\n\nD 333.5 7 January 1948\n\nSUBJECT: \"Flying Disks\"\n\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Director of Intelligence\n\nCommanding General\nAir Defense Command\nMitchel Field, New York\nATTN: Asst Chief of Staff, A-2\n\nCommanding General\nFourth Army\nFt.Sam Houston, Texas\nATTN: Asst Chief of Staff, G-2\n\nInclosed is Summary of Information prepared by the Tenth Air Force Resident Agent at Houston, Texas covering a report of \"Flying Disks\" received by the FBI Office at Houston, Texas.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n1 Incl\nSummary of Inform,\nsubj: \"Flying Disk\"\n175th AFBU, Ellington Fld,\ndtd 19 Dec 47\n\n/s/ RAYMOND D. STEPHENS\nMajor, USAF\nActg Asst Chief of Staff, A-2\n\nC\nO\nP\nY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAFOIR-CO/Col Garrett/1wd/4544\n2 March 48\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\n4 MAR 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Material Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\n\nAttached report from Military Air Attache, Canada, closes the incident reported by Johnson and Harrison.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl.\nMAA Canada Rpt.\ndtd 2 Feb 48\n\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nP 99514\n\nHQ USAF\n5 MAR 1948\nCAG-MAIL BRANCH\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL | 1. AFCIR-CO Col Taylor Col Garrett | 2. AFOIR Eiseman C. P. CABELL May Gen. USAF | 3. | 4. | 5.\nGRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS\n\n16-20242-2 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544\n16 Feb 48\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\n24 FEB 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Material Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\n\n1. Attached, for your information, is copy of Collection Memorandum Number 7, which was forwarded to field collection agencies for action on above subject.\n\n2. This Directorate has been advised that contact has been made with the Horton Brothers, and the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, of European Command has accordingly been advised by Telecon to use this Memorandum as the basis for interrogation.\n\n3. The results of this interrogation will be forwarded to your Headquarters as soon as received.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl\nCol Memo #7\ndtd 21 Jan 48\n\nC.P. CABELL\nMajor General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nP 99247\n\nHQ USAF\n24FEB 1948\nCAG-MAIL BRANCH\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL | 1. AFOIR-CO Col. Taylor Lt. Col. Garrett | 2. AFOIR C.P. CABELL Brig. Gen. | 3. | 4. | 5.\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFCAG-10 (Rev 13 Oct 47)\n\nINDEX: 000.9 Phenomena DATE: 13 February 1948\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\n\nFROM: Executive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div., Directorate of Intelligence.\n\nSUMMARY: \"Project SIGN\"\n\"Flying Discs\"\n\n1st Ind\n\nFILED: 380 Project\nINDEXER: rg\nREMARKS:\n\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nCORRESPONDENCE REFERENCE FORM"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFGMR-60 (REV. OCT 1947)\n\nINDEX: 000.9 Flying Discs DATE: 12 February 1948\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\n\nFROM: Executive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div. Directorate of Intelligence.\n\nSUMMARY: Project \"SIGN\".\n\n1st Ind\n\nFILED: 380 Project\nINDEXER: rg\nREMARKS:\n\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nCORRESPONDENCE REFERENCE FORM"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Col. Garrett/jh/4544\n4 Feb 48\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n3/6/48\n\nAFOIR-CO-5 1st Ind.\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\n6 - FEB 1948\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\n\nForwarded as a matter pertaining to your Command.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nP 97897\n\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n1 Incl\nn/c\n\nMAIL BRANCH\n\n6-FEB 1948\n\nCAO-MAIL BRANCH\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL | 1 AFOIR-CO | 2. AFOIR | 3. | 4. | 5.\nGRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS | Col. Taylor | C. P. CABELL Brig. Gen., USAF | | |\nCol. Garrett"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA-1208-I\n\nJAN 1 5 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Report of Flying Disc.\n\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Forces\nWashington, D. C.\nATTN: Director of Intelligence\n\nAttached report for your information.\n\n/S/ Donald L. Springer\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, USAF\nAC of S, A-2\n\n1 Incl:\nRpt of Flying Disc.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6a42c8e65ff3f29c","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFCAG-10 (Rev 13 Oct 47)\n\nINDEX: 000.9 Phenomena\n\nDATE: 6 February 1948\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\n\nFROM: Executive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div., Directorate of Intelligence.\n\nSUMMARY: Flying Discs.\n\nLtr\n\nFILED: 312.3 Channels\nINDEXER: rg\nREMARKS:\n\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nCORRESPONDENCE REFERENCE FORM\n\n8-3867, AF"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\n\nMCIA/JCB/amb\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\n\nMCIA\n\n23 APR 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Project \"SIGN\"\n\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Director of Intelligence\n\n1. This is an initial report on unidentified flying objects as directed by Hq, USAF letter dated 30 December 1947, signed by General L. C. Craigie, subject: \"Flying Discs\". Quarterly reports will be submitted beginning 1 July 1948.\n\n2. As a result of this letter, Project HT-304 was activated on 26 January 1948 and Technical Instruction 2185, dated 11 February 1948, was published. Present files on Project \"SIGN\" represent a consolidation of reports received directly by Hq, AMC and those forwarded by the Director of Intelligence, USAF.\n\n3. Schedules of activities of lighted night-flying advertising blimps have been secured and cross-checked at this Headquarters to consider them as a possible source of incident reports.\n\n4. Inclosure 1 represents a tabulation and breakdown of all available reports through 1 February 1948.\n\n5. The following is a series of interesting observations that were noted when reviewing the many incident cases:\n\na. High rate of climb, as well as the apparent ability to remain motionless or hover for a considerable length of time.\n\nb. The object was described as being oval, disc or saucer-shaped 31 times.\n\nc. Associated sound was present 11 times.\n\nd. Reported sizes have varied from that of a 25-cent piece to 250 feet in diameter, and from the size of a pursuit plane to the bulk of six B-29 airplanes.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nAMC\nSubject: Project \"SIGN\"\n\n23 APR 1948\n\ne. Number of objects per sighting:\n\nObjects per sighting 1 2-5 5-10 over 10\nNumber of sightings 77 21 8 9\n\nf. Exhaust trails were reported 23 times.\n\ng. Speed has been estimated throughout the entire range from very slow or hovering to supersonic.\n\n6. Inclosures 2 and 3 are enlargements of photographs taken of Incident #40. Inclosure 4 is an evaluation of inclosure 2 by this Headquarters. Attention is invited to the marked similarity between inclosures 2 and 3, and inclosure 5. Similarity also exists between inclosures 2 and 3 and configurations illustrated in inclosure 6.\n\n7. Representatives from this Headquarters visited Dr. Irving Langmuir of the Research Laboratories, General Electric Company, Schenectady, N. Y. to discuss Project \"SIGN\". It was the opinion of this scientist that present available data does not encompass sufficient information to enable a positive identification to be made. Dr. Langmuir was reluctant to consider the so-called \"flying discs\" as a reality. However, it is believed at this Headquarters that it is possible to construct a low aspect ratio aircraft that would duplicate many of the appearance and performance characteristics of reported \"flying discs\". Experts have agreed that this would be possible through the intelligent application of boundary layer control.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nH. M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\n\n6 Incls\n1. Tabulation\n2. Photo\n3. Photo\n4. Eval of Incl 2\n5. Horten Parabola\n6. Biology of Flying Saucer\n\n2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nIncident No. | Date | Hour | Location | No. Sighted | Observed From\n\n1 | 8 Jul 47 | 0930 | Muroc Air Field, Muroc, Calif. | 2 | Ground\n1a | 8 Jul 47 | 0930 | Muroc Air Field, Muroc, Calif. | 2 | Ground\n1b | 8 Jul 47 | 0930 | Muroc Air Field, Muroc, Calif. | 2 | Ground\n1c | 8 Jul 47 | 0945 | Muroc Air Field, Muroc, Calif. | 2 | Ground\n1d | 8 Jul 47 | 1000 | Muroc Air Field, Muroc, Calif. | 3 | Ground\n1e | 8 Jul 47 | 1000 | Muroc Air Field, Muroc, Calif. | 3 | Ground\n2 | 8 Jul 47 | 1200 | Muroc Air Field, Muroc, Calif. | 1 | Ground\n3 | 7 Jul 47 | 1010 | Muroc Air Field, Muroc, Calif. | 1 | Ground\n4 | 8 Jul 47 | 1150 | Area #3, Rogers Dry Lake, Muroc Air Field, Muroc, Calif. | 1 | Ground\n5 | 4 Jul 47 | 1305 | Portland, Oregon | 5 | Ground\n6 | 4 Jul 47 | 1305 | Milwaukee, Oregon | 3 | Ground\n7 | 4 Jul 47 | 1305 | Portland, Oregon | 1 | Ground\n8 | 4 Jul 47 | 1305 | Portland, Oregon | 3 | Ground\n9 | 4 Jul 47 | 1305 | Portland, Oregon | undetermined | not stated\n10 | 4 Jul 47 | 2004 | Boise, Idaho | 5 | Air\n11 | 4 Jul 47 | not stated | Seattle, Washington | 1 | Ground\n12 | 4 Jul 47 | 1305 | Vancouver, Washington | 20-30 | Ground\n13 | 4 Jul 47 | 1400 | Portland, Oregon | 4 | Ground\n14 | 4 Jul 47 | 1630 | Portland, Oregon | 1 | Ground\n15 | 4 Jul 47 | 1700 | Portland, Oregon | 3 | Ground\n16 | 4 Jul 47 | 1100 | Mount Jefferson near Redmon, Oregon | 4 | Ground\n17 | 24 Jun 47 | 1500 | Mt. Rainier, Washington | 9 | Air\n18 | not stated | not stated | Toronto, Canada | 1 | Ground\n19 | 20 Oct 47 | 1320 | Dayton, Ohio | 2 | Ground\n20 | 20 Oct 47 | 1100 | Xenia, Ohio | 1 | Ground\n\nInc 1\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nIncident No. | Date | Hour | Location | No. Sighted | Observed From\n\n21 | 29 Jun 47 | 1645 | Des Moines, Iowa | 18 | not stated\n22 | 21 Jun 47 | about noon | Spokane, Washington | several | Ground\n23 | 30 Jun 47 | 1745 | Boise, Idaho | 1 | Ground\n24 | 12 Jun 47 | 1815 | Weiser, Idaho | 2 | Ground\n25 | 4 Jul 47 | 2345 | West Trenton, N. J. | 1 | Ground\n26 | 10 Jul 47 | not stated | Harmon Field, Newfoundland | 1 | Ground\n27 | 10 Jul 47 | 2000Z | Harmon Field, Newfoundland | 1 | Ground\n28 | 24 Jun 47 | not stated | Idaho | 1 | Ground\n29 | 23 Jun 47 | not stated | Bakersfield, Calif. | 10 | Ground\n30 | 7 Jan 48 | 1925EST | Lockbourne AB, Columbus, Ohio | 1 | Ground\n30a | 7 Jan 48 | 1925EST | Lockbourne AB, Columbus, Ohio | 1 | Ground\n30b | 7 Jan 48 | 1915EST | Lockbourne AB, Columbus, Ohio | 1 | Ground\n30c | 7 Jan 48 | 1940 | Lockbourne AB, Columbus, Ohio | 1 | Ground\n31 | mid-December early a.m. 1946 | Northern Arizona | 1 | Ground\n32 | not stated | after dark | Columbus, Ohio | 1 | Air\n33 | 7 Jan 48 | 1330-1700 | Godman Field, Ky. (south of) | 1 | Ground\n33a | 7 Jan 48 | 1400CST | Godman Field, Ky. | 1 | Ground\n33b | 7 Jan 48 | 1320CST | Godman Field, Ky. | 1 | Ground\n33c | 7 Jan 48 | 1420 CST | 210° from Godman Field, Ky. | 1 | Ground\n33d | 7 Jan 48 | 1400 | Godman Field, Ky. | 1 | Ground\n33e | 7 Jan 48 | 1430-1600 | Godman Field, Ky. | 1 | Ground\n33f | 7 Jan 48 | 1445 | Godman Field, Ky. | 1 | Air\n33g | 7 Jan 48 | 1854-1906 | Madisonville, Ky. | 1 | Ground\n34 | 13 Oct 47 | 0530 | 14 miles north of Dauphin, Manitoba, Canada | 1 | Ground\n35 | 12 Nov 47 | early a.m. | Ticonderoga at sea (40 miles south of Cape Blanco, 20 miles off shore) | 2 | Boat\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nINCIDENT No. | Date | Hour | Location | No. Sighted | Observed From\n\n36 | Not Stated | Not Stated | Boise, Idaho | 1 | Ground\n37 | 12 Oct 47 | 1200 | Cave Creek, Arizona | 1 | Ground\n38 | 10 Jun 47 | Not Stated | Budapest, Hungary | 1 | Ground\n39 | 9 Jul 47 | 2330 | Grand Falls, Newfoundland | 5 | Ground\n40 | 7 Jul 47 | 1600 | Phoenix, Arizona | 1 | Ground\n41 | 11 Jul 47 | Not Stated | Elendorf Field, Alaska | 1 | Ground\n42 | 12 Jul 47 | 0430Z | Elendorf Field, Alaska | 1 | Ground\n43 | 29 Jun 47 | 1645 | Clarion, Iowa | 18 | Ground\n44 | 28 Jun 47 | 1543 | Rockfield, Wisconsin | 7-10 | Ground\n45 | 28 Jun 47 | Afternoon | Illinois | 7-10 | Ground\n46 | 22 Jun 47 | 1130 | Greenfield, Mass. | 1 | Ground\n47 | 6 Jul 47 | Not Stated | Fairfield-Suisun Air Base, Calif. | 1 | Ground\n48 | 7 Jan 48 | 1920-1955 | Wilmington, Ohio | 1 | Ground\n48a | 7 Jan 48 | 1925 | Wilmington, Ohio | 1 | Ground\n48b | 7 Jan 48 | 1910EST | Wilmington, Ohio | 1 | Ground\n48c | 7 Jan 48 | 1930 | Wilmington, Ohio | 1 | Ground\n48d | 7 Jan 48 | 1920-1950 | Wilmington, Ohio | 1 | Ground\n49 | 9 Jan 48 | 2300-2315 | Danville, Kentucky | 1 | Ground\n50 | 10 Jan 48 | 2200 | Wildwood, New Jersey | One at this date, previously 1 each 27 Dec, 3 Jan all at 2000 o'clock. | Ground\n51 | 3 Sept 47 | 1215 | Oswego, Oregon | 12-15 | Ground\n52 | 29 Jul 47 | 1450 | Hamilton Field, California | 2 | Ground\n52a | 29 Jul 47 | After 1200 | Hamilton Field, California | 2 | Ground\n53 | 28 Jun 47 | 1515 | Lake Mead, Oregon | 5-6 | Air\n54 | 16 Jan 47 | 2230 | North Sea (50 miles from the Dutch Coast) | 1 | Air\n55 | 23 Jul 47 | 0345Z | Harmon Field, Newfoundland | 1 | Ground\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No. Date Hour Location No. Sighted Observed From\n56 6 Jul 47 2045 Birmingham, Alabama 7-10 Ground\n57 20 Jul 47 0015Z Aboard the Burgeo (at Sea one hr. from Sydney, Australia) 1 Boat\n58 4 Aug 47 Evening Bethel, Alaska 1 Air\n59 14 Sept 47 0558OCT Necker Island 1 Air\n60 10 Jul 47 1000 Cordroy, Canada 1 Ground\n61 8 Sept 47 2230 Salt Lake City, Utah 12 Ground\n62 8 Sept 47 2230-2300 Salt Lake City, Utah 5 groups each containing 35-60 objects. Ground\n63 29 Jul 47 1205 Canyon Ferry, Montana 1 Ground\n64 19 Aug 47 2130 Twin Falls, Idaho Approx. 55. Ground\n65 2 Jun 47 Not stated Rehoboth Beach, Deleware 1 Ground\n66 10 Aug 47 2100 Silver Springs, Ohio 1 Ground\n67 14 Aug 47 1600 Placerville, California 1 Ground\n68 24 Jun 47 Not stated Cascade Mountains, Portland, Oregon 6 Ground\n69 6 Aug 47 2230-2245 Philadelphia, Pa. 1 Ground\n70 6 Aug 47 1045 Philadelphia, Pa. 1 Ground\n71 8 Oct 47 Not stated Las Vegas, Nevada 1 Ground\n72 Not stated Not stated Fort Richardson, Alaska 1 Ground\n73 4 Aug 47 1600 Boston (10 miles NW) Mass. 2 Air\n74 24 Jun 47 App. 1500 Mt. Adams, Washington Not Stated Ground\n75 13 Aug 47 1300 Smoke River Canyon, Idaho 1 Ground\n76 13 Aug 47 Morning Salmon Dam, Idaho 2 Ground\n77 3 July 47 1830Z South Brookville, Maine 10 Ground\n78 30 Jun 47 0910 MST Grand Canyon, Arizona 2 Air\n79 Apr 47 1100 EST Richmond, Virginia 1, others on other occasions Ground"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No. Date Hour Location No. Sighted Observed From\n80 7 Jul 47 2230-2300EDT Arlington, Virginia 1 Ground\n81 7 Jul 47 0900 Hickam Field, Hawaii 1 Ground\n82 17 May 47 2030-2100 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 1 Ground\n83 9 Jul 47 1217 Boise (Between Boise and Meridian) Idaho 1 Air\n84 7 Jul 47 1300-1400EST Lakeland, Florida 5 Ground\n85 14 Jun 47 1200 Portland, Oregon 10 Ground\n86 6 July 47 Not stated Hollywood, California 1 Ground\n87 Not stated Not stated Habberbishopshiem (20 miles north) Germany 1 Ground\n88 3 Aug 47 Afternoon Hackensack, N. J. 1 Ground\n89 6 Jul 47 1545 Kansas City (100 miles west), Kansas 1 Air\n90 29 Jun 47 1300-1330 Las Cruces, New Mexico 1 Ground\n91 28 Jun 47 2120-2145 Maxwell Field, Alabama 1 Ground\n92 19 Jun 47 1215-1315 Colorado Springs, Colorado 1 Ground\n93 11 Jan 48 1 1630 Hartford, Connecticut 1 Air\n94 30 Dec 47 1926PST Between Great Falls, Montana and Fairfield, California 1 Air\n95 30 Dec 47 1925PST Rosedale, California 1 Air\n96 30 Dec 47 1926 Lovelock (30 miles west), Nevada 1 Ground\n97 30 Dec 47 1925PST Between Medford and Mt. Chasta, Oregon 1 Air\n98 2 Nov 47 Daybreak Houston, Texas 1 Ground\n99 3 Jan 48 Not stated Vassa, Finland 1 Ground\n100 5 Jan 48 Not stated Pretarsaari, Finland 1 Ground"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No. Observer's Occupation Maneuvers Weather\n1 1st Lt, USAF None - horizontal flight Not stated\n1a S/Sgt, USAF Not stated Not stated\n1b Unknown Not stated Not stated\n1c S/Sgt, USAF Not stated Not stated\n1d Pfc, USAF Flying in tight circle Not stated\n1e Not stated Horizontal and tight circles Not stated\n2 Maj, USAF Descended from an intermediate altitude in an oscillating fashion almost to the ground, then started climbing again to a very high altitude and moved off slowly in the distance. Not stated\n3 Major, USAF Oscillating in a downward twirling movement Not stated\n4 Capt, USAF Falling at three times the rate of a parachute Not stated\n5 Patrolman, Portland Police Dept. Dipping up and down in oscillating motion Not stated\n6 Sgt, Oregon Police Following each other Clear with little or no cloud formation\n7 Patrolman, Portland Police Dept., former Air Force pilot Not stated Clear with little or no cloud formation\n8 Patrolman, Portland Police Dept. Private pilot Straight line formation; last disc fluttered very rapidly in side-way arc Clear with little or no cloud formation\n8a Patrolman, Portland Police Dept. Private pilot Straight line formation; last disc fluttered very rapidly in side-way arc Clear with little or no cloud formation\n9 Capt., Harbor pilot Discs would oscillate and sometimes a full disc would be visible, then a half-moon shape, then nothing at all Not stated"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No. Observer's Occupation Maneuvers Weather\n10 Capt, United Airlines Straight-away horizontal flight Not stated\n11 Coast Guard Horizontal flight Not stated\n12 Deputy Sheriff Not stated Not stated\n13 Not stated Not stated Not stated\n14 Not stated Flipping around Not stated\n15 Not stated Not stated Not stated\n16 Not stated Not stated Not stated\n17 Private pilot Straight horizontal flight Clear as crystal\n18 Not stated Horizontal flight Clear\n19 Farmer Straight course - were flying about a city block apart, one behind the other Cloudless and sunny\n20 Not stated Straight course Not stated\n21 Not stated Single file Not stated\n22 Not stated Flashing Not stated\n23 Not stated Horizontal flight Not stated\n24 Not stated Shooting up and down Clear\n25 Not stated Horizontal flight Bright moonlight\n26 Mechanic Not stated Not stated\n27 TWA Representative Not stated Clear\n28 Lt Governor Not stated Not stated\n29 West Coast Pilot, 7000 hrs. Not stated Not stated\n30 Capt, USAF, Asst Operations Officer Climbing and descending vertically Solid overcast\n30a VHF/DF Operator Hovering, made three 360 turns around one place. Moved to another position and circled more. Turns required 30-40 sec. Diameter estimated at 2 miles. Overcast, 1000 ft."} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No. Observer's Occupation Maneuvers Weather\n30b Traffic Air Controller Bobbing up and down Overcast\n30c Not stated Climbing and descending High overcast\n31 Professor and Head of Aero Engineering None Clear\n32 Lt, USAF None Overcast\n33 T/Sgt, USAF None High scattered clouds Visibility unlimited.\n33a 1st Lt, USAF None High scattered\n33b PFC None Not stated\n33c Capt, USAF May have been turning High overcast with BKS\n33d Capt, USAF None High scattered, visibility unlimited\n33e Col, Ky. State Police None Clear\n33f Capt, USAF (Flight Leader NG 869) Not stated Not stated\n33g Unknown Not stated Not stated\n34 Judge None Clear\n35 Second Officer, Navy None Not stated\n36 CAA Official Not stated Not stated\n37 Pilot None Clear\n38 Hungarian Peasants Not stated Not stated\n39 Constable None CAVU\n40 Not stated Spiraled downward from 5,000 to 2,000 ft and then went upward at a 45 angle Cumulus clouds"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nIncident No. | Observer's Occupation | Maneuvers | Weather\n41 | Colonel, USAF | Not stated | Not stated\n42 | Major, USAF | Not stated | Not stated\n43 | Bus Driver | None | Not stated\n44 | Not stated | None | Not stated\n45 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n46 | Not stated | None | Cloud banks.\n47 | Captain, USAF | Rolled from side to side | Not stated\n48 | Major, USAF | Ascending and descending | Not stated\n48a | T/Sgt | Up and down and side to side | Cold and clear with few scattered clouds.\n48b | Cpl. | Ascending and descending | Light scattered clouds with haze towards S/W.\n48c | S/Sgt | Ascending and descending very rapidly | Clear with overcast in S/W.\n48d | Not stated | Ascending and descending | Clear to scattered.\n49 | Not stated | None | Not stated\n50 | Knitting designer | Approaching shore from Ocean then rise and fall slowly. | Not stated\n51 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n52 | Capt, USAF, ASST. Operations Officer and instructor Pilot | Horizonal left to right, right to left like a guard in an airplane formation. | Clear\n52a | 1st Lt. in Air Reserves former B-29 Pilot | Similar to a fighter aircrafts maneuvers when accompanying heavier ships. | Not stated\n53. | 1st Lt, USAF, Pilot | Horizonal very close formation | Not stated\n54 | Mosquito Pilot | Efficient controlled evasive action | Not stated\n55 | Government Employee | Abrupt darts | High scattered condition visibility 15 miles.\n56 | S/Sgt, USAF | Traveling in a definite arc. | Not stated\nNND 927545"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nIncident No. | Observer's Occupation | Maneuvers | Weather\n57 | Bridge Construction | Not stated | Clear and dark.\n58 | Chief Pilot-Flying service | Not stated | Not stated\n59 | Pilot | None | Not stated\n60 | Storekeeper | Not Stated | Clear at dusk\n61 | Not stated | None | Not stated\n62 | Not stated | Not stated | Cloudy\n63 | Not stated | Hovering and fluttering, rising and descending. | Scattered small clouds.\n64 | Executive Director of Housing Authority. | Horizonal | Overcast\n65 | Pilot | Not stated | Not stated\n66 | Lt. Col, GSC Scientific Branch Research Group. | Horizonal Flight | Not stated\n67 | Insurance Adjuster | None | Clear\n68 | Prospector | Banking | Clear\n69 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n70 | Insurance Agent | Not stated | Clear\n71 | Capt. AC Reserves | Not stated | Clear\n72 | Army Officer | Not stated | Cloud formation scattered above 10000 ft.\n73 | Navigator (Constellation type aircraft) | Not stated | 5/10 scattered cumulus with tops at 10000, visibility 10 miles.\n74 | Prospector | Standing on edge and banking in the clouds. | Not stated\n75 | Trout Farm Oper. | Rode up and down over the hills and hollows of the canyon floor. | Not stated\n76 | County Commissioner | Not stated | Not stated\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nIncident No. | Observer's Occupation | Maneuvers | Weather\n77 | Astronomer | Not stated | Not stated\n78 | Lt, USN (PBO Pilot | Not stated | Not stated\n79 | Weather reporter | Not stated | Clear\n80 | Lt. Col, USAF | Not stated | Scattered clouds visibility 10-12 miles.\n81 | Civil Service Employee | Ascending slowly | Cloudy\n82 | Field Engineer | Not stated | Not stated\n83 | Pilot | Slow roll or barrel | Some clouds\n84 | Sign Painter | Climbing | Clear-scattered clouds\n85 | Private Pilot | Not stated | Not stated\n86 | Not stated | Turned a corner and seemed to roll. | Clear\n87 | U. S. Army | Descended slowly and then dropped in a spiral motion. | Not stated\n88 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n89 | Major, USAF | Not stated | CAVU\n90 | Administrative Asst, Rocket Sonde Section | Not stated | Clear\n91 | Captain | Traveling in zig-zag course | Clear\n92 | Railroad Employees | Climbing, diving and reversal of direction which happened every few seconds. | Clear and sunny\n93 | Capt, USAF | Shooting towards the east at 45 degree angle | Not stated\n94 | Lt Col, Hq, EPW | Descending vertically - seemed to slow down on nearing the earth | Not stated\n95 | C-47 crew | Not stated | Not stated\n96 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n97 | Airplane crew | Not stated | Not stated\n98 | Immigration Service | Appeared to be spinning in its descent | Not stated\n99 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n100 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\nCONFIDENTIAL\nNND 927545"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nIncident No. | Color | Shape | Size | Sound\n1 | Silvery | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n1a | | | | \n1b | | | | \n1c | Silvery | Saucer shaped | Not stated | None\n1d | Reflected the sun's rays | Disc | Not stated | Not stated\n1e | Silvery | Disc | Not stated | None\n2 | Aluminum colored surface | Thin metallic object, unconventional shape | Pursuit ship | Not stated\n3 | Yellowish-white | Spherical | 5-10 ft, diameter | Not stated\n4 | White aluminum | Distinct oval outline; two projections on upper surface which might have been thick fins or nobs. These crossed each other at intervals, suggesting either rotation or oscillation of slow type | 50 ft. | None\n5 | Not stated | Round | Not stated | None\n6 | Whitish-brown | Disc | Not stated | None\n7 | Aluminum | Disc | Not determined | None\n8 | White | Disc | Out of sight before detailed observation made | None\n8a | White | Disc | Out of sight before detailed observation made | None\n9 | Like shiny chromium hub cap | Disc | Not stated | Not stated\n10 | Not stated | Thin and smooth on bottom; rough appearing on top | Not stated | Not stated\nCONFIDENTIAL\nNND 927545"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nIncident No. | Color | Shape | Size | Sound\n11 | White | Saucer | Not stated | Not stated\n12 | Not stated | Like flock of geese | Not stated | Low humming sound\n13 | Resembled metallic | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n14 | Like a new dime | Like a new dime | Like a new dime | Not stated\n15 | Silver | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n16 | Not stated | Disc | Not stated | Not stated\n17 | Mirror bright | Approximately circular, no tail | Diameter equal to distance between outboard engines of DC 4 | Not stated\n18 | Yellow | Ball | Not stated | Not stated\n19 | Reflected the sun brilliantly | Like cigars - much longer than wide | Not stated | None\n20 | Silver | Round | About 12 inches in diameter | None\n21 | Dirty white | Between circle and oval - inverted saucer | 175-250 ft. diameter 12 ft. thick | Like electric motor or dynamo\n22 | Shiny silvery | Slim body | Quite large | Not stated\n23 | Bright and silvery | Half-circle | Not stated | Not stated\n24 | Glistened in sun | Too far away to determine shape | Too far away to determine shape | None\n25 | Luminous | Flying saucer - no tail | Not stated | Not stated\n26 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n27 | Silvery | Circular in shape like a wagon wheel | Same span as C-54 at 10,000 ft. | Not stated\n28 | Not stated | Comet-like | Not stated | Not stated\n29 | Not stated | Almost round | Not stated | Not stated\n30 | White (light) | Not stated | Not stated | None\nCONFIDENTIAL\nNND 927545"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No.\tColor\tShape\tSize\tSound\n30a\tAmber\tRound or oval\tC-47 airplane\tNone\n30b\tBright white to amber\tCone-shaped, blunt on top and tapering off toward bottom\tEnormous\tNone\n30c\tWhite (light)\tRound\tComparable to runway light\tNone\n31\tWhite\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNone\n32\tAmber\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNone\n33\tSun flashes on metal or metallic\tRoughly circular\tAt the distance and altitude the object appeared to be the size of silver dollar\tNone\n33a\tWhite or luminous. Turned to be more red as the sun set\tRound tending to be conical\tUnknown - altitude and distance too great\tNone\n33b\tNot stated\tCone, topped with red\tNot stated\tNone\n33c\tSilver with shadow\tRaindrop\tUnknown - believed to be large\tUnknown\n33d\tWhite\tRound at times - cone shaped\tUncertain because of distance\tNone\n33e\tWhite\tRound\t1/4 size full moon\tNone\n33f\tMetallic\tNot stated\tTremendous\tNot stated\n33g\tNot stated\tCone\t100 ft. high, 43 ft. across\tNone\n34\tRedish tinge\tRound\tLarge grapefruit\tNone\n35\tFire color\tBall\tNot stated\tNot stated\n36\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n37\tReddish with blue background. Black with white background\tNot stated\t3 ft. from point of view\tNone\n38\tSilver\tBall\tNot stated\tNot stated"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No.\tColor\tShape\tSize\tSound\n39\tPhosphorus\tEgg-shaped discs\tNot stated\tNot stated\n40\tGray\tElliptical\t20-30 ft.\tNoise like jet aircraft prior to its appearance. No audible sound heard while object was in view.\n41\tAluminum\tRound\t3 ft. diameter\tNot stated\n42\tGrayish\tBalloon\t10 ft diameter\tNot stated\n43\tDirty white\tBetween a circle and an oval (Inverted saucer)\t12 ft thick and 175-250 ft diameter\tElectric Motor or dynamo\n44\tNot stated\tFlying Saucers (not actually described as being this shape)\tNot stated\tNone\n45\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n46\tSilvery white\tRound\tSmall\tNot stated\n47\tNo definite color top side reflected light.\tNo definite shape\tC-54 airplane\tNot determined due to the noise of airplane.\n48\tRed\tFlaming Red cone\tNot stated\tNot stated\n48a\tBright light changing to red then to white or yellow\tCircular-like a star in the sky only larger.\tVery large compared to an aeroplane light.\tNone\n48b\tRed - when descending\tCone\tNot determined\tNot stated\n48c\tRed when moving then green and black to red.\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n48d\tYellow or flame colored.\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n49\tNot stated\tPencil shaped object\tNot stated\tNot stated"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No.\tColor\tShape\tSize\tSound\n50\tStated as queer light.\tReferred to as saucer but not stated as being of this definite shape.\tNot stated\tNot stated\n51\tSilver\tRound\tNot stated\tNot stated\n52\tWhite, shiny\tCircular like a ball on the bottom but not completely round.\t15-25 ft Diameter\tNot stated\n52a\tMilk white\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNone\n53\tWhite\tCircular\t36 inches diameter\tNot stated\n54\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n55\tRedish\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNone\n56\tDim glow of light\tRound\t2 ft. diameter\tNone\n57\tSilver to Red\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n58\tBlack\tSaucer (not definitely stated as being this shape)\tLarger than C-54 airplane\tNot stated\n59\tIncandescent light without appreciable blue and no reddish tinge.\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n60\tFlame color\tDisc shaped (the after glow made it look like a cone)\tBarrel Head, dinner plate and the size of a plane flying high.\tNot stated\n61\tWhite and illuminated\tNot stated\tSize of Pigeons\tNot stated\n62\tYellowish white\tNot stated\tSmall\tNot stated\n63\tGleamed and Shimmered\tDisc (not actually stated as being of this shape)\t3 ft. diameter and of no great thickness.\tNot stated\n64\tColor similar to electric light.\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n65\tNot stated\tNot stated\t15 inches diameter\tNot stated\n66\tBright Orange\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n67\tMutal color highly polished chromium.\ttop surface slightly curved-larger in front than in the rear.\t4-6 ft in length and 10-14 inches wide.\tNot stated"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No.\tColor\tShape\tSize\tSound\n68\tNot stated\tDisc - appeared to have a tail.\t30 ft diameter\tNone\n69\tWhite\tNot stated\tNot stated\tBuzzing sound.\n70\tNot stated\tGiant fire cracker\tNot stated\tBuzzing sound not as loud as a rocket ship.\n71\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n72\tSilver\tSphere( was not like saucer or disc.\t2-3 ft diameter\tNot stated\n73\tDeep Gold\tElliptical\t15 ft long 2-3 ft in length.\tNot stated\n74\tNot stated\tTapered sharpely to a point in the front end.\t30 ft. diameter\tNone\n75\tSky blue\tOblong like a broad rim hat with a low crown.\t20 ft. long and 10 ft. thick.\tMade a swishing sound.\n76\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tLike the echo of a motor.\n77\tLight colored\tOnly concrete evidence of form appeared on the left tangent of the group.\t50-100 ft wide.\tLoud roar\n78\tLight gray\tCircular\t8 ft. diameter\tNot stated\n79\tSilver\tNot stated\tLarger than a Pibal balloon when observed through a theodolite.\tNot stated\n80\tReflected white light.\t\"Blob\"\tSmall airplane\tNone\n81\tSilver\tLarge Balloon with silver disc below it, no attaching cables were noticed.\tLarge\tNot stated\n82\tProsty white\tRound and flat\tEqual to bulk of 6 each, B-29 airplanes with diameter to thickness ratio of 10-1.\tA slight swishing.\n83\tBlack\tRound\tTwenty-five cent piece.\tNot stated"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No.\tColor\tShape\tSize\tSound\n84\tShinny\tRound\tNot stated\tMore or less Shrill.\n85\tNot stated\tResembled the XF5U-1.\tNot stated\tNot stated\n86\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n87\tNotStated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n88\tNot stated\tFlying disc (not actually described as being of this shape)\tNot stated\tNot stated\n89\tSilvery\tRound disc shaped object\t30-50 ft. diameter\tNot stated\n90\tReflected light\tUniform with no protuberances such as wings of an airplane\tNot stated\tNot stated\n91\tLight\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNone\n92\tSilver\tNot stated\tSmall\tNot stated\n93\tBluish center with red on its edges\tAppeared to be a disc\tResembled a shooting star; however, observers not certain\tNot stated\n94\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n95\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n96\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n97\tFlash of light\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n98\tBright light\tAlmost round or perhaps oval or saucer-shaped\t26-30 miles diameter\tNot stated\n99\tShining\tBrightly shining object with long tail\tNot stated\tNot stated\n100\tShining\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nIncident No. | Exhaust Trail | Heading | Altitude Ft. | Speed | Effect on Clouds\n1 | None | 320° | 1000-8000 ft. | 300 mph | Not stated\n1a\n1b\n1c | Not stated | Northwest | 7500-8000 ft. | 350-400 mph | Not stated\n1d | Not stated | Northwest | 7000-8000 ft. | 300-400 mph | Not stated\n1e | Not stated | Northwest | 8000 ft. | 300-400 mph | Not stated\n2 | Not stated | Not stated | From very near the ground to very high | Not stated | Not stated\n3 | Not stated | West to east | 10000-12000 ft. | 200-225 mph | Not stated\n4 | Not stated | North of due east | Under 20000 ft. | Slower than maximum speed of P-80 | Not stated\n5 | Not stated | Two flying south - 3 flying east | Not stated | Great speed | Not stated\n6 | Not stated | Northwesterly | Undetermined | Terrific | Not stated\n7 | None | Southwest | 30000 ft. | Terrific - faster than any object ever seen by him | Not stated\n8 | None- | South | 40000 ft. | Terrific | Not stated\n8a | None | South | 40000 ft. | Terrific | Not stated\n9 | Not stated | South | High over Globe Mills | Terrific | Not stated\n10 | None | Northwest | Not stated | Cruised for 45 min. at conventional airline speed (180 mph) then rapidly disappeared | Not stated\n11 | Not stated | Over north end of Lake Washington | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\nNND 927545\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nIncident No. | Exhaust Trail | Heading | Altitude Ft. | Speed | Effect on Clouds\n12 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n13 | Not stated | 3 west to east. 1 north | Did not appear very high | Traveling so fast they were out of sight in east in 2-4 seconds | Not stated\n14 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Moving slowly over sandy district | Not stated\n15 | Not stated | 1 headed southeast. 2 headed northeast | High | Not stated | Not stated\n16 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n17 | Not stated | north to south about 170° | 9500 ft. | Not stated | Not stated\n18 | Trail streaming out behind like vapor trail behind airplane on misty day | Seen hover west end of Toronto | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n19 | Like slight trace of steam. Disappeared immediately. | West to east | One mile high | Very fast | Not stated\n20 | Not stated | Southwest | About 1500 ft. | Fast | Not stated\n21 | Not stated | N.N.W. | 1200 ft. | About 300 mph | Not stated\n22 | Not stated | S.W. of S. | 7000 ft. | Slower than two-motored army plane | Not stated\n23 | Not stated | Not stated | 3000 ft. | Not stated | Not stated\n24 | Cloud-like vapor - retained shape and persisted for over an hour | Southeast | Very high | Very fast | Not stated\nNND 927545\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nIncident No. | Exhaust Trail | Heading | Altitude Ft. | Speed | Effect on Clouds\n25 | Not stated | East | High | Fast | Not stated\n26 | Bluish-black | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Cut a clear path through clouds\n27 | Bluish-black 15 mi. long | Not stated | 10000 ft. | Fast | Seemed to cut clouds open\n28 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Did not move. Seemed to go below horizon with rotation of earth | Not stated\n29 | Not stated | 10 flying north; on reverse course there were only 7 | High | 300-400 mph | Not stated\n30 | None (appeared to have bluish streaks out from sides) | West | 3000 | Slow | Not stated\n30a | Five times length of object | 120° | From very near ground to 1000 ft. | 500 mph after it started to leave vicinity | Not stated\n30b | Small streak trailing object | S.S.W. | 2000-3000ft. | Exceeding 500 mph | Not stated\n30c | Not stated | Not stated | different altitudes | Motionless | Not stated\n31 | White, heavy | West to east | 20000-50000 ft. | 600-200 mph | Not stated\n32 | None | Stationary | 3000 ft. | Stationary | None\n33 | None | None visible | Unknown | none visible | None\n33a | None | 210° from Godman Field | Extremely high | Stationary | None\n33b | None | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\nNND 927545\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nIncident No. | Exhaust Trail | Heading | Altitude Ft. | Speed | Effect on Clouds\n33c | Not seen | Appeared to be stationary. | Very high. | Appeared to be stationary. | None\n33d | None | 210° from Godman Fld. | Uncertain-very high. | Stationary. | Could be seen through cirrus\n33e | None | 210° from Godman Fld. | 25000 ft. | Stationary. | None\n33f | Not stated | Approx. 210° from Godman Fld. | 15000 ft. | 500 mph | Not stated\n33g | Not stated | Southwest | 4 miles | 10 mph | Not stated\n34 | None | West to east | Not stated | Speed of a meteor or falling star. | None\n35 | Stream of fire. | Northwesterly | Not stated | 700-900 mph | Not stated\n36 | Not stated | Northeast | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n37 | Not stated | Northeast | 8000-10000 ft. | 350 mph | Not stated\n38 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n39 | None | East | 30000 ft. | Very fast | Not stated\n40 | Not stated | Appeared from northeast. | 5000 ft. | 400-600 mph | Not stated\n41 | Not stated | South | Not stated | Great | Not stated\n42 | Not stated | Northwest | 1500 | 100 mph | Not stated\n43 | Not stated | First group S S/E, second group N/W. | 1200 | 300 mph | Not stated\n44 | Not stated | South | Not stated | Fast | Not stated\n45 | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n46 | Not stated | Northwesterly | 1000 | Faster than an airplane. | Not stated\n47 | Not stated | Southwesterly | 10000 | Faster than any aircraft he had ever seen. | Not stated\n48 | Gaseous green mist. | S/W when it left the vicinity. | Not stated | Gained and lost altitude at a terrific rate. | Not stated\nNND 927545\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nIncident No. | Exhaust Trail | Heading | Altitude Ft. | Speed | Effect on Clouds\n48a | Very faint exhaust trail when moving. | S/W when it left the vicinity. | Not stated | Left vicinity at very high speed. | Not stated\n48b | Greenish mist when descending. | S/W when it left the vicinity. | Not stated | Not stated | Not stated\n48c | Not stated | 210 degrees when it left the vicinity. | 15000-20000 | Not stated | Not stated\n48d | None | Approximately due west when it left the vicinity. | From 4000 to very high. | Slow | Not stated\n49 | Long trail of smoke. | West | Very high | Not stated | Not stated\n50 | Not stated | Shoreward | Not stated but said to be quite close. | Slow until over land then higher speed while leaving. | Not stated\n51 | Not stated | Not stated | High | Not stated | Not stated\n52 | None | Southward | 8000-10000 | Made a P-80 look like it was motionless in the air. | Not stated\n52a | Not stated | 120° | 6000 | Approximately 750 mph. | Not stated\n53 | Not stated | 120° | 6000 | 285 mph. | Not stated\n54 | Not stated | North Sea to Norfolk | 22000 | Equal to or greater than a British Mosquito. | Not stated\n55 | Not stated | NNE | 10000 | High velocity, stated to be faster than conventional airplane. | Not stated\n56 | Not stated | South East | 2000 ft | 500-600 mph. Not stated | Not stated\nNND 927545\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No.\tExhaust Trail\tHeading\tAltitude Ft.\tSpeed\tEffect on Clouds\n57\tNot stated\tNNE (30° E of true North on horizonal plane.\t30° off the horizon at an estimated 1/4 mile range.\tHigh velocity, stated to be faster than a tracer bullet.\tNot stated\n58\tNot stated\tN/W\t1000\t510 mph.\tNot stated\n59\tNot stated\t350° later changed to 109°.\t9500-10000\t1000 knots\tNot stated\n60\tLight flame color.\tFrom N/W heading Eastward.\t6000\tVery high velocity.\tNot stated\n61\tNot stated\tNorthern\t2000-3000\tFaster than birds.\tNot stated\n62\tNot stated\tNot stated\tSeveral thousand ft.\tHigh rate of speed.\tNot stated\n63\tNot stated\tNortheasterly\t3000\tTremendous Speed.\tNot stated\n64\tNot stated\tNortheasterly\tNot stated\tTerrific\tNot stated\n65\tNot stated\tWest to East\t1000\t1000-1200mph\tNot stated\n66\tLong straight white streak similar to the streak left by a tracer bullet.\tNorth to South\tLow\tRequired 3-4 seconds to travel 70° arc.\tNot stated\n67\tWhite trail of smoke.\tNot stated\t500-1000\tTerrific\tNot stated\n68\tNot stated\tSoutheasterly\t6000\tNot stated\tNot stated\n69\tThin streak of greyish color.\tSouth\tNot stated\tVery fast.\tNot stated\n70\tEither smoke or condensation lasting 2 seconds.\tNE to SW\t1000-3000\t400-500\tNot stated\n71\tMay have been smoke or vapor from intense speed, was almost white.\tSoutheast then turned and went west.\tNot stated\t7000000\tNot stated"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No.\tExhaust Trail\tHeading\tAltitude Ft.\tSpeed\tEffect on Clouds\n72\tNone\tSouth\tBelow 10000\tTremendous\tNot stated\n73\tNone\tEasterly approximately 110° magnetic.\t7000\t175 mph\tNot stated\n74\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tGreater than anything ever witnessed.\tNot Stated\n75\tNone\tEast to west\t75\tNot stated\tNot stated\n76\tNot stated\tNot stated\t4000-6000\tNot stated\tNot stated\n77\tNot stated\tNorthwest(True)\tNot stated\t600-1200\tNot stated\n78\tNot stated\tStraight down.\tDecreasing from approximately 25000.\tInconceivable\tNot stated\n79\tNot stated\tEast to West\tLess than 15000\tNot stated\tNot stated\n80\tNone\tSoutheast\tLess than 500\tComputed at 1350 mph, however appeared to move with the speed of a jet aircraft.\tNot stated\n81\tNot stated\tNorthwest\t6000\tNot stated\tNot stated\n82\tNone\t350°\t10000-18000\tThree times that of a jet aircraft.\tNot stated\n83\tNot stated\tNot stated\t11000\tNot stated\tNot stated\n84\tNot stated\tNortheast\t7500\tNot stated\tNot stated\n85\tNot stated\tNorth\t8500\t350 mph\tNot stated\n86\tNot stated\tNorthward\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n87\tNot stated\tNot stated\tfrom 5000\tNot stated\tNot stated\n88\tNot stated\tNot stated\t200 yards\tmoving rapidly\tNot stated\n89\tNot stated\tEast\t11000\t210 mph\tNot stated"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident No.\tExhaust Trail\tHeading\tAltitude Ft.\tSpeed\tEffect on Clouds\n90\tOne witness thought he saw vapor trails\tNortherly\t8000-10000\tNot stated\tNot stated\n91\tNot stated\tDisappeared in the southwest\tGreat height\tHigh rate of speed\tNot stated\n92\tNot stated\tWest\tAbove 1000\tGreat speed\tNot stated\n93\tNone\tDropped from sight on north side of Mt. Tom near Holyoke, Mass.\tNot stated\tVery high velocity\tNot stated\n94\tGreen and blue flames\tDescending vertically\tFrom 13000\tVery high rate of speed\tNot stated\n95\tSeveral colors of flames - red and green predominating\tEastward\tLow\tVery high rate of speed\tNot stated\n96\tNot stated\tNot stated\t1200-1300\tNot stated\tNot stated\n97\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n98\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n99\tNot stated\tWest to east\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated\n100\tGrey streaks were left in sky\tNorth to south\tNot stated\tNot stated\tNot stated"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTE: Incident #18\n\nIt has now been definitely determined that both the photograph and story were a hoax, perpetrated for publicity and money.\n\nIncident #84\n\nThe person making the report on this incident was determined to be an excitable person, very talkative, and possessing an exaggerated imagination and inclined to impress people with his continuous chatter."} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORTED DIRECTIONS OF FLIGHT\nNW 63\nN 38\nNE 9\nE 22\nW 5\nSW 14\nSE 22\nS 34\nCircling 15\nStraight down 3\nDirection Indefinite 64\nDirection Not Stated 61\nWhere an undetermined number of objects were reported the minimum number of objects are plotted. Same object reported by different people only shown once."} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Identification of Subject Matter (as per sample)\n\nMCIA MCIT 19 Feb 48 1\n\n1. Reference is made to the films taken by Mr. Rhoades (Incident #40) which were forwarded for examination. The following data were derived from a study of the specimen:\n\na. It is concluded that the image is of true photographic nature, and is not due to imperfections in the emulsion, or lack of development in the section in question. The image exhibits a \"tail\" indicating the proper type of distortion due to the type of shutter used, the speed of the object and the fixed speed of the shutter. This trailing off conforms to the general information given in the report.\n\nb. The report states the object was seen at approximately 2000 feet at the time of exposure. The observer also reports being able to see clearly a canopy of enclosure. The visual acuity of an average person would allow for this perception, but certainly not much further as the subject had low visual contrast, being gray against a gray sky. If we can establish the distance from camera to subject, we will have quantity #1. The report states that a 620 camera was used, indicating several possibilities, since the 620 is nomenclature for the spooling and width of the film we may have negatives 2 1/4 x 2 1/4\", 2 1/4 x 3 1/4\" and 2 1/4 x 4 1/4\". The sample submitted had been cut and it was not possible to establish the exact frame size. The 2 1/4 x 2 1/4\" size was ruled out, leaving 2 1/4 x 3 1/4\" and 2 1/4 x 4 1/4\". If it were the former, then the focal length of the lens would be 4\", and using 2000 feet as the approximate subject distance and the image size at 7/64\", we have an approximate size of 44 feet as the diagonal of the object. Now if we choose the latter value of 5\" for focal length, we have an approximate value of 55' for the diagonal. Points of measurement are indicated from x to x on Exhibit \"A\"."} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Exhibit \"A\""} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEBRUARY 13, 1948 185 THE AEROPLANE\nThe Biology of the Flying Saucer—I\nThe Story of Low Aspect Ratio Aircraft\nBy A. R. Weyl, A.F.R.Ae.S.\nSEVERAL MONTHS AGO people on both sides of the Atlantic rushed into print with claims of having observed queer saucer-shaped aircraft which flew very fast. Some maintained, indeed, that they had seen squadrons of such mysterious objects; others described vividly how these celestial saucers were able to descend vertically. All agreed on the saucer-like shape.\nSceptics considered that, for non-aeronautical people living far from the former playgrounds of V.1, V.2, and all the rest of Hitler's \"civilizatory\" practices, flying saucers might indeed constitute phenomena of threatening aspect, from their experience of domestic disagreements. Doctors, however, hastened to assure the World that saucer-shaped or lenticular objects could well be nothing more than specks in the lenses of the eyes of the observers—the so-called musae volantes associated with high blood pressure. Teetotallers blamed the sorry consequences of imbibing intoxicating liquors for the observations. On the other hand, the U.S. Air Force considered the matter serious enough to warrant investigations into the incidents which had been reported.\nIn the meantime, the occurrence of Flying Saucers has ceased to be news. Presumably, they have all landed. [A new crop was reported in THE AEROPLANE for January 16 last under the heading \"Tuppence Coloured.\"—ED.]\nAeronautical Antiquities and Iniquities\nAs a matter of fact, saucer-shaped aeroplanes are not quite as new as some people have tried to make out. (Fig. 1.) Quite a number of aircraft have been constructed and flown with wings of the ring or disc type which could well have been mistaken for saucers, hat-brims, spades, doughnuts, diamonds, Greek letters, pancakes, flat-fish, geometrical symbols, dinner plates, and other entirely non-aeronautical commodities.\nMoreover, it is quite true, and not even a minor secret, that, at present, aeronautical engineers are paying increased attention to such queer wing shapes; disc wings, for instance, permit certain disadvantages of conventional wings to be overcome. It is even thought that such shapes have been neglected too long.\nThe blame for their neglect can be ascribed to the doctrine of the induced drag. When the Lanchester-Prandtl aerofoil theory became recognized nearly 30 years ago, and when the sailplane movement proved that slender wings were a necessity for soaring, designers began striving after \"good\" aspect ratios. The theory blinded their eyes against the possibilities of other than conventional wings. This, however, was not the fault of the theory, as Prandtl soon showed its restrictions.\nWe have now come to reconsider the matter of wing shape in an objective way, as it is quite possible that aircraft design is approaching a cul-de-sac so long as it retains its bias in"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE AEROPLANE 186 FEBRUARY 13, 1948\nfavour of the \"well-tried\" convention of \"normal\" wings. For these reasons, a study of the history of the use of low aspect ratios in wing design will be of interest.\nSpiritually, the fathers of such aeronautical exhibits were Englishmen. They were people of good reputation and by no means suspect of aerodynamic perversion.\nF. W. Lanchester was undoubtedly the first aerodynamicist to give thought to aeroplane wings of circular or square shape. In his book published in 1907, he referred expressively to such \"apteroid\" wing shapes (Fig. 2) and advanced the view that Newton's law was valid for these. The correctness of this view was experimentally proved 30 years later.\nIn a previous article on \"Stalling Characteristics of Tailless Aeroplanes\" (THE AEROPLANE for August 15, 1947), the early interest taken by F. (now Sir Frederick) Handley Page in the stalling qualities of wings of low aspect ratio was mentioned. He showed, in a paper read in April, 1911, that marginal vortices and pressure-equalizing flow around the tips were responsible for the delay of flow separation which had been observed at high incidences.\nHe stated, in this connection:—\"... With planes of high aspect ratio (i.e., with slender wings of normal span/chord ratio), there is not the same facility for the \"feeding in\" of fresh air at the plane sides (i.e., at the wing tips) to act as a link between the plane and the live stream, and therefore the live stream leaves the plane's back at an earlier stage than in the case of the plane of lower aspect ratio. . . .\" He then showed some experimental evidence for the delay of flow separation with decrease of the aspect ratio and for the greater maximum lift of such wings.\nWhen Lanchester published his book, man was just beginning to spread his wings, and in order to fly with a minimum expenditure in power, wings of fair aspect ratio were a necessity. Nevertheless, there were a few early aeroplanes, notably the little \"Demoiselle\" monoplane of Santos Dumont (1909-1910), which had an aspect ratio of only 2 and proved to be quite successful.\nOne of the earliest attempts at a genuine \"apteroid\" aeroplane was an experiment by a German architect, Flick-Reinig (1910). It had a span of 7½ ft., and performed in hops only.\nAnnular Aerodynamics\nA simple experiment with some paper and a pair of scissors shows that the sinking speed of a circular disc loaded with a paper clip is decreased when a hole of sufficient diameter is cut out in the centre (Fig. 3). This justifies the development from the circular disc wing to the annular aerofoil. The theory of the phenomenon is still somewhat obscure.\n(Having tried this experiment, we can confirm that the characteristics of an annular aerofoil are certainly very different from those of the plain disc aerofoil. Our own experiments were admittedly somewhat limited in scope and we were unable to form more than an impression of the relative sinking speeds; it did, however, appear to be less with the annular aerofoil. Our main conclusions were that cutting a 2.25-in. diameter hole in a 5.375-in. diameter disc, resulted in a much flatter glide; the stall was not so abrupt, and the stability in the glide was improved. We were so fascinated with the experiment that we hope to repeat it at a later date on a more scientific level.—ED.)\nThe conventional aeroplane is constituted of two basic aerofoils: a wing (which supplies the lift) and a tail (which balances and stabilizes the wing). We know that such an arrangement of the two aerofoil components is by no means the only possible one. The balancing and stabilizing aerofoil (tailplane) need not to be aft of the lifting wing as a tail. It can be arranged anywhere in relation to the wing, e.g., above it, below it, or in front of it.\nIf the balancing aerofoil is in front of the main wing, the aeroplane is of the tail-first type, and if it is attached to the\nFig. 5. Kitchen's doughnut of 1911.\nFig. 3.—A simple experiment in annular aerofoils.\nFig. 4.—Principle of the Huth annular-biplane system.\nmain wing, the tailless aeroplane is created. For all these arrangements, the condition is that, in the case of a wing comprised of normal (unstable) aerofoil sections, the stabilizing aerofoil exerts a certain leverage in relation to the centre of gravity of the aircraft.\nAnother possibility is to combine two lifting wings so that they will stabilize and balance each other. For this purpose, all that is required is that the front wing shall possess, at all incidences of flight, a greater effective incidence than the rear wing. In other words, the centre of gravity must be nearer to the leading wing than to the trailing wing, and the whole arrangement must be balanced accordingly. In this way, we arrive at the conception of a stable tandem aeroplane.\nIf we now take such a tandem arrangement and sweep the leading wing back and the trailing wing correspondingly forward so that the tips of both wings merge into each other, we obtain an annular or ring-shaped wing system. Aerodynamically, it is of minor importance if the shape is actually circular or oval, or if triangular or quadrangular shapes constitute the wing. For simplicity's sake, in all such cases considered here, the term \"annular\" is applied.\nAs mentioned, the aerodynamics of such shapes cannot yet be considered as fully established. But it is proved that longitudinally stable wing systems can be obtained with such shapes. Some types relying on such wings have shown quite remarkable flying qualities. It is also possible that, with annular wings, the induced drag is less than with conventional wings of equivalent aspect ratio.\nIn common with circular wings, annular wings have the remarkable property that the lift force steadily increases with incidence up to fairly high values without a stall. For all known arrangements the maximum lift seems to occur at incidences exceeding 30 degrees. As such high angles of incidence are not likely to be reached in flight unintentionally, it is obvious why annular wings have become renowned for their good-natured flying characteristics.\nAnother property of annular wings (first established by Tilghman Richards) is that the centre of pressure of such wing systems is nearly stationary in flight, or that a travel of the centre of pressure can be obtained which is positively stable until incidences of the order of 18 degrees are reached. In fact, no case of longitudinal instability has ever been reported with an annular wing, although the centre of gravity has often been located dangerously far back.\nThe first annular-wing aeroplane dates back to 1908. It had little success. Two types were constructed in succession to the designs of a capable German aeronautical engineer, Fritz Huth, who was by profession a teacher at a technical school (Figs. 4 and 6). The second type, which had a less elaborate airscrew drive, flew in May, 1910; it was, however, so devoid of performance, in spite of a 50 b.h.p. engine, that it was soon afterwards discarded as a hopeless proposition.\nBritain's First Doughnut\nThe British conception of the idea has been far more successful. As it is constituted, until now, the best tried representative, its history may be given somewhat more extensively.\nThe original idea for an annular-wing aeroplane came from G. A. Kitchen, in about 1910; he constructed a biplane with ring-shaped wings, but made no progress with it. The stable"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEBRUARY 13, 1948 187 THE AEROPLANE\nflight of Kitchen's models, however, convinced Cedric Lee that an aeroplane of such design would be a success, and late in 1910 he acquired the patents. At the same time, G. Tilghman Richards, who was a qualified aeronautical engineer, became sufficiently interested in the matter to give up a budding engineering bureau in order to join Cedric Lee and to devote his energy to the idea of a \"safety\" aeroplane.\nTilghman Richards began with systematic experiments on models and on large gliders. Later, careful wind-tunnel tests (including the observation of the pressure distribution) were made by him in a 2-ft. tunnel he had constructed at East London College and also in tunnels of the National Physical Laboratory. The preparation of the design was, therefore, uncommonly careful for this early period of 1911-1914.\nIn order to appreciate the intentions for the development, the following quotation from a paper read by Tilghman Richards in about 1912 is illuminating:—\n\"... The very fact of high lift occurring at small angles means the provision of large area for landing speed resulting in an inefficient attitude of the plane at high speed; and the inherent instability of curved aerofoils means a continual dependence on extraneous controls carried at some distance from the wing by heavy and redundant structure. ... High lift at small angles is useless, likewise high lift/drag ratio at small angles, and what is required is the reversal of the normal type of lift curve giving little lift at small angles with low value of the lift/drag ratio for landing. ...\"\nSeen from our present state of knowledge and development, and facing the burning problems of personal aircraft for the man in the street, it would seem that this opinion is a very good argument for further experimentation along the lines indicated.\nThe experience with powered aeroplanes was at first beset with disappointments. Famine Point, Heysham, was apparently not a spot from which aeronautical experimenters could derive any comfort.\nThe original Kitchen biplane with a 50 b.h.p. rotary engine was wrecked by a gale, during 1911, before flight tests could be made. After reconstruction some flights were performed with it at Shoreham during 1911-12; yet it never gave any proof of superior qualities. The biplane had ailerons of the original Farman variety between the wings. Very soon the biplane arrangement was given up in favour of the monoplane.\nA subsequent experimental monoplane was nicknamed the \"Secret-Circle Plane\" or \"Doughnut,\" the experiments being shrouded against publicity (much against the interests of the development). This annular-wing aeroplane (Fig. 7) was equipped with an 80 b.h.p. rotary and test-flown by Gordon England on November 23, 1912, at Shoreham. The flight was remarkable and lucky for the pilot, but unlucky for the precious craft. After having flown a large circuit on the first attempt, the pilot noticed, when coming in to land, that the aeroplane was exceedingly tail-heavy and getting out of control, the elevator being insufficient. At about 150 ft. above the ground the inevitable stall took place; but the pilot managed somehow to drop his mount upside down on to telegraph wires and escaped without personal injury.\nWith the reconstructed and improved monoplane many successful flights were made by Gordon England, N. S. Percival and Gordon Bell. Finally it came to grief when flown by Cedric Lee himself without previous training. After a good flight he managed to put it into a river.\nAnother incident happened with a subsequent annular monoplane: the elevator jammed and broke in flight. The aeroplane merely pancaked to the ground, again preserving the health of its pilot, E. C. Gordon England.\nThese types in their final form had lateral control effected by differential deflection of the elevators. It was realized that this elevon control was not very effective for lateral manœuvres, yet the lateral stability of the wing proved so great that the provision of ailerons seemed superfluous. The longitudinal stability was always satisfactory, once the centre of gravity was properly located. Because of the great inherent fore-and-aft stability, a separate elevator was, at one time, located on top of the vertical fin and permitted the fitting of special ailerons. For directional control a vertical rudder was attached to the stern of the fuselage at the trailing edge of the wing. A form of tricycle undercarriage was employed.\nIn respect of performance, the wind-tunnel tests indicated that a better lift/drag ratio could be expected than with a comparable conventional aeroplane. However, no conclusive evidence for this has, as yet, been presented.\nThe third British monoplane of this type also had an 80 b.h.p. rotary engine, but this time it was located aft and, further, drove the airscrew by means of an extension shaft. Unlike its predecessors, no dihedral was provided, and because of this the flying qualities were found to have been greatly improved. From early in 1914 until the outbreak of the 1914-18 War this unconventional aeroplane was frequently flown (mostly by Gordon Bell); it was demonstrated before Winston Churchill in the hope of securing orders from the Admiralty.\nAltogether, 11,000 miles were flown in about 128 hours, and even people not previously trained as pilots were able to fly it. In May, 1914, two such aeroplanes were being designed for participation in the Gordon-Bennett Race of 1915. When the 1914-1918 War terminated the work, it had clearly grown far beyond the stage of an untried project and could have well been termed a successful experiment with every prospect of becoming a practical proposition.\nIn 1919-20 Tilghman Richards succeeded in persuading the Air Ministry to place an order for a further experimental aeroplane. But a week after communicating this decision Major-General Bagnall-Wild, the promoter of the idea, retired, and red tape killed an intelligent intention.\nIt is only fair to record that aeronautical progress has suffered from the failure to have this development continued. As Tilghman Richards stated many years ago:—\n\"There is nothing mysterious about the annular plane. It affords high lift at large angles, has no burble point, and has a good lift/drag ratio for wings with a body. The machine was very fast in flight, for its day, and extremely slow in landing; and there being three distinct regions of lift, one apteroid and two pterygoid on each half-wing, the movement of the centre of pressure was a resultant of three distinct regional movements; and with slight modifications could be made to move in any desired manner without affecting the general efficiency of the plane.\"\nAs mentioned, the circular shape for the wing is not in itself a decisive characteristic. Previously, in 1908, A. H. Edwards invented the ring-type wing with rhomboidal or triangular shape (Brit. Pat. Spec. No. 4519 of February, 1908). An experimental aeroplane of this type, \"The Rhomboidal,\" was constructed and tested at Brooklands. It was not successful.\n(To be continued.)\nFig. 6.—Huth annular biplane of 1909.\nFig. 7.—Cedric Lee Monoplane No. 1 of Tilghman Richards, 1912."} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MARCH 5, 1948 279 THE AEROPLANE\nThe Biology of the Flying Saucer—II\nBy A. R. Weyl, A.F.R.Ae.S.\nIn this series of articles the history of low-aspect-ratio aircraft is recounted and technical aspects of their design discussed, leading up to their use for supersonic flight.\n(Continued from page 185, February 13 last.)\nTHE SECRET-CIRCLE \"CONSPIRACY,\" mentioned previously in connection with circular-aerofoil aeroplanes, did not lack congenially inventive spirits. Early in 1913 an engineer in Dijon, M. Bourgoin, made experiments with an annular-wing aeroplane. The tests were unsatisfactory. One feature of this design was the provision made for varying the wing incidence in flight.\nMore recently, a similar idea was suggested by N. H. Warren and Th. R. Young (Fig. 8). In 1937 they secured a patent (Brit. Pat. Spec. No. 508,022 of December, 1937) for a nonstallable monoplane of rhomboidal shape (i.e., leading wing swept back and trailing wing swept forwards with the wing tips merged together). This was provided with a conventional tail at the stern of a long fuselage and a number of advantages were claimed. In 1943 a model for a two-seater fighter with tail turret showed the separate tail omitted; special emphasis was laid on the triangular shape of each wing and the effect of sweep was relied upon. Nothing more has become known since, however, but it is worth noting that the project had been based on sound aerodynamic considerations.\nIn 1933, the annular wing of the German sculptor Antes created a mild sensation because of the good performance of models made to this conception (Fig. 9).\nSomewhat peculiar was the aerodynamic conception of the rhomboidal annular aeroplane of P. Nesbitt Willoughby, a qualified aeronautical engineer (Fig. 10). The Willoughby Delta Co. of London had taken up the development of this idea in 1931 and sufficient means were available to make rather extensive tests.\nThe principle is best described as a tandem monoplane with two aerofoil-shaped parts connecting the leading wing with the trailing wing near the tips. The \"side wings\" had aerofoil shape not only in their longitudinal cross-section (i.e., in the direction of flight), but also laterally. This was considered a characteristic feature and subject to patents. It was claimed that the vortex distribution induced by such shape gave an unusually high aerodynamic efficiency in spite of the small span of the aeroplane. In addition, it was pointed out that the maximum lift was shifted to very high incidences. Moreover, the \"side wings\" should reduce the drag of engine nacelles fitted underneath them.\nAll this was said to be proved by extensive wind-tunnel experimentation here and abroad. Designs of passenger transport aircraft reaching weights of 40,000 lb. were prepared on the basis of model tests made at the National Physical Laboratory and elsewhere. The results must have been so encouraging that an experimental monoplane with two 125 b.h.p. Menasco engines and weighing 2,540 lb. was constructed late in 1938 (Fig. 11). This aeroplane flew indeed and was even publicly demonstrated (including one-engine flight) at a Garden Party in May, 1939. Shortly afterwards the experimenter was killed in an unexplained crash during a flight test.\nFrom pressure plots over the \"side planes\" which have been published, apparently trim changes could be expected at various incidences. These components were thus capable of producing longitudinal instability and it is not improbable that this and poor control efficiency may have contributed to the accident. There was also evidence of a stall at normal incidences, although of a very mild character and with little apparent decrease in the lift coefficient (which, however, would not exclude the presence of fluctuating lift forces).\nFig. 8.—Project by Warren and Young for a light twin-engined two-seater of 90 h.p. (1937). The elevator is fitted between fin and fuselage. There is no tailplane.\nFig. 9.—Model of the \"annular wing\" of Antes, 1933.\nFig. 10.—Principle of the Willoughby Delta design.\nAnother suggestion for an annular wing was made by L. Peel, in 1944. This, however, was concerned less with the aerodynamic properties of such wing systems than with the arrangement of two engines facing each other with their airscrews, in order to overcome the torque reaction.\nA phenomenon of which aerodynamic experimenters were always well aware, but which aircraft designers failed to utilize, was that wind-tunnel tests clearly proved good-natured stalling properties of wings having very small aspect ratios. Yet even in the very early days when centres of gravity were far too far back on the old box-kites, the square shape of tailplanes, then unaccountably in vogue, may have saved the pilot's bacon more than once by its refusal to stall under extreme provocation. Later on science came and proved that a tailplane of \"good\" aspect ratio was more efficient. It was, but it made the stall worse when the centre of gravity happened to be rather aft.\nThe interesting thing is that aerofoils of circular or square shape were tested in the early days at incidences up to 90 degrees, while on normal aerofoils tests were restricted to rather small incidences only, generally excluding the range of stall."} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE AEROPLANE 280 MARCH 5, 1948\nargument against disc wings. The best aerofoil sections in use prior to about 1925 had a plain camber which implies travel of the centre of pressure when the incidence varies; the length of such travel is linked up with the wing chord. Hence the change in trim or stability is, with such aerofoil sections, greater with large-chord wings. On this consideration of fore-and-aft stability and control, designers had some justification for their decision against experimenting with disc wings. Yet quite useful aerofoil sections had already been used in flight which had practically no travel of the centre of pressure and hence did not suffer from this disadvantage of the disc wing.\nThe whole argument, however, lost its importance immediately M. M. Munk proved that very efficient aerofoil sections could be designed with a completely (or nearly so) stationary centre of pressure. It is, therefore, right to say that from that time all conditions existed for a practical evolution of disc-wing aeroplanes.\nF. Handley Page converted an aerofoil, leaving an aspect ratio of 6.25, into six square-aerofoil portions by five slots, each parallel to the chord of the wing. By so doing he hoped to have the low drag of a normal wing combined with the high stalling angle of the disc-type wing. Although a very slight improvement was claimed, the principle was that of eating the cake and having it too: the induced drag is responsible for the stalling properties of the disc wing and you cannot have the benefits of the high drag without suffering its disadvantages. Moreover, in order to have the effect of the disc wing, the provision of mere slots is insufficient. Marginal vortices need room to deploy.\nOn the whole, however, the idea proves that at least one practical aircraft designer had realized that there was something in wings of abnormally small aspect ratio.\nThere were other, although not quite as well thought out, antecedents of the disc-wing aeroplane. In the first soaring-flight competition on the Rhoen (1920), Friedrich Richter, a burly naval pilot of 20 stone or so, performed on a triplane glider with wings having an individual aspect ratio of far less than three. H. Hayden secured, in 1922, a patent for a rhomboidal wing with an aspect ratio of nearly unity, claiming for such a shape high lift and good flying qualities.\nIn 1925 he constructed a glider with a wing having an aspect ratio of only 2.25. The wing was nearly triangular in shape, with its apex leading, and a pronounced wash-out towards the tips (Fig. 12); no lateral controls were fitted. The tailplane with the elevator was fitted underneath the trailing edge at the stern of a fuselage. Flying experiments in Styria were said to have proved satisfactory flying qualities.\nSome early tailless aeroplanes, such as certain experimental types of Rene Arnoux, had rather stub wings and heavily reflexed (i.e., positively stable) aerofoil sections. A 1929 design of G. Abrial showed an aspect ratio of 2.88, with, however, substantial tip discs (which have the effect of increasing the aerodynamic aspect ratio) and wind-tunnel experiments indicated a creditable performance (Fig. 13). Russian attempts, in particular the parabola type of Tscheranowsky, too, were experiments with aspect ratios of three and even less (Figs. 14 and 15). Their resemblance in shape to the latest designs of super-sonic aeroplanes is remarkable.\nA Modern Pioneer\nFurther interest in the aerodynamics of disc wings was displayed by research workers with the arrival of Juan de la Cierva's Autogiro. This was indeed something like a circular wing, and performance estimates were based on the properties of such wings. Yet the question of stalling stability did not arise, because of the rotor blades.\nThe real pioneer of the disc wing was a very able American research engineer of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (N.A.C.A.), who proved capable of following independent lines of development. In about 1930 Charles H. Zimmermann subjected the properties of disc wings to\nFig. 12.—Experimental Hayden glider, 1925. Span, 19.7 ft.; length, 13·85 ft.; wing area, 173 sq. ft. All-up weight, 310 lb. No lateral control.\nFig. 13.—A French project of G. Abrial, 1929."} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MARCH 5, 1948 281 THE AEROPLANE Fig. 14.—A Russian 'parabola' glider of 1924. extensive wind-tunnel investigation and the published reports still form the basis of present development. In places, the results confirm, qualitatively, the experiments made 20 years before. But, as mentioned earlier, these experiments had been practically forgotten. Zimmermann's target has been the development of a really fool-proof aeroplane for amateur pilots. It is no use hiding the fact that in nearly all accidents in which blame is attributed to an 'error of judgment' on the part of the pilot, the aeroplane is actually at fault. The most common causes are the consequences of inadvertent stalling. Once this is completely remedied, the overwhelming majority of accidents will become mere incidents or just fun, and instead of coroners and hospitals, aircraft manufacturers and repair shops will have the benefit. On such very sound lines (which seem to be generally acknowledged, but still far too often ignored), Zimmermann directed his main attention to the stalling problem. He proved that small variations in the aspect ratio made profound differences and that the shape of the wing tips also had a great influence. At the same time he confirmed that the induced drag of circular or square wings is by no means as prohibitive as the simple theory of the 'horseshoe' vortex line would indicate. He also proved that it was simply the induced drag due to the predominant influence of the marginal vortices which brought about the behaviour at high incidences; the idea that the provision of oblique slots might help in this connection proved, however, abortive. An advantage which Zimmermann's research brought to light was that disc wings gave less profile drag at small incidences (high-speed flight), because of the reduction of the relative thickness of the aerofoil sections. This drag reduction has indeed become one of the main reasons for disc wings being adopted for aeroplanes capable of flying at speeds at which the compressibility of the air needs to be considered. For supersonic flight disc wings seem, at present, to be a necessity. Alternatively, for a given aerofoil thickness ratio, the height available for structure and storage (power plants) is greatest within a disc wing; this makes for light and stiff wing structures as well as for the possibility of housing everything within a wing. Hence there are very real design reasons for the preference of disc wings, quite apart from the eased accommodation of short-span aeroplanes. Some Remarkable Results Zimmermann established that the optimum aspect ratio was found between the values of 0.75 and 1.5. These values include both square and circular wing shapes. For a given wing section (Clark Y) the latter gave the highest lift coefficient, 1.85 at 45 degrees incidence, compared with a value of 1.24 at 14 degrees incidence for an aspect ratio of six. Furthermore, an important result was evidence that at an aspect ratio of unity (square or elliptical wings), and at an aspect ratio of 0.9 (wing with faired tips), no tendency to autorotation could be found. A circular wing (aspect ratio of 1.27) indicated the possibility of autorotation (i.e., spinning) at incidences below that of maximum lift. The possibility of spinning before the actual stall is reached is, indeed, extraordinary. All these results refer to tests with the Clark Y aerofoil section. Less established was the contention that disc wings would give improved lateral and longitudinal stability at low incidences. This seems still to be a moot point of the Flying Saucer. In Fig. 16, Fig. 17, and Fig. 18 some characteristic results of Fig. 16.—N.A.C.A. tests by C. H. Zimmermann which prove the extraordinary stalling qualities of disc wings. Zimmermann's wind-tunnel experiments of 1932 are given. It is seen from Fig. 18 that the difference between the incidence of maximum lift and the gliding angle at maximum lift (amax - a max) remains fairly independent of aspect ratio, and of the order of 9 to 13 degrees. This would mean that the attitude of the disc-type aeroplane, when flattening out, would not greatly differ from that of conventional aeroplanes. In particular, there would be no need to provide high undercarriages for disc aeroplanes as their gliding path is steep. This is an important difference from wings with leading-edge slots. In practice, however, the landing of disc-wing aeroplanes gives rise to undercarriage problems. As the induced drag increases rapidly with the reduction of flying speed, when the aeroplane flattens out prior to touching-down, the gliding angle steepens abruptly. This is particularly true of tailless designs, and the result is a strong tendency to pancake to the ground as soon as the pilot flattens out. Thus to avoid the necessity of fitting undercarriages able to stand the strain of abnormally high sinking speeds, it has been found practical to land with power on. For a tailless aeroplane with an aspect ratio of three, M. B. Morgan found that, without flaps, the trimmed gliding angle at 160 m.p.h. was three degrees; it increased to 17 degrees at 126 m.p.h., while the stalling speed was 115 m.p.h. This pronounced steepening of the gliding angle makes a merger between the aeroplane and the helicopter an attractive proposition. Another neculiarity of the disc wing established by Zimmermann was its sensitivity to the shape of the wing-tips Fig. 15.—A 'parabola' aircraft by B. I. Tscheranowsky. NND 927545"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE AEROPLANE 282 MARCH 5, 1948 and pseudo-circular and pseudo-square wings thus exhibit significant differences. This also applies to the ground effect, i.e., the landing qualities. The provision of oblique nozzle-shaped slots at the tips yielded no useful results. In any case, square-cut tips were found to be a disadvantage, with respect to drag, as well as to other qualities. Later N.A.C.A. research by F. E. Weick and Robert Saunders referred to aspect ratios of the order of 3 in connection with slotted auxiliary Vevions flaps for the trim of tailless aeroplanes. This constituted the first investigation of what has become known to-day as the 'Delta Wing,' i.e., the combination of sweep-back with low aspect ratio. Such shapes are of special interest for aeroplanes capable of flying through the trans-sonic region. Pancakes á la Zimmermann The results of Zimmermann's research were so convincing that a number of otherwise quite respectable designers were tempted into experimentation with disc-wing aeroplanes. In accordance with Zimmermann's views, all these designs were intended to be of the safety-first type of privately owned aircraft. This distinguishes the early phase from the more recent interest in Flying Saucers. In 1934 Farman was stimulated into experimenting with a wing with an aspect ratio of only 1.9. This was seen in his F-1020 monoplane which otherwise had a long fuselage with a conventional tail. It was said to have proved very stable in flight, but was not further heard of. An experimental parasol monoplane with a completely circular wing, a camber flap in the trailing edge and severely skewed ailerons was tested in the U.S.A. (in 1934), with indifferent results. It was shown in flight in news reels. At about the same time Raoul J. Hoffmann, of St. Petersburgh, Florida, an eminent aeronautical engineer of Austrian origin (known as the first to prove—in 1913—that the ratio CL3/CD2 governs optimum climb and glide with minimum sinking speed, took up development of the disc-wing aeroplane. Hoffmann's Flying Saucer was a tailless aircraft with an aspect ratio of slightly over 2. The first type was an ultralight single-seater with 36 b.h.p. Later a side-by-side two-seater with an 85 b.h.p. Cirrus engine was constructed and flew well; the wing tips served as ailerons and the elevators formed part of the trailing edge. The aerofoil sections employed were N.A.C.A. M.6 basically, with N.A.C.A. M.1 at the tips. Both are sections designed by M. M. Munk. The former is a reflexed-camber section with a practically stationary centre of pressure; the latter is symmetrical. The central structure of the wing, the fuselage and the fin was of welded-steel tube; the wing had three spars. This little two-seater was stated to fly well and to exhibit very good stability. It seems, however, that the controllability, in particular directionally, was not satisfactory. The vision from the cockpit must have been very restricted—a moot point with all these designs. A speed range from 28 m.p.h. to 135 m.p.h. was claimed. The empty weight was given as 900 lb., and the wing loading was 5.5 lb./sq. ft. One remarkable characteristic observed during the flying tests of Hoffmann's aircraft was that, when coming in to land, the approach was steep; yet prior to the flattening out and just before touching down, the glide flattened. This would seem to contradict the experience referred to above, and it was attributed to a ground effect arising from the rake of the wing-tips. It is indeed reasonable to expect that the presence of the ground would affect the formation of the marginal vortices to an extent which may markedly influence the behaviour of disc wings during take-off and landing. Hoffmann projected a pusher and a twin-engined version, but these types did not materialize. A further development was the Arup monoplane of R. J. Hoffmann and C. L. Snyder at South Bend, Indiana. The wing shape was very similar. It resembled a semi-circle flying with its straight side as the leading edge; to this wing, ailerons were added as special tips. The aspect ratio practically corresponded to that of the previous Hoffmann types. Again, aerofoils with little centre-of-pressure travel were used. The latest type had its tailplane and elevator separately located over the wing trailing edge (similar to the 'Elytroplane' of De Rougé). It seems that the longitudinal control at certain incidences was not satisfactory. The ailerons which formed part of the wing shape and reduced the aspect ratio to a value of 1.75 had a triangular shape and were greatly skewed (taking into account the oblique flow over the wing tips). The engine was a 70 b.h.p. Le Blond radial; a tricycle undercarriage was fitted. With the pilot alone, a gliding speed of 23.5 m.p.h. was recorded (the wing loading was about 3.3 lb./sq. ft.) and a gliding angle of 21 degrees was measured, with a sinking speed of 12.3 ft. per second, which can be accommodated by a sturdy undercarriage without flattening out of the glide. The maximum speed was 86 m.p.h., and the take-off was stated to require 5 secs. in zero wind. Several more Arup types seem to have been constructed and flown during 1935. The flying qualities were praised—gliding angles of 1:2.6 being quoted—and the published performance figures sounded extremely good. Yet, for reasons never disclosed, the production stage was not reached and the development ceased abruptly. It is worth noting that Charles Zimmermann himself has taken no part in this development, but he was an interested spectator at demonstration flights with an Arup monoplane at Langley Field. An Italian Tortellino At the time of the Arup development (1934), F. Piana Canova, an Italian, began to embark on a development for a tailless aeroplane with a low aspect ratio. In May, 1935, he secured patents for a rhomboidal wing, one diagonal of which coincided with the direction of flight. The ailerons were to be located at the lateral apices, elevator and rudder at the rear apex, while the airscrew was in front of the leading apex. Another patent related to bi-convex aerofoils with ducts and control valves for the pilot, enabling the latter to neutralize the negative pressure on the forward ventral surface when at negative incidences. The latter patent was, apparently, never submitted to flight experiments. (To be continued.) Fig. 17.—These results from Zimmermann's wind-tunnel tests on disc wings (1932) clearly show the characteristics of low aspect ratio aerofoils. Fig. 18 Further results from Zimmermann's tests shown here also indicate the advantages to be gained from disc wings. NND 927545"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MARCH 19, 1948 337 THE AEROPLANE The Biology of the Flying Saucer—III By A. R. Weyl, A.F.R.Ae.S. Previous articles in this series appeared in The Aeroplane for February 13 and March 5. WIND-TUNNEL TESTS were made in Turin and at Rome of five Canova projects (described in the previous instalment of this article). It is interesting to note that the Canova disc-wing types did not make use of reflexed-camber aerofoils. Stability and trim could, therefore, be secured only by an upwards deflection of enlarged elevators. Early in 1935, an open glider of the Zoegling type was constructed by a Milan firm and M. A. Garbell made fairly successful flights with it. He reported that the longitudinal stability (with the enlarged elevator) was good and that parachute-like landings could be performed. The lateral stability characteristic, however, proved deficient, since a Dutch-roll motion was experienced; turns were of questionable steadiness. In this respect, insufficient damping in roll and yaw are mentioned. With winch-launching, this glider reached altitudes of 600 ft. On the basis of this design, a light aeroplane was developed and the Italian Government financed the construction of two larger experimental aeroplanes, including one with 130 b.h.p. Gipsy engine. A fatal accident described as not necessarily reflecting on the technical merits of the design, caused the authorities to change their minds and to terminate this development. A Return to Childish Things Aeroplanes with a long, deep tail affixed to a small-span wing form a development of the low-aspect wing in another direction. Although the overall aspect ratio is low with such an arrangement, the wing system is not that of a disc. It is more akin to primitive kites or, better, to the paper dart of our school days which, as we may be able to remember with some mental effort, exhibited quite remarkable flying qualities and made better use of our school books than we ever expected. A representative of this aboriginal type is shown in Fig. 19. It crashed during the first tests (which would not seem very surprising in view of the arrangement of engines and airscrews). Another less eccentric arrangement was the French Payen single-seat racer of 1935. This was a daring experimental type with a 400 b.h.p. radial engine. An improved type, this time more reasonable—a 70 b.h.p. light aeroplane—was constructed in 1936. To a very small, conventionally tapered wing, a large triangular tail was fitted; the wing alone had dihedral, and the overall aspect ratio was about 1.76. No flights have been reported of one of these Payen aeroplanes, but take-off attempts with the second type seem to have suggested that with the small span the torque reaction of the airscrew cannot be adequately dealt with. Fig. 19.—An American Flying Flapjack with two engines. It crashed while under test (1938). A third design (in 1938) the Flêchair single-seat fighter project, therefore, incorporated two coaxial counter-rotating airscrews driven by two 100 b.h.p. engines mounted in tandem in the long fuselage. The pilot's cockpit was located at the root of the fin, and a single-track undercarriage was adopted. There were, however, far too many untried features in this unusual design to make it a serious proposition. Nothing more has been heard of Payen's efforts. The modern phase of the Flying Saucer aeroplane is characterized by two distinct developments. One is the helicopter-aeroplane, the other is the trans-sonic or supersonic aeroplane. Both have become—unfortunately—essentially military developments; the progress is hence shrouded in the usual pretentious secrecy (which implies that the potential enemy knows everything) while the work is gravely hampered by elaborate security precautions. The helicopter-aeroplane is not a novel idea. Many years ago, for instance, Nicola Tesla (famous for his electrical experiments with high-frequency phenomena) secured a patent for a tailless aeroplane equipped with a large lifting airscrew permitting a vertical ascent. In 1921 Claud Dornier secured a patent for a conventional"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE AEROPLANE 338 MARCH 19, 1948 aeroplane with take-off as helicopter (Brit. Pat. Spec. No.161,948). Earlier still (in 1916), the German, F. Bendemann, a noted research worker on airscrews, conducted a secret development of an aeroplane with a large tilting airscrew capable of rising and descending as a helicopter. The development of this air observation post was later discontinued in view of the Austrian helicopter experiments by Th. v. Karman and Petroczy. From his early experiments with lifting airscrews, F. Bendemann found that hovering without forward movement could be achieved—when the power loading of the aircraft was less than about 9 lb./b.h.p. With fighter aeroplanes, such low power loadings were already then being approached, and operational experience had indeed shown that certain single-seaters could, under favourable conditions, be held in attitudes approaching that of hovering (later the Fokker D.VII biplane, with a large airscrew, became renowned for this trick in air combat on the Western Front). Attempts to revive the project at a later date failed, and with the suicide of its promoter (who had gone into the Civil Service), all interest in the development ceased. Charles W. Zimmermann, mentioned earlier as stimulator of the disc wing, approached the conception of the helicopter aeroplane on the basis of his results with low aspect ratio wings. He secured basic patents and constructed during 1934-35, in the cellar of his home, a man-carrying aircraft of his design. This had a wing of only 7-ft. span, with two airscrews driven by two 25 b.h.p. engines. Due to persistent engine trouble, no flights were made; the little aircraft showed, however, all the essential features of the present types. In 1937 he granted a licence for his patents to the Chance-Vought Aircraft Division of the United Aircraft Corporation in Stratford, Connecticut, and joined this firm for the further development of his ideas. It is possible that the public conception of the mysterious Flying Saucers has originated from this development. Zimmermann's intention may have been the development of a safety-first aeroplane for the private owner. The U.S. Navy, however, took an interest in the possibilities of the helicopter-aeroplane, and the work done at present is purely for military purposes. In 1942 a low-powered piloted scale model type V-173 was constructed. This wooden aircraft made many flights and proved that the ideas underlying the design were practical. The principle is that, at high speed and when cruising, the aircraft shall fly as an aeroplane, while for slow speed and hovering it flies as a helicopter. Hence the airscrews are at the same time rotors and must have a rather large diameter. With the V-173 the problem of the prone position for the pilot was studied, and there is reason to believe that the latest types have adopted this feature. A further step towards the realization of a naval gun-spotter and a fighter for use from aircraft carriers has been the Chance-Vought XF5U-1 single-seater (1946), for which a speed range from 40 m.p.h. landing speed to over 425 m.p.h. has been claimed; in general, it follows the V-173 model. (See p. 185, February 13.) The aspect ratio of the wing is less than unity. Strictly speaking, however, it is not a genuine tailless aeroplane because of the attachment of a trimming elevator to both sides of the wing. The reason for such excrescences is the need to locate control organs directly in the slipstream of the paddle-like airscrew rotors. The twin rudders, too, are in the slipstream. Unlike the V-173 type, the XF-5U-1 has an all-moving tail surface and the undercarriage is retractable. This interesting hybrid has a modern metal structure. Two Pratt and Whitney R-2000-2 engines of 1,350 b.h.p. each (at 2,700 r.p.m.) are mounted within the wing, entirely buried and cooled by forced draught. Water injection for temporarily boosting the power is one of the engine features. A special problem was the design of a transmission gear which allows both rotors to be driven from either of the engines—this is a necessity in case of an engine failure. The four-bladed rotors are contra-rotating so that there is no residual torque and are geared down to about one-fifth of the engine speed, hence their substantial diameter. The wing loading is rather high, reaching the order of 40 lb./sq. ft. The Real Flying Saucer? Since this experimental type was produced, further progress has been made in the development. It seems that axial-flow gas turbines have been installed, and it is quite possible that a combined propulsion with thermal jet and airscrew rotor is already under test. With this, for slow flight (take-off, climb and landing) the rotors are driven by the gas turbines, while at high speed the rotors are declutched and feathered and pure jet propulsion is used. This would, incidentally, Fig. 22.—Increase of profile drag with section thickness, at zero lift. The importance of the tip shape is obvious. The data refer to an aspect ratio of five (From D.V.L. wind-tunnel tests at low turbulence). NND 927545"} {"doc_id":"6b35fc2c6744ffac","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MARCH 19, 1948 339 THE AEROPLANE M. B. Morgan has recently communicated the following values for the limit of stability at the stall from this graph: Upper limit of the Angle of Sweep-back (referred to the 1/4 chord) beyond which self-stall can be expected Aspect Ratio Required Degrees 65 1 54 2 46 3 38 4 25 6 14 8 5 10 It is thus advisable to combine sweep-back with low-aspect ratio when safe stalling is required. Considerations of high speed lead to a similar combination, since both features tend to delay the shock stall. We have, as a result, the rare case of two quite different aspects of an engineering problem pointing to an identical solution. The inevitable result has been the development of arrow-shaped, more or less triangular, disc wings, termed Delta-Wings, for flight at speeds which are trespassing into the trans-sonic velocity regime. Another advantage of such wings is that when the shock stall occurs, the backward shift of the centre of pressure is less than with normal wings. The induced drag does not count quantitatively at these high speeds. Development of such abnormal aeroplane types began in Germany during the War, following the progress accomplished in jet and rocket propulsion since 1937, which had shown that flight at sonic velocity was a practical proposition. A few experimental delta-wing types had been brought to initial flying tests when the War came to a close. The German development had two distinct aims, resulting in two separate lines of approach. The immediate target necessitated by the Allied bombing raids, was the creation of very fast jet fighters or fighter-bombers which could surpass in speed even the Me 262. Secondly, there was the long-term development of a supersonic aeroplane capable of flying over very long distances, such as from Europe to America and back, and dropping a bomb or two on the way. It is perhaps not too fantastic to surmise that this development had some connection with the research on atomic bombs and bacteriological warfare instituted by the Hitler Gang. For the immediate target, orders for interceptor-fighters were placed with enterprising firms, notably with the Horten brothers and Messerschmitt (both pets of the Reichsluftministerium), with the Gotha Works, Henschel, Junkers, Heinkel and Arado (a Government enterprise), etc. In order to facilitate experiments with rather unusual aircraft types and to enable an exchange of ideas and experiences, a special research aerodrome was built at Oranienburg (near Berlin) with all facilities for flight testing (in particular, very long wide runways and workshops for repairs and modifications were provided). This was placed under the command of a capable technician, Lt.-Col. Knemeyer. On this aerodrome, all the initial and development tests with novel prototypes had to be made. When the Russians collected the aerodrome, they were agreeably surprised to discover some of the most progressive aircraft ever constructed. It has since become certain that they have made intelligent use of this aeronautical treasure as well as of the technicians collected then and afterwards. Of the German firms interested in the development, at least one, the well-known Junkers works at Dessau, has been completely transferred to Russia, lock, stock and barrel. Most of the scientists and designers were urged to volunteer for development work in Russia. Few could afford to refuse. According to reliable information, among the interceptor prototypes at Oranienburg, at the time of the Occupation, were the following:—One Horten tailless delta-wing, which had been damaged during tests and was undergoing repair; another Horten tailless jet-fighter was just ready for its first tests. There was also the latest version of the Lippisch-Junkers' development of the Me 163-C; another advanced Junkers design; an experimental Gotha, and several research gliders. Hitler's Last Secret Weapon The German long-term development of an aeroplane capable of reaching truly supersonic speeds discarded the gas-turbine jet engine. It was based on the ram-jet or aerodynamic propulsive duct (Athodyd)—the simplest engine ever invented. The ram-jet, a widely discussed invention by the genial René Lorin in 1912, had been experimented with in Germany, notably by the Austrian Eugen Sanger (for whom a special laboratory had been built by the German authorities in 1938), by Otto Pabst, of Focke-Wulf, and by others. Following a suggestion made by Alexander Lippisch (formerly known as an eminent sailplane designer and research worker on tailless aeroplanes), progress had been made with the combustion of solid fuel in ram-jets. Such fuel took the form of solid blocks of specially prepared coal which lined the walls of the duct. This development had been perfected by the German Research Institute for Soaring Flight. (To be continued.) NND 927545"} {"doc_id":"6b9652660085e9bc","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. Department of Justice (MATERIAL MUST NOT BE REMOVED FROM OR ADDED TO THIS FILE) COPIED FOR FOIPA REQUESTED BY COVAR FEB 7 1980 COPIED BY 56 FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Declassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007 ENTIRE FILE REVIEWED FOR HISTORICAL DECLASSIFICATION of CLASSIFIED INFORMATION ENCLOSED INVESTIGATION serial 109 COPIED FOR FOIPA MAR 1 1978 BY 67 USE CARE IN HANDLING THIS FILE Transfer-Call 3421 117-HQ- SECTION 2 SERIALS 71-145 SECTION 2 SERIALS 71-145 NW 91173 DocId:34743666 Page 1"} {"doc_id":"6b9652660085e9bc","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"First Presbyterian Church REV. CHARLES C. BARNES, PASTOR BOX 391 McMinnville, Oregon January 31, 1949 Mr. J. Edgar Hoover Washington D.C. Dear Mr. Hoover: Here is a bit of information which may be of great significance, or may be merely an observation of a sientific experiment. It may be known by military authorities and the A.E.C. or only a few may have seen it and none reported it to the right place. Here it is. Can you pass it to the right persons? Last May one afternoon I saw four beams in the sky passing from the northwest to the southeast and converging in the Cascade mountains. In those four narrow beams small clouds were forming. And where the beams met apparently against the mountains a great explosion effect was to be seen. I would say that they were visible for at least 10 minutes or longer. The sight brought to mind an article read before the war about experiments carried on in Europe with various types of radio beams to effect rainfall. I would guess that I had seen the article in the Science Digest. The Columbia River flood of last summer and the unusual precipitation this winter have forced me to feel that this observation of mine should be sent somewhere in the interest of national security. I have one son in the Air Corps and another works with the A.E.C. at Hanford which causes me to pray for peace, as well as the fact that as a minister I deplore the waste and tragedy of war. That is one reason that I have refrained from passing on information and ideas that might incite warlike attitudes. May I add these words to paragraph two. The explosion effect seemed to rise to a height of about ten thousand feet. Sincerely, C. C. Barnes 117-0-109 MAR 7 1949 RECORDED - 119 INDEXED - 119 Ex 22 NW 91173 DocId:34743666 Page 2"} {"doc_id":"6b9652660085e9bc","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 119 February 9, 1949 EX-22 117-0-109 Reverend Charles C. Barnes First Presbyterian Church Box 391 McMinnville, Oregon Dear Mr. Barnes: I have received your letter of January 31, 1949, and want to thank you for sending the information with reference to the matter you mentioned. It was indeed thoughtful of you to communicate with me in this connection. Sincerely yours, John Edgar Hoover Director COMMUNICATIONS SECTION MAILED 15 FEB 10 1949 P.M. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE NW 91173 DocId:34743666 Page 3"} {"doc_id":"6b9652660085e9bc","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEXED - 119 RECORDED - 119 EX-22 117-0-109 Date: March 3, 1949 To: Director of Special Investigations The Inspector General Department of the Air Force The Pentagon Washington 25, D. C. From: John Edgar Hoover - Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation Subject: AERIAL PHENOMENA A letter has been received from Reverend Charles C. Barnes of McMinnville, Oregon, advising that last May he observed four beams of light in the sky passing from the northwest to the southeast and converging over the Cascade Mountains. In these beams small clouds were forming. According to Reverend Barnes, where these beams met an explosive effect was to be seen. This was visible for approximately ten minutes. The explosive effect seemed to rise to a height of about 10,000 feet. Reverend Barnes requested that this information be passed on as he felt it might be merely an observation of a scientific experiment known to the military authorities of the Atomic Energy Commission. This is furnished for your information. cc - Atomic Energy Commission Room 30 Public Health Building Washington, D. C. Attention: Rear Admiral John E. Gingrich Director of Security and Intelligence CWB:arm RECEIVED MAR 3 1949 COMMUNICATIONS SECTION BY SPECIAL MESSENGER MAR 3 1949 FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE NW 91173 DocId:34743666 Page 4"} {"doc_id":"6bc53aaa59d51cbd","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"6bc53aaa59d51cbd","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"6bc53aaa59d51cbd","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"6bc53aaa59d51cbd","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"6bc53aaa59d51cbd","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"6bc53aaa59d51cbd","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)\n1.4(a)\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\n1.4(a)\n\n• Description: (S//REL) AT 1246Z, 1.4(a) OBSERVED 1X PROB UAP IVO 3SKT4255899519. NO MISSION IMPACT, 1.4(a) CONTINUED ORIGINAL TASKING."} {"doc_id":"6bc53aaa59d51cbd","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"6cfcfc9eb6114cc5","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Misrep 4685903\n\nNarrative\n\n([REDACTED]) AT 2307Z, [1.4a] TOOK OFF FROM OKAS. AT 2320Z, [1.4a] HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE. FROM 0003Z TO 1917Z, [1.4a] COLLECTED SIGINT VIA AIRHANDLER. FROM 0041Z TO 1840Z, [1.4a] SUPPORTED NAVCENT TO OPERATION [1.4a] IVO ARABIAN GULF, STRAIT OF HORMUZ AND GULF OF OMAN. SEE ISR LINE 1. AT 0532Z, [1.4a] RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARDCALL LINE 1. AT 1527Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED 1X UNK FORMATION. SEE OBSERVATION LINE 1. AT 1840Z, [1.4a] WAS CLEARED TO RTB. AT 1944Z, [1.4a] HANDED BACK TO THE LRE. AT 2012Z, [1.4a] LANDED AT OKAS. FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS1. 21 MISSION HOURS, 17.9 IMINT HOURS, 1 IMINT TASKING PROSECUTED, 19.2 SIGINT HOURS, 1 SIGINT TASKING PROSECUTED, 2 TOTAL TASKINGS PROSECUTED\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: [REDACTED]\n• Associated Caveats: [REDACTED]\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20450301\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: [1.4a]\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): ACC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 482ATKS\n• Submit Date (Auto-generated):\n\nMSNID"} {"doc_id":"6cfcfc9eb6114cc5","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Tasking Order (ATO) [1.4a]\n• Mission Type: AREC\n• ATO Mission Number: [1.4a]\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: 1st Lt\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 482ATKS\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: Ctr\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 12AF, Det 3, PAROC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: 1st Lt\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 609th AOC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [3.5c,(b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nINGEST"} {"doc_id":"6cfcfc9eb6114cc5","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Radar Name or Destination: -\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: -\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• MWS Name or Designator: -\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• IRCM Name or Designator: -\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• ECM Name or Designator: -\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• CMD Name or Designator: -\n• Chaff Designator: -\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: -\n• Flare Designator: -\n• Num Flares: -\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator: -\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Num Towed Decoys: -\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Gun Name or Designator: -\n• Num Gun Rounds: -\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4(a)\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: ANDAS4\n• Additional Avionics: AH_GMESH\n• Data Link: -"} {"doc_id":"6cfcfc9eb6114cc5","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Gentext: -\n\nTimeline\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Last Land Time: 272012:00ZAUG20\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 272022:00ZAUG20\n• Total Mission Time: 21 hours 5 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): [1.4a]\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 262307:00ZAUG20\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 262320:00ZAUG20\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: AREC\n• JTAC Callsign: -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 270041:00ZAUG20\n• Time-off Station DTG: 271840:00ZAUG20\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Msn Type: AREC\n• Primary Sensor: ANDAS4"} {"doc_id":"6cfcfc9eb6114cc5","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Sensors Available: AH\\GMESH\n• Tasking Type: PLANNED\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 39RUN46[1.4a]38[1.4a]\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] [1.4a] COORDINATED WITH NAVCENT 24 HOURS PRIOR TO TAKE OFF. PRECOORD WAS SATISFACTORY. AT 0041Z, [1.4a] ARRIVED ON STATION ISO NAVCENT TO OPERATION [1.4a] TO CHARACTERIZE IRIN\\IRGCN VESSELS, UAS ACTIVITY, ACTIVITY OUTSIDE OF PORTS, AND TO ESTABLISH PATTERN OF LIFE. FROM 0041Z TO 1840Z, [1.4a] CONDUCTED SCANS IAW THE TARGET DECK IN THE ARABIAN GULF (AG). AT 0532Z, [1.4a] RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARDCALL LINE 1. AT 0611Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED ONE SMALL VESSEL DOCKED AT GREATER TUNB NAVAL PORT IVO 40RCQ30[1.4a]06[1.4a]. AT 1527Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED 1X UNK FORMATION. SEE OBSERVATION LINE 1. AT 1742Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED 1X PROB NASER WAP BESIDES AN M\\T VESSEL IVO 39RUN49[1.4a]1 1[1.4a] BOTH VESSELS WERE DEAD IN WATER (DIW) IVO GRIDS. ADDITIONALLY, 2X ADULT MALES (ADMS) WERE OBSERVED ON THE REAR DECK OF THE PROB NASER WAP. AT 0700Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED 1X POSS IL-76 CANDID AT ABU MUSA ISLAND AFLD IVO 40RCP02[1.4a]63[1.4a] AT 1840Z, [1.4a] WAS CLEARED OFF TASKING AND RETURNED TO BASE (RTB).\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: NAVCENT\n• Supported Operation: OPERATION [1.4a]\n• Precoord Time: 24 HOURS\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: LIGHT CLOUD COVERAGE PREVENTED CONTINUOUS TRACKING OF UAP EVENT\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: No\n• Gentext: -"} {"doc_id":"6cfcfc9eb6114cc5","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Off Station\n• Time Off Station DTG: 271944:00ZAUG20\n• Total Time On Station: 20 hours 24 minutes\n\nGUARDCALL\n• GUARDCALL DTG: 270532:00ZAUG20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Ground Station Callsign: IRANIAN AIR DEFENSE\n• Aircraft Location: 40RCP78[1.4a]87[1.4a]\n• Aircraft Heading: 018 M\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL150\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Number of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\n• Guardcall Tone: PROFESSIONAL\n\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 0532Z, [1.4a] WAS HAILED ON GUARD [1.4g] FREQ BY IRANIAN AIR DEFENSE. ORDERS GIVEN: STANDARD CALL. [1.4a] GAVE A STANDARD RESPONSE. NO MISSION IMPACTS\n\nOBSERVATION\n• Observation DTG: 271527:00ZAUG20\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Aircraft Location: 39RVM38[1.4a]59[1.4a]\n• Aircraft Heading: -\n• Aircraft Altitude: -\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Relative Bearing or Clock Position: -\n• Range: -\n• Killbox & Keypad: -\n• Observed Activity Location: 39RVM81[1.4a]99[1.4a]\n• Observed Activity Description: FORMATION OF UNK FLYING OBJECTS\n• Method of Observation: [1.4a] SENSOR\n\nGENTEXT/OBSERVATION\n• Gentext: (S//REL) FROM 1527Z TO 1529Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED A FORMATION OF FLYING OBJECTS TRAVELING NE-NW ALONG THE COAST IVO 39RVM81[1.4a]99[1.4a] [1.4a] WAS TRACKING THIS FORMATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 2 MINUTES BEFORE PID WAS LOST IN\n\n3.5c, (b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 006"} {"doc_id":"6cfcfc9eb6114cc5","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLOUD COVER. AIRCREW WAS UNABLE TO GAIN PID AGAIN ON THIS FORMATION\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: LIGHT CLOUD COVERAGE PREVENTED THE CONTINOUS TRACKING OF THE FORMATION\n\n3.5c, (b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 007"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0062 83894 Vol. 1 438-Only\n\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS HQ-0000-86775B; HQ\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 1 438 ONLY\n8/11/1274161\nRRP0031XG3\n\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007."} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nIn Reply, Please Refer to File No. Albuquerque, New Mexico May 8, 1964\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSOCORRO, NEW MEXICO\nAPRIL 24, 1964\n\nSpecial Agent D. Arthur Byrnes, Jr., Federal Bureau of Investigation, stationed at Albuquerque, New Mexico, was at Socorro, New Mexico, and at the State Police Office there on business late afternoon of April 24, 1964.\n\nAt approximately 5:45 to 5:50 P. M., Nep Lopez, radio operator in the Socorro County Sheriff's Office, located about thirty feet down the hall from the State Police Office, came into the State Police Office.\n\nMr. Lopez advised M. S. Chavez, New Mexico State Police, that he had just received a radio call from Officer Lonnie Zamora to come to an area about one mile southwest of Socorro. The call was in relation to some unknown object which \"landed and has taken off.\" Agent Byrnes finished his work in the State Police Office at Socorro at approximately 6:00 P. M., April 24, 1964, and thereafter proceeded to the site where Officer Zamora, Socorro County Undersheriff Jim Luckie, Sergeant M. S. Chavez, and Officer Ted Jordan, New Mexico State Police, were assembled.\n\nIt may be noted that it has been the observation of Agent Byrnes that Officer Zamora, known intimately for approximately five years, is well regarded as a sober, industrious, and conscientious officer and not given to fantasy.\n\nOfficer Zamora was noted to be perfectly sober and somewhat agitated over his experience.\n\nSpecial Agent Byrnes noted four indentations in the rough ground at the \"site\" of the object described\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of any kind. It is the property of the FBI, and is a loan to your agency; it and/or its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n\nby Officer Zamora. These depressions appeared regular in shape, approximately sixteen by six inches rectangular. Each depression seemed to have been made by an object going into the earth at an angle from a center line. Each depression was approximately two inches deep and pushed some earth to the far side.\n\nInside the four depressions were three burned patches of clumps of grass. Other clumps of grass in the same area appeared not to be disturbed. One burned area was outside the four depressions.\n\nThere were three circular marks in the earth which were smooth, approximately four inches in diameter and penetrated in the sandy earth approximately one-eighth of an inch as if a jar lid had gently been pushed into the sand.\n\nNo other person was noted in the area the night of April 24, 1964. No other objects were noted in the area possibly connected with the incident related by Officer Zamora.\n\nSo far as could be noted, there were no houses or inhabited dwellings in the area or in sight of the area.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nIn Reply, Please Refer to File No. Albuquerque, New Mexico May 8, 1964\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSOCORRO, NEW MEXICO\nAPRIL 24, 1964\n\nSpecial Agent D. Arthur Byrnes, Jr., Federal Bureau of Investigation, stationed at Albuquerque, New Mexico, was at Socorro, New Mexico, and at the State Police Office there on business late afternoon of April 24, 1964.\n\nAt approximately 5:45 to 5:50 P. M., Nep Lopez, radio operator in the Socorro County Sheriff's Office, located about thirty feet down the hall from the State Police Office, came into the State Police Office.\n\nMr. Lopez advised M. S. Chavez, New Mexico State Police, that he had just received a radio call from Officer Lonnie Zamora to come to an area about one mile southwest of Socorro. The call was in relation to some unknown object which \"landed and has taken off.\" Agent Byrnes finished his work in the State Police Office at Socorro at approximately 6:00 P. M., April 24, 1964, and thereafter proceeded to the site where Officer Zamora, Socorro County Undersheriff Jim Luckie, Sergeant M. S. Chavez, and Officer Ted Jordan, New Mexico State Police, were assembled.\n\nIt may be noted that it has been the observation of Agent Byrnes that Officer Zamora, known intimately for approximately five years, is well regarded as a sober, industrious, and conscientious officer and not given to fantasy.\n\nOfficer Zamora was noted to be perfectly sober and somewhat agitated over his experience.\n\nSpecial Agent Byrnes noted four indentations in the rough ground at the \"site\" of the object described\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of any kind. It is the property of the FBI, and is a loan to your agency; it and/or its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n\nby Officer Zamora. These depressions appeared regular in shape, approximately sixteen by six inches rectangular. Each depression seemed to have been made by an object going into the earth at an angle from a center line. Each depression was approximately two inches deep and pushed some earth to the far side.\n\nInside the four depressions were three burned patches of clumps of grass. Other clumps of grass in the same area appeared not to be disturbed. One burned area was outside the four depressions.\n\nThere were three circular marks in the earth which were smooth, approximately four inches in diameter and penetrated in the sandy earth approximately one-eighth of an inch as if a jar lid had gently been pushed into the sand.\n\nNo other person was noted in the area the night of April 24, 1964. No other objects were noted in the area possibly connected with the incident related by Officer Zamora.\n\nSo far as could be noted, there were no houses or inhabited dwellings in the area or in sight of the area.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nAlbuquerque, New Mexico\nMay 8, 1964\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSOCORRO, NEW MEXICO\nAPRIL 24, 1964\n\nSpecial Agent D. Arthur Byrnes, Jr., Federal Bureau of Investigation, stationed at Albuquerque, New Mexico, was at Socorro, New Mexico, and at the State Police Office there on business late afternoon of April 24, 1964.\n\nAt approximately 5:45 to 5:50 P. M., Nep Lopez, radio operator in the Socorro County Sheriff's Office, located about thirty feet down the hall from the State Police Office, came into the State Police Office.\n\nMr. Lopez advised M. S. Chavez, New Mexico State Police, that he had just received a radio call from Officer Lonnie Zamora to come to an area about one mile southwest of Socorro. The call was in relation to some unknown object which \"landed and has taken off.\" Agent Byrnes finished his work in the State Police Office at Socorro at approximately 6:00 P. M., April 24, 1964, and thereafter proceeded to the site where Officer Zamora, Socorro County Undersheriff Jim Luckie, Sergeant M. S. Chavez, and Officer Ted Jordan, New Mexico State Police, were assembled.\n\nIt may be noted that it has been the observation of Agent Byrnes that Officer Zamora, known intimately for approximately five years, is well regarded as a sober, industrious, and conscientious officer and not given to fantasy.\n\nOfficer Zamora was noted to be perfectly sober and somewhat agitated over his experience.\n\nSpecial Agent Byrnes noted four indentations in the rough ground at the \"site\" of the object described"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n\nby Officer Zamora. These depressions appeared regular in shape, approximately sixteen by six inches rectangular. Each depression seemed to have been made by an object going into the earth at an angle from a center line. Each depression was approximately two inches deep and pushed some earth to the far side.\n\nInside the four depressions were three burned patches of clumps of grass. Other clumps of grass in the same area appeared not to be disturbed. One burned area was outside the four depressions.\n\nThere were three circular marks in the earth which were smooth, approximately four inches in diameter and penetrated in the sandy earth approximately one-eighth of an inch as if a jar lid had gently been pushed into the sand.\n\nNo other person was noted in the area the night of April 24, 1964. No other objects were noted in the area possibly connected with the incident related by Officer Zamora.\n\nSo far as could be noted, there were no houses or inhabited dwellings in the area or in sight of the area.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSOCORRO, NEW MEXICO\nAPRIL 24, 1964\n\nThe following data were obtained from Officer Lonnie Zamora, Police Department, Socorro, New Mexico, the night of April 24, 1964, and early morning, April 25, 1964, as related by Officer Zamora.\n\nLonnie Zamora, 606 Reservoir Street, Socorro, New Mexico, 835-1134, Officer Socorro Police Department about five years, office phone 835-0941, now on 2:00 P. M. to 10:00 P. M. shift.\n\nAbout 5:45 P. M., April 24, 1964, while in Socorro 2 Police Car (1964 Pontiac white) started to chase a car due south from west side of Courthouse. Car was apparently speeding, and was about three blocks in front. At point on Old Rodeo Street, (extension of Park Street south), near George Morillo residence (about one-half mile south of Spring Street). The chased car was going straight ahead toward rodeo grounds. Car chased was a new black Chevrolet, (it might have been Floyd Reynolds' boy, Vivian, about 17). Chased car still about three blocks ahead."} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nLonnie alone.\n\nAt this time heard a roar and saw a flame in the sky to the southwest some distance away--possibly a half mile or a mile. Came to mind that a dynamite shack in that area had blown up. Decided to abandon the chase, and to check on the flame. The flame was bluish and sort of orange too. Could not tell size of flame. Sort of motionless flame, slowly descending. Was still driving the police car and could not pay too much attention to the flame. It was a narrow type of flame. It was like a \"stream down\"-- a funnel type--narrower at top than at bottom. Flame possibly three degrees or so in width--not wide. The flame was possibly a mile south of Socorro, in isolated area.\n\nThe flame about twice as wide at bottom as top, and about four times as high as top was wide. Did not notice any object at top, did not note if top of flame was level. Sun was to west and did not help vision. Had green sun glasses over prescription glasses. Could not see bottom of flame because it was behind the hill.\n\nNo smoke noted. Noted some \"commotion\" at bottom--dust? Possibly from windy day--wind was blowing hard. Clear sunny sky otherwise--just a few clouds scattered over area.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n\nNoise was a roar, not a blast. Not like a jet. Changed from high frequency to low frequency and then stopped. Roar lasted possibly ten seconds--was going towards it at that time on the rough gravel road. Saw flame about as long as heard the sound. Flame same color as best as recall. Sound distinctly from high to low until it disappeared. Both car windows were down. No other spectators noted--no traffic except the car in front--and car in front might have heard it but possibly did not see it because car in front was too close to hill in front, to see the flame.\n\nAfter the roar and flame, did not note anything, while going up the somewhat steep rough hill toward the flame site. Got up about half way first time, wheels started skidding, roar still going on, had to back down and try twice again before made the hill. Hill about sixty feet long, fairly steep and with loose gravel and rock. While beginning third time, noise and flame not noted.\n\nAfter got to top, traveled slowly on the gravel road westwardly. Noted nothing for awhile, for possibly ten or fifteen seconds, went slow, looking around for the dynamite shack--did not recall exactly where the dynamite shack was.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSuddenly noted a shiny type object to south\nabout 150 to 200 yards. It was off the road. At first\nglance, stopped. It looked, at first, like a car turned\nupside down. Thought some kids might have turned over.\nSaw two people in white coveralls very close to the object.\nOne of these persons seemed to turn and look straight at\nmy car and seemed startled--seemed to quickly jump somewhat.\nWhen I first saw the object, (when I thought it\nmight be a car), I saw what appeared to be two legs of\nsome type from the object to the ground. At the time, I\ndidn't pay much attention to what it was--I thought it was\nan accident--I saw the two persons. I didn't pay attention\nto the two \"legs?\". The two \"legs\" were at the bottom\nof the object, slanted outwards to the ground. The object\nmight have been about three and a half feet from the ground\nat that time. I just glanced at it.\nAt this time I started moving my car towards them\nquickly, with idea to help. Had stopped about only a\ncouple seconds. Object was like aluminum--it was whitish\nagainst the mesa background, but not chrome. Seemed like\n in shape and I at first glance took it to be an\noverturned white car. Car appeared turned up like standing\n-4-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\non radiator or on trunk, at this first glance.\nThe only time I saw these two persons was when I\nhad stopped, for possibly two seconds or so, to glance at\nthe object. I don't recall noting any particular shape\nor possibly any hats or headgear. These persons appeared\nnormal in shape--but possibly they were small adults or\nlarge kids.\nThen paid attention to road while drove towards scene.\nRadioed to sheriff's office, \"Socorro 2 to Socorro, possible\n10-44 (accident); I'll be 10-6 (busy) out of the car checking\nthe car down in the arroyo.\"\nStopped car, was still talking on radio, started\nto get out, mike fell down, reached back to put up mike,\nthen replaced radio mike in slot, got out of car and turned\nto go down to where knew the object (car) was.\nAs my mike fell, I got out of car, at scene area,\nI heard about two or three loud \"thumps,\" like someone\npossibly hammering or shutting a door or doors hard. These\n\"thumps\" were possibly a second or less apart. This was\njust before the roar. The persons were not seen when I got\nup to the scene area.\n-5-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nHardly turned around from car when heard roar,\n(was not exactly a blast), very loud roar--at that close\nwas real loud. Not like a jet--knows what jets sound like.\nStarted low frequency quickly, then roar rose in frequency\n(higher tone) and in loudness--from loud to very loud. At\nsame time as roar saw flame. Flame was under the object.\nObject was starting to go straight up--slowly up. Object\nslowly rose straight up. Flame was light blue and at bottom\nwas sort of orange color. From this angle, saw what might\nbe the side of object (not end, as first noted). Difficult\nto describe flame. Thought, from roar, it might blow up.\nFlame might have come from underside of object, at middle,\npossibly a four feet area--very rough guess. Can not\ndescribe flame further except blue and orange. No smoke,\nexcept dust in immediate area.\nAs soon as saw flame and heard roar, turned away,\nran away from object but did turn head several times towards\nobject. Bumped leg on car--back fender area. Car facing\nsouthwest. Glasses fell to ground, left them there. Ran\nto north--car between him and object.\nObject was in shape. It was smooth--no\nwindows or doors. As roar started, it was still on or near\nground. Noted red lettering of some type, like .\n-6-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nInsignia was about two and one-half feet high and about\ntwo feet wide, guess. Was in middle of object, like\n . Object still like aluminum-white.\nAfter fell by car and glasses fell off, kept\nrunning to north with car between me and object. Glanced\nback couple of times. Noted object to rise to about level\nof car, about twenty to twenty-five feet, guess--took I\nguess about six seconds when object started to rise and I\nglanced back. I ran I guess about half way to where I\nducked down--about fifty feet from the car is where I ducked\ndown, just over edge of hill. I guess I had run about\ntwenty-five feet when I glanced back and saw the object about\nlevel with the car and it appeared about directly over the\nplace where it rose from.\nI was still running and I jumped just over the\nhill--I stopped because I did not hear the roar. I was\nscared of the roar, and I had planned to continue running\ndown the hill. I turned around toward the object and at\nsame time put my head towards ground, covering my face with\nmy arms. Being that there was no roar, I looked up, and I\nsaw the object going away from me, in a southwest direction.\nWhen the roar stopped, heard a sharp tone whine from high\ntone to low tone. At end of roar was this whine and the\n-7-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nwhine lasted maybe a second. Then there was complete\nsilence about the object. That's when I lifted up my head\nand saw the object going away from me. It did not come\nany closer to me. It appeared to go in a straight line\nand at same height--possibly ten to fifteen feet from ground,\nand it cleared the dynamite shack by about three feet. Shack\nabout eight feet high. Object was traveling very fast. It\nseemed to rise up and take off immediately across country.\nI ran back to my car and as I ran back, I kept an eye on the\nobject. I picked up my glasses, (I left the sunglasses on\nthe ground), got into the car, and radioed to Nep Lopez,\nradio operator, to \"look out the window, to see if you could\nsee an object.\" He asked, \"What is it?\" I answered, \"It\nlooks like a balloon.\" I don't know if he saw it. If Nep\nlooked out his window, which faces north, he couldn't have\nseen it. I did not tell him at the moment which window to\nlook out of.\nAs I was calling Nep, I could still see the object.\nThe object seemed to lift up slowly, and to \"get small\" in\nthe distance very fast. It seemed to just clear the Box\nCanyon or Six Mile Canyon Mountain. It disappeared as it\n-8-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nwent over the mountain. It had no flame whatsoever as it was traveling over the ground, and no smoke or noise.\n\nCan't tell how long saw object second time (the \"close\" time), possibly twenty seconds--just a guess--from time got out of car, glanced at object, ran from object, jumped over edge of hill, then got back to car and radioed as object disappeared.\n\nJust before Sergeant Chavez got to scene, I got my pen and drew a picture of the insignia on the object.\n\nFeeling in good health. Last drink--two or three beers--was over a month ago. Noted no odors. Noted no sounds other than described. Gave directions to Nep Lopez at radio and to Sergeant M. S. Chavez to get there. Went down to where the object had been and I noted the brush was burning in several places. At that time, I heard Sergeant Chaves, (New Mexico State Police at Socorro), calling me on radio for my location, and I returned to my car, told him he was \"looking at me.\" Then Sergeant Chavez came up, asked me what the trouble was, because I was sweating and he told me I was white, very pale. I asked the Sergeant to see what I saw, and that was the burning brush. Then\n\n-9-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSergeant Chavez and I went to the spot, and Sergeant Chavez pointed out the tracks.\n\n-10-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nAlbuquerque, New Mexico\nMay 8, 1964\n\nIn Reply, Please Refer to File No.\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSOCORRO, NEW MEXICO\nAPRIL 24, 1964\n\nThe following data were obtained from Officer Lonnie Zamora, Police Department, Socorro, New Mexico, the night of April 24, 1964, and early morning, April 25, 1964, as related by Officer Zamora.\n\nLonnie Zamora, 606 Reservoir Street, Socorro, New Mexico, 835-1134, Officer Socorro Police Department about five years, office phone 835-0941, now on 2:00 P. M. to 10:00 P. M. shift.\n\nAbout 5:45 P. M., April 24, 1964, while in Socorro 2 Police Car (1964 Pontiac white) started to chase a car due south from west side of Courthouse. Car was apparently speeding, and was about three blocks in front. At point on Old Rodeo Street, (extension of Park Street south), near George Morillo residence (about one-half mile south of Spring Street). The chased car was going straight ahead toward rodeo grounds. Car chased was a new black Chevrolet, (it might have been Floyd Reynolds' boy, Vivian, about 17). Chased car still about three blocks ahead.\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of any kind. It is the property of the FBI, and is a loan to your agency; it and/or its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nLonnie alone.\n\nAt this time heard a roar and saw a flame in the sky to the southwest some distance away--possibly a half mile or a mile. Came to mind that a dynamite shack in that area had blown up. Decided to abandon the chase, and to check on the flame. The flame was bluish and sort of orange too. Could not tell size of flame. Sort of motionless flame, slowly descending. Was still driving the police car and could not pay too much attention to the flame. It was a narrow type of flame. It was like a \"teardrop down\"--a funnel type--narrower at top than at bottom. Flame possibly three degrees or so in width--not wide. The flame was possibly a mile south of Socorro, in isolated area.\n\nThe flame about twice as wide at bottom as top, and about four times as high as top was wide. Did not notice any object at top, did not note if top of flame was level. Sun was to west and did not help vision. Had green sun glasses over prescription glasses.\n\nCould not see bottom of flame because it was behind the hill.\n\nNo smoke noted. Noted some \"commotion\" at bottom--dust? Possibly from windy day--wind was blowing hard. Clear sunny sky otherwise--just a few clouds scattered over area.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n\nNoise was a roar, not a blast. Not like a jet. Changed from high frequency to low frequency and then stopped. Roar lasted possibly ten seconds--was going towards it at that time on the rough gravel road. Saw flame about as long as heard the sound. Flame same color as best as recall. Sound distinctly from high to low until it disappeared. Both car windows were down. No other spectators noted--no traffic except the car in front--and car in front might have heard it but possibly did not see it because car in front was too close to hill in front, to see the flame.\n\nAfter the roar and flame, did not note anything, while going up the somewhat steep rough hill toward the flame site. Got up about half way first time, wheels started skidding, roar still going on, had to back down and try twice again before made the hill. Hill about sixty feet long, fairly steep and with loose gravel and rock. While beginning third time, noise and flame not noted.\n\nAfter got to top, traveled slowly on the gravel road westwardly. Noted nothing for awhile, for possibly ten or fifteen seconds, went slow, looking around for the dynamite shack--did not recall exactly where the dynamite shack was.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n Suddenly noted a shiny type object to south\nabout 150 to 200 yards. It was off the road. At first\nglance, stopped. It looked, at first, like a car turned\nupside down. Thought some kids might have turned over.\nSaw two people in white coveralls very close to the object.\nOne of these persons seemed to turn and look straight at\nmy car and seemed startled--seemed to quickly jump somewhat.\n When I first saw the object, (when I thought it\nmight be a car), I saw what appeared to be two legs of\nsome type from the object to the ground. At the time, I\ndidn't pay much attention to what it was--I thought it was\nan accident--I saw the two persons. I didn't pay attention\nto the two \"legs?\". The two \"legs\" were at the bottom\nof the object, slanted outwards to the ground. The object\nmight have been about thee and a half feet from the ground\nat that time. I just glanced at it.\n At this time I started moving my car towards them\nquickly, with idea to help. Had stopped about only a\ncouple seconds. Object was like aluminum--it was whitish\nagainst the mesa background, but not chrome. Seemed like\n in shape and I at first glance took it to be an\noverturned white car. Car appeared turned up like standing\n\n-4-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\non radiator or on trunk, at this first glance.\n The only time I saw these two persons was when I\nhad stopped, for possibly two seconds or so, to glance at\nthe object. I don't recall noting any particular shape\nor possibly any hats or headgear. These persons appeared\nnormal in shape--but possibly they were small adults or\nlarge kids.\n Then paid attention to road while drove towards scene.\nRadioed to sheriff's office, \"Socorro 2 to Socorro, possible\n10-44 (accident); I'll be 10-6 (busy) out of the car checking\nthe car down in the arroyo.\"\n Stopped car, was still talking on radio, started\nto get out, mike fell down, reached back to put up mike,\nthen replaced radio mike in slot, got out of car and turned\nto go down to where knew the object (car) was.\n As my mike fell, I got out of car, at scene area,\nI heard about two or three loud \"thumps,\" like someone\npossibly hammering or shutting a door or doors hard. These\n\"thumps\" were possibly a second or less apart. This was\njust before the roar. The persons were not seen when I got\nup to the scene area.\n\n-5-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n Hardly turned around from car when heard roar,\n(was not exactly a blast), very loud roar--at that close\nwas real loud. Not like a jet--knows what jets sound like.\nStarted low frequency quickly, then roar rose in frequency\n(higher tone) and in loudness--from loud to very loud. At\nsame time as roar saw flame. Flame was under the object.\nObject was starting to go straight up--slowly up. Object\nslowly rose straight up. Flame was light blue and at bottom\nwas sort of orange color. From this angle, saw what might\nbe the side of object (not end, as first noted). Difficult\nto describe flame. Thought, from roar, it might blow up.\nFlame might have come from underside of object, at middle,\npossibly a four feet area--very rough guess. Can not\ndescribe flame further except blue and orange. No smoke,\nexcept dust in immediate area.\n As soon as saw flame and heard roar, turned away,\nran away from object but did turn head several times towards\nobject. Bumped leg on car--back fender area. Car facing\nsouthwest. Glasses fell to ground, left them there. Ran\nto north--car between him and object.\n Object was in shape. It was smooth--no\nwindows or doors. As roar started, it was still on or near\nground. Noted red lettering of some type, like ."} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nInsignia was about two and one-half feet high and about\ntwo feet wide, guess. Was in middle of object, like\n . Object still like aluminum-white.\n After fell by car and glasses fell off, kept\nrunning to north with car between me and object. Glanced\nback couple of times. Noted object to rise to about level\nof car, about twenty to twenty-five feet, guess--took I\nguess about six seconds when object started to rise and I\nglanced back. I ran I guess about half way to where I\nducked down--about fifty feet from the car is where I ducked\ndown, just over edge of hill. I guess I had run about\ntwenty-five feet when I glanced back and saw the object about\nlevel with the car and it appeared about directly over the\nplace where it rose from.\n I was still running and I jumped just over the\nhill--I stopped because I did not hear the roar. I was\nscared of the roar, and I had planned to continue running\ndown the hill. I turned around toward the object and at\nsame time put my head towards ground, covering my face with\nmy arms. Being that there was no roar, I looked up, and I\nsaw the object going away from me, in a southwest direction.\nWhen the roar stopped, heard a sharp tone whine from high\ntone to low tone. At end of roar was this whine and the\n\n-7-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nwhine lasted maybe a second. Then there was complete\nsilence about the object. That's when I lifted up my head\nand saw the object going away from me. It did not come\nany closer to me. It appeared to go in a straight line\nand at same height--possibly ten to fifteen feet from ground,\nand it cleared the dynamite shack by about three feet. Shack\nabout eight feet high. Object was traveling very fast. It\nseemed to rise up and take off immediately across country.\nI ran back to my car and as I ran back, I kept an eye on the\nobject. I picked up my glasses, (I left the sunglasses on\nthe ground), got into the car, and radioed to Nep Lopez,\nradio operator, to \"look out the window, to see if you could\nsee an object.\" He asked, \"What is it?\" I answered, \"It\nlooks like a balloon.\" I don't know if he saw it. If Nep\nlooked out his window, which faces north, he couldn't have\nseen it. I did not tell him at the moment which window to\nlook out of.\n As I was calling Nep, I could still see the object.\nThe object seemed to lift up slowly, and to \"get small\" in\nthe distance very fast. It seemed to just clear the Box\nCanyon or Six Mile Canyon Mountain. It disappeared as it\n\n-8-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nwent over the mountain. It had no flame whatsoever as it was traveling over the ground, and no smoke or noise.\n\tCan't tell how long saw object second time (the \"close\" time), possibly twenty seconds--just a guess--from time got out of car, glanced at object, ran from object, jumped over edge of hill, then got back to car and radioed as object disappeared.\n\tJust before Sergeant Chavez got to scene, I got my pen and drew a picture of the insignia on the object.\n\tFeeling in good health. Last drink--two or three beers--was over a month ago. Noted no odors. Noted no sounds other than described. Gave directions to Nep Lopez at radio and to Sergeant M. S. Chavez to get there. Went down to where the object had been and I noted the brush was burning in several places. At that time, I heard Sergeant Chaves, (New Mexico State Police at Socorro), calling me on radio for my location, and I returned to my car, told him he was \"looking at me.\" Then Sergeant Chavez came up, asked me what the trouble was, because I was sweating and he told me I was white, very pale. I asked the Sergeant to see what I saw, and that was the burning brush. Then\n-9-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSergeant Chavez and I went to the spot, and Sergeant Chavez pointed out the tracks.\n-10-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nAlbuquerque, New Mexico\nMay 8, 1964\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSOCORRO, NEW MEXICO\nAPRIL 24, 1964\nThe following data were obtained from Officer Lonnie Zamora, Police Department, Socorro, New Mexico, the night of April 24, 1964, and early morning, April 25, 1964, as related by Officer Zamora.\nLonnie Zamora, 606 Reservoir Street, Socorro, New Mexico, 835-1134, Officer Socorro Police Department about five years, office phone 835-0941, now on 2:00 P. M. to 10:00 P. M. shift.\nAbout 5:45 P. M., April 24, 1964, while in Socorro 2 Police Car (1964 Pontiac white) started to chase a car due south from west side of Courthouse. Car was apparently speeding, and was about three blocks in front. At point on Old Rodeo Street, (extension of Park Street south), near George Morillo residence (about one-half mile south of Spring Street). The chased car was going straight ahead toward rodeo grounds. Car chased was a new black Chevrolet, (it might have been Floyd Reynolds' boy, Vivian, about 17). Chased car still about three blocks ahead.\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of any kind. It is the property of the FBI, and is a loan to your agency; it and/or its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nLonnie alone.\n\tAt this time heard a roar and saw a flame in the sky to the southwest some distance away--possibly a half mile or a mile. Came to mind that a dynamite shack in that area had blown up. Decided to abandon the chase, and to check on the flame. The flame was bluish and sort of orange too. Could not tell size of flame. Sort of motionless flame, slowly descending. Was still driving the police car and could not pay too much attention to the flame. It was a narrow type of flame. It was like a \"stream down\"-- a funnel type--narrower at top than at bottom. Flame possibly three degrees or so in width--not wide. The flame was possibly a mile south of Socorro, in isolated area.\n\tThe flame about twice as wide at bottom as top, and about four times as high as top was wide. Did not notice any object at top, did not note if top of flame was level. Sun was to west and did not help vision. Had green sun glasses over prescription glasses. Could not see bottom of flame because it was behind the hill.\n\tNo smoke noted. Noted some \"commotion\" at bottom--dust? Possibly from windy day--wind was blowing hard. Clear sunny sky otherwise--just a few clouds scattered over area.\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nNoise was a roar, not a blast. Not like a jet. Changed from high frequency to low frequency and then stopped. Roar lasted possibly ten seconds--was going towards it at that time on the rough gravel road. Saw flame about as long as heard the sound. Flame same color as best as recall. Sound distinctly from high to low until it disappeared. Both car windows were down. No other spectators noted--no traffic except the car in front--and car in front might have heard it but possibly did not see it because car in front was too close to hill in front, to see the flame.\n\tAfter the roar and flame, did not note anything, while going up the somewhat steep rough hill toward the flame site. Got up about half way first time, wheels started skidding, roar still going on, had to back down and try twice again before made the hill. Hill about sixty feet long, fairly steep and with loose gravel and rock. While beginning third time, noise and flame not noted.\n\tAfter got to top, traveled slowly on the gravel road westwardly. Noted nothing for awhile, for possibly ten or fifteen seconds, went slow, looking around for the dynamite shack--did not recall exactly where the dynamite shack was.\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSuddenly noted a shiny type object to south\nabout 150 to 200 yards. It was off the road. At first\nglance, stopped. It looked, at first, like a car turned\nupside down. Thought some kids might have turned over.\nSaw two people in white coveralls very close to the object.\nOne of these persons seemed to turn and look straight at\nmy car and seemed startled--seemed to quickly jump somewhat.\nWhen I first saw the object, (when I thought it\nmight be a car), I saw what appeared to be two legs of\nsome type from the object to the ground. At the time, I\ndidn't pay much attention to what it was--I thought it was\nan accident--I saw the two persons. I didn't pay attention\nto the two \"legs?\". The two \"legs\" were at the bottom\nof the object, slanted outwards to the ground. The object\nmight have been about three and a half feet from the ground\nat that time. I just glanced at it.\nAt this time I started moving my car towards them\nquickly, with idea to help. Had stopped about only a\ncouple seconds. Object was like aluminum--it was whitish\nagainst the mesa background, but not chrome. Seemed like\n in shape and I at first glance took it to be an\noverturned white car. Car appeared turned up like standing\n\n-4-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\non radiator or on trunk, at this first glance.\nThe only time I saw these two persons was when I\nhad stopped, for possibly two seconds or so, to glance at\nthe object. I don't recall noting any particular shape\nor possibly any hats or headgear. These persons appeared\nnormal in shape--but possibly they were small adults or\nlarge kids.\nThen paid attention to road while drove towards scene.\nRadioed to sheriff's office, \"Socorro 2 to Socorro, possible\n10-44 (accident); I'll be 10-6 (busy) out of the car checking\nthe car down in the arroyo.\"\nStopped car, was still talking on radio, started\nto get out, mike fell down, reached back to put up mike,\nthen replaced radio mike in slot, got out of car and turned\nto go down to where knew the object (car) was.\nAs my mike fell, I got out of car, at scene area,\nI heard about two or three loud \"thumps,\" like someone\npossibly hammering or shutting a door or doors hard. These\n\"thumps\" were possibly a second or less apart. This was\njust before the roar. The persons were not seen when I got\nup to the scene area.\n\n-5-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nHardly turned around from car when heard roar,\n(was not exactly a blast), very loud roar--at that close\nwas real loud. Not like a jet--knows what jets sound like.\nStarted low frequency quickly, then roar rose in frequency\n(higher tone) and in loudness--from loud to very loud. At\nsame time as roar saw flame. Flame was under the object.\nObject was starting to go straight up--slowly up. Object\nslowly rose straight up. Flame was light blue and at bottom\nwas sort of orange color. From this angle, saw what might\nbe the side of object (not end, as first noted). Difficult\nto describe flame. Thought, from roar, it might blow up.\nFlame might have come from underside of object, at middle,\npossibly a four feet area--very rough guess. Can not\ndescribe flame further except blue and orange. No smoke,\nexcept dust in immediate area.\nAs soon as saw flame and heard roar, turned away,\nran away from object but did turn head several times towards\nobject. Bumped leg on car--back fender area. Car facing\nsouthwest. Glasses fell to ground, left them there. Ran\nto north--car between him and object.\nObject was in shape. It was smooth--no\nwindows or doors. As roar started, it was still on or near\nground. Noted red lettering of some type, like .\n\n-6-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nInsignia was about two and one-half feet high and about\ntwo feet wide, guess. Was in middle of object, like\n . Object still like aluminum-white.\nAfter fell by car and glasses fell off, kept\nrunning to north with car between me and object. Glanced\nback couple of times. Noted object to rise to about level\nof car, about twenty to twenty-five feet, guess--took I\nguess about six seconds when object started to rise and I\nglanced back. I ran I guess about half way to where I\nducked down--about fifty feet from the car is where I ducked\ndown, just over edge of hill. I guess I had run about\ntwenty-five feet when I glanced back and saw the object about\nlevel with the car and it appeared about directly over the\nplace where it rose from.\nI was still running and I jumped just over the\nhill--I stopped because I did not hear the roar. I was\nscared of the roar, and I had planned to continue running\ndown the hill. I turned around toward the object and at\nsame time put my head towards ground, covering my face with\nmy arms. Being that there was no roar, I looked up, and I\nsaw the object going away from me, in a southwest direction.\nWhen the roar stopped, heard a sharp tone whine from high\ntone to low tone. At end of roar was this whine and the\n\n-7-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nwhine lasted maybe a second. Then there was complete\nsilence about the object. That's when I lifted up my head\nand saw the object going away from me. It did not come\nany closer to me. It appeared to go in a straight line\nand at same height--possibly ten to fifteen feet from ground,\nand it cleared the dynamite shack by about three feet. Shack\nabout eight feet high. Object was traveling very fast. It\nseemed to rise up and take off immediately across country.\nI ran back to my car and as I ran back, I kept an eye on the\nobject. I picked up my glasses, (I left the sunglasses on\nthe ground), got into the car, and radioed to Nep Lopez,\nradio operator, to \"look out the window, to see if you could\nsee an object.\" He asked, \"What is it?\" I answered, \"It\nlooks like a balloon.\" I don't know if he saw it. If Nep\nlooked out his window, which faces north, he couldn't have\nseen it. I did not tell him at the moment which window to\nlook out of.\nAs I was calling Nep, I could still see the object.\nThe object seemed to lift up slowly, and to \"get small\" in\nthe distance very fast. It seemed to just clear the Box\nCanyon or Six Mile Canyon Mountain. It disappeared as it\n\n-8-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nwent over the mountain. It had no flame whatsoever as it\nwas traveling over the ground, and no smoke or noise.\n\nCan't tell how long saw object second time (the\n\"close\" time), possibly twenty seconds--just a guess--from\ntime got out of car, glanced at object, ran from object,\njumped over edge of hill, then got back to car and radioed\nas object disappeared.\n\nJust before Sergeant Chavez got to scene, I got\nmy pen and drew a picture of the insiguia on the object.\n\nFeeling in good health. Last drink--two or three\nbeers--was over a month ago. Noted no odors. Noted no\nsounds other than described. Gave directions to Nep Lopez\nat radio and to Sergeant M. S. Chavez to get there. Went\ndown to where the object had been and I noted the brush was\nburning in several places. At that time, I heard Sergeant\nChaves, (New Mexico State Police at Socorro), calling me\non radio for my location, and I returned to my car, told\nhim he was \"looking at me.\" Then Sergeant Chavez came up,\nasked me what the trouble was, because I was sweating and\nhe told me I was white, very pale. I asked the Sergeant\nto see what I saw, and that was the burning brush. Then\n\n-9-"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSergeant Chavez and I went to the spot, and Sergeant\nChavez pointed out the tracks."} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-158"} {"doc_id":"6e67bd75a568cfb3","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\nDefense Futures\n\n03 January 2011\n\nICOD 30 August 2010\n\nDIA-08-1101-023\n\nNegative Mass Propulsion\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nNegative Mass Propulsion\n\nThe Defense Intelligence Reference Document provides non-substantive but authoritative reference information related to intelligence topics or methodologies.\n\nPrepared by:\nTechnology Warning Division (DWO-4)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 72\n\nAdministrative Notes:\n\n(U) COPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2010 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to [REDACTED] AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: JUIAF - DI/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\n1. Introduction ........................................................................ 2\n2. The Theory by Bondi.................................................................. 4\n3. Hund's Nonlinear Newtonian Theory of Gravity .............................................. 6\n4. The Theory of Bondi Revisited ........................................................... 10\n5. The Zitterbewegung Phenomenon as a Manifestation of Negative Masses ............. 10\n6. Planck Aether Hypothesis ............................................................... 14\n7. Dynamic Interpretation of Lorentz Invariance .............................................. 18\n8. Negative Mass Interpretation of the Aharonov-Bohm Effect ................................ 23\n9. Negative Masses in Cosmology ........................................................... 29\n10. The Cusp/Core Problem in Galatic Halos ................................................. 31\n11. Searching for Negative Matter in the Gravitational Potential Well of the Moon...... 32\n12. Making a Tunnel through the Moon ..................................................... 33\n13. Conclusion........................................................................................ 38\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Forces.................................................................................2\nFigure 2. Translation of Mass Dipole................................................................11\nFigure 3. Circular Motion of a Pole-Dipole Particle...................................................12\n\nTables\n\nTable 1. Interactions.............................................................................2\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nNegative Mass Propulsion\nSummary\n\nIt is easy to prove that there are negative masses all around us, albeit hidden behind positive masses. But their use for propulsion by reducing the inertia of matter, for example in the limit of macroscopic bodies with zero rest mass, depends on a technical solution to free them from their imprisonment by positive masses. It appears that there are basically two ways this might be achieved: 1. By the application of strong electromagnetic or gravitational fields or by high particle energies; 2. By searching for places in the universe where nature has already done this separation, and from which the negative masses can be mined.\n\nThe first of these two possibilities is for all practical means excluded, because if possible at all, it would depend on electromagnetic or gravitational fields with strengths beyond what is technically attainable, or on extremely large particle energies likewise not attainable.\n\nWith regard to the 2nd possibility, it has been observed that non-baryonic cold dark matter tends to accumulate near the center of galaxies, or places in the universe which have a large gravitational potential well. Because of the equivalence principle of general relativity, the attraction towards the center of a gravitational potential well, produced by a positive mass, is for negative masses the same as for positive masses. Large amounts of negative masses might have over billions of years been trapped in these gravitational potential wells.\n\nNow it just happens that the center of the moon is a potential well, not too deep that it cannot be reached by making a tunnel through the moon, not possible for the deeper potential well of the earth, where the temperature and pressure are too high. Making a tunnel through the moon, provided there is a good supply of negative mass, could revolutionize interstellar space flight. A sequence of thermonuclear shape charges would be required to make such a tunnel technically feasible.\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n1. Introduction\nIf we extend the law of gravity to negative masses, but hold onto the equivalence of inertial and gravitational masses, we have to distinguish between the following four cases, if a test particle is placed near a gravitational field producing mass (Table 1):\nTable 1. Interactions\nCase | Gravitational field producing mass | Mass of test particle | Motion of test particle\n1 | + | + | attraction\n2 | + | – | attraction\n3 | – | + | repulsion\n4 | – | – | repulsion\nUnder the principle of equivalence if a negative test mass particle would be placed in the gravitational field of earth, it would not fall upwards, as happens in science-fiction antigravity machines. A test particle, regardless of whether it has positive or negative mass, would there always fall down. It would fall upwards only if placed in the field of a large negative mass.\nA somewhat different situation arises if both masses, the field producing mass and the mass of the test particle, have the same absolute value but are permitted to have different signs. There we have to distinguish between the cases shown in Figure 1.\nCase 1 attraction; Case 2 and 3 selfacceleration; Case 4 repulsion\nFigure 1. Forces\n2\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nIf both masses are positive, we have the usual Newtonian attraction. For negative masses, the force has the same magnitude but is repulsive. A quite different situation exists if one mass is positive and the other one is negative. With both forming a mass dipole, the system becomes self-accelerating, because one mass is repelled and the other one attracted. With the two masses having opposite sign, the total energy and momentum of the combined system remains zero for all times, leaving intact the conservation laws of energy and momentum. Under its self-acceleration, the mass dipole would eventually reach the velocity of light. It is this property of self-acceleration without expenditure of energy that has intrigued many researchers and raised the prospect of a propulsion system without limits. We remark that even without an appreciable gravitational interaction, a mass dipole with zero, or close to zero inertial mass, could be accelerated to very high velocities with negligible jet power and energy.\nNo matter how strange the properties associated with negative masses appear to be, there can be little doubt that they can be incorporated into Einstein's gravitational field theory as long as they do not violate the principle of equivalence. In particular, the well known Schwarzschild solution for a positive mass M\nds^2 = dr^2 / (1 - 2γM/c^2 r) + r^2(dθ^2 + sin^2 θ dφ^2) - (1 - 2γM/c^2 r)c^2 dt^2 (1)\ncan be extended to a negative mass, simply by replacing M with -M:\nds^2 = dr^2 / (1 + 2γM/c^2 r) + r^2(dθ^2 + sin^2 θ dφ^2) - (1 + 2γM/c^2 r)c^2 dt^2 , (2)\nwhere γ is Newton's constant.\nOne therefore has to raise the question if nature has not made use of negative masses somewhere. Over and over again we have found that what is possible, within the framework of the fundamental laws of physics, exists. Only one important physical set of laws, Einstein's special theory of relativity appears to forbid the existence of negative masses. This is because in a relativistic quantum field theory the particle number is not a conserved quantity, and the existence of negative masses would make all matter unstable against decay into negative masses.\n3\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nApart from Einstein's purely kinematic interpretation of special relativity, being the expression of a Minkowskian space-time structure, there is an older alternative dynamic interpretation by Lorentz and Poincaré. In it space and time are absolute, but it can explain all relativistic effects as well. It assumes the existence of an aether, with all objects in absolute motion through the aether suffering a Lorentz contraction and time dilation. If this aether has a grainy structure, characterized by some smallest length (e.g., the Planck length ~ 10^-33 cm), then according to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle special relativity would ultimately break down at a high energy. If the length is very small, this energy can be so high as to be far beyond the capabilities of any existing particle accelerator or even beyond the high energy of cosmic ray particles, making both interpretations of special relativity experimentally indistinguishable at the energies presently available.\n2. The Theory of Bondi\nThe first attempt to introduce negative masses into general relativity to describe a mass dipole was made by H. Bondi [1]. For a uniformly accelerating mass dipole Bondi uses the axially symmetric metric by Weyl and Levi-Civita [2]:\nds^2 = e^(2φ) dt^2 [e^(2σ)(dr^2 + dz^2) + r^2 dθ^2], (3)\nwhere φ = φ(r,z) and σ = σ(r,z) satisfy\n(∂^2/∂r^2 + (1/r)∂/∂r + ∂^2/∂z^2) φ = 0 (4)\n∂σ/∂r = r[(∂φ/∂r)^2 - (∂φ/∂z)^2] (5)\n∂σ/∂z = 2r (∂φ/∂r)(∂φ/∂z) . (6)\n4\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nInserting (3-6) into Einstein's nonlinear gravitational field equations, one obtains four nonlinear partial differential equations (κ = 8πγ/c^4) given by\n-κρ = -κT^0_0 = e^(2(φ-σ)) [-2∇^2φ + ∇^2σ - (1/r)∂σ/∂ℜ + (∂φ/∂ℜ)^2 + (∂φ/∂ℨ)^2] (7)\n-κp_11 = -κT^1_1 = κT^2_2 = κp_22 = e^(2(φ-σ)) [(1/r)∂σ/∂ℜ - (∂φ/∂ℜ)^2 + (∂φ/∂ℨ)^2] (8)\n-κp_33 = -κT^3_3 = e^(2(φ-σ)) [∇^2σ - (1/r)∂σ/∂ℜ + (∂φ/∂ℜ)^2 + (∂φ/∂ℨ)^2] (9)\n-κT_12 = 2 (∂φ/∂ℜ)(∂φ/∂ℨ) - r ∂σ/∂ℨ . (10)\nIn solving these equations Bondi assumes that φ is small, which then also implies that because of (5) and (6) σ is small by the second order, reducing the solution of the problem to the linear Laplace equation of the scalar Newtonian potential in empty space. Making this assumption, Bondi can reproduce the uniform acceleration of the mass dipole, as it is expected from an elementary analysis. It is here that we must disagree with Bondi¹, because it can be shown that the nonlinearity of the gravitational field equation leads to a very different result. The nonlinearity also sheds light on why it is so difficult to separate negative from positive masses, whereby negative masses are all around us, but imprisoned by positive masses.\n¹ The author had the pleasure to meet Prof. Bondi on a common flight from Graz, Austria in 1993 (we both are members of an academy which had a meeting in that year in Graz), and ask him how his solution can be correct since it does not include the field of the positive gravitational field mass of a mass dipole. This problem will be analyzed in the next section, and its solution has far reaching consequences.\n5\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n3. Hund's Nonlinear Newtonian Theory of Gravity\nAs explained by Hund [3], already Newton's theory of gravity, in conjunction with the postulates of special relativity, leads to a nonlinear theory of gravity. With this model theory of gravity the nonlinearity of the gravitational field can be much better explained than with Einstein's theory.\nHund begins with the force F acting on a mass m in a \"merry-go-round\":\nF = mg + (mv/c) × G . (11)\nIf g is the gravitational acceleration by real masses with the density ρ, one has in Newton's theory\ndiv g = -4πγρ . (12)\nIn the merry-go-round g has a vertical component from the earth's gravitational field, but also a radial component by the radial centrifugal acceleration which is not source-free. With |g| = ω^2 r, where ω = 2π/T, with T the time of revolution, and r the radial distance from the center of the merry-go-round, one has\ndiv g = 2ω^2 . (13)\nComparing (13) with (12) one sees that the centrifugal force corresponds to a gravitational repulsion of a homogeneous mass density\nμ = -ω^2/(2πγ) . (14)\nFor a typical \"merry-go-round\" one has T = 10 sec, and hence, ω = 0.6 s^-1. For this example one obtains from (14), μ = -10^6 g/cm^3 , taken as an absolute value about equal to the mass density of a white dwarf.\n6\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nThe mass density (14) is not fictitious but represents physical reality. According to Einstein's E = mc2 one obtains for an electric field E the mass density\nu = ε0|E|2 / 8πc2 > 0. (15)\nReplacing ε0 with –(1/γ), one obtains the energy density of the gravitational field\nu = –g2 / 8πγ < 0. (16)\nIt possesses the (negative) mass density\nμ = –g2 / 8πγc2. (17)\nBesides the field g, we have on a \"merry-go-round\" the Coriolis force field\nG = 2cω. (18)\nBy setting G = g and inserting G into (17) with g2 = G2, one obtains the mass density (14). This means the centrifugal force is the gravitational force associated with the mass density of the Coriolis field.\nBut where is this huge negative mass coming from? The obvious answer is by the very large vacuum energy, making itself felt by going to an accelerated frame of reference.\nIn Mach's principle the motion of the distant galaxies as seen in an accelerated frame of reference is responsible for the inertial forces. But this idea is wrong because if by some miracle the distant galaxies were to be set into motion, it would take a long time before their fields propagating with the velocity of light would reach the earth.\nAdding the mass of the Coriolis field to the right side of the equation (12), we have by putting it on the left hand side\ndiv F – 1/2c2 G2 = –4πγρ. (19)\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nIn one further step one should have\ndiv F – 1/2c2 (F2 + G2) = –4πγρ (20)\nor if G = 0 and F = –∇φ, where φ is the Newtonian gravitational potential, one obtains for Poisson's equation:\n∇2φ = 4πγρ – 1/2c2 (∇φ)2. (21)\nAccording to (21) the positive mass as the source of the Newtonian potential is reduced by the negative mass of its field. (Einstein's theory leads to almost the same, except that there the negative gravitational mass density is twice as large.) One can then write\n∇2φ + 1/2c2 (∇φ)2 = 4πγρ. (22)\nThe earth is therefore embedded in a sea of negative mass. Making the substitution\nψ = e φ/c2 (23)\ntransforms (22) into\n∇2ψ = 4πγρ/c2 ψ. (24)\nIf ρ is a delta function at r = 0, where\nm = ∫ 4πr2δ(r)ρdr, (25)\nthen one obtains from (24):\nd/dr (r2 dψ/dr) = mγψ/c2 (26)\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nor φ = mγ/r, (27)\nthe same as in Newton's theory.\nFor a sphere of constant density ρ one obtains the solution\nψ = sinh kr / kr, k2 = 4πγρ/c2. (28)\nHence,\nφ = c2 ln[sinh kr / kr]. (29)\nFor small values of r one has\nφ = (2π/3) γρr2 (30)\nwith the force per unit mass\n|g| = –|∇φ| = (4π/3) γρr, (31)\nas in Newton's theory.\nIn general one has\n|g| = c2 [1/r – √(4πγρ)/c ctnh(√(4πγρ)/c r)], (32)\nwhich in the limit r → ∞ becomes a constant:\n|g| = –√(4πγρ) c, (33)\nwhich implies the self-shielding of a large mass by the negative mass of its own gravitational field surrounding the mass. The shielding becomes important at the distance\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nR = c/√(4πγρ). (34)\nInserting into (34) the average mass density of the universe, R becomes the radius of the universe. The negative gravitational mass of the universe there shields its positive mass.\n4. The Theory of Bondi Revisited\nWe are now in a position to revisit the theory by Bondi. In his treatment of the positive-negative-mass dipole two body problem, he did not take into account the gravitational field of this configuration. According to (27) the gravitational potential of a point mass remains the same as in Newton's theory. This means that the gravitational potential interaction energy for two positive equal masses,\nEpot = –γ m×m / r = –γm2 / r (35)\nis changed for a mass dipole into\nEpot = –γ m×(–m) / r = γm2 / r. (36)\nIn the theory of Bondi this positive field mass must be added to the positive mass, resulting in a mass pole-dipole, which is a mass pole with a superimposed mass dipole. As we will see in the next section this fact has very important consequences [4].\n5. The Zitterbewegung Phenomenon as a Manifestation of Negative Masses\nThere is no fundamental physical principle standing in the way which forbids the existence of negative masses. If this is true, the question is: Where are these negative masses? The recently noticed large bubbles or voids observed in intergalactic space could possibly be explained by the repulsive force of negative masses assumed to occupy the voids, but alternative, less exotic, explanations have been offered as well. However, there is at least one fundamental phenomenon which strongly speaks for the\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nexistence of negative masses. It is the spin of the fermions, like the spin of the electron. Fermions are described by Dirac's relativistic wave equation. This equation has both positive and negative energy components and because of the mass-energy relation, it therefore must have negative mass components. According to Schrödinger [4], it is these negative mass components which lead to the phenomenon of the spin. Since the overall mass of the electron is positive, the occurrence of negative masses in the Dirac equation must mean that the electron is a mass pole with a superimposed mass dipole [5].\nThe spin is definitely not an intrinsic rotational motion of a finite size particle, as older models had suggested it to be. The original model by Uhlenbeck and Goudsmit, for example, cannot possibly be correct because it requires superluminal rotation velocities for an electron with the classical radius r0 = e2/mc2.\nIf we consider the linear motion of a mass dipole (Figure 2), we immediately see that its translation generates angular momentum. Construction of a mass pole with a superimposed mass dipole can simply be done by choosing the positive mass slightly larger than the magnitude of its negative counterpart. For such a pole-dipole particle the center of mass S is outside the line connecting both masses (Figure 3) with its motion taking place on a circle of radius rc.\n+ m+v\nv\n–|m–|v\n–\nFigure 2. Translation of mass dipole.\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nv→c m⁺ m⁻ r rc S\n\nFigure 3. Circular motion of a pole-dipole particle.\n\nBecause it is self-accelerating the circular motion will eventually reach the velocity of light. The connection with Schrödinger's analysis is reached if one puts in Planck's constant and m as the electron mass\n\nrc = h/2mc, (37)\n\nwhereby the circular motion around S produces just the angular momentum h/2 as in Dirac's equation.\n\nThe velocity-of-light result was first obtained by Breit [6], according to which Dirac's equation predicts a local electron velocity equal to the velocity of light. Even though its time-averaged velocity is always less than the velocity of light, this means that the electron, represented by the pole-dipole configuration, makes a circular luminal motion onto which a subluminal motion of the center of mass S is superimposed. The trajectory of the resulting motion is a screw-line, but it is the motion of S only which one identifies with the (time-averaged) electron velocity. The result derived from this simple pole-dipole model is in beautiful agreement with Schrödinger's analysis of the Dirac equation,\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nin which the luminal rotational motion emerges as a fluctuation of the electron coordinate, called by Schrodinger Zitterbewegung (German for quivering motion).\n\nWe may analyze the simple pole-dipole model in more detail as follows. If the positive and negative masses are m⁺, m⁻, with m⁺ − |m⁻| << m⁺, and with the mass pole given by\n\nm = m⁺ − |m⁻|, (38)\n\nthe mass dipole is\n\np = m⁺r ~ |m⁻|r (39)\n\nwhere r << rc is the distance of separation in between m⁺ and m⁻. The center of mass is determined by\n\nm⁺rc = |m⁻|(rc + r). (40)\n\nThe angular momentum then becomes (ω is the angular velocity of circular motion with rcω → c):\n\n|J| = |[m⁺rc² − |m⁻|(rc + r)²]ω|\n\n= m⁺rcrω\n= m⁺rc (41)\n\nComparing (40) with (37) shows that\n\n2m⁺rc = h (42)\n\nand\n\nm/m⁺ = r/rc. (43)\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nExperimentally, the electron is indistinguishable from a point. This would make r = 0. In reality its size must be finite but in principle can be very small. This means that m⁺ (and |m⁻|) are likely to be very much larger than m.\n\nIt has been conjectured by Hönl and Papapetrou [5] that the electron is a pole-dipole particle where the surplus positive energy comes from the positive gravitational interaction energy of a very large positive m⁺ mass with a likewise very large negative m⁻ = −|m⁺| mass. According to this hypothesis one would have for the electron rest mass energy\n\nmc² = γ|m⁺|² / r. (44)\n\nCombining (44) with (42) one can compute m⁺. The result is [5]:\n\nm⁺ = ∛(mch / 2γ) ~ 6 X 10⁻¹³ g, (45)\n\nlarger by a factor 3.6×10¹¹ times the mass of the proton.\n\nWe therefore see that there are huge amounts of negative masses bound to positive masses in Dirac spinors. It shows that it cannot be a simple matter to free the negative masses from the positive masses. And it explains why the masses of the elementary particles are so much smaller than the Planck mass, m_p ~ 10⁻⁵ g.\n\n6. Planck Aether Hypothesis [7,8]\n\nWe make here the proposition that the fundamental group is SU2, and that by Planck's conjecture the fundamental equations of physics contain as free parameters only the Planck length r_p, the Planck mass m_p and Planck time t_p (γ Newton's constant, h Planck's constant, c the velocity of light):\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nr_p = √(hγ/c³) ≈ 10⁻³³ cm\n\nm_p = √(hc/γ) ≈ 10⁻⁵ g\n\nt_p = √(hγ/c⁵) ≈ 10⁻⁴⁴ s.\n\nThe assumption that SU2 is the fundamental group means that nature works like a computer with a binary number system. Since SU2 is isomorphic to SO3, the rotation group in R3, this explains why natural space is three-dimensional.\n\nThe Planck's aether conjecture is the assumption that the vacuum of space is densely filled with an equal number of positive and negative Planck mass particles, with each Planck length volume on the average occupied by one Planck mass, with the Planck mass particles interacting with each other by the Planck force over a Planck length, and with Planck mass particles of equal sign repelling and those of opposite sign attracting each other. The particular choice made for the sign of the Planck force is the only one that keeps the Planck aether stable. While Newton's action-reaction remains valid for the interaction of equal Planck mass particles, it is violated for the interaction of a positive with a negative Planck mass particle, even though globally the total linear momentum of the Planck mass plasma is conserved, with the recoil absorbed by the Planck aether as a whole.\n\nIt is the local violation of Newton's action-reaction which leads to quantum mechanics at the most fundamental level, as can be seen as follows: Under the Planck force F_p = m_p c² / r_p, the velocity fluctuation of a Planck mass particle interacting with a Planck mass particle of opposite sign is Δv = (F_p/m_p) t_p = (c²/r_p)(r_p/c) = c, and hence yields the momentum fluctuation Δp = m_p c. But since Δq = r_p and because m_p r_p c = h, one obtains Heisenberg's uncertainty relation Δp Δq = h for a Planck-mass particle. Accordingly, the quantum fluctuations are explained by the interaction with hidden negative masses, with energy borrowed from the sea of hidden negative masses.\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAccording to Newtonian mechanics and Planck's conjecture, the interaction of a positive with a negative Planck-mass particle leads to a velocity fluctuation a_p t_p = c with a displacement of the particle equal to δ = (1/2) a_p t_p² = r_p / 2, where a_p = F_p/m_p. Therefore, a Planck-mass particle immersed in the Planck aether makes a stochastic quivering motion (Zitterbewegung) with the velocity\n\nv_D = −(r_p c / 2)(∇n/n), (46)\n\nwhere n = 1/r_p³ is the average number density of positive or negative Planck mass particles. The kinetic energy of this diffusion process is given by\n\n(m_p/2) v_D² = (m_p/8) r_p² c² (∇n/n)² = (h²/8m_p)(∇n/n)². (47)\n\nPutting\n\nv = (h/m_p) ∇S, (48)\n\nwhere S is the Hamilton action function and v is the velocity of the Planck aether, the Lagrange density for the Planck aether is\n\nL = n[h ∂S/∂t + h²/(2m_p)(∇S²) + U + h²/(8m_p)(∇n/n)²]. (49)\n\nVariation of (49) with regard to S according to\n\n∂/∂t(∂L/∂(∂S/∂t)) + ∂/∂t(∂L/∂(∂S/∂r)) = 0 (50)\n\nleads to\n\n∂n/∂t + (h/m_p) ∇(n∇S) = 0 (51)\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nor\n∂n/∂t + ∇(nv) = 0, (52)\nwhich is the continuity equation of the Planck aether. Variation with regard to n according to\n(∂L/∂n) − ∂/∂r (∂L/∂(∂n/∂r)) = 0 (53)\nleads to\nh ∂S/∂t + U + h²/(2m_p)(∇S²) + h²/(4m_p)[ (1/2)((∇n)/n)² − (∇²n)/n ] = 0 (54)\nor\nh ∂S/∂t + U + h²/(2m_p)(∇S²) + h²/(2m_p) (∇²√n)/√n = 0. (55)\nWith the Madelung transformation\nψ = √n e^{iS}, ψ* = √n e^{−iS}, (56)\none obtains from (51) and (55) the Schrödinger equation\nih ∂ψ/∂t = −h²/(2m_p) ∇²ψ + Uψ. (57)\nIn the Planck aether hypothesis all particles, save and except the Planck mass particles, are quasi-particles of the Planck aether, like the phonons, rotons, excitons, etc., of condensed matter physics, and by the wave structure of the Planck aether are Lorentz invariant. In forming quantized vortices, the Planck aether also has vortex waves, simulating Maxwell's and Einstein's electromagnetic and gravitational waves. Dirac spinors are made possible by the negative masses of the Planck aether.\n17\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nQuantum mechanics predicts for each harmonic oscillator the zero-point energy (1/2)hω, which has to be multiplied with the volume element in frequency space 4πω²dω, to obtain the zero-point energy spectrum\nf(ω)dω = const × ω³dω. (58)\nNow (58) turns out to be just the only spectrum that is Lorentz invariant. But the spectrum (58) is also the only one which does not lead to a friction force on a charged particle moving through an electromagnetic spectrum with this frequency dependence. This means that special relativity is a consequence of quantum mechanics, leading to the zero point vacuum energy, and can be interpreted by saying that the zero-point vacuum energy \"generates\" the Minkowski space-time.\n7. Dynamic Interpretation of Lorentz Invariance\nA cut-off at the Planck frequency generates a distinguished reference system in which the zero-point energy spectrum is isotropic and at rest. In this distinguished reference system, the scalar potential from which the forces are to be derived satisfies the inhomogeneous wave equation:\n−(1/c²)(∂²Φ/∂t²) + ∇²Φ = −4πρ(r,t), (59)\nwhere ρ(r,t) are the sources of this field. For a body in static equilibrium at rest in the distinguished reference system for which the sources are those of the body itself one has\n∇²Φ = −4πρ(r). (60)\nIf set into absolute motion with the velocity v along x-axis, the coordinates of the reference system at rest with the moving body are obtained by the Galilei transformation:\n18\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nx′ = x − vt,\ny′ = y,\nz′ = z,\nt′ = t (61)\ntransforming (59) into\n−(1/c²)(∂²Φ′/∂t′²) + (2v/c²)(∂²Φ′/∂x′∂t′) + (1 − v²/c²)(∂²Φ′/∂x′²) + ∂²Φ′/∂y′² + ∂²Φ′/∂z′² = −4πρ′(r′,t′). (62)\nAfter the body has settled into a new equilibrium in which ∂/∂t′ = 0, one has instead of (60)\n(1 − v²/c²)(∂²Φ′/∂x′²) + ∂²Φ′/∂y² + ∂²Φ′/∂z² = −4πρ(x′,y,z). (63)\nComparison of (63) with (60) shows that the left-hand side of (63) is the same if one sets Φ′ = Φ and dx′ = dx√(1 − v²/c²). This implies a uniform contraction of the body by the factor √(1 − v²/c²) because the sources are contracted by the factor √(1 − v²/c²) as well, whereby the right-hand side of (63) becomes equal to the right-hand side of (60). Since the zero-point energy is invariant under a Lorentz transformation, the quantum potential changes in the same way as Φ. The body therefore sustains its static equilibrium under a contraction by the factor √(1 − v²/c²) if set into absolute motion, explaining the Lorentz contraction dynamically.\nThe clock retardation effect can be derived from the contraction effect, and from there the Lorentz transformation. Following Builder [9] this original interpretation of Lorentz invariance by Lorentz and Poincaré has been worked out in every detail by Prokhovnik [10]. To derive the clock retardation effect from the contraction effect one considers a light clock, which is a rod with mirrors attached to its two ends in between which a light signal is sent forth and back. If the length of the rod is l, and if the rod rests in the distinguished reference system, the time needed for the light signal to be sent forth and back is\n19\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nt₀ = 2l/c. (64)\nIf prior to being set into motion the rod is inclined against the x-axis by the angle φ, it appears to be inclined against the x-axis by the different angle ψ after set into motion, with ψ expressed through φ by\ntan ψ = γ tan φ (65)\nγ = (1 − v²/c²)^(−1/2).\nThe absolute motion then contracts the rod from l to l′:\nl′ = l√(1 − (v²/c²)cos²φ) = l / (γ√(1 − (v²/c²)sin²ψ)). (66)\nRelative to the moving rod the velocity of light is anisotropic, and for the to and fro directions given by\nc₊ = √(c² − v² sin²ψ) − v cos ψ\nc₋ = √(c² − v² sin²ψ) + v cos ψ (67)\nwith the time t′ for a to and fro signal given by\nt′ = l′/c₊ + l′/c₋ = γt₀. (68)\nTherefore, as seen from an observer at rest in the distinguished reference system the clock goes slower by the factor γ = 1/√(1 − v²/c²), independent of the inclination of the rod making up the clock. With solid bodies held together by electromagnetic forces, clocks made from solid matter should behave like light clocks. As it was claimed by Poincaré, it should for this reason be possible to obtain the Lorentz transformations solely from the contraction effect with a proper convention about the synchronization of clocks.\nAccording to Einstein, two clocks, A and B, are synchronized if\n20\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nt_B = (1/2)(t_A¹ + t_A²), (69)\nwhere t_A¹ is the time a light signal is emitted from A to B, reflected at B back to A, arriving at A at the time t_A², and where it is assumed that the time t_B at which the reflection at B takes place is equal to the arithmetic average of t_A¹ and t_A². Only by making this assumption does the velocity of light turn out always to be isotropic and equal to c. From an absolute point of view, the following rather is true. If t_R is the absolute reflection time of the light signal at clock B, one has for the out and return journeys of the light signal from A to B and back to A, if measured by an observer in an absolute system at rest in the distinguished reference system:\nγ(t_R − t_A¹) = d/c₊\nγ(t_A² − t_R) = d/c₋ (70)\nwhere d is the distance between both clocks, and where c₊ and c₋ are given by (67). Adding the equations (70) one obtains\nc(t_A² − t_A¹) = 2γd√(1 − (v²/c²)sin²ψ). (71)\nIf an observer at rest with the clock wants to measure the distance from A to B, he can measure the time it takes a light signal to go from A to B and back to A. If he assumes that the velocity of the light is constant and isotropic in all inertial reference systems, including the one he is in, moving together with A and B with the absolute velocity v, the distance is\nd′ = (c/2)(t_A² − t_A¹). (72)\nAnd because of (71)\nd′ = γd√(1 − (v²/c²)sin²ψ). (73)\n21\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nComparing this result with (66), one sees that he would obtain the same distance d′, if he uses a contracted rod as a measuring stick, or Einsteins's constant light velocity postulate. The velocity of light between A and B by using a rod to measure the distance and the time it takes a light signal in going from A to B and back to A, of course, will turn out to be equal to c, because according to (72)\n\n2d′ / (t²_A − t¹_A) = c . (74)\n\nRather than using a reflected light signal to measure the distance d′, the observer at A may try to measure the one-way velocity of light by first synchronizing the clock B with A and then measure the time for a light signal to go from A to B. However, since this synchronization procedure also uses reflected light signals, the result is the same. For the velocity he finds\n\nd′ / (t_B − t¹_A) = d′ / (1/2(t¹_A + t²_A) − t¹_A) = 2d′ / (t²_A − t¹_A) = c . (75)\n\nBy subtracting the equations (70) one finds that\n\nt_R = t_B + (γ/c²) vd cos ψ , (76)\n\nwhich shows that from an absolute point of view the \"true\" reflection time t_R at clock B is only then equal to t_B, if v = 0. From an absolute point of view the propagation of light is isotropic only in the distinguished reference system, but anisotropic in a reference system in absolute motion against the distinguished reference system. This anisotropy remains hidden due to the impossibility to measure the one-way velocity of light. The impossibility is expressed in the Lorentz transformations themselves, containing the scalar c² rather than the vector c, through which an anisotropic light propagation would have to be expressed.\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n8. Negative Mass Interpretation of the Aharonov-Bohm Effect [11]\n\nIn Maxwell's equations the electric and magnetic fields can be expressed through a scalar potential Φ and a vector potential A:\n\nE = −(1/c)(∂A/∂t) − grad Φ\nH = curl A (77)\n\nE and H remain unchanged under the gauge transformation of the potentials\n\nΦ′ = Φ − (1/c)(∂f/∂t),\nA′ = A + grad f (78)\n\nwhere f is called the gauge function. Imposing on Φ and A the Lorentz gauge condition,\n\n(1/c)(∂Φ/∂t) + div A = 0 , (79)\n\nthe gauge function must satisfy the wave equation\n\n−(1/c²)(∂²f/∂t²) + ∇²f = 0. (80)\n\nIn an electromagnetic field the force on a charge e is\n\nF = e[E + (1/c) v × H]\n= e[−(1/c)(∂A/∂t) − grad Φ + (1/c) v × curl A]. (81)\n\nBy making a gauge transformation of the Hamilton operator in the Schrödinger wave equation, the wave function transforms as\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nψ′ = ψ exp[ie f / hc], (82)\n\nleaving invariant the probability density ψ*ψ .\n\nTo give gauge invariance a hydrodynamic interpretation, we compare (81) with the force acting on a test body of mass m placed into the moving Planck aether. This force follows Euler's equation and is\n\nF = m dv/dt = m[∂v/∂t + grad(v²/c) − v × curl v] . (83)\n\nComplete analogy between (81) and (83) is established if one sets\n\nΦ = −(m/2e) v²\nA = −(mc/e) v . (84)\n\nAccording to (78) and (82), Φ and A shift the phase of a Schrödinger wave by\n\nδφ = (e/h) ∫ Φ dt\n\nδφ = −(e/ħc) ∮ A · ds . (85)\n\nThe corresponding expressions for a gravitational field can be directly obtained from the equivalence principle [3]. If ∂v/∂t is the acceleration and ω the angular velocity of the universe relative to a reference system assumed to be a rest, the inertial forces in this system are\n\nF = m[∂v/∂t + ω̇ × r − ω × (ω × r) − 2 ω × v] . (86)\n\nFor (86) we write\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nF = m[Ê + (1/c) v × Ĥ] , (87)\n\nwhere\n\nÊ = ∂v/∂t + ω̇ × r − ω × (ω × r)\n\nĤ = −2c ω . (88)\n\nWith\n\ncurl(ω̇ × r) = 2ω̇\n\ndiv(−ω × (ω × r)) = 2ω² , (89)\n\none has\n\ndiv Ĥ = 0\n\n(1/c)(∂Ĥ/∂t) + curl Ê = 0 . (90)\n\nÊ and Ĥ can be derived from a scalar and vector potential\n\nÊ = −(1/c)(∂Â/∂t) − grad Φ\n\nĤ = curl  . (91)\n\nApplied to a rotating reference system one has\n\nΦ̂ = −(1/2)(ω × r)²\n = −c(ω × r) (92)\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nor\n\nΦ̂ = −v²/2\n = −c v (93)\n\nApart from the factor m/e, this is same as (84).\n\nFor weak gravitational fields produced by slowly moving matter, Einstein's linearized gravitational field equations permit the gauge condition (replacing the Lorentz gauge)\n\n(4/c)(∂Φ/∂t) + div  = 0\n\n∂Â/∂t = 0 .\n\nWith the gauge transformation for Φ and A\n\nΦ′ = Φ\nÂ′ =  + grad f (94)\n\nwhere f has to satisfy the potential equation\n\n∇²f = 0 . (95)\n\nFor a stationary gravitational field the vector potential changes phase of the Schrödinger wave function according to\n\nψ′ = ψ exp[im f / hc], (96)\n\nleading to phase shift on a closed path\n\nδφ = −(m/ħc) ∮  · ds\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nδφ = −(m/ħ)∮v · ds (97)\n\nIn the hydrodynamic interpretation suggested by the Planck aether hypothesis, the phase shifts caused by either the magnetic or the gravitational vector potential result from a circular flow of the Planck aether. The principle of equivalence can precisely relate this circular flow to the angular velocity of a rotating platform. According to (93), one has for the gravitational vector potential in a rotating frame of reference\n\n = −ωcr\n\nwith the phase shift given by (97). One can apply (97) to the Sagnac effect for photons of frequency ν. By putting mc² = hν = 2πħν, with the result that\n\nδφ = −(2πνℏ/c²)∮v · ds\n\nδφ = 2ωπr² (2πν/c²) (97)\n\nthe same as predicted by quantum mechanics.\n\nWe now compute the phase shift (85) by a magnetic vector potential. To make a comparison with the gravitational vector potential in the Sagnac effect, we consider the magnetic field produced by an infinitely long cylindrical solenoid of radius R. Inside the solenoid the field is constant, vanishing outside. If the magnetic field inside the solenoid is H, the vector potential is\n\nA_φ = (1/2) Hr r < R\n\nA_φ = (1/2) HR²/r r > R. (98)\n\nAccording to (85) the vector potential on a closed path leads to the phase shift\n\n27"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nδφ = −(e/hc) Hπr² r < R\n\nδφ = −(e/hc) HπR² r > R. (99)\n\nAs noted by Aharonov and Bohm [11], there is a phase shift for r > R, even though for r > R, H = 0 (because for r > R, curl A = 0).\n\nExpressing A by (84) through v, the hypothetical circular aether velocity, one has\n\nv_φ = −(e/2mc) Hr r < R\n\nv_φ = −(e/2mc) HR²/r r > R. (100)\n\nOne sees that inside the coil the velocity profile is the same as in a rotating frame of reference, having outside the coil the form of potential vortex. If expressed in terms of the aether velocity the phase shift becomes\n\nδφ = −(m/ħ)∮v · ds (101)\n\nthe same as (97) for the vector potential created by a gravitational field, and hence the same as in the Sagnac experiment and neutron interference experiment. But for the magnetic vector potential the aether velocity can easily become much larger than in any rotating platform experiment. According to (102), the velocity reaches a maximum at r = R, where it is\n\n|v_max|/c = eHR/(2mc²). (102)\n\nFor electrons this is |v_max|/c = 3×10⁻⁴HR, where H is measured in Gauss. For H = 10⁴ G, this would mean that v_max ≥ c for R > 0.3 cm. If this would be same aether velocity felt on a rotating platform, it would lead to an enormous centrifugal and Coriolis field inside the coil, obviously not observed.\n\n28"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe Planck aether model can give a simple explanation for this paradox. The Planck aether consists of two superfluid components, one composed of positive Planck masses and the other one of negative Planck masses. The two components can freely flow through each other, making possible two configurations, one where both components are corotating and one where they are counterrotating. The corotating configuration is realized on a rotating platform, where it leads to the Sagnac and neutron interference effects. This suggests that in the presence of the magnetic vector potential the two superfluid components are counterrotating. Outside the coil, where curl A = 0, the magnetic energy density vanishes, implying that the magnitudes of both velocities are exactly the same. Inside the coil, where curl A ≠ 0, there must be a small imbalance in the velocity of the positive over the negative Planck masses to result in a positive energy density.\n\n9. Negative Masses in Cosmology\n\nIn the Planck aether theory, the negative gravitational field energy surrounding a mass is due to an excess of negative over positive mass, and the negative mass surrounding a highly collapsed spherical body or black hole is of the same order of magnitude as the positive mass accumulated inside the collapsed body. An assembly of interacting positive and negative masses can, in general, not lead to a thermodynamic equilibrium. If all the positive masses are separated from the negative ones, it is sufficient to require that each mass species reaches thermodynamic equilibrium. It was shown by Vysin [12] that an assembly of negative masses can acquire thermodynamic equilibrium provided the temperature is negative. The kinetic energy of a negative Planck mass is negative, and an assembly of negative Planck masses has, for this reason, a negative temperature. It therefore can reach thermodynamic equilibrium.\n\nWe now make the following hypothesis:\n\nIf an assembly of positive and negative masses, with the total energy equal to zero, is brought together, the temperature and hence entropy of the mixture will go to zero.\n\n29"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThis hypothesis is the only one consistent with Nernst's theorem. It, of course, implies that an assembly of positive and negative masses can perfectly mix because otherwise no equilibrium can be reached. To satisfy this hypothesis, we assume that the negative masses have negative entropy. Only the assumption that an assembly of negative masses has negative entropy permits an analytic continuation of the entropy from positive to negative temperatures. If the entropy for negative temperatures would be counted positive, the function dS/dT would be discontinuous at T = 0.\n\nFor the entropy of a mixture of positive and negative masses to become zero requires an exact correlation in the disorder of the positive mass gas with the disorder of the negative mass gas. This is certainly true if the negative mass is equal to the negative mass of the gravitational field of the positive mass, because the Newtonian gravitational field of each particle, all the way down to the smallest dimension, is precisely correlated to the position of the particle. The entropy of the positive mass of matter and the entropy of the negative mass of its gravitational field (correlated to the entropy of the positive mass which is the source of this field) might therefore be called complementary (like a positive and negative photographic image). The expansion from a very small phase space volume would then be possible, because if the positive and negative masses are densely packed within the same volume, not only their energy, but also their entropy would cancel.\n\nThe time needed to bring back the universe to its original low entropy state, is the Poincaré recurrence time. While under normal conditions this time is huge, it may in a dense mixture of positive and negative masses with a divergent acceleration become quite small. This might explain why the initial entropy of the universe is very small. The Planck aether hypothesis gives a plausible explanation for the observed vanishing of the sum of all charges, like the electric, color and weak charges. With the phenomenon of charge explained to result from the zero point fluctuations of Planck masses bound in vortex filaments and with an equal number of positive and negative Planck masses, the sum of all the charges must vanish. That this should be also be true for the gravitational charges finds its expression in the compensation of the positive energy in the universe by its negative gravitational energy. This compensation explains why the flatness parameter is Ω=1.\n\n30"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFurthermore, with the sum of all gravitational charges equal to zero, the cosmological constant Λ playing the role of a kind of charge, demands that also Λ = 0.\n\nFinally, with the negative entropy of the negative Planck masses playing the role of a kind of photographic negative for the positive entropy of the positive Planck masses, the total entropy, made up from the sum of the positive and negative Planck masses, would also be equal to zero.\n\nIn summary we may write\n\n∑charges = 0 (103)\n\nwith the cosmological consequence\n\nΩ−1 = Λ = S = 0. (104)\n\nThe horizon problem is here resolved by superluminal electromagnetic and gravitational shock waves during the high density phase of the cosmological evolution, not by an inflationary expansion of space.\n\n10. The Cusp/Core Problem in Galactic Halos\n\nWe have seen that there appears to be strong evidence for the existence of negative matter in the universe. And we have also given reasons that negative matter might be hidden behind positive matter, forming pole-dipole Dirac spinor configurations neutralizing the negative matter. This still leaves open the question as to whether in certain regions of space there might be a surplus of negative over positive matter, and if negative matter can be \"mined\" from such regions.\n\nIt has been conjectured by Forward [13] that negative matter might be located in the intergalactic voids, explaining the \"bubble\" structure of the metagalaxy. The negative mass in the voids would produce gravitational potential hills repelling all matter, positive and negative, like the positive matter of the galaxies produces gravitational potential wells attracting all matter, positive and negative. But the accumulation of negative matter in the gravitational wells of positive matter reduces and flattens the\n\n31"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ndepth of the wells. This simple fact might explain the unsolved cusp/core problem of galactic halos [14].\n\nBut what happens in the center of galaxies must also happen to a lesser degree in the center of the sun, the planets, the earth and the moon. To \"mine\" negative matter, if it should exist there, excludes the sun, and also all planets, that have a hot molten core. This does not exclude the moon, however, having the deepest potential well near the earth, with only hot rocks in its center accessible by advanced nuclear mining technology, permitting in principle constructing a tunnel through the moon [15].\n\n11. Searching for Negative Matter in the Gravitational Potential Well of the Moon\n\nThe radius of the moon is R=1.74×10^8 cm and the gravitational acceleration at its surface is g0 ≅1.62×10^2 cm/s^2. At a distance r < R from its center the gravitational acceleration is\n\ng(r)=-g0(r/R) (105)\n\nand the pressure balance equation is\n\ndp/dr = -ρg0 r/R (106)\n\nwhere p = p(r) is the pressure for r < R. The pressure at the center therefore is\n\npmax = (ρg0/R)∫(0 to R) r dr = (1/2)ρg0R. (107)\n\nWith ρ ≅ 3.33 g/cm^3 the average density of the moon, one finds that pmax ≅ 5×10^10 dyn/cm^3 ≅ 50,000 atm.\n\nThe temperature T can be estimated from the equation pmax = nkT, where k ≡ 1.38×10^-16 erg/K is the Boltzmann constant and n ≅ 10^23 cm^-3 the atomic number"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"density of the rocks. For pmax ≅ 5×10^10 dyn/cm^2 one finds T ≅ 4×10^3 K. Both the pressure and the temperature are technically manageable, the pressure with layers of shattered rocks around a tunnel passing through the center of the moon, and the temperature with some cooling. Seismic measurements suggest that the center of the moon is made up of hot rocks.\n\nIf appreciable amounts of negative matter have accumulated over billions of years in the center of the moon, it is more likely that this matter is in the form of ultra-light matter, perhaps by an order of magnitude lighter than ordinary matter. There are indications that a Swedish research group has found evidence for the existence of an ultra-dense phase of deuterium, about more than 100,000 times more dense than water [16]. Suppose that in the center of the moon the accumulation of negative matter has led to a form of matter which is 100,000 times lighter than steel, but still has the strength of steel. This would not lead to a negative-positive mass self-chasing mass dipole as envisioned by Forward [13], but to something very important for space-flight, because it would dramatically reduce the energy requirements to accelerate a space craft made from such ultra-light material.\n\nThe question as to whether there is such an unusual substance in the center of the moon can probably be answered by seismic wave tomography, obtained by nuclear explosions set off on the surface of the moon.\n\n12. Making a Tunnel through the Moon [15]\n\nThe cohesive energy of rocks is of the order εr ≈10^10 erg/cm^3. Therefore, the explosive yield needed to shatter a spherical volume of radius r is\n\nE ≅(4π/3)εr r^3. (108)\n\nThe energy released in a kiloton nuclear explosion is E ≈4×10^19 erg. With this energy, the radius of the crushed rocks would be r ≈10^3 cm (= 10 m), and with a 10 kiloton explosion it would be twice as large."} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nTo make a tunnel, a cylindrical, rather than spherical, volume of crushed rocks is desired. For this reason a thermonuclear shape charge or an explosive lens is better suited to shatter the rocks.\n\nIn the center of the moon the temperature is several thousand degrees centigrade. With the heat diffusion equation given by\n\n∂T/∂t = χ∇^2 T, (109)\n\nwhere χ is the heat diffusion coefficient, the diffusion time for a layer of thickness x is\n\nτ = x^2/χ. (110)\n\nFor lunar rocks one has χ ≅4×10^-3 cm^2/s. Taking the example x=20m=2×10^3 cm, one finds that τ=10^9 s ≅30 yr, and at the high rock temperatures the heat diffusion time would be uncomfortably long.\n\nThe situation is drastically changed for a layer of crushed rocks, because there it is possible to remove heat by a coolant pumped through the porous medium of the crushed rocks. At the high temperatures of several thousand degrees centigrade, a liquid alkali metal, for example lithium, abundantly available on the moon, could be used as a coolant. The velocity the coolant diffuses into the crushed rocks is determined by Darcy's law\n\nv = -D grad p, (111)\n\nwhere p is the pressure, D = κ/ρg, with κ ~ 1 cm/s a typical value. If the pressure gradient is provided by the gravitational force one has grad p = ρg and hence\n\n|v| = κ ~ 1 cm/s. (112)"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nThe time needed for the liquid metal to pass through a ~ 20 m thick layer is then ~ 2 × 10^3 seconds ~ 1 hour. The specific heat per unit volume of the coolant is ρcv ~ 3 x 10^7 erg/cm^3K, and for T = 3 × 10^3 K one has ρcvT ~ 10^11 erg/cm^3.\n\nThe heat per unit volume which has to be removed from the crushed rocks is of the order p, where p is the rock pressure. In the center of the moon where p = 5 × 10^10 dyn/cm^2, this energy is 5 × 10^10 erg/cm^3. It thus follows that the volume of the liquid coolant must be about ½ of the rock volume to be cooled. For a rock volume of (20 cm)^3 ~ 10^4 m^3, a coolant volume of about 5 × 10^3 cm^3 would be needed. The same coolant can be used many times over after the heat is removed from it, which could be done on the surface of the moon by radiation or perhaps better by heat exchangers transferring the heat to lunar sand. Without a thick layer of shattered rocks surrounding the tunnel, the pressure acting on the tunnel wall would be large, in particular in the center of the moon. Because of friction between particles of the shattered rock, large shear stresses can be sustained changing the pressure distribution in the rock and reducing the pressure gradient and hence the pressure on the tunnel wall.\n\nA more detailed calculation [15] for the pressure distribution in the shattered rock tunnel wall gives\n\np=(r/r0)^9, (113)\n\nwhere r0 is the radius of the tunnel.\n\nIntegrating eqn (108) one obtains for the pressure distribution in the moon\n\np(r) = -(ρg0/R)∫(R to r) r dr = -(ρg0/R)(R^2 - r^2) (114)\n\nfor which one can also write\n\np(r) = pmax(1-(r/R)^2). (115)"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nIf rs is the horizontal radius up to which the rocks at a certain depth have to be shattered (cylindrical case), one finds by equating p(r) in (115) and (117)\n\nrs = r0 (pmax/p0)^(1/9) (1-(r/R)^2)^(1/9). (116)\n\nThe total energy required to shatter the rocks to make a tunnel from the center at the moon where r = 0, to its surface where r = R, is then given by summing up over the slices with radius rs and thickness dr\n\nE = πr0^2 εr (pmax/p0)^(2/9) ∫(0 to R) (1-(r/R)^2)^(2/9) dr, (117)\n\nwhere as in eqn (110) εr ≅10^10 erg/cm^3 is the cohesive binding energy of the rocks. For (119) one can write\n\nE = πr0^2 R εr (pmax/p0)^(2/9) ∫(0 to 1) (1-x^2)^(2/9) dx. (118)\n\nWith the help of Euler's betafunction one has\n\n∫(0 to 1)(1-(x)^2)^(2/9) dx = (1/2)B(1/2, 11/9) ≅ √π/2. (119)\n\nHence,\n\nE ≅(π^(3/2)/2) r0^2 R εr (pmax/p0)^(2/9). (120)\n\nInserting r0 =2×10^3 cm, R=1.74×10^8 cm, εr ≅10^10 erg/cm^3, (pmax/p0)=5×10^4, one finds that E ≅2×10^24 erg ≅5×10^4 kiloton = 50 Megaton.\n\nIt must be emphasized that this energy must be quite nonuniformly released along the tunnel shaft. Nuclear fusion explosions below a yield of 10 kiloton become uneconomical with only a fraction of the energy in the fissionable material (needed to"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nmake a critical assembly) released. For a 10 kiloton fission explosion the shatter radius computed from (110) is ~ 20 m. With a tunnel radius r0 ~ 10 m one would have (rs/r0) ~ 2 and from (118) that\n1-(r/R) ≅ 2^9 (p0/pmax). (121)\nPutting for the depth of the tunnel (if measured from the surface of the moon) δ = R-r, with\n2δ/R ≅ 2^9 (p0/pmax) ≅ 10^-2 (122)\nor that δ ≅ 10 km.\nFor a depth < 10 km the nuclear explosion with a yield < 10 kiloton would suffice, a yield which is uneconomical. It is for this reason suggested that one uses altogether thermonuclear explosive devices where the cost per yield is much lower. To penetrate and shatter the rocks more efficiently, jet-generating thermonuclear explosive lenses could be used. The thermonuclear detonation wave ignited at one point is there shaped into a jet-producing conical explosion by placing obstacles in the path of the wave. The ignition can be done by a fission explosive, but conceivably also by a powerful laser beam, with the laser beam projected down the tunnel shaft, triggering the thermonuclear explosive positioned at the lower end.\nWith the above-given estimate of ~ 50 Megaton needed to dig the tunnel shaft, the number of thermonuclear explosive devices making use of the detonation wave lens technique could for this reason be quite reasonable, and certainly much less than the number of required fission explosives.\nAfter nuclear explosions have crushed the rocks and the heat is removed, the tunnel wall has to be made from some kind of ceramic material, since water with which to make concrete is only sparsely available on the moon. But for the wall to last, its temperature must be kept low. The low heat conductivity of rocks, requiring little cooling, is there of considerable help. For the crushed rocks the heat conduction coefficient should not be very different than for solid rocks. According to eqn (112) the\n37\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nheat diffusion time for a 20 m layer of rocks is ~ 30 years. This means that a small, continuous removal of the heat through the injection and circulation of a liquid metal into the crushed rocks should keep down the temperature of the tunnel wall and its environment.\n13. Conclusion\nThe purpose of this study is the question as to whether negative mass might exist, and if negative mass propulsion is possible at all. It is unlikely to be possible in the fashion speculated by Forward [13] (but also see Winterberg [17]), where a negative mass is chasing a positive mass without the expenditure of any energy. Rather, it might perhaps be possible through the existence of an ultra-light form of matter with the tensile strength of ordinary matter on a macroscopic scale where positive matter is bound to negative matter, as happens with Dirac spinor particles on a microscopic scale. This is the speculative existence of macroscopic bodies approaching zero rest mass, of importance for space flight because such matter would greatly reduce its energy requirements.\n38\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ebbc45ae093d028","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nREFERENCES\n1. H. Bondi, Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 423 (1957).\n2. P.G. Bergmann, Introduction to the Theory of Relativity, Prentice Hall, Inc., New York (1946), p.208.\n3. F. Hund, Z. F. Physik 124, 742 (1948).\n4. E. Schrödinger, Berliner Berichte 1930, 416; 1931, 418.\n5. H. Hönl and A. Papapetrou, Z. Phys. 112, 512 (1939); 114, 478 (1939); 116, 153 (1940).\n6. G. Breit, Proc. Amer. Acad. 14, 553 (1928).\n7. F. Winterberg, The Planck Aether Hypothesis, Carl Friedrich Gauss Academy of Science Press, Reno, Nevada (2002).\n8. F. Winterberg, Z. Naturforsch. 58a, 231 (2003).\n9. G. Builder, Aust. J. Phys. 11, 279, 457 (1958).\n10. S.J. Prokhovnik, The Logic of Special Relativity, Cambridge University Press, London (1967).\n11. Y. Aharonov and D. Bohm, Phys. Rev. 115, 485 (1959).\n12. V. Vysin, Phys. Lett. 2, 32 (1962).\n13. R.L. Forward, Proceedings NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Workshop 1999, p.201.\n14. K.Spekkens et al., The Astronomical Journal 129, 2119 (2005).\n15. F. Winterberg, Acta Astronautica 51, 873 (2002).\n16. S. Badiei, P.U. Anderson, L. Holmlid, International Journal of Mass Spectroscopy 282, 70 (2009).\n17. F. Winterberg, 40th Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, October 7-12, 1989, Malaga Spain. IAF-89-668.\n39\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 5/2\n\nCC\tYes, we copied your V_I and your EMS numbers, and\n\twe've got a number for you. Maneuver start time\n\twill be at 03 plus 33 plus 27.\n\nLMP\tOkay, we got you. Maneuver at 03:33:27.\n\nCC\tThat's affirmative, Jack.\n\nLMP\tYou guys didn't tell us we couldn't see anything\n\tgoing through the sunrise.\n\nCC\t(Laughter) Roger.\n\n00 03 25 01 CC\t17, Houston. We're making plans here for a space-\n\tcraft SEP time of 03 plus 43.\n\nLMP\t03 plus 43. Roger.\n\n00 03 27 27 CC\t17, Houston. We're copying cabin press of 5.9 this\n\ttime.\n\nCMP\tRoger. We - we just got it, Bob.\n\nCC\tOkay.\n\nCMP\tThank you.\n\n00 03 31 55 LMP\tFrame 65 for the LMPs mag November November.\n\n00 03 34 10 LMP\tOkay. We - we are maneuvering, Houston.\n\nCC\tRoger. We're watching it.\n\nCMP\tNow we've got a few very bright particles or frag-\n\tments or something that go drifting by as we\n\tmaneuver.\n\nCC\tRoger. Understand.\n\nLMP\tThere's a whole bunch of big ones on my window\n\tdown there - just bright. It looks like the\n\tFourth of July out of Ron's window.\n\nCMP\tYes. Now you can see some of them in shape.\n\tThey're very jagged, angular fragments that are\n\ttumbling."} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CMP\tRoger. They look like fluid of some sort?\n\nCC\tNot to me. They look like pieces of something.\n\nCMP\tRoger.\n\nCC\tThey're very bright.\n\nCMP\tJack, we'd like OMNI Charlie.\n\nCC\tBob, for the most part, these fragments are not -\n\tor are tumbling at a very slow rate. I tried a\n\tcouple of pictures of them - different settings.\n\tYou may get an idea of what, at least, the patterns\n\tlook like.\n\nCC\tRoger. I've got you. We're all ears on these frag-\n\tments. Do you think you can figure out what they\n\tmight be?\n\nCMP\tWell, you know I - I don't know. There are a num-\n\tber of possibilities. If you had some kind of a -\n\tI got the impression maybe they were curved a little\n\tbit, as if they might be - off the side of the\n\tS-IVB. And that's a wild guess - -\n\nCDR\tOkay. RCS LOGIC is ... - -\n\nCMP\t- - ice chunks, possibly. Or maybe there's paint\n\tcoming off of it.\n\n00 03 37 34 CC\tRoger. I noticed on one trip up the elevator last\n\tweak near one of the flags. I thought it was on\n\tthe S-II, but it might have been on the S-IVB.\n\tLooked like it was peeling. Maybe that's what\n\tyou've got.\n\n00 03 37 45 CC\tAnd the S-IVB maneuver is complete.\n\n00 03 37 46 LMP\t... in 1 minute.\n\nCDR\tOkay. We'll set the old clock.\n\nCMP\tOkay. And the - with the maneuver complete, the\n\tfragment field is essentially static, except for\n\tvery slight tumbling within the fragments."} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 5/3\n\n00 03 38 01 CC\tRoger. Cut in.\n\nCMP\tEvery once in a while, a fragment of considerably\n\thigher velocity than the others goes across my\n\twindow. But that's very rare.\n\nCC\tRoger.\n\nCMP\tHey, that's that field of view I saw out my window.\n\tJack, do you see it now?\n\nLMP\tYes.\n\nCMP\tAnd, Bob. At least, there - there's no apparent\n\trelative motion between fragments.\n\nCC\tRoger. Understand.\n\nCMP\tI'll take two pictures about a minute apart if I\n\tcan. And it'll be Frame 70.\n\nCC\tOkay. Frame 70.\n\nCDR\tAnd, Bob. This is Geno. My impression is that\n\tthey are - flat, flakelike particles. Some may\n\tbe 6 inches across. And, although there's no\n\trelative motion between the two, most of them seem\n\tto be twinkling. And I think, for the most part,\n\tthey're all moving away from us.\n\nCC\tRoger, Gene. Thank you.\n\n00 03 39 35 CMP\tOkay. We've got 0180 and 0 on the old thumbwheels.\n\nLMP\tOkay.\n\nCC\tRoger, Ron.\n\n00 03 39 53 CMP\tOkay. TRANS CONTROL is ARMED.\n\nLMP\t... two ARMED.\n\n00 03 39 57 CMP\tCONTROLLER number 2 is ARMED.\n\nLMP\t... SECS LOGIC ...\n\n00 03 40 01 CMP\tOkay. SECS LOGIC is CLOSED; SECS ARM are CLOSED;\n\tLOGIC POWER is ON.\n\nLMP\tOkay.\n\n00 03 40 13 CC\t17, Houston. You have a GO for T&D.\n\nCDR\tOkay. A GO for T&D.\n\n00 03 40 38 CMP\tOkay. We'll ARM the PYROs. And we'll hit the GDC\n\tALIGN.\n\n00 03 41 00 CMP\tAnd maneuver's complete. And 0180 and 0? On the\n\tGDC? No. It's just ... It's kind of diddling.\n\n00 03 41 19 CMP\tOkay. DELTA-V in NORMAL.\n\n00 03 41 42 CMP\tS-IVB, okay. Okay, switches are all set.\n\nLMP\tOkay; 59:30.\n\n00 03 41 55 CMP\tOkay. Let's start the DET.\n\n00 03 41 59 CDR\tTickity-tick-tickity, Houston. We're running\n\tat 59:30.\n\nCC\tRoger.\n\nCMP\tOkay.\n\n00 03 42 12 CMP\tOkay. That's LAUNCH VEHICLE SEP, push button.\n\nLMP\tOkay.\n\n00 03 42 19 CMP\tMC in AUTO.\n\nCMP\tNext?\n\n00 03 42 29 CDR\tSEPARATION, Houston.\n\nCMP\tOkay, check the covers. Okay. And check the\n\tother ones off.\n\nLMP\tThey're all ...\n\nCMP\tOkay, I'm going to start the - My gosh, look at\n\tthe junk! Okay; there's 15 seconds. Pitch her\n\tup. Okay, we'll PROCEED on the - -"} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 46/4\n\n02 18 41 11 CDR\tOkay. Is that it? Yes, I can get that, Gene.\n\nCMP\tOkay, you want to take a picture of it first?\n\tOkay, POWER ... Okay, stand by. 3, 2, 1 -\n\n02 18 41 59 CMP\tMARK it. POWER switch OFF.\n\nCDR\tSay, Bob or Stu.\n\nCC\tRoger. Go ahead.\n\n02 18 42 34 CDR\tOkay, add - to ad to today. Not last night, but -\n\tI guess the first night I was in bed - I definitely\n\tsaw some of these - because I had a hard time going\n\tto bed, to start with - I saw some of the same\n\tperipheral horizon-type things you said were not\n\tthe type of data you were looking for; but I also\n\tsaw a - some sets of the streaks. And probably\n\tthe one most imposing thing I remember is - and the\n\tlast one I remember before falling asleep - was\n\tthe fact that there was a very bright spot that\n\tflashed right between my eyes like a very bright\n\theadlight - like a train coming at you, only with\n\ta flash. It's difficult probably to estimate the\n\tfrequency of any of those because I was in a -\n\tsort of a sleep-hazy mode.\n\nCC\tRoger.\n\nCDR\tBut then, as today, I saw some that flashed and\n\tlit up the horizon and some that lit up peripher-\n\tally; and I guess, as you say, that's a different\n\tkind of data, but I did see them there and they\n\timpressed me.\n\nCC\tOkay. We got all that, Gene.\n\nCDR\tOkay.\n\nCMP\tAnd it might be interesting to know I've never\n\tseen it before today.\n\nCC\tHey, Gene, we appreciate all the data. We were\n\tjust trying to make the data fit the curve; you\n\tknow the old trick."} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"02 18 44 40 CDR Okay, I just wanted you to - just told them like\nwe saw them. That's all.\n\nCC Roger.\n\nCDR I will say one thing, though; no question in my\nmind but that they're there. Last trip I took,\nI guess I just wasn't looking for them or paying\nany attention to them. Maybe they were there and\nI ignored them because of other things. But they're\nthere.\n\nLMP Okay, all you flash bugs down there - or flash-\nbulbs I guess is the word - frame 50. I just took\nfour pictures to show - two on the side and two\non the bottom - to show the position of the ALFMED,\nand one of them of each set was focused on the\nALFMED. The others were focused on the - the\nother set was focused on the struts.\n\nCC Roger, Jack.\n\nLMP And when you don't have anything else to do, why\ndon't you have somebody predict where the S-IVB\nis. I think I've got her spotted - behind us and\nabove us with respect to the Earth and our travel\nfrom it.\n\nCC FIDO just went out and shot himself, but we'll\nget working on it.\n\nLMP Oh, don't worry about it. Shoot. I thought you\nguys might have an idea off-the-cuff there.\n\nCC No, what's humorous on this, Jack, is they have\nreally been working on that S-IVB impact point -,\nand they've really been - it's been a - a real\ndifficult problem for them so far.\n\nLMP I'll tell you, I bet you Ron could give a star\nsighting on it (laughter). I looked at it through\nthe monocular and sure looks like the S-IVB.\n\nCC Jack, we're not doubting you at all. We could\nprobably start cranking it right now."} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 46/6\n\n02 18 46 46 CC Jack, are you sto - you all stowing the ALFMED\nnow or are you done?\n\nCMP What's that, Bob?\n\nCC Are you all done with the ALFMED now, Ron?\n\nCMP Yes, I've got to get it to - get the plate moved\nback down there yet.\n\nCC Okay, Ron - -\n\nCMP ... get the blindfold off first so I can see what\nI'm doing.\n\nCC Roger. I just want you to know. We've got a real\nlong update coming up to you here on the LOI abort\ncharts and that - and it's going to be, probably,\na difficult readup. And you're the most familiar\nwith the charts; you probably would want to take\nthem. But whenever you want to take them, they\nare on - charts on page 3-81, 3-82, and then the\ncue card for LOI limits. Whenever you want to\ntake them. It will be a lengthy one.\n\nCMP Stand by, Bob. Let us get squared away from the\nALFMED; then we can get going on that.\n\nCC No, I don't want to hurry you, Ron. I just want\nyou to know what - when - just get yourself com-\nfortable and be ready to take them whenever you\nwant them. It's going to be a lengthy time,\nthough.\n\n02 18 47 51 CMP Okay.\n\nCDR Hey, Bob, I'm looking at what - what Jack was\ntalking about; and it's definitely not a particle\nthat's nearby because there is another one I can\nlook at and get a three-dimensional comparison\nwith. It is a - it is a bright object, and it's\nobviously rotating because it's flashing. It's\nway out in the distance, as I say, because there\nare particles that are close by and it's obviously\nnot one of those. It's apparently rotating in a"} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"very rhythmic fashion because the flashes come\naround almost - almost on time. And it's as we\nlook back at the Earth, it's up at about 11:00\nabout - oh, maybe 10 or 12 Earth diameters. I\ndon't know whether that does you any good, but\nthere is something out there.\n\nCC Roger. We don't doubt it, Gene. And we might\nwork out a set of gimbal angles or something here;\nmaybe we can get a look at it through the optics.\n\n02 18 49 02 CDR Okay. And I - I - I just want to emphasize that\nit's definitely not - not one of these particles\nthat tends to look like a star out there. It's\nsomething physical in the distance. (Laughter)\nOh, yes.\n\nSC ... thing off.\n\n02 18 50 13 CMP Yes, guess I am.\n\nCC Okay, Gene. If you can call up a NOUN 20 so we\nknow the spacecraft attitude, and if you can\nreference the object you're looking at out of your\nwindow, with - with respect to body axis and let\nus look at your - your - give us a mark, somehow,\nand give us your NOUN 20s, we can try and get a\ntie-in and start locating - locating this object\ndown for you.\n\n02 18 50 58 CDR Okay, I'm looking it out - looking at it out the\ncenter window - the hatch window - and I'll give\nyou a hack when it crosses the XX axis at the\ncenter window; and I guess it's up maybe 45 degrees.\n\nCC Okay, give us a hack and we're copying your\nNOUN 20s right now.\n\nCDR Okay, Jack says pitched up about 30 degrees but - -\n\nLMP No. 45, because -\n\nCDR Yes, he agrees. It's 45 degrees pitched up, and\nI'll give you a hack when it crosses the XX axis.\n\nCDR Okay -"} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 46/8\n\n02 18 51 32 CDR MARK it. It just crossed through the - -\n\nCC Mark. We got it.\n\nCDR - - let's call it the XZ plane of the spacecraft.\nOne unique thing about it, Bob, is that it's got\ntwo flashes. As it comes around in - in rhythmic\nfashion, you get a very bright flash; and then\nyou get a dull flash. And then it'll come around\nwith a bright flash, and then a dull flash.\n\n02 18 52 18 LMP That's the side and - of the S-IVB - and then the\nengine bell, Gene.\n\nLMP The commander doesn't think that I can see the\nengine bell on that thing.\n\nCC Roger, Jack. Is that with the monocular you're\nlooking at it?\n\nCDR He couldn't see the engine bell if he had 10 monoc-\nulars.\n\nCMP Okay. I've got the cable restowed now.\n\nCC Say again, Ron.\n\n02 18 53 10 CMP And, Gene, where's your blindfold? ...\n\n02 18 55 24 LMP Bob, couple of revolutions ago when I was looking\nat it, I had a much brighter view and I believe\nI was looking at it broadside. It looks to me like\nit may be flashing more or less end-on now. It's\nmuch, not - not as bright, although it's getting\nbrighter. But it's not as bright now as it was\nawhile ago.\n\nCC Roger, Jack.\n\nLMP ... we've been noticing that, I think, for about\n24 hours or so. I just - hadn't put it together\nas maybe being the S-IVB. I thought it was just\nsome other particle out there.\n\n02 18 56 27 CC Roger, Jack.\n\nCDR Hey, Robert, what's the final Cowboy score?"} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 46/9\n\nCC Okay; I was just going to update that. The Cowboys\nwon it 34 to 24. And by winning it, they wrap up\nthe wild-card slot in the NFC; and so both Wash-\nington and Dallas will be in the playoffs.\n\n02 18 56 53 CDR Sounds good.\n\nLMP Bob, that line of clouds I called a fir-tree pat-\ntern that swings up towards Hawaii - Hawaii, if\nyou will - has - also has a mushroom pattern on\nthe top. It has the appearance as if two major\nair masses - one going from west to east and the\nother form east to west - have converged along\nthat line, and the joint movement of air at the\ninterface being south to north. And up in the\narea of Hawaii, I think, it tends to mushroom so\nthat the pattern then goes back to flow from west\nto east on the east side and from east to west on\nthe west side.\n\nCC Roger.\n\n02 18 58 27 LMP In a little while, we'll probably get a pretty\ngood look at a - what looks like a very concen-\ntrated intense storm that, I think, is just - east -\n\nCMP *** And then we'll put them. once we get updated a\nlittle bit. Yes, I'll get out of VOX in a minute.\n\nLMP I was looking for the Flight Plan and stuff. And\nthe little books.\n\nLMP Say, Bob.\n\nCC Go ahead.\n\nLMP Houston, 17. How do you read?\n\nCC Go ahead, Jack. Read you loud and clear.\n\nCDR Okay, Bob, you want to update the LOI card and\nFlight Plan 3-82 and 3-81; is that right?\n\nCC That's affirmative.\n\nCDR Which one do you want to start on?"} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 47/14\n\nAnd I'll just confirm that the - that disturbance over the So - Solomon Islands is an awfully tightly wound little storm system. And right now, I finally have see New Zealand for the first time in a couple of days, for sure. And the South Island's got some, probably high cirrus over it. North Island looks pretty clear. That's the end that I can get right now.\n\nCC\tRoger. We saw you looking at Regulus there; we didn't realize you were looking at the Earth instead.\n\nLMP\tRon's been looking for the booster. And he called me down and asked me to look at the Earth. He's been holding out on me.\n\nCC\tRoger.\n\nLMP\tPass the torch of weather forecasting to Ron.\n\n02 20 55 22\tCC\tHey, Jack. I also have some words for you and Gene. Got some advice from the home front. The thing to do with Ron in the future is to hook up a Baby Ben and a metal dishpan. It works every time, if you want to wake him up.\n\nCMP\tNo. I think that's not a good way.\n\nCC\tRon, everybody's fine over at El Lago. They are doing great. Listening to every word.\n\nCMP\tVery good, Bob. Thank you very much.\n\nCDR\tHey, Bob. We got two of those flashers out there. They could be SLA panels. I don't know. They're alike in intensity and pretty regular in the - in the intensity, bright and dim flashes they come out with, and they're widely separated. One is about the position we called at the first time; the other one is - oh, as I'm looking at the Earth, far to the left. Closer to the center window now.\n\n02 20 56 52\tCC\tRoger.\n\n02 21 01 07\tLMP\tHouston, 17."} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 47/15\n\nCC\tGo ahead.\n\nLMP\tYes, Bob, what is your - analysis chart, if you have it - surface terms analysis chart show for Hawaii today?\n\nCC\tStand by on that.\n\nCC\tJack, according to the - -\n\nLMP\tThe reason I ask is that for using your term - Go ahead.\n\nCC\tNo, go ahead on that, Jack.\n\nLMP\tI was going to say, using your terminator time as a partial - mark for where Hawaii ought to be, Hawaii ought to be, it looks like that cyclonic circulation at the north end of the cloud bank I described, approaching that area, would be just about on the Hawa - Hawaiian Islands. I'm curious if they're getting some weather down there now.\n\nCC\tStand by right now; I've got my weatherman right beside me here.\n\nLMP\tAlso, that major front we talked about last night as being east and south of Japan has progressed even farther and is, oh, maybe 20 degrees longitude - about 20 degrees longitude from the Hawaiian Islands. And I'm making some guesses on exactly where Hawaii is.\n\nCC\tRoger, Jack. We've got nothing adverse in the Hawaiian area at all. Just a lot of winds, high winds and surface winds and surface roughness, but we don't have any bad cloud area in the Hawaiian area. I'll get the Hickam sequence report here shortly, Jack.\n\nLMP\tOkay, ... a little bit. The - our zero-phase point is now centered just a little south of the disturbance near the Solomon Islands. And I see no distinct change in the intensity of that zero-phase point over what I had talked about a couple hours ago."} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 47/16\n\n02 21 04 23\tCC\tRoger, Jack. The Solomon Islands disturbance and everything is confirmed on this chart that I've got. It's very definitely confirmed in there.\n\nLMP\tOkay. Well, it's a lot more obvious today than it was yesterday; but even then it was showing pretty strong circulation. It is starting to wrap up, look very much like Therese did yesterday.\n\nCC\tRoger. I'm sure of that. The one right off of Vietnam is also pretty tight, isn't it still?\n\nLMP\tWell, we can't see that one yet.\n\nCC\tOkay.\n\nLMP\tAustralia in general is still very clear except in the northeastern portions where it looks like they have got scattered clouds; but it looks like a pretty night - over Australia.\n\nCC\tRoger. Looks that way from the satellite photo from the last couple days. Looks pretty nice down there.\n\n02 21 05 34\tLMP\tRight.\n\n02 21 07 05\tCC\tJack, in looking at the sequence reports for Hickam and Hilo and that area, it looks like they just got their standard 3500 scattered, 4500 broken clouds, maybe a rain shower or two. But just their standard tropical fluffy clouds.\n\nEND OF TAPE"} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 59/19\n\nmare. Still looking at Oceanus Procellarum. And now, out window 3, up to the northwest, Grimaldi is starting to show up - a very obvious dark area within the highlands of that part of the Moon - and one of the darkest mare regions that we have seen on the - on the Moon. It's comparable, at least in the photographs, to that of Tsiolkovsky.\n\nCC\tRoger.\n\n03 15 33 25\tLMP\tNormally, of course, we think of the dark mare as being the younger basalt flows that - on the Moon, but in our case, of course, young means something on the order of 3 billion years or older.\n\nEND OF TAPE"} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APOLLO 17 AIR-TO-GROUND VOICE TRANSCRIPTION\n\nTape 60/1\n\n03 15 33 44\tCC\tRoger.\n\nLMP\tFor our interp - If we can extrapolate from the samples returned by other missions.\n\nLMP\tAmazing how far over - now the highlands to the west of Procellarum are - still are bright, and the contrast between fresh craters and the normal highland are very - are very obvious still in earthlight, particularly along the zero phase point with respect to the Earth. Rima Gamma now is - is coming a little bit closer to our oval track in the horseshoe in the - larger and more western end of it; the dark horseshoe is quite clear in this light. It's a west - or northwest-pointing horseshoe, as is the complete trend of that strange feature. I think Ron is going to have an excellent chance to study these light-colored swirls within the mare and other parts of the Moon. We had some good views of them and Mare Marginis and to the east of Crisium - Mare Crisium, and he should - if there is anything to be seen, he should be able to see it for - during the next few days.\n\nCC\tOkeydoke.\n\n03 15 35 50\tCDR\tSay, Gordo, something I just noticed here in working with the GDC what-have-you. I - looked at the Pc gage, and in the Pz - Pc position, there is a continuous bias on it now of about, oh, 7 percent, and if I switch to ALPHA, it goes to zero. We never saw that bias before this last burn.\n\nCC\tRoger, Gene.\n\n03 15 36 35\tLMP\tHey, Gordy, I'm looking right up the western edge of the Procellarum mare where it contacts the - the - the high - western highlands of the Moon, and we're just about to fly a little bit south of Grimaldi. That edge is very irregular. There is no obvious indications that it - there are large basins that have been flooded by mare that have formed that edge, but, again, the topographic distinction's possible in this lighter small. Now I'm starting to see that there are shadows in the craters."} {"doc_id":"6ed4d631ac3694e2","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 60/2\n\nCC\nRoger.\n\nLMP\nThat's the small craters. There, in the Mare Procellarum closest to Grimaldi, there are two arcuate rilles. Look like they are probably V-shaped in their cross section. I'm sure we've seen those on the photographs much better than I can see them here. Those - the rille patterns, though, do seem to project over into the highlands.\n\nCC\nOkay.\n\nLMP\nTo the north of that - to the north of that bay of mare. Just interrupt.\n\n03 15 38 09 LMP\nHey, I just saw a flash on the lunar surface!\n\nCC\nOh, yes?\n\nLMP\nIt was just out there north of Grimaldi. Just north of Grimaldi. You might see if you got anything on your seismometers, although a small impact probably would give a fair amount of visible light.\n\nCC\nOkay. We'll check.\n\nLMP\nIt was a bright little flash right out there near that crater. See the crater right at the edge of Grimaldi. Then there is another one north of it. Fairly sharp one north of it is where there was just a thin streak of light.\n\nCC\nHow about putting an X on the map where you saw it.\n\nLMP\nI keep looking occasionally for - yes, we will. I - I was planning on looking for those kind of things. Starting to see the edge of Orientale, Gordy. Way off to the west. Hey, just yell, Gene, anytime you - -\n\n03 15 39 46 LMP\nGordy, to the north of Grimaldi there is a large basin that is about the same size but only incompletely filled with mare in its northeastern quadrant. The rest of it looks like a fairly irregular and hummocky floor material of some kind.\n\nCC\nRoger."} {"doc_id":"6f39352cab68ee72","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nJuly 28, 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM\n\nTo:\tMr. Armstrong\n\nPaul Nitze asked me what the Air Force thought about the flying saucers, and I suspect that the others would be interested. I recommend, therefore, that you pass on the gist of the attached at the morning meeting tomorrow. Samford gave it to me at the IAC.\n\nF.H.\n\nAtt.\n\nSubsequently at lunch 5th floor Paul asked me about it so I have given the gist of this to Paul, Doc, Howland, McFall.\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"6f39352cab68ee72","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nJuly 28, 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM\n\nSubject: Flying Saucers\n\nGeneral Samford, A-2, in response to my inquiry, said that there is very little that can be said to clarify the flying saucer business: It is still a complete enigma.\n\nHe did, however, point out that phenomena falling within the general description of flying saucers have actually been known to exist and have been reported one way or another for over 100 years. The increase in observation and in reporting and publicity on the subject is probably attributable in the main to vastly improved methods of observation and reporting, including not only radar but the reporting systems used by civilian and military pilots. It is also attributable in some measure to the publicity which is given it, which takes on certain elements of a \"fad.\"\n\nThere is no question, according to Samford, that \"credible observers are reporting the incredible.\" The radar observation may have elements of \"electronic fluke,\" but is sufficiently tied in with pilot observation so that it cannot be attributed entirely to this. The Air Force views the flying saucers as a threat only because they are not understood and they are sufficiently frequent as a phenomena to mean that they will give great attention to them until they understand them.\n\nGeneral Samford did not say anything about the possibility that they were man-made or controlled, friend or foe, but the whole implication of his remarks was that this possibility was remote and not to be seriously considered.\n\nF.H.\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"70199d5df8d5767a","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:19:40"} {"doc_id":"7038bbed85eb66df","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"712d13ecb772f75f","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\nMisrep 9381202\n\nNarrative\n\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\nAT 0217Z, [1.4a] TOOK OFF FROM [1.4a] AT 0229Z, [1.4a] HANDED OVER\nFROM THE [1.4a] PROCEEDED TO FRAGGED TASKING TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED.\n\nAT 0217Z, [1.4a] WAS 7-LINED TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED. [1.4a] DID NOT ARRIVE\nONSTATION AT 38S MB 48[1.4a]86[1.4a](SEE ON/OFF-STATION 1).\n\nAT 0355Z, [1.4a] WAS 7-LINED TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED. [1.4a] ARRIVED ON-STATION AT\n0431Z, CHECKED IN WITH DATA MASKED, AND PERFORMED FMV/SIGINT COLLECTION AT\n37S FU 81[1.4a]06[1.4a](SEE ISR 2).\n\nAT 0539Z, [1.4a] WAS 7-LINED TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED. [1.4a] ARRIVED ON-STATION AT\n0805Z, CHECKED IN WITH DATA MASKED, AND PERFORMED FMV/SIGINT COLLECTION AT\n38S MB 48[1.4a]86[1.4a](SEE ISR 3).\n\nAT 2153Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED AN UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENON AT 37D ST 69[1.4a]\n07[1.4a](SEE UAP 1).\n\nAT 1933Z, [1.4a] RETURNED TO BASE. AT 2254Z, [1.4a] HANDED BACK TO THE [1.4a] AT 2319Z,\n[1.4a] LANDED AT [1.4a] FULL MOTION VIDEO WAS EXPLOITED BY [1.4a]\n[1.4a]\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\n\n\n(S//RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nAT 0217Z, [1.4a] TOOK OFF FROM [1.4a] AT 0229Z, [1.4a] HANDED OVER\nFROM THE [1.4a] PROCEEDED TO FRAGGED TASKING TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED.\n\nAT 0217Z, [1.4a] WAS 7-LINED TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED. [1.4a] DID NOT ARRIVE\nONSTATION AT 38S MB 48[1.4a]86[1.4a](SEE ON/OFF-STATION 1).\n\nAT 0355Z, [1.4a] WAS 7-LINED TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED. [1.4a] ARRIVED ON-STATION AT\n0431Z, CHECKED IN WITH DATA MASKED, AND PERFORMED FMV/SIGINT COLLECTION AT\n37S FU 81[1.4a]06[1.4a](SEE ISR 2).\n\nAT 0539Z, [1.4a] WAS 7-LINED TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED. [1.4a] ARRIVED ON-STATION AT\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//NOFORN 06/02/2025 000001\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"712d13ecb772f75f","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\n0805Z, CHECKED IN WITH DATA MASKED, AND PERFORMED FMV/SIGINT COLLECTION AT\n38S MB 48[1.4a]86[1.4a](SEE ISR 3).\n\nAT 1933Z, [1.4a] RETURNED TO BASE. AT 2254Z, [1.4a] HANDED BACK TO THE [1.4a] AT 2319Z,\n[1.4a] LANDED AT [1.4a] FULL MOTION VIDEO WAS EXPLOITED BY [1.4a]\n[1.4a]\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\n\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: NOFORN\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MS\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20481109\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): [1.4a]\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): [1.4a]\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): [1.4a]\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• ATO Mission Number: [1.4a]\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//NOFORN 06/02/2025 000002\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"712d13ecb772f75f","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(3)130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: [3.5c,(b)(6)]\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(3)130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Wing: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c,(b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(3)130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: [3.5c,(b)(6)]\n• Phone Number: [3.5c,(b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//NOFORN 06/02/2025 000003\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"712d13ecb772f75f","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n[1.4g]\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): [1.4a, 1.4g]\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//NOFORN 06/02/2025 000004\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"712d13ecb772f75f","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): [1.4a]\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): [1.4a]\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 090217:00ZNOV23\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): [1.4a]\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): [1.4a]\n• Last Land Time: [1.4a]\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: [1.4a]\n• Total Mission Time: [1.4a]\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG:\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• JTAC Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station: On\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG:\n• Total Time On Station:\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 090431:00ZNOV23\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• JTAC Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//NOFORN 06/02/2025 000005\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"712d13ecb772f75f","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 090554:00ZNOV23\n• Total Time On Station: 1 hour 23 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 090431:00ZNOV23\n• Time-off Station DTG: 090554:00ZNOV23\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Msn Type: 1.4a\n• Primary Sensor: FMV\n• Sensors Available: 1.4g\n• Tasking Type: Dynamic\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): DATA MASKED\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 37S FU 81 1.4a 06 1.4a\n• Activity Description: TARGET DEVELOPMENT\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed: Yes\n• Number of EEIs: 1\n• Global Campaign Plan: GCP - VEO (violent extremist group)\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nUPON ARRIVAL TO THE SP AT 0431Z, 1.4a OBSERVED NO EEI RELATED ACTIVITY. AT 0528Z, IT WAS 1X VEHICLE PARKED E OF COI WAS ASSESSED AS A PROB IMINT MATCH TO VOI. AT 0539Z, 1.4a RECEIVED A NEW TASKING. 1.4a REMAINED ONTGT UNTIL PUSHING TO NEW COORDS AT 0554Z.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: 1.4g\n• Supported Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Precoord Time: -\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (UNCLASSIFIED)\n\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//NOFORN 06/02/2025 000006\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"712d13ecb772f75f","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\nCLEAR WX\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: Yes\n• Gentext: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nSATISFACTORY\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 090805:00ZNOV23\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• JTAC Callsign: 1.4a\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 091933:00ZNOV23\n• Total Time On Station: 11 hours 28 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 090805:00ZNOV23\n• Time-off Station DTG: 091933:00ZNOV23\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Msn Type: 1.4a\n• Primary Sensor: FMV\n• Sensors Available: 1.4g\n• Tasking Type: Dynamic\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): DATA MASKED\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 38S MB 48 1.4a 86 1.4a\n• Activity Description: TARGET DEVELOPMENT\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed: Yes\n\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//NOFORN 06/02/2025 000007\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"712d13ecb772f75f","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\n• Number of EEIs: 2\n• Global Campaign Plan: GCP - VEO (violent extremist group)\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nUPON ARRIVAL TO THE BUILDING AT 0805Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X WHITE SUV WITH A REAR MOUNTED TIRE, ASSESSED TO BE PROB VOI WAS PARK ON THE N SIDE. 1X ADM ASSESSED TO BE PROB POI WAS INTERNAL TO THE BUILDING. ASSESSMENT, SLANT AND DISPOSITION DERIVED FROM 1.4a S2. FROM 0805Z - 1552Z, 1.4a CONDUCTED A 6X STOP FOLLOW ON PROB VOI AND POI REULTING IN EEI RELATED ACTIVITY. DURING STOP 2, AT 0926Z, PROB POI AND 1X ADM EXITED THE S SIDE OF RESIDENCE AND ENTERED THE FRONT LEFT AND RIGHT OF THE PROB VOI. AT 0939Z, 1.4a RECIVIED A PROB MATCH TO THE 1X ADM WHO EXITED THE S SIDE OF THE RESIDENCE AND ENTERED THE FRONT RIGHT OF THE PROB VOI. UPON LOST OF PID, 1.4a RESET BACK TO 1.4a AT 1632Z AND OBSERVED NO EEI RELATED ACTIVITY. AT 1719Z, 2X PREV OBSERVED ADMS WAS ASSESSED TO BE POSS IMINT MATCH TO POI AND PROB TO POI. AT 1933Z, 1.4a RTB WITHOUT ADDITIONAL EEI TO REPORT.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: 1.4g\n• Supported Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Precoord Time: -\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nCLEAR WX\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: Yes\n• Gentext: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nSATISFACTORY\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nUAP\n\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//NOFORN 06/02/2025 000008\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"712d13ecb772f75f","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 092153:00ZNOV23\n• UAP Event Type: UAP Incident\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations: NONE\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions: NO\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Tail Number: 1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 37S ET 34 1.4a 09 1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: 1.4g\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory: SOUTHEAST\n• Observer Assessment of UAP: Benign\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed:\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns):: NO\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters: NONE\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable):\n• Operational Range:\n• UAP Physical State: Solid\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n• UAP Propulsion Means: UNK\n• UAP Payload:\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Signatures: 1.4g\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): YES, TRAVELED ~424KN CONSISTANTLY FOR AT LEAST 7MINS IN THE SHAPE OF A BOUNCY BALL.\n• UAP RF Frequency: NONE\n• UAP RF Duration: N/A\n• UAP Event Serial Number: 092153ZNOV2023-CENTCOM\n• UAP Effects on Persons: NO\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Effects on Equipment: NONE\n• Full Name: 3.5c,(b)(3)130b, (b)(6)\n• Rank/Grade: 3.5c,(b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c,(b)(6)\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE): 3.5c,(b)(6)\n• Observer Engagement of UAP (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• First Coordinate: 37DST69 1.4a 7 1.4a\n• First Seen Radius: 5\n• Last Accuracy: Estimated\n• Last Coordinate: 37SFT28 1.4a 3 1.4a\n• Last Seen Radius: 10\n• Kinetic Altitude Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Altitude: 170\n• Kinetic Depth Accuracy: Estimated\n\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//NOFORN 06/02/2025 000009\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"712d13ecb772f75f","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\n• Kinetic Depth:\n• Kinetic Velocity Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Velocity: 424KN\n• Kinetic Trajectory Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Trajectory:\n• UAP Date of DoD Acquisition: 092153:00ZNOV23\n• UAP Reaction to Observation, Interrogation, Engagement (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Anomalous Characteristics/ Behaviors: N/A\n• First Accuracy: Estimated\n• Call Sign: 1.4a\n• UAP First Seen Location:\n• UAP Last Seen Location:\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): SHOWED AS 1.4g 1.4g\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): (SECRET//NOFORN)\nWHILE RTB AT 2153Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X PROB HC UAP SHAPED AS A BOUNCY BALL COME FROM THE SOUTH AT NEAR CO-ALT. 1.4a OBSERVED THE PROB UAP DROP ALTITUDE AND SAFELY PASS THEIR AIRCRAFT WHILE CONSISTANTLY MAINTAINING ~424KN. AFTER 7MIN OF WATCHING, THE PROB UAP BECAME OUT OF RANGE AND 1.4a CARRIED ON THEIR RTB. NO EMISSIONS CAME FROM THE PROB UAP, UAP WAS NOT CONSIDERED A THREAT TO THE AIRCRAFT OR PUBLIC SAFETY, AND THE UAP HAD NO EFFECTS ON THE AIRCREW.\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\n\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//NOFORN 06/02/2025 000010\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ROUTING SLIP\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION\nMAIL CODE\nNAME\nAction\nApproval\nCall Me\nConcurrence\nFile\nInformation\nInvestigate and Advise\nNote and Forward\nNote and Return\nPer Request\nPer Telephone Conversation\nRecommendation\nSee Me\nSignature\nCirculate and Destroy\nRecords\nMemos for photographic (filmo) release from Gemini 4, Hq to MSC & vice versa\nNAME J. Gill\nTEL. NO. (or code) & EXT.\nCODE (or other designation)\nDATE 6/18/71\nNASA FORM 26 APR 69 PREVIOUS EDITIONS MAY BE USED\nGPO : 1969 OF-348-365"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mission Operation Report\nNo. M-913-65-04\nMEMORANDUM\nJune 1, 1965\nTo : A/Administrator\nFrom : M/Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight\nSubject: Gemini Flight Number Four (GT-4) Additional Flight Activities\nSubsequent to the preparation of the GT-4 Mission Operation Report several new procedures and items of equipment have progressed to a stage of flight readiness. Consequently, three significant additional flight activities are now possible and have been included in the mission. These activities are: extra vehicular activities (EVA); extra vehicular propulsion; and demonstration of rendezvous with the booster second stage. Additional details of these flight plan activities are provided in the attached supplement to the basic report.\nGeorge E. Mueller\nEnclosure:\nMOR No. 913-65-04\nChange 1\nFOR INTERNAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\nADDITIONAL GT-4 FLIGHT PLAN ACTIVITIES\nThree additional special engineering and operational objectives are now planned for the first four orbits of the GT-4 Mission:\n1. Demonstration of extravehicular activities (EVA) using a 25 foot umbilical. Potential future application includes crew transfer, inflight repair, and inspection of orbiting objects.\n2. Demonstration of extravehicular maneuvering using a simple, oneman propulsion unit. This device could be used with or without a spacecraft tether on future missions.\n3. Demonstration of rendezvous with the booster second stage. This activity will provide valuable early information and maneuvering procedures necessary to rendezvous with a target vehicle. Flashing lights identical to those designed for the Gemini/Agena Vehicle have been installed on the booster second stage for this test.\nThe Flight Plan sequence involves post-launch separation from the launch vehicle, then maneuvering to stop the spacecraft separation velocity. The first two orbits will be flown with the spacecraft at distances less than one quarter of a mile from the launch vehicle. Nighttime separation will be sufficient to prevent the flashing lights from disturbing the pilot's visual dark adaptation. The first orbit will be occupied with operational checks of the spacecraft guidance, maneuvering, and environmental control systems. The pilots will utilize the second orbit to prepare for the extravehicular activity. This procedure involves unstowing and assembling a 25-foot umbilical, the emergency oxygen pack, a maneuvering unit, and the cameras. Over Hawaii, at daybreak, near the end of the second orbit, the cabin will be depressurized and Jim McDivitt will maneuver to within close proximity of the booster. At this point, the right hatch will be opened and Ed White will climb out and hold on the right forward portion of the spacecraft until McDivitt gives him a release command. Upon command, White will push off slowly and reorient himself with the hand-held maneuvering unit to face the booster. A 35-mm still camera (Zeiss-Contarex) mounted on the maneuvering unit will be used to photograph the booster and spacecraft with various earth/sky backgrounds. After testing his ability to maneuver in a zero gravity environment, White will maneuver back toward the spacecraft and ingress. The total time separated from the spacecraft will be approximately 10 minutes. He will be inside with the cabin repressurized by the time the spacecraft passes over Ascension Island on the start of the third orbit.\nShortly after passing Ascension, McDivitt will maneuver ahead of the booster with 5 feet per second separation velocity. Because this maneuver places the spacecraft in a higher altitude and longer period orbit than the booster, it will rise above and fall behind the booster. One orbit later, the spacecraft\n6/1/65 Page 1"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\nwill trail 16 miles behind the booster. At this point, a spacecraft retardation maneuver of 13 feet per second will initiate the visual rendezvous sequence. The spacecraft will approach the booster from behind and below. Because of unknown variation in the atmospheric density and drag of the slowly tumbling booster, the exact approach trajectory cannot be predicted. The flight crew will measure elevation angles of the booster and will initiate rendezvous maneuvers when the booster is approximately 45 degrees elevation angle above the spacecraft. By observing the movement of the booster with respect to the star background and with respect to the spacecraft inertial platform display, the crew can determine the proper lateral maneuver to null the lateral component of velocity thereby resulting in a spacecraft velocity vector which is directly toward the booster. After removing the lateral velocity difference, the pilot will apply a series of breaking maneuvers with the forward firing thrusters to reduce the closing velocity. The flight crew will measure with onboard instruments the total maneuvering velocity required for the rendezvous procedure. The spacecraft should be back in close proximity of the launch vehicle over the Northeast coast of South America at the beginning of the fifth orbit.\nAfter the rendezvous operation is complete, the spacecraft will again separate from the booster - this time using a maneuver which will place the Gemini spacecraft on an orbit with a predicted lifetime of four days.\nThe EVA suit is the new G4C suit which replaces the G3C suit used so successfully by the GT-3 flight crew. The G4C suit has the following new features:\na. Helmet - incorporation of triple lens shield (visors) for visual, thermal, impact, and micrometeorite protection.\nb. Torso -\n1. Change to Nomex (HT-1) \"Linknet\" in restraint layer for increased structural strength.\n2. Incorporation of strain relief zipper in sealing closure.\n3. Incorporation of redesigned ventilation inlet and outlet fittings with automatic locking and redundant sealing features.\n4. Replace Nomex (HT-1) coverlayer with integrated thermal and micrometeority cover layer.\nc. Gloves - Incorporate new design with increased mobility, abrasion resistance and thermal protection.\nd. Bio-connector - Self-alignment, pin protective design.\n6/1/65 Page 2"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\nFigure 1 depicts the principal physical differences between the old G3C suit and the new EVA G4C suit. Figure 2 shows that with one visor down on the new G4C helmet, there is practically no attenuation of light entering, whereas Figure 3 shows that with two of the visors down there is a noticeable difference in the amount of light that enters the astronaut's eyes. With the third visor down, there would be a similar decrease in the amount of light allowed to enter the helmet.\nThe multivarious layers of materials used in the EVA G4C suits are delineated in Figure 4. It should be noted that the old G3C suit consisted only of the pressure and restraint layers of Figure 4 with the HT-1 nylon outer protective layer.\nThe EVA spacesuit has received the following qualification tests:\nSPACE SUITS\nG-3C G-4C\nFIG. 1\nG-4C OVERVISOR SPACE HELMET\n6/1/65 Page 3"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\n\nG-4C EXTRAVEHICULAR SUIT\n\nTHERMAL AND MICROMETEOROID LAYERS\n\nPRESSURE AND RESTRAINT LAYERS\n\nHT-1 NYLON OUTER PROTECTIVE LAYER (6.8 OZ/YD2 WHITE) USE: WEAR AND SOLAR REFLECTANCE\n\nHT-1 NYLON MICROMETEOROID ABSORBER (6 OZ/YD2 WHITE) USE: MICROMETEOROID AND THERMAL PROTECTION\n\nMULTI LAYER INSULATION (5.5 OZ/YD2 TOTAL) USE: THERMAL PROTECTION\n\nCOTTON CONSTANT WEAR UNDERGARMENT (3 OZ/YD2 WHITE)\n\nOXFORD NYLON COMFORT LAY. R (3 OZ/YD2 BLUE)\n\nPRESSURE LAYER NEOPRENE COATED NYLON (7-1/2 OZ/YD2)\n\nRESTRAINT LAYER LINK NET DACRON AND TEFLON (1-1/4 OZ/YD2)\n\n7 LAYERS ALUMINIZED MYLAR SEPARATED BY 7 LAYERS UNWOVEN DACRON SPACERS\n\nHT-1 NYLON INNER MICROMETEOROID STOPPER LAYERS (EACH 6.8 OZ/YD2 WHITE) USE: WEAR AND MICROMETEOROID PROTECTION\n\nCOVERLAYER WEIGHT THICKNESS G-3C 6.8 OZ/YD2 .013 INCHES G-4C 39.9 OZ/YD2 .312 INCHES\n\nFIG. 4\n\n6/1/65 Page 4"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\n\na. Leakage\nb. Proof pressure\nc. O2 compatibility\nd. Ejection envelope\ne. Cold temperature\nf. Rapid decompression\ng. Life cycling\nh. Visor testing\n\nShould the 25-foot long tether fail in some manner, the pilot will be carrying a chestpack that has been compatibility qualified with the G4C suit and consists principally of an emergency oxygen bottle with automatic valving.\n\nIt should be emphasized that both the primary and backup flight crews have undergone 40 minutes cabin depressurization with the hatches open at a simulated altitude of 150,000 feet in the chambers at McDonnell, St. Louis during which time they practiced opening and closing the hatches, taking pictures, and other actions that will take place during EVA.\n\nThe extravehicular maneuvering will be accomplished using a zero g Integral Propulsion (ZIP) Unit as shown in Figure 5. This device is handheld and accomplishes propulsion by jetting oxygen out through a single forward firing nozzle and two aft firing nozzles as selected and aimed by the operator. It includes a camera mounted for convenient extravehicular photography.\n\nFIG. 5\n\n6/1/65 Page 5"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mission Operation Report No. M-913-65-04\n\nMEMORANDUM May 24, 1965\n\nTo : A/Administrator\n\nFrom : M/Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight\n\nSubject: Gemini Flight Number Four (GT-4)\n\nGT-4, the fourth in a series of twelve planned Gemini flights is scheduled to be launched from Complex 19 at the John F. Kennedy Space Center on or after 3 June 1965. This will be the second manned Gemini mission and the longest ever attempted by a two-man crew. The purpose of the mission is to further demonstrate manned space flight for a period of four days.\n\nThe nominal launch time is 10 a.m. EDT (1400 GMT). The space vehicle is to be launched on an azimuth of 72 degrees and the spacecraft will be inserted into an initial orbit of 87-161 N.M. at an orbital inclination of 32.5 degrees. The 62 revolution mission will have a duration of approximately 97 hours and 50 minutes. The primary and backup flight crews are of the \"new generation,\" being members of the second group of astronauts. James A. McDivitt will be the command pilot and Edward H. White, II will be the pilot. Because the duration of the flight is one of the most significant aspects of their mission, the post-flight activities will involve expanded medical evaluation as compared with previous missions, including at least 24 hours aboard the recovery aircraft carrier, the USS WASP.\n\nAfter conducting various orbital maneuvers and the thirteen experiments during the four-day mission, the spacecraft will reenter and touchdown approximately 400 miles southwest of Bermuda for a water landing and carrier retrieval.\n\nfor George E. Mueller\n\nEnclosure\nMOR No. M-913-65-04\n\nFOR INTERNAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Report No. M-913-65-04\n\nMISSION OPERATION REPORT\n\nGEMINI FLIGHT NUMBER FOUR (GT-4)\n\nNASA OFFICE OF MANNED SPACE FLIGHT\n\nFOR INTERNAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FOREWORD\n\nMISSION OPERATION REPORTS are published expressly for the use of NASA General Management as required by the Administrator in NASA Instruction 6-2-10 dated August 15, 1963. The purpose of these reports is to provide NASA General Management with timely, complete and definitive information on flight mission plans and results from launchings with Scout class or larger vehicles.\n\nInitial reports are to be prepared and issued for each flight project just prior to launch. Following launch, updating reports for each mission will be issued to keep General Management currently informed as provided in NASA Instruction 6-2-10.\n\nDistribution of these reports has been specifically directed by General Management and they are not available for additional or general distribution. The Office of Public Affairs publishes a comprehensive series of pre-launch and post-launch reports on NASA flight missions which are available for general distribution.\n\nPublished and Distributed by OFFICE OF PROGRAM REPORTS OFFICE OF PROGRAMMING NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION Washington, D.C. 20546"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\n\nGENERAL\n\nGemini Flight Number Four (GT-4) is the second manned orbital flight in the Gemini Program and the fourth flight in a series of twelve planned to develop long-duration and rendezvous capability, docking techniques, extra-vehicular activities, and controlled reentry. The first three Gemini flights demonstrated: orbital insertion capability; spacecraft structural integrity; and spacecraft systems performance and crew accommodation qualities, respectively. This GT-4 mission is intended to further demonstrate manned space flight for a period of four days, the longest ever flown by two astronauts. The space vehicle is depicted in Figure 1.\n\nMISSION OBJECTIVES\n\nPRIMARY\n\n• Demonstrate and evaluate the performance of the Gemini spacecraft systems for a period exceeding four days.\n\n• Evaluate the effects of prolonged exposure to the space environment on the two-man flight crew in preparation for missions of longer duration.\n\nSECONDARY\n\n• Demonstrate OAMS capability to perform retro fire backup.\n\n• Demonstrate the capability of the spacecraft and flight crew to make significant in-plane and out-of-plane maneuvers.\n\n• Conduct further evaluation of spacecraft systems as outlined below:\n\n1. Structure and thermal protection\n2. Environmental Control Systems (ECS)\n3. Crew stations\n4. Guidance and Control System\n5. Orbital Attitude and Maneuver System (OAMS)\n\n• Execute the following experiments:\n\n• D-1, Basic Object Photography\n• D-6, Surface Photography\n• D-8, Radiation in Spacecraft\n• D-9, Simple Navigation\n• M-3, In-Flight Exercises\n• M-4, In-Flight Phonocardiogram\n• M-6, Bone Demineralization\n• MSC-1, Electrostatic Charge\n\n5/24/65 Page 1"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\n\n• MSC-2, Proton Electron Spectrometer\n• MSC-3, Tri-Axis Magnetometer\n• MSC-10, Two-Color Earth's Limb Photos\n• S-5, Synoptic Terrain Photography\n• S-6, Synoptic Weather Photography\n\nUNUSUAL TASKS OF THIS MISSION\n\nOne of the interesting tasks of this mission is the duration of the flight. It will be the longest ever to be conducted by a two-man crew. Another highly interesting item is that control of the mission for the first time will be from the Mission Control Center (MCC) Houston. Some elements of the Mission Control Center at Cape Kennedy and the GSFC computing facility will be standing by as a backup during the launch phase. The computing facilities at GSFC will also be used as a backup to MCC-Houston during the orbital phase. Flight controllers will man the MCC in three shifts to give complete round-the-clock coverage of the four-day mission. Crew control of reentry will be accomplished by tracking the roll needle rather than nulling the down-range and cross-range needles as on GT-3. The experiments will, of course, contribute much information for the scientific and medical communities. The G4C suit which replaces the G3C suit used on GT-3 has the following new features: a triple overvisor, a redundant pressure closure seal (zipper), and thermal and meteoroid protection integrated in the outer cover layer. Abort procedures to be utilized by the astronauts in the unlikely event it becomes necessary for them to terminate a mission before orbital insertion are different from those used in the Mercury program. In that program, the fireball that would have been created had a conflagration occurred on the pad, would have been large enough to engulf an ejecting astronaut, so it was necessary to add an escape rocket to lift the entire spacecraft free of the area. The GLV, on the other hand, uses self-igniting fuels which, upon mixing, create a fireball small enough so that the astronauts can eject from the spacecraft in much the same manner as is done in today's high performance jet aircraft. This is called the Mode I abort procedure. The three abort modes are more fully defined by the altitude and elapsed time-after-launch parameters depicted on Figure 2.\n\nABORT PROCEDURES\n\nMODE I - EJECT AFTER SHUTDOWN\nMODE II - SALVO RETROS AFTER SHUTDOWN\nMODE III - SHUTDOWN, SEPARATE, TURN AROUND, RETROFIRE\n\n20,700 FPS VELOCITY\n78,000 FT.\nMODE III\nMODE II\nDELAYED MODE II (WAIT 5 SECS)\n5 MIN. 10 SEC.\n50 SECONDS\n15,000 FT.\nMODE I\n50 SECONDS\nSEA LEVEL\n\nFIG. 2\n\n5/24/65 Page 2"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-931-65-04\n\nLAUNCH VEHICLE DESCRIPTION\n\nThe Gemini Launch Vehicle (GLV) has been modified by man-rating an Air Force Titan II missile. The GLV has two stages, the first 71 feet long and the second 18 feet long; both stages have a diameter of 10 feet. The gross loaded weight of the two stages is 337,521 pounds and they both burn storable hypergolic (self-igniting upon mixture) propellants. First stage thrust is approximately 430,000 pounds at sea level. Second stage thrust is approximately 100,000 pounds. The various systems of the GLV have been detailed in previous Gemini MOR's and what follows is additional information concerning modifications made to GLV-4. The fuel dampener and oxidizer standpipe used to suppress longitudinal oscillations have been redesigned. Butt welding vice lapped joints have been utilized on the fuel tank conduits to eliminate minute cracks. Malfunction Detection System circuitry has been redesigned to provide separate indications of the subassembly thrust level and additional insulation has been applied to provide increased fire protection. Sixteen T/M readout points have been removed from the GLV because they are no longer required and one range safety circuit has been added to the destruct system interlocking AGE and the GLV motor driven switch control. This circuit will prevent switch cycling in the event that both set and reset signals are inadvertently applied during checkout.\n\nTABLE I\nPROJECT COST\n(In Millions)\n\nFY 62 FY 63 FY 64 FY 65 FY 66 FY 67 Total\nSpacecraft 30.3 205.1 280.5 165.3 122.7 19.1 823.0\nLaunch Vehicle 24.4 79.1 122.7 115.4 88.6 8.5 438.7\nOperational Support .1 4.9 15.7 27.7 30.8 13.0 92.2\nTotal RD & O 54.8 289.1 418.9 308.4 242.1 40.6 1353.9\n\nThis level of funding will provide for twelve Gemini Launch Vehicles, twelve spacecraft, seven Agena Target Vehicles, six Atlas booster missiles and the operational costs of flight testing and the associated Ground Support Equipment.\n\nSPACECRAFT\n\nThe spacecraft is 18.75 feet long and its two sections, a reentry module and an adapter section will weigh 7799 lbs. fully loaded with the astronauts onboard. The configuration will be the same as was flown on GT-3 except for the following: minor changes have been made to switch positions and nomenclature, three additional (total of six) adapter\n\n5/24/65 Page 3"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\n\nbatteries will be required, radial thrusting TCA's and burst diaphragms in the \"B\" package that were removed for GT-3 are both installed on GT-4, and will act through the Spacecraft Centers of Gravity. An HF antenna has been added to the adapter section for orbital use and the HF transciever there has been removed. The C-band phase shifter now has its own inverter, the recovery flashing light can now be turned off during daylight hours, the HF antenna on the cabin section has been redesigned, and the adapter S-band transponder in the adapter section has been replaced with a C-band transponder which will have a different pulse spacing from the one in the spacecraft. In the GT-4 mission S/C, urine will be dumped directly overboard from the urine bellows through a shut-off and selector valve, a solenoid valve and a heated line. Redundancy is provided by the capability to dump urine through the launch cooling heat exchanger (water boiler). The main chute disconnect cartridge has been changed from a 22-second time delay to a zero second delay and new long-life attitude thrusters have been installed.\n\nEXPERIMENTS\n\nThe 13 experiments are depicted and described on the following pages:\n\n1. D-1, Basic Object Photography\nIn conducting this experiment, the astronauts will employ elaborate photo-optical equipment to investigate the technical problems associated with observing, evaluating, and photographing objects in space. These objects include the 2nd stage of the launch vehicle and natural celestial bodies such as the moon. Data from this experiment will be used to evaluate the astronauts' ability to view and track objects, and to maintain object-camera orientation by maneuvering the spacecraft. Equipment which will be used is illustrated in Figure 3.\n\nD-1 BASIC OBJECT PHOTOGRAPHY\n\nFIG. 3\n\n5/24/65 Page 4"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\n\n2. D-6, Surface Photography\nThis experiment will investigate the technical problems associated with an astronaut's ability to acquire, track, and photograph terrestrial objects from a spacecraft with more elaborate photo-optical equipment than that used previously. The astronaut will photograph selected series of objects during day-side and night-side intervals of the flight using specified lens-film combinations. The resulting data will be used to evaluate the astronaut's ability to maintain object-camera orientation by maneuvering the spacecraft. Figure 4 shows the camera mount installed on the spacecraft window.\n\nD-6 SURFACE PHOTOGRAPHY\n\nFIG. 4\n\n3. D-8, Radiation in Spacecraft\nData from this experiment will be used to supplement external radiation measurements in studying the dose levels within the spacecraft resulting from passes through regions of varying radiation intensity. Two tissue-equivalent, current-mode ionization chambers will be used to measure the variation of absorbed dose-rate inside the spacecraft. Five small packets containing radiation detection and measurement devices will be placed at various locations in the cabin to ascertain their suitability as convenient dosimeters of space radiation and measure total accumulated dose. Figure 5 shows some of the equipment to be used for this experiment.\n\nD-8 RADIATION IN SPACECRAFT (PORTABLE UNIT)\n\nFIG. 5\n\n5/24/65 Page 5"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4. D-9, Simple Navigation\nThis experiment is designed to\ndevelop and test navigation pro-\ncedures which employ a simple\nstadimetric device and a sextant\nto make sightings and measurements\nin space using the horizon and\nstars as references. Data from\nsightings will be used in compu-\ntations to determine orbital\nparameters. These results will\nbe compared with actual\nparameters to determine the\naccuracy of the procedures.\nThe hand held sextant to be used\nis shown in Figure 6.\n\nD-9 SIMPLE NAVIGATION\nHAND HELD SPACE SEXTANT\nMG5-8097\n\nFIG. 6\n\nM-913-65-04\n5. M-3, In-Flight Exerciser\nThe purpose of this experiment is\nto assess the astronauts' capacity\nto perform physical work under\nspacecraft conditions. Monitored\nexercise will be performed by the\nastronauts prior to the flight to\nestablish control data. Isotonic\nexercises employing a bungee\ncord and involving the arms and\nlegs will be taken prior to and\nafter exercising. Pulse rate will\nbe monitored continuously. The\ninflight data obtained will be\ncompared with the control data\nto determine the capacity for\nwork in space. Figure 7 shows\nthe manner in which this exercise\nwill be performed.\n\nM-3 IN-FLIGHT EXERCISER\nMG5-8099\n\nFIG. 7\n\n5/24/65\nPage 6"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6. M-4, In-Flight Phonocardiogram\nThe purpose of this experiment is\nto measure the fatigue-stage of an\nastronaut's heart muscle during a\nlong-duration flight. A microphone\nwill be applied to an astronaut's\nchest wall at the cardiac apex.\nHeart sounds detected during the\nflight will be recorded on an on-\nboard biomedical recorder. The\nsound trace will be compared to\nthe waveform obtained from a\nsimultaneous inflight electro-\ncardiogram to determine the time\ninterval between electrical\nactivation of the heart muscle\nand the onset of ventricular\nsystrole. Figure 8 illustrates the\nmethod of installation of the phono-\ncardiogram transducer.\n\nM-4 IN-FLIGHT PHONOCARDIOGRAM\nPROTOTYPE PHONOCARDIOGRAM TRANSDUCER AND SIGNAL CONDITIONER\n\nFIG. 8\n\n7. M-6, Bone Demineralization\nThe purpose of this experiment\nis to establish the occurrence\nand degree of bone deminerali-\nzation resulting from prolonged\nweightlessness during spaceflight.\nSpecial X-rays will be taken of\nan astronaut's heel bone and the\nterminal bone of the fifth digit\nof the right hand. Three pre-\nflight and three postflight\nexposures will be taken of these\ntwo bones and compared to\ndetermine if any bone deminerali-\nzation has occurred due to the\nspace flight. Figure 9 illustrates\nthe laboratory procedure which will\nbe used for this experiment.\n\nGEMINI EXPERIMENT NO. M-6\nBONE DEMINERALIZATION\nPURPOSE ESTABLISH DEGREE OF BONE DETERIORATION\nEQUIPMENT STANDARD X-RAY\nWEIGHT N/A VOLUME N/A\nPROCEDURE PRE AND POST FLIGHT X-RAY\nLOCATION N/A\nMG4-1886\n\nFIG. 9\n\n5/24/65\nPage 7"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\n8. MSC-1, Electrostatic Charge\nBefore rendezvous missions are\nattempted, an investigation\nmust be made of the possibility\nof inadvertent ignition of\npyrotechnics and other detri-\nmental effects due to discharge\nof electrostatic charge potentials\nduring rendezvous. In this\nexperiment, an electrostatic-\npotential meter, which protrudes\nthrough the wall of the space-\ncraft adapter assembly, will be\nused to detect and measure any\naccumulated electrostatic charge\nthat may be created on the\nsurface of the spacecraft by\nionization from engine exhaust.\nThis data will be analyzed to\ndetermine if the charge is adequate\nto create a rendezvous hazard. Fig-\nure 10 shows the detector installation.\n\nMSC-1 ELECTROSTATIC CHARGE\nMG5-8102\n\nFIG. 10\n\n9. MSC-2, Proton Electron Spectrometer\nThis experiment is designed to\nmeasure the quantity and energy\nof protons and electrons present\nimmediately exterior to the\norbiting spacecraft. This will be\naccomplished by means of a\nscintillating-crystal, charged-\nparticle analyzer mounted on\nthe adapter assembly of the\nspacecraft. Data from this\nexperiment will be used to\ncorrelate radiation measure-\nments made inside the space-\ncraft and to predict radiation\nlevels on future space missions.\nThe proton electron spectrometer\ninstallation is shown in Figure 11.\n\nMSC-2 PROTON ELECTRON SPECTROMETER\nMG5-8103\n\nFIG. 11\n\n5/24/65\nPage 8"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\n10. MSC-3, Tri-Axis Magnetometer\nIn this experiment, the\ndirection and magnitude\nof the earth's magnetic\nfield with respect to the\nspacecraft will be measured.\nA tri-axis fluxgate magneto-\nmeter, mounted in the adapter\nassembly of the spacecraft will\nbe used. The equipment installa-\ntion is shown in Figure 12.\n\nMSC-3 TRI-AXIS MAGNETOMETER\nMG5-8104\n\nFIG. 12\n\n11. MSC-10, Two-Color Earth's Limb Photos\nThe astronaut will obtain photo-\ngraphs of the earth's limb using\na hand-held camera, black and\nwhite film, and a special filter\nmosaic which will allow each\npicture to be taken partly\nthrough a red filter and partly\nthrough a blue filter. After\nthe flight, the negative will\nbe subjected to careful measure-\nments, and the resulting data\nwill be used in statistical\nanalyses to evaluate the limb\nradiance. These studies will\nbe used to determine if the\nsun-lit earth's limit can be\nreliably observed in the short-\nvisible or near-ultraviolet spectral\nregion. The camera to be used for\nthis experiment is shown in Figure 13.\n\nMSC-10 TWO-COLOR EARTH'S LIMB PHOTOS\nMG5-8105\n\nFIG. 13\n\n5/24/65\nPage 9"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\n12. S-5, Synoptic Terrain Photography\nThe objective of this experi-\nment is to obtain high quality\nphotographs of selected parts\nof the earth's surface. The\nspacecraft will be manually\noriented from an orbit mode\nattitude to a moderately high\ncamera depression angle attitude.\nAfter a series of photographs\nhas been taken, the spacecraft\nwill be reoriented to the orbit\nmode attitude. Four spacecraft\norientation maneuvers will be\nrequired during which approxi-\nmately 40 pictures will be\ntaken over areas of the\nUnited States. Figure 14 shows\none of the photos taken by Gordon\nCooper which is similar to the\nterrain photographs planned.\n\n13. S-6, Synoptic Weather Photography\nThe objective of this experi-\nment is to learn more about\nthe earth's weather systems by\nobtaining high quality photo-\ngraphs of selected cloud for-\nmations. As in experiment\nS-5, the spacecraft will be\noriented from an orbit mode\nattitude to a moderately high\ncamera depression angle attitude.\nAfter a series of photographs\nhas been taken, the spacecraft\nwill be reoriented to the orbit\nmode attitude. Approximately\n10 orientation maneuvers will\nbe required during which\napproximately 40 pictures will\nbe taken. The photograph shown\nin Figure 15 taken by Gordon\nCooper is similar to those planned\non this flight.\n\nGEMINI EXPERIMENT NO. S-5\nSYNOPTIC TERRAIN PHOTOGRAPHY\nPURPOSE OBTAIN HIGH QUALITY PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE EARTH'S SURFACE\nEQUIPMENT 70MM CAMERA AND FILM\nWEIGHT 1 LB. VOLUME 0.036 CU. FT.\nPROCEDURE POSITION SPACECRAFT, TAKE PICTURES\nLOCATION PRESSURIZED CABIN\nMG4-1768\n\nFIG. 14\n\nGEMINI EXPERIMENT NO. S-6\nSYNOPTIC WEATHER PHOTOGRAPHY\nPURPOSE OBTAIN HIGH QUALITY CLOUD PHOTOGRAPHS\nEQUIPMENT 70 MM CAMERA AND FILM\nWEIGHT 1 LB. VOLUME 0.036 CU. FT.\nPROCEDURE POSITION SPACECRAFT AND TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS\nLOCATION PRESSURIZED CABIN\nMG4-1767\n\nFIG. 15\n\n5/24/65\nPage 10"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\nASTRONAUTS\nThe Command Pilot for the GT-4 mission will be James A. McDivitt and the Pilot will be Edward H. White, II. The backup flight crew will consist of Frank Borman as Command Pilot and James A. Lovell, Jr., as Pilot. Their pictures and biographies follow:\nFIG. 16\nFIG. 17\nJAMES A. MCDIVITT\nBorn in Chicago, Illinois on June 10, 1929. He graduated first in his class from the University of Michigan with a B.S. in aeronautical engineering. McDivitt is married to the former Patricia A. Hass of Cleveland, Ohio and has three children. McDivitt joined the Air Force in 1951 and is an Air Force Major. He was awarded three Distinguished Flying Crosses, five Air Medals and the Choo Moo Medal from South Korea. He is a graduate of the United States Air Force Experimental Test Pilot School and the United States Air Force Aerospace Research pilot course. He served at Edwards Air Force Base, California, as an experimental test pilot. McDivitt has logged more than 3,000 hours flying time, including 2,500 hours in jet aircraft.\nMcDivitt was selected as an astronaut by NASA in September 1962. In addition to participating in the overall astronaut training program he has had additional specialized duties. These duties include monitoring the design and development of the guidance and navigation systems for the Gemini and Apollo spacecraft, as well as monitoring the overall Apollo Command and Service Modules.\nEDWARD H. WHITE II\nBorn in San Antonio, Texas, on November 14, 1930. White received his B.S. from the United States Military Academy and his M.S. in aeronautical engineering from\n5/24/65 Page 11"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\nthe University of Michigan. He is married to the former Patricia E. Finegan of Washington, D.C. and has two children. White, an Air Force Major, received flight training in Florida and Texas, following his graduation from West Point. He attended the Air Force Test Pilot School at Edwards Air Force Base, California, in 1959. White was later assigned to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, as an experimental test pilot with the Aeronautical Systems Division. In this assignment he made flight tests for research and weapons systems development, wrote technical engineering reports, and made recommendations for improvement in aircraft design and construction. He has logged more than 3,600 hours flying time, including more than 2,200 hours in jet aircraft. White was named as a member of the astronaut team selected by NASA in September 1962.\nFRANK BORMAN\nBorn in Gary, Indiana on March 14, 1928. He received his B.S. from the United States Military Academy and his M.S. in aeronautical engineering from the California Institute of Technology. He is married to the former Susan Bugbee of Tucson, Arizona and has two sons.\nUpon graduation from West Point, Borman, now an Air Force Major, chose an Air Force career and received his pilot training at Williams Air Force Base, California From 1951 to 1956 he served with fighter squadrons in the United States and in the Philippines and was an instructor of thermodynamics and fluid mechanics at the U.S. Military Academy, West Point. He was graduated from the USAF Aerospace Research Pilots School in 1960 and later served there as an instructor. In this capacity he prepared and delivered academic lectures and simulator briefings, and flight test briefings on the theory and practice of spacecraft testing. Borman has logged more than 4,400 hours flying time, including more than 3,600 hours in jet aircraft. Borman was one of the nine astronauts named by NASA in September 1962.\nJAMES A. LOVELL, JR.\nBorn in Cleveland, Ohio, on March 25, 1928. He received his B.S. from the United States Naval Academy. Lovell is married to the former Merilyn Gerlach of Milwaukee, Wisconsin and has three children.\nLovell, a Navy Lieutenant Commander, received flight training following his graduation from Annapolis. He served in a number of Naval\n5/24/65 Page 12\nFIG. 18\nFIG. 19"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\naviator assignments including a three year tour as a test pilot at the Naval Air Test Center at Patuxent River, Maryland. His duties there included service as program manager for the F4H Weapon System Evaluation. Lovell was graduated from the Aviation Safety School of the University of Southern California. He served as flight instructor and safety officer with Fighter Squadron 101 at the Naval Air Station at Oceana, Virginia. Lovell has logged 3,000 hours flying time, including more than 2,000 hours in jet aircraft.\nLovell was selected as an astronaut by NASA in September 1962. In addition to participating in the overall astronaut training program, he has been assigned special duties. These duties included monitoring design and development of recovery and crew life support systems. These include space suits, environmental control system and developing techniques for lunar and earth landings and recovery.\nThe launch trajectory for the GT-4 mission will be similar to that flown by GT-3. Insertion will be at the same altitude, 87 miles, but the first apogee of GT-4 will be 161 miles. The Gemini launch sequence is shown in Figure 20.\nFLIGHT PLAN\nIn addition to the various orbital maneuvers to be performed during the mission, as called out in Table II, other activities will be taking place as is shown below in Table III, a summarization of the Flight Plan. The consumable items loaded onboard the spacecraft are shown in Table IV.\nTRAJECTORY\nFIG. 20\n5/24/65 Page 13"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MANEUVER ΔV HP/HA AFTER MANEUVERS POINT OF APPLICATION DIRECTION OF THRUST TRANSLATIONAL THRUSTER PURPOSE\nSeparation 10FPS 87/161 N.M. SECO+2- FWD AFT S/C-Booster Separation\n1 7FPS 91/161 N.M. 2d Apogee FWD FWD Adjust lifetime (for insertion dispersions. Evaluate thruster operation.\n2A 12FPS Apogee of 30th Rev. FWD Left Adjust lifetime. Evaluate thruster operation.\n+TSC #1 5FPS Approx. 15 min after 2A Left Right Evaluate thruster operation. Determine visual characteristics of thruster plume.\nTSC #2 5FPS 5 min. after TSC #1 Down Up Evaluate thruster operation. Determine visual characteristics of thruster plume.\nTSC #3 5FPS 5 min after TSC #2 Up Down Evaluate thruster operation. Determine visual characteristics of thruster plume.\n2B 27FPS 94/134 N.M. Perigee following 2A AFT AFT Adjust lifetime. Evaluate 3-axis application.\n3A 4FPS Apogee of 45th Rev. FWD FWD Adjust lifetime. Evaluate thruster operation.\n3B 6FPS 93/124 N.M. Perigee following AFT FWD Adjust lifetime. Evaluate thruster operation.\n4 110FPS 45/99 (45/97)* 62d Rev. (or 66th Rev.)* AFT AFT Achieve OAMS retrofire. Evaluate thruster operation.\n*FOR PACIFIC LANDING\n+TRANSLATIONAL SYSTEM CHECK\n5/24/65 Page 14\nM-913-65-04"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE III\nIN-FLIGHT ACTIVITIES\nTime HRS:MIN | Revolution No. | EVENT | Function CP | Function P | Day | Night\n0:12 1 Insertion Checklist X X X\n1:45 2 D-9 Experiment X X X\nTranslation Maneuver X X\n4:35 3-4 D-6 Experiment X X\n7:45 5-6 MSC-1,2,3, and 10 Experiments X X\nM-3 Experiment X X\n11:15 7-8 MSC-2 and 3 Experiments X X\nD-8 Experiment X X\n13:05 9 D-9 Experiment X\n17:05 11 D-1 Experiment X X\n19:52 13-14 M-3 Experiment X\n24:00 16 S-5 Experiment X\n25:58 17-18 HF Communication Tests X X X\n29:25 19 D-9 Experiment X X\n31:20 20 S-6 Experiment X X\n31:40 21 MSC-2 & # Experiments X X\nD-8 Experiment X X\n33:20 22 D-8 Experiment X X\nS-6 Experiment X X\n43:00 28 S-6 Experiment X\nS-5 Experiment X X\n44:25 29 S-6 Experiment X X\nM-3 Experiment X\n46:48 30 MSC-1 Experiment X X\nTranslation Maneuvers X X\n47:33 31 Translation Maneuvers X X\nThruster Failure Check X X\nPower Down S/C X X X\nS-5 Experiment X\nS-6 Experiment X\n52:30 33-34 M-3 Experiment X X\n54:35 35 D-9 Experiment X X X\nMSC-2 & 3 Experiments X X\n56:35 36-37 S-6 Experiment X X\n41 D-9 Experiment X X\n70:26 46 Translation Maneuvers X X\nM-3 Experiment X\nApollo Yaw Orientation X X X X\nPower Down S/C X X X\n76:30 49 M-3 Experiment X X\n77:20 50 D-9 Experiment X X X\n90:45 58 Power Down S/C X X X\n95:45 61 M-3 Experiment X X X\n96-35 62 Pre Retro Checklist, TR-5 Minutes Checklist, TR-1 Minute Checklist X X X\n97:32 Retrofire, Retro Jettison, Post-Retro Checklist X X X\n97:46 63 Reentry, Drogue Chute Deploy, Pilot Chute Deploy, Main Chute Deploy, Two-Point Suspension, Touchdown, Post-Landing Checklist X X X\n5/24/65 Page 15 M-913-65-04"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-03\nTABLE IV\nGT-4 CONSUMABLE LOADINGS\nITEM\nQUANTITY\nREMARKS\nBatteries\n703 lbs. based on a 2400 A-h\nEach battery has a 400 A-h capacity\nOAMS Propellants\n Odixizer\n246 lbs\n Fuel\n164 lbs\nOxygen\n Primary\n52 lbs\nEgress bottle are also carried if ejection is required.\n Secondary\n13 lbs\nLithium Hydroxide\n97 lbs\nFood\n1b lbs\nDrinking Water\n Spacecraft\n14 lbs\n Adapter\n61 lbs\nRCS Propellants\n Oxidizer\n40.4 lbs\n Fuel\n31.6 lbs\nGEMINI PARACHUTE LANDING SEQUENCE\n50,000 FEET - HIGH ALTITUDE DROGUE CHUTE DEPLOYED\n21,000 FEET - OPEN CABIN VENT VALVE\n10,600 FEET - PILOT PARACHUTE DEPLOYED\n9,600 FEET - R & R SECTION SEPARATION\n9,000 FEET - MAIN CHUTE DEPLOYMENT\n6,700 FEET - TWO-POINT SUSPENSION\n1,500 FEET - CABIN WATER SEAL CLOSED\nSEA LEVEL - TOUCHDOWN\nJETTISON CHUTE\nLANDING SEQUENCE\nAt the end of the mission, the parachute landing sequence shown in Figure 21 will be employed. One item that should be mentioned in this regard is that should the 84-foot main parachute fail to open, the crew can abandon the spacecraft by ejecting and using their personal parachutes to effect a safe water landing. The latter sequence would also be employed should the spacecraft come in overland instead of the intended water landing.\nFIG. 21\n5/24/65\nPage 16"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-03\nMISSION MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITY\nThe Gemini Program is managed by the Gemini Program Director who exercises his direction through the Project Manager at the Manned Spacecraft Center. The direction of a specific mission is accomplished by a Mission Director acting under the cognizance of the Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight from the time a space vehicle is committed to flight test until the end of the Mission Period.\nTITLE\nNAME\nORGANIZATION\nProgram Director (Acting)\nDr. G.E. Mueller\nNASA Headquarters\nDeputy Program Director\nMr. W.C. Schneider\nNASA Headquarters\nProgram Manager\nMr. C.W. Mathews\nMSC\nMission Director\nMr. C.C. Kraft\nMSC\nPROGRAM MANAGEMENT\nNASA HEADQUARTERS Office of Manned Space Flight\nPROJECT MANAGEMENT\nManned Spacecraft Center\nTRACKING & DATA ACQUISITION\nSPACECRAFT\nLAUNCH VEHICLE\nMSC\nGSFC\nETR\nMSC\nMcDonnell Aircraft Co.\nMSC\nSSD\nAerospace Corporation\nMartin Company\nAerojet General\nOPERATIONS ORGANIZATION FOR MISSION PERIOD\nMISSION DIRECTOR\nDOD Mgr for MSF Support Operations\nStaff\nGemini Program Manager\nDeputy for Launch Operations\nDeputy for Flight Operations\nDOD Recovery Director\nGLV Launch Director\nAtlas/Agena Launch Director\nMedical Director\nPublic Affairs Director\nFlight Crew Director\nRecovery Support Officer\nGemini S/C Test Conductor\nFlight Crew\nS/C Communicator\nFlight Support Officer\nMedical Monitor\nFlight Control\n5/24/65\nPage 17"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\nTRACKING AND DATA ACQUISITION\nThe ground support network for GT-4 will be the Gemini Manned Space Flight Network (MSFN) illustrated in Figure 22 and tabulated in Table V. There will be, however, some minor modifications to the MSFN for the GT-4 mission. These changes for the GT-4 flight are primarily in locating the range tracking ships in positions most advantageous for the orbits to be flown.\nTABLE V - NETWORK REQUIREMENTS FOR GT-4\nNOTES:\na - Record Only\nc - Remoted to and from the MCC\nb - Remoted to MCC\nd - Three telemetry aircraft in primary recovery area\n* Remote Site Data Process (RSDP)\nThe ground network support facilities include the MCC-Houston, Cape Kennedy (CNV), Air Force Eastern Test Range (AFETR) downrange stations, the MSFN, and Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). Real time tracking and the acquisition of data for post flight evaluation will be provided by optical and photographic systems, MISTRAM, GE Mod III radar, C-band radar, and the Impact Predictor (IP) 7094. The network as listed in Table V will monitor spacecraft and launch vehicle PCM telemetry. The flight controller-manned stations, as shown in Table V will display selected spacecraft data for real-time evaluation and transmit these data to the MCC via teletype. The MCC will use both the Digital Command System (DCS) for transmitting commands. All the remote sites that are flight controller-manned, except for GYM, will have the DCS command capability. Tone commands for use by the Range Safety Officer will be used for manual fuel cutoff (MFCO), auxiliary second stage cutoff (ASCO), and Destruct.\n5/24/65\nPage 18"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\nBACKGROUND\nProject Gemini is the stepping stone between the comparatively simple one-man orbital flights of Project Mercury and the complexities involved in the multi-man lunar flights of Project Apollo. As such, Gemini's prime reason for being is to increase knowledge of man's capabilities in space and in developing operational techniques to support the Apollo Program. Thus, Gemini's objectives become:\na. Long-duration flights - up to fourteen days\nb. Rendezvous and maneuver in space\nc. Docking with a target vehicle\nd. Extra-vehicular activities by the astronauts\ne. Controlled reentry\nf. Operational training for all flight personnel concerned\nTo accomplish these objectives, a series of flights have been planned of which this GT-4 is the fourth. The first three demonstrated respectively: orbital insertion capability, spacecraft structural integrity, and crew accommodation qualities. The four-day manned flight will further demonstrate manned space flight capabilities for the support of future missions of even longer duration. The remaining eight Gemini flights, all of which will be manned by two astronauts, are tabulated in Table VI with type of missson and approximate date of flight:\nTABLE VI\nMission No.\nMission Objectives\nDate\nGT-5\nSeven-day flight with experiments*\nLatter 1965\nGTA-6\nRadar rendezvous and docking\nEarly 1966\nGT-7\n14-day Extra-vehicular activities\nEarly 1966\nGTA-8\nOptical rendezvous and docking\nEarly 1966\nGTA-9\nSimultaneous countdown and rendezvous\nMid 1966\nGTA-10\nDirect rendezvous\nMid 1966\nGTA-11\nApollo-LEM rendezvous simulation\nLate 1966\nGTA-12\nApollo-LEM abort simulation\nEarly 1967\n*Includes rendezvous evaluation pod\nThe planned end-of-the-mission touchdown point is in the Atlantic Ocean approximately 400 miles southwest of Bermuda as is shown in Figure 23. This is the primary landing area. The GT-4 mission employs a zone concept for recovery which establishes four recovery zones: East Atlantic, West Atlantic, West Pacific and Mid-Pacific. Each zone consists of a circular area with a radius of 240 nautical miles in which various ships and planes will be stationed. An aircraft carrier will be stationed only in the primary landing area as illustrated in the recovery forces diagram\n5/24/65\nPage 20"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\n\nGT-4 PRIMARY AND SECONDARY LANDING ZONES,\nRECOVERY SHIP SUPPORT AND CONTINGENCY RESCUE FORCES\n\nFIG. 23\n\nof Figure 24. Other areas in the world along the ground tracks are called contingency landing areas. Because these contingency landing areas are world-wide, it has been necessary to pre-position certain aircraft with their associated crews, pararescuemen, and paramedics so that they will be able to reach the spacecraft in sufficient time to render aid to the downed astronauts. These contingency forces have been deployed to the bases shown in Figure 23.\n\nIt should be noted that there are numerous types of aircraft in the launch area and primary landing area for telemetry, weather reconnaissance, aerial photography, and recovery operations. In addition to these aircraft there are also several helicopters in the primary recovery area from the aircraft carrier that are carrying swimmers. These swimmers deploy into the water and attach an auxiliary flotation collar to the spacecraft. Launch area recovery forces are depicted in Figure 25.\n\nRECOVERY AREA FORCES\n\nARS AIRCRAFT\n\nPRIMARY RECOVERY ZONE (480 MILES IN DIAMETER)\n\nLANDING FOOTPRINT (ELLIPSE - 200 MILES BY 40 MILES)\n\n250 MI.\n\n250 MI.\n\nARS AIRCRAFT\n\nUSS WASP AND ONE DESTROYER AT TOUCHDOWN POINT 3 WASP HELICOPTERS 1 WASP COMMAND AIRCRAFT 1 USAF SSB RELAY AIRCRAFT\n\nFIG. 24\n\n5/24/65\n\nPage 21"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M-913-65-04\n\nLAUNCH AREA RECOVERY FORCES\n\nN\n\n(ARS) 72° AUXILIARY RESCUE 50 MI SHIP\n\n2 MINESWEEPER OCEAN GOING SHIPS (MSO)\n\nLANDING FOOTPRINT (27 MILES LONG)\n\nUSA M 113 LARK TANKS\n\nUSMC AMPHIBS\n\nFOUR HELICOPTERS TWO PHOTO JETS\n\nFIG. 25\n\n5/24/65\n\nPage 22"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA ROUTING SLIP\n\nCODE NAME (if necessary)\n\nACTION\nAPPROVAL\nCONCURRENCE\nFILE\nINFORMATION\nINVESTIGATE AND ADVISE\nNOTE AND FORWARD\nNOTE AND RETURN\nPER REQUEST\nRECOMMENDATION\nSEE ME\nSIGNATURE\nREPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n\n1. Fiesch\n2.\n3.\n4.\n5.\n6.\n7.\n\nREMARKS:\n\nI want to send copies of this enormous transmission if at all possible to\nDr. Franklin Roach, Boulder\nLawrence Dunkelman, GGSFC\n\nHow can it be done?\nHelen to O. Smistad - other eyes available 9/2/17\n\nFROM: CODE: NAME: DATE:\n\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. Jan. 1963)\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1963 OF-671845"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA ROUTING SLIP\n\nCODE NAME (if necessary)\n\nACTION\nAPPROVAL\nCONCURRENCE\nFILE\nINFORMATION\nINVESTIGATE AND ADVISE\nNOTE AND FORWARD\nNOTE AND RETURN\nPER REQUEST\nRECOMMENDATION\nSEE ME\nSIGNATURE\nREPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n\n1. Jen IV\n2. File\n3.\n4.\n5.\n6.\n7.\n\nREMARKS:\n\nRecord of Expts.\nDebriefing at MSC\nca. June 25, 1965\n\nFROM: CODE: NAME: DATE:\n\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. Jan. 1963)\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1963 OF-671845"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EX13 ROUTING SLIP\n\nNAME INITIAL\n\nN. G. FOSTER\nR. L. COX\nW. A. EATON\nG. C. HRABAL\nR. A. MOKE\nF. B. NEWMAN\nO. SMISTAD\nB. BROCKER\nM. M. MALINAK\nFILE\n\nREMARKS\n\nPlease Send to Dr Jocelyn Gill"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"35 or something like that down from looking at the air glowedge on\nNow the air glow was discovered quite a number of years ago when it was studied from the ground the hard way and, uh, uh, by betometer (?), and by (triangulation), by trying to determine how high it was, it was many years before one had some idea how high the air glow really was, and in a moment we will indicate how in a matter of seconds Glenn and Carpenter was able to determine in a matter of seconds how high it was. And then he did away with 30 years of hard work. Again, there was a discovery made there, but the point was that in a few seconds from the right vantage point you can do a job. Now with the air glow then looking edge on it sort of, uh, ... we'll ... a band we never mean by band a real perfectly designed band like in the slide or something like that, it sometimes a little fuzzy but this is the air glow band and this is the earth, and this is roughly about 90 kilometers as determined by Carpenter and by rocket passing through the air glow. Uh, this is the air glow edge on that we have heard about this morning uh, it was used in connection with the (Sextan) experiments and so on. Now I just wanted to give you some idea of where we stand in brightness. Now, uh, before Glenn was to have gone off uh, the thought was to have him intimate some visual observations during whatever time he might have. And NASA headquarters and we at Goddard uh, thought about it a little bit and, uh Murry (Drewman) and Johnson (Gill) and myself thought perhaps a little work on the air glow might be a good beginning. And uh, uh, John Glenn was given a narrow, interference filter very similar to this type that was used over the (Sextant). Uh, he, he, us, did not have very much time"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to use it, but he, uh, did, uh, have a chance to observe the air glow with the naked eye and he saw it edge on and he called it, uh .... name for it at the moment and ..... and really the first time you see a thing like that you don't know whether it haze or luminous sort; it does look hazy. Unfortunately, the press and other people kept that term in existence a long time, so long that a number of astronomers in Europe .... papers on this. Much of this haze layer was really a hazy layer and consist, consisting of dust particles and so on. Really, what Glenn saw was air glow edge on a luminous layer. There may be a little dust there, Murray may have something to say about that, but the predominate feature is it is a self luminous layer. Now, Carpenter has more time to observe it. He took the interference filters back up with him, and uh, he was able to time a star passing through the air glow as the star was setting and he noted it and turned it very carefully .... through the air glow the upper the lower and when it disappeared. From that careful timing information one was able to pin down the exact time of the air glow. Roughly 90 kilometers. And this is what took many many years to do from the ground by triangulation (?) which is very very difficult cause you never know how to take care of that ...... transmission was later done by rocket passing through the air glow returning when the ... was ...... But (Carpenter) was able to do this in a matter of seconds. Well that started ....... observation. Uh, we had hoped that later on perhaps the ...... light which is very difficult to see near the sun, on earth you can see it only when the sun is, oh, some"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2 or so degrees below the horizon. We sometime see astronauts might be able to see that. Uh, Cooper was able to see the ... light, and uh, White and McDivitt saw the ... light, very well. Uh, the let's see there's another point here; well, we'll go back to that in a moment. The reason I think have the other designs to show what can be done. If we have time to show what can be done by extending visual observations we will do so. Uh, some of these new results, uh, that McDivitt and White were able to record are very interesting. Uh, first of all, they saw a structure in the air glow and this is the first time this is reported. In one instance, a uh, ............ is seen some structure in the air glow that they're looking edge on turns (white) .... This has never been observed before. It is very hard to observe this with a rocket; you don't know when to fire the rocket to do that. They, they observed that. They observed another interesting thing. They observed meteor going into the earth's atmosphere down below them. It is the first time a meteor is reported from uh, uh, space by an astronaut. And it was a very peculiar experience for them I am sure because they saw the things below them going down into the earth's atmosphere. They saw when they were over Australia, they saw uh, over Australia they saw (southern) lights uh, this again is the first time I think this is reported by astronauts. They saw these these silver lights below them as a, a curtain I think that they can guess ...... a lot better than I could. Uh, uh, .... and this is sort of below them. They both saw the uh, southern lights? Uh, these, these are sort of night time phenomena. There are some interesting twilight phenomena that is difficult observe from rockets or satelites and they have been watching sunrise and sunsets. Uh, they found sunrises more"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"spectacular than sunsets. I will try to explain that in a moment if I can. Uh, .... going to go back a moment to what Cooper, uh, what Schirra uh, saw during a twilight right after sunset. He observed, uh, the planet Mars and he observed at twilight, the sun had just set, a very spectacular array of colors, he describes them very carefully in the report, in the blue book, his blue book, and summarys blue book too. Uh, he described a rather interesting blue band that's three blue bands; you can call Schirra's blues. Uh, ...... is true and he's able to do quite well, with blues. He observed a dark blue, light blue, and a dark blue. And the word \"light\" is a difficult word. When one says light one doesn't know whether one means the blue was a lighter hue or it was brighter. But, it, it appears to be a light blue, and one has to use these words for what they stand. Anyway, we uh, from what these observations were is (reportedly) on to a tape and is .... (debriefing) and afterwards we are all very consistent. We had an order to try to construct this thing. The first time around it needed a little correction when Schirra saw it; the second time around he was somewhat, he was quite pleased with it. We didn't quite know what this thing (band) was at first; we're still not too sure. Uh, we think it might be looking ....... timeless tube because the .... tomorrow is ... use the same technique for timing as Carpenter had started. Uh, we think possibly, one is observing the ozonisphere edge on. The ozonisphere is approximately, uh, oh, from 10 to 15 kilometers high up to r0, something like that. It seems to have a maximum around 25 or 20 kilometers. The, uh, ozone as you know, is very very absorbing in the ultraviolet,"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 11 5\nin fact complete absorbant below 3000 for solar radiation coming ... does not penetrate. There is another weak band of ozone in the red, yellow, and green ... in the ... band uh, at, uh, distance 5000 ... 4000 .... 6000 .... 7000 and if by clock uh, absortion this way then a weak ozone band or something like that. And it does subtract, it does absorb a bit of the red, yellow, green and the ozone is completely transparent and the reason 4000 down to 3500 then it starts taking off again and then it becomes again the well known deep absorption uh, in the ultraviolet. Well, uh, there is only an equivalent of 2 millimeters or 3 millimeters ... 2 or 3 millimeters equivalent of ozone in the upper atmosphere that is of course, because complete (continuation) of the sunlight. However, when you look at this edge on you're looking through quite a long path and this, perhaps, this ozone does seem to this weak absorption begins becoming equal. So it does attract out a lot of red, yellow, and green light that otherwise would exist in this rarely atmosphere, this blue atmosphere that (uses) .... scattered light. There's certainly a lot of red, yellow, and green in the blue sky anyway. And by attracting that out you end up with another kind of blue, ozone blue, which looks probably differently from, different from the .... blue. In fact, this is what it was. We weren't sure and then yesterday, late yesterday, uh, the astronauts showed us some of the movies they were taking, they had been taking with their gun camera and uh, on the whole in some of the very spectacular sunsets, there this band appears. There's a light of blue. Again, uh, they weren't that light that the coloring in the top of these .... naked eye, but, uh, this is very true."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Anyway, there's a case where Echirra's visual observation has been confirmed by photography, motion picture photography. The explanation I give may or may not be right, I don't know. I haven't had a chance to look at all the other problems. There's also a dust layer in here within this general region too around 20 kilometers which could add some scattering and . . . . the situation down by the white light too well, I don't know, it may be very complicated. So here's another situation where an observation, later confirmed by, uh, another set of astronauts doing the job by (physical) means. Uh, Cooper made some very interesting observations. At night he, uh, during moonless nights, he had no trouble seeing clouds looking straight down. And this is interesting because uh, well, we know why he can see the clouds now that he says he could. It is simply that these clouds are being illuminated by the airglow. The air glow is the . . . . . light source is illuminating down on the clouds and air glow is very transparent in solar radiation and that sort of thing, so when you look down you're getting uh, sort of . . . . . right behind it, you're getting an intensement of, of light here and you see clouds and of course the rest is a factor of two different . . . So he has no trouble seeing clouds. This is interesting because the people now are working on the pole-vault air glow experiment which will be launched . . . . . . this year. Uh, well, we . . . . . . . . . no. they haven't time to figure how they separate the air glow observations . . . . . clouds . . . . . . . But again this particular observation brings to light some problems will face people who are working on a major satellite. There's another interesting little by-product. Cooper also had no trouble seeing the earth lem at night. Uh, without moon. This is"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"reasonable too, because uh, as you look in this direction you see the always the edge on air glow. But you also are looking through the air glow, as it is coming around; you're looking sort of taking two passes through the air glow instead of one, long big path and you are getting some light; and you are not getting very much light from the surface of the earth. So there is a kind of s (positive) contrast. There's a little bit of light here and . . . . . up in here. Uh, McDivitt and White reported the same thing, although, McDivitt said that when we asked him what was moon condition, he says wasn't concerned about it because he could see the earth lem all the time. Well, fine, if the moon is out it is illuminating the earth's lem and perhaps the it was a little brighter than the air glow when there is no moon the other way around. But the point is there is a line of demarkation, at night. In fact, they prefer, the thing the line of demarkation is much more firm at night than in the daytime. The daytime, day the cloud situation is uh, very difficult but there're clouds at night, too, but uh, I think, one . . . effect of (night) one is not seeing too much detail. It seems that they, they may have something to say about this. Uh, uh, I haven't had much time to think about it but, uh, they did seem to feel that this, this, situation at night was a little bit sharper in the daytime, than in the daytime. Does the air glow vary in elevation? Uh, yes, it does. Uh, but not very much. Not the uh, uh, the visable air glow and the, the green air glow, the green continues. Oh. I might make one statement. I, I think maybe by our not being careful enough early in the game, by separating the 5577 atomic oxygen green line of"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the air glow from the continual we may have caused people to think that there's something very magic about the green (line)."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4477 atomic oxygen green line of the air glow from the continual we may have caused people to think that there's something very magic about the green (line). If you are starting the green line certainly you want to observe the green line . . . . . . . are built very carefully to observe (holding) the green line in and uh, would continue (near). But for . . . . . applications it may not be always wise to subtract the (continuim). In other words, while you're dealing with and this is again those 4000, 7000 . . . . 23 mentioned 5577 is the green line right here but there's a strong continuim right along here. A lot of light here; this is the light we've been talking about. This visual night (glow) visable night glow edge on is is the total. So there's a lot of light there and just . . . . in the Sextant experiment . . . . constructively critical perhaps the reason why the . . . . didn't work too well is after one is throwing away a lot of light. Uh, this is not as bad as the case of fog lights you know. Remember years ago the fog lights were yellow. They were light wasters. There is no reason, the only reason why they worked well is they were low down so eventually the yellow . . . . disappear. But you don't want to waste any light. However, White will point out to you or . . . . he did prefer using the green filter and McDivitt preferred not using the filter. So . . . . . first to depends a lot your own method of observation. I do want to point out that one has to be very careful how one makes . . . . applications of air glow. Uh, . . . . . recall any other, uh, things, they, you weren't here yesterday; . . . . . know a little bit about it. Uh, I think I should . . . . . sensitiveity if each of the astronauts"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"starting with Glenn who had trouble getting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Well, I really don't want to get into that too much for this reason. Finally, there will be a very fine experiment carefully planned through the . . . . I mean sensitivity uh, Oh, uh, uh, O. K. Well, Glenn didn't a change to get . . . . and therefore he wasn't able to make the same acute observations for example, as Cooper was able to make because for example, I don't think Glenn had an opportunity to really get . . . . and see very much on the daytime skies but you mean maybe, uh, that type of uh, Well, uy, yes, uh, or even starlight. Oh, alright, fine, alright, I see what you mean. What was the (landing) orbit magnitude? Yes. O. K. Uh, . . . . going back to . . . . let me continue with that Uh, in one case Cooper was taking a small, woke up and opened his blind and looked out and he was on the day side. The earth was directly below him, the sun was directly behind him. So the earth was not illuminating any portion of the window nor was it illuminating anything that the window saw. There is not primary, secondary . . . . area . . . . . . Like that. He had a pretty good situation and he did see stars in the daytime but he did indicate that he was not able to see as well in the day side as he did at night and he saw quite well at night. And, again we know there's a day air glow but its very difficult to measure and here is a beginning of a subjective observation of, of its (men) at the"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(nutation) and I hope some day there will be sensitive enough to . . . . .\non board so that during the day side one can look and observe physically\nwhat the day air glow is. Now this is very important because here we\nhave the orbiting . . . . . next year and very important background prob-\nlem. Two of the orbiting . . . . . observatories . . . . . are above the\nair glow, this air glow. But the day air glow is much higher and uh,\nat least, there's good evidence in the rocket measurements that it's\nhigher and it's sort of associated with a red air glow. And, so here's\nour situation where an astronaut was able to subjectively note the difference\nbetween day and night in the (sky) Uh, McDivitt and White were able to\nsee down to 7th and 8th magniture stars where as the other astronauts\nwere not able to see so well. Again it may be a question of time\n(darkmentation) perhaps not that much more time but uh, . . . . . .\nthey were getting down to uh, the kinds of sensitivity . . . . that uh,\nshould be possible under, under good conditions of dull atmosphere.\nUh, should we mention anything (about) the window (pane) and uh, . . . . .\nto hear more about it, the question on did uy, White smear something on\nthe window or take something off with his elbow or something. It appeared,\nfrom what we heard, that he tood something off there has been some\naccumulation (?) them scattering the medium on the window and we took\nsome of it off and when it look at what he did, they have to look in, in\nthrough the window, it looked black where he had rubbed something off,\nand this seems to make sense because scattered light . . . . coming in and\nscattering off window which had accumulation of little particles which\nare brought or something which would get in the light the place where\nhe moved it and again it looked. But after all the cockpit inside is"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"relatively black compared to the outside. And this is true and they\nlooked out through the window uh, there seemed to be a change. In fact,\nthey have aphotograph of this (spot) . . . . . talk about that. Uh,\nthey are very uh, they say the astronauts have taken advantages of every\npossible opportunity . . . . to note something unusual. And he keeps all\nthe copies . . . . . . . Uh, . . . . . . I think we can look a little bit\nto the future. I think we all would like to extend the . . . . range of\nvision and the way to do that is with image converters. This may be\nvery practical. Uh, if one is dealing with uh, the idea of perhaps using\na violet lens rather than a blue to get down to a region that is . . . . .\nmany more comments on. You may be getting into a region where the eye\nis not very sensitive or not sensitive at all, yet it is a very inter-\nesting region to do practical navigation well, there one can use the image\nconverter and have the eye become sensitive through an image converter\nto uh, (the near violet). There are many observations that have made\nfrom rockets that are hard to repeat. Uh, for example, ultraviolet aurora.\nWe're not sure this happened but uh, two of these . . . . . in a rocket\nand through air and it got saturated and it turns out that it probably\nwas a very strong ultraviolet aurora over Wallops Island. And fortunately\ntwo of the (dactometors) worked and because they were . . . . to such\nhigh sensitivity but the other two were . . . . Well, uh, there was\nno visable counterpart of this area; there was no way of knowing it;\nsatellites have . . . . . . astronauts might be able to look around and\nsee . . . . . ultraviolet aurora. They saw this aurora in south\nAustralia visually. Well, that's the beginning. Perhaps with image\nconverters they might pick up some other aurora. . . . . . . . . . .\nultraviolet . . . . uh, is a very . . . . region; we don't know whether\nthe pesibili of the ultraviolet is going to be . . . . . . "} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"than other kind, uh portions. Now here again an image converter\nwill convert. . . . light to visable light. Uh, their observations\nthat have been made of these nebulocities(?) which may or may not\nbe so, these are ultraviolet nebulocities(?) in the 1200-1300\nregion. Again one might have an image converter or create an image\nin a matter of a moment, look at a line(?) and see if one can see this\nnebulocities(?). Maybe one... instrumental problem(?) we don't\nknow. In this type of experiment very difficult to achieve. Uh,\nwell, I think that's about all I wanted to say uh, I am sure you'll\nget a much better feeling of how these observations were made and how\nthey appeared; the astronauts when they tell you about the, when....\nThe last thing on our program is the astronauts, and they've\nobviously been delayed so I suggest we take a coffee break while\nwe wait for them..... We'll cut our coffee break short. Colonel\nMcDivitt and Colonel White have shown up here. Uh, maybe we can\nrecount(?), take a minute and recount for them what we've done. Uh,\nour intent here was to have each of our experimentors go through\nthe background of the experiment, go through the experiment, and\nalso give some of your comments you gave to them yesterday, so\nas to fill in as much background as you could. I think that the\nspeaker(?) would appreciate, if you would, uh, gave some of your own\ncomments and observations on each of these experiments,where you par-\nticipated more than the (switch was in operation?), and, uh, give\nthem the opportunity to ask a few questions based on the other\nthings they talked about this morning... And I guess this morning\nwe went through the medical experiments first... the medical experiments"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and, uh, choice as to how you..........\n(Actually) two hours in space.\nI don't think there are any questions on that.\nHa, Ha.\nThe X-rays (?) didn't cause any significant hardships as far as the......\nto flight. They made us get up what, 10 minutes earlier.\nYeah.\nWell, you can hack (?) that. Since there was only 4.3.(?) I guess\nThat's most serious problems and I wanted a milkshake or something\nas soon as I landed and I couldn't have it. Said I couldn't have any\ncalcium until, what, (20 hours afterwards?)\nAs far as the flight problems\nThat's a pretty safe floor (?) my heel didn't hurt at all.\nMine's all healed up.\nHa, Ha.\nI didn't think you had enough shield at the moment (?)\nHa, Ha.\nThe uh, phonocardiogram (?) like some of the other senses (?)....\ncouple days (?) Not so that we couldn't carry on the mission.\nIt wasn't any more bothersome than any of the other ones.\nI'd been interested in, interested in knowing, uh, the......\nresults of them.\nIt hasn't come up......\nYeah.\nWhat I'm really interested in is whether or not our motion disturbed\nthe microphone enough so that you heard a lot of other things.....and\nnot necessarily our heart. But we did uh, always have the band on the......"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"had the.....man on the tape.\nThe EKG?\nOn the biometry tape recorder.\nThey were arranged in such a manner that the - the phonocardio-\ngram by itself was not recorded on both tape recorders. It was\nonly recorded on one tape recorder. And since we were not necessarily\ninterested in the man who was awake, because he was moving around\nand you weren't going to try to get around to that anyway. Whenever\none went to sleep, his biomed tape recorder was on. Most of the\nflight profile on the biomed.....\nDo either of you talk in your sleep?\nNo, I don't believe so.\nJim doesn't, do it?\nThere were some - throughout the sleep I felt fine. I know I moved\naround, moved my arms and tried to get more comfortable.\nI only used about half of my first three sleep periods, which.....\n\nAre there any other questions on that?\nOn the group of......your heel to heal, meaning that all the calcium\nhas been redeposited by the time the third X-ray was being...\nNo, it is all healed up right now. There is nothing wrong with it.\nWe don't really have the data yet, I just talked to Dr......\nWe heard this morning that 8 to 10 percent, 8 to 10 percent calcium\ndeficient.\nWell, we made a......and I am afraid we loss - not quite back\nNot quite all back.\nNot quite all back and we were a little curious. We wondered if maybe"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 13 2\nwe do provide extra shielding on the right side of the pilot's heel\nuntil a couple of weeks from now we will check it again out of\ncuriosity. It is not part of the protocol or anything else.\nThat's all right.\nBut, we are just curious to find out. Now we realize that you have\njust been parading...\n.....the more you jomp around on it the more it comes back.\nI don't know if you think you have been jumping more or.....\nI will tell you one thing - I haven't had my fair share of ice\ncream and milk.\nWhen had you taken your last X-rays?\nPostflight, about, it's a little over 10 days, it was supposed to\nbe 10 days and it turned out to be 12, I believe.\nWe just had them.\nCame down the 7th right, and we just did it yesterday morning, so\nthere it is, the 23rd, about the 23rd day.\nI think if it is a function of exercise, and....\nIt is not a direct function, I mean that is one variable, but it is\njust a curiousity that we had expected that it would be back up by\nnow and it is not quite back near pre.\nWell, what is it now? How many percent down is it? Can you tell?\nWell, it varies now between the two of you. And these are still\nvery preliminary now. We look those yesterday, and we - they were\nstill practically wet when we were doing it, but we are still"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 13 3\nprobably 4 or 5 percent below what you were when we took our pre-\nflights, and those were very constant, especially the first two.\nWell, if we are still 4 or 5 percent down, then we only went down\nabout 8 percent.\nRight.\nWhat is the sensitivity in your method?\nWell, as I pointed out this morning, it depends on the situation, but\nwe think we are definitely within 5 percent. It - we produced it\non several machines - many times we get much closer than that, but\nwe are not - we don't want to go out and say that we are - it varies.\nWhat was your experience with the exercise?\nYes, well let me comment on this first, because I think I deviated\nfurther the experiment. But after about 2 days I felt that I wasn't\ngetting any exercise at all, and there is a limit to how much push-\ning on the floor that you can do, so I got clearance from Dr. Grady,\nto go ahead and use the exerciser throughout the remainder of the\nflight. Not only as a method of exercise as prescribed in our medical\ntype 1 passes, but also as a form of exercising my arms and legs,\nhowever I saw fit. And I did do this through the remainder of the\nflight. I think the reason I did this, I sort of felt it was advan-\ntageous to go 4 days and be capable to get outside the spacecraft\nby myself than to sort of stay in the state of hibernation. I\nkind of liked your comment yesterday, something about rather than\nturning into a pumpkin. Something like that, I thought it was funny.\nReally, we were - I was getting much less exercise than I had anti-\ncipated. There was a spurt early in the flight when I was getting\neverything out, getting everything stored before the EVA and we"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 13 4\nhad a lot of, a fair amount of exercise there. Then I found I could\nreach everything that I needed to reach without really....myself all\nover the inside of the spacecraft. I managed to get all the food\nout which is a - in a lg is a fairly difficult task, I managed to\nget it out without any effort whatsoever, once I got the first one\noff. They were all....and they were in a box right behind me and\nI just - I always left one hanging out. It was big enough so it\nwouldn't go back into the hole and it was taped all.....and I didn't\nhave to worry about losing it, so I just reached back and find it,\nand I just jerked it and pretty soon the next meal would flop out,\nthen I would take the scissors and cut that one off, with no\neffort whatsoever, and I anticipated that I might have to turn\naround and reach back in there and could do a lot of exercises\nthat.....\nAnother thing that we thought might provide exercise just didn't so\nyou had to make it. And I wasn't that - I didn't feel like during\na lot of exercises for exercise sake because we weren't getting all\nthe sleep that was thought we should have and I just lost the desire\nto be doing pushups or anything like that, but I did feel that I\nneeded more exercise than I was getting.\nI think that something ought to be made clear though here, I think\nwe are using the word exercise rather freely here, in a common lay\nsense, and again the experiment here as it was designed was not\nnecessarily - a work capacity or a work heart capacity test. It is\nnot a thing designed to provide the crew with an extensive amount of"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 13 5\nexercise, and I think - I guess because - you probably - might have\nguessed he had about 60 pulls that you were really heating yourself\nup a little bit under those conditions.\nWell, I made the comment that 30 was kind of trivial.\nRight.\nThen I said 60 warmed me up in the suit more than I would have liked\nto have been, I was kind of warm most of the time anyhow, and it just\nmade me a little warmer. So it wasn't a real big exercise workload,\nthe kind of exercise that you would do over in the gym.\nRight. I think that some people just get a misconception of this\nthing - this exerciser- the fact that we call it that that we use\nthe word exercise, that we should use the proper prospective\nhere, what actually was taking place, which is a very short spurts\nof energy expenditures; yes, but not exercise like in a gym or\na real good workout, of any type.\nDo you feel that the ventilation in the suit was adequate?\nI did, but there again, it was adequate but marginal. You couldn't\ndo a lot of exercise, you would get a heat load. As a matter of fact,\nwhen Ed was exercising a lot, I could actually feel the heat going\nup into my side of the suit also. And Ed had a - Ed felt warmer\nthan I did all during the flight.\nI think you are aware that you had different temperatures on our suits..\nWhich will help explain the difference in the feelings as far as the\nenvironment.\nHow could you feel the heat when he exercised?\nWell, it is a closed loop. There are two branches to the loop."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 13 6\nBut, the hot air went out, went through a bunch of contraptions,\nand eventually came back into both of our suits again, same way that\nmine did. He didn't have a closed loop for himself only, and I had\nanother closed loop. We had a closed loop that was closed - but we\nwere part of the same mechanical unit, so that anytime the air temp-\nerature went up in the suit, regardless of whether Ed added the\nheat to it or whether I added the heat to it, it went across the\nheat exchanger and it was only taking out so much of the heat, so\nit essentially it came in a little higher temperature than it would\nhave if he wasn't exercising. So, you can notice these small temp-\nerature changes.\nWas the noise level associated with the cold air through the....\nI think so, yes.\nProbably no, but I think probably your noise in your intercom was -\ner - was so much more than that, you probably didn't even notice it\nas much as you had.\nYou get used to it. Just like flying the P35, you get somebody in\nhere that is not used to the hot make sitting in there it probably\ngets pretty objectionable in a short period of time, but when you\nare used to that, after a period of time, you know there is a noise,\nbut you know what it is and you can put it away. I think another\ninteresting thing about the exercise, though, not particularly the\nexerciser, but the desire to do, I thought there was a decreasing\ndesire to do some of the exercise at work. You just didn't really -\nI did what I had to, but I did go boomering around the inside of\nthe spacecraft unnecessarily. As far as the workload is concerned.\nI don't know whether this is a getting tired process, or to the lack\nof desire to have to do work, and I think Jim somewhat expressed the"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"same feeling.\nDid your freak electric static charge worked on electron and magno-\nmeter, we didn't get any performance at all on those three.\nFirst, from an instrumentation standpoint, we had - the switches\nwere acceptable, even to me, I thought Ed was asleep when we had\nto turn those things on, I had to reach across with this thing we\ncall the swivel stick which is about this long and has an unusually\nshaped end on it that we could reach under the switches and flick\nthem on and off with it.\nEd, did you see the....... extend?\nNo.\nIt wasn't extended?\nNo, it wasn't extended.\nDid you ever see the the back end, did you get far enough back\nto get to look in deep enough to see it?\nNo.\nDid you hear it extend?\nNo. I extended it the first time but I really didn't see it.\nThroughout the flight, what - we probably - what did it cycle there,\nabout 5 times.\nJust in case that anyone time there was something wrong with it,\nwouldn't extend, would you attempt to extend it going through the\nextend cycle about 4 or 5 times during the flight.\nJust in case something was wrong with it at any one time that it\nmight get out to it. We never retracted it, so, it if works, then\nnothing could have happened.\nWhen did you turn the switch off? The.........switch."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"As soon as it was extended, after about 30 seconds or so. What ever\nit said in the flight.\n30 seconds.\nHave you got any data back on it yet?\nEven on the computer.\nAny other questions on those three?\nWhat was the cost of the photography? The weather and marine\nphotography.\nDid you skip MSC-10?\nOkay, 10.\nI would like to say we got some good pictures and I appreciate it.\nThere again, it was a pretty straight forward experiment. We didn't\nhave any difficulty with it.\nI've got a couple of questions about the ES5. A couple of things\nthat came up last night. You said - you know the systematic photo-\ngraphy across the United States, every 5 seconds, how did you time\nthat?\nCount, or clock or how?\nI started the event timer with the digital clock that we got in\nminutes and seconds, and then I controlled spacecraft and then I\nset the mark every 5 seconds.\nI see, and Ed cranked the camera on and took the pictures.\nDid the same subject, do you think that one man could do this by\nhimself. This is important to the flight plan, do you think it\ntakes both men to do it?\nI think so; it would be very difficult to time it and control the\nspacecraft as you take the pictures."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I think you could get some degree of pictures, but I don't think\nthat you could get the same set that you got. The set we lostin\nthe southern part of Mexico, I believe I did one time when Jim was\nasleep, but it was not nearly as long a period and I think it\nwas only probably about 12 pictures. This is shorter piece, but\nthe country isn't very long.\nYes.\nWell, were focusing it then Ed.\nYeah, I just wanted to get it all set up ahead of time, and by the\ntime we passed there we didn't change it a great deal. But on the\npass that we made across the United States, it was, I think, most\nprecisely held straight down, and we went much longer period of\ntime and there were controls that were made, and to sit there and\nfiddle with the controller and time yourself and turn the camera\nand take the picture, you can't do it as exact as you can.\nOkay, I will put that in as a firmative request for my experiment\nif at all possible, have both pilots on the job.\nFor any of your sequence pictures.\nYeah. Those other ones, the target........\nEnd of belt."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"O. K., I'm going to put that....address prefer request for my experi-\nment if that is at all possible to have both pilots on the job for\nany of your sequence pictures.\nAnother one's Target of Opportunities if you don't need the controls.....\n..........the ones that we've got you weren't all straightened out..........\n.....you don't necessarily pass over them, you know.\nThe thing they want to take a picture of is over here; it's best to\ntake a picture.\nYou guys certainly have your eyes open, buy some of those things--\nthat volcano shot, that reshot structure especially, that's really\ngoing to give us the mileage.\nCould you make a comment just on the general stability of the\nspacecraft, ..........pulsing and you stopped once, and you were wait-\ning; how long did it take for rates to build up, for instance, how\nlong could a fellow count on maybe pulling position in general?\nWhoever got the rates stopped I'd say it takes him a couple of days\nfor him to get started. There's nothing to make them go except that\nrotating machinery which is practically nil.....\nSo, just a matter of the metal break with the jet.........\nBut you have to remember, though, as you get your rates all stopped,\nyou're inertially fixed and the thing's rotating underneath you, so\nyou're not stopped with the respect that what you want....\nForty degrees per minute....per second.\nIn the same vein, do you notice any reactive motion in the space-\ncraft when you're inside, when you disturb it, when you move around\nat all?\nI could feel Ed moving around, but whether I felt it moving around"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"as....because he was actually moving the spacecraft or whether I\nfelt it moving around because he was bumping it, either that, now I\ndidn't move you really, but I'm sure that you quite felt some (stable?),\nso I don't know whether it was that kind of a thing I was feeling\nor whether it was the spacecraft effects. I don't.......\nYou don't tend to......you don't tend to pick up these motions\nfrom the spacecraft.....\nI remember several times when I kicked into the footwell that you\nmentioned; you could hear that, but I'm sure that was just some-\nthing that he heard, and that I didn't really disturb the motion of\nthe spacecraft.\nWhat about the externally.....I mean, could you disturb.....\nSure could.\nSure could.\nThen you were aware that when he did it?\nI sure was.\nBut I also knew it too. I knew the times when, when I kicked off\nhard on the spacecraft, so I...and this was the times that I wanted\nto get all the way out to the end of the cutter, and that was the\ntime that Jim remarked, one time when I really punched off it hard,\nand when he said, \"Hey, you're putting rates of two degrees per\nsecond on the spacecraft.\"\nThen I could read the.......\nI knew I was, when, you know, when you're sitting out on the end of\nthe nose, and you kick down on it, it's going to move."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"......do you have any figures on what the....used to stabilize the spacecraft..........\nI used, uh, translation of bigger percentage than mine was........\n'Cause you're only translating your............\n......need some pictures, sir.\nDo what?\n.....Did you just fix yourself in one position.....?\nYeah, that's kinda hard (for me) to say, a way to describe; but I used proportionally of the fuel that I used, probably, three quarters of it, translating in about a forth of it just in the pitch and yaw maneuvers that were made, and I didn't try to take out roll..... and I didn't really (put in) very much roll; one time I called--I called out roll on my tape a couple of times, but pitch.....\nCould you....did you understant though that when he did these pitch and yaw maneuvers he wasn't trying to translate, he was actually just demonstrating that this could be done?\nYeah, all I did was pitch a little bit or yaw a little bit, yaw, do a little of this type of maneuvers with it, and to see if I could stop it and put in in so that I didn't put all the motions in too.\nSo it wasn't truly, I see what Jim's driving at...that you don't want to say that to translate from point A to B is three quarters in translation, and a quarter in attitude. That's what you were getting, right?\nYeah.\nOf my fuel that I carry in the gun I probably use three quarters in translation and a quarter in attitude, but you don't need very much"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in attitude. One time I got pitched over backwards and I did use the gun to take that out, because I just didn't want to use the oxygen.\nOne more quick question: .....some of the (numbers? members?) say that you were moving the structure about in a one-side configuration......\nIt's pretty big, but it very well has to be within your work area--you know, in your suit, you're rather restricted on where you reach, you don't reach underneath and behind you especially, but out in front; if a guy would've handed me something that's big, I could've held it.\nTen, twenty feet.....\nWhat?\nTen feet?\nTen, right, ten..........................Ten by ten sections.......\nWait, now wait a minute, we're talking about smaller things right now.\nTen by ten what? ........Moving where? Do what with it?\nI couldn't move it an inch, because I wouldn't have anything to... how would I move it? I'd go the other way if I moved it this way.\n....................Propulsion.....equal?\nNo, I don't think this is us, it's not what we were demonstrating with it....\nI'm just saying, look at that....\nYeah. I see what you're interested in.\nOne thing you gotta be careful of...\nYou got a center of gravity that big thing you're talking about,"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and I don't know what happened--unless I knew where that was I could really very well get pretty close.\nI knew where mine was.\nThese things, these things are weightless up there but they're not baskets that fly away, once you get these things going, you gotta stop them again, if you started pushing, if you had a...some means of proportion, you've got something like the sides of this table going, and if it hit that wall down there, it'd go right through it.\nThis is the general question I'm leaning at: Is it, well, I'm trying to get it...with the distinction that you can use it .....automatic tape stabilization......\nYou'd have the same problem with automatic stabilization that you would..... Sure.\nBut with automatic stabilization you might, it would set down in fine (resistance to) the motion where with this thing you wouldn't... with a gun you, probably, would you know, how to find, you've gotta find.........\nYou mean, you have to find your automatic stabilization as soon as you've held on to a ten by ten box, it would stabilize you and it too?\nWell, if you could still hold on, and so forth, it would start firing the stabilizer.\nOh, and within limits of its control......\nYeah, I think you would find out that it wasn't designed to do that.\nSee, if you had a system that would strap to you....\n.....It might not be very much, though."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Just a second, Bob. You had a system that was strapped to you that had automatic stabilization and translation of a person, well, than you've got the whole of a box or something that you were holding when you were down in one corner of it. I'm sure that you wouldn't have engouth stabilization control authority to handle the translation of something like that, because you're putting your engine...\nWell, it depends on his mass. Again you said it's mass. If it were magnesium bonds or something, then...............\n................. ...................... ..........\nI think we're asking......\nYeah, well I know what we're talking about--we're talking about building a space station. I'm as anxious to do that as the next guy, but this isn't quite what we looked into. I appreciate your question; we certainly have to fact up to it........\nOn-stabilization, uh, suppose you were trying to take off (both pictures) on Gemini, compared to Mercury.....\nWould it take you what?\nSuppose you try to take one photo picture of the star, say three stars, uh, what do you think your sensitivity in terms of angular accuracy would be for, say, ten seconds or three seconds focus, angular-wise, but (who) took pictures of the horizon and......changes four degrees per second.\nOh, does that ...... to the dyed balloon?\nWell, it's a very special question on generalization, you know, you're moving around, how can you, can you counteract the motion on the vehicle, for instance, the Gemini capsule .... to take stabilizer...\nYeah, you'd have to, if you want to compare it with Mercuey stabilizer,"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"you have to go back and get moment of impulse of the control system, then apply it to the moment of inertia of the spacecraft, and then do the same with the Gemini....\nNo, in this case he'd be moving a camera.\nPardon?\nMove the camera to control the angle.\nDo you just hold it?\nYou hold it, yeah. We could take them as well as you could in Mercury, according to how stable they tie it.\nIt's quite possible that you could stabilize the spacecraft better than you could stabilize the.....\nYeah, can you get that in the spacecraft......Thank you.\nUn-huh.\nI would (use) the spacecraft to stabilize it...to hold it out the window, kinda hold it out the wondow, you have to, you don't have to move the stabilizer.\nThe spacecraft is moving, that means that you've gotta, you have to move your hand at the, an opposite rate, or the opposite direction, the same rate that the spacecraft is moving, I don't think that you want to do that, because you've got a stabilizer thing in your hand holding it, what you would probably do is brace your hand up against the side of the spacecraft and take the picture, then you're going to get........\n.........................\nYeah, you see we've got a site on the spacecraft (blastoff) that has a radical that you're going to light for night so with the minimum impulse that we have in the spacecraft, we could fix it on a star,"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and get a fixed attitude stabilized in this manner. It would probably be rather.....(unstable?)\nI have the feeling it would be very stable. Some of our section sitings over there, particularly when we were working on the Apollo siting, where I was keeping a certain fixed two stars on a certain location on my window, and Jim just doing it over there with pulses.....\nHe didn't have the radical on....\nHe had the radical on. On, yeah.\n.............You were well within a degree taking a few minutes of oxygen. You can hold it within a degree or a quarter of a degree.\nYou can get the exact answer to this if you just analytically....\nDo you have the data?\nNo, I can't quote it to you off-hand. It's not in the order of hundreds of degrees per second.\nMy overall impression was that we were more stable that I thought we would be when we wanted to stabilize.\n....We've looked at our agenda here, and it's got some general questions in the end, get a good stabilization study going....\nThat's fine, were there any more questions on the terrain photography?\nI've got a question. Can a fellow, you know, look at the movies and see if we got any terrain on there?\nYeah, as a matter of fact, I got the impression from what you showed as yesterday afternoon, that there's quite a bit of terrain.\nAnd also some of the 35-millimeter films.\nYeah.\nDid you know there were some pictures taken outside of the window"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of the 35-millimeter?\nUh, yeah, ....\nMost of them are, I think, blocked, because we have to be over the water, but, if I'm not mistaken, on the little bit I just caught a look, there might be some land bands.\nOh, yes, as a matter of fact, you got three or four, uh, they're toward the end of that box of 35-millimeter slides. It shows spectular structures probably, they weren't taken outside, they were over Asia somewhere but they were really nice. Those definitely should be blown up, also the movies.\nWe did take a lot of movies of the clouds.\nWe did just, a couple of times, just turn the thing on. We weren't going to take movies around us of things that were still, and wanted - to get a big structure of the......area, so I took some over the Pacific, on the - up over the northern Pacific between Hawaii and the United States, about 3, 4, or 5 minutes.\nWe took a lot of ocean movies....\nWas there ever any question in your mind as to whether or not you were looking at clouds, did you always get.....\nDaylight.\nDaylight and nighttime.\nDaylight, there is never any doubt.\nAt night time it is kind of hard to see the ground.\nOne question from the pictures, it did not appear to be too ground, but were you able to be conscious of haze or dust layers, say over your deserts, or even over pollution areas of cities and so forth.\nWere you conscious of seeing the industrial pollution or the dust?"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Over North Africa a couple of times we commented on dust storms, although they weren't really dust storms?\nWe weren't sure that was a dust storm, right. Remember I said that is a ........, and then we said well maybe not.\nIt wasn't a dust storm as you would see it from an airplane where you see the wind blowing on or prior to the desert.\nWe decided it wasn't a dust storm, just a dusty haze.\nOver North Africa.\nOver North Africa. Over north India there was quite a pronounced haze redorded.\nI would way you were, far less conscious of it. In fact, a rather interesting thing, it's - on one of our first passes over the Cape I was looking on talking to the Cape at that time, I told them I could look down and see the Cape, launch pads, and everything was quite clear. But in fact, the weather down there was not clear at all. Some of the fellows were leaving at that time to go back to Houston, and the visibility was very, very low. You could see a mile or something and it was all quite.....\nWe could see straight down but we couldn't see the hangover at all.\nAnother question, did you ever - Gordon Cooper noted that there was static on his radio the same time when he saw lightening discharge on the ground. Had you - did you get any static that you might have correlated with being near disturbed weather on the ground?\nThis is sort of a chance observation if you made it.\nNo, I don't think I did.\nNo, I didn't either. We was a lot of lightening.\nWe - we had no..."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This was a sort of a chance observation.\nNo, I wouldn't say that I did .....\n.... I guess you would call it but you couldn't ... it didn't at any rate.\nDid you notice the .... with the flash if lightning ....\nThere was an awful lot of lightning ...\nSure was, South America and ...\nAny more coverage on the water photography?\nYes ... on atmospheric phenomena ... Did you feel as though you would have time to study them instrumentally? I mean from the time that they come into view until they pass out of view? Did you go through the exercise with the instrument - let's say a hand-held spectrometer or ....\nDid I phrase the question?\nI think so.................... but I'm not sure of the duration that your studies require.\nThat's my problem - I was trying to get some feel as to the duration that you had something in sight.\nDoes this ... reduce the phenomena ... where you'd fly along in regard to what the weather was and you'd say O. K., at 5 minutes after eleven I'm gonna do a spectrometer study and then you'd set the thing up and at 5 minutes after 11, you would start it or is it something where you would say - When I pass over this fungus ... that's been reported to be 25 miles north of Tripioli - I'm going to study .... which of these things are .........."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"You see the big problem is finding these things.\nIn looking for objects on the ground and things like that you just don't find them 500 miles in front of you.\nHow about something in the sense of a target of opportunity? You see it without advanced warning.\nI would think you'd have on the order of a minute or 80 seconds maybe to study it if you have your (equipment) already mileaged if you wanted to look at it you've got to aim the spacecraft as it, say.\nAiming the spacecraft at it is not difficult. If you've got a field to do if, you can track right on a point. If you say a thunderstorm, say, off to your left, you could maneuver the spacecraft around there and just keep pointing at it as it went by.\nAbout how many miles would 60 secons - 80 seconds - ......\nWell of course 25 down ...... 45 down -\nThat's about 80 seconds.\nThat's 80 seconds, roughly.\nThat's right. For the (normal) altitude\nSo, you can figure that out in miles, but-\nI've got a whole set of data if you want it for various altitudes on just this type of (answer).\nYou've provided enough-\nAnd I think you can probably see it from the 30 down below the horizon 45 down - you might be able to start seeing these things\nI think you can get a real good feeling for it if you'd take a look at some of the tracking film on which we looked for an object on the ground,"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"found the object, and then tracked it all the way. And as soon as they\nget that film and put the pieces in to make it — it's a sequence camera —\nit's not a real movie camera — as soon as they put the pieces in and in-\nsert the extra frames so it is in such a movie camera, I think you can get\na real idea of exactly how long you can see. So if you know how much re-\nquirement you have as far as using your instrumentation is concerned, you\ncan tell exactly whether you can or what kind of measurements you can make.\nThen you can also theoretically figure it out, too.\nThe big problem is to identify the object . . . If you're looking for a\nspecific object, a certain thunderstorm or the northeast corner of the\nRed Sea or something, that means that you don't — you're not going to be\nable to pick it up and aim the spacecraft at it 30° below the horizon.\nYou.re going to have to wait awhile. You're probably not going to get it\npicked out 'til later, so that your time on the target is going to be less.\nOf course, you know the range is changing very rapidly. That thing is\nbelow you — say it's right below your track. When you first see out of\nthat 45° it's going to be roughly 200 miles away and if you pass over\nit'll be 200 miles away. So that the range is essentially doubling. If\nyou're interested in something that requires anything like a constant\nrange, I don't know exactly how you'd do that. This is a problem that you—\nDr. . . . . . .\nLet me try to rephrase that question . . . . . although I think it was\nanswered in the seeing those movies yesterday . . . . you were tracking,\nI think my answer to it was a yes, but let me rephrase the question about"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"these targets of opportunity. Let's take the airglow for a moment here.\nThere's the night airglow, the twilight glow, and the day glow. Now\nthere are no . . . . . . of day glow. That would take (perhaps a) second\nexposure, and you know where to look the next time around, and (you can do\nthat forever.)\nThe twilight airglow might take 10 seconds to get . . . . . . . . . . .\nAnd the night airglow you would want maybe 4 minutes. Now how do you feel\nabout if that were programmed in with proper spectographs? Either hand-\nheld or on the capsule. How do you feel about it? Taking a one-second\nexposure of the dayglow, a 10-second exposure of the twilight glow, and\na 4-minute exposure of the nightglow. You're moving all the time, but\nthe phenomena are pretty much the same during that period.\nOne second's no problem for us. Four minutes, you might have to be a little\nblurry.\nI think you could probably, if you tried enough, you could probably get a\n10-second . . . . . .\nFour minutes—\nWell of course the spectograph can . . . . . . . . . the time to permit a fair\namount of motion, too.\nYou'd get something on the—\nSchirra might have been able to take twilight, day, and night airglow. If\nthe spectograph could stay in orbit, the person would have to go back in.\nSo shortly after that, the experiment was tried in a rocket and the rocket\nstabilization was a problem, too. With timing after four minutes, the\nexposure one did get the spectograph because the thing was able to point\nin this direction even though it did wobble a little bit.\nI wouldn't think you'd want to hand-hold a 4-minute one, I'll tell you"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that—\nNo, no.\nYou'd have to be spacecraft-modern. You could get the rates down low\nand you could—\nO. K.—\nYou could certainly hold it within a half a degree. But now your half-degree—\nYou'd have half-degree tones within the spacecraft . . . (I think that\nwould do it).\nThat's all right. You can build in a certain amount of smear (so you can\nget a very good day).\nWait a second — Let me ask you another thing. What is the airglow that\nyou're looking at now. How will you look at this? Where abouts is it\ngoing to be?\nWell, it will be at the horizon, or a degree or two above it.\nI know, but you see, you're looking at — the horizon behind you is gone\ndonw — by very fast. The airglow is essentially — if you're looking at a\ndifferent piece of the airglow — not the horizon at a certain spot. Now\nare you going to look behind you and look at continually changing airglow\nor look in front of you and see a continually changing airglow or are you\ngoing to try and look out at night in viewpoint and try to pick up a piece\nof airglow and track . . . . . .\nThat's a very good question. I would say one would be very satisfied to\npay the integrated aspect it's moving.\nOne should also try the other experiment. Ha Ha Ha.\nI didn't mean that I didn't think of your experiment, Dr. _______\nI didn't mean to complain.\nPart of the game.\nThe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":". . . . . airglow over lighted areas, I think that that would be more\neasily done than trying to track a certain spot in the airglow because\nthat means that if your flight path is this way, you've got to aim the\nspacecraft over here and then you've got to track it along like this.\nIt would seem to me that it's easier to just put it some place and hold\nit there.\nMM-hmm.\nAnd especially from the pilot's standpoint when you've got a gunsite or\nsomething like it. . . . . . maintain that spacecraft essentially wings\nlevel with . . . and if the pitch attitude's proper, you don't have to\nworry about the translation across the . . . . . .\nThis is a question on both 5 and 6. In terms of pre-warned subjects, like\nthe . . . . . . . . . these storms, and this sort of thing. A lot of\npre-warned subjects. To your eye, how far below the horizon could you\nfeel you could pick up say a weather phenomenon. Now you're not looking\nthrough the atmosphere at something in the atmosphere. Do you feel you\ncould see say 10° below the horizon? Can you come up with some estimate\nthere. If you're pointed head essentially try the plane towards it so\nit's in your window.\nWouldn't this depend upon what the phenomenon was—\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n. . . covered a 1000 miles on the side — lit's make it more\n500 miles on the side — I'd be able to see that at 10° below the horizon.\nIf it were a line of thunderstorms, I think probably 20 or 30°. If\nyou're looking for some of the things that we were looking for at 30°"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"below the horizon, I thought that was a good place to look for small ob-\njects. When we say small objects, they have to have large identifying fea-\ntures near them; maybe if we're going to start looking for something like\nthe —\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (could be a cloud)\n—the Red Sea . . . . . . . . 30° below the horizon, I think you could probably\nstart picking it up. This is below the apparent horizon. This is below\nthe local horizontal.\nRight.\nAs to water and land you say it may be 20 to 30°. As for clouds, perhaps\nabout the same, or maybe further up?\nA little further up.\nFurther up.\nTo tell the difference between a storm and just a sheaf that's so far\noff that you can't tell if i's just a sheaf of clouds or is it honestly\na storm gathering.\nYou see as you get farther out there, 0° below the horizon . . . when you're\nlooking like that you don't know the difference. One degree either side\ncovers 100's of miles, so if you get right down below you one degree either\nside only covers a couple miles. So, if you get too close to the hori-\nzon, you're really not confining any point out there.—\nThe point is, if I set up for say 30° or 20° below the horizon, would\nthat be a good place to give a man a value on to set up?\nI think 20° would be (easier, yes.)\nI think 20° would be easier.\n30°?\nMore than that."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"You just can't differentiate in what you're looking at.\nWell you see we're playing a game here between giving you enough time to get on it so you're on it when you get there and at the same time not so far that it's wasting time.\nReally to me you're not wasting time at all when you tell me where to start even if you start me way out. To tell you the truth, I want to start looking as soon as I—\nO. K.\nI'll tell you all this though, if you're just going to give one time—\nNo. That's no good.\nWhich time would you like, now? I was talking—\nIf you're going to give them multiple times, you know, start early and just continue out, but if you're just going to give one time, then I'd say 30°.\n30°.\nOr 20° maybe, but no closer to the horizon.\nFrom the earth's horizon. That's about 45 half the horizontal, or something like that.\nIt's about 5 . . . . . . . . . . 20.\nNo.\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nNo sir, it sure isn't. More about a minute and a half. Then he goes.\nYou've got to get a man on it early enough to have the same kind not to throw all your weight fields picking around and wait for it for a long time."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":". . . . . . . . . your real key, though is the first time you look at it it's pretty hard to find it. As soon as you've gone by it once, maybe missed it once, the next time you come through, you can give it up there at 10° if you want. You know exactly what you're looking for and you know what's coming before and you go right up to it and get a . . .\nCause you're saying about 30 to do that or 45 down from the horizon for terrain and perhaps a little further up for weather. . . . . 10° further up for weather on a first-on a chance basis target of opportunity.\nI just wanted to ask you that in your — part II of this — under the great and under the terrial — what is the ground altitude that you took 4 shots with the pitch down — I don't know if both of you were up or not.\nYou pitched down and you fired a thruster as a preliminary to the experiment on the rediacal light to see how much the thruster flame would and could interfere with the target. I was just wondering what you actually observed on the . . . . . . . .\nAny brightness of the thruster and so forth and if it could have any effect on the target. I haven't found a photograph yet.\nWell on something like, you'd better really get over there and look for them because they're going to turn out balck and your polaroid probably isn't going to print them.\nYeah, that's probably why we haven't seen them.\nThey're in the black-and-white roll, aren't they?\nYes. They were in the black-and-white roll.\n. . . . . . . . document out on the tape."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The document out on the tape and I think that's probably the part where the tape . . . .\nI believe it's in the book there, Tim.\nDo you recall how they came out? You could see . . . . . . light or . .\nOh, no. No. It's in the same ball park, but the diagonal light that we saw maybe once or twice. You looked like you saw it once, and . . . .\nYou did see it once.\nWell, we thought we did from what we'd been briefed up to . . . .\nDid you draw a picture of it yesterday?\nYeah.\nI could comment. We talked quite a bit about this after the GT-3 flight and I know Gus and John both had quite a bit to say about it if you want to check the notes on it.\nYou mean on the—\nOn the bright thrusters, yeah.\nWait a second. I think they may have been talking a lot about the re-entry control system.\nNo. No. No.\nDo you know what caused you to see it? Was it reflected off the spacecraft or was it an aura of glow somewhere around—\nA glow from behind.\nYou're just seeing that section of the glow that comes your way.\nNow — Is it primary or secondary glow. Was it particles themselves . . . to the light, or you think reflections off the particles that were round?\nI don't think you could tell. It was so dim, you couldn't tell.\nDid you discuss yesterday particles of space and . . . . . . . . . ."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 16\nI don't think you could help - -\n. . . . . . . .\n\nYou discussed yesterday particles of space junk?\nYes we did, do you have any particular question?\nI would like to have the information later though.\nWe.. what was your question?\nI was just curious about the amount of junk you had about the spacecraft.\n. . . . . . . . . . . .\nFrom the spacecraft?\nWell, from the spacecraft and also the amount in the spacecraft?\nFrom the spacecraft.\nI am not talking about any strange particles that appeared. . . . .\nAnd also, when you were outside the spacecraft, whether you could keep any geometry of any junk off the spacecraft? Particular the spacecraft angle of view.\nNo, the spacecraft only. I didn't see any - -\nYou didn't see any particles - -\nSatellites or particles floating around.\nI saw the glove float off.\nIt was a definite.\nBut it was not small particles floating off the spacecraft?\nThere were all kinds.\nBut you have no geometrical picture of these when you were outside the spacecraft.\nI think they float in all directions. When you dump the urine, you have a snow storm out there. It is really beautiful. Snow flakes"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"all over. Millions of them. And it doesn't make any difference which way they are going but you can see them come off by the window and they look like they are going off spherically, from what you can see. Now maybe they are not going out the back, but I doubt that.\nDid you see them at any other time? Glenn mentioned that he had seen them, ice crystals, they weren't associated with such situations as this -\nYou see a crystal or two go by every once in a while.\nYou know, I think that these are associated with systems in the spacecraft.\nThe exhaust?\nYes, we've got a water cooler and the water separator and the suit loop pumps in the water and the evaporator, and there are things going overboard.\nI think that it might be pretty obvious that they're from the spacecraft. They are going away generally.\nI think a point that Jim made, and I think I've made it clear, but maybe not, that they were actually going small end forward, actually, the first time we were going front end forward quite a bit, and it looked like the streamlines were going back, and you thought, well, that is the way it ought to go, there is a little bit of flow. But several times we got around to going small end forward and the streamline and the little particles were going equally as well this way.\nSo, I know that this is a theory that some people had that there is enough particles even in a very reduced flow area to cause a streamline but apparently not.\nGordon Cooper said he thought that he could use it as a yaw reference if he had to, perhaps."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 16 3\nThe particles coming out the back.\nBut then we saw that he could absolutely could not use it as a yaw reference.\nThey were going straight forward.\nAny way you were going, they were always flowing with you, and it was there were two urine dump systems on the spacecraft, one dumped out the right side and one dumped out the left side. The one on the right side you could see out the right window and they would eventually come on the left side and you could see them out both windows. Predominantly on the right side. When you dumped from the left side, it was predominate on the left side.\nThey always appeared to be spherical.\nYou could look out and they were going straight - you know you would look out and they were going straight up this way.\nThey were very brilliant.\nAs a matter of fact, the prettiest sight of the whole flight was - you'd do this right a sunset and you would have a perfectly black sky with all these - with the sun shining on all these particles.\nIt was real pretty.\nWhat were your thoughts regarding participating in the coordinated ground-spacecraft experiment where something has to be done on the ground concurrently with your - doing something else, from the spacecraft.\nYou mean one more participant?\nI think you would be able to do something like that.\nYou mean laying out patterns on the ground for visual.\nOh, let's say creating a hurricane or something such as that where"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"you would visually, you would observe something down below you.\nWe were essentially doing something like that on our flight - on our flight plan, and we didn't follow it exactly. We were getting information from the ground on when to do certain things. We were essentially doing that.\nThey told us when we were coming over Carla, a hurricane, and the hurricane name, give accounts of the extensive cloud areas.\nIt was unfortunate at that time though; there were no characteristic clouds that characterized a tropical storm. There was just a big structure of cloud mass, we took some pictures of it. They don't give you the circulation that you would like to see, but they can tell you - this is what we did on the ground tracking too, they told us where to look to pick up certain targets. We did, we picked up the targets.\nWe did the same actually with getting into the anomaly. We had requested position versus altitude. We had to change time and run ours down a little bit.\nAs a matter of fact, we got orbit tracked up there which we couldn't really do a great deal with our own selves because the orbit track had time check right along it and we could independently know at a time when we were coming over an object of interest on the ground.\nEd, did you experience any difficulty in operation of the......... camera? How to erect the camera.\nI believe we might have. I am not sure whether we had one or two difficulties with it. When we - I brought the camera back in and gave it to Jim, he said it was set on about......\nNot when you handed it to me some time later."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 16 5\nSome time later, but we don't know whether we got gimmied around in the spacecraft or whether it was my big fat handed glove I turned the wheel and actually turned it about - you have to turn it this way to find out what you turned it to and I am afraid - of course I held it this way and I could have done that with the hand on the clock. So, this might be one source of error which would have been due to the operation of it. Another one though, that we had prior to the time that continuous taking pictures, the inside shutter doesn't back - doesn't open - so you drop the front shutter all you want and you get a black frame and we got quite a weries of black frames on the film. But this may be a mechanical problem that we had, as far as operating the camera, the mounting of the camera on the gun itself, made it difficult to operate. The same thing, if you had a camera that was 3 foot wide and one and one-half foot long it would be harder to operate.\nI realize that. I noticed that in one of your shots from the spacecraft you had a white smear in the print. Now, is that one you experienced also during your training period?\nThe white smear, I believe is the picture Jim took of the window, and it had that smear on the window.\nNo, this was in the print itself. You know the one I am referring to.\nYes, the one you took right right front nose straight into Jim's window. Is this the one with the white symetrical streak all the way across the window.\nThat's right.\nThere are 2 frames."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 16 6\nWe are not sure what they are at all.\nThere is a symmetrical one on each one of them.\nWell, it goes back across the film, about 90 degrees.\nIs it straight?\nStraight, it's a pretty, the same width all the way across.\nIt might be my helmet tie-down strap.\nNo, this was a different exposure on both sides.\nThis is particular too, because the exposure goes all the way across the film. You...........\nIt is not within the frame itself. So there is a peculiarity there.\nWith respect to the black frame, the people have looked at it and they don't think this is a mechanical problem. It is an exposure problem most likely. We are investigating it further.\nI also, was talking to some people on the cameras on it and they felt that it was an image of some type with the brightness out there, even if you are shooting at about 200 feet. It wouldn't be black. There would be an image there you could bring it out.\nAre these things really black, or is there anything on it?\nWell, I don't know.\nWe just held it up like this and looked down, and that is about all we have done too, Jim. I don't think -\nThat is the only way I have and I couldn't see anything.\nI haven't run a good detailed study yet.\nBut as bright as it is out there, just remember the, it was my visor, I think I had about 8 percent of light coming through which is about a normal type or light for me. It is really bright out there. I don't see how, even at a 1000; because with the recommended"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"setting I think is about 500 that you would have some type of an underexposed something you can see........\nI think so.\nOur measured success of that camera hasn't been high.\nI'm afraid every time we used it, it failed.\nOf course, we are getting a lot of these things, but when we go to trace them down, we can't really tie them down.\nWell, I can tie down about 5 times for you. When the film in the altitude chamber in exactly that mode, the shutter doesn't fall, That is, the mirror in the back doesn't fall.\nIt's got a handle on that one and he discovered the reason for it.\nThey had this camera back at McDonnell right now.\nThe one we had on the flight.\nThe one we had on the flight and they are looking at it to see if there were any of those kind of event frames, that they found.\nIs that the one - -\nNo, the problem that they found in the altitude chamber was a bent part. But they don't know how it got bent, they don't know what made it bend, but they are going to look at this camera to to see if there were any of those kinds of frames apparent.\nI think what is also interesting to me. I remember looking in the film and it looks like the film I saw has a lot of sequence. It looks like they put two rolls together.\nYeah, I could figure out the sequence.\nI could look at the roll of the original sequence and I think we could almost tell if we had a camera failure or we had an exposure failure. Because the exposure failure, you had it, from then on"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"your pictures would be black and maybe if you had a random failure\nof the mirror back there it might take a picture sometime, sometime\nnot. The back plate - there were exposures on almost every frame.\nThere weren't these, I guess a fairly large number of frames that\nwere black.\nWere the frames intermittently that were black on these?\nNo, no, that I recall. I looked - I didn't look at all of them -\nbut I looked at a fairly good string of them and there were a\ncouple of them, one or two points, one point where there is a small\noverlap in the frame, but that is about the only problem that we\nfound on the black and white.\nWell, are there exceptions in the color that are black?\nIn the color, yes. There are.\nI think this is - -\nI don't know - -\nThere is no indication that you got a random failure in the mirror\nthen?\nRight, you see we are applying this on GT-5. Three experiments\nand we are kind of concerned about that.\nI think you should be really.\nDid you see dust particles floating out the cabin when you had the\nhatch open. If you did, what floated out?\nYes, we did see dust particles, there was dust floating from the inside\nto the outside, I think they are just going from a high pressure area\nto a low pressure area.\nJust obvious.\nRight, my suit pedals had a lend rate of about 90 cc's......"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Anyway, my suit leaked, they all do you know so that there is\ngetting something on the inside, also, we had a lot of things in\nthere that were probably outcast.\nAlso, the insides were dirty.\nI don't agree with that. There was a definite flow of particles\nfrom the inside to the outside.\nHow did you get the glove outside.\nI think that may have - -\nNo, the glove wasn't put out, it went out by itself.\nI can't say for sure that anyone hit it, but there is something\nvery interesting that unless you see it, it never dawned on me\nbefore, but we had some periods of time where Ed was asleep and I\ndidn't have much to do, so I fooled around with what things do in\nzero g and I almost had a perfect conservation of energy until you\nrelease an object and push it off in a certain direction, it continued\nto ricochet around the spacecraft until it catches onto a lever or\nit gets wedged in something, but it doesn't seem like when you drop\na ball on the ground it goes boom, boom, boom, boom, and finally\nstops, it is kind of like that. It keeps going - - - If you take\nsomething and spin it, it will just stay there and spin. I took\none of the food bags we had which were about this long and about that\nwide and very thin and I would just spin it like that and it would\njust stay there and spin. With no decrease in - essentially no\ndecrease in flotation rate. Another indication I observed, I had\na piece of metal that was screwed onto the instrumentation panel\nthat had a round disc with a loop in it and then it had a chain\nlink dewitt and then there was another chain link dewitt, and that"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"chainlink was screwed onto the instrument panel, so that there\nreally was - the metal a link, then another fixed link, and there\nwere, we had a fan in our suit loop, and you could feel that inlet\nvalve underneath the instrument panel, and I really shouldn't be\nvery much air going through there because you only blowing just\na small portion of the air from the cabin and mixing it with all\nthe small air or oxygen in the suit itself, so you just sort recir-\nculate a little bit of air from the cabin and mixing it with mostly\nair from the suit and it just so happened that I noticed the parti-\ncles within the spacecraft tended to flow down and you could get\na redefinite streamline fell through my leg and this metal was\nmounted just above that, but up against the flat panel so that the......\n\nEnd of tape."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and the Spacecraft tended to pull down to here the redefinite streamline\ndown through my legs and this metal was mounted just above that, but up\nagainst a flat panel so that the ballad of the panel is here and the metal\nis mounted up in here. And I watched that thing start into motion.\nReally, I'd just touch it and it would start loffing. It would loff over\nlike this and bounce up like this. And it went on for - one time I timed\nit for over 20 minutes and other times for as long as 30 minutes - and\nthe only thing that ever stopped it from this continuous motion - this loffing\nback and forth - was a piece of gawkroll that we had glued on underneath\nit and every once in a while it had an edge on it like a nickel or a dime\nwhere it essentially came off like this and every once in a while I'm\nsure that that edge got stuck in the gawkroll, but it never, ever stopped\nunless it got stuck in the gawkroll. And the same kind of thing could\nhave happened to the glove. It might have been put in motion in the\nspacecraft and then just I wasn't looking at it AND it could have been\nricocheting around inside the spacecraft for a long time and it finally\nwent off.\nThe same thing applies to your strap.\nI think what you ought as far as a flowout of spacechart is concerned,\nthere's a tremendous example of it in the first part of the film.\non my helmet tied-on strap. It's definitely taking exactly the path of\nthe flow - comes up, goes out, and arches over, and if you recall, the\nglove came out and followed exactly that path. It came up and out,\narched over, and went right out the right side of the spacecraft over the\ntop of the....."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It continued right on out.\nYou can see there was a fair amount of sun in and out of the cockpit.\nQuite a bit.\nYou could see all the dust particles. You can count the streamline on the\nway out. Maybe we'll have a touch on these last two experiments and then\ncome back if there - just to make we touch on all the...... the\nradiation experiment inside the cabin. Is there any comment or question\nthat....... that this was the little ball.\nRight. Ed White, why don't you comment on that?\nYeah, this is a fairly straightforward experiment in which I'm sure the\npeople responsible that are familiar with it. It was a measuring device\nin which we measured the spacecraft radiations for 1-minute periods of\ntime at 6 different spots of the spacecraft and this we did at prescribed\ntimes during the flight. A very straightforward experiment.\nThat's all the background (up to) this morning. Are there any questions\nabout it? The last one was the Hangdella Sexon experiment.......\nWe covered this in great, great detail yesterday, and I don't......\nDid anybody brief on that experiment? I think it would be better if\ny'all asked questions on it because if we went through it, it would take\nabout three hours. Does anybody have any questions about it?\nNo, I think we got a very good thorough field for it yesterday when we\nwent through it in detail.\nThat leaves the visual observations.\nYes.\nAnd I know you went through that yesterday and I listened carfully.\nThat's right. We won't have to -"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"And I personally asked Glen, Cochran, Schirra, and Cooper if they say a\nmeteor and they all said negative.\nAnd then you both said you saw a meteor.\nNo, a falling star. Ha Ha.\nI think there's a difference between what we say and what we were expected\nto see as far as meteors are concerned.\nAre you talking about micro-,eteorites striking the-\nNo, I'm talking about meteors in the atmosphere.\nO. K.\nBelow. O. K. Below we saw them.\nLittle ones.\nAh, little ones.\nYes. Now, one of the obvious situations is that you said you said a 7th\nmagnitude star. So probably your visual sensitivity was better than\nanother observation. The window was better or something. Is that it?\nDid you make a count of the number of the-\nWait a minute. What are files you use success?\nWell, if you have poor visual sensitivity, then the number of meteors\nobservable drops off very quickly with the sensitivity of the eyes.\nYou see, 10th magnitude, you could see a lot more meteors in the atmosphere\nthan you can if you . . . . . . 2nd magnitude. And the question arises\nHow many do I exceed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n. . . . . . . . 2nd order of meteors.\nYeah.\nThey were 2nd order meteors and -"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"They were quite bright.\nO. K. You saw only bright ones. About how many did you see?\nAbout how often did you see any? Could you have made a count of them and\nsaid, \"Let's look at meteors for awhile\"?\nYes, we could have.\nCould you have sat down there and counted them all off as you say them and\ngive them relative attention?\nYou see, I hesitate to give you a number because I think that if we did,\nyou'd tend to come to the wrong conclusion because we weren't looking out\nof the windows at night all the time.\nNo.\nQuite often we had things to do inside and we turned the lights up and\nnever even looked out . . . . . .\nOh, you weren't dark enough, is that it?\nNo, we already were looking out. We were attempting to look out and we\ncouldn't see out because we had the lights way up and, first, we were\nworking at the window, and secondly, if we were we couldn't have seen. So\nif we give you a number, make sure that you don't say that, O. K., we say\n15 meteors in four days and therefore they're going to see . . . . . and\nthat's not right.\nNo. O. K. But because. -\nIf you want a number, I saw probably between 10 and 20, but again I\nwasn't looking out all the time.\nNo, so you really weren't looking for a meteor, right?\nNo, we sure weren't.\nAnd you have to remember, also they occur in a rather uninteresting place."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"They don't occur up in the heavens, they occur down below you. This is the\narea that you spend a great deal of time looking at in the night. You're\nlooking up at the stars.\nWe came to the conclusion that you looked at the ground in the daytime,\nyou looked at the horizon starting at night, and if you were looking some-\nwhere else, you really didn't see much. You find out that sky, in the\ndaytime you don't see anything-\nI was just curious whether it would be worthwhile to spend a little bit\nof time looking sort of at the ground close to the horizon and trying to\ncount meteors in terms of finding out what -\nI'm sure we could.\nGetting a count on.\nIt occurred quite low down . . . . . . . . . You looked down at 30° and\nthere'd be meteors; at 45° there'd be meteors. Obviously well below you.\nDid they look any different from shooting stars from a balloon?\nThe thing that I noticed about them is that they were short and I think\nthis is probably because you're looking at them from above and the angle -\nthe length of them - of short, and you're seeing them as they come down\nthrough the atmosphere from above and so you see a line that's lonly that\nlong from above. Up there it's only that long, and then when you look at\nthem from down below you see them come all the way down and they appear to\nme-\nThey're probably microscopic. The random slope direction.\nSometimes they're real little tiny short ones and-\nAnd I think the short ones would more be an indication that they were very\ndim ones, because the dimmer the meteor, the shorter the trail.\nWell that seems reasonable.\nUnless you'relo bring a window down at them."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"But what you're looking at right here then if it was dark.\nTo tell you the truth, I think what's more important is the angle that\nyou're looking at them at.\nWell anyway, we did see a lot of them. And they're not difficult to see.\nAnd I don't think we were looking at anything that approaches a 7th magni-\ntude meteor.\nYou see we could see-\nWell, I was just curious whether this was the reason why the-\n. . . . . Much brighter than that. I didn't see any real dim ones. As\na matter of fact, since we weren't looking for them, you know, we wouldn't\nhave seen them. You look up there and you say \"I wonder what magnitude\nstar I can see\" and you look around and you say \"O. K., I know that's a\n3rd magnitude and that's a fifth and then I see that one over there is\ndimmer than the fifth and that one's evan dimmer so that\neventually you come to the conclusion that maybe you can see 7th magnitude\n. . . . . . . I saw those because I was looking for them and I could come\nto that conclusion, but I never looked out at them to see how dim a meteorite -\nI was only seeing the ones that I was attracted to while I was looking\nfor something else.\nSo that might be a nice thing to (ask) . . . . . . . . . . . on the next\n(flight).\nWell, if you looked out for them, you probably could see a lot dimmer ones.\nDr.—— . . . . . . . . . general question or something?\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Do you remember on your consumption of oxygen . . . . . . . . .\nYou shouldn't ask. That's a hard one for me to answer. I know what the\nflow into the suit was and-\nLook, somebody might have given you the . . . . .\nI don't believe that you could get that figure because you see it was an\nopen roof system and-\nWhat's not used goes right on. In fact, not only that, it comes in at a\nfixed rate and it goes right over the sides.\nYou can't get that when you're fueling.\nDid you come across any unusual problem outside the vehicle that you didn't\nexpect?\nNo.\nHere's one you may not want to comment on. Do you have any comments to\nmake in regard to the capability of putting man aboard and hide inside the\nvehicle, the satellite without actually . . . . . . . ?\nDoing what?\nPutting a man aboard . . . . . . . .\nYou mean go over and take a look . . . . . . . . . . Sure. That's one of the\nreasons we're doing this.\nYou think it's perfect.\nPull up along side of it and go over and take a look at it.\n(You don't foresee any unusual problems, do you?)\nNo.\n. . . . . . . . . the tumbling (mold)?\nExcuse me?\nEven if it's in the tumbling mold?\nYou're going to use some good judgment about what you do as far as going"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 17 8\n\n. . . . . . It's the same kind of problem we have associated with the booster. We spend quite a bit of time ahead of time trying to determine exactly how much of the tumbling booster we could plan to go up and take a look at and we finally came to the conclusion that it was up to the pilot's good judgment to approach the booster using his own judgment on it. There just wasn't a way to put a handle on it — well it's tumbling so many degrees and out of plane and you can go or you can't go. I think if you see it, you'll know whether you can or you can't.\nIs the problems connected with the difficulties in closing the hatch unidentified?\nThey're working on those, I think. I'm not sure that they completely completed the case.\nI was asked to find out whether we have some lubricants in the very close cauldrons was contributed?\nI think that kind of information should come from the systems people who have done a lot of work on it.\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nYes, I think . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nAre there any other general questions?\nYes, I have one. In your effort to photograph specific objects on the ground, what kind of siting devices — did you use optical siting? Did you try at any time to use the reflex viewing arrangement of the 35 mm? uh siting device?\nFor siting?\nyes.\nWe looked out through it but it was mounted in such a manner that you"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 17 9\n\ncouldn't do any more than look out.\nYou couldn't aim at a particular point and correct for-\nNo, because it amounted to looking over this way and then controlling the spacecraft back that way.\nIn addition to that, you had up and down, which is worse.\nA reduced . . . .\nThat's the reason I asked the question. I wondered if you had used that particular thing and whether it was useful.\nYou could see what you were looking at, yes, but, controlling a spacecraft, no. I think you could have made a little near — actually got around to that part of it . . . . . you did the first time. But if you wanted to take a picture of s specific object, and one person was controlling the spacecraft and the other person was going to take the picture, he could take the pictures when he saw them in the viewer. . . . . control the spacecraft too it would be a —\nOne other point is how accurately do you think you can point a photo-system with the optical site?\nCertainly with ± a half a degree.\nPlus or minus half a degree.\nProbably less than that. Maybe on the order of a quarter.\nDo you have a picture of the site again?\nNo, we don't.\nThere's a difference between the open bars on the site.\nDo you havt to go, Bill?\nNo, I don't.\nI can give you a better answer if you come and ask me in a day or two"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 17 10\n\nwhen I get a little — let me look at the site again.\nThere's . . . . . . . visual observations.\nExcuse me. Let me answer one more.\nHave you seen the tracking film?\nNo.\nLook at that — you could probably . . . . . putting a grid on a screen.\nI could show you what I was using as the targe. You could — . . . . . feel the view that you got — that you're looking at.\nKnowing the field you know, I'm sure you could calculate exactly what you can do.\nExactly what you can do.\nThat's the second thing I want to ask Dr. White about — comments of fields of view. You went outside the spacecraft and then you had a wider field of view.\nYeah.\nHow would you describe the difference in field of view in terms of your visual sensibility in looking at the lemo. Any problems about that?\nOh, golly.\nIt's like looking out the bathroom window versus looking out the front windo, out a picture window, which is like going to a movie theatre where you have a little film there and then going to one of these wide-screen ones. You have to turn your head to see it all.\nDid you find the space plate quite adequate?\nWell, I said you have to turn your head to see it.\nCould like you see then the whole horizon? Did you find any differences"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 17 11\n\nalong the horizon?\nYou can see the curvature in the horizon when you're just looking out the window of the spacecraft. And then when you're looking out there you see— O. K. then, you could compare one part of the horizon to another to look for variations.\nYes.\nIn daylight.\nYes.\nYou could see a great deal of the horizon out the window . . . . . . .\nDid it look all the same — uniform — or did you find any variations?\nNo, I didn't. It looked just the same — like three more pieces of dough . . .\nWhat about stars in the daytime?\nI didn't see any outside. And I didn't specifically try to chaff myself to do that.\n. . . . . . . . . . . . scattered light . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nIt was very bright out there and I even looked in the shaded areas which weren't shaded deed shade but behind the door, places like that. Were Cooper and Schirra in the daytime? Saw a dayglow."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 18 1 a\n\n. . . . . . . . . . deep shade, behind the door, places like that.\nWere Cooper and Schirra in the daytime?\nSort of date-low. . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nCould you see that also?\nWhat did they describe as the basis?\nThey. . . . . . the sky had a brightness to it. . . . . above them.\nAnd when Cooper woke up, he was mostly in the daytime. He (noticed) out on the window he knew it was daytime right away.\n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ha Ha Ha.\nI could tell by up and down. . . . . . . . . . .\nI tell ya, I wouldn't be uh I would hesitate that there was actually phenomena like day glow because it might be uh. . . .You could liik out the window and whether you're at night or in the daytime. But it may (not) have anything to do with what's out there. It might not have anything to do with the spacecraft.\nYou've got two windows, anyhow. You can tell whether you're. . . . . . .\nThere's more to it than that. You know you've got a big long nose"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sticking out on that spacecraft; and if the sun is shining on that nose, you know darn well it's based on it. Also the light on the nose is reflected back into the windows gives you a light. And there's a lot of things outside that window that give light to your eyes. We found that there was a flim on (the cone?) that gave light to your eyes. There are so many things around there that would give you a clue. You could indeed be placed out into a.....if you tllk that same spacecraft and I knew there wasn't anything outside, no dayglow, just nothing but an absolutely black sky up there, shining light on the spacecraft, I would get the impression that I was in the daytime. I hesitate to lead you down the wrong path.....\nDid you see stars in the daytime from inside the spacecraft?\nAt sunset and sunrise that you couldn't when you shaded both one's sides. Here again it's the same kind of problem. We had something on the windows; we had the bright nose of the spacecraft, the sun was shining on the spacecraft anyplace it eventually came into the windows......in the form of money. And I, once or twice when we were in free drift, I could see something bright up in the sky. I couldn't tell you whether it was a planet or whether it was a star or anything. But you've got a lot of light coming into the spacecraft on the day side from the sun....doesn't have anything to do with what's out there. It has to do with the fact that you've got a lot of nose sticking out, you've got a lot of window, there was something on the window, and even if there wasn't anything on the window, the light comes in the window from the sun and is reflected around inside the spacecraft. You've got sources of light just all"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"over the place.\nIt follows, then, if you switch that, I mean the next time is terical and the next time was great...........that if you could get out in the spacecraft at night,.......\nYou'd see a lot more. You say it's \"great\" because you saw 7th magnitude stars, but Ed and I both proved that we could see more stars flying in an airplane at 40,000 feet here on earth than we could up there.\nBut then if you want to look at the diagolectric example, which is geometrically extended object--you're looking through this little narrow angle restriction whereas if you'd gone outside you could see this elongated phenomenon with ease--the same with looking at meteors....\nYou're making some conclusions right now that we're not--haven't made--nor making.\nWell I'm trying to get your impression as to whether--\nAnd I'm not sure before when you were talking about the dayglow of what conclusion you drew from what I said. Are you trying to imply that there's a difference between a night sky and a day sky which are obviously........or between the sky and the ground in the daytime?\nI'm trying to find out how well your seeing conditions were compared to the Mercury crew's.\nUh-huh.\nAnd the implication that I get is that the implication is the same condition in the daytime with terrical, probably because of the way the spacecraft is shaped and multiple scattered light."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I think you're drawing improper conclusions.\nO. K.\nI don't see why you say that the seeing conditions in the daytime were extremely poor.\nIn terms of visual accuity, for looking, for example, at stars,--\nWell, how about for turning down and looking at objects on the ground.\nNow that's visual accuity, also.\nYes.\nAnd I thought it was outstanding.\nLooking at bright objects, you see. Where you don't have a high contrast required.\nYou mean on the ground they're bright, yes.\nThen there is a high contrast required on the ground. If you're looking out at a star, you know, you've got a bright star against a black sky. That's pretty high contrast. The same thing looking down at the ground. You're looking at a white road going across a dark field. You can see those things.\nYes, but the only problem here is that you're looking through a haze or a scattered layer of light......scattering into the spacecraft or on the window. For instance, the case if there's no scattered (frost) on the spacecraft. When that disappears at night you can see directly through the window and your visual sensitivity goes up to a maximum of (photographication).\nWhich obviously must have happened because of the way things were.\nLet me tell you what I think. I think there are so many things involved in spacecraft geometry, the windows, the layer on the"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"windows, the light coming through, that I couldn't tell you whether there's anything that if I looked up above I could see an image, or not. But I think that possibly, if we could find a long black tube and a window with no film on it and some way of closing off all the light inside the spacecraft, I feel that maybe I could look up and I could have seen the black sky (and the stars).\nYeah, we didn't have that, so I wouldn't draw that conclusion from what I saw up there. All I can say is that you couldn't see up and see the stars in the daylight because of all these other reasons. Now if you eliminate other reasons, I think probably you could. I wouldn't say for sure that that's right. The point that interests you when you're talking about accuity, is to look down on the ground and you can see very small objects in the daylight. So that with one is (resolution) and the other one is sensitivity to different light levels. And I'm talking about light levels from Gemini, in terms of having a niosy background.\nI want you to be careful of the conclusion that you made. You've got three things that you're obviously trying to make conclusions out of, and I want to be sure that you didn't make some of your own conclusions out of them. Out of this Mercury, they have Mercury, and you're going to compare Mercury and Gemini observations and you took the inside-the-spacecraft observations and said at night it was great and in the daytime it was lousy. Well, in the daytime I didn't feel it was lousy. I don't know what standard you're comparing it against. You're comparing it against Mercury. I think you'd be very careful in drawing that conclusion.\nAnd then there's another area that you want to make conclusions on"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and that's vision outside the spacecraft, and I (can) make a comparison between those two and I have already; but you can see clearer from outside the spacecraft. And I was quite surprised at this because I had three visors on: one of them was a left-hand visor which isn't high on optical properties and one of them which is a sun visor which is probably pretty good optically with a gold coating on it and then a flexiglass which is very high in optical qualities. And I felt as far as vision was concerned, I could see better outside the spacecraft and I'd love to be able to make some further visual testing out and I think we probably well do this--take the visors up, this type of work, later on. So you're comparing three different things and I think we can definitely tell you some conclusions between inside and outside as far as Gemini is concerned.\nI'd be very careful against saying that the vision out of Mercury was worse or better with respect to what we could see out of Gemini in the day. At night we were able to see and compare high magnitudes down to what we felt was 7th order magnitude stars.\n(The only thing that)bothers me just a little bit is you saying because Gordo said he could — he woke up in the daylight — pointed at the sky, he could tell whether it was day or night, and therefore it was an airglow. Now I could wake up and tell whether it was day or night, too, but it wasn't because there was any airglow. It was because I had sun in the spacecraft. And I think.......\nGordo also saw.............................in the daylight. So that's the second indication."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 18 6\n\nYeah, this is a unique situation. He happened to be in a situation where the earth was beneath and the sun was behind him and there was no lightning scattered into his window or anything or at least apparently there wasn't anything. He didn't feel there was any and that he had a good opportunity. There's only one datum .....\n(?) Two were there when they have poor days.\nShade on the windows.\nYou know the stars are there; there's no question that they're up there and if we make the conditions right we can see them.\nCouple times I did see stars or planets or something in the daylight. I couldn't tell you what they were, what magnitude they were at all. All I could tell you is that as we drifted around some random positions I could see some sorts of light coming through the window.\nI think the point that we tried to make also is we have been working on Apollo and we know that stars and measurement of stars in the daytime and the lighting conditions are very important. And on a routine operation in this matter, the stars weren't there. This is the observation that I felt I made and I think we've both been working in (guidance). I think this is what Jim was driving at also. I was looking for them in the daytime because I wanted to see them out there in the daytime; I didn't want to see them in a cloud (Apollo?). But they weren't there to the extent that I would like to have seen.\nAs a matter of fact, that was one of the real surprises we had. They just aren't out there. At least they weren't out there in the configuration we .....\nYou see a passing star of a 1st or 2nd magnitude out there, that's not going to do you a bit of good as far as anything but saying \"O, look, I"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"see one\" because you don't have any idea what it is certainly can't get into measurement.\nResults of this............. Maybe we can give Dr. (Ritch) a chance.\nDid he have any questions?\nI was curious as to what the difference is between sunset and sunrise.\n............\nWell, particularly with respect to the shape of the sun and how much does it spread out in lattitude. Is it different for night and day?\nWe sort of concluded that the sunrise was prettier than the— no the sunset was prettier than the sunrise. The sunrise seems to be to my way of thinking was more white and blue. But the sunset was many colors. A lot of red. It is red and blue. They were much prettier. I don't know why because we've got some movies with us.\nActually we do have some movies that we tried to vary on some of them the aperture and I think we've got, at least at certain times during the filming, we've got a fairly true representation of what's up there. The colors in the pictures really do look right and, in fact, I was pretty happy with them. There are certain parts in there that give you pretty close to the impression that we got, and I think these will also show you that the sunset is a little more spectacular than the sunrise. Now there is one thing that certainly is different in the sunrise. When the sun comes, it really comes up with such a much higher rate and it just booms right up and bang it's light and a big ball of fire from the sun comes up. Now when it goes down, though, it's the reverse, and it kind of dies out slowly and you can maybe sit there and enjoy and absorb the colors a little more. Maybe that's the reason.... that the sunset is a little prettier."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Is the sunset more billiant than the sunrise?\nYes.\nContrast-wise?\nRight.\nHow about the elongation?\nWait a second. When you say it's really .........\nThat was brightness.\nSunrise is more brilliant.\nSunrise is more brilliant. Up it comes.\nSee it's dark and then the next thing it's light. It's really light.\nSunset seems to take longer and the gradation-\nAnd more color.\nMore colorful.\nWhat about the elongation and latitude? Is there a difference in sunset and ....\nDoes the sun squash down elliptical?\nNo. It doesn't move. It goes so ... You know ... It takes about 4 seconds to reverse the whole thing there and it's so bright, you don't notice it squashing ........... Did you?\nNo, I didn't. No, I've seen a lot of peculiar sunsets and moonsets; the sun and moon have ears on them and things like that-\nIt's all due to the thick amount of atmosphere that you're going in.\nIt all goes pretty quickly and I didn't notice that the sun came up in any different shape was set, but it may have.\nYou know, one thing on the films when you see them, the bottom part looks like the reflection or something, either in the lens or - I don't think"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it's in the processing - must be in the lens under the film. The - down at the bottom part kind of duplicates and lets magnitude look on top and that's really not fair. It doesn't reflect down and what you see is only on top.\nDid you see any difference between moonsets and moonrises?\nNo, I didn't.\nDid you see any (classing) .......... of the moon?\nThe elongation that you see?\nNo. I didn't. I didn't notice any.\nI thought the interesting thing, too, about the moon is that clarity - that you see it's quite clear when you look at it here, but also it just looked like a little silver globule going down. It just goes right down. You have no scanning or anything associated with it.\nAnd no ......., either.\nThat's right, it goes right down. And also, your viewing of the stars beyond my comment on this earlier doing this. It doesn't obscure your viewing - the moon being up there doesn't particularly bother you as far as the (stars?) .......\nThen you could always tell where the horizon was because of the stars which you know appeared.\nAnd then the airglow.\nCould you also tell from the stars? ...... sort of a supplemental picture of the horizon from the stars?"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"...the air glow.\nCan y'all tell if it's dark? Some little (Supplemental? Sublimal?) picture of the horizon?\nWell if you watched a certain star, you could tell when it went below the horizon. You just can't look out there and say, \"O. K., that's the horizon.\" It depends on the stars. Now, you can look out there and say, \"O. K., now, that's the horizon; not because of the stars.\"\nBecause of the lack of the stars and also the air glow.\nAnd also thunderstorms on the horizon ......... (of the Lark?) proves that you can get it (pictures?). But you never can say that- and I never would ever say that I could take a pencil and draw a very fine line and say that's the horizon at night. As a matter of fact, in the daytime, either.\nDid you get the point that Edward made about the moon, though, that when you look at it from even far and high, you can see all these stars. You see the moon; but you don't see just the light of the moon. You see a lot of glow around it. ...And from on earth. But up in orbit I didn't see any glow around it. I saw the light--I saw the moon. Right next to it was dark.\nThere's nothing around it. It's sharp.\nEven when you see a sharp rim here on earth--You see, if the moon were here and was that big around I'd tend to see glow around here.\nEven when the moon is in (venus?) You do at times.\nThat depends on the humidity on a clear night.\nNormally when the moon's out on a clear night, you have a lot of haze and stuff around it. (that's not there?..air?) which you'd expect when you're out of the atmosphere. You know, we received a picture in the mail which if you just, having been on a space flight, I think"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 19 2\nit means a little more to me....now that I think about it.\nExpecially as you look at it now and the artist has taken these things\nand he's put them in very clearly on a stark black background--and\nyou know and you say, \"Gee, isn't that artificial looking?\" But that's\nnot artificial looking. That's the way it really does look. The\nmoon's up there on a stark black background (and the other artists\nshould [paint] like that.) I'd like to ask Colonel White what color\nwas his (watch) (blush)\nJust silvery white..................I suppose.\n.......... .......... ..........\"Dr. (Acre)\"--\nI take it you would not have any trouble finding the sun if you were\nto try orienting at some angle with respect to this......\nYou wouldn't have to do too much searching if you wanted to line up\nwith the sun in order to.....\nNo, No. You can generally tell where it is by the brightness. The\nsame holds true with an (open landing).\nYou can find it on the way in. It's easier if you've got an attitude\nreference with inertial references working and you just go up there\nand swoop across the sky and you can find it. But if you've got to\nget up...\nYou've got to go find it without any references (out in the space-\ncraft), I guess if you get on the horizon and get all set and then\nstart a pitch rate or something you can go find it. But when you're\ndrifting freely, and you don't know which way is down, you simply end\nup looking up at the sky and you don't know how to get to the local\nhorizontal--it might be right there and your plane here and you're"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 19 3\nnot sure until you start looking for it like this and you can search\naround for a long time.\nYou can search a long time...\nAnd never get back down to the horizon, but if you establish (a\nper rate) well you can get there. The big thing is how much fuel\nyou've got to expend.\nYou get right on the horizon and pick up......Milky Way well it can\nhelp you...well you can get there. The big thing is how much fuel\nyou've got to expend. You get right on the horizon and pick up....\nMilky Way, well it can help you.\nDr. (Ayer), I think we're getting close to time to go home here\nIn regard to your (meter) program (in your notes that you made in\nthe auditorium) could you make any recommendations as to the new\nmake-up of that meter program?\nI think Ed and I have a common recommendation that we don't fly many\nmore flights in GMT and elapse time at the same time. We've got a\none real problem to kinda sort all this stuff out, and I think we\nought to fly these things in alloted times...I think that's the one\nsingle recommendation we'd make that stands head and shoulders above\nall other ones. Trying to correlate the time is very tough.\nBeyond that, would you say that you could make recommendations as\nto make-up of the...books?\nI thought the books were outstanding and I think that make-up modifies\nthis suit to certain white as the way we ought to go at them.\nI think they're outstanding, too, and, of course, Ed and I designed"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"them, so we're prejudiced. Ha Ha Ha. No, as a matter of fact,\nwe have a flight planner over in the spacecraft center. You roll\nthree times during flight--You roll (when you come down to) liftup\nfrom the launch bases which you have never looked at and about\n20 hours later we rolled around for 20 hours--I never even got it\nto 20 (here)\nJust part of re-entry we rolled it around some more and then gave\nup 70 hours.\n(We milked some stuff on it). Storm books are real good. Excuse\nme, let me see these books. We have a book like this. To do any\nreal time flight planning, you have to have access to the--every-\nthing--all at once, and you don't want to have to get every some-\nthing on a roller when you've got to roll through it like this. If\nyou want to know what's going to happen in 95 hours, you just open\nthe book up and turn over to 95 hours. Then if you want to compare\nthat with say 40 hours--you want to have a comparison there, you\ncan't fo this on a roller film. Unless you've got some quick access,\na way of getting that our like you had your own sort of a meteor\nmicrofilm.\nDid you take notes on your book, sir?\nYes, we did. I think one thing that we did decide on is that the\nlime-scales that we have in our flight plan here are--neither one\nof them are exactly right. The early part of the mission was highly\nexpanded; the latter part was washed down a little. I think we have\nsix hours per page in the latter stage and we have an hour per page"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 19 5\nin the early stage. I think probably three hours per page or some-\nthing like that would give us more room to write the notes.\nHas that book been reproduced?\nYes, it has. There are copies for everyone.\nLet me ask you one here. Do you think you could hold half a degree\nin pitch on the night horizon with the radical?\nSure. Just do it on the top of the air glow layer and you'd have\nno trouble at all.\nYou wouldn't need a filter, or anything.\nNo. You don't want to make the air go away or any dimmer. And the\nsight is (difficult) as it is and it's adequate to use at night.\nBut then you could take pictures, otherwise.\nTake pictures at gunsight.\nWhat were you going to do when you held this?\nThe sharp point is down, and fortunately, it was a camera now\ndesigned by Spacecraft. It's a flush-mounted camera for GT5 and\ndiagonnally, push down the right window, so the camera is looking\nup like this. So the spacecraft is on over at an angle like this.\nIt's not a 4-satellite camera is what I'm saying. So while the point\nis probably good, I'd hate to see the thing get out that O. K. we\ncan pull out the dike. I like the way it's certainly designed.\nActually, there's more to it than that. The experimentor will go\nwith a 30° cut through the sadiacal light, so this has nothing to\ndo with the experiment anymore. Only one time it did.\nAnd you also have other than just a fipper on the radical you could"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 19 6\nhold............7 points.\nI'd like to get your feeling on calcium balance coming up on the\nseven.....what do you think how it will affect your post-flight.\nI don't know how it's going to affect your postflight, but I know\nit's going to be a real problem. You've just got a lot of things\nto do. There are a lot of things that can't be done until two\nweeks before the flight. If you get involved in the bit data--\ngathering exercises before the flight, I think that it could indeed\njeopardize the whole flight. This is my personal opinion. I sort\nof thought that some of the medical examinations that we had should\nbe moved back earlier. We had a big medical examination at FlTA and\nthat's one of those few days we got a lot of other things that\nshould be taking place and I can't see that my physical condition\nchanged in the last week. Except maybe I got sleepier. But I just\nfeel that when you put all these things into the last couple weeks,\nyou really--the guys that are flying the flight--have got to get\nready and there's almost an infinite amount of work to do. You just\ncan't do it all, and it you take time for data-gathering exercises,\nI sort of feel that it jeopardizes the success of the whole flight.\nYou think you could--another question--Do you think if you had a\ncamera in the right window with a swizzle stick arrangement for\npitch, do you think could telescope sites could lock onto have\ncontrol better pitch than you could with a rigid mounted camera\nin the right window.\nYou're talking about a control of the mounting for the camera.\nA control of the pitch; a control of the mount and the pitch."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 19 7\nIs this a ball-jocket-socket type of junkhead or something.\nIt's not a ball and socket, but a pitch.....for holding a pitch attitude.\nOh, for the air glow.\nFor the air glow, yes.\nThis would be for one minute photographing.\nFor minutes\nSome of them may be up to 22 minutes.\nWow. I'd hate to be a ..........\nYou mechanize it with a low-speed electronic drive and a rheostat-type drive on it.\nNo. Manually. A manual swivel. Let's do sound effects for the good old .......\nYeah,....Elroy T. V.'s charging, you're not going to have more than 20 minutes exposure of night air.\nHa Ha Ha We're safe there, aren't we. Ha Ha Ha\nA swivel stick here in the right coming out; you have authority taken on a different one.\nLarry, did you talk to them about the Northern lights below the southern lights.\nI tried to.\nOh, excellent, excellent.\nI just covered a few little things and I surely would like to hear your comments about the um I would love to. Venus.\nYeadh, we were really impressed with the planet Venus up there and we took some pictures of it and it did come out with about 1/5 the"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 19 8\nmagnitude and brilliance that it really appears up there. It's a beautiful sight. After the dark up there, it's very brilliant and much more large as far as I was concerned and bright in magnitude than anything I've seen looking from the ground.\n(Mercury)proved very, very pretty.\nI bet you caught a photograph, too.\nYeah, just........you know and you've just--\nYeah, the colors on those things.\nThe colors that we took on the ground weren't too graphic.\nDid you ever see--\nBlack.\nWas there anything else?\nBlack actually looked beautiful and this is the way the sky looks.....\nThe sky's black, but it's a beautiful black background. But that doesn't come out on the picture.\nWas the radical any good in the day?\n(Hasistas) would be brighter than it is.\nAbout twice as bright.\nTwice as bright.\nYou could see it on the ground.\nIf you can't see it on the cause, that's the big thing here.\nYou could see it on the land.\nYou could see it on the land and the water. It was fine. But when you cross the crosscloud, I think we ought to have two rings of brightness.\nYou know right now it's very bright and just the next beat tannicals look very dim and then you've got a gradation of dims."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 19 9\nI think the dim gradation is excellent.\nI think we need a little variation of brightness.\nDid you find any difference in the two windows? Did you see any ventigral difference in those two windows?\nWe couldn't change places. Ha Ha Ha\nSee I looked in mine, he looked in his, and there wasn't any way in the world that we could--\nYou couldn't get near enough to start a ration?\nNo. No. You really can't.\nIndependent of your ration. You're pretty safe to check your radical brightness against the bright cloud right on the earth.\nYou know on a bright day like this.\nShoot, they said it was checked against the snowbank.\nYou can't bank there. You're in trouble.\nUnless there's a..............\nA couple of times I was looking for it.\nThose were dirty St. Louis snowbanks. (snowguns?) Ha Ha Ha\nO. K., I think......the more you want to say. If you'll wrap it up. I think between this morning and Jim and Ed's comments this afternoon we can extract everything we present.......\nI'd like to say something. The way it looks right now, you have 11 experiments and everyone of them is a total success. There is no indication that there's anything, any anomaly and there's no indication that there will be any anomaly. Just a quick look.........\nCertainly nothing operational, I mean it's not operational........\nThere's nothing at all. Now you've got a couple of equipment problems, but you expected that I'm tols. It was perfect as far as"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Belt 19 10\nexperiments go. There was nothing that could have been done to improve it. This is the way the guider shows it; this is the way the mock-up.......\nEven the experiment you didn't have a very successful flight.. Ha Ha Ha.\nWell, we've got how many more....8 more to go, huh. Ha Ha.\nWhat,.............\nNo, flights.\nEnd of tape."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Notes from the De-Briefing transcript GT-4\n\nMeteors:\n\nBoth McDivitt and White mentioned seeing a number of meteors below them: \"We saw quite a few fall and burn up below our altitude. They were about one-half to one-third as high as we were when they were consumed. We never saw one above us.\" (short and swift?)\n\nAs the accompanying plots of numbers of meteors against the months of the year shows the amount of meteor activity in early June is at a rather low level, beginning to rise very shortly after that towards a peak in August. *Fig. 1(Roach's plot of Olivier data from Smithsonian Contrib. to Astrophys.\n\nRegardless of their brightness meteors appear on the average between 40 and 60 miles in the earth's atmosphere. Bright meteors are seen to reach about 40 miles, whereas large fireballs may still be seen as low as 20 miles or so.\n\nThe average height throughout the path is greater for fainter meteors and for those of high velocities. Actually the bright objects are larger and hence travel further before they are consumed, often traveling for several hundred miles before they are consumed.\n\nPlanets\n\nThe pilots remarked that \"the planets are so clear and bright,\" and later that \"all the sunsets had the planet in it.\" They have in fact recorded Venus in the horizon bands on one of their sunset pictures. At that date Venus was still close to the sun being (angular distance?)Sup.conj.Apr.11) about 15deg. east of the sun (eve. star). On the color print S-65-34771 the image of Venus can be distictly seen amid the horizon bands."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Draft\nSymps. report\n\n2.\n\nZodiacal Light\n\nTxxxxxxxxxxxx Mc Divitt and White were taking 16 mm. movies xxxxxxxxxx\nbefore one\"capsule dawn\" when they noiced the zodiacal light and described\nit xx thus, \"it was a shaft of light and a long time before the sun came up.\"\nOn the ground observers can note the cone of light in the eastern sky or\nwestern sky after the sun has set and gone down about 18 deg. ( about and hour\nafter sunset or an hour before sunrise.) Pilots at 40,000 feet can follow it for\na longer span since they are away from disturbing city lights.\n\n\nCondition of the Window:\n\nThe Gemini optical window is quite superior to the Mercury window. None-\nthe less the pilots note that\"both their windows ere foggy;\" and at one\npoint during EVA White rubbed his sleeve accidentally on Jims window\nsmudging it --probably partially removing the silicon film."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEASURE REL STATIC CHARGE\n\nTAPE PLYBACK BLOOD PRESSURE (P)\n3-1, 4-1 UPDATES\n\n1:40\nEGRESS PREPARATION\nUNSTOW AND ATTACH\nUMBILICAL\nY FITTINGS\nEMER O2 PACK\nMANEUVER UNIT\nCAMERA\n\n2:00\nALIGN PLATFORM\n\nNULL REL VEL\n\n2:10\n\n2:20\nBLOOD PRESSURE (C)\nCOMM CHECK\nGO/NO GO FOR EVA\n\n2:30\nDEPRESSURIZATION\n\n2:40\nMAINTAIN PRIMARY O2 PRESS\nWITH MANUAL HEATER (850 - 925 PSIA)\n\nCLOSE WITH BOOSTER\n\n2:50\nOPEN HATCH\nAND\nSTAND UP\n\n3:00"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EGRESS S/C\n\n3:00\n\n3:10\nINGRESS S/C\nCLOSE HATCH\nREPRESSURIZE S/C\n\n3:20\nALIGN PLATFORM\n\n3:30\nSEPARATION ΔV ~ 5 FT/SEC\nCOMPLETE INGRESS\nCHECKLIST\n\n3:40\n\n3:50\n\n4:00\nD/T TAPE PLYBK\nMEDICAL DATA\nPASS TYPE 1\n\n4:10\n\n4:20\nD/T TAPE PLYBK MEDICAL\nDATA PASS\nTYPE 2\n\n4:30"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INITIATE TERMINAL REND PHASE\nMEASURE ΔV REQ'D\n\n6:00\n6:10\n\n6:20\nCLOSE WITH BOOSTER\nPHOTOGRAPHS DURING APPROACH\n\n6:30\nINCREASE SEPARATION WITH\nBOOSTER PRIOR TO DARKNESS\n\n6:40\n6:50\n\n7:00\n\n7:10\n\n7:20\nGO/NO GO FOR AREA 18-1\n\n7:30"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4:30\n4:40\nMANEUVER UPDATE\n4:50\n5:00\nALIGN PLATFORM\n5:10\nCLOSING ΔV ~ 13 FT/SEC\n5:20\n5:30\n5:40\nALIGN PLATFORM\n5:50\nD/T TAPE PLYBACK\nMONITOR BOOSTER ELEV\n6:00\nTEX\nGYM\nCNV\nANT\nASC\nTAN\nCRO\nCSQ\nHAW\nNIGHT\ndarken (either by cutting or shading)"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"7;30\nD/T TAPE PLYBK\n7:40\nMANEUVER UPDATE\n7:50\n8:00\nALIGN PLATFORM\n8:10\nSEPARATION ΔV ~5 FT/SEC\n8:20\nSEXTANT BOOSTER/STAR\nOBSERVATION\n8:30\nFLASHING LIGHT EVAL.\n8:40\n8:50\n9:00\nHW\nTEX\nGYM\nTAN\nPRE\nNIGHT\nHAW"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOMINAL GT-4 TRANSLATIONAL MANEUVERS\nPoint of Application | ΔV | HP/HA After Maneuvers | Direction of Thrust | Translational Thruster | Purpose\nSECO +30 | 5 | | Posigrade | Aft | S/C-Booster Separation\n| 5 | 86/153 | Retrograde | Aft | Station-Keep on Booster\nBeginning of 3rd Rev (3:33) | 5 | 88/154 | Posigrade | Fwd | S/C - Separation\n99 min. later (5:12) 4th Rev | 12.5 | 82/153 | Retrograde | Aft | Rendezvous Maneuver (Start intercept)\n76 min. later (6:28) 5th Rev | 21 | 86/150 | Posigrade | Various | Terminal Phase/Braking\n106 min. later (8:14) 6th Rev | 12 | 93/150 | Posigrade | Aft | Orbital Lifetime Adjust - 5 days\n15th or 16th Rev | 25-30 | | | Various | **Adjust lifetime - 4 days\n30th Rev | | | | | Adjust lifetime - 3 days\n45th Rev | | | | | Adjust lifetime - 2 days\n62nd Rev (or 66th Rev*) | +110 | | | Aft | Achieve OAMS Retrofire\n** Lifetime Adjustments will be minimum required\n* For Pacific landing\n+ If available"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0:00\nLAUNCH\nSECO+30 S/C SEP~5 FT/SEC\nYAW 180° NULL REL VEL~5 FT/SEC (340 FT SEP)\nINSERTION CHECKLIST 2-1 UPDATE\n0:10\nALIGN PLATFORM\nCNTL MODE CK COMM. CHECK\n0:20\nDUMP LAUNCH DAY URINE BAGS\nSUIT INTEGRITY CHECK\n0:30\nCHECK ACC BIAS\n0:40\nNULL REL VEL\nWITH BOOSTER\nRADIATOR - FLOW\n0:50\nGO/NO GO FOR 2-1 BLOOD PRESSURE (PILOT)\n1:00\nUNSTOW CAMERAS\n1:10\n1:20\nCLOSE WITH BOOSTER\nESTABLISH FORMATION FLIGHT PROCEDURE\nFOR EVA PASS BASED ON BOOSTER ANGULAR\nRATES\n1:30\nCNV\nBDA\nCYI\nKNO\nTAN\nCRO\nCTN\nNIGHT\nGYM"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DENVER RESEARCH INSTITUTE\nUNIVERSITY OF DENVER\nP. O. Box 8786, Denver, Colorado 80210\nDr. J. B. Blizzard - Metallurgy\nFrom\nTo: Dr. Jocelyn Gill\nNASA Headquarters\n1512 H Street, N.W.\nWashington 25, D.C.\nAIR MAIL PAR AVION\nClippings"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GT-4 File\nclippings - Wash-Post\n\nGT-4"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Astronauts Track Missile in Space\nIn 'Typical Day' Aboard Gemini 5\n\nBy Howard Simons\nWashington Post Staff Writer\n\nHOUSTON, Aug. 24—Astronauts L. Gordon Cooper Jr. and Charles Conrad Jr. spotted, tracked and photographed a Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missile launched from California today as their Gemini 5 spacecraft orbited the earth.\n\n\"I see it, I see it!\" Conrad shouted as the missile streaked through space on its way to a watery target in the Pacific.\n\nFor two minutes the astronauts watched the Minuteman.\n\nConrad took six pictures of it. At the same time, an infrared or heat-sensing device recorded the kind and amount of heat being emitted by the solid-fueled ICBM—a thousand of which constitute the bulk of America's strategic nuclear punch.\n\nConrad and Cooper continue to circle the earth in their fourth day. They have already been granted permission to continue their journey for another day and Gemini officials see no current problems that might foreshorten an eight-day mission. If all goes well, the astronauts will pass the four-day mark at roughly 10 a.m. (EDT) Wednesday.\n\n\"Dull\" and \"Typical\"\n\nToday was variously described as \"dull,\" \"typical,\" and \"busy.\"\n\nFlight Surgeon Charles Berry characterized the day as \"dull,\" which he explained is \"a good day\" medically. The astronauts were \"alert\" and appeared to have mastered the temperature-regulating mechanism, which was giving them the chills and causing them to shiver, particularly during sleep.\n\nAstronaut James McDivitt called it a \"typical\" day, during which the astronauts were catching up with their experiments. Some of these were successful; others were not.\n\nCooper had repaired his faulty reticle, or gunsight, which helped the astronauts better to pinpoint targets in space and on the ground. Hence, they took a heat-sensing measurement of the star Deneb, which they were unable to do the day before. The astronauts also have photographed the mysterious zodiacal light, which is thought to be a backscattering of light from dust orbiting the earth.\n\nTrouble in Spotting\n\nAttempts to see giant 2000x 2000-foot eye charts on the ground near Laredo, Tex., have been less successful. Although they could see smoke from smoke pots set out to help them pinpoint the Laredo charts, they first missed the charts altogether and then saw two that they misidentified.\n\nMore visible to the orbiting sightseers were contrails from three airplanes near Jacksonville, Fla., \"and all the streets in it (Jacksonville), and the Cape (Kennedy) and all the way down to Miami.\"\n\nBut the experiment that caused the most excitement was the successful tracking by the astronauts of the Minuteman missile from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.\n\nThe 65-foot Minuteman was launched at 12:37 a.m. (EDT), as part of a missile combat crew training mission. Shortly after the ICBM was off the pad Conrad spotted it.\n\nThe Minuteman was flying a path 155 statute miles north of Gemini 5's path. The point of closest approach to the spacecraft was 201 miles. At the time Conrad and Cooper tracked the missile, they were 125 miles above the earth's surface.\n\nQuestions Raised\n\nThe fact that the heat-sensing measurements and the photographs of Minuteman and other targets are being conducted for the Defense Department has raised some questions here.\n\nThe problem, essentially, seems to be this:\n\nNational policy has cast the activities of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in a peaceful light. Great care has been taken to divorce the military aspects of space from civilian program, notably space flight effort.\n\nThe kind of information being gathered by Cooper and Conrad does have potential application for the military.\n\nThe challenge, therefore, is whether the Nation should preclude all military scientific and engineering experiments from NASA's activities.\n\nChronology of astronauts' fourth day in orbit.\nPage A10."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Water Excess Forces Cut in Gemini's Power\n\nTHE WASHINGTON POST Thursday, Aug. 26, 1965 A11\n\nBy a Washington Post Staff Writer\n\nHOUSTON, Aug. 25 — A new problem aboard the Gemini 5 spacecraft and a new American man-in-space record dominated today's orbital activities of astronauts L. Gordon Cooper Jr. and Charles Conrad Jr.\n\nToo much nondrinking water is being produced by Gemini's fuel cell and threatens to flood the power-producing cell. To stem the flow of excess water, Gemini officials decided to reduce the amount of power used by the astronauts for experiments.\n\nFlight Director Christopher Columbus Kraft does not regard the problem as serious. The astronauts still will be able to orbit for eight days. They still will be able to perform their planned experiments. What will be limited in the remaining days of the flight are extra experiments that might have been added to the space flight plan.\n\nNew Space Record\n\nThe new record established by Cooper and Conrad roughly at noon (EDT) today, in Gemini 5's 62d orbit, bested that for duration of an American space-flight.\n\nThe old record was set early in June by astronauts James A. McDivitt and Edward White who stayed aloft for 97 hours and 37 minutes.\n\nFrom the Control center here, McDivitt radioed the orbiting astronauts:\n\n\"Let me be the first to congratulate you on setting a new American record for manned spacecraft.\"\n\nAn even more impressive record will fall to the two Americans at about 9 a.m. Thursday.\n\nAt that time Cooper and Conrad will have been in space longer than any other human. When the astronauts pass Cosmonaut Valery F. Bykovsky's 1963 endurance record of 119 hours, it will also mark the first time that America has wrested a major manned space flight record from Russia.\n\nThere were these other highlights today:\n\n• Cooper and Conrad saw and recorded a second Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missile fired from California. They also saw and recorded a rocket sled test at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico. And, after several previous and unsuccessful attempts, they got a good look at the aircraft carrier Lake Champlain.\n\n\"I can see her turning bigger than heck,\" was the way Conrad put it.\n\n• The astronauts took some pictures of Cuba. \"Just scenic shots,\" said Cooper. They also photographed cloud patterns, thunderstorms and, on request of U.S. Weather Bureau scientists, they tried to photograph the eye of tropical storm Doreen roughly 200 miles south of Hawaii.\n\nIn spite of mild discomfort brought on by itching, continued cold and sleepless nights, Cooper and Conrad were said to be in \"extremely good condition\" by Kraft and chief flight surgeon Charles Berry.\n\nRelief for some of Conrad's itching came when he asked for and received permission to cut the tight pneumatic cuffs around his thighs. The experimental cuffs were designed to counter the effects of weightlessness on the cardiovascular system. But the power supply for the cuffs, which automatically tighten and relax continuously, ran out of gas. Just how much this reduces the value of the experiment is not yet known.\n\nDiscussing another medical matter, Dr. Berry said there was absolutely no concern over the fact that apparently only one astronaut has had a bowel movement over the last four days of flight. Indeed, according to Dr. Berry, the astronauts could maintain their present regimen for eight days without effect.\n\nFuel Cell Problem\n\nAs for the fuel cell water problem, what is involved is this:\n\nFuel cells convert oxygen and hydrogen gases into electricity, heat and water. The more power the fuel cell is asked to produce, the more of these byproducts it produces.\n\nSimilarly, lesser demands for electricity mean lesser amounts of water and heat, too. This is why the Gemini officials have taken a \"conservative\" approach and ordered the astronauts to use less power.\n\nBecause the fuel cell water is poor in color and taste and high in acid, it is being used to press upon a plastic bladder containing the astronaut's normal drinking water supply. But the fuel cell is producing more water than desired and officials fear if the situation continues, a back-pressure could result and flood out the fuel cell.\n\nAnticipating a similar problem on longer flights, Gemini officials are developing filters that will make the fuel cell water clean and tasty for drinking.\n\nFinally, Gemini officials announced today that barring unforeseen difficulties, the astronauts are expected to land in the Atlantic Ocean off Bermuda at 10:27 a.m. Sunday.\n\nRound-by-Round Story Of Gemini 5 Flight\n\nHOUSTON, Aug. 25 (UPI) Here is a chronological account of the activities of the Gemini 5 Astronauts:\n\n56th, 57th Orbits\n\nNo voice contact was established with the spacecraft during its 56th orbit, which began at 1:30 a.m., and during the 57th the ship's track took it out of range of most of the tracking stations.\n\n58th Orbits\n\nWith both astronauts awake, Gemini Control at Houston relayed a long list of experiments for them to perform. Cooper reported that the tight schedule was still hampering performance of experiments.\n\n59th Orbit—6:19 a.m.\n\n\"We would like to request that we keep everything to a minimum in the evenings,\" Cooper told fellow astronaut Elliot M. See Jr. \"We, for some reason, are having trouble sleeping.\" He said noise from the experiments posed a problem.\n\n60th Orbit—7:54 a.m.\n\nGemini Control relayed congratulations to Cooper from his wife Trudy on passing the total space flight record of 119 hours 6 minutes, counting his earlier orbital flight.\n\nBad weather over Laredo, Tex., forced cancellation of a test on this pass of whether the astronauts could spot huge eye charts on the ground.\n\nCooper reported that he had seven hours of sleep. He said his beard was itching, but that the skin sensors in his suit were more irritating than the beard. \"Pete's (pressure) cuffs are itching him a lot,\" he noted.\n\n61st Orbit—9:29 a.m.\n\nCooper and Conrad watched the firing of a rocket sled at Holloman Air Force Base, N.M. \"There it goes, we see it!\" cried Conrad. \"We could see it very well, we were right on the money with the tracking,\" Cooper reported. The astronauts used infrared detection devices to measure radiation from the rocket's engine.\n\n62d Orbit—11:03 a.m.\n\nAt the beginning of the orbit, Cooper and Conrad spotted the aircraft carrier Lake Champlain steaming in circles in the Atlantic near Bermuda. At the end of the orbit, they watched a second Minuteman missile launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. They were unable to track the rocket on their infrared radiation detection equipment.\n\nConrad reported he slept six hours last night \"in bits.\"\n\n63d Orbit—12:38 p.m.\n\nCooper made the flight surgeon's heart flip by remarking nonchalantly, \"We feel much better since we got our suits off.\" The surgeon quickly realized Cooper was joking. Conrad was allowed to remove some inflatable pressure cuffs around his thighs. He said they \"itch pretty bad\" and were not working anyway.\n\n64th Orbit—2:13 p.m.\n\nCooper reported he and Conrad had completed all of the day's assigned experiments except one. The spacecraft was powered down and Conrad was told to get some sleep.\n\n65th Orbit—3:50 p.m.\n\nCooper photographed Tropical Storm Doreen in the Pacific as an experiment for the Weather Bureau.\n\nThe 66th orbit, which began at 5:26 p.m., the 67th, which started at 7:02, and the 68th, beginning at 8:36, apparently were relatively quiet."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A10 Wednesday, Aug. 25, 1965 THE WASHINGTON POST\n\nHow It Went on Gemini's 4th Day\n\nOn their Gemini 5 spaceflight yesterday, Astronauts L. Gordon Cooper Jr. and Charles Conrad Jr. sighted a Minuteman launching and repaired an important sighting system aboard their craft. Following is a chronological account, as compiled from news dispatches, with times in Eastern Daylight Time.\n\n40th Orbit—12:05 a.m.\n\nThe pair drifted quietly into the 40th orbit with Conrad asleep. Dr. Duana Catterson at Gemini Control in Houston reported the astronauts had consumed 13 pounds of water each, \"pretty nearly an optimum curve for water intake.\"\n\n41st Orbit—1:38 a.m.\n\nConrad continued sleeping soundly and only one contact was made with ground tracking stations during the orbit.\n\n42nd Orbit—3:14 a.m.\n\nThe quietest orbit of the flight thus far, in terms of space-to-ground communication. For a 70-minute period the spacecraft was out of voice contact range. Conrad was still asleep and Cooper had a meal. Cooper said he had reassembled a defective reticle \"and it works fine.\" The reticle is a sighting device necessary for the success of a number of Gemini 5 experiments.\n\n43d Orbit—4:50 a.m.\n\nThe spacecraft made contact with the Carnarvan, Australia, tracking station and flight observer Chuck Lewis gave the astronauts landing and experiment data.\n\n44th Orbit—6:27 a.m.\n\nWith both astronauts wide awake and the spacecraft passing over the United States, Gemini Control at Houston relayed instrument readings and experiment directions to the crew.\n\nThis exchange between communicator David Scott, an astronaut, and Conrad took place:\n\nScott—\"Okay. You look real good here on the ground. Do you have any questions on the experiments?\"\n\nConrad—\"No. I'd say we got a full day. I hope we can get them all done. How's the weather back there in Houston?\"\n\nScott—\"Oh, It's real nice. Just hot and sunny as usual. No rain in particular. Just once in a while a little thunderstorm.\"\n\nConrad—\"Rog.\"\n\nScott—\"Say, we've noticed that the temperature up there is a little cooler than we expected. How's your comfort?\"\n\nConrad—\"Cold. We are taking the inlet hoses off our suits every once in a while to warm up. It has been quite cold.\"\n\nChief Flight Director Christopher Kraft Jr. said good morning to the astronauts and told them, \"You are doing a good job up there.\"\n\nConrad—\"I'll tell you one thing, Mr. Kraft. Gordo's beard is white.\n\nKraft—\"A Rip Van Winkle, eh?\"\n\nConrad: — \"Nope, Santy Claus.\"\n\nCooper—\"Boy, putting those two coolant loops in the circuit really cooled it down. We both have been sitting here shivering for the last few hours.\"\n\nKraft—\"Turn the valve to warm and it will shut off the flow completely. We will monitor on the ground and let you know if it gets too cool.\"\n\n45th Orbit—8:03 a.m.\n\nCooper had a meal consisting of orange drink, spaghetti and meat, butterscotch pudding, toasted bread cubes and cheese sandwiches. He said he saw three airplanes approaching Jacksonville, Fla. He and Conrad saw smoke signals sent up near Laredo, Tex., to help them find a huge pattern of white gypsum laid out on the ground, but they could not see the pattern. Fellow astronaut James McDivitt told the men they could go at least 62 orbits.\n\n46th Orbit—9:35 a.m.\n\nAn attempt to photograph landmarks near Dallas was abandoned because of a cloud cover over the target area, but the astronauts insisted on trying the experiment later. \"We're going to pick a good site somewhere over the U.S. and get it because we're all rigged for it,\" Conrad said.\n\nGemini control reported a few minutes later the men were able to get a picture of a ship west of Bermuda.\n\n47th Orbit—11:12 a.m.\n\nAs Gemini 5 approached California, a Minuteman missile was fired from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif.\n\nAt an altitude of 125 miles, Cooper and Conrad got a fine view.\n\nConrad: \"I see it, I see it... Hey Gordo! Right through that hole in the clouds. There he goes, bigger than heck.\"\n\nCooper: \"Yeah, we saw him going 'way out above us.\"\n\nThe Minuteman, climbing in a high suborbital arc, came within 200 miles of Gemini 5, Space Agency officials said.\n\nConrad reported he sighted the Minuteman 10 seconds after launch when it had pierced the overcast. The Minuteman peaked at an altitude of 575 miles and headed down the Air Force western test range over the Pacific Ocean to hit a mythical target.\n\n48th Orbit—12:47 p.m.\n\nCooper and Conrad reported they were getting \"some strange readouts\" from their on-board computer. Officials said the signals were not a cause of \"major concern,\" but would be watched closely. Cooper and Conrad finally spotted the checkerboard eye chart laid out near Laredo, Tex.\n\n49th Orbit—2:22 p.m.\n\nSpace officials on the ground noted Cooper sounded \"just a wee bit tired.\" He was given a long updating on the flight plan and was told to watch for the Kilauea volcano in Hawaii on the next orbit. The astronauts hoped to measure the intensity of infrared radiation from the volcano.\n\nThe astronauts said they took about six photographs of the flying rocket and made infrared measurements of its exhaust plume.\n\nConrad also spotted Holloman Air Force Base, N.M., and Bergstrom Air Force Base, Tex., as he whirled over them.\n\nAs they ended the orbit, the astronauts had their radar trained on Cape Kennedy and reported they were able to keep in touch with the Cape longer than expected."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A6 Tuesday, Aug. 24, 1965 THE WASHINGTON POST\n\nGEMINI—From Page A1\n\nGemini Makes Precision Maneuvers\n\nMrs. Charles Conrad Jr., accompanied by her father, Winn DuBose, sits in the viewing booth behind Gemini Control Center and gets a first-hand view of the progress of her husband's flight aboard the Gemini 5 spacecraft.\n\nChronological Account of Orbits As Space Flight Enters 3d Day\n\nFollowing is the chronology of the Gemini 5 space flight of Astronauts L. Gordon Cooper Jr. and Charles Conrad Jr., compiled from news dispatches.\n\nShortly after midnight Sunday Gemini 5 had completed 24 orbits and 39 hours of its 121-orbit, 190-hour scheduled voyage.\n\n25th Orbit—12:15 a.m.\n\nGemini Control at Houston concluded that Conrad's husky voice resulted from lack of sleep and not from any serious threat condition. Dr. Duane Catterson said it had \"not affected his ability to perform.\" Cooper continued to catch up on sleep.\n\n26th Orbit—1:48 a.m.\n\nConrad tried several simple experiments as the capsule passed over central Asia. Cooper woke up and Conrad began a long sleep. Ground Control said the flight \"looked real good.\"\n\n27th Orbit—3:31 a.m.\n\nThe orbit began along the west coast of South America near the equator. While his companion remained in a deep sleep, Cooper made outstanding a successful purge of the fuel cell oxygen and hydrogen systems. He also made periodic checks on electrical and ion flux interaction with the spacecraft.\n\n28th Orbit—5:05 a.m.\n\nCooper ate a substantial meal of concentrates of chicken and gravy, bacon and eggs and chocolate pudding. Conrad continued to sleep.\n\n29th Orbit—6:39 a.m.\n\nConrad woke up and had the following conversation with the Canary Island tracking station:\n\nSurgeon: \"You're pumping full scale. We have a good blood pressure . . . Give me a mark when you begin exercising.\"\n\nConrad: \"Stand by—mark.\"\n\nSurgeon: \"We have a good blood pressure.\"\n\nConrad: \"Roger, the command pilot (Cooper) is taking his two-hour period nap now. The pilot (Conrad) slept about 4 hours 45 minutes of his six-hour period, very soundly.\"\n\nSurgeon: \"How's your water intake?\"\n\nConrad: \"Twelve and a half pounds of water for the command pilot, 11 pounds 3 ounces for the pilot (roughly six quarts each). I'm just getting ready to eat Meal Charlie.\"\n\n30th Orbit—8:14 a.m.\n\nThe astronauts reported that each had slept a total of about 10 hours since the flight began at 10 a.m. Saturday. The oxygen pressure, at more than 100 pounds, was up 10 pounds from the previous day and 40 pounds from the low point Saturday when it appeared that the mission might have to splash down prematurely after the sixth orbit. Control gave the capsule instructions for performing a simulated rendezvous with a make-believe Agena rocket on the 32d through 34th orbits.\n\n31st Orbit—9:47 a.m.\n\nThe mission passed the two-day mark. The astronauts again complained of the workload ordered by Ground Control this conversation with astronaut James A. McDivitt, mission communicator at Houston:\n\nCooper: \"You might have a little talk with the flight planning problems, Gordon, is that the weather is too good today, so they are trying to stick them (experiments) in where they have good weather . . .\"\n\nMcDivitt: \"Okay, Gordo, I'll take a check on that. I think one of the flight planning problems, Gordon, is that the weather is too good today, so they are trying to stick them (experiments) in where they have good weather.\"\n\nCooper: \"Yeah, well some of these . . . were just bang, bang, bang right together. We just can't do them that close together. That's rather poor planning.\"\n\nMcDivitt: \"Okay.\"\n\nConrad: \"We got to watch these lens changes. We got every piece of gear in the spacecraft floating around in it.\"\n\nMcDivitt: \"Roger, roger.\" Then later:\n\nMcDivitt: \"Hey, Pete, Gemini 5 Houston here. Why don't you make some comments for the better sex.\"\n\nConrad: \"Hello there. We just passed over Tampico, Mexico.\"\n\nMcDivitt: \"Pete, Pete. Jane's up here. Why don't you say something?\" (Jane is Conrad's wife.)\n\nConrad: \"Hello there. How's all the boys (his four sons) doing?\"\n\nMcDivitt: \"She says fine.\"\n\nStill later in the orbit, the banter turned into an impromptu variety act with this exchange between the capsule and Houston:\n\nMcDivitt: \"You sure do talk a lot.\"\n\nConrad: \"Say again.\"\n\nMcDivitt: \"I said you sure do talk a lot.\"\n\nConrad: \"What do you want me to do, sing you a song?\"\n\nMcDivitt: \"Think you can?\"\n\nCooper: \"He sings off key.\"\n\nConrad: \"In a singsong: 'Over the ocean, over the blue, here's Gemini 5 singing to you. (Pause) Well, I'm going back to talking.\"\n\nMcDivitt: \"Get you a job with the Houston Astros.\"\n\nAt 11:18 a.m. control told the spacemen they could go at least until the 47th orbit or until about noon Tuesday.\n\n32d Orbit—11:21 a.m.\n\nThe astronauts powered up their equipment and executed the first of four blasts from their maneuvering rockets to change their orbit and bring them into theoretical rendezvous with the phantom Agena, whose track was being programmed by a ground computer. By comparing the lat-ter with the actual track of Gemini 5, Control would later estimate the closeness of the simulated linkup.\n\n33d Orbit—12:56 p.m.\n\nCooper and Conrad performed two more rendezvous maneuvers. The command pilot spotted a huge checkerboard design laid out on the ground near Laredo, Tex., as a test of the astronauts' ability to see from more than 100 miles in space.\n\n34th Orbit—2:31 p.m.\n\nThe astronauts completed the make-believe rendezvous attempt and learned they had come within two minutes of being in the right spot at the right time. Then they turned off much of their electrical equipment, successfully performed a routine test of their fuel cell system, and settled down for some sleep and meals.\n\n35th Orbit—4:07 p.m.\n\nWhile Conrad slept, Cooper snapped pictures of selected landmarks in an experiment designed to help future astronauts navigate successfully home from the moon. A medical check indicated both spacemen were in excellent condition. Cooper was told weather conditions around the world were good.\n\n36th Orbit—5:43 p.m.\n\nConrad reported that the temperature gauge in the capsule cabin had failed, but he said a hand-held gauge was working. Ground Control said the temperature reading made from telemetry data was 74 degrees. During this orbit, the astronauts photographed a tropical storm.\n\n37th Orbit—7:19 p.m.\n\nThe Ground Control center reported that the radar jet aboard the spacecraft was becoming too cold. To warm it up, officials ordered the astronauts to turn the radar on. The temperature rose from 16 degrees to 28 degrees, which is normal. All other systems aboard the capsule were also operating normally.\n\nLooks very good for eight days and there is nothing that says it shouldn't.\n\nIn a mishap on the ground, trouble developed in a computer memory system at Gemini 5 mission control late today, but was cleared up with, in 11 minutes.\n\nThe failure in the memory system did not adversely affect the flight. It developed in the historical data drums, which provide instant displays of flight trends.\n\nAfter the problem was solved, personnel, who had calculated lost data manually, programmed the trends into the drums. The drums store flight information for 12 hours, then are erased.\n\nThe failure occurred at 6:25 p.m. (EST) during the 37th orbit.\n\nAs for the astronauts, their day was filled with experiments, sightseeing from space and some complaint.\n\nCooper's Complaint\n\nThe complaint came from Cooper. In a brief flare-up of irritability, after normally facetious astronaut said the flight planners were not giving the astronauts enough time to get their chores done. \"We can't get the equipment put together and torn apart the time they are putting these things (the experiments) together,\" said Cooper.\n\nReport on Sightings\n\nAs for the sights, the astronauts reported seeing their home territory of Houston, and nearby Clear and Taylor Lakes. They also saw Florida, the Bahamas and Cuba.\n\nBut there was a lot they did not see, too, largely because of the faulty reticle. Missed for example, was a planned destroyer; a star called Deneb and a Minuteman missile sent aloft from Cape Kennedy, which, though not planned to be viewed by the orbiting astronauts, was the object of their attention as they passed roughly 1000 miles away.\n\nIn spite of their difficulties in viewing the world around them, Cooper and Conrad are doggedly performing as many of the 17 medical, engineering and scientific experiments as possible.\n\nPod Heat Measured\n\nIndeed, today an Air Force spokesman reported that the astronauts had recorded more than an hour of radiation data; information on the amount and kind of heat emitted both by objects of nature and manmade objects—it is space and on the ground.\n\nThe Air Force spokesman noted from a preliminary analysis that it gave off roughly as much heat as had been anticipated.\n\n\"This is the first time that a space object has been studied in this manner by Americans from space. Such infrared or heat-sensing devices could prove useful to the military for satellite inspection in space.\n\nThe radar evaluation pod, which was to have played a significant role in a Gemini 5 rendezvous attempt on Saturday, is expected to plunge into the earth's atmosphere and a fiery disintegration during the evening of Aug. 26. Today, Gemini officials indicated that if they knew on Saturday what they know now it might have been possible to have carried out their original rendezvous plans with the small pod.\n\nSince Saturday, ground tests have shown that would have been possible with the amount of oxygen available on Saturday. What the officials did not know at that time was when the falling pressure in the oxygen would stabilize, if at all.\n\nNonetheless, Gemini officials obviously are delighted with their makeshift simulated rendezvous carried out today.\n\nIt involved making believe that an Agena rocket was at a given point in space—acting the part of a real Agena is expected to be at during the forthcoming Gemini 6 mission. Then, using radar data from ground stations, commands were sent to Gemini 5 instructing Cooper and Conrad to maneuver on four different occasions during three revolutions around the earth.\n\nHow Craft Was Maneuvered\n\nWhat Gemini officials assumed was that the Agena was in an elliptical orbit whose high point and low point were respectively. To effect a near rendezvous with the imaginary Agena the astronauts had to maneuver their craft into an orbit with high and low points of 183 and 124 miles above the earth.\n\nAfter four maneuvers, including a orbital plane change of roughly 1-50th of a degree, Gemini 5 virtually achieved the high and low points desired.\n\nAn orbital plane change works this way:\n\nThe plane of every orbit cuts through the earth's center. Most of these orbits are with a tilted angle. The plane makes to the Equator is its inclination. Through the use of propulsion, spacecraft can alter that inclination, and hence, change their orbital plane.\n\nPolice Reinforced After Ramleh Attack\n\nReuters\n\nTEL AVIV, Aug. 23—Reis toured the township of Ramleh where a crowd of Jewish youths attacked the Arab quarter yesterday.\n\nJewish youths attacked the Arabs after the funeral of a Jewish youth killed on Friday in a collision between his motorcycle and a taxi driven by an Arab. Some 12 Arabs were injured in the attack. Police said today they had arrested 22 of the youths.\n\nStaking of Claims On Moon Ruled Out\n\nAssociated Press\n\nThe Government has some advice for would-be moon homesteaders: Forget it.\n\n\"The moon belongs to the world, not the first arrival,\" said a spokesman for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.\n\n\"We assume that any exploration there will be handled on an international cooperative basis much like that in Antarctica.\"\n\nOver the years, however, many Americans have contemplated a life beyond earth. Some even filed claims with a county court.\n\nVenus Heat Held Caused By Snowfall\n\nBLACKSBURG, Va., Aug. 23 (AP)—Venus, the red hot planet between the earth and the sun, is as hot as ice on its \"black side\"—the side away from the sun—as its lighted face, and it is kept hot by snowfalls, a Johns Hopkins University theoretical physicist speculated today.\n\nDr. John Strong, a pioneer in balloon telescope astronomy, dropped this curious item into the scientific pot on the first day of Virginia Tech's fifth annual space conference. The conference is devoted to the exploration of Mars and Venus.\n\nStrong described 250 scientists the instrumentation and techniques of the November, 1964, balloon ascent provided. Strong noted that the crystals were discovered on a 1959 balloon flight.\n\nHe speculated that a 120-mile-per-hour wind on the face of Venus drags the ice crystals around to the back side, there, presumably, to become the 'warming snowfall.'\n\nDr. Strong told the engineers, teachers and researchers from universities, space exploration companies and government that man's current knowledge of Venus owes as much to 'Gulliverian speculation' as to documented research.\n\nLater this year, he said, another balloon carrying equipment from his laboratory is expected to bring back more information on the characteristics of Venus.\n\nHe told the conference the automated, unmanned balloon is much preferable to the manned vehicle; also that a balloon gondola is never an easy base from which to fix on and track a planet like Venus.\n\nDr. Dick Brouwer, director of Yale University observatory, spoke on the orbits of Mars and Venus.\n\nHe was asked by reporters about speculation about life on Mars.\n\n\"Cross it off,\" he answered with a laugh.\n\nDisposal of Body Waste Is Easy for Astronauts\n\nHOUSTON, Tex., (AP)—Disposal of body waste is no problem on the space trip of astronauts L. Gordon Cooper Jr. and Charles Conrad Jr., according to Dr. Duane Catterson.\n\nA plastic bag with a newstyle adhesive lip is used for collection of feces. The adhesive provides a secure attachment to the body.\n\nA germicide inside the bag prevents the formation of bacteria and gas.\n\nAfter use, soiled items, toilet tissues and a wet towel are placed in the bag, which then is sealed, rolled and stowed in empty food container spaces.\n\nThe bags will be brought back to earth for analysis.\n\nUrine is disposed of with an adaptation of the relief tube system currently used in military fighter planes.\n\nTooth-brushing is just that. The brush hangs on the spacecraft interior by means of the material used as fasteners on golf gloves and women's purses.\n\nThere is no toothpaste on board, so the astronauts squirt their mouths full of water, brush and swallow.\n\nWashing after each of the day's four meals is done with wash pads and towels that resemble deodorant pads and face cloths.\n\nThe pads are treated with a nontoxic disinfectant that has no odor but does clean and is lint-free.\n\nCooper and Conrad will resemble grizzled old prospectors because scientists have not found a way to get rid of whiskers.\n\nFainting Possible At Orbits' End\n\nABOARD USS LAKE CHAMPLAIN AT SEA, Aug. 23 (UPI)—The physician for the Gemini 5 astronauts aboard the recovery carrier Lake Champlain said today there is a \"possibility\" they may faint when they leave their capsule at the end of eight days.\n\nDr. Howard Minners said they might experience the faintness a person feels who has been bedridden for some time and first gets to his feet. their mouths full of water, \"The treatment is simple,\" said Minners. \"Lie down.\" He called the faintness \"orthostatic hypertension.\"\n\nWest Va."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ney sure OK, meaning mpix\non rho\n\nundense dropping intens. by\n2 & 3 pg mps - Dunkelman's\nexpos. verifies this.\n\n5-10 factor ant down\nMA-9 window fast worse\nsmmy mission - worse!\nsatell. night\n* Condensate on window dimy\nnight - less expos on film\nas than whole period on\n#s Thm whole period on\nGT-8 & heating ~ Ell Sec\nAmpul / worse than φ"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"tape on switch\nConrad -\n\nR+10 days Sept 8\n\nDate a\npix from Houston\nBert m,"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Space Photography\n(7) Baumann, R.C. Pg from\nViking II Rocket at\nalts up to 158 miles\nNRL 4489 DDC\nFeb. 1955\n\n(10) Bauman, Pg from\nViking 12 Rocket\nup to 143.5 miles\nNRL 5273\napr. 1959\n(11) Lathrop, P.A. & Rush\nReport of Missile & Space\nDept., G.E. Co, Phila. 1959"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(12) Evans, Baumann\nGactic Met. Photo\nProbe, NASA TN\nD-706, Feb 1962\n(18) Conover, J. N. &\nFuller, Cloud\nPatterns as seen 250-580\nmi.\nContinl to Satell. Met.\nGRD Reach Notes no\n86, AFCRC-TN-60-\n427, Bedford, June\n1960, pp 31-45"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Seminar Pg in Space PRIOR to GT-4's Walk-In-Space 5/19/65\nQues. to which Chas. Mathews would like answers Save JRS.\n\n1. Pictures will be taken before opening the hatch:(Before de-pressurization)\nWhat will happen to the film when the hatch is opened? Nothing!\nHA3-337\nGT-5 Tom Brohn\nfrom PJ Branch in MSC\n2. During pressurization:\n# How long can you use the film? 30 mins? or what?\n3. Pressurization in cabin:\nAfter exposure to outside (outer space) and a very low temp.(10 deg.F.), how long will it take for the film to recover?\n4. Will cold temp. cause problems with rolling the film? Will it break?\n5. If one waited a period of time inside capsule, how long would this be?\nfor film to recover\n\npictures:-\nglass rac. interface different fm\n\nGT-5 briefing went O.K. McDivitt & White got a reporter\nConrad also briefed\n\nERP:\nMay 10\n55456\nMSC10 infor (4 mil Estar)"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Bu. of Standards calibrated\nlenses\nW. Darling focal length\nof lenses Stewart Beam dist\nSounding Rockets & Satells Pressure\nLomax Cartographer Review\n1463-456 Lviv J. Bryan Bond & A. Kamm\nValue of 204 applic. date & focal length\nValue 1967 Space & geographic\n158 mi.\nNRL 4489 document\nUsing 4 & 12 pg\nadjustment of focus\n\nprism of lenses determined expt'ly\n.002 inches on optical bench\n.004 forward film\nin large vacuum chamber\nchk check focus\nGSFC - chk to be done under\nvac. conds."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5/18/65 45 min Conference\nStoddard\n373-4686\n4.7 mins.\nHaroldson\nRusty - suggestion\n(How about assignment of an astronaut to\nNASA HQ purpose office for 3-6 mos.\nMedical\nScientific (SM)\nAstronauts want to be in on planning\nHasselblad\nGT\n16 mm movie\nStandard = [ Huck briefing notes\nRoy Stokes\nUnderwater porter\nseveral yrs ago\nFt Churchill\n70 mm cameras\nhermetically sealed\nin water tight &\nfix. when then Pratz\nwindows\n134-5/16\nProf. Bowman\nWhite sands\nCompensate focus"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"N. Foster\nPhotography\n134 - 5781\n(1) doesn't in curtain way\ndepends on light intensity\nproblem\nfocus!\nOtto Berg -\nBowman - GSFC\nHurricane Hazard\nSmithsonian\nper sq. mm\n15#/in2\nDarlin\nrockets\nemulsion\nUV spectrograph\nforces not by\nemp"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Science not J. Shaw Col. Flum (June briefing\ndone\nRuhin\nEclipse & moderate\npicture - GSFC\nstabilized set up (rocket)\nAzimuth 4 & 8\n30 km 1968 &\nbright sunlight\nsl. dark-adapted\nRte 180, 385 cities\nTexas & New Mexico\nsimmick\nde-briefing operat.\nother astronauts\nmorale\n10 expts\non"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2 Cabs-earth link\nx 27557"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":". .For Norman Foster 5/19/65\n\nVacuum pg\nEvelo -\nBertie, E. Davin\nStrelinger Cunningham\nQuntley\nPhoenix\nT. Gold\n\nApollo (Ed Davin)\nofice in Houston\n→ Dombachó group developing in Houston\n\n→ Sasses (tech. monitor\nin Italy stage\nhand held camera for lunar surface\n\nGeorge Goerz Am. optical Co.\n\nEdgerton, Germeshausen, Grier (film) experts\nEdgerton in Boston EGG\nendurance\n[across from MIT]\n\nSasses has study contract for"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PE\n\nInstrumentation Pg. (editorial staff)\nand source of info.\n\nPhotogrammetry"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"clinch hathera - (white sands abort\n1) Before de pressing -\nwhat will happen to film\n2) during pressurization (how long can you use film\n3) 5/11 pressure in cabin\nhow long for it recover\nso can put\nfilm\n\npres.\n10° Fahrenheit temp,\nevell\nrolling film"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"So far: Scripts, MPC 10 MIT blue\nESTOK\n\nTN D-706 Feb. 1962\n[p. 14, 15, 16]\nNASA PET 4.43\nsend to\n\nEastman Kodak\nMSRS. Sohen & Betts\n\n↓\nNorm Foster\n\nTell him about\nApollo contract!"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Optik: Hans 60 mi\nregard of brightness\nfaintest disappears at\n52 mi.\nbrightest 40 mi.\nanes, at thirtieth gall\nscanter for faintest meteors\n& for those with highest,\nlarge fireballs after\n20 mi.\nlight ph. on or\nlayer ago for faintest &\nbefore dawn\nfast moving brightest\nquick,\nvelocities?"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 mi. = 1.60935 x 10^5 cm = 1.60935 Km\nn. mi. =\n\nGT-4\n\nMeteors Height & velocity,\nNos. - F. Roach\n\nRegardless of their brightness, meteors appear between 40 and 60 miles in the earth's atmosphere. Bright meteors are seen about 40 miles, large fireballs often as low as 20 miles or so.\n\nThe average height throughout the path is greater for fainter meteors & for those with high velocities. Actually the bright objects are deeper and go further before they are burned up, often traveling rather slowly for several hundred miles. The\n\np.206 shooting stars\nwhite \" Saw quite a few, fell & burned up below our altitude. They were about 1/2 to 1/3 as high as the jets when Cmd. (O/K). \nMcD - oh yes -\n Seven saw one above us."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GT-4 Wash DC 10/8/65\n\nNotes\nphoto of ? in foreign hands, No. = S 65 34771.\nSeen at every sunset\nSunsets all land 4\n\nairglow pm time line\n new item in airglow absorb. IIII ?\n Ft. meas. with sextant \"Plotting\n Green light sketch in\n Horizon bands logbook\n p. notes\n Bulletin\n\nGill to do: - 8.193 \"planets are so clear bright\"\n ? in ? bright hands does Lang\n meteors have slick?\n 2nd. lt. maximum 8.239\n\nRoach\n Dip of horizon logbook sketches\n Polar aurora 2+ to 3 - intensity, yellow color (fresh)\n Lightning - for outband tape (times)\nRunkelman\n airglow-form ft.\n horizon bands"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"p.205 <-d. Cart.\n\ntaking movies during this,\n\"it was a short light & a long time before sun came up.\"\n\np.206 Shooting stars\nwhite saw quite a few, fell & burned below our altitude\n 1/2 - 1/3 as high as we were when they burned.\nMcD - oh yes [Neva saw one above us]\n\nMcD - Neva\n\np.207, 208\nHorizon\n& airglow very clearly\n\nMcD altitude thunder not flashing\np.209\n\np.216 Both windows were pretty foggy\n217 MSC-10\nEarth Limb photography event time indicator (end with shutter) \nframes"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tmp. 8.8\n\nAsk McD/White or Meson\n\n1. Pictures of Auroras? what camera?\n p.202 (1st time I had my setting):\n 1/250 at f/11\n\n what unit? tape?\n lasted for 3 or 4 mins. or so (p.203)\n\n2. Airglow measures (O. )\n optical characteristics of all cameras,\n\n when did they take the movies?\n Times of sun camera risk\n Times of airglow measures\n Contrast phenomena\n\nTake 3 FILMS to MSC to get nailed originals prints\n\non board tape:\n aurora sightings times (onboard tape)\n weather over earth - \"black\" background\n Ratio of albedos"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Boulder\nSept 1, 2, 1965 1.\n\nGill\n\nS-h = 3.5 cm = 3.8 cm\nh-S = 20.5 mm = 20.8 mm -1.2 20.8 - 1.2 = 19.6 mm\nf = 21.8 mm = 21.7 mm\n\nS = 1.5 mm OK\n\nf = horizontal = 21.8 cm\nh = earth to white layer = 20.2 mm OK\n\n(1) NASA Tech. Report {Roach, Runkelman, Gill}\n(2) Condensed reason for the work summary\n\nS-5 on Rev 32 over U.S.\nStart at 17:40 GMT?\n\nfor\nzero\n\nDrawings ask to sketch for flashing in Airglow (Z. Roach)\nsize & features determined by window (10 - 10°) waste/sporadic 30 - 300 km\nusually too large to see from ground"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"11:45 GMT\nodd 5:45 (Houston) 20h 30 mins.\n\nGT-4\n\nPlanets: 4 sunsets all had the planet in it. 4\nVenus - seen at every sunset & fog. in horizon band\nMars in Leo\n\nVol I, p.205\n\nPhoto of Venus in horizon bands tape dump\n# ? S-65 34 848 ??\nSee original. S-65-34771"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Airglow\nstructure (only new thing)\nmeas. with sextant\n\nsharp line of low ent emission - pitting line.\n5577 in airglow layer (\nabout 20% of oxygen.\n\nBrownish patches\nSchmid, Cosper\n\nRoach\nDip of horizon\nPolar aurora\n\nDunkelman\nAirglow - Jan. 62\nHorizon bands\nDepression of dawn\n\nGT-4\nTo m Venus in twilight bands (15° fromdim)\nMeteors"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ques to ash white/McD.\n\nLog book material\nSketches of auroras\n\non board tape\n\ntime of auroral sightings\n\nfilms (16 mm)\norbit # may get film tape\ncd estimate the times of horizon band photos"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GT-4 Refs.\n\nThe Sky and Eye - F. Roach\nS&T Vol 17 Feb 1958\nColor threshold, etc.\n\n2+3 - interval auroras\n\np.207"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Zodiacal Light\n\nWhite probably saw it\none b4 sunrise"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Planets\n\nBrightness of Venus\n\nVenus\nMars\n\nmeteors (visual meteors)\n90-120 km\nclassical return background\n\nAug 11-12\n\nGrall Hawkins\nAnnual Review - proper plot / chart of Epsilon\nbest reference for Legend\n\nSunsets vs. Sunrises"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Take written\n\nMeteors.\n\nGive some info on meteor heights\nto compare with height of spacecraft\n\nSunsets"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA ROUTING SLIP\n\nCODE | NAME (if necessary) | ACTION / APPROVAL / CONCURRENCE / FILE / INFORMATION / INVESTIGATE AND ADVISE / NOTE AND FORWARD / NOTE AND RETURN / PER REQUEST / RECOMMENDATION / SEE ME / SIGNATURE / REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n\n1. MGSD A.J. Liccardi\n2. MGS Ewa Hall\n3. MG W.C. Schneider\n4. Gill\n5. Calis AC\n6.\n7. Kathy - Jan 4\n\nREMARKS:\nFile pls\n\nFROM: CODE: MGSD NAME: Osbenick DATE: 7-22-65\n\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. Jan. 1963)\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1963 OF-671845"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GT-4\n\nOPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 MAY 1962 EDITION GSA GEN. REG. NO. 27 5010-107\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO: SM/Manned Space Science\nFROM: MG/Deputy Director, Gemini Program\nDATE: 22 JUL 1965 M-C MGS 1352.2\n\nSUBJECT: Technical Analysis of Gemini (GT-4) Photography\n\nThe attached TWX on the subject matter from Willis Foster to Robert Piland on July 16, 1965, has been coordinated by Mr. Liccardi of my office and Dr. Gill of your office. I believe that this TWX satisfies the request of your letter to me of July 16, 1965 on the same subject.\n\nI do not anticipate any problems in your office receiving the S-5 70MM film, however, should you encounter any difficulties my office will prepare additional authorization that may be deemed necessary to expedite this matter.\n\nWilliam C. Schneider\n\ncc: Dr. J. Gill\n\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA HEADQUARTERS\n\nX\n\n\nMR. ROBERT O. PILAND\nEXPERIMENTS PROGRAM OFFICE\nMANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER\nHOUSTON, TEXAS\n\nINFO TO: DR. PAUL LOWMAN, GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER,\nGREENBELT, MARYLAND\nMR. LEO CHILDS, CODE ET22, MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER\nHOUSTON, TEXAS\n\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT YOU AUTHORIZE THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES AT\nMSC TO RELEASE THE ORIGINAL FILM OF SPOOL 3 OF MAGAZINE 8 (WHICH\nCOVERS THE SOUTHWESTERN U.S.) TO MR. LEO CHILDS, MSC, FOR 2 TO 3\nDAYS. MR. CHILDS WILL CARRY IT TO DATA CORPORATION, DAYTON, OHIO\nFOR MEASUREMENT ON THEIR MICRODENSITOMETER [REDACTED] THE PURPOSE OF THESE\nMEASUREMENTS IS TO DETERMINE THE TRUE RESOLUTION OF THE S-5 70 MM\nPHOTOGRAPHY ON GT-4. WE REFER TO A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION BETWEEN\nEMERY HARRIS OF YOUR OFFICE AND ANTHONY LICCARDI, CMSF, LAST NIGHT.\n\nWHILE MAKING THE RESOLUTION ANALYSIS WE ARE ASKING DATA\nCORPORATION TO MAKE FIVE (5) SETS OF CONTACT PRINTS AND ONE (1)\nDUPLICATE NEGATIVE OF SELECTED FRAMES USING VERY FINE-GRAINED\nMATERIALS WHICH GIVE ALMOST 100% TRANSFER. THESE PRINTS AND FILM\nWILL BE USED FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS BY AGENCIES IN THE WASHINGTON\nAREA.\n\n1 2"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\n\nDR. PAUL LOWMAN PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR ON THE S-5 EXPERIMENT HAS\nCONCURRED IN THESE ARRANGEMENTS. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT\nMR. LEO CHILDS WILL SAFEGUARD THE FILM IN TRANSIT AND AT DATA\nCORPORATION. AT DATA CORPORATION THE CONTACTS ARE\nMR. WILLIAM GOROG, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD AND MR. ROBERT BOONE.\n\nWE WILL GREATLY APPRECIATE YOUR EXPEDITING OUR OBTAINING THIS\nIMPORTANT SCIENTIFIC DATA WHICH CAN BE ACQUIRED FROM THE S-5\n70 mm FILM.\n\n\nWILLIS B. FOSTER\nDIRECTOR\nMANNED SPACE SCIENCE PROGRAMS\n\ncc: MD/Schneider\nMOB/Liccardi\nSN/Calvocoressi\n\n2 2\n\nJocelyn B. Gill\nChief, Inflight Sciences\n20593 7/16/65 2:00 p.m.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20546\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO: SM(JRG:com)\n\nDr. F. Saiedy\nU.S. Weather Bureau\nNational Weather Satellite Center\nSuitland, Maryland\n\nDear Dr. Saiedy:\n\nWe are pleased to inform you that the Office of Space Science and Applications has recommended to the Office of Manned Space Flight that the following experiment be flown on the early Gemini series of manned space flights:\n\nTitle: Spectrophotography of Clouds\n\nPrincipal Investigator: Dr. F. Saiedy\n\nSponsoring Institution: U.S. Weather Bureau\nNational Weather Satellite Center\n\nPresent plans call for ten manned Gemini missions, spaced three months apart, beginning in the last quarter of Calendar Year 1964. Overall responsibility for manned space science investigations is assigned to Mr. Willis B. Foster, Director, Manned Space Science Division, NASA Headquarters. The Manned Spacecraft Center, Houston, has been assigned implementation responsibility for the Gemini scientific payload under the direction of Dr. Jocelyn Gill, Chief, In-Flight Sciences, a member of Mr. Foster's staff. Will you please inform Dr. Gill by letter of any co-investigator(s) officially associated with your experiment. Technical coordination for your experiment will be handled by Mr. Roy Stokes, Manned Spacecraft Center, Houston, Texas, telephone number, HU 3-7633.\n\nIn accordance with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's policy for the release of data, experimenters are granted a period of time for exclusive use of the data. For Gemini, you are granted a period of six months from the receipt of the data. If this time period is not satisfactory, please get in touch with Dr. Gill to discuss a period which would be mutually agreeable to the NASA and yourself."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-2-\n\nExperimenters are encouraged to publish experimental results promptly in order to inform the scientific community as early as possible. A brief analysis of experimental results with illustrations where appropriate is required to be furnished to the experiment coordinator within two weeks following the mission for the postlaunch memorandum prepared by Manned Spacecraft Center. Experimenters are also encouraged to coordinate and exchange data among themselves in order to enhance to the fullest extent, the scientific benefits of each mission. It is important to the conduct of your experiment that all Gemini schedule deadlines be met and that you keep your MSC experiment coordinator informed on progress of your experiment at all times.\n\nWe hope that the planning of your experiment and the construction and integration of your flight hardware will be brought to satisfactory completion in order that your experiment, along with those of the other experimenters on the attached list, may serve to make the Gemini scientific payload a successful addition to the United States Space Program.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nHomer E. Newell\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Space Science & Applications\n\nEnclosure:\nList of\nApproved Experimenters"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 MAY 1962 EDITION GSA GEN. REG. NO. 27\n5010-107\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : SM/Manned Space Science\n\nDATE: 22 JUL 1965\nM-C MGS 1352.2\n\nFROM : MG/Deputy Director, Gemini Program\n\nSUBJECT: Technical Analysis of Gemini (GT-4) Photography\n\nThe attached TWX on the subject matter from Willis Foster to Robert Piland on July 16, 1965, has been coordinated by Mr. Liccardi of my office and Dr. Gill of your office. I believe that this TWX satisfies the request of your letter to me of July 16, 1965 on the same subject.\n\nI do not anticipate any problems in your office receiving the S-5 70MM film, however, should you encounter any difficulties my office will prepare additional authorization that may be deemed necessary to expedite this matter.\n\nWilliam C. Schneider\n\ncc: Dr. J. Gill\n\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAME OF AGENCY NASA HEADQUARTERS ACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION SM THIS BLOCK FOR USE OF COMMUNICATIONS UNIT PRECEDENCE ACTION: PRIORITY INFO.: TYPE OF MESSAGE SINGLE BOOK MULTI-ADDRESS UNCLASSIFIED CLASSIFICATION STANDARD FORM 14 REV. MARCH 15, 1957 GSA REGULATION 2-IX-301.00 14-304 TELEGRAPHIC MESSAGE OFFICIAL BUSINESS U. S. GOVERNMENT MESSAGE TO BE TRANSMITTED (Use double spacing and all capital letters) THIS COL. FOR AGENCY USE START MESSAGE ADDRESS HERE MR. ROBERT O. PILAND EXPERIMENTS PROGRAM OFFICE MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS INFO TO: DR. PAUL LOWMAN, GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER, GREENBELT, MARYLAND MR. LEO CHILDS, CODE ET22, MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS IT IS REQUESTED THAT YOU AUTHORIZE THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES AT MSC TO RELEASE THE ORIGINAL FILM OF SPOOL 3 OF MAGAZINE 8 (WHICH COVERS THE SOUTHWESTERN U.S.) TO MR. LEO CHILDS, MSC, FOR 2 TO 3 DAYS. MR. CHILDS WILL CARRY IT TO DATA CORPORATION, DAYTON, OHIO FOR MEASUREMENT ON THEIR MICROSENSITOMETER. THE PURPOSE OF THESE MEASUREMENTS IS TO DETERMINE THE TRUE RESOLUTION OF THE S-5 70 mm PHOTOGRAPHY ON GT-4. WE REFER TO A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION BETWEEN EMORY HARRIS OF YOUR OFFICE AND ANTHONY LICCARDI, OMSF, LAST NIGHT. WHILE MAKING THE RESOLUTION ANALYSIS WE ARE ASKING DATA CORPORATION TO MAKE FIVE (5) SETS OF CONTACT PRINTS AND ONE (1) DUPLICATE NEGATIVE OF SELECTED FRAMES USING VERY FINE-GRAINED MATERIALS WHICH GIVE ALMOST 100% TRANSFER. THESE PRINTS AND FILM WILL BE USED FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS BY AGENCIES IN THE WASHINGTON AREA. DO NOT TYPE MESSAGE BEYOND THIS LINE PAGE NO. 1 NO. OF PAGES 2"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAME OF AGENCY ACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION THIS BLOCK FOR USE OF COMMUNICATIONS UNIT PRECEDENCE ACTION: INFO.: TYPE OF MESSAGE SINGLE BOOK MULTI-ADDRESS CLASSIFICATION STANDARD FORM 14 REV. MARCH 15, 1957 GSA REGULATION 2-IX-301.00 14-304 TELEGRAPHIC MESSAGE OFFICIAL BUSINESS U. S. GOVERNMENT MESSAGE TO BE TRANSMITTED (Use double spacing and all capital letters) THIS COL. FOR AGENCY USE START MESSAGE ADDRESS HERE PAGE TWO DR. PAUL LOWMAN PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR ON THE S-5 EXPERIMENT HAS CONCURRED IN THESE ARRANGEMENTS. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT MR. LEO CHILDS WILL SAFEGUARD THE FILM IN TRANSIT AND AT DATA CORPORATION. AT DATA CORPORATION THE CONTACTS ARE MR. WILLIAM GOROG, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD AND MR. ROBERT BOONE. WE WILL GREATLY APPRECIATE YOUR EXPEDITING OUR OBTAINING THIS IMPORTANT SCIENTIFIC DATA WHICH CAN BE ACQUIRED FROM THE S-5 70 mm FILM. WILLIS B. FOSTER DIRECTOR MANNED SPACE SCIENCE PROGRAMS cc: MG/Schneider MGS/Liccardi SM/Colvocoresses DO NOT TYPE MESSAGE BEYOND THIS LINE PAGE NO. 2 NO. OF PAGES 2 NAME AND TITLE OF ORIGINATOR Jocelyn R. Gill Chief, Inflight Sciences ORIGINATOR'S TEL. NO. 20593 DATE AND TIME PREPARED 7/16/65 2:00 p.m. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION UNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SM (JRG:kby) JUL 14 1965 Dr. Karl G. Henize Dearborn Observatory Northwestern University Evanston, Illinois 60201 Dear Karl: Thank you so much for your letter of 24 June telling me that you were not present at the GT-4 debriefing. I am sorry you could not make it, but I am aware that the rescheduling was most inconvenient. It was a most interesting two-day session with one day for the individual experimenters and another day for the general scientific public. I am attempting to plan the next Inflight Experimenters meeting to occur in juxtaposition with the Scientific Debriefing Sessions in Houston. At present, we are hoping for a whole week of meetings in Houston, August 30 - September 3. So put this on your calendar with the thought that last-minute shifts are still the order of the day in this business. I want to congratulate you on the fine reports you have been submitting for your S-13 experiment and especially the document entitled \"Definitive Plan.\" The full documentation of your experiment is very important and I am glad to see you are keeping up with that. I want to urge you to look into the final stages of documentation for equipment delivery at the Cape. Just this week we had a trying experience of a co-experimenter arriving with his piece of equipment and McDonnell refusing to accept it. Some 4 or 5 pieces of documentation with \"stamps,\" etc. were missing and the experimenter had apparently never even heard of these pieces of paper. In the orderly assembly of the spacecraft and its equipment much documentation has, of course, to be assembled, time-consuming as it is. I suggest that you have Mr. Wackerling check very carefully into the documentation required for McDonnell to accept a piece of experimental"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"equipment for an actual flight, in the event that you should make use of a Boggess camera. I also plan to have this as an agenda item at the next Experimenters meeting. Best of luck with your membership on the Astronomy Subcommittee. You will certainly find it educational. Have a good summer. Sincerely yours, Jocelyn R. Gill Jocelyn R. Gill Chief, Inflight Sciences Manned Space Science Programs cc: Dr. Al Boggess, III/GSFC Willis B. Foster, SM Subject File Reading File SM:JRGill:kby 20593 7/12/65"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEARBORN OBSERVATORY NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY EVANSTON, ILLINOIS 60201 24 June 1965 Dr. Jocelyn Gill Chief, Inflight Sciences Branch Code SM Manned Space Science Programs NASA Headquarters Washington, D. C. 20546 Dear Jocelyn: In connection with the astronaut debriefing conference, I'm sorry if my lack of attendance has caused you any embarrassment. I simply couldn't make it on such short notice. I was at the University of Wisconsin when the news reached me on Wednesday morning. Having just driven for three hours to get there I was reluctant to turn around and leave immediately as would have been required for me to catch a late afternoon plane to Houston. I hope that it might be possible for me to attend the next debriefing in which the astronauts may be discussing either open hatch activities, spacecraft stabilization, or operation of the General Purpose Camera. As you are probably already aware, I have just received an invitation from Dr. Newell to become a member of the Astronomy Advisory Subcommittee. I am delighted both for the honor of having been so chosen and also by the implication that astronomical observations from manned space vehicles have at last been recognized as worthwhile scientific activities. I thank you for your very considerable efforts in backing my original proposals and in making it possible for this whole situation to develop so favorably. Sincerely, Karl G. Henize KGH:mjw"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GT-4 file\n\nSM (JRG:cvd)\n\nJUL 14 1965\n\nTO: Manned Spacecraft Center\n Chief, Photographic Division, Code BT2\n\nFROM: NASA Headquarters\n Chief, Inflight Sciences\n\nSUBJECT: Request for duplicate movie films and color prints of\n all 70 mm, hand-held pictures\n\nOne copy of each of color movie films which include sunsets,\nsunrises, horizon bands, limb of earth and terrain views is requested to be forwarded to Dr. J.R. Gill, Code SM, NASA Headquarters. Please send these air mail since this material is needed soon for preparation of an astronomical report on GT-4. One of the most important films for this purpose is Magazine 9.\n\nTwo sets of color prints of all color still pictures which were taken with Hasselblad 70 mm camera (on GT-4) are also requested. It will be adequate to send these by regular mail. These prints pertain mainly to the S-5 and S-6 Gemini Experiments.\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\n\nJocelyn R. Gill"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GT-4 file\n\nSM (JRG:kby)\n\nJUL 1 1965\n\nTO : Manned Spacecraft Center\n Mr. Robert O. Piland, Deputy Manager\n Apollo Spacecraft Program Office\n\nFROM : Chief, Inflight Sciences Branch\n Manned Space Science Programs\n\nSUBJECT: Request for copies of transcript of voice tape from GT-4\n\nAs per our telephone conversation some days ago, the following persons will greatly appreciate receipt of copies of subject transcript, viz.\n\n1. Dr. Franklin Roach\n National Bureau of Standards\n Bureau of Central Radio Propagation\n Boulder, Colorado\n\n2. Mr. Laurence Dunkelman\n Institute for Defense Analyses\n 400 Army-Navy Drive\n Arlington, Virginia\n\n3. Mrs. Winifred Cameron\n Code 641\n Goddard Space Flight Center\n Greenbelt, Maryland\n\n4. Dr. J. R. Gill\n Code SM\n NASA Headquarters\n Washington, D.C. 20546\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\n\ncc: MGS/Mr. Liccardi\n SM Reading Files SM File: Sci. debriefing GT-4 file\n\nCONCURRENCES: SM:JRGill:kby 20593 7/1/65\nOFFICE CODE\nSIGNATURE\nDATE\nOFFICIAL FILE COPY\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-77210-1"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SM (JRG:Kby)\n\nJUN 17 1965\n\nDr. Elizabeth Roemer\nU.S. Naval Observatory\nFlagstaff Station\nFlagstaff, Arizona\n\nDear Pat:\n\nThank you so very much for responding to my request for comet photographs and ephemerides so that I could apprise the GT-4 astronauts on this subject.\n\nI do not know how you managed to assemble this material and send it to me so promptly. The timing was perfect -- it arrived just in time so I could forward the comet photographs along with some other information I was mailing to them.\n\nHope the western weather cleared sufficiently so that your trip was not difficult from that standpoint.\n\nThanks again for your contribution to the GT-4 mission.\n\nBest regards,\n\nSincerely yours,\nJocelyn R. Gill\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\nChief, Inflight Sciences Branch\nManned Space Science Programs\n\ncc: SM Files\n\nSM:JRGill:kby 20593 6/7/65"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SM (JRG:kby)\n\nJUN 17 1965\n\nDr. Elizabeth Roemer\nU.S. Naval Observatory\nFlagstaff Station\nFlagstaff, Arizona\n\nDear Pat:\n\nThank you so very much for responding to my request for comet photographs and ephemerides so that I could apprise the GT-4 astronauts on this subject.\n\nI do not know how you managed to assemble this material and send it to me so promptly. The timing was perfect -- it arrived just in time so I could forward the comet photographs along with some other information I was mailing to them.\n\nHope the western weather cleared sufficiently so that your trip was not difficult from that standpoint.\n\nThanks again for your contribution to the GT-4 mission.\n\nBest regards,\n\nSincerely yours,\nJocelyn R. Gill\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\nChief, Inflight Sciences Branch\nManned Space Science Programs\n\ncc: SM Files\n\nSM:JRGill:kby 20593 6/7/65"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SM (JRG:kby)\n\nJUN 17 1965\n\nDr. Elizabeth Roemer\nU.S. Naval Observatory\nFlagstaff Station\nFlagstaff, Arizona\n\nDear Pat:\n\nThank you so very much for responding to my request for comet photographs and ephemerides so that I could apprise the GT-4 astronauts on this subject.\n\nI do not know how you managed to assemble this material and send it to me so promptly. The timing was perfect -- it arrived just in time so I could forward the comet photographs along with some other information I was mailing to them.\n\nHope the western weather cleared sufficiently so that your trip was not difficult from that standpoint.\n\nThanks again for your contribution to the GT-4 mission.\n\nBest regards,\n\nSincerely yours,\nJocelyn R. Gill\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\nChief, Inflight Sciences Branch\nManned Space Science Programs\n\ncc: SM Files\n\nSM:JRGill:kby 20593 6/7/65"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SM (JRG:kby)\n\nJUN 17 1965\n\nDr. Elizabeth Roemer\nU.S. Naval Observatory\nFlagstaff Station\nFlagstaff, Arizona\n\nDear Pat:\n\nThank you so very much for responding to my request for comet photographs\nand ephemerides so that I could apprise the GT-4 astronauts on this subject.\n\nI do not know how you managed to assemble this material and send it to me\nso promptly. The timing was perfect -- it arrived just in time so I could\nforward the comet photographs along with some other information I was\nmailing to them.\n\nHope the western weather cleared sufficiently so that your trip was not\ndifficult from that standpoint.\n\nThanks again for your contribution to the GT-4 mission.\n\nBest regards,\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\nJocelyn R. Gill\nChief, Inflight Sciences Branch\nManned Space Science Programs\n\ncc: SM Files\n\nSM:JRGill:kby 20593 6/7/65"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION\nWASHINGTON, D. C. 20546\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO: SM-(JRG:kby)\n\nDear\n\nWe are enclosing lists of Gemini photographs for Missions IV\nthrough VIII which you requested. These include the numbers\nthat Creative Arts* can utilize in filling orders. The\nGemini IV material can be ordered by the magazine, spool,\nand frame numbers (Example: Gemini IV, Magazine 16, Spool 5,\nFrame 31). The Gemini V, VI, VII, and VIII material can be\nordered by the \"HC\" number (Example: 65-HC-701).\n\nNote that the column \"GET\" signifies ground elapsed time and\ncan be converted to GMT, which is Greenwich Mean Time.\n\nWe hope this information will answer your needs. Thank you\nfor your interest in the Gemini photographs.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJocelyn R. Gill\nManned Flight Experiments Office\n\nEnclosures:\nLists of Gemini IV, V, VI,\nVII, VIII photographs\n\n* Creative Arts\nAttn: Mr. Tinsley\n814 H Street, N.W.\nWashington, D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NORTHERN ARIZONA SOCIETY OF SCIENCE AND ART, INC.\nFLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA\nP. O. Box 1389\n\nFrom\n\nNational Aeronautics & Space Admin.\nCode: Dr. Jocelyn R. Gill\nWashington, D. C. 20546\n\nOrder No.\n\nCLASS MAIL: Insured, Parcel Post, Book Post, Printed Matter\nEXPRESS: Prepaid, Collect, Pieces, Value\n\nContents:\n\nPOSTMASTER: This parcel may be opened for postal inspection if necessary.\nRETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"N\n\nBahia Todos Santos\n\nQuaternary alluvium\n\nMesozoic igneous rocks\n\nMesozoic igneous rocks\n\nSierra de Juarez\n\nGroove Fault (?)\n\n#1"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"F614E2A\nPOLAROID\nJ. R. Fill\nCode SM\nNASA HQ\nWash. D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"N\n(2)\nCultivated Fields\nQuaternary alluvium\nColorado River\nMesozoic igneous rocks\nSierra Pinta\nephemeral stream\nGulf of California\nMesozoic igneous rocks\nSierra de la Cocha Tinaja\nQuaternary alluvium\n#2"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"F614E2A\nPOLAROID\nJ. R. Fill\nCode SM\nNASA HQ\nWash. D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"N ARIZONA\nU.S. MEXICO\nSONORA\n#6"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"F614E2A\nPOLAROID\nJ. R. Fill\nCode SM\nNASA HQ\nWash. D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"#7"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"F612228\nICLASSIFIED\nJ. R. Fill\nCode SM\nNASA HQ\nWash. D,C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"#9"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"F512328\nUNCLASSIFIED\nJ. R. Sill\nCode SM\nNASA HQ\nWash. D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"#10"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g.R. Lill\nCode 5M\nNASA HQ\nWash. D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"J.R. Fill\nCode 5M\nNASA HQ\nWash. D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g.R. Gall\nCode 5 M\nNASA HQ\nWash. D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"N\nPlacida\nMt.\nSierra\nCarrizalillo\nLaguna de Guzman (Colean)\nLaguna Grande\nCasas Grandes R."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"N\nU.S. 54 To Ro. R.R.\nW. Potrillo Mts.\nLava Flow\nS.P. Rio. RR.\nFranklin Mts.\nEl Paso\n\"cloud\"\nE. Potrillo Mts.\nPotrillo Basin\nU.S. MEXICO\nmesa?\nN.M. sandy desert\ndunes\nLaguna de Guzman\nR. Santa Maria\n#14"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Hueco Mts.\nHueco Basin\nEl Paso\nU.S. MEXICO\nRio Grande R.\nFranklin Mts.\nSierra del Presidio\n#15"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"J.R. Sill\nCode SMY\nNASA HQ\nWash. D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"#16\n\nCornudas Mts.\nSalt Basin\nFinlay Mts.\nU.S.\nMEXICO\nRio Grande R.\nDevil Trap\nQuitman Mts."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"#17\n\nGuadalupe Mts.\nN\nU.S. 180-62\nGuadalupe Peak\nSalt Basin\nDelaware Mts.\nApache Mts.\nDavis Mts.\nU.S.\nMEXICO\nRio Grande R.\nQuitman Mts.\nTiburon Mts.\n\nref. N.M.\nMC\nWash. D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"J.R. Sill\nCode SMY\nNASA HQ\nWash. D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"N\n\nFort Stockton\n\n#18"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"#19\n\nU.S. 80\n\nsand dunes\n\nMonahans\n\nU.S. 80\nMonahans\n\nPecos R.\n\nPecos Toyah Basin\n\nFt. Stockton\n\nApache Mts.\n\nDavis Mts.\n\nBorrilla Mts.\n\nGlass Mts.\n\nRio Grande R."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"J.R. Fill\nCode SM\nNASA-HQ\nWash. D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"N\n\n20\n\nLlano Estacado\n\nMidland\n\nMidland-Odessa Airport\n\nOdessa\n\nSmate\n\nEstacado Plateau\n\nPecos R.\n\nToyah Basin\n\nDavis Mts.\n\n#20"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Midland\nOdessa\nPecos R.\nStockton\nPlateau\n#21"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"J.R. Sill\nCode 3ry\nNASA HQ\nWash. D.C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Big Spring\nEdwards\nPlateau\nMidland\nOdessa\n#22"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"#23"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"J. B. Sief\nCode SMJ\nNASA HQ\nWash. D. C."} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Abilene\nUS 83\nU.S. 84\nColeman\nU.S. 67\nSan Angelo\nEdwards\nDel Rio\n# 24"} {"doc_id":"71da836bb92ee463","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"J. R. Fill\nCode SMJ\nNASA HQ\nWash. D. C."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 917033\nBuller, Sn\n00 6853\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSECRET\nSECRET\nSECRET\nSECRET\nSECRET\n[REDACTED]\n020240 30014\n578-1(126)\nCONFIDENTIAL\nP 615\nEncl 1 34"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8 July 1947 Incident # 1\n2. Time 0930\n3. Location Muroc Air Field, Muroc, Calif\n4. Name of observer 1st Lt Joseph C. McHenry\n5. Occupation of observer Billeting Officer in Charge, Muroc AAFld.\n6. Address of observer Muroc, AAFld\n7. Place of observation ground - Muroc, AAFld\n8. Number of objects 2 at first - 1 sometime later\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Approx 8000 ft\n12. Speed 300 MPH\n13. Direction of flight 320° due north heading\n14. Tactics Performed a tight circle\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Silver\n18. Shape disc-like or spherical\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - Apparently metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance in distance\n26. Remarks: At approximately 0930 Lt McHenry left Post Exchange (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL\n1"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nenroute to his office and before entering heard one of the local aircraft in the traffic pattern. Looking up he observed the aircraft and slightly to the left he saw 2 silver objects of either spherical or disc-like shape moving about 300 MPH at approximately 8000 ft heading about 320° due north. He immediately called S/Sgt Gerald E. Nauman, T/Sgt Joseph Ruvolo and Miss Jannette Marie Scotte. Witnesses all verified the sighting and the direction of the objects - all three stated that the objects were moving toward Mojave, Calif.\n\nWitness was sure it was not an optical illusion or that the objects were not weather balloons since they traveled against prevailing wind and since the speed at which they traveled and the horizontal direction taken indicated that they were not weather balloons. Furthermore they could not remain at the same altitude so consistently if they were weather balloons. Witness then attempted to get personnel (medical officers) to further verify the sighting but by the time the additional personnel had arrived at the same the original objects had disappeared due to the speed at which they were traveling. However, two of them sighted a third object of a silver spherical or disc-like nature at approximately 8000 ft traveling in circles over the north end of the airfield. Five out of the seven personnel saw this object All looked away from the object several times to make sure there was no eye strain. He stated that this object performed too tight a circle to be any type of known aircraft.\n\nEvaluation: Confirmed by other sources.\n\nWitnesses: S/Sgt Gerald E. Nauman\nT/Sgt Joseph Ruvolo\nMiss Jannette Marie Scotte\n[REDACTED]\nCONFIDENTIAL\n2"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8 July 47 Incident # 1e\n2. Time 10:00\n3. Location Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, Calif\n4. Name of observer Jannette Marie Scott\n5. Occupation of observer Secretary to 1st Lt J. C. McHenry, Billeting Officer\n6. Address of observer Muroc AAFld, Muroc, Calif.\n7. Place of observation Ground - Muroc\n8. Number of objects 3 - two the first time - 1 later\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Approx 8,000 ft\n12. Speed 300 to 400 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Northwest - toward Mojave, Calif.\n14. Tactics First 2 maintained straight horizontal course; the last performed a tight circle\n15. Sound none - Witness heard no drone such as would come from any aircraft\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Silver\n18. Shape Disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S Apparently metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Sunlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S - apparently in the distance\n26. Remarks: Witness was called by Lt McHenry together with T/Sgt (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL\n3"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nJoseph Ruvolo and S/Sgt. Gerald E. Nauman to the front of the B.O.Q. \"A\" Bldg. Pointing up in a direction directly above the group he asked them to explain what they saw. Witness states that she saw 2 silver-colored disc-like objects flying toward Mojave, Calif, one directly back of the other, at a speed of about 300 to 400 MPH at an altitude of approximately 8,000 ft. She listened carefully for a few minutes but could hear no drone such as occasioned by any aircraft. Casting her eyes for a moment in another direction and then looking back to the same spot she was able to distinguish the same objects again. Assured that it was not eye-strain, she was convinced the objects were not weather balloons due to the horizontal position in which they traveled. Nor could they have been birds since they reflected the sun's rays.\n\nSome three or four minutes after the objects had nearly disappeared she saw another flying object similar to the above-mentioned objects. It was silver colored and disc-like in shape. Unlike the first two, it flew in a tight circle, neither losing nor gaining altitude, at approximately 8,000 ft. She thought it performed too tight a circle to have been any type aircraft with which she was familiar.\n\nEvaluation: Confirmed by other sources\n4"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 8 July 47 Incident # 1c\n2. Time 0945\n3. Location Muroc AAFld, Muroc, Calif 34° 54' N 117° 53' W\n4. Name of observer S/Sgt Joseph Ruvolo\n5. Occupation of observer NCO Charge Billeting Office\n6. Address of observor Muroc Air Fld., Muroc, Calif\n7. Place of observation Ground - Muroc\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Between 7500 or 8000 ft\n12. Speed 350 - 400 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Northwestern\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Silver\n18. Shape Saucer or Disc shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - Apparently metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Witness, NCO in charge of Billeting Office, Muroc AF Base,\n(over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nAbout 0945 Lt McHenry, Billeting Officer in Charge, upon returning from the Post Exchange contacted the witness, Sgt Ruvol and asked him to look up in the sky. Witness observed two (2) flying objects which appeared like two flying discs or saucer-shaped silver-colored objects flying in a northwestern direction at approximately 350 to 400 MPH at an altitude of about 7500 or 8000 ft. He could hear no motor roar and was positive that it was not a balloon.\n\nHe states: \"I am of good health and sound mind and this was no hallucination\"\n\nEvaluation: Confirmed by other sources.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 2.\n\n1. Date 8 July 1947\n2. Time Approximately noon\n3. Location Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California.\n4. Name of observer Major Richard R. Shoop\n5. Occupation of observer Employed in Office of Chief of Tech. Engineering Div Major -\n6. Address of observer Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California.\n7. Place of observation Ground\n8. Number of objects One (1)\n9. Distance of object from observer Five (5) to eight (8) miles.\n10. Time in sight Eight (8) minutes\n11. Altitude fairly high altitude\n12. Speed slowly\n13. Direction of flight North\n14. Tactics The object moved from an intermediate altitude in an oscillating fashion, almost to the surface of the ground and then started climbing again.\n15. Sound not stated\n16. Size pursuit airplane\n17. Color aluminum colored surface\n18. Shape unconventional shape\n19. Odor detected not stated\n20. Apparent construction apparently metallic\n21. Exhaust trails not stated\n22. Weather conditions not stated\n23. Effect on clouds not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance moved off slowly in the distance\n26. Remarks: At approximately noon on 8 Jul 1947, Major Shoops, at the attention of Col. Gilkey observed five (5) to eight (8) miles to the north what appeared to be a thin metallic object. It appeared to be metallic because the method in which it was flying the sun was reflected from an apparently aluminum colored surface.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 3.\n\n1. Date 7 July 1947\n2. Time 10:10\n3. Location Muroc Army air Field, Muroc, California.\n4. Name of observer Major J. C. Wiso,\n5. Occupation of observer Test Pilot\n6. Address of observor Muroc AAF, Muroc, California.\n7. Place of observation Ground - Muroc AAF, Muroc, California\n8. Number of objects One (1)\n9. Distance of object from observor Off to the north about 10,000 to 12,000 feet altitude.\n10. Time in sight not stated\n11. Altitude 10,000 to 12,000 feet\n12. Speed 200 to 225 MPH\n13. Direction of flight heading from west to east\n14. Tactics Oscillating in a forward whirling movement without losing altitude\n15. Sound not stated\n16. Size Five (5) to (10) feet in diameter\n17. Color yellowish white\n18. Shape sphere\n19. Odor detected not stated\n20. Apparent construction assumed at first to be a weather balloon\n21. Exhaust trails not stated\n22. Weather conditions not stated\n23. Effect on clouds not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance not stated\n26. Remarks:\nOver\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REMARKS:\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nStatement given by Major J. C. Wise, Test Pilot, Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California.\n\nOn 7 July 1947, at approximately 10:10, while running up the XP-84 on the ground I noticed everyone was looking up into the air. Off to the north about 10,000 to 12,000 feet altitude, was an object that I assumed at first to be a weather balloon, but after looking at it for a while I noticed that it was oscillating in a forward whirling movement without losing altitude. It was traveling about 200 to 225 MPH, and heading from west to east.\n\nThe object was yellowish white in color and I would estimate that it was a sphere about 5 to 10 feet in diameter.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 8 July 1947 Incident # 4.\n2. Time 11:50\n3. Location Area # 3, Rogers Dry Lakes, California.\n4. Name of observer Captain John Paul Strapp\n5. Occupation of observer Flight Test\n6. Address of observer Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California.\n7. Place of observation Observation Truck, Area #3, Rodgers Dry Lake, Calif.\n8. Number of objects One (1)\n9. Distance of object from observer 20,000 feet\n10. Time in sight 90 seconds\n11. Altitude lower than 20,000\n12. Speed slower than the maximum velocity 50-60 aircraft\n13. Direction of flight Slightly north of due west against prevailing wind\n14. Tactics rotation or oscillation of slow type (suggested by 2 fins or nobs on the upper surface which crossed each other at intervals\n15. Sound not stated\n16. Size About 50'\n17. Color silvery\n18. Shape resembled a parachute canopy at first then assumed ovular shape\n19. Odor detected not stated\n20. Apparent construction It presented a distinct ovular outline, with two (2) projections on the upper surface which might have been thick fins or nobs. These crossed each other at intervals, suggesting either rotation or oscillation of slow type.\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions not stated\n23. Effect on clouds not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance Dropped to a level such that comes into line of vision of the mountain tops.\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nOn the 8 July 1947 at 11:50 the undersigned was sitting in an observation truck located in Area #3, Rogers Dry Lake, was gazing upward toward a formation of two (2) P-82's and an A-26 aircraft fly ing at 20,000 feet, preparing the carry out of a seat ejection experiment, when I observed a rounded object, white aluminum in color, which at first resembled a parachute canopy. The first impression was that a premature ejection of the seat and dummy had occurred. This body was ejected at a determined height lower than 20,000 feet, and was falling at three (3) times the rate observed for the parachute which ejected thirty minutes later. As it fell it drifted slightly north of due west against the prevailing wind, toward Mount Wilson. The speed, horizontal motion could not be determined, but appeared slower than the maximum velocity P-80 aircraft.\n\nAs this object descended through a low enough level to permit observation of its lateral silhouette, it presented a distinct ovular outline, with two (2) projections on the upper surface which might have been thick fins or nobs. These crossed each other at intervals, suggesting either rotation or oscillation of slow type.\n\nNo smoke flames, propellar arks, engine noise, or other clasuable or visible mens of propulsion were noted. The color was silvery, resembling aluminum painted fabric, and did not appear as dense as a parachute canopy.\n\nWhen the object dropped to a level such that comes into line of vision of the mountain tops, it was lost to the vision of the observer.\n\nIt is estimated that the object was in line of vision about 90 seconds. Of the five (5) people sitting in the observation truck, four (4) observed this object and made remarks about it. These people include:\n\nMr. Lens - Civilian, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n(Other names not given)\n\nThe following is my own personal opinions about this object:\n\n1. I think it was a manmade object, as evidenced distaintly by the outline and functional appearance.\n\n2. It's size was not far from 25 feet with a parachute canopy.\n\n3. The path followed by this object appeared as though it might have been dropped from a great height.\n\nSeeing this was not a hallucination or other fancies of a sense.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 4 July 1947 Incident # 5\n2. Time 1305\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Kenneth A. McDowell\n5. Occupation of observer Patrolman, Portland City Police\n6. Address of observer Portland City Police Dept., Portland, Oregon\n7. Place of observation Parking lot back of police station\n8. Number of objects 5\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Great speed\n13. Direction of flight 2 discs flying south, 3, in easterly direction\n14. Tactics Dipped up and down in oscillating motion at great speed\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S Large\n17. Color Could not be determined\n18. Shape Round - disc-shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S - No visible means of propulsion observed\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Quickly - before any detailed observation could be made\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nOfficer McDowell stated that at approximately 1305, 4 July 1947 while he was on duty at Precinct #1 and feeding the pigeons in the parking lot back of the station he noticed that the pigeons became quite excited over something and flattered in the air. Officer McDowell in looking around to see what had disturbed them saw 5 large discs in the air east of Portland; two discs flying south and three flying in an easterly direction. He stated he could determine no color to the discs but advised they were dipping in an up and down oscillating motion and were traveling at great speed. He was unable to give an estimate of the speed or altitude of the discs as they were out of sight before any detailed observation could be made. Officer McDowell advised that he notified the Police Radio who immediately broadcast an alert. He saw no indication of any motivating force nor heard any sound coming from the discs and could give no description other than round.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 4 July 1947 Incident # 7\n2. Time 1305\n3. Location Oregon\n4. Name of observer Earl E. Patterson\n5. Occupation of observer Patrolman - former Air Corps pilot\n6. Address of observer 124 Southeast 13th Avenue, Portland, Oregon\n7. Place of observation Southeast 82d and Foster Road, Portland\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Approx 30,000 ft\n12. Speed Terrific - faster than any speed witness had ever seen\n13. Direction of flight Southwesterly direction over Portland\n14. Tactics Performed 90° angle without difficulty - thought to be radio controlled\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Aluminum\n18. Shape disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S Apparently metallic or eggshell white didn't reflect light\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nWitness was getting out of his car when he observed one disc flying in a Southwesterly direction over Portland. Disc was aluminum in color and traveled at terrific speed - faster than any flying object witness had ever seen - It left no vapor trail or smoke trail. [REDACTED] Estimated altitude approx 30,000 ft. Thought the disc was definitely some type of aircraft but could not give further description as speed made observation difficult. No sound was heard from the flying object. He thought it appeared radio-controlled because the disc could change direction at a 90° angle without difficulty."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 6\n\n1. Date 4 July 47\n2. Time 1305\n3. Location Milwaukee, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Sergeant Claude Cross\n5. Occupation of observer Oregon State Police Officer\n6. Address of observor District #1, Milwaukie, Oregon\n7. Place of observation Police station\n8. Number of objects 3\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Undetermined\n12. Speed N/S Terrific\n13. Direction of flight Northwest\n14. Tactics Three discs following each other at terrific speed\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Whitish brown glint as the sun was reflected from them\n18. Shape Disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cross saw three discs following each other at an undetermined altitude at terrific speed, traveling in a Northwesterly direction. He noticed a whitish brown glint to them as the sun reflected from them. Could give no other description nor could he judge the speed or altitude. No sound was made by the objects."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 8\n\n1. Date 4 July 47\n2. Time 1305\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer W. A. Lisey\n5. Occupation of observer Patrolman - also a private pilot\n6. Address of observor Portland City Police Dept.\n7. Place of observation ground\n8. Number of objects 3\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 40,000 ft\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight South\n14. Tactics Straight-line formation except last disc fluttered to side in arc\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color white\n18. Shape disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear - with little or no cloud formations visible from ground.\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - no clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Patrolman W. A. Lissy of the Portland City Police Department possesses a private pilot license. He perceived three flat round discs which flew at terrific speed in straight line formation the last disc fluttering very rapidly in a side-way arc. They saw no evidence of any motivating powers and there were no vapor or smoke trails. No sound could be heard. Ground temperature was 82°F with little or no cloud formation.\n\nNOTE: Corroroborated account. Witnessed by Patrolman D. W. Ellis (also a private pilot) Both very dependable & trustworthy officers."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 8a\n\n1. Date 4 July 47\n2. Time 1305\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer D. W. Ellis\n5. Occupation of observor Patrolman\n6. Address of observor Portland City Police Dept., Oregon\n7. Place of observation Portland, Oregon\n8. Number of objects 3\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Approx 40,000 ft\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight South\n14. Tactics Straight-line formation except last which flutter to side in arc\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N.S\n17. Color White\n18. Shape Disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear - with little or no cloud formation visible from ground\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - no clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED\n10"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nPatrolman D. W. Ellis (also a private pilot) perceived three flat round discs which flew at terrific speed in straight line formation, the last disc fluttering very rapidly in a side-way arc. He saw no evidence of any motivating powers and there were no vapor or smoke trails. No sound could be heard. Ground temperature was 82°F with little or no cloud formation.\n\nNOTE:Corroborated account. Witnessed by Patrolman W. A. Lissy (also a private pilot) Both very dependable & trustworthy officers\n\nRESTRICTED\n21"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 9\n\n1. Date 4 July 1947\n2. Time 1305\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Capt. K. A. Prehn\n5. Occupation of observor Harbor Pilot,\n6. Address of observor Ft NW Irving St., Portland\n7. Place of observation \" \" \"\n8. Number of objects 3 to 6 - unable to ascertain\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude High\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight South over the Globe Mills\n14. Tactics oscillated, wobbled, disappeared & reappeared.\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color chromium - shiny\n18. Shape full disc, half-moon shape, then nothing.\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs N/S\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared and reappeared\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED\n22"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nMembers of the harbor patrol at the foot of NW Irving Street stopped out when they heard the all-car alert. Capt. K. A. Prehn, Harbor Pilot, A.T. Austed and Patrolman K. C. Hoff, all saw the objects and said they appeared to be going south high over the Globe Mills at terrific speed. Capt. Prehn said the flashes kept them from ascertaining whether there were three or six.\n\n\"The discs would oscillate and sometimes we would see a full disc, then a half-moon shape,then nothing at all,\" he reported. The objects looked more like a shiny chromium hub cap off a car which wobbled, disappeared and reappeared.\"\n\nThere was a plane in the sky at the time, but all were emphatic that the discs were not planes.\n\nRELIABILITY: Corroborated report\n\nRESTRICTED\n23"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 10\n\n1. Date 4 July 1947\n2. Time 8:04 P. M.\n3. Location [REDACTED] Boise, Idaho\n4. Name of observer Capt E. J. Smith\n5. Occupation of observor UAL Pilot\n6. Address of observor UAL Office Boise\n7. Place of observation Air - [REDACTED] Over Emmett, Ida.\n8. Number of objects 9 - 5 at first, then 4 more\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S - but followed them for about 45 miles\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Northwest\n14. Tactics preserved \"loose formation\"\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Could not be ascertained but appeared thin and smooth on the bottom and rough on the top\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S however, a sunset was mentioned\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Could not be ascertained\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n24"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Capt E. J. Smith, UAL Pilot, enroute to Seattle reported that he and the entire crew of the westbound UAL plane saw nine flying discs near Blanch, Idaho. At first he saw 5 discs flying what appeared to be a \"loose formation.\" They called Marty Morrow, Stewardess, to the cockpit to verify that they were actually seeing the discs. She saw them too. Then they saw 4 more of them, three cluster together, and a 4th flying by itself, way off in the distance.\n\nCapt Smith described them as follows:\n\n5 \"somethings\" which were \"thin and smooth on the bottom and rough appearing on top.\" Silhouetted against sunset after the plane took off at 6:01 p.m. \"We saw them clearly,\" he reported. \"We followed them in a northwesterly direction for about 45 miles. Finally they disappeared. We were unable to tell whether they outraged the plane or disintegrated.\n\nHe couldn't determine the shape. \"We can't say whether they were smoke-like, oval or anything else.\" \"But whatever they were, they were not other aircraft, nor were they smoke or clouds.\"\n\nRELIABILITY: Corroborated report by a UAL Pilot"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 4 July 47 Incident # 11\n2. Time Evening\n3. Location Lake City, Seattle Wash\n4. Name of observer Frank Ryman\n5. Occupation of observer Coast Guardsman\n6. Address of observer Lake City, Seattle, Wash.\n7. Place of observation Ground - Lake City\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 10 minutes\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight over north end of Lake Washington\n14. Tactics Horizontal flight\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color \"white\"\n18. Shape saucer or ball shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs 1 news photograph\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nThe results of Ryman's photographic effort showed a tiny light spot against the dark background of the evening sky. He took the picture when the disc was directly overhead. He and his wife watched it for about 10 minutes as it seemed to speed across the sky. Her impression was that it was a shiny ball at great height.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 4 July 1947 Incident # 12\n2. Time 1305\n3. Location Vancouver, Washington\n4. Name of observer John Sullivan\n5. Occupation of observer Sheriff's Deputy\n6. Address of observer Vancouver, Washington\n7. Place of observation Vancouver, Washington, \"ground\"\n8. Number of objects 20 to 30\n9. Distance of object from observer 3 to 5 miles away over Portland\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound low humming sound\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape \"V\" shaped - like flock of geese\n19. Odor detected N.S\n20. Apparent construction N/A\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nIn Vancouver, Washington, Sheriff's Deputies, John Sullivan & Clarence McKay and Fred Krives, heard the Portland police radio broadcast and ran out of the Sheriff's office to look at the sky. Over Portland about three to five miles away, Sullivan said, they saw 20 to 30 objects \"like a flight of geese.\" They heard a low humming sound.\n\nCORROBORATED ACCOUNT\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 13\n1. Date 4 July 1947\n2. Time 1400\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer E. A. Evans\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor 3433 SW Macadam Ave.\n7. Place of observation Portland, Oregon - ground\n8. Number of objects 1 at first 2 later\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight 2 - 4 seconds\n11. Altitude one object appeared not too high, 2 others appeared far away & very high\n12. Speed very fast\n13. Direction of flight 1, west to east, 2 - north\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Resembled metallic discs glinting in sunlight\n18. Shape disc\n19. Odor detected n/s\n20. Apparent construction n/s - unless metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Skeches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance out of sight within 2 to 4 seconds\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED\n30"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Three discs were observed by E. A. Evans & neighbors, one object appeared very high and two others appeared far away and very high. One traveled from west to east, two others traveled north. They resembled metallic discs glinting in the sunlight. They first appeared in the west and were out of sight in the east in 2 to 4 seconds.\nRESTRICTED\n31"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 14\n1. Date 4 July 47\n2. Time 1630\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Lawrence J. Hayward\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor 6124 N. E. 21st Ave., Portland\n7. Place of observation Portland, Oregon - ground\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Slow\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics Flipping around\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size dime\n17. Color silvery\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - apparently metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: At 4:30 P.M. Mrs Lawrence J. Hayward, 6124 NE 21st Ave. reported sighting a disc \"like a new dime flipping around\" in the air over the Sandy district. She said it seemed to be moving slowly.\nRESTRICTED\n32"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 4 July 1947\nIncident # 15\n2. Time 1700\n3. Location Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Thomas W. Dwyer\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor 1232 N. E. 59th Ave\n7. Place of observation Portland, Oregon\n8. Number of objects 3\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude high\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight 1 - southeast; 2- northeast\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Skeches or photographs N/S\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: One object was heading southeast and two others were going northeast.\nRESTRICTED\n33"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 16\n1. Date 4 July 1947\n2. Time 1100\n3. Location Mt Jefferson, Oregon\n4. Name of observer C. J. Bogne\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor Tigard, Oregon\n7. Place of observation Near Redmond - ground\n8. Number of objects 4\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: C. J. Bogne, Tigard reported that four discs flew past Mt Jefferson at about 11 a. m., while he was driving near Redmond.\nRESTRICTED\n34"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 17\n1. Date 24th June 1947\n2. Time 1500\n3. Location Mt. Ranier, Washington\n4. Name of observer Kenneth Arnold\n5. Occupation of observer Dealer in fire control supplies holds private pilot's license\n6. Address of observor Box 387, Boise, Idabb\n7. Place of observation Near Mineral, Washington\n8. Number of objects 9\n9. Distance of object from observor [illegible] 20 to 25 miles\n10. Time in sight 2-1/2 to 3 minutes\n11. Altitude 9,500 ft\n12. Speed [illegible] Approx 150 MPH\n13. Direction of flight North to South at 170°\n14. Tactics Horizontal flight\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Approximately that of DC-4 - 45 to 50 ft\n17. Color mirror like\n18. Shape Approximately circular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Drawings\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The pilot Kenneth Arnold was flying his plane at an altitude of approximately 9,200 feet. He trimmed out plane in direction of Yakima, Washington which was almost directly east of his position and sat in his plane observing the sky and the terrain. To the left was a DC-4 and to his rear approximately 15 miles distant there was a 14,000 ft elevation. The sky was clear as crystal. A bright flash suddenly reflected on the plane. Upon looking to the left and to the north of Mt. Rainer he observed a chain of 9 peculiar looking craft flying from north to south at approximately 9,500 ft elevation and going seemingly in a definite direction of about 170°. Thought at first they were jet aircraft but noticed that every few seconds 2 or 3 of them would dip or change their gamma course slightly just enough to cause the sun to strike them at an angle which reflected brightly on his plane. As they approached Mt. Rainier he could observe their outlines against the snow quite plainly, but couldn't find any tails. Clocked speed and found it to be approximately 150 MPH. Never before had he observed planes flying so close to mountain tops. They flew directly south to southeast down the hog's back of a mountain range. Pilot thought they were at approximately the same elevation as he was. They flew in rather diagonal chain-like line as if linked together and seemed to hold a definite direction but swerved in and out of the high mountain peaks. Distance which was almost at right angles seemed to be between 20 to 25 miles. Thought they were quite large to be observed at that distance even on a clear day. They seemed smaller than the DC-4 but he judged their span to be as wide as the furthest engines on each side of the fuselage of the DC-4 (45 to 50 ft). The chain seemed to be approximately five miles long.\n\nNOTE: It was the opinion of the agent interviewing Mr. Arnold that he saw the \"flying discs\". In this regard agent further stated that if Mr. Arnold could write a report of such a character and did not see the objects he was in the wrong business and should be engaged in writing Buck Rogers fiction.\n\nThe attached is what Kenneth Arnold later produced. See \"Fate\" magazine article by Kenneth Arnold.\n\nSeemed to travel in sidewise position and did not appear to whirl or spin\n\nSide View\n\nTop\n\nThey seemed longer than wide thickness being about 1/20 of width"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 19\n1. Date 20 Oct 47\n2. Time 1320\n3. Location David Road, Dayton, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mr. S. C. Britton\n5. Occupation of observer [illegible] N/S\n6. Address of observor David Road, Dayton\n7. Place of observation ground - David Road, Dayton\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 1 to 5 miles high - could not be determined\n12. Speed Very fast\n13. Direction of flight West to East but slightly to the North\n14. Tactics One object followed the other about a city block apart\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Reflected light\n18. Shape like cigar\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails like a slight trace of steam\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - no clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness strolling in his orchard in an easterly direction when his grandson called his attention to \"the funny flying fishes in the sky\" Looking up he saw 2 strange looking craft flying very fast in a very straight course from West to East but slightly to the North. The sun was to observer's right and the sky cloudless which seemed to make the objects reflect the sunlight rather brilliantly. As a result the shape was not clearly evident but he distinctly observed that they did not have wings and they looked like cigars - longer than they were wide. They were flying together, one object to the rear about one city block apart and to the right of the leading plane. They did not dip nor veer from a straight flight in any manner. Seemed very high but observer could not judge this except that they were at least a mile high and possibly 5 miles high. There was no noise nor sound of any kind. The trail or exhaust was very unusual and seemed like a slight trace of steam attached to the plane which disappeared immediately. It did not persist in the air like vapor trails nor like exhaust from ordinary planes and jet aircraft. Witness familiar with aircraft since they fly over his property daily. He was positive that they were not meteors, birds nor ordinary aircraft.\n\nNOTE: Subsequent investigation by this Cmd indicates that Mr. Britton's testimony should be considered reliable. The objects seen are not as yet identified."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 20\n1. Date 20 Oct 47\n2. Time 1100\n3. Location Xenia, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Ruth Atkinson\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer R 1, Xenia, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Xenia, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 1000 to 1500 ft\n12. Speed fast\n13. Direction of flight Southwest\n14. Tactics straight course\n15. Sound None\n16. Size 12\" in dia.\n17. Color Silver\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Could not see any propellers or dome which observer thought strange nor was the object making any noise at all.\nNOTE: Observer mentions two witnesses.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 21\n\n1. Date 29 June 47\n2. Time 1645\n3. Location Des Moines, Iowa\n4. Name of observer Dale Bays\n5. Occupation of observer Agent of Amazing Stories Magazine\n6. Address of observer Box 12, Crocker, Mo.\n7. Place of observation Not stated\n8. Number of objects at first 5. then 13\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude 1200 ft.\n12. Speed 300 mph\n13. Direction of flight NNW\n14. Tactics single file\n15. Sound like an electric motor or dynamo\n16. Size about 12 ft. thick & 175 to 250 ft. in diameter\n17. Color Dirty white\n18. Shape Between circle and oval - inverted saucer\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: None\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 22\n\n1. Date 21 June 1947\n2. Time Shortly before noon\n3. Location Spokane, Washington\n4. Name of observer Guy R. Overman\n5. Occupation of observer Not stated\n6. Address of observer 621 E. Hoffman Ave., Spokane, Washington\n7. Place of observation Spokane, Washington on ground\n8. Number of objects one at first. later others more indistinct\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude 7,000 or 8,000 feet\n12. Speed slower than 2 motored plane.\n13. Direction of flight South, a little to the west of south\n14. Tactics Flashed repeatedly as it moved along\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size Quite large\n17. Color Shiny - silvery\n18. Shape flashes or discs\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction flashes or discs\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance became less distinct but flashed repeatedly.\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On Saturday June 21st, shortly before noon, I was in our yard at home when I happened to glance up at a passing plane. I would say this was a two motored one from one of the army bases, flying south at about 10,000 or 12,000 feet. On the more glance at the plane a bright shiny flash attracted my attention, coming from approximately two or three thousand feet lower than the plane, but slightly ahead of my line of vision of the plane. My first thought was that the plane had thrown out hand bills, but this could not be as they (the flashes or disks) were ahead of the plane. One thing different tho, it seems to me they were not traveling as fast as the plane. We realize to, now, that whatever they were, they must have been quite large, being as plain as the nearest one was, yet so high. And again, they were traveling south against prevailing winds. At least some of the smaller flashes, if not all were as high or higher than the plane, but the nearest one seemed lower, both when it flashed and otherwise, as it did intermittently.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n42"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 23\n\n1. Date 30 June 1947\n2. Time 5:45 PM approximately\n3. Location Boise, Idaho\n4. Name of observer Angelo Donofrio\n5. Occupation of observer Not stated\n6. Address of observer 917 East Bannock Street, Boise, Idaho\n7. Place of observation Boise, Idaho traveling west to Plantation Golf Cour\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 10 miles\n10. Time in sight few minutes\n11. Altitude 3,000 feet\n12. Speed Stationary\n13. Direction of flight Stationary\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size Not stated\n17. Color Bright and silvery\n18. Shape Half circled\n19. Odor detected Not Stated\n20. Apparent construction Looked like a mirror in the sun\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds Seemed to be clinging to a huge cloud\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not Stated\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED Dup 43"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nAn object was seen in this locality on 30 June 1947. The hour was approximately 5:45 PM and we (my wife and I) were traveling west to the Plantation Golf Course, which is approximately five miles from Boise. On the way, I happened to spot something in the sky which seemed to be clinging to a huge cloud. It was half circled in shape and just as bright and silvery looking as a mirror caught in the rays of the sun. After a few minutes of traveling and looking the object disappeared. I would say it was about 10 miles distant, and from our location, approximately 3,000 feet in the air.\n\nNote: Witness states he has had \"Aircraft Recognition\" in the USAF about 4 times and is positive that the object sighted was not an airplane\n\nRESTRICTED 44"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 12 June 1947 Incident # 24\n2. Time 6:15 P.M. evening\n3. Location Weiser, Idaho\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Herbert Erickson\n5. Occupation of observor Not Stated\n6. Address of observor R. #2, Weiser, Idaho\n7. Place of observation Weiser, Idaho toward the west\n8. Number of objects 1 at first later 1 more\n9. Distance of object from observor Not stated\n10. Time in sight few seconds\n11. Altitude Not stated\n12. Speed Not stated\n13. Direction of flight South easterly course\n14. Tactics shooting up and down\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Not stated to far away to determine\n17. Color Glistening in the sun\n18. Shape Not stated to far away to determine\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Tiny object which emitted vapor\n21. Exhaust trails Vapor looked like clouds, kept shape and seemed to glide across the sky to the east.\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance only a glisten and vapor could no longer be seen\n26. Remarks: (over) RESTRICTED dup"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nOn the evening of June 12 about 6:15, a neighbor and I returning home from another neighbors, glanced into the sky toward the West, and saw what we thought was smoke from an airplane. She mentioned that she had never seen that before, so we stopped to look and listen, thinking we would see the plane. But there was no sound, so we kept looking until we saw a tiny object from which the vapor was emitting. It was so far away we could not determine the size or even the shape. Its only identity was a glisten in the sun. We had watched this one for a few seconds, when from the general direction of the sun, another object shot into the sky. It followed the general direction of the first, shooting up and down before settling to a south-easterly course across the sky, where we followed them until they were only a glisten and the vapor could no longer be seen. After the objects were gone, we continued to look and to watch the vapor that had been left which now looked like clouds but kept a shape, and this shape seemed to glide across the sky to the East where there was a black streak leading to the horizon. The vapor stayed in the sky for over an hour.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 4 July 1947 Incident # 25\n2. Time 11:45 p.m.\n3. Location East over West Trenton, New Jersey\n4. Name of observer Miss Marion Marshall\n5. Occupation of observor Not stated\n6. Address of observor WINJ Western Electric, Trenton, New Jersey\n7. Place of observation Southbound platform of the West Trenton station of the Reading railroad\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor Not Stated\n10. Time in sight Not Stated\n11. Altitude High\n12. Speed Fast\n13. Direction of flight East over West Trenton\n14. Tactics Not stated\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size Not stated\n17. Color Luminous\n18. Shape Flying saucer - no tail or halo\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Bright Moonlight\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: Over RESTRICTED dup"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I wish to report having seen a \"flying saucer\" on July 4, 1947, traveling east over West Trenton at 11:45 p.m. It was \"flying\" high and fast, was self-luminous with no tail or halo. The moonlight was bright at the time and I was standing on the southbound platform of the West Trenton station of the Reading railroad.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 10 July 1947 Incident # 26\n2. Time Between 3:00 and 5:00 PM in the afternoon\n3. Location Pan American Airways, Harmon Field, Newfoundland\n4. Name of observer Robert W. Leidy\n5. Occupation of observor Station Mechanic\n6. Address of observor APO 864, c/o Postmaster, New York, New York\n7. Place of observation Traveling in a car, returning from fishing.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor Not Stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude Not stated\n12. Speed Terrific rate of speed in a circle because of the arcs in the path.\n13. Direction of flight Not stated\n14. Tactics Definite trail and caused clouds to break open as it went through. It looked to be traveling in a circle and left sharp edges to cloud\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size Not stated\n17. Color No difference in color looked as if object broke the cloud and left this opening.\n18. Shape Trail horizontal\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction object or flying discs\n21. Exhaust trails bluish streak\n22. Weather conditions Clear with clouds\n23. Effect on clouds Cut a path through the cloud & you could see the trail right through the clouds, and it left sharp edges on the clouds.\n24. Skotches or photographs Kodachrome film\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: (over) CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Woodruff saw the object or flying disc first and said he saw the thing travelling through the sky. We did not believe him at first but when he was so concerned about it we stopped the car and got out. I had my camera so took a picture of it. There was a bluish streak left in the sky which could not have been a cloud formation. It was a definite trail and caused the clouds to break open as it went through. It cut a clear path through the cloud and you could see the trail right through the cloud, it looked to be travelling in a big circle and it left sharp edges to the clouds. The trail looked as if an object passed through similar to that of a pebble leaving a ring in the pond. There was no difference in color. It looked as if the object broke and cloud and left this opening."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 24 June 1947 Incident # 28\n2. Time Not stated\n3. Location Idaho\n4. Name of observer Lt Governer Donald S. Whitehead\n5. Occupation of observer Lt. Governor\n6. Address of observer Not stated\n7. Place of observation Idaho western sky\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude Not stated\n12. Speed [REDACTED] Remained immobile\n13. Direction of flight Didn't move just seemed to go below the horizon with the rotation of the earth\n14. Tactics [REDACTED] hovering\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size not stated\n17. Color not stated\n18. Shape comet-like\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction not stated\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds comet-like hanging in the western sky\n24. Sketches or photographs Not stated\n25. Manner of disappearance seemed to go below the horizon with the rotation of the earth.\n26. Remarks: [REDACTED] (Over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lt Gov Whitehead said that he saw a \"comet-like object hanging in the western sky June 24.\" He stated that the object \"didn't move but just seemed to go below the horizon with the rotation of the earth.\"\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 14 June 1947 Incident #29\n2. Time 1200 noon first time later at 1415 approximately\n3. Location [REDACTED] Portland, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Richard Rankin\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot\n6. Address of observer 1808 South \"M\" St., Bakersfield, California\n7. Place of observation Ground Front yard\n8. Number of objects 10 first time 7 second time\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude 8500 feet\n12. Speed 350 miles per hour\n13. Direction of flight First group South to North. Second group North to South\n14. Tactics Flying in \"V\" formation with one object straggling in the rear\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size Resembled the XF5U-1\n17. Color Not stated\n18. Shape resembled the XF5U-1, the so called \"Flying Flapjack\"\n19. Odor detected Not Stated\n20. Apparent construction flying machines\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Clear and Sunny\n23. Effect on clouds Not Stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not Stated\n26. Remarks: (Over)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approximately 1200 noon on the 14 of June I was lying in the front yard of my home. There was a lad mowing the lawn at the time. I looked into the sky and saw ten articles flying from the South to the North at what I would judge to be 8500 ft. The objects were flying at approximately what I would judge to be 350 miles per hour. I distinctly remember that at the time I saw the articles I mentioned it to the lad who was mowing the lawn at the time. I told the lad that the objects were in all probability some sort of Army or Navy test planes from the nearby test centers on the deserts of Sourthern California. The objects resembled the pictures that I have seen of the XF5U-1, the so called \"Flying Flapjack\" that the Navy is testing. At approximately 1415 I went back into the yard to sit and lie in the shade. At this time the objects reappeared going from North to South, although this time there were only seven of the articles. When I first saw the original ten objects they were flying in a \"v\" formation with one object seemingly straggling in the rear of the formation. When the objects appeared the second time they were still in the \"V\" formation although there was only seven of the objects at this time. I remember at this time that I told the lad, who was still working on the lawn, that probably three of the objects had proceeded back to their base on a different course. I actually thought that this was the case, that the other three objects had probably gone back to their base on the other side of the mountains from Bakersfield. I am firmly convinced that the articles I saw are actually some sort of flying machines although I cannot say from where they came or to where they were going.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 January 1948 Incident # 30\n2. Time 1925 EST\n3. Location Lockbourne Army Air Base, Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Charles E. McGee, Capt. USAF\n5. Occupation of observer Asst. Operations Officer (Pilot)\n6. Address of observer Airdrome Operations, Lockbourne AAB, Columbus, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Runway 23 Overhead approach\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer first 4-5 miles Southwest of Base second time 6-7 miles West and moved westerly in a hovering manner\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude 3000 ft approximately\n12. Speed slow\n13. Direction of flight West\n14. Tactics Flashed on and off, on westward flight appeared to be fading and descending\n15. Sound No noise\n16. Size Large size of a flood light\n17. Color white later yellowish to orange\n18. Shape Oval as if looking at spot light\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction like a spot light\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated bluish streaks like a jet effect out from right (according to Mr. Boudreaux on \"squawk\" box.\n22. Weather conditions Sky solid overcast\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance descending and burning out\n26. Remarks: (Over) RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Very bright white light southwest of the field. The light did not cast a beam and seemed the size of a flood light. From the ground the light appeared to move westward. It was further west and lower than I saw it in the air, also the light was similar to that of a lantern light in it that it was glimmering. The light varied yellowish to orange and appeared to be descending and burning out. The latter observation may be that in its westward movement it appeared to be fading out and descending however the light was not nearly as bright on the second observation. At first it was very white and did not appear to be moving though when it flashed on and off it appeared as in a x fash descent. With the naked eye I could at no time make out any shape other than the light being oval shaped as though looking at a large spot light. It was not a heavenly body of any type in that the sky was solid overcast in the Lockbourne area and the object's movement outweighs such a thought. I heard no noise in connection with the object. I estimated at the first observation that it was 4-5 miles southwest of the base. At the second appearance it was 6-7 miles West and moved Westerly in a hovering manner but moving away.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 January 1948\nIncident # 30b\n2. Time Between 1915 and 1930 EST Later 1935 to 1940\n3. Location Lockbourne AAB, Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mr. Boudreaux\n5. Occupation of observer Tower Operator\n6. Address of observer Lockbourne AAB, Columbus, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Tower, Lockbourne AAB, Columbus, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight about 15 minutes\n11. Altitude Not stated\n12. Speed Not stated\n13. Direction of flight Southwest\n14. Tactics Bobbed up and down\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Enormous\n17. Color white to amber as it moved southwest it changed from amber to red\n18. Shape Glowing object with a cone-shaped streak to the right\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails Bluish streaks like a jet effect out from the right\n22. Weather conditions Sky overcast\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance went out\n26. Remarks: (over) RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Saw what he thought was a star but then he noticed the sky was overcast so it couldn't have been a star. It was a glowing object with a cone-shaped streak to the right. It glowed from white to amber. He says he first noticed it over the Lockbourne Power Plant; just southwest of here. The object was moving southwest and it changed from amber to red and then disappeared. Mr. Boudreaux, said the light was what he had been watching about 15 minutes or so and that through the field glasses it appeared to have bluish steaks like a jet effect out from the right. He stated that it went out while Capt. McGee was in the pattern. During the conversation he said it could be seen again (1935-1940).\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 January 1948 Incident # 30c\n2. Time Around 1940\n3. Location Lockbourne AAB, Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mr. Eisele\n5. Occupation of observer DF Operator, Lockbourne Control Tower\n6. Address of observer Lockbourne AAB, Columbus, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Ground, Lockbourne AAB\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer An estimated 5 miles - altho rpts f/Godman Fld, Clinton Cy Airport & relayed rpt f/Columbus, O, indicated much greater distance\n10. Time in sight Around 15 minutes\n11. Altitude 5,000 ft\n12. Speed 500 MPH - as indicated by rpts f/Godman Fld & Clinton Cy airport\n13. Direction of flight Appeared to hover but performed eliptical, counter-clock wise course when it descended to horizon (4\") remained stationary (3\") returning original position (3\")\n14. Tactics See 13\n15. Sound No sound\n16. Size About size of runway light when viewed from 500 ft - apparently enormous - see 9 above\n17. Color Red to amber-yellow\n18. Shape Circular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Thin wisp of trail five times diameter of object\n22. Weather conditions high overcast\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - was under overcast\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Faded and lowered into horizon\n26. Remarks: (over) RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object first seen 15° above horizon in the West-Southwest of Lockbourne emitting a ruddy red light which changed to an amber-yellow at intervals not exceeding 1 to 2 seconds. Its size and magnitude were greater than that of any star - a good comparison of the size and magnitude would be a runway light at full intensity viewed from a distance of 500 ft. Shape - circular with the exception of a thin wisp of tail extending towards the horizon, the tail being 5 times the diameter of the object in length. For approximately 10 minutes it remained motionless, thereupon it descended to the horizon in about 4\", hovered on the horizon in 3\", then ascended to its original position in about 3\", the course being eliptical, counter clockwise. It then faded and lowered toward the horizon disappearing at 1955. No sound was heard from the object at any time.\n\nNote: Object appeared about 5 miles from Lockbourne, however info received f/Godman Fld and Clinton County Tower plus a relayed report from a pilot over Columbus, O., indicated that they all had observed a similar phenomenon in the same general direction and position at the same time.\n\nRELIABILITY: Witness spent 37 mos in AF in communications work including C. W. and Control Tower Operation. Holds valid CAA Certificate for Control Tower Operator and Aircraft Communications and has worked at Lockbourne in this type of work for over 1-1/2 yrs. Enthusiast of astronomy.\n\nCORROBORATED ACCOUNT: See also Incidents 30, 30a and 30b."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 31\n\n1. Date Mid-December 1946\n2. Time Early morning\n3. Location Northern Arizona, Route 66\n4. Name of observer K. D. Wood\n5. Occupation of observer Professor and Head Aeronautical Engineering\n6. Address of observer University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado\n7. Place of observation In flight on a trip through the southwest\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude 20,000 feet to 50,000 feet\n12. Speed 600 mph, ± 200\n13. Direction of flight First vertical then West to East overhead\n14. Tactics No maneuvers\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Not stated\n17. Color White - Did not see object\n18. Shape Not stated - did not see object\n19. Odor detected Not Stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated - did not see object\n21. Exhaust trails White, heavy\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: Saw only vapor trail, like rocket or jet exhaust. Not like usual jet airplane trail."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lt C.W.Thomas and Lt Sims were making a regular cross country flight and reported in to Columbus Airways who asked them if they saw any unusual object in the sky. This report was relayed to Lockbourne - See Eisele's report - incident 30c."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 32\n\n1. Date 7 January 1948\n2. Time 1953\n3. Location Columbus\n4. Name of observer Lt. C. W. Thomas\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot\n6. Address of observer Flight AF 9944 Dayton to Washington\n7. Place of observation Cross Country flight from Dayton to Wash. at Columbus Airways to the West\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer About 15 miles\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude 3000 feet\n12. Speed Seemed stationery\n13. Direction of flight Stationery\n14. Tactics No maneuvers\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size large\n17. Color amber\n18. Shape like a large star or planet\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Dark and overcast\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: Large bright light off to the west. They estimated it below them, or about 3000 ft. It seemed stationery. The light was amber and looked like a large star or planet. It was about 15 miles away from them. (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 33\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 48\n2. Time Between 1345 and 1350\n3. Location Godman Fld, Fort Knox, Ky\n4. Name of observer T/Sgt Quinton A. Blackwell\n5. Occupation of observer Chf Operator in Control Tower at Godman Fld, Ky.\n6. Address of observer USAF, Airways & Air Communications Svc, ATC Detachment 733-5 AF Base Unit (103D AACS Sq) Godman Fld., Ft Knox, Ky.\n7. Place of observation Tower, Godman Fld.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Over 15,000 ft\n12. Speed In excess of P-51\n13. Direction of flight South\n14. Tactics N/S continued climbing\n15. Sound Not Stated\n16. Size Tremendous\n17. Color Silvery or metallic\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - seemed metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approximately 1320 Sgt Cook from the CO's office notified the observer (T/Sgt Quinton A Blackwell) that according to Ft Knox Military Police & \"B\" Town State Police, a large circular object about 250 to 300 ft in diameter was over Mansville, Ky. Advised him to check with Army Flight Svc. They advised negative but shortly thereafter reported object over Irvington, Ky, then Owensboro, Ky. Object first sighted by Blackwell about 1345 to 1350 over south Godman Fld.\n\nVerification: 1st Lt Orner (Detachment Commander)\nCapt Carter (Operations Officer)\nCol Hix (CO) sighted it about 1420\n\nAt approximately 1430 to 1440, four P-51's approached Godman f/south enroute f/Marietta, Ga. to Standiford Fld, Ky. Lt Blackwell asked Flight Leader NG 869 to attempt to identify object. Accompanied by two other planes he proceeded south f/Godman. Fourth plane proceeded to Standiford Fld alone.\n\nAbout 1445, flight leader (NG 869) reported sighting object \"ahead and above - still climbing\" At 15,000 ft he reported \"Object directly ahead and above and moving about half my speed.\" Again \"it appears metallic of tremendous size.\" Still later \"I'm still climbing - object is above and ahead moving about my speed or faster - I'm trying to close in for better look\". This was about 1515. Five minutes later the other two ships turned back. NG 800 reported \"it appeared like the reflection of sunlight on an airplane canopy\" Shortly afterward this same pilot (NG 800) resumed search going to 33,000 ft, 100 miles south but did not sight anything."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 Jan 45 Incident # 33 a\n2. Time Shortly after 1400 CST\n3. Location Godman Fld., Ft Knox, Ky.\n4. Name of observer Lt Paul I. Orner\n5. Occupation of observer Detachment Commander\n6. Address of observer Godman Fld., Ft Knox, Ky.\n7. Place of observation Control Tower\n8. Number of objects 1 See Note attached.\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed half speed of P-51\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics Appeared stationary\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color white\n18. Shape like parachute - round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Seemed to be some red light around the lower part of it.\n22. Weather conditions High - scattered but clear\n23. Effect on clouds None\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Unknown object first reported by Military Police at Ft Knox, approx 1400 CST, vicinity of Mansville. Later over Irvington & Owensboro, Ky. Sighted, Godman, by Blackwell, Chf Control Tower. Lt Orner then left office of CO, proceeding to Control Tower where he sighted a small white object in the southwest sky. It appeared stationary. Could not determine of object radiated or reflected light. Thru binocs it appeared partially as parachute with bright sun reflecting from top of the silk, however, there seemed to be some red light around the lower part of it. Three P-51s alerted to pursue object. Took a course of around 210°. Approx 5\" later object sighted. NG 861 (flight leader) reported it\"high and traveling about 1/2 his speed at '12 o'clock'\" Later he stated he was \"closing in to take a good look\" This was his last message. NG800 then reported NG 869 had disappeared. At the time of his disappearance he was reported high and ahead of wing man at approx 15,000 to 20,000 ft and wing man at approx 15,000 ft. Wing man (NG800) returned for fuel and resumed pursuit going to altitude of 33,000 ft but did not sight object. At about 1645 Lt Orner left tower.\n\nLater, Lt Ormer, returned to Control Tower (about 1735 CST) and perceived bright light at a position of about 240° azimuth and 5° elevation. It was a round object and did not resemble a star. Although there was a hazy haze the object remained visible and did not disappear until it went below the level of the earth in a manner similar to the sun or moon setting. This object was viewed and tracked with the Weather Station theodolite from the hangar roof.\n\nRELIABILITY: Verified by Commanding Officer, Operations Officer, S-2 and Executive Officer. However, these officers were apparently present when second sighting took place."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 Jan 45 Incident # 33B\n2. Time Approx 1320 CST\n3. Location Godman Fld., Ft Knox, Ky.\n4. Name of observer PFC Stanley Oliver\n5. Occupation of observer N/S - duty in control tower\n6. Address of observer Godman Fld., Ft Knox, Ky.\n7. Place of observation Control Tower, Godman Fld., Ft Knox, Ky.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Over 15,000 ft\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Southwest\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Object appeared like \"ice-cream cone topped with red\" - apparently white with red above cone\n18. Shape cone\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Cloud formations\n23. Effect on clouds Went behind clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PFC Stanley Oliver was on duty at the Control Tower at Godman Fld when Col Hix's office informed the tower that an unidentified object (supposedly some 250 ft to 300 ft in diameter) was sighted over Mansville, Ky. This was approx at 1330 CST. At PFC Oliver saw the object southwest of Godman Fld To him it resembled an ice cream cone topped with red. Could not ascertain if it were moving or not.\n\nRELIABILITY: Witnesses: Col, Hix, (CO), Capt Carter, Lt Orner & M/Sgt Blackwell\n\nNOTE: The report of alerting the P-51 aircraft contained in PFC Oliver's statement and the witnesses corroborates material contained in the other reports."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 48\n2. Time 1420 CST\n3. Location Control Tower, Godman Fld\n4. Name of observer Capt J. F. Duesler, Jr.\n5. Occupation of observer Capt, USAF\n6. Address of observer Godman Fld, Ky\n7. Place of observation Godman Fld Control Tower\n8. Number of objects 1 at 1420\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight From 1420 to 1600 CST - Over an hour and a half\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed 360 MPH - according to statement of Mantell\n13. Direction of flight Apparently from 234° to 259° South to West\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Believed large\n17. Color Silver - bright\n18. Shape like tear drop - round; later, object seemed fluid\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails No tail -\n22. Weather conditions N/S - Scattered but clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Obscured by clouds\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nAt approx 1420 7 Jan 48, Duesler accompanied by Lt Col E. G. Wood went to Godman Control Tower to observe an unidentified aerial object. Shortly after their arrival Col Hix, the Commanding Officer was summoned. At about this time Duesler first sighted a bright silver object. Then Col Hix arrived. Shortly thereafter a flight of four P-51's flew over Godman. Leader was contacted to pursue object. He assented and three P-51's climbed on the course, the fourth P-51 returning to base. Flight leader called to observe that \"object was twelve o'clock high.\" Asked to describe it, he stated \"it is bright and climbing away from me.\" He stated at first that it was going about 180 MPH. Then Control Tower lost sight of the flight but could still see the object. (In connection with this, Lt Col E. Garrison Wood who witnessed the sighting stated that while it appeared about 1/10 the size of a full moon, if the thing were a great distance away, as compared to the diminishing size of the P-51's flying toward it, it would seem that it was at least several hundred feet in diameter.) Shortly after NG 861, the flight leader, stated that he was \"at 15,000 ft and still climbing\" He stated that he judged the speed to be the same as his or approx 360 MPH. One of his planes then asked him to level off but no reply was heard from the flight leader. That was the last message received from any member of the flight.\n\nAfter dark, another or the same object appeared in approx 234° from Godman at 6° elevation. This body moved to the west (259°) and then down. The shape was fluid but generally round with no tail, the color changing from white, to blue, to red to yellow and had a black spot in the center at all times.\n\nAt 1600 CST it was obscured by clouds.\n\nNOTE: Later, an astronomer was contacted who attempted to account for this phenomena as either Venus or a comet. (?)\n\nSEE ALSO: Report of civilians and state police and corroborated version on this incident.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 48\n2. Time After 1407\n3. Location Godman Fld\n4. Name of observer Capt Cary W. Carter\n5. Occupation of observer Operations Officer\n6. Address of observer Godman Fld., Ky\n7. Place of observation Control Tower\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 3 to 4 minutes\n11. Altitude Very high\n12. Speed Approx 360 MPH - f/Flight Leader's reports\n13. Direction of flight 210° f/Godman Fld\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Could not be determined\n17. Color white\n18. Shape Round - at times cone shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails [REDACTED] N/S\n22. Weather conditions High scattered - [REDACTED]\n23. Effect on clouds Could be seen thru cirrus\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nAt approx 1407, 7 Jan 48, Capt Carter was called by Lt Orner, AACS Detachment Commander, to come to Tower to witness an unidentified aerial object.\n\nObject appeared round and white (whiter than the clouds that passed in front of it) and could be seen thru cirus clouds.\n\nAfter observing it thru field glasses for some 3 - 4 minutes, he called Col Hix's office. Col Hix, Lt Col Wood & Capt Duesler came to the tower shortly thereafter.\n\nCapt Carter then suggested that a group of P-51 aircraft in the vicinity be contacted to pursue the object. T/Sgt Blackwell, Tower Operator, contacted the flight leader to take a look. Three planes proceeded on a heading of approx 230°. One of the planes (Mantell's) spotted it at 1200 o'clock position. Another plane relayed \"This ks 15,000 ft, let's level out\" First speed as relayed by Mantell (180 MPH) Later, \"object going up and forward as fast as I am\" - or 360 MPH. Mantell then stated he was going to 20,000 ft and if no closer would abandon chase. Last radio contact heard by Capt Carter.\n\nNOTE: Apparently, Mantell blacked out at 20,000 ft or proceeded on since the object apparently appeared closer(if such were the case)and then crashed thru lack of oxygen.\n\nDoes not seem to tally with report that the phenomena was \"Venus or a comet\"\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 48\n2. Time 1445\n3. Location Godman Fld. Ky\n4. Name of observer Col Guy G. Hix\n5. Occupation of observer Commanding Officer, Godman Fld\n6. Address of observer Godman Fld. Ky.\n7. Place of observation Control Tower, Godman Fld\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 5 minutes\n11. Altitude 25,000 +\n12. Speed 180 MPH\n13. Direction of flight 215° South to the west\n14. Tactics Remained stationery for approx 1-1/2 hours\n15. Sound None\n16. Size 1/4 size full moon\n17. Color white\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Seemed at times to have a red border at the top and at the bottom\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds None\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Behind a cloud\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approx 1300 hrs State Police reported flying object near Elizabethtown. Ten minutes later sighted near Madisonville. A third call reported it over Lexington. (all south of Godman) Tower them alerted. Tower sighted object at 1445 and notified Col Hix who went immediately to tower where he observed the object thru 8-power binocs. Object also lined up with sighting bar. Three P-51 planes were already pursuing the thing on a course of 215°. (One pilot reported the thing to be traveling at 180 MPH) Col Hix reported the object appeared to the south and near the sun. \"It was very white and looked like an umbrella,\" he stated. \"I thought it was a celestial body but I can't account for the fact it didn't move.\" \"I just don't know what it was.\" Appeared about 1/4 size of full moon and white in color. Thru the binocs it appeared to have a red border at the bottom at times and a red border at the top at times. It remained stationary (seemingly) for 1-1/2 hours.\n\nRELIABILITY: CO of Godman Fld. Obj chased by National Guard planes and followed from the ground by State Highway patrolman. See corroborating accounts."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 January 1948\n2. Time 1515 xxxx 1445\n3. Location Godman Field, Ky.\n4. Name of observer Flight Leader NG 869 (Capt. Thomas F. Mantell\n5. Occupation of observor Flight Leader\n6. Address of observor\n7. Place of observation Over Godman Field, Ky.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated Apparently over 1 hour and a half\n11. Altitude above 15000 20,000 ft\n12. Speed Approximately 500 mph\n13. Direction of flight approximately 210° from Godman Field\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size Tremendous\n17. Color Metallic\n18. Shape Not stated\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction metallic\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: This information taken from a report describing a radio conversation between Flt. leader NG 869 who investigated the object at the request of Godman Field Tower. The Flt. Leader Capt. Thomas F. Mantell crashed and was killed after his last radio contact with Godman Field at 1515 hrs (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Info taken from reports of radio conversation between Control at Godman and Ng 869 essentially as follows:\n\nCol Hix's account. NG 869: \"Object traveling at 180 MPH - half my speed\"\n\nLt Orner's account. NG 869: \"high and traveling about 1/2 my speed at 12 o'clock position.\"\n\nLater: \"Closing in to take a good look\"\n\nNo further word heard by Orner\n\nT/Sgt Quinton A. Blackwell: NG 869: At 1445. \"Object traveling at 180 MPH Directly ahead of & above me now and moving at about 1/2 my speed.\"\n\nLater: \"I'm trying to close in for better look\"\n\nAt 15,000 ft: \"Object directly ahead of and above me now and moving about 1/2 my speed. It appears metallic of tremendous size. I'm trying to close in for better look\"\n\nNo other word heard by Blackwell from NG 869.\n\nCapt Cary W. Carter: NG 869: \"Object going up and forward as fast as he was\" - approx 360 MPH.\n\n\"going to 20,000 ft and if no closer will abandon chase\"\n\nNo further contact heard by Capt Carter - *Apparently last word ever received from NG 869."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 Jan 48\n2. Time 1310\n3. Location Madisonville, Ky.\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Madisonville\n7. Place of observation Madisonville, Ky\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S 4 miles\n12. Speed 10 MPH\n13. Direction of flight SW\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 100 ft from top to bottom and 43 ft across\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape cone shape\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Someone from Madisonville advised Military P they had observed thru a Finch telescope an object described as c (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"estimated size: 100 ft from top to bottom, 43 ft across and 4 miles high proceeding SW at 10 MPH.\n\nNOTE: Kentucky State Police were informed by unknown individual(s) that an unusual aircraft or object was flying thru the air, circular in appearance, with an approximate size of 250-300 ft which was moving westward \"at a pretty good clip\". This was relayed to Godman Fld.\n\nNOTE: See also report by James Hudson, Inc. 48b\n\nNOTE: Course of object on 7 July 48 is reported roughly as follows:\n\n0720C Edwardsville, Illinois: Object of aluminum appearance without apparent wings or control surfaces which moved southwest remaining visible for about 30 minutes\n\n1300: Elizabethtown: No description\n\n1310: Lexington, Ky. Madisonville, Ky. - as reported in this.\n\n1400: Maysville: No description\n\nAfter 1400: Irvine: No description\n\nAfter 1400: Owensboro: No description\n\n1630C - 1645C: Nashville, Tenn: A Dr. Seyfert, Astronomer at Vanderbilt Univ. spotted an object SSE of Nashville, Tenn. between 1630C with basket attached which moved first SSE then West at a speed of 10 MPH at approx 25,000 ft.\n\n1735: Godman Fld Control Tower: See Orner's account (33a) See Duesler account (33c)\n\nEST 1925: Lockbourne AB, Columbus, Ohio: See Incident 30, 30a, 30 b & 30c"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 12 Nov 47 Incident # 35\n2. Time Early\n3. Location 40 miles south of Cape Blanco, Oregon, 20 miles offshore.\n4. Name of observor Second Officer Claude Lee Williamson\n5. Occupation of observor Second Officer\n6. Address of observor N/S (Excerpt from \"Oregon Journal\" 13 Nov 47)\n7. Placo of observation At sea, 20 miles offshore, 40 miles south of Cape Blanco, Oregon\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 45 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed 700 to 900 MPH\n13. Direction of flight from north horizon in westerly direction\n14. Tactics Performed a long, low arc\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction fire\n21. Exhaust trails jet-like streams of fire\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED\n80"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nTwo flying discs trailing jet-like streams of fire were sighted from the bridge of the tanker Ticonderoga, early Wednesday, Second Officer Claude Lee Williamson radio-telephoned the United Press. The discs moved at tremendous speed out of the north horizon and curved in a westerly direction in a long low arc. Thought they were moving between 700 to 900 MPH. Didn't think they were meteors because they generally do not travel in pairs and usually fall to the horizon. Thought they were \"flying discs\"\n\nAlso observed by: Ordinary Seaman James S. Lynde who claimed he also saw \"discs\"\n\nRESTRICTED\n81"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date Unknown Incident # 36\n2. Time After dark\n3. Location Boise, Idaho\n4. Name of observer CAA Observer\n5. Occupation of observer Not stated\n6. Address of observer Not stated\n7. Place of observation between Boise and Mountain Home\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Not stated\n10. Time in sight Not stated\n11. Altitude Not stated\n12. Speed Not stated\n13. Direction of flight southwest and disappeared in northeast\n14. Tactics [REDACTED] N/S\n15. Sound Not stated\n16. Size Not stated\n17. Color Bluish green\n18. Shape Not stated\n19. Odor detected Not stated\n20. Apparent construction Not stated\n21. Exhaust trails Not stated\n22. Weather conditions Not stated\n23. Effect on clouds Not stated\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Not stated\n26. Remarks: Mr. Dave Johnson of the \"Statesman Newspaper\" in Boise reported that a CAA official had seen an object that was giving off a pulsating bluish-green light that appeared in the southwest and disappeared in the northeast over the mountains between Boise and Mountain Home.\n82"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nMr. Clark's attention was first drawn to the object by his partner, Mr. Anderson. It appeared to be a black object which was traveling at an estimated [REDACTED] height of 8/10,000 ft above the ground and was moving in a straight line from northwest to southeast. It was traveling some 350 MPH. It did not change elevation nor direction. From their range of vision where they were standing upwards to the object would be at about a 25° angle. It remained within their vision from 45 seconds to a minute. No sound was audible. Mr. Clark thought the nearest thing it resembled was a \"flying wing.\" However, both men stated positively that there was no tail visible. From where they were the object appeared about 3 feet in diameter [REDACTED] but could offer no estimate as to its size were it on the ground. As to color both stated that the object appeared red against a blue background and black against a white cloud. Ground wind was about 15 miles in velocity and was blowing in a northeasterly direction which would tend to carry any sound away from them.\n\nBoth men are pilots. Mr. Clark was a pilot in the U. S. A. F. for a period of 5 years, flying fighter type of [REDACTED] planes during most of this period. Mr. Anderson was a gunner in the AAF for 2 years and is also a pilot. Both appeared level headed and not excitable, and were very sincere in making the report.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n84"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 9 July 47 Incident # 39\n2. Time Between 11:15 and 11:40\n3. Location Grand Falls, Newfoundland\n4. Name of observer Eric Kearsey\n5. Occupation of observer Constable\n6. Address of observor Newfoundland Constabulary, Grand Falls\n7. Place of observation Grand Falls,\n8. Number of objects 5. 4 seen at first 1, later\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight brief period\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight First four - flying in easterly direction Last object: N/S\n14. Tactics Maintained formation - flew side by side, last one: N/S Flew in a rocking motion\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size about size of barrel head\n17. Color N/S - seemed phosphorescent\n18. Shape round - about size\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S However, there appeared to be a phosphorescent glow about it\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Four \"flying saucers\" were seen by Constable Kearsey's wife just before his arrival home at approx 11:30, on 9th of July. A Mr. John Jackman, a resident of St. John's and a friend of the family also witnessed them. They were flying in an easterly direction, and appeared to be four round figures that had passed overhead at terrific speed, flying side by side.\n\nOn looking skyward, Constable Kearsey, himself, perceived a huge jelly-fish flash across the sky. Could not determine the height and speed owing to the brief period it was visible. Could not determine color but there seemed to be a phosphorescent glow about it. It was found in shape and about the size of a barrel head, and appeared to be flying in a rocking motion.\n\nNote: The last object was seen by Constable Kearsey, his wife and Mr. Jackson.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 July 1947 Incident # 40\n2. Time 1600\n3. Location Phoenix, Arizona\n4. Name of observer William Albert Rhodes\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor 4333 N. 14th St., Phoenix, Arizona\n7. Place of observation 37° 27' N 112° 3' W\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 2,000 ft to 5,000 ft\n12. Speed 400-600 MPH\n13. Direction of flight NE to West\n14. Tactics Spiraled down from 5000' to 2000 ft and then ascended at 45° angle\n15. Sound Noise like jet on approach - no sound heard while in view\n16. Size 20-30 ft\n17. Color grey\n18. Shape elliptical\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Cumulus clouds\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Photos (2)\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (Over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object appeared elliptical in shape and had a diameter of 20-30 feet. When first seen it was at about 5,000 ft and traveling from 400 to 600 MPH. Its grey color rendered it difficult to perceive at a distance as it blended with the clouds. Although a jet-like noise was heard prior to the object's appearance no audible sound was produced while it remained in view. The tail of the object had two points on the outside area, visible as it made its two left-to-right circles which had an approximate radius of 1/4 to 1/2 miles. The object had what appeared to be a cockpit canopy in the center which extended toward the back and beneath the object. The \"cockpit\" did not protrude from the surface but was clearly visible with the naked eye. The object did not revolve on its own axis. It had no discernible landing gears nor propellers. It appeared to have an excellent air foil (tapered from wing tip to wing tip). Mr. Rhodes thought that the 10-15 MPH wind velocity which caused a rustling of tree leaves might have made it impossible for him to hear any noise connected with the object. He also stated that he thought the object was the Navy's new \"Flapjack Plane\" but altered his opinion since the object seemed to have no landing gears and no propellers. (The Navy ship is illustrated as having both). Rhodes managed to take one photograph of the object at its lowest point (about 2000 ft) and another as it turned out of its second spiral and started upward.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 29 June 1947 4:45\n2. Time 1645 - 1915 P. M.\n3. Location 7 miles out of Clarion Iowa in direction of Mason City, Iowa\n4. Name of observer Dale Bays\n5. Occupation of observer Had been bus driver\n6. Address of observor Box 12, Crocker, Mo.\n7. Place of observation 7 miles out of Clarion - 42° 43' N - 93° 44' W\n8. Number of objects 5 in first group; 13 in second\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight several minutes\n11. Altitude 1200 ft\n12. Speed 300 MPH\n13. Direction of flight South by Southeast and North Northwest\n14. Tactics Objserved single file\n15. Sound sound like that of an electric motor or dynamo\n16. Size From 175 to 250 ft in diameter by 12 feet in thickness\n17. Color \"dirty\" white\n18. Shape between a circle and an oval - inverted saucer\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs N/S\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"About 7 miles out of Clarion, Iowa, observer saw an object shoot across\nthe sky in front of the bus he was driving. It was followed by four more.\nthe height appeared about 1200 feet. Observed stepped out of the bus\nwhich was facing east and noticed some dots in the sky approaching from the\nopposite direction. They were flying about the same altitude at a speed of\nabout 300 MPH. These 13 objects flew in a single file. Roughly, the objects\nwere between a circle and an oval in shape. In appearance they looked like\nan inverted saucer flying thru the air. The thickest part seemed to be about\n12 feet. The diameter could have been anywhere from 175 to 250 feet. They were\ndirty white in color. The second group disappeared into the NNW sky in a\nmatter of a few minutes. They made a noise as they passed overhead similar to\nan electric motor or dynamo."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 28 June 47 Incident # 44\n2. Time 3:43 P. M.\n3. Location 16 miles NW of Milwaukee\n4. Name of observer N/S - brother to Marion Beuscher who reported incident\n5. Occupation of observor \"farmer\"\n6. Address of observor Rockfield, Wisconsin\n7. Place of observation 16 miles NW of Milwaukee 43° 05' N 88° 22' W\n8. Number of objects seven to ten\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed \"like blue blazes\"\n13. Direction of flight south\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape \"saucer\"\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness saw the flying saucers (about seven to ten of them) which flew directly over their home. Said they went like \"blue blazes\" and didn't make any noise and were headed south.\n\nWitness did not report this info. It was reported by Marion Beuscher, a sister. Her address is Menomonee Falls, Wisc.\n\nReported in Amazing Stories, Page 170"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 28 June 47 Incident # 45\n2. Time afternoon\n3. Location Illinois\n4. Name of observer N/S - Taken f/\"The Latest News\" at 8 to 8:15 A. M. w/Charles Sebastin\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Illinois\n8. Number of objects 7 to 10\n9. Distance of object from observer\n10. Time in sight\n11. Altitude\n12. Speed\n13. Direction of flight\n14. Tactics\n15. Sound\n16. Size\n17. Color\n18. Shape\n19. Odor detected\n20. Apparent construction\n21. Exhaust trails\n22. Weather conditions\n23. Effect on clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs\n25. Manner of disappearance\n26. Remarks: This info broadcast 29 June 47 at 8:00 A. M. over WGN \"The Latest News\". Charles Sebastin, announcer.\n(over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The radio announcer stated that the discs had been sighted over Illinois the preceding afternoon (28 June 47).\n\nThe announcement of this program was taken from a letter published in \"Amazing Stories\" dated Jan 47."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 48 Incident # 48\n2. Time between 7:20 and 7:55 P. M.\n3. Location Wilminton, Ohio\n4. Name of observer s Gale F. Walter, Col James Hudson M/Sgt Irvin H. Lewis, S/Sgt John P. Haag, Sgt Harold E. Olvis & T/Sgt\n5. Occupation of observer Control Tower operators Leroy Ziegler and 4 members of the alert crew\n6. Address of observer Clinton County Air Base\n7. Place of observation Clinton County AF Base Control Tower\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 35 minutes\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed terrific bursts of speed\n13. Direction of flight SW\n14. Tactics hung suspended in the air at intervals and then gained and lost altitude at seemingly terrific bursts of speed\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color red\n18. Shape cone\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction \"fire\"\n21. Exhaust trails gaseous green mist\n22. Weather conditions Heavy layer of clouds\n23. Effect on clouds intense brightness of sky phenomena pierced thru a heavy layer of clouds passing intermittently over the area\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared over horizon\n26. Remarks: (Over)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nA sky phenomena which had the appearance of a flaming red cone trailing a gaseous green mist appeared in the southwest skies of Wilmington, Ohio, between 7:20 and 7:55 P. M. Jan 7, 48.\n\nThe sky phenomena hung suspended in the air at intervals and then gained and lost altitude at what appeared to be terrific bursts of speed. The intense brightness of the phenomena pierced thru a heavy layer of clouds passing intermittently over the area and obscured other celestial phenomena.\n\nNOTE: See account of an unamed comet due in the northern hemisphere approx Jan 1. attached.\n\nSee incidents 48a, 48b, 48c, 48d & 33, 33a, 33b, 33c, 33d, 33e 33f and 30 and 32."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 48 Incident # 48a\n2. Time 1925 o'clock\n3. Location Clinton County Air Field\n4. Name of observer LeRoy Ziegler\n5. Occupation of observer T/Sgt\n6. Address of observer Clinton County AF, Wilmington, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Clinton County AF Base\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Thirty-five minutes\n11. Altitude high\n12. Speed stationary for a while and then made rapid ascents and descents and then to SW with great speed\n13. Direction of flight to SW\n14. Tactics Vertical ascents and descents at great speed\n15. Sound None\n16. Size very large\n17. Color Same as star\n18. Shape circular - starlike - only larger\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails faint exhaust trail when moving up and down or from side to side\n22. Weather conditions Cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds Object could be seen thru clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance over the horizon at about 20:00\n26. Remarks: (Over)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nObject appeared to be moving up and down and from side to side. At one time the object was covered by a cloud but the light could be seen thru the cloud. It was the same color as a star only very much brighter sometimes changing to a more reddish hue then turning white or yellow. At first it did not appear to be traveling at any speed. Then it seemed to go up and down and sometimes change off and go from side to side at what seemed to be a very great speed. It seemed pretty high in the air - too high to be any kind of a light from the ground. There was no beam. No sound could be heard. A faint exhaust trail was discernible when it moved up or down or from side to side. Finally it began to move away toward the SW at very great speed and disappeared over the horizon at about 20:00.\n\nSee: 48, 48b, 48c, 48d & 33, 33a, 33b, 33c, 33d, 33e, 33f & 30 and 32."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 48 Incident # 48b\n2. Time 1920 EST\n3. Location Clinton County Army Air Field, Wilmington, Ohio\n4. Name of observer James H. Hudson,\n5. Occupation of observer Corporal, on duty in Control Tower\n6. Address of observer Clinton County AAF.\n7. Place of observation Control Tower, Clinton County AAF\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer some 15 to 20 miles\n10. Time in sight 35 minutes\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Hovered then moved with great speed\n13. Direction of flight South West\n14. Tactics Changed shape on ascent and descent - When it climbed it was right side up - (point up) When descending the point turned down\n15. Sound none\n16. Size larger than star\n17. Color White changing to red to green\n18. Shape Triangle\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction surrounded with burning gas or something that emanated light\n21. Exhaust trails When ascending & descending it appeared to trail a green mist\n22. Weather conditions light scattered clouds with a haze toward the SW\n23. Effect on clouds Could be seen thru the cloud which passed under it.\n24. Sketches or photographs 4 penciled sketches\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared on SW heading at great speed\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The object when first sighted appeared white then it turned red. Its\nreal shape could not be distinguished until it descended. It then took\nthe form of a cone or up-side-down triangle. (See Sketch \"A\")\n\nSketch \"A\"\n\nWhen it climbed it was right side up (Sketch \"B\") ---------> \n\nOn ascending and descending it appeared to have a green mist following it\nSee Sketch \"C\" -- -- green mist\nred\n\nSpeed could not be determined in miles per hour for it appeared to hover at\nspots, then, when it moved, it moved with great speed. After making a\nvertical descent and ascent it headed due SW at great speed and disappeared\nat approx 1955 EST. Distance from the field when first sighted was some\n5 to 15 to 20 miles. There was no sound. The trail, maybe from exhaust,\nwas green (at least thru the field glasses it appeared green) During the\ntime it was under observation a cloud passed under it and the light shown thru.\n\nAccording to this observer the object was not a balloon, a comet, star or\nany known aircraft. The light did not come from an aircraft's running lights.\nThe whole object appeared surrounded with burning gas or something which\nemitted a light.\n\nSee also: 4g, 4ga, 4gc, 4gd & 33, 33a, 33b, 33c, 33d, 33e, 33f and\nIncidents 30 and 32."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness observed very bright light in the sky southwest of Clinton County\nAF Base which appeared to be the complete wing of an aircraft on fire.\nWhen viewed thru field glasses from the Control Tower the object would gain\nand lose altitude very rapidly [REDACTED] with barely any discernible\nforward or backward motion. At times it changed colors (from red to green, etc)\nAt one time it disappeared behind the overcast but its light penetrated thru\nthe overcast. At approximately 19:45 o'clock it began to move away from the\nfield on a heading of 210° and disappeared over the horizon at approximately\n19:55. (1st acct)\n\nNOTE: See also 4g, 4ga, 4gb, 4gd & 33, 33a, 33b, 33c, 33d, 33e, 33f and\n30 and 32.\n\nAt the time of the sighting the weather was clear over the Base, with a\nSouthWest wind which was moderate. There was an overcast in the SE which\nappeared to be a layer approximately 1000 feet thick. The height of this\novercast was approximately 5,000 ft. Object seemed to be about 5 miles\nfrom the field at an altitude of from 15,000 to 20,000 ft. The object\nwhich appeared stationary at first resembled the complete wing of an airplane\non fire. No beam of light was projected. After observing it with the\nnaked eye for some five minutes, witness went to control tower and looked thru\nfield glasses and then decided that it was not a comet or a falling star\nto his knowledge of astronomy. With the aid of the glasses the object\nappeared to go from an altitude of15,000 to 10,000 feet without any noticable\nforward or backward motion, and then back up to its original altitude very\nrapidly. This occurred some 3 or 4 times. When it moved a red light would\ndominate and change to a green light and then back to its original color.\nIt then started to recede on a heading of 210° going behind the overcast.\nHowever, the light was discernible thru the overcast. It then moved very\nrapidly away, stopping momentarily for 3 or 4 minute intervals and then\ndisappearing over the horizon at 19:55. No sound was heard. No photographs\nwere taken (From a signed statement second account)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jan 48 Incident # 48d\n2. Time 1920 to 1950\n3. Location Clinton County Army Air Fld., Wilmington, O.\n4. Name of observer Mr. Ralph L. Stirr\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Clinton County AAB\n7. Place of observation Clinton County AAB\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Seemed to be at first some 4,000 ft high\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 4,000 ft+\n12. Speed movement slow in appearance\n13. Direction of flight approx due west\n14. Tactics described arc from point first seen to horizon\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color fire-colored\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction \"fire\"\n21. Exhaust trails none -\"left no trails or tails like a meteor or comet\"\n22. Weather conditions clear to scattered\n23. Effect on clouds Light could be seen when clouds passed beneath it.\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance due west over horizon\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object seemed to be some sort of flare. Witness thought it was some\naircraft in trouble. Requested the tower to take a look at it to\ndetermine if it were a flare. It appeared, with the naked eye, to be\na very bright light the color of ordinary fire which lost and regained\naltitude in the manner of a parachute flare riding on thermals. The\nintensity of the light varied. This was attributed to clouds passing\nbelow; however, the light was readily discernible thru the\nclouds. The sky was clear to scattered. When the object was compared\nto the stars there was a decided difference. Stars were of the usual\nwhite; this object was yellow or flame color. When first seen it appeared\nto be about 4,000 ft but disappearing over the horizon would make it much\nhigher. The movement was very slow in appearance and it left no trails\nor tails like a meteor or comet. Place of disappearance was approximately\ndue west from position of observer.\n\nNOTE: See also 4g, 4ga, 4gb, 4gc, 4gd &\n33, 33a, 33b, 33c, 33d, 33e, 33f\n& 30 and 32"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 9 Jan 48 Incident # 49\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location around Danville, Ky.\n4. Name of observer Mr & Mrs. Markam\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S - picked up in WHIO news broadcast relayed from Danville, Ky.\n7. Place of observation Danville, Ky.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight West\n14. Tactics none\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape pencil-shape\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails long trail of smoke or exhaust\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance / trail exploded into a beautiful display of sparks, etc\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"According to a WHIO News Broadcast at 2300-2315, 9 Jan 48, relayed from Danville, Kentucky, a Mr. & Mrs. Markham were driving in their car in or about Danville, Kentucky, when they saw a pencil-like object flying very high which left a long trail of smoke or exhaust. The trail shortly afterwards turned into a beautiful fireworks display of sparks, etc. The object appeared to be traveling a straight course.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 10 Jan 48 (see reverse side of sheet) Incident # 50\n2. Time 10 PM EST\n3. Location Wildwood, N. J. (39° 00' N & 78° 48' W)\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Ethel Evans\n5. Occupation of observer authority on knitting\n6. Address of observer Bellvue Apts, Wildwood, N. J.\n7. Place of observation 401 Pine Ave, Wildwood (home of Mrs. Krueger)\n8. Number of objects 1 which split into 2 pieces\n9. Distance of object from observer undetermined\n10. Time in sight 5-8 seconds\n11. Altitude varying - slow descent\n12. Speed slow\n13. Direction of flight shoreward (270°)\n14. Tactics broke into two pieces\n15. Sound None\n16. Size lamplight\n17. Color yellow, red or amber-colored\n18. Shape ovular - tear drop\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails none\n22. Weather conditions Clear night\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Skotches or photographs Forwarded a picture of Mars published in \"Life\" which showed an orange-red ball\n25. Manner of disappearance fell into sea\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness saw one object which split into two separate pieces and fell into the ocean. (See Mrs Krueger's account)\nFeb 19, 1948, 1225 A. M. : Witness stated that she saw saucer. Tried to take picture but says object was moving too fast.\nFeb 21, 1948 (Sat Night) : Reported seeing another \"saucer\"\nMar 11, 1948 10:50 P. M. : Saw mystery light drop and fall in the water (Thursday night)\nApr 2, 4:40 P. M. : Object resembles a small pilot-less plane - very bright metal - no motor noise and looks like the pictures of the German pilot-less planes. The center was ball shaped and very bright metal. It followed the coast line until out of sight. It came from the south and was heading north.\nApr 2d; 5:10 P. M. : (same date) Object appeared to fall in water. The metal wings were small and evidently broke as it fell since it appeared like sheets of metal dropping at the side. Witness states she saw this clearly.\nApr 2 and 3: \"new guided missile of bright metal seen since 2 Apr.\"\nJuly 1st, 1948 \"There is activity in Wildwood again - the saucers have been appearing since 1 July.\" Mrs. Evans inclosed picture shown in \"Life\" of the planet \"Mars\" which shows an orange-red ovular circle.\nIn letter to President Truman she writes: \"there have been more 'flying saucers' which appear on very clear nights - when there is a moon. They appear to come from the SE and from the ocean. Over the island they appear unsteady - like the one that broke. Then over the land they ascend quite high and move towards the NW, disappearing at not too fast a speed.\"\nNOTE: Individual appears to be \"crackpot\" No one (with the exception of Mrs. Krueger) appears to have seen the many sightings mentioned. This in spite of an alerted coast guard, police dept. and others.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 10 Jan 48 Incident # 50a\n2. Time 10 PM EST\n3. Location Wildwood, N. J.\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Krueger\n5. Occupation of observer housewife\n6. Address of observer 401 Pine Ave., Wildwood, New Jersey\n7. Place of observation from 401 Pine Ave (39° 00' N & 78° 48' W)\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer 500 ft\n10. Time in sight 5-8 seconds\n11. Altitude varying\n12. Speed slow descent\n13. Direction of flight down\n14. Tactics Floated slowly across horizon, separated and disappeared below housetops\n15. Sound none\n16. Size N/S - that of lamplight\n17. Color orange-colored\n18. Shape discs or balls\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear night\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance fell into sea\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Objects were brought to Mrs. Krueger's attention by Mrs. Evans. Mrs Krueger saw \"a most unusual thing drop out of the sky. I think it was a flying saucer as I have never seen anything equal to it before\" She then states that she saw what appeared to be 2 round orange colored discs or balls, the one being smaller, and that these objects appeared to descend vertically toward the earth in a slow and steady manner until disappearing from their sight. Mrs. Evans said that Mrs Krueger observed two objects (apparently related) but that they were originally one object which separated at about the time Mrs. Krueger sighted it.\n\nAll witnesses+ (Mrs. Evans, her son and Mrs Krueger) agree on the following:\n\nColor and size - that of an old-fashioned gas light which had a yellow, red or amber shade. Outline was distinct and did not appear aflame or irregular. No noise or sound of kind. No smoke or exhaust trails seen. Shape oval to round. All stated that it was not to their knowledge a balloon, dirigible, flare, paracmute or any other known object and all seemed to have a pretty good knowledge as to the appearance of the fore-going.\n\nNOTE: Witness appeared calm and normally sensible in her responses to various questions."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 3 Sept 47 Incident # 51\n2. Time 1215\n3. Location Oswego, Oregon\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Raymond Dupui\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor N/S\n7. Place of observation Oswego, Oregon\n8. Number of objects 12 to 15\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude high\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: 12 to 15 round silver objects seen at high altitude above Oswego, Oregon at 1215, 3 Sept 47 while witness was observing a local plane flying overhead."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 29 July 47 Incident # 52\n2. Time 1450\n3. Location Hamilton Fld., Calif\n4. Name of observer Capt William H. Ryherd\n5. Occupation of observor Capt, USAF, - Assistant Operations Officer\n6. Address of observor Hamilton Fld\n7. Place of observation Hamilton, Fld., Calif. 38° 03' N 122° 31' W\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observor observed from ground\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 8,000 - 10,000 ft\n12. Speed very fast - made P-80 look as if it were motionless\n13. Direction of flight Southward toward Oakland\n14. Tactics 1st object pursued horizontal flight; 2d object seemed to be going from left to right and right to left like guard in aircraft formation\n15. Sound No sound heard\n16. Size 15-25 ft in diameter\n17. Color white shiny\n18. Shape circular like a ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Disappeared in flight\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Capt Ryherd saw two unidentified aerial objects at approximately 8,000 to 10,000 ft traveling above a P-80. He thought they were approximately 15 to 25 feet in diameter. In shape they were circular like a ball on the bottom but not completely round. The first flew straight and level but the second flying close behind the first at the same altitude seemed to be going from left to right and right to left - more like a guard in an aircraft formation. Due to the noise of the P-80, no sound could be heard from them. They did not leave any vapor smoke or visible trail. The weather was clear and Captain Ryher and Lt Ward Stewart watched them until they disappeared in flight presumably over Oakland headed toward the ocean.\n\nNOTE: Capt Ryherd showed extreme sincerity throughout the interview"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 29 July 47 Incident # 52A\n2. Time After 1200\n3. Location Hamilton Fld., California\n4. Name of observer Ward L. Stewart\n5. Occupation of observor 1st Lt., Air Res. (Former B-29 pilot)\n6. Address of observor Hearst Mining Bldg., Univ. ov Calif.\n7. Place of observation 38° 03' N 122° 31' W\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight 15 seconds\n11. Altitude 6,000 ft\n12. Speed Approx 750 MPH\n13. Direction of flight 120°\n14. Tactics Similar to fighter a/c when accompanying heavier ships\n15. Sound none\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color milk white\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance flew out of sight\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Stewart's attention called to unidentified flying object by Capt Ryherd\nStewart estimates the P-80 at 250 miles on preliminary approach for\nlanding at Hamilton Fld. Object was estimated to be following P-80 at\nthree or four times its speed. A moment later another object appeared and\nflew a course described as something similar to a fighter's maneuvers when\naccompanying a heavier ship, on a left to right movement, over the object\nfirst sighted. The object continued this maneuvering until out of sight.\nSize could not be estimated but not believed to be above 6,000 ft altitude.\nDescribed as milky-white in color, and unlike any conventional aircraft seen."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 53\n1. Date 28 June 47\n2. Time 1515 CST\n3. Location 30 miles northwest of Lake Meade, Nevada\n4. Name of observer 1st Lt Eric B. Armstrong\n5. Occupation of observer Ferry Division, Brooks Fld., San Antonio, Texas\n6. Address of observer Brooks Fld., San Antonio, Texas, 170th AF Base Unit\n7. Place of observation 30 miles northwest of Lake Meade from air\n8. Number of objects 5 or 6\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 6,000 ft\n12. Speed 285 MPH\n13. Direction of flight 120° (NW)\n14. Tactics horizontal very close formation\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 36\" in diameter\n17. Color white\n18. Shape circular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On 28 June 47 [REDACTED] in a P-51 bound for Portland, Oregon, by way of\nMedford, Oregon, at approx 1515 CST (course of 300°) and ground speed of\n285 MPH, altitude 10,000 ft, approximately 30 miles NW of Lake Meade, Nevada,\nLt Armstrong sighted 5 or 6 white, circular objects at 4:00, [REDACTED] altitude\napproximately 6,000 ft, on a course of 120° and flying at an estimated speed\nof 285 MPH. The objects were flying very smoothly and in a close formation.\nThe estimated size of the white objects was approximately 36\" in diameter.\nLt Armstrong was sure the white objects were not birds since the rate of\nclosure was very fast. He was certain too that the white objects were not\njets or conventional aircraft since he has flown both.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES:\n\nLt Armstrong was very sincere in the explanation and was not the exagerating\ntype. He merely stated what he saw and drew no conclusions."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witnesses were walking when they observed a peculiar reddish light.\nThey thought at first that the light was a shooting star but it left\nno streak. It appeared again and they thought it was a plane flying at\nvery bright high altitude. Then a number of intermittant flashes were observed\nfor three minutes. After observing the abrupt darts of light and hearing\nno hum of motors they concluded that it was definitely not a plane,\nas the maneuvers appeared too abrupt."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 55\n1. Date 23 July 47\n2. Time 0345Z (0715 local)\n3. Location Harmon Fld., Stephenville, Newfoundland\n4. Name of observer Miss Patricia Abbott & Lt Hammaker\n5. Occupation of observer government employee and Navigator & Public Relations Officer\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Harmon Fld., Newfoundland 48° 30' N 58° 33' W\n8. Number of objects 1 Undetermined\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Three minutes\n11. Altitude 10,000 ft.\n12. Speed high velocity - stated to be faster than conventional A/C\n13. Direction of flight NNE\n14. Tactics abrupt darts\n15. Sound no noise\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color reddish flashes of light\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions high scattered clouds - visibility 15 miles\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 6 July 47 Incident # 56\n2. Time 2045 hours\n3. Location Birmingham, Alabama\n4. Name of observer Staff Sergeant Ira L. Livingston\n5. Occupation of observor S/Sgt. w/250 hours as Pilot and Armorer Gunner\n6. Address of observor 1354 Meadow Lane, Green Acres, Birmingham, Ala.\n7. Place of observation As above 33° 33'N 86° 52' W\n8. Number of objects 7 to 10\n9. Distance of object from observor Undetermined\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 2000 ft above horizon at 45° angle\n12. Speed 500 to 600 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Southeast\n14. Tactics vertical ascent - traveled in arc\n15. Sound none\n16. Size 2 ft in diameter\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs xx one photograph\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nAt 2045 hours, 6 July 47, Staff Sergeant Livingston's attention was called by a neighbor (a Mr. Herman M. Sockwell) to witness some \"flying discs\" The objects appeared in the west of Birmingham and were traveling southeast. They appeared to be 2000 above the horizon at a 45° angle at an unestimated distance away. They were approximately 2 ft in diameter, and round. They produced a dim glow of light and were traveling at an estimated speed of 500 to 600 MPH. The object (or objects) appeared to be traveling in a definite arc rather than straight, and as soon as one was out of sight, another would appear behind it but not always in the same path. One seemed to come straight up. The view of its source was obstructed by a nearby house but upon reaching the altitude of approximately 2000 ft it started off in the same direction as the others. Sergeant Livingston says that he did not at any time see more than one object at a time, and tho it could have been one object it was his personal opinion that there were seven to ten objects. The discs were silent and appeared composed of a single light.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 20 July 1947 Incident # 57\n2. Time 0015Z\n3. Location About one hour from Sidney, Newfoundland.\n4. Name of observer Mxx Messrs Maitland, Larkin, Douglas and Hamilton\n5. Occupation of observor All employees of Hamilton, Metcalfe and Kansas City Bridge Company which concern is doing construction work at Harmon Fld\n6. Address of observor With above-named concern\n7. Place of observation on board the \"Burgeo\" enroute from Sydney Nova Scotia to Port aux Basques, Newfoundland.\n8. Number of objects N/A - saw flashes - 4 or 5 approximately 1 second apart and equidistant.\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S 30° off horizon at an estimated 1/4 mile range\n12. Speed high velocity - faster than tracer bullet\n13. Direction of flight NNE (30° East of true North)\n14. Tactics horizontal flight\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S - object not seen - flashes were silvery to red in color\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S - possibly what was observed was itself the rocket charge\n22. Weather conditions Clear and dark\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nObservers did not see the object but only four or five flashes approximately one second apart and equidistant. The flashes appeared silvery to reddish in color and were likened to the glow of a firefly excepting they were larger and at equal intervals. The witnesses did not believe the flashes were occasioned by either a shooting star or a plane, because of the evenly-spaced discharges or flashes, the color and the speed.\nCorroboration: Capt Gullage, Master of the \"Burgeo\" also saw the flashes while standing on the starboard deck. He stated that he had seen the same thing at approximately the same time and location on the evening of 15 July 47 except at that time the object or flashes were traveling faster and frequently changed courses (\"it changed course abruptly several times\") and was headed generally to the SSW.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 4 Aug 47 Incident # 58\n2. Time evening\n3. Location NW of Bethel Alaska\n4. Name of observer Capt Jack Peck and Co-pilot Vince Daly\n5. Occupation of observor Pilot and Co-pilot - Al Jones Flying Svc.\n6. Address of observor N/S\n7. Place of observation 60° 57' N 161° 48' W\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor 1200 ft\n10. Time in sight 4 minutes\n11. Altitude 500 to 1,000 ft\n12. Speed 520 MPH - 3 times that of C-54\n13. Direction of flight NW\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size As large or larger than C-54\n17. Color black in color\n18. Shape saucer - like that of C-54 (from rear) but without motors or flying wings.\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions brilliant evening sky\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance flew rapidly out of sight\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Capt Jack Peck and his Copilot Vince Daly stated that on 4 Aug at sunset they sighted and followed a\"flying saucer\" northwest of Bethel, Alaska. The object which appeared as large or larger in mass than a C-54 and black in color appeared silhouetted against a brilliant evening sky. In order to avoid a possible collision (being unable at first to determine in what direction the object was moving) they pulled up to about 1200 ft in order to avoid possible collision. The object crossed their path at right angles to them. Seeing that it was moving away from them at a very rapid rate and flying at an altitude of from 500 to 1,000 ft they swung in behind it and followed it at an air speed of 170 MPH but the thing was out of sight in four minutes. They state the object was smooth-surfaced and streamlined and resembled a C-54 without motors (from the rear) and was without wings or any visible means of propulsion whatever. Wind was negligible and it was on a NW course.\n\nOfficial in Charge of the Airlines for which Peck was working states that the pilot is not the \"imaginative type\"."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 12 Sept 47\nIncident # 59\n2. Time 45 minutes after sunset\n3. Location Midway Island to Oahu - beyond Necker Island\n4. Name of observer Capt Stanley S. Griffin & 2d Officer Edward B. Polhemus\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot and 2d officer, PAA\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Beyond Necker Island (23° 34' N 164° 42' W)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 1 mile\n10. Time in sight. Six seconds\n11. Altitude 9,500 to 10,000 ft\n12. Speed 1160 MPH (1000 knots)\n13. Direction of flight 350° then 109°\n14. Tactics Abruptly changed course but observed horizontal flight holding altitude\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S (See below - exhaust)\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S - light the color of an incandescent light without appreciable blue & no reddish tinge\n22. Weather conditions dark - 45 minutes after sunset\n23. Effect on clouds No effect on clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Appeared to burn out 30 miles ahead of PA plane\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Plane had just passed Necker Island at 0535 GCT. At 0558 GCT an intense white light was observed 60° off starboard bow of plane. It appeared similar to the light of an approaching plane except that it was extremely intense. The color was that of an incandescent light without appreciable blue and no reddish tinge. It appeared on a course about 350° true some 5 miles away. The light grew in intensity (but without any change in color) to a point estimated to be one mile off starboard bow of the plane. When the PA plane switched over to manual control the object suddenly veered to an approximate course of 109° and then the bright light appeared to split into two parts and assumed a reddish hue. These two reddish lights did not have the intensity of the white light and appeared about a wing-length apart. As it changed its course the extraordinary speed was noted. It far outraced the Pan American plane and the twin lights appeared to burn out 30 miles ahead. The entire phenomenon was observed for some six seconds. Object was estimated to be traveling 1,000 knots per hour.\n\nNOTE: Both observers thought it could have been a meteor except for the manner in which it held altitude. At no time did it appear to get above or below 9,500 ft. When it disappeared it still seemed at about 9,500 ft. at no time did it give off sufficient illumination to reflect on the cloud formation at 8,000 ft.\n\nBoth observers were questioned as to possibility of optical illusion and the probability that the object dropped at an oblique angle but both firmly declared the object apparently changed course and that it appeared to hold altitude throughout the entire time observed.\n\nPAA plane was eastbound from Midway on magnetic course 98, which is approximately 110° true, and flying at 9,000 feet at about 205 knots. It was flying on automatic pilot with Griffin in the right-hand seat in the control cabin and Polhemus in the left-hand seat. It was dark and there were cumulus clouds of about .4 density. The sun had set 45 minutes previously."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 10 July 47\nIncident # 60a\n2. Time 1000\n3. Location Cordroy, Newfoundland - 47° 52' N 59° 21' W\n4. Name of observer Wm Evans\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Cordroy, Newfoundland\n7. Place of observation Cordroy, Newfoundland\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed very fast\n13. Direction of flight couldn't ascertain\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size dinner plate\n17. Color between red and yellow\n18. Shape circle\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Had tail on it of yellowish hue which was not as bright as circle and seemed a little over a yard long.\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance \"hardly in sight before it disappeared\"\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness stated that if the object were a shooting star it was larger than any he had ever seen and much brighter than anything he had ever observed in the sky. It appeared round with a yellowish tail which was not as bright as the circle. The circle itself appeared to be sort of red and yellow and about the size of a large dinner plate. It went so fast that it was hardly in sight before it disappeared. It was traveling much closer than a shooting star. Witness sure it did not in any way resemble a shooting star nor a plane.\n\nSee Legge account (Incident 60) and Albert Samms' account (Incident 60b)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 10 July 47 Incident # 60b\n2. Time 1000\n3. Location Cordroy, Newfoundland - 47° 52' N 59° 21' W\n4. Name of observer Albert Samms\n5. Occupation of observor N/S - child of 12\n6. Address of observer Cordroy, Newfoundland\n7. Place of observation N/S Cordroy, Newfoundland\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight \"only a minute\"\n11. Altitude N/S - flying at height of plane which is flying high\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S - \"shot down very fast\" - See Mrs Samms' account as told by her son Albert\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color bright reddish yellow\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S - witnesses affirm it was \"clear\" and at dusk\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nAlbert Samms is a twelve-year old boy. He was alone when he saw the object. He thought it was flying at the height of a plane at high altitude but that it looked strange for an airplane because it was lit up so brightly-it was not carrying lights (\"planes do have a light or two\") It was of a bright reddish yellow color. Witness saw it only momentarily because of the tremendous speed. \"I saw it only for a minute because it was traveling at a terrific speed.\"\n\nHis mother, Mrs. Samms, is the Post Mistress of the town and after hearing her son's description felt that it answered the description of the \"flying disc\". She added that Albert didn't believe the thing was a plane since \"it wouldn't shoot down like that did\" and \"besides it was too 'lit up'\".\n\nSee Legge account (Incident 60) and Evans' account (Incident 60a)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8 Sept 47 Incident # 61\n2. Time 2230 P. M.\n3. Location Logan, Utah\n4. Name of observer Mr and Mrs. Richard Anderson\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor Logan, Utah\n7. Place of observation Logan, Utah 40° 45' N 111° 54' W\n8. Number of objects Approx a dozen\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N one to 2 minutes\n11. Altitude 2,000 to 3,000 ft\n12. Speed \"faster than birds\"\n13. Direction of flight north\n14. Tactics circle city in approx one to two minutes observing group formation.\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size about the size of pigeons\n17. Color white and illuminated\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance in flight to the north\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nMr. & Mrs. Anderson stated that they in company with a Mr. & Mrs. Gaylon Caldwell saw approximately 12 objects flying in group formation at about 2,000 or 3,000 ft in the air. In size they resembled pigeons but seemed to be white and illuminated. They were certain they were not birds as they appeared to be moving faster than birds and they circled the city in approximately one to two minutes. Saw no wing movement during the flight. They couldn't make up their minds as to exactly what they saw.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8 Sept 47 Incident # 61a\n2. Time Approx 10:30 P. M.\n3. Location Logan, Utah\n4. Name of observer Mr & Mrs. Norman Hall\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor N/S Logan, Utah\n7. Place of observation Logan, Utah 40° 45' N 111° 54' W\n8. Number of objects N/S\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S Much faster than birds\n13. Direction of flight clockwise above city\n14. Tactics changed formation\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size approx that of star\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Saw a group of flying objects similar in appearance to a group of moving stars which traveled clockwise above the city.\n(over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At first the objects were thought to be the lights of a plane. However they seemed to change in formation. Thought that objects traveled much faster than birds."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 63\n1. Date 12:05 P. M.\n2. Time 29 July 47\n3. Location 1/4 mile NW of Canyon Ferry while proceeding NW along road leading from Canyon Ferry to York - some 25 miles NE of Helena\n4. Name of observers R. J. Madden et al\n5. Occupation of observor Division Plant Engr, The Pac. Tel & Tel Co.\n6. Address of observor The Pac. Tel & Tel Co.\n7. Place of observation 25 NE of Helena, Montana\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor 2 to 3 miles\n10. Time in sight 5 seconds +\n11. Altitude 3,000 ft\n12. Speed tremendous\n13. Direction of flight NE\n14. Tactics Hovering - rising and descending thru vertical distance of some 50-100 ft - then swooping to the NE at tremendous speed\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 3 ft in dia X 3 or 4 inches in thickness - as seen from observers viewpoint. - Apparently huge\n17. Color like polished nickel\n18. Shape circular\n19. Odor dotected N/S\n20. Apparent construction like polished nickel\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions blue sky with scattered small clouds. Bright sunshine causing disc to gleam and shimmer.\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance \"melted into thin air\"\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Obwervers saw bright disc hovering and fluttering in the air. It descended and rose thru a vertical distance of 50 to 100 ft for some 5 seconds and while at the top of an ascent it suddenly swooped to the NE at tremendous speed, traveled some 200 ft and disappeared into the clear air - appeared to \"melt into thin air\" as a result of the tremendous speed. Appeared to be approximately 3 ft in dia X 3 or 4 inches in thickness from observers' viewpoint - and estimated as considerably greater/as they were some 2 or 3 miles from the object.\n\nWitnesses: Steve Herrmann and Karl Herrmann."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 64\n1. Date [REDACTED] 19 Aug 47\n2. Time 9:30 P. M.\n3. Location Twin Falls, Idaho\n4. Name of observer Mr. H. H. Hedstrom, his wife, and a neighbor (Mrs Shultz) Detective Richard A. Frazier of the Twin Falls Police Dept. and members of the Twin Falls Police Dept.\n5. Occupation of observer Executive [REDACTED] of the Twin Falls, Housing Authority director\n6. Address of observor 322 3rd Ave., North, Twin Falls, Idaho\n7. Place of observation As above\n8. Number of objects undetermined - see below\n9. Distance of object from observer Could not be estimated\n10. Time in sight [REDACTED] few minutes at a time\n11. Altitude could not be determined\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight NE and came back toward the SW\n14. Tactics observed triangular formation\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Could not be estimated\n17. Color seen only as a glow going thru the air similar to that of regular electric lights -\n18. Shape Could not be estimated\n19. Odor dotected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None could be observed -\n22. Weather conditions overcast sky at night\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mrs Hedstrom saw the first object traveling at a terrific rate of speed in a northeasterly direction. It was out of sight before Mr. Hedstrom & their neighbor Mrs. Shultz could see anything. While discussing this sighting all 3 saw 10 similar objects proceed rapidly in the same direction in the form of a triangle. As they were disappearing 3 of the objects on the left flank peeled off and proceeded in a more northerly direction. The remaining objects appeared to close ranks and proceed on a NE course. Five minutes later they saw another group of 3 objects proceeding in the same direction in triangular formation. Three to 5 minutes another tirangular formation of five or six objects were observed going in the same direction. Then a few minutes later the three witnesses saw large group of objects (some 35 to 50 of them) flying in a triangular formation in the same direction. Approximately 20 or 25 minutes after this group of objects were observed similar objects were noted coming back over the city in a Southwesterly direction. Generally they were in groups of 3, 5 and 7 and followed each other at approximately 5-minute intervals.\n\nMrs. Hedstrom then called Detective Richard A. Frazier of the Twin Falls Polic Dept., a next door neighbor who was accompanied by M. E. Rountree and Richard Scott also members of the Twin Falls Police Dept. They observed a group of about 12 objects flying in formation over the city in a southwesterly direction.\n\nDetective Frazier and Mr. Hedstrom stated that the objects were not meteors or comets as they flew on a level line and did not appear to drop. [REDACTED] they could not have been birds [REDACTED] as the objects appeared lighted from the inside. Said the lights were not a reflection of the city lights\n\nNo other persons reported seeing the phenomena but Mr. Hedstrom and Mr. Frazier stated that it was purely accidental that they had seen the object. No one noticed any flames or anything except the glow of lights."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 10 Aug 47\nIncident # 66\n2. Time 9 o'clock - well after dark\n3. Location Near Silver Springs, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Lt Colonel,F. L. Walker Jr., GSC\n5. Occupation of observer Scientific Branch, Research Group\n6. Address of observer R&DD, WDGS\n7. Place of observation Near Silver Springs, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 3-4 seconds\n11. Altitude low flying\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight north to south\n14. Tactics [illegible] absolutely horizontal\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color bright orange glow or flame\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails long, straight, narrow white streak of flame (similar to streak left by tracer bullet) which vanished very quickly.\n22. Weather conditions N/S - well after dark\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance simply vanished in mid-air.\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nAbout 9 o'clock, well after dark, Lt Col F. L. Walker, Jr. GSC, of the Scientific Branch, Research Group, saw a low flying object appear over the top of a barn to his left traveling in an absolutely straight line in an arc of about 70° moving from north to south. The object appeared as a bright orange glow of flame and left behind it a long, straight, narrow white streak of flame similar to the streak left by a tracer bullet and itself, covering an arc of approximately 20° or 30°. There appeared to be a fine mist of smoke trailing behind this streak which vanished very quickly. The object took about 3 - 4 seconds to cover the arc of 70° and then simply vanished in mid air. The path traveled was absolutely horizontal.\n\nWitness states he never observed a comet which acted in this manner and was of the opinion that he had sighted a \"flying saucer\".\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 14 Aug 47\nIncident # 67\n2. Time 1600 hours\n3. Location 5 miles southwest of Placerville, Calif.\n4. Name of observer Mr Ray A. Switzer and wife\n5. Occupation of observer Switzer is an Insurance Executive with the firm of McGuire & Wallis and a graduate of the Univ of Calif.\n6. Address of observer Box 43, Auburn, Eldorado County, Calif.\n7. Place of observation Between 4 and 5 miles southwest from Placerville on Cedar Ravine Road. 38° 42' 45\" N. Lat x 120° 47' 15\" W. Long.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Estimated distance seemed about 750 ft\n10. Time in sight short period\n11. Altitude 500 to 1,000 ft\n12. Speed high rate of speed\n13. Direction of flight north to south\n14. Tactics in a very shallow dive\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Seemed to be about 5 feet long by some 12 to 14 inches in depth\n17. Color polished chromium\n18. Shape Seemed rectangular except for a short period when it appeared to have a slightly curved top surface. Seemed tilted in semi-circle. More rocket-shaped than disc-shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S - a white smoke trail was first observed - later object was enveloped in puff of dark gray smoke\n22. Weather conditions fair with sunshine\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared in puff of dark gray smoke\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL RESTRICTED\nObserver first noticed a white smoke trail and while searching for its source he saw an object 4 to 6 ft in length x 10 to 14 inches wide and of a metal color which gave off a very bright reflection like highly polished chromium. It was first observed at 1030 position to the automobile. Upon reaching a 1200 position it was engulfed in a puff of dark gray smoke about 10 ft in diameter. There was no change in the color of the smoke. The object was traveling at terrific speed and seemed to be in a very shallow dive. When the puff of smoke appeared the object disappeared completely; no particles were observed falling from it. The point of disappearance seemed to be about 800 yards in front of Switzer. There was no possibility of being hidden by vegetation or terrain. It appeared rectangular for the most part but once it appeared to have a very slightly curved top surface. It seemed more rocket-like than disc-like, and seemed tilted in a semi-circle.\n\nNOTE: Agent notes that the point of observation would afford a sweeping view thru 40° of the canyon and the south side of Webber Creek. (Switzer was not definite as to what part of the field of view he had seen the object and mix indicated that it could have been as far as the horizon.) Any object or particles thereof would be in a six square mile area of wooded mountainous terrain full of canyons and ravines.\n\nAgent thought that witness could have seen a conventional type aircraft which due to the distance from which it was observed presented no distinguishing features for the short period it was under observation. However, agent could not account for the smoke trail.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 24 June 47\nIncident # 68\n2. Time afternoon\n3. Location Cascade Mts. (Portland, Oregon)\n4. Name of observer Fred M. Johnson\n5. Occupation of observer Prospector\n6. Address of observer Globe Hotel, 106 N. W. 1st Ave, Portland,\n7. Place of observation Cascade Mts\n8. Number of objects 5 or 6\n9. Distance of object from observer overhead at 1,000 ft\n10. Time in sight 45 - 60 seconds\n11. Altitude 6,000 ft from sea level\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight SE\n14. Tactics banking\n15. Sound none\n16. Size about 30' dia\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape round with tail\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"While prospecting in the Cascade Mts some 5,000 ft above sea level\nhe noticed a reflection. Upon looking up he saw a disc preceeding\nin a southeasterly direction. Upon sighting it he placed his telescope\nto his eye and observed it for some 45 to 60 seconds. At the time\nthe disc was sighted it was banking in the sun. He observed 5 or 6\nbut concentrated on one. Said they did not fly in any particular formation\nand he estimated them to be about 1,000 ft from where he was standing.\nHe estimated that they were around 30 feet in diameter and that they had a\ntail. They made no noise. He noticed that the combination compass and\nwatch in his possession reacted in a very peculiar manner, the hand\nwaving from one side to the other but that this condition corrected itself\nimmediately after the discs had passed out of sight.\n\nNOTE: Informant appeared to be very reliable and advised that he\nhad been a prospector in the States of Montana, Washington and Oregon\nfor the past 40 yrs."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 69\n1. Date 6 Aug 47\n2. Time 2230-2245\n3. Location Philadelphia, Pa.\n4. Name of observer Eleanor Naddle\n5. Occupation of observer employed by Geo A. Greenwald Mfg Co.\n6. Address of observer 2114 Hobart St., Philadelphia, Pa.\n7. Place of observation At observer's home\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Very fast\n13. Direction of flight South\n14. Tactics N/S - apparently straight flight\n15. Sound slight buzzing after passage of object\n16. Size large\n17. Color white\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Thin streak of grayish smoke\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Between 10:30 and 10:45 P. M. 6 Aug 47, Miss Naddle was seated on the\nsteps of her home with Cecelia Fine. She was facing north and observed\na large white object traveling at a very fast rate of speed to the south.\nThere was a buzzing sound, not too loud but plainly audible just after\nthe object passed thru the air. The object appeared white in color and\nleft a thin streak of smoke which was grayish in color."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 69a\n1. Date 6 Aug 47\n2. Time 2230-2245\n3. Location Philadelphia, Pa.\n4. Name of observer Miss Cecelia Fine\n5. Occupation of observer Employed by Pressman & Gutman Co., Inc.\n6. Address of observer 5617 Arlington St., Phila, Pa.\n7. Place of observation 2114 Hobart St., Phila, Pa.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound slight buzzing sound\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Miss Fine was sitting on the steps of Miss Naddle's home the evening of 6 Aug 47 around 10:45 P. M. engaged in conversation when (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"she observed that Miss Naddle appeared frightened. As she was facing south she did not see the object after she noticed her companion's change of expression but she did hear a slight buzzing sound."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 6 Aug 47 Incident # 70\n2. Time Around 2245\n3. Location Philadelphia, Pa\n4. Name of observer John Snyder\n5. Occupation of observer Insurance agent (former B-24 pilot)\n6. Address of observer 1440 Vankir St., Philadelphia, Pa.\n7. Place of observation above address\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 1,000 - 3000 ft\n12. Speed between 400-500 MPH\n13. Direction of flight from NE to SW\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound hissing\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Smoke or condensation - also emitted bluish white flame\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (Over)\nRESTRICTED 15-0"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nJohn Snyder, a former pilot of B-24 in the Army Air Corps advised that he was sitting on the steps of his home around 10:45 P. M. the night of Aug 6, 1947 and that his neighbors, the Kelly family, were also sitting on their steps. All parties were facing east. Snyder noticed an object which emitted a bluish-white flame pass quickly thru the air. It was traveling NE to SW. Using his experience in the Army Air Corps he estimated the speed as between 400 to 500 MPH. The object did not lose elevation and left either a smoke or condensation trail in its former path. The vapor lasted for about 2 seconds. A hissing sound accompanied the passing. The sound was moderate and not nearly as loud as that occasioned by a rocket ship.\nRESTRICTED 151"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 6 Aug 47 Incident # 70A\n2. Time Around 2245\n3. Location Philadelphia, Pa.\n4. Name of observer John J. Kelley\n5. Occupation of observer retired police officer\n6. Address of observer 1442 Vankirk St\n7. Place of observation above\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight gone in a split second\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Very rapid\n13. Direction of flight South\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound No noise\n16. Size large\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape \"like giant firecracker\"\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails \"fiery trail for about 100 ft\"\n22. Weather conditions clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED 152"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nAround 10:45 on the night of 6 Aug 47, Kelly and his wife were sitting on the steps of their home when Kelly noticed an object resembling (to him) a giant firecracker which passed quickly thru the air. He heard no noise and the object completely passed from view in a southerly direction within a split second. It left a fiery trail for about 100 feet. The object did not lose altitude so he was sure it was not falling star.\nNOTE: It is to be noted that the Snyders and the Kellys live in NE Phila, near Oxford Circle (about 10 miles removed from the residence of Miss Naddle - Inc 69) It is further noted that the observations of Miss Naddle, the Kellys and the Snyders roughly correspond. All seemed reliable and were not the types to seek publicity or to spread rumors.\nRESTRICTED 153"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 6 or 9 Oct 1947 Incident # 71\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Las Vegas, Nevada\n4. Name of observer Thomas L. Moore\n5. Occupation of observer N/S - Capt. USAFR - Ex pilot\n6. Address of observor N/S\n7. Place of observation Outskirts of Las Vegas\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 4 to 5 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed 700 to 800 MPH\n13. Direction of flight East & circled to west\n14. Tactics Flew straight, turned, flew straight again\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Trail almost white and of cumulus cloud density which lasted some 15-20 minutes\n22. Weather conditions almost cloudless\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs sketch of course of object\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED 154"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED On Oct 5th or 9th, 1947 while witness was driving on the NW outskirts of Las Vegas, Nevada, he observed what appeared to be a sky-writing pilot's trail. He stopped his car to observe it and noticed two things which troubled him. (1) Where the missile should have been at the head of the steadily appearing trail there was nothing visible or was too small to see (estimated to be a distance of about 5 miles or less) and (2) the speed appeared startling. Thought it was between 400 and 1,000 MPH but thought more precisely to be from 700 to 800 MPH - too fast for conventional aircraft. The trail he thought could have been smoke, vapor from intense speed or any unknown substance. The color was almost white - much like a cumulo-nimbus cloud and of approximately the same density and it was 15-50 minutes before the trail disintegrated. The object took a radius of from 5 to 15 miles to complete a turn (he estimated closer to 10) in an attempt to judge its exact course over topographic features of the surrounding countryside. He stated that since the climate in this vicinity is extremely dry and it was almost a cloudless day that the speed would have to be exceedingly great to create such a trail. Side View; 40 mile; Mt Charleston; X; 5 miles; my position; View from Above; Mt Charleston; Pass sighted; my position; RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS Incident # 72 1. Date 17 Sept 1947 2. Time N/S 3. Location Alaska (Ft Richardson (?)) 4. Name of observer N/S 5. Occupation of observer Army Officer 6. Address of observer N/S 7. Place of observation Near Ft Richardson, Alaska 8. Number of objects 1 9. Distance of object from observer N/S 10. Time in sight N/S 11. Altitude Below 10,000 ft 12. Speed tremendous 13. Direction of flight N/S 14. Tactics N/S 15. Sound N/S 16. Size 2-3 ft diameter 17. Color metallic silver 18. Shape spherical 19. Odor detected N/S 20. Apparent construction None 21. Exhaust trails None 22. Weather conditions Scattered clouds 23. Effect on clouds N/S 24. Sketches or photographs None 25. Manner of disappearance N/S 26. Remarks: (over) RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED Two army officers reported to Office, Director of Intelligence, Hq. Alaskan Dept., Ft Richardson, Alaska, saying that they had witnessed an objectpassing thru the air at tremendous speed. Object appeared to be a sphere and did not give the impression of being saucer-like or comparable to a disk. Altho, the first officer stated that it would be impossible to give minute details, the object appeared to be 2 to 3 feet in diameter and did not leave any vapor trail in the sky. He stated the object appeared metallic and silver in color (like that of airplanes) As there was scattered cloud formations at 10,000 ft and the object was noted to be traveling below the cloud formation they were able to determine the approximate altitude. To the second officer the object appeared approximately 10 ft in diameter and compared it to half the size of a full moon on an ordinary night. He estimated the altitude to be only 3,000 or 4,000 ft. The object appeared broadside to the second officer and gave no evidence of a spinning motion or did he note a reflection. To him it appeared to be a dull metal finish. In conclusion the second officer pointed out that the object was definitely traveling against the wind. RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS Incident # 73 1. Date 4 Aug 47 2. Time 1600 3. Location Boston, Mass 4. Name of observer Alpheas D. Powell, Capt of PA Airways, Inc. Walter I. White, Navigator 5. Occupation of observer Crew of Pan Amer Constitution 6. Address of observer 28 Redwood Road, New Hyde Park, Long Island 7. Place of observation Approximately midway between Everett, Mass and Bedford Radio Beacon. 8. Number of objects 2 9. Distance of object from observer 1 mile away 10. Time in sight 30 seconds 11. Altitude 7,500 ft 12. Speed 175 MPH 13. Direction of flight easterly - approx 110 degrees magnetic 14. Tactics N/S 15. Sound N/S 16. Size 15 ft long, 2-3 feet in depth 17. Color deep gold 18. Shape elliptical 19. Odor detected N/S 20. Apparent construction N/S 21. Exhaust trails None 22. Weather conditions 5/10 scattered cumulus with tops 1000 Visibility: 10 mi. 23. Effect on clouds N/S 24. Sketches or photographs None 25. Manner of disappearance Lost in clouds 26. Remarks: (over) CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL At 1600 P. M., 4 Aug 47, midway between Everett, Mass, and the Bedford Radio Beacon, pilot and navigator sighted an unidentified aerial object. The following conditions existed: Visibility: good Cloud coverage: 6-8/10ths; tops: 10,000 ft Wind at 8,000 ft: 270/25 MPH Aircraft: 8,000 ft Airspeed 265 MPH Course: 240 degrees magnetic. Mr White, Navigator, called Mr Powell's attention to a bright orange object slightly below the level of their aircraft. Mr Powell was unable to see the object from his position (left side of cockpit) as he had no visibility to the right and down, from his position. But, upon glancing out his side window he noticed at a 45 degree angle to the left an unidentified flying object. It was one mile away at approximately 7,500 ft. Mr. Powell then banked to obtain a better view. He described it as being the length of a P-40 fuselage, blunt at both ends, cylindrical in shape and having a bright orange hue. The object had a definite shape and there was no suggestion of gaseous dissipation (as there would be if the orange color were the result of exhaust from a rocket or jet aircraft. It was traveling at approx 150 MPH, on a course 200 degrees magnetic. It was under observation for approximately 30 seconds. Mr. Powell lost sight of the object when a cloud came between their aircraft and the object. AGENTS NOTES: Mr. A. O. Powell is a graduate of the Aviation Cadet Flying Trng Program, and has over 4,000 command pilot hours to his credit. He appears calm, and intelligent and not given to flights of fancy. He has a fear of publicity. He stated that he has seen numerous pilot balloons, radiosonic devices and tow targets but that the object was definitely not one of them EVALUATION: of source: \"C\"; of information: \"3\" CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 75\n1. Date 13 Aug 47\n2. Time 1300\n3. Location Smoke River Canyon (near Twin Falls) Idaho\n4. Name of observer A. C. Urie and two sons, Kenneth & Billy\n5. Occupation of observer farmer\n6. Address of observer Operator of \"Anger Falls Trout Farm\" 6 miles west of Blue Lakes Ranch, Snake River Canyon\n7. Place of observation As above - going down the Snake River\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 300 ft\n10. Time in sight momentary\n11. Altitude 75 ft from the canyon floor - 300 ft away from observer level view afforded\n12. Speed 1000 MPH\n13. Direction of flight East to West\n14. Tactics Road up and down over hills & hollows of canyon\n15. Sound swishing sound\n16. Size 20 feet by 10 ft in thickness\n17. Color sky blue\n18. Shape oblong broad rimmed hat with low crown Inverted pie-plate\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Exhaust flame - a red tubular fiery glow at the side of the top or hood.\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs one\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared behind hill\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Urie had sent his sons to the river for some tops from his boat. As they were overdue he went to look for them, when he noticed some 300 feet away some 75 feet in the air a sky-blue object silhouetted against the steep walls of the canyon on the far side. (The canyon is about 400 ft deep and 1200 ft across at that place.) The object was traveling 75 feet in the air (300 ft below the rim of the canyon) and so was plainly visible. Urie states that the sky-blue color would probably not be noticed against the sky. He states that \"it did not spin like a top\". However, he did say that the trees over which it passed almost directly did not just bend with the wind as if a plane had gone by but that they \"spun around on top as if they were in a vacuum.\"\n\nKeith Urie, a son, eight years of age said he saw the machine coming down the canyon heading from east to west and following the contours of the ground. Billy, age ten, another son, saw it almost immediately. Both watched it fly out of sight behind a tree in a matter of moments.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Urie seemed completely sincere about the incident and appeared to be a sober, middle-aged man\nThe boys stated that they had never before seen one of the discs.\n\n"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nAgent could not locate Commissioner L. W. Hawkins but J. H. Brown, who accompanied Hawkins at the time stated that he and Hawkins could hear a roar. They looked up and saw 2 objects flying at great height which might have been between 4,000 and 6,000 ft. He could give no estimate as to size and said they could have been several miles away. He and Hawkins were satisfied that had seen something and were very doubtful if the objects were planes.\n\nFrom a newspaper account (Times News, Twin Falls, Idaho, Friday Aug 15, 1947) County Commissioner Hawkins said he had seen an unusual object in the air the same day as Urie' experience (Incident 75) and that a sound resembling the echo of a motor caused him to look upward and there he saw two circular objects which reflected light. They were traveling at a great speed and at higher altitude than most planes.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 76\n1. Date 13 Aug 47\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Salmon Dam\n4. Name of observer County Commissioner Hawkins J. H. Brown\n5. Occupation of observer County Commissioner\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Salmon Dam\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer [REDACTED] several miles away\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 4,000 to 6,000 ft\n12. Speed great speed\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound echo of a motor - County Commissioner Hawkins roar - J. H. Brown\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S - reflected light\n18. Shape circular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nAgent could not locate Commissioner L. W. Hawkins but J. H. Brown, who accompanied Hawkins at the time stated that he and Hawkins could hear a roar. They looked up and saw 2 objects flying at great height which might have been between 4,000 and 6,000 ft. He could give no estimate as to size and said they could have been several miles away. He and Hawkins were satisfied that had seen something and were very doubtful if the objects were planes.\n\nFrom a newspaper account (Times News, Twin Falls, Idaho, Friday Aug 15, 1947) County Commissioner Hawkins said he had seen an unusual object in the air the same day as Urie' experience (Incident 75) and that a sound resembling the echo of a motor caused him to look upward and there he saw two circular objects which reflected light. They were traveling at a great speed and at higher altitude than most planes.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"An unusually loud roar attracted the observer and upon looking up he saw a group of very light-colored objects at an altitude of about 50° bunched rather closely with no regular formation. The group could have covered 1-1/2° angular diameter in the sky. There might have been 10\nAs a group they were proceeding as to cover 30° of arc estimated of course in 10 to 15 seconds. If one of them subtended 1/10° with a possible wing spread of 100 ft it would put it at a distance of over 10 miles, and quite invisible for a light object. With 30° arc of travel at a 10 mi distance would be roughly 5 miles in 15 seconds or 20 mi per minute or 1200 mi per hour. Rather fast for a bomber. A 50 ft object at 5 miles dist. wo ld be about 600 mi. per hr - also fast going. The only concrete evidence of form appeared on the left tangent of the group - two dark shaped forms:\nThese could have been tail wings. But since they were in no regular formation, and seemed to be moving irregularly like a swarm of bees why shouldn't all of them have had wings? The loud roar suggests they may have been much closer and rather small. The sky background was hazy blue with the sun behind. One plane towing a lot of balloons, the witness thought, would have been easily recognized."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 78\n1. Date 30 June 1947\n2. Time 0910 MST\n3. Location Near Williams Field over Grand Canyon, Arizona\n4. Name of observer Lt William G. McGinty, USN\n5. Occupation of observer P-80 student, Williams Fld, Chandler, Ariz.\n6. Address of observor Williams Fld., Chandler, Ariz.\n7. Place of observation plane\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude decreasing from 25,000 ft\n12. Speed \"inconceivable\"\n13. Direction of flight straight down\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 8 ft in dia.\n17. Color Light gray\n18. Shape circular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance Seemed to have hit ground some 25 miles south of the South Rim of Grand Canyon, Arizona\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nOn 30 June 1947 at about 0910 MST, William G. McGinty, P-80 pilot was flying at 25,000 feet over Grand Canyon, Arizona, heading south towards Williams Field, Arizona, when he saw 2 round objects going at inconceivable speeds straight down. One of the unidentifiable objects followed the other seconds apart. Due to their speed he could see only that they were circular and possibly light gray in color. In his opinion the objects were approximately 8 feet in diameter. He estimated that the objects would have probably hit the ground approximately 25 miles south of the South Rim of Grand Canyon, Ariz.\nAGENT'S NOTES: Lt McGinty gave his permanent address as: N. A. M. T. C., Point Hugu, Port Hueneme, Calif."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 79\n1. Date April 1947\n2. Time 1100 E Pibal Observation\n3. Location N/S - presumably Richmond, Va.\n4. Name of observer Mr. Minozewski\n5. Occupation of observer Weather reporters\n6. Address of observor N/S\n7. Place of observation Richmond, Va.\n8. Number of objects 3 -4 separate sightings\n9. Distance of object from observer high altitude\n10. Time in sight 15 seconds\n11. Altitude high altitude\n12. Speed rapid\n13. Direction of flight east to west\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Larger than pibal balloon when observed thru a theodolite\n17. Color metallic grey or silver\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nMr. Minozewski observed a strange metallic disk on three occasions thru the theodolite while making his pibal observation during a six-months period. Mr Minozewski last observed the disk in April 1947 at 1100 E Pibal Observation when the balloon was at 15,000 ft. He followed it for 15 seconds. It was moving on level flight from east to west to the far north of the station. The object was a metallic like chrome - shaped something like an ellipse with a flat level bottom and a dome like-round top. [REDACTED] The disk appeared below the (weather) balloon, was much larger in size (in the instrument) and shown like silver. It was impossible to estimate the height or speed of the disk except that it appeared to be moving rather rapidly.\nMiss Baron, a co-worker observed the disk when her balloon was at about 27,000 ft. She thought the color to be a dull metallic luster.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 80\n\n1. Date 7 July 1947\n2. Time 2230-2300\n3. Location Arlington, Va.\n4. Name of observer James A. Cobb\n5. Occupation of observor Lt Col., AC\n6. Address of observor N/S\n7. Place of observation Arlington, Va. - 2507 N. Glebe Road.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 3/4 mile\n10. Time in sight 2-3 seconds\n11. Altitude less than 500 ft\n12. Speed that of jet\n13. Direction of flight SOUTH EAST\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Small plane\n17. Color Reflected white light\n18. Shape \"blob\"\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Scattered clouds - Visibility: 10-12 mi.\n23. Effect on clouds None\n24. Sketches or photographs 2\n25. Manner of disappearance behind trees\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED\n170"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nObserved from a bedroom window as a blob of light crossing at very high speed estimated by observer at approx 1350 MPH. \"In color, the object had the appearance of a reflected white light, a cool bright white light with no red in it, like the moon on a clear night.\"\n\nRESTRICTED\n171"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 81\n\n1. Date 7 July 1947\n2. Time 0900 hours\n3. Location Hickam Village #2\n4. Name of observer Mr. Daniel Saito\n5. Occupation of observer Air Communications Sections, Hawaii, Hickam Fld.\n6. Address of observer N/S - Could be contacted at Hickam Fld\n7. Place of observation vicinity of Hickam Village #2\n8. Number of objects 1 - a large balloon with a silver disc suspended below it.\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight few minutes\n11. Altitude 6,000 ft\n12. Speed slow\n13. Direction of flight NW toward sea\n14. Tactics revolved\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size [REDACTED] N/S\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape spherical - like large balloon with disc attached\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance lost among the clouds\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED\n172"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nMr Saito's attention was attracted by a flashing object in the sky. He stated that this object had the appearance of a large balloon with a silver disc (not unlike a camera lens) suspended below it. Although he could not distinguish a cable connecting the two objects he assumed that they were attached since they kept the same distance apart and seemed to move in unison. It was at approximately 6,000 ft and slowly ascending moving in a northwesterly direction toward the sea. He observed the object several minutes during which time the silver disc attachment flashed off and on which he attributed to the rays of the sun striking it as it revolved. He discontinued watching after a few minutes and upon trying to locate it again could not do so owing to the cloudiness.\n\nRESTRICTED\n173"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 82\n\n1. Date Between 17 & 21 May 1947\n2. Time Just after dusk - (2030 & 2100)\n3. Location Oklahoma City, Okla.\n4. Name of observer Byron B. Savage\n5. Occupation of observer Field Engineer for Radio Corp of Amer. Holder of a private pilot's license\n6. Address of observer 416 N. W. 29th St., Oklahoma City, Okla.\n7. Place of observation As above\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from N/S observer\n10. Time in sight 15 - 20 seconds\n11. Altitude 10,000 - 15,000 ft\n12. Speed 3 times that of jet\n13. Direction of flight 160° south to 350° N\n14. Tactics straight flight\n15. Sound loud swishing sound after passage\n16. Size bulk of mix B-29's\n17. Color frosty white\n18. Shape Round but disc-like with no protrusions\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance flew out of sight\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED\n174"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Savage stated that he realized that the object was not a conventional aircraft when it was at a 45° angle from him. It appeared elliptical and as it moved closer it seemed perfectly round and flat. It had no appearance of being spherical and had a ratio of diameter to the thickness of approximately 10 to 1, appearing thicker in the center. He judged the altitude to be between 10,000 to 18,000 ft and the object left no trailing effects. The bulk seemed to be that of 6 B-29's at an altitude of approximately the same height. The speed was 3 times that of a jet-propelled aircraft. There were no protrusions and there was no noise altho he thought he detected a swishing sound \"like the rushing of air\" after this object had passed him. The sound was not loud and did not last very long. He did not know if it was his imagination or expectation. The color appeared frosty white at all times. The object appeared to diminish in size and speed as it moved away in a direction of 350° to the north. Savage was sure that the object was not a meteor and it was his opinion that it was radically built and power - possibly atomic."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 9 July 1947\n2. Time About 12:17\n3. Location Between Boise & Meridiam\n4. Name of observer David M. Johnson\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observor Boise, Idaho\n7. Place of observation Air\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer over a mile\n10. Time in sight 10-30 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed great\n13. Direction of flight\n14. Tactics slow roll, climbed with jerky rising motion\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 25 cent piece\n17. Color black\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions part cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs sketch of movement\n25. Manner of disappearance lost sight of the object\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observer flying a National Guard AT-6 was on an easterly heading pointing toward Gowen Fld and had flown that course for a minute when there appeared in the left hand portion of his field of vision a round black object. Due to its erratic movement he first thought it a weather balloon. Calling the weather station he ascertained that no release had been made for several hours. He then exposed 10 second's duration of 8 mm motion picture film. Centering his gaze once more on the object he observed it to roll so that its edge was presented. At this time it flashed once in the sunlight. It then appeared as a thin black line. Then it performed a maneuver which looked as if it had begun a slow roll - (barrel roll) which instead of being completed was broken off at about the 180° point. The object rolled out of the top of the maneuver at this point and observer lost sight of it. Performance viewed against background of clouds. Object appeared relatively as the size of a twenty-five cent piece. Observer could not estimate the speed. He thought tho that it was very great\n\nThe above design portrays the movements of the object. At all times the object appeared black. Positions (1) (2) and (3) show the jerky rising motion. Position (4) is where it rolled presenting its edge to the observer. It then followed the dotted line, rolling over the top of the maneuver and disappearing at position (5)."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 July 1947\n2. Time between 1300 and 1400 hours EST\n3. Location 1 mile east of Lakeland, Fla\n4. Name of observer Mr. Hiram William Griffin\n5. Occupation of observer \"sign painter\" previously cab-driver amateur artist. Also former 2d-class seaman in U. S. Navy\n6. Address of observor 602 N. Tennessee Ave., Lakeland, Fla\n7. Place of observation 1 mile east of Lakeland, Fla - ground\n8. Number of objects 5\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S one mile\n10. Time in sight 15 - 30 seconds\n11. Altitude between 5,000 to 7,500 ft\n12. Speed very fast\n13. Direction of flight N/S - upward\n14. Tactics climbed 2500 feet in just a few seconds\n15. Sound swishing noise that seemed to sing with a more or less shrill whine.\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color \"glittery\"\n18. Shape N/S - seemed \"turtle-backed\" from maxkmamix photograph submitted\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction plastic appearance\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Clear with scattered clouds\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs photograph\n25. Manner of disappearance climbed out of sight\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"While walking on U. S. Highway #92 7 July 47, at approximately 1 mile east of Lakeland, Fla., between 1300 and 1400 hours observer's attention was attracted skyward by a swishing noise which seemed to sing with a shrill whine. He saw 5 shiny objects going upward from 5,000 ft to approximately 7,500 feet in just a few seconds (between 15 - 30 ). They were traveling northeast and in an upward direction as they disappeared in flight. He thought they were a mile from him when first sighted. Griffin observed 2 spots on either side of the missile and an additional spot in the center which he believed to be the tail. The objects did not have wings and the witness thought they were jet jobs. It appeared to him that the leading jet (of plastic appearance) was towing the four other shining objects.\n\nNOTES: Griffin made a model of what he saw and forwarded it as an exhibit. (See file)\n\nPERTINENT FACTS: He is a very exitable person, very talkative possessing an exaggerated imagination and inclined to impress people with his continuous verbal chatter. Questioning of neighbors & associates disclosed that he belonged to no subversive organization.\n\nEvaluation of source: \"B\"; of information \"3\""} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 6 July 1947 Incident # 86\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Hollywood, Calif\n4. Name of observer M. Lenore Corey\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer 2636 Magnolia Ave., Los Angeles, Calif\n7. Place of observation from bus terminal\n8. Number of objects \"several\"\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed great speed\n13. Direction of flight northward - parallel to Ventura Blvd.\n14. Tactics \"rolled\"\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape \"saucer\"\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions sunlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nObserver was mostly concerned with the accompanying ray phenomena rather than with the \"saucers\" themselves.\n\nPerceived what appeared to be milky white rays in the sunlight which seemed to cross and recross each other like searchlights at night. It did not appear as reflected light for the rays were not spaced and were not as close together and they \"cris-crossed\". However, they did seem to converge toward a center but did not meet in that center. In the vortex - a radious of about 18 inches (it seemed from where observer sat) that there were spinning objects of some red substance about the color of the semi-precious report \"Cornelian\". These fragments were sharp and irregular and shining. They were flying as if to a magnet. This effect was momentary. Witness then looked to see if the \"saucers\" were still there. They were but the same illusion occurred again and observer was again conscious of the secondary phenomena. But by this time the \"Saucers\" were out of sight.\n\nNOTE: Observer seemed to be speculating on ray warfare, but did not think that \"our army would shoot deadly rays over a crowded highway\"\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nObserver after reading reports about disc-shaped aircraft recalled a nearly forgotten incident which occurred some 20 miles NW of Habberbishopshiem, Germany after the last war.\nObject first sighted some 8 to 10 miles to observers' front - at approx 5,000 ft high. It rapidly approached, descending slowly. About a mile away it stopped its horizontal motion but continued a slow oscillating descent similar to a descending parachute. Then it suddenly dropped in a spiral motion. Tried to locate the place where it fell but it became too dark. The first impression of the observer was that it was a cloud but it was traveling at right angles to the wind.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 88\n1. Date 3 Aug 1947\n2. Time late afternoon\n3. Location Hackensack, N. J.\n4. Name of observer Charles Casella, Jr. 287 Euclid Ave, Hackensack Wm Truex, U. S. Army, Ft. Dix\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer See 4 above\n7. Place of observation Hackensack, N. J.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 200 yds\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 200 yds\n12. Speed rapid\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics revolved slowly\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCharles Casella, Jr. and William Truex, US Army, Ft. Dix, N. J. sighted a flying disc in late afternoon 3 August 47. Claimed it was 200 yrds in air, revolving slowly but moving rapidly and was neither a kite nor a balloon."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 6 July 1947 Incident # 89\n2. Time 1:45 P. M.\n3. Location 100 miles west of Kansas City, Missouri\n4. Name of observer Maj Archie B. Browning\n5. Occupation of observer Maj, Air Corps, pilot of B-25\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation air\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 10 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 11,000 ft\n12. Speed 210 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Eastward\n14. Tactics observed horizontal flight\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 30-50 ft in diameter\n17. Color very bright and silvery colored\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Disappeared when pilot started to turn into it.\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nOn 6 July 1947 while flying from Ogden, Utah, to Kansas City, Mo, at 10,000 ft in a B-25 pilot noticed a very bright object low and to his left, approximately 10 miles away. Time was 1:45 P. M. and position was approximately 100 miles west of Kansas City. His first impression was that it was the top of a water tank. After checking his position he again looked to his left (elapsed time 5 seconds). He saw a round, disc shaped object, very bright and silvery colored which seemed to be flying 1 to 2 miles off his left wing at 11 o'clock position at 11,000 ft. The brightness of the object was very great. Diameter of the object was estimated as 30-50 feet. It was traveling in the same direction at the same rate of speed (210 MPH) as the observer. However, when he started to turn into it, it completely disappeared. Weather conditions at the time were CAVU.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 29 June 1947 Incident # 90\n2. Time 1:00 and 1:30 P. M.\n3. Location Highway 17 between Las Cruces, N. M. & White Sands V-2 firing grounds\n4. Name of observer Mr. J. R. Kauke, Mr. Zohn, Mr. C. C. Rockwood, & Mrs. Nancy Rockwood.\n5. Occupation of observer Mr. Zohn - Admin Assis in Rocket Sonde Section NRL Mr. Rockwood, NRL Rocket Sonde high altitude spectrograph scientist, & Mr. Kauke, Telemetering supervisor\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation highway 17 - ground\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 30 seconds\n11. Altitude between 8,000 and 10,000 ft (Mr. Zohn put little credence in the estimates)\n12. Speed rapid velocity\n13. Direction of flight northerly direction\n14. Tactics horizontal flight\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape uniform - no protuberances such as wings of a plane\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Mr. Kauke thought at one time there were vapor trails\n22. Weather conditions sunlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance receded until lost from sight\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nMr. Kauke who was driving the car noticed the object first. He called it to the attention of the other occupants. Mr. Zohn thereupon opened the window nearest him and observed the object moving at an unknown rapid velocity at an unknown altitude (which he estimated at 10,000 ft) and which Mr. Kauke thought was between 8,000 and 10,000 feet. When first sighted the object was to their right and forward of the automobile at an unstated elevation and apparently moving horizontally in a Northerly direction such as to cross the highway from right to left. The object was seen by all the occupants of the machine. Mr. Zohn could observe no details other than the shape was uniform with no protuberances such as the wings of a plane. It was too distant to enable stereoscopic visualization. There was some solar specular reflection which seemed to change in intensity as the object receded until lost from sight (after an estimated 30 seconds from the time first noticed.) Mr. Zohn could not explain how it disappeared except that he thought the reflection angle could have changed abruptly. The sun was to the rear of the automobile. Mr. Kauke thought at one time he saw vapor trails.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 28 June 1947\n2. Time 2120 Central Time\n3. Location Maxwell Fld., Montgomery, Ala.\n4. Name of observer Capt Wilson H. Kayko, O-38841, Hq TAC / Capt John H. Cantrell, O-255404, Hq TAC / 1st Lt Theodore Dewey, O-3094172, Hq TAC\n5. Occupation of observer Capt. Redman, Randolph Fld., Texas / See above\n6. Address of observer See above\n7. Place of observation Maxwell Field, Ala\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Over 5 minutes\n11. Altitude impossible to determine - great height\n12. Speed frequent bursts of speed\n13. Direction of flight changing - zig-zag course - first east, then south then southwest\n14. Tactics traveled with frequent bursts of speed in a zig-zag course\n15. Sound No audible sound\n16. Size slightly greater than a star\n17. Color N/S - brilliant light\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction \"light\"\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions clear moon-light night\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None in our file altho letter of transmittal indicates one was sent\n25. Manner of disappearance lost in brilliancy of the moon\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nAt approximately 2120 Central time, a light, with a brilliance slightly greater than a star appeared from the West traveling in an easterly direction at a high rate of speed. It first appeared slightly above the horizon of a clear moon-light night. There was no audible sound. It appeared to be at great height altho it was impossible to determine the altitude. It traveled a zig-zag course with frequent bursts of speed similar to a water bug but with spurts and stops across the surface of water. Directly overhead it changed course 90° into the South. After 5 minutes it turned southwest and was lost in the brilliancy of the moon. At 2145 Central it was not longer possible to observe it.\n\nA call was placed to Maxwell Fld operations concerning the phenomena and inquiry was made if any experimental aircraft were scheduled for a flight in the vicinity but the reply was negative. No plausible explanation was offered for the unusual action of this source of light which acted contrary to any common aerodynamical laws. Two of the above noted observers were rated pilots and the other two, air intelligence officers.\n\n191"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 19 May 1947\n2. Time 1215-1315\n3. Location Pikes Peak Railway, Manitou Springs, Colorado\n4. Name of observer Mr. D. A. Hauser, Mr. F. J. Smith, & Mr. L. D. Jamison\n5. Occupation of observer employees of Mt Pikes Peak Railway\n6. Address of observer Pikes Peak Railway, Manitou Springs, Colorado\n7. Place of observation Manitou Springs, Colorado\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Over 1,000 feet\n12. Speed Not determined - but very rapid\n13. Direction of flight westward\n14. Tactics climbing diving and reversal of direction of flight hovering\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Could not be determined\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape Could not be determined\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions CAVU - no ground wind\n23. Effect on clouds No clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance climbing very fast towards the West\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED 192"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nDuring their lunch period (1215-1315) 19 May 1947 a member of a train crew called attention to a silver object in the sky approaching from the Northeast. It appeared to be traveling at great speed. The object appeared extremely small and therefore the altitude could not be estimated. It did appear higher than the top of Manitou Mountain which is some 1,000 feet higher than the city. No definite shape could be determined even with the aid of 4-6 power binoculars. The men were certain that the object was not a conventional aircraft since it did not have any of the physical characteristics. Upon reaching the area just north of Manitou the object remained in the area for several minutes during which time it executed maneuvers such as climbing, diving and reversal of flight. This happened every few seconds. The distance and location between views prompted two of the men to think that there may have been more of the objects in the sky. At times it seemed to hoover and then it would start on another flight path. When last seen the silver object was climbing very fast towards the west almost directly into the wind.\n\nEvaluation:\nof source \"B\"\nof Information \"O\"\n193"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 11 Jan 48\n2. Time 1630\n3. Location Hartford, Conn.\n4. Name of observer Kenneth M. Helton / James J. Pargoe\n5. Occupation of observer Captains, USAF (ATC)\n6. Address of observer Atlantic Division, ATC (Sq. \"D\" Air Evac.)\n7. Place of observation Hartford, Conn.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Unknown - very high velocity\n13. Direction of flight shooting toward earth at 45°\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Resembled shooting star, observers not certain however.\n17. Color bluish center, red on the edges\n18. Shape Appeared to be disc\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails No tail or trails\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Dropped out of sight on the north side of Mt.Tom which is near Holyoke, Mass.\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL 194"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object appeared to be a disc which had a bluish center was red on its edges and was traveling at a very high velocity. It hadno tail nor did it leave any sort of a trail in the air. Because of its high velocity and the short space of time that it was sighted neither observer could be certain of the size but in general, report it resembled a shooting star. It dropped out of sight on the north side of Mt. Tom which is near Holyoke, Mass."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 94\n1. Date 30 Dec 47\n2. Time 1926 PST\n3. Location 42° 9.3' N and 114° 22.2' W\n4. Name of observer Lt Col W.W. Jones\nMaj A. A. Andrae\n5. Occupation of observer USAF pilots\n6. Address of observer Hq, Eastern Pacific Wing of ATC\n7. Place of observation See #3\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S - at 2:30 position from plane\n10. Time in sight 2 seconds\n11. Altitude A/C was at 13,000 '. Object was descending vertically.\n12. Speed Very high - unknown\n13. Direction of flight Vertically down\n14. Tactics seemed to slow as it neared the ground\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S trailed intense green and blue flames\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails See #17 - trailed intense green and blue flames\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"While enroute from Great Falls, Montana, to Fairfield-Suisun AF on the night of 30 Dec 47, a possible rocket sighting was made by pilot (Lt Col W. W. Jones, Hq. EPW) and co-pilot (Maj A. A. Andrae, Hq., EPW) Airplane was cruising at 13000 ft. An unidentifiable object trailing green and blue flames was viewed for a period of 2 seconds. The object was descending vertically at a very high rate of speed and seemed to slow down slightly upon nearing the ground. The object appeared at a position of 2:30 o'clock in relation to the plane and the flames were intensely bright."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 95\n1. Date 30 Dec 47\n2. Time 1925 PST\n3. Location Rosedale, Calif (38° 58' N., 123° 53' W)\n4. Name of observer N/S (C-47 crew)\n5. Occupation of observer\n6. Address of observer Sacramento Air Depot C-47 #7488\n7. Place of observation Rosedale, Calif\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude low\n12. Speed very high\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color several colors of flame with red & green predominating N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails several colors of flame with red & green predominating\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs N/S\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared eastward toward some hills at approximately 38° 50' N, 121° 02' W.\n26. Remarks:\n(over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nA report received at Fairfield-Suisun tower from McClellan Airfield Tower at Sacramento stated a report was received from Sacramento Air Depot C-47 #7488 flying near Rosedale, Calif. to the effect that an object was sighted at 1925 P.S. time trailing several colors of flame with red and green predominating. It was traveling at very high speed and low altitude eastward toward some hills at approximately 38°50' N, 121° 02' W. McClellan tower asked the pilot to investigate and at 1958 the pilot reported a small fire at 38° 50' N and 120° 53' W which became considerably larger. Fairfield tower requested a local night flying C-47 to also investigate the fire for possible aircraft accident and the pilot reported over the fire at 1937 P. S. time at a position of 38° 50' N and 120° 53' W. The fire was burning in a triangular shape over a small area and went out at 2155. Two particular points in the fire seemed to burn with a bright blue-green flame"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 30 Dec 1947 Incident # 96\n2. Time 1925 PST\n3. Location 30 miles west of Lovelock, Nevada\n4. Name of observer N/S (motorist on US highway #40)\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor N/S\n7. Place of observation See 3 (39° 58' N, 118° 53' W)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 12 to 13 hundred feet above the ground\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance exploded\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED\nHandwritten: Filed under Incident #94"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 30 Dec 47 Incident # 97\n2. Time 1925 PST\n3. Location Between Medford, Oregon & Mt.Shasta, Calif.\n4. Name of observer N/S (United Airline Flight #191)\n5. Occupation of observor Pilot on Flight #191 as above\n6. Address of observor N/S\n7. Place of observation on airways between Medford, Oregon & Mt Shasta\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S - saw flash - presumably an explosion\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED\nHandwritten: Filed under #94"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nThe Fairfield Control tower obtained a report from Oakland Airport Flight Control (CAA) at approximately 2315 PST, 30 Dec 1947 that United Airlines Flight 191 proceeding on airways between Medford, Oregon, and Mt. Shasta observed a flash at 1925 PST just north of their position.\nSee incidents 94, 95, & 96.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 2 November 1947 Incident # 98\n2. Time just before break of day\n3. Location Anderson Road, Houston, Texas\n4. Name of observer Mr. & Mrs. Elmer L. Brimberry\n5. Occupation of observor N/S Employe of Immigration Svc, Dept of Justice\n6. Address of observor Anderson Road, Houston, Texas\n7. Place of observation their home while lying in bed\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S - it appeared to fall in a field adjacent their residence\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight earthward\n14. Tactics \"spinning\"\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size large - 26 to 30 inches in diameter\n17. Color fire\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N \"fireball\"\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance suddenly \"went out\" just before it reached the earth.\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to Mrs Brimberry\nIncident occurred just before break of day. Object appeared/as a\nlarge round ball of fire about 26 to 30 inches in diameter with a \"tail\"\nof approximately 20 feet in length. This \"tail\" seemed to diminish as it\napproached the ground. It appeared to have suddenly \"gone out\" just\nbefore it reached the earth. It possibly could have hit the ground a great\ndistance away but it seemed to have landed in the open vacant field adjacent\nthe house. This field is about 18 [REDACTED] acres in area. Mr. Brimberry\ndescribed the object as being \"almost round, maybe a little oval or saucer-\nshaped and giving off a bright light. It appeared to be spinning. He did\nnot see the tail when he observed the object.\n\nThis incident occurred just before sun-up and it was pretty light outside."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 99\n1. Date 3 Jan 1948\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Military Attache, Helsinki, Finland (official source of information)\n4. Name of observer Helsinki Press, 10th Jan 48. Finland (USMILATTACHE AMLEGATION Helsinki Finland sgd Burrill)\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor Helsinki, Finland\n7. Place of observation Vaasa, Finland\n8. Number of objects One (1)\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 30 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight west to east\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Shining\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Long tail\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Helsinki press 10th January reported observation of light phenomena vicinity Vaasa 3rd January brightly shining object with long tail moved west to east visible for 30 seconds."} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 100\n1. Date 5 Jan 1948\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Military Attache, Helsinki Finland (official source of information)\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor N/S\n7. Place of observation Pietarsaari, Finland\n8. Number of objects One (1)\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight 10 Seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight north to south\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Shining\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Grey streaks were left in the sky.\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: A shining object was seen near Pietarsaari 5th Jan which was observed 5th Jan for 10 seconds. It was going from north to south. Eyewitnesses state flames were ejected and grey streaks left in the sky"} {"doc_id":"72cca9f58fabfbe7","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"72d6e56f4e6a1124","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONTRACT DIRIBUTION LIST\n\nVIRGINIA CONTRACTING ACTIVITY\nBuilding 6000, Bolling AFB\nWashington, D.C. 20340-5100\n\nDATE: 18 May 2010\nPIIN: HHM402-08-C-0072\nDelivery Order /Task Order:\nMOD: P00003\nREQ: Admin Mod\nCS:\nKO: (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\n\nTO: | COPY SENT: | ADDRESS: | NO. OF COPIES\n1. Contractor Stamp the copy—“Duplicate Original Contractor Copy\" | X | Bigelow Aerospace Advanced 4640 S. Eastern Ave Las Vegas, NV 89119 AAP Person 4 | 1\n2. Payment Office NSA | X | NSA FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING OFFICE P.O. Box 1685 ATTN: DF2211 FT George Meade, MD 20755-6000 Phone: 410-854-7657 & 410-854-8742 (for Invoice status) NIPR: operationpayment@nsa.gov (for Invoice status) [REDACTED] | 1\n4. COR/POC | X | (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6) | 1\n5. DI FE Representative | X | (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6) | 1\n6. Report Copy DD-350 | X | AE-2A | 1\n7. Contract File (Original) | X | D.O. File | 1\n8. Other | | |\nCOPIES: TOTAL NO. 7\n\nDISTRIBUTION COMPLETED: (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6) 5-18-10 (Date)"} {"doc_id":"72d6e56f4e6a1124","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES 1 2\n\n2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. P00003 | 3. EFFECTIVE DATE MAY 18, 2010 | 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. | 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)\n6. ISSUED BY CODE HHQ402: Virginia Contracting Activity ATTN: AE-2 Bolling AFB, Bldg. 6000 Washington DC 20340-5100 (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6) | 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE ZD50: Virginia Contracting Activity ATTN: DIAC, AE-2 Building 6000 Washington DC 20340-5100\n8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR: BIGELOW AEROSPACE ADVANCED SPACE STUDIES, LLC 4640 S EASTERN AVE LAS VEGAS NV 891196135 DUNS: 827037768 Cage Code: 54JU7 | 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO. 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11) 10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO. HHM402-08-C-0072 10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13) SEP 22, 2008\nCODE 00000434 FACILITY CODE\n\n11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS\n\nThe above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended. Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods: (a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment your desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.\n\n12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) Modification Amount: $0.00. See Schedule. Modification Obligated Amount: $0.00\n\n13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.\nCHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.\nX B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).\nC. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:\nD. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)\n\nE. IMPORTANT: Contractor [X] is not, [ ] is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.\n\n14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)\nThe purpose of this modification is to Change the COR designation on Contract HHM402-08-C-0072 in accordance with the terms below:\n\na) The following individual is named as the Contracting Officer™s Representative:\n(b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\n\nb) For guidance from the COR to be valid, it must be:\n1.Consistent with the Statement of Work for this Contract.\n2.Not constitute a new assignment of work or change the expressed terms, conditions, or specifications incorporated in this Contract.\n3.Not constitute a basis for extension to the period of performance or delivery schedule.\n4.Not constitute a basis for increase in any CLIN quantities or in the total contract value.\n\nc) All other terms and conditions remain the same.\n\nExcept as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.\n15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) | 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print): (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\n15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR | 15C. DATE SIGNED | 16C. DATE SIGNED 5-18-10\n(Signature of person authorized to sign)\nNSN 7540-01-152-8070 Previous edition unusable. STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243"} {"doc_id":"72d6e56f4e6a1124","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cover Page\n\nSecurity Classification\n\nDocument: P00003 | P00003 COR Change\nDocument Classification: Unclassified"} {"doc_id":"735a8b91807355ec","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:10:02"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007.\n\nFD-245.1 (Rev. 1-4-99)\n\nU.S. Department of Justice\n\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nClass / Case #\n0062 83894\nSub A\nVol. 1\nSerial # 1 OPEN\n\nBureau\nof\nigation\n\nRRP003IXFT\n8/11/274151\n\nFile No. 62-83894-A\nVolume Number 1\nSerials 1-OPEN\n\nField Office Criminal Investigative\nand Administrative Files\n\nArmed and Dangerous\nDO NOT DESTROY\nELSUR\nEscape Risk\nFinancial Privacy Act\nSee also Nos.\n\nFOIPA\nNCIC\nOCIS\nSuicidal\nOther"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Parsons\nMr. Belmont\nMr. Callahan\nMr. DeLoach\nMr. Malone\nMr. McGuire\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tamm\nMr. Trotter\nMr. W.C.Sullivan\nTele. Room\nMr. Ingram\nMiss Gandy\n\nFlying Saucer Photo Ain't What It Used to Be---Joe\n\nBy Charles Manos\nStaff Writer\n\nGRAND BLANC, May 25--Joe Perry, the talented pizza man, feels the Pentagon people have sabotaged him or something.\n\nNo, the Washington experts haven't fussed with Joe's saucy pies, but they have certainly done something to his flying saucer, Joe claims.\n\n\"IT AIN'T what it used to be since they got their hands on it,\" said Joe, who takes potshots at the moon with a homemade telescope-camera.\n\nJoe, 44, took another look at his color-slide photo, snapped last February on the second night of the full moon.\n\n\"It's not the same,\" he said dejectedly. \"The flying saucer has faded . . . something has happened to it.\"\n\nThe Washington experts returned the color slide a few days ago.\n\nTHE FEDERAL agents picked it up last March when they heard Joe's picture showed a saucer-like object silhouetted against the moon.\n\nMost of Joe's customers at his pizza palace here were convinced the object was a \"flying saucer.\"\n\nJoe became even more concerned over his picture when an Unidentified Flying Object group wanted to buy his rights to the slide.\n\nHe also got an offer from a national magazine to buy the picture. Other inquiries came from all sections of the country.\n\nSO JOE was anxious to get his picture back.\n\nHe called the FBI. He talked to the air force. He made a trip to Selfridge Air Force Base, all in vain.\n\nThe picture was returned shortly after he sent a letter to President Eisenhower.\n\nA letter included in the package from the Pentagon said the strange object in the picture was the result of faulty development and nothing more.\n\nAmong other things, the Pentagon folks have added insult to injury, Joe said.\n\nDetroit Division\nDetroit, Mich.\n\n() Detroit Free Press Editor: Lee Hills\n() Detroit News Editor: Martin S. Hayden\n() Detroit Times Editor: John C. Manning\n\nDate: 5-25-60\nEdition: Final\nPage: 7 Col: 2\nTitle of Case:\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT; JOSEPH PERRY, GRAND BLANC, MICHIGAN - COMPLAINANT\n\n(Defile 65-2477-105)\n\nEX 109\nREC-41\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n46 JUN 3 1960\n\n5 9 JUN 7 1960"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Central Research Section\n\n0-19 (Rev. 1-28-59)\n\nTolson\nBelmont\nDeLoach\nMcGuire\nMohr\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nTrotter\nW.C. Sullivan\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy\n\nfile 62-83894 5-Mar\n\n3 'Objects' Trailed Plane 45 Minutes, Pilot Says\n\nDETROIT, Feb. 25 (AP) The pilot of an American Airlines DC6 passenger plane said today three mysterious objects that looked like shining saucers appeared to accompany the plane for 45 minutes last night on its non-stop flight from Newark, N.J., to Detroit.\n\nCapt. Peter Killian of Syosset, N.Y., who has flown passenger planes for 15 years, said \"I have never seen anything like it before.\"\n\nKillian said other members of the crew and the 35 passengers also saw the flying objects. The plane left Newark at 7:10 p.m.\n\nKillian and co-pilot John Dee of Nyack, N.Y., said they lost the three strange objects in the haze when they started their descent for landing at Detroit's Metropolitan Airport while the plane was over Cleveland, Ohio.\n\nThe three bright whitish lights first were sighted while the plane was flying at 8500 feet between Philipsburg and Bradford, Pa., at 8:45 p.m.\n\nThe Washington Post and Times Herald A3\nThe Washington Daily News\nThe Evening Star\nNew York Herald Tribune\nNew York Journal-American\nNew York Mirror\nNew York Daily News\nNew York Post\nThe New York Times\nThe Worker\nThe New Leader\nThe Wall Street Journal\nDate\n\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n17 MAR 3 1959\n\n57 MAR 4 1959"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UPI\n\n...P.M. -- A GROUP OF UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS \"CLUSTERED LIKE JEWELS\" HOVERED FOR MORE THAN AN HOUR NEAR HERE LAST NIGHT AND THEN \"STAR\" BROKE APART AND DISAPPEARED,\" WITNESSES SAID TODAY.\n\nA SUDDEN... FOR THE AERIAL RESEARCH PHENOMENA ORGANIZATION FILTER CENTER ... A TOTAL OF NINE PERSONS HAD REPORTED SEEING THE MYSTERIOUS OBJECTS.\n\nA CHECK OF NEARBY MILITARY BASES, AIRPORTS, AND THE U.S. WEATHER BUREAU DISCLOSED THERE WERE NO JETS OR WEATHER BALLOONS ALOFT AT THE TIME OF THE SIGHTINGS, BETWEEN 10 P.M. AND 11:30 P.M., FILTER CENTER DIRECTOR L.J. LORENZEN SAID.\n\n8/9--GD253P\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nfile 62-83894\n\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\nAUG 12 1958\n\n59 AUG 12 1958"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-19 (Rev. 10-29-57)\n\nTolson\nBoardman\nBelmont\nMohr\nNease\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nTrotter\nClayton\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy\n\nFlying Discs Show Sign Of Guidance, Jung Says\n\nALAMOGORDO, N. Mex., July 29 (P)--Dr. Carl Jung, Swiss psychologist, says in a report that Unidentified Flying Objects are real and \"show signs of intelligent guidance by quasi-human pilots.\"\n\n\"I can only say for certain these things are not a mere rumor, something has been seen,\" Dr. Jung said in the report released yesterday. \"A purely psychological explanation is ruled out.\"\n\nDr. Jung, who started his research on UFO's in 1944, released his report through the UFO filter Center of the Aerial Phenomena Research Organization here. It was released by L.J. Lorenzen of Holloman Air Force Base.\n\n\"I have gathered a mass of observations of unidentified flying objects since 1944,\" Dr. Jung said.\n\n\"The discs do not behave in accordance with physical laws, but as though without weight. . . .\n\n\"If the extra-terrestial origin of this phenomena should be confirmed this would prove the existence of an intelligent interplanetary relationship.\n\nWhat such a fact might mean for humanity cannot be predicted.\n\n\"But it would put us without doubt in the extremely precarious position of primitive communities in conflict with the superior culture of the whites.\n\n\"That the construction of these machines proves a scientific technique immensely superior to ours cannot be argued.\"\n\nThe Air Force has said investigation of flying saucers reported over the past 10 years has produced no evidence that such things exist.\n\nIt has contended that not a shred of evidence has turned up to show the existence of a flying saucer or interplanetary space ship or that the objects sighted indicate developments beyond the range of current scientific knowledge or pose a threat to the Nation's security.\n\nThe Air Force said last November that investigations of 5,700 reported sightings showed the mysterious objects were balloons, aircraft, astronomical phenomena, birds, fireworks or hoaxes, among other things.\n\nWash. Post and Times Herald\nWash. News\nWash. Star\nN.Y. Herald Tribune\nN.Y. Journal-American\nN.Y. Mirror\nN.Y. Daily News\nN.Y. Times\nDaily Worker\nThe Worker\nNew Leader\nDate 7-29-58\n\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n17 AUG 1 1958\n\n62-83894\n\n67 AUG 1 1958"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No Saucers' Trace Found\nA.F. Checks Schmidt; Kearney Amused\nTales of flying saucers and other such space craft got an unofficial raspberry Wednesday night from an Air Force official.\nA top official of the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio told the Dayton Journal-Herald his investigators have found no evidence in the past 10 years that flying saucers are real. He said 5,700 reported sightings were investigated between 1947 and 1957. Not a single landing impression, footprint, saucer or little green man was found.\nInvestigation Goes On\nIn Kearney, Neb. Reinholdt Schmidt's story of an afternoon's visit with the crew of a space ship near the city Tuesday was still under investigation, officials said.\nSchmidt, 48, an ex-Nebraskan and now a California grain dealer, was questioned by Air Force investigators from the Continental Air Defense Command. Oil found near the alleged landing spot of the space ship was identified as ordinary but will be tested by the University of Nebraska.\nWhile the Schmidt tale was giving Kearney a sensational conversation piece, most of the talk was of a skeptical variety.\nNewsmen Busy\n\"Everybody downtown seems to think it's a big joke,\" one business man said.\nA Kearney clothier put up a sign advertising \"space ship specials.\" A window sign in a car agency announced: \"Space Ships Tuned Up.\"\nThe Kearney car-rental operator reported business was so good all of his cars were in use. They were being rented by visiting newsmen.\nPresence of the newsmen was nearly the only sign that anything unusual had happened — or may have happened."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Space-Ship Story Raises Eyebrows\nThe World-Herald's News Service.\nKearney, Neb.—A grain buyer who said he saw a space ship Tuesday in a field near here and chatted amicably with its six occupants had more pleasant dealings with the visitors from outer space than with skeptical authorities.\nThe sensational report by R. O. Schmidt, about 50, of Bakersfield, Cal., which topped a host of reports across the nation Tuesday of seeing mysterious flying objects, had these consequences:\n—State Penitentiary records showed a man of the same name served a term for embezzlement from Scotts Bluff County in the 1930's. Scotts Bluffs County Sheriff Steve Warrick said he talked to Schmidt by phone and was convinced he \"saw nothing.\"\n—He turned down a chance to take a lie-detector test.\n—Schmidt was kept up most of the night for questioning. He finally asked for an attorney. Ward Minor of Kearney was named.\n—Wednesday forenoon he went to the scene of the space ship's landing with investigators from the Continental Air Defense Command at Colorado Springs, Colo., Kearney Police Chief Thurston Nelson and Buffalo County Attorney Kenneth Gotobed. They said Schmidt's story \"appeared to be weakening.\"\n—Oil drippings on the ground from the space machine were being analyzed at Kearney State College. Investigators said the \"mysterious green oil\" closely resembled that in a partially-emptied can of commercial auto oil found in the back of Schmidt's car and a nearly-empty can found near the site of the \"landing.\"\nSchmidt's story came to light when, white-faced and shaken, he appeared in Kearney Tuesday and asked to see a minister. Taken to police, he told this story:\nTuesday he inspected a field of milo about two miles south and a mile east of Kearney. When ready to leave he drove down a side road seeking a place to turn around. Near the Platte River he saw what appeared to be a wrecked balloon. As he neared it, Schmidt said, his car engine conked out.\nSchmidt said he got out and walked toward the machine. Proximity revealed\nSchmidt (left) and Kearney Police Chief Nelson . . . In \"heart-to-heart\" talk.\nSIDE VIEW OUTSIDE\nLENGTH: APPROX. 100 FEET\nFLOOR PLAN INSIDE\nThe Schmidtnik . . . As described by the grain buyer."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it to be a translucent, cigar-shaped device about one hundred feet long, 30 feet wide and about 14 feet high. Schmidt said that when he was 25 or 30 feet away, two men got out and waved what looked like a flashlight.\n\"I couldn't move. I don't know whether I was just afraid or what, but it was like being paralyzed,\" he said.\n'In Business Suits'\nSchmidt said the men, dressed in business suits, searched him for weapons then remarked that as long as they were going to be there for some time \"you might as well come in and see things for a few minutes.\"\nInside the machine were two other men and two women working on wires and instruments. The device had a fan at each end.\nBy a strange coincidence one of the crewmen \"looked exactly like\" a hotel acquaintance with whom he has been watching television programs.\nWhen the occupants wanted to move from place to place they would step in a certain location and be pulled to the new location without moving.\n'Spoke German'\nThe ship occupants talked among themselves in High German, which Schmidt says he understands to a limited extent. One man spoke excellent English and interpreted for the others.\nSchmidt said the interpreter told him repeatedly he had nothing to fear. The visitors refused to answer any questions but said he would \"find out all about it in a couple of weeks.\"\nWhen repairs were completed, Schmidt said he was asked to leave but was told he would be unable to start his car until the machine had disappeared.\n'Disappeared'\nOutside the machine, Schmidt said, he turned to watch as the fans started in motion without a sound. He said the machine lifted about one hundred or two hundred feet into the air and disappeared.\n\"It just blended into the sky—like it changed color or disappeared into thin air,\" he said.\nSchmidt pressed the starter of his car. The motor started right off."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-19 (Rev. 9-7-56)\nCoast to Coast\nRash of 'Flying Saucer' Reports Floods U. S.\nSeveral persons reported seeing a \"red ball\" hovering over the Atomic Energy Commission's Savannah River plant near Augusta, Ga., last night.\nThere was an unofficial report that Air Force personnel at nearby Aiken, S. C., spotted the object on radar and issued an alert.\nThe object appeared to be a \"constant red light,\" according to Augusta Chronicle executive editor Louis Harris, who saw the object from the downtown newspaper building. \"It could have been a tiny red light a short distance away or a gigantic thing at a great distance,\" he said.\nOne witness, J. T. James, said he saw the object on two occasions from his home near Aiken. It was cigar-shaped, he said, and would alternate from bright to amber and occasionally got out altogether.\nElsewhere, strange \"saucer\" sightings were reported.\nNEBRASKA\nAt Kearney, Neb., authorities held a \"heart-to-heart\" talk with Reinhold O. Schmidt, a salesman, later discovered to be an ex-convict, who said he talked to four men and two women in a transport space ship which had landed. He said the space people spoke in English and German.\nPolice roped off the area where the \"whatnik\" allegedly landed and examined various impressions and oil stains on the ground.\nAt Long Beach, Calif., three Air Force weather observers, one of them the commanding officer of the spotting unit, late yesterday reported sighting six unidentified, saucer-shaped flying objects over Long Beach Air Force base.\nThe Coast Guard reported picking up an unidentified flying object on radar over the Gulf of Mexico south of New Orleans. A Coast Guard commander said the object paused over the cutter Sebago in the Gulf and was on the radar scope for about 27 minutes.\nWHITE SANDS\nMilitary authorities apparently gave credence to a report by an electronics engineer who said he saw an object which made car engines stall near the White Sands proving grounds.\nCol. John McCurdy, Air Force public relations officer at White Sands, said the engineer, James Stokes, 42, will be given a thorough medical examination and a radiation count test. Col. McCurdy said he was \"personally satisfied\" with Mr. Stokes' report.\nA Civil Service worker at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Tex., said he saw an egg-shaped object land in a ravine about 200 yards from him as he drove near the city. He said his car engine and lights went off, and the object took off in a few minutes, enabling him to drive away.\nAt about the same time, the Ground Observer Corps at Midland, Tex., said it saw a large, red object and picked up unintelligible conversation on a sound detector. (AP)"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tracked 27 Minutes on Radar\nU.S. Cutter in Gulf of Mexico Reports Sighting Mysterious 'Object' in Sky\nAssociated Press\nA brilliant mystery object was reported sighted yesterday in southern skies by a Coast Guard cutter; even as Air Force special investigators checked a flurry of earlier, similar reports.\nThe Coast Guard cutter Sebago, cruising in the Gulf of Mexico about 200 miles south of Louisiana, radioed that an object resembling \"a brilliant planet with a high rate of speed\" was seen for about three seconds at 5:21 a. m. (CST).\nThe Sebago's message said the object was tracked on the vessel's radar screen for 27 minutes and that, during that period, the object flitted on and off the screen several times. Crewmen caught sight of it only for a few seconds.\n[The Sebago radioed New Orleans Coast Guard Headquarters that the object was traveling at an estimated 1000 miles per hour, International News Service reported. However, at one point, the object appeared to remain stationary and hover above the waters before it resumed its erratic flight.\n[The cutter's captain, Cmdr. C. H. Waring, said the object first appeared on the ship's radar screen as a \"good, strong pip\" at 5:10 a. m. and was lost in a northerly direction at 5:37 a. m.\n[In this time, the skipper said the object, which came as close as two miles to the vessel, was actually seen by four members of the crew. One, Ens. Wayne D. Shockley, described it as a \"bright point of light with no definite shape, resembling the planet Venus.\" Shockley said there were no vapor trails or any other indications as to the object's method of propulsion. One estimate of its height placed it at 2000 feet.\n[Glenn Northcutt, Willis, Okla., rancher and member of the University of Oklahoma Board of Regents, reported that on Saturday he and five others had watched \"a brilliant, mysterious light that looked like the planet Venus magnified many, many times.\" The object, he said, was visible more than half an hour.]\nSightings of strange objects have been reported from widely scattered sections of the United States, most of them near secret military installations in the Southwest.\nThe Air Force said the radar network of the Air Defense See MYSTERY, A5, Col. 3"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Command was keeping watch so far with no results—and that specially qualified investigators had been assigned to look into the reports.\n\nFor several years the Air Force has checked all reports of unidentified flying objects. Investigators work under the Air Defense Command at Colorado Springs, Colo., and report to the Air Technical Intelligence Center.\n\nJudging from past findings, the chances are 50-1 the Air Force will offer a humdrum explanation for the current sightings.\n\n- During the first half of this year, the Air Force said, only 1.9 per cent of the 250 reported sightings of flying saucers and other fantastic aerial objects have wound up in the \"unknown\" category.\n\nAir Force Skeptical\n\nAnd the Air Force said firmly—though not all flying saucer buffs may agree—that it doesn't believe even the 1.9 per cent residue is made up of the things you read about in science fiction magazines.\n\nBalloons, aircraft and such astronomical sights as meteorites and bright stars account—at least to the Air Force's official satisfaction—for almost four-fifths of the sightings.\n\nThe director of a private organization set up to investigate flying saucers and such said he couldn't evaluate at this point the current rash of reported sightings.\n\nBut retired Marine Maj. Donald E. Keyhoe, director of the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena added that the reported objects may be something from another planet.\n\n\"Assuming they are real,\" he said, \"they would be secret weapons made on earth or are interplanetary.\" Any nation with the secret, he added, would by now have abandoned conventional aircraft or missiles.\n\nCosmic Energy\n\n\"It looks as though they are interplanetary,\" Keyhoe said.\n\nHe said one source of power for such reported objects could be cosmic ray energy.\n\nSome of the citizens, peace officers and servicemen who reported sighting mystery objects in the Southwest since the weekend said the objects stalled auto engines and caused radios to fade.\n\nJames Stokes, an engineer at the Air Force missile development center at Alamogordo, N. M., reported 10 autos were stalled Monday on a desert highway between Alamogordo and the White Sands (N. M.) Proving Grounds.\n\nHe reported seeing a soundless, \"brilliant colored egg-shaped object\" which flitted erratically across the countryside and left a sort of heat wave, \"like radiation from a giant sun lamp,\" in its wake.\n\nDevice Sought\n\nLeonard Hardlund, chief engineer for the National Inventors Council in Washington, said a device that could stall autos or other mechanical equipment was one of the things the armed forces would like to see developed.\n\nBut Hardlund said he knew of no research in this country aimed at producing such a device.\n\nTwo teen-age girls reported seeing a mysterious object in the sky over Annapolis, Md., last week.\n\nJean Hunt, 13, and Sylvia Fowler, 15, said they saw an egg-shaped object which glowed like a neon light. They spotted it while trick-or-treating with Jean's two younger sisters on Halloween night in Primrose Acres, a housing development on the outskirts of Annapolis.\n\nJean said the girls became frightened and ran home but no one would believe their story until weekend newspaper accounts told of a mystery object sighted in Texas."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mystery Objects Called Mirage by Astronomer\n\nBy the Associated Press\n\nA Harvard astronomer says mysterious objects reported from various parts of the country and the Gulf of Mexico are mirages stemming from natural causes.\n\nDr. Donald H. Menzel, director of the Harvard College Observatory, said yesterday in Cambridge, Mass., that the whole thing amounts to \"another flying saucer scare.\"\n\nThe Air Force has started an investigation of the reported sightings of the strange glowing objects in the sky. The Air Force for years has had the responsibility of checking reports of unidentified flying objects, but as one officer put it, \"We don't investigate all of them.\"\n\nA rash of such reports has developed since Sunday, with some of the sightings said to have been made near secret military installations in the Southwest. Some of the persons making the reports said the objects caused their auto engines to stall and their radios to fade.\n\nCutter Claims Sighting\n\nYesterday the Coast Guard Cutter Sebago radioed from the Gulf of Mexico that an object resembling a brilliant planet with a high rate of speed was seen for about three seconds, and that it was tracked by radar.\n\nDr. Menzel said it is probable the cutter's crewmen got a false image \"quite likely from bubbles of hot air in the atmosphere which would give a radar reflection.\"\n\nAs for reports of the auto engines stalling, he said, \"It would not be surprising that a nervous foot could stall an engine.\"\n\nDr. Menzel, author of a book about flying saucers, said he has been studying them for about 10 years and has yet to hear of one which could not be explained by natural phenomena.\n\n\"They are caused by a layer of heated air . . . acting as a lens and forming an image of objects as much as 40 or 50 miles away,\" he said.\n\nCommon in West\n\n\"They are nothing more than a mirage. They are prevalent just after nightfall as the heated air begins to cool off at the ground, and they are common in the West where they have clear air.\"\n\nThe Air Force aid that during the first half of this year only 1.9 per cent of the 250 reported sightings of flying saucers and other strange objects in the air have been classed as \"unknown.\" And the Air Force wasn't ready to believe that even this small percentage has sinister implications.\n\nIt seemed a good bet the Air Force will agree with Dr. Menzel's opinion that the current sightings have explanations in nature, or that the reported objects are actually aircraft or similar man-made things.\n\nDate 11-6-57"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"J. G. Kirby of Dallas made this photo of a diamond shaped object flying through the sky while he and his family were driving near Amarillo, Tex., in August, 1956. The photo was turned over to the FBI and has just been released after intensive study. The Air Force described the glow as \"radiation vapor.\""} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UP42\n(OBJECT)\nLEVELLAND, TEX.--FIVE PERSONS INCLUDING A SHERIFF REPORTED TODAY SEEING A MYSTERIOUS EGG-SHAPED OBJECT WHICH LOOKED LIKE A BLINDING-RED SUNSET OVER LEVELLAND IN WEST TEXAS. THREE MOTORISTS SAID IT KILLED THEIR AUTO ENGINES AND PUT OUT THEIR HEADLIGHTS WHEN THEY GOT NEAR IT. IN EACH CASE, THE MOTORISTS SAID THEIR ENGINES AND HEADLIGHTS WERE ALL RIGHT AFTER THE OBJECT SUDDENLY TOOK OFF AND DISAPPEARED. SHERIFF WEIR GLEN AND A DEPUTY ALSO SAW THE OBJECT AT 1130 AM EDT WHEN THEY WENT OUT TO LOOK FOR IT AFTER GETTING EARLIER REPORTS. THE SHERIFF SAID IT STREAKED NOISELESS ACROSS THE ROAD SOME 200 YARDS IN FRONT OF HIM, BUT DID NOT AFFECT HIS CAR.\n11/3--WO530P"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UP44\nADD OBJECT, LEVELLAND, TEX.\nONE MOTORIST, JAMES LONG OF WACO, TEX., TOLD THE SHERIFF HE DROVE UP ON THE OBJECT SITTING IN THE ROAD ABOUT 200 FEET FROM HIM.\nLONG TOLD THE SHERIFF HE DROVE UP WITH HIS LIGHTS ON THE OBJECT, WHICH GLOWED INTERMITTENTLY LIKE A BLINDING NEON LIGHT. HE SAID IT APPEARED TO BE ABOUT 200 FEET LONG AND EGG SHAPED. HE SAID IT CAUSED HIS ENGINE TO DIE AND HIS HEADLIGHTS TO GO OUT.\nWHEN LONG STARTED TO GET OUT OF HIS CAR TO INVESTIGATE, THE OBJECT SUDDENLY ROSE SOME 200 FEET STRAIGHT UP AND DISAPPEARED IN A FLASH OF LIGHT, HE TOLD THE SHERIFF.\nGLEN SAID AUTHORITIES COULD FIND NO BURN MARKS OR OTHER INDICATIONS AT THE SPOT WHERE LONG SAID THE OBJECT HAD LANDED.\nGLEN SAID REESE AIR FORCE BASE OFFICIALS AT LUBBOCK, ABOUT 50 MILES EAST OF LEVELLAND, CHECKED FOR A POSSIBLE PLANE CRASH IN THE AREA, BUT REPORTED NOTHING.\nPEDRO SACIDO, A LEVELLAND MOTORIST, WAS THE FIRST TO REPORT SIGHTING THE THING.\n\"IT SOUNDED LIKE AN EAR-SPLITTING CLAMP OF THUNDER--AS IF SOMETHING HAD EXPLODED,\" SACIDO TOLD THE SHERIFF.\nHE SAID IT KILLED HIS ENGINE AND KNOCKED OUT HIS HEADLIGHTS UNTIL AFTER IT PASSED OVER.\nA KERMIT, TEX., MOTORIST, WHOSE NAME THE SHERIFF DID NOT GET, ALSO REPORTED SPOTTING THE OBJECT WHILE DRIVING ON STATE HIGHWAY 51 ABOUT EIGHT MILES NORTH OF LEVELLAND. HE TOLD THE SHERIFF IT HAD THE SAME AFFECT ON HIS CAR ENGINE AND LIGHTS AS THE OTHERS REPORTED.\nGLEN SAID HE COULD NOT OFFER A GUESS AS TO WHAT THE OBJECT MIGHT HAVE BEEN.\n11/3--WO543P"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-19 (Rev. 9-7-56) Tolson Nichols Boardman Belmont Mohr Parsons Rosen Tamm Trotter Nease Tele. Room Holloman Gandy NOTHING REMOTELY RELATED' Mysterious Object Amazes Saucer Skeptic A veteran airline pilot who once denounced flying saucers as \"bunk\" has reported encountering a mysterious unidentified flying object near Mobile, Ala. Capt. W. J. Hull of Capital Airlines described the incident in a report published by \"The UFO Investigator,\" magazine of the unofficial National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, 1536 Connecticut av nw. Capt. Hull wrote an article for a pilots' magazine in 1953 titled \"The Obituary of the Flying Saucer.\" His experience described in the \"Investigator\" took place Nov. 14, 1956. He did not suggest what he saw was a flying saucer. Capt. Hull said he was flying a Viscount at about 10,000 feet near Mobile, at 10:10 p. m., when he and his copilot spotted what we thought was a brilliant meteor. He said the \"meteor\" was descending rapidly, but instead of burning out with the usual flash, \"it abruptly halted directly in front of us.\" \"It was an intense blue-white light, approximately seven or eight times as bright as Venus when this planet is at its brightest magnitude,\" he wrote. He said he thought the object might be a jet fighter, turning away from the airliner and giving the pilots a view of its glowing tailpipe. But he said instead of growing smaller, the light remained in front of the Viscount. Capt. Hull wrote that the \"UFO\" (unidentified flying object) then began a series of violent maneuvers, \"sharper than any known aircraft, sometimes changing direction 90 degrees in an instant.\" It finally zoomed up at an extremely sharp angle and shot out of sight, he added. He said his own plane was above the clouds, \"precluding any reflections of search lights from below.\" There's accent on local sports in The News sports pages. Wash. Post and Times Herald Wash. News P-6 Wash. Star N. Y. Herald Tribune N. Y. Journal-American N. Y. Mirror N. Y. Daily News N. Y. Times Daily Worker The Worker New Leader Date 10-9-52 62-83894-A NOT RECORDED 141 OCT 14 1957 60 OCT 14 1957 F492"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-19 (Rev. 9-7-56) Tolson Nichols Boardman Belmont Mohr Parsons Rosen Tamm Trotter Nease Tele. Room Holloman Gandy Doolittle Scoffs at Report Of Nazi Flying Saucer By the Associated Press James H. Doolittle says it \"just ain't so\" that Nazi Germany developed a flying saucer and a bomber that could attack the United States and return without refueling. The veteran airman, chairman of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, last month gave a House Appropriations Subcommittee his estimate of reports published in Germany of great aviation accomplishments under Hitler. These were contained in a book by Rudolf Lusar, former German War Ministry special weapons chief. Gen. Doolittle's testimony was published today, along with that of Hugh L. Dryden, director of the advisory committee. Mr. Dryden said \"there is no truth\" in a statement that German engineers designed a flying saucer which attained a height of 40,000 feet and speed of 1,250 miles an hour. \"This is an advertisement for a book which includes material discovered by our groups who went into Germany after the war,\" he said. He said also the man supposed to have designed the bomber that could cross the Atlantic twice without refueling had written a book of his own with no mention of any such invention. Gen. Doolittle, asked about both the saucer and the bomber, said, \"it just ain't so.\" Wash. Post and Times Herald Wash. News Wash. Star A-1 N. Y. Herald Tribune N. Y. Journal-American N. Y. Mirror N. Y. Daily News N. Y. Times Daily Worker The Worker New Leader Date MAR 14 1957 INDEXED - 83 EXH 107 62-83894-A NOT RECORDED 138 MAR 20 1957 52 MAR 27 1957 62-83894"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-19 (11-22-55) Flying Saucers Tolson Nichols Boardman Belmont Mason Mohr Parsons Rosen Tamm Nease Winterrowd Tele. Room Holloman Gandy There Are Saucers, Expert Says By VERN HAUGLAND WASHINGTON, Jan. 15 (AP), -- Retired Rear Adm. Delmer S. Fahrney once head of the Navy's guided missiles program, said Wednesday reliable reports indicate that \"there are objects coming into our atmosphere at very high speeds.\" Fahrney told a news conference that \"no agency in this country or Russia is able to duplicate at this time the speeds and accelerations which radar and observers indicate these flying objects are able to achieve.\" * * * FAHRNEY SAID he never has seen a flying saucer, but has talked with a number of scientists and engineers who reported seeing strange flying objects. Fahrney called a news conference following an organizational meeting of a new private group, the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, of which he is board chairman. Fahrney said the committee was set up largely to tie together a number of UFO--meaning \"unidentified flying objects\" --clubs being formed throughout the world. Fahrney said his committee will collect and investigate flying saucer reports, evaluate them and make public its findings. Wash. Post and Times Herald Wash. News Wash. Star N. Y. Herald Tribune N. Y. Mirror 2 N. Y. Daily News Daily Worker The Worker New Leader Date JAN 17 1957 62-83894-A NOT RECORDED 191 JAN 28 1957 60 JAN 28 1957"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson Mr. Nichols Mr. Boardman Mr. Belmont Mr. Mason Mr. Mohr Mr. Parsons Mr. Rosen Mr. Tamm Mr. Nease Mr. Winterrowd Tele. Room Mr. Holloman Miss Gandy 'Saucer' Seen by 7 West of Saginaw SAGINAW, July 30. -- (P) -- State Police at Bridgeport Post received seven reports of a \"flying saucer\" between midnight and 7 a.m. today. One officer said he saw a flying object himself. The first report, which came from the nearby Burt Ground Observer Corps. station, said the object appeared about 12 feet in diameter, had red and blue lights and was moving swiftly. Various reports put the object's height at between 1,200 and 25,000 feet. The reports came from Saginaw, Midland and Gratiot counties. Police said the callers told them the object was seen over Freeland, Clare, Alma and Breckinridge, all west of Saginaw. Midland police said they received one call but could not spot the object. Similar reports were received from the Cadillac area early Saturday, but Air Force investigating planes found nothing. Glos Ludowy Michigan Editor-The Worker The Daily Worker Narodna Volya Romanul American Pittsburgh Courier Michigan Chronicle Detroit Free Press Detroit News Detroit Times Michigan Daily Wayne Collegian Date 2-3-56 Edition 5 STAR Page 8 Column 2 62-93994-A NOT RECORDED 126 AUG 8 1956 53 AUG 10 1956 Flying Saucer File"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-19 (11-22-55) Flying Saucers Tolson Nichols Boardman Belmont Mason Mohr Parsons Rosen Tamm Nease Winterrowd Tele. Room Holloman Gandy 'Confidential Files' Gets 10-Cent 'Saucer' Inquiry By the Associated Press If you want information on flying saucers, don't address your request to \"Confidential Files, Washington, D. C.\" Takes too long. And besides you may be investigated by the FBI. A woman out in Los Angeles (name withheld by various Government agencies) dashed off a note on January 15. It said: \"Confidential Files \"Wash., D. C. Dear Sirs--Please send me a bulletin of flying saucers, or the address where I can get information about them. I am inclosing 10 cents. \"Thanks.\" Seemed like a simple, direct approach--except for the address. The post office, casting about for some Federal agency that might have confidential files, sent it to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI, never one to pass out military secrets, made discreet inquiries. Then the FBI forwarded the letter to the Air Force, advising that nothing derogatory or indicative of subversion could be found in the woman's activities. So the Air Force reached into its nonclassified files and plucked out the latest summary on the number of sightings of UFO (unidentified flying objects), together with an explanation of why people think they see flying saucers--or what it is they see which the Air Force can or can't explain. The lady's 10 cents was taped to the summary and both were mailed to her address in Los Angeles. Wash. Post and Times Herald Wash. News Wash. Star A-1 N. Y. Herald Tribune N. Y. Mirror N. Y. Daily News Daily Worker The Worker New Leader Date MAR 21 1956 62-83894-A NOT RECORDED 126 MAR 28 1956 71 MAR 28 1956"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nOffice of Public Information\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nU. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information\nConcerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\n\nThe Air Force feels a very definite obligation to identify and analyze things that happen in the air that may have in them menace to the United States and, because of that feeling of obligation and pursuit of that interest, the Air Force established an activity known as the Unidentified Flying Object Program.\n\nThis program was established in 1947 when unidentified flying objects were being reported in various parts of the United States. The reports of sightings reached a peak of 1,700 in 1952 and dropped to a total of 429 in 1953. During the first nine months of 1954 only 254 sightings were reported.\n\nFrom a survey of the volume of sightings received by the Air Force, it has been determined that over 80 percent are explainable as being known objects. Generally, sighted objects fall into the category of: balloons, aircraft, astronomical bodies, atmospheric reflections, and birds. All reports of unidentified flying objects result from either radar or visual sightings.\n\nExplanations pertaining to sightings reported from military and civilian radar facilities are as follows:\n\n1. Temperature inversion reflections can give a return on a radar scope that is as sharp as that received from an aircraft. Speeds of these returns reportedly range from zero to fantastic rates. The \"objects\" also appear to move in all directions. Such sightings have resulted in many fruitless intercept efforts.\n\nTo possibly bear out the theory of temperature inversion reflection is an incident which occurred in January 1951 near Cakridge, Tennessee. Two Air Force aircraft attempted to intercept an unidentified \"object\" and actually established a radar \"lock\" on the object. Their altitude at the time was 7,000 feet. The unidentified object, according to their radar, appeared to be at an elevation of 10 to 25 degrees from this altitude. Three passes were made in an attempt to close on the object. In each instance the pilots reported that their radar led them first upward and then down toward a specific point on the ground. (One scientific theory holds that light can be similarly reflected from a layer of warm air above the earth. If this proves to be correct, many visual night sightings could be accounted for.)\n\n2. Ionized clouds have caused some unidentified radar returns. Thunderstorms are identifiable by radar and radar returns have also been received from ice formations in the air, balloons, ground reflections, frequency interference between other radar stations, and windborn objects. Obviously, such returns are very difficult to identify, especially when they occur during darkness."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. The radar screen has picked up birds and in one case a flock of ducks. Flight interceptions proved these phenomena.\n\nAn explanation of known types of visual sightings are as follows:\n\n1. Present-day jet aircraft, flying at great speeds and high altitudes, are often mistaken for unknown objects by the untrained observer. Sunlight reflections from the polished surfaces of aircraft can be seen plainly even when the aircraft itself is too distant to be visible. The exhaust of jet aircraft emits a trail and often this is seen rather than the aircraft itself.\n\n2. Weather balloons account for a substantial number of sightings. These balloons, sent to altitudes of 40,000 feet and higher, are launched from virtually every airfield in the country. They are made of rubber or polyethylene, swell as they gain altitude, have very good reflective qualities, carry small lights when launched after dark, and can be seen at very high altitudes.\n\n3. In addition to the ordinary weather balloon, huge 90-foot balloons, which sometimes drift from coast to coast, are used for upper air research. These balloons also have a highly reflective surface and are visible at extreme altitudes.\n\n4. Frequently, unusually bright meteors and planets will cause a flurry of reports, sometimes from relatively experienced observers. At certain times of the year, Venus, for instance, is low on the horizon and will appear to change color and move erratically due to hazy atmospheric conditions. Since the stars are charted and most of their characteristics known, many cases are traced to them. Meteors on the other hand are of rapid single-direction movement and are only visible for a few seconds. Meteor activity is more common at certain times of the year than others, and reports of UFO's have shown a tendency to increase during these periods.\n\n5. Some cases arise which, on the basis of information received are of a weird and peculiar nature. The objects display erratic movements and phenomenal speeds. Since maneuvers and speeds of this kind cannot be traced directly to aircraft, balloons, or known astronomical sources, it is believed that they are reflections from objects rather than being objects themselves. For example: suppose we would hold a mirror in hand under a light, causing a reflection on the ceiling. Only a slight, quick movement of the hand would result in erratic movements and phenomenal speeds of the reflected beam. Reflections may be projected to clouds and haze both from the ground and air. Many things which are common to the sky have highly reflective qualities, such as balloons, aircraft, and clouds. Accurate speeds are also difficult to determine due to the inability of the reporter to judge distance, angles, and time.\n\n6. Brilliant flashing lights that sometimes appear red and white in color have been reported by observers. This type has been traced to a new lighting system of commercial airlines and military aircraft. Atop the tail section of these aircraft highly reflective red and white flasher type lights have been installed and are many times misinterpreted by the ground observer.\n\n-2-\nMORE"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In the analysis and investigation of the radar and visual sightings described, there are some yardsticks which have been established from experience and trends to measure and attempt to determine the source of UFO's. Some of these are general in nature and are subject to change as new scientific and factual information is received. It should be remembered that any object viewed from a great distance appears to be round. Nearly all the sightings reported are described as round and would tend to indicate that most of the objects are at a greater distance from the observer than is generally estimated.\n\nAnother misconception centers about photographs of unidentified flying objects. At best the majority of photographs have proven non-conclusive as evidence to this program mainly due to type cameras used. Also, it might be mentioned that because still photographs can be so easily faked, either by using a mock-up or model against a legitimate background, or by retouching the negative, they are worthless as evidence. Innumerable objects, from ashtrays to wash basins, have been photographed while sailing through the air. Many such photos have been published without revealing the true identity of the objects.\n\nMore attention is given to moving pictures of unidentified flying objects since they are more difficult to retouch. However, only a very few movie-type films have been received by the Air Force and they reveal only pinpoints of light moving across the sky. The Air Force has been unable to identify the source of these lights because the images are too small to analyze properly. Since ownership of these films remains with the persons taking them, the Air Force is now in a position to give them out.\n\nThe difficulty of evaluating reports of all types is based largely upon the lack of basic data surrounding the sightings. The drop in sightings during 1953 is largely due to the increased accuracy and the completeness of reports being received. To be of value, a report should include such basic data as size, shape, composition, speed, altitude, direction, and the maneuver pattern of the objects. Without such information, it is almost impossible to establish the identity of the object sighted. In addition, a recent study has shown a direct correlation between the number of sightings reported and the publicity given to \"saucers\" by the nation's press.\n\nThe Air Force took a further step in early 1953 by procuring Videon cameras for the purpose of photographing this phenomena. These cameras were distributed to various military installations. This type camera has two lenses, one of which takes an ordinary photograph, and the other has a diffraction grating which separates light into its component parts. This aids in determining the composition of the object photographed. A small number of photographs have been received from this camera; however, only light spots of no detail have been indicated in the photos to date. As more photographs are taken by these observers, it is believed that a great deal of the mystery will be lifted from the program.\n\nThe Air Force would like to state that no evidence has been received which would tend to indicate that the United States is being observed by machines from outer space or a foreign government. No object or particle of an unknown substance has been received and\n-3-\nMORE"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"no photographs of detail have been produced. The photographs on hand are, at best, only large and small blobs of light which, in most cases, are explainable.\n\nIt may be concluded from the above and from past experience that no new significant trends have developed out of these cases. There was an increase in public interest which occurred simultaneously with the publication of various books and articles on the subject; however, this trend has been noted several times previously.\n\nIn order to overcome the lack of basic data, and to standardize all reports, a detailed questionnaire is now submitted to each person reporting an unidentified aerial object. It is felt that the information thus obtained will lower still more the number of unexplained sightings.\n\nFor observers who wish to report unidentified aerial objects, the Air Force would welcome the information. Attached to this report is a brief basic summary form. It would be appreciated if observers would send the completed form to the nearest Air Force Base.\n\nIf and when new developments turn up in this program, the Air Force will keep the public informed.\n\n-4-"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PLEASE SEND TO YOUR NEAREST AIR FORCE BASE\n\nDATE:\nTIME OF SIGHTING:\nSIZE:\nSHAPE:\nCOMPOSITION:\nSPEED:\nALTITUDE:\nDIRECTION OF TRAVEL:\nMANEUVER PATTERN:\nCOLOR:\nSOUND:\nLENGTH OF TIME OBSERVED:\nSKY CONDITIONS:\nVISIBILITY:\nGROUND DIRECTION OF WIND:\nNAME, AGE, MAILING ADDRESS OF OBSERVER:\n\nREMARKS: (General desceiption of what you saw--use back if necessary)\n\n6 2-83894-A\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. Boardman\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Belmont\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Parsons\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tamm\nMr. Sizoo\nMr. Winterrowd\nTele. Room\nMr. Holloman\nMiss Gandy\n\nGEORG KLEIN\n\nA NEW SLANT ON FLYING SAUCERS\n\nBy FORSAITH REES\n\nHERE is the \"real truth\" about Flying Saucers, as told by Georg Klein, former secret weapons expert in the German War Production Ministry, and now an engineer in Switzerland.\n\n\"Flying Saucers,\" he says, are top secret weapons of the USA and Russia.\n\"They are a continuation of German wartime experiments.\n\"Prototype Flying Saucers were built in Germany during the war. I saw one reach a height of 40,000 feet in three minutes, near Prague, in 1945.\"\nKlein says the Russians captured a scale model and top technicians at Breslau. The technicians have not returned to Germany.\nAnd Walter Miethe, V weapon inventor and key man in Saucer development, fled West and now works in the United States.\nKlein in a Zurich interview said there are two types of Flying Saucer built to-day-one with a diameter of 48ft. powered by five jets and a larger model with a diameter of 126ft. and 12 jets.\nThis, he says, accounts for the rumour that Saucers often appear to change size suddenly.\nRaised wing flaps lift both aircraft like a helicopter. The big one can keep stationary by turning jets down to counterbalance gravity.\nFlying Saucers developed in Canada by John Frost, former colleague of Sir Frank Whittle, have reached speeds up to 1,500 mph and have been inspected by Field-Marshal Montgomery, says Klein.\n\nREYNOLDS NEWS\nDECEMBER 19, 1954\nLONDON, ENGLAND\n\nOFFICE OF THE LEGAL ATTACHE\nAMERICAN EMBASSY\nLONDON, ENGLAND\n\n66 FEB 16 1955\n\nINDEXED - 24\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n126 FEB 7 1955\n\n1/21/55\nAF advised Sullivan (Mrs.) but on if Frost's ideas but we know he has never had anything in the air, attached letter from AF on flying saucers. Eg. Expert"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Flying Saucer?': Weird Spy Disc Sighted By Ship\n\nA circular object, grayish at first and then brighter, like the moon, shooting up from near sea level and disappearing in clouds at 5,000 feet, was sighted at sea last night 80 miles east of New York. Officers of the Dutch liner Groote Beer reported the incident when the vessel arrived in Hoboken.\n\n\"I don't know what it was,\" said Capt. Jan P. Boshoff, a veteran shipmaster, who said he watched the object through his binoculars. \"It might have been what has been described as a flying saucer, but I don't know what it was.\"\n\nThrough his most powerful binoculars, the captain trained them on the object, 40 degrees off the port side. Several other officer similarly trained binoculars.\n\nCapt. Boshoff described it as \"a flat object, resembling the mon, at first kind of gray and then turning brighter on the lower part, and around the edges having bright spots as if they were lights.\" He said it was moving \"directly upward, with great speed.\"\n\nHe said he never had seen anything like it before, and added:\n\"I am positive it was not a meteor. Nor was it anything supernatural in the sky.\"\n\nFlying Saucers\nJules Edh\n\nCLIPPING FROM THE N.Y. JOURNAL AMERICAN\nDATED JUL 29 1954\nFORWARDED BY N.Y. DIVISION\n53 AUG 9 1954\n\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n117\nAUG 9 1954"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. Boardman\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Belmont\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Parsons\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tamm\nMr. Sizoo\nMr. Winterrowd\nTele. Room\nMr. Holloman\nMiss Gandy\n\nFlying Saucers\n\n(OBJECT)\nNEW YORK--THREE CREW MEMBERS OF A TRANS-WORLD AIRLINES PARIS-NEW YORK FLIGHT REPORTED TODAY THEY SIGHTED AN UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT ABOUT 10 MILES NORTH OF BOSTON.\nTHE PILOT, CAPT. CHARLES J. KRATOVIL OF PORT WASHINGTON, L.I., SAID HE SAW \"A LARGE, WHITE-COLORED, DISC-LIKE OBJECT\" AT 9:30 A.M. EDT. KRATOVIL SAID THE OBJECT WAS PURSUING A PARALLEL COURSE AHEAD OF HIS PLANE BUT HE COULD NOT GET A CLEAR LOOK AS IT MOVED ABOVE HIGH CLOUDS.\nAFTER THE PLANE ARRIVED AT IDLEWILD AIRPORT, KRATOVIL RECEIVED A MESSAGE FROM TRANS-WORLD AIRLINES IN BOSTON STATING THAT A WEATHER BALLOON HAD BEEN RELEASED FROM GREENIER AIR FORCE BASE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, ABOUT 90 MILES NORTHWEST OF BOSTON, AT 4:30 A.M. EDT. THE MESSAGE SAID THE BALLOON WAS OVER BOSTON AT 9:15 A.M. EDT.\nKRATOVIL SAID THE MESSAGE DESCRIBED THE BALLOON AS \"ABOUT 100 FEET IN DIAMETER AND JUST ABOUT FITS THE DESCRIPTION OF WHAT YOU SAW.\"\nCOMMENTING ON THE MESSAGE, KRATOVIL, WHO HAS BEEN FLYING SINCE 1927, SAID \"IT SOUNDS LIKE A COVER-UP TO ME. IF THIS IS A WEATHER BALLOON, IT'S THE FIRST TIME I EVER SAW ONE TRAVELING AGAINST THE WIND.\"\nKRATOVIL'S STATEMENT ABOUT THE OBJECT WAS SUPPORTED BY THE CO-PILOT, W.R. DAVIS OF HICKSVILLE, L.I., AND BY THE FLIGHT ENGINEER, HAROLD RANEY OF BAYSIDE, QUEENS.\nKRATOVIL SAID THE LOGAN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT TOWER IN BOSTON SAID EIGHT EMPLOYES THERE TOLD OF SEEING THE OBJECT, AND IT DID NOT APPEAR TO BE A BALLOON.\n6/1--MJ315P\n\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n141 JUN 17 1954\n\n50 JUN 17 1954\n316\nWASHINGTON CITY NEWS SERVICE"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. Boardman\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Belmont\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Parsons\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tamm\nMr. Sizoo\nMr. Winterrowd\nTele. Room\nMr. Holloman\nMiss Gandy\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\n(OBJECT)\nMOBILE, ALA.--BROOKLEY AIR FORCE BASE REPORTED THAT AN \"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT, BRILLIANT AND SILVER COLORED\" WAS TRACKED BY RADAR OVER MOBILE AND THE ALABAMA-MISSISSIPPI GULF COAST LAST NIGHT.\nMAJ. JAMES ZICHERALI, PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER AT BROOKLEY, SAID THE OBJECT \"APPEARED TO BE A JET-TYPE AIRCRAFT OF NEW DESIGN WITH SHORT STUBBY WINGS.\"\nFIVE OTHER RESIDENTS OF ALABAMA AND MISSISSIPPI ALSO REPORTED SIGHTING THE OBJECT.\nZICHERALI SAID THE OBJECT APPEARED ON THE BASE CONTROL TOWER RADAR SCREEN AT 6:50 P.M. CST. HE SAID RADAR OPERATORS REPORTED IT \"MADE NO SOUND AND LEFT NO TRAIL BUT GAVE EVIDENCE OF DEFINITELY BEING MANEUVERED.\"\n7/1--S804P\n\n62-83894\nNOT RECORDED\n76 JUL 14 1954\n\n60 JUL 14 1954\n62\nWASHINGTON CITY NEWS SERVICE"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-19\nTolson\nLadd\nNichols\nBelmont\nClegg\nGlavin\nHarbo\nRosen\nTracy\nMohr\nTrotter\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nMiss Gandy\n\nG.I.R.-7\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nAir Force Hushes Up Saucer Probe\n\nBy ROBERT CRATER\nScripps-Howard Staff Writer\n\nAir Force leaders have slammed down a \"brass\" curtain at the Dayton (O.) Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC), where flying saucer reports are investigated.\n\n\"The Air Force will be unable to honor visits (including the press) to the ATIC because the volume of requests for information has seriously interfered with investigations,\" an Air Force spokesman here said today.\n\nHe said the original official policy had been to exclude visits by newspapermen, however this policy had been relaxed in recent months.\n\nMost of the mail received at the Dayton office is from persons over the nation who are curious about flying saucers.\n\n\"The mail has become so heavy that the two or three persons detailed to investigating unidentified flying objects--called UFO's--are not getting anything else done,\" the Air Force official said.\n\n\"Actually, UFO's are supposed to be only a small part of the investigative work done at the ATIC.\"\n\nThe flood of mail from the public was attributed to newspaper and magazine articles about flying saucers. Singled out were two current books, \"Flying Saucers Have Landed\" and \"Flying Saucers From Outer Space.\"\n\nJust how banning the press was expected to ease the situation was not explained--unless the Air Force figures this will reduce the number of flying saucer stories.\n\nTimes-Herald\nWash. Post\nWash. News\nWash. Star\nN.Y. Herald Tribune\nN.Y. Mirror\n\nDate: 1/13/54\n\n50 JAN 18 1954\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n160 JAN 15 1954\nJules Edgar"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'THAT WAS NO AIRPLANE'\nAre They Hiding Those Lights Under a Bushel?\nBy EVERT CLARK\nMysterious red lights which have flown over the Quantico Marine Base 22 times in the past six nights were officially explained away today as a new type of aircraft navigation light. But most of the Marines who saw them still don't believe that's what they were.\nIn addition, The News ran into what seems to be a deliberate attempt to cover up certain facets of the longest continuous \"flying saucer\" run in history.\nThe first man to see the light was Pfc. Norman Viets, 18, of Greenville, Pa. Since then, at least 30 other Marines, including half a dozen officers, have seen it, too.\nOn one occasion, sentries reported seeing three lights at once. They say they have seen the lights drop straight down, fly straight up and stand still.\nEven the most careful—and skeptical—observer, the base provost marshal, Maj. D. D. Pomerleau, admitted the lights had characteristics he never expected to find on an airliner.\nFIRST SIGHTING\nPfc. Viets was standing sentry duty at the Tank Park a few miles north of Camp Barrett on the southwestern side of the Quantico reservation at 9:05 p. m. Dec. 30 when he \"reported a moving, blinking red light near his post which he could not explain.\"\nThe sergeant of the guard, Sergt. Francis R. Salinder, \"investigated and saw the light but could not explain it.\"\nPfc. Viets told The News the light first appeared to come straight toward him over a line of trees about 200 yards to the south of his post.\n\"It was about a foot and a half in diameter,\" he said, \"only going about 10 or 15 miles an hour. Then it followed the tree line about 50 yards to the right and went down.\n\"It went straight down, all of a sudden. Fifteen minutes later it went straight up and moved over here toward the tank shed.\n\"I saw it two times after that. It did the same thing. It was the weirdest looking thing I ever saw. There was no engine noise and no shape—just the light.\""} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NO SALE\nBy the time The News talked to Pfc. Viets at Quantico yesterday, the airplane navigation light theory already had been offered. The News asked Pfc. Viets about it, and he said:\n\"That was no airplane. I first thought it might be a weather balloon, but it wasn't. Either way, you could have seen the shape.\"\nPfc. Viets and Sergt. Salinder saw the light again at 10:15 the same night. Five minutes later they called in the roving guard from a nearby guard tower, but the light was gone.\nCONFLICT\nFirst reports had it that troops were sent into the area to look for the lights. Yesterday Maj. A. B. Ferguson, the base information officer, said that report was erroneous.\n\"We did at no time dispatch troops to fight off the invaders or capture then or welcome them aboard or anything else,\" he said.\nHowever, this is what the official record says:\n\"A 13-man detail arrived (at 11:15 p. m., Dec. 30) from Camp Barrett and made a search of the area in which the light was first seen. The search proved fruitless.\"\nFifty minutes later Pfc. Viets' relief \"reported seeing the same red light.\" Sergt. Salinder saw nothing.\nHOVERS\nThe next night the light was seen again, at 6:25 p. m., by a tank park sentry and the guard tower. At 7:10, it appeared again. This time the sergeant of the guard \"came out and checked the area with troops,\" the official report says.\nThirty minutes later, the sergeant of the guard saw it again, and at 8:23 p. m. three lights were seen. (This was New Year's Eve.) At 9:01 it was seen again, and at 4:20 New Year's morning it moved northeast, then south, then north and remained \"over the tank shed at an elevation of about 3500 feet.\"\nThat was the time Pfc. Viets said, \"when they saw it come up there and lay under the moon until morning.\"\nPfc. Viets' relief of the night before got so excited he \"grabbed a butcher knife and headed for the tank shed to help out his troops,\" his barracks mates said.\nThe light came back three times Friday night, once Saturday night, five times Sunday night and twice last night.\nMaj. Pomerleau said the best possible way to describe the light's size, shape and intensity was to compare it to \"the way a blinking red traffic light appears to a motorist as he pulls up to an intersection.\"\nHe heard no noise and saw no shape. He said the light was \"sharply delineated.\"\n\"But I have friends and a professional reputation,\" he said, \"and as far as I'm concerned just say it's an aircraft navigation light.\"\nSeveral airlines that fly in and out of Washington say they began installing new lights atop the tails of planes six months ago. They blink on and off, are red, and can be seen much farther away than older types.\n\"Nobody in the barracks knows,\" Pfc. Viets said. \"They're just talking flying saucers, that's all. They're talking about men from Mars and everything else you could name.\"\nPfc. Bennett (top front) grabbed a butcher knife and said: \"It's landing in the tank shed!\" Maj. Pomerleau (middle photo) is skeptical, but still curious. Pfc. Viets (bottom photo) saw enough to convince him \"that was no airplane.\"\n-News Staff Photos by Gene Thomas\nTHE WASHINGTON DAILY NEWS\nGreater Washington Edition\n1-5-54"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mystery Is Dissolved\nMarines Decide 'Objects' Are New Airliner Lights\nAuthorities at the Quantico Marine Base last night took a long, searching look at those strange flying objects with flashing lights seen near the base for the past five nights—and decided they were commercial airliners.\nQuick as a flash, airlines operating out of Washington confirmed the Marine Corps' guess.\nAn American Airlines spokesman said flashing red lights, visible for 10 to 15 miles, have been installed recently atop the vertical stabilizer, or tail, of its planes. Other airlines also have put in such lights, he said.\nA group of Marine officers last night made a field trip to the \"Guadacanal\" area of the base, west of U.S. 1. They reported: \"This flashing red light, when seen for the first time by the unaided eye, creates an unusual impression and an illusion of nearness.\" That closed the matter as far as the Marine Corps is concerned, a spokesman said.\nUntil last night, however, the lights were reported to have done about everything. Nineteen Marines reported sighting a mysterious reddish \"blinking or revolving\" light over the base the nights of December 30 and January 1, 2 and 3. Rumors that platoons of infantry had been sent to the \"landing site\" of the objects and a report that a helicopter flew to intercept the lights were discounted by the Marine Corps earlier yesterday.\nThe base provost marshal, Maj. D. D. Pomerleau, who saw the lights twice, guessed that they came from an airliner, but added that he couldn't be sure.\nBut last night the Marine Corps had this final word:\n\"Officials here are convinced that the unusual phenomenon was a new navigational light of greater intensity used on airliners flying near the reservation.\""} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Marines Investigating\nMystery 'Flying Object' Lands Near Quantico, Say Sentries\nOne of those mysterious flying objects reportedly landed near Quantico on New Year's Eve but took off again before the Marines could get the situation in hand.\nA spokesman yesterday confirmed that a flying object had been reported near the base.\nTwo sentries on duty at Camp Barrett, a Marine installation about 15 miles from Quantico, reported seeing an object in the sky and described it as a flying saucer,\" according to the spokesman. They notified the Officer of the Day that it had landed, and the helicopter took off from Quantico. By the time it arrived, the mystery ship had risen and was out of sight.\nThe news spread swiftly among Quantico personnel. One report had it that two platoons were deployed to capture the thing but this was denied by the official spokesman.\nStatements were taken from the two sentries, and the spokesman said the investigation was now in the hands of \"higher authorities.\"\nThe two sentries were reported off the base on pass last night and the Marine spokesman was not able to supply their description of the objects, or their report of its actions.\nThe spokesman reported they had been summoned to appear before high officers of the Marine Base this morning for additional statements."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Swedish Pilot Reports 'Saucer'\nBy United Press\nSTOCKHOLM, Sweden, Dec. 18—The Swedish Royal Air Force ordered a full investigation today of an airliner crew's report of seeing a saucer-shaped object over Sweden near secret Soviet bases.\nGen. Bengt Norderskjold, air force commander-in-chief, called in complete reports from all Swedish radar stations after joining the defense staff in promising a detailed inquiry.\nCapt. Ulf Christiernsson, pilot of the passenger liner, told the defense staff he and his crew saw the disc-shaped metallic object shortly after noon yesterday over the southern Swedish town of Haessleholm, about 300 miles from the strategic Baltic coast.\n\"It was entirely an unorthodox, metallic, symmetrical and circular object,\" Capt. Christiernsson said. \"I was not at all scared, but curious, very curious.\"\nCapt. Christiernsson said the object flew faster than sound about 5000 feet above the ground.\nCapt. Christiernsson said the object headed southward over a low-lying cloud layer which would obscure it from ground observers. He said he watched it for about six seconds before it disappeared in the direction of East Germany's Baltic shore, near the former Nazi research station at Peenemunde, now operated by the Russians."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAUCERS HELD SPACE SHIPS BY EX-MARINE\nHits AF Stand On Flying Disks\n(This is the last of three articles on the controversial subject of \"flying saucers\" and their investigation by the Air Force.)\nBY RICHARD REILLY\nAre the flying saucers real—and if they are, what are they?\nThat, in essence, is the question that faces the Air Force—and the American public as well. Altho it remains unanswered, it has stirred no end of opinions and theories.\nOne theory advanced from time to time is that the saucers are some revolutionary type of weapon perfected either by this country or some other nation.\nThe Air Force, however, deprecates this possibility. In a recent statement, it said:\n\"The Air Force has stated in the past, and reaffirms at the present time, that unexplained aerial phenomena are not a secret weapon, missile or aircraft developed by the United States. None of the three military departments nor any other agency in the government is conducting experiments, classified or otherwise, with flying objects which could be a basis for the reported phenomena.\"\nWeapon Theory Discounted\nIn addition, a high-ranking Air Force officer indicated to the Times-Herald that it is believed impossible the saucers could be a foreign weapon.\nRegarding the question as to whether flying saucers exist, Lt. Robert White, public information officer, said the Air Force believes reliable observers such as veteran airline pilots are sincere when they report sighting unidentified objects.\nThe Air Force was tossed a hot potato recently by Maj. Donald E. Keyhoe, U.S.M.C. (ret.), who claimed in his recent book, \"Flying Saucers from Outer Space,\" that the saucers not only are real but that they are of inter-planetary origin.\nFurthermore, Keyhoe contends that the so-called \"Utah film\" possessed by the Air Force proves this point.\n\nTheory Bolstered\nKeyhoe's inter-planetary theory was bolstered by a letter published on the jacket of his book from Albert M. Chop, former Air Force civilian expert on the saucer project, who now is with the Douglas Aircraft company in California.\nIn the letter, Chop stated:\n\"The Air Force, and its investigative agency, 'Project Bluebook,' are aware of Maj. Keyhoe's conclusion that the flying saucers are from another planet. The Air Force has never denied that this possibility exists. Some of the personnel believe that there may be some strange natural phenomena completely unknown to us, but that if the apparently controled maneuvers reported by many competent observers are correct, then the only remaining explanation is the inter-planetary answer.\"\nUpon publication of the letter written on Defense department stationery—the Air Force challenged Chop's claim and said he was merely expressing his personal opinion.\nChop subsequently admitted that he was not speaking for the Air Force, but maintained that some of the investigative personnel had subscribed to the interplanetary theory. He said this was based on \"personal contacts with these various individuals\" and insisted that it was \"a true statement.\"\nCharges Cover-Up\nAmplifying his theory that the saucers come from another planet, Keyhoe claims they could originate from some other body in the earth's solar system—such as Mars or Venus—or from some other system or universe.\nKeyhoe charges that the Air Force is convinced that the saucers are space ships from another world, but that it is covering up because of a fear that such a disclosure would result in widespread panic.\nThe Air Force, however, insists that this is not so—that it is holding back no important facts from the public.\nLt. White said the names of persons involved in the sightings"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"intelligence experts reached the following conclusions:\n1. The average speed of the unknown objects was somewhere between 653 and 980 miles per hour.\n2. All the objects appeared round, of the same size, and gave off a bluish-white glow of very high intensity.\n3. The objects seemed to be maneuvering in a circular or elliptical pattern within the group, at very high speeds.\n4. Because of these high speeds, the objects obviously could not be balloons or birds.\n5. They were not any type of known aircraft.\n6. The sighting could not be explained by any conventional answer.\nAsked if the Times-Herald could see the final analysis report, an Air Force spokesman said that there were certain reports the Air Force could not make public for security reasons, risk of libel, and other reasons.\nHowever, the spokesman said the film could be viewed at Wright field, Ohio.\nNot Discounting Theory\nThe Air Force officially neither accepts nor rejects the interplanetary theory.\nBrig. Gen. Sory Smith, Air Force public relations chief, put it this way:\n\"We do not know enough about it to deny that flying saucers exist. Conversely, we have no proof that they do exist.\n\"In our investigation we are not discounting the possibility that the saucers—if they exist—could be interplanetary. We are interested in anyone who might be using the air over the United States.\n\"However, we have no authentic physical evidence that they are interplanetary.\"\nContinuing, Gen. Smith stated:\n\"For the Air Force to admit that flying saucers exist, it would want indisputable physical evidence. For such an admission, it would want stronger evidence than it now has.\"\nSumming up the problem, he said:\n\"So far, the question of whether flying saucers exist, and if so, what they are, has not been conclusively answered either way.\"\nBut one thing is certain, he added. The Air Force will continue to seek the answer.\nWill Push Campaign\nMeanwhile, Keyhoe plans to continue his campaign to compel the Air Force to disclose the facts he says it is concealing. He told the Times-Herald he will continue to make his claims in print and on television, and will challenge the Air Force to deny them.\n\"If any official, after reading the final analysis on the Utah film, says that it did not rule out birds, known aircraft or conventional objects as the cause of those objects, I will call him a liar to his face.\n\"I do not like to use such terms, but after all, the Air Force has, in effect, been calling me a liar and I'm getting tired of it.\"\nRegardless of the charges and counter-charges, so long as the Air Force has unsolved sightings in its files — and until it is definitely known what the flying saucers are — the average person is bound to wonder . . .\nAre the flying saucers real?\nIf so, what are they?\nThe final chapter is yet to be written in this strange drama. The answer is not yet available to us."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"To Fan Hysteria\nRed Labels 'Saucers' U.S. Fiction\nLONDON —(P)— A Soviet commentator Saturday accused \"aggressive forces\" in the United States and other countries of inventing flying saucers to fan war hysteria.\nMoscow radio broadcast excerpts from an article by K. Khachaturov in the Soviet army newspaper Red Star, saying:\n\"Those who spread these fables are endeavoring to create the impression that the mysterious object originate from Moscow.\n\"The mythical 'saucers' take off from the pages of the bourgeois press every time the ruling circles of this or that capitalist country, on orders from Washington, are trying to foist upon their people the new burden of military expenditure.\"\nNOT RECORDED\n46 JAN 8 1954\nTHE MIAMI HERALD\nMIAMI, FLORIDA\nDECEMBER 28, 1953"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BOWLING GREEN, O.—A PRIVATE PLANE PILOT SAID TODAY HE SAW \"AN OBJECT BRIGHTER THAN THE SUN FOR ABOUT FIVE SECONDS.\" WHILE CRUISING AT ABOUT 80 MILES PER HOUR TWO MILES WEST OF HERE.\nTHE PILOT, WHO ASKED THAT HIS IDENTITY NOT BE REVEALED, SAID HIS PLANE WAS AT ABOUT 2,000 FEET THIS MORNING WHEN HE SAW THE UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT.\n\"IT LOOKED LIKE A BALL OF FIRE,\" HE SAID. \"IT WAS BRILLIANT WHITE, LIKE MOLTEN STEEL. THEN IT TURNED BLUE AND TOOK OFF STRAIGHT WEST. IT TOOK OFF WITHIN FIVE SECONDS.\"\nTHE PILOT SAID THE OBJECT WAS TRAVELLING FASTER THAN ANY JET PLANE AND WAS GOING SOUTH WHEN HE FIRST SAW IT. HE SAID THE SKY WAS CLEAR AND THERE WERE NO OTHER PLANES IN SIGHT AT THE TIME.\nHE SAID HE DIDN'T THINK IT COULD HAVE BEEN ANY REFLECTION. HE SAID IT APPEARED ABOUT A FOOT IN DIAMETER AND WAS ABOUT THE SAME ALTITUDE AT WHICH HE WAS FLYING.\n12/11--TS151P\nNOT RECORDED\n191 DEC 16 1953"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CANADA PLANS FLYING SAUCER OBSERVATORY\nNot Optical Illusions, Top Experts Hold\nOTTAWA, Nov. 12 (CTPS)— Establishment of a Canadian government observatory for flying saucers, the first in the world, has been announced here.\n\"There is a very high degree of probability that flying saucers are real objects, and a 60 per cent probability that they are alien vehicles,\" Wilbert B. Smith, scientist appointed to supervise the new saucer sighting station, told reporters.\nHe said the federal transport department, in which he has charge of the telecommunications broadcast and measurement section, receives constant reports of sighting of flying saucers. The total number, he said, is classified as restricted information.\n\"The optical illusion explanation is lovely,\" he said, \"but in every sighting there is always some factor that precludes this explanation. We have decided to try to learn just what they are.\"\nCanada's sighting station will be at Shirley bay, on the Ottawa river 10 miles west of here. Smith said any one location in Canada is sure to have at least one saucer sighting a year. Associated with Smith in the project, which is under the transport department and the defense research board, will be a theoretical physicist and a specialist in gravitational studies.\nA 24-hour watch will be kept for saucers. Specially built equipment is wired to alarm bells. The equipment includes an ionospheric reactor, electronic devices for measurement of sounds, a gamma ray detector, a gravimeter, and other paraphernalia.\nJet planes may be sent up from the air force field near Ottawa to investigate any saucers reported by the station.\nDefense research scientists here never have poo-poohed flying saucers, which have been publicly reported in nightmarish shapes and forms over Canadian cities. Some of them have been described as multicolored cigar figurations.\nFrequency of the saucer sightings has been noted here to rise with the increase in proximity of the planet Mars to the earth.\nSmith said he does not rule out the possibility that the saucers may come from outer space.\nNOT RECORDED\n145 JAN 4 1954"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(SAUCERS)\nTHE AIR FORCE STILL INSISTS THAT \"FLYING SAUCERS\" ARE WEATHER FREAKS DESPITE A RETIRED MARINE OFFICER'S ATTEMPT TO PROVE THEY ARE SPACE SHIPS FROM ANOTHER PLANET.\nA SPOKESMAN SAID THERE WAS NO CHANGE IN AIR FORCE'S OFFICIAL VIEW, ALTHOUGH DONALD E. KEYHOE, IN A BOOK \"FLYING SAUCERS FROM OUTER SPACE,\" CLAIMED THE AIR FORCE HAS SECRET MOVIES PROVING THE OFT-SEEN GLOWING OBJECTS ARE INTERPLANETARY CRAFT.\nBOTH THE AIR FORCE AND THE WEATHER BUREAU, AFTER EXHAUSTIVE STUDIES, AGREED MANY MONTHS AGO THAT THE FIERY, FAST-MOVING OBJECTS SEEN BY OBSERVERS FROM COAST TO COAST WERE LIGHT EFFECTS CAUSED BY TEMPERATURE \"INVERSION.\"\nKEYHOE, HOWEVER, CLAIMED HE SUPPORTS HIS INTERPLANETARY SHIP THEORY WITH OFFICIAL AIR FORCE DOCUMENTS. A PRESS RELEASE PREPARED BY HIS PUBLISHER \"REVEALED\" WHAT IT SAID WAS A BITTER STRUGGLE IN HIGH AIR FORCE CIRCLES OVER WHETHER TO MAKE THE ALLEGED PICTURES PUBLIC.\nKEYHOE SCHEDULED A COCKTAIL PARTY AT 4:00 P.M. FOR THE PRESS TO PLUG HIS BOOK.\n9/29--GE1024A"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Plastic 'Moby Dicks' Flying Since 1950\nWhale-Like Air Force Balloons Rise 20 Miles, Solve Flying Saucer Riddle, Wind Secrets\nBy the Associated Press\nThe magazine Aviation Week published a new report yesterday on what the Air Force has found out about the upper atmosphere with its \"Moby Dick\" balloons—whale-like bags which have often been mistaken for flying saucers.\nSince the big helium-filled balloons made their appearance three years ago, the magazine said, more than 90 percent of the \"saucer\" sightings have coincided with their logged ascents and charted courses.\nThe shiny surface of the plastic balloons is an excellent reflector of light. Long after the sun has set and darkness has covered the earth, they shine brillantly with the light reflected from the sun at altitudes of from 90,000 to 100,000 feet, almost 20 miles up in the sky.\nVapor dust or other foreign particles in the atmosphere make the light appear white, red, purple, or green. Because of the difficulty of judging speed at high altitudes, the balloons sometimes seem to be racing at tremendous velocities, whereas they actually are moving at 60 miles an hour or less.\nOne evening after sunset many units of the Strategic Air Command in Texas were kept busy trying to catch and shoot down a flying object that was actually a Moby Dick drifting along at about 90,000 feet in a glow of dust-refracted sunlight.\nB-36 bomber crews, accustomed to flying high altitudes, gave up the chase when they were left behind at 45,000 feet, and jet fighters stalled trying to pursue the object above their altitude ceiling.\nAnother mysterious object, later identified positively as a research balloon, floated over San Francisco last spring during a parade welcoming Gen. James A. Van Fleet home from Korea. It shone as a brilliant white sphere as jet fighters vainly tried to reach it. On another day, Dayton, Ohio, was filled with \"saucer\" reports as another balloon floated over the city. The balloon flights have confirmed the fact that air currents travel in opposite directions at different altitude layers. The prevailing wind moves from West to East across the United States at about 50,000 feet. About 10,000 feet higher, however, the flow is sometimes reversed.\nBalloons have also carried various kinds of animal life, ranging from fruit flies to mice and monkeys, up to 80,000 feet. The experimental animals have survived such altitudes for 24 hours and have been recovered to provide living data for scientific research.\nThe Moby Dick balloons are released almost daily at Tillamook, Ore.; Vernalis, Calif., and Edwards Air Force Base in California. Two more sites will be used to take advantage of late summer winds—the Moody Air Force base near Valdosta, Ga., and Sedalia, Mo.\nThe big bags are made so that they destroy themselves automatically when they descend to 33,000 feet. Recording machines and instruments are parachuted to earth.\nTimes-Herald\nWash. Post\nWash. News\nWash. Star\nN.Y. Herald Tribune\nN.Y. Mirror\nDate: AUG 23 1953"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pilot Sights Small Flying Disc Chasing F-84 Over Japan\nBy the Associated Press\nUNITED STATES AIR BASE, Northern Japan, Jan. 28.—The United States Air Force last night reported a small, metallic, disc-shaped object made a controlled, sweeping pass at an American jet fighter-bomber and was observed at very close range by another pilot.\nThe report, from Air Force intelligence files, said the sighting was made over Northern Japan at 11:20 a.m., March 29, 1952, by Lt. David C. Brigham of Rockford, Ill.\nIt was a bright, cloudless day. Lt. Brigham said he got a very good look at the object from about 30 to 50 feet for about 10 seconds.\nThe pilot described it as \"about eight inches in diameter, very thin, round, and as shiny as polished chromium; had no apparent projections and left no exhaust trails or vapor trails.\"\nHe said it caught up with an F-84 Thunderjet, hovered a few moments and then shot out of sight. The F-84 pilot, whose name was not revealed, did not see it.\nIt was the second disclosure in a week by Air Force intelligence of mysterious flying objects over Northern Japan near the Russian-Siberia area.\nOn January 21, the Air Force disclosed that \"rotating clusters of red, white and green lights\" had been sighted over Northern Japan by American airmen.\nA.M. Edition\nDate: 1-28-53"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SANTA FE, N.M.--THE SANTA FE NEW MEXICAN SAID TODAY THAT \"FANTASTIC\" STRIDES HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE FIELD OF GUIDED MISSILE RESEARCH AND THAT IT IS \"POSSIBLE\" THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT MAY SOON CLEAR UP THE MYSTERY OF THE FLYING SAUCERS.\nTHE NEWSPAPER SAID \"SOME WRAPS MAY BE REMOVED FROM SOME ASPECTS OF THE HUSH-HUSH PROGRAM\" AT A SPECIAL DEMONSTRATION TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED AT THE WHITE SANDS PROVING GROUNDS SOUTH OF HERE LATER THIS SPRING.\n\"IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE DISCLOSURE SOON TO BE MADE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE MAY, IN PART AT LEAST, EXPLAIN SOME OF THE 'THINGS' SIGHTED IN SOUTHWESTERN SKIES BY BEWILDERED OBSERVERS WHO HAVE TERMED THEM 'FLYING SAUCERS' FOR LACK OF A BETTER NAME,\" THE PAPER SAID.\n(HOWEVER COL. M. G. HENDRICKS, COMMANDANT OF THE PROVING GROUNDS, SAID TODAY THAT RESEARCH THERE \"HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYING LIKE THE SO-CALLED FLYING SAUCER. WE ARE STRICTLY IN THE GUIDED MISSILE BUSINESS. THERE CERTAINLY WON'T BE ANYTHING LIKE A FLYING SAUCER DEMONSTRATED.\")\n1/8--N1134P\nWASHINGTON CITY NEWS SERVICE"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SANTA FE, N.M.--THE SANTA FE NEW MEXICAN SAID TODAY THAT \"FANTASTIC\" STRIDES HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE FIELD OF GUIDED MISSILE RESEARCH AND THAT IT IS \"POSSIBLE\" THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT MAY SOON CLEAR UP THE MYSTERY OF THE FLYING SAUCERS.\nTHE NEWSPAPER SAID \"SOME WRAPS MAY BE REMOVED FROM SOME ASPECTS OF THE HUSH-HUSH PROGRAM\" AT A SPECIAL DEMONSTRATION TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED AT THE WHITE SANDS PROVING GROUNDS SOUTH OF HERE LATER THIS SPRING.\n\"IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE DISCLOSURE SOON TO BE MADE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE MAY, IN PART AT LEAST, EXPLAIN SOME OF THE 'THINGS' SIGHTED IN SOUTHWESTERN SKIES BY BEWILDERED OBSERVERS WHO HAVE TERMED THEM 'FLYING SAUCERS' FOR LACK OF A BETTER NAME,\" THE PAPER SAID.\n(HOWEVER COL. M. G. HENDRICKS, COMMANDANT OF THE PROVING GROUNDS, SAID TODAY THAT RESEARCH THERE \"HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYING LIKE THE SO-CALLED FLYING SAUCER. WE ARE STRICTLY IN THE GUIDED MISSILE BUSINESS. THERE CERTAINLY WON'T BE ANYTHING LIKE A FLYING SAUCER DEMONSTRATED.\")\n1/8--N1134P\nWashington City News Service"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(RELEASE AT 7:00 P.M. EST)\nNEW YORK--THOSE LIGHTS IN THE SKY NEXT WEEK WILL NOT BE FLYING\nSAUCERS, BUT MERELY \"SUDDEN TRAILS OF LIGHT CAUSED BY SOLID\nPARTICLES FROM OUTER SPACE THAT ENTER OUR ATMOSPHERE AT TREMENDOUS\nSPEEDS AND ARE HEATED TO INCANDESCENCE BY THE RESISTANCE OF AIR TO\nTHEIR FLIGHT.\"\nTHEY'LL BE ESPECIALLY BAD ABOUT THE 10TH AND THE 16TH OF THE\nMONTH.\nROBERT R. COLES, CHAIRMAN OF THE HAYDEN PLANETARIUM OF THE AMERICAN\nMUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY, GAVE FAIR NOTICE OF THE LIGHTS TODAY.\nTHE TWO PRINCIPAL METEOR SHOWERS IN NOVEMBER, COLES SAID, ARE THE\nSO-CALLED TAURID METEORS, WHICH SHOW OFF BEST ABOUT THE 10TH OF THE\nMONTH, AND THE LEONID METEORS, WHICH STEAL THE SHOW ABOUT THE 16TH.\n11/8--E346P"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Discs\n(SAUCER)\nHELENA, MONT.--THE FBI, HIGHWAY PATROL AND POLICE OFFICERS INVESTI-\nGATED TODAY A STRANGE WHITE OBJECT WHICH REPORTEDLY STREAKED ACROSS THE\nSKY OVER MONTANA FOR ABOUT 100 MILES.\nTHE STRANGE OBJECT APPEARED LATE LAST NIGHT, AND THE LAW ENFORCEMENT\nOFFICIALS TRACED IT FROM BOZEMAN, MONT., TO THIS CITY. IT WAS ALSO\nSIGHTED OVER BUTTE AND BOULDER, MONT.\nCAA OFFICIALS SAID THERE WAS NO PLANE IN THE SKY THAT COULD HAVE BEEN MISTAKEN FOR THE WHITE OBJECT.\n9/20--WO952A\nWashington City News Service"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-19\nFIVE-STATE WHATZIT\nWell, It Sure Was Some Ball of Fire\nIt has been pretty well established today that the \"mass of flaming, incandescent material\" which flashed across the sky over Washington and five eastern states last night was a meteor, a flying saucer \"as big as a washtub,\" or a mass of flaming, incandescent material.\nThe Naval Observatory, the Weather Bureau and observers at National Airport lean toward the meteor theory.\nScores of Washingtonians, who saw it, leaned in all directions. Police remained stolidly upright, and the FBI had no comment.\nHOW IT LOOKED\nBut citizens here, in Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio couldn't be silenced.\nThey said:\n\"Suddenly this thing came swooping down from the eastern skies. It looked like it was right above the housetops. It was a ball of bright greenish fire with a long tail.\" (This was a housewife).\n\"I thought it was a flying saucer. I thought it was a flare at first--that is, I thought it was a flare until the darned thing swooped down--and then up again. It seemed to follow the contours of the road.\" (Army veteran).\n\"It looked at first look like a plane on fire, it was that big. It was sun-colored with a tail.\" (Suburbanite.)\nShaped like a star \"about as big as the inside of a tennis racket.\" (12-year-old boy.)\nSHOCKING\nFour Frederick farmers saw \"a ball shooting across the horizon.\"\nNear Washington, three United Press correspondents said it was like this:\n\"A rocket with a fiery tail... It shocked us, it looked so close.\" (Frank Eleazer.)\n\"A big magnesium flare... It gave off sparks.\" (Robert Loftus.)\nIt plunged out of the sky \"very fast,\" like a plane shot down in the war. It was trailing a tail of flame.\"--(John A. Goldsmith.)\nGeorge Lincoln, of 756 S. Greenbrier-st, Arlington, saw something \"about as big as a washtub. I was sure it was going to crash, some place,\" he said.\nA Maryland state trooper, sitting out his lonely vigil atop Negro Mountain in far Western Maryland, said \"it\" passed over him, too.\nTimes-Herald\nWash. Post\nWash. News\nWash. Star\nN.Y. Herald Tribune\nN.Y. Mirror\nN.Y. Compass\nDate: SEP 13 1952"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Saucers\nHigh-Flying Bomber Caused New Disc Tale\nSpecial to The Inquirer\nREADING, Pa., Aug. 28.--Air National Guard officers and control tower operators of the Civil Aeronautics Administration today \"cleared up\" the latest flying saucer mystery, as evolved in the skies over Berks county last Monday.\nThe saucers, seen by a large number of persons at that time, a spokesman said, were vapor trails of a B-36 inter-continental bomber and a jet plane, which CAA towermen said were flying at an altitude of 40,000 to 45,000 feet.\nThe jet left a bigzag trail as it dived in on the big bomber in a mock interception attack. The spokesman said such air shows were frequent when atmospheric conditions were right for the hot exhausts from engines to freeze at high altitude.\nThe big bombers, the spokesman explained, often fly far out over the ocean, and when they approach the coastline on their return journeys they are observed on radar screens and jets are sent up to intercept them. Such tests, he added, are frequent, to keep interceptor teams on the alert.\nThe aerial display on Monday was witnessed by hundreds of Guardsmen of the 112th Fighter Wing, Pennsylvania-Maryland Air National Guard, as well as officers who watched the maneuvers through binoculars.\nAir National Guard officers said the report submitted by Harry Feinauer, 43, of Birdsboro, who said he thought he saw a plane release a flying saucer in the air Monday morning, probably had to do with the jet which he saw diving on the bomber.\nNor did the Guard's explanation dovetail very closely with the account given by Herbert Long, 29, Kutztown insurance salesman, who told of seeing a flying saucer 30 feet in front of his automobile Monday night, off the Allentown pike near Maxatawny. Long said he saw the object so clearly that he was able to make a detailed drawing of its appearance.\nDATE: 8/29/52 THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER PHILADELPHIA, PA. PAGE: 1 COLUMN: 7 EDITION: STAR"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Saucers\n\nWHAT IS IT?\n\nFLYING SAUCER MAYBE?—The unknown object over the building in the picture, photographed above Anacortes, moves swiftly through the sky, seemingly a part of a cloud formation. But is it? Walter Elliott of Anacortes was preparing to take a picture of the building when he noticed the unusual saucer-like object in his view finder, so he snapped the picture at 1/100th of a second. Elliott was unable to determine the nature of the unusual object which quickly disappeared. (Associated Press Wirephoto.)\n\nSEATTLE POST INTELLIGENCER\nPAGE 10 COL. 1\n68 SEP 18 1952"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Discs\n\n(SAUCERS)\nSAN FRANCISCO--A FORMER AIR FORCE B29 TEST MECHANIC AND SCIENTIFIC LECTURER SAID TODAY HE SAW TWO SILVER GREY OBJECTS FLYING ERRATICALLY OVER SAN FRANCISCO AIRPORT \"AT TERRIFIC SPEEDS.\"\nROBERT G. GARNER, 38, SAN FRANCISCO, SAID HE AND HIS WIFE BOTH OBSERVED THE OBJECTS AT 5:30 P.M. YESTERDAY AND HE WAS CONVINCED THEY WERE \"NOT OF THE EARTH.\"\nGARDNER, WHO SAID HE WAS WITH THE AIR FORCE IN THE PACIFIC DURING WORLD WAR II, SAID THE OBJECTS LOOKED LIKE \"CROSS SECTIONS OF A CONE CLIPPED OFF AT BOTH ENDS.\"\n\"THEY WERE SILVER GREY IN COLOR AND APPEARED TO HAVE A DIAMETER OF ABOUT 150 TO 200 FEET EACH,\" HE SAID.\n\"BOTH OF THEM FLEW AT AN ALTITUDE OF ABOUT 12,000 FEET,\" GARNER SAID. \"AND I'D ESTIMATE THEY WERE GOING AT LEAST 1800 MILES AN HOUR.\"\n8/25--TS1147A\n\nFlying Discs OR Flying Saucers\n\nWASHINGTON CITY NEWS SERVICE\n51 SEP 17 1952"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Saucers\n\n(SAUCERS)\nPHYSICIST NOEL W. SCOTT SAID TODAY THAT THOSE FLYING \"THINGS\" PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SEEING MAY BE \"ANODE GLOWS\" CAUSED BY IONIZATION OF THIN AIR IN THE UPPER ATMOSPHERE.\nONE REASON SCOTT FEELS THAT WAY IS THAT HE HAS PRODUCED \"FLYING SAUCERS\" IN HIS LABORATORY AT FORT BELVOIR, VA., WHICH POSSESS ALL THE CHARACTERISTICS ATTRIBUTED TO THE RADAR-SPOTTED \"OBJECTS\" REPORTED HERE IN RECENT WEEKS.\nSCOTT WAS NOT TALKING ABOUT THE BRIGHT METEOR WHICH FLASHED ACROSS THE NORTHWESTERN SKIES HERE SUNDAY NIGHT, BUT ABOUT WHATEVER IT IS THAT HAS BEEN PRODUCING \"BLIPS\" ON AIR FORCE RADAR SCREENS.\nFIVE SUCH \"UNIDENTIFIED OBJECTS\" WERE SPOTTED BY RADAR AT NEARBY ANDREWS AIR FORCE BASE IN MARYLAND SHORTLY BEFORE LAST MIDNIGHT.\nAS A RESULT OF HIS CREATIONS IN THE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT LABORATORIES AT FORT BELVOIR, SCOTT SAID, \"I AM CONVINCED THAT THESE 'FLYING THINGS' ARE NATURAL PHENOMENA.\"\nSCOTT HAS BEEN CONDUCTING EXPERIMENTS WITH A LARGE VACUUM JAR UNDER CONDITIONS SIMULATING THE RAREFIED AND IONIZED UPPER ATMOSPHERE. BY IONIZING THE THIN AIR IN HIS BELL JAR WITH STATIC ELECTRICITY SCOTT AT WILL PRODUCED BALLOON-LIKE BLOBS OF LIGHT WHICH HE COULD MOVE AROUND AT ANY DESIRED SPEED. ALL, HE SAID, COULD HAVE BEEN \"DETECTED\" BY RADAR.\nIN A DEMONSTRATION YESTERDAY FOT LT. GEN. LEWIS A. PICK, CHIEF OF ARMY ENGINEERS, AND OTHERS, SCOTT SAID HE MADE THE LIGHTS STAND STILL, REVERSE THEMSELVES, OR WINK OUT.\nBY ALTERING THE AIR PRESSURE HE CHANGED THE COLOR FROM A NEON-LIKE ORANGE TO WHITE OR BLUE OR WHITE WITH A GREEN HALO. HE COULD MAKE THE BLOBS APPEAR TO LEAVE AN INCANDESCENT TRAIL LIKE A JET DISCHARGE.\nSCOTT EXPLAINED THAT AN \"ANODE GLOW\" FORMS ON AN IONIZED (ELECTRIFIED) LAYER OR VOLUME OF GAS WHICH IS POSITIVE IN RESPECT TO THE SURROUNDING ATMOSPHERE. SUCH GLOWS COULD OCCUR ANYWHERE FROM 50 TO 200 MILES UP, HE SAID, DEPENDING ON CONDITIONS OF ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURE AND IONIZATION.\n8/6--TS1259P\n\nWASHINGTON CITY NEWS SERVICE\n65 AUG 14 1952"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Saucers\n\n(SAUCERS)\nTHE COAST GUARD TODAY RELEASED A PHOTOGRAPH OF FOUR BRILLIANT WHITE LIGHTS SNAPPED OVER ITS SALEM, MASS., AIR STATION SEVERAL WEEKS AGO.\nTHE PICTURE, TAKEN BY A 21-YEAR OLD COAST GUARD PHOTOGRAPHER, WAS THE LATEST EPISODE IN THE NATIONWIDE OUTBURST OF \"FLYING SAUCER\" MYSTERIES.\nIT CLEARLY SHOWS FOUR RAGGED-EDGED ROUND OBJECTS IN V-FORMATION, EACH APPEARS TO HAVE TWO IDENTICAL SHAFTS OF LIGHT EXTENDING ACROSS ITS CENTER AND PROTRUDING FORE AND AFT LIKE A WING.\nA SPOKESMAN SAID THE NEGATIVE HAS BEEN EXAMINED BY COAST GUARD PHOTOGRAPHY EXPERTS WHO ARE SATISFIED \"THERE IS NO RETOUCHING OR FAKERY INVOLVED.\"\n\"WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE OBJECTS ARE,\" A COAST GUARD OFFICER SAID, \"BUT THAT BOY'S CAMERA CAUGHT SOMETHING.\"\nA UNITED PRESS REPORTER WAS ALLOWED TO SEE THE NEGATIVE WHICH WAS FLOWN LATER TODAY TO DAYTON, O., WHERE IT WILL BE EXAMINED BY AIR FORCE INVESTIGATORS.\nTHE NEGATIVE SHOWS NO SIGN OF RETOUCHING, EVEN UNDER AN ENLARGER WHICH PRESUMABLY WOULD SHOW UP ANY FAKING.\nTHE PHOTOGRAPHER WAS SHELL ALPERT, A COAST GUARD ENLISTED PHOTOGRAPHER. HE SAID HE MADE THE PICTURE AT 9:35 A.M., JULY 16, THROUGH AN OPEN WINDOW OF THE AIR STATION'S PHOTO LABORATORY.\n8/1--GE1137A\n\nWASHINGTON CITY NEWS SERVICE\n68 AUG 18 1952"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Discs\n\nJust Nature Cutting Up, Says Air Force of 'Saucers'\n\nTHE LATEST NEWS: Washington, July 29—Air Force experts said today that they are convinced \"natural causes\" account for the \"flying saucers\" which have been dotting local skies for more than a week and have been appearing intermittently throughout the country for more than five years.\nMaj. Gen. John A. Samford, director of Air Force intelligence, offered the further assurance that a six-year study shows \"no pattern vaguely resembling any threat to the United States.\"\nReferring to the fact that radar screens are picking up what appear to be natural phenomena, Gen. Samford said:\n\"I think radar is beginning to tell us a great many things it was not built to discover—for instance, about Northern Lights and atmospheric conditions after a heat wave.\"\nDespite the reassurance, which was delivered in an atmosphere of confusion, public concern over the mystery of the skies reached an all-time high.\nTwelve more unidentifiable dots on a Civil Aeronautics Administration radar scope here early today threw the city into a dither.\n(Jersey City reported tracking flying disks and one observer offered a photo of an oddly-shaped chunk of light to prove it.)\nThe Air Force flew the experts from Wright-Patterson Field, Dayton, O., to quell the gathering alarm, but meanwhile, USAF planes were equipped with special astronomical cameras, with which it is hoped pursuing pilots may be able to take pictures of the phenomena.\nAir Defense Command planes remained on 24-hour alert to chase the \"interlopers\" and, if possible, \"shoot them down.\"\nToday's rash of \"saucers\" appeared on the CAA screen from 1:30 a.m. to 6 a.m. Airline pilots who were asked to scan the skies for signs of the things reported did they saw nothing. Air Force radar equipment at a field near the CAA installation also spotted nothing.\nFor that reason, the Air Defense planes remained grounded, giving rise to rumors that the Pentagon somehow was surrendering to the \"saucers.\" The Air Force took pains to deny this, and promised pursuit the next time a flying mystery is sighted with the naked eye.\nMeanwhile, other responsible Pentagon officials reiterated denials that the strange aerial lights—or whatever they are—represent some new phase of U.S. military experimentation. They expressed firm conviction, too, that the things are no threat to the nation's security.\nTimes-Herald\nWash. Post\nWash. News\nWash. Star\nN.Y. Mirror\nN.Y. Compass\nDate: 7-30-52"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BEHIND THE NEWS\nBy RICHARD CARTER\n\nThe swift-moving celestial luminosities which the American public has come to call \"flying saucers\" are phenomena with a recorded history dating back at least 200 years and perhaps several thousand.\n\nThe Biblical Ezekiel's airborne wheels, for example, had some of the earmarks of what modern American science fiction readers, televiewers and \"cold worriers\" are on the verge of regarding as interplanetary scouts or missiles from Moscow.\n\nDr. Donald H. Menzel, professor of astrophysics at Harvard University, made this point in an interview last month with Time magazine. He produced documentary evidence that there was a saucer scare in Chicago on April 10, 1897, when many sky-watchers claimed to have seen two flying cigar-shaped objects.\n\nCigar-shaped objects have been spotted skyward by innumerable participants in America's postwar saucery.\n\nFlying lights which differ in all apparent respects from shooting stars, meteors, and the like, have been seen by multitudes of sailors over the centuries, and their accounts of the phenomena differ hardly at all from those contributed by recent viewers.\n\nSome people see white lights moving in formation; others see kelly green fire balls; others see orange fire balls; others see flying disks; others see the cigar-shaped mysteries. Some of the objects seem to hover, virtually motionless, before darting into a cloud and disappearing forever; others move at what seems to be an impossible rate of speed, reversing direction instantaneously, swooping and climbing in a manner which no man-made machine or human pilot could survive.\n\nSince one of the foundations of modern science is to believe nothing that cannot be proved, most theories about the skittering whatizzits have to be rejected. Many theories which have gained wide currency are based on facts which are \"probably true.\" But no scientist bases conclusions on things which only are probable.\n\nThe closest anyone has come not only to explaining the phenomena, but duplicating them, is Prof. Menzel. He believes the saucers are fancy mirages—actual images of lights, but displaced through miles of space by refraction. He explains that light moves slower through a dense medium like cold air than in warm air. When it passes from a layer of dense cold air into a layer of less dense warm air at an appropriate angle, it is bent, and may be seen miles away, as if disembodied.\n\nmoving at fantastic speeds, or just hovering, depending on conditions.\n\nHeadlights, aerial searchlights, even street lights in a city can be refracted by the atmosphere and become \"flying saucers\" out in the country miles away, he says.\n\nTo prove it, he has produced startlingly similar phenomena in his own laboratory.\n\nOne of the reasons the Air Force has felt impelled to take part in the public debate on the subject, after having satisfied itself through research that the saucers are something akin to what Menzel describes, is that radar scopes in Washington have been described as spotting the saucers at the same time pilots and ground observers were seeing them with the naked eye.\n\nUntil further returns are in, the only explanation available is one known to anyone who has ever had anything to do with radar—you see all kinds of unaccountable things on it. It was considered noteworthy that Air Force radar in the same region failed to pick up the impulses which the CAA now has added to flying saucer lore."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Saucer' Mystery Is Solved; Device Studies Weather\n\nOne of the Washington area's flying saucers has been tracked down finally.\n\nLast week a Martinsburg (W. Va.) woman found a mysterious five-foot square piece of aluminum covered material on her farm. She wanted to know what it was but nobody seemed to be able to tell and there was the usual speculation about flying saucers.\n\nAndrews Air Force Base cleared up the mystery today. A spokesman said the object was used by the Air Weather Service. It is attached to a balloon and sent into the sky.\n\nIt is then tracked by radar and the direction and speed of the wind calculated. The device is in constant use, the air base said."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"They're in the Sky Again\n\nRadar Spots More Mystery Objects Here, Fliers Report Sighting Glowing Lights\n\nWashington received another visit last night from the unidentified aerial objects similar to those reported here last Monday.\n\nAt least a dozen of the mysterious objects were reported to have been seen glowing in the sky within a 30-mile radius of the city. They were all picked up on the radar screen of the CAA Air Route Traffic Control center at Washington National Airport.\n\nAt 11:25 p.m., two F-94 jet fighters were sent up by the Air Defense command to investigate the lights. The pilots reported seeing the lights, but were not able to get any closer to them than about 7 miles.\n\nThe jet pilots described the lights as hard to see and track down.\n\nAt 11:33 p.m., one jet pilot observed four lights in the vicinity of Andrews Air Force base. The lights were about 500 feet above him and about 10 miles away. The pilot said he wasn't able to close on them, and they were \"really moving.\" He lost sight of them two minutes later.\n\nThe same pilot observed a steady white light 10 miles east of Mount Vernon at 11:49 p.m. The light, about five miles ahead of him, faded in a minute.\n\nThe interceptors did not sight any more lights after that. Although the radar screen still picked up the objects. One plane landed shortly before midnight, and the other about 12:15 a.m.\n\nIt was the second time these objects have been picked up by radar. Last night's visitors showed up first on the screen at 9:08 p.m. and remained for some time.\n\nAirline, private and military pilots all reported seeing them. Some pilots said they came within two or three miles of the objects.\n\nThey were variously described as looking like blue lights, the lighted end of a cigaret, or a cluster of orange and red lights.\n\nRadar operators plotted their speed at from 38 to 90 miles per hour. They were not able to determine their altitude. Some pilots reported flying over them and some under them.\n\nBefore last week's report of the mysterious lights, so-called \"flying saucers\" are believed never to have been picked up on radar screens. The objects shown on the National Airport radar, however, caused definite \"blips\" on the screen, which means contact with solid objects, rather than lights or reflections.\n\nA CAA spokesman said the objects picked up last night gave off blips similar to those of regular aircraft.\n\nThe Air Force has been investigating last week's objects. It said reports of flying saucers this month have been the highest since 1947, when they first were seen."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(SAUCERS)\nMIAMI, FLA.--(UNITED PRESS-UCNS)--TWO VETERAN PAN AMERICAN AIRWAYS PILOTS REPORTED TODAY THEY SAW EIGHT HUGE \"FLYING SAUCERS\" FLYING AT A 1,000-MILE-AN-HOUR CLIP NEAR NORFOLK, VA., LAST NIGHT.\n\nCAPT. NASH SAID HE AND W.H. FORTENBERRY SAW SIX OF THE STRANGE CRAFT, ESTIMATED TO BE 100 FEET IN DIAMETER AND \"GLOWING ORANGE-RED LIKE HOT COALS,\" FLY IN FORMATION SOME 6,000 FEET BENEATH THEIR DC-4.\n\nTHE SIX \"THINGS\" TURNED WESTWARD SHARPLY WHEN THE PAA PLANE PASSED OVERHEAD AND WERE JOINED BY TWO OTHER SIMILAR FLYING DISCS, NASH SAID. THE EIGHT \"SAUCERS\" ZOOMED UPWARD TO AN ESTIMATED 10,000 FEET ALTITUDE BEFORE THE GLOWING LIGHT EMANATING FROM THE \"PULSATED OFF\" AND THEY DISAPPEARED INTO THE SKY, NASH SAID.\n\nNASH, 35, ESTIMATED THAT HE AND FORTENBERRY, 30, \"WATCHED THE WHOLE MANEUVER\" FOR BETWEEN 10 AND 12 SECONDS.\n\n\"BOTH FORTENBERRY AND I HAVE READ OTHER REPORTS ON SO-CALLED 'FLYING SAUCERS' AND HAVE RESPECT FOR THE JUDGMENT OF SOME OF THE ASTRONOMERS AND OBSERVERS WHO HAVE REPORTED THEM,\" NASH SAID. \"OUR EXPERIENCE LAST NIGHT IS IN LINE WITH THOSE REPORTS.\"\n\nNASH, A FIRST OFFICER FOR PAA AND A FLYING EMPLOYE FOR 10 YEARS, SAID HE AND FORTENBERRY \"WOULD JUDGE THAT THE EIGHT OBJECTS WERE DEFINITELY INTELLIGENTLY CONTROLLED--WHETHER FROM WITHIN OR WITHOUT, WE COULDN'T SAY.\"\n\n\"ALSO,\" SAID NASH, \"WE CAN BE REASONABLY POSITIVE THAT NONE OF US--AS WE KNOW PILOTS--COULD PHYSICALLY ENDURE THE CENTRIFUGAL FORCE THAT WOULD BE IMPOSED ON THE OCCUPANTS WHEN MAKING TURNS OF SUCH VIOLENCE AS THESE OBJECTS MADE.\"\n\nNASH SAID THEIR DC-4, CARRYING 10 COMPANY PERSONNEL, WAS FLYING SOUTHWARD BETWEEN NEWPORT NEWS, VA., AND NORFOLK WHEN THE FIRST SIX SAUCERS APPEARED TO THE SOUTHWEST. NASH SAID THEY WERE FLYING IN AN ECHELON FORMATION--A DIAGONAL STRAIGHT LINE--AT ABOUT 2,000 FEET ALTITUDE.\n\n7/15--W0932P"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ADD SAUCERS, MIAMI\n\"WE FEEL, BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE MISSILES ACTED AND BECAUSE OF ALL THE OTHER REPORTS THAT HAVE BEEN HEARD, THAT THEY MUST BE FROM SOME EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL SOURCE,\" NASH SAID.\n\n\"IF EITHER OF US HAD SEEN THE THINGS ALONE, WE WOULD HAVE HESITATED TO TELL ANYONE ABOUT IT,\" THE PILOT SAID. \"BUT WE WATCHED THE WHOLE THING TOGETHER.\"\n\nNASH SAID THE OTHER PASSENGERS ON THE DC-4 WERE WITTING WHERE THEY COULD NOT HAVE SEEN THE EIGHT MISSILES.\n\n\"GIVING CONSIDERATION TO THE DIFFERENCE IN OUR ALTITUDE AND THEIRS, WE JUDGED THAT THEY WERE APPROXIMATELY 100 FEET IN DIAMETER AND BETWEEN 10 AND 15 FEET THICK,\" NASH SAID.\n\n\"AS THEY NEARED US,THEY APPEARED TO BE SOLID BODIES OF LIGHT, GLOWING ORANGE-RED LIKE RED HOT IRONS,\" NASH SAID. \"BUT THEY HAD DEFINITE OUTLINES.\"\n\nNASH SAID WHEN THE STRANGE OBJECTS GOT ALMOST DIRECTLY BELOW THE PAA PLANE, THEY MADE A SHARP, 150-DEGREE TURN TO THE WEST, THEN BANKED UPWARD AT AN ALMOST 90 DEGREE TURN. AS THEY GAINED ALTITUDE, THEY WERE JOINED BY TWO OTHER IDENTICAL \"THINGS.\"\n\nTHE LIGHTS OF ALL EIGHT FLICKERED OFF IN SUCCESSION AT \"PERHAPS 10,000 BUT THEY WERE GOING SO FAST IT WAS DIFFICULT TO ESTIMATE,\" HE SAID.\n\nSANTOS CEYANES, ACTING OPERATIONS MANAGER FOR PAN AMERICAN HERE, SAID THE FLYING SAUCERS SEEN BY NASH AND FORTENBERRY \"OBVIOUSLY WERE NOT FIGMENTS OF THEIR IMAGINATION.\"\n\nNASH, A NAVY TRANSPORT PILOT IN WORLD WAR II, IS A VETERAN OF 10,000 AIR HOURS. FORTENBERRY, FORMERLY A NAVY FIGHTER PILOT, HAS BEEN AN EMPLOYE OF PAA SINCE THE WAR.\n\nTHE REPORT MADE BY NASH AND FORTENBERRY TODAY WAS THE LATEST OF SEVERAL RECENT REPORTS OF MYSTERIOUS OBJECTS IN THE AIR.\n\nON JULY 6, FOUR PILOTS FOR A NON-SCHEDULED AIRLINE REPORTED SEEING A \"SAUCER\" HOVERING NEAR THE ATOMIC ENERGY PLANT AT RICHLANDS, WASH.\n\n7/15--W0908P"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(SAUCERS)\nCHICAGO--O'HARA AIR FORCE BASSE OFFICERS SAID TODAY \"FLYING SAUCER\" REPORTS HAVE PICKED UP LATELY.\nTHE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE SAID IT HAS RECEIVED 16 REPORTS OF MYSTERIOUS OBJECTS IN THE SKY IN THE CHICAGO VICINITY THIS WEEK.\nBUT OFFICERS DENIED REPORTS THAT A SPECIAL \"FLYING SAUCER\" ALERT AS BEEN ORDERED.\nPUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERS SAID JET PATROLS NORMALLY ARE ON THE ALERT \"24 HOURS A DAY.\"\nOFFICERS SAID THE AIR FORCE ENCOURAGES CALLS ON OBJECTS SIGHTED. THEY AID THE REPORTS ARE \"PASSED ON TO HIGHER AUTHORITY\" FOR EVALUATION.\nAN OFFICER SAID SOME OF THIS WEEK'S REPORTS APPARENTLY STEMMED FROM AN ORPHANAGE PICNIC AT WHICH 5,000 TOY BALLOONS WERE RELEASED.\n7/3--W0753P\nWASHINGTON CITY NEWS SERVICE"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(SAUCERS)\nDENVER--(UNITEDPRESS-WCNS)--FOUR FLORIDA PILOTS, THREE OF THEM WORLD WAR II VETERANS, TOLD TODAY OF SEEING A \"FLYING SAUCER\" HOVERING OVER THE HANFORD ATOMIC PLANT AT RICHLANDS, WASH.\nCAPT. JOHN BALDWIN OF CORAL GABLES, FLA., AN AIR FORCE PILOT IN THE PACIFIC DURING WORLD WAR II WHO HAS 7,000 HOURS OF AIRLINE PILOT EXPERIENCE, SAID THE OBJECT HE AND HIS COMPANIONS REPORTED SEEING EARLY TODAY WAS A \"PERFECTLY ROUND DISC, WHITE IN COLOR AND ALMOST TRANSPARENT WITH SMALL VAPOR TRAILS OFF IT LIKE THE TENTACLES OF AN OCTOPUS.\"\nHE SAID HE WAS FLYING AT ABOUT 9,000 FEET AND SAW THE OBJECT \"JUST BELOW A DECK OF WISPY CLOUDS ABOUT 10,000 TO 15,000 FEET DIRECTLY ABOVE US.\"\n\"ALL OF US HAVE BEEN FLYING A NUMBER OF YEARS AND WE'VE SEEN ALL KINDS OF CLOUDS AND FORMATIONS, BUT NONE OF US HAD EVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS BEFORE,\" BALDWIN SAID.\n\"THE OBJECT SEEMED TO BACK AWAY FROM US AND CHANGE SHAPE. IT WAS PERFECTLY ROUND AND STILL AT FIRST. THEN IT SEEMED TO BACK AWAY FROM US AND CHANGE SHAPE. IT BECAME FLAT, GAINED SPEED AND THEN DISAPPEARED QUICKLY.\"\n7/5--N643P"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Navy Calls Saucers Only Its Big Balloons\nNEW YORK, Feb. 12 (P).--Flying saucers are real--but they're only huge balloons used in cosmic ray studies, Look magazine will say Tuesday, quoting Dr. Urner Liddel, chief of the nuclear physics branch of the Office of Naval Research. He is in charge of the cosmic ray-balloon project.\nThe balloons are huge plastic bags, 100 feet in diameter, that may rise 19 miles high--about 100,000 feet. Winds may sweep them along at 200 miles an hour. At dusk, the slanting rays of the sun light up their bottoms, giving them a saucer-like appearance, the article says.\nThey carry instruments aloft to record what happens when cosmic rays hit atoms in the earth's atmosphere. This splitting gives a clue to how atoms are put together, and how to release their energy.\n\"When this project first began it was kept secret,\" the magazine quotes Dr. Liddel. \"Now there is no longer any need for secrecy on a scientific basis. And certainly, there is no longer any need to keep the public in the dark about what flying saucers are.\"\nLook says \"the Liddel report is considered to be the most authoritative scientific explanation of the flying-saucer phenomenon. As far as Dr. Liddel is concerned personally, he considers his answer incontrovertibly right.\"\nThe balloons, called skyhooks, were first sent aloft in 1947, and it was then that flying saucer reports began, it adds. There were more balloons in the next two years and more \"saucers\" seen. There were fewer balloons sent up in 1950, and fewer saucer reports.\nA picture, taken by telescope of a balloon at 77,000 feet over Minnesota, convinced Dr. Liddel even more, the magazine says. The photo fits descriptions of flying saucers.\nAt dusk on a cool summer evening is the best time to see the balloon \"saucer,\" it adds.\n\"The lateral rays of the sun at dusk illuminate the base of the balloon. There is no chance of your ever seeing the full roundness of it because you are so far below it. You see only the illuminated cup of the bottom. If your imagination soars, the light reflection on the side may impress you as the glow of an atomic engine. The wisp of the balloon's instrument-filled tail may impress you as the exhaust. The sun's rays may suffuse the plastic bag with a fiery glow.\n\"Even seasoned airmen have no way of estimating the size and speed of an object they see. To peg size and speed, the mind must know the nature of the object.\"\nLook says Dr. Liddel and associates studied 2000 reports of flying saucers, eliminating those \"seeming to be the visions of crackpots or psycopaths\" or \"clearly the result of inaccurate vision.\"\n\"This left a solid base of reports from airplane pilots, scientific observers and reliable laymen which could not be brushed aside. After a thorough investigation, Dr. Liddel said: 'There is not a single reliable report of an observation which is not attributable to the cosmic balloons'.\"\nIt quotes Dr. Liddel as saying that Capt. Thomas F. Mantell, air force pilot found dead in his crashed plane after radioing that he was pursuing a strange sky object, was chasing \"a balloon of the skyhook type.\"\n\"There have been several reports of squadrons of flying disks, and \"this is explained by Dr. Liddel as clusters of 20 to 30 balloons 10 to 15 feet in diameter, which are sometimes used in place of the huge skyhook.\"\nDr. Liddel checked other Government agencies and \"is satisfied that no other research or experimental project has utilized anything even roughly resembling a flying saucer.\""} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WHAT FLEW ACROSS ENGLAND YESTERDAY?\nFootball Crowds See 'Flying Saucer'\nBy Sunday Dispatch Reporter\nTHOUSANDS of people in many parts of Britain, including spectators at football matches, saw what many of them believed to be a flying saucer yesterday.\nIn each case the phenomenon--a strange white flash which darted across the sky at terrific speed--was seen about 4 p.m.\nThese reports of the passage of this object through the sky were received by the Sunday Dispatch last night:\nMore than 500 spectators at a Soccer cup match at Chard, Somerset, saw a strange white phenomenon dart across the clear sky high above the grandstand at about 3.45. Within a split second of passing it seemed to disperse on the horizon.\nSpectators Cried 'Oh'\nSpectators in the stand cried \"Oh!\" as the white, liquid form sped inland from the direction of the English Channel.\nSpectators at a Rugby match two fields away saw it.\nOne, Mr. Arthur H. Jenkins, postmaster of Chard, said: \"It was like a diamond flash; its shape was like a big peardrop, with the thin end tapering behind. Suddenly it melted' into nothingness.\"\nSUNDAY DISPATCH\nLONDON, ENGLAND\nDEC. 3, 1950"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Other people described it as a \"blob of brilliant whiteness\" and a \"sheet of white hot metal\"\nChairman of Chard F.C., Mr. William Taunton, sitting in the stand, said: \"It came right over the top of us like a brilliant streak and then seemed to dissolve before our eyes.\"\nSnake-Shape\nMiss Myra Scott, who was watching a football match at Perry Street, three miles south of Chard, said she saw a \"low-flying, silvery star with a tail\" shortly before four o'clock.\nAt North Petherton, near Bridgwater, spectators at another match saw an object in the north-west sky shortly before four o'clock.\nIt was described as \"a long snake-shape thing which streaked through the sky at a terrific rate.\"\nMr. T. Hollinghurst, of North Petherton, said: \"It appeared suddenly and went away suddenly, leaving a creamy smoke. There was no noise and there were no planes about.\"\nChannel Explosion\nA few minutes later a flash, as though from an explosion, was seen at a great height over the Bristol Channel, 50 miles to the north of Chard.\nReports from places as much as 130 miles apart were received at the Air Ministry.\nPortishead (near Bristol) police reported that a white flash was seen between 4.5 and 4.10 p.m. which appeared to be an explosion. It turned pink and disintegrated. The estimated height was 20,000ft.\nWeston-super-Mare police reported to the Air Ministry that they saw a similar flash in the Portishead direction at the same time.\nAnother sighting was reported from as far away as Durham.\nAirmen Saw It\nPilots of four jet aircraft of the Royal Auxiliary Air Force coming in to land at Llandaw, near Cardiff, reported a flash of light at 15,000ft. to the north-east of the airfield.\nAt a football match at Easton-In-Gordano, near Bristol, spectators saw a flash. Mr. M. V. Perrett, of Ham Green, said: \"It looked like a rocket coming down from 2,000ft. There was an intense white flash which left a trail of vapour.\"\nSpectators at the match between Shaftesbury and Longfleet St. Mary reported what appeared like a giant rocket. It seemed to fall from the sky.\nBovingdon airport in Hertfordshire, 150 miles east of Llandaw, also reported to the Air Ministry that a brilliant white light was seen a long way to the west at 4.5 p.m. Observers estimated that it was at about 20,000ft. and say that it vanished in a trail of smoke.\nAir Ministry said last night: \"A thorough check has been made and no aircraft is missing or believed to have blown up in the air.\"\n\"It is most unlikely that an unscheduled private flight could have taken place at such a height. We cannot explain the phenomenon.\"\n\"No aircraft was flying in the Portishead area.\"\nGame Stopped\nAt Towyn, near Rhyl, North Wales, Rugby players dropped the ball and, with spectators, stared into the sky as a yellow object threw sparks flashed across it.\nIt vanished over Tower Hill, Abergele, within ten seconds.\nAt about 4 o'clock spectators at Amersham, Buckinghamshire, football ground saw a brilliant object \"like a huge star\" flash across the sky, leaving a volume of smoke in its wake.\nAmong people who saw the object at Launceston, Cornwall, were two ex-R.A.F. officers who were watching a Rugby match.\nThe object, which was circular, gave off a bright bluish-white light.\nFootnote: One theory advanced last night by Professor F. A. Paneth (Professor of Chemistry at Durham University and a leading expert on meteorites) was that the object was a meteor. \"If pieces of meteorite are found,\" he said, \"it will be only the tenth to have fallen in this country.\"\n\"I would like to appeal to anyone in the areas from which it was reported to report at once if they notice a hole in the ground or a damaged tree that was not there yesterday.\""} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"What Did The People Of Devon See Last Week?\nBy Sunday Dispatch Reporter\nWEST OF ENGLAND newspapers gave much publicity last week to reports of \"flying saucers\" over Devon.\nThe saucers were reported by a number of independent witnesses from places as far apart as Woolacombe (near Ilfracombe), Exeter, Cullompton, Sidmouth Junction, and Paignton (60 miles south of Woolacombe).\nEye witnesses' descriptions of what they saw are substantially in agreement—there was no noise and a trail of fire streamed from the back. The observations were at about 11 p.m. in all instances.\nMr. J. Stewart, 70-year-old Woolacombe pensioner, who has worked in aircraft factories in two wars, was one of the five people who told the Exeter Express and Echo what they had seen.\nAt 10.50 on Monday evening, he noticed an object come inshore from the direction of the north end of Lundy at a \"terrific speed.\"\nMr. H. A. Franklin, of Beacon-lane, Whipton, near Exeter, wrote to the paper that while at Countess Wear (two miles south-east of Exeter) on Monday night, he saw two circular objects.\n\"They were of a brilliant silvery blue, travelling south, one behind the other in close formation,\" he said.\n\"After passing overhead, the rear object appeared to catch up with the front one and collide, whereon they disintegrated.\"\nBright Disc\nThe object was described by Miss J. Spurway, of Exeter-hill, Cullompton (12 miles north-east of Exeter), as \"a bright disc travelling with a circular movement at great speed.\"\nTwo and a half miles north of Exmouth, the object was seen at 11 p.m. by Mr. and Mrs. L. Mussell of Hill-crest, Lympstone, who described it as having been in two parts \"apparently attached in some way with a lighted tail.\"\nThe sixth witness quoted in the Express and Echo is Mr. A. J. Powell, of Sidmouth Junction, who, while between Patterson's Cross, Ottery St. Mary and Sidmouth Junction at 11 p.m. on Monday saw \"two brilliant, white lights come into view to the north-west, from behind a bank of mist.\"\nWAS IT A FLYING SAUCER ?\nSUNDAY DISPATCH LONDON, ENGLAND 11-5-50"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Long Red Trail'\n\"They passed swiftly,\" he said, \"in a southerly direction and appeared to be 'in line astern' with a long red trail to the rear . . . both lights seemed to fizzle out as I watched them—they were in a clear patch of sky when this happened . . . I heard no sound.\"\n\"Two large circular objects travelling south in a horizontal position looking something like large white flames\" is the description given in the Western Morning News of what Mr. Arthur N. Bearne, 55-year-old estate agent, of Southfield-avenue, Preston, Devon, saw at Paignton at 11 p.m. on Monday.\nMembers of the crew of a liberty boat plying between Flagstaff Steps, Devonport Dockyard, and H.M.S. Defiance are also reported in the Western Morning News as having seen \"circular objects travelling at an incalculable speed and emitting a trail of fire\" late on Monday night.\nThe Torquay Herald Express quotes four other people who saw similar objects.\nBluish Light\nFrederick Bray, fisherman, aged 39, was lying in the bunk of his boat in Torquay outer harbour when he saw a \"bluish-white light\" appear over Princess Pier at about 11 p.m. \"I watched the flames for about ten seconds. They seemed to surround a roundish object which was travelling towards Thatcher Rock\" (to the East).\nWhile walking along the sea front to Torquay Station, Mr. D. Jeffery, of Winner-street, Paignton, saw something in the sky. \"I thought at first it was a rocket firework,\" he told the Herald Express. \"Then I noticed it was maintaining a constant speed at a constant height . . . It was absolutely silent. It seemed to disintegrate suddenly and disappear.\"\nA \"ball of bluish-white light\" was seen at about 11 p.m. in the sky above Paignton travelling south towards Brixham. Mr. Harry Cove-Clark, of Marine-drive, Paignton, said: \"The ball of light was preceded by a thin blue blur which was overtaken by the main body.\"\n'Like Feeble Rocket'\n\"Then another bluish-white light appeared and a broken stream of lights seemed to fall from it. They all seemed to be following each other straight across the sky, then there was a spurt of flame from the end of the broken pieces—just like a feeble rocket.\"\nThe last of the witnesses, Mr. H. Warren, of East-street, Torre, Torquay, saw from his bedroom window an object \"going towards Brixham, due south of Torquay.\" Describing it in a letter to the paper, he said: \"I thought it was three stars with a long tail of light trailing behind them. . . .\""} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-19\nReports Plentiful, 'Saucers' Nil\nBy Drew Pearson\nThough a large part of the American public appears to be convinced that flying saucers do exist, so far the Air Force has not been able to track down a single bona fide saucer.\nThis is despite the fact that United States aviators have spent hour upon hour checking reports not only of flying saucers, but of such weird phenomena as midgets from Venus, shooting stars, and even an old washtub.\nThis column has now been able to examine Air Force files, and it is quite evident that the Air Force has done a painstaking job of trying to establish whether or not flying saucers do exist.\nThese files show that considerable time was even spent checking the report received from Movie Actor Bruce Cabot and the Wyandotte Echo, a newspaper published in Kansas City, that corpses of blond, beardless 3-foot men from Venus had been seen arriving on a flying saucer by a man named Coulter.\nDead on arrival, these space-traveling midgets had no cavities in their teeth, and wore shoes resembling human skin according to the story told the Air Force. Furthermore, Coulter was supposed to have as proof of this visit from Venus—a lunar clock operating on a 28-day cycle, a space radio, and, gear from the flying saucer, all of them supposedly arriving with the blond midgets from Venus.\nSo the Air Force, as it does with most of these rumors, painstakingly and patiently investigated.\nThe mysterious Mr. Coulter turned out to be George Koehler of Denver, an advertising salesman for radio station KMYR. He produced the flying-saucer gen, but it turned out to be a mundane product of this planet, stamped with the Roman numeral VI. His space radio was a chunk of metal that utterly failed to pick up a message or even a wheeze from space.\nIn the face of this evidence, Koehler still claimed knowledge of the little men, but refused to divulge his source and drastically revised his story.\nAccording to the confidential Air Force report, \"Koehler stated that he had no parts of flying saucers in his possession at present. He denied having ever seen any flying saucer or its occupants.\"\nFlying Washtub\nAnother hot tip which Air Force investigators patiently tracked down was that a flying saucer had actually crashed near Warren, Minn. The report was traced to Walter Sirek, a service station operator, who directed the investigators to look behind Nish's Tavern.\nWhat they saw was summed up in the secret Air Force files as follows: \"The machine was obviously made from various objects such as an old washing machine cover, part of a radio set chassis and a spent insecticide bomb.\"\nIt developed that Ted Heyen and Robert Schaeffer, who run the local hardware store, had made the \"flying saucer\" as a joke.\nThe Air Force has even received pictures of saucers in flight. The most spectacular was a movie of two silvery discs streaking over the baseball park at Great Falls, Mont., sent in by Nick Mariana, park manager.\nHowever, investigators found that the pictures were taken between 11:20 and 11:35 a. m. on August 15. By coincidence, two silvery F-84 jet fighters from Ladd Air Force Base, Alaska, flew high over Great Falls at exactly that time. The sun was shining so that reflections from the high-flying jets appeared as two silvery blurs, like saucers.\nOnce the Air Force's own radar screen near Wright Field, Ohio, picked up what appeared to be a flying saucer drifting eastward at 20 miles per hour. But prompt investigation showed it to be only a dense black cloud so charged with electronic particles that it appeared on radar.\nMeanwhile, flying saucer reports continue to pour into the Air Force at the rate of five or six per day but, so far, not a one has ever materialized.\nMissing GIs\nOne tragic and unpublicized fact about the Korean war is that at this writing the Army has only been able to release 138 prisoners of war from Korean prison camps.\nThis leaves approximately 4000 Americans still missing. Originally the Army believed that most of these missing GIs had been killed in action. However, since U. N. troops have now traveled the entire length of Korea without recovering the bodies of these missing men, it is believed they must have been taken prisoners and removed to Siberia.\nSo far, Chinese troops have treated American prisoners almost as if they were allies, returning many of them to American lines. But if the 4000 GIs were transported into Siberia by the Russians, the story may be different. This possibility is giving the Army great concern.\nNOTE—As of the last official count, 4144 GIs were listed as missing.\nCapital Capsules\nLady Diplomats—Madame Minister Perle Mesta put up a gallant fight but she lost. She's going to have to be 'satisfied with being a plain \"Minister\" instead of a full-fledged \"Ambassador\" to Luxembourg. . . . Main reason Perle came back to Washington was to persuade the President to raise her American Legation to a full Embassy. Even though she's a close friend of Mr. Truman's, he said no. . . Meanwhile, the other lady diplomat, Eugenie Anderson in Denmark, will continue to reign supreme as the only lady Ambassador in the United States diplomatic corps.\nTo Aid for Tibet—United States Ambassador Austin has privately advised El Salvador to give up its campaign to get the United Nations to rescue Tibet. The United Nations, Austin said, has enough trouble in Korea without taking on more headaches in the most mountainous and inaccessible country in the world.\nTreaty for Japan—President Truman has told Secretary Acheson that unless Russia answers within the next month, he is in favor of going ahead and holding the Japanese peace treaty conference without Soviet representatives. The President told this to Acheson and John Foster Dulles during a secret meeting at which they reported that Russia has not yet even indicated it will attend the conference."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Discs\nThe World Today\nFour Philadelphia policemen said they saw a saucer-like object land in a field. Before FBI men could join them, however, the six-foot gadget had evaporated. One of the policemen who touched the thing said the portion he handled dissolved at once, leaving a sticky odorless residue."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(SAUCER)\nPOPLAR BLUFF, MO.--FOUR PLANES CHASED AFTER A STRANGE SPHERICAL OBJECT WHICH HUNDREDS OF PERSONS SAW ROARING ACROSS THE SKY, BUT THE PILOTS SAID TODAY THEY COULDN'T GET NEAR IT.\nPOLICE, AIRPORT AND RADIO STATION PERSONNEL SAID \"JUST ABOUT EVERYONE IN POPLAR BLUFF\" SAW THE MYSTERIOUS OBJECT FOR FIVE OR SIX HOURS YESTERDAY AFTERNOON.\nCAA WORKERS AT MALDEN, 25 MILES SOUTHEAST OF HERE, PLOTTED ITS SOUTHEASTERLY COURSE FROM 4 P.M. UNTIL DARK. DESCRIPTIONS OF THE OBJECT AND GUESSES AS TO ITS IDENTITY WERE VARIED.\nNATIONAL GUARD AUTHORITIES AT MEMPHIS, TENN., SENT TWO F-51 FIGHTERS UP FOR A CHECK.\nA NATIONAL GUARD SERGEANT CONFIRMED THAT THE F-51'S CLIMBED TO 30,000 FEET BUT COULD NOT MAKE CONTACT WITH THE OBJECT. HE DID NOT SAY WHETHER THE PILOTS ACTUALLY SAW THE OBJECT.\nA CAA OFFICIAL AT MALDEN, WHO MAINTAINED TWO-WAY RADIO CONTACT WITH THE F-51'S, SAID THE PILOT OF THE FIRST PLANE UP REPORTED FROM AN ALTITUDE OF 31,000 FEET:\n\"IT'S STILL WAY ABOVE ME, APPARENTLY MOTIONLESS. I'M NOT GETTING ANY NEARER. FUEL SUPPLY ALMOST EXHAUSTED.\"\nTHE OTHER F-51 PILOT MADE A SIMILAR REPORT, THE CAA OFFICIAL SAID. THE CAA WORKER ALSO LOGGED A REPORT FROM AN F-80 JET PLANE, BASE AND DESTINATION UNKNOWN, WHICH PRESUMABLY HAD BEEN TOLD TO SIZE UP THE OBJECT. AT 40,000 FEET, THE F-80 PILOT REPORTED HE APPEARED TO BE \"NO CLOSER THAN ON THE GROUND.\"\n9/19--TS1022A\nWASHINGTON CITY NEWS SERVICE"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(\"SAUSAGE\")\nSPRINGFIELD, ILL--PILOT JIM GRAHAM CLAIMED TODAY THAT A \"FLYING SAUSAGE\" COLLIDED WITH HIS PLANE AND \"EXPLODED LIKE A BOMB\"--BUT CAUSED NO DAMAGE.\nGRAHAM, CHIEF PILOT FOR THE CAPITAL AVIATION COMPANY HERE, WAS FLYING TO SPRINGFIELD FROM CHICAGO LAST NIGHT WHEN HE SIGHTED THE OBJECT AS HE FLEW OVER WILLIAMSVILLE, JUST NORTH OF HERE.\nHE SAID THE OBJECT WAS A \"BLUE STREAK ABOUT 10 FEET LONG AND SHAPED LIKE A SAUSAGE.\" HE SAID IT WAS TRAILING YELLOW FIRE.\nTHE OBJECT, WHICH WAS SLIGHTLY ABOVE HIS PLANE, DIVED SUDDENLY AND PLOUGHED DIRECTLY INTO HIS PROPELLER.\n\"IT EXPLODED LIKE A BOMB WHEN IT STRUCK,\" HE SAID.\nGRAHAM MANAGED TO STAY ON COURSE AND LANDED AT CAPITAL AIRPORT HERE. HE EXPECTED TO FIND HIS PLANE EXTENSIVELY DAMAGED, HE SAID, BUT A THOROUGH INSPECTION SHOWED NOTHING.\nSEVERAL OTHER SPRINGFIELD RESIDENTS ALSO REPORTED SEEING THE \"FLYING SAUSAGE.\" ONE WOMAN SAID SHE AND HER HUSBAND WERE SITTING ON THEIR PORCH AND SAW IT PASS OVER SPRINGFIELD.\nOBSERVERS AT THE WEATHER BUREAU SAID THE ONLY EXPLANATION THEY COULD OFFER WAS THAT THE OBJECT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A METEOR THAT APPEARED TO HIT GRAHAM'S PLANE BUT EXPLODED RIGHT IN FRONT OF IT. THEY SAID THEY DID NOT SEE THE OBJECT.\n7/30--L0441P"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(SAUCERS)\nFARGO, N. D.--FOUR PERSONS REPORTED THEY WATCHED FIVE STRANGE, MOON-LIKE OBJECTS FLYING IN FORMATION SOUTH OF FARGO FOR 34 MINUTES.\nTHE BRIGHTLY-SHINING OBJECTS WERE SPOTTED AT 3:07 A. M. CST BY FARGO WEATHER BUREAU EMPLOYE RAY WILSON. HE SAID HE WATCHED THEM UNTIL 3:41 WHEN CLOUDS OBSCURED VISION.\nMARIAN EDDY, AN AIRLINES EMPLOYE, AND MIKE ENDERSBY AND MARGARET LAWSON OF THE CAA SAID THEY SAW THE OBJECTS FROM THE FARGO AIRPORT.\nWILSON SAID ONLY ONE OF THE OBJECTS WAS VISIBLE TO THE NAKED EYE. WITH TELESCOPES AND FIELD GLASSES THE FARGOANS SAID THEY COULD SEE TWO SMALL OBJECTS ON EACH SIDE OF THE \"THING.\"\nWILSON SAID THE OBJECTS DIDN'T SHOW MUCH SPEED, BUT SHOWED MANEUVERABILITY. ENDERSBY SAID THEY LOOKED LIKE A WHITE FLAME MANEUVERING IN THE AIR.\n7/14--T130P"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-26\n'Flying Saucer' Tracked on Navy Radar Screen\nMEMPHIS, Tenn., July 13 (UP). The Navy studied a report today from two pilots and an electronics instructor who claimed to have tracked a flying saucer or some strange craft on a radar screen for eight miles.\nBoth fliers reported seeing a shiny round object whizzing past their training planes, about 10 miles northeast of Osceola, Ark., last night.\nElectronics technician G. D. Wehner, who was flying with enlisted pilot R. E. Moore, said he \"caught it on the radar scope. It was helmet-shaped. The outline of the edges were all right, but glare from the center of it presented getting a better look.\"\nFirst Thought Jet\n\"At first we thought it was a jet plane distorted by glare off the aluminum body,\" said Lt. (j.g.) J. W. Martin, the second pilot.\n\"When I first spotted the saucer it was about two miles off and appeared to be a round ball. It was in sight for about three minutes and at one time we were within one mile of it.\"\nMoore said, \"It was on our left and traveled across in front of us and disappeared in the distance to our right. I think it would be about 25 to 45 feet across and about seven feet high.\"\n\"The thing looked like a World War I helmet seen from the side. Or a shiny shallow bowl turned upside down. We wanted to follow it, but our training ships couldn't keep up with the saucer, or whatever it was.\"\nThe pilots, based at the Millington naval air station near here, estimated the object was flying at an altitude of 8,000 feet at a speed of 200 miles per hour.\nThe navy declined comment.\nSimilar flying saucer stories have been discounted by the armed forces.\nTimes-Herald 9 sec\nWash. Post\nWash. News\nWash. Star\nN.Y. Mirror\nDate: 7-13-50"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCER RIDDLE\nSO far flying saucers have been treated by the majority of British people with incredulity and polite ridicule. But why?\nI have studied all the reports available. I have seen photographs—those in the Sunday Dispatch last week were particularly clear—and I believe they are photographs of disc-type aircraft.\nEarlier pictures published in the Spanish Press last April, and alleged to have been taken in the Balearic Islands, might have been anytning and could have been a leg-pull. It is not always easy to sort the wheat from the chaff.\nSECRET TRIALS\nIN all the reports the objects fall into three groups. The most substantial of them come from America.\nFirst group are those saucers which are capable of being explained away as glimpses of experimental trials of various devices.\nUnder this heading fall many of the objects seen in Southern U.S. and other areas where secret experiments are in progress. For this group I am prepared to accept the explanation given by the United States Army Air Force as \"misinterpretations of conventional objects.\"\nThese conventional objects are giant experimental cosmic ray balloons which fill out to 100ft. long and 70ft. in diameter as they rise, radar target balloons capable of rising to 70,000ft. and trailing glittering aluminium foil strip, guided missiles, and stratospheric experiments from Los Alamos, where rockets are stated to have reached 250 miles above the earth's surface.\nGroup Two consists of those currently mysterious visitants which have led to wild surmises about space ships, missiles from other planets and inter-planetary shooping.\nThe descriptions are remarkably consistent and generally the object is either white or silver, darting about without directional control or travelling at prodigious speeds, vanishing suddenly, and associated with brilliant light, fringes of fire or flames of peculiar colour and generally rotating or whirling.\nFrom many parts of the world come these reports. The very fact that their descriptions are so consistent has led to their being dismissed as hallucinations, defective vision, or mild hysteria.\nIt might be that the solution of this riddle could lie in a very unorthodox approach, and I have wondered if there could possibly be turbulence set up in our atmosphere which could cause whirling \"dust devils\" of luminous gases caused by jet or other high speed experiments which might be responsible for the generation of small atomic whirlpools in the atmosphere.\nGroup Three reports suggest that the saucers are high speed aircraft of circular or disc shape travelling at speeds much higher than those attained by normal planes.\nSAFETY SEARCH\nTHERE is no reason at all why annular and circular disc-like aircraft should not have been common objects at any time during the past 30 years.\nThe early history of these very unorthodox-looking aircraft was, ironically, based on a search for safety.\nBefore 1910 it had been shown that square and circular surfaces had very good non-stalling characteristics up to large angles. But when powered aircraft arrived it was found that the easiest way to minimise the losses due to the end slip of the air from the wing tips was to increase the span of wings while keeping them narrow.\nThis compromise brought other trouble. Early planes reached their stalling angle at some 15 degrees, and stalling must result in a dive since the only correction of a stall is a flight at some speed greater than the stalling speed.\nVery early in the 1905-1910 period there were people who would not accept that aircraft must, of necessity, be subject to these dangers. They turned aside to investigate possible wing forms which should be safe from stalling and spinning.\nAmong these \"rebels\" a few names have become air history, Jose Weiss and Arthur Keith with their completely stable swallow-like monoplane in 1909. Etrich and Wels in Austria in 1911, evolving a stable wingform based on the Zannonia leaf from which Rumpler and the majority of German builders developed the Taube monoplane. Dunne, with his too stable, tailless, back-swept wing biplane in 1912, and the Lee-Richards annular monoplane of 1910-14, with which I was associated.\nNOT PERFECT\nWITH the outbreak of the 1914 war research of this type was abandoned, and study concentrated on performance rather than safety.\nBy 1918 the modern plane was established, and earlier research was forgotten.\nCivil airlines naturally used adapted war planes, and then came World War II. Once more limitations were imposed.\nIn spite of the orthodoxy of design there was throughout the inter-war years, and still today there is still, a considerable body of technical opinion not satisfied that perfection has been reached. And here, I think, lies the real answer.\nThis body of opinion has been continually searching for the \"safe\" design. Designers of many nationalities have been striving since the early 1920's with great success toward a foolproof plane of disc type.\nIn 1934-35 Charles H. Zimmermann, in the United States, built a disc wing airplane combined with a helicopter capable of vertical ascent and descent and a high forward speed.\nNAVY STEPS IN\nIN 1937 he granted licences for his patents to the Chance Vought Aircraft Division of the United Aircraft Corporation in the U.S.\nBut at that point the U.S. Navy stepped in, and all further development has been of a secret nature, though it has been stated that this combination is capable of speeds from 0 to 500 miles per hour.\nThis performance is in accord with reports that flying saucers travel at great speeds, hover, ascend and descend with little forward motion.\nIt is perhaps, a little hard to believe that there can, as yet, exist enough of these types to meet the many reports, but there is no reason at all why such aircraft should not have been seen providing that full scale work followed the experimental period. And the secrecy would suggest that this is so.\nAnd there could lie the most solid proof that flying saucers do exist."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'I believe they are disc-type aircraft,' says—\nG. TILGHMAN RICHARDS, senior Research assistant and official lecturer at the South Kensington Science Museum, London, who has studied all the evidence.\nEnlargements from flying saucer pictures—front-paged last week—which set everyone talking. They were taken by Farmer Trent, McMinnville, Oregon, U.S."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OK\n\nFlying Disc\n\nTolson ___ Ladd ___ Clegg ___ Glavin ___ Nichols ___ Rosen ___ Tracy ___ Harbo ___ Belmont ___ Mohr ___ Tele. Room ___ Nease ___ Gandy ___\n\nADD OBJECT (614P)\nTHE AIR FORCE SAID IT HAD RECEIVED NO WORD AT ALL ON ANOTHER OBJECT, DESCRIBED AS APPEARING TO BE A GUIDED MISSILE, WHICH THE ALASKA AIR COMMAND SAID PASSED OVER FAIRBANKS, ALASKA, SATURDAY NIGHT.\n7/34-W0901P\n\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n135 AUG 11 1950\n\nWASHINGTON CITY NEWS SERVICE\n\n51 AUG 14 1950"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tolson Ladd Clegg Glavin Nichols Rosen Tracy Harbo Belmont Mohr Tele. Room Nease Gandy\n\nFalcon flying discs\n\nO FLYING DISCS\n\nFLYING SAUCERS AS SPAIN SEES IT\nFirst picture of a flying saucer comes from the Spanish newspaper Informaciones.\nDAILY GRAPHIC correspondent in Madrid explains:\nThe caption stated that this picture was obtained at 3 a.m. in the Balearic Islands by Enrique Haus-mann Muller, a newsreel cameraman.\nIt added that he and his assistants heard a loud noise and saw a luminous trail crossing the sky. He pulled out his camera and obtained a picture—but expresses no opinion about flying saucers.\nFOOTNOTE from Texas: Ira Maxey, wartime member of a U.S. bomber crew, photographed two groups of \"flying saucers\" near Fort Worth. \"But,\" he said, \"they were more like flying bananas than flying saucers.\"\n\nThe picture that Spanish newspaper readers saw.\n\nDAILY GRAPHIC\nAPRIL 20, 1950\nLONDON, ENGLAND\n\nOFFICE OF THE LEGAL ATTACHE\nAMERICAN EMBASSY\nLONDON, ENGLAND\n\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n78 JUL 5 1950"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tolson Ladd Clegg Glavin Nichols Rosen Tracy Harbo Mohr Tele. Room Nease Gandy\n\nFiled 7 flying discs\n\n\"Saucer\" Denial Held Valuable to Russia\n\nNew York, April 10 (U.P.)—Air Force denials that \"flying saucers\" exist are \"worth a billion dollars to the Russians in the 'cold war,'\" Radio Commentator Henry J. Taylor said tonight.\n\nTaylor said over the ABC network that this country has several unconventional air vehicles that could be taken for \"flying saucers.\"\n\nHe described one as a fantastic contraption \"in pulsating plastic,\" as tall as an eight-story building and used to record cosmic rays.\n\n\"What has happened to our brains?\" Taylor asked. \"These denials are worth a billion dollars to the Russians in the 'cold war'...\"\n\nPresident Truman and the Air Force both denied similar reports by Taylor last week that \"flying saucers\" are top-secret United States military inventions.\n\nTaylor warned that if the Russians suddenly announced they were sending \"flying saucers\" around the world, United States officials would have no way to stem American hysteria.\n\nTaylor said the United States should announce:\n\"We have no further comment about anything in the skies except that America is creating many helpful and incredible things. All are harmless and good news for freedom-loving people.\"\n\nAnd this would be a true statement, the commentator said.\n\nTaylor said that at an airfield near Minneapolis and also at other places, the Navy is \"launching into our high skies an enormous and fantastic type of vehicle...\"\n\nNobody is in it,\" he said, \"but it carries 70 pounds of instruments to record cosmic rays... It is an enormous translucent thing with a long tail and flies up to 100,000 feet in the air. When the weird contraption is launched off the ground, it is filled to only one percent of its capacity with helium. At high altitudes, expansion causes it to blow itself up into a gigantic monster 100 feet tall and 70 feet in diameter, tall as an eight-story building, all in pulsating plastic.\"\n\nTaylor said some of these vehicles travel all over America, 20 miles up in the sky. At sunset, the whole contraption glows and can be seen as long as 30 minutes after darkness.\n\nThe instruments are floated back to earth by parachute, Taylor said. Then the huge contraption \"breaks into pieces in the sky or explodes,\" showering plastic pieces over the land.\n\nWASHINGTON POST\nPage\nDate 4-11-50\n\n65 APR 21 1950"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"FLYING SAUCER\" REPORT\nMAY BE BALLOON\nFrom Our Own Correspondent\nPRESTON, Monday.\n\nAn object which they thought might have been a \"flying saucer\" was seen by three girls who were walking along the Preston-Lancaster main road near Preston yesterday afternoon. \"It looked like a very bright star in the east, but was brighter than any star,\" they said.\n\nOne of the girls, Miss Lilian Spencer, of Pole-street, Preston, said: \"It was oval-shaped and resembled the wing of a silver plane caught in the sunlight. There was no sound of an engine and it had a peculiar swinging movement.\" It was going against the wind.\n\nAn Air Ministry meteorological official pointed out that it was a common error for people to speak of something travelling in a certain direction when they really meant that it was coming from that direction. If that was the case here it was possible that the object could have been a meteorological balloon blown over from Northern Ireland.\n\nMany Londoners reported on April that they had seen a \"flying saucer.\" The Air Ministry explained that it was a balloon used for parachute jumping which had broken from its mooring at an R.A.F. station in Oxfordshire.\n\nDAILY TELEGRAPH AND MORNING POST\nAPRIL 11, 1950\nLONDON, ENGLAND\n\nOFFICE OF THE LEGAL ATTACHE\nAMERICAN EMBASSY\nLONDON, ENGLAND\n\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n76 APR 29 1950\n\n53 MAY 15 1950"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-26\n\nTolson Ladd Clegg Glavin Nichols Rosen Tracy Harbo Mohr Tele. Room Nease Gandy\n\nFiled: Flying Saucers\n\nHouse Member Swears He Saw Flying Saucer\nBy United Press\n\nOne House member who should know said flatly today there is no such thing as a flying saucer. But another member equally qualified said maybe not, but he has seen one himself.\n\nRep. Mahon (D) of Texas, chairman of the House military appropriations subcommittee, said it isn't so what they say about those discs. He had no concrete evidence—but the solidest kind of support.\n\nPresident Truman, Defense Secretary Johnson, the Air Force and the Navy all backed him up.\n\nThey said none of the armed services is messing around with saucers, and that nobody else is far far as they knew. The people, they said, are seeing things.\n\nHe Saw One\n\nRep. Engel (R) of Michigan, is the man who says he saw one. A member of Mahon's subcommittee, he also is a candidate for governor of Michigan when he isn't helping dole out the money it takes to keep the military in business.\n\nHe said the fact that he saw a flying disc may not be evidence, but it sure was convincing.\n\nIt happened about 1 p.m. one day last summer at Elsie, Mich. Several other citizens, all of them sober and well thought of, saw it, too. Two of them chased it in a plane, but the thing unfortunately was too high and too fast and got away.\n\nMahon put it this way:\n\"I guess my subcommittee would know if there were anything to this flying saucer business. We even knew about the atomic energy experiments several years before the story was told.\"\n\nNot Informed\n\"I am quite sure the military establishment would have told us if they were working on such a thing as a saucer. But the fact is they haven't said a word about it.\"\nAs far as Mahon is concerned, the saucer is \"just a fantasy.\"\nEngel said maybe so, maybe not. It is perfectly true, he said, that none of the subcommittee's witnesses ever owned up to any connection with saucers. But then, as far as he could recall, nobody ever asked them about it.\n\"I am confident of this,\" Engel said. \"If there are any such things as saucers, they are ours, not somebody else's. If another country were sending them over, I am sure the subcommittee would have heard about it.\"\n\nDenials Repeated\nAir Force and Navy officials have been denying the existence of \"flying saucers\" all along. And a Defense department statement late yesterday reiterated the denials.\n\nBut indications were that reports of the mysterious flying object would continue. L. Nobel Robinson, managing editor of the U.S. News and World Report, said his magazine had expected official denials of its story that the saucers are a \"revolutionary type of new aircraft,\" probably built by the Navy.\n\nPage\nTimes-Herald 10\nWash. Post\nWash. News\nWash. Star\nN.Y. Mirror\n\nDate: 4-5-50\n\nINDEXED - 102\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n78 JUN 30 1950\n\n65 JUL 14 1950"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tolson\nLadd\nClegg\nGlavin\nNichols\nRosen\nTracy\nHarbo\nMohr\nTele. Room\nNease\nGandy\n\nStatement by Air Force\nTruman, Other Officials Deny Knowledge of Flying Saucers\nBy John G. Norris\nPost Reporter\nTop officials and agencies of the Government—from President Truman on down—joined yesterday in an effort to convince the American public that \"flying saucers\" do not exist.\nA formal statement issued by the Air Force last night was most explicit. It declared flatly that:\n1. None of the armed forces is conducting secret experiments with \"disc-shaped flying objects which could be a basis for the reported phenomena.\"\n2. There is no evidence that the latter stem from \"the activities of any foreign nation.\"\n3. Evaluation of reports of recent \"sightings\" bears out early conclusions that all can be explained away as \"misinterpretation of various conventional objects, a mild form of mass hysteria, or hoaxes.\"\nEarlier, President Truman announced through his press secretary at Key West, Fla., that he knew absolutely nothing of such flying objects being developed by the United States or any other nation.\n\"We are not denying this because of any development of secret weapons,\" said Secretary Charles G. Ross, \"but purely because we know of nothing to support these rumors.\"\nDefense Secretary Louis Johnson said about the same thing at a news conference. He told reporters he was \"satisfied there is nothing in the reports.\"\nJohnson said he had facetiously\nSee SAUCER, Page 3, Col. 2\nSaucers 'News' To Officials\nraised the question at yesterday's meeting of the Armed Forces Policy Council, which includes the departmental secretaries and Joint Chiefs of Staff. Navy Secretary Francis Matthews and Admiral Forrest P. Sherman, chief of naval operations, assured him the denials were sincere and truthful.\nThe latest flareup of public interest in the saucers resulted from statements by Radio Commentator Henry J. Taylor and the weekly news magazine United States News and World Report that the saucers do exist and are revolutionary American aircraft probably developed by the Navy. A Navy spokesman flatly denied this Monday.\nJohnson said he is convinced the saucers could not be experiments conducted by any other Government agency outside his department because the Pentagon's Research and Development Board coordinates all such activity.\nDespite the denials, new reports of \"saucers\" continued. At Tipp City, Ohio, nine persons said they saw saucers over the Air Force base at Wright Field, early Sunday. Jerry Robinson, a 22-year-old Marine veteran, speaking for the group, said they saw \"two bright lights in the sky\" which later were discerned as brilliant discs trailing a small streak of orange flame.\nAfter hovering for a time, they shot straight up in the air and disappeared, he said.\nPolice Chief J. C. Lee of Elizabeth City, Ill., reported that \"a weird red and blue disc-like object\" whizzed over the town early Sunday, \"traveling at a high rate of speed.\"\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n42 APR 21 1950\nWASHINGTON POST\nPage\nDate 4-5-50"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Discs\nHeinrich\nFlying Discs\n\nBut the Navy Says 'No'\n'Saucers' New-Type Aircraft, Probably Navy, Magazine Says\nBy John G. Norris\nPost Reporter\n\"Flying saucers\" are in fact radically new type aircraft, conforming to known aerodynamic laws and probably developed by the United States Navy, the magazine United States and World Report said yesterday.\nThis latest effort to explain the continuing reports of strange flying disks at various points over the country brought a prompt denial from the Navy Department that it is now \"conducting research or flying\" any such plane or missile.\nA spokesman pointed out that the Navy did develop the \"pancake-shaped\" Chance-Vought XF5U-1, but that it never flew and was scrapped more than a year ago. A small, 3000-pound scale model of the plane was flown and pictures of it have been released, but this model is now at Norfolk awaiting shipment to the National Air Museum here.\nThe weekly news magazine did not quote any authority for its statement that the \"flying saucers\" are real American planes, but said \"engineers competent to appraise reports of reliable observers reach these conclusions:\n\"They are aircraft of a revolutionary type, a combination of helicopter and fast jet plane. They conform to well-known principles of aerodynamics.\"\nThey are \"exactly 105 feet in diameter, circular in shape\" and \"are made of a metal alloy, with a dull whitish color. There are no rudders, ailerons or other protruding surfaces. From the side, the saucers appear to be about 10 feet thick.\"\n\"Each saucer appears to have a series of variable-direction jet nozzles around its rims... fuel used is unknown... Direction of the aircraft and its velocity, in turn, evidently are controlled by the angle at which the jet nozzles are tilted, the number operating, the power applied.\"\n\"By choosing which nozzles to turn on or off and the angle of tilt, the pilot could make the saucer rise or descend vertically, hover, fly straight ahead or make sharp turns. A right-angle turn, for example, could be made by turning off the rear jets, turning on the side and front nozzles.\"\n\"Great speed can be obtained by focusing to the rear all nozzles in the after half of the aircraft. With all nozzles pointed downward, the saucer could rise straight off the ground, and with less power, could descend the same way...\"\n\"Jet helicopter action... makes takeoffs and landings almost completely safe.\"\nThe magazine said that an early model of the saucer was built by National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics experts in 1942 and made 100 successful flights. The Navy then took over development and 'much more advanced models now are being built.'\nNACA Engineer Charles H. Zimmerman designed the first model, which had a speed of from 400 to 500 miles an hour and was powered by two piston propellers, said the article.\n\"Surface indications,\" the magazine went on, \"point to research centers of the United States Navy's vast guided-missile project as the scene of present flying-saucer development.\" The project, it was said, has the \"scientists, the engineers, the dollars, the motive and the background\" for the job.\n\"This likelihood will remain, despite any future denials by the Navy front office, until secrecy is lifted,\" the magazine added.\nThe Navy declared it was true that its abandoned \"flying pancake\" was designed by Zimmerman, and was called the \"Zimmerman Skimmer.\" It added that a still smaller scale model—one-third of actual size—is still at NACA's Langley, Va., laboratory for wind-tunnel tests, but the Navy insisted it had no such project now active.\nThe Air Force, after many months of investigation of \"flying saucer\" reports, concluded that all the evidence pointed to \"misinterpretation of various conventional objects, a mild form of mass hysteria, or hoaxes.\"\nThe Original 'Flying Saucer'?\nAssociated Press Photo\nModel of aircraft developed in 1948 and flown by the Navy under radio control—full-size craft never flew, the Navy has announced\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n83 APR 11 1950\nWASHINGTON POST\nDated 4-4-50"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE CASE FOR THE FLYING SAUCER\nFrom America, the 'home' of flying saucers, comes this up-to-the-minute summary of report and rumour about the modern mystery of the skies.\nby RICHARD GREENOUGH\nTHE DAILY MAIL\nAPRIL 3, 1950\nLONDON, ENGLAND\nOFFICE OF THE LEGAL ATTACHE\nAMERICAN EMBASSY\nLONDON, ENGLAND\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n58 APR 20 1950"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"New York, Sunday.\nEVER since Kenneth Arnold, 30-year-old, ordinary business-man pilot from Boise, Idaho, touched off the \"flying saucers\" mystery by reporting, on the afternoon of June 24, 1947, that he had seen \"nine shiny discs like metal hub-caps flip-flapping along at about 1,200 m.p.h.\" only one fact seems quite certain.\nNobody has yet proved definitely that such things do or do not exist.\nAir Force finding\nTHIS includes the U.S. Air Force, still investigating reports about \"celestial crockery,\" though officially last December, after checking 375 cases, it closed down \"Project Saucer,\" a special investigation group of Intelligence officers with headquarters in Ohio.\nAt that time it was stated in a blanket turn-down that all reports were:\n1. Misinterpretation of \"conventional\" aerial objects. These included giant experimental cosmic-ray balloons, radar targets, balloons with dangling strips of aluminium foil, meteor trails, wisps of or whole vapour trails from high-flying aircraft, bright planets.\n2. Mild form of mass hysteria.\n3. Hoaxes.\nBut steadily, from 1947 up till a few days ago, reports of curious objects that \"go whizz in the air\" keep on coming in from all over the United States.\nThey have now been reported from 43 out of the 48 States, with the majority coming from the south and east and near the Mexican border.\nThey have also, of course, been reports from other parts of the world, from Scandinavia, Africa, China, the Far East.\nThe objects allegedly seen here have ranged from the now almost conventional flying disc or \"saucer\" sometimes with \"fuzzy\" edges, or lit up at night to torpedo-shaped wingless \"space ships\" showing regular rows of lights in the dark and orange flames coming from the tail.\nSometimes they have been reported shaped like tubes, pillars, spheres.\nBut two facts seem to remain constant. They are all said to be either white or silver, and to move across the sky in an undulating way, tilting first in one direction, then the other, rising and falling, before finally disappearing into nothing or over the horizon.\nPilot's chase\nONE U.S. Air Force pilot, Capt. Thomas Mantell, lost his life some months ago trying to catch up with something that looked like \"a silver ice cream cone topped with red.\"\nAn experienced war-time pilot, with several thousand hours' flying time, Mantell was in his fighter plane leading two others near Fort Knox, Kentucky, when the control tower at his airbase, Godman Field, radioed him to try to locate a strange object sighted from the ground and moving in his direction.\nMantell later called back that he had spotted the \"thing\" at \"12 o'clock high\" (directly ahead and above him), and that it looked like a silver ice-cream cone topped with red.\nHis air-to-ground conversation was logged at the air base and I have checked it. He later reported:\n\"I'm closing in now to take a good look. It's directly ahead of me and moving at a good speed. The thing looks metallic and is tremendous.\""} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"His last report\nFOR 25 minutes Mantell and the two other pilots tried vainly to close in. Mantell reported the object was climbing and moving at a speed equal to his own, which he gave as 360 m.p.h.\nIn broken cloud at 18,000ft. the other two pilots lost sight of him, later broke off and landed.\nMantell called once more to say that if he were no closer at 20,000ft. he'd abandon the chase as he hadn't the oxygen.\nThat was the last heard from him.\nHis body was later found near Fort Knox and the wreckage of his machine scattered over half a mile around. Obviously his plane had disintegrated in mid-air.\nOfficial Air Force version was that Mantell had probably \"blacked out\" from lack of oxygen and had not regained consciousness before he crashed, out of control.\nStill a mystery\nBUT one of his fellow-pilots later commented: \"I think that was a cover-up. Mantell was too experienced a pilot for that. He was quite familiar with signs of approaching anoxia [lack of oxygen], and would have taken steps to prevent it.\n\"Some of us think he may have collided with whatever he saw and that it knocked him out in the air.\"\nEngineers later added that the type of machine Mantell was flying, starting a dive at 20,000ft, would not have disintegrated so thoroughly.\nDuring the past two and three quarter years a multitude of people on the ground claim have seen these \"flying saucers\" nor have they always been seen with the naked eye, many saw them through binoculars.\nBut the fact that first started the U.S. Air Force to sit up, take notice, and then institute \"Project Saucer\" was the large number of apparently responsible pilots and aircrew members who sent in startling reports of what they claimed to have seen.\nOne of the theories along which \"P.S.\" investigators worked was evident from the fact that every plane whose pilot reported close encounters with \"flying saucers\" was checked with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity.\nHead-on meeting\nTAKE the case, for instance, of Captain Clarence Chiles, former Air Transport Command pilot, and John B. Whitted, who flew B-29 Superforts during the war. Both are happily married men with families, good jobs and no need of apparent desire for publicity.\nThey were flying a scheduled airline service near Montgomery, Alabama, one night last summer when a brilliant, fast-moving object suddenly appeared ahead of them.\n\"We saw it at the same time,\" Chiles told investigators later. \"Whatever it was flashed down towards us and we veered to the left. It veered sharply too and passed about 700 feet to our right and above us.\"\n\"The thing was about 100 feet long, cigar-shaped and wingless, about twice the diameter of a B-29 without protruding fins,\" said Whitted.\n\"There was a tremendous burst of orange flame from the rear. It zoomed into clouds, its jet or prop wash rocking our DC3.\"\nSeeing's believing\nMORE recently, two weeks ago, two other airline pilots, Captain Jack Adams, with some 8,000 hours' flying time, and co-pilot G. W. Anderson reported a \"flying saucer\" with windows on the bottom and a blinking light near the top as they passed over Arkansas.\n\"It was flying almost due north and we crossed its path at about a 45 degree angle,\" said Adams. \"It was about 1,000ft. above us and travelling at a tremendous rate. It had a peculiarly coloured and very intense light near the top which blinked very rapidly.\n\"We kept the object in sight for about 45 seconds.\n\"I've been a sceptic all my life about such things, but what can you do when you see a thing like that?\" he concluded. \"We were both flabbergasted.\""} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET INQUIRY INTO FLYING SAUCERS\nU.S. 'LOSES' REPORT BY AIRMEN\nFrom ROBERT WAITHMAN, News Chronicle Correspondent\nWASHINGTON, Sunday.\nIN the United States in the last month it has become a good deal harder to dismiss as hallucinations reports that flying saucers—or alternatively \"flying objects of non-conventional design\"—have lately been seen in the skies.\nIt has become harder, first because the reports have been coming in from such sources and with such independent detail that it would be remarkable indeed if they were all the product of too vivid imaginations; and second because there has been some rather peculiar official behaviour in the matter.\nNEWS CHRONICLE\nLONDON, ENGLAND\nAPRIL 3, 1950\nOFFICE OF THE LEGAL ATTACHE\nAMERICAN EMBASSY\nLONDON, ENGLAND"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In the huge Pentagon building in Washington, headquarters of the Defence Department, there is an Air Force major whose duty it is to repeat to all inquirers the substance of the last Air Force statement on flying saucers, issued on December 27, 1949.\n\"Mass hysteria\"\nOn the basis of inquiries into 375 alleged occurrences over a period of two years, it was announced: \"Reports of unidentified flying objects are the result of misinterpretation of various conventional objects or a mild form of mass hysteria or hoaxes.\"\nIt was said a continuance of the inquiry was \"unwarranted.\"\nBut in fact it has appeared during the last month that credible witnesses who say they have seen flying saucers are still being examined by Intelligence officers.\nIt was noted, too, how quickly and how thoroughly one of the most comprehensive of the newest reports has been officially \"lost.\"\nOurs?\nEmployees of the Civil Aeronautics Authority at work in control tower at Dayton municipal airport in Ohio, in conjunction with U.S Weather Bureau observers and four pilots of the Air National Guard who took off in fighters to look at the \"unidentified object\"—they all saw and submitted their testimony to the administrator of C.A.A.\nThe idea—sometimes seriously advanced and often half-believed—that the saucers could be exploratory craft from another planet has infinite possibilities.\nBut until it is proved it may be more profitable to wonder whether there has been developed somewhere a disc-like plane with a circle of swiftly revolving vanes that might enable it to hover or to fly at high speed.\nIf this or something like it turns out to be the answer, there may be good reason for hoping here that it is one of ours."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Rocket saucer'\nROME, Thursday.—A flying saucer was reported over Milan today. Then later it was discovered that three boys had attached rockets to a large metal disc and set them off from the roof of a high building.—Express News Service.\nOFFICE OF THE LEGAL ATTACHE\nAMERICAN EMBASSY\nLONDON, ENGLAND\nDAILY EXPRESS\nLondon, England\nMARCH 31, 1950\n162-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n85 APR 19 1950"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying saucers—N.E., S. and W.\nROME, Wednesday.—Flying saucers again—over Italy now. This is what people in five different areas reported:\nSalo, on Lake Garda.—A disc as large as a full moon streaking towards the north-east.\nCarrara.—Four, three miles up, flying southwards, Calabria.—Disc \"like a moon with a wake of fire\" speeding westwards.\nSardinia.—A flying saucer remained suspended 20 seconds then disappeared to the south.\nVal d'Aosta.—A disc flying over head.—Reuter.\nOFFICE OF THE LEGAL ATTACHE\nAMERICAN EMBASSY\nLONDON, ENGLAND\nEVENING STANDARD\nMARCH 29, 1950\nLONDON, ENGLAND\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n85 APR 19 1950"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Saucery\nFlying fact or flight of fancy? RICHARD GARRETT traces the history of an aerial phenomenon which gave America sky-war jitters\nYOU TOO CAN SEE THEM\nProfessor F. S. Cotton, of Sydney University, was discussing with his students the mystery of the flying saucers. He asked them to stand still, train their eyes on a point in the sky about a mile away.\nWithin ten minutes 22 members of the class were seeing \"saucers.\"\nThe hallucination was merely the effect of red blood corpuscles passing in front of the eye retina.\nOFFICE OF THE LEGAL ATTACHE\nAMERICAN EMBASSY\nLONDON, ENGLAND\nSUNDAY GRAPHIC\nMARCH 26, 1950\nLONDON, ENGLAND\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n85 APR 11 1950"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"FLYING saucers\" are back in the news.\nFrom New York comes a report that Captain Jack Adams, pilot of the Chicago and Southern Airlines, radioed that he and a co-pilot had crossed the path of a large flying saucer, with lighted windows and a peculiarly coloured blinking light on top and travelling at about 600 m.p.h. over Arkansas.\nThis was followed by a news cable from Lisbon: Scores of flying saucers reported by coastguards of the North Portugal coast flying in line and other formations and moving west \"faster than tracer bullets.\"\nSo the 1950 \"saucer season\" seems to have opened early.\nFirst report of these strange craft came on June 25, 1947, when a Mr. Dahl of Tacoma, Washington, noticed a circular flying machine, like a silver doughnut, cutting capers over his back-yard.\nPresently he saw five more planes\" rotating round a seventh.\nSpeculations\nThe centre craft then began to shed metallic rain. Most of it fell seawards, but one piece landed in Mr. Dahl's yard.\nOn July 4, the first photograph of a \"flying saucer\" was taken by a Seattle coastguard. The snap revealed a small white oblong, set against a dark grey background.\nThe U.S. Navy said that the descriptions fitted its new wingless plane—the \"Flying Pancake\"—but there was only one of these, and it had never ventured outside Connecticut.\nA meteorologist suggested that solar reflections on low cloud would produce similar effects, and a Los Angeles scientist talked about \"transmutation of atomic energy.\"\nA letter to a San Francisco newspaper hinted at an interplanetary solution.\nThe San Francisco correspondent was soon to find his idea carried a stage further. Mr. Mead Layne, publisher of an occult magazine, produced an article in which he claimed to have received a message, via a medium, that there were people aboard the \"saucers.\"\n- They came from another planet, and wished to try living on earth.\nIn Britain \"saucers\" were reported over Brighton beach, and another was seen by a clergyman's wife at Sandwich.\nBack in America President Truman compared the rumours to the scare of over a hundred years ago, when word got around that there were men and bats living on the moon.\nThe neatest \"flying saucer\" quipping came from Mr. Gromyko at U.N. headquarters.\n\"Some,\" he said, \"attribute them to the British for exporting too much whisky to the U.S., others that it is a Russian discus thrower training for the Olympic Games who does not know his own strength.\"\nThe first flying saucer fever died down under sheer weight of explanation, but reports still came in.\nSpain suspected\nIn May, 1948, a U.S. Air Force intelligence officer opined that the \"discs\" were the work of ex-Nazi scientists in Spain.\nDuring Franco's 1938 siege of Madrid his German allies had tried out a circular missile, with an explosive centre and four engines around the circumference.\nThe experiment had failed, but in 1944 the Germans had repeated it, using jet engines.\nIt was believed that the scientists responsible had escaped from the Russian zone, through France, and were now working for the Spanish Government.\nIn December, 1949, the official body which had been established in America to probe the \"saucers\" was disbanded. It had been in operation for two years, and had investigated 375 incidents.\nIt said that the phenomenon was caused by: (a) misinterpretation of various conventional objects; (b) a mild form of mass hysteria; (c) hoaxes.\nAnd there, one might have imagined, the story would have ended. But the \"flying saucers\" refused to be grounded.\nFellow travellers?\nThe present phase of flying saucerisms reached its climax on March 9, when a U.S. business man, travelling in Mexico, claimed to have seen a streamlined \"disc\" in which a 23in. tall pilot had perished.\nA Mexican denial immediately followed but not before Denver, Colorado, had reported that a similar \"saucer\" had come to grief near by and three little men had been discovered inside it.\nThe Defence Department of the U.S., repeating its denial of \"flying saucers,\" said: \"If these saucers start landing, and little men with radar sticking out of their ears climb out, we shall have to do something about it.\"\n\"Flying saucers\" have now been seen in pretty well every country of the world. They have been chased by jet planes, and observed by scientists and have baffled all attempts to explain them away.\nAre they sheer fantasy, or is there a grain of truth in the accounts? Your guess is as good as mine."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-26\nTolson\nLadd\nClegg\nGlavin\nNichols\nRosen\nTracy\nHarbo\nBelmont\nMohr\nTele. Room\nNease\nGandy\nExpert 'Explains' Flying Saucers\nBy United Press\nROME, March 25—Prof. Giuseppe Belluzzo, 73-year-old Italian turbine engineer, said today that designs for \"flying saucers\" were prepared for Hitler and Mussolini in 1942.\n\"According to those designs,\" he said in an interview, \"the disks could carry a cargo of explosives of any kind—and today an atomic bomb—to destroy entire cities.\"\nOf the present rash of reports of \"flying saucers,\" which the U.S. Air Force has declared are without foundation in fact, Sr. Belluzzo said:\n\"It has passed my mind that some great power is experimenting with flying disks—without explosives or atomic bombs.\"\nDRAFTED PLANS\n\"There is nothing supernatural about flying disks. It's just the most rational use of recently-evolved techniques.\"\nSr. Belluzzo said he personally had drafted plans for a \"flying disk\" 32 feet in diameter, but claimed they disappeared with Mussolini when he fled to northern Italy in 1943.\n\"Both Hitler and Mussolini were interested in flying discs,\" he said.\n\"The principle of the flying disc is very simple. Its construction is easy and can be done with very light metal.\"\n\"Two jet pipes placed on either side of the rim of the disk, provide the locomotion. The orifices of these jet tubes are adjustable to permit maximum and minimum speeds.\"\nPILOT NOT NEEDED\n\"Propulsion comes from a mixture of compressed air and naphtha—the same fuel used in modern jet planes.\"\n\"The air is mixed under pressure and ignited at first by cartridges and then by an electrical device. Terrific pressure is set up and the expanding gas forced out thru the jet pipes.\"\n\"The reaction, coming from the opposing pipes on either side of the disc, start the entire apparatus revolving, making it airborne.\"\nThe missiles could be aimed like the wartime German V-2 rockets, he said, and would descend when the fuel was exhausted or cut off by an automatic timing device. No human pilot would be required.\nPage\nTimes-Herald\nWash. Post\nWash. News 4\nWash. Star\nN.Y. Mirror\nDate: MAR 25 1950\nFlying Discs\nIndexed - 1335 APR 18 1950\nEX-128\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VENICE REPORTS FLYING SAUCER\nVenice, Monday Morning.—A silver-coloured \"flying saucer\" was reported above the fishing port of Caioggia near here, early today travelling \"at great speed\" about 6,000ft. up.—Reuter.\nTHE DAILY MAIL\nFEBRUARY 27, 1950\nLONDON, ENGLAND\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n83 APR 12 1950\nOFFICE OF THE LEGAL ATTACHE\nAMERICAN EMBASSY\nLONDON, ENGLAND\nAPR 12 1950"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Saucers' Spies From Planets, Writer Claims\nNEW YORK, Dec. 26 (AP)—A monthly magazine says the so-called flying saucers are real—vehicles for systematic observation of the earth by visitors from other planets.\nThe conclusions are contained in an article by Donald E. Keyhoe in the January issue of True, published by Fawcett Publications, Inc. Keyhoe is a former information chief for the aeronautics branch, U.S. Commerce department.\nThe magazine said the conclusions were based on an eight-month investigation.\nKeyhoe says True \"learned that a rocket authority stationed at Wright field has told 'Project Saucer' personnel flatly that the saucers are interplanetary and that no other conclusion is possible.\"\nLast April the Dayton (Ohio) Journal Herald that the Air Force, although conceding the saucers were no \"joke,\" had discounted the theory that the discs represented visitations from such planets as Mars, where human life is believed by some to exist.\nToday, an Air Force spokesman said that \"Air Force studies of 'flying saucers' lend no support to the view that they come from another planet.\"\nTolson\nLadd\nClegg\nGlavin\nHarbo\nNichols\nRosen\nTracy\nMohr\nFletcher\nTele. Room\nNease\nGandy\nMarkham\nDressly (sic)\nFlying Discs\n62-83894\nFiles Edson\nPage 4\nTimes-Herald\nWash. Post\nWash. News\nWash. Star\nN.Y. Mirror\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n75 FEB 8 1950\nDate: DEC 27 1949"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nTele. Room\nMiss Gandy\nfile in Flying Discs\nFLYING DISCS\nMENU OF THE FUTURE:\nIt's 'Wild New World' Dished Up in Saucers\n\"Flying saucers,\" observatories on the moon, high-flying rockets and earth satellite vehicles carrying weapons and possibly men to whirl endlessly far out in space, today seem like pipe dreams of a mad world of fantasy.\nThey may be harbingers of a wild new world to come.\nThe air force, as early as last spring, said officially that the flying saucers \"are not a joke.\"\nAir force authorities even now may be preparing an announcement stating that the flying discs are real objects, not merely figments of imagination as far as the air force is concerned, The Mirror learned yesterday.\nThat would seem to remove the flying discs from the realm of old wives' tales and the bubble talk of guys who have had one or two snifters too many.\nPossibilities that the saucers are missiles launched from a foreign planet are given serious consideration.\nThe U.S. defense department's announcement of plans considering a super spaceship, to be kept under control while traveling an orbit around the earth, lend credence to reports of satellite missiles.\nNo such ship has as yet been built, according to the best informed sources. But ideas for one haven't been forgotten.\nGravity gradually falls off far out in space beyond the earth, scientists explain. It never quite ends, they say, but at 5000 miles it is relatively weak.\n\"A spaceship could easily be kept in position there,\" according to Dr. Lloyd Motz, a Columbia University astronomer.\n\"If left to itself it would gradually return to earth,\" he said. \"But it would take very little thrust, from small rockets discharged at intervals to keep it where it was wanted.\"\nTo get it up there, the spaceship would have to leave the earth at an initial velocity of 25,000 miles an hour, to escape the pull of gravity.\nAt such speeds, present known metals would melt because of friction.\nBut in other words, far from our own earth, perhaps better metals have been developed.\nIt is the wildest kind of speculation, but the flying discs may be the first calling cards from an interstellar neighbor.\nThe Mirror—Los Angeles\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n78 NOV 17 1949\nOCT 7 1949\n62 NOV 30 1949"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Missing Inventor Hunted for Clue to 'Saucers'\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\nBy United Press\nAir Force investigators—skeptical but intrigued are trying today to locate an eccentric inventor who more than 10 years ago built two contraptions that look like \"flying saucers.\"\nThe disc-type ships, battered and damaged, were found yesterday in an abandoned barn near Glen Burnie, Md., where they had lain untended for nine years.\n\"It is apparent that both ships would give the appearance of flying discs,\" an Air Force spokesman said.\nNO REAL PROOF\nAn Air Force officer last night described the two craft as \"definite prototypes of flying saucers,\" but the service hedged today.\nA spokesman objected to the word \"prototype,\" saying the Air Force has only reports of what flying saucers look like and has never established that such things actually were seen.\nThe Maryland inventor, Jonathan E. Caldwell, disappeared in 1940. The only possibility of any connection between his old abandoned devices and the rumored \"flying saucers\" of recent years would lie in the possibility that he went to some other part of the country, developed better models and flew them successfully.\nA good many officers find it difficult to believe he could have done that without coming to public attention during the periodic excitement over \"flying saucers\" in the past two years. But they would like to find out what happened to Mr. Caldwell after he left Maryland and talk with him, if he still is alive.\nMr. Caldwell, who would be about 70 today, left the Maryland farm hastily nine years ago, after getting into financial trouble with the state. He took with him his wife and son. Maryland authorities at that time had ordered him to stop selling any more stock in his enterprise, \"Gray Goose Airways, Inc.\" Previously, he had been ordered to stop selling stock in New Jersey and New York.\nNOT NATURALLY DISHONEST\nRobert E. Clapp, who as assistant Attorney General for Maryland, conducted the investigation of Mr. Caldwell's operations in 1940, said in Baltimore today:\n\"Whenever he needed more funds he went out and sold stock, and he continued to run the business as tho, it were his own. He wasn't the ordinary type of fraudulent stock salesman. I believe he sincerely thought he had something and I doubt if he thought he was being dishonest.\"\nFor two years Air Force investigators have been running down clues from coast to coast on reports of flying saucers. The Air Force in the main has taken a skeptical attitude toward the reports. Its last official report said it just didn't have conclusive evidence that they either did or didn't exist.\nONE TESTED HERE\nSome of the flying saucers have been reported seen from the air, but traveling at such high speed as to make pursuit impossible. One military pilot crashed to his death, reportedly while chasing a flying saucer.\nOne of the craft found in the Maryland barn reportedly flew here briefly around 1939. It was said to have gotten only 75 feet in the air.\nOne ship resembled a helicopter. But instead of rotor blades it had a disc-like device about 16 feet in diameter. The device resembled two saucers revolving top to top. Small rotor blades jutted from between the two saucers.\nThe other craft, named the \"Roto-Plane,\" looked like a plywood tub about 14 feet in diameter. The pilot sat in the middle. The engine was in the tub. Around top and bottom rims of the tub were four-bladed propellers which revolved in opposite directions.\nWASHINGTON NEWS\nPage 6"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WASHINGTON NEWS\nPAGE 6"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Flying Saucer' Story Deflated By Air Force\nExperimental Craft Will Be Examined For Other Clues\nThe Air Force's long search for \"flying saucers\" has turned up two contraptions almost as weird as anything yet described by the most wild-eyed \"witnesses\" of two summers ago.\nHeld for the examination of experts are two weather-beaten remnants of an inventor's dream uncovered yesterday in a tobacco shed near Glen Burnie, Md., an outer suburb of Baltimore.\nAn official Air Force statement issued today said \"the two experimental aircraft found near Baltimore yesterday have absolutely no connection with the reported phenomenon of flying saucers.\" This does not mean, however, that they will not be examined for other clues by Air Force representatives, it was said.\nThe relics are more than 10 years' old, and so far as can be determined, only one of them ever got off the ground under its own power. This occurred in Washington almost 10 years ago, and ended in near-disaster after a flight of about 60 seconds.\nPilot Tells of Test Hop\nThe inventor, Jonathan E. Caldwell, who is now over 70, if still living, and his wife and son left Glen Burnie in 1940 after Maryland authorities ordered Mr. Caldwell to \"cease and desist\" from selling stock to finance his aeronautical ideas. None of the neighbors have heard from them since.\nWillard E. Driggers of 1530 Olive street N.E., now with the Civil Aeronautics Administration at National Airport, made the first and only test hop in Mr. Caldwell's helicopter, the Gray Goose, at the old Benning Race track in 1940.\nMr. Driggers said he helped design the helicopter.\nThe machine rose about 40 feet and after some 60 seconds in the air. Mr. Driggers became aware the controls were not operating properly, he told The Star.\nHe decided if he took it any higher he might not get down safely and he crash landed on the race track. He was uninjured, but the machine was damaged.\nLived Here Several Years.\nMr. Driggers said the saucer rotors was designed to act as a wing after the ship had attained cruising altitude. The rotor would then be stopped and the ship flown with the conventional propeller. He explained, however, that this was theory, because the ship was never flown again.\nMr. Caldwell lived in Washington for several years before his disappearance, and seems to have returned here briefly from Glen Burnie before dropping from sight. The model tested here was a small helicopter whose rotors projected from a saucerlike disc mounted on a tripod above the cockpit.\nTattered remnants of this disc, covered with cloth, and the battered fuselage were found in the shed, along with a plywood box, like a huge circular cheesebox, whose top and bottom sections were designed to revolve in opposite directions with short rotors projecting from the rims. The pilot was to have ridden in the middle, near the motor mount.\nCapt. Claudius Belk, head of the Baltimore office of Special Investigation of the Air Force, revealed that his office has \"been investigating the machines for months\" as possible prototypes of the flying saucers reported so frequently. He said efforts are being made to locate Mr. Caldwell in the hope of getting engineering data on his roto-plane ideas.\nThe remains of the two machines were placed in storage by Maryland State police, who helped locate them at the request of the Air Force. The material will be held, it was said, until it can be determined if experts from the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base at Dayton, Ohio, wish to examine it.\nBuilder Was Carpenter.\nThe helicopter consisted of a light wingless frame with a propeller in front and a tripod over the cockpit which mounted the saucer-like rotor and its projecting blades.\nExcept for the pancake structure around the inner sections of the rotor, the model was much the same as other experimental jobs of that time.\nMr. Caldwell, a former carpenter, whose friends said he had studied the science of aeronautics in several books, had a far less conventional idea in his \"flying cheesebox.\"\nThe upper and lower lids, containing short rotor blades jutting from their outer rims, were supposed to rotate in opposite directions, giving rapid life and some stability in flight. Mr. Caldwell's friends said. They admitted the 1,500-pound contraption never flew, but said Mr. Caldwell had claimed that a light model proved successful.\nThe inventor earlier had tried a third model.\nThis looked something like a complicated hay rick on wheels, and had rotors designed to fan the air somewhat after the fashion of the paddle wheels on old steamboats. There were no claims that this machine ever left the ground, and Mr. Caldwell abandoned it in favor of later ideas.\nAttorney Robert E. Clapp, who was Assistant Attorney General of Maryland at the time of Mr. Caldwell's disappearance, and helped administer the blue-sky laws, conducted a hearing in 1940 into the affairs of two of Mr. Caldwell's companies—Gray Goose Airways, Inc., and Rotor Flanes, Inc. He later restrained the firms from selling stock in Maryland.\n\"All he had was models,\" Mr. Clapp said, \"and whenever one failed and he needed more funds, he went out and sold stock.\"\nIn his report, Mr. Clapp said:\n\"The literature used in connection with these stock sales clearly indicates that the public was led to believe that the invention was on the verge of perfection and would be completed and ready for general production within a very short time, whereas, the fact as testified by Mr. Caldwell indicate that no machine on which he had ever worked had been successfully flown or was in any condition for manufacture and sale upon a satisfactory commercial basis. * * *\n\"The history of the development of these companies indicates that they were organized merely for the purpose of raising money to develop the ideas of Mr. Caldwell, and that as soon as this money was raised, it was treated as belonging solely to him and as the subject of any use which he deemed proper.\n\"No meeting of stockholders has ever been held by either company and no financial report to stockholders has ever come out since organization.\"\nWASHINGTON STAR\nPage A 18"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AIR FORCE FINDS 'FLYING SAUCERS'—This is Jonathan E. Caldwell's \"Gray Goose\" helicopter pictured before it made a near-disastrous test flight of about a minute in Washington nearly 10 years ago.\nWashington Star\nPage A 18"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Troopers J. J. Harbaugh and Peter Kosirowsky of the Maryland State police are shown yesterday looking over remnants of Mr. Caldwell's helicopter, which had a pancakelike structure around the inner part of the rotors.\nState troopers with the \"flying cheesebox\" invented by Mr. Caldwell and found with his old helicopter in a tobacco shed on a farm near Glen Burnie, Md., after a search requested by the United States Air Force.\nWashington Star\nPage A 18"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tolson____\nLadd____\nClegg____\nGlavin____\nNichols____\nRosen____\nTracy____\nHarbo____\nMohr____\nTele. Room__\nNease____\nGandy____\n\nGlen Burnie 'Saucer' Clips 'Confidential,' but They Aren't\n\nNewspaper clips on the \"flying saucers\" found in a Glen Burnie barn last week have been sent to Washington marked \"Classified-Confidential.\"\nAs part of an OSI report which contains other data, the clips are crammed into a folder marked \"Confidential.\" But that doesn't mean a thing.\n\"You can take that file and pull those clippings out and show them to anybody,\" an Air Force spokesman said. \"But if a folder is marked 'Confidential,' a fellow wants to look out because he knows some of the other stuff in there is a lot more important.\"\n\nWASHINGTON DAILY NEWS\nFINAL EDITION\nDATE 8/22/49\n\n58 SEP 15 1949"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson____\nMr. Clegg____\nMr. Glavin____\nMr. Ladd____\nMr. Nichols____\nMr. Rosen____\nMr. Tracy____\nMr. Egan____\nMr. Gurnea____\nMr. Harbo____\nMr. Mohr____\nMr. Pennington__\nMr. Quinn Tamm__\nMr. Nease____\nMiss Gandy____\n\nHBF Fletcher\n\nResearchers' Balloons Mistaken for Discs\n\nCHICAGO, July 16 (INS), \"Flying discs\" and \"fast-moving jet planes\" that had some Chicagoans worried were identified today as gas balloons used by the University of Chicago for cosmic ray research. Large numbers of Chicagoans reported seeing mysterious objects in the sky yesterday morning. Descriptions varied from jet planes to silvery globules 40 to 50 feet long.\n\nWASHINGTON TIMES-HERALD\nPage 3 Sec. 1\n\nJUL 17 1949\n\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n59 SEP 9 1949"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Flying Saucers' On Secret List\n\nThe Air Force disclosed yesterday that secrecy restrictions have been clamped on certain incidents connected with the mysterious \"flying saucers\" seen in the skies last year.\n\nAt the same time, the Air Force admitted it is impossible to \"deny categorically\" that the weird objects originated in the Soviet Union or some other foreign nation.\n\nA statement declared that some incidents linked with the \"flying saucers still are unexplained.\" A spokesman said some of the \"inexplicable\" incidents have been placed in the \"classified\" category, denied to all persons except authorized military personnel.\n\nThe statement was issued as the Air Force continued to receive inquiries arising out of a commentator's broadcast. The commentator said the \"saucers\" came from Russia. The Air Force said:\n\"To date there has been no tangible evidence which would support a theory that any of the incidents are attributable to activity of a foreign nation. On the other hand, there is no evidence to deny categorically such a possibility.\n\"Many of the reported incidents have definitely been determined to be meteorological balloons or natural celestial phenomena. However, there are some incidents reported by reliable and competent observers which are still unexplained.\"\n\nThis clipping is from the evening edition of The Washington Times Herald\n4-8-49\nDate\n\n58 APR 20 1949\n62-83894-A\nNOT RECORDED\n45 APR 19 1949"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson____\nMr. E. A. Tamm__\nMr. Clegg____\nMr. Glavin____\nMr. Ladd____\nMr. Nichols____\nMr. Rosen____\nMr. Tracy____\nMr. Carson____\nMr. Egan____\nMr. Gurnea____\nMr. Harbo____\nMr. Hendon____\nMr. Jones____\nMr. Pennington__\nMr. Quinn Tamm__\nMr. Nease____\nMiss Gandy____\n\nGerman Spy Calls Self Flying Disc' Inventor\n\nRIO DE JANEIRO, Nov. 5 (INS)—Nils Christensen, a convicted German spy in Brazil, claimed today to be the inventor of \"flying discs\" which have been sighted in many parts of the world, including the United States.\n\nWASHINGTON TIMES HERALD\nAFTERNOON EDITION\nDATE 11-6-48\n\n63 DEC 3 1948\nINDEXED - 64\nEX-109\n62-83894-A\nNOV 19 1948"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Soviet Still Wants Answer To 'Saucers'\n\nBy DAVID SENTNER\nN. Y. Journal-American Washington Bureau\nWASHINGTON, Aug. 14.—Soviet agents in the United States have been ordered to solve the mystery of the \"Flying Saucers,\" it was learned today.\n\nWhile the guessing game in this country has burned itself out, the Soviet Union continues to be acutely interested in the phenomena, according to American investigative agencies.\n\nInstructions to Soviet espionage agents in the United States indicate the Kremlin believes the saucers may be connected with Army experiments in devices to decommission enemy radar during bombing raids.\n\nRECORDED EX-93\n62-83894-A\nFBI\nOCT 10 1947\n\nSoviet Espionage Agents in U.S. Interested in \"Saucers\"\n\nCLIPPING FROM THE N.Y. Journal American\nDATED AUG 14 1947\nFORWARDED BY N.Y. DIVISION"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Gander for Saucers\nVFW Chief Awaiting Message\nFrom Capital on Flying Discs\nThe national leader of the Veterans of Foreign Wars said yesterday in Columbus, Ohio, that he was momentarily expecting word from Washington which would explain the \"flying saucers\" mystery.\nLouis E. Starr, national commander of the VFW, told the Ohio State encampment of the VFW that he might have \"within a few hours\" an explanation from Washington. He had expected the message at 3 p. m. but it did not arrive, he said.\n\"Too little is being told the people of this country,\" Starr told the delegates.\nHundreds of persons in about 30 States have reported seeing the silvery saucer-shaped discs speeding through the skies at tremendous speeds.\nAn exhaustive check with the War Department and other agencies disclosed last night that no new formation was available in Washington. No one knew anything. But a new tendency to take the reports a bit more seriously was apparent. As the mystification waxed, the scoffing waned.\nSome of the mystery missiles may have passed over Washington Friday night at about midnight.\nDavid Atamian, 5160 Shoemaker lane, Friendship Heights, Md., reported that he had seen three or four of the flying saucers traveling northward at a rapid rate of speed at about that time. He said they were at an altitude of between 1000 and 2000 feet and appeared to be of a bright, bluish hue.\nThe flying saucers produced a series of speculations and attempted explanations throughout the country yesterday.\nSee SAUCERS, Page 3, Column 2.\nIS IT?—Coast Guardsman Frank Ryman, 27, made this picture with a Speed Graphic camera from the front porch of his Seattle, Wash., residence. It shows, says Ryan, a \"white saucer\" (arrow) that is neither an airplane, a cloud, nor a silver balloon. So, is it a \"flapjack\" or a saucer? Or maybe a bottle cap? Photo is enlarged about 20 times\nDAVID ATAMIAN, 5160 Shoemaker la., Friendship Heights, Md., said he saw three or four flying discs Friday about midnight\nTHIS IS NOT ONE OF 'EM, SAYS THE NAVY—The \"flying pancake,\" a wingless plane developed by the Navy, is the only plane it has which might resemble the reported \"flying saucers,\" but officials in Washington said yesterday that this strange-looking aircraft has never left Bridgeport, Conn. Authorities are still skeptical that the mystery missiles said to have been seen in the skies over the West Coast and as far East as the Carolinas are any sort of new airplane"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VFW Chief Awaiting Message From Capital on Flying Discs\ntempted explanations throughout the country yesterday.\nA Los Angeles newspaper quoted an unidentified scientist in nuclear physics at the California Institute of Technology as saying the flying discs have resulted from experiments in \"transmutation of atomic energy\" being conducted at Muroc Lake, Calif., White Sands, N. Mex.; Portland, Oreg., and elsewhere.\nThe scientist, whom the newspaper said had worked as a researcher on the atomic bomb \"Manhattan Project,\" was quoted as saying:\n\"People are not seeing things. Such flying discs actually are in experimental existence.\n\"These saucers so-called are capable of high speeds but they can be controlled from the ground.\n\"They are 20 feet in width at the center and are partially rocket-propelled on the takeoff.\"\nHowever, other scientists were skeptical about the claims of the unnamed California physicist. Dr. Harold Urey, famed atomic scientist at the University of Chicago, said the term \"transmutation of atomic energy\" is \"gibberish.\"\n\"You can transmute metals, but not energy,\" and Dr. Urey.\nDavid Lilienthal, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, declared the unexplained discs are in no way connected with atomic experiments. Lilenthal said he couldn't shed any light on the mystery and added:\n\"Until someone has the facts about this phenomenon, I can't see how anyone can say anything definite about it.\"\nAnd Dr. C. C. Lauritsen, head of the nuclear physics department at California Institute of Technology, said he was certain nobody in his department, which includes four former Manhattan Project researchers including himself, had made \"such a statement.\"\nHe expressed the opinion that the discs \"have nothing to do with nuclear physics.\"\nStrangely enough, the Muroc, Calif., Army Air Base, identified as one of the sites where the \"secret experiments\" are being carried out, announced that it had a P-80 fighter plane standing by to give chase if one of the flying saucers made an appearance.\nCol. Al Dutton, commanding officer of the Oregon National Guard, announced that the guard's squadron would attempt to photograph any future apparitions of the discs. He said six P-51 fighter planes, equipped with gun and telescopic cameras, would be kept ready to take off on a moment's notice.\nCol. F. J. Clark, commanding officer of the Hanford Engineering Works in the Pacific Northwest where the largest saucer influx has been reported, said the saucers were not coming from the atomic plant there.\n\"I have been waiting for someone to tie the discs to the Hanford atomic plant,\" he said. He declared that as far as he knew no experiments were under way there which would explain the mystery.\nTwo Chicago astronomers said the discs are probably \"manmade.\"\n\"They couldn't be meteors,\" said Dr. Girard Kuiper, director of the University of Chicago's Yerkes Observatory at Williams Bay, Wis.\nDr. Oliver Kee, director of Northwestern University's Dearborn Observatory, said:\n\"We realize that the Army and Navy are working on all sorts of things we know nothing about.\"\nHe said the mystery disks may represent an accomplishment similar to that of sending radar signals to the moon,\" one of the greatest technological achievements of the war and accomplished in absolute secrecy.\"\nHere in Washington, Dr. Newbern Smith of the National Bureau of Standards expressed the opinion that all the excitement is akin to \"those Loch Ness Monster stories.\"\nThe only comment offered by\nCapt. E. Duvall, assistant superintendent of the Naval Observatory, says that the saucer \"does not seem to be an astronomical phenomena.\"\nCredence in the saucers—widely laughed off at their first reported appearance June 25—grew as hundreds of observers, some of them trained fliers, reported seeing them.\nA crowd of 200 observed a disc at Hauser Lake, Idaho, Friday and a group of 60 picnickers saw them at Twin Falls, Idaho. And in Portland, Oreg., so many residents witnessed them that same day the police department sent out an all-cars broadcast.\nThe crew of a United Airlines plane said several of the round, flat objects were visible for about 12 minutes.\nWASHINGTON POST Page 1-M & 3-M"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying Saucer Found\nAdd latest reports on flying saucers—a garage sign with a garbage can lid and an ingenious \"buzzer\" found on the lawn of the home of Thaddeus Elder, 111 6th st., Laurel, Md.\nThe \"saucer\" was discovered Friday night shortly before 10 o'clock. Two small aerials projected from the contraption. It contained a dry cell battery, a flashlight bulb, a camera lens and a ticker that caused the buzzing.\nThe \"saucer\" was turned over to Laurel police who kept a straight face while informing the FBI of the \"discovery.\" The FBI wasn't interested.\nWASHINGTON POST Page 17 M"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Boys' Flying Saucer Hoax Stirs Police, FBI and Army\nBy the Associated Press\nTWIN FALLS, Idaho, July 12.—Four lads with imaginations that run to flying discs may or may not be laughing up their sleeves today after their version of a flying saucer had practically the entire populace, the FBI, Army intelligence officers and police on the run.\nThe boys created and planted in a yard yesterday an object that looked to them, as well as to the Army and civilian officers, just like a flying disc should look.\nTheir hoax was exposed after Assistant Police Chief L. D. McCracken was tipped off that one of the boys knew something about the disc.\nThe creation, which took two days to complete, was made from parts of an old phonograph, burned-out radio tubes and other discarded electrical parts. It had a plexiglass dome, radio tubes, burned wires and glistening gold and silver sides.\nSince the boys are juveniles, their names were withheld. They will not be prosecuted, Chief McCracken\nWASHINGTON STAR Page 1"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Juke Box Birthed This Flying Disc, Army Expert Finds\nBy United Press\nSALT LAKE CITY, July 12—The \"Flying Disc\" that fell with a thud in the yard of a Twin Falls, Idaho, housewife was found today to have been manufactured by four teenage boys from the parts of a rundown juke box.\nDiscovery of the disc was announced yesterday by an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who turned it over to Army officers at Twin Falls. They in turn put it aboard a plane and rushed it to Ft. Douglas near here for examination by experts.\nThe examination showed the fancy gadget—complete with plexiglass dome, three radio tubes, chromium-plated edges and numerous wires—was a hoax and, according to the Army, had \"no other function than to be ornamental in a limited manner and to cause considerable expense to Federal agencies investigating it.\"\nWASHINGTON NEWS Page 3"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Coffey\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Carson\nMr. Egan\nMr. Hendon\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nSaucer-Shaped Gadget Found By Californian in Flower Bed\n\nBy the Associated Press\nNORTH HOLLYWOOD, Calif., July 10.—A saucer-shaped mechanical contraption, resembling a chicken brooder top with a few gadgets added, was found in a germanium bed at the home of Russell Long, construction engineer, last night, and the first official reaction was from Fire Battalion Chief Wallace E. Newcombe, who looked at it skeptically and said:\n\"It doesn't look to me like it could fly.\"\nMr. Long called the Van Nuys Fire Department and excitedly pointed to the metal saucer, 30 inches in diameter, which he said had been belching smoke from two exhaust pipes and emitting a blue-white glare. The office of Richard B. Hood, Federal Bureau of Investigation chief here, said an FBI man had taken a look at the device and that it would be turned over to military authorities. The FBI office said Mr. Hood had not other comment.\nChief Newcombe exhibited the object. A radio tube on top was set down into the upper half of the saucer, which was about 5 inches thick at the middle and tapered to a thin perimeter. There were wires leading to a plug embedded in the center of the lower half. There was a rudder-type wing on top.\nMr. Long told reporters he was awakened by a pop, not as loud as an explosion, and rushed outside to find the device. He declared the object had nudged a few bricks but of the border of his flower bed."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"While Science Sneers\n\nAir Forces Intelligence Joins Search for Flying Saucers\n\nArmy Air Forces intelligence yesterday disclosed it has joined the search for a flying saucer.\nBizarre reports on the whirling, high-speed discs continued to pour in, drawing an official statement from the AAF, much cynicism from science and the offer of $1000 for the first one downed.\nThe Air Forces, which has jurisdiction over the White Sands (N. Mex.) Rocket Proving Grounds, denied the saucers are any of its doing. \"No such phenomena can be explained by any experiments being conducted,\" the statement said.\nFrom the Naval Research Laboratory's Rear Admiral Paul F. Lee came the curt comment: \"We concur in the Army announcement.\"\nNeither denied existence of the discs, but the AAF said statements of witnesses are being correlated \"in an effort to identify the reported objects.\"\nWith few States in the Nation without at least one flying saucer report, the AAF has a chore.\nA Navy flier with five years' experience tabbed the discs as \"space ships\" after at first considering all reports as \"crazy.\" He changed his mind, he said in Alameda, Calif., yesterday, after he and about 50 other persons saw a group of about \"50 of the saucers in triangular formation near Auburn Saturday.\"\nOne report which won't trouble the AAF is that of a commercially operated, converted P-38, whose pilot said he had knocked one of the \"pearl-colored, clam-shaped airplanes\" out of the Montana sky. He admitted the story was a hoax.\nIn Washington, Dr. L. R. Hafstad, executive secretary of the Joint Research and Development Board and former director of the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory, said:\n\"Poppycock!\"\nDr. Jesse Sprowls, psychology professor at the University of Maryland, said, \"There is absolutely no limit to the delusion that the mind can harbor. A tremendously interesting social psychological delusion,\" he added.\nDr. Ivan E. McDougle of Baltimore's Goucher College, said he guessed \"it's one of those phychological epidemics where people see things that aren't there.\"\nBut C. J. Zohn, 440 Mellon st. se., who works in the rocket-sonde, high altitude research section of the Naval Research Laboratory, yesterday reported he and three other men saw one \"saucer\" in New Mexico June 29. He described it as a bright, silvery disc, traveling at 10,000 feet.\n\"It was clearly visible—and then it wasn't there.\"\nSee SAUCERS, Page 3, Column 5\n\nJUL 8 1947\nWASHINGTON POST\nPage 1"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAUCERS—From Page 1\n\nFlying Discs Interest AAF\n\nit as a bright, silvery disc, traveling at 10,000 feet.\n\"It was clearly visible—and then it wasn't there.\"\nThe FBI here was noncommittal.\nIn Milwaukee, Wis., the FBI said it was \"not interested\" in what appeared to be a circular saw, rigged with a few wires, which the Rev. Joseph Brasku said crashed into his yard at Grafton, Wis. He admitted it probably was a joke, but was holding the disc for FBI's attention.\nAtomic experts in session at Lake Success, N. Y., did not discuss officially the flying saucer reports, but made no secret of their interest. They were reported as \"baffled.\"\nNot so was a 34-year-old watchmaker in Chattanooga, Tenn., who said he invented the flying saucer in 1943 but \"got tired of the runaround\" when he tried to peddle it to the Government or an aircraft concern. His model was powered with a rubber band.\nA $1000 reward was posted in Northbrook, Ill., \"for the capture of a flying disc—or the true explanation of the phenomena.\" The offer, made by E. J. Culligan, is made \"solely through an interest in science.\"\nA theory that the saucers might be artificial satellites came from the British physicist Prof. A. M. Low. The artificial satellite, he explained, might be created by unknown scientists and could serve many purposes, such as deflecting television or radar beams.\nLester P. Barlow, a Stamford, Conn., inventor, said he believes the discs are jet-propelled missiles being manufactured for the Navy by the Martin Aircraft Co., in Baltimore.\n\nFlying Saucers Traced To Wife's Pitching Arm\n\nPittsburgh, July 7 (AP).—Many persons have seen the mysterious \"flying saucers,\" but Connie Dunbar, 35, knows the source of the ones he saw.\nDunbar, who said he was struck by saucers thrown by his wife, Mrs. Bessie Dunbar, was granted a divorce today by Judge Harry H. Roward."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Report New Red Planes Resemble 'Flying Saucers'\n\nSpecial to the N. Y. Journal-American\n\nLOS ANGELES, July 7.—Federal agents today investigated a letter to The Examiner describing Russian supersonic atom-powered planes resembling the \"flying saucers.\"\nA top-flight atomic scientist to whom The Examiner referred the letter said it was \"not all nonsense,\" and suggested the matter be turned over to the FBI.\nThe letter writer said he got the information from an officer aboard a Russian tanker recently in Los Angeles harbor.\nThe Russian, he said, also described experiments with controlled radioactive clouds in the Arctic, where birds, animals and even worms were killed.\n18 INCHES THICK.\nThe planes, as described by the Russian to the writer, are only 18 inches thick, with a kidney-shaped outline and no propellors.\nThe pilot lies on his stomach and is artificially cooled against the heat developed by air friction.\n\"The outer surface is highly polished,\" the Russian said. \"Both upper and lower surfaces are convex, like a giant lens. The lifting force is an entirely different principle found about 10 years ago among unpublished papers of a Russian chemist.\"\n\"Energy is required only for climbing, but no energy is needed for support when the airplane goes along the earth's gravitational contour lines.\"\nThe writer of the strange letter said he met the Russian officer in Wilmington and, because he wanted to hear about Russia, invited him to be his guest at dinner.\nDESTROYS ALL LIFE.\nThe Russian first asked where he could sell 18 Polar bear pelts which he received \"for very dangerous work.\"\nHe said he had been assigned to go over the route of the radioactive cloud near Lake Bakal (or Baykal) and pick up dead animals. \"They loaded a few small ships with all kinds of animals and directed the cloud over them,\" the writer said.\n\"During this experiment, a violent storm blew the cloud far north into the tundra, but before it dissipated it destroyed all life on its way.\n\"The cloud may be controlled from land, from a plane or from a robot-piloted 'leader.' As I understand it, the control is based on electro-magnetic waves and the cloud has two components: The carrier and the killer.\"\nHAVE ATOMIC ENERGY.\n\"I asked him if the Russians have an atomic bomb. He said he doubted it, because the atomic bomb cannot be used without killing innocent people, such as children and women. But they have atomic energy which they use for propelling supersonic airplanes.\"\nThe writer said he asked the Russian officer to another dinner, but when he came the second time his father was leaving unexpectedly and he could only say goodbye.\nThe nuclear physicist consulted by The Examiner said it was difficult to appraise the value of the letter because of the writer's \"technical ignorance.\"\n\"The remark implying that the Russians wouldn't use the atom bomb if they had it is nonsense. The Russians would like very much to have the bomb,\" the physicist said.\n\nBureau Interest\n\nJournal American\nJUL 7 1947"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIVISION OF PRESS INTELLIGENCE\nGOVERNMENT INFORMATION SERVICE\nBUREAU OF THE BUDGET\nTempo V Bldg.\n\nSYM. J\nExaminer\nLos Angeles, Calif.\n184\nDATE JUL 7 1947\n\nFBI CHECKING RUSS DISC TIP\n\nFederal agents yesterday investigated a letter to the Examiner describing Russian supersonic atom-powered planes resembling the \"flying saucers.\"\nA top-flight atomic scientist to whom the Examiner referred the letter said it was \"not all nonsense,\" and suggested the matter be turned over to the FBI.\nThe letter writer said he got the information from an officer aboard a Russian tanker recently in Los Angeles harbor.\nDEATH CLOUDS\nThe Russian, he said, also described experiments with controlled radioactive clouds in the Arctic, where birds, animals and even worms were killed.\nThe planes, as described by the Russian to the writer, are only 18 inches thick, with a kidney-shaped outline and no propellers.\nThe pilot lies on his stomach, and is artificially cooled against the heat developed by air friction.\n\"The outer surface of the plane is highly polished,\" the writer said the Russian told him. \"Both upper and lower surfaces are convex, like a giant lens. The lifting force is an entirely different principle found about 10 years ago among unpublished papers of a Russian chemist and developed recently at one of Russia's research laboratories.\"\n\"Energy is required only for climbing, but no energy is needed for support when the airplane goes along the earth's gravitational contour lines.\"\nReports of the flying discs dropped off sharply in the Los Angeles area yesterday and police said they had received no calls about them in the city or county since Saturday.\nThe writer of the strange letter said he met the Russian officer in Wilmington and, because he wanted to hear about Russia, invited him to dinner.\nThe Russian first asked where he could sell 18 polar bear pelts which he received \"for very dangerous work.\"\nHe said he had been assigned to go over the route of the runaway radioactive cloud near Lake Baikal and pick up dead animals.\nANIMALS KILLED\n\"They loaded a few small ships with all kinds of animals and directed the cloud over them,\" the writer said.\n\"During this experiment, a violent storm blew the cloud far north into the tundra, but before it dissipated it destroyed all life on its way.\n\"The cloud may be controlled from land, from a plane or from a robot-piloted 'leader.' As I understand it, the control is based on electro-magnetic waves and the cloud has two components: The carrier and the killer.\"\n\"I asked him if the Russians have an atomic bomb. He said he doubted it, because the atomic bomb cannot be used without killing innocent people, such as children and women. But they have atomic energy, which they use for propelling supersonic airplanes.\"\nThe writer said he asked the Russian officer to another dinner, but when he came the second time his tanker was leaving unexpectedly and he could only say good-by.\nThe nuclear physicist consulted by the Examiner said it was difficult to appraise the value of the letter because of the writer's technical ignorance.\n\"The remark implying that the Russians wouldn't use the atom bomb if they had it is nonsense. The Russians would like very much to have the bomb.\"\nOn the other hand, he decried the efforts of some groups who take advantage of \"all this flying disc talk\" to stir up suspicion of Russia's intentions.\nThe Examiner had two more reports of flying discs yesterday. Fred Dodge of 738 South Tin avenue said he was in West Lake Park at 12:02 p.m. when he saw one flying westward at 2500 to 3000 feet. He said it was silent, round and shiny and was not an airplane.\nLeonard Posella, 14, of 3267 Waverly drive, reported a flight of 20 near Griffith Park going west at 500 feet. He said they were round and silvery \"with their noses pointing upward,\" and he watched them for three minutes.\n\nRECORDED 48 AUG 4 1947\nGOVERNMENT INFORMATION SERVICE"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Planes to Chase 'Flying Saucers';\n'Something to This,' AAF Feels\n\nWith aircraft, including a jet plane, alerted along the West Coast in hopes of chasing and explaining the mystery of the \"flying saucers,\" an Army Air Forces spokesman here disclosed today that the AAF believes \"there's something to this\" but is completely mystified as to just what.\nCapt. Tom Brown of AAF public relations said the tales of flat, round objects zipping through the sky are too widespread to be groundless. He pointed out that a number of competent airmen have reported seeing the phenomena that have been the talk of the Nation since June 25.\nFor 10 days, he declared, the AAF has been checking on the stories \"and we still haven't the slightest idea what the things can be.\"\nMeanwhile, from Washington and the rest of the country came more reports of \"flying saucers\" as well as a number of scientific and pseudo-scientific explanations of the mystery.\nDavid Atamian, 5610 Shoemaker lane, Bethesda, Md., said he saw three or four \"flying saucers\" traveling north at great speed at 11:45 p.m. Friday. Mr. Atamian, who described himself as a writer of poetry, said he was sure he wasn't mistaken. The discs, he said, were flying at between 1,000 and 2,000 feet and appeared to be of a bright, bluish hue.\nGovernment sources denied that any tests are being conducted that might be the answer to the mystery. A Navy official said the Navy had checked all its facilities to determine whether any were sending aloft objects that could account for the strange sights. The answers were negative.\nDavid Lilienthal, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, said (See FLYING SAUCERS, Pg. A-3.)\nthe \"saucers\" had nothing to do with atomic experiments.\nA Los Angeles newspaper story quoting an unidentified California Institute of Technology scientist as saying the \"flying saucers\" must have something to do with experiments in \"transmutation of atomic energy\" caused a brief flurry by the institute quickly denied the report.\nDr. Harold Urey, atomic scientist at the University of Chicago, called it \"gibberish\" and said elements could be \"transmuted\" but energy could not.\nP-80 fighter at the Muroc, Calif., Army Airfield in California and six fast conventional fighters at Portland, Oreg., stood ready to take off on an instant's notice should any \"flying saucers\" be sighted in those areas. Some of the planes carried photographic equipment.\nAir-Ground Search Slated.\nAn air-ground search was scheduled to get under way today to investigate a report that eight flying discs had landed on a mountainside near St. Maries, Idaho, in full view of 10 persons.\nMrs. Walter Johnson, Dishman, Wash., said the \"saucers\" came down in timber near St. Maries Thursday evening, but were not reported until she returned to her home in Dishman yesterday.\nShe said they came into view at extreme speed, traveling north. Suddenly, she said, they slowed and then \"fluttered like leaves to the ground.\"\n\"The mysterious part was that we couldn't see them after they landed,\" Mrs. Johnson said. \"We could see them flutter down into the timber yet we couldn't see that they did anything to the trees.\"\nShe described them as \"about the size of a five-room house\" and shaped more like washtubs than discs.\nPlanes to Comb Area.\nCol. G. R. Dodson of the Oregon Air Guard announced a patrol would leave Portland, Ore., today to investigate the report and Sheriff"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"More About Saucers\n\nPriest Finds 'Whirring' Disc\nIn Yard and Holds It for FBI\n\nChicago, July 6 (U.P.).—A Catholic priest at Grafton, Wis., said tonight that a round, metal disc, which might be one of the mysterious \"flying saucers,\" had crashed into his parish yard and that he is holding it for the Federal Bureau of Investigation.\nThe Rev. Joseph Brasky of St. Joseph's Church at Grafton, 45 miles north of Milwaukee, said he heard a swishing and whirring noise this morning. A second later he said, he heard a thud and a mild explosion.\nHe investigated and found a sheet metal disc about 18 inches in diameter, resembling a circular saw blade.\n\"The object still was warm, weighed about four or five pounds and was about one eighth of an inch thick,\" he said.\nThere was a hole about one inch in diameter in the middle of the disc, he said, and in the opening were \"gadgets and some wires.\"\nThe priest said he did not know if his discovery were important or whether it might be an elaborate practical joke. He said he had notified the FBI of his find. H. K. Johnson of the Milwaukee FBI office said he hadn't heard yet about the disc but that an official report might be at his office.\nThe flying discs have been reported \"seen\" by persons in 30 States, but Brasky's disc was the first one that actually had been found—if that is what was found.\nHis report came a few hours after a military plane made an unsuccessful speed dash in an attempt to track down one of the discs and the Army and scientists sought to ascertain whether coast-to-coast reports about the discs zooming through the sky were fact or fancy.\nArmy planes scoured the northwest Pacific skies for them without success today and one \"eyewitness\" even reported having seen one of the discs take off in Arizona. A St. Louis railroad man exhibited some paper \"discs\" he said he had seen floating over St. Louis.\nThe flying saucers which have been reported skimming through America's skies at speeds up to 1200 miles have eluded the usually keen eye of radar.\nCapt. Tom Brown of the Army Air Forces public relations staff See SAUCERS, Page 3, Col. 2."} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAUCERS—From Page 1\n\nPriest Finds 'Whirring' Disc\nIn Yard and Holds It for FBI\n\nsaid the Army Airways Communications Service had reported late yesterday that so far its radar scopes throughout the country have been unable to pick up any strange objects in flight.\nAnd in the Pacific Northwest—where most of the fly-happy platters have been reported—the Army has radar equipment which can pierce fog and darkness and pick up objects in the sky 200 miles away.\nEven so, Brown acknowledged that the Air Forces had decided \"there's something to this\" and had been checking it for 10 days.\n\"And we still haven't the slightest idea what they could be,\" he added.\nAnd a new wrinkle—the reported landing of a fleet of eight skimming platters—was reported from Idaho in full view of 10 persons. A. Dishman, Idaho housewife, said she and others in her party had seen the saucers land on a mountainside near St. Maries, Idaho.\nShe said they came into view at an extreme speed, suddenly slowed, and then \"fluttered like leaves to the ground.\"\n\"The mysterious part was that we couldn't see them after they landed,\" she said. \"We could see them flutter down into the timber yet we couldn't see that they did anything to the trees.\"\nShe said she hoped to hike into the timber tomorrow and search for the objects which she said were saucer-shaped but resembled washtubs more than disks and were \"about the size of a five-room house.\"\nLocally, Hazen Kennedy of 2615 4th st. ne. reported he had seen one passing over the Northeast section of the city at about 8:40 p. m.\nThis would be the first one reported over the District, although others have been reported over nearby Maryland.\nKennedy, who has 125 hours flying time as a student pilot in the Army Air Forces to his credit, said he believed the saucer he had seen was traveling at \"well over\" 1000 miles an hour at an altitude of between 1200 and 1500 feet.\n\"The best way I can describe it,\" said Kennedy, \"was that it looked like an orange lamp bulb without the socket. It was going faster than any jet plane I've ever seen.\"\nIn Hagerstown, Md., Mrs. Madelyn Ganoe, 30, said she had seen five of the discs, racing in 2-1-2 formation at \"terrific speed,\" from her backporch. \"They sounded like a faraway train,\" she said.\nIn the wake of these new eyewitness accounts came a new series of comments, and explanations, but most of them were tinged with a slight tendency to laugh off the whole thing.\nDr. Winfred Overholser, nationally known psychiatrist and superintendent of St. Elizabeths Hospital here, said it \"has some of the earmarks of being national hysteria.\"\n\"Everytime someone comes up with a sea-serpent story,\" said Dr. Overholser, \"others with vivid imaginations are sure they have seen the same thing.\"\n\"The critical faculty in man, the last one he received, is still not very well developed. Scratch the surface and you find the same mass hysteria which predominated during the witchcraft scare. Some persons are quite ready to see things and follow beliefs.\"\nDr. Overholser said that when he made his rounds of the mental patients yesterday at St. Elizabeths not a one commented on the flying saucers story.\n\"I think they may be a little skeptical,\" he added.\nHowever, Dr. Overholser said he was not trying to dismiss the matter as a joke \"because there are so many strange things going on today that one can't be sure.\"\nMaj. Alexander P. de Seversky, noted aircraft designer, told The Post by telephone from New York that until he sees a flying saucer he \"wouldn't like to pass judgment.\"\nHe agreed with Dr. Overholser that much if not all of the story may be because of hysteria.\n\"After all,\" he said, \"we are more or less an hysterical Nation.\"\nMajor de Seversky said it was possible that the persons who claim to have seen the aerial discs have instead glimpsed the exhaust of jet-propelled planes.\nHe conceded, too, that they might be guided missiles let loose as part of an experiment, but added:\n\"I don't think the Government would fire them so promiscuously. They would test them in one spot, in an isolated area, like they did the atomic bomb.\"\nMaj. Gen. Curtis E. LeMay, who as Deputy Chief of Air Staff for Research and Development would know if the saucers involved experiments with guided missiles, commented:\n\"Whatever these people have seen it hasn't been anything resulting from experiments by the Army Air Forces. As far as I'm concerned there's nothing to it at all. The whole thing is unfortunate.\"\nGeneral LeMay refused to discuss whether the Air Forces has guided missiles which can attain speeds of 1200 miles.\n\"There's been too much said about guided missiles now,\" he said.\nHoward W. Blakeslee, Associated Press science editor, said the whole business may be an optical illusion.\n\"At any distance which is close to the limit of how far a person can see,\" he wrote, \"all objects appear round or nearly so. This law of sight covers both small things seen nearby and large ones at great distances.\"\n\"The one outstanding fact about virtually all the saucers is that they had no structure—they seemed merely round and flat. That description fits exactly with the tricks that eyes play. This trickiness varies with differences in weather and lighting.\"\nHowever, Nova Hart, St. Louis mechanic who was trained during service in the war to spot all types of aircraft, yesterday offered a minute description of one of the flying patterns which he claimed he saw flying at an altitude of about 300 feet.\nReporter Sees One\nHe described it as circular with a ribbed framework and silver gray in color. He said it appeared to have a motor with a propeller attached in the center and that it kept turning like an airplane doing a slow roll.\nAlthough many explanations have been offered, none has been convincing. A Los Angeles newspaper quoted an unnamed nuclear physicist as saying the silvery discs resulted from experiments in the \"transmutation of atomic energy.\"\nThis report was rapidly herded into the hoax column by David Lilienthal, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, and several prominent atomic scientists.\nStarr Expects Word\nLouis E. Starr, national commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, announced Saturday at Columbus, Ohio, that he was expecting \"momentarily\" information from Washington which would explain the dashing discs. But the message never arrived.\nThe Air Forces said that Gen. Carl Spaatz, Air Forces chief, was in the Pacific Northwest where most of the saucers have been reported, but added that his trip there was planned two months ago, long before the saucers scare. General Spaatz is expected back in Washington late tomorrow.\nMuroc Army Air Field in California had a P-80 jet fighter standing by, and the National Guard in Oregon had prepared six regular fighters to give chase should saucers be reported nearby.\nTHE WASHINGTON POST\nPAGE\nDATE"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"saw in the sky. She is the first known observer to claim what she saw was stationary. All the rest have spoken of tremendous speeds. Mrs. Kole said all she could think of was a blazing disc. Alexandria police looked in the direction she indicated but the disc had gone.\nJack Labous, an artist, 3500 block East Capitol St., reported seeing one of the \"things\" flying over Bethesda. He described it as \"a flat disc with a cone shape under it and a stick like a radio antenna projecting from the bottom.\"\nThe scientist who claimed to know something about the \"saucers\" was described by a Los Angeles newspaper as a member of the California Institute of Technology staff.\nMay Be Real, He Says\nHe was quoted as saying \"transmutation of atomic energy\" experiments might be responsible. He was said to have been a researcher on the Manhattan project that made the atom bomb, and was quoted as saying:\n\"These so-called saucers are capable of high speed but can be controlled from the ground. They are 20 feet wide in the center and are partially rocket propelled on the take off. People are not seeing things. Such flying discs actually are in experimental existence.\"\nExperiments with these \"discs\" were reported as being in progress at Muroc Dry Lake, Calif.; White Sands, N. M.; Portland, Oreg., and other places.\nDr. Harold Urey, atom scientist at the University of Chicago, commented: \"Transmutation of atomic energy sounds like gibberish. You can transmute metals, not energy.\"\nCol. F. J. Clarke, in command of the Hanford Engineering works of the atomic energy project, said he knew of no experiments involving \"flying saucers.\"\n\"I have been waiting several days for someone to get the idea the so-called flying saucers were tied up in some way with what we are doing,\" Clarke said. \"But as far as I know, there is no connection.\"\nThe \"piece\" found in Ohio was discovered near Circleville. It was a six-pointed star covered with tinfoil and attached to part of a balloon. It was reported to be a device used by the Army air forces in radar research to check on high wind speeds. There was no comment from the air forces.\nA War Department spokesman revealed Army intelligence has been working for a year on reports of strange objects seen in the sky and had reached the conclusion that some sort of meteorites were responsible.\nAstronomers at the Naval observatory and Georgetown university, who admitted they have been on the alert for flying saucers as they swept the skies with their powerful telescopes, insisted they not only had not seen any but knew of no astronomical theory that might account for the reports.\nKenneth Arnold, the private pilot who was first to announce seeing the saucers, expressed gratification at the support he was getting but insisted he still didn't believe he had seen nine discs whizzing by at 1,200 miles an hour, although he had seen them.\nArnold started yesterday on a flying fishing trip over the Pacific northwest armed with a new camera in the hope of getting pictures if he encountered any more saucers. He took along Col. Paul W. Weiland, World War II artillery officer, just in case he sees some more and needs a witness.\nArnold announced he has been getting tons of letters commenting on his report of the saucers. Many of them predict they are the forerunner of an atom bomb attack. One correspondent blamed them on survivors of the lost continent of Atlantis who are preparing for an atomic war in 1960.\nArmy, Navy and civil aeronautics officials agreed none of them had any reliable information about the discs and would refrain from commenting until they saw one, or at least a picture.\nJUL 6 1947\nWASHINGTON TIMES-HERALD\nPage 1 & 8 Sec. I"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Atom Experiments or Bunk?\nDelusions or Factual, Those Flying Saucers Have Nation Eyeing Skies; 5 Seen in D. C. Area\n\"And there shall be signs in the heavens. And wise men will mock them and the learned revile, but unto the chosen the signs shall be revealed and they will have wisdom and knowledge.\"—Ancient prophecy.\nBy JAMES COLLIGAN\nThe words of the prophecy were being fulfilled last night in Washington and throughout the nation as thousands of official and scientific observers and just ordinary people searched the skies for flying saucers—and plenty of watchers were seeing them, including five in the Washington area.\nScientists, for the most part dismissed the \"saucers\" as optical illusions, figments of the imagination or \"someone having a little fun,\" but the reports continued to pour in.\nBy now they have been seen in every part of the country, from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico and from the Pacific to the Atlantic.\nThe reports grew in \"authenticity\" with their increase in volume. A farmer in Ohio came up with a piece of one, a \"scientist in nuclear physics\" threw out hints of mysterious atomic energy experiments, another observer claimed to have a picture to back up what he saw.\n(Turn to Page 8, Col. 1)\nFlying Saucers Intrigue Nation; Five Seen Here\n(Continued from First Page)\nLouis E. Starr, national commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, announced he expected an \"explanation from Washington\" within a matter of hours. He hinted to newsmen at Columbus, Ohio, that the Government is holding out on the public about the \"saucers,\" and commented: \"Too little is being told the people of this country.\"\nStationary at Alexandria\nA mother and daughter in Northeast Washington reported yesterday they saw three huge things hurtling through the sky last Thursday but were afraid to say anything for fear of what might be said about them. Even yesterday they asked that their names be withheld.\nThe \"things,\" according to these observers, looked like dishes and made a noise like jet-propelled planes. They were traveling so fast they disappeared an instant after they were observed.\nMrs. Martin Kole, 3200 block Valley Dr., Alexandria, called her local police station to ask about the round, flat bright light she\nIs It Saucer, Sorcery, or Just Plain Sausage?\nI.N.P. Photo by U.S. Coast Guard\nReports of \"flying saucers\" were laughed off by authorities until many witnesses, including reliable pilots and servicemen, said they had seen the plate-like objects whizzing overhead. Above is the picture Yeoman Frank Eyman, 27, took in the Seattle twilight when he observed what seemed to him to be a flying saucer 10,000 feet high traveling at 500 miles per hour.\nWASHINGTON TIMES-HERALD\nPage 1 & 8 Sec. I"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Carson\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Hendon\nMr. Jones\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nHundreds in 31 States Report Seeing Weird 'Flying Saucers'\nBy the Associated Press\nThe Nation was baffled today by \"flying saucers\" reported seen in 31 States by hundreds of persons, and conjectures came from scores of named and unnamed sources throughout the country.\nOfficial Government sources took a \"Let's see one\" stand on the phenomenon, and no scientist offered a detailed explanation.\nTwo Chicago astronomers said the objects are probably \"man-made,\" undulating, flashing objects couldn't be meteors,\" said Dr. Girard Kieuper, director of the University of Chicago's Yerkes Observatory at Williams Bay, Wis.\n\"We realize,\" said Dr. Oliver Lee, director of Northwestern University's Dearborn Observatory, \"that the Army and Navy are working on all sorts of things we know nothing about.\"\nDr. Lee said the discs might represent the same sort of thing as sending radar signals to the moon, \"one of the greatest technological achievements of the war and accomplished in absolute secrecy.\"\nDavid Lilienthal, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, told the Denver Post in a brief telephone interview that the flying saucers were in no way connected with experiments in atomic energy, the transmutation of metals, or similar research.\nCol. F. J. Clark, commanding officer of the Hanford Engineering Works in the Pacific Northwest where the largest saucer influx has been reported, said the saucers were not coming from the atomic plant there.\nCredence in the saucers—widely laughed off at their first reported appearance June 25—grew as hundreds of observers, many of them trained flyers, reported seeing them.\nA crowd of 200 observed a disc at Charleston, S. C.—one of them a newspaper reporter—said a flying saucer passed over Charleston heading east at 7:20 p.m. Saturday about the same time two men in Albany, Oreg., saw a single disc wash southward, halt, and retrace its course before vanishing into a cloud.\nAn Army Air Forces spokesman in Washington on July 3 said there was not enough fact to \"warrant further investigation,\" but the Air Materiel Command at Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio, said it was making a study. Saturday at Washington an Army researcher admitted \"we're mystified\" and the Navy said it had no theories.\nFirst Reported June 25.\nThe first published report of \"flying saucers\" came from Kenneth Arnold, Boise, Idaho, businessman pilot, who reported at Pendleton, Oreg., on June 25 that he had seen nine of them flying at 1,200 miles an hour in formation, shifting position \"like the tail of a kite,\" over Washington State's Cascade Mountains.\nBefore scoffers had more than begun to offer explanations such as \"reflections,\" \"persistent vision\" and \"snow blindness,\" an Oklahoma City private flyer, Byron Savage, said he had seen a similarly shaped object some weeks earlier but fear of ridicule kept him quiet.\nThen the reports began to filter in, mostly from individuals. The discs were seen in Texas, in New Mexico, in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Missouri, Colorado, California, Arizona and Nebraska. The number varied from one to a dozen, seen mostly by one or two people.\nSeen by Group of 200.\nThen the July 4 deluge hit. Two hundred persons in one group and 60 in another saw them in Idaho; hundreds saw them in Oregon, Washington and other States throughout the West. In Augusta, Me., the Civil Aeronautics Administration received a report that a dozen of the discs had been seen there.\nAnd, for the first time, the Eastern States had their reports. Observers came in with reports from Michigan, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Indiana, Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina and Canada's Atlantic seaboard.\nNear unanimity was recorded on some of the discs' characteristics: terrific speed, bright reflections, round or oval in shape, flat and flying with a peculiar undulating motion. Size was moot and expressed by Capt. Smith of United Air Lines as \"hard to judge\" without knowing the distance from the observer to the objects.\n2 D. C. Area Residents Say They Saw 'Flying Saucers'\nTwo Washington area residents today were on record as having observed the mysterious \"flying saucers\" hereabouts.\nA Bethesda (Md.) man was reported to have seen three or four of these objects at midnight Friday while in the vicinity of Friendship Heights, Md. They were described as being rapid, bluish and bright, traveling northward.\nMrs. Martin Kole, 3202 Valley drive, Alexandria housewife, said early Friday she saw a large round object floating in the southwest sky. She declared a light shining in her face awakened her about 4 a.m. She went to the window and saw something round and large with a reddish tinge. It seemed to be standing still. After looking at it a few minutes, Mrs. Kole said she returned to bed.\nDiscs (Continued From First Page.)\nHauser Lake, Idaho, on the Fourth of July. A group of 60 picnickers saw them at Twin Falls, Idaho, And in Portland, Oreg., so many residents witnessed them on the Fourth that the police department sent out an all-cars broadcast.\nA United Air Lines pilot of 14 years experience walked up the ramp to his plane at Boise, joking that 'I'll believe in these discs when I see them.' Ten minutes later he radioed, shaken, that he had spotted five of them from his plane. He was Capt. A. J. Smith. His co-pilot, Ralph Stevens, and his stewardess, Miss Marty Monro, told the same story.\nWitnesses in two points of California and in Spokane—one of them an Army Air Forces sergeant—reported seeing the discs Saturday.\nTwo persons in different sections\nSee DISCS, Page A-9.\nWASHINGTON STAR\nPage A-1 & A-9"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Flying Saucers' Reported Seen By Scores of 'Eyewitnesses'\nBy the Associated Press\nThe \"flying saucer\" mystery reached fever pitch today, after \"I saw them myself\" statements from a veteran United Air Lines crew, scores of Portland (Oreg.) residents, and 60 picknickers at Twin Falls Park in Idaho is said.\nThe UAL pilot, copilot and stewardess, who had scoffed consistently at \"flying saucer\" tales, said they saw such objects last night while flying a passenger plane from Boise, Idaho, to Portland.\nTheir statements followed a day during which the \"saucers\" were reported seen in many parts of the Nation.\nMany Portlanders—including police, experienced flyers and three newspapermen—declared they saw silvery discs over Portland.\nIn New Orleans, Miss Lillian Lawless said she saw an object, shining like silver or chromium, flying at a great height and at a terrific speed in a northeasterly direction over Lake Pontchartrain.\n\"Pancake Standing on End.\"\nDescribing what they saw as flat, translucent plates 12 to 15 inches in diameter, several Port Huron (Mich.) residents reported seeing the \"saucers.\"\nCapt. E. J. Smith, Seattle, a veteran of 14 years with United Air Lines, said he observed the round flat objects—\"like a pancake standing on end\"—for about 12 minutes while flying from Emmett Idaho, to a point southeast of Ontario, Ore.\nHe radioed the Ontario airport but airport officials saw nothing.\nSixty persons picknicking at Twin Falls Park, near Twin Falls, Idaho, said they saw the discs yesterday afternoon. A party of seven first saw some and 10 minutes later, a crowd of 20 or 30 people saw another batch of nine or ten. Word passed around, and soon the waiting crowd saw another batch circling and climbing.\nAt Seattle, Frank Ryman, Coast Guard yeoman, said he took a picture of what some residents north of Seattle thought was a flying disc. The photograph showed a pinhead-size light spot against the dark evening sky.\nThe Oregonian dispatched a plane to hunt Portland's saucers. It found nothing but empty sky.\nStrange Craft Over Philadelphia.\nIn Philadelphia, Dr. M. K. Leisy, a junior interne at the Pennsylvania Hospital for Mental Diseases, and other persons in the western section of the city, reported seeing strange craft in the skies last night.\nIt was something round with a luminous halo about it, Dr. Leisk declared. It was not shiny, but dark in color and seemed to be propelled by whirling wings. Dr. Leisy said the object he saw was moving at approximately the speed of the wind, below the clouds. It eventually vanished in the clouds, he added.\nA dispatch from Summerside, Cana, said farmers in the Prince Edward Island region claim to have seen more of the mysterious disc-like missiles reported flying through northern skies earlier this week.\nJames Harris, farmer at Sheldrake, 1 mile north of here, and his hired man, Herman Linkletter, said they saw one of the object last night traveling from the northwest toward the southeast.\nWASHINGTON STAR\nPage A-7"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Of Flying Discs\nSaucers Here, Saucers There—Including Washington\nAs rumors persisted (and were denied) that the \"flying saucers\" are radio controlled rocket or jet planes being tested secretly, Washington got in the act today with a report from two District women of strange goings-on overhead.\nMeanwhile, assorted scientists came up with widely varying theories as to what—if anything—the heavenly wanderers may be.\nDr. John G. Lynn, human behavior expert of Valhalla, N. Y., said people have the atomic jitters.\nNavy Observatory astronomers here said that so far as they can judge from description, the objects are not astronomical phenomena. Another astronomer—civilian—opined that people \"are seeing spots before their eyes.\"\nBut unnamed scientists quoted by Science Service expressed doubt that a purely optical illusion would make people think they were seeing flying disks. Science Service also pointed out that some of the saucers have been reported by \"reliable observers accustomed to looking at the sky.\"\n'There Were Three—Shaped Like Dishes'\nMINNESOTA-AV NE, July 5.—Scientists from many Washington's top-drawer institutions are expected to flock to this street today after the first authenticated report of flying saucers within the city limits of Washington was made by two startled matrons.\nThe ladies spotted the things night before last, but were understandably reluctant to report it at once.\n\"I know what you'll think,\" the younger one said in an exclusive interview with The News, \"but mother saw them, too, and she doesn't drink.\nWe were shopping on Minnesota-ave ne at about 7 Thursday night,\" she said, \"when I heard a noise like a jet-propelled plane. I looked up and saw these things going thru the air. There were three of them, shaped like dishes and going fast as a jet plane. They were bright golden in color, but that may have been from th sun being reflected from some bright metal objects.\n\"I couldn't estimate the size of the things, but they seemed to be fairly far away. I looked away for an instant to tell mother to look at the things.\"\nThe witness' mother looked up and also saw the \"dishes.\" Then they swished over the horizon and disappeared.\nThe two women asked that their names be withheld from publication, lest skeptical neighbors poke fun at them.\nRECORDED 62-83894-A\nJUL 5 1947\nWASHINGTON NEWS\nPage 5"} {"doc_id":"736586885dc77a75","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Neither Airplane, Nor Cloud, Nor Balloon'\nBy United Press\nCoast Guardsman Frank Ryman, 27, had a picture today snapped from the front porch of his home near Seattle which authorities hoped would clear up the mystery of the flying saucers.\n(It didn't.)\nHe said what he saw was neither an airplane, a cloud nor a \"silver balloon.\"\nThe pilot and co-pilot of a United Airlines plane said they turned their craft off its course near Boise, Idaho, and chased a \"strange object\" for 15 miles before it outdistanced them or disintegrated in the dusk. Capt. R. J. Smith and Second Officer R. E. Stevens, both of Seattle, said \"we can definitely say that what we saw was not smoke, not a cloud, and not another airplane.\"\nA similar object was seen by John Corlett, United Press staff correspondent, his wife, and two friends from Mr. Corlett's back yard in Boise. He said it was a white disc flying about 10,000 feet directly overhead. It disappeared in three or four seconds.\nTwo Portland, Ore., police scout cars three miles apart notified headquarters at 1:15 p. m. yesterday that they had sighted a group of strange objects weaving in a \"playful manner\" 10,000 feet above the ground over the southern suburbs of Portland. Clark County (Wash.) Deputy Sheriff Fred Krives, across the Columbia from Portland, said he saw 20 flying discs \"slewing off to one side, almost in single file\" over the county court house.\nT. L. Huckaby of Pine Bluff, Ark., said he saw a flying object \"about the size and color of a Bluff area. Decatur, Ill., and Salt Lake City also reported in today.\nAt Philadelphia, Dr. M. K Leisy of the Pennsylvania Hospital for Mental Diseases, said he saw a big dark saucer-like object move slowly across the sky just before sunset yesterday. He said it was surrounded by a luminous halo and appeared to be propelled by whirling jets.\nJUL 5 1947\nWASHINGTON NEWS\nPAGE 5"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE AND ORDERS JACKET\n\nKEY PUNCH OPERATOR'S - INFORMATION SHEET\nPLEASE PRINT INFORMATION\nNAME Last First Middle initial\nNEWHOUSE Delbert C.\nDATE OF BIRTH\nSERVICE NUMBER 177283\nSOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER\nDATE OF ACTION\nNOT AVAILABLE\nThis form is placed in the file to assist key punch operators in extracting vital information when part of the above information is missing from topmost paper.\nNATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION\nNA FORM 13137 (10-86)\n83\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\n(1) MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE\n(2) ORDERS\nA. ORDERS\nB. OFFICER ORDER MEMORANDA\nC. REPORTS OF LEAVE\nD. REPORTS OF COMPLIANCE\nCLOSED"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This Record is CLOSED to Further Filing\nNAVPERS-774 (NEW 11/55)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORD OF EMERGENCY DATA\nSEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE BEFORE MAKING ENTRIES\n1. DESIGNATOR'S LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME: NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n2. PRESENT SERVICE NO.: 177283\n3. RANK/RATE: CWO-4\n4. SERVICE: USN\n5. DATE OF BIRTH: 5/6/13\n6. HOME ADDRESS AT TIME OF LAST ENTRY INTO SERVICE: c/o Mrs. Vencl Richter Garibaldi, Oregon\n7. FORMER SERVICE NO.: 393 07 21\nDESIGNATIONS\n8. PERSON TO BE NOTIFIED IN CASE OF EMERGENCY: Norma Isobel NEWHOUSE, 208 Bryant Road N.P., Pensacola, Fla., Wife\n9. BENEFICIARY FOR GRATUITY PAY IN EVENT THERE IS NO SURVIVING SPOUSE OR ELIGIBLE CHILD\nPRINCIPAL: Edith May Richter, P. O. Box 127 Garibaldi, Oregon, Mother\nCONTINGENT: Darrel Edwin Newhouse, Rt #6, Box #756, Tacoma, Washington, Brother\n10. BENEFICIARY FOR SERVICEMEN'S INDEMNITY (PL 89, 83d Congress) (All prior designations are canceled. Designation for indemnity does not affect insurance (NSLI or USGLI) beneficiary designation)\nPRINCIPAL(S): SHARE $ Not Applicable\nCONTINGENT(S): SHARE $ NSLI - USGLI\n11. BENEFICIARY OR BENEFICIARIES FOR UNPAID PAY AND ALLOWANCES (PL 147, 84th Congress)\nSHARE 100 %: Norma Isobel Newhouse, Same as #8, Wife\nSHARE %: Delbert Carroll Newhouse, ditto, Son\n12. PERSON TO RECEIVE ALLOTMENT OF PAY IF MISSING OR UNABLE TO TRANSMIT FUNDS: Norma Isobel Newhouse, ditto, Wife\n13. PERSON TO RECEIVE PERSONAL EFFECTS FOR SAFEKEEPING: Executive Officer, NATTU\n14. COMMERCIAL INSURANCE COMPANIES TO BE NOTIFIED IN CASE OF DEATH IN ACTIVE SERVICE\nG. I. N. S. L. I.: Veteran's Administration, ditto\n15. FATHER: Noah Frank Newhouse, Tacoma, Washington\n16. MOTHER: Edith May Richter, P. O. Box 127 Garibaldi, Oregon\n17. WIFE OR HUSBAND: Norma Isobel Newhouse, Same as #8\n18. NAME OF CHILDREN: Delbert Carroll Newhouse, Same as #8, M, 6/27/38; Anne Lisbet Newhouse, ditto, F, 3/14/40\n19. ORGANIZATION AND ADDRESS OF DESIGNATOR: NATECHTRAU, NAS, Pensacola, Florida\n20. DATE SIGNED: 2 May 1957\n21. SIGNATURE OF WITNESS: Marjorie A. Gobbold\n22. SIGNATURE OF DESIGNATOR\nDD FORM 93-1\nFor Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard use: Will be used in lieu of DD Form 93."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pers-E24-CBE:jlk 177283 15 May 1957\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nVia: Commanding Officer Naval Air Technical Training Unit U. S. Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida\nSubj: Home of Record; change of\nRef: (a) Your ltr of 2 May 1957 with 1st end.\n1. In reply to reference (a), the records of the Bureau have been changed to show your home of record to be Pensacola, Florida, effective this date.\nV. E. ARMSTRONG\nBy direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL AIR TECHNICAL TRAINING UNIT\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nPENSACOLA, FLORIDA\nIN REPLY REFER TO 177283/8311/(mag) 2 May 1957\nFrom: CWO Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, USN\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: Commanding Officer\nSubj: Change of home of record; notification of\nRef: (a) Article B-2206, BuPers Manual\n1. This change of address is submitted as authorized in paragraph (2) of reference (a).\n2. My home of record is changed as follows:\nFrom: c/o Mrs. Vincl Richter Garibaldi, Oregon\nTo: 208 Bryant Road, Navy Point Pensacola, Florida\n3. It is requested that the records of the Bureau be changed accordingly.\nDELBERT CLEMENT NEWHOUSE\nNC/Pnc1a/(mag) P1\n2-MAY 1957\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\nFrom: Commanding Officer\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\n1. Forwarded.\nF. M. HALL By direction\nFinished File Pers-E243"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"C-1\nNC/Pncla/(mag)\nP15\n177283/8311\n12 DEC 1956\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on BuPers ltr Pers E24-IH:mjs of 10 Dec 1956\nFrom: Commanding Officer, Naval Air Technical Training Unit, Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida\nTo: CHPHOT, W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nSubj: Awards; information concerning\n1. Delivered.\nEDWIN L. KIEM\nCopy to:\nBuPers (Pers E24)\nFinished File Pers E241"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VOUCHER FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL (DEPENDENTS OF MILITARY PERSONNEL)\nD.O. VOUCHER NO. 17288\nBUREAU VOUCHER NO. 1-8-61\nDEPARTMENT, BUREAU OR ESTABLISHMENT: NAVY DEPARTMENT\nPAYEE (Name) Delbert C. Newhouse, USN 177283 (Rank or rate) (File or Service No.)\nMAILING ADDRESS: USNAS PENSACOLA, FLORIDA\nOFFICIAL DUTY STATION: NAS PENSACOLA, FLORIDA\nCERTIFICATION OF CLAIMANT\nPayment is requested for travel by persons listed below who were establishing a bona-fide residence. (If any of these be other than my dependents on the effective date of applicable orders or other authority; such travel was actually performed with the intent of establishing a bona-fide residence. (If any of these be other than my lawful wife or unmarried legitimate child under 21 years of age or a MALE member, complete appropriate certificate on reverse.)\nNAME / RELATIONSHIP / BIRTH DATES OF CHILDREN\nNorma Isobel Newhouse wife\nDelbert C. Newhouse son 6-28-38\nAnne Lisbet Newhouse daughter 3-14-40\nLOCATION OF DEPENDENTS (On date of receipt of orders/authority - street address, city, state) DATE OF DEPARTURE\nDESIGNATED: 3581 SE Grant Court, Portland, Oregon 7/19/56 DATE OF ARRIVAL\n736 Lakewood Road, Warrington, Fla. 8-2-56\nNOTE: When travel is from other than vicinity of the old station or to other than vicinity of the new station, explain circumstances on the reverse.\nGOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION FURNISHED: KIND (Rail, air, etc. If none, so state)\nPLACE OF DEPARTURE / DESTINATION (Date of arrival)\nTRAVEL COVERED BY THIS CLAIM REPRESENTS ENTIRE TRAVEL OF ALL MY DEPENDENTS ON THIS CHANGE OF STATION EXCEPT:\nPENALTY FOR PRESENTING FRAUDULENT CLAIM - Fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than 5 years or both. Title 18, U.S.C. 287; Id. 1001.\nFORFEITURE OF FRAUDULENT CLAIM - Falsification of an item in an expense account works a forfeiture of the claim. Title 28, U.S.C. 2514.\nSIGN ORIGINAL ONLY: I CERTIFY that this voucher and attachments are correct and just in all respects and that payment therefor has not been received. No prior claim has been presented by me or any member of my family for the travel of dependents as claimed herein.\nSIGNATURE OF PAYEE: [signature] DATE: 8-3-56\nAUTHORIZED ALLOWANCE (From: Delbert C. Newhouse) (To)\nMILEAGE: Portland, Oregon to Warrington, Florida 2900 mi. at 7¢ (2 months & 1 day) ... $ 446.00\nPursuant to authority vested in me, I certify this voucher to be correct and proper for payment.\nAUTHORIZED CERTIFYING OFFICER: [signature] DATE: 8-3-56\nACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION\nAppropriation Symbol and Subhead 17 1453118 MPN 56 / Object Class 029 / Expenditure Account / Chargeable Activity / Bureau Control Activity No. 22 / Bureau Control No. 91600 / Amount\nPAID BY CHECK: Check number: Date of check:\nPAID BY: Amount $ 446.00 Date paid:\nSIGNATURE OF PAYEE (Required for cash payment only) [signature]\nDD FORM 1 APR 54 766 REPLACES NAV. S. AND A. FORMS 912 & 913 MEMORANDUM COPY Form Approved by Comptroller General March 15, 1954"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATA SHEET TO ACCOMPANY CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR DEPENDENTS' TRAVEL\n(All entries to be made by the claimant in his own handwriting)\nThe following data is submitted in substantiation of my claim for reimbursement for travel performed by my dependents:\nMEMBER'S FULL NAME: Delbert Clement Newhouse 177283 CWO-4 (First) (Middle) (Last) (Service number) (Rank/rate)\nADDRESS TO WHICH CHECK IS TO BE MAILED:\nWIFE'S NAME: Norma Isobel Newhouse\n*CHILDREN'S NAMES: RELATIONSHIP DATE OF BIRTH\nDelbert Carroll Newhouse Son 6/28/38\nAnne Lisbet Newhouse Daughter 3/14/40\n*Step children or adopted children must be classified as such. Dependent parent must be classified and claimed as such.\n\"I certify that my dependents were located at (Street address, city, and State) 3581 SE Grant Court, Portland, Oregon when orders directing detachment from my old permanent station were received and departed that place on (Date) 7/19/56; and arrived at (Street address, city, and State) 736 Lakewood Rd, Warrington, Florida, on (Date) 8/2/56; that such travel was performed at my own expense, and that the travel covered by this claim represents the entire travel of all my dependents which has been or will be made on this change of station except as follows: (Exception, if any)\nIf orders direct my travel overseas where dependents are not permitted to go, I HEREBY DESIGNATE (Street address, city, and State) as point to which transportation of dependents is desired.\nI certify that my dependents were last transported or reimbursed at Government expense for travel to Portland, Oregon.\"\nNOTE.—This data sheet is to be presented to the disbursing officer with the original and three certified copies of travel orders, with all endorsements. The \"Voucher for Reimbursement for Expenses Incident to Dependent Travel\" (NAV. S. AND A. FORM 912 Rev.) will be signed when completely filled in. This \"Data Sheet\" or the \"Voucher for Reimbursement for Expenses Incident to Dependents Travel\" (NAV. S. AND A. FORM 912 Rev.) will not be signed in blank.\n\"I further certify that all entries made above are in my own handwriting and are true and correct; that I have read this completed data sheet and understand that any misrepresentation or concealment of material fact by me may work a forfeiture of the claim and subject me to trial by court martial or Federal District court and to penalties extending to 5 years imprisonment or $10,000 fine, or both.\"\n[signature] (Signature of Claimant)\nNAV. S. AND A. FORM 915 (4-53) U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—68710-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"C-1\nRECORD OF EMERGENCY DATA\nSEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE BEFORE MAKING ENTRIES\n1. DESIGNATOR'S LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME: NEWHOUSE, DELBERT CLEMENT\n2. PRESENT SERVICE NO.: 177 283\n3. RANK/RATE: CWO-4\n4. SERVICE: USN\n5. DATE OF BIRTH: 6 May 13\n6. HOME ADDRESS AT TIME OF LAST ENTRY INTO SERVICE (City, county, and State): 3581 SOUTH EAST GRANT COURT PORTLAND, MULTNOMAH, OREGON\n7. FORMER SERVICE NO.: 393 07 21\nDESIGNATIONS\n8. PERSON TO BE NOTIFIED IN CASE OF EMERGENCY: Norma Isobel Newhouse, 3581 SE Grant St. Portland 15, Ore. Wife\n9. BENEFICIARY FOR GRATUITY PAY IN EVENT THERE IS NO SURVIVING SPOUSE OR ELIGIBLE CHILD\nPRINCIPAL: Edith May Richter, P.O. Box 127 Garibaldi, Ore. Mother\nCONTINGENT: Darrel Edwin Newhouse, Rt. #6, Box 756 Tacoma, Wash. Brother\n10. BENEFICIARY FOR SERVICEMEN'S INDEMNITY (PL 23, 82d Congress) (All prior designations are canceled. Designation for indemnity does not affect insurance (NSLI or USGLI) beneficiary designation.)\nPRINCIPAL(S) SHARE $ Not Applicable\nCONTINGENT(S) SHARE $ NSLI - USGLI\n11. BENEFICIARY OR BENEFICIARIES FOR UNPAID PAY AND ALLOWANCES (PL 147, 84th Congress)\nSHARE 100 % Norma Isobel Newhouse, 3581 SE Grant Ct. Portland 15, Ore. Wife\nSHARE % Delbert Carroll Newhouse SAME Son\n12. PERSON TO RECEIVE ALLOTMENT OF PAY IF MISSING OR UNABLE TO TRANSMIT FUNDS: PERCENT OF PAY EACH MO. Norma Isobel Newhouse, 3587 SE Grant Ct. Portland 15, Ore. Wife\n13. PERSON TO RECEIVE PERSONAL EFFECTS FOR SAFEKEEPING: Executive Officer, NATTU\n14. COMMERCIAL INSURANCE COMPANIES TO BE NOTIFIED IN CASE OF DEATH IN ACTIVE SERVICE\nCalifornia Western States L.I.C. G.I. N.S.L.I. Sacramento, California; Veteran's Administration; Veteran's Administration\n15. FATHER: Noah Frank Newhouse, Tacoma, Washington\n16. MOTHER: Edith May Richter, P.O. Box 127, Garibaldi, Oregon\n17. WIFE OR HUSBAND: Norma Isobel Newhouse, 3581 South East Court Portland 15, Oregon\n18. NAME OF CHILDREN: Delbert Carroll Newhouse, 3581 South East Grant Ct. Portland 15, Oregon, M, 27 JUN 38; Anne Lisbet Newhouse, SAME, F, 14 MAR 40\n19. ORGANIZATION AND ADDRESS OF DESIGNATOR: NATTU, Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida\n20. DATE SIGNED: 17 May 56\n21. SIGNATURE OF WITNESS: [signature] C&R ... \n22. SIGNATURE OF DESIGNATOR: [signature]\nDD FORM 1 OCT 55 93-1 For Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard use: Will be used in lieu of DD Form 93."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"C-1\nRECORD OF EMERGENCY DATA\nSEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE BEFORE MAKING ENTRIES\n1. DESIGNATOR'S LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME: NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n2. PRESENT SERVICE NO.: 177283\n3. RANK/RATE: CWO4\n4. SERVICE: USN\n5. DATE OF BIRTH: 6-5-13\n6. HOME ADDRESS AT TIME OF LAST ENTRY INTO SERVICE (City, county, and State): Garibaldi, Tillamook, Oregon\n7. FORMER SERVICE NO.: 393 07 21\nDESIGNATIONS\n8. PERSON TO BE NOTIFIED IN CASE OF EMERGENCY: Norma Isobel NEWHOUSE, 3581 SE Grant Court Portland, Oregon, Wife\n9. BENEFICIARY FOR GRATUITY PAY IN EVENT THERE IS NO SURVIVING SPOUSE OR ELIGIBLE CHILD\nPRINCIPAL: Edith May RICHTER, PO Box 127 Garibaldi, Oregon, Mother\nCONTINGENT: Darrel Edwin NEWHOUSE, Rt. 6, Box 756 Tacoma, Washington, Brother\n10. BENEFICIARY FOR SERVICEMEN'S INDEMNITY (PL 23, 82d Congress): Not Applicable. NSLI\n11. BENEFICIARY OR BENEFICIARIES FOR UNPAID PAY AND ALLOWANCES (PL 147, 84th Congress): SHARE 100 % Norma Isobel NEWHOUSE, 3581 SE Grant Court Portland, Oregon, Wife\n12. PERSON TO RECEIVE ALLOTMENT OF PAY IF MISSING OR UNABLE TO TRANSMIT FUNDS: PERCENT OF PAY EACH MO. 80% Norma Isobel NEWHOUSE, 3581 SE Grant Court Portland, Oregon, Wife\n13. PERSON TO RECEIVE PERSONAL EFFECTS FOR SAFEKEEPING: Commanding Officer\n14. COMMERCIAL INSURANCE COMPANIES TO BE NOTIFIED IN CASE OF DEATH IN ACTIVE SERVICE\nCalifornia Western State Life Insurance Company, Sacramento, California, POLICY NO. 399422\n15. FATHER: Noah Franklin NEWHOUSE, Unknown\n16. MOTHER: Edith May RICHTER, PO Box 127, Garibaldi, Oregon\n17. WIFE OR HUSBAND: Norma Isobel NEWHOUSE, 3581 SE Grant Court, Portland 15, Oregon\n18. NAME OF CHILDREN: Delbert Carroll NEWHOUSE, 3581 SE Grant Court, Portland, Oregon, NO, M, 6-28-38; Anne Lisbet NEWHOUSE, 3581 SE Grant Court, Portland, Oregon, NO, F, 3-14-40\n19. ORGANIZATION AND ADDRESS OF DESIGNATOR: Utility Squadron FIVE, NAVY #3835, c/o FPO, San Francisco, California\n20. DATE SIGNED: 2-9-56\n21. SIGNATURE OF WITNESS: A. C. Walker, LT, USNR-R\n22. SIGNATURE OF DESIGNATOR: [signature] DELBERT CLEMENT NEWHOUSE\nDD FORM 1 OCT 55 93-1 For Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard use: Will be used in lieu of DD Form 93."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORD OF EMERGENCY DATA\nSEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE BEFORE MAKING ENTRIES\n1. DESIGNATOR'S LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME\n2. SERVICE NO.\n3. GRADE OR RATE\nSERVICE\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n177283\nCHPHOT\nUSN\n5. MARITAL STATUS\n6. FULL NAME OF SPOUSE\n7. ADDRESS (Number, street, city, zone, and State)\nMarried\nNorma Isobel NEWHOUSE\n3581 S.E. Grant Court, Portland 15, Ore.\n8. CHILDREN (List each child of any marriage. If none, so state)\nFIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME—LAST NAME\nADDRESS\nMARITAL STATUS\nSEX\nDATE OF BIRTH\nDelbert Carroll NEWHOUSE\n3581 S.E. Grant Court, Portland 15, Oregon\nSingle\nM\n6/28/38\nAnne Lisbet NEWHOUSE\n3581 S.E. Grant Court, Portland 15, Oregon\nSingle\nF\n3/14/40\n9. NAME OF FATHER OR MALE GUARDIAN\n10. ADDRESS IF LIVING—IF DECEASED SO STATE\nNoah Frank NEWHOUSE\nPortland, Oregon\n11. NAME OF MOTHER OR FEMALE GUARDIAN\n12. ADDRESS IF LIVING—IF DECEASED SO STATE\nEdith May RICHTER\nBox 127, Garibaldi, Oregon\nIN THE EVENT THAT I AM NOT SURVIVED BY A SPOUSE OR ELIGIBLE CHILD I DESIRE THAT PAYMENT OF 6 MONTHS' DEATH GRATUITY BE MADE TO THE RELATIVE SHOWN BELOW. (The name of father or mother must be repeated if it is desired that he or she receive payment)\n13. FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME—LAST NAME\n14. RELATIONSHIP\n15. ADDRESS\nEdith May RICHTER\nMother\nBox 127, Garibaldi, Oregon\n16. ALTERNATE RELATIVE\n17. RELATIONSHIP\n18. ADDRESS\nDarrel Edwin NEWHOUSE\nBrother\nRt 6, Box 756, Tacoma, Washington\n19. IN THE EVENT THAT I AM LISTED AS MISSING OR OTHER MILITARY CIRCUMSTANCES PREVENT ME FROM TRANSMITTING FUNDS TO MY DEPENDENTS, IT IS MY DESIRE THAT\nFIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME—LAST NAME\nRELATIONSHIP\nNorma Isobel NEWHOUSE\nWife\nADDRESS\nRECEIVE EACH MONTH\n3581 S.E. Grant Court, Portland 15, Oregon\n90\nPERCENT OF MY PAY\n20. I REQUEST THE FOLLOWING COMMERCIAL INSURANCE COMPANIES BE OFFICIALLY NOTIFIED IN CASE OF MY DEATH IN ACTIVE SERVICE\nNAME OF COMPANY\nADDRESS OF HOME OFFICE\nPOLICY NO.\nPilot Life Insurance Company\nGreensboro, North Carolina\n321583\nCalifornia Western States\nSacramento, California\n399422\nNational Service Life Insurance\nVeterans Administration, Wash., D.C.\nV-77-44-32\nGovernment Life Insurance\nVeterans Administration, Wash., D.C.\nK 948 857\n21. DESIGNATION OR CHANGE OF BENEFICIARY—SERVICEMEN'S INDEMNITY (PL 23, 84d Cong.)\n(Does not operate as a designation or change of beneficiary of any insurance contracts issued by United States Government)\nALL PREVIOUS DESIGNATIONS OF PRINCIPAL AND CONTINGENT BENEFICIARIES, IF ANY, UNDER SERVICEMEN'S INDEMNITY ACT OF 1951, ARE HEREBY CANCELED, AND IT IS DIRECTED THAT SAID INDEMNITY BE PAID TO:\nNAME\nRELATIONSHIP\nSHARE OR AMOUNT TO EACH BENEFICIARY\nNorma Isobel NEWHOUSE\nWife\n100 per cent\nWITNESSED BY (Signature on all copies)\nG. L. LUCAS\nSIGNATURE OF SERVICEMAN (Sign all copies)\nGRADE OR RATE OF WITNESS\nSERVICE NO.\nDATE SIGNED\nLieutenant-USNR- R\n290572\n30 March 1955\nDD FORM 1 FEB 52 93 Replaces DD Form 93, 1 Jul 50, which may be used.\n10-67492-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAV. S. AND A. FORM 913—REV.\nForm Prescribed by Comptroller General, U.S. May 17, 1945\nVOUCHER FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR EXPENSES INCIDENT TO DEPENDENTS TRAVEL\nMAIL TO BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, WASHINGTON 25, D.C.\nD.O. VOU. No. 143\nBU. VOU. No.\nTHE UNITED STATES, Dr.\nTO (PRINT) NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. CHPHOT, USN 177283\nOFFICIAL ADDRESS Utility Squadron FIVE\nNavy 943, c/o FPO, San Francisco, Calif\nCERTIFICATE OF DEPENDENCY OF CHILDREN\nMEMORANDUM\n109.20\nJ. G. HARPER, LT, SC, USN\nPAID BY\nJUL 9 1954\nJ. G. HARPER\n(For use of Paying Officer)\nAMOUNT\nDOLLARS\nCENTS\n$ 109 20\nPAID BY CHECK No.\nACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION (For completion by Administrative Officer)\nFARE AUTHORIZED\nAPPROPRIATION, LIMITATION OR PROJECT SYMBOL\nAPPROPRIATION TITLE\nFROM Oakland, Cal TO Portland, Oregon\nNot to exceed:\nRAIL 728 miles @15¢\nPULLMAN\nTOTAL $ PAID $109.20 CASH\n1741453.16\n029 74150\n22/31600\nDelbert C. NEWHOUSE\nCERTIFICATION OF CLAIMANT (FILL IN ALL BLANKS BELOW WHERE APPLICABLE)\nPayment is requested for transportation for travel performed by the following, who were my dependents on the effective date of orders directing this change of station.\nNAME\nRELATIONSHIP\nDATE OF BIRTH OF CHILDREN\nNorma I. NEWHOUSE\nwife\nDelbert C. NEWHOUSE\nson\n6/28/38\nAnne L. NEWHOUSE\ndaughter\n3/14/40\n1948 Derby Street\nBerkeley, Calif\nI certify that my dependents were located ___ when orders directing detachment from my old permanent station were received, and departed from that place on (date) 6/12/54\n3581 S.E. Grant Court\nPortland, Oregon\nand arrived at ___ on (date) 6/14/54 I further certify that my dependents traveled at my own expense, and that the child (children) named above is (are) the legitimate child (children) of the officer or man concerned. (IF CHILD (CHILDREN) IS (ARE) STEP OR ADOPTED, FILL IN CERTIFICATE ON REVERSE SIDE.)\nI certify that the travel covered by this claim represents the entire travel of all my dependents which has been or will be made on this change of station except as follows: NONE\n*Reimbursement requested herein is (is not) in accordance with par. 3 of SecNav letter of 23 Dec. 1943.\n*I hereby designate Portland, Oregon as point to which transportation of dependents is desired.\nI certify that this account and schedule annexed are true and just in all respects, that payment therefor has not been received, and that my statements of travel correctly reflect travel performed by my dependents. and at the places claimed and listed above I have actually established a bonafide residence for my dependents.\nSIGN ORIGINAL (PAYEE) ONLY\nDelbert C. NEWHOUSE\nDATE\nRANK OR RATING\nCHPHOT\nU.S.N.\n*If applicable see Instruction 1.\n16-44896-1\n(Instructions on reverse side of form.)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS\n1. In the event this claim involves travel under secret or confidential orders, or orders from which the location of the old or new duty station is omitted for reasons of security, or under orders effecting assignment to or from sea duty or to or from a place to which dependents are not permitted to go, careful attention should be given to SecNav letter of 23 December 1944, particularly paragraphs 2, 3, 6 and 10.\n2. If your claim is not submitted under SecNav letter of 23 December 1944 (Instruction 1, above), the original and two certified copies of all orders involved, with all endorsements, must accompany claim.\n3. Claim should be prepared and forwarded to BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, Washington 25, D.C., in accordance with Article 2513, U.S. Navy Travel Instructions.\n4. CLAIM MUST BE SUBMITTED IN QUADRUPLICATE. The original is to be on NAV. S. and A. Form 912—Rev. and signed in ink on the face. Three copies (unsigned) to be on NAV. S. and A. Form 913—Rev.\n5. SECURELY STAPLE ALL PAPERS TOGETHER.\n6. The space below is to be used for any additional information by claimant which is necessary in settlement of this claim.\nI certify, except as noted hereon, that no prior claim has been presented by me or by any member of my family for the reimbursement for transportation of dependents as claimed herein and that my dependents traveled at my own personal expense as listed hereon and that no transportation in kind has been furnished with the exception of travel performed via government vessel from San Francisco, Calif to Guam, M.I.\nI further certify that my dependents were not authorized to travel to Guam, M.I. at the time I departed from my old permanent duty station due to the unavailability of housing. My dependents will travel to Guam, M.I. upon certification of housing by ComNavMarianas\nPayee's Signature\nCERTIFICATE OF DEPENDENCY OF CHILDREN\n(Note: To be used only for adopted or step children)\nI ___ certify that ___ is (are) my (adopted) (step) child (children) and is (are) member(s) of my household; that said child is (children are) not possessed of property or income adequate for its (their) support and education; that it is (they are) not the beneficiary or beneficiaries, either directly or through others, or any trust or estate entitling it (them) to income adequate for its (their) support and education; that said child is (children are) in fact now and at all times solely dependent on me; that in all respects I maintain the child (children) at my own expense and from my own resources and am not reimbursed therefor directly or indirectly in any manner or form whatsoever; and that evidence of the child's (children's) dependency on me and my maintenance of it (them) has been filed with my pay accounts and is hereby made a part thereof. (See special requirements, Art. 2513, U.S. Navy Travel Instructions.)\nSIGNATURE\n16-44895-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATA SHEET TO ACCOMPANY CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR DEPENDENTS' TRAVEL\n(All entries to be made by the claimant in ink, in his own handwriting)\nThe following data is submitted in substantiation of my claim for reimbursement for travel performed by my dependents:\nMEMBER'S FULL NAME Delbert Clement Newhouse 177283 CHPHOT\nDUTY STATION Utility Squadron FIVE PHONE NUMBER 14-21282\nWIFE'S NAME Norma Isobel Newhouse Date of marriage 8/7/36 06\nCHILDREN'S NAME: **RELATIONSHIP DATE OF BIRTH\nDelbert Carroll Newhouse Son 6/28/38.06\nAnne Lisbet Newhouse Daughter 3/14/40.03\n** Step children or adopted children must be classified as such. Dependent parent must be classified and claimed as such.\n\"I certify that my dependents were located at 1948 Derby St. Berkeley Calif when orders directing detachment from my old permanent station were received, and departed from that place on 6/12/54.\n*** STRIKE OUT IF NOT APPLICABLE ***\nand arrived at (Point of Selection) 3581 SE Grant Court Portland, Oregon on 6/14/54. and departed from that place on\nand arrived at San Francisco, Calif on ___ and departed there on ___ and arrived on Guam, M.I. on ___ Address on Guam ___.\n\"I certify that my dependents were last transported or reimbursed at Government expense for travel to Oakland, Calif.\"\nNOTE: This data sheet is to be presented to the disbursing officer with the original and three certified copies of travel orders, with all endorsements. The \"Voucher for Reimbursement for Expenses Incident to Dependent Travel\" (NAV. S. AND A. FORM 912 Rev.) will be signed when completely filled in. This \"Data Sheet\" or the \"Voucher for Reimbursement for Expenses Incident to Dependent Travel\" (NAV. S. AND A. FORM 912 Rev.) will not be signed in blank.\n\"I further certify that all entries made above are in my own handwriting and are true and correct; that I have read this completed data sheet and understand that any misrepresentation or concealment of material fact by me may work a forfeiture of the claim and subject me to trial by court martial or Federal District court and to penalties extending to five years imprisonment or $10,000, fine, or both\".\n(Signature of Claimant)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAV. S. AND A. FORM 913—REV.\nForm Prescribed by Comptroller General, U.S. May 17, 1945\nVOUCHER FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR EXPENSES INCIDENT TO DEPENDENTS TRAVEL\nMAIL TO BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, WASHINGTON 25, D.C.\nD.O. VOU. No. 143\nBU. VOU. No.\nGUAM, M.I.\nTHE UNITED STATES, Dr.\nTO (PRINT) NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. CHPHOT, USN 177283\nOFFICIAL ADDRESS Utility Squadron FIVE\nNavy 943, c/o FPO, San Francisco, Calif\nCERTIFICATE OF DEPENDENCY OF CHILDREN\nMEMORANDUM\n109.20\nJ. G. HARPER, LT, SC, USN\nPAID BY\nJUL 9 1954\nJ. G. HARPER\n(For use of Paying Officer)\nAMOUNT\nDOLLARS\nCENTS\n$ 109 20\nPAID BY CHECK No.\nACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION (For completion by Administrative Officer)\nFARE AUTHORIZED\nAPPROPRIATION, LIMITATION OR PROJECT SYMBOL\nAPPROPRIATION TITLE\nFROM Oakland, Cal TO Portland, Oregon\nNot to exceed:\nRAIL 728 miles @15¢\nPULLMAN\nTOTAL $ PAID $109.20 CASH\n1741453.16\n029 74150\n22/31600\nDelbert C. NEWHOUSE\nCERTIFICATION OF CLAIMANT (FILL IN ALL BLANKS BELOW WHERE APPLICABLE)\nPayment is requested for transportation for travel performed by the following, who were my dependents on the effective date of orders directing this change of station.\nNAME\nRELATIONSHIP\nDATE OF BIRTH OF CHILDREN\nNorma I. NEWHOUSE\nwife\nDelbert C. NEWHOUSE\nson\n6/28/38\nAnne L. NEWHOUSE\ndaughter\n3/14/40\n1948 Derby Street\nBerkeley, Calif\nI certify that my dependents were located ___ when orders directing detachment from my old permanent station were received, and departed from that place on (date) 6/12/54\n3581 S.E. Grant Court\nPortland, Oregon\nand arrived at ___ on (date) 6/14/54 I further certify that my dependents traveled at my own expense, and that the child (children) named above is (are) the legitimate child (children) of the officer or man concerned. (IF CHILD (CHILDREN) IS (ARE) STEP OR ADOPTED, FILL IN CERTIFICATE ON REVERSE SIDE.)\nI certify that the travel covered by this claim represents the entire travel of all my dependents which has been or will be made on this change of station except as follows: NONE\n*Reimbursement requested herein is (is not) in accordance with par. 3 of SecNav letter of 23 Dec. 1943.\n*I hereby designate Portland, Oregon as point to which transportation of dependents is desired.\nI certify that this account and schedule annexed are true and just in all respects, that payment therefor has not been received, and that my statements of travel correctly reflect travel performed by my dependents. and at the places claimed and listed above I have actually established a bonafide residence for my dependents.\nSIGN ORIGINAL (PAYEE) ONLY\nDelbert C. NEWHOUSE\nDATE\nRANK OR RATING\nCHPHOT\nU.S.N.\n*If applicable see Instruction 1.\n16-44896-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS\n\n1. In the event this claim involves travel under secret or confidential orders, or orders from which the location of the old or new duty station is omitted for reasons of security, or under orders effecting assignment to or from sea duty or to or from a place to which dependents are not permitted to go, careful attention should be given to SecNav letter of 23 December 1944, particularly paragraphs 2, 3, 6 and 10.\n\n2. If your claim is not submitted under SecNav letter of 23 December 1944 (Instruction 1, above), the original and two certified copies of all orders involved, with all endorsements, must accompany claim.\n\n3. Claim should be prepared and forwarded to BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, Washington 25, D. C., in accordance with Article 2513, U. S. Navy Travel Instructions.\n\n4. CLAIM MUST BE SUBMITTED IN QUADRUPLICATE. The original is to be on NAV. S. and A. Form 912—Rev. and signed in ink on the face. Three copies (unsigned) to be on NAV. S. and A. Form 913—Rev.\n\n5. SECURELY STAPLE ALL PAPERS TOGETHER.\n\n6. The space below is to be used for any additional information by claimant which is necessary in settlement of this claim.\n\nI certify, except as noted hereon, that no prior claim has been presented by me or by any member of my family for the reimbursement for transportation of dependents as claimed herein and that my dependents traveled at my own personal expense as listed hereon and that no transportation in kind has been furnished with the exception of travel performed via government vessel from San Francisco, Calif to Guam, M.I.\n\nI further certify that my dependents were not authorized to travel to Guam, M.I. at the time I departed from my old permanent duty station due to the unavailability of housing. My dependents will travel(ed) from the designated place to Guam, M.I. upon certification of housing by ComNavMarianas\n\nPayees Signature\n\nCERTIFICATE OF DEPENDENCY OF CHILDREN\n(Note: To be used only for adopted or step children)\n\nI, ______ certify that ______ is (are) my (adopted) (step) child (children) and is (are) member(s) of my household; that said child is (children are) not possessed of property or income adequate for its (their) support and education; that it is (they are) not the beneficiary or beneficiaries, either directly or through others, or any trust or estate entitling it (them) to income adequate for its (their) support and education; that said child is (children are) in fact now and at all times solely dependent on me; that in all respects I maintain the child (children) at my own expense and from my own resources and am not reimbursed therefor directly or indirectly in any manner or form whatsoever; and that evidence of the child's (children's) dependency on me and my maintenance of it (them) has been filed with my pay accounts and is hereby made a part thereof. (See special requirements, Art. 2513, U. S. Navy Travel Instructions.)\n\nSIGNATURE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORD OF EMERGENCY DATA FOR THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES\nINFORMATION INCLUDED ON THIS FORM DOES NOT DESIGNATE OR CHANGE BENEFICIARIES OF LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES\n(See instructions on reverse side of form prior to making entries)\n\n1. DESIGNATOR'S LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME: NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n2. SERVICE NO.: 177283\n3. GRADE, RANK, OR RATE: CHPHOT\n4. SERVICE: USA, USN (checked), USAF, USMC, USCG\n5. FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME—LAST NAME OF PERSON TO BE NOTIFIED IN CASE OF EMERGENCY (Person with permanent address is advisable): Edith May Richter\nRELATIONSHIP (If friend, so state): Mother\nADDRESS: General Delivery, Garibaldi, Oregon\n\nTHE PERSONS NAMED IN ITEMS 6, 8, AND 9, BELOW WILL ALSO BE NOTIFIED OF THE EMERGENCY. IF SUCH NOTIFICATION IS NOT DESIRABLE, DUE TO HEALTH OR OTHER PERTINENT REASONS, PLEASE SO STATE UNDER \"REMARKS\" ON THE REVERSE SIDE.\n\n6. SPOUSE: Norma Isobel Newhouse. ADDRESS: S.E. 3581 Grant Court, Portland, Oregon\n7. CHILDREN\nDelbert Carroll Newhouse, 3581 S.E. Grant Court, Portland, Oregon, Single, M, 16\nAnne Lisbet Newhouse, Same, Single, F, 14\n(Continue on reverse side)\n\n8. NAME OF FATHER (or male guardian): Noah Frank Newhouse. ADDRESS: General Delivery, Waldport, Oregon\n9. NAME OF MOTHER (or female guardian): Edith May Richter. ADDRESS: General Delivery, Garibaldi, Oregon\n\nIN THE EVENT THAT I AM NOT SURVIVED BY A SPOUSE OR ELIGIBLE CHILD, OR IF THEIR DECEASE OR DISQUALIFICATION BEFORE PAYMENT OF 6 MONTHS' GRATUITY IS MADE, I THEN DESIRE THAT PAYMENT BE MADE TO THE DEPENDENT RELATIVE SHOWN BELOW. (See instruction 4 on reverse side of form)\n\n10. FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME—LAST NAME: Edith May Richter. RELATIONSHIP: Mother\nADDRESS: General Delivery, Garibaldi, Oregon\n\nIN THE EVENT OF DEATH OR DISQUALIFICATION OF THE ABOVE-NAMED DEPENDENT RELATIVE, I THEN DESIGNATE THE ALTERNATE DEPENDENT RELATIVE SHOWN BELOW. (Other than spouse or child)\n\n11. FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME—LAST NAME: Darrel Edwin Newhouse. RELATIONSHIP: Brother\nADDRESS: Rt. 6, Box 756, Tacoma, Washington\n\nVOLUNTARY ENTRIES\nI REQUEST THAT THE FOLLOWING COMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANIES BE OFFICIALLY NOTIFIED IN CASE OF MY DEATH IN ACTIVE SERVICE. (The \"Policy Number\" should be entered if possible, since this information will assist in expediting action by the insurance company should a claim become payable.)\n\n12. FULL NAME OF COMPANY | ADDRESS OF HOME OFFICE | POLICY NO.\n(Continue on reverse side)\n\nIN THE EVENT THAT I AM LISTED AS MISSING, OR BY OTHER MILITARY CIRCUMSTANCE AM UNABLE TO TRANSMIT FUNDS TO MY DEPENDENTS, IT IS MY DESIRE THAT—\n\n13. FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME—LAST NAME: Norma Isobel Newhouse. RELATIONSHIP: Wife\nADDRESS: 3581 South East Grant Court, Portland, Oregon. RECEIVE EACH MONTH: 100 % OF MY PAY\nMILITARY ADDRESS: NSC, Oakland, Calif. DATE SIGNED: 5/14/54. SIGNATURE OF DESIGNATOR: (signed)\n\nDD FORM 93 1 JUL 50. REPLACES DD FORM 93, 1 JAN 50; NME FORM 93 1 OCT 48; NAVMC 118 (15 PD); NAVPERS 601 PAGES 7 AND 8; AND NCG 2529, WHICH ARE OBSOLETE."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VOUCHER FOR REIMBURSEMENT\nFOR\nEXPENSES INCIDENT TO DEPENDENTS TRAVEL\nTO BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, WASHINGTON 25, D.C.\nNAVED A. FORM 913—REV. Form Prescribed by Comptroller General, U.S. May 17, 1945\n17387\nD. O. VOU. No. ____\nBU. VOU. No. 107\nPAID BY\nTO (PRINT) NEWHOUSE, DELBERT CLEMENT, CHPHOT USN, 177283\n(Last Name) (First) (Middle) (Rank or Rating) (File or Service No.)\nOFFICIAL ADDRESS (225) U.S. NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA\nMEMORANDUM\n452.85\nE. FORD, LCDR SC USN\nPAID BY CHECK NO. 4,229\nJUL 18 1952 (For use of Paying Officer) AMOUNT 452 85\nACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION (For completion by Administrative Officer)\nAPPROPRIATION, LIMITATION OR PROJECT SYMBOL: 1721453.18\nAPPROPRIATION TITLE: MPN 1952 029 74150\nFARE AUTHORIZED: FROM Silver Spr., Md. TO El Cerrito, Calif.\nRAIL / PULLMAN / TOTAL\n\nCERTIFICATION OF CLAIMANT (FILL IN ALL BLANKS BELOW WHERE APPLICABLE)\nPayment is requested for transportation for travel performed by the following, who were my dependents on the effective date of orders directing this change of station.\nNAME | RELATIONSHIP | DATE OF BIRTH OF CHILDREN\nNorma I. Newhouse | wife |\nDelbert C. Newhouse | son | 6/26/38\nAnne Lisbet Newhouse | daughter | 3/14/40\n\nI certify that my dependents were located 8623 Piney Branch Road, Silver Spring, Maryland (City and State) when orders directing detachment from my old permanent station were received, and departed from that place on (date) 6/28/52 and arrived at 605 San Pablo Ave. El Cerrito, California on (date) 7/7/52. I further certify that my dependents traveled at my own expense, and that the child (children) named above is (are) the legitimate child (children) of the officer or man concerned. (IF CHILD (CHILDREN) IS (ARE) STEP OR ADOPTED, FILL IN CERTIFICATE ON REVERSE SIDE.)\n\nI certify that the travel covered by this claim represents the entire travel of all my dependents which has been or will be made on this change of station except as follows: none\n\n*Reimbursement requested herein is (is not) in accordance with par. 3 of SecNav letter of 23 Dec. 1943.\n*I hereby designate none as point to which transportation of dependents is desired.\n\nI certify that this account and schedule annexed are true and just in all respects; that payment therefor has not been received; and that my statements of travel correctly reflect travel performed by my dependents.\n\nSIGN ORIGINAL ONLY (PAYEE) D. C. Newhouse\nDATE 7/18/52 RANK OR RATING CHPHOT U.S.N.\n(*If applicable see Instruction 1. Instructions on reverse side of form.)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS\n\n1. In the event this claim involves travel under secret or confidential orders, or orders from which the location of the old or new duty station is omitted for reasons of security, or under orders effecting assignment to or from sea duty or to or from a place to which dependents are not permitted to go, careful attention should be given to SecNav letter of 23 December 1944, particularly paragraphs 2, 3, 6 and 10.\n\n2. If your claim is not submitted under SecNav letter of 23 December 1944 (Instruction 1, above), the original and two certified copies of all orders involved, with all endorsements, must accompany claim.\n\n3. Claim should be prepared and forwarded to BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, Washington 25, D. C., in accordance with Article 2513, U. S. Navy Travel Instructions.\n\n4. CLAIM MUST BE SUBMITTED IN QUADRUPLICATE. The original is to be on NAV. S. and A. Form 912—Rev. and signed in ink on the face. Three copies (unsigned) to be on NAV. S. and A. Form 913—Rev.\n\n5. SECURELY STAPLE ALL PAPERS TOGETHER.\n\n6. The space below is to be used for any additional information by claimant which is necessary in settlement of this claim.\n\nCLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS from Silver Springs, Md. to El Cerrito, Calif. I hereby certify that all travel performed by my dependents was at my own expense.\n\nCOMPUTATION OF MILEAGE:\nSilver Springs, Md. to Sacramento, Calif. (OTD) (Washington, D.C.) 2938\nSacramento, Calif. to Richmond, Calif. (ORG) 77\nRichmond, Calif. to El Cerrito, Calif. (RetNV) 4\n3019 full\n$.15 per mile, 2 fares & one 1/2 fare\n$452.85\n\nI certify except as noted hereon that no prior claim has been presented by me or by any member of my family for the reimbursement for transportation of dependents as claimed herein and that no transportation in kind has been furnished therefor.\nD. C. Newhouse\n\nCERTIFICATE OF DEPENDENCY OF CHILDREN\n(Note: To be used only for adopted or step children)\n\nI, ______ certify that ______ is (are) my (adopted) (step) child (children) and is (are) member(s) of my household; that said child is (children are) not possessed of property or income adequate for its (their) support and education; that it is (they are) not the beneficiary or beneficiaries, either directly or through others, or any trust or estate entitling it (them) to income adequate for its (their) support and education; that said child is (children are) in fact now and at all times solely dependent on me; that in all respects I maintain the child (children) at my own expense and from my own resources and am not reimbursed therefor directly or indirectly in any manner or form whatsoever; and that evidence of the child's (children's) dependency on me and my maintenance of it (them) has been filed with my pay accounts and is hereby made a part thereof. (See special requirements, Art. 2513, U. S. Navy Travel Instructions.)\n\nSIGNATURE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\nIN REPLY REFER TO\n177283/8311\nPers-B115j-rgw-1\n4 October 1950\n28 Nov. 1950\nNADO, 12th ND, San Francisco, Calif.\nPaid Mileage: $242.40 PV No. 5488\nFrom Washington, D.C. to San Francisco, Calif.\nIDELLE SULLENS, LT., SC, USNR, For E. D. SPENCER, LT., SC, USN\n538868\n\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, Naval Photographic Center, Naval Air Station, Anacostia, Washington, D.C.\nVia: Commanding Officer\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. When directed by your commanding officer in October 1950, you will regard yourself detached from duty at the Naval Photographic Center, Naval Air Station, Anacostia, Washington, D.C., and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; will proceed to San Francisco, Calif., and report to the Commandant, Twelfth Naval District, for transportation to Barbers Point, T.H., and upon arrival report to the Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station, for duty.\n\n2. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of ten days (provided no excess leave involved) in reporting at San Francisco, Calif., in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel advised of your address.\n\n3. Travel via government transportation is directed outside the United States. Class TWO priority is certified for travel via government aircraft.\n\n4. Cost of travel is chargeable to 1711453.18, MPN 1951, expenditure account 74110, object class 029.\n\nCopy to: CNART, OP 54, ComPRNC, ComTwelve, ComFourteen, ComServPac (3), CO NAS, BarberaPt, TH, ComNAB, FourteenthNavDist\n\nJacket copy: \"QUAL\" 124559, Pers B11ls 161270, B11183 148200, E111a, B115j\n\nUSNADO, 12th N.D. T.I., San Francisco, Calif. 1/5/50 Paid $118.00 on PR # 446 which has been charged on the pay record.\nH. V. GUNDRY, LTJG, SC, USNR For E. D. SPENCER, LT, SC, USN\nJ. W. BOPER\n\n21865\n\nUSNADO, 12th N.D. T.I., San Francisco, Calif. 4/27/50 Paid $246.00 on PR # 428 which has been charged on the pay record.\nH. V. GUNDRY, LTJG, SC, USNR For E. D. SPENCER, LT, SC, USN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"...ando, Calif. 7/18/52\nCLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS from Silver Springs, Md. to El Cerrito, Calif.\n(3019 miles @ $.15 per mile, 2 full and one ½ fares) under BuVars 107 ck 4,229 dtd 7/18/52.\nE. FORD, LCDR SC USN\nSymbol 57370"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U.S. NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC CENTER\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nANACOSTIA, D. C.\n\nNPC31/P16-3/00/LWP:rts\n\n9 October 1950\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on Bupers ords ser 21865 dated 4 October 1950\n\nFrom:\tCommanding Officer\nTo :\tCHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\n1. Delivered.\n\nL. W. PARRISH\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT\t\tU. S. NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC CENTER\n\t\t\t\tU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\n\t\t\t\tANACOSTIA, D. C.\n31 OCT 1950\n\nFrom:\tCommanding Officer\nTo :\tCHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\n1. Detached this date.\n\n2. There were no public quarters available for assignment to you and therefor it was necessary for you to procure quarters at your own expense.\n\nMSTS PAC (Name of Ship) (Date)\n(was) (was not) L. W. PARRISH\n\nfurnished subs at govt expense while traveling from\nduring the period\nAmount (due) (charged & collected) for subs furnished\n\nUS NAVAL AIR STATION\nANACOSTIA D.C.\nADVANCED $300.00 10/31/50\nWHICH HAS BEEN CHARGED ON THE\nPAY RECORD.\n\nSYM. 572483\n\nDISTRICT STAFF HEADQUARTERS\nTWELETH NAVAL DISTRICT\nSAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\nNOV 26 1950\n\nIlued End.\nReported this date for transportation.\nYou are hereby directed to report to\nCC, Naval Station, Treasure Island,\nfor assignment of quarters in BOQ.\n\nBy direction of the Comdt."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Privately owned automobile.\nDEPARTED: 6 November 1950 Washington, D.C.\nARRIVED: San Francisco 26 November 1950\nThe above travel was performed via\nI certify; travel from Washington, D.C. to San Francisco, Calif.\nwas necessary in the execution of these orders."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. NAVAL STATION\nTreasure Island\nSan Francisco, California\nNOV 27 1950\nDate\n\nEND on Orders of\nFrom: Commanding Officer, U.S.Naval Station, Treasure Island\nTo:\n1. Reported. You are assigned Room No. BOQ, U.S. Naval Station, Treasure Island, until\n\n2. Special authority must be obtained from the Execuuive Officer, Naval Station, to occupy rooms or use facilities of the Commissioned Officers' Mess (Closed) beyond the date indicated above.\nJ.A.E. O'HANDLEY"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ORIGINAL\nIn Reply Address\nCommandant\nTwelfth Naval District\nAnd Refer to\nND12/11J/5 abm\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert C.\nCHPHOT 8311 USN\n177283\nORIGINAL\nOFFICE OF COMMANDANT\nTWELFTH NAVAL DISTRICT\nFederal Office Building\nSAN FRANCISCO 2, CALIFORNIA\nDEC 8 1950\n4th Endorsement\nFrom: Commandant, Twelfth Naval District\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nSubj: Change of duty\n1. Detached this date. You will proceed via transportation furnished you and upon arrival at destination will report for duty as directed in basic orders.\n2. Vacated public quarters in BOQ this date.\nA. E. JACOBSON\nBy direction\nCopy to\nFile\nMSTS PAC USNS SGT CHARLES E. MOWER DEC 13 1950\n(Name of Ship) (Date)\nfurnished subs at govt expense while traveling from SAN FRANCISCO\nto HONOLULU, T.H. during the period 12/8 thru 12/13\nAmount (due) (charged & collected) for subs furnished $ 7.50\n(Special Disbursing Agent)\nU.S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nSan Francisco, California\n1950 DEC 13 PM 3:39\n12ND 2720\nNAVY-DPPO12ND-TI-8931"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NA70/P16-4/00\n11a:le\n\n13 DEC 1950\n\nFIFTH ENDORSEMENT on BUPERS ord 21865 of 4 OCT 1950\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Air Station, Barber's Point\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. Reported for duty.\n\nW. T. RASSIEUR\n\nJ. M. ST.ONGE\nBy direction\n\nCopy to:\nBUPERS\nNAVOP (OP-54)\nCNART\nCOMSERVPAC\nCOMFOURTEEN\nCOMPRNC\nCOMNABFOURTEEN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U.S. NAVAL DISPATCH\n\nFrom: BUPERS PERS B115J\nAction: NAS BARBER'S POINT\nInfo: COMFLEACT JAPAN-KOREA/COMFAIR JAP/COMNAVFE/COMNAB 14/COMFOURTEEN/\nCOMSERVPAC\n\nCHPHOT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/8311 DIR DET ABOUT 1 MAY PROPORICH COMFLEACT JAPAN-KOREAN ARREP DUTY PHOTECHOFF AVSUP BRANCH YOKOSUKA X GOVTRANSIDROUT GOVAIRPRITWO X TRAVCHAR SUBHEAD 18 MPN CURRENT ON DATE DETACHMENT PAREN 1711453 FOR 1951 X 1721453 FOR 1952 PAREN EXACCT 74110 OBJECT CLASS 029 X QUAL 124554 X 161270 X 148200\n\nCOMNAB OFF PERS\n\nRELEASE CWO GB TOR 1740W TOD DATE 26 APR 51 D/T GR. 261853Z"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In Reply\nRefer To\nNA70/P16-4\n11a:ni\n\nNAVAL AIR STATION\nBARBER'S POINT, OAHU, T. H.\nNavy Number 14 (One Four)\nc/o Fleet Post Office\nSan Francisco, California\n\n27 APR 1951\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Air Station, Barber's Point\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\nRef: (a) BUPERS PERS B115J desp 261853Z of APR 1951\n\n1. Reference (a), certified original despatch, is transcribed herewith:\n\n\"When directed by your commanding officer, about 1 May, you will regard yourself detached from duty at the U. S. Naval Air Station, Barber's Point, T. H. and from such other duty as may have been assigned; will proceed to a port in which Commander, Fleet Air Activity, Japan-Korean may be and upon arrival report for duty at the Photographic Technical Office, Aviation Supply Branch, Yokosuka.\n\n\"Travel via government transportation is directed outside the United States. Class TWO priority is certified for travel via government aircraft.\n\n\"Cost of this travel is chargeable to subhead 18, MPN current on date of detachment (1711453 for 1951 - 1721453 for 1952), expenditure account 74110, object class 029.\n\n\"Qualified 124554, 161270, 148200.\"\n\n2. Immediately upon reporting for duty in compliance with these orders, or any modifications thereto, you are directed to forward to the Chief of Naval Personnel via your new commanding officer, a copy of these orders complete with all endorsements thereto, including the final reporting endorsement (staff corps officers an additional copy to cognizant Bureau).\n\n3. Delivered this date.\n\nW. T. RASSIEUR\nJ. M. ST.ONGE\nBy direction\n\nU.S. Fleet ... Navy #3923 Paid per diem\nin the ... $19.80 PV 5630\nFrom 5/7/51 to 5/10/51 incl. dates\nDate JUN 1 1951\n\nW.F. CALDWELL\nSymbol 58-212\n\nCopy to:\nCOMFLEACT JAPAN-KOREAN\nCOMFAIR JAP\nCOMNAVFE\nCOMNAB FOURTEEN\nCOMFOURTEEN\nCOMSERVPAC\n\nForm No. NASBP-36"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DO,NSC,OAKLAND,CALIF. 7/18/52 Paid $452.85 CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS from Silver Springs, Md. to El Cerrito, Calif. (3019 miles @ $.15 per mile, 2 fares) under BuVou# 107 ok 4,229.\n\nH. FORD, LCDR SC USN\nSymbol 57370"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NA70/P16-4\n11a:ni\n\n7 MAY 1951\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on CO NAS Barber's Point ord of 27 APR 1951\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Air Station, Barber's Point\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. Detached this date. Report immediately to the Commandant, Fourteenth Naval District, for transportation.\n\nW. T. RASSIEUR\nJ. M. ST.ONGE\nBy direction\n\nCopy to:\nCOMFLEACT JAPAN-KOREAN\nCOMFAIR JAP\nCOMNAVFE\nCOMNAB FOURTEEN\nCOMFOURTEEN\nCOMSERVPAC\n\nReceived these orders for execution at 1058 on 7 MAY 1951.\n\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\n\nREPORTED HICKAM FIELD FOR TRANSPORTATION. 7 May 51-1215 DATE & TIME\nARRIVED ON FLIGHT local: J. Lindsey Lt USN SIGNED BY\n\nMAY 7-1951 End.\nOFFICE OF THE COMMANDANT\n14TH NAVAL DISTRICT, PEARL HARBOR, T. H.\nReported this date. Report immediately to Passenger Booking Office, MATS terminal, Hickam Air Force Base, for air transportation. Priority HAE-MIK-20-0274-WN-5\n120 lbs. excess baggage hereby authorized.\nR. D. HIGGINS By direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ORIGINAL\n\nCOMMANDER FLEET ACTIVITIES, JAPAN-KOREA\nNAVY NO. 3923\nF.P.O. SAN FRANCISCO,CALIF\nCFA3923/10/1o\nP16-4/00\n10 May 1951\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on CO NAS Barber's Point ord of 27 Apr 1951\n\nFrom: Commander Fleet Activities, Japan-Korea\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. Reported this date for duty.\n\n2. You will report immediately to Commander Fleet Activities, Yokosuka for duty.\n\nW. B. PORTER\nBy direction\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nCOMMANDER FLEET ACTIVITIES\nNAVY NO. 3923\nF.P.O. SAN FRANCISCO,CALIF\nCFA3923/10/1o\nP16-4/00\n10 May 1951\n\nTHIRD ENDORSEMENT\n\nFrom: Commander Fleet Activities, Yokosuka\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n\n1. Reported for duty this date.\n\nW. B. PORTER\nBy direction\n\nCopy to:\nBuPers"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ORIGINAL\n\nNAVY NO. 3923\nFPO, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\n\nCFA3923/10/1o\nP16-4/00\n\n29 NOV 1951\n\nFrom: Commander Fleet Activities, Yokosuka\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\nRef: (a) BuPers Pers B115J disp 211747Z of 22 NOV 51\n\n1. Reference (a) is quoted below and is certified to be a true copy of the original dispatch:\n\n\"CHPHOT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/8311 ORDGAN 1 NOV and MSG 1513312 NOV X DIRDET ABOUT 1 DEC PROUS APPOREP BUAER NAVDEPT WASHDC TEM ABOUT TWO WEEKS X COMPTEDIRDET PROREP NSC OAK DUTY X DELREP FIFTEEN DAYS WASHDC X GOVTRANSDIROUT GOVAIRPRITHREE X TRAVCHAR 1721453.18 MPN EXACCT 74110 OC 029 X QUAL 124555 161270 148200\"\n\n2. Reference (a) is transcribed below for your information and compliance:\n\nCHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311, orders of 1 November and BuPers disp 1513312 of November 1951 are hereby cancelled. When directed by Commander Fleet Activities, Yokosuka, on or about 1 December 1951, detached from duty as Assistant Aviation Supply Officer and from such other duty as may have been assigned; proceed to the United States and upon arrival further proceed and report to the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington, D.C. for temporary duty for a period of about two (2) weeks. Upon completion of temporary duty and when directed by proper authority, detached; proceed and report to the Commanding Officer, Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California for duty. Authorized to delay fifteen (15) days in reporting Washington, D.C. provided no excess leave involved, such delay to count as leave. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new commanding officer advised of your leave address. Government transportation is directed outside the United States. For travel via government aircraft, class THREE priority is certified. Travel chargeable to Appropriation 1721453.18 MPN: Expenditure Account 74110; Object Class 029. Qualified: 124555, 161270, 148200.\n\n3. Immediately upon reporting for duty in compliance with these orders, or any modification thereto, you are hereby directed to forward to the Chief of Naval Personnel, via your new commanding officer, a copy of these orders with all endorsements thereto, including the final reporting endorsement.\n\n4. In accordance with ALNAV 41-50 you are authorized to receive three (3) months advance pay.\n\n5. Delivered and detached.\n\nJ.P. THEW\nChief of Staff\n\nCopy to:\nCO, NSC, Oakland\n\nOrders received for compliance at (Time) 1320 (Date) 29 NOV 1951\n\nD.C. NEWHOUSE\n\nORIGINAL"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DO,NSC,OAKLAND,CALIF. 7/18/52 Paid $452.85\nCLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nOF DEPENDENTS from Silver Springs, Md. to\nEl Cerrito, Calif.(3019 miles @ $.15 per\nmile, 2/3 fares) under BuVou# 107\nok 4,229.\n\nE. FORD, LCDR SC USN\nSymbol 57370"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NSC Oakland, Calif. Date 2/21/52\nPaid $ 392.15 Per Diem for period 12/4/51\n2/5/52 (38 1/2 days @ $9.00 less $3.60\n6 days @ $7.00 & misc exp @ $.25\nunder BuVou # 1853 Check # 637160 dtd 2/21/52\n\nA. E. SALM, LCDR SC USN\nSYMBOL 531-296\n\nCONTINENTAL DIVISION\nMILITARY AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE\nMcChord Air Force Base Wash.\nDATE 5 DEC 1951\nFROM: PAE 1726th Spt Sq, McChord AFB, Wash.\nTO:\nSUBJECT: Termination of MATS Transportation. 1. You arrived this station on 5 DEC 1951 at 1700 hrs from MATS flight.\nSigned R. Nelson Lt USAF\n\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\n1 Feb 1952\n\nTransportation furnished as follows:\nT/R N154,484 Wash DC-Oakland Calif one way via CAP-Chicago-UAL.\n\nP.I. VOSHELL\nASST HEAD TRAFFIC"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COMMANDER FLEET ACTIVITIES\nNAVY NO. 3923\nFPO, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\n\nCFA3923/016-4/00\n10/FS\n\n4 DEC 1951\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\n\nFrom: Commander Fleet Activities Yokosuka\n\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311, USN\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. Reported for transportation on 29 November 1951.\n\n2. Travel via government air transportation authorized; Class THREE priority certified.\n\n3. 65 pounds air baggage authorized; - - - - excess air baggage as air cargo under the same priority as for yourself.\n\n4. I certify that government quarters were available on the following dates; 29 Nov 1951 to 4 DEC 1951, and that government meals were available on the following dates for the number of meals indicated: None.\n\n5. Detached this date. Carry out basic orders.\n\nM. ROMANO\nBy direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ORIGINAL\nAer-PE-31\nOO/NEWHOUSE,D.C.\n\n27 December 1951\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT ON BUPERS DISP 211747Z of 22 NOV 1951\n\nFrom: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311, USN\n\nSubj: Change of duty.\n\n1. Reported 27 December at 0745 for temporary duty for a period of about two (2) weeks.\n\nS. C. WALLS\nBy direction\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nAer-PE-31\nOO/NEWHOUSE,D.C.\n\n2 February 1952\n\nTHIRD ENDORSEMENT ON BUPERS DISP 211747Z of 22 NOV 1951\n\nFrom: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311, USN\n\nSubj: Change of duty.\n\n1. Detached this date.\n\n2. No public quarters were available and none were assigned you; it was therefore necessary for you to procure quarters at your own expense.\n\nJ. D. BEDFORD\nBy direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ORIGINAL\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER\nOAKLAND 4, CALIFORNIA\n\nNT4-28/11\nP16-3/00\n5 February 1952\n\nFOURTH ENDORSEMENT ON BUPERS DISP 211747Z of 22 NOV 1951\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311, USN\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. Reported this date at 1850 for duty.\n\n2. No public quarters available for the use of yourself and your dependents.\n\n3. Excess delay of one (1) day in reporting is officially excused as authorized absence which will be charged to the officer's leave record.\n\nJ. S. BIERER\nBy direction\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nNT4-28/11\nP16-3/00\n5 February 1952\n\nFIFTH ENDORSEMENT ON BUPERS DISP 211747Z of 22 NOV 1951\n\nI departed Washington, D. C. at 1745 on 2-3-52.\nI arrived at NSC Oakland on 2-5-52 at 1850.\nTravel in connection with these orders performed via commercial air and was not at my own expense.\n\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\nCHPHOT USN\n\nORIGINAL"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CERTIFICATE OF CLEARANCE FOR HANDLING CLASSIFIED MATTER\nONI FORM 5521-429 (REV. 2-52) (Supersedes NAV FORM 5510-4)\n\nFROM: Commanding Officer\n(CO, Officer-in-Charge, etc.)\n\nNaval Supply Center\n(Name of activity)\nOakland 4, California\n(Address of activity)\n\nSERIAL NO: 0/25\nDATE: OCT 22 1952\n\nTO: [X] CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\n(Check one) [ ] COMMANDANT OF MARINE CORPS (CODE DKC)\n[ ] LOCAL CIVILIAN PERSONNEL FILE (Maintained by activity wherein employed)\n\nSUBJ: Clearance for handling classified matter:\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement CHPHOT USN 177283\n(Name - last, first, middle) (Rank or Rate) (File or service no.)\n(NOTE: If no middle name, indicate by inserting NMN.)\n\n5 June 1913, Morcold, Oregon\n(Date and place of birth)\n\nREF: (a) U.S. Navy Security Manual For Classified Matter, 1951 - OPNAV INSTRUCTION 5510.1\n(b) Form OPNAV-32-397, completed 8 Sept 1952 (Make reference to correspondence reporting results of Background Investigation, National Agency Check, etc.)\n\n1. In accordance with Chapter 15 of reference (a), I certify that subject named person was granted [INTERIM] (FINAL) clearance to handle classified matter up to and including Secret (Classification) on SEP 22 1952 (Date). This [INTERIM] (FINAL) clearance was granted for access to Secret (Classified categories) security information required in the performance of officially assigned duties and was based on a National Agency Check (Background Investigation, National Agency Check, etc.), results of which were reported to this activity by reference (b).\n\nSIGNATURE: J. F. CAMERON\nBy direction\n\n(NOTE: Sign original and all copies and affix seal.)\n\nCC: Director of Naval Intelligence.\nLocal military personnel record (NAVY - Enlisted Service Record or Officer's Qualification Record Jacket. MARINE CORPS - Service Record Book or Officer's Qualification Record.)\nDistrict Intelligence Officer (This copy forwarded only by activities within a Naval District or River Command.)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORD OF EMERGENCY DATA FOR THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES\nINFORMATION INCLUDED ON THIS FORM DOES NOT DESIGNATE OR CHANGE BENEFICIARIES OF LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES\n(See instructions on reverse side of form prior to making entries)\n\n1. DESIGNATOR'S LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME: NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n2. SERVICE NO.: 177283\n3. GRADE, RANK, OR RATE: CHPHOT\n4. SERVICE: USN\n5. FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME-LAST NAME OF PERSON TO BE NOTIFIED IN CASE OF EMERGENCY: Edith May Richter\nRELATIONSHIP: Mother\nADDRESS: General Delivery, Garibaldi, Oregon\n\n6. SPOUSE: Norma Isabel Newhouse\nADDRESS: 8623 Piney Branch Rd., Silver Spring, Md.\n\n7. CHILDREN\nDelbert Carroll Newhouse, 8623 Piney Branch Rd., Silver Spring, Md., SINGLE, M, AGE 14\nAnne Lisbet Newhouse, 8623 Piney Branch Rd., Silver Spring, Md., SINGLE, F, AGE 12\n\n8. NAME OF FATHER (or male guardian): Noah Frank Newhouse\nADDRESS: General Delivery, Waldport, Oregon\n\n9. NAME OF MOTHER (or female guardian): Edith May Richter\nADDRESS: General Delivery, Garibaldi, Oregon\n\n10. FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME-LAST NAME: Edith May Richter\nRELATIONSHIP: Mother\nADDRESS: General Delivery, Garibaldi, Oregon\n\n11. FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME-LAST NAME: Darrel Edwin Newhouse\nRELATIONSHIP: Brother\nADDRESS: RT. 6 Box 756, Tacoma, Washington\n\nVOLUNTARY ENTRIES\n\n13. FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME-LAST NAME: Norma Isabel Newhouse\nRELATIONSHIP: Wife\nADDRESS: 8623 Piney Branch Road, Silver Spring, Md.\nRECEIVE EACH MONTH: 100 % OF MY PAY.\nMILITARY ADDRESS: NSC, Oakland, Calif.\nDATE SIGNED: 2/6/52\nSIGNATURE OF DESIGNATOR: [signature]\n\nDD FORM 93 REPLACES NME FORM 93. 1 OCT 48; NAVMC 118 (15 PD); NAVPERS 601, PAGES 7 AND 8; AND NCG 2529, WHICH MAY BE USED UNTIL 1 JANUARY 1951. WHEN THEY WILL ALL BECOME OBSOLETE.\n16-61480-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORD OF EMERGENCY DATA FOR THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES\nINFORMATION INCLUDED ON THIS FORM DOES NOT DESIGNATE OR CHANGE BENEFICIARIES OF LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES\n(See instructions on reverse side of form prior to making entries)\n\n1. DESIGNATOR'S LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME: NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement\n2. SERVICE NO.: 177283\n3. GRADE, RANK, OR RATE: CHPHOT\n4. SERVICE: USN\n5. FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME-LAST NAME OF PERSON TO BE NOTIFIED IN CASE OF EMERGENCY: Edith May RICHTER\nRELATIONSHIP: Mother\nADDRESS: P. O. Box 127, Garibaldi, Oregon\n\n6. SPOUSE: Norma Isobel NEWHOUSE Age 36\nADDRESS: 8623 Piney Branch Rd. Silver Spring, Md.\n\n7. CHILDREN\nDelbert Carroll NEWHOUSE, Same as wife, SINGLE, M, AGE 13\nAnne Lisbet NEWHOUSE, Same as wife, SINGLE, F, AGE 11\n\n8. NAME OF FATHER (or male guardian):\n\n9. NAME OF MOTHER (or female guardian): Edith May RICHTER Age 55\nADDRESS: P. O. Box 127, Garibaldi, Oregon\n\n10. FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME-LAST NAME: Edith May RICHTER\nRELATIONSHIP: Mother\nADDRESS: P. O. Box 127, Garibaldi, Oregon\n\n11. FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME-LAST NAME: Darrel Edwin NEWHOUSE\nRELATIONSHIP: Brother\nADDRESS: Orting, Washington\n\nVOLUNTARY ENTRIES\n\n12. FULL NAME OF COMPANY: California, Western States Life Insurance Co.\nADDRESS OF HOME OFFICE: Sacramento, Calif.\n\n13. FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME-LAST NAME: Norma Isobel NEWHOUSE\nRELATIONSHIP: Wife\nADDRESS: 8623 Piney Branch Rd., Silver Spring, Md.\nRECEIVE EACH MONTH: 80 % OF MY PAY.\nMILITARY ADDRESS: U.S. Naval Air Station, Navy Number 14 (one four) c/o F.P.O. San Francisco, Calif.\nDATE SIGNED: 14 DEC 1950\nSIGNATURE OF DESIGNATOR: [signature]\n\nDD FORM 93 REPLACES NME FORM 93. 1 OCT 48; NAVMC 118 (15 PD); NAVPERS 601, PAGES 7 AND 8; AND NCG 2529, WHICH MAY BE USED UNTIL 1 JANUARY 1951. WHEN THEY WILL ALL BECOME OBSOLETE.\n16-61480-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAV. S. AND A. FORM 913—REV.\nForm Prescribed by\nComptroller General, U. S.\nMay 17, 1945\n\nVOUCHER FOR REIMBURSEMENT\nFOR\nEXPENSES INCIDENT TO DEPENDENTS TRAVEL\nMAIL BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, WASHINGTON 25, D. C.\nBU. VOU. No.\nD. O. VOU. No. 71907\n\nTHE UNITED STATES, Dr.\nPAID BY\nTO (PRINT)\n(Last Name) (First) (Middle) (Rank or Rating) (Title or Service No.)\nNO. 179\nNRAO, WASH.\nOFFICIAL ADDRESS\nBureau of Aeronautics, Navy Dept., Room 2744\nWashington 25, D. C.\nOCT 27 1949\nJ. E. LEWIS\nSYM 56-049\n(For use of Paying Officer)\nAMOUNT\nDOLLARS CENTS\nPAID BY CHECK NO.\nMEMORANDUM\nACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION (For completion by Administrative Officer)\nAPPROPRIATION, LIMITATION OR PROJECT SYMBOL\nAPPROPRIATION TITLE\n1701454 TRNP 1950 029 74130\nFARE AUTHORIZED\nFROM Springfield, Ohio TO Washington, D.C.\nRAIL\nPULLMAN\nTOTAL\nCERTIFICATION OF CLAIMANT (FILL IN ALL BLANKS BELOW WHERE APPLICABLE)\nPayment is requested for transportation for travel performed by the following, who were my dependents on the effective date of orders directing this change of station.\nNAME RELATIONSHIP DATE OF BIRTH OF CHILDREN\nNorma I. Newhouse Wife\nDelbert Carroll Newhouse Son 6-28-38\nAnne Liebet Newhouse Daughter 3-14-40\nI certify that my dependents were located Springfield, Ohio (City and State) when orders directing detachment from my old permanent station were received, and departed from that place on (date) 29 September 1949 and arrived at Washington, D.C. (City and State) on (date) 30 September 1949. I further certify that my dependents traveled at my own expense, and that the child (children) named above is (are) the legitimate child (children) of the officer or man concerned. (IF CHILD (CHILDREN) IS (ARE) STEP OR ADOPTED, FILL IN CERTIFICATE ON REVERSE SIDE.)\nI certify that the travel covered by this claim represents the entire travel of all my dependents which has been or will be made on this change of station except as follows:\n*Reimbursement requested herein is (is not) in accordance with par. 3 of SecNav letter of 23 Dec. 1943.\n*I hereby designate ____ as point to which transportation of dependents is desired.\nI certify that this account and schedule annexed are true and just in all respects; that payment therefor has not been received; and that my statements of travel correctly reflect travel performed by my dependents.\nSIGN ORIGINAL ONLY PAYEE Delbert C. Newhouse\nDATE 1949 RANK OR RATING Lieutenant U.S.N.\n*If applicable see Instruction 1.\n16-44806-1\n(Instructions on reverse side of form.)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BUREAU OF AERONAUTICS GENERAL REPRESENTATIVE, USN, CENTRAL DISTRICT\nREFER TO INITIALS AND NO. OO/NEWHOUSE,D.C. LT/177283/1350 RN:rn Serial: 9593\n27 September 1949\nFrom: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN.\nSubj: Change of duty.\nRef: (a) BuPers (Pers 31B14) dispatch 261713Z of September 1949.\n1. Reference (a) is transcribed and quoted herewith for compliance:\n\"Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, 177283/1350, USN, when directed by the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, you will regard yourself detached from duty in the Office of the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; proceed to Washington, D. C., and report to the Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington, D. C. for duty. You are hereby authorized to delay 15 days, provided no excess leave involved, in reporting in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new station advised of your address. Qualifications: 161270; 124500.\"\n2. Delivered.\nT. J. RAFTERY\nBy direction of BAGR-CD.\nOrders received at 1330, 27 September 1949.\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\nOO/NEWHOUSE,D.C. LT/177283/1350 RN:rn Serial: 9594\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\n29 September 1949\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\nFrom: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN.\n1. Detached this date.\nT. J. RAFTERY\nBy direction of BAGR-CD.\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BUREAU OF AERONAUTICS GENERAL REPRESENTATIVE, USN, CENTRAL DISTRICT\nREFER TO INITIALS AND NO. OO/NEWHOUSE,D.C. LT/177283/1350 RN:rn Serial: 9593\n27 September 1949\nFrom: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN.\nSubj: Change of duty.\nRef: (a) BuPers (Pers 31B14) dispatch 261713Z of September 1949.\n1. Reference (a) is transcribed and quoted herewith for compliance:\n\"Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, 177283/1350, USN, when directed by the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, you will regard yourself detached from duty in the Office of the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; proceed to Washington, D. C., and report to the Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington, D. C. for duty. You are hereby authorized to delay 15 days, provided no excess leave involved, in reporting in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new station advised of your address. Qualifications: 161270; 124500.\"\n2. Delivered.\nT. J. RAFTERY\nBy direction of BAGR-CD.\nOrders received at 1330, 27 September 1949.\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\nOO/NEWHOUSE,D.C. LT/177283/1350 RN:rn Serial: 9594\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\n29 September 1949\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\nFrom: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN.\n1. Detached this date.\nT. J. RAFTERY\nBy direction of BAGR-CD.\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"US NAS, ANACOSTIA, D.C.\n3 October 1949\nReceived for pay purposes this date.\nPay computed 9/30/49.\nPaid $200.00 MPR #71 and has been charged on man's pay record.\n/s/ H. E. Nichols\nJ. W. HILLMAN LTJG SC USN\nSymbol 531316\n(J.W. Hillman by H. E. Nichols, Deputy)\nPE-11\n00/NEWHOUSE, D.C.\n20 Oct 1949\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on BUPERS (Pers 31B14) disp 261713Z dtd Sep 1949\nFrom: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350\nSubj: Change of duty.\n1. Reported this date for duty.\n/s/ J. L. Bettinger, Jr.\nJ. L. Bettinger\nBy Direction\nLeft - Dayton, Ohio on 29 Sept. 1949\nArrived - Wash., D. C. on 30 Sept. 1949\nTraveled via privately-owned vehicle.\nNo Government transportation furnished.\n/s/ D. C. Newhouse (Signature)\nCERTIFIED A TRUE COPY"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FILE NUMBER NAME RANK FLYING PAY DATE MO DAY YR\nENLISTED FROM TO YEARS MONTHS DAYS FILE NO. NAME\nORF. 3-18-29 6-4-31 2 2 11\nNG. 6-5-31 1-25-32 7 21\nUSN 1-24-33\nCOMMISSIONED USN 1-15-43\nWARRANT USN 9-1-42\nDATE OF PRESENT CONTINUOUS NAVAL SERVICE 33 1 24\nTOTAL PRIOR SERVICE 2 10 8 7 27\nDATE COMPUTED 7-12-48 INITIALS-ADJ. EW INITIALS-FIN. REV. PAY ENTRY BASE YEAR 32 MONTH 6 DAY 3\nPUNCH CARD REC'D 30 3 16\nDATE WRITTEN DATE RECEIVED\nNAVY ARMY NATIONAL GUARD OFFICER\nENLISTED SERVICE NUMBER A AND D DATE\nREQUEST DATE RECEIVED DATE COMPLETED 10-31-49\nCERTIFICATION DATE RECEIVED CODE NO. DATE COMPLETED\nNAME RANK ABBREV\nLICENSED FOR USE UNDER PATENT 1,772,492 IBM 743499"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\n\n12 October 1949\n\nC-1\n\nDear Mr. Newhouse:\n\nIt is with very real personal regret that I inform you of the Navy's inability to retain you on active duty in your present temporary status during the fiscal year 1950.\n\nThis decision was made necessary solely because of unavoidable budgetary reductions in appropriations for the Navy, and a consequent mandatory reduction in the personnel ceiling. It is in no way to be construed as a reflection upon the performance of your duties, and the Navy will not forget that you gave unstintingly of time and effort. I hope that you will continue to serve the Navy there your support is needed as never before.\n\nYour temporary appointment will be terminated on 31 December 1949. If you are eligible for retirement, and so desire, you should submit your request to reach the Bureau at the earliest practicable date but not later than 10 November 1949. If you do not retire you may expect to be reassigned to another billet upon reversion.\n\nPlease be assured of the Navy's deep appreciation of your loyal and honorable service.\n\nSincerely,\n\nJ. W. ROPER\n\nFinished File Pers-31R11\n\nLt Delbert C. Newhouse, USN\nBureau of Aeronautics\nDepartment of the Navy\nWashington 25, D.C."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nPers 362-mhl\n177283\n\n16 MAY 1949\n\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350.\n\nVia: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative,\nCentral District,\nWright Field,\nDayton, Ohio.\n\nSubj: Application for transfer to commissioned limited duty status; action on.\n\nRefs: (a) Your application for transfer to commissioned limited duty status.\n(b) BuPers Circular Letter 175-48.\n\n1. Your application for transfer to commissioned limited duty status has been carefully considered by the Selection Board convened in April 1949 by the Secretary of the Navy. I regret to inform you that your name was not included among those recommended for appointment. However, I wish to assure you that this decision is no reflection upon your performance of duty in the Navy; nor will it in any way affect your present status.\n\n2. The number of applicants desiring transfer to commissioned limited duty status has been far in excess of the number of appointments which can be offered. Therefore, it was necessary for the Selection Board to recommend, from among eligible applicants, only those best qualified for appointment. The decision in your case was made after a careful review of your entire record and your qualifications as compared with those of other applicants of your rank and classification or enlisted rating.\n\n3. The interest you have shown in pursuing a naval career represents an exemplary attitude of service and patriotism. The Navy is sincerely appreciative of your contribution toward maintaining the naval establishment at a high level of efficiency during the war, the demobilization period, and the continuing period of world unrest.\n\nT. L. SPRAGUE\n\nB-12060\nFINISHED FILE PERS 362"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAV. S. AND A. FORM 913-REV.\nVOUCHER FOR REIMBURSEMENT\nEXPENSES INCIDENT TO DEPENDENTS TRAVEL\nTO BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, WASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nTHE UNITED STATES, Dr.\nTO (PRINT) NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. Lt. USN 177283\n\nOFFICIAL ADDRESS Office of Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n\nMEMORANDUM\n\n202.06 J. SCOTT, Officer in Charge 52-527 By Alice G. Gibbons, Agent Cashier\n\nPAID BY J. A. REBENTISCH Symbol 540415 NCDO Great Lakes\n\nSEP 15 1948\nJ. SCOTT Symbol 52-527\n\nAMOUNT $202.06\nPAID BY CHECK NO. 526944\n\nACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION\nAPPROPRIATION TITLE TRMP-1949 020 74150\n\nCERTIFICATION OF CLAIMANT\n\nNAME / RELATIONSHIP / DATE OF BIRTH OF CHILDREN\nNorma Isabel Newhouse, Wife\nDelbert Carroll Newhouse, Son, 6/28/38\nAnne Lisbet Newhouse, Daughter, 3/14/40\n\nat 412 Third St., NHA #1, Honolulu 50, T.H. when orders directing detachment from my old permanent station were received, and departed from that place on (date) 1 July 1948; Arrived Alameda California 16 July 1948; Departed Alameda, California 16 July 1948 and arrived at Dayton, Ohio on (date) 24 August 1948.\n\nI further certify that my dependents traveled at my own expense from Alameda, California to Dayton, Ohio.\n\nI certify that the travel covered by this claim represents the entire travel of all my dependents which has been or will be made on this change of station except as follows: No exceptions\n\nDATE 1 Sept. 1948 Delbert C. Newhouse, Lieutenant U.S.N."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS\n\n1. In the event this claim involves travel under secret or confidential orders, or orders from which the location of the old or new duty station is omitted for reasons of security, or under orders effecting assignment to or from sea duty or to or from a place to which dependents are not permitted to go, careful attention should be given to SecNav letter of 23 December 1944, particularly paragraphs 2, 3, 6 and 10.\n\n2. If your claim is not submitted under SecNav letter of 23 December 1944 (Instruction 1, above), the original and two certified copies of all orders involved, with all endorsements, must accompany claim.\n\n3. Claim should be prepared and forwarded to BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, Washington 25, D. C., in accordance with Article 2513, U. S. Navy Travel Instructions.\n\n4. CLAIM MUST BE SUBMITTED IN QUADRUPLICATE. The original is to be on NAV. S. and A. Form 912-Rev. and signed in ink on the face. Three copies (unsigned) to be on NAV. S. and A. Form 913-Rev.\n\n5. SECURELY STAPLE ALL PAPERS TOGETHER.\n\n6. The space below is to be used for any additional information by claimant which is necessary in settlement of this claim.\n\nI certify except as noted hereon that no prior claim has been presented by me or by any member of my family for the reimbursement for any transportation of dependents as claimed herein and that no transportation in kind has been furnished therefor.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse, Lt. USN.\n\nCERTIFICATE OF DEPENDENCY OF CHILDREN\n(Note: To be used only for adopted or step children)\n\nI, ___ certify that ___ is (are) my (adopted) (step) child (children) and is (are) member(s) of my household; that said child is (children are) not possessed of property or income adequate for its (their) support and education; that it is (they are) not the beneficiary or beneficiaries, either directly or through others, or any trust or estate entitling it (them) to income adequate for its (their) support and education; that said child is (children are) in fact now and at all times solely dependent on me; that in all respects I maintain the child (children) at my own expense and from my own resources and am not reimbursed therefor directly or indirectly in any manner or form whatsoever; and that evidence of the child's (children's) dependency on me and my maintenance of (them) has been filed with my pay accounts and is hereby made a part thereof. (See special requirements, Art. 2513, U. S. Navy Travel Instructions.)\n\nSIGNATURE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PERS 82-15\nREPORT OF BENEFICIARIES\nNAVPERS-601 (1-45)\n\n7\n\nOFFICER [X] ENLISTED [ ]\n\n1 May 1948.\n(Date)\n\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement\n(Last name) (First) (Middle)\n\n0177283 LT USN\n(File or service number) (Rank or rate and classification)\n\nU.S. COMMANDER UTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET (STAFF ALLOWANCE).\n(Ship or station)\n\nTo carry out the provisions of the acts approved 4 June 1920, 22 May 1928, 12 May 1930, and 17 March 1941, and acts amendatory thereof directing the payment of 6 months' pay to the widow, children, or dependent relative of any of the personnel on the active list of the Regular Navy, or on the retired list when on active duty, or of any of the personnel of the Naval Reserve called or ordered into active naval service by the Federal Government for extended naval service in excess of 30 days, who dies of wounds or disease not the result of his or her own misconduct, I give below the name and address of my wife or husband and that of each of my children:\n\nMrs. Norma Isabel NEWHOUSE\n(Full name of wife or husband; if not married, so state)\n\n412 - 3rd St., NHA #1, Pearl Harbor, T.H.\n(Address of wife or husband)\n\nDelbert Carroll NEWHOUSE 6-28-38\n(Full name of child; if none, so state) (Date of birth)\n\nSame as above.\n(Address of child)\n\nAnne Lisbet NEWHOUSE 3-14-40\n(Full name of child) (Date of birth)\n\nSame as above.\n(Address of child)\n\n(Full name of child) (Date of birth)\n\n(Address of child)\n\nIn the event that I am not survived by a wife (or husband) or child, or in the event of their decease prior to payment and collection of the gratuity, I then designate the following person as my dependent beneficiary under the act:*\n\nMrs. Vencl RICHTER\n(Name in full)\n\nGen. Del. Garibaldi, Oregon.\n(Address)\n\nMother.\n(Relationship)\n\nIn the event of the death of the above-named beneficiary before payment and collection of the gratuity, I then designate the following person as my dependent beneficiary under the act:*\n\n(Name in full)\n\n(Address)\n\n(Relationship)\n\n*The acts state that death gratuity must be paid to the surviving wife (or husband) or children, if any. In the event of leaving no wife or children, it may then be paid to a designated dependent beneficiary. Every member of the service, whether married or not, should designate a beneficiary (and an alternate, in case of prior death of the primary beneficiary). Failure to make such designation may result in nonpayment of the gratuity. Such designation does not affect payment to a surviving wife (or husband) or children.\n\n16-16-43177-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8\n\nI CERTIFY that I will inform the Bureau of Naval Personnel via my commanding office immediately of any changes in marital status, or conditions of dependency, or of voluntary occupancy of public quarters by my dependents.\n\nI CERTIFY that there has been no change in condition of dependency between 1 May 1947 and current date.\n(Date of last report of beneficiaries)\n\nI do solemnly swear (or affirm) that the facts stated and disclosed in the foregoing are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n(Signature)\n\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this 1st\n\nday of May, 1948, I having authority to administer oaths.\n\nJ. C. CRONIN CAPT.\n(Signature) (Rank)\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n\nThis form must be sworn to before an officer of the United States Navy authorized to administer oaths, or before a notary public.\n\nThe full names and addresses of the beneficiaries must be stated carefully. If a married woman, her own given name should be stated; thus: \"Mrs. Anna May Smith,\" not \"Mrs. John Smith.\"\n\nThis slip shall be made out and handled as follows:\nOfficer, Navy: Forward to Bureau of Naval Personnel.\nNurse: Forward to Bureau of Medicine and Surgery.\n\nEnlisted men, Navy: In duplicate; one copy to Bureau of Naval Personnel, one copy secured inside service record. In cases of men entitled to money allowances for quarters for enlisted men with dependents, two additional copies, bearing the required certificate, to the Disbursing Officer.\n\nNew beneficiary slips shall be executed and forwarded as above in all cases of change in status of the grantor or in that of his or her beneficiaries.\n\nIn any event, payment will be made to the widow or children, if any, whether designated or not.\n\nNormally casualty notification will be sent to all the beneficiaries designated on this form. If, by reason of unusual circumstances, other special arrangements are desired, a statement should be attached setting forth full instructions including full names, addresses, and relationships.\n\n66-16-43177-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Navy Department\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nPers 3216A gm\nFile No: 177283\n\n23DEC1946 24DEC1946\n\nTo: Lt. Delbert Clement Newhouse\nAviation Supply Depot\nPearl Harbor, Territory of Hawaii\n\nVia:\n\nSubject: Claim for Settlement of Unused Leave, Return of.\n\nRef: (a) Bupers-BuSandA Joint Letter, claims for unused leave.\n\n1. Your Claim for Settlement of Unused Leave is returned herewith for the reason indicated below. After correction of the error indicated all papers should be returned to this Bureau for further action.\n\n2. Payment cannot be made on your claim as submitted for the following reason:\n\nDate of present continuous active duty apparently incorrect, Check and resubmit claim.\n\n3. You are advised that your claim must be resubmitted prior to 1 September 1947, in order that payment may be made under the Armed Forces Leave Act of 1946.\n\nBy Direction of the Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nC.F. NELSON,\nLT. (jg), USN,\nOfficer Performance Division.\n\nFinished File Pers 3216A\n\n467"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"00/Newhouse, D. C.\n(177283)mv\n\n29 November 1946.\n\nFrom: Commandant, U. S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\nTo : Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, U. S. Navy.\nVia : Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\n\nSubj: Orders - Additional duty.\n\nRef (a) ComNavBase orders dated 25 September 1946.\n\n1. The additional duty assigned by reference (a) is hereby cancelled. Continue present duty.\n\nE. W. HANSON\n\ncc:BuPers\nComServPac(2)\nCom 14\nCO, RecSta,Pearl\n\nEnd-1 NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, PEARL HARBOR T. H.\n\n11 December 1946\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo : LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, LINE, USN\n\n1. Delivered\n\nE. E. BRIGHTON"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283\n\nIn Reply Address\nComdr. FAW-3\nRefer File No.\n\nAIR FORCE ATLANTIC FLEET\nFLEET AIR WING THREE\n\nFAW3/P15\nSerial 1622\n\nc/o Fleet Post Office,\nNew York, N.Y.,\n29 October 1943.\n\nFrom: The Commander Fleet Air Wing THREE.\nTo: Ensign D. C. NEWHOUSE, Assistant Photographic Officer, Naval Air Station, Coco Solo, C.Z.\nVia: The Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station, Coco Solo, C.Z.\n\nSubject: Air Crew Insignia.\n\nReference: BuPers C/L No. 173-43.\n\n1. Authority is hereby granted you to wear the Air Crew Insignia without stars.\n\n2. The records indicate that you served more than three months as a regularly assigned member of the crews of combatant aircraft while serving under my command at the Naval Air Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba during the first half of the year 1942.\n\n3. This letter shall be presented to a Ships' Service store selling this insignia as your authority to purchase same.\n\nG. L. COMPO.\n\nEND-1 30 October 1943 NA10/P15\nTo: Ensign D. C. Newhouse, Assistant Photographic Officer\n\n1. Delivered.\n\nR. P. KAUFFMAN\nCommander, USN\nCommanding\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 56"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CORRECTION SLIP\nNAVPERS-1664 (10-43)\n\nTo Tabulated Records Section\nRecords Division\nPers. 82233\n\nNAME Newhouse, D. C.\nFILE NO. 177283\n\nITEM | SHOWN AS | SHOULD BE | PER ORDERS ROSTER DATED\nPERMANENT DUTY STATION (Do not show temporary or Additional Duty Stations) | 7460 | NAS Coco Solo | 11-1-43\nRANK | Wo | |\nCORPS | Phot | |\n\nSIGNED Pers Status Officer\nSIGNED Detail Officer\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This form is to be used to indicate any changes which should be made in the roster of officer personnel.\n2. Information shown on this form will not be checked and the form should not be originated unless the information shown above under \"should be\" can be fully substantiated.\n3. This form should not be used to request replacement of missing or broken linedex strips.\n\nDEC 4 1943"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283\n134 019\nWG\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\nPers-326 -FKB\nMarch 18, 1943\nMemorandum for Records and Statistics Division, Manual Files Section\nIt is requested that the Performance Division (Officer Personnel) be furnished statement of service for the following enlisted man appointed to officer rank:\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\nFull name NEWHOUSE, Delbert C.-To Photographer - 393-07-21\nDate of birth JUNE 5, 1913\nPlace of birth Marcola, Oregon\nHome address (City and State)\nGaribaldi, Oregon\nName and address of beneficiary (show date slip submitted)\nWife, Norma Isobel Newhouse,1210-S.E.,37th.Ave., Portland, Ore.(1-15-42)\nName and address of next of kin (if different)\nSame\nFleet Reserve? No\nEnlisted rating CP(PA)\nDate of last enlisted rating 8-1--1942\nDates of enlistment, reenlistment, extension of enlistment, and discharge; time lost for any reason; and Army or other service which may be counted for pay or retirement.\nPers. 2332-1-mah March 20, 1943.\nENLISTED DISCHARGED\n3-18-29 (National Guard)(Active) 1-25-1932\n1-24-1933\nExt.Enl.2 yrs.\n1-24-1937 1-23-1939\n1-24-1939\nNo Unauthorized Absences.\nF. A. Van Slyke\nappt Photg 9-14-42\nFINISHED FILE PERS 323"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283 NY\nFINISHED FILE PERS 3180\n25 September 1946\nFrom: Commandant, U. S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, USN, 0177283\nEnsign Oley (n) Ratsep, SCS, USNR, 0483558\nVia: SOinC, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\nSubj: Orders - Additional duty.\n1. When directed by Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H., on 26 September 1946 you will report immediately to the Commanding Officer, Enlisted Personnel, U. S. Naval Receiving Station, Pearl Harbor, T. H., for additional duty on a summary Court Martial Board.\n2. This is in addition to your regular duty.\nE. W. HANSON\ncc:\nBuPers(Clipper)\nComServPac(2)\nComLi\nCO,RecSta,Pearl\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, PEARL HARBOR\nEnd / SEP 26 1946\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\n1. Forwarded. E. E. BRIGHTON BY DIRECTION"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAV. S. AND A. FORM 550 MUSTERING OUT PAYMENT\n17283 NEWHOUSE Delbert C LT LINE USN\n(File or service No.) (Surname) (First name) (Initial) (Rank or rating and branch of service)\n24 Sept. 45 Aviation Supply Depot, Pearl Harbor 60 Days or More\n(Date discharged or released from active duty) (Activity from which discharged) (Length of service-Enter (less than 60 days) or (60 days or more))\nDoes service record show service outside of continental limits of United States or in Alaska? Enter Yes or No Yes\nCOMMANDING OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE: Discharged for convenience of government to accept permanent appointment in U.S. Navy.\nI certify that the above-named person is being discharged or released from active duty, that such person is entitled to payment under the MUSTERING OUT PAYMENT ACT OF 1944, and that the above information is correct. E. A. GRAHN, SC USN\n(Name and signature of officer authorized to sign in accordance with article 2025(2)NR)\nVETERAN'S CERTIFICATE:\nI hereby certify that I have not made previous application for mustering-out payment under the MOP Act of 1944. I am aware of the fact that making application more than once is a criminal offense under the United States Criminal Code.\nADDRESS TO WHICH CHECK(S) ARE TO BE SENT: (Omit address if service is LESS than 60 days)\nPAID IN FULL\nHave you served outside the continental limits of United States or in Alaska? Yes (Enter Yes or No)\nAviation Supply Depot (Number) (Street)\nPearl Harbor, T.H. (City) (Zone) (State)\nDISBURSING OFFICER'S PAYMENT DATA MUSTERING OUT PAYMENT DIVISION DATA\nJMP SUB EOP $300.00\nPaid ___ on 110-27 5,112 9/26/46\n(Public voucher) (Check number) (Date)\nD. F. SULLIVAN - SB673\n(Type name and symbol No. of disbursing officer making initial payment)\nTRIPLICATE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"22 March 1956\nC-2\nFrom: CWO Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: Commanding Officer, Naval Air Technical Training Unit, Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida\nSubj: Orders; forwarding of\nRef: (a) BuPers Manual Art C-5407(4)\nEncl: (1) One copy of basic orders with all endorsements thereto\n1. In compliance with reference (a), enclosure (1) is forwarded herewith.\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\nNC/Pncla/(mag)\nP16-4/00\n22 MAR 1956\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on CWO Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, ltr of 22 Mar 1956\nFrom: Commanding Officer, Naval Air Technical Training Unit, Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\n1. Forwarded.\nH. M. GARVEY By direction\nCopy to: CNATECHTRA\nFinished File--Pers P11A"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NC/Pncla/(mag)\nP16-4/00\n177283/8311\n21 March 1956\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on CO, VU-5 Orders ser 121 of 23 Jan 1956\nFrom: Commanding Officer, Naval Air Technical Training Unit, Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida\nTo: CWO4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nSubj: Change of duty\n1. Reported for duty this date.\nF. M. HALL By direction\nEnclosure (1)\nFinished File--Pers P11B"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VU-5/ACW:rbd\nP16-4/00\nSer: 185\n10 February 1956\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on CO, VU-5 Orders ser 121 of 23 January 1956\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, Utility Squadron FIVE\nTo: CWO4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. Detached this date.\n\n\nB. F. ROWE\n\nCopy to:\nCOMSIX\nCNATRA\nCNATECHTRA\nCOMSERVPAC\nCOMUTWINGPAC\nNATECHTRAU NAS PNCLA\nCOMAIRPAC\n\n\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY\n\n\nFinished File--Pers P1BAC"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET\nAIR FORCE\nUTILITY SQUADRON FIVE\nVU-5/ACW:kf\nP16-4/00\nSer: 121\n23 January 1956\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, Utility Squadron FIVE\nTo: CWO4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\nRef: (a) BUPERS msg 191325Z of January 1956\n\n1. Reference (a) is quoted below for your information and compliance:\n\n\"CWO W3 DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/8311 DIR DET ABT 15 FEB PROUS ARPROREP NATECHTRAU NAS PNCLA DUTY X DELREPARUS THIRTY DAYS X GOVTRANSDIRVAIL TWO COMLTRANS AUTH OUTUS WHERE GOVTRANS NOT AVAL X TRAVCHAR 1761453.18 MPN 1956 OC 029 EXACCT 74120 BUCONTROL 22/31600\"\n\n2. In accordance with reference (a), when directed by the Commanding Officer, Utility Squadron FIVE, about 15 February 1956, you will regard yourself detached from duty with Utility Squadron FIVE and from such other duty as may have been assigned. You will proceed to a port in the United States and upon arrival further proceed and report to the Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Air Technical Training Unit, Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida for duty.\n\n3. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of thirty (30) days, provided no excess leave involved, in reporting in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave, any portion of which may be taken prior to or after arrival in the United States.\n\n4. Travel via government transportation is directed outside the United States where available. Class TWO priority is certified for travel via government aircraft. Commercial transportation authorized outside of the United States where government transportation is not available.\n\n5. Cost of this travel is chargeable to appropriation 1761453.18 MPN 1956, object class 029, expenditure account 74120, Bureau Control 22/31600.\n\n6. Immediately upon reporting, copies of these orders shall be forwarded to the Chief of Naval Personnel in accordance with Art. C-5407(4), Bureau of Naval Personnel Manual.\n\n7. You are hereby authorized to draw three (3) months advance pay.\n\n8. Delivered.\n\n\nB. F. ROWE\n\nCopy to:\nCOMSIX/CNATRA/CNATECHTRA/COMSERVPAC/\nCOMUTWINGPAC/NATECHTRAU NAS PNCLA/COMAIRPAC\n\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY:\n\nFinished File--Pers P1BAC"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\nC-2\n\nDRAFTED BY: PERS-B15c-NGS-1\nFILE NR.: 177283/8311\nROOM NR.:\nEXT. NR.: 41302\nRELEASED BY: CAPT R E HARMER\nCODE/SECT. NR.:\nDATE: 18 JAN 1956 1400\n\nPlease leave this space clear\n\nFROM: BUPERS\n19/325Z (date/time) (GCT)\nPRECEDENCE: PRIORITY ROUTINE DEFERRED\nTO: UTRON FIVE\nINFO: COMSIX (MAIL), CNATRA (MAIL), CNATECHTRA (MAIL), COMSERVPAC (MAIL) (3), COMUTWGPAC (MAIL), NATECHTRAU NAS PNCLA (MAIL) *, COMAIRPAC (CODE 61) (AIRMAIL)\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted with Deferred Precedence\n\nTEXT:\nCWO W 3 DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/8311 DIRDET ABT 15 FEB PROUS ARPROREP NATECHTRAU NAS /PNCLA DUTY X DELREPARUS THIRTY DAYS X GOVTRANSDIRVAIL TWO COMLTRANS AUTH OUTUS WHERE GOVTRANS NOT AVAL X TRAVCHAR 1761453.18 MPN 1956 OC 029 EXACCT 74120 BUCONTROL 22/31600\n\nCC:\nUTRON FIVE\n(CONFIRMATION COPY)\nOP 54\n\nAUTHENTICATED BY:\n\nJACKET COPY\nPERS-B116\nE111a\nB1143\nB15c (2)\nB7\n\n2963"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18/8:50 18/10:40\nRANK CWO NAME (First) Delbert (Middle Initial) C. (Last) NEWHOUSE FILE NO./DESIGNATOR 177283/8311/W3\nAT\nTYPE OF ORDERS: VU-5 (Give Date)\nFIRST ORDERS [ ] CHANGE OF DUTY [X] APPROVAL OF ACTION [ ] COTA [ ]\nDATE 1/17 ORIGINATING PERS B15c\nDATE OUT BY 1/20 CONTROL NUMBER C02963\nLETTER / DISPATCH: NL [X] ROUTINE [ ] PRIORITY [ ]\nDETACHED: DIRDET [X] ABOUT [X] INACT 15 FEB 56\nFROM: DUTY [X] TEM [ ] DUINS [ ] DUFLY [ ] STAFF [ ]\n1. TO: PROREP [X] NATTU PENSACOLA NAS\nDELREP [X] 30 days\nFOR: DUTY [X]\n2. TO: DIRDET [ ] COMPTEM-DIRDET [ ] PROREP [ ]\nCTR: BROWNFIELD/GOOLSBY\nDELREP [ ]\nSPECIAL CLAUSES: GOVTRANSDIROUT [X] GOVAIRPRI II [X] BAGAIR 1C [X]\nCC AND INFO ADDRESSES: VU-5 (struck) Com 6 Comairpac Comseewpac Comutwingpac NATTU PENSACOLA * CNO (OP-54) B15c\nDETAIL OFFICER: LCDR D. C. GOOLSBY\nEXTENSION 41302\nOFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM NAVPERS-1152 (REV. 5-50)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OP-511e2/pr/1-16-56\nOFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM\nTO: BUPERS (ATT. PERS: B115)\nOPNAV FORM - 1321-1 (REV. 5-55)\n17 Jan 1956\n\n1. It is requested that the below named person be issued orders as indicated:\nRANK CWO NAME DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE CORPS USN FILE NO. & DESIGNATOR 177283/8311/W-3\nAT VU-5\nTYPE OF ORDERS: CHANGE OF DUTY [X]\nDATE OUT BY CONTROL NO.\nDISPATCH: NL [X]\nDETACHED: DIRDET [X] ABOUT 15 February\nFROM: DUTY [X] DIFOT STAFF\n1. TO: PROREP [X] NATTU PENSACOLA\nDELREP [X] 30\nFOR: DUTY [X]\n2. TO: DIRDET [ ] COMPTEM-DIRDET [ ] PROREP [ ]\nCTR: BROWNFIELD/GOOLSBY 1-16-56\nDELREP [ ] Ref/ OP-553C/jp Ser 165055 dtd 11-7-55\nSPECIAL CLASSES: GOVTRANSDIROUT [X] GOVAIRPRI II [X] BAGAIR 160 [X]\nCC AND INFO ADDRESSES: OP-54 NATTU PENSACOLA\nDETAIL OFFICER: G. B. BROWN BY DIRECTION\nEXTENSION\nFinished File Pers B 15c\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1955-344859"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nREPORT BUPERS 1050-1\nDATE: 10-12-55\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nB. F. ROWE, CDR, USN\nUtility Squadron FIVE (VU-5)\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle)\nGRADE AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\nCWO4 - USN\n177283/8311\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 05\n10-3-55\n10-7-55\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS --\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 53\nUNDER ORDERS OF\nDATED\nCommanding Officer\n3 October 1955\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\n(Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-5"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nREPORT BUPERS 1050-1\nDATE: 22 Aug 1955\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nB. F. ROWE, CDR, USN\nUtility Squadron FIVE, Navy #3835, c/o FPO, S.F.\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle)\nGRADE AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\nCHPHOT-USN\n177283\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 2\n8-18-55\n8-19-55\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS ---\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 58\nUNDER ORDERS OF\nDATED\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\n(Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-5"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nREPORT BUPERS 1050-1\nDATE: 31 May 1955\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nB. F. ROWE, CDR, USN\nUtility Squadron FIVE (VU-5)\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle)\nGRADE AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert C.\nCHPHOT USN\n177283/8311\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 10\n5-17-55\n5-26-55\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS -0-\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 48\nUNDER ORDERS OF\nDATED\n---\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\n(Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-5"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nREPORT BUPERS 1050-1\nDATE: 9 July 1954\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nUtility Squadron FIVE (VU-5)\nNAS, Agana, Guam, M. I.\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle)\nGRADE AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert C.\nCHPHOT-USN\n177283\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME --\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS 10\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 28\nUNDER ORDERS OF\nDATED\nBUPERS ords ser 20098\n5 March 1954\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\n(Signature of commanding officer)\nF. H. CARRIER, LT, USNR, By dir.\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-5"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nDATE: 4-26-54\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nCommanding Officer\nNaval Supply Center, Oakland, California\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle)\nGRADE AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement\nCHPHOT USN\n177283/8311\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 4\n4-20-54 to 4-23-54 incl.\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 38\nUNDER ORDERS OF\nDATED\nApproved leave papers\n4-16-54\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\nC. BRACKEN\nBy direction\n(Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-4"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"B115c\n177283/8311\nPers-B115c-dp-1\n5 March 1954\n\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nNaval Supply Center\nOakland, Calif.\nVia: Commanding Officer\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. When directed by your commanding officer, on or about 1 June 1954, you will regard yourself detached from duty at the Naval Supply Center, Oakland, Calif., and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; will proceed to San Francisco, Calif., and report to the Commandant, Twelfth Naval District, for transportation to the port in which the Commanding Officer, Utility Squadron FIVE may be, and upon arrival report to the Commanding Officer, Utility Squadron FIVE, for duty.\n\n\n2. Provided no excess leave is involved, you are hereby authorized to delay for a period of ten days in reporting at San Francisco, Calif., in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave.\n\n3. Travel via government transportation is directed outside the United States. Class TWO priority is certified for travel via government aircraft.\n\n4. Cost of travel is chargeable to 1741453.18, MPN 1954, object class 029, expenditure account 74120, Bureau Control 22/31600.\n\n5. Upon reporting, forward to BuPers a copy of these orders (Staff Corps Officers an additional copy to cognizant Bureau) via new commanding officer with all endorsements. Where leave or delay is involved, keep old and new station advised of address using Form NavPers 3036.\n\nCopy to:\nOP 54\nCOMAIRPAC CODE 61\nCOMUTWINGPAC\nCO UTRON FIVE\nCOMTWELVE\nCOMNAVBASE SFRAN\nCOMSERVPAC (3)\nJacket copy \"QUAL\" 784162\nPers-B111s 161254\nE111a\nB11183\nB115c\nB31\n\nJ. L. HOLLOWAY, JR."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Op-541E2/ahp 2-23-54\nOFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM\nTO: BUPERS (ATT. PERS: B115)\n\nOPNAV FORM - 1321-1 (REV. 2-52)\n\n25 FEB 1954\n\nIt is requested that the below named person be issued orders as indicated:\nRANK CHPHOT NAME Delbert C. NEWHOUSE\nAT Naval Supply Center Oakland, California\nDATE 2/22 ORIGINATING PERS B1152\nFILE NO. & DESIGNATOR OR CLASS 177283/8311\nTYPE OF ORDERS: CHANGE OF DUTY\nDATE OUT BY 3/5\nCONTROL NO. 20098\n\nDETACHED FROM: DIRDET, 1 May 1954 to 1 June 54\nFOR DUTY, PRO REP\nTO: Commanding Officer Utility Squadron FIVE (VU-5) c/o FPO San Francisco, Calif.\nDELREP 10 days to Coml2 for transportation\n\nRef: Op-553 per req 20-54 of 2-10-54\n\nSPECIAL CLAUSES: GOVTRANSDIROUT, GOVAIRPRI II, CARBAGAIR\n\nCC AND INFO ADDRESSES\nCNO OP-54\nCOMAIRPAC\nCO, VU-5\nCOMUTWINGPAC\nComl2\n\nDETAIL OFFICER W. L. CURTIS By direction\n\nT&P: QUAL 784162 161254"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nREPORT PERS-3-4\n\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nDATE: 2-15-54\n\nFROM (Commanding officer): Commanding Officer\nSHIP OR STATION: Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California\n\nIn conformity with requirements of U.S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\n\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement\nGRADE AND CORPS CHPHOT USN\nFILE NO. 177283/8311\n\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 4\n2-9-54 to 2-12-54 incl.\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 42\n\nUNDER ORDERS OF: Approved leave papers\nDATED 2-8-54\n\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\nR. A. BENNETT By direction (Commanding officer)\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\n\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 18-52837-4"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY ADDITIONAL DUTY ORDERS\n12ND 4827\n\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER OAKLAND, CALIF.\n\nFROM Commanding Officer\nTO CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN (177283/8311)\nREF (a)\nENCL (1)\nSERIAL NO. T-12\nESTIMATED COST: TRANSPORTATION $42.00; PER DIEM 45.00; MISCELLANEOUS 7.50; TOTAL 94.50\n\nUNDER THE BASIC AUTHORITY GRANTED IN THE REFERENCE/ENCLOSURE, YOU ARE HEREBY DIRECTED AS FOLLOWS:\n\n(1) On or about 7 September 1953 you will proceed to the place(s) designated below for temporary additional duty, and upon completion thereof you will return to your station and resume regular duties.\nPURPOSE/PLACE(S)\nProceed to the Naval Ordnance Test Station, Inyokern; China Lake, California, for temporary additional duty of approximately 5 days duration, to represent this activity at a conference concerning photographic problems.\n\nYOU ARE AUTHORIZED TO VARY, OMIT, REVISIT / VISIT SUCH ADDITIONAL PLACES DEEMED NECESSARY\n\n(2) Travel in connection with these orders is authorized as follows:\nGOVERNMENT VEHICLE IS DIRECTED WHERE AVAILABLE.\nGOVERNMENT AIR IS DIRECTED WHERE AVAILABLE. CLASS ___ PRIORITY IS CERTIFIED.\nWHERE GOVERNMENT TRANSPORTATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, TRAVEL VIA ANY ONE OR COMBINATION OF THE COMMON CARRIERS, RAIL/BUS/AIR, IS AUTHORIZED.\nPRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLE IS AUTHORIZED WITH NO ADDITIONAL EXPENSE TO THE GOVERNMENT.\nPRIVATELY OWNED VEHICLE WITH REIMBURSEMENT AT THE RATE OF SEVEN CENTS PER MILE FOR THE OFFICIAL DISTANCE TRAVELED, SUCH MODE CONSIDERED MORE ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE GOVERNMENT.\n(3) If temporary duty is to be performed at an installation of the uniformed services and government quarters are not utilized, and maximum per diem is claimed, you are directed to obtain a certification as to the availability of government quarters (and mess for temporary duty under instruction or temporary duty outside the U.S.) from the installation commander or his designated representative.\n(4) The cost of this travel is chargeable as follows:\nAPPROPRIATION 1741503.11 S1412 ALLOT. NO. 11018 EXPEND. ACCT. 48140 OBJ. CLASS 022\nJOB ORDER 0808-1140 (UVX) DOCUMENT NO. 105180\nALLOTTEE: Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California\n\nREMARKS: [handwritten and stamped notations]\nNSC Oakland, Calif. Date 9/29/53\nPaid $33.50 Per Diem for period 9/13/53 to 9/18/53 (4 days @ $5, 1 3/4 days @ $9, less 2.25) under BuVou # 997 Check # 73216\n\nSIGNATURE (COMMANDING OFFICER) V. E. LAUDERDALE, LT SC USNR 520471\nDATE 26 August 1953\nNAVY DPPO 12ND-T1-8007\n\nCopy to: BuPers"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DO, NSC, Oakland, Calif. 8/28/53 Issued the following:\nT/R N757,686 COACH CLASS RT Oakland, Cal to Mojave,Cal via SP. $11.52\nN757,687 SPEC SERV CHG Oakland, Cal to Mojave,Cal via SP. .75\nN757,688 SPEC SERV CHG Mojave, Cal to Oakland, Calif via SP. .75\nTotal Net cost to Gov't $13.22\n\nV. E. LAUDERDALE, LT SC USNR 520471\n\nREPORTED: USNOTS INYOKERN, CALIFORNIA\nDEPARTED: USNOTS INYOKERN, CALIFORNIA\n\n1820 SEP 13 1953 (TIME) (DATE)\n0815 9-18-53 (TIME) (DATE)\n\n/s/ R.J.HORNE Jr. (OFFICER-OF-THE-DAY) /s/ (OFFICER-OF-THE-DAY)\n\nU. S. NAVAL ORDNANCE TEST STATION, INYOKERN CHINA LAKE, CALIFORNIA\n\nFirst Endorsement\nFrom: COMMANDER\nSubj: Temporary Additional Duty\n\n1. Reported SEP 13 1953\n2. Detached SEP 18 1953\n3. Government quarters were available while on this Station.\n4. Government mess was not available nor furnished.\n5. Government transportation was not available from NOTS Inyokern, Calif. to Oakland, Calif.\nR. H. SOLIER Acting\n/s/ A. B. BENNETT\nA. B. BENNETT By direction\n\n2 End.\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA\n1. Reported this date. Resume your regular duties.\nSEP 18 1953\nL. D. PATTON By direction\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY\nD. C. Newhouse"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\n\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS\nPRINTED BELOW\n\nREPORT PERS-3-4\n\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nDATE: 18 AUG 1953\n\nFROM (Commanding officer)\n\nSHIP OR STATION\n\nCommanding Officer\n\nNaval Supply Center, Oakland, California\n\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\n\nNAME (Last)\n(First)\n(Middle)\n\nGRADE AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\n\nNEWHOUSE\nDelbert\nClement\n\nCHPHOT USN\n177283/8311\n\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\n\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 14\n\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\n\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\n\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 46\n\n8-4-53 to 8-17-53 inclusive\n\nUNDER ORDERS OF\n\nDATED\n\nApproved Leave Papers\n\n29 JULY 1953\n\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\n\nE. N. JACOBSON\nBy direction\n(Signature of commanding officer)\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-4"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\n\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS\nPRINTED BELOW\n\nREPORT PERS-3-4\n\nChief of Naval Personnel\n\nDATE: 12 JUNE 1953\n\nFROM (Commanding officer)\n\nSHIP OR STATION\n\nCommanding Officer\n\nNaval Supply Center, Oakland, California\n\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\n\nNAME (Last)\n(First)\n(Middle)\n\nGRADE AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\n\nNEWHOUSE\nDelbert\nClement\n\nCHPHOT\n177283/8311\n\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\n\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 4\n\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\n\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\n\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 31\n\n6-2-53 to 6-5-53 inclusive\n\nUNDER ORDERS OF\n\nDATED\n\nApproved Leave Papers\n\n27 MAY 1953\n\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\n\nE. N. JACOBSON\nBy direction\n(Signature of commanding officer)\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-4"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\n\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS\nPRINTED BELOW\n\nREPORT PERS-3-4\n\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nDATE: 2 MAR 1953\n\nFROM (Commanding officer)\n\nSHIP OR STATION\n\nCommanding Officer\n\nNaval Supply Center, Oakland, California\n\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\n\nNAME (Last)\n(First)\n(Middle)\n\nGRADE AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\n\nNEWHOUSE\nDelbert\nClement\n\nCHPHOT USN\n177283/8311\n\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\n\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 4\n\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\n\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\n\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 35\n\n2-26-53 to 3-1-53 inclusive\n\nUNDER ORDERS OF\n\nDATED\n\nApproved Leave Papers\n\n2 MAR 1953\n\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\n\nF. A. FIELDING\nBy direction\n(Signature of commanding officer)\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-4"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER\nOakland 4, California\n\n11:TAH:jlm\n177283/8311\n19 AUG 1952\n\nT-4\n\nC-2\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\nSubj: Temporary additional duty\n\n1. Proceed on or about 20 August 1952 to the place indicated below for temporary duty. This is in addition to your present duties, and upon completion thereof you will return to your station and resume your regular duties.\n\nTo Naval Ordnance Test Station, Inyokern, California, for temporary additional duty, of approximately 3 days duration, in connection with photographic matters.\n\n2. Travel via government transportation, including government air, is directed where available. Class THREE priority is certified. Where government transportation is not available, travel via any one, or combination, of the common carriers RAIL/BUS/AIR is authorized; or at your option travel via privately owned conveyance is authorized at no additional expense to the government, if such travel can be accomplished in the allowed travel time by rail.\n\n3. If temporary duty is to be performed at an installation of the uniformed services, and government quarters are not utilized, and maximum per diem is claimed, you are directed to obtain a certification as to the availability of government quarters from the installation commander.\n\n4. Cost of this travel is chargeable to appropriation 1731803.11 Service Wide Supply and Finance, expenditure account 45026, job order number 04061110004, allotment 11018, object class 022, document no. 04-002,207, NSC Oakland. The estimated cost is: Transportation $60.00, per diem $27.00.\n\nT. EARLE HIPP\n\nCopy to:\nBuPers\n\nAUG 25 1952\nMEMORANDUM ENDORSEMENT\nFrom: Air Traffic Control Office 12ND, San Francisco, California\nNo government air transportation available San Francisco, California to Inyokern, Calif. this date.\nA. E. JACOBSON\nCDR, USN\nOfficer in Charge"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORTED: USNOTS\nINYOKERN, CALIFORNIA\n1610 25 AUG 1952\n\nR. SMITH, YNC, USN\n\nU. S. NAVAL ORDNANCE TEST STATION\nINYOKERN, CHINA LAKE, CALIFORNIA\n\n29 August 1952\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\n\nFrom: COMMANDER\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n\nSubj: Temporary Additional Duty\n\n1. Reported 25 August 1952.\n\n2. Detached 29 August 1952.\n\n3. Government quarters were available while on this Station.\n\n4. Government subsistence was not available nor furnished while on this Station.\n\n5. Government transportation was not available from U. S. Naval Ordnance Test Station, Inyokern, China Lake, California to Oakland, California.\n\nW. V. R. VIENEG\n\nR. H. SOLIER\nBy direction\n\n2 End.\nAUG 29 1952\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER\nOAKLAND, CALIFORNIA\n\n1. Reported this date. Resume your regular duties.\n\nF. A. FIELDING\nBy direction\n\nFinished File Copy"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nDATE: 4 AUG 1952\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nCommanding Officer\nNaval Supply Center, Oakland, California\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle)\nGRADE AND CORPS FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement\nCHPHOT USN 177283/8311\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 14\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 39\n7-19-52 to 8-1-52 Incl.\nUNDER ORDERS OF\nDATED\nApproved Leave Papers\n9 July 1952\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\nF. A. FIELDING\nBy direction\n(Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-4"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nDATE: 9 July 1952\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nCommanding Officer\nNaval Supply Center, Oakland, California\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle)\nGRADE AND CORPS FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement\nCHPHOT USN 177283/8311\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 7\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 53\n7-1-52 to 7-7-52 Incl.\nUNDER ORDERS OF\nDATED C-2\nApproved Leave Papers\n1 May 1952\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\nF. A. FIELDING\nBy direction\n(Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-4"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nDATE: 9 July 1952\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nCommanding Officer\nNaval Supply Center, Oakland, California\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle)\nGRADE AND CORPS FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement\nCHPHOT USN 177283/8311\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 12\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 32\n6-19-52 to 6-30-52 Incl.\nUNDER ORDERS OF\nDATED C-2\nApproved Leave Papers\n1 May 1952\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\nF. A. FIELDING\nBy direction\n(Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-4"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DRAFTED BY PERS-B115j-MAR-1\nFILE NR. 177283/8311\nROOM NR.\nEXT. NR. 42804\nRELEASED BY CAPT W A MOFFETT\nCODE/SECT. NR.\nDATE 21 NOV 1951 1200\nPlease leave this space clear\nFROM: BUPERS WASHDC\nTO: COMFLEACT JAPAN\nINFO: NSC OAK\nCOMAIRPAC (MAIL)\nCOMNAVFE (MAIL)\nCOMSERVPAC (MAIL)(3)\nCOMNAVBASE SFRAN (MAIL)\nPRECEDENCE PRIORITY ROUTINE DEFERRED NIGHT LETTER\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED RESTRICTED WILL BE CLASSIFIED PLAIN\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted with Deferred Precedence\nTEXT:\nCHPHOT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/8311 ORDCAN 1 NOV AND MSG 151331 NOV X DIRDET ABOUT 1 DEC PROUS ARPRPOREP BUAER NAVDEPT WASHDC TEM ABOUT TWO WEEKS X COMPTEMDIRDET PROREP NSC OAK DUTY X DELREP FIFTEEN DAYS WASHDC X GOVTRANSDIROUT GOVAIRPRI THREE X TRAVCHAR 1721453.18 MPN EXACCT 74110 OC 029 X QUAL 124555 161270 148200\nCC:\nCOMFLEACT JAPAN (CONFIRMATION COPY)\nOP 54\nOP 553\nBUAER (2)\nJACKET COPY\nPERS B11ls\nE11a\nB11183\nB115j (2)\nAUTHENTICATED BY:\n35318\nOPNAV 19-7 (4-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RANK CHPHOT NAME Delbert C. NEWHOUSE FILE NO. & DESIGNATOR OR CLASS 177283/8311\nAT Fleet Activities, Yokosuka, Japan c/o Fleet Post Office San Francisco, California\nDATE OUT BY 11-21 ORIGINATING PERS B115j\nTYPE OF ORDERS FIRST ORDERS CHANGE OF DUTY APPROVAL OF ACTION COTA CONTROL NUMBER 035318\nORDCAN UNORDCAN ORDMOD FURORDMOD ORDCOR CONPRESDU CONTREAT REPEATED FOR COMPLIANCE UNDELIVERED Issued By BuPers Letter dated 1 Nov. 1951 Dispatch, Time Group 151331\nDETACHED DIRDET HERDET RELDET RELDIRDET INACT DECOM COMPCOURDET DIRMAKETRANS DISTREAT ABOUT 1 December 1951 DETRELBY UPON REPORTING OF RELBY FROM DUTY TEM DUFLY DUINS TEMFLY STAFF DUFLY INS TEMFLY INS\nTO: PROREP PROWDELREP PROIMREP PROPORICH REPT ON Chief Bureau of Aeronautics Navy Department Washington, D. C. DELREP 15 days Ref: Op-553 memo 138-51 FOR DUTY TEM AS: about two (2) weeks\nTO: DIRDET COMPTEM-DIRDET PROREP Mod: Two weeks temp. duty at BuAer, prior reporting to NSC for duty. Officer-in-Charge, Aviation Supply Depot U.S. Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California DELREP Report not later than 1 February 1952 FOR DUTY\nSPECIAL CLAUSES PERDIEMAUTH CARBAGAIR HERDESNAVAV SUPCORGREESERV PASSQUIRED GOVAIRDIRVAIL CONASAERO CEPVOL GREESERVTWELVE CHARGEPSANDTR GOVAIRAUTHVAIL HERDUFLY RETAPPLIM AUTHTRAVNOPENSE CHARGENAVRES BAGAIR HERDUFLYDORSE SERVCOMPTERN IMMUNQUIRED OTHER\nCC AND INFO ADDRESSES CNO (Op-54) CNO (Op-553) ComAirPac BuAer CINCPAC ASD, NSC Oakland, California CO, NSC, Oakland ComNavFE ComServPac ComNavBase Sfran\nT&P: QUAL: 124555 161270 148200\nEXTENSION 42804\nP. K. BLESH By direction\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1951; 944277"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS\nPRINTED BELOW\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nDATE: 1/10/52\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nChief, Bureau of Aeronautics.\nBureau of Aeronautics., Washington,D. C.\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last)\n(First)\n(Middle)\nGRADE AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE\nDELBERT\nCLEMENT\nCHPHT/USN\n177283/8 311\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS 15\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 45\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nUNDER ORDERS OF\nDATED\nBuPers DISP 2117472 of 22 November 1951\n22 November 1951\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\n(Signature of commanding officer)\nS. C. WALLS\nBy direction\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 10-52637-4"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aer-PE-51\nOO/NEWHOUSE,D.C.\n27 December 1951\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT ON BUPERS DISP 2117472 of 22 NOV 1951\nFrom: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8611, USN\nSubj: Change of duty.\n1. Reported 27 December at 0745 for temporary duty for a period of about two (2) weeks.\nS. C. WALLS\nBy direction\nCertified a True Copy"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COMMANDER FLEET ACTIVITIES\nNAVY NO. 3923\nFPO, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\nCFA3923/P16-4/00\n10/\n4 DEC 1951\nENDORSEMENT\nFrom: Commander Fleet Activities Yokosuka\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311, USN\nSubj: Change of duty\n1. Reported for transportation on 29 November 1951.\n2. Travel via government air transportation authorized; Class ______ priority certified.\n3. ______ pounds air baggage authorized; ______ excess air baggage as air cargo under the same priority as for yourself.\n4. I certify that government quarters were available on the following dates; 29 Nov 1951 to 4 DEC 1951 and that government meals were available on the following dates for the number of meals indicated: None.\n5. Detached this date. Carry out basic orders.\nH. RICHARD\nBy direction\nCertified a True Copy"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COMMANDER FLEET ACTIVITIES\nNAVY NO. 3923\nFPO, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\nCFA3923/10:do\nP16-4/00\n29 NOV 1951\nFrom: Commander Fleet Activities, Yokosuka\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311\nSubj: Change of duty\nRef: (a) BuPers Pers B115J disp 211747Z of 22 NOV 51\n1. Reference (a) is quoted below and is certified to be a true copy of the original dispatch:\n\"CHPHOT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/8311 ORDCAN 1 NOV and MSG 151331Z NOV X DIRDET ABOUT 1 DEC PROUS APPREP BUAER NAVDEPT WASHDC TEM ABOUT TWO WEEKS X COMPTENDIRDET PREREP NSC OAK DUTY X DELREP FIFTEEN DAYS WASHDC X GOVTRANSDIROUT GOVAIRPRIT THREE X TRAVCHAR 1721453.18 MPN EXACCT 74110 OC 029 X QUAL 124555 161270 148200\"\n2. Reference (a) is transcribed below for your information and compliance:\nCHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311, orders of 1 November and BuPers disp 151331Z of November 1951 are hereby cancelled. When directed by Commander Fleet Activities, Yokosuka, on or about 1 December 1951, detached from duty as Assistant Aviation Supply Officer and from such other duty as may have been assigned; proceed to the United States and upon arrival further proceed and report to the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington, D.C. for temporary duty for a period of about two (2) weeks. Upon completion of temporary duty and when directed by proper authority, detached; proceed and report to the Commanding Officer, Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California for duty. Authorized to delay fifteen (15) days in reporting Washington, D.C. provided no excess leave involved, such delay to count as leave. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new commanding officer advised of your leave address. Government transportation is directed outside the United States. For travel via government aircraft, class THREE priority is certified. Travel chargeable to Appropriation 1721453.18 MPN: Expenditure Account 74110; Object Class 029. Qualified: 124555, 161270, 148200.\n3. Immediately upon reporting for duty in compliance with these orders, or any modification thereto, you are hereby directed to forward to the Chief of Naval Personnel, via your new commanding officer, a copy of these orders with all endorsements thereto, including the final reporting endorsement.\n4. In accordance with ALNAV 41-50 you are authorized to receive three (3) months advance pay.\n5. Delivered and detached.\nJ.P. THEW\nChief of Staff\nCopy to:\nCO, NSC, Oakland\nOrders received for compliance at (Time) 1320 (Date) 29 NOV 1951\nD.C. NEWHOUSE\nCertified a True Copy"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS\nPRINTED BELOW\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nDATE: 2-6-52\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nCOMMANDING OFFICER\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, OAKLAND, CALIF.\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last)\n(First)\n(Middle)\nGRADE AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE\nDelbert\nClement\nCHPHOT USN\n177283\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS 1\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 44\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nUNDER ORDERS OF\n2-3-52 to 2-4-52 Incl.\nDATED\nBUPERS DISP 211747Z of\n22 Nov 1951\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\nJ. H. LILLIS\nBy direction\n(Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-4"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BuPers\n\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER\nOAKLAND 4, CALIFORNIA\n\nNT4-28/11\nP16-3/00\n5 February 1952\n\nFOURTH ENDORSEMENT ON BUPERS DISP 211747Z of 22 NOV 1951\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311, USN\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. Reported this date at 1650 for duty.\n\n2. No public quarters available for the use of yourself and your dependents.\n\n3. Excess delay of one (1) day in reporting is officially excused as authorized absence which will be charged to the officer's leave record.\n\nJ. S. BIERER\nBy direction\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nNT4-28/11\nP16-3/00\n5 February 1952\n\nFIFTH ENDORSEMENT ON BUPERS DISP 211747Z of 22 NOV 1951\n\nI departed Washington, D. C. at 1745 on 2-3-52.\nI arrived at NSC Oakland on 2-5-52 at 1850.\nTravel in connection with these orders performed via commercial air and was not at my own expense.\n\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\nCHPHOT USN\n\nPlaced File-Pers B115J"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aer-PE-31\nOO/NEWHOUSE, D.C.\n\n27 December 1951\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT ON BUPERS DISP 211747Z of 22 NOV 1951\n\nFrom: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311, USN\n\nSubj: Change of Duty.\n\n1. Reported 27 December at 0745 for temporary duty for a period of about two (2) weeks.\n\nS. C. WALLS\nBy direction\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nAer-PE-31\nOO/NEWHOUSE, D.C.\n\n2 February 1952\n\nTHIRD ENDORSEMENT ON BUPERS DISP 211747Z of 22 NOV 1951\n\nFrom: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311, USN\n\nSubj: Change of duty.\n\n1. Detached this date.\n\n2. No public quarters were available and none were assigned you; it was therefore necessary for you to procure quarters at your own expense.\n\nJ. D. BEDFORD\nBy direction\n\nCERTIFIED A TRUE COPY\n\n/s/ D. C. Newhouse"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COMMANDER FLEET ACTIVITIES\nNAVY NO 3923\nFPO, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\n\nCFA3923/p16-4/00\n10/rs\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\n\nFrom: Commander Fleet Activities Yokosuka\n\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert G. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311, USN\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. Reported for transportation on 29 November 1951.\n\n2. Travel via government transportation authorized; Class THREE PRIORITY certified.\n\n3. 65 pounds air baggage authorized; ---------- excess air baggage as air cargo under the same priority as for yourself.\n\n4. I certify that government quarters were available on the following dates: 29 Nov 1951 To 4 Dec 1951 and that government meals were available on the following dates for the number of meals indicated: none.\n\n5. Detached this date. Carry out basic orders.\n\n/s/ M Romano\nM.Romano\nby direction\n\nCertified to be a true copy:\n\n/s/ D. C. Newhouse"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COMMANDER FLEET ACTIVITIES\nNAVY NO. 3923\nFPO, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\n\nCFA3923/10:do\nP16-4/00\n\n29 NOV 1951\n\nFrom: Commander Fleet Activities, Yokosuka\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\nRef: (a) BuPers Pers B115J disp 211747Z of 22 NOV 51\n\n1. Reference (a) is quoted below and is certified to be a true copy of the original dispatch:\n\n\"CHPHOT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/8311 ORDCAN 1 NOV and MOG 151331Z NOV X DIRDET ABOUT 1 DEC PROCS APPREP BUAER NAVDEPT WASHDC TEM ABOUT TWO WEEKS X COMPTEMDIRDET PROREP NSC OAK DUTY X DELREP FIFTEEN DAYS WASHDC X GOVTRANSDIROUT GOVAIRPRITHREE X TRAVCHAR 1721453.18 MPN EXACCT 74110 OC 029 X QUAL 124555 161270 148200\"\n\n2. Reference (a) is transcribed below for your information and compliance:\n\nCHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311, orders of 1 November and BuPers disp 151331Z of November 1951 are hereby cancelled. When directed by Commander Fleet Activities, Yokosuka, on or about 1 December 1951, detached from duty as Assistant Aviation Supply Officer and from such other duty as may have been assigned; proceed to the United States and upon arrival further proceed and report to the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington, D.C. for temporary duty for a period of about two (2) weeks. Upon completion of temporary duty and when directed by proper authority, detached; proceed and report to the Commanding Officer, Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California for duty. Authorized to delay fifteen (15) days in reporting Washington, D.C. provided no excess leave involved, such delay to count as leave. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new commanding officer advised of your leave address. Government transportation is directed outside the United States. For travel via government aircraft, class THREE priority is certified. Travel chargeable to Appropriation 1721453.18 MPN: Expenditure Account 74110; Object Class 029. Qualified: 124555, 161270, 148200.\n\n3. Immediately upon reporting for duty in compliance with these orders, or any modification thereto, you are hereby directed to forward to the Chief of Naval Personnel, via your new commanding officer, a copy of these orders with all endorsements thereto, including the final reporting endorsement.\n\n4. In accordance with ALNAV 41-50 you are authorized to receive three (3) months advance pay.\n\n5. Delivered and detached.\n\nJ.P. THEW\nChief of Staff\n\nCopy to:\nCO, NSC, Oakland\n\nOrders received for compliance at (Time) ______ (Date) 29 NOV 1951\n\nD.C. NEWHOUSE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DRAFTED BY\nPERS-B115j-DMR-1\nRELEASED BY\nCAPT V A MOFFETT\nFILE NR.\n177283/8311\nCODE/SECT. NR.\nROOM\nDATE\n15 NOV 1951\nEXT. NR.\n42804\n0955\n\nPlease leave this space clear\n\nFROM: BUPERS WASHDC\nTO: COMFLEACT JAPAN\n\nINFO: NSC OAK\nASD NSC OAK\nCOMNAVBASE SFRAN (MAIL)\n\n15 1331 (date/time) (GCT)\n\nPRECEDENCE\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nDEFERRED\nXXXXNIGHT LETTER\n\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nWILL BE CLASSIFIED\nPLAIN\n\nC-2\n\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted with Deferred Precedence\n\nTEXT:\nCHPHOTO DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/8311 ORDMOD 1 NOV X REPT NSC OAK DUTY INSTEAD OF REPT\n\nASD NSC OAK DUTY X PROVMAIN\n\nCC:\nCOMFLEACT JAPAN (CONFIRMATION COPY)\nOP 54\n\nJACKET COPY\nPERS B115s\nE111a\nB11183\nB115j(2) AUTHENTICATED BY: 33666\n\nOPNAV 19-7 (4-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NO QUAL\n\nRANK CHPHOT NAME (First) Delbert (Middle Initial) C. NEWHOUSE (Last) FILE NO./DESIGNATOR 177283/8311\nUSNR USN\nAT ComFltActs JAPAN DATE 11-14-51 ORIGINATING PERS B115J\nTYPE OF ORDERS (Give Date) DATE OUT BY 15 CONTROL NUMBER 033666\nFIRST ORDERS / CHANGE OF DUTY / APPROVAL OF ACTION / COTA\nORDCAN ORDCOR UNDELIVERED\nUNORDCAN CONPRESDU Issued By BUPERS\nORDMOD CONTREAT Letter dated 1 NOV 51\nFURORDMOD REPEATED FOR COMPLIANCE Dispatch, Time Group\nLETTER AIR PLAIN DISPATCH NL ROUTINE PRIORITY\nDETACHED DIRDET DECOM ABOUT HERDET COMPCOURDET DETRELBY* RELDET DIRMAKETRANS UPON REPORTING OF* RELDIRDET DISTREAT RELBY* INACT\n*Insert the name of relief on line below\nFROM DUTY TEMINS DUFLY DUFLY INS STAFF TEM DUINS TEMFLY TEMFLY INS ADDU AS:\n1. TO: PRorEP PROWDELREP PROIMREP PROPORICH REPT ON\nRPT TO C.O. NAVAL SUPPLY CTR, OAKLAND CAL FOR DUTY INSTEAD RPT TO OINC, AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT, NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, OAKLAND CAL X/ROUMAIN\nDELREP\n2. TO: DIRDET COMPTEM-DIRDET PROREP\nREF: NSC SPDLTR DTD 7 NOV\nDELREP\nSPECIAL CLAUSES: GOVTRANSDIROUT GOVAIRPRI BAGAIR CARBAGAIR PERDIEMAUTH CONASAERO HERDUFLY HERDESNAVAV HERDUFLYDORSE CEPVOL RETAPPLIM SERVCOMPTERN SUPCORGREESERVE GREESERVETWELVE AUTHTRAVNOPENSE IMMUNQUIRED PASSQUIRED OTHER\nCHARGE TO APPN: MPN OTHER (Specify)\n\"CC\" AND INFO ADDRESSEES\nCNO(op-54) CO NSC Oak OINC, ASD, NSC, Oak Com Nav Base SFran\nDETAIL OFFICER\nEXTENSION 42804\nOFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM NAVPERS-1152 (REV. 5-50)\nT & P: QUAL:"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL SPEEDLETTER\n12ND GEN-1006 (REV. 1-49)\nUSE FOR URGENT LETTERS ONLY\nDO NOT CLEAR THROUGH COMMUNICATION OFFICE\n(One box must be checked) REGULAR MAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY AIR MAIL REGISTERED MAIL\nCLASSIFICATION NONCLASSIFIED\nIN REPLY REFER TO: NT4-28/011 P16-4/00\nDATE 7 NOV 1951\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel ATTN: Pers-B115j Navy Department Washington 25, D.C.\nNAVAL SPEEDLETTER— Permits dispatch or informal language. May be sent (1) with enclosures, (2) in a window envelope (size 8 5/8 x 3 5/8), if contents are not classified as confidential or higher, (3) to both naval and nonnaval activites. Is packaged 500 sheets of white or of one color: yellow, pink, or green.\n(Fold)\nREFUR BUPERS ORDERS 30691 OF 1 NOVEMBER 1951 TO CHPHOT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE USN X REQUEST MODIFICATION TO READ QUOTE REPORT TO COMMANDING OFFICER NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER OAKLAND CALIFORNIA FOR DUTY UNQUOTE VICE QUOTE REPORT TO OFFICER IN CHARGE AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER FOR DUTY UNQUOTE X\nJ. H. LILLIS LCDR SC USN Administrative Officer\nCOPY TO\nADDRESS: Commanding Officer Naval Supply Center Oakland 4, California\nSENDER'S MAILING ADDRESS\nCLASSIFICATION NONCLASSIFIED\nMINS STANDARD"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"From: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN Fleet Activities Yokosuka, Japan\nVia: Commander, Fleet Activities\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n177283/8311 Pers-B115J-AMB-1 1 November 1951\n\n1. When directed by the Commander, Fleet Activities, on or about 1 December 1951, you will regard yourself detached from duty with the Fleet Activities, Yokosuka, Japan, and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; will proceed to a port in the United States and upon arrival further proceed to Oakland, Calif., and report to the Officer in Charge, Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, for duty.\n\n2. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of fifteen days (provided no excess leave involved) in reporting in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave.\n\n3. Keep your old and new station advised of your address.\n\n4. Travel via government transportation is directed outside the United States. Class TWO priority is certified for travel via government aircraft.\n\n5. Cost of travel is chargeable to 1721453.18, MPN, expenditure account 74110, object class 029.\n\nCopy to: OP 54 OP 553 ComNavFE ComTwelve CO,NSC,Oak ComServPac (3) ComNavBase,SFran OIC,ASD,NSC, Oak\n\nUpon reporting, forward to BuPers a copy of these orders (Staff Corps officers an additional copy to cognizant Bureau) via new Commanding Officer with all endorsements.\n\nL. T. DuBOSE\n\nJacket copy Pers B115s E115a B11183 B115J\n\"QUAL\" 124555 161270 148200\n\n30691"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM OPNAV FORM-135-1 (REV. 4-51)\nTO: BU PERS (Att. Pers: B115)\n1. It is requested that the below named person be issued orders as indicated:\n29 OCT 1951\nRANK CHPHOT NAME Delbert C. NEWHOUSE CORPS USN USNR FILE NO. & DESIGNATOR OR CLASS 177283/8311\nAT Commander Fleet Activities Navy No. 3923 Yokosuka, Japan c/o F.P.O., San Francisco, California\nDATE 11-7 CONTROL NUMBER 030691 ORIGINATING PERS B115J\nTYPE OF ORDERS: CHANGE OF DUTY\nDETACHED DIRDET 1 December 1951\nFROM DUTY\n1. TO: PRorEP\nOfficer in Charge, Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California\nRef: Op-553 ltr ser 130-51 dtd 22 Oct 1951.\nDELREP 15 days\nSPECIAL CLAUSES\nCC AND INFO ADDRESSEES: OInC, ASD, Oakland; ComNavFE; Com12; CNO (Op-553); CNO (Op-54); ComNavBase, San Fran; CO, Naval Supply Center, Oakland\nT&P: QUAL: 124555 161270 148200\nP. K. BLESH By direction\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1951; 944277"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF COMMANDANT TWELFTH NAVAL DISTRICT SAN FRANCISCO, 2, CALIFORNIA\n12th. ND 60t Hs NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. Lt. USN 177283\n2nd Endorsement\nFrom: The Commandant, Twelfth Naval District.\nTo: Lt. Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nSubj: Change of duty.\n1. Reported 1 Sept. 1946 for transportation.\n2. Detached this date. You will proceed in accordance with paragraph 3 and upon arrival at destination will report for duty as directed in basic orders.\n3. Via government air transportation. Priority No. 3\n4. The Disbursing Officer, Headquarters 12th. Naval District is authorized and directed to furnish you the necessary commercial air transportation from San Francisco, California to Honolulu, T. H., via Pan-American Airways. Excess baggage in amount pounds is authorized. Priority No. certified by Naval Air Priorities Office (NATS)\n5. Vacated public quarters in BOQ this date.\nJ. G. ANDREWS By direction of the Commandant\nCopy to: BuPers.\nNAV 12 FORM 526"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-49)\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS\nPRINTED BELOW\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nDATE: 19 June 1950\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nL.W. PARRISH, CDR., USN\nU.S. Naval Photographic Center,\nNAS,Anacostia,D.C.\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle)\nGRADE AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\nPHOT USN\n177283\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 4\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 25\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nUNDER ORDERS OF\nC-2\nDATED\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\n(Signature of commanding officer)\nBy direction\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5409(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COMMANDER FLEET ACTIVITIES\nNAVY NO. 3923\nFPO SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\n11 May 1951\nFrom: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: Commander Fleet Activities, Yokosuka\nSubj: Change of duty orders; forwarding copy of\nRef: (a) BuPers C/L 131-50\nEncl: (1) NAS Barber's Point ord of 27 Apr 51 with end thereto\n1. In accordance with reference (a), enclosure (1) is forwarded herewith.\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\nCOMMANDER FLEET ACTIVITIES\nNAVY NO. 3923\nFPO SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\nIn reply refer to: CFA3923/10/mo P16-4/00\nMAY 11 1951\n2809\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\nFrom: Commander Fleet Activities, Yokosuka\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\n1. Forwarded.\nM. ROMANO\nBy direction\nCopy to:\nOfficer's Qualification Record Jacket\nC-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COMMANDER FLEET ACTIVITIES, JAPAN-KOREA\nNAVY NO. 3923\nF.P.O. SAN FRANCISCO,CALIF\nCFA3923/10/1o\nP16-4/00\n10 May 1951\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on CO NAS Barber's Point ord of 27 Apr 1951\nFrom: Commander Fleet Activities, Japan-Korea\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nSubj: Change of duty\n1. Reported this date for duty.\n2. You will report immediately to Commander Fleet Activities, Yokosuka for duty.\nW. B. PORTER\nBy direction\nCOMMANDER FLEET ACTIVITIES\nNAVY NO. 3923\nF.P.O. SAN FRANCISCO,CALIF\nCFA3923/10/1o\nP16-4/00\n10 May 1951\nTHIRD ENDORSEMENT\nFrom: Commander Fleet Activities, Yokosuka\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n1. Reported for duty this date.\nW. B. PORTER\nBy direction\nCopy to:\nBuPers\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVY NO.70/P16-4\n7 MAY 1951\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on CO NAS Barber's Point ord of 27 APR 1951\nFrom: Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Air Station, Barber's Point\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nSubj: Change of duty\n1. Detached this date. Report immediately to the Commandant, FOURTEENTH Naval District, for transportation.\nW. T. RASSIEUR\nJ. M. ST. ONGE\nBy direction\nCopy to:\nCOMFLEACT JAPAN-KOREAN\nCOMFAIR JAP\nCOMNAVFE\nCOMNAB FOURTEEN\nCOMFOURTEEN\nCOMSERVPAC\nReceived these orders for execution at ____ on 7 MAY 1951.\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\nMAY 7 - 1951\nEnd.\nOF THE COMMANDANT\nNAVAL DISTRICT, PEARL HARBOR, T.H.\nthis date. Report immediately to Passenger Booking Office, MATS terminal, Hickam Air Force Base for air transportation. Priority designator.\nR. D. HIGGINS\nBy direction\n2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVY NO.70/P16-4\n27 APR 1951\nFrom: Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Air Station, Barber's Point\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nSubj: Change of duty\nRef: (a) BUPERS ERS B115J desp 261853Z of APR 1951\n1. Reference (a), certified original desptach, is transcribed herewith:\n\"When directed by your commanding officer, about 1 May, you will regard yourself detached from duty at the U. S. Naval Air Station, Barber6s Point, T. H. and from such other duty as may have been assigned; will proceed to a port in which Commander, Fleet Air Activity, Japan-Korean may be and upon arrival report for duty at the Photographic Technical Office, Aviation Supply Branch, Yokosuka.\n\"Travel via government transportation is directed outside the United States. Class TWO priority is certified for travel via government aircraft.\n\"Cost of this travel is chargeable to subhead 18, MPN current on date of detachment (1711453 for 1951 - 1721453 for 1952), expenditure account 74110, object class 029.\n\"Qualified 124554, 161270, 148200.\"\n2. Immediately upon reporting for duty in compliance with these orders, or any modifications thereto, you are directed to forward to the Chief of Naval Personnel via your new commanding officer, a copy of these orders complete with all endorsements thereto, including the final reporting endorsement (staff corps officers an additional copy to cognizant Bureau).\n3. Delivered this date.\nW. T. RASSIEUR\nJ. M. ST.ONGE\nBy direction\nCopy to:\nCOMFIE ACT JAPAN-KOREAN\nCOMFAIR JAP\nCOMNAVFE\nCOMNAB FOURTEEN\nCOMFOURTEEN\nCOMSERVPAC"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DRAFTED BY\nPERS-B115j-MLJ-1\nRELEASED BY\nCAPT E A HANNEGAN\nFILE NR.\n177283/8311\nCODE/SECT. NR.\nROOM\nEXT. NR.\n42804\nDATE\n26 APR 1951 1540\nPlease leave this space clear\nFROM: BUPERS WASHDC\nTO: NAS BARBERS POINT TH\nINFO: COMFLEACT JAPAN-KOREA\nCOMFAIRJAPAN\nCOMNAVFE\nCOMNAB FOURTEENTHNAVDIST\nCOMFOURTEEN\nCOMSERVPAC (MAIL) (3)\nPRECEDENCE\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nDEFERRED\nNIGHT LETTER\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nWILL BE CLASSIFIED\nPLAIN\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted with Deferred Precedence\nTEXT:\nCHPHOT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/8311 DIRDET ABOUT 1 MAY PROPORICH COMFLEACT JAPAN-KOREA ARREP DUTY PHOTCTECHOFF. AVSUPBRANCH YOKOSUKA. X GOVTRANSDIROUT GOVAIRPRITWO X TRAVCHAR SUBHEAD 18 MPN CURRENT ON DATE DETACHMENT PAREN 1711453 FOR 1951 X 1721453 FOR 1952 PAREN EXACCT 74110 OBJECT CLASS 029 X QUAL 124554 X 161270 X 148200\nCC:\nNAS BARBERS POINT TH\n(CONFIRMATION COPY)\nOP 54\nOP 553\nAUTHENTICATED BY:\nJACKET COPY\nPERS B111s\nE111a\nB11183\nB115g (2)\n32431\nOPNAV 19-7 (4-49)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Op-54104(e)/mh\nOFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM\nTO: BU PERS (Att. Pers: B115)\nOPNAV-54-109 REV. 4-50\n25 APR 1951\n1. It is requested that the below named person be issued orders as indicated:\nRANK CHPHOT\nNAME (First) Delbert (Middle Initial) C. (Last) NEWHOUSE\nCORPS USN USNR\nFILE NO. & DESIGNATOR OR CLASS 177283/8311\nAT Naval Air Station Barbers Point, T.H. c/o Fleet Post Office, San Francisco, Calif.\nDATE 4-25-51\nORIGINATING PERS B115g\nTYPE OF ORDERS\nDATE OUT BY 4-26\nCONTROL NUMBER 032431\nFIRST ORDERS\nCHANGE OF DUTY\nAPPROVAL OF ACTION\nCOTA\nORDCAN ORDCOR UNDELIVERED\nUNORDCAN CONPRESDU Issued By\nORDMOD CONTREAT Letter dated\nFURORDMOD REPEATED FOR COMPLIANCE Dispatch, Time Group\nDETACHED DIRDET DECOM About 1 May 1951\nHERDET COMPCOURDET DETRELBY\nRELDET DIRMAKETRANS UPON REPORTING OF\nRELDIRDET DISTREAT RELBY\nINACT\nFROM LETTER: AIR PLAIN\nFROM DUTY TEMINS DUFLY INS\nTEM DUFLY TEMFLY INS\nDUINS TEMFLY STAFF\nAS:\n1. TO: PROREP PROWDELREP PROIMREP PROPORICH REPT ON\nCommander Fleet Activities Yokosuka, Japan-KOREA NAVY NO 9923 c/o Fleet Post Office, San Francisco, Calif.\nFOR DUTY TEMINS DUFLY INS TEM DUFLY TEMFLY INS DUINS TEMFLY STAFF TEMSEP RAD DUREL\nAS: Photo Technical Officer, Aviation Supply Branch, Yokosuka, Japan\nDELREP\n2. TO: DIRDET COMPTEM-DIRDET PROREP\nREF; Op-553 Memo serial 43-51 of 4/24/51\nDELREP GOVTRANSDIROUT\nSPECIAL CLAUSES: PERDIEMAUTH CARBAGAIR HERDESNAVAV SUPCORGREESERV PASSQUIRED GOVAIRDIRVAIL CONASAERO CEPVOL GREESERVTWELVE CHARGEPSANDTR GOVAIRAUTHVAIL HERDUFLY RETAPPLIM AUTHTRAVNOPENSE CHARGENAVRES BAGAIR HERDUFLYDORSE SERVCOMPTERN IMMUNQUIRED OTHER\n\"CC\" AND INFO ADDRESSEES\nCNO (Op-54); (Op-553)\nComAirPac\nComFAIR Japan\nComNAB FOURTEEN - ComServPac (3)\nCom14\nT&P:\nQUAL: 124554 161270 148200\nDETAIL OFFICER\nEXTENSION 42804\nP.K. BLESH By direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NA70/P16-4/00\n11a:1e\n13 DEC 1950\nFIFTH ENDORSEMENT on BUPERS ord 21865 of 4 OCT 1950\nFrom: Commanding Officer, U.S. Naval Air Station, Barber's Point\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN 177283\nSubj: Change of duty\n1. Reported for duty.\nW. T. RASSIEUR\nJ. M. ST.ONGE\nBy direction\nCopy to:\nBUPERS\nNAVOP (OP-54)\nCNART\nCOMSERVPAC\nCOMFOURTEEN\nCOMPRNC\nCOMNABFOURTEEN\n6"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In Reply Address Commandant Twelfth Naval District And Refer to\nND12/11J/5\nOFFICE OF COMMANDANT TWELFTH NAVAL DISTRICT Federal Office Building SAN FRANCISCO 2, CALIFORNIA\nDEC 8 1950\nEndorsement\nFrom: Commandant, Twelfth Naval District\nTo: [REDACTED]\nSubj: [REDACTED]\n1. Detached this date. You will proceed via transportation furnished you and upon arrival at destination will report for duty as directed in basic orders.\n2. Vacated public quarters in BOQ this date.\nA. E. JACOBSON\nBy direction\nCopy to File\nMSTS PAC USNS SGT CHARLES E. MOWER DEC 13 1950\nCh.Phot Newhouse\nfurnished subs at govt expense while traveling from SAN FRANCISCO to HONOLULU, T.H. during the period 12/8 thru 12/13\nAmount (due) (charged & collected) for subs furnished $ 7.50\n/s/ Dave Hendrickson\nNAVY-DPPO12ND-TI-8931\n12ND 2720"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. NAVAL STATION Treasure Island San Francisco, California\nDate NOV 27 1950\nEND on Orders of\nFrom: Commanding Officer, U.S.Naval Station, Treasure Island\nTo:\n1. Reported. You are assigned Room No. BOQ, U.S. Naval Station, Treasure Island, until.\n2. Special authority must be obtained from the Executuive Officer, Naval Station, to occupy rooms or use facilities of the Commissioned Officers' Mess (Closed) beyond the date indicated above.\n/s/ J. A. E. O'HANDLEY\nJ. A. E. O'HANDLEY"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTED: 6 November 1950 Washington, D.C.\nARRIVED: San Francisco 26 November 1950\nThe above travel was performed via privately owned automobile\nI certify; travel from Washington, D. C. to San Francisco, Calif. was necessary in the execution of these orders.\n/s/ D. C. Newhouse"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC CENTER\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nNPC31/P16-3/00/LWP:rts ANACOSTIA, D. C.\n9 October 1950\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on BuPers ords ser 21865 dated 4 October 1950\nFrom: Commanding Officer\nTo : CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n1. Delivered.\nL. W. PARRISH\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT U. S. NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC CENTER\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nANACOSTIA, D. C.\n31 OCT 1950\nFrom: Commanding Officer\nTo : CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n1. Detached this date.\n2. There were no public quarters available for assignment to you and therefor it was necessary for you to procure quarters at your own expense.\nL. W. PARRISH\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY\nNOV 26 1950\nDISTRICT STAFF HEADQUARTERS\nTWELFTH NAVAL DISTRICT\nSAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\nThird End.\nReported this date for transportation.\nYou are hereby directed to report to\nCO, Naval Station, Treasure Island,\nfor assignment of quarters in ECQ.\nA. T. JACKSON\nBy direction of the Comdt."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/8311\nPers-B115j-rgw-1\n4 October 1950\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nNaval Photographic Center\nNaval Air Station\nAnacostia, Washington, D.C.\nVia: Commanding Officer\nSubj: Change of duty\n1. When directed by your commanding officer in October 1950, you will regard yourself detached from duty at the Naval Photographic Center, Naval Air Station, Anacostia, Washington, D.C., and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; will proceed to San Francisco, Calif., and report to the Commandant, Twelfth Naval District, for transportation to Barbers Point, T.H., and upon arrival report to the Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station, for duty.\n2. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of ten days (provided no excess leave involved) in reporting at San Francisco, Calif., in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel advised of your address.\n3. Travel via government transportation is directed outside the United States. Class TWO priority is certified for travel via government aircraft.\n4. Cost of travel is chargeable to 1711453.18, MPN 1951, expenditure account 74110, object class 029.\nCopy to:\nCNART\nOP 54\nComPRNC\nComTwelve\nComFourteen\nComServPac (3)\nCO NAS,BarbersPt,TH\nComNAB,FourteenthNavDist\nJacket copy \"QUAL\"\nPers B11ls 124559\nB11183 161270\nE111a 148200\nB115j\nUpon reporting, travel to DrPers a copy of these orders, (Chief Corps Officers an additional copy to cognizant Bureau) via new Commanding Officer with all endorsements.\nJ. W. ROPER\n21865"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"vges\n177283/8311\nPers-B115j-rgw-1\n4 October 1950\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nNaval Photographic Center\nNaval Air Station\nAnacostia, Washington, D.C.\nVia: Commanding Officer\nSubj: Change of duty\n1. When directed by your commanding officer in October 1950, you will regard yourself detached from duty at the Naval Photographic Center, Naval Air Station, Anacostia, Washington, D.C., and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; will proceed to San Francisco, Calif., and report to the Commandant, Twelfth Naval District, for transportation to Barbers Point, T.H., and upon arrival report to the Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station, for duty.\n2. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of ten days (provided no excess leave involved) in reporting at San Francisco, Calif., in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel advised of your address.\n3. Travel via government transportation is directed outside the United States. Class TWO priority is certified for travel via government aircraft.\n4. Cost of travel is chargeable to 1711453.18, MPN 1951, expenditure account 74110, object class 029.\nCopy to:\nCNART\nOP 54\nComPRNC\nComTwelve\nComFourteen\nComServPac (3)\nCO NAS,BarbersPt,TH\nComNAB,FourteenthNavDist\nJacket copy \"QUAL\"\nPers B11ls 124559\nB11183 161270\nE111a 148200\nB115j\nUpon reporting, travel to DrPers a copy of these orders, (Chief Corps Officers an additional copy to cognizant Bureau) via new Commanding Officer with all endorsements.\nJ. W. ROPER\n21865"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Op-541C5/Hm\nOFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM\nTO: BU PERS (Att. Pers: B115)\nOPNAV-54-109 REV. 4-50\n1. It is requested that the below named person be issued orders as indicated:\nRANK CPHOT NAME Delbert C. NEWHOUSE FILE NO. 177283/8311\nAT Naval Photographic Center, Naval Air Station, Anacostia, Washington, D.C.\nDATE 9-29 ORIGINATING PERS B11-7\nDATE OUT BY 10-6 CONTROL NUMBER 021865\nCHANGE OF DUTY; PLAIN; DIRDET in October.\nTO: PROREP Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station, Barbers Point, T.H.\nDELREP 10 days to COM-12 for transportation.\n2. TO: Op-553 Ser: 3-50 of 26 Sept.50 Refers.\nDELREP No Trans Out Si.\nCC AND INFO ADDRESSES Op-54 CNART COM-12 CO NAS Barbers Pt. ComPac\nP. K. BLESH By direction\nEXTENSION 42803\nT&P:\nQUAL: 124559 161270 148200"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/8311\nPers-B1118-mag-2\n11 September 1950\n\nFrom:\tChief of Naval Personnel\nTo:\tCHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\tU. S. Naval Photographic Center\n\tNaval Air Station\n\tAnacostia, Washington, D. C.\nVia:\tCommanding Officer\n\nSubj:\tTemporary additional duty\n\n1. On or about 11 September 1950, you will report to the Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington, D. C. for temporary duty in connection with photographic matters.\n\n2. This is in addition to your present duties and upon the completion thereof you will resume your regular duties.\n\n\nCopy to:\nBuAer\n\nJacket Copy\nPers-B111s\n\tB1111g\n\tB1118\n\nJ. W. ROPER\n\nT-2626"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TO: Chief of Naval Personnel (TAD Unit)\nNPC-#10-51\nDATE 8 Sept 1950\nRANK CHPHOT NAME (First) Delbert (Middle Initial) C. (Last) NEWHOUSE CORPS USNR USN FILE NO./DESIGNATOR 177283/8311\nAT (where orders are to be addressed)\nU.S. Naval Photographic Center, NAS, Anacostia, D.C.\nPROBOUT 11 Sept 1950 PROTIMEREP DIRPRO AUTHPROBOUT\nIs officer on TEMDUTY? YES NO *If YES, reference orders\nOn per diem basis? YES NO\nITINERARY\nChief of Bureau of Aeronautics - report\nWashington 25, D.C.\nCompletion resume regular duties\nTHIS SPACE FOR BUPERS USE OUT BY DATE 9/11 CONTROL NO. C02626\nLETTER: AIR PLAIN; DISPATCH: NIGHT ROUTINE PRIORITY\nSPECIAL CLAUSES: PERDIEMAUTH, DELURN, DELREP, DELREPANY, REPERDIS, NOCOST, IMMUNQUIRED, OTHER (specify)\nADDPLA (If requested, state reason in REMARKS)\nREASON FOR TRAVEL: TEMADDCON x, TEMADD, TEMADDINS, TEMADDFLYCON, TEMADDFLYINS, TEMADDFLY\nGive reason: In connection with photographic matters\nMITREVAR MITRE MITVAR REVAR OMIT VARY REVISIT\nMODE OF TRAVEL: GOVAIRDIRVAIL, GOVMER AIRAUTH, BAG AIR, MERAIRAUTH, GOVMER AIRDIR, CAR BAGAIR, GOVAIR AUTHVAIL, GOVEHICLE, CESSGOV QUIP, GOVAIRDIR, PRIVAUTH\nGive appropriation Name, Symbol, Exp. Acct., and Allot. No.\nTRAVCHAR: NO COST TO GOVERNMENT\nCOTA (DATE) TRAVNEC\nREMARKS NO COST TO GOVERNMENT\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION $ NO COST TO GOVERNMENT; ESTIMATED COST PER DIEM $; MISCELLANEOUS (tips, taxis) $; TOTAL $; CONTEMPLATED MODE OF TRAVEL ---; ESTIMATED PERIOD AWAY (Days) 14 days\nBUREAU OR OFFICE REQUESTING ORDERS U.S. NavPhotoCen, NAS Anacostia, D.C.; SECTION Administration; EXTENSION 225\nSIGNED (1) L.W. PARRISH, CDR, USN; SIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY; DATE ORDERS DESIRED 1300 11 September 1950\nOFFICER TEMPORARY ADDITIONAL DUTY REQUEST NAVPERS-1863 (REV. 4-50)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-49)\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nDATE: 16 Jan 1950\nFROM (Commanding officer) L.W. PARRISH, CDR., USN.\nSHIP OR STATION U.S. Naval Photographic Center, NAS, Anacostia, D.C.\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement; GRADE AND CORPS CHPHOT USN; FILE NO. 177283\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS 10\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 29\nUNDER ORDERS OF BuPers ords Pers-31B14-GVB-2 ser no. 017761 dtd. 5 Dec. 1949.\nDATED 5 December 1949\nSignature of officer who took leave; L.W. PARRISH, CDR, USN (Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5409(4).\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-49)\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nDATE: 1/3/49\nFROM (Commanding officer) Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics.\nSHIP OR STATION Bureau of Aeronautics.\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement; GRADE AND CORPS LT/USN; FILE NO. 177283\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 4\nInclusive dates: 12/20/49 - 12/23/49\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 39\nUNDER ORDERS OF Commanding Officer\nDATED 13 December 1949\nSignature of officer who took leave; (Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5409(4).\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\nPers-31B14-GVB-2\n5 December 1949.\n\nFrom:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo:\tLT Delbert E. NEWHOUSE, USN,\n\tBureau of Aeronautics,\n\tNavy Department.\n\nVia:\tThe Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics.\n\nSubject:\tChange of duty.\n\n1. When directed by your commanding officer, on or after 31 December 1949, upon the termination of your temporary appointment by the Secretary of the Navy on 31 December 1949, you will regard yourself detached from duty in the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; will report to the Commanding Officer, Naval Photographic Center, Naval Air Station, Anacostia, Washington, D.C., for duty.\n\n2. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of ten days (provided no excess leave involved) in reporting in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave.\n\n3. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new station advised of your address.\n\nEncl: (HW)\nA. Termination of temporary appointment.\n\nCC:\nCNO (OP-54).\nCO., NavPhotographicCen.,\nNAS, Wash., D. C.\nComPRNC.\n\nJ. W. ROPER\n\n017761\n\nJacket copy\nPers-311s\n311s4\n3118-F\n82212\n31B14\n321\n311G\n\n\"QUAL\"\n124556\n161270\n148200\n\nUpon reporting, forward to BuPers a copy of these orders, (Staff Corps Officers an additional copy to complaint Bureau) via new Command-ing Officer with all endorsements."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Op-54105/wjl\nOFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM\nOPNAV-54-109 REV. 8-48\nTO: BU PERS (Att. Pers: 3116)\n1. It is requested that the below named person be issued orders as indicated:\n25 NOV 1949\nFILE NO. — DESIGNATOR\nNAME (last) (first) (middle-initial)\nRANK\nU.S.N.\nU.S.N.R.\n177 283/8311 3 50\nNEWHOUSE\nDelbert\nE.\nLtPhoto\nFIRST ORDERS\nCHANGE OF DUTY\nAPPROVAL OF ACTION\nCONFIRMING\nORDERS OF\nUNEXECUTED PORTION ORDERS OF\nSTUDENT AVIATOR CLAUSE\nPLAIN\nAIR\nLETTER\nDISPATCH (TIME GROUP)\nFLYING CLAUSE\nCANCELED\nMODIFIED\nCORRECTED\nREPEATED FOR COMPLIANCE\nTECHNICAL OBSERVER\nDETACHED\nHEREBY\nWHEN RELIEVED\nFROM TEM-FLY DUTY TEM-FLY-INS DUFLY INS DUINS STAFF DUFLY\nNIGHT\nROUTINE\nPRIOR\nRESTR.\nCONF.\nWHEN DIRECTED\nON OR ABOUT\nAS:\n31 December\nUPON REPORTING OF\nAT\nBureau of Aeronautics, Washington, D.C.\nPROCEED\nPROREP\nPROWDELREP\nPROIMREP\nDELREP 10 days\nFOR TEM-FLY DUTY STAFF DUFLY\nTRANS:\nTO\nCommanding Officer, Naval Photographic Center, NAS, Anacostia, D.C.\nDIRDET COMP DIRDET\nAS:\nPRm. PROREP DELREP\nTRANS:\n2. TO\nDIRDET COMP DIRDET\nAS:\nPRm PROREP DELREP\nTRANS:\n3. TO\n017761\nAS:\nPER DIEM\nREMARKS:\nnote: attach enclosed letter to orders\nCopy to: BuAer\nJ. H. ARMSTRONG BY DIRECTION\nINFORMATION ADDRESSEE(S)\nMAIL DISP.\nPers 32150\nDATE 11-28 PERS. NO. 31814 DETAIL OFFICER EXT. DATE OUT BY\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1948-802668"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18 81\n177283/1350\nPers-3118-DJK-2\n6 October 1949\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, Office of the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nVia: The Bureau Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nSubject: Cancellation of orders.\nReference: (a) BuPers dispatch orders 301347 of September 1949.\n1. Reference (a) is hereby cancelled.\nCC: BuAer\nJ. W. ROPER\nJacket Copy Pers-311s 31B11 3118 3118-F\nT-4646\nCO/NEWHOUSE,D.C. 12/177283/1350(Ulm:rm) Serials: 10136\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\n11 October 1949\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\nFrom: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, USN.\nVia: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington, D.C.\n1. Forwarded.\nD. J. JOHNSON By direction\nCC: BuPers (Pers-3118)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BUREAU OF AERONAUTICS GENERAL REPRESENTATIVE, USN, CENTRAL DISTRICT\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton,Ohio.\nREFER TO INITIALS AND NO. OO/NEWHOUSE,D.C. LT/177283/1350 RN:rn Serial: 9593\n27 September 1949\nFrom: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN.\nSubj: Change of duty.\nRef: (a) BuPers (Pers 31B14) dispatch 261713Z of September 1949.\n1. Reference (a) is transcribed and quoted herewith for compliance:\n\"Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, 177283/1350, USN, when directed by the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, you will regard yourself detached from duty in the Office of the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; proceed to Washington, D.C., and report to the Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington, D. C. for duty. You are hereby authorized to delay 15 days, provided no excess leave involved, in reporting in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new station advised of your address. Qualifications: 161270; 124500.\"\n2. Delivered.\nT. J. RAFTERY By direction of BAGR-CD\nOrders received at 1330, 27 September 1949.\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\nOO/NEWHOUSE,D.C. LT/177283/1350 RN:rn Serial: 9594\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\n29 September 1949\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\nFrom: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN.\n1. Detached this date.\nT. J. RAFTERY By direction of BAGR-CD\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY D. C. Newhouse"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECOND ENDORSEMENT on BUPERS (Pers 31B14) disp 261713Z dtd Sep 1949\nPE-11 OO/NEWHOUSE,D.C. 20 Oct 1949\nFrom: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350\nSubj: Change of duty.\n1. Reported this date for duty.\nJ. L. Bettinger By Direction\nCertified a True Copy\nD. C. Newhouse"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-49)\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nDATE: 20 Oct 1949\nFROM (Commanding officer): Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics\nSHIP OR STATION: BuAeronautics, Navy Dept. Wash. D.C.\nIn conformity with requirements of U.S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, (First) Delbert, (Middle) Clement. GRADE AND CORPS LT USN. FILE NO. 177283/1350\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME. Inclusive dates: 30 Sep 1949; 14 Oct 1949\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS 15\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 43\nUNDER ORDERS OF BUPERS DISP. 261713Z\nDATED September 1949\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5409(4).\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—52637-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BEP A61\nBEC24\nBECB 11\nBECBAM4\nRR BEPH\n\nDE BECBAM 2\nR Ø31455Z\nFM BAGR CD WPAFB DAYTON OHIO\nTO BUPERS PERS 3118\n\nGRNC\n\nYOUR 3Ø1347Z AND PERS 31B14 DISPATCH 261713Z SEP X LT D C\nNEWHOUSE/DETACHED 29 SEP X ACCORDINGLY 3Ø1347Z BEING CANCELLED\n\nCFN 3Ø1347Z 31B14 261713Z 29 3Ø1347Z\n\nØ3/15Ø3Z SEPT BECBAM\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 31182-A"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BEP A61\nBEC24\nBECB 11\nBECBAM4\nRR BEPH\n\nDE BECBAM 2\nR Ø31455Z\nFM BAGR CD WPAFB DAYTON OHIO\nTO BUPERS PERS 3118\n\nGRNC\n\nYOUR 3Ø1347Z AND PERS 31B14 DISPATCH 261713Z SEP X LT D C\nNEWHOUSE/DETACHED 29 SEP X ACCORDINGLY 3Ø1347Z BEING CANCELLED\n\nCFN 3Ø1347Z 31B14 261713Z 29 3Ø1347Z\n\nØ3/15Ø3Z SEPT BECBAM\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 31182-A"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\n\nDRAFTED BY Pers-3118-AMB-2\nRELEASED BY CDR LINDSEY WILLIAMSON\nFILE NR. 177283/1350\nROOM NR.\nEXT. NR. 7272\nDATE 30 SEPTEMBER 1949 1000\n\nPlease leave this space clear\n\nFROM: BUPERS WASHN D. C.\nTO: BAGR CENDIST WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB DAYTON OHIO\nINFO:\n\nPRECEDENCE\n[ ] PRIORITY\n[ ] ROUTINE\n[X] NIGHT\n\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED RESTRICTED\nWILL BE CLASSIFIED PLAIN\n\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted as a night message.\n\nTEXT: LT DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 ABOUT 4 OCT PROREP BUAER WASHDC TEMADD FOR CONFERENCE X COMPRET X GOVT AIRCRAFT DIRECTED WHERE AVAILABLE X CLASS TWO PRIORITY CERTIFIED X PERDIEM ACCORDANCE PAR 4153 NTI\n\nCC:\nBuAer\n\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\nPers-31B11\nPers-3118(3)\nPers-3118-F(AER)\n\nT-4394\n\nOPNAV-19-7 (4-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 8-48)\n\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nDATE 29 Sept 1949\n\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\nBUREAU OR OFFICE Bureau of Aeronautics\nNAME (Last) Newhouse, Delbert C.\nRANK AND CORPS LT, USN\nFILE NO. 177283\nDESIGNATOR OR CLASSIFICATION 1350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION BAGR, CD, Dayton, Ohio\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes [ ] No [X]\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS Wright-Patterson Air Force Base\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 4 Oct. 1949\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Naval Reserve [ ] Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel [X]\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY 3 days\n\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS: BuAer, Washington, D. C.\n\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO: Omit [ ] Vary [ ] Revisit places listed above [ ] Visit such additional places as may be necessary in connection with the duty [ ]\n\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL: To attend a photographic conference.\n\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? Government Air [X] (PRIORITY 2) Commercial Air [ ]\n\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM 19.00\nMISCELLANEOUS (TAXI, TIPS, ETC.)\nTOTAL\n\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL: Govt. air\n\nREMARKS: REQUEST DESPATCH ORDERS.\n\nREQUESTED BY Mr. Leo J. Finnerty\nSECTION Military Personnel\nROOM 3910\nEXTENSION 61115\n\nSIGNED (1)\nSIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-377043"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BUREAU OF AERONAUTICS GENERAL REPRESENTATIVE, USN\n\nREFER TO INITIALS AND NO. P16-4/00 HJB:lgp\nCENTRAL DISTRICT\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nDAYTON, OHIO\n\nSerial: 9060\n\n12 September 1949\n\nFrom: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel. (Attention: Pers-3118).\n\nSubj: BuPers Dispatch Orders - Report of unused TAD authorized by. C-2\n\nRef: (a) BuPers Dispatch Pers-3118, 081253Z of September 1949.\n\n1. Authority for Lieutenant Delbert D. NEWHOUSE, 177283/1350, USN to proceed on or about 13 September 1949, to Washington, D. C. on temporary additional duty granted by reference (a) was not used. The reason therefore was due to receipt of permanent change of duty orders to detach Lieutenant NEWHOUSE on or about 10 September 1949.\n\nH. J. JOHNSON,\nDirection.\n\ncc: BuAer PE-2.\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 31182-A"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\nDRAFTED BY\nPers-3118-AMB-2\nFILE NR.\n177283/1350\nROOM NR.\nEXT. NR.\n7272\nRELEASED BY\nCDR LINDSEY WILLIAMSON\nCODE/SECT. NR.\nDATE\n19 SEPTEMBER 1949 0945\nPlease leave this space clear\nFROM: BUPERS WASHN D. C.\n191237\n(date/time group) (GCT)\nPRECEDENCE\nTO:\nBAGR CENDIST WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB\nDAYTON OHIO\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nINFO:\nNIGHT\nC-2\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nWILL BE CLASSIFIED\nPLAIN\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted as a night message.\nTEXT:\nLT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 BUPERS DISORDCAN 081253Z\nOF SEP\nCC:\nBUAER\nT-3786\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\nPers-31B11\nPers-3118(3)\nPers-3118-F(AER)\nOPNAV-19-7 (4-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 8-48)\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nDATE 15 September 1949\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\nBUREAU OR OFFICE\nBureau of Aeronautics\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle initial)\nRANK AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\nDESIGNATOR OR CLASSIFICATION\nNewhouse, Delbert C.\nLT, USN\n177283\n1350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION (Where officer is to be addressed)\nBAGR, CD, Dayton, Ohio\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes No\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT\n13 Sept .49\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Naval Reserve, Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY (Number of days)\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS (List location first. If naval activity, to whom reporting; otherwise, exact name of organization or firm)\nCANCELLATION OF BUPERS DESPATCH ORDERS 081253Z DATED SEPTEMBER 1949 X\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO (Check as appropriate)\nOmit Vary Revisit places listed above Visit such additional places as may be necessary in connection with the duty\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL (Nature, purpose of visit)\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? (Check mode(s) of travel)\nGovernment Air (PRIORITY) Commercial Air\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM\nMISCELLANEOUS (TAXI, TIPS, ETC.)\nTOTAL\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL:\nREMARKS:\nREQUESTED BY Mr. Leo J. Finnerty\nSECTION Military Personnel\nROOM 3910\nEXTENSION 61115\nSIGNED (1)\nSIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-37704-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\nDRAFTED BY\nPERS-31B14-RS-1\nFILE NR.\n177283/1350\nROOM NR.\nEXT. NR.\n7804\nRELEASED BY\nCAPT E A HANNEGAN\nCODE/SECT NR.\nDATE\n19 SEP 1949 1530\nPlease leave this space clear\nFROM: BUPERS WASHN D. C.\n191657\n(date/time group) (GCT)\nPRECEDENCE\nTO:\nBAGR CENTRALDIST WRIGHTPATTERSON AIRFORCEBASE DAYTON OHIO\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nINFO:\nCOMNINE\nNIGHT\nC-2\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nWILL BE CLASSIFIED\nPLAIN\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted as a night message.\nTEXT:\nLT DELBERT E NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 ORDCAN DISPATCH 091229 SEP X CONPRESDU\nCC:\nCNO (OP 54)\nBUAER (2)\nBUAER (PE 5) (2)\nCNO (OP 553)\nJACKET COPY\nPERS 311s\n311s4\n82212\n3118-F\n31B14 (2)\n9591\nOPNAV-19-7 (4-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPNAV-54105/mjl\nOFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM\nOPNAV-54-109 REV. 8-48\nTO: BU PERS (Att. Pers: 3116)\n1. It is requested that the below named person be issued orders as indicated:\n16 SEP 1949\nFILE NO. — DESIGNATOR 177 283/1350\nNAME (last) NEWHOUSE (first) Delbert (middle-initial) E.\nRANK LT\nU.S.N. X\nU.S.N.R.\nFIRST ORDERS\nCHANGE OF DUTY\nAPPROVAL OF ACTION\nCONFIRMING\nORDERS OF 9 Sep\nUNEXECUTED PORTION ORDERS OF\nSTUDENT AVIATOR CLAUSE\nLETTER 8 September 1949\nDISPATCH 091229\nFLYING CLAUSE\nCANCELED\nMODIFIED\nCORRECTED\nREPEATED FOR COMPLIANCE\nTECHNICAL OBSERVER\nDETACHED HEREBY\nWHEN RELIEVED\nWHEN DIRECTED\nON OR ABOUT\nUPON REPORTING OF\nFROM TEM-FLY DUTY X TEM-FLY-INS DUFLY INS DUINS STAFF DUFLY\nAS:\nAT Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson AFB Dayton Ohio\nPROCEED PR、EP PROWDELREP PROIMREP DELREP\nTRANS: 1. TO Continue present duties.\nDIRDET COMP DIRDET\nPRO REP DELREP\nTRANS: 2. TO\nDIRDET COMP DIRDET\nPRO REP DELREP\nTRANS: 3. TO\n009591\nPER DIEM\nREMARKS: 141270 124500 148200\nJ. H. ARMSTRONG BY DIRECTION\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL 19 SEP 1949 FINISHED FILE PERS-311S2\nINFORMATION ADDRESSEE(S) CNO OPS1 Bu Aer Comp\nMAIL DISP.\nDATE 9-19 PERS. NO. 31B14 DETAIL OFFICER EXT. 7804 DATE OUT BY 9-19\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1948-802868"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\nDRAFTED BY\nPERS-31B14-MLJ-1\nFILE NR.\n177283/1350\nROOM NR.\nEXT. NR.\n7804\nRELEASED BY\nCAPT E A HANNEGAN\nCODE/SECT. NR.\nDATE\n26 SEP 1949 1440\nPlease leave this space clear\nFROM: BUPERS WASHN D. C.\n261713\n(date/time group) (GCT)\nPRECEDENCE\nTO:\nBAGR CENTRALDIST WRIGHTPATTERSONAFB DAYTON OHIO\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nINFO:\nCOMNINE\nNIGHT\nC-2\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nWILL BE CLASSIFIED\nPLAIN\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted as a night message.\nTEXT:\nLT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 DIRDET PROREP BUAER NAVDEPT WASHDC DUTY X DELREP 15 DAYS PROVIDED NO EXCESS LEAVE INVOLVED X QUAL 161270 X 124500\nCC:\nCNO (OP 54)\nBUAER (2)\nJACKET COPY\nPERS 311s\n311s4\n82212\n3118-F\n311D\n31B14\n10427\nOPNAV-19-7 (4-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM\nNAVPERS-1152 (REV. 6-45)\nFILE NO.\n177283\nNAME (PRINT)\n(last)\n(first)\n(middle initial)\nRANK\nCLASSIF.\nU.S.N.\nNEWHOUSE\nDELBERT\nC.\nLT\n1350\nU.S.N.R.\nFIRST ORDERS\nCHANGE OF DUTY\nWAIVER OF PHYS DEFECTS\nAPPROVAL OF ACTION\nCONFIRMING\nORDERS OF\nUNEXECUTED PORTION ORDERS OF\nSTUDENT AVIATOR CLAUSE\nLETTER\nDESPATCH\n(time group)\nFLYING CLAUSE\nCANCELED\nMODIFIED\nCORRECTED\nREPEATED FOR COMPLIANCE\nTECHNICAL OBSERVER\nDETACHED\nHEREBY\nWHEN RELIEVED\nWHEN DIRECTED\nON OR ABOUT\nUPON REPORTING OF\nFROM\nTemdu Duty Tem-Duins Duins Staff Dufly\nAS:\nAT BAGR, Cent Dist Dayton Ohio\nPROCEED Prorep Prowdelrep Prolmrep Report on Delrep 15th\n1. TO\nTRANS: Dirdet Comp Dirdet\nAS:\nFOR Temdu Duty Staff Dufly\nTem-duins Duins Furas by\n2. TO\nTRANS:\nProrep Delrep\nFOR Temdu Duty Staff Dufly\nTem-duins Duins Furas by\n3. TO\nTRANS:\nPER DIEM\nREMARKS\nSCHOOLS CODE\nQUALIFICATIONS CODE\nINFORMATION ADDRESSEE(S)\nMAIL MGM AMGM DESP.\nDATE 9-26\nPERS. NO. 31814\nDETAIL OFFICER\nEXT. 7804\nDATE OUT BY 9-26\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-42343-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\nPers-3118-DJK-2\n6 October 1949\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, Office of the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nVia: The Bureau Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nSubject: Cancellation of orders.\nReference: (a) BuPers dispatch orders 301347 of September 1949.\n1. Reference (a) is hereby cancelled.\nCC:\nBuAer\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\n31B11\n3118\n3118-F\nJ. W. ROPER\nT-4646"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 8-48)\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nDATE 3 Oct 1949\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\nBUREAU OR OFFICE\nBureau of Aeronautics\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle initial)\nRANK AND CORPS\nFILE NO.\nDESIGNATOR OR CLASSIFICATION\nNewhouse, Delbert C.\nLT, USN\n177283\n1350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION\nBAGR, CD, Dayton, Ohio\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes No\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Naval Reserve Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY (Number of days)\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 4 Oct 1949\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS\nCANCELLATION OF BUPERS DESPATCH ORDERS 301347 DATED SEPTEMBER 1949.\nRef(a) Bupers despatch orders 301347 of Sept 49\nRef(a) is hereby cancelled.\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO (Check as appropriate): Omit Vary Revisit places listed above Visit such additional places as may be necessary in connection with the duty\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL\n004646\ncc: Buaer\nFINISHED FILE PERS-311S2\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? Government Air (PRIORITY) Commercial Air\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM\nMISCELLANEOUS (TAXI, TIPS, ETC.)\nTOTAL\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL:\nREMARKS:\nREQUESTED BY Mr. Leo J. Finnerty\nSECTION Military Personnel\nROOM 3910\nEXTENSION 61115\nSIGNED (1)\nSIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-33704-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\nIN REPLY REFER TO\n177283/1350\nPers-3118-DJK-2\n30 June 1949\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, Office of Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nVia: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nSubject: Temporary additional duty.\n1. On or about 5 July 1949, you will proceed to the following places for temporary duty in connection with aeronautical matters:\nRochester, N.Y., Binghampton, N.Y., Baltimore, Md.\n2. You are authorized to omit or revisit any of the above mentioned places and to vary the above itinerary as may be deemed necessary.\n3. This is in addition to your present duties and upon the completion thereof you will return to Dayton, Ohio and resume your regular duties.\n4. Travel via government aircraft is directed where available. Class TWO priority is certified.\n5. You will be reimbursed on a per diem basis while absent from your station in accordance with Par. 4153, NTI.\nCC: BuAer\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\n316\n3118\n3118-F(BuAer)\nT. L. SPRAGUE\nT-11117\nFinish File Pers-3118F"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BUREAU OF AERONAUTICS GENERAL REPRESENTATIVE, USN\nCENTRAL DISTRICT\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nDAYTON, OHIO\nREFER TO INITIALS AND NO.\n00/NEWHOUSE,D.C.\nLT/177283/1350\nLGP:lgp\nSerial: 7009\n18 July 1949\nFrom: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nSubj: Temporary Additional Duty Orders - Cancellation of; Request for.\nEncl: (A) Temporary Additional Duty Orders for LT Delbert C NEWHOUSE, 177283/1350 over Pers-3118-DJK-2 dtd 30 June 1949.\n1. Enclosure (A) was not used and is returned herewith for cancellation.\nBy direction.\ncc: BuAer (PE-2)\nFinish File Pers-3118F"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 8-48)\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nDATE: 7 Sept 1949\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nBUREAU OF AERONAUTICS CENTRAL REPRESENTATIVE CENTRAL DISTRICT, WRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle) GRADE AND CORPS FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement LT/USN(T) 177283/1350\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME -02-\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) -58-\nFINISHED FILE PERS 3270\nUNDER ORDERS OF\nDATED\nBAGR-CD leave authorization.\n30 August 1949\nC-2\nC. D. BROWN, LTJG, USN\nBy direction\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\n(Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before the regular hour for forenoon quarters on board ship or for beginning work at a shore station. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article 1727, Navy Regulations).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers C/L 44-47.\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\nDRAFTED BY PERS-3118-DJK-2 FILE NR. 177283/1350 ROOM NR. EXT. NR. 7272\nRELEASED BY CDR LINDSEY WILLIAMSON CODE/SECT. NR. DATE 8 SEP 1949 1000\nPlease leave this space clear\nFROM: BUPERS WASHN D. C.\n081253 (date/time group) (GCT)\nPRECEDENCE\nTO: BAGR CENDIST WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB DAYTON OHIO\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nINFO: NIGHT\nC-2\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED RESTRICTED WILL BE CLASSIFIED PLAIN\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted as a night message.\nTEXT: LT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 ABOUT 13 SEP PROREP BUAER WASHDC TEMADD CONFERENCE X COMPRET X GOVT AIRCRAFT DIRECTED WHERE AVAILABLE X CLASS TWO PRIORITY CERTIFIED X PERDIEM ACCORDANCE PAR 4153 NTI\nCC:\nBuAer\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\n311B11\n3118 (3)\n3118F(AER)\nT-3188"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1883 (REV. 8-48)\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nDATE 6 September 1949\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\nBUREAU OR OFFICE Bureau of Aeronautics\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle initial) RANK AND CORPS FILE NO. DESIGNATOR OR CLASSIFICATION\nNew house, Delbert C. LT, USN 177283 1350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION BAGR, CD, Dayton, Ohio\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes No\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 13 September 1949\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Naval Reserve, Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY (Number of days) 5 days\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS\nBuAer, Washington, D. C.\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO (Check as appropriate): Omit, Vary, Revisit places listed above, Visit such additional places as may be necessary in connection with the duty\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL (Nature, purpose of visit)\nAttend Photographic conference.\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? (Check mode(s) of travel) Government Air (PRIORITY 2) Commercial Air\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM 33.00\nMISCELLANEOUS (TAXI, TIPS, ETC.)\nTOTAL\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL: Govt. air\nREMARKS:\nREQUESTED BY Mr. Leo J. Finnerty, Section Military Personnel, Room 3910, Extension 61115\nSIGNED (1)\nSIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-37781-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\nDRAFTED BY PERS-31B14-RRT-1 FILE NR. 177283/1350 ROOM NR. EXT NR. 71302\nRELEASED BY CAPT L A HANNIGAN CODE/SECT. NR. DATE 9 SEP 1949 0930\nPlease leave this space clear\nFROM: BUPERS WASHN D. C.\n091229 (date/time group) (GCT)\nPRECEDENCE\nTO: BAGR CENDIST WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB DAYTON OHIO\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nINFO: COMNAVE NIGHT\nC-2\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED RESTRICTED WILL BE CLASSIFIED PLAIN\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted as a night message.\nTEXT: LT DELBERT E NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 DIRDET ABOUT 10 SEP PROREP BUAER NAVDEPT WASHDC DUTY X DELREP 15 DAYS PROVIDED NO EXCESS LEAVE INVOLVED\nCC:\nCNO (Op-54).\nBUAER.\nBUAER (PE-5) (2).\nCNO (OP-553).\nJACKET COPY\nPERS-311s\n311s4\n82212\n3118-F\n31B14 (2)\n8418"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OP-54105/efb\nOFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM\nOPNAV-54-109 REV. 8-48\nTO: BU PERS (Att. Pers: 3116)\nSEP 1949\n1. It is requested that the below named person be issued orders as indicated:\nFILE NO. — DESIGNATOR 177283 1350\nNAME (last) NEWHOUSE (first) Delbert (middle-initial) E. RANK LT\nU.S.N. U.S.N.R.\nFIRST ORDERS, CHANGE OF DUTY, APPROVAL OF ACTION, CONFIRMING\nORDERS OF, UNEXECUTED PORTION ORDERS OF, STUDENT AVIATOR CLAUSE, FLYING CLAUSE, TECHNICAL OBSERVER\nLETTER, DISPATCH (TIME GROUP), CORRECTED, REPEATED FOR COMPLIANCE\nCANCELED, MODIFIED\nDETACHED HEREBY, WHEN RELIEVED, WHEN DIRECTED X, ON OR ABOUT X 10 September, UPON REPORTING OF\nFROM TEM-FLY, DUTY X, TEM-FLY-INS, DUFLY INS, DUINS, STAFF, DUFLY\nAT Bureau of Aeronautics, General Representative, Central District, Wright Field Dayton\nPROCEED PROREP X, PROWDELREP, PROIMREP, DELREP X 15 days\nTRANS: 1. TO Chief of Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department Washington D. C.\nDIRDET, COMP DIRDET\nPROREP, DELREP\nTRANS: 2. TO\nTRANS: 3. TO 008418\nFOR Tem-Fly, Duty X, Staff, Dufly\nPER DIEM\nREMARKS:\nReference: OP553 memorandum dtd 30 August 1949\nCopy to: OP553 BuAer.\nJ. H. ARMSTRONG BY DIRECTION\nINFORMATION ADDRESSEE(S) MAIL DISP.\nOp 54 OPM-9 BuAer PE 5(2)\nDATE 9-9-49 PERS. NO. 31014 DETAIL OFFICER EXT. 71302 DATE OUT BY 9-9-49\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1948-802868"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\nDRAFTED BY\nPERS-3118-DJK-2\nRELEASED BY\nCDR LINDSEY WILLIAMSON\nFILE NR.\n177283/1350\nCODE/SECT. NR.\nROOM\nEXT. NR.\n7272\nDATE\n2 SEPT 1949\n1020\nPlease leave this space clear\nFROM: BUPERS WASHN D. C.\n02/1731 (date/time group) (GCT)\nPRECEDENCE\nTO:\nBAGR CENDIST\nWRIGHT PATTERSON AFB\nDAYTON OHIO\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nINFO:\nNIGHT\nC-2\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nWILL BE CLASSIFIED\nPLAIN\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted as a night message.\nTEXT: LT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 AUTHORIZED PROCEED 6 SEPT BUAER WASHDC TEMADDCON PHOTOGRAPHIC MATTERS X COMPLETION RESUME REGULAR DUTIES X GOVT AIRCRAFT AUTHORIZED WHERE NECESSARY X CLASS THREE PRIORITY CERTIFIED X ABOVE AUTHORIZED NO EXPENSE GOVT\nCC:\nBuAer\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\n31B11\n3118 (3)\n3118F\nT-2939\nOPNAV-19-7 (4-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 8-48)\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nDATE 31 August 1949\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\nBUREAU OR OFFICE\nBureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department\nNAME (Last) Newhouse / (First) Delbert / (Middle initial) C. / RANK AND CORPS Lt., USN / FILE NO. 177283 / DESIGNATOR OR CLASSIFICATION 1100/350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION (Where officer is to be addressed)\nBAGR, Central District, Dayton, Ohio\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes [ ] No [X]\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 6 Sept. 1949\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Naval Reserve [ ] Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel [X]\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY (Number of days) 3 days\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS (List location first. If naval activity, to whom reporting; otherwise, exact name of organization or firm)\nBuer\nPhotographic Division, Navy Department, Washington D.C.\n002939\nNo cost\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO (Check as appropriate)\nOmit [ ] Vary [ ] Revisit places listed above [ ] Visit such additional places as may be necessary in connection with the duty [ ]\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL (Nature, purpose of visit)\nFamiliarization of procurement functions in the Photographic Division\nFINISHED FILE PERS 311S2\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? (Check mode(s) of travel)\nGovernment Air [X] (PRIORITY 3) Commercial Air [ ]\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL: Government Air\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION None\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM None\nMISCELLANEOUS (TAXI, TIPS, ETC.) None\nTOTAL None\nREMARKS: It is requested that the following paragraph be incorporated into the requested orders: \"The above is authorized with the understanding that you will be entitled to no expenses in connection therewith. In case you do not desire to bear this expense, you will regard this authorization as revoked.\"\nREQUESTED BY Lt. E.E. Crowder, USNR / SECTION Material Procurement Branch / ROOM 2944 / EXTENSION 4194\nSIGNED (1) Cdr. C.A. Van Dusen, USN / SIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-37704-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\nDRAFTED BY Pers-3118-MES-2\nRELEASED BY CDR LINDSEY WILLIAMSON\nFILE NR. 177283/1350\nCODE/SECT. NR.\nROOM NR.\nEXT. NR. 7272\nDATE 29 JULY 1949 1310\nPlease leave this space clear\nFROM: BUPERS WASHN D. C.\n291601 (date/time group) (GCT)\nPRECEDENCE\nTO: BAGR CENDIST WRIGHT PATTERSON AIRFORCEBASE DAYTON OHIO\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nINFO:\nNIGHT\nC-2\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED RESTRICTED\nWILL BE CLASSIFIED PLAIN\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted as a night message.\nTEXT:\nLT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 ABOUT 3 AUG PROREP BUAER WASHDC TEMADDCON AERONAUTICAL MATTERS X COMPRET X GOVT AIRCRAFT DIRECTED WHERE AVAILABLE X CLASS TWO PRIORITY CERTIFIED X PERDIEM ACCORDANCE PARA 4153 NTI\nT-1153\nCC:\nBuAer\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\nPers-316\nPers-3118(3)\nPers-3118F(Aer)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 8-48)\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nDATE 25 July 1949\nBUREAU OR OFFICE\nBureau of Aeronautics\nNAME (Last) Newhouse, Delbert C. / RANK AND CORPS LT, USN / FILE NO. 177283 / DESIGNATOR OR CLASSIFICATION 1350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION\nBAGR, CD, Dayton, Ohio\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes [ ] No [X]\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 3 August 1949\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel [X]\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY (Number of days) 3 days\nPLACES TO BE VISITED: BuAer, Washington, D. C.\n001153\nc/ Buaer\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL\nAeronautical matters.\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? Government Air [X] (PRIORITY 2)\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM 19.00\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL: Govt. air and/or com. air\nFINISHED FILE PERS 311S2\nREQUESTED BY Mr. Leo J. Finnerty / SECTION Military Personnel / ROOM 3910 / EXTENSION 61115\nSIGNED (1) / SIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-37704-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\nPers-3118-DJK-2\n30 June 1949\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, Office of Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nVia: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nSubject: Temporary additional duty.\n1. On or about 5 July 1949, you will proceed to the following places for temporary duty in connection with aeronautical matters:\nRochester, N.Y.,\nBinghampton, N.Y.,\nBaltimore, Md.\n2. You are authorized to omit or revisit any of the above mentioned places and to vary the above itinerary as may be deemed necessary.\n3. This is in addition to your present duties and upon the completion thereof you will return to Dayton, Ohio and resume your regular duties.\n4. Travel via government aircraft is directed where available. Class TWO priority is certified.\n5. You will be reimbursed on a per diem basis while absent from your station in accordance with Par. 4153, NTI.\nCC: BuAer\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\n316\n3118\n3118-F(BuAer)\nT. L. SPRAGUE\nT-11117"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 8-48)\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nDATE 24 June 1949\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\nBUREAU OR OFFICE\nBureau of Aeronautics\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle initial) RANK AND CORPS FILE NO. DESIGNATOR OR CLASSIFICATION\nNewhouse, Delbert C LT. USN 177283 1350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION (Where officer is to be addressed)\nBAGR CD, Dayton, Ohio\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes No\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT\n5 July 1949\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Naval Reserve, Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY (Number of days) 4 days\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS (List location first. If naval activity, to whom reporting; otherwise, exact name of organization or firm)\nRochester, N.Y.\nBinghampton, N.Y.\nBaltimore, Md.\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO (Check as appropriate)\nOmit Vary Revisit places listed above Visit such additional places as may be necessary in connection with the duty (If this authority is requested, a supplementary statement explaining reason must be attached)\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL (Nature, purpose of visit)\nAeronautical matters\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? (Check mode(s) of travel)\nGovernment Air (PRIORITY 2) Commercial Air\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM 26.00\nMISCELLANEOUS (TAXI, TIPS, ETC.)\nTOTAL 26.00\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL: Govt. air\nREMARKS:\nREQUESTED BY Mr. Lee J. Finnerty SECTION Military Personnel ROOM 3910 EXTENSION 61115\nSIGNED (1) SIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-37704-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\nPers-3118-AMB-2\n22 June 1949\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, Office of the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nVia: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative.\nSubject: Modification of Orders.\nReference: (a) BuPers orders T-10206 dated 13 June 1949.\n1. Reference (a) is hereby modified in that you will proceed to Philadelphia, Pa., for further temporary duty in addition to the places specified in your basic orders.\n2. You are authorized to omit or revisit any of the places and to vary the itinerary as may be deemed necessary.\n3. All other provisions of your basic orders remain in effect.\n(Confirming telephoned instructions of 16 June 1949.)\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\n316\n3118\n3118-F\nT. L. SPRAGUE\nT-10638"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 8-48)\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nDATE 16 June 1949\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\nBUREAU OR OFFICE Bureau of Aeronautics\nNAME Newhouse, Delbert C. RANK AND CORPS LT, USN FILE NO. 177283 DESIGNATOR 1350\nDUTY STATION BAGR CD, Dayton, Ohio\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 16 June 1949 ESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY 5 days\nMODIFICATION OF BUPERS ORDERS T-10206 DATED 13 JUNE 1949.\nRequest proceed date be changed from 20 June to 16 June 1949.\nProceed to Philadelphia, Pa. with authority to omit, vary and revisit.\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO: Omit, Vary, Revisit places listed above\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL\nT-10638\nETA-16 June 49\nFINISHED FILE PERS-311S2\nCONFIRMING TELEPHONE REQUEST FOR DESPATCH ORDERS 16 June 1949.\nREQUESTED BY Mr. Lee J. Finnerty SECTION Military Personnel ROOM 3910 EXTENSION 61115\nSIGNED (1) SIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 10-37704-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-49)\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nDATE: 16 May 1949\nFROM (Commanding officer) Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District\nSHIP OR STATION Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton 1, Ohio.\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement\nGRADE AND CORPS LT USN FILE NO. 177283/1350\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 11\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 33\nUNDER ORDERS OF BAGR-CD\nDATED 28 April 1949\nDelbert C. Newhouse\nT. J. RAFTERY, CAPT, USN\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave.\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereto, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5409(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\nPers-3118-AMB-2\n13 June 1949\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, Office of the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nVia: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nSubject: Temporary additional duty.\n1. On or about 20 June 1949, you will proceed to Washington, D. C., for temporary duty in connection with aeronautical matters.\n2. This is in addition to your present duties and upon the completion thereof you will return to Dayton, Ohio, and resume your regular duties.\n3. Travel via government aircraft is directed where available. Class TWO priority is certified.\n4. You will be reimbursed on a per diem basis while absent from your station in accordance with Par. 4153, NTI.\nCC: Buaer.\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\n316\n3118-F(Buaer)\n3118\nT. L. SPRAGUE\nT-10206"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUE\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 8-48)\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nDATE 10 June 1949\nBAGR, CD\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\nBUREAU OR OFFICE\nBureau of Aeronautics\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle initial) RANK AND CORPS FILE NO. DESIGNATOR OR CLASSIFICATION\nNewhouse, Delbert C. LT, USN 177283 1350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION (Where officer is to be addressed)\nBAGR, CD, Dayton, Ohio\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes [ ] No [X]\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 20 June 1949\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Naval Reserve [ ] Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel [X]\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY (Number of days) 3 days\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS (List location first. If naval activity, to whom reporting; otherwise, exact name of organization or firm)\nWashington, D. C.\n010206\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO (Check as appropriate)\nOmit [ ] Vary [ ] Revisit places listed above [ ] Visit such additional places as may be necessary in connection with the duty (If this authority is requested, a supplementary statement explaining reason must be attached)\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL (Nature, purpose of visit)\nAeronautical matters.\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? (Check mode(s) of travel)\nGovernment Air [X] (PRIORITY 2) Commercial Air [ ]\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM 18.00\nMISCELLANEOUS (TAXI, TIPS, ETC.)\nTOTAL 18.00\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL: Govt. air\nREMARKS:\nREQUEST DESPATCH ORDERS.\nREQUESTED BY Mr. Leo J. Finnerty\nSECTION Military Personnel\nROOM 3910\nEXTENSION 3294\nSIGNED (1)\nSIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-37704-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\nPers-3118-DJK-2\n21 April 1949\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department.\nVia: The Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics.\nSubject: Modification of Orders.\nReference: (a) BuPers orders dated 31 March 1949.\n1. Reference (a) is hereby modified in that upon completion of your temporary duty at Washington, D. C. you will proceed to Aviation Supply Office, Philadelphia, Pa. for further temporary duty and upon the completion thereof carry out the remainder of your basic orders.\n2. All other provisions of your basic orders remain in effect.\n(Confirming telephoned instructions of 20 April 1949).\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\n3118\n3118-F\n316\nT. L. SPRAGUE\nT-6606"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUE\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 6-47)\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nDATE 20 April 1949\nBureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington, D. C.\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. RANK AND CLASSIFICATION LT USN FILE NO. 177283/1350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION B A G R, CD, DAYTON, OHIO\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes [X] No [ ]\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS TAD Orders T-5092 dated 31 March 1949\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 21 April 1949\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel [X]\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY (Number of days) 6 days\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS\nModification on TAD orders T-5092 dated 31 March 1949 to include:\nA S O, Philadelphia, Penn.\nT06606\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL\nIn connection with Aeronautical matters.\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED?\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION 33.87\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM 39.00\nTOTAL 72.87\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL: Rail\nREMARKS:\nREQUESTED BY Mr. L. J. FINNERTY\nSECTION MILITARY PERSONNEL BRANCH\nROOM 3910\nEXTENSION 3294\nC.T.A. 20 APR 1949"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\nPers-3118-MES-2\n31 March 1949\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, Office of Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nVia: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nSubject: Temporary additional duty.\n1. On or about 19 April 1949 you will proceed to Washington, D.C., and report to the Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, for temporary duty to attend a conference.\n2. This is in addition to your present duties and upon the completion thereof you will return to Dayton, Ohio, and resume your regular duties.\n3. Travel by government air is directed where available. For travel by naval transport aircraft, Class Three priority is hereby certified.\n4. You will be reimbursed on a per diem basis while absent from your station in accordance with Par. 4153, NTT.\nENCL: (HW) A. Housing Info\nCC: BuAer Jacket Copy Pers-311s Pers-3118 Pers-3118-F(Aer) Pers-316\nT. L. SPRAGUE\nT-5092"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQ\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 8-48)\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nDATE 28 March 1949\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\nBUREAU OR OFFICE Bureau of Aeronautics (Photographic Division)\nNAME (Last) Newhouse (First) Delbert (Middle initial) C. RANK AND CORPS Lt., USN FILE NO. 177283 DESIGNATOR OR CLASSIFICATION 1350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes [ ] No [X]\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 19 April 1949\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel [X]\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY 1 day\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS\nBureau of Aeronautics (Photographic Division) Navy Department Washington 25, D. C.\n005092\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO Omit [X] Vary [ ]\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL\nTo attend conference on combined photographic procurement for the Naval Establishment\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) 1630 (DATE) 15 April 1949\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? Government Air [X] (PRIORITY 3)\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM $7.00\nMISCELLANEOUS 2.00\nTOTAL $9.00\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL: Government air if available, otherwise by Rail\nREMARKS: Request dispatch orders.\nREQUESTED BY Captain H. J. Dyson, USN\nSECTION Photographic Division\nROOM 2950\nEXTENSION 5105\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-37704-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\nPers-3118-DJK-2\n\n14 March 1949\n\nFrom:\t\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo:\t\tLT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\t\tOffice of Bureau of Aeronautics General\n\t\tRepresentative, Central District,\n\t\tWright-Patterson Air Force Base\n\t\tDayton, Ohio\n\nVia:\t\tBureau of Aeronautics General Representative,\n\t\tCentral District\n\nSubject:\tTemporary additional duty.\n\n1. On or about 8 March 1949 you will proceed to Washington, D. C. for temporary duty in connection with Aeronautical matters.\n\n2. This is in addition to your present duties and upon the completion thereof you will return to Dayton, Ohio and resume your regular duties.\n\n3. Travel by government air is directed where available.\n\n4. For travel by naval transport aircraft, Class THREE priority is hereby certified.\n\n5. Where government air is not available, commercial air is authorized where necessary to expedite completion of this duty.\n\n6. You will be reimbursed on a per diem basis while absent from your station in accordance with Par. 4153, NTI.\n\n7. Subject travel was essential at this time, and the length of time consumed in administrative channels prevented written orders from being issued prior to your departure.\n\n(Confirming telephoned instructions\n of 7 March 1949.)\n\nCC: BuAer\n\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\n 3118\n 3118-F(AER.)\n 316\n\nT. L. SPRAGUE\n\nT-3859"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 6-47)\n\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nDATE 7 March 1949\n\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\nBUREAU OR OFFICE\nBureau of Aeronautics, Navy Dept. Wash. DC\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) C.\nRANK AND CLASSIFICATION LT USN\nFILE NO. 177283/1350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION\nBAGR CD DAYTON, OHIO\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes [ ] No [X]\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT\n8 March 1949\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Naval Reserve [ ] Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel [X]\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY (Number of days) 3 days\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS\n\nWASHINGTON, D. C.\n\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO (Check as appropriate)\nOmit [ ] Vary [ ] Revisit places listed above [ ] Visit such additional places as may be necessary in connection with the duty [ ]\n\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL (Nature purpose of visit)\n\nIN CONNECTION WITH AERONAUTICAL MATTERS\n\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? (Check mode(s) of travel)\nGovernment Air [X] (PRIORITY 3) Commercial Air [X]\n\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM $18.00\nMISCELLANEOUS (TAXI, TIPS, ETC.)\nTOTAL\n\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL: Government Air where available\n\nREMARKS:\nCONFIRMING TELEPHONED AUTHORITY AS OF 7 MARCH 1949\n\nREQUESTED BY Mr. L. J. Finnerty SECTION Military Personnel Branch ROOM 3910 EXTENSION 3294\n\nSIGNED (1) SIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-37704-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 8-48)\n\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\n\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nFinished File Pers 3216A\nDATE: JAN 7 1948\n\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nFROM (Commanding officer)\nSHIP OR STATION\nBUREAU OF AERONAUTICS GENERAL REPRESENTATIVE\nCENTRAL DISTRICT, WRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO\n\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) C.\nGRADE AND CORPS LT USN\nFILE NO. 177283/1350\n\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 07\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 44\n\nUNDER ORDERS OF BAGR-CD\nDATED 26 Nov 48\n\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\n(Signature of officer who took leave)\nHENRY J BOWKER, By direction\n(Signature of commanding officer)\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before the regular hour for forenoon quarters on board ship or for beginning work at a shore station. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article 1727, Navy Regulations).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereof, as required by BuPers C/L 44-47.\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\nPers-3118-LEN-2\n\n17 January 1949\n\nFrom:\t\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo:\t\tLT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN,\n\t\tOffice of Bureau of Aeronautics General\n\t\tRepresentative, Central District,\n\t\tWright Patterson Air Force Base,\n\t\tDayton, Ohio.\n\nVia:\t\tBureau of Aeronautics General Representative.\n\nSubject:\tTemporary additional duty.\n\n1. On or about 11 January 1949 you will proceed to Washington, D.C. for temporary duty in connection with photographic and policy conference.\n\n2. This is in addition to your present duties and upon the completion thereof you will return to Dayton, Ohio, and resume your regular duties.\n\n3. Travel by government air is directed where available.\n\n4. For travel by naval transport aircraft Class THREE priority is hereby certified.\n\n5. You will be reimbursed of a per diem basis while absent from your station in accordance with Para. 4153, NTI.\n\n6. Subject travel was essential at this time, and the length of time consumed in administrative channels prveneted written orders from beinf issued prior to your departure.\n\n(Confirming telephoned instructions\n of 11 January 1949)\n\nJacket Copy\npers-3118\n 3118-F (BuAer)\n 311s\n 311D\n\nT. L. SPRAGUE\n\nT-692"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 6-47)\n\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nDATE 11 January 1949\n\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\nBUREAU OR OFFICE Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington, D. C.\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) C.\nRANK AND CLASSIFICATION LT, USN\nFILE NO. 177283/1350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION BAGR, C. D., DAYTON, OHIO\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes [ ] No [X]\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 11 January 1949\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Naval Reserve [ ] Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel [X]\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY (Number of days) 2 days\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS\n\nWASHINGTON, D. C.\n\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO (Check as appropriate)\nOmit [ ] Vary [ ] Revisit places listed above [ ] Visit such additional places as may be necessary in connection with the duty [ ]\n\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL (Nature purpose of visit)\n\nIN CONNECTION WITH PHOTOGRAPHIC & POLICY CONFERENCE\n\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? (Check mode(s) of travel)\nGovernment Air [X] (PRIORITY 3) Commercial Air [ ]\n\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM $11.00\nMISCELLANEOUS (TAXI, TIPS, ETC.)\nTOTAL $11.00\n\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL: Government Air\n\nREMARKS:\n\nREQUESTED BY Mr. L. J. Finnerty SECTION Military Personnel Branch ROOM 3910 EXTENSION 3294\n\nSIGNED (1) SIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-37704-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER FORM\nAviation Supply Depot\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement LT 177283 Pearl Harbor, T.H.\nFrom: (Claimant's name in full) (Rank) (File No.) (Duty Sta.)\nTo : Officer-in-Charge, Terminal Leave Disbursing Office.\nVia : (1) Disbursing Officer\n(2) Commanding Officer\n(3) Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers 3216A)\nSubj : Claim for settlement for accrued leave.\nRefs : (a) Armed Forces Leave Act 1946.\n(b) BuPers Circular Letter 193-46.\nC-2\n1. In accordance with the provision of reference (a) I hereby submit claim for accrued leave due me, if any.\n2. To the best of my knowledge and belief I have had leave in the amounts and during the fiscal years since 1 July 1939 as indicated below:\nNo. of Days Fiscal Year No. of Days Fiscal Year\n30 1943 4 1947\n35 1945\n3. In accordance with the provisions of reference (b) I have computed that my total leave credit on 31 August 1946 was 110 days. It is requested that the Chief of Naval Personnel verify the above total leave credit and by endorsement of this letter so inform the addressee.\n4. I entered into present continuous active duty as a commissioned or warrant officer on 1 September 1942.\n5. On 31 August 1946, I was serving in the rank of Lieutenant\n6. I have had enlisted service since 8 September 1939 and I have not appended hereto as an enclosure a statement of such service together with supporting documents. I have not submitted any other claim for settlement for accrued leave.\nSignature of Claimant\nEnd 1\nAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nFrom: Disbursing Officer Pearl Harbor, T.H.\n(Ship or Station)\nTo : Officer-in-Charge, Terminal Leave Disbursing Office.\nVia : Commanding Officer.\n1. The rate of pay of the above claimant on 31 August 1946 was $ 9.583 per day.\n2. He was receiving subsistence allowance at the rate of $ 1.40 per day.\n3. His rate of rental allowance was $ 3.00 per day.\nD.F. SULLIVAN ENS.(SC)USN 584673\nSignature of D.O. Symbol No.\nNOV 25 1946\nEnd 2\nTo : Officer in Charge Terminal Leave Disbursing Office.\nVia: The Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers 3216A).\n1. Forwarded.\n15 APR 1947\nK. A. GRAHN, CDR SC USN\nEnd 3\nTo : Officer-in-Charge, Terminal Leave Disbursing Office.\n1. Examination and verification of the claimant's record indicated that on 31 August 1946, he had a total of 39 days accrued leave standing to his credit for his officer services.\nLOUIS E. DENFELD\n14ND-GEN-35 PH-10-10-46-17,500"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(FORM FOR OFFICERS WITH PRIOR ENLISTED SERVICE)\nName NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement Officer File No. 177283\n1. I had enlisted service subsequent to 7 September 1939 in a branch of the Armed Forces of the United States as follows:\nDate of Enlistment Branch of Service Enlisted Serial No.\n24 January 1939 U. S. Navy 393 07 21\n2. During the above period (a) of service I had leave as follows:\nDays of leave Fiscal Year Days of leave Fiscal Year\n19 1940\n3. During the above period (a) of service I was AWOL, AOL or in confinement as a result of sentence of a court martial 0 days.\n4. (a) I was appointed a commissioned or warrant officer directly from enlisted status on\n1 September 1942\nOr\n4. (b) I was discharged from Branch of Service, on at which time my enlisted rank or rating was, and I was appointed a commissioned or warrant officer on\n5. At the date of my discharge, or appointment (as indicated in 4 (a) or (b) above) I was [REDACTED] serving in one of the first three pay grades.\n6. If the statement above is in the affirmative I did [REDACTED] have a dependent.\n7. I attach the following documents: Acceptances of appointments as PHOT, USN; ENS USN; LTJG, USN; and LT USN\n8. I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I am the person who served in the Armed Forces under the name stated above and that the foregoing statements are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.\nSignature of Claimant\nSubscribed and sworn to before me on NOV 25 1946\nOfficer Authorized to administer oaths.\nK. A. GRAHN, CDR SC USN\n(After completing this form attach it securely to the Officer Claim Form.)\nNOV 25 1946\nEnd-1.\nTo: Officer in Charge Terminal Leave Disbursing Office.\nService record of LT NEWHOUSE cannot be examined; record forwarded to BuPers at time of NEWHOUSE'S discharge from permanent enlisted status to accept permanent appointment as Chief Photographer on 25 Sept 1946.\nCommanding Officer\nK.A.GRAHN, CDR SC USN\n14ND-Gen-36 PH-10-10-46-5,600"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"End-1. NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. USN LIEUT 177283\nTo: Officer in Charge Terminal Leave Disbursing Office.\n1. Examination of the claimant's enlisted record shows that on the date preceding the date of appointment, as shown in paragraph 4 (a) above, he was serving in the rate of CP(PA) and his net service for pay purposes was 9 years 5 months 25 days.\nBy Direction of the Chief of Naval Personnel.\nC. F. NELSON,\nLt.(jg), USN\nOfficer Performance Division"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY COPY COPY\nU. S. NAVAL BASE\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador\nOctober 15, 1942\nFrom: Photographer Delbert C. Newhouse, USN\nTo: The Bureau of Naval Personnel\nSubject: Acceptance of Appointment to the Rank of Photographer, USN for Temporary Service\nReference: (a) Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Base Santa Elena Bay, Ecuador letter of October 15, 1942\n(b) BuNavPers C/L No 127-42 of September 1, 1942\n1. By reference (a) I was informed by my Commanding Officer that I had been appointed by the President of the United States on September 1, 1942 to the rank of Photographer, USN for temporary service to rank from June 15, 1942, in accordance with reference (b).\n2. I have this date accepted this appointment.\nDelbert C. Newhouse\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT to Photographer D. C. Newhouse, USN to BuPers of October 15, 1942\nU. S. NAVAL BASE Santa Elena Bay, Ecuador October 15, 1942\nFrom: The Commanding Officer\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel\n1. Forwarded.\nJ. R. LITCHFIELD\nCertified to be a true copy\nD C NEWHOUSE, LT LINE USN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY COPY COPY\nNA10/P17-2/00\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nCoco Solo, Upham, C.Z.\nNavy 1955\nc/o Fleet Post Office\nNew York, N.Y.\n6 July 1943\nFrom: Ensign Delbert C. Newhouse, U. S. Navy\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: The Commanding Officer\nSubj: Acknowledgment of notice of Temporary Appointment\n1. I hereby acknowledge receipt of notice of my appointment to the rank of Ensign in the regular Navy, for temporary service made by the President on 15 June 1943.\n2. Notice of this temporary appointment was made by my Commanding Officer pursuant to the authority contained in BuPers C/L 96-43.\n3. This temporary appointment has not and will not be declined by me.\n4. Two (2) certified copies of this letter are being furnished by me to the Disbursing Officer carrying my accounts in order that my pay may be adjusted accordingly.\nDelbert C. Newhouse\nNA10/P17-2/00 FIRST ENDORSEMENT U. S. NAVAL AIR STATION Coco Solo, Upham, C.Z. Navy 1955 c/o Fleet Post Office New York, N.Y.\nFrom: The Commanding Officer\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel\n1. Forwarded.\nR. P. KAUFFMAN\nCopy to: Com15\nCertified to be a true copy\nD C NEWHOUSE, LT LINE USN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\t\tCOPY\t\tCOPY\n\nACKNOWLEDGMENT OF NOTICE OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT\n\nDate: 5 SEP 1944\n\nFrom: Lieut(jg) Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, USN\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: The Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Air Station, Coco Solo, C.Z.\n\n1. I acknowledge receipt of notice of appointment to the rank of Lieut.(jg) in the Navy, for temporary service made by the President on 1 Sept. 1944.\n\n2. Notice of this temporary appointment was made by my reporting senior pursuant to the authority contained in AlNav No. 169. My BuPers file number is 177283.\n\n3. This temporary appointment has not and will not be declined by me.\n\n4. Two (2) certified copies of this letter are being furnished by me to the Disbursing Officer carrying my accounts.\n\n5. I certify that the appointment to the above rank has not been previously withheld for any reason.\n\nDELBERT CLEMENT NEWHOUSE\n\nFirst Endorsement\n\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nCOCO SOLO, CANAL ZONE\n\n5 SEP 1944\n\nFrom: The Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Air Station, Coco Solo, C.Z.\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel\n\n1. Forwarded.\n\nTHOMAS DURFEE\n\ncc: Two-Disbursing Officer Carrying Accounts\nOne-Officers file jacket\nOne-Officer concerned\nOne-ComI5\n\nCertified to be a true copy:\n\nD C NEWHOUSE, LT LINE USN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\t\tCOPY\t\tCOPY\n\nNAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT, PHILADELPHIA, PA.\n\nACKNOWLEDGMENT OF NOTICE OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT\n\n3 April 1946\n\nFrom: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, USN 177283\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: Supply Officer in Command, Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Phila.,Pa.\n\n1. I acknowledge receipt of appointment to the rank of Lieutenant USN in the Navy for temporary service made by the President on 1 April 1946.\n\n2. Notice of this temporary appointment was made by my reporting senior pursuant to the authority contained in AlNav No. 150-46. My BuPers file number is 177283.\n\n3. This temporary appointment has not and will not be declined by me.\n\n4. Two (2) certified copies of this letter are being furnished by me to the Disbursing Officer carrying my accounts.\n\n5. I certify that my appointment to the rank of Lieutenant USN has not been previously withheld for any reason.\n\nDELBERT C NEWHOUSE\n\n3 April 1946\t\tFIRST ENDORSEMENT\n\nFrom: The Supply Officer in Command, Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Phila.\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel\n\n1. Forwarded.\n\nBy direction of SOinC:\n\nW. D. SAMS\nMilitary Personnel Officer\n\nCertified to be a true copy\n\nD C NEWHOUSE, LT LINE USN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 6-47)\n\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nDATE 10 December 1948\n\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\n\nBUREAU OR OFFICE\nBureau of Aeronautics, Inspection Division\n\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) C. RANK AND CLASSIFICATION LT, USN FILE NO. 177283/1350\n\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION (Where officer is to be addressed)\nBAGR, CD, Dayton, Ohio.\n\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes [ ] No [X]\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 13 December 1948\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Naval Reserve [ ] Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel [X]\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY (Number of days) 4 days\n\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS\nPhiladelphia, Pa.\nWashington, D.C.\n\nOrders have been issued. [handwritten]\n\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO (Check as appropriate)\nOmit [ ] Vary [ ] Revisit places listed above [ ] Visit such additional places as may be necessary in connection with the duty [ ]\n\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL (Nature, purpose of visit)\nAeronautical matters.\n\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\n\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? Government Air [X] (PRIORITY) Commercial Air [ ]\n\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM $25.00\nMISCELLANEOUS (TAXI, TIPS, ETC.)\nTOTAL $25.00\n\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL:\n\nREMARKS:\nCONFIRMING TELEPHONE REQUEST FOR DESPATCH ORDERS. 12/10/48.\n\nREQUESTED BY Mr. Leo J. Finnerty\nSECTION Military Personnel Branch ROOM 3910 EXTENSION 3294\n\nSIGNED (1)\nSIGNED (2)\n\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 10-37704-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\n\nDRAFTED BY PERS-3118-LEN-2\nFILE NR. 177283/1350\nROOM NR.\nEXT. NR. 7272\nRELEASED BY CDR LINDSEY WILLIAMSON\nCODE/SECT. NR.\nDATE 10 DEC 1948 1150\n\nPlease leave this space clear\n\nFROM: BUPERS WASHN D. C.\n101911 (date/time group) (GCT)\nTO:\nBAGR CENDIST DAYTON OHIO\nINFO:\n\nPRECEDENCE\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nNIGHT\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED RESTRICTED\nWILL BE CLASSIFIED PLAIN\n\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted as a night message.\n\nTEXT:\nABOUT\nLT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 PROCEED/13 DEC PHILA PA THENCE BUAER NAVDEPT WASHN DC TEMADDCON AERONAUTICAL MATTERS X COMPRET X GOVT AIR DIRECTED WHERE AVAILABLE X NAVTRANSAIRTHREE X PERDIEM ACCORDANCE PARA 4153 NTI\n\nCC:\nBUAER\n\nJACKET COPY\nPERS-311s\n3118-F (BUAER)\n3118 (3)\n311D\n\nT-7636\n\nOPNAV-19-7 (4-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 8-48)\n\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nDATE 10 Dec 48\n\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\n\nBUREAU OR OFFICE\n\nNAME (Last) newhouse (First) Delbert (Middle initial) C RANK AND CORPS LT FILE NO. 177283 DESIGNATOR OR CLASSIFICATION 1350\n\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION (Where officer is to be addressed)\nBAGR CD. Dayton Ohio\n\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes [ ] No [ ]\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 13 Dec 48\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Naval Reserve [ ] Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel [ ]\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY (Number of days) 4 days\n\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS\nPhiladelphia Pa\nBuaer, Wash. D.C.\n\n[Handwritten: Rontine, Buaer]\n\n1007636\n\n[Red handwritten: Office-Bureau aeronautics general representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base]\n\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO (Check as appropriate)\nOmit [ ] Vary [ ] Revisit places listed above [ ] Visit such additional places as may be necessary in connection with the duty [ ]\n\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL (Nature, purpose of visit)\nc/w aeronautical matters\nOc: Buaer\n\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\n\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? (Check mode(s) of travel)\nGovernment Air [ ] (PRIORITY 3) Commercial Air [ ]\n\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM\nMISCELLANEOUS (TAXI, TIPS, ETC.)\nTOTAL $65.00\n\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL:\n\nREMARKS:\n\nREQUESTED BY Leo Brundige\nSECTION ROOM EXTENSION\n\nSIGNED (1)\nSIGNED (2)\n\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 10-37704-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\n\nDRAFTED BY\nPers-3118-MES-2\nRELEASED BY\nCDR LINDSEY WILLIAMSON\n\nFILE NR.\n177283/1350\nCODE/SECT. NR.\n\nROC\n\nEXT. NR.\n7272\nDATE\n11 OCT 1948 1030\n\nPlease leave this space clear\n\nFROM: BUPERS WASHN D. C.\n\nTO:\n\nINFO:\n\nBAGR CENDIST DAYTON OHIO\n\n(date/time group) (GOT)\n\nPRECEDENCE\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nNIGHT\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nWILL BE CLASSIFIED\nPLAIN\n\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted as a night message.\n\nTEXT:\n\nLT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 ABOUT 13 OCT PROCEED PHILA THENCE\nWILMINGTON DEL THENCE BALTIMORE MD TEMADDCON PROCUREMENT MATTERS X\nCOMPRET X GOVT AIR DIRECTED WHERE AVAILABLE X NAVTRANSAIRTHREE X\nPERDIEM ACCORDANCE PARA 4153 NTI AND BUPERS CL 235-47\n\nCC:\nBuAer\nJacket Copy\nPers-311s\nPers-3118(3)\nPers-3118-F(Aer)\nPers-3116\n\nT-4775\nC-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDER REQUEST\nNAVPERS-1863 (REV. 6-47)\n\nTO: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nDATE 8 October 1948\n\nIT IS REQUESTED THAT TEMPORARY TRAVEL ORDERS BE ISSUED AS INDICATED:\n\nBUREAU OR OFFICE\nBureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department.\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle) RANK AND CLASSIFICATION FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE D. Delbert C. LT, USN 177283/1350\nDUTY STATION OR TEMPORARY DUTY STATION\nBAGR, CD, Dayton, Ohio.\nIS OFFICER NOW ON TEMPORARY DUTY ON PER-DIEM BASIS? Yes No\nIF YES, REFERENCE ORDERS\nOFFICER IS PAID FROM APPROPRIATION: Naval Reserve Pay and subsistence of Naval Personnel\nESTIMATED PERIOD OF DUTY AWAY 3 days\nTO PROCEED ON OR ABOUT 13 October 1948\n\nPLACES TO BE VISITED IN SEQUENCE OF VISITS\nPhiladelphia, Pa.\nWilmington, Delaware.\nBaltimore, Maryland.\n\nC04775\n\nAUTHORITY IS REQUESTED TO: Omit Vary Revisit places listed above Visit such additional places as may be necessary in connection with the duty\n\nREASONS FOR TRAVEL\nProcurement matters.\n\nIT IS NECESSARY THAT I RECEIVE ORDERS NOT LATER THAN (HOUR) (DATE)\nIS AIR TRAVEL TO BE DIRECTED? Government Air (PRIORITY 3) Commercial Air\nESTIMATED COST TRANSPORTATION\nESTIMATED COST PER DIEM $18.00\nMISCELLANEOUS (TAXI, TIPS, ETC.)\nTOTAL $18.00\nHOW OFFICER WILL TRAVEL: Government air.\n\nREMARKS:\n\nREQUEST DESPATCH ORDERS.\n\nREQUESTED BY Mr. Leo J. Finnerty\nSECTION Military Personnel Branch ROOM 3910 EXTENSION 3294\nSIGNED (1) SIGNED (2)\nFORWARDED/APPROVED BY\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-37704-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET\nFU/FF12/P16-4/00/60:wn Air Force\nUTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET\n\nSerial: 82-48 1 July 1948.\n\nFrom: The Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nTo : Lieutenant\nDelbert C. NEWHOUSE, 0177283/1350, U.S. Navy.\n\nSubject: Change of Duty.\n\nReference: (a) BuPers disp. 221345Z of June 1948.\n\n1. Reference (a) is quoted, for information and compliance:\n\nLT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 DIRDET ABOUT 1 JULY PRORFP BUAER NAVY DEPT TEN ABOUT 2 WEEKS X COMPLETION DIRDET PREP BAGR\n\nCENTRALDIST WRIGHT PATTERSON AIRFORCE BASE DAYTON OHIO DUTY REPLTR COMMINE X DELREP 15 DAYS WASH DC PROVIDED NO EXCESS\n\nLEAVE INVOLVED XX XX XX\n\n2. You will proceed immediately and report to the Commandant of the FOURTEENTH Naval District for transportation for yourself and your dependents to a port in the United States. Upon arrival you will proceed and carry out the orders contained in paragraph one above or any modification thereto.\n\n3. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new station advised of your address.\n\n4. Immediately upon reporting for duty in compliance with these orders, or any modifications thereto, you are hereby directed to forward to the Chief of Naval Personnel, via your new Commanding Officer, a copy of these orders, complete with all endorsements thereto, including the final reporting endorsement.\n\n5. Delivered and detached this date.\n\nJ. C. CRONIN.\n\nCopy to:\nCNO (OP-54)\nBuPers (Pers 31163)\nBuAer\nComMINE\nComAirPac\nComServPac\nBAGR, Central District Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nComFOURTEEN.\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CO/Newhouse, D.C.\n(177283/1350)\n\n13 July 1948\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on ComUWingPac orders Serial 82-48 dated 7-1-48.\n\nFrom: Commandant, Fourteenth Naval District.\nTo : Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, U.S. Navy.\n\nSubject: Change of duty.\n\n1. You reported for transportation on 2 July 1948.\n\n2. Travel by government air is directed outside the continental limits of the United States. For travel via Military Air Transport Service Aircraft, Class THREE priority is hereby certified.\n\n3. Detached this date. Report immediately to the Booking Office, MATS Terminal, Hickam Field, for air transportation.\n\nS. S. MURRAY."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aer-PE-2 THIRD ENDORSEMENT on ComUWingPac 11 August 1948\nCO/NEWHOUSE,D.C. orders Serial 82-48 dated 7/1/48\n\nFrom: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350\n\nSubject: Change of duty.\n\n1. Reported this date for temporary duty.\n\nC. H. Holt\nBy Direction\n\nFinished File Pers 311S33\n\nC-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BUREAU OF AERONAUTICS GENERAL REPRESENTATIVE, USN\nREFER TO INITIALS\nAND NO.\nCENTRAL DISTRICT\nWRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO\nMLS:mls\n\nFinished File Pers 311S99\n\n26 August 1948\n\nFrom:\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350.\nTo\t:\tChief of Naval Personnel.\nVia\t:\tBureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\n\nSubj:\tCompliance with Orders - Reporting of.\n\nRef\t:\t(a) BuPers disp 221305Z/JUNE 48, as modified by BuPers ser 6717, dtd 18 Aug 48.\n\n1.\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel is hereby furnished a certified copy of reference (a), containing all endorsements thereto including the final reporting endorsement.\n\n2.\tBy copy of this letter, the Commandant, NINTH Naval District is informed of my reporting for duty with the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\n\nD. C. NEWHOUSE.\n\nENCL: (HW)\n1. Certcy of ref(a), w/all ends thereto incl final reporting endorsement.\n\nCopy to:\n Com9 (OffDistrOff)\n w/1 cy ref (a).\n\n-----------------------------------------------\n\nOO/NEWHOUSE, D.C./\nLT/177283/1350/USN\nMLS:mls\t\tEnd-1\n7904\tAUG 27 1948\n\nFrom:\tBureau of Aeronautics Representative, Central District.\nTo :\tChief of Naval Personnel.\n\n1.\tForwarded.\n\nBy direction of BAGR-CD:\nM. LUKE.\n\nCopy to:\n Com9 (OffDistrOff)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aer-PE-2\t\tFOURTH ENDORSEMENT on ComUtWingPac\t18 August 1948\nOO/NEWHOUSE,D.C.\t\torders Serial 82-48 dated 7/1/48\n\nFrom:\tChief, Bureau of Aeronautics.\nTo:\tLT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350\n\nSubject:\tChange of Duty.\n\n1.\tDetached this date from temporary duty.\n\n/s/ C. H. HOLT\nBy direction\n\nJN-177283/1350\nEnd-5\t\t21 August 1948\t\tASO Phila., 11, Pa.\nTo:\tLT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350\n1.\tReported 19 August 1948; temporary duty completed 21 August 1948. No government quarters available or assigned you at this station.\n\nBy direction of Supply Officer-in-Command:\n\n/s/ E.R. BRITT\n\nOO/NEWHOUSE, D.C./\nLT/177283/1350/USN\t\t24 AUGUST 1948\t\tEnd-6\n\nFrom:\tBureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nTo :\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN.\n\n1.\tReported this date. No government quarters or messing facilities are available at this station.\n\nM. LUKE,\nBy direction.\n\nI hereby certify that travel performed in accordance with these orders was by privately owned vehicle as follows:\n\nDeparted Washington, D.C. 1000, 8/18/48.\tArrived Philadelphia 2100 8/18/48.\nDeparted Philadelphia, Pa 1230, 8/21/48.\tArrived Dayton, Ohio 1030 8/24/48.\n\nI further certify that no Government transportation requests were furnished me for use in performing travel in compliance with these orders.\n\nD. C. NEWHOUSE."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\nPers-31167-PAB-1\n\n18 August 1948\n\nFrom:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo:\tLT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN,\n\tBureau of Aeronautics,\n\tNavy Department.\n\nVia:\tBuAer (2).\n\nSubject:\tModification of orders.\n\n1.\tYour dispatch orders 221305 June 1948 are modified in that when directed by the Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics, you will regard yourself detached from temporary duty in the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, will proceed immediately to Philadelphia, Pa., and report to the Supply Officer in Command, Naval Aviation Supply Depot for temporary duty for a period of about two days in the Aviation Supply Office, Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa.\n\n2.\tUpon completion of this temporary duty you will carry out the remainder of your basic orders.\n\nCC: ComNine (2)\nCNO (OP-54)\nSupOfComd,NASD,Phila,Pa.\nBAGR,CentralDist,WrightPatterson,\n AirForceBase,Dayton,Ohio.\t\tT. L. SPRAGUE\n\nJacket copy\nPers-31l5\nPers-82233\nPers-3118-F\nPers-31167\t\t6717"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aer-PE-2\t\tTHIRD ENDORSEMENT on ComUtWingPac\t11 August 1948\nOO/NEWHOUSE,D.C.\t\torders Serial 82-48 dated 7/1/48\n\nFrom:\tChief, Bureau of Aeronautics.\nTo:\tLT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350\n\nSubject:\tChange of duty.\n\n1.\tReported this date for temporary duty.\n\nARRIVED CONT. U.S. at Alameda, California 16 July 1948.\n\nLeft Alameda 16 July 1948\n\nArrived Washington, D.C. 11 August 1948\n\nNo government transportation furnished.\n\n/s/ D.C. Newhouse.\n(Officer's Signature)\n\nTravel was performed by privately owned automobile.\nAuthority ALNAV 613-46. No government Transportation furnished.\n\n/s/ D.C. Newhouse.\nSignature of Officer."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM ENDORSEMENT\nAir Transport Squadron TWO\nNAS, Alameda, California\nArrived NAS, Alameda, California aboard\nFlight JUL 16 1948 date 2216\nat 1330 PST\n\n/s/ Totwenas\nAir Transport Officer\n\nMEMORANDUM ENDORSEMENT\t\t17 July 1948\n\nArrived San Francisco, California\nProceeding this date, via privately owned automobile, to carry out basic orders.\n\n/s/ D. C. NEWHOUSE,\nLt., USN."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OO/Newhouse, D.C.\n(177283/1350)\n\n13 July 1948\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on\nComWingPac orders\nSerial 82-48 dated\n7-1-48.\n\nFrom:\t\tCommandant, Fourteenth Naval District.\nTo :\t\tLieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, U.S. Navy.\n\nSubject:\t\tChange of duty.\n\n\t1.\t\tYou reported for transportation on 2 July 1948.\n\n\t2.\t\tTravel by government air is directed outside the continental limits of the United States. For travel via Military Air Transport Service Aircraft, Class THREE priority is hereby certified.\n\n\t3.\t\tDetached this date. Report immediately to the Booking Office, MATS Terminal, Hickam Field, for air transportation.\n\n\t\t\t\tS. S. MUNRAY.\n\nMATS SPACE CONTROL CENTER, HONOLULU\nENDORSEMENT JUL 13 PAID DATE\nOFFICE OF THE COMMANDANT, 14th NAVAL DISTRICT\nREPORTED, PROCEED BY AIR TRANSPORTATION ASSIGNED\nTO WC AIR PRIORITY 3D\nCERTIFIED TRANSPORTATION FURNISHED VIA MATS\nTRIP 2216 ON 15 JUL 1948\nJ.B. CANNON\nBy direction\n\nHEADQUARTERS 12TH NAVAL DISTRICT PR #47\nPAID $225.**, DATE 7/17/48\nR. B. PRENTICE, Comdr. (SC) USNR. 56-310\n\nK.D. TAYLOR, Deputy\nFor R.B. PRENTICE, COMDR (SC) USNR 56-310"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2 - JUL 1948\nOFFICE OF THE COMMANDANT\n14TH NAVAL DISTRICT, PEARL HARBOR, T. H.\nRequested for transportation this date.\n\nTHOS. H. BINFORD\nBy direction\n\nBuS&A Wash 25 D.C.\nMileage Pd $242.16\nAugust 17 1948\nVoucher\nP.L. BARENSFIELD, JR.\nLT, SC, USN, Symbol #55914\n1138\n\nBuS&A Wash 25, D.C.\nPaid $1400\nSubs Tpn Acct Exp\nAug 17 1948\nPer Diem From 7/15 to 7/16/48\nP.L. BARENSFIELD, JR, LT SC USN\nSYMBOL # 55914 1139\n\nMATS SPACE CONTROL CENTER, HONOLULU\nENDORSEMENT JUL 13 1947 DATE\nOFFICE OF THE COMMANDANT, 14th NAVAL DISTRICT\nREPORTED, PROCEED BY AIR TRANSPORTATION ASSIGNED\nTO WC AIR PRIORITY #3D\nCERTIFIED TRANSPORTATION FURNISHED VIA MATS\nTRIP 2216 on 15 JUL 1948\nJ.B. CANNON\nBy direction\n\nMEMORANDUM ENDORSEMENT\nAir Transport Squadron TWO\nNAS Alameda California\nArrived NAS Alameda, California\naboard flight 16 JUL 1948 2216\nat _______ PST\n\nAir Transport Officer\n\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FU/FF12/P16-4/00/60:wn\nUNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET\nAir Force\nUTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET\n\nSerial: 82-48\t\t\t\t\t\t1 July 1948.\n\nFrom:\tThe Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nTo :\tLieutenant\n\tDelbert C. NEWHOUSE, 0177283/1350, U.S. Navy.\n\nSubject:\tChange of Duty.\n\nReference:\t(a) BuPers disp. 221305Z of June 1948.\n\n1.\tReference (a) is quoted, for information and compliance:\n\nLT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 DIRDET ABOUT 1 JULY PRorep BUAER NAVY DEPT TEN ABOUT 2 WEEKS X COMPLETION DIRDET PROREP BAGR\n\nCENTRALDIST WRIGHT PATTERSON AIRFORCE BASE DAYTON OHIO DUTY REPLTR COMINE X DELREP 15 DAYS WASH DC PROVIDED NO EXCESS\n\nLEAVE INVOLVED XX XX XX\n\n2.\tYou will proceed immediately and report to the Commandant of the FOURTEENTH Naval District for transportation for yourself and your dependents to a port in the United States. Upon arrival you will proceed and carry out the orders contained in paragraph one above or any modification thereto.\n\n3.\tKeep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new station advised of your address.\n\n4.\tImmediately upon reporting for duty in compliance with these orders, or any modifications thereto, you are hereby directed to forward to the Chief of Naval Personnel, via your new Commanding Officer, a copy of these orders, complete with all endorsements thereto, including the final reporting endorsement.\n\n-5.\tDelivered and detached this date.\n\nJ. C. CROWIN.\n\nCopy to:\nCNO (OP-54)\nBuPers (Pers 31163)\nBuAer\nComMINE\nComAirPac\nComServPac\nBAGR, Central District Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nComFOURTEEN.\tCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WILL CALL\nOFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM\nNAVPERS-1152 (REV. 6-45)\nFILE NO. 177283/1350\nNAME (PRINT) NEWHOUSE DELBERT C\nRANK LIEUT\nCLASSIF. U.S.N.\nORDERS OF 22 JUNE 48\nDESPATCH 221305 (time group)\nWHEN DIRECTED\nAT BUAER (2)\nPROCEED 1. TO ASO, NASD, Phila (Dependents)\nFOR Temdu abt 2 days\nREMARKS on completion you will carry out Basic orders\n006717\nINFORMATION ADDRESSEE(S)\nCNO(OP54)\nASO NASD Phila\nBAGR, Central Dist Wright Patterson Air Force Base Dayton, Ohio\nDATE 8/18/48 PERS. NO. 31167 DETAIL OFFICER EXT. 71302 DATE OUT BY 8/18/48"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FU/FF12/P16-4/00/60:wn\nUNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET\nAir Force\nUTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET\n\nSerial: 82-48\t\t\t\t\t\t1 July 1948.\n\nFrom:\tThe Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nTo :\tLieutenant\n\tDelbert C. NEWHOUSE, 0177283/1350, U.S. Navy.\n\nSubject:\tChange of Duty.\n\nReference:\t(a) BuPers disp. 221305Z of June 1948.\n\n1.\tReference (a) is quoted, for information and compliance:\n\nLT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 DIRDET ABOUT 1 JULY PRORep BUAER NAVY DEPT TEN ABOUT 2 WEEKS X COMPLETION DIRDET PROREP BAGR\n\nCENTRALDIST WRIGHT PATTERSON AIRFORCE BASE DAYTON OHIO DUTY REPLTR COMINE X DELREP 15 DAYS WASH DC PROVIDED NO EXCESS\n\nLEAVE INVOLVED XX XX XX\n\n2.\tYou will proceed immediately and report to the Commandant of the FOURTEENTH Naval District for transportation for yourself and your dependents to a port in the United States. Upon arrival you will proceed and carry out the orders contained in paragraph one above or any modification thereto.\n\n3.\tKeep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new station advised of your address.\n\n4.\tImmediately upon reporting for duty in compliance with these orders, or any modifications thereto, you are hereby directed to forward to the Chief of Naval Personnel, via your new Commanding Officer, a copy of these orders, complete with all endorsements thereto, including the final reporting endorsement.\n\n5.\tDelivered and detached this date.\n\nJ. C. CROWIN.\nFINISHED FILE PERS-31182\n\nCopy to:\nCNO (OP-54)\nBuPers (Pers 31163)\nBuAer\nComMINE\nComAirPac\nComServPac\nBAGR, Central District Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nComFOURTEEN.\tCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAV. S. AND A. FORM 913—REV.\nForm Prescribed by\nComptroller General, U. S.\nMay 17, 1945\n\nVOUCHER FOR REIMBURSEMENT\nFOR\nEXPENSES INCIDENT TO DEPENDENTS TRAVEL\nMAIL TO BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, WASHINGTON 25, D. C.\nD. O. VOU. NO. 3375\nBU. VOU. NO.\n\nTHE UNITED STATES. DR.\nTO (PRINT) NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. Lt. USN 177283\n(Last Name) (First) (Middle) (Rank or Rating) (File or Service No.)\nOFFICIAL ADDRESS Office of Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative,\nCentral District, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n\nSEP 15 1948\nJ. SCOTT\nSymbol 52-527\n(For use of Paying Officer)\nAMOUNT\nDOLLARS CENTS\n$ 202 08\nPAID BY CHECK NO. 526944\n\nMEMORANDUM\n\n202.08 J. SCOTT, Officer in Charge 52-527\nBy Alice C. Gibbons, Agent Cashier\n\nACCOUNTING CLASSIFICATION (For completion by Administrative Officer)\nFARE AUTHORIZED\nAPPROPRIATION, LIMITATION OR PROJECT SYMBOL / APPROPRIATION TITLE\nFROM / TO\nRAIL / PULLMAN / TOTAL\n1790813 TRNP-1949 020 74130\n\nCERTIFICATION OF CLAIMANT (FILL IN ALL BLANKS BELOW WHERE APPLICABLE)\nPayment is requested for transportation for travel performed by the following, who were my dependents on the effective date of orders directing this change of station.\nNAME / RELATIONSHIP / DATE OF BIRTH OF CHILDREN\nNorma Isabel Newhouse Wife\nDelbert Carroll Newhouse Son 6/25/38\nAnne Elisbet Newhouse Daughter 3/14/40\nat 412 Third St., HHA #1, Honolulu 50, T.H.\nI certify that my dependents were located ____ when orders directing detachment\n(City and State)\nfrom my old permanent station were received, and departed from that place on (date) 1 July 1948; Arrived Alameda California 16 July 1948; Departed Alameda, California 16 July 1948\nand arrived at Dayton, Ohio on (date) 24 August 1948. I further certify that my dependents traveled at my own expense, and that the child (children) named above is (are) the legitimate child (children) of the officer or man concerned. (IF CHILD (CHILDREN) IS (ARE) STEP OR ADOPTED, FILL IN CERTIFICATE ON REVERSE SIDE.)\nI certify that the travel covered by this claim represents the entire travel of all my dependents which has been or will be made on this change of station except as follows: No exceptions\n*Reimbursement requested herein is (is not) in accordance with par. 3 of SecNav letter of 23 Dec. 1943.\n*I hereby designate ____ as point to which transportation of dependents is desired.\nI certify that this account and schedule annexed are true and just in all respects; that payment therefor has not been received; and that my statements of travel correctly reflect travel performed by my dependents.\nSIGN ORIGINAL ONLY PAYEE Delbert C. Newhouse, Lieutenant\nDATE 1 Sept. 1948 RANK OR RATING\n*If applicable see Instruction 1. 16—44806—1 (Instructions on reverse side of form.) U.S.N."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS\n\n1. In the event this claim involves travel under secret or confidential orders, or orders from which the location of the old or new duty station is omitted for reasons of security, or under orders effecting assignment to or from sea duty or to or from a place to which dependents are not permitted to go, careful attention should be given to SecNav letter of 23 December 1944, particularly paragraphs 2, 3, 6 and 10.\n\n2. If your claim is not submitted under SecNav letter of 23 December 1944 (Instruction 1, above), the original and two certified copies of all orders involved, with all endorsements, must accompany claim.\n\n3. Claim should be prepared and forwarded to BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, Washington 25, D. C., in accordance with Article 2513, U. S. Navy Travel Instructions.\n\n4. CLAIM MUST BE SUBMITTED IN QUADRUPLICATE. The original is to be on NAV. S. and A. Form 912—Rev. and signed in ink on the face. Three copies (unsigned) to be on NAV. S. and A. Form 913—Rev.\n\n5. SECURELY STAPLE ALL PAPERS TOGETHER.\n\n6. The space below is to be used for any additional information by claimant which is necessary in settlement of this claim.\n\nI certify except as noted hereon that no prior claim has been presented by me or by any member of my family for the reimbursement for the transportation of dependents as claimed herein and that no transportation in kind has been furnished therefor.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\nLt. USN\n\nMEMORANDUM\n\nCERTIFICATE OF DEPENDENCY OF CHILDREN\n(Note: To be used only for adopted or step children)\n\nI, ____ certify that ____ is (are) my (adopted) (step) child (children) and is (are) member(s) of my household; that said child is (children are) not possessed of property or income adequate for its (their) support and education; that it is (they are) not the beneficiary or beneficiaries, either directly or through others, or any trust or estate entitling it (them) to income adequate for its (their) support and education; that said child is (children are) in fact now and at all times solely dependent on me; that in all respects I maintain the child (children) at my own expense and from my own resources and am not reimbursed therefor directly or indirectly in any manner or form whatsoever; and that evidence of the child's (children's) dependency on me and my maintenance of it (them) has been filed with my pay accounts and is hereby made a part thereof. (See special requirements, Art. 2513, U. S. Navy Travel Instructions.)\n\nSIGNATURE\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—44805—1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FU/FE12/P16-4/00/60:wn UNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET Air Force UTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET\nNAVY ACCOUNTS DISSOLVED GREAT LAKES, ILLINOIS\nTRANS. OF DEPENDENTS\nSerial: 82-48 1 July 1948.\nFrom: Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nTo: Lieutenant\nAmount $\nOn Bu. Vou. No.\nDate\nJ. SCOTT (SC) USN\nSubject: LT. Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 0177283/1350, U. S. Navy. Change of Duty.\n\nReference: (a) BuPers disp. 221305Z of June 1948.\n\n1. Reference (a) is quoted, for information and compliance:\n\nLT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 DIRDET ABOUT 1 JULY PRORFP BUAER NAVY DEPT TEM ABOUT 2 WEEKS X COMPLETION DIRDET PRORFP BAGR\n\nCENTRALDIST WRIGHT PATTERSON AIRFORCE BASE DAYTON OHIO DUTY REPLTR COMUNE X DELREP 15 DAYS WASH DC PROVIDED NO EXCESS\n\nLEAVE INVOLVED XX XX XX\n\n2. You will proceed immediately and report to the Commandant of the FOURTEENTH Naval District for transportation for yourself and your dependents to a port in the United States. Upon arrival you will proceed and carry out the orders contained in paragraph one above or any modification thereto.\n\n3. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new station advised of your address.\n\n4. Immediately upon reporting for duty in compliance with these orders, or any modifications thereto, you are hereby directed to forward to the Chief of Naval Personnel, via your new Commanding Officer, a copy of these orders, complete with all endorsements thereto, including the final reporting endorsement.\n\n5. Delivered and detached this date.\n\nJ. C. CRONIN.\n\nCopy to: CNO (OP-54) BuPers (Pers 31163) BuAer ComNINE ComAirPac ComServPac BAGR, Central District Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio. ComFOURTEEN. CERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2 - JUL 1948 Endorsement\nOFFICE OF THE COMMANDANT 14TH NAVAL DISTRICT, PEARL HARBOR, T. H.\nReported for transportation this date.\nTHOS. H. BINFORD By direction\n\nBuS&A Wash 25 D.C.\nMileage Rd 242.16\nAugust 17 1948\nVon\nP.L. BARNSFIELD, JR,\nLT, SC, USN, Symbol #55914 1138\n\nBuS&A Wash 25, D.C.\nPaid $14.00\nSubsTpnAcctExp\nAug 17 1948\nPer Diem From 7/15 to 7/16/48\nP.L. BARNSFIELD, JR, LT SC USN\nSYMBOL # 55914 1139\n\nNATS SPACE CONTROL CENTER, HONOLULU\nENDORSEMENT JUL 13 1947 DATE\nOFFICE OF THE COMMANDANT, 14th NAVAL DISTRICT\nREPOLTED, PROCEED BY AIR TRANSPORTATION ASSIGNED TO WC AIR PRIORITY 3D\nCERTIFIED TRANSPORTATION FURNISHED VIA NATS TRIP 2216 ON 15 JUL 1948\nJ.B. CANNON By direction\n\nMEMORANDUM ENDORSEMENT\nAir Transport Squadron TWO\nNAS Alameda California\nArrived NAS Alameda, California aboard flight 16 JUL 1948 2216 at ____ PST\nAir Transport Officer\n\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OO/Newhouse, D.C. (177283/1350)\n13 July 1948\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on ComWingPac orders Serial 82-48 dated 7-1-48.\nFrom: Commandant, Fourteenth Naval District.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, U.S. Navy.\nSubject: Change of duty.\n1. You reported for transportation on 2 July 1948.\n2. Travel by government air is directed outside the continental limits of the United States. For travel via Military Air Transport Service Aircraft, Class THREE priority is hereby certified.\n3. Detached this date. Report immediately to the Booking Office, MATS Terminal, Hickam Field, for air transportation.\nS. S. MURRAY.\n\nNATS SPACE CONTROL CENTER, HONOLULU\nENDORSEMENT JUL 13 PAID DATE CHECKED IN ATC FOR FLITE\nOFFICE OF THE COMMANDANT, 14th NAVAL DISTRICT REPORTED, PROCEED BY AIR TRANSPORTATION ASSIGNED TO WC AIR PRIORITY 3D\nCERTIFIED TRANSPORTATION FURNISHED VIA NATS TRIP 2216 ON 15 JUL 1948\nJ.B. CANNON By direction\n\nHEADQUARTERS 12TH NAVAL DISTRICT PR #47\nPAID $225.=, DATE 7/17/48\nR. E. PRENTICE, Comdr. (SC) USNR. 56-310\nK.D. TAYLOR, Deputy For R.E. PRENTICE, COMDR (SC) USNR 56-310\n\nUSNAS Anacostia, D.C. Paid $210 this date. PAY 30 8/9/48\nJ. W. HILLMAN, LTJG, SC, USN, Symbol 531316 By H.E. NICHOLS Deputy"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM ENDORSEMENT\nAir Transport Squadron TWO\nNAS, Alameda, California\nArrived NAS, Alameda, California aboard\nFlight JUL 16 1948 date 2216\nat 1330 PST\n\n/s/ Tetwenas\nAir Transport Officer\n\nMEMORANDUM ENDORSEMENT 17 July 1948\n\nArrived San Francisco, California\nProceeding this date, via privately owned automobile, to carry out basic orders.\n\n/s/ D. C. NEWHOUSE,\nLt., USN."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aer-PE-2\nOO/NEWHOUSE,D.C.\n\nTHIRD ENDORSEMENT on ComUtWingPac\norders Serial 82-48 dated 7/1/48\n\n11 August 1948\n\nFrom: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350\n\nSubject: Change of duty.\n\n1. Reported this date for temporary duty.\n\nC. H. Holt\nBy Direction\n\nARRIVED CONT. U.S. at Alameda, California 16 July 1948.\n\nLeft Alameda 16 July 1948\n\nArrived Washington, D.C. 11 August 1948\n\nNo Government transportation furnished.\n\n/s/ D.C. Newhouse.\n(Officer's Signature)\n\nTravel was performed by privately owned automobile.\nAughority ALNAV 613-46. No government Transportation\nfurnished.\n\n/s/ D.C. Newhouse.\nSignature of Officer."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\nPers-31167-PAB-1\n\n18 August 1948\n\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN,\nBureau of Aeronautics,\nNavy Department.\n\nVia: BuAer (2).\n\nSubject: Modification of orders.\n\n1. Your dispatch orders 221305 June 1948 are modified in that when directed by the Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics, you will regard yourself detached from temporary duty in the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, will proceed immediately to Philadelphia, Pa., and report to the Supply Officer in Command, Naval Aviation Supply Depot for temporary duty for a period of about two days in the Aviation Supply Office, Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa.\n\n2. Upon completion of this temporary duty you will carry out the remainder of your basic orders.\n\nCC: ComNine (2)\nCNO (OP-54)\nSupOfComd, NASD, Phila, Pa.\nBAGR, CentralDist, WrightPatterson AirForceBase, Dayton, Ohio.\n\nJacket copy\nPers-311s\nPers-82233\nPers-3118-F\nPers-31167\n\nT. L. SPRAGUE\n\n6717\n\n[stamps: RECEIVED SEP -3 1948 BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL; NAVY ACCOUNTS DISBURSING OFFICE GREAT LAKES, ILLINOIS; SEP 15 1948]"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aer-PE-2\nOO/NEWHOUSE,D.C.\n\nFOURTH ENDORSEMENT on ComUtWingPac\norders Serial 82-48 dated 7/1/48\n\n18 August 1948\n\nFrom: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350\n\nSubject: Change of Duty.\n\n1. Detached this date from temporary duty.\n\n/s/ C. H. HOLT\nBy direction\n\nJN-177283/1350\nEnd-5 21 August 1948 ASO Phila., 11, Pa.\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350\n1. Reported 19 August 1948; temporary duty completed 21 August 1948. No government quarters available or assigned you at this station.\n\nBy direction of Supply Officer-in-Command:\n\n/s/ E.R. BRITT\n\nOO/NEWHOUSE, D.C./ 24 AUGUST 1948 End-6\nLT/177283/1350/USN\n\nFrom: Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN.\n\n1. Reported this date. No government quarters or messing facilities are available at this station.\n\nM. LUKE,\nBy direction.\n\nI hereby certify that travel performed in accordance with these orders was by privately owned vehicle as follows:\n\nDeparted Washington, D.C. 1000, 8/18/48. Arrived Philadelphia 2100 8/18/48.\nDeparted Philadelphia, Pa 1230, 8/21/48. Arrived Dayton, Ohio 1030 8/24/48.\n\nI further certify that no Government transportation or transportation requests were furnished me for use in performing travel in compliance with these orders.\n\nD. C. NEWHOUSE."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 6-47)\n\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\n\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel DATE: 11 Aug. 1948\n\nFROM (Commanding officer) SHIP OR STATION\nChief, Bureau of Aeronautics BuAero., Navy Dept. Washington, D. C.\n\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\n\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle) RANK AND CORPS FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert C. LT, USN 177283/1350\n\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\n\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME\n\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS 9\n(Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.)\n\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 51\n\nUNDER ORDERS OF ComUtWingPac orders Serial 82-48 DATED 1 July 1948\n\n[stamps: Finished File Pers 8216A; C-2]\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before the regular hour for forenoon quarters on board ship or for beginning work at a shore station. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article 1727, Navy Regulations).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers C/L 44-47.\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/1350\nPers-31167-PAB-1\n\n18 August 1948\n\nFrom:\t\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo:\t\tLT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN,\n\t\tBureau of Aeronautics,\n\t\tNavy Department.\n\nVia:\t\tBuAer (2).\n\nSubject:\t\tModification of orders.\n\n1. Your dispatch orders 221305 June 1948 are modified in that when directed by the Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics, you will regard yourself detached from temporary duty in the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, will proceed immediately to Philadelphia, Pa., and report to the Supply Officer in Command, Naval Aviation Supply Depot for temporary duty for a period of about two days in the Aviation Supply Office, Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa.\n\n2. Upon completion of this temporary duty you will carry out the remainder of your basic orders.\n\nCC: ComNine (2)\nCNO (OP-54)\nSupOfComd,NASD,Phila,Pa.\nBAGR,CentralDist,WrightPatterson,\nAirForceBase,Dayton,Ohio.\t\t\tT. L. SPRAGUE\n\nJacket copy\nPers-311s\nPers-82233\nPers-3118-F\nPers-31167\n\nStruck: Pers 31167 / 5-18-48 / P.R.B.\n\nUpon reporting, forward to BuPers a copy of those orders, (Staff Corps Officers an additional copy to cognizant Bureau) via new Commanding Officer with all endorsements.\n6717"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET\nAir Force\nUTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET\nFU/FF12/P16-4/00/60:wn\n\nSerial: 82-48\t\t\t\t\t\t\t1 July 1948.\n\nFrom:\tThe Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nTo :\tLieutenant\n\tDelbert C. NEWHOUSE, 0177283/1350, U.S. Navy.\n\nSubject:\tChange of Duty.\n\nReference:\t(a) BuPers disp. 221305Z of June 1948.\n\n1.\tReference (a) is quoted, for information and compliance:\n\nLT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 DIRDET ABOUT 1 JULY PROREP BUAER NAVY DEPT TEM ABOUT 2 WEEKS X COMPLETION DIRDET PROREP BAGR\n\nCENTRALDIST WRIGHT PATTERSON AIRFORCE BASE DAYTON OHIO DUTY REPLTR COMINE X DELREP 15 DAYS WASH DC PROVIDED NO EXCESS\n\nLEAVE INVOLVED XX XX XX\n\nFinish File Pers-31163\n\n2.\tYou will proceed immediately and report to the Commandant of the FOURTEENTH Naval District for transportation for yourself and your dependents to a port in the United States. Upon arrival you will proceed and carry out the orders contained in paragraph one above or any modification thereto.\n\n3.\tKeep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new station advised of your address.\n\n4.\tImmediately upon reporting for duty in compliance with these orders, or any modifications thereto, you are hereby directed to forward to the Chief of Naval Personnel, via your new Commanding Officer, a copy of these orders, complete with all endorsements thereto, including the final reporting endorsement.\n\n5.\tDelivered and detached this date.\n\nCopy to:\nCNO (OP-54)\nBuPers (Pers 31163)\nBuAer\nComNINE\nComAirPac\nComServPac\nBAGR, Central District Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nComFOURTEEN.\n\nJ. C. CROHIN.\n\nFinish File Pers-31163"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\n\nDRAFTED BY: PERS 31163 RLR 1\tFILE NR: 177283/1350\tROOM NR:\tEXT. NR: 71302\nRELEASED BY: CAPT ALLEN SMITH JR\tCODE/SECT. NR:\tDATE: 21 JUNE 1948 1005\n\nPlease leave this space clear\n\nFROM: BUPERS WASHN D. C.\t\t\t\t\t23 1305\n\nTO:\tCOMUTWINGSPACFLT\n\nINFO:\tCOMAIRPAC\n\tCOMSERVPAC\n\tBAGR CENTRALDIST WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE DAYTON OHIO\n\tCOMNINE\n\nPRECEDENCE: PRIORITY / ROUTINE / NIGHT\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED RESTRICTED WILL BE CLASSIFIED PLAIN\n\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted as a night message.\n\nTEXT:\n\nLT DELBERT E NEWHOUSE 177283/1350 DIRDET ABOUT 1 JULY PROREP BUAER NAVY DEPT TEM ABOUT 2 WEEKS X COMPLETION DIRDET PROREP BAGR CENTRALDIST WRIGHT PATTERSON AIRFORCE BASE DAYTON OHIO DUTY/X DELREP 15 DAYS WASH DC PROVIDED NO EXCESS LEAVE INVOLVED\n\nCC:\nBUAER (2)\nCNO OP 54\n\nJacket copy\nPers-311s\nPers-82233\nPers-310F\nPers-31163 (2)\n\n24873"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVY DEPARTMENT\nOFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nOp-54D6/mls\nTo: Bu Pers (Att. Pers 316)\n\n14 JUN 1948\n\n1. It is requested that the below named person be issued orders as indicated below:\n\nFILE NO. 177283\tNAME NEWHOUSE Delbert E.\tRANK Lt.\tCLASSIF. 1350\tU.S.N. X\n\nORDERS OF / LETTER / CANCELED / MODIFIED / CORRECTED / REPEATED FOR COMPLIANCE / UNEXECUTED PORTION ORDERS OF / DISPATCH (time-group) / STUDENT AVIATOR CLAUSE / FLYING CLAUSE / TECHNICAL OBSERVER\n\nDETACHED: HEREBY / WHEN DIRECTED X / ON OR ABOUT X 1 July / WHEN RELIEVED (BY) / UPON REPORTING (OF) / UPON DISCHARGE TREATMENT\n\nFROM: Tem / Duty X / Temins / Dulns / Staff / Dufly\nAS:\n\nAT Utility Wings Pacific Fleet\nPROCEED: X Prorep / Prodelrep / Promrep / Report on / X Delrep 15 days\n\n1. TO Chief of Bureau of Aeronautics\nTRANS: X Prorep / Delrep \t Dirdet / X Comp Dirdet\nFOR: X Tem / X Duty / Staff / Dufly -- for approximately two (2) weeks\n\n2. TO Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n(handwritten: Wright Patterson Air Force Base)\nFOR: Tem / X Duty / Staff / Dufly\n\n3. TO\n\nHandwritten: Finished File Pers-31163\n\nPER DIEM / REMARKS\n\n24873\n\nJ. H. ARMSTRONG BY DIRECTION\n\nHandwritten notes: Utility Wings Pac; ComAirPac; CNO OP54; BuAero; (BuAero Rep Wright Field)\n\nINFORMATION ADDRESSEE(S): Utility Wing PAC; Bu Aero Rep Wright Fld.; Com Air PAC; CNO OP 54; BU AERO\n\nDATE 6-15\tPERS. NO. 31163\tDETAIL OFFICER Stochdale\tEXT. 71302\tDATE OUT BY 6-21-48\n\nNAVAER-1145 (REV. 9-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS 321—Revised July 1943\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW\n\nSHIP OR STATION: COMMANDER UTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET\tDATE: 20 March 1948\n\nFROM: The Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet. COMMANDING OFFICER\nTO: BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, NAVY DEPARTMENT\n\nSUBJECT: REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE. REPORT OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OF ABSENCE.\n\nIN CONFORMITY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF U. S. NAVY REGULATIONS, I REPORT THE FOLLOWING LEAVE OF ABSENCE TAKEN BY:\n\nNAME: NEWHOUSE (LAST) Delbert (FIRST) Clement (MIDDLE)\tFILE NO. 0177283\n\nRANK AND CORPS: LT, 1350, U.S.Navy\tSIGNAL NO. 16046\n\nUNDER ORDERS OF: ComUtWingPac\tDATED 2 March 1948\n\nNOTE: USE EITHER (A) OR (B). DO NOT USE BOTH FOR SAME LEAVE.\n\n(A) LEAVE: TOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME: TEN (10) days\n\n(B) DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS: TOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, EXCLUDING PREPARATION PERIOD OF 4 DAYS AND EXCLUDING ALLOWANCE FOR TRAVEL TIME FROM OLD TO NEW STATION VIA SHORTEST USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE.\n\nINSERT INCLUSIVE DATES TO AGREE WITH NUMBER OF DAYS LEAVE. SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW.\n\nCOMMENCING DATE / EXPIRING DATE\n\nLeave credit remaining as indicated on Officer's Leave Record, 31 days.\n\nSIGNED: ONIA B. STANLEY, Jr., CDR, USN. By direction. COMMANDING OFFICER\n\nINSTRUCTIONS:\n1. THE DAY OF DEPARTURE FROM STATION OR DUTY COUNTS AS A DAY OF DUTY; THE DAY OF RETURN AS A DAY OF LEAVE. THIS REFERS TO LEAVE TAKEN WHEN NOT DETACHED FROM SHIP OR STATION (SEE ARTICLE 1727, NAVY REGULATIONS).\n2. IN CASES OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE, THIS FORM SHOULD BE SUBMITTED IN ADDITION TO THE B-SLIP FORM.\n3. THIS REPORT WILL BE MADE AT EXPIRATION OF LEAVE BY THE IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR OF THE OFFICER TO WHOM THE LEAVE IS GRANTED AND FORWARDED IMMEDIATELY TO THE NAVY DEPARTMENT (BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL). CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO INSURE THAT CORRECT NUMBER OF DAYS OF LEAVE IS REPORTED AND CORRESPONDS WITH THE INCLUSIVE DATES REPORTED.\n16-33335-2 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UTILITY SQUADRON NINE\nCARE OF FLEET POST OFFICE\nSAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\n\nVU9/P16-4/00/rub\n\nSerial: 79\n\n26 January 1948\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT to\nComAirPac Orders serial\nT-194-48 dated 7 January\n1948.\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer, Utility Squadron NINE.\nTo :\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 0177283/1350, USN.\n\nSubject:\tTemporary Additional Duty.\n\n1.\tYou reported for temporary additional duty in Utility Squadron NINE on 19 January 1948.\n\n2.\tTemporary additional duty completed this date. Carry out your basic orders.\n\nA. G. NEAL\n\ncc:\tBuPers\n\tComAirPac\n\tComUtWingPac"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FU/FF12/P16-4/00\n60:ac\n\nUNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET\nAir Force\nUTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET\n\nSerial: 2-48\n\n17 January 1948\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT to:\nComAirPac Orders serial\nT-194-48 dated 7 January\n1948.\n\nFrom:\tThe Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nTo :\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 0177283/1350, U.S.N.\n\nSubject:\tTemporary Additional Duty.\n\n1.\tDelivered for compliance.\n\nJ. C. CRONIN.\n\nCopy to:\nBuPers\nComAirPac\n\nFinished File Pers 310F"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW\n\nNAVPERS 321—Revised July 1943\n\nSHIP OR STATION COMMANDER UTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET\nDATE 6 January 1948\n\nFROM: The Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet\nCOMMANDING OFFICER\nTO: BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, NAVY DEPARTMENT\n\nSUBJECT: REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE.\nREPORT OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OF ABSENCE.\n\nIN CONFORMITY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF U.S. NAVY REGULATIONS, I REPORT THE FOLLOWING LEAVE OF ABSENCE TAKEN BY:\n\nNAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement\nLAST FIRST MIDDLE\nFILE NO. 0177283\n\nRANK AND CORPS LT, U.S. Navy\nSIGNAL NO. 16046\n\nUNDER ORDERS OF ComUtWingPac\nDATED 9 December 1947\n\nNOTE: USE EITHER (A) OR (B). DO NOT USE BOTH FOR SAME LEAVE.\n\n(A) LEAVE: TOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME SEVEN (7) days\n\n(B) DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS:\nTOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, EXCLUDING PREPARATION PERIOD OF 4 DAYS AND EXCLUDING ALLOWANCE FOR TRAVEL TIME FROM OLD TO NEW STATION VIA SHORTEST USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE.\n\nINSERT INCLUSIVE DATES TO AGREE WITH NUMBER OF DAYS LEAVE. SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW.\n\nCOMMENCING DATE EXPIRING DATE\n\nLeave credit remaining as indicated on Officer's Leave Record, 40 days.\n\nSIGNED J. C. CRONIN, CAPT., U.S.N.,\nCommander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\n\nINSTRUCTIONS:\n\n1. THE DAY OF DEPARTURE FROM STATION OR DUTY COUNTS AS A DAY OF DUTY; THE DAY OF RETURN AS A DAY OF LEAVE. THIS REFERS TO LEAVE TAKEN WHEN NOT DETACHED FROM SHIP OR STATION (SEE ARTICLE 1727, NAVY REGULATIONS).\n2. IN CASES OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE, THIS FORM SHOULD BE SUBMITTED IN ADDITION TO THE B-SLIP FORM.\n3. THIS REPORT WILL BE MADE AT EXPIRATION OF LEAVE BY THE IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR OF THE OFFICER TO WHOM THE LEAVE IS GRANTED AND FORWARDED IMMEDIATELY TO THE NAVY DEPARTMENT (BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL). CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO INSURE THAT CORRECT NUMBER OF DAYS OF LEAVE IS REPORTED AND CORRESPONDS WITH THE INCLUSIVE DATES REPORTED.\n\n16-33335-2 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FT12-5/P16-3/00\n611-ms\n\nCOMMANDER AIR FORCE\nUNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET\n\nT-194-48\t7 January 1948\n\nFrom:\tCommander Air Force, Pacific Fleet.\nTo :\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, AVH, U.S. Navy, (177283).\n\nVia :\tCommander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\n\nSubject:\tTemporary Additional Duty.\n\n1.\tWhen directed by the Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet in January, 1948, proceed to the command indicated below for temporary duty in connection with inspection and operation of photographic laboratories. This is in addition to your present duties and upon completion thereof you will return and resume your regular duties.\n\nUtility Squadron NINE and detachments\n\n2.\tYou are authorized to omit or revisit any of the above mentioned commands or vary the itinerary as may be deemed necessary.\n\n3.\tTravel by government air is directed. For travel via Naval Transport Aircraft, Class II priority is hereby certified.\n\n4.\tAn excess of forty (40) pounds baggage is authorized while traveling by air.\n\n5.\tA per diem of $7.00 will be allowed while absent from your station, in accordance with paragraph 4153, U. S. Navy Travel Instructions.\n\nJ. D. PRICE.\n\nCopy to:\nBuPers\n\nFinished File Pers 310F"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\n\nDRAFTED BY PERS 31167 MD 1B\nFile Nr. 177283\nROOM Nr.\nEXT. Nr. 7803\n\nRELEASED BY CAPT ALLEN SMITH JR\nCODE/SECT. Nr.\nDATE 13 OCT 1947 1445\n\nPlease leave this space clear\n\nFROM: BUPERS WASHN D. C.\n(date/time group) (ECT)\n\nTO: COMFOURTEEN\n\nINFO: COMAIRPAC\nNAVAVIATIONSUPDEPOT NAVSUPCEN PEARL\n\nPRECEDENCE\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nDEFERRED\nNIGHT LETTER\n\nUNLESS CLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nWILL BE CLASSIFIED\nPLAIN\n\nUnless otherwise indicated, this dispatch will be transmitted with Deferred Precedence.\n\nTEXT:\nLT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE LINE 177283 DIRDET IN OCT NAVAVIATIONSUPDEP NAVSUPCEN PEARL PROCEP COMAIRPAC DUTY X DELREP FIFTEEN DAYS PROVIDED NO EXCESS LEAVE INVOLVED\n\nCC\nCNO OP54\n\n15885\n\nJacket Copy Pers 82233 Pers 28184 311a 3106 31167\nOPNAV-19-7 (8-46)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVY DEPARTMENT\nOFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n10 OCT 1947\nOp-54D6/rp\nTo: Bu Pers (Att. Pers 316)\n1. It is requested that the below named person be issued orders as indicated below:\nFILE NO. NAME (last) (first) (middle-initial) RANK CLASSIF.\n177 283 NEWHOUSE Delbert C. Lieut. Line\nU.S.N. U.S.N.R.\nORDERS OF\nUNEXECUTED PORTION ORDERS OF\nSTUDENT AVIATOR CLAUSE\nPLAIN AIR BGM NL DEF ROU-TINE PRIOR RESTR. CONF.\nLETTER\nDISPATCH (time-group)\nFLYING CLAUSE\nCANCELED MODIFIED CORRECTED REPEATED FOR COMPLIANCE TECHNICAL OBSERVER\nDETACHED HEREBY WHEN DIRECTED ON OR ABOUT In October\nWHEN RELIEVED (BY)\nUPON REPORTING (OF) UPON DISCHARGE TREATMENT\nFROM Tem Duty Temins Duins Staff Duffy\nAS:\nAT Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Pearl Harbor, T.H.\nPROCEED Prorep Prodelrep Prolmrep Report on Delrep 15 Days\n1. TO Commander, Air Force Pacific Fleet Pearl Harbor, T.H.\nFOR Tem Duty Staff Duffy Temins Duins Furas by\nTRANS: Dirdet Comp Dirdet AS:\nProrep Delrep\n2. TO\nFOR Tem Duty Staff Duffy Temins Duins Furas by\nTRANS: Dirdet Comp Dirdet AS:\nProrep Delrep\n3. TO\nFOR Tem Duty Staff Duffy Temins Duins Furas by\nTRANS: AS:\nPER DIEM REMARKS\n15885\nFINISHED FILE PERS-311S2\nG. J. Frauenheim\nG. J. Frauenheim\nBy Direction\nCno-op-54\nInformation Addressee(s) Comdt 14 N.D Com air pac MAIL MGM AMGM DISP.\nDATE 10-13-47 PERS. NO. 31167 DETAIL OFFICER Horigh EXT. 7803 DATE OUT 10-13-47\nNAVAER-1145 (REV. 9-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OC/Newhouse, D. C. (177283/1100)\nSerial No. 15809\n14 October 1947\nFrom: The Commandant, Fourteenth Naval District.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, LINE, U. S. Navy.\nVia: (1) Commander, U. S. Naval base, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\n(2) Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\nSubject: Change of duty.\nReference: (a) Bupers dispatch to Com 14, 131707Z of Oct. 1947.\n1. Reference (a) is quoted for your information and compliance:\n\"LT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE LINE 177283 WHEN DIRECTED BY THE SUPPLY OFFICER IN COMMAND NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER PEARL HARBOR TH IN OCTOBER 1947 DETACHED FROM DUTY AT THE NAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER PEARL HARBOR TH AND FROM SUCH OTHER DUTY AS MAY HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED X PROCEED AND REPORT TO THE COMMANDER AIR FORCE US PACIFIC FLEET FOR DUTY X A DELAY OF FIFTEEN DAYS IN REPORTING IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE ORDERS IS AUTHORIZED PROVIDED NO EXCESS LEAVE IS INVOLVED X DELAY TO COUNT AS LEAVE X KEEP BUPERS AND NAV STATION INFORMED OF ADDRESS X\"\n2. Immediately upon reporting for duty in compliance with these orders, or any modifications thereto, you are hereby directed to forward to the Chief of Naval Personnel, via your new commanding officer a copy of these orders complete with all endorsements thereto, including the final reporting endorsement.\nThos. H. Binford, By direction.\ncc: Bupers CNO (OP 54) ComservPac ComAirPac Com NAB 14ND"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS 321—Revised July 1943\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW\nShip or Station: Aviation Supply Depot Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H. Date: 17 October 1947\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo: Bureau of Naval Personnel, Navy Department\nSubject: Report of Leave of Absence.\nIn conformity with requirements of U.S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nName: Newhouse, Delbert C. File No. 177283\nRank and Corps: Lieutenant, USN\nUnder orders of: Dated:\nNote: Use either (a) or (b). Do not use both for same leave.\n(a) Leave: total number of days, including any travel time: Two\n(b) Delay counting as leave or leave between stations: total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route:\nInsert inclusive dates to agree with number of days leave.\nCommencing date: 0815 - 10/14/47 Expiring date: 2115 - 10/16/47\nLeave credit as indicated on Officers Leave Record, 48 days.\nSigned: M. J. P. Foley Commanding Officer\nInstructions:\n1. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article 1727, Navy Regulations).\n2. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form should be submitted in addition to the B-slip form.\n3. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Navy Department (Bureau of Naval Personnel). Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days of leave is reported and corresponds with the inclusive dates reported.\n16—33335-2 U.S. Government Printing Office"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"23 October 1947.\nFrom: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, LINE, U. S. Navy, (0177283).\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nVia: The Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nSubject: Compliance with orders - Report of.\nReference: (a) BuPers CircLtr 44-47\nEnclosure: (A) Orders of subject officer with FIRST, SECOND, THIRD, AND FOURTH endorsements thereto.\n1. In accordance with reference (a), enclosure (A) is forwarded herewith.\nDelbert C. Newhouse\nUNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET Air Force UTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET\nFU/FF12/P16-4/00/ 60:ac\nSerial: 1240\nOCT 24 1947\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT:\nFrom: The Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n1. Forwarded.\nJ. C. Cronin."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"23 October 1947.\nFrom: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, LINE, U. S. Navy, (0177283).\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nVia: The Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nSubject: Compliance with orders - Report of.\nReference: (a) BuPers Circltr 44-47\nEnclosure: (A) Orders of subject officer with FIRST, SECOND, THIRD, AND FOURTH endorsements thereto.\n1. In accordance with reference (a), enclosure (A) is forwarded herewith.\nDelbert C. Newhouse\nUNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET Air Force UTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET\nFU/FF12/P16-4/00/ 60:ac\nSerial: 1240\nOCT 24 1947\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT:\nFrom: The Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n1. Forwarded.\nJ. C. Cronin."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FU/FF12/P16-4/00/60:\tUNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET\nAir Force\nUTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET\n\nSerial: 092-47\n\n23 October 1947.\n\nFOURTH ENDORSEMENT on\nCom-14 Orders Serial\n15809 dated 10-14-47.\n\nFrom:\t\tThe Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nTo :\t\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, LINE, U.S. Navy,\n\t\t(0177283).\n\nSubject:\tChange of Duty.\n\n\t1.\tYou reported this date for duty on the Staff of the Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\tJ. C. CRONIN.\n\nCopy to:\n\tCNO (OP-54)\n\tComServPac\n\tCom-14\n\tComNAB 14ND\n\tComNavBase Pearl\n\tComFair, West Coast\n\tComAirPac"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COMMANDER AIR FORCE\nUNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET\n\nFF12-5/P16-4/00\n611-sn\n\nTHIRD ENDORSEMENT on\nCom-14 Orders Serial\n15809 dated 10-14-47.\n\n23 OCT 1947\n\nFrom:\t\tCommander Air Force, Pacific Fleet.\nTo :\t\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, Line, U.S. Navy, (177283).\n\nSubject:\tChange of Duty.\n\n\t1.\tYou reported to Commander Air Force, Pacific Fleet on 23 October 1947. You will proceed immediately and report to Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet for duty on his staff.\n\n\t2.\tNo transportation is necessary in the execution of these orders.\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\tJ. D. PRICE.\n\nCopy to:\n\tCNO (OP-54)\n\tComServPac\n\tCom-14\n\tComNAB 14ND\n\tComNavBase Pearl\n\tComFairWestCoast"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OO/NEWHOUSE D C\n(177283)\t\t\t\tNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, PEARL HARBOR, T. H.\n\t\t\t\t\t\tFSD-2 on Coml4 Ords Ser 15809 dtd 14 Oct 47\n\n22 October 1947\n\nFrom:\tSupply Officer in Command\nTo :\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, U. S. Navy\n\nSubj:\tChange of Duty\n\n1.\tDelivered and detached this date.\n\n\t\t\t\tW. V. FOX\n\ncc:\nCNO (OP 54)\nComServPac\nComAirPac\nComNAB 14ND\nCom14\nComNavBase Pearl"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"15443\n\nOO/NEWHOUSE, D. C.\n(177283)6CB/aft\n\n15 Oct 1947\n\nEnd-1 on Coml4 orders\nSer 15809 dtd 14 Oct 47.\n\nFrom:\tCommander, U. S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\nTo :\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, Line, U. S. Navy\nVia :\tSupply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center,\n\tPearl Harbor, T. H.\n\nSubj:\tChange of Duty\n\n1.\tForwarded for compliance when directed by the Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H., in October 1947.\n\n\t\t\t\tE. W. HANSON\n\ncc:\tCNO (OP 54)\n\tComServPac\n\tComAirPac\n\tComNAB 14ND\n\tCom14"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"15443\n\nOO/Newhouse, D. C.\n(177283/1100)\n\nSerial No. 15809\n\n14 October 1947\n\nFrom:\tThe Commandant, Fourteenth Naval District.\nTo:\tLieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, LINE, U. S. Navy.\nVia:\t(1) Commander, U. S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\n\t(2) Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\n\nSubject:\tChange of duty.\n\nReference:\t(a) Bupers dispatch to Com 14, 131707Z of Oct. 1947.\n\n1.\tReference (a) is quoted for your information and compliance:\n\n\"LT DELBERT C NEWHOUSE LINE 177283 WHEN DIRECTED BY THE SUPPLY OFFICER IN COMMAND NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER PEARL HARBOR TH IN OCTOBER 1947 DETACHED FROM DUTY AT THE NAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER PEARL HARBOR TH AND FROM SUCH OTHER DUTY AS MAY HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED X PROCEED AND REPORT TO THE COMMANDER AIR FORCE US PACIFIC FLEET FOR DUTY X A DELAY OF FIFTEEN DAYS IN REPORTING IN CONFORMANCE WITH THESE ORDERS IS AUTHORIZED PROVIDED NO EXCESS LEAVE IS INVOLVED X DELAY TO COUNT AS LEAVE X KEEP BUPERS AND NEW STATION ADVISED OF ADDRESS X\"\n\n2.\tImmediately upon reporting for duty in compliance with these orders, or any modifications thereto, you are hereby directed to forward to the Chief of Naval Personnel, via your new commanding officer a copy of these orders complete with all endorsements thereto, including the final reporting endorsement.\n\n\t\t\tTHOS. H. RINFORD,\n\t\t\tBy direction.\n\ncc: Bupers\n\tCNO (OP 54)\n\tComServPac\n\tComAirPac\n\tCom NAB 14ND"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS 821—Revised July 1943\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW\nSHIP OR STATION Aviation Supply Depot\nNaval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor DATE 1 August 1947\nFROM: SUPPLY OFFICER IN COMMAND\nCOMMANDING OFFICER\nTO: BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, NAVY DEPARTMENT\nSUBJECT: REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE.\n[REDACTED]\nIN CONFORMITY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF U. S. NAVY REGULATIONS, I REPORT THE FOLLOWING LEAVE OF ABSENCE TAKEN BY:\nNAME NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement FILE NO. 177283\nLAST FIRST MIDDLE\nRANK AND CORPS Lieutenant, USN SIGNAL NO.\nUNDER ORDERS OF DATED\nNOTE: USE EITHER (A) OR (B). DO NOT USE BOTH FOR SAME LEAVE.\n(A) LEAVE: TOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME Ten\n(B) DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS:\nTOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, EXCLUDING PREPARATION PERIOD OF 4 DAYS AND\nEXCLUDING ALLOWANCE FOR TRAVEL TIME FROM OLD TO NEW STATION\nVIA SHORTEST USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE.................................\nINSERT INCLUSIVE DATES TO AGREE WITH NUMBER OF DAYS LEAVE. SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW.\nCOMMENCING DATE 21 July 1947 EXPIRING DATE 31 July 1947\nLeave credit remaining as indicated on Officers Leave Record, 25 days\nSIGNED H. P. P. FOLEY\nCOMMANDING OFFICER\nINSTRUCTIONS:\n1. THE DAY OF DEPARTURE FROM STATION OR DUTY COUNTS AS A DAY OF DUTY; THE DAY OF RETURN AS A DAY OF LEAVE. THIS REFERS TO LEAVE TAKEN WHEN NOT DETACHED FROM SHIP OR STATION (SEE ARTICLE 1727, NAVY REGULATIONS).\n2. IN CASES OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE, THIS FORM SHOULD BE SUBMITTED IN ADDITION TO THE B-SLIP FORM.\n3. THIS REPORT WILL BE MADE AT EXPIRATION OF LEAVE BY THE IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR OF THE OFFICER TO WHOM THE LEAVE IS GRANTED AND FORWARDED IMMEDIATELY TO THE NAVY DEPARTMENT (BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL). CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO INSURE THAT CORRECT NUMBER OF DAYS OF LEAVE IS REPORTED AND CORRESPONDS WITH THE INCLUSIVE DATES REPORTED.\n16—33385-2 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF BENEFICIARIES NAVPERS-601 (1-45) 7\nOFFICER ENLISTED 1 May 1947\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement\n(Last name) (First) (Middle)\n177283 Lt., USN\n(File or service number) (Rank or rate and classification)\nU.S. Aviation Supply Depot, NSC, P.H., T.H.\n(Ship or station)\nTo carry out the provisions of the acts approved 4 June 1920, 22 May 1928, 12 May 1930, and 17 March 1941, and acts amendatory thereof directing the payment of 6 months' pay to the widow, children, or dependent relative of any of the personnel on the active list of the Regular Navy, or on the retired list when on active duty, or of any of the personnel of the Naval Reserve called or ordered into active naval service by the Federal Government for extended naval service in excess of 30 days, who dies of wounds or disease not the result of his or her own misconduct, I give below the name and address of my wife or husband and the name and address of each of my children:\nNorma Isobel Newhouse\n(Full name of wife or husband; if not married, so state)\n412 3rd St., NHA#1, Honolulu, T.H.\n(Address of wife or husband)\nDelbert Carroll Newhouse 6/28/38\n(Full name of child; if none, so state) (Date of birth)\n412 3rd St., NHA#1, Honolulu, T.H.\n(Address of child)\nAnne Lisbet Newhouse 3/14/40\n(Full name of child) (Date of birth)\n412 3rd St., NHA#1, Honolulu, T.H.\n(Address of child)\n(Full name of child) (Date of birth)\n(Address of child)\n* In the event that I am not survived by a wife (or husband) or child, or In the event of their decease prior to payment and collection of the gratuity, I then designate the following person as my dependent beneficiary under the act:*\nEdith May Richter\n(Name in full)\nG.D., Garibaldi, Oregon\n(Address)\nMother\n(Relationship)\nIn the event of the death of the above-named beneficiary before payment and collection of the gratuity, I then designate the following person as my dependent beneficiary under the act:*\n(Name in full)\n(Address)\n(Relationship)\n*The acts state that death gratulty must be paid to the surviving wife (or husband) or children, if any. In the event of leaving no wife or children, it may then be paid to a designated dependent beneficiary. Every member of the service, whether married or not, should designate a beneficiary (and an alternate, in case of prior death of the primary beneficiary). Failure to make such designation may result in nonpayment of the gratuity. Such designation does not affect payment to a surviving wife (or husband) or children.\nc6-16—43177-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8\nI CERTIFY that I will inform the Bureau of Naval Personnel via my commanding officer immediately of any changes in marital status, or conditions of dependency, or of voluntary occupancy of public quarters by my dependents.\nI CERTIFY that there has been no change in condition of dependency\nbetween ____________________ and current date.\n(Date of last report of beneficiaries)\nI do solemnly swear (or affirm) that the facts stated and disclosed in the foregoing are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.\n[signature]\n(Signature)\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this 28th\nday of April, 1947, I having authority to administer oaths.\n[signature]\n(Signature) Cdr, SC, USN\n(Rank)\nINSTRUCTIONS\nThis form must be sworn to before an officer of the United States Navy authorized to administer oaths, or before a notary public.\nThe full names and addresses of the beneficiaries must be stated carefully. If a married woman, her own given name should be stated; thus: \"Mrs. Anna May Smith,\" not \"Mrs. John Smith.\"\nThis slip shall be made out and handled as follows:\nOfficer, Navy: Forward to Bureau of Naval Personnel.\nNurse: Forward to Bureau of Medicine and Surgery.\nEnlisted men, Navy: In duplicate; one copy to Bureau of Naval Personnel, one copy secured inside service record. In cases of men entitled to money allowances for quarters for enlisted men with dependents, two additional copies, bearing the required certificate, to the Disbursing Officer.\nNew beneficiary slips shall be executed and forwarded as above in all cases of change in status of the grantor or in that of his or her beneficiaries.\nIn any event, payment will be made to the widow or children, if any, whether designated or not.\nNormally casualty notification will be sent to all the beneficiaries designated on this form. If, by reason of unusual circumstances, other special arrangements are desired, a statement should be attached setting forth full instructions including full names, addresses, and relationships.\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE c6-16—43177-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Address Reply to SUPPLY OFFICER IN COMMAND and refer to:\nAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nNaval Supply Center\nPearl Harbor, T. H.\n19 November 1946\nFrom: LT Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, USN (177283)\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nAttn: Pers-3122\nVia: Supply Officer in Command\nSubj: Retention on Active Duty in Commissioned Status\nRef: (a) AlNav 588-46\n(b) My Acceptance and Oath of Office, 25 September 1946\n1. It is requested that I be retained on active duty in a commissioned status until 30 June 1948 or longer.\n2. By reference (b) I accepted a permanent appointment as Chief Photographer, USN, and acknowledged receipt of notice of appointment to the rank of Lieutenant in the Navy for temporary service.\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\nP16-3/00\nNT4-93(3:KAG:nlw)\nSerial: 4763\n19 NOV 1946\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nAttn: Pers-3122\n1. Forwarded, recommending approval.\nK. A. GRAHN\ncc: Com-14 (Officer Personnel Section)\nSOinC NSC PH\nFINISHED FILE PERS 82232\nForm No.-NSC-43"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":225,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Address Reply to SUPPLY OFFICER IN COMMAND and refer to:\nAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nNaval Supply Center\nPearl Harbor, T. H.\n19 November 1946\nFrom: LT Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, USN (177283)\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nAttn: Pers-3122\nVia: Supply Officer in Command\nSubj: Retention on Active Duty in Commissioned Status\nRef: (a) AlNav 588-46\n(b) My Acceptance and Oath of Office, 25 September 1946\n1. It is requested that I be retained on active duty in a commissioned status until 30 June 1948 or longer.\n2. By reference (b) I accepted a permanent appointment as Chief Photographer, USN, and acknowledged receipt of notice of appointment to the rank of Lieutenant in the Navy for temporary service.\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\nP16-3/00\nNT4-93(3:KAG:nlw)\nSerial: 4763\n19 NOV 1946\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nAttn: Pers-3122\n1. Forwarded, recommending approval.\nK. A. GRAHN\ncc: Com-14 (Officer Personnel Section)\nSOinC NSC PH\nFINISHED FILE PERS 82232\nForm No.-NSC-43"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":226,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283\n\nC./Newhouse, D.C.\n(177283)\n\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, PEARL HARBOR, T.H.\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on Coml4 Ords\nserial 3014 dtd 26 Feb 1947\n\n26 February 1947\n\nFrom:\tSupply Officer in Command\nTo :\tLieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, USN\nVia :\tSOinC, Aviation Supply Depot\n\nSubj:\tAuthorization to travel.\n\n1.\tDelivered.\n\nE. E. BRIGHTON\nBy direction\n\ncc: BuPers\nComNavBase\nComl4\n\nC-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":227,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Address Reply to\nSUPPLY OFFICER IN COMMAND\nand refer to:\n\nAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nNaval Supply Center\nPearl Harbor, T. H.\n\n4 April 1947\n\nFrom: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN (177283)\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers 3216A), Navy Department, Washington 25, D.C.\n\nSubj: Claim for Unused Leave, Request for information concerning\n\n1. On 25 November 1946 my claim for unused leave was forwarded to the Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers 3216A) by my commanding officer. In January 1947 the claim was returned for correction of minor errors; required corrections were made, and all papers were returned to the Bureau of Personnel the same month.\n\n2. To date I have not been advised by BuPers either that my claim has been forwarded to the Terminal Leave Disbursing Office or that further correction of the claim is necessary. Information concerning action taken by the Bureau in processing the claim would be appreciated.\n\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\n\nForm No.-NSC-43\n\nFinished File Pers 3216A"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":228,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Address Reply to\nSUPPLY OFFICER IN COMMAND\nand refer to:\n\nAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nNaval Supply Center\nPearl Harbor, T. H.\n\n4 April 1947\n\nFrom: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN (177283)\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers 3216A), Navy Department, Washington 25, D.C.\n\nSubj: Claim for Unused Leave, Request for information concerning\n\n1. On 25 November 1946 my claim for unused leave was forwarded to the Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers 3216A) by my commanding officer. In January 1947 the claim was returned for correction of minor errors; required corrections were made, and all papers were returned to the Bureau of Personnel the same month.\n\n2. To date I have not been advised by BuPers either that my claim has been forwarded to the Terminal Leave Disbursing Office or that further correction of the claim is necessary. Information concerning action taken by the Bureau in processing the claim would be appreciated.\n\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\n\nForm No. NSC-43"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":229,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CO/Newhouse, D.C.\n(177283)\n\nSerial No. 3 14\n\n2 February 1947\n\nFrom: The Commandant, Fourteenth Naval District.\nTo : Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, U.S. Navy.\nVia : SOinC, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H.\n\nSubj: authorization to travel.\n\n1. When directed by the Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H., on or about 28 February 1947, you are authorized to proceed to the island of Maui, T.H., and upon arrival report to the Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station, Kahului, Maui, T.H., for temporary duty in connection with processing Naval Air Station requisitions backlog. This is in addition to your present duties, and upon completion thereof, and when directed by the Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station, Kahului, Maui, T.H., return to your station and resume your present duties.\n\n2. Except where other means of authorized travel are equally or more expeditious, travel by government air is directed and is necessary for the successful accomplishment of an essential or emergency mission. For transportation via Naval Air Transport Service aircraft, Class THREE priority is hereby certified.\n\n3. No expense to the government is authorized in the execution of this authorization. In case you do not desire to bear this expense you will regard this authorization as revoked.\n\nJ. J. HALL, JR.\n\ncc: Rulers\nComdt., NavBase, Pearl\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 3163\n\nC-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":230,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CO/Newhouse, D.C.\n(177283)\n\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, PEARL HARBOR, T.H.\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on ComL4 Ords\nserial 3014 dtd 26 Feb 1947\n\n26 February 1947\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo : Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, USN\nVia : SOinC, Aviation Supply Depot\n\nSubj: Authorization to travel.\n\n1. Delivered.\n\nE. E. BRIGHTON\nBy direction\n\ncc: BuPers\nComNavBase\nComl4\n\nC-2\n\n-----\n\nCO/Newhouse, D.C.\n(177283)\n\nAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT, PEARL HARBOR, T.H.\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on ComL4 Ords\nserial 3014 dtd 26 Feb 1947\n\n27 February 1947\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, USN\n\nSubj: Authorization to travel\n\n1. Delivered.\n\nK. A. GRAHN\n\ncc: BuPers\nComNavBase\nComl4\nSOinC, NSC PH\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 3163"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":231,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL AIR STATION KAHULUI, MAUI, T. H.\n\nNA114/P16-4/00\nOR3/MHH/ess\n\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nKAHULUI, MAUI, T. H.\n\nEnd-3 28 February 1947.\nFrom: The Commanding Officer.\nTo : Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, U. S. Navy.\n\nSubj: Authorization to travel.\n\n1. Reported for temporary additional duty this date.\n\n2. Temporary additional duty completed this date. Carry out remainder of basic orders.\n\nT. J. HEDDING.\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nEND-4 on ComI4 Orde serial 3014 dtd 26 Feb 1947\nAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT PEARL HARBOR\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, U. S. Navy\n28 February 1947\n\n1. Returned from temporary additional duty this date.\n\nK. A. GRAHN\n\ncc: BuPers\nComNavBase\nComl4\nSOinC NSC PH"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":232,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BNP 321 REVISED [REDACTED] 243\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE See Instructions Below\n\nShip or Station Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Phila., Pa Date 25 April 1946\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nCommanding Officer\n\nTO: Bureau of Naval Personnel, Navy Department\n\nSUBJ: REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\n\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. NAVY regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\n\nNAME NEWHOUSE Delbert C File No. 177283\nLast First Middle\n\nRANK AND CORPS Lieut. USN SIGNAL NO.\n\nUNDER ORDERS OF SOinC 1st endorsement DATED 11 April 1946\n\nNOTE: Use either (A) or (B). DO NOT use both for same leave.\n\n(A) LEAVE: Total number of days, including any travel time 2 Days\n\n(B) Delay counting as leave or leave between stations. Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.\n\nInsert inclusive dates to agree with number of days leave. See instructions below.\n\nCOMMENCING DATE 16 April 1946 EXPIRING DATE 17 April 1946\n\nBy direction of SOinC:\n\nSIGNED W. D. SAMS Lieut. SC USN\nMilitary Personnel Officer\n\nINSTRUCTIONS:\nThe day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; of return as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not from ship or station (See ARTICLE 1727, Navy Regulations).\n\nAuthorized delay counting as leave, this form should be sent to the B-slip Form.\n\nmade at expiration of leave by the immediate from the leave is granted and forwarded ent (Bureau of Naval Personnel). Care rect number of days leave is reported and tes reported."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":233,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Standard Form No. 1012a-Revised\nVOUCHER FOR PER DIEM AND/OR REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCIDENT TO OFFICIAL TRAVEL\n\nD. O. Vou. No. 278-47\nBureau No.\n\n(Statement of account must be completely filled in by payee prior to signature, and there must not be any erasure or alteration unless initialed or signed by him)\n\nGeneral Accounting Office PREAUDIT\n\nU.S. NAVY DEPARTMENT\nTHE UNITED STATES, Dr., To Delbert C. Newhouse, Lt. SC, USN\nAviation Supply Depot, Pearl Harbor.\nOfficial Headquarters c/o FPO San Francisco, California\n\nPAID BY\n23 DEC 1946\n\nFOR PER DIEM in lieu of subsistence, mileage for privately owned motor vehicle, and/or REIMBURSEMENT of travel and other expenses paid by me in the discharge of official duty from August 21, 1946, to Nov. 27, 1946, as per itemized statement within, under authority No. ______, dated August 7, 1946, copy of which is attached.\n\nAMOUNT Dollars 254.32\n\nAccounting classification\nAppropriation 1770813 TRNP 1947 74110 $254.32\n\nPaid by Cash, $254.32, on 23 Dec. 1946\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse, Lt SC, USN\n\nMEMORANDUM"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":234,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ITEMIZED SCHEDULE OF TRAVEL AND OTHER EXPENSES\n\n1. Date and hour of departure from official headquarters\n2. Give duty status on first day of voucher period:\n*Arrived at on 19\nfor temporary duty for approximate period\nApproximate date of return to official headquarters 19\n3. State authorized per diem in lieu of subsistence, $\n4. State authorized allowance for actual subsistence expenses: Not to exceed $ per day.\n5. Where for traveler's personal convenience or through the taking of leave there is interruption of travel, deviation from the direct route, or where traveler delays at a place other than post of duty, a statement showing the facts should appear on the voucher.\n\nReimbursement for cost of transportation of my dependents wife and children on permanent change of duty from Aviation Supply Depot, Phila Pa. to Aviation Supply Depot, P. H.\n\nI certify that Norma I. Newhouse is my lawful wife, and that Delbert Carroll Newhouse, and Anne Lisbet Newhouse, age 8 and 6 years, male and female born June 28, 1938 and March 14, 1940 are my legitimate children.\n\nI, Delbert C. Newhouse certify that Delbert Carroll Newhouse and Anne Lisbet Newhouse are my legitimate children, will be 9 and 7 years of age at next birthday, and are members of my household; that said children are not possessed of property or income adequate for their support and education; that they are not the beneficiary, either directly or through others, of any trust or estate entitling their income adequate for their support and education; that said children are in fact now and at all times solely dependent on me; that in all respects I maintain the children at my own expense and from my own resources and am not reimbursed therefor directly or indirectly in any manner or form whatsoever, and that evidence of the children's dependency upon me and my maintenance of them have been filed with my pay accounts and is hereby made a part hereof.\n\nI certify that the location of my dependents named herein on August 7, 1946 the date I received my orders was Philadelphia, Pa.\n\nTravel of dependents named herein was made from PHILA Pa. to San Francisco, California."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":235,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Departed: Phila Pa. on August 21, 1946\nArrived: Garibaldi, Oregon on Aug. 27, 1946\n(Privately owned automobile)\n\nDeparted: Garibaldi, Oregon on Nov. 26, 1946\nArrived: San Francisco, Calif. on Nov. 27, 1946\n(Commercial transportation)\n\nPhiladelphia Pa. to San Francisco, California - 3079 miles\n(G.M.T. TM 14-510 page 356-)\n3079 miles - - - - - - - 6 4¢ per mile 127 16\n3079 miles - - - - - - - 6 2¢ per mile 63 58\n3079 miles - - - - - - - 6 2¢ per mile 63 58\nTOTAL CLAIMED: $254.32\n\nAbove travel was performed by private conveyance and commercial transportation.\n\nI certify that all travel performed by my dependents was at my own expense, no portion thereof being made by Government conveyance or transportation requests.\n\nThe reimbursement requested herein is in accordance with paragraph 3 of the Secretary of the Navy's letter of 23 Dec. 1943.\n\nI hereby designate San Francisco, California as the point to which travel is desired.\n\nI hereby certify that the above account is just and true in all respects and that the penalties for presenting a false claim are known to me.\n\nI certify, except as noted hereon, that no prior claim has been presented by me or any member of my family for the reimbursement for transportation of dependents as claimed herein that no transportation in kind has been furnished therefor.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\nLt. SC, USN\n\nTotals (to be carried forward to continuation sheet, if necessary)\n\nTotal amount of voucher (not to be used when totals are carried forward to continuation sheet)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":236,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STATEMENT OF TRAVEL PERFORMED FOR WHICH REIMBURSEMENT IS NOT CLAIMED BY TRAVELER\nDATE OF TRAVEL | NO. OF TRANSPORTATION REQUEST OR SPEEDOMETER READING | FROM— | TO— | VIA (Kind of carrier or vehicle)* | CLASS OR MILEAGE† | AMOUNT\n*Railroad, steamship, airplane, bus, etc.\n†Abbreviate class of service or accommodations used. Railroad: F, first class; I, intermediate class; M, mixed class; C, coach; P, Pullman accommodations; DR, drawing room; CP, compartment; BR, bedroom; SOS, single occupancy section; SEC, section; LB, lower berth; UB, upper berth; S, seat. By other mode: Number of miles traveled.\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. The provisions of the travel regulations must be strictly observed in order to avoid suspensions and disallowances in the accounts.\n2. When more space is required for itemization of the account, use continuation sheets, standard forms 1012b—Revised and 1012c—Revised) and fasten together at left-hand corner.\n3. As many copies of the approved memorandum voucher may be made as required for administrative purposes.\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—23954-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":237,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In reply address not the signer of this letter, but Bureau of Naval Personnel, Navy Department, Wash. 25, D.C. Refer to No. 177283\nPers-3161-JMJ-1A\n7 August 1946\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa.\nVia: Supply Officer in Command.\nSubject: Change of duty.\n1. When directed by the Supply Officer in Command, Aviation Supply Depot, you will regard yourself detached from duty at the Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa., and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; will proceed to San Francisco, Calif., and report to the Commandant, Twelfth Naval District, for first available transportation to Pearl Harbor, T.H., and upon arrival report to the Commandant, Fourteenth Naval District, for duty at the Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Pearl Harbor, T.H., in connection with photography.\n2. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of five days in reporting at San Francisco, Calif., in compliance with these orders such delay to count as leave.\n3. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel advised of your address.\n/s/ LOUIS DENFELD\nLOUIS DENFELD F.W.B.\nCC:\nComFour.\nComTwelve.\nCNO (OP512).\nComFourteen.\nComServPac (2).\nSupOfComd, NavAviationSupDep, Pearl Harbor, T.H.\n11909\nStamped on face of Basic Letter:\nU.S. Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa.\n19 AUG 1946\nAdvanced ____months pay $300.00 which has been charged on my rolls.\n/s/ W.D. WRIGHT, Lt. (jg) (SC) USN\nDisbursing Officer"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":238,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Stamped on face of Basic Letter:\nD-AO---12th N.D. San Francisco,Calif. 9/3/46\nPaid mileage or per diem $238.31 04222-47\nFrom Philadelphia, Pa. To San Francisco, Calif.\n/s/ R E Pel, Deputy\nFor R. E. PRENTICE, COMDR.(SC) USNR 56-310\nNOTICE TO ALL OFFICERS ON CHANGE OF STATION\nIn view of the extreme housing shortage in all shore establishments it is considered highly inadvisable to move families until such time as the officer in question has reported for duty and obtained suitable quarters for his family.\nJacket No. 177283\nEnd-1 19 AUG 1946 NASD, Phila., Pa.\nTo: Lieut. Delbert C. Newhouse, USN.\n1. Delivered. Detached.\nBy direction of SOinC:\n/s/ J. A. SINCOCK\nJ. A. SINCOCK\nMilitary Personnel Officer\n18 SEP 1946 DISTRICT STAFF HEADQUARTERS TWELFTH NAVAL DISTRICT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\n_______Endorsement\nReported this date for transportation.\nYou are hereby assigned public quarters in BOQ.\n/s/ W.L.TAYLOR\nW.L.TAYLOR\nBy direction of the Comdt."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":239,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office of Commandant TWELFTH NAVAL DISTRICT San Francisco 2, California\n12th. ND 60ths NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. Lt. USN 177283 SEP 8 1946 2nd Endorsement\nFrom: The Commandant, Twelfth Naval District.\nTo: Lt. Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nSubj: Change of duty.\n1. Reported 1 Sept. 1946 for transportation.\n2. Detached this date. You will proceed in accordance with paragraph 3 and upon arrival at destination will report for duty as directed in basic orders.\n3. Via government air transportation. Priority No. C3\n4. The Disbursing Officer, Headquarters 12th. Naval District is authorized and directed to furnish you the necessary commercial air transportation from San Francisco, California to Honolulu, T.H., via Pan-American Airways. Excess baggage in amount ____ pounds is authorized. Priority No. ____ certified by Naval Air Priorities Office (NATS)\n5. Vacated public quarters in BOQ this date.\n/s/ W. L. TAYLOR\nW. L. TAYLOR\nBy direction of the Commandant\nCopy to: BuPers.\nMEMORANDUM ENDORSEMENT\nFrom: COMMANDING OFFICER VR-4\nTo: Newhouse\nTRANSPORTATION VIA NAVAL AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE FURNISHED FROM THIS STATION\nTO: H H L\n8 Sept 46 /s/ Lt. Cdr. Hawley Ca BY DIRECTION\nARRIVED AT Hon AT 0825 9/9/46\n/s/ Lt.(jg) Clements Signed by ATO OHG"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":240,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"End-3 Date: 9 SEP 1946\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, LINE, U.S. Navy.\nSubj: Change of duty.\nReported this date. You will further report to the Commandant, U.S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T.H., for duty at the Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H., in connection with photography.\n/s/ A. A. KNOTEK\nA. A. KNOTEK\nBy direction.\ncc: BuPers ComServPac CNO (op 512) FRO San Fran\nEnd-4 9 September 1946\nFrom: Commandant, U. S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T.H.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, LINE, USN.\nSubj: Change of duty.\n1. Reported this date. Further report to Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H. for duty at the Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H., in connection with photography.\n/s/ E. W. HANSON\nE. W. HANSON\ncc: BuPers ComServPac CNO (Op 512) FRO San Fran Com 14\nEnd-5 (onBuPers 3161-JMJ-1A dtd 7 Aug 1946) Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H.\n9 September 1946\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo: LT Delbert C. Newhouse, LINE, USN\nVia: SOinC, Aviation Supply Depot, NSC\nSubj: Change of Duty\n1. Reported this date. You will further report to the Supply Officer in Command, Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H. for duty.\n/s/ T. M. NEECE\nT. M. NEECE\nBy direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":241,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"END-6\t\t\t\t\t\tAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT, PEARL HARBOR\n\n9 September 1946\n\nFrom:\tSupply Officer in Command\nTo:\tLT Delbert C Newhouse LINE USN\n\n1.\tReported this date.\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t/s/ G. M. BRYDON\n\t\t\t\t\t\tG. M. BRYDON ( )\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tCertified to be a True Copy\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[signature]"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":242,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S. and A. Form 33\n(Revised May 1941)\n\nAPPLICATION FOR TRANSPORTATION FOR DEPENDENTS\n(See Art. 2505-3 Navy Travel Instructions)\n\nFROM: LT D C NEWHOUSE, LINE, U.S. N.\nTo: Bureau of Naval Personnel Via: Commandant, Fourteenth Naval Dist.\n\nEnclosures: Three certified copies of orders of BuPers dated 7 August 1946, detaching me from duty at (on) NASD Philadelphia and ordering me to permanent duty at (on) ASD Pearl Harbor.\n\n1. It is requested that transportation be furnished the following, who were my dependents on the effective date of above orders:\nName / Relationship / Date of birth of children / Location of dependents when orders were received\nNorma I. Newhouse, Wife, 6148 Oxford Ave., Philadelphia, Pa.\nDelbert C. Newhouse, Son, 6/28/38\nAnne L. Newhouse, Daughter, 3/14/40\n\nAddress of dependents Garibaldi, Oregon - c/o Mrs. V. Richter\nFrom San Francisco, Cal to Pearl Harbor, T.H. via\nWith stopover at\nPullman or stateroom accommodations Stateroom\nApproximate time travel is to begin First available\n\n2. I certify that the children named above are my Legitimate children will be 9 and 7 years of age, respectively, at next birthday, and are members of my household; that said children are not possessed of property or income adequate for their support and education; that they are not the beneficiary, or beneficiaries, either directly or through others, of any trust or estate entitling them to income adequate for their support and education; that said children are in fact now and at all times solely dependent on me; that in all respects I maintain the children at my own expense and from my own resources and am not reimbursed therefor directly or indirectly in any manner or form whatsoever; *and that evidence of the children's dependency upon me and my maintenance of them has been filed with my pay accounts and is hereby made a part hereof.\n\n3. I further certify in the case of my dependent mother that she is in fact dependent on me for her chief support, that she resided with me as a member of my household while at my last permanent duty station, and that an affidavit of evidence of dependency, filed ____ has been accepted by the General Accounting Office for pay purposes. I further certify that there has been no change in the conditions of dependency since last filing of affidavit of dependent mother.\n\n4. I certify that ____ (Stepchild--stepchildren) is (are) the child (children) of ____ (Name of mother), who is on this date living, and my lawful wife.\n\n5. If transportation is furnished as requested above, to a place other than my new duty station, I hereby waive additional transportation for the dependents named herein.\n\n6. I certify that I have not made application for transportation for the dependents named in paragraph 1 on this change of station except as follows: ____\n\n7. I hereby authorize the checking of my personal pay account for any excess cost involved due to transportation furnished in excess of that authorized at Government expense; and hereby agree to accept such checkage in lieu of cash payment prior to issuance of transportation requests.\n\nAPPROVED: [signature] (Signature of applicant)\n____ U.S.N., Commanding.\nApproval of commanding officer is required in all cases where it is impracticable or impossible for the applicant to attach original orders.\n\n13 DEC 1946\nBUPS-TWELFTH NAVAL DISTRICT\nThe transportation requested above has been furnished as described on the reverse hereof. No Government transportation available. furn on USS GEN. RANDALL on 11/27/46. No rail transp. furn.\nFOR: A. E. JACKSON (SC) USNR (Signature of issuing officer) U.S.N.\n\n*In the case of officers drawing rental and subsistence allowance with dependents including a wife this clause may be omitted.\n†If adopted children of enlisted men attach authenticated copy of adoption papers signed under seal by the clerk of the court having jurisdiction to be forwarded to the Bureau of Supplies and Accounts. If such copy has been forwarded on a previous change of station reference to such evidence should be furnished.\n‡When orders are received while the dependents are temporarily absent from the old station a statement will be furnished showing necessity for dependents returning to the old station prior to proceeding to the new station.\n\nSEE INSTRUCTIONS FOR ISSUING OFFICERS ON REVERSE OF THIS FORM\n\nFinished File 812"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":243,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"END-6\t\t\t\t\t\tAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT, PEARL HARBOR\n\n9 September 1946\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo: LT Delbert C Newhouse LINE USN\n\n1.\tReported this date.\n\n\t\t\t\t\t/s/ G. M. BRYDON\n\t\t\t\t\tG. M. BRYDON ( )\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\tCertified to be a True Copy\n\t\t\t\t\t\t[signature]\n\nFinished File 812"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":244,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0/Newhouse, D.C. 4th Naval District, Pearl Harbor, T.H.\n177283)\n\nnd-3 Date: 9 SEP 1946\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, LINE, U.S. Navy.\nSubj: Change of duty.\n\nReported this date. You will further report to the Commandant, U.S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T.H., for duty at the Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H., in connection with photography.\n\n/s/ A. A. KNOTEK\nA. A. KNOTEK\nBy direction.\n\ncc: BuPers\nComServPac\nCNO (op 512)\nFRO San Fran\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nEnd-4 9 September 1946\nFrom: Commandant, U. S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T.H.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, LINE, USN.\nSubj: Change of duty.\n\n1. Reported this date. Further report to Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H. for duty at the Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H., in connection with photography.\n\n/s/ E. W. HANSON\nE. W. HANSON\n\ncc: BuPers\nComServPac\nCNO (Op 512)\nFRO San Fran\nCom 14\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nEnd-5 (onBuPers 3161-JMJ-1A dtd 7 Aug 1946)\t\tNaval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H.\n\n9 September 1946\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo: LT Delbert C. Newhouse, LINE, USN\nVia: SOinC, Aviation Supply Depot, NSC\n\nSubj: Change of Duty\n\n1. Reported this date. You will further report to the Supply Officer in Command, Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H. for duty.\n\n/s/ T. M. NEECE\nT. M. NEECE\nBy direction\n\nCertified to be a True Copy\n\nFinished File 812"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":245,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office of Commandant\nTWELFTH NAVAL DISTRICT\nSan Francisco 2, California\n\n12th. ND 60ths\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert C.\nLt. USN\n177283\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSEP 8 1946\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t2nd Endorsement\n\nFrom: The Commandant, Twelfth Naval District.\nTo: Lt. Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\nSubj: Change of duty.\n\n1. Reported 1 Sept. 1946 for transportation.\n\n2. Detached this date. You will proceed in accordance with paragraph 3 and upon arrival at destination will report for duty as directed in basic orders.\n\n3. Via government air transportation. Priority No. C3\n\n4. The Disbursing Officer, Headquarters 12th. Naval District is authorized and directed to furnish you the necessary commercial air transportation from San Francisco, California to Honolulu, T.H., via Pan-American Airways. Excess baggage in amount ____ pounds is authorized. Priority No. ____ certified by Naval Air Priorities Office (NATS)\n\n5. Vacated public quarters in BOQ this date.\n\n/s/ W. L. TAYLOR\nW. L. TAYLOR\nBy direction of the Commandant\n\nCopy to:\nBuPers.\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nMEMORANDUM ENDORSEMENT\n\nFrom: COMMANDING OFFICER VR-4\nTo: Newhouse\nTRANSPORTATION VIA NAVAL AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE FURNISHED FROM THIS STATION\n\nTO: H H L\n8 Sept 46 /s/ Lt. Cdr. Hawley Ca\nBY DIRECTION\n\nARRIVED AT Hon AT 0825 9/9/46\n\n/s/ Lt.(jg) Clements\nSigned by ATO OHG\n\nCertified to be a True Copy\n[signature]\n\nFinished File 812"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":246,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Stamped on face of Basic Letter:\n\nD-AO---12th N.D. San Francisco,Calif. 9/3/46\nPaid mileage or per diem $238.31 04222-47\nFrom Philadelphia, Pa. To San Francisco, Calif.\n\n/s/ R E Pel, Deputy\nFor R. E. PRENTICE, COMDR.(SC) USNR 56-310\n\n\nNOTICE TO ALL OFFICERS ON CHANGE OF STATION\nIn view of the extreme housing shortage in\nall shore establishments it is considered\nhighly inadvisable to move families until\nsuch time as the officer in question has\nreported for duty and obtained suitable\nquarters for his family.\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nJacket No. 177283\nEnd-1 19 AUG 1946 NASD, Phila., Pa.\n\nTo: Lieut. Delbert C. Newhouse, USN.\n\n1. Delivered. Detached.\n\nBy direction of SOinC:\n\n /s/ J. A. SINCOCK\n J. A. SINCOCK\n Military Personnel Officer\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\n18 SEP 1946 DISTRICT STAFF HEADQUARTERS\n TWELFTH NAVAL DISTRICT\n SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA\n\n _______Endorsement\n\n Reported this date for transportation.\n You are hereby assigned public quarters in BOQ.\n\n /s/ W.L.TAYLOR\n W.L.TAYLOR\n By direction of the Comdt.\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nCertified to be a True Copy"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":247,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In reply address not the\nsigner of this letter, but NAVY DEPARTMENT\nBureau of Naval Personnel, BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nNavy Department, Wash. 25, D.C. WASHINGTON 25, D.C.\nRefer to No. 177283\n\nPers-3161-JMJ-1A\n\n7 August 1946\n\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN,\n Aviation Supply Depot,\n Philadelphia, Pa.\n\nVia: Supply Officer in Command.\n\nSubject: Change of duty.\n\n1. When directed by the Supply Officer in Command, Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa., and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; will proceed to San Francisco, Calif., and report to the Commandant, Twelfth Naval District, for first available transportation to Pearl Harbor, T.H., and upon arrival report to the Commandant, Fourteenth Naval District, for duty at the Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Pearl Harbor, T.H., in connection with photography.\n\n2. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of five days in reporting at San Francisco, Calif., in compliance with these orders such delay to count as leave.\n\n3. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel advised of your address.\n\n /s/ LOUIS DENFELD\n LOUIS DENFELD F.W.B.\n\nCC:\n ComFour.\n ComTwelve.\n CNO (OP512).\n ComFourteen.\n ComServPac (2).\n SupOfComd, NavAviationSupDep,\n Pearl Harbor, T.H. 11909\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nStamped on face of Basic Letter:\n\nU.S. Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa. Certified to be a True Copy\n\n 19 AUG 1946\nAdvanced ______months pay $300.00 which has been\ncharged on my rolls.\n\n /s/ W.D. WRIGHT, Lt. (jg) (SC) USN\n Disbursing Officer"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":248,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Address Reply to\nSUPPLY OFFICER IN COMMAND\nand refer to:\n\nAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nNaval Supply Center\nPearl Harbor, T. H.\n\n20 September 1946\n\nFrom: NEWHOUSE, Delbert C., 177283, LT, LINE, USN\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: (1) Supply Officer in Command\n (2) Commandant, FOURTEENTH Naval District\n\nSubject: Transportation of Dependents; Request for\n\nReference: (a) District C/L 88-45\n\nEnclosures: (A) S&A Form 33 in quadruplicate\n (B) Certified Copies of orders\n\n1. Forwarded herewith is my request for transportation of my dependents to this station.\n\n2. I expect to remain on duty in this area for at least six months from this date.\n\n3. I have obtained quarters for my dependents and myself in the Ex-Dispensary, Junction Area, Aviation Supply Depot, Pearl Harbor.\n\n[signature]\nDELBERT C NEWHOUSE\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT 20 September 1946\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: Commandant, FOURTEENTH Naval District\n\n1. Forwarded, recommending approval.\n\n2. The conditions enumerated in paragraph (2) of reference (a) have been met.\n\n[signature]\nK. A. GRAHN\n\nForm No.-NSC-43"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":249,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF COMMANDANT\n14th NAVAL DISTRICT, PEARL HARBOR, T. H.\nNAVY NUMBER 128 (ONE TWO EIGHT)\nc/o Fleet Post Office\n\nSerial: D-4773\n\n23 September 1946\n\nEndorsement TWO on\nNEWHOUSE, D. C. LT.,\nLINE, USN, ltr dtd 20\nSeptember 1946 to BuPers\n\nTo : Commandant, 12th Naval District.\n\n1. Forwarded approved in accordance with BuPers\ndispatch 272100 November 1945, under catagory : -\n\n\"A\"\n\nBy direction of the Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\n[signature]\nJ. L. HALL, Jr.\n\ncc: AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT, SUPPLY OFFICE (NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER) PARL"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":250,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283\n\nEND-6\n AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT, PEARLHARBOR\n9 September 1946\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo: LT Delbert C Newhouse LINE USN\n\n1. Reported this date.\n\n G M BRYDON\n\ncc: BuPers\n Coml4\n ComNavBase\n ComServPac\n CNO (Op 512)\n FRO SanFran\n SOinC NSC PH\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 835"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":251,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"00/Newhouse, D. C.\t14th Naval District, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\n(177283)\n\n9 SEP 1946\n\nEnd-3 Date:\nTo :\tLieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, LINE, U. S. Navy.\nSubj:\tChange of duty.\n\n1.\tReported this date. You will further report to the Commandant, U. S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T. H., for duty at the Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H., in connection with photography.\n\n\n\n\n\n\ncc: BuPers\nComServPac\nFBC Ny 128\nCNO (Op 512)\nFRO San Fran\n\nA. A. KNOTEK,\nBy direction."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":252,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS 321—Revised July 1943\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW\n\nSHIP OR STATION Aviation Supply Depot, Pearl Harbor DATE 9 December 1946\nFROM: Comdr. Karl A. GRAHN, SC, USN (81449)\nCOMMANDING OFFICER\nTO: BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, NAVY DEPARTMENT\nSUBJECT: REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE.\nREPORT OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OF ABSENCE.\n\nIN CONFORMITY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF U. S. NAVY REGULATIONS, I REPORT THE FOLLOWING LEAVE OF ABSENCE TAKEN BY:\n\nNAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement FILE NO. 177283\nLAST FIRST MIDDLE\nRANK AND CORPS LT LINE SIGNAL NO. - - -\nUNDER ORDERS OF CO End-1 to Request for Leave DATED 25 Nov 46\n\nNOTE: USE EITHER (A) OR (B). DO NOT USE BOTH FOR SAME LEAVE.\n(A) LEAVE: TOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME Four\n(B) DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS:\nTOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, EXCLUDING PREPARATION PERIOD OF 4 DAYS AND\nEXCLUDING ALLOWANCE FOR TRAVEL TIME FROM OLD TO NEW STATION\nVIA SHORTEST USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE.\n\nINSERT INCLUSIVE DATES TO AGREE WITH NUMBER OF DAYS LEAVE. SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW.\nCOMMENCING DATE 3 December 1946 EXPIRING DATE 6 December 1946\nSIGNED\nCOMMANDING OFFICER\n\nINSTRUCTIONS:\n1. THE DAY OF DEPARTURE FROM STATION OR DUTY COUNTS AS A DAY OF DUTY; THE DAY OF RETURN AS A DAY OF LEAVE. THIS REFERS TO LEAVE TAKEN WHEN NOT DETACHED FROM SHIP OR STATION (SEE ARTICLE 1727, NAVY REGULATIONS).\n2. IN CASES OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE, THIS FORM SHOULD BE SUBMITTED IN ADDITION TO THE B-SLIP FORM.\n3. THIS REPORT WILL BE MADE AT EXPIRATION OF LEAVE BY THE IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR OF THE OFFICER TO WHOM THE LEAVE IS GRANTED AND FORWARDED IMMEDIATELY TO THE NAVY DEPARTMENT (BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL). CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO INSURE THAT CORRECT NUMBER OF DAYS OF LEAVE IS REPORTED AND CORRESPONDS WITH THE INCLUSIVE DATES REPORTED.\n16—33335-2 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":253,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS 423 (Revised April, 1943)\nFINISHED FILE PERS-3216\nB\n\nREPORT OF COMPLIANCE WITH ORDERS\n(See notes below)\n\nAviation Supply Depot, Pearl Harbor 9 September 1946\n(Ship or Station) (Date)\nFrom: LT D C NEWHOUSE (LINE) USN File No. 177283\n(Typewrite or print rank and name)\n\nTo: BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL,\nVia Commanding Officer.\nSubject: Report of compliance with orders.\nReference: (a) Order No. Pers-3161-JMJ-1A dated 7 August 1946\nissued by BuPers\n\n1. Reference (a) was received on 19 August 1946\nI was detached from NASD, Philadelphia on 19 August 1946 (Date of detachment)\nI reported Aviation Supply Depot, Pearl Harbor on 9 September 1946 (Date of reporting)\n\n2. (a) I sailed from United States to duty outside continental limits thereof on 9 Sept. 1946 (this item to be inserted only if applicable). (Date of sailing)\n(b) I arrived in United States from duty outside continental limits thereof on ______, 19____ (this item to be inserted only if applicable). (Date of arrival)\n\nSignature: Delbert C. Newhouse\nForwarded by GEORGE M BRYDON CAPT SC USN Supply Officer in Command\n\nNOTE (a).—It is a matter of special importance to officers' records that this form be made out with care and accuracy and forwarded to the Bureau of Naval Personnel promptly. In the case of aviation and staff corps officers, a copy marked DUPLICATE should also be forwarded.\n(b).—In cases of delay counting as leave, the forwarding of this form does not dispense with the requirement of forwarding Form BNP 321 (Report of Leave of Absence), which should be forwarded in addition to this form.\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—20071-6"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":254,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"End-3 Date:\nTo :\tLieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, LINE, U.S. Navy.\nSubj:\tChange of duty.\n\n1.\tReported this date. You will further report to the Commandant, U. S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T. H., for duty at the Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H., in connection with photography.\n\ncc: BuPers\nComServPac\nFBC Ny 128\nCNO (Op 512)\nFRO San Fran\n\nBy direction.\n\nEnd-4 9 September 1946\nFrom: Commandant, U. S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\nTo : Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, LINE, USN.\nSubj: Change of duty.\n\n1. Reported this date. Further report to Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H. for duty at the Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H., in connection with photography.\n\nE. W. HANSON\n\ncc: BuPers\nComServPac\nCNO (Op 512)\nFRO San Fran\nCom 14"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":255,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"25 September 1946\n\nFrom: Commandant, U. S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\nTo : Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, USN, 0177283\nEnsign Oley (n) Ratsep, SC, USNR, 0483558\n\nVia : SCinC, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\n\nSubj: Orders - Additional duty.\n\n1. When directed by Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H., on 26 September 1946 you will report immediately to the Commanding Officer, Enlisted Personnel, U. S. Naval Receiving Station, Pearl Harbor, T. H., for additional duty on a summary Court Martial Board.\n\n2. This is in addition to your regular duty.\n\nE. W. HANSON\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, PEARL HARBOR\nEnd— SEP 26 1946\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\n1. Delivered.\n\nE. E. BRIGHTON\nBY DIRECTION\n\ncc:\nBuPers (clipper)\nComServPac(2)\nCom14\nCO,RecSta,Pearl"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":256,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"316\n\n25 September 1946.\n\nFrom:\t\tCommandant, U. S. Naval Base, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\nTo :\t\tLieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, USN, 0177283.\n\t\tEnsign Oley (n) Hatsep, SCS, USNR, 0463558.\nVia :\t\tSOinS, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H.\n\nSubj:\t\tOrders - Additional duty.\n\n1.\t\tWhen directed by Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T. H. on 26 September 1946 you will report immediately to the Commanding Officer, Enlisted Personnel, U. S. Naval Receiving Station, Pearl Harbor, T. H. for additional duty on a summary Court Martial Board.\n\n2.\t\tThis is in addition to your regular duty.\n\n\nE. W. HANSON\n\ncc:\nBuPers (clipper)\nComServPac (2)\nCon 14\nCO, ReeSta,Pearl"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":257,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS 395 (Rev. December 1942)\n\nBENEFICIARY SLIP\n\nName NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n(Name in full, surname to the left)\n\nSerial No. 177283\n(File number, not signal number)\n\nStation Naval Aviation Supply Depot\n(Name)\n\nPhiladelphia 11, Penna. 19 May 1945\n(Place) (Date)\n\nUnder the provisions of the Act approved May 22, 1928, as extended by the Act of March 17, 1941, directing the payment of 6 months' pay to the widow, children, or dependent relative of any of the personnel on the active list of the Regular Navy, or on the retired list when on active duty, or of any of the personnel of the Naval Reserve called or ordered into active naval service by the Federal Government for extended naval service in excess of 30 days, who dies of wounds or disease not the result of his or her own misconduct, I give below the name and address of my wife and that of each of my children:\n(See instructions on reverse side)\n\nMrs. Norma Isobel Newhouse\n(Full name of wife; if not married, so state)\n\n6841 Oxford Ave., Philadelphia 11, Pa.\n(Address of wife)\n\nDelbert Carroll Newhouse 28 June 1938\n(Full name of child; if none, so state) (Date of birth)\n\nSame as wife.\n(Address of child)\n\nAnne Lisbet Newhouse 14 March 1940\n(Full name of child) (Date of birth)\n\nSame as wife.\n(Address of child)\n\n*************************\n(Full name of child) (Date of birth)\n\n(Address of child)\n\nIn the event of my leaving no widow or child or of their decease before payment is made, I then designate as my beneficiary under the said act the following relative, my\n\nMother\n(Relationship)\n\nMrs. Edith May Newhouse Richter\n(Name in full)\n\nP.O. Box 225, Garibaldi, Oregon\n(Address)\n\n* If the beneficiary named above is your father, mother, brother, or sister, you need not fill in these three lines. If the beneficiary is a more distant relative, such as a grandparent, state briefly wherein dependency exists, such as \"allotments registered,\" \"monthly contributions by Government check,\" indicating amounts and regularity thereof.\n\n[OVER]\n16-82303-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":258,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In the event of the death of the above-named beneficiary before payment is made, I then designate as my beneficiary under said act the following relative, my\n\nBrother\n(Relationship)\n\nDarrell Edwin Newhouse\n(Name in full)\n\nP.O. Box 225, Garibaldi, Oregon\n(Address)\n\n* In case of relatives more distant than your parent or brother or sister, state briefly wherein dependency exists, indicating amounts and regularity thereof.\n\nI CERTIFY that I will inform the Bureau of Naval Personnel immediately of any changes in marital status or conditions of dependency.\n\nI do solemnly swear (or affirm) that the facts stated and disclosed in the foregoing are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n(Name)\n\nLieut. (jg), U. S. Navy,\n(Rank)\n\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this 22nd\n\nday of May, 1945, I having authority to administer oaths.\n\nWilliam M. Turner, Lieut USNR\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n\nThis form must be sworn to before an officer of the United States Navy or Marine Corps authorized to administer oaths, or before a notary public.\n\nThe full names and addresses of the beneficiaries must be stated carefully. If a married woman, her own given name should be stated; thus: \"Mrs. Anna May Smith,\" not \"Mrs. John Smith.\"\n\nThis slip shall be made out and handled as follows:\nOfficer, Navy: Forward to Bureau of Naval Personnel.\nOfficer, Marine Corps: Forward to Commandant, Marine Corps.\nNurse: Forward to Bureau of Medicine and Surgery.\n\nNew beneficiary slips shall be executed and forwarded as above in all cases of change in status of the grantor or in that of his or her beneficiaries.\n\nIn any event, payment will be made to the widow or children, if any, whether designated or not, but not to a mother or other relative unless designated.\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-32303-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":259,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FILE No. 177283\n\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n(Name of officer; surname first)\n\nEnsign, USN\n(Rank and corps)\n\n19 August 1944\n(Date)\n\nIf your status has changed from \"no dependents\" to \"dependents\" (or vice versa) since last report, indicate by √ in this space\n\nREPORT OF DEPENDENTS UNDER ACT OF JUNE 10, 1922\n\nNOTE.—The Act of June 10, 1922, defines the term \"dependent\" as a lawful wife, unmarried children under 21 years of age, or the mother of an officer provided she is in fact dependent on him for her chief support.)\n\nNumber 3\nMother Yes\n(Yes or No)\nWife Yes\n(Yes or No)\n\nAge and sex of each child under 21 years of age:\nMale - 6 yrs.\nFemale - 4 yrs.\n\nBENEFICIARY SLIP\nName NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\nSerial No. 177283\nShip or station NAS\nCOCO SOLO C Z 19 August 1944\n\nNO CHANGE SINCE LAST REPORT\n\nIn the event of my leaving no widow or child or of their decease before payment is made, I then designate as my beneficiary under the said Act the following relative, my\n\nREPORT OF NEXT OF KIN\nFile No. 177283\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n19 August 1944\nAny change since last report: YES or NO\nName of next of kin\nPermanent residence: Street and No. City or town State\nEmergency address: Street and No. City or town State\n(Signature)\n(Rank and corps)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":260,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FILE No. 177283\n\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n(Name of officer; surname first)\n\nEnsign, USN\n(Rank and corps)\n\n6-30-44\n(Date)\n\nREPORT OF DEPENDENTS UNDER ACT OF JUNE 10, 1922\n\nNumber Three\nMother No\nWife Yes\n\nAge and sex of each child under 21 years of age:\n6 yrs. - male\n4 yrs. - female\n\nFILE No. 177283\nBENEFICIARY SLIP\nName NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\nNAS, Coco Solo, C.Z. 6-30-44\n(Place) (Date)\n\nAny change since last report: YES or NO\n\nUnder the provisions of the Act of June 4, 1920 (41 Stat. 824), as amended by the Act of May 22, 1928 (45 Stat. 710; U.S.C. Title 34, Sec. 943), as further amended by Public Law 16, 77th Congress, approved March 17, 1941, directing the payment of six months' pay to the widow, children, or dependent relative of any officer, enlisted man, or nurse, on the active list of the regular Navy or regular Marine Corps, or on the retired list when on active duty, or officer, aviation cadet, midshipman, nurse, warrant officer, or enlisted man of the U.S. Naval Reserve called or ordered into active naval or military service by the Federal Government for extended naval or military service in excess of 30 days, who dies of wounds or disease not the result of his or her own misconduct, I give below the name and address of my wife and that of each of my children:\n\nIn the event of my leaving no widow or child or of their decease before payment is made, I then designate as my beneficiary under the said act the following dependent relative, my—\n\n*State briefly wherein dependency exists, such as \"allotments registered,\" \"monthly contributions by Government check,\" etc.\n\n(OVER)\n\nREPORT OF NEXT OF KIN\nFILE NO.: 177283\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n6-30-44\nAny change since last report: YES or NO\nName of next of kin\nPermanent residence: Street and No. City or town State\nEmergency address: Street and No. City or town State\n(Signature)\n(Rank and corps)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":261,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n(Name of officer; surname first)\nEnsign\n(Rank and corps)\n12/31/43\n(Date)\nREPORT OF DEPENDENTS UNDER ACT OF JUNE 10, 1922\n(Note: The Act of June 10, 1922, defines the term \"dependent\" as lawful wife, unmarried children under 21 years of age, or the mother of an officer provided she is in fact dependent on him for her chief support.)\nNumber Three\nMother No\n(Yes or No)\nWife Yes\n(Yes or No)\nAge and sex of each child under 21 years of age:\n6 years - male\n4 years - female\nBENEFICIARY SLIP\nName NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n(Print name, surname to the left)\nNAS, Coco Solo,C.Z. 12/31/43\n(Place) (Date)\nAny change since last report:\nYES or NO\n(Strike out one; if no change, do not fill out remainder of this report)\nUnder the provisions of the Act of June 4, 1920 (41 Stat. 824), as amended by the Act of May 22, 1928 (45 Stat. 710; U.S.C. Title 34, Sec. 943), as further amended by Public Law 16, 77th Congress, approved March 17, 1941, directing the payment of six months' pay to the widow, children, or dependent relative of any officer, enlisted man, or nurse, on the active list of the regular Navy or regular Marine Corps, or on the retired list when on active duty, or officer, aviation cadet, midshipman, nurse, warrant officer, or enlisted man of the U.S. Naval Reserve called or ordered into active naval or military service by the Federal Government for extended naval or military service in excess of 30 days, who dies of wounds or disease not the result of his or her own misconduct, I give below the name and address of my wife and that of each of my children:\n(Full name of wife; if not married, so state)\n(Address of wife)\n(Full name of child; if none, so state)\n(Address of child)\n(Full name of child; if none, so state)\n(Address of child)\n(Full name of child; if none, so state)\n(Address of child)\nIn the event of my leaving no widow or child or of their decease before payment is made, I then designate as my beneficiary under the said act the following dependent relative, my\n(Relationship)\n(Name in full)\n(Address)\n* State briefly wherein dependency exists, such as \"allotments registered,\" \"monthly contributions by Government check,\" etc.\n(OVER)\nREPORT OF NEXT OF KIN\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n(Name of officer, surname first)\n12/31/43\n(Date)\nAny change since last report:\nYES or NO\n(Strike out one; if no change, do not fill out remainder of this report)\nName of next of kin:\n(Relationship)\nPermanent residence:\nStreet and No.\nCity or town\nState\nEmergency address:\nStreet and No.\nCity or town\nState\n(Signature)\n(Rank and corps)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":262,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BENEFICIARY SLIP\nName Newhouse, Delbert Clement\n(Print name, surname to the left)\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador 2-14-43\n(Place) (Date)\nAny change since last report:\nYES or NO First Report\n(Strike out one; if no change, do not fill out remainder of this report)\nUnder the provisions of the Act of June 4, 1920 (41 Stat. 824), as amended by the Act of May 22, 1928 (45 Stat. 710; U.S.C. Title 34, Sec. 943), as further amended by Public Law 16, 77th Congress, approved March 17, 1941, directing the payment of six months' pay to the widow, children, or dependent relative of any officer, enlisted man, or nurse, on the active list of the regular Navy or regular Marine Corps, or on the retired list when on active duty, or officer, aviation cadet, midshipman, nurse, warrant officer, or enlisted man of the U.S. Naval Reserve called or ordered into active naval or military service by the Federal Government for extended naval or military service in excess of 30 days, who dies of wounds or disease not the result of his or her own misconduct, I give below the name and address of my wife and that of each of my children:\nNorma Isabel Newhouse\n(Full name of wife; if not married, so state)\n1210 SE 37th Ave. Portland, Oregon\n(Address of wife)\nDelbert Carroll Newhouse\n(Full name of child; if none, so state)\nSame as above\n(Address of child)\nAnne Lisbet Newhouse\n(Full name of child; if none, so state)\nSame as above\n(Address of child)\n(Full name of child; if none, so state)\n(Address of child)\nIn the event of my leaving no widow or child or of their decease before payment is made, I then designate as my beneficiary under the said act the following dependent relative, my\n(Relationship)\n(Name in full)\n(Address)\n*State briefly wherein dependency exists, such as \"allotments registered,\" \"monthly contributions by Government check,\" etc.\n(OVER)\n16-22799-1\nREPORT OF NEXT OF KIN\nNewhouse, Delbert Clement\n(Name of officer, surname first)\n2-14-43\n(Date)\nAny change since last report:\nYES or NO First Report\n(Strike out one; if no change, do not fill out remainder of this report)\nName of next of kin:\nNorma Isobel Newhouse\nWife\n(Relationship)\nPermanent residence:\nStreet and No. 1210 S.E. 37th Avenue\nCity or town Portland\nState Oregon\nEmergency address:\nStreet and No. Same as above\nCity or town\nState\n(Signature) Delbert C. Newhouse\n(Rank and corps) Photographer (Temp), U.S.N.\n16-22799-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":263,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In the event that payment cannot be made to the above-named dependent relative, I then designate as my beneficiary under the said act the following dependent relative, my\n(Relationship)\n(Name in full)\n(Address)\n* State briefly wherein dependency exists.\nI do solemnly swear (or affirm) that the facts stated and disclosed in the foregoing are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.\nDelbert Clement Newhouse\n(Name)\nPhotographer (Temp), U.S. Navy.\n(Rank)\nSubscribed and sworn to before me, this 14th day of February, 1943, I have authority to administer oaths.\nJ. R. LITCHFIELD\nCommander, USNR\nCommanding Officer.\nINSTRUCTIONS\nThis form must be sworn to before an officer of the United States Navy or Marine Corps authorized to administer oaths, or before a notary public.\nThe full names and addresses of the beneficiaries must be stated carefully. If a married woman, her own given name should be stated; thus: \"Mrs. Anna May Smith,\" not \"Mrs. John Smith.\"\nNew beneficiary slips shall be executed and forwarded as above in all cases of change of status of the grantor or in that of his or her beneficiaries.\nIn any event, payment will be made to the widow or children, if any, whether designated or not.\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1942 16-22799-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":264,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS 321—Revised July 1943\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW\nSHIP OR STATION Aviation Supply Depot, Pearl Harbor DATE 9 September 1946\nFROM: [REDACTED] Supply Officer in Command\nCOMMANDING OFFICER\nTO: BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, NAVY DEPARTMENT\nSUBJECT: [REDACTED]\nREPORT OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OF ABSENCE.\nIN CONFORMITY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF U.S. NAVY REGULATIONS, I REPORT THE FOLLOWING LEAVE OF ABSENCE TAKEN BY:\nNAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement FILE NO. 177283\nLAST FIRST MIDDLE\nRANK AND CORPS LT LINE SIGNAL NO. 16132\nUNDER ORDERS OF BuPers Pers-3161-JMJ-1A DATED 7 August 1946\nNOTE: USE EITHER (A) OR (B). DO NOT USE BOTH FOR SAME LEAVE.\n(A) LEAVE: TOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME\n(B) DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS:\nTOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, EXCLUDING PREPARATION PERIOD OF 4 DAYS AND EXCLUDING ALLOWANCE FOR TRAVEL TIME FROM OLD TO NEW STATION VIA SHORTEST USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE.... Four Days\nINSERT INCLUSIVE DATES TO AGREE WITH NUMBER OF DAYS LEAVE. SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW:\nCOMMENCING DATE 29 August 1946 EXPIRING DATE 1 September 1946\nSIGNED G M BRYDON CAPT SC USN\nCOMMANDING OFFICER\nFINISHED FILE PERS-3216\nINSTRUCTIONS:\n1. THE DAY OF DEPARTURE FROM STATION OR DUTY COUNTS AS A DAY OF DUTY; THE DAY OF RETURN AS A DAY OF LEAVE. THIS REFERS TO LEAVE TAKEN WHEN NOT DETACHED FROM SHIP OR STATION (SEE ARTICLE 1727, NAVY REGULATIONS).\n2. IN CASES OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE, THIS FORM SHOULD BE SUBMITTED IN ADDITION TO THE B-SLIP FORM.\n3. THIS REPORT WILL BE MADE AT EXPIRATION OF LEAVE BY THE IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR OF THE OFFICER TO WHOM THE LEAVE IS GRANTED AND FORWARDED IMMEDIATELY TO THE NAVY DEPARTMENT (BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL). CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO INSURE THAT CORRECT NUMBER OF DAYS OF LEAVE IS REPORTED AND CORRESPONDS WITH THE INCLUSIVE DATES REPORTED.\n16—33335-2 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":265,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CROSS REFERENCE SHEET\nName or subject Newhouse, D.C. Lt.\nFile 177283\nFrom: AVSUPJEP PEARL Date 8/3/46\nTO: BUPERS\n032222Z RE BUPERS PERS-3145-JG-1D 19 Jul 46 ORDERG PHOT J. P. MALITO TO THIS DEPOT FOR DU. INDICATNS ALSO RECVD THAT --- RECENTLY AT NASD PHILA ALSO IN PROCESS TRANSF TO ASD PEARL AS PHOTO OFFCR. CHP PHOT E. J. HAIRR RPTD ON 20 JULY FR NAS KANEO E UNDAR COM14 ORDERS 20374 dtd 17 JUL. BUREAU ADVISED OF THIS APPARENT DUPLICATN FOR APPROPRIATE ACTN.\n8/8/46 BUPERS TO AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT PEARL HARBOR.\n091537 REFUR 032222. ORDERS PHOT MALITO USN CANCELLED. --- ORDERED FR NASD PHILA.\nSEE FILE NUMBER 443964\nGENERAL FILES, BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nNAVPERS-2109 (7-88)\n(P)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":266,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BNP 321 REVISED FEB. 1943\n\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE See Instructions Below\n\nShip or Station Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Phila.,Pa. Date 16 August 1946\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command, Commanding Officer\n\nTO: Bureau of Naval Personnel, Navy Department\n\nSUBJ: REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\n[REDACTED]\n\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. NAVY regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\n\nNAME NEWHOUSE Delbert C File No. 177283\nLast First Middle\n\nRANK AND CORPS Lieut. USN SIGNAL NO.\n\nUNDER ORDERS OF SOinC 1st endorsement DATED 12 August 1946\n\nNOTE: Use either (A) or (B). DO NOT use both for same leave.\n(A) LEAVE: Total number of days, including any travel time 3 Days\n(B) Delay counting as leave or leave between stations. Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.\n\nInsert inclusive dates to agree with number of days leave. See instructions below.\n\nCOMMENCING DATE 13 August 1946 EXPIRING DATE 15 August 1946\n\nBy direction of SOinC:\n\nSIGNED J. A. SIMCOCK Lt. Cdr. SC(S) USNR\nMilitary Personnel Officer\n\nINSTRUCTIONS:\n1. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (See ARTICLE 1727, Navy Regulations).\n\n2. In cases or authorized delay counting as leave, this form should be submitted in addition to the B-slip Form.\n\n3. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the Officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Navy Department (Bureau of Naval Personnel). Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave is reported and corresponds with the inclusive dates reported."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":267,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In reply address not the signer of this letter, but Bureau of Naval Personnel, Navy Department, Washington 25, D.C.\nRefer to No. 177283\nPers-3161-JMJ-1A\n\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\n7 August 1946\n\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa.\n\nVia: Supply Officer in Command.\n\nSubject: Change of duty.\n\n1. When directed by the Supply Officer in Command, Aviation Supply Depot, you will regard yourself detached from duty at the Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa., and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; will proceed to San Francisco, Calif., and report to the Commandant, Twelfth Naval District, for first available transportation to Pearl Harbor, T.H., and upon arrival report to the Commandant, Fourteenth Naval District, for duty at the Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Pearl Harbor, T.H., in connection with photography.\n\n2. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of five days in reporting at San Francisco, Calif., in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave.\n\n3. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel advised of your address.\n\nCC:\nComFour.\nComTwelve.\nCNO (OP512).\nComFourteen.\nComServPac (2).\nSupOfComd, NavAviationSupDep, Pearl Harbor, T.H.\n\nLOUIS DENFELD\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n11909"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":268,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Op-512-RMS\n\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nOFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\nTo: Bu Pers (Att. Pers 316)\n\n31 JUL 1946\n\n1. It is requested that the below named person be issued orders as indicated below:\n\nFILE NO. 177283 NAME NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. RANK Lieut. CLASSIF. USN\n\nDETACHED WHEN DIRECTED\nUPON REPORTING (OF) SOinC\nAT Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa.\nPROCEED TO Commandant, Fourteenth Naval District\nFOR Duty Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Pearl Harbor, T.H. in connection with photo.\n\nDelrep five (5) days\n\nCHARLES C. GOLD\nBy Direction\n\nINFORMATION ADDRESSEE(S) Op 512\n\nDATE 8/1/46 PERS. NO. 3161 DETAIL OFFICER EXT. 7803 DATE 8/7/46\nNAVAER-1145 (REV. 8-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":269,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In reply address not the signer of this letter, but Bureau of Naval Personnel, Navy Department, Washington, D.C.\nRefer to No. Pers-3214 177283\n\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\n23 AUG 1946\n\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: Lt. Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN.\nVia: SupOfCom, NASD, Oxford Ave. & Martin's Mill Rd., Phila.\n\nSubj: Application for Transfer to the Regular Navy - Action on.\n\nRefs: (a) Your Application for Permanent Appointment in the U.S. Navy.\n(b) BuPers Circular Letter 288-45 (Revised).\n\n1. The Selection Board, convened by the Secretary of the Navy to recommend Naval Reserve and Temporary USN officers for appointment as commissioned officers and warrant officers in the Regular Navy, has considered your application for transfer, and I am pleased to inform you that this Board has recommended you for permanent appointment in the Regular Navy as a commissioned warrant officer.\n\n2. This notification is for informational purposes only, in order to advise you of the action taken by the Selection Board on your application. Of additional interest to you is the fact that the President has signed Public Law #347, which provides the necessary legislation to effect the transfer of officers to the Regular Navy.\n\n3. Upon confirmation by the Senate the appointments of officers to the Regular Navy will be issued to the service in a circular letter published in the Navy Department semi-monthly bulletin. If you are on inactive duty you will be notified of your appointment including instructions for acceptance. In the event that you fail to receive this notification from the Bureau of Naval Personnel and you find your appointment published in the semi-monthly bulletin you may contact the nearest Naval District Commandant for instructions and acceptance of appointment.\n\nCC: Pers 31.\n\nFINISHED FILE Pers-3214\n\nT. L. SPRAGUE\nActing\n\nC-73156"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":270,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF BENEFICIARIES 7\nNAVPERS-601 (1-45)\n\nX OFFICER ENLISTED 5 June 1946 (Date)\n\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement (Last name) (First) (Middle)\n\n177283 Lieut. USN (T) (File or service number) (Rank or rate and classification)\n\nU.S. NASD Philadelphia, Pa. (Ship or station)\n\nTo carry out the provisions of the acts approved 4 June 1920, 22 May 1928, 12 May 1930, and 17 March 1941, and acts amendatory thereof directing the payment of 6 months' pay to the widow, children, or dependent relative of any of the personnel on the active list of the Regular Navy, or on the retired list when on active duty, or of any of the personnel of the Naval Reserve called or ordered into active naval service by the Federal Government for extended naval service in excess of 30 days, who dies of wounds or disease not the result of his or her own misconduct, I give below the name and address of my wife or husband and that of each of my children:\n\nNorma Isobel Newhouse\n(Full name of wife or husband; if not married, so state)\n\n6148 Oxford Avenue, Phila., Pa.\n(Address of wife or husband)\n\nDelbert Carroll Newhouse 6/28/38\n(Full name of child; if none, so state) (Date of birth)\n\nSame as above\n(Address of child)\n\nAnne Lisbet Newhouse 3/14/40\n(Full name of child) (Date of birth)\n\nSame as above\n(Address of child)\n\n[REDACTED]\n(Full name of child) (Date of birth)\n\n(Address of child)\n\nIn the event that I am not survived by a wife (or husband) or child, or in the event of their decease prior to payment and collection of the gratuity, I then designate the following person as my dependent beneficiary under the act:*\n\nMrs. Edith M. Richter\n(Name in full)\n\nGaribaldi, Oregon\n(Address)\n\nMother\n(Relationship)\n\nIn the event of the death of the above-named beneficiary before payment and collection of the gratuity, I then designate the following person as my dependent beneficiary under the act:*\n\nDarrell Edwin Newhouse\n(Name in full)\n\nGaribaldi, Oregon\n(Address)\n\nBrother\n(Relationship)\n\n*The acts state that death gratuity must be paid to the surviving wife (or husband) or children, if any. In the event of leaving no wife or children, it may then be paid to a designated dependent beneficiary. Every member of the service, whether married or not, should designate a beneficiary (and an alternate, in case of prior death of the primary beneficiary). Failure to make such designation may result in nonpayment of the gratuity. Such designation does not affect payment to a surviving wife (or husband) or children.\nOP-16-43177-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":271,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8\n\nI CERTIFY that I will Inform the Bureau of Naval Personnel via my commanding officer Immediately of any changes in marital status, or conditions of dependency, or of voluntary occupancy of public quarters by my dependents.\n\nI CERTIFY that there has been no change in condition of dependency between 1 May 1945 and current date.\n(Date of last report of beneficiaries)\n\nI do solemnly swear (or affirm) that the facts stated and disclosed in the foregoing are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.\n\n(Signature)\n\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this 7th day of June, 1946, I having authority to administer oaths.\n\n(Signature) (Rank)\n\nINSTRUCTIONS\n\nThis form must be sworn to before an officer of the United States Navy authorized to administer oaths, or before a notary public.\n\nThe full names and addresses of the beneficiaries must be stated carefully. If a married woman, her own given name should be stated; thus: \"Mrs. Anna May Smith,\" not \"Mrs. John Smith.\"\n\nThis slip shall be made out and handled as follows:\nOfficer, Navy: Forward to Bureau of Naval Personnel.\nNurse: Forward to Bureau of Medicine and Surgery.\n\nEnlisted men, Navy: In duplicate; one copy to Bureau of Naval Personnel, one copy secured inside service record. In cases of men entitled to money allowances for quarters for enlisted men with dependents, two additional copies, bearing the required certificate, to the Disbursing Officer.\n\nNew beneficiary slips shall be executed and forwarded as above in all cases of change in status of the grantor or in that of his or her beneficiaries.\n\nIn any event, payment will be made to the widow or children, if any, whether designated or not.\n\nNormally casualty notification will be sent to all the beneficiaries designated on this form. If, by reason of unusual circumstances, other special arrangements are desired, a statement should be attached setting forth full instructions including full names, addresses, and relationships.\n\nc6-10—43177-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":272,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BNP 321 REVISED FEB. 1943\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE See Instructions Below\nShip or Station Naval Aviation Supply Depot Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Date 29 December 1945\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nCommanding Officer\n\nTO: Bureau of Naval Personnel, Navy Department\n\nSUBJ: REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE [REDACTED]\n\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. NAVY regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\n\nNAME NEWHOUSE Delbert C File No. 177283\nLast First Middle\n\nRANK AND CORPS Lieut.(jg) USN SIGNAL NO.\n\nUNDER ORDERS OF SOinC 1st endorsement DATED 21 November 1945\n\nNOTE: Use either (A) or (B). DO NOT use both for same leave.\n\n(A) LEAVE: Total number of days, including any travel time 10 Days\n\n(B) Delay counting as leave or leave between stations. Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station via shortest usually traveled route.\n\nInsert inclusive dates to agree with number of days leave. See instructions below.\n\nCOMMENCING DATE 12 December 1945 EXPIRING DATE 21 December 1945\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS-3216\n\nBy direction of SOinC: SIGNED Lieut. SC USN\nMilitary Personnel Officer\n\nINSTRUCTIONS:\n1. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (See ARTICLE 1727, Navy Regulations).\n\n2. In cases or authorized delay counting as leave, this form should be submitted in addition to the B-slip Form.\n\n3. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the Officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Navy Department (Bureau of Naval Personnel). Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave is reported and corresponds with the inclusive dates reported."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":273,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IN REPLY ADDRESS AVIATION SUPPLY OFFICER NAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT PHILADELPHIA 11, PA.\n\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nNAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nOXFORD AVENUE AND MARTIN'S MILL ROAD\nPHILADELPHIA 11, PA.\nAVIATION SUPPLY OFFICE\n\nT-945\n\n25 January 1946\n\nFrom: The Supply Officer-in-Command.\n\nTo: Lieutenant (jg) Delbert C. Newhouse, USN, JR-177283, Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Oxford Avenue & Martin's Mill Road, Philadelphia 11, Pa.\n\nSubject: Temporary Additional Duty.\n\n1. Proceed to the place (or places—in the order given) indicated below, for temporary duty. This is in addition to your present duties and upon the completion thereof, you will return to your station and resume your regular duties:\n\nOn or about 28 January 1946, to the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Navy Dept., Washington, D. C., regarding problems concerning photo. materials.\n\n2. A per diem of $7.00 in lieu of subsistence will be allowed while absent from station in accordance with Article 2501-4(d) U. S. Navy Travel Instructions.\n\nE. D. FOSTER\nRear Admiral SC USN\nSupply Officer-in-Command\n\nCopies to:\nBuPers\nComFour"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":274,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASD Form #153\nBNP 321 REVISED FEB. 1943\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE See Instructions Below\nNaval Aviation Supply Depot, Phila., 11, Pa. Date 22 February 1945\nFROM: Supply Officer-in-Command\nCommanding Officer\nTO: BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, NAVY DEPARTMENT\nSUBJECT: REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE REPORT OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OF ABSENCE\n\nIn conformity with requirements of U.S. NAVY regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME NEWHOUSE, DELBERT C. FILE NO. 177283\nLAST FIRST MIDDLE\nRANK AND CORPS Lt.(jg) USN SIGNAL NO.\nUNDER ORDERS OF SOinC 1st End. DATED 6 February 1945\nNOTE: Use either (A) or (B), DO NOT use both for same leave.\n(A) LEAVE: total number of days, including any travel time 5 days\n(B) Delay counting as leave or leave between stations: Total number of days, excluding preparation period of 4 days and excluding allowance for travel time from old to new station Via shortest usually traveled route"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":275,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ADDRESS REPLY TO COMMANDANT FOURTH NAVAL DISTRICT AND REFER TO NO.\n\n00\n\nFOURTH NAVAL DISTRICT\nDISTRICT STAFF HEADQUARTERS\nBUILDING NO. 4\nNAVY YARD, PHILADELPHIA 12, PA.\n\n24 November 1944.\n\n4ND T—12215\n\nFrom: The Commandant, Fourth Naval District.\n\nTo: Lieutenant, junior grade, Delbert C. Newhouse, USN, (JN 177283), Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Oxford Avenue & Martin's Mill Road, Philadelphia 11, Pa.\n\nVia: Supply Officer in Command, Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Oxford Avenue & Martin's Mill Road, Philadelphia 11, Pa.\n\nSubject: Temporary Additional Duty.\n\n1. Proceed to the place (or places—in the order given) indicated below, for temporary duty. This is in addition to your present duties and upon the completion thereof, you will return to your station and resume your regular duties:\n\nOn or about 24 November 1944, to the Bureau of Aeronautics, Photographic Division, Navy Department, Washington, D.C., to attend a conference.\n\n2. Reimbursement will be on a per diem basis in accordance with ALNAV 80.\n\nM. P. DRAHEIM\n\nCopies to:\nBuPers\nBuAer\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS-102\n\nPhila. Na. Yd.—11961—6-10-44—30,000 over 2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":276,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BNP 323\n(Revised April 1943)\n\nREPORT OF COMPLIANCE WITH ORDERS\n(See notes below)\n\nNaval Aviation Supply Depot, Phila.,Pa. 9/13/44\n(Ship or Station) (Date)\nFrom: Lieut.(jg) Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN. File No. 177283\n(Typewrite or print rank and name)\n\nTo: BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL,\nVia Commanding Officer.\nSubject: Report of compliance with orders.\nReference: (a) Order No. 024605 dated 31 July, 1944\nissued by Bureau of Naval Personnel\n\n1. Reference (a) was received on 6 September, 1944.\nI was detached from U.S.Naval Air Station, Coco Solo, Canal Zone\non 6 September, 1944.\n(Date of detachment)\nI assumed command of Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Phila.,Pa.\non 13 September, 1944.\n(Date of reporting)\n\n2. (a) I sailed from United States to duty outside continental limits thereof on ______, 19____ (this item to be inserted only if applicable).\n(Date of sailing)\n(b) I arrived in United States from duty outside continental limits thereof on 9/7/44, 19____ (this item to be inserted only if applicable).\n(Date of arrival)\n\n(Signature)\n\nForwarded by E. M. CRONIN, Capt(SC) USN - Acting Supply Officer in Command.\n\nNOTE (a).—It is a matter of special importance to officers' records that this form be made out with care and accuracy and forwarded to the Bureau of Naval Personnel promptly. In the case of aviation and staff corps officers, a copy marked DUPLICATE should also be forwarded.\n(b).—In cases of delay counting as leave, the forwarding of this form does not dispense with the requirement of forwarding Form BNP 321 (Report of Leave of Absence), which should be forwarded in addition to this form.\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—29671-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":277,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS 321—Revised July 1943\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW\n\nSHIP OR STATION NAS, COCO SOLO, CANAL ZONE DATE 21 August 1944\nFROM: COMMANDING OFFICER\nTO: BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, NAVY DEPARTMENT\nSUBJECT: REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE.\n[REDACTED]\n\nIN CONFORMITY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF U. S. NAVY REGULATIONS, I REPORT THE FOLLOWING LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nTAKEN BY:\nNAME NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement FILE NO. 177283\n(LAST) (FIRST) (MIDDLE)\nRANK AND CORPS Ensign USN CO SIGNAL NO. 13749\nUNDER ORDERS OF NAS COCO SOLO, CANAL ZONE DATED 6/26/44\n\nNOTE: USE EITHER (A) OR (B). DO NOT USE BOTH FOR SAME LEAVE.\n(A) LEAVE: TOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 30\n(B) DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS:\nTOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, EXCLUDING PREPARATION PERIOD OF 4 DAYS AND\nEXCLUDING ALLOWANCE FOR TRAVEL TIME FROM OLD TO NEW STATION\nVIA SHORTEST USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE.\n\nINSERT INCLUSIVE DATES TO AGREE WITH NUMBER OF DAYS LEAVE. SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW.\nCOMMENCING DATE 16 July 1944 EXPIRING DATE 15 August 1944\nSIGNED T. DURFEE, Comdr., USNR.\nCOMMANDING OFFICER\n\nINSTRUCTIONS:\n1. THE DAY OF DEPARTURE FROM STATION OR DUTY COUNTS AS A DAY OF DUTY; THE DAY OF RETURN AS A DAY OF LEAVE. THIS REFERS TO LEAVE TAKEN WHEN NOT DETACHED FROM SHIP OR STATION (SEE ARTICLE 1727, NAVY REGULATIONS).\n2. IN CASES OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE. THIS FORM SHOULD BE SUBMITTED IN ADDITION TO THE B-SLIP FORM.\n3. THIS REPORT WILL BE MADE AT EXPIRATION OF LEAVE BY THE IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR OF THE OFFICER TO WHOM THE LEAVE IS GRANTED AND FORWARDED IMMEDIATELY TO THE NAVY DEPARTMENT (BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL). CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO INSURE THAT CORRECT NUMBER OF DAYS OF LEAVE IS REPORTED AND CORRESPONDS WITH THE INCLUSIVE DATES REPORTED.\n16—33335-2 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":278,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283\nPers-3163-DNB-5\n\n31 July 1944.\n\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nTo: Ens. Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN,\nNaval Air Station,\nCoco Solo, C. Z.\n\nVia: ComFifteen.\n\nSubject: Change of duty.\n\n1. When directed by the Commandant, Fifteenth Naval District, upon the reporting of your relief Lieutenant (jg) James T. Griffin, A-V(S), USNR, you will proceed to a port in the United States, via first available government transportation, including air, and upon arrival further proceed to Philadelphia, Pa., and report to the Supply Officer in Command, Aviation Supply Depot, for duty, reporting by letter to the Commandant, Fourth Naval District.\n\n2. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of twenty days in reporting in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave.\n\n3. Keep the Bureau of Naval Personnel and your new station advised of your address.\n\n4. The attention of the Supply Officer in Command, Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa., is invited to the fact that you have been trained in photographic supply.\n\n5. The Secretary of the Navy has determined that this employment on shore duty is required by the public interests.\n\nCC:\nCNO (Op 32).\nCO, NAS, Coco Solo, C. Z.\nSupOfinComd, AvSupDepot,\nPhiladelphia, Pa.\nComFour.\n\nRANDALL JACOBS.\n\n024605\n\nJacket copy\nPers 82233\nPers 3101\nPers 102\nPers 3163\n\nJUL 31 1944"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":279,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Op-32-B1-CAN\nOO/NEWHOUSE, D.C. NAVY DEPARTMENT\nOFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nFOR VICTORY BUY UNITED STATES WAR BONDS AND STAMPS\n\n29 JUL 1944\n\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Operations.\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nSubj: Ensign Delbert C. Newhouse, USN, #177283\nChange of duty - Request for.\n\n1. It is requested that Ensign Newhouse be detached from duty US Naval Air Station, Coco Solo, when directed upon reporting of relief (Lt.(jg) James T. Griffin, A-V(S), USNR.) and ordered to proceed (with twenty (20) days' delay) and report to the Supply Officer-in-Command, Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania for duty.\n\n2. It is requested that a paragraph be added to subject officer's orders stating that he has been trained in photographic supply.\n\nA. O. Prell\nBy Direction\n\nLt.(jg) Noyes\n28 July, 1944\nLeona Monk\nDetail B1\n\nJUL 29 1944\n\n024605"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":280,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5th Endorsement on Request for leave, dated 25 Mar. 1943.\n\n177283\n\nPORT DIRECTOR'S OFFICE\nNaval Transportation Service\nEleventh Naval District\n242 West Seventh Street\nSan Pedro, California.\n\nP16-3\nGMDJ/jas/llc\nSerial B-SP-15433\n\n18 May, 1943.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nFrom: The Port Director (NTs), San Pedro.\nTo: Photographer Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, U.S.Navy.\n\nSubject: Orders.\n\nReferences: (a)\n(b)\n\n1. Reported, 18 May, 1943.\n\n2. You will proceed immediately to the U.S.S. CAMERIA for transportation to 15th Nav.Dist. Upon Arrival at that destination you will report to the nearest Naval activity for further instructions.\n\n3. During the period covered by this endorsement there were no Government quarters available for assignment to you and none were assigned.\n\n4. The contents of these orders are to be considered confidential and are not to be disclosed together than proper Naval authorities.\n\nG. M. D. DASHIELL\n\nCopy to:\nBuPers (Air mail)\nComservpac (Air mail)\nCom 12 ND\nPD 12 ND\nCom Fifteen (Air mail)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":281,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"P16-4/00 OFFICE OF\nTHE NAVAL DISTRICT COMMANDANT\nNAVY 121\nFLEET POST OFFICE\nNEW YORK, N.Y.\nBUR OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nRECEIVED\n177283\n1943 JUN 4 PM 3 35\nFrom:\nTo :\nJune 1, 1943\nThe Commandant Fifteenth Naval District\nPhotographer\nDelbert C. Newhouse, USN\nVia:\nSubject: Change of duty.\n1. Upon the receipt of these orders and when directed by the proper authority you will consider yourself relieved of your present duties and all other duties that may have been assigned you.\n2. You will report to Commanding Officer Naval Air Station for such duty as he may assign.\nS. C. MC CORMICK,\nBy direction.\ncc:\nSupers\nFINISHED FILE PERS 323\n6083\nNOTED PERS-23231\nX out and initial over your encircled Pers. No. before releasing"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":282,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BNP 321 REVISED FEB. 1943\n177283\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW\nSHIP OR STATION Hdqtrs. 15th Naval District. DATE May 27, 1943.\nFROM: The Commandant, Fifteenth Naval District.\nTO: BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL, NAVY DEPARTMENT\nSUBJECT: REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE.\nREPORT OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OF ABSENCE.\nIN CONFORMITY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF U. S. NAVY REGULATIONS, I REPORT THE FOLLOWING LEAVE OF ABSENCE TAKEN BY:\nNAME NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. FILE NO.\nRANK AND CORPS Photographer, USN. SIGNAL NO.\nUNDER ORDERS OF Comdt.15th N.D. P18-1/00/EFA/bwj(60) DATED 3/23/43\nNOTE: USE EITHER (A) OR (B). DO NOT USE BOTH FOR SAME LEAVE.\n(A) LEAVE: TOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME Thirty (30)\n(B) DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS: TOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS, EXCLUDING PREPARATION PERIOD OF 4 DAYS AND EXCLUDING ALLOWANCE FOR TRAVEL TIME FROM OLD TO NEW STATION VIA SHORTEST USUALLY TRAVELED ROUTE\nINSERT INCLUSIVE DATES TO AGREE WITH NUMBER OF DAYS LEAVE. SEE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW.\nCOMMENCING DATE April 17, 1943. EXPIRING DATE May 16, 1943\nSIGNED S.C. MCCORMICK, By direction. COMMANDING OFFICER\nFinished USNR Register File\nINSTRUCTIONS:\n1. THE DAY OF DEPARTURE FROM STATION OR DUTY COUNTS AS A DAY OF DUTY; THE DAY OF RETURN AS A DAY OF LEAVE. THIS REFERS TO LEAVE TAKEN WHEN NOT DETACHED FROM SHIP OR STATION (SEE ARTICLE 1727, NAVY REGULATIONS).\n2. IN CASES OF AUTHORIZED DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE, THIS FORM SHOULD BE SUBMITTED IN ADDITION TO THE B-SLIP FORM.\n3. THIS REPORT WILL BE MADE AT EXPIRATION OF LEAVE BY THE IMMEDIATE SUPERIOR OF THE OFFICER TO WHOM THE LEAVE IS GRANTED AND FORWARDED IMMEDIATELY TO THE NAVY DEPARTMENT (BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL). CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO INSURE THAT CORRECT NUMBER OF DAYS OF LEAVE IS REPORTED AND CORRESPONDS WITH THE INCLUSIVE DATES REPORTED.\n18-33335-1 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":283,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REFER TO No.\nP16-4/00/nm/mmm OFFICE OF\nCOMMANDANT FIFTEENTH NAVAL DISTRICT\nBALBOA, CANAL ZONE\n1943 FEB 15 PM 5 30\n177283\nJanuary 23, 1943.\nFrom: The Commandant\nTo: Photographer Newhouse, D. C., USN\nVia: Officer-in-Charge Outlying Bases\nSubject: Change of duty\n1. Upon the receipt of these orders and when directed by your Commanding Officer you will consider yourself relieved of your present duties and all other duty assigned you; will report via such government transportation including air as may be arranged to Balboa, Canal Zone.\n2. Upon arrival Balboa, Canal Zone report to the Commandant Fifteenth Naval District for duty with the Officer-in-Charge District Photographic Activities.\nS. C. McCormick\nBy direction\ncc:\nSupers\nFINISHED FILE PERS 323\n1200501\n15 ND CALBOA\nNOTED PERS 323"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":284,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"QR/P18-1/00/EFA/bwj(60) SECOND ENDORSEMENT\nHdqtrs., 15th Naval District, Balboa, C. Z. March 23, 1943.\nFrom: The Commandant, Fifteenth Naval District.\nTo: Photographer Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, U.S.N.\nVia: The Co-ordinator of Photographic Activities, Fifteenth Naval District (Division Officer).\nSubject: Leave of absence - request for.\n1. Returned granted. Arrangements for return transportation should be made immediately upon arrival in the United States.\n2. For security of information, the Commander in Chief, United States Fleet, directs that personnel on leave should not participate in a press conference or talk to reporters or talk over the radio, except after consultation with and clearance of the subject matter by a Public Relations Officer of the Navy or Marine Corps.\nT. S. KING,\nChief of Staff.\ncc: BuPers.\nFINISHED FILE PERS 31954\nFINISHED FILE PERS 31954\n177283\n[REDACTED]\nX out and initial over your encircled Pers. No. before releasing"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":285,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REFER TO No.\nOFFICE OF\nCOMMANDANT FIFTEENTH NAVAL DISTRICT\nBALBOA, CANAL ZONE\nMarch 25, 1943\nFrom: Photographer Delbert C. Newhouse, U.S.N.\nTo : The Commandant, Fifteenth Naval District.\nVia : The Co-ordinator of Photographic Activities, Fifteenth Naval District (Division Officer).\nSubject: Leave of Absence - request for.\n1. It is requested that I be granted thirty (30) days leave in the United States to begin on or about April 15, 1943.\n2. I have been on duty outside the United States since November 16, 1940 and have had no leave since March, 1940.\n3. On October 25, 1939 I was transferred from the Naval Air Station, Sitka, Alaska to Patrol Squadron Forty-five at the Naval Air Station, San Diego, California. This squadron was redesignated VP Squadron Fourteen and I was transferred from there on November 16, 1940 to the Naval Air Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba where, on August 10, 1942, I received orders to report to the Commandant Fifteenth Naval District for assignment to duty.\n4. If this request be granted, my address while in the United States will be:\n1210 S.E. 37th Avenue, Portland, Oregon\n5. I am not a member of any court or board.\nDelbert C. Newhouse\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT The Office of the CO-ORDINATOR OF PHOTOGRAPHIC ACTIVITIES Fifteenth Naval District\nMarch 25, 1943\n1. Forwarded recommending approval.\nH.E. SHEFFERS\nFINISHED FILE PERS 31954"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":286,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REFER TO No.\n\nP16-4/00/RPR/1e\n\nOFFICE OF\nCOMMANDANT FIFTEENTH NAVAL DISTRICT\nBALBOA, CANAL ZONE\n\nT-495\n\nFebruary 17, 1943.\n\nFrom:\tThe Commandant.\nTo :\tPhotographer\n\tDelbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN.\n\nSubject:\tTemporary additional duty.\n\n1.\tOn or about February 2, 1943 you will proceed from U.S. Naval Base, Santa Elena, Ecuador, to Quito, Ecuador, for temporary additional duty in connection with making photographs as may be necessary of the source of food supply of the base.\n\n2.\tThis is in addition to your regular duties and upon the completion thereof, you will return to your station and resume your regular duties.\n\n3.\tA per diem of $6.00 in lieu of subsistence is authorized while in an air travel status and away from your station in the execution of these orders.\n\n4.\tTransportation will be via government aircraft.\n\n(Confirming written orders of C.O. Santa Elena Bay, dated January 26, 1943.)\n\nD. E. CUMMINGS, Acting.\n\nDT 36753\n\nMAR 13 1943"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":287,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NBl25/P16-4/00/den\n\nU.S. NAVAL BASE,\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador,\nJanuary 26, 1943.\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer.\nTo :\tPhotographer Delbert C. Newhouse, U.S.N.\n\nSubject:\tTemporary Additional Duties.\n\n1.\tUpon receipt of these orders and when directed by proper authority you will proceed via Military Aircraft, on an inspection tour of the Quito, Ecuador area, to inspect and make such photographs as may be necessary of the source of food supply of this base.\n\n2.\tYou are authorized $6.00 per diem for necessary expenses while on this inspection.\n\n3.\tUpon completion of this inspection you will return to this base and continue with your regular duties.\n\nJ. R. LITCHFIELD\nCommander, USNR\n\nFirst Endorsement.\n00/N.S.Salinas\n\nOffice of the Naval Attache,\nQuito, Ecuador\n4 February 1943.\n\nFrom: U.S. Naval Attache, Quito, Ecuador.\nTo :\tPhotographer Delbert C. Newhouse, U.S.N.\n\n1.\tReported. Upon completion of temporary duty carry out the remainder of your orders.\n\nRobert S. Black, Jr.\nAssistant.\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT\n\nU.S. NAVAL BASE,\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador,\nFebruary 12, 1943.\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer.\nTo:\tPhotographer Delbert C. Newhouse, U.S.N.\n\n1.\tIn compliance with the above orders you departed this base at 0700 February 2, 1943.\n\n2.\tYou returned to duty this date.\n\nJ. R. LITCHFIELD"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":288,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S\nSELECTION BOARD JACKET\n\n(1) PHOTO - CERTIFICATES - COMMISSIONS\nA. PHOTOGRAPH\nB. BIRTH\nC. CITIZENSHIP\nD. EDUCATION-TRAINING\nE. COMMISSIONS\nF. APPOINTMENTS\nG. ACCEPTANCES\nH. WAIVERS\nI. OATHS OF OFFICE\nJ. CLASSIFICATION CHANGES\n\n(2) CITATIONS - AWARDS - DISCIPLINE\n\n(3) REPORTS - TRANSCRIPTS - APPLICATIONS\nK. PERSONAL BIOGRAPHY\nL. STATEMENTS OF SERVICE\nM. REPORTS OF PHYSICAL EXAMINATION\nN. REPORTS OF MEDICAL SURVEYS\nO. APPLICATION FOR COMMISSION\nP. NOTICE OF SEPARATION\nQ. REQUESTS FOR CHANGE OF DUTY\n\n(4) MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE\n(STAMPED: \"SELECTION BOARD\")\n\nSEPARATED\n\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":289,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U.S. NAVAL RECEIVING STATION\nU.S. NAVAL STATION\nSAN DIEGO 36, CALIFORNIA\n\nS-1\n\n991/GHH:rb\n1900\n31 March 1960\n\nTHIRD ENDORSEMENT on BUPERS ORDS 021081 of 29 February 1960\n\nFrom:\tCommanding Officer, U.S. Naval Receiving Station, San Diego 36, California\nTo:\tCHIEF W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n\nSubj:\tOrders relieving you of all active duty incident to your retirement on 1 April 1960\n\n1.\tReported 25 March 1960.\n\n2.\tGovernment quarters and messing facilities were available to you but not to your dependents, if any.\n\n3.\tPhysical examination incident to your retirement not required in accordance with Article C-10409, BuPers Manual.\n\n31 March 1960\t\tB.C. LUSHBOUGH, LT, MC, USNR\n\n4.\tAs verified by your officer leave record (NavPers 329), your earned leave credit computed through the effective date of retirement is sixty (60) days.\n\n5.\tDetached 31 March 1960, you will regard yourself released from all active duty effective 2400 this date at which time you are transferred to inactive duty on the Retired List of the U.S. Navy with the rank of Lieutenant but with retired pay based on the rank of Chief Photographer W-4.\n\n6.\tYou have stated that upon release from active duty, your home address, the place at which you may be reached at any time by orders or other official communications will be 652 Burkham St., El Cajon, California.\n\n7.\tInform the Chief of Naval Personnel and the Commandant of the Naval District in which your home address as set forth above is located of any change in such address. Such notification also shall be forwarded to the U.S. Naval Finance Center (Special Payment Division), Cleveland 15, Ohio in order that your retired pay check may not be delayed, due to incorrect address.\n\nG. H. HANSELL Jr.\nBy direction\n\nCopy to:\nBUPERS - DATPROBR\nDNI\nCOM - 11\n\nFinished Files, Pers 19233\n\nAPR 06 1960"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":290,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PACIFIC FLEET PHOTO-TRIANGULATION GROUP\nU. S. NAVAL STATION, BOX 144\nSAN DIEGO 36, CALIFORNIA\n\nPFPTG:RWJ:gt\n1320\nSer: 44\n25 March 1960\n\nFrom:\tOfficer in Charge, Pacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group\nTo:\tCHPHOT, W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\nSubj:\tOrders relieving you of all active duty incident to your retirement\n\n1. Detached this date. You will report immediately to the Commanding Officer, U.S. Naval Receiving Station, San Diego, California for temporary duty in connection with your retirement processing.\n\n2. No expense to the government is authorized in the execution of these orders.\n\nROBERT W. JOHNSON"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":291,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PFPTG:RWJ:BS\n1821\nSer: 39\n14 March 1960\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT\n\nFrom: Officer in Charge, Pacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group\nTo: CHPHOT, W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\n1. Delivered.\n\nROBERT W. JOHNSON"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":292,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283/8311\nFF8-1:NI:rle\n1321\n8 March 1960\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on BUPERS Orders 021081 of 29 Feb 1960\n\nFrom: Commander Training Command, U. S. Pacific Fleet\nTo: CHPHOT, W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nVia: Officer in Charge, Pacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group\n\nSubj: Orders relieving you of all active duty incident to your retirement\n\n1. Readdressed and forwarded for delivery.\n\n2. When directed by the Officer in Charge, Pacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group on 31 March 1960, you will proceed and carry out your basic orders.\n\nT. M. FLECK\nChief of Staff"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":293,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IMPORTANT: Forward only this copy to BuPers upon reporting to final destination. Include all endorsements. (See Art. C-5407 (4) BuPers Manual)\n\n177283/8311\nPers-B721-cbc-2\n29 February 1960\n\nAIRMAIL\n\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT, W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nPacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group\n\nVia: Commander, Training Command, Pacific Fleet\n\nSubj: Orders relieving you of all active duty incident to your retirement\n\nRef: (a) Sections 1 and 5, Chapter 14, BuPers Manual\n(b) BuPers Instruction 1811.1A\n\n1. Your request to be transferred to the retired list was approved by the Secretary of the Navy, effective 1 April 1960.\n\n2. When directed by your commanding officer on 31 March 1960 you will regard yourself detached from all duties which may have been assigned you and will proceed to your home of selection. You will regard yourself relieved of all active duty in the Navy effective at 2400 on date of detachment.\n\n3. On 1 April 1960 you will be transferred to the retired list with the rank of Chief Photographer, W-4 pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Sections 1293, 1315 and 1371.\n\n4. It having been determined that you served satisfactorily in the rank of lieutenant you are hereby advanced, effective 1 April 1960 to the rank of lieutenant on the retired list and with the retired pay based on the rank of Chief Photographer, W-4, pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, U. S. Code, Section 6151 as amended.\n5. Attention is invited to references (a) and (b) concerning general information affecting the retirement of officers.\n\n6. If you are hospitalized at any time during the period preceding the date of your retirement, you should advise the Chief of Naval Personnel by message concerning the diagnosis, prognosis, and probable period of hospitalization.\n\n7. You will not be required to take a new physical examination unless a material change in your physical condition has occurred subsequent to your recent retirement physical examination.\n\n8. It is requested that you report your mail address in accordance with Article B-2206 (7), Bureau of Naval Personnel Manual.\n\n9. Accounting data 1701453.2218 030 22/31600.140\n\n10. Enter in item 11c, DD Form 214: BuPers ltr Pers-B721-cbc-2 of 29 February 1960, 569, Voluntary retirement after twenty years' service - Warrant Officer - 10 USC 1293.\n\nCopy to:\nNAVFINCEN CLEVE SPD (2)\n\nJacket copy\nPers-B74\nB812 B115\nB721 B1314\nB52 (2) 021081\n\nW. R. SMEDBERG, III"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":294,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS 2259 (Rev. 1-59)\n\nOFFICER DESIGNATOR CODE CHANGE\n\n60-6170\n\nDATE 30 June 1960\n\nTHE DESIGNATOR CODE OF THE OFFICER NAMED BELOW WAS APPROVED FOR CHANGE:\n\nNAME (Last, in caps) (First) (Middle) RANK FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert C. LT 177283\n\nCHANGED FROM CHANGED TO 1353\n\nUSNR USN Ret\n\nAPPROVAL RECOMMENDED BY\n\nRELEASE APPROVED BY\n\nEFFECTIVE 4-6-60 per orders of 2-29-60 per jacket review\n\nPER\n\nCOPIES TO:\nFINISHED FILE\nQUALIFICATIONS FILE\n\nJ. E. HOLLAND\n(Officer Designator Section)\nPers B765\n\nS-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":295,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S-1\n\n177283/8311\nPers-B721-cbc-2\n29 February 1960\n\nAIRMAIL\n\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT, W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nPacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group\n\nVia: Commander, Training Command, Pacific Fleet\n\nSubj: Orders relieving you of all active duty incident to your retirement\n\nRef: (a) Sections 1 and 5, Chapter 14, BuPers Manual\n(b) BuPers Instruction 1811.1A\n\n1. Your request to be transferred to the retired list was approved by the Secretary of the Navy, effective 1 April 1960.\n\n2. When directed by your commanding officer on 31 March 1960 you will regard yourself detached from all duties which may have been assigned you and will proceed to your home of selection. You will regard yourself relieved of all active duty in the Navy effective at 2400 on date of detachment.\n\n3. On 1 April 1960 you will be transferred to the retired list with the rank of Chief Photographer, W-4 pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Sections 1293, 1315 and 1371.\n\n4. It having been determined that you served satisfactorily in the rank of lieutenant you are hereby advanced, effective 1 April 1960 to the rank of lieutenant on the retired list and with the retired pay based on the rank of Chief Photographer, W-4, pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, U. S. Code, Section 6151 as amended.\n5. Attention is invited to references (a) and (b) concerning general information affecting the retirement of officers.\n\n6. If you are hospitalized at any time during the period preceding the date of your retirement, you should advise the Chief of Naval Personnel by message concerning the diagnosis, prognosis, and probable period of hospitalization.\n\n7. You will not be required to take a new physical examination unless a material change in your physical condition has occurred subsequent to your recent retirement physical examination.\n\n8. It is requested that you report your mail address in accordance with Article B-2206 (7), Bureau of Naval Personnel Manual.\n\n9. Accounting data 1701453.2218 030 22/31600.140\n\n10. Enter in item 11c, DD Form 214: BuPers ltr Pers-B721-cbc-2 of 29 February 1960, 569, Voluntary retirement after twenty years' service - Warrant Officer - 10 USC 1293.\n\nCopy to:\nNAVFINCEN CLEVE SPD (2)\n\nJacket copy\nPers-B74\nB812 B115\nB721 B1314\nB52 (2) 021081\n\nW. R. SMEDBERG, III"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":296,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICERS ORDER MEMORANDUM NAVPERS 1152 (Rev. 5-59)\nRANK NAME (First, Middle Initial, Last) CORPS FILE NO./DESIGNATOR\nCHPHOT W4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE USN 177283/8311\nAT Pacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group Pacific ORIGINATING PERS\nVIA Contraper DATE 24 Feb 60 B721\nLETTER ORDERS MESSAGE ORDERS DATE OUT BY CONTROL NO.\nPLAIN XXX AIR DEFERRED ROUTINE PRIORITY 29 Feb 021081\nTYPE OF ORDERS\nCHANGE OF DUTY RAD NEW APPT. RECALL RECALL & RAD APPROVAL OF ACTION AUTHORIZATION\nORDCAN ORDCOR ORDMOD CONTREAT ISSUED BY\nUNDELORDCAN UNORDCAN FURORDMOD CONPRESDU LETTER DATED MESSAGE TIME GROUP\nDETACHED DIRDET COMPCOURDET DIS TREAT ON OR ABOUT FROM DUTY DUINS DIFOT DIFOTINS\nHERDET DIRMAKETRANS GRAD ON OR BEFORE TEM TEMINS TEM DIFOT TEMDIFO-TINS\nRELDET UPON REPORTING OF DECOM ON OR AFTER STAFF ADDU RESPON PAY AS\nRELDIRDET Form 2 Wrnt Inside\nTO: PROUS PROPORICH (PRO) IMREP REPT ON FOR DUTY DUINS DIFOT DIFOTINS\n1. PROREP PRO SUCH-TRANS BUPERS COM 12 TRANS REPT ON OR BEFORE TEM TEMINS TEM DIFOT TEMDIFO-TINS\nPara 1 eff 1 Apr 60 (by SecNav)\nPara 2 on 31 mar CHPHOT W4\nPara 3 on 1 Apr trf rank/[REDACTED], Sec 1293, 1315 & 1371. It having been detm served sat rank LT adv to LT & pay CHPHOT W4, Sec 6151 as amnd\nDelete paras 8 & 9\nSep code 569\nDELREP STAFF TEMSEP-RAD FURAS-PERS FURAS BY RESPON PAY AS REL:\n2. COMPTEM DIRDET PROREP PRO SUCH-TRANS BUPERS COM 12 TRANS FOR DUTY DUINS DIFOT DIFOTINS\nPROPORICH TEM TEMINS TEMDIFOT TEMDIFO-TINS STAFF TEMSEP-RAD FURAS-PERS FURAS BY RESPON PAY AS REL:\nDELREP\nCHECK IF APPLICABLE GOVTRANS-DIRVAIL GOVAIRPRI IMMUNQUIRED STUDENT NAVAL AVIATOR CRITICAL HOUSING (AREA) FLYING CLAUSE\nCOMLTRANS AUTH-OUTUS BAGAIR PASSQUIRED STUDENT FLIGHT SURGEON ORG. RES. (UNIT) SECNAV FIND\nCC AND INFO ADDRESSEES\nB721 B52(2) B1314 B115\nDETAIL/PLACEMENT OFFICER EXTENSION\nLCDR W. Q. DAMON, USN 42961"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":297,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pers-B52-HOA/cg 177283/8311 S-1\n11 FEB 1960\nTHIRD ENDORSEMENT on ltr of CHPHOT, W-4 Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, USN, dated 5 January 1960\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: Secretary of the Navy\nSubj: Transfer to the Retired List of; Chief Photographer, W-4 Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, U. S. Navy\nRef: (a) SECNAVINST 1811.3A\n1. Forwarded.\n2. The request submitted in basic letter does not fall within any of the criteria of sub-paragraph 4.a. of reference (a). However, its approval would not be contrary to the best interests of the Service.\n3. Pursuant to the foregoing and sub-paragraph 4.b. of reference (a), I recommend that the attached request of subject named officer to be transferred to the retired list of officers of the Navy after completing more than twenty-seven years' service be approved, effective 1 April 1960, and that he be transferred to the retired list in his present grade, or such other grade as he may be entitled to on date of retirement, in accordance with the provisions of U. S. Code, Title 10, Sections 1293, 1315 and 1371.\nALMON E. LOOMIS\nDeputy Chief of Naval Personnel\nFinished File B52"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":298,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S-1\n1mm 177283/8311\n5 February 1960\nMEMORANDUM TO PERS-B53a\nSubj: CHPHOT, W-4, Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE USN\n1. The official record of the subject indicates he held a higher temporary grade in the U.S. Navy. It is requested that a determination be obtained from the Secretary of the Navy as to the highest rank or grade in which the subject is deemed to have satisfactorily served. The subject's retirement is scheduled to be effective 1 April 1960.\nH. O. ANSON, JR.\nLCDR, USN\nHead, Non-Disability Retirement Branch\nTOTAL ACTIVE SERVICE:\n30 yrs. effective 1 March 1960\nPresent Duty Station:\nOfficer in Charge\nPacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group Headquarters\nU. S. Naval Station\nSan Diego 36, California\nFinished File Pers-B83"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":299,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON 25, D.C. S-1\n177283/8311\n12 FEB 1960\nFrom: Secretary of the Navy\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nSubj: Determination of highest federally recognized rank satisfactorily served\nRef: (a) 10 USC 6151, as amended\n1. Pursuant to reference (a), I have determined the highest grade and rank in which Delbert C. Newhouse has satisfactorily served to be that of lieutenant.\nFinish File Pers B52"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":300,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL WASHINGTON 25, D.C. S-1\nIN REPLY REFER TO Pers-B52-HOA/cg 177283/8311\n11 FEB 1960\nTHIRD ENDORSEMENT on ltr of CHPHOT, W-4 Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, USN, dated 5 January 1960\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: Secretary of the Navy\nSubj: Transfer to the Retired List of; Chief Photographer, W-4 Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, U. S. Navy\nRef: (a) SECNAVINST 1811.3A\n1. Forwarded.\n2. The request submitted in basic letter does not fall within any of the criteria of sub-paragraph 4.a. of reference (a). However, its approval would not be contrary to the best interests of the Service.\n3. Pursuant to the foregoing and sub-paragraph 4.b. of reference (a), I recommend that the attached request of subject named officer to be transferred to the retired list of officers of the Navy after completing more than twenty-seven years' service be approved, effective 1 April 1960, and that he be transferred to the retired list in his present grade, or such other grade as he may be entitled to on date of retirement, in accordance with the provisions of U. S. Code, Title 10, Sections 1293, 1315 and 1371.\nALMON E. LOOMIS\nDeputy Chief of Naval Personnel\nFinished File B52 APPROVED SECNAV 10 FEB 1960"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":301,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FF8-1:Nl:jdw\n1800\nSer: 58\n8 JAN 1960\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on CHPHOT W-4 Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nltr of 5 January 1960\n\nFrom: Commander Training Command, U. S. Pacific Fleet\nTo: Secretary of the Navy\nVia: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nSubj: Retirement from Active Duty; request for\n\n1. Forwarded, recommending approval.\n\nT. M. Fleck\nChief of Staff\n\nCopy to:\nOIC PACFLT PHOTO-TRIANGULATIONGRU\nCHPHOT W-4 D. C. NEWHOUSE\n\nFinished File B52\n2\nAPPROVED SECNAV 19 FEB 1960"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":302,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5 January 1960\n\nFrom: CHPHOT W-4 Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nTo: Secretary of the Navy\nVia: (1) Officer in Charge, Pacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group\n(2) Commander Training Command, U.S. Pacific Fleet\n(3) Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nSubj: Retirement from Active Duty; request for\n\nRef: (a) BuPers Instruction 1811.1A\n\nEncl: (1) Report of Medical Examination (Form 88)\n\n1. In accordance with reference (a), it is respectfully requested that I be considered for retirement effective 1 April 1960.\n\n(27 years active) fee\n\n2. I will complete 30 years service during March 1960.\n\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\n\nPFPTG:RWJ:gt\n1800\nSer: 4\n5 January 1960\n\nFrom: Officer in Charge, Pacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group\nTo: Secretary of the Navy\nVia: (1) Commander Training Command, U.S. Pacific Fleet\n(2) Chief of Naval Personnel\n\n1. Forwarded, recommending approval.\n\nROBERT W. JOHNSON\n\nPERS B5\nJAN 18 1960\nREC'D\n\nFinished File B52\nAPPROVED SECNAV 19 FEB 1960"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":303,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Standard Form 88 (Rev. June 1956)\n\nREPORT OF MEDICAL EXAMINATION\n\n1. LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME\nNEWHOUSE; Delbert Clement\n\n2. GRADE AND COMPONENT OR POSITION\nCHPHOT (W-4) USN\n\n3. IDENTIFICATION NO.\n177283\n\n4. ADDRESS\nc/o Mrs Vencl Richter\nP.O. Box 127 Garibald Oregon\n\nPurpose: Pre Retirement RELEASE TO INACTIVE DUTY\n\n6. DATE OF EXAMINATION\n12-18-59\n\n7. SEX MALE\n8. RACE CAUCASIAN\n9. TOTAL YEARS GOVERNMENT SERVICE\n10. AGENCY U.S. NAVY\n12. DATE OF BIRTH 5 June 1913\n13. PLACE OF BIRTH Oregon\n14. NAME, RELATIONSHIP, AND ADDRESS OF NEXT OF KIN\nNorma I. NEWHOUSE(W) 652 Burham St. El Cajon, California\n15. EXAMINING FACILITY OR EXAMINER, AND ADDRESS\nU.S. NAVAL STATION, SAN DIEGO, CALIF.\n16. OTHER INFORMATION RELIGION: Protestant\n17. RATING OR SPECIALTY\n\nCLINICAL EVALUATION\n\n[Clinical evaluation items 18 through 43 all marked normal (X) except as noted in notes]\n\nNOTES. (Describe every abnormality in detail. Enter pertinent item number before each comment. Continue in item 73 and use additional sheets if necessary.)\n\nAnt. scar (3)1/2\" frontal, S1/2\" lt eyebrow, S1/2 above upper lip LS1\" rt. thumb, OPS RLQ 3\"\n\n44. DENTAL\nREMARKS AND ADDITIONAL DENTAL DEFECTS AND DISEASES\nCLASS 1\n\nLABORATORY FINDINGS\n45. URINALYSIS: A. SPECIFIC GRAVITY NORMAL\nB. ALBUMIN NEGATIVE\nC. SUGAR NEGATIVE\n46. CHEST X-RAY U.S. NAVAL STATION, SDIEGO, CALIF. 70MM CHEST FILM NO. 38367 NEG.\n47. SEROLOGY PRESUMPTIVE KAHN NEGATIVE\n48. EKG NOT DONE\n49. BLOOD TYPE AND RH FACTOR NOT DONE\n50. OTHER TESTS NONE EKG NORMAL 12-18-59\n\nFinished File B52\nAPPROVED SECNAV 19 FEB 1960"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":304,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEASUREMENTS AND OTHER FINDINGS\n\n51. HEIGHT 73\"\n52. WEIGHT 210\n53. COLOR HAIR Brn Grey\n54. COLOR EYES Blue\n55. BUILD: HEAVY\n56. TEMPERATURE NORM\n\n57. BLOOD PRESSURE (Arm at heart level) A. SITTING SYS. 108 DIAS. 70\nC. STANDING SYS. 120 DIAS. 80\n58. PULSE A. SITTING 68 C. 2 MIN. AFTER 84\n\n59. DISTANT VISION RIGHT 20/200 CORR. TO 20/20 LEFT 20/20 CORR. TO 20/20 BY Glasses\n60. REFRACTION\n61. NEAR VISION\n62. HETEROPHORIA\n63. ACCOMMODATION\n64. COLOR VISION AOC 1940 18/18\n65. DEPTH PERCEPTION\n66. FIELD OF VISION\n67. NIGHT VISION\n68. RED LENS TEST\n69. INTRAOCULAR TENSION\n70. HEARING RIGHT WV 15/15 SV 15/15 LEFT WV 15/15 SV 15/15\n71. AUDIOMETER\n72. PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PSYCHOMOTOR\n\n73. NOTES (Continued) AND SIGNIFICANT OR INTERVAL HISTORY\nNONE CONSIDERED DISQUALIFYING\n\n\"I CERTIFY THAT I HAVE BEEN INFORMED OF AND UNDERSTAND THE PROVISIONS OF BUMED. INSTRUCTION 6120.6 (PHYSICAL EXAMINATION FOR SEPARATION FROM THE ACTIVE LIST).\"\n\nSIGN HERE\n\n74. SUMMARY OF DEFECTS AND DIAGNOSES\nNONE CONSIDERED DISQUALIFYING\n\n75. RECOMMENDATIONS—FURTHER SPECIALIST EXAMINATIONS INDICATED\nNONE\n\n76. A. PHYSICAL PROFILE\nB. PHYSICAL CATEGORY\n\n77. EXAMINEE A. X IS QUALIFIED FOR RELEASE TO INACTIVE DUTY AND TO PERFORM ACTIVE DUTY AT SEA AND ON FOREIGN SHORE.\nPRE-RETIREMENT IN THE U.S. NAVY\n\n78. IF NOT QUALIFIED: LIST DISQUALIFYING DEFECTS BY ITEM NUMBER\n\n79. TYPED OR PRINTED NAME OF PHYSICIAN J. WARREN CAPT (MC) USN\n80. TYPED OR PRINTED NAME OF PHYSICIAN W.W. GILBERT CAPT (MC) USN\n81. TYPED OR PRINTED NAME OF DENTIST OR PHYSICIAN G. N. CROSLAND CAPT (DC) USN\n82. TYPED OR PRINTED NAME OF REVIEWING OFFICER OR APPROVING AUTHORITY\n\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1957 O—432298"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":305,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nPers-B52-HOA/ lmn\n177283/8311\n5 February 1960\n\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nTo: CHPHOT, W-4, Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\nVia: Officer in Charge\nPacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group Headquarters\nU. S. Naval Station\nSan Diego 36, California\n\nSubj: Voluntary Retirement\n\nRef: (a) BuPers Instruction 1811.1A\n\nEncl: (1) Navy Guide for Retired and Fleet Reserve Personnel\n\n1. This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter of 5 January 1960 in which you have requested voluntary retirement effective 1 April 1960. Your request is being processed for 1 April 1960.\n\n2. Your attention is invited to the requirements set forth in subparagraph 3k of reference (a) regarding a retirement physical examination. Your request cannot be forwarded to the Secretary of the Navy for approval until a report of such examination is received. If you have forwarded a report of pre-retirement physical examination or a certified copy thereof to Pers-B52, please disregard this paragraph.\n\n3. This acknowledgment is not to be construed as being an indication of approval of your retirement, as such action is at the discretion of the Secretary of the Navy. Appropriate orders will be issued effecting your transfer to the Retired List upon approval of your request by the Secretary of the Navy. It would be advisable to exercise caution in making commitments in anticipation of voluntary retirement until you are in receipt of retirement orders.\n\n4. You are advised that, with certain exceptions, retired officers including warrant officers of the Regular Navy are prohibited from holding a civilian position or office with the Federal Government when either the retired pay or the rate of compensation fixed for the civilian position or office amounts to $2500 or more per annum. Your specific attention is invited to the information concerning the Dual Employment Statute, the Dual Compensation Statute, and the conflict-of-interest restrictions of private employment activities, contained in Chapters 1 and 2 of Part Eight of enclosure (1).\n\nH. O. ANSON, JR.\nBy direction\n\nCopy to: Pers-File\nNAVPERS 2527 (REV 12-58)\nGPO 870257\n\nFinished File B52"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":306,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT PERS-82-79 INDIVIDUAL ORDER TO ADJUST PAY RECORD\n1. LEAVE RATIONS OR LOSS OF PAY DUE TO ABSENCE HOUR DATE\nWITH LEAVE: AOL OR AWOL period, if any, excused as unavoidable\nWITHOUT LEAVE: Not excused as unavoidable DEPARTURE\nWITH LEAVE: AOL period, if any, not excused as unavoidable\nOVER LIBERTY: Not excused as unavoidable LEAVE OR LIBERTY EXPIRED RETURNED TO NAVAL JURISDICTION\nCredit leave rations and/or check pay in accordance with current directives\n2. CHANGE RATE: TO (Rate) FROM (Rate)\nEFFECTIVE (Date change effected) AUTHORITY AUTHORITY RECEIVED (Date)\n3. CHANGE IN SERVICE FOR PAY PURPOSES: YEARS MONTHS DAYS\nOTHER SERVICE** NAVAL SERVICE\nON (Date) COMPLETED NET SERVICE OF\n**Career Compensation Act of 1949. BuPers statement of service filed in service record.\n4. COMMUTED RATIONS: FROM (Date) TO (Date)\nPermission to mess separately has been granted. Commutation of rations to a mess or subsistence in kind has not and will not be authorized or furnished for this period.\n5. SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCE: FROM (Hour and date) TO (Hour and date) AT $ per day\nRations in kind not available or furnished for this period.\n6. QUARTERS ALLOWANCE: FROM (Date) TO (Date) AT $ per mo. AND/OR\nNo Government quarters available. AT $ per day\n7. MISCONDUCT: The below-named individual has been incapacitated for duty from (Date of admission) TO (Date of discharge) as a result of his own: INTEMPERATE USE OF DRUGS INTEMPERATE USE OF ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS\nSIGNATURE, RANK, AND TITLE OF M. O. (Sign original and duplicate) SHIP OR STATION OF M. O.\n8. MISCELLANEOUS PAY ORDERS (See reverse of part 4 for instructions)\nAPPLICATION FOR SOCIAL SECURITY ACCOUNT NUMBER CARD MADE 25 OCT 1956\nISSUED SOCIAL SECURITY NO. 540-46-3224\nThe Disbursing Officer is authorized and directed to adjust pay record of the below-named individual for the reason and period stated above. NOTE: VOID IF MORE THAN ONE ITEM IS COMPLETED\nEFFECTIVE FOR ITEM ONLY (Number) SIGNATURE P. M. HALL, LCDR, USN, PERSONNEL OFFICER BY DIRECTION OF THE CO C. O. ORDER NO. 1461-57\nSHIP OR STATION MATECHTRAU, NAS, PENSACOLA, FLORIDA D. O. SYMBOL NO. A7222\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement SERVICE NO. 177283 RATE CHPHOT, USN BRANCH AND CLASS USN\nINDIVIDUAL ORDER TO ADJUST PAY RECORD NAVPERS-601/NAVSANDA-515 (REV. 3-51) PART 4—FORWARD TO BUPERS. 7"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":307,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS\nPrepare in quadruplicate. Original and all copies shall be signed.\nItems 1 through 7. Complete appropriate item as applicable. Only one item shall be completed on each page prepared.\nItem 8. (Miscellaneous Pay Orders.) This item may be used to authorize credit of pay for diving duty, salvage and footage dives, duty at a Submarine Escape Training Tank, Navy Deep Sea Diving School or Navy Experimental Diving Unit, and such other items of pay as may subsequently be authorized. Entries in item 8 will be made in the following form:\n1. Diving Duty: \"Entered on diving duty (Date) Duty terminated (Date)\nQualified as (Designation) Diver, lapsing (Date)\" and, if applicable, \"Assigned Experimental Diving Unit.\"\n2. Salvage and Footage Dives:\nTypes of Dive (Salvage or Footage—List separately) Date Hours—Minutes Number of Feet\n3. Duty at Navy Deep Sea Diving School or Navy Experimental Diving Unit: \"Assigned to (or terminated) duty involving training of divers at (Sub. Esc. Trng., etc.) on (Date) Duty terminated (Date)\"\n4. Duty at Submarine Escape Training Tank: \"Assigned to diving duty involving training of personnel in methods of escape from submerged submarine at (Activity) on (Date) Duty terminated (Date)\"\nThe first page used will be numbered 1 in block provided beside the page number and subsequent pages numbered 2, 3, 4, etc.\nThis page supersedes a portion of the entries included on old forms, page 9U, NavSandA-518; page 9V, NavSandA-517; page 9W, NavSandA-516; page 9X, NavSandA-515; page 9T, NavSandA-519.\nPage 7"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":308,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"From: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: Commanding Officer, Utility Squadron FIVE\nSubj: Code of Conduct for Members of the Armed Forces of the United States\nRef: (a) SECNAV INSTRUCTION 1610.1\n1. In accordance with reference (a), the following statement is submitted:\n\"I fully understand the Code of Conduct for Members of the Armed Forces of the United States; and if I become a prisoner of war, I will do everything in my power to measure up to its standards.\"\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\nVU-57ACW:rlp P20 Ser: 1478 1 DEC 1955\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\nFrom: Commanding Officer, Utility Squadron FIVE To: Chief of Naval Personnel\n1. Forwarded.\nB. F. ROWE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":309,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS: USE TYPEWRITER OR PRINT IN INK. ORIGINAL TO THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL WHITE COPY TO APPOINTEE; PINK COPY TO COMMANDING OFFICER YELLOW COPIES TO DISBURSING OFFICER 96089-50 Date: 13 July 1955\nFrom: Commanding Officer, Utility Squadron FIVE\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311 (Name) (File No./Designator)\nSubj: Appointment as Chief Warrant Officer W-4\nRef: (a) Commission or SecNav letter Pers-B1311-eg dated 28 June 1955.\n1. By physical examination conducted on 13 July, 1955 you were found physically fit for continuation on active duty and, therefore, physically qualified for subject promotion.\n2. Subject appointment, authorized by reference (a), is delivered herewith. B. F. ROWE (Signature)\nI, Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311, having been permanently temporarily appointed a Chief Warrant Officer W-4 USN USNR, to rank from the 15th day of June, 1955, do accept such appointment.\nHaving accepted the appointment indicated above, I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.\n(Signature of appointee in full)\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this 13th day of July, 1955. Hamilton G. PARK, Jr., LCDR (Signature and rank of witnessing officer)\nEffective Date: 15 June 1955\nFrom: Utility Squadron FIVE (Commanding Officer) 13 July 1955 (Date)\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers-B1312)\n1. Forwarded.\nB. F. ROWE (Signature)\nFINISHED FILE PERS B812 A51118"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":310,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL WASHINGTON 25, D. C.\nIN REPLY REFER TO Pers-B1311-eg 177283/8311 28 JUN 1955\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: Commanding Officer Utility Squadron 5 FPO, San Francisco, Calif.\nSubj: CWO, W-4, Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN Promotion of\nRef: (a) Warrant Officer Act of 1954\nEncl: (1) Appointment (2) Delivery, Acceptance and Oath of Office Form\n1. Enclosure (1) is authority for the promotion of subject officer.\n2. Prior to delivery of enclosure (1) the commanding officer must determine that subject officer is mentally, morally and professionally qualified to perform the duties of the grade indicated therein, and that he meets the physical qualifications prescribed below.\n3. If subject officer's health record indicates that he has undergone an annual physical examination within the four months preceeding receipt of this letter, and no disqualifying defects were noted, he is to be considered physically qualified for promotion and the appointment may be delivered.\n4. If subject officer has not had an annual physical examination within the above stated time, or if he has had an examination wherein disqualifying defects were noted, the commanding officer shall direct him to report to a medical officer for physical examination for promotion. The physical standards shall be the same as those for retention on active duty. The findings of the medical officer should read, \"is (or is not) physically qualified for continuation on active duty and for promotion to the grade of Chief Warrant Officer W-4\". Report of this physical examination will be made to the Chief of the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery on Standard Form 88.\n5. In the event the commanding officer should determine that subject officer is not mentally, morally or professionally qualified or, if he is not physically qualified for promotion, enclosure (1) shall be returned to the Chief of Naval Personnel, Attn: Pers B1311, with a report of the circumstances.\nB. T. MORRISON By direction\nA28238"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":311,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"28 JUN 1955\nKNOW YE, that reposing special trust and confidence in the patriotism, Valor,\nFidelity and Abilities of DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE I do\nappoint him, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate,\na Chief Warrant Officer, W-4\nUNITED STATES NAVY\nto rank as such from the fifteenth day of, June nineteen\nhundred and fifty-five\nTHIS IS A SKELETON DOCUMENT FOR FILE\nAND RECORD PURPOSES OF THE ARMED\nFORCES TYPE COMMISSION ISSUED TO THE\nABOVE NAMED OFFICER.\nFinished File Pers B1311\nDone at the City of Washington, this twenty-second day of June\nin the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifty-five and of the\nIndependence of the United States of America the one hundred and seventy-ninth\nBy the President\nRegistered:\nB. T. Morrison\nFOR THE CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nEffective: 15 June 1955\nC. S. THOMAS\nSECRETARY OF THE NAVY\nFile No. 177283\nA 5723"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":312,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. NAVAL CORRESPONDENCE COURSE CENTER\nBUILDING \"RF\"\nU. S. NAVAL BASE\nBROOKLYN 1, NEW YORK\nIN REPLY REFER TO:\nNCCC/P11-1/00\nHSB:et\n13 June 1951\nFrom: Officer in Charge\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nBox 11-H, Navy #3923\nc/o FPO, San Francisco, Calif.\nSubj: Correspondence Course in Uniform Code of Military Justice\nNavPers 10971 ; completion of\n1. In recognition of having furthered your proficiency in the naval service by the successful completion of the subject correspondence course on 26 May 1951 with a mark of 4.0 , the U.S. Naval Correspondence Course Center, on behalf of the Chief of Naval Personnel, takes pleasure in transmitting this Letter of Satisfactory Completion.\n2. A copy of this letter will be placed on file in your official record.\nHUGH S. BROWN\nCopy to:\nBuPers (Pers E221)\nCommander, Fleet Activities,\nNavy # 3923, c/o FPO,\nSan Francisco, Calif."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":313,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\nPers-3215-arr\n177283/1100\n14 December 1949\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo:\nLieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, U. S. Navy\nVia:\nChief of the Bureau of Aeronautics\nNavy Department\nWashington 25, D. C.\nSubj: Initial Distribution of Warrant Officers and Chief Warrant Officers in Pay Grades prescribed by Career Compensation Act of 1949.\nRef: (a) AlNav 97 of 12 October 1949\n1. You were initially assigned as of 1 October 1949 in accordance with reference (a) to pay grade W 3 in your permanent status as a commissioned Warrant Officer. Accordingly, upon reversion to your permanent status you will be entitled to receive the pay and allowances of a commissioned Warrant Officer in pay grade W 3\nJames H. Curran\nBy direction.\n16 DEC 1949\nFINISHED FILE PERS-B139"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":314,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TEMPORARY PROMOTIONAL ACTION TAKEN PURSUANT TO PUBLIC LAW 381, 80TH CONGRESS:\nFILE NO. NAME CLASS RANK DATE OF RANK\n177283 NEWHOUSE DELBERT C LAP- LT 4 01 46\nAFFIRMED IN ALNAV. NO. 210-47\nCONTINUED IN ALNAV NO.\nS-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":315,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS - 1782 (REV. 3-45)\nSTATEMENT OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT\nFILE NUMBER NAME CLASS APPOINTED TO\nDATE OF APPOINTMENT DATE OF RANK CIRC. LTR. ALNAV. NUMBER DATED\nSubject to the conditions stated below, the above individual was appointed by the President to the rank indicated above, for temporary service.\nIn the event all stated conditions be met, the appointment (unless expressly declined) is to be regarded for all purposes as having been accepted on the date made, without formal acceptance or oath of office, as provided in Section 5 of an Act of Congress approved June 30, 1942, (Public No. 639 — 77th Congress).\nCONDITIONS UNDER WHICH APPOINTMENT WOULD NOT BE EFFECTED:\n1. Physical disqualification.\n2. Withheld by commanding officer.\n3. Declined.\n4. (a) Under treatment in hospital;\n(b) On sick leave;\n(c) Missing;\n(d) Prisoner of war.\nNOTE: The effectiveness of this appointment must be verified by other correspondence in the officer's correspondence jacket unless notation appears hereon indicating appointment not effected.\nFINISHED FILE OFFICER PROMOTION SECTION\nSTATEMENT OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":316,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Address Reply to\nSUPPLY OFFICER IN COMMAND\nand refer to:\n\nROUTING\n\nAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nNaval Supply Center\nPearl Harbor, T. H.\n\nPers-32173\n32152\n32170A\n8 OCT 32171A\n3216\n\nACCEPTANCE AND OATH OF OFFICE FOR PERMANENT APPOINT-\nMENT IN THE NAVY, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY CON-\nTAINED IN BUPERS CIRCULAR LETTER NO. 182-46\n\n25 September 1946\n\nFrom: Lt. Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, LINE, USN (177283)\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: Supply Officer in Command, Aviation Supply Depot, Pearl\nHarbor, T.H.\n\n1. I, Delbert Clement Newhouse, having been appointed Chief\nPhotographer in the U. S. Navy, to rank from - - - - -,\ndo hereby accept such appointment, and do solemnly swear (or\naffirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the\nUnited States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that\nI will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, that I take\nthis obligation freely, without any mental reservation or pur-\npose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge\nthe duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help\nme God.\n\nDelbert Clement Newhouse\nDelbert Clement Newhouse\n\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this twenty-fifth day of\nSeptember 1946.\n\nK. A. GRAHN\nSupply Officer in Command\n\nACKNOWLEDGMENT OF NOTICE OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT\nIN THE U. S. NAVY\n\n1. I hereby acknowledge receipt of notice of appointment to\nthe rank of Lieutenant in the Navy, for temporary service, to\nrank from 1 April 1946 as made by the President and effective\nfrom the date of the above acceptance and oath of office.\n\n2. This temporary appointment has not and will not be declined\nby me.\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS-3216\n\nForm No.-NSC-43"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":317,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- 2 -\n\n3. Two (2) certified copies of this acknowledgment and the above\nacceptance and oath of office are being furnished by me to the\nDisbursing Officer carrying my accounts.\n\nDelbert Clement Newhouse\n\nI hereby certify that I have been in a continuous active duty\nstatus since 1 October 1945.\n\nEND-1 AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT, PEARL HARBOR\n\n25 September 1946\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\n1. Forwarded.\n\nK. A. GRAHN\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS-3216"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":318,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,\nTo All Who Shall See These Presents, Greeting:\n\nKnow Ye, that, reposing special Trust and Confidence in the Patriotism, Valor, Fidelity, and Abilities of . . . Delbert C. Newhouse . . . I have nominated, and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, do appoint him [REDACTED] in the service of the UNITED STATES. He is, therefore, carefully and diligently to discharge the Duties of [REDACTED] by doing and performing all Manner of Things thereunto belonging. And I do strictly charge and require all Officers, Seamen and Marines, under his Command, to be obedient to his Orders as [REDACTED] and he is to Observe and Follow such Orders and Directions, from time to time, as he shall receive from me, or the future PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA, or his Superior Officer set over him, according to the Rules and Discipline of the Navy. This Commission to continue in force during the pleasure of the President of the United States for the time being.\n\nDone at the City of Washington, this [REDACTED] day of [REDACTED] in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and [REDACTED] and of the Independence of the United States the one hundred and [REDACTED]\n\nBy the President:\n\n[REDACTED]\nJames Forrestal\nSecretary of the Navy.\n\n(L.S.)\n\nRegistered No. [REDACTED] (The lowest number of same date takes rank)\n\nW. J. Stewart\nRegistrar"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":319,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ORIGINAL PRECEDENCE DATE 15 JUNE 1943\n\nRANK | P.T.S. | REG. NO. | DATE OF RANK | DATE OF SELECTION BD. | QUAL | AD INTERIM NOMINATED | DATE CONFIRMED | DATE REGISTERED | AUTHORITY\n\nChf.Photo. P 28 Oct 1942 USN Q 31 Jul 46 9 Aug 46 C/L 182-46\nLieut T 736 894 1 Apr 46 (1) Appt term eff 31 Dec 49. Effective on date of oath of AFFIRM Ack Rec Ch.Photo (A&O 25 Sep 46) ALNAV 210-47\nCHF.PHOTO P 28 Oct 42\nCWO W4 P 15 Jun 55 15 Jun 55 Ack Rec 13 Jul 55 Comm. Iss. 22 Jun 55\n\nTransfered to the Retired List 1 Apr 60 with the rank of pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, U. S. Code, Section RAD\n\nSELECTED-55 RETIRED 1 APR 1960\n\nBIRTH DATE 5 June 13 | ORIG. A & O DATE 25 Sep 46 | PAY ENTRY DATE\nTrans (Pub. Law 347 79th Cong - 18 Apr 46)\nNAME NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. | ACAD. YR. | FILE NO. 177283 | CLASSIFICATION CPHoM(AA) 16 | ACT. DUTY DATE Feb 42 | FINDER NO."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":320,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER PRECEDENCE RECORD NAVPERS 839\nREMARKS\n(1) Appt term eff 31 Dec 49, reverts to perm CP, Auth: SecNavLtr 21 Nov 49.\nFEB 12 1960\nDetermination made this date for Pers B52, Retirement.\nHighest rank satisfactorily served was that of LIEUT.\n\nACTIVE DUTY AND SEPARATION\nFROM | TO | ACCUMULATED ACTIVE DUTY | REMARKS | CLASS. | DATE\nASSIGNED CONSIDERED FOR PAY GRADE 3 6-15-99 (fiscal year)\n\nBIRTH DATE 5 June 13 | ORIG. A & O DATE 25 Sep 46 | PAY ENTRY DATE\nTrans (Pub. Law 347 79th Cong - 18 Apr 46)\nNAME NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. | ACAD. YR. | FILE NO. 177283 | CLASSIFICATION CPHoM(AA) 16 | ACT. DUTY DATE Feb 42"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":321,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REMARKS\n(1) Appt term eff 31 Dec 49, reverts to perm CP, Auth: SecNavLtr 21 Nov 49.\nFEB 1 2 1960\nDetermination made this date for Pers B52, Retirement.\nHighest rank satisfactorily served was that of LIEUT.\n\nACTIVE DUTY AND SEPARATION\nKP21620C\nFROM | TO | ACCUMULATED ACTIVE DUTY | REMARKS | CLASS. | DATE\nASSIGNED CONSIDERED FOR PAY GRADE 3 6/5-99\n(delete one) (fiscal year)\nBIRTH DATE | ORIG. A & O DATE | PAY ENTRY DATE\n5 June 13 | 25 Sep 46\nTrans (Pub. Law 347 79th Cong - 18 Apr 46)\nNAME | ACAD. YR. | FILE NO. | CLASSIFICATION | ACT DUTY DATE | FINDER NO.\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert C. | 177283 | CPHoM(AA) 16 | Feb 42"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":322,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Delbert C. Newhouse\nAPPOINTMENT\nACCEPTED ORIGINAL BORN:\n7-6-43\nP.E.D.\n177283 | NO. | DATE OF RANK | DATE OF SELECTION BOARD | QUAL. | A.I. | NOM. | CONF. | Appt. by REG.\nTemporary Ensign | 133 | 15 JUN'43 | | | Cir. Letter No. 96-43 | | | 15 JUN'43\nTemporary Lieutenant (J.G.) | 861 | 1 SEP 44 Akgd.5 Sep'44 | | | Alnav 169 | | | 1 SEP 44\nLieutenant | 894 | 1 APR '46 Ack Rec 3 apr '46 | | | Alnav 150 | | | 1 APR '46\nLt. Commander\nCommander\nCaptain\nRear Admiral\nRear Admiral Upper Half\nGPO 4-8193\nPho(T) 6-25-42 CPhoM(AA) 2-16-42\nK-6655"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":323,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date of entry (present appointment)\nPRIOR SERVICE FOR PAY | PRIOR SERVICE FOR RETIREMENT\nYEARS | MONTHS | DAYS | YEARS | MONTHS | DAYS\nConstructive\nEnlisted\nWarrant\nMidshipman\nCommissioned\nOther\nTOTAL,\nConstructive date of entry for pay purposes:\n(Prior pay service included)\nRemarks:\n4-8193"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":324,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Delbert C. Newhouse Temp.\nACCEPTED ORIGINAL APPOINTMENT: BORN: June 5-1913\n10-15-42 P.E.D. 3-16-30\nNO. | DATE OF RANK | DATE OF SELECTION BOARD | QUAL. | A.I. | NOM. | CONF. | Appt. by REG.\nPhotographer (Acting) | 19 | 25 Jun.'42 | 1 June '42 | | Circ.Ltr. 127-42 | | 9-1-42\nPhotographer (Warrant)\nChief Photographer\nCred. Record (after 10 years)\nCred. Record (after 20 years)\nGPO 4-8193\nCPhotoM(AA) 2-16-42\n134019"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":325,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date of entry (present appointment) Photo (2) 7-1-42\nPRIOR SERVICE FOR PAY | PRIOR SERVICE FOR RETIREMENT\nYEARS | MONTHS | DAYS | YEARS | MONTHS | DAYS\nConstructive\nEnlisted 12 5 15\nWarrant\nMidshipman\nCommissioned\nOther\nTOTAL,\nConstructive date of entry for pay purposes: Mar. 16-1930\n(Prior pay service included)\nRemarks:\n4-8193\n3-16-30"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":326,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) DELBERT (Middle) CLEMENT FILE NO. 177283 CLASSIFICATION USN\nRANK LT. (JG) (T) DATE OF RANK 1 April 46 USN REGISTER NO. Lt. 894 DATE OF BIRTH 5 June 13 RECOMMENDED FOR CWO/CHF.PHOTO.\nSOURCE AND LOCATION Enlisted USN\nPREVIOUS RANKS RANK DATE OF RANK\nCREDIT LOSS ITEM Y M D\nTRANSF. FROM active\nDATE RETURN A.D.\nRAD/RESIG.\nITEM Y M D\nACTIVE DUTY\nO & A\nDATE OF APPT.\nDATE OF RANK 43 6 15\nPREV. 9-9-39\nLieut. (T) 1 April 46\nLT (JG) (T) 1 Sept 44\nENS (T) 15 June 43\nPhoto (T) 25 June 42\nLOSS- None\n÷ 2\nPRECEDENCE 43-6-15\nREMARKS: *BuPers C/L No. 127-42\nCLASS STANDING PROBATIONARY PERIOD\nPERMANENT RANK CWO DATE OF RANK 23 Feb 44\nLINEAL PRECEDENCE RECORD NAVPERS - 2372 - (REV.-2-46) (Briefed) C-65781"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":327,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAME NEWHOUSE, DELBERT C. APPOINTMENT 1 2 3 4 5 SCHOOLS 1 3 4 5 TOUR 1/58 PROGRAM 1/60 CLASS/ CHPHOT FILE NUMBER 177283/8311 10-2\nS-3\nDATE OF ORDERS PERS. ORDERING TRANSFER FROM ETD REPORT TO DUTIES ETA\n2-29-60 B721 Form 2 Wrnt Inside. Dirdet duty. On 1 Apr 60 trf ret list rank CHPHOT W4 Sec 1293, 1315 & 1371. It having been determined served sat rank LT adv LT & pay CHPHOT W4, Sec 6151 as amnd. Rep code 569\nREMARKS\nFinish file Pers B732"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":328,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"QUALIFICATIONS Perm CWO-4 - 6-15-55 NAVAL SCHOOLS W-3 RANK CHPHOT DATE OF RANK 6/30/48\nFITNESS REPORT\nDATE OF ORDERS PERS. ORDERING TRANSFER FROM ETD REPORT TO DUTIES ETA\n19132521 B15c VU-5 2/15/56 NATTU PENSACOLA DUTY DEL: 30 days\n06915Z 11/57 Bb112 NATTU PENSACOLA 12/57 USS ESSEX DUTY 1-10-58\n4-27-59 B1314 RelDet (7/59) Rept OIC FLT CAMERA GRP PAC HQTRS SDIEGO REL SCOTT 8/59"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":329,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DD FORM 214 NOV 55 REPORT OF TRANSFER OR DISCHARGE\n1. LAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE NAME NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement 2. SERVICE NUMBER 177283 3a. GRADE, RATE OR RANK CHPHOT W-4 3b. DATE OF RANK 15 JUN 55\n4. DEPARTMENT, COMPONENT AND BRANCH Navy USN/RET 5. PLACE OF BIRTH Marcola, Oregon 6. DATE OF BIRTH 5 JUN 13\n7a. RACE Caucasian 7b. SEX Male 7c. COLOR HAIR Grey 7d. COLOR EYES Blue 7e. HEIGHT 73 7f. WEIGHT 215 8. U.S. CITIZEN Yes 9. MARITAL STATUS Married\n10a. HIGHEST CIVILIAN EDUCATION LEVEL High School 4 Years 10b. MAJOR COURSE Academic\n11a. TYPE OF TRANSFER OR DISCHARGE Retired 11b. STATION U.S. Naval Receiving Station, San Diego 36, Calif.\n11c. REASON AND AUTHORITY BuPers Ltr Pers-B721-cbc-2 of 29 February 1960, 569, Voluntary retirement after twenty years service - Warrant Officer - 10 USC 1293 11d. EFFECTIVE DATE 31 MAR 60 11e. TYPE OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED DD217N\n12. LAST DUTY ASSIGNMENT AND MAJOR COMMAND PacFltPhoto-TraGru, San Diego, California 13a. CHARACTER OF SERVICE HONORABLE\n14. SELECTIVE SERVICE NUMBER Not Applicable 15. SELECTIVE SERVICE LOCAL BOARD Not Applicable 16. DATE INDUCTED Not Applicable\n17. DISTRICT OR AREA COMMAND Commandant: ELEVENTH Naval District, San Diego, California\n18. TERMINAL DATE OF RESERVE OBLIGATION Not Applicable 19. CURRENT ACTIVE SERVICE Commissioned (15 JUN 43) 19b. TERM Indef. 19c. DATE OF ENTRY 15 JUN 43\n20. PRIOR REGULAR ENLISTMENTS Two 21. GRADE AT TIME OF ENTRY Ensign 22. PLACE OF ENTRY Coco Solo, Canal Zone\n23. HOME OF RECORD General Delivery Garibaldi, Oregon\n24. STATEMENT OF SERVICE a. Net service this period 16 years 09 months 16 days; Other service 13 years 03 months 00 days; Total 30 years 00 months 16 days; b. Total active service 27 years 02 months 07 days; c. Foreign and/or sea service 14 years 00 months 00 days\n25a. SPECIALTY NUMBER ---\n26. DECORATIONS, MEDALS, BADGES, COMMENDATIONS, CITATIONS AND CAMPAIGN RIBBONS Good Conduct, American Defense, American Campaign, World War II Victory, Navy Occupation, National Defense, Korean Service, United Nations\n27. WOUNDS RECEIVED None\n28. SERVICE SCHOOLS ---\n29. OTHER SERVICE TRAINING ---\n30a. GOVERNMENT LIFE INSURANCE IN FORCE Yes\n30b. AMOUNT OF ALLOTMENT N-$15.18 G $6.12 30c. MONTH ALLOTMENT DISCONTINUED ACTIVE\n31a. VA BENEFITS PREVIOUSLY APPLIED FOR Home Loan 31b. VA CLAIM NUMBER C-4089371\n32. REMARKS Number of Days Leave Paid - 60 3/31/60 NADO, USNS, San Diego, California. Excess Leave - None. No MOP Paid. Not Entitled. Time Lost - None. R. W. H. DARROW C5242. Effective 1 April 1960, you are hereby advanced on the retired list to the rank of LIEUTENANT and with retired pay based on the rank of CHIEF PHOTOGRAPHER W-4 pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 6151 as amended.\n33. PERMANENT ADDRESS 652 Durham St., El Cajon, California\n34. SIGNATURE OF PERSON BEING TRANSFERRED OR DISCHARGED Delbert Clement Newhouse\n35a. TYPED NAME, GRADE AND TITLE OF AUTHORIZING OFFICER G.H. HANSELL Jr., CHSHIPCLK, USN, SEP OFF, BY DIR.\n35b. SIGNATURE OF OFFICER AUTHORIZED TO SIGN G. H. Hansell\n2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":330,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CERTIFICATE OF CLEARANCE FOR HANDLING CLASSIFIED MATTER OPNAV FORM-5521-429 (Rev. 3-56)\nFROM: Officer in Charge (CO, Officer-in-Charge, etc.) Pacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group (Name of Activity) U.S. Naval Station, Box 144 (Address of Activity) San Diego 36, California\nPFPTG:RWJ:gt 5500 SERIAL NO: 9 DATE: 18 January 1960\nTO: XX CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nCOMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS (AO-2)\nLOCAL CIVILIAN PERSONNEL FILE (Maintained by activity wherein employed)\nSUBJ: Clearance for handling classified Security Information\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement (Name - Last, first, middle) CHPHOT, W-4 (Rank, Grade, Rate) 177283/8311 (File or service no.)\n6 May 1913 - Moreold, Oregon (Date and place of birth)\nREF: (a) U.S. Navy Security Manual For Classified Matter, (OPNAV INSTR. 5510.1A)\n(b) ONI rpt of NAC dtd 8 September 1952\n1. In accordance with reference (a), I certify that on 18 January 1960 subject named person was granted XXXXXXXX(FINAL) clearance for access up to and including SECRET matter required in the performance of officially assigned duties, and based on a National Agency Check and 10 years service results of which were reported by reference (b).\nSIGNATURE Robert W. Johnson ROBERT W. JOHNSON\nCC: Local military personnel record NAVY - Enlisted Service Record or Officer's Qualification Record Jacket. MARINE CORPS - Service Record Book or Officer's Qualification Record.\nB-57034"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":331,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE OF BIRTH\n6/5/13\nPAY ENTRY BASE DATE\n3/16/30\n\nRETIREMENT RECORD CARD—NAVPERS 2480 (Rev. 2-59)\nNAME (last, first, middle)\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\nPRESENT GRADE\nCHPHOT WL\nFILE NO./DESIG.\n177283/8311\nSTATEMENT OF SERVICE\nCOMPONENT\nINACTIVE SERVICE\nACTIVE SERVICE\nTRAINING DUTY\nINACTIVE SERVICE\nACTIVE SERVICE\nCOMMISSIONED SERVICE\nYRS. MOS. DAYS\nYRS. MOS. DAYS\nYRS. MOS. DAYS\nORENG-E 3-18-29 1-25-32 2 10 8\nUSN-E 1-24-33 1-23-39 6 0 0\nUSN-E 1-24-39 8-31-42 3 7 7\nUSN-WO 9-1-42 6-14-43 9 14\nUSN-O 6-15-43 7-12-55 12 0 18 12 0 18\nUSN-CWO 2-13-55 3-31-60 4 8 18 4 8 18\nTOTAL 2 10 8 27 2 7 16 9 16\nDAYS MONTHS YEARS\nA. TOTAL ACTIVE SERVICE 7 2 27\nB. TOTAL CONTINUOUS ACTIVE SERVICE THIS PERIOD 7 2 27\nC. TOTAL ACTIVE SERVICE CREDITABLE FOR AVIATION LUMP SUM BONUS\nD. TOTAL ACTIVE SERVICE FOR TERM RETENTION PAY\nE. TOTAL ACTIVE SERVICE CREDITABLE FOR COMPUTATION OF READJUSTMENT PAY (ITEM A MINUS C AND D)\nF. AMOUNT MOP PAID UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF 1944 ACT AND/OR 1952 ACT\nG. TOTAL ACTIVE COMMISSIONED SERVICE 16 9 16\nPers-E24-JWF:bmb 10 Feb 1960 (date)\nD. R. FREDERICK, LT, USN (signature)\nHead,\nCorrespondence and Services Branch"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":332,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S-3\nPers-B115:mc\nSerial: N948\n177283/8311\n8 April 1959\n\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT, W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\nVia: Commanding Officer\nU.S.S. ESSEX CVA-9\nc/o Fleet Post Office\nNew York, New York\n\nSubj: Reassignment; request for\n\nRef: (a) Your ltr dtd 25 Mar 59 with endorsements thereto\n\n1. Receipt of reference (a) is hereby acknowledged.\n\n2. It is the intention of the Chief of Naval Personnel to transfer you to the Fleet Camera Party Pacific in July of this year.\n\nR. S. WENTWORTH Jr.\nBy direction\n\nCopy to:\nCOM NAVAIRFORLANT"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":333,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"25 March 1959\n\nFrom: Chief Photographer, W-4, Delbert C. Newhouse, USN, 177283/8311\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: (1) Commanding Officer, U.S.S. ESSEX (CVA-9)\n(2) Commander Naval Air Force, U. S. Atlantic Fleet\n\nSubj: Reassignment; request for\n\n1. Having less than one year remaining on active duty prior to retirement on thirty years service, it is requested I be transferred to a billet on the West Coast. I plan to make my permanent home on the coast of Oregon or California. I have been on duty aboard this vessel since 10 January 1958.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\nCVA9:JBH:hmf\nCode 12\nSer: 791\n27 MAR 1959\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, U.S.S. ESSEX (CVA-9)\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: Commander Naval Air Force, U. S. Atlantic Fleet\n\nSubj: Reassignment; request for\n\n1. Forwarded for consideration. A relief is required.\n\nT. W. SOUTH II\nC. S. WALLINE\nActing\n\nFinished File Pers B115"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":334,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APR 2 1959\n142/plm\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on CWO W-4 D.C. NEWHOUSE's ltr of 25 Mar 59\n\nFrom: Commander Naval Air Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nSubj: Reassignment; request for\n\n1. Forwarded, for consideration.\n\nW. R. McQUILKIN\nBy direction\n\nCopy to:\nCO USS ESSEX (CVA-9)\n\nFinished File Pers B115"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":335,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM NOTATION OF COMPLETION OF SECURITY INVESTIGATION\nNAVPERS 417 (New 2-57)\n\n3 December 1957 (Date)\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer (Appropriate Command)\nNaval Air Technical Training Unit (Address)\nU.S. Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida\n\nSubj: National Agency Check/Background Investigation; certification of completion of\n\nRef: (a) BUPERS INST 5521. 2B of 19 April 1957\n(b) Form OPNAV 32-397 completed 8 SEP 1952\n\n1. In accordance with reference (a), this is to certify that a satisfactory National Agency Check/Background Investigation has been completed on the below named officer on 8 September 1952 (Date)\n\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement (Name—last, first, middle) CHPHOT/W4 (Rank) 177283 (File Number)\n6 May 1913 (Date of Birth) Moreold, Oregon (Place of Birth)\n\nD. C. CECIL\nBy direction of the Commanding Officer\n(Signature of Certifying Officer)\n\nOriginal—Officer Service Record (NAVPERS 3021)\nCopy— BuPers (Pers-FI)\n\n* Make reference to correspondence reporting completion of National Agency Check/Background Investigation (Example:\nAsst. Chief (Perf) Memorandum Endorsement on BuPers Orders of (Date).) Finished File Pers B\n\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1957—O-416545\nAUG 26 1958"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":336,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CERTIFICATE OF CLEARANCE FOR HANDLING CLASSIFIED MATTER\nONI FORM-5521-429 (REV. 2-52) (Supersedes OPNAV FORM-5510-4)\n\nFROM: Commanding Officer\n(CO, Officer-in-Charge, etc.)\n\nNaval Air Technical Training Unit\n(Name of activity)\nU.S. Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida\n(Address of activity)\n\nSERIAL NO: 21-56(S)\nDATE: 22 March 1956\n\nTO: [X] CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\n(Check one) [ ] COMMANDANT OF MARINE CORPS (CODE DKC)\n[ ] LOCAL CIVILIAN PERSONNEL FILE (Maintained by activity wherein employed)\n\nSUBJ: Clearance for handling classified matter:\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement CHPHOT 177283\n(Name - last, first, middle) (Rank or Rate) (File or service no.)\n(NOTE: If no middle name, indicate by inserting NMN.)\n6-5-13 Moreold, Oregon\n(Date and place of birth)\n\nREF: (a) U.S. Navy Security Manual For Classified Matter, 1951 - OPNAV INSTRUCTION 5510.1\n(b) Form OPNAV-32-397, completed 8 SEP 1952 (Make reference to correspondence reporting results of Background Investigation, National Agency Check, etc.)\n\n1. In accordance with Chapter 15 of reference (a), I certify that subject named person was granted [REDACTED](FINAL) clearance to handle classified matter up to and including SECRET (Classification)\non 22 March 1956 (Date). This [REDACTED](FINAL) clearance was granted for access to SECRET (Classified categories) security information required in the performance of officially assigned duties and was based on a National Agency Check (Background Investigation, National Agency Check, etc.) results of which were reported to this activity by reference (b).\n\nSIGNATURE: [signed] EDWIN L. KIEM\n(NOTE: Sign original and all copies and affix seal.)\n\nCC: [REDACTED] Local military personnel record\n(NAVY - Enlisted Service Record or Officer's Qualification Record Jacket.\nMARINE CORPS - Service Record Book or Officer's Qualification Record.\n[REDACTED]\nC69379"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":337,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL AIR TECHNICAL TRAINING UNIT\nU.S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nPENSACOLA, FLORIDA\n\n22 March 1956\n(Date)\n\nSERVICE RECORD MEMORANDUM\n\nSubj: Satisfactory completion of National Agency Check/[REDACTED] (Cross one out)\n\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement CHPHOT 177283/8311\n(Name: Last, First, Middle) (Rank) (File No. and Designator)\n\n6-5-13 Moreold, Oregon\n(Date and place of birth)\n\nRef: (a) BuPers Instruction 5521.2A of 13 OCT 1954\n(b) Form OPNAV-32-397, completed 8 September 1952\n(Correspondence reporting results of National Agency Check/[REDACTED] (Cross one out)\n\n1. In compliance with reference (a), this is to certify that a satisfactory National Agency Check/[REDACTED] (Cross one out) was completed on subject named officer as established by reference (b).\n\nD. C. CECIL\nBy direction of the Commanding Officer\n\nCopy to:\nBUPERS (Pers Bb)\n\nFinish File Pers Bb APR 4 1956"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":338,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Standard Form 88 (Rev. Aug. 1950) Promulgated by Bureau of the Budget Circular A-24\n\nREPORT OF MEDICAL EXAMINATION\n\n1. LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME: NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n2. GRADE AND COMPONENT OR POSITION: CHPHOTOGRAPHER\n3. IDENTIFICATION NO.: 177283/8311\n4. HOME ADDRESS: 3581 S.E. Grant Ct., Portland, Oregon\n5. PURPOSE OF EXAMINATION: Promotion\n6. DATE OF EXAMINATION: 7-12-55\n7. SEX: Male 8. RACE: Cauc 9. TOTAL YRS. GOVT. SERVICE MILITARY 22-06\n10. DEPARTMENT, AGENCY, OR SERVICE: USNAVY\n11. ORGANIZATION UNIT: VU-5, USPACFLTAF, FPO, S.F., CALIF.\n12. DATE OF BIRTH: 5Jun13\n13. PLACE OF BIRTH: Marcola, Oregon\n14. NAME, RELATIONSHIP, AND ADDRESS OF NEXT OF KIN: (W) Norma I. NEWHOUSE/Same as #4\n15. EXAMINING FACILITY OR EXAMINER, AND ADDRESS: USNAS, NAVY 3835, FPO, S.F., CALIF.\n16. OTHER INFORMATION: Rel: P\n17. RATING OR SPECIALTY\n\nCLINICAL EVALUATION (Check each item in appropriate column: enter \"N. E.\" if not evaluated)\nItems 18-42 normal except:\n39. IDENTIFYING BODY MARKS, SCARS, TATTOOS: abnormal\n\nNOTES: #39. ANT: 3 1/2\" Frontal; 1/2\" Lt. Eyebrow; 1/4\" Above Upper Lip; LS1\" Rt. Thumb; OPS RLQ 3\"; 5S Lt. Knee; S1\" LU Tibia\nPOST: LS1 1/2\" Infrascapular, Lt.; 1/4\" Lt. Thumb; LS1\" Rt. Hand\n\n43. PELVIC [ ] VAGINAL [ ] RECTAL (Females only)\n(Continue in item 73)\n\n44. DENTAL: Type III Exam Class I QUALIFIED\n\nLABORATORY FINDINGS\n45. URINALYSIS: SP. GR. 1.017; ALBUMIN Neg.; SUGAR Neg.; MICROSCOPIC Negative\n46. CHEST X-RAY: USNAS, NAVY 3835 7-12-55 #1439: Negative\n47. SEROLOGY: KAHN: Negative\n48. EKG\n49. BLOOD TYPE AND RH FACTOR: BT \"B\"\n50. OTHER TESTS\n\n16-62288-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":339,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEASUREMENTS AND OTHER FINDINGS\n51. HEIGHT 73; 52. WEIGHT 206; 53. COLOR HAIR Gray-Bald; 54. COLOR EYES Blue; 55. BUILD: Medium; 56. TEMP. 98.0\n57. BLOOD PRESSURE: SITTING SYS. 120 DIAS. 72\n58. PULSE: SITTING 80; AFTER EXERCISE 96; 2 MIN. AFTER 80\n59. DISTANT VISION: RIGHT 20/40 CORR. TO 20/20; LEFT 20/20\n60. REFRACTION: BY -2.00 S. -1.75 CX 35\n61. NEAR VISION\n62. HETEROPHORIA\n63. ACCOMMODATION\n64. COLOR VISION (Test used and result): AOC 20/20\n65. DEPTH PERCEPTION\n66. FIELD OF VISION: Normal\n67. NIGHT VISION\n68. RED LENS\n69. INTRAOCULAR TENSION: Normal\n70. HEARING: RIGHT WV 15/15 SV; LEFT WV 15/15 SV\n71. AUDIOMETER\n72. PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PSYCHOMOTOR\n73. NOTES (Continued) AND SIGNIFICANT OR INTERVAL HISTORY\nAUG - 2 1955 TO COMDT. MARCORPS. 1. FORWARDED CONSIDERED PHYSICALLY QUALIFIED. By direction of Chief, BuMed. EDWARD F. HOGAN CAPT (MC) USN\n\n74. SUMMARY OF DEFECTS AND DIAGNOSES: #59. Defective Distant Vision: OD 20/40 corrected to 20/20 by glasses. NCD.\n\n75. RECOMMENDATIONS: None\n76. PHYSICAL PROFILE\n77. EXAMINEE (Check): [X] QUALIFIED; [ ] IS NOT QUALIFIED. Physically qualified to perform active duty at sea and on foreign service, for continuation on active duty and for Promotion to the grade of Chief Warrant Officer, W-4.\n78. IF NOT QUALIFIED, LIST DISQUALIFYING DEFECTS BY ITEM NUMBER\n79. TYPED OR PRINTED NAME OF PHYSICIAN: A. S. MARKOVITS, LTJG MC USNR\n80. TYPED OR PRINTED NAME OF PHYSICIAN\n81. TYPED OR PRINTED NAME OF DENTIST OR PHYSICIAN: P. A. KOPPES, LT DC, USNR\n82. TYPED OR PRINTED NAME OF REVIEWING OFFICER OR APPROVING AUTHORITY: J. P. DOBSON, CDR MC USN\nNUMBER OF ATTACHED SHEETS: 0\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-62288-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":340,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CERTIFICATE OF CLEARANCE FOR HANDLING CLASSIFIED MATTER\nOPNAV FORM-5521-429 (REV. 11-54)\n\nFROM: Commanding Officer\nUtility Squadron FIVE (VU-5)\nNavy #3835, c/o FPO, San Francisco, Calif.\n\nSERIAL NO: 668\nDATE: 25 MAY 1955\n\nTO: [X] CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\n[ ] COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS (AD2)\n[ ] LOCAL CIVILIAN PERSONNEL FILE (Maintained by activity wherein employed)\n\nSUBJ: Clearance for handling classified Security Information\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement CHPHOT 177283\n(NOTE: If no middle name, indicate by inserting NMN.)\n6-5-13 Moreold, Oregon\n\nREF: (a) U.S. Navy Security Manual For Classified Matter, Chapter 15\n(b) Form OPNAV-32-397, completed 8 Sep 1952 (Make reference to correspondence reporting results of Background Investigation, National Agency Check, etc.)\n\n1. In accordance with reference (a), I certify that on 24 May 1955 (Date) subject named person was granted [REDACTED](FINAL) clearance for access up to and including SECRET (Category) matter required in the performance of officially assigned duties, and based on a National Agency Check (Background Investigation, NAC plus 10 yrs., etc.) results of which were reported by reference (b).\n\nSIGNATURE: [signed] B. F. ROWE\n(NOTE: Sign original and all copies and affix seal.)\n\nCC: Local military personnel record\n(NAVY - Enlisted Service Record or Officer's Qualification Record Jacket.\nMARINE CORPS - Service Record Book or Officer's Qualification Record.\n\nA-26693\nFinish File Pers Bb JUN 23 1955"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":341,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IN REPLY ADDRESS\nSUPPLY OFFICER\nNAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nPHILADELPHIA 11. PA.\n\nJN 177283\n\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nNAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nOXFORD AVENUE AND MARTIN'S MILL ROAD\nPHILADELPHIA 11, PA.\nSUPPLY DEPARTMENT\n\n4 April 1946\n\nFrom: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, USN(T)\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nVia: SOIC, NASD, Philadelphia, Pa.\n\nSubj: Retention on Active Duty - Request for.\n\nRef: (a) ALNAV 151-46.\n(b) My Request for Permanent Commission in the U.S. Navy, dated 27 August 1945.\n(c) My Request for Appointment to Commissioned Rank, U.S. Navy, dated 29 March 1946.\n\n1. It is requested that I be retained on active duty in a commissioned status until 1 July 1947 or longer if my services are required.\n\n2. I have the following accumulated active service:\n\nEnlisted Service - 9 yrs. - 5 mos.\nWarrant Service - 0 yrs. - 11 mos.\nCommissioned Service - 2 yrs. - 10 mos.\n\n3. I have submitted a request for transfer to the regular Navy in a commissioned status under references (b) and (c).\n\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\n\nJacket No. 177283\nEnd-1\n10 April 1946\nNASD, Phila., Pa.\n\nTo: BuPers.\n\n1. Forwarded, recommending approval.\n\nR. M. HUMES\nADMIN. EXEC. ASSIST.\nBy direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":342,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pers B115c-bp\n177283/8311\n8 April 1954\n\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\nVia: Commanding Officer\nNaval Supply Center\nOakland 4, California\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\nRef: (a) Your ltr req dtd 17 Mar 1954\n\n1. Receipt of reference (a) is acknowledged.\n\n2. Since your services are required at Utility Squadron FIVE (VU-5), it is regretted that your request must be disapproved.\n\nW. E. CLARKE\nBy direction\n\nFinished File Pers B115c"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":343,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"11:TAM:dlp\n177283/8311\n\nMAR 22 1954\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE's ltr of 17 Mar 1954\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. Forwarded for consideration.\n\nT. EARLE HIPP\n\nFinished File Pers B115e"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":344,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER\nOAKLAND 4, CALIFORNIA\n\nADDRESS REPLY TO COMMANDING OFFICER AND REFER TO:\n753:DCN:pn\n\n17 March 1954\n\nFrom: CHPHOT Delbert C. Newhouse, USN\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel, Department of the Navy, Washington 25, D. C.\nVia: Commanding Officer, Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\nRef: (a) NavPers ltr 177283/8311 Pers-B115c-dp-1 of 5 Mar 1954\n\n1. Reference (a) directs my detachment on or about 1 June 1954. To enable me to move my family to my home of record after my two children have completed their current school term on 18 June, it is requested that reference (a) be modified to read \"on or about 15 June 1954\".\n\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\n\nFinished File Pers B115e"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":345,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER BIOGRAPHY SHEET\nNAVPERS-979 (REV. 5-49)\nREPORT PERS-3-31\n\nThis form (one copy only) to be submitted initially and when changes occur. It will be used for public relations purposes and will be considered authoritative. Officers should insure that an accurate up-to-date biography is on file in BuPers.\n\nNAME (Surname) NEWHOUSE, (First) Delbert, (Middle) Clement, GRADE CHPHOT, CLASSIFICATION 8311, FILE NO. 177283\nHOME TOWN ADDRESS: Garibaldi, Oregon. DATE OF BIRTH 6/5/13. PLACE OF BIRTH Marcold, Oregon\nFATHER'S NAME: Noah Frank Newhouse. MOTHER'S MAIDEN NAME: Edith May Posey\nSCHOOLS OR COLLEGES ATTENDED PRIOR TO ENTERING NAVY: Garibaldi, Oregon, High School; University of Kansas, Lawrence Kansas. DEGREES: Graduate; None\nDATE COMMISSIONED 10/23/42. GRADE COMMISSIONED IN CHPHOT. DATE DESIGNATED (If Naval Aviator or Submariner)\nATHLETICS, SPECIAL ACHIEVEMENTS, LITERARY SOCIETIES, ETC, PARTICIPATED IN: None\nDATE AND PLACE OF MARRIAGE 8/7/36 Vancouver, Wash. HOME TOWN AND MAIDEN NAME OF WIFE: Garibaldi, Oregon - Norma I. Strom\nNAMES OF CHILDREN / DATE OF BIRTH: Delbert Carroll Newhouse 6/28/38; Anne Lisbet Newhouse 3/14/40\nCLUBS, SOCIETIES, ORGANIZATIONS, ETC. MEMBER OF: None\n\nBRIEF BIOGRAPHY OF CAREER - FOR PUBLICITY PURPOSES (Include information relative to (a) Occupation and achievements in civil life. (b) Unusual assignments to special duties. (c) Participation in any naval or military campaigns or engagements. (d) List campaign badges or medals, citations, decorations and foreign decorations received.) Include permanent duty assignments, promotions, and military service prior to commissioning. If recent picture in present grade has not been filed, forward one in accordance with BuPers Manual.\n\nEnlisted Portland, Oregon 23 January 1933\nTemporary appointment to Photographer 25 June 1942\nTemporary appointment to Ensign 15 June 1943\nTemporary appointment to LTJG 1 September 1944\nTemporary appointment to LT 1 April 1946\nPermanent appointment to CHPHOT 23 October 1942\nReverted to permanent rank 31 December 1949\n\nDATE SUBMITTED 2/6/52\nSIGNATURE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":346,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"List below duties performed complete to date, with most recent at top.\nDuty of less than 2 months shall not be listed.\n1 Indicate month and year. Do not give days.\n16—63341-1 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE\nSEA DUTY (Inclusive dates) 1 | Check if in Ship | NO. OF MOS. | TYPE SHIP | SHIP | FLEET OR FORCE | DUTIES (Eng., Gun, Com., etc.) | SHORE DUTY (Inclusive dates) 1 | NO. OF MOS. | LOCALITY | DUTIES\n5/51-Now | 3 | | ASB YOKOSUKA | | PHOTO, Tech | 1/50-11/50 | 10 | NPC NAS Anacostia, D. C. | PHOTO\n11/50-5/51 | 6 | | NAS BARBERS PT COM 14 | PHOTO, Tech\n10/47-7/48 | Staff | ComUtWing Pacific | PHOTO, Tech | 7/49-1/50 | 6 | BuAer (PH Div) | Photo. Prco\n9/46-10/47 | 14 | ASD | Pearl H. Com 14nd | PHOTO, Tech | 7/48-7/49 | 12 | BAGR, Cen Dist | Tech, Photo\n6/43-9/44 | 16 | NAS, Caco Solo, Com 15nd | PHOTO,\n3/43-6/43 | 5 | Staff Com 15nd | PHOTO | 9/44-9 | 46 | 24 NSD PHIL PA | PHOTO, Tech.\n8/42-3/43 | 7 | Adv. Base Ecuador | Ord. & Photo."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":347,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, Delbert (First) | C. (Middle Initial) | GRADE AND CORPS CHPHOT LINE | FILE NO. 177283 | DESIGNATOR 8311 | PRESENT STATION US. FltAct 3923 | PRESENT DUTIES Supply Photo. Tech. Off.\nOFFICER DATA CARD\nNAVPERS-340 (REV. 12-50)\nREPORT PERS-3-14\nFILL OUT BOTH SIDES (Please type or print) and submit directly to BuPers annually (on 1 Aug) and when significant changes occur. Naval Aviators submit to DCNO (Air). It is required of all commissioned and warrant officers. Officers qualified in submarines or currently serving in submarine force organization, submit form in duplicate. All others submit one copy. DO NOT FOLD CARD.\nDATE OF PRESENT RANK 10/28/42 | DATE REPORTED PRESENT STATION 5/10/51 | DATE CARD SUBMITTED JUL 1-1951\nSPECIAL AND LANGUAGES QUALIFICATIONS (Do not use Code Nos. Include all courses completed)\nPhotographic School\nOperational Photography\nS-3\nNEXT SEA DUTY DETAIL DESIRED | NEXT SHORE DUTY DETAIL DESIRED (Give four Choices)\nLOCALITY | KIND OF DUTY | TYPE SHIP\n1. San Diego, Calif. | 1. Photographic | 1. VU Squadron | 1. NAS San Diego, Calif.\n2. Miramar, Calif. | 2. \" | 2. VC Squadron | 2. NAS, Alemeda, Calif.\n3. Pearl Harbor, T.H. | 3. \" | 3. VU Squadron | 3. ASD, NSC, Oakland, Calif.\n4. Pearl Harbor, T.H. | 4. \" | 4. Staff CinC PacFlt | 4. NPC, Anacostia, D.C.\nADVANCE BASE: 1. Naval Mission, Brazil | 2. Naval Mission Equador | 3. Naval Mission, England\nPRESENT HOME ADDRESS\n8623 Piney Branch Rd., Silver Spring, MARYLAND\nPRESENT HOME TELEPHONE NUMBER\n4358\nREMARKS\nPers-E2 Finish File\nMARITAL STATUS\nMARRIED\nSINGLE\nDEPENDENTS (Show age and sex of children)\n1. M-13yrs 2. F-11yrs\n3. 4.\n5. 6.\nSIGNATURE\n16—63341-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":348,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"LAST NAME NEWHOUSE, | (Initials) D. C. | RANK AND CORPS LT | FILE No. 177283 | N. A. CLASS OR DESIG.(1) LAP | PRESENT STATION BAGR-CD | PRESENT DUTIES Photo. Liaison\nOFFICER'S DATA CARD NAVPERS-340 (Rev. 7-46) DATE OF PRESENT RANK: 1 April 1946\nNOTICE: This card to be submitted directly to Bureau of Naval Personnel annually (on 1 August), and when any significant changes in data occur. Naval aviators submit to DeNo. It is required of all commissioned and warrant officers. Officers qualified in submarines or currently serving in submarine force organization submit this form in duplicate. All other officers submit only one copy.\nPLEASE TYPE OR PRINT\nDATE REPORTED PRESENT STATION 24 August 1948 | DATE OF BEGINNING PRESENT TOUR OF— SEA DUTY / SHORE DUTY 24 August 1948 | IS CHANGE OF PRESENT DUTY DESIRED? YES [ ] NO [X] | IF YES, STATE WHEN AND DUTY DESIRED\nDETAIL DESIRED FOR NEXT DUTY\nSEA AND/OR ADVANCED BASE | SHORE (Give four choices)\nLOCALITY | KIND OF DUTY | TYPE SHIP\n1. Pacific Fleet | 1. Photographic | 1. CV or CVB | 1. NAS, Alameda, California\n2. West Coast | 2. Photographic | 2. Photo Squadron | 2. NAS, San Diego, California\n3. | 3. | 3. | 3. NASD, NSD, Oakland, California\n4. | 4. | 4. | 4. Navy Dept.(BuAer or CNO) Wash., D.C.\nS-3\nPRESENT HOME ADDRESS\n1820 Stratford Pl. Springfield, Ohio\nPRESENT HOME TEL. No. #4-4936\nSPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS (Do not use code numbers):\nOperational Photography; Photographic Supply & Procurement\nNaval School of Photography 1935.\nLANGUAGE QUALIFICATIONS\nMARITAL STATUS: [X] MARRIED SINGLE\nDEPENDENTS (Show age and sex of children)\n1. Norma I. NEWHOUSE (wife)\n2. Delbert C. \" - M - 11\n3. Anne L. \" - F - 9\n4.\nFINISHED - FILE - REORD\nREMARKS: Permanent Rank: Chief Photographer\nDATE CARD SUBMITTED: 1 August 1949\nSIGNATURE:\nDO NOT WRITE IN SPACE BELOW\nOCCUPYING AUTHORIZED BILLET FOR: (Rank) | TO BE REL[...] o/a | SLATED FOR:\nBY , PRESDU\nREPORT PERS-3-14 16—49165-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":349,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"SEA AND/OR ADVANCED BASE | SHORE (Give four choices)\nLOCALITY | KIND OF DUTY | TYPE SHIP\n1. Pacific Fleet | 1. Photographic | 1. CV or CVB | 1. NAS, Alameda, California\n2. West Coast | 2. Photographic | 2. Photo Squadron | 2. NAS, San Diego, California\n3. | 3. | 3. | 3. NASD, NSD, Oakland, California\n4. | 4. | 4. | 4. Navy Dept.(BuAer or CNO) Wash., D.C.\nS-3\nPRESENT HOME ADDRESS\n1820 Stratford Pl. Springfield, Ohio\nPRESENT HOME TEL. No. #4-4936\nSPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS (Do not use code numbers):\nOperational Photography; Photographic Supply & Procurement\nNaval School of Photography 1935.\nLANGUAGE QUALIFICATIONS\nMARITAL STATUS: [X] MARRIED SINGLE\nDEPENDENTS (Show age and sex of children)\n1. Norma I. NEWHOUSE (wife)\n2. Delbert C. \" - M - 11\n3. Anne L. \" - F - 9\n4.\nFINISHED - FILE - REORD\nREMARKS: Permanent Rank: Chief Photographer\nDATE CARD SUBMITTED: 1 August 1949\nSIGNATURE:\nDO NOT WRITE IN SPACE BELOW\nOCCUPYING AUTHORIZED BILLET FOR: (Rank) | TO BE REL[...] o/a | SLATED FOR:\nBY , PRESDU\nREPORT PERS-3-14 16—49165-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":350,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"NOTE: This side to be filled in by officer submitting card, complete to date\nDUTIES PERFORMED\nSEA | SHORE\nINCLUSIVE DATES (2) | No. OF MOS. | TYPE SHIP | SHIP | FLEET OR FORCE | DUTIES (Eng., Gun., Com., etc.) | INCLUSIVE DATES (2) | No. OF MOS | LOCALITY | DUTIES\n9/47-7/48 | 10 | Staff | ComUTW | PAC | Photo&AssOp | 8/48-8/49 | 12 | BAGR-CD, Dayton | PhotoLiaison\n7/47-9-47 | 02 | ASD | NSC, PH | PAC | PhotoLiaison | 10/46-7/47 | 09 | ASC, NSC, PH | PhotoLiaison\n9/46-10/46 | 01 | ASD | NSC, PH | PAC | PhotoLiaison | 9/44-9/46 | 24 | NASD, Phila.Pa. | PhotoLiaison\n6/43-9/44 | 15 | NAS | CocoSolo | LANT | PhotoOfficer | 4/36-6/39 | 38 | NASSanDiegoCalif | Photographic\n2/43-5/43 | 04 | Staff | 15ND | LANT | DistPhotoAct | 7/35-12/35 | 06 | NavPhotoSchol | Under Instruction\n6/42/2/43 | 09 | NB | Equador | LANT | Gunner&Photo | | | NAS Pensacola |\n11/40-3/42 | 21 | NAS | Guantanamo | LANT | Photo | 1/33-6/33 | 06 | NTS, SanDiegoCal | Recruit Tra.\n11/39-11/40 | 12 | VP-14 | | LANT | Photo\n10/39-11/39 | 01 | NAS, Sitka, Alaska | PAC | Photo\n6/39-10/39 | 04 | VP-45 | | PAC | Photo\n12/35-4/36 | 04 | VS-3B | | PAC | Photo\n12/34-7/35 | 07 | VS-3B | | PAC | Photo\n6/33-12/34 | 17 | Flag | ComAirBatFor | | YeoStkr.\n(1.) If not USNA give designation; I. E. LXR,—Ex-Reserve; L-XT,—Ex-Temp. appointment USN; Reserve Classification.\n(2.) Exact dates preferred.\n16—49165-1 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":351,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAST NAME (Initials) RANK AND CORPS FILE No. N. A. CLASS OR DESIG.(1) PRESENT STATION PRESENT DUTIES\nNEWHOUSE, D. C. LT USN 177283 L XT ASD NSC Pearl Photo Liaison Offr\nOFFICER'S DATA CARD NAVPERS-340 (Rev. 7-46) DATE OF PRESENT RANK: 1 Apr 46\nNOTICE: This card to be submitted directly to Bureau of Naval Personnel annually (on 1 August), and when any significant changes in data occur. Naval aviators submit to DcNo. It is required of all commissioned and warrant officers. Officers qualified in submarines or currently serving in submarine force organization submit this form in duplicate. All other officers submit only one copy. PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT\nDATE REPORTED PRESENT STATION: 9 Sept 46\nDATE OF BEGINNING PRESENT TOUR OF— SEA DUTY SHORE DUTY: 1 Oct 46\nIS CHANGE OF PRESENT DUTY DESIRED? YES NO\nIF YES, STATE WHEN AND DUTY DESIRED\nDETAIL DESIRED FOR NEXT DUTY\nSEA AND/OR ADVANCED BASE: LOCALITY 1. Pacific 2. West Coast; KIND OF DUTY 1. Photographic Off 2. \"; TYPE SHIP 1. CV 2. Photo Squadron\nSHORE (Give four choices): 1. NAS, Alameda, Calif 2. NAS, San Diego, Calif 3. NAS, Seattle, Wash 4. Navy Dept, BuAer or CNO, Wash DC\nPRESENT HOME ADDRESS: 412 - 3rd St, NHA, Honolulu, T.H.\nPRESENT HOME TEL. No. 403903\nSPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS (Do not use code numbers): Operational Photography Photographic Supply\nMARITAL STATUS: MARRIED SINGLE\nDEPENDENTS (Show age and sex of children): 1. son 9 yrs 2. daughter 7 yrs 3. wife 4.\nLANGUAGE QUALIFICATIONS: None\nREMARKS: Permanent rank CHPHOT\nDATE CARD SUBMITTED: AUG 1 1947\nSIGNATURE: [signature]\nDO NOT WRITE IN SPACE BELOW\nOCCUPYING AUTHORIZED BILLET FOR: (Rank)\nTO BE RELIEVED O/a BY PRESDU\nSLATED FOR:\n16—49165-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":352,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTE: This side to be filled in by officer submitting card, complete to date\nDUTIES PERFORMED\nSEA\nINCLUSIVE DATES (2) | No. OF MOS. | TYPE SHIP | SHIP | FLEET OR FORCE | DUTIES (Eng., Gun., Com., etc.) | INCLUSIVE DATES (2) | OF MOS | LOCALITY | DUTIES\n9/1/46 10/1/46 | 1 | | ASD NSC PH | PAC | Photo Liaison | 10/1/46 present | 10 | ASD NSC PH | Photo Liaison\n6/1/43 9/13/44 | 15 | | NAS Coco Solo, C.Z. | ATL | Photo Offr | 9/13/44 9/7/46 | 24 | NASD, Phila Pa | Photo Liaison\n2/10/43 6/1/43 | 4 | | Staff,Com 15ND | ATL | Dist Photo Activities | | | |\n6/15/42 2/10/43 | 8 | | ABNB, Santa Elena Bay Ecuador | ATL | Photo Offr | | | |\n1/23/33 6/15/42 | | | Continuous Enlisted Status | | | |\n(1.) If not USNA give designation; I. E. LXR,—Ex-Reserve; L-XT,—Ex-Temp. appointment USN; Reserve Classification.\n(2.) Exact dates preferred.\n16—49165-1 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":353,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2/10/43 6/1/43 4 Staff,Com 15ND ATL Dist Photo Activities\n6/15/42 2/10/43 8 ABNB, Santa Elena Bay Ecuador ATL Photo Offr\n1/23/33 6/15/42 Continuous Enlisted Status\n(1.) If not USNA give designation; I. E. LXR,—Ex-Reserve; L-XT,—Ex-Temp. appointment US\n(2.) Exact dates preferred."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":354,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In reply refer to Initials and No.\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nOp-54lC2/efb OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS\nOO-NEWHOUSE, D. C. WASHINGTON 25, D. C.\nSerial:2220 P54\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on\nltr from LT D. C. NEWHOUSE, USN dtd 23 November 1949\n22 DEC 1949\nFrom: Chief of Naval Operations\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers-31B).\nSubject: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse; information concerning termination of temporary appointment\n1. Forwarded for appropriate action.\nRAY C. NEEDHAM BY DIRECTION\nS-3\nFinished File Pers-31B11\nFinished File Pers-31B11"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":355,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Op-54lC2/efb\nOO-NEWHOUSE, D. C.\nSerial:2220 P54\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on\nltr from LT D. C. NEWHOUSE, USN dtd 23 November 1949\n22 DEC 1949\nFrom: Chief of Naval Operations\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers-31B).\nSubject: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse; information concerning termination of temporary appointment\n1. Forwarded for appropriate action.\nRAY C. NEEDHAM BY DIRECTION\nFinished File Pers-31B11\nFinished File Pers-31B11"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":356,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aer-PE\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on letter from Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, USN/\n177283/1350 dated 23 November 1949.\n\n219593\n19 DEC 1949\n\nFrom: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics.\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel.\nVia: Chief of Naval Operations (Op-54).\n\nSubj: LIEUTENANT DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE; information concerning termination\n of temporary appointment.\n\n1. Forwarded for consideration.\n\n2. During the period 27 August 1948, to 29 September 1949, while on\nduty at the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central Dis-\ntrict Headquarters, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio,\nLieutenant Newhouse served as Bureau of Aeronautics liaison officer\nwith the Air Materiel Command in matters relating to procurement of\nphotographic items under the single-service purchase assignment which\nwas awarded to the Air Force by the Department of Defense.\n\n3. On 10 August 1949, the Head of the Procurement Branch of the\nPhotographic Division was ordered to sea duty and it became necessary\nto obtain a suitable relief. Lieutenant Newhouse was ordered to this\nduty in the Bureau of Aeronautics because of his exceptional qualifica-\ntions and recent experience in procurement procedures gained while on\nduty at Air Materiel Command Headquarters, Dayton, Ohio. He is now\nserving as Head of the Procurement Branch, Photographic Division, during\nwhich time his services have been entirely satisfactory.\n\nT. C. Lonnquest\nRear Admiral, U.S.N.\nDeputy and Assistant Chief of Bureau\n\n21185"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":357,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5. Other pertinent matter in my correspondence file includes:\n\n(a) A report of scores for college degree:\n\nAptitude English History Math Science Total\n\n99 94 93 81 97 98 219593\n\nPossible scores range from 01 to 99.\n\n(b) A notation that I am physically and educationally qualified\nfor transfer to regular Navy in permanent rank.\n\n(c) A Certificate of Satisfactory Service dated 25 August 1948.\n\n(d) The following memorandum:\n\n\"MEMO 4 May 1948\n\nTo: Operations (a) Sub-board (Cdr. Moore)\n\nThe enlisted record of Newhouse, Delbert C., cannot be\nlocated. Consideration for selection will have to be based\non his officer record only.\n\n/s/ G. F. Dalton\nRecorder\"\n\n6. Within my specialty I have been consistently ordered to duty of\never increasing responsibility from Photographic Officer of Naval\nAir Stations; through Photographic Liaison Officer of Naval Aviation\nSupply Depots; Staff Photographic Officer, Commander Utility Wings,\nPacific; Staff Photographic Liaison Officer, Bureau of Aeronautics\nGeneral Representative, Central District with the U.S. Air Force at\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base; to my present assignment as Head,\nMaterial Procurement Branch under the Director, Photographic Division\nof the Bureau of Aeronautics.\n\n7. While I appreciate the many problems which were faced by the Bureau\nof Naval Personnel and the Robinson Board in listing personnel to revert,\nit appears that reference (b), the governing directive, was not followed\nin my case. On these grounds it is requested that my case be re-examined.\n\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":358,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nBUREAU OF AERONAUTICS\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO\n\n23 November 1949\n\nFrom: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, USN/177283/1350\nTo: Chief, Bureau of Naval Personnel\nVia: Chief, Bureau of Aeronautics\n\nSubj: Information concerning termination of temporary appointment\n\nRef: (a) BuPers ltr 177283/1350 dtd 12 Oct 1949\n (b) BuPers C/L No. 148-49 dtd 15 Sept 1949\n\nEncl: (1) Transcripts of portions of representative fitness reports\n\n1. I received reference (a) on 25 October 1949 notifying me that my\ntemporary appointment as lieutenant would terminate on 31 December 1949.\n\n2. Reference (b) published the policy for the priority of reversion\nof temporary officers and asserted that it was highly desirable that\nreductions be effected on a logical basis, considering both the best\ninterests of the service and the most equitable consideration of the\ntemporary officers concerned. Paragraph 2(d) stated that temporary\nofficers, permanent commissioned warrant, would be reverted in ascending\norder of retirement dates.\n\n3. After receipt of reference (a), I have made a careful examination\nof my correspondence and fitness report files in the Bureau of Naval\nPersonnel. Material of a possibly adverse nature was disclosed by\nthis examination in that an officer's fitness report dated 29 February\n1948 was checked in the unfavorable box and was signed by Captain J.\nC. Cronin, USN, then Commander Utility Wings, Pacific. A partial\ntranscript thereof is appended hereto as Exhibit \"A\" of Enclosure (1).\nThis was my first report from this command and covered the period from\n23 October 1947 to 29 February 1948. I was transferred from the com-\nmand on 1 July 1948 and a transcript of section 12 of my next and final\nfitness report from Captain Cronin is appended hereto as Exhibit \"B\"\nof Enclosure (1).\n\n4. The balance of all my fitness reports have ranged from above average\nto superior and, almost without exception, have recommended retention\nin temporary rank, transfer to regular commissioned rank, and promotion\nwhen eligible. Exhibits \"C\" through \"G\" to Enclosure (1) are submitted\nas being truly representative of my fitness as an officer."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":359,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aer-PH-3\n\nENCLOSURE (1)\n\nExhibit \"A\" 29 February 1948 Captain J. C. Cronin, USN\n\n12. \"Unfavorable.\"\n\nLt. Newhouse is a reserved, cheerful, and generally likeable officer.\nHe is having a most difficult time adjusting himself to staff duty.\nHe is judged competent in the technical aspects of photography, but\nhis performance of his administrative duties in both the photographic\nand operational departments is below average. It is felt that his\ndeficiency is principally due to his background and lack of experience\nin administration. He is making a sincere effort to correct this\ndeficiency. He is not yet fitted for promotion.\n\nExhibit \"B\" 1 July 1948 Captain J. C. Cronin, USN\n\n12. \"Satisfactory.\"\n\nLt. Newhouse is a quiet, reserved, and likeable officer. He has had\na difficult time adjusting himself to his duties on this staff, but\nhe has earnestly endeavored to do so. If his experience in naval\naviation had been wider, it is believed he would have performed his\nduties better. He has performed his technical duties as Photographic\nOfficer well. His performance of administrative duties, both as\nPhotographic Officer and as Assistant Operations Officer, has improved\nduring the period of this report. He is not yet fitted for promotion.\n\nExhibit \"C\" 19 August 1946 Admiral E. D. Foster,SC,USN\n\n12. \"Satisfactory.\"\n\nLt. Newhouse has carried out his duties as Photographic Liaison Officer\nin a manner which has reflected credit on this Depot. He has a confident\nand quiet manner and excellent military conduct. His screening of\nphotographic requests and handling of photographic problems has dis-\nplayed an initiative and thoroughness which is most desirable for an\nofficer in his particular billet. Lt. Newhouse is recommended for pro-\nmotion when due and for commissioned rank in the regular Navy."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":360,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aer-PH-3\n\nENCLOSURE (1)\n\nExhibit \"D\" 13 March 1947 Cdr. K.A.Grahn,Jr.,SC,USN\n\n12. \"Satisfactory.\"\n\nLt. Newhouse has shown a superior grasp of photographic supply details,\nsound judgment, foresight, devotion to duty and thoroughness in his\nprimary duty as photographic officer. He carries out his depot duties\nas well as liaison with, and assistance to, ComAirPac and CinCPac with\ntact and efficiency, and is firm in administering photographic supply\ndoctrine in this area. As Administrative Officer he is in charge\nof over 35 civilians and acts as division officer for 40 enlisted men,\nperforming both assignments very well. His personal and military\ncharacteristics are the highest, he is recommended for promotion when\neligible.\n\nExhibit \"E\"\nRear Admiral C.W.Fox,SC,USN 23 May 1947 Cdr.E.R.Joshua,Jr.,SC,USN\n\n12. \"Satisfactory.\"\n\nLt. Newhouse possesses a sound grasp of supply procedures and has\nexerted a beneficial influence in this area in carrying out instructions\nof the Chief of Naval Operations, Chief,Naval Photographic Services.\nHis judgment is sound and mature; he shows consistent devotion to duty\nand is thoroughly reliable and loyal. Performance of his collateral\nduty has been uniformly efficient. His personal and military character-\nistics are excellent,and he is recommended for retention of present\ntemporary rank and for promotion when eligible.\n\nExhibit \"F\"\nRear Admiral C.W.Fox,SC,USN 22 October 1947 Cdr.H.J.P.Foley,Jr.,SC,USN\n\n12. \"Satisfactory.\"\n\nLt. Newhouse's performance of duty has continued to be excellent and\noutstanding. In addition to a sound grasp of area and service-wide\nphotographic supply procedures, he possesses mature judgment and a\nhigh order of devotion to duty. He is willing to accept responsibility\nand completes assignments with interest and dispatch. His personal and\nmilitary character is excellent,and he has been recommended for a\nlimited service commission in his present rank. He is recommended for\npromotion when eligible.\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":361,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aer-PH-3\n\nENCLOSURE (1)\n\nExhibit \"G\"\t29 September 1949\tRear Admiral L.M.Grant, USN\n\n12. \"Satisfactory.\"\n\nLt. Newhouse is a loyal, capable officer. He carries out the liaison work on Single Department Procurement of photographic materials effectively and in a manner reflecting credit tothe Navy. He is tactful, cooperative, and has effectively handled numerous problems arising in this joint department undertaking. He is alert in keeping the Bureau of Aeronautics advised on U.S. Air Force Research and Development projects. Lt. Newhouse's personal and military character is excellent,and he is recommended for promotion and continuation on duty in a commissioned status."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":362,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAST NAME NEWHOUSE, (Initials) D. C. RANK AND CORPS LT USN FILE No. 177283 N. A. CLASS OR DESIG.(1) LAP PRESENT STATION BAGR-CD,Dayton PRESENT DUTIES Photo. Liaison\n\nOFFICER'S DATA CARD NAVPERS-340 (Rev. 7-46) DATE OF PRESENT RANK: 1 April 1946\n\nNOTICE: This card to be submitted directly to Bureau of Naval Personnel annually (on 1 August), and when any significant changes in data occur. Naval aviators submit to DcNo. It is required of all commissioned and warrant officers. Officers qualified in submarines or currently serving in submarine force organization submit this form in duplicate. All other officers submit only one copy. PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT\n\nDATE REPORTED PRESENT STATION 24 August 1948\n\nDATE OF BEGINNING PRESENT TOUR OF— SEA DUTY SHORE DUTY 24 August 1948\n\nIS CHANGE OF PRESENT DUTY DESIRED? YES NO X\n\nIF YES, STATE WHEN AND DUTY DESIRED\n\nDETAIL DESIRED FOR NEXT DUTY\n\nSEA AND/OR ADVANCED BASE: LOCALITY 1. Pacific Fleet 2. West Coast; KIND OF DUTY 1. Photographic 2. Photographic; TYPE SHIP 1. CV or CVB 2. Photo Squadron\n\nSHORE (Give four choices): 1. NAS Alameda, California 2. NAS San Diego, California 3. NASD, NSD, Oakland, California 4. NavyDept.(BuAerorCNO)Wash.,D.C.\n\nPRESENT HOME ADDRESS 1820 Stratford Pl., Springfield, Ohio\n\nPRESENT HOME TEL. No. #4-4936\n\nSPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS: Operational Photography; Photgraphic Supply & Procurement Naval School of Photography 1935.\n\nMARITAL STATUS: X MARRIED, SINGLE\n\nDEPENDENTS: 1. Norma I. NEWHOUSE,(wife) 2. Delbert C. \" M-11 3. Anne L. \" F-9\n\nLANGUAGE QUALIFICATIONS: None\n\nREMARKS: Permanent Rank: Chief Photographer\n\nDATE CARD SUBMITTED: 1 August 1949\n\nSIGNATURE: [signature]\n\nDO NOT WRITE IN SPACE BELOW\n\nOCCUPYING AUTHORIZED BILLET FOR: (Rank)\n\nTO BE RELIEVED O/a BY PRESDU\n\nSLATED FOR:\n\nREPORT PERS-3-14 16-49165-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":363,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTE: This side to be filled in by officer submitting card, complete to date\n\nDUTIES PERFORMED\n\nSEA: INCLUSIVE DATES (2) | No. OF MOS. | TYPE SHIP | SHIP | FLEET OR FORCE | DUTIES (Eng., Gun., Com., etc.) | INCLUSIVE DATES (2) | MOS | LOCALITY | DUTIES\n9/47-7/48 10 StaffComUTW PAC Photo&AsstOp 8/48-8/49 12 BAGR-CD,Dayton PhotoLiaison\n7/47-9/47 02 ASD,NSC,PH PAC PhotoLiaison 10/46-7/47 09 ASD,NSC,PH PhotoLiaison\n9/46-10/46 01 ASD,NSC,PH PAC PhotoLiaison 9/44-9/46 24 NASD,Phila.Pa. PhotoLiaison\n6/43-9/44 15 NAS CocoSolo LANT PhotoOfficer 4/36-6/39 38 NAS SanDiego,Cal Photo.\n2/43-5/43 04 Staff15ND LANT DistPhotoAct 7/35-12/35 06 NavPhotoSchool Under Instr.\n6/42-2/43 09 NB Equador LANT Gun&PhotoOff NAS Pensacola Fla.\n11/40-3/42 21 NAS Guantanamo LANT PhotoOff. 1/33-6/33 06 NTS SanDiego,Cal. Recruit Tra.\n11/39-11/40 12 VP-14 LANT PhotoOff.\n10/39-11/39 01 NAS Sitka,Alaska PAC PhotoOff.\n12/35-4/36 04 VP-45 PAC PhotoOff.\n12/34-7/35 04 VS-3B PAC PhotoOff.\n6/33-12/34 17 FlagComAirBarFor YeoStkr.\n\n(1.) If not USNA give designation; I. E. LXR,—Ex-Reserve; L-XT,—Ex-Temp. appointment USN; Reserve Classification.\n(2.) Exact dates preferred.\n\n16-49165-1 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":364,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S-3\n\nSECNAV\n\nPers-32150-mjr\n177283/1350\n\n21 NOV 1949\n\nFrom: Secretary of the Navy.\nTo: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, U.S. Navy.\n\nVia: Chief of the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nSubj: Termination of Temporary Appointment as a Lieutenant.\n\n1. In view of the reduction in the officer personnel strength of the Navy, the President terminates your temporary appointment as a Lieutenant in the Navy, effective 31 December 1949.\n\n2. You will revert to your permanent status as a Chief Photographer. The designator assigned you in this grade is 8311.\n\nFor the President:\n\nFRANCIS P. MATTHEWS\n\nSecretary of the Navy.\n\nFINISHED FILE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":365,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S-3\n\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\nPers-8234-JAB\n\n31 Oct 1949\n\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: BuSandA, Officers' Accounts Division, Room 0202, Navy Department, Code F.O. Washington 25, D. C.\nAttn: Miss Watt\nSubj: Base Pay Entry Dates.\n\nRef: (a) Ur recent requests.\n\n1. In accordance with reference (a) Base Pay Entry Dates for the following listed officers are forwarded herewith:\n\n079591 INGALLS, Charles E., Jr. LCDR USN 10-11-37\n522740 FIGHTER, William F. ENS USNR 9-20-45\n413154 HOWARD, William D. LTJG USNR 10-21-42\n177283 NEWHOUSE, Delbert C. LT USN 3-16-30\n\nM. M. ANGAS\nBy direction\n\nTotal 4\n\nFINISHED FILE 2234"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":366,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVY DEPARTMENT\nRefer to: BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nPers-3622-rwb WASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n177283\n\n1 FEB 1949\n\nFrom:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo:\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350.\n\nVia:\tBureau of Aeronautics General Representative,\n\tCentral District,\n\tWright Field,\n\tDayton, Ohio.\n\nSubj:\tApplication for commission as Limited Duty Officer;\n\tAcknowledgment/Information regarding.\n\nRefs:\t(a) Your application for commission in Limited Duty Status.\n\t(b) BuPers Circ Ltr No 175-48.\n\n1. Receipt is acknowledged of the (original) (duplicate copy) of reference (a). Defects, if any, are noted below. It is requested that action be expedited and papers returned to the Bureau of Naval Personnel (Attn: Pers-362) if indicated:\n\n(X) No defects.\n\n( ) Application and all substantiating documents returned for completion in the form shown in reference (b).\n\n( ) Application incomplete. Forward following document(s) immediately:\n\t( ) Fitness report form.\n\t( ) NavMed Form H-8 (report of physical examination).\n\t( ) Signed sworn statement for Detailed Information Sheet.\n\t( ) Commanding Officer's verification of statements in application in accordance with paragraph 11(e) of reference (b), and enclosure (B) thereto.\n\n( ) Individual documents returned for correction or completion as follows:\n\t( ) Fitness report form returned for completion accordance paragraph 11(c) and/or 11(d) of reference (b).\n\t( ) Fitness Report form returned for proper signature (s).\n\n( ) Application will not be considered by the Selection Board and is filed without action by reason of ineligibility due to:\n\t( ) Insufficient service (less than 10 years' active Naval service).\n\t( ) Overage (cannot complete 30 years' service prior to attaining age 55).\n\t( ) Ineligibility as indicated in paragraph 8(b) of reference (b).\n\n( ) Not eligible for rank requested. Refer paragraphs 8 and 9 reference (b); application in Bureau has been corrected accordingly, and will be considered by Board for appointment in the rank for which eligible unless withdrawn by written request. The highest rank for which eligible is ____________.\n\n( ) Other:\n\n-1-\t\t\t\tFINISHED FILE PERS 362"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":367,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2. Attention of officers is invited to the fact that the special fitness report, submitted with the application, is an additional report for the use of the Selection Board and will not be filed in the officer's fitness report record. This period must be included in the regular fitness reports submitted in accordance with current instructions.\n\nA. ZIMM\nBy direction."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":368,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DETAILED INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR COMMISSION IN LIMITED DUTY STATUS\n\n(a) NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n\n(b) Rank: Lieutenant. File #: 177283/1350. Form of appointment: Lieutenant, Unrestricted. Date of rank: 1 April 1946.\n\n(c) Not applicable.\n\n(d) Highest enlisted rating held: CPhoM. Service #: 393 07 21.\n\n(e) through (i) are not applicable.\n\n(j) Date and place of birth: 5 June 1913; Marcola, Lane County, Oregon.\n\n(k) Detailed computation of service:\n\nENLISTED / WARRANT / COMMISSIONED / Total Service\nEnlisted Discharged From To From To Total Service\n1/24/33 1/23/39 06-00-00\n1/24/39 6/24/42 03-05-01\nPhotographer 6/25/42 6/14/43 00-11-20\nEnsign 6/15/43 8/31/44 01-02-17\nLieutenant (jg) 9/1/44 3/31/46 01-07-00\nLieutenant 4/1/46 12/31/48 02-09-00\nTime lost due to SKMC, NPDI, AOL, AWOL.......NONE\nNet active naval service as of 1 January 1949.......15-11-08\n\n(l) Present station and description of duties:\nBureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nAssistant Director, Procurement Division for Photographic Procurement and Developmental Engineering.\n\n(m) From October 1947 to July 1948. Rank: LT\nStaff, Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nDuties: Photographic Officer., Assistant to Staff Operations Officer and Photographic Officer of Fleet Air Photographic Laboratory operated by Commander, Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nFrom September 1946 to October 1947 Rank: LT\nNASD, Pearl Harbor, T.H.\nDuties: Receipt, storage and issuance of photographic materials. Administration of Naval and civilian personnel and duties as Recreation Officer; Training Officer; Voting Officer; Fire Prevention Officer; Member Survey Board; Member General Court Martial Board, and Summary Court Martial Board, Naval Base, Pearl Harbor.\nFrom September 1944 to September 1946 Rank: LT & LTJG\nNASD, Philadelphia, Pa.\nDuties: Receipt, storage and issue of photographic materials.\nFrom June 1943 to September 1944 Rank: LTJG, ENS & PHOT\nNAS, COCO SOLO, C.Z.\nDuties: Administration and operation of photographic laboratory."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":369,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DETAILED INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR COMMISSION IN LIMITED DUTY STATUS\n\n(m) (Continued).\n\nFrom February 1943 to June 1943. Rank: PHOT\nStaff, Commandant FIFTEENTH Naval District.\nDuties: Coordination of District photographic activities.\nFrom August 1942 to February 1943. Rank: PHOT & CPhoM\nAdvanced Base \"GAMMA\", later designated as USNavBase, Santa Elena Bay, Ecuador.\nDuties: Administration of the Ordnance Department and duties as Photographic Officer, Athletic Officer, and Welfare Officer.\nFrom November 1940 to August 1942. Rate: CPhoM & PhoM1\nNAS, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.\nDuties: Administration and operation of photographic laboratory, production of aerial photographic maps and aerial and ground photography.\nFrom June 1939 to November 1940. Rate: PhoM1\nPatrol Squadron FOURTEEN (Redesignated from VP-45).\nDuties: Aerial and ground photography.\nFrom April 1936 to June 1939. Rate: PhoM1, 2, & 3.\nNAS, San Diego, California.\nDuties: Aerial and ground photography.\nFrom December 1935 to April 1936. Rate: PhoM3\nBombing Squadron ONE-B.\nDuties: Aerial and ground photography.\nFrom June 1935 to December 1935. Rate: PhoM3 & S1.\nNAS, Pensacola, Florida.\nDuties: Under instruction at Naval School of Photography.\nFrom November 1934 to June 1935. Rate: S1\nScouting Squadron THREE-B.\nDuties: Photographic Striker.\nFrom June 1933 to November 1934. Rate: S1 & S2\nFlag Unit, Commander Aircraft Battle Force.\nDuties: Yeoman Striker.\nFrom January 1933 to June 1933 Rate: S2 & AS\nNaval Training Station, San Diego, California.\nDuties: Recruit Training.\n\n(n) Special naval qualifications and naval service schools attended:\n1. Naval School of Photography, NAS Pensacola, Florida.\n\n(o) Awards, decorations, and medals:\n1. Good Conduct Medal.\n2. American Defense, w/Base Clasp.\n3. World War II Victory Medal.\n4. Air Crew Insignia.\n\n(p) Civilian Education.\n1. Graduate of High School (12 years), Garibaldi, Oregon, 1931.\n2. Enrolled in the University of Kansas at Lawrence, Kansas, in September 1931, and withdrew in December of the same year.\n3. Completed United States Armed Forces Tests of General Education Development, College Level at the Navy Yard, Philadelphia, in June, 1946., with average percentile score of 98+."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":370,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DETAILED INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR COMMISSION IN LIMITED DUTY STATUS\n\n(q) Eligible for rank of Lieutenant (junior grade). Lowest rank acceptable is Lieutenant (junior grade).\n\nI do solemnly swear (or affirm) that all statements made in this application and any additional statments pertainihg thereto are entirely true and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief:\n\n[signature]\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE.\n\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this 6 day of December 1948. I have authority to administer oaths.\n\n[signature]\nHENRY J. BOWKER,\nLieutenant Commander,\nU.S. Naval Reserve."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":371,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BUREAU OF AERONAUTICS GENERAL REPRESENTATIVE, USN\nREFER TO INITIALS\nAND NO.\nCENTRAL DISTRICT\nWRIGHT FIELD, DAYTON, OHIO\nDCN:mls\n\n29 November 1948\n\nFrom:\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/1350.\nTo :\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel (attn: Pers-362).\nVia :\tBureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\n\nSubj:\tApplication for a commission in limited duty status.\n\nRefs:\t(a) BuPers C/L #175-48.\n\t(b) BuPers C/L #174-47, (Corrected).\n\t(c) BuPers C/L #104-48.\n\t(d) Public Law #381-80th Congress.\n\nEncls:\t(A) Detailed information in support of application for commission\n\tin limited duty status.\n\t(B) Special report of fitness, present duty.\n\n1.\tIn accordance with references (a) through (d), I hereby apply for a\npermanent commission as Lieutenant (junior grade), in LINE, Aviation; Aviation Operations.\n\n[signature]\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------\nOO/NEWHOUSE, D.C./\nLT/177283/1350/USN\nMLS:mls\t12973\t END-1\nDEC 2 1 1948\n\nFrom:\tBureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District.\nTo :\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel (attn: Pers-362).\n\nEncl:\t(C) NavMed H-8.\n\n1.\tForwarded.\n\n2.\tIt is believed that Lieutenant NEWHOUSE is specially qualified for the Limited Duty Status requested, and that he will, if selected, carry out the duties pertaining thereto in a creditable manner. The Commanding Officer, therefore, recommends Lieutenant Newhouse's selection.\n\n3.\tItems of Enclosure (A) have been verified from applicant's record on board.\n\n[signature]\nL. M. GRANT."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":372,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVMED H-8 (Rev. 5-45)\tPAGE N\nMEDICAL HISTORY\nSURNAME\n[REDACTED]\nCHRISTIAN NAME(S)\nDelbert Clement\nRANK OR RATE\tFILE OR SERVICE NO.\nLT\tUSN\t0177283\nBIRTHPLACE\tBIRTH DATE\nOhio\t6-5-23\nSTATE NAME OF PLACE—DATE EACH NEW ENTRY\nMAS. Columbus, Ohio\n12-1-48\nExamined this date in accordance with Bureau C.L. 175-48 and found physically qualified for retention in the regular Navy. It is the opinion of this Medical Officer that this officer will be physically and psychologically qualified to perform all duties in his work at sea and on foreign shore. Further that he may reasonably be expected to remain physically qualified to serve out the expected length of duty in his rank.\n\n[signature]\nW. A. BUTCHER\nCDR (MC) USNR\n\n16—44869-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":373,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICERS BEING REPORTED ON to fill out Sections 1 through 5. Sign all three pages in the lower left hand corner.\nREPORTING OFFICER to fill out Sections 6 through 12. Sign all three pages in the lower right hand corner.\nOFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT\nNAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45)\nPLEASE TYPE THIS FORM\nTHIS REPORT IS NOT TO BE FILED WITH OTHER FITNESS REPORTS\nDATE 11/29/48\n1. NAME: NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement; RANK AND CLASSIFICATION: LT 1350 USN; FILE NO. 177283\nSHIP OR STATION: Office of Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, O.\nPERIOD OF REPORT: FROM 9/1/48 TO 11/29/48\nDATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 8/24/48\nOCCASION FOR REPORT: SPECIAL\n2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES: Assistant to Director, Procurement Division, BAGR-CD, for Photographic procurement and developmental engineering. FROM 9 48 TO 11 48\nHas present duty changed since last fitness report was submitted? No\n3. Courses of instruction: None. Are you physically qualified for Sea Duty? Yes\n4. If Aviator: Non-Aviator.\n5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: SEA KIND OF DUTY Photographic LOCATION Pacific; SHORE KIND OF DUTY Photographic LOCATION West Coast.\n6. SECTIONS 6 THROUGH 12 TO BE FILLED IN BY REPORTING OFFICER: NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER L. M. GRANT RADM USN 34644 Commanding Officer. Is this officer qualified to perform all his present duties? Yes. Indicate more responsible duties: None.\nComment: Lieutenant Newhouse' training has been in specialized Camera and Photographic Work, and he is particularly well informed, and has had long practical experience in this work for fourteen (14) years.\nFOR WHAT DUTIES IS HE RECOMMENDED? ASHORE NAS - BuAer - Aviation Photographic AFLOAT CV - Aviation Photographic\n7. RATING FACTORS (table of checkmarks omitted)\n8. INDICATE YOUR ATTITUDE: PARTICULARLY DESIRE HIM!\n9a. Considering all officers: (rating scale checkmarks)\n9b. How many officers: (checkmarks)\n10. COMMENT: None.\n11. HAVE YOU ANY ADVERSE COMMENTS: NO\n12. Lieutenant Newhouse performs his duties in an outstanding manner. He is energetic, enthusiastic and thorough with his work, and tactful in his dealing with the Air Force. His military and personal character is excellent. He is loyal and devoted to the service and is considered the type of officer required by the Bureau of Aeronautics in Limited Duty Status. He is strongly recommended for appointment in rank of Lieutenant (junior grade).\nSELECTION BOARD stamp.\nSIGNATURE OF OFFICER REPORTED ON (Applies only to Sections 1 through 5): [signature]\nSIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER: [signature] L. M. Grant\nWhen completed remove carbon paper, forward Pages 1 and 2, not detached, to BuPers. Retain Page 3 for \"Officer's Qualification Record Jacket\".\nPAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":374,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S QUALIFICATION REPORT\nNAVPERS-310B (REV. 6-45)\nBUPERS COPY\nPLEASE TYPE THIS FORM\nTHIS REPORT IS NOT TO BE FILED WITH OTHER FITNESS REPORTS\nDATE 11/29/48\n1. NAME: NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement; RANK AND CLASSIFICATION: LT 1350 USN; FILE NO. 177283\nSHIP OR STATION: Office of Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, O.\nPERIOD OF REPORT: 9/1/48 TO 11/29/48\nDATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 8/24/48\nOCCASION FOR REPORT: SPECIAL\n2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES: Assistant to Director, Procurement Division, BAGR-CD, for Photographic procurement and developmental engineering. FROM 9 48 TO 11 48\nHas present duty changed since last fitness report was submitted? No\n3. COURSES OF INSTRUCTION: None. Are you physically qualified for Sea Duty? Yes\n4. If Aviator: Non-Aviator.\n5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: SEA Photographic, LOCATION Pacific; SHORE Photographic, LOCATION West Coast.\n6. SECTION 6 TO BE FILLED IN BY REPORTING OFFICER: NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER L. M. GRANT RADM USN 34644 Commanding Officer. Is this officer qualified to perform all his present duties? YES. Indicate more responsible duties: None.\nLieutenant Newhouse' training has been in specialized Camera and Photographic Work, and he is particularly well informed, and has had long practical experience in this work for fourteen (14) years.\nFOR WHAT DUTIES IS HE RECOMMENDED? ASHORE NAS - BuAer - Aviation Photographic AFLOAT CV - Aviation Photographic\nSIGNATURE OF OFFICER REPORTED ON: [signature]\nSIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER: [signature]\nWhen completed remove carbon paper, forward Pages 1 and 2, not detached, to BuPers. Retain Page 3 for \"Officer's Qualification Record Jacket\".\nPAGE 2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":375,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Utility Wing Pacific Fleet\nActivity\n\n19 March 1948\t(date)\tS-3\n\nFrom:\tDelbert C. Newhouse, Lieut., USN177283\n(Name, Rank, & Serial No.)\n\nTo:\tDisbursing Officer\n\nSubject: Longevity.\n\n1.\tYou are advised that on 15 March 1948, I completed (18) years service for pay purposes in the U.S.(Navy) (Naval Reserve) and request that my account be adjusted accordingly.\n\n2.\tIn event of any error, I authorize checkage of my pay account to adjust any overpayment resulting therefrom.\n\ncorrect\ncut.\n\n[signature]\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n(Signature)\n\n532886"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":376,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"( Name, Rank, & Serial No.)\n\nTo:\t\tDisbursing Officer\n\nSubject:\tLongevity.\n\n1.\tYou are advised that on 15 March 1948, I completed (18) years service for pay purposes in the U.S.(Navy) (Naval Reserve) and request that my account be adjusted accordingly.\n\n2.\tIn event of any error, I authorize checkage of my pay account to adjust any overpayment resulting therefrom.\n\ncorrect\ncut\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n(Signature)\n\n532886"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":377,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"22 SEP 1948\n\nEnd-1 Pers 8272\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo:\tChief of Bureau of Supplies and Accounts\n\tCentral Pay Accounts Division\n\tCleveland, 15, Ohio\n1.\tVerified and found to be correct.\nBy direction of Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nI. J. MAYNARD,\nDirector, Misc. Rec. Div.\nRecords Activity"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":378,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASD FORM #17\n\nU. S. NAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nNAVY #128 (ONE TWO EIGHT)\nFLEET POST OFFICE\nSAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.\n\n177283\n(File No.)\t\t\t\t\t\t3/15/47\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(Date)\n\nFrom: [REDACTED]\n(Name in full,\t\tRank\tClass\tDesig.\n\nTo:\tDisbursing Officer NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, NAVY #128\n\nSubj:\tStatement of Service.\n\nRef:\t(a) Pay Readjustment Act of 16 June 1942, as amended\n\t(b) ALNAV 200 - 44\n\n1.\tIn accordance with references the following officer's certificate of service for longevity pay purposes is submitted. It is requested that my pay account be adjusted accordingly.\n\nOrganization\tTotal Service From\tTo\tTime Lost From\tTo\tNet Time Years\tMos.\tDays\nNational Guard Unit\t3/18/29\t1/25/32\t\t\t2\t10\t8\nU.S.N. Enlistment\t1/24/33\t8/31/42\t\t\t9\t7\t7\nU.S.N.Comm(Temp)\t9/1/42\t9/24/46\t\t\t4\t0\t24\nU.S.N.Comm(Perm)\t9/25/46\t3/15/47\t\t\t0\t5\t21\n\nTOTAL SERVICE FOR PAY PURPOSES\t17 years\t15\t22\t60\n\n2.\tI certify the above to be a true and correct statement of my prior service. In the event of any errors I authorize the checkage of my pay account to adjust any overpayment resulting therefrom.\n\n(Signature)\n\n(For Disbursing Officer)\nCompleted last 3 years' period of service\t15 years 3/15/45\nTotal Service for Pay Purposes\t17 years 3/15/47\n\nD. F. SULLIVAN\tSignature\tSymbol No.\n\nCorrect 7-13-48 C.W."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":379,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"15 JUL 1948\n\nEnd-1 Pers 8272\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo:\tChief of Bureau of Supplies and Accounts\n\tCentral Pay Accounts Division\n\tCleveland, 15, Ohio\n1.\tVerified and found to be correct.\nBy direction of Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nI. J. MAYNARD,\nDirector, Misc. Rec. Div.\nRecords Activity"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":380,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVY DEPARTMENT\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\nRefer to No. Pers-362-fh\n177283\n\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: LT DELBERT CLEMENT NEWHOUSE, USN.\n\nVia: Commander Air Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet, c/o Fleet Post Office, San Francisco, California.\n\nSubj: Application for transfer to commissioned limited duty status; action on.\n\nRefs: (a) Your application for transfer to commissioned limited duty status.\n(b) BuPers Circular Letter 175-47.\n\n1. Your application for transfer to commissioned limited duty status has been carefully considered by the Selection Board convened by the Secretary of the Navy. I regret to inform you that your name was not included among those recommended for appointment. However, I wish to assure you that this decision is no reflection upon your performance of duty in the Navy; nor will it in any way affect your present status or preclude your making application and being considered by subsequent selection boards.\n\n2. The number of applicants desiring transfer to commissioned limited duty status has been far in excess of the number of appointments which can be offered. Therefore, it was necessary for the Selection Board to recommend, from among eligible applicants, only those best qualified for appointment. The decision in your case was made after a careful review of your entire record and your qualifications as compared with those of other applicants of your rank and classification or enlisted rating.\n\n3. The interest you have shown in pursuing a naval career represents an exemplary attitude of service and patriotism. The Navy is sincerely appreciative of your contribution toward maintaining the naval establishment at a high level of efficiency during the war, the demobilization period, and the continuing period of world unrest.\n\nT. L. SPRAGUE\n\nA-17154"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":381,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"From:\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, (Chief Photographer),\n\tUSN, 177283.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\nVia:\tThe Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\n\nSubject:\tMy Application for a Commission in Limited Duty Status;\n\tRank for which Eligible.\n\nReference:\t(a) BuPers ltr Pers-3622-dmm 17283/1100 of 5 March 48.\n\t(b) My request for modification of subject application\n\tforwarded by ComUtWingPac 1st end. P14-2 ser 62 of\n\t17 Jan 48.\n\nEnclosure:\t(A) Certified copy of ref (b).\n\n\t1.\tEnclosure (A) is forwarded in reply to reference (a).\n\n\t2.\tI do desire to be considered for a lower rank than now\nheld, but not less than lieutenant (junior grade).\n\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT:\n\nFrom:\tThe Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\n\t1.\tForwarded.\n\nONIA B. STANLEY, JR.\nBy direction."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":382,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In Reply Refer to\nFU/FF12/P14-2\n60:Sr\n\nSerial: 62\t\t\t\t\t17 January 1948\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT to:\nLT D.C. NEWHOUSE, USN,\nltr request dtd 16\nJanuary 1948.\n\nFrom:\tThe Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel (Attn: Pers-31).\n\nSubject:\tTransfer to Commissioned Limited-Duty Status.\n\n\t1.\tForwarded.\n\nJ. C. CRONIN\n\nCopy to:\nLT NEWHOUSE.\n\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY\n\nForm No. UTWING-20\n\nENCLOSURE ( )"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":383,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JN 177283\n\nUNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET\nAir Force\nUTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET\n\n16 January 1948.\n\nFrom:\tLieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, (Chief Photographer),\n\tUSN, 177283.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel (Attn: Pers-31).\nVia:\tThe Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet.\n\nSubject:\tTransfer to Commissioned Limited-Duty Status.\n\nReference:\t(a) SOinC, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H. ltr\n\tNT4-9/P17/00/021/CF ser 10583 of 31 Oct 1947.\n\t(b) BuPers C/L No. 175-47.\n\t(c) BuPers C/L No. 245-47.\n\n\t1.\tReference (a) forwarded my request for transfer to\ncommissioned limited-duty status.\n\n\t2.\tDue to the change in paragraph 4, second sentence of\nreference (b) effected by reference (c), it is requested that paragraph\n2 (1) of my request for commissioned limited-duty be changed to read:\n\"I do desire to be considered for a lower rank than now held, but not\nless than lieutenant (junior grade).\n\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE,\nLieutenant, U. S. Navy.\n\nI do solemnly swear that all statements made in this request for\nmodification of application are entirely true and complete to the best\nof my knowledge and belief.\n\nDELBERT CLEMENT NEWHOUSE.\n\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this sixteenth day of January\n1948. I have authority to administer oaths.\n\nA. E. MARDEN,\nLieutenant, U. S. Navy.\n\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY\n\nENCLOSURE ( )"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":384,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pers-3622-dmm\n177283/1100\n\n5 - MAR 1948\n\nFrom:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo:\tLT. Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN.\n\nVia:\tSupply Officer in Command\n\tAviation Supply Depot\n\tNaval Supply Center\n\tNavy 128, c/o Fleet Post Office\n\tSan Francisco, California\n\nSubj:\tYour application for a commission in limited-duty\nstatus; Rank for which eligible.\n\nRefs:\t(a) Your application for a commission in limited-\n\tduty status.\n\t(b) BuPers Circ.Ltr. No. 174-47 as modified by\n\tBuPers Circ.Ltr. No. 245-47.\n\t(c) BuPers Circ.Ltr. No. 175-47.\n\n1. By careful review of reference (a) and your records in the\nBureau, it has been determined that the lowest rank which you\nhave indicated will be acceptable is higher than the highest\nrank for which you are eligible in accordance with reference\n(b). The highest rank for which you are eligible is LTJG.\n\n2. The provisions of reference (c) require determination by\nthe applicant of his eligibility, however, in order to protect\nyour interests, it is assumed that you have misinterpreted\nreferences (b) and (c). Therefore, your application will be\nsubmitted to the Selection Board for consideration for appoint-\nment to the highest rank for which you are eligible.\n\n3. If you desire to be considered for a lower rank as well as\nthat given above, or to withdraw your application, you are\ndirected to submit a signed statement to that effect.\n\nG. F. DALTON,\nBy direction."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":385,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283 PHOTO\n\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n11 DEC 1947\n\nFrom:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo:\tLt Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283.\nVia:\tSupply Officer in Command,\n\tAviation Supply Depot,\n\tNaval Supply Center,\n\tNavy 128, c/o FPO, San Francisco, Calif.\n\nSubj:\tApplication for Commission as Limited Duty Officer; Receipt of.\n\nRef:\t(a) BuPers Circular Letter No. 175-47.\n\nEncl:\t(A)\n\n1. Receipt is acknowledged of the (original) (advance copy) of your application\nfor commission as limited duty officer.\n\n2. The following defects, as checked below, are noted:\nXX\n( ) None.\n\n( ) Fitness Report was not received with your application. Your Commanding\nOfficer is requested to comply with reference (a), paragraphs 2(b)(2)\nand 2(b)(3), and forward the completed fitness report to the Bureau of\nNaval Personnel (attention Pers-311M).\n\n( ) Fitness Report is returned herewith for completion in accordance with\nreference (a), paragraphs 2(b)(2) and 2(b)(3). Your Commanding Officer\nis requested to complete or correct and return the fitness report as\nsoon as possible to the Bureau of Naval Personnel (attention Pers-311M).\n\n( ) NavMed Form H-8 (report of medical officer's examination), as required\nby reference (a), paragraph 2(c), was not received with your application.\nYour Commanding Officer is requested to forward a signed copy of this\nform to the Bureau of Naval Personnel (attention Pers-311M).\n\n( ) Other:\n\nA. ZIMM\nBy direction."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":386,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"END-1 on Lt. Newhouse's\nltr dated 17 October 1947\n\n22 October 1947\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command, Aviation Supply Depot,\n Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel (Attn: Pers-31).\nVia: Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor\n\nSubj: Transfer to Commissioned Limited-Duty Status.\n\n1. Forwarded.\n\nH. J. P. FOLEY\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nNT4-9/P17/00\n021\n\nEND-2 on LT D. C. Newhouse, USN ltr dtd\n17 Oct 47\n\nCF 10583\n31 OCT 1947\n\nFrom: Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center,\n Pearl Harbor, T. H.\nTo : Chief of Naval Personnel (Attn: Pers-31)\n\nSubj: Transfer to Commissioned Limited Duty Status\n\n1. Forwarded.\n\nG. F. THOMAS\nBy direction\n\ncc:\nComAirPac"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":387,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JN 177283\n17 October 1947\n\n(g) Cont'd.\n (5) Naval Air Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Chief in Charge\n of Photographic Laboratory. November 1940 to August 1942.\n (6) U. S. Fleet, Aircraft Scouting Force, Patrol Squadron\n Fourteen (Redesignated from VP-45). Senior Photographer,\n June 1939 to November 1940.\n (7) U. S. Naval Air Station, San Diego, Calif. Photographer.\n April 1936 to June 1939.\n (8) U. S. Fleet, Aircraft Battle Force, Bombing Squadron\n One-B. Photographer. December 1935 to April 1936.\n (9) Naval Air Station, Pensacola. Under instruction at\n Naval School of Photography. June 1935 to December 1935.\n (10) U. S. Fleet, Aircraft Battle Force, Scouting Squadron\n Three-B. Photographer striker. November 1934 to June\n 1935.\n (11) U. S. Fleet, Aircraft Battle Force, Flag Unit. Yeoman\n striker. June 1933 to November 1934.\n (12) Naval Training Station, San Diego, Calif. Under recruit\n training. January 1933 to June 1933.\n\n(i) Graduate of Naval School of Photography at Naval Air Station\n Pensacola, Florida.\n(j) Good Conduct Medal, American Defense Campaign ribbon with\n overseas star, American Theater campaign ribbon, World War II\n Victory Medal, and Air Crew Insignia.\n(k) Graduated from twelfth grade at Garibaldi High School, Garibaldi,\n Oregon in 1931. Enrolled at the University of Kansas, Lawrence,\n Kansas in September 1931 and withdrew from the University in\n December of the same year.\n Completed the United States Armed Forces Tests of General\n Educational Development, College Level at the Navy Yard,\n Philadelphia in June 1946 with the average percentile score\n of 98.\n(l) I do not desire to be considered for a lower rank than now held\n which is that of lieutenant.\n\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\nLieutenant, U. S. Navy\n\nI do solemnly swear (or affirm) that all statements made in this application and any additional statements pertaining hereto are entirely true and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.\n\nDelbert Clement Newhouse\n\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this 17 day of October 1947.\nI have authority to administer oaths.\n\nD. E. PARRISH\nLT., SC, USN\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":388,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JN 177283\n\n17 October 1947\n\nFrom: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, (Chief Photographer), USN, 177283.\nTo : The Chief of Naval Personnel (Attn: Pers-31).\nVia : The Supply Officer in Command.\n\nSubj: Transfer to Commissioned Limited-Duty Status.\n\nRef : (a) BuPers Circular Letter No. 175-47.\n\nEncl: (A) Certificate of physical fitness.\n (B) Special Report of Fitness.\n\n1. In accordance with reference (a), I hereby apply for a permanent commission in the United States Navy in a limited-duty status.\n\n2. The following information is submitted:\n\n(a) Age 34, born 5 June 1913 at Marcola, Oregon.\n(b) Does not apply.\n(c) First enlisted 23 January 1933.\n(d) 14 years, 11 months and 7 days total active duty.\n(e) 1 April 1946 appointed to rank of lieutenant for temporary service persuant to authority contained in AlNav No. 150-47.\n(f) Reported 9 September 1946 to Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, for duty as Photographic Liaison Officer with the collateral duties of: Military Personnel Officer; Recreation Officer; Training Officer; Voting Officer; Savings Bond Officer; Examining Board; Survey Board and Summary Court Martial Board.\n(g) Chief Photographer's Mate, Aviation, all aerial photographic operations including aerial mapping with single and multiple lens cameras and motion picture photography.\n(h) (1) N.A.S.D., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Photographic Liaison Officer and Officer in Charge, Photographic Materials. September 1944 to September 1946.\n (2) NAS, Coco Solo, C. Z. Photographic Officer. June 1943 to September 1944.\n (3) Commandant Fifteenth Naval District. Assistant to Officer in Charge District Photographic Activities. February 1943 to June 1943.\n (4) Advanced Base \"GAMMA\" later designated as U. S. Naval Base, Santa Elena Bay, Ecuador. Gunnery Officer with the collateral duties of (1) Photographic Officer, (2) Athletic Officer, (3) Educational Officer, (4) Welfare Officer. August 1942 to February 1943.\n\n-1-"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":389,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4 May 1948\n\nMEMORANDUM\n\nTo: Operations (a) Sub-Board (CDR MOORE)\n\nThe enlisted record of NEWHOUSE, Delbert C., cannot be located. Consideration for selection will have to be based on his officer record only.\n\nG. F. DALTON,\nRecorder."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":390,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVMED H-8 (1943)\nPage\n\nMEDICAL HISTORY\n\nNEWHOUSE, (Surname) 177283\nDelbert Clement (Christian name(s))\nBorn: Place Marcola, Ore. Date 6-5-13\n\nSTATE NAME OF PLACE DATE EACH NEW ENTRY\n\nU.S. Naval Air Station, (ASD)\nPearl Harbor, T.H.\n20, October 1947\nRef.: BuPers C/L 175-47, NDB, 15, Sept., 1947.\n\nThis Officer is considered to be physically qualified to perform full duty at sea and on foreign shore in a Limited Duty Officer status and meets the standards for original officer appointment, (Part II, MMD) and if commissioned, the applicant could reasonably be expected to remain physically qualified.\n\nN.L. TODD, CDR(MC)USN\n\nENCLOSURE (A)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":391,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page ____________ MEDICAL HISTORY STATE NAME OF PLACE DATE EACH NEW ENTRY 10-6017"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":392,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICERS BEING REPORTED ON to fill out Sections 1 through 5. Sign all the pages in the lower left hand corner. REPORTING OFFICER to fill out Sections 6 through 12. Sign all three pages in the lower right hand corner. OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT NAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45) PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM This report is not to be filed with other fitness reports DATE 21 October 1947 1. NAME NEWHOUSE (last) Delbert (first) Clement (middle) RANK AND CLASSIFICATION Lieut. (Line) USN FILE NO. 177283 SHIP OR STATION Aviation Supply Depot Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor PERIOD OF REPORT (mo., day, year) DATE FROM DATE TO Application for Limited Duty Officer Status DATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 9 Sept 1946 OCCASION FOR REPORT Detachment of Officer Reported On Detachment of Reporting Senior Regular Semi-Annual Quarterly X Special 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT (List most recent first and describe accurately. Include periods of leave, transit, etc., also include employment of ship.) Photographic Liaison Officer Oct 47 Collateral Duties Military Personnel Officer Savings Bond Officer Oct 47 Recreation Officer Examining Board Oct 47 Training Officer Survey Board Oct 47 Voting Officer Summary Courts Martial Board Oct 47 Has present duty changed since last fitness report was submitted? Yes X No 3. IF COURSES OF INSTRUCTION WERE COMPLETED DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT, LIST TITLE OF COURSE, LOCATION OF SCHOOL, LENGTH OF COURSE AND DATE COMPLETED. Naval School of Photography, NAS, Pensacola, Fla., 6 months, 12/23/35 Are you physically qualified for Sea Duty? X Yes No Don't Know 4. If Aviator, indicate No. of Flight Hours Last Two years for Each Type Aircraft (List Most Recent Type First) TYPE OF AIRCRAFT NO. OF HOURS TOTAL 5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: SEA KIND OF DUTY Photographic LOCATION No preference SHORE KIND OF DUTY Photographic LOCATION West Coast 6. SECTIONS 6 THROUGH 12 TO BE FILLED IN BY REPORTING OFFICER NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER H.J.P. Foley Comdr., (SC) 81346 OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON Supply Officer in Command IS THIS OFFICER QUALIFIED TO PERFORM ALL HIS PRESENT DUTIES? X YES NO INDICATE MORE RESPONSIBLE DUTIES FOR WHICH HE IS IN TRAINING. None DATE OF EXPECTED QUALIFICATION Qualified by training and experience as photographic officer. Also possesses an intimate knowledge of inventory control, storage and supply procedures relative to photographic material. FOR WHAT DUTIES IS HE RECOMMENDED? ASHORE Photo Officer, ASO, ASA, ASD AFLOAT Photo Officer, CVB, VRU 7. RATING FACTORS A. SEA OR ADVANCE BASE DUTY B. INITIATIVE AND RESPONSIBILITY C. UNDERSTANDING AND SKILL D. LEADERSHIP E. CONDUCT AND WORK HABITS 8. INDICATE YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARD HAVING THIS OFFICER UNDER YOUR COMMAND, WOULD YOU: PARTICULARLY DESIRE HIM! 9a. Considering All Officers of the Same Rank, Classification and Corps, Whose Professional Abilities Are Known to You Personally, Would You Promote Him? 9b. How many Officers are included in the group used for the comparison in 9a? 10. COMMENT IN SECTION 12 AND GIVE REFERENCE HERE TO ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ON THE OFFICER DURING THIS PERIOD. None 11. HAS HE ANY MENTAL OR MORAL WEAKNESS WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECTS HIS EFFICIENCY? 12. Give in this space a clear, concise appraisal of the officer reported on and his performance of duty. Check one of these boxes: I CONSIDER THIS REPORT TO BE X SATISFACTORY UNFAVORABLE UNSATISFACTORY. Lt. Newhouse's performance of assigned duties in the command has been uniformly excellent. He is a mature officer. He possesses all of the qualities indicative of a desirable officer -- loyalty, initiative, intelligence, industry and tact coupled with a high standard of personal and military conduct. Of the considerable number of temporarily commissioned officers with whom I am acquainted, I consider him to be definitely outstanding. Lt. Newhouse is highly recommended for commission as a limited duty officer. SIGNATURE OF OFFICER REPORTED ON (Applies only to Sections 1 through 5) SIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER Has this report been shown or referred to officer reported on? Yes No When completed remove carbon paper, forward Pages 1 and 2, not detached, to BuPers. Retain Page 3 for \"Officer's Qualification Record Jacket\". Enclosure (B)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":393,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S QUALIFICATION REPORT NAVPERS-310B (REV. 6-45) BUPERS COPY PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM This report is not to be filed with other fitness reports DATE 21 October 1947 1. NAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement RANK AND CLASSIFICATION Lieut. (Line) USN FILE NO. 177283 SHIP OR STATION Aviation Supply Depot Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor PERIOD OF REPORT Application for Limited Duty Officer Status DATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 9 Sept 1946 OCCASION FOR REPORT SPECIAL X 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT Photographic Liaison Officer Collateral Duties Military Personnel Officer Savings Bond Officer Recreation Officer Examining Board Training Officer Survey Board Voting Officer Summary Courts Martial Board Oct 47 Has present duty changed since last fitness report was submitted? No 3. Naval School of Photography, NAS, Pensacola, Fla., 6 months, 12/23/35 Are you physically qualified for Sea Duty? Yes 4. TYPE OF AIRCRAFT NO. OF HOURS TOTAL 5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: SEA KIND OF DUTY Photographic LOCATION No preference SHORE KIND OF DUTY Photographic LOCATION West Coast 6. SECTION 6 TO BE FILLED IN BY REPORTING OFFICER NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER H.J.P. Foley Comdr.,(SC) 81346 OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON Supply Officer in Command IS THIS OFFICER QUALIFIED TO PERFORM ALL HIS PRESENT DUTIES? YES NO INDICATE MORE RESPONSIBLE DUTIES FOR WHICH HE IS IN TRAINING. None Comment on special or outstanding qualifications as well as any physical defects. Qualified by training and experience as photographic officer. Also possesses an intimate knowledge of inventory control, storage and supply procedures relative to photographic material. FOR WHAT DUTIES IS HE RECOMMENDED? ASHORE Photo Officer, ASO, ASA, ASD AFLOAT Photo Officer, CVB, VRU SIGNATURE OF OFFICER REPORTED ON (Applies only to Sections 1 through 5) SIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER When completed remove carbon paper, forward Pages 1 and 2, not detached, to BuPers. Retain Page 3 for \"Officer's Qualification Record Jacket\". PAGE 2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":394,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Form No. UTWING-20 UNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET Air Force UTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET In Reply Refer to FU/FF12/P14-2 60:Sr Serial: 62 17 JAN 1948 FIRST ENDORSEMENT to: LT D.C. NEWHOUSE, USN, ltr request dtd 16 January 1948. From: The Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet. To: The Chief of Naval Personnel (Attn: Pers-31). Subject: Transfer to Commissioned Limited-Duty Status. 1. Forwarded. J.C. CRONIN. Copy to: LT NEWHOUSE. Form No. UTWING-20"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":395,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Form No. UTWING-20 UNITED STATES PACIFIC FLEET Air Force UTILITY WING, PACIFIC FLEET In Reply Refer to JN 177283 16 January 1948. From: Lieutenant Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, (Chief Photographer), USN, 177283. To: The Chief of Naval Personnel (Attn: Pers-31). Via: The Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet. Subject: Transfer to Commissioned Limited-Duty Status. Reference: (a) SOinC, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H. ltr NT4-9/P17/00/021/CF ser 10583 dtd 31 Oct 1947. (b) BuPers C/L No. 175-47. (c) BuPers C/L No. 245-47. 1. Reference (a) forwarded my request for transfer to commissioned limited-duty status. 2. Due to the change in paragraph 4, second sentence, of reference (b) effected by reference (c), it is requested that paragraph 2 (1) of my request for commissioned limited-duty be changed to read: \"I do desire to be considered for a lower rank than now held, but not less than lieutenant (junior grade).\" DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, Lieutenant, U. S. Navy. I do solemnly swear that all statements made in this request for modification of application are entirely true and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. DELBERT CLEMENT NEWHOUSE. Subscribed and sworn to before me this sixteenth day of January 1948. I have authority to administer oaths. A. E. MARDEN, Lieutenant, U. S. Navy. Form No. UTWING-20"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":396,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER SELECTION TEST\n\nReport of scores for:\n\nName NEWHOUSE DELBERT C S-3\n\nService Number 177283 COLLEGE DEGREE\n\nSection of Test APTITUDE ENGLISH HISTORY MATHEMATICS SCIENCE TOTAL SCORE\nPercentile Score 99 94 93 81 97 98\n\nAPR 30 1946 NAVY TEST RESEARCH UNIT\n Princeton, N. J.\n\n(See reverse side for explanation of scores)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":397,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXPLANATION OF SCORES\n\n1. The scores are given in percentiles. The percentile scores run from 01 to 99 and indicate the percent of candidates receiving a lower score. Thus, if a candidate has a percentile score 63, 63 percent of the candidates taking the test made a lower score and 37 percent had the same or a higher score.\n\n2. It should be noted that the total score percentile is not an average of the percentiles for the sections, but indicates a candidate's relative standing on the basis of his total test score. Candidates with a generally high record on the test will have a percentile on the total score that is higher than the average of their percentiles on the sections. Similarly, candidates with a generally low record on the test will have a lower percentile on the total score than the average of their section percentile scores."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":398,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BRIEF SHEET-TRANSFER TO U.S. NAVY\nNAVPERS-2365 (1-45)\n\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle) FILE NO. CORPS CLASSIF. RANK\n\nNEWHOUSE DELBERT CLEMENT 177283 LT. j.g.\n\nI. INCOMING CHECK OFF\n1. APPLICATION RECEIVED WITHIN 6 MOS. OF DATE OF INACTIVE DUTY\nYES NO NOT APPLICABLE\nSIGNATURE THROUGH DISTRICT COMMANDANT\n2. CO RECOMMENDATION (Check One) NOT RECOMMENDED\n3. LOCAL BOARD ACTION RECOMMENDED NOT RECOMMENDED\n4. FORM Y (Duplicate) NAVMED AV-1 (Duplicate) SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED STATEMENT BY APPLICANT RE DEFECTS\nSIGNATURES BY MED. OF. CHEST X-RAY (Within 6 Months) CURRENT BLOOD KAHN\n5. FITNESS REPORT WITH SPECIAL NOTATION (Except officers who apply while on terminal leave, inactive duty or after resignation)\nCHECKED BY a.j. DATE Feb. 1, 1946\n\nAPPLICATION CODE C PHOT/COMM/L\nREMARKS\n\nII. APPLICATION BRIEF\nENSIGNS AND ABOVE: (See age chart) DATE OF BIRTH June 5, 1913 AGE ON 1 JAN. 1945 31\nDATE PRESENT RANK Sept. 1, 1944 ELIGIBLE WILL ACCEPT CWO NOT INDICATED\nCOMMISSIONED WARRANT OR WARRANT: DATE OF BIRTH\nAGE AT TIME APPOINTMENT TO TEMP. RANK ABOVE CPO: 9-1-12 29\nAGE AT BASIC DATE IF NR RANK IS ENSIGN OR ABOVE: ELIGIBLE YES NO\nREMARKS CHECK WARRANT Perm status Enl.; p.177 Register\n\nHIGH SCHOOL GRADUATED? YES NO COLLEGE 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR DEGREE YES NO\nNAVY TEST PERCENTILE 98 TEST GIVEN NOT REQUIRED\nDENTAL SCHOOL \"A\" MEDICAL SCHOOL\nENGINEERING DEGREE (CEC) THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY\nEDUCATIONALLY QUALIFIED? YES NO\nREMARKS NEEDS TEST. Test Pending\n\n3. SUMMARY\nAPPLICANT MEETS REQUIREMENTS FOR (Line and/or Corps or Specialty) C Phot\nAPPLICANT IS INELIGIBLE FOR TRANSFER BECAUSE\nBRIEFED BY DATE REVIEWED BY DATE 2-20-46\n\nRECEIPT OF APPLICATION IS ACKNOWLEDGED:\nACTION TO BUMED RETURNED BUMED TO SEL. BD. FROM SEL. BD. TURNDOWN LETTER SENT\nINITIAL\nDATE\nPRESENT DUTY STATION"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":399,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LOCAL BOARD\nNAVAL BASE, PHILA., PA.\n5 April 1946\n\n3r. End. to: Lt. (jg) Hewhouse's ltr. dated 29 March 1946\n\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nSubj: Lieut. (jg) Delbert C. Newhouse, USN(T)\nRequest for transfer to U. S. Navy.\n\nRef: (a) ComFour ltr. A17-31 of 13 December 1945.\n(b) BuPers Circ. Ltr. No. 288-45 (Revised) of 15 November.\n(c) BuPers Circ. Ltr. No. 303-45.\n(d) Nav Act 36-46.\n(e) Applicant's request for permanent commission in the U. S. Navy dated 27 August 1945.\n\n1. A board consisting of:\n\nCaptain Dennis L. Francis, USN, member;\nCommander William R. Miller, USN, member;\nCommander Frank G. Law, USN, member;\nLieutenant Leslie T. Bukstel, CD, USNR, recorder;\nmet at the Naval Base, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, at 0900 on 5 April 1946 in compliace with reference (a).\n\n2. The board personally reinterviewed the applicant and submiets the following comment:\n\n(a) He does not possess the educational requirements.\n\n(b) He will be given the general background and mental capacity test.\n\n(c) He does not meet the requirements as to age.\n\n(d) He meets the other requirements of BuPers Circ. Ltr 288-45 (revised), BuPers Circ. Ltr. 303-45.\n\n(e) He has had sea duty.\n\n3. The board forwards this request as a modification of the original request dated 27 August 1945. It is noted that the applicant is average and does not meet the educational requirements. He will be given the general background and mental capacity test.\n\nDENNIS L. FRANCIS\nCaptain, USN\nSenior Member, Acting"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":400,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"End-2 3 April, 1946 Naval Base Station Philadelphia, 12, Pa.\n\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nVia: Local Board to Consider Applicants for Transfer of Reserve and U.S.N. (Temporary) Officers to the Regular Navy. (Captain F. H. Dean, U.S.N., Senior Member).\n\nSubj: Lieutenant (jg) Delbert C. Newhouse, USN(T). Supplemental application for transfer to Regular Navy.\n\nRef: (a) Applicant's Request for Permanent Commission in the U. S. Navy dated 27 August 1945.\n\n1. Forwarded.\n\nBy direction of ComFour:\n\nE. H. MOLLISON\nSpecial Asst. to Asst. Chief of Staff for Personnel"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":401,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Jacket No. 177283\nEnd-1 1 APR 1946 NASD, Philadelphia, Pa.\nTo: BuPers\nVia: (1) ComFour (Local Board)\n(2) DCNO (Air) Op-512\n1. Forwarded, recommending approval.\nR. M. HUMES\nADMIN. EXEC. ASSIST.\nBy direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":402,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IN REPLY ADDRESS\nSUPPLY OFFICER\nNAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nPHILADELPHIA 11, PA.\n\nJN 177283\n\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nNAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nOXFORD AVENUE AND MARTIN'S MILL ROAD\nPHILADELPHIA 11, PA.\nSUPPLY DEPARTMENT\n\n29 March 1946\n\nFrom: Lieutenant (jg) Delbert C. Newhouse, USN (T).\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nVia: (1) SOIC\n(2) ComFour (Local Board)\n(3) CNO, Op53\n\nSubj: Appointment to Commissioned Rank, U. S. Navy - Request for.\n\nRef: (a) BuPers C/L 288-45, dated 1 October 1945 and ALNAVS 202, 206 and 207-45.\n(b) Applicant's Request for Permanent Commission in the U. S. Navy, dated 27 August 1945.\n(c) NAVACT 136-46.\n\n1. This supplements and modifies reference (b) in that I request to be considered for appointment as Photographic Specialist as authorized by reference (c).\n\n2. A brief summary of my experience leading to qualification in the technical phases of photographic development work follows:\n\n(a) Over twelve years experience in Naval Photography.\n(b) Installation and operation of photographic laboratories at NAS, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and Naval Advanced Base, Santa Elena Bay, Ecuador.\n(c) Redesign, installation of changes and operation of photographic laboratory at NAS, Coco Solo, C. Z.\n(d) Duty as Photographic Liaison Officer representing the Chief, U. S. Naval Photographic Service, at NASD Philadelphia, Pa.\n\n3. Recommendation on reference (b) by the Local Board was appointment as permanent commissioned warrant officer in the grade of Chief Photographer due to my inability to meet educational requirements for commissioned rank as set forth in reference (a). It is further requested therefore that I be permitted to take the required qualification test.\n\n4. If found ineligible for commissioned rank I do wish to be considered for commissioned warrant officer as Chief Photographer as recommended by the Local Board on reference (b)."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":403,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- 2 -\n\n5. I do solemnly swear that all statements made in this application and any additional statements pertaining hereto are entirely true and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.\n\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\n\nPhiladelphia,\nPennsylvania\n\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this 1st day of April 1946. I have authority to administer oaths.\n\nW. D. SEARS\nLieut. (SC), USN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":404,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\n16 Jan 1946\n\n1. The Board met at 10:00 A.M. this date, pursuant to an order appearing on the reverse hereof.\n\n2. The Board convened for the consideration of the physical examination of Lieut. (jg) Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, USN (177283).\n\n3. The recorder read the precept. The Board and recorder were duly sworn.\n\n4. The Board, having reviewed the report of physical examination mentioned above and the medical records on file in the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, considers that this officer meets the physical standards for appointment in the U. S. Navy.\n\n5. We, the undersigned members, therefore, certify that the officer of the case referred to in paragraph 2 is physically qualified for appointment in the U. S. Navy.\n\nL. G. BELL, CAPT., COMDR. (MC) USN\nSenior Member\n\nF. E. CHATARD, COMDR. (MC) USN\nMember and Recorder\n\nBUMED RP PEH (ENDORSEMENT)\nDate: 16 Jan 1946\nTo: BuPers\nSubj: Record of Proceedings of a Special Board of Medical Examiners.\n1. Forwarded.\n2. The findings of the Board are approved.\n\nBy direction of the Chief, BuMed:\n\nC. R. BALL, CAPT. (MC) USN\n\nBUMED-722 (Rev. 11-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":405,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Senior Member Member and Recorder\n\nBUMED RP PEH (ENDORSEMENT)\nDate: 16 Jan 1946\nTo: BuPers\nSubj: Record of Proceedings of a Special Board of Medical Examiners.\n1. Forwarded.\n2. The findings of the Board are approved.\n\nBy direction of the Chief, BuMed:\n\nC. R. BALL, CAPT. (MC) USN\n\nBUMED-722 (Rev. 11-45)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":406,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVY DEPARTMENT\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\n71763 Washington 25, D.C.\nPers-3176(3191)pmd-2A\n\n26 December 1945\n\nFrom: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nTo: Captain Luther G. B E L L,\nMedical Corps, USN,\nBureau of Medicine and Surgery,\nNavy Department.\n\nVia: The Chief of the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery.\n\nSubject: Precept convening a board of medical examiners.\n\nReference: (a) SecNav 1st endorsement dated 17 November 1943.\n\n1. In accordance with the authority vested in me by reference (a), a board of medical examiners for the purpose of acting upon reports of physical examinations of officers of the U. S. Naval Reserve and the U. S. Marine Corps Reserve for appointment in the regular Navy and Marine Corps, is hereby ordered to convene at the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, Navy Department.\n\n2. The board will consist of yourself as president and of the following named officers as members.\n\nCaptain Clifford P. POWELL, MC, USN,\nCommander Gerald W. HURST, MC, USN,\nCommander Joseph C. PLACAK, Jr., MC, USNR,\nCommander Ferdinand E. CHATARD, MC, USN,\nLieutenant Commander Arthur F. GARDNER, MC, USN, Ret.,\nLieutenant Commander Daniel R. KOHLI, MC, USN.\n\n3. Lieutenant Commander Daniel R. KOHLI, MC, USN, will act as recorder:\n\n4. Any two or more members may act in any one case and the junior member will act as recorder in the absence of the designated recorder.\n\n5. The board of medical examiners convened by BuPers letter Pers-3176 (3191) gv-2A dated 2 November 1945 is hereby dissolved.\n\nLOUIS DENFELD\n\nCertified a true copy:\n\n/s/ Daniel R. Kohli\nLt. Comdr. (MC), USN\nMember and Recorder"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":407,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NYPhil\n\n19 September 1945\n\nEnd-2 on ltr. from Lieut. (jg) Delbert C. Newhouse (T), USN, 177283, dtd. 27 August 1945.\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nSubj: Lieutenant (jg) Delbert C. Newhouse, (T), USN, 177283, - Request for Transfer to U. S. Navy.\n\nRef: (a) ComFour ltr. A17-31 of 22 August 1945.\n(b) ALNAV 202, 206 and 207 of August 1945.\n\nEncl: (A) Report of Physical Examination.\n(B) Fitness Report.\n\n1. A board consisting of: Captain Wyatt Craig, U. S. Navy, senior member; Captain John M. Hoskins, U. S. Navy, member; Commander William R. Miller, U. S. Navy, member; and Lieutenant (jg) Adolph (N) Rosset, U. S. N. R., recorder; met at the Navy Yard, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, at 0900, 19 September in compliance with reference (a).\n\n2. The board personally interviewed Lieutenant (jg) Newhouse and submits the following comment:\n\n(a) He very favorably impressed the board.\n(b) He is physically qualified as shown by enclosure (A).\n(c) His experience has been almost entirely in photography.\n(d) He has the necessary qualification as to age.\n(e) He has had overseas duty but no shipboard duty during the present war.\n(f) He meets the other requirements of ALNAVS 202, 206 and 207.\n\n3. This officer is recommended for a commission as a Chief Photographer in the regular Navy.\n\nWyatt Craig\nCaptain, U. S. N."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":408,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Jacket No. 177283\nEnd-1\n10 SEP 1945 NASD, Philadelphia, 11, Pa.\n\nTo: BuPers\n\nVia: ComFour (Local Board)\n\nSubj: Permanent Commission in the United States Navy - Application for.\n\n1. Forwarded, approval recommended.\n\n2. Lt. (jg) Newhouse has been attached to this activity from Sept. 13, 1944 to the present date. During this period he has demonstrated initiative and a keen interest in his duties. Lt.(jg) Newhouse has applied himself thoroughly and has shown outstanding ability in his technical specialty. His personal and military character is excellent.\n\nE. D. FOSTER\nRear Admiral (SC) USN\nSupply Officer-in-Command"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":409,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JN 177283\n27 August 1945\n\n(g) Cont'd.\n(4) Advanced Base \"GAMMA\" later designated as U. S. Naval Base, Santa Elena Bay, Ecuador. Gunnery Officer with the collateral duties of (1) Photographic Officer, (2) Athletic Officer, (3) Educational Officer, (4) Welfare Officer. August 1942 to February 1943.\n(5) Naval Air Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Chief in charge of Photographic Laboratory. November 1940 to August 1942.\n(6) U. S. Fleet, Aircraft Scouting Force, Patrol Squadron Fourteen (Redesignated from VP-45). Senior Photographer, June 1939 to November 1940.\n(7) U. S. Naval Air Station, San Diego, Calif. Photographer. April 1936 to June 1939.\n(8) U. S. Fleet, Aircraft Battle Force, Bombing Squadron One-B. Photographer. December 1935 to April 1936.\n(9) Naval Air Station, Pensacola. Under instruction at Naval School of Photography. June 1935 to December 1935.\n(10) U. S. Fleet, Aircraft Battle Force, Scouting Squadron Three-B. Photographer striker. November 1934 to June 1935.\n(11) U. S. Fleet, Commander Aircraft Battle Force (FLAG DIV.) Yeoman striker. June 1933 to November 1934.\n(12) Naval Training Station, San Diego, Calif. Under recruit training. January 1933 to June 1933.\n(h) Graduate of Naval School of Photography at Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Fla.\n(i)(1) Good Conduct Medal.\n(2) American Defense campaign ribbon with one star.\n(3) American Theater campaign ribbon.\n(j)Graduated from twelfth grade at Garibaldi High School, Garibaldi, Oregon 1931.\nEnrolled at the University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas in Sept. 1931 and withdrew from the University in December of the same year.\n(k) Have had no civilian business or professional experience.\n\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\nD. C. NEWHOUSE\n\nPhiladelphia\nPennsylvania\n\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this 31st day of August 1945.\n\nJ. A. NOBLE, LT. SC(S) USNR,\nMilitary Personnel Officer."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":410,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CORRESPONDENCE (IN DUPLICATE) SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO THE SUPPLY OFFICER-IN-COMMAND, NOT TO SIGNER OF THIS LETTER, AND REFER TO NO.\nJN 177283\n\nNAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nOXFORD AVENUE & MARTIN'S MILL ROAD\nPHILADELPHIA 11, PA.\n\n27 August 1945\n\nFrom: Lieutenant (jg) Delbert C. Newhouse, USN (T)\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nVia: (1) SOIC, NASD\n(2) ComFour\n\nSubj: Permanent Commission in the United States Navy - Application for\n\nRef: (a) ALNAV 207\n\n1. In accordance with the provisions of reference (a), I hereby make application for permanent commission in the United States Navy.\n\n2. The information requested by reference (a) follows:\n\n(a) Age - 32, born 5 June 1913 at Marcola, Oregon.\n(b) Does not apply.\n(c) Reported for active duty as apprentice seaman 24 January 1933.\n(d) Appointed lieutenant (junior grade) 1 September 1944 by ALNAV for temporary duty.\n(e) Present duty is Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in the capacity of Bureau of Aeronautics Representative and Technical Advisor in Photography to the Supply Officer in Command. My duties as Assistant to the Officer in Charge of the Photographic Unit (Storage Division) include administration of the unit in receipt, stowage, and issue of photographic materials. This unit handles its own invoicing and correspondence, combining the regular functions of Stock Control and Issue Divisions.\n(f) Operational photography and photographic supply.\n(g) (1) NASD, Philadelphia, Penna. Reported for duties described in paragraph (e) above on 13 September 1944.\n(2) NAS, Coco Solo, C. Z. Photographic Officer from June 1943 to Sept. 1944.\n(3) Commandant Fifteenth Naval District. Assistant to Officer in Charge District Photographic Activities. February 1943 to June 1943.\n\n-1-"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":411,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NMS Form Y\n(1929)\n\nREPORT OF PHYSICAL EXAMINATION\n\nPurpose of this examination ANSWER TO REGULAR NAVY & PER... MANENT RANK Date of examination 28 August 1945\nPlace of duty NASD, PHILA., PA. Place of examination NASD, PHILA., PA.\nName NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement 177283 Rank Lt.(jg) Corps USN\n(Surname first, Christian names in full)\nPlace of birth Oregon Date of birth 6-5-13\nFamily history Irrelevant\n\nHistory of illness or injury Mumps, Influenza, Measles. Fracture of left clavical and scapula, Appendectomy 1930.\n\nHead and face Normal\nEyes: Pupils (size, shape, reaction to light and distance, etc.) Round, equal, react to L & A\nDistant vision Rt. 18/20, corrected to 20/20 by Lenses\nLt. 18/20, corrected to 20/20 by Lenses\nBinocular vision ___ (Without lenses—Recorded only when visual defects exist) Color perception Normal AOP 1940 (State edition of Stilling's plates used)\nDisease or anatomical defects None\nEars: Hearing Rt. Watch 40/40 Coin click 20/20 Whispered voice 15/15 Spoken voice 15/15\nLt. Watch 40/40 Coin click 20/20 Whispered voice 15/15 Spoken voice 15/15\nBinaural --/15. (Spoken voice) Disease or defects None\nNose Normal (Disease or anatomical defect, obstruction, etc. State degree)\nSinuses Normal\nTongue, palate, pharynx, larynx, tonsils Normal\nTeeth and gums (disease or anatomical defect): Normal\nMissing teeth #17, 32 (List numbers)\nNonvital teeth No.9 (List numbers)\nPeriapical disease None (Degree)\nMarked malocclusion No (Yes or no)\nLack of serviceable occlusion No (Yes or no)\nPyorrhea alveolaris None (Degree)\nTeeth replaced by bridges None (List numbers)\nMeets dental requirements Yes (Yes or no)\nDentures None (Description)\nGeneral build and appearance Medium (State whether slender, medium, or heavy, and postural abnormalities)\nTemperature 98.6 Chest at expiration 39\nHeight 73\" Chest at inspiration 43\nWeight 198 Circumference of abdomen at umbilicus 35\nRecent gain or loss, amount and cause None\nSkin, hair, and glands Normal\nNeck (abnormalities, thyroid gland, trachea, larynx) Normal\nSpine and extremities (bones, joints, muscles, feet) Normal\n\nMark missing teeth by X whether replaced or not. Show size and position of caries in black, use red to indicate fillings and restorations.\n\nM. Hovsepian, (DC) LT.USNR\n(Signature of dental examiner)\n16—11249"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":412,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Thorax (size, shape, movement, rib cage, mediastinum) Normal\nRespiratory system, bronchi, lungs, pleura, etc. Normal\n\nCardio-vascular system Normal\nHeart (note all signs of cardiac involvement) Normal\n\nPulse: Before exercise 88 Blood pressure: Before, S 120, D 80\nAfter exercise 108 Three minutes after, S 110, D 80 (Manual of the Medical Department par. 1520(6))\nThree minutes after 96\nCondition of arteries Normal Character of pulse Full & Regular\nCondition of veins Normal Hemorrhoids None\nAbdomen and pelvis (condition of wall, scars, herniae, abnormality of viscera) Appendectomy 1930\n\nGenito-urinary system Normal\nUrinalysis: Sp. gr. 1.024, alb. Neg., sugar Neg., microscopical --\nVenereal disease None\nNervous system Normal (Organic or functional disorders)\n\nRomberg Negative Incoordination (gait, speech) Normal\nReflexes, superficial Normal, deep (knee, ankle, elbow) Normal Tremors None\nSerological tests (when required) Not required\nAbnormal psyche (neurasthenia, psychasthenia, depression, instability, worries) None\n\nSmallpox vaccination: Date last vaccination 9-21-42; Reaction Immune Typhoid prophylaxis: Number of courses Two.; Date of last course 2-18-38\nRemarks on abnormalities not otherwise noted or sufficiently described above None\nSummary of defects Defective vision both eyes 18/20, corrected to 20/20, NCD.\nIs the individual fit to perform active duty at sea or on foreign service? (If not, state limit of duty) Yes\nFindings and recommendations (as per Courts and Boards, when necessary) Examined and found physically qualified for transfer to regular Navy and permanent rank.\n\nA. H. VAUGHN, LT.COMDR. (MC) USNR\nP. R. CRONLUND, LT. (MC) USNR\nRemarks or endorsement\n\nINSTRUCTIONS: Be definite in statement and specific in recommendation. All abnormal conditions shall be given diagnostic titles as listed in Navy Nomenclature. The original only shall be forwarded direct to the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery except in cases of personnel of the Naval Reserve when the original and one copy shall be forwarded via the Commandant. Regarding preliminary examinations for the Naval Academy, see paragraph 1403, and for color perception, paragraph 1428. Manual of the Medical Department, U. S. Navy. The spoken voice (ordinary conversation) shall be recorded in all cases of defective hearing. In recording vision, the numerator of the fraction shall be the distance at which Snellen's 20-foot test letters can be determined and the denominator, 20.\n16—11249"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":413,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL HISTORY\nGENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON 25\n\nPers-3271-TLG\n177283\n4 February 1947.\n\nTo: General Accounting Office, Claims Division, Washington 25, D.C.\n\nSubject: Lieut. Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, USN - statement of service for use in connection with claim for longevity pay purposes.\n\nReference: (a) GAO ltr., Claim No. 2303893-SH, dtd 12 Dec 46.\n\n1. The following is a statement of subject officer's service as shown by the records of this Bureau:\n\nOREGON NATIONAL GUARD (ACTIVE).\n18 Mar 29 Enlisted.\n25 Jan 32 Honorably discharged.\n\n(Underage - 18 years 5 June 1931).\n\nU. S. NAVY.\n24 Jan 33 Enlisted, USN.\n1 Sep 42 Photographer (tempo.), USN.\n15 Jun 43 Ensign (tempo.).\n1 Sep 44 Lieut. (jg) (tempo.), USN.\n1 Apr 45 Lieut. (tempo.).\nContinuous service to date.\n\nNo record of time lost.\n\n2. It is requested you contact Lieutenant Newhouse for the activities to which attached during the period in question.\n\nBy direction of the Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nM A Robertson\nLieut. USNR\nOfficer Performance Div."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":414,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE\nWASHINGTON 25\n\nNAVAL HISTORY\n\nCLAIMS DIVISION\nIN REPLY PLEASE QUOTE\n\n2303893\n\nDEC 12 1946\n\nNavy Department,\nBureau of Naval Personnel,\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nIt is requested that information as checked below be furnished relative to:\n\nNewhouse Delbert C 177283 Lt. USN\nLast Name First Name Initial Service No. Rank/Rating\n\n[X] Statement of Service. [X] Transcript of Service 2/11/43 - 6/30/44\nPlease show all active dates ship's & stations from 2/11/43 - 6/30/44 for longevity purposes.\n\nDan Harvey\nFor Chief of Section\n\nNavy Department,\nBureau of Naval Personnel. Washington, D. C.\n\nReturned to General Accounting Office, Claims Division, with information that:\n\nENLISTED DISCHARGED\nDate Place Accepted Date Place Unauthorized Absences\n\nBy direction of\nCHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\n\nC-271 (7/26/46)\n13 DEC 1946"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":415,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283\nPers-327-JS\n\n7 April 1945\n\nTo: Supply Officer in Command\nNaval Aviation Supply Depot\nOxford Avenue and Martin's Mill Road\nPhiladelphia 11, Pennsylvania\n\nSubj: Lieutenant (jg) Delbert Clement Newhouse, U. S. Navy, (177283) Statement service of.\n\nRef: (a) Public Law 607 - 77th Congress, as amended.\n(b) Letter dated 8 March 1945, file 177283 from subject officer\n\n1. The following is a statement of the naval service of subject officer.\n\nActive Service (Inclusive Dates) Inactive Service (Inclusive Dates)\n\nEnlisted, National Guard\nState of Oregon *18 Mar 29 - 25 Jan 32\nEnlisted, USN 24 Jan 33 - To Date\nOfficer, USN, (Tempo) 1 Sep 42 - To Date\n\n*Since subject officer was underage at time of enlistment in National Guard, service prior to 5 June 1931 (18th birthday) may not be counted for pay purposes.\n\nBy direction of the Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nG. P. Gotschall\nLieutenant, USNR\nOfficer Performance Division\n\nCC: Lieutenant (jg) Delbert Clement Newhouse, USN\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 3270"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":416,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IN REPLY ADDRESS\nSUPPLY OFFICER IN COMMAND\nNAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nPHILADELPHIA 11, PA.\n\nUNITED STATES\nNAVAL AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nOXFORD AVENUE AND MARTIN'S MILL ROAD\nSUPPLY DEPARTMENT\n\nOfficer's File:\n177,283\n\nCHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nRECEIVED\n1945 MAR 13 AM 10 47\n\n8 March 1945\n\nFrom:\tLieut.(jg) Delbert C. Newhouse, U.S.N.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nSubject:\tStatement of Service - Request for.\n\n1.\tIt is requested that I be furnished with a statement of my military service as indicated by the records of the Bureau of Naval Personnel.\n\nD.C. Newhouse\nD.C. Newhouse\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 3270\n\n1945"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":417,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pers-316-MP\n\n177283\n\nNOV 18 1943\n11-15\n\nFrom:\tBuPers.\nTo:\tEnsign\n\tDelbert C. Newhouse, U.S.N.\n\tNaval Air Station, Coco Solo, C.Z.\nVia:\t(1) Commanding Officer.\n\t(2) Commandant, Fifteenth Naval District.\n\nSubj:\tOrders to duty involving flying as Technical Observer - request for.\n\nRef:\t(a) Your ltr 177283 dated 20 Oct 1943.\n\t(b) BuPers C/L 206-43 dated 30 Sept 1943.\n\n1. Receipt of reference (a) is acknowledged.\n\n2. The Bureau of Naval Personnel does not consider that the duties of this officer fulfill the requirements for Technical Observer orders as set forth in reference (b). The request of reference (a) is, therefore, disapproved.\n\nBy direction.\n\nL.K. Rice,\nCaptain, U.S.N.,\nAviation Detail Officer."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":418,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Op-32-B1-GAH\nOO/Newhouse, Delbert C.\n\nFourth Endorsement\n\nNOV 12 1943\n\nFrom:\tThe Chief of Naval Operations.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nSUBJECT:\tEnsign Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN - 177283 - Request for orders to duty involving flying as Technical Observer.\n\n1.\tReturned, recommending disapproval.\n\n2.\tIt is believed that orders to duty involving flying as Technical Observer are not required in the proper performance of subject officer's regular duties.\n\nA. O. PREIL\nBy Direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":419,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Op-32-B1-GAH\nOO/Newhouse, Delbert C.\n\nFourth Endorsement\n\nNOV 12 1943\n\nFrom:\tThe Chief of Naval Operations.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nSUBJECT:\tEnsign Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN - 177283 - Request for orders to duty involving flying as Technical Observer.\n\n1.\tReturned, recommending disapproval.\n\n2.\tIt is believed that orders to duty involving flying as Technical Observer are not required in the proper performance of subject officer's regular duties.\n\nA. O. PREIL\nBy Direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":420,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Op-32-B1-GAH\nOO/Newhouse, Delbert C.\n\nFourth Endorsement\n\nNOV 12 1943\n\nFrom:\tThe Chief of Naval Operations.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\nSUBJECT:\tEnsign Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN - 177283 - Request for orders to duty involving flying as Technical Observer.\n\n1.\tReturned, recommending disapproval.\n\n2.\tIt is believed that orders to duty involving flying as Technical Observer are not required in the proper performance of subject officer's regular duties.\n\nA. O. PREIL\nBy Direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":421,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pers-316-vmp\n\nEnd. - 3.\n\nFrom:\nTo:\t\tBuPers.\n\t\tThe Chief of Naval Operations.\n\nSubj:\t\tRequest for detail to duty as Aviation Technical\n\t\tObserver - from Ensign Delbert C. Newhouse, USN,\n\t\t(177283).\n\n1.\t\tForwarded for comment, recommendation and return.\n\nBy direction.\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\tL. W. Carstensen,\n\t\t\t\t\t\tLieutenant, USNR,\n\t\t\t\t\t\tAviation Detail Office."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":422,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Refer to File No.\n177283\n\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nCoco Solo\nUpham, Canal Zone\nOctober 20, 1943\n\n5670\n\nFrom:\tEnsign Delbert C. Newhouse, U.S.N.\nTo :\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\nVia :\t(1) The Commanding Officer.\n\t(2) Commandant, Fifteenth Naval District.\n\nSubject:\tDetail to duty as aviation technical\n\tobserver - request for.\n\n1.\tIt is requested that I be ordered to duty as an\naviation technical observer at this activity.\n\n2.\tI have had approximately one thousand hours experience in the air on photographic aerial missions during\neleven years active duty in the Navy.\n\n3.\tAt present at this activity there is no photographic officer ordered to duty as technical observer.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n\nNA10/P16-3\n2060\n\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nCOCO SOLO, CANAL ZONE\n\n1st Endorsement\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer\nTo:\tThe Commandant, Fifteenth Naval District\n\n1.\tForwarded, recommending approval.\n\nR. P. KAUFFMAN\n\n23 October 1943\n\nEnd-2\nP16-3/00(60)bmm\nFrom: Com 15\nTo: Bupers\n\n1.\tForwarded recommending approval.\n\nS. C. McCORMICK\nBy direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":423,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Prep 2 Nov 1943\n\nPers-316-vmp\n\nEnd. - 3.\n\nFrom:\nTo:\t\tBuPers.\n\t\tThe Chief of Naval Operations.\n\nSubj:\t\tRequest for detail to duty as Aviation Technical\n\t\tObserver - from Ensign Delbert C. Newhouse, USN,\n\t\t(177283).\n\n1.\t\tForwarded for comment, recommendation and return.\n\nBy direction.\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\tL. W. Carstensen,\n\t\t\t\t\t\tLieutenant, USNR,\n\t\t\t\t\t\tAviation Detail Office."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":424,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283\n\nOctober 20, 1943\n\nFrom:\tEnsign Delbert C. Newhouse, U.S.N.\nTo :\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\nVia :\t(1) The Commanding Officer.\n\t(2) Commandant, Fifteenth Naval District.\n\nSubject:\tDetail to duty as aviation technical\n\tobserver - request for.\n\n1.\tIt is requested that I be ordered to duty as an\naviation technical observer at this activity.\n\n2.\tI have had approximately one thousand hours experience in the air on photographic aerial missions during\neleven years active duty in the Navy.\n\n3.\tAt present at this activity there is no photographic officer ordered to duty as technical observer.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n\nNAIO/P16-3\n2060\n\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nCOCO SOLO, CANAL ZONE\n\n1st Endorsement\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer\nTo:\tThe Commandant, Fifteenth Naval District\n\n1.\tForwarded, recommending approval.\n\nR. P. KAUFFMAN\n\nEnd-2\nP16-3/00(60)bmm\nFrom: Com 15\nTo: Bupers\n\n23 October 1943\n\n1.\tForwarded recommending approval.\n\nS. C. McCORMICK\nBy direction\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 319"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":425,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"177283\n\nP3-1359448\tENDORSEMENT\tR: NEW. March 23, 1943\nFrom:\tThe Chief of the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\nSubject:\tPhysical fitness in the case of Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, AP, USN., for temporary appointment to warrant or commissioned rank.\n\nReference:\tALNAV 254.\n\n1.\tIt is recommended that this applicant be considered physically qualified for temporary appointment to warrant or commissioned rank.\n\nROSS T. McINTIRE\nChief of Bureau\n\nE. S. WILLIAMS,\nBy direction.\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 366"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":426,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NB 125/P-17/JRL\n\nU.S.Naval Base\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador\n\nFebruary 10,1943\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer\nTo:\tThe Bureau of Naval Personnel\n\nSubject:\tNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement Acting Photographer 395-07-21 USN\n\nReference:\tLHZ SNOW 301932/254 RAFT D ZRK GR 312 of December 1,1942\n\nEnclosure:\tNMS Form Y\n\n1.\tThe subject Acting Photographer is recommended to be placed on the list for advancement to Chief Warrant Photographer.\n\n2.\tHe is qualified to perform the duties of Chief Warrant Photographer afloat.\n\nJ.R.Litchfield\nJ.R.Litchfield\n\nc.c. to The Commandant, Fifteenth Naval District\n\n\"X\" out and initial over your encircled Pers. No. before relering"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":427,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. NAVAL BASE\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador\n\nA.P.O. #661\n% Post Master\nNew Orleans, La.\nOctober 27, 1942\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer.\nTo:\tThe Chief of the Bureau of Naval Personnel.\n\nSubject:\tPhotographer Delbert C. Newhouse USN.\n\n1.\tPhotographer Delbert C. Newhouse USN, is hereby recommended to take the examination for Permanent Appointment to Chief Photographer USN.\n\nJ. R. LITCHFIELD"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":428,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. NAVAL BASE\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador\n\nA.P.O. #661\n% Post Master\nNew Orleans, La.\nOctober 27, 1942\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer.\nTo:\tThe Chief of the Bureau of Naval Personnel.\n\nSubject:\tPhotographer Delbert C. Newhouse USN.\n\n1.\tPhotographer Delbert C. Newhouse USN, is hereby recommended to take the examination for Permanent Appointment to Chief Photographer USN.\n\nJ. R. LITCHFIELD"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":429,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. NAVAL BASE\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador\nOctober 25, 1942\n\nFrom:\tPhotographer Delbert C. Newhouse, (T.A.), USN.\nTo:\tThe Chief of the Bureau of Naval Personnel.\nVia:\tThe Commanding Officer.\n\nSubject:\tApplication for examination for appointment to permanent rank - request for.\n\nReference:\t(a) AlNav 160.\n\n1.\tApplication is made herewith for examination for appointment to permanent rank of Chief Photographer USN.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n\n1st Endorsement\nU. S. NAVAL BASE\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador\nOctober 25, 1942\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer.\nTo:\tThe Chief of the Bureau of Naval Personnel.\n\n1.\tForwarded.\n\nJ. R. LITCHFIELD"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":430,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. NAVAL BASE\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador\nOctober 25, 1942\n\nFrom:\tPhotographer Delbert C. Newhouse, (T.A.), USN.\nTo:\tThe Chief of the Bureau of Naval Personnel.\nVia:\tThe Commanding Officer.\n\nSubject:\tApplication for examination for appointment to permanent rank - request for.\n\nReference:\t(a) AlNav 160.\n\n1.\tApplication is made herewith for examination for appointment to permanent rank of Chief Photographer USN.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n\n1st Endorsement\nU. S. NAVAL BASE\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador\nOctober 25, 1942\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer.\nTo:\tThe Chief of the Bureau of Naval Personnel.\n\n1.\tForwarded.\n\nJ. R. LITCHFIELD"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":431,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS - 1782 (REV. 3-45)\n\nSTATEMENT OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT\n\nFILE NUMBER | NAME | CLASS | APPOINTED TO\n177283 | NEWHOUSE DELBERT C | LAP- | LT\n\nDATE OF APPOINTMENT | DATE OF RANK | CIRC. LTR. | ALNAV. | NUMBER | DATED\n04 01 46 | 04 01 46 | | 0 | 150 46 | 04 01 46\n\nSubject to the conditions stated below, the above individual was appointed by the President to the rank indicated above, for temporary service.\n\nIn the event all stated conditions be met, the appointment (unless expressly declined) is to be regarded for all purposes as having been accepted on the date made, without formal acceptance or oath of office, as provided in Section 5 of an Act of Congress approved June 30, 1942, (Public No. 639 — 77th Congress).\n\nCONDITIONS UNDER WHICH APPOINTMENT WOULD NOT BE EFFECTED:\n1. Physical disqualification.\n2. Withheld by commanding officer.\n3. Declined\n4. (a) Under treatment in hospital;\n(b) On sick leave;\n(c) Missing;\n(d) Prisoner of war.\n\nNOTE: The effectiveness of this appointment must be verified by other correspondence in the officer's correspondence jacket unless notation appears hereon indicating appointment not effected.\n\nFINISHED FILE\nOFFICER PROMOTION\nSECTION\n\nSTATEMENT OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":432,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3 April 1946 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT\n\nFrom: Lieutenant Delbert C. Newhouse, USN 177283\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: Supply Officer in Command, Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Phila., Pa.\n\n1. I acknowledge receipt of appointment to the rank of Lieutenant USN in the Navy, ([REDACTED]) for temporary service made by the President on 1 April 1946.\n\n2. Notice of this temporary appointment was made by my reporting senior pursuant to the authority contained in (Alnav No. 150-46 [REDACTED] [REDACTED] ). By BuPers file number is 177283.\n\n3. This temporary appointment has not and will not be declined by me.\n\n4. Two (2) certified copies of this letter are being furnished by me to the Disbursing Officer carrying my accounts.\n\n5. I certify that my appointment to the rank of Lieutenant USN has not been previously withheld for any reason.\n\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\n\n3 April 1946 FIRST ENDORSEMENT\n\nFrom: The Supply Officer in Command, Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Phila.\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\n1. Forwarded.\n\nBy direction of SOinC:\n\nMilitary Personnel Officer\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 32152"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":433,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Forward part below to BuPers - ORIGINAL ONLY)\n\nACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT.\nDate 5 SEP 1944\n\nFrom: Lieut. (jg) Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, USN\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\nVia: The Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Air Station, Coco Solo, C.Z.\n\n1. I acknowledge receipt of notice of appointment to the rank of Lieutenant (jg) in the Navy, ([REDACTED]) for temporary service made by the President on 1 September, 19 44.\n\n2. Notice of this temporary appointment was made by my reporting senior pursuant to the authority contained in (Alnav No. 169 [REDACTED] ). My BuPers file number is 177283.\n\n3. This temporary appointment has not and will not be declined by me.\n\n4. Two (2) certified copies of this letter are being furnished by me to the Disbursing Officer carrying my accounts.\n\n5. I certify that the appointment to the above rank has not been previously withheld for any reason.\n\nDELBERT CLEMENT NEWHOUSE\n\nFirst Endorsement\n\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION COCO SOLO, CANAL ZONE\n5 SEP 1944\n\nFrom: The Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Air Station, Coco Solo, C.Z.\nTo: The Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\n1. Forwarded.\n(Following paragraph to be completed only when appropriate).\n\n2. Reported for duty on ______ 19 ____ (or to be for assignment to duty by the Chief of Naval Personnel).\n\ncc: Two-Disbursing Officer Carrying accounts.\nOne-Officers file jacket.\nOne-Officer concerned.\nOne-ComI5\n\nTHOMAS DUFFEE\n\nNOTED PERS 32152\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 8255\n\n6655"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":434,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-1782(3-44)\nSTATEMENT OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT\n\nOFFICER FILE ENLISTED FILE REGISTERED NO. 861\nNAME APPOINTED TO\nDelbert C. Newhouse 177283 LT.(jg)\nDATE OF APPOINTMENT DATE OF RANK CIRCULAR LETTER ALNAV NUMBER DATED\n1 Sept.'44 1 Sept.'44 169 1 Sept.'44\n\nSubject to the conditions stated below, the above individual was appointed by the President to the rank indicated above, for temporary service.\n\nIn the event all stated conditions be met, the appointment (unless expressly declined) is to be regarded for all purposes as having been accepted on the date made, without formal acceptance or oath of office, as provided in Section 5 of an Act of Congress approved June 30, 1942, (Public No. 639 - 77th Congress).\n\nCONDITIONS NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATION OF APPOINTMENT:\n1. Physical qualification.\n2. Delivery of appointment by commanding officer.\n3. Not declined.\n4. Not: (a) under treatment in hospital;\n(b) on sick leave;\n(c) missing;\n(d) prisoner of war.\n\nNOTE: The effectiveness of this appointment must be verified by other correspondence in the officer's correspondence jacket unless notation appears hereon indicating appointment not effected.\n\nFinished File Pers-32152\n\nA32034 STATEMENT OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":435,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-1782(3-44)\nSTATEMENT OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT\n\nOFFICER FILE ENLISTED FILE REGISTERED NO. 861\nNAME APPOINTED TO\nDelbert C. Newhouse 177283 LT.(jg)\nDATE OF APPOINTMENT DATE OF RANK CIRCULAR LETTER ALNAV NUMBER DATED\n1 Sept.'44 1 Sept.'44 169 1 Sept.'44\n\nSubject to the conditions stated below, the above individual was appointed by the President to the rank indicated above, for temporary service.\n\nIn the event all stated conditions be met, the appointment (unless expressly declined) is to be regarded for all purposes as having been accepted on the date made, without formal acceptance or oath of office, as provided in Section 5 of an Act of Congress approved June 30, 1942, (Public No. 639 - 77th Congress).\n\nCONDITIONS NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATION OF APPOINTMENT:\n1. Physical qualification.\n2. Delivery of appointment by commanding officer.\n3. Not declined.\n4. Not: (a) under treatment in hospital;\n(b) on sick leave;\n(c) missing;\n(d) prisoner of war.\n\nNOTE: The effectiveness of this appointment must be verified by other correspondence in the officer's correspondence jacket unless notation appears hereon indicating appointment not effected.\n\nFinished File Pers-32152\n\nA32034 STATEMENT OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":436,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NA10/P17-2/00\n\n177283\n\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nCoco Solo, Upham, C.Z.\nNavy 1955\nc/o Fleet Post Office\nNew York, N.Y.\n6 July 1943\n\nFrom:\tEnsign Delbert C. Newhouse, U. S. Navy.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\nVia:\tThe Commanding Officer.\n\nSubject:\tAcknowledgement of notice of Temporary Appointment.\n\n1.\tI hereby acknowledge receipt of notice of my appointment to the rank of Ensign in the regular Navy, for temporary service made by the President on 15 June 1943.\n\n2.\tNotice of this temporary appointment was made by my Commanding Officer pursuant to the authority contained in BuPers C/L 96-43.\n\n3.\tThis temporary appointment has not and will not be declined by me.\n\n4.\tTwo (2) certified copies of this letter are being furnished by me to the Disbursing Officer carrying my accounts in order that my pay may be adjusted accordingly.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n\nNA10/P17-2/00\tFIRST ENDORSEMENT\tU. S. Naval Air Station, Coco Solo, Upham, C. Z. Navy 1955 c/o Fleet Post Office, New York, N.Y.\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\n1.\tForwarded.\n\nR. P. KAUFFMAN\nR. P. KAUFFMAN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":437,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-1782\nSTATEMENT OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT\n\nOFFICER FILE\tENLISTED FILE\tREGISTERED NO. 133\n\nNAME\tAppointed to\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert C.\t177283\tEnsign USN\nDATE OF APPOINTMENT\tDATE OF RANK\tCIRCULAR LETTER\tALNAV\tNUMBER\tDATED\n15JUN'43\t15JUN'43\t\t\t96-43\t15JUN'43\n\nSubject to the conditions stated below, the above individual was appointed by the President to the rank indicated above, for temporary service.\n\nIn the event all stated conditions be met, the appointment (unless expressly declined) is to be regarded for all purposes as having been accepted on the date made, without formal acceptance or oath of office, as provided in Section 5 of an Act of Congress approved June 30, 1942, (Public No. 639 - 77th Congress).\n\nCONDITIONS NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATION OF APPOINTMENT:\n1. Physical qualification.\n2. Delivery of appointment by commanding officer.\n3. Not declined.\n4. Not: (a) under treatment in hospital; (b) on sick leave; (c) missing; (d) prisoner of war.\n\nTHE EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS APPOINTMENT MUST BE VERIFIED BY OTHER CORRESPONDENCE IN THE OFFICER'S CORRESPONDENCE JACKET UNLESS NOTATION APPEARS HEREON INDICATING APPOINTMENT NOT EFFECTED.\n\nFINISHED FILE PERS 326\nSTATEMENT OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":438,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. NAVAL BASE\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador\nOctober 15, 1942\n\nFrom:\tPhotographer Delbert C. Newhouse, USN\nTo:\tThe Bureau of Naval Personnel.\n\nSubject:\tAcceptance of Appointment to the Rank of Photographer, USN for Temporary Service.\n\nReference:\t(a) Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Base Santa Elena Bay, Ecuador letter of October 15, 1942.\n(b) BuNavPers. C/L No 127-42 of September 1, 1942\n\n1.\tBy reference (a) I was informed by my Commanding Officer that I had been appointed by the President of the United States on September 1, 1942 to the rank of Photographer, USN for temporary service to rank from June 15, 1942, in accordance with reference (b).\n\n2.\tI have this date accepted this appointment.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT to Photographer D.C. Newhouse, USN to BuPers of October 15, 1942\nU. S. NAVAL BASE Santa Elena Bay, Ecuador October 15, 1942\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\n1.\tForwarded.\n\nJ. R. LITCHFIELD\n\nFinished - File Registrar (Directory)\nFinished - File Registrar (Appointments)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":439,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. NAVAL BASE\nSanta Elena Bay, Ecuador\nOctober 15, 1942\n\nFrom:\tPhotographer Delbert C. Newhouse, USN\nTo:\tThe Bureau of Naval Personnel.\n\nSubject:\tAcceptance of Appointment to the Rank of Photographer, USN for Temporary Service.\n\nReference:\t(a) Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Base Santa Elena Bay, Ecuador letter of October 15, 1942.\n(b) BuNavPers. C/L No 127-42 of September 1, 1942\n\n1.\tBy reference (a) I was informed by my Commanding Officer that I had been appointed by the President of the United States on September 1, 1942 to the rank of Photographer, USN for temporary service to rank from June 15, 1942, in accordance with reference (b).\n\n2.\tI have this date accepted this appointment.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT to Photographer D.C. Newhouse, USN to BuPers of October 15, 1942\nU. S. NAVAL BASE Santa Elena Bay, Ecuador October 15, 1942\n\nFrom:\tThe Commanding Officer.\nTo:\tThe Chief of Naval Personnel.\n\n1.\tForwarded.\n\nJ. R. LITCHFIELD\n\nFinished - File Registrar (Directory)\nFinished - File Registrar (Appointments)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":440,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ELECTION OF OPTIONS UNDER THE UNIFORMED SERVICES CONTINGENCY OPTION ACT OF 1953\nNAVPERS 591 (NEW 9/53)\nS-3\n\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle)\tSERVICE NUMBER\tRANK OR RATING\tUSN\tUSNR\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\t177283\tCHPHOT\tX\n\nPERMANENT ADDRESS\nc/o Mrs. Vencl Richter Garibaldi, Oregon\n\nSTATUS: REGULAR X; RESERVE: ACTIVE DUTY, INACTIVE DUTY\nNO. YEARS SERVICE COMPLETED FOR PAY PURPOSES 24\nMEMBER'S BIRTHDATE 6/5/13\n\nX I DO NOT DESIRE TO RECEIVE REDUCED RETIRED PAY IN ORDER TO PROVIDE AN ANNUITY FOR MY DEPENDENTS.\n\nI ELECT THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS: (NOTE: YOU MAY SELECT OPTION 1 OR 2 OR 3 AND YOU MAY COMBINE OPTION 4 WITH THE ONE SELECTED, OR YOU MAY SELECT OPTIONS 1 AND 2 AND YOU MAY COMBINE OPTION 4 WITH EITHER OR BOTH. HOWEVER, THE COMBINED TOTAL OF OPTIONS ELECTED CANNOT EXCEED 50% OF REDUCED RETIRED PAY.)\n\nOPTION 1 [ ] 1/8 [ ] 1/4 [ ] 1/2 OF MY REDUCED RETIRED PAY PAYABLE TO OR ON BEHALF OF MY WIDOW UNTIL HER REMARRIAGE OR DEATH.\n\nOPTION 2 [ ] 1/8 [ ] 1/4 [ ] 1/2 OF MY REDUCED RETIRED PAY PAYABLE TO OR ON BEHALF OF MY SURVIVING CHILD OR CHILDREN UNMARRIED AND UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE AND SURVIVING CHILD OR CHILDREN UNMARRIED AND OVER 18 YEARS OF AGE INCAPABLE OF SELF SUPPORT BECAUSE OF BEING MENTALLY OR PHYSICALLY INCAPACITATED.\n\nOPTION 3 [ ] 1/8 [ ] 1/4 [ ] 1/2 OF MY REDUCED RETIRED PAY PAYABLE TO OR ON BEHALF (A) OF MY SURVIVING WIDOW UNTIL HER REMARRIAGE OR DEATH AND (B) THEREAFTER TO MY SURVIVING CHILD OR CHILDREN UNMARRIED AND UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE AND SURVIVING CHILDREN OVER 18 YEARS OF AGE AND INCAPABLE OF SELF SUPPORT BECAUSE OF BEING MENTALLY OR PHYSICALLY INCAPACITATED.\n\nOPTION 4 NO FURTHER DEDUCTIONS SHALL BE MADE FROM MY RETIRED PAY COMMENCING WITH THE FIRST DAY OF THE MONTH FOLLOWING THAT IN WHICH THERE IS NO BENEFICIARY ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE AN ANNUITY UPON MY DEATH. I DESIRE THIS OPTION TO BE COMBINED WITH OPTION NUMBER(S)____CHECKED ABOVE. (insert numbers)\n\nIMPORTANT: If any of the above options is elected the following information must be furnished:\nFULL NAME OF SPOUSE\tDATE OF BIRTH OF SPOUSE\nFULL NAME OF WIFE PRIOR TO MARRIAGE\nPLACE OF MARRIAGE (City) (County) (State)\tDATE OF MARRIAGE\nHAVE YOU BEEN PREVIOUSLY MARRIED? YES NO\nHAS YOUR SPOUSE BEEN PREVIOUSLY MARRIED? YES NO\n\nIMPORTANT: If either option 2 or 3 is included in your election, furnish required information below concerning legitimate child or children:\nNAME OF EACH CHILD\tDATE OF BIRTH\tINDICATE IF STEPCHILD OR ADOPTED CHILD\n\nI understand that during any period subsequent to my transfer to Fleet Reserve or retirement in which I am not receiving retired or retainer pay, I shall be required to deposit with the United States Treasury the amount that would have been withheld from my retired pay under the Options elected had I been receiving such retired pay, and if I fail to make such deposit I consent to checkage of such undeposited amounts, plus accrued interest upon being restored to a pay status; and that if I do not combine option 4 with the option selected, deductions will be made from my retired pay despite the fact that all beneficiaries predecease me or become ineligible for annuity benefits; and that in the case of retired members, election of any of the options provided is irrevocable. I certify the above information to be complete and accurate.\n\nSignature (Sign original and all copies)\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this 1st day of March 1954\nSignature and Title of Attesting Officer or Notary\n\nFinished File Pers E-241\nNOTED TABULATED RECORDS\n\nG. P. O.: 1953-273402 FOR DISTRIBUTION INSTRUCTION SEE NO. 7 ON REVERSE (ORIGINAL)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":441,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INFORMATION AND INSTRUCTIONS CONCERNING THIS ELECTION FORM\n(For Nonretired members)\n\n1. It is desired that all members with 17 years service creditable for basic pay purposes, active or inactive, either decline or elect to provide certain annuities for their dependents under the provisions of the Uniformed Services Contingency Option Act of 1953 (Public Law 239-83rd. Congress). If you desire to receive a reduction in the retired pay which you may subsequently receive, thereby providing an annuity for your dependents, you must elect the desired option(s) not later than 30 April 1954 or prior to completion of 18 years service creditable for basic pay purposes, whichever is later. The terms of the election may be modified or revoked prior to retirement, but any modification or revocation will not be effective if you retire within five years from the date of such modification or revocation.\n\n2. If you do not desire to receive reduced retired pay to provide an annuity for your dependents, check the square opposite \"I do not desire to receive reduced retired pay in order to provide an annuity for my dependents\" on the face of this form, sign all copies of the form and return it to the Bureau of Naval Personnel, Washington 25, D. C. You may subsequently elect to be covered by this Act, provided you submit such election to the Bureau of Naval Personnel, Washington 25, D. C., not later than 30 April 1954 or prior to completion of 18 years service creditable for basic pay purposes, whichever is later.\n\n3. If you desire to receive reduced retired pay to provide an annuity for your dependents, fill out the form completely checking desired option(s) ; all copies must be signed and notorized or attested.\n\n4. If either Option 2 or 3 is elected, it is required that all eligible children be named.\n\n5. If should be noted that, under Option 3, all benefits are paid to the widow until her death or remarriage and thereafter in equal shares to or on behalf of the surviving children remaining eligible at the time the payment is due. Consequently, if it is desired that children of a former marriage receive payments concurrently with the widow, Options 1 and 2 should be elected.\n\n6. In indicating the place of dissolution of a former marriage, please include the city, county and state.\n\n7. The triplicate of this form is to be retained by you for your personal file. For active duty personnel, the original will be forwarded to the Bureau of Naval Personnel, Washington 25, D. C., and the duplicate is to be filed in your personnel jacket at your station of duty. For members in the reserve components, the original and duplicate will be forwarded to the Bureau of Naval Personnel, Washington 25, D. C."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":442,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VETERANS ADMINISTRATION REQUEST FOR INFORMATION\n2. SEPARATION FORMS ON FILE: YES / NO (X)\n3. DATA REQUESTED: SERVICE (X) MEDICAL (X) DENTAL OTHER\n1. TYPE OF CLAIM: Original\n4. TO: ARMY, NAVY (X), AIR FORCE, MARINE CORPS, COAST GUARD, NATIONAL GUARD (Army), NATIONAL GUARD (Air), OTHER (Specify)\n5A. NAME AND ADDRESS OF VA REQUESTING OFFICE: VARO 1380 S. Sepulveda Blvd Los Angeles, Calif 90073\n5B. ORIGINATING UNIT: 3044/211\n6. CLAIM NO. C- 22312461\n7. INSURANCE NO.\n8. LAST NAME - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE INITIAL: NEWHOUSE, DELBERT CLEMENT\n9. ALL SERVICE NOS.: 393 07 21\n10. DATE OF BIRTH: 6/5/13\n11. PLACE OF BIRTH: Marcola, Oregon\n12. DATE OF DEATH\n13. DATE ENTERED ACTIVE DUTY: A. 1/2/33\n14. DATE SEPARATED FROM ACTIVE DUTY: 3/21/60\n15. CHARACTER OF SEPARATION OR DISCHARGE: Unk\n16. LAST GRADE, RATE OR RANK, AND ORGANIZATION: Lt\n17. ALLEGED DISEASE OR INJURY: A. Arthritis B. Arthritis\n18. DATES OF TREATMENT: 1957; 1961-1964\n19. PLACES OF TREATMENT: Navy Hosp - N.A.S. Barbers Point; Navy U.S. - San Diego Calif\n20. ORGANIZATION AT TIME DISEASE OR INJURY WAS INCURRED\n21. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED\n[handwritten note, partly illegible]\n22. DATE: 9/24/64\n23. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF VA OFFICIAL: F. B. WILLIAMS, Adjn MH Officer RR:GD\nENDORSEMENT - VERIFICATION BY SERVICE DEPARTMENT (Check applicable box(es))\nAVAILABLE REQUESTED RECORDS FORWARDED; ITEMS 8 & 9, AND 12 THROUGH 15 VERIFIED CORRECT; ITEMS 8 & 9, AND 12 THROUGH 15 VERIFIED CORRECT, EXCEPT (X)\nVia: BUMED\nOfficer No. 177283\n13A. 1-24-33 15C. Hon\nB. 1-24-39 D. Hon\nC. 8-1-42 16. CWO, W-4\nD. 6-17-43\n14A. 1-23-39\nB. 8-31-42\nC. 6-14-48\nD. 3-31-60\n15A. Hon\nB. Hon\nPers E24-RAD-cjb\nSubject officer was eligible for complete separation on 23 Jan 1939\nVeteran has 90 days or more active service, exclusive of furlough and/or other non-creditable time.\nNO. OF ENCLOSURES: HEALTH RECORDS; PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS AT ENTRANCE; PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS AT SEPARATION\nNO. ENCLS. (Cont.): CLINICAL RECORDS; X-RAYS; DENTAL RECORDS; MEDICAL RECORDS; OTHER RECORDS\nSERVICE INFORMATION DATE 10/20/64 SIGNATURE AND TITLE H. F. OTT, Head, Disp. Sec. Corresp. & Serv. Br.\nMEDICAL RECORDS DATE SIGNATURE AND TITLE\nV A FORM 3101 JULY 1957. SUPERSEDES VA FORM 3101, NOV. 1945; VA FORM 3101-1, NOV 1945; AND VA FORM 3102, JAN 1946; WHICH WILL NOT BE USED.\n4\nFinished File Pers E243"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":443,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORD OF EMERGENCY DATA\nSEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE BEFORE MAKING ENTRIES\nC-1\n1. DESIGNATOR'S LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME: NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n2. PRESENT SERVICE NO.: 177283\n3. RANK/RATE: CHPHOT W-4\n4. DATE OF BIRTH: 6/5/13\n5. RELIGION: Prot.\n6. HOME ADDRESS AT TIME OF ENTRY INTO SERVICE: P.O. Box 127 c/o Mrs. Vencl Richter Garibaldi, Oregon\n7. PRIOR MIL. SERVICE: YES (X) NO\n8. FORMER SERVICE NO.: 393 07 21\n9. SOCIAL SECURITY NO.: 540-46-3224\n10. WIFE OR HUSBAND: Norma Isobel NEWHOUSE — 652 Burnham St., El Cajon, California\n11. NAME OF CHILDREN: Delbert Carroll NEWHOUSE — 330 Roosevelt Ave., Chula Vista; MARRIED YES (X), SEX M, DATE OF BIRTH 6/28/38; Anne Lisbet FORSGREN — P.O.Box 63, Imperial Beach Calif.; MARRIED YES (X), SEX F, DATE OF BIRTH 3/14/40\n12. FATHER: Noah Frank Newhouse — Tacoma, Washington\n13. MOTHER: Edith May (newhouse) Richter — P.O. Box 127, Garibaldi, Oregon\n14. ADULT NEXT OF KIN NOT NAMED IN ANY OTHER ITEM: Darrel Edwin Newhouse — 304 Labor Temple, Tacoma 3, Washington\n14a. ALL PERSONS RECEIVING MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THEIR SUPPORT FROM ME: Florence Estelle Strom — 4619 N. Michigan Avenue Portland, Oregon — Mother-in-Law — 5/4/81\n15. PERSON(S) NAMED ABOVE WHO ARE NOT TO BE NOTIFIED DUE TO ILL HEALTH: None\nDESIGNATIONS\n16. BENEFICIARY FOR GRATUITY PAY IN EVENT THERE IS NO SURVIVING SPOUSE OR ELIGIBLE CHILDREN: Edith May Richter, P.O. Box 127 Garibaldi, Oregon, Mother; Darrel Edwin Newhouse, 304 Labor Temple Tacoma 3, Washington, Brother; Noah Frank Newhouse, Tacoma, Washington, Father\n17. BENEFICIARY OR BENEFICIARIES FOR UNPAID PAY AND ALLOWANCES: 100% Norma Isobel Newhouse, 652 Burnham St., El Cajon, California, Wife\n18. PERSON TO RECEIVE ALLOTMENT OF PAY IF MISSING OR UNABLE TO TRANSMIT FUNDS: 100% Norma Isobel Newhouse, 652 Burnham St., El Cajon, California, Wife\n19. INSURANCE POLICIES IN FORCE: National Service Life Insurance — Veterans' Administration, Munitions Building, Washington 25, D.C. — V774432; Government Life Insurance — K948857\n20. SERVICE ORGANIZATION AND ADDRESS OF DESIGNATOR: Pacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group, at San Diego California; DATE SIGNED 24 August 1959\n21. SIGNATURE OF WITNESS: C. F. REINHOLZ, LTJG, USNR\n22. SIGNATURE OF DESIGNATOR\nDD FORM 93-1, 1 Dec 56. Previous Editions are obsolete. For Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard use: Will be used in lieu of DD Form 93."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":444,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS\n(Items for which no instructions are printed below are self-explanatory)\n\nIf Necessary, Continue Any Item in \"Remarks\" But Specify the Particular Item Being Continued.\n\nAll items of this form Must be completed and Maintained Current by all officers and enlisted personnel in accordance with the following: NAVY-BuPers Manual, Art. B2312; MARINE CORPS-Par. 4019, PRAM; U. S. COAST GUARD-Personnel Manual, Par. 13-B-14.\n\nIn the event you, the designator, should die, the persons or agencies named in items 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 19 will be notified unless item 15 shall indicate a person or persons Not to be notified.\n\nShould you become critically or seriously ill, or incapacitated to the extent that you cannot notify them, the persons named in items 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 will be notified unless item 15 shall indicate a person or persons Not to be notified.\n\nPayment of any benefits and disposition of remains in case of death shall be in accordance with applicable law.\n\nItem 10.—Enter full name and address of wife or husband. For wife, use given names, for example, \"Marion Elizabeth Dawson.\" If the designator is single, divorced, or widowed, so state.\n\nItems 12 and 13.—The term \"Father\" and/or \"Mother\" shall be interpreted to include \"natural,\" \"step,\" \"adoptive\" and person who stood in \"loco parentis\" to the designator for a period of not less than 1 year at any time prior to designator's entry upon active service.\n\nItem 14.—In the event that there is no other adult next of kin other than those named in items 10, 12 and 14, you may name a friend here. However, if a friend is named, he or she must be so identified.\n\nItem 14a.—Enter under this item, the names of those persons who are in fact actually receiving more than 50 percent of their support from the designator. The information thus furnished shall be used in connection with other determinations of dependency under existing or future laws.\n\nItem 16.—Enter the name, address, and relationship of beneficiary (or beneficiaries) whom you desire to receive the 6 months' death gratuity in the event you are not survived by a spouse or eligible child(ren). The succession of eligible survivor's as set forth in the \"Servicemen's and Veterans' Survivor Benefits Act,\" P. L. 881-84th Congress, is as follows: (1) Spouse; (2) Children (without regard to their age or marital status) in equal shares; (3) Parents or brothers or sisters (including those of halfblood and those by adoption), when so designated; (4) Parents in equal shares; or (5) Brothers and sisters (including those of halfblood or those by adoption) in equal shares.\n\nNOTE: The payment to either category (4) or (5) is in the event that a designation is not made under category (3). The term \"parents\" includes \"natural parents,\" \"stepparents,\" \"adoptive parents\" and persons who stood in \"loco parentis\" to the designator for a period of not less than 1 year at any time prior to the designator's entry upon active service.\n\nItem 17.—Enter name and address of the beneficiary or beneficiaries whom you desire to receive any unpaid pay and allowances (Arrears of Pay) due you at the time of death. There are no restrictions on who may be designated as a beneficiary or beneficiaries to receive unpaid pay and allowances and once a designation has been made it is binding until superseded by the completion of a later DD Form 93-1.\n\nItem 18.—The \"Missing Persons Act\" provides that pay and allowances continue to accrue to the pay account of any service member for the period he is missing or captured and may be paid to the dependents for support. This item reflects your desires and is used as a guide in the disposition of your pay. Allotments to dependents and insurance companies initiated prior to entering a missing status are continued in effect unless unusual circumstances indicate changes.\n\nItem 21.—The person assigned, by the commanding officer, the responsibility for interviewing the designator will, upon completion of the form, witness the designator's signature and sign in block 21.\n\nDISPOSITION INSTRUCTIONS\nU. S. NAVY: Original to BuPers, Washington 25, D. C. Duplicate—File in Service Record at duty station. See BuPers Instruction 1085.25 of 27 May 1953.\nU. S. MARINE CORPS: See Par. 4019, PRAM.\nU. S. COAST GUARD: See Personnel Manual, Par. 13-B-14.\n\nEntry of other useful information in connection with emergency data such as location of will, safety deposit boxes, etc., if applicable, should be made under \"Remarks.\"\n\nREMARKS:\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1957 O-F-411267"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":445,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"C-1\nBlbcl FCT\nPers-Blbc-ljs 177283/8311 Blbc B 7 April 1959\nBl15 H&R; Blba\nBl (circled)\nBlbc FCT\n1623\n\nMy dear Senator Morse:\n\nThis is in further reply to your inquiry of 31 March 1959 concerning Chief Warrant Officer Delbert C. Newhouse, United States Navy.\n\nPresent plans are to detach Mr. Newhouse from the USS ESSEX (CVA-9) in July of this year and to transfer him to the Fleet Camera Party, Pacific at San Diego, California. Earlier detachment of Mr. Newhouse is not feasible due to the unavailability of a qualified replacement officer.\n\nYour interest in this matter is appreciated, and it is hoped that the foregoing information may be of service to you.\n\nBy direction of Chief of Naval Personnel:\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nF. J. Brush\nCaptain, USN\nDirector,\nOfficer Distribution Division\n\nHonorable Wayne Morse\nUnited States Senate\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nEncl: (1) Ltr. fm Mrs. D. C. Newhouse dtd 17 March 1959.\n\nOriginated by: LCDR F. C. Turner, USN Pers Blbcl, x42075\n\nCopy to:\nPers Blbc\nPers Bl15\nNaval Liaison Office\nJacket\n\nFinished File Pers Blbc"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":446,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL LIAISON OFFICE TO THE CONGRESS\nROOM 313B OLD HOUSE OFFICE BLDG.\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nBlbc\n\n2 April 1959\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nATTENTION:\n\nSUBJECT: NEWHOUSE, Delbert C., CWO, USN; request for duty on the West Coast for last year in service\n(NOTE DATE OF SHIPS CRUISE)\n\n1. The attached correspondence has been referred to this office by\nSenator Wayne Morse of Oregon.\n2. It is requested that your office reply in duplicate direct to the\nSenator , and return to him all enclosures except his letter, if any.\nPlease furnish this office with a copy of your reply.\n3. The Senator has been advised of this referral to the NAVY\nDEPARTMENT.\n\nRespectfully yours,\n\nE. J. NEWBOULD\nCommander, USN\n\nEncl: 1. Trans chit dtd 31 Mar 59\n2. Ltr fm Mrs. Delbert C. Newhouse dtd 17 Mar 59\n3.\nmlk\n\n3454\nRECEIVED APR 2 59 BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nE-29424"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":447,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"United States Senate\n\nMarch 31, 1959\n\nRespectfully referred to\n\nCommander E. J. Newbould\nNavy Liaison Office\n\nwith thanks for such favorable consideration as the communication herewith submitted warrants, and for a report thereon, in duplicate to accompany return of inclosure.\n\nBy direction of\n\nWayne Morse\nU. S. S.\n\nEncl. re CWO D. C. Newhouse - who would like to be stationed on West Coast for last year of duty. Newhouse's ship scheduled to leave April 15, so early consideration would be appreciated."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":448,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"C-1\n\nSHIP OR STATION\nU.S.S. ESSEX (CVA-9)\n\nImperium Neptuni Regis\n\nGibraltar 12 Feb. 1958\nSuez Canal 28 Aug. 1958\n\n19 November, 1958\n\nThe U.S.S. ESSEX (CVA-9) bound South on a return voyage from Formosa to Mayport, Florida, via the Cape of Good Hope and southern latitudes; therefore, be it remembered that said vessel, and officers, and crew, have been inspected and passed on by his Imperial Majesty, Neptunus Rex and his Royal Staff and each found worthy to be membered as a trusty Shellback and having been duly initiated into the Ancient Order of the Deep.\n\nAlso be it known that said man participated in operations off the coast of Lebanon from 15 July to 21 August, 1958 while providing air coverage for United States troops landed to maintain order by request of the Lebanese Government.\n\nTo Formosa\n\nQualified Shellback 15 Oct., 1958\n\nE.C. MONAGHAN\nCHSHIPCLK, USN\nOfficer Personnel Officer\n\nRio De Janeiro\nFrom Formosa\n\nCape of Good Hope 25 Oct., 1958\n\nNAME (Last, first, middle)\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert C.\nRATE CWO SERVICE NO. 177283 BRANCH AND CLASS USN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":449,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pers-E24-TLB:ems\n177283/8311\n25 Nov 1957\n\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\nVia: Commanding Officer\nNaval Air Technical Training Unit\nU. S. Naval Air Station\nPensacola, Florida\n\nSubj: Home of Record; change of\n\nRef: (a) Your ltr of 12 Nov 1957 with CO'S end NC/Pnola/(mag) Pl of 14 Nov 1957\n\n1. As requested by reference (a), the records of this Bureau have been changed to show your home of record to be Garibaldi, Oregon, effective this date.\n\nV. E. ARMSTRONG\nBy direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":450,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3-14\n177283/8311\n12 November 1957\n\nRECD PERS E241\nNOV 1957\n\nFrom: CWO, W-4, Delbert Clement NEWHOUSE, USN\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: Commanding Officer, Naval Air Technical Training Unit, Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida\n\nSubj: Change of home of record; notification of\n\nRef: (a) Article B-2206, BuPers Manual\n\n1. This change of address is submitted as authorized in paragraph (2) of reference (a).\n\n2. My home of record is changed as follows:\n\nFrom: 208 Bryant Road, Navy Point\nPensacola, Florida\n\nTo: c/o Mrs. Vinel Richter\nGaribaldi, Oregon\n\n3. It is requested that the records of the Bureau be changed accordingly.\n\nDELBERT CLEMENT NEWHOUSE\nNC/Pnola/(mag)\nPl\n\n14 NOV 1957\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, Naval Air Technical Training Unit, Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\n1. Forwarded.\n\nJ. B. DOSTER\nBy direction\n\nFinished File Pers-E24s"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":451,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORD OF EMERGENCY DATA\nSEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE BEFORE MAKING ENTRIES\n1. DESIGNATOR'S LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME\n2. PRESENT SERVICE NO.\n3. RANK/RATE\n4. DATE OF BIRTH\n5. RELIGION\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement\n177283\nCHPHOT(W4)\n6/5/13\nProt.\n6. HOME ADDRESS AT TIME OF ENTRY INTO SERVICE\n7. PRIOR MIL. SERVICE\n8. FORMER SERVICE NO.\nP.O. Box 127 c/o Mrs. Vencl Richter Garibaldi, Oregon\nYES NO\n393 07 21\n(DATE LAST ENTRY)\n9. SOCIAL SECURITY NO.\n540-46-3224\nFIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME—LAST NAME (If deceased, so state)\nADDRESS\n10. WIFE OR HUSBAND (If none, so state)\nNorma Isobel NEWHOUSE\n208 Bryant Road, NP, Pensacola, Florida\n11. NAME OF CHILDREN (If none, so state. If step or adopted, so state)\nADDRESS\nMARRIED\nSEX\nDATE OF BIRTH\nYES NO\nDelbert Carroll NEWHOUSE\nSame as Block #10\nx M 6/28/38\nAnne Lisbet NEWHOUSE\nx F 3/14/40\n12. FATHER\nADDRESS\nNoah Frank NEWHOUSE\n? Tacoma, Washington\n13. MOTHER\nADDRESS\nEdith May (Newhouse) RICHTER\nP.O. BOX 127, Garibaldi, Oregon\n14. ADULT NEXT OF KIN NOT NAMED IN ANY OTHER ITEM\nADDRESS\nDarrel Edwin NEWHOUSE\n304 Labor Temple, Tacoma 3, Washington\n14a. ALL PERSONS RECEIVING MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THEIR SUPPORT FROM ME (OTHER THAN WIFE OR CHILDREN UNDER 21)\nADDRESS\nRELATIONSHIP\nDATE OF BIRTH\nFlorence Estelle STROM\nPortland, Oregon 4619 N. Michigan Avenue/\nMother in Law\n5/4/81\n15. PERSON(S) NAMED ABOVE WHO ARE NOT TO BE NOTIFIED DUE TO ILL HEALTH\nADDRESS\nNone\nDESIGNATIONS\n16. BENEFICIARY FOR GRATUITY PAY IN EVENT THERE IS NO SURVIVING SPOUSE OR ELIGIBLE CHILD(REN). NAME PARENTS OR BROTHERS OR SISTERS ONLY (P.L. 881 84th Congress)\nFIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME—LAST NAME\nADDRESS\nRELATIONSHIP\nEdith May RICHTER\nP.O. Box 127 Garibaldi, Oregon\nMother\nDarrel Edwin NEWHOUSE\n304 Labor Temple Tacoma, Washington\nBrother\nNoah Frank NEWHOUSE\nTacoma, Washington\nFather\n17. BENEFICIARY OR BENEFICIARIES FOR UNPAID PAY AND ALLOWANCES (P.L. 147, 84th Congress). PERCENT OF SHARES MUST TOTAL 100 PERCENT.\n100 %\nNorma Isobel NEWHOUSE\nSame as Block #10\nWife\n%\n18. PERSON TO RECEIVE ALLOTMENT OF PAY IF MISSING OR UNABLE TO TRANSMIT FUNDS.\nPERCENT OF PAY EACH MO.\n100\nNorma Isobel NEWHOUSE\nSame as Block #10\nWife\n19. INSURANCE POLICIES IN FORCE INCLUDING USGLI AND NSLI\nFULL NAME AND ADDRESS OF COMPANY\nADDRESS OF OFFICE RECEIVING PAYMENT OR HOME OFFICE\nPOLICY NO.\nNational Service Life Insurance\nVeterans' Administration,\nV774432\nGovernment Life Insurance\nMunitions Building, Washington 25, D.C.\nK948857\n20. SERVICE ORGANIZATION AND ADDRESS OF DESIGNATOR\nDATE SIGNED\nNaval Air Technical Training Unit, NAS, Pensacola, Florida\n19 Aug 1957\n21. SIGNATURE OF WITNESS\n22. SIGNATURE OF DESIGNATOR\nMrs. Mabel M. Kirkland\nDD FORM 93-1 1 Dec 56\nPrevious Editions are obsolete.\nFor Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard use: Will be used in lieu of DD Form 93."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":452,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS\n(Items for which no instructions are printed below are self-explanatory.)\nIf Necessary, Continue Any Item in \"Remarks\" But Specify the Particular Item Being Continued.\nAll items of this form Must be completed and Maintained Current by all officers and enlisted personnel in accordance with the following: NAVY-BuPers Manual, Art. B2312; MARINE CORPS-Par. 4019, PRAM; U. S. COAST GUARD-Personnel Manual, Par. 13-B-14.\nIn the event you, the designator, should die, the persons or agencies named in items 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 19 will be notified unless item 15 shall indicate a person or persons Not to be notified.\nShould you become critically or seriously ill, or incapacitated to the extent that you cannot notify them, the persons named in items 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 will be notified unless item 15 shall indicate a person or persons Not to be notified.\nPayment of any benefits and disposition of remains in case of death shall be in accordance with applicable law.\nItem 10.—Enter full name and address of wife or husband. For wife, use given names, for example, \"Marion Elizabeth Dawson.\" If the designator is single, divorced or widowed, so state.\nItems 12 and 13.—The term \"Father\" and/or \"Mother\" shall be interpreted to include \"natural,\" \"step,\" \"adoptive\" and person who stood in \"loco parentis\" to the designator for a period of not less than 1 year at any time prior to designator's entry upon active service.\nItem 14.—In the event that there is no other adult next of kin other than those named in items 10, 12 and 14, you may name a friend here. However, if a friend is named, he or she must be so identified.\nItem 14a.—Enter under this item, the names of those persons who are in fact actually receiving more than 50 percent of their support from the designator. The information thus furnished shall be used in connection with other determinations of dependency under existing or future laws.\nItem 16.—Enter the name, address, and relationship of beneficiary (or beneficiaries) whom you desire to receive the 6 months' death gratuity in the event you are not survived by a spouse or eligible child(ren). The succession of eligible survivor's as set forth in the \"Servicemen's and Veterans' Survivor Benefits Act,\" P. L. 881-84th Congress, is as follows: (1) Spouse; (2) Children (without regard to their age or marital status) in equal shares; (3) Parents or brothers or sisters (including those of halfblood and those by adoption), when so designated; (4) Parents in equal shares; or (5) Brothers and sisters (including those of halfblood or those by adoption) in equal shares.\nNOTE:\nThe payment to either category (4) or (5) is in the event that a designation is not made under category (3).\nThe term \"parents\" includes \"natural parents,\" \"stepparents,\" \"adoptive parents\" and persons who stood in \"loco parentis\" to the designator for a period of not less than 1 year at any time prior to the designator's entry upon active service.\nItem 17.—Enter name and address of the beneficiary or beneficiaries whom you desire to receive any unpaid pay and allowances (Arrears of Pay) due you at the time of death. There are no restrictions on who may be designated as a beneficiary or beneficiaries to receive unpaid pay and allowances and once a designation has been made it is binding until superseded by the completion of a later DD Form 93-1.\nItem 18.—The \"Missing Persons Act\" provides that pay and allowances continue to accrue to the pay account of any service member for the period he is missing or captured and may be paid to the dependents for support. This item reflects your desires and is used as a guide in the disposition of your pay. Allotments to dependents and insurance companies initiated prior to entering a missing status are continued in effect unless unusual circumstances indicate changes.\nItem 21.—The person assigned, by the commanding officer, the responsibility for interviewing the designator will, upon completion of the form, witness the designator's signature and sign in block 21.\nDISPOSITION INSTRUCTIONS\nU. S. NAVY: Original to BuPers, Washington 25, D. C.\nDuplicate—File in Service Record at duty station. See BuPers Instruction 1085.25 of 27 May 1953.\nU. S. MARINE CORPS: See Par. 4019, PRAM.\nU. S. COAST GUARD: See Personnel Manual, Par. 13-B-14.\nEntry of other useful information in connection with emergency data such as location of will, safety deposit boxes, etc., if applicable, should be made under \"Remarks.\"\nREMARKS:\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1957 O-F-411267"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":453,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"C-2\nPFPTG:RWJ:bh\nCode 01\n18 August 1959\nTHIRD ENDORSEMENT on BuPers Orders 082908 of 27 April 1959\nFrom: Officer in Charge, Pacific Fleet Photo-Triangulation Group\nTo: CWO4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nSubj: Change of Duty\n1. You reported aboard at 1500 for duty this date.\nROBERT W. JOHNSON\nCopy to:\nCOMELEVEN\nCOMCARDIV SIX\nCOMSERVPAC\nCOMNAVAIRLANT CODE 142\nCOMTRAPAC\nBUPERS\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY\nROBERT W. JOHNSON, LCDR, USN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":454,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IMPORTANT: Forward only this copy to BuPers upon reporting to final destination. Include all endorsements. (See Art. C-5407 (4) BuPers Manual)\nAIRMAN\n177283/8311\nPers-B1314-dh-1\n27 April 1959\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT, W-2 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN USS ESSEX (CVA-9)\nVia: Commanding Officer\nSubj: Change of duty\n1. When relieved you will regard yourself detached from duty on board the USS ESSEX (CVA-9) and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; will proceed to San Diego, Calif., and report to the Commander, Training Command, Pacific Fleet, for duty with the Fleet Camera Group, Pacific as the relief of Chief Photographer, W-2 Robert M.Scott, USN, 552419/8312.\n2. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of fifteen days (provided no excess leave involved) in reporting in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave. Keep your old and new station advised of your address using Form NavPers 3036.\n3. Accounting data 1701453.2218 079 22/31600.120 CIC 3/0/453/18/*/2/079 (*Insert 1 for officer and 2 for dependent travel)\nCopy to:\nCOMELEVEN\nCOMCARDIV SIX\nCOMSERVPAC\nCOMNAVAIRLANT CODE 142\nOIC FLECAMERAGRUPAC\nCOMTRAPAC *\nH. P. SMITH\n082908"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":455,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"B1314 C-2\n177283/8311\nPers-B1314-dh-1\n27 April 1959\nAIRMAN\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT, W-2 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN USS ESSEX (CVA-9)\nVia: Commanding Officer\nSubj: Change of duty\n1. When relieved you will regard yourself detached from duty on board the USS ESSEX (CVA-9) and from such other duty as may have been assigned you; will proceed to San Diego, Calif., and report to the Commander, Training Command, Pacific Fleet, for duty with the Fleet Camera Group, Pacific as the relief of Chief Photographer, W-2 Robert M.Scott, USN, 552419/8312.\n2. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of fifteen days (provided no excess leave involved) in reporting in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave. Keep your old and new station advised of your address using Form NavPers 3036.\n3. Accounting data 1701453.2218 079 22/31600.120 CIC 3/0/453/18/*/2/079\nCopy to:\nCOMELEVEN\nCOMCARDIV SIX\nCOMSERVPAC\nCOMNAVAIRLANT CODE 142\nOIC FLECAMERAGRUPAC\nCOMTRAPAC *\nH. P. SMITH\n082908\nJacket copy\nPers-B74\nB1314\nB115\nF1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":456,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"...Record of NAVPERS 0000, USN, 552419/8312.\n\n2. You are hereby authorized to delay for a period of fifteen days (provided no excess leave involved) in reporting in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave. Keep your old and new station advised of your address using Form NavPers 3036.\n\n3. Accounting data 1701453.2218 079 22/31600.120 (*Insert 1 for officer and 2 for dependent travel) CIC 3/0/453/18/*/2/079\n\nCopy to:\nCOMELEVEN\nCOMCARDIV SIX\nCOMSERVPAC\nCOMNAVAIRLANT CODE 142\nOIC FLECAMERAGRUPAC\nCOMTRAPAC *\n\nH. P. SMITH\n\n082908\n\nJacket copy\nPers-B714\nB1314\nB115\nF1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":457,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICERS ORDER MEMORANDUM\nNAVPERS 1152 (REV. 5-58)\nCLASSIFICATION CODE: 2\n\nRANK CHPHOT W-2 NAME DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE CORPS USN FILE NO./DESIGNATOR 177283/8311\nAT USS ESSEX (CVA 9) DATE 4/23/59 ORIGINATING PERS B1314\nTYPE OF ORDERS: CHANGE OF DUTY DATE OUT BY 4/28/59 CONTROL NO. 82908\n\nTO: PROUS PROPORICH (PRO) IMREP REPT ON\n1. PROREP COM 12 TRANS PRO SUCH TRANS BUPERS REPT ON OR BEFORE\nCIC FLEET CAMERA GROUP PACIFIC HQTRS SDIEGO\nDELREP 15 DAS\n\nFROM: W-2 CHPHOT ROBERT M. SCOTT 552419/8312\n\nFinished File--Pers B741\n\nCC AND INFO ADDRESSEES\nFLE CAMERA GRP PAC*\nCOM 11\nCOMTRAPAC\nCOMGARDIV SIX\nCOMNAVAIRLANT\n\nDETAIL/PLACEMENT OFFICER LCDR G.G.E. KIRK/ch EXTENSION 41640"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":458,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"15 January 1958\n\nFrom: CHPHOT, W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\nVia: Commanding Officer, USS ESSEX (CVA-9)\n\nSubj: Orders; forwarding copy of\n\nRef: (a) Art C5407(4), BuPers Manual, 1948\n\nEncl: (1) CO, NATTU, NAS, Pensacola, Florida Orders of 13 Nov 1957\n\n1. In accordance with reference (a), enclosure (1) is forwarded.\n\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\n\nCVA9/P16-4/00\n11:LVR:wrn\nSer 64\n16 JAN 1958\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, USS ESSEX (CVA-9)\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\n1. Forwarded.\n\nT. A. CHRISTOPHER\n\nL. V. ROBISON\nBy direction\n\nFinished File--Pers B1147"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":459,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CVA9/P16-4/00\n11:LVR:wrn\n10 January 1958\n\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on BUPERS msg Orders #050915Z of Nov 1957\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, USS ESSEX (CVA-9)\nTo: CWO, W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. You reported aboard at 1540 this date for duty.\n\nT. A. CHRISTOPHER\n\nCopy to:\nCOMNAVAIRLANT\nCOMCARDIV SIX\n\nFinished File--Pers B1169"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":460,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NC/Pnola/(mag)\nP16-4/00\n177283/8311\n30 December 1957\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on BuPers msg ords #050915Z of Nov 1957\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, Naval Air Technical Training Unit, Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida\nTo: CWO, W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\n1. Detached this date. Carry out your basic orders.\n\n2. You are authorized to draw advanced mileage in the execution of these orders.\n\n3. Your leave balance on 1 July preceding 60 days. 21 days leave taken to date this fiscal year.\n\nJ. B. DOSTER\nBy direction\n\nReceived these orders at ____ on ____ for execution.\n\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\n\nDEPARTED NATC HQ, N.A.S. PENSACOLA, FLA.\n\nTIME DATE\n\nOFFICER OF THE DAY\n\nFinished File--Pers B1184"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":461,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL AIR TECHNICAL TRAINING UNIT\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nPENSACOLA, FLORIDA\n\nNC/Pncla/(mag)\nP16-4/00\n177283/8311\n13 November 1957\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer\nTo: CWO, W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\nSubj: Change of duty\n\nRef: (a) BuPers msg #050915Z of Nov 1957\n\n1. Reference (a) is quoted and transcribed herewith for your information and compliance:\n\n\"CHPHOTO W4 DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/8311 DIRDET IN DEC PROPORICH USS ESSEX CVA 9 ARREPCOVES X DELREP 10 JAN 1958 X VERCATEBURRS X TRAVCHAR 1781453.18 MPN 1958 OC 029 EXACCT 74120 BUCONTROL 22/31600\"\n\nTranscribed: When directed by your Commanding Officer in December 1957, you will regard yourself detached from duty with the Naval Air Technical Training Unit, Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida, and from such other duty as may be assigned you; will proceed to the port in which the USS ESSEX (CVA-9) may be and upon arrival report to the Commanding Officer of that vessel for duty.\n\nYou are authorized to delay until 10 January 1958, provided no excess leave is involved, in reporting in compliance with these orders, such delay to count as leave. Keep your old and new station advised of your address using Form NavPers 3036. Since reimbursement for travel is based on travel required due to location of vessel or fleet command indicated above on the date of expiration of delay, it is important to verify the location on that date.\n\nTravel is chargeable to appropriation 1781453.18, MPN 1958, object class 029, Expenditure Account 74120, Bureau Control 22/31600.\n\n2. You are authorized to draw up to three months advance pay in the execution of these orders.\n\n3. Delivered.\n\nJ. B. DOSTER\nBy direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":462,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM\nPLACEMENT REVIEWED BY:\nDRAFTED BY PERS-Bb1129-AW-1\nFILE NR. 177283/8311\nEXT. NR. 43296\nRELEASED BY CAPT G F SMALE\nCODE/SECT. NR.\nDATE 4 NOV 1957 1040\nC-2\nBb1129\nPlease leave this space clear\n\nFROM: BUPERS\n050915Z (date/time group) (GCT)\nPRECEDENCE\nTO: NATECHTU NAS PNCLA\nPRIORITY\nROUTINE\nINFO: USS ESSEX CVA 9 *\nDEFERRED\nCNATRA (MAIL) (2)\nCCMSIX (MAIL)\nCNATECHTRA (MAIL)\nCOMNAVAIRLANT (MAIL) (2)\nCOMCARDIV FOUR (MAIL)\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nUnless otherwise indicated, this message will be transmitted with Deferred Precedence.\n\nTEXT:\nCHPHOTO W3 DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 177283/8311 DIRDET IN DEC PROPORICH\nUSS ESSEX CVA 9 ARREPCOVES X DELREP 10 JAN 1958 X VERCATEBURS X TRAVCHAR 1781453.18\nMPN 1958 OC C29 EXACCT 74120 BUCONTROL 22/31600\n\nCC:\nNATECHTU NAS PNCLA\n(CONFIRMATION COPY)\n\nJACKET COPY A 1/10/58\nPERS B116 D 12/57\nE111a DEP 3\nB335 LOCD PNCLA 12/7/022514\nBb1129(2) LOCA PUGET SOUND\nBb NPD PNCLA\nF1 NPA SDIEGO\n\nNAVPERS 3078 A (NEW 2-56)\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: OCT. 1956-396719"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":463,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pers Bb1129/srm\nOFFICER'S ORDER MEMORANDUM\nTO: BUPERS (ATT. PERS: B115)\nOPNAV FORM 1321-1 (REV. 5-55)\n\n1. It is requested that the below named person be issued orders as indicated: 29 October 1957\n\nRANK CHPHOTO/W-3 NAME Delbert C. NEWHOUSE CORPS USN FILE NO. & DESIGNATOR OR CLASS 177283/8311\nAT NATTU PENSACOLA Fla. NAS DATE 10-29-57 ORIGINATING PERS Bb1129\nTYPE OF ORDERS: CHANGE OF DUTY (X) DATE OUT BY 11/5 CONTROL NO. 022514\nDETACHED: DIRDET (X) ABOUT IN DECEMBER 1957\n1. TO: PRORep (X) PROPORICH (X) USS ESSEX (CVA-9) Vercatebus\nDELREP (X) 10 JANUARY 1958\n2. TO: REF OP-553C SER 94-57 dtd 10-11-57\nDETAIL OFFICER T. B. WOLFE CDR USN\nEXTENSION 43296\nQUAL: ETA: 1/10/58 EDD: 12/57 DEP: 3 LOCD: PENSACOLA LOCA: PUG SD NPD: PENSACOLA NPA: SD\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1956-397658"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":464,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS 321 (REV. 9-54)\nREPORT BUPERS 1050-1\nC-2\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nFROM (Ship or Station) NATECHTRAU, NAS, Pensacola, Florida\nDATE 26 March 1957\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement\nGRADE AND CORPS CHPHOT/USN FILE NO. 177283\nTOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS CHARGED AS LEAVE 04\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS 329) 32\nFOR LEAVE TAKEN ON CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS FURNISH THE AUTHORITY AND DATE:\n(Signature of officer who took leave) (Signature of Commanding Officer) Acting\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. It is imperative that this report be executed at expiration of leave by the Commanding Officer of the individual to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately. Do not file a copy in the Officer Service Record (Form NAVPERS 3021). Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days charged as leave is reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station.\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual.\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-70955-1\n\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS 321 (REV. 9-54)\nREPORT BUPERS 1050-1\nC-2\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nFROM (Ship or Station) Naval Air Technical Training Unit, NAS, Pensacola, Florida\nDATE 17 August 1956\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement\nGRADE AND CORPS PHOT, W-4 FILE NO. 177283\nTOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS CHARGED AS LEAVE 15\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS 329) 36\nFOR LEAVE TAKEN ON CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS FURNISH THE AUTHORITY AND DATE:\n(Signature of officer who took leave) (Signature of Commanding Officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. It is imperative that this report be executed at expiration of leave by the Commanding Officer of the individual to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately. Do not file a copy in the Officer Service Record (Form NAVPERS 3021). Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days charged as leave is reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station.\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual.\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-70955-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":465,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nREPORT BUPERS 1050-1\nC-2\nDATE: 3/22/56\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nFROM (Commanding officer) EDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, USN SHIP OR STATION NATECHTRAU, NAS, Pensacola, Florida\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement GRADE AND CORPS CWO4/USN FILE NO. 177283\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS 22\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 31\nUNDER ORDERS OF VU-5 Orders #121 DATED 23 January 1956\n(Signature of officer who took leave) (Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-5\n\nREPORT OF LEAVE OF ABSENCE\nNAVPERS-321 (REV. 1-50)\nREPORT PERS-3-4\nC-2\nDATE: 4/26/56\nTO: Chief of Naval Personnel\nREAD CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS PRINTED BELOW\nFROM (Commanding officer) EDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, USN SHIP OR STATION NATECHTRAU, NAS, Pensacola, Florida\nIn conformity with requirements of U. S. Navy Regulations, I report the following leave of absence taken by:\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement GRADE AND CORPS CWO/USN FILE NO. 177283/8311\nNOTICE: Complete either A or B; do NOT use both for same leave\nA. TOTAL NO. OF DAYS LEAVE INCLUDING ANY TRAVEL TIME 10\nB. DELAY COUNTING AS LEAVE OR LEAVE BETWEEN STATIONS\nLEAVE CREDIT REMAINING AS INDICATED ON OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD (NAVPERS-329) 21\nUNDER ORDERS OF\nDATED\n(Signature of officer who took leave) (Signature of commanding officer)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. This report will be made at expiration of leave by the immediate superior of the officer to whom the leave is granted and forwarded immediately to the Chief of Naval Personnel. Care must be taken to insure that correct number of days leave are reported.\n2. The day of departure from station or duty counts as a day of duty; the day of return as a day of leave, except when such return is made before 0900, in which case it shall not be counted as a day of leave. This refers to leave taken when not detached from ship or station (see Article C-6313 BuPers Manual).\n3. In cases of authorized delay counting as leave, this form is to be submitted in addition to one copy of each set of basic orders with all endorsements thereon, as required by BuPers Manual Article C-5407(4).\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52637-4"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":466,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20370\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nPers-E24AR:enw\n177283/8313\n20 November 1964\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: LT Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN (RET)\n652 Burnham Street\nEl Cajon, California 92021\nXXVia:\nSubj: Awards; information concerning\nRef: (a)Your ltr of recent date\nEncl: (1)One medal\n1. An adjudication of your entitlement to certain awards has been made in response to reference (a). This adjudication encompassed ( ) all awards to which you are entitled; X ) only those awards indicated in reference (a).\nPERSONAL DECORATIONS\nELI-GIBLE\nFWD.\nSEE NOTE\nCAMPAIGN AND SERVICE MEDALS\nELI-GIBLE\nFWD.\nSEE NOTE\nAMERICAN DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL Fleet Clasp Base Clasp\nAMERICAN CAMPAIGN MEDAL\nEUROPEAN-AFRICAN-MIDDLE EASTERN CAMPAIGN MEDAL\nASIATIC-PACIFIC CAMPAIGN MEDAL\nWORLD WAR II VICTORY MEDAL\nNAVY OCCUPATION SERVICE MEDAL Asia Clasp Europe Clasp\nCHINA SERVICE MEDAL\nNATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL\nKOREAN SERVICE MEDAL\nUNITED NATIONS SERVICE MEDAL\nOTHER AWARDS\nArmed Forces Expeditionary Medal (Lebanon)\nX\nX\nNAVAL RESERVE MEDAL\nARMED FORCES RESERVE MEDAL\nCopy to: NRMC, NTC Bainbridge, Maryland\nL. W. DUNTON, JR. By direction\nFH-24 (Rev. 9-63)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":467,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOTE 1. The records of this Bureau fail to establish your entitlement to this award. If you have evidence to substantiate your entitlement to the award in question, further consideration will be given to your request upon submission of such evidence to the Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers E24).\nNOTE 2. The records of this Bureau show that you were previously issued this award.\nAwards may not be replaced without charge unless the original issue has been lost, destroyed, or rendered unfit for use, through no fault or neglect on the part of the recipient. If such is the case, you may advise the Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers E24) the circumstances of loss and consideration will be given to the replacement of this award without cost. Replacement awards may be purchased as indicated in note 3 below.\nNOTE 3. Replacement awards may be purchased by returning the pink copy of this letter to the Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers E24) with a check or money order made payable to the BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL. The price list shown below includes the cost of manufacture and mailing of the award. The purchase of duplicate awards to which you are entitled and have in your possession is not authorized. (See note 2).\nNAVY CROSS.......................$3.75\nDISTINGUISHED SERVICE MEDAL.......$3.75\nSILVER STAR MEDAL.................2.50\nLEGION OF MERIT (DEGREE OF LEGIONNAIRE).....4.50\nDISTINGUISHED FLYING CROSS.........3.50\nNAVY AND MARINE CORPS MEDAL........2.50\nBRONZE STAR MEDAL..................2.50\nPURPLE HEART.......................2.50\nAIR MEDAL..........................2.50\nNAVY COMMENDATION MEDAL............2.50\nALL OTHERS.........................1.00"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":468,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D PERS E241 NOV 12 1964\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel.\nFrom: Lt. Delbert C. Newhouse, USN(Ret) File No 177283\nSubject: Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (Lebanon)\n1. It is requested subject medal be forwarded to me at below address.\n2. I was serving as Photographic Officer in USS Essex (CVA-9), with rank of CWO-4/8311 during the Lebanon operation.\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n652 Burnham St.\nEl Cajon, Calif. 92021\nFinished File Pers E243 hdh"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":469,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S-2\nCVS9/JFH:jh\nCode 11\nSer: 527\nMAR 10 1961\nSECOND ENDORSEMENT on COMNAVAIRLANT ltr CNAL 334 of 2 Sep 1960\nFrom: Commanding Officer, USS ESSEX (CVS-9)\nTo: CWO-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nSubj: Commander Naval Air Force, U. S. Atlantic Fleet Ship Department Excellence Insignia\n1. Delivered. A copy of the basic leter and endorsements thereto will be made a part of your offical record.\nS. S. SEARCY, Jr.\nCopy to:\nBUPERS (With Basic Ltr and 1st End)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":470,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FB2-18/002/rr\n5060\nSerial: 368\n11 September 1960\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on COMNAVAIRLANT ltr CNAL 334 of 2 SEP 1960\nFrom: Commander Carrier Division EIGHTEEN\nTo: Commanding Officer, USS ESSEX (CVS-9)\nSubj: Commander Naval Air Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet Ship Department Excellence Insignia; award of\n1. Forwarded with congratulations.\n2. Commander Carrier Division EIGHTEEN takes pleasure in commending the Commanding Officer and personnel of the Operations Department for the outstanding performance of duties which earned this coveted award.\nF. L. ASHWORTH\n2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":471,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS\nCOMMANDER NAVAL AIR FORCE, U. S. ATLANTIC FLEET\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nNORFOLK 11, VIRGINIA CNAL-334\n\n2 SEP 1960\n\nFrom: Commander Naval Air Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet\nTo: Commanding Officer, USS ESSEX (CVS-9)\nVia: Commander Carrier Division EIGHTEEN\n\nSubj: Commander Naval Air Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet Ship Department Excellence Insignia; award of\n\nRef: (a) OPNAVINST 3590.4A, Subj: Awards for intratype battle efficiency competition and insignia to denote excellence in certain weapons and operations\n\n1. Commander Naval Air Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet takes pleasure in certifying the Operations Department of the USS ESSEX (CVS-9) as standing first in the CVA class ship during fiscal year 1960.\n\n2. The Commanding Officer is congratulated on the exemplary performance of the ESSEX's Operations Department.\n\n3. The ESSEX is authorized to display the Operations Department Excellence Insignia in accordance with reference (a).\n\n4. Suitable entries will be made in the personnel records of the officers and men of the ESSEX who materially contributed to the earning of this award. The Commanding Officer is requested to forward a copy of this letter to the command of those personnel formerly serving on board during fiscal year 1960, who significantly contributed to the winning of this award."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":472,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS\nCOMMANDER NAVAL AIR FORCE, U. S. ATLANTIC FLEET\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nNORFOLK 11, VIRGINIA CNAL-334\n\n2 SEP 1960\n\nFrom: Commander Naval Air Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet\nTo: Commanding Officer, USS ESSEX (CVS-9)\nVia: Commander Carrier Division EIGHTEEN\n\nSubj: Commander Naval Air Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet Ship Department Excellence Insignia; award of\n\nRef: (a) OPNAVINST 3590.4A, Subj: Awards for intratype battle efficiency competition and insignia to denote excellence in certain weapons and operations\n\n1. Commander Naval Air Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet takes pleasure in certifying the Operations Department of the USS ESSEX (CVS-9) as standing first in the CVA class ship during fiscal year 1960.\n\n2. The Commanding Officer is congratulated on the exemplary performance of the ESSEX's Operations Department.\n\n3. The ESSEX is authorized to display the Operations Department Excellence Insignia in accordance with reference (a).\n\n4. Suitable entries will be made in the personnel records of the officers and men of the ESSEX who materially contributed to the earning of this award. The Commanding Officer is requested to forward a copy of this letter to the command of those personnel formerly serving on board during fiscal year 1960, who significantly contributed to the winning of this award."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":473,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U.S.S. ESSEX (CVA-9)\nFLEET POST OFFICE\nNEW YORK, NEW YORK\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nCVA9/1650/CSW/meh\nCode 01\n10 March 1959\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, USS ESSEX (CVA-9)\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\nSubj: CWO4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, 177283/8311 correspondence in the case of\n\nEncl: (1) Copy of CO ESSEX ltr CVA9/CSW/deb Code 01 of 13 Nov 1958\n\n1. Enclosure (1) is forwarded herewith for inclusion in the record of subject officer as indicated in paragraph 5 thereof.\n\nT. W. SOUTH II\nC. S. WALLINE\nBy direction"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":474,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"USS ESSEX (CVA9)\nFleet Post Office\nNew York, New York\n\nCVA9:CSW:deb\nCode 01\n13 NOV 1958\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer, USS ESSEX (CVA9)\nTo: All Hands, USS ESSEX (CVA9)\nCommander, Air Task Group 201\n\nSubj: Commendation for Operations performed during Mediterranean and WesPac Deployment\n\n1. The Commanding Officer is in receipt of many complimentary communications concerning the outstanding performance of ESSEX and Air Task Group 201 during the period 2 February to 17 November 1958.\n\n2. During this period ESSEX and her embarked Air Group served as a striking unit of the Sixth Fleet in Mediterranean waters, and her aircraft provided initial and sustained air support for U. S. Marine landings in Lebanon from 15 July to August 1958. These operations, under wartime conditions, were performed by the men of ESSEX and ATG 201 with an outstanding degree of professional skill and devotion to duty.\n\n3. Following this, ESSEX was deployed on an emergency basis to the Far East, where air operations in support of U. S. National policy during the Formosa crisis were conducted in the same outstanding manner.\n\n4. Indicative of the performance of ESSEX and her Air Group are the following excerpts from various communications received:\n\na. In a letter of March 28, 1958, RADM N. S. HENDERSON, O.B.E., RN, Vice Naval Deputy, Supreme Headquarters, Allied Powers Europe who was on board observing operations, stated.... \"But above all I took away an impression of a quietly efficient ship with a very lively crew, all of whom seemed keen and interested in the job. I was deeply impressed....\"\n\nb. From Commander Sixth Fleet....\"AM DELIGHTED WITH A RECENT LETTER RECEIVED FROM COMMANDING OFFICER TENCH REPORTING THE OUTSTANDING TREATMENT ACCORDED TENCH AND SEA ROBIN BY YOU WHILE IN COMPANY DURING YOUR RECENT VISIT TO PALMA X IT IS TRULY HEART WARMING TO LEARN OF THE WHOLEHEARTED COOPERATION AND MUTUAL SUPPORT BETWEEN UNITS OF THE SIXTHFLT X"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":475,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CVA9:CSW:deb\nCode 01\n\nALSO MENTIONED WAS THE PUNCTILOUS MANNER IN WHICH HONORS WERE RENDERED ON THE OCCASION OF AN INFORMAL VISIT BY COMMANDING OFFICERS OF TENCH AND SEA ROBIN X WELL DONE X SIGNED VADM BROWN\"\n\nc. From Commander Sixth Fleet....\"I LIKE THE WAY YOU APPRECIATED THE SITUATION CMM GOT GOING EARLY AND REACHED OUT TO DO A SUPERIOR JOB YESTERDAY X THERE CERTAINLY ISN'T ANY FIRST AND SECOND TEAM IN MY CARRIERS X WELL DONE TO YOU AND ALL YOUR BOYS X SIGNED BROWN\"\n\nd. From Commander Task Force Sixty....\"IT WAS A GRAND PERFORMANCE ON SUCH SHORT NOTICE X BOX SEATS IN YANKEE STADIUM FOR SATURDAYS DOUBLE HEADER TO ALL CONCERNED X RADM ANDERSON\"\n\ne. From Commander Sixth Fleet....\"CONGRATULATIONS ON WHAT I HAVE COME TO EXPECT AS A ROUTINE BUT HIGHLY POLISHED PRECISION PERFORMANCE ON THE PART OF THE WORLDS GREATEST FLYERS X SIGNED BROWN\"\n\nf. From Commander Sixth Fleet....\"THIS MESSAGE FOR ALL HANDS X PROBABLY NO GROUP OF PEOPLE IN THE WORLD TODAY IS MORE CALM THAT THE MEN WHO SAIL AND FIGHT THE SHIPS OF THE SIXTHFLT X THIS IS AS IT SHOULD BE X WITH A MINIMUM OF NOISE AND LOST MOTION THE FLEET HAS AGAIN SWUNG INTO ACTION WITH QUIET DECISIVENESS X LESS THAN SEVENTY TWO HOURS AGO, ON 15 JULY, THE SCATTERED 75 SHIPS OF THE FLEET WERE ENJOYING LIBERTY IN PORTS SEPARATED BY AS MUCH AS 1900 MILES X THIS MORNING, 18 JULY, MORE THAN 5000 COMBAT READY MARINES ARE IN LEBANON, OUR AIR HAS BEEN PARADED OVER JORDAN AND THE WHOLE OF THE FLEET IS IN THE BEST POSITION TO SUPPORT OUR MARINES OR TO CARRY OUT ANY OTHER ASSIGNED TASK X YOU WILL RECALL THAT WITHIN A VERY FEW HOURS OF WORD FROM THE PRESIDENT, OUR COMMANDER IN CHIEF, THE FIRST BATTALION OF MARINES WAS LANDED UNDER COVER OF NAVAL GUNS AND CARRIER BASED AIRCRAFT X THESE FACTS BEAR WITNESS TO OUR READINESS, OUR PLANNING AND OUR TRAINING X THEY TESTIFY TO OUR FLEXIBILITY AND MOBILITY AS A FIGHTING FORCE X NONE OF THESE ARE THINGS FOR WHICH WE CAN CONGRATULATE OURSELVES FOR THEY ARE THE THINGS WHICH EVERYONE HAS A RIGHT TO EXPECT OF US DASH OUR HALLMARK AND OUR REASON FOR BEING X HOWEVER, I BELIEVE WE CAN AND SHOULD CONGRATULATE OURSELVES ON THE FACT THAT A WORLD WHERE SO MANY HAVE TO SERVE BY STANDING AND WAITING, THE PRIVILEGE HAS FALLEN TO US TO BE OF REAL USE IN A TIME OF REAL NEED X SIGNED BROWN\""} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":476,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CVA9:CSW:deb\nCode 01\n\ng. From Commander Task Force Sixty....\"ON THIS SEVENTH DAY OF ROUND THE CLOCK OPERATIONS I NOTE HOW SUPERBLY YOU HAVE MET YOUR SCHEDULE X NINETY EIGHT POINT TWO PER CENT IS SOMETHING TO BE PROUD OF X JOE DIMAGGIO GOT ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND FOR BATTING THREE FIFTY\"\n\nh. From Commander Sixth Fleet....\"I AND MEMBERS OF MY STAFF HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY THE LAST FEW DAYS TO OBSERVE YOUR OPERATIONS CLOSE AT HAND, WHICH WE HAVE WANTED TO DO FOR SOME TIME X WE WERE IMPRESSED BOTH WITH THE QUALITY OF YOUR AIR OPERATIONS AND THE SPIRIT OF THE CREW X I HAVE NEVER RECEIVED ANYTHING BUT \"CAN DO\" FROM ESSEX AND I NOW KNOW WHY X YOUR PERFORMANCE DURING THE LEBANON OPERATIONS HAS ADDED LUSTRE TO THE ALREADY FAMOUS RECORD OF A FAMOUS SHIP X A TIP OF THE BROWN HAT TO ONE AND ALL X SIGNED VADM C R BROWN\"\n\ni. From Commanding Officer USS BOSTON (CAG-1)....\"YOUR FLYING TAXIES HAVE BEEN TERRIFIC X THE SERVICES YOU HAVE GIVEN US AT THE DROP OF A HAT IS VERY SINCERELY APPRECIATED X HEINZ X\"\n\nj. From Commander Sixth Fleet....\"PERSONAL TO THE CAPTAIN AND ALL HANDS X I TOO WISH YOU WERE LEAVING THE MED THROUGH THE STRAITS OF GIBRALTAR X NO ONE KNOWS BETTER THAN I DO THAT YOU HAVE WORKED HARD AND WELL AND DESERVE TO GO HOME FOR A REST X BUT THERES A JOB TO BE DONE AND I HOPE SOME DAY YOU WILL LOOK BACK AND FEEL LUCKY AND PROUD THAT YOU WERE AMONG THE VERY FEW PEOPLE IN THE WORLD WHO AT A CRITICAL TIME REALLY DID DO SOMETHING TO HELP KEEP PEACE IN THE WORLD X AND IF YOU HAVE TO THROW A PUNCH, I KNOW YOU CAN DO IT WITH THE BEST OF THEM X THERE ISN'T ANY ONE ON THE SIXTHFLT TEAM THAT I WOULD RATHER HAVE REPRESENT US OUTSIDE THE MED X YOU HAVE BEEN A SHARP CAN DO SHIP FROM THE START X GOOD LUCK AND GOD BLESS YOU X SIGNED BROWN\"\n\nk. From Commander in Chief, U. S. Atlantic Fleet to ESSEX and others....\"COMMANDER IN CHIEF U.S. ATLANTIC FLEET REGRETS THE NECESSITY OF YOUR TEMPORARY DEPARTURE FROM THE ATLANTIC FLEET BUT APPRECIATES YOUR READINESS AND ABILITY TO HANDLE ANY SITUATION WORLD WIDE X WE WILL WELCOME YOU BACK WHEN THE SITUATION CLARIFIES X SIGNED ADM JERAULD WRIGHT\"\n\n1. From American Legation U. S. Naval Attache, Cairo, Egypt....\"SUEZ TRANSIT ESSEX AND UNITS COMDESRON 10 ON 28 AUGUST CHARACTERIZED BY SMARTNESS AND EFFICIENCY X EGYPTIAN NATIONALS AND MEMBERS DIPLOMATIC CORP WHO OBSERVED ESSEX GREATLY IMPRESSED X LARGE NUMBER AIRCRAFT ABOARD\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":477,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CVA9:CSW:deb\nCode 01\n\nCAUSED MUCH COMMENT X MUSIC BY SHIPS BAND AND PLAYING OF 'I'LL SEE YOU IN MY DREAMS' ON DEPARTURE SUEZ WAS 'MASBOUT' WHICH IN ARABIC MEANS JUST RIGHT\"\n\nm. From Chief of Naval Operations to ESSEX and others ....\"THE EXPEDITIOUS AND EFFICIENT MANNER IN WHICH ALL ARRANGEMENTS WERE COMPLETED ON 28 AUG, TOGETHER WITH THE SMART SEAMANLIKE TRANSIT OF SUEZ CANAL BY ESSEX AND DESTROYERS UNDER COMDESRON 10 IS DESERVING OF HIGHEST CREDIT TO ALL CONCERNED X WELL DONE X ARLEIGH BURKE\"\n\nn. From Commanding Officer,USS CHARA (AKA58)....\"MSG CAPT X IT HAS BEEN A REAL PLEASURE TO WORK WITH SUCH A SMART SHIP X JOHN\"\n\no. From Commander Naval Base, Subic Bay, Philippines.... \"IT WAS A PLEASURE TO HAVE YOU VISIT US HERE AT SUBIC X THE CONDUCT, COOPERATION, AND APPEARANCE OF YOUR SHIPS COMPANIES WERE MOST OUTSTANDING X COME SOON AGAIN X RADM KEITH SENDS\"\n\np. From Commander Carrier Division Six to Commander Naval Air Force, U. S. Atlantic Fleet....\"MANY THANKS FOR YOUR WELCOME X IT IS MY PRIVILEGE TO HAVE BROUGHT HOME A SEASONED SHIP AND A SPLENDID AIR GROUP WHICH NAVAIRLANT CAN BE PROUD X I REGRET ESSEX IS NOT WITH US BUT REPORTS FROM MY FRIENDS OUT WEST SAY SHE IS WORTH ANY TWO PACFLT CARRIERS PUT TOGETHER X RADM ANDERSON\"\n\nq. From Commander Task Group Seventy Seven point Four ....\"IT HAS BEEN A PLEASURE TO HAVE HAD YOU WITH US X I HAVE BEEN VERY IMPRESSED WITH YOUR GET UP AND GO ATTITUDE THIS APPLIES PARTICULARLY TO THE AIR GROUP X FINEST OPERATION I HAVE SEEN IN A LONG TIME X GOOD LUCK AND A PLEASANT TRIP HOME X RADM SOUTHERLAND\"\n\nr. From U. S. Navy Liaison Officer, Singapore....\"YOUR BRIEF VISIT TO SINGAPORE CONSIDERED OUTSTANDING IN ALL RESPECTS X FINE APPEARANCE OF SHIPS AND MEN CMM EXEMPLARY CONDUCT ASHORE CMM ENTHUSIASTIC COOPERATION WITH ALL ORGANIZATIONS CMM ESPECIALLY AS REGARDS VISITING YOU PROVIDED TO CROSS SECTION OF LOCAL COMMUNITY CMM WAS NOTED THROUGHOUT AMERICAN CONSULATE AND BRITISH AND LOCAL COMMUNITY X AMERICAN CONSUL GENERAL CONCURS YOUR VISIT ENHANCED ESTEEM AND PRESTIGE OF OUR NAVY AND COUNTRY IN SINGAPORE AND JOINS ORIGINATOR IN BEST WISHES FOR PLEASANT CRUISE AND HAPPY HOME COMING\"\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":478,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CVA9:CSW:deb\nCode 01\n\ns. From Senior Officer Royal Ceylon Navy....\"IT WAS A PLEASURE TO HAVE HAD YOUR SHIPS HERE X GOODBYE AND GOOD LUCK TO ALL\"\n\nt. From American Legation, U. S. Naval Attache, Colombo, Ceylon....\"CONGRATULATIONS ON THE EXCELLENT IMPRESSION AND OUTSTANDING CONDUCT OF YOUR MEN AND OFFICERS WHILE IN COLOMBO X WE CONSIDER OURSELVES FORTUNATE IN HAVING SHIPS OF YOUR HIGH CALIBER VISIT US X GOOD LUCK AND GOD SPEED ON YOUR PRESENT VOYAGE.\"\n\nu. From Commander in Chief, U. S. Atlantic Fleet....\"ON YOUR RETURN TO LANTFLT QUOTE A WELL DONE UNQUOTE FOR YOUR CLEAR DEMONSTRATION OF READINESS AND MOBILITY X BEST WISHES FOR A SPEEDY HOMEWARD VOYAGE AND A LONG AWAITED REUNION WITH YOUR FAMILIES\"\n\n5. I commend ALL HANDS in ESSEX and CATG 201 for their outstanding performance during this period, and have directed that a copy of this document be inserted in the official records of the personnel concerned.\n\nT. A. CHRISTOPHER\n\n5"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":479,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"USS ESSEX (CVA-9)\nFleet Post Office\nNew York, New York\n\nCVA9/P15\n11:ECM:jc\n2 JUN 1958\n\nS-2\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer\nTo: CHPHOT, W-4, Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n\nSubj: National Defense Service Medal and Korean Service Medal\n\n1. Delivered.\n\nE. C. MONAGHAN\nBy direction\n\nCopy to:\nBUPERS"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":480,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S-2\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nPers E24-IH:mjs\n177283/8311\n10 Dec 1956\n\nFrom: Chief of Naval Personnel\nTo: CHPHOT W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN\n\nVia: Commanding Officer\nNaval Air Technical Training Unit\nU. S. Naval Air Station\nPensacola, Florida\n\nSubj: Awards; information concerning\n\nRef: (a) Your ltr of 29 Oct 1956 with 1st end\n\nEncl: (1) (SC) Three Medals\n\n1. In reply to reference (a), the following information is furnished:\n\nAWARDS | Eligible | Forwarded | Not Eligible (See Note #1) | Previously issued (See Note #2) | Authorization to purchase (See Note #3) Price of medal\nComplete award adjudication\nAwards requested\n\nGood Conduct Medal-1937 | x | x | #4 | |\n\nAmerican Defense Service Medal Fleet Clasp Base Clasp | | | | |\nAmerican Campaign Medal | x | x | | |\nEuropean-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal | | | | |\nAsiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal | | | x | |\nWorld War II Victory Medal | | | | |\nNavy Occupation Service Medal Asia Clasp Europe Clasp | | | x | |\nChina Service Medal | | | | |\nNational Defense Service Medal | x | (Not available for issuance) | | |\nKorean Service Medal | x | (Not available for issuance) | | |\nUnited Nations Service Medal | x | x | | |\n\nV. E. ARMSTRONG\nBy direction\n\n(See applicable notes on reverse side)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":481,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"#1 Since the records of the Bureau fail to show that you are eligible for the award(s), it is suggested that if you have substantiating evidence to verify your eligibility for the medal(s) and will forward this evidence to the Chief of Naval Personnel, further consideration will be given to your request.\n\n#2 You are advised that the Bureau is without authority to issue more than one medal to each recipient unless the original medal was lost, destroyed or rendered unfit for use without fault or neglect on the part of the person to whom it was awarded. Therefore, it is requested that you submit to the Chief of Naval Personnel a statement as to whether the loss of your medal(s) was due to no fault or neglect on your part. Upon receipt of this information, further consideration will be given to your request.\n\n#3 In the event you should desire to purchase the medal(s) from the Superintendent, U.S. Mint, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, you may use this letter as your authorization. The prices listed include $.25 per medal for postage and handling. This is payable by postal money order or certified check to the Treasurer of the United States.\n\n#4 You are authorized to wear two bronze stars in lieu of the Second and Third Good Conduct award. Clasps for subsequent awards of the Good Conduct Medal are no longer issued nor authorized.\n\nA75505"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":482,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nDISCHARGED ENLISTED PERSONNEL RECORDS BRANCH\n9700 PAGE BOULEVARD\nST. LOUIS 14, MISSOURI\nX-3d\nIN REPLY REFER TO:\nPers-E374/RAP/md\n393 07 21\n3 Dec 1956\n\nFrom: Head, Branch SEVEN\nEnlisted Services and Records Division\n\nTo: Head, Correspondence and Services Branch (Pers-E24)\n\nSubj: NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement, 393 07 21, ex-CPhoM, USN\nEligibility for awards earned during enlisted service\n\nEncl: (1) Copy of your spdltr of 14 Nov 56\n\n1. The records of the Bureau reveal that subject officer earned the following awards for his enlisted service as indicated by (X) below. Medals that have been previously issued are indicated by an asterisk.\n\n( )\n(*) Good Conduct Medal 1937 2 Bronze Star(s) in lieu of 2nd & 3rd awards\n( ) American Defense Service Medal with ( ) Bronze Letter \"A\"\n( ) Fleet/Base Clasp\n( ) American Campaign Medal\n( ) European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal\n( ) Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal\n( ) World War II Victory Medal\n( ) Navy Occupation Service Medal with \" \" Clasp\n( ) China Service Medal (Extended)\n( ) National Defense Service Medal\n( ) Korean Service Medal\n( ) United Nations Medal\n( ) Philippine ________ Ribbon\n( ) Korean Presidential Unit Citation\n\n[signature]"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":483,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IN REPLY REFER TO\nNo. NC/Pncla /(mag)\nP15\n\nNAVAL SCHOOLS\nPHOTOGRAPHER'S MATE (Class A)\nADVANCED PHOTOGRAPHER'S MATE (Class B)\nCAMERA REPAIR (Class C)\nMOTION PICTURE CAMERA (Class C)\n\nNAVAL AIR TECHNICAL TRAINING UNIT\nU.S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nPENSACOLA, FLORIDA\n\nREC'D PERS E241\nNOV 05 1956\n\n29 October 1956\n\nFrom: CHPHOT, W-4 Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel (Pers E24)\nVia: Commanding Officer\n\nSubj: Medals; request for\n\n1. It is requested that I be issued the following medals:\n\nGood Conduct Medal with 2 stars bars\nKorean Service Medal\nAmerican Campaign Medal\nAsiatic-Pacific Area Campaign Medal no\nJapanese Occupation Medal no\nUnited Nations Service Medal\nNational Defense Medal (For Korea)\n\n2. The above medals were previously issued to me but were lost in transit between duty stations and was due to no fault or neglect on my part.\n\nDelbert C. Newhouse\nDELBERT C. NEWHOUSE\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT\n\n31 OCT 1956\n\nFrom: Commanding Officer\nTo: Chief of Naval Personnel\n\n1. Forwarded. CHPHOT NEWHOUSE's current service record shows that he is authorized the above medals.\n\nF. M. HALL\nBy direction\n\nFinished File Pers-E241"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":484,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVGEN-1006 (REV. 1-49)\nNAVAL SPEEDLETTER\nUSE FOR URGENT LETTERS ONLY\nDO NOT CLEAR THROUGH COMMUNICATION OFFICE\n(One box must be checked) REGULAR MAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY AIR MAIL REGISTERED MAIL\nCLASSIFICATION\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nPers-E24-IH:tlb\n177283\nDATE\n14 Nov 1956\nNAVAL SPEEDLETTER-\nPermits dispatch or informal language.\nMay be sent (1) with enclosures, (2) in a window envelope (size 8 7/8\" x 3 7/8\"), if contents are not classified as confidential or higher, (3) to both naval and nonnaval activities.\nIs packaged 500 sheets of white or of one color: yellow, pink, or green.\n\nTO: Discharged Enlisted Personnel Records Branch\nU. S. Naval Records Management Center\n9700 Page Boulevard\nSt. Louis 14, Missouri\n(Fold)\n\nADVISE PERS E24 ELIGIBILITY DELBERT C NEWHOUSE 393 07 21 GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL WITH SECOND AND THIRD AWARDS X APPT PERMANENT CWO 25 SEP 1946\n\nV. E. ARMSTRONG\nBy direction\n\nCOPY TO\n\nADDRESS: Chief of Naval Personnel, Department of the Navy, Washington 25, D.C.\n\nSENDER'S MAILING ADDRESS\nAddress reply as shown at left; or reply hereon and return in window envelope (size 8 7/8\" x 3 7/8\"), if not classified as confidential or higher.\nCLASSIFICATION\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-64902-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":485,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEDAL RECEIPT\nNAVPERS-2476 (NEW 5-47)\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle)\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement LT USN\nPRESENT ADDRESS SERVICE No.\nAviation Supply Depot, NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, PEARL HARBOR, T.H. 177283\nI CERTIFY that I am eligible for and have received the medals and appurtenances checked below and that I have not previously received these medals:\n(Check appropriate box(es))\n[X] WORLD WAR II VICTORY [ ] ASIATIC-PACIFIC THEATRE\n[X] AMERICAN DEFENSE [ ] AMERICAN THEATRE\n[ ] FLEET CLASP [ ] EUROPEAN-AFRICAN-MIDDLE EASTERN THEATRE\n[X] BASE CLASP\nFinished File Pers-101\nS-2\n5-5-47 (Date)\n(Signature)\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-52398-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":486,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"652 Burnham St.\nEl Cajon, Calif. 92021\n\nChief of Naval Personnel\nDepartment of the Navy\nWashington 25, D.C."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":487,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"II.\nRECORD CLOSING DATA\nA. FINAL COMPUTATION\n1. TOTAL DAYS LEAVE CREDITED (Total—Col. E) 62½\n2. TOTAL DAYS LEAVE TAKEN (Total—Col. C) 00\n3. BALANCE (1 minus 2) 62½\nB. DISPOSITION (Check appropriate item)\n1. BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD TO NEW RECORD 00\n2. CASH SETTLEMENT REQUESTED 60\n3. OTHER (Specify) 00\nNAME, GRADE AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICER\nG.H.HANSELL Jr.,CHSHIPCLK,USN,SEP OFF.\nSIGNATURE OF CERTIFYING OFFICER\nIII. NAME (Last, first, middle)\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement 177283\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1957 O-429654\n8"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":488,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I. LEAVE ACCOUNT\nLEAVE TAKEN / LEAVE CREDITED / BALANCE / SHIP OR STATION / SIGNATURE\nCREDIT ESTABLISHED OR BROUGHT FORWARD 25MAR60 40 U.S.NAVRECSTA SDIEGO,CALIF. G.H.HANSELL Jr.,CWO,USN BY DIRECTION\n31MAR60 22½ 60 U.S.NAVRECSTA SDIEGO,CALIF. G.H.HANSELL Jr.,CWO,USN BY DIRECTION\nII. RECORD CLOSING DATA\nA. FINAL COMPUTATION\n1. TOTAL DAYS LEAVE CREDITED (Total—Col. E) 62½\n2. TOTAL DAYS LEAVE TAKEN (Total—Col. C) 00\n3. BALANCE (1 minus 2) 62½\nB. DISPOSITION (Check appropriate item)\n1. BALANCE CARRIED FORWARD TO NEW RECORD 00\n2. CASH SETTLEMENT REQUESTED 60\n3. OTHER (Specify) 00\nNAME, GRADE AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICER\nG.H.HANSELL Jr.,CHSHIPCLK,USN,SEP OFF.\nIII. NAME (Last, first, middle)\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement 177283\n8"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":489,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD\nNAVPERS-329 (NEW 10-46)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. Enter each period of leave taken upon return or reporting for duty.\n2. On 1 July each year enter credit for leave accrued during past fiscal year at rate of 2½ days per month, not to exceed 30 days. Reduce credit as necessary in order that new balance available does not exceed 60 days. Unused credit cannot be carried forward except as noted below.\n3. In the case of leave commenced and extending beyond the end of a fiscal year: Upon return or reporting for new duty, deduct leave taken from balance available at commencement of leave period; add leave credit accrued as of 30 June not to exceed 30 days. New balance available may not exceed 60 days.\n4. This record to be transferred with officer upon change of duty; commanding officer authenticate entries prior to detachment of officer.\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement RANK CHPHOT USN FILE No. 177283/8311\nCredit originally established or brought forward from previous record, 32 days\nLEAVE TAKEN FROM TO DAYS / CREDITED DATE DAYS / BALANCE AVAILABLE / SHIP OR STATION / SIGNATURE OF COMMANDING OFFICER\n30JUN57 28 60 NATECHTRAU, NAS, PENSACOLA, FLA. J.A. GOODWIN, CDR, USN\n10SEP57 13SEP57 04 56 NATECHTRAU,NAS, PENSACOLA,FLA. LCDR JB DOSTER,USN,dir.\n4DEC57 20DEC57 17 39 NATECHTRAU,NAS, PENSACOLA,FLA. LCDR JB DOSTER,USN,dir.\nVerified and Certified Correct as of 30DEC57 NATECHTRAU,NAS, PENSACOLA,FLA. LCDR JB DOSTER,USN,dir.\n1-6-58 1-10-58 05 34 USS ESSEX (CVA-9) L. V. ROBISON, By dir.\n30JUN58 30 64 USS ESSEX (CVA-9) E. C. MONAGHAN, By dir.\n1JUL58: LEAVE BALANCE REDUCED TO SIXTY DAYS 60 USS ESSEX (CVA-9) E.C. MONAGHAN, By dir.\n14DEC58 27DEC58 14 46 USS ESSEX (CVA-9) E.C. MONAGHAN, By dir.\n27JAN59 9FEB59 14 32 USS ESSEX (CVA-9) E. C. MONAGHAN, By dir.\n30JUN59 30 62 USS ESSEX (CVA-9) E.C. MONAGHAN, By dir.\n1JUL59:LEAVE BALANCE REDUCED TO SIXTY DAYS 60 USS ESSEX (CVA-9) E.C.MONAGHAN, By dir.\nVERIFIED AND CERTIFIED CORRECT AS OF 24JUL59 USS ESSEX (CVA-9) E.C.MONAGHAN, By dir.\n25 JUL 1959 3 AUG 1959 10 50 PACFLTPHOTO-TRIGRU C.F.REINHOLZ,LTJG,USNR\n24 FEB 60 4 MAR 60 10 40 PACFLTPHOTO-TRIGRU C.F.REINHOLZ,LTJG,USNR\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 10-50160-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":490,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD\nNAVPERS-329 (NEW 10-46)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. Enter each period of leave taken upon return or reporting for duty.\n2. On 1 July each year enter credit for leave accrued during past fiscal year at rate of 2½ days per month, not to exceed 30 days. Reduce credit as necessary in order that new balance available does not exceed 60 days. Unused credit cannot be carried forward except as noted below.\n3. In the case of leave commenced and extending beyond the end of a fiscal year: Upon return or reporting for new duty, deduct leave taken from balance available at commencement of leave period; add leave credit accrued as of 30 June not to exceed 30 days. New balance available may not exceed 60 days.\n4. This record to be transferred with officer upon change of duty; commanding officer authenticate entries prior to detachment of officer.\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement RANK CHPHOT USN FILE NO. 177283/8311\nCredit originally established or brought forward from previous record, 60 days as of 7-1-52\nLEAVE TAKEN FROM TO DAYS / CREDITED DATE DAYS / BALANCE AVAILABLE / SHIP OR STATION / SIGNATURE OF COMMANDING OFFICER\n7-1-52 7-7-52 7 53 NSC OAKLAND CALIF F.A. FIELDING, By dir.\n7-19-52 8-1-52 14 39 NSC OAKLAND CALIF F.A. FIELDING, By dir.\n2-26-53 3-1-53 4 35 NSC OAKLAND CALIF F. A. FIELDING, By dir.\n6-2-53 6-5-53 4 31 NSC OAKLAND CALIF E.N. JACOBSON, By dir.\n6-30-53 30 60 NSC OAKLAND CALIF E.N. JACOBSON, By dir.\n8-4-53 8-17-53 14 46 NSC OAKLAND CALIF E.N. JACOBSON, By dir.\n2-9-54 2-12-54 4 42 NSC OAKLAND CALIF R.M. BENNETT, By dir.\n4-20-54 4-23-54 4 38 NSC OAKLAND CALIF C. BRACKEN, By dir.\nDETACHED: 6-11-54 NO FURTHER LEAVE TAKEN THIS COMMAND NSC OAKLAND CALIF C. BRACKEN, By dir.\n6-16-54 6-25-54 10 28 UTRON FIVE J. L. MOTE, CDR, USN\n6-30-54 30 58 UTRON FIVE J. L. MOTE, CDR, USN\n5-17-55 5-26-55 10 48 UTRON FIVE B. F. ROWE, CDR, USN\n6-30-55 30 78 UTRON FIVE B. F. ROWE, CDR, USN\n7-1-55 Leave balance reduced 60 UTRON FIVE B. F. ROWE, CDR, USN\n8-18-55 8-19-55 2 58 UTRON FIVE B. F. ROWE, CDR, USN\n10-3-55 10-7-55 5 53 UTRON FIVE A.C. WALKER, BY DIR\n2-10-56 NO FURTHER LEAVE TAKEN THIS COMMAND UTRON FIVE A.C. WALKER, BY DIR\n2/14/56 3/6/56 22 31 NATECHTRAU, NAS, PENSACOLA, FLA. EDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, USN EMERGENCY\n4/16/56 4/25/56 10 21 NATECHTRAU, NAS, PENSACOLA, FLA. EDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, USN\n6/30/56 30 51 NATECHTRAU, NAS, PENSACOLA, FLA. EDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, USN\n8/2/56 8/16/56 15 36 NATECHTRAU, NAS, PENSACOLA, FLA. EDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, U\n3/22/57 3/26/57 04 32 NATECHTRAU, NAS, PENSACOLA, FLA. J.A. GOODWIN, CDR/USN, Acting\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 10-50160-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":491,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD\nNAVPERS-329 (NEW 10-46)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. Enter each period of leave taken upon return or reporting for duty.\n2. On 1 July each year enter credit for leave accrued during past fiscal year at rate of 2½ days per month, not to exceed 30 days. Reduce credit as necessary in order that new balance available does not exceed 60 days. Unused credit cannot be carried forward except as noted below.\n3. In the case of leave commenced and extending beyond the end of a fiscal year: Upon return or reporting for new duty, deduct leave taken from balance available at commencement of leave period; add leave credit accrued as of 30 June not to exceed 30 days. New balance available may not exceed 60 days.\n4. This record to be transferred with officer upon change of duty; commanding officer authenticate entries prior to detachment of officer.\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle) RANK FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement CHPHOT USN 177283/8311\nCredit originally established or brought forward from previous record, 60 days as of 7-1-52\nLEAVE TAKEN CREDITED BALANCE AVAILABLE SHIP OR STATION SIGNATURE OF COMMANDING OFFICER\nFROM TO DAYS DATE DAYS\n7-1-52 7-7-52 7 53 NSC OAKLAND CALIF F. A. FIELDING By dir.\n7-19-52 8-1-52 14 39 NSC OAKLAND CALIF F. A. FIELDING By dir.\n2-26-53 3-1-53 4 35 NSC OAKLAND CALIF F. A. FIELDING, By dir.\n6-2-53 6-5-53 4 31 NSC OAKLAND CALIF E. N. JACOBSON, By dir.\n6-30-53 30 60 NSC OAKLAND CALIF E.N. JACOBSON, By dir.\n8-4-53 8-17-53 14 46 NSC OAKLAND CALIF E. N. JACOBSON, By dir.\n2-9-54 2-12-54 4 42 NSC OAKLAND CALIF R.M. BENNETT, By dir.\n4-20-54 4-23-54 4 38 NSC OAKLAND CALIF C. BRACKEN, By dir.\nDETACHED: 6-11-54 NSC OAKLAND CALIF C. BRACKEN, By dir.\nNO FURTHER LEAVE TAKEN THIS COMMAND\n6-16-54 6-25-54 10 28 UTRON FIVE J. L. MOTE, CDR, USN\n6-30-54 30 58 UTRON FIVE J. L. MOTE, CDR, USN\n5-17-55 5-26-55 10 48 UTRON FIVE B. F. ROWE, CDR, USN\n6-30-55 30 78 UTRON FIVE B. F. ROWE, CDR, USN\n7-1-55 Leave balance reduced 60 UTRON FIVE B. F. ROWE, CDR, USN\n8-18-55 8-19-55 2 58 UTRON FIVE B. F. ROWE, CDR, USN\n10-3-55 10-7-55 5 53 UTRON FIVE A.C. WALKER, BY DIR\n2-10-56 NO FURTHER LEAVE TAKEN THIS COMMAND UTRON FIVE C. WALKER, BY DIR\n2/14/56 3/6/56 22 31 NATECHTRAU, NAS, PENSACOLA, FLA. EDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, USN\nEMERGENCY\n4/16/56 4/25/56 10 21 NATECHTRAU, NAS, PENSACOLA, FLA. EDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, USN\n6/30/56 30 51 NATECHTRAU, NAS, PENSACOLA, FLA. EDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, USN\n8/2/56 8/16/56 15 36 NATECHTRAU, NAS, PENSACOLA, FLA. EDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, USN\n3/22/57 3/26/57 04 32 NATECHTRAU, NAS, PENSACOLA, FLA. J.A. GOODWIN, CDR/USN, Acting\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—50160-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":492,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S LEAVE RECORD\nNAVPERS-329 (NEW 10-46)\nINSTRUCTIONS\n1. Enter each period of leave taken upon return or reporting for duty.\n2. On 1 July each year enter credit for leave accrued during past fiscal year at rate of 2½ days per month, not to exceed 30 days. Reduce credit as necessary in order that new balance available does not exceed 60 days. Unused credit cannot be carried forward except as noted below.\n3. In the case of leave commenced and extending beyond the end of a fiscal year: Upon return or reporting for new duty, deduct leave taken from balance available at commencement of leave period; add leave credit accrued as of 30 June not to exceed 30 days. New balance available may not exceed 60 days.\n4. This record to be transferred with officer upon change of duty; commanding officer authenticate entries prior to detachment of officer.\nNAME (Last) (First) (Middle) RANK FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement LT, USN 177283/1350\nCredit originally established or brought forward from previous record, 60 days\nLEAVE TAKEN CREDITED BALANCE AVAILABLE SHIP OR STATION SIGNATURE OF COMMANDING OFFICER\nFROM TO DAYS DATE DAYS\n7/17/48 7/25/48 9 51 Washington, DC Delay to BuAero.\n12/30/48 1/5/49 07 44 BAGR-CD Dayton O HENRY J BOWKER\n5-3-49 5-13-49 11 33 BAGR-CD Dayton O T. J. RAFTERY, CAPT, USN\nDrop excess of 60 days -- 6-30-49 30 60 BAGR CD DAYTON O H.J. BOWKER, LCDR, USNR.\n9-1-49 9-2-49 02 58 BAGR_CD DAYTON O C.D. BROWN, LTJG, USN\n9/30/49 10/14/49 15 43 DELAY to BuAero. Washington, D.C.\n12/20/49 12/23/49 4 39 BuAero. Wash.DC. J. L. BETTINGER, JR.\n1-4-50 1-13-50 10 29 Delay to U.S. NavPhotoCen, NAS, Anacostia, D.C. L.W. PARRISH (LMA)\n6-6-50 6-9-50 4 25 U.S.NavPhotoCen, NAS, Anacostia, D.C. T.R. ODENATH, By direction\n6-30-50 30 55 NPC, NAS, Anacostia .T.R. ODENATH, By direction\n10-3-50 10-13-50 10 10-31-50 45 NPC, NAS, Anacostia T.R. ODENATH, By direction\nNo further leave taken at this command\n1 NOV 50 10 NOV 50 10 AUTHORIZED DELAY --- 35 NAS BARBER'S PT. J. M. ST. ONGE By direction\nNO LEAVE TAKEN SINCE 11 NOV 1950 TRANSFERRED 7 MAY 1951 NAS BARBER'S PT. J. M. ST. ONGE By direction\n7-1-51 30 60 CFA, YOKOSUKA M. ROMANO, By Dir.\n29 NOV 1951 Authenticated upon detachment CFA, YOKOSUKA M. ROMANO, By Dir.\n12/6/51 12/20/51 15 45 DELAY TO BUAERO. WASHINGTON, D.C. J. D. Bedford\nNO LEAVE TAKEN FROM 12/20/51 TO DATE OF DETACHMENT 2 Feb 1952 BuAerWash, DC J. D. Bedford\n2-3-52 2-4-52 1 44 NSC OAKLAND,CALIF. J. H. LILLIS, By dir.\n6-19-52 6-30-52 12 32 NSC OAKLAND CALIF F.A. FIELDING, By dir.\n6-30-52 30 60 NSC OAKLAND CALIF F.A. FIELDING, By dir.\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—50160-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":493,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAME (Last) (First) (Middle) RANK FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement LT, USN 177283/1350\nCredit originally established or brought forward from previous record, 60 days\nLEAVE TAKEN CREDITED BALANCE AVAILABLE SHIP OR STATION SIGNATURE OF COMMANDING OFFICER\nFROM TO DAYS DATE DAYS\nWashington, DC Delay to BuAero. 51 7/17/48 7/25/48 9\nBAGR-CD Dayton O HENRY J BOWKER 44 12/30/48 1/5/49 07\nBAGR-CD Dayton O T. J. RAFTERY, CAPT, USN 33 5-3-49 5-13-49 11\nDrop excess of 60 days 6-30-49 30 60 BAGR CD DAYTON O H.J. BOWKER, LCDR, USNR.\n9-1-49 9-2-49 02 58 BAGR-CD DAYTON O C.D. BROWN, LTJG, USN\n9/30/49 10/14/49 15 43 DELAY to BuAero. Washington, D. C.\n12/20/49 12/23/49 4 39 BuAero. Wash.DC. J. L. BETTINGER, JR.\n1-4-50 1-13-50 10 29 Delay to U.S. NavPhotoCen, NAS, Anacostia, D.C. L.W. PARRISH (LMA)\n6-6-50 6-9-50 4 25 U.S.NavPhotoCen, NAS, Anacostia, D.C. T.R. ODENATH, By direction\n6-30-50 30 55 NPC, NAS, Anacostia .T.R. ODENATH, By direction\n10-3-50 10-13-50 10 10-31-50 45 NPC, NAS, Anacostia T.R. ODENATH, By direction\nNo further leave taken at this command\n1 NOV 50 10 NOV 50 10 AUTHORIZED DELAY 35 NAS BARBER'S PT. J. M. ST. ONGE By direction\nNO LEAVE TAKEN SINCE 11 NOV 1950 TRANSFERRED 7 MAY 1951 NAS BARBER'S PT. J. M. ST. ONGE By direction\n7-1-51 30 60 CFA, YOKOSUKA M. ROMANO, By Dir.\n29 NOV 1951 Authenticated upon detachment CFA, YOKOSUKA M. ROMANO, By Dir.\n12/6/51 12/20/51 15 45 DELAY TO BUAERO. WASHINGTON, D.C. J. D. Bedford\nNO LEAVE TAKEN FROM 12/20/51 TO DATE OF DETACHMENT 2 Feb 1952 BuAerWash, DC J. D. Bedford\n2-3-52 2-4-52 1 44 NSC OAKLAND,CALIF. J. H. LILLIS, By dir.\n6-19-52 6-30-52 12 32 NSC OAKLAND CALIF F.A. FIELDING, By dir.\n6-30-52 30 60 NSC OAKLAND CALIF F.A. FIELDING, By dir."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":494,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICERS LEAVE RECORD\nNavPers-329 (new 10-46)\nNAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement RANK LT USN FILE NO. 177283\nCredit originally established or brought forward from previous record 39 days. 8/31/46 Verified by Bupers as balance as of\nLeave Taken Credited\nFrom To Days Date Days Balance Available Ship or Station Signature of Commanding Officer\n9/1/46 9/1/46 39\n12/3/46 12/6/46 4 35\n6/30/47 Leave Earned Fiscal 47 25\nLeave Credit as of 7/1/47 60\n7/21/47 7/31/47 10 50\n10/14/47 10/16/47 2 48 NSC Pearl Harbor JOHN N. HAMDSHIRE By direction\n10/22/47 No leave taken on transfer\n12-10-47 12-18-47 07 41 ComUtWingPac Staff J. C. CRONIN, CAPT, USN\n3-3-48 3-14-48 10 31 ComUtWingPac Staff ONIA B. STANLEY, Jr., CDR By direction. J. C. CRONIN, CAPT, USN\n7-1-48 30 60 ComUtWingPacStaff"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":495,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS\n1. Enter each period of leave taken upon return or reporting for duty.\n2. On 1 July each year enter credit for leave accrued during past fiscal year at rate of 2½ days per month, not to exceed 30 days. Reduce credit as necessary in order that new balance available does not exceed 60 days. Unused credit cannot be carried forward except as noted below.\n3. In the case of leave commenced and extending beyond the end of a fiscal year: Upon return or reporting for new duty deduct leave taken from balance available at commencement of leave period; add leave credit accrued as of 30 June not to exceed 30 days. New balance available may not exceed 60 days.\n4. This record to be transferred with officer upon change of duty; commanding officer authenticate entries prior to detachment of officer."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":496,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":497,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENS WALTER H ATTLESEY USNR\n6225 WILCOX AVE\nBELL CALIF\n\nD 23 11ND 412627\n\nCHECKED\nBY DATE"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":498,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECKED\nBY 1 DATE 11/10/49"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":499,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE\nPresident of the United States of America\n\nExpresses the sincere appreciation of his fellow-countrymen for the loyal service rendered by\n\nLIEUTENANT DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, UNITED STATES NAVY\n\nFile No. 0177283\n\non active duty in the United States Navy during World War II.\n\nIn testimony whereof I am privileged to bestow this\n\nCertificate of Satisfactory Service\n\nDone in the City of Washington, D.C. this Twenty-fifth day of August Nineteen hundred and forty eight\n\n348626\n\nFor the President,\nJohn L. Sullivan\nSecretary of the Navy"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":500,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\n\nOFFICER\nFITNESS REPORT\nJACKET\n\nNO PAPER OR DOCUMENT\nMAY BE ADDED TO OR REMOVED FROM\nTHIS FILE JACKET\nEXCEPT BY SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED\nPERSONNEL OF THE OFFICER RECORDS DIVISION"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":501,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TICKLER CHIT FOR FITNESS REPORT(S)\nNAME Newhouse Delbert C 177283/8312\n(Surname) & (Initial) (File No.)\nPeriod of report: From 8/18/59 To 11/30/59\nOfficer's Fitness Report (withheld) (or requested) by Pers E222 due to:\nReason: Performance (F2)\n(B111)\nPhotostat\nReturned\n(Type letter)\nOther C 2 4\n(Reviews date stamp or initials)\n(NOTE: THIS IS NOT A PERMANENT RECORD - TO BE REMOVED WHEN THE REPORT INDICATED IS FILED)\nDO NOT FILE OTHER MATTER ON TOP OF THIS FORM\n026503"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":502,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMISSION OF PHOTOGRAPH\nIN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE B-2210 BUPERS MANUAL\n1. This sheet may be used in lieu of a letter of transmittal by stapling or otherwise attaching photograph, prepared as indicated below, in center and filling in spaces indicated.\n2. Photographs shall be submitted by all officers of the Navy and the Naval Reserve, regardless of status, periodically as follows:\na. Upon origi\nb. Upon accep\nc. In any eve\nd. Upon trans\n3. The photograph uniform other than 4 inches in width\n4. Group pictures\n5. Enter on back approximate date p\n6. Photographs su may be used for of\n7. Secure photogr Naval Personnel (A\n8. Label container\n9. The Navy Photo activities having to produce photogr\nNAME: DELBERT CLEMENT NEWHOUSE CWO-4 CHPHOT 177283/8311\nFirst Middle Last Rank Corps File No.\nDate Photograph was taken: 22 MARCH 1960\nBUPERS\nFILE JACKET"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":503,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEC 17 1959\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\nNAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54)\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement 2. GRADE CHPHOT W-4 3. USN (R) USN 4. DESIGNATOR 8312 5. FILE NO. 177283\n6. SHIP OR STATION PACIFIC FLEET PHOTO-TRIANGULATION GROUP, HEADQUARTERS 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 18 AUGUST 1959\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT SEMI-ANNUAL X 9. TYPE OF REPORT REGULAR X 10. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 18 AUG 59 TO 30 NOV 59\n11. DUTIES: Photographic Officer (4), Public Information Officer (4), Reenlistment Officer (4)\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT Providing Photo-Triangulation services to Fleet Units\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT NONE\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES\n(a) Present Assignment; (b) As Duty Watch Officer; (c) Collateral Duties; (d) Technical Specialty Photography; (e) Ship Handling; (f) In Administration; (g) Ability to Command; (h) As Executive or Division Officer; (i) Duty on a Staff; (j) Other\n15. Considering the possible requirements of war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you: Prefer him to most? X\n16. (a) and (b) ratings: A very fine officer of great value to the service (a) X; (b) 0 0 0 0 0\n17. COMMENTS: CHPHOT NEWHOUSE has a long and an excellent background in photography and possesses the ability to implement this experience in an efficient and effective manner. He is completely dependable under all circumstances and does much to promote harmony within the unit. He is consistently a good leader and commands the respect of his subordinates.\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER: ROBERT W. JOHNSON, LCDR, USN, 194464/1100, OFFICER IN CHARGE\n16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":504,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities?\n(a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE\n(b) COOPERATION\n(c) JUDGMENT\n(d) LEADERSHIP\n(e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL\n(f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS\n(g) REMARKS. NONE\n20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. NOT OBSERVED\n21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. (b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES NO X\n22. DATE FORWARDED 8 December 1959\n23. Robert W. Johnson (Signature of reporting officer)\n24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent)\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":505,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OCT 21 1959\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\nNAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54)\nFinished File Fitness Report Pers E2\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement 2. GRADE CWO4 3. USN (R) USN 4. DESIGNATOR 8311 5. FILE NO. 177283\n6. SHIP OR STATION USS ESSEX (CVA-9) 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 10 January 1958\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT SEMI-ANNUAL X 9. TYPE OF REPORT REGULAR X 10. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 11-20-58 TO 5-31-59\n11. DUTIES: Photographic Officer (5); Ast. OP DIV Officer (5); Operations Department Duty Officer (5)\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT Leave and Upkeep, Mayport, Fla.; Shipyard Overhaul, Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, Va.; INTEX 1-59\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT None\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES (table of ratings)\n15. Considering the possible requirements of war: Be pleased to have him? X\n16. (a) In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? (a) A dependable and typically effective officer X; (b) 2\n17. COMMENTS: CWO NEWHOUSE has performed his assigned duties in a competent manner. He is an excellant photographer. As OP junior division officer he has demonstrated average leadership ability. His military bearing and dress are above average.\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER: T. W. SOUTH II, Captain, 73643, Commanding Officer\n16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":506,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities?\n(a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his various duty assignments and compare them to his professional knowledge.)\nNOT OBSERVED\nHas exceptional knowledge of his duty assignments. Extremely well informed.\nHas excellent knowledge of most phases of his duty assignments. Is well informed on the remaining phases. Occasionally demonstrates exceptional knowledge.\nIs well informed on most phases of his duty assignments. Frequently demonstrates excellent knowledge.\nHas satisfactory knowledge of routine phases of his duty assignments.\nSerious gaps in his knowledge of fundamentals of his duty assignments. (Adverse)\n(b) COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony with and for others.)\nNOT OBSERVED\nExtremely successful in working with others. Has an outstanding ability to create harmony.\nPromotes harmony in dealing with others. A very good team worker.\nGets along well with most people. Knows how to take orders. Fits in with a team.\nIndifferent to others. Cooperates occasionally.\nInclined to create friction. Generally not cooperative. (Adverse)\n(c) JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.)\nNOT OBSERVED\nOutstandingly sound and logical thinker with an exceptional grasp of the situation involved.\nExceptionally good judgment based on sound evaluation of all the factors involved.\nJudgment is usually sound and reasonable.\nIs prone to neglect or misinterpret facts. Occasionally commits errors in judgment.\nDue to faulty judgment, his decisions or recommendations are too frequently wrong. (Adverse)\n(d) LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing, obtaining the cooperation of others, and in directing their efforts effectively.)\nNOT OBSERVED\nOutstanding skill in directing others results in a very effective unit. Inspires confidence even under very difficult circumstances.\nA consistently good leader. Commands respect of his subordinates. Is very effective under difficult circumstances.\nCapable leader. Develops good cooperation and team work in difficult circumstances. Knows how to give orders.\nGenerally obtains effective cooperation under normal circumstances.\nFails to command. Unable to exert control. (Adverse)\n(e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility, ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, and training.)\nNOT OBSERVED\nCapable of increased responsibility and rapid advancement.\nVery promising promotional material.\nDemonstrates promise for further growth at moderate rate.\nPresent job is taxing his capabilities. Requires considerable amount of training.\nDefinitely limited. (Adverse)\n(f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (Consider his utilization of men, money, and materials.)\nNOT OBSERVED\nIs most effective in the utilization of men, money, and materials.\nIs effective in accomplishing extra savings in men, money, and materials by implementing and maintaining improved management procedures.\nConserves men, money, and materials effectively by implementing and maintaining routine management procedures.\nUtilizes men, money, and materials in a barely satisfactory manner.\nIs needlessly wasteful of men, money, and materials. Is irresponsible in this regard. (Adverse)\n(g) REMARKS. Marks in any of the starred (*) boxes must be justified in this section with a brief description of the factors which were considered in evaluating the officer. The justification should be in concrete and specific terms.\nNot applicable.\n20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state.\nNot observed.\n21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report.\n(b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES NO X\n22. DATE FORWARDED 4 OCT 1959\n23. T. W. SOUTH II (Signature of reporting officer)\n24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":507,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Instructions for submission of photograph in accordance with Article B-2210 BUPERS Manual\n1. This sheet may be used in lieu of a letter of transmittal by stapling or otherwise attaching photograph, prepared as indicated below, in center and filling in spaces indicated.\n2. Photographs shall be submitted by all officers of the Navy and the Naval Reserve, regardless of status, periodically as follows:\na. Upon ori\nb. Upon acc ade.\nc. In any e\nd. Upon tra\n3. The photograph er in a uniform other than proximately 4 inches in width\n4. Group picture\n5. Enter on back rps and approximate date\n6. Photographs ent and may be used for\n7. Secure photo Chief of Naval Personnel\n8. Label contain\n9. The Navy Pho aval activities having quested, to produce photo\nNAME: DELBERT CLEMENT NEWHOUSE W-4 CHPHOT 177283/8311\nFirst Middle Last Rank Corps File No.\nDate photograph was taken: 8/25/59\n/BUPERS FILE JACKET"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":508,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54)\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\nNOV 24 1958 J\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement\n2. GRADE CWO4\n3. USN (R) USN\n4. DESIGNATOR 8311\n5. FILE NO. 177283\n6. SHIP OR STATION USS ESSEX (CVA-9)\n7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 10 January 1958\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT SEMI-ANNUAL, DETACHMENT OF REPORTING SENIOR X, DETACHMENT OF OFFICER\n9. TYPE OF REPORT REGULAR X\n10. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 6-1-58 TO 11-19-58\n11. DUTIES. Photographic Officer (6); Ast OP Division Officer (6); Senior Air Terminal Unit Duty Officer (6)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER:\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT: CV OPS as Unit of TF 60, SIXTHFLT; WESTPAC CV OPS as Unit of CTF 77, SEVENTHFLT.\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT: COMSIXTHFLT msg 161022Z of Jul'58; CNO msg of 30 Aug'58; CINCLANTFLT msg 152325Z of Oct'58.\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES\nDUTY ASSIGNMENT: (a) Present Assignment; (b) As Air Terminal Watch Officer; (c) Collateral Duties; (d) Technical Specialty Photography; (e) Ship Handling; (f) In Administration; (g) Ability to Command; (h) As Executive or Division Officer; (i) Duty on a Staff; (j) Other\n15. Considering the possible requirements of war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you: Particularly desire to have him? X\n16. (a) In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? (b) For this report period indicate in (b) how many officers of his grade you have designated in each category of (a). (a) A very fine officer of great value to the service X; (b) 6 / 10 / 1\n17. COMMENTS. Chief Warrant Officer NEWHOUSE quietly and unpretentiously has directed the efforts of the photographic group in performing an outstanding job during the Lebanese support operations. Thousands of aerial photographic prints were expeditiously developed in order to support intelligence requirements. He can be depended upon to complete any photographic assignment with speed and expertness. Chief Warrant Officer NEWHOUSE is well liked and respected by all who know and work with him. He conducts himself in a good military manner and his appearance is always neat and trim. He is recommended for promotion to higher rank.\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. T. A. CHRISTOPHER, Captain, 72419, Commanding Officer"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":509,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities?\n(a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his various duty assignments and compare them to his professional knowledge.)\nNOT OBSERVED\nHas exceptional knowledge of his duty assignments. Extremely well informed.\nHas excellent knowledge of most phases of his duty assignments. Is well informed on the remaining phases. Occasionally demonstrates exceptional knowledge.\nIs well informed on most phases of his duty assignments. Frequently demonstrates excellent knowledge.\nHas satisfactory knowledge of routine phases of his duty assignments.\nSerious gaps in his knowledge of fundamentals of his duty assignments. (Adverse)\n(b) COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony with and for others.)\nNOT OBSERVED\nExtremely successful in working with others. Has an outstanding ability to create harmony.\nPromotes harmony in dealing with others. A very good team worker.\nGets along well with most people. Knows how to take orders. Fits in with a team.\nIndifferent to others. Cooperates occasionally.\nInclined to create friction. Generally not cooperative. (Adverse)\n(c) JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.)\nNOT OBSERVED\nOutstandingly sound and logical thinker with an exceptional grasp of the situation involved.\nExceptionally good judgment based on sound evaluation of all the factors involved.\nJudgment is usually sound and reasonable.\nIs prone to neglect or misinterpret facts. Occasionally commits errors in judgment.\nDue to faulty judgment, his decisions or recommendations are too frequently wrong. (Adverse)\n(d) LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing, obtaining the cooperation of others, and in directing their efforts effectively.)\nNOT OBSERVED\nOutstanding skill in directing others results in a very effective unit. Inspires confidence even under very difficult circumstances.\nA consistently good leader. Commands respect of his subordinates. Is very effective under difficult circumstances.\nCapable leader. Develops good cooperation and team work in difficult circumstances. Knows how to give orders.\nGenerally obtains effective cooperation under normal circumstances.\nFails to command. Unable to exert control. (Adverse)\n(e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility, ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, and training.)\nNOT OBSERVED\nCapable of increased responsibility and rapid advancement.\nVery promising promotional material.\nDemonstrates promise for further growth at moderate rate.\nPresent job is taxing his capabilities. Requires considerable amount of training.\nDefinitely limited. (Adverse)\n(f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (Consider his utilization of men, money, and materials.)\nNOT OBSERVED\nIs most effective in the utilization of men, money, and materials.\nIs effective in accomplishing extra savings in men, money, and materials by implementing and maintaining improved management procedures.\nConserves men, money, and materials effectively by implementing and maintaining routine management procedures.\nUtilizes men, money, and materials in a barely satisfactory manner.\nIs needlessly wasteful of men, money, and materials. Is irresponsible in this regard. (Adverse)\n(g) REMARKS. Marks in any of the starred (*) boxes must be justified in this section with a brief description of the factors which were considered in evaluating the officer. The justification should be in concrete and specific terms.\nNot applicable\n20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state.\nNot observed.\n21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report.\n(b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES NO X\n22. DATE FORWARDED 19 NOV 1958\n23. T. A. CHRISTOPHER (Signature of reporting officer)\n24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":510,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CWO4 D. C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311 NOV 24 1958 J\nCOMSIXTHFLT MSG 161022Z OF JULY 1958\nI LIKE THE WAY YOU APPRECIATED THE SITUATION, GOT GOING EARLY AND REACHED OUT TO DO A SUPERIOR JOB YESTERDAY X THERE CERTAINLY ISN'T ANY FIRST AND SECOND TEAM IN MY CARRIERS X WELL DONE TO YOU AND ALL YOUR BOYS X SIGNED BROWN\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY\nE. C. MONAGHAN, CHSHIPCLK, USN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":511,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOV 24 1958 J\n\nCWO4 D. C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n\nCHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS MESSAGE OF 30 AUGUST 1958\n\nTHE EXPEDITIOUS AND EFFICIENT MANNER IN WHICH ALL ARRANGEMENTS WERE COMPLETED ON 28 AUG, TOGETHER WITH THE SMART SEAMANLIKE TRANSIT OF SUEZ CANAL BY ESSEX AND DESTROYERS UNDER COMDESRON 10 IS DESERVING OF HIGHEST CREDIT TO ALL CONCERNED X WELL DONE X ARLEIGH BURKE\n\nCERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE COPY\nE. C. MONAGHAN, CHSHIPCLK, USN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":512,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOV 24 1958 J\n\nCWO4 D. C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283/8311\n\nCINCLANTFLT MSG 152325Z OF OCTOBER 1958\n\nON YOUR RETURN TO LANTFLT WATERS A QUOTE WELL DONE UNQUOTE FOR YOUR CLEAR DEMONSTRATION OF READINESS AND MOBILITY X BEST WISHES FOR A SPEEDY HOMEWARD VOYAGE AND A LONG AWAITED REUNION WITH YOUR FAMILIES\n\nCERTIFIED TO BE A COPY TRUE\nE. C. MONAGHAN, CHSHIPCLK, USN"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":513,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n\nNAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54)\n\nOCT 13 1959\n\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n\n1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement; 2. GRADE CWO4; 3. USN (R) USN; 4. DESIGNATOR 8311; 5. FILE NO. 177283\n\n6. SHIP OR STATION USS ESSEX (CVA-9); 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 10 January 1958\n\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT: Detachment of Officer; 9. TYPE OF REPORT: Regular; 10. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 6-1-59 TO 7-24-59\n\n11. DUTIES: Photo Officer (1 1/2); Ass't OP Division Officer (1 1/2)\n\nSignature of officer reported on: Delbert C. Newhouse\n\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT: Refresher Training; INTEX 1-59; LANTFLEX 2-59; EX RIP TIDE; Leave & Upkeep, Mayport, Fla.\n\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT: None\n\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES: Table of duty assignments with ratings marked as printed.\n\n(a) Present Assignment; (b) As Watch Officer; (c) Collateral Duties; (d) Technical Specialty PHOTO; (e) Ship Handling; (f) In Administration; (g) Ability to Command; (h) As Executive or Division Officer; (i) Duty on a Staff; (j) Other\n\n15. Considering the possible requirements of war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you: Particularly desire to have him? Prefer him to most? Be pleased to have him? Be satisfied to have him? Prefer not to have him? (Adverse)\n\n16. (a) In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? (b) For this report period indicate in (b) how many officers of his grade you have designated in each category of (a).\n\n17. COMMENTS: Chief Warrant Officer NEWHOUSE performed his assigned duties satisfactorily. Although on occasion he did not take advantage of opportunities to display initiative, he could be relied upon to perform his routine duties in a thorough manner. As Assistant Divison Officer he was attentive to the personal and military needs of the men in the division.\n\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON: T. W. SOUTH II, Captain, 73643, Commanding Officer"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":514,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities?\n\n(a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his various duty assignments and compare them to his professional knowledge.)\n\n(b) COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony with and for others.)\n\n(c) JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.)\n\n(d) LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing, obtaining the cooperation of others, and in directing their efforts effectively.)\n\n(e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility, ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, and training.)\n\n(f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (Consider his utilization of men, money, and materials.)\n\n(g) REMARKS. Marks in any of the starred (*) boxes must be justified in this section with a brief description of the factors which were considered in evaluating the officer. The justification should be in concrete and specific terms.\n\nNot Applicable.\n\n20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state.\n\nNot Observed.\n\n21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. (b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES NO X\n\n22. DATE FORWARDED\n\n23. T. W. SOUTH II (Signature of reporting officer)\n\n24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":515,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOV 13 1958 G\n\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n\nNAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54)\n\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n\n1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement; 2. GRADE CWO4; 3. USN (R) USN; 4. DESIGNATOR 8311; 5. FILE NO. 177283\n\n6. SHIP OR STATION USS ESSEX (CVA-9); 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 10 January 1958\n\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT: Semi-Annual; 9. TYPE OF REPORT: Regular; 10. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 12-31-57 TO 5-31-58\n\n11. DUTIES: Photographic Officer (5); Ast OP Division Officer (5); Air Terminal Unit Duty Officer (4)\n\nSignature of officer reported on: C. Newhouse\n\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT: INTEX 1-58; INTEX 2-58 enroute Med.; Fleet & NATO Exercises as Unit of TF 60, SIXTHFLT.\n\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT: None.\n\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES: ratings marked as printed.\n\n15. Considering the possible requirements of war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you: Particularly desire to have him? X\n\n16. (a) and (b) ratings: One of the few highly outstanding officers I know: 2; A very fine officer of great value to the service: 13; A dependable and typically effective officer: 1\n\n17. COMMENTS: CWO NEWHOUSE is a very competent and well informed officer whose performance as Photographic Officer of this command has been commendable. He controls his men and his facilities very effectively, always meeting the demands placed on his section and working in harmony with all departments on the ship. He is the type of officer who, when given a task to perform, does it with no questions asked, quietly and efficiently. During the period of this report very heavy work loads have been imposed on the photo lab in conjunctions with air operations, public relations and miscellaneous requirements. These have been met with promptness and outstanding quality because of the excellent administration of section by CWO NEWHOUSE. CWO NEWHOUSE is a very likeable and congenial officer who is respected by both juniors and seniors alike. His bearing, deportment and dress have been outstanding.\n\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON: T. A. CHRISTOPHER, Captain, 72419, Commanding Officer"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":516,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities? (a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his various duty assignments and compare them to his professional knowledge.) NOT OBSERVED | Has exceptional knowledge of his duty assignments. Extremely well informed. | Has excellent knowledge of most phases of his duty assignments. Is well informed on the remaining phases. Occasionally demonstrates exceptional knowledge. | Is well informed on most phases of his duty assignments. Frequently demonstrates excellent knowledge. | Has satisfactory knowledge of routine phases of his duty assignments. | Serious gaps in his knowledge of fundamentals of his duty assignments. (Adverse) X (b) COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony with and for others.) NOT OBSERVED | Extremely successful in working with others. Has an outstanding ability to create harmony. | Promotes harmony in dealing with others. A very good team worker. | Gets along well with most people. Knows how to take orders. Fits in with a team. | Indifferent to others. Cooperates occasionally. | Inclined to create friction. Generally not cooperative. (Adverse) X (c) JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.) NOT OBSERVED | Outstandingly sound and logical thinker with an exceptional grasp of the situation involved. | Exceptionally good judgment based on sound evaluation of all the factors involved. | Judgment is usually sound and reasonable. | Is prone to neglect or misinterpret facts. Occasionally commits errors in judgment. | Due to faulty judgment, his decisions or recommendations are too frequently wrong. (Adverse) X (d) LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing, obtaining the cooperation of others, and in directing their efforts effectively.) NOT OBSERVED | Outstanding skill in directing others results in a very effective unit. Inspires confidence even under very difficult circumstances. | A consistently good leader. Commands respect of his subordinates. Is very effective under difficult circumstances. | Capable leader. Develops good cooperation and team work in difficult circumstances. Knows how to give orders. | Generally obtains effective cooperation under normal circumstances. | Fails to command. Unable to exert control. (Adverse) X (e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility, ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, and training.) NOT OBSERVED | Capable of increased responsibility and rapid advancement. | Very promising promotional material. | Demonstrates promise for further growth at moderate rate. | Present job is taxing his capabilities. Requires considerable amount of training. | Definitely limited. (Adverse) X (f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (Consider his utilization of men, money, and materials.) NOT OBSERVED | Is most effective in the utilization of men, money, and materials. | Is effective in accomplishing extra savings in men, money, and materials by implementing and maintaining improved management procedures. | Conserves men, money, and materials effectively by implementing and maintaining routine management procedures. | Utilizes men, money, and materials in a barely satisfactory manner. | Is needlessly wasteful of men, money, and materials. Is irresponsible in this regard. (Adverse) X (g) REMARKS. Marks in any of the starred (*) boxes must be justified in this section with a brief description of the factors which were considered in evaluating the officer. The justification should be in concrete and specific terms. Not applicable 20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state. Not observed 21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report. (b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES NO X 22. DATE FORWARDED 30 JUN 1958 23. T. A. CHRISTOPHER (Signature of reporting officer) 24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent) U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":517,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54) JAN 7 1958 J REPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS THE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS: 1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement 2. GRADE CWO-4 3. USN (R) USN 4. DESIGNATOR 8311 5. FILE NO. 177283 6. SHIP OR STATION Naval Air Technical Training Unit, NAS, Pensacola, Fla. 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 21 March 1956 8. OCCASION FOR REPORT SEMI-ANNUAL X DETACHMENT OF REPORTING SENIOR DETACHMENT OF OFFICER X 9. TYPE OF REPORT REGULAR X CONCURRENT SPECIAL 10. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 6/30/57 TO 12/30/57 11. DUTIES. List principal duties assigned including watches, and indicate in parentheses after each the number of months during the reporting period. Material Officer (6) Plant Account Officer (6) Officer of the Day (6) Training Class Division Officer (2) 12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT Training Navy aerial and ground photographers and photographic officers 13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT None 14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES DUTY ASSIGNMENT (a) Present Assignment X (b) As OOD Watch Officer X (c) Collateral Duties X (d) Technical Specialty Photography X (e) Ship Handling NOT OBSERVED (f) In Administration X (g) Ability to Command X (h) As Executive or Division Officer X (i) Duty on a Staff NOT OBSERVED (j) Other NOT OBSERVED 15. Considering the possible requirements of war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you: Prefer him to most? X 16. (a) In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? (b) For this report period indicate in (b) how many officers of his grade you have designated in each category of (a). (a) A very fine officer of great value to the service X (b) 1 3 0 0 0 17. COMMENTS. CWO NEWHOUSE has performed his assigned duties in a very satisfactory manner. His naval photographic experience, coupled with his previous experience in Aviation Supply (Photographic Technical Advisor) billets have enabled him to efficiently handle his duties as Material Officer of this Command. He is conscientious, has a pleasing personality and obtains full cooperation and support of the personnel working under his supervision. 18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON. JOHN A. GOODWIN, CDR, USN, 85852/1310, Commanding Officer 16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":518,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparisoh with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities? (a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his various duty assignments and compare them to his professional knowledge.) NOT OBSERVED | Has exceptional knowledge of his duty assignments. Extremely well informed. | Has excellent knowledge of most phases of his duty assignments. Is well informed on the remaining phases. Occasionally demonstrates exceptional knowledge. | Is well informed on most phases of his duty assignments. Frequently demonstrates excellent knowledge. | Has satisfactory knowledge of routine phases of his duty assignments. | Serious gaps in his knowledge of fundamentals of his duty assignments. (Adverse) X (b) COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony with and for others.) NOT OBSERVED | Extremely successful in working with others. Has an outstanding ability to create harmony. | Promotes harmony in dealing with others. A very good team worker. | Gets along well with most people. Knows how to take orders. Fits in with a team. | Indifferent to others. Cooperates occasionally. | Inclined to create friction. Generally not cooperative. (Adverse) X (c) JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.) NOT OBSERVED | Outstandingly sound and logical thinker with an exceptional grasp of the situation involved. | Exceptionally good judgment based on sound evaluation of all the factors involved. | Judgment is usually sound and reasonable. | Is prone to neglect or misinterpret facts. Occasionally commits errors in judgment. | Due to faulty judgment, his decisions or recommendations are too frequently wrong. (Adverse) X (d) LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing, obtaining the cooperation of others, and in directing their efforts effectively.) NOT OBSERVED | Outstanding skill in directing others results in a very effective unit. Inspires confidence even under very difficult circumstances. | A consistently good leader. Commands respect of his subordinates. Is very effective under difficult circumstances. | Capable leader. Develops good cooperation and team work in difficult circumstances. Knows how to give orders. | Generally obtains effective cooperation under normal circumstances. | Fails to command. Unable to exert control. (Adverse) X (e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility, ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, and training.) NOT OBSERVED | Capable of increased responsibility and rapid advancement. | Very promising promotional material. | Demonstrates promise for further growth at moderate rate. | Present job is taxing his capabilities. Requires considerable amount of training. | Definitely limited. (Adverse) X (f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (Consider his utilization of men, money, and materials.) NOT OBSERVED | Is most effective in the utilization of men, money, and materials. | Is effective in accomplishing extra savings in men, money, and materials by implementing and maintaining improved management procedures. | Conserves men, money, and materials effectively by implementing and maintaining routine management procedures. | Utilizes men, money, and materials in a barely satisfactory manner. | Is needlessly wasteful of men, money, and materials. Is irresponsible in this regard. (Adverse) X (g) REMARKS. Marks in any of the starred (*) boxes must be justified in this section with a brief description of the factors which were considered in evaluating the officer. The justification should be in concrete and specific terms. Not applicable 20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state. CWO NEWHOUSE has demonstrated ability for constructive professional work by the efficient manner in which he reorganized the records of the Material Department. He demonstrated planning ability and initiative in screening and obtaining disposition instructions for on hand material no longer needed by this Command. 21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report. (b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES NO X 22. DATE FORWARDED 2 January 1958 23. (Signature of reporting officer) 24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent) JAN 6 1958 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":519,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54) REPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS JUL 23 1957 THE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS: 1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) DELBERT (Middle) CLEMENT 2. GRADE CHPHOT 3. USN (R) USN 4. DESIGNATOR 8311 5. FILE NO. 177283 6. SHIP OR STATION Naval Air Technical Training Unit, NAS Pensacola, Fla. 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 3-21-56 8. OCCASION FOR REPORT SEMI-ANNUAL X 9. TYPE OF REPORT REGULAR X 10. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 6/22/57 TO 6/30/57 11. DUTIES. Material Officer - 9 days Plant Account Officer - 9 days OOD - 9 days 12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT Training Ground & Aerial Photographers and Photographic Reconnaissance Officers 13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT 14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES DUTY ASSIGNMENT (a) Present Assignment X (b) As OOD Watch Officer X (c) Collateral Duties X (d) Technical Specialty Photo X (e) Ship Handling NOT OBSERVED (f) In Administration X (g) Ability to Command X (h) As Executive or Division Officer X (i) Duty on a Staff NOT OBSERVED (j) Other 15. Considering the possible requirements of war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you: Prefer him to most? X 16. (a) (b) 1 3 17. COMMENTS. CHPHOT Newhouse has been assigned to duty as Unit Material Officer and has performed this duty in a very satisfactory manner. His Naval experience and knowledge of the Navy photographic supply system have enabled him to rapidly become familiar with his new duties. He is loyal and devoted to duty. He is of excellent military and personal character. 18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON. JOHN A. GOODWIN, CDR, 85852, U.S.N., Commanding Officer 16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":520,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities? (a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his various duty assignments and compare them to his professional knowledge.) NOT OBSERVED | Has exceptional knowledge of his duty assignments. Extremely well informed. | Has excellent knowledge of most phases of his duty assignments. Is well informed on the remaining phases. Occasionally demonstrates exceptional knowledge. | Is well informed on most phases of his duty assignments. Frequently demonstrates excellent knowledge. | Has satisfactory knowledge of routine phases of his duty assignments. | Serious gaps in his knowledge of fundamentals of his duty assignments. (Adverse) X (b) COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony with and for others.) NOT OBSERVED | Extremely successful in working with others. Has an outstanding ability to create harmony. | Promotes harmony in dealing with others. A very good team worker. | Gets along well with most people. Knows how to take orders. Fits in with a team. | Indifferent to others. Cooperates occasionally. | Inclined to create friction. Generally not cooperative. (Adverse) X (c) JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.) NOT OBSERVED | Outstandingly sound and logical thinker with an exceptional grasp of the situation involved. | Exceptionally good judgment based on sound evaluation of all the factors involved. | Judgment is usually sound and reasonable. | Is prone to neglect or misinterpret facts. Occasionally commits errors in judgment. | Due to faulty judgment, his decisions or recommendations are too frequently wrong. (Adverse) X (d) LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing, obtaining the cooperation of others, and in directing their efforts effectively.) NOT OBSERVED | Outstanding skill in directing others results in a very effective unit. Inspires confidence even under very difficult circumstances. | A consistently good leader. Commands respect of his subordinates. Is very effective under difficult circumstances. | Capable leader. Develops good cooperation and team work in difficult circumstances. Knows how to give orders. | Generally obtains effective cooperation under normal circumstances. | Fails to command. Unable to exert control. (Adverse) X (e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility, ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, and training.) NOT OBSERVED | Capable of increased responsibility and rapid advancement. | Very promising promotional material. | Demonstrates promise for further growth at moderate rate. | Present job is taxing his capabilities. Requires considerable amount of training. | Definitely limited. (Adverse) X (f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (Consider his utilization of men, money, and materials.) NOT OBSERVED | Is most effective in the utilization of men, money, and materials. | Is effective in accomplishing extra savings in men, money, and materials by implementing and maintaining improved management procedures. | Conserves men, money, and materials effectively by implementing and maintaining routine management procedures. | Utilizes men, money, and materials in a barely satisfactory manner. | Is needlessly wasteful of men, money, and materials. Is irresponsible in this regard. (Adverse) X (g) REMARKS. Marks in any of the starred (*) boxes must be justified in this section with a brief description of the factors which were considered in evaluating the officer. The justification should be in concrete and specific terms. 20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state. Not observed 21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report. (b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES NO X 22. DATE FORWARDED 12 July 1957 23. (Signature of reporting officer) 24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent) JUL 16 1957 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":521,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54)\n\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) (First) (Middle) 2. GRADE 3. USN (R) 4. DESIGNATOR 5. FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement CWO-4 USN 8311 177283\n6. SHIP OR STATION 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION\nNaval Air Technical Training Unit, NAS, Pensacola, Fla. 21 Mar 1956\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT 9. TYPE OF REPORT 10. PERIOD OF REPORT\nSEMI-ANNUAL [X] DETACHMENT OF REPORTING SENIOR [X] DETACHMENT OF OFFICER [ ] REGULAR [X] CONCURRENT [ ] SPECIAL [ ] FROM 12/31/56 TO 6/21/57\n11. DUTIES. List principal duties assigned including watches, and indicate in parentheses after each the number of months during the reporting period. If assignment is in other than regular Navy billet or involves duties not well established, give outline of purpose, scope, and significance of such duties. If necessary, use separate sheet and attach to this form.\nGround Phase Officer PH(A) School (6)\nOOD (6)\n\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER: Signature of officer reported on: [signature]\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nTraining Navy aerial and ground photographers and photographic officers\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES (In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, consider the requirements of his duties and evaluate his performance.)\nDUTY ASSIGNMENT | NOT OBSERVED | Outstanding performance in most aspects of his duty assignments. Highly qualified. | Excellent performance in most aspects of his duty assignments. Efficient or competent in most of the remaining aspects. Frequently demonstrates outstanding performance. | Competent and efficient performance in most aspects of his duty assignments. Frequently demonstrates excellent performance. | Satisfactory performance in most aspects of his duty assignments. Needs some supervision. Basically qualified. | Inadequate performance in many aspects of his duty assignments. Needs close supervision. He is not qualified. (Adverse)\n(a) Present Assignment: X in Excellent\n(b) As OOD Watch Officer: X in Competent\n(c) Collateral Duties: X in Competent\n(d) Technical Specialty Photography: X in Excellent\n(e) Ship Handling: NOT OBSERVED X\n(f) In Administration: X in Competent-Frequently demonstrates excellent\n(g) Ability to Command: X in Competent\n(h) As Executive or Division Officer: X in Competent\n(i) Duty on a Staff: NOT OBSERVED X\n(j) Other: NOT OBSERVED X\n15. Considering the possible requirements of war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you: Particularly desire to have him? [ ] Prefer him to most? [ ] Be pleased to have him? [X] Be satisfied to have him? [ ] Prefer not to have him? (Adverse) [ ]\n16. (a) In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? (b) For this report period indicate in (b) how many officers of his grade you have designated in each category of (a).\nOne of the few highly outstanding officers I know | A very fine officer of great value to the service | A dependable and typically effective officer | An acceptable officer | Unsatisfactory (Adverse)\n(a) X in dependable column\n(b) 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0\n17. COMMENTS. In this section it is important that the outstanding characteristics of the officer, and any weaknesses which seriously affect his performance of duty, be reported. The appraisal should be concise and concrete in terms of specific examples of performance from which the more general factors can be inferred. The appraisal will justify the marks assigned in items 14, 15, and 16, above. In addition, the appraisal should include outstanding qualifications in any field such as the following: administration, planning, logistics, electronics, new weapons, and in dealing with the public in personal or official contacts. This space must not be left blank.\nCHPHOT NEWHOUSE is an experienced and well-qualified photographic specialist. He is interested and strives to improve the PH(A) School photographic training program. He has a pleasant easy-going disposition. At times, he gives the impression of not having sufficient enthusiasm and drive; however, this is countered by the fact that the school phase under his supervision has been operating in a smooth and efficient manner. He is of excellent moral character.\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON.\nEDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, USN, 78971/1310, Commanding Officer"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":522,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities?\n(a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his various duty assignments and compare them to his professional knowledge.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Has exceptional knowledge of his duty assignments. Extremely well informed. | Has excellent knowledge of most phases of his duty assignments. Is well informed on the remaining phases. Occasionally demonstrates exceptional knowledge. | Is well informed on most phases of his duty assignments. Frequently demonstrates excellent knowledge. | Has satisfactory knowledge of routine phases of his duty assignments. | Serious gaps in his knowledge of fundamentals of his duty assignments. (Adverse)\nX in column 2\n(b) COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony with and for others.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Extremely successful in working with others. Has an outstanding ability to create harmony. | Promotes harmony in dealing with others. A very good team worker. | Gets along well with most people. Knows how to take orders. Fits in with a team. | Indifferent to others. Cooperates occasionally. | Inclined to create friction. Generally not cooperative. (Adverse)\nX in column 3\n(c) JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Outstandingly sound and logical thinker with an exceptional grasp of the situation involved. | Exceptionally good judgment based on sound evaluation of all the factors involved. | Judgment is usually sound and reasonable. | Is prone to neglect or misinterpret facts. Occasionally commits errors in judgment. | Due to faulty judgment, his decisions or recommendations are too frequently wrong. (Adverse)\nX in column 2\n(d) LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing, obtaining the cooperation of others, and in directing their efforts effectively.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Outstanding skill in directing others results in a very effective unit. Inspires confidence even under very difficult circumstances. | A consistently good leader. Commands respect of his subordinates. Is very effective under difficult circumstances. | Capable leader. Develops good cooperation and team work in difficult circumstances. Knows how to give orders. | Generally obtains effective cooperation under normal circumstances. | Fails to command. Unable to exert control. (Adverse)\nX in column 3\n(e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility, ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, and training.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Capable of increased responsibility and rapid advancement. | Very promising promotional material. | Demonstrates promise for further growth at moderate rate. | Present job is taxing his capabilities. Requires considerable amount of training. | Definitely limited. (Adverse)\nX in column 3\n(f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (Consider his utilization of men, money, and materials.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Is most effective in the utilization of men, money, and materials. | Is effective in accomplishing extra savings in men, money, and materials by implementing and maintaining improved management procedures. | Conserves men, money, and materials effectively by implementing and maintaining routine management procedures. | Utilizes men, money, and materials in a barely satisfactory manner. | Is needlessly wasteful of men, money, and materials. Is irresponsible in this regard. (Adverse)\nX in column 3\n(g) REMARKS. Marks in any of the starred (*) boxes must be justified in this section with a brief description of the factors which were considered in evaluating the officer. The justification should be in concrete and specific terms.\nNot applicable\n20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state.\nNot observed\n21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report.\n(b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES [ ] NO [X]\n22. DATE FORWARDED [blank] 23. [signature] (Signature of reporting officer)\n24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":523,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54)\n\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) (First) (Middle) 2. GRADE 3. USN (R) 4. DESIGNATOR 5. FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement CHPHOT USN 8311 177283\n6. SHIP OR STATION 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION\nNaval Air Technical Training Unit, NAS, Pensacola, Fla. 21 March 1956\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT 9. TYPE OF REPORT 10. PERIOD OF REPORT\nSEMI-ANNUAL [X] DETACHMENT OF REPORTING SENIOR [ ] DETACHMENT OF OFFICER [ ] REGULAR [X] CONCURRENT [ ] SPECIAL [ ] FROM 6/30/56 TO 12/31/56\n11. DUTIES. Ground Phase Officer PH(A) School (6), Aerial Phase Officer PH(A) School (2) - OOD (6)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER: Signature of officer reported on: [signature]\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nTraining Navy aerial and ground photographers and photographic officers\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nNone\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES (In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, consider the requirements of his duties and evaluate his performance.)\n(a) Present Assignment: X in Excellent\n(b) As OOD Watch Officer: X in Excellent\n(c) Collateral Duties: X in Excellent\n(d) Technical Specialty Photography: X in Outstanding\n(e) Ship Handling: NOT OBSERVED X\n(f) In Administration: X in Competent\n(g) Ability to Command: NOT OBSERVED X\n(h) As Executive or Division Officer: X in Competent\n(i) Duty on a Staff: NOT OBSERVED X\n(j) Other: NOT OBSERVED X\n15. Considering the possible requirements of war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you: Prefer him to most? [X]\n16. (a) X in A very fine officer of great value to the service\n(b) 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0\n17. COMMENTS.\nCHPHOT NEWHOUSE has displayed consistent reliability. He accepts and carries out his assignments and responsibilities in an excellent manner and with dispatch. He has assumed responsibility for more jobs than would normally be assigned to him due to a shortage of personnel, but his years of experience in the field of photography, coupled with his amiable nature have enabled him to efficiently handle the additional work. He is impeccable in his wearing of the uniform and in his military manner.\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON.\nEDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, USN, 78971/1310, Commanding Officer"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":524,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities?\n(a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE: X in column 2\n(b) COOPERATION: X in column 2\n(c) JUDGMENT: X in column 3\n(d) LEADERSHIP: X in column 4\n(e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL: X in column 3\n(f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS: X in column 3\n(g) REMARKS: Not applicable\n20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state.\nNot observed\n21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report.\n(b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES [ ] NO [X]\n22. DATE FORWARDED 9 JAN 1957 23. [signature] (Signature of reporting officer)\n24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":525,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54)\n\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) (First) (Middle) 2. GRADE 3. USN (R) 4. DESIGNATOR 5. FILE NO.\nNEWHOUSE Delbert Clement CWO4 USN 8311 177283\n6. SHIP OR STATION 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION\nNaval Air Technical Training Unit, NAS, Pensacola, Fla. 21 March 1956\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT 9. TYPE OF REPORT 10. PERIOD OF REPORT\nSEMI-ANNUAL [X] DETACHMENT OF REPORTING SENIOR [ ] DETACHMENT OF OFFICER [ ] REGULAR [X] CONCURRENT [ ] SPECIAL [ ] FROM 2/10/56 TO 6/30/56\n11. DUTIES.\nIn training for Ground Phase Officer PH(A) School (1)\nGround Phase Officer PH(A) School (2)\nOOD (2)\nTravel and leave from 2/10/56 to 3/21/56\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER: Signature of officer reported on: [signature]\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nTraining Navy aerial and ground photographers and photographic officers\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nNone\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES\n(a) Present Assignment: X in Excellent\n(b) As OOD Watch Officer: X in Competent\n(c) Collateral Duties: X in Competent\n(d) Technical Specialty Photography: X in Excellent\n(e) Ship Handling: NOT OBSERVED X\n(f) In Administration: X in Excellent\n(g) Ability to Command: X in Excellent\n(h) As Executive or Division Officer: X in Competent\n(i) Duty on a Staff: NOT OBSERVED X\n(j) Other: NOT OBSERVED X\n15. Prefer him to most? [X]\n16. (a) X in A very fine officer of great value to the service\n(b) 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0\n17. COMMENTS.\nCWO NEWHOUSE has performed his assigned duties in a very satisfactory manner. Although this is his first tour of duty in the Training Command, his Naval experience and experience in Naval Photography has enabled him to rapidly become familiar with the technical aspects of his assigned duty as Ground Phase Officer PH(A) School. He is of excellent personal character and is cooperative and tactful in his dealings with other officers, supervisors and instructors in this Command.\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON.\nEDWIN L. KIEM, CDR, USN, 78971/1310, Commanding Officer"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":526,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities?\n(a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his various duty assignments and compare them to his professional knowledge.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Has exceptional knowledge of his duty assignments. Extremely well informed. | Has excellent knowledge of most phases of his duty assignments. Is well informed on the remaining phases. Occasionally demonstrates exceptional knowledge. | Is well informed on most phases of his duty assignments. Frequently demonstrates excellent knowledge. | Has satisfactory knowledge of routine phases of his duty assignments. | Serious gaps in his knowledge of fundamentals of his duty assignments. (Adverse)\n(b) COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony with and for others.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Extremely successful in working with others. Has an outstanding ability to create harmony. | Promotes harmony in dealing with others. A very good team worker. | Gets along well with most people. Knows how to take orders. Fits in with a team. | Indifferent to others. Cooperates occasionally. | Inclined to create friction. Generally not cooperative. (Adverse)\n(c) JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Outstandingly sound and logical thinker with an exceptional grasp of the situation involved. | Exceptionally good judgment based on sound evaluation of all the factors involved. | Judgment is usually sound and reasonable. | Is prone to neglect or misinterpret facts. Occasionally commits errors in judgment. | Due to faulty judgment, his decisions or recommendations are too frequently wrong. (Adverse)\n(d) LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing, obtaining the cooperation of others, and in directing their efforts effectively.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Outstanding skill in directing others results in a very effective unit. Inspires confidence even under very difficult circumstances. | A consistently good leader. Commands respect of his subordinates. Is very effective under difficult circumstances. | Capable leader. Develops good cooperation and team work in difficult circumstances. Knows how to give orders. | Generally obtains effective cooperation under normal circumstances. | Fails to command. Unable to exert control. (Adverse)\n(e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility, ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, and training.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Capable of increased responsibility and rapid advancement. | Very promising promotional material. | Demonstrates promise for further growth at moderate rate. | Present job is taxing his capabilities. Requires considerable amount of training. | Definitely limited. (Adverse)\n(f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (Consider his utilization of men, money, and materials.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Is most effective in the utilization of men, money, and materials. | Is effective in accomplishing extra savings in men, money, and materials by implementing and maintaining improved management procedures. | Conserves men, money, and materials effectively by implementing and maintaining routine management procedures. | Utilizes men, money, and materials in a barely satisfactory manner. | Is needlessly wasteful of men, money, and materials. Is irresponsible in this regard. (Adverse)\n(g) REMARKS. Marks in any of the starred (*) boxes must be justified in this section with a brief description of the factors which were considered in evaluating the officer. The justification should be in concrete and specific terms.\nNot applicable\n20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state.\nNot observed\n21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report.\n(b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES [ ] NO [X]\n22. DATE FORWARDED 6 JUL 1956\n23. (Signature of reporting officer)\n24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent)\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":527,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54) MAR 06 1956\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICER\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement | 2. GRADE CWO4 | 3. USN (R) USN | 4. DESIGNATOR 8311 | 5. FILE NO. 177283\n6. SHIP OR STATION Utility Squadron FIVE (VU-5) | 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 2 July 1954\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT SEMI-ANNUAL [ ] DETACHMENT OF REPORTING SENIOR [ ] DETACHMENT OF OFFICER [X] | 9. TYPE OF REPORT REGULAR [X] CONCURRENT [ ] SPECIAL [ ] | 10. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 1-1-56 TO 2-19-56\n11. DUTIES. List principal duties assigned including watches, and indicate in parentheses after each the number of months during the reporting period.\nAssistant Photographic Officer (1)\nSquadron Duty Officer (1)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER: Signature of officer reported on: Delbert Clement Newhouse\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nGeneral Utility Services, Western Pacific Area\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nNone\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES (In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, consider the requirements of his duties and evaluate his performance.)\nDUTY ASSIGNMENT: (a) Present Assignment; (b) As Squadron Watch Officer; (c) Collateral Duties; (d) Technical Specialty Photography; (e) Ship Handling; (f) In Administration; (g) Ability to Command; (h) As Executive or Division Officer; (i) Duty on a Staff; (j) Other\n15. Considering the possible requirements of war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you: Prefer him to most? [X]\n16. (a) In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? (b) For this report period indicate in (b) how many officers of his grade you have designated in each category of (a). (a) A very fine officer of great value to the service [X]; (b) 1\n17. COMMENTS. CWO4 NEWHOUSE has performed and carried out his duties as Assistant Fleet Air Photographic Officer in an excellent manner. His devotion to duty as a naval officer in the field of photography sets an example for personnel in his specialty to follow. He maintains and generates a high degree of morale among the men with whom he works. His past experience and excellent knowledge of photography has been a great help both to the personnel and to the efficient operation of the Lab. He has a pleasant and radiant personality.\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON.\nB. F. ROWE, CDR, USN 83860/1310 Commanding Officer\n16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":528,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities?\n(a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his various duty assignments and compare them to his professional knowledge.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Has exceptional knowledge of his duty assignments. Extremely well informed. | Has excellent knowledge of most phases of his duty assignments. Is well informed on the remaining phases. Occasionally demonstrates exceptional knowledge. | Is well informed on most phases of his duty assignments. Frequently demonstrates excellent knowledge. | Has satisfactory knowledge of routine phases of his duty assignments. | Serious gaps in his knowledge of fundamentals of his duty assignments. (Adverse)\n(b) COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony with and for others.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Extremely successful in working with others. Has an outstanding ability to create harmony. | Promotes harmony in dealing with others. A very good team worker. | Gets along well with most people. Knows how to take orders. Fits in with a team. | Indifferent to others. Cooperates occasionally. | Inclined to create friction. Generally not cooperative. (Adverse)\n(c) JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Outstandingly sound and logical thinker with an exceptional grasp of the situation involved. | Exceptionally good judgment based on sound evaluation of all the factors involved. | Judgment is usually sound and reasonable. | Is prone to neglect or misinterpret facts. Occasionally commits errors in judgment. | Due to faulty judgment, his decisions or recommendations are too frequently wrong. (Adverse)\n(d) LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing, obtaining the cooperation of others, and in directing their efforts effectively.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Outstanding skill in directing others results in a very effective unit. Inspires confidence even under very difficult circumstances. | A consistently good leader. Commands respect of his subordinates. Is very effective under difficult circumstances. | Capable leader. Develops good cooperation and team work in difficult circumstances. Knows how to give orders. | Generally obtains effective cooperation under normal circumstances. | Fails to command. Unable to exert control. (Adverse)\n(e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility, ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, and training.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Capable of increased responsibility and rapid advancement. | Very promising promotional material. | Demonstrates promise for further growth at moderate rate. | Present job is taxing his capabilities. Requires considerable amount of training. | Definitely limited. (Adverse)\n(f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (Consider his utilization of men, money, and materials.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Is most effective in the utilization of men, money, and materials. | Is effective in accomplishing extra savings in men, money, and materials by implementing and maintaining improved management procedures. | Conserves men, money, and materials effectively by implementing and maintaining routine management procedures. | Utilizes men, money, and materials in a barely satisfactory manner. | Is needlessly wasteful of men, money, and materials. Is irresponsible in this regard. (Adverse)\n(g) REMARKS. Marks in any of the starred (*) boxes must be justified in this section with a brief description of the factors which were considered in evaluating the officer. The justification should be in concrete and specific terms.\nNone\n20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state.\nCWO4 NEWHOUSE has had several excellent and original ideas to improve the efficient operation of the Photo Lab. His professional work has been in keeping with the high standards of naval tradition.\n21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report.\n(b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES [ ] NO [X]\n22. DATE FORWARDED 17 FEB 1956\n23. (Signature of reporting officer)\n24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent)\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":529,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JAN 16 1956 J\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\nNAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54)\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement | 2. GRADE CWO4 | 3. USN (R) USN | 4. DESIGNATOR 8311 | 5. FILE NO. 177283\n6. SHIP OR STATION Utility Squadron FIVE (VU-5) | 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 2 July 1954\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT SEMI-ANNUAL [X] | 9. TYPE OF REPORT REGULAR [X] | 10. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 7-1-55 TO 12-31-55\n11. DUTIES.\nAssistant Photographic Officer (6)\nSquadron Duty Officer (6)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER: Signature of officer reported on: O. Newhouse\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nGeneral Utility Services, Western Pacific Area\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nNone\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES (In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, consider the requirements of his duties and evaluate his performance.)\n15. Considering the possible requirements of war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you: Prefer him to most? [X]\n16. (a) In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? (b) For this report period indicate in (b) how many officers of his grade you have designated in each category of (a). (a) A very fine officer of great value to the service [X]; (b) 3\n17. COMMENTS. CWO4 NEWHOUSE has performed his duties as Assistant Officer-in-Charge of the Fleet Air Photo Lab in a very efficient manner. He has consistently shown a high degree of competency in the technical field of Photography. He has ably assisted the Officer-in-Charge of the Photo Lab in maintaining a very high morale level in their department. Although he at times tends to be argumentative he has a very pleasant personality and generally achieves very good results in his numerous contacts through the Photo Lab with outside agencies. He is very conscientious and gets along well in his dealings with both superiors and subordinates.\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON.\nB. F. ROWE, CDR, 83860 Commanding Officer\n16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":530,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities?\n(a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his various duty assignments and compare them to his professional knowledge.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Has exceptional knowledge of his duty assignments. Extremely well informed. | Has excellent knowledge of most phases of his duty assignments. Is well informed on the remaining phases. Occasionally demonstrates exceptional knowledge. | Is well informed on most phases of his duty assignments. Frequently demonstrates excellent knowledge. | Has satisfactory knowledge of routine phases of his duty assignments. | Serious gaps in his knowledge of fundamentals of his duty assignments. (Adverse)\n(b) COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony with and for others.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Extremely successful in working with others. Has an outstanding ability to create harmony. | Promotes harmony in dealing with others. A very good team worker. | Gets along well with most people. Knows how to take orders. Fits in with a team. | Indifferent to others. Cooperates occasionally. | Inclined to create friction. Generally not cooperative. (Adverse)\n(c) JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Outstandingly sound and logical thinker with an exceptional grasp of the situation involved. | Exceptionally good judgment based on sound evaluation of all the factors involved. | Judgment is usually sound and reasonable. | Is prone to neglect or misinterpret facts. Occasionally commits errors in judgment. | Due to faulty judgment, his decisions or recommendations are too frequently wrong. (Adverse)\n(d) LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing, obtaining the cooperation of others, and in directing their efforts effectively.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Outstanding skill in directing others results in a very effective unit. Inspires confidence even under very difficult circumstances. | A consistently good leader. Commands respect of his subordinates. Is very effective under difficult circumstances. | Capable leader. Develops good cooperation and team work in difficult circumstances. Knows how to give orders. | Generally obtains effective cooperation under normal circumstances. | Fails to command. Unable to exert control. (Adverse)\n(e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility, ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, and training.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Capable of increased responsibility and rapid advancement. | Very promising promotional material. | Demonstrates promise for further growth at moderate rate. | Present job is taxing his capabilities. Requires considerable amount of training. | Definitely limited. (Adverse)\n(f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (Consider his utilization of men, money, and materials.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Is most effective in the utilization of men, money, and materials. | Is effective in accomplishing extra savings in men, money, and materials by implementing and maintaining improved management procedures. | Conserves men, money, and materials effectively by implementing and maintaining routine management procedures. | Utilizes men, money, and materials in a barely satisfactory manner. | Is needlessly wasteful of men, money, and materials. Is irresponsible in this regard. (Adverse)\n(g) REMARKS. Marks in any of the starred (*) boxes must be justified in this section with a brief description of the factors which were considered in evaluating the officer. The justification should be in concrete and specific terms.\nNone\n20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state.\nNot observed\n21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report.\n(b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES [ ] NO [X]\n22. DATE FORWARDED 3 JAN 1956\n23. (Signature of reporting officer)\n24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent)\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":531,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54)\nJUL 21 1955 I\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement 2. GRADE CHPHOT 3. USN (R) USN 4. DESIGNATOR 8311 5. FILE NO. 177283\n6. SHIP OR STATION Utility Squadron FIVE (VU-5) 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 2 July 1954\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT SEMI-ANNUAL X DETACHMENT OF REPORTING SENIOR DETACHMENT OF OFFICER 9. TYPE OF REPORT REGULAR X CONCURRENT SPECIAL 10. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 1-1-55 TO 6-30-55\n11. DUTIES. List principal duties assigned including watches, and indicate in parentheses after each the number of months during the reporting period. If assignment is in other than regular Navy billet or involves duties not well established, give outline of purpose, scope, and significance of such duties. If necessary, use separate sheet and attach to this form.\nAssistant Photographic Officer (6)\nSquadron Duty Officer (6)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER: Signature of officer reported on: [signature]\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nGeneral utility services, WESPAC area.\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES (In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, consider the requirements of his duties and evaluate his performance.)\nDUTY ASSIGNMENT / NOT OBSERVED / Outstanding performance in most aspects of his duty assignments. Highly qualified. / Excellent performance in most aspects of his duty assignments. Efficient or competent in most of the remaining aspects. Frequently demonstrates outstanding performance. / Competent and efficient performance in most aspects of his duty assignments. Frequently demonstrates excellent performance. / Satisfactory performance in most aspects of his duty assignments. Needs some supervision. Basically qualified. / Inadequate performance in many aspects of his duty assignments. Needs close supervision. He is not qualified. (Adverse)\n(a) Present Assignment - X in Excellent column\n(b) As Squadron Watch Officer - X in Competent column\n(c) Collateral Duties - not observed\n(d) Technical Specialty Photography - X in Excellent column\n(e) Ship Handling - not observed\n(f) In Administration - X in Competent column\n(g) Ability to Command - not observed\n(h) As Executive or Division Officer - X in Competent column\n(i) Duty on a Staff - not observed\n(j) Other\n15. Considering the possible requirements of war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you: Particularly desire to have him? Prefer him to most? Be pleased to have him? X Be satisfied to have him? Prefer not to have him? (Adverse)\n16. (a) In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? (b) For this report period indicate in (b) how many officers of his grade you have designated in each category of (a).\n(a) X in A dependable and typically effective officer\n(b) 0 / 2 / 1 / 0 / 0\n17. COMMENTS. In this section it is important that the outstanding characteristics of the officer, and any weaknesses which seriously affect his performance of duty, be reported. The appraisal should be concise and concrete in terms of specific examples of performance from which the more general factors can be inferred. The appraisal will justify the marks assigned in items 14, 15, and 16, above. In addition, the appraisal should include outstanding qualifications in any field such as the following: administration, planning, logistics, electronics, new weapons, and in dealing with the public in personal or official contacts. This space must not be left blank.\nCHPHOT NEWHOUSE has carried out his assigned duties in a very capable and satisfactory manner. His conscientious attitude and attention to details together with his pleasant personality have enable him to work well with other officers and men. He has very capably substituted in the absence of the Officer-in-Charge of the Fleet Air Photo Lab and has done much toward the improvement of the material readiness of the Lab.\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON.\nB. F. ROWE, CDR, 083860/1310, Commanding Officer\n16-70100-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":532,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities?\n(a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his various duty assignments and compare them to his professional knowledge.) X in the fourth-from-left column (Has excellent knowledge of most phases...) - marked in column 2 position\n(b) COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony with and for others.) X in Gets along well with most people column\n(c) JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.) X in Judgment is usually sound and reasonable column\n(d) LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing, obtaining the cooperation of others, and in directing their efforts effectively.) X in Capable leader column\n(e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility, ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, and training.) X in Demonstrates promise for further growth at moderate rate column\n(f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (Consider his utilization of men, money, and materials.) X in Effective in accomplishing extra savings column\n(g) REMARKS. Marks in any of the starred (*) boxes must be justified in this section with a brief description of the factors which were considered in evaluating the officer. The justification should be in concrete and specific terms.\n20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state.\nNot observed\n21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report.\n(b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES NO X\n22. DATE FORWARDED 30 JUN 1955 23. [signature] (Signature of reporting officer)\n24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent)\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-70109-1\n13 JUL 1955"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":533,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEB 02 1955 C\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\nNAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54)\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement 2. GRADE CHPHOT 3. USN (R) USN 4. DESIGNATOR 8311 5. FILE NO. 177283\n6. SHIP OR STATION Utility Squadron FIVE 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 2 July 1954\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT SEMI-ANNUAL X 9. TYPE OF REPORT REGULAR X 10. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 8-14-54 TO 12-31-54\n11. DUTIES. Photographic Officer (4) Squadron Duty Officer (4)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER: Signature of officer reported on: [signature]\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nGeneral utility services, WESPAC area.\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nNone.\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES (In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service, consider the requirements of his duties and evaluate his performance.)\n(a) Present Assignment - X in Competent column\n(b) As Squadron Watch Officer - X in Excellent column\n(c) Collateral Duties - not observed\n(d) Technical Specialty Photography - X in Competent column\n(e) Ship Handling - not observed\n(f) In Administration - X in Satisfactory column\n(g) Ability to Command - not observed\n(h) As Executive or Division Officer - X in Satisfactory column\n(i) Duty on a Staff - not observed\n(j) Other - X in not observed column\n15. Considering the possible requirements of war... X Be satisfied to have him?\n16. (a) X in A dependable and typically effective officer. (b) 1\n17. COMMENTS.\nCHPHOT NEWHOUSE has performed his assigned duties in a satisfactory manner. He is fairly well versed in his technical specialty and has maintained high requirements of workmanship of personnel in the Photographic Division. Through a continuing maintenance program he has maintained the laboratory in an excellent material condition and, as noted in paragraph 20, has also improved the state of material readiness of photographic equipment.\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON.\nB. F. ROWE, CDR, 083860/1310. Commanding Officer.\n16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":534,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities?\n(a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE X in Is well informed on most phases column\n(b) COOPERATION X in Gets along well with most people column\n(c) JUDGMENT X in Is prone to neglect or misinterpret facts column\n(d) LEADERSHIP X in Generally obtains effective cooperation column\n(e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL X in Demonstrates promise for further growth column\n(f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS X in Conserves men, money, and materials column\n(g) REMARKS.\n20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state.\nCHPHOT NEWHOUSE has a sound knowledge of the workings of the Photographic Supply System and, during the period of this report, he has used this knowledge to good purpose. He evaluated the material condition of the photographic equipment and has raised the state of material readiness by replacing obsolete and worn items.\n21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report.\n(b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES NO X\n22. DATE FORWARDED 11 January 1955. 23. [signature] (Signature of reporting officer)\n24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent)\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-70109-1\n25 JAN 1955"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":535,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SEP 17 1954 C\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\nNAVPERS-310 (REV. 3-54)\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST ELEVEN SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement 2. GRADE CHPHOT 3. USN (R) USN 4. DESIGNATOR 8310 5. FILE NO. 177283\n6. SHIP OR STATION Utility Squadron FIVE (VU-5) 7. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 7-2-54\n8. OCCASION FOR REPORT DETACHMENT OF REPORTING SENIOR X 9. TYPE OF REPORT REGULAR X CONCURRENT 10. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 6-12-54 TO 8-13-54\n11. DUTIES. Photographic Officer (1/2) Squadron Duty Officer (1) Assistant Photographic Officer (1) Leave and transit (6-12-54 to 7-2-54)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER: Signature of officer reported on: [signature]\n12. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nGeneral utility services, WESPAC area.\n13. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\nNone.\n14. PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES\n(a) Present Assignment - X not observed\n(b) As Squadron Watch Officer - X in Competent column\n(c) Collateral Duties - not observed\n(d) Technical Specialty Photography - not observed\n(e) Ship Handling - not observed\n(f) In Administration - not observed\n(g) Ability to Command - not observed\n(h) As Executive or Division Officer - X in Competent column\n(i) Duty on a Staff - not observed\n(j) Other - not observed\n15. Considering the possible requirements of war... X Be pleased to have him?\n16. (a) X in A dependable and typically effective officer. (b) 1 / 1 / 1\n17. COMMENTS.\nDue to the short period of time CHPHOT NEWHOUSE has been attached to this command, this report is submitted primarily for record purposes. His attitude is excellent and it is believed he will be a valuable asset to this squadron.\n18. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON.\nJ. P. BARRON, CDR, 085247/1310, USN. Commanding Officer.\n16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":536,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19. In comparison with other officers of his grade and approximate length of service or approximate length of duty assignment, to what degree has this officer exhibited the following qualities?\n(a) PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE (Consider the requirements of his various duty assignments and compare them to his professional knowledge.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Has exceptional knowledge of his duty assignments. Extremely well informed. | Has excellent knowledge of most phases of his duty assignments. Is well informed on the remaining phases. Occasionally demonstrates exceptional knowledge. | Is well informed on most phases of his duty assignments. Frequently demonstrates excellent knowledge. | Has satisfactory knowledge of routine phases of his duty assignments. | Serious gaps in his knowledge of fundamentals of his duty assignments. (Adverse)\n(b) COOPERATION (Consider ability and willingness to work in harmony with and for others.)\nNOT OBSERVED | Extremely successful in working with others. Has an outstanding ability to create harmony. | Promotes harmony in dealing with others. A very good team worker. | Gets along well with most people. Knows how to take orders. Fits in with a team. | Indifferent to others. Cooperates occasionally. | Inclined to create friction. Generally not cooperative. (Adverse)\n(c) JUDGMENT (Consider his ability to grasp a situation, think clearly, and develop correct and logical conclusions.)\nNOT OBSERVED [X] | Outstandingly sound and logical thinker with an exceptional grasp of the situation involved. | Exceptionally good judgment based on sound evaluation of all the factors involved. | Judgment is usually sound and reasonable. | Is prone to neglect or misinterpret facts. Occasionally commits errors in judgment. | Due to faulty judgment, his decisions or recommendations are too frequently wrong. (Adverse)\n(d) LEADERSHIP (Consider his ability in organizing, obtaining the cooperation of others, and in directing their efforts effectively.)\nNOT OBSERVED [X] | Outstanding skill in directing others results in a very effective unit. Inspires confidence even under very difficult circumstances. | A consistently good leader. Commands respect of his subordinates. Is very effective under difficult circumstances. | Capable leader. Develops good cooperation and team work in difficult circumstances. Knows how to give orders. | Generally obtains effective cooperation under normal circumstances. | Fails to command. Unable to exert control. (Adverse)\n(e) PROMOTION POTENTIAL (Consider his capacity to handle jobs of increased scope and greater responsibility, ability to learn rapidly, personality, self-improvement efforts, special abilities, and training.)\nNOT OBSERVED [X] | Capable of increased responsibility and rapid advancement. | Very promising promotional material. | Demonstrates promise for further growth at moderate rate. | Present job is taxing his capabilities. Requires considerable amount of training. | Definitely limited. (Adverse)\n(f) MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS (Consider his utilization of men, money, and materials.)\nNOT OBSERVED [X] | Is most effective in the utilization of men, money, and materials. | Is effective in accomplishing extra savings in men, money, and materials by implementing and maintaining improved management procedures. | Conserves men, money, and materials effectively by implementing and maintaining routine management procedures. | Utilizes men, money, and materials in a barely satisfactory manner. | Is needlessly wasteful of men, money, and materials. Is irresponsible in this regard. (Adverse)\n(g) REMARKS. Marks in any of the starred (*) boxes must be justified in this section with a brief description of the factors which were considered in evaluating the officer. The justification should be in concrete and specific terms.\n20. State your estimate of this officer's capacity for original and constructive professional work and indicate to what degree his performance during this reporting period has reflected that capacity. State concrete attainments wherever possible. If not observed, so state.\nNOT OBSERVED.\n21. (a) As a general rule, officers should not be shown their fitness reports by the reporting seniors unless the report contains adverse matter. An adverse report must be referred for statement pursuant to Article 1701-(8) Navy Regulations. His statement should be attached to this report.\n(b) Has the officer reported on seen this report? YES [ ] NO [X]\n22. DATE FORWARDED 16 August 1954 23. (Signature of reporting officer)\n24. (Signature of regular reporting senior if report is concurrent)\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-70109-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":537,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (Rev. 10-51)\nJUL 15 1954 K\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\nDate submitted 6-11-54\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST FIVE SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement Grade CHPHOT USN(R) USN Designator 8311 File No. 177283\n2. SHIP OR STATION Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 2-5-52\n3. PERIOD OF REPORT From 1-1-54 To 6-11-54. OCCASION FOR REPORT Semi-annual, Detachment of Reporting Senior, Detachment of Officer X. TYPE OF REPORT Regular X, Concurrent, Special\n4. REGULAR AND ADDITIONAL DUTIES. List all duties assigned, including watches. List courses of study or instruction carried on. After each item insert in parentheses number of months this reporting period.\nAssistant Stock Control Branch Officer for Photographic Materials, Aviation Supply Depot (5 1/2); Aviation Supply Depot Survey Board (5 1/2)\n5. PROFICIENCY IN FOREIGN LANGUAGES, STATING WHICH ONES AND ABILITY THEREIN\nNone\n(Signature of officer reported on)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER:\n6. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\n7. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND COPY OF ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\n8. PERFORMANCE. Assign marks on a scale of 0 to 4.0 on the appropriate qualifications listed, and on any other significant qualification, on which observation has been sufficient to justify marking. PRESENT ASSIGNMENT 3.9. ABILITY TO COMMAND ---. AS STAFF OFFICER ---. AS EXECUTIVE OR DIVISION OFFICER ---. AS (Type watch) WATCH OFFICER ---. IN ADMINISTRATION 3.9. SHIP HANDLING ---. TECHNICAL COMPETENCE IN Photographic 4.0 (State specialty) ---\n9. CONSIDERING THE POSSIBLE REQUIREMENTS OF WAR, INDICATE YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARD HAVING THIS OFFICER UNDER YOUR COMMAND. WOULD YOU: PARTICULARLY DESIRE TO HAVE HIM? X. BE PLEASED TO HAVE HIM? BE SATISFIED TO HAVE HIM? PREFER NOT TO HAVE HIM? (Adverse)\n10. IN COMPARISON WITH OTHER OFFICERS OF HIS GRADE AND APPROXIMATE LENGTH OF SERVICE, HOW WOULD YOU DESIGNATE THIS OFFICER? OUTSTANDING X. EXCELLENT. ABOVE AVERAGE. AVERAGE. BELOW AVERAGE.\n11. COMMENTS. Give in this space a concise appraisal of the officer reported on. Comment on any outstanding characteristics of value to the naval service, including ability to command and outstanding qualifications in any field such as administration, planning, logistics, electronics, new weapons, or new developments. Comment on observed skill in dealing with the public in personal or official contacts. Any mental, moral, or physical weaknesses which might affect his efficiency, or failure to meet qualifications normally expected of an officer of his grade and designation should be indicated. Any adverse entry made in any part of the report must be explained in this paragraph. This space must not be left blank.\nCHPHOT NEWHOUSE, through the application of his administrative experience and technical knowledge, has performed his duties in an outstanding manner and has aided the Stock Control Branch in its successful operation in the supply support for photographic supplies and equipment to the Pacific Ocean and Western Continental Areas. The high rate of efficiency and morale elicited from his subordinates is directly inspired by his loyalty and cooperation. His quiet manner and dependability have gained the respect of all who work with him. His character, both personal and military, is excellent. He is recommended for promotion.\n12. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON.\nT. EARLE HIPP, RADM SC USN 15943 Commanding Officer\nG9-16-63843a-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":538,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13. To WHAT DEGREE HAS THE OFFICER REPORTED ON EXHIBITED THE FOLLOWING QUALITIES?\nNOT OBSERVED | (a) INTELLIGENCE (With reference to the faculty of comprehension; mental acuteness.) | Exceptionally quick-witted; keen in understanding. [X] | Grasps essentials of a situation quickly. | Understands normal situations and conditions.\n(b) JUDGMENT (With reference to a discriminating perception by which the values and relations of things are mentally asserted.) | Unusually keen in estimating situations and reaching sound decisions. [X] | Can generally be depended on to make proper decisions. | Fair judgment in normal and routine things.\n(c) INITIATIVE (With reference to constructive thinking and resourcefulness; ability and intelligence to act on own responsibility.) | Exceptional in ability to think, plan, and do things without waiting to be told and instructed. [X] | Able to plan and execute missions on his own responsibility. | Capable of performing routine duties on own responsibility.\n(d) FORCE (With reference to moral power possessed and exerted in producing results.) | Strong, dynamic. | Strong. [X] | Effectual under normal and routine circumstances.\n(e) LEADERSHIP (With reference to the faculty of directing, controlling, and influencing others in definite lines of action and of maintaining discipline.) | Inspires others to a high degree by precept and example. Requires a high standard of discipline. [X] | A very good leader. | Leads fairly well.\n(f) MORAL COURAGE (With reference to that mental quality which impels one to carry out the dictates of his conscience and convictions fearlessly.) | Exceptionally courageous. [X] | Courageous to a high degree. | Fairly courageous.\n(g) COOPERATION (With reference to the faculty of working harmoniously with others toward the accomplishment of common duties.) | Exceptionally successful in working with others to a common end. [X] | Works in harmony with others. | Cooperates fairly well.\n(h) LOYALTY (Fidelity, faithfulness, allegiance, constancy—all with reference to a cause and to higher authority.) | Unswerving in allegiance; frank and honest in aiding and advising. [X] | A high sense of loyalty. | Reasonably faithful in the execution of his duty.\n(i) PERSEVERANCE (With reference to maintenance of purpose or undertaking in spite of obstacles or discouragement.) | Determined, resolute. | Constant in purpose. [X] | Fairly steady.\n(j) REACTION IN EMERGENCIES (With reference to the faculty of acting instinctively in a logical manner in difficult and unforeseen situations.) NOT OBSERVED [X] | Exceptionally cool-headed and logical in his actions under all conditions. | Composed and logical in his actions in difficult situations. | Fairly logical in his actions in general.\n(k) ENDURANCE (With reference to ability for carrying on under any and all conditions.) NOT OBSERVED [X] | Capable of standing an exceptional amount of physical hardship and strain. | Can perform well his duties under trying conditions. | Of normal endurance.\n(l) INDUSTRY (With reference to performance of duties in an energetic manner.) | Extremely energetic and industrious. | Thorough and energetic. [X] | Reasonably energetic and industrious.\n(m) MILITARY BEARING AND NEATNESS OF PERSON AND DRESS (With reference to dignity of demeanor, correctness of uniform, and smartness of appearance.) | Exceptional. [X] | Very good. | Fair.\n14. A report containing adverse matter must be referred to the officer reported on for statement pursuant to article 1701 (8) USNR. His statement should be attached to this report. Statements of minor deficiencies either in character or performance of duties must be brought to the attention of the officer reported on either orally or in writing.\nHAS THIS BEEN DONE? ___ WHAT IMPROVEMENT, IF ANY, HAS BEEN NOTED? ___\n(Signature of reporting senior)\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE c9-16-63843-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":539,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEB 04 1954 C\nNAVPERS-310 (Rev. 5-53)\nREFER TO BUPERS INST. 1035.23 IN COMPLETING THIS REPORT.\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\nDate submitted 12-31-53\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST FIVE SECTIONS:\n1. NAME (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement Grade CHPHOT USN Designator 8311 File No. 177283\n2. SHIP OR STATION Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California. DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 2-5-52\n3. PERIOD OF REPORT From 7-1-53 To 12-31-53. OCCASION FOR REPORT Semi-annual X. TYPE OF REPORT Regular X, Concurrent, Special\n4. REGULAR AND ADDITIONAL DUTIES.\nAssistant Stock Control Branch Officer - Photographic, Aviation Supply Depot (6)\nAviation Supply Depot Survey Board (6)\nJunior Duty Watch Officer (6)\n5. PROFICIENCY IN FOREIGN LANGUAGES, STATING WHICH ONES AND ABILITY THEREIN\nNone\n(Signature of officer reported on)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER:\n6. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\n7. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND COPY OF ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS ON THIS OFFICER RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT\n8. PERFORMANCE. PRESENT ASSIGNMENT 3.9. ABILITY TO COMMAND ---. AS STAFF OFFICER ---. AS EXECUTIVE OR DIVISION OFFICER ---. AS (Type watch) WATCH OFFICER ---. IN ADMINISTRATION 3.8. SHIP HANDLING ---. TECHNICAL COMPETENCE IN Photographic Material 4.0 (State specialty)\n9. PARTICULARLY DESIRE TO HAVE HIM? X. BE PLEASED TO HAVE HIM? BE SATISFIED TO HAVE HIM? PREFER NOT TO HAVE HIM? (Adverse)\n10. OUTSTANDING X. EXCELLENT. ABOVE AVERAGE. AVERAGE. BELOW AVERAGE.\n11. COMMENTS. CHPHOT Newhouse has performed his duties in an outstanding manner. The application of his thorough technical knowledge and administrative experience has resulted in the efficient operation of the Stock Control Branch in the performance of its mission to give area support for photographic supplies and equipment. His loyalty and cooperation are an inspiration to his subordinates resulting in a higher rate of efficiency and morale. His military and personal character is excellent. He is recommended for promotion.\n12. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON.\nT. EARLE HIPP, RADM SC USN 15943 Commanding Officer"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":540,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13. To WHAT DEGREE HAS THE OFFICER REPORTED ON EXHIBITED THE FOLLOWING QUALITIES?\n(a) INTELLIGENCE (With reference to the faculty of comprehension; mental acuteness.) | Exceptionally quick-witted; keen in understanding. [X] | Grasps essentials of a situation quickly. | Understands normal situations and conditions.\n(b) JUDGMENT (With reference to a discriminating perception by which the values and relations of things are mentally asserted.) | Unusually keen in estimating situations and reaching sound decisions. [X] | Can generally be depended on to make proper decisions. | Fair judgment in normal and routine things.\n(c) INITIATIVE (With reference to constructive thinking and resourcefulness; ability and intelligence to act on own responsibility.) | Exceptional in ability to think, plan, and do things without waiting to be told and instructed. [X] | Able to plan and execute missions on his own responsibility. | Capable of performing routine duties on own responsibility.\n(d) FORCE (With reference to moral power possessed and exerted in producing results.) | Strong, dynamic. | Strong. [X] | Effectual under normal and routine circumstances.\n(e) LEADERSHIP (With reference to the faculty of directing, controlling, and influencing others in definite lines of action and of maintaining discipline.) | Inspires others to a high degree by precept and example. Requires a high standard of discipline. | A very good leader. [X] | Leads fairly well.\n(f) MORAL COURAGE (With reference to that mental quality which impels one to carry out the dictates of his conscience and convictions fearlessly.) | Exceptionally courageous. [X] | Courageous to a high degree. | Fairly courageous.\n(g) COOPERATION (With reference to the faculty of working harmoniously with others toward the accomplishment of common duties.) | Exceptionally successful in working with others to a common end. [X] | Works in harmony with others. | Cooperates fairly well.\n(h) LOYALTY (Fidelity, faithfulness, allegiance, constancy—all with reference to a cause and to higher authority.) | Unswerving in allegiance; frank and honest in aiding and advising. [X] | A high sense of loyalty. | Reasonably faithful in the execution of his duty.\n(i) PERSEVERANCE (With reference to maintenance of purpose or undertaking in spite of obstacles or discouragement.) | Determined, resolute. [X] | Constant in purpose. | Fairly steady.\n(j) REACTION IN EMERGENCIES (With reference to the faculty of acting instinctively in a logical manner in difficult and unforeseen situations.) NOT OBSERVED [X] | Exceptionally cool-headed and logical in his actions under all conditions. | Composed and logical in his actions in difficult situations. | Fairly logical in his actions in general.\n(k) ENDURANCE (With reference to ability for carrying on under any and all conditions.) NOT OBSERVED [X] | Capable of standing an exceptional amount of physical hardship and strain. | Can perform well his duties under trying conditions. | Of normal endurance.\n(l) INDUSTRY (With reference to performance of duties in an energetic manner.) | Extremely energetic and industrious. [X] | Thorough and energetic. | Reasonably energetic and industrious.\n(m) MILITARY BEARING AND NEATNESS OF PERSON AND DRESS (With reference to dignity of demeanor, correctness of uniform, and smartness of appearance.) | Exceptional. [X] | Very good. | Fair.\n14. A report containing adverse matter must be referred to the officer reported on for statement pursuant to article 1701 (8) USNR. His statement should be attached to this report. Statements of minor deficiencies either in character or performance of duties must be brought to the attention of the officer reported on either orally or in writing.\nHAS THIS BEEN DONE? ___ WHAT IMPROVEMENT, IF ANY, HAS BEEN NOTED? ___\n(Signature of reporting senior)\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE c9-16-63843-3"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":541,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (Rev. 10-51)\n\nAUG 14 1953 A\n\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n\nDate submitted 6-30-53\n\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST FIVE SECTIONS:\n1. Name (Last) NEWHOUSE (First) Delbert (Middle) Clement Grade CHPHOT USN(R) USN Designator 8311 File No. 177283\n2. Ship or Station Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California. Date Reported Present Duty Station 2-5-52\n3. Period of Report From 1-1-53 To 6-30-53. Occasion for Report: Semi-annual X. Type of Report: Regular X\n4. Regular and Additional Duties. List all duties assigned, including watches. List courses of study or instruction carried on. After each item insert in parentheses number of months this reporting period.\nAssistant Stock Control Division Officer for Photographic Material, Aviation Supply Depot (6) Junior Duty Watch Officer (6)\n5. Proficiency in Foreign Languages, Stating Which Ones and Ability Therein\nNone\n(Signature of officer reported on)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER:\n6. Employment of Command During Period of This Report\n7. Reference Here and Append Copy of Any Commendable or Adverse Reports on This Officer Received During the Period of This Report\n8. Performance. Present Assignment 3.9; Ability to Command --; As Staff Officer --; As Executive or Division Officer --; As Watch Officer --; In Administration 3.8; Ship Handling --; Technical Competence in Photographic Material 4.0\n9. Considering the Possible Requirements of War, Indicate Your Attitude Toward Having This Officer Under Your Command. Would You: Particularly Desire To Have Him? X\n10. In Comparison With Other Officers of His Grade and Approximate Length of Service, How Would You Designate This Officer? Outstanding X\n11. Comments.\nCHPHOT Newhouse has performed his duties in an outstanding manner. The use of his technical knowledge and experience in the administration and control of photographic supplies and equipment has successfully assisted the Aviation Supply Depot in the performance of its mission. He has been particularly effective in interpreting Bureau photographic policies. His loyalty and cooperation inspire subordinates to a high rate of efficiency and morale. CHPHOT Newhouse is dependable and conscientious. His quiet manner gains the respect of all with whom he works. He is recommended for promotion.\n12. Name, Grade, and File Number of Reporting Officer. Official Status Relative to Officer Reported on.\nT. EARLE HIPP, RADM SC USN 15943 Commanding Officer"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":542,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13. To What Degree Has the Officer Reported on Exhibited the Following Qualities?\n(a) INTELLIGENCE: Outstanding X\n(b) JUDGMENT: Outstanding X\n(c) INITIATIVE: Outstanding X\n(d) FORCE: Excellent X\n(e) LEADERSHIP: Excellent X\n(f) MORAL COURAGE: Outstanding X\n(g) COOPERATION: Outstanding X\n(h) LOYALTY: Outstanding X\n(i) PERSEVERANCE: Excellent X\n(j) REACTION IN EMERGENCIES: Not Observed X\n(k) ENDURANCE: Not Observed X\n(l) INDUSTRY: Excellent X\n(m) MILITARY BEARING AND NEATNESS OF PERSON AND DRESS: Outstanding X\n14. A report containing adverse matter must be referred to the officer reported on for statement pursuant to article 1701 (8) USNR. His statement should be attached to this report. Statements of minor deficiencies either in character or performance of duties must be brought to the attention of the officer reported on either orally or in writing.\nHas This Been Done? ___ What Improvement, If Any, Has Been Noted? ___\n(Signature of reporting senior)\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 69-16-63843-1\n3 AUG 1953"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":543,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEB 18 1953 C\n\nNAVPERS-310 (Rev. 10-51)\n\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n\nDate submitted 12-31-52\n\n1. Name NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement CHPHOT USN 8311 177283\n2. Ship or Station Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California. Date Reported Present Duty Station 2-5-52\n3. Period of Report From 7-1-52 To 12-31-52. Type of Report: Regular X\n4. Regular and Additional Duties: Assistant Stock Control Officer for Photographic Materials, Aviation Supply Depot (6) Junior Duty Watch Officer (6)\n5. Proficiency in Foreign Languages: None\n8. Performance. Present Assignment 3.9; Ability to Command --; As Staff Officer --; As Executive or Division Officer --; In Administration 3.8; Ship Handling --; Technical Competence in Photo Materiel 4.0\n9. Particularly Desire To Have Him? X\n10. Outstanding X\n11. Comments.\nCHPHOT Newhouse has performed his duties in an outstanding manner. He has a thorough knowledge of the supply functions existing in aviation photographic materials. He has demonstrated competence in recommending and following through procedures pertinent to his daily work. His ability to work with others makes it possible to achieve the maximum effort from his subordinates. His military and personal character is excellent. He is recommended for promotion.\n12. Name, Grade, and File Number of Reporting Officer. T. EARLE HIPP, RADM SC USN 15943 Commanding Officer"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":544,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13. To What Degree Has the Officer Reported on Exhibited the Following Qualities?\n(a) INTELLIGENCE: Outstanding X\n(b) JUDGMENT: Outstanding X\n(c) INITIATIVE: Outstanding X\n(d) FORCE: Excellent X\n(e) LEADERSHIP: Excellent X\n(f) MORAL COURAGE: Outstanding X\n(g) COOPERATION: Outstanding X\n(h) LOYALTY: Outstanding X\n(i) PERSEVERANCE: Excellent X\n(j) REACTION IN EMERGENCIES: Not Observed X\n(k) ENDURANCE: Not Observed X\n(l) INDUSTRY: Outstanding X\n(m) MILITARY BEARING AND NEATNESS OF PERSON AND DRESS: Outstanding X\n14. A report containing adverse matter must be referred to the officer reported on for statement pursuant to article 1701 (8) USNR. His statement should be attached to this report. Statements of minor deficiencies either in character or performance of duties must be brought to the attention of the officer reported on either orally or in writing.\nHas This Been Done? ___ What Improvement, If Any, Has Been Noted? ___\n(Signature of reporting senior)\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 69-16-63843-1\n3 FEB 1953"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":545,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (Rev. 10-51)\n\n11 AUG 1952\n\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n\nDate submitted 6-30-52\n\n1. Name NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement CHPHOT USN 8311 177283\n2. Ship or Station Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California. Date Reported Present Duty Station 2-5-52\n3. Period of Report From 2-3-52 To 6-30-52. Occasion for Report: Semi-annual X. Type of Report: Regular X\n4. Regular and Additional Duties.\nIn leave & travel status 2-3-52 to 2-4-52\nAssistant Stock Control Branch Officer for Photography (5)\nCommand Duty Watch Officer (4)\nAviation Supply Depot Duty Officer (4)\n5. Proficiency in Foreign Languages, Stating Which Ones and Ability Therein. (Signature of officer reported on)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER:\n8. Performance. Present Assignment 3.8; Ability to Command --; As Staff Officer --; As Executive or Division Officer --; As Watch Officer --; In Administration 3.8; Technical Competence in Photographic Materiel 4.0\n10. Excellent X\n11. Comments.\nCHPHOT Newhouse has performed all assignments in an excellent manner. He has readily adapted himself to his duties at the Aviation Supply Depot. His thorough knowledge of the technical aspects of photographic material and his understanding of the inventory control procedures involved in its storage and distribution has materially aided this Depot in the performance of its mission. He organizes his work well and demonstrates initiative in recommending desirable procedures. He is cooperative and inspires subordinates in the performance of their duties. His military and personal character is excellent. He is recommended for promotion.\n12. Name, Grade, and File Number of Reporting Officer. T. EARLE HIPP, RADM SC USN 15943 Commanding Officer"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":546,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13. To What Degree Has the Officer Reported on Exhibited the Following Qualities?\nNOT OBSERVED | OUTSTANDING | EXCELLENT | AVERAGE | UNSATISFACTORY\n(a) INTELLIGENCE (With reference to the faculty of comprehension; mental acuteness.) | Exceptionally quick-witted; keen in understanding. | Grasps essentials of a situation quickly. | Understands normal situations and conditions.\n(b) JUDGMENT (With reference to a discriminating perception by which the values and relations of things are mentally asserted.) | Unusually keen in estimating situations and reaching sound decisions. | Can generally be depended on to make proper decisions. | Fair judgment in normal and routine things.\n(c) INITIATIVE (With reference to constructive thinking and resourcefulness; ability and intelligence to act on own responsibility.) | Exceptional in ability to think, plan, and do things without waiting to be told and instructed. | Able to plan and execute missions on his own responsibility. | Capable of performing routine duties on own responsibility.\n(d) FORCE (With reference to moral power possessed and exerted in producing results.) | Strong, dynamic. | Strong. | Effectual under normal and routine circumstances.\n(e) LEADERSHIP (With reference to the faculty of directing, controlling, and influencing others in definite lines of action and of maintaining discipline.) | Inspires others to a high degree by precept and example. Requires a high standard of discipline. | A very good leader. | Leads fairly well.\n(f) MORAL COURAGE (With reference to that mental quality which impels one to carry out the dictates of his conscience and convictions fearlessly.) | Exceptionally courageous. | Courageous to a high degree. | Fairly courageous.\n(g) COOPERATION (With reference to the faculty of working harmoniously with others toward the accomplishment of common duties.) | Exceptionally successful in working with others to a common end. | Works in harmony with others. | Cooperates fairly well.\n(h) LOYALTY (Fidelity, faithfulness, allegiance, constancy—all with reference to a cause and to higher authority.) | Unswerving in allegiance; frank and honest in aiding and advising. | A high sense of loyalty. | Reasonably faithful in the execution of his duty.\n(i) PERSEVERANCE (With reference to maintenance of purpose or undertaking in spite of obstacles or discouragement.) | Determined, resolute. | Constant in purpose. | Fairly steady.\n(j) REACTION IN EMERGENCIES (With reference to the faculty of acting instinctively in a logical manner in difficult and unforeseen situations.) | Exceptionally cool-headed and logical in his actions under all conditions. | Composed and logical in his actions in difficult situations. | Fairly logical in his actions in general.\n(k) ENDURANCE (With reference to ability for carrying on under any and all conditions.) | Capable of standing an exceptional amount of physical hardship and strain. | Can perform well his duties under trying conditions. | Of normal endurance.\n(l) INDUSTRY (With reference to performance of duties in an energetic manner.) | Extremely energetic and industrious. | Thorough and energetic. | Reasonably energetic and industrious.\n(m) MILITARY BEARING AND NEATNESS OF PERSON AND DRESS (With reference to dignity of demeanor, correctness of uniform, and smartness of appearance.) | Exceptional. | Very good. | Fair.\n14. A report containing adverse matter must be referred to the officer reported on for statement pursuant to article 1701 (8) USNR. His statement should be attached to this report. Statements of minor deficiencies either in character or performance of duties must be brought to the attention of the officer reported on either orally or in writing.\nHas This Been Done? ____ What Improvement, If Any, Has Been Noted? ____\n(Signature of reporting senior)\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE c9-16—63843-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":547,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\nNAVPERS-310 (Rev. 10-51)\nDate submitted 2/26/53\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST FIVE SECTIONS:\n1. Name: NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement, Grade CHPHOT, USN(R) 8311, Designator, File No. 177283\n2. Ship or Station: Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington, D.C. Date Reported Present Duty Station 26 December 1951\n3. Period of Report: From 11/30/51 To 2/2/52. Type of Report: Detachment of Officer X, Special X\n4. Regular and Additional Duties: Enroute Fleet Activities, Yokosuka, Japan, to Bureau of Aeronautics 11/30/51 to 12/26/51. Ref: BuPers dispatch orders: Pers B115J-2117477, Nov 1951. Temporary duty - Photographic Division, Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington D.C. from 12/26/51 to 2/2/52\n5. Proficiency in Foreign Languages, Stating Which Ones and Ability Therein\n(Signature of officer reported on)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER:\n6. Employment of Command During Period of This Report: Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, Washington, D.C.\n7. Reference Here and Append Copy of Any Commendable or Adverse Reports on This Officer Received During the Period of This Report: None\n8. Performance. Present Assignment 3.9; Ability to Command; As Staff Officer; As Executive or Division Officer; As Watch Officer; In Administration 3.9; Ship Handling; Technical Competence in Photography 4.0 (State specialty)\n9. Considering the Possible Requirements of War, Indicate Your Attitude Toward Having This Officer Under Your Command. Would You: Particularly Desire To Have Him? X; Be Pleased To Have Him?; Be Satisfied To Have Him?; Prefer Not To Have Him? (Adverse)\n10. In Comparison With Other Officers of His Grade and Approximate Length of Service, How Would You Designate This Officer? Outstanding; Excellent X; Above Average; Average; Below Average\n11. Comments. Give in this space a concise appraisal of the officer reported on. Comment on any outstanding characteristics of value to the naval service, including ability to command and outstanding qualifications in any field such as administration, planning, logistics, electronics, new weapons, or new developments. Comment on observed skill in dealing with the public in personal or official contacts. Any mental, moral, or physical weaknesses which might affect his efficiency, or failure to meet qualifications normally expected of an officer of his grade and designation should be indicated. Any adverse entry made in any part of the report must be explained in this paragraph. This space must not be left blank.\nCHPHOT Newhouse has been on temporary duty at the Bureau of Aeronautics, Navy Department, for briefing, prior to assuming the duties of Photographic Technical Officer at the Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Oakland. During this period he has also assisted materially in setting up the procedures whereby the Bureau of Aeronautics could assume purchase and inventory control of microfilm equipment and related supplies.\nHe is of excellent military and personal character. CHPHOT Newhouse is highly recommended for promotion when due.\n12. Name, Grade, and File Number of Reporting Officer. Official Status Relative to Officer Reported on: Murlin W. Alley, CDR, USN, 79137, Acting Director, Photographic Division, BuAer\nc9-16-63843a-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":548,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13. To What Degree Has the Officer Reported on Exhibited the Following Qualities?\n(Table as on page 546, with check marks: (a) Excellent; (b) Outstanding; (c) Outstanding; (d) Outstanding; (e) Outstanding; (f) Outstanding; (g) Outstanding; (h) Outstanding; (i) Outstanding; (j) Not Observed; (k) Not Observed; (l) Outstanding; (m) Outstanding)\nA MARK TO THE RIGHT OF THIS LINE CONSTITUTES AN ADVERSE REPORT\nAccepted Pers-E2222\nCorrections or Erasures\n14. A report containing adverse matter must be referred to the officer reported on for statement pursuant to article 1701 (8) USNR. His statement should be attached to this report. Statements of minor deficiencies either in character or performance of duties must be brought to the attention of the officer reported on either orally or in writing.\nHas This Been Done? ____ What Improvement, If Any, Has Been Noted? ____\n(Signature of reporting senior) M. W. Alley\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE c9-16—63843-1\n24FEB1953"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":549,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (Rev. 3-51)\n11 JAN 1952\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\nDate submitted NOV 29 1951\nTHE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST FIVE SECTIONS:\n1. Name: NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement, Grade CHPHOT, USN, 8311, Designator, File No. 177283\n2. Ship or Station: U.S. Fleet Activities, Yokosuka, Japan. Date Reported Present Duty Station 5-10-51\n3. Period of Report: From 11-3-51 To NOV 29 1951. Type of Report: Detachment of Officer X, Regular\n4. Regular and Additional Duties: Aviation Supply Photo Technical Officer (1); Supply Duty Watch (1); Base Security Patrol (1)\n5. Proficiency in Foreign Languages, Stating Which Ones and Ability Therein: None.\n(Signature of officer reported on)\nFOLLOWING TO BE FILLED IN BY THE REPORTING OFFICER:\n6. Employment of Command During Period of This Report: In support of U.S. and U.N. Fleet Units in Far East.\n7. Reference Here and Append Copy of Any Commendable or Adverse Reports on This Officer Received During the Period of This Report: None.\n8. Performance. Present Assignment 4.0; Ability to Command; As Staff Officer; As Executive or Division Officer; As Supply (Type watch); Watch Officer 3.9; In Administration 3.9; Ship Handling; Technical Competence in Photo Tech. 4.0 (State specialty)\n9. Considering the Possible Requirements of War: Particularly Desire To Have Him? X\n10. Outstanding X\n11. Comments. In the short period since last report, CHPHOT NEWHOUSE has continued to demonstrate his outstanding capability as a naval officer and photographic technical specialist. Strongly recommended for promotion.\n12. Name, Grade, and File Number of Reporting Officer. Official Status Relative to Officer Reported on: J.P. THEW, CAPT, 58538, USN, Chief of Staff, COMFLEACT, Yokosuka\nc9-16-63843-1a"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":550,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13. To What Degree Has the Officer Reported on Exhibited the Following Qualities?\n(Table as on page 546, with check marks: (a) Outstanding; (b) Outstanding; (c) Excellent; (d) Excellent; (e) Excellent; (f) Outstanding; (g) Outstanding; (h) Outstanding; (i) Outstanding; (j) Not Observed; (k) Outstanding; (l) Outstanding; (m) Outstanding)\nA MARK TO THE RIGHT OF THIS LINE CONSTITUTES AN ADVERSE REPORT\n14. A report containing adverse matter must be referred to the officer reported on for statement pursuant to article 1701 (8) USNR. His statement should be attached to this report. Statements of minor deficiencies either in character or performance of duties must be brought to the attention of the officer reported on either orally or in writing.\nHas This Been Done? ____ What Improvement, If Any, Has Been Noted? ____\n(Signature of reporting senior) J.P. Thew\nEmergency Printing Navy—PPO Guam, M. I.\n17DEC1951"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":551,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS-310 (Rev. 3-51) REPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS Date submitted 11/2/51 THE OFFICER REPORTED ON WILL FILL IN THE FIRST FIVE SECTIONS: 1. NAME (Last) (First) (Middle) Grade USN(R) Designator File No. NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement CHPHOT USN 8311 177283 2. SHIP OR STATION U.S. Fleet Activities, Yokosuka DATE REPORTED PRESENT DUTY STATION 5-10-51 3. PERIOD OF REPORT From 7/1/51 To 11/2/51 OCCASION FOR REPORT Detachment of Reporting Senior X TYPE OF REPORT Regular X 4. REGULAR AND ADDITIONAL DUTIES. Aviation Supply Photo Technical Officer (4) Supply Duty Watch (2) Base Security Patrol (2) 5. PROFICIENCY IN FOREIGN LANGUAGES. None 6. EMPLOYMENT OF COMMAND DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT In support of US & UN Fleet Units in Far East 7. REFERENCE HERE AND APPEND COPY OF ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS. None 8. PERFORMANCE. Present Assignment 4.0; As Executive or Division Officer -; Ability to Command -; As Staff Officer -; As Supply (Type watch) Watch Officer 3.9; In Administration 3.9; Ship Handling -; Technical Competence in Photo Tech 4.0; 9. Considering the possible requirements of war, indicate your attitude: Particularly Desire To Have Him X. 10. In comparison with other officers: Outstanding X. 11. COMMENTS. CHPHOT NEWHOUSE is one of the outstanding officers of the Supply Department. Exceptionally intelligent, capable, persevering, and energetic, he can always be depended upon to carry out his photographic technical tasks of great responsibility with dispatch and efficiency. Eminently qualified and strongly recommended for promotion. 12. NAME, GRADE, AND FILE NUMBER OF REPORTING OFFICER. F. J. GRANDFIELD, CAPT, USN, 58894, Chief of Staff, COMFLEACTS, YOKOSUKA"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":552,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13. TO WHAT DEGREE HAS THE OFFICER REPORTED ON EXHIBITED THE FOLLOWING QUALITIES? Not Observed / Outstanding / Excellent / Average / Unsatisfactory. (a) INTELLIGENCE: Outstanding X. (b) JUDGMENT: Excellent X. (c) INITIATIVE: Excellent X. (d) FORCE: Excellent X. (e) LEADERSHIP: Excellent X. (f) MORAL COURAGE: Outstanding X. (g) COOPERATION: Outstanding X. (h) LOYALTY: Outstanding X. (i) PERSEVERANCE: Outstanding X. (j) REACTION IN EMERGENCIES: Not Observed X. (k) ENDURANCE: Outstanding X. (l) INDUSTRY: Outstanding X. (m) MILITARY BEARING AND NEATNESS OF PERSON AND DRESS: Outstanding X. 14. A report containing adverse matter must be referred to the officer reported on for statement pursuant to article 1701 (8) USNR. Has This Been Done? What Improvement, If Any, Has Been Noted? Signature of reporting senior: F. J. GRANDFIELD. Emergency Printing Navy-PPO Guam, M. I."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":553,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT NAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45) PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM. 21 SEP 1951 Pers 3-3. DATE 2 July 1951. 1. NAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement, RANK AND CLASSIFICATION CHPHOT 8311 USN, FILE NO. 177283. SHIP OR STATION U.S. Fleet Activities, Navy No. 3923. PERIOD OF REPORT DATE FROM 5/10/51 DATE TO 6/30/51. Date of reporting to present ship or station 5/10/51. Occasion for report: Regular Semi-annual X. 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES: Assistant to Supply Officer (Photo. Technical Officer) 5 51 6 51; En route from 5/7/51 to 5/10/51 5 51 5 51. 3. Has present duty changed since last fitness report was submitted? Yes X. If courses of instruction were completed: None. Are you physically qualified for Sea Duty? Yes X. 5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: Sea Kind of duty Photographic, Location Pacific Fleet; Shore Kind of duty Photographic, Location West Coast U.S. 6. Name of reporting officer F. J. GRANDFIELD, CAPT, USN, 58894, Official status: Chief of Staff. Is this officer qualified to perform all his present duties? Yes X. Indicate more responsible duties: None. Comment: CHPHOT NEWHOUSE is particularly well qualified in the procurement phase of photographic work. His knowledge of Bureau policy in implementation of the Navy Photographic Policy is particularly valuable. For what duties is he recommended? Ashore Photographic Officer; Afloat Photographic Officer. 7. Rating factors marked, with Photo technical in technical competence. 8. Indicate your attitude: Particularly Desire Him X. 9a. Would you promote him: If 10% were to be promoted X. 9b. Number of officers: 10 or less X. 10. Comment in section 12: None. 11. Adverse comments: No. 12. CHPHOT NEWHOUSE has been on board only a short time, he appears to be an exceptionally well qualified, aggressive and alert officer. He has a thorough background of all phases of the photographic field; and seems to be fully capable of performing all duties assigned him. He has a military bearing and a pleasant demeanor. He is recommended for reappointment to the rank of Lieutenant (LDO). Check one: Satisfactory X. Signature of officer reported on: N. Newhouse. Signature of reporting officer: F. J. Grandfield. PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":554,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT NAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45) PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM. 10 OCT 1951. PERS 3-3. DATE 13 AUG 1951. 1. NAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement, CHPHOT 8311 USN, FILE NO. 177283. SHIP OR STATION U.S. Naval Air Station, Barber's Point, Oahu, T.H. PERIOD OF REPORT DATE FROM 12-13-50 DATE TO 5-7-51. Date of reporting to present ship or station 12-13-50. Occasion for report: Detachment of Officer Reported On X. 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES: Photographic Officer 12 50 5 51; On leave and in transit (1 NOV - 12 DEC 1950) 11 50 12 50. 3. Has present duty changed since last fitness report was submitted? Yes. If courses: None. 4. Non-aviator. 5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY: Sea Kind of duty Photographic, Location Pacific Fleet Air Unit; Shore Kind of duty Photographic, Location NAS, Anacostia, D.C. 6. Name of reporting officer W. T. RASSIEUR, CAPT, USN, 58184, Official status: Commanding Officer. Is this officer qualified to perform all his present duties? Yes X. Indicate more responsible duties: None. For what duties is he recommended? Ashore Photographic; Afloat Photographic. 8. Indicate your attitude: Particularly Desire Him X. 9b. Number of officers: 10 or less X. 10. Comment in section 12: None. 11. Adverse comments: No X. 12. Chief Photographer Newhouse demonstrated considerable aptitude to the problems of photographic supply. His background and experience in this type of work greatly contributed to a smooth and efficient photographic supply section in the Supply Department of this command. His energy and initiative improved the services rendered by his section. His suggestions and recommendations to the overall supply system are sound. He possesses an excellent personal and military character. He is recommended for promotion. Check one: Satisfactory X. Signature of officer reported on: N. Newhouse. Signature of reporting officer: W. T. Rassieur. PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":555,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. NAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement CHPHOT 8311 USN 177283. SHIP OR STATION U.S. Naval Photographic Center, NAS, Anacostia, D.C. PERIOD OF REPORT DATE FROM 7-1-50 DATE TO 10-31-50. Date of reporting to present ship or station 1-1-50. Occasion for report: Detachment of Officer Reported On X. 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES: Head Black & White Production Section 7 50 10 50; Member Examining Board 7 50 10 50; Ten (10) days annual leave (10-3-50 to 10-13-50) 10 50 10 50. 3. Courses: None. 4. Non Aviator. 5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY: Sea Kind of duty Photographic, Location Pacific Fleet Air Unit; Shore Kind of duty Photographic, Location NAS, Barbers Point, T.H. 6. Name of reporting officer L. W. PARRISH, CDR, 71432, Commanding Officer. Is this officer qualified to perform all his present duties? Yes. Indicate more responsible duties: Material Officer. Date of expected qualification: Now. Comment: Qualified by past duties as Photographic Technical Liaison Officer with other Departments of the Armed Forces and is qualified in photographic supply and material duties. For what duties is he recommended? Ashore Photographic; Afloat Photographic. 8. Indicate your attitude: Particularly Desire Him X. 9b. Number of officers: 10 or less X. 11. Adverse comments: No X. 12. CHPHOT NEWHOUSE is an especially capable loyal and conscientious technical officer, particularly well qualified in administrative duties. During the period of this report CHPHOT NEWHOUSE has performed his duties in an outstanding manner. He is qualified now and is strongly recommended for return to his former temporary commissioned rank as Lieutenant. Check one: Satisfactory X. Signature of officer reported on: N. Newhouse. Signature of reporting officer: L. W. Parrish, CDR, USN. PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":556,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT REPORT PERS-3-3 NAVPERS-910A (REV. 6-45) PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM If no typewriter is available use ink but be sure all copies are legible. DATE Sept 1950 1. NAME Newhouse, Delbert, Clement. RANK AND CLASSIFICATION CHPHOT 8311. FILE NO. 177283. SHIP OR STATION U.S. Naval Photographic Center, NAS, Anacostia, D.C. DATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 13 Jan 1950. PERIOD OF REPORT 1/13/50 to 6/30/50. OCCASION FOR REPORT: Regular semi-annual. 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT: Administrative Assistant, 1 50 to 3 50. Head, Still Picture Library, 4 50 to 6 50. HAS PRESENT DUTY CHANGED SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT WAS SUBMITTED? YES. 3. IF COURSES OF INSTRUCTION WERE COMPLETED DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT: None. 4. NON-AVIATOR. 5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: Sea: Kind of duty Photographic, Location Pacific Fleet Air Unit. Shore: Kind of duty Photographic, Location NAS West Coast. 6. NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER: L.W. PARRISH CDR. 71432 Commanding. INDICATE MORE RESPONSIBLE DUTIES FOR WHICH HE IS IN TRAINING: None. 7. Rating factors marked. ASHORE AFLOAT. 8. Attitude: Be pleased to have him. 9a. Would you promote him: Over 50. 10. COMMENT IN SECTION 12: None. 11. No adverse comments. 12. CHPHOT NEWHOUSE is an especially capable, loyal, steady and conscientious technical officer. He has a pleasant personality and agreeable manner. During the period of this report CHPHOT NEWHOUSE has performed his assigned duties in an outstanding manner. This officer, just prior to his assignment to duty with the Naval Photographic Center was reverted from the rank of Lieutenant to his present grade. He has accepted this reversion with grace and good humor which is a tribute of his character. He is capable of and is presently performing the duties of the higher rank. NEWHOUSE is qualified now and is strongly recommended for promotion when due. Signature of officer reported on: Delbert C. Newhouse. Signature of reporting officer: L.W. Parrish, CDR, USN. When completed remove carbon paper, forward Pages 1 and 2, not detached, to BuPers. Retain Page 3 for \"Officer's Qualification Record Jacket\". PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":557,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT NAVPERS-910A (REV. 6-45) PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM. 7 FEB 1950. 1. NAME Newhouse Delbert Clement. RANK AND CLASSIFICATION Lt, USN 1350. FILE NO. 177283. SHIP OR STATION Bureau of Aeronautics, Photographic Division. DATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 10/20/49. PERIOD OF REPORT 10/20/49 to 1-3-50. 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT: 15 days delay from BAGR-CD to BuAer (9/30/49 to 10/14/49). In transit to BuAer including proceed time (10/15/49 to 10/20/49). Head, Procurement Branch, Photographic Division (10/49 to 1/50). HAS PRESENT DUTY CHANGED SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT WAS SUBMITTED? YES. 3. None. 4. NON-AVIATOR. 5. Sea: Photographic, Pacific Fleet Air Unit. Shore: Photographic, Bureau of Medicine & Surgery. 6. NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER: J.H. McELROY, Capt, 62661, Director, Photographic Division. INDICATE MORE RESPONSIBLE DUTIES: None. 9a/9b checked. 10. COMMENT IN SECTION 12: None. 12. Lt. Newhouse is a capable, steady, and conscientious officer who has a pleasant and quiet personality. He has performed his duties in an efficient and military manner. This officer's exceptional qualifications and recent experience in procurement procedures gained while on duty at Air Materiel Command Headquarters, Dayton, Ohio, have benefited the Photographic Division in matters relating to procurement of photographic material. Lt. Newhouse is considered qualified now and is recommended for promotion when due. PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":558,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT NAVPERS-910A (REV. 6-45) PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM. 9/29/49. 1. NAME NEWHOUSE DELBERT CLEMENT. RANK AND CLASSIFICATION LT/1350/USN. FILE NO. 177283. SHIP OR STATION Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District. PERIOD OF REPORT 3/1/49 to 9/29/49. DATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 8/24/48. 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES: Assistant to Director of Procurement Division, BAGR-CD, for Photographic Procurement. Assistant to Director of Procurement Division, BAGR-CD, for Photographic Developmental Engineering. 3 49 to 9 49. 4. NON-AVIATOR. 5. Sea: Photographic, Pacific Fleet Air Unit. Shore: Photographic, West Coast - POA Air Station. 6. NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER: L. M. GRANT, Rear Admiral, 34644, Commanding Officer. INDICATE MORE RESPONSIBLE DUTIES: None. APPRAISAL: LT. Newhouse has specialized throughout his career (enlisted, warrant and temporary) in camera and photographic work for which he is recommended in future assignments. Assignment for an advanced course, or study in and with Industry is recommended. ASHORE Photographic Officer. AFLOAT Photographic Officer. 8. Attitude: Be pleased to have him. 10. None. 12. LT. Newhouse is a loyal, capable officer. He carries out the liaison work on Single Department Procurement of Cameras and Photographic materials effectively and in a manner reflecting credit to the Navy. He is tactful, cooperative, and has effectively handled numerous problems arising in this joint department undertaking. He is alert in keeping the BuAer advised on USAF Research and Development projects. LT. Newhouse's personal and military character is excellent and he is recommended for promotion and continuation on duty in a commissioned status. Signature of officer reported on: Delbert C. Newhouse. Signature of reporting officer: L. M. Grant. PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":559,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT NAVPERS-910A (REV. 6-45) PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM. 11 MAR 1949. DATE 2-28-49. 1. NAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement. RANK AND CLASSIFICATION LT USN 1350. FILE NO. 177283. SHIP OR STATION Office of Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative Central District, Wright-Patterson AFB, Dayton, Ohio. PERIOD OF REPORT 9-1-48 to 2-28-49. DATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 8-24-48. 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES: Assistant to Director Procurement Division for Photographic Procurement. Assistant to Director Technical Division for Photographic Developmental Engineering. 9 48 to 2 49. 3. NONE. 4. NON AVIATOR. 5. Sea: Photographic, Pacific Fleet Air Unit. Shore: Photographic, West Coast or POA Air Station. 6. NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER: L. M. GRANT RADM 34644 USN Commanding Officer. INDICATE MORE RESPONSIBLE DUTIES: NONE. APPRAISAL: Lieutenant Newhouse possesses a good service background. For fourteen (14) years he has been engaged in Photographic and Camera assignments. He attended the Naval Photo. course at Pensacola in 1945. To broaden his potential capabilities and value to the service, he is recommended for the Camera maintenance and Repair course, temporary duties at Manufacturing plants and attendance at the Naval School of Motion Picture Photography. ASHORE Bureau Aeronautics Photo. Division for inter Department work. AFLOAT Staff, or Photo Squad. 8. Attitude: Be pleased to have him. 10. NONE. 12. During the period covered, Lieut. Newhouse has carried out his duties in a commendable manner. He is hard working, conscientious, and fully versed in his specialized subject. In his coverage of the U.S. Air Force Research and Development projects on Photography and Cameras, he has kept abreast of progress and kept both services fully informed. In his liaison work he exercises the good judgment, and maintains the high standards necessary for joint service cooperative efforts. His personal and military character is excellent and he is recommended for promotion. He would be valuable as, and is recommended for, a limited commission. PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":560,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT NAVPERS-910A (REV. 6-45) PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM. 27 SEP 1948. DATE 31 August 1948. 1. NAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement. RANK AND CLASSIFICATION LT USN 1350. FILE NO. 177283. SHIP OR STATION Office of the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District, Wright-Patterson AF Base, Dayton, Ohio. DATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 8/24/48. PERIOD OF REPORT 7/2/48 to 8/31/48. 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES: Assistant to Director Procurement Division covering: 1. Cameras, Projectors & photographic material procured by Air Material Command for the Navy under \"Single Service Procurement\"; 2. Liaison with photographic laboratories to keep BuAer advised on research and development progress. (NOTE: Last report dated 7/1/48) (In transit & on leave 7/1/48 to 8/11/48) (Temporary duty, ASO Phila, 8/19 to 8/21) (Temporary Duty, BuAer 8-11-48 to 8-18-48). 3. NONE. 4. NON AVIATOR. 5. Sea: Photographic, Pacific Fleet Air Unit. Shore: Photographic, West Coast or POA Air Station. 6. NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER: L. M. GRANT RADM USN 34644 Commanding Officer. APPRAISAL: See Section #12. 8. SEE BELOW. 9a. SEE BELOW. 10. NONE. 12. This officer has been attached to the Command of the Bureau of Aeronautics General Representative, Central District only for a period of one week, which has not permitted sufficient time for observation justifying entry of rating factors and other points. Lieutenant NEWHOUSE impresses the reporting officer as being a capable officer, and has energetically taken hold of his assignment, concerning which he has initially displayed good knowledge. Signature of officer reported on: Delbert C. Newhouse. Signature of reporting officer: L. M. Grant. PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":561,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT\nNAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45)\nPLEASE TYPE THIS FORM\nIf no typewriter is available use ink but be sure all copies are legible.\nDATE 1 July 1948\n1. NAME (last) NEWHOUSE, (first) Delbert (middle) Clement RANK AND CLASSIFICATION LT 1350 FILE NO. 177283\nSHIP OR STATION Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet, Staff PERIOD OF REPORT DATE FROM 3-1-48 DATE TO 7-1-48\nDATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 10-23-47 OCCASION FOR REPORT Detachment of Officer Reported On (X) Regular Semi-Annual\n2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT\nStaff Photographic Officer (Fleet Air Photo Lab operated by Staff) 3 48 7 48\nAssistant to Staff Operations Officer 3 48 7 48\nHAS PRESENT DUTY CHANGED SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT WAS SUBMITTED? YES NO (X)\n3. Are you physically qualified for Sea Duty? (X) Yes\n4. If Aviator, indicate No. of Flight Hours\n5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: SEA Kind of Duty Photographic Location Pacific Fleet; SHORE Kind of Duty Photographic Location NAS, West Coast\n6. SECTIONS 6 THROUGH 12 TO BE FILLED IN BY REPORTING OFFICER\nNAME OF REPORTING OFFICER J. C. CRONIN, Captain, 57009, ComUtWingPac\nIS THIS OFFICER QUALIFIED TO PERFORM ALL HIS PRESENT DUTIES? NO (X)\nINDICATE MORE RESPONSIBLE DUTIES FOR WHICH HE IS IN TRAINING: None\nFOR WHAT DUTIES IS HE RECOMMENDED?\nASHORE NAS Photographic Laboratory AFLOAT Shipbased or Aircraft Squadron Photo Duties\n7. RATING FACTORS (table of marks)\n10. COMMENT IN SECTION 12 AND GIVE REFERENCE: None\n11. HAVE YOU ANY ADVERSE COMMENTS: NO\n12. Lieutenant Newhouse is a quiet, reserved, and likable officer. He has had a difficult time adjusting himself to his duties on this staff, but he has earnestly endeavored to do so. If his experience in naval aviation had been wider, it is believed he would have performed his duties better. He has performed his technical duties as Photographic Officer well. His performance of administrative duties, both as Photographic Officer and as Assistant Operations Officer, has improved during the period of this report. He is not yet fitted for promotion.\nPAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":562,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT\nNAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45)\nDATE 29 February 1948\n1. NAME NEWHOUSE, Delbert, Clement RANK LT, 1350, USN FILE NO. 0177283\nSHIP OR STATION Staff, Commander Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet PERIOD OF REPORT DATE FROM 10-23-47 DATE TO 2-29-48\nDATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 10-23-47 OCCASION FOR REPORT Regular Semi-Annual (X)\n2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT\nStaff Photographic Officer (Fleet Air Photo Lab operated by Staff) 10 47 2 48\nAssistant Operations Officer 10 47 2 48\nLeave (12-10-47 to 12-18-47)\nHAS PRESENT DUTY CHANGED SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT WAS SUBMITTED? YES (X)\n3. COURSES OF INSTRUCTION: None\n5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: SEA Kind of Duty Photographic Location Aircraft Squadron, Pacific Fleet; SHORE Location NAS, West Coast\n6. NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER J. C. CRONIN, CAPT, USN 0057009 ComUtWingPac\nINDICATE MORE RESPONSIBLE DUTIES: None\nASHORE NAS Photographic Laboratory AFLOAT Aircraft Squadron Photo Officer\n7. RATING FACTORS (table of marks)\n10. COMMENT IN SECTION 12: None\n12. LT NEWHOUSE is a reserved, cheerful and generally likeable officer. He is having most difficult time adjusting himself to staff duty. He is judged competent in the technical aspects of photography, but his performance of his administrative duties in both the photographic and operational departments are below average. It is felt that his deficiency is principally due to his background and lack of experience in administration. He is making a sincere effort to correct this deficiency. He is not yet fitted for promotion.\nPAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":563,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT\nNAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45)\nDATE 22 October 1947\n1. NAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement Lieutenant(T) USN FILE NO. 177283\nSHIP OR STATION Aviation Supply Depot Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor\nPERIOD OF REPORT DATE FROM 8/31/47 DATE TO 10/22/47\nDATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 9 Sept 1946\n2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT\nPhotographic Liaison Officer 8/47 10/47\nMilitary Personnel Officer 8/47 10/47\nRecreation Officer 8/47 10/47\nLeave 2 days 10/47 10/47\n3. COURSES OF INSTRUCTION: None\n5. MY PREFERENCE: SEA Photographic, Pacific Coast; SHORE Photographic, West Coast\n6. NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER H.J.P. Foley, Comdr.(SC)USN 81346 Supply Officer in Command\nQualified by experience and training for photographic supply duty.\nReviewed, approved and forwarded. W. V. Fox, RADM, SC, USN, Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center\nASHORE Photo officer ASO, ASD, Class A NAS AFLOAT Photo officer CUB, URU\n7. RATING FACTORS (table of marks)\n8. BE SATISFIED / PARTICULARLY DESIRE HIM (X)\n10. COMMENT IN SECTION 12: None\n11. HAVE YOU ANY ADVERSE COMMENTS: NO\n12. Lt. Newhouse's performance of duty has continued to be excellent and outstanding. In addition to a sound grasp of area and service-wide photographic supply procedures, he possesses mature judgement and a high order of devotion to duty. He is willing to accept responsibility and completes assignments with interest and dispatch. His personal and military character is excellent and has been recommended for a limited service commission in his present rank. He is recommended for promotion when eligible.\nPAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":564,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT\nNAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45)\nDATE 31 August 1947\n1. NAME NEWHOUSE DELBERT C. Lieutenant, USN FILE NO. 177283\nSHIP OR STATION Aviation Supply Depot Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor\nPERIOD OF REPORT DATE FROM 15 July 1947 DATE TO 31 August 1947\nDATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 9/9/46\n2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT\nPhotographic Liaison Officer Jul 47 Aug 47\nMilitary Personnel Officer Jul 47 Aug 47\n5. MY PREFERENCE: SEA Photographic, Utility Wing, Pacific Fleet; SHORE Photographic, Air Station, West Coast\n6. NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER H.J.P. Foley CDR, SC, USN 81346 Supply Officer in Command\nQualified by experience and training for photographic supply duty.\nReviewed, approved, and forwarded. W. V. Fox, RADM SC USN. Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center\nASHORE Photo Officer, ASO, ASD AFLOAT Photo Officer, CVB, VRU\n7. RATING FACTORS (table of marks)\n8. PARTICULARLY DESIRE HIM (X)\n10. COMMENT IN SECTION 12: None\n11. HAVE YOU ANY ADVERSE COMMENTS: NO\n12. Lt. Newhouse possesses a sound grasp of area and service wide photographic supply procedures and has been of great assistance in furthering the policies and instructions of the Chief of the U.S. Naval Photographic Service. He is a mature officer of good judgement with a high order of devotion to duty. Performance of his collateral duties has been uniformly efficient. His personal and military character is excellent and he is recommended for retention of his present temporary rank and for promotion when eligible.\nPAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":565,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT\nNAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45)\nDATE 14 July 1947\n1. NAME NEWHOUSE DELBERT CLEMENT LT., USN FILE NO. 177283\nSHIP OR STATION Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor\nPERIOD OF REPORT DATE FROM 23 May 1947 DATE TO 14 July 1947\nDATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 9 Sept. 1946\n2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT\nPhotographic Officer: Control and issue of photographic material and supplies. May 47 July 47\n* Military Personnel Officer (Collateral) May 47 July 47\n* Recreation Officer (Collateral) May 47 July 47\n5. MY PREFERENCE: SEA Photographic Officer, CV, Pacific Fleet; SHORE Photographic Officer, Navy Dept., Washington, D.C.\n6. NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER E.R. JOSHUA JR. Lr.Comdr SC USN 83531 Supply Officer in Command\nQualified by experience and training for photographic supply duty.\nReviewed, approved and forwarded. W. V. Fox, RADM SC USN. Supply Officer in Command, Naval Supply Center\nASHORE Photo Officer ASD, ASO, ASA or ASO AFLOAT Photo Officer, CVB, VRU\n8. PARTICULARLY DESIRE HIM (X)\n10. COMMENT IN SECTION 12: None\n11. HAVE YOU ANY ADVERSE COMMENTS: NO\n12. Lt. Newhouse possesses a sound grasp of supply procedures and has exerted a beneficial influence in this area in carrying out instructions of the Chief of the U.S. Naval Photographic Service. His judgement is sound and mature, he shows consistent devotion to duty and is thoroughly reliable and loyal. Performance of his collateral duty has been uniformly efficient. His personal and military characteristics are excellent and he is recommended for retention of his present temporary rank and for promotion when eligible.\nPAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":566,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT NAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45) PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM If no typewriter is available use ink but be sure all copies are legible. DATE 23 May 1947 1. NAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement LT USN FILE NO. 177283 SHIP OR STATION Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H. PERIOD OF REPORT FROM 1 Mar 47 TO 23 May 47 DATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 9 Sept 46 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT: PHOTOGRAPHIC OFFICER: Control and issue of photographic material and supplies. * ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPT. OFFICER: (Collateral) Administration of personnel, maintenance and office services functions. MAR 47 MAY 47; MAR 47 APR 47 5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: SEA KIND OF DUTY Photographic Officer LOCATION CVB, Pacific Fleet; SHORE KIND OF DUTY Photographic LOCATION Navy Dept., Washington, D.C. 6. K. A. GRAHN CDR SC USN 81449 Supply Officer in Command. 7. RATING FACTORS (see form). Appraisal: Particularly qualified by experience and training for photographic supply duty. Reviewed, approved, and forwarded. W. V. FOX, RADM, SC, USN. SOinC, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, T.H. FOR WHAT DUTIES IS HE RECOMMENDED? ASHORE Photo Officer, ASD, ASA or ASO AFLOAT Photo Officer, CVB, VRU 8. INDICATE YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARD HAVING THIS OFFICER UNDER YOUR COMMAND: PARTICULARLY DESIRE HIM 9a. 9b. 10. COMMENT IN SECTION 12 AND GIVE REFERENCE HERE TO ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ON THE OFFICER DURING THIS PERIOD. 11. HAVE YOU ANY ADVERSE COMMENTS: NO. 12. Check one of these boxes: I CONSIDER THIS REPORT TO BE SATISFACTORY. Lt. Newhouse shows a remarkably sound grasp of supply procedures and has exerted a most beneficial influence as the senior photographic officer in this area in carrying out instructions of the Chief of the U.S. Naval Photographic Service. His judgment is sound and firm; he shows consistent devotion to duty and is thoroughly reliable and loyal. Performance of his collateral duties has been uniformly efficient. His personal and military characteristics are splendid, and he is recommended for retention of his present temporary rank and promotion when eligible. SIGNATURE OF OFFICER REPORTED ON / SIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER. When completed remove carbon paper, forward Pages 1 and 2, not detached, to BuPers. Retain Page 3 for \"Officer's Qualification Record Jacket\". PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":567,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT NAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45) PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM DATE 13 March 1947 1. NAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement LT USN FILE NO. 177283 SHIP OR STATION Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Pearl Harbor, TH PERIOD OF REPORT 20 Aug 46 TO 28 Feb 47 DATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 9 Sept 46 REGULAR SEMI-ANNUAL 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT: Photographic Officer: Control and issue of photographic mat'l. & supplies. Administrative Services Dept. Officer: (Collateral) Administration of personnel, maintenance and office services functions. In Transit (16 days). On Leave (4 days). 5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: SEA KIND OF DUTY Photographic Officer LOCATION CVB, Pacific Fleet; SHORE KIND OF DUTY Photographic LOCATION Navy Dept., Washington, D.C. 6. K. A. GRAHN CDR SC USN 81449 Supply Officer in Command. Appraisal: Sound background in photographic supply. FOR WHAT DUTIES IS HE RECOMMENDED? ASHORE Photo. Officer, large NAS, ASA AFLOAT Photo. Officer, CVB, VRU 10. [blank] 12. Mr. Newhouse has shown a superior grasp of photographic supply details, sound judgment, foresight, devotion to duty and thoroughness in his primary duty as photographic officer. He carries out his depot duties as well as liaison with and assistance to ComAirPac and CinCPac with tact and efficiency, and is firm in administering photographic supply doctrine in this area. As Administrative Officer he is in charge of over 35 civilians and acts as division officer for 40 enlisted men, performing both assignments very well. His personal and military characteristics are the highest, and he is recommended for promotion when eligible. Check one of these boxes: I CONSIDER THIS REPORT TO BE SATISFACTORY. SIGNATURE OF OFFICER REPORTED ON / SIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER. When completed remove carbon paper, forward Pages 1 and 2, not detached, to BuPers. Retain Page 3 for \"Officer's Qualification Record Jacket\". PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":568,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT NAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45) PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM DATE 8/19/46 1. NAME NEWHOUSE DELBERT Clement Lieut. USN FILE NO. 177283 SHIP OR STATION Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Penna. PERIOD OF REPORT DATE FROM 3/1/46 DATE TO 8/19/46 DATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 9/13/44 REGULAR SEMI-ANNUAL 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT: Assistant to Officer in Charge, Supply Department, Naval Aviation Supply Depot. FROM 3 46 TO 8 46 5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: SEA KIND OF DUTY PHOTOGRAPH OFFICER, CV LOCATION PACIFIC FLEET; SHORE KIND OF DUTY NASD LOCATION PEARL HARBOR, P.H. 6. E.D. FOSTER Rear Admiral SC,USN 17552 Aviation Supply Officer. Appraisal: None. FOR WHAT DUTIES IS HE RECOMMENDED? ASHORE Photo Liaison ASD, Pearl Harbor AFLOAT Photo Officer CV or Squadron 10. None 12. Lieut. Newhouse has carried out duties as Photographic Liaison Officer in a manner which has reflected credit on this Depot. He has a confident and quiet manner and excellent military conduct. His screening of photographic requests and handling of photographic problems has displayed an initiative and thoroughness which is most desirable for an officer in his particular billet. Lieut. Newhouse is recommended for promotion when due and for commissioned rank in the regular Navy. This officer has not seen this report because he has been detached from this activity. Check one of these boxes: I CONSIDER THIS REPORT TO BE SATISFACTORY. SIGNATURE OF OFFICER REPORTED ON / SIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER. When completed remove carbon paper, forward Pages 1 and 2, not detached, to BuPers. Retain Page 3 for \"Officer's Qualification Record Jacket\". PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":569,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT NAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-45) PLEASE TYPE THIS FORM DATE 2/28/46 1. NAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement Lt.(jg) USN FILE NO. 177283 SHIP OR STATION Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Phila., Pa. PERIOD OF REPORT DATE FROM 9/1/45 DATE TO 2/28/46 DATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT SHIP OR STATION 9/13/44 REGULAR SEMI-ANNUAL 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT: Photographic Liaison Officer, NASD - CNO, Op 53. FROM 9 45 TO 2 46 5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: SEA KIND OF DUTY Photographic Liaison LOCATION Pacific Area (NASD); SHORE KIND OF DUTY Photographic Officer LOCATION Any West Coast Air Station 6. E. D. FOSTER, Rear Admiral, SC, USN, Supply Officer-in-Command. Appraisal: None. FOR WHAT DUTIES IS HE RECOMMENDED? ASHORE Photographic Officer NAS AFLOAT Photographic Officer CV 12. Lt.(jg) Newhouse has performed duties as Photographic Liaison Officer in an excellent manner during the period of this report. His experience with photography and his knowledge of photographic organization in the office of CNO coupled with his good judgment have enabled this Depot to give outstanding service to the Fleet in supplying photographic material. His personal and military character is excellent, and he is recommended for promotion when due and for permanent commissioned rank in the regular Navy. SIGNATURE OF OFFICER REPORTED ON / SIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER. When completed remove carbon paper, forward Pages 1 and 2, not detached, to BuPers. Retain Page 3 for \"Officer's Qualification Record Jacket\". PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":570,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT NAVPERS-310A (REV. 6-44) Transmitted Pub. Law 347 79th Cong. DATE 8/31/45 1. NAME NEWHOUSE Delbert Clement Lieut. (jg) USN FILE NO. 177283 SHIP OR STATION Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pa. PERIOD OF REPORT 3/1/45 TO 8/31/45 DATE OF REPORTING TO PRESENT DUTY 9/13/44 REGULAR SEMI-ANNUAL 2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT: Assistant to Officer in Charge, Photographic and Photo-Lithographic Materials, Supply Department. FROM 3 45 TO 8 45 5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: SEA KIND OF DUTY CV or Photographic Sqdn. LOCATION Pacific Fleet; SHORE KIND OF DUTY Photographic LOCATION West Coast 6. C. L. LYNN CAPTAIN (SC) USNR ASSISTANT SUPPLY OFFICER IN COMMAND. Photographic Officer. DATE OF EXPECTED QUALIFICATION 12/1/45. FOR WHAT DUTIES IS HE RECOMMENDED? ASHORE Photographic Officer, NAS or NASD AFLOAT Photographic Officer, CV 12. Lieut. (jg) Newhouse has performed his duties as Assistant and Technical Advisor to the Officer in Charge, Photographic and Photo-Lithographic materials in a satisfactory manner during the period of this report. He has shown considerable initiative in assuming responsibility for administrative details of this Division and he has demonstrated an outstanding ability in his technical specialty. Lieut. (jg) Newhouse's personal and military character is excellent and he is considered qualified for promotion to the next higher rank when due. He is also recommended for a permanent commission in the regular Navy. This report has been shown to Lieut. (jg) Newhouse. Check one of these boxes: I CONSIDER THIS REPORT TO BE SATISFACTORY. SIGNATURE OF OFFICER REPORTED ON / SIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER. HAVE YOU READ THE ATTACHED INSTRUCTION SHEET? YES. When completed remove carbon paper, forward Pages 1 and 2, not detached, to BuPers. Retain Page 3 for \"Officer's Qualification Record Jacket\". PAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":571,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICER'S FITNESS REPORT\nNAVPERS-310A (REV. 8-44)\nPLEASE TYPE THIS FORM\nIf no typewriter is available use ink but be sure all copies are legible.\nDATE 2/28/45\n1. NAME (last) NEWHOUSE (first) DELBERT (middle) CLEMENT. RANK AND CLASSIFICATION Lt.(jg), USN. FILE NO. 177283\nSHIP OR STATION Naval Aviation Supply Depot, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. PERIOD OF REPORT DATE FROM 9/13/44 DATE TO 2/28/45\nDATE OF ASSIGNMENT TO PRESENT DUTY 9/13/44. OCCASION FOR REPORT: Detachment of Officer Reported On; Detachment of Reporting Senior; Regular Semi-Annual (X); Quarterly; Special\n2. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES SINCE LAST FITNESS REPORT. Technical Advisor in Photography to the Assistant Supply Officer-in-Command. FROM MO. 9 YR. 44 TO MO. 2 YR. 45\n3. IF COURSES OF INSTRUCTION WERE COMPLETED DURING PERIOD OF THIS REPORT, LIST TITLE OF COURSE, LOCATION OF SCHOOL, LENGTH OF COURSE AND DATE COMPLETED. Are you physically qualified for Sea Duty? Yes (X) No Don't Know\n4. IF AVIATOR, INDICATE NO. OF FLIGHT HOURS LAST TWO YEARS FOR EACH TYPE AIRCRAFT. TYPE OF AIRCRAFT. NO. OF HOURS. TOTAL\n5. MY PREFERENCE FOR NEXT DUTY IS: SEA KIND OF DUTY CV LOCATION Pacific. SHORE KIND OF DUTY NAS LOCATION West Coast\n6. SECTIONS 6 THROUGH 12 TO BE FILLED IN BY REPORTING OFFICER. NAME OF REPORTING OFFICER JN-17552 E. D. FOSTER. RANK Commodore, (SC), USN. OFFICIAL STATUS RELATIVE TO OFFICER REPORTED ON Supply Officer-in-Command\nIS THIS OFFICER QUALIFIED TO PERFORM PRESENT DUTIES? Yes No. INDICATE MORE RESPONSIBLE DUTIES FOR WHICH HE IS IN TRAINING. DATE OF EXPECTED QUALIFICATION\nComment on special or outstanding qualifications as well as any physical defects, which should be considered in determining the kinds of duty to which he should be detailed. Only comments on qualifications significant in detailing should be entered here. ANY COMMENTS REGARDING FITNESS FOR PROMOTION SHOULD BE ENTERED IN SECTION 12 ONLY.\nFOR WHAT DUTIES IS HE RECOMMENDED? ASHORE Photographic Officer. AFLOAT Photographic Officer.\n7. FOR EACH FACTOR OBSERVED CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX TO INDICATE HOW THE OFFICER COMPARES WITH ALL OTHERS OF THE SAME RANK WHOSE PROFESSIONAL ABILITIES ARE KNOWN TO YOU PERSONALLY. RATING FACTORS: Not Observed; Within Bottom 10%; Within Next 20%; Within Middle 40%; Within Next Top 20%; Within Top 10%.\nA. SEA OR ADVANCE BASE DUTY: 1. STANDING DECK WATCHES UNDERWAY? 2. ABILITY TO COMMAND? 3. PERFORMANCE IN PRESENT DUTIES AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 2, ABOVE? 4. REACTIONS DURING EMERGENCIES? 5. PERFORMANCE AT BATTLE STATION OR IN BATTLE DUTIES?\nB. INITIATIVE AND RESPONSIBILITY: 1. ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY WHEN SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS ARE LACKING? 2. GIVE FRANK OPINIONS WHEN ASKED OR VOLUNTEER THEM WHEN NECESSARY TO AVOID MISTAKES? 3. FOLLOW THROUGH DESPITE OBSTACLES IN CARRYING OUT RESPONSIBILITIES ASSIGNED OR ASSUMED?\nC. UNDERSTANDING AND SKILL: 1. GRASP INSTRUCTIONS AND PLANS GIVEN TO HIM? 2. USE IDEAS AND SUGGESTIONS OF OTHERS? 3. RATE IN TECHNICAL COMPETENCE IN HIS SPECIALTY, IF ANY? (Name Specialty) Photographic Material\nD. LEADERSHIP: 1. INSPIRE SUBORDINATES TO WORK TO THE MAXIMUM OF THEIR CAPACITY? 2. EFFECTIVELY DELEGATE RESPONSIBILITY? 3. TRANSMIT ORDERS, INSTRUCTIONS, AND PLANS? 4. ORGANIZE HIS WORK AND THAT OF THOSE UNDER HIS COMMAND OR SUPERVISY? 5. MAINTAIN DISCIPLINE AMONG THOSE UNDER HIS COMMAND OR DIRECTION?\nE. CONDUCT AND WORK HABITS: 1. ABILITY TO WORK WITH OTHERS? 2. ABILITY TO ADAPT TO CHANGING NEEDS AND CONDITIONS? 3. MILITARY CONDUCT—BEARING, DRESS, COURTESY, ETC.?\n8. INDICATE YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARD HAVING THIS OFFICER UNDER YOUR COMMAND, WOULD YOU: Definitely Not Want Him; Prefer Not To Have Him; Be Satisfied To Have Him; Be Pleased To Have Him; Particularly Desire To Have Him\n9a. CONSIDERING ALL OFFICERS OF THE SAME RANK WHOSE PROFESSIONAL ABILITIES ARE KNOWN TO YOU PERSONALLY, WOULD YOU PROMOTE HIM: Under No Circumstances; If 60% Were Promoted; If 70% Were Promoted; If 30% Were Promoted; If Only 10% Were Promoted. 9b. How many Officers are included in the group used for the comparison in 9a?\n10. COMMENT IN SECTION 12 AND GIVE REFERENCE HERE TO ANY COMMENDABLE OR ADVERSE REPORTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ON THE OFFICER DURING THIS PERIOD.\n11. HAVE YOU ANY ADVERSE COMMENTS TO MAKE REGARDING THIS OFFICER'S QUALITIES OR PERFORMANCE? No. HAS HE ANY MENTAL OR MORAL WEAKNESS WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECTS HIS EFFICIENCY? No. If yes, explain in Section 12. UNSATISFACTORY. Yes in either item of Section 11 constitutes an unsatisfactory report and must be referred to the officer for statement.\n12. Give in this space a clear, concise appraisal of the officer reported on and his performance of duty. Check one of these boxes—I CONSIDER THIS REPORT TO BE: SATISFACTORY / UNSATISFACTORY\nLt. Newhouse has been technical advisor on all matters pertaining to photographic material and has a complete knowledge of his specialty. He has an outstanding military and personal character and is considered well qualified and recommended for promotion when due.\n(If additional space is needed attach extra sheet)\nSIGNATURE OF OFFICER REPORTED ON (Applies only to Sections 1 through 5). SIGNATURE OF REPORTING OFFICER. HAVE YOU READ THE ATTACHED INSTRUCTION SHEET? Yes\nWhen completed remove carbon paper, forward Pages 1 and 2, not detached, to BuPers. Retain Page 3 for Officer's Qualification Record Jacket.\nPAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":572,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Refer to File No.\nNA10/P20-2/00\n1619\nU. S. NAVAL AIR STATION\nCoco Solo\nUpham, Canal Zone\n7 September 1944\n8-32\nFrom: CO\nTo: BuPers\nSubj: Lt. (jg) Delbert C. NEWHOUSE, USN, 177283 - Fitness report covering period 7-1-44 to 8-19-44\nRef: (a) Navy Regs. Article 137.\n1. In accordance with reference (a), it is requested that subject fitness report be extended to include the period 8-20-44 to 9-6-44.\nBy direction of Commanding Officer:\nC. GOULDRUP"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":573,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS 311 (Rev. 8-43)\n(TO BE USED ONLY FOR OFFICERS ON SHORE DUTY)\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n(To be submitted in accordance with Section 5 of Chapter 2, U. S. Navy Regulations, 1920, and Bureau of Naval Personnel Manual, Article C-1006)\n(Before making out this report read latest Bureau of Naval Personnel circular letter on the subject of fitness reports.)\nThe following four questions to be made out by the officer reported on:\nFile No. 177283\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement. Rank Ensign, U. S. N.\nStation NAS COCO SOLO C Z. Period from 1 July 1944 to 19 August 1944\n1. Regular duties Photographic Officer.\nAdditional duties\n2. Present address of wife (if married) 1031 S.E. 16th Ave., Portland, Oregon. next of kin (if unmarried)\n3. Proficiency in foreign languages, stating which ones, and ability therein None.\n4. My preference for next duty is—\n(a) Sea Fleet Air Wing. Fleet Pacific.\n(b) Shore NAS. Location West Coast.\n5. Reporting Officer: Name R.P. KAUFFMAN. Rank CAPTAIN, U. S. N.\n6. Reporting officer's official status relative to officer reported on COMMANDING OFFICER\n7. Assign marks on scale of 0—4 in appropriate subdivisions given below. Present assignment 3.6. Ability to command 3.5. As executive or division officer 3.5. As deck watch officer. In administration 3.6.\n8. Has the work of this officer been reported on either in a commendatory way or adversely during the period of this report? No.\n9. Considering the possible requirements in war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. (1) Particularly desire to have him? (2) Be pleased to have him? X (3) Be satisfied to have him? (4) Prefer not to have him?\n10. Has he any weaknesses—mental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? No."} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":574,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"11. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualities? (See instructions in latest Bureau of Naval Personnel circular letter on the subject of fitness reports.)\nIntelligence: Exceptionally quick-witted; keen in understanding. Grasps essentials of a situation quickly (X). Understands normal situations and conditions. Slow of comprehension; unimaginative.\nJudgment: Unusually keen in estimating situations and reaching sound decisions. Can generally be depended on to make proper decisions (X). Fair judgment in normal and routine things. Frequently draws wrong conclusions.\nInitiative: Exceptional in ability to think, plan, and do things without waiting to be told and instructed. Able to plan and execute missions on his own responsibility (X). Capable of performing routine duties on own responsibility. Requires constant guidance and supervision in his work, or evades responsibilities.\nForce: Strong, dynamic. Strong (X). Effectual under normal and routine circumstances. Less than normal.\nLeadership: Inspires others to a high degree by precept and example. A very good leader (X). Leads fairly well. A poor leader.\nMoral Courage: Exceptionally courageous. Courageous to a high degree. Fairly courageous. Timid.\nCooperation: Exceptionally successful in working with others to a common end. Works in harmony with others (X). Cooperates fairly well. Not cooperative.\nLoyalty: Unswerving in allegiance; frank and honest in aiding and advising (X). A high sense of loyalty. Reasonably faithful in the execution of his duty. Inclined to be disloyal.\nPerseverance: Determined, resolute. Constant in purpose. Fairly steady. Inclined to vacillate.\nReactions in emergencies: Exceptionally cool-headed and logical in his actions under all conditions. Composed and logical in his actions in difficult situations (X). Fairly logical in his actions in general. Inclined to be disconcerted.\nEndurance: Capable of standing an exceptional amount of physical hardships and strain (X). Can perform well his duties under trying conditions. Of normal endurance. Less than normal.\nIndustry: Extremely energetic and industrious. Thorough and energetic. Reasonably energetic and industrious. Indolent; lazy.\nMilitary bearing and neatness of person and dress: Exceptional. Very good (X). Fair. Unmilitary and untidy.\n12. In comparison with other officers of his rank and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? Outstanding; Excellent; Above average (X); Average; Below average.\nREMARKS\n13. Is this officer professionally qualified to perform ALL the duties of his grade? Yes (X) No. If deficient in any particular, comment is required. Give in this space a clear, concise estimate of this officer's personal and military character, his fitness for promotion, and duty performed worthy of special mention, and any information which might be of value to the Department in making assignments to duty.\nThis officer has wide experience in photography, much of it while he has been in the Navy but with additional background from civil life. He has extensive Navy service and is familiar with naval procedure. He is a steady, orderly, practical type of average intelligence but his dependable and conscientious performance and his administrative qualities are above average. He can be trusted with responsibility. He has a sturdy physique and a healthy common-sense outlook that fit him for any kind of duty, and is excellent material for an eventual rank in the regular Navy. Recommended for promotion when due.\n14. An unsatisfactory report must have statement of officer reported on attached; an unfavorable report requires that officer reported on has been informed of his deficiencies either verbally or in writing. Has this been done? What improvement, if any, has been noted?\n(Do not write in unruled portion of this space)\n16—33831-2"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":575,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NAVPERS 311 (Revised February 1943)\n(TO BE USED ONLY FOR OFFICERS ON SHORE DUTY)\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n(To be submitted in accordance with Section 5 of Chapter 2, U. S. Navy Regulations, 1920, and Bureau of Naval Personnel Manual, Article C-1007)\n(Before making out this report read latest Bureau of Naval Personnel circular letter on the subject of fitness reports)\nThe following four questions to be made out by the officer reported on:\nFile No. 177283\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement. 4 JUL 1944. Rank Ensign, U. S. N.\nStation Naval Air Station, Coco Solo, C.Z. Period from 1-1-44 to 6-30-44\n1. Regular duties Photographic Officer (6)\nAdditional duties Naval Censor(6); Audit Board A.O.C.(5); Aviation Examining Board(4)\n2. Present address of wife (if married) Garibaldi, Oregon. next of kin (if unmarried)\n3. Proficiency in foreign languages, stating which ones, and ability therein None\n4. My preference for next duty is—\n(a) Sea Photographic Squadron. Fleet Pacific.\n(b) Shore N.A.S. Location Tillamook, Oregon.\nFollowing to be made out by Reporting Officer:\n5. Reporting Officer: Name R. P. KAUFFMAN. Rank Captain, U. S. N.\n6. Reporting officer's official status relative to officer reported on Commanding Officer\n7. Assign marks on scale of 0—4. Present assignment 3.6. Ability to command 3.5. As executive or division officer 3.5. As deck watch officer. In administration 3.6.\n8. Has the work of this officer been reported on either in a commendatory way or adversely during the period of this report? No.\n9. Considering the possible requirements in war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. (2) Be pleased to have him? X\n10. Has he any weaknesses—mental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? No.\n16—33831-2\n(OVER)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":576,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"11. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualities? (See instructions in latest Bureau of Naval Personnel circular letter on the subject of fitness reports.)\nIntelligence (With reference to the faculty of comprehension; mental acuteness.) | Exceptionally quick-witted; keen in understanding. | Grasps essentials of a situation quickly. | Understands normal situations and conditions. | Slow of comprehension; unimaginative.\nJudgment (With reference to a discriminating perception by which the values and relations of things are mentally asserted.) | Unusually keen in estimating situations and reaching sound decisions. | Can generally be depended on to make proper decisions. | Fair judgment in normal and routine things. | Frequently draws wrong conclusions.\nInitiative (With reference to constructive thinking and resourcefulness; ability and intelligence to act on own responsibility.) | Exceptional in ability to think, plan, and do things without waiting to be told and instructed. | Able to plan and execute missions on his own responsibility. | Capable of performing routine duties on own responsibility. | Requires constant guidance and supervision in his work, or evades responsibilities.\nForce (With reference to moral power possessed and exerted in producing results.) | Strong, dynamic. | Strong. | Effectual under normal and routine circumstances. | Less than normal.\nLeadership (With reference to the faculty of directing, controlling, and influencing others in definite lines of action.) | Inspires others to a high degree by precept and example. | A very good leader. | Leads fairly well. | A poor leader.\nMoral Courage (With reference to that mental quality which impels one to carry out the dictates of his conscience and convictions fearlessly.) | Exceptionally courageous. | Courageous to a high degree. | Fairly courageous. | Timid.\nCooperation (With reference to the faculty of working harmoniously with others toward the accomplishment of common duties.) | Exceptionally successful in working with others to a common end. | Works in harmony with others. | Cooperates fairly well. | Not cooperative.\nLoyalty (Fidelity, faithfulness, allegiance, constancy - all with reference to a cause and to higher authority.) | Unswerving in allegiance; frank and honest in aiding and advising. | A high sense of loyalty. | Reasonably faithful in the execution of his duty. | Inclined to be disloyal.\nPerseverance (With reference to maintenance of purpose or undertaking in spite of obstacles or discouragement.) | Determined, resolute. | Constant in purpose. | Fairly steady. | Inclined to vacillate.\nReactions in emergencies (With reference to the faculty of acting instinctively in a logical manner in difficult and unforeseen situations.) | Exceptionally cool-headed and logical in his actions under all conditions. | Composed and logical in his actions in difficult situations. | Fairly logical in his actions in general. | Inclined to be disconcerted.\nEndurance (With reference to ability for carrying on under any and all conditions.) | Capable of standing an exceptional amount of physical hardships and strain. | Can perform well his duties under trying conditions. | Of normal endurance. | Less than normal.\nIndustry (With reference to performance of duties in an energetic manner.) | Extremely energetic and industrious. | Thorough and energetic. | Reasonably energetic and industrious. | Indolent; lazy.\nMilitary bearing and neatness of person and dress (With reference to dignity of demeanor, correctness of uniform, and smartness of appearance.) | Exceptional. | Very good. | Fair. | Unmilitary and untidy.\n12. In comparison with other officers of his rank and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? Outstanding ____ Above average X Average ____ Below average ____\nREMARKS\n13. Is this officer professionally qualified to perform ALL the duties of his grade? Yes X No ____ If deficient in any particular, comment is required. Give in this space a clear, concise estimate of this officer's personal and military character, his fitness for promotion, and duty performed worthy of special mention, and any information which might be of value to the Department in making assignments to duty. A check opposite \"No,\" except for inexperienced Ensigns, or a statement that performance of duty is clearly unsatisfactory constitutes an unsatisfactory report. A statement of minor deficiencies either in character or performance of duties constitutes an unfavorable report. (THIS SPACE IS NOT TO BE LEFT BLANK.)\nThis officer has wide experience in photography of all types, much of it while he has been in the Navy but with additional background from civil life. He has extensive Navy service and is familiar with naval procedure. He is a steady, orderly, practical type of average intelligence but his dependable and conscientious performance and his administrative qualities are above average. He can be trusted with responsibility and will run a good department without supervision. He has a sturdy physique and a healthy common-sense outlook that fit him for any kind of duty. He should be kept in the photographic field and is excellent material for eventual promotion to permanent commissioned rank in the regular Navy.\n14. An unsatisfactory report must have statement of officer reported on attached; an unfavorable report requires that officer reported on has been informed of his deficiencies either verbally or in writing. Has this been done? ____ What improvement, if any, has been noted? R. P. KAUFFMAN (Signature)\n(Do not write in unruled portion of this space)\n16-33821-1"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":577,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BNP 311 (Revised February 1943) (TO BE USED ONLY FOR OFFICERS ON SHORE DUTY)\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n(To be submitted in accordance with Section 5 of Chapter 2, U. S. Navy Regulations, 1920, and Bureau of Navigation Manual, Article C-1007)\n(Before making out this report read latest Bureau of Naval Personnel circular letter on the subject of fitness reports)\nThe following four questions to be made out by the officer reported on: File Number 177283\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement (Surname first) Rank Ensign, U. S. N.\nStation US Naval Air Station, Coco Solo, C.Z. Period from 6/15/43 to 12/31/43\n1. Regular duties Photographic Officer (6)\nAdditional duties Naval Censor (6) Junior Watch Officer (6) Audit Board, Aviation Officers Club (4)\n2. Present address of wife (if married) Garibaldi, Oregon; next of kin (if unmarried) ____\n3. Proficiency in foreign languages, stating which ones, and ability therein None\n4. My preference for next duty is (a) Sea Any Photographic Squadron Fleet Pacific (b) Shore Naval Air Station Location Tillamook, Oregon\nFollowing to be made out by Reporting Officer:\n5. Reporting Officer: Name R. P. KAUFFMAN Rank Captain, U. S. N.\n6. Reporting officer's official status relative to officer reported on Commanding Officer.\n7. Assign marks on scale of 0-4: Present assignment 3.6; Ability to command 3.4; As executive or division officer 3.6; As deck watch officer ____; In administration 3.4\n8. Has the work of this officer been reported on either in a commendatory way or adversely during the period of this report? No\n9. Considering the possible requirements in war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you (2) Be pleased to have him? X\n10. Has he any weaknesses - mental, moral, physical, etc. - which adversely affect his efficiency? No\n[OVER]"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":578,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"11. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualities? (See instructions in latest Bureau of Naval Personnel circular letter on the subject of fitness reports.)\nIntelligence, Judgment, Initiative, Force, Leadership, Moral Courage, Cooperation, Loyalty, Perseverance, Reactions in emergencies, Endurance, Industry, Military bearing and neatness of person and dress (rating check marks as printed on form, see entries in corresponding columns)\n12. In comparison with other officers of his rank and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? Outstanding ____ Above average X Average ____ Below average ____\nREMARKS\n13. Is this officer professionally qualified to perform ALL the duties of his grade? Yes X No ____ If deficient in any particular, comment is required. Give in this space a clear, concise estimate of this officer's personal and military character, his fitness for promotion, and duty performed worthy of special mention, and any information which might be of value to the Department in making assignments to duty. A check opposite \"No,\" except for inexperienced Ensigns, or a statement that performance of duty is clearly unsatisfactory constitutes an unsatisfactory report. A statement of minor deficiencies either in character or performance of duties constitutes an unfavorable report. (THIS SPACE IS NOT TO BE LEFT BLANK.)\nThis officer is serious minded and conscientious about any duties assigned him. During the period covered by this report he has been very cooperative in all respects. He will be fit for promotion to the next higher rank when it is due him. A long acquaintance with photographic problems both in naval service and civilian life makes him fully able to handle all photographic responsibilities.\n14. An unsatisfactory report must have statement of officer reported on attached; an unfavorable report requires that officer reported on has been informed of his deficiencies either verbally or in writing. Has this been done? ____ What improvement, if any, has been noted? R. P. KAUFFMAN (Signature)\n(Do not write in unruled portion of this space)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":579,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nBUREAU OF NAVAL PERSONNEL\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\nIN REPLY REFER TO Pers-E222-cm 19 Apr 1954\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE FITNESS REPORT JACKET OF:\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert C. NAME | PHOTO USN GRADE | 177283 FILE NO.\n7 March 1943 to 14 June 1943 PERIOD OF REPORT\n1. (X) It was not considered appropriate to attempt to obtain the fitness report for the above period in view of the time elapsed and the probability that such a report, depending for its accuracy upon the memory of the reporting senior over such a period of time, would not be of significant value in the evaluation of the officer concerned.\n( ) Efforts to obtain a fitness report for the above period have been unsuccessful because the reporting senior is unavailable, or the nature of the duty performed was such that the identity of the reporting senior could not be determined from the information available. Experience indicates that correspondence with officers higher in the chain of command would result in a report of little or no value due to lack of opportunity for observation.\n2. A review of the officer's record on file in this Bureau for the above period shows:\nX No pertinent information.\n___ The following pertinent information:\n3. The officer was assigned the following duties during the above period:\nOn Staff, Office of Commandant, FIFTEENTH Naval District.\n4. This memorandum is being filed in lieu of a fitness report for the above period. The Judge Advocate General has confirmed the legality of this procedure.\nE. C. FINNEY, CDR, USN\nDirector, Officer and Miscellaneous Records Division\nE20037"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":580,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"N Nav. 443a (Revised February 1942) (TO BE USED ONLY FOR OFFICERS ON SHORE DUTY)\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n(To be submitted in accordance with Section 5 of Chapter 2, U. S. Navy Regulations, 1920, and Bureau of Navigation Manual, Article C-1007)\n(Before making out this report read latest Bureau of Navigation circular letter on the subject of fitness reports)\nThe following four questions to be made out by the officer reported on:\nNewhouse, Delbert Clement (Surname first) Rank Photographer(T), U. S. N.\nStation Headquarters, 15th Nav. Dist. Period from 2-16-43 to 3-6-43\n1. Regular duties Assistant to Officer in Charge 15th Nav. Dist Photo. Activities\nAdditional duties -None-\n2. Present address of wife (if married) 1210 S.E. 37th Ave, Portland, Oregon\n3. Proficiency in foreign languages, stating which ones, and ability therein -None-\n4. My preference for next duty is (a) Sea VJ Squadron One Fleet Pacific (b) Shore ____ Location ____\nFollowing to be made out by Reporting Officer:\n5. Reporting Officer: Name ____ Rank ____, U. S. N.\n6. Reporting officer's official status relative to officer reported on ____\n7. Assign marks on scale of 0-4 in appropriate subdivisions given below: Present assignment ____; Ability to command ____; As executive or division officer ____; As deck watch officer ____; In administration ____\n8. Has the work of this officer been reported on either in a commendatory way or adversely during the period of this report? ____\n9. Considering the possible requirements in war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you (1) Particularly desire to have him? ____ (2) Be pleased to have him? ____ (3) Be satisfied to have him? ____ (4) Prefer not to have him? ____\n10. Has he any weaknesses - mental, moral, physical, etc. - which adversely affect his efficiency? (If \"Yes,\" give details.)\n16-29709-1\n[OVER]"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":581,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"11. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualities? (See instructions in latest Bureau of Navigation circular letter on the subject of fitness reports.)\nIntelligence (With reference to the faculty of comprehension; mental acuteness.) Exceptionally quick-witted; keen in understanding. Grasps essentials of a situation quickly. Understands normal situations and conditions. Slow of comprehension; unimaginative.\nJudgment (With reference to a discriminating perception by which the values and relations of things are mentally asserted.) Unusually keen in estimating situations and reaching sound decisions. Can generally be depended on to make proper decisions. Fair judgment in normal and routine things. Frequently draws wrong conclusions.\nInitiative (With reference to constructive thinking and resourcefulness; ability and intelligence to act on own responsibility.) Exceptional ability to think, plan, and do things without waiting to be told and instructed. Able to plan and execute missions on his own responsibility. Capable of performing routine duties on own responsibility. Requires constant guidance and supervision in his work, or evades responsibilities.\nForce (With reference to moral power possessed and exerted in producing results.) Strong, dynamic. Strong. Effectual under normal and routine circumstances. Less than normal.\nLeadership (With reference to the faculty of directing, controlling, and influencing others in definite lines of action.) Inspires others to a high degree by precept and example. A very good leader. Leads fairly well. A poor leader.\nMoral Courage (With reference to that mental quality which impels one to carry out the dictates of his conscience and convictions fearlessly.) Exceptionally courageous. Courageous to a high degree. Fairly courageous. Timid.\nCooperation (With reference to the faculty of working harmoniously with others toward the accomplishment of common duties.) Exceptionally successful in working with others to a common end. Works in harmony with others. Cooperates fairly well. Not cooperative.\nLoyalty (Fidelity, faithfulness, allegiance, constancy - all with reference to a cause and to higher authority.) Unswerving in allegiance; frank and honest in aiding and advising. A high sense of loyalty. Reasonably faithful in the execution of his duty. Inclined to be disloyal.\nPerseverance (With reference to maintenance of purpose or undertaking in spite of obstacles or discouragement.) Determined, resolute. Constant in purpose. Fairly steady. Inclined to vacillate.\nReactions in emergencies (With reference to the faculty of acting instinctively in a logical manner in difficult and unforeseen situations.) Exceptionally cool-headed and logical in his actions under all conditions. Composed and logical in his actions in difficult situations. Fairly logical in his actions in general. Inclined to be disconcerted.\nEndurance (With reference to ability for carrying on under any and all conditions.) Capable of standing an exceptional amount of physical hardships and strain. Can perform well his duties under trying conditions. Of normal endurance. Less than normal.\nIndustry (With reference to performance of duties in an energetic manner.) Extremely energetic and industrious. Thorough and energetic. Reasonably energetic and industrious. Indolent; lazy.\nMilitary bearing and neatness of person and dress (With reference to dignity of demeanor, correctness of uniform, and smartness of appearance.) Exceptional. Very good. Fair. Unmilitary and untidy.\nA CHECK TO RIGHT OF THIS LINE CONSTITUTES AN UNSATISFACTORY REPORT\n12. In comparison with other officers of his rank and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? Outstanding ___ Above average ___ Average ___ Below average ___\nREMARKS\n13. Is this officer professionally qualified to perform ALL the duties of his grade? Yes ___ No ___ If deficient in any particular, comment is required. Give in this space a clear, concise estimate of this officer's personal and military character, his fitness for promotion, and duty performed worthy of special mention, and any information which might be of value to the Department in making assignments to duty. A check opposite \"No,\" except for inexperienced Ensigns, or a statement that performance of duty is clearly unsatisfactory constitutes an unsatisfactory report. A statement of minor deficiencies either in character or performance of duties constitutes an unfavorable report. (THIS SPACE IS NOT TO BE LEFT BLANK.)\n14. An unsatisfactory report must have statement of officer reported on attached; an unfavorable report requires that officer reported on has been informed of his deficiencies either verbally or in writing. Has this been done? ___ What improvement, if any, has been noted? ___\n(Signature)\n(Do not write in unruled portion of this space)\n(Do not write in unruled portion of this space)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":582,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"N. Pers. 443a (Revised July 1942)\n(TO BE USED ONLY FOR OFFICERS ON SHORE DUTY)\nREPORT ON THE FITNESS OF OFFICERS\n(To be submitted in accordance with Section 5 of Chapter 2, U. S. Navy Regulations, 1920, and Bureau of Navigation Manual, Article C-1007)\n(Before making out this report read latest Bureau of Naval Personnel circular letter on the subject of fitness reports.)\nAPR 16 1943\nThe following four questions to be made out by the officer reported on:\nNEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement, Rank Photographer (Temp), U. S. N.\n(Surname first)\nStation U. S. NAVAL BASE, Santa Elena Bay, Ecuador, Period from Sept. 1, 1942 to Feb. 14, 1943\n(Aviation units enter naval station to which attached)\n1. Regular duties Photographic Officer.\nAdditional duties Welfare & Recreation (4), Gunnery (2), Education (4) Ship's Service (1)\n(After each duty insert in parentheses number of months this reporting period)\n2. Present address of wife (if married) 1210 SE 37th Avenue, Portland, Oregon\nnext of kin (if unmarried)\n(Indicate above the best address at which the Bureau of Navigation may communicate with the wife or next of kin in an emergency. The above address does not relate to the usual residence (home) which is maintained in the Bureau. See Art. 135(2), U. S. N. R., 1920.)\n3. Proficiency in foreign languages, stating which ones, and ability therein\n4. My preference for next duty is—\n(a) Sea Fleet\n(b) Shore (Under Orders) Location Fifteenth Naval District.\n(Signature)\nFollowing to be made out by Reporting Officer:\n5. Reporting Officer: Name John R. Litchfield, Rank Commander, U. S. N. R.\n6. Reporting officer's official status relative to officer reported on Commanding Officer.\n7. Assign marks on scale of 0-4 in appropriate subdivisions given below, and any other qualification on which observation has been sufficient to justify marking.\n(Staff officers to be marked with respect to required duties. Mark below 2.5 constitutes an unsatisfactory report)\nPresent assignment 3.4 Ability to command 3.0 As executive or division officer 3.0\nAs deck watch officer -- In administration 3.2\n8. Has the work of this officer been reported on either in a commendatory way or adversely during the period of this report? If so, state the subject, reference numbers, and substance of report. Clip copy to report. Comply with U. S. Navy Regulations, Article 137 (11) with respect to commendatory reports. Any adverse comment constitutes an unsatisfactory report.\nNot reported on\n9. Considering the possible requirements in war, indicate your attitude toward having this officer under your command. Would you—\n(An affirmative entry in item (4) constitutes an unsatisfactory report)\n(1) Particularly desire to have him? ___ (2) Be pleased to have him? ___ (3) Be satisfied to have him? X\n(4) Prefer not to have him? ___\n10. Has he any weaknesses—mental, moral, physical, etc.—which adversely affect his efficiency? (If \"Yes,\" give details.)\n(An implied or stated defect constitutes an unsatisfactory report)\nNone\n16-22760-2 [OVER]"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":583,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"11. To what degree has he exhibited the following qualities? (See instructions in latest Bureau of Naval Personnel circular letter on the subject of fitness reports.)\nIntelligence (With reference to the faculty of comprehension; mental acuteness.) Exceptionally quick-witted; keen in understanding. Grasps essentials of a situation quickly. Understands normal situations and conditions. Slow of comprehension; unimaginative.\nJudgment (With reference to a discriminating perception by which the values and relations of things are mentally asserted.) Unusually keen in estimating situations and reaching sound decisions. Can generally be depended on to make proper decisions. Fair judgment in normal and routine things. Frequently draws wrong conclusions.\nInitiative (With reference to constructive thinking and resourcefulness; ability and intelligence to act on own responsibility.) Exceptional ability to think, plan, and do things without waiting to be told and instructed. Able to plan and execute missions on his own responsibility. Capable of performing routine duties on own responsibility. Requires constant guidance and supervision in his work, or evades responsibilities.\nForce (With reference to moral power possessed and exerted in producing results.) Strong, dynamic. Strong. Effectual under normal and routine circumstances. Less than normal.\nLeadership (With reference to the faculty of directing, controlling, and influencing others in definite lines of action.) Inspires others to a high degree by precept and example. A very good leader. Leads fairly well. A poor leader.\nMoral Courage (With reference to that mental quality which impels one to carry out the dictates of his conscience and convictions fearlessly.) Exceptionally courageous. Courageous to a high degree. Fairly courageous. Timid.\nCooperation (With reference to the faculty of working harmoniously with others toward the accomplishment of common duties.) Exceptionally successful in working with others to a common end. Works in harmony with others. Cooperates fairly well. Not cooperative.\nLoyalty (Fidelity, faithfulness, allegiance, constancy - all with reference to a cause and to higher authority.) Unswerving in allegiance; frank and honest in aiding and advising. A high sense of loyalty. Reasonably faithful in the execution of his duty. Inclined to be disloyal.\nPerseverance (With reference to maintenance of purpose or undertaking in spite of obstacles or discouragement.) Determined, resolute. Constant in purpose. Fairly steady. Inclined to vacillate.\nReactions in emergencies (With reference to the faculty of acting instinctively in a logical manner in difficult and unforeseen situations.) Exceptionally cool-headed and logical in his actions under all conditions. Composed and logical in his actions in difficult situations. Fairly logical in his actions in general. Inclined to be disconcerted.\nEndurance (With reference to ability for carrying on under any and all conditions.) Capable of standing an exceptional amount of physical hardships and strain. Can perform well his duties under trying conditions. Of normal endurance. Less than normal.\nIndustry (With reference to performance of duties in an energetic manner.) Extremely energetic and industrious. Thorough and energetic. Reasonably energetic and industrious. Indolent; lazy.\nMilitary bearing and neatness of person and dress (With reference to dignity of demeanor, correctness of uniform, and smartness of appearance.) Exceptional. Very good. Fair. Unmilitary and untidy.\nA CHECK TO RIGHT OF THIS LINE CONSTITUTES AN UNSATISFACTORY REPORT\n12. In comparison with other officers of his rank and approximate length of service, how would you designate this officer? Outstanding ___ Above average ___ Average X Below average ___\nREMARKS\n13. Is this officer professionally qualified to perform ALL the duties of his grade? Yes X No ___ If deficient in any particular, comment is required. Give in this space a clear, concise estimate of this officer's personal and military character, his fitness for promotion, and duty performed worthy of special mention, and any information which might be of value to the Department in making assignments to duty. A check opposite \"No,\" except for inexperienced Ensigns, or a statement that performance of duty is clearly unsatisfactory constitutes an unsatisfactory report. A statement of minor deficiencies either in character or performance of duties constitutes an unfavorable report. (THIS SPACE IS NOT TO BE LEFT BLANK.)\nThis officer makes a good appearance. He performs his major duties as Photographer in an entirely satisfactory manner. Such additional duties as he undertook were accomplished with rather indifferent results.\n14. An unsatisfactory report must have statement of officer reported on attached; an unfavorable report requires that officer reported on has been informed of his deficiencies either verbally or in writing. Has this been done? ___ What improvement, if any, has been noted? ___\n(Signature)\n(Do not write in unruled portion of this space)\n(Do not write in unruled portion of this space)"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":584,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMISSION OF PHOTOGRAPH\n1. This sheet may be used in lieu of a letter of transmittal by stapling or otherwise attaching photograph, prepared as indicated below, in center and filling in spaces indicated.\n2. Photograph ... light are desired.\n3. It is desired ... other than working dress.\n4. Enter or ... and approximate\n5. Group pi...\n6. Photograph ... and may be used\n7. Secure p... Chief of Naval Person...\n8. Label co...\nNAME: Delbert Clement Newhouse, cPhot 177283\nFirst Middle Last Rank Corps File No.\nDate Photograph was Taken: Feb. 18, 1952"} {"doc_id":"73dc6f9d770b5c3b","page":585,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NEWHOUSE, Delbert Clement, LT 177283/1350 USN\n14 JANUARY 1949\nDate Of Photograph\nSignature"} {"doc_id":"7438b4d577271bb8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\nAll-domain Anomaly Resolution Office | Department of War\n\nSubject: All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) Witness Debrief: Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) Observation, 1843(a)(1)(C) 1843(a)(1)(C) 2026.\nInterviewers:\n1843(a)(3)\n1843(a)(3)\nPrimary Interviewees:\n- 1843(a)(2) (SOURCE 1): 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) (SOURCE 2): 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2)\nAdditional Corroborating Witness: 1843(a)(2) (SOURCE 3): 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2)\n\nOVERVIEW:\nThis report reflects the reporter's interpretation at the time of the event. Such characterizations should not be interpreted as a conclusive indication of the presence or absence of any intrinsic object features or performance characteristics.\n\nOn approximately 1843(a)(1)(C) 2026, at 2023L, federal law enforcement agents documented an unidentified craft presenting as a matte black triangular shape of extremely low aspect ratio that was nonreflective under the observed lighting conditions. It had an estimated thirteen-to-fifteen-foot wingspan, apparent six-to-nine-foot fuselage length, and a maximum vertical thickness of roughly one to two feet. The unidentified craft maintained a completely fixed horizontal alignment with did not tilt, sway, or wobble during the controlled vertical ascent of approximately ten seconds. It climbed to an altitude of an estimated 200 to 300 feet above the local ridge line. Upon reaching this altitude, the craft instantaneously arrested all vertical motion and entered a stable hover for an estimated twenty seconds. It then reportedly transitioned from a zero-velocity state directly into high-speed horizontal flight, executing a fluid banking maneuver and terrain-hugging descent into a canyon drainage in approximately two to three seconds, with speed the observers described to be as fast as a fighter jet. Under banking angle, the craft's silhouette appeared to flatten and present as a more triangle.\n\nThe unidentified craft generated no detectable acoustic signature throughout the entire engagement. It did not produce engine roar, rotor hum, aerodynamic friction, or air-displacement"} {"doc_id":"7438b4d577271bb8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sound despite velocities of conventional military fighter aircraft. In the infrared spectrum it displayed a spatially uniform thermal signature across the entire airframe without localized thermal concentrations, exhaust gradients, or discrete heat sources associated with propulsion. The exterior presented as a continuous (seamless), featureless surface lacking any discernible structural discontinuities, propulsive apertures, intake structures, aerodynamic control effectors, or cockpit features. No physiological effects were reported by the agents.\n\nCHRONOLOGICAL NARRATIVE OF EVENTS:\n1843(a)(1)(C): SOURCE 1 and SOURCE 2 were positioned at the primary observation post conducting routine observation support. Weather conditions were highly favorable for both visual and electro-optical collection, with unrestricted line of sight, negligible cloud cover, and late-dusk illumination. The sun had dropped entirely below the western horizon, eliminating direct solar glare. A residual sunset gradient provided a high-contrast backdrop against the western ridge lines while the deeper valley floors and canyon cuts were rapidly falling into shadow. Primary optical and tripod-mounted sensor systems were initially oriented eastward.\n\nAt 2023L, SOURCE 3, positioned at the secondary observation post scanning westward with long-range thermal equipment, detected an elevated object transiting over the ridge line and called out the contact to SOURCE 1 and SOURCE 2. Upon receipt of the radio alert, SOURCE 1 and 2 reportedly immediately relocated across the peak to establish a westward visual line of sight. Terrain conditions precluded quick relocation of the primary tripod-mounted thermal system. SOURCE 2 noted he advanced with binoculars and a handheld thermal monocular; SOURCE 1 followed seconds later. SOURCE 2 reported acquiring the unidentified craft with the unaided eye as it silhouetted against the residual western sky illumination. Binoculars were employed for initial tracking and then passed to SOURCE 1. SOURCE 2 purportedly powered the handheld thermal monocular and began concurrent infrared observation.\n\nPhase I - Vertical Ascent (Duration: ~10 seconds)\nUpon initial visual acquisition the unidentified craft was executing a slow, controlled, perfectly vertical ascent directly over the ridge line. The craft climbed approximately two to three hundred feet while maintaining a completely static orientation without tilting, swaying, or wobbling. The non-reflective, matte black exterior presented a continuous, featureless profile with. No propulsive apertures, rotating elements, rivets, panels, windows, canopy, cabin structures, and no protrusions or structural features were observed. The ascent occurred in absolute acoustic silence. Range to the object was bounded between approximately 1.4 and 3.2 miles west of the primary observation post by terrain cross-reference.\n\nPhase II - Station-Keeping Hover (Duration: ~20 seconds)\nUpon reaching approximately 200 to 300 feet above the ridge line, the unidentified craft instantaneously arrested all vertical motion and entered a stable hover. It remained in this station-keeping attitude for approximately twenty seconds with no observable drift or oscillation. The exterior remained uniformly featureless. Under infrared observation the entire airframe presented a spatially uniform thermal signature with no localized hot spots, engine heat"} {"doc_id":"7438b4d577271bb8","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"signature, or exhaust plumes. No heat shimmer, vapor trail, or particulate discharge was detected. The surface did not exhibit cloaking, optical shifting or distortion, or shimmering properties, remaining matte black throughout. There was no thermal fluctuation or expansion independently of the physical profile of the craft. The transition from stable hover to high-speed horizontal flight occurred without observable acceleration ramp, gradual pitching or momentum.\n\nPhase III - Terminal Maneuver and Loss of Contact (Duration: ~2-3 seconds)\nImmediately following the hover, the unidentified craft appeared to transition from a stationary position to rapid horizontal flight. Approximated by the distance made along the ridge before visual contact was lost, the SOURCES estimated that its speed was compared to that as a military fighter jet. No instrumented speed measurement was obtained.\nIt executed a fluid banking turn and steep, terrain-conforming descent into the canyon with drainage similar in appearance to low-altitude terrain-masking flight. The unidentified craft did not wobble, oscillate, or drift in the wind during any part of its transit, and as it banked to follow the canyon's path, its physical profile shifted relative to the observers. The entire horizontal transition, bank, and descent lasted approximately two to three seconds before the craft disappeared behind intervening terrain. Under banking angle, the silhouette flattened and presented as a more symmetrical isosceles triangle. Absolute acoustic silence persisted throughout the high-velocity phase. Infrared tracking was lost due to the sudden acceleration exceeding the narrow field of view of the handheld monocular; subsequent unaided visual tracking confirmed the craft's disappearance into the canyon shadows. No impact signature, smoke, dust, or physical disturbance was observed. A ground survey of the canyon drainage conducted the following morning located no wreckage, ground scarring, or vegetation damage.\n\nCollector Note: SOURCE 1 and SOURCE 2 have extensive operational experience working alongside government agencies and academic studies utilizing unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and regularly observe conventional aircraft operating around the observation site. 1843(a)(1)(B), 1843(a)(1)(C) 1843(a)(1)(B), 1843(a)(1)(C) They noted that on this hilltop, even a conventional Group 1 drone, high-torque quadcopter motor, or rotary-wing aircraft operating at a distance of 1.4 miles would have been clearly audible. The SOURCES established a spatial, elevation, and speed bounding for the unidentified craft based on prominent local terrain features. SOURCE 1 and 2 compared the physical outline of the craft against the trees along the ridge line behind it providing a reliable physical scale reference.\n\nThe two primary witnesses reported no physiological effects. There were no reports of (but not limited to) disorientation, nausea, headache, dermal sensation, visual disturbance, memory gap, or other anomalous sensory phenomena. No anomalous odors were noted. No electromagnetic interference, signal degradation, or anomalous sensor readings were recorded on personal or agency equipment.\n\nREPORT PREPARED BY:\n1843(a)(3) All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) |\n1843(a)(3) Official Record of Joint Witness Debrief"} {"doc_id":"74cf67e828cefd27","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Misrep 4592219\nNarrative\n[REDACTED], AT 0337Z, 1.4a TOOK OFF FROM OKAS. AT 0359Z, 1.4a HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE. FROM 0434Z TO 2300Z, 1.4a COLLECTED SIGINT VIA AIRHANDLER. FROM 0513Z TO 2256Z, 1.4a SUPPORTED NAVCENT TO OPERATION 1.4a IVO ARABIAN GULF, STRAIT OF HORMUZ AND GULF OF OMAN. SEE ISR LINE 1. AT 0726Z, 1.4a OBSERVED NOTEWORTHY ACTIVITY. SEE OBS LINE 1. AT 2256Z, 1.4a WAS CLEARED TO RTB. AT 0017Z, 1.4a HANDED BACK TO THE LRE. AT 0045Z, 1.4a LANDED AT OKAS. FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS1. 20.3 MISSION HOURS, 17.7 IMINT HOURS, 1 IMINT TASKING PROSECUTED, 18.4 SIGINT HOURS, 1 SIGINT TASKING PROSECUTED, 2 TOTAL TASKINGS PROSECUTED\nAdmin\nCLASSIFICATION\nClassification: [REDACTED]\nAssociated Caveats: [REDACTED]\nClassification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\nDeclassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20450301\nOPERATION\nOperation: 1.4a\nDomain: AIR\nOperations Center: 609th\nMajor Command (MAJCOM): ACC\nCombatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\nMSGID\nReport Type: MISREP\nOriginator (Unit or Squadron): 482ATKS\nSubmit Date (Auto-generated):\nMSNID\nTasking Order (ATO): BP"} {"doc_id":"74cf67e828cefd27","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mission Type: AREC\nATO Mission Number: 1.4a\nCountry Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\nService Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\nPoc\nPOC\nRank: SrA\nFull Name: (b)(3), (b)(6)\nUnit: 482ATKS\nWing: 432 AEW\nPhone Number: (b)(6)\nEmail: (b)(6)\nService: Air Force\nOperations Center: 603 AOC\nQC\nRank: Ctr\nFull Name: (b)(6)\nUnit: PAROC IDAT\nWing: Other\nPhone Number: (b)(6)\nEmail: (b)(6)\nService: Air Force\nOperations Center: Other\nAPPROVER\nRank: 1st Lt\nFull Name: (b)(3), (b)(6)\nUnit: 609th AOC\nWing: Other\nPhone Number: (b)(6)\nEmail: (b)(6)\nService: Air Force\nOperations Center: 609 CAOC\nINGEST\n(b)(6)"} {"doc_id":"74cf67e828cefd27","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Rank:\nFull Name:\nUnit:\nWing:\nPhone Number:\nEmail:\nService:\nOperations Center:\nACEQUIP\nACEQUIP\nAircraft Callsign: 1.4a\nRadar Name or Destination: -\nRadar Software Load or Mission Data: -\nRadar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: -\nRWR Software Load or Mission Data: -\nMWS Name or Designator: -\nMWS Software Load or Mission Data: -\nIRCM Name or Designator: -\nIRCM Software Load or Mission Data: -\nECM Name or Designator: -\nECM Software Load or Mission Data: -\nCMD Name or Designator: -\nChaff Designator: -\nNum Chaff or Cartridges: -\nFlare Designator: -\nNum Flares: -\nTowed Decoy Name or Designator: -\nTowed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: -\nNum Towed Decoys: -\nType of Radar-Guided AAM: -\nNum Radar-Guided AAM: -\nType of IR-Guided AAM: -\nNum IR-Guided AAM: -\nGun Name or Designator: -\nNum Gun Rounds: -\nAir-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4(a)\nTGT Pod Name or Designator: ANDAS4\nAdditional Avionics: AH_GMESH\nData Link: -\n(b)(6)"} {"doc_id":"74cf67e828cefd27","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Gentext: -\nTimeline\nLanding\nLast Land Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\nLast Land Time: 090045:00ZAUG20\nLast Engine Shutdown Time: 090055:00ZAUG20\nTotal Mission Time: 21 hours 8 minutes\nGentext/Additional Details: -\nGUARDCALL\nGUARDCALL DTG: 081250:00ZAUG20\nAircraft Callsign: 1.4a\nGround Station Callsign: IRANIAN AIR DEFENSE GUARD\nAircraft Location: 40RCP98 1.4a 97 1.4a\nAircraft Heading: HDG 200\nAircraft Altitude: FL 170\nAircraft Airspeed: 110 KIAS\nNumber of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\nGuardcall Tone: PROFESSIONAL\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\nGentext: [REDACTED] AT 1250Z, 1.4a WAS HAILED ON GUARD 1.4a BY IRANIAN AIR DEFENSE. ORDERS GIVEN: STANDARD CALL. 1.4a RESPONDED STANDARD RESPONSE. NO IMPACT TO THE MISSION\nOBSERVATION\nObservation DTG: 080726:00ZAUG20\nAircraft Callsign: 1.4a\nAircraft Location: 39RWK95 1.4a 53 1.4a\nAircraft Heading: -\nAircraft Altitude: -\nAircraft Airspeed: -\nRelative Bearing or Clock Position: -\nRange: -\nKillbox & Keypad: -\nObserved Activity Location: 39RVL90 1.4a 53 1.4a\n(b)(6)"} {"doc_id":"74cf67e828cefd27","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observed Activity Description: TRANSITTING\nMethod of Observation: FMV\nGENTEXT/OBSERVATION\nGentext: [REDACTED] AT 0726Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X UAP IVO 39RWL08 1.4a 52 1.4a NO IMPACT TO MISSION.\nWEATHER\nWeather: WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR\nTakeoff\nCallsign: 1.4a\nNumber of Aircraft: 1\nAsset Type (Aircraft): 1.4a, 1.4g\nAircraft Tail Number(s): 1.4a, 1.4g\nTakeoff Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\nTakeoff Time DTG: 080337:00ZAUG20\nMode 3 (IFF Codes): -\nGentext/Additional Details: -\nMission Canceled:\nOn Station\nTime On Station DTG: 080359:00ZAUG20\nCallsign: 1.4a\nJTAR Number: -\nKillbox (Location): -\nMission Type: AREC\nJTAC Callsign: -\nGentext/Additional Details: -\nDid not Arrive On Station:\nISR\nTime-on Station DTG: 080513:00ZAUG20\nTime-off Station DTG: 082256:00ZAUG20\nAircraft Callsign: 1.4a\nMsn Type: AREC\nPrimary Sensor: ANDAS4\nSensors Available: AH\\GMESH"} {"doc_id":"74cf67e828cefd27","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20 March 2026\n\n• Tasking Type: PLANNED\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 39RVN34[1.4a]35[1.4a]\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] [1.4a] COORDINATED WITH NAVCENT 24 HOURS PRIOR TO TAKE OFF. PRECOORD WAS SATISFACTORY. AT 0513Z, [1.4a] ARRIVED ON STATION ISO NAVCENT TO OPERATION [1.4a] TO CONDUCT SCANS FOR IDENTIFIED IRINVRGCN VESSELS TO ESTABLISH PATTERN OF LIFE, UAS ACTIVITY AND CHARACTERIZE ACTIVITY OUTSIDE OF PORTS. FROM 0513Z TO 2256Z, [1.4a] CONDUCTED SCANS IAW THE TARGET DECK IN THE ARABIAN GULF (AG). AT 0726Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED NOTEWORTHY ACTIVITY. SEE OBS LINE 1. AT 2256Z, [1.4a] WAS CLEARED OFF TASKING AND RETURNED TO BASE (RTB)\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: NAVCENT\n• Supported Operation: OPERATION [1.4a]\n• Precoord Time: 24 HOURS\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: DENSE CLOUD COVERAGE INTERMITTANTLY IMPACTED FMV COLLECTION\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: No\n• Gentext: -\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 090017:00ZAUG20\n• Total Time On Station: 20 hours 18 minutes\n\n(b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0038 to MDR 26-0046 Approved for Release to AARO 03/27/26 000006"} {"doc_id":"75fc42cc05cd3b63","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"75fc42cc05cd3b63","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"75fc42cc05cd3b63","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"75fc42cc05cd3b63","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"75fc42cc05cd3b63","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"75fc42cc05cd3b63","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): (SECRET//REL TO USA, FIN, SWE, EYEY, NATO) AT 1653Z, 1.4(a) [REDACTED] OBS 2X ROUND WHITE HOT UAPS DYNAMIC SOUTH AT APPROX 240NM/HOUR IVO 35SQT3423692957.\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): (SECRET//REL TO USA, FIN, SWE, FVEY, NATO) AT 1653Z, 1.4(a) [REDACTED] OBS 2X UAPS DYNAMIC SOUTH AT APPROX 240NM/HOUR IVO 35SQT3423692957."} {"doc_id":"75fc42cc05cd3b63","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nLOWRY FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nLOWRY AIR FORCE BASE\nDENVER, COLORADO\n\nGRR/wfw\n\nRY 319.1\n\n9 January 1950\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nTO:\tCommanding General\n\tAir Materiel Command\n\tWright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio\n\n1.\tIn compliance with Flight Service Regulation 200-4, dated 2 November 1948, Subject: \"Unidentified Flying Objects,\" the following report is submitted.\n\n2.\tOn the night of 6 January 1950, two objects were sighted over Kansas City, Kansas, and Olathe, Kansas. They appeared to be motionless over Olathe for ten to fifteen minutes, then moved off very fast.\n\n3.\tThe weather at Kansas City was clear with twelve miles visibility.\n\n4.\tThe incident was witnessed by James F. Grey, 6200 Hadley St., Raytown, Missouri, phone FL 2744; and Robert Van De Vyvere, 5532, Raytown Road, Missouri. Both are employed at Bendix Aviation, Kansas City, Kansas, and the former is a pilot.\n\n5.\tPhotos are not available. Sketches are enroute to Lowry Flight Service and will be forwarded immediately upon receipt.\n\n6.\tTwo objects were sighted, both spherical in shape. They appeared to be the size of old fashioned street lights about two blocks distant. They were a brilliant white, emanating orange and red flashes.\n\n7.\tThey moved from over Kansas City toward Olathe, Kansas, remained motionless from ten to fifteen minutes, then moved off very fast in a southwesterly direction. The estimated altitude was between seven and eight thousand feet. No sound was emitted, nor exhaust trail apparent.\n\n8.\tThis report was given to Fairfax AFB Operations, Kansas City, Kansas, and transmitted to Lowry Flight Service.\n\nCopies Furnished:\n\tC/S, USAF, Wash DC, Attn\n\t\tDir of Intelligence\n\tComdr, MATS, Wash DC, Attn\n\t\tChief, Intelligence Div\n\tCO, Flight Service, Wash DC\n\nRobert M. McLeod\nROBERT M. MCLEOD\nLt Col, USAF\nCommanding\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nOLMSTED FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nOlmsted Air Force Base\nMIDDLETOWN, PENNSYLVANIA\n\nBAH/lc\nMDT 000.92\t22 September 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nTO:\tCommanding General\n\tAir Materiel Command\n\tWright-Patterson Air Force Base\n\tDayton, Ohio\n\n1.\tIn compliance with FSR 200-4 dated 2 November 1949, and letter, Headquarters USAF, Subject: \"Reporting of Information on 'Flying Discs'\", dated 6 February 1948, the following information is submitted.\n\nESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF INFORMATION\n\n1.\tDate of Sighting: 20 September 1949\n\n2.\tTime of Sighting: 0906E\n\n3.\tWhere Sighted: Thirty North East, Griffiss Air Force Base, Rome, New York\n\na.\tGround\n\tNot applicable\n\nb.\tAir\n\n(1)\tType aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight:\n\tC-45\t160\t10,000\t250 degrees\n\n(2)\tDistance and direction from city, town or known landmark:\n\tThirty North East, Griffiss Air Force Base, Rome, New York\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nMDT 000.92\t22 Sep 49\nSubj: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\n(3)\tClock position of object from observer's aircraft:\n\tFour o'clock, approximately thirty miles to the right and to the rear\n\n(4)\tLatitude and longitude: 43°40\"N 74°55\"W\n\nc.\tSea\n\tNot applicable\n\n4.\tNumber of objects: One\n\na.\tFormation type: Not applicable\n\n5.\tDistance of object from observer: Thirty miles\n\na.\tLaterally or horizontally: Horizontally\n\nb.\tAngle of elevation from horizon: Level plane\n\nc.\tAltitude: 20,000 feet letting down slowly until it disappeared into the overcast at 7,000 feet\n\n6.\tTime in sight: Not stated\n\n7.\tAppearance of object:\n\na.\tColor: Silvery or aluminum\n\nb.\tShape: Cylindrical\n\nc.\tApparent construction: No opinion\n\nd.\tSize: Undetermined due to distance and speed\n\n8.\tDirection of flight: 250 degrees\n\n9.\tTactics or maneuvers: Slow descent into overcast\n\n10.\tEvidence of exhaust: Yes (flame)\n\na.\tColor of smoke: Orange and white flame\n\nb.\tLength and width: More than twice the length of the object\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nMDT 000.92\nSubj: Unidentified Flying Objects\t22 Sep 49\n\nc.\tOdor: Unknown\n\nd.\tRate of evaporation: Unknown\n\te.\tDoes trail vary with sound: Unknown\n\n11.\tEffect on clouds: Unknown\n\n12.\tLights: None\n\n13.\tSupport: None\n\n14.\tPropulsion: Appeared to be rocket or jet\n\na.\tPropeller or jet: Appeared to be rocket or jet\n\tb.\tRotor: None\n\tc.\tAerodynamic vanes: None observed\n\td.\tVisible exhaust or jet openings: None observed\n\n15.\tControl and stability: None observed\n\na.\tFins: None observed\n\nb.\tStabilizers: None observed\n\t(1)\tSize: Not applicable\n\t(2)\tShape: Not applicable\n\t(3)\tLocation: Not applicable\n\n16.\tAir Ducts: Not observed\n\na.\tSlots: Not applicable\n\tb.\tDuct openings: Not applicable\n\n17.\tSpeed - MPH: High rate of speed\n\n18.\tSound: None heard\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MDT 000.92 22 Sep 49\nSubj: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\n19. Was any radio antenna to be observed: None noted\n20. Manner of disappearance: Disappeared into overcast\na. Explode: Not applicable\n(1) Possibility of fragments: Not applicable\n(2) Other physical evidence: Not applicable\nb. Faded from view: Not applicable\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle: Not applicable\n\nRELATIVE TO THE OBSERVER\n\n1. Name of observer: Lt Colonel Phillip J. Kuhl, 3716A\n2. Air Materiel Command, AF Procurement Field Office, Bedford, Mass.\n3. Occupation: USAF\n4. Place of business: AF Procurement Field Office, Bedford, Mass.\n5. Hobbies: Not applicable\n6. Ability to determine: Unknown\n7. Reliability of observer: No opinion\n8. Notes relative to observer on\na. Sightings in general:\n\nThe aircraft, AF 7110, was proceeding from Bedford, Mass. to Griffiss Air Force Base, Rome, New York. The flame appeared more than twice the length of the object. The object finally disappeared into the overcast, reported at 7000 feet at the time. The approximate coordinates of the sighted object was 43°40\"N 74°56\"W. The approximate distance of the object from the observer was thirty miles.\n\nb. How attention was drawn to objects: Normal pilot surveillance\n\n9. Witnesses:"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MDT 000.92 22 Sep 49\nSubj: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nMajor Earl Goodrich, Air Materiel Command, AF Procurement Field Office, Bedford, Mass. Co-pilot\n\n10. Comments of interrogator re intelligence and character of person interrogated: No opinion\n\nRELATIVE TO RADAR SIGHTINGS\n\n1. Are radars now operating on ground: No radar sightings\n2. If airborne, when object was sighted: Not applicable\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequence of local weather conditions:\n\nEstimated 4500 feet overcast, 500 broken, 8 miles visibility\n\n2. Winds aloft report: 280 degrees - 40 knots\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying invicinity at the time: Unknown\n\n4. Possibility releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations, or any other: Unknown\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed for purposes of making comparisons of soils: Unknown\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects, check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radio-activity. Make comparisons with out unaffected aircraft objects: Unknown\n\n7. Obtain photographs: None obtained\n8. Not obtained.\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible: None\n\nJoseph L. McNeil\nLt Colonel, USAF\nCommanding"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Restricted\n\nMCCHORD FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nMcChord Air Force Base\nWashington\n\nTCM 452 23 August 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio\nATTENTION: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. In compliance with FS Regulation 200-4 the following reports of sighting of unidentified flying objects are submitted:\n\na. Location and time of sighting: Over the city of Seattle, Washington, 1845P, 22 August 1949.\n\nb. Weather at the time: Clear, visibility unrestricted.\n\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses:\n(1) Sgt Jack Faulkner, Controller, 143rd National Guard Aircraft Control and Warning Squadron, 6736 Ellis Avenue, Seattle 8, Washington.\n(2) T/Sgt T. D. Mullen, Controller, 143rd National Guard Aircraft Control and Warning Squadron, 6736 Ellis Avenue, Seattle 8, Washington.\n(3) Sgt Roger H. Studeman, Controller, 143rd National Guard Aircraft Control and Warning Squadron, 6736 Ellis Avenue, Seattle 8, Washington.\n\nd. Photographs of objects, if available: Photographs of objects are not available.\n\ne. Sketches of object's configuration: Sketches of object's configuration are not available.\n\nRestricted"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Restricted\n\nTCM 452 23 August 1949\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nf. Object sighted:\n(1) Number: One.\n(2) Shape: Circular.\n(3) Size: Estimated seventy-five (75) to one hundred (100) feet in diameter with an estimated depth of ten (10) to fifteen (15) feet.\n(4) Color: Shiny aluminum. Object reflected the sun's rays.\n(5) Speed: Estimated five (5) to six (6) hundred miles per hour.\n(6) Heading: From north to south.\n(7) Maneuverability: Object did not maneuver.\n(8) Altitude: Estimated ten (10) thousand feet.\n(9) Sound: The sound was similar to a jet aircraft.\n(10) Exhaust trail or not: No exhaust trail was noted.\n\ng. Sgt Studeman first saw the object from his home in the north end of Seattle. He called Sgt Faulkner who was on duty at the 143rd National Guard Aircraft Control and Warning Squadron and reported the object. Sgt Faulkner reported that after receiving the call from Sgt Studeman he stopped outside of the office and he saw apparently the same object reported by Sgt Studeman. T/Sgt Mullen also saw the same object. Sgt Mullen was at his home in the south end of Seattle at the time he saw the object and he reported the information to the CAA Control Tower at Boeing Field, Seattle, Washington, who relayed the information to the McChord Flight Service Center. Both Sgt Faulkner and Sgt Studeman saw other aircraft in the air at the same time the circular object was\n\n2\n\nRestricted"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sighted and reported that it bore no resemblance to any air-craft they had ever seen before.\n\n2. a. Location and time of sighting: Approximately thirty (30) miles west northwest of Seattle-Tacoma Airport, 1920P, 22 August 1949.\n\nb. Weather at the time: Clear, visibility unrestricted.\n\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses:\n\n(1) Ben Frieman, ARTC Controller, Seattle Air Route Traffic Control Center, P. O. Box 3224, Seattle 14, Washington.\n\n(2) Howard Watson, Senior ARTC Controller, Seattle Air Route Traffic Control Center, P. O. Box 3224, Seattle 14, Washington.\n\nd. Photographs of objects, if available: Photographs of objects are not available.\n\ne. Sketches of object's configuration: Sketches of object's configuration are not available.\n\nf. Object sighted:\n\n(1) Number: One.\n\n(2) Shape: Similar to an F-84.\n\n(3) Size: Similar to an F-84.\n\n(4) Color: Similar to an F-84.\n\n(5) Speed: Similar to an F-84.\n\n(6) Heading: Object was heading from south to north.\n\n(7) Maneuverability: Object did not maneuver."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TCM 452\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n23 August 1949\n\n(8) Altitude: Object was estimated four (4) to five (5) thousand feet.\n\n(9) Sound: No sound was heard.\n\n(10) Exhaust trail or not: No exhaust trail was noted.\n\ng. Mr. Frieman, an Air Route Traffic Controller, was on duty at the Seattle Air Route Traffic Control Center at the Seattle-Tacoma Airport and noticed what appeared to be a jet aircraft in the direction of the Olympic Mountains at an estimated distance of twenty (20) to thirty (30) miles away. He brought this to the attention of Mr. Watson who was the senior controller on duty. Since they were aware that no jet units were stationed within this area they notified the McChord Flight Service Center. The dispatcher on duty at the McChord Flight Service Center did not have a flight plan on any jet aircraft or fighter type aircraft in this area and made a check of all the military bases within the area to determine if any jet or fighter type aircraft were flying locally from their bases. A negative report was received. Mr. Frieman and Mr. Watson both reported that they were definite that the object sighted displayed visual characteristics of a jet fighter and that its speed was such to lead them to believe it was a jet aircraft.\n\nEarl J. Livesay\nLt. Col., USAF\nCommanding\n\nCopies furnished:\nChief of Staff, USAF\nCommander, MATS\nCommanding Officer, Flight Service"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MAXWELL FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nMaxwell Air Force Base, Alabama\n\nMDF 300\n16 August 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson AFB, Ohio\nATTN: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. An unidentified flying object was sighted over Greenville, S. C., at 1930E, 15 August 1949.\n\n2. The 1930E weather for Greenville AF Base was 4000 scattered, 15 miles visibility. Greenville, S. C. Municipal Airport weather at 1930E was 25000 broken, 9000 scattered, 30 miles visibility, with distant thunderstorms in all quadrants.\n\n3. Two witnesses reported the unidentified flying objects. One of the witnesses was not identified and the other was Mr. Harper of Lensing Avenue, Greenville, S. C., who is employed at the Greenville Municipal Airport.\n\n4. No photographs or sketches are available.\n\n5. The unidentified object was described by the witnesses as round, fairly large, grey, moving in a northeasterly direction at an undetermined speed. No sound was heard nor was any exhaust trail visible, its altitude was estimated to be 5000 feet or less. The maneuverability is not known, but it appeared to be moving at a constant speed and altitude.\n\n6. All reports were received via Plan 62 interphone by Maxwell Flight Service Center from Atlanta Air Route Traffic Control Center. The Atlanta ARTC received them from the Greenville Municipal Airport Control Tower.\n\n7. The operations section of the 316th Troop Carrier Wing investigated this incident further and determined that the unidentified object was a Geological Weather Service balloon believed to have been released in Tennessee.\n\nGEORGE G. NEFFINGER\nMajor, USAF\nCommanding\n\nCopies furnished:\nChief of Staff USAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Director of Intelligence\n\nCommander MATS\nATTN: Chief, Intelligence Div\n\nCO, FLIGHT SERVICE, Washington 25, D. C.\nATTN: A-2"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McCHORD FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nMcChord Air Force Base\nWashington\n\nTCM 452\n28 July 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio\nATTENTION: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. The following report of sighting unidentified flying objects is submitted:\n\na. Location and time of sighting: Over the city of Spokane, Washington, at 2020 PST, 26 July 1949.\n\nb. Weather at the time: The 2030 PST weather report for Spokane, Geiger Field, estimated ceiling fourteen (14) thousand feet, broken, lower broken, visibility forty (40) miles, upper broken clouds estimated at twenty-two (22) thousand feet.\n\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses: Bill Miller, civilian commercial pilot, S 411 Carahan, Spokane, Washington, Phone Number Lakeview 7933.\n\nd. Photographs of objects, if available: Photographs of objects were not available.\n\ne. Sketches of object's configuration: Sketches of object's configuration were not available.\n\nf. Objects sighted:\n\n(1) Number: eight.\n\n(2) Shape: Dish shaped.\n\n(3) Size: Larger than a B-29.\n\n(4) Color: Not reported."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nTCM 452\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n28 July 1949\n\n(5) Speed: Much faster than a B-29.\n\n(6) Heading: From east to west.\n\n(7) Maneuverability: Not reported.\n\n(8) Altitude: Estimated fourteen (14) thousand five (5) hundred feet.\n\n(9) Sound: Similar to a formation of jet aircraft.\n\n(10) Exhaust trail or not: Not reported.\n\ng. General remarks: Mr. Miller reported he was in his home and was attracted by a sound similar to a formation of jet aircraft. He went outside his home and the only aircraft in sight was a B-29 heading from east to west. At an estimated one (1) thousand feet above the B-29 Mr. Miller reported he saw a formation of eight (8) dish shaped objects, each larger than a B-29, traveling in the same direction as the B-29 and at a much greater speed. The pilot of the B-29, AF-7742, stated he was at thirteen (13) thousand five (5) hundred feet at the time and had not sighted anything unusual. Mr. Miller stated that he had not been drinking and had good vision.\n\nh. Mr. Miller gave this report to Spokane Radio who forwarded it to Seattle Air Route Traffic Control Center who in turn forwarded the report to the McChord Flight Service Center.\n\nEARL J. LIVESAY\nLt. Col., USAF\nCommanding\n\nMCCHORD FIELD FLT SERVICE CENTER\n\nRESTRICTED\n2"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nMCCHORD FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nMcChord Air Force Base\nWashington\n\nTCM 452\n10 August 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio\nATTENTION: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. The following report of sighting of unidentified flying objects is submitted:\n\na. Location and time of sighting: East and southeast of Medford, Oregon, 1120P to 1230P, 8 August 1949.\n\nb. Weather at the time: Sky clear, visibility thirty (30) miles.\n\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses:\n\n(1) Corporal E. H. Conger, AACS Air/Ground operator of Medford Airways, address AACS Detachment 1905-1, Medford, Oregon.\n\n(2) Staff Sergeant Arthur Paulson, AACS Air/Ground operator of Medford Airways, address AACS Detachment 1905-1, Medford, Oregon.\n\n(3) Corporal Frank Bishop, AACS Air/Ground operator of Medford Airways, address AACS Detachment 1905-1, Medford, Oregon.\n\n(4) G. E. Milligan, CAA Tower operator, Medford Airport, Medford, Oregon, address P. O. Box 832, Medford, Oregon.\n\n(5) Jack Edmonds, CAA Tower operator, Medford Airport, Medford, Oregon, address P. O. Box 832, Medford, Oregon.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTCM 452\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n10 August 1949\n\n(6) G. W. White, Communicator CAA Range Station, Medford, Oregon, address P. O. Box 286, Medford, Oregon.\n\n(7) Earl Wescott, Communicator CAA Range Station, Medford, Oregon, address P. O. Box 286, Medford, Oregon.\n\nd. Photographs of objects if available: Photographs of objects are not available.\n\ne. Sketches of object's configuration: Sketches of object's configuration are not available.\n\nf. Objects sighted:\n\n(1) Number: Varying from one (1) to seven (7).\n\n(2) Shape: Undetermined.\n\n(3) Size: Undetermined.\n\n(4) Color: Shiny.\n\n(5) Speed: Varying from slow to very fast.\n\n(6) Heading: Objects did not hold any specific heading and were last seen heading west.\n\n(7) Maneuverability: Objects maneuvered horizontally but not vertically.\n\n(8) Altitude: Very high.\n\n(9) Sound: None.\n\n(10) Exhaust trail or not: None.\n\ng. General remarks: Personnel from Medford Airways first sighted the objects and notified Medford Tower and Medford Radio. Personnel from Medford Radio used the theodalite to get a better look at the objects. Personnel from Medford Tower used binoculars and were able to distinguish wings on\n\n2\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTCM 452\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n10 August 1949\n\nthe objects but no further identification could be detected. The objects would fly formation for a while and then break off and reform in a trail formation. They would disappear for short periods and then reappear in the same general area. Objects were visible to the unaided eye only when they reflected the sun's rays.\n\nEARL J. LIVESAY\nLt. Col., USAF\nCommanding\n\nCopies furnished:\nChief of Staff, USAF\nCommander, MATS\nCommanding Officer, Flight Service\n\nMCCHORD FIELD FLT SERVICE CENTER\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n3"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRANSMITTED\n\nAUG 10 3 46 PM '49\nMCCHORD FIELD\nFLT SERV CENTER"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nDAYTON, OHIO\n\nCEG/DJS/deg\n\n452\n\n4 August 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Report of Unidentified Flying Object\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio\nATTN: MCIAXO-3\n\nThe following report of an unidentified flying object is submitted in compliance with Flight Service Regulation 200-4. At 1955E, 1 August 1949, the Wright-Patterson Flight Service Center received the following information from Lockbourne Tower, Columbus, Ohio:\n\nAt 1955E, Columbus Tower, Columbus, Ohio, reported to Lockbourne AFB, Columbus, Ohio, the following information:\n\n\"a. LOCATION: Over Columbus, Ohio for two (2) hours - 1900E to 2100E.\n\nb. WEATHER: 1930E Columbus Weather: 5,000 scattered clouds 12 miles visibility.\n\nc. NAME: Mr. Robert J. Andees, CAA Controller, % Columbus Tower, phone Douglas 1322. Mr. Robert L. Markwith, CAA Controller, 177 N. James Road, phone Douglas 5692. Mr. E. J. Lutz, CAA Controller, 457 Marion Road, phone Garfield 6726.\n\nd. PHOTOGRAPHS: None.\n\ne. SKETCHES: None.\n\nf. OBJECT SIGHTED:\n\n(1) NUMBER: One.\n\n(2) SHAPE: No shape.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n452\nSubject: Report of Unidentified Flying Object (4 Aug 49)\n\n(3) SIZE: Impossible to identify size.\n\n(4) COLOR: white and then yellowish red when on the horizon.\n\n(5) SPEED: No estimate in MPH.\n\n(6) HEADING: Northwest 320°.\n\n(7) MANEUVERABILITY: Only observed in straight line.\n\n(8) ALTITUDE: 30,000 feet or higher.\n\n(9) SOUND: None.\n\n(10) EXHAUST OR NOT: Exhaust trail before a white light.\n\nCopy Furnished:\n1 - Chief of Staff, USAF, ATTN: Dir of Intelligence\n1 - Commander MATS, Chief Intelligence Divn\n1 - Commanding Officer Flight Service, ATTN: A-2\n\nCHARLES E. GROGAN\nLt Colonel, USAF\nCommanding\n\n2\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nMCCHORD FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nMcChord Air Force Base\nWashington\n\nTCM 452 1 August 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nCommanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio\nATTENTION: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. The following report of sighting of unidentified flying objects is submitted:\n\na. Location and time of sighting: In the vicinity of Portland, Oregon, Troutdale, Oregon, and Mount Hood, Oregon, from 2100P to 2130P, 30 July 1949.\n\nb. Weather at the time: Sky clear, visibility unlimited.\n\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses:\n\n(1) Captain Thrush, pilot Northwest Airlines, address Northwest Airlines Dispatch Office, Portland, Oregon.\n\n(2) Robert Henery, CAA Tower Operator, Portland Airport, Box 1807, Portland, Oregon.\n\n(3) H. W. Penhallegan, Civilian Instructor Pilot, Western Skyways, Troutdale, Oregon, 4422 SE Brookland, Portland 6, Oregon.\n\n(4) B. J. Brasford, CAA Tower Operator, Portland Airport, Box 1807, Portland, Oregon. Mr. Brasford has the names and addresses of four other witnesses of this sighting.\n\nd. Photographs of objects, if available: Photographs of objects are not available.\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nTCM 452\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\t\t\t\t\t\t1 August 1949\n\nCaptain Thrush, the pilot of a Northwest Airline Martin 202, reported that while approaching Portland from the east he noticed what appeared to be an aircraft displaying two red lights and one white light. Since this was nonstandard lighting Captain Thrush watched the object very closely. His sighting of this object was at 2110P at an altitude of six (6) thousand feet and he was approximately five (5) miles west of Stevenson, Washington. He reported that the object was behind him and slightly to the left and maintained that same position until Troutdale. When over Troutdale Captain Thrush heard Portland Tower giving instructions to other aircraft to hold over the airport because of an unidentified flying object dropping flares. Upon hearing this information Captain Thrush turned one hundred and eighty (180) degrees and attempted to intercept the flying object displaying the two red lights and one white light that had been following him. He reported that this object then turned to the southeast and appeared to pull away from him quite easily. Captain Thrush reported that his indicated airspeed was two hundred and ten (210) miles per hour while he was trying to intercept the object.\n\nMr. Penhallogan reported that he saw the object while in the traffic pattern in Troutdale, Oregon. He was flying at an altitude of one (1) thousand three (3) hundred feet indicated and reported that the object appeared to be five (5) hundred to eight (8) hundred feet above him and at an estimated distance of twenty (20) miles to the east.\n\nThe only Air Force aircraft in the vicinity at the time was a B-29, AF 7758, who was over Portland at 2130P at an altitude of seven (7) thousand five (5) hundred feet, northbound. The pilot was questioned and stated that he did not drop any flares and did not circle over Portland and did not see anything unusual.\n\nEARL J. LIVESAY\nLt. Col., USAF\nCommanding\n\nCopies furnished:\n Chief of Staff, USAF\n Commander, MATS\n Commanding Officer, Flight Service"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRANSMITTED\nAUG 2 10 50 AM '49\nMCCHORD FIELD\nFLT SERV CENTER"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nMCCHORD FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nMcChord Air Force Base\nWashington\n\nTCM 452\t\t\t\t\t\t25 July 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nTO:\tCommanding General\n\tAir Materiel Command\n\tWright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio\n\tATTENTION: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. In accordance with FS Regulation 200-4, subject: Unidentified Flying Objects, dated 2 November 1948, the following report of information received concerning the sighting of unidentified flying objects is submitted:\n\na. Location and time of sighting: Ten (10) miles northwest of Mountain Home, Idaho, at 1205 MST, 24 July 1949.\n\nb. Weather at the time: As reported by Mountain Home Air Force Base for 1130 PST was scattered clouds at five (5) thousand feet, visibility thirty (30) miles.\n\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses: The only individual who reported this sighting was Harry Clark, occupation Airport Manager of Ritchie Field, Nampa, Idaho, address Nampa, Idaho.\n\nd. Photographs of objects if available: Photographs of objects were not available.\n\ne. Sketches of object's configuration: The objects were delta wings with no protrusions. The angle of the apex as reported by Mr. Clark was between thirty (30) and forty-five (45) degrees with the base of the triangle being a slightly curved convex.\n\nf. Objects sighted:\n\t(1) Number: Seven (7) objects were sighted flying in a V formation."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nTCM 452\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\t\t\t\t\t\t25 July 1949\n\n\t(2) Shape: In addition to the description in paragraph 1e Mr. Clark noted a dark circular structure where the pilot normally sits. The leading edge of this dark circular structure was approximately one-fourth (1/4) the distance from the apex of the delta wing to the rear. This dark circular structure was noted at the time Mr. Clark was below the objects.\n\t(3) Size: Larger than an F-51.\n\t(4) Color: Darker than normal aluminum skin and not shiny. Mr. Clark reported the surface seemed to be between a light gray and a dirty white with no markings or diffusion of color.\n\t(5) Speed: Faster than an F-51 and estimated by Mr. Clark to be at least six (6) hundred miles per hour.\n\t(6) Heading: Mr. Clark reported that when first sighted the formation was heading approximately three (3) hundred degrees. The formation passed by him and then made a one hundred and eighty (180) degree turn to approximately one hundred and twenty (120) degrees.\n\t(7) Maneuverability: Mr. Clark reported that no maneuvers were noted other than the one hundred and eighty (180) degree turn. The objects did not appear to bank during the turn. When the objects were first sighted and before the one hundred and eighty (180) degree turn was made, the outer wing surfaces appeared to move slightly.\n\t(8) Altitude: Mr. Clark reported the formation between eight (8) thousand five (5) hundred and ten (10) thousand feet. When the formation was first sighted Mr. Clark was cruising at ten (10) thousand feet and\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nTCM 452\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\t\t\t\t\t\t25 July 1949\n\nobjects were slightly below and one-fourth (1/4) of a mile to the left of his position. When the formation made the one hundred and eighty (180) degree turn Mr. Clark descended to eight (8) thousand five (5) hundred feet and was below the formation when they came back.\n\t(9) Sound: No sound was noted from the formation.\n\t(10) Exhaust trail or not: No exhaust trail was visible.\n\ng. General remarks: Mr. Clark was enroute from Burley, Idaho, to Nampa, Idaho, in a Cub Cruiser when the objects were sighted. When the formation was first sighted they were going in approximately the same direction as Mr. Clark and were approximately one-fourth (1/4) of a mile to his left and below. Mr. Clark was cruising at ten (10) thousand feet at this time. He observed the formation until it made the one hundred and eighty (180) degree turn at which time Mr. Clark descended in his aircraft and made a ninety (90) degree turn to the left in an effort to intercept the formation. He was able to get below the level of the formation at eight (8) thousand five (5) hundred feet at which time he noticed the dark circular bulge on the bottom side of the objects. Because of their speed the flying objects soon became lost from the sight of Mr. Clark who proceeded on to his destination. Mr. Clark is known personally by Captain John S. Batis of this organization who states that in his opinion Mr. Clark is a reliable witness.\n\nEARL J. LIVESAY\nLt. Col., USAF\nCommanding\n\nCopies furnished:\n Chief of Staff, USAF\n Commander, MATS\n Commanding Officer, Flight Service\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McCHORD FIELD\nFLT SERV CENTER\nJUL 25 11 30 AM '49\nTRANSMITTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nDAYTON, OHIO\nCEG/TEL/deg\n20 July 1949\nSUBJECT: Report of Unidentified Flying Object\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Material Command\nWright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio\nATTN: MCIAXO-3\nThe following report of an unidentified flying object is submitted in compliance with Flight Service Regulation 200-4. At 2202E, 19 July 1949 the Wright-Patterson Flight Service Center received the following information from Cincinnati Air Route Traffic Control Center:\nAt 2130E, Mr Neinkirchen of 2419 Cleveland Avenue, Columbus, Ohio, phone Jefferson 2956, telephoned Columbus Ohio Municipal Airport Control Tower to report the following information with respect to unidentified flying object.\n\"a. LOCATION: Over Columbus, Ohio at 2135E.\nb. WEATHER: Clear sky - visibility 15 miles.\nc. NAME: Mr Neinkirchen, 2419 Cleveland Avenue, Columbus, Ohio, phone Jefferson 2956, photographer by trade - has worked with jet aircraft and engines.\nd. PHOTOGRAPHS: None.\ne. SKETCHES: None\nf. OBJECT SIGHTED:\n(1) NUMBER: One.\n(2) SHAPE: Flying wing type, swept back wings, tail but no noticeable nose - similar to present day jet aircraft.\n(3) SIZE: Seemed too small for one man aircraft."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nSubject: Report of Unidentified Flying Object (20 Jul 49)\n(4) COLOR: Luminous.\n(5) SPEED: No estimate in MPH but was traveling very fast.\n(6) HEADING: Due East.\n(7) MANEUVERABILITY: Only observed in straight line.\n(8) ALTITUDE: 3000 to 4000 feet.\n(9) SOUND: Humming noise instead of rushing noise.\n(10) EXHAUST OR NOT: No exhaust.\"\nCopy Furnished:\n1 - Chief of Staff, USAF, ATTN: Director of Intelligence\n1 - Commander MATS, ATTN: Chief Intelligence Divn\n1 - CO Flight Service, ATTN: A-2\nCHARLES E. GROGAN\nLt Colonel, USAF\nCommanding\n2\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WRIGHT-PATTERSON FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nDAYTON, OHIO\n1949 JUL 20 13:39"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nDAYTON, OHIO\nCEG/DJS/deg\n29 June 1949\nSUBJECT: Report of Unidentified Flying Object\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Material Command\nWright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio\nATTN: MCIAXO-3\nThe following report of an unidentified flying object is submitted in compliance with Flight Service Regulation 200-4.\na. LOCATION AND TIME OF SIGHTING: 1750E - 1755E, 26 June 1949, Fairfield, Ohio.\nb. WEATHER AT THE TIME: 3,000 thin scattered, 10 miles visibility, temperature 92, dew point 62, wind north-northwest 14, altimeter 29.94.\nc. NAMES, OCCUPATIONS, AND ADDRESSES OF WITNESSES:\n(1) Major R. L. Long, Wright-Patterson AFB, Dayton, Ohio.\n(2) Unidentified Civilian, resident of Fairfield, Ohio.\nd. PHOTOGRAPHS OF OBJECTS, IF AVAILABLE: None available.\ne. SKETCHES OF OBJECT'S CONFIGURATION: None.\nf. OBJECT SIGHTED:\n(1) NUMBER: 1.\n(2) SHAPE: Long tail of flame accompanied by a long tail of smoke.\n(3) SIZE: Undetermined.\n(4) COLOR: Flame and smoke.\n(5) SPEED: High rate.\n(6) HEADING: West to East\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSUBJECT: Report of Unidentified Flying Object (29 June 1949)\n\n(7) MANEUVERABILITY: Undetermined.\n\n(8) ALTITUDE: Undetermined - very high.\n\n(9) SOUND: Undetermined.\n\n(10) EXHAUST TRAIL OR NOT: Yes.\n\n8. GENERAL REMARKS: None.\n\nCopy Furnished:\n1 - Chief of Staff, USAF,\nATTN: Director of\nIntelligence\n1 - Commander MATS, ATTN:\nChief Intelligence Divn\n1 - CO Flight Service, ATTN: A-2\n\nCHARLES E. GROGAN\nLt Colonel, USAF\nCommanding\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HqMAAMA Form No. 7\n(Rev. 28 Oct. 48)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nOLMSTED FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nOlmsted Air Force Base\nMIDDLETOWN, PENNSYLVANIA\n\nMDT 000.92\n10 June 1949\nPKB/vw\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\n\nATTN: MCIAKO-3\n\n1. In compliance with FS Regulation 200-4 dated 2 November 1948 and letter, Headquarters USAF, Subject: \"Reporting of Information on 'Flying Discs,'\" dated 6 February 1948, the following information is submitted.\n\nESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF INFORMATION\n\n1. Date of Sighting: 10 June 1949.\n\n2. Time of Sighting: 0845E.\n\n3. Where Sighted: See Par 3 b (2)\n\na. Ground\n\nNot applicable.\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\n\nT-6 150 4000 ft 330 degrees\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city, town or known landmark.\n\n20 miles southwest of Boston, Mass.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nMDT 000.92\nSubj: Unidentified Flying Objects (10 June 49)\n\n(3) Clock Position of object from observer's aircraft:\n\n1200 hrs, approximately 6 miles in front and over aircraft.\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude: 42°N 71° 30' W\n\nc. Sea\n\nNot applicable.\n\n4. Number of objects: One (1)\n\na. Formation type: No formation.\n\n5. Distance of object from observer: Six (6) miles\n\na. Laterally or horizontally: Perpendicular\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon: 45 degrees.\n\nc. Altitude: 30,000 feet.\n\n6. Time in sight: Not stated.\n\n7. Appearance of object:\n\na. Color: White\n\nb. Shape: Tubular\n\nc. Apparent construction: No opinion\n\nd. Size: 100 feet long\n\n8. Direction of flight: 330 degrees - 340 degrees.\n\n9. Tactics or maneuvers: None\n\n10. Evidence of exhaust: None\n\na. Color of smoke: None\n\nb. Length and width: None\n\nc. Odor: Unknown\n\nd. Rate of evaporation: Unknown\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nMDT 319.1\nSubj: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\ne. Does trail vary with sound: None\n\n11. Effect on clouds: None\n\n12. Lights: None\n\n13. Support: None\n\n14. Propulsion: Not observed.\n\na. Propeller or jet: Unknown\n\nb. Rotor: Unknown.\n\nc. Aerodynamic vanes: Unknown\n\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings: Unknown\n\n15. Control and stability: Not observed.\n\na. Fins: Unknown\n\nb. Stabilizers: Unknown\n\n(1) Size: Unknown\n\n(2) Shape: Unknown\n\n(3) Location: Unknown\n\n16. Air Ducts: Not observed.\n\na. Slots: Unknown\n\nb. Duct openings: Unknown\n\n17. Speed - MPH: 150 MPH\n\n18. Sound: Unknown\n\n19. Was any radio antenna to be observed: Not observed.\n\n20. Manner of disappearance: Not stated.\n\na. Explode\n\n(1) Possibility of fragments: Unknown\n\n(2) Other physical evidence: Unknown\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nMDT 000.92\nSubj: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nb. Faded from view: Yes\n\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle: No\n\nRELATIVE TO THE OBSERVER\n\n1. Name of Observer: 1st Lt Kirshbaum.\n\n2. Fort Devens, Massachusetts\n\n3. Occupation: USAF\n\n4. Place of Business: USAF\n\n5. Hobbies: Not applicable\n\n6. Ability to determine: Unknown\n\n7. Reliability of observer: No opinion\n\n8. Notes relative to observer on\n\na. Sightings in general: None\n\nb. How attention was drawn to objects: Directly in flight path.\n\n(1) Sound: Unknown\n\n(2) Motion: Stationary\n\n(3) Glint of light: Glint of light on canopy.\n\n9. Witnesses:\n\nNone\n\n10. Comments of interrogator re intelligence and character of person interrogated: No opinion.\n\nRELATIVE TO RADAR SIGHTINGS\n\n1. Re radars now operating on ground: No radar sightings.\n\n2. If airborne, when object was sighted: Not applicable.\n\nGENERAL\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nMDT 000.92\nSubj: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions:\n\n25,000' overcast - 1200 scattered\n\n2. Winds aloft report: Not given.\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time: Unknown.\n\n4. Possibility releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other: Unknown.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil sampled within and without depression or spot where object landed for purposes of making comparison of soils: Unknown.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects, check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects: Unknown.\n\n7. Obtain photographs: None\n\n8. Not obtained.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible: None\n\nHOWELL P. McCORKLE\nMajor, USAF\nCommanding\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\ncc: Chief of Staff, Hq USAF\nCommander, MATS\nCO, FS\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n5"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHAMILTON FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nHAMILTON AIR FORCE BASE\nHAMILTON FIELD, CALIFORNIA\n\nSRF 319.1\n\n2 MAY 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Report on Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nATTENTION: MCIAKO-3\n\n1. Reference Flight Service Regulation 200-4, which directs a complete report will be rendered.\n\n2. A copy of inclosed teletype report from this center contains all information available to the Hamilton Flight Service Center on unidentified flying objects. This report was received from Mr. Marvin L. Small, a radio operator from the CAA Radio Station at Elko, Nevada, on 2 May 1949.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING OFFICER:\n\nWILLIAM D. JAMESON\n1st Lt, USAF\nAdjutant\n\n1 Incl\nCopy TWX to CG, AMC fr\nHFSC, dtd 2 May 49\n\nCopy furnished:\nChief of Staff, USAF\nATTN: Dir of Intelligence\nComdr, MATS, Wash 25, DC\nATTN: Chief, Intell Div\nCO, Flt Sv, Wash 25, DC\nATTN: A-2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nUSHER CO 78TH FTR WG HAMILTON AFB HAMILTON CALIF CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCG\nAIR MATERIEL COMDG\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OHIO PRIORITY\n\nx\n\nCO FLT SV WASH 25 DC\n\nGOVT PREPAID HAM HF HFSC 2-E-8 PD ATTN MIKE CHARLIE ITEM ABLE XRAY OBOE-THREE PD FOL MSG RECD FROM SALT LAKE AIR ROUTE TRAFFIC CONTROL AT 1140 MST TWO MAY FOUR NINE CLN QUOTE MR MARVIN LOVE SMALL CMA A RADIO OPERATOR FROM THE CHARLIE ABLE ABLE RADIO STA AT ELKO CMA NEV CMA CALLED FROM HIS HOME TO ELKO RADIO AND ADVISED HE SAW WHAT APPEARED TO BE THREE FLYING DISCS IN THE VICINITY OF ELKO GOING SOUTHWEST PD THEY REMAINED IN THE VICINITY THREE OR FOUR MINUTES PD MR SMALL ENTERED HOUSE TO GET FIELD GLASSES CMA THRU GLASSES THEY APPEARED TO BE THIRTY FEET IN DIAMETER AT APPROX FOURTEEN THOUSAND FT PD THEY MADE LEFT TURN AND DEPARTED AHEAD OF UNITED AIR LINES PLANE DEPARTING ELKO PD SPEED ESTIMATED AT THREE TO FOUR HUNDRED MILES PER HR PD UNITED AIR LINES PILOT DID NOT SEE THEM PD UNQUOTE PAR ONLY MIL ACFT IN THE VICINITY AT THAT TIME WAS ONE BAKER-TWO SIX PD WEATHER AT ELKO CLEAR CMA VISIBILITY THREE ZERO MILES OR GREATER PD\n\nPD SGD PEDRAZZINI COMDG HFSC\n\nI CERTIFY THAT IT IS ESSENTIAL THIS MSG BE TRANSMITTED BY ELECTRICAL MEANS AND THAT ORDINARY OR AIR MAIL WILL NOT SUFFICE IN ITS DELIVERY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nHAROLD O PEDRAZZINI 2145Z R M KOLBENSCHLAG\nLT COL USAF COMDG HFSC 2 MAY 49 CAPT USAF ADJ 1 1\n\nInc #1"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Classification of SECRET Authorized by CG 2143D AWW 6AM 15-6-49\nHEADQUARTERS\n2143D AIR WEATHER WING\nAPO 925\n\n16 JUN 1949\n\nWGI 350\n\nSUBJECT: Semi-Monthly Intelligence Summary\n\nTO : Commanding General\nMilitary Air Transport Service\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nIn accordance with provisions of letter, Headquarters, Air Weather Service, subject as above, file A-2, WEA 350.05, the following report is submitted for the period ending 15 June 1949.\n\n1. a. During a test hop of an RB 29, a radar operator from the 514th Reconnaissance Squadron (VLR) Weather, made the following observations and report:\n\n\"On Monday, the 2nd of May, 1949, we took off in aircraft number 45-21824 for the purpose of test hopping the ship. Take off was made at approximately 1500K. The radar set was turned on at approximately 1515K and was tuned in. Guam and Rota were picked up by radar and after about ten (10) minutes of operation some type of interference was noticed on the scope. It came in in the same form as a regular range marker except that the pulses were approximately ten (10) miles apart. They only covered the area covered by Guam plus about five (5) degrees on either side of the island. The scope was on the one hundred (100) mile range.\n\nAs the range was reduced the interference grew larger on the scope. On an attached sheet of paper there is a sketch of the scope as it appeared with the interference drawn in. I do not believe that what was picked up on this flight was intentional jamming.\n\nCOMMENT\nThe operator who made the above observation is one of the 514th Reconnaissance Squadrons' most experienced radar operators and is very proficient in the operation of radar equipment. He checked the set after landing and could find no malfunctions."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2. b. On the 8th of June 1949, at a position of 12° 25'N and 140° 20'E, an RB 29 aircraft from the 514th Reconnaissance Squadron made the following sighting:\n\nAt 1109Z while flying a heading of 80 degrees, at 18500 ft on a routine Vulture Baker weather reconnaissance mission, a white billowing substance was sighted at an altitude of 30000 to 35000 ft. The sighting was made by two crew members, 1st Lt. Ernest Swanson, weather observer and M/Sgt Walter Rogers engineer. What appeared to be a traveling contrail was moving from east north east to west south west at an estimated speed of 4200 miles per hour, this speed was determined by means of triangulation, the substance was observed at a relative bearing of approximately 45 degrees to the heading of the aircraft at a distance of 30 miles, substance disappeared from view approximately one minute after first sighting at a relative bearing of approximately 160 degrees. The substance was traveling in a straight line and was definitely white, a three quarter moon made visibility excellent. No sketches or photographs are available.\n\nThe above information was sent by radio from the 514th to the Continental Weather Wing, Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma.\n\n1 Incl:\n1. Radar Scope Diagram\n\nTHOMAS S. MOORMAN JR.\nCOL. USAF\nCOMMANDING\n\n2\n00408 SECRET"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Classification of SECRET Authorized by CG 2143D AWW 6AM 15-6-49\nAPPEARANCE OF THE SCOPE AND THE INTERFERENCE\n\nLUBBER LINE\n\nROTA ISLAND\n\nGUAM\n\nINTERFERENCE AS IT APPEARED ON THE SCOPE\n\nSCOPE WAS ON THE 100 MILE RANGE\n\nIncl #1\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPNAV-N.I. 96-1943 (Rev.)\nBy\nMAIL\nCLASSIFICATION\nCONFIDENTIAL\nISSUED BY THE INTELLIGENCE DIVISION\nOFFICE OF CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nINTELLIGENCE REPORT\n(Reference to this report must specify Serial No., Place and Date.)\nSerial 13-49 at Kodiak, Alaska Date 23 April, 1949\n(Start new series each year, i.e. 1-43, 2-43.)\nFrom DIO-17ND [REDACTED] IFI (See Special Note)\n(Ship, fleet, unit, district, office, station, or person) Make separate report for each main title. See O.N.I. Index Guide.\nReference DIO-17ND Secret NNI-96, Serial 4-S-48, dated 13 February 1948\n(Directive, correspondence, previous related report, etc., if applicable)\nSource Informants named in report Evaluation B-0\n(As official, personal observation, publication, press, conversation with-- A-1 to F-6 etc.\nidentify when practicable, etc.) Ref: AS/EN 3-10; SER. 4312416-11-18-42\nSubject US/ALASKA - Meteorological Phenomena - Luminous Energy\n(Nation reported on) (Main title as per index guide) (Subtitles) (Make separate report for each title)\nBRIEF. (Here enter careful summary of report, containing substance succinctly stated; include important facts, names, places, dates, etc.)\nPOSSIBLE METEOROLOGICAL OR CELESTIAL PHENOMENA.\nBRIEF: A manifestation of luminous energy was observed on the night of 8 April 1949 passing over the U.S. Naval Operating Base, Kodiak, Alaska.\nNOTE: This information is as of 8 April 1949.\nSPECIAL NOTE: Inasmuch as the Intelligence File Index, 1948 Edition, does not contain an index relative to celestial or meteorological phenomena, as related in this report, no Index Guide Number has been incorporated.\nENCLOSURE: (A) Photostatic copy of a drawing made by Paul Herring indicating course of atmospheric disturbance on 8 April 1949.\n1. Deputy U.S. Marshal Paul HERRING, Kodiak, Alaska, reported to the Intelligence Officer on 11 April 1949 that he observed a celestial manifestation crossing the sky above the U.S. Naval Operating Base, Kodiak, Alaska, 8 April 1949 at approximately 2030 hours. According to Mr. HERRING, he saw a flaming greenish-blue object plummet across the sky at an altitude of 2,500 feet at an estimated speed of 1,500 miles per hour. This disturbance, stated Mr. HERRING, was first observed above Anton Larson Bay, (See Enclosure (A)), moving from West to East on a course that approximately paralleled the East-West runways of the U.S. Naval Air Station, Kodiak, Alaska, and was visible for approximately 15 seconds when the flame disappeared in the vicinity of Puffin Island, Chiniak Bay. In the opinion of Mr. HERRING, the object was not a meteor as it was too large and there were no sparks which are generally observed associated with such phenomena. He stated that his first impression was that it was either a jet fighter or that an aircraft was on fire. This opinion was dissipated when he\nTHIS REPORT CONSISTS OF TWO (2) PAGES.\nDistribution By Originator ONI, CINCPACFLT, CINCAL, CG-USARAL, CG-AAC\nRouting space below for use in O.N.I. N 03756 CLASSIFICATION CONFIDENTIAL\nCIA (5) Op.322F2 (2) OR13-1 ALASKA\nState (6) 322F1B1\nID GS USA (7) 321E (2)\nDI USAF (6) 322Y (2) ENCL. (A) (3 ccs)\n322H2 Op.322F2 1 cc\nI.G. GS USA 1 cc\nDI USAF 1 cc\nM3B/U5 (2)"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nDIO-17ND, Serial 13-49 23 April 1949\nSubject: US/ALASKA - Meteorological Phenomena - Luminous Energy\ncalled the Naval Air Base and learned there were no aircraft of any description in the air in the vicinity of the Naval Air Station.\n2. Lieutenant Commander D. SHEPARD, USN, Operations Officer, U.S. Naval Operating Base, Kodiak, Alaska, reported that while standing near the NCB Post Office he had observed \"a strange object streaking across the sky, near Old Woman Mountain\", on 8 April 1949 at approximately 2040 hours. Lieutenant Commander SHEPARD described the object as a reddish ball of fire approximately two (2) feet in diameter traveling from West to East at an estimated 2,500 feet altitude. \"The object was a brilliant color, without a tail, traveling with a flat trajectory of decline between 21 and 20 degrees. It seemed to disintegrate over Chiniak Bay\" was Lieutenant Commander SHEPARD's report of his observation. No opinion as to the nature of the object was advanced by Lieutenant Commander SHEPARD.\n3. Lawrence B. SHAW, taxicab driver, Arrow Cab, Kodiak, Alaska, stated that he was enroute from the Enlisted Mens Club to the Administration Building on 8 April 1949, when he saw a strange bright blue object streak across the sky at approximately 2035 hours. To SHAW, the object appeared to be about 1-1/2 feet in diameter trailed by a three (3) foot streamer which was \"pinkish in shading\". This object, stated SHAW, appeared in the sky over Old Woman Mountain traveling on a West to East course at an estimated altitude of 2,500 feet. It was losing altitude at an estimated 25 degrees and, if it continued on it's course, it would have struck Chiniak Bay off Nyman Peninsula. To SHAW, the object appeared to disintegrate as bright particles flew from the object as it passed beyond Nyman Peninsula. SHAW was of the firm opinion that the object he saw was not a meteor or shooting star which he has seen on numerous occasions.\n4. Paul KREUGER, Bus Driver, U.S. Naval Operating Base, Kodiak, Alaska, reported that he was driving his bus on 8 April 1949, when at 2045 hours, he observed a strange greenish-blue object flash across the sky from the vicinity of Old Woman Mountain to Nyman Peninsula (West to East direction). KREUGER described the object as being 1-1/2 feet in diameter and approximately 10 feet long. He stated the object was approximately 500 feet high as it passed over hangar #3 of the Air Station and it would have landed in Chiniak Bay off Nyman Peninsula but it faded from his view when it passed over the Peninsula. \"It had the appearance of a large greenish tracer shell\", stated KREUGER.\n5. U.S. Navy Weather Central, U.S. Naval Operating Base, Kodiak, Alaska, reported the weather for 8 April 1949 at 2000 hours as follows:\nCeiling: 3,000 feet, scattered clouds, 3/10 coverage.\nVisibility: 15 miles.\nWind: North-Northwest, 15 knots.\nTemperature: 27 degrees.\n6. No emission of noise by the object was reported by the observers.\nCOMMENT:\nAs the above statements are approximately the same in position, altitude, course and time of the luminous manifestation, it's existence has been evaluated as probable. However, as the shape, size and color of the object have been variously described and as unsuccessful efforts have been made to determine the nature of the phenomena with no further information available, no valuation of the nature of the atmospheric disturbance has been made.\n-2-\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112-PART I\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCOUNTRY United States REPORT NO. IR-16-49 AF 66320-1\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nSUBJECT Forwarding Inclosure\nAREA REPORTED ON Kodiak, Alaska FROM (Agency) Intelligence Division, Alaskan Air Command\nDATE OF REPORT 23 April 1949 DATE OF INFORMATION 14 April 1949 EVALUATION B-0\nPREPARED BY (Officer) R. A. Smythe, 1st Lt, USAF SOURCE\nREFERENCES RAD from CG, AAC to USAF, AAOIO-6-2466, DIV 230210Z\nSUMMARY: Inclosed is Intelligence Report issued by the Office of Chief of Naval Operations, dated 23 April 1949, Subject: US/ALASKA - Meteorological Phenomena - Luminous Energy.\n1 INCL\nONI Intell Rpt 13-49 from Kodiak\nDISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR\nDI, Alaskan Command (incl w/d)\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nCONFIDENTIAL\n(CLASSIFICATION)"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLASSIFICATION\nCONFIDENTIAL\nISSUED BY THE INTELLIGENCE DIVISION\nOFFICE OF CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nINTELLIGENCE REPORT\nSerial 13-49 at Kodiak, Alaska Date 23 April, 1949\nFrom DIO-17ND IFI (See Special Note)\nReference DIO-17ND Secret NNI-96, Serial 4-S-48, dated 13 February 1948\nSource Informants named in report Evaluation B-0\nSubject US/ALASKA - Meteorological Phenomena - Luminous Energy\nBRIEF: A manifestation of luminous energy was observed on the night of 8 April 1949 passing over the U.S. Naval Operating Base, Kodiak, Alaska.\nNOTE: This information is as of 8 April 1949.\nSPECIAL NOTE: Inasmuch as the Intelligence File Index, 1948 Edition, does not contain an index relative to celestial or meteorological phenomena, as related in this report, no Index Guide Number has been incorporated.\nENCLOSURE: (A) Photostatic copy of a drawing made by Paul Herring indicating course of atmospheric disturbance on 8 April 1949.\n1. Deputy U.S. Marshal Paul HERRING, Kodiak, Alaska, reported to the Intelligence Officer on 11 April 1949 that he observed a celestial manifestation crossing the sky above the U.S. Naval Operating Base, Kodiak, Alaska, 8 April 1949 at approximately 2030 hours. According to Mr. HERRING, he saw a flaming greenish-blue object plummet across the sky at an altitude of 2,500 feet at an estimated speed of 1,500 miles per hour. This disturbance, stated Mr. HERRING, was first observed above Anton Larson Bay, (See Enclosure (A)), moving from West to East on a course that approximately paralleled the East-West runways of the U.S. Naval Air Station, Kodiak, Alaska, and was visible for approximately 15 seconds when the flame disappeared in the vicinity of Puffin Island, Chiniak Bay. In the opinion of Mr. HERRING, the object was not a meteor as it was too large and there were no sparks which are generally observed associated with such phenomena. He stated that his first impression was that it was either a jet fighter or that an aircraft was on fire. This opinion was dissipated when he\nTHIS REPORT CONSISTS OF TWO (2) PAGES.\nAAC-1365"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDIO-17ND, Serial 13-49 23 April 1949\n\nSubject: US/ALASKA - Meteorological Phenomena - Luminous Energy\n\ncalled the Naval Air Base and learned there were no aircraft of any description in the air in the vicinity of the Naval Air Station.\n\n2. Lieutenant Commander D. SHEPARD, USN, Operations Officer, U.S. Naval Operating Base, Kodiak, Alaska, reported that while standing near the NOB Post Office he had observed \"a strange object streaking across the sky, near Old Woman Mountain\", on 8 April 1949 at approximately 2040 hours. Lieutenant Commander SHEPARD described the object as a reddish ball of fire approximately two (2) feet in diameter traveling from West to East at an estimated 2,500 feet altitude. \"The object was a brilliant color, without a tail, traveling with a flat trajectory of decline between 21 and 20 degrees. It seemed to disintegrate over Chiniak Bay\" was Lieutenant Commander SHEPARD's report of his observation. No opinion as to the nature of the object was advanced by Lieutenant Commander SHEPARD.\n\n3. Lawrence B. SHAW, taxicab driver, Arrow Cab, Kodiak, Alaska, stated that he was enroute from the Enlisted Mens Club to the Administration Building on 8 April 1949, when he saw a strange bright blue object streak across the sky at approximately 2035 hours. To SHAW, the object appeared to be about 1-1/2 feet in diameter trailed by a three (3) foot streamer which was \"pinkish in shading\". This object, stated SHAW, appeared in the sky over Old Woman Mountain traveling on a West to East course at an estimated altitude of 2,500 feet. It was losing altitude at an estimated 25 degrees and, if it continued on it's course, it would have struck Chiniak Bay off Nyman Peninsula. To SHAW, the object appeared to disintegrate as bright particles flew from the object as it passed beyond Nyman Peninsula. SHAW was of the firm opinion that the object he saw was not a meteor or shooting star which he has seen on numerous occasions.\n\n4. Paul KREUGER, Bus Driver, U.S. Naval Operating Base, Kodiak, Alaska, reported that he was driving his bus on 8 April 1949, when at 2045 hours, he observed a strange greenish-blue object flash across the sky from the vicinity of Old Woman Mountain to Nyman Peninsula (West to East direction). KREUGER described the object as being 1-1/2 feet in diameter and approximately 10 feet long. He stated the object was approximately 500 feet high as it passed over hangar #3 of the Air Station and it would have landed in Chiniak Bay off Nyman Peninsula but it faded from his view when it passed over the Peninsula. \"It had the appearance of a large greenish tracer shell\", stated KREUGER.\n\n5. U.S. Navy Weather Central, U.S. Naval Operating Base, Kodiak, Alaska, reported the weather for 8 April 1949 at 2000 hours as follows:\n\nCeiling: 3,000 feet, scattered clouds, 3/10 coverage.\nVisibility: 15 miles.\nWind: North-Northwest, 15 knots.\nTemperature: 27 degrees.\n\n6. No emission of noise by the object was reported by the observers.\n\nCOMMENT:\n\nAs the above statements are approximately the same in position, altitude, course and time of the luminous manifestation, it's existence has been evaluated as probable. However, as the shape, size and color of the object have been variously described and as unsuccessful efforts have been made to determine the nature of the phenomena with no further information available, no valuation of the nature of the atmospheric disturbance has been made.\n\n66320 -2-\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCARSWELL FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nCarswell Air Force Base\nFort Worth, Texas MDG:lvb\n\nFWH 319.1 14 April 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Report of Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio\n\nAttention: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. In compliance with FS Regulation 200-4, subject \"Unidentified Flying Objects\" dated 2 November 1948, in reference to letter, Headquarters, USAF, subject: \"Reporting of Information on 'Flying Discs,'\", dated 6 February 1948, the following report is submitted.\n\n2. An unidentified flying object was seen over Fort Worth, Texas, on 13 April 1949, at approximately 2100, by 1st Lt Robert A. Francis, who called it to the attention of Captain Stanley Borowski. Both officers are assigned to the Carswell Flight Service Center, Carswell Air Force Base, Fort Worth, Texas.\n\n3. Subject officers had just returned from a local flight and were standing by their aircraft on the flight line. The weather at time object was sighted reported by Carswell Air Force Base was clear and visibility of eight miles. No photographs are available. Object was round and in the shape of a ball, very silver in color. It was traveling at a tremendous rate of speed, estimated to be over 1000 miles per hour, altitude was very hard to judge and cannot be estimated correctly; however, object seemed to be clearly visible. Lieutenant Francis saw the object appear on the horizon in the north northwest direction, it seemed to fly horizontally in the direction of south southeast. It did not appear to burn out, but suddenly disappeared. No sound was heard. The exhaust trail seemed to be approximately three times the size of the object and also was silver in color. The exhaust consisted of silver streaks and star shaped figures. The object definitely did not appear to be a jet or meteor. Its speed was far in excess of any jet speed witnessed by officers. The entire sighting took place in a matter of a few seconds. A check of the Carswell Flight Service flight following racks showed no jet aircraft flying in this area at time object was sighted.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING OFFICER:\n\nCC: Hq FS, Attn A-2\nCC: C, MATS, Attn: Chief, Intelligence Section\nC/S USAF, W25,D.C., Attn: Director of Intelligence\n\nM. D. GENTRY\nCaptain, USAF\nAdjutant\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nMILITARY AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE\n\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGES\n\nCR NBR 13/26\nDTG 2516452\nPRECEDENCE ROUTINE\n\nFROM: NBC FT PEPPERREL ST JOHNS, NFLD\n\nTO: HQ MATS\nAMC, WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB, OHIO\nHQ USAF (ATTN CHIEF INTELLIGENCE DIV CMA MATS)\n(ATTN MCIAXO-3) (DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE)\n\nREF NBR: EN694\n\nREF MSG FROM ONE TWO TWO SEVEN AB GP GOOSE BAY CMA LAB DATED TWO ONE ONE NINE THREE ZERO ZEBRA FEB FOUR NINE PD INCIDENT REPORT NOT IN PURVIEW OF USAF AIR INTELL REQUIREMENTS MEMORANDUM NUMBER FOUR DATED ONE FIVE FEN FOUR NINE THEREFORE WRITTEN REPORT MENTIONED IN GOOSE BAY MESSAGE AS FORTHCOMING NOT BEING SUBMITTED\n\nACTION COPY\nASSIGNED TO PL/INT\nInformation copies were distributed to\n\nSECRET\nParaphrase not required. Handle as ____________correspondence per paragraphs 9a(1) and 9Da(4), AR 380-5, 15 August 1948.\n\nUNDERLINED GARBLE WILL BE SERVICED IF DESIRED?\nCX 1 OF 2 ___\n\nMATS CM-IN X-0266 SECRET\nForm Hq-AG-54 (28 June 1948)"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS\nMILITARY AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE\n\nSECRET\n\nCR NBR 05/23\nCT\nDTG 221850Z\nPRECEDENCE PRIORITY\n\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGES\n\nFROM: NFLD BASE COMD FT PEPPERRELL NFLD\nTO : HQ MATS - ATTN INTELLIGENCE DIV\n\nREF NBR: EN 676\n\nPRIORITY\n\nrefers to X 0274 Fet\nGB 211930 Fet\nGB 192130 March\n\nSCOPE OF POSSIBILITIES PREVENT PROPER EVALUATION OF GOOSE BAY RADIOS DTG TWO ONE ONE NINE THREE ZERO ZEBRA FEB AND DTG ONE NINE TWO ONE THREE ZERO ZEBRA MAR CMA INFO COPIES OF WHICH WERE ADDRESSED YOUR HQ PD INFORMATION AVAILABLE AT THIS HQ INDICATES REPORTED FLIGHTS DID NOT ORIGINATE OR TERMINATE IN THIS COMD AREA PD REPORTS INDICATE ACTIVITY REPORTED IN GREENLAND LAST SUMMER MAY HAVE BEEN EXTENDED OR SHIFTED TO NORTH AMERICAN CONTINENT PD REQUEST YOUR HQ CHECK APPROPRIATE UNITED STATES AND CANADIAN SOURCES OF FLIGHTS THAT MAY HAVE ENTERED SPECIFIED AREA AT TIMES INDICATED IN REFERENCED MESSAGES CMA EVALUATE INFORMATION AND ADVISE THIS HQ RESULTS\n\nACTION COPY\nASSIGNED TO PL/INT\nInformation copies were distributed to\n\nSECRET\n\nParaphrase not required. Handle as SECRET correspondence per paragraphs 51i and 60a(4), AR 380-5, 15 August 1946.\n\nMarch 23\n\nCY 1 OF CYS\n\nSECRET\n\nMATS CM-IN X-0248\n\nForm Hq-AG-54 (28 June 1948)"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS\nMILITARY AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE\n\nSECRET\n\nCR NBR 02720\nBW\nDTG 192130Z\nPRECEDENCE PRIORITY\n\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGES\n\nFROM: HQ SAC\nTO : HQ AMC\n\nINFO: HQ USAF, HQ MATS, HQ NFLD BASE COMD, DIRECTORATE OF INTEL HQ USAF CMA CHIEF OF INTELL DIV MATS AND ABLE CHARLIE SLANT SUGAR INTELL NBC.\n\nREF NBR:\n\nREF PROJ SIGN PD MSG FROM CO DET XTAL ONE CMA FORT CHIMO CMA QUEBEC CMA STATED UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT SIGHTED THAT STATION ONE NINE FIVE ZERO ZERO ZEBRA ONE EIGHT MARCH FOUR NINE CMA OBJECT DISPLAYED RED LIGHT SAME AS ACFT CMA APPROX ONE ZERO THOUSAND FEET ALT PD ESTIMATED SPEED TWO HUNDRED MILES PER HOUR PD DIRECTION OF FLIGHT WAS WEST TO EAST CMA REMAINED IN SIGHT FOR APPROX THREE MINUTES PD NO SOUND WAS HEARD PD OBJECT SIGHTED BY FOUR RELIABLE WITNESSES PD ADDITIONAL INFO WILL BE FURNISHED UPON COMPLETION OF INVESTIGATION FROM THIS STATION.\n\nACTION COPY\nASSIGNED TO PL/INT\nInformation copies were distributed to LOG\n\nParaphrase not required. Handle as SECRET correspondence per paragraphs 51i and 60a(4), AR 380-5, 15 August 1946.\n\nMarch 20\n\nCY 1 OF 2 CYS\n\nSECRET\n\nMATS CM-IN X-0227\n\nForm Hq-AG-54 (28 June 1948)"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nSTAFF MESSAGE CENTER\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGE\n\n23 Feb\nMATS\n\nSECRET\nPRIORITY\n\nPARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED\n\nFrom: CO Airfield Goose Bay Labrador\n\nTo : COMGENAMC Wright Patterson AFB Dayton Ohio\n\nInfo: CSUSAF attn Dir of Intell Wash DC; COMMATS attn Chief Intell Div MATS Andrews AFB Md; CO NBC attn AC/S Intell Ft Pepperrell Nfld\n\nDTG : 211930Z 21 February 1949\n\nReport from Crystal 1, Fort Chimo, Quebec, states that on 19 Feb 1949 at about 1840 hours, a sound appearing to be slow running aircraft engines was heard from a general southwesterly direction from the Base at a very high altitude. The sound remained within hearing distance for about 15 to 20 minutes, during which no objects or lights were observed. Check has been made to establish the fact that there were no Canadian or USAF planes from Goose Bay in the vicinity at that time. Written report will follow.\n\nACTION COPY\nASSIGNED TO PL/INT (2)\nInformation copies were distributed to\n\nACTION: AF\nINFO : ID, PO\n\nCM IN 5140 (22 Feb 49) DTG 211930Z mcs/D RC 23/22\n\nSECRET\n\nCopy No.\n\nTHE MAKING OF AN EXACT COPY OF THIS MESSAGE IS FORBIDDEN\n\n15"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nMARCH FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nMarch Air Force Base, California\n\nDMZ 360.112 1 March 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Information of Unidentified Flying Object.\n\nTO: Commanding General,\nAir Materiel Command,\nWright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.\nATTENTION: MCIAXO-3.\n\n1. In accordance with letter, Headquarters, USAF, subject: \"Reporting of Information on Flying Discs,\" dated 6 February 1948 and Flight Service Regulation 200-4, the following information of unidentified flying object is forwarded as received by March Flight Service Center from Air Route Traffic Control, Los Angeles.\n\na. 1st Lt. John T. Smith, pilot of Air Force 7346, T-11 on a round robin flight from Fresno Air Terminal, California to Los Angeles and return, reported that he was circled by a jet propelled blimp while over Sandberg Pass, about 40 miles south of Bakersfield, California at 2030 P, 28 February 1949. The speed of the object was estimated at 500 MPH, flying at an altitude of nine thousand feet. The object then disappeared on a heading of 180°.\n\nb. Weather reported for Sandberg Pass at 2030 P was twenty thousand feet thin scattered clouds, visibility 10 miles, temperature 36, dew point 34, wind south 7, altimeter 3007. Remarks to the sequence weather were: Visibility west 1 mile, fog ceiling and visibility variable due to scattered stratas drifting over station. Conditions radically changing.\n\nc. No other information of object's size, shape, speed, or color, is available.\n\nRALPH A. REEVE,\nLt. Colonel, USAF,\nCommanding.\n\nInformation Copies to:\nChief of Staff, USAF, Washington 25, D.C.\nAttn. Director of Intelligence\nCommander, MATS, Washington 25,D.C.\nAttn: Intelligence Division\nCO, Flight Service, Washington 25, D.C.\nAttn: A-2\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MFSC\nMARCH AIR FORCE BASE\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n1. [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible].\n\n2. [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible].\n\n3. [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MFSC MARCH AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA\t\tUNCLASSIFIED\n\nCOMMANDER, MATS\nWASH DC\t\t\t\t\t\tROUTINE\nATTN: STAT CONTROL SECTION\t\t\t\tX\n\nCO FLIGHT SERVICE WASH DC\n\nDHZ CQQ4 C PD RCS AF-SC-A1A AS OF 28 FEB 49 SUBMITTED QIN\n\nA B C D E F G H I K L M N P Q R\nB-25J C1 1 672 576 294 168 0 126 56 11 1 12 68 7513 0\nC-47B C1 1 672 366 306 72 0 234 80 22 3 28 57 6846 0\nC-45F C1 2 1176 560 816 672 0 144 69 21 2 16 62 2636 0\nTOTAL C1 4 2520 1104 1416 912 0 504 205 54 6 56 187 17047 0\n\nPD END\n\nREEVE CO MFSC\n\n\n\n\n\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nLT COL R A REEVE EXT 4247 1300 02 MAR 49\t\t\t\t1 1"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRANSMITTED\n\nMAR 2 1 16 PM '49\nMARCH\nFLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible] [illegible]\n\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible]"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n17 February 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Project \"Sign\"\n\nTO : Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\n\nATTN: Chief, Intelligence Department\n\n1. On page 46 of the (British) Inter-Services Aircraft Recognition Journal for November 1948 (Vol 3 No. 4) appears a photograph bearing the following caption:\n\n\"Flying Saucer, original, U.S. Navy, for the use of. The Chance-Vought V-173 or XF5U-1 was designed for speed range from zero to 550 m.p.h. -- ideal for carrier work. There is no sign of it in service yet.\"\n\n2. Reference publication is unclassified, however its distribution is limited to personnel of the British Armed Forces. No copies at present are available in this office.\n\n3. Outline tracing of the above photo is attached.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nIncl\n[REDACTED] as described above.\n\nSTANLEY Q. WENTZ\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Intelligence Division\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chance-Vought V-173 or XF5U-1\n\nU.S.Navy\n\nIncl. 1"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n13 Feb.\nHEADQUARTERS\nMILITARY AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE\nCR NBR 3/12\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGES\nDTG 111800Z\nPRECEDENCE PRIORITY\nFROM: FT PEPPERRELL, NFLD\nTO : CG AMC-ATTN MCIAXO DASH THREE\nINFO: CS USAF\nHQ MATS\nATTN INTELLIGENCE DIVISION\nREF NBR: CITE XRAY CHARLIE ZERO ONE EIGHT ACTION\nWILLIAM WELTS OF FEEPERS CROSSING AND JIM BURNES OF CURLING EAST\nNEWFOUNDLAND OBSERVED BURNING OBJECT AT ZERO SIX FIVE FIVE LOCAL\nTIME ONE ONE FEBRUARY FOUR NINE TRAVELING SOUTHEAST THROUGH AIR AT\nALTITUDE ONE THOUSAND FEET WHILE WAITING FOR BUS PD BUS DRIVER ALSO\nSAW IT PD VISIBILITY UNLIMITED PD OBJECT CAME UP OVER HORIZON AND\nDISAPPEARED BEHIND TWO THOUSAND FOOT HILL PD WHETHER IT LANDED\nUNKNOWN PD VISIBLE FROM FIVE TO ONE ZERO MINUTES PD GLOWING WHEN\nLIGHTED CMA FADED CMA THEN PUT ON SECOND BURST AT WHICH TIME\nFLAMING EXHAUST ESTIMATED TO BE TWO HUNDRED YARDS LONG PD NO SOUND\nPD WELLS WAS ONLY WITNESS INTERVIEWED PD CONSIDERED RELIABLE BY POLICE\nCMA BUT IS INARTUCULATE PD REPORTED OCCURANCE BECAUSE HE THOUGHT IT\nCOULD BE AIRCRAFT IN TROUBLE\nParaphrase not required. Handle as SECRET correspondence per paragraphs 51i and 60a(4), AR 380-5, 15 August 1946.\nMATS CM-IN X-0165\nForm HQ-AG-54 (28 June 1948)"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nPRIORITY\nU.S.A.F. MILITARY AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE\nFEB 13 20 14 1949\nMATS MESSAGE CENTER\nRECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nHEADQUARTERS\nMILITARY AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE\nCR NBR 58/01\nTRUE DTG 230800Z 240400Z\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGES\nDTG\nPRECEDENCE PRIORITY\nSR\nFROM: FT PEPPERREL NFLD CRYPTO\nTO : CG MAMA\nINFO: CS USAF\nHQ MATS\nREF NBR: XRAY CHARLIE ZERO TWO ZERO\nATTN INTEL\nREOURAD XRAY CHARLIE ZERO ONE EIGHT DTD ONE ZERO FEB FOUR NINE\nOBSERVATION WAS MADE FROM CURTING FOUR EIGHT DEGREES FIVE EIGHT\nNORTH FIVE EIGHT DEGREES WEST\nACTION COPY\nASSIGNED TO DPLIINT\nInformation copies were distributed to\nPRIORITY\nSECRET correspondence\nParaphrase not required. Handle as correspondence per paragraphs 51i and 60a(4), AR 380-5, 15 August 1946.\nSECRET\nCY 1 OF 2 CYS\nMATS CM-IN X-0024\nForm HQ-AG-54 (28 June 1948)"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nPRIORITY\nU.S.A.F. MILITARY AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE\nMAR 1 21 26 1949\nMATS MESSAGE CENTER\nRECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nHEADQUARTERS 6TH WEATHER SQUADRON\nAlbrook Air Force Base\nCanal Zone\nFlying discs\n17 February 1949\n322\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Aerial Objects Vicinity of San Andres Islands, Caribbean Sea\nTO: Commanding General\nMilitary Air Transport Service\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTENTION: AC/S, A-2\n1. In accordance with Restricted letter, Headquarters, 2108th Air Weather Group, subject: Report on Information on \"Flying Discs\", dated 24 March 1948, the following report is submitted.\n2. At 2030 hours on 8 February 1949, Captain McBride of the S. S. Antigua, A United Fruit vessel, berthed at Cristobal pier area, Canal Zone, was interviewed by Intelligence personnel, Caribbean Air Command, concerning three aerial objects sighted by officers of his ship on voyage to Canal Zone from New Orleans, Louisiana.\n3. Captain McBride stated that the first object, which appeared to be a disc, was sighted at 1630 on 6 February 1949 at 12 degrees 30 minutes north latitude, 81 degrees 10 minutes west latitude, in the close vicinity of the San Andres Islands. The S. S. Antigua's course was 152 degrees at 16 knots. When sighted, the object was at an altitude of 60 degrees from the horizon as determined by the ship's sextant in the direction of 120 degrees. As it passes directly over the ship, several officers described it as a round, silver-colored sphere. Although McBride had difficulty in determining its height, he estimated the diameter as 12 to 14 inches. As it passed overhead, bearing 310 degrees, it changed color from silver to yellow to red and went out of sight in the dusk at an altitude of 22 degrees. The wind at the time was estimated at force four, approximately 29.\n4. At 1700 on the same date two more objects were sighted, one off the port bow at an altitude between 50 and 60 degrees, and the other off the starboard bow bearing 201 degrees at an altitude of 47 degrees. Both disappeared abeam in the dusk. None showed any luminousity or motivating power.\n5. The circumstances described suggest a possibility that these objects are some type of weather balloons. A study made by this headquarters of the prevailing winds at all altitudes during the period 4-6 February 1949 virtually eliminate any possibility of a radiosonde instrument being the object sighted. The only release point which might have\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\nHeadquarters Air Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\n[illegible]\n\nRef:\n\nSubj: [illegible] Report of Unidentified Flying Objects [illegible]\n\nTo: Commanding General\nMilitary Air Transport Service\nWashington, D.C.\nAttn: [illegible]\n\n1. In accordance with the requirements of Air Force Regulation [illegible], subject report is submitted as indicated in Section IV of this report.\n\n2. At 0300 hours on 7 February 1949, a radar operator at the Caribbean Air Command reported an unidentified flying object of unknown configuration, traveling at an estimated speed of [illegible] knots, in the vicinity of the San Andres Islands. Visual observation was made by [illegible] personnel. The object was seen to be [illegible] and [illegible] in color, and disappeared from view after approximately [illegible] minutes.\n\n3. Investigation was initiated immediately. Weather conditions at the time were [illegible], with visibility [illegible] miles. No aircraft were known to be operating in the area.\n\n4. [illegible] the Air Materiel Command has been [illegible] of this report."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"resulted in a balloon being in the area of the San Andres Islands is that located at Managua, Nicaragua. However, since no objects were seen to be attached to the discs, it seems improbable that a radiosonde train might have been involved. There is a possibility that a balloon broke free prior to release and subsequently developed a leak which caused it to drift into the area of the sighting. However, none of these possibilities account for the sighting of three objects within a thirty minute period.\n\n6. On 7 February 1949 two Russian 300-ton sloops (Omar and Blesk) arrived at Colon, Republic of Panama, from St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, enroute to Valdivostok via Honolulu, Hawaii. The backtrack computation of wind and course and point of sighting lend a possibility that the objects were in free flight after release from these ships which followed a direct course from St Thomas to Colon. These two vessels are presently awaiting repairs at Colon. Two other vessels of the same type are presently in St Thomas undergoing repairs. Any further developments will be reported promptly.\n\n7. The above report has already been submitted to Headquarters Air Materiel Command and Headquarters United States Air Force by the Caribbean Air Command.\n\nInfo cys to:\nChief, AWS\nCO, 2108th Air Wea Gp\n\nGEORGE W MOXON\nMajor, USAF\nCommanding\n\nRESTRICTED\n2"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nresulted into a [illegible] which is that of a balloon [illegible] in the area of [illegible]. However, since no objects were seen to be attached to the discs, it seems improbable that a radiosonde train might have been involved. [illegible] a balloon broke free prior to release and subsequently developed a leak which caused it to drift into the area of the sighting. However, none of these possibilities account for the sighting of three objects within a thirty minute period.\n\n6. On 7 February 1949 two Russian 300-ton sloops (Omar and Blesk) arrived at Colon, Republic of Panama, from St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, enroute to Valdivostok via Honolulu, Hawaii. The backtrack computation of wind and course and point of sighting lend a possibility that the objects were in free flight after release from these ships which followed a direct course from St Thomas to Colon. These two vessels are presently awaiting repairs at Colon. Two other vessels of the same type are presently in St Thomas undergoing repairs. Any further developments will be reported promptly.\n\n7. The above report has already been submitted to Headquarters Air Materiel Command and Headquarters United States Air Force by the Caribbean Air Command.\n\nGEORGE W MOXON\nMajor, USAF\nCommanding\n\nInfo cys to:\nChief, AWS\nCO, 2108th Air Wea Gp\n\n[illegible]\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nDAYTON, OHIO\n\nCLH/deg\n\n7 February 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Report of Unidentified Flying Object\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio\nATTN: MCIAXO-3\n\nThe following report of an unidentified flying object is submitted in compliance with Flight Service Regulation 200-4.\n\na. LOCATION AND TIME OF SIGHTING: Godman AFB, Ft Knox, Kentucky, 0250E, 7 February 1949.\n\nb. WEATHER AT THE TIME:\n(1) 0230E Weather: Clear 10 miles visibility, 31.63 MB, temperature 31, dew point 29, wind NNW at 7, Kolzman Setting 29.99.\n(2) 0330E Weather: Clear 10 miles visibility, 31.69 MB, temperature 29, dew point 26, wind NW at 4, Kolzman Setting 30.01.\n\nc. NAMES, OCCUPATIONS, AND ADDRESSES OF WITNESSES:\n(1) Sgt Donald E. Ledbetter, Tower Operator, Ft Knox, Kentucky.\n(2) PFC Richard G. Dumphy, Weather Observer, Ft Knox, Kentucky.\n(3) PFC Richard E. Peterman, Weather Observer, Ft Knox, Kentucky.\n(4) Cpl Charles L. Rogers, occupation unknown, Ft Knox, Kentucky.\n\nd. PHOTOGRAPHS OF OBJECTS, IF AVAILABLE: None available.\n\ne. SKETCHES OF OBJECT'S CONFIGURATION: None.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSubject: Report of Unidentified Flying Object\n\n7 Feb 49\n\nf. OBJECT SIGHTED:\n(1) NUMBER: One.\n(2) SHAPE: No report.\n(3) SIZE: No report.\n(4) COLOR: Bright green, yellow, red.\n(5) SPEED: Unknown.\n(6) HEADING: SW from Godman Field.\n(7) MANEUVERABILITY: Object appeared to be rotating.\n(8) ALTITUDE: Horizontal angle 242.5°, vertical angle 03.6°.\n(9) SOUND: No report.\n(10) EXHAUST TRAIL OR NOT: None.\n\ng. GENERAL REMARKS:\n(1) At 0250E, bright object sighted SW of Ft Knox, Kentucky by weather observers. Traced on Theodolite. Object appeared to be rotating with green, yellow and red colors. The object was getting dimmer as time passed.\n(2) At 0310E, object disappeared in SW completely after a series of bright flashes.\n\nCopy Furnished:\n1 - Chief of Staff, USAF, ATTN: Director of Intelligence\n1 - Commander MATS, ATTN: Chief Intelligence Divn\n1 - CO Flight Service, ATTN: A-2\n\nCLARK L. MILLER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nCommanding\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CCNFIDENTIAL\nPRIORITY\t\tPARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED\n\nFrom: COMGENAMC Wright-Patterson AFB Ohio cite COWPPFSC\n\nTo: CO Flight Service Wash DC\n\nNr: AT-542\t\t\t\t\t\t7 February 1949\n\nUnidentified flying object report.\n\nLocation and time of sighting:Godman AFB Ft Knox Ky 7 Feb 1949 0250 eastern. Weather at the time: 0230 eastern weather clear 10 miles visibility 1016.3 MB, temp 31, dew point 29, wind west north west at 7, Kolzman setting 29.99. 0330 eastern weather: clear 10 miles visibility 1016.9 MB, temp 29, dew point 26, wing north west at 4, Kolzman setting 30.01.\n\nNames occupations and addresses of witnesses: Sgt Donald E Ledbetter Tower Operator Fort Knox Ky, PFC Richard G Dumphy Weather Observer Fort Knox Ky, PFC Richard E Peterman Weather Observer Fort Knox Ky, Cpl Charles L Rogers occupation unknown Fort Knox Ky.\n\nPhotographs of objects if available: none available. Sketches of objects configuration: none. Object sighted: number: 1. Shape: no report, size: no report, color: bright green yellow red, speed: unknown, heading: south west from Godman Field, maneuverability: object appeared to be rotating, attitude, horizontal angle 242.5 degrees, vertical angle 03.6 degrees. Sound: no report, exhaust trail or not: none. General remarks: at 0250 eastern bright object sighted s west of Fort Knox Ky by weather observers. Traced on Theodolite. Object appeared to be rotating with green, yellow and red colors. The object were dimmer as time passed. At 0310 eastern object disappeared in south west completely after a series of bright flashes.\n\nACTION: AF\n\nINFO : ID, PO\n\nCM IN 1714\t\t(8 Feb 49)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nREPORT ON AN ABNORMAL PHENOMENON"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS\n2143D AIR WEATHER WING\nAPO 925\n\nFEB 3 1949\n\n311.5\n\nSUBJECT: Report of Sighting of Unidentified Phenomenon\n\nTO : Commanding General\nFar East Air Forces\nAPO 925\nATTN: AC/S, A-2\n\n1. In accordance with the provisions of letter, Headquarters, United States Air Force, subject: \"Reporting of Information on 'Flying Discs'\", 26 February 1948, the following information is forwarded:\n\na. Inclosures 1, 2 and 3 are reports received by the Japanese Central Meteorological Observatory in Tokyo. The observations indicated in these reports were taken by Japanese Weather personnel at the respective stations.\n\nb. Inclosure 4 indicates the location of the stations which observed the object and it's probable path and point of explosion or disappearance.\n\nc. Inclosures 5 and 6 are surface synoptic charts showing the weather existing over Japan at 0600Z and 1200Z on 25 January, which times are approximately four and one half (4½) hours before and one and one half (1½) hour after the unidentified object was sighted.\n\nd. No information has been received other than that reported by the Japanese.\n\n6 Incls:\n1. Rpt - Fukushima\n2. Rpt - Iida, Suwa and Nagano\n3. Rpt - Takayama and Gifu\n4. Chart - Observation and Path\n5. Wx Chart- 250600Z\n6. Wx Chart- 251200Z\n\ncc: Commanding General\nMilitary Air Transport Service\nWashington 25, D.C.\nATTN: Chief, Intelligence Div.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT ON AN ABNORMAL PHENOMENON\n\nJan. 28, 1949.\nCMO., Tokyo\n\nA telegram was received from the Fukushima Weather Station (37°45'N, 140°28'E) stating as follows:\n\nAt about 7.30 p.m., a glow pale in colour was seen flying from northwest toward southeast, which fell with a roar like thunder. The spot of descent seems to be Nakagori Village, Tamura County to the east of Koriyama (37°24'N, 140°23'E). Probably, it was a meteor. The detailed state is now under investigation.\n\nInc1 1"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ADDITIONAL REPORT ON THE GLOW PHENOMENON ON 25TH\n\nJan. 27th, 1949.\nCMO., Tokyo\n\nIn addition to the previous report on the glow from the Takayama Weather Station, we have received reports also from the other stations on the same phenomenon, stating as follows:\n\n1. Iida Weather Station.\nLast night, we have observed in this district a phenomenon, probably be a fall of meteor. The following is the report for it.\n\nAt Iida, at 19h 46m 30s, a pale glow was observed in the direction of Northeast at an altitude of 35° above the horizon, which moved almost horizontally through north toward west and then disappeared. This glow was as great as one and a half of the moon in diameter with considerable brightness. At about 19h 50m, a heavy sound was heard and doors trembled. This phenomenon have been observed in many places in the district of this station, of which report will be made after investigation.\n\n2. Suwa Weather Station.\nAt 19h 50m on 25th, a pale glow like meteor with a sound was observed at Suwa. This glow appeared in a distance of a few degree to the north-north-east of Betelguese in the Orion Constellation and moved almost to southeast, attaining its maximum brightness at an altitude of about 60° above horizon. It shined with palish white colour, the intensity of which was such that objects on the ground near the observer were clearly discernible for a moment illuminated by it. Thereafter, it became yellowish in colour, then yellowish red passing a point in the southwest and at an altitude of about 40°, and finally disappeared. The time elapsed for the above was 3 or 4 seconds. About 1 minute thereafter, a sound resembling to a distant thunder was heard, which continued for about 15 seconds.\n\n3. Nagano Weather Station.\nAt about 19h 50m on January 25th, a phenomenon, probably be a meteor, with a sound like that of explosion was observed in many places near this station. According to the observation taken by Yasuo Miyamoto, a member of this station, a glow appeared in the direction of east-south-east and at a point of medium altitude above horizon, which moved sending out palish white light toward a point in the direction of west-south-west, where it disappeared below the horizon. This glow continued about 5 minutes. About 3 minutes thereafter, a sound like that of explosion was heard in the direction of west-south-west.\n\nInc1 2"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT OF AN ABNORMAL PHENOMENON\n\nJan. 26, 1949.\nCMO., Tokyo.\n\nA telegram was received from the Takayama Weather Station\n(36°09'N, 137°15'E) stating as follows:\n\nAt about 7.40 p.m. on 25th, a remarkable glow was experienced\nto the southeast of this station. This glow moved southwest-\nwards and then disappeared followed by a sound like thunder\nafter a few minutes. This sound was rather loud in the vicinity\nof Osaka Town near this station. According to a report from\nMiya Village, the glow appeared there almost overhead and, a\nfew minutes later, a sound resembling to thunder was heard\nfrom the south. Summing up the reports by eye-witnesses, this\nphenomenon might be the explosion of a meteor.\n\nAlso at Gifu, a glow was seen to the north-north-east at\nabout the same instance as above, while in the Nagoya District\nCentral Meteorological Observatory, no such a phenomenon was\nobserved."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nSECRET\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MATS A-2, ATTN: Capt. Hathaway\nDATE: 7 February 1949\nAACS/A-2/CCR/mlb/2113\n\nFROM : AACS A-2\nCOMMENT NO. 1\n\nSUBJECT: Sighting of Unidentified Air Object\n\nFollowing information received from the 1810th AACS Group, Hickam AFB, regarding the sighting of an unidentified air object, is quoted for your information:\n\n\"ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO CHECK CHARLIE FIVE FOUR SUSPECTED OF RELEASING SIGHTED OBJECT BUT NO CHARLIE FIVE FOUR CONTACTED OR IN AREA AT ONE FOUR ZERO SEVEN LOCAL TIME PD HOWEVER THERE WERE TWO ROGER FIVE DOGS IN AREA WHICH IS NAVAL DESIGNATION FOR CHARLIE FIVE FOUR PD ONE LANDED AT ONE FIVE ZERO SIX BEARING NUMBER ZERO EIGHT SEVEN SEVEN AND TAKE OFF HAD BEEN FROM EWA MARINE BASE PD NOT LIKELY IN THE AREA AT ONE FOUR ZERO SEVEN PD SECOND ROGER FIVE DOG LANDED AT ONE FIVE FOUR EIGHT PD NUMBER SIX FOUR EIGHT SIX PD ALSO DEPARTED FROM EWA AND NOT LIKELY IN AREA PD ONLY OTHER CONTACT WAS CHARLIE FIVE FOUR AT ZERO NINE ZERO NINE LOCAL TIME AND WAS TRANS-PAC SHIP DEPARTING FOR JOHNSTON ISLAND PD IN VIEW OF LARGE NUMBER OF AIR FIELDS IN THIS AREA IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT OTHER CONTACTS WITH OTHER TOWERS WERE MADE AT THE TIME PD HOWEVER HICKAM CONTACTS DO NOT REVEAL ANY FURTHER INFO.\"\n\nERNEST S. MOON\nColonel, USAF\nAssistant Chief of Staff\nIntelligence & Security\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nSECRET\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MATS A-2, ATTN: Capt. Hathaway\n\nFROM : AACS A-2\n\nDATE: 8 february 1949\nAACS/A-2/CCR/mlb/2113\nCOMMENT NO. 1\n\nSUBJECT: Sighting of \"Flying Discs\"\n\nA strong possibility exists that the \"flying disc\" might have been a piece of cardboard, or light metallic substance carried aloft by the funneled air currents over Hickam.\n\nThe nearby cane fields give off a considerable amount of moisture, thereby creating a \"dead space.\" The prevailing winds striking this area are directed upward over the field, and hence could carry inanimate objects up with them.\n\nThen, too, the altitude given could be considerably off, inasmuch as the object sighted was thin. Judging heights of such objects is difficult enough, even if the object were 3 - 4 feet in thickness.\n\nSuggest you check records of Air Weather Service for confirmation of wind peculiarities over Hickam.\n\n2 Incls\n1. Cy ltr, 1810th AACS Gp,\n8 Jan 49, w/2 ind\n2. Cy msg, 71st AACS Gp,\n050330Z Jan\n\nCHARLES C. ROBINSON\nCaptain, USAF\n\nChecked with AWS and found updrafts occur in this area but not of sufficient intensity to induce movement described in correspondence attached.\n\nM.H.\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nSECRET\n\nAIRWAYS AND AIR COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE\nHEADQUARTERS, 1810th AACS GROUP\nAPO 953, c/o PM, San Francisco, California\n\nC-1/bc\n\nAACS 350.09 8 January 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Sighting of \"Flying Disc\"\n\nTHRU: Commanding Officer\n1808th AACS Wing\nAPO 925, c/o PM\nSan Francisco, California\nATTN: A-2\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright Patterson AFB\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. In compliance with directives received from higher headquarters, forwarded herewith is complete information as received from a witness who viewed an object presumed to be a \"flying disc\" over Hickam Field. This object was first seen by Capt. Paul R. Stoney, AO 36278, on 4 January 1949 at 1407 local time and went out of sight at approximately 1435 local time. The object was first sighted by Capt. Stoney when it was approximately 25 miles due east of Hickam. There were scattered clouds at 3500 feet (base) and the visibility at the time was approximately 20 miles plus. Capt. Stoney is the Assistant S-2 Officer of the 1810th AACS Group located at Hickam Field, T. H., and is also a twin-engine pilot. No photographs are available due to the fact that Capt. Stoney was not in possession of a camera at the time and had no idea that he would have sufficient time to procure one. In the words of Capt. Stoney, the object appeared to be a large round piece of flat white cardboard, oscillating continually. The object sighted was the only one seen and appeared to approximate the size of an AT-6. Capt. Stoney stated that the object seemed to be extremely white on the underside, while the topside portion of the object seemed to have a dark, non-reflecting surface. The speed of the object was approximated at 85 miles per hour. Capt. Stoney further stated that the object circled the area, making right circles and left circles at approximately"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nSECRET\n\nAACS 350.09\nSubject: Sighting of \"Flying Disc\" 8 January 1949\n\n3000 feet, continually gaining altitude and then suddenly departed, still climbing on a straight course of 25 degrees magnetic. It is the opinion of the witness that the object had limited maneuverability, and that no audible sound emanated from the object. There was no exhaust trail visible.\n\n2. The witness was much impressed by the brilliance of the whiteness of the underside of the object and stated that prior to the disappearance of the object at a distance of 40 to 50 miles from Hickam Field, the object still seemed to give off a blinking whitish reflection and, according to the witness, this blinking seemed to go on and off with decided regularity.\n\n3. Capt. Stoney reported the presence of a C-54 type aircraft in the vicinity of Hickam Field at the time of the initial sighting of the object, and he stated that he was almost convinced that this object was released from or by this C-54 aircraft.\n\n4. Capt. Stoney reported that, at all times and during the departure of the object, the undulation of the object was extremely rhythmical and that this rhythmical cycle was completed approximately once every second.\n\n5. When object ultimately departed on a straight course, it appeared to increase speed and also to increase the angle of climb so that the angle of climb approximated 25 degrees. Witness stated that it was extremely difficult to approximate the rate of speed during departure due to the distance involved and the intermittency of the reflection. Witness stated that it was his opinion that this object was under absolute control at all times and that definite gyrations were being executed. The turns were extremely wide and decisive.\n\n6. The opinion of Capt. Stoney on this subject is considered to be worthy of consideration as this officer is an extremely cool and level-headed person, who is not given to the making of rash statements or using poor judgment.\n\n7. In the event that further information is desired by your headquarters concerning the object as reported, this headquarters will be ready to cooperate in every way possible.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING OFFICER:\n\n/s/ George E. Murray\nGEORGE E. MURRAY\nCaptain, USAF\nSecurity & Intelligence Officer\n\n2\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nSECRET\n\nBASIC: Ltr frm 1810 AACS Gp, 8 Jan 49, subj: \"Sighting of \"Flying Disc\"\"\n\nAACS 350.09 1st Ind Cl/dms\n\nHQ 1808TH AACS WING, APO 925, c/o PM, San Francisco, California,\n17 January 1949\n\nTO: Commanding General, Airways & Air Communications Service, Washington 25, D.C., Attn: A/C of S, A-2\n\nThis written report confirms information contained in Priority radio, DTG 050330Z Jan, of the 1810th AACS Group.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING OFFICER:\n\n/s/ Elton D. Vaughan\nELTON D. VAUGHAN\nMajor, SIG C (USAF)\nA/C of S, A-2\n\n3\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAACS 350.09 (8 Jan 49) 2d Ind\nSUBJECT: Sighting of \"Flying Disc\"\n\nHq Airways and Air Communications Service, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson AF Base, Dayton, Ohio, ATTENTION: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. Foregoing correspondence is forwarded in compliance with Hq USAF Letter, subject: \"Reporting of Information on 'Flying Discs,'\" dated 26 February 1948, as amended by Hq USAF Letter, same subject, dated 26 February 1948.\n\n2. The attention of the 1808th AACS Wing has been invited to the above-referenced Hq USAF Letters, with particular emphasis on the correct routing of information pertaining to the sighting of \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nERNEST S. MOON\nColonel, USAF\nAssistant Chief of Staff\nIntelligence & Security\n\n3\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY SECRET\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nMILITARY AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE\n\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGES\n\nCR NBR 30/05\nDTG 050330Z\nPRECEDENCE PRIORITY\n\nFROM: 71 AACS GP HICKAM AFB\n\nTO : HQ AACS\n\nINFO: 1808 AACS WG, PAC AIR COMD\n\nFOLLOWING REPORT SUBMITTED BY MEMBER OF THIS COMMAND CONCERNING SEEMING FLYING DISC PD OBJECT FIRST CITED BY CAPT STONEY RPT STONEY THIS COMMAND AT ONE FOUR ZERO SEVEN LOCAL TIME ON FOUR JAN FOUR NINE PD THE DISAPPEARANCE OF OBJECT AT ONE FOUR THREE FIVE LOCAL TIME PD OBJECT FIRST CITED SIX MILES DUE EAST OF HICKAM FIELD WITH SCATTERED CLOUDS AT THREE FIVE ZERO ZERO FEET AND VISIBILITY OF TWO ZERO MILES PLUS PD OBJECT APPEARED TO BE LARGE ROUND PIECE OF FLAT WHITE CARDBOARD OSCILATING AND APPROXIMATELY THE SIZE OF ABLE TARE SIX PD EXTREMELY WHITE UNDERSIDE AND DARD NON REFLECTED TOPISDE TRAVELING AT APPROXIMATELY EIGHT FIVE MILES PER HOUR PD CIRCLED AREA APPROXIMATELY ONE FIVE MINUTES GAINING ALTITUDE ALL THE TIME AND FINALLY DEPARTED WHILE STILL CLIMBING ON ABLE STRAIGHT COURSE OF TWO FIVE DEGREES MAGNETIC PD MANEUVERABILITY WAS LIMITED CMA NO AUDIBLE SOUND AND NO EXHAUST TRAIL VISIBLE PD WITNESS BELIEVES OBJECT WAS RELEASED FROM CHARLIE FIVE FOUR AIRCRAFT IN VICINITY OF HICKAM AT TIME OF INITIAL SIGHTING PD OBJECT UNDULATED RHYTHMICALLY COMPLETING CYCLE APPROXIMATELY EVERY SECOND PD OBJECT SEEMED TO BE UNDER CONTROL AT ALL TIMES PD DEFINITE GYRATIONS BEING EXECUTED PD TURNS WERE EXTREMELY WIDE PD NO PHOTOGRAPHS AVAILABLE PD COMPLETE ALSO TO CG AIR MATERIEL COMMAND WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB DAYTON OHIO ATTN MCIAXO RPT MCIAXO\n\nSECRET\n\nAnl 2)"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DASH THREE CUT WRITTEN REPORT BEING FORWARDED THRU CHANNELS\n\nParaphrase not required. Handle as SECRET correspondence per paragraphs 51i and 60a(4), AR 380-5, 15 August 1946."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS, 1501ST AIR TRANSPORT WING\nPACIFIC DIVISION - MILITARY AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE\nFAIRFIELD-SUISUN AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA\n\nD/AC/dwm\n\n19 January 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Project \"SIGN\"\n\nTO: Commanding General\nMilitary Air Transport Service\nAndrews Air Force Base\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Chief, Intelligence Division\n\nIn compliance with instructions from Pacific Division, MATS, there is transmitted herewith a report of an unidentified aerial object. The Essential Elements of Information Form together with three attachments thereto are enclosed. Copies of the report have been forwarded to:\n\nHeadquarters, USAF, Attention: Director of Intelligence\nHeadquarters, Air Materiel Command, Attention: MCIAXO-3\nHeadquarters, Pacific Division, MATS, Attention: Chief, Intelligence Division.\n\n1 Incl\nEEI Form\n\nARTHUR CONRADI JR.\nMajor, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n* STATEMENT *\n\n12 January 1949\n\nAt the request of Chief of Intelligence, the undersigned wishes to describe as accurately as possible his impressions of the brief appearance of an unknown illuminated object which appeared over Fairfield-Suisun AFB at 2015 PST on 3 December 1948. The object first shot into view about 2 miles north of the control tower, flying at a low altitude between 500 and 1000 feet, climbing on a low trajectory, with a speed estimated at something in excess of 400 miles per hour. Immediately after sighting, this observer rushed to the east side of the tower. By this time the object was estimated to have not more than 1500 feet of altitude and its speed had slowed for several seconds to perhaps two-hundred (200) miles per hour. The observer can recall that at this stage the object had a very slight undulating or bouncing motion. When its position oriented with a line between the tower and the air freight terminal, but a slight distance east of the terminal, the object took an almost vertical rise or climb and levelled off again at an estimated three thousand feet. At that time the other control tower operator on duty continued watching the object while this observer telephoned the AACS operations officer residing on the base in hopes he might be able to get a look at it. The other tower operator reported the object almost immediatly afterwards started a fast climb toward the south-southeast and reached about twenty thousand feet, at which point he lost sight of it. The undersigned never saw the object again after going for the telephone.\n\nPertinent information is that the light was clearly seen with the naked eye, brilliant but by no means blinding. In size it was comparable to one of Fairfield-Suisun AFB's high-intensity runway lights. The observer is convinced it was not an aircraft navigation light. The night was clear, and the wind was indicating southwest at 10 miles per hour on tower instruments.\n\nI certify and affirm that the information herein is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and ability.\n\nCERTIFIED TRUE COPY\nARTHUR CONRADI JR\nMajor, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\n\n/s/ Bruce Earlin McFarland\n/t/ Bruce Earlin McFarland\nPFC, USAF\n1901 AACS Squadron\nFairfield-Suisun AFB, Calif.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nBLDGS IN CLUMP OF TREES\n\nOBJECT CAME INTO VIEW AT AN ALT. OF 500-1000 FEET TRAVELLING AT AN ESTIMATED SPEED OVER 400 MPH\n\nOBJECT CLIMBED ON A LOW TRAJECTORY TO 1500 ALT.\n\nOBJECT SLOWED TO AN ESTIMATED 200 MPH\n\nVICINITY MAP\n\nOBJECT CLIMBED TO AN ESTIMATED 3000 FEET AND LEVELED OFF MOMENTARILY THEN STARTED TO CLIMB AGAIN\n\nOBJECT MAINTAINED A FAST CLIMB TO 20,000 FEET\n\nOBJECT LOST FROM VIEW AT AN ESTIMATED 20,000 FEET ALT.\n\nGRAPHIC SCALE\n\nMILITARY CONSTRUCTION FAIRFIELD-SUISUN AIR FORCE BASE NEAR FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA BASIC LAYOUT PLAN\n\nTRACK OF UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECT\nMAJOR-USAF - CHIEF OF INTELLIGENCE - FAIRFIELD-SUISUN AFB\n\nCONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF INFORMATION\n\n(Re Sightings of Unidentified Aerial Objects)\n\nPROJECT \"SIGN\"\n\n1. Date of Sighting:\n\n3 December 1948\n\n2. Time of sighting (Zonal by 24 hr clock)\n\n2015 hours Pacific Standard Time\n\n3. Where sighted:\n\na. Ground:\n\n(1) City, town:\n\nObject was sighted by personnel in the Fairfield-Suisun AFB Control tower.\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town road, intersections, etc.\n\nFairfield-Suisun AFB Control tower is located in the center of the AF Base and 5.5 miles east of the town of Fairfield, California.\n\n(3) From building (story), yard, etc..\n\nPersonnel sighted the object while standing inside the control tower 50 feet above ground level.\n\n(4) Map coordinates (if feasible) showing latitude and longitude:\n\nNorth latitude 38° 16'\nWest Longitude 121° 56'\n\nb. Air\n\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight:\n\nNot applicable\n\n(2) Distance and direction from city or town or known landmark:\n\nNot applicable\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPage 2\nEEI Project \"SIGN\"\n\n(3) Clock position of object from observer's aircraft:\n\nNot applicable\n\n(4) Latitude and longitude:\n\nNot applicable\n\nc. Sea:\n\n(1) Latitude and longitude:\n\nNot applicable\n\n(2) Proximity to land: (Name city, country, etc)\n\nNot applicable\n\n4. Number of objects:\n\na. Formation type (if any) (sketch if possible)\n\nOne object was sighted.\n\n5. Distance of object from observer:\n\na. Laterally or horizontally:\n\nThe object was first sighted at a distance of two miles; it proceeded toward the observer and passed within 500-800 yards of the tower, then climbed out of sight.\n\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon:\n\nApproximately 20° when first sighted, then it climbed out of sight.\n\nc. Altitude:\n\nAltitude was 500 to 1000 feet when first sighted, then it climbed out of sight at approximately 20,000 feet.\n\n6. Time in sight:\n\nApproximately 25 seconds.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPage 3\nEEI Project \"SIGN\"\n\n7. Appearance of object:\n\na. Color:\n\nObject was a colorless white light.\n\nb. Shape (sketch if possible):\n\nRound light 30 inches in diameter.\n\n[sketch: circle labeled 30\" with rays]\n\nc. Apparent construction (translucent):\n\nLooked like a searchlight with the light intensity of a runway light.\n\nd. Size:\n\n(1) Estimated Size:\n\nApproximately 30 inches diameter.\n\n(2) Size as it appeared from observer's view: (Compared to known object)\nAbout the size of a 30\" diameter searchlight.\n\n8. Direction of flight:\n\nNNW to SSE\n\n9. Tactics or maneuvers:\n\na. Vertical ascent or descent, horizontal, oscillating, fluttering evasive, aggressive, erratic, etc.\n\nCame over horizon from altitude of 500 to 1000 feet and when opposite the control tower seemed to slow down then climbed to about 3,000 feet, seemed to hesitate again and then climbed almost vertically out of sight at an altitude estimated to be 20,000 feet. See description contained in statement in paragraph 8 of the General section below.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 4\nFEI Project \"SIGN\"\n10. Evidence of exhaust:\na. Color of smoke:\nNo exhaust was observed.\nb. Length and width:\nNone observed.\nc. Odor (if any):\nNo odor was detected by the observers inside the control tower.\nd. Rate of evaporation:\nNone.\ne. Does trail vary with sound?\n(spurts)\nNo trail observed.\n11. Effect on clouds:\na. Opened path thru clouds:\nNo clouds were present where the object climbed.\nb. Formed cloud or mists:\nNo cloud or mists were formed.\nc. Reflected on cloud:\nNo reflections were observed.\nd. Shown thru cloud:\nNo clouds were between observer and object at any time.\n12. Lights:\na. Reflected or attached:\nThe object itself resembled a light.\nb. Luminous:\nThe object shone with the brightness of a high-intensity runway light."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 5\nEFI Project \"SIGN\"\nc. Blinked on and off in relation to speed:\nObject was a steady light.\n13. Support:\na. Wings:\nNo wings were observed on the object.\nb. Aerodynamic lift of fuselage:\nNo fuselage was observed.\nc. Vertical jet:\nNo jet was observed.\nd. Rotating cylinder or cone:\nNo cylinder or cone was observed.\ne. Aerostatic lift (balloon or dirigible):\nNo aerostatic lift condition was observed.\n14. Propulsion:\na. Propeller or jet:\nNo propeller or jet was observed.\nb. Rotor:\nNo rotor was observed.\nc. Aerodynamic vanes (flapping or oscillating)\n(Watzmaver effect):\nNo aerodynamic vanes were observed.\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings:\nNo exhaust or jet openings were observed.\n15. Control and stability\na. Fins:\nNo fins were observed."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 6\nEEI Project \"SIGN\"\nb. Stabilizers\nNo stabilizers of any kind were observed.\n16. Air Ducts:\na. Slots:\nNo slots were observed.\nb. Duct openings:\nNo duct openings were observed.\n17. Speed-MPH:\nCame over the horizon from NNW at approximately 400 MPH slowed to approximately 200 MPH and then climbed at 400-500 MPH out of sight.\n18. Sound:\na. Continuous whine or buzz:\nNo sound of any kind was heard by the observer.\nb. Roar, whistle, whoosh:\nNo sound was heard.\nc. Intermittent:\nNo sound was heard.\n19. Was any radio antenna to be observed, i.e., (any projections or extensions that might presumably be construed as such):\nNo radio antenna of any description was observed.\n20. Manner of disappearance:\na. Explode:\nThe object did not explode.\n(1) Possibility of fragments:\nNo fragments were observed or could be found from the object.\n(2) Other physical evidence:\nNo other physical evidence of the object could be found."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 7\nFEI Project \"SIGN\"\nb. Faded from view:\nThe object climbed out of sight.\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle:\nThe object climbed out of sight in a clear sky.\nRelative to the Observer\n1. Names of observers:\nJoseph Don Delafayette\nSgt AF 12106504\nHonorably discharged from the service 6 December 1948.\nBruce Earlin McFarland\nPfc AF 16278687\n2. Address:\nDelaFayette\nR.D. 1, Ballston Spa\nNew York\nMcFarland\n1901st AACS Squadron\nFairfield-Suisun AFB, California\n3. Occupation:\nDeLafayette - Unknown\nMcFarland - Control tower operator\n4. Place of business:\na. Employer or employee:\nDeLafayette - Unknown\nMcFarland - USAF\n5. Hobbies:\na. Time engaged in hobby (experience)\nIs observer amateur astronomer, pilot, engineer, etc.\nDeLafayette - Unknown\nMcFarland - Pfc McFarland, prior to military service, was for three years a radio announcer and was well trained as an announcer of sporting events. No other hobbies are engaged in by Pfc McFarland."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 8\nFEI Project \"SIGN\"\n6. Ability to determine:\na. Color:\nBoth observers are required by high physical requirements to know colors.\nb. Speed of moving objects:\nObservers are constantly required to estimate the speed of moving aircraft in the course of their normal duties.\nc. Size at distance:\nObservers are constantly required to estimate the size and distance of objects in the course of their normal duties.\n7. Reliability of observer:\na. Sources:\n(1) Neighbors:\nBoth observers are considered fully reliable, competent airmen by their fellow NCO's.\n(2) Police Dept:\nNo police record on the observers.\n(3) FBI records:\nNo FBI records on the observers.\n(4) Employer:\nAACS officer in charge of the observers consider them high type individuals fully qualified both mentally and physically for control tower duty; they are considered competent, reliable observers psychologically stable.\n8. Notes relative to observer on:\na. Sightings in general:\nBoth observers are considered competent, reliable and psychologically stable."} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPage 9\nEEI Project \"SIGN\"\n\nb. How attention was drawn to objects:\n\n(1) Sound:\n\nNo\n\n(2) Motion:\n\nYes\n\n(3) Glint of light:\n\nYes\n\n9. Witnesses:\n\na. Addresses:\n\nNo other witnesses could be found. The object was in view too short a time to obtain the observations of other personnel.\n\n10. Comments of interrogator re intelligence and character of person interrogated:\n\nBoth observers are considered competent, reliable and psychologically stable. Pfc McFarland has a General Classification Test Schore of 143.\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\nNo radar sightings of the object were made or could be obtained.\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions:\n\n3 December 1948 at 2030 Pacific Standard Time, Fairfield-Suisun Air Force Base, Ceiling 3000 feet scattered 15 miles visibility, 1014.6 millibars, temperature 44°, dewpoint 32° F, wind 10 MPH from the west, Altimeter setting 29.95 inches.\n\n2. Winds aloft report:\n\nWinds aloft sequence for 032315Z December 1948 follows: SUU 21 02312 2513 22809 3109 43213 3016 63017 3019 82920 2923 03022 23017 42823.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPage 10\nEEI Project \"SIGN\"\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time:\n\nNo flying was scheduled or observed in the vicinity of the Fairfield-Suisun Air Force Base at the time of the observation.\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other:\n\nA winds-aloft balloon was released 35-45 minutes prior to the sighting and was lost from view 10 minutes after release.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed (and then presumably departed) for purposes of making comparison of soils:\n\nObject made no apparent contact with the earth and no contacts could be found.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects, check surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make comparisons with other unaffected aircraft,objects, etc.\n\nObject did not come sufficiently near known objects to obtain radioactivity readings.\n\n7. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\n\na. Object:\n\nObject appeared to be a round light 30 inches in diameter.\n\n[diagram of a circle labeled 30\" with radiating lines]\n\nb. Surrounding terrain where object was observed:\n\nAnnotated photographs and diagrams of the Fairfield-Suisun Air Force Base are attached as enclosures 1 and 2 to this report.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPage 11\nEEI Project \"SIGN\"\n\nc. Place where object contacted earth (if this happened):\n\nObject did not contact the earth.\n\nd. Maneuvers:\n\nThe object maneuvered as described in statement contained in enclosure #3 and indicated in enclosures #1 and #2 to this report.\n\ne. Formation (if more than two):\n\nOne object was sighted.\n\n8. Secure signed statement:\n\nStatement attached as enclosure #3 to this report.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible:\n\nNo fragments or other physical evidences of the object were obtained.\n\n[signature] ARTHUR CONRADI JR. Major, USAF Chief of Intelligence\n\n3 Incls.\n1. Photograph\n2. Diagram\n3. Statement\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Chief, Intelligence Division, MATS\nATTN: Capt. Hathaway\nFROM: AACS A-2\n\nDATE: 24 January 1949\nAACS/A-2/CCR/mlb/2113\nCOMMENT NO. 1\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Object\n\n1. The following information is transmitted for such action as you may deem necessary. Source is the 1805th AACS Group, located in Newfoundland; Newfoundland Base Command has already been notified:\n\n\"OBSERVED ONE EIGHT ZERO TWO TWO ZEBRA JAN FOUR NINE WAS UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT FLYING OVER INDIAN HOUSE LAKE CANADA PD BRIGHT LIGHTS WAS EMITTED FROM OBJECT PD LIGHT TRAVELLED EXCEEDINGLY FAST AND WAS ONLY PART SIGHTED CMA NOT OBJECT ITSELF PD SHOOTING STAR OR METEOR WAS DEDUCTION OF INDIAN HOUSE PERSONNEL WHO PASSED FOREGOING INFO TO THIS HQ VIA GOOSEBAY AACS SQUADRON WITH FURTHER STATEMENT THAT OBJECT OR LIGHT WERE NOT SIGHTED AGAIN.\"\n\n2. Paraphrase is not required. Handle as CONFIDENTIAL correspondence per paragraphs 51i and 60a, AR 380-5.\n\nCHARLES C. ROBINSON Captain, USAF\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nWEATHER DETACHMENT 26-41\n26th Weather Squadron\nHawkins Field\nJackson, Miss.\t\tBHG/lkt\n\n5 January 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Reporting of Information on Flying Discs\n\nTO:\tCommanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIB\n\n1. In compliance with Group letter 205-3, dated 22 September 1948, the following information is submitted.\n\na. (1) Object was sighted two (2) miles East of Jackson, Mississippi at 1700C, 1 January 1949.\n\nb. Weather at the time: See inclosure number one (1).\n\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses:\nThomas A. Rush\nAirport Manager, Dixie Airport\n402 Mitchell Ave.\nJackson, Mississippi\n\nMrs. Thomas A. Rush\n402 Mitchell Ave.\nJackson, Mississippi\n\nMrs. T. A. Doolittle\nHousewife\n3777 Kings Hiway\nJackson, Mississippi\n\nd. Photographs of object: None\n\ne. Sketches of objects: See inclosure number two (2).\n\nf. Object sighted:\n\n1. Number: One (1).\n\n2. Shape: Cigar like. Not unlike sleeve target.\n\n3. Size: Approximately 60 feet long and 10 feet diameter at the front tapering to the rear.\n\n4. Color: Dark blue or black\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cont'd SUBJ: Report of Information on Flying Discs\n\n5. Speed: Approximately 200 MPH when first sighted, then accelerated to approximately 400 to 500 MPH.\n\n6. Heading: West, turning to South to Southwest.\n\n7. Maneuverability: Not noticed.\n\n8. Altitude: 1500 to 1600 feet, then gradual climb.\n\n9. Sound: Roar.\n\n10. Exhaust trail: None.\n\ng. General remarks: The persons who sighted the above described object were enroute from Gulfport, Miss. to Jackson, Miss. in a private aircraft and were making an approach for a landing at the Dixie Airport when the object was first sighted. After landing, Mr Rush called the control tower at Hawkins Field to find out if the objecthad landed there and if so to find out its identity. The control tower reported the incident to Base Headquarters.\n\n2 Incl\n1. Weather Report\n2. Sketch of Object\n\nBENJAMIN H. COLE\nCaptain USAF\nCommanding\n\nDISTRIBUTIONS:\ncc Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Director of Intelligence\n\ncc Commanding General\nMilitary Air Transport Service\nAndrews Air Force Base\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\n2cc Commanding Officer\n2059th Air Weather Wing\nTinker Air Force Base\nOklahoma City, Oklahoma\n\ncc Commanding Officer\n2104th Air Weather Group\nRobins Air Force Base\nRobins Field, Georgia\n\ncc Commanding Officer\n26th Weather Squadron\nBrookley Air Force Base\nMobile, Alabama\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nJACKSON WEATHER\n\n1630C JACKSON WEATHER\nE180-@@ 15+ 173/ 53/35 7/003/E350-@\n\n1730C JACKSON WEATHER\nM160@ 15+ 169/52/2911/002/BINOVC\n\nWINDS ALOFT\n\n2000 FEET\t200 DEGREES\t10 KNOTS\n4000 FEET\t270 DEGREES\t10 KNOTS\n6000 FEET\t270 DEGREES\t15 KNOTS\n8000 FEET\t275 DEGREES\t20 KNOTS\n10000FEET\t270 DEGREES\t15 KNOTS\n12000FEET\t270 DEGREES\t20 KNOTS\n14000FEET\t270 DEGREES\t20 KNOTS\n16000FEET\t270 DEGREES\t20 KNOTS\n20000FEET\t275 DEGREES\t55 KNOTS\n\nINCL 1\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nJACKSON WEATHER\n\n1630C JACKSON WEATHER\n\nWINDS ALOFT\n\nRECEIVED\nAIR TRANSPORT COMMAND\nA-3\nJAN 13 1949\n\nREGISTERED\nUNIT\nMATS\nRECEIVED\n11 JAN 1949"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n10ft\n\n60ft\n\nRear View\n\n10ft\n\nINCL 2\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DETACHMENT, 1701ST AIR TRANSPORT WING\tGPB/md\nCONTINENTAL DIVISION, MATS\nEDMONTON ALBERTA CANADA\t19 Nov 48\n\nSUBJECT: Observation of an Object in the Atmosphere\n\nTO:\tCommanding General\n\tAir Materiel Command\n\tWright-Patterson Air Force Base\n\tDayton, Ohio\n\tATTENTION: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. The following report of an object observed by 1st Lt. James Toomey is submitted in compliance with Secret Letter dtd 20 Oct 48 from MATS Headquarters, subject: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\".\n\na. Location and time of sighting - 117° 30' W Longitude\n50° 10' N Latitude\n1418Z 17 November 1948\n\nb. Weather at the time - Weather at the time was overcast with tops at approximately 4500' MSL with a high deck of thin broken stratus clouds at approximately 12,000 ft.\n\nc. Names and occupations and addresses of witnesses - S/Sgt Onno C. Blink, AF 20715676, Radio Operator on the crew and stationed at Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.\n\nd. Photographs of objects, if available. No photographs available.\n\ne.\n\n[drawing]\n\nf. Object sighted:\n(1) Number - One\n(2) Shape - Egg shaped with a tail\n(3) Size - Approximately 50' in height tapering to a point at the tail.\n(4) Color - Bright flaming orange\n(5) Speed - Unknown\n(6) Heading- South West"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OLMSTED FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nOlmsted Air Force Base\nMIDDLETOWN, PENNSYLVANIA\nOperating Location 33-8\n\nMDT 000.9\t13 December 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nTO:\tCommanding General\n\tAir Materiel Command\n\tWright-Patterson Air Force Base\n\tDayton, Ohio\n\tATTN: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. In compliance with FS Regulation 200-4 dated 2 November 1948 and letter, Headquarters, USAF., Subject: \"Reporting of Information on 'Flying Discs'\", dated 6 February 1948 the following information is submitted:\n\nESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF INFORMATION\n\n1. Date of Sighting: 11 December 1948\n2. Time of sighting: 2245E\n3. Where sighted: See Paragraph 3b (2)\na. Ground\nNot applicable\nb. Air\n(1) Type aircraft, speed, altitude, direction of flight.\nC-45F\t150\t9500 ft\t125 Degrees\n(2) Distance & Direction from City, town or known landmark:\n40 miles northwest of Martinsburg, West Virginia\n(3) Clock Position of object from observer's aircraft:\n12 o'clock., approximately 20 miles in front of aircraft\n(4) Latitude and longitude: Approximately 39°58'N 78°20'W"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MDT 000.9\nSubj: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nc. Sea\nNot applicable\n\n4. Number of objects: One (1)\na. Formation type: No formation\n\n5. Distance of object from observer: Twenty miles in front of aircraft.\na. Laterally or horizontally: Laterally\nb. Angle of elevation from horizon: 5 degrees\nc. Altitude: 10,000 - 11,000 feet\n\n6. Time in sight: one (1) minute\n\n7. Appearance of object:\na. Color: Red to Blue to Red\nb. Shape: Resembled to parachute flare\nc. Apparent construction: No opinion\nd. Size: undetermined\n\n8. Direction of flight: Appeared to be stationary\n\n9. Tactics or maneuvers: None\n\n10. Evidence of exhaust: None\na. Color of smoke: None\nb. Length and width: None\nc. Odor: Unknown\nd. Rate of evaporation: Unknown\ne. Does trail vary with sound: None\n\n11. Effect on clouds: No clouds - unlimited ceiling\n\n12. Lights: Object appeared as a brilliant flare in the sky.\n\n2\n\nTRANSMITTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OLMSTED FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nOlmsted Air Force Base\nMIDDLETOWN, PENNSYLVANIA\nOperating Location 33-8\n\n[illegible]\n\nDEC 13 3 53 PM '48\n\nTRANSMITTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nDEC 13 3 53 PM '48\n\nTRANSMITTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MDT 000.9\nSUBJ: Unidentified Flying Objects,, 13 December 1948\n\n13. Support: Not visible\n14. Propulsion: Object appeared to be stationary.\na. Propeller or jet: Unknown\nb. Rotor: Unknown\nc. Aerodynamic vanes: Unknown\nd. Visible exhaust or jet openings: None visible\n15. Control and stability: Unknown\na. Fins: None visible\nb. Stabilizers: Unknown\n(1) Size: Unknown\n(2) Shape: Unknown\n(3) Location: Unknown\n16. Air Ducts: Unknown\na. slots: Unknown\nb. Duct openings: Unknown\n17. Speed - MPH: Appeared to be stationary\n18. Sound: Unknown\n19. Was any radio antenna to be observed: None observed\n20. Manner of disappearance: Similiar to a flare burning out\na. Explode\n(1) Possibility of fragments: Unknown\n(2) Other Physical evidence: Unknown\nb. Faded from view: Yes\nc. Disappeared behind obstacle: No\nRELATIVE TO THE OBSERVER\n1. Name of Observer: Capt O. M. Legg"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRANSMITTED\nDec 13 3 53 PM '48"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MDT 000.9\nSUBJ: Unidentified Flying Objects,, 13 December 1948\n\n2. Headquarters, Air Rescue Service\n3. Occupation: USAF\n4. Place of Business: USAF\n5. Hobbies: Not applicable\n6. Ability to determine: Unknown\n7. Reliability of observer: No opinion\n8. Notes relative to observer on\na. Sightings in general: None\nb. How attention was drawn to objects: Directly in Flight Path\n(1) Sound: Unknown\n(2) Motion: Stationary\n(3) Glint of light: Brilliant\n9. Witnesses:\na. Capt R. H. Cassidy\nHeadquarters, Air Rescue Service\nWashington 25, D. C.\nb. S/Sgt T.P. Turner\nAir Rescue Service\nFort Bragg, N. C.\n10. Comments of interrogator re intelligence and character of person interrogated: No opinion\nRELATIVE TO RADAR SIGHTINGS\n1. Re radars now operating on ground: No radar sighting\n2. If airbourne, when object was sighted: Not applicable\nGENERAL\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions:\nClear sky - 7 miles visibility\n2. Winds aloft report: Not given"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n\nCOPY\n\n6 February 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Commanding General, Strategic Air Command\nCommanding General, Air Defense Command\nCommanding General, Tactical Air Command\nCommanding General, Air Training Command\nCommanding General, Air University\nCommanding General, Alaskan Air Command\nCommanding General, Air Transport Command\nCommanding General, Air Materiel Command\n\nRescinded per ltr 17g13AHF dated 1 Jan 1955\n\n1. Any information pertaining to the sighting of so-called flying discs, which is secured by or comes to the attention of Air Force installations within the United States and Alaska, will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attention: TSDIN.\n\n2. Such reports will be sent direct, and not through ordinary channels, but copies of all such information may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n\n3. In observing the above procedure for reporting information on flying disc sightings, every effort will be made to include the following items:\n\na. Location and time of sighting\nb. Weather at the time\nc. Names, occupations and addresses of witnesses\nd. Photographs of objects, if available\ne. Sketches of object's configuration\nf. Object sighted:\n(1) Number (5) Speed (9) Sound\n(2) Shape (6) Heading (10) Exhaust trail or not\n(3) Size (7) Maneuverability\n(4) Color (8) Altitude\ng. General Remarks\n\n4. A copy of all reports or summaries of information sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with the above provisions will be forwarded at the same time to this Headquarters, Attention: Director of Intelligence.\n\n5. Headquarters, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with installations of the addresses of this letter in connection with the development of information on flying discs.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nLtr to CG, Major Commands, Subject: \"Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\",\ndtd 6 February 1948, cont'd\n\n6. The Air Materiel Command will furnish this Headquarters with such reports\nas are called for by paragraph 4 of this Headquarters letter dated 30 December\n1947, subject: \"Flying Discs\".\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n/s/ C. P. Cabell\nC. P. CABELL\nBrigadier General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nRESTRICTED\n2"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MAXWELL FLIGHT SERVICE CENTER\nMAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE\nMONTGOMERY, ALABAMA\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects 2 January 1949\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio\nATTN: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. Reference letter, Headquarters USAF, subject: \"Reporting of\nInformation on 'Flying Discs.'\" dated 6 February 1948 and Flight Service\nRegulation 200-4 dated 2 November, subject: \"Unidentified Flying Objects,\"\nthe following information is submitted:\n\na. Location and time of sighting: Two (2) miles east of\nJackson, Mississippi at 17000, 1 January 1949.\n\nb. Weather at time: The 1630C weather sequence from Jackson,\nestimated 18,000 feet, broken clouds, visibility 15, temp-\nerature 53, dew point 35, surface wind south-southwest at\n7 mph, altimeter setting 3003, remarks, estimated 35,000\nfeet thin broken.\n\nThe 1730C weather for Jackson was ceiling measured 16,000\nfeet, overcast, visibility fifteen(15) miles, temperature\n52, dew point 29, wind south at one (1) mph, remarks,\nbreaks in the overcast.\n\nc. Names, Occupations and addresses of witnesses:\n\nMr. Tom Rush, 402 Mitchell Avenue, Jackson, Mississippi\nEmployed by Dixie Air Service at Jackson, Mississippi as\na pilot. He is an ex-AAF pilot. Telephone Jackson-Miss-\nissippi 5-1064.\n\nMrs. Willette Rush, 402 Mitchell Avenue, Jackson, Mississippi,\nwife of the above, housewife and private pilot.\n\nd. Photographs, if available: None available.\n\ne. Sketches of objects configuration: To be forwarded.\n\n-1-"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ltr fr Maxwell Flight Service Center, Maxwell AF Base, Ala dtd 2 Jan 49\nSubj: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nf. Object Sighted, description:\n\n(1) Number: One.\n\n(2) Shape: Cigar-shaped, with short stubby wings, resembling\na rocket, also reported later as resembling a sleeve tow-\ntarget.\n\n(3) Size: Estimated sixty (60) feet long.\n\n(4) Color: Dark Blue or black.\n\n(5) Speed: Initially estimated as 200 mph, then increasing\nto 5-600 mph.\n\n(6) Heading: West when first sighted, then southwest when\nlast sighted.\n\n(7) Maneuverability: Apparently very maneuverable.\n\n(8) Altitude: 1500 feet.\n\n(9) Sound: Similiar to a helicopter.\n\n(10) Exhaust trail: None visible.\n\ng. General remarks:\n\n(1) When the object was first sighted and reported to\nFlight Service at Maxwell AF Base at 1735C by the\nJackson Operations Office, an attempt was made to\ninvestigate the object by calling all military\nairfields in the area from which a jet or rocket\nflight may have originated, or at which the object\nmay have been sighted.\n\n(2) The following stations were contacted:\n\n(a) Eglin AF Base, Florida\n\n(b) Pensacola NAS and Chevalier Field NAS, Florida\n\n(c) Whiting NAS, Florida\n\n(d) New Orleans NAS, Louisana\n\n(e) Memphis NAS, Tennessee\n\n(f) New Orleans Air Route Traffic Control Center was\nalso contacted.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MDT 000.9\nSUBJ: Unidentified Flying objects: 13 December 1948\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft\nflying in vicinity at the time: Unknown.\n\n4. Possibility releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft\nby Ordnance, Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations\nor any other: Unknown.\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil sampled within and without\ndepression or spot where object landed for purposes of making comparison\nof soils: Unknown.\n\n6. If object came sufficiently near other aircraft or known objects,\ncheck surfaces with Geiger counters for possible radioactivity. Make com-\nparisons with other unaffected aircraft objects: Unknown.\n\n7. Obtain photographs: None\n\n8. Not obtained.\n\n9. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible: None\n\nJOSEPH L. MC NEIL\nLt. Col., USAF\nCommanding\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n\nc/o to Ch of Staff, Hq USAF\nCommander, MATS\nCO, FS"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n\nTRANSMITTED\nDEC 13 3 53 PM 48"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ltr fr Maxwell Flight Service Center, Maxwell AF Base, Ala dtd 2 Jan 49\nSubj: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\n(3) No information was available at any of these stations.\n\n2. The object was sighted by the witnesses from a Stinson civilian aircraft, and no photographs were taken because no camera was available. At the time of sighting, the Stinson was 3 or 4 miles east of Jackson, Mississippi on the east leg of the Jackson radio range at approximately 1200 feet altitude.\n\n3. At 1840C on 1 January 1949, New Orleans Air Route Traffic Control Center reported to Maxwell Flight Service Center that the Associated Press had advised them that the above mentioned object had been sighted 40 miles south of Jackson, Mississippi. This second report was evidently the same as the above because the reporting pilot was the same, i.e., Mr. Tom Rush. Maxwell Flight Service contacted Mr. Rush, who is preparing sketches of the object he reported. He also advised that he saw the object only once.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING OFFICER:\n\n\nCopies furnished:\nChief of Staff, USAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Director of Intelligence\n\nCommander, Military Air Transport Service\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Chief, Intelligence Division\n\nCommanding Officer, Flight Service\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: A-2\n\nHAROLD E. ETHERIDGE\n1st Lt., USAF\nAdjutant\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nDETACHMENT NO. 1\n16th Weather Sqdn.\nChanute Air Force Base\nChanute Field, Illinois.\n\n5/B/a\n\n9 December 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\n\n1. In compliance with 2102D Air Weather Group TWX 454 dated 19 November 1948 and letter, Headquarters, United States Air Force, subject as above, 6 February 1948, the following report is submitted:\n\na. Chanute Air Force Base, Illinois, 0900452.\nb. High scattered clouds, visibility ten miles.\nc. Sgt. James E. Doty and Sgt. Eugene E. Montag, Weather Observers, Det 16/1L, 16th Weather Squadron, Chanute AFB, Illinois.\nd. Photographs of objects - none available.\ne. Sketches of objects - None available.\nf. Object sighted:\n(1) One\n(2) Round\n(3) Undetermined size\n(4) Bright white color\n(5) Two tenths of distant sky within two to three seconds.\n(6) Heading from north east toward south south west.\n(7) Undetermined maneuverability.\n(8) Undetermined altitude.\n(9) No sound\n(10) Exhaust trail undetermined.\n\ng. General remarks:\n\nObject sighted to north east moving to south south west that resembled a skyrocket or meteor but was moving upward fifteen degrees. Object was described to be about thirty five degrees above the horizon and traversed across thirty five degrees of the horizon within three seconds and disappeared.\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No file #\nSubj: RDIOFD\t\t\t\t\t\t9 Dec 48\n\n2. Statements of observers are inclosed herewith.\n\n2 Incls.\n1. Stmt Sgt. J. E. Doty\n2. Stmt Sgt. E. E. Montag\n\nRUSH T. KELLEY\nCaptain, USAF\nFor CHARLES K. TAYLOR,\nMajor, USAF\nStation Weather Officer"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STATEMENT\n\n9 December 1948\n\nI, James E. Doty, Sergeant, USAF, AF 17171864, Weather Observer, 16th Weather Squadron, Chanute Air Force Base, Chanute Field, Illinois, do hereby make the following statement to Captain Rush T. Kelley, Assistant Base Weather Officer.\n\nOn 8 December 1948 at approximately 1846 hours, I was walking with Sgt. Eugene E. Montag towards the Base Weather Station when I happened to look up at the sky and notice what appeared to be either a sky rocket or meteor. I tapped Sgt. Montag on the arm and called his attention to it.\n\nThe object did not appear to be a star because it was three or four times as large as a star and it seemed to be closer to us than a star would be. It was heading from the north east toward the south south west and was moving upwards at about 15 or 20 degree angle. As it moved it seemed to get larger, and it was leaving a trail. In about two or three seconds it disappeared. The object was round, white and moved very fast.\n\nWe went into the Weather Station and reported this to the Duty Forecaster whose name is M Sgt. Robert W. Fillman.\n\nJames E. Doty\nJAMES E. DOTY\nSergeant, USAF\nAF 17171864"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STATEMENT\n\n9 December 1948\n\nI, Eugene E. Montag, AF 16206705, Sergeant, USAF, an a Weather Observer assigned to the 16th Weather Squadron, Chanute Air Force Base, Chanute Field, Illinois, and do hereby make the following statement to Capt. Rush T. Kelley, Assistant Base Weather Officer, Chanute AFB:\n\nOn 8 December 1948 at approximately 1846 hours, I was walking with Sgt. James E. Doty, also of the 16th Weather Squadron, towards the Base Weather Station when I noticed what appeared to be a sky rocket or meteor. This object was heading upwards about a 15 degree angle, moving from the north east to the south south west. The object was white in color, very bright and moved about two to three tenths of the sky and then disappeared.\n\nThis object did not appear to me to be a falling star.\n\nI immediately went to the Duty Forecaster at the Base Weather Station and reported seeing this.\n\nEugene E. Montag\nEUGENE E. MONTAG\nAF 16206705\nSergeant, USAF"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUBJ: Observation of an Object in the Atmosphere\n\n(7) Maneuverability - Appeared to be in a shallow dive.\n(8) Altitude - Approximately 18,000 feet.\n(9) Sound - None\n(10) Exhaust trail or not - Yes\n\ng. Remarks: Object was sighted on the first leg of a flight from Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, to Kittigazuit, N. W. T. Canada while flying at 7,000 ft. MSL on top of an overcast. The object was momentarily sighted above a deck of broken status clouds. It seemed to be a bright flaming orange object and illuminated the sky momentarily behind it.\n\nDist:\n\nHdqs.MATS Attn: Dir.of Intelligence\nCmdr.MATS Attn: Chief, Intelligence Division\n\nGEORGE P. BRENNER,\nCapt. USAF\nCommanding\n\nSECRET\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nP&O/INT\n\nDHP/res\n\nSUBJECT: Reporting of Information on Flying Discs\n\n26 OCT 1948\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAirways and Air Communication Service\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: AC/S, Intelligence and Security\n\n1. The following TWX received from Headquarters, USAF is quoted for your information and necessary action:\n\n\"REFER TO THIS HQS LETTER OF SIX FEB ONE NINE FOUR NIGHT CMA SUBJ SNCLN REPORTING INFORMATION ON FLYING DISCS PD RESEARCH REVEALS GROUPS OF SIGHTINGS OCCUR AT PERIODIC INTERVALS WITH BEGINNING OF NEW INTERVAL IMMINENT PD REQUEST ALL UNITS OF YOUR COMMAND BE PARTICULARLY ALERTED TO REPORT SIGHTINGS OF UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS DIRECT TO MCIAXO DASH THREE CMA AMC CMA FASTEST PD WHERE POSSIBLE INITIATE INVESTIGATIVE ACTION WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE\"\n\n2. Paraphrase of the above message is not required when handled as secret correspondence.\n\n3. The above referenced USAF letter of 6 February 1948 in quoted TWX is further modified to include reporting of all sightings of flying discs whether they occur within or outside the United States and Alaska.\n\nBY COMMAND OF MAJOR GENERAL KUTER:\n\nJAMES F. RHODES\nMajor, USAF\nAsst Adjutant General\n\nRescinded per ltr Hq [illegible] Std 14 Jan 50\n\nOCT 25 1948\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"763c5fe591cc8de8","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISPATCHED OCT 1948 REGISTERED UNIT MATS\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"77c2ddd5020806a3","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007.\n\nScreened by NARA (RF) 11-25-2025 FOIA # 90288 DOCID: 34715588\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, DETROIT\n\nDATE: April 17, 1958\n\nFROM : SA ROBERT ROSS REYNOLDS\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nDAVID WEAVER, 15801 Decosta, Detroit, Michigan, Telephone No. KEnwood 5-7546, telephonically advised this office at 4:08 A.M., today, that he had just seen an object in the sky described as a circular object with a crystal-type dome that reflected lights. He said this object was passing in a northern direction from southwest and crossed the City three blocks south of Six Mile at Lamphere Street.\n\nWEAVER advised that he attempted to call Selfridge Field to get in touch with the Air Force but his attempts were unproductive. He then called the office to furnish the above information.\n\nWEAVER said he was 23 years of age, was the son of a Detroit policeman, and that he had previous experience with the Civil Air Patrol (CAP); however, he was not too familiar with the identification of aircraft. WEAVER stated he was on his way home from his employment in Detroit when he observed instant object.\n\nRECOMMENDATION\n\nAdvise proper air force authorities.\n\nRRR/mac\n(1)\n\nLt Col (Bunnie) E. Prater advised 4/17/58 no letter req MJA\n\nFOIPA 844 DO NOT DESTROY SERIAL 3/89 PRIOR TO\n\n100-26505\n\n100-18821-844\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED APR 17 1958 FBI - DETROIT\n\nNW 90288 DocId:34715588 Page 1"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-245 (REV. 1-21-80)\nScreened by NARA (RF)\n11-19-2025 FOIA #\n90290 DOCID: 34714592\nU. S. Department of Justice\nMUST NOT BE REMOVED FROM OR ADDED TO THIS FILE\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007.\nBUREAU\nof\nIGATION\n0100 26505\nClass / Case #\nSub\nVol.\nDE - DETROIT\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\n8/08/374524\nRRPC00PJD9\n1\n1\nSerial #\nOPEN\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nSERIALS\nREQUESTERS FULL NAME\nCOMPUTER NUMBER\nDATE\nBY\nSee also Nos.\nAll\nChanest, Michael R.\n245,974\n5-31-85\nlee\nClosed Section\nSerials\nVolume Number\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED on this envelope HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/22/85 BY SP-6 bjafftey\nNW 90290 DocId:34714592 Page 1"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Notes re: interview with WLADYSLAW KRASUSKI (rec'd 11/7/57(\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED on this envelope HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/22/85 BY SP-6 bjafftey\n100-26505-14\nSEARCHED INDEXED\nSERIALIZED FILED\nNOV 18 1957\nFBI - DETROIT\nNW 90290 DocId:34714592 Page 2"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date Received 11/7/57\nFrom (Name of contributor)\n(Address of contributor)\nBy (Name of Special Agent)\nTo Be Returned Yes ( ) No ( )\nDescription:\nFile No. 100-26505-14\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED on this envelope HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/22/85 BY SP-6 bjafftey\nNotes re interview w/ WLADYSLAW KRASUSKI 11/7/57\nNW 90290 DocId:34714592 Page 3"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WA 27516 - 5457 JP Campau 11/7/57\nPlot\ncable Gk men in 44 goes in 45\n44 - 45\n2 mi\nGutoltt Golsen\n55 Major\n50 - light 100 - 150 gpm\n35-30 mi Berlin\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/22/85 BY SP-6 bjafftey\nNW 90290 DocId:34714592 Page 4"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Franciszek Grabowski"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Record Request\nFD-125 (5-27-55)\n\nBirth Credit Criminal Motor Vehicle\n\nDeath Marriage* INS\n\nTo:\n\nReturn to: Rainbow\n\nFile number 100-26505 Buded\n\nName and aliases of subject, applicant or employee & spouse\nWLADYSLAW KRASUSKI\naka WALTER\n\nAddresses\nResidence 5457 Jos. Campau.\nBusiness Gobel Brewery\nFormer\n*Date and place of marriage\n(if pertinent)\n\nRace Sex Birth date Birthplace\nW Male [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nFemale\n\nAge Height Weight Hair Eyes\n\nArrest Number Fingerprint Classification\n\nCriminal Specialty\n\nSpecific information desired\nany record\n\n(See reverse side for results of check)\n\nFOIA(b)(6)"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"URGENT 11-6-57 5-40 PM CS\n\nTO SAC, DETROIT\n\nFROM DIRECTOR 1P\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS, IS-X. MR. W. KIASUSKI, Complainant\nFIVE FOUR FIVE SEVEN JOS. CAMPAU, DETROIT ELEVEN MICHIGAN,\nADDRESSED LETTER DATED NOVEMBER FOURTH TO ROBERT CUTLER,\nWHO IS SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT, STATING QUOTE I\nMIGHT HAVE SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE ROCKET IN TEXAS. I\nHEARD ABOUT IT ON THE POLISH RADIO PROGRAM. I WOULD LIKE\nTO KNOW TO WHOM I COULD SPEAK TO. UNQUOTE. IMMEDIATELY\nINTERVIEW KIASUSKI FOR ANY INFORMATION HE MAY HAVE. BUFILES\nREFLECT NO INFORMATION RE KIASUSKI. SUTEL.\n\nEND ACK PLS\n\nOK FBI DE JH\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/28/85 BY Delagatay\n\n100-26505-1\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED NOV 6 1957 FBI DETROIT"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Detroit 31, Michigan\nNovember 7,1957\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIn response to a letter directed by him to Mr. Robert Cutler, Special Assistant to President Dwight D. Eisenhower,reflecting that he \"might have some information about the rocket in Texas,\" Wladyslaw Krasuski, 5457 Joseph Campau, Detroit, was interviewed November 7, 1957, and furnished the following information:\n\nBorn [REDACTED] in the State of [REDACTED]. Krasuski was brought from Poland as a Prisoner of War to Gut Alt Golssen,approximately 30 miles east of Berlin, Germany, in May, 1942, where he remained until a few weeks after the end of World War II. He spent the following years at Displaced Persons Camps at Kork, Strasburg, Offenburg, Milheim and Freiburg, Germany. He attended a radio technician school at Freiburg and for about a year was employed in a textile mill at Laurachbaden, Germany. He arrived in the United States at New York, May 2, 1951, via the \"S.S. General Stewart\" as a Displaced Person, destined to the Reverend Father Petro Walkowiak, Hamtramck, Michigan; his alien registration number [REDACTED](b)(6).\n\nSince May, 1951, he has been employed at the Gobel Brewery, Detroit.\n\nNews report of mysterious vehicle in Texas causing engines to stall prompted him to communicate with the United States Government concerning a similar phenomenon observed by him in 1944 in the area of Gut Alt Golssen.\n\nAccording to Krasuski, during 1944, month not recalled, while enroute to work in a field a short distance north of Gut Alt Golssen, their tractor engine stalled on a road through a swamp area. No machinery or other vehicle was then visible although a noise was heard described as a high-pitched whine similar to that produced by a large electric generator.\n\n1 - Bureau (RM)\n1 - Detroit (100-26505)\nCH:JLK\n(6)\n\n100-26505-2\nSearched Serialized Indexed Filed\n\nFOIA(b)(6)"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"An \"SS\" guard appeared and talked briefly with the German driver of the tractor, who waited five to ten minutes, after which the noise stopped and the tractor engine was started normally. Approximately 3 hours later in the same swamp area, but away from the road where the work crew was cutting \"hay\", he surreptitiously, because of the German in charge of the crew and \"SS\" guards in the otherwise deserted area, observed a circular enclosure approximately 100 to 150 yards in diameter protected from viewers by a tarpaulin-type wall approximately 50 feet high, from which a vehicle was observed to slowly rise vertically to a height sufficient to clear the wall and then to move slowly horizontally a short distance out of his view, which was obstructed by nearby trees.\n\nThis vehicle, observed from approximately 500 feet, was described as circular in shape, 75 to 100 yards in diameter, and about 14 feet high, consisting of dark gray stationary top and bottom sections, five to six feet high. The approximate three foot middle section appeared to be a rapidly moving component producing a continuous blur similar to an aeroplane propeller, but extending the circumference of the vehicle so far as could be observed. The noise emanating from the vehicle was similar but of somewhat lower pitch than the noise previously heard. The engine of the tractor again stalled on this occasion and no effort was made by the German driver to start the engine until the noise stopped, after which the engine started normally.\n\nUninsulated metal, possibly copper, cables one and one-half inch to two inches in diameter, on and under the surface of the ground, in some places covered by water, were observed on this and previous occasions, apparently running between the enclosure and a small concrete column-like structure between the road and enclosure.\n\nThis area was not visited by Krasuski again until shortly after the end of World War II, when it was observed the cables had been removed and the previous locations of the concrete structure and the enclosure were covered by water. Krasuski stated he has not been in communication since 1945 with any of the work crew of 16 or 18 men, consisting of Russian, French and Polish POWs, who had discussed this incident among themselves many times. However, of these, Krasuski was able to recall by name only Franciszek Grabowski, no address known, described as then about 50 years of age and presumed by Krasuski to have returned to Poland after 1945.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This report is loaned to you by the FBI,\nand neither it nor its contents are to be distributed\noutside your agency.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE 5/20/85 BY [signature]\n\nAIRTEL\n\nAMSD - RM\n\n11/7/57\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM: SAC, DETROIT (100-26505)\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS; IS - X.\n\nRe Detroit Teletype to Bureau, 11/7/57, captioned \"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS; IS - X.\"\n\nInterview of WLADYSLAW KRASUSKI, aka. WALTER KRASUSKI, reported in Blank Memo, five copies of which are enclosed herewith for the Bureau, was conducted by SA CASSIUS RATHBUN.\n\nNo indication of irrational or otherwise abnormal behavior by KRASUSKI was observed during the interview.\n\nKRASUSKI advised that his communication was directed to Mr. ROBERT CUTLER rather than to President EISENHOWER after seeing Mr. CUTLER's picture and identification with the President's Office in a local paper.\n\nKRASUSKI resides with his wife, nee JOANN WISNIEWSKI, married in 1952 at Detroit, and four small children,in a single residence in an old Polish neighborhood at 5457 Jos. Campau Avenue, Detroit. No previous record located in Detroit Indices identifiable with KRASUSKI or his wife.\n\nOn 11/7/57, WILLIAM RECKNAGEL, Manager, advised IC PAUL DESMOND that records of the Mich. Merchants Credit Association, reflect only credit inquiries concerning WALTER KRASUSKI during 6/56 and 3/57 and 6/57, which confirm his local address and employment.\n\n3 - Bureau (Encls.5)(RM)\n1 - Detroit\nCR:JLK\n(4)\n\n110-26505-3"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-36 (Rev. 3-13-56)\n\nFBI\n\nDate: 11/7/57\n\nTransmit the following message via TELETYPE\n\nURGENT\n(Priority or Method of Mailing)\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM: SAC, DETROIT\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/20/85 BY [signature]\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS; IS - X.\n\nREBUTEL NOV. SIX LAST. WLAYSLAW KRASUSKI, AKA. WALTER KRASUSKI,\n[REDACTED] WAS\nGERMAN POW MAY, NINETEEN FORTY TWO, UNTIL SUMMER OF NINETEEN FOURTY FIVE. ARRIVED NY MAY TWO, NINETEEN FIFTY ONE, AS DP, AR NO. (b) (6) . KRASUSKI UPON INTERVIEW ADVISED THAT WHILE GERMAN POW DURING NINETEEN FORTY FOUR, OBSERVED A VEHICLE DESCRIBED AS CIRCULAR IN SHAPE, SEVENTY FIVE TO ONE HUNDRED YARDS IN DIAMETER, APPROXIMATELY FOURTEEN FEET HIGH. THE VEHICLE WAS OBSERVED TO SLOWLY RISE VERTICALLY TO HEIGHTS SUFFICIENT TO CLEAR FIFTY FOOT WALL AND TO MOVE SLOWLY HORIZONTALLY A SHORT DISTANCE OUT OF VIEW OBSTRUCTED BY TREES. ENGINE OF TRACTOR FAILED TO OPERATE DURING THIS PERIOD AND ONE SEVERAL OTHER OCCASIONS WHEN HIGH PITCHED WHINING NOISE HEARD IN AREA. NO INDICATION OF MENTAL INSTABILITY DURING INTERVIEW. FURTHER DETAILS FOLLOW AMSD.\n\nWLS:JLK\nDE 100-26505\n(1)\n\n100-26505-4\nApproved: Special Agent in Charge\nSent M Per"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The Oklahoma UFO Research Association\n\nKerry Liesch, Director\n3539 N. W. 53rd\nOklahoma City, Oklahoma\n\nBob Stamps, Co-Director\n5024 N. W. 20th\nOklahoma City, Oklahoma\n\nOctober 2, 1966\nFBI OFFICE\n913 Federal Building\nDetroit, Michigan\n\nDear Sirs:\n\nMy organization would appreciate any information that you could send us on Unidentified Flying Objects, specifically those sightings in your area in early spring of this year.\n\nWe will greatly appreciate any information that you could send us on this subject. I thank you for your time and co-operation.\n\nSincerely:\nKerry Liesch\nDirector, O.U.F.O.R.A.\n\nKKL/lw\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/13/85 BY [signature]\n\n100-26505-5\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED OCT 7 1966 FBI - DETROIT"} {"doc_id":"78562e600144ebdd","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Post Office Box 2118\nDetroit, Michigan 48231\nOctober 11, 1966\n\nMr. Kerry Liesch\nDirector\nThe Oklahoma UFO\nResearch Association\n3539 N.W. 53rd\nOklahoma City, Oklahoma\n\nDear Mr. Liesch:\n\nThis is to acknowledge your letter of October 2, 1966.\n\nPlease be advised that this office does not have the information you have requested. It is possible that the United States Air Force, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, may be the proper agency to contact.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nPaul H. Stoddard\nSpecial Agent in Charge\n\n1-Addressee\n1-Detroit (100-26505)\nIRA:frq\n(2)\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/13/85 BY [signature]\n\n100-26505-6\nSEARCHED SERIALIZED INDEXED FILED"} {"doc_id":"797fd0dfe9b3ce6c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n-1 of 2-\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nDate of entry [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] On [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] ([REDACTED]) was interviewed along with [REDACTED], [REDACTED], at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED].\nAfter being advised of the identity of the interviewing agents and the nature of the interview, [REDACTED] provided the following information:\n\n[REDACTED] On [REDACTED], [REDACTED] arrived home in the evening around 9:15pm. Once parking in the driveway, [REDACTED] noticed a ball of light through [REDACTED] windshield which was yellow and about the size of a basketball. Upon exiting the vehicle, [REDACTED] saw a second ball of light which was larger and about the size of a beach ball. The objects were behind a row of trees, which have since been taken down but in front of a section of trees between [REDACTED] property and [REDACTED] neighbor's property behind the home. [REDACTED] was able to look at the lights without strain or discomfort on [REDACTED] eyes. [REDACTED] stated that [REDACTED] has not had any health issues or concerns since seeing these objects.\n\n[Agent Note: Based on where [REDACTED] was standing, the objects were approximately 30 yards away and 20-30 feet above the ground].\n\n[REDACTED] Upon seeing the lights, [REDACTED] came outside to views the objects as well. Both [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] observed the objects move laterally to their left, passing behind a tree approximately 36 yards away, at the same height, continuing behind a neighbor's house and beyond a tree that was approximately 75 away. It was at this point where [REDACTED] stated that [REDACTED] saw one orb going into the other orb before disappearing abruptly.\n\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] stated that a few weeks after this event, [REDACTED] saw several white orbs travel over [REDACTED] house from the west to the east. These white orbs were traveling much higher in altitude than the prior red orbs.\n\n[REDACTED] In 1987, [REDACTED] stated that [REDACTED] had witnessed something strange off of [REDACTED], [REDACTED] in [REDACTED] [REDACTED] near power lines. [REDACTED] saw a red light circling around itself at night described it like the front end of Kit from"} {"doc_id":"797fd0dfe9b3ce6c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]\nInterview of [REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED], On [REDACTED], Page 2 of 2\n\nthe TV show nightrider. [REDACTED] saw the object hover and then land near the power station. Since then [REDACTED] stated that [REDACTED] has always been interested in the topic of UAP.\n\n[REDACTED] Attached to this interview were photos taken by Agents at the permission of [REDACTED] [REDACTED]."} {"doc_id":"79faa0943854da25","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:10:00"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNW 91526\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n19\n\nCLASSIFICATION CHANGE\nTo UNCLASSIFIED\nBy authority of EO 11652, 6-1-72\nChanged by Cheyaum Date NOV 20 1973\n\nGEMINI V\n\nTECHNICAL DEBRIEFING (U)\n\nPart 1\n\nNOTICE: This document may be exempt from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Requests for its release to persons outside the U.S. Government should be handled under the provisions of NASA Policy Directive 1382.2.\n\nTHIS MATERIAL CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE LAWS, TITLE 18, U.S.C. SECTION 793 AND 794. THE TRANSMISSION OR REVELATION OF WHICH IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW.\n\nGROUP 4\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS\nDECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPRELIMINARY\n\nGT-5 FLIGHT CREW DEBRIEFING TRANSCRIPT\n\nPART I\n\nPrepared By\n\nSpacecraft Operations Branch\n\nFlight Crew Support Division\n\nSeptember 1, 1965\n\nThis material contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18. U. S. C. Section 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\n\nGroup 4: Downgrade at 3 year intervals\nDeclassified after 12 years\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPREFACE\n\nThis preliminary transcript was made from voice tape recordings of the GT-5 flight crew debriefing conducted August 30, 1965 thru September 1, 1965 at the Crew Quarters, Cape Kennedy, Florida.\n\nAlthough all the material contained in this transcript has been edited, the urgent need for the preliminary transcript by mission analysis personnel precluded a thorough editorial review prior to its publication. Errors in this transcript will be corrected as soon as possible and an official transcript will be published at a later date.\n\nThis document contains a transcript of the first part of the debriefing, during which the crew described the mission generally from an operational viewpoint. A preliminary transcript of the remainder of the debriefing will be published by September 3, 1965. It will cover systems operations, operational checks, visual sightings, experiments, pre-mission planning, mission control, and training.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nParagraph Page Number\n\n1.0 COUNTDOWN\n1.1 Crew Insertion.1\n1.2 Communications.1\n1.3 Crew Participation and Countdown.1\n1.4 Comfort.1\n1.5 Environmental Control System.2\n1.6 Sounds.2\n1.7 Vibrations.2\n1.8 Visual.3\n1.9 Crew Station Controls and Displays.4\n\n2.0 POWERED FLIGHT\n2.1 Lift-Off Cues.6\n2.2 Roll Program.7\n2.3 Pitch Program.8\n2.4 Aerodynamics.8\n2.5 Environmental Control System.9\n2.6 Maximum q.9\n2.7 Windshear.9\n2.8 DCS Update.9\n2.9 Engine 1 Operation.9\n2.10 POGO.10\n2.11 Engine 2 Status.12\n2.12 Acceleration g's.12\n2.13 BECO.12\n2.14 Staging.13\n2.15 Engine 2 Ignition.13\n2.16 RGS Initiate.14\n2.17 Fairing Jettison.15\n2.18 GO/NO GO.20\n2.19 Systems Status.21\n2.20 SECO.21\n2.21 Steering.22\n\n3.0 INSERTION\n3.1 Post-SECO.23\n3.2 SECO + 20 Seconds.26\n3.3 Insertion Activities.30\n\n4.0 ORBITAL FLIGHT 38\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPage Number\n\n5.0 RETROFIRE\n5.1 TR-36 Events.168\n5.2 TR-256 Events.172\n5.3 TR-1 Events.173\n5.4 TR-0 Events.174\n5.5 Retropack Jettison.182\n5.6 Communications.183\n\n6.0 REENTRY\n6.1 400 K.194\n6.2 Acceleration profile.196\n6.3 Spacecraft control.197\n6.4 100 000 Feet.197\n6.5 50 000 Feet.198\n6.6 35 000 checklist items.202\n6.7 Communications.202\n6.8 10.6K barostat.202\n6.9 Main chute deployment.203\n6.10 Single point release.204\n6.11 Blood pressure measurements.204\n6.12 Postmain checklist items.205\n\n7.0 LANDING AND RECOVERY\n7.1 Impact.206\n7.2 Checklists.210\n7.3 Communications.211\n7.4 Systems Configuration.211\n7.5 Spacecraft Status.212\n7.6 Post-Landing Activities.213\n7.7 Comfort.214\n7.8 Recovery Force Personnel.214\n7.9 Egress.214\n7.10 Survival Gear.215\n7.11 Crew Pickup.215\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n1\n1.0 COUNTDOWN\n1.1 Crew Insertion\nCooper\tThe crew insertion, I thought, went very well.\nConrad\tYes, we had the suiting thing down on my cuffs and\neverything so that we got right out there and, boy,\nthe Gunter was ready for us and in we went.\nCooper\tThey were all set. There were no delays and every-\nthing went exceedingly well on the gantry.\n1.2 Communications\nCooper\tCommunications, I thought were good and no problem at\nall on communications, and everything went real well.\nConrad\tYes, Stoney handled that whole thing real well.\nCooper\tAll right, volume was still down on the little comm\nsets in the transfer van there. That's Stoney's\nlittle improvement.\n1.3 Crew Participation\nin Countdown\nCooper\tCrew participation in the countdown was good. I\ndidn't see anything at all wrong.\nConrad\tYes, we weren't rushed. We felt that we had enough\ntime to get the switches in the right position and\njust everything went real good.\n1.4 Comfort\nCooper\tComfort was real fine. We went on to two suit fans\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n2\nright away. I thought we felt plenty cool the\nwhole time.\n1.5 ECS\nCooper\tECS was good. Never any problem with it.\n1.6 Sounds\nCooper\tSounds, I thought the only sounds that we had that\nwere abnormal we'd been warned about. When the\nprevalves opened, they were fairly loud and when\nthe engines gimballed they were quite loud, and\nboth of those we were aware of the fact that they\nwould cause a lot of noise and vibration.\nConrad\tThere is something that really dings the booster\ntoo when they start.... I don't--whether they\ndrop a platform away.\nCooper\tIt's before they start moving the gantry.\nConrad\tJust before they start lowering that erector. Boy,\nsomething really, like it really bangs that booster,\nI thought. I still don't know what it is, but, of\ncourse, we'd been up there with the erector down\ntwice before that so we were sort of getting used\nto those kind of sounds.\n1.7 Vibration\nCooper\tOkay, vibrations we already covered that. Sounds,\nvibrations.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n3\n1.8 Visual\nCooper\tVisual. Nothing....\nConrad\tOh, yes, wait a minute, I started getting this win-\ndow fogging.\nCooper\tWell, let's cover that under the right area.\nConrad\tWell, it was actually in the countdown when the\nerector went down before liftoff.\nCooper\tWell, okay, allright.\nConrad\tI mean we still had it later.\nCooper\tWell, you want to cover that now then in systems.\nConrad\tWell, is that what this means, is visual, or does\nthat just mean something else?\nFCSD REP\tYes, that's before liftoff. Powered flight is next.\nConrad\tYes, well this happened before liftoff.\nCooper\tAllright, even before liftoff, I think that this\nreally is completely unforgiveable. Each window\nwas filthy. Just fogged completely over, and it was\non the inside of the outer pane of glass. It was\nwithin the sealed unit of glass, and it was so\nfoggy when they lowered the erector that it was\njust like it was frozen over solid. I couldn't\nsee out of it and neither could Pete.\nConrad\tWell, it had fogged over before they lowered the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n4\nerector and then the guys heated it with hot air to\nmake it go away and that just made things worse when\nthey lowered the erector.\nCooper\tIt didn't make it go away all the way.\nConrad\tThat's right it made it worse actually.\nCooper\tNow on my side in my window in between the inside\npane and the two outside panes of glass, I had a\nsmall bee, and I had a fly, and I had several\nflecks of things that I had written up before and\nnever got corrected, and they were the whole flight,\nand I'm sure they will show up on all the films\nand everything. Now between the outer sealed panes\nof glass there were numerous little specks and\nof stuff and throughout the flight as...well, we'll\ncover that later, but that was even before the flight\nstarted. The windows were not plain and were not in\ngood shape to go for the flight.\n1.9 Crew Station Controls\nand Displays\nConrad\tI think the Gemini cockpit is a pretty good cockpit.\nCooper\tI think in general that crew stations controls and\ndisplays were pretty adequate.\nConrad\tI've got a couple comments on switches and things,\nbut these are....\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n5\nFCSD REP\tOkay, how about the time you spent in there on\nprelaunch. Do you think that this is about right?\nCooper\tYes, yes, I think that this is just about right.\nI think that if you cut it down too much more\nthan that you are going to be....you could cut it\ndown some more, there's no doubt....\nConrad\tIt's that cabin purge cycles when you're not doing\nanything really, and that's excellent time.\nCooper\t...that you can cut it down, but that's the thing\nthat takes the time for both the ground crews...\nand that's lost time. I don't know....\nConrad\tI don't think you want to rush the crew and now\nour count that second day went by the clock, boy.\nWe got in there at the right time. We counted down\nand lifted off on, and I didn't feel that I was\nrushed, and I didn't feel that I sat in there for\nan excessive amount of time.\nCooper\tNo, I didn't either. I thought that it went just\nabout right, time wise.\nConrad\tLong as there's no holds in the count everything's\ngreat.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6\nCONFIDENTIAL\n2.0 POWERED FLIGHT\n2.1 Lift Off Cues\nCooper\tOkay, lift-off cues, CAP COM. CAP COM didn't come into the act until later. Stoney counted us down thru ignition and lift-off and then CAP COM picked us up at lift-off. Motion is an excellent clue. There's doubt in your mind when you lift-off. You know, the second you lift-off that you've lifted. Vibration was very low.\nConrad\tIt had dropped out almost completely at lift-off, felt that shaking was very light.\nCooper\tThere was very little vibration at all. Okay, vibration, very low. Noise I thought, was quite low.\nConrad\tI was particularly aware of the noises of going through the max Q regionary thing. Oh, this is lift-off again. I thought the noises were very well at liftoff. You know the engines were running from the outside before, you know, and man they really make a racket, but from where you are it's pretty quite. You know there running. You can here them, there's no doubt about that, but ...\nCooper\tOkay, on visual I don't .... We had a very clear day. There weren't even any clouds in sight on\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\t7\nour sight as we were lifting off, and I couldn't tell any visual cues to lift-off, could you?\nConrad\tYou had the feeling that you were moving visually. After you get your roll program you see it visually and you can see the pitch program starting visually, but just at first lift-off you don't really have any visual cues. Cockpit displays are just like advertised. The two stage - one lights go out, and ... just like the simulator.\n2.2 Roll Program\nConrad\tYes, I watched roll program on the gyro, I was watching for it to come in on time and in glancing up when the roll program started I was still looking at nothing but blue sky, but I was aware visually as you say that the booster was rolling. Yes, you can have a airplane when you are looking at nothing but blue sky and start a motion and you may not know exactly what the motion is, but you know that you are moving.\nCooper\tNow on this cockpit display, something that I got two different answers to from different people on how the gyro and the actual case was going to be set and it suddenly dawned on me that they actually set the gyro so that you are launching down the 90 degrees. You're\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8\nCONFIDENTIAL\nprogressing down to 90 degrees line, as la the simulator, although the booster sets on 85 degrees and when you turn to 72 degrees launch azimuth you are rolling clockwise so far as the crew is concerned.\nConrad\tYou roll to zero.\nCooper\tBut you are rolling to is really to 0 on the gyro as precessed around so that you are not really setting on the actual launch azimuth, you are actually setting so that when you stage on over in yaw then pitch over then in your yaw your on the in-plane line.\nFCSD REP\tYou're coming down the zero line. You're yawing down the zero line.\nCooper\tThat's right, and I kept getting different answers on this and this is in fact the case. Roll program was exactly right on time and ended exactly on time.\n2.3 Pitch Program\nCooper\tPitch program started exactly on time.\n2.4 Aerodynamic\nCooper\tAerodynamic was nothing new or different about it. It was just standard. We build up to the noises at max Q; the noise built up to gradual level and the vibration and quantity built up to max Q and then dropped off very rapidly immediately thereafter.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"9\nCONFIDENTIAL\n2.5 ECS\nConrad\tRight on the button.\nCooper\tECS was right on the money, no problem at all. Max Q we've already stated.\nConrad\tThe cabin sealed a little bit high like they said it would. I forget the number. It was about 5.8.\nCooper\tAbout 5.8 or 9 and just gradually dwindled back down.\nConrad\tAnd just after we got in there by the time I looked at it again after insertion everything it bled down on our gage to 4.9, our gage read a little low. I think the actual reading, you will probably find the cabin actually was 5.1, but the whole rest of the flight the gage never budged off the 4.9.\nCooper\tThe gage stayed right there like it was glued.\n2.7 Wind Shear\nCooper\tThe wind shear, we had none and, certainly nothing that we could tell, but as I understand we've been told that for that day anyway we had almost negible wind shear.\n2.8 DCS Updates\nCooper\tDCS updates were right on time.\nFCSD REP\tYou had two updates?\nConrad\t1 plus 45, 2 plus 25.\n2.9 Engine 1 Operation\nCooper\tThe engine 1 operation couldn't have been better,\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"10\nCONFIDENTIAL\nIt was beautiful. Just now in between engine 1 operation and engine 2 here we have two items we will insert in here.\n2.10 POGO\nCooper\tOne was POGO. At 2 minutes and 5 seconds we started picking up POGO and I got a fairly good amount of POGO on through, stopping just at about 5 to 7 seconds before staging. POGO dropped clean out exactly the same time there that we programmed POGO on the early days.\nConrad\tYes, that one surprised me. We'd heard and read that both John and Gus's and Jim and Ed's flight that they were hardly even aware of POGO and boy when it came in on us it was loud and clear and, well Gordon, neither one of us could talk hardly; we were really vibrating with it and I was hard pressed to read the displays. By golly, if I had to read the number on the displays I think I would have been hard pressed to do it, because we really had it pretty good.\nCooper\tYes, the rate ... the amplitude of them were such ... 11 cps frequency and the amplitude of them was such that you were on -- you were on the marginal\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"edge of reading of any large gage and any fine\nreading that you had to read, you would never be\nable to read any numbers. It was exactly like\nthe POGO we did all along on the program up at\nAmes and as the exact amplitude, I don't know, but\nit was, ..... I think we don't want that kind of POGO.\nIt was not particularly upsetting to me, because I\nreally was fairly familiar with POGO having been\nthrough all that POGO program, but this thing kind\nof tickled me that we got it to see that we had\nstill hadn't solved it, but I don't think ...\nits something you don't want because if you had other\nthings going wrong during that period of time it\nwould make it very difficult to say what you had\nwrong or what ...\nConrad It didn't upset me, but it surprised me, you know,\nbecause I just wasn't expecting POGO.\nRCSD REP What g-level would you estimate it to be?\nCooper Well, we were sneaking right up there.\nFCSD REP I mean the POGO.\nCooper Oh, it was right at about 5 g's.\nFCSD REP Well, I mean plus or minus amplitude.\nCooper Well I, my estimate on it was that it was something"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"on the order of maybe three quarters of a g. Well, I\ndon't know whether it was that high or not.\nConrad I thought it was at least a half, if not better.\nApparently it wasn't that high. I was really\nsurprised. Like I say, we were really getting the\nramrod out of it.\nCooper It was beyond what we selected as we thought\nshould be the cutoff. It was more than what we\nhad selected at Ames as being max acceptable.\nAlso in this, I passed up very briefly there one of\nthe first things that happened immediately about\nthe time that we got the pitch program was the\nIGS Stage 2 fuel needle failed in the full-max\ndeflection position. And it came back on and was\nreading after staging briefly and then failed again\nduring staging. It was intermittent.\n2.11 Engine 2 Status\nCooper Engine 2 status stayed ... was perfect. There was\nnot anything wrong at all.\n2.12 Acceleration G's\nCooper Acceleration g's were right on the profile, were\ncertainly very pleasant. Nothing wrong at all with them.\n2.13 BECO"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper BECO was right on the money.\n2.14 Staging\nConrad Boy, that staging was smooth too.\nCooper They told us that BECO was going to occur early, but\nit was ....\nConrad We did loft a little bit apparently like they said\nwe would because, right after staging ....\n2.15 Engine 2 Ignition\nConrad Well, Engine 2 ignition, I wasn't even hardly aware of\nthat other than we just started to get a little, you\nknow, we just sort of went off the peg at 6 g's and\nGordo said staging OK and Engine 2 is good and I\nwasn't even aware that Engine 2 had lit. You\ncan't hear it, to speak of, but you can feel the\nacceleration slowly building up.\nFCSD REP Did you see anything visually?\nConrad No, I didn't see anything. I heard the other guys\ntalking about see the flash at the brig. Never\nsaw a thing and I wasn't aware of any flash out\nthere either.\nCooper I didn't see anything at all at BECO. The best clue\nthat I have on my side, is that I see the Fuel\nand Oxidizer needles start coming down as the engine"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"starts burning. And then they coming down fairly\nrapidly at first, I mean you get a very definite\nmotion on them right at first there and they kind of settled\nout. Engine 2 ignition we've already covered.\n2.16 RGS Initiate\nCooper RGS initiate right on the money.\nConrad I was going to mention that we had lofted and\nthat we were expected to pitch down and we did when\nit picked up RGS.\nCooper It smoothed in very smooth, and the fading was\njust right.\nConrad The IGS needle really deflected and I was, you know,\nI don't think it pitched, it didn't peg out, but it\ndid make a large dip and then when the booster\ncame down just pitched down very smoothly down to\nabout 75 or 80 degrees, I guess it pitched down\nalmost 10 degrees.\nFCSD REP What rate did it pitch over?\nConrad Very slow, but steady, at just ....\nCooper It took about 20 seconds I guess to fade it in there.\nConrad The needle came in and made a big deflection and\nright after that the booster started pitching and\nthe needle started back and boy the needle was"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"back and thing was right on the money at about 80\ndegrees. It was a very smooth transition and then\ndo you remember they were telling us to look\nfor this one cps oscillation? Well, I didn't have\nrate needles like Gordo did, but I wasn't aware of\nany oscillations at any time. That booster was in\npitch and yaw as far as that went ....\nCooper Those rate needles were like they were glued .\nThere was never through boost or second stage was\nthere ever any rate except that one tiny little\nrate, one teensy little rate just at when we were\nin POGO we got one tiny little longitudinal rate,\njust one tiny little fleck on a rate, and was the\nonly one. Otherwise it was just smooth as silk,\nthe whole time, rate wise.\n2.17 Fairing Jettison\nCooper Fairing jettison. We jettisoned fairings at 3:25\nand man do they ever go.\nConrad I counted Gordo down to them. Okay, yes, that's\na good point.\nCooper Beside the scanner fairing and the nose fairing go\nand when the nose fairing went it went with all\nkinds of debris. There were pieces flying all"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"16\nCONFIDENTIAL\nover.\nConrad Yes, and I don't think it went right. I don't believe it went right, because the R and R can was ripped up in the front, and I can show you on my side the nose went like that and there was some tape or fiber glass that goes around the ....\nIt was fiberglass cloth and it was all broken loose in jagged flaps sticking up that, you know, had broken loose from along in here when that cover went I had decided impression that the cover went off askew, that it didn't jettison the way it should have. And this could be a good point of putting it back to after insertion.\nCooper Well, it's supposed to go off askew.\nConrad Yes, well, it just didn't go off clean. That's why this was ripped up, see.\nCooper Well, it something somebody might look into, but you don't want to recommend that they put back to after insertion, because your taking a weight penalty to carry that all the way up.\nConrad Yes, I realize that, but ....\nCooper It was designed to go off ....\nConrad That was the reason in the first place that they"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n17\nmoved it up there anyhow, because they weren't ....\nCooper No, the reason they moved it up there was because they didn't have strong enough propulsion on those squibs and spring combinations or whatever they use. We never did get a reading on that, but whatever the total propulsive expulsion system wasn't kicking, the scanner fairing wide enough but what they would come back into the booster. But didn't you have the distinct impression that the nose fairing broke into jillions of pieces when it blast.\nConrad I certainly, I certainly, yes. That's why when I say askew, I mean something didn't look right. I can't put my finger on it, but --\nCooper It came off in many pieces anyway. There were many, many pieces and the whole area was just filled with debris.\nConrad Yes, and then, I'm not sure that that's when we got all that glop on our windshield, the spots ...\nCooper Well, I noted exactly at that time immediately after the fairing went, I noted about 5 or 6, I saw them hit, 5 or 6 gray splots, just small ones, very small little gray-type splots and I was distinctly looking for that and watching for it and\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthey were not there before they were there and I saw them when they hit. They hit during all this debris flying around period.\nConrad I think that you can still find them on the windshields. They didn't burn off during reentry.\nCooper But they're not bad and there are just a few little scattered ones and I think it might be interesting to compare how many you get there versus and how many you get when you jettison them in orbit. It may well be that jettisoning in orbit would be preferable, but I didn't find anything objectionable to jettisoning where they went, they went fine. It did add a lot of debris and I agree with Pete there was a big torn something or other out there which may just be a fiberglass thing that is kind of ....\nConrad Yes, I want to get down and look at the R and R and and I can tell you what it was, describe it a lot better. We'll probably have some pictures of it too in the camera somewhere. I know it'll show up in some film.\nFCSD REP How long was this visible? You say there was a big bunch of stuff out there.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n19\nCooper There's a whole fly. Oh, you mean the debris. It was gone.\nConrad It was gone like that, but it just looked like the whole darn thing exploded.\nCooper It looked like it just flew into a jillion pieces. It was all around you for maybe a period of a second or two.\nConrad I didn't think it was that much, it was just gone.\nCooper But it was a defininite period of time when you were aware of all this debris all over and then clear. Okay, enough for fairing jettison."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20\nCONFIDENTIAL\n2.18 GO/NO GO\nCooper GO/NO GO: We never got a GO/NO GO because we lost our number 1 radio in about 4 minutes sometime just prior ... let see we got a .8 .... We got a V over V_R of .8. We got a GO/NO GO of ...\nFCSD REP You did get a .8?\nCooper We got a .8.\nConrad Yes, that comes much later - that comes after the GO/NO GO.\nCooper Yes, that's right, okay, well I don't remember ever getting a ... yea, we did, we got MCC GO. Right we got a GO/NO GO, okay, but then immediately after .8 we never got anything at all from there on until after we were inserted and gone to UHF No. 2.\nConrad I think it must be in the antenna problem, I really do.\nCooper Well, there's some problem there because the same thing happened on one of the previous flights and we definitely and completely lost radio and I switched over just before we inserted. I switched over to number 2 and then when I called out the IVI's we were back with them then.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 21 2.19 Systems Status Cooper System Status everything .... Conrad We did have ... Let me describe the delta P lights. Shortly after liftoff I got the number 1 fuel cell delta P light and I reported it and just about the time I reported it, then the number 2 fuel cell delta P light came on. They stayed on all the way through boost and they were on after insertion for ten, fifteen seconds and after that they went right back out again and that was it. It didn't effect anything on the fuel cell operation, the currents, the voltages, everything stayed fine other than their being on there was no other way of telling the ΔP was out of tolerance so I don't think it is a problem. We expected it. Cooper I'm glad that we had them changed to orange rather than red. Conrad Yeah, yeah. Cooper Systems status in addition to that I don't think we had any systems that were exactly right, except the radio and the acceleration as we had expected it. We were right on the profile. SECO was ... 2.20 SECO"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"22 CONFIDENTIAL Conrad I think we burned out at, Gordo, 7 and 1/4 g's. Cooper Right. SECO was exactly on time, just exactly on time and IVI's read 002 AFT. Almost perfect. 2.21 Steering Cooper Steering was ... there was no steering accelerations or velocities that we could tell. Steering was just smooth as silk, apparently they had us going right down the slot. And when we came off, apparently we were lined up well because there weren't any rates because when we came off and waited our 20 seconds there were no rates whatsoever and it was just setting there just .... as smooth as Conrad As stable as a rock. Cooper As smooth as silk so that and when we started thrusting and separating we came off just right straight forward. No deviation, no skidding around or anything. Just right straight off. Conrad I thought the IVI's were plus 2. That's what I have written down here. Plus 28 right, 3 up. Cooper I guess that's what it was. FCSD REP This velocity you read? Conrad I was going to cover that in your .... Cooper Your right, plus 2, it was -- that's right. Plus"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"23 CONFIDENTIAL 002. Conrad I have all the computer readouts. Cooper 008 right and how many up? Conrad 3 up. 3.1 Post SECO Cooper MANEUVER CONTROLLER worked fine. We went right through .... Conrad Well, let's go through that. The way we had practice SECO, Gordo, got SECO and Gordo unstowed the CONTROLLER and I armed the BUS ARM Switch so that we get the MSC-1 doors OFF. Cooper Brought the propulsion power ON. Conrad Brought the ATTITUDE CONTROL Electric Power ON. Went from RATE COMMAND to DIRECT. Armed the switch and hit the computer. Armed the sep spacecraft thing and Gordo and I counted the seconds down. In the meantime, I punched off address 72 so that it was reading and then in 20 seconds we had SEP S/C .... Cooper In 20 seconds I started and I called it out and started thrusting and Pete would hit the sep spacecraft .... Conrad The reason we did that was so that we would have"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"24 CONFIDENTIAL the inertial velocity readout on the gage and that was beautiful 25,808 and nominal was supposed to be 25,807. You can't ask for a better calculation from a computer than that, and a lot of people don't have much faith in that thing but, I think that I'll bet that the computed MCC figure isn't more than a foot or two off. It couldn't be because everything was nominal for hours and hours in the past. Day's it went that way where we stayed on the flight plan to the minute, to the second so I know that it was a good computation, and I have the five address readouts that we read. We read out address 72 as 25,808; address 94 which was R dot for gamma was plus 20 feet which is pretty darn small so we must have almost a zero gamma address 97 which is the forward IVI was plus 2 feet; address 52 was perfect, it was zero. So there was no adjustment needed and if there had been an adjustment needed that would have come at 3,042 seconds on the computer if there had been an address. 52 correction and nominal 3,008 seconds so the computer computed the nominal thing off only by less than a minute, about a half a CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"25 CONFIDENTIAL minute of what the actual nominal value should have been, so I think thats pretty darn good for that ascent routine in that computer, and I think that now that we have Math flow 6 in there this is why I think the guy shouldn't get so darn worried in MCC about underspeeds and giving them burn corrections and going through all this Mickey Mouse. I've been trying to make this point ever since we got associated with .... Cooper I think we had better immediate data available on board than people have been giving it credit for. Conrad That's right, and it really pleased me to see it come out on the computer this way. Cooper And had we never gotten our communications back we would have known that we were in good shape because of the data we had on board, we didn't have to worry about the ground readouts and what to do; we would have known what to do whether we had been under or over or anything else. Cooper Attitudes and rates, there weren't any rates. The thing was steered right down the slot. We came off smooth. Conrad Spacecraft separation ...."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"26\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tWe separated as smooth as silk just right straight ahead ....\nConrad\tWell, we counted down and Gordo said he was ready and I SEP spacecraft and he thrusted and I went back to RATE COMMAND for them and we came straight off. I didn't even feel it. The first thing we felt was thrust.\nCooper\tAnd rolled upright and went to 000 00 -15 which happened to be right on the horizon. As it turned out that 15 figure was good. It read out the IVI's.\nFCSD REP\tThat's, you know on 4 ... they thought they came off the booster.\nConrad\tYes, that's why I mentioned that because ....\nCooper\tThat's what we were looking for, too.\n3.2 SECO Plus 20 Seconds\nCooper\tWe've already mentioned the IVI displays. Spacecraft separation occurred very smoothly. Thrusting was smooth, nothing wrong at all. Attitude rates were good.\nConrad\tYes, I don't understand this! I don't understand this guy saying that they can't hear them or they can't sense them. Boy, I was easily aware ....\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"27\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tYou can feel them almost more than you can hear them. You can feel them vibrate really, more than you can hear them. I mean, you can hear them too, but the vibration you can hear them too, but the vibration you can feel the thrust.\nConrad\tHave you ever heard a high speed hose or high speed water jet. Shhh ... That's the impression that I had.\nCooper\tYes, that's right.\nFCSD REP\tEven from the aft firing thruster?\nCooper\tEvery thruster we had on there.\nConrad\tWe heard every thruster on the whole flight\nCooper\tIt never occurred in my mind when the thrusters were fired. You can feel them and I can hear them. I couldn't hear them in the sense of an explosive sound or a roar. It sounded like water swishing.\nConrad\tYes, very definitely, more a Shhh.\nCooper\tAnd I was aware of it again when we made the burns later on, you know, we made the reverse coelliptic stuff and all that. ....\nFCSD REP\tHow did these noises, the thruster noises, sound compared with the way the last crew set the mission simulator?\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"28\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad\tHey, that's another interesting point.\nCooper\tThey're not very close on pulse.\nConrad\tPulse is a ...\nCooper\tPulse is more of a thump.\nConrad\tThat's the one sound that does sound like you'd expect a rocket engine to sound.\nCooper\tHere's a sound just about like this: (knock)\nConrad\tYes, it very definitely sounds like a knock. There is no \"shhh\" or roar, just a little thud.\nCooper\tYou can hear it just like somebody knocking at the back of the spacecraft. You can hear it go \"tap tap, tap, tap, tap,\"\nConrad\tReally, the simulator doesn't sound the right way. It's a general enough nature and it the same type manner ....\nCooper\tYes, it is close enough to give you a good cue.\nConrad\tThe platform mode for instance, you know, when it goes shh, shh, shh, shh ... did the same thing in the spacecraft except it was all in one thump and swooshes when it was constantly firing the thrusters it sounded like the swish.\nCooper\tThe air-to-ground communications I thought was excellent the whole time. I didn't find anything wrong.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"29\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad\tWe really had good comm the whole flight.\nCooper\tThere was never a time -- the only time -- the only fault we find was one or two times through the remote site when the MCC was trying to remote to these sites they would get some fading. I must say the HF worked excellent. When they were transmitting music, broadcasting music to us, my gosh they had us practically the world round on the HF section. The music quality was quite good in most cases.\nConrad\tI got times on that we can bring out later so that they can correlate how far ....\nCooper\tGO/NO GO, there wasn't any problem on that. They gave us the GO right away.\nFCSD REP\tHow long did it take them to give this?\nCooper\tOh, heck, immediately. Almost immediately.\nConrad\tThere was no swivel because there was no velocity correction.\nCooper\tThere was no velocity correction needed. Orbit quantitites were good, they had those for us. It took them quite a while to read us our experiments but they just said you have a nominal orbit and then maybe ....\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"30\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad\tI've got down here the GMT of liftoff. I wrote down 13 plus 59 plus 59 which they later change to 14 plus 00 plus 00. I have the one A time they got it up to us okay, which was 10 plus 11. Then I have the 2 dash 1 they gave us was 01 plus 27 plus 16 which they later revised to 01 plus 26 plus 27. I wrote those down.\n3.3 Insertion Activities\nCooper\tOkay, let's start on insertion activities. SAFE the switches we did that just right for our checklist. In fact, we are even more convinced than ever that a good, thorough, accurate, checklist is the only thing to have and ...\nConrad\tPhysically marked them off when they were done.\nCooper\tWe followed it conscientiously. The sequential light tests, we did it just by the tests. Stowage, we already had modified our checklists and we already had written on some of it that we would do these if we decided to. For instance, the D-ring safety pin, we did install them at right time, and there was no problem on those; they were much easier under zero-g to get in and out than we had thought and I had no\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n31\ntrouble getting my D-ring in, did you?\nConrad I waited on mine, remember.\nCooper Yes, you waited ....\nConrad I stowed my D-ring thing ....\nCooper So we closed the cover immediately and I decided I would go ahead and see if I could get mine, and I got to it right away and it went right in, so I put it in.\nConrad We, of course, got in trouble in the second orbit, but we did not unstrap or put the drogue pins in the seat or unstow any items of gear other than the flight plan books and the 16mm camera and the Hasselblad. I take it back. We went through the Flight Plan as advertised and then stowed the items. We had D-2 camera out, the Blob out, but we did this in the proper places in the Flight Plan. But we never did unstrap.\nCooper We never unstrapped and never put the drogue pins in until after we go to 6 - 4 GO. We got a 6 - 4 GO.\nConrad But we restowed too, after we got in trouble. We thought maybe having to go into 6-4 why, we'd put ourselves back into the configuration CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n32\nthat was pretty close to being able to reenter\nCooper My arm restraints were never up. I already decided that I was not going to launch with them. They are just useless as far as I am concerned, and I was delighted I did not have them; and I didn't miss them and I don't think, I think personally you could remove them and ...\nConrad The arm restraints are there for the pressurized case and high altitude ejection. I did go with mine up. I would prefer to go with them down, but there wasn't any reason, I didn't need to get my hands on the hand control or anything so I left them as they were, but I don't think they were necessary.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n33\nCooper Okay, belts. I couldn't find anything wrong with the belts. The harness - While we're on the harness, I don't like that harness worth anything. I personally think what we need is a simple type adjustable type harness with clips on the legs that you can undo the legs to get to some of the functions you have to: urination and defecation and so on in the spacecraft. I don't see why we have to have a big, expensive, custom, made harness that you can't readily get on and off and this one you can not readily get on and off and if you had one with simple adjusting buckles on it and snaps like you do on an airplane parachute harness, it would be, I think, a hundred times useful as this one.\nConrad Let me ask you a question. Do you really - now, do you really - I agree. Let me say this. I agree you should first be able to get your harness on and off, but in zero-g I'm not convinced that three, especially two leg snaps type arrangement. In other words, a harness that would come completely loose and have many straps that hitch to the other straps would be really good in zero-g. What I think we need to do is to be able to get in and out of that harness that we have, easier. Like, maybe you could loosen the leg straps on it but not have them come apart. Now, I CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n34\ntook my harness off in flight twice. I took 'em off once--\nCooper Yeah, but you wouldn't even have to step through these leg loops if you had - just like on an airplane harness. You could undo that and you wouldn't even have to worry about the leg loops. Then all you'd have to do is just slide out of the torso area.\nConrad Yeah. Well, lets see, that's what I'm saying. If you unhook both of those leg loops and you throw the whole thing down in the footwell and then you pull it back up again you got a leg strap floating off over here and you got a--\nCooper Well that's no problem. It's no worse than it is finding your lap belt. Did you ever have trouble getting your lap belt back on after you took it off?\nConrad I always hitched it on the Velcro over on the side.\nCooper But you never had any trouble getting to it. I didn't. I let mine float free and I never had any trouble getting to them at all.\nConrad Well, I just don't know now. I really didn't think it was that bad getting in and out of this harness. My only concern was that if--I stayed--\nCooper How many times did you get in and out of it?\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n35\nConrad Twice. The big problem was having you unhitch the straps on my suit.\nCooper That's right. With the cables to go over the harness.\nConrad The harness--the easiest thing was getting in the legs. That was no problem at all.\nCooper Yeah.\nConrad Where I needed help was getting over my shoulder and getting the straps on the suit hitched back up again, which is a two man operation.\nCooper Well, my point is that for normal wearing around the pad area or wearing around when your suited and everything, you'd be much more comfortable if you could have those straps loose where they're not gouging you in the legs.\nConrad Yes, well-- Oh, I agree.\nCooper Or where you had adjustments on them ....\nConrad ... adjustments see--\nCooper Okay, well.\nConrad Where you could make the legstraps loose but you'd never disconnect them so you don't have free floating straps around there. It was no big problem ....\nCooper My suggestion would be to have them exactly like you did in a parachute harness. You have the leg adjust-\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nment and on that same fitting you have the little snap\nwhere you can unsnap in the places you want to.\nConrad\nOh yes, you dan do it either way. Sure.\nCooper\nYou could either loosen them or--I just think we've\ngone to such complex tailoring devices in order to\nprovide some company with a great elaborate program of\nproviding expensive harnesses that they ... I just per-\nsonally don't think they're worth a darn for what they're\nintended for. I don't think you gain that much. I\nthink you loose a lot of it.\nConrad\nWe'd have been better off if we'd had a place to stow\nthat harness.\nCooper\nThe life vest. Now I disagree with everybody that's ever\nsaid that those aren't in the way. We wore them all\nthe time mainly because we didn't have a darn place to\nstore them and they're a pain in the neck to get on and\noff but they are really in the way. They're in the way\nof everything you do. They bump into your arms.\nThey're there to cut down visibility on your chest and\nthey're just a nuisance.\nConrad\nYeah, we didn't have a place to store them.\nCooper\nWe didn't have anywhere to store them or we'd have taken\nthem off and left them off. I am here to say that I\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nthink they're really bad where they are.\nConrad\nAfter the big sweat was over and we got a GO and we\nwere relatively sure we were going to stay there for\nawhile unless we, you know, had some other emergency\ncome up, I would have preferred to take off the harness\nand the life jacket and stow it somewhere if we'd\nhave had a place to stow it.\nCooper\nRight.\nConrad\nBut the other thing is that maybe that's just my per-\nsonal feeling. I'm extremely meticulous and we kept\nthat spacecraft as empty as possible. Everything had\nit's place and it stayed in it's place.\nCooper\nAnd that harness and the vest--are pretty big, bulky\nitems -\nConrad\nAnd I wasn't going to have it rattling around down there\non the floor,loose.\nCooper\nOkay, on the drogue pins. By golly, I thought those\nnew little things on the drogue pins made them very easy\nto get in and out. There wasn't a bit of problem with\nthose.\nConrad\nI popped the drogue pins in and out on mine.\nCooper\nI put mine in or out once just to ....\nConrad\nI think Gordo put his own in and out once to see if he\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\ncould do it and he could. That worked real well.\nCooper\nOkay. Fuel Cell O2 and Fuel Cell Hydrogen Quantity Read.\nYes, we read them at least a million times. Fuel Cell\nPower Readings. Yes, everything checked out fine on\nthose. Bermuda 2-1 update: fine. Orbital Flight.\nFCSD Rep\nYou'd better get out your flight plan on this because\nthis is the original stuff I was telling you about.\nConrad\nWell, that's all right. This probably will go fairly....\nFCSD Rep\nAll three, if you go the way you did it.\n4.0 Orbital Flight\nCooper\nOkay, on 4.0 Orbital Flight. Platform Alinement.\nConrad\nThere's our first problem.\nCooper\nThere's our first problem. Our platform mode did not\nwork and I don't know what's wrong with it. but the\ndarn thing does not zero out the alinement on the space-\ncraft. It allows a good size yaw attitude to sit in\nthere and won't zero it out and it is extremely sloppy\nin pitch. The whole thing, I think there was something\nwrong with the whole thing because it doesn't work at\nall like the ones in the simulator, and the whole thing\nplus or minus a half a degree should be a very, very\ntight control system and this was lucky to be plus or\nminus ten degrees in any axis and I think there's some-\nthing really wrong with it. I personally think that\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nsomething was wired up wrong or something in it because\nit was not working right.\nConrad\nWe didn't really get a chance to evaluate it too well\nbecause we had trouble with it so we stopped using it\nand by the time we'd been able to do anything with it\nwe had other problems, fuel problems and so forth. So\nwe never did get back to using it again.\nCooper\nWell, we had other control system problems which were\noverpowering, platform problem wise, but we did try one\nburn on the platform and it was a terrible mistake. The\ndarn thing did not have the accuracy to really hold it\nand we got one foot per second in and out of plane there.\nConrad\nYeah. That was in those coeliptic.\nCooper\nIn one of those, that coeliptic burns and we made our\nother burns then on Rate Command and man, that Rate\nCommand system is just beautiful. It holds that space-\ncraft so tight that it can't vary.\nConrad\nYeah. We had a beautiful control system, I thought. When\nGordo made any of the burns on the Rate Command or\nanything like that it really responded -- well.\nCooper\nRate Command has tremendous torqueing. Boy, it's strong\nand it's instantaneous and you can just stop it right on\nthe money. Really good.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nFCSD Rep\nOkay, on this platform alinement thing. You went to\nSEF and caged and SEF and Platform Control Mode.\nCooper\nWe pitched down to visual when we went to CAGE and then\nwent to SEF and we went to Platform mode and after fid-\ndling around with it awhile we decided the Platform mode\nwouldn't work so I went to Pulse and then I, just using\nmy needles, Platform needles then, I just pulsed the er-\nrors out until we torqued around and got the ... got\nit ... on a fine line.\nConrad\nOkay, Now, there's no doubt in my mind that the Primary\nScanners, there's no doubt in my mind now, but we lost\non Primary Scanners. We started to aline the primary\nScanners and I don't think we ever got to platform aline\ncorrectly because the primary scanners were not working\ncorrectly.\nCooper\nNow the primary scanners. The funny part of it is the\nPrimary Scanner was working in such a manner - working\njust enough, that it checked right because when we checked\nout the alinement of it and the tolerances on it it was\nworking fine, but there was something in it on one of\nthe tests that we did later showed that it was actually\ndriving, tending to drive the spacecraft down.\nConrad\nContinuing to torque you down to about fifteen degrees\nnose-down.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCooper Or more.\nConrad In other words, it continued to try to aline the platform at about fifteen degrees. It tried to put the nose on the horizon is what it did.\nFCSD Rep It tried to aline the platform up at fifteen degrees nose down?\nCooper Or more. I figured it was about somewhere around-- Well, one time it alined us at about 40 degrees nose down and it still was indicating in scanner limits.\nConrad The scanner got worse as the flight went on, but I don't think it ever worked correctly.\nCooper No. I don't think it did, now I look back.\nConrad That's the thing right there and I think that this-- I'd like to know what they decided from tracking the REP on how we put the REP out because we put the REP out in the proper position, but I don't think the platform was alined correctly. We had trouble with that scanner in the sunlight on the horizon and this was right when we were using it to aline - just before we put the REP out.\nCooper Just as we were using it to aline and put the REP out, the Scanner began to skew all the platform needles off and it skewed off and, --went to ORBIT RATE.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nConrad Now wait til we get the onboard tapes because the tape recorder was working and this all is on the onboard tape; the conversation that Gordo and I had about that. So we weren't really sure it was working right but it wasn't that far off that we were going in the dark--\nCooper Approximately 30 seconds before we had to pitch around or had to yaw around to eject the REP, I had to go back to CAGE and try getting a real rapid Platform aline in there, SEF and PULSE and I had the needles zeroed and we may not have been so far off but you don't know. That isn't enough time to really get it alined. In other words. I had about the time we did it and got there we probably had maybe, 30 seconds to Platform aline. That's about all we had.\nConrad Well, we were just hoping that if it had been pulled off only in pitch why, you know, we'd get it right--we'd pull the pitch right back in again.\nCooper But the scanner was acting up very badly by that time.\nFCSD Rep How long did you aline the Platform initially?\nCooper Initially, we alined the platform for about 15 to 20 minutes and it seemed to aline allright although at that time Pete and I had a discussion right then that we seemed to be alining nose down.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nConrad Now, you see. Here's something that I've never heard from the other guys.\nCooper Now there's another thing. See, we never had a simulator to show us. Never once did we have any darn thing to show us what out the window should look like.\nConrad And when the Platform is alined and you're zero-zero-zero, boy, oh boy! That's a, just -- It's a very peculiar looking situation and it's not what I expected to see at all.\nCooper No, it isn't me either.\nConrad And I've never heard either Gus of John or Jim and Ed say \"Put a little gouge out\" Now I've got a gouge that I can draw for you where I'm sure that I can put the Platform in roll and pitch within a degree in roll and pitch of where it should be out the window on the horizon and it's by using the corner of the window and the RCS thrusters on the front: the front RCS yaw thruster in the lower corner of the window and you can put the Platform-- you can put the spacecraft zero-zero and roll and pitch just, well, like that. We didn't know that before we went.\nCooper This is one of my strongest recommendations if we aren't going to have any kind of a visual out the window display at least we ought to get some of the great planners to\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\ndraw up on a piece of paper what the window, what the horizon should look like through the window which I'd requested several times and never got -- to show the guy what these various things should look like out the window. We spent the whole darn eight days trying to figure out what some of these angles should look like and I'm not sure we were very clear on it to the day we re-entered.\nConrad Yeah.\nCooper Now that's ridiculous! And it's because of this odd angle that you sit off in there. It completely fouls up everytning, as to getting these various angles: inverted and right side up and 90 degrees angles and all this.\nConrad I think we ought to--I'll tell you it's a good recommendation for the guys who are going to have the time to do this on GT-7 with that Hasselblad can take a pound or two of fuel and sit up there and photograph with the camera back inside the spacecraft so that you get the window perspective in this thing. Photograph zero-zero-zero, bank right 90, bank left 90, at different nose pitches above the horizon. Boy theres--you start moving that nose around and it's not like an airplane.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCooper Really, we sat there and had hours worth of discussions in drifting flight when we'd be drifting through, you know, and we'd say, \"Hey, doesn't that look like they're about 30 degrees nose up and roll right 60 degrees?\" and then we'd try to find those lines and match them and see ... there's an awful lot of learning there. By golly, if we'd have a Platform Aline Gouge, a visual gouge idea, we'd have picked up this trouble right off the bat. We really didn't think the platform was alined right, but we really didn't have anything to tell us that it wasn't.\nCooper Now looking at it where we know now after we went to the other scanner finally and we got proper operation knowing what we learned during the flight it appears now like we were--the number one scanner was trying to aline us several degrees down over what it should.\nConrad Yeah.\nFCSD Rep Did you ever go back to Primary after that?\nCooper Oh. We checked it a lot of times after that and tried it numerous times and it got worse and worse and worse and it finally was actually driving the spacecraft down to minus 90 degrees and still the scanner, that's the funny part of it, the scanner wouldn't go off until you were about 60 degrees below the horizon.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"46\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad\tIt seems to me we've got some data for them on Primary\nscanner over the states so they could have it on telemetry.\nThey should be able to find out what happened on that.\nCooper\tYes, something was really fouled up, I think. Insertion\nCheck List--\nConrad\tWe went through it by the numbers.\nCooper\tBy the numbers, Thruster and Control Mode Check - we went\nthrough by the numbers. Everything was fine.\nConrad\tWell, we were a little bit late. We got a little bit\nbehind and it was about the time when we were late per-\nforming the thruster control mode check because that was\nsupposed to be done before you got to the Canaries and\nwe did it after the Canaries.\nCooper\tThat's right.\nConrad\tWe were behind, but we started catching up.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n47\nCooper\tCom Systems Check. We were right on the money, on time,\non that.\nFCSD Rep\tEverything checked out okay on that?\nCooper\tYeah.\nFCSD Rep\tCom System?\nConrad\tD-4, D-7, I did by checkoff list and checked out\nokay over Carnarvon.\nCooper\t6-4 GO/NO GO, well, that was quite late.\nConrad\tNo. We got a GO for 6-4 over Carnarvon. That's\njust to get past 2-1.\nCooper\tOkay, Yeak Okay, got the 6-4 GO/NO GO, that's right,\nD-4, D-7 GO/NO GO. Those were right on the money\nand everything was fine there. Third adjustment\nmaneuver.\nConrad\tWas nominal\nCooper\tWas nominal and everything was fine there. Power\ndown D-4, D-7 was nominal. 16mm, 35mm, D-6 equipment\nunstowed and mounted and there we begin to deviate\na little because just prior to this time we began\nto get this rapid decrease in the -well- where\nwas it there?\nConrad\tIt was-let me go into the log-book here for one\nsecond because I got some.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n48\nFCSD Rep\tThis Perigee adjust. Did you do that in Rate-is\nthat the one you did in Rate Command? Or is that\nthe one you tried in PLATFORM?\nCooper\tDid that in PLATFORM and it worked fine on that one.\nDid that one in PLATFORM and it worked great, but\nthen on some of these other burns we did I tried\nit in PLATFORM and it really didn't work well at\nall. That's why I rather suspect the PLATFORM\nthing. There's something wrong with it. I think\nit was better at some times than others. It was\nallowing a lot of drift.\nConrad\tOkay, in the log book I have it at 50 minutes which\nis just prior to Carnarvon that I found the Fuel\nCell O2 and H2 Heater Circuit Breaker OFF. Now\nthat--I found it off because they told us to heat\nthe Hydrogen not the Oxygen, but the Hydrogen finally\ndrilled down to the 220 and they wanted us to\nuse the heater and I turned the heater on and I\nnoticed that I didn't get any ammeter rise and so\nI looked at the circuit breaker panel and the\nCircuit Breaker was OFF. So, now in retrospect\nseeing the O2 ON which is on the same circuit\nbreaker burned out, I'm sure that it blew when this\nthing burned out.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n49\nFCSD Rep\tWe were at the power down on the D-4 and D-7.\nConrad\tOh Yeah. Well, about that time I think we were\ngetting back on the Flight Plan. We got the 16mm\nout. We got the 35mm out.\nCooper\tD-6 equipment was - - -\nConrad\tWell, it's really D-2, it's what it was and I had\nthat work so I decided, \"I'll put together in\npieces at the blob and the camera put together\nseparately and they had it all loaded with the\nright film and everything and had it on the floor,\nand we were ready to go.\"\nFCSD Rep\tWere you pushed for time to do this?\nConrad\tWe were right on the money. We finally caught up\nafter Canaries and we were on the schedule at\nCarnarvon.\nCooper\tYeah. We were in good shape at Carvarvon.\nCooper\tRadar test #6, at 01:30, that worked fine. We did\nbring it on. It worked. Observed the transients\non R dot, range and range rate. 6-4 Preretro command\nload came out fine. Blood pressure on the Command\nPilot there past Carnarvon, let's see. Now that\nwas back over the Cape here, yeah.\nConrad\tNo, you broke the O-ring didn't you? Right off the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n50\nbat we broke the O-ring.\nCooper\tThat's right. That's right. That's the first\none. We broke the O-ring and couldn't give them\nthat blood pressure.\nConrad\tI think that was the one.\nCooper\tThat's right. We finally gave that one up. The\nO-ring was broken on that one.\nFCSD Rep\tLet's see. This first blood pressure that you got\nan hour...\nConrad\tThey got that one and then when Gordo--\nCooper\tWhen I, When we transferred over to me and I\nplugged it in the ...O-ring broke and we didn't\nhave time for that pass again.\nConrad\tWe had a bunch more O-rings. I forget when we fixed\nit but we fixed it...\nCooper\tFixed somewhere around there.\nConrad\t...shortly thereafter.\nCooper\tM-1 experiment.\nConrad\tWe turned it on on time.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper\tYeah. I got a lot of comments later on that on. That thing is so noisy.\nConrad\tOh, you know, I found out what happened, you know. They went back and recomputed and they found out they had four days worth of air in the bottle--Ha Ha!\nFCSD Rep\tFour days?\nConrad\tYeah. It ran out.\nCooper\tBut the thing. You can turn it off and it keeps running back there. And it goes SMACK-CHOO, SMACK-CHOO, SMACK-CHOO.\nConrad\tYeah, it's pretty noisy.\nCooper\tAnd in a real quiet cockpit it really sounds loud.\nFCSD Rep\tThis radar test #6 here at 01:30-\nCooper\tUsed to turn the radar on.\nConrad\tUsed to turn it on.\nFCSD REP\tUsed to turn it to standby.\nCooper\tTurn it to standby and warm it up.\nConrad\tUsed to observe the warmup transients.\nFCSD REP\tAnd all this happened, right?\nConrad\tYes, and it's on the voice tape. Like Gordo said, you know, what the radar needle did. What it does is it has sort of a cyclic thing when you put it in standby and it's ready to run why it sits there and the lock on"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"light blinks Green/OFF, Green/OFF.\nCooper\tLock on light will blink on and it will come out R and R dot will go from peg to peg. And they'll settle out when it really is warmed up good and you've gotten past the transient periods and they'll all come back to zero.\nConrad\tI think what they're looking for are clues to tell you that the set is warming up correctly. Back in the early days of TACAN we had warmup problems.\nFCSD REP\tIn other words, this would be your first indication if something was wrong?\nCooper\tPurge Section. One and Two.\nConrad\tWell, we got our first load, this 6-4 load. The first load that came up over the DCS system and it came up right over the Cape.\nCooper\tPurge Section. One and Two. Got that?\nConrad\tYes, no. Yes. That's when we were getting rushed. Let's go back to that. Let's stop right there. The REP was supposed to go out at 02:07 and I purged early and I always had been purging early because I purged it about 1+50 and then I went through the check off list and they were all checked off here. I powered up at 1+50, I purged the fuel cells and here I checked them off here.\n... prop gauge experiments and the RAD 1 on and the cold"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IR on and the power on the exmitter on and the recorder off and I went through these by the numbers. Computer, we went to Catch-Up. We had the hundred feet in the window. We were really getting ready to put the REP out and right then and there was when we came over the hill and we were beginning to get to the dark side you know, and the sun was getting low and that's when the scanner started going out.\nCooper\tThat's when the scanner started dropping out.\nConrad\tAnd we started getting the scanner light and then now, you got to visualize there's part of the problem. We're coming into this \"Fuzzy Zone\"-horizon and that is the best way to describe it.\nCooper\tYeah, you can't see anything.\nConrad\tAnd the spacecraft looks like you're pitched up tremendously when you're zero-zero-zero to begin with and we both had the impression that the scanner was pitching us up. Well, that may not have been true. It just may have been that that's the way the sky got to looking as we approached the dark side zero-zero-zero.\nCooper\tActually, you have a transition point there where you cannot see the horizon and it doesn't look like either sky or earth or anything. It's a complete blank."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tIt's really a grey area.\nFCSD REP\tRight at dusk.\nConrad\tYeah.\nCooper\tRight at dusk or right at sunrise.\nConrad\tYeah. Now the first time we went through there we didn't even see it. We were working. That was right after insertion. So, mind you, this is the second time we got to see it and I can't emphasize this point enough, even though we were on the flight plan and everything else, you got to let the guys learn what's going on up there. You haven't been up there before in that darn vehicle you've got to learn it. That's right where we started getting in trouble.\nCooper\tThat's right. That's the exact point that we made.\nConrad\tI made it for six months now.\nCooper\tFor many, many months we've made this over this flight plan, sticking this REP, this whole REP thing in that early in the Flight Plan before you really have a chance to get the systems ironed out and checked over and everything and if everything goes exactly right and nothing fails you can run through it time and time and time and time again and you'll make it and you'll make it on time."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tYeah.\nCooper\tBut you add one little failure in there and you've had it.\nConrad\tYeah. That's where I made my first mistake. We got purged in an hour and 50 minutes and I was going by the check off list and right there we got in this discussion about what was happening to the platform and I missed the most important thing on the check off list. I forgot to blow the doors on the cold IR. It's just as simple as that. That's the whole G-- d------ Flight Plan been running for the D-4 cold IR, it's been our biggest constraint and a thing that I knew as well as my right arm but there was a glitch and the glitch got us off the scheduled activities and I missed it bigger than heck. I didn't blow the doors on the cold IR and it's all my fault and I accept the blame for it. We went through this quickie aline business and we got turned around and Gordo had it right on the money, we were right out of plane and we got the REP out 15 seconds late. It went out at 02+07+15 and we turned around, waited for one minute, got the radar on, locked on it and we were whistling away from it and I was back on the Flight Plan and happy as a clam when I suddenly"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"56 CONFIDENTIAL\ndecided that something wasn't reading right and I realized\nthat I hadn't blown the doors on the cold IR and I blew\nthem and at that time the REP was at 2500 feet from us,\nwhich is the end of the experiment, but I think it was\nstill reading--\nCooper But it was still reading on the, according to the gage.\nConrad Yeah. I think that cold IR read to a great, great thing.\nNow, the Radar gage, this is where--here comes the next\nmystery-the radar gage said the REP was leaving us at\nthis point in time and that--\nCooper Five feet per second?\nConrad Yeah. I have 3 1/2 feet per second written down.\nCooper Oh, at that particular point. Oh, well it--when we\nfirst got our first measurement on it the range rate on\nmy analog dial over there read exactly 5 feet per second\nthat it was going away from us.\nConrad Yeah. Okay.\nCooper Right on the money.\nConrad To go back to the D-4 in time it was 02, it was 02+16+15\nwhen I blew the doors, which was corresponding to\n2500 feet and I ran that REP D-4 recorder until 02+37+12\nand--okay, now. That darn REP! Gordo had the needles\nright on the REP and that REP was going straight out\nfrom us at 270 on the ball. It just went, I just\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 57\nthought everything was going perfect. The REP was\nmoving just exactly out of plane away from us and\nit was moving at about the right velocity and then the\nmystery came. It just kept on going.\nCooper Yeah.\nConrad It kept right on going straight out, and--\nCooper It wasn't slowing down very much.\nConrad And I got over here on the graph and I kept reading\nthe mileage and we were up to about 7 feet a second.\nIt was leaving us, and I realized, I began to think,\nwell gee, this is- That's when I was really convinced\nthat the platform wasn't alined and we must have kicked\nit out some screwy way. Then it started to drift behind\nus quite fast. It finally did peak out and it went\naround the corner at some phenomenal distance, like it\nwas almost nine tenths of a mile away from us, but\nat that point it had started to drift aft quite rapidly\nand when we got to the nodal crossing time, it was behind\nus by a mile, according to the radar. Now this is all\non radar. And now, mind you, it's nighttime and it was\nright there. We could see it plain as day.\nCooper Okay, let's see, we were at the--\nConrad Okay, that's when we got to this next screwy thing.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"58 CONFIDENTIAL\nSee, the REP went straight out and kept on going.\nCooper The REP goes straight out and then it just kept on\ngoing. It was slowing down very little and just kept on\ngoing and going and going and going.\nConrad And it never really stopped. What it did was it\nsorta, it sorta starting going off this way, you know,\nand it never got out to a node point where you had\na definite stopping range and a start back in again.\nWell, the range rate never got below a foot per second.\nCooper The range rate never decreased. You never got a decrease\nin range rate, but it just kept-it started drifting slowly\noff the 270 line on back out, but it went straight\nout the 270 line to a--\nConrad For quite a while\nCooper What was the range? Do you remember what the range was\nwhen it still was out there?\nConrad It went straight like relative motion to us would\nhave looked like it went out looking down a plan form,\nif we were here. It looked like it went out like this\nand it slowly started doing this.\nCooper Yeah.\nConrad And it never did have a stop to it. It finally crossed\nbehind us back in here someplace.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 59\nCooper We never got the point where it crossed behind us be-\ncause somewhere when it was about the 210 point was when\nwe were out of fuel, of fuel cell O2.\nConrad Yeah, well, you see, we went by Carnarvon--\nCooper And this was coming down just BALOOM BALOOM BALOOM\nBALOOM BALOOM.\nConrad See, here we go. We went by Carnarvon. Here I was trying\nto figure out in here what was going on and what we\nwere going to take out and everything and we went by\nCarnarvon and right here at Carnarvon and that's when\nCharlie ... called up and says check your O2 heater\nswitch to AUTO. Now I had seen it fall, had noticed\nthat it had been falling and I had gone to the AUTO\nposition when without even being told --\nCooper You had already gone to manual.\nConrad And then I was doing many other things and I decided\nit wasn't coming up and so I'd gone to manual and held\nit over there a couple times and sort of looked at it\nand --\nCooper That didn't work either.\nConrad I must have kidded myself into thinking that I was\ngetting something out of it, and then I forgot it\nagain and then--\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"60 CONFIDENTIAL\nCooper But you did go back to the AUTO.\nConrad Yeah. I put it back in AUTO, you know, and then I called\nthem, I think it was on the tape and I think I told\nthem, I said, the switch is on AUTO. We're okay.\nDon't worry about it and then right after that we got up\nto this 240 or so in there and we realized that something\nwas wrong and the heater was out and I guess we told\nthem--We told them at Carnarvon that the heater was out.\nCooper Well, we checked at that time then on the ammeter on\nand off and on and off that on both manual and AUTO and\nit was obvious.\nConrad And that's when we--\nCooper And it was coming down so rapidly that it looked like\nvery shortly thereafter we were going to have fuel\ncell stoppage.\nConrad We were getting below 200 and falling pretty fast and\nwe had a big discussion between ourselves and we just\nmade up our mind to forget the REP. We felt we were\nreally in trouble.\nCooper So we elected at that point to start powering down because\nwe knew that we were using fuel cells at a very high\nrate.\nConrad And we secured the Platform and Radar and everything else.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n61\nCooper So we said okay and we're stopping it right here and of course about this time we were in the boondocks area away from everybody as always occurs.\nConrad We were between Carnarvon and Hawaii.\nCooper And--so we just started powering down everything and holding on.\nConrad So from there on we were off the Flight Plan.\nCooper From here on to the next twenty orbits the REP was right with us. Ha,Ha,Ha!\nConrad That's what I cam't figure out. How did it get 375 miles from us when it hung around for 5 orbits? That darned thing. Everytime we went on the night side-\nCooper It was so--\nConrad As a matter of fact, I didn't see it for a time or two and then all of a sudden, the nose of the spacecraft was lighting up!\nCooper We even saw it in the day side. It was so near we could even see it in the day side and at the transit areas when the light would be shining on it we'd be just going into the darkness we could look back and you could even see the dipole on it as it tumbled. The tumble rate was very, very slow.\nConrad And then you guys called up and told us it was 375 miles away.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper That's impossible. That thing wasn't that far away. It hung right in there.\nCooper I think that's the whole things.\nCooper But I'll tell you there were two different night sides we went into. Several--\nConrad Two different night sides--well, I really--it wouldn't have surprised me if it had hit us.\nCooper Me either. It seemed to me like it was a lot closer.\nConrad That's what made me think that well, the platform was aligned and I don't know what exactly happened. I did notice that it sort of climbed on us. So then I had the feeling that maybe it was doing sort of a figure eight type thing. That maybe we had fired it off up or down a little bit you know. And it was in three dimensions; a little bit out of plane working it's way around us, backing up and going ahead and coming back around because the darn thing was always there. It was there until the darn lights burned out on it. Anytime we wanted to find it if you wanted to move the spacecraft around you could find it out there.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"63\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper It was close enough so that almost any attitude you were in you could see it shining on the spacecraft. Even if it was clear back out here you could see the nose just lighting up from it.\nConrad So I know it couldn't have been too darn far away. I mean maybe up to five miles or something like that, but it didn't get that far away from us. I don't understand the 375. I was really surprised that those guys called up and said it was 375 miles away.\nCooper Yes. Well, I don't believe that figure.\nConrad It will be real interesting to see what they dig out from it. Well, all the radar and everything we had is on the tape, isn't it?\nCooper Well, that was our first big heart breaker.\nConrad We ought to be able to put that all together.\nCooper After all the work we did on the REP, then not to pull the rendezvous out, we sure--\nConrad Well, from there until we got the GO to 6-4 we just were along for the ride. We just stayed--\nCooper I knew that--I was just so sure of all the time we put in simulating that darn thing I just had a queasy, uneasy feeling that maybe we better put\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"64\nCONFIDENTIAL\nin more time on other things.\nThat something was going to go wrong--\nConrad I felt every problem that we had I felt real good about the fact that we had either the smarts to know that it was straight forward-- It didn't take too long to figure out that that heater was on one line, both heaters, and that we'd had a single point failure. And as a matter-of-fact we took the schematics out.\nCooper And there's another argument for our having it, for when it occured there wasn't anybody around to ask advice.\nConrad It was very straight forward to throw the switches and look at the amp meter to see whether you were getting anything out. There was no doubt in my mind that it had burned out and the same darn thing with the thrusters. When we finally decided we had a problem with them we went through the circuit breakers just like we did in the trainer and it was obvious that number 7 was out and 8 went out and then the rest of them started getting sour. So, I think that all the training we had we were pretty well prepared.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"65\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper I do, too. I'll tell you--the launch--we were perfectly normal and right on the money--\nConrad Yes, we were sitting there waiting to find out what they wanted us to do. I mean we knew we could go on the batteries long enough to get to a fairly decent re-entry place and we were taking bets with one another and we were kidding about McDivitt. There must have been real pandamonium at MCC. They were burning up the lines to everywhere. Because there really wasn't anything we could do after that but just sort of wait. We re-stowed everything and we were ready to go into 6-4 if they wanted us to. We were all prepared to go into 6-4. We didn't want to.\nCooper We really didn't think we'd make 18-1.\nConrad Gordo was the eternal optimist though. I'd say, \"125 pounds\" and he'd say, \"Well, it hasn't really fallen anymore.\" Then it would fall about another 20 pounds and I'd say, \"Well, that's 100 pounds now,\" and he'd say, \"Well, that's really not much below what it was before.\"\nI think we had a little more confidence than the guys on the ground, I really do. I remember old\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Steiner saying don't worry about that liquid\ngoing through that heat exchanger. He said it\nwill go through just fine. The one thing that I\nthought was that we might have dinged the tank\nwith the REP but as long as the quantity stayed\nup there we were in pretty good shape, but I wasn't\nsure that we didn't just might have some sort of\na hole back there and were just slowly leaking\npressure even though the quantity--\nCooper That was one thing--we always worried about that\nREP with that big diapole hanging out. If it\nskewed up a little going out what would it wipe\nout going out. It just happened to be with a lot\nof that OAMS--fuel cell lines and all that type\nstuff back there and that was one thing that\nalways kind of concerned us about ejecting the REP\nnow and then.\nSo that was one thing we kept running over and\nwondering what it had wiped out.\nConrad Yes. That was the only thing that kept bothering\nme, but it held to 60 though and that was pretty\ngood.\nCooper Okay. Let's see boresight on RER, nodal crossing.\nWe didn't get the nodal crossing. I sure wish we"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"could have hung on long enough to find out where\nit crossed us behind there.\nFCSD Rep Let's back up just a minute on your lock on.\nCooper Okay. Boy, it just clung right on to it and zap.\nWe got the lock on and the darn range and range\nrate came right on there. It was moving right\nout at about 5 1/4 feet per second just throttling\nright down the old line.\nConrad Address 69 was reading just fine.\nCooper Everything was right on the money.\nConrad Address 58,59--\nCooper The range was moving right on out just like it\nshould and we were sitting right there on our 270\npoint on the ball tracking right straight out for\na long ways out. Then is when the variance came\nin, when it kept going out. It should have\nstarted slowing down on range rate. But, it\nseemed like it was slowing down awfully slow. It\nseems like the range rate kept on for quite a ways.\nConrad You know I had a 58,of -63.8, and a 59 of a 139.8\nat .89 miles and we should have never gotten that\nfar away from it ever--in the beginning.\nCooper See with it moving out at the R that we had, all\nthe figures we had ever run on it--we had our own"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"little calculations right here--finally we were\noff our graph up there, weren't we?\nConrad Yes. Well, you've got to realize that the graph's\nbased on out of plane and this was the hypotenuse\nto the thing, but even so--\nCooper But still you've got to--\nConrad It still went away more than it should have.\nCooper Because you cosine angles were fairly small in\nthere.\nConrad It still went away more than it should have.\nCooper I don't quite understand it.\nConrad We'll know what the platform--I presume they can\ntell how well we had the platform aligned.\nCooper But there again, there's the first little horse\nshoe nail that throws the glitch in things. When\nthat darn scanner screwed up right at the most\ncrucial time. It probably had been screwing up\nall along, we just hadn't really caught it. It\nreally threw the glitch in right there at a point\nwhen it really shouldn't have. We may have lucked\nout still, and gotten it out right on the money\nand it may not have been the problem. I don't\nknow, but anyway with the best we had to work with\nwe got it out the best we could and it looked like"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it went out in good fashion. I think we still\nwould have been all right if we had gone ahead\nand done the rendezvous with no problem even if\nwe had gotten a little out of plane with it we could\nhave handled this later on. But, there again it made\nit difficult for Pete because it got him completely\noff his schedule, too. It got him late blowing\nthe doors. Well, we still were reasonably well on\ntop of it. Let's see.\nConrad We can skip all this REP stuff. You got anything\nelse you want to know about the radar?\nFCSD Rep It would be best I think to go on through it and\nsay what you did and didn't do so we can stay on\nthis.\nConrad Yes, well--\nFCSD Rep Use your flight plan.\nConrad Well, we got as far--let's see, it says when on bore--\nsight read and record address 58, 59, and 69 and\nthis was just before 2:51 when we were supposed\nto have a reading to give back on the ground.\nThis is the reading I got: 58 read -63.8, 59 read\n139.8. The distance was-- address 69 was .89 miles\nand I got that at the time that it was supposed to"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"be gotten.\nCooper Why don't you bring the flight plan over here\nand let's start down it. We might as well\nskip what he has in the flight plan here\nbecause it varies so from there on.\nConrad From here on you can forget this flight plan.\nCooper That's right.\nConrad Right here.\nCooper Where's our little book of the flight plan?\nConrad I've got it right here.\nCooper Oh, okay.\nConrad Okay. All this time we sweated out getting home\nand that's when we wound up--here is where we\nstarted on this flight plan, at 1 day and 02 hours,\nso that's 12 hours after lift-off.\nCooper We finally got back on A flight plan and --\nConrad Yes, and that's the first thing we started to do\nwas to power back up.\nFCSD Rep One day. That's 24 hours.\nConrad No. That one day remember we--\nCooper We started that one day--\nConrad We went CET to 2400 Zulu and then that became day\n1, 00 hours and lift-off was 1400 Zulu."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n71\nCooper From lift-off until 2400 hours the day of launch\nwas elapsed time and starting at that time we started\ncalling it day one and then GMT.\nConrad Okay. So, we went through a little deal here\nwhere we started to power up and they let us turn--\nwe'd been drifting hadn't we?\nCooper Yes. I'll say.\nConrad We turned up the AC, ACME inverter on and the ACME\nbias power on OAMS attitude on and we went to pulse\nand we were supposed to power back down again at\n02 + 27 + 25. We were supposed to have this H2\npurge at 02 + 45 + 00. That was the first thing,\nthey were just going to let us purge H2 we\ndidn't purge the oxygen. Everybody was worried\nabout that. Then we were on the flight plan and\nthey gave us an update time for our first\nmedical pass and we stayed--I think we took these\nvision tests, didn't we?\nCooper Yes, we did.\nConrad We just stayed right on the flight plan, had the\nvision tests, and I have a comment in here that at\n01 days 04 hours and 32 minutes we saw our first\nmeteor re-enter.\nCooper Man, we saw a lot of those meteorites re-enter"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n72\nbelow us. That kind of startles you when you\nrealize they are entering below you. It means\nthey've gone through you.\nConrad This is when the experimenters went out of their\nminds. They handed us this flight plan you wouldn't\nbelieve where they had 1, 2, 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,\n12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23 no 22 experiments\nthey gave us to do in a row and they involved\neverything in the spacecraft and we had gear all\nover. You wouldn't believe it. I never had so\nmuch junk--we went wild. That's when we called\nup and said, \"Hey, gang let's be a little more\nreasonable.\"\nCooper The other problem was they didn't list them\nsequentially.\nConrad Yes, that's right.\nCooper They put them in there and we had to keep skipping\naround on them to get the sequential time on them\nand that was a mess.\nConrad Now, what we did is we copied down in this book\nand then we'd write it down at the proper time so\nthat we had it sequentially in the flight plan.\nCooper It worked out very well."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n73\nConrad You don't want to get into which experiments we\ngot done and which ones we didn't or do you?\nDo you want to go through it that detailed?\nFCSD Rep Well, there's an experiment section in there.\nCooper Well, let's cover all the experiments in the\nexperiment section. We might just comment right\nnow how that I think our book arrangement worked\nout extremely satisfactory and I don't know how\nwe'd have ever kept up with where we were if\nwe hadn't had these books to follow. We just\npassed these books back and forth and we managed\nto keep them stowed pretty neatly. I knew right\nwhere they were. Pete kept them stowed beside\nhis left leg in the seat. They slid right down\nthe seat.\nConrad Right here and Gordo kept them on his right and if\nhe had them and I wanted one --\nCooper If he was asleep I would just reach over and slide\nthem out and vice-versa. And then our Volkswagon\npouches held the little ones real fine. These\nbooks were used a jillion man-hours--just back\nand forth. They really worked out well. They're\neasy to write in and we tried to keep meticulous\nlogs on everything and I think we did reasonably"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n74\nwell.\nConrad Okay, now we also wrote in these little screwy\nditties. This is where we kept the things if\nthey wanted us to power-up something or pull\none of their nutty tests that they dreamed up\nin the middle of the night. We'd write them down\njust in order in which they came.\nCooper Do we just want to go right on down through here?\nFCSD Rep Okay. Why don't we go right on down and list what\nwe did and then when we get in the experiment section\nwe can go into detail.\nCooper Okay. Where did we leave off here now. At--okay,\none day 4 hours and 40 minutes. Let's see we\ndidn't do this--\nConrad No, we didn't do the cryogenic test. That's right.\nCooper Then at 1 day 5 hours we did the S-8, D-13, Command Pilot.\nConrad That's another thing. They had you doing these\nthings while one guy was asleep and one guy was\nawake. You wake up and have a briefing period -- it's\njust a bunch of baloney. We were both awake\nand when we took a test why we took it together\nand got it out of the way.\nCooper We ate together and slept together and took the\n.... together. We'd been completely startled"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n75\nwith terrible pulse rates when we'd hear somebody\ncalling from down in that deep barrel, Gemini 5,\nGemini 5, Gemini 5. Ha,ha.\nLights on all over the place trying to find the\nradio switch. Ha-ha. Out of a deep sleep.\nCooper Okay. I think maybe if we'd just go down through\nhere and hit these things that particularly--\nConrad Tell me where we are in time and then I'll look\nin here to see what notes there are in here.\nCooper Well, and then we left these pretty well as we went\nthrough the flight plan here and then we left\nthose pretty well--\nConrad Well, these are all the next day so--\nCooper These things are all ready listed in there--I think\nwere just mainly the things we wrote in here.\nConrad These S-6 passes --\nCooper S-6 weather pass at 1 day 6 hours and 10 minutes.\n1 day 7 hours 48 minutes 26 seconds. Sequence\n08, we did that. That was the hurricane too wasn't\nit? And then we had another sequence on that--\nthe next trip around at 9 hours 22 minutes 49 seconds.\nWe looked at it again. Then at 9 hours 27 minutes\n33 seconds we had a sequence 208 and that was--\nConrad Man, we've got logs for the logs."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"76\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper I don't know but what we might be better\non this just to go through our individual\nspecialty logs and log where occured at what\ntime, because that's the more accurate\none of all--because this was kind of our running\nlogs of what was going on--to warn us when things\nwere coming up ahead. As far as going back into\nthis and doing the whole thing that isn't as accurate\nas going into--there are so many specialty\nareas in here. We have those logged real\naccurately according to time. I think it\nmight be better to go through and get all\nthose and build a flight plan out of that\nrather than go through the flight\nplan because the flight plan had to\nbe just completely--we didn't sleep\nwhen we were supposed to and we didn't\neat when we were supposed to and--.\nConrad Well, let's go on through this thing, and now as far\nas the experiments go those guys have a complete\nlog of what they sent up to us and that should\njive with the complete log that we have of what\nwe received and from that and what we logged and what\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"77\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwe did we can tell you at any point in time whether\nwe got a certain experiment done or not. If they\nwant to know if we got something done or not and\nif there's a reason why we didn't do it why we\nusually had that recorded somewhere. Either\nin here or in the flight plan.\nWhy don't we go through this one?\nCooper Okay.\nConrad When we get to a point of the experiment or something we can check in here.\nCooper We did the UHF test.\nFCSD Rep Why don't you read off those days.\nCooper Okay. One day and 8 hours--let's see 1 day 10 hours 49 minutes. Sequence 03 UHF test 3.\nConrad Right.\nCooper We did that.\nConrad We had--were supposed to do an Apollo at 01 12 36 17. Now I don't think we got that one.\nCooper I think that was sequence 208. Why don't you check that one real quick--yes.\nI think that was the one we couldn't get because--\nCooper We had weather over that one.\nConrad Covered by clouds.\nCooper Okay, we had UHF test number 3 at 10 hours 49 minutes.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"78\nCONFIDENTIAL\nFCSD Rep One day?\nCooper We've all ready mentioned that one. We did get that one. We have that one written up here actually it occurred around down here. Flight plan up-date. Yes, we had lots of those.\nConrad Now, here was the D-4, D-7.421.\nCooper D-4, D-7 421 occuring at 1 day 12 hours and 7 minutes.\nConrad I'll tell you whether we got it done or not. No.\nCooper We didn't do that one.\nConrad I don't know why we didn't do it. We were in drifting flight by then, I guess.\nCooper Then we have a note right here. The D-6 number 19 scrubbed for the State side pass. They scrubbed that one. There was a weather problem on that one.\nConrad Yes.\nCooper Yes.\nConrad Okay now this is an interesting thing at 01 days 14 hours, completely different than GT 4, we started getting these RCS heater lights. Those guys--the only time they got an RCS heater light was something like day 3. Ed said it was in ring A and he turned on the heater and he got\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"79\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthe light 2 or 3 times and he turned the heater off then it came on again. You know, for an hour's period of time and he never had the lights again. Now, this is another reason why I suspect this OAMS system--one of the biggest mistakes ever made--whoever recommended it on the ground to power down that OAMS heater to save electrical energy fouled our whole system because we started at this point time having RCS heater lights. I checked for 8 days throughout the flight and I could always get an RCS heater light. If I turned off that heater switch I'd have an RCS light come on every once in a while and so we left those RCS heaters on all the time.\nCooper From one day and 14 hours the RCS heater were on the whole flight.\nConrad You know they're auto. And the only heat when necessary, but every time we turned the heater off we wouldn't run for an hour or two that the light didn't come back on again and it would either be on ring A or ring B.\nCooper And the temperature that we'd get on the gage when those lights would come back on was something in the order of about 60 degrees wasn't it?\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"80\nCONFIDENTIAL\n55 degrees.\nConrad Yes.\nCooper They ran when the heater was on--it kept them between 60 and 80. One time ring B got up to 80 degrees. But it ran between 60 and 80 degrees, that those heaters kept the RCS, A and B.\nBut, any time if you turned that heater off it wasn't any time at all until the light came back on again so we just turned them on and left them on the whole flight.\nAnd that RCS couldn't have worked better. It was the most beautiful system you ever saw.\nConrad Boy, it sure did. Now, here of course--\nCooper As you say, in contrast to what we had before.\nConrad Here's another thing when we got into these high tumbling rates that really kept the spacecraft cold.\nCooper Shew! The windows even froze over.\nConrad Yes, it was darn cold.\nCooper We were down to minimum flow. We had both suit flows off--completely off. We had the suit coolant completely down to the next to last notch and we left it cracked as we were afraid we would completely freeze up the whole coolant if we shut\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it completely off and later they told us that we\ncould go ahead and shut it completely off. And\nwe were sitting in there just shivering and shaking\nand I was a lot colder than Pete. He was cold and\nI was really cold. I was really thinking seriously\nabout--if we couldn't get that thing warmed up I\nwas going to take my suit off and I did for a\nwhile in fact take my inlet and exhaust hoses off.\nConrad Yes, that was his answer to the problem. When he\ngot too cold, just disconnect.\nConrad Just let it blow into the cabin.\nCooper But, it was so cold in there that the windows froze\nover and we were sitting there spinning.\nConrad It had a rapid freeze on them. I didn't see that\nexcept when we were doing the high tumbling and it\ngot really cold in there.\nCooper You could see the frost build up on the outside all\nover the spacecraft. Outside up on the nose\nsection around the thrusters it had frost all over\ndown there. When you tumble the thing doesn't\nhave enough time for the sunlight--when the sun-\nlight hits on it -- I think to warm up that particular\nsection. When we damped it immediately thereafter"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the whole thing started to warm up. You could see\nthe frost melt outside. Everything seemed to go up.\nThe fuel temperatures would go up, and the whole\nECS system would warm up, the cabin would warm up\nand everything. We were sitting there--\nConrad A slow drift or stabilized flight--\nCooper When we were sitting there really spinning up, things\njust got colder and colder and colder. Now by\nspinning up I'm talking about we got up once to\n12 degrees per second. It wasn't any bother to us\nexcept visually. You just couldn't stand to look\nat it cut the window. It just gave you such an\nawful looking picture. Like you were in an inverted--\nupside down--wrong side up--. So we finally put\nthe polaroid filters up ... the holes.\nConrad We got completely in the dark there.\nCooper I didn't even want to look at what was going on.\nIt was odd because before you could take a pencil and\nput it out here and it's the best attitude indicator\nyou had. If there's any little rate going on at all\nthe pencil would give it to you. You can sit and\nhold it right out in front of you and it's just like\nan artificial horizon. It's the most beautiful--\nor camera or whatever you have out there it will do"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the same thing. You put something out in front of\nyou and it would just disappear. Whew!\nIt wouldn't sit in front of you. It would move from\none side to the other of the spacecraft due to the\nrates you would build up.\nConrad Yes, here's where we got into this business of the\nOAMS Heater-Off and ACME-Off and the C adapter to\nCommand and the Scanners-Off and they wanted to up-\ndate the computer. We brought the IGS and the\ncomputer on and then we powered down again and this\nis--\nCooper One day 14 hours where this started.\nConrad Yes, right in here. That was passing over Carnarvon.\nCooper And then is where we brought up the second fuel\ncell. We brought back on--\nConrad Got the pump back on the line and then we got ready\nfor our first big day over the States.\nCooper Yes, that's a great day.\nConrad Boy, we were busy though. We learned a lot.\nCooper I tell you though, those passes over the states\nwere really good.\nConrad The third day was our best day as far as being\norganized. They gave us about the proper amount\nof experiments and we were well organized.--"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Yes, we had a great day. That third day was a goody.\nMan we had everything right on the button. We\ngot good shots of it and everything just worked\nout right on the money. Okay, let's see. This is\n15 hours 40 minutes, that's still with everything\npowered up.\nConrad Then we had this D-1 and D-4 and we got those. Those\nwere photographs. We got the photographs of the moon\nand the IR measurements of the moon and with the IR\nfilm and I think they're probably pretty good. Of\ncourse the Air Force has that film.\nCooper We found that the IR and the retical and the radar\nand everything were pretty well right on the money.\nEverything seemed to be boresighted pretty well, and\nPete could look through his questar lense at a star\nand be boresighted right in the middle of the darn\ncamera. I'd have it right in the middle of the ret-\nicle.\nConrad Yes, I've got to eat crow on that. I was the guy\nthat was complaining about did they really have this\nstuff boresighted. Everything was extremely well\nboresighted.\nCooper Yes, it sure was. Can't complain about it at all."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad No, it worked very well.\nCooper Let's see we had an observation of the storm and some\npictures there at 17 hours and 12 minutes still on\nday 1. Oh, we brought the radar to stand-by to\nwarm things up there at 17 hours-- 16 hours --\nConrad Radar temperature went down to 19 degrees .\nCooper 16 hours and 50 minutes--it was the secondary\ncoolant loop that got so cold. They wanted us to\nbring on some added heat source so we brought the\nradar on to stand-by for quite a period of time\nto warm things up, and let's see--\nConrad They wanted to warm the radar up, too. It got too cold.\nCooper Yes, that's right. What did we do in here.\nConrad That was S-8, D-13.\nCooper That was S-8, D-13, and that didn't work out very well.\nThat was too early. That was the one that was so\nearly in the morning.\nConrad It seems to me that's the first time we looked at\nit and we saw the smoke.\nCooper Oh yes.\nCooper Now, let's see was it the first one or the second\nthat I saw and you didn't see.\nConrad I don't know. I never saw it."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FCSD Rep S-8, D-13. One day and 18 hours.\nCooper I saw it. That's right. We couldn't see it at\nall until we were almost over it and then I found\nthe target.\nConrad We could see the smoke and we were looking at the\nsmoke and looking at the smoke--\nCooper The sun angle was very low and it was very bad\nbut just after we got right on top of it and going\non over I located the targets and was trying to\npoint them out to Pete. At least I sort of got\na pattern on the ground and I think that's why\nI could find them. I recognized the pattern on the\ngeneral area of the ground that I could find. They\nwere in between two rivers and a big red mud hill.\nOkay, what did we get on that? That was next and\nI got on that one. Let's see that was three and\nfour and 18 hours and one day 20 hours 4 minutes\n43 seconds. We got that. And then S-8, D-13.\nConrad The same one.\nCooper The same one we were discussing there. Yes."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Okay, we moved to Med Data to Hawaii at 19 hours\nand 55 minutes which we did. I got there at 7 in\nthe Caribbean at 20 hours and did the MSC-1 at 21\nhours 52 minutes to 22 hours and 44 minutes.\nConrad Then we stayed on the flight plan there and at\nHawaii had a critical tape dump at 1 day 23 hours.\nI congratulated Gordo for exceeding his original\nflight time at 2 days ... hours.\nCooper Just barely started.\nConrad Gee. Oh! Here's that \"dinged by a micrometeorite.\"\nI haven't told anyone about this because I'm not\nreally sure that was what happened, because it\nhappened twice and it happened right in the same\nplace. It might have been metal cooling, but right\nover my head something dinged the hatch. Just\nbigger than heck - dinged. You know, just like\nsomeone shot a B-B off of it.\nCooper Yes, I could hear. That's just exactly what it\nsounded like.\nConrad I was convinced that we had gotten dinged by a\nmicrometeorite. So I put it on the voice tape and\nwrote it down here. Then a couple of hours later\nwe got dinged just as loud just about in the same"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"place again, so that made me think, well, you know\nthey aren't going to strike the same place twice\nso maybe it wasn't a micrometeorite after all. I\nreally don't know what it was, but I think it's\nworth a look at the hatch. It could have just been\nthat metal was cooling down or expanding or some-\nthing, you know --\nCooper They were right directly overhead on the right\nhatch.\nConrad Yes. It really sounded like someone fired a pellet\nor a B-B, or a .22 off of a piece of metal.\nCooper We decided we wouldn't put this out over the radio\nor we would get everybody all shattered. Okay,\nwell essentially that day 2 - that whole page from\n2 hours to 4 hours - went right on flight plan\nschedule. We did the Vision Test there and we\ncalled down the scores from both that one and the\nday before.\nConrad Now we were on this split purge cycle.\nCooper Yes, now here is where they started making a\nmistake. Somebody didn't realize that I could not\npurge the fuel cells from my side. I can't get\nto those switches, and I had to wake Pete up"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"every time he was supposed to be asleep when the\nfuel cells were purged. Well, I could get to them,\nbut I had to crawl right over in his lap to do it,\nso he was awake then. After that I learned to wake\nhim up early and let him get awake before he\npurged them.\nConrad Scared the heck out of that guy at Carnarvon, too,\nI'll bet you -- We were going to purge the fuel\ncells for the first time and I was sound asleep.\nGordo said, \"Wake up, wake up, we've got to purge\nthe fuel cells!\" I reached over there and turned\non everything and all the Delta-P lights came on.\nCooper He hadn't put the crossover --\nConrad The crossover valve on. I said, \"The Delta-P\nlights are on!\" The guy at Carnarvon said, \"Stop\npurging! Stop purging!\" He must have thought the\ncells were going to go right then and there so --\nCooper And then Pete woke up.\nConrad Then finally I woke up and got to thinking about\nwhat was going on there and found out that I'd\nfouled up, slightly.\nCooper All right, let's see. We deleted on day 2, 6 hours,\nand 35 minutes, we deleted that Philippines S-7 and they"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"were --\nCooper I wonder what the reason was for that. There was\nsome interference with something. I couldn't get\nto that one. Oh, what the heck was it? There was\nsomething else going on they had us doing right\nthen. Oh, somebody was asking me something. They\nwere having a big discussion over cryo. That's\nright. We had a great big 2 days 6 hours-we had\na big discussion over the net on something on these\ncryos and it occured right at the time when we\nwere supposed to get this one on this pass.\nCooper Okay, at 2 days 7 hours and 45 minutes we did MSC-\n1 again, and in fact I think we did all the MSC-1's\npretty much on schedule. At 2 days 9 hours and\n15 minutes we were supposed to do an Apollo\nLandmark in Africa, and the one they called out for\nus to do in the Flight Plan, there just wasn't any\ndescription of it. It was very poorly described\nand we couldn't find where and what it was they\nwanted us to get. They never did call out a\nnumber on this nor did they have it listed here.\nConrad What was the time on that?\nCooper It was almost 02:09:20:00."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 91\nConrad 02:09, huh?\nCooper Yes.\nConrad Gosh, that doesn't even show here. So, I guess they never did even call it up from the ground. You just saw it in the Flight Plan.\nCooper It was in the Flight Plan --\nConrad But they never called it out.\nCooper They never called it out.\nConrad I haven't got it written down, either.\nCooper Okay, on through the second day we did another UHF Test, another Medical Data, on 2 days 12 hours and 50 minutes.\nConrad That's when we first powered the platform back up. We were still building up.\nCooper Two days and 13 hours, we powered the platform back up and we did a UHF No. 1, we did a D-1 sequence 2, we did a D-1 sequence 3, we did a D-6 sequence 12; and these are all stateside passes. That was a busy time! We did a D-6 at day 2, 14 hours. We did a D-4/D-7 at 14:35.\nConrad What's this, now? I have the platform power up, a D-4, a UHF 2 --\nCooper Right.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"92\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad -- an S-6 at 15:45 --\nCooper You're ahead of where I was.\nConrad Oh, I'm sorry. Okay, we'll back up. D-6 at 13:41 46. We got Tampico instead of Monterey because it was clouded in. Then we did the UHF No. 1, and we got this S-5/S-6 during our African pass-didn't we? And we got the D-4/D-7 over Kano. Wait a minute, I'm not sure we got that one. Let me look in the log here. 4:20, no clouds over Kano, so we didn't get it. It was supposed to be cloudy over Kano.\nCooper That's right. There were supposed to be clouds over Kano. It was supposed to be clouds we were getting pictures of, and there weren't any clouds.\nConrad Yes, it was clear. Then we had an S-1, which we did not do. We did the S-1 later. That's when we went to platform power up and the computer on, and then we started a D-6 at 15:16. After D-6 at 15:16 was a number 20, which, if I'm not mistaken, was supposed to be Waco; and we got Dallas instead because Waco was cloudy then. Yes, it was supposed to be James Connally and we took Dallas instead, because Waco was clobbered.\nCooper What's this I have here? That's your note there.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"93\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad 21.1 feet per second Delta P.\nCooper Oh, that was our pre-burn stuff. At 2 days 17 hours 34 minutes and 31 seconds we had a maneuver load.\nConrad Well, I have the whole thing here. We powered up the platform on day 2 at 15:50 with the platform caged BEF, and at 16:15 we alined BEF with the rate gyros on. At 16:45:00 the computer went on and we addressed 25 90201, and apogee adjust maneuver was at 16:50:17. We translated forward to zero the IVI, so it was actually a retro burn. I mean we were BEF.\nCooper We were using the aft-firing thrusters.\nConrad Yes. We had a D-6 on the ship, and we didn't see it, at 2 days 16 hours 56 minutes and 49 seconds. We didn't see the ship. Then at 17:20 the second day we alined the platform SEF and we sat the computer up to address 25 00158. We made an SEF burn, which was a phase adjust maneuver, at 17:34:58. Now, that one we did in the Platform Mode and it didn't burn for schmaltz.\nCooper The platform didn't hold it. It allowed us to get a little bit of left-right and up-down.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"94\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad I don't believe that Platform Mode was holding the tolerances it was supposed to. It was drifting a full degree, and it was supposed to hold better than that.\nCooper It is supposed to hold plus or minus half a degree.\nConrad By drifting off in yaw a degree, it burned the whole time 1 degree off in yaw in the same direction. You see, that accounted for the sort of large out-of-plane number; it was like 0.8 foot per second that we got in to the out of plane. Okay, then we had a D-4/D-7 at 17:42:00, a 410 B and a 407 over Carnarvon; and it was not done.\nCooper That's right; we didn't have a reticle.\nConrad Because the reticle pooped out. We thought the reticle had burned out. It wasn't until later on after we were going to fix the reticle by putting the auxiliary light in there that Gordo found that there was a short in the cord when the cord was stretched, and that the short wasn't in the cord when the cord wasn't stretched, and that the sight was okay. That reminds me of another thing. Right after we got airborne I went to use the little auxiliary light down here. It was in the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"95\nCONFIDENTIAL\nclip so hard that when I pulled it out, I pulled it completely apart. I shattered it. I broke out my lens. Glass floating around and everything. Where did we stow that? I forgot. I gave it to you and you stowed it --\nCooper I put it in the garbage bag.\nConrad That's right; it's in the garbage bag, someplace. Well, they have gone through all that.\nCooper Incidentally, that one single-point cord that we have in there over on my side, if I had had something to cut it with, I should have cut it right in two so it wouldn't be used again. It's no good. It works fine as long as you don't put any tension on it. When you string it up to put it in the reticle, it shorts out.\nConrad Then we went through another maneuver preparation at 17:50:00 on the second day. We alined the platform SEF and we sat up an out-of-plane maneuver and address 27 00150, 15 feet per second out of plane burn, and 90 degrees yaw left. At 02 days 18 hours 06 minutes 50 seconds we made that out-of-plane burn.\nCooper We did that in Rate Command and right on the money.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"96\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad Yes, we did that in Rate Command right on the money.\nThen we had an S-8/D-13 and we documented those things; Gordo saw part of it and I didn't. We never did really get a good score. Then at 18:50 again we alined the platform SEF and set the computer up to 25 00164 and burned this reverse coelliptic maneuver at 19:04:18, and that was a good burn too. MCC had put in their Agena computer an Agena ephemeris, and they ran a rendezvous solution on a fake Agena. They had us make the actual burns, and then they computed how close we would have wound up. I was told over the radio that we got within 0.2 mile of altitude and 0.3 mile horizontal distance from where we should have actually been. That was well within the tolerances, so they were apparently fairly pleased with the burns. Then we had S-7 at 2 days 21 hours 33 minutes 02 seconds, and Gordo shot most of those. They always happened on your watch.\nCooper Yes.\nCooper Then we did 2 days 21 hours and 50 minutes. We had Apollo Landmark south --\nConrad That's when I woke up and you had that Lake ... I\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"99\nCONFIDENTIAL\ngot the S-7 again, or you got it, at 3 days 06 hours and 32 minutes. We deleted an S-7 at 3 days 05 hours for some reason. I just have \"delete\" in here.\nCooper What was that? An S-7?\nConrad Yes.\nCooper Yes. I don't know; they just told us to delete that one at 3 days 05 hours. Let's see; we deleted a Cabin Lighting Survey because Pete was asleep. That was one time when you were asleep and I didn't want to disturb you. You hadn't had any sleep in awhile.\nConrad You have the note down here that at 3 days 6 hours and 33 minutes you found the OAMS Control Propellant circuit breaker open and OAMS Control Regulator No. 1 circuit breaker open; and you don't know when they were opened, and I don't know when they opened, but we know what did it. We had been parking the water gun up there like you are supposed to be able to do and then pulling it off. You tend to pull down this way, which would cock the gun barrel up into the circuit breaker panel; and I think I probably knocked them off, but when\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"100\nCONFIDENTIAL\nI'm not sure. So, from that point in time on we never used the hook-up that you can hock it up on the --\nCooper We also found that little-hook up was peeling gray paint off of those bars and it was floating all over the cabin.\nConrad That's right. It kept knocking the gray paint off the guards and it kept floating around the cabin. So from then on we always put the water gun in the gun holster down there where it belongs. As a matter of fact I think it was easier to get it in and out of the plastic thing that holds it on the circuit breaker guards - holds it on there so tightly that it is a big swivet everytime you pull it off.\nCooper Okay. At day 3, 6 hours 32 minutes 46 seconds we did an S-7 Experiment that aircraft support on it. This was over the Philippines.\nConrad We got four pictures.\nCooper Right.\nConrad We did an MSC-1 at 07:40. We had a medical data pass in there at 04:53.\nCooper Right.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Then I have Platform to ORB Rate, Prelaunch, and\nhorizon scan for some reason. Questar 01, 90\ndegrees left.\nCooper We alined SEF at 13:10.\nConrad Oh, that was these platform tests 1 and 2 that they\nwanted us to do.\nCooper That's right. We were getting ready for another\nstateside pass, too. We installed the photometer,\nwe did an S-8/D-13 pass at day 3, 13 hours 32\nminutes at Laredo.\nConrad Oh, let me make a comment right now on S-8/D-13.\nWe were supposed to make a measurement, a window\nsurvey, of the window before day one and the last day.\nOkay, the window scan was done on 1 day 18 hours\n26 minutes 00 seconds. That was the first window\nscan. A second window scan was never done because\nthe last 3 days of the flight we were in drifting\nflight. This required a 30-degree sun angle on the\nwindow, and we never did have a control system\nback until we were on the RCS system. We weren't\nabout to do any experiments on RCS fuel. That was\nright before retro. The second window scan, the\none at the end of the flight, wasn't done. But"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I will make the comment that I don't think the\nwindow changed, just from my looking at it.\nCooper No, I don't think it did, either, I think it was\njust as bad at first, as it was at last.\nConrad That's right.\nCooper And it was pretty bad.\nConrad So, I don't think they lost anything there on that\ndata. We just couldn't get that one.\nCooper Okay. Let's see. We had a medical pass at day 3,\n13 hours 50 minutes - 13 hours 47 minutes, actually.\nAlined the platform --\nConrad We went through a really big day. This was day\n3 and this was the day we were really organized.\nThe experimenters sent us up about the right\nnumber of experiments. They gave us enough time\nbetween experiments, and they planned them well\nenough so that we didn't have any trouble changing\nthe gear around or anything, and we had a big day\nthat day.\nCooper This was a great day.\nConrad We had enough time to do it all and we felt good\nabout it. We felt that it was the best day we\nflew."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Let's see. Day 3, 14 hours and 18 minutes, we did\nthat Zodiacal Light.\nConrad That's right. Gordo really had it on there. I\nthink he got some good dope out of that Zodiacal\nLight. The pictures should be good. Gordo held\nit right on the money.\nCooper Let's see; and then we did D-6.\nConrad On the D-6 134, we looked for the ship again but\ndidn't see it that day, and that was one thing we\ndidn't get.\nCooper I have here now a D-6. We did it. This is El\nCentro. No, no.\nConrad 021 is Dallas, I think, or something like that.\nCooper That's right. And then day 3, 15 hours 8 minutes."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper We had a full day this day. Let's see--\nat 3 hours--day 3, 15 hours, 13 minutes\nwe had D-6 134.\nConrad When was this?\nCooper 3:05:13:51\nConrad Yes. That was a 134--that was the ship\nand we didn't see it.\nCooper Yes--that was the weather.\nConrad Yes--I have \"no joy for sunlight here.\"\nOK then we had a D-4 at 15:59.\nCooper Right\nConrad 409 and 410b and we got them both done.\nCooper We got both of those.\nConrad We had a platform aline at 16:15:00.\nCooper And a medical pass - right - platform\naline.\nConrad What was that--the computer was off by\n240 miles?\nFCSD rep Yes. Their computations were calling\nfor 240 short based on what was put into\nit.\nConrad That's right--that's just what happened\nand we were trying to fly short."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FCSD Rep Yes.\nConrad Well, do you feel better?\nCooper No--\nCooper At 16 hours and 24 minutes we had a\nmedical pass. At 16 hours and 15 minutes\nwe alined SEF, powered up the radar,\nrate gyros, etc. At 16 hours and 37\nminutes we had a D-4 pass 423a.\nConrad That was the first missile.\nCooper And we saw it.\nConrad Saw it come up thru the clouds--or right\nat the edge of the clouds.\nFCSD rep. Which one was this--out of here--\nConrad No--we didn't get any missiles out of\nhere. It was out of Vandenburg. It\nwas the Minuteman out of Vandenburg.\nFCSD rep. You got it as soon as you came out of\nthe clouds?\nCooper Yes.\nConrad Yeah--just as plain as day.\nCooper Right on it. Should have gotten some\ngood readings on that. We powered up\nthe computer then at day 3, 16 hours"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nand 45 minutes and radar was on and\nradar off, on--we had that radar test\nright in there that they wanted to do.\nConrad Did we get those pictures of Venus and\nFomalhaut. This platform 1 and 2\nbusiness?\nCooper I thought we did.\nConrad I didn't have a done log on that and\nI don't think I wrote that down anywhere\nwhether we--\nCooper I don't remember whether we ever got\nVenus or not. OK, let's see---the tape\nrecorder was apparently still working\nthere because you changed the tape there.\nThat day at 17 hours--yeah--here we go.\nConrad Wait a minute--here, I got it down here.\nPlatform test 1, magazine 9, picture 23,\n1/30th of a second- no - something\nQuestar.\nCooper Didn't get Venus--\nConrad Platform test 02, magazine 9, picture 22,\n1/30th of a second--oh, no filter--I'm\nsorry. Fomalhaut--we got Fomalhaut but\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nwe didn't get Venus. We never found\nit. That's right.\nCooper That's right. We never even found\nVenus on that night side. Platform\ntest 2--\nConrad And I got a remark here to find out\nthat on day 6 at 01 hours, 02 minutes\nand 15 seconds where in the heck were\nwe because there were great fires on the\nground?\nCooper Yeah.\nConrad OK--so I did write it down--all right--\nSA-D-13, day 3, 18:16:14--and I had\nsome comments about that here some place.\n16:14 - We scored a 4 and a 1--and the\n4 was in the upper--the 1 was in the\nupper left hand box and the 4 was in\nthe second box in the second row.\nCooper Right. OK about this period of time--\nlet's see we had an S-7--Oh, first before\nthis--then we had run some more tests\non our primary scanner and found out\nthat it was completely inoperative and--\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nConrad Yeah.\nCooper Just kept getting worse, worse, worse--\nand so--Pete has a note here--tell Houston\nabout primary scanner--which we did\nshortly thereafter at 3 hours, 18 minutes,\n3 days, 18 hours and 16 minutes we did\nan S-7, and then at 3 days, 18 hours\nand 25 minutes we purged, powered down,\ncomputer off, platform off, reticle off,\nrate gyros off, etc., etc.\nConrad Yeah. Then you have a--you've got an\nS-7 done at 03:21:20:08.\nCooper Right.\nConrad You had an Apollo landmark at 03:21:38:02\na 213 and I think that--we got Lake\nDe Poo Poo or whatever it was, when we\ngot that done.\nCooper We got that one.\nConrad There was a D-4 D-7 at 03:22:48:17 a\n425a--I don't know what that was but--\nCooper Well, we also got in addition just before\nthat at day 3, 22 hours and 15 minutes\nwe got an S-6 magazine 4, exposure 12,\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\ncyclone off Japan which has been added\ninto there. And then you start on that\nHF test number 1 starting at 22 hours,\n55 minutes.\nConrad Oh, yeah, 425a was Hawaii, Maui.\nCooper Oh, yeah, you got that one.\nConrad Maunakea was the volcano--it's not\nactive--but anyhow--\nCooper Wait a minute--oh--213 is what--\nConrad Huh? That's Apollo landmark--this was\nthe D-4 D-7--let's see the Apollo land-\nmarks--let me look there and see if we\ngot 213 on it.\nCooper All right, then that was at 22:48 - the\nD-4 D-7 was at 3 days, 22 hours, 48 min-\nutes, and 17 seconds was the 425a--and\n416.\nConrad You got the Apollo landmark at 03:21:38:\n02:213, magazine 4, frame 10, 1 - 2\npictures you took.\nCooper Yes.\nConrad Camera 11.\nCooper Then--day 4 start at day 4, 00 hours,\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n25 minutes, cabin lighting. 19 minutes\nwas the medical data, at 40 let's see--\n40 minutes there was the D-2 series 1, 4,\n5--sequence 1, 4, 5.\nCooper Mode 414 I have here--What was that?\nConrad 145 was a military, U. S.\nCooper Yeah. What's this Mode 414--\nConrad That was if we saw it we were to be in\nMode 414 on the IR.\nCooper Oh, OK. Then we had a D-6, mode 01 at\n44:10, day 4, 44 minutes and 10 seconds.\nConrad On day 4?\nCooper Yes.\nConrad I don't have anything down here for that.\nCooper 04:00\nConrad Mode 01--that's--I think that's - I\nmay have the numbers wrong.\nCooper OK--at day 4, two hours, 20 minutes -\nvision tests, both of us.\nConrad Had that HF test in there someplace.\nCooper Yeah, I've already called that out.\nMedical data pass on me over CSQ at\n03:11:00. We had an S-7, day 4, 03 hours,\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20 minutes and 25 seconds, we got an\nS-7, sequence 01 and let's see--and thru\nthis period was where we both completely\nran out of steam--here on--we were trying\nto get you to sleep so I deleted all of\nthese tests right in thru here to let\nPete sleep. On day 4, starting at 3\nhours and 45 minutes on--\nConrad Deleted the HF tests here--\nCooper Kept adding these tests in here that\nwere--just weren't going to get him\nany sleep at all.\nConrad This was this 145 mode this was at D-6,\nD-4, D-7 and D-2. It was the 145 mode\nfor the 01 and 414.\nCooper That's right. At day 4, 48 hours--\nConrad Yeah, here I have this thing--4th day,\nU. S. passes--we started at 11:00 o'clock.\nCooper What's this 04, 4 hours, 48 minutes and\n58 seconds there was a D-2 that we had\nno success on.\nConrad Now comment on that. To do any of those\nthings you have to have the platform on."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FCSD rep. Then the platform wasn't on?\nConrad Was not on.\nCooper That's right--see you got to be able\nto have an accurate means of pointing\nof having yaw and--\nConrad They said pitch up 83 degrees, yaw 45\ndegrees left--out of that window. You\ndon't have any idea in the world. I\nmean, we didn't even have rate gyros\npowered up. You have no idea in the\nworld where you are pointing, just--\nCooper You are wasting your time trying to do\nthis kind of job without a platform.\nFCSD rep. What is this a shot of--what is this\ntarget?\nConrad Well, for any pointing requirements,\nespecially ones in the sky--\nCooper Where they are going at different angles,\nsee.\nConrad You have to have a platform.\nCooper Then along at day 4, 5 hours and 40\nminutes, Buzz's experiment was placed\nin there on a switch--"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Yeah.\nCooper That was the straw that broke the camel's\nback--we didn't do.\nCooper Did MSC-1, day 4, 5 hours and something\nto 6 hours and something. Let's see--\nthen on down to day 4, 11 hours and 5 minutes\nConrad Powered up.\nCooper Then it's powered up platform, had a\nmedical data pass, 11 hours and 25 minutes\naligned SEF--11 hours and 40, powered\nup the rate gyro and computer on--11:51\nbio-med recorder number 1 off, number 2 on.\nConrad That was half way through the flight.\nCooper 11:55:55 we had a D-6, the recovery ship,\nand that was the one we saw.\nConrad No, we didn't get it. I got no joy on\nthat one.\nCooper OK.\nConrad We got them the next time around I think.\nCooper 11:55:55, 134 sequence zero A.\nConrad Yeah, we got them the next rev.\nCooper OK.\nConrad OK--I've got the D-6 at 12:24:02 was done-"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that was the sequence 091 or whatever\nit was.\nCooper Right.\nConrad The platform aligned SEF, for the command\npilot we got--\nCooper Purged the fuel cells at day 4, 12 hours\nand 50 minutes.\nConrad Yeah, SA D-13 on Laredo at 13:23:39--\nwhat happened?\nCooper Neither one of us saw the target--on\nthat one.\nConrad I'm not sure I've got anything written\ndown. I don't. Why don't I? Huh.\nI don't know what happened. Then we had\na D-6 089-what the heck was 089?\nCooper Day 4, 13:58:50, D-6 in East Africa--\nConrad Oh yeah, that was Blantyro Aerodrome and\nMalawi. I don't think we got that one.\nCooper Yes we did.\nConrad Did we?\nCooper Malawi airport--remember?\nConrad Maybe we did--I don't have a done written\non it for some reason."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Yeah, I remember we had the picture of\nit you know and it was out there on\nthat little point--or was that the one\nby Kano that we couldn't find because\nof the weather.\nConrad There's one in there where we did 089--\nlet's see what it looked like.\nCooper Look up 089--that's the one where we\nhad all the weather on it by Kano,\nwasn't it?\nConrad Yeah, well, we saw these lakes but--\nCooper We saw the lakes but that was in under\na big deck of clouds.\nConrad Did we or didn't we get the aerodrome. I\nguess we didn't get the aerodrome.\nCooper No, we didn't get it. Because remember\nwe saw the lake and saw the river come\nout and then there was this whole deck\nof clouds over there so we couldn't get\nthat because of the cloud cover.\nConrad That's right.\nCooper We saw the general area--where it was\nat--but we couldn't get on it at all."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"116\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nLet's see at 14:15, day 4, D-4, D-7,\n410c.\nConrad D-4, D-7, 410c was--that's one of the\nones where we were supposed to track\na star or something--yeah, we were\nsupposed to track Nunki and we never\ncould find it because it was--\nCooper It was up in first, early--\nConrad It was up early--we had trouble with\nthat. That's another thing I could have\nrecommended those guys--we got enough\nto do in the spacecraft not to worry\nabout setting up the star chart and\nfiguring out from the--something you\ncan't do from the star chart is figure\nout a pitch and yaw angle and the\nground's got that information up the\nkazoo, so on any of these ones where\nthey want you to photograph some stars\nor anything else--you've got to platform\nup again - the easiest thing to do is\nsend up a pitch and yaw with it and\nthat just takes all the work out of it\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"117\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nin the spacecraft. Gosh, we're messing\naround with the star charts--still don't\ntell you how much to pitch up or yaw\naround to find the darn thing.\nCooper They tell you where it would be on yaw\npath.\nConrad You just sort of got to figure it out-\nit's over to the left or the right and\ngo over and look for it. Well, that's\nnot the way to do it. Heck, we never\nnavigated that way in the Navy. You\ngo into star chart with local hour angle\nand it gives you the elevation and azimuth\nto the star, from North, and that's\nessentially what you need here. You\nneed the elevation and azimuth angle off\nthe orbital plane.\nCooper OK, let's see--at day 4, 14:56:50 we had\na D-4, D-7 White Sands Sled Run which\nwas successful.\nConrad And then we got the ship.\nCooper An then we got the D-6 424a right after\nthat. At 14:57:31 we got D-6 sequence 134.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"118\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nConrad Which we did photograph the Lake Champlain.\nFCSD rep. Did you see this thing--how did you\npick this thing up--did you use a tele-\nscope or-\nCooper We saw him visually - found him visually\nand then\nFCSD rep. From the wake--\nCooper Put the pipper on him and Pete took\npictures with the big camera. Then we\ngot a D-6 15:04:40 series 134. What\nwas that?\nConrad That's the ship.\nCooper Well, what was the 424a?\nConrad That was the White Sands Missile Run.\nCooper Oh, OK. We got a D-4, D-7 at 15:19:00\nthat was the 419--\nConrad The 419 was the ascension calibration.\nWe did that darn thing again for them--\nremember that over Australia or something\nI don't know what the heck we did it\nfor because I told them we got that\nthing once. Anyhow, then we did a platform\naline.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"119\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nCooper All right - 15 hours 40 minutes-\nConrad Then D-4, D-7 was the second Minuteman\nwhich we saw but we didn't track.\nCooper 16 hours 28 minutes, 423b - we did the\nHF tests 4 at 17 hours.\nConrad Wait a minute- I got a - we had an S-7\nat 16:37 and it was the thunderstorms in\nsouthern Florida. I think we got those.\nCooper We got that one. All right -\nConrad We had a D-6 at 16:51:25 which was an 065 -\nCooper Right\nConrad And if I'm not mistaken that was that\nIsland off Brazil and we photographed\nthe wrong island - then we found out\nour mistake in time and -\nCooper Just as we were going over we shifted\nover to the other island -\nConrad And we photographed the right island -\nit looked like there was only one island\nout there and we found out there were\ntwo islands out there so we did get the\nright pictures.\nCooper There again, the maps we had just weren't\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"120\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nbig enough in their overall look at\nthings to give you a clue as to what -\nConrad I'll show you this - This is the kind of\nthing that you just can't have-that was\n065-now what you need to help you find\nan island is some clue as to where it\nis located in the world- well, that's\nwhat we had--\nCooper Yeah, there was the island--\nConrad Now it turns out that right up about here\nthere's another island--laughter--and\nman we took all kinds of -- see fortunately\nit was far enough away - you -- look 15\nseconds up there is 15 x 8 is 120 miles-\nand 120 miles is a lot of distance but\nyou are covering that in 15 seconds - well\nfortunately this was about 15 or 20\nseconds - we were pitched down and we\nwere at least at the 90 and we got the\nsecond island a little bit past the nadir,\nbecause we already had been tracking this\nfirst island see and then here we came\ndrifting along feeling how great we were\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\ngetting the picture but we really didn't think it quite looked like the right island but because we didn't see an air field on it - well here came the island with the air field - it was a good 200 miles down the pike but you need a little more -\nA little more help as to where it's at.\nLet's see 17 hours was HF test 4 - we did that.\nYeah, we powered down.\n17:40 - Medical data - we did that.\nYeah, now here is a good time for a comment on this thing. Every time we went thru these state-side passes now a - to operate on a state-side passes - they start out two orbits before you hit the state-side passes-you started getting chatter--the first time you hit Carnavon and then well--no, I take that back - the first thing that happened is we come by that low sweep up thru Central America where we got Canaveral and Antigua and we get Houston\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nremote from there and it would be Dave Scott and Elliot and they would start giving us a little poop about what was going to go on that day see--and heck they'd tell us a little bit about the latest hydrogen calculations or something (laughter) and that was - we'd sort of get an idea of what was going on, then the next trip around is the first time you pick up Carnavon and then he'd start to give you an update and he'd get about half way through what you were going to do in those state-side passes and we'd pick up Dave Scott again at Canton and he'd finish it and then we'd come by that fringe pass by the states and that's when they changed the watch and we'd say hello to everybody that was going off and coming on and then we'd have all the stuff and the next trip around - that would start the three revs over the states see and then it was just go--you had gear all over the spacecraft - gee we had everything\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nwe owned out and we'd be going through books and writing and flight plan and then we'd leave the states and it says pilot's nap period and Gordo was supposed to do something else and that was impossible - it would take two more revs to clean up the spacecraft before we ever got to do anything else so we never got on that part of the flight plan. This pilot nap period - that was a big joke -\nCooper: Now pilot's eat period and nap period and all -\nConrad: Always cleaning the spacecraft and we had to clean up the whole thing - it was a good time to do it -- we'd have meal garbage out and we'd have all the experiments out so we'd -- up to the states on that last one.\nCooper: It was handier to eat together too - because you had to get the stuff out anyway--so it was handier for us just to eat together so we just always ate at the same time.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nConrad: And we would be in the process of cleaning up when we'd come by and we'd have that Guaymas pass where we'd come by and have California acq. and Guaymas acq. and we'd go right down the side of Mexico, the west side, and then cross the isthmus and go down Brazil and then from there on you - that was your last contact with the states and you'd stay out there with the CSQ RKV cycle through the rest of the night and that time we got all the way around there and picked up the CSQ the first time and we'd have Hawaii once more -\nCooper: Then we were already through my sleep period and that's supposed to be Pete's sleep period - that was the normal sleep period.\nConrad: We worked our tail off that whole time -\nCooper: That was the normal sleep period and we just barely have things all squared away so then we both powered down --\nConrad: Go thru this terrible 50 minutes with both of us like this - we'd uh-uh, oh, yeah - hi\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nthere - laughter.\nCooper: Yeah, ok, everything's fine (snoring) (laughter).\nConrad: Talk about lonely--that's when it really got bad. You really knew you were out in the no place.\nCooper: We just discussed one thing while you were out, was this window situation. You couldn't even begin to see out of Pete's window when we launched. It was really terrible and it was in between those outside panes and glass. And my window between the outside sealed units and the inside unit of glass there was a bee -\nConrad: Oh, yeah, yeah, that stuff is on the inside of the outer pane. I don't know how that got there.\nCooper: And inside these two outside units on my side in between those and the inside pane of glass there was a little bee and a fly and a whole bunch of flecks of dirt and odds and ends in there. And my window wasn't as frosted over as his.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n126\nOver the period of time, they both got a certain amount of little frosty scum on the outside of them and when we fired the scanner covers there were about four or five little gray flecks of stuff and debris just flew everywhere right in that period of time and four or five little gray flecks came on the window.\nConrad Heck, that's before launch isn't it?\nOh, I didn't know that.\nFCSD rep. Did it ever clear up?\nCooper No. I think it was just unforgiveable.\nI think if they can't do better on windows than that they ought to just quit trying.\nI could see maybe having some amount of debris--and then when you use the thrusters the debris would all show up again. We were on--here we are up here--this med data. Day 4, 16 hours and that data - did.\nCooper 16 hours 28 minutes - D-4, D-7, D-6, 423b.\nConrad Yeah that was the second missile - which we didn't get any track on -- we saw -\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n127\nCooper HF test 4 then at 417. 4:17:40 med data was done. HF test 4 ended on - down there - OK, day 4, 19 hours 44 minutes was S-7 which was completed.\nConrad Yeah, both the S-7's were completed.\nCooper Then there's an S-7b, 21 hours, 9 minutes and 50 seconds storm Doreen - we completed. Time of closest approach was at 21:09:30. They had us tracking this storm - you see --\nConrad Oh, yeah.\nCooper We estimated the eye was approximately 250 miles left of course -\nConrad Have you got the orbits - yeah, here it is. This thing is the greatest thing in the whole world. It's the simplest - cheapest thing in the spacecraft and -\nCooper It is - it is great.\nConrad We would have been lost without this thing. This orbital update map. Boy, it really- well, the orbit was really good as far as -\nCooper You really don't know where you are at-\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n128\nConrad But this is a good little map too. It really has the right things on it. There wasn't anytime we didn't look down and know exactly where we were. This thing is really great. Probably the cheapest thing in the spacecraft.\nCooper That's one Jerry Jones made up. We tried out a long time ago and I said I liked it and I wanted to take one like that rather than this big elaborate one -\nConrad Yeah, it really worked great.\nConrad Yeah, I just saw all these map star updates we had here.\nCooper Yeah. One thing they could do. They could put about 3 or 4 more orbits on it and not have to update it so often. Might be a little handier. Just a thought - but it's good the way it is. OK, let's see, we're on day 4, 22 hours and 20 minutes - we did a cabin lighting survey.\nConrad We did the radar test 10. Cabin lighting S-7, MSC-1.\nCooper And med data.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n129\nConrad Apollo landmark 207- that was at 07:14:25 must be day 5.\nCooper No, not that far along - We did UHF 6 we did at 2 hours, day 5, 2 hours and something.\nConrad You said you had an S-7 that was again during my sleep cycle and you said missed while discussing Cryos with CSQ.\nCooper Right.\nConrad And then you had an MSC 1 at 05:40 and you got that done.\nCooper Now you're ahead of me--hold up just a minute. We're down here now - let's see - here's the S-7. 05:40 MSC-1 that was done.\nConrad You got your Apollo landmark -\nCooper Apollo landmark at sequence 207 at 7 hours and 14 minutes.\nConrad What was 207?\nCooper Lake Titicaca\nConrad That was the Canaries -\nCooper Oh, yeah, all right. Then we had SAD-13 - vision tests on both of us which we did together instead of separately. And then\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n130\nat 5 day, 10 hours and 20 minutes we had Apollo No. 208, which we got. We had S-502 which we got. We had D-4, D-7, sequence 414 which we got and we had the platform tests which we did.\nConrad Yeah then we got the radar test run -\nCooper And Pete has a note here \"Get serious,\" it really starts getting thick and heavy.--\nConrad Well, I don't know--they were really getting wild -\nCooper We had a platform aline - platform test, radar test, this is day 5, 11 hours and 35 minutes - We had D-6, D-4, D-7, platform aline, radar test -\nConrad That's where they were off their rocker.\nCooper But we got them. Those were all in the day 5, 11 to 12 hours -\nConrad Listen, there's a lot of sloppy things in there - I mean we got things done but we missed little subtleties - like we were supposed to run the 16mm camera along with some part of the IR gear and I wouldn't get that on - and a bunch of\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"little things. Again, we were always\nman, they had stuff thrown at us as fast\nas you could say Jack Robinson.\nCooper Let's see--S-8, D-13 at Laredo--do you have\none of those right in that period- day 5,\n13 hours -\nConrad Day 5, 13 hours - no.\nCooper I don't have it either.\nConrad I have this all scratched out for some\nreason.\nCooper D-6 - This is where we really began to\nhave trouble with something -- what was\nit we were really having trouble with?\nConrad The OAMS systems cut out.\nCooper That's right. The OAMS systems pooped\nout. Day 5, at about 11 hours when we\nwere cranking up for this is when we found\nthat our OAMS systems was really getting\nbad, and we already had discovered that\nwe had one thruster out and a partial\nother one out but this is the time when\nwe found out we had about 3 others that\nwere just about out.\nConrad Yeah, I have a little note here - report"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to flight voice tape out - number 7 yaw\nleft thruster out and OAMS heater light\nturned back on again.\nConrad And so we were supposed to ask 7 Keywest\nand D-8 S-13, SAD-13 about 6:22:50 -\nCooper OK - From there on for a while things\njust got scrubbed in the flight plan on\nthat day five, the latter part of the\ntime on entries there.\nConrad Yeah, that's when they got us into this\nminimum power down - voice control - 1\nsuit fan - 2 coolant pumps, 1 acq. aid,\nUHF receiver, DCS receiver, PCM -\nCooper That's when they decided the hydrogen\nwasn't going to last at the present\nelectrical rate.\nConrad That's what I wrote down - Houston hot\ndope - drift for three days - ricky, ticky.\n(Laughter) Sorry -\nCooper But at day 5, 19 hours and 25 minutes we\ndid get a fix on Doreen - where she was\nthere.\nConrad Yeah, everything happened that day. That"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was when the PCO2 started to read for\nsome reason.\nCooper PCO2 came off the scale and was reading\nway up there for a while. We broke out\none of the CO2 tapes, and it showed that\nwe were still all right. We figured the\ngage was its usual reliability.\nConrad Okay, now, I think this is good for the\nrecorder right here. At that time, as\nof 5 days 21 hours 00 minutes they\nwanted to know what our experiment status\nwas. So on the UHF, we had completed\ntests 1, 2, 3 and I said 6 just so that\nif they were still trying to keep that\nnumber under their lid. That's what it\nsounded like because they kept mentioning\nit. We'd done D-1, 1, 2, and 3 which\nhad completed D-1. D-2 we had done\nnothing, because we didn't get the REP.\nD-6 we'd taken 72 pictures. D-4, D-7 we'd\nhad completed 405, 408, 409, 410, 410a,\n410b, 411, 414, 420, 422, 423a, 423b, 424a,\n425a. We had 16 minutes and 8 seconds of\nrecorder time left on."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad On S-8, D-13 we completed all tests although we\ndidn't see the targets several times. On S-1 we\ncompleted it. S-5 and S-6 we'd taken three maga-\nzines for a total of 210+ pictures. S-7 we had\n23 pictures or 8 groups that they had wanted plus\nwe had taken cal card picture. The M-1 broke at\n4 days and some odd hours, and I don't know the\nexact time. M-3 didn't make any difference. MSC-1\nwe did on day one, three, and four. Apollo-we got\nLandmarks 207, 8, 12, and 13. We'd done 4 cabin\nlighting surveys. The humidity sensor we read at\nleast once a day, and the 16mm film we had one and\na quarter magazines shot up which is general stuff.\nThat was what we had completed in 5 days. Then\nfrom there on, we went through this big drill of\nsending up of all kinds of experiments but don't\nexpend any fuel on them. An so we were pretty well\nrestricted to S-5, S-6, and S-7 type photographs\nwhich was about all we got.\nCooper Catch as catch can.\nConrad We marked down all this other stuff. We did catch\na D-4/D-7 occasionally if it was the right sort of\nthing-if we were sort of pointed in the right"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"direction. Like I got a--in drifting flight I\ngot 417 and 418 at 6 days 8 hours 41 minutes.\nI don't remember what that is.\nCooper From here on, we just--we drifted through this\nperiod of time and the only time we ever powered\nanything up was when the drift rates got up pretty\nhigh. We would power up, damp the rates, and power\nright back down, and hope we--and did manage to\nkeep somewhat attitude so we could get occasionally\nsome pictures. For instance on--we did continue\ndoing MSC-1 experiments which incidentally--even in\ntimes of minimum power when they wanted us powered\nright down to our eyeballs they still left MSC-1\non. I don't know how much fuel it takes, but it\nalways erks me if we had to have everything off\nwhy could they manage to leave that one on. Day\n6, 8 hours, 41 minutes we got D-4/D-7 417, 418, and\n414.\nConrad Yes, on that one day, Day 6, when they had the HF\ntests in Houston--broadcast HF--we had Houston on\nHF till 15 hours 59 minutes 00 seconds and this\nincluded the remoting through Ascension, and the\nremoting through Ascension was beautiful. That"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nwas really good reception. And then they were\nplaying 'Never on Sunday' and that faded out at\n15 hours 08 minutes.\nCooper\tThat was the best HF test we had.\nConrad\tYes, and we started receiving the music again\ncoming around the other side of the world at\n15 hours 49 minutes. This must be 16:59. 14:59?\n14:59, I got the wrong number in here I think. I'll\njust make a note to check it. No, this is 15:08,\n15:49 which is about right half way around the world\nand this number may be wrong.\nCooper\tIs that day 6?\nConrad\tYes, check it and see if we got a note in the Flight\nPlan. Day 6 at 1400, almost 1500. Then we did\nsome of these radar tests and for the likes of\nme to understand do you know what was some of the\ndiscussion on why the radar didn't work after that.\nGee, it locked up so beautifully the first day on\nthe REP down there.\nCooper\tThe one REP pass we had, man, things just worked\nlike a charm.\nConrad\tAnd it just never did work after that. We always\ngot a lock on.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tAnd I read analog. My analog read beautiful, but\nhe couldn't read out digital and that's impossible\nbecause the analog data comes from the digital data.\nI could even tell where it was. It was sitting\nout on Meritt Island, wasn't it? I'll bet--it was\naccurate enough--I'll bet you that you could almost\ntell what building it was in. It looked like it\nwas right out here in the south part of the complex\nhere.\nConrad\tWhere were we receiving music from?\nCooper\tWe got a little Chinese HF broadcast every now and\nthen. Peoples program.\nConrad\tWe went through these radar tests just drifting\naround out there.\nCooper\tOh, yes, they were trying to jam our radios.\nEverytime we went over the China area.\nConrad\tI had the decided impression that they were trying\nto jam our UHF. So it was either that or--oh, yes,\nwhere was it where we heard the radar on the radio.\nCooper\tChina.\nConrad\tNo, we were along the fringes of Russia, but we\nwent over China. We were over something like India.\nCooper\tWe were coming right over the Tibet--the high Tibet\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n138\narea there, and we were just on the south edge of\nChina.\nConrad\tHave you ever taxied close by radar? You can hear\nit on radio, it goes \"beep, beep, beep, beep,\"\nand you can even clock the antenna sweep, and\nyou can get about three pulses....\"Beep,beep,beep,\"\nand then, \"beep, beep, beep\", and you can see that\nold antenna down there on the ground going around\nand we could hear the UHF as big as heck and we\nwere way up in the middle of no place, and I know\ndarn well it must have been--Russian radar.\nCooper\tWe were up on the high of southern China. High\nplains area.\nConrad\tOkay, then we ran another experiment summary, and\nthis experiment summary was for the sixth day.\nAnd on the D-6 we did not see 135 which was the\nLaser. Laser out of White Sands. Never did see\nthat darn Laser. And the D-4/D-7 we caught a\n417, 418, and on S-6 we'd taken five more pictures.\nOn S-5 we'd taken 43 more pictures and on S-7 we'd\ntaken one more storm or two pictures. On S-8, D-13\nI have no--we didn't get to mark the targets, but\nwe may have gotten the 70mm pictures of them that\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n139\nthey wanted. I had to point--I may have all\nspacecraft in the picture. I don't know-we were\njust drifting by this one. And then at 11 hours\n30 minutes on the sixth day, we went through this\ncrank up this number 2 fuel cell again after it\nhad been shut down for 20 hours. They wanted to\nbring it up by warming up the coolant loop so\nwe went through this drill of shutting off the\nPrimary Cooling Valve Circuit Breaker and opening\nthe Rad Flow to BYPASS so that we could bypass\nthe SECONDARY LOOP and let it warm up a bit. Then\nwe went through the purge procedures and brought\nthe fuel cell on the line. And it came on pretty\ngood.\nConrad\tWe never got any of the rest of the experiments\non that day. They wanted general photos of the\nU. S. and so forth, D-6's and we just were never\nin position. We were always pointed straight up\nor something like that. Then we had another UHF\ntest leaving the States and on the seventh day\nand we lost HF on the seventh day at 16 hours\nand 27 minutes and 00 seconds. I had the Squelch\nset on 4, and I brought the Squelch up higher and\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n140\nand we got them back again and lost it 3 minutes\nlater at 07 days 16 hours and 30 minutes. Then\nwe did a MSC-1.\nCooper\tI have a note here 7 days and 20 minutes was that\nlarge storm where we located the depression on it.\nTake a look at it, and see just where it was,\nand weather breaking off from it.\nConrad\tAnd then when they came up with their next ground\ntest which--\nCooper\tHad two S-7 experiments.\nConrad\t...which I think we could have done without and\nthat's when they had us warm up the solenoids for\nten minutes. The thing that got to us was that\nwe had turned-- They had us shut off the Propellant\nValve and what we should have done was dumped the\nPropellant by rotating through all control positions\non the handle, but what they had us do was go to\nthe full yaw left position and dumped the whole load\nof manifold propellants out through the the mal-\nfunctioning left yaw thrusters and man did that\ncouple up into a couple of beautiful rates, and we\nwere doing it at night, and we didn't realize until\nit was too late and all of a sudden there were the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nstars going by, and we were just going through the\nworld every which way, and we were supposed to\nhold it that way for ten minutes and we were--okay,\nwe were well aware....\nCooper\tWhere were you? This day 7?\nConrad\tYes, and I just got to this big set of procedures\non that test and it didn't work.\nCooper\tI have a note here at Day 7, 3 hours and 19 minutes\nonly 22 more revolutions to go. Same length as\nMA-9.\nConrad\tOkay, now, here are the comments of the degregation\nof the other thrusters. Now left roll only with\nthe roll logic switch in pitch. We had no right\nyaw. Right yaw only with the roll logic switch in\nyaw position. No left roll. Then if you had the\nroll logic in yaw, pitch up and down were okay in\nyaw right gave right roll also. Pitch up, right\nroll, pitch down you also got a right roll.\nYou've got to figure out which thrusters were\nweaker than the other ones.\nCooper\tRoll right gave yaw right.\nConrad\tRight, and then roll logic and pitch rolled right\nokay. Roll left okay. No left yaw. So and the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nother thing is is when you hit the thrusters you\ncan very definitely tell from the sound that some\nwere putting out more than others.\nCooper\tI think that's what was giving us the yaw\nroll off was that in pairs of thruster of one would\nbe strong maybe and one weak and would give you\ncouplings.\nConrad\tThat was exactly what was happening. They were\ncross coupling.\nCooper\tIt was really messy.\nConrad\tAnd then I've got down here the roll. I have\nnothing else in the book until we start talking\nabout retro here and the changes that we decided\nto go into 121-1 instead of 122. And there would\nbe 27 minutes over Carnarvon instead of 36 and all\nthe power up sequence. Now, I've got one comment.\nWe came up over Carnarvon and when I had--when\nwe left the Cape on the Rev going into retrofire\na transmitted a valid load up to the spacecraft\nand I called McDivitt and I said, \"I'm putting the\nComputer into Reentry,\" and we came up over\nCarnarvon and the guy says, \"Stand by. I'm going\nto update you computer with a new load. Boom!\"\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nAnd the computer was in reentry and I said, \"Golly,\"\nand I switched that thing to prelaunch and he said\nthe loads in and validated, and I didn't get a DCS\nlight. And I'd gotten a DCS light everytime.\nCooper\tWe never failed to get a DCS light.\nConrad\tAnd I was never really convinced even when we\nchecked the two cores that the load was right that\nhe put up there, but I guess it was. That's been\nchecked out. We did have the right load in the\ncomputer.\nCooper\tThat procedure is really poor, very, very poor.\nConrad\tI don't understand....\nCooper\tWe had agreed and agreed and agreed that nobody\nwould send a DCS load or anything without permission\nfrom you first--till they cleared with you first.\nAnd he just right out of the clear blue sky with\n12 minutes--something like that to go to retro.\nConrad\t27.\nCooper\t27 was it? Well, anyway, it's getting down darn\nclose. Here we were all lined--all set up to go\nand everything all squared away and what we thought\nwas a real proper load out of the Cape. Had gone\ninto reentry and here we were all set. Then here\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nthis guy just says, \"I'm sending a DCS update,\"\nand WHAM! here it comes. No warning. No nothing.\nBefore you could even tell him to wait, the\ndarn things in reentry.\nConrad\tHe didn't check his ground information, because\nif he'd looked at his board, he would have seen\nthat the computer was in reentry. He could have\ntold us to put it in prelaunch. It all happened\nso fast. Boy, my heart really sank, because we\nhad that thing--we were all set up. We were ready\nto go and everything and that was a big blitz.\nNow, after 121 orbits and we'd left the Cape after\nstateside track. Why, after 121 orbits did they\nhave to update that thing between the Cape and\nCarnarvon? I mean they should have known where\nthe heck we where. I just don't understand it.\nCooper\tI don't either and if they are going to play\naround with that, boy, my feelings right now on\nit is that that DCS circuit breaker ought to be\noff all the time. I felt that way before, and\nI decided well, those guys worked out so well that\nmaybe it would work, but after that one time,\nthat just convinced me that you ought to just\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nturn that darn thing off and leave the DCS circuit\nbreaker off.\nConrad\tOkay, the next thing before retrofire.\nCooper\tI had one note here, just a second, at 7--Day 7,\n22 hours, and 30 minutes. We were on that real\nblack night side way down there somewhere on the\nSouth American area. Remember we saw those tre-\nmendous series of thunderstorms. Just fantastic,\nyou could--\nConrad\tThe brightest lightning I've ever seen anywhere.\nIt lit up the inside of the spacecraft.\nCooper\t--see hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of miles\nalmost as far as you could see in any direction\nout the windows you could see lightning just\nlighting up-just blossoming everywhere. There\nwere hundreds of miles of thunderstorms of which\nyou could probably see at one time-you could\nprobably see 20 or 25 thunderstorms light up\nat the same time.\nConrad\tAnd I've got somewhere on the 16mm film. I opened\nthe stops up, and I took pictures of the lightning.\nI don't know whether it came out.\nCooper\tThey would just light the whole spacecraft up.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Boy, I've never seen such fantastic big areas\ncovered by thunderstorms. Just, tremenlous! And\nthey were big, each individual CB looked like it\nwas maybe 50 to 100 miles across and just whole\ncolumns of them stacked around. They must have\nreally been....\nConrad Okay, about the only other thing that I can think\nof that we did in the test nature there--was\nwanted to and did fire the oams Squibb on the\nregulator, and you can't hear it. And every other\nSquibb--every other thing that we ever fired we\ncould hear. But that one we couldn't hear.\nCooper That simulator was really good on that SEP OAMS,\nSEP ELECT, and SEP ADAPT. Simulator could be\na lot louder on the SEP ADAPT. That thing really\ntakes off.\nConrad How do you want to cover the reentry phase?\nBecause that's about it. I've got one other comment,\nbut this one is written after landing. It's the\nHF whip antenna didn't deploy."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Well, why don't we get ourselves down on the water?\nStowage wise when we left the United States on the\nlast California-Guaymas pass which occurred at--\nit occurred around 7:18:40, something like that.\nWe started our reentry stowage right then and there.\nVery early in the game, because we wanted to make\nsure that we had--that was almost 20 some hours to\nreentry.\nCooper First of all, at least once a day, we went through\nthe entire cockpit and brought everything up to\ncompletely clean configuration. Everything stowed\nand we had about a 2 day basis. We planned what\nmeals we were going to need for the next 2 days and\nwe would get these meals out, get them stowed in an\neasy-to-get-to place--around the footwell areas--\ngenerally in the footwells back in our feet area\nand would restack and restow garbage and try and\nget it completely caught up on a day-to-day basis,\nso that we didn't have a lot of garbage sitting\naround.\nConrad We always did it right after that California-\nGuaymas last pass over the States starting out\ninto the boondock area and this conflicted with the\nPilot's naptime. That was my scheduled naptime."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"We never--we always ran late on that. I'd get the\nnap, but I'd get it much later and that would cut\na little bit into Gordo's sleep period and that\nwould wind up overlapping into my sleep period and\nthen we would both catch a nap...Gordo's naptime\nwhich was just before Carnarvon.\nCooper I don't think we ever came over Carnarvon but what\nwe were asleep.\nConrad The next morning we would both be asleep. ... but\n... Gordo's right. The meals--if we would like to\nstop and talk about that. We did not even get into\nthe left food box until the fourth day. We ate the\nmeals that were in the footwell. There were two\nstowage footwells to start with and that gave us\nthe two garbage bags that we always had out. In\nother words we always had two silver bags, food\nbags, open that we could put garbage in--any kind\nof garbage--and we always kept two of those out,--\none on Gordo's side and one on mine. Then we'd\nactually collect more--we'd eat more meals, but\nwe always ran with two of those out at least and\nwe'd wind up with maybe two in each footwell and\nthat's when we would restow at the end of that day.\nWhat we did was put as much of the garbage as"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"possible back in the right hand box. We completely\nemptied the right hand box at the beginning of\nthe flight and stowed the articles around the\ncockpit in those red bags that we had built for the\nback of the seat and they really worked well. On\nthe top of the seat. I kept two meals always stowed\nin the area that led to the right hand stowage box\nover my left shoulder. I kept my two meals there.\nGordo normally kept his two down on either side\nof his helmet in the footwell area. We kept our\ngarbage bags--our silver garbage bags down in there\nand the reason I say silver garbage bags is because\nthose green ones that McDonnell made just didn't\nwork at all. We never used them in the whole\nflight.\nCooper They are no good at all.\nConrad They tore up.\nCooper They are hard to get into. They tear. The top--\nthe way it puckers up there you have a hard time\ngetting anything in and out of it. I finally used\none over there to fasten that camera--that 200\nmillimeter camera, that 35 mm camera. We put the\nlens down there so that it would hold--so that the"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"bag would hold it in. Keep it from floating and\nthen fasten the velcro upon the back of the\nmaneuver controller.\nConrad Now there was one thing that one green bag that I\nhad originally had the REP plan stow in it. The\nREP plan was never taken out and I never took the\nbag off the wall. Then, the other green bag had\nthe Poleroid light filter in. I took that light\nfilter in and out so many times that the elastic on\nthe top of the bag broke and the bag got completely\nfrayed from my right leg rubbing against it. My\npressure suit actually wore that cloth all through.\nYou can see that on that bag that came out of there.\nSo they didn't work at all. We kept all our food\ngarbage and all that little sort of things in the\nsilver food bags that we opened and when we filled\none we would wrap it with tape and stow it down\nthere until it was time for our daily housecleaning.\nCooper I might add for stowage two items that we found were\nextremely important were rubber bands and tape.\nConrad We actually ran out of tape on the eighth day pack-\ning the last of the garbage. We used every bit of\ntape that we could lay our hands on. We took the\ntape off of the bags."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper\tAnd I had a whole pocketful of rubber bands.\nConrad\tAnd Gordo had a whole pocketful of rubber bands.\nWe found that was the only way to handle the food.\nAfter we ate a rehydratable package or even a few solid packages that we opened. We always resealed them again with tape and rolled them up as small as we could get them and used the tape to wrap them with for stowage.\nCooper\tTo keep them very small and compact.\nFCSD Rep\tDid you get all this stuff where you originally planned to put it?\nConrad\tI have a copy of our reentry stowage here which shows what varied from the way it was. Now the big items, there was only one big item that didn't go. There were only two items that didn't get stowed in the place that it was called for that I remember right now. The S-1 camera went over in the right food box rather than the left food box and the urine device we kept out until the last minute and we restowed it in its original stowage place which was in Gordo's left box.\nCooper\tAnd then there were two partial bags of defecation bags and an empty bag and one bag full of about a half of a meal, paper and wrappings from one meal"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that went in behind my ejection seat. I managed to work around the side and get clear down around to the back and manage to shove it down in behind the seat.\nConrad\tThen I had a little bit of miscellaneous trash like that in the right lower wrap around red pouch that was over the seat for reentry. It consisted of several things which we hadn't planned to stow any place. The cardiovascular cuffs that I cut off were one of them. Some loose paper trash like the top round paper ring off the defecation bags. This was just a convenient place to put light trash and I saw no reason to remove it from there. And that was about it. I forget--they'll have a list of the other items that were in there but they were all minor paper things.\nCooper\tYes, I had a few pieces of paper and things in the outboard back wing.\nConrad\tBut we pretty well had everything stowed in its proper place before reentry. Very little exception. Well, let me look right now. I marked what we had stowed in the right place. Okay, in the two left--they're called left and right food box extensions. The back ones that had the rubber covers on them."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"They had originally had the--in my side the blood pressure reprogrammer, the hose interconnect adapters and the pilot's personal preference kit. Gordo's side it had just the personal preference kit and the hose interconnect, right? There wasn't anything else in there, was there?\nCooper\tI don't think there was.\nIt calls out here for a blood pressure reprogrammer but we only had one.\nCooper\tNo, we only had the one on board.\nConrad\tOkay, I removed those three items and Gordo removed his two items just prior to reentry.\nCooper\tThe hose interconnect--I had ....\nConrad\tYes, that's what I said, the hose interconnect and the pilot's personal preference kit. The two kits we stowed in our leg pockets and the two hose things we stowed up in the green pouches during reentry so that they would be handy on the water to connect the hoses up. We filled those wing boxes with food trash from the last days worth of meals because we had completely filled the right hand food box with trash and we had completely filled the left food box. Let's see in the left food box we did stow the 16 mm"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"camera and we did stow the 17 mm lens and the 18 mm lens and the 75 mm Hasselblad. We did not stow the urine receiver there. We stowed that up where it had started out in the left side food box. We did stow the mirror sight there and we did stow the ring sight and we did stow the 18 voice tapes. Now the 18 voice tapes cartridge holder was entirely unsatisfactory. We had to take the 18 voice tapes and take them in groups of three and wrap them with tape so that we had something that was a little handier to work with than stuffing that box.\nCooper\tYes, that thing is just too big.\nConrad\tWe stowed them in groups of three in that box, but we got it all in there and the reason we didn't get anymore in was that that box was still half full of food. Matter of fact, you didn't hardly get below the level of the lid.\nCooper\tI got just to the bottom level of the lid.\nConrad\tYes, there was a good three days worth of food left in that box. Everything else went where it was supposed to go. Except we only stowed two 16 mm film bags in the center compartment and I left two in the original right hand box because they were not exposed. We spent so much time in drifting"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"flight and everything that we just didn't ever shoot up the 16 mm film. There just wasn't that much to shoot it up on.\nFCSD Rep\tHow long for reentry? Starting stowage for reentry? Would you estimate?\nConrad\tWe did it in three steps. 20 hours before reentry we started really really thinking about the big stuff. You know the thing that we thought might cause us a problem. The one place that we were worried about was getting all the stuff in the left hand box. So that's when we got to looking at the tapes. We got all the gear out that we had to stow in there including the Hasselblad and sort of got an idea how much room it was going to take in that box and that was when we decided we had to tape the cartridges. Now when I say tape 18 cartridges, heck, that shot an hour right there. I mean, you just don't do anything fast up there, and so we were ready for reentry 6 or 7 hours before reentry. We could have come in anytime, because we took care of our major items very early. Now, this doesn't mean that we couldn't afford to pull that camera gear and run experiments because all that stuff was still in the same place and we"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"could have laid our hands on it. We didn't\nactually stow the Hasselblad till the very end.\nCooper We stowed it about 4 hours.\nConrad And so we were prepared by working constantly\nthrough the night but not steadily. We worked on\nand off. We took little rests. Then we went\nback and--\nCooper To give a time estimate though for purposes of\nplanning I would say you should figure on it taking\nyou at least a minimum of about 4 hours to really\nthoroughly restow. And this depends on how messy\nthe cockpit is. If its really messy it will take\nlonger than that. If the cockpit is reasonably\nsquared away and reasonably clean you should\nfigure on it taking about 4 hours to really completely\nthoroughly stow everything and get ready for\nreentry.\nConrad Now we were really conscious all 8 days--we would\nsay to one another, \"Boy, it's time to stop and\nstow things right now,\" because the situation is\ngetting out of hand and you'd be surprised at\nhow fast you can build up trash in that cockpit\nand not realize that it is in there, you see."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Realize that if we had to reenter shortly or even\nif we pack it tightly, but I think the bottom of\nthe box I think I wasted a---I'll say I could\nhave put another silver bag or two worth of trash\nin there by stuffing the lower part if I had\nknown about it in the beginning. But it didn't\ntake us much past day 2 to realize that we had a\ntrash problem and we had to keep on top of it\nevery single day if we were going to ever have it\ncleaned up at the end. And we were in good shape.\nWe were as clean as a whistle when we came in."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FCSD REP How about the power up?\nCooper I think that the power up went just right straight\nforward.\nConrad Yessir, I've the checklist right here. Just like the\ninsertion checklist we went by the numbers and I actually\nmarked it off as we did it and you can see it right\nthere. I went through power off check off list and we\nwent right down the thing we had. Our checkoff list is\nwrong and we had changes in it right here. We had\nAttitude Indicator with FDI, Computer Power-ON, Computer\nto PRELAUNCH, Platform-CAGE, Scanners PRIMARY, Rate Gyros-\nON and it should read Attitude Indicator with FDI Rate\nGyros-ON, Computer in the PRELAUNCH MODE, Computer\nPower-ON Platform, Scanner etc.\nCooper The arrangement of it was wrong.\nConrad Yes, the arrangement was wrong. But we did it just by\nthe numbers right here. And it was completely straight-\nforward. Interesting note on the Platform, we went for\nmany days with the platform powered down to that it\ngot as cold soaked as it was ever going to get and the\nplatform took the maximum time. Heat drop out took\nexactly 25 minutes and then it was a little slow coming\nin. On the cold starts it took 28 minutes to get the"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"attitude light. It took 3 minutes after the fast heat\ndrop out. And then I noticed after that was the first\ntime after we did that--powered it up two or three times\nwhy the platform came in at 25 minutes of a fast heat\ndrop out. And then right after that it would start to\ncage up and you'd get the Attitude Light on and you'd\nbe in business with the Platform, but that platform\nperformed beautifully.\nCooper Well, I might make just one remark on the platform. Something that I thought was extremely interesting to me.\nPeople have talked about the bad platform drift and\neverything but we had one occasion we had our platform\npowered for some 18 or 20 hours.\nConrad Let's see, why did we do that?\nCooper Because they wanted us to-\nConrad Oh, it was after we tumbled up there with that OAMS\ncheck which they really didn't think out too well and\nthey thought we might lose our gas volume.\nCooper We were about to lose the gas volume by starting to\nvent again so they wanted us to power up, bring the\npower up to a pretty high level to keep below the\nvent pressure on the hydrogen.\nConrad Yes, to keep the platform warmed up incase we had to-"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper So they wanted to keep the platform warmed up also.\nSo we went for some approximately 20 hours with the\nplatform warm-running-up.\nConrad In drifting flight.\nCooper In drifting flight. So what we did--we caged the\nplatform, brought it up to cage and then we just went\nto orbit rate. Left it in orbit rate and we caged it\nat a time when were just guessing pretty close to 0,0,0\nand then went to orbit rate. Some 20 hours later drifting\nall around,--tumbling all over the sky,--all over the\nplaces--\nConrad It was amazing how close the platform was.\nCooper The platform was almost right on what our attitude was\nafter that many hours of orbital rate errors and drift\netc. etc. added in to there and it still was a good\nrelative attitude indicator I thought it was really good.\nConrad In all three axis it stayed on. I was pretty surprised.\nCooper I really thought that was quite good. That platform really\nbehaved well and it really took a lot of abuse. Different times we powered it up-in drift- did all kinds\nof things. You couldn't have mistreated it more if\nyou tried. Alining the platform very straightforward.\nWe alined it in BEF. First of all, we went right to"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n161\nour old platform position which was BEF and started right from there in lining in a fine line by BEF position going out just--lining from there and we found that we had quite a yaw error in it. We noted that-\nConrad That showed up in roll real fast.\nCooper So we noted then that our yaw-what we figured was our yaw star one of them that we remember as our yaw star was a little bit over to the right about 10 degrees.\nSo we just went to cage. Eased it over about 10 degrees, uncaged it in BEF and sure enough then we went to platform position in BEF showed the needles weren't very far off. Right away they began to aline. ... very closely and we had it alined very shortly.\nConrad Yes, I can't say too much for that star chart either, boy, it was real comforting to have those yaw stars and it turned out that Scorpio went right down the middle of the tube for us. We just always knew that we had the platform in good alinement be for retrofire. We knew that we were right on in yaw all the way down that line and we could just name the stars and we knew that they were just going to come right down the middle by watching them go and it worked real well.\nFCSD REP How long did you aline the platform?\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"162\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad One and a half orbits. We really alined in about one and a half orbits.\nCooper We powered up two and one half and then. actually, we were actually alining for about an orbit and a half before retrofire. And we were on all the alinement and everything was done on the RCS system.\nFCSD REP How about the preretro checklist?\nCooper Let me say this on this alining. We found that we couldn't even see any decrease at all in RCS after an orbit and a half. The way we were doing this we were doing it in Horizon Scan BEF then using the Pulse Mode in the Horizon Scan. To really keep those needles really closely centered. Now, you can do the same thing in Pulse BEF,-but the Horizon Scan if you neglect it for just a minute, the Horizon Scan would hold it in there real closely and wouldn't let you wander off anywhere in pitch.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n163\nConrad I can't say too much for that star chart either. Boy, it was real comforting to have those yaw stars, and it turned out that Scorpio went right down the middle of the tube for us and we always knew that we had the platform in good alinement before retrofire. We knew we were right on in yaw all the way down the line, and we could just name the stars and knew that they were just going to come right down the middle of the pipe, and watch them go. It worked real well.\nFCSD Rep How long did you aline the platform for retrofire?\nConrad Well, we really alined it about 1 1/2 orbits.\nCooper We powered up for 2 1/2 and we actually were alining for an orbit and a half before retrofire. All the alinement and everything was done on the RCS system.\nLet me say this on this alining. We found that we couldn't see any decrease at all in the RCS quantity after an orbit and a half. We were doing it in horizon scan, BEF, and then using the pulse mode in the horizon scan to give you the fine control within the horizon scan to really keep the needles closely centered. Now you can do the same thing just in pulse, but if you neglect it for just a minute, the horizon scan would hold it in there real close. It wouldn't\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"164\nCONFIDENTIAL\nlet you wander off anywhere in pitch and roll. You had to watch the yaw very carefully, of course, but you could concentrate on doing other things for just a few seconds time and you didn't get your errors built up into it. You still have the pulse correction within the wider band of the horizon scan. We found that little teensy little blips to make your correction -- and I don't think we were using any fuel at all.\nFCSD Rep Did you get any reading on how much you did use?\nConrad I checked this morning and it's not in yet. I don't know how much fuel. We used Ring A since we powered it up at 2 orbits, over Carnarvon the first time. What I recall from the preretro checklist -- it commenced at Carnarvon one pass before reentry. In other words, we went an orbit and a half on the RCS system -- Ring A. Most of that time we were alining.\nCooper We used dual ring RCS rate command for retrofire only. Then we turned Ring B off and did the whole reentry on ring A.\nConrad Pulse.\nFCSD Rep You operated Ring A all the way?\nCooper The last I saw of Ring A in the reentry, down before\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"165\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwe went to drogue chute out, I still couldn't see any decrease in Ring A.\nConrad Well, I'm not sure that Ring A wasn't out of fuel, somewhere around between 100 000 on down. But the other ring wasn't. I know darn well it wasn't.\nCooper What do you mean it was? It wasn't out before we put the other ring in at all.\nConrad No. I know it wasn't out before we put the other ring in.\nCooper Did you take a look at it around 100 000?\nConrad Yes. I know the thrusters were firing. It was firing.\nCooper Well, the gauge indicated it still had all kinds of fuel left in it just before 100 000.\nConrad Well, that's regulated pressure.\nCooper Yes, it's pressure.\nConrad It's not going to tell you anything in the way of fuel usage. You have to see source pressure to find out what -- we don't have that.\nCooper Well, you would --\nConrad I'm not sure that Ring A didn't run out of fuel, but if it did, it did it somewhere around the time we put the other ring on, because we never got any\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"oscillations or anything. The rings were firing all the time.\nCooper It never was out of fuel before we put the other one on, I'll guarantee. I know because I was sitting there controlling with it and I know that we had control.\nConrad I know that both thrusters were physically burning inside -- you know, the throats were burning when I shut the propellant off. In other words, the propellant was shut off and there was no fuel flow going to them, but both Ring A and Ring B thrusters that I could see had throat flames in them.\nCooper That's just from residual fuel.\nConrad Yes, that's what I mean. So, I had the impression that they ran all the way down, and then if Ring A did run out of fuel at all, it did it at the very end, you know. I think that you'll find that there was fuel in both RCS rings and there should have been plenty of RCS B fuel left, because we didn't even turn on RCS B until less than 70 000. We were at 50 because --\nCooper Yes.\nConrad -- Gordo put the drogue out instead of turning the ring on."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FCSD Rep Why don't we pick up on page 26?\nCooper Okay.\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"168\nCONFIDENTIAL\n5.0 RETROFIRE\n5.1 TR-36 Events\nCooper TR-36 --\nConrad TR-36 is not right. There's no aft-firing thrusters verification. That's for OAMS. And there was no TR-22 either because that was for OAMS, nor was there a TR-13 or 12. What we had was a TR-27 clock set over Carnarvon.\nFCSD Rep You started your event timer at TR-27?\nConrad That's because we changed from 122-1 to 121-1. We went right down the pre-retro checklist before that by the numbers, and we had what we call a TR-36 which was nothing more than pick up the event timer. So we had the pre-retro checklist complete before Carnarvon. That's when they glitched us, and I'm going to complain about this one. We had a valid load in the computer and a valid TR when we left the States on Rev 120, and I see absolutely no reason if those guys don't know what the heck our orbit is after 120 of them up there, that they had to go ahead and send a quick up-date over Carnarvon --\nCooper Yes.\nConrad -- I felt that screwed us. I still want to know what happened."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"169\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper And we told McDivitt --\nConrad We didn't get a DCS light.\nCooper We told McDivitt when we left Houston that everything was all square and that we're going to Reentry Mode on the computer then. We did, and then at Carnarvon the CAP COM, before he even gave us a warning or asked us about anything or even checked to see what mode our computer was in, sent an up-date. Very, very poor.\nConrad He said, \"I'm sending you a new load and a new TR. Stand by.\" Boy, we were all over the thing trying to get it back to PRELAUNCH. I never got a DCS light on either the TR or the load. I quizzed him and I told him I didn't think the load went in. He said, \"No, the load was valid.\" We read out a couple of cores and checked TR, but I don't understand why we didn't get a DCS light. Now I won't understand it because we should have gotten two DCS lights.\nCooper Yes. One for TR and one for --\nConrad I didn't get one the first time when he sent the TR, and I didn't get one when he sent the load. We were in the process of switching the computer to PRELAUNCH, and I think the electrons got lost in the shuffle there. I gather that they took the computer\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"170\nCONFIDENTIAL\nout yesterday and that the load in it was valid. It's just that they computed the wrong place to land, in Houston, and sent the wrong load, period. Boy, that was a heck of a thing to do, and I really -- that darn DCS! I'm going to do just what I said I was going to do. If I ever fly again, I'm not going to fly with that DCS circuit breaker on. That's just exactly what I was afraid was going to happen, and they couldn't have done it at a worse time in the flight. They just absolutely couldn't have done it worse. The one thing that I had forgotten many times was putting that computer from PRELAUNCH to REENTRY. I had it underlined 50 times on the check-off list. I was going to make sure that it was in REENTRY. When they told me leaving the Cape we had a valid load and a valid TR, I called McDivitt and I said I'm putting the computer in REENTRY. The next thing is, at Carnarvon the guy should have seen on his board that the computer was in REENTRY and should have told me instead of sending a load like he did. We moved as fast as we could when he said he was sending loads to put the darn thing back to PRELAUNCH. That really screwed us up and I'm really mad about that. That's the only gripe I have against them, but it's a major one.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n171\nCooper\tYes. It's major enough that, by golly, my recom-\n\tmendations exactly like Pete's. From now on my rec-\n\tomendation is --\nConrad\tThat did it.\nCooper\t-- that the DCS circuit breaker is left in the OFF\n\tposition.\nConrad\tYes. The next time I ever go for the reentry and we\n\tput a valid load in the computer, I'm going to turn\n\tthe DCS off so they can't screw it up again without\n\tme turning it back on.\nCooper\tAbsolutely. Turn that circuit breaker to the OFF\n\tposition.\nConrad\tThat's right. I'd rather miss a load and go with\n\tthe earlier one. I still can't believe that after\n\t120 orbits they didn't know exactly what our param-\n\teters were for orbit. I don't even know why they\n\tneeded that track over the United States the last\n\tpass. They'd been tracking us all night long.\n\tThey'd been tracking us for 8 days, and they ought\n\tto know where the heck we were. If they want to do\n\tit at the last minute, then let's plan on loading the\n\tcomputer at Carnarvon and not load the computer at\n\tthe Cape. This loading it at the Cape and then chang-\n\ting it again at Carnarvon has got to go.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"172\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tAnd then saying this is your final load. Verify --\nConrad\tBad news. I'm really mad about that!\nCooper\tThen unscheduled and everything else --\nConrad\tI don't blame that guy at Carnarvon because he wasn't\n\texpecting to send us a load either. I blame Houston.\n\tHouston sent it down to them at the last minute,\n\tobviously, and he was doing the best he could and\n\the got rushed. The whole thing we wanted to do on\n\treentry and the reason we stowed early and sat there\n\twith nothing to do was to make sure that we were\n\tnever rushed. We weren't until the guy sent that\n\tload. And there we were, 27 minutes from retrofire,\n\tand I really wasn't convinced we had the right load\n\tin the computer even when we left Carnarvon. Boy,\n\tI'm really mad at that!\n5.2 TR-256\nCooper\tOkay. TR-256.\nConrad\tOkay. I've got some recommendations. I think we\n\tought to rewrite our TR-256 check-off list because\n\tthere are too many things that happen on it at TR-5\n\tand TR-256. We changed the procedure in flight --\n\tI knew I was going to do it that way anyhow, in that\n\tI brought up the main batteries early. I brought\n\tthem on at 7 minutes. I verified the computer in\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"173\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\tREENTRY again, of course, and squib batteries. We\n\twere already on the RCS system, so we didn't have to\n\tbring them on, but I did bring on the other ring at\n\tthat point. At the 256, we wanted to go platform to\n\tORB RATE as late as possible, so we did that after\n\twe got TR-256 function light -- the attitude indicator\n\tlight -- and that showed we had all our clocks were\n\tin sync just perfectly. There wasn't a clock in the\n\tspacecraft that wasn't in sync. The TR was in sync\n\twith the event timer and they were in sync with our\n\tback-up watches. There was no doubt in our minds\n\tthat everything in the TRS system was working right\n\tdown the line and that we were working right down\n\tthe line.\nCooper\tWe went to retro attitude punched the --\nConrad\tWent to retro attitude, set up the whole thing for\n\tthe reentry, and at TR-1 --\n5.3 TR-1\nCooper\tTR-1, SEP OAMS, SEP ELEC, SEP ADAP, four squibs on --\nConrad\tAt TR-30 seconds --\nCooper\tArm retro. We already had that.\nConrad\tI've always made it a procedure to arm auto-retro at\n\tTR-5 seconds --\nCooper\tLet's see -- SEP OAMS, SEP ELEC, SEP ADAP -- we did a\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"174\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\tTR-1. Let's see, retro rockets squib -- all four\n\tarmed at TR-30, arm auto-retros at about TR-5 seconds --\nConrad\tYes. TR-5. And I absolutely positively go on record\n\tthat the manual retro-fire button was pushed, because\n\tI pushed it four times at one second and the COMP\n\tlight went green at --\nFCSD Rep\tOne second after auto?\nConrad\tNo. One second after the retros actually fired.\n5.4 TR-0\nCooper\tAt TR-0, spacecraft attitude was right on the money.\n\tThere were no rates. Control mode was dual RCS --\nConrad\tI've got a couple of comments about the retros.\n\tThere's no doubt in my mind that the number 3 retro\n\tstopped firing at least a half a second before the\n\tnumber 4 retro started to fire.\nCooper\tIt sure did.\nConrad\tAnd there was another one in there --\nCooper\tThere was no overlap.\nConrad\tI'm pretty sure that between the second and the\n\tthird, there was no overlap --\nCooper\tBetween 2 and 3.\nConrad\t-- but they were much closer together than between\n\t3 and 4.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"175\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tNumber 1 was firing and it was just tailing off when\n\tnumber 2 took in. It had the proper sequence on it.\n\tNumber 2 had completely stopped and there was an\n\tinterval there of, it seemed like, several seconds.\n\tIt wasn't, but it seemed like there was a definite\n\tdistinct --\nConrad\tBetween 3 and 4 was the one that really seemed like an\n\teternity.\nCooper\tThere was a definite distinct separate interval\n\tthere where there was no firing going on. Then 3\n\tfired. Then there was an even longer interval in\n\tthere involved and then 4 fired.\nConrad\tYes. That was long enough between 3 and 4 for me to\n\tthink maybe the fourth one wasn't going to fire at\n\tall.\nFCSD Rep\tI think we ought to get some comments on the night --\nConrad\tOh, we weren't even aware of it.\nCooper\tWe had the lights up bright in the cockpit --\nConrad\tWe went with the lights bright --\nCooper\tWe decided we'd play it just like we did in the\n\tsimulator, just like we were going to be in the simu-\n\tlator, you know, with all the lights up bright and not\n\teven worry about what was going on out the window.\n\tHowever, I did sneak a little peaky or two and you\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"look like you were sitting in the middle of a fire\nbarrel. Boy! When those retros go off, the whole\nspacecraft's enveloped in flames -- just looks like\nthe whole place is burning all over back there.\nThis flame comes all the way back over the spacecraft\nand all the way up --\nConrad\tAt SEP OAMS, electric and adapter, though, we didn't\nsee much of anything.\nCooper\tNo. I saw a flash at SEP ADAP.\nConrad\tI saw a little flash, but I thought maybe we'd see a\nlot more flashing-type flame. Actually, no big problem in that night retro, but I'll tell you one thing,\nyou're not ever going to do it out the window.\nCooper\tYou're never going to see anything out the window in\na night retro. You're just completely enveloped in\nflames.\nConrad\tThose RCS's are firing away like mad and there's all\nkinds of light outside and everything, so night retro\nis an instrument-type thing.\nCooper\tIt's purely instruments. If you don't have instruments, you're just not going to shoot it.\nConrad\tBut otherwise, I don't think there was any difference.\nCooper\tNo.\nConrad\tWe were completely in the dark for a long time. We"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"didn't have a horizon for 5 minutes after retro-fire. We were in the middle of the United States before we saw the ground.\nCooper\tThe first place we saw was White Sands.\nConrad\tWhite Sands --\nCooper\tJust past the terminator --\nConrad\t-- was the first place I saw when we came out of the terminator on the ground. Of course, by that time, we had a sort of what you might call a discernable horizon, but it was so fuzzy. There is no such thing as a horizon at sunrise, looking the other way. Looking 180 from the sun you're looking into a gray, black, fuzzy -- boy, there's no discernable horizon. You're looking at the terminator. It's not a usable horizon. I don't call it usable. We were on gauges all the way and not until we got past the Mississippi River did we get what you would really call a horizon. That's when the reentry started getting different than the ones in the simulator. The reentry was much different in ball attitudes, in that we were much steeper on the ball. We were looking at more and more white that I ever saw before. I was hard pressed -- if we didn't have the bank angle index on the ball you couldn't tell what your bank angle was."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper\tYes.\nConrad\tThere was no horizon. The black part of the ball was gone. It was gone for the rest of reentry. We lost it awful early.\nFCSD Rep\tDo you remember a point, say 400 000 feet, at what pitch angle you were on the ball?\nConrad\t400 000 feet -- the trim hadn't begun to affect you too much and Gordo was at about 30 degrees.\nCooper\tAbout 30 degrees. Yes.\nConrad\tYes. But he was still flying the spacecraft, just holding attitude there.\nFCSD Rep\tOkay, how about when you hit the atmosphere?\nConrad\t280 K.\nCooper\tAt 280 K we were --\nConrad\tIt seemed to me that's when things started to steepen up. We started to really trim up. We were beginning to get g --\nCooper\tBy the time we got to 280 K, we were at about 50 degrees pitch, roughly -- 50 or 60 degrees on the ball. We were quite a way down. From there on, we were moving right on around on the ball.\nFCSD Rep\tWere you able after retrofire to roll it up and put the horizon on the top of the window and hold that?\nCooper\tYes, on the ball, but we couldn't see the horizon."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tYes, those lines were useless as far as the horizon on it, because there wasn't any horizon out there.\nGCSD Rep\tYou had to use the 8-ball entirely?\nCooper\tYes.\nConrad\tThat was a pure instrument retro.\nCooper\tYou're darn right, boy. I'll guarantee you anytime you fire retros at night, you'd better have instruments because you're not going to have a visual out-the-window, because those RCS thrusters out there will just blind you.\nConrad\tYes, and this talking about doing this stuff on rate needles and no ball and everything is a bunch of hog-wash. You'd better have the whole panel.\nCooper\tYou're darn right.\nConrad\tOr you fire them in the daytime, with a good horizon.\nFCSD Rep\tLet me see now. You rolled it upside down, and what did you hold? You held 20 degrees --\nCooper\t20 degrees until it started trimming out. Then, I'd switch between rate and attitude. I'd just hold that attitude and when I'd see a little tiny rate creep in -- I was on single-ring pulse -- I'd just pulse that rate out. Of course, that was establishing my trim angle right there. You'd see it on the rate. You'd"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"see the pitch rate needle start to move just a little tiny bit. That was showing you that you weren't quite on trim. Then I'd tweek it and it would sit right there, and it would just start trimming itself out on the ball.\nFCSD Rep\tWhen it trimmed out you damped the rates. You were in single-ring direct?\nCooper\tWell, at 400 K I went to single-ring direct.\nConrad\tYes, we were in pulse --\nCooper\tYes, single-ring pulse.\nConrad\tSingle-ring pulse to 400 K --\nCooper\tThen I went to RATE COMMAND on the attitude control selector and took the ACME RCS switch to direct -- one to direct, the other one was to off. Then I used single-ring direct throughout the reentry, until very late when the oscillations got so rapid that I had to concentrate too much on them rather than the attitude. Then I went into ACME -- just put the RCS switch to ACME and then flew the attitude with the stick and allowed the RCS to damp the oscillations.\nFCSD Rep\tStill one ring?\nCooper\tStill one ring.\nConrad\tWe didn't go on dual-rings until below 70 000 feet."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper We had the drogue out before we went on dual-rings.\nFCSD Rep Was there any problem?\nConrad The thing was steady as a rock all the way.\nCooper Yes, it was beautiful.\nConrad I've been hearing 40-degree oscillations on the drogue and all that sort of stuff. The only oscallations we had on the drogue were high-frequency low-amplitude oscillations where the drogue was stable, sitting above us steady as a rock, pulsing longitudinally like this --\nCooper It squidded super-sonically for we were about 112 --\nConrad And then the shrouds --\nCooper Did you hear about the Mercury tests where the drogue was ... a few times?\nConrad The shrouds on the spacecraft had a high frequency low amplitude oscillation, but the nose was like 5 degrees, it seemed to me. It's just surprising. We were as steady as a rock as far as I was concerned.\nCooper Well, I think the whole --\nConrad The oscillation was there, but I think the --\nCooper I think the whole retrofire and reentry is so much easier than Mercury that I can't believe it. It is really a piece of cake."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad At 30 000 we shut off the propellant valves to the RCS. It was still working away merrily there trying to steady it down on the drogue. As far as I know, there was propellant in both Ring A and Ring B when we shut them down.\n5.5 Retropack Jettison\nCooper We jettisoned the retropack right in retro attitude --\nFCSD Rep You didn't see the retropack burning up or anything?\nConrad Yes, I saw it reenter behind us but nowhere near like those guys did. It was miles behind us when I saw it.\nCooper I thought I saw something way back there burning. I guess that was it.\nConrad Yes. Up and on the left side of where I was looking. I saw it burn up behind us. But it was miles behind us by then. You see, it had been chasing us in the dark so we never did see it close up. We never saw anything like pump packages blowing out when we set the retros."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5.6 Communications\nCooper Communications were good throughout the whole re-entry. We went into blackout right on time.\nConrad Right on time.\nCooper Yes, just right on the second when they said we'd go into blackout. We came out just exactly when they said we would. The only thing was, when they asked us what our over-shoot or under-shoot was I'll be darn if I could tell them at that point. I sure as heck didn't know with this computer telling us one thing and yet it not doing the right thing.\nFCSD Rep We'd better put the retrofire IVI readings in here.\nConrad 269 aft, 010 left, 181 down. And that comes out amazingly close to a nominal combination. As a matter of fact, it shows that we should have had about a 60 degree bank angle, and if you compensate the 60 degrees for the off-set it would have been 54 or 53--\nCooper Yes.\nCooper Almost completely nominal.\nConrad I think this chart's a handy gouge. It agrees with what the ground gave us. We didn't fly it, of course. We flew the computer, but--"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Well, this is the bank angle we flew until we got cross, and down-range at 280K.\nConrad We went from full lift at 400K to 53 degrees, which was the given bank angle by the ground which we agreed to use. We went to 53 degrees until guidance came in, and it came in at 280K. The needle showed that we were high. It showed that we were very high, that we were going to over-shoot by a large distance, and--\nCooper This is the first normal indication. The computer is supposed--\nConrad ... do anything which is what you're supposed to do. We sat there to watch the trend. Nothing happened. The needle didn't come up off the peg. I looked at the high scale and it didn't look to me like the high scale was pegged out.\nCooper It wasn't pegged. I went to the high scale and it was about half way down.\nConrad Less than half way down, indicating that we were up around a 75 mile over-shoot, which just told me we were humping a little bit to get down into the target.\nCooper Right.\nConrad And, in fact, at that time we were ...."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper ...to get on down to it because it told me--\nConrad We were just sitting there waiting for the needle to come up like we had seen it do a million times in the same situation. It never came off the peg. Then, we got in a little discussion, you know. I felt that we ought to go to full lift because I thought something was wrong with guidance. Gordo agreed that something was wrong with guidance but he really thought maybe we really had over-shot. I'm sure the retros were on time and they were nominal, almost. So, we finally wound up going back to the nominal lift vector--\nCooper I went back to the nominal bank angle, which we had agreed we'd go to if anything happened. We had agreed with FOD that if anything happened throughout re-entry--something was wrong with guidance--\nConrad We flew--\nCooper --we would go back to the nominal bank angle, that we wouldn't take any great abnormal-type situation. We would go back to the nominal bank angle, so that in the event they lost communication with us or something screwed completely up in the reentry, they would know that we used as near as possible to the nominal bank angle."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"186\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad Now, what really hurt there though was that he\nsat there at the nominal bank angle of 53 degrees\nuntil we got to, say, 2 1/2 g's, which is a fair\nlong time through the guidance.... When he elected\nto roll to the 90 degree bank angle, that's when\nwe were getting the most lift. Boy, we dug in--\nI'll tell you we shot up there to 7 1/2 g's in\nnothing flat. It was at about that time that we\nrolled back out again, you see. We'd lost the main\nlift that we were going to get out of it, but, as\nit is, I don't think we did so badly winding up 83\nmiles short. I understand they were targeting\n240 miles short.\nCooper That's apparently what the load they had in the computer\nturned out to be--erroneously put in at 240 miles\nshort.\nConrad Yes, they were off by a factor of 240 miles.\nCooper So, if we had followed the computer exactly we'd\nhave been a lot further shorter than we were.\nFortunately, we recognized that something was amiss.\nFCSD Rep Did that down-range needle ever do anything?\nConrad No, I don't think it moved at all.\nCooper I don't think it ever really moved. I think one\ntime it moved a little, but I really don't think\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n187\nit moved much.\nConrad I think we were hoping to see it move, you know,\nbut it was just one of those--that's a fast time\nsituation there, and it was just one of those things\nwhere we made the right decision in the end to go\nback to the nominal bank angle. Everything in the\ncomputer indicated--the time to 400K and roll needle\ninitiate were within a second of one another. What\nthe ground gave us--\nCooper And the time to 290K was exactly right.\nConrad And 280K time, roughly as far as we knew and every-\nthing--BANG! in comes the guidance initiate down-\nrange predict on the needles. Everything up to\nthat point--the computer had come on green, the\nIVI's read nominal, we saw the kind of thing we\nexpected to see. We were completely suckered on\nthat, because the computer worked just like it was\nsupposed to--\nCooper And the down-range needle indicated exactly what\nit always will do and exactly what we'd briefed\nwith FOD. They had agreed that what we should see\non the computer is just about the maximum deflection\non the low scale when it first comes on.\nConrad And that's just what we got.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n188\nCooper Because that's exactly the way things are all set\nup in the math flow. You'll get that and then very\nshortly thereafter if you hold the nominal bank\nangle it will take a little bit of time and it will\nstart easing on up.\nConrad And you'll get an idea by the rate of easing up.\nCooper If you roll to the 90, of course, in that position\nyou'll get to it in a big rush, but you want to be\ncareful not to overshoot.\nConrad You'll never get back.\nCooper But, then when I held the nominal bank angle and\nit didn't come up and didn't come up, then I rolled\nto the 90 to see if I was going to be able to bring\nit up. Of course, by this time I realized that\nwhen I didn't see it come up something was really\nwrong. I then went back to the nominal. Fortunately,\nthat period that we held at the nominal is what\ncarried us down as near as it did. The short period\nthat we were at 90, of course, is where we were\nreally digging in--\nConrad It cost us 83 miles, probably, because I think if\nwe had flown the nominal bank angle all the way that\nwe'd have really wound up real close to the darn\ncarrier.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCooper We'd probably wound up 45 miles from the carrier--\nConrad That going to the 90 degrees for the time period\nthat we did cost us 80 something miles. Otherwise,\nwe flew the nominal.\nCooper The whole thing is if we hadn't tried following the\ncomputer we would never have known\nConrad Yes, and I'll tell you one thing. I'm still con-\nvinced right now sitting in this room that computer\nwill bring you right in to where you want to go if\nyou have the right load in it, because it just worked\nmagnificently. It came in just like it was supposed\nto and it did it on boost, too. I was really sold\non it. I think the computations in that computer\nare accurate enough for the kind of work that a guy\ncan do onboard the spacecraft, and it's a darn fine\npiece of equipment and it was working well. We're\nthe first ones to get a good look at it and it\nworked just like it was supposed to. If it had the\nright darn parameters in it we'd have split the\nship right up the middle.\nCooper I think so. I think it's just a dirty shame.\nFCSD Rep What was the cross-range needle doing?\nCooper Cross-range was showing that we needed left bank in\nthere--that we needed to move to the left. In other\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n190\nwords, you're flying opposite. You're flying your\nneedle to. In other words, you're flying back\ncourse ILS on lateral and you're flying a standard\nILS on the glide slope--front course ILS. The\ncross-range needle was showing off to the right,\nwhich indicated that we needed to bank left, which\nis exactly right. That's just exactly right. We\nhit 10 miles short. We never did get the cross-\nrange--cross-range was coming in--cross-range did\nmove in on us. Down-range, I don't believe, ever\nreally moved. Cross-range did move in some on us,\nand that's when I went back to the nominal. I\nthought, well, we're past the time to reverse bank\nangle. Maybe I ought to roll right. So, I rolled\nover to the right side and said, no, by golly, I'm\nstill going to follow the cross-range. At least\nit's giving us the proper indications, I believe.\nSo, I rolled back in to the left bank, which was\nsmart because we still hit slightly to the right.\nWere we off to the north or the south, Pete? I had\nit all figured out one time.\nCooper I don't really know Gordo. I didn't pay any atten-\ntion to the cross-range needle.\nCooper Anyway, the way I had it figured out here the other\nthe cross-range need\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"day the cross-range needle was indicating properly.\nFCSD Rep The down-range needle, when it came on, stayed in the same place all the time--all the way through?\nCooper Yes.\nFCSD Rep Full-scale.\nCooper Full-scale. Right. Just about full-scale on the low range.\nFCSD Rep Okay. How about any of the up-dating done during reentry?\nConrad We got all the times. We got all the times just fine and I wrote them all down. They gave us enter blackout at 16:14, out of blackout at 21:20, reverse bank at 19:25, bank left 54, and bank right 68. The drogue time was 22+05, and the main time was 23+48. They were all good times. I had them all written down. No problem. They got the up-dates in before blackout and in plenty of time before blackout, as a matter of fact. We whistled right in there. No sweat on the times. I guess maybe we went to the 90 degree bank or something like that, but from about the time of 1g to the time of guidance locking out, which is roughly 100K and the altimeter coming off the peg, man, I don't know whether it was just because we did it for real"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"but everything else worked like the simulator timewise, but that time period seemed extremely short to me in comparison to simulator reentry.\nCooper Yes, it sure did to me.\nConrad Yes. Now we can go back and look at the times and see what the actual times were to these--\nCooper Maybe just in real time--\nConrad This might have been the real-time case to make--\nFCSD Rep How about the altimeter?\nConrad It worked very poorly on lift-off. It had been very jerky and jumped all around but it was smooth as a bell. Boy, it came off the peg. It locked up at 96 000. What was it? It did it in the altitude chamber.\nCooper 96 800 feet or something like that.\nConrad It didn't ever run to 100 000 and it never had. It didn't do that in the altitude chamber, and it quit where it always quit--96 800. It came off the peg smooth and just wound right on down. No jumping or jittering.\nCooper It was right with the barostats coming down.\nConrad Yes, it was right with the barostats coming down. I called the altimeter off the peg to Gordo and he put the landing arm on, which was roughly at"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"100 000. Then, I said, \"Stand by for 70 000.\"\nI was going to tell him to go attitude control RCS A and B to ACME, and he punched out the drogue. So, we qualified the drogue at 70 000, and then I got the rate command, both rings on, and we were somewhere below 70 000 when we put Ring B on."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6.0 REENTRY\n6.1 400K\nCooper By the time we hit 400K I was at full lift position from Retro Jett until there. Roll command gave a roll right and a roll command the bug just as it always does. Time correlation was right on the money. 400K occurred right to the second when it was supposed to. Guidance initiate occurred just at 280K at exactly the right time and it indicated we had a right .... the azimuth needle indicated right and the down range needle indicated full scale it was well up into the thing. I would say maybe half deflection.\nConrad Yes. That was full scale. High scale was not --\nCooper The bank angle was 53 degrees left bank which was our nominal bank angle which I went to at guidance initiate and held 53 degrees left. The rool needle at this time the roll needle indicated off full right and very shortly thereafter then .... before I even got suspicious that we weren't getting down on this, the roll needle then crossed over the middle position and held there indicating we had the right bank angle there for a minute and then crossed full scale over to the other side ...."} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"which gave me one little old tweak of suspicion there that something was wrong right there on the roll bug. At that point then, I rolled 90 to see if I could get on that too, the down range needle. The cross range needle moved in some from the right. It had been out... not completely full scale, but quite a ways out. It moved in slightly but not much. Down range needle, let's see, I don't believe it ever moved up from there on and then at that point when I saw that the 90 wasn't going to hold it in there, I said I was going back to the nominal bank angle. I went back to the 53 but then put in 60....67 degrees bank right, to see if I can get the roll bug to change. It didn't change at that time so cross range was still indicating that I should be banked left so I went back to my bank left to see if I can kill off the cross range. I knew at that point that something was really seriously wrong and I was just trying to hold it as nominal as possible. I should have probably at that time since I was already passed the time of reverse bank angle, I probably should have gone ahead and held that, but that was a mistake, I probably should have gone ahead and held that 67 degrees bank right, and"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nheld that on in. It probably would have corrected\nus out a little better cross-range-wise, but the\nperiod of time that we were at 90 degrees trying\nto get the glide slope, to get onto the glide slope\nthere, is what cost us that 86 miles. Had we held\nthe nominal bank angle all the way and ignored the\ncomputer, I think we would have hit very, very near\nthe carrier. But, we... at least we gave the com-\nputer a try. I think that if it had had the right\nvalues loaded in it, I think it would have done\nvery well by us. The spacecraft behaved very well.\nIonization, we got into that ionic layer. After\nthe 280K point, we began to really ionize quite a\nbit and got into a typical fire ball effect back\nthere although it didn't seem to me like it was\nas much of a fire ball effect in this as it was in\nMercury. It seemed a lot less.\n6.2 Acceleration Profile\nCooper Acceleration profile, I noted the g's very early be-\nfore we got the 2g's on. I noted the g's felt\npretty strong in there. I could feel them fairly\nsevere now. I never felt at all from there on. I\nnever even felt like we had any amount of g's on\nus until I noted we had seven and a half and I could\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nhardly believe it. So, I didn't have any trouble\ncontrolling or... I just didn't think about having\nit on there. Pete noticed the g's more than I did\nbecause he wasn't as busy, I guess, as I was.\n6.3 Spacecraft Control\nCooper Spacecraft control was beautiful. There was no\nproblem at all. I was on single ring DIRECT and\nthen had gone fairly late down in the guidance\nprogram there when the oscillations got to be often\nenough in there that it was taking a little concen-\ntration to damp the oscillations as well as to watch\nthe guidance. I just went over the single ring\nACME or RATE COMMAND ACME and let the RATE COMMAND\ndamp the oscillations and I was doing the steering,\nwith the RATE COMMAND also. Still single ring.\n6.4 100K Feet\nCooper Let's see, at a 100K the altimeter came off the peg\nvery shortly thereafter. I was going to arm both\nRCS rings, bringing on ring B to ACME at 70K and\ninstead I deliberately, calmly, cooly, and delibera-\ntely deployed the drogue chutes. And it worked\nbeautifully. Most stable drogue chute I ever saw.\nIt squidded, just like a supersonic drogue test that\nwere done in Mercury that I saw. In fact, 70 was\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nthe point where he put the Mercury drogue out. It\nsquidded a couple of times very nicely and stabilized\nout and was just beautiful....We never had any\noscillations on it or anything. It was just as\nnice as it could be.\n6.5 50K Feet\nCooper By 50K we had both RCS rings-ON, just letting them\nfeed on out and then were blipping away out there\nand the spacecraft just came right straight down.\nNo oscillation or anything.\nFCSD Rep What kind of oscillation on drogue deployment....\nwhat would you estimate the .....\nCooper I don't think we had any at all. I don't think we\nhad a single oscillation really, when we deployed\nthe drogue, do you?\nConrad Oh yeah. It oscillated but the ..... it was sort\nof high frequency and low amplitude.\nCooper That's just what I say. I mean it was just kind\nof like.....It was just kind of like -- a little\nquiver on the line. Like when you pluck a bow\nstring, you know, the string ....the spacecraft\nwould kind of go like this but not any amount\nof --\nConrad These guys were talking about 40 degree yaw angles\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nand stuff like -- Nothing like that.\nCooper I bet you couldn't make it any more than 2 or 3\nor 4 degrees.\nConrad Yes, I would say 5 at the most. Now I don't have\nany horizon or anything to reference this to. All\nI'm doing is watching the drogue. But I didn't\nhave any physical sensations, or --\nCooper There were no physical sensations of any kind of\noscillations.\nConrad The frequency was too high to ever get any amplitudes\nthat big. We were just sitting there and the drogue\nlooked steady to me, see, and all I could see was\nthe nose and the shrouds zacking back and forth like\nthat. Oh, sort of around, and, you know. They were\nboth at pitch and yaw...but I felt comfortable all\nthe time. I didn't have any idea that we were\nreally going to --\nCooper It was well stabilized. Stable as a rock\nConrad Now, I'll tell you that RCS was really working.\nNow, we were in RATE COMMAND not REENTRY RATE COM-\nMAND, we were in RATE COMMAND. So, it would. I\nmean, it was firing full time.\nCooper Yes, it was really working.\nConrad We were outside the rate command bands.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nFCSD Rep You don't use the reentry command?\nConrad Heck no!\nCooper No, no that's useless.\nConrad We had fuel up the kazoo.\nCooper We had all kinds of fuel. We figured to just go\ninto RATE COMMAND. That's exactly what --\nConrad ... to see how smooth a reentry you could make.\nCooper The only thing we deviated from our very carefully\ncalculated preflight plan was that I, instead of\ngoing to dual ring RCS, I put the drogue out at\n70K.\nConrad We just had that step backwards between 50 and 70K.\nCooper There must be a hold over from Mercury there some-\nwhere, too, still getting to me.\nConrad Okay, now the next most important thing was that at\n50 000 or shortly thereafter, we went to repress.\nGordo turned on the REPRESS and I hit the O2 HIGH\nRATE, and as we planned you know, we were not going\nto vent the cabin or open the inlet snorkel, and\nman, going through 27 000 feet that needle hit zero\nfaster than you can say \"Jack Robinson.\" That\ncabin came down from 5 psid to nothing and I said\n\"Holy Christmas\"; it came down so fast that I was\nreally humping to get the .....I wanted to get the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nvent open and I opened the vent and opened the in-\nlet snorkel and set the recirc at 45 degrees in\npretty fast order. But, all the fancy calculations\nby the ECS people are dead wrong, because there\nisn't enough in that repress or the O2 HIGH RATE\nto keep up with that differential drop off. We\ngot fumes too, but not many.\nCooper Boy, I did'nt think they were hardly noticeable,\nat all.\nConrad It was noticeable.\nCooper Just a musty smell.\nConrad But it was noticeable. I'm sure it helped to have\nthe O2 HIGH RATE and the REPRESS on all the way down.\nCooper But then the one thing that we did do then at 2000.\nWe closed it back up. Closed it back up and left\nthe REPRESS and O2 HIGH RATE on, so that I expect\nthat we had a little bit of delta pressure in the\ncabin when we touched.\nConrad Oh, we did. We had about a pound. It was very\nslowly coming up.\nCooper It was up .....\nConrad We had about a pound.\nCooper Now I think this kept a lot of the fumes out.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nConrad Then we sat there in the water, very leisurely. It\nwas still building up. I went and cycled the O2\nHIGH RATE handle OFF.\n6.6 35K Checklist Items\nConrad Before you leave that let's just say that at\n35 000 feet for the check off list we uncovered\nour D-rings. At 30 000 feet we turned off the RCS\npropellant A and B and they ran out shortly there-\nafter. We ....\n6.7 Communications\nCooper We... communicated with the recovery forces. Talked\nto them at that point twice on the way down and they\nasked us for a short count.\nConrad We gave this here.\nCooper We gave this a short count. They said, \"Roger,\nreading you loud and clear.\" and they had us fixed\nat 270 degrees at .....\nConrad 289, I think it was.\nCooper 289, was it? Well, some.....I know you had a degree\nand a bearing and a range on us at that point.\nConrad We managed to get all the way through our post main\ncheck off list, too.\n6.8 10.6K Barostat\nCooper Then at .....the barostat came on, deployed the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\ndrogue just as the barostat came on. It came on\nright at 10.6, right on the money. I punched the\nmain, deployed the main just as the barostat came\non. As we have already said, the main deployed.....\nConrad There seemed like an awful long time to me though\nfrom the time you punched the main for it to go\nthrough the sequence. It seemed like an eternity\nfor the R and R can to blow.\nCooper Well, you could see the sequence going on out there,\nall this thing trundling out and all the long lines\ngoing out, and all the sequence happening, and then\nthe main coming out.\nConrad It was really pretty though.\nCooper Well, I guess I was anticipating.\nConrad It was just like in that picture.\nCooper You see all this stuff coming out, you know, that\ndrawing where it shows all the cycles of the stuff\ncoming out. Just like advertised.\n6.9 Main Chute Deployment\nCooper We reported when we had a drogue, when we had a good\nmain. The main came out nominally. De-reefed ex-\nactly on time .....\nConrad Beautiful thing. No gores out, no nothing, rips or\nanything, nothing. It was just nominal all the way.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCooper It was a real pretty main, and we were very stable\non the main. We weren't oscillating at all, I mean\nobviously. It looked like we were just coming\nstraight down.\nConrad Yes, the whole thing damped out. That is another\nreason the water landing was so smooth.\nCooper And when we touched in the water, as I said, we\nwent to the 2000, we went to --\n6.10 Single Point Release\nFCSD Rep Okay, single point release. How about that?\nCooper Single point release. It's there. I mean it's\nreally a jolt when you go to single point release,\nbut being aware of it we were both braced like this\nwhen I hit it, it oscillated us a couple of times\nand then that is all there is to it.\nConrad You hit the end of the strap and then you see-saw\na couple of oscillations. That's exactly what it\nfelt like.....\nCooper As long as you know what to expect there is no prob-\nlem. I can see why Gus and John would knock the\nheck out of themselves.\nConrad Not expecting it.\n6.11 Blood Pressure Measurements\nCooper Okay, we gave a blood pressure at Guaymas after\nretrofire and I told them I wouldn't put the programer\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nON until we were on the water and I gave them three\nblood pressures and I don't think any of them worked,\nI don't think the bowl bled down.\n6.12 Post-Main Checklist Items\nFCSD REP Okay, we got the rescue beacon without lights and\nthe suit fans and ACME BIAS power OFF. This is\npost main check list and landing attitudes.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"206\nCONFIDENTIAL\n7.0 LANDING AND RECOVERY\n7.1 Impact\nCooper Impact, was very very soft. We just hit. We hit very easy. We didn't go under water at all. We didn't change attitude one bit from the time we hit the water. We went bloop.\nConrad We just pitched down a little bit --\nCooper The nose pitched down 8 or 10 degrees but the water didn't even come over the windows. The main hit parachute release, the chute drifted off in front just slightly out to the right of us and just sat out there in the water on the right for a long time.\nConrad We did skip this one thing here with this 6.13 post main check off list. We got all the way through that and I wanted to say that I had the decided impression that we got to the post main and got back over here on this 2000 foot check list pretty fast. I mean that time happened faster than the simulator but it took us a little while to get our heads unlocked, and after we went to 2-point and get back on this check-off list, and boy, we hadn't any more gotten through this when we were\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nover there to the 2000 K and I was ....\nCooper One thing that took a little bit of our time there though, Pete, was the fact that the AIR BOSS called us twice there and we were actually busy answering that.\nConrad We were talking on the radio and a little talking to Houston on the radio too.\nFCSD REP Why don't you talk a little bit more about the 2000 foot that pressurized in the cabin.\nConrad Yes, well then we went the D-ring safety cover. We covered our D-rings but I can't put my D-ring pin in so I didn't put the pin in until we were on the water. I can't put that pin in, in flight, strappen in the seat. I can't reach down there. Gordo, can. Gordo can reach down and get it. I can't do it. So, I didn't put mine in. Then I went to cabin vent UP and inlet snorkel UP and then left the recirc valve at 45 degrees, and of course the repress had been on since 50,000. So had the O2 HIGH RATE, or some altitude shortly thereafter. The cabin seemed to be coming up very slowly. It doesn't even with repress on. That's a, I guess, a lot of volume in there or something, but it just doesn't come up fast. So we were about a pound when\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"208\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwe landed.\nFCSD REP Never got over a pound?\nConrad Never got over a pound I don't believe.\nCooper Then we came OFF on the repress and we opened our face plates.\nConrad Then we opened our face plates and took a sniff in there. It didn't smell to bad. I had a little smell of RCS fumes. Now mind you we were sealed off at 2000 so I know it didn't come in on the water. The RCS fumes that were in there came in there at 27000 when we opened the vent and the inlet snorkel so I'm still -- if the structure would take it, I really think you should come in and leave that inlet snorkel and that vent closed. If you did that you would have a clean, cold cabin when you hit the water. Okay, now.\nCooper I didn't really think it was as objectionable.\nConrad No, it wasn't objectionable.\nCooper It was cool. One thing we might add right here right now, that we didn't cover back in the pre-retro area was that we went the full cold on everything. We had that cabin so cold, and we went to cabin fan and so that the cagin was about, what, 40 degrees, 50 degrees.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"209\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad No, the cabin was about 53 degrees. Somewhere in there. It was a little over 50, and the suit was running ....\nCooper The suit was running about 50 on reentry so the whole thing was pretty cool.\nConrad It was never hot at any time.\nCooper When we opened our face plates the cabin was still cool, the suits were still cool, and the snorkel and vent when we did open them and both fans came on after we went OFF of O2 HIGH RATE, Repress and both fans came on. We were getting nice cool air through .... Yes, we have been hearing everybody say, you know, boy you've got to get those suits off, you really get hot in there. You see and Gordo said \"Well come on we are going to be here for awhile, we'll get the suits off\" and it was perfectly obvious that we were getting a good flow and I said \"Well, why don't we put our neck dams on and we'll leave the inlet snorkel open here and get this fans running and see, just see, just sit here for a second, because you get awful hot getting out of the suit period. And by golly we were in good shape. We could have stayed in that\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"210\nCONFIDENTIAL\nspacecraft 2, 3 hours. As a matter of fact the longer we stayed the cooler we were getting because we were just sitting back letting --\nCooper We really debated seriously about waiting if the carrier had been an hour or so nearer we would have waited for a carrier pick up rather than go with the choppers.\nConrad Because we were in good shape in there and we didn't feel bad and the smells weren't bad and what little RCS fumes where in there from picking them up at 27000 went right out.\nCooper Of course we had -- let's face it though, we had an ideal day on the water. It was like a mill pond out on the water. It was nice and smooth and sunny and everything was in good shape, with the spacecraft.\nConrad It was early in the morning and the air was about 80 degrees - air that it was pulling in the aircraft pumping in our suits, see. But we were in good shape.\n7.2 Checklists\nCooper Check list. I thought our check lists were very good with a few minor things we have mentioned\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"here that we might ... we would suggest maybe\nreshuffling a little there.\n\n7.3 Communications\n\nCooper\tThe communications were excellent all the way, all the way down until impact and from there on we were hearing everybody in the whole darn world but nobody apparently was hearing us.\n\nConrad\tNow, Houston read us twice on the water, but ....\n\nCooper\tHouston read us twice.\n\nConrad\tWe transmitted both on UHF and we transmitted on HF.\n\nCooper\tOur HF antenna never did extend on the water. They don't know whats wrong with it at this point, but we went through the right procedures several times of extending it. Point of impact, we found out fairly shortly what our point of impace was by hearing the discussion in the air on where it was. Status of recovery. We were kept well informed of that because our radio receivers were working fine.\n\n7.4 Systems Configuration\n\nCooper\tSystems configuration, ECS was excellent. No problem at all. Electrical was good, control was good, aeromedical -- what does aeromedical have to"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"do with it here?\n\nFCSD REP\tBiomed records and all that stuff.\n\nCooper\tThe gear worked. The one thing was, the blood pressure bulb wouldn't bleed down and Pete never could get a proper blood pressure there when on the water.\n\nConrad\tI took the bulb up to the helicopter and gave it to the doctor and told him to check it right away and find out what happened because it worked fine all flight.\n\n7.5 Spacecraft Status\n\nCooper\tSpacecraft status. There was a faint odor of fumes in there but I didn't personally consider them objectionable at all.\n\nConrad\tIt cleared out once we got the fans running.\n\nCooper\tMain chute was excellent. The windows -- visibility was doggone good out the windows ... we were fogged over just a little bit.\n\nConrad\tThey steamed up a little bit. I could see out of them all right and could see the airplanes flying overhead.\n\nCooper\tThey steamed up a little bit. After we sat there they steamed up more than they were when we first landed and they .. but we could see outside very"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"well and I guess the guy outside probably couldn't see in as well as we could see out. They were fogged a little. There were no leaks that we could tell. Electrical Power, everything was nominal. O2 was fine.\n\nConrad\tElectrical power, we,we, we, did not power down the squib betteries after we got on the water and we went through the landing check list and powered down all electrical equipment except the radios and the beacons and a biomed recorders and the blood pressure.\n\nCooper\tWe took a complete power down check list. We followed check list right on the money. Sea condition was 2 to 3 foot easy swells.\n\n7.6 Post Landing Activity\n\nCooper\tPost landing activities. Let's see, we proceeded to continue to try and contact and answer somebody. We heard all the activity around and over and around us. The first thing we finally heard in the way of communications was when one of the swimmers plugged in this outside phone jack and talked to us. He wasn't real clear but he was coming through pretty well. He wanted to know if we"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wanted to wait on the carrier or if we wanted a chopper pick up. I asked him how far the carrier was away and he went ahead and told us about 75 miles at that time. We told him we believed we wanted to take the choppers.\n\n7.7 Comfort\n\nCooper\tComfort was fine in the spacecraft.\n\nFCSD REP\tHow long were you in the spacecraft in your suit?\n\nConrad\t35, 40 minutes.\n\nCooper\tAbout 35 or 40 minutes I ... Maybe a little bit more.\n\n7.8 Recovery Force Personnel\n\nCooper\tRecovery force personnel and communications. As I say they did communicate with us with the telephone. First of all one of the swimmers came up and looked in the window and held up his thumb and we held up our thumbs okay, so that took the sweat off them. Floatation collar, they had slightly more trouble than usually getting it around but not a great deal. It probably took them maybe 10 or 15 minutes to get it around there and inflated.\n\n7.9 Egress\n\nCooper\tRight after they got it inflated we told them we were coming out for the chopper. I opened the left"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"side hatch. We did have our ...we saw that they had the floatation collar around there and the sea was calm and there was no problem getting any water in the spacecraft and we decided we weren't going to go in the water ourselves. We did have our neck dams on but we did not have our gloves on. We left our helmet and gloves in the cockpit and decided well if we did go in the water for unforecast reason we had our water wings and our wrists are tight enough to hold your arms above water and not get much in.\n\n7.10 Survival Gear\n\nCooper\tSo, we didn't fiddle with any survival gear or anything.\n\n7.11 Crew Pick Up\n\nCooper\tWe just stood out on the nose of the spacecraft. In fact ...then I moved from the nose over into one of the liftrafts. Pete came up out of the hatch and stood on the nose and he took the first ...horse collar came around. He got the horse collar and went up to the chopper first and they lowered it again and I went in behind him.\n\nFCSD REP\tOh, one thing we didn't mention here. How about cutting the chute, the main chute?"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n216\n\nConrad\tOh, you mean jettison? Gordo jettisoned about 1 second after we touched down.\nCooper\tAbout 1 second after we landed I hit it and away it went.\nConrad\tIt sat right there beside us and floated around for quite a while.\nCooper\tIt sat there about 30 yards off to the front and slightly to one side of us.\nRCSD REP\tOkay.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3\n10\n21\n25\n33\n36\n38\n44 <-\n55 <-\n57 RSP SEP\n72\n81\n\nHF & VHF noise over China\nLate alt. OK @ 40K + 10.6K\nPickled drogue @ 70K rather than deal RCS\nTime interval between los 7 3 retros\nNetwork wired worse catch up and reentry\nTime for cdg ≈ 25 min\nPoor cockpit cond. NG. for contng reentry\nShake pambolic mirror\nRetrofit storage NG. on map\n2 or 3 more revs but it is change\nDiurnal sleep cycle difficult\nNeed airlock for 7\nGuard for O2 and handles\nGrms RIO deadband NiGr.\nTimer on water gun? Flowmeter\n4 rehydratable bag failures\nharness to restrictive (no life vest in st.)\nPogo REPORT\nScanner + comp. check after pilots alive\nNose visor in RIDS\nO2 spring force too high\nECS O2A caused hi torque"} {"doc_id":"7b1c30298947f2db","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n28 January 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-0912-005\n\nPulsed High-Power Microwave\nSource Technology\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPulsed High-Power Microwave Source Technology\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 64\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nSummary vi\nCritical Technologies 1\nInsulation 1\nUniform Homogeneous 2\nSolid 2\nPlastics 2\nEpoxies 3\nUrethanes and Silicones 4\nLiquids 4\nGaseous 4\nLaminated 6\nPlastic-Paper-Oil 6\nPlastic-Paper-Epoxy 6\nDielectric Tapering 7\nCathode Materials 7\nVelvet 9\nCarbon 9\nCeramics 10\nCesium Iodide Coated 10\nHigh-Voltage Switching 11\nGaseous Switching 12\nHigh-Speed Liquid Switching 14\nSolid-State Switching 14\nHigh-Voltage Pulse Sources 15\nMarx Generators 15\nTransformer Based Generators 16\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nExplosively Driven Generators 16\nPulsed High-Power Microwave Sources 17\nPulsed Electron Beam Sources 17\nBWOs, TWTs, and RKAs 17\nSplit-Cavity Oscillators 18\nVirtual Cathode Oscillators 18\nMagnetrons 18\nGyrotrons 19\nImpulse HPM Sources 20\nSNIPER 20\nEMBL 20\nH-Series HPM Sources 20\nThe Phoenix HPM Source 22\nThe GEM II HPM Source 24\nThe Jolt HPM source 24\nMesoband Sources 24\nHPM Antennas 25\nNarrowband Antennas 25\nWideband and Ultrawideband Antennas 27\nConclusion 29\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Paschen Curve for Air 13\nFigure 2. Example of Marx Generator Circuit 16\nFigure 3. Orion HPM Testing Facility 19\nFigure 4. Active Denial System With FLAPS Antenna 20\nFigure 5. H2 With Large TEM Horn and PGC Output 21\nFigure 6. Cross-Section Drawing of H5 With Point Geometry Converter, Brewster Angle Window, and Extended-Ground-Plane Antenna 21\nFigure 7. H5 Output Section With the Point Geometry Converter Feeding an Extended-Ground-Plane Antenna Through a Brewster Angle Window 22\nFigure 8. Phoenix Radiated Pulse at 8.5 Meters 23\nFigure 9. Phoenix Radiated Spectral Content 23\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 10. Jolt Hyperband HPM Source 24\nFigure 11. Jolt Radiated Electric Field Waveform at 85 Meters 24\nFigure 12. FLAPS Antenna With a Cross-Shorted Dipole Array 26\nFigure 13. Mode Converter Vlasov Antenna and Vlasov Antenna Attached to a Coaxial MILO 27\n\nTables\n\nTable 1. Dielectric Properties of Some HPM Plastics 3\nTable 2. Relative Spark Breakdown Strength of Gases 5\nTable 3. Cathode Study Findings 11\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPulsed High-Power Microwave Source Technology\n\nSummary\n\nThis paper provides an overview of the major types of high-power microwave (HPM) sources and the critical technologies required to build them. Pulsed HPM technology has been of scientific and military interest for several decades. Originally, the interest focused on the area of high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) concerns.\n\nHEMP is produced when a nuclear weapon is detonated high above the earth's surface, creating gamma radiation that interacts with the atmosphere to create an intense electromagnetic (EM) energy field that is harmless to people as it radiates outward but can overload computer circuitry with effects similar to, but causing damage more swiftly than, a lightning strike. HEMP effects became fully known in 1962, when a high-altitude nuclear test (codenamed \"Starfish Prime\") over the Pacific Ocean disrupted radio stations and electronic equipment 800 miles away in Hawaii. The HEMP effect can span thousands of miles, depending on the altitude, design, and power of the nuclear burst. It is speculated that a single device detonated at high altitude over the central United States could affect the entire country, since the HEMP would be picked up by conductors, such as wires and power cables, acting as antennas to conduct the electrical energy into various electronic systems. This EM radiation was found to have field levels on the order of several hundreds of kilovolts per meter with onset or rise times of a few nanoseconds and a duration of nearly a microsecond. Fields of these magnitudes were found to have severe detrimental effects on numerous electrical systems and items, such as the power grid, automobiles, communications equipment, and aircraft.\n\nMuch testing was done in the 1960s and 1970s to determine vulnerabilities and to find mitigation solutions. The HEMP is essentially a wideband microwave pulse, and several EMP simulators were devised and built for use in testing its effect on various electronic systems. In addition, several programs were established to investigate the possibility of generating and radiating other spectrums of EM radiation that may have some of these same effects without requiring a nuclear detonation. This was the impetus for the advancement of pulsed HPM technologies for weapons.\n\nHPM radiation is composed of shorter waveforms at higher frequencies than is HEMP, which makes it highly effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to harden against. Whereas HEMP weapons are large in scale and require a nuclear capability along with technology to launch high-altitude missiles, HPM weapons are smaller in scale, involve a much lower level of technology, and are within the capability of almost any state. HPMs can damage computers and electronics similar to the way HEMP can, although the effects are limited to a much shorter range. Technical accessibility, lower cost, and the vulnerability of U.S. electronic equipment could make small-scale HPM weapons attractive to terrorist groups. HPM devices are now categorized as directed-energy weapons.\n\nvi\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nOne major use of HPM by the military is for electronic attack, or what is referred to by the media as an \"ebomb.\" HPM sources developed for this purpose provide peak powers in excess of 10 gigawatts. The goal of such a weapon is to disable communications and computer systems prior to any troop movements and render the enemy unable to stage a response. The technology used to drive such sources has its roots in pulsed power, and for narrowband sources requires the use of tools that have been developed in the plasma physics community. Reliance on microprocessors that have an increasing density of circuits packaged onto each chip makes such systems ever-more vulnerable to HPM effects. As an example of the possible effects of HPM weapons, on 28 May 2001, a U.S. Commanche helicopter, flying in New York state while performing tests involving HPM weapons, was reported to have generated a low-level energy pulse that disrupted the Global Positioning System devices used to land commercial aircraft in Albany.\n\nThe use of this type of weapon can be based on several scenarios, depending on the asset it will be used against. Sometimes, it may only be necessary to upset a data bus transfer to produce a success; other times, success may not be so simple. Some of the kill mechanisms obtained from microwave weapons include semiconductor overheating or burnout, arc generation, computer upsets, voltage induction into sensitive circuits, display upset, and overvoltage in discrete components. The asset to be neutralized will often determine the specific type of microwave source to be used; for example, assets with slots designed for communications purposes may be most vulnerable to narrowband HPM of a specific frequency, while assets with several computers linked by a communications bus may be more vulnerable to ultrawideband (UWB) pulses of a specific pulse repetition rate (PRR). Often, the variety of EM radiation that would be most effective is not obvious, and therefore several must be evaluated.\n\nIf EM radiation is able to penetrate a target, the issue then becomes the susceptibility of the many semiconductor devices, which make up the various circuits of the target. Failures in semiconductors owing to thermal effects occur when junction temperatures are raised above 600° Kelvin. Since thermal energy diffuses through the semiconductor, failure mechanisms depend on the microwave pulse duration. If the pulse duration is short compared with thermal diffusion times, then the temperature increases in proportion to the deposited energy. Pulse durations (t) shorter than about 100 nanoseconds fall into this regime, and the threshold power for damage varies as 1/t. Experimental testing has shown that for pulse durations between 100 nanoseconds and 10 microseconds, the power required for damage scales as 1/t1/2. And for pulses longer than 10 microseconds, a steady state in which the thermal diffusion rate equals the rate of energy deposition and temperature is proportional to power, resulting in a constant power requirement for damage. In this case, the power requirement scales as t. The consequence of these scaling factors is that short pulses require very high power but little energy, while very long pulses require large amounts of energy but little power. This analysis results in a vast range of HPM sources capable of damaging semiconductor devices. The above applies to single-shot pulse durations, but if\n\nvii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\na PRR is applied such that there is insufficient time for thermal diffusion between pulses (about 1 millisecond), then there will be an overall constant rise in temperature. For this reason, the PRR capability is of extreme importance for any HPM source.\n\nAs a matter of course, assets to be tested include those of friend and foe alike, the goal being to find vulnerabilities in both and correcting those found in our own assets. Several techniques are employed to mitigate vulnerabilities found in assets, including filtering of conductor lines, using metallic enclosures, eliminating any unnecessary openings in the outer enclosure, and using ferrite or other magnetic materials. Any electronics inside a completely sealed metallic container (Faraday cage) would have no vulnerability to HPM of any variety; however, such a scenario is also of little or no use, since there could be no communication to or from the enclosure. Assets therefore must include some openings for communications, instruments, air flow, and sensors, sometimes as a matter of fulfilling their function.\n\nFrom the HPM source perspective, care must be taken to prevent fratricide and harm to friendly assets. To prevent fratricide, all connections to the source must be filtered to prevent fast transients from returning to the control unit. Some signals can be transmitted using fiber-optic cable; however, there is usually a piece of equipment at the source end that must be filtered. Some connections, such as the high-voltage power supplies, can make good use of high inductance filtering to eliminate fast transients, while others, such as trigger lines, must make use of other filtering means, such as transformer coupling, lightning arrestors, transorbs, and fast-acting, high-voltage diodes. Preventing harm to friendly assets is difficult and is a major reason why HPM has rarely been employed in actual battlefield settings. To ensure there is no harm to friendly assets, all assets would have to be tested for vulnerabilities, something that is not done at present. The antenna is a major factor in this matter. Unfocused antennas radiate a pattern that spreads as it progresses outward and, thus, the area subjected to the EM fields increases with distance. It is then harder to separate one's own assets from the radiated fields.\n\nIn addition, it is very difficult to detect these sort of pulsed sources, since the pulses are very short (typically 1-500 nanoseconds), and even in burst mode, the bursts are usually less than 10 seconds. The short burst mode operation is necessary because of the high peak powers and subsequent heating of key components such as switches. The UWB sources would be the most difficult to detect, since they have nearly zero energy at any one frequency and so would not be detected at all by instruments such as spectrum analyzers.\n\nviii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCritical Technologies\n\nSeveral technology areas are critical to the design and fabrication of a working HPM source. First, because the pulsed-power section of the source must operate at high voltages, it must contain insulating materials capable of withstanding the required voltage. The insulating scheme chosen is critical to the success of the project; therefore, several insulation techniques will be discussed, along with the merits and drawbacks of each. Another pulsed-power technology that is critical to the success of any source is high-voltage switching; various types of switches will be discussed, along with applications. Finally, cathode materials are a technology area that has been thoroughly researched and is critical to narrowband HPM generation; several cathode materials will be discussed, along with needs for future cathodes.\n\nINSULATION\n\nElectrical insulating materials or dielectrics are essential not only for pulsed power and HPM generation but for the proper functioning of all electrical and electronic equipment. In fact, usually the size and operating limitations of a piece of equipment are determined by the choice of insulating material. In the past, all manner of varnishes, tars, petroleum asphalts, natural resins, gums, saps, and minerals were used for electrical insulation. Now there is an almost endless list of possible insulating materials. The question now is, which material is the most appropriate for the task at hand? In pulsed power, and even more so in HPM applications, the choice is critical. All properties of a material must be weighed against one another to make the proper choice. Such properties as voltage breakdown, dielectric loss, dielectric constant, cure temperatures, hardness, tensile strength, flow modulus, and the variation of all these with frequency, voltage, and temperature must be considered before an appropriate insulating material can be selected. Many of these properties have never been published for most materials, and even when they have been published, they are typically known only at one or two frequencies. Designing insulation for challenging applications is at best a compromise between evils. Most of the material studies are carried out for the power industry, making them valid only at 50 or 60 hertz. Measurements at these low frequencies usually provide little or no clue about the values at much higher frequencies. Therefore, it is often up to diligent engineers to obtain materials data on their own.\n\nOne recent research area of interest is in developing what are termed artificial dielectrics in an effort to decrease insulation weight. This material is made by suspending hollow glass microspheres in a lightweight dielectric medium. Depending on the concentration of these spheres, the dielectric constant can be lowered and tailored for the application, and the loss tangent of the media can also be reduced. Coating the spheres with a conductor such as aluminum can also raise the dielectric constant. Thus far, as might be expected, the dielectric strength of such materials is much lower than that of many thermoplastics, but they have been useful for applications such as radomes.\n\nInsulation generally falls into one of three categories: (1) homogeneous insulation, where the entire insulating volume is filled with the same media, be it solid, liquid, or gas; (2) laminated insulation, where the insulating volume is filled with some manner of\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nlayering of different materials; and (3) insulation by other means, such as magnetic insulation—these are usually used only where special conditions apply.\n\nUNIFORM HOMOGENEOUS\n\nUniform homogeneous insulation implies that the insulating material is consistent throughout the volume. However, in some cases, such as that of epoxies, there is a uniform loading of some other material, usually to increase some desired characteristic of the final product. Examples are loading with silica to increase dielectric strength and loading with glass fibers to increase mechanical strength. The loaded material is typically of such small dimensions that it has only a very small effect on other material parameters from the truly homogeneous case. The use of uniform homogeneous insulation also results in a more easily modeled design.\n\nSOLID\n\nSolid insulation is often the easiest and typically the most desirable form of insulation since it does not require maintaining or replacing a liquid level or containing or monitoring pressure. This fact is often critical to a source project if maintenance or long shelf lives are important factors.\n\nPlastics\n\nThe true title for this section should be \"Thermoplastic Polymers (Plastics),\" as they comprise one of the largest groups of insulating materials used in pulsed power and HPM generation. The term \"plastics\" includes acetals, acrylics, amides, imides polyarylate, polybutylene, polycarbonate, polypropylene, styrene, and sulfone polymers. Plastics were first used as insulation in the 1930s, and it is hard to conceive of constructing a high-voltage pulse source without them. Plastic materials have been tailored to suit a wide variety of applications. In the early 1980s, plastics manufacturers soliciting Sandia National Labs stated that they could engineer plastics to meet any set of material properties desired. It later became apparent that this was not the case and that, as usually occurs in nature, when one parameter was made more desirable, others were made less desirable. In spite of this fact, some well-engineered plastics are now available for some very demanding applications, such as switch housings and transmission lines. Nevertheless, virtually no new plastics are being introduced today. For the past 20 years, engineers have worked with essentially the same plastic materials, although some improvements have been made in the quality of resins and extruding and casting methods. In spite of this, there is still much more variation in specifications (especially mechanical specifications, such as tensile strength) for plastics from batch to batch than there is for metals. For this reason, the most demanding plastics applications where the limits of some specification will be approached require purchasing and independently testing a specific batch to assure confidence. One interesting and well-documented phenomenon associated with plastics is the nonlinearity of electrical breakdown strength with thickness. In very thin layers, some plastics display extremely high breakdown strength. For instance, polypropylene in half-mil (1 mil = 1/1000 inch) layers yields 7,000-volts-per-mil breakdown strength, while in one-eighth–inch thickness, this figure drops off to 900 volts per mil. One theory to explain this is that the proximity of imperfections in the material across the thickness reduces the dielectric strength in thicker samples. This fact can be used to advantage by layering thin sheets of insulation together to form thicker insulating regions (see\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nsection on laminated insulation). Many plastics come in a wide variety of shapes, forms, and grades, including bulk volumes, a variety of sheet thicknesses, and various rod diameters. The subject of using plastics as insulation fills volumes in reference books and has yet to be exhausted. Table 1 shows selected dielectric properties, collected over several years, on some of the most common plastics for high-voltage use.\n\nTable 1. Dielectric Properties of Some HPM Plastics\n\nMaterial | Trade Name | Breakdown Voltage (kV/mil)\nAcetal | Delrin | 4.0\nPolypropylene | | 6.0\nPolyetherimide | Ultem | 7.0\nPolysulfone | Ultrason S | 7.5\nPolyethersulfone | Ultrason E | 5.8\nPolycarbonate | Lexan | 6.3\nPolyphenylene Ether | Noryl | 0.6\nPolyphenylene Sulfide | Ryton | 0.4\nPolyethylene | | 5.0\nPolyvinylchloride | | 1.8\n\nEpoxies\n\nOne of the greatest advantages of casting epoxies is that a high dielectric strength can be attained with low maintenance, a long shelf life, and ease of transportation compared with liquid or laminated insulation schemes. Some of the best epoxies ever used for high-voltage insulation have only recently become available. These advancements are due mainly to efforts by the automotive industry to miniaturize the ignition coil to the point where a separate coil could be incorporated into the spark plug cap at each cylinder. Technologies have been devised for casting several varieties of epoxy to allow larger volume castings. The goals are to minimize voids and bubbles, deal with any exothermal effects, and reduce shrinkage. In addition, a good candidate material for high-voltage casting must have a high dielectric strength at the frequencies required, a long pot life, good adhesion, and an unlimited cure depth at a low temperature. With many epoxies, shrinkage and the glass transition point are functions of the cure temperature. New, state-of-the-art epoxies have several desirable characteristics never before available in a single product that make them ideal for high-voltage applications. Two such characteristics are a low viscosity at room temperature and a long pot life. This means the epoxy can be mixed (resin and hardener) and the unit to be insulated can be filled under vacuum to eliminate voids and bubbles. Some of these epoxies have the viscosity of milk at about 100 degrees Fahrenheit and a pot life of several hours. A third desirable characteristic is a very low, almost imperceptible exotherm. This allows insulation of items sensitive to heat, such as thin plastics, paper, and electronic components or integrated circuits. A fourth desirable characteristic is low shrinkage, even in large castings. This allows insulation of regions where dimensional stability is important, such as at distances from high-voltage sections and resonant structures. A fifth desirable characteristic is good adhesion, both to itself and to components to be insulated. This is important because any separation from a component creates a void region where the dielectric strength will be compromised.\n\n11"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAdhesion to itself allows casting in several stages without fear of voids or mechanically weakened areas. A final desirable characteristic—one that is of obvious importance—is a very high dielectric strength. With attention to detail and diligence in the casting procedures, dielectric strengths of more then 4 kV/mil on 0.125-inch thickness have been achieved. All these advantages have allowed operation of high-voltage pulse systems at increased power levels and at half the volume of those previously insulated with mineral oil.\n\nUrethanes and Silicones\n\nThese materials are used for casting solid high-voltage equipment, as well as for coating components to reduce the effects of shrinkage or shock. Typically these materials are very hard to use with vacuum casting techniques and, thus, have a much lower dielectric strength than do the best epoxies, especially in larger volumes. Another drawback is that many urethanes and silicones require either moisture or volatile ingredients in the curing process, both of which cause problems with high-voltage systems. Nonetheless, a wide variety of these materials are used in the fabrication of high-voltage pulse systems for applications that require their characteristics.\n\nLIQUIDS\n\nLiquid insulation has been the primary type of insulation for high-voltage systems since the beginning of the field. Over the years, mineral oils, vegetable oils, hydrocarbons, and even tars and saps have been used as insulation. Dielectric liquids have long served as electrical insulation in power transformers, capacitors, cables, and switching equipment. Several once commonly used fluids are no longer available because of their toxicity and environmental impact. As a result, liquids for insulation that do not have these problems have now been developed for certain applications, including mineral oils, silicon oils, fluoropolymers, and high-molecular-weight paraffin oils. Most of the dielectric fluids made are tailored to the power industry, which accounts for about 99 percent of the demand for these liquids. As a result, many such liquids contain additives that, while necessary for the power industry, are detrimental to high-voltage applications. These include low-vapor-pressure additives for controlling viscosity and antioxidants for improved aging. In addition, most insulating liquids also contain moisture and dissolved gases, which are only weakly bound to the liquid molecules and are easily freed when high electric field stresses are present. Scientists have for years worked to extend the usefulness of transformer oils, fuorinert, and castor oil. They have also developed corona-processing equipment for improving the high-voltage characteristics of insulating oils. This has allowed state-of-the art insulation design using insulating oils and oil-impregnated systems. The corona processing involves flowing the liquid insulation media through a high-field-stress region while under vacuum to remove dissolved gases and low-vapor-pressure constituents from the oil. The liquid is then filtered to remove particles larger than 5 microns. This process improves the corona initiation voltage limit for the liquid and greatly extends the life of components insulated with the media. It has also allowed a significant reduction in the size and, thus, energy density of pulsed transformer systems.\n\nGASEOUS\n\nInsulating gases are used in many high-voltage applications where weight is a primary issue. Typically the use of gases as an insulating media requires pressurization and,\n\n12"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthus, implies heightened safety concerns. Even low-volume vessels can contain hundreds of joules of energy in the compressed gas, and a housing failure can hurl fragments at deadly velocities. Highly compressed gases are used only in cases where some prized benefit is worth the increased cost and design trials to be exacted. One example of this is extremely fast switching where the electrode spacing is proportional to the added inductance during conduction—the smaller electrode spacing requires higher gas pressure for insulation. Almost every common gas has been used as insulation, and many have attributes making them desirable for certain applications. Sulfur hexafluoride, nitrogen, air, argon, helium, oxygen, and hydrogen are commonly used. Of these, only sulfur hexafluoride is an electronegative gas, meaning it has the ability to remove electrons from the volume through the formation of negative ions and thereby increase the dielectric strength. Electrical discharges in sulfur hexafluoride result in foul-smelling sulfur compounds that also deposit on the switch housing and electrodes and require frequent cleaning. These discharge compounds also tend to be highly corrosive, especially in the presence of water. Other gases with electronegative species, typically other halogens such as chlorine, also make good insulators. These gases are usually much denser than air, and breakdown voltage is roughly proportional to density, thus higher voltages can be supported even at low pressures. The halogenated hydrocarbon refrigerants, such as CCl4, CCl2F2, CCl3F, and C2Cl2F4, are also popular for insulation. The breakdown of air has been thoroughly researched, and in fact the breakdown voltage of a calibrated gap can be used to determine the magnitude of high voltages. Table 2 shows the breakdown voltages of several insulating gases relative to that of air.\n\nTable 2. Relative Spark Breakdown Strength of Gases\n\nGas: N2, Air, NH3, CO2, H2S, O2, Cl2, H2, SO2, C2Cl2F4, CCl2F2\nV/Vair: 1.15, 1, 1, 0.95, 0.9, 0.85, 0.85, 0.65, 0.30, 3.2, 2.9\n\nGaseous insulation as a switch medium limits the pulse repetition rate (PRR) to 500-600 pulses per second because of the creation of numerous metastable states and elevated energy levels by the previous pulses. This is true for all gases listed here except hydrogen. Hydrogen can be used at a much higher PRR; however, its dielectric strength is only 65 percent that of air and, thus, almost twice as much pressure is required for the same operating voltage. When the pressure is doubled, the energy content increases by a factor of four, leading to elevated safety concerns. Using hydrogen for switch insulation poses no explosive danger provided the oxygen content in the gas is kept below about 5 percent. Other handling problems associated with hydrogen include hydrogen embrittlement—it will leak through even tiny holes, including the pores in metal tanks, eventually causing the metal to become brittle and fail. In addition, hydrogen is flammable when mixed with oxygen. A hydrogen flame is colorless but very hot, which can be dangerous if leaks develop in pressurized switches or gas lines. One class of hydrogen switches, hydrogen thyratrons, makes use of the low-pressure characteristics of gases to eliminate the safety concerns associated with high pressures (these are discussed in a later section dedicated exclusively to gas switches).\n\n13"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nLAMINATED\n\nLaminated insulation has been used in some very demanding applications in which size is of primary importance and very small repeating structures are required, including high-energy-density capacitors, high-voltage transformers, and high-voltage transmission lines or pulse-forming lines. Laminated insulation schemes make use of the nonlinearity of electrical breakdown strength with thickness mentioned earlier for plastics. Such schemes offer the possibility of significant improvements in state-of-the-art insulation, including a reduction in the size and an increase in the energy density of high-voltage pulsed systems. As new and improved materials become available, the possibilities for such improvements will become more substantial.\n\nPLASTIC-PAPER-OIL\n\nWith appropriate attention to process details, very high dielectric strength is routinely achieved using this lamination scheme. This is in fact the insulation method used in most high-voltage and high-energy-density capacitors, with the addition of foil layers on either side of the plastic (usually biaxially oriented polypropylene) to form the capacitor. Use of corona-processed oil dramatically improves the utility of this insulating scheme. The plastic is frosted on at least one side and, together with the very thin (1 mil or less) paper layer, allows the oil to penetrate throughout the volume during the impregnation process. Without the oil, the tightly wound plastic layers can become sealed around small volumes of air that will not be filled with oil, and breakdowns will occur. Once the paper is impregnated with the oil, tests have shown that it attains essentially the same dielectric strength as the oil. Often, vacuum and pressure are alternately applied to ensure full penetration of the oil into the full volume. It is vitally important that no bubbles or voids be left in the insulation volume. For this reason, once the insulating volume is ready for impregnation, it should be left under vacuum at slightly elevated temperature for at least 24 hours. This not only ensures air pockets are removed but also allows the removal of surface moisture from the plastic and paper, which will also contribute to voltage breakdown. The paper not only aids impregnation but also serves as a path for residual charge to dissipate between voltage applications. The plastic has a very high surface resistivity, and some residual charge can become trapped on the surface after each discharge, resulting in charged regions of different magnitudes and even polarities, which can eventually lead to dielectric failure. Using this insulation scheme with biaxially oriented polypropylene as the plastic and Shell Diala AX as the impregnating oil, average dielectric strength of more than 2.1 kV/mil and operating voltages higher than 1.3 MV have been attained in large volumes.\n\nPLASTIC-PAPER-EPOXY\n\nSince the oil is the weakest dielectric medium in the preceding insulation scheme, it is reasonable to assume that replacing it with a stronger dielectric medium can improve the overall dielectric strength. Another advantage of this scheme is that in the end we would have a solid insulated volume with the advantages mentioned earlier. Thus far, only smaller volumes (1-2 gallons) have been successfully insulated with this scheme. The problem is that the increase in viscosity over the oil, although small, makes it more difficult to ensure that full impregnation is achieved. Meanwhile, the programs for which this scheme is desired insist on nearly 100-percent certainty of success. The most successful process to date involves using quarter-inch sections of 1-mil paper followed by quarter-inch open sections for each layer. This is a tedious task in large volumes but\n\n14"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nhas resulted in an average dielectric strength of more than 3 kV/mil for the volumes mentioned. Adapting this scheme to the manufacture of high-voltage capacitors could result in significant improvement over the current state of the art of 1 joule per cubic centimeter.\n\nDIELECTRIC TAPERING\n\nThis insulation scheme is little known but has been used with much success in many high-voltage systems, especially where compact high voltage is required. The basic scheme is to first design the system while minimizing the peak electric field stress. This involves hours of small but well-chosen changes to a design in order to shape the field lines and achieve the least range from minimum to maximum field stress. We then find the surfaces, which have the highest electric field stresses and therefore the highest probability of breakdown. In evaluating these parameters, it must be remembered that dielectric media are much less likely to initiate breakdown than are conducting surfaces under the same electric field stress. The conductor surfaces under highest field stress are then layered with high-voltage coatings (usually acrylics, polyurethanes, silicones, or engineered coatings) with dielectric constants chosen to reduce the electric field strength at the conductor surface. This technique works because the conductor is the source of electrons, without which breakdown will not occur. Since the electric field is excluded from regions of relatively higher dielectric constant, if the insulating volume is filled with mineral oil (relative dielectric constant of 2.2), then a conducting surface coated with 10 mils of polyurethane (relative dielectric constant of 3.6) will have a lower electric field stress than it would without the coating, and the increase in field stress in the mineral oil will be minimal.\n\nDielectric tapering can be applied using several layers of coatings with progressively lower relative dielectric constant from the conducting surface and dramatically reduces the conducting surface electric field stress. Using finite element electric field solving codes and several hours of iteration, this technique can often reduce peak electric field stress for a system by 50 percent. The technique works best when the volume dielectric fluid has a low relative dielectric constant, such as mineral oil has (εr =2.2), since coatings are readily available for εr = ~3 to 5. In practice, care must be taken in choosing and applying the coatings to ensure that no voids or bubbles are introduced at the conductor surface. Careful inspection and repair of any flaws is relatively simple with this technique. Another, more recent use of this concept is what is termed continually varying dielectrics in ultrawideband (UWB) guiding structures, such as transmission lines with greatly reduced dispersion at bends.\n\nCATHODE MATERIALS\n\nThis area of research is vitally important to any HPM source requiring electron beam generation. All high-power microwave tubes, including virtual cathode oscillators and cavity resonators, rely on a bunched flow of free electrons to set up oscillating electric fields and thereby generate a radiofrequency (RF) output. The electron flow is usually initiated by applying a high-voltage pulse to a vacuum diode. For high-power operation, the cathode must be capable of emitting a very high electron current density using one of several emission mechanisms.\n\n15"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThese mechanisms include:\n\n• Thermionic emission (apply heat – 1,000 °Celsius)\n\n• Secondary emission (electron bombardment; > 100 eV)\n\n• Field emission (apply a very strong electric field; 107 V/cm)\n\n• Explosive emission (form a plasma on the surface; εω= 0)\n\nThe emission mechanisms of major importance for HPM at present are thermionic emission and explosive electron emission; however, field emission shows some hope with the advancements in nanostructures. Explosive emission, creating a dense plasma at the cathode surface, is of primary importance at this point. A review of pure metals reveals a direct correlation between the work function (εω) and melting temperatures. When cathodes are made from metals with low work functions, there are problems with metal deposition onto other components. Most cathodes of use in HPM tubes depend on a surface flashover at a dielectric-metal interface. The surface flashover generates plasma, typically at tens–of-kilovolts-per-centimeter electric fields. The threshold and nature of the plasma depend greatly on the cathode materials. Therefore, the choice of cathode material is of critical importance in the design and operation of any HPM tube. No discussion of HPM diodes could be complete without mentioning space charge limited current flow. This stems from the fact that at some magnitude of current density, the density of electrons in the anode-cathode gap begins to shield the cathode from further emission owing to their cumulative effect on the electric field at the cathode surface. The current density at which this happens is given by the Child-Langmuir law:\n\nJsc(kA/cm2) = 2.33 x 10-6 (V(MV)3/2 /d(cm)2)\n\nand is dependent on the diode voltage and the anode-cathode spacing. So, if we could have the ideal cathode material, what would its characteristics be? The response has not changed much in more than 60 years, as can be seen in the following extraction from a textbook on the subject.\n\nPrimary Characteristics of an Ideal Cathode (J. R. Pierce, 1946):\n\n• Emits electrons freely, without any form of persuasion such as heating or bombardment (electrons would leak off from it into vacuum as easily as they pass from one metal to another).\n\n• Emits copiously, supplying an unlimited current density.\n\n• Lasts forever, its electron emission continuing unimpaired as long as it is needed.\n\n• Emits electrons uniformly, traveling at practically zero velocity.\n\nEfforts are still under way to increase the output power, pulsed emission duration, repetition rate, and emission uniformity by investigating new and existing cathode materials in an effort to draw closer to the ideal cathode. Some of the materials currently being investigated are ceramic cloth and felt, carbon structures including nanotubes and microfibers, and carbon structures coated with cesium iodide.\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nVELVET\n\nVelvet has been an explosive electron emission standard for more than 20 years. This material works by means of the dielectric-metal surface flashover mechanism mentioned earlier.\n\nFive steps are involved in the explosive emission process for dielectric fibers:\n\n• Surface flashover generates a cold, dense plasma/gas column.\n\n• The applied electric field extracts a space-charge-limited current flow.\n\n• The flow of current resistively heats the gas column.\n\n• The gas columns expand at a rate determined by the gas temperature.\n\n• The gas continues to expand into the anode-cathode gap.\n\nVelvet has several desirable properties that have endeared it to the pulsed power community and kept it a useful material for all this time. First, it emits at relatively low field strengths (~10 kV/cm), allowing a wider range of use than do many other materials. Second, it has a fast turn-on time. Third, the insulating nature of the velvet fibers provides a sort of built-in ballast during operation. Velvet also has a wide range of vacuum compatibility (pressures from 10-3 to 10-8 Torr), easing the expense of vacuum hardware. Finally, velvet is inexpensive and readily available. All these factors combined have made velvet cathodes common for the past two decades.\n\nHowever, velvet cathodes also have drawbacks. First, velvet outgases heavily, especially during and after explosive emission. Significant amounts of material are released from the velvet during this process. The increased pressure inside the HPM device then leads to gap closure (conductive bridging of the anode-cathode region) and early termination of the RF output from the device. The closure rate can be estimated from:\n\nVelocity of closure (m/s) = 100 (d*/d)2/3 Vd1/2\n\nwhere: d is the diode gap, d* is the velvet tuft density, and Vd is the diode voltage.\n\nSecond, velvet has a very limited lifetime, partly owing to the material lost during each shot. Some material lasts for only about 100 shots in single-shot mode. Third, because of the increase in pressure after each shot, the repetition rate is very limited. Finally, lack of control over the manufacturing process results in a wide variation in performance. Results are not reproducible, even between one roll and the next from the same manufacturer.\n\nCARBON\n\nCarbon cathodes have been used in diodes for more than three decades and have some appealing characteristics. The outgassing characteristics of carbon cathodes are much better than those of velvet, although the threshold voltage for emission is generally much higher. The primary material given off during outgassing from carbon cathodes\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nappears to be hydrogen ions, which, because of their low mass, contribute to the problem of gap closure. The gap closure velocity using carbon cathodes quoted by most reports researched is 2-2.5 cm/μsec, and diode gaps from the same reports were 1-4 centimeters. Carbon cathodes also have much longer lifetime than velvet. However, one of the greatest advantages of carbon is the ever-expanding ability to form both macro- and nanostructures using it as a base or substrate. Structures formed using carbon include pyramids, fibers, microfibers, nanotubes, and tufts. Many possible carbon structures still have yet to be formed and tested. Thus far, structures with the most surface area appear to perform best.\n\nCERAMICS\n\nCeramics, much like carbon, can be formed into at least microstructures and have some features that have attracted interest in them for a couple of decades. These include virtually unlimited lifetimes and extremely low outgassing. A problem with ceramics, however, is that very high threshold fields are required for diode operation. Coatings to improve the performance of ceramic cathode structures may exist, and research is continuing in this area.\n\nCESIUM IODIDE COATED\n\nOne of the most recent and impressive materials to be used in cathodes for HPM tubes is cesium iodide. Cesium is a pure metal that has a work function of only 1.9 eV and a melting temperature of 28 °Celsius; thus, it is liquid at only slightly above room temperature. Cesium ions are quite heavy, and that is why this coating was used initially. It was believed that the gap closure rate would be slowed since the heavy cesium ions would progress much more slowly across the anode-cathode gap than would other ion species, given the same electric field. This has proved to be the case, and closure velocities that are about one-fourth those for velvet or bare carbon (0.4 cm/μsec) have been attained. As a result, the HPM emission times have been extended. Typically, the cesium salt is dissolved in water as a saturated solution and then the carbon cathodes are dipped several times. Subsequently, the cathodes must be baked under vacuum for several hours to remove the water from the surface and leave the hardened cesium salt. Once completed, the cathodes have a very long lifetime unless contaminated by back splatter of material from the anode. At present, HPM programs investigating the performance of cathodes having some form of cesium coating over carbon nanostructures show the most potential for progress in the state of the art. The goal of these programs is hundreds of kiloamps for tens of microseconds, resulting in gigawatt narrow-band HPM sources running at repetition rates of possibly 100 hertz and thus capable of 100-megajoule energy output per burst. Also of great interest at present are cathodes termed \"hybrids,\" which utilize multiple emission mechanisms in beam generation. The cathodes developed by these programs are to be used with the magnetically insulated line oscillator (Sandia National Laboratories [SNL]), the relativistic klystron oscillator (Kyle Hendricks, Air Force Research Laboratory [AFRL]), the reltron (Bruce Miller, SNL), and the super reltron, among others.\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 3 shows findings of cathode material studies at SNL and at the AFRL.\n\nTable 3. Cathode Study Findings\n\nMaterial | Emission Threshold (kV) | Lifetime (# of Shots) | Outgassing (Neutrals/Electron)\nCsI-Carbon Microfibers | < 3 kV/cm | > 72,000 | 4 – 6.5 (substrate)\n“Sandia Red” Velvet | 8 kV/cm | ~ 8,000 | 10\n“MILO Green” Velvet | 10 kV/cm | ~ 4,000 | 10 - 14\nVelveteen Low | Low | < 600 | > 12\nF-Velvet | Low | < 100 | > 12\nCeramic Cloth | > 120 kV/cm | --- | ---\nCeramic Felt | > 100 kV/cm | --- | ---\nCarbon Pyramids | > 80 kV/cm | --- | ---\nCarbon Nanotubes | 20-50 kV/cm | Arc rate of ~ 2% | ~ 4\nBare Carbon Microfiber (packing density) | 15-40 kV/cm | > 36,000 | 4.3 – 6.5 (substrate)\nCsI-Carbon Fiber Tufts | < 3 kV/cm | > 200,000 | ~ 4\nMetal / Ceramic | 95 kV/cm (diode collapse unless > 150 kV/cm) | --- | 8\n\nHIGH-VOLTAGE SWITCHING\n\nHigh-voltage switching is among the most challenging of technologies for HPM sources. Although high-voltage switches have been used for several decades, and thousands of experiments have been performed on the mechanisms involved in liquid and gaseous breakdown, there are still many aspects of the phenomenon that defy explanation. This is especially true as the time required to reach the fully conducting state becomes extremely short. The usual explanation for this process involves Townsend avalanching, whereby electron streamers begin at the cathode in an average electric field of only 20-25 kV/cm and, by virtue of an enhanced electric field at their tip, progress in an orderly fashion to the anode. At this time, a heating phase begins, and an increasing amount of current is passed through the streamer until the switch finally reaches the fully conducting state. The problem with this explanation is that it is most likely incorrect and relies on exaggerated ion densities to explain how switches can reach full conduction in less than a billionth of a second. Alternative explanations involving runaway electron generation provide a better match to observations. Very fast switching is critically important to the concept of UWB HPM. The basic concept is to generate a square pulse with the fastest rise time possible. A Fourier transform of this waveform results in a frequency spectrum containing frequencies determined by the width and rise time of the square pulse. The period of the lowest frequency is twice the pulse width, and the rise time is about one-quarter the period of the highest frequency.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAn oft-forgotten aspect of the spectral content is that the spectrum also contains only the odd harmonics of the lowest frequency by the definition of a Fourier transform. Thus, the faster the rise time and the wider the pulse, the broader the spectral content. Therefore, switching speed is the most important parameter of a UWB HPM source. The types of switches used for HPM are essentially the same as the types of insulation discussed earlier: gaseous, liquid, and solid state at lower voltages. The single most important attribute of gases and liquids in switching is their self-healing ability, which implies some measure of PRR capability.\n\nGASEOUS SWITCHING\n\nGas switches are commonly used for HPM sources as both a prime power and a high-speed or peaking switch. As mentioned in the discussion of insulation earlier, when used in a high-speed switch, gas pressure can pose substantial safety concerns. In fact, all of the discussion regarding gaseous insulation also applies to gas switching, since a gas switch is simply a gas-insulated region that we wish to fail in a timely fashion. The higher the voltage impressed across a gas switch, the greater the pressure required to prevent the switch from conducting until the peak voltage is reached. This is why when a gas switch is used as a final-stage peaking switch, very high pressures are often required. A fast-rising pulse is crucial to source design since the rise time determines the upper frequency content. This is why UWB HPM sources usually contain a peaking switch at the output to decrease the rise time and increase the spectral content. If the peaking switch is charged past the DC breakdown level faster than streamers can form conduction channels, then the final breakdown occurs in an overvolted (compared with the DC breakdown voltage) switching state. The higher electric field strength between the switch electrodes results in shortened breakdown times since breakdown develops in an elevated electric field. All switches exhibit some capacitance to an applied pulse because of their electrode spacing, resulting in a displacement current as this switch capacitance charges. This is seen on the other side of the switch as a pre-pulse. The magnitude of the pre-pulse depends on the rate of change of the charging voltage as well as the electrode cross-sectional area and spacing. Sometimes efforts to reduce this pre-pulse are required if it causes problems at the load or undesired spectral content from the antenna. The pre-pulse phase of breakdown occurs at the speed of light in the media since it is essentially a field phenomenon. Because of the added inductance and design of the switch components, pre-pulse has a distinct charging profile. The next phase of breakdown is a resistive phase as the weakly conducting streamer channel heats to the final arc or inductive phase and the switch is fully conductive. Since the final phase is inductive, very low switch inductance and very short gaps are required for fast rise times. Both the resistive and inductive phase periods contribute to the rise time as:\n\nτ = (τr2+τL2)1/2\n\nwhere: τr = (88ns x ρ1/2) / (Z1/3 x E4/3)\n\nand: τL = (Lc + Lh) / Z\n\nwith ρ being the gas density as a multiple of that for sea level air, Z is the circuit impedance in ohms, and E is the electric field between the electrodes in kV/cm. Also, τr and τL are known as the resistive and inductive rise times, respectively. The resistive\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nrise time is the time required to heat the gas channel to full conductivity, and the inductive rise time is the delay caused by the addition of the switch into the circuit. There are two contributions to the inductive rise time, with Lc being the spark channel inductance and Lh the housing inductance. A shorter switch gap reduces the inductive time by lowering the channel inductance but also increases the electric field in the gap, reducing the resistive time and resulting in a faster rise time. Even though the switch electrodes are usually designed for minimal cross-sectional area at a given current, the very short electrode separation required can still result in high interelectrode switch capacitance. As mentioned earlier, it is also preferable to charge the switch very quickly to achieve an overvolted switching condition, and, therefore, very fast switches always have some level of pre-pulse. Because the PRR is also of great importance, hydrogen has been chosen most often for high-speed gas switching in UWB HPM sources. Switches of this type have achieved rise times of just over 100 picoseconds (ps) and PRRs of 1,500 pulses per second.\n\nAnother type of gas switch meriting mention for its utility and indispensability in the HPM pulsed-power driver circuits is the hydrogen thyratron. The thyratron is a partial vacuum switch. Figure 1 shows what is known as the Paschen curve for air; however, all gases exhibit the same curve characteristics. At some product of pressure and electrode spacing, a minimum value of breakdown voltage is reached. While high-pressure gas switches operate in the region on the right side of the Paschen minimum, the hydrogen thyratron operates on the left side, beyond the Paschen minimum. The physics of voltage breakdown in this region results in smaller electrode spacing holding off higher voltages and reduced pressure at the same spacing enabling greater voltage holdoff. The single-stage thyratron operates at only tens of kilovolts, while high-pressure gas switches may operate at several hundreds of kilovolts. When coupled with a good pulse transformer, a properly chosen thyratron forms the heart of an excellent driver for HPM sources. The thyratron also has the capability to initiate breakdown using modest trigger levels (~1 kilovolt) and with nanosecond timing, allowing the use of multiple switches to share current.\n\nBreakdown Voltage vs. Pressure x Gap (Air)\nBreakdown Voltage - Volts\n100000, 10000, 1000, 100\n1.00E-02, 1.00E-01, 1.00E+00, 1.00E+01, 1.00E+02, 1.00E+03, 1.00E+04\nPressure x Gap - Torr Inches\n\nFigure 1. Paschen Curve for Air\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nHIGH-SPEED LIQUID SWITCHING\n\nLiquid switching has also been used in UWB HPM sources with great success. The same phases of breakdown exist for liquid switches as do for gas switches. The electrode spacing is typically smaller for liquid switches, and electrodes can be made smaller for the same level of energy transfer owing to greater thermal diffusion to the liquid as compared with a gas. Liquid switching does not have the extreme safety concerns associated with gas switching; however, for repetitively pulsed operation, flow of the liquid insulating media is required. Filtering, evacuation, and processing may also be required. Liquid switches have achieved rise times of less than 100 ps and PRRs of 1,500 pulses per second.\n\nSOLID-STATE SWITCHING\n\nSolid-state switches have seen some improvement in voltage holdoff capability but generally still do not have the capability of operating at tens of kilovolts required of HPM sources. The current technology in lateral gallium arsenide (GaAs) switches is greatly improved compared with the old bulk avalanche semiconductor switch technology of the last decade. The power handling capabilities of this technology are impressive; however, it still suffers from short lifetimes because of heat dissipation problems. Source designs using GaAs switches typically involve an array of horns with one switch per horn. The array can then be phased in time to allow steering of the beam. GaAs switches operate at about 10 kV and, therefore, in the large arrays required, several switches fail during any burst mode operation. The most promising new developments in semiconductor switches today are based on physics pioneered by I. V. Grekhov and colleagues at the Ioffe Physical-Technical Institute in St. Petersburg. The AFRL is currently collaborating with Dr. Grekhov and the University of New Mexico in studies of delayed breakdown devices, silicon avalanche shapers, and drift step recovery diodes in efforts to improve the performance of these devices. It is also investigating the use of silicon carbide as an alternative to silicon and GaAs. State-of-the art pulse generators using these devices currently are capable of 6-8 kV output with 100-ps rise times and 20-ps switching jitter. Conventional solid-state devices such as junction gate field-effect transistors (JFETs) have not seen substantial improvement and operate at about a kilovolt with rise times of a few nanoseconds, making them useful for trigger supplies but not in HPM sources.\n\nPhotoconductive solid-state (PCSS) switching is still of great interest because of the inherent advantages it could provide. PCSS switches have very low jitter, have fast rise times, and are compact. This technology, sufficiently developed, could allow design of HPM sources with fewer compression stages, allow greater frequency agility and pulse width adjustment, and be used in arrays by phasing many lower power sources together. The technology's main limitations at present are power handling and a limited lifetime. PCSS switches have three modes of operation. In the linear mode, one electron-hole pair is generated by each photon absorbed, and so the conductivity is linearly proportional to the incident photon flux. Linear mode PCSS switches are made from silicon, doped GaAs, and indium phosphide. The electrical pulse output follows the amplitude of the optical trigger pulse. Switching in this mode requires about 1 mJ/cm² of optical energy and thus requires a larger laser trigger than do other operating modes. PCSS switches also operate in a lock-on mode in which once the optical trigger causes conduction, carriers remain as long as current still flows, even if the optical\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\npulse ceases. This mode requires much less optical power. Finally, PCSS switches may also be designed to operate in the avalanche mode. Switches operating in this mode are designed for higher voltages, and above some critical electric field, the switch remains closed even without optical energy. Carrier multiplication occurs because of the electric field, and the switching process sustains conduction. Optical energy required for avalanche mode PCSS switches is about 1-10µJ/cm². Lock-on mode GaAs is the most commonly used PCSS switch for high-voltage applications. PCSS research at the University of Texas at Dallas (UTD) has resulted in promising techniques for improving the longevity of switches. High current densities in PCSS switches normally result in damage at the metal-semiconductor interface. Research at UTD using amorphic diamond coatings at the metal-semiconductor interface has resulted in significant lifetime improvement for the switches. The process uses a conformal coating with the hardness of natural diamond and extremely high electron emissivity originally called amorphous ceramic diamond and later shortened to simply amorphic diamond. Used in stacked Blumlein pulser configurations, these switches have demonstrated 150-ps switching speed at 100 kV and 10⁵-shot lifetimes.\n\nHigh-Voltage Pulse Sources\n\nHPM sources have three basic components:\n\n• Electrical or explosive prime power.\n\n• RF generator.\n\n• Antenna.\n\nThe prime power is supplied by means of pulsed-electrical-circuit Marx generators and transformer-based generators or by single-event explosively driven means.\n\nMARX GENERATORS\n\nMarx generators have been used for several decades now and have seen many improvements in their reliability and repetition rate capabilities. In a Marx generator, some number of capacitors, referred to as the number of stages, are charged in parallel. After the charge cycle is complete, gas switches located between each stage are triggered to conduction, and the capacitor configuration is changed to a series connection. The result is that the charge on each capacitor is multiplied by the number of stages, and the effective capacity is the stage capacitance divided by the number of stages. Because all inductances are also in series, the equivalent inductance is the sum of all circuit, switch, and capacitor inductances. One problem with Marx generator circuits is that approximately half the energy used is lost as heat in the charging resistance for each stage. Using inductive charging can lessen this problem, but care must be taken, since several LC loops can be formed, all of which resonate at different frequencies. The result can be extremely high voltages in circuit locations where these are not expected. This can be especially troublesome in high-repetition-rate circuits.\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 2 shows an example of a Marx generator circuit.\n\n[circuit diagram]\n\nFigure 2. Example of Marx Generator Circuit\n\nTRANSFORMER BASED GENERATORS\n\nTransformer-based pulse generators have also been used for many years as prime power for HPM sources. Transformers with ferrite cores have been used successfully in sources with multigigawatt output powers at kilohertz repetition rates. Ferrite development is an area where substantial gains could be made in HPM sources. Typically, programs are under time or budget constraints and do not give adequate attention to this research. As a result, little or no progress in new ferrite materials for pulsed operation has been made. Ferrites with increased frequency ranges and increased saturation flux density are needed. Air core transformers are used at higher flux densities and are often of the resonant variety because of their decreased coupling levels. Resonant transformers develop peak voltages after multiple cycles owing to coupling effects. Dual-resonant air core pulse transformers are prevalent and require coupling coefficients of 0.8, producing peak secondary voltage and maximum energy transfer after an initial reverse voltage swing. In dual-resonant designs, two frequencies or resonant modes are generated, and the output is the superposition of the two modes. Transformer systems generally require the primary circuit to be matched or tuned to the secondary, or vice versa.\n\nEXPLOSIVELY DRIVEN GENERATORS\n\nExplosively driven generators, also called flux compression generators (FCGs), work by setting up a strong magnetic field between two conductors, usually by discharging a capacitor bank charged to high voltage through an inductive coil. A conducting hollow cylinder filled with high explosives is placed in the center of the coil, filling the region between the two conductors with magnetic flux. The explosives are then used to compress the initial magnetic flux by driving the conducting cylinder surface, which contains the flux, outward into the current carrying coil. Work done by the conductors moving against the magnetic field results in a huge increase in the EM energy. The additional energy comes from chemical energy stored in the explosives. Thus, FCGs essentially convert a portion of the chemical explosive energy into EM energy. The explosively driven conductor is called an armature, and the nondriven inductive coil of the generator is called the stator. Miniaturizing the generators and fine-tuning the magnetohydrodynamic aspects takes years and is still an area of intense research. Material properties under the enormous forces involved are also required for success. Many hours of research and computer code writing and testing go into the selection of every single material used. One problem with this form of HPM source is that of coupling the energy to the load. Attempts to energize the load by direct generation often result in the development of excessive internal generator voltages and\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nbreakdown. One solution to these difficulties has been transformer-coupling the load by having the FCG drive the primary of a transformer. The load for HPM production is typically some type of loop antenna with very small inductance and driven directly from the generator. Much research has been done on the effectiveness of this type of antenna, and one method of improving the operation is to fuse the loop along its length such that at peak current, the fuses open and radiate large voltage dI/dt spikes.\n\nPulsed High-Power Microwave Sources\n\nPulsed HPM sources can be divided into two types:\n\n• Pulsed electron beam sources – these are typically narrow-band HPM sources such as relativistic klystron amplifiers, backward wave oscillators, traveling wave tubes, split-cavity oscillators, reltron and super reltron, virtual cathode oscillators, magnetrons, gyrotrons, and the magnetically insulated line oscillator.\n\n• Impulse HPM sources – these are typically wideband or ultrawideband sources such as SNIPER, EMBL, Phoenix, Jolt, Thor, GEM II, and the H series.\n\nPULSED ELECTRON BEAM SOURCES\n\nIn pulsed electron beam sources, the RF source includes an electron beam generator, a beam transport, and a wave structure. These sources work by converting the kinetic energy of an electron beam into EM energy.\n\nBWOs, TWTs, AND RKAs\n\nHPM tubes, such as backward wave oscillators (BWOs), traveling wave tubes (TWTs), and relativistic klystron amplifiers (RKAs), are also very similar in concept to their conventional counterparts. The main differences lie in the techniques of beam formation; the use of pulsed, large magnitude axial magnetic fields for beam transport; and the application of relativistic voltages and very high beam currents. BWO efficiencies as high as 35 percent have been obtained at moderate power levels, but as power levels are increased, the output levels tend to saturate, and the radiated spectra tends to broaden. These effects are due to beam breakup and turbulent transport. To maintain high beam quality, large magnetic fields are required for high-power operation. An approximately 25- to 50-kG applied axial field implies that mechanically strong solenoidal magnets are required with pulsed capacitor banks to drive them. These requirements in turn dictate a much larger and heavier HPM source. TWTs can be made using many of the same techniques as BWOs. The difference is that the beam-wave interaction is with a forward wave. Thus, TWTs have many of the same issues and limitations as BWO sources. RKAs use cavities for beam bunching and power extraction rather than continuous slow wave structures as in BWOs and TWTs. Some RKA designs use extended structures for power extraction to reduce the power densities and to increase efficiency. They use high beam currents where space charge forces become dominant in the bunching process. Tubes have been developed at the 10-GW power level. They use 0.5 to 1 MeV beams guided by axial magnetic fields of about 10 kG. Efficiencies are on the order of 40-50 percent. Some of the issues with these tubes are beam transport, beam loading of the cavities, base pressure of the vacuum system, x-\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nray production, and beam breakup. The combination of x-rays and the high base pressures has led to breakdowns in the cavities and unstable beam propagation.\nSPLIT-CAVITY OSCILLATORS\nSplit-cavity oscillators (SCOs) utilize transit-time bunching of the beam to generate microwave energy. They can generate microwave pulses of about 100 MW for durations on the order of 100 nanoseconds (ns). The SCO can be very compact since no magnetic field is required and low beam quality requiring only basic pulse power sources is adequate. Complete systems, including a power supply and mode-converting antenna, have been built on roll-around laboratory carts.\nVIRTUAL CATHODE OSCILLATORS\nVirtual cathode oscillators (vircators) operate because of a phenomenon of intense beam physics. They have no conventional counterpart. They have operating frequencies tunable from 300 MHz to 40 GHz, no required magnetic field, simple construction, and low efficiency. Power output varies from 200 MW to 15 GW, and efficiencies range from 1 to 10 percent. Operation is typically in a TM mode in a cylindrical geometry with mode conversion necessary for efficient radiation. The frequency of oscillation of a free-running vircator is related to the relativistic beam plasma frequency and typically chirps upward during the pulse. Plasma closure effects limit the pulse length. Containing the oscillating beam in a resonant cavity can stabilize the frequency. If the resonant cavity is driven by an external source, the vircator can be made to lock to the external signal. Although vircators' simplicity is a major advantage, their very low efficiency poses real problems for weaponization. They have been used as sources for testing, where efficiency and size are not an issue.\nMAGNETRONS\nHPM magnetrons are basically relativistic, cold-cathode versions of their conventional counterparts. They are characterized by relatively high efficiency, low power densities internal to the tube, robust operation, and compact size. Their modulators and power supplies are simple and inexpensive compared with BWOs, TWTs, and RKAs. Relativistic magnetrons have achieved efficiencies of 10-30 percent in the bands from 0.5 to 10 GHz at power levels of about 5 GW. Pulse widths are on the order of 100 ns, limited by plasma closure of the anode-cathode gap. Magnetrons may be phase locked for higher output power.\nThe magnetically insulated line oscillator (MILO) is essentially a magnetron that uses the magnetic field of the beam current to provide magnetic insulation between the cathode and anode. This eliminates the need for pulsed magnets and their power supplies while also reducing the size and weight of the system. No mode conversion is required with the MILO.\n18\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nThe Orion system, first fielded in 1995, is a self-contained, transportable HPM test facility housed in five standard shipping containers. It is computer controlled via fiberoptic links. The system is based on four continuously tunable magnetrons with a tunable frequency range of 1 to 3.3 GHz. The thyratron-switched modulator pulse charges an 11-section pulse-forming network through a step-up transformer and a triggered gas output switch. This provides a 100- to 500-ns pulse at 200 to 500 kV and up to 100 PRR that drives the magnetrons. The magnetrons are tuned by stepper-motors and use explosive emission cathodes. The vacuum of 10-6 to 10-7 is provided by cryopumps. The magnetic field of about 10 kG is provided by cryomagnets. The system includes an entire shipping container housing a combiner/attenuator network to provide continuously variable power over five orders of magnitude. The antenna is formed by two offset, shaped parabolic reflectors, each fed by two pyramidal horns. The antenna produces a 7 x 15 meter elliptical beam spot at a distance of 100 meters. Figure 3 shows the Orion test facility with its antenna.\nFigure 3. Orion HPM Testing Facility\nGYROTRONS\nGyrotrons tap the energy associated with electrons gyrating about strong magnetic field lines. The main purpose for gyrotron development thus far has been magnetic confinement fusion research, in which megawatt-power, long-pulse gyrotron sources operating at more than 100 GHz provide resonant heating, current drive, and instability suppression. These devices use an electron gun to launch an electron beam into a region of slowly increasing magnetic field, where it is compressed. Compression raises the current density and produces a perpendicular component to the beam velocity. After compression, electron-guiding structures are placed at the peak electric field position for the TE01 mode. The beam and guiding center structure then enter a resonant cavity. Inside the cavity, the electron motion decomposes into three components: a drift along the magnetic field lines, a slow rotation of the beam about the magnetic axis owing to the E×B drift involving the beam self-electric field, and the Larmor rotation of individual electrons about the guiding centers. Resonant cavity fields oscillating faster than the rotational cyclotron frequency of electrons cause the electrons to bunch on one side of their common guiding centers. This bunching causes net electron energy to be given up to the cavity fields, which is then extracted.\n19\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nGyrotrons are important in narrowband HPM production because the only directed-energy weapon system known to be fielded today is based on them. The Active Denial System (ADS) uses a gyrotron operating at 95 GHz that is capable of continuous operation. Power output is 100 kW, and the range is more than 750 meters. The system uses an innovative flat parabolic surface (FLAPS) antenna to radiate a focused beam in a manner similar to a parabolic dish. The ADS is effective as a less-than-lethal weapon for crowd dispersal. The radiation passes through the atmosphere with very low loss and is absorbed in the outer layer of skin, causing a burning sensation sufficiently intense to trigger an involuntary reflex response in the target. Energy is deposited to a depth of about 0.4 mm. Figure 4 shows a deployment of the ADS with the FLAPS antenna.\nFigure 4. Active Denial System With FLAPS Antenna\nIMPULSE HPM SOURCES\nImpulse HPM sources are typically ultrawideband. Microwave generation is accomplished by charging the antenna, a transmission line, or a tuned circuit directly with an extremely fast rise-time electrical pulse. This is usually done using a well-designed switch operating in an extremely overvolted condition.\nSNIPER\nSNIPER (Sub-Nanosecond ImPulsE Radiator) is an SNL HPM source operating at 290 kV that is capable of greater-than-1-kHz PRR. The peak power in the 3.5-ns-wide pulse is 1.25 GW, and the rise time is approximately 150 ps, resulting in spectral content from 100 MHz to 1.5 GHz. The radiated field strength, normalized to a distance of 1 meter, is 120 kV/m using a transverse electromagnetic (TEM) horn.\nEMBL\nEMBL (EnantioMorphic BLumlein) is an SNL HPM source operating at 750 kV that is capable of 700-Hz PRR. The peak power in the 3.5-ns-wide pulse is 11 GW, and the rise time is about 200 ps. EMBL radiates a 285-ps impulse with a TEM horn antenna. Its spectral content extends from 0.2 to 1.2 GHz, with the peak at 800 MHz. The radiated field strength normalized to a distance of 1 meter is 350 kV/m.\nH-SERIES HPM SOURCES\nThe H-series HPM sources—H2, H3, and H5—were built at the AFRL and used for various tests of assets. They are all currently inactive, except for a modified version of H3, which is being used for research at the University of New Mexico. The H-series HPM sources are all coaxial line pulsers, meaning they contain a pulsed power section that\n20\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nuses a pulse transformer to charge a short section of coaxial transmission line to high voltage. The transmission line is charged quickly enough to overvolt a high-pressure (2,000-psi) hydrogen switch, providing 120-ps rise-time pulses at about 350 kV and 2.5-ns pulse width to another 40Ω coaxial transmission line, which uses a point geometry converter (PGC) to feed an antenna.\nFigure 5 shows H2 with a PGC output driving a large TEM horn. The peak power is 2 GW, and these sources were capable of a power supply-limited PRR of 1.8 kHz. Using a flat-plate TEM horn antenna, the radiated field at 10 meters was 25 kV/m. At the AFRL, they compare HPM sources using what is termed a figure of merit (FOM), defined as the field value at some distance multiplied by the distance. Thus, for H3 the FOM is 250 kV. While developing the H series of HPM sources, scientists devised a means of efficiently converting from a coaxial geometry to a parallel-plate geometry. Radiation from a coax forms a doughnut pattern with no field on bore site, and thus the PGC was developed to feed a more interesting antenna.\nFigure 6 shows a cross-section drawing of H5 with a PGC feeding a Brewster angle window and an extended-ground-plane antenna. H5 was developed using a much smaller volume high-pressure hydrogen switch than its predecessors used; however, with the pressures involved, personnel were isolated from the source whenever any pressure was in the switch.\nFigure 5. H2 With Large TEM Horn and PGC Output\nFigure 6. Cross-Section Drawing of H5 With Point Geometry Converter, Brewster Angle Window, and Extended-Ground-Plane Antenna\n21\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 7 is a closeup photograph of the same actual components as built and tested at the High Energy Research and Test Facility antenna range. This source was used extensively for testing in the 1990s, including remote tests in which the entire system, including the antenna, a screen room, and far-field diagnostics, was fitted into a trailer specially modified for the purpose.\nFigure 7. H5 Output Section With the Point Geometry Converter Feeding an Extended-Ground-Plane Antenna Through a Brewster Angle Window\nTHE PHOENIX HPM SOURCE\nThe Phoenix was a UWB source developed by the AFRL specifically for asset testing at the High-Energy Microwave Laboratory (HEML). The HEML has a large anechoic chamber and is capable of testing small fighter aircraft. The Phoenix had a ferrite core transformer-based system using two flowed oil switches to generate the fast rise-time voltage pulse. It was bulkier than the H-series sources and thus was less portable. An oil-processing platform with 1-micron filtering and a 5-horsepower DC motor driving the positive displacement oil pump was used. The pumping system was capable of a 7-gallon–per-minute flow rate through the two switches. The oil switches were designed into 50Ω parallel-plate transmission lines. The peaking switch electrode spacing was only 0.015 to 0.020 inches and was highly overvolted. The operating voltage was about 500 kV with a 90-ps rise time and a 1.25-ns pulse width. The peak power was 5 GW, and the radiated field at 9 meters was 45 kV/m, giving it an FOM of more than 400 kV. Phoenix had the fastest rise time of any HPM source to date. Figure 8 shows the waveform of the radiated field at a distance of 8.5 meters. Figure 9 shows the resulting spectral content. Note that the source has good spectral content beyond 2.5 GHz owing to the extremely fast rise time.\n22\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nElectric Field on Axis (KV/m)\nTime in nanoseconds\nFigure 8. Phoenix Radiated Pulse at 8.5 Meters\n\nEnergy Spectral Density (dBJ/m^2*Hz)\nFREQUENCY (GHz)\nFigure 9. Phoenix Radiated Spectral Content\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTHE GEM II HPM SOURCE\n\nThe GEM II source was based on PCSS switch technology using GaAs bulk avalanche semiconductor switches (BASS). GEM II was built by Power Spectra, Inc., in the mid-1990s and was evaluated by the AFRL. The source was built from individual modules, each containing a rectangular horn output with a BASS switch at the feed point. The modules were assembled in a 12 x 12 array to form a planar radiator measuring 1.6 x 1.6 x 0.85 meters. By timing the switching sequence of each BASS module, the beam was steerable up to 30° off center. The HPM output reached 22 kV/m at a distance of 75 meters and was capable of repetition-rate operation at 3 kHz. The rise time of each module was about 200 ps, and the pulse width was about 2 ns. The major problem with GEM II was switch lifetime; typically, a few switches failed during each burst.\n\nTHE JOLT HPM SOURCE\n\nThe Jolt, shown in Figure 10, was designed especially to feed the half-IRA antenna. The AFRL refers to this source as hyperband, meaning the frequency band ratio is greater than 10. On the pulsed-power end, Jolt uses a dual-resonant transformer operating at 1.1 MV. The transformer charges an intermediate capacitance discharged by an oil-insulated peaking switch at the focal point of the half IRA to two flat-plate transmission lines terminated at the edge of the dish. The voltage rate of rise is 5 x 10^15 V/sec, and the repetition rate is a maximum of 200 Hz. The radiated electric field waveform recorded at 85 meters is shown in Figure 11. The half-power point frequencies are an upper frequency of 2 GHz and a lower frequency of 30 MHz.\n\n[Photo: Figure 10. Jolt Hyperband HPM Source]\n\nFigure 11. Jolt Radiated Electric Field Waveform at 85 Meters\n\nMESOBAND SOURCES\n\nThe AFRL has defined mesoband or moderate band sources as those with a bandwidth ratio between one and three. These sources usually generate HPM energy between 50 and 900 MHz. They are designed using two techniques. The first is to feed a damped sine wave onto a wideband antenna. The second is to switch a transient pulse onto a resonant transmission line connected to a wideband antenna. One such system at the\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAFRL, called the Matrix, is simply a quarter-wave, high-voltage coax line that is switched onto a half-IRA antenna by a high-pressure hydrogen switch. This produces a damped sinusoid with a frequency variable from 180 to 600 MHz by means of different coax line lengths.\n\nDIEHL Munitiossysteme in Germany manufactures several mesoband sources for sale to the public. One is a suitcase-sized system using a compact 600-kV Marx generator to provide an impulse to a loop antenna. It is made tunable by changing the size of the loop antenna and can radiate a damped sinusoid at 70 kV/m at 2 meters' distance.\n\nBAE Systems in the United Kingdom also sells mesoband sources made using nonlinear transmission lines and solid-state modulators. These are repetition-rate operated to more than 1 kHz.\n\nHPM Antennas\n\nMany types of antennas are used for radiating HPM signals, and the choice of which to use depends on many factors, including power level, bandwidth, size constraints, efficiency and range requirements, and fratricide concerns. This section discusses the most common antennas used for high-power applications: horns, parallel-plate antennas, and impulse radiating varieties.\n\nNARROWBAND ANTENNAS\n\nHPM narrowband antennas have typically been extrapolations of conventional types modified in some way to prevent air breakdown and to support higher electric fields. Antenna arrays are in development, albeit mainly for phase-locked multioscillator systems. The obstacle to using arrays in single-oscillator systems is that little has been done to develop the required antenna subelements (phase shifters and phase splitters) capable of high-power operation. Eventually, however, antenna arrays will be dominant in narrowband HPM because higher powers will require larger area antennas to prevent breakdown and arrays are the only antennas that are compatible with electronic control for tracking targets. To achieve good effectiveness and gain, the array size should be larger than the wavelength to be radiated. The beam width is approximately 2λ/L, and the gain is L²/λ². Also of importance is the separation between elements in the array. Larger distances between elements cause grating lobes offcenter from the main beam. If the distance between elements can be reduced to less than the wavelength, grating lobes will be minimal. In practice, however, breakdown constraints make this hard to accomplish.\n\nIn practice, only a very small number of antenna types have been used in narrowband HPM with any success. By far the most common type is the horn in its many forms, including transverse electromagnetic (TEM), pyramidal, and conical. One advantage of horn antennas for narrowband use is that the radiation pattern and the gain can be calculated precisely.\n\nFor TEM and pyramidal horns, the gain is given by:\n\nG = 2πab/λ²\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nwhere: a and b are dimensions of the sides and λ is the wavelength.\n\nFor conical horns, the gain is given by:\n\nG = 5D²/λ²\n\nwhere: D is the diameter and λ is the wavelength.\n\nMode conversion is critically important with horn antennas in order to generate field patterns of use. The fundamental modes, TE10 in rectangular waveguide and TE11 in circular waveguide, are preferred since they radiate a field pattern with peak field strength on axis. These are the most common modes used in electronic vulnerability testing.\n\nParabolic dish antennas are the most common type found in conventional microwave applications, but their use in narrowband HPM has been limited because of breakdown problems in center feed geometries. Variations of the parabolic dish have, however, been very successful. The Active Denial System (ADS) uses a flat parabolic surface (FLAPS) antenna. FLAPS uses an array of crossed dipole scatterers placed about 1/8 wavelength above a ground plane to create a geometrically flat surface that behaves like a parabolic dish. Each dipole controls its corresponding polarization. Incident energy causes a standing wave to be established between the dipole and the ground plane. The interaction of the dipole reactance and the standing wave causes the incident RF energy to be reradiated with a phase shift determined by the dipole length, thickness, and distance from the ground plane, as well as by the angle of incident RF, the dielectric constant of the media between the dipole and ground plane, and the proximity to adjacent dipoles. Figure 12 shows the essential elements of the FLAPS antenna with a cross-shorted dipole array. These antennas are easier to store and have less wind resistance than conventional parabolic dishes.\n\nFigure 12. FLAPS Antenna With a Cross-Shorted Dipole Array\n\nThe Vlasov antenna is also well suited to narrowband HPM radiation and has some distinct advantages. It can be fed with a TM01 mode and produce a directed beam with a nearly Gaussian profile; mates easily to the cylindrically symmetric HPM sources, such as the MILO and vircators; is easily constructed; and has a large feed aperture to support high electric fields. Typically sources that generate their power in the TM0n modes require a mode converter for radiating anything other than a donut beam, but the Vlasov antenna does not; the antenna is actually adapted from a mode converter.\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 13 shows (a) Vlasov antenna origins and (b) a Vlasov antenna attached to a cylindrical MILO. Vlasov antennas have one major drawback: the propagation angle is a function of the operating frequency. Thus, if the frequency chirps during the RF pulse, then the beam direction will sweep. The propagation angle is given by:\n\nθ = 90° − cos((1-(fc/f)²)^1/2)\n\nWIDEBAND AND ULTRAWIDEBAND ANTENNAS\n\nWideband antennas generally present a much greater design challenge than do narrowband antennas. As pulse duration and rise times are shortened, antenna design becomes more difficult. A good wideband antenna must have low dispersion across the entire bandwidth and high gain with minimal sidelobes. These are difficult to achieve because the wavelengths are large, requiring large antenna dimensions for high gain. Often, mission constraints dictate a much smaller antenna, thus the gain will not be constant with frequency, resulting in a distorted radiated pulse shape. The main consideration for transmitting UWB signals is minimizing frequency dispersion. For conventional antennas, the gain is a function of frequency. One approach to solving this problem has been to correct a conventional antenna (TEM horn) for dispersion. A second approach has been to use the dispersive characteristics of a conventional antenna, with the appropriate tailored drive signal, to radiate the desired UWB signal. A third approach has been to develop a new type of antenna. These three approaches cover the limited gamut of UWB HPM antennas.\n\nThe basic approach to attaining low dispersion in a conventional antenna is to ensure a slowly varying antenna impedance change along the length, beginning at the source output impedance and ending somewhere close to the impedance of free space (377Ω). In practice, it is found that the final impedance does not have to be very close to that of free space; instead, 220Ω to 280Ω provides the highest efficiency for most TEM horns. Best results are obtained for any length TEM antenna if the impedance is increased at a constant percentage rate (that is, is exponentially tapered). The resulting design may then have electrical breakdown problems at the connection point with the source, since the antenna impedance changes initially are quite small and, thus, plate spacing also remains small. Typically, a specially shaped, solid insulating material is required to obtain a gradual impedance change when transitioning from the source media into air. This is where the highest electric field strength is found and also where the temptation to aid impedance tapering by incorporating abrupt transitions in conductor dimensions is greatest. Any reflections of the pulse from farther down the antenna will also enhance fields at the feed point. All these factors combine to make the design of the antenna feed section possibly the most important factor in HPM sources and, in many\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ninstances, the determinant of the radiated signal characteristics. Sidelobes generated using TEM antennas tend to fall off sharply and are accompanied by a stretching of the original pulse duration. The distance from the antenna to where the far field region begins is defined such that the travel time of the differential distance is less than the rise time of the pulse. Parameters such as gain and beam width for UWB antennas are difficult to define because these concepts are from the narrowband world, where the definitions are for a single frequency. For UWB antenna comparisons, the community uses the previously described figure of merit concept to aid with this problem. The FOM is the peak electric field measured at some distance multiplied by that distance, thus the unit for FOM is volts. Using this concept, gain for UWB antennas is defined as:\n\nUWB gain = FOM/Vp\n\nwhere: Vp is the peak voltage of the driving pulse.\n\nTypical gains are 3-4 but with extreme designs can reach 6 and above. These are the antennas of choice for impulse radars since they can be small and lightweight but radiate UWB pulses quite well. However, sidelobe pulse stretching makes the aiming accuracy of the transmitting and receiving antennas crucial.\n\nAnother technique of interest in WB/UWB antennas uses a log-periodic antenna designed with dispersion characteristics such that, when driven with the proper input signal, it produces the fast rise time pulse required. The drive signal in this technique must have a strong increase in frequency from start to end. No high-power designs using this technique appear to have been accomplished.\n\nA new type of antenna, the impulse radiating antenna (IRA), incorporates a parabolic dish as a main component of the design (in fact, it is debatable whether this is actually a new design because it incorporates a parabolic dish). The distinguishing feature of an IRA is its use of a final fast switch located at the focal point of the dish to provide a spherical waveform to the dish. The design also must include a high-voltage transmission line to feed the peaking switch, which in all probability will not be dispersionless. However, the frequency content of the feed signal most likely will be less than that of the wave front from the peaking switch. The design also must include some number of conical transmission lines from the peaking switch back to the dish, providing something close to an impedance match for the feed pulser. The crucial criterion here is that the IRA be driven by a spherical TEM wave front, in which case the phase center of the wave is then fixed and the IRA is dispersionless. There is also a much smaller pre-pulse that is radiated from the front side of the switch and is not reflected from the dish. This signal will be radiated two focal lengths ahead of the main pulse. For a 4-meter dish, the pre-pulse arrives about 10 ns before the main pulse. Fast-acting semiconductor protection devices could in principle be effective in negating the effects of the main pulse. The peaking switch at the focal point must be contained in some insulating media and, thus, there is a reflection associated with the transition to air. The wave front generally is not spherical as it enters the air beyond the peaking switch owing to the physical dimensions of the switch and high-voltage insulation requirements. Successful IRA designs use the switch insulating media and container to form a lens designed to give a spherical wave at the air interface. The IRA, like the TEM horn, transmits a differentiated signal from the applied pulse. This is why the rise time of the driving pulse is so important to antenna response.\n\n28\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7b4ea6c823cda01b","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nConclusion\n\nThis paper provided an overview of the current state of HPM sources and the technologies driving their development. Advanced cathode materials, computer codes for more predictive ability in electron beam generation and propagation, high-speed switching at high power, and low-loss insulation techniques are just a few of the areas where advancement clearly is needed for progress to occur. Advancements in photoconductive solid-state (PCSS) and other solid-state switching and sharpening devices appear to finally be reaching a level of development such that they may soon be of use in high-voltage systems. If PCSS switching devices capable of higher operating voltage and extended lifetime are made available, variations of the phased array will become the HPM source design of choice, given the inherent advantages. More compact antennas are greatly desired; however, the physics of the radiation process requires structure sizes on the order of one-half wavelength of the lowest radiated frequency. With demanding levels of directivity and gain also requirements, compact UWB antenna designs will continue to be difficult, if not impossible, to realize.\n\n29\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"7cd6a44bc7904f7c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"7d56caa1327183b9","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n-1 of 2-\nOFFICIAL RECORD\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nDate of entry [REDACTED]/2026\nOn [REDACTED] 2026, [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] was interviewed telephonically by Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Special Agent (SA) [REDACTED]. After being advised of the identity of the interviewing agent, [REDACTED] provided the following information:\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] arrived at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] on [REDACTED], 2026 to support the [REDACTED] On [REDACTED] 2026, [REDACTED] left the [REDACTED] at approximately 2100[REDACTED] with the intention of driving north on [REDACTED] for area reconnaissance. When they arrived at the gate to [REDACTED], it was raining heavily, so they waited for the rain to subside, which it did shortly thereafter. [REDACTED] then unlocked the gate and began driving north on [REDACTED]. At approximately 2200 [REDACTED], after they had gone approximately 25 miles, [REDACTED] noticed a red light at the crest of the mountain range to their west and pulled over to investigate. Initially, [REDACTED] thought the light was something on the mountain, but it began to move to the east. Due to the mountain range being approximately 5000 feet and the cloud cover being at approximately 7000 feet, [REDACTED] stated he believed the light was traveling somewhere between 5000 and 7000 feet above ground level (AGL). After approximately 15 minutes, as [REDACTED] watched this light, multiple more (approximately 6 to 10) lights appeared directly over their position. These lights, along with the first-observed light, appeared to “sync up” and traveled to the east/southeast. During this time, one of the lights descended rapidly [REDACTED] estimated approximately 1000 feet), then disappeared. The other lights continued east/southeast and disappeared as well.\n[REDACTED] described the lights as red in color and stated that a first glance, as well as when observed through Night Optical Devices (NODs), the lights appeared as a single point of light, however upon closer observation,\nInvestigation on [REDACTED]/2026 at [REDACTED] United States [REDACTED]\nFile # [REDACTED] Date drafted [REDACTED]\nby [REDACTED]\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"7d56caa1327183b9","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED], On [REDACTED]/2026, Page 2 of 2\nor while “squinting,” the lights appeared to each be three separate lights in a triangular or diamond-shaped pattern. [REDACTED] stated that each “cluster” of the three lights moved in tandem and never separated, as if all three lights were attached to the same object. [REDACTED] also noted that the cloud cover was heavy at this time, to the point that no stars were visible.\nAt approximately 2350 [REDACTED], [REDACTED] witnessed two lights on or close to the ground to their east, which were only visible using NODs. One of lights moved west toward their position and the second, which was south of the first, moved north and stopped in the vicinity of the first light. Both lights appeared to stop approximately 200-300 meters from their position. As [REDACTED] watched these lights to his east, he saw a rapidly moving streak of light on the periphery of his vision. [REDACTED] described it as analogous to how a sparkler or flashlight looks at night if someone moves it quickly, where the “light tail” is visible behind the light source. [REDACTED] turned to look at the source, but was only able to see a bright hue of light emitting from the vicinity, as the source was in a defilade. The hue moved north, following the defilade until it faded out or disappeared. The lights to their east also disappeared.\n[REDACTED] then got into their vehicle and attempted to drive east to the vicinity of their observations but were unsuccessful. They then returned to their original position, parked and exited the vehicle. After some time, [REDACTED] walked back to the truck to check his phone and give his eyes a break. [REDACTED] then asked [REDACTED] what time he had and relayed that his watch was 25 minutes fast. [REDACTED] was wearing a digital [REDACTED] watch, which displayed the same time as their cell phones and the vehicle clock. [REDACTED]'s watch was the only analog/non-digital clock and was the only clock that was different.\n[REDACTED] relayed that he had known [REDACTED] for years and described him as “squared away.” Having an inaccurate watch or faulty gear was not something he would let happen. Moreover, [REDACTED] had been looking at his watch throughout that day/night and it had been accurate up to that point.\n[REDACTED] stated he did not have any physiological reactions/effects during or after the above-described events."} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62- HQ-83894\nSerials EBF 220\n62-HQ-83894-EBF 220\nEBF\nDO NOT DESTROY\nFOIPA# 1294-932\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 1 220 ONLY\n8/11/1274164\nRRP003IXG6\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007.\nENCL BEHIND FILE\n62-83894-220"} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MIGUEL ANGEL GARCIA MACIAS\nPianist Composer Discoverer\nand Ideographic Inventor\nNo. 324 Pino Suarez Avenue\nVERACRUZ, Veracruz\n\nVeracruz, Veracruz\nMarch 19, 1950\n\nTo the President of the Commission of Scientific Investigation\nof the United States of North America\n\nNew York\n\nDear Mr. President,\n\nThis is to greet you and at the same time to bring to your knowledge the STUDIES which I permit myself to send to that Honorable Commission of Scientific Investigation, because I believe that it is my duty to make them available for the deep consideration of that commission over which you so worthily preside.\n\nThis deals with stratospheric aerostats (?)* or Flying** saucers as people commonly call them, and which I believe your great Nation, making use of ATOMIC force, possesses. Before giving an exposition of my IDEA, I want you to know of the Inventions which I have thought up by means of my STUDIES as an IDEOGRAPHIC Inventor, and which have been REGISTERED and PATENTED by other persons whom I do not know and which are the following:\n\n\"GOTE-GRADUNS\" (DROP GRADUATION?)\n\nThe \"Gote-Graduns\" was originated when I was making studies on Atmospheric Graduations of the Earth and one afternoon it occurred to me to graduate a Dropper. The experiment did not cause me a great deal of work since I was able to graduate it with ease, but the PLANS of my IDEA were stolen from me and patented in your Nation.\n\n\"AUTOMATIC SHOVELS\" for Dump-Trucks (or Concrete-Mixers)***\n\nThe Automatic Shovels originated when a party of Workers was trying to fill a Dump-Truck in front of the Custom House of the Port. I took my watch and I was able to prove that the workers took a long time to fill the truck since it took almost an hour and a half of continuous work. Then I thought that the same Truck equipped with an Automatic Shovel could do the same work in less time. I set about drawing up the plans and I sent them to Mexico to the Secretary of National Economy. The plans remained there\n\n* These words are written \"aereo-astactos extratofericos\". I think that the writer intended to write \"aereo-estaticos estratoesfericos\".\n** The writer frequently uses capital letters when there is no apparent need for them. I have retained them in the translation.\n*** \"Camiones de volteo\", literally, \"trucks for turning over or revolving\"."} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- 2 -\n\nfor eight months. After that time, and after I had paid all my fees as an Inventor of the said Apparatus, I received a reply stating that the said Patent had already been given to another person whose identity I do not know.\n\n\"ROOMS FOR MEASURING OPTICS\" for the Examination of vision.\n\nI have this study in my possession and have not REGISTERED it since I need to prove some things in order to be able to put it into effect.\n\n\"THE GRADUAL CENTIMETRIC MUSIC OF THE FUTURE\" or the discovery of Sound (15) composed for PIANOMETRICS, PHONOMETRICS, CENTIMETRICS and DISCOPHONOMETRICS.\n\nI have finished this Study and the plans are in the TOWN LIBRARY of this Port, as well as the Autophonics and the Euphonics of Alphabetic Letters.\n\nThe \"FERROTACTOMETER and the FERROCEMACTOMETER\" to eliminate Railway collisions from a DISTANCE at Road crossings. I extended this IDEOGRAPHIC INVENTION to eliminate automobile collisions on Roads, but since I do not have money I was not able to put it in PRACTICE nor to have it REGISTERED.\n\n\"EXQUINOCIS\" (?) of graduation, time and distance, in order to determine the distribution and division of TIME on CLOCKS of the whole World. This drawing is in the Town Library of this Port.\n\nDescription of the STABILITY of SURFACE and the SUPERMEDIA (?) in order to prevent the sinking of big Transatlantic liners, guaranteeing the lives and interests of persons who travel, like those of Navigation Companies of the whole World.\n\nThe graduation and Illumination of the Wharves which load large quantities of combustible materials, in order to eliminate accidents on the Wharves during the loading and unloading of the same.\n\nStudy of the MULTIPLES and the SUBMULTIPLES of Mechanized gears. This study is correlated with Music since it deals with Universal mechanical gearing or the gradual Centimetric Music of the Future.\n\n\"STRATOSPHERIC AEROSTATS\"\n\nIn this study enters Global Stability which the Globe has and Semi-Global Stability which the Parachute has. Uniting the two STABILITIES into one, we find the superior Stability or the SUPER-STABILITY of bodies in Air or space. These apparatuses can be used in order to avoid Atomic Explosion on the Earth, since the velocity is Greater than that of Light or Sound in accordance with the quantity of Atomic Material which is used in their fabrication. These apparatuses can be thrown from the ground or from"} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- 3 -\n\nthe Water since the Conic-Global or Global-Conic form permits it.\n\nThe force that the said apparatus can develop can be compared only with THOUGHT since this has no barriers on the earth such as mountains and clouds in Space. This apparatus can be used for the Study of the Stars. This force is applied by means of stratospheric skyrockets placed at the top or sides of this apparatus using Nuclear-Atomic force.\n\nI hope that my idea is Studied and approved by the said Commission and may serve for the Progress of the Universe instead of its DESTRUCTION, and for the good of all of us human beings who inhabit the Earth.\n\nMy description is IDEOGRAPHIC, but I believe that it will be a grain of sand which will help the SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION of that big Nation.\n\nCordially yours,\nMiguel Angel Garcia Macias\n\nIdeographic Inventor\n\n\"FOR UNIVERSAL PROGRESS\"\n\nTranslator: Mrs. Sophia Saliba"} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE FIRST PHOTOGRAPHS OF A \"FLYING SAUCER\", OBTAINED IN DURANGO AT AN ALTITUDE OF 9000 FEET\n\n(Caption under photographs)\n\nMr. German Horacio Robles Jr., student at the National School of Engineering, is one of the thousands of persons who have seen \"with their own eyes\" the flying saucers or disks which have become the general topic of commentaries and have given rise to the most varied hypotheses. But at the same time the young man himself is the first to have photographed those strange apparatuses. He observed one of them and was able to take its picture against the skies of the city of Durango. 1. Picture of the \"flying saucer\" at an altitude of 8000 to 9000 feet above the streets of Durango. The apparatus seems to be a double truncated cone, joined at its bases which moves by something like jet propulsion and which displaces itself by changing position in order to use its motive force in the direction desired, for which reason it can be seen under apparently different forms. 2. Conception of Mr. Robles Jr., concerning the real form of the strange mechanical objects drawn by him. 3. Another aspect of the flying saucer. 4. The future civil engineer, Horacio Robles Jr. sketched in our editorial offices after having reported his observations on the flying disk and after having handed over the pictures of this apparatus which he had obtained.\n\n(Page with five drawings is entitled \"Wings and Propellers\"\n\nNext drawing Propeller\nAir-Seizing Force\n\nDirection of the currents of air\n\nCatches\nCuts\nExpels\nDirection of the Wings\n\nAtomic Force\n\nVacuum Third Level\nOxygen Chamber 2nd Level\nEntrance of the Air Currents 1st Level\nPropeller Air Seizing Force\nExits of the Air Currents\nExpulsion of Air\n\nGLOBAL-CONIC AND SEMI-GLOBAL STABILITY\n\nTranslator: Mrs. Sophia Saliba\n\nFBI - NEW YORK APR 7 1950"} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE FIRST PHOTOGRAPHS OF A \"FLYING SAUCER\", OBTAINED IN TURKEY AT AN ALTITUDE OF 5,000 FEET\n\n(Caption under photographs)\n\nMr. Lorman Horacio Robles Jr., student at the National School of Engineering, is one of the thousands of persons who have seen \"with their own eyes\" the flying saucers or disks which have become the pearl of commentaries and have given rise to the most varied hypotheses. At the same time the young man himself is the first to have photographed those strange apparatuses. He observed one of them and was able to take its picture against the skies of the city of Durango. J. Picture of the \"flying saucer\" at an altitude of 5000 to 6000 feet above the streets of Durango. The apparatus seems to be a double truncated cone, joined at its bases which moves by something like jet propulsion and which displaces itself by changing position in order to use its motive force in the direction desired. For which reason it can be seen under aspects of different forms. 2. Conception of the strange phenomenon given by Mr. Robles Jr., 3. Another aspect of the flying saucer. 4. The future civil engineer, Horacio Robles Jr. sketched in our editorial offices after having reported his observations on the flying disk and after having handed over the pictures of this apparatus which he had observed.\n\nPage with five drawings is entitled \"Wings and Propellers\"\n\nand drawing\nPropeller\nAir-Selling Force\n\nDirection of the currents of air\n\nGatoes\nOuts\nAngels\nDirection of the Wings\n\nAtomic Force\n\nVacuum\n(Upper Chamber)\nPresence of the Air Currents\nPropeller Air-Selling Force\nAxis of the Air Currents\nCirculation of Air\n\nCIVIL-CODE AIR-SYSTEM-GLOBAL STABILITY\n\nTranslator: Mrs. Sophia Heller\n\n62-83894-220"} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MIGUEL ANGEL GARCIA MACIAS.\nPianista Compositor Descubridor\n'o Inventor Ideógrafo.\nAv. Pino Suarez Núm. 324.\nVERACRUZ, Ver.-\n\nH. Veracruz, Ver., a 19 de Marzo de 1950.\n\nCo. Presidente de la Comisión de Investigación Científica de Estados Unidos de Norte América.\n\nNueva York.\n\nMuy apreciable y distinguido señor Presidente.\n\nLa presente es para saludarlo y al mismo tiempo, para hacer de su conocimiento sobre los ESTUDIOS que me permito remitir a esa Honorable Comisión de Investigación Científica, porque creo ser mi deber ponerlos a la alta consideración de la que usted dignamente preside.\n\nSe trata sobre los Aereo-astactos extraterrestres o sean los platos Voladores como bulgarmente nombran las gentes y que yo creo esa gran Nación los posee, aprovechando la fuerza ATOMICA, antes de hacer una exposición de mi IDEA, quiero que sepa usted de los Inventos que he idealizado por medio de mis ESTUDIOS como Inventor IDEOGRAFO y que han sido REGISTRADOS y PATENTADOS por otras personas que yo desconosco y son los siguientes:\n\n\"GOTE-GRADUNS\"\n\nEl Gote-Gradung nació cuando yo estaba haciendo Estudios sobre Graduaciones Admosféricas y de la Tierra y una tarde se me ocurrio graduar un Gotero el esperimento no me causó gran trabajo, pues pude graduarlo con facilidad, pero los PLANOS de mi IDEA me fueron robados y patentados en esa Nación.\n\n\"Las PALAS AUTOMACICAS\" para Camiones de Volteo.\n\nLas Palas Auto-maticas nació cuando frente al Edificio Aduana de este Puerto una partida de Obreros trataba de llenar un Camión de Volteo, tomé mi reloj y pude comprobar que el tiempo que demoraban dichos Obreros para llenar el Camión hora mucho, pues casi llegaba a una hora y media de trabajo continuo, entonces pense que ese mismo Camion dotado de un Recojedor Automatico, podría hacer el mismo trabajo en menos tiempo, me puse hacer los planos y los mandé a México a la secretaría de Economía Nacional, los planos estubieron cerca de Ocho meses, después de dicho tiempo y de haber pagado todos mis derechos como Inventor de dicho Aparato se me contestó que dicha Patente ya habia sido dada a otra persona la cual desconosco.\n\n\"Las SALAS de OPTICA GRADUAL\" para el Examen de la vista.\n\nEste Estudio lo tengo en mi poder sin REGISTRAR, pues necesito comprobar algunas cosas, para poderlo llevar a efecto.\n\n\"LA MUSICA GRADUAL CENTIMETRICA DEL FUTURO\" o sea el descubrimiento del Sonido (15) compuesto por la PIANOMETRIA, FONOMETRIA, CENTIMETRIA y la DISCOFONOMETRIA.\n\nEste Estudio lo tengo terminado y los cuadros se encuentran en la BIBLIOTECA del PUEBLO de este Puerto, asi como la Auto-fonia y Eufonía de las Letras Alfabeticas.\n\nal frente..........#"} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Hoja número 2.\n\nEl \"FERROTACTOMETRO y el FERROCEMACTOMETRO\" para evitar los choques de los ferrocarriles por DISTANCIA en los cruces de las Vías de este IDEOGRAFO lo amplió para evitar los choques de los Autos en las carreteras, pero como yo no tengo dinero no lo he podido poner en PRACTICA ni hacer el REGISTRO del mismo.\n\n\"EXQUINOCIS\" de graduación, tiempo y distancia, para precisar la distribución y repartición del TIEMPO en los RELOJES de todo el Mundo, este cuadro se encuentra en la Biblioteca del Pueblo de este Puerto.\n\nDescripción de la ESTABILIDAD de SUPERFICIE y la SUPER-MEDIA para evitar el undimiento de los grandes Trasatlanticos, garantizando vida a Intereses de las personas que viajan, así como la de las Cías. de Navegación en todo el Mundo.\n\nLa graduación é Iluminación de los Muelles que cargan gran cantidad de Combustible, para evitar accidentes en los Muelles de la carga y descarga de los mismos.\n\nEstudio de los MULTIPLOS y SUB-MULTIPLOS de los engranajes Mecánidos, este estudio tiene correlación con la Música por tratarse del engranaje Universal mecánico ó sea la Música gradual centimétrica del FUTURO.\n\n\"AEROSTATOS EXTRATEROSFERICOS\"\n\nEn este estudio entra la Estabilidad-Global que tiene el Globo y la Estabilidad Semi-Global que tiene el Paracaidas, juntando las dos ESTABILIDADES en una sola, encontramos la Estabilidad superior o sea la SUPER-ESTABILIDAD de los cuerpos en el Aire ó espacio. estos aparatos se pueden usar para evitar la Explosión Atómica en la Tierra, puesto que velocidad es mayor a la de la Luz ó el Sonido de acuerdo con la cantidad de Materias Atómicas que se emplean en su fabricación. Estos aparatos pueden ser arrojados desde la tierra o desde el Agua porque la forma Global-Cónica ó Cónica-Global se lo permite.\n\nLa fuerza que pueden desarrollar dichos aparatos solo se puede comparar con el PENSAMIENTO porque este no tiene barreras en la tierra como montañas y nubes en el Espacio, estos aparatos pueden emplearse para los Estudios de los Astros, esta fuerza se aplica por medio de conectos extraterrestres aplicados a dichos aparatos en la parte su potior del mismo ó en los costados, aprovechando la fuerza Nuclear-Atómica.\n\nEspero que mi idea sea Estudiada y aprobada por dicha Comisión y sirva para el Progreso Universal en vez de la DESTRUCCION, y en bien de todos los seres humanos que habitamos en la Tierra.\n\nMi descripción es IDEOGRAFICA, pero creo será una grano de arena que ayudará a la INVESTIGACION CIENTIFICA de esa gran Nación.\n\nDe usted muy atentamente.\n\n\"POR EL PROGRESO UNIVERSAL\"\nEl Inventor Ideógrafo.\n\nMiguel Angel Garcia Macias."} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Miguel Angel Garcia Macias\nDescubridor e Inventor Ideografo\nAv. Pino Suarez #324.\nVeracruz, Ver.\n\nAl C.\nPresidente de la Comisión de Investigación\nCientífica de Estados Unidos de Norte America\n\nW. L. Court House\nFoley, Ala.\n\nNueva York\n\n20 MAR 50"} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ESTABILIDAD\nCÓNICA-GLOBAL Y SEMI-GLOBAL."} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Global 7\nEstabilidad Semiglobal. 11 Conica-global\n6- 1- 6\n11- 1- 6- 1- 1- 1- 10 = 31."} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HÉLICE.\nCAPTA-AEREA-FUERZA.\nPropiedades:\ncapta - corta y expulsa.\nDirección de las corrientes del Aire.\nCapta\nCorta\nExpulsa.\nRespas\nDirección\nde las\nFuerza Ciclónica.\nVacío\n3er Plano.\nCámara de Oxígeno.\n2e Plano.\nEntrada\n1e Plano.\nde las Corrientes de Aire\nHélice\nCapto-Aéreo Fuerza.\nlas Flechas\nCorrientes de Aire\nExpulsión del Aire"} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"El señor Germán Horacio Robles, Jr., pasante de la Escuela Nacional de Ingeniería, es uno de los miles de personas que han visto \"con sus propios ojos\" los platos o discos voladores que se han convertido en el tema general de los comentarios y dado lugar a las más variadas hipótesis. Pero al mismo tiempo es el propio joven el primero en haber fotografiado esos extraños aparatos. Observó uno de ellos y pudo captarlo sobre los cielos de la ciudad de Durango.—1. Gráfica del \"plato volador\" a 8,000 o 9,000 pies de altura sobre las calles durangueñas. El aparato parece un doble como trunado, unido por sus bases que se mueve por algo parecido a la propulsión a chorro y que se desplaza cambiando de posición para aprovechar su fuerza motriz en la dirección deseada, motivo por el cual puede verse con diversas formas aparentes.—2. Concepción del señor Robles, Jr., dibujada por él mismo acerca de la forma real de los extraños dispositivos mecánicos.—3. Otro aspecto del plato volador.—4. El futuro ingeniero civil, Horacio Robles, Jr., retratado en nuestras oficinas de redacción después de informar acerca de sus observaciones del disco volador y de entregar las gráficas del mismo aparato logradas por él.\nLas Primeras Fotografías de un \"Plato Volador\", Logradas en Durango a Nueve mil Pies de Altura\nMexico, D. F., Jueves 16 de Marzo de 1950\nNumero 12,096"} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aspas y Helices\nFigura Nº 2.\nFigura Nº 3.\nFigura Nº 1.\nFigura Nº 4.\nFigura Nº 5."} {"doc_id":"7d8fa0165ae7f148","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Estabilidad\nGlobal-Conica y Semi-Global."} {"doc_id":"7ddd4d4df36d1c4d","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 740185\n\nSecret\n\n1948\n\nDATE CLOSED\n\nOffice, Chief\nArmy Field Forces\n\nSecret\n\nA. G. Files\n\nNW 91215\nDocId:34746269 Page 1"} {"doc_id":"7ddd4d4df36d1c4d","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FIFTH NAVAL DISTRICT\nNorfolk 11, Virginia\n\nRefer to:\nND5(32)/VZ1\nSerial 0430\n\n13 Dec 1948\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nFrom: Commandant, Fifth Naval District\nTo: Activities Indicated in Distribution List\n\nSubj: \"Flying Discs\" - Report of\n\nRef: (a) CNO Conf ltr Op-322V P16-3/QN, Serial 04422P32, dtd 4 November\n1948\n\n1. Reference (a) is quoted herewith for information and compliance:\n\n\" From: Chief of Naval Operations.\nTo: Commandants, All Naval Districts.\n\nSUBJECT: \"Flying Discs\" - Report of.\n\n1. The Director of Intelligence, U.S. Air Force has informed the Navy Department that a cycle of reappearance of \"Flying Discs\" is becoming apparent, and that the beginning of a new interval is imminent. They have requested that any such sightings be reported as quickly as possible, and that these phenomena be investigated.\n\n2. It is requested, therefore, that all stations be directed to report to the nearest Air Force command and to the Naval District Intelligence Office any reported sighting of \"Flying Discs\" or other unidentified aerial objects. It is desired, also, that photographic evidence of the phenomena be obtained whenever possible.\n\n3. DIO's will forward such information to the Chief of Naval Intelligence who will pass the information to the Director of Intelligence U.S. Air Force by the fastest means.\n\ns/ Thos. B. Inglis\nTHOS. B. INGLIS\nBy direction\"\n\ns/ R. C. Hudson\nR. C. HUDSON\nCHIEF OF STAFF\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDistribution List (Rev. 7/1/48)\n\nList 1A (only 1, 3, 9, 10, 11, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 27, 28, 36, 58, 60, 62) 1 copy each.\n2A (only 1, 3, 4, 16) 1 copy each.\n3A (only 5, 6, 13, 34, 35, 63, 64, 66) 1 copy each.\n6A 1 copy each.\n7A (only 1, 2, 10, 20) 1 copy each.\n85 copies.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nNW 91215\nDocId:34746269 Page 2"} {"doc_id":"7ddd4d4df36d1c4d","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"7ed09c556d50d22f","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UCNI\n\nPantex Unidentified Object Incident Report\n\nImage from Ground Surveillance Radar Tower\n\n(b)(3) (UCNI)\n\nUCNI\n\nPage 5 of 6"} {"doc_id":"7ed09c556d50d22f","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UCNI\n\nPantex Unidentified Object Incident Report\n\nSandia National Labs Enhanced Images of the Object\n\nUCNI\n\nPage 6 of 6"} {"doc_id":"7f9a687a64d878c8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nOn [REDACTED] 2025, at approximately 1700 hours [REDACTED] [WITNESS 1 (a senior US intelligence official)], [FEDERAL PARTNER 1] and [FEDERAL PARTNER 2], accompanied by [WITNESS 2 (a senior US intelligence official)], and two pilots from [STATE PARTNER ORGANIZATION], departed the [REDACTED] [OPERATIONS CENTER] ([COORDINATES]), [REDACTED] ([FACILITY]) main [REDACTED] area via a [STATE PARTNER ORGANIZATION] helicopter (call sign [CALL SIGN 1]) to conduct a daytime ariel search of the [MOUNTAIN RANGE NAME] west of [SITE CODE NAME] on [FACILITY]. Previous eyewitness reports from personnel who observed orbs/lights IVO [REDACTED] [COORDINATES]) cited hearing thuds as if something has fallen and hit the ground. (Note: Earlier that day the [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Office [REDACTED] completed a successful test of the [REDACTED] [REDACTED] at [SITE CODE NAME] ([COORDINATES]) on [FACILITY].\n\nAt 1751 hours [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1] spotted a large cavern entrance ([COORDINATES]) and conducted a short orbit of the location [REDACTED]\n\nAt approximately 2050 hours [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1] landed west of the [REDACTED] [REDACTED] mountains and dropped off [WITNESS 2] with [FEDERAL PARTNER 3] personnel. At 2052 hours [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1] headed toward [SITE CODE NAME] to refuel. A second helicopter ([STATE PARTNER ORGANIZATION] – [CALL SIGN 2]) briefly landed at [SITE CODE NAME] to await refueling but then lifted off and returned to the [REDACTED].\n\nAt 2141 hours [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1] lifted off from [SITE CODE NAME] and headed toward debris spotted by the Listening Post/Observation Post (LP/OP - [FEDERAL PARTNER 4] personnel using Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) and Night Vision Goggles (NVG)- position ([COORDINATES]) located approximately four miles east of [SITE CODE NAME] in the mountains [REDACTED] location ([COORDINATES])). [CALL SIGN 1] orbited the location while searching with NVGs (pilots) and the naked eye ([WITNESS 1]) with the aid of the helicopter's spotlight in near full darkness for several minutes with negative results.\n\nAt approximately 2149 hours, [CALL SIGN 1] departed the search location to return to base and received notification from LP/OP that [REDACTED] had [REDACTED] hits bearing [REDACTED], 4 miles out from their location. The JOC then provided coord ([COORDINATES]). [CALL SIGN 1] moved to intercept.\n\nAt 2202 hours [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1] arrived at the aforementioned coordinates and spotted a possible aircraft on the horizon moving away to the west. LP/OP confirmed the sighting then relayed they spotted an orb under FLIR and described as \"super-hot\" hovering at ground level before heading bearing [REDACTED] from LP/OP. LP/OP reported the orb was heading east and then south at a high rate of speed and then broke into two objects. LP/OP directed [CALL SIGN 1] to head south to [COORDINATES] to intercept.\n\nSECRET//NOFORN"} {"doc_id":"7f9a687a64d878c8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nAt 2207 hours [REDACTED] JOC reported five [MILITARY AIRCRAFT] from [REDACTED] were in the air space conducting a training mission.\n\nOnce on station, [CALL SIGN 1] searched the location with FLIR, NVG, and the naked eye but did not locate the orb. LP/OP reported the orb gained elevation, came within ten feet of [CALL SIGN 1] and then headed east to [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1] moved to intercept but LP/OP reported the orb continued southeast and estimated it to be past [ROAD NAME], some 20 miles from the current position at [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1], unable to match speed, broke off pursuit, however the co-pilot reported seeing under NVG something emerge from the two objects and then travel in a different direction and a high rate of speed.\n\nAt 2218 hours [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1] remained at [COORDINATES] awaiting instructions when the pilots (NVG) and [WITNESS 1] (naked eye) spotting a swarm of lights (too many to count) moving in all directions but generally located west of [REDACTED] and headed south. JOC relayed they contacted the [MILITARY AIRCRAFT] who were enroute to assist, eta two minutes. At 2227 hours [REDACTED], [CALL SIGN 1] lost visual of the swarm.\n\nAt approximately 2227 hours [REDACTED] (possible out of order), in proximity of [SITE CODE NAME] headed south, [WITNESS 1] (naked eye) and the pilots (NVG) spotted two large orbs appear in close proximity to [CALL SIGN 1] to the west and above the rotor disk. From the naked eye perspective, the two orbs appeared to flare up and remain stationary side by side. They appeared to be oval shaped, orange in color with a white or yellow center and emitting light in all directions. After a few seconds, a third orb flared up below the two, and then another one below that one until there were four or five in total below the original two. After a few seconds the orbs began to flare down in reverse order while appearing to be stationary until visual was lost.\n\nAt approximately 2228 hours [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1] - [WITNESS 1] (naked eye) and the pilots (NVG) spotted four or five orbs (similar to the orbs that were in close proximity to the helicopter) appear to the west over the mountains above the [MILITARY AIRCRAFT]. The orbs flared up one at a time in a horizontal formation and after approximately ten – fifteen seconds, flared down in the opposite order.\n\nAt approximately 2233 hours [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1] - [WITNESS 1] (naked eye) and the pilots (NVG) spotted a similar orb formation to the east in the direction of [NEARBY TOWN NAME]. The orbs flared up one at a time in a horizontal formation and after approximately ten – fifteen seconds, flared down in the opposite order and lost visual.\n\nAt approximately 2241 hours [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1] - [WITNESS 1] (naked eye) and the pilots (NVG) spotted a similar orb flare up west of [SITE CODE NAME] over the mountain. After several seconds the orb flared down and lost visual.\n\nSECRET//NOFORN"} {"doc_id":"7f9a687a64d878c8","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nAt 2249 hours [REDACTED] while positioned IVO [SITE CODE NAME], [CALL SIGN 1] - [WITNESS 1] (naked eye) and the pilots (NVG) spotted a swarm of lights moving in all directions west of [REDACTED] with three distinct orbs in a triangle formation. After several seconds the orbs flared down and lost visual.\n\nAt 2252 hours [REDACTED] while positioned approximately ten miles north of [SITE CODE NAME], [CALL SIGN 1] - [WITNESS 1] (naked eye) and the pilots (NVG) spotted five to six orbs flare up IVO [LOCAL TOWN] (east of [SITE CODE NAME]). The orbs flared up one at a time in a horizontal formation and after approximately ten seconds, flared down in the opposite order and lost visual.\n\nAt 2257 hours [REDACTED] while positioned approximately ten miles north of [SITE CODE NAME], [CALL SIGN 1] - [WITNESS 1] (naked eye) and the pilots (NVG) spotted four orbs flare up over the [MILITARY AIRCRAFT] as they descended to land at [REDACTED] [REDACTED]. The orbs flared up one at a time in a horizontal formation and after approximately ten seconds, flared down in the opposite order and lost visual.\n\nAt approximately 2306 hours [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] At 2316 hours [REDACTED] low on fuel, [CALL SIGN 1] returned to the [OPERATIONS CENTER].\n\nAt approximately 2320 hours [REDACTED] [CALL SIGN 1] headed southbound for the [OPERATIONS CENTER] and already in air-to air contact with [FEDERAL PARTER AIRCRAFT], passed each other as [FEDERAL PARTER AIRCRAFT] headed north toward [SITE CODE NAME].\n\n[WITNESS 1] Comments:\n\n[REDACTED] – Pilots indicated they were recording however many sightings were above the helicopter which was outside of the helicopters FLIR camera angle.\n\nSome things I could not see with the naked eye, but I recall the pilots calling out sightings.\n\nThe orbs appeared to break off from [CALL SIGN 1] and pursue the [MILITARY AIRCRAFT].\n\nSECRET//NOFORN"} {"doc_id":"80c3e2336f2882a2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 843014\nTOP SECRET\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nHeadquarters, U. S. Air Force\n4B-854 Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\nAll documents filed in numerical sequence according to Top Secret Control Number.\nTOP SECRET\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nTS CONT. NO. 2-5300 - 2-5399\nNov 48\nNW 90307\nDocId:34714985 Page 1"} {"doc_id":"80c3e2336f2882a2","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"2-5317\nT.S. Cont. #\nD.I.—Hq, USAF\nAFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\nCOVER SHEET\n*\n*\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM:\nDATE: 8 Nov 48\n*\nAFOIR-CO\nTYPE:\nTOP SECRET\nSUMMARY:\nExtracts from TT #1524,\nD/1, HQ. USAF vs A-2, USAFE\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\n*\nASGD BY\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nNO.\nc. TO: AFOIR\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE 8 Nov 48\n1. Submitted for information.\nNO. 1\n2. All items have been distributed\nto AFOAI branches.\n3. Item USAFE 14 has been distributed to CIA, AMC, +\narmament Intelligence Branch, DCS/M.\n4. Item USAFE 16 has been distributed to OIR-SR.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nCO-12\nd. TO BR. TO\nTO DIV. TO\nTO DIR/INT TO\nDOWN UP\nDOWN UP\nDOWN UP\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nAFOIP\nASST EXEC\nADMIN\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nASST EXEC\n10 Nov\nOIR-AA\nAFOIR\nOIR-CM\nEXECUTIVE\n8 Nov\nOIR-RC\nOAI-OA\nDIR/INT\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nAFOAI\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nOCI-IS\nOCI-RR\nAFOCI\nOCI-CI\n......\n......\nAction\n......\nCoordination\n......\n(376)\ne. DATE REC'D BR\nf. DISPATCH\nFILE\nACTION ASGD TO\nDATE\nDISPATCHED BY\nTO\nSIGNED\nDATE\nDATE DISPATCHED\n8-3477,AF\nNW 90307\nDocId:34714985 Page 2"} {"doc_id":"80c3e2336f2882a2","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nUSAFE 2 TT 1524 SECRET 4 Nov 48\n\nTo Gen Cabell\n\nWe now have one complete set of all reports prepared by special\nintelligence organization of the European Command from its conception to\npresent date. We are forwarding these reports for your inspection and\nfinal disposition. We are of the opinion that inspection of these reports\nwill lend weight to arguments for allocating Air Force funds to this\norganization. Advise caution in utilizing these reports as most of them\nwere forwarded as received.\n\n(END OF ITEM)\n\nSECRET\n\nNW 90307\nDocId:34714985 Page 3"} {"doc_id":"80c3e2336f2882a2","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUSAFE 10 TT 1524 CONFIDENTIAL 4 Nov 1948\nFrom OI OB\n\nFollowing report on unidentified aircraft sighting comes from 307th Bomb\nGroup which participated in operation daggar. Unidentified aircraft was\nsighted by three crews of the group at 1402Z 5 Sep 48 off west coast of Holland,\n5155N/0355E. Altitude of all aircraft was 30,000 feet. When first sighted\nthe unidentified A/C was cruising at a normal jet speed, heading 120 degrees.\nSoon after first seen, A/C began leaving smoke trails and condensation trails\naccompanied by sudden acceleration and then climb. Generall agreed by\nobservers that it was a single jet propelled A/C employing probably rocket\nassists with tremendous reserve power, more than normal curising speed for\njets of the 1947 variety. Never within identification range; its course\ndid not indicate its purpose.\nOur evaluation of the above: B-2.\n(END OF ITEM)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nNW 90307\nDocId:34714985 Page 4"} {"doc_id":"80c3e2336f2882a2","page":5,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"80c3e2336f2882a2","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nHe also knows of a Soviet-built radar set located near Kholomia Airfield (5 KM W of Airfield, near the town of Kholomia). This type set is called \"Redut\". He believes personnel of this set to be army, assigned to PVO, but is not certain. His regiment conducted flying cooperation exercises with the set, presumably to train the set operators, since the set was first located at Kholomia in Spring 1947. His aircraft, in October 1948, lost the set on such an exercise at a distance of 150 kilometers and altitude of 1200 meters. Following instructions, he then climbed to 3000 meters, when the set again picked him up. he states he believes this type set is standard throughout the PVO, and that he believes its maximum range to be 150 kilometers, because no training flights of greater distances were ever undertaken. Further details will be sought.\n\nAll TU-2 of 63 Regt are fitted with IFF type S. CH. (C-4), located in the tail of the aircraft and operated by a switch in the radio operator's compartment. Further, experiments with airborne radar (A tail warning device) were carried out in 1947 and TU-2 of his regiment. This equipment involved the installation of a small external array. Sets were removed after a few days of testing, but results were understood to have been satisfactory.\n\nOn the subject of Kholomia Airfield, this field is currently apparently simply a level pasture, 600 meters N/S by 1400 meters E/W, but a paved runway is being constructed outside the north boundary of the airfield. No details are known to subject, as work has just commenced. The airfield currently has no installations; aircraft are parked in the open, and fuel is brought directly to the aircraft from the town of Kholomia (7 kilometers to the W) by tank trucks.\n\nAnother interesting fact is the arrival of the TU-2 with only a crew of three, and without the dorsal turret machine gun in place (nor anyplace on the aircraft). Subject states that the air gunner sergeants who should occupy this fourth position are on duty with the regiment, but are engaged in fatigue details, and [REDACTED] rarely carried on training flights.\n\nSubject believes the TU-2 to be manufactured in a factory in Moscow, and it is noted that a plaque in the aircraft stated that it had been produced in Factory No. 19.\n\nA fuller report will shortly be underway, based on interrogation conducted so far, and many more details are expected to be obtained in the next week or two, with both pilot and navigator being interrogated.\n\n(BVD USFA-1)\n\nTOP SECRET"} {"doc_id":"80c3e2336f2882a2","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nUSAFE 16 TT 1524 SECRET 4 Nov 48\n\nCIC source reports that the Russians have ordered CSR Missions in foreign countries to purchase radar tubes in large quantities regardless of costs. Mission also instructed to purchase a complete radar set.\n\n(Eval C-3)\n\n(END OF ITEM)\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n31 March 2010\n\nICOD: 1 December 2009\n\nDIA-08-1003-019\n\nState of the Art and Evolution\nof High-Energy Laser Weapons\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nState of the Art and Evolution of High-Energy Laser\nWeapons\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 79\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nSummary ................................................................................ v\nIntroduction ............................................................................ 1\nBasic Attributes of Kinetic Energy and HEL Weapons ....................................... 1\nElements of an HEL weapon ............................................................. 2\nLaser Devices ........................................................................... 3\nLaser Fundamentals ..................................................................... 3\nChemical Lasers ........................................................................ 5\nSolid-State Lasers ...................................................................... 6\nRod and Slab Lasers .................................................................... 7\nFiber Lasers ........................................................................... 8\nUltra-Short Pulse Lasers ................................................................ 10\nFree-Electron Lasers ................................................................... 11\nBeam Control and Atmospheric Propagation of Laser Devices ............................... 12\nBrief History of DoD Laser Weapon Research ............................................. 16\nLaser-Material Interaction ............................................................... 20\nVulnerability of Spacecraft to Laser Radiation ............................................ 22\nProjection of Future HEL Weapon Capability ............................................. 23\nRecommendations ....................................................................... 25\nSources of Further Information ......................................................... 26\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Utility of KE and HEL Weapons ........................................... 2\nFigure 2. Elements of an HEL Weapon System ...................................... 3\nFigure 3. Basic Laser Concept ................................................... 4\nFigure 4. Cylindrical Gain Generator for HF Chemical Space Based Laser ............... 5\nFigure 5. Common Solid-State Lasers and Their Wavelengths ......................... 6\nFigure 6. Incoherent Combination of Single Mode Lasers at the Target ................. 9\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 7. Incoherent Combination of Single Mode Lasers in a Fiber Combiner ....... 9\nFigure 8. Free-Electron Laser Wiggler ........................................... 11\nFigure 9. Elements of the 2 kW FEL at Thomas Jeffereson National Accelerator\nFacility ............................................................................... 12\nFigure 10. HEL Weapon Basic Tracking and Pointion Controls .......................... 14\nFigure 11. SeaLite Beam Director ................................................ 14\nFigure 12. Typical Atmospheric Absorption and Scattering in the Infrared .......... 16\nFigure 13. Army Mobile Tactical Unit ............................................ 17\nFigure 14. Air Force Airborne Laser Laboratory ................................... 17\nFigure 15. Mid-Infared Advanced Chemical Laser .................................. 18\nFigure 16. MDA Airborne Laser in a Boeing 747-400F ............................. 19\nFigure 17. The Advanced Tactical Laser C-130 Aircraft ............................ 20\nFigure 18. Single Pulse Maximum Permissible Exposure ........................... 22\n\nTables\n\nTable 1. Laser Systems Irradiance Calculations ................................... 25\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nState of the Art and Evolution of High-Energy Laser\nWeapons\n\nSummary\n\nThe laser was invented in 1960, only 49 years ago, and (along with the light-emitting diode) has evolved into an essential part of our modern every-day life in ways that could not have been foreseen. On the military side, there have also been incredible advances in laser and beam control technologies but no deployment of any high-energy weapons. Many concepts have been developed and pursued, only to be discarded or deferred owing to technical immaturity, expected production cost, lack of apparent utility, or logistics concerns.\n\nThe most significant technical impediment to deployment may have been the large quantities of expensive and hazardous chemicals that were required by the only available high-average-power lasers. This is now changing with recent advances in electrically powered lasers (both solid-state and free-electron lasers). As these devices mature over the next few decades, they will enable practical military weapons at power levels ranging from kilowatts to megawatts. This evolution may be somewhat slowed or limited in the United States if there are policy concerns about the use of new types of weapons or about weaponization of space. As an example, the Department of Defense developed a microwave device for crowd control, called Active Denial, which has been shown to produce temporary pain without any injury. However, DoD was precluded from deploying it owing to policy (not legal) concerns. Other countries may not exhibit similar restraint, as evidenced by the open marketing of laser-blinding weapons despite a 1980 Geneva Convention prohibiting their development or use.\n\nSpace offers the ideal environment for laser beam propagation; there is no atmosphere to either attenuate or spread the beam. As a result, large distances could be bridged quickly, with range limited by the size of the transmitting telescope and the potential damage mechanisms limited primarily by the laser's output power. Initial spacecraft laser weapons are conceivable within the next 20 years, with the potential for follow-on growth in laser power and transmitting telescope size. Transmitting telescope size would be limited by the spacecraft size and competing demands for weight and volume. Laser power could grow to the megawatt range as solid-state and free-electron laser technology matures, but the major limitation to a spacecraft's weapon capability may prove to be its ability to generate and store the energy required by the laser and to store and dissipate the resultant waste heat.\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIntroduction\n\nThe purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the current state-of-the-art and potential evolution of megawatt (MW) class high-energy laser (HEL) weapons. Implications for space vehicles in or beyond earth orbit will be addressed.\n\nIt is rare today to find an individual who doesn't have some concept of a laser weapon. From Orson Wells's Martian invaders in War of the Worlds, who used them with chilling efficiency, to the now-classic Star Wars movies, the capabilities attributed to such devices have grown with time and with writers' imagination. While most fictional depictions of laser weapons (and many news stories) are without sound basis, these devices do offer the potential for a whole new class of weapons and capabilities which may complement (but not replace) existing kinetic energy (KE) weapons and electronic warfare.\n\nBASIC ATTRIBUTES OF KINETIC ENERGY AND HEL WEAPONS\n\nKE weapons (bullets, shells, missiles, bombs, and so forth) require a finite period of time to reach the target but are then able to destroy it instantly. They can deliver immense quantities of explosive energy and destroy large areas. This makes KE weapons most effective at engaging hardened, large, or stationary targets. Collateral damage concerns, such as a desired target next to a hospital, enemy forces near friendly forces, or a sniper target in a crowd can significantly limit the opportunity to use KE weapons. Randomly moving targets also present a challenge for KE weapons due to difficulties in predicting the target's location at the future time of arrival or in tracking the target with sufficient accuracy.\n\nHigh Energy Laser (HEL) weapons, by contrast, begin delivering the laser beam's energy to the target at the speed of light. However, they require a finite dwell time to accumulate enough thermal energy (heat) on the aim point to achieve the desired effect (similar to a blowtorch). The strength of an HEL weapon is its ability to precisely deliver a limited quantity of energy to a small spot with little collateral damage to nearby objects or people. The instantaneous measure of a focused laser beam's effectiveness is called \"irradiance\" and is measured in power per unit area over the laser spot (typically watts/cm2). The beam's ability to inflict damage, by heating during a time interval, is called \"fluence\" and is typically measured in joules/cm2. Fluence is simply irradiance × time and one joule is equal to one watt for one second.\n\nSpeed-of-light energy transfer, coupled with precision tracking, allows HEL weapons to efficiently engage softer targets which are highly maneuverable, only visible for short periods of time, or at extremely long range. Although the initial cost of a laser weapon might be high, the logistics trail is short and the cost per shot is comparatively inexpensive since the only major expendables are laser chemicals or electricity.\n\nFigure 1 compares the relative strengths and weaknesses of KE & HEL weapons for different classes of potential targets. Just as there is a wide variety of KE weapons (ranging from bullets to precision guided munitions to nuclear weapons) for different types of applications, one could envision a range of future HEL weapons at different power levels, wavelengths, weights, volumes, and costs which would be best suited for specific applications.\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nHEL and Kinetic Weapons offer complementary capabilities\n\nFigure 1. Utility of KE and HEL Weapons\n\nELEMENTS OF AN HEL WEAPON\n\nThe purpose of an HEL weapon system is to place and maintain the focused laser beam on a target aim point for sufficient time to cause the desired heating effect. To accomplish this, the weapon beam is generated by the laser device, then shaped and relayed to the input of a pointing telescope (Figure 2). Laser beam sensors and steering mirrors are required to maintain the HEL beam centered as it traverses the optical train. The pointing telescope, which typically sits on azimuth and elevation gimbals, then expands the beam to the diameter of its primary mirror and focuses it to the range of the target while an imaging system (which can use a separate telescope or share the transmitting telescope) acquires the target, tracks it, and points the transmitting telescope's beam at the desired aim point. If the HEL beam's propagation path from the weapon to the target includes the earth's atmosphere, it can have a significant deleterious effect. Absorption and scattering of the beam, which reduce its strength at the target, are caused by molecular constituents of the atmosphere and aerosols such as haze or dust. Additionally, atmospheric turbulence spreads the focused spot and further reduces its effectiveness. All of these factors must be taken into account when designing a laser weapon.\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 2. Elements of an HEL Weapon System\n\nLaser Devices\n\nLASER FUNDAMENTALS\n\nThe term \"Laser\" is an acronym for Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. It is a unique device that employs the quantum states of matter to store and convert energy into electromagnetic radiation. The resulting radiation is referred to as \"coherent,\" meaning it is single wavelength or \"monochromatic\" and highly focusable due to its well controlled phase. In its simplest form, any laser device can be viewed as an \"energy-conversion\" box with one input and two outputs. The input is energy, which can take a variety of forms (electricity, light, or a chemical reaction) depending on the specific laser, while the two outputs are a coherent beam and heat (Figure 3). Since the overall energy-conversion lasing process is considerably less than 100 percent efficient, significant waste heat is generated which must be removed from the laser. Inside the laser is a \"gain-medium\" which stores a fraction of the input energy in its atoms or molecules and then releases the energy at the laser's selected wavelength. The laser also contains \"resonator\" mirrors which repeatedly relay the beam back and forth through the gain medium to increase its energy level. The laser device functions as the optical equivalent of an electrical oscillator with the resonator optics providing the feedback. Different lasers, which use various materials as their gain medium, emit radiation at wavelengths ranging from the infrared through the visible spectrum and into the ultraviolet.\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 3. Basic Laser Concept\n\nThe principles behind the laser were first described by Basov and Prokhorov at the Soviet Lebedev Institute of Physics in 1952. The first concept demonstration was actually at microwave frequencies (24 GHz) in 1953 by Townes, Gordon, and Zeiger at Columbia University. They called their device a MASER for Microwave Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. The first working laser, initially called an \"Optical MASER,\" produced milliwatts of visible light using a ruby rod as the gain medium. This was done in 1960 by Theodore Maiman at Hughes Research Laboratories in California. Since then, many types of lasers have found uses in an extremely wide variety of applications ranging from everyday life (bar code readers, CD players, flashlights), to industry (cutters, welders, surveyors, levelers), to the military (range finders, precision guided munitions, dazzlers). These lasers have proven to be inexpensive when produced in large quantity, rugged, reliable, and safe.\n\nSince the earliest days of the laser, the Department of Defense (DoD) has conceptualized and led the development of high-average-power lasers for weapon applications. There have been many open literature reports of similar work in Russia, China, and other countries. Lasers currently exist in a wide variety of forms with many solids, liquids, gases or even electrons being used for a gain medium to produce beams over a wide range of wavelengths and power levels. However, only a small group of laser types have shown the potential to produce weapon level powers.\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCHEMICAL LASERS\n\nChemical lasers use a chemical reaction in gas or liquid to release the energy which produces their lasing. A reaction can be initiated with an electric current, by light from another source, or by simply mixing hypergolic chemicals. These lasers include familiar low power, sealed gas types such as helium-neon, argon, or krypton-ion and typically produce light in the visible or near infrared. Excimer lasers are another low average power sub-category of gas lasers. These use dimer molecules as the lasing medium, are generally electrically excited, and lase in the ultraviolet.\n\nTo-date, every laser which has been scaled to MW-class average power falls in the chemical category. They use large quantities of rapidly flowing chemicals to produce reactions which then release the required energy. The carbon dioxide laser (CO2 at 10.6 μm) was the first to be scaled to high power around 1970 followed by the deuterium-fluoride laser (DF at 3.8 μm) and its first cousin the hydrogen-fluoride laser (HF at 2.8 μm) in the mid-1970s. These devices lase in the far- to mid-infrared and depend on exciting vibrational and rotational states of the lasing molecules. CO2, DF, and HF lasers resemble rocket engines because they combust a fuel with an oxidizer. The DF laser ignites a mixture of nitrogen-trifluoride (NF3) with ethylene (C2H4) and then injects deuterium (an isotope of hydrogen) into the exhaust stream to produce the lasing molecule of deuterium-fluoride. This laser was the choice of the Navy and Army in the 1970's and 80's for tactical laser development while the HF laser was the choice of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) for their Space Based Laser development in the 1980's (Figure 4).\n\nFigure 4. Cylindrical Gain Generator for HF Chemical Space Based Laser\n\nThe newest chemical laser to be scaled to high power is the Chemical Oxygen Iodine Laser (COIL at 1.315 μm) which excites vibronic states (simultaneous change of vibrational and electronic quantum numbers) in monatomic iodine to achieve the near-infrared wavelength. COIL generates light in a more complex process which does not involve combustion but still releases considerable heat. Gaseous chlorine (Cl2) is mixed with a destabilized hydrogen-peroxide (H2O2) mixture to produce an excited oxygen molecule and water. The oxygen molecule is then combined with iodine (I2) in a reaction which separates the iodine molecule into monatomic iodine and transfers the oxygen molecule's energy to it. Iodine then becomes the lasing atom. This near-infrared laser was the device of choice for the Missile Defense Agency's Airborne Laser program.\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTypically in a chemical laser, 10 to 20 percent of the energy released in the chemical reaction will result in lasing while the other 80 to 90 percent becomes heat. Fortunately in a flowing gas laser, the heat can be easily removed from the resonator region of the gain generator by the exhaust gas. It is this efficient heat removal mechanism which has allowed chemical lasers to be scaled to such high average powers. If a MW-class laser were required today or in the next few years, chemical lasers provide the only available options. Because they use large quantities of hazardous chemicals and need refueling, this type of laser is not a preferred choice by the military.\n\nThe physics and scaling of chemical lasers such as DF, HF, and COIL are well understood and, in principal, they could be scaled to power levels significantly beyond the MW level. However, due to the maturity of these technologies, only marginal further efficiency improvements are likely. As a result, the quantity of chemicals which must be stored and consumed for a laser beyond ~ 10 MW would make the concept highly impractical for space-based applications and extremely cumbersome for ground based lasers. Additionally, the atmospheric degradation of a laser beam propagating from ground to space makes these wavelengths impractical at power levels beyond 10 MW.\n\nSOLID-STATE LASERS\n\nThe earliest and perhaps the most diverse laser category is the solid-state laser which uses specific atoms or molecules as a lasing gain medium (called the dopant) uniformly suspended in transparent crystalline or ceramic glass (called the host). For example, the familiar Nd:YAG laser uses a few percent of neodymium (Nd) atoms as the dopant suspended in a crystalline mix of yttrium, aluminum, and garnet (YAG). Figure 5 shows some of the many combinations of solid-state laser dopants and hosts in use or being developed today.\n\nWavelength (microns)\n0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0\nVisible Near Infrared\nTi:Sapphire\nAlexandrite\nNd: YAG\nYb:YAG\nRuby\nRhodamine\nNd:YAG X2\nEr: YAG\nEr:Yb:YAG\nTm:\nHo:\nHosts can include:\nRuby = Al2O3::Cr\nSapphire = Al2O3\nYAG = Yttrium, Aluminum, Garnate = Y3Al5O12\nLuAG = Lutetium, Aluminum, Garnate = Lu3Al5O12\nYittira = Y2O3\n\nFigure 5. Common Solid-State Lasers and Their Wavelengths\n\nA major advantage of solid-state lasers for mobile or portable applications is that they only require electricity to power them although cooling is also needed. For example, a 5 second run of a 15 percent efficient 100 kW laser would require less than one kilogram of gasoline or diesel fuel. No hazardous chemicals are needed and an\n\n6\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nextremely deep magazine becomes possible. These attributes combine to make solid-state lasers very attractive for both civilian and military applications.\n\nROD AND SLAB LASERS\n\nThe earliest solid-state laser mediums took the shape of a cylindrical rod and were optically pumped with flashlamps. Higher power solid-state lasers were later made using larger rectangular slabs since the amount of laser power which can be extracted increases with the lasing medium's volume. Additionally, rectangular geometries allowed more efficient optical pumping and cooling. Newer solid-state lasers were pumped with semiconductor diodes which emitted light more efficiently than flashlamps and at wavelengths which were more useable by the gain medium. Like chemical lasers, they are considerably less than 100 percent efficient overall and generate heat. However, solid-state lasers accumulate heat in the glass lasing medium where the resulting thermal stresses can distort the lasing beam enough to render it useless or even crack the glass. Since the glass-based medium is a poor thermal conductor, it is difficult to remove heat. Thus, thermal management of the gain medium imposes fundamental limits to increasing the average power in a single slab laser. Much of the recent research in slab lasers has focused on developing innovative ways to remove this heat or to combine beams from many smaller slabs.\n\nIn order to combine laser beams in a fashion which retains good overall beam quality, the wavelength, phase, and polarization of the individual beams must be tightly controlled. This process is referred to as \"coherent combination\" or \"phasing\" and results in the maximum irradiance (watts/cm2) by minimizing the focused spot area over which the total laser power is spread. If an application (such as welding or machining) depends more on total power than on minimizing spot size, then coherent combination is not needed and the laser beams can be separately focused to the same spot with no regard to differences in wavelength, phase, or polarization. This technique is called \"incoherent combination.\"\n\nMajor progress has been made in slab laser development during the last few years. Northrop-Grumman, under a DoD-funded program, recently produced 100 kW with good beam quality. This laboratory device, called the Joint High-Power Solid-State Laser (JHPSSL), uses a single Nd:YAG master-oscillator that feeds parallel, well-phased Nd:YAG power amplifiers. Brute-force power scaling, well beyond 100 kW, seems relatively straight-forward using approaches available today. Unfortunately, as more lasers are combined the overall beam quality will deteriorate while the parts-count, complexity, and fragility increases. This makes either militarization at the 100 kW level or laboratory scaling to/beyond the MW level unlikely in the near-term with this approach. However, given the recent rate of progress and the relative immaturity of the technology, it would be reasonable to expect further major technological breakthroughs in thermal management and phasing, cheaper/more powerful pump diodes (the major cost today), and far more rugged engineering. These improvements could be expected to yield affordable, rugged, militarily useful MW-class slab laser systems with reasonable beam quality within the next 20 years. Much of the relevant research is occurring outside of the United States.\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFIBER LASERS\n\nFiber lasers are also solid-state lasers but are frequently considered separately due their many differences in implementation. They are made of the same materials listed in Figure 4 and lase at the same wavelengths. A fiber laser can be visualized as a rod laser which has been stretched many meters with a resulting diameter about the size of a human hair. The fundamental reason is to improve heat dissipation. The ratio of a fiber's surface area to its volume is much greater than a rod or slab and the distance which heat must travel to the edge of the lasing medium is reduced by orders of magnitude. The lasing fiber is surrounded by a concentric, larger diameter undoped fiber into which pump light is injected (usually at the ends) and then allowed to leak into the lasing fiber along the entire length. Fiber lasers are manufactured or \"pulled\" in much the same way as conventional optical communications fibers. Because the fibers are so thin, the power which can be generated in any one lasing fiber before the onset of damage is currently quite limited. New approaches to injecting the pump light and controlling the laser beam as it is generated or amplified are occurring almost daily. Fibers have been constructed using multiple cores, photonic crystals and air spaces in order to increase the power of individual fiber lasers with good beam quality and in ways to combine the beams.\n\nThe smallest diameter fiber lasers, which produce single mode beams with very good wavelength control and stable polarization, have demonstrated a few hundred watts and are currently thought to have a damage threshold upper bound of about 10 kW. Small numbers of these beams have been coherently combined using techniques which match wavelength, phase and polarization of each fiber laser in the cluster. The bandwidths of these laser/amplifier chains must be extremely narrow (<< 1 GHz) to maintain polarization and to then be coherently phased to about 01. λ rms. It remains to be seen how much total power can be generated with good beam quality and what are the fundamental limits to coherent combining. Phasing research into mechanical techniques which use deformable mirrors and passive approaches which use stimulated Raman scattering are both being aggressively pursued. These combining techniques, when applied to fiber lasers, are in their infancy and offer the potential for weapons with fairly long tactical ranges.\n\nOther single mode fiber lasers have been produced which generated as much as 5 kW. Although their outputs are of good beam quality, they lase over a wavelength band which is too broad to maintain polarization and cannot be coherently combined. However, these types of beams can be combined incoherently by individually focusing them onto the same spot (Figure 6), similar to incoherent combination of slab laser beams or by physically splicing the output fibers of the individual lasers onto a larger undoped fiber (Figure 7) which can accommodate the higher total power.\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 6. Incoherent Combination of Single Mode Lasers at the Target\nPointing Telescope\nsingle mode lasers\n\nPointing Telescope\nle\nSingle mode lasers\n\nFigure 7. Incoherent Combination of Single Mode Lasers in a Fiber Combiner\n\nThis larger fiber does not maintain the beam quality of the individual laser beams and results in performance roughly equivalent to separately focusing the beams onto a single spot. For example, seven individual fibers have been combined into a larger fiber to produce a single beam with a beam quality of about 6 times the diffraction limit and\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n25 to 50 fibers have been combined into an even larger fiber with a resultant output power of 50 kW and an effective beam quality of about 30. Highly reliable commercial welders and cutters are made today with fiber lasers which combine beams by splicing laser fibers together to increase output power. Some of these devices operate at a reported wall plug to light-out efficiency > 30 percent but these numbers do not include any power required for cooling. As a weapon, these off-the-shelf lasers could produce useful beams for short distances.\n\nA significant advantage of fiber lasers is their inherent ruggedness when compared to slab or rod lasers. Most of the optical functions (such as wavelength and polarization control, beam splitters and combiners) which are required to produce a high-power beam with good beam quality can be integrated into the fibers while slab laser systems require discrete components which must be kept clean and held in mechanical alignment.\n\nGiven the immaturity and rate of advance of fiber lasers today, it is impossible to predict where they will go. Current power scaling research has been centered on Yb:YAG and Nd:YAG fibers at 1 μm with limited effort at 1.5 μm and 2 μm. Although lagging the maturity of 1 μm fibers, they offer potential for increased eye safety.\n\nIf the maturation process continues as it has, fiber lasers will offer the best promise for high power and good beam quality with inherent ruggedness and reliability. Militarized devices at the 50 kW to 100 kW should be available within the next 15 years and it's not difficult to imagine MW systems within 20 to 30 years.\n\nULTRA-SHORT PULSE LASERS\n\nUltra-Short Pulse (USP) lasers, sometimes called femtosecond (fs) lasers, produce pulses of light shorter than 1 picosecond (10-12 second). Some USP lasers have produced pulses less than 10 fs which is a length of 3 microns and equivalent to only a few cycles of visible light (by comparison, a human hair is about 100 microns in diameter). They were developed in the 1970s using long pulse lasers to illuminate chemical dyes which then produced the short pulses; today USP lasers employ slabs such as Titanium:Sapphire or a variety of fibers and table-top size devices are commercially available. Although the average power of these devices is typically sub-watt, the short pulses result in peak powers which can range from a terawatt (1012 watts) to a petawatt (1015 watts). The extremely high power contained in very short pulses has proven useful for precision machining, drilling tiny holes, and selective material removal in a wide variety of materials. In addition to commercial machining applications, medical uses such as eye surgery and cancer cell destruction have been developed. When propagated in the atmosphere, these ultra short pulses do not obey the usual laws of diffraction spreading and can (under certain circumstances) remain tightly focused over long distances. This technology remains in its infancy and research is ongoing to increase average power (generally with a higher pulse rate), to better understand the physics of USP propagation, and to explore material interactions with USP. Much of the USP research today is found in world-wide academic institutions. Other than the potential for inflicting sensor damage, the military potential of these devices is yet to be determined.\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFREE-ELECTRON LASERS\n\nFree-electron lasers (FELs) are unique in that they are not limited to lasing only at specific wavelengths dictated by the characteristics of a specific solid, liquid, or gaseous gain medium. FELs use a stream of \"free\" (unbound to atoms) electron bunches, moving at almost the speed of light, to provide the lasing medium. These short bunches of electrons are generated by a photocathode and accelerated by an RF linear accelerator which is powered by klystron tubes. The relativistic electron bunches are then passed through an alternating-polarity set of magnets, called a \"wiggler\" or \"undulator\" (Figure 8) which transversely accelerates the electrons and converts a small fraction of the electron bunches' energy into a coherent optical energy.\n\n[Figure 8 diagram: Injected electron beam micropulse, Output radiation, Spent electron beam, λw, λr]\n\nFigure 8. Free-Electron Laser Wiggler\n\nResonator optics on each end of the wiggler repeatedly reflect the optical bunches back through the wiggler to increase their strength. The lasing wavelength can be chosen by proper design of the wiggler and selection of the electron beam's energy. Figure 9 is a diagram of a 2 kW infrared FEL built by the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility. The highest average power FEL to-date is 10 kW.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Figure 9 diagram: Helium Refrigerator, Optical System, IR Wiggler, Controls, RF Power, Injector, Linac, Beam Transport, 10 m]\n\nFigure 9. Elements of the 2 kW FEL at Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility\n\nLike chemical lasers, FELs have the potential to produce megawatt class average power. Unlike chemical lasers, FELs do not rely on potentially hazardous chemical reactions to generate a beam but they do require an electrically powered RF linear accelerator which is cooled to superconducting temperatures by a large refrigerator. Precise control of many megawatts of circulating relativistic electron beam is also needed. Many large RF linear accelerators have been built around the world for research purposes but all are laboratory devices. A small particle accelerator has been ruggedized and flown in space but never used operationally in a military environment. It remains to be seen if the significant technical issues associated with average power scale-up can be resolved in the laboratory and then engineered to function in a military environment such as on-board a ship.\n\nBeam Control and Atmospheric Propagation of Laser Devices\n\nReferring back to Figure 2, the beam control system includes that portion of the weapon system which generates the HEL beam inside the laser gain generator, relays and aligns it through the optical train, expands it using the pointing telescope, and then focuses it at the range of the target. It also contains the sensors and trackers which acquire the target and hold it stably in the field of view. Since the HEL beam's spot on the target is generally much smaller than the target, the beam control system must identify the desired aim point on the target and place the HEL beam there for a sufficient duration to inflict damage. If wavefront sensors and deformable mirrors are used to improve the laser's beam quality (referred to as \"local loop\" adaptive optics) or to compensate for atmosphere distortion (referred to as \"target loop\" adaptive optics), then they are also part of the beam control system. If the propagation path is\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ncompletely in the vacuum of space, there is obviously no need for target loop adaptive optics.\n\nThe measure of a beam control system's performance is its ability to maximize the HEL beam's average irradiance (watts/cm2) in the focused spot on the aim point and maintain it there while sufficient fluence (watts/cm2 x time or joules/cm2) is accumulated. The total power in this focused spot is typically about one-half of the laser's output power further reduced by losses in the beam control system's optical train and the atmosphere.\n\nThe laser beam's spot size on the target has many contributors. Optical diffraction establishes the spot's minimum area at approximately (Rλ/D)2 where R is the range to the target, λ is the laser beam's wavelength and D is the diameter of the pointing telescope. Improvement can be only achieved by reducing the range to the target, using a laser with shorter wavelength or increasing the pointing telescope's size. This ideal (diffraction limited) spot area, is unachievable in a real system. Additional contributors to the actual spot area include a less-than-perfect laser beam (beam quality greater than one), mechanical jitter of the beam control system from the tracker, the alignment systems, or base motion disturbance and atmospheric distortions from turbulence or thermal blooming. Each of these contributors to the laser beam spot's area serve to reduce the irradiance by spreading the laser power over a larger area.\n\nFigure 10 is a cartoon of the gimbaled portion of a beam control system and is used to illustrate basic servo control functions. A tracking telescope and optical sensor are mounted on the elevation over azimuth gimbal. Their purpose is to generate an electronic image of the target and send it to the tracker. This tracker is a special-purpose computer which then processes the target image, identifies the desired aim point and measures the angle between it and the optical boresight of the telescope. Its output is a command to the gimbals to rotate until the optical axis of the tracking telescope is following the target and pointing at the aim point. If the gimbals are mounted on a moving or vibrating platform, these disturbances introduce additional tracking errors. Unlike target motion, this base motion disturbance can be directly measured using gyros and accelerometers which are attached to the telescope. This package, called an Inertial Reference Unit (IRU), provides an additional command to the gimbals which stabilizes the telescope and improves the tracker's ability to measure target motion errors. The HEL, shown simply in this cartoon as a box, provides the weapon beam to a pointing telescope which is then mechanically boresighted (optical axis made parallel) to the tracking telescope. Finally, the range to the target must be measured so that a parallax correction can be applied to the pointing telescope. This slightly tilts its optical axis to intersect the tracking telescope's optical axis at the range of the target and thus place the HEL beam on the aim point.\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Figure 10 diagram: Tracker, Stabilization Electronics, Mount drive, Gimbal, sensor, θ error, θ target, θ HEL, θ sensor, El, Az, gyro, HEL]\n\nFigure 10. HEL Weapon Basic Tracking and Pointing Controls\n\nThe concept described above and illustrated in Figure 10 was used for beam control systems until the 1980s. At that point, there was a desire for higher performance systems using larger pointing telescopes but with lower jitter. This conflicting set of requirements (more massive telescopes and higher structural resonant frequencies) was first resolved in the SeaLite Beam Director (SLBD) shown in Figure 11. Instead of attaching the IRU to the pointing and tracking telescopes then attempting to mechanically stabilize them, the IRU was loosely mounted inside the pointing telescope. Using an optical reference attached to the IRU, its measurement of base motion disturbance was relayed to the SLBD's optical alignment sensors which commanded small fast steering mirrors to stabilize the HEL beam. The large telescope was then allowed to experience the base motion disturbance even though the HEL beam passing through it was stabilized.\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe lower atmosphere is a difficult medium through which to propagate a laser beam. The molecules which make up the atmosphere and the aerosols which are suspended in it can scatter and absorb light, reducing the number of photons which arrive at the target. These effects are collectively referred to as \"atmospheric extinction.\" Atmospheric ducting can bend the laser beam (this causes mirages), and atmospheric turbulence or thermal blooming (explained later) can enlarge the spot. These effects combine to reduce the beam's irradiance (measured in watts/cm2) on the target and its effectiveness. Some are almost independent of wavelength while others can vary dramatically with small changes in wavelength. As a result, the wavelength for a laser weapon which operates in the lower atmosphere must be carefully chosen.\n\nScattering occurs when photons strike molecules or aerosols in the atmosphere and are reflected away from the target direction. This effect is commonly observed in haze or fog but always exists, even in the clearest of skies. For example, as much as 50 to 75 percent of a laser beam's energy can be lost over a 10 km lower atmosphere path on a fairly clear day. Within reasonable limits, this reduction in photons reaching the target can be accommodated by increasing the laser power or reducing the range to the target. The losses due to scattering vary quite slowly with changes in wavelength; longer (infrared) wavelengths are less affected than shorter (visible) as can be seen from the green curve in Figure 12.\n\nAbsorption occurs when molecules or aerosols in the atmosphere absorb some of the photons. This phenomenon, caused by resonant interaction, is very strongly dependent on wavelength and can vary by orders of magnitude with wavelength changes of a fraction of a micron (red curve in Figure 12).\n\nExtinction (the sum of absorption and scattering) is shown by the yellow curve in Figure 12 and for a low-power laser, there is no apparent difference as both effects simply reduce the number of photons which strike the target. However, if enough energy is absorbed in the laser beam's path (when using a high-power laser), it heats slightly which causes a distortion and defocusing of the laser beam. This effect is called thermal blooming and can be a significant limit on the performance of a lower atmosphere based MW-class laser system. It was a key reason (beyond the desire to eliminate chemicals) why the Navy abandoned development of DF chemical laser weapons for self-defense where thermal blooming is at its worst. One can see from Figure 12 that wavelengths around 1 μm, 1.2 μm, 1.6 μm and 2.2 μm offer the lowest absorption windows. Unfortunately, no MW-class lasers existed at those wavelengths and no candidates were apparent. For this reason, the Navy began the development of FEL technology which can be tuned to any desired optical or infrared wavelength.\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Figure 12 chart: Typical Atmospheric Absorption and Scattering in the Infrared, plotting Extinction, 1/km against Wavelength, μ; legend: Total Extinction, Total Scattering, Total Absorption; labels: YAG 1.06μ, COIL 1.315μ, HF overtone 1.4μ, HF 2.8μ, MIRACL 3.5 - 4.0μ]\n\nFigure 12. Typical Atmospheric Absorption and Scattering in the Infrared\n\nBrief History of DoD Laser Weapon Research\n\nThe Department of Defense began funding research in high energy lasers soon after the invention of the laser in 1960 when it was thought that they might (if scalable to high power) have tremendous impact on how wars were fought. The Advanced Research Projects Agency led the way with studies on the use of lasers for strategic applications, such as anti-satellite and anti-ICBM, while each of the services began looking at more modest tactical applications and began building one-of-a-kind demonstrators. By the mid-1970's, the Army had placed a 50 kW carbon-dioxide (CO2) laser with a 40 cm beam director in a tracked vehicle called the Mobile Tactical Unit (MTU) and had shot down small drone aircraft. The Air Force placed a larger CO2 laser in a KC-135 (the Airborne Laser Laboratory or ALL) and, by the early 1980's, had used it to shoot down air-to-air missiles such as the AIM-9. See Figures 13 and 14.\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Photographs: Army Mobile Tactical Unit; Air Force Airborne Laser Laboratory]\n\nFigure 13. Army Mobile Tactical Unit Figure 14. Air Force Airborne Laser Laboratory\n\nIn 1973, a new chemical laser technology, based on deuterium fluoride (DF), was determined to be scalable to high power at mid-infrared wavelengths which propagate far better in the atmosphere than CO2 laser beams. The Navy and ARPA jointly built a multi-hundred-kW class laser and mated it with a 70 cm beam director. In March 1978, this integrated system succeeded destroying operational TOW anti-tank missiles in flight.\n\nThe Navy then used this technology to produce the nation's first MW-class HEL weapon test bed. The Mid-InfraRed Advanced Chemical Laser (MIRACL, Figure 15) and the SeaLite Beam Director (SLBD, Figure 11) were installed and integrated at White Sands Missile Range in the mid-1980s and used for experiments by the Department of Defense. Subsonic drones and multi-mach missiles as well as strapped down ICBM boosters were among the many targets successfully engaged.\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Photograph: Mid-Infared Advanced Chemical Laser]\n\nFigure 15. Mid-Infared Advanced Chemical Laser\n\nIn 1983, President Reagan gave his \"Star Wars\" speech which resulted in the initiation of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) and the start of a very ambitious set of HEL technology programs which peaked at a billion dollars per year. These efforts produced significant advances but did not result in the fielding of any weapons or major demonstration systems. By the mid-1990s, SDI (then the Missile Defense Agency) had terminated almost all of their HEL programs to better focus on missile development. The sole surviving MDA HEL program is the Airborne Laser (ABL) which has accounted for $200M to $500M/yr over the last decade. Its purpose is to place a MW-class chemical oxygen-iodine laser (COIL) system in a Boeing 747-400F (Figure 16) to demonstrate boost phase intercept of ICBMs and IRBMs.\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Photograph: MDA Airborne Laser in a Boeing 747-400F]\n\nFigure 16. MDA Airborne Laser in a Boeing 747-400F\n\nAlso in the mid-1990s, the Navy concluded that the DF laser wavelengths would not propagate adequately for use as weapons at-sea and began the development of free-electron laser technology to open more favorable propagation opportunities in the near-infrared wavelength region. To-date, FEL technology has been demonstrated at the 10 kW average power level and Navy-funded scale up continues with an ultimate goal at the MW-class.\n\nCurrently, all three services are developing solid-state slab and fiber laser technologies to support modest size, near-term, 100 kW-class weapons. These should be capable of engaging short range tactical targets such as UAVs, rockets, artillery, mortars, and swarming boats. The Air Force and the Special Operations Command (SOCOM) installed and are testing a chemical laser weapon system test-bed in a C-130, called the Advance Tactical Laser, to evaluate the utility of a laser addition to the AC-130J gunship (Figure 17).\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Photograph: The Advanced Tactical Laser C-130 Aircraft]\n\nFigure 17. The Advanced Tactical Laser C-130 Aircraft\n\nLaser-Material Interaction\n\nLaser radiation, with the exception of ultra-short pulse, damages materials by rapidly depositing heat on the target's surface. The field of laser effects/lethality studies this interaction at levels ranging from basic energy transfer physics to how specific military targets (such as missiles or mortar shells) could be defeated. The interaction of a laser beam with typical target materials such as metal, ceramic or fiberglass can vary significantly with parameters such as laser wavelength, irradiance level, material surface preparation and airflow. A material's hardness to laser radiation is frequently described using the parameter \"W\" in units of joules/cm3. This is a measure of the total energy (in joules) required to melt or remove one cubic cm of material under the specific conditions of the test. Over the past three decades, a wide variety of materials have been tested using a CO2, DF and (more recently) Nd:YAG lasers. Although specific results are usually classified, general observations can be offered about typical material classes used in aircraft and spacecraft.\n\nA wide variety of metals are used for applications such as missile skins, pressurized fuel tanks, electronics enclosures, and structural members. Laser coupling can vary quite widely, from a few percent to almost 100 percent, depending on the laser wavelength, type of metal, surface preparation, and temperature. If not under structural load, failure is usually from complete melt-through. If the metal piece is under aerodynamic load or is part of a pressure vessel, failure will typically occur from crack initiation and propagation well before complete burn-through. Airflow is beneficial, providing melt removal and aerodynamic loads. The total energy which would cause a metal plate or pressure vessel to fail is thickness dependent in a fairly linear fashion.\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAdvanced airframe structures, pressure vessels and radar domes are frequently fabricated using cut glass fibers or whole fiberglass cloth layers which are impregnated with epoxy resin. These materials typically fail through a combination of thermal ablation of the epoxy and delamination. Like metals, if the piece is under aerodynamic load or is part of a pressure vessel, failure will typically occur before complete burn-through although crack initiation and propagation is less likely due to the residual strength of the fiberglass cloth after the epoxy is removed. Also, like metals the energy required for penetration is thickness dependent.\n\nCeramic materials, similar in composition to common Corning Ware, are routinely used in high temperature applications such as radomes for multi-mach air-to-air missiles or engine components. Although designed to handle heat when absorbed slowly, it will fracture and shatter if thermally shocked at moderate irradiance levels. Due to the poor thermal conductivity of ceramic materials, a thick piece of ceramic will shatter at almost the same irradiance and fluence levels as a much thinner piece.\n\nA discussion of laser-material interaction requires background information on the hazards of eye damage from laser radiation. There is a popular misconception that there are \"eye safe\" laser wavelengths in the infrared. The reality is that any wavelength in the UV, visible or infrared can damage the eye or skin. The damage mechanisms and damage thresholds, however, are a function of the laser's wavelength, pulse length and pulse energy (if pulsed) or average irradiance (if continuous). Laser wavelengths in the UV, visible and near infrared out to about 1.2 μm are the most dangerous. These wavelengths pass easily through the cornea and ocular fluid and are then focused on the retina where individual rods and cones can easily be permanently destroyed. This damage leaves the person with localized blind spots in the eye's field of view. Infrared wavelengths from about 1 μm to about 1.5 μm pass through the cornea but are absorbed by the eye's ocular fluid which results in localized heating. The damage threshold in this wavelength range is considerably higher than for retinal damage but in extreme cases the eye can be destroyed. Infrared radiation at wavelengths longer than about 1.5 μm is absorbed by the cornea and results in scarring similar to cataracts. Although it requires considerably more energy to damage the cornea than the retina, eye and skin safety at these wavelengths cannot be ignored. There are detailed ANSI standards which establish the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) as a function of wavelength and pulse/continuous beam format. Figure 18 provides an example of single pulse MPE values for a variety of wavelengths.\n\n21"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCorneal Exposure (Joules/cm2) vs Time (seconds) chart with legend: ▲ Visible, ● Near I R. Curve labels: 500 - 700 nm, 1.05 μm to 1.15 μm, 1.2 μm to 1.4 μm, 475 nm, 400 - 450 nm, 400 - 700 nm.\n\nFigure 18. Single Pulse Maximum Permissible Exposure\n\nVulnerability of Spacecraft to Laser Radiation\n\nMan-made objects in space, whether in earth-orbit or beyond and manned or unmanned, have attributes which lead to unique laser radiation vulnerabilities:\n\n• Whole-body vulnerability - Spacecraft operate in a delicate thermal equilibrium which requires maintenance of an overall, long-term temperature fairly close to 70 °F for the survival of electronics and personnel. They are heated by absorbed solar radiation, onboard electronics, mechanical and propulsion systems, internal heating systems, internal cooling systems, and any personnel on-board. Because of the surrounding vacuum, black-body radiation and material ejection are the only available methods of removing heat. If laser radiation were to permanently alter the solar absorption or black-body emission characteristics (referred to as the α/ε ratio) of a significant portion of the spacecraft's external surface, this thermal balance could be destroyed with slow, but catastrophic results. This damage could conceivably be inflicted rapidly from a large earth-based laser weapon, if the spacecraft were in earth orbit, or inflicted more slowly by a smaller laser weapon which was onboard a much closer spacecraft.\n\n• Alternately, if a large earth-based laser system were to flood-load a spacecraft with a total power of megawatts for a few minutes (the typical duration of a low-earth orbit pass over a fixed location on earth), the spacecraft could potentially be heated to the point of failure.\n\n22"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Component vulnerability – All spacecraft have essential components which are exposed and potentially susceptible to laser radiation. Solar panels, from either the front or back, could be damaged or shorted. Cabling among the solar panels and between the spacecraft and the panels could be damaged. If the mechanism which keeps the solar panels pointed at the sun were damaged, then the panels couldn't be rotated and would lose efficiency. Similarly, antennas used for communications or navigation are susceptible along with their RF/power cables and the mechanisms which keep them pointed. Many spacecraft use optical sensors to locate stars, the sun, or the earth's horizon for navigation or attitude determination. The loss of any of these types of sensors could significantly affect the spacecraft and could be accomplished fairly easily by a medium-to-large earth-based laser weapon if the spacecraft were in earth orbit or by a smaller laser system which was onboard another spacecraft.\n\n• Structural penetration – A unique vulnerability of manned spacecraft is the requirement to maintain a suitable internal atmosphere. If the pressure-vessel portion of the spacecraft were penetrated, even in a small area, it could prove fatal.\n\nThe design and operation of any spacecraft should consider these vulnerabilities if damage from laser radiation is a concern. In addition to thermal modeling and careful design/shielding, candidate components, materials, and surface treatments could be tested for laser radiation susceptibility in government laboratories or independently by purchasing commercial lasers.\n\nProjection of Future HEL Weapon Capability\n\nChemical Lasers - Once the physical processes were reasonably well understood and determined to be scalable, MW-class chemical laser systems were quickly achieved by the late-1970s and still remain the sole source of that power level. Since then, the technology has matured which resulted in marginal efficiency improvements with very low probability major additional breakthroughs in this area. There are no first-principles reasons why output powers could not have been brute-force scaled upward by another decade using larger gain generators but a few practical reasons (in addition to cost) precluded that happening:\n\n• Efficient atmospheric propagation of 10+ MW chemical laser beams would have required 10+ meter pointing telescopes which are unreasonable for any mobile or portable (including ships) military applications.\n\n• The only possible military applications which don't suffer atmospheric propagation limitations are space-based however the weight, volume and consumption rate of chemicals would cause this to also become unreasonable and unaffordable.\n\n• There were better wavelength choices (and potential laser types) for conceivable non-military applications such as power beaming to the moon or spacecraft in earth orbit and laser assisted propulsion of spacecraft.\n\nSolid-State and Free-Electron Lasers - The current (and probably foreseeable future) thrust in laser development and power scaling should be expected in the area of electrically powered lasers. This will probably be true whether the laser system is earth-based or space-based. These include solid-state (slab & fiber) as well as FELs.\n\n23"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe reasons are that they avoid separate (and usually hazardous) fuels to carry/refuel and allow propagation at wavelengths that are favorable for use from the earth or in space. In addition to significant progress in compact, rugged, reliable and efficient laser systems for spacecraft, major developments in energy generation and storage will be needed. These lasers might be expected to have an overall \"wall plug\" efficiency of 25 percent, which requires at least four times the laser output power in prime power to generate the laser beam. A MW solid-state laser would require at least 4 MW of electrical power while lasing. If a low duty-cycle were allowable, much of the required lasing energy could be accumulated from a smaller prime-power source and stored in batteries, capacitors or flywheels. In addition to the energy required to support lasing, the residual energy (3 MW from a 25 percent efficient MW laser) in the form of heat must be stored and then removed from the spacecraft.\n\nSolid-state lasers will be the optimum candidate for power in the sub-MW to MW range due to their ruggedness and relative simplicity. An FEL would be the prime candidate for power well above a MW. This type of laser lends itself better to heat removal from the gain medium than a solid-state laser. This ability of an FEL to be scaled to higher power comes with considerable additional complexity and a requirement for about a MW of continuous power to maintain a large cryogenic refrigeration system which cools the niobium accelerator cavity with liquid helium at 2K. The future development of appropriate higher temperature superconducting materials may lessen this requirement. The storage and removal of heat from any of these electrically powered lasers may prove to be a more stressing task than generation of the required prime power for lasing.\n\nTable 1 provides an estimate of the irradiance that various potential space-based laser systems could provide. It assumes a wavelength of 1 μm, a transmitting telescope of 1 meter diameter and a system beam quality of about 1.5. If the transmitting telescope were increased to 3 meter diameter, the same irradiance would be delivered at 3 times the range.\n\n24"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 1: Laser Systems Irradiance Calculations\nRange (km) | Laser Power (MW) | Spot Area (cm^2) | Irradiance (kW/cm^2)\n1000 | 10 | 50000 | 0.1\n350 | 10 | 500 | 1\n350 | 1 | 50000 | 0.1\n100 | 1 | 500 | 1\n100 | 0.1 | 500 | 0.1\n35 | 0.1 | 50 | 1\n10 | 0.1 | 5 | 10\n\nThese irradiance levels show what could be delivered with laser powers from 100 kW to 10 MW at ranges from 10 to 1,000 km. This spans a wide range of realistic powers and potential engagement ranges. The effectiveness of these irradiances against candidate spacecraft designs will need to be determined through analyses and experiments.\n\nRecommendations\n\nIf there are concerns about the potential vulnerability of future spacecraft to laser radiation, then the following recommendations are offered:\n\n• Optical components, such as horizon sensors, should have their telescopes baffled and shielded to preclude the entrance of off-axis scattered light. Front shutters can be installed and kept closed when the sensor is not in use or if excess optical energy is detected.\n\n• Antennas should be made with maximum reflectivity to UV, visible and near IR wavelengths. They should also have as much thermal mass as possible. Coax cables and power lines should be inside shields.\n\n• Solar cells are more difficult to protect although some types are more tolerant of laser radiation and thermal overload than others. They should be wired such that a short or open in one area does not disable others. Cables should be shielded.\n\n• Windows should have covers and potentially be coated to reflect laser wavelengths of concern. Shutters that close automatically if laser radiation is detected might also be useful.\n\n25"} {"doc_id":"82d7af44c5f0411c","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• The thermal control paints applied to the spacecraft's surface should be tolerant of laser heating and not change their characteristics.\n\n• The spacecraft structure should be designed to be as resistant as possible to penetration of laser energy.\n\n• Potential materials and design approaches should be evaluated by testing for resistance to laser damage. This can be done using commercially available lasers or using available government testing facilities.\n\nSources of Further Information\n\nOnly one professional society in the United States is centered on development of high-energy laser and high-power microwave weapons and technologies: the Directed Energy Professional Society (DEPS). This organization holds a variety of conferences each year focused on various aspects of directed energy weapons. All of the conferences have portions that are unclassified, and some have classified sessions. Additionally, half-day and full-day introductory or special topic courses are frequently taught prior to the first day of the meetings. Examples of DEPS conferences each year are given below; further information can be obtained from its website (www.DEPS.org):\n\n• Directed Energy Systems Symposium.\n\n• Directed Energy Programs and Capabilities Conference.\n\n• Solid-State and Diode Laser Technology Review.\n\n• Ultrashort Pulse Laser Workshop.\n\n• Directed Energy Test & Evaluation Conference (cosponsored with the International Test & Evaluation Association).\n\n• Annual Directed Energy Symposium.\n\nOther societies (U.S. and foreign) have conferences and publications related to the general fields of lasers and optics. Two major examples are:\n\n• SPIE (originally the Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers) who have many conferences annually and sponsor a major event called \"Photonics West\". Their web site is www.spie.org.\n\n• American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) has an annual spring conference on Beam Control. Their web site is www.aiaa.org.\n\n• Air Force Institute of Technology (www.afit.edu) offers a web-based course on HEL weapon technology and systems.\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"83892c504c8c9c94","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"83892c504c8c9c94","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"83892c504c8c9c94","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"83ff14812df46fc2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:10:18"} {"doc_id":"851f5f2ee8e07370","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-1057 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\nOFFICIAL RECORD\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nElectronic Communication\nTitle: [REDACTED] Site survey of [REDACTED] Date: 11/[REDACTED]/2024\n[REDACTED]\nCC: [REDACTED]\nFrom: [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nContact: [REDACTED]\nApproved By: [REDACTED]\nDrafted By: [REDACTED]\nCase ID #: [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) - [REDACTED]\nSynopsis: [REDACTED] Site survey of [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nEnclosure(s): Enclosed are the following items:\n1. [REDACTED] Treeline photos located west of [REDACTED]' home\n2. [REDACTED] Treeline photos located west of [REDACTED]' home\n3. [REDACTED] Treeline photos located west of [REDACTED]' home\n4. [REDACTED] Treeline photos located west of [REDACTED]' home\n5. [REDACTED] Treeline photos located west of [REDACTED]' home\n6. [REDACTED] Treeline photos located west of [REDACTED]' home\n7. [REDACTED] Treeline photos located west of [REDACTED]' home\n8. [REDACTED] Treeline photos located west of [REDACTED]' home\n9. [REDACTED] Treeline photos located west of [REDACTED]' home\n10. [REDACTED] Treeline photos located west of [REDACTED] home\n11. [REDACTED] Photos from trail camera on [REDACTED]' property\n12. [REDACTED] Photos from trail camera on [REDACTED]' property\n13. [REDACTED] Photos from trail camera on [REDACTED]' property\n14. [REDACTED] Photos from trail camera on [REDACTED] property\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"851f5f2ee8e07370","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nTitle: [REDACTED] Site survey of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nRe: [REDACTED] 11/[REDACTED]/2024\n15. [REDACTED] Photos from trail camera on [REDACTED] property\n16. [REDACTED] Photos of [REDACTED]\n17. [REDACTED] Photos of [REDACTED]\n18. [REDACTED] Photos of [REDACTED]\n19. [REDACTED] Photos of [REDACTED]\n20. [REDACTED] Photos from [REDACTED] back deck\n21. [REDACTED] Photos from [REDACTED] back deck\n22. [REDACTED] Photos from [REDACTED] back deck\n23. [REDACTED] Photos from [REDACTED] back deck\n24. [REDACTED] Photo Log\nDetails:\n[REDACTED] On 11/[REDACTED]/2024, Special Agents (SA) [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] visited the home of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] ([REDACTED] at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] The [REDACTED] [REDACTED] of [REDACTED] property and survey areas where [REDACTED] has seen Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) over the last three years.\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] provided a tour of [REDACTED] property which gave prospective to previously provided recordings. [REDACTED] took agents down into a wooded area approximately 200 yards from [REDACTED] home, where [REDACTED] has has a trail camera affixed. This camera has captured UAP activity facing West of [REDACTED] home. Within the wooded area, there were signs to indicate the area was restricted from hunting or fishing as well as a stone wall running south to north.\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] showed agents around [REDACTED]home and indicated areas where [REDACTED] had seen UAP activity over [REDACTED] [REDACTED] stated that there is a trail that goes around [REDACTED] but the trail does not run through the area where [REDACTED] has seen UAP activity. Upon observation, it appeared that multiple homes along [REDACTED], which is to the east of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] would have line of sight to the area where [REDACTED] has observed UAP activity.\n[REDACTED] After surveying [REDACTED] property, [REDACTED] showed agents [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"851f5f2ee8e07370","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nTitle: [REDACTED] Site survey of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nRe: [REDACTED] 11/[REDACTED]/2024\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] also showed a video of [REDACTED] hiking around the north side of [REDACTED] In the video, walks in the vicinity of where [REDACTED] observed UAP activity.\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] gave agents a copy of [REDACTED] and told agents that [REDACTED] would be open to equipment being set up on [REDACTED] property in order to [REDACTED] or time lapse video. [REDACTED] also stated that [REDACTED] would coordinate with agents to have them come out to [REDACTED] property during an evening, when the UAP activity is often observed.\n[REDACTED]\n♦♦\n[REDACTED]\n3"} {"doc_id":"8654b968c2149d0a","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:11:12"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62- HQ-83894 SECTION 1\nSERIALS 1-52\n#62-HQ-83894-1#\nSECTION 1\nSERIALS 1-52\nDO NOT DESTROY\nFOIPA # 1366404\nDO NOT DESTROY\nFOIPA # 993087\nPICKETT STREET\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 1 1 52\n8/11/1274199\nRRP003IXH5\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007.\nTransfer - Call 3421\nUse Care in Handling this File\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"72055\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Coffey\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Carson\nMr. Egan\nMr. Hendon\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\nMore About Saucers\nPriest Finds 'Whirring' Disc In Yard and Holds It for FBI\nChicago, July 6 (U.P.).--A Catholic priest at Grafton, Wis., said tonight that a round, metal disc, which might be one of the mysterious flying saucers, had crashed into his parish yard and that he is holding it for the Federal Bureau of Investigation.\nThe Rev. Joseph Brasky of St. Joseph's Church at Grafton, 45 miles north of Milwaukee, said he heard a swishing and whirring noise this morning. A second later, he said, he heard a thud and a mild explosion.\nHe investigated and found a sheet metal disc about 18 inches in diameter, resembling a circular saw blade.\n\"The object still was warm, weighed about four or five pounds and was about one eighth of an inch thick,\" he said.\nThere was a hole about one inch in diameter in the middle of the disc, he said, and in the opening were \"gadgets and some wires.\"\nThe priest said he did not know if his discovery were important or whether it might be an elaborate practical joke. He said he had notified the FBI of his find.\nH. K. Johnson of the Milwaukee FBI office said he hadn't heard yet about the disc but that an official report might be at his office.\nThe flying discs have been reported \"seen\" by persons in 30 States, but Brasky's disc was the first one that actually had been found--if that is what was found.\nHis report came a few hours after a military plane made an unsuccessful speed dash in an attempt to track down one of the discs and the Army and scientists sought to ascertain whether coast-to-coast reports about the discs zooming through the sky were fact or fancy.\nArmy planes scoured the northwest Pacific skies for them without success today and one \"eyewitness\" even reported having seen one of the discs take off in Arizona. A St. Louis railroad man exhibited some paper \"discs\" he said he had seen floating over St. Louis.\nThe flying saucers which have been reported skimming through America's skies at speeds up to 1200 miles have eluded the usually keen eye of radar.\nCapt. Tom Brown of the Army Air Forces public relations staff\nSee SAUCERS, Page 3, Col.\nJULY 7 1947 WASHINGTON POST Page 1\n83 JUL 10 1947\n62-83894-1 NOT RECORDED\nSE 40 INDEXED 94"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-TAMM FBI U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE JUL 7 12 42 PM '47\nMR. JONES JUL 9 9 53 AM '47 RECEIVED FBI U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED DIRECTOR U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE JUL 7 8 56 AM '47\nRECEIVED FBI U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE JUL 8 AM '47"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FCRS--From Page 1\nPriest Finds 'Whirring' Disc In Yard and Holds It\nsaid the Army Airways Communications Service had reported late yesterday that so far its radar scopes throughout the country have been unable to pick up any strange objects in flight.\nAnd in the Pacific Northwest--where most of the fly-happy platters have been reported--the Army has radar equipment which can pierce fog and darkness and pick up objects in the sky 200 miles away.\nEven so, Brown acknowledged that the Air Forces had decided \"there's something to this\" and had been checking it for 10 days.\n\"And we still haven't the slightest idea what they could be,\" he added.\nAnd a new wrinkle--the reported landing of a fleet of eight skimming platters--was reported from Idaho in full view of 10 persons. A. Dishman, Idaho housewife, said she and others in her party had seen the saucers land on a mountainside near St. Maries, Idaho.\nShe said they came into view at extreme speed, suddenly slowed, and then \"fluttered like leaves to the ground.\"\n\"The mysterious part was that we couldn't see them after they landed,\" she said. \"We could see them flutter down into the timber yet we couldn't see that they did anything to the trees.\"\nShe said she hoped to hike into the timber tomorrow and search for the objects which she said were saucer-shaped but resembled washtubs more than disks and were \"about the size of a five-room house.\"\nLocally, Hazen Kennedy of 2615 4th st. ne. reported he had seen one passing over the Northeast section of the city at about 8:40 p. m.\nThis would be the first one reported over the District, although others have been reported over nearby Maryland.\nKennedy, who has 125 hours flying time as a student pilot in the Army Air Forces to his credit, said he believed the saucer he had seen was traveling at \"well over\" 1000 miles an hour at an altitude of between 1200 and 1500 feet.\n\"The best way I can describe it,\" said Kennedy, \"was that it looked like an orange lamp bulb without the socket. It was going faster than any jet plane I've ever seen.\"\nIn Hagerstown, Md., Mrs. Marilyn Ganoe, 30, said she had seen five of the discs, racing in 2-1-2 formation at \"terrific speed,\" from her backporch. \"They sounded like a faraway train,\" she said.\nIn the wake of these new eyewitness accounts came a new series of comments, and explanations, but most of them were tinged with a slight tendency to laugh off the whole thing.\nDr. Winfred Overholser, nationally known psychiatrist and superintendent of St. Elizabeths Hospital here, said it \"has some of the earmarks of being national hysteria.\"\n\"Everytime someone comes up with a sea-serpent story,\" said Dr. Overholser, \"others with vivid imaginations are sure they have seen the same thing.\"\n\"The critical faculty in man, the last one he received, is still not very well developed. Scratch the surface and you find the same mass hysteria which predominated during the witchcraft scare. Some persons are quite ready to see things and follow beliefs.\"\nDr. Overholser said that when he made his rounds of the mental patients yesterday at St. Elizabeths not a one commented on the flying saucers story.\n\"I think they may be a little skeptical,\" he added.\nHowever, Dr. Overholser said he wasn't trying to dismiss the matter as a joke \"because there are so many strange things going on today that one can't be sure.\"\nMaj. Alexander P. de Seversky, noted aircraft designer, told The Post by telephone from New York that until he sees a flying saucer he \"wouldn't like to pass judgment.\"\nHe agreed with Dr. Overholser that much if not all of the story may be because of hysteria.\n\"After all,\" he said, \"we are more or less an hysterical Nation.\"\nMajor de Seversky said it was possible that the persons who claim to have seen the aerial discs have instead glimpsed the exhaust of jet-propelled planes.\nHe conceded, too, that they might be guided missiles let loose as part of an experiment, but added:\n\"I don't think the Government would fire them so promiscuously. They would test them in one spot, in an isolated area, like they did the atomic bomb.\"\nMaj. Gen. Curtis E. LeMay, who as Deputy Chief of Air Staff for Research and Development would know if the saucers involved experiments with guided missiles, commented:\n\"Whatever these people have seen it hasn't been anything resulting from experiments by the Army Air Forces. As for as I'm concerned there's nothing to it at all. The whole thing is unfortunate.\"\nAlthough many explanations have been offered, none has been convincing. A Los Angeles newspaper quoted an unnamed nuclear physicist as saying the silvery disc resulted from experiments in 'transmutation of atomic energy.'\nThis report was rapidly herded into the hoax column by David Lilienthal, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, and several prominent atomic scientists.\nStarr Expects Word\nLouis E. Starr, national commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, announced Saturday at Columbus, Ohio, that he was expecting \"momentarily\" information from Washington which would explain the dashing discs. But the message never arrived.\nThe Air Forces said that Gen. Carl Spaatz, Air Forces chief, was in the Pacific Northwest where most of the saucers have been reported, but added that his trip there was planned two months ago, long before the saucers scare. General Spaatz is expected back in Washington late tomorrow.\nMuroc Army Air Field in California had a P-80 jet fighter standing by, and the National Guard in Oregon had prepared six regular fighters to give chase should saucers be reported nearby."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The B.D.\nWashington\nDistrict of Colombia\nNEW BRUNSWICK N.J. JUL 5 2 PM 1947\nUNITED STATES POSTAGE 5 CENTS"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dear Sir B. J.:\nIt is my opinion about\nthose \"flying discs\" reported\nseen over Kentuky, new Mexico,\nCalifornia, Oregon, Washington,\nIdaho, Colorodo, South Carolinia\nand Eastern Canada that some Europe-\nan Country is using them by filling\nthem up with germs or highly\nexploseres, and after a couple thousand\nmiles they dup their contents and\ndissappear.\nI suggest that you keep"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"From\nC. Forney\nDear sir [illegible] something [illegible] United States"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nJUL 8 1947\nTELETYPE\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\nFBI NEW ORLEANS 7-8-47 11-22 AM TMC\nDIRECTOR ROUTEIN\nRE FLYING DISCS, MISCELLANEOUS. DISC REPORTED FOUND BY F. G. HARISTON\nREVEALED TO BE PRANK.\nWEEKS\nEND\n9\n1-24 PM OK FBI WA BW\nV"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nLIAISON SECTION\n9 11 45 AM '47\nFBI\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJul 8 2 37 PM '47\nRECEIVED-LADD\nFBI\nU S DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJUL 9 9 13 AM '47\nRECEIVED\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nJul 8 1 25 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BY SPECIAL MESSENGER\nDate: August 5, 1947\nTo: Director of Intelligence\nWar Department General Staff\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\nAttention: Colonel L. R. Forney, Chief, Security Group\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover - Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\nSubject: FRED R. REIBOLD\nThere are attached hereto copies of a letter received from the above-captioned individual, together with copies of a newspaper clipping enclosure, concerning \"flying discs.\"\nMr. Reibold's letter has been acknowledged and he has been advised that copies of his letter have been furnished to you for your consideration.\nDECLASSIFIED BY 1259\nON 10-28-75"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington D.C.\nGentleman:\non July 7th 1947, 10:30 P.M.\nGertrude Sniffen my mother in law\nand I witnessed a flaming object\nwhich dropped in street in front\nof our house at 2315 Himebaugh ave\nOmaha Nebr.\n\nUpon examination, the object\nwas solid and had form of round\ncircular disc, approximately the\nsize of a silver dollar and\n1/4\" thick burning with extreme\nheat.\nThe World Herald newspaper\nwas notified and reporter was\nsent out.\nIn the mean time, a boy kicked"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the object over and it fell into\npieces.\nWhen the reporter arrives he\nscoopes up the fragments and\nsaid he would have them analyzed.\nYour attention is directed to\nattached analyses.\nThere were six people who\nactually saw the object and\ncan testify to the extreme heat\nat which it was burning.\nWe did not claim it was\none of the so called \"flying saucers\"\nor any such phenomena but we\ndid want some kind of a reasonable\nexplanation because if this object\nhad dropped on a boog top it\nwould have certainly set fire.\nWe can definitely say it"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was not tobacco ashes as\ninferred by Dr. Kenny.\nIt burns with such extreme\nheat as to scorch pavement on and\nnear pavement where it let\npossibly this could have\nbeen a late Fourth of July\nfirework or something similar\nbut at any rate we are calling\nit to your attention as the\nanswer the \"learned\" Dr Kenny\ngave as being pipe ashes is full\nof ridicule an entirely unsatisfactory\n\nYours sincerely\nFred R. Reibold\nFred R Reibold\n2315 Himebaugh ave\nOmaha Nebraska"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Flying Saucer\" Just Someone's Pipe Dream\nThe \"flying saucer\" that fell near 2319 Himebaugh Avenue Monday evening was nothing but \"ashes from somebody's pipe dream.\"\nSo says Dr. C. L. Kenny, head of the chemistry department at the Creighton College of Dentistry. He had two students analyze the ashes. They found sodium, potassium, iron, aluminum, carbonate, sulphate and unburnt carbon, he said.\n\"This is the same analysis you would get from ordinary pipe tobacco,\" Dr. Kenny said.\n62-83894-4\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dear Mr. Hoover -\nANONYMOUS COMMUNICATION\nKEEP ENVELOPE ATTACHED\nI have also seen a flying saucer -\nthe evening of July 4- about 10^30 PM - only\nit was in the air at the same level as\ntwo obvious portions of light in the\nsearch light beams from the air field\nnear Lake St. Clair. I was sitting on my\nsearch at the time. could As few trucks could\nwith proper equipment create the\nsame illusion. There were two clearly\noutlined beams - one partly faded out to the level\nThe saucer ..."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"third beam faded out from the ground\nto the saucer. Recently I mentioned the\ndistressed ship in the Pacific not\nbeing due entirely to natural phenomena.\nand co-ordinated that ship, the bomb\n\nRECORDED\n62-83 897-5\nEX-12\nFBI\n34 JUL 9 1947"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. J. Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nU.S. Dept. of Justice Bldg.\nWashington, D. C."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 11, 1947.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nHave you seen one of the mysterious \"Saucers\"?\nWhat did it look like?\nDo you think these strange, celestial manifestations are harbingers of a better day?\nDo you believe it means that a new and revolutionary advance is coming?\nWill it make your life brighter, happier, more useful?\nWe believe one of these startling discs is on its way to you. Then the secret will be out.\n\nThe Combined and Amalgamated Committee\nof Sky-Scanners, Disc Decipherers and\nNew-Product Introducers.\n\nRECORDED\n62-83894-6"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 14, 1947\n\nHave you seen one of the mysterious \"Saucers\" that look like [illegible]\nWhat did it look like? [illegible]\nDo you think these [illegible] are [illegible] to [illegible] a better day?\nDo you believe it means that a new and vitally [illegible] is coming?\n\nWill it make your life brighter, happier, more useful?\n\nWe believe one of those [illegible] that gives it on its way to you. Then the second [illegible] out\n\nThe Gerhard [illegible] [illegible] of Sky-Wanderers that [illegible] are [illegible] Introduces."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Boston Mass.\nJuly 14, 47\n\nDear Sir:\n\nMay I call your kind attention to the heartless criticism in some papers, of people who reported the \"Flying Saucers,\" especially an article in the \"Boston Globe\", by a writer called Linen. Also, an"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"apology in the \"Boston Post\" this week.\n\nThis criticism of people who make these reports is very unfair. Everyone from oculists to psychiatrists slammed them, publicly, in articles. It is a poor way to thank people for their efforts, someday, when something will happen when they are needed, these people probably will not bother.\nMiss C. Finkelstein\nFormerly of Keene N.H."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. D. M. LADD\nFROM : H. B. FLETCHER\nSUBJECT:\n\nDATE: July 7, 1947\n\nAt 10:45 a.m., July 7, 1947, I talked to SAC Johnson of the Milwaukee Office concerning the United Press item appearing in the Washington Post for Monday, July 7, with reference to a flying disc or flying saucer allegedly reported to the Milwaukee Office by Reverend Joseph Brasky of St. Joseph's Church, Grafton, Wisconsin.\n\nSAC Johnson advised that the Associated Press and the United Press between the hours 1:00 and 6:00 a.m. today had made inquiry of him as to whether anything had been reported to the Milwaukee Office. He declined to comment. He stated as a matter of fact the priest had not made any contact with him, and he learned from the Associated Press that the priest was intoxicated and as far as the Associated Press was concerned they were not releasing the story because all that was involved was a circular saw. Mr. Johnson stated the Milwaukee Sentinel apparently sent the report out and that they handled United Press service. He stated a photograph of the priest was in this morning's paper holding a circular saw which apparently covers the body of the priest from arm pit to arm pit. Attached to the saw are several wires and two small tubes described as about three inches long and one inch in diameter. The news item in the Milwaukee Sentinel indicates it was believed some prankster had thrown it into the yard, perhaps with a firecracker attached. Mr. Johnson stated the Milwaukee Sentinel had stated the priest would make a report of this matter today to the Milwaukee Office. I instructed SAC Johnson in the event the priest made a report to furnish details of the report immediately, but in view of the nature of the information in his possession, no inquiry should be conducted at the present.\n\nHBF:cmw"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nAt 10:45 a.m., July 7, 1947, I talked to SAC Johnson of the Milwaukee Office concerning the United Press item appearing in the Washington Post for Monday, July 7, with reference to a flying disc or flying saucer allegedly reported to the Milwaukee Office by Reverend Joseph Brasky of St. Joseph's Church, Grafton, Wisconsin.\n\nSAC Johnson advised that the Associated Press and the United Press between the hours 1:00 and 6:00 a.m. today had made inquiry of him [illegible]"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Yoakum, July 12, 1947,\nR. Box 1.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nI do send to you\nsomething new from\nTexas.\n\nFlying of fire cir-\ncled around the Ca-\nlestine and the peo-\nple are afred of lit\nand crounde Cuero,\nnot far away from\nYoakum, fall down sw-\nmeeking lichgt from\nairplens.\n\nAnyway got in\nthat hands enemy\nor Nazi mob and\nwant ruind the\nTexas,"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\n\nThey did start in\nTexas City demach\nthe factory.\n\nIn the Private part\nof Yoakum airport\nand Broadcasting\nStations are such ene-\nmy like that, We do\nnot know who are\nthem. Now got no\nairoplas here, just\nhangars and Broad\ncasting tower with\nlichgt, on roling tower\nand lichgt are like\nneedles to ow\neyes\nAnd got the lichgts\naround the holle air-\nport and from the\nlichgts is runig"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3\n\nthe electrice and\nmake us sick.\nAnd the air is ful\nof electric by lichg-\nding is run fire\nball from Telefon\nbox ins the store, far\naway above half mile.\n\nThe airport is con-\nnected with Alamo\nRegister in San An-\ntonio and people are\ntalking with us\nThe people are Arbi-\nshop Robert Lucey\nleaving in new reside-\nce and is talking with\nus.\n\nIn the Broadcast-\ning Stations and\nAlamo Register pres,"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4\n\nand with the old\narbishop residence,\nand with the Cate-\ndrale priests.\n\nThe Alamo Broad-\ncasting is operate with\nby two german old\nshoes, and the men\nare now sick, are blind\nfrom the electrice\nand they talk with us\nAnd ther are two men\nmore and they are fi-\nting and fosing together\nand we can heare them.\nthe Arbishop is bad\nman and unmoral,\nand working nothing.\nAll work is don by\nthe Cathedral Board."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5\n\nIn the olds arbi-\nshops residence are\nsome priests,\nOne is name Morkov-\nsky, hy is bad man\ntoo!\nHe was in care wreck\nwith arbishops care and\nhis Mother is kild,\nand from that time hi\nis leave in the old re-\nsidence, and talking\nwith us.\nHis brother is priest\nin Hallettesville and\ntalking withs us too.\n\nAll the people luck\nsomkind like tresh,\nare no Citysen United\nStates, no speak En-\nglish, they say they are\ncoming from Checko-\nslovakia."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6\n\nThe Cathedrals\nBoard are men ar\npriests german and\nthey all ar working\nfor germany.\nSee such tresh people\nwe got in Texas and\nname the Alamo, place\nthat is saint, to Te-\nxas people, fitying\nagainst the Mexican\nSanta Ana.\n\nAnd I am ending with\nwarlords.\nRemember Alamo\nand Texas City.\n\nMrs. Anna Benys\nMr. Joe Benys\nMRS. ANNA BENYS\nMR. JOE BENYS\n6"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-9"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D-TIMES\n\n5 CENTS PER COPY. No. 91 PAGE 1\n\net Home Boy\nWinner In\nsay Contest\n\nFIRST ITS FLYING DISKS - NOW\nITS \"FIRE BALLS\" PEOPLE SEE.\n\nRevealing Flying\nDisk Data May\nBring Prosecution\n\nGrowing\n\nmateurs' Display\ncellent Form\n\nGas Truck Hits\nLocal Station\n\nLions To Make\nFarmer Award\n\nCuero Residents\nSee Flying Disc\n\nCURITY MAN\nBE HERE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO Yoakum\n\nYOAKUM HERALD - TIMES\nOwned by MALEC PUBLISHING CO.\nJOSEPH J. MALEC, Editor-Manager\n\nPOLITICAL ANNOUNCEMENTS\nFor Senator, 18th Dist.\nJOHN J. BELL\nMORRIS ROBERTS\n\nWE SPECIALIZE in Whiskies, Wines and Gins\nR. F. DARLING PACKAGE STORE\n\nChas. Mieck Your WATKINS City Dealer Phone 599-W\n\nYou will save by building your new home of firesafe CONCRETE\n\nF&M Concrete Products Yoakum, Texas\n\nDR. C. R. TUBBS Veterinarian\nLarge and Small Animals\n\nShe'll Never Forget THIS GIFT\n\nQUALITY MERCHANDISE EXPERT WATCH REPAIRING HAMILTON JEWELRY Yoakum\n\nHorace Wimberly, Jr. Lawyer\nOffices now in Yoakum National Bank Building Phone 50\n\nBY THE WAY - By W. M.\nJohn L. Lewis calls the new labor law a \"slave law\". The big trusts had unduly.\n\nHOW CAN\nNorman Thomas debate about Russia.\n\nMent. Man Wi Truck Award\n\nJust Men"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMBER OF AUDIT BUREAU OF CIRCULATIONS\nThis Paper Is Connected With NCWC Washington News Headquarters by Direct Leased Wire, Has International News\nService Daily Wires, Its Own Special Service, Religious News Service, Inter-Catholic Press Agency, Lumen Service of China,\nFides Service, Religious News Photos, International Illustrated News, NCWC Picture Service, Photo Features\nTHE\nALAMO REGISTER\n(Name Registered in the U. S. Patent Office)\nDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1946\nSECTION TWO"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Speaking at Castelgandolfo, his summer home, Pius XII asserted that the world today has men who ignore not only the Church, but the \"very rudiments of religion itself;\" men who see no evil in evil deeds and lust and would spurn \"the primary norms of morals and justice;\" \"there are cynics who would deride holy things and weak men who would permit these offenses to pass. . . .\"\nDespite this turmoil, His Holiness said, \"there are great rays of hope and fields white with harvest for those who labor to bring Christ to the world.\" He stressed the oath of the Jesuits, which enables them to bring \"a spirit prepared and prompt to obey in all things the true Spouse of Christ . . . our holy Mother Church.\"\nIn another audience, held for the Most Rev. Emmanuel Suarez, O.P., and the Dominicans who elected\nWORLD UNREST"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nJUL 7 1947\nWESTERN UNION\nTU\nWU17 47/46 2 EXTRA COLLECT\nSAN MARCOX TEX JULY 7 1947 714P\nFBI\nWASHDC\nCHECK FILES IN INVENTORS COUNCIL FOR DRAWING OF MULTI-APRING CATAPULT THIS INVENTION SENT BY ME TO WAR DEPARTMENT IN 1945 POSSIBLE LEAKAGE OF INFORVATION HAS RESULTED MY DEVICE OR VARIATION THERE FROM COULD CONCIEVABLY CATAPULT A DISC AND IN SILENCE FOR SEVERAL MILES\nWOODSON C COPE CLIFFSIDE HALL\n941P\n1945.\nRECORDED\n62-83894-10\nF B I\n37 JUL 18 1947\nEX-74"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : D. M. Ladd\nDATE: 7-10-47\nFROM : J. P. Coyne\nSUBJECT: WOODSON C. COPE\nInformant\nFlying disc\nThere is being attached hereto a Western Union telegram received from the above individual in which information is furnished concerning a \"disc.\" This telegram has been acknowledged.\nACTION:\nIt is recommended that this telegram be turned over to the Liaison Section in order that they may make the information contained therein available to the War Department.\nAttachment\nRECORDED\nINDEXED\n62-83894-10\n37 JUL 23 1947\nEX-74\n63JUL 23 1947\nWVC:mn"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Western Union\n\nCLASS OF SERVICE\nThis is a full-rate Telegram or Cablegram unless its deferred character is indicated by a suitable symbol above or preceding the address.\n\nSYMBOLS\nDL = Day Letter\nNL = Night Letter\nLC = Deferred Cable\nNLT = Cable Night Letter\nShip Radiogram\n\nThe filing time shown in the date line on telegrams and day letters is STANDARD TIME at point of origin. Time of receipt is STANDARD TIME at point of destination\n\nQA 92\n\nQ CNA392 PD=DARLINGTON SOCAR 6 630P\nUS DEPT OF JUSTICE=\nWASHDC=\n\n1947 JUL 6 PM 6 50\n\nABOUT 12 SO-CALL FLYING DISCS PASSED OVER DARLINGTON SC\nAPPROXIMATELY 5:30 PM TODAY ADVISE IF WISH DETAILS=\nJ U WATTS JR\n\n12 5:30 PM\n\nFED. BU. OF INV.\nDEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nJUL 7 1947\nDIVISION OF RECORDS\nFED. BU. OF INV.\n\nRECORDED\n62-83894-1\n\nEX-56\n\nGUARD ADV HAVE MSG DLVD SA 720P\n\nTHE COMPANY WILL APPRECIATE SUGGESTIONS FROM ITS PATRONS CONCERNING ITS SERVICE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nJUL 7 4 57 PM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nJUL 6 PM 7 CD"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: D. M. Ladd\nFROM: J. P. Coyne\nSUBJECT: J. U. WATTS, JR.\nInformant\n\nDATE: 7-10-47\n\nFlying Disc\n\nThere is being attached hereto a Western Union telegram received from the above individual in which information is furnished concerning a \"disc.\" This telegram has been acknowledged.\n\nACTION:\n\nIt is recommended that this telegram be turned over to the Liaison Section in order that they may make the information contained therein available to the War Department.\n\nAttachment\n\nWVC:mn\n\nRECORDED\nINDEXED\n\n50 JUL 24 1947\n\nEX-56"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JUL 11 3 23 PM '47\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED\nJUL 23 1 39 PM\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nJUL 11 3 55 PM '47\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Saucer' Stories\nDisk Found Is\nPriest Hears a 'Bang,' Discovers a Circular Blade With Teeth; Other Disks 'Seen'\nPicture on Picture Page\nThe \"what is it?\" which Father Joseph Brasky said he found early Sunday on the lawn of St. Joseph's Catholic church in Grafton may be just another gadget to add to Father Brasky's already sizable collection.\nThose who saw it Sunday said \"what is it?\" was a circular saw blade with a few wires attached. Father Brasky, who said he knew of no sawmills in the area, would not claim it was a \"flying saucer\" when he called newspapermen to his home.\n\"It may or may not be one of those flying disks that have been reported all over the country,\" he said. \"Let's just call it a 'what is it?'\"\nMeanwhile, in Milwaukee and other points in Wisconsin, several persons reported seeing the \"flying saucers.\" Father Brasky's disk, however, was the only case here in which the \"landing\" of a \"saucer\" was reported.\nHears \"Bang,\" Finds Disk\nFather Brasky gave the following account of how he found the object, a steel plate 19 inches in diameter, about an eighth of an inch thick and with saw teeth.\n\"I usually get up about 5 a.m. on Sundays. I was at the front door of my house, about to take my dog out for a walk, when I heard a 'bang!' like a big firecracker. I stepped outside and found this disk on the church lawn.\n\"Although the grass was still wet from the night rain, the disk was too hot to pick up. I noticed the glass ball had been knocked off one of the lightning rods on the church, so I suppose it struck that in landing.\"\nTries to Call FBI Man\nFather Brasky said he did not bother to show the disk to any of his parishioners Sunday. He tried to telephone an FBI agent whom he knows, but was unable to reach him Sunday, he added. Asked whether it could have been the work of a practical joker, Father Brasky replied: \"Could be. I don't know.\"\nThe disk, apparently of steel, had a one and three-eighth inch hole in the center. Through it ran a few wires. To each end of the cluster of wires was attached what looked like a small condenser about three inches long. The condenserlike objects were wrapped in black tape which still was sticky. The disk was greasy and somewhat dirty. Stamped on it was: \"Approved, Dunlap.\"\nFather Brasky declined to part with the disk. He showed a number of items in his trinket collection. All of them had something to do with fishing, Father Brasky's favorite sport. They included his \"bass bottles,\" beer bottles with the head of a fish — and a fish pole from Manila which folds up into a cane. When opened, it extends to 12 feet.\n\"I use it in reaching folks who can't be touched with a 10 foot pole,\" Father Brasky quipped.\nOthers Report \"Saucers\"\nFather Brasky also passed out copies of his recent publication, \"Fish Tales.\"\n\"I'm going to revise this thing,\" he explained. \"I've got some new and better tales to put in it.\"\nThere were other reports around Milwaukee and Wisconsin of \"flying saucers.\" Mrs. Anthony Hoffman, 3410 W. Layton av., said she and her husband saw one at 8:25 p.m. Sunday flying toward Billy Mitchell field from the northwest. When it neared the field, it veered toward the south and disappeared, she said. It was flying high and appeared illuminated, according to Mrs. Hoffman.\n\"It looked like a small meat platter,\" Mrs. Hoffman asserted.\nGlenn Rowden of Detroit claimed he saw a \"saucer,\" about 50 inches in diameter, over Billy Mitchell field at 10:05 p.m. when he alighted from an airplane. He said it was in sight for 90 seconds.\nWilliam Humphrey, who lives with his wife in a quonset hut at 3148 S. 20th st., telephoned police at 9 p.m. Sunday that he and Mrs. Humphrey had seen a slightly illuminated disk which appeared to fall to earth near Pulaski high school. Mrs. Humphrey said Monday that her husband tried unsuccessfully to photograph the disk.\nChanged Colors, He Says\nErwin Rottman, 1328 N. 19th st., claimed he saw three of them flying through the air in a northwesterly direction at 6 p.m. Sunday. They turned from orange to gold to silver before disappearing, he said.\nReports came also from Janesville, where Mr. and Mrs. Alva Sievert and Mr. and Mrs. Howard Roth reported seeing a flying disk about 11:35 p.m. Saturday. The Roths were leaving the Sievert home when Sievert saw it, according to Roth. It appeared to be several thousand feet up and about 10 miles away. Roth said. He described it as vaguely resembling the moon and as having a regular motion in a counterclockwise, elongated orbit. It appeared to Roth to be moving faster than an airplane. He said it was yellow on its face, but when it turned it looked silver.\nRoth said that the four of them viewed the disk for 10 minutes.\nStopped in Sky, Claim\n\"It fluttered around, faded out and came back again, and once it just stopped and hung there for about two minutes,\" Roth said. \"The last time we saw it, it had a very noticeable tail. When it disappeared entirely, it just popped out.\"\nJanesville police reported a telephone call from a Dick Thompson, who said he saw flying disks about 12:15 a.m. Sunday.\nAt Oshkosh, Mrs. L. A. Davis reported that she and her husband had sighted one of the mysterious disks whizzing over the city at 6:45 p.m. Sunday.\nShe said they were driving on a town road six miles west of Oshkosh, headed east toward the city, when they first sighted the object \"flying very fast and very high.\"\nAt first, she said, it looked like an airplane and then loomed larger and larger until it \"appeared as big as the sun.\"\nStops Car, Disk Vanishes\nHer husband stopped the car so that they could get a better look at the disk, which appeared round and silvery, but by the time they got out of the car the object had disappeared, she said.\nAt Green Bay, Eugene Le Plant reported that he and his 12 year old son, Duane, had seen a rapidly moving silver ball or disk about 6:30 p.m. Wednesday while working in his garden on the western edge of the city. Le Plant said he saw the object silhouetted against a dark cloud to the north and that he and his son watched it for three or four minutes while it moved away to the northwest. Le Plant said he could not estimate the altitude or distance, but that it \"definitely was not an airplane.\"\nLaws of Eyesight Clarify Reports of Flying Saucers\nBy HOWARD W. BLAKESLEE\nAssociated Press Science Editor\nNew York, N. Y.— The flying saucers may be explained by certain laws of eyesight.\nAll objects appear round or nearly so at any distance close to the limit of how far a person can see.\nIf the objects are seen by reflected light, as in most cases reported, they are almost certain to be round, and if the reflections are sunlight then the sizes reported are those which would be expected from distant light reflections.\nDescriptions of virtually all the saucers as round and flat fit exactly with the tricks that eyes play. This trickiness varies with differences in weather and lighting.\nThis writer has seen flying saucers over Long Island sound, not only this year but in previous years. They were round, bright and moving fast. But they were no mystery because they were light reflected from the bodies of airplanes that soon identified themselves by changing course and coming near enough to be seen distinctly.\nMany descriptions of movements of the flying saucers fit with the common maneuvers of airplanes, singly or in groups. Some of the maneuvering reported, which took saucers out of sight and back into sight again, resembles what can be seen while watching distant airplanes.\nWhether planes are guided, pilotless or jet, they all would look the same at great distances.\nMirages, Traveler Says\nPhiladelphia, Pa. -(AP)- Dr. Aurel Aczel, editor of a Hungarian language newspaper, expressed belief that the flying saucers were mirages—possibly circularly distorted reflections of real airplanes many miles away. A world-wide traveler, Dr. Aczel said:\n\"Years ago I have seen similar things on the Egyptian desert and on the Buszta (Hungarian plain). At sea I have also seen mirages of ships known to be a great distance away.\n\"In July and August, and sometimes even in June, atmospheric conditions are especially adaptable to the creation of mirages.\""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Sharp-Eyed Sight Disks, but Only a Saw Blade Is Found"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Sharp-Eyed Sight Disks, but Only a Saw Blade Is Found"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Who, what, where, why are flying disks? The year's biggest mystery produced these Sunday photos while reports came from everywhere and everyone that the saucers were everywhere. Top left, a movie camera is fitted to a P-51 fighter plane at Portland, Ore., as Oregon national guard planes are made ready to chase the disks. Lower, Mrs. Walter Johnson (right) of Spokane, Wash., and her children pose and tell how they saw the saucers land on a mountainside in Idaho and disappear. Right, is Father Joseph Brasky of St. Joseph's Catholic church at Grafton, Wis., with the disk he reported struck his church early Sunday. It turned out that the disk was a prankster made projectile, featuring a Dunlop circular saw blade. Note that something apparently took a glass ball off one of the lightning rods. A whole lot of Milwaukeeans reported that they saw the saucers traveling past Sunday night.\n—AP Wirephotos and Journal Staff"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Seen in 36 States; Jet Fighters Alerted\n\nSAN FRANCISCO, July 6—(AP) — Military aircraft hunted the skies over Pacific Coast states today for sight of the mysterious \"flying saucers\" that for 12 days have puzzled the entire country.\nEarly reports of results were negative.\nFive P-51s of the Oregon National Guard cruised over the Cascade Mountains of Washington—the area where the strange objects first were reported sighted. A sixth circled over Portland, in constant radio contact with the other five. All carried photographic equipment.\nCol. G. R. Dodson, commanding, described their flight as a \"routine patrol,\" but said they had been instructed to watch for the flying discs.\nAt Manhattan Beach, Calif., A. W. McKelvey took a Mustang fighter plane up above Van Nuys For two hours he cruised at 35,000 feet, but \"didn't see a thing.\"\nGen. Carl Spaatz, commandant of the Army Air Forces, was on a Pacific Northwest fishing trip. He denied knowing anything about the flying discs — or of plans to use AAF planes to look for them.\n\nJET FIGHTER SET\n\n\"I've been out of touch with things for four or five days,\" he said.\nLouis E. Starr, national commander-in-chief of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, yesterday in Columbus, O., said he understood Spaatz had a \"group out right now\" looking for discs.\nAt Muroc Army Air Field in California a P-80 jet fighter stood ready to take off the moment any flying saucers are sighted in that area.\nA cautious attitude marked both official and scientific comments, but Capt. Tom Brown of the Air Forces Public Relations staff in Washington acknowledged the Air Forces had decided \"there's something to this\" and had been checking up on it for 10 days.\n\nSEEN IN 36 STATES.\nFirst sighted June 25 and greeted generally with scornful laughs, the objects have been reported every day since by observers in 36 states. Most of the objects were reported seen July 4. A few were reported yesterday.\nSuch competent observers as airline pilots said they had seen the totally unexplained discs or saucers, larger than aircraft and flying in \"loose formation\" at high speed.\nDavid Lilienthal, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, said they had nothing to do with atomic experiments, and Army and Navy officials also entered positive disclaimers.\nNewspaper stories quoting an unidentified California Institute of Technology scientist as saying the phenomena might have something to do with experiments in \"transmutation of atomic energy\" caused a brief sensation late yesterday. The institute quickly denied the report.\nReports generally agreed that the flying objects were round or oval. Estimates of their speed ranged from about 300 to 1,200 miles an hour. They were described as flying with an undulating motion at heights of 10,000 feet and less. Some described them as glowing, or luminous.\n\n'PROPELLER IN CENTER'\n\nNova Hart, St. Louis mechanic who was trained during service in the war to spot all types of aircraft, said he saw one of the strange objects near Pattonville yesterday. It was flying at 300 feet, he said.\nHe described it as circular, with a ribbed framework and silver gray in color. Hart said it appeared to have a motor with a propeller attached in the center and it kept turning like an airplane doing a slow roll.\n\nFirst published reports of the phenomena occurred June 25. Kenneth Arnold, Boise, Ida., businessman pilot, told of seeing nine of the discs flying in formation at 1,200 miles an hour over the Cascade Mountains in Washington.\n\nSEEN BY 200\n\nArnold's account was taken lightly. Various explanations were offered—\"reflections,\" \"persistent vision,\" \"snow blindness.\"\nSoon afterward other individuals—in New Mexico, Missouri, California and other states—reported they also had seen the flying objects.\nThen on Independence Day 200 persons in one group and 60 in another saw them in Idaho. Hundreds of others in Oregon, Washington and other western states reported seeing them.\nJuly 4 also brought first reports of the flying discs from east of the Mississippi. Since then they have been reported seen in widely separated sections of the country—in 33 states in all.\n\n'Must Be Insane'\n\nLONDON, July 6—(AP)—Don't mention those flying saucers on this side of the Atlantic unless you're prepared for an argument about your sanity.\nMaybe they have been seen by sober citizens over a vast area of the United States, but Europe won't believe in them until somebody lassoes one and has it photographed by Frank Sinatra, the British ambassador and five Supreme Court justices.\n\"America's reply to the Loch Ness monster,\" chortled today's Sunday dispatch, referring to Britain's hoariest tall story—the serpent that is \"seen\" romping in Scotland's Loch Ness every time the tourist trade needs a shot in the arm.\n\nMILWAUKEE SENTINEL\nMILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Planes Chasing Disks Find Only Empty Sky\n\nJokesters Add Some Comedy to Air Mystery\n\nEast St. Louis Objects Prove to Be Washers; Chicago Woman Spots One With Legs\n\nBy the United Press\n\nArmy pilots were ready Monday for another air search for the mysterious \"flying saucers\" now reported seen in 39 states and parts of Canada as practical jokesters added to the confusion.\nEquipped with telescopic cameras, 11 army planes searched the Pacific northwest Sunday without finding any trace of the flying disks which had been reported over scores of communities the preceding two days. At Sioux Falls, S. D., a national guard plane already in the air was ordered to investigate a silvery disk with a short tail which Gregory Zimmer said he saw shoot across the heavens. The pilot found nothing but empty sky.\nThe army \"camera patrol\" over the Cascade mountains Sunday included eight P-51 pursuit ships and three A-26 bombers.\n\nIllusions Or Jokes\n\nThere was growing belief that the concentrated aerial search would show the saucers to be optical illusions or the work of practical jokesters magnified by aroused imaginations.\nA number of \"disks\" whirled over rooftops in East St. Louis, Ill., Sunday. J. T. Hartley, a locomotive engineer, gathered some of them up and found they were made of pressed white paper, 11 inches in diameter and with a two inch hole in the center. Railroad workers said they looked like locomotive packing washers.\n\nradio announcement that disks were flying over Lewiston, Idaho, Sunday sent hundreds into their yards for a look. Weatherman Louis Krezak said the objects were moving eastward with the prevailing wind and probably were weed seeds. Three air transport pilots agreed.\n\nSearchlights on Clouds\n\nA Birmingham radio station was deluged with more than 400 calls in one hour by persons who said they saw fluorescent balls circling over the city and clearly outlined against near-by mountains. A carnival at Alabaster, Ala., was playing searchlights on cloud wisps.\nAn argument raged at Lodi, Calif., over the cause of a spectacular glow in the sky and a roar shortly before electrical power went off. Mrs. W. C. Smith said she heard a noise \"like a four motored bomber\" just before the lights went off at dawn. Erving Newcomb of the Pacific Gas & Electric Co. offered the explanation that a low flying crop dusting plane probably had struck a power line and burned out a transformer. However, no planes were reported damaged and no one could explain what a crop dusting plane was doing in the air at dawn on Sunday. It was the first time any noise had been attributed to flying saucers.\n\nGive 'Em Room\n\nNewport News, Va.—Peninsula airport here is taking no chances with flying saucers. Pilots reporting Monday to take out planes found this notice on the bulletin board: \"Two thousand feet vertical and horizontal clearance required between aircraft operating from this field and any flying saucers.\"\n\nJ. U. Watts, jr., Darlington (S. C.) attorney, said he saw an army pursuit plane chasing a V-formation of flying saucers at 250 miles an hour 3,000 feet high. However, no pilot reported such a chase.\n\nSaw One With Legs\n\nMeantime, authorities were plagued with reports that bordered on the fantastic. An excited Chicago woman reported that she had seen a flying saucer with legs. \"I was standing on my porch and I thought for sure it was coming right down and slap me in the face,\" she said.\nGeorge Kuger of Denver said he saw a flying disk with an American flag on it.\nFrancis Howell, Tempe, Ariz., claimed he saw a saucer two feet in diameter disappear behind a row of trees near his home. When he rushed to inspect it, he said, the flat, thin, aluminumlike disk took off at a \"high rate of speed\" toward Phoenix, nine miles away.\nMrs. Walter Johnson returned to Spokane, Wash., after a vacation near St. Maries, Idaho, and after reading newspaper reports of the flying saucers said she and several others had seen speeding shiny objects \"as big as a four or five room house\" disappear into the forest covered mountains.\nThe first of the saucers over New York State was reported by Mrs. Kenneth Wohley of Rochester, N. Y., who said she and her husband saw an object \"about the size of an ordinary saucer\" flying above her back yard at 8:30 p.m. Sunday.\n\nMILWAUKEE JOURNAL\nMILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"New Jersey residents said they \"thought\" they saw flying disks over Palisades Park and near-by Bergenfield Sunday night.\nSkeptical scientists recalled the mysterious \"rockets\" seen over Sweden last year. Eighty per cent of the \"ghost rockets\" proved to be meteors, and Swedish officials said the others could be discounted as pure imagination.\nScientists asserted that the objects in order to be seen clearly at 10,000 feet—the level at which most of the saucers have been reported—would have to be 20 feet in diameter, would require a large mass of metal, would be more conspicuous at night and would be seen by a far greater number of persons.\nDr. J. S. Nassau, director of the Warner & Swasey observatory at the Case Institute of Technology at Cleveland, said he was inclined to \"think the reports are fancies.\"\nCapt. Tom Brown, army air force spokesman at Washington, said the army was trying to run the reports to earth.\n\"We're not dismissing the possibility that there's something to it,\" he said, \"and we're not dismissing the possibility that it's all a hoax.\""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. Planes Hunting Discs; Russ Tells of 'Atom Saucers'\n\nFBI Probes Story of Soviet Ship Officer\n\nLOS ANGELES, July 6—(Special)—Federal agents today investigated a letter to the Examiner describing Russian supersonic atom-powered planes resembling the \"flying saucers.\"\nA top flight atomic scientist to whom the Examiner referred the letter said it was \"not all nonsense,\" and suggested the matter be turned over to the FBI.\nThe letter writer said he got the information from an officer aboard a Russian tanker recently in Los Angeles harbor.\n\nKILLED EVEN WORMS\n\nThe Russian, he said, also described experiments with controlled radioactive clouds in the Arctic, where birds, animals and even worms were killed.\nThe planes, as described by the Russian to the writer, are only 18 inches thick, with a kidney-shaped outline and no propellors.\nThe pilot lies on his stomach and is artificially cooled against the heat developed by air friction.\n\"The outer surface is highly polished,\" the Russian said. Both upper and lower surfaces are convex, like a giant lens. The lifting force is an entirely different principle found about 10 years ago among unpublished papers of a Russian chemist.\n\"Energy is required only for climbing, but no energy is needed for support when the airplane goes along the earth's gravitational contour lines.\"\nThe writer of the strange letter said he met the Russian officer in Wilmington and, because he wanted to hear about Russia, invited him to dinner.\n\nThe Russian first asked where he could sell 18 polar bear pelts which he received \"for very dangerous work.\"\nHe said he had been assigned to go over the route of the radioactive cloud near Lake Bakal (or Baykal) and pick up dead animals.\n\nALL LIFE DESTROYED\n\n\"They loaded a few small ships with all kinds of animals and directed the cloud over them,\" the writer said.\n\"During this experiment, a violent storm blew the cloud far north into the tundra, but before it dissipated it destroyed all life on its way.\n\"The cloud may be controlled from land, from a plane or from a robot-piloted 'leader.' As I understand it, the control is based on electro-magnetic waves and the cloud has two components: The carrier and the killer.\"\n\nENCLOSURE\n\nRECORDED\n\nMilwaukee Sentinel\nMilwaukee, Wis\nJuly 7, 1947"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Quirks of Eyesight May Explain Disc Mystery\n\nBy HOWARD BLAKESLEE\nAP Science Editor\n\nNEW YORK, July 6—(AP)—Certain laws of human eyesight will explain much of what has been described about the flying saucers reported from nearly all parts of the United States.\nAt any distance which is close to the limit of how far a person can see, all objects appear round or nearly so. This law of sight covers both small things seen nearby and large ones at great distances.\nRegardless of shape, the object near the limit of sight looks round. If the thing is silhouetted against a bright sky, as some of the flying saucers have been reported, then it is more likely to reveal its true shape.\n\nHAVE 'NO STRUCTURE'\n\nIf the thing is seen by reflected light, as in most cases reported, it is almost certain to be round, and if the reflections are sunlight, then the sizes reported are those which would be expected from distant light reflections.\nThe one outstanding fact about virtually all the saucers is that they had no structure — they seemed merely round and flat. That description fits exactly with the tricks that eyes play. This trickiness varies with differences in weather and lighting.\nThis writer has seen flying saucers over Long Island Sound near his home, not only this year but in previous years. They were round, bright and moving fast.\n\nNOT A MYSTERY\n\nBut they were no mystery because they were light reflected from the bodies of airplanes that soon identified themselves by changing course and coming near enough to be seen distinctly.\nLast week this writer also saw one oval flying form which for a moment looked exactly like the photograph of the oval object taken by Yeoman Frank Ryman north of Seattle, Wash. The Long Island oval came closer and turned into an airplane.\nPlanes at great distances tend to look round when light is reflected from their sides. Many descriptions of movements of the flying saucers fit with the common maneuvers of airplanes, singly or in groups.\nThey fit also with what birds look like, flying at a considerable distance. However the bird illusion is not very common. Some of the maneuvering reported, which took saucers out of sight and back into sight again resembles what can be seen while watching distance airplanes.\n\nSPEED MYSTERY\n\nThere is no explanation for reported speeds of 1,000 or more miles an hour. Meteors, although they go much faster than that, do not explain it because the saucers mostly appear in daytime and there are not enough daylight meteors.\nIce crystals forming little round clouds have been suggested. But these fail to fit in most cases because the ice crystals form at altitudes which are higher than most of the saucers reported.\nNothing published in science or atomic studies gives the slightest clue to flying saucers unless the objects are aircraft.\nOne scientist today said that at least a lot of saucers are explained by the force of suggestion which causes a person to say to himself:\n\"Oh, gee, I see it too.\"\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Saucers' Fly Here; Grafton Disc Joke\n\nWhat was reported as a \"flying disc\" which struck a church in Grafton early yesterday turned out to be a circular saw with two small tubes and several wires attached to it. Father Joseph Brasky, pastor of St. Joseph's Church, Grafton, holds the \"disc\" and points to the lightning rod on the church (arrow), which he said was struck by the disc. Sentinel Photo by Ernest Anheuser.\n\nThe mystery of the \"flying discs,\" strange luminous objects seen speeding across the sky in many states, turned to Wisconsin yesterday when several persons reported them at Milwaukee and Janesville.\n\nMystery was added to mystery when Father Joseph Brasky, pastor of St. Joseph's Church at Grafton, Wis., reported a missile hurtled through the air early yesterday, knocked the ball off the church lightning rod, and landed on the front lawn.\n\nWIRES AND TUBES\n\nIt was a large circular saw-about 16 inches in diameter-and still hot when Father Brasky picked it from the lawn.\n\nThere were wires and two tubes attached to it. The tubes were an inch in diameter and three inches long.\n\nOne theory was that pranksters or belated Fourth of July celebrants had attached explosives to the saw, and sent it skimming through the air.\n\nFather Brasky said he heard a swishing noise and a sizzling at 5 a. m., followed a second later with a thud and an explosion.\n\nAn excited resident telephoned to Billy Mitchell Field, and said he saw 15 flying saucers, in U formation, heading north over Granville, at 10:05 p. m. He hung up before his name could be procured.\n\nA passenger aboard a New York-Detroit-Milwaukee plane, which landed at Billy Mitchell Field at 10:05 p. m., told employes in the office of Northwest Airlines, Inc., he saw a flying saucer bobbing up and down over the airfield just after he had alighted from the plane.\n\nOther passengers with him also saw it, he said. He gave the name of J. W. Rowden of Detroit. Despite its bobbing, the saucer was going at great speed, and was out of sight in a few seconds, he said. Rowden is stopping at the Plaza Hotel.\n\nDISCS HAD TAILS\n\nErwin Rottman, 1328 N. 19th St., said he saw three of them, with tails, flying northwest to southeast, as he stood at N. 18th and W. Vliet Sts. They turned from gold to another color and then to silver, he said.\n\nFrank Phifer, stopping at the Maryland Hotel, said he saw three balls of fire shoot across Lake Michigan at 8:20 last night, about a mile from shore, and going at terrific speed.\"\n\nWhat he described as an illuminated saucer was seen last night by William Humphrey, 3148 S. 20th St., he said. It was zigzagging directly over the Heil Co. plant, said Humphrey, and seemed to land in a wooded area nearby.\n\nREPORTED IN JANESVILLE\n\nFour Janesville residents reported they had seen a flying disc Saturday night. They are Mr. and Mrs. Al Sievert and Mr. and Mrs. Howard Roth.\n\nThey saw the disc flying in a northwesterly direction from Janesville at a \"terrific speed.\" They viewed it for 20 minutes. It was yellow-golden, and seemed to turn at times to a silvery color, they stated. An oval flight pattern was followed. Then, they said, tails appeared on the disc and shortly afterwards it disappeared.\n\nJohn Bosch, 4377 S. Adams St., Milwaukee, a machinist, insisted he saw two flashing saucer-shaped objects pass over Billy Mitchell Field shortly after midnight yesterday. They were close enough so he could definitely state they were not shooting stars, nor airplanes, he said. Bosch's home is near the airport."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANONYMOUS COMMUNICATION NOT SIGNED ENVELOPE ATTACHED\n\nHA! HA! WINCHELL HAS REVEALED THE \"SAUCER\" SECRET. YOU CANT HIDE ANYTHING FROM US & OUR AGENTS LICE WINCHELL COMMUMST\n\n166\n\nflying discs"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: July 8, 1947\n\nFROM: SAC, MILWAUKEE\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS OR SAUCERS\nMISCELLANEOUS\nTELEPHONE CALL FROM MR. FLETCHER\nAT THE BUREAU AT 8:30 AM, 7/7/47\n\nATTENTION: MR. H.B. FLETCHER\n\nAttached are newspaper clippings from the Milwaukee Sentinel and Milwaukee Journal of July 7, 1947.\n\nFor the Bureau's information, United Press and Associated Press telephoned me at my residence about three or four times between 1:00 A.M. and 2:30 A.M., July 7, 1947. The United Press representative informed me that Father JOSEPH BRASKY had stated on interview by a Milwaukee Sentinel reporter, one BILL WEEKS, (Phonetic) that he, Father BRASKY, was going to call the FBI concerning the contraption, which apparently was identical with one of the flying discs recently publicized throughout the country. The United Press representative desired to know if we had any statement to make on the matter. I informed him that I had no official comment, other than \"No Comment.\"\n\nSince I have contacted the United Press representative on various occasions, I asked him what the actual details were, and he stated he did not know except that the interview of the priest reflected that a circular saw had been found with some devices attached to it.\n\nThe Associated Press called me shortly after the United Press representative did, and on being advised that I had no comment to make concerning the story, I asked the Associated Press representative what the actual facts were, and he informed me that as far as the Associated Press was concerned, the facts were that a circular saw had been found and a story had been obtained from a priest who had been drinking quite heavily. The Associated Press representative informed me that apparently the United Press desired to get a statement from me denying or affirming that the FBI was investigating the matter. I informed the Associated Press representative that apparently someone was suffering under a misinterpretation of any comment I had made, and possibly some reporter was in an embarrassing position if a story had gone out over the wire services.\n\nI then telephoned the United Press representative, who apparently in the meantime had been called by the Associated Press in an effort to straighten out the United Press. No reference was made to the FBI in the Milwaukee Sentinel article appearing July 7, 1947, but the Milwaukee Journal article, which is attached, referred to an alleged statement by Father BRASKY that he attempted to get in touch with an FBI Agent whom he knows. Father BRASKY has never contacted the Milwaukee FBI Office or any Agent concerning his find. In my opinion, this is just another hoax story, since a photograph of Father BRASKY with the saw indicates no basis for any investigation by any authority.\n\nHKJ:JJ 62-0 Enclosures"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: July 8, 1947\n\nFROM: SAC, MILWAUKEE\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS OR SAUCERS\nMISCELLANEOUS\nTELEPHONE CALL FROM MR. FLETCHER\nAT THE BUREAU AT 8:30 AM, 7/7/47\n\nAttached are newspaper clippings from the Milwaukee Sentinel and Milwaukee Journal of July 7, 1947.\n\nFor the Bureau's information, United Press and Associated Press telephoned me at my residence about three or four times between 1:00 A.M. and 2:30 A.M., July 7, 1947. The United Press representative informed me that Father JOSEPH BRASKY had stated on interview by a Milwaukee Sentinel reporter, one BILL WEEKS, (Phonetic) that he, Father BRASKY, was going to call the FBI concerning the contraption, which apparently was identical with one of the flying discs recently publicized throughout the country. The United Press representative desired to know if we had any statement to make on the matter. I informed him that I had no official comment, other than \"No Comment.\"\n\nSince I have contacted the United Press representative on various occasions, I asked him what the actual details were, and he stated he did not know except that the interview of the priest reflected that a circular saw had been found with some devices attached to it.\n\nThe Associated Press called me shortly after the United Press representative did, and on being advised that I had no comment to make concerning the story, I asked the Associated Press representative what the actual facts were, and he informed me that as far as the Associated Press was concerned, the facts were that a circular saw had been found and a story had been obtained from a priest who had been drinking quite heavily. [illegible]"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES POSTAGE 3 CENTS 3\nWOODSTOCK JUL 7 7 AM 1947 ILL.\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\nF.B.I.\nWashington, D.C."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PHONE 636 BOOTH PHONE 814 LOCATED IN BUSINESS DISTRICT\nHOTEL WOODSTOCK\nWOODSTOCK, ILLINOIS\nG.I.R.-5\nANONYMOUS COMMUNICATIONS KEEP ENVELOPE ATTACHED\nFlying Saucers\nDear Mr Hoover:\nIn todays paper, I see more news concerning the flying saucers. Now those one without a doubt from Russia. See they are likely checking how completely they can cover the U.S. in Pshot. - I feel it is wrong for us to report areas in which they are seen.\nIn traveling I sat by a spiritualist I wasn't sure what she was - I talked to her, obtained much information as I could - I became interested when she said - Russia has a poison which she will place in an atom bomb that will destroy not one city but dozens of cities - so when I read of the flying saucers I wonder if Russia has still perfected a device which might destroy the whole country in one shot - See the flying saucers were reported in mich. St. New Orleans. These horrible flying saucers are very real and to determine what they are - We are foolish to give them vital information -"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"them vital information -\nNow this woman may only be guessing but it should not be passed up - The name she gave her -\nMrs. MAC NASS\nMrs. Mal Nass 811 E. State St. Milwaukee, Wis. Phone Daily 3136\nWhy do we wait till we are destroyed or nearly so before we act -\nIf we aren't ready in 3 seconds the next war will end all - I seems to see it clearly in these total event -\nLet our war dept. take notice - It's no time to sleep - We should secretly draft men - have all other guns set for a moment's notice - We must be ready. But can we afford to wait if Russia flies destroying us in one shot? Why not let her know it and have it in big doses first - That's the only way I can see no coming out all of all -\nSincerely\n2."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PHONE 636 BOOTH PHONE 814 LOCATED IN BUSINESS DISTRICT\nHOTEL WOODSTOCK\nWOODSTOCK, ILLINOIS"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED JUL 23 10 25 AM 1947 INTERNAL SECURITY F.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED JUL 24 3 14 PM 1947 F.B.I. U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED ATOMIC ENERGY SECTION"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : D.M.LADD\n\nFROM : K.C.Howe\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nDATE: July 11, 1947\n\nAt 10:45 PM on the evening of July 11, 1947, Clerk Piercy of the Washington Field Office called and stated that at the instruction Mr. Hennrich he wanted to pass on to the Bureau information he had just received from one Alvin B. Parker, 200 6th Street, Laurel, Maryland, to the effect that a \"flying disc\" had just landed in Parker's yard \"and the machinery is still buzzing.\" Piercy stated Parker was apparently so excited he had a difficult time even getting his name out, and no further detail could be obtained from him.\n\nAt 10:50 PM I passed the above information on to Captain West, duty officer at G-2 who indicated he had also received the same data from another source, and would pass our information along to appropriate army quarters.\n\nSid Roberts of the AP called at about 10:55 PM and asked whether the Bureau had received any report on a \"flying disc\" in Laurel Maryland. After checking with Mr. Nichols I told him we had received such a report and had passed it on to army authorities.\n\nKCH:H\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED 162-83894-15\n\nEX-16\n\n57JUL24 1947"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. E. A. TAMM\n\nFROM : D. M. LADD\n\nSUBJECT:\n\nDATE: July 11, 1947\n\nSAC Johnson of the Milwaukee Office called to advise he had just received a telephone call from Colonel Harry Schafer, Reserve Officer with the Civilian Air Patrol, Black River Falls, Wisconsin. Colonel Schafer reported that at 3:30 p.m., July 10, one Sig Hanson, City Engineer at Black River Falls, Wisconsin, had found a large 17\" disc which appeared to have been possibly made out of cardboard painted with silver airplane dope. In the center was a tube and a small motor with a propellor attached to the side. Colonel Schafer expressed the opinion that this disc would not be able to fly by itself. He advised it would be taken to the Air Corps Headquarters. Colonel Schafer advised, however, that Hanson did not want to release the disc without FBI approval.\n\nI instructed Mr. Johnson to advise the Air Corps officer to get in touch with Colonel Schafer and tell him he saw no reason for the Bureau to attempt to secure the release of the material since it was not in our custody and we had no control. He stated the press was also calling concerning this matter. I instructed him to make no comment to the press.\n\nDML:cmw\n\nRECORDED 162-83894-16\n\nEX-56\n\n57JUL24 1947"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. LADD\n\nFROM : F. P. GRIFFEE\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: July 12, 1947\n\nReference is made to Mr. Howe's memorandum to you dated July 11, in the above-captioned matter.\n\nAt 11:55 P.M., July 11, I took a phone call from Sergeant Lonis of the Laurel, Maryland, Police Department. Sergeant Lonis said that he had examined the \"flying disc.\" He said that it had been made from a Gulf Oil sign and the top of a garbage can and had been painted with aluminum paint. It had been recently painted because the paint was still wet. Attached to it were a dry cell battery, a flashlight bulb, some wires and a buzzer. He asked if the Bureau was sending anyone out to look at it. I told him that we were not, that we had referred the matter to the Army, and suggested that he call them.\n\nI subsequently telephoned Captain Calvert, the Duty Officer at G-2, and passed on to him the information furnished by Sergeant Lonis.\n\nFPG:jc\n\nRECORDED 62-83894-17\n\nEX-56\n\n57JUL24 1947"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI DALLAS 7-8-47 6-17 PM URGENT\n\nDIRECTOR AND SAC, CINCINNATI\n\nFLYING DISC, INFORMATION CONCERNING. MAJOR CURTAN, HEADQUARTERS EIGHTH AIR FORCE, TELEPHONICALLY ADVISED THIS OFFICE THAT AN OBJECT PURPORTING TO BE A FLYING DISC WAS RECOVERED NEAR ROSWELL, NEW MEXICO, THIS DATE. THE DISC IS HEXAGONAL IN SHAPE AND WAS SUSPENDED FROM A BALLON BY CABLE, WHICH BALLOON WAS APPROXIMATELY TWENTY FEET IN DIAMETER. MAJOR CURTAN FURTHER ADVISED THAT THE OBJECT FOUND RESEMBLES A HIGH ALTITUDE WEATHER BALLOON WITH A RADAR REFLECTOR, BUT THAT TELEPHONIC CONVERSATION BETWEEN THEIR OFFICE AND WRIGHT FIELD HAD NOT [REDACTED] BORNE OUT THIS BELIEF. DISC AND BALLOON BEING TRANSPORTED TO WRIGHT FIELD BY SPECIAL PLANE FOR EXAMINATION. INFORMATION PROVIDED THIS OFFICE BECAUSE OF NATIONAL INTEREST IN CASE [REDACTED] AND FACT THAT NATIONAL BROADCASTING COMPANY, ASSOCIATED PRESS, AND OTHERS ATTEMPTING TO BREAK STORY OF LOCATION OF DISC TODAY. MAJOR CURTAN ADVISED WOULD REQUEST WRIGHT FIELD TO ADVISE CINCINNATI OFFICE RESULTS OF EXAMINATION. NO FURTHER INVESTIGATION BEING CONDUCTED.\n\nEND\n\nCXXXX ACK IN ORDER\n\nWA 92 FBI CI MJW\n\nBPI H8\n\n8-38 PM O\n\n8-22 PM OK FBI WASH DC\n\nRECORDED 62-83894-18\n\nEX-29"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nJul 8 8 22PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nJUL 1\nTELETYPE\nFBI NEW ORLEANS 7-7-47 8-02 PM CGD\nDIRECTOR FBI VERY URGENT\nFLYING DISCS. MISCELLANEOUS. F. C. HARISTON, FIFTEEN FIFTY FOUR TEXAS AVENUE, SHREVEPORT, LOUISIANA ADVISES HE OBSERVED A CIRCULAR DISC AT SIX FIVE PM THIS DATE COMING FROM NW DIRECTION. DISC LANDED IN FIFTEEN HUNDRED BLOCK OF TEXAS AVENUE. HAIRSTON PICKED UP DISC AT FIFTEEN FIFTY FOUR TEXAS AVENUE. DISC WHIRLING WHEN SEEN IN AIR AND FIRE SEEN SPOUTING FROM SIDES. FIRE WENT OUT ON LANDING AND SMOKE ISSUED FEW SECONDS AFTER FIRE WENT OUT. DISC PICKED UP AND NOT HOT. [REDACTED] HAIRSTON NOTIFIED C-2 BARKSDALE IMMEDIATELY AND THEY TOOK DISC BEFORE SA ARRIVED. DISC DESCRIPTION-- THIN ALUMINUM DISC SIXTEEN INCHES IN DIAMETER. HAS SMALL COILS TWO INCHES IN DIAMETER AND FOUR INCHES LONG AT THE ENDS OF THE DIAMETER. COILS CONNECTED BY TWO COPPER WIRES TO TWO TERMINALS ON EACH COIL AND THESE WIRES ARE CONNECTED AT THE CROSSING IN THE CENTER OF THE DISC TO AN OBJECT ONE INCH IN DIAMETER BY TWO INCHES LONG, SIMILIAR TO STARTER ON FLOURESCENT LIGHT. CENTER OBJECT HAS ON UPPER END - [REDACTED] --MADE IN USA--MADE SOUND LIKE A POLICEMAN-S WHISTLE AND SMOOTH SIDE TOWARD EARTH IN FLIGHT. BARKSDALE FIELD AGREED IF NOT HARMFULL WOULD TURN OVER TO FBI IF WE WANT IT SUBJECT TO SUPERIOR INSTRUCTIONS. NAMES OF ALL PERSON WHO HANDLED DISC BEFORE ARRIVAL OF AGENT SECURED. [REDACTED] BARKSDALE FIELD MAKING PHOTOS. WILL SECURE AND FORWARD PHOTOS TO BUREAU. BELIEVED PRESS AWARE OF INCIDENT WEEKS"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nJul 7 10 18PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 10, 1947\nRECORDED 62-83894-20\nMr. L. C. A. Hoersch\n349 Central Avenue\nJersey City, New Jersey\nDear Mr. Hoersch:\nYour letter dated July 6, 1947, has been received and I do want to thank you for making this information available to me. Your interest is appreciated.\nSincerely yours,\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nFRY:mjo\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 11\nJUL 11 1947 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHAS. G. MacREYNOLDS\nTELEPHONE 2-14\nThe MacReynolds\n305-307 Sunset Avenue\nAsbury Park, New Jersey\n7/6/47\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D.C.\nGentlemen:\nFor your information & for what ever value it may be I should like to report seeing one of these \"Flying Discs\" on July 4. It appeared to have started from the dance hall here at Asbury Park & momentarily I thought it was a balloon but it went in a definite direction at an apparently constant speed & gradually ascending following a path similar to the trajectory of a bullet but more pronounced. It disappeared in the distance going north along the shoreline. Glenn Miller & Tex Beneke are presently at the dance hall.\nI hope this may be of some help to you.\nYours very truly\nL.C. Hoersch\n349 Central Ave\nJersey City 7, N.J."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. J. Edgar Hoover\nWash. D.C.\nDoesn't it seem wisest for you to forbid papers - (No not forbid - but ask the co-operation of all papers) to keep all news of those discs out of the news until you are sure just what they are & where from.\nSeems to us with all the enemies we have, even within our borders, it could be something far more important than may seem at first. I had 2 sons in this war & another who over-did for his America - & we do want it really protected from danger from now on. Enough are dead & maimed - with-out losing out now as it easily could be. Why have the papers carried that story if reporters were made to see how much more sensible not to report - it except to the F.B.I.\nThere is too much of danger ahead anyway --\nHastily\n/s/ T. Norris\n1734 Thome Ave\nChicago -\nTRUE COPY"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : D. M. Ladd\nFROM : H. B. Fletcher\nDATE: July 11, 1947\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nSAC Bannister of the Butte Office called at noon today and stated that a Mrs. Fred Easterbrook, 215 7th Avenue East, Twin Falls, Idaho, at 2:45 a.m. Mountain Time today heard a noise in the back of her home. She thought a collision had occurred and investigated and found in the back yard of the home next door an object described as follows:\nA disc 30 1/2\" in diameter, circular in shape, it is dished like a saucer and actually there is a saucer within a saucer in the manner of cymbals. On one surface there is attached a plastic dome described as about 14\" in diameter and affixed by 8 bolts in a rather rough manner. The bolts can best be described as similar to stove bolts. On the other surface is another dome of metal which is gold in color on one side and on the inside is silver in color, which looks like tin. Through the plastic dome can be observed three tubes similar to radio tubes and there is some wiring. The disc generally is 10\" thick and at the point where the domes are located about 14\" in thickness. There is an object on it similar to electric coil which has some type of an arm on it and bears the words \"Inspected TS\". Some of the wiring has been burned off and it looks as though something might be missing.\nMr. Bannister stated that if this were the work of some prankster he went to quite a bit of trouble. He stated the press is aware of this incident. He stated that the disc had been picked up and was now at the Police Department, Twin Falls, Idaho. He was instructed to notify the local Army authorities of the existence of this disc.\nHBF:PES\nRECORDED\nINDEXED\n62-83894-21\n37 JUL 29 1947\nLA-65\n5 JUL 30 1947"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nLABORATORY DIVISION\nRECEIVED\nJUL 17 10 22 AM '47\nRECEIVED-LADD\nJUL 17 10 08 AM '47\nTECHNICAL LABORATORY\nRECEIVED\nJUL 16 5 09 PM '47\nLIAISON SECTION\nRECEIVED\nJUL 16 10 02 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nRECEIVED-LADD\nJUL 11 4 39 PM '47"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 18, 1947\n\nMr. G. T. Morris\n1734 Thome Avenue\nChicago, Illinois\n\nDear Mr. Morris:\n\nI wish to acknowledge receipt of your letter postmarked July 7, 1947. The information contained therein has been carefully reviewed and is being made a matter of permanent record in the files of this Bureau. Your interest in writing as you did is indeed appreciated.\n\nIn the future should you have information which you feel might be of interest to this Bureau you might find it convenient to contact the Special Agent in Charge of our Chicago Office, which is located at 1900 Bankers' Building, Chicago 3, Illinois.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncc - Chicago (With incoming. There is no identifiable information in the Bureau's files concerning the writer of this letter. Despite the fact that this letter refers to \"flying discs\", it is not believed that the information furnished is sufficiently important to refer to Army authorities.)\n\nWVC:WMJ"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"multif you are sure just what they are & where from.\n\nSeems to us with all the enemies we have, even within our borders, it could be something far more important than may seem at first. I had 2 sons in this war & another who overdid for his America - & we do want it really protected from danger from now on enough are dead & maimed - without losing out now as it easily could be. Why have the papers carried that story - reporters"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"were made to see how much more sensible not to report it - except to the F.B.I. There is too much danger ahead anyway -\n\nHastily\n\nR. Morris\n1734 Thome Ave\nChicago\n\nMr J. Edgar Hoover\nWash. D.C.\n\nDoesn't it seem wisest for you to forbid papers (no not forbid - but ask) the co-operation of all papers to keep all pieces of those discs out of the news"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: MR. LADD\nFROM: Roy E. Wood\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS (DISCS) INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDATE: July 10, 1947\n\nAt 5:45 AM this date, SAC Hood telephonically contacted the Bureau and advised at approximately 11:30 PM, July 9, 1947, the office in Los Angeles had received information from the Resident Agent at Burbank, California, that a \"flying disc\" had landed in or near Burbank and had been seen to burst into flame when it landed. Further, that it had been the cause of a fire in some woods, this fire either in Burbank or possibly in the city limits of Los Angeles, which Mr. Hood could not be certain. The fire chief at Burbank had called the resident agent at Burbank and told him he would hold the disc for him.\n\nCoincident with the information received from Burbank, the Los Angeles Office received calls from the newspapers requesting information. The newspapers stating they had called the Army Air Force Intelligence who had stated \"we are not interested\". According to Mr. Hood, this comment had aroused the newspapers and they stated they intended to publish this quotation and belabor same in their first issues. Mr. Hood stated that he had refrained from making any statement to the press other than to admit possession of an object and that it was being turned over to military authorities in the morning (this AM), it being Mr. Hood's opinion that he did not want any quotes in the press and certainly not one to the effect that we were not interested.\n\nAs described to him, Mr. Hood stated that the object was an aluminum disc about 2' in diameter weighing about ten pounds, painted with aluminum paint and having some sort of a radio tube in the center of the disc. This object was in possession of the resident agent at Burbank and would be turned over to military authorities (G-2) in Los Angeles this morning.\n\nMr. Hood's purpose in calling was to place the Bureau on notice regarding the above described object and any further information would be transmitted to the Bureau at once.\n\nAction: None indicated.\n\nREW:da"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJUL 10 10 31 AM '47\nRECEIVED-TAMM\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJUL 10 9 15 AM '47\nRECEIVED\nATOMIC ... SECTION\nJUL 16 2 16 PM '47\nJUL 17 12 28 PM '47\nCHNICAL LABORATORY\nF B I\nS. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED\nLIAISON SECTION\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJUL 17 10 24 AM\nRECEIVED-TOLSON\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nJUL 10 2 38 PM '47\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SIDE VIEW\n62-83894-24"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BOTTOM VIEW"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP VIEW"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nDATE: July 17, 1947\n\nFROM : SAC, Los Angeles\n\nSUBJECT: RECOVERY OF \"FLYING DISC\",\nNORTH HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA,\nJULY 9, 1947\n\nOn the evening of July 9, 1947, a report was received at the Los Angeles Office that a so-called \"flying disc\" had landed in the vicinity of Radford and Magnolia Streets in North Hollywood, California, the contraption being briefly described as approximately 30 inches in diameter, all metal, disc shaped, and having a radio antenna. It was reported to have burst into flames upon landing. At the time of the report the disc was being held at the Valley Fire Department in Van Nuys, California.\n\nSA RICHARD D. AUERBACH went to the fire department immediately at which time it was found that a number of people had gathered including newspaper reporters and photographers who were taking pictures of the disc. Battalion Fire Chief WALLACE E. NEWCOMB advised Agent that at approximately 10:30 P.M., an unknown woman called on the telephone and excitedly reported that the disc had dropped into her garden where it began to flame, her residence being located at 11858 Magnolia Boulevard, North Hollywood. A fire department truck was sent there and put out the flaming object with the fire hose, after which the object was taken to the fire station. SA AUERBACH thereafter arranged to transport the disc to the office.\n\nThe device is briefly described as consisting of two convex steel discs approximately 2 feet in diameter, fused together at the outer edge and fastened together in the center by a hollow cylindrical connection. A vertical galvanized iron fin was screwed to the top of the disc, and a short length of pipe closed at one end ran from the outer circumference into the interior of the contraption. What appeared to be a radio tube was installed in the center of the top side. The contraption had a total weight of approximately 20 pounds.\n\nAt the Bureau Office a series of photographs were taken of the device from various positions, and a set of these photographs are being forwarded herewith for the Bureau's inspection and information.\n\nThe \"flying disc\" was thereafter turned over to Major COURTNEY W. HEMPSTEAD, A.C., G-2, Fort MacArthur, San Pedro, California, who subsequently reported that the object was definitely a hoax and under no circumstances could have flown under its own power."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nDATE: July 17, 1947\n\nFROM : SAC, Los Angeles\n\nSUBJECT: RECOVERY OF \"FLYING DISC\",\nNORTH HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA,\nJULY 9, 1947\n\nOn the evening of July 9, 1947, a report was received at the Los Angeles Office that a so-called \"flying disc\" had landed in the vicinity of Radford and Magnolia Streets in North Hollywood, California, the contraption being briefly described as approximately 30 inches in diameter, all metal, disc shaped, and having a radio antenna. It was reported to have burst into flames upon landing. At the time of the report the disc was being held at the Valley Fire Department in Van Nuys, California.\n\nSA RICHARD D. AUERBACH went to the fire department immediately at which time it was found that a number of people had gathered including newspaper reporters and photographers who were taking pictures of the disc. Battalion Fire Chief WALLACE E. NEWCOMB advised Agent that at approximately 10:30 P.M., an unknown woman called on the telephone and excitedly reported that the disc had dropped into her garden where it began to flame, her residence being located at 11858 Magnolia Boulevard, North Hollywood.\n\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\nFBI\nJUL 31 1947\nRECEIVED\nLIAISON SECTION\n\nRECEIVED\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nJUL 31 1947 12 35 PM\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n\nEX-64"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\n\nJuly 17, 1947\n\nRe: RECOVERY OF \"FLYING DISC\",\n NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA,\n JULY 9, 1947\n\n On the following day, July 10, 1947, one FRANK V. BROWN, 6552 Teesdale Avenue, North Hollywood, reported that on this morning he was at the North Hollywood Service Station eating at which time there was considerable talk about the flying disc having been found in the vicinity. A number of what appeared to be young high school students were present and were having quite a laugh about the excitement caused by the finding of the disc. BROWN stated that he received a definite impression that these young students either had themselves or knew of someone who had been working for the past two weeks making this \"flying disc\". BROWN was unable to furnish the names of any of these young men but identified one of them who was making the statements as being employed in a Chevron Service Station at the corner of Victory Boulevard and Whitsett Street. He described the youngster as about sixteen years of age.\n\n The above information was also furnished to the G-2 Office at San Pedro, California.\n\n\n\nMMB:MGM\n100-9099\nENC. (3)\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, Butte\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: July 3, 1947\n\nMr. DAVE JOHNSON, of the Idaho Daily Statesman, Boise, Idaho, telephonically contacted the Butte Office and asked if the FBI was checking on the flying discs reported to have been seen by many citizens. He advised that so many had reported having seen them that it undoubtedly was not a figment of the imagination. He said that these discs had been seen on July 1, 1947, in the vicinity of Trail Creek near Sun Valley, Idaho, by reputable citizens.\n\nThe writer informed Mr. JOHNSON that this office was not making an investigation and inquired as to whether he had contacted Army and Navy officials. He said that he was inquiring of these agencies.\n\nWGB:LB\n\nAIR MAIL\n\n[handwritten notes]\n\nEX-46\n\n62-83894-25"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nJUL 16 1947\n\nTELETYPE\n\n7-16-47 10 15 AM\n\nURGENT\n\nFBI SEATTLE\nDIRECTOR\n\nRE FLYING DISKS. MRS. T. L. KREMMER, TWO SIX NAUGHT EIGHT DASH THIRD AVE., WEST, SEATTLE, REPORTED FLYING DISK HAD LANDED ON ITS ROOF ABOUT NINE FORTY TWO PM LAST NIGHT, THAT IT WAS BURNING AND IMMEDIATELY EXTINGUISHED. SHE ALSO ADVISED ONI, AND DISK FELL SHORT DISTANCE FROM THEIR OFFICES. AGENTS IMMEDIATELY DISPATCHED TO SCENE AND RECOVERED DISK TAKEN ONI OFFICES AND EXAMINED BY NAVY BOMB AND ELECTRONICS [REDACTED] EXPERTS AND AGENTS. DISK DESCRIBED AS ABOUT TWENTY EIGHT INCH [REDACTED] CIRCULAR PIECE THREE SIXTEENTH INCH PLYWOOD CUPPED UP ON TWO SIDES AND HELD THIS POSITION BY WIRE ACROSS ITS CENTER. DISK NEWLY PAINTED LIGHT GRAY OUTSIDE AND RED INSIDE, AND INSIDE OF DISK HAD PRINTED LETTERS IN WHITE PAINT AS FOLLOWS QUOTE U S S R UNQUOTE, ALSO QUOTE E Y R UNQUOTE, WHICH WOULD APPEAR TO BE RYE PRINTED BACKWARD AND A HAMMER AND SICKLE. MOUNTED ON PIECES OF BAKELITE IN THE CENTER OF THE INSIDE OF THE DISK WERE TWO RADIO TUBES, WHICH WERE WIRED UP AND ALSO SO MOUNTED WAS ABOUT A QUART TYPE CYLINDRICAL SHAPED OIL CAN TO WHICH WAS FITTED A SHORT PIECE OF RUBBER TUBING RUNNING FROM CAN TO ENTRANCE TO A PIECE OF ONE INCH PIPE ABOUT FOURTEEN INCHES LONG. THE PIPE EXTENDED THROUGH THE DISK AND AT THE OUTER END OF THE PIPE WAS ABOUT A SIX INCH PIECE OF CLOTH, WHICH WAS WOUND ABOUT AND STUCK INTO THE END OF THE PIPE. THE ENDS OF THIS CLOTH WERE CHARRED FROM BURNING. THE CLOTH WAS SATURATED WITH SOME SUBSTANCE\n\ncc: Mr. Ladd\n\nPAGE ONE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\n\nBELIEVED TO BE TURPENTINE. CONSENSUS OF ALL PRESENT PRESENT THAT\nDISK COULD NOT FLY. DISK PRESENTLY IN POSSESSION OF ONI SEATTLE\nAND NO INVESTIGATION BEING CONDUCTED. NO PUBLICITY THUS FAR AND\nNO COMMENT BEING MADE IN EVENT PRESS INQUIRIES ARE RECEIVED.\n\nMAYNOR\n\nEND\n\n2-22 PM OK FBI WA NM\n\nO"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM : SAC, NEW HAVEN\nSUBJECT: \"FLYING SAUCERS\"\nEDWIN M. BAILEY, JR.\nSTAMFORD, CONNECTICUT, INFORMANT\nATOMIC ENERGY ACT\n\nDATE: July 18, 1947\n\nFor the information of the Bureau this is to advise that on July 7, 1947, EDWIN M. BAILEY, Jr., 6 Home Court, Stamford, Connecticut, appeared at the Stamford Resident Agent's office and furnished the following information:-\n\nMr. BAILEY prefaced his remarks by stating that he is a scientist by occupation and is currently employed at the American Cyanamid Research Laboratories on West Main Street in Stamford, Connecticut, in the Physics Division. Mr. BAILEY further indicated that during the war he was employed at MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, in the Radiation Laboratory which Laboratory is connected with the Manhattan Project. BAILEY advised that he is thirty years of age and is a graduate of the University of Arizona.\n\nMr. BAILEY stated that the topic of \"flying saucers\" had caused considerable comment and concern to the present day scientists and indicated that he himself had a personal theory concerning the \"flying saucers\". Prior to advancing his own theory, BAILEY remarked that immediately after the conclusion of World War II, a friend of his, RENATO FECHETTI, allegedly observed the \"flying saucers\" from an observatory in Milan and Bologna, Italy. He stated that apparently at that time the \"flying saucers\" had caused a little comment in Italy but that after some little publicity they immediately died out as public interest. Mr. BAILEY stated that it is quite possible that actually the \"flying saucers\" could be radio controlled germ bombs or atom bombs which are circling the orbit of the earth and which could be controlled by radio and directed to land on any designated target at the specific desire of the agency or country operating the bombs. He stated that one of the items of interest which he personally has observed is the fact that the saucers have been observed in Mexico City, New Orleans, Philadelphia, New York, Boston, Halifax, Newfoundland, Paris, Milan, Bologna and Yugoslavia as well as Albania. By placing a string around the globe of the earth it\n\nFXM/clb\n117-0\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"would be noticed that all of the above-mentioned cities form a direct orbit or circle around the earth and would be more or less in line of any path in which the saucers could be circling.\n\nMr. BAILEY further stated that he had recently talked with RICHARD PERKIN, one of the owners of Perkin-Elmer Company in Glenbrook, Connecticut, and had been informed by Mr. PERKIN that his company is making a large powerful telescope to be used in searching the stratosphere for atom bombs."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nJUL 18 1947\n\nTELETYPE\n\nWASHINGTON FROM BOSTON 3\n\n18\n\n10-53P\n\nDIRECTOR\n\nMETAL FRAGMENTS OBSERVED AT WEST RINDGE, N.H., JULY SEVEN, FORTYSEVEN, SECURITY MATTER-X, DEAN JOHN M. BUNKER, SECURITY OFFICER, M.I.T., CAMBRIDGE, MASS., ADVISED THAT TODAY HE WAS IN CONTACT WITH ONE CHARLES [REDACTED] N. TASKER, OF WEST RINDGE, N.H., A RETIRED VICE PRESIDENT OF THE NEW ENGLAND TEL. AND TEL.CO. MR.TASKER ADVISED THAT AT APPROXIMATELY THREE PM ON JULY SEVEN LAST SEVERAL PEOPLE SITTING ON A PORCH OBSERVED ON THE LAWN OF EARL WHITEHEAD, ROUTE TWO NAUGHT TWO, WEST RINDGE, N.H., LITTLE CURLS OF SMOKE, WHICH ON INSPECTION DISCLOSED SMALL BURNED [REDACTED] SPOTS ABOUT ONE AND ONE HALF INCHES IN DIAMATER ON THE GREEN LAWN. ALSO IN THE LONG DRY GRASS ON BOTH SIDES OF ROAD IN A CIRCLE APPROXIMATELY TWO HUNDRED FEET IN DIAMETER SEVERAL LITTLE BLAZES HAD STARTED AND THE FIRE [REDACTED] DEPT.WAS CALLED. FIRES WERE APPARNTLY CAUSED BY METALLIC FRAGMENTATIONS WHICH WERE TURNED OVER TO PROFESSOR RENTGES, OF MIT, BY A MR. PARKE D. APPEL, OF THE TELEPHONE COMPANY. RENTGES HAS ADVISED DEAN BUNKER THAT THEIR GENERAL [REDACTED] APPEARANCE ARE SIMILAR TO THE LINING OF V DASH TWO BOMBS, WHICH HE HAD OBSERVED AT NEW MEXICO. [REDACTED] PROFESSOR L.H. [REDACTED] REWALD, AN OUTSTANDING METALLURGIST AT MIT, STATED THAT THEY ARE POSSIBLY THE LINING FROM A JET TURBO PLANE. AT PRESENT TIME HE IS IN PROCESS OF ANALYZING TWO OF THESE PIECES. THESE SCIENTISTS IN ROUGHLY RECONSTRUCTIN THE METALLIC OBJECT STATE IT WAS APPROXIMATELY FOURTEEN INCHES IN DIAMETER, THREE\n\nA-----END PAGE ONE-----\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n\n270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"---PAGE TWO----\n\nSIXTEENTHS OF AN INCH THICK, AND MACHINE TOOLED, AND SOME FRAGMENTS INDICATED THEY WERE BURNED AND [REDACTED] APPEARED TO HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED TO TERRIFIC HEAT. THESE SCIENTISTS ARE TREATING THIS MATTER AS CLASSIFIED INFORMATION. MR. [REDACTED] TASKER, AT WEST RINDGE, N.H. IS ALSO ENDEAVORING TO COLLECT ADDITIONAL FRAGMENTS AND HAS STATED THAT THE FIRE CHIEF AT WEST RINDGE HAS ALSO SEVERAL FRAGMENTS IN HIS POSSESSION. MR.TASKER INDICATED THAT THE WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE IS SEVEN TO EIGHT HUNDRED FEET EAST OF THE RAILROAD TRACKS. DEAN BUNKER STATED HE WILL MAKE THE RESULTS OF M I T RESEARCH AVAILABLE IF SIGNIFICANT. OPINIONS OF SCIENTISTS AS SET FORTH ABOVE SUGGEST POSSBLE MILITARY INTEREST. MILITARY AUTHORITIES AT BOSTON HAVE NOT BEEN NOTIFIED.\n\nSOUCY\n\nHOLD\n\ncc - Mr. Ladd"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 23, 1947\n\n62-83894-29\n\nMrs. John Maurice Clark\n41 Wright Street\nWestport, Connecticut\n\nDear Mrs. Clark:\n\nYour letter dated July 17, 1947, together with enclosures, has been received and I want to thank you for submitting the letter you mentioned to me.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 2\nJUL 23 1947 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nBHM:ptb"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MRS. JOHN MAURICE CLARK\nTHREE CORNERED POND\nR. F. D. 6\nAUGUSTA, MAINE\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover,\nF.B.I.\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\n\tThe enclosed came to my husband yesterday. After reading it aloud to the family, as a good example of crack-pot-ism, advertising or what have you, he threw it into the wastebasket. I retrieved it, thinking it might better go into your wastebasket than ours, examined by your department en route thither, as of possible value. I presume several thousand have been mailed, and you may receive numberless duplicates. I will risk that. Mr. Clark as an economist at Columbia University receives many strange missives. This is as strange a one as has come for some time, and very appropriate to the present moment.\n\n\tSincerely yours,\n\tWinifred G. Clark\nMrs. J.M. Clark\nJuly 17, 1947\nHome address: 41 Wright St. Westport, Conn.\n\nDr. John M. Clark"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 11, 1947.\n\nDear Sir:\n\n\tHave you seen one of the mysterious \"Saucers\"?\n\tWhat did it look like?\n\tDo you think these strange, celestial manifestations are harbingers of a better day?\n\tDo you believe it means that a new and revolutionary advance is coming?\n\tWill it make your life brighter, happier, more useful?\n\tWe believe one of these startling discs is on its way to you. Then the secret will be out.\n\t\tThe Combined and Amalgamated Committee\n\t\tof Sky-Scanners, Disc Decipherers and\n\t\tNew-Product Introducers.\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 10, 1947\n\nMr. Woodson C. Cope\nCliffside Hall\nSan Marcos, Texas\n\nDear Mr. Cope:\n\n\tI wish to acknowledge receipt of your Western Union telegram dated July 7, 1947. Your interest in making this information available to me is greatly appreciated.\n\n\tInasmuch as the contents of your telegram appear to be of interest to the War Department only, I have taken the liberty of making the information furnished by you available to that Department.\n\n\tSincerely yours,\n\n\tJohn Edgar Hoover\n\tDirector\n\ncc - San Antonio\nNOTE: The telegram referred to \"flying discs.\"\n\nWVC:mn"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\n\n\nJuly 10, 1947\n\nMr. J. U. Watts, Jr.\nDarlington, South Carolina\n\nDear Mr. Watts:\n\nI wish to acknowledge receipt of your Western Union telegram dated July 6, 1947. Your interest in bringing this information to my attention is greatly appreciated.\n\nInasmuch as the contents of your telegram appear to be of interest to the War Department only, I have taken the liberty of turning this information over to that Department.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\n\n\n\ncc - Savannah\nNOTE: The telegram referred to \"flying discs.\""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 10, 1947\n\nMr. J. U. Watts, Jr.\nDarlington, South Carolina\n\nDear Mr. Watts:\n\nI wish to acknowledge receipt of your Western Union telegram dated July 6, 1947. Your interest in bringing this information to my attention is greatly appreciated.\n\nInasmuch as the contents of your telegram appear to be of interest to the War Department only, I have taken the liberty of turning this information over to that Department.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\n\ncc - Savannah\nNOTE: The telegram referred to \"flying discs.\""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI SEATTLE 8-14-47 5-15 PM FB\nDIRECTOR ROUTINE\n\nFLYING DISCS SIGHTED BY FRED CHRISMAN AND HAROLD A. DAHL, TACOMA, WASHINGTON, SM X. REURTEL INSTANT DATE. PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT DAHL DID NOT ADMIT TO SMITH THAT HIS STORY WAS A HOAX BUT ONLY STATED THAT IF QUESTIONED BY AUTHORITIES HE WAS GOING TO SAY IT WAS A HOAX BECAUSE HE DID NOT WANT ANY FURTHER TROUBLE OVER THE MATTER. COMPLETE REPORT NOW EN ROUTE TO BUREAU AMSD, WHICH INDICATES PROBABLY CHRISMAN OR DAHL MADE THE ANONYMOUS PHONE CALL IN THE HOPE OF BULDING UP THEIR STORY THROUGH PUBLICITY TO A POINT WHERE THEY COULD MAKE A PROFITABLE DEAL WITH FANTASY MAGAZINE, CHICAGO ILLINOIS. DAHL AND CHRISMAN WILL NOT BE REINTERVIEWED UNLESS ADVISED TO THE CONTRARY BY THE BUREAU.\nWILCOX\nA AND HOLD PLS\n9-16 PM OK FBI WASH DC GAR"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\n\n\n[illegible]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAUG 14 1947 PM\nRECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(B) FLYING DISCS -- The Bureau, at the request of the Army Air Forces Intelligence, has agreed to cooperate in the investigation of flying discs. The Air Forces have confidentially advised that it is possible to release three or more discs in odd numbers, attached together by a wire, from an airplane in high altitudes and that these discs would obtain tremendous speed in their descent and would decend to the earth in an arc. The Army Air Forces Intelligence has also indicated some concern that the reported sightings might have been made by subversive individuals for the purpose of creating a mass hysteria."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"7-30-47\nBUREAU BULLETIN NO. 42 - 2 -\nSeries 1947\n\nYou should investigate each instance which is brought to your attention of a sighting of a flying disc in order to ascertain whether or not is is a bona fide sighting, an imaginary one or a prank. You should also bear in mind that individuals might report seeing flying discs for various reasons. It is conceivable that an individual might be desirous of seeking personal publicity, causing hysteria or playing a prank.\n\nThe Bureau should be notified immediately by teletype of all reported sightings and the results of your inquiries. In instances where the report appears to have merit, the teletype should be followed by a letter to the Bureau containing in detail the results of your inquiries. The Army Air Forces have assured the Bureau complete cooperating in these matters and in any instances where they fail to make information available to you or make the recovered discs available for your examination, it should promptly be brought to the attention of the Bureau.\n\nAny information you develop in connection with these discs should be promptly brought to the attention of the Army through your usual liaison channels."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFTER FIVE DAYS RETURN TO\n6512 Mission St\nDaly City, Calif\n\nMr J Edgar Hoover\nF.B.I.\nWashington, D.C."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Daly City Sheet Metal Works\nAir Conditioning - Gas Furnaces\nSky Lights - General Repairing\n\nMr J Edgar Hoover\nWashington D.C.\n\nDear Sir,.\n\nReading about Kenneth Arnold seeing these flyling saucers. I got a brainstorm, Maybe there is someone that is Manufacturing a contraption that could be sent up by Remote Control. and could be used against us.\n\nYours truly\n\nJ. Hennman"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: D. M. LADD\nFROM: E. G. Fitch\nDATE: 7/10/47\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISKS\n\nAt request of Brigadier General George F. Schulgen, Chief of the Requirements Intelligence Branch of Army Air Corps Intelligence, Special Agent S. W. Reynolds discussed the above captioned matter with him on July 9, 1947. General Schulgen indicated to Mr. Reynolds that the Air Corps has taken the attitude that every effort must be undertaken in order to run down and ascertain whether or not the flying disks are a fact and, if so, to learn about them. According to General Schulgen, the Air Corps Intelligence are utilizing all of their scientists in order to ascertain whether or not such a phenomenon could in fact occur. He stated that this research is being conducted with the thought that the flying objects might be a celestial phenomenon and with a view that they might be a foreign body mechanically devised and controlled.\n\nGeneral Schulgen also indicated to Mr. Reynolds that all Air Corps installations have been alerted to run out each reported sighting to obtain all possible data to assist in this research project. In passing, General Schulgen stated that an Air Corps pilot who believed that he saw one of these objects was thoroughly interrogated by General Schulgen and scientists, as well as a psychologist, and the pilot was adamant in his claim that he saw a flying disk.\n\nGeneral Schulgen advised Mr. Reynolds that the possibility exists that the first reported sightings of the so-called flying disks were fallacious and prompted by individuals seeking personal publicity, or were reported for political reasons. He stated that if this was so, subsequent sightings might be the result of a mass hysteria. He pointed out that the thought exists that the first reported sightings might have been by individuals of Communist sympathies with the view to causing hysteria and fear of a secret Russian weapon.\n\nGeneral Schulgen indicated to Mr. Reynolds that he is desirous of having all the angles covered in this matter. He stated that reports of his scientists and findings of the various Air Corps installations will be available in his office. He advised that to complete the picture he desired the assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in locating and questioning the individuals who first sighted the so-called flying disks in order to ascertain whether or not they are sincere in their statements that they saw these disks, or whether their statements were prompted by personal desire for publicity or political reasons. General Schulgen assured Mr. Reynolds that there are no War Department or Navy Department research projects presently being conducted which could in any way be tied up with the flying disks. General Schulgen indicated to Mr. Reynolds that if the Bureau would cooperate with him in this matter, he would offer all the facilities of his office as to results obtained in the effort to identify and run down this matter.\n\nMr. Reynolds advised General Schulgen that his request would be made known to the Bureau and an answer made available to him as soon as possible."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : D. M. LADD\nFROM : S. W. REYNOLDS\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISKS\n\nAt request of Brigadier General Schulgen, Chief of the Require Intelligence Branch of Army Air Corps Intelligence, Special Agent S. W. Reynolds discussed the above captioned matter with him on July 8, 1947. General Schulgen indicated to Mr. Reynolds that the Air Corps has taken the attitude that every effort must be undertaken in order to find out whether or not the flying disks are actual, if so, to learn about them. According to General Schulgen, the Air Corps Intelligence are trying all of their scientists in order to ascertain whether or not the phenomena could in fact come. He stated that this may be a relatively remote possibility that the flying objects might be a celestial phenomena, or they may be a foreign body mechanically designed and"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memorandum for Mr. Ladd\n\nMr. Reynolds also discussed this matter with Colonel L. R. Forney of MID. Colonel Forney indicated that it was his attitude that inasmuch as it has been established that the flying disks are not the result of any Army or Navy experiments, the matter is of interest to the FBI. He stated that he was of the opinion that the Bureau, if at all possible, should accede to General Schulgen's request.\n\nSWR:AJB\n\nADDENDUM\n\nI would recommend that we advise the Army that the Bureau does not believe it should go into these investigations, it being noted that a great bulk of those alleged discs reported found have been pranks. It is not believed that the Bureau would accomplish anything by going into these investigations.\n\nDML\n\nI think we should do this\n7-15\n\nI would do it but before agreeing to it we must insist upon full access to discs recovered. For instance in the case the Army grabbed it & would not let us have it for cursory examination.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 30, 1947\n\nMr. George J. Pluskat\n907 Seneca Avenue\nBrooklyn 27, New York\n\nDear Mr. Pluskat:\n\nRECORDED 62-83894-35\n\nI desire to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated July 14, 1947, and to express my appreciation to you for bringing this matter to my attention.\n\nThe information set forth in your letter has been carefully reviewed and is being maintained in this Bureau as a matter of record.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNOTE: Pluskat has been a previous correspondent with the Bu file 62-0-34750. No record could be located in the Crime Records Section indicating that the correspondent might be a mental case.\n\nJLS:FM\n\nMAILED 10 JUL 31 1947 P.M.\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"907 Seneca Ave., Brooklyn 27, NY\nJuly 14th, 1947.,\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover, Chief of the F.B.I.\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Sir;\n\nPlease forgive me for taking up your time, with this item. It really isn't necessary. Yet, although everybodys tongue was wagging from the East and to the West coast, I couldn't resist putting my oar in.\n\nFlying Saucers in the Sky. Heading for the Milky Way. Funny? I dont know.\n\nWe read and read and read. \"Sky Disc Derby Open to All\"-\"Calls Saucers Trick of Vision\"-\"Believe it or not, 27 States see those flying saucers\"-\"Who saw the Saucers? 40 States in the Game\"-\"Celestial Dishes sought between the Raindrops\"-\"Find 'Disk' is weather kite\"-\"Disks called chunks of Mirage\"-\"Report new Red Planes resemble 'Flying Saucers'\".-Air-liner crew reports seeing 9 flying disks for 12 minutes\". That's the way it went on, for days and days.\n\nPlease, dont remind me that this is a military problem. Soldiers fight the enemy out in the open and away from home if possible. The Federal Agents (the unsung heroes) fight the enemy under cover and in their home grounds. So Here I am.\n\nThese so-called saucers may be kites, but according to reports, these things didn't flutter or float, they sailed and kites don't sail, the strangest part is, they all sailed in the same direction, from West to East.\n\nRewards were offered, no collectors. Planes chased them, none captured. They had to land, no finders. So. As long as the Military, Scientist and Civilians deny, being responsible for this. Were does it lead to? An enemy. A little while back, it was mentioned somewhere that Russia had or has a contraption for their next war, emitting sound (like a silent whistle for dogs) what it does to their enemy, I don't know. If a country was experimenting such a weapon, the brave people of the U.S. were not scared. They only informed the so-called enemy how successful they were.\n\nIt could be an optical illusion, or; supposing some unwelcomed persons, planted a few well chosen words, here and there and left the rest to a confused mind. These innocent people reporting the phenomena.\n\nWhat confuses me is, that when we became too curious and determined to find out what they really are, those things disappeared and we found substitutes, called kites. These things resembling description as near as possible to the real thing. Why couldn't these things have been directed back home again like a homing pigeon?\n\nTo make sport of this thing, is bad taste. It sort of reminds me of the boy that cried WOLF. When the wolf really came. Twas sad. He, was a niceboy. There should be a law, against such jokes or experiments in the future. They should be announced to the proper authorities. These in replacement, should be tried for treason, even if the so-called joke seems less or ridicules. We can't take any chances. At this age, Time is slow. Man, is This POOH POOH business is no joke.\n\nI had in mind that the floods were responsible for these disks (mirages) the rushing waters of the Mississippi, Missouri, Platte, Columbia and Ohio Rivers. sun going from East to West, plus the Catskill in the Easterly North. The Blue Ridge in the East and the Rocky Mountains in the West. Reflections, or whatever, were, went from West to East. Hence the Disks? I hope.\n\nRECORDED 62-83894-\n\nRespectfully Submitted\n\nGeorge J. Pluskat."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR D. M. LADD 7/23/47\n\nRECOMMENDATION\n\nThere is attached a Bureau Bulletin to the Field for their assistance in handling this matter.\n\nAttachment\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : D. M. LADD\n\nFROM : E. G. Fitch\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: 7/24/47\n\nReference is made to my memorandum to you in the above captioned matter dated July 10, 1947, indicating that Brigadier General George F. Schulgen of the Army Air Corps Intelligence had requested that the Bureau cooperate with the Army Air Corps Intelligence in connection with the above captioned matter. The Director noted on the referenced memorandum, \"I would do it but before agreeing to it we must insist upon full access to discs recovered. For instance in the Ia. case the Army grabbed it and would not let us have it for cursory examination.\"\n\nThis is to advise that Special Agent Reynolds has recontacted General Schulgen and advised him in connection with the Director's notation. General Schulgen indicated to Mr. Reynolds that he desired to assure Mr. Hoover of complete cooperation in this matter and stated that he would issue instructions to the field directing that all cooperation be furnished to the FBI and that all discs recovered be made available for the examination by the FBI Agents. General Schulgen pointed out to Mr. Reynolds that he will from time to time make the results of the studies of his scientists available to the Bureau for the assistance of the FBI Field Offices. General Schulgen indicated to Mr. Reynolds that there has been a decrease in the reported sightings of the discs which might be because of the fact that it has lost much of its publicity value. He indicated, however, that he believed it necessary to follow this matter through to determine as near as possible if discs were in fact seen and to determine their origin.\n\nGeneral Schulgen inquired of Mr. Reynolds the method by which the Bureau would make the information obtained from the Bureau's inquiries, known to the Air Corps, in the Field as well as at the War Department level. Mr. Reynolds pointed out to General Schulgen that the best procedure appeared to be through the regular established channels. It was pointed out to General Schulgen that the Bureau Field Offices maintain close liaison with the Intelligence Divisions of the various Armies as well as close liaison with the Intelligence Division of the War Department. General Schulgen indicated that he would be satisfied to receive information through this means.\n\nGeneral Schulgen indicated to Mr. Reynolds that he believed that there was a possibility that this entire matter might have been started by subversive individuals for the purpose of creating a mass hysteria. He suggested that the Bureau keep this in mind in any interviews conducted regarding reported sightings. General Schulgen stated to Mr. Reynolds that he would make available to the Bureau all information in the possession of the Air Corps regarding the sightings which were first reported so that the Bureau could conduct some investigation regarding these individuals to ascertain their motives for reporting that they had observed flying discs. When General Schulgen makes the information available regarding these individuals, it will be promptly brought to your attention.\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, EL PASO\n\nDATE: July 22, 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Mrs. GWYNNE M. MERCHANT, Informant\nFLYING OBJECTS IN AIR\n\nMrs. GWYNNE M. MERCHANT has come to the resident agency at Santa Fe, New Mexico on several occasions to report that she has received information concerning flying objects passing through the air. Some of the reports that she has received concern light objects seen at night which have allegedly been followed by explosions. She advised that one of such objects was reported by FRANK BURTRAM, Forest Ranger, who works near Canjilon, New Mexico. She claims that others were seen near Park View and Tierra Amarilla, New Mexico.\n\nMrs. MERCHANT called attention to clippings from various newspapers concerning \"disc-like\" objects seen in New Mexico and other parts of the country.\n\nMrs. MERCHANT claims to be a student of radio waves and ray forms, and contends that the above mentioned objects may be missiles similar to those appearing over Sweden some time ago.\n\nMrs. MERCHANT has discussed the above with officials of the Atomic Energy Commission, and has written the Secretary of War and other government officials concerning her theories. Mr. SIDNEY NEWBURGER, Chief of Security and Intelligence for the A.E.C., has advised that officials at Los Alamos consider Mrs. MERCHANT unreliable and possibly not well balanced mentally. She has mentioned to agents of this office that she was struck by lightning when a child.\n\nOn July 15, Mrs. MERCHANT came to the Santa Fe resident agency and advised that she had written to WALTER WINCHELL, promising him a story in connection with the \"flying discs.\"\n\nThe foregoing information is being submitted to the Bureau, inasmuch as Mrs. MERCHANT has written to several government officials and Mr. WINCHELL.\n\n62-0-3594c\nFTM:GH\n\nRECORDED INDEXED\n\n62-83894-37\n\nAUG 3 1947"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : D.M.LADD\n\nFROM : K.C.Howe\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nMiscellaneous\n\nDATE: July 7, 1947 9:50 PM\n\nSAC Weeks called from New Orleans on the matter discussed in the attached teletype. He wanted to know what policy the Bureau was following in connection with reports concerning these \"flying discs\" which were being received.\n\nI told Mr. Weeks that, unless advised to the contrary, he should, in the particular case at hand, allow G-2 to handle and not take any jurisdiction for the FBI. He was told the Bureau would be interested in being kept advised of developments, and in copies of the photographs he said G-2 would make of the object found, but that he should not allow himself to be jockeyed into a position where investigative responsibility, if any were entailed, would fall on us. Mr. Weeks said he would so handle unless I called him back immediately with instructions for specific action.\n\nAs you will recall, I called you concerning the foregoing.\n\nKCH:h\n\n162-83894-38\nAUG 6 1947"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNIDENTIFIABLE OBJECTS\nWilliams Field, Chandler\nArizona\n\n7 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n1. On 1 July 1947, Lt William G. McGinty, USN, 195803, P-80\nStudent, Williams Field, Chandler, Arizona, was interviewed by\nthis Agent, and stated in substance: That on 30 June 1947, at about\n0910, MST, he was flying at 25,000 feet over Grand Canyon, Arizona, in\na P-80 type aircraft. He stated that he was heading south towards\nWilliams Field, Ariz., when he saw two round objects going at incon-\nceivable speeds, straight down. He further stated that his reactions\nwere to turn away from the objects. He further stated that one of the\nunidentifiable objects followed the other seconds apart. He further\nstated that due to the speed of the objects, he could only see that\nthey were circular, and that they were possible light gray in color.\nHe further stated that it was his opinion that the objects were approx-\nimately eight feet in diameter. In conclusion, he stated that the\nobjects would have probably hit the ground approximately twenty-five\nmiles south of the South Rim of Grand Canyon, Arizona.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Lt McGinty gave his permanent address as: N.A.M.T.C.,\nPoint Hugu, Port Hueneme, Calif.\n\n2. On 1 July 1947, Captain Malcolm G. Armstrong, O-734168,\nInstructor, Single Engine, Williams Field, Chandler, Arizona, was\ninterviewed by this Agent and stated in substance: That his brother\n1st Lt E. B. Armstrong, stationed at Hq, 10th AAF, Brooks AAF, Texas\nhad related to him that he saw a formation of unexplainable objects\nin the vicinity of Lake Mead, Nev. Captain Armstrong, further stated\nthat his brother stated the objects were heading south, and were at\napproximately 10,000 feet altitude.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Captain Armstrong could not give too much information\non the objects that his brother had seen. Lt. E. B. Armstrong can be\ncontacted at Hq, 10th AAF, Brooks Field, Texas for further information.\n\nFletcher 38\n\nLynn C. Aldrich, Special Agent, CIC AAF, FDTRC\n\nTHIS IS A TRUE COPY\n/s/ John K. Orr,\nJOHN K. ORR, Major, A.C."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: August 1, 1947\n\nTo: Director of Intelligence\nWar Department General Staff\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nAttention: Colonel L. R. Forney, Chief, Security Group\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director - Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: MRS. ARTHUR DOUGLAS ANDERSON\n\nThere are attached hereto copies of a letter received from the above-captioned individual concerning \"flying saucers.\"\n\nMrs. Anderson's letter has been acknowledged and she has been advised that copies of her letter have been furnished to you for your consideration.\n\nAttachment\n\nWVC:mjp\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED\n\n39"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: August 1, 1947\n\nTo: Director of Intelligence\nWar Department General Staff\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nAttention: Colonel L. R. Forney, Chief, Security Group\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director - Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: MRS. ARTHUR DOUGLAS ANDERSON\n\nThere are attached hereto copies of a letter received from the above-captioned individual concerning \"flying saucers.\"\n\nMrs. Anderson's letter has been acknowledged and she has been advised that copies of her letter have been furnished to you for your consideration.\n\n34"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nAUG 6 1947\n\nTELETYPE\n\nFletcher\n\nFBI PORTLAND 8-5-47 8-50 PM URGENT\n\nDIRECTOR AND SACS SEATTLE AND SAN FRANCISCO\n\nFLYING DISCS, SM DASH X. RE TELEPHONE CALL FROM MR. LADD, ONE PM TODAY REQUESTING TELETYPE SUMMARY CONCERNING NEWSPAPER REPORTS OF RECENT REPORTED FLYING DISCS IN PORTLAND AREA AND A REPORTED CONFERENCE OF ARMY OFFICIALS IN PORTLAND CONCERNING FLYING DISCS. LEAVERITT G. RICHARDS, AVIATION EDITOR THE OREGONIAN, ADVISED THAT A CAPTAIN WILLIAM L. DAVIDSON AND LT. FRANK M. BROWN OF FOURTH AAF HEADQUARTERS, SAN FRANCISCO WERE IN PORTLAND JULY TWENTYSEVEN LAST AND INTERVIEWED DICK RANKIN, AN EXPERIENCED PILOT, WHO HAD REPORTED JUNE FOURTEEN LAST SEEING A FORMATION OF TEN FLYING DISCS OVER BAKERSFIELD, CALIF. ACCORDING TO RICHARDS THEY HAD ALSO INTERVIEWED FOLLOWING FOUR EXPERIENCED PILOTS WHO WERE AMONG FIRST WHO REPORTED SEEING DISCS - KENNETH ARNOLD, BUSINESS MAN, BOISE, IDAHO, CAPTAIN E. J. SMITH AND CO-PILOT RALPH STEVENS, UNITED AIRLINES, AND DAVE JOHNSON, AVIATION EDITOR, IDAHO STATESMAN. TO ASCERTAIN THE PURPOSE OF THE INTERVIEWS RICHARDS CONTACTED MAJOR GENERAL TUNING OF WRIGHT FIELD, OHIO BY PHONE AT ALBUQUERQUE, NM, AND FROM HIM GAINED THE IMPRESSION THAT THE AAF INSTITUTED THIS INVESTIGATION TO WASH OUT THE DISC REPORTS, SINCE THEY ARE DEFINITELY NOT OF AAF ORIGIN. ON FRIDAY, AUGUST FIRST, THE PLANE IN WHICH AAF INVESTIGATORS CAPTAIN DAVIDSON AND LT. BROWN WERE RIDING, CRASHED AT KELSO, WASH. AND BOTH"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I\n\n PAGE TWO\n\nWERE KILLED. THE WRECKAGE WAS SCREENED BY AAF INTELLIGENCE FROM\nMCCHORD FIELD. THE TACOMA NEWS TRIBUNE AND THROUGH THEM THE UNITED\nPRESS PUT OUT A STORY THE PLANE WAS CARRYING PARTS OF A DISC WHICH\nHAD STRUCK A BOAT OWNED BY HAROLD DAHL AND FRED CRISMAN , TACOMA, WN.\nRICHARDS ADVISED THAT TODAYS ISSUE OF THE OREGONIAN CARRIES A UP STORY\nSTATING THAT DAHL DENIES SAYING THE METAL FRAGMENTS HE FURNISHED WERE\nFROM A DISC, AND ANALYSIS OF THE FRAGMENTS SHOWS THEM TO BE FROM A\nTACOMA SLAG MILL. NO AAF INTELLIGENCE PERSONNEL AVAILABLE PORTLAND.\nNO RECENT SUBSTANTIVE REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS IN THE PORTLAND AREA.\nSEATTLE VERIFY AT MCCHORD FIELD AND SAN FRANCISCO VERIFY AT AAF\nHDQRTS. SF, SUBMITTING TELETYPE SUMMARIES TO THE BUREAU. NO FURTHER\nINVESTIGATION PORTLAND.\n\n BOBBITT\n\nEND AND ACK\nWA 0157AM OK FBI WA DW\nSE\n S OK FBI SE KLS\nSF OK FBI SF NCW\nDVIMSC"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI PORTLAND 8-5-47 8-50 PM HHS\nDIRECTOR AND SACS SEATTLE AND SAN FRANCISCO URGENT\nFLYING DISCS, SM DASH X. RE TELEPHONE CALL FROM MR. LADD, ONE PM\nTODAY REQUESTING TELETYPE SUMMARY CONCERNING NEWSPAPER REPORTS OF\nRECENT REPORTED FLYING DISCS IN PORTLAND AREA AND A REPORTED CONFERENCE\nOF ARMY OFFICIALS IN PORTLAND CONCERNING FLYING DISCS. LEAVERITT G.\nRICHARDS, AVIATION EDITOR THE OREGONIAN, ADVISED THAT A CAPTAIN\nWILLIAM L. DAVIDSON AND LT. FRANK M. BROWN OF FOURTH AAF HEADQUARTERS,\nSAN FRANCISCO WERE IN PORTLAND JULY TWENTYSEVEN LAST AND INTERVIEWED\nDICK RANKIN, AN EXPERIENCED PILOT, WHO HAD REPORTED JUNE FOURTEEN\nLAST SEEING A FORMATION OF TEN FLYING DISCS OVER BAKERS-\nFIELD , CALIF. ACCORDING TO RICHARDS THEY HAD ALSO INTERVIEWED\nFOLLOWING FOUR EXPERIENCED PILOTS WHO WERE AMONG FIRST WHO REPORTED\nSEEING DISCS - KENNETH ARNOLD, BUSINESS MAN, BOISE, IDAHO, CAPTAIN\nE. J. SMITH AND CO-PILOT RALPH STEVENS, UNITED AIRLINES, AND DAVE\nJOHNSON, AVIATION EDITOR, IDAHO STATESMAN. TO ASCERTAIN THE\nPURPOSE OF THINTERVEWS RICHARDS CONTACTED MAJOR GENERAL TWINING\nOF WRIGHT FIELD, OHIO BY PHONE AT ALBUQUERQUE, NM, AND FROM HIM\nGAINED THE IMPRESSION THAT THE AAF INSTITUTED THIS INVESTIGATION TO\nWASH OUT THE DISC REPORTS, SINCE THEY ARE DEFINITELY NOT OF AAF ORIGIN.\nON FRIDAY, AUGUST FIRST, THE PLANE IN WHICH AAF INVESTIGATORS CAPTAIN\nDAVIDSON AND LT. BROWN WERE RIDING, CRASHED AT KELSO, WASH. AND BOTH"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : D. M. LADD\nFROM : E. G. Fitch\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\nDATE: August 6, 1947\n\nSpecial Agent S.W. Reynolds of the Liaison Section contacted Lieutenant Colonel C. P. Martin, Army Air Forces Intelligence, inquiring about an article which appeared in the West Coast newspapers recently stating in substance that an airplane carrying recovered flying saucers crashed in route from Portland, Oregon, to Los Angeles, California.\n\nColonel Martin advised Mr. Reynolds that the only information that has been received by Headquarters of the Army Air Forces is that a CIC Agent of the 4th Air Forces Headquarters, Hamilton Field, San Francisco, was killed in an airplane crash. The Headquarters of the Air Forces have been advised that he was on a top secret mission. Colonel Martin indicated that he was under the impression that the CIC Agent was either on route to or from an interview with Mr. Arnold who is one of the individuals who first saw one of the flying saucers.\n\nColonel Martin stated that the Air Forces have no additional information and will receive none until the report is received from the 4th Air Forces. Colonel Martin suggested that the San Francisco Field Office contact Colonel Springer, Headquarters 4th Air Forces, Hamilton Field, San Francisco, who undoubtedly would be able to furnish the details regarding this matter which are at this time unknown by the Headquarters of the Air Forces. Colonel Martin pointed out to Mr. Reynolds, however, that it was his belief that no flying saucers have been recovered but that it was merely an attempt to reinterview an individual who previously had reported seeing one of the flying saucers.\n\nSubhr"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED LIAISON SECTION 18 9 18 AM '47 FBI DEPT OF JUSTICE RECEIVED INTERNAL SECURITY F.B.I. DEPT OF JUSTICE AUG 15 4 38 PM '47 RECEIVED-TAMPA F.B.I. AUG 6 11 01 AM '47"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Robert J. Sroka\n469 N. Washington Ave.\nWaukesha, Wis.\n\nAttn.\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nGentlemen;\n\nRecently I have heard and read about reports of disc-shaped aircraft, or whatever they are, in our western regions. They reminded me of a nearly forgotten incident in Germany, after the war. I report this to you because I feel this may be of international scope.\n\nMy buddy and I went on pass to see a friend of his. One evening the three of us were driving along some back roads when I sighted a strange looking object in the sky from eight to ten miles to our front and approximatly 5,000 feet high.\n\nI immediatly stopped the jeep for a better look. The object rapidly came toward us, descending slowly. About a mile away it stopped it's horizontal motion but continued a slow oscillating descent, similar to a descending parachute. Then suddenly it dropped in a spiral motion.\n\nImmediatly I drove over to where it had dropped. It took almost five minutes to reach the place but we saw nothing. After ten minutes of cruising around the area it became too dark to see so we went back to town.\nI am not sure my companions saw this, it happened so quickly it could easily have been missed, but I described what I had seen so vividly that they were as excited as I was. My first impression was that it was a cloud, but it was traveling at right angles to the wind.\n\nThe local of this incident was approximatly 120 miles north-west of Habberbishopshiem. If necessary, I will swear to the authenticity of this and to the shape of the object.\n\nSincerely Yours,\nRobert J. Sroka"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Robert J. Sroka\n469 N. Washington Ave.\nWaukesha, Wis.\n\nAttn.\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nGentlemen;\n\nRecently I have heard and read about reports of disc-shaped aircraft, or whatever they are, in our western regions. They reminded me of a nearly forgotten incident in Germany, after the war. I report this to you because I feel this may be of international scope.\n\nMy buddy and I went on pass to see a friend of his. One evening the three of us were driving along some back roads when I sighted a strange looking object in the sky from eight to ten miles to our front and approximatly 5,000 feet high.\n\nI immediatly stopped the jeep for a better look. The object rapidly came toward us, descending slowly. About a mile away it stopped it's horizontal motion but continued a slow oscillating descent, similar to a descending parachute. Then suddenly it dropped in a spiral motion.\n\nImmediatly I drove over to where it had dropped. It took almost five minutes to reach the place but we saw nothing. After ten minutes of cruising around the area it became too dark to see so we went back to town.\nI am not sure my companions saw this, it happened so quickly it could easily have been missed, but I described what I had seen so vividly that they were as excited as I was. My first impression was that it was a cloud, but it was traveling at right angles to the wind.\n\nThe local of this incident was approximatly 120 miles north-west of Habberbishopshiem. If necessary, I will swear to the authenticity of this and to the shape of the object.\n\nSincerely Yours,\nRobert J. Sroka"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Invoice of Contents from FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION WASHINGTON, D. C. L-26\n\nDate 9-10-47 Case References Flying Saucer\n\nConsigned to: Mrs. J. H. Mixon\nRoute 1, Box 30\nEstill, South Carolina\n\nList of Contents\n\nPowered Soap Stone.\n\nMr. Harbo, 7641\nMr. Conrad, 7142\nMr. Downing, 7632\nMr. Sizoo, 7601\nMr. Baughman, 7121\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION REGISTERED MAILED 7 SEP 13 1947 P.M. 497251\n\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Mail Room, place date of shipment and registry number; Shipping Room, show date of shipment and initial this invoice; then return it to person whose name is checked in column at right. After this checked name has been initialled, invoice should be placed in administrative file.\n62-83894"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"L-26\n\nInvoice of Contents from FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION WASHINGTON, D. C.\n\nDate Case References\nConsigned to\n\nList of Contents\n\nMr. Harbo, 7641\nMr. Conrad, 7142\nMr. Downing, 7632\nMr. Sizoo, 7601\nMr. Baughman, 7121\n\nREGISTERED\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION MAILED 7 SEP 13 1947 P.M. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Mail Room, place date of shipment and registry number; Shipping Room, show date of shipment and initial this invoice; then return it to person whose name is checked in column at right. After this checked name has been initialled, invoice should be placed in administrative file."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC ORDED\n\nDate: 62-73894 #1 August 5, 1947\n\nTo: Director of Intelligence CONFIDENTIAL BY SPECIAL MESSENGER\n War Department General Staff\n The Pentagon\n Washington 25, D. C.\n\n Attention: Colonel L. R. Forney, Chief, Security Group\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover - Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: ROBERT J. SROKA\n\n There are attached hereto copies of a letter received from the above-captioned individual concerning \"flying discs.\"\n\n Mr. Sroka's letter has been acknowledged and he has been advised that copies of his letter have been furnished to you for your consideration.\n\nAttachment\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Carson\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Hendon\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nWVC:mjp:rb\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nRECEIVED\nAUG - 7 1947 P M\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"To: Director of Intelligence\nWar Department General Staff\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nAttention: Colonel L. R. Forney, Chief, Security Group\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover - Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: ROBERT J. SROKA\n\nThere are attached hereto copies of a letter received from the above-captioned individual concerning \"flying discs.\"\n\nMr. Sroka's letter has been acknowledged and he has been advised that copies of his letter have been furnished to you for your consideration.\n\nAttachment\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nFBI\nRECEIVED-MAIL ROOM\nAUG 6 4 20 PM\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION CC-159\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nTo: COMMUNICATIONS SECTION.\nTransmit the following message to:\n\nAUGUST 7, 1947\nSAC, DETROIT \"URGENT\"\n\nUNSUBS, RAYMOND EDWARD LANE, MRS. LAURA LANE, INFORMANTS, FLYING DISC, MISC.\nREURTEL AUGUST 5 MATERIAL SHOULD NOT BE FORWARDED TO FBI LABORATORY FOR EXAMINATION BUT SHOULD BE TURNED OVER TO THE ARMY AIRFORCE INTELLIGENCE.\n\nHOOVER\n\nRGF:mae\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nAUG 7 1947\nTELETYPE\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED\n62-83894\nFBI\nAUG 11 1947\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964\n\nSENT VIA\nPer"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WASHINGTON 1 FROM NEWARK 8-4-47 5-36 PM EDST JFG\nDIRECTOR URGENT\n\nFLYING DISC REPORTED AT HACKENSACK, NJ AUGUST THREE, NINETEEN FORTY SEVEN, MISC. INFORMATION RECEIVED THAT CHARLES CASELLA, JR. AGE [REDACTED] AGE TWENTY, TWO EIGHT SEVEN EUCLID AVENUE, HACKENSACK AND WILLIAM TRUEX, US ARMY, FT. DIX, NJ ON LATE AFTERNOON AUGUST THIRD LAST SIGHTED FROM GROUND OBJECT DESCRIBED AS FLYING DISC. CASELLA CLAIMED IT WAS TWO HUNDRED [REDACTED] YDS, IN AIR, REVOLVING SLOWLY, MOVING RAPIDLY, AND NEITHER A KITE NOR A BALLOON. CASELLA TELEPHONED INFORMATION TO HACKENSACK PD. INQUIRY BEING MADE, BUREAU WILL BE KEPT ADVISED.\n\nMC KEE\n\nEND ACK PLS\nNK R 1 WA\n\nRECORDED 62-83894\nFBI\nAUG 11 1947\nEX-46"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AUG 4 8 07 PM '47\nRECEIVED-LADD\nFBI\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAUG 4 5 37 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\n[illegible]\n\nRECEIVED\nLIAISON SECTION\nAUG 8 11 AM '47\nF B I\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nAUG 5 2 03 PM '47\nF B I\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED\nLIAISON SECTION\n\nAUG 5 10 18 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nRECEIVED\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nFROM : SAC, Norfolk\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: August 8, 1947\n\nRe Bureau Bulletin No. 42, dated July 30, 1947, Series 1947, wherein information is set forth pertaining to flying discs.\n\nThere is enclosed with this letter a newspaper clipping from the \"Norfolk Ledger-Dispatch\", dated July 9, 1947. The photograph appearing on this clipping is alleged to represent a flying disc which was observed by BILLY TURRENTINE, a Norfolk school boy, who was successful in photographing the object with his small camera.\n\nBILLY was interviewed on August 8, 1947 by Special Agent (A) THOMAS J. CONNOR, at which time BILLY informed that the original negative was given by him to a Mr. BROWN of the Photo Craftsman Service, who in turn furnished the negative to the International News Service. BILLY advised that he has an agreement with Mr. BROWN whereby the latter will share equally in any profits derived from the use of the negative by commercial firms or newspapers. As of August 8, 1947 BILLY has not received any remuneration for the use of this negative.\n\nHe informed that he was sitting on the front porch of his apartment which is located on the third floor at 410 West 14th Street, Norfolk, Virginia, around noontime on July 8, 1947. He had read numerous newspaper articles pertaining to flying discs and decided to sit on his front porch in the hopes of seeing one and attempting to photograph it. On July 8, 1947 BILLY observed a large, black object moving rapidly through space proceeding from the southwest to a northeast direction. He said the black object was followed by two smaller objects which also proceeded in the same direction. BILLY explained that the objects were moving at a very fast speed which appeared to him to be much faster than the speed of an airplane, and further, that the objects appeared to be extremely high. He said that they were much higher than the average plane travels in the City of Norfolk and appeared to be above the clouds, and that a white mist followed each of the three objects. BILLY was unable to state what the black objects represented, but admitted that they could have been large balloons. He indicated that he has observed small, toy balloons flying through the air, but that definitely these were not the toy type balloons. He said that when he first observed the objects they were at such a great distance from him that it was not necessary that he raise his head in order to see them from his porch on the third floor of the apartment building. He immediately turned around to obtain\n\nRECORDED\nINDEXED"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nRECEIVED\nLIAISON SECTION\nAUG 18 2 19 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nINTERNAL SECURITY\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to Director, FBI\nRe: FLYING DISCS\nAugust 8, 1947\n\nhis camera and estimated it took him approximately twenty to thirty seconds, at which time the discs were almost directly over his apartment and it was necessary that he stoop and look up almost perpendicular in order to obtain the photograph, which accounts for the porch railing being shown in the newspaper clipping. BILLY pointed out that the day on which he took the picture, the weather was hazy and somewhat cloudy and there was a slight breeze blowing from the southwest in the general direction of the northeast, which is the same direction traveled by the black image which he photographed.\n\nInasmuch as the Army authorities in the Tidewater Area of Virginia are cognizant of the above information, no further investigation will be conducted by this office in this matter.\n\nEnclosure.\n\nTJC:lab\n62-182\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Flying From Norfolk Ledger-Dispatch\nDate 7-9-47\n\nFlying Disc 'Bigger Than Automobile' Photographed By Youth Who Is Amazed Because No One Else Saw It\n\nBy GEORGE HEBERT\nThe flying disc \"was lots bigger than an automobile,\" and 15-year-old Bil Turrentine, of 410 West Fourteenth Street, doesn't understand why almost everybody in Norfolk didn't see it.\n\nIn fact, when he came to the Ledger-Dispatch with a photograph he had taken of the object, he wanted to know why the newspapers hadn't already taken a picture of it. \"I thought your photographers were fast,\" he told a reporter.\n\n(Editor's Note: Although the Ledger-Dispatch has had many reports of flying discs and saucers in recent days, no other person reported seeing the object which Turrentine photographed.)\n\nHowever, Bill said he had done some fast moving himself shortly before noon Tuesday, when he stood on his front porch and saw the large gray object, \"rocking and spinning like a football\" and coming from the southwest.\n\nHe had just returned from Summer school classes at Maury, he said, and with all the talk about \"flying saucers,\" had gone out with his camera to see if he could see anything.\n\n\"I don't see why they call them flying saucers,\" he said. \"The big one I took a picture of and the two little ones that came behind it a maybe a rock or stone. The edges glittered, he said, and seemed to be trailing dust. Neither it nor the two which followed made any sound.\n\nBill said he wasn't very surprised when he saw the object, but \"almost killed myself\" getting shots of it with his camera, set at 1/100th of a second.\n\nHe called his 18-year-old sister, Josephine, to come and look, but apparently she didn't believe him.\n\nAs the \"flying football\" passed over, Bill said he took three shots of it, but when he hurriedly developed the film, after lugging it to Olney Road for a vial of developer, only one negative came out well enough for reproduction.\n\nHe showed a reporter a contact print he had made himself, and the picture reproduced here is an enlargement made by Photo Craftsmen. Photo experts of this firm are convinced that the boy did a fine job with the old camera he was using. Having closely examined the negative, they said the only flaw was in the kind of film, which perhaps didn't bring out enough detail. They pointed out, however, that this wasn't really a flaw, in view of the fact that Bill's photograph, with the comparison afforded by the front porch rail and the trees, was certainly the best one taken since the mysterious discs were first reported.\n\nNORFOLK BOY AND PHOTO OF DISC—Bill Turrentine, 15, (right) tells Ledger-Dispatch reporter George Herbert (left) of the \"lucky\" circumstances which enabled him to take the photograph at far right of a flying disc. However, the boy said the object pictured here looked and moved more like a football, being rounded and oval, rather than disc-like. Bill took this picture from the porch of his home at 410 West Fourteenth Street between 11 o'clock and noon Tuesday, using an old camera, with the shutter set at 1/100th of a second. He said the \"flying football\" shown here was followed by two smaller ones, all moving at about 600 miles an hour and he guessed they were about 5,000 feet high, just below the clouds. The photograph reproduced here is an enlargement made by Photo Craftsmen. In the foreground of young Turrentine's picture is the porch rail of his home.\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The Flying Roll\n3615 Alexia Place\nSan Diego 4, Calif.\n\n6751\n\nTHE ROUND ROBIN\nTHE FLYING ROLL\n\nSan Diego, California. July 8, 1947\n\n(For your Information) - A MEMORANDUM OF IMPORTANCE -\n\nTHIS MEMORANDUM is respectfully addressed to certain scientists of distinction, to important aeronautical and military authorities, to a number of public officials, and to a few publications.\nThe writer has little expectation that anything of import will be accomplished by this gesture. The more fact that the data herein were obtained by so-called supernormal means is probably sufficient to insure its disregard by nearly all the persons addressed; nevertheless it seems a public duty to make it available. (The present writer has several university degrees and was formerly a university department head).\nA very serious situation may develop at any time with regard to the \"flying saucers.\" If one of these should be attacked, the attacking plane will almost certainly be destroyed. In the public mind this might create near panic and international suspicion. The principal data concerning these craft is now at hand and must be offered, no matter how fantastic and unintelligible it may seem to minds not previously instructed in thinking of this type.\n\n1. Part of the disks carry crews, others are under remote control.\n2. Their mission is peaceful. The visitors contemplate settling on this planet.\n3. These visitors are human-like but much larger in size.\n\n4. They are NOT excarnate earth people, but come from their own world.\n5. They do NOT come from any \"planet\" as we use the word, but from an etheric planet which interpenetrates with our own and is not perceptible to us.\n6. The bodies of the visitors, and the craft also, automatically \"materialize\" on entering the vibratory rate of our dense matter. (Cp. \"apports.\")\n\n7. The disks possess a type of radiant energy, or a ray, which will easily disintegrate any attacking ship. They reenter the etheric at will, and so simply disappear from our vision, without trace.\n8. The region from which they come is NOT the \"astral plane\", but corresponds to the Lokas or Talas. Students of esoteric matters will understand these terms.\n9. They probably cannot be reached by radio, but probably can be by radar, if a signal system can be devised for that apparatus.\n\nWe give information and warning, and can do no more. Let the newcomers be treated with every kindness. Unless the disks are withdrawn, a situation threatens with which our culture and science are incapable of dealing. A heavy responsibility rests upon the few in authority who are able to understand this matter.\n\nN.Meade Layne\n\n3615 Alexia Place\nSan Diego, California\n\nAddendum: The Lokas are oval shape, fluted lengthwise of the oval with a heat-resisting metal or alloy not known to us; the front edge contains the controls; the middle portion is a laboratory; the rear contains armament. The power consists essentially of a powerful radiant energy apparatus, perhaps a ray apparatus."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COM-4a\n\nF.B.I. TELETYPE\n\nDECODED COPY\n\nWASH FROM SFRAN S2 8-9-47 2-50 PM KC\n\nDIRECTOR FBI AND SACS, SEATTLE AND PORTLAND URGENT\n\nFLYING DISKS, SECURITY MATTER-X. LT. COL. DONALD C. SPRINGER OF G2, SAN FRANCISCO, ADVISED TODAY HE HAS NO FURTHER INFORMATION AND THAT OUR SEATTLE OFFICE IS IN POSSESSION OF ALL INFORMATION KNOWN BY HIM AND IS HANDLING THE MATTER AT TACOMA, WASHINGTON.\n\nKIMBALL\n\nRECEIVED 8-9-47 8:15 PM EDST\nSACS SEATTLE AND PORTLAND ADVISED\nIf the intelligence contained in the above message is to be disseminated outside the Bureau, it is suggested that it be suitably paraphrased in order to protect the Bureau's coding systems."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: D. M. Ladd\nFROM: J. P. Coyne\nDATE: August 1, 1947\n\nSUBJECT: MRS. ARTHUR DOUGLAS ANDERSON\nINFORMANT\n\nThere is attached hereto a letter received from the captioned individual postmarked July 12, 1947, concerning \"flying saucers.\"\n\nThere is also attached a letter of acknowledgement to Mrs. Anderson together with a letter to the War Department for approval.\n\nIt is recommended that the letter to the War Department be forwarded to the Liaison Section for transmittal to that agency.\n\nAttachments\nWVC:mjp\n\nRECORDED\nINDEXED"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, MILWAUKEE\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI PORTLAND 8-11-47 1-17 PM PST KAM\n\nDIRECTOR URGENT\n\nFLYING DISCS. SECURITY MATTER DASH X. ONE RED HATFIELD, FORMER NAVY PILOT AND PRESENTLY AIRPORT MANAGER, MYRTLE CREEK, [REDACTED] OREGON, REPORTS SEEING A MYSTERIOUS OBJECT ON TWO OCCASIONS THE EVENING OF AUGUST SIXTH WHILE FLYING AT ABOUT FIVE THOUSAND FEET ABOVE MYRTLE CREEK. HATFIELD TO BE INTERVIEWED.\n\nBOBBITT\n\nEND\n\n5-18 PM OK FBI WASH DC GAR\nV"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nDATE: August 12, 1947\n\nFROM : SAC, MILWAUKEE\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nSABOTAGE\n\nReference is made to Bureau Bulletin No. 42, Series 1947, dated July 30, 1947, Section (B), which advises that all reports concerning flying discs should be investigated by field offices.\n\nPrior to the receipt of these instructions, two instances were called to the attention of this office concerning flying discs. One report was received July 7, 1947, the details of which are set forth in Milwaukee letter to the Bureau dated July 8, 1947, entitled, \"Flying Discs or Saucers, Miscellaneous, Telephone Call from Mr. Fletcher at the Bureau at 8:30 a.m., 7-7-47.\" No investigation was conducted concerning this report.\n\nThe second report was received by this office at 1:20 p.m. July 11, 1947, from Lieutenant Colonel HARRY W. SCHAEFER, who is in charge of the Civil Air Patrol of Wisconsin, an auxiliary of the Army Air Forces. On that occasion Colonel SCHAEFER, calling from Black River Falls, Wisconsin, telephonically advised this office that an object in the shape of a disc, nineteen inches in diameter had been found July 10, 1947, by one SIG HANSON, city electrician on the Jackson County fairgrounds, near Black River Falls, Wisconsin, about 3:30 p.m. The disc might be made of a substance such as cardboard covered by a silver airplane dope material. The contraption has a small wooden tail like a rudder in the back and inside of the disc is what appears to be an RCA photo-electric cell or tube. Also inside the disc is a little electric motor with a shaft running to the center of the disc. At one end of the shaft is a very small propeller. In Colonel SCHAEFER's opinion that contraption might possibly have been made by some juvenile. Colonel SCHAEFER stated that he desired to return the contraption to Milwaukee and eventually turn it over to the Army Air Forces, but that the finder, SIG HANSON, apparently wanted to get some publicity on his find and wanted it returned to him.\n\nThis information was telephonically called to the attention of Assistant Director D. M. LADD of the Bureau on July 11, 1947.\n\nSubsequently, SAC H. K. JOHNSON telephoned Colonel FRED SIEBERT in charge of Counter Intelligence, Fifth Army, Chicago AC of S G-2 Headquarters Fifth Army, East Hyde Park Avenue, Chicago, Illinois, who stated he would contact Colonel SCHAEFER of Black River Falls, Wisconsin.\n\nNo further investigation was conducted in this matter."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director\n8-12-47\n\nThe above constitutes the only two instances in which this office was contacted concerning flying discs. Unless contrary instructions are received from the Bureau, this office does not contemplate taking any further action in connection with the above two cases, but will fully investigate all future reports concerning flying discs.\n\nJGF/ddc\n98-O\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 5, 1947\n\nMr. Fred R. Reibold\n2315 Himebaugh Avenue\nOmaha, Nebraska\n\nDear Mr. Reibold:\n\nI wish to acknowledge receipt of your letter postmarked July 10, 1947, together with its enclosure.\n\nInasmuch as the information which you furnished is of interest to the War Department I have taken the liberty of furnishing it to that agency for their consideration.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"copy\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNIDENTIFIABLE OBJECTS,\nWILLIAMS FIELD, CHANDLER,\nARIZONA.\n\n14 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\nOn 8 July 1947, this Agent obtained pictures of unidentifiable objects, (Exhibits 1 and 2) from the managing editor of the Arizona Republic newspaper. The pictures were taken by Mr. William Rhoads, 4333 N. 14th St., Phoenix, Arizona, at sunset, on 7 July 1947. The Subject objects flew at unconceivable speeds, making three circles in the vicinity of Mr. Rhoads' home. The pictures were taken with a box camera, size 620. The photograph (Exhibit 1) was taken as the object passed in front of Mr. Rhoads, and Exhibit 2 as the object turned towards Mr. Rhoads. The height of the object was estimated at 1000 feet.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: See Exhibits 1 and 2, photographs of unidentifiable objects, enlarged approximately 20 times. No further reports have been received by this office of objects seen by military personnel.\n\nLynn. C. Aldrich, Special Agent, EIC - AAF, FDTRC\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\ncopy"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA\n333.5 ID\n\n4 August 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Special Agent in Charge, FBI, U. S. Dept of Justice, Suite 426, 111 Sutter Street, San Francisco 4, California.\n\nInclosed herewith is information copy of MOIC and newspaper clipping re subject.\n\n2 Incls:\n1. MOIC Sorensen 7 Jul 47.\n2. Newspaper clipping dtd\n5 Jul 47.\n\nWILLIAM R. GRAHAM\nMajor, Air Corps\nDeputy AC of S, A-2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-52"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA\n333.5 ID\n\n4 August 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Special Agent in Charge, FBI, U. S. Dept of Justice, Suite 426, 111 Sutter Street, San Francisco 4, California.\n\nAttached MOIC is forwarded for your information.\n\n1 Incl:\nMOIC Aldrich, 14 Jul 47.\n\nWILLIAM R. GRAHAM\nMajor, Air Corps\nDeputy AC of S, A-2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA\n333.5 ID\n\n4 August 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Special Agent in Charge, U. S. Department of Justice, Suite 426, 111 Sutter Street, San Francisco, California.\n\nForwarded herewith is information copy of statement and newspaper clipping re subject.\n\n2 Incls:\n1. Statement of RANKIN, dtd 30 Jul 47.\n2. Newspaper clipping, dtd 5 Jul 47.\n\nWILLIAM R. GRAHAM\nMajor, Air Corps\nDeputy AC of S, A-2\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nAUG 7 1947\nSAN FRANCISCO\nROUTED TO\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nFrom the Oregon Journal - continued.\n\nMORE SEEN LATER.\n\nSeveral late flights of objects over Portland were reported Friday afternoon. E. A. Evans, 3435 SW Macadam avenue, said he saw three fly east across the Willamette river near the Ross Island bridge about 2 p.m.\nThe objects did not appear high, he said, and were traveling so fast that, appearing in the west, they were out of sight in the east in two to four seconds. He said they resembled metallic disks glinting in the sunlight.\nLater, he said, he and neighbors saw a single disk-like object flying north far away and very high.\nAt 4:30 p.m., Mrs. Lawrence J. Hayward, 6124 NE 21st Avenue, reported sighting a disk \"like a new dime flipping around\" in the air over the Sandy district. She said it seemed to be moving slowly.\n\nPAPER RECOVERED.\n\nThomas W. Dwyer, 1232 NE 59th Avenue, said he sighted two white or silver objects flying southeast high over Portland a few minutes before 5 p.m. He reported another, headed northeast, over his home at 5:30 p.m.\nC. J. Bagne, Tigard, reported that four disks flew past Mount Jefferson at about 11 a.m. while he was driving near Redmond.\nSherman Cook, 2000 NE 65th avenue, recovered from Rose City golf course a piece of paper he said had fallen from a great height in the sky. Time of its fall coincided with some of the reports of flying disks. The paper, of low quality, measured 23 x 36 inches.\n\nSILVERED DISKS, DROPPED BY PLANE.\n\nEUGENE, July 5 -(AP)- A Eugene railroad cashier said Friday he saw silvered disks being dropped out of a light airplane flying over this city.\nE. F. Smith, Rt 2, Eugene, an assistant cashier for the Southern Pacific Railroad, said he was driving on a Eugene street when --"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nFROM THE OREGON JOURNAL - 5 July 1947, Portland, Ore.\n\nAIRLINES CREW CONFIRMS REPORTS OF FLYING DISKS: FIVE SPOTTED.\n\nCircumstantial reports of flying disks in the sky Friday came from the crew of a United Airlines plane over Boise, Idaho, and a coast guardsman near Seattle, as well as from Portland area police and citizens.\nE. J. Smith, captain of the airliner, told United Press that he sighted five \"somethings\" which were \"thin and smooth on the bottom and rough appearing on top.\" The objects appeared against the sunset shortly after the plane took off at 8:04 p.m., he said.\n\"We saw them clearly,\" he reported. \"We followed them in a northwesterly direction for about 45 miles. Finally the objects disappeared. We were unable to tell whether they outsped us or disintegrated.\n\nNOT AIRCRAFT.\n\n\"We can't say whether they were saucer-like, oval or anything else,\" the captain said, \"but whatever they were, they were not another aircraft, nor were they smoke or clouds.\"\nIn Seattle, Coast Guardsman Frank Ryman, 27, reported to United Press that he snapped a picture from the front porch of his home which showed a \"white saucer\" flying over the north end of Lake Washington.\nAcme News Pictures, New York City, said a 7x9 inch print of the photograph showed two tiny dots, one of which was a flaw in the print.\nDon Metcalfe, 19, Oaks Amusement park employe, reported that he saw several objects \"like spinning disks\" in the sky Friday. He said several picnickers, including a woman pilot noticed them.\nIn Vancouver, Wash., Sheriff's Deputies John Sullivan, Clarence McKay and Fred Krives heard the Portland police radio broadcast and ran out of the sheriff's office to look at the sky. Over Portland, three to five miles away, Sullivan said, they saw 20 to 30 objects \"like a flight of geese.\" They heard a low humming sound.\n\nOTHERS DOUBTFUL.\n\nCol. G. R. Dodson, commander of the Oregon national guard, made an inspection of this area from the air after the disks were reported here. He said he saw nothing \"suspicious.\"\nOnly known military airplanes in the air at the time of the reports were 23 B-29 bombers near Astoria.\nDespite all the reports, at least two persons remained unconvinced of the existence of the disks. Al P. Sanford, Holgate moorage, gave his opinion that the objects were cottonwood blossoms.\nBurl Nollsch, 64, of 6604 N. Burrage avenue, telephoned the Journal to berate the newspapers for \"perpetuating a hoax.\" He said he saw objects in the sky about a minute after an airplane passed over his house. To him the objects looked like bits of aluminum foil, perhaps cigarette wrappers."} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPORTLAND, OREGON\n30 July 1947\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nOn 30 July 1947 Mr Richard Rankin, 834 N. E. Simpson Street, Portland, Oregon was interviewed by this agent and stated in substance as follows:\n\nMy name is Richard Rankin. I am 47 years old and have flown since I was nineteen years old. I first soloed in an aircraft in 1919. I have flown over all the western parts of the United States many times and have mapped all of the western part of this United States during the years before the late war for the US Forest Service. I am familiar with almost every part of the western United States. During a great part of my life I have done stunt flying for air shows and various other types of aeronautical exhibitions. My brother was \"Tex\"Rankin who was quite well known in both civilian and Military flying circles for many years before his death and during the late war ran thousands of Flying Cadets through primary training schools owned and operated by him. To date I have accomplished 7000 hours in the air as pilot of both civilian and Military aircraft. I am well acquainted with most articles that one would see in the air and I feel that I am well qualified to say when I see articles flying through the air, although I would not attempt to say that I am infallible and state that I could definitely identify every object that might be flying through the air. The following is an account of what I saw on 14 June 1947 from the yard of my home at 1003 South \"H\" St, Bakersfield, California.\n\nAt approximately 1200 noon on the 14 of June I was lying in the front yard of my home. There was a lad mowing the lawn at the time. I looked up into the sky and saw ten articles flying from the South to the North at what I would judge to be 8500 ft. The objects were flying at approximately what I would judge to be 350 miles per hour. As I have stated before, I have done quite a lot of map work for the US Forest Service. I distinctly remember that at the time I saw the articles I mentioned it to the lad who was mowing the lawn at the time. I told the lad that the objects were in all probability some sort of Army or Navy test planes from the nearby test centers on the deserts of Southern California. Having quite a knowledge of aircraft in general I attempted to explain to the lad mowing the lawn that the objects were probably on some sort of training mission for either the Army or Navy. At that time I did not give the slightest thought to anything but that the objects were some sort of test ship for the Government Services. The objects resembled the pictures that I have seen of the XF5U-1, the so called \"Flying Flapjack\" aircraft that the Navy is testing. After the objects disappeared I proceeded into the house and had my noon meal. At approximately 1:15 I went back into the yard to sit and lie in the shade. At this time the objects reappeared going from North to South, although this time there were only seven of the articles. When I first saw the original ten objects they were flying in a \"V\" formation with one object seemingly straggling in the rear of the formation. When the objects appeared the second time they were still in the \"V\" formation although there was only seven of the objects at this time. I remember at this time that I told the lad, who was still working on the lawn, that probably three of the objects had proceeded back to their base on a different course. I actually thought that this was the case, that the other three objects had probably gone back to their base on the other side of the mountains from Bakersfield. A week or so later when I read of Mr Kenneth Arnold claiming that he had seen articles flying through the air over the Cascade Mountains in"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY\n\nFROM \"THE OREGONIAN\" - Thursday, July 3, 1947\n\nPILOT RECALLS SEEING DISCS.\n\nDick Rankin Tells Of Odd Aircraft:\n\nMore reports of \"flying flapjacks\" turned up Wednesday, one from no less than Dick Rankin, brother of the late Tex Rankin, and himself an experienced pilot of more than 7000 hours' flying time.\nRankin, who is recovering from an old back injury received in an automobile accident, came to Portland over the weekend to spend the summer. He saw the \"silver saucers\" over Bakersfield, Cal., June 23, while lying on the lawn sun bathing, he told The Oregonian.\n\"I hesitated so say much about them,\" Rankin said, \"until I noticed all the hullabaloo in the papers. I puzzled over their strange shape for a while and finally concluded that they were the navy's new XF5U-1 flying flapjacks, which are thin and round, with twin propellers and stubby tail.\"\n\nONLY ONE XF5U-1 BUILT.\n\nThe navy and the manufacturer have announced officially that only one such machine was built and that it never left Connecticut.\n\"These planes were flying high, maybe 9000 feet, and fairly fast, about 300 or 400 miles an hour. I first counted ten of them in formation, going north. About 2:15 P.M. they returned on the reverse course, headed south, but there were only seven in the formation.\n\"They were not weaving or bobbing in formation; I couldn't make out the number or location of their propellers and couldn't distinguish any wings or tail. They appeared almost round. They looked like pictures of the navy's flying flapjack,\" Rankin said.\nRankin, who plans to spend the summer here at 834 N. E. Simpson St., is now able to resume a little flying for fun, but not commercially, he said. He now operates a string of auto courts, spending his winters at Palm Springs.\n\nTWO DESCRIPTIONS CHECK.\n\nRankin's description of the mysterious aerial objects agrees with that of Kenneth Arnold, Boise, Idaho, business man, who first reported them over the State of Washington, except that Arnold clocked them at an estimated 1200 miles an hour.\nOther reports came Wednesday from Astoria. Jack Hayes, patient in St. Mary's hospital there, said he saw two of the discs Monday flying southwest at a rapid speed and that they vanished behind the hills.\nMrs. Earl Seado, Fort Stevens, said she saw a disc traveling north over Fort Stevens Tuesday noon, and that other observers saw the same object.\nThe army at Fort Stevens and the coast guard at nearby Point Adams did not see the discs.\nThe report of a Centralia, Wash., man Wednesday coincided in matter of time with the original report made by Arnold. Sidney B. Callagher of Centralia said he saw nine aluminum-hued objects flying north at 3 P.M. June 24. He was working 11 miles southwest of Mineral, Wash., at the time.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(2)\n\nwashington I realised that the articles that I saw were probably the same thing. I was still reluctant to mention this to anyone thinking that they would probably say that I was crazy. After sometime I mentioned the incident to the editor of the \"Oregonian\", a Portland, Oregon newspaper. At this time I was in Portland for the remainder of the summer. The results of the conversation with the editor of the paper is put forth in the accompanying newspaper articles.\n\nI fully realize that this is a broad statement in view of the fact that there has been so much publicity hoaxes put forth in various newspapers of the country. I am of sound mind in every respect and I am firmly convinced that the articles I saw are actually some sort of flying machines although I cannot say from where they came or to where they were going. I say what I have said with no idea of publicity or personal gain.\n\nSIGNED\nRichmond Hankin\nPortland, Oregon\n30 July 1947"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FROM THE OREGON JOURNAL - 5 July 1947, Portland, Ore.\n\n\"PROWL CARS SPOT DISKS IN SKY HERE\"\n\nWhatever they are, there are some disk-like objects flying around in the sky.\n\nOr else eight Portland area policemen and deputy sheriffs who sighted the objects Friday, numerous private citizens, the crew of a United Air Lines plane over Boise, Idaho, and a coastguardsman who claims to have photographed one near Seattle, are all wrong.\n\nIn Portland the alert was sounded over police radio at 1:06 p.m. Friday, after the East Side station received a score of calls that the disks were overhead. Within seconds, two prowl cars reported spotting the mystery craft.\n\nFLASHES SEEN, NOISE LACKING.\n\nFirst to report in were Patrolmen Walter Lissy and Robert Ellis in Car No. 82, who stopped near Oaks Park. Both World War II veterans and civilian pilots, they sighted three of the objects within 30 seconds traveling at great height and speed over the park. They reported they heard no engine noises but saw flashes. The objects seemed erratic and changed direction of flight. The patrolmen agreed that without knowledge of the size of the objects it would be impossible to judge their speed or altitude.\n\nPatrolman Earl Patterson in car No. 13 stopped at SE 82d avenue and Foster road to look eastward from there the disks were reported. Telephone calls located them coming out of the sun. He saw nothing, but a few seconds later observed one coming out of the west and heading southwest. The craft seemed to be aluminum or eggshell white and didn't flash or reflect light, he said.\n\nOBJECTS UNIDENTIFIED.\n\nA former aircorps veteran, he said the object was unlike any plane he'd ever seen. He thought it appeared radio-controlled because the disk could change direction at a 90-degree angle without difficulty.\n\nMembers of the harbor patrol at the foot of NW Irving street stopped out when they heard the all-car alert. Capt. K. A. Prehn, Harbor Pilot, A. T. Austed and Patrolman K. C. Hoff all saw the objects and said they appeared to be going south high over the Globe mills at terrific speed. Capt. Prehn said the flashes kept them from ascertaining whether there were three or six.\n\n\"The disks would oscillate and sometimes we would see a full disk, then a half-moon shape, then nothing at all,\" he reported. The objects looked more like a shiny chromium hub cap off a car which wobbled, disappeared and reappeared.\"\n\nThere was a plane in the sky at the time, but all were emphatic that the disks were not planes.\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nAUG 7 1947\nSAN FRANCISCO\nROUTED TO\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNEXPLAINED FLYING DISCS\n7 July 1947\n\n5. This agent interviewed W. A. Lissy and D. W. Ellis, both Patrolmen, Portland City Police Department and both possess private pilots licenses. Both officers advised that upon hearing the radio alert, they saw three flat round discs, having a white color to them. These discs were, according to these officers, flying at a terrific speed in a Southerly direction away from Portland. They described them as flying in a straight line formation, the last disc fluttering very rapidly in a side way arc. They further advised the discs were equally spaced and kept in formation. Both officers estimated the discs altitude at 40,000 feet. They saw no evidence of any motivating powers and vapor trails or smoke trails. Both officers stated these discs were traveling so fast, they were out of sight before any detailed observation could be made, or any sound could be heard.\n\nAGENT'S NOTE: All informants mentioned herein are known to this agent as very dependable and trustworthy officers, not being afflicted with hallucinations. The weather in the Portland area at this time was clear with little or no cloud formations being visable from the ground. Ground temperature at this time was 82 degrees Fahrenheit.\n\nKeith A. Sorensen, S/A CIC, Sixth Army\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNEXPLAINED FLYING DISCS\n7 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n1. At 1305, 4 July 1947, a radio alert was issued via the Portland City Police Radio, advising all cars and listeners that some fast flying objects were in the air over Portland and vicinity. Upon contacting the radio dispatcher, this agent was advised that Kenneth A. McDowell, Patrolman, Portland City Police Department, residing at 916 S. E. Bush Street, Portland, Oregon, on duty at Precinct #1, Portland City Police, Southeast Morrison at 10th Avenue, had called in advising the dispatcher of the flying objects.\n\n2. This agent interviewed Officer McDowell who stated at approximately 1305, 4 July 1947, he was on duty at Precinct #1, and was in the parking lot back of the Police Station, feeding the pigeons. At this time the pigeons became very excited over something and fluttered in the air all at once. Officer McDowell stated in looking around to see what had disturbed them, he saw five large discs in the air to the East of Portland two discs flying South and three flying in an Easterly direction. Officer McDowell stated he could determine no color to the discs, but advised they were dipping in an up and down oscillating motion and were traveling at a great speed. He was unable to give an estimate of the speed or altitude of these discs as they were out of sight before any detailed observation could be made. Officer McDowell advised he notified the Police Radio who immediately broadcast an alert. Officer McDowell advised he saw no indication of any motivating force or heard any sound coming from these discs and could give no description other than round.\n\n3. This agent interviewed Sergeant Claude Cross, Oregon State Police Officer on duty at District Number 1 Station, Milwaukie, Oregon. Cross stated upon hearing the radio alert he went outside and upon looking in an Easterly direction he saw three discs following each other at an undetermined altitude and at a terrific speed, traveling in a Northwesterly direction. Cross advised he noticed a whitish brown glint to these objects as the sun reflected from them. Cross was unable to give any other description nor could he judge the objects speed or altitude. No sound was made by the objects.\n\n4. This agent interviewed Earl E. Patterson, Patrolman, Portland City Police Department, and residing at 124 Southeast 13th Avenue, Portland, Oregon. Patterson advises he was a former Air Corps pilot during the war. He stated that the time the radio alert sounded, he was at Southeast 82nd and Foster Road, Portland, and upon getting out of his car he saw one disc flying in a Southwesterly direction over Portland. Patterson advised this disc was aluminum in color, left no vapor trail or smoke trail and was traveling at a terrific speed, faster than he has ever seen any flying object before. Patterson further advised, although not knowing the exact size of the object it is difficult to determine the altitude, he estimates its altitude at 30,000 feet.\n\nPatterson further advised the flying disc was definitely some type of aircraft but he could not give any further description as its speed made observation difficult. He heard no sound emitted by the flying objects.\n\nKeith A. Sorensen, S/A CIC, Sixth Army\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"86f171f4438f09a0","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"86f67e9dc6c9d0a6","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nMRN: 01 MOSCOW 13169\nDate/DTG: Oct 30, 2001 / 300000Z Oct 01\nFrom: AMEMBASSY MOSCOW\nAction: WASHDC, SECSTATE ROUTINE\nE.O.: Unknown\nTAGS: PREL, MARR, KCFE, UN, OSCE, GG, RS\nReference: (A) MOSCOW 13072 (B) TBILISI 3087\nSubject: UFOS OVER GEORGIA: STRANGE ENCOUNTERS OF AN MFA KIND\n\nCONFIDENTIAL PTQ6889\n\nPAGE 01 MOSCOW 13169 01 OF 02 301754Z\nACTION IO-00\n\nINFO LOG-00 NP-00 AID-00 ACQ-00 CIAE-00 DOEE-00 DOTE-00\nSRPP-00 DS-00 EB-00 EUR-00 OIGO-00 FAAE-00 FBIE-00\nVC-00 H-01 TEDE-00 INR-00 LAB-01 L-00 VCE-00\nMOFM-05 MOF-03 M-00 AC-01 DCP-01 NRRC-00 NSAE-00\nNSCE-00 OIC-02 OMB-01 PA-00 PC-01 PM-00 PRS-00\nACE-00 P-00 SCT-00 SP-00 SS-00 TRSE-00 T-00\nUSIE-00 SA-00 BBG-00 SNIS-00 NISC-00 SSD-00 PMB-00\nDSCC-00 PRM-00 DRL-02 G-00 NFAT-00 SAS-00 SWCI-00\n/018W\n------------------3782F8 301754Z /38\nP 301741Z OCT 01\nFM AMEMBASSY MOSCOW\nTO SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 1142\nINFO AMEMBASSY TBILISI PRIORITY\nUSMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY\nMOSCOW POLITICAL COLLECTIVE\nAMEMBASSY BAKU\nAMEMBASSY YEREVAN\nUSMISSION USOSCE\nSECDEF WASHDC\nJOINT STAFF WASHDC\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECTION 01 OF 02 MOSCOW 013169\n\nE.O. 12958: DECL: 10/29/21\nTAGS: PREL, MARR, KCFE, UN, OSCE, GG, RS\nSUBJECT: UFOS OVER GEORGIA: STRANGE ENCOUNTERS OF AN MFA\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nPAGE 02 MOSCOW 13169 01 OF 02 301754Z\n\nDeclassified in Full / Release in Full\nJohn Powers, Acting-Director\nUS Department of State\n2/25/2026\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 1 of 5"} {"doc_id":"86f67e9dc6c9d0a6","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nKIND\n\nCLASSIFIED BY POLMINCOUNS GEORGE KROL. REASON 1.5 (B/D).\n\nREF: (A) MOSCOW 13072 (B) TBILISI 3087\n\n1. (C) SUMMARY: DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER MAMEDOV TOLD AMBASSADOR VERSHBOW OCTOBER 30 THAT ACCORDING TO THE RUSSIAN MINISTRY OF DEFENSE, NO RUSSIAN PLANES FLEW OVER OR BOMBED POSITIONS IN THE KODORI GORGE OCTOBER 28-29, DESPITE GEORGIAN ACCUSATIONS TO THE CONTRARY. MFA GEORGIA DESK CHIEF TEREOKEN ECHOED MAMEDOV'S STATEMENT. TEREOKEN FURTHER CONFIRMED THAT ONE RAILWAY CAR FULL OF RUSSIAN MILITARY EQUIPMENT LEFT GUDAUTA BASE AND ENTERED RUSSIA OCTOBER 29 (REF A) AND THAT TWO OTHER RAILWAY CARS ARE LOADED AND AWAITING ABKHAZ PERMISSION TO LEAVE FOR RUSSIA. THERE ARE NO PLANS TO WITHDRAW PERSONNEL UNTIL TBILISI AGREES THAT APPROXIMATELY 340 RUSSIAN \"GUARDS\" CAN REMAIN AT GUDAUTA. TEREOKEN SAID THAT ABKHAZ AUTHORITIES WOULD NOT ALLOW ANY OUTSIDE OBSERVERS TO WITNESS THE WITHDRAWAL. TEREOKEN TERMED GEORGIAN PARLIAMENTARY SPEAKER ZVANIA'S OCTOBER 25-28 VISIT TO MOSCOW POSITIVE IN TONE BUT EMPTY OF RESULTS. ACCORDING TO THE GEORGIAN EMBASSY, ZVANIA AND RUSSIAN DUMA SPEAKER SELEZNEV AGREED THAT BOTH SIDES SHOULD AVOID RECRIMINATIONS. TEREOKEN DENIED MEDIA REPORTS THAT DEFENSE MINISTER SERGEY IVANOV WAS PLANNING TO VISIT TBILISI SOON BUT DID NOT RULE OUT A VISIT COMPLETELY. END SUMMARY\n\n2. (C) ON OCTOBER 30, DURING A PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED MEETING, AMBASSADOR VERSHBOW RAISED REFTEL B REPORTS\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nPAGE 03 MOSCOW 13169 01 OF 02 301754Z\nALLEGING RUSSIAN PLANES HAD VIOLATED GEORGIAN AIRSPACE AND BOMBED AREAS OF THE KODORI GORGE. THE AMBASSADOR STRESSED THAT SUCH INCIDENTS, IF TRUE, AND IF CONTINUED, COULD BE DISASTROUS FOR U.S.-RUSSIAN RELATIONS AND SPOIL THE UPCOMING SUMMIT MEETING OF OUR PRESIDENTS IN THE U.S. MAMEDOV AGREED THAT SUCH INCIDENTS WOULD HAVE A NEGATIVE EFFECT ON THE SUMMIT, BUT QUOTED THE RUSSIAN MINISTRY OF DEFENSE AS CATEGORICALLY DENYING THAT RUSSIAN PLANS WERE INVOLVED IN ANY INCIDENTS IN GEORGIAN AIRSPACE.\n\n3. (C) MFA GEORGIA DESK CHIEF TEREOKEN, ECHOING MAMEDOV'S CLAIMS, DENIED TO US OCTOBER 30 REPORTS OF RUSSIAN PLANES BOMBING KODORI GORGE IN ABKHAZIA. HE ALSO DENIED THAT THERE WERE ANY RUSSIAN VIOLATIONS OF GEORGIAN AIRSPACE, SAYING THAT THERE HAD BEEN NO RUSSIAN PLANES FLYING NEAR THE AREA ON EITHER OCTOBER 28 OR 29. ACCORDING TO TEREOKEN, THERE WERE CREDIBLE REPORTS OF ABKHAZ HELICOPTERS BOMBING THE AREAS \"WHERE THE TERRORISTS WERE\" BUT THAT REPORTS OF PLANES IN THE AREA MIGHT AS WELL HAVE BEEN ABOUT \"UFOS.\" MOSCOW, HE EXPLAINED, DOES NOT HAVE THE TECHNICAL CAPABILITY TO DETERMINE WHETHER THERE WERE FOREIGN PLANES IN THE REGION. UNDERSCORING THAT HE \"WAS NOT ACCUSING\"\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 2 of 5"} {"doc_id":"86f67e9dc6c9d0a6","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nANYONE,\" TEREOKEN ADDED THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE THAT \"ANY SIDE\" HAD SENT PLANES OVER KODORI.\n\n4. (C) ASKED ABOUT PLANS TO WITHDRAW FROM GUDAUTA (REF A), TEREOKEN CONFIRMED THAT ONE TRAINLOAD OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT HAD DEPARTED THE BASE AND HAD ENTERED RUSSIA THE MORNING OF OCTOBER 29. TWO MORE TRAINS HAVE BEEN LOADED AND ARE AWAITING PERMISSION FROM ABKHAZ AUTHORITIES TO MOVE TO RUSSIA. MEMBERS OF THE RUSSIAN GENERAL STAFF ARE IN\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nPAGE 04 MOSCOW 13169 01 OF 02 301754Z\nSUKHUMI TO COORDINATE THESE MOVES.\n\n5. (C) WE ASKED WHY OUTSIDE OBSERVERS HAD NOT BEEN INVITED TO INSPECT THE WITHDRAWALS. TEREOKEN CLAIMED THAT THE ABKHAZ AUTHORITIES LIKELY WOULD NOT TOLERATE THE PRESENCE OF OUTSIDERS GIVEN THE TENSE SITUATION WITH TBILISI. THE RUSSIANS, HE ADDED, HAD NO TIME TO INVITE OUTSIDE OBSERVERS BECAUSE \"WE DIDN'T KNOW UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE\" THAT THE WITHDRAWAL OF ONE TRAINLOAD OF EQUIPMENT WOULD PROCEED. WE ARGUED THAT MOSCOW NOW HAS TIME IF IT HAS ALREADY LOADED TWO OTHER TRAINS BUT IS WAITING FOR ABKHAZ PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW. THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY MIGHT RAISE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE GOR'S INTENTIONS, WE NOTED. WE ASKED ABOUT PLANS TO WITHDRAW TROOPS. TEREOKEN SAID THAT APPROXIMATELY 600 RUSSIAN PERSONNEL REMAIN AT GUDAUTA. MOSCOW CONTINUES TO INSIST ON KEEPING ABOUT 340 THERE AS \"GUARDS.\" TBILISI, HE NOTED, CONTINUES TO WANT A MUCH LOWER FIGURE.\n\n6. (C) WE ASKED TEREOKEN ABOUT GEORGIAN PARLIAMENTARY SPEAKER ZURAB ZVANIA'S VISIT TO MOSCOW LAST WEEK. HE CONFIRMED THAT THE TONE OF ZVANIA'S VISIT WAS POSITIVE. HE NOTED, HOWEVER, THAT THE VISIT \"HAD NO PRACTICAL OUTCOME.\" THE GEORGIAN EMBASSY TOLD US OCTOBER 26 THAT GEORGIAN ZVANIA'S VISIT WAS GOING WELL (NOTE: ZVANIA DEPARTED MOSCOW OCTOBER 28). ACCORDING TO GEORGIAN POLCOUNS CHKHEIDZE, ZVANIA AND RUSSIAN DUMA SPEAKER GENNADIY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nCONFIDENTIAL PTQ6891\n\nPAGE 01 MOSCOW 13169 02 OF 02 301754Z\nACTION IO-00\n\nINFO LOG-00 NP-00 AID-00 ACQ-00 CIAE-00 DOEE-00 DOTE-00\nSRPP-00 DS-00 EB-00 EUR-00 OIGO-00 FAAE-00 FBIE-00\nVC-00 H-01 TEDE-00 INR-00 LAB-01 L-00 VCE-00\nMOFM-05 MOF-03 M-00 AC-01 NRRC-00 NSAE-00 NSCE-00\nOIC-02 OMB-01 PA-00 PC-01 PM-00 PRS-00 ACE-00\nP-00 SCT-00 SP-00 SS-00 TRSE-00 T-00 USIE-00\nSA-00 SNIS-00 NISC-00 SSD-00 PMB-00 DSCC-00 PRM-00\nDRL-02 G-00 NFAT-00 SAS-00 SWCI-00 /017W\n------------------378300 301754Z /38\nP 301741Z OCT 01\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 3 of 5"} {"doc_id":"86f67e9dc6c9d0a6","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nFM AMEMBASSY MOSCOW\nTO SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 1143\nINFO AMEMBASSY TBILISI PRIORITY\nUSMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY\nMOSCOW POLITICAL COLLECTIVE\nAMEMBASSY BAKU\nAMEMBASSY YEREVAN\nUSMISSION USOSCE\nSECDEF WASHDC\nJOINT STAFF WASHDC\n\nCONFIDENTIAL SECTION 02 OF 02 MOSCOW 013169\n\nE.O. 12958: DECL: 10/29/21\nTAGS: PREL, MARR, KCFE, UN, OSCE, GG, RS\nSUBJECT: UFOS OVER GEORGIA: STRANGE ENCOUNTERS OF AN MFA KIND\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nPAGE 02 MOSCOW 13169 02 OF 02 301754Z\n\nSELEZNEV AGREED THAT BOTH COUNTRIES NEEDED TO DISCUSS THEIR DIFFERENCES CALMLY AND WORK ON A GENERAL TREATY.\n\n7. (C) TEREOKEN DISMISSED PRESS REPORTS THAT DEFENSE MINISTER SERGEY IVANOV HAD AGREED TO VISIT TBILISI VERY SOON BUT NOTED HE COULD NOT ENTIRELY RULE OUT A VISIT IN THE COMING WEEKS. HE CLAIMED THERE ARE PLANS FOR A POSSIBLE MEETING BETWEEN SHEVARDNADZE AND PUTIN ON THE MARGINS OF THE NOVEMBER 30-DECEMBER 1 CIS SUMMIT IN MOSCOW, BUT NOTED NOTHING IS YET CONFIRMED.\n\n8. (C) COMMENT: IT IS HARD TO ACCEPT OFFICIAL RUSSIAN DENIALS THAT RUSSIAN PLANES WERE NOT INVOLVED. TO POSIT THAT THEY COULD BE UFOS WOULD BE HUMOROUS IF IT WERE NOT FOR THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE VIOLATIONS. MOST LIKELY THE RUSSIANS WANT TO KEEP THE PRESSURE ON THE GEORGIANS AND THE CHECHENS IN THE GORGE IN AN UNSUBTLE EFFORT TO PREVENT THESE GROUPS' MOVEMENT TO ABKHAZIA OR TO RUSSIA. THEIR OFFICIAL DENIALS REFLECT A TRADITIONAL RUSSIAN PENCHANT TO AVOID AN AWKWARD ADMISSION WITH A BOLD LIE. AS FOR GUDAUTA, THE GOR LIKELY IS USING THE CONTINUED PRESENCE OF ITS 600 TROOPS THERE AS A BARGAINING CHIP TO TRY TO GET CONCESSIONS FROM TBILISI ON BOTH THE BODEN PAPER ON ABKHAZIA AND ON CLAMPING DOWN ON CHECHENS INSIDE GEORGIA.\n\nVERSHBOW\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n<< END OF DOCUMENT >>\n\nInfo: TBILISI, AMEMBASSY ROUTINE\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 4 of 5"} {"doc_id":"86f67e9dc6c9d0a6","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nDissemination Rule: Archive Copy\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 5 of 5"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident Summaries\n\n101 - 172 Incl."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 18 February 1948 Incident # 101\n2. Time 5:01 P.M.\n3. Location Norcatur, Kansas\n4. Name of observer M. R. Rehbiel account (taken from newspaper)\n5. Occupation of observor Editor\n6. Address of observor Norton, Kansas\n7. Place of observation Norcatur, Kansas\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 30 - 35 miles above earth\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound One big explosion - \"afterwards a lot of little explosions\"\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Bluish-white smoke smudge\n18. Shape Mushroom\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction Meteor\n21. Exhaust trails None Bluish-white smoke smudge\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Photo of vapor trail left in sky by explosion\n25. Manner of disappearance Disintegration\n26. Remarks: Oscar Monnig, of the Texas Observers, Amateur Astronomy, 1010 Morningside Drive, Ft. Worth, offers \"tangible proof that the fireball"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of February 18 over northern Kansas was just that, inasmuch as meteorites have been recovered from it.\" There were found, beginning April 24, first several smaller fragments up to one of 4 1/2 pounds. Then a disturbed spot in a clover field led to the digging up of a piece of some 109 pounds embedded about two feet in the soil. The stone is what is termed as an \"achondrite\", a technical name for an unusual type of stony meteorite. It is reported to be of a type which will deteriorate rapidly.\n\nA photograph of the trail of the meteor, made by amateur photographer Duane W. Wray of Norton, shows the vapor trail left in the sky by the explosion of a meteor which was seen in Oklahoma, New Mexico, Colorado, Kansas, and Nebraska. It was made at Wray's home, nine miles north of Norton, just four minutes after the meteor exploded. A smudge of blue-white smoke remained in the sky for an hour February 18th. This photograph is in file under Incident #101.\n\nFurther remarks are contained in supplement."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(COPY)\n\n323 W. Tenth St.,\nPueblo, Colorado\nFebruary 20, 1948\n\nOffice of the Chief of Staff\nU. S. Army\nWashington, D. C.\n\nSubject: Explosion in the sky near Norcatur, Kans. 4:00 p.m. (MST) February 18, 1948\n\nPurpose: To call attention to some peculiarities in connection, whether coincidental or not\n\nAccording to an AP bulletin appearing in the Pueblo CHIEFTAIN for February 18, 1948, some object was seen moving eastward across the sky on the late afternoon of February 18th, and when this thing reached a position approximate to Norcatur, Kansas, exploded, or disrupted, or disappeared. The explosion is said to have been terrific.\n\nDirections given as to the progress of this appearance indicate that it moved from west to east.\n\nInformation contained in the dispatch under a Denver dateline indicate that while many would call this object a bolide - e.g., exploding meteor - the astronomers of Chamberlin Observatory (Denver) did not so assess it: it is said in the dispatch that these officials could offer no explanation of it.\n\nIf this is the case, the apparance is anomalous, and may lend itself to other meteoric explanation.\n\nA sketch-diagram of the earth and moon's orbit reveals a peculiarity in connection with the appearance, which may be significant.\n\nIf a line is stricken at right-angles across the meridional position of the site of explosion of this meteor at hour angle four o'clock (local time) and this line be considered the west-to-east course of the object, then it will be seen that if this line is continued outward into space toward the orbit of the moon it will intersect the lunar orbit at a place near to where the moon would be at from 80 to one hundred hours after the explosion took place.\n\nNew moon occurred at 9 D 10 H 2 M February; First Quarter at 17D 8H M. February -- the moon moves approximately 12.5 degrees per day along its orbit."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It is held by rocketry experts (example, WILLY LEY - see his ROCKETS, p. 192, diagram and note in connection therewith) that it would take about 100 hours for a rocket-craft to negotiate the distance from Earth to Moon.\n\nPrior to its explosion over Norcatur, this object of Feb. 18th was variously reported as a \"falling plane\", a \"jet plane\", and a \"ball of fire\". It is said by some to have left a trail of smoke behind it.\n\nIt is the suggestion of this writer that the Army collect and assimilate reports on this object, with a view to determining where it was seen as an object trailing smoke and where as a ball of fire.\n\nIf this thing is a rocket of some kind headed for the moon, it might first have been seen as a streak of smoke, then later as a ball of fire, and lastly as a tremendous explosion when it at last reached sufficient speed and elevation for take-off.\n\nThe writer has in mind the various and unexplained reports on \"flying saucers\", and bases this speculation upon a long consideration of various oddments of reports whose significance might be of space-craft from other worlds of space.\n\nThe so-called \"meteoric procession\" which crossed Toronto in February 1913, consisted of a number of groups of illuminated bodies traveling in groups of three and moving in \"rigid formation\", all pursuing a course across the same streak of the earth's surface. If a line is projected backward along this line of flight it will be seen that this line \"comes out\" at the position of the moon at the time. The 1913 phenomenon occurred in the mid-period of a series of reports on dirigible aircraft of appearance like zeppelins which were seen over England and whose appearance terminated - or reports on the appearances stopped - just prior to the inferior conjunction of Venus of April 24, 1913.\n\nThe writer begs to call attention to the fact that the times prior to and just after inferior conjunction of Venus are prolific in reports of strange things seen in the sky.\n\nAlso that lights have been reported on the moon from time to time, back for at least a century.\n\nIf in the future of military experiment the moon is selected as a base for the launching of rockets (which has been suggested by some writers), it may be well to look first"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"into reports like this one on the explosion over Norcatur and the direction of the object involved.\n\nThere is a possibility, however remote this may seem, that the moon is either inhabited or in use by other than human beings.\n\n+ours,\n\n/s/ NORMAN GARRETT MARKHAM\n\nIt may do not harm to watch the moon for possible arrival of this thing in the quarter at 80 to 100 hours after \"its departure\".\n\nNGM"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(COPY)\n\nFILE REF: - SIGGE-M-1\n\nFrom:\n\nTo:\n\nSubject:\n\nPurpose:\n\nMarch 14, 1948\n\nNorman G. Markham\nMAIN HOTEL, Pueblo, Colo\n\nChief Signal Officer\nU. S. Army, Washington, D.C.\n\nNorcatur, Kans., sky explosion of 18 February, 1948\n\nTo show a speculation regarding the above phenomenon and another one of earlier date and to call attention to occurrences between the two which have an appearance of relationship whether coincidental or not.\n\nThe geographical position of the Norcatur explosion suggests possible linkage with other occurrences happening inside latitudinal limits arbitrarily demarkable between 43° 36' North (which is the latitude of Boise, Idaho) and 36° 10' North (the latitude of Nashville, Tenn.), a belt about 485 miles wide.\n\nThis suggestion is gained from positions given for occurrences happening between June 24, 1947 and February 18, 1948, as shall be hereinafter briefly described.\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nTHE BOISE (Idaho) OBJECT--This was seen either beginning or ending at 330 pm 24 June 1947 and was visible for 20 minutes. It was in the western sky, was of comet-like appearance, and settled gradually toward the horizon as planetary bodies set. It was seen by Lt. Gov. Whitehead and Chief Justice Lampert. Its nature was unknown.\n\nThe peculiarity which connects this object, for speculative purposes, with the explosion of some unknown object over Norcatur, Kans., on 18 February 1948 is the seeming of a relationship between the positions of the moon for the two phenomena:\n\nIn the former case the moon was at the date of phenomenon, about 7%, 63 before the positionof First Quarter; on the second case it was about 8%.73 beyond the position of first quarter.\n\nSince the Boise object was visible for 20 minutes before it sank this argues it was about ten degrees above the horizon when first seen. Now if a line be drawn westward and at ten degrees zenithward from the"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"horizon of Boise at 3:30 p.m. and another line be drawn from the position of the moon at one hundred hours before the sighting of the Boise object, and projected to the center of the earth, it will be seen that this ten-degrees-altitude and the moon-earth line intersect as a place far above a geographical position considerably to the west of Cape Blanco, in the neighborhoodof about 700 miles off the coast.\n\nThe Boise object in its appearance suggests a rocket-type of craft possibly using reaction blasts to brake itself down for a landing on the earth. The bright point and plumy tail of the description suggest this, as also its apparent fixity in space.\n\nHOLLE'S \"SHIP IN FLAMES\" -- Nine days after the sighting of the Boise object a forest lookout named Earl Holle saw at or soon after 4:00 p.m., 3rd July, 1947, something he took to be a \"tanker in flames\". This was seen horizon-ward from a point in Sonoma County, California, near to Fort Ross. A search was instituted by the Navy or Coast Guard, and nothing was found. The soviet tanker ELBRUZ, which had been in the vicinity, was queried and found to be all right. This was not explained.\n\nIf this apperance had been on the horizon, there is no telling how far it may have been from the observer.\n\nCAPE MENDOCINO BLIMP INCIDENT -- Not far from the location of Holle's \"burning ship\" an accident occurred to a navy blimp, 14 July 1947, off Cape Mendocino.\n\nThis blimp suddenly settled into the water, slipped out its crew and rose again.\n\nThe anomaly here is that one would not expect to find drastic down-drafts of such violence as to thus upset a lighter than air craft. Possibly a downdraft accounted for the accident - but if the Signal Officer will look up the incident of the British steamer Talma which, at the time of the sighting of a luminous wheel-like phenomenon in the Gulf of Martaban, reported a slowing of the engines from some unknown cause, it may be seen that possibly forces are generated in some manner by certain unknown objects at times in the ocean, which may have physical attraction for material objects. This blimp accident occurring in waters where occurred other phenomena shortly to be mentioned, seems to have a doubtful side to it.\n\nTHE OAKLAND OBJECT -- Early on the morning of 13th October, 1947, a photographer named Ben Dobus together with a taxidriver named A. J. Goldman saw a thing \"that looked like Saturn with a ring around it.\" It shot at terrific speed WESTWARD across the sky of the Bay area, and was seen shortly after midnight.\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This may have been heading in the general direction of what may have been the goal of two later objects which roughly resemble it in description.\n\nTHE TICONDEROGA OBJECTS -- According to the tanker Ticonderoga's second officer, two \"flying discs\" were seen heading SOUTHWEST when the ship was in 43 degrees fifteen minutes north and 124 degrees 54 minutes west, at 0620 GCT, 12th November 1947.\n\nThese may have been heading for the object seen in the Pacific off the Golden Gate, not long afterward - or possibly at the same time, if earlier reports on this are consulted.\n\nTHE PHANTOM REEF -- On November 24, 1947, the Navy denied that it had found a phantom reef or other obstruction to navigation at a point about 400 miles west of San Francisco. The Navay Survey ship MAURY, sent out there in response to reports of ships that some huge object had been seen in the water in that neighborhood, reported that when in the approximate latitude and longitude of the supposed obstruction they picked up an echo from something in the water 1600 yards from the ship; but that when they had steamed to within 400 yards of this, the echo vanished.\n\nThere seems a possible connectability between the various elements so far considered.\n\nLater on January 7, 1948, there were occurrences in the neighborhood of Wilmington, O., Ft. Knox, Ky., Franklin, Ky., and Nashville, Tenn., all of which must be now familiar to the archivists of the Signal Office.\n\nSomething like a \"flying disc\" was pursued by one Lt. Mantell and two other pilots, Mantel being killed while in the process of attempting to gain altitude to get close to whatever it was he was chasing.\n\nAlso, in this connection, it may not be amiss to mention the deaths of two military officers who were said to have been bringing back material evidence from \"flying discs\" one of which was said to have met with some kind of accident over Maury Island, Puget Sound, around June, 1947.\n\nIt will be seen on inspection that the geographical locales of these incidents fit inside the belt of latitudes hereinbefore mentioned.\n\nTHE NORCATUR EXPLOSION was described in a previous letter of this writer, and it was shown in that letter that a line tangential to the meridian of Norcatur, Kans., at hour-angle 2:20 p.m., would if continued outward into space to the orbit of the moon, intersect the moon's orbit at a point where the moon would have been at about 100 hours after the time of the explosion.\n\nAccording to rocketry theory, it would take a reaction-propelled craft of the rocket type about 100 hours to reach the moon.\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I submit there is a likelihood that on June 24, 1947, something like a space-ship came here from the moon and upon February 18, 1948, returned to the moon.\n\nThis is of course speculation.\n\nBut has anyone yet explained the \"flying discs\" in terms of all the pretty-well proven facts in connection with them?\n\nHas anyone yet devised a fuel powerful enough to kick a rocket from Earth to the Moon?\n\nThere have been hundreds of reports, during the past century, on occurrences which imply this world is visited from outside space. Absence of contact by these postulatable visiting entities may imply a state of culture far beyond ours, to the point where it would be inexpedient for their members to have to do with us en-masse.\n\nThese reports have never been seriously considered by science, which in general ignores them.\n\nHowever, according to Dr. Rocht of Chamberlin Observatory, Denver, there is nothing in astronomy to explain the thing which exploded over Norcatur. Dr. Nininger's idea that the thing was a meteor flatly disregards Dr. Rocht's opinion, which may have been based on the Denver Posts' statement that a Denver woman saw the Norcatur object twenty minutes before the explosion occurred.\n\nI submit that the Army needs men who are capable of recognizing the anomalies beforementioned when they occur, evenif only to aid in speculation regarding them.\n\nThe undersigned offers his services to that end, if the Army may wish to avail itself of them.\n\n/s/ N. G. MARKHAM\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Excerpt of letter dated April 11, 1948 from Dr. Lincoln LaPaz, Director, Institute of Meteoritics, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, to the Deputy Executive Director, Committee on Geophysical Sciences, Research and Development Board:\n\nThank you for the surprising documents sent me under date of March 30. As you remark, certain aspects of Markham's letters are fantastic (for example: (1) the fireball procession of 1913, February 9, was genuinely meteoric, although a rare type of chain fall; (2) no astronomer could take seriously Markham's \"invasion by beings from Venus or the Moon\"-theory; (3) he appeals to, and biases in his favor, such untrustworthy evidence as newspaper stories, e.g., the absurd statement attributed to Dr. Rocht of the Chamberlin Observatory). Nevertheless, Markham is justified in calling attention to certain incidents as unexplained, for example, the \"flying lenses\" (in my opinion 99% hoax and imagination and 1% real).\n\nAs regards the Norcatur, Kansas incident, I remain convinced that, like the Four Corners incident, it was a genuine meteorite fall, although one of exceptional size (again like the Four Corners fall). However, there are many curious aspects of both these falls, some of an objective nature, like the singular fact that in spite of intensive searches (admittedly under bad terrain and weather conditions), not a trace of meteoritic material has so far been found; some of a non-objective nature, like the amazing testimony given by Mr. Leland Sammons, Mr. Alfred Glenn, and other witnesses of the Norcatur incident, both to members of the State Highway Commission of Kansas and to Institute of Meteoritics field survey parties. (See exhibits A, B, and C enclosed.)\n\nSome comment on such testimony as appears in A,B, and C would seem desirable:\n\n1. Glenn first reported the battery case as red hot. When I pointed out that the paper on it was not charred, his account was changed to \"too hot to handle\". The Institute of Meteoritics party found only two men, not four, who saw the battery case fall. The battery case has been examined by Dr. Victor Regener, Department of Physics, University of New Mexico, who states that it appears to be identical with the small batteries used in portable radios.\n\n2. K. Hays' identification of the Norcatur object as a rocket has the following support: On the morning of February 19, I talked to the towerman and two assistants at the Air Base at McCook Field, Nebraska. All three denied the Norcatur object was a fireball and described it as a black object with an extremely bright jet of flame pouring out of the rear. Furthermore, a 14-year old, and presumably unbiased, schoolgirl in Oberlin, Kansas wrote me a similar description of the \"Fireball.\""} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. A determined effort is under way to check up on Sammons' veracity (and sanity!) I have neither seen nor talked to Sammons, but another member of the Institute of Meteoritics party (Dr. D. M. Gragg, an Instructor in the Department of Mathematics) who did so believes Sammons (who is a well-to-do farmer) to be sincere and very badly scared. Of course nearness to a big meteorite fall would scare one as badly as an atom bomb; but how could it produce such testimony as Sammons\".\n\nThe \"meteoritic\" incidents from the great fall of 1945, November 29 (from which no meteorites have been recovered either!) through the sequence of similar falls culminating in the Four Corners and Norcatur incidents, coupled with such things as the Ussuri incident, convince me that either the earth is under a most unusual cosmic bombardment or many of the fireballs are not meteorites at all. While I still cling to the meteoritic hypothesis, it is clear that which ever alternative is the right one, the situation cries aloud for thorough investigation."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBIT B\n\nStatement taken from Leland Sammons\n\nMy name is Leland Sammons, and I live on a farm 1 1/4 miles west of Stockton and 1 mile north, off US 24.\n\nOn February 18 at about 5 P.M., I was standing near my hog-pen about 100' east of my house, when I heard the pheasants raising a disturbance and the chickens all rushed to the chicken-house. I looked around toward the house to see what was causing it and saw something hovering just above the house. I ran toward the house, and it then lowered over the north end of the house and settled toward the ground. I was then very near it, approximately 6' when it stopped about level with my face, and just wobbled around for an instant, fire belching out of it and sucking back in. The thing was about 4' long, shaped something like a funnel. There was a pipe sticking out the back of it, and once as it wobbled around, the pipe was sticking right at my belly. Suddenly there was a lot of sparks showered from it, and the fire increased as if a fuse might have lighted, and it took off in a north-westerly direction very fast, gaining altitude as it went. My wife heard it leave and ran out where I stood, and we watched it go, leaving a trail of smoke all the way. Suddenly there was a great cloud of smoke in the sky, not more than 40 seconds after it left my yard, and in a few seconds or more, we heard an explosion. I then stepped off from my house to where it had been, and it was five steps. Yes, it was hot, I could feel the heat from it. Had I not been washing my car prior to the occurrence, wetting the ground, there would have been a bare spot in the yard where the thing started up because there was a great rush of fire from it when it left. It must have been quite high when it exploded.\n\nKenneth Hays, son of Floyd Hays, 1/4 miles east of Norton on US 36, at the Jct. of K-60, south side of highway. At about 5 to 5:30 P.M., not sure of time, was riding his horse in a pasture, when he heard something queer in the sky. Looking up to the south-west, he saw what appeared to him to be a rocket, just like he had seen during the war in Europe. It startled him, and he jumped off the horse. He then remounted, watched its course, almost on a level but losing altitude a little, and it then exploded with a big cloud of smoke, apparently over Norton, from where he was, south of Prairie View. He rode on toward home a ways, when suddenly the sound and jar of the explosion reached him. Mrs. Hays was home in the house, when she heard and felt something like a truck might have struck the house. She ran out of the house and then first saw the huge cloud of smoke. About 40 minutes later, a part of the smoke cloud drifted directly over their house, and went on east over Phillipsburg.\n\nRalph New, postmaster at Norcatur, stated that at about 4:50 P.M. he was standing just inside the front window of the postoffice in Norcatur, when he observed a blinding flash as if someone had taken a flashlight picture. He could locate no one with a camera, but noticed several men walking to the center of the street and looking up. He then walked out to where they were and looking up, saw a high cloud of smoke in the sky almost directly overhead"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"but slightly east. Suddenly, about 1 and 1/2 minutes after he had seen the flash, there was a terrific explosion and jar, shaking the ground and causing the windows all around to rattle. Following the explosion, there were several loud reverberating rumblings across the heavens. He stated that the explosion must have been very high.\n\nEdgar Young, a boy living at Regar, just east of Norcatur, was outside the elevator, when he observed the explosion, looked up and saw the huge cloud of smoke. He stated that it was almost overhead but slightly west of him. He said that it was a big explosion. The elevator man was out in the elevator, when he heard the explosion. He thought that his oil-burner had exploded in the office and ran in to see about it. Finding it O.K., he ran outside to see what had exploded, saw the big cloud of smoke high overhead, slightly west.\n\nEastern Kansas newspaper carried a story about 6 days ago of one just like this one, coming from the south to vicinity of Iola, Kansas, where it turned west and disappeared into the sky.\n\nCheck with Chief Scott of Norton about a burned flashlight battery which fell in the street of Norton just after the explosion. It was too hot to be picked up for several minutes. Chief Scott has it.\n\nNote: A copy of Exhibit \"C\" referred to in letter from Dr. LaPaz, was not received."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 18 February 1948 Incident # 102\n2. Time 1500 MST\n3. Location [REDACTED] Air Near Green River, Utah\n4. Name of observer Lenord P. Marchese (B-29 Pilot, Lt. 28 Bomber Gp) Carl W. Stucki, Lt., Co-Pilot, (see reverse side for other witnesses)\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot\n6. Address of observer 77th Bomb Sq, 28th Bomb Gp (VH), Weaver AFB, S.D.\n7. Place of observation 39° N - 100° W - near Green River, Utah\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer 100 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 20,000 feet\n12. Speed Very high\n13. Direction of flight Southeast of Limon, Colorado\n14. Tactics Explosion rate\n15. Sound Could not be determined due to B-29 engine noise\n16. Size Huge\n17. Color Multi-colored ball of fire\n18. Shape Huge multi-colored ball of fire and dense cloud of smoke\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Vapor trail with ball of fire at head of trail\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: [REDACTED] Over"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A huge multi-colored ball of fire trailing a dense cloud of smoke was sighted at approx 1500 hours MST 18 Feb 48, 39° N-100° W at approx 20,000 ' by two B-29 aircraft of the 28th Bombardment Group (VH). It was seen some 100 miles southeast of the B-29s. Size was estimated as huge altho impossible to determine accurately due to the distance. It was traveling at very high speed and heading southeast of Limon, Colorado, at approx 20,000 ft.\n\nWitnesses: Capt Howard H. Berodt, AO-.949504, 718th Bomb Sq 28th Bomb Gp (VH). Pilot of 1st B-29\n\nCapt Maurice T. Ritenour, AO-.48043, 718th Bomb Sq 28 Bomb Gp (VH). Co-Pilot of 1st B-29.\n\n1st Lt Leonard P. Marchese, AO-748714, 77th Bomb Sq., 28th Bomb Gp (VH). Pilot of 2nd B-29\n\n1st Lt. Carl W. Stucki, AO-785916, 77th Bomb Sq, 28th Bomb Gp (VH). Co-Pilot of 2nd B-29.\n\nNOTE: See Incident 101 - Norcatur Kansas."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 103\n\n1. Date 18 February 1948\n2. Time 1500 MST\n3. Location [REDACTED] Air near Green River Utah\n4. Name of observers Capt. Howard H. Berodt - Capt Maurice T. Ritenour (See Inc 102 - corroboration)\n5. Occupation of observer Pilots\n6. Address of observer 718th Bomb Sq, 28th Bomb Gp (VH) Weaver AFB, S.D.\n7. Place of observation 39° N - 100° W - Near Green River, Utah\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer 100 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 20,000 feet\n12. Speed Very high\n13. Direction of flight Southeast (of Limon, Colorado)\n14. Tactics Explosion rate\n15. Sound Could not be determined due to B-29 engine noise\n16. Size Huge (Seen 100 miles west of the B-29's)\n17. Color Multi-colored ball of fire\n18. Shape Hugh milti-colored ball of fire and dense cloud of smoke followed\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Vapor trail with a ball of fire at the head of trail\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Name - Same as incident 102 which see"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 104\n\n1. Date 7 Mar 48\n2. Time 2055 C\n3. Location Smyrna, Tenn.\n4. Name of observer Frank L. Fenn, Maj, USAF, CO, Smyrna AF Base Cpl Richard C. Pettingill & Pvt Frank C. Johnson,\n5. Occupation of observers CO of Smyrna & radio and tower operators AACS Station\n6. Address of observer Smyrna AAF, Smyrna, Tenn\n7. Place of observation Smyrna AAF - 6 miles from (ground)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 6 miles\n10. Time in sight 45 minutes\n11. Altitude About 5° above horizon\n12. Speed very slow\n13. Direction of flight WNW away from Smyrna\n14. Tactics N/S Faded away\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Unknown\n17. Color yellow-orange\n18. Shape oval\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - seemed to be flare\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions CAVU - 10 miles\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Figs (2) showing yellow orange flame-like oval\n25. Manner of disappearance faded into horizon\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A yellow-orange object which had the appearance of a flare was observed some six miles from Smyrna AAF between the west and northwest just above the horizon and moving directly away from Smyrna. The speed was estimated as slow since the object remained visible some forty-five minutes. It gradually faded away disappearing into the horizon. No exhaust trail was seen and no sound was heard."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 105\n\n1. Date 8 Mar 48\n2. Time 1100\n3. Location Belmont, N. C.\n4. Name of observer Mr. A. C. Morrison\n5. Occupation of observer Supt. Meter Dept, Duke Power Co., Charlotte, N. C.\n6. Address of observer Charlotte, N. C. (Duke Power Co.)\n7. Place of observation Belmont, N. C. (Sighted from ground)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight about 10 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S - could not be estimated\n12. Speed Around 600 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Easterly\n14. Tactics None - moved in straight line at constant speed without change in altitude or direction\n15. Sound None\n16. Size From a distance - that of a small coin\n17. Color bright or silver - looked metallic\n18. Shape round or sphere (unable to determine which)\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction Metallic\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear with scattered white clouds\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance behind small white cloud\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A round metallic-appe ring object moving very rapidly at an estimated speed of 600 MPH was observed near Belmont, N. C., at Approx 1100 the morning of 8 Mar 4g. The weather was clear with excellent visibility with a few small scattered fleecy white clouds. It could not be determined if the object were a disc or sphere. Its apparent size was that of a small coin of a bright or silver color. It reflected the sun maintaining a steady reflection which did not flicker. The object which was under observation for some 10 seconds was on an easterly heading and moved in a straight line at a constant speed without apparent change in altitude or direction. It was impossible to determine the altitude but it was moving above the clouds. No sound of any kind was heard nor was any exhaust trail observed.\n\nNOTE: Witness (Mr Morrison) is a man of excellent character and reputation, a first-grade engineer and employee of Duke Power Co for some 30 years. He impressed the agent as being conservative and sound and is a technical man with a very technical and responsible position.\n\nMr. Morrison was careful in his statements. He does not claim he saw the \"flying disc\", merely [REDACTED] claiming that they saw an object which they could not identify with any natural phenomenon or known type of aircraft. It resembled \"a round metallic appearing object moving very rapidly.\"\n\nWitnesses: Mr. Hendrix, assistant Superintendent, Meter Dept Duke Power Co., Charlotte, N. C.\nMr. G. W. Jordan, Gastonia Electric Co., Gastonia, N. C."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 5 March 1948 Incident # 106\n2. Time 1610 - 1655\n3. Location Bakersfield, California\n4. Name of observer George L. Buchner\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observor Bakersfield, California\n7. Place of observation From ground, southwest toward Buena Vista Lake, Calif.\n8. Number of objects Two\n9. Distance of object from observer 10 - 12 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Earthward\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Seemingly on fire, black and red smoke trailing behind\n18. Shape Similar to falling aircraft\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Brownish-white smoke and debris trailing\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Behind a water tower, which was an obstruction to the view\n26. Remarks: Comments of G. L. Buckner and other witnesses to this sighting contained in attached supplement."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\nLAFDA-3/1208-I\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of Flying Disc. Mar 11, 1948\n\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Forces\nWashington, D. C.\nATTN: DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nAir Intelligence Requirements Branch\n\n1. Incident reported on 9 March 1948, this headquarters, per telephone call from Sgt A. M. Larsen, Sheriff's office, Bakersfield, California.\n\na. Observation by Mr. (George L) Les Buchner, Bakersfield, California, of two objects falling to earth from unknown source on 5 March 1948 between 1610 and 1655 hours. Description of objects similar to falling aircraft with smoke and debris trailing. Observation made at Bakersfield with objects sighted southwest toward Buena Vista Lake, California.\n\nb. Observation by Mr. Denio, employee of the Pacific General Electric Company, Bakersfield, California, of two objects which fell to earth from unknown source north of Bakersfield, California, 8 March 1948. One object seemed to be on fire with red and black smoke trailing behind.\n\n2. Informant Larsen stated that searching parties, aircraft and rescue units have made numerous attempts to locate these reported objects without success.\n\n3. Investigation of incident has been initiated by this headquarters. Report will follow.\n\n/s/ Donald L. Springer\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, USAF\nAC of S, A-2\n\nInformation to:\nADC, Mitchel Fld, N.Y.\nFBI, San Francisco\nG-2, Sixth Army\nDIO, San Francisco (12th Nav.Dist)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA-3/1208-I\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of Flying Discs\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION:\n\nInformation from the Sheriff's Office, Bakersfield, California, revealed that numerous calls from residents in Bakersfield concerning peculiar objects in the sky over Bakersfield, predicated an investigation by their office and contact with A-2 Headquarters Fourth Air Force.\n\nOn 13th March 1948, two informants, Mr. George L. Buchner, and Mr. H. B. Nix, stated that they observed a flying object which appeared to be consumed in fire, and left a brownish-white plume of smoke, which suddenly stopped and disappeared. Seconds later, what appeared to be a parachute, was seen to be drifting to the east.\n\nThe object, as described, appeared to be a burning fabric airplane, consumed in smoke. Observations were made in Bakersfield of object to the south and southwest, approximately ten to twelve miles distance, around 1600 hours on 5 March 1948.\n\nOn 13th March 1948, informant, Mr. H. B. Nix, stated that he observed an object at 0830, 8 March 1948, due north of Bakersfield, approximately five miles distance. The object was a large, orange-red ball of fire, somewhat larger than a small airplane, appeared to remain static for approximately thirty seconds, then split and continued to burn; each visible as a burning half. A parachute, with a black object hanging was then observed to fall, drift to the east and disappeared into the hills east of Bakersfield.\n\nOn 13th March 1948, two informants, Mrs. Callie R. Mason, secretary, Haberfelde Building, Bakersfield, California, and Dr. J. E. Johnson, dentist Haberfelde Building, Bakersfield, California, stated that they were in Room 518, Haberfelde Building, on the morning of 9 March 1948. Mrs. Mason was a patient of Dr. Johnson. Both informants stated that they observed a flaming object which appeared at first to be a very small airplane. Orange red flames seemed to envelope the object with considerable black smoke trailing in a zigzag manner for approximately 4,000 to 5,000 feet. The object was observed at 1,000 feet, approximately due north of Bakersfield, seven to ten miles distant at approximately 0830 hours.\n\nInformants further stated that the object disappeared behind a water tower, which was an obstruction to their view, and was near the ground. Both informants watched for an explosion, thinking that it would explode upon reaching the ground, but nothing unusual was noted."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A-2 COMMENT:\n\nAlthough there is no evidence to substantiate the following, it is the opinion of this headquarters that this activity could be attributed to marker flares. Any further developments, or evidence obtained, will be forwarded this headquarters from the Sheriff's Office, Bakersfield, California.\n\nEVALUATION\n\nOf Source C Of Information 3"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8 March 1948 Incident # 107\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Bakersfield, California\n4. Name of observer Mr. Denio\n5. Occupation of observor Pacific General Electric Company employee\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Sighted from ground\n8. Number of objects Two\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Earthward\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color One object seemingly afire, red and black smoke trailing\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance XXX Fell to earth\n26. Remarks: See supplement to Incident #106.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8 March 1948\n2. Time 0830\n3. Location Bakersfield, California\n4. Name of observer H. B. Nix\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor N/S\n7. Place of observation Sighted from ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observor 5 miles\n10. Time in sight Approx. 30 seconds before splitting and burning\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Static for approx 30 seconds, and then drifting\n13. Direction of flight eastward\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Larger than a small airplane\n17. Color Orange-red ball of fire\n18. Shape Ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Drifted to the east into the hills east of Bakersfield\n26. Remarks: See supplement to Incident #106"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 9 March 1948 Incident # 109\n2. Time 0830\n3. Location Bakersfield, California\n4. Name of observers J.E. Johnson and Mrs. Callie R. Mason\n5. Occupation of observer J.E. Johnson, Dentist, Mrs. Mason, Secretary\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation 5th Floor of business building\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer 7 - 10 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 1000 feet\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Due north of Bakersfield\n14. Tactics Zig-zaging\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Appearance of a very small airplane\n17. Color Orange-red flame\n18. Shape Appearance of a very small airplane\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Considerable black smoke trailing for 4000 to 5000 feet\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: See supplement to Incident #106\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 23 March 1948 Incident # 110\n2. Time 0300 - 0500\n3. Location Baltimore (Hamilton) Maryland\n4. Name of observer Identity confidential\n5. Occupation of observer Active in American Legion activities\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation N/S\n8. Number of objects Undetermined\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Not sighted\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound Motor drone of foreign type aircraft\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: See Supplement"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(COPY) RESTRICTED Incident # 110\nHEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND A2B\nAndrews Field\nWashington 20, D. C.\nSAC 350 (29 Mar 48) 29 March 1948\nSUBJECT: Report of Unidentified Aerial Sounds.\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nAttention: Director of Intelligence\n1. The following is quoted from a copy of a letter, Baltimore Office, FBI, addressed to the Director of Intelligence, Second Army:\n\"On March 23, 1948, an individual, who desired that her identity be kept confidential, telephonically communicated with this office and indicated that she is the wife of a former member of the United States military forces, and that she is presently active in American Legion activities, but was emphatic in stating that she was in no way hysterical or unduly apprehensive regarding present world conditions. She did, however, wish to bring to the attention of the proper authorities that during the past six or eight weeks, on a number of occasions between the hours of 3:00 and 5:00 A.M., she has heard peculiar sounding noises in the sky, which appear to come from airplanes in the distance, but the sound is not the type of airplane motor drone which is generally heard from American planes. She has discussed the matter with her husband, and he believes that the sound is more like that of a foreign type airplane. She recently discussed this matter with an unidentified woman who lives in her neighborhood, which is Hamilton, Baltimore, Maryland, and this woman stated that she, too, had heard the noise in question, and that her husband is also an ex-G.I. and he has stated that the motors sounded like that of foreign planes.\"\n2. No action is contemplated by this headquarters.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\nc/c furnished CG, AMC, Attn: MCI.\nALAN MARCEAU CWO, USAF Asst Adj Gen\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 111\n\n1. Date 1 April 1948\n2. Time 0955\n3. Location 124° 3' East, 12°, 52' North\n4. Name of observer 1st Lt. Meyers (Robert W.)\n5. Occupation of observer P-47 Pilot\n6. Address of observer 67th Fighter Squadron, 18th Fighter Group\n7. Place of observation Philippine Islands - Sighted from air\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer 3 miles\n10. Time in sight Approximately 60 seconds\n11. Altitude 1000 feet\n12. Speed 200 mph (disappeared in 5 seconds, indicating great acceleration)\n13. Direction of flight 270°\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Estimated - wing-span 30 feet, length 20 feet\n17. Color Silver\n18. Shape A half moon closely resembling a flying wing type acft; turtle back and an indistinct dorsal fin\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None observed\n22. Weather conditions Scattered cumulus, base 3000 feet, tops 6000 feet\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Skotches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Object leveled out on heading of 270°, accelerated rapidly and disappeared from sight\n26. Remarks:\nSee attached supplement"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS, THIRTEENTH AIR FORCE\nCLARK AIR FORCE BASE\nAPO 719 B-2/am\n\n8 April 1948\n\nAG 452.1\n\nSUBJECT: Report of Sighting of Unidentified Aircraft and/or Flying Object.\n\nTO : Commanding General,\nFar East Air Forces,\nAPO 925,\nU. S. Army.\nATTN: AC/S, A-2\n\n1. In compliance with \"Intelligence Requirements - Un-identified Aircraft\" and letters, your headquarters, AG 452.1 A-2, 3 November 1947 and AG 452.1 A-2, 20 March 1948, the following incident is reported.\n\n2. At 1630 hours on 1 April 1948, the S-2 officer of the 18th Fighter Group contacted the A-2 Division, this headquarters, and reported that 1st Lt. Robert W. Meyers had sighted an unidentified flying object. His story is as follows.\n\n3. On 1 April, at 0955, 1st Lt. Meyers was leading a flight of four (4) P-47 aircraft of the 67th Fighter Squadron, 18th Fighter Group. He was flying a heading of 180 degrees, altitude 1500 feet, position 124 degrees 3 minutes east and 12 degrees 52 minutes north, when he sighted an unidentified object approximately three (3) miles east of his position and at an estimated altitude of 1000 feet, heading of 360 degrees. The object appeared to be a flying wing type aircraft, its shape resembled a half moon what appeared to be a dorsal fin was barely perceptible, the span of the object estimated to be thirty feet, length twenty feet and silver in color. Upon sighting the object, Lt. Meyers immediately started a left turn with the intention of intercepting and to more positively identify this phenomena. While Meyers was making a 240 degree turn, the unidentified object made a 90 degree left turn, then leveled out on a heading of 270 degrees, accelerated rapidly and disappeared from sight in approximately five seconds. There was no sound heard, and no exhaust trails were observed. At the time of the sighting visibility was unlimited, scattered cumulus, base 3000 feet, tops 6000 feet.\n\na. Because of the distance from which the sighting was made, no distinguishing features i.e. power units, landing gear, armament or cockpit were observed.\n\nT-22190"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"B-2, AG 452.1, Subject: \"Report of Sighting of Unidentified Aircraft and/or Flying Object.\"\n\ncockpit were observed.\n\nb. The interview with Lt. Meyers indicated that he is a reliable, non-excitable individual and appeared quite positive in his statements. It must be taken into consideration however that he was the only witness to this incident, as he was unable to call the object to the attention of his three wing-men because of their maneuvering in the turn, plus the fact that his radio was out.\n\n3. Above incident reported your headquarters, 2 April 1948, in radio, cite K1213H.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n/s/ Robert F. DeLong\nROBERT F. DE LONG\n1st Lt., USAF\nActing Asst Adjutant General\n\n2\n\nT-22190"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BASIC: Ltr Hq 13th AF, APO 719, Subj: \"Rpt of Sighting of Unidentified Aircraft and/or Flying Object,\" dtd 8 Apr 48.\n\nAG 452.1 A-2 1st Ind 15 April 1948\n\nHEADQUARTERS, FAR EAST AIR FORCES, APO 925,\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attention: CMI\n\n1. Reference is made to letter Headquarters United States Air Force, subject: \"Reporting of Information on 'Flying Discs'\" dated 26 February 1948.\n\n2. Evaluation of sighting described in basic communication by this headquarters is that in view of the circumstances surrounding the incident, the object was probably a bird.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n/s/ C. N. Stewart\nC. N. STEWART\nCapt, AGD\nAsst Adj Gen\n\n3\n\nT-22190"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(COPY)\n\nPRIORITY\n\nIN 090359Z\nApril 1948\n\nFROM: CINCFE TYKYO JAPAN 080731Z.\n\nTO: DEPT OF ARMY WASHINGTON DC FOR CSGID, COMGENAMC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB DAYTON OHIO ATTN MCI RPT MCI\n\nINFOL: COMGENFEAF\n\nIN REPLY CITE: CX 59769\n\nReport control is A-1917. Pilot, 13 Air Force, at 0955, 1 April 48, Flying P-47 Aircraft heading 180 degrees altitude 1500 feet indicated at 124 degrees 3 minutes East, 12 degrees 52 minutes North, weather scattered CUMULUS Rpt CUMULES 3/10 base three thousand, top 600 visibility unlimited sighted flying object approximately 3 miles East 1A heading 360, altitude estimated one thousand feet below him. Unidentified object estimated speed at time of sighting 200 miles per hour. Pilot turned left attempting to intercept unidentified flying object for more positive identification. At this time flying object made a turn of 90 degrees left, leveled out and accelerated disappearing in approximately 5 seconds. Described as having A turtle back and an indistinct dorsal fin. The sahpe of the object was that of A half moon closely resembling A flying wing type aircraft, estimated wing span 30 feet, estimated length 20 feet, color silver, no rpt no exhaust trail was observed. Five seconds elapsed time for disappearing would indicate exceedingly high speed and great acceleration. Reporting officer is considered sincere and non-excitable type and firmly believes he sighted object. A report will be forwarded upon completion of an investigation of this incident.\n\nReceived MCAAGM21 9 Apr 48 1008 (1508Z)\nTyped by MCAAGM21 9 Apr 48 1359 )1859Z)ams\nDISTRIBUTION: EJK\n\n1. MCI--action\n\n2. MCAAGM21\n\nT-17789"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 112\n\n1. Date 8 Apr 48\n2. Time 1400 - 1430\n3. Location Ashley, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Miss Winifred Paines - Mrs. Bertha Slack\n5. Occupation of observor Miss Paines: Asst Bank Cashier; Mrs. Slack: housekeeper\n6. Address of observor 227 W High St., Ashley, O.\n7. Place of observation Ashley, Ohio (ground)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor \"Quite a distance\"\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Could not estimate\n12. Speed slow-moving\n13. Direction of flight Southwest\n14. Tactics No maneuvers\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size undetermined\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape Oblong, long and narrow - like silver streak\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, no clouds near object\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - no clouds near object\n24. Skotches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Romarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness thought she heard plane which appeared to be flying low and making an unusual amount of noise. Could not locate the plane but did see an object oblong in shape and long and narrow which had the appearance of a silver streak. It was clearly outlined and moving slowly and steadily in a southwesterly direction parallel to the ground and without changing direction. Altitude and size were not estimated.\n\nNote: See Incident #112a in which the plane was perceived flying low.\n\n31a"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 112a\n\n1. Date 8 April 1948\n2. Time 1400 - 1430\n3. Location Ashley, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Melah Stephens\n5. Occupation of observor Newspaper reporter\n6. Address of observor 226 West High Street, Ashley, Ohio\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observor Not stated\n10. Time in sight Approximately five minutes\n11. Altitude Quite high\n12. Speed Slow - dirfting\n13. Direction of flight Southwesterly\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Smaller than the airplane that was in view at the time\n17. Color Opalescent - like mother of pearl\n18. Shape Long cylindrical body, like a stick of firewood\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, few clouds in sky but non around object\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Skotches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Romarks: A plane, which sounded as if it were flying low since there was an exceptionally loud roaring noise,first attracted the attention"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of this witness. She observed a large airplane, heading south, and about the same time also observed a strange object in the sky travelling slowly in a southwesterly direction. Witness first thought it was sky writing, as it looked like a streak; but later it became clearly outlined, appearing to be a long cylindrical body like a stick of firewood. With the sun shining on it, it appeared opalescent, like mother of pearl. The object was much higher, and quite a bit smaller than, the airplane, but drifted slowly along after the airplane disappeared. It may have been drifting with the wind.\n\n32a"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 112b\n\n1. Date 8 April 1948\n2. Time 1430\n3. Location Delaware, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. James B. Stephenson\n5. Occupation of observor Housewife\n6. Address of observor 93 North Franklin Street, Delaware, Ohio\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Slow\n13. Direction of flight Southwesterly\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Very large - about the size of a full moon in height but much smaller in width\n17. Color Very white\n18. Shape Cylindrical, with vapor around the top\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, no clouds around object\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Skotches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Romarks: At 1430 Mrs. J. B. Stephenson's attention was attracted from her window by an object of unusual shape in the sky. Upon going outside"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to get a better view it appeared very white, with no shadows at all, was cylindrical in shape and seemed to have vapor around the top. When first seen, it appeared to be leaning at an angle, and then right itself and move along \"perpendicular\" to the ground. It appeared not to be moving at first, but upon a closer look it was seen moving slowly in a southwesterly direction, without sound or manueverings, and remaining at the same altitude. The weather was clear, and no exhaust trails were seen. The object seemed very large, about the size of a full moon in height, but much smaller in width. Since there was nothing to compare it with, she could not be sure of the size. No statement was made as to whether or not witness heard an airplane."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 112c\n1. Date 8 April 1948\n2. Time 1430\n3. Location Delaware, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Rev. James B. Stephenson\n5. Occupation of observer Pastor\n6. Address of observer 93 N. Franklin Street, Delaware, Ohio\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Slow\n13. Direction of flight Southwesterly\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Not Stated\n17. Color White\n18. Shape Verticle, larger at the bottom and narrow at the top\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Witness first thought that object was a plane on fire, as it was surrounded by a vaporous substance. A plane was heard, and"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it seemed low and made a great deal of noise. After a few seconds' study object became clearly outlined and looked similar to a vertical cylinder, large at the bottom and narrow at the top, with streamers or streaks of vapor attached. It gave the appearance of a white cloud, but did not behave as a cloud. It retained its shape and maintained a steady movement on a straight course against the wind. The Delaware airport was alerted for its appearance, but after a half hour it had not been sighted there."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 112d\n1. Date 8 April 1948\n2. Time 1430\n3. Location Delaware, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. John Bergen\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 111 North Washington Street\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Southwesterly\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound Could not be determined\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color White\n18. Shape Spherical \"blob\" with streaks above it\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Witness heard planes prior to the sighting, but doesn't know whether or not they had any connection with the object."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The object was clearly outlined, but did not look like a balloon. The Perkins Observatory was alerted but was unable to sight theobject."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Date 8 April 1948\n2. Time 1130\n3. Location Delaware, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Rev. John H. Bergen\n5. Occupation of observer Pastor\n6. Address of observer 111 North Washington Street\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer Not determined\n10. Time in sight Ten minutes\n11. Altitude Several thousand feet\n12. Speed Not too fast\n13. Direction of flight Almost due west into the wind\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Not less than 5 feet in width\n17. Color Very white\n18. Shape Spherical, with a small protrusion above it, like vapor streaks\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Disappeared from view behind the trees\n26. Remarks: This object appeared like a concentrated bit of cloud except it was clearly outlined. The size could not be determined,"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"since witness could not tell whether it was a small object near him or a large object far away. It traveled in a straight line and did not maneuver. It was not stated that the sound of a plane was heard."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Date 8 April 1948\n2. Time 1130\n3. Location Delaware, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. H. S. Kirkpatrick\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 107 North Washington Street\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Steady - not too fast\n13. Direction of flight Southwesterly\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound None\n16. Size It was not large enough for a person to be inside\n17. Color white - about the color of a fleecy cloud\n18. Shape Spherical - somewhat larger at top with a protruding end underneath\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, blue sky, sunny\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Witness heard, but did not see airplane, and saw instead a white object, spherical in shape, larger at the top with a protruding"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"end underneath. It was clearly outlined and maintained the same shape as it moved along, steadily, and at the same altitude. Robert Cochran, son of the witness, who is in the Merchant Marine, thought the object very unusual. He said it was in the shape of a rainspout."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 9 April 1948\n2. Time 1510\n3. Location Montgomery, Alabama\n4. Name of observer Robert B. Hughes, Lt. Colonel, USAF\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot\n6. Address of observer Tactics Div., Air Tactical School, Tyndall AF Base\n7. Place of observation From the air\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Five seconds\n11. Altitude Approximately 16000 feet\n12. Speed In excess of the viewer's 310 mph air speed\n13. Direction of flight Northwest\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Top part eight feet diameter\n17. Color Silver\n18. Shape Had the appearance of a parachute carrying a large canister or ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, visibility and ceiling unlimited\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs - Sketch (trip)\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Lt. Col. Robert B. Hughes first sighted the object before completing an 180° left turn over the town of Montgomery, Alabama."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The object, sighted at ten o'clock off his left wing, appeared to be a\nsilver disc. He immediately completed a sharp bank to the left and was\nable to get a better look at the object, and described it as follows:\n\n\"Top part of the object approximately eight feet in diameter, silver\nin color, had the appearance of a parachute. Attached to the bottom of this\nhad been a dark cable or shroud which appeared to be approximately five feet\nlong. Suspended upon the cable had been a large canister or ball (Colonel\nHughes could not discern which) also silver in color. This canister or\nball had theappearance of being slightly to the rear of the top part of the\nobject. The overall appearance of theobject looked something similar to\nthe parachute and canister containing photographic testing equipment dropped\nfrom a V-2 rocket.\"\n\nAt the time he lost sight of the object, Hughes' aircraft had been\nindicating 310 miles per hour air speed, and the object had appeared to fly\naway from him on a horizontal plane rather than a vertical decline.\n\nA sketch of the object is attached."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBIT I\n\nEXHIBIT I"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 18 Apr 48 Incident # 114\n2. Time 1306 hours\n3. Location Approx 1 mile north of Fairbanks, Alaska\n4. Name of observer Lt Aytch Johnson\n5. Occupation of observer 1st Lt (discharged f/USAF as per authority Para 1, SO. 60 dated 28 May 48)(see)\n6. Address of observer Ft Worth, Texas\n7. Place of observation Over city of Fairbanks, Alaska\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight few minutes\n11. Altitude 2000-3000 ft\n12. Speed 250-300 miles (traveled 500 feet in 1 or 2 seconds)\n13. Direction of flight Northeast toward southwest\n14. Tactics Oscillated from horizontal plane (rapid speed)\n15. Sound No sound\n16. Size 8\" in diameter\n17. Color silvery\n18. Shape round and flat\n19. Odor detected N,S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails no trails of any kind\n22. Weather conditions Weather clear and visibility u[REDACTED]\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object observed at altitude of about 2000-3000 on NE-SW heading.\nIt appeared to be some 8 inches in diameter and gave off a silvery\nbrilliantreflection. It oscillated from a horizontal plane to a\nvertical plane at a very rapid pace. Estimated speed: about 250-300\nMPH -(traveled some 500 feet in 1 or 2 seconds ) No sound could be\nheard nor were there any trails of any kind.\n\nNOTE: This sighting may have been the reflection of sun from wings\nof these aircraft. At the approximate time of the sighting a\nnumber of aircraft were flying in the local area."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nWitnesses were attracted by sound of fighter aircraft in vicinity.\nThey started searching the sky for the aircraft and sighted the\nobjects. When first sighted, the witnesses thought the objects might\nbe weather balloons. However, when they accelerated so rapidly in\na northerly heading, they determined the objects could not be balloons.\nThey were in a trail formation on a North-South line, and moved so\nrapidly they wereout of sight within a few seconds. From original\nsighting in the stationary position to their disappearance, a period\nof approximately two (2) minutes elapsed, or which the objects were\nin a stationary position for approximately one (1)minute.\n\nNOTE: Wind at 20,000 ft from 340° at 10 knots per hour (1230 EST Rpt)\nWind at 20,000 ft 32° at 13 knots per hour (1830 EST Rpt)\n\nNOTE: Nearest weather station releasing balloons is Spartanburg, S. C.\nOne black balloon was released at 1230 EST."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nleft on this heading\n\n(4) In approximately 2 minutes objects had disappeared\n\n(3) Objects began moving in a NNE direction and rapidly accelerating\nand climbing.\n\n(2) When first seen objects were in a semi-stationary position.\n\n(1) First one object was sighted, next, another one appeared.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 11 Mar 48 Incident # 116\n2. Time night\n3. Location Near shores of James Bay,\n4. Name of observer V. J. Pratt\n5. Occupation of observer Employe of Hudson Bay Co.\n6. Address of observer Moose Factory\n7. Place of observation Moose Factory, Canaca\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed meteoric\n13. Direction of flight earthward\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound No noise\n16. Size size of football\n17. Color N/S Blue flame\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction meteor\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Night\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Skeches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance exploded\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A big ball of blue flame, seemingly the size of a football streaked out of the sky and exploded near this Northern Ontario community (Moose Factory) near the shores of James Bay. The explosion lit up the entire area brighter than daylight, the whole ball disappeared and a second later a streak of orange light shot upward from where the ball was last seen. The orange streak was gone within a second. Witnesses heard no noise of any kind.\n\nNOTE: This ties up with earlier reports from Cochran, 150 miles south of Moose Jaw where several citizens reported seeing what they thought to be a meteor around 11.40 P. M. EST Thurs.\n\nOne witness ( a Mrs. Charles Giles) said that the object plunged downward like a spent rocket in the northern sky. She described it as about the size of a full moon which gave the appearance of disintegration as it fell."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 May 48\n2. Time 1500 to 1700\n3. Location Memphis, Tenn.\n4. Name of observer Miss Jean Bray, Housekeeper et al (see other side)\n5. Occupation of observer Housekeeper\n6. Address of observer 253 W. Waldorf Ave., Memphis, Tenn.\n7. Place of observation Memphis, Tenn.\n8. Number of objects 50 or 60\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude extremely high\n12. Speed faster than any aircraft witnesses had ever seen\n13. Direction of flight easterly\n14. Tactics Most traveled in straight line altho some of them zig-zagged.\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Very small\n17. Color shiny - like bright aluminum\n18. Shape unknown - possibly like meteor\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Some objects seemed to have a silvery tail which might have been exhaust\n22. Weather conditions CAVU, wind: 330 to 340°, 15 MPH at surface increasing to 66 MPH at 20,000; Surface temp: 72°; dew point 43° relative humidity 40%\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Skeches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Fifty to 60 shiny objects were seen moving at a speed faster than any known aircraft on an Easterly heading at an extremely high altitude. For the most part these objects traveled in a straight line altho some of them zig-zagged slightly. No sound was heard. Some objects seemed to have a silvery tail which might have been exhaust. These objects could not have been weather balloons as only one balloon was released by the Memphis Weather Bureau that day.\n\nNOTE: Witnesses thought they had seen a meteor; however subsequent investigation seemed to preclude this possibility.\nSee Supp II to Trip Report to Memphis - Visit with Dr. Paul Herget of the Observatory of Cincinnati, Ohio, in which Dr. Herget expressed serious doubt that the 50 or more objects observed 7 May 48 in Memphis were meteors. He, was, however unable to offer any explanation as to a possible identification of the objects.\n\nDr. Hynek of OSU and Dr. Lincoln LaPaz are to be consulted about the possibility of [REDACTED] these being a meteor shower.\n\nWitness of this incident were: Mr. F. J. Kaiser, salesman\n251 W. Waldorf Ave., Memphis\n\nMrs F. J. Kaiser, housewife\n251 W. Waldorf Ave., Memphis,Tenn."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 118\n\n1. Date 28 Mar 48\n2. Time 1630 hours\n3. Location Berlin Lichtenrade, Kirchbachstrasse 2\n4. Name of observer Dr Ormans,\n5. Occupation of observer Former guided missile expert at Exeinmetall Borsig\n6. Address of observer Berlin Lichtenrade, Kirchbachstrasse 2\n7. Place of observation As above\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 14 kilometers\n12. Speed rather fast\n13. Direction of flight South to North\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound No sound reported\n16. Size \"white point\"\n17. Color White\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails No exmust trail reported\n22. Weather conditions clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Skətches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dr Ormans, former Guided Missile expert at Exeinmetall, Borsig mentioned that he sighted 1 white point moving from South to North at an approx height of 14 kilometers, speed undetermined, rather fast, no rpt of sound, and no report of exhaust trail.\n\nWITNESSES: Dr and Mrs. Ormans.\nNo photographs available."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 119\n\n1. Date 20 Feb 48\n2. Time 0700 hours\n3. Location Asuncion, Paraguay\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Agustina Vargas de Paula\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer resident of Asuncion (southern part of city)\n7. Place of observation Asuncion\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight west to east\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape oval\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails highly colored wake\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approx 0700 hours 20 Feb 48 witness saw object of oval shape traveling thru space from west to east. Its form ended in a very thin tail of approximately 3 feet in length. The forward part was bulky compared with the rear. The interior portion of the object gave off green, yellow and orange colors and it had a highly colored wake.\n\nStatements from a local newspaper \"La Tribuna\" which has interviewed several people claiming to have seen the saucers."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 20 Feb 48 Incident # 119a\n2. Time 0700\n3. Location Aregua - 10 miles east of Asuncion\n4. Name of observer \"withheld\"\n5. Occupation of observer employee of Bank of Paraguay\n6. Address of observer Bank of Paraguay\n7. Place of observation N/S - [REDACTED] in Aregua\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight west to east\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape oval\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"An employee of the Bank of Paraguay declared that in Aregua,10 miles east of Asuncion on 20 Feb 48 at 0700 hours an object which he judged to be a meteor crossed the sky from west to east. Many other people also saw this object. Its form was oval and it had various colors and all agreed that it was a meteor. Later, inhabitants of Cicervo Cua claimed to have seen a \"star\" fall in one of the hills some distance to the east of Aregua"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 20 Feb 48 Incident # 119b\n2. Time 0700\n3. Location Villa Hayes (10 miles NNE of Asuncion)\n4. Name of observer 1st Rancher and laborers\n5. Occupation of observer Rancher\n6. Address of observer in the \"Chaco\"\n7. Place of observation Ranch house in neighborhood of Villa Hayes\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 1,000 ft\n12. Speed less than that of a plane\n13. Direction of flight west to east\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S - gave off an intense green color\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nPerceived a disc giving off an intense green color. Witness reports that the object traveled from west to east at a speed less than that of a plane and at an altitude of approx 1000 ft. Along its edges it gave off an aureola with the color green predominant.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date N/S - around 7 Feb 48 Incident # 120\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Vejle, Denmark\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer field laborers\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Gadbjerg (near Vejle)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 200 meters altitude\n10. Time in sight N/S 3 seconds\n11. Altitude 200 meters altitude\n12. Speed high speed\n13. Direction of flight SE to NW\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color shining\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Three men working in a field in Gadbjerg (near Vejle) Denmark, have observed a shining object which moved at high speed over the sky from southeast to northwest at about 200 meters altitude. It remained visible for three seconds.\n\nMA COMMENT: No verification received of the above. Evaluation P-6"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 121\n\n1. Date 9 January 1948\n2. Time 2330\n3. Location Cartersville, Georgia, 34° 10' N, 84° 49' W\n4. Name of observer Hugh DuBose\n5. Occupation of observor Pilot (EAL)\n6. Address of observor N/S\n7. Place of observation Air\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 3000 feet\n12. Speed 400 mph\n13. Direction of flight 175° M\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Light, sky-blue\n18. Shape Circular, except for the top quarter which was flat, pot-shaped\n19. Odor dotected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance 10° below the horizon\n26. Remarks: When object crossed the path of the witness all that could be observed was an intense blue flame, in a shape circular except for the top quarter which was flat, pot-shaped. The witness states that the object definitely did not have the curved trajectory of a wingless missile. Shartly after crossing his path, the blue flame sputtered and turned immediately earthward. The flame then died altogether but nothing was seen hitting the ground. Witness states that the flame was not of the long trailing type, but rather gave the impression that you were looking down a long exhaust stack at a short but concentrated mass of blue flame and further stated that his connections with RAF pilots in England during the war leads him now to believe this object looked the same as the \"Buzz Bombs\" chased by those RAF pilots at night. Arthur Porter, purser on this flight 9 January 48, also saw the object, the flame only, but can give no further evidence for its identification.\n\nMr. DuBose stated on April 29 that seventy-five cattle had died of an unknown disease on the farm of a Mr. Gordy at Newman, Georgia, and expressed concern over a possible connection between the unidentified object he reported and this unusual fatality among healthy cattle. However, the Atlanta Office of the Animal Industry Division, U.S. Department of Agriculture, advises that this \"unknown\" disease has persisted for over a year and other cases repeated elsewhere in the country for some time back. There apparently remains no basis for connection between the object Mr. DuBose reports and the death of seventy-five cattle at Newman, Georgia."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 122\n\n1. Date 5 April 1948\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Holloman Air Force Base\n4. Name of observer Mr. Olsen\n5. Occupation of observor Trained balloon observer, Geophysics Lab Section\n6. Address of observor N/S\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 30 seconds\n11. Altitude Very high\n12. Speed Faster than any known aircraft\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics Erratic - completing a large loop after its downward descent, then soaring upward and disappearing suddenly\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Large\n17. Color Grey-white\n18. Shape Rounded, indistinct form\n19. Odor dotected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions C.A.V.U.\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Disappeared suddenly\n26. Remarks: This was evidently the one object, of two sighted by another witness, that veered to the right and down. Its vaguely"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"defined form gave the appearance of a large object at a great distance. The statements of other witnesses to this incident are contained in reports 112a and 112b.\n\nAll witnesses agreed that the object was very high, moved faster than any known aircraft, possessed a rounded, indistinct form, and disappeared suddenly rather than fading away in the distance. It was under observation 1/2 minutes or slightly less. It was definitely not a balloon, and apparently not manned, judging from the violent maneuvers which were performed at a high rate of speed."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 5 April 1948 Incident #122 a\n2. Time Afternoon\n3. Location Holloman Air Force Base\n4. Name of observer Mr. Johnson\n5. Occupation of observer Trained balloon observer, Geophysics Lab Section\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 30 seconds\n11. Altitude Very high\n12. Speed Tremendous\n13. Direction of flight West\n14. Tactics Object made three vertical loops, upon completion of which it\n it disappeared in a large arc to the west\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Considering the moon the size of an orange, the object was the\n size of a dime\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Bore some resemblance to, but definitely not, a balloon\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Disappeared suddenly\n26. Remarks: Presumably Mr. Johnson saw the object that did not veer\nto the right. (See Incident #112 b) He stated that it was absolutely"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"silent on the desert that afternoon and that no audible noise was heard\nfrom the object. Neither was any signal nor atmospheric noise heard on\nthe 400-meter receiver to which he was listening at the time. He further\nstated that the wind at high altitude that day was very calm being only\n10 to 15 miles an hour from the west at 65,000 feet.\n\nThe statements of other witnesses to this incident are contained in\nreports 112 and 112b.\n\nAll witnesses agreed that the object was very high, moved faster than\nany known aircraft, possessed a rounded, indistinct form, and disappeared\nsuddenly rather than fading away in the distance. It was under observation\n1/2 minutes or slightly less. It was definitely not a balloon, and\napparently not manned, judging from the violent maneuvers which were\nperformed at a high rate of speed.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n50a"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 5 April 1948 Incident # 122 b\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Holloman Air Force Base\n4. Name of observer Mr. Chance\n5. Occupation of observer Trained balloon observer, Geophysics Lab Section\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation From the ground\n8. Number of objects Two\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 30 seconds\n11. Altitude Very high\n12. Speed Very high, faster than any known aircraft\n13. Direction of flight 1 straight up, 1 disappeared in the west\n First one veered to the right, started down and was lost to view.\n14. Tactics Second one made arc into the west at a terrific speed and\n disappear suddenly.\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Golden hue\n18. Shape Had appearance of a major's insignia, that is, irregularly\n rounded and slightly concave on top\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Disappeared suddenly\n26. Remarks: Mr. Chance was the only one of the three witnesses who\nsaw two objects. When he first perceived them, they were going"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"straight up then one veered to the right, started down, and was lost to\nview. Directing his attention to the other object, Mr. Chance saw it\narc into the west at a terrific speed and disappear suddenly. Mr. Chance\ndescribed the object as being of a golden hue, rather indistinct in\noutline and possessing somewhat the appearance of a major's insignia,\nthat is, irregularly rounded and slightly concave on top.\n\nThe statements of other witnesses to this incident are contained in\nreports 112 and 112a.\n\nAll witnesses agreed that the object was very high, moved faster than\nany known aircraft, possessed a rounded, indistinct form, and disappeared\nsuddenly rather than fading away in the distance. It was under observation\n1/2 minutes or slightly less. It was definitely not a balloon, and\napparently not manned, judging from the violent maneuvers which were\nperformed at a high rate of speed.\n\n51a"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 11 April 1948 Incident # 123\n2. Time 2330\n3. Location 4 miles north of Alton, Illinois\n4. Name of observer Col W. F. Siegmund\n5. Occupation of observer Former Commandant of the Air Base at Kearns, Utah\n and at present sales manager for Western Cartridge, Co., Alton.\n6. Address of observer Western Cartridge,Co., Alton, Ill.\n7. Place of observation 4 miles north of Alton, Ill - ground\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics \"flapped its wings\"\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size \"bigger than an airplane\"\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Resembled a huge fowl and not a type of aircraft\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Col Siegmund said he observed the creature at about\n11:30 A. M. 11 Apr 48, while riding four miles north of Alton, Ill\n(over)\n52"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Siegmund said he didn't see any flapping of wings but he was sure it was a huge fowl and not a type of aircraft. He was riding with a companion, Col. Ralph Jackson, Head of Western Military Academy, at the time. Jackson, however, was talking to a farmer and didn't see it. Siegmund said he didn't mention it to anyone as it seemed too incredible.\n\nNote: A child, James Torres, age 12, said he saw the bird flying over his home in suburban Glendale, Mo., some 3 months previous.\n\nThe Belvidere report quoted a Robert Price and Veryl Babb as saying the bird was \"bigger than an airplane\" and flapped its wings.\n\nRELIABILITY: Impossible to evaluate.\nCol Siegmund was never questioned but some sort of investigation obviously should be made in lieu of the fact that he was once commandant of the Air Base at Kearns."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 18 April 1948 Incident # 124\n2. Time 1500 GCT\n3. Location North Atlantic, 62°00'N 33°00'W\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer Weather station patrol\n6. Address of observer First Coast Guard District\n7. Place of observation Air\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer 6500 yards - 18000 yards\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed 30 mph\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions C.A.V.U.\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Target strength was S5 fading at 18,000 yards\n26. Remarks: This incident is the result of a radar sighting. Copy is also filed in radar sighting file."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This target was contacted on the air search radar at 1500 GCT on 18 April 48. The first contact was made at 6500 yards and was tracked to 18,000 yards giving a velocity of approximately 30 m.p.h. The area in which the target was contacted was thoroughly search visually and there were no clouds nor weather fronts in said area. There were no target indications on the surface radar. The target strength was S5 fading at 18,000 yards."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 2 May 1948 Incident # 125\n2. Time Night\n3. Location St. Louis, Missouri, 40°00'N 90°15'W\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Phosphorescent after dark\n18. Shape Bird\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: See Incident #123"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 30 April 1948 Incident # 126\n2. Time 1015\n3. Location Anacostia, Naval Air Station, 38°52'N, 77°00'W\n4. Name of observer Marcus L.Lowe\n5. Occupation of observer Lt Commander, US Navy\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Air\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer One mile\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 4500 feet\n12. Speed 100 m.p.h.\n13. Direction of flight 360° N\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 25 - 40 ft diameter\n17. Color Yellow (light colored)\n18. Shape Sphere\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: The object appeared to the pilot to be a yellow (or light colored) balloon, and attracted attention principally because"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of its flight path. No external fittings or attachments were observed on the object. The speed of the object was estimated at about 100 m.p.h. The flight of the object was in approximately a south to north direction, despite upper winds from north northwest, and apparently followed a constant altitude. Pilot did not pursue object further because it was entering the prohibited flying area, U.S. Capitol, White House Area."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 7 May 1948 Incident # 127\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Lake Doiran, along the Yugoslav-Greek frontier\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor N/S\n7. Place of observation Ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 3000 feet\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight 180°\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound Like artillery shell (shrill whine)\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Flying disc\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: A press dispatch quoted residents of the Lake Doiran area along the Yugoslav-Greek frontier as saying they saw a \"flying"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"disc\". It was described as speeding southward from Yugoslavia at a height of about 3,000 feet, making a noise like an artillery shell."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 8 May 1948 Incident # 128\n2. Time Night\n3. Location(Hobson) Middleport, Ohio, 30° 00' N, 82° 03' W\n4. Name of observer Ben Rupe\n5. Occupation of observer New York Central System Car Inspector\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Ground\n8. Number of objects N/S\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 6 - 8 miles\n12. Speed Great amount of speed\n13. Direction of flight 90°\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 9\" diameter from ground level\n17. Color Phosphorescent\n18. Shape Round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Phosphorescent trail in sky\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: The above covers sighting of same objects by Earl Roush, New York Central System Car Inspector; Bob White, New York Central"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Hard Clerk; and C. K. Hite, New York Central Patrolman. Patrolman Hite stated in addition that his attention was called to these objects by Car Inspector Ben Rupe. Upon observing the sky Hite saw disc-shaped objects traveling from west to east in succession in the same path at about two-minute intervals. Now and then one would \"hook back apparently in the same path whence it had come.\" Occasionally one seemed to burst and disintegrate. For a resemblance, Hite said \"Take a large clock face, cover it with radium, and sail it through the air.\""} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 129\n1. Date 31 May 1948\n2. Time 1320\n3. Location Wilmington, North Carolina, 34° 14' N, 77° 57' W\n4. Name of observer Mrs. H. D. Alspach\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor 709 South 6th\n7. Place of observation Ground\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sightN/S\n11. Altitude Awfully high\n12. Speed Fast\n13. Direction of flight 90°\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size As large as an arm, and about 3 feet long\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Oblong\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Emitted smoke\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Mysterious sky object was sighted by Mrs. Alspach, her sister Mrs. Colvin, and Mrs. H.D. Hufham. It came at first at a fast"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"speed from the direction of Bluethenthal Field at 1:20 p.m., over the Cape Fear River, then veered at a low speed back towards Wrightsville, a little to the west.\n\nThe local office of the Civil Aeronautics administration discredited a supposition by Bluethenthal Field's station manager James Holomon, that object could have been a P-30 plane in flight. The CAA said there was no such plane in the sky there at the time."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 130\n1. Date 17th May 1948\n2. Time Night\n3. Location Between Plevna and Miles City, Montana\n4. Name of observer W. A. Bonneville\n5. Occupation of observer Territory Mgr., B. F. Goodrich Company\n6. Address of observer 415 W. Rosser Ave., Bismark, N. D.\n7. Place of observation Ground, Route #212, West of Plevna, traveling west\n8. Number of objects One\n9. Distance of object from observer At closest point, approx. 2500 feet\n10. Time in sight Some twenty minutes\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Twice the speed of the Northwest Airlines planes\n13. Direction of flight West, slightly south, then west\n14. Tactics Performed arc\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Fairly large compared with an aircraft\n17. Color White - (might have had slight bluish-white tinge)\n18. Shape Ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S - but apparently meteor-like\n21. Exhaust trails A long bright light shooting from under it\n22. Weather conditions Moonlight, but cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None - Map forwarded showing location of object\n25. Manner of disappearance Flew in a dark cloud bank\n26. Romarks: See Supplement"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The B. F. Goodrich Company\n1653 Hennepin Avenue\nMinneapolis, Minnesota\n\n415 W. Rosser Avenue\nBismarck, N. Dakota\nJune 16, 1948\n\nCol W. R. Clingerman\nU. S. Army Air Forces\nWright Field\nDayton, Ohio\n\nRefer - MCIAXO-3\n\nDear Sir: -\n\nIn reply to your letter of June 15th in which there are several questions which you desire answered to the best of my ability - with reference to the object which I saw flying through the air between Plevna and Miles City Montana on the night of May 17th, I will answer them and give you a graphic description again with a little more elaboration than my previous letter - if that is possible.\n\nQuestion: - Did the entire object appear to be glowing, or did it give the effect of carrying lights. Answer: This thing seemed to be a ball of bright white light - and I could not make out if it was being carriedor just what made it go - however, it did disturb me quite a little because after stopping to view it at the Powder River Bridge I could not hear motors humming such as an aircraft in these parts might have, and I therefore tried to find out just what it was by the use of my field glasses.\n\n(b) Question: - An estimate of the size of the object in comparison with some other known object. Answer - the size of the light which was very brilliant would indicate that it was fairly large compared with aircraft - and I would say that this exceedingly bright light which was one light and not several was as bright as the headlight on a locomotive, only about three times that bright and without direction. By this I mean that this light simply glowed very bright and was not a directed light.\n\n(c) Question: - An estimate of the speed of the object in comparison with the jet type or conventional aircraft. Answer: This object flew at about twice the speed of any aircraft that Northwest Airlines planes fly - because it would appear coming thro where I was traveling west on Highway #212 or #12 as we call it out here appearing only faintly first and then growing larger as it approached over the hills north of the highway - until it seemed to hang there off in the northwest of me brightly and then would turn south toward the highway where it became real bright and then would start back West again and fly out of sight. This thing did this several times - which actually got my goat - if I may put it that way. (d) Question: Did the object appear to be circling at random or didit follow a definite flight pattern. Answer: As I have explained before - the object appeared first when"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the West - then turning slightly South and turning in a big swing and then heading West again - flying out of sight into the dark black cloud bank out of sight - then reappearing, and it did this several times.\n(e) Question: - Is it possible that its disappearance into a \"heavy cloud bank\" might have been caused by clouds obscuring reflected moonlight from a higly polished surface. Answer: - No - I have seen aircraft many times on moonlight nights - but this was not anything like that - this thing glowed brightly white light such as any real white brilliant light might. The moon was not bright enough to reflect polished light unless the craft might have been South of me in the direct light of the moon - which showed (the moon) from time to time through the clouds. This objedt was in theblack section of the sky over to the North of me and slightly west, and was a steady oncoming light growing brighter as it came, and had the appearance of something carrying this light in the air but without sound, and it certainly was close enough to me to have heard motors.\n\nI thought it might have been some kind of a jet aircraft that I perhaps had never seen - because we as civilians know very little as to what might be going on in defense or experimental mechanics however I felt it my duty to report the thing regardless as to what it might have been. This was somewhat difficult for me to do because of the crackpot stories making the rounds in some sections about flying saucers etc., but for the life of me this had all the ear marks of just that kind of a deal.\n\nI have traveled this road about which I have releated this sighting many many times and at night Winter and Summer - and have never before in my life seen anything like this - so naturally I was somewhat alarmed about it, and have steadfastly kept the whole thing to myself. I will certainly be on the lookout for the damned thing the next trip I make through this same area which is generally after dark - because most of the time I work from Lemmon South Dakota or Hettinger North Dakota along this highway to Miles City which is about one days work ith my Dealers. In times like these I feel as before stated anything of this nature which we are not familiar with we are duty bound to report to our Defense Forces who may be better equipped to understand the unfamiliar than we are.\n\nYours very truly,\n\nW.A. BONNEVILLE - Territory Mgr for the B. F. Goodrich Company\n\nWAB"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY\nMinneapolis 3, Minnesota\n\n415 West Rosser Ave\nBismark, N. D.\n5-23-48\n\nUnited States Army - Intelligence Div.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nGentlemen:-\n\nOn the night of May 17th at about 11:30 PM driving from Baker, Montana to Miles City Montana on U.S. Highway #12 just West of Plevna, Montana before getting to the hills I noticed a very bright object in the sky to the Northwest. The sky was overcast in the West but to the South the moon could be seen at times - with a broken sky. Having traveled this same route for many years - about 15, I am pretty well used to open prairie road at night and can tell a star from an unusual object when I see it.\n\nNorthwest Airlines travel a Western route just North of this route also, but I stopped at the Powder River Bridge where the road dips considerably down from a high ridge - cut off my car motor and watched this object as it sailed around in the sky - which at times close and others seemed to speed away into the heavy cloud bank to the West and then later reappearing, at a very bright white light at what I would judge about not more than several miles away or closer. I carry a pair of field glasses with me, and after stopping the car engine watched this thing through my glasses, which seemed to appear as a small object with a long very bright light shooting from the under part of it. Because of the speed of the object and the darkness it was very difficult to make out what it might be, but I am sure that if I had had a more powerful glass I might have made it out.\n\nI am perfectly sincere and do not drink so the foregoing is absolutely the truth. With some of this newspaper funabout flying saucers etc, this had all of the appearance of just that- and in stopping the car if this had been an aeroplane I would certainly have been able to hear the motors.\n\nI stopped at a service station just before getting to the Powder River Bridge but they had all gone to bed so did not have anyone along with me to witness the object as it flew through the air. It stayed around this area for about 20 minutes and then flew off through the heavy cloud bank to the West.\n\nI am enclosing a map showing the location of the foregoing.\n\nYours very truly,\n\nThe B. F. Goodrich Company\n\n/s/ Wm. Bonneville\nTerritory Manager\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Inc 131\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nProbably true\n\n1. Date 20 June 1948\n2. Time 2330\n3. Location Belleville, Illinois\n4. Name of observer Lt Col Wm I. Hull\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot, Supervisor of Flying Trng Scott AF Base\n6. Address of observer Scott AF Base, Belleville, Illinois\n7. Place of observation (?)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Undetermined but below 6,000 ft\n12. Speed Approx 500 MPH\n13. Direction of flight 295° S of Base then 340° upon reaching south end of Scott AF Base\n14. Tactics Zigzag course\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Six or eight inches in diameter\n17. Color White light\n18. Shape Approx round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Complete overcast at 6,000 ft\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks No aircraft flying in the vicinity of Scott AF Base at the time light was sighted\n27. Disappearance: N/S\n63"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Inc 131a\nProbably true\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 20 June 1948\n2. Time 2330\n3. Location Belleville, Illinois\n4. Name of observer Major Earl J. Harrington\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot, Supervisor, Military Trng\n6. Address of observer Scott AF Base, Belleville, Ill\n7. Place of observation Belleville, Ill. (?) Ground (?)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Undetermined but below 6,000 ft.\n12. Speed Approx 500 MPH\n13. Direction of flight 295° S of Base then 340° upon reaching south end of Scott AF Base\n14. Tactics zigzag course\n15. Sound none\n16. Size Six or eight inches in diameter\n17. Color White light\n18. Shape Approx round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Complete overcast at 6,000 ft.\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\nRESTRICTED\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks No aircraft flying in the vicinity of Scott AF Base at the time light was sighted.\n64 131a"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT 132\nFile 8-365-47\nRD 12199\nT-7477\nFK 4910\nRESTRICTED\nEvaluation A-3\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 12 Dec 1947\n2. Time 2205 & 2208\n3. Location Oslo, Norway\n4. Name of observer Daughter to Mr Kai E. Rasmussen, Col GSC\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Same as MA, Oslo, Norway\n7. Place of observation Oslo, Norway (Ground)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Between two and three seconds\n11. Altitude N/S (apparently traveling fairly close to ground or would be visible to more people)\n12. Speed Not quite as fast as a meteor\n13. Direction of flight SSE-SSW to NNE-(?)\n14. Tactics Performed arc of circle, curvature very great\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Luminous white with greenish-yellow tail\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction Meteor-like\n21. Exhaust trails Greenish-yellow trail\n22. Weather conditions No fog, sky clear and star-lit\n23. Effect on clouds none\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance Trees obscured vision\n26. Remarks: Office employee reports unusual no. of falling stars night of 13 Dec.\nUniv Observatory has no record of incident.\n65\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nINCIDENT 133\n\n1. Date 20 - 26 Feb 48\n2. Time Usually around 2130 hours\n3. Location N/S (Norway Denmark & Sweden)\n4. Name of observer N/S\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation N/S\n8. Number of objects N/S\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude From tree-top level to 20,000 ft\n12. Speed one to two miles per second\n13. Direction of flight Come from direction of Pennemunde\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color (green tail)\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails green\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks The trend of these objects to appear at 2130 hours might be significant.\n66\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 134\n\n1. Date of Incident 28 May 1948\n2. Time of Incident 1500 hours (Eastern Daylight Saving Time)\n3. Place of observation 6 miles due east of Monroe, Michigan from air while passenger in a C-47 plane\n4. Name of observer 1st Lt Alexander Kokolonis\n5. Occupation of observer 1st Lt USAFR Corps of Engineers, Security Officer\n6. Address of observer 838 Eng. Aviation Bn, Co. B. Oscoda AF Base, Michigan\n7. Number of objects observed 5 objects; 3 at first; 2 later\n8. Distance of object from observer 2 miles to left of their plane\n9. Time in sight 10 to 15 seconds\n10. Altitude 7500 to 8,000 ft\n11. Speed well over 500 MPH\n12. Direction of flight Southwest\n13. Tactics executed abrupt turns, flew in line of stern stepped up.\n14. Lights N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 300 to 400 ft - about the same size of lake freighters on Lake Erie\n17. Color bright silvery golden hue\n18. Shape disc shape with well rounded contours - all had hazy or fuzzy outline\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21 Exhaust trails no exhaust or trail of any kind\n22. Weather conditions high overcast at 18,000 ft and a low thin stratus layer very broken at 8,000; lateral visibility: 10 - 15 miles\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs drawing\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lt Kokolonis first observed the objects from the navigator's window. At the time their plane was on a 35° heading, altitude approx 8,000 ft and they were six miles east of Monroe, Michigan. The objects came into view at 9:00 o'clock position and disappeared in the haze at a 7:00 o'clock position, making an abrupt turn to their right, ship's left. Visibility into the sun was some 8 miles. The size of the objects seemed about 300-400 ft (about the size of the lake freighters on Lake Erie). The objects were moving at great rate of speed well over 500 MPH. Their track thru the sky was smooth. They were disc shaped with well rounded contours. All of the objects maintained a slight nose-up attitude and all had a hazy or fuzzy outline. They were a bright silvery gold color. They left no exhaust or trail of any kind."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nINCIDENT 134a\n\n1. Date 28 May 1948\n2. Time 1500 hours (Eastern Daylight Saving Time)\n3. Location Enroute to Selfridge Fld., Mt. Clemens, Mich f/MacDill Fld Position: 6 miles due east of Monroe, Michigan\n4. Name of observer M/Sgt Ernest Davis, Jr. (colored)\n5. Occupation of observer M/Sgt\n6. Address of observer Selfridge Field\n7. Place of observation 6 miles due east of Monroe, Michigan\n8. Number of objects 2\n9. Distance of object from observer 25 to 30 miles to left\n10. Time in sight 30 seconds\n11. Altitude approx 8,000 ft\n12. Speed Over 400 miles per hour\n13. Direction of flight South West from 35° at 8:00 o'clock position\n14. Tactics Pursued straight course\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size Appeared to be four feet in diameter\n17. Color Shiny brass\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, high overcast at 18,000 ft; thin stratus layer broken at 8,000 ft, lateral visibility: 10 to 15 miles\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Sketch\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks Discrepancy as to position of 2nd object in group 2 as sighted by Lt Kokolomis (Inc 134) Witness perceived only top-side of object. Objects seen flying over wooded section"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nINCIDENT: 135\n\n1. Date Between 15th & 20th Aug 47\n2. Time 2130 MST\n3. Location Rapid City AF Base, Weaver, S.D.\n4. Name of observer Maj Elmer H. Hammer, Jr. (AO-46014)\n5. Occupation of observer Intel Officer 28th Bombardment Group (VR)\n6. Address of observer Rapid City AFBase Weaver, S. D.\n7. Place of observation Weaver, S. D.\n8. Number of objects 12 (Approx)\n9. Distance of object from observer 4 miles\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 10,000 ft to approx 6,000 ft.\n12. Speed 500 MPH +\n13. Direction of flight Approached first from NW then turn to right and disappeared in SW\n14. Tactics tight diamond-shaped formation\n15. Sound no noise heard\n16. Size Length: 100+ ft estimate\n17. Color Yellowish-white - brilliant\n18. Shape Elliptical\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, no clouds, stars visible, wind, calm visibility 30+\n23. Effect on clouds none\n24. Sketches or photographs Sketches\n25. Manner of disappearance Disappeared on a SW heading\n26. Remarks There appears to be minor discrepancies as to speed and altitude in the report given verbally to Glasebrook and 1 tr to this Hq f/Maj Hammer"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS 28th Bombardment Wing (VH)\nOffice of the Intelligence Officer\nRapid City Air Force Base\nWeaver, South Dakota\n\n26 BGS 2350.09 1 July 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Report of Flying Discs\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: PROJ. SIGN\n\n1. In compliance with paragraph 3, Regulation No. 45-5, Headquarters Strategic Air Command, Andrews Air Force Base, Washington 20, D. C., dated 19 February 1948, the following information is submitted for your information and guidance.\n\na. Flying Discs sighted over Rapid City Air Force Base, Weaver, South Dakota at 2130 MST between 15th and 20th of Aug 1947\n\nb. Sky - clear; no clouds, stars visible; visibility 30+; wind - calm.\n\nc. Name, occupation and address of witness:\n\nMajor Elmer H. Hammer, Jr. AO-46014\nIntelligence Officer\n28th Bombardment Group (VH)\nRapid City Air Force Base\nWeaver, South Dakota\n\nd. No photographs available\n\ne. See Inclosure Number 1\n\nf. Object sighted: Flying Discs\n\n(1) Number: Twelve (12), (Approximate)\n(2) Shape: Oval shaped\n(3) Size: Length: One hundred plus (100+) feet (estimate)\n(4) Color: Yellowish-white, brilliant\n(5) Speed: Five hundred plus (500+) MPH.\n\nIncident 135"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(6) Heading: Approached the base from the NW on a SE heading at 8 to 10,000 feet altitude; when at 5 to 6,000 feet and a mile or so West of the field, a turn to the right was made (by the entire formation) in a wide arc, and while turning began a climb at a 30° to 40° angle, accelerating very fast. Disappeared on a SW heading.\n(7) Maneuverability: Very maneuverable; held a tight formation (all equally spaced) and remained so during all maneuvers.\n(8) Altitude: Ten thousand (10,000) feet when first seen; descended to approximately six thousand (6,000) feet near the field.\n(9) Sound: No sound whatsoever. (The night was very still and no aircraft engines were running or other noises to distract).\n(10) Exhaust trail: No exhaust trail - unknown means of propulsion.\ng. There is no doubt as to the existance of these sightings, but there is little substantiating evidence inasmuch as no other witnesses are known and no pictures could be taken. The objects sighted were visible only for approximately one (1) minute. Their form remained the same throughout the time observed.\nFOR THE COMMANDING OFFICER:\n1 Incl.\n1. Diagram of size and formation\nELMER H. HAMMER, JR.\nMajor, USAF\nIntelligence Officer"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OBJECT CONFIGURATION\nFormation Pattern\nFig. 2"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 136\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 30 June 1948 at 2140\n2. Where Sighted: South Knoxville, Tennessee\n3. Observer's Position: (i.e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Mrs. Whitehouse, South Knoxville, Tenn.\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: wife of Major Harvey J. Whitehouse Commanding Officer, ASU, 3319 Tennessee\n6. Attention Attracted by:\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): N/S\n9. Color of Object(s): orange\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) Ball\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: 30,000 ft (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: 1,000 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: 3 minutes (according to Mrs Whitehouse) 3 seconds (according to ORC instructors)\n16. Tactics:\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) West\n19. Apparent Construction: \"fire\"\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): \"streamer of bluish color trailing\"\n22. Manner of Disappearance: over horizon\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S\n24. Peculiarities Noted:\n25. Summary of Incident: (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approximately 2140 hours, 30 June, a ball of fire of orange color with a streamer of bluish color trailing, traveled thru the sky in a westerly direction and disappeared over the horizon to the west. The object traveld at a very fast rate of speed. No sound was heard.\nWitnesses: Mrs. Whitehouse, wife of Maj Harvey J. Whitehouse, C. O., ASU 3319 Tennessee\nORC instructors, Knoxville, Tenn.\nMr. Tryus W. Setliff (See Incident 136a)\nMrs. Whitehouse stated that the object remained visible for approximately 3 minutes and that the streamer emitted sparks.\nMr. Setliff stated that the object was visible for about 3 seconds and traveled at an estimated speed of 1,000 miles perhour at an altitude of about 30,000 feet."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 30 June 1948\n2. Time 2140\n3. Location S. Knoxville, Tenn\n4. Name of observer Mr Tryus W. Setliff\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Oakridge, Tennessee\n7. Place of observation Knoxville, Tenn\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 3 seconds\n11. Altitude [REDACTED] 30,000 ft\n12. Speed 1,000 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Westerly\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Orange Color\n18. Shape Ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction Fire\n21. Exhaust trails Bluish Color\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Over horizon to West\n26. Remarks"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 137\n\n1. Date 7 Jul 48\n2. Time 2114 and 2115\n3. Location Chapel Hill, N. C.\n4. Name of observer James Eaves, Lt., U. S. Naval Reserve\n5. Occupation of observer Mathematics Instructor\n6. Address of observer University of North Carolina\n7. Place of observation Chapel Hill, N. C.\n8. Number of objects three (3)\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Approximately one (1) minute\n11. Altitude Extreme\n12. Speed High\n13. Direction of flight East Northeast\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound Jet\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Not Visible\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks:\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n10"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 137\n\nto a point in the rear. Objects shaped like cigars. Appeared about the size of an airplane in the sky. They were about 3-1/2\" in length. Didn't have wings or any apparent means of getting around in the sky."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 7 Jul 48\nIncident # 137a\n2. Time 2114 and 2115\n3. Location Chapel Hill, N. C.\n4. Name of observer H. W. Daniels\n5. Occupation of observer Capt., Infantry, Reserve\n6. Address of observer Box 188, Chapel Hill\n7. Place of observation Chapel Hill, N. C.\n8. Number of objects three (3)\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Approximately one (1) minute\n11. Altitude Extreme\n12. Speed High\n13. Direction of flight East Northeast\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound Jet\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Not Visible\n22. Weather conditions Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks:\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n72"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident #138\n\n1. Date 8 Jul 48\n2. Time 0920\n3. Location Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Wilda Zittek\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 2579 Avalon Ave. Columbus, O.\n7. Place of observation Ground\n8. Number of objects two (2)\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight four (4) minutes\n11. Altitude Judged to be around 3000 feet\n12. Speed Could not be estimated around\n13. Direction of flight First headed NE then North\n14. Tactics Bobbed up and down\n15. Sound None\n16. Size With binoculars (Type M-3, 6 x 30) about 3 1/2\" in length by 1\" in diameter\n17. Color Silver\n18. Shape Like a cigar or torpedo\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction Metallic\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear, sunlight, no clouds\n23. Effect on clouds None (There were none)\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Faded away\n26. Remarks: (Over)\n\nSECRET\n\n73"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mrs. Zittek said that the objects looked like something going through air currents. They had a blunt nose and the tail was obscured. At first they looked like a dark blot. Both ends were indistinct. They were visible for three or four minutes and began to fade away.\n\nSubject's powers of observation were checked on air craft flying in the area and were found to be good as far as direction and movement, but poor for distance and altitude.\n\nA check at Patterson Field Operations showed two F-80's in the air at the time of sighting.\n\nCapt. Darnell, pilot of one F-80, was flying a loose formation in trail of Lt. Collins while pacing him on a calibrated speed check. The aircraft were not equipped with wing tip tanks. The pilots stated that they were in the Columbus Area. Mrs. Zittek position was from a three quarter rear positon at sighting.\n\nAn article was published by the Columbus Citizen News Paper, Columbus, Ohio, 8 Jul 48.\n\n74"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Information received from Captain Boyd, District Intelligence Office,\n320 Old Post Office, Columbus, Ohio\n\nUnconventional aircraft sighted by Mrs. Wilda Zittek, 2579 Avalon Ave.,\nColumbus at 0920 on 8 July. Weather was clear, sun shining brightly,\nno clouds near the object. She first saw the object with her naked eye,\nthen spent two minutes looking for binoculars. Observed the object for a\nabout two minutes with them. There was no flying objects; both appeared\nto have a blunt front and seemed to taper to a point at the rear. The\nshape was very much like a cigar. The sun was shining on them and they\nappeared to be silver in color. With the naked eye, they appeared to be\nabout the size of a airplane when writing in the sky. They were about\n3 1/2\" in length and 1\" in diameter. In other words, they seemed to be\na little more than three times the diameter in length. Speed was not\nestimated. Observed for approximately four minutes. When first seen,\nthey were headed northeast. Seemed to bob up and down rather than pursuing a set and steady course. Altitude was judged to be approximately\n3000 ft. No sound audible from the object; no exhaust trail visible.\nFirst seen in east point toward Fort Columbus, then moved generally north\nthere. Binoculars were 6x.\n\n*************\n\nThe following was broadcast over the radio this morning (9 Jul) but not persons not yet interviewed: On 7 July, five members of one family saw the object which looked like pie pans, directly over Fort Columbus.\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 139\n\n1. Date 9 Jul 48\n2. Time 2147\n3. Location North end of Osborn, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Clarence Glasebrook, 1st Lt., USAF, Hq AMC (MCIAXD-4)\n5. Occupation of observer ATI Investigator\n6. Address of observer Hq AMC (MCIAXD-4)\n7. Place of observation ground\n8. Number of objects one\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Appeared 3 times each time being 1-2 second duration\n11. Altitude 3000 to 4000 feet\n12. Speed between 500 & 600\n13. Direction of flight west (east to west)\n14. Tactics Made intermittent appearances at regulated intervals\n15. Sound None\n16. Size could not be estimated\n17. Color pale yellowish white (luminous)\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Clear w/quarter moon in the East-Southeast.\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Suddenly at angle of approx. 70° to horizon in front of observer who was looking north\n26. Remarks: Lt. Glasebrook was a reconnaissance pilot in World War II."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The object seemed to flow and was not a directed beam.\n\nIt is believed that his powers of observation are above average and that the estimates of speed can be considered to be fairly accurate."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Unidentified Flying Object\n\nMCIAXD-3 MCIAXD-4 16 July 1948 Cmt 1\n\n1. At 2147 hours on 9 July 1948, the undersigned sighted an unidentified object flying from east to west at approximately three to four thousand feet over the north end of Osborn, Ohio.\n\n2. The object appeared as a pale yellowish white light that seemed to glow. It was not a directed beam. The light was traveling at a rate of speed between five or six hundred miles. It appeared long enough to allow the observer to determine its flight path (approximately one to two seconds) and then went out. There was a pause of three seconds, the light then reappeared again for the same length of time, another three-second pause and the pattern was repeated. After the third appearance it was not seen again. The final sighting was made with the object at an angle of approximately 70° to the horizon in front of the observer who was looking north. The last sighting was slightly above the horizon to the west, just north of Patterson Field. The intermittent appearance of the light was at a regulated interval.\n\n3. The sky was clear with about a quarter moon rising in the East-southeast; however, nothing could be ascertained except the glow of the light. There was no sound or trail.\n\n4. The undersigned was a reconnaissance pilot in World War II and served for eight months in the 160th Reconnaissance Sqd. (J. P.) flying FF-80 type aircraft. It is believed that his powers of observation are above average and that the estimates of speed can be considered to be fairly accurate.\n\n/s/ CLARENCE GLASEBROOK\n1st Lt., USAF\n\nCWG/ew\nEx 65310\nBldg 288\nPost 201F\n\nIncident 139"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 140\n\n1. Date 1 July 1948\n2. Time between 2100 and 2200 hours\n3. Location Gahanna, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Howard Enslow\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer Gahanna, Ohio\n7. Place of observation ground\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 3 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Northeast to Southwest\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color golden\n18. Shape saucer\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction luminous\n21. Exhaust trails Seemed to wear a halo of silver\n22. Weather conditions Clear - moonlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Witness states: \"A beautiful golden saucer glowing like a halo with a silver rim around it.\""} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 140a\n\n1. Date 1 July 1948\n2. Time Between 2100 and 2200 hours\n3. Location Gahanna, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mr Jack Taylor\n5. Occupation of observer N/S but now active in National Guard\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation Gahanna, Ohio ( ground )\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 2 seconds\n11. Altitude 3000 to 4000 ft\n12. Speed terrific\n13. Direction of flight Northeast to Southwest\n14. Tactics Pursued [REDACTED] flat line of flight\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color bright yellow-white\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction luminous\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Clear - bright moonlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Mr. Chester Taylor gave the same version as that of his son. Mrs. Taylor apparently did not observe the phenomenon.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 140a\n\nObject was described as a bright yellow-white light that moved through the sky at a terrific rate of speed. It was a glow and not a directed light and was about two seconds in duration. It didn't fade but ceased abruptly. The line of flight appeared flat and the object appeared from the Northeast going southwest. Altitude was between 3,000 and 4,000 ft. There was no audible noise although it was a quiet night and the object appeared close in at an angle to the horizon of about 45°. Although the sky was clear and the moon was bright nothing but the light was seen."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 141\n\n1. Date 30 June 1948\n2. Time 11:25 A. M., to 1:27 PM and shortly thereafter\n3. Location Hecla, South Dakota\n4. Name of observer Norman Pfutzenreuter\n5. Occupation of observer Chemical Engineer - Amateur Astronomer\n6. Address of observer Hecla, South Dakota\n7. Place of observation Between Watertown, S. D., & Webster, S. D.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight Slightly over two hours\n11. Altitude 150 miles (?)\n12. Speed Stationary\n13. Direction of flight Stationary\n14. Tactics Remained in one position then disintegrated approx\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Like polished aluminum\n18. Shape Changing\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction Seemed to be a cluster of parts\n21. Exhaust trails Particles of disintegrating mass left very faint trails of vapor\n22. Weather conditions Brilliantly clear (CAVU) - Wind velocity 3 MPH\n23. Effect on clouds No clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs Map showing locations of sightings\n25. Manner of disappearance Disintegrated into smaller pieces\n26. Remarks: Object appeared as cluster of parts which remained fairly stationary and constant for some two hours when it underwent a rather slow change in shape. A large chunk fell off. Within the next 2-1/2 minutes the entire spot started to very slowly disintegrate. Three larger parts moved (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\naway out from the mass and formed a perfect isometric triangle, the remaining mass slowly moved into hundreds of small parts seemingly leaving very faint vapor trails. The three remaining parts continued to move apart holding their related positions of a perfect triangle but gradually getting smaller and fainter until they dissapeared some 9 minutes after the initial break-up. It could [REDACTED] easily be seen that the parts were moving away from the earth.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 142\n\n1. Date\n2. Time\n3. Location\n4. Name of observer Mr. Charles W. Shangle, Jr.\n5. Occupation of observer\n6. Address of observer Boise, Idaho\n7. Place of observation\n8. Number of objects\n9. Distance of object from observer\n10. Time in sight\n11. Altitude\n12. Speed\n13. Direction of flight\n14. Tactics\n15. Sound\n16. Size\n17. Color\n18. Shape\n19. Odor detected\n20. Apparent construction\n21. Exhaust trails\n22. Weather conditions\n23. Effect on clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs\n25. Manner of disappearance\n26. Remarks:\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 143\n\n1. Date\n2. Time\n3. Location\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Felix G. Matthews\n5. Occupation of observer\n6. Address of observer. Columbia, South Carolina\n7. Place of observation\n8. Number of objects\n9. Distance of object from observer\n10. Time in sight\n11. Altitude\n12. Speed\n13. Direction of flight\n14. Tactics\n15. Sound\n16. Size\n17. Color\n18. Shape\n19. Odor detected\n20. Apparent construction\n21. Exhaust trails\n22. Weather conditions\n23. Effect on clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs\n25. Manner of disappearance\n26. Remarks:\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n71"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 24 July 48\nIncident # 144\n\n2. Time 0245\n\n3. Location 20 miles south of Montgomery, Ala\n\n4. Name of observer Pilot Clarence Shipe Chiles & Co-Pilot John B. Whitted & Mr. McKelvie, (Occupation - N/S)\n\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot and Co-pilot, EAL\n\n6. Address of observer Atlanta Office of EAL\n\n7. Place of observation Air - 20 miles south of Montgomery, Ala\n\n8. Number of objects 1\n\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n\n10. Time in sight 5 to 10 seconds\n\n11. Altitude 5,000 ft\n\n12. Speed 500 to 700 MPH (See Atlanta Constitution of 25 July 48)\n\n13. Direction of flight Southwest toward Mobile and New Orleans\n\n14. Tactics Pulled up sharply with tremendous burst of flame (Atlanta Constitution - 25 July 48)\n\n15. Sound none\n\n16. Size 100 ft long and about twice the diameter of \"B-29\"\n\n17. Color N/S\n\n18. Shape cigar-shaped\n\n19. Odor detected N/S\n\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n\n21. Exhaust trails red-orange flame\nblue fluorescent glow running beneath the object\n\n22. Weather conditions Full moon, clear with broken cloud coverage of 4/10 at 6,000 ft\n\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - pulled up into one\n\n24. Sketches or photographs 2\n\n25. Manner of disappearance Disappeared into a cloud\n\n26. Remarks: See attached statements\n\n73a"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 24 July 48\nIncident # 144a\n\n2. Time 0230\n\n3. Location Near Blackstone, Va. enroute to Raleigh-Durham\n\n4. Name of observer Louis Feldwary\n\n5. Occupation of observer pilot\n\n6. Address of observer LGA\n\n7. Place of observation Air - near Blackstone, Va.\n\n8. Number of objects Only trail seen\n\n9. Distance of object from observer n/s\n\n10. Time in sight N/S\n\n11. Altitude N/S\n\n12. Speed terrific speed -\n\n13. Direction of flight 230°\n\n14. Tactics Trail covered an 80° to 90° arc laterally\n\n15. Sound N/S\n\n16. Size N/S\n\n17. Color N/S Only trail perceived - object was not seen\n\n18. Shape N/S\n\n19. Odor detected N/S\n\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n\n21. Exhaust trails Seemed to be a jet or rocket trail\n\n22. Weather conditions at 0230 at Blackstone: 0/70 4GF 112/73/72/ wsw 5/987. Greensboro and Raleigh-Durham had 0/15 plus\n\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n78"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nShortly after checking Blackstone, at approx 0230, a trail was picked up that appeared to be a jet or rocket trail. The object leaving the trail was traveling at terrific speed in a southwesterly direction and as nearly as they could estimate they calculated the degree of travel as 230°.\n\nThey were on a heading at the time of 215°. The jet or rocket trail at no time crossed their flight path. It was on the distant western horizon at approx 20° above the horizon. The trail covered an 80° to 90° arc laterally.\n\nNOTE: There is a 15 minute difference in time f/this sighting at (0230) to the rocket sighting at 0245 in Atlanta some 400 to 475 miles distant.\n\nNOTE: The above time (0230) tallies with another sighting by another pilot in the vicinity of Blackstone, Va. who saw a very unusual meteor that appeared to be on a bearing of about 210° from them traveling in a southerly direction above but close to the horizon.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n78a"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Supplement to Trip Report to Columbus, Ohio - 31 July 1948\nRe: Atlanta Sighting\n\nTHRU: Col Clingerman\n\nTO: Col McCoy\n\n1. The object of this trip was to interview C. L. McKelvie, a passenger aboard the Eastern Airlines DC-3, the night of 24 July 1948.\n\n2. Mr. McKelvie's written statement is essentially as follows: He was occupying the 5th or 6th seat from the front of the plane on the right and would periodically glance out the window. There was a full moon which illuminated the ground and the skies and the ground could clearly be seen. Frequently they passed cumulus clouds. On one occasion as he was looking out he observed a sudden streak of light moving in a southeastern direction across the airway above the plane. He wondered if it were lightning but observed the flame moved in a straight line and not in a flare. The color was bright flame - he thought it was probably a light cherry red - although the edges were more of a yellow flame. He shifted his position in his seat for better observation, momentarily losing sight of it. Then he saw it again. He estimated the flame to be about 1/2 as far above the plane as the plane was above the ground. He saw no physical shape - only a streak of flame moving in a straight line. The whole experience was momentary so that detailed observation was absent. He heard no sound but stated that the vibration of the plane was much greater than normal and that it was not possible to hear any sound from the outside.\n\n3. In the interview Mr. McKelvie stated to Maj Llewellyn that the pilots seemed quite excited and that they appeared nervous over the episode.\n\nR. A. LLEWELLYN\nMajor, USAF\nPAL/aw\n65310\nBldg 288\nPost 203F\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n79"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Atlanta, Ga.\nAug 3, 1948\n\nMr. S. L. Shannon\nEastern Air Lines\nMiami, Fla.\n\nThe following is a report of an unidentified aircraft which was sighted by John Whitted and me, as we were twenty miles southwest of Montgomery, Ala. July 24, 1948, as we were on Eastern's trip 576.\n\nAt 2:45 A. M. we were cruising at 5,000 feet when there came, what looked like a Jet type of aircraft to our right and slightly above meeting us. It was a clear moonlight night with the visibility excellent; therefore, we were able to view the ship as it passed for a period of around ten seconds. It was clear there were no wings present, that it was powered by some jet or other type of power shooting flame from the rear some fifty feet. There were two rows of windows,which indicated an upper and lower deck, from inside these windows a very bright light was glowing. Underneath the ship there was a blue glow of light.\n\nAfter it passed it pulled up into some light broken clouds and was lost from view. There was no prop wash or rough air felt as it passed.\n\nAfter talking to the only passenger awake at the time, he saw only the trail of fire as it passed and pulled into the clouds. I called the company at Columbus and asked if there was any reported jet army craft and requested if the ATC had any aircraft under control. I was told that no such craft was reported by either source.\n\n/s/ C. S. Chiles\n\nC. S. Chiles\nCapt E. A. L."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 144b\n\n1. Date 24 July 48\n2. Time 0230\n3. Location Between Blackstone, Va. and Greensboro, N.C.\n4. Name of observer Capt Perry R. Mansfield,\n5. Occupation of observor Capt on 571/23 EAL\n6. Address of observor EAL\n7. Place of observation Between Blackstone, Va. and Greensboro, N. C.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 3 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed meteoric\n13. Direction of flight southerly\n14. Tactics traveling horizontally\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S -\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance \"died out\" in the distance\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pilot\nAt about 0230 on July 24, 1948, C. Kingsley/and Capt Perry R. Mansfield saw what they thought was an unusual meteor. It was brighter than any ever seen before and traveling in a horizontal direction, slightly above the horizon. It was observed for 3 seconds before it died out. At no time did it appear to travel in a downward direction. Kingsley & Mansfield discussed the matter that the meteor appeared to be traveling horizontally.\n\nAt the time they were traveling between Blackstone, Va., and Greensboro, S. C.. The sky was clear and the visibility unlimited. They were on magnetic heading of 240° and estimated the object to be on a bearing of about 210° from them - that is - about 30° to the left of their heading. It appeared to be traveling in a southerly direction, above, but close to the horizon.\n\nNOTE: There is a 15 minute variance in [REDACTED] time f/this sighting (0230) to the rocket sighting at 0245 in Atlanta some 400 to 475 miles distant. The time (0230) also tallies with Inc 144a Pilot Louis Feldwary's account of sighting a jet or rocket trail just after leaving Blackstone."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSTATEMENT OF JOHN B. WHITTED\n\nI was flying co-pilot for Capt. C. S. Chiles on Trip 576 which left Houston, Texas at 8:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, Friday night, July 22, 1948. At 0245 EST, we sighted a strange object coming toward us at a high rate of speed. We were at 5000 feet and our position was 25 miles southwest of Montgomery, Ala. The strange object had a stream of red fire coming from its tail. I assumed that it was a jet type airplane of the Army or Navy but as it came nearer I could see that it was much larger than any Army or Navy jet that I have ever seen or read about. It passed us on the right side of our DC-3. I estimate its speed in the neighborhood of 700 MPH but this is purely a rough estimate. We were holding a compass heading of 50 degrees and the object passed us going in the opposite direction. To me, the object seemed about a half-mile from us, flying straight and level. I could see no wings supporting the object.\n\nThe object was cigar shaped and seemed to be about a hundred feet in length. The fuselage appeared to be about three times the circumference of a B-29 fuselage. It had two rows of windows, an upper and a lower. The windows were very large and seemed square. They were white with light which seemed to be caused by some type of combustion. I estimate that we watched the object for at least 5 seconds and not more than 10 seconds. We heard no noise nor did we feel any turbulence from the object. It seemed to be at about 5500 feet.\n\nI asked Capt. Chiles what we had just seen and he said that he didn't know. Capt Chiles then contacted the company radio operator at Columbus, Ga., and asked him to contact LawsonFld at Ft Benning, Ga., and find out if the Army had any jet or experimental planes in the vicinity. The company operator called us a few minutes later and stated that Lawson Field reported that they had no planes flying in our area. Capt Chiles then reported back to the company radio operator saying that a strange aircraft just passed us and it looked like some type of rocket ship.\n\nWe passed up Columbus because of ground fog and continued on to Atlanta"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Date 9 July 1948 Incident # 145\n2. Time 1205 AST\n3. Location Fielding Lake\n4. Name of observers 1st Lt Dominick J. Caramia & Thomas B. Carpenter\n5. Occupation of observers(VLR) Photo\n6. Address of observers 72nd RCN Squadron (VLR) Photographic c/o APO 731, c/o Postmaster Seattle Washington\n7. Place of observation Fielding Lake, Alaska (63°11' - 145° 40' W\n8. Number of objects Approximately 20\n9. Distance of object from observer 5,000 + above\n10. Time in sight 5 seconds or less\n11. Altitude 5,000 + immediately below the clouds\n12. Speed over 500 MPH\n13. Direction of flight From WNW to ESE\n14. Tactics Jockeyed back and forth in the group formation (gave impression of shotgun blast pattern) but maintained straight course.\n15. Sound Loud roaring sound heard (thought it was strong wind) before objects were sighted; sound sharpened into a buzz as they approached and passed.\n16. Size dot\n17. Color grayish black\n18. Shape [REDACTED] Spheroid or disc-shaped\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails none visible\n22. Weather conditions bright and sunny w/ 5/10 strato-cumulus cloud coverage\n23. Effect on clouds none - flew immediately below them\n24. Sketches or photographs sketch\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: The objects resembled a group of dots, grayish black in color and numbering about 20. They were plainly visible and either spheroid or disc shaped. They appeared to be jockeying back and (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"forth in the group formation which gave the overall impression of a shotgun blast pattern. The objects were thought to be moving in excess of 500 MPH at approximately 5,000 ft (immediately below the clouds) from WNW to ESE and were definitely flying a straight course. Just before they were sighted a loud roaring sound was heard which was attributed to a strong wind blowing through the surrounding woods. However, as the objects approached and passed, the sound sharpened into a buzz such like that made by a group of jet aircraft. No exhaust trails were visible. There were no photographs available."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Date 17 July 1948 Incident # 146\n2. Time 1650\n3. Location Vicinity of San Acacia Dam, 65 miles south of Albuquerque\n4. Name of observers M/Sgt Wm R. Carter & M/Sgt Bernard E. Harvey\n5. Occupation of observers N/S Carter: Armament technician Harvey: experienced AF non-com\n6. Address of observer 428th AFBU Kirtland AF Base\n7. Place of observation Vicinity of San Acacia Dam\n8. Number of objects 7\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 20,000 ft\n12. Speed 1,500 MPH (if estimated altitude correct)\n13. Direction of flight northerly heading (between north and northwest)\n14. Tactics Maintained formation\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color Color of aluminum aircraft at high altitude\n18. Shape When overhead: circular. After passing zenith: indeterminate\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction metallic\n21. Exhaust trails none\n22. Weather conditions CAVU At 20,000 ft wind velocity 5 to 10 miles\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Skotches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S In northwest\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"About 65 miles south of Albuquerque 7 unidentified objects flying on northerly heading were observed. Objects initially in V formation at an estimated altitude of 20,000 ft above earth. Formation varied from \"V\" to \"L\" to \"Q\" and then grouped in an irregular formation and a regular pulsating flashing light was observed from them after they had passed 30° beyond zenith. The shape was difficult to ascertain. When directly overhead they were circular and resembled a cluster of balloons traveling at a great rate of speed. The color was that of aluminum at high altitude (or white painted aircraft). It the altitude estimation is correct the speed could be estimated as 1500 MPH. There was no vapor, smoke or other trail visible. They did not appear spherical when viewed at oblique angle. Disappeared on heading between north and northwest.\n\nAGENTS NOTES: Sgt Carter is a sober industrious, level headed individual, an armament technician of outstanding ability. Definitely not the type to experience hallucinations. Info received in other instances from this individual in each instance proven accurate.\n\nSgt Harvey is an experienced AF non-com accustomed to the sight of aircraft at various altitudes and speeds.\n\nEVALUATION OF INFORMANTS: \"A\"\nOF INFORMATION: 3."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 27 July 48 Incident # 147\n2. Time 2200\n3. Location Springfield, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. H. H. Gibson\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 1217 East Main St.\n7. Place of observation Springfield, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 3 seconds\n11. Altitude Great height\n12. Speed That of a jet plane\n13. Direction of flight north\n14. Tactics None - traveled in straight line\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Witness stated object resembled \"huge ball\"\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Bright red tail of fire\n22. Weather conditions Some thunder and lighting\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Flew out of sight\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On night of 27 July 48, at 2200 hours observer saw object which resembled a huge ball in the sky. It came from the south and was headed north traveling at speed of jet planes which often fly over observer's house. Object trailed a bright red tail of fire and traveled in a straight line. There was some lightning and thunder at the time, but [REDACTED] observer thought the object something entirely foreign. No noise could be heard. Object only seen for three seconds.\n\nAgents note: Mrs. Gibson is the wife of a local carpenter, and is highly respected. Not inclined to exaggerate or brag, according to neighbors."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 28 July 48 Incident # 148\n2. Time 0400\n3. Location Springfield, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Rose Henry\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 826 Dibert Ave., Springfield, Ohio\n7. Place of observation 826 Dibert Ave., Springfield, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 1st time: 5 minutes. 2d time: 15 minutes\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Remained nearly stationary\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics Hovering\n15. Sound Witness thought she heard sound of plane before she saw the object\n16. Size About the size of a basketball\n17. Color Intense yellow\n18. Shape Round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Faded away\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On morning of 28 July (about 0400) Mrs Rose Henry happened to look out of her bedroom window toward the northeast and saw an object the size of a basketball which gave off an intense yellow light. It remained for some 5 minutes and appeared to fade away. Remarks In a moment it reappeared and was visible for some fifteen minutes, then faded away completely. It made no noise. Sound like that of a plane heard before the object was seen. No witnesses.\n\nAgent's Note: Mrs. Henry is a colored woman about 50 yrs of age and is a respected member of the community. She appeared well educated and sure of her statements during the interview."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 19 Jan 49 Incident # 149\n2. Time 7:30 AM\n3. Location North Jutland (Hjerrin, the Scaw and Hjerup)\n4. Name of observer N/S\n) Taken from OMA R-34-48 (NAD 11796)\n5. Occupation of observer N/S as prepared by Lt Col Franklin E. Tomlinson\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation North Jutland\n8. Number of objects Three\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed apparently rocket-like\n13. Direction of flight East - West\n14. Tactics \"suddenly stopped, exploded and disappeared\"\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape ball - saucer\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction rocket-like objects\n21. Exhaust trails tail of green light\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Skotches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Exploded and disappeared\n26. Remarks: (over)\nRESTRICTED 81"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Various parts of North Jutland have reported that on 19 Jan 48 at 7:30 AM the [REDACTED] so-called flying saucers were observed. The phenomena has been observed in Hjerring, the Scaw and Hjerup. The objects were surrounded by a bluish light and had tail of green light, moving east west. One observer thought they looked like three balls. Several observers in the Scaw say they were rocket-like objects which suddenly stopped, exploded and disappeared.\n\nM/A COMMENT: Impossible to get any verification of this from Danish officials or Danish War Ministry."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 150\n\n1. Date Approx 1 Mar 48\n2. Time - 0930 hours\n3. Location Swedish Coast\n4. Name of observer N/S - a Norwegian pilot\n5. Occupation of observor ONL pilot\n6. Address of observor N/S Material taken from MA R-130-48 NAD 20560\n7. Place of observation Air - enroute from Aalberg, Denmark to Oslo, Norway\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight 4 seconds\n11. Altitude 20,000 ft\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight Southeast - passing along Swedish Coast and disappearing over Norway\n14. Tactics N/S - flight path followed earth's surface\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S but emitted a bluish-green flame\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Over Norway\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"An ONL plane enroute from Aalberg, Denmark, to Oslo, Norway, sighted a projectile coming from the southeast, passing along the Swedish Coast and disappearing over Norway. The missile was at 20,000 ft and disappeared over the horizon in four seconds. It emitted a bluish-green flame but left no trail in the sky. The projectile seemed to flow follow the earhh's surface.\n\nNOTE: Similar missiles have been observed at Rjuken, Norway & Finse, Norway.\nIn this connection, it is of interest to know that heavy water is currently being produced in Rjuken.\n\nObservers: A Norwegian pilot and his co-pilot.\nThe pilot served with the Royal Norwegian AF in Great Britain."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 151\n\n1. Date 29 July 1948\n2. Time 0955\n3. Location Northeastern part of Indianapolis, Indiana (See attached sketch of location)\n4. Name of observers Mr. James W. Toney & Mr. Robert Huggins\n5. Occupation of observers Both employees of W. O. Jones Rug Cleaners\n6. Address of observor Toney: 235 So Bradley, Indianapolis Huggins: 5040 Indianaola, Indianapolis\n7. Place of observation (See attached drawing of location)\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S - not over a few hundred feet\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 30 feet - just above tree-tops\n12. Speed 25 to 30 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Headed south in bank to left\n14. Tactics gliding with no apparent spinning action\n15. Sound no discernible sound\n16. Size 6 to 8 feet long by 1-1/2 to 2 feet wide (See attach drwg.)\n17. Color Aluminum and shiny in color\n18. Shape Shaped like a broad short propeller (See attached drwg.)\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction Aluminum construction\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions CAVU - no clouds\n23. Effect on clouds No clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs 2\n25. Manner of disappearance Went down in wooded area (seemingly)\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object was shaped like a broad short propeller approximately 6 to 8 ft long, each blade approximately 2 feet wide and approximately one foot thick with cups on upper side of blades. It appeared alumimum and shiny in color. Traveled approximately 25 to 30 MPH. It was sighted just above the trees at approximately a 30 ft altitude in bank to the left of approx 20° and appeared in a slight descent. There was no discernible sound and no exhaust trail.\n\nNOTE: Truck had just started across bridge (see drwg) when object was sighted directly ahead above the trees. Witnesses stopped on the other side of the cantilever bridge but could not relocate object.\n\nSearch by Lt John E. Hoskins, Base PIO, and Lt Russell J. Carey, Jr. Base Intel Off. (331st AFEU) Res Tng Stout Fld. did not produce any result. However the area in which it was believed to have fallen is densely wooded with many hills and valleys. See diagram attached."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6' to 8'\n1-1/2' x 2'\n/s/ Russell J. Carey, Jr.\n1st Lt., USAF\nIntel Officer\nThese are round cups which protrude"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Path of Object\nCantilever Type Bridge\nE 56th St\nFall Creek Blvd\nWOODS\nWOODS\nWOODS\nClearing\nFall Creek\nLady wood School\n(Approx 1/4 mi f/sighting\n/s/ Russell J. Carey Jr.\n1st Lt, USAF\nIntel Officer\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 31 July 48\nIncident # 152\n2. Time 0825\n3. Location Indianapolis, Indiana (South-Central part)\n4. Name of observers Mr. & Mrs Vernon Swigert\n5. Occupation of observers an electrician and housewife\n6. Address of observers 2020 Boyd St., Indianapolis, Indiana\n7. Place of observation As above -\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 10 seconds\n11. Altitude 2,000 ft\n12. Speed 1800 MPH\n13. Direction of flight 90° - east\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size 20 ft in dia. and approx 6 to 8 ft in height in center - Ratio about 3:1\n17. Color white with no shine\n18. Shape like a cymbal\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions Sky clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs 1\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL 92"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object first perceived in the west. The object was shaped like a cymbal with smooth surfaces and approximately 20 feet in diameter at the base and approximately 6 to 8 feet in height in the center. Ratio was about 3:1. It appeared to be flat white in color with no shine. It traveled extremely fast crossing the sky in approximately 10 seconds (a distance of about 5 miles) on a 90° heading. It maintained a level course and shimmered in the sun giving the appearance of spinning. The altitude was estimated at approximately 2,000 ft. Object made no discernible sound and left no exhaust trail. No openings were noted on the object.\n\nNOTE: Mr. Swigert was standing by open bathroom window which faces the west when he was attracted by the object in the sky. Couldn't believe his eyes. He rushed into adjoining kitchen and showed his wife the object thru the kitchen window facing south. He stated the object appeared large enough to carry one person\n\nNOTE: Investigation conducted by Intel Officer, 1st Lt Russell J. Carey, Jr., on a call from Mr. Swigert. It was noted that visibility was good from both windows for such observation.\n\nNo other reports received on this object.\n92a"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6 to 8'\nNOTED SHADOW\n'20'\n(Ration approx. 3:1)\n/s/ Russell J. Carye Jr.,\nRUSSELL J. CAREY JR.\n1st Lt., USAF\nIntel Officer"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 16 Rudolph 5 August 48 Incident # 153\n2. Time 0100 hours\n3. Location Between Parrott, Ga. and Richland,Ga.\n4. Name of observer James Amaral, Former AF Pilot\n5. Occupation of observer N/S - but formerly AF pilot\n6. Address of observor N/S (Info forwarded f/Turner AF Base)\n7. Place of observation Between Parrott, Ga. & Richland, Ga.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 5 to 10 seconds\n11. Altitude 20,000 to 35,000 ft\n12. Speed 3600 MPH (estimated)\n13. Direction of flight 250°\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color blue-white streak of light\n18. Shape \"streak\"\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction \"rocket-like\"\n21. Exhaust trails A trail of sparks several miles long followed it\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED 94"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nWitness was traveling between Parrott, Ga., and Richland, Ga., in an automobile when he observed a brilliant blue-white streak of light which lasted from 5 to 10 seconds, traveling in an apparent level flight on a heading of approximately 250°, at about 30,000 ft altitude (estimated). After the light disappeared a trail of sparks was observed which appeared several miles long. This trail lasted from 45 seconds to (1) minute\n\nNOTE: Mr. Amaral did not believe this to be any celestial but based on his experience as a pilot in the AF, he stated it appeared to be a burst of power applied to a rocket or rocket ship.\n\nRESTRICTED 94"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 2 Aug 48\n2. Time 1945 hours\n3. Location Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Charles Saunders\n5. Occupation of observer Attorney\n6. Address of observer 265-1/2 South High St\n7. Place of observation Yard of 1337 Clifton Ave., Columbus, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 10-15 minutes\n11. Altitude 1,500 to 2000 ft\n12. Speed 15 MPH\n13. Direction of flight Moving south from the north\n14. Tactics Constant slow speed - Once it hesitated & thin trail of smoke issued from opposite direction of travel. Changed position assuming different shapes\n15. Sound None\n16. Size Judged to be about 20 to 30 ft in diameter\n17. Color N/S. Perimeter: constant grey-black. Center: transparent.\n18. Shape Changing. First: side-view: Parallelogram. Second: circular then reverted to original form\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails thin trail of smoke\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds No clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs 4 sketches\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\n95"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On 2 Aug 48 at approx 1945 a round object which appeared to be about 20 to 30 ft in diameter was observed moving in southerly direction from the north over center of Columbus. Had constant grey-black perimeter with a transparent center. The blue sky could be observed through this grey-black perimeter while it moved at a constant, slow speed of about 15 MPH. It made no noise of any kind. Once it hesitated in its movements and a thin trail of smoke issued from the opposite direction of travel. The smoke soon disappeared and was not seen again during the 10 to 15 minutes object was visible to the observer. The object changed position - but not direction of travel - three times. When first seen, it evidently presented a side view which was a parallelogram in shape. (See). Slowly its position altered and it became circular in form, only to revert after a time to its original form. The altitude was judged to be some 1500 to 2000 ft above ground.\n\nAgent's Note: Saunders drew the following sketches\n\n[drawings: Fourth, Third, Second, First]\n\nThe above drawings constitute four positions of one phase. The object passed thru three of these phases during the 15 minute period.\n\n95"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 2 16 Aug 48\n2. Time 7:50 P. M.\n3. Location Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer James Saunders, A. B., M. A.\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observor 1337 Clifton Ave, Columbus, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Columbus, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 15 minutes\n11. Altitude N/S 1/2 mile high\n12. Speed slow and regular speed\n13. Direction of flight N/S from North to South to Southwest\n14. Tactics/ Oblong to circular to oblong change in shape\n15. Sound None\n16. Size of small plane\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Changing but circular for the most part\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails tail of smoke\n22. Weather conditions Unusually favorable for observation. Light sufficient without interference from sun's rays.\n23. Effect on clouds Cloudless\n24. Skotches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL 96"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On 2 Aug 48, at 7:50 P. M. Mrs. Saunders observed an unusual object in the sky. Her attention was directed toward it because some neighborhood children were looking toward the north. She called her husband, Charles Saunders, (Inc 154) to witness the phenomenon. The sky was cloudless and the light more than sufficient, without interference from the rays of the sun which were hidden by the buildings of the city.\n\nObject first appeared oblong in shape and was traveling from north to south at a slow, regular speed. [REDACTED] at a height of a half mile. During the 15 minutes under observation the object traveled approx 7-1/2 miles. Although it did not change its course, it presented different appearances from time to time. From oblong to circular then to oblong. Object went thru this change three different times until observer lost sight of it. However, for the most part it presented a circular appearance. Outline very dark in contrast with the transparency of the center. Only when the shape appeared circular was observer aware of the center being a void. Once it hesitated momentarily, observer noticed a tail of smoke emanating from the rear, after which the object continued in a southerly direction. This tail of smoke was observed but once. The size appeared to be that of a small plane. It made no sound altho at one time observer thought she detected one. At approx 8:00 P. M. observer lost sight of the object just as it appeared to be changing direction from South to Southwest."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 31 July 48\nIncident # 155\n2. Time 1630\n3. Location 480 N. Monroe Ave., Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Edward G. Watson\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 480 N. Monroe Ave., Columbus, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Columbus, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 6 or 7\n9. Distance of object from observer Very great distance away\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S - very great\n12. Speed Hovering\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics Hovering -hanging in the sky\n15. Sound N/S -\n16. Size of an ash tray\n17. Color gold\n18. Shape starlike\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions CAVU - bright sunlight\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness Statement:\n\nObjects first looked like large stars. They seemed to be at a very great distance and appeared to be about the size of an ash tray. There were approximately six or seven of them in a formation that resembled the shape of the big dipper. Did not have a definite shape individually but just seemed to be a group of spots glittering in the sky. They were gold in color and seemed to be just hanging in the sky. The sky was clear and blue and the sun was shining but do not believe the gold color caused by a reflection of the sun.\n\nCorroborated by truck driver but/could not obtain his name."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 31 July 48\nIncident # 156\n2. Time 8:00 P. M.\n3. Location Columbus, Ohio - Tremont Rd near WOSU radio tower located near University Golf Course\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Martin Price & Mrs. Mary Rippetoe\n5. Occupation of observer Mrs. Price: housewife Mrs. Mary Rippetoe: mother of Mrs. Price\n6. Address of observer 2186 Lamont Ave., Columbus, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Tremont Rd near WOSU Radio Tower\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 250 feet\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 250 feet\n12. Speed very slow\n13. Direction of flight West to East\n14. Tactics Did not change course or altitude\n15. Sound No noise\n16. Size of gasoline drum - Approx 5' x 6'\n17. Color [REDACTED] Black\n18. Shape Oblong\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails Spouted black smoke from the top\n22. Weather conditions Clear with no clouds\n23. Effect on clouds No clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (above)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On Saturday evening, 31 July 48, at approximately 8:00 P. M., while driving south on Tremont Road as observers approached the WOSU Radio Tower located on the University Golf Course, a large object resembling a huge lantern was seen floating in the sky. The weather was clear, and it was still daylight so object could be seen quite clearly. It was oblong in shape and about the size of a gasoline drum. It was coming from the west and moving very slowly. It passed close to the tower and was about 1/2 the height of the tower from the ground. As it passed overhead traveling east, it spouted black smoke from the top and at the bottom on the left side there was a dull enclosed light like that of a lamp. The object did not change its course or altitude but continued on to the east with black smoke trailing behind. The object was black. It did not make any noise. There were no wings visible nor did it have any motor. No openings of any kind could be seen.\n\nNOTE: Another car stopped near them with two occupants who claimed that they had never witnessed anything like it before."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Date 31 July 48 Incident # 157\n2. Time 8:00 P. M.\n3. Location Columbus, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Robert C. Goshorn\n5. Occupation of observer Teletype Operator\n6. Address of observer State Highway Patrol Radio Station\n7. Place of observation Near Golf Driving Range, Columbus, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer Object was balloon which fell to earth & was investigated by observer\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Came to earth from around 100 ft (when first observed)\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight earthward\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size 2 ft x 3-1/2 ft\n17. Color white crepe paper\n18. Shape N/S - but said to be like old time \"County Fair\" balloon - round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction crepe paper\n21. Exhaust trails smoking - caused by large ball of waste material\n22. Weather conditions N/S - (clear - see Incident: 156)\n23. Effect on clouds N/S (no clouds)\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Fell to earth where it was retrieved.\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object was perceived floating in the sky coming from the west over Ohio State Student Housing Project and was approximately 100 feet off the ground when first observed. It got lower all the time and landed in a field nearby. Three small boys ran toward it and observer went over to investigate. Saw paper bag affair approx 2 feet in diameter and 3-1/2 feet long made of white crepe paper. (like old time \"County-Fair\" hot air balloons) It was smoking when first observed and this was caused by a large ball of waste material which was fastened underneath it. There were no marks or writing on it [REDACTED]\n\nNote: See Incident 156 - in which time & direction tally."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Date 1 Aug 48 Incident # 158\n2. Time 2:00 P. M.\n3. Location [REDACTED] Groveport, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Harold A. Yantis\n5. Occupation of observer Student, @\n6. Address of observer 25 West Hinman Ave.\n7. Place of observation 1 mile west of Groveport, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S very high\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight in westerly direction against a light wind\n14. Tactics N/S - just exhaust visible - smoke pattern dark & very large dispersed rapidly and appeared again as wide streak a mile or so in length twisted from wide to narrow streak and back.\n15. Sound No sound\n16. Size N/S - object not seen\n17. Color N/S - object not seen\n18. Shape Just a streak observed\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S An exhaust trail (smoke)\n21. Exhaust trails Appeared as black cloud with no definite shape but looked like an anti-aircraft shell a few seconds after it exploded\n22. Weather conditions [REDACTED] Few white clouds - but clear\n23. Effect on clouds black cloud silhouetted among them that moved\n24. Skeches or photographs 3 figs.\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observer noticed what appeared to be a small black cloud between two white ones. Seemed peculiar because the weather was clear and there were a few white clouds in the sky - but no other dark clouds or formations of any kind. The black cloud did not have any definite shape but looked like an anti-aircraft shell a few seconds after it explodes. Suddenly it stretched out into a wide streak with smaller vertical streaks, then rapidly turned and twisted, moving into a different direction and disappearing. In three or four seconds, the smoke burst appeared again spontaneously, approximately 20 degrees west of the place where first noticed. Smoke pattern dark, very large, and dispersed rapidly, appearing again as a wide streak a mile or so in length which appeared to twist from a wide to a narrow streak and then back again changing direction as it twisted. Moving in westerly direction against light wind. Plainly visible altho far away and very high. No sound heard. Seemed like a streak that would be made if a flying wing with several engines were banking and turning and leaving exhaust trails.\n\nNote: Yantis was in the war and had seen a lot of anti-aircraft shells burst and many vapor trails from planes but had never observed anything like this. He states: \"It was so spontaneous like a rubber band which is round, then suddenly is stretched at length and twisted, and then disappears without a trace.\"\n\nAgent's Note: Yantis drew the sketches below\n\nStreak twisted and turned - suddenly disappeared\n\nwidth same - length estimated at 1 to 2 miles\n\n1st position"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Date 30 July 1948 Incident # 159\n2. Time 2015 hours\n3. Location Worthington, Ohio\n4. Name of observer John A. Felton\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer 5800 High St, Worthington, Ohio\n7. Place of observation Worthington, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 15 minutes\n11. Altitude Approx 3000 ft\n12. Speed very slow\n13. Direction of flight SW\n14. Tactics None\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape cylindrical\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions Clear with high scattered clouds, visibility good\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object appeared cylindrical in shape with no apparent wings or tail surfaces. No standard marker lights were displayed and there were no engine noises. The object emitted a steady silver glow.\n\nAltitude was judged to be approximately 3000 ft and the object was moving very slowly in a southwest course. It was in line of vision some 15 minutes. No other aircraft, military or civilian were in vicinity of Felton's hearing or vision. The sky was clear with high scattered clouds and the visibility was good.\n\nNOTE: Felton questioned by Maj Campbell of the USAF, but nothing further was gained by this interview with the exception that his wife also saw the object."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 4 July 48 Incident # 160\n2. Time 11:15 P. M.\n3. Location Dravasburg, Pa.\n4. Name of observer John Jannicky, Jr.\n5. Occupation of observer N/S\n6. Address of observer Box 227, Dravasburg, Pa.\n7. Place of observation Dravasburg, Pa.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 20 seconds +\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed Hovering - then moving on at undetermined speed\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics moved across sky, stopping three times and resuming movement\n15. Sound No noise\n16. Size of a star\n17. Color same as a star\n18. Shape looked like a star\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs Vague sketch\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\nRESTRICTED\n102"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nOn 4 July 48 at approx. 11:15 P. M., OST, witness and his wife thought they saw a star moving. There was a light in the sky the same color and size of a star which was moving. [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Then they thought it was a plane but it made no noise. The object moved across the sky, then changed its course a bit and went straight and stopped again for about 5 seconds, changed its course a bit and went straight for awhile and stopped again this time for at least 15 seconds, then it went across the sky a little ways and disappeared completely. When the object stopped in the sky, it resembled a star and only by following its course could the difference be noticed.\n\nNOTE: Witness states that he lives some 2-1/2 miles from the two woman (McKeesport, Pa.) who reported seeing a big silver plate zooming noiselessly overhead in the direction of Kennywood Park. See Inc. 161.\n\nRESTRICTED\n102"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date Around July 8, 48 Incident # 161\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location McKeesport, Pa.\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Nell Veway & Mrs. Elizabeth Goltz\n5. Occupation of observer housewife\n6. Address of observers Mrs Veway: 3404 Grover Ave ) McKeesport, Pa.\nMrs Goltz: 2604 Grover Ave.\n7. Place of observation McKeesport, Pa.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S - toward Kennywood Park\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound noiseless\n16. Size 12 to 15 inches in dia.\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape \"plate\"\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds disappeared in cloud bank\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance disappeared in cloud bank\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\n103"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness saw what looked like a \"big, silver plate\" zooming noiselessly overhead in the direction of Kennywood Park.\n\n\"Oh look, that's not a plane, screamed Mrs. Veway of 3404 Grover to her neighbor, Mrs. Goltz, 3604 Grover, \"it looked like one of those flying saucers.\"\n\nMrs. Veway said the disc was about 12 to 15 inches in diameter. It disappeared in a cloud bank but reappeared on the far side and was seen by Mrs. Goltz. They followed the direction of the disc until out of sight.\n\nNOTE: Taken from the Daily News \"McKeesport, Pa. - July 8, 1948.\n\n103"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 11 Aug 48 Incident # 162\n2. Time 1200 and 1215 hours CST\n3. Location Hamel, Minnesota\n4. Name of observer Jerome Leuer (age 10 and Benne Leuer (age 8)\n5. Occupation of observer children\n6. Address of observer R/R 1 Hamel, Minnesota\n7. Place of observation As above - back yard\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer a matter of a few feet\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude rested on ground -\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight After resting on ground it ascended to a height of 30 feet and shot off in a northeasterly direction\n14. Tactics spun once, made whistling noise, shot straight up 20 ft, halted and again made whistling noise. Maneuvered around tree branches & tele wires.\n15. Sound whistling noise - like steam whistle\n16. Size 1 ft thick - 2 feet wide\n17. Color dull gray\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction metallic\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance into northeast\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Informants stated that on 11 Aug 48 between 1200 and 1215 hours, CST, Jerome and Benno were playing in the back yard and noticed an object in descent approximately twelve feet from the ground which was descending between the two of them. It settled to the ground gently - much as a balloon. Upon hitting the ground the object spun once, made a sort of whistling noise, described by the two boys as resembling a steam whistle, and then shot straight up into the air approximately 20 feet, halted and again made a whistling noise. The object then shop upward to a height of about 30 feet, and, in this ascent, maneuvered around tree branches and telephone wires. Upon reaching a height of approximately 30 feet the object shot off in a northeasterly direction. The object approached from the northwest.\n\nThe boys described the object as \"approximately one foot thick, two feet side and round.\" The object had no windows, wires, or any visible appurtenances. It was a dull gray in color and when it hit the ground, it made a slight clanking noise, much as metal hitting against metal.\n\nPhilip and Mrs Leuer stated the boys were visibly frightened when they ran into the house and were afraid to tell what they had seen. Upon close questioning, the boys related the above story to them.\n\nMr. Leuer advised that he then had notified Mr. E. R. Sheridan, Postmaster at Hamel, Minnesota (who subsequently notified the proper authorities)\n\nAGENTS NOTES: Agent noted that the spot where the alleged \"flying saucer\" had landed was approximately 2 feet in diameter and appeared as though some heavy object had landed there or had been set down - as the ground was dented and protruding rocks had been leveled. The spot was covered by a washtub.\n\nMr. E. R. Sheridan, Postmaster, advised that he had no reason to doubt the story of the boys or of Mr. and Mrs. Leuer, and for this reason had reported the matter to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, St. Paul, Minn."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 22 July 48 Incident # 163\n2. Time hour before dark\n3. Location Van Nuys, Calif\n4. Name of observer Capt Henry Glover & wife (Ord-Res)\n5. Occupation of observer Ordnance Reserve Officer\n6. Address of observer 8531 Variel Ave., Canoga Park, Calif\n7. Place of observation Van Nuys, Calif.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 2000 ft overhead\n10. Time in sight N/S about an hour\n11. Altitude great height\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight toward the sun from the East or W to E to W\n14. Tactics traveled a vertical arc of about 25° or more\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size of weather balloon at 2000 ft\n17. Color bluish luminescence like fluorescent lamp which gradually changed to orange color at dusk\n18. Shape round tending to spherical\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions CAVU ground temperature 70-75°\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance snapped off like a lamp when you throw switch\n26. Remarks: (Over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Object appeared round and probably spherical. At first looked similar to weather balloon at about 2000 ft but there was no characteristic bobbing. The wind was blowing on the ground with fair strength and gusty yet the object was quite steady. In the time it was under observation (about an hour) it traveled thru a vertical arc of about 25° or more. After watching the object for a while the observer concluded that whatever it was the thing was at great height but not a star. It had a bluish luminescence like a fluorescent lamp and as the sun set the color gradually changed to an orange color at dusk and finally snapped off like a lamp when the switch is thrown. The outline was clear and sharp and symetrical (no fuzziness or blurring), the air clear with visibility unlimited. Direction of travel from East directly toward the sun."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STATEMENT\n\nStatement made by Mr. Henry Glover, Power Consultant, Department of Water and Power, Van Nuys, California; home address, 8531 Variel Avenue, Conoga Park, California. 1230 hours, 17 September 1948, concerning object sighted in the sky, 22 July 1948, in the vicinity of San Fernando Valley, California:\n\n\"On the evening of 22 July 1948, between the hours of 1930 and 2030, my wife and I were having dinner in the patio of an open air market in Van Nuys, California. We arrived there about an hour before dark. Our attention was attracted by other patrons to a strange object in the sky almost directly overhead.\n\nDESCRIPTION: It appeared to be round and probably spherical. At first, it appeared to be a weather balloon at about 2000 feet but there was none of the characteristic bobbing. The wind was blowing on the ground in fair strength and gusty yet the object was quite steady. After watching it a while, I concluded that whatever it was, was at great height but not a star. It had a bluish luminescence like a fluorescent lamp and as the sun set the color gradually changed to an orange color at dusk and finally snapped off like a lamp when you throw the switch (at which moment I was looking right at it). In about an hour that I had been observing it, the object had traveled through a vertical arc of about 25 degrees or more. The outline of the object was clear and sharp and symetrical (no fuzziness or blurring); the air was very clear with visibility unlimited; ground temperature about 70-75 degrees dropping to about 60 degrees an hour after dark (two hour time lapse); direction of travel was from East directly toward the sun.\n\nADDITIONAL INTERROGATION BY SPECIAL AGENT WILLIAM G. SPROULL\n\nMR. SPROULL: Can you approximate the geographical location when you first sighted the object?\n\nMR. GLOVER: Directly over Van Nuys about 25 or 30 degrees it travelled.\n\nMR. SPROULL: Approximately what was the time when you first sighted this object?\n\nMR. GLOVER: I didn't know the exact hour, but it was about an hour before sundown.\n\nMR. SPROULL: Who called your attention to the object?\n\nMR. GLOVER: Unidentified member of a group at the patio.\n\nMR. SPROULL: What was the weather condition at the time?\n\nMR. GLOVER: Very clear sky. Visibility unlimited.\n\nMR. SPROULL: What was your impression of the actual shape or dimension of the object?\n\nMR. GLOVER: It appeared to be round with no certain construction.\n\n- 1 - MR. HENRY GLOVER"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MR. SPROULL: What was the approximate size of the object?\nMR. GLOVER: The size, as near as I could judge, would be a weather balloon at 2,000 feet. I am POSITIVE it was not a weather balloon.\nMR. SPROULL: What would you approximate as the speed?\nMR. GLOVER: That I wouldn't know except that it travelled about 25 or 30 degrees at approximately forty-five minutes to an hour.\nMR. SPROULL: In what direction did it move?\nMR. GLOVER: Overhead directly into the sun.\nMR. SPROULL: Did you think it might be a reflection from anything?\nMR. GLOVER: I thought it might be a reflection from the sunlight at first but then I couldn't account for the blue tinge.\nMR. SPROULL: Did it glint or sparkle?\nMR. GLOVER: No, it didn't sparkle at all. The light from the object was constant with a constant intensity but changed as the sun set lower until it turned toward an orange color. As the sun was setting, it became yellow and after the sun completely dropped, it became orange color. I was just observing this particular change of coloring, when it disappeared completely.\nMR. SPROULL: What was the manner of disappearance?\nMR. GLOVER: It disappeared like the turning off of a light. I was looking directly at it, when it seemed to disappear as an incandescent light when one turns off the switch. There was no expansion and no change in dimension whatsoever. That is the last I saw of the object.\nMR. SPROULL: Any tactics employed during flight of object?\nMR. GLOVER: No change in altitude or direction.\nMR. SPROULL: Was there any sound to this object?\nMR. GLOVER: There was no sound whatsoever.\nMR. SPROULL: Was there an exhaust trail?\nMR. GLOVER: No exhaust trail at all.\nMR. SPROULL: Did you notice the object as carrying any lights?\nMR. GLOVER: There were no distinguishing characteristics at all except for the bluish light.\nMR. SPROULL: Did this occur to you to be something resembling a flying saucer?\nMR. GLOVER: When I first viewed the object, the flying saucers immediately came to my mind.\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MR. SPROULL: Do you feel that you were observing a definite object?\nMR. GLOVER: Yes, it had a definite sharp outline - something I had never seen before. At first I thought it might be a gaseous formation but it didn't have the characteristics of a meteor or comet and the outline was too definite and sharp to be gaseous. It instead appeared to be a definite material object. I had even considered that it might be an astronomical object caught in our Earth's rotation like the moon, but it travelled faster than the sun so it couldn't have been. It was travelling three times as fast as the sun and was going in the same direction as the sun.\nMR. SPROULL: Do you know any of the persons who observed this object personally?\nMR. GLOVER: No.\nEND OF STATEMENT\nHENRY GLOVER\n8531 Variel Avenue\nConoga, California\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 164\n1. Date 29th June\n2. Time 11 P.M.\n3. Location Uniontown, Pa.\n4. Name of observer Mrs Catherine McDonald\n5. Occupation of observer N/S widow\n6. Address of observer 38 Kensington Circle, Uniontown\n7. Place of observation Uniontown, Pa. - Observer's front porch\n8. Number of objects three - one at a time\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 5000 ft\n12. Speed Very fast\n13. Direction of flight NE\n14. Tactics spinning vertically on edge\n15. Sound none\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color luminous\n18. Shape oval\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S - transparent\n21. Exhaust trails trail of light about 1 yard long\n22. Weather conditions stormy and cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S - flew across sky beneath base of clouds - lightning could be seen thru it.\n24. Sketches or photographs vague sketch\n25. Manner of disappearance lost sight of - obstructed by neighboring houses\n26. Remarks: (over)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At approximately 11 P.M. on the 29th of June Mrs Hollar saw a luminous oval-shaped object similar to a meat platter rolling along on its edge. It appeared to be going very fast since it disappeared in about 5 to 10 seconds. It was without sound or odor but seemed to have a tail which extended about a yard or so. Five minutes later, witness saw a second object and after another five-minute interval a third object was observed. They appeared in the Southwest and flew to the Northeast. The weather was cloudy with lightning and rolling thunder. The objects flew over the Oakland St. Area or just to the side of it (East of Oakland St.) They traveled about 1,000 ft and then disappeared behind the houses across the street from the witnesses.\nWitnesses: Mrs. Catherine McDonald\nPolice Sergeant Snuh & daughter"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 164a\n1. Date 29 June 48\n2. Time 2300\n3. Location Uniontown, Pa.\n4. Name of observer Mrs. Margaret Hollar et al\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer 100 Moore Ave., Uniontown, Pa.\n7. Place of observation 38 Kensington Circle, Uniontown (home of Mrs. Catherine McDonald)\n8. Number of objects 3 - one at a time\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 10 seconds\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed very fast\n13. Direction of flight from Southwest to Northeast\n14. Tactics rolled along on its edge\n15. Sound No sound\n16. Size \"platter\"\n17. Color luminous\n18. Shape oval\n19. Odor detected None\n20. Apparent construction N/S - luminous\n21. Exhaust trails a tail of about a yard in length\n22. Weather conditions cloudy with lightning and rolling thunder\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance View obstructed by neighboring houses\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness saw a luminous, oval-shaped object flying at an altitude of approx 5,000 ft which was traveling beneath the base of some [REDACTED] clouds from southwest to northeast across the sky. The weather was stormy and cloudy and as a second object flew across the sky a flash of lightning could be seen thru it. It seemed to be transparent. The objects(3) traveled very fast and seemed to just disappear within 10 seconds. The objects appeared at approximately five minute intervals. There was no odor or sound from them. However, a trail of light about a yard long was observed. The objects rolled vertically on their edges and appeared to be spinning on end across the sky. Witnesses lost sight of the objects as neighboring houses obstructed their view.\n\nWitnesses: Mrs. Margaret Hollar\nPolice Sergeant Shuh & [REDACTED] his daughter"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 29 June 48 Incident # 164b\n2. Time 2300 - 11:00 P. M.\n3. Location Uniontown, Pa.\n4. Name of observer Sgt Chas E. Schuh & daughter\n5. Occupation of observer Uniontown Police Dept.\n6. Address of observor 32 Lawton Ave., Uniontown\n7. Place of observation from front porch of 38 Kensington Circle, Uniontown,\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight 5 - 7 seconds\n11. Altitude 6,000 ft\n12. Speed 100 MPH\n13. Direction of flight NE - sighted in west\n14. Tactics straight & level\n15. Sound none\n16. Size half of a large meat platter (1-1/2')\n17. Color N/S luminous\n18. Shape semi-circular\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions partly cloudy\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On the night of 29th June at about [REDACTED] 11:00 P. M., witness saw an object that resembled a half of a large meat platter which appeared over [REDACTED] the west end of the city at Oakland Ave & West Main St., Uniontown, Pa. It seemed to be at a height of about 6,000 ft and sailed in a straight line of about 8 or 900 feet in about 5 to 7 seconds. No sound was heard and the object [REDACTED] emitted no rays. It was traveling in a northeastly direction.\n\nWitnesses: Mrs. McDonald\nMrs. Hollar\nSgt Schuh's daughter"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 26 July 1948 Incident # 165\n2. Time 2100 E\n3. Location Chamblee, Ga.\n4. Name of observer Doyle L. Avery et al\n5. Occupation of observer Observer, Atlanta Naval Air Base\n6. Address of observor Atlanta Naval Air Base, Chamblee, Ga.\n7. Place of observation Observation tower\n8. Number of objects 1 blue white light\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S - like shooting star\n13. Direction of flight SE turning S and gaining altitude\n14. Tactics straight & level & gaining altitude\n15. Sound None\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color blue-white light\n18. Shape N/S - object not seen\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction like shooting star\n21. Exhaust trails N/S - possibly the blue white light was the exhaust\n22. Weather conditions 2/10 cirrus at 25,000 ft; 1 to 4/10 of lower stratocirrus at 5,000 ft. Visibility 12 to 15 miles. Surf wind light & variable 2-5 MPH\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Doyle L. Avery Observer, Atlanta Naval Air Base, Chamblee, Ga., while on duty at the observation tower on 26 July 48 about 2100 hours sighted a blue-white light traveling southeast from the northeast It was traveling very fast and maintained a uniform altitude (undetermined) and speed. It looked like a shooting star except for the fact that it maintained the same altitude. While under observation it then appeared to gain altitude and then turned sharply to the south. The weather was clear and still. There was no sound. Shortly after sighting the light several residents of the area called and reported seeing the same thing. No flights left or arrived at the station after 1910 hours on 26 July 48.\n\n165a Witnesses of this phenomena who were interviewed made statements as follows: On 26 July 48 they were seated on the lawn of the Georgia School of Technology Housing Project at Chamblee, Ga. About 2045 hours Mrs. John Gall sighted a strange light and called it to the attention of her companions. The light appeared about the size of a football and was traveling southeast on a steady course. It was green and faded into a silver-colored tail. The light appeared [REDACTED] to lose altitude slowly much the same as a plane coming in for a landing. It appeared to fade away in flight as if extinguished. No sound was heard.\n\nWitnesses: Mr. & Mrs. Harold Shaw\nMr. Robert Sebring\nMrs. Jeanne Hill\nMrs. Myrtle Renfroe\nMrs. John Gall"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"165 - supporting evidence for Incidence #144\nassigned a number in error"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 30 Aug 48 Incident # 166\n2. Time 20,000 hours or 8:00 P. M.\n3. Location Los Angeles, Calif.\n4. Name of observer S/Sgt Leroy H. Estes\n5. Occupation of observer S/Sgt\n6. Address of observer N/S 1301 W. Olympic Blvd., Los Angeles\n7. Place of observation 1301 W. Olympic Blvd. Los Angeles, Calif.\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude estimated to be well over 20,000 ft.\n12. Speed thought to be well over 700 MPH\n13. Direction of flight West to East\n14. Tactics none - flew level course\n15. Sound No sound\n16. Size Larger than B-29\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape V-2 rocket\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction rocket - like\n21. Exhaust trails blue exhaust trail\n22. Weather conditions N/S Clear\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\n110"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0911\n\nObject resembled the fuselage of a V-2 rocket - but much larger.\nS/Sgt Estes stated that it was much larger than a B-29 and silver in\ncolor and that it completely filled the lens of a 10 B-80 field glass\nwhich was taken from a German 88 mm artillery piece. Each lens was 8\"\nin diameter. Speed estimated to be well over 700 MPH, and object was\ntraveling at an altitude of well over 20,000 ft. No sound was heard\nLeft a blue exhaust trail. Object traveling from west to east. Only one\nobject sighted."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Date 6 May 1948 Incident # 167\n2. Time 0905 GCT\n3. Location 19° 08' N - 164° 05' E between Kwajalein Island, Marshall Islands and Hickam Field.,\n4. Name of observer Capt Floyd Barnes\n5. Occupation of observer Pilot USAF\n6. Address of observer Pacific Division, Milit Air Trans Service\n7. Place of observation Ahead & above his plane\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer 4 to 5 miles\n10. Time in sight split second\n11. Altitude 10,000 ft\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics exploded like a shell\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color white\n18. Shape ball\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S \"fire\"\n21. Exhaust trails None\n22. Weather conditions 5/10 cloud coverage\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance exploded\n26. Remarks: (over)\n\n111"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A large white ball of fire was observed some four to five miles\ndirectly ahead of and slightly above the aircraft. It was observed\nfor only a split second and was comparable to the explosion of a shell\nThere were no streamers or \"tails\" observed such as usually related\nto a meteor or a distress signal. As the aircraft approached the\napproximate position where the ball of fire was observed a single white\nlight was seen on the water surface. However, this disappeared within\na few seconds after sighting because of the existing cloud coverage.\nMore lights were immediately observed on the water surface some 10 miles\nnorth of the plane's course. It is the opinion of the witness (Capt\nBarnes) that these were from a surface vessel. Some 10 minutes elapsed\nafter these lights were observed on the water surface when an aircraft\nwas sighted flying a reciprocal course (240°) at about 1000 ft below\nthe observers's aircraft and slightly to the right of the course.\nCapt Barnes made numerous attempts to contact this aircraft on Channel \"B\"\nand \"C\", \"VHF\" but acknowledgment of his transmission was never received."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 20 July 1948 Incident # 168\n2. Time 1330 local\n3. Location Obrechstreet, Arnhem, The Hague\n4. Name of observer A. D. Otter\n5. Occupation of observor Chf. Investigator of Court of Damage\n6. Address of observor Arnheim, The Hague\n7. Place of observation 52° 30' N, 4° 30' E\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude very high\n12. Speed high speed - comparable to V-2\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound Same as V-2\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S\n18. Shape Aircraft with 2 decks and no wings\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions visibility unlimited - scattered clouds\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: Object appeared to be wingless aircraft with two decks. It was traveling at very high altitude and was seen four times intermittently thru clouds. Visibility: unlimited."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 169\n1. Date 29 Aug 48\n2. Time 0530\n3. Location Maplewood, Ohio\n4. Name of observer Mr. Faby Niswonger\n5. Occupation of observor farmer\n6. Address of observor RD #1, Maplewood, Ohio. Phone: Jackson Central 8-OF42\n7. Place of observation Maplewood, Ohio\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude N/S\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics Arose from behind woods - seemed to unravel a silver substance that floated earthward\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size large\n17. Color silver\n18. Shape sphere\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails - silver substance (?)\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance Disintegrated in mid-air\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Witness observed a large silver-colored sphere which seemed to arive from behind his woods and continued to float across his farm. While in flight it seemed to unravel a silver substance which floated earthward. While under observation it disintegrated in mid-air.\n\nNOTE: Witness seemed very conscientious and sincere while relating this incident. Subject arose while witness was talking to a man from this Command (MCIAXP) when an airplane chanced to fly overhead."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date Around 5 May 48 Incident # 170\n2. Time N/S\n3. Location Adapazari, Turkey\n4. Name of observer N/S - taken from telecon\nItem extracted from Turkish newspaper \"Yeni Sabah\", Istanbul, 5 May 48\n5. Occupation of observor N/S\n6. Address of observor See above\n7. Place of observation Village near Adapazari, Turkey\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observor N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude 650 feet\n12. Speed N/S\n13. Direction of flight N/S\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound N/S\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color \"shining\"\n18. Shape N/S\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction N/S\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance exploded\n26. Remarks: Investigation now under way and the debris will be inspected by experts."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 170\n\nItem from Turkish newspaper \"Yeni Sabah\" Istanbul, 5 May 48:\n\n\"There have been reports lately to the effect that shining objects like meteors, have been sighted in various parts of the country. Some people suggest that these might be rockets. Information received from authorized circles reveals that such a thing passed over Adapazari and was seen to explode in the air. Parts of it fell into a village nearby and killed a sheep dog. The thing was found to be a rocket and the debris will be inspected by experts.\n\nObservers say that the rocket which is claimed to have come from the Northwest was flying at an altitude of 200 meters over Adapazari before it fell.\n\nAccording to rumors, it is possible that the rocket is connected with the \"flying disc\" experiments being conducted by the Russians at the station on Mt Alagoz close to the eastern frontiers.\n\nSOURCE: MA, Ankara, Turkey, 10 May 1948, Serial 86-48, Myal F-0\n\nCOMMENTS: Air Attache, Ankara, Turkey, has been requested to investigate this incident fully and encourage Turkish General Staff to do likewise. Whether incident can be confirmed or not Air Attache has been directed to determine source for information contained in Yeni Sabah article."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST - UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n1. Date 3 Aug 48\n2. Time Sunset\n3. Location Moscow, USSR\n4. Name of observer N/S - American Newspaper Reporter\n5. Occupation of observer Newspaper reporter\n6. Address of observer N/S\n7. Place of observation About 25 kilometers (19 to 20 miles) NW of Moscow\n8. Number of objects 1\n9. Distance of object from observer N/S\n10. Time in sight N/S\n11. Altitude Very high\n12. Speed high but not excessive\n13. Direction of flight Southwest-Northeast direction\n14. Tactics N/S\n15. Sound No sound\n16. Size N/S\n17. Color N/S - shone brightly\n18. Shape long narrow\n19. Odor detected N/S\n20. Apparent construction Apparently metallic since it shone very brightly\n21. Exhaust trails N/S\n22. Weather conditions N/S - sunny\n23. Effect on clouds N/S\n24. Sketches or photographs None\n25. Manner of disappearance N/S\n26. Remarks: (over)\nIncident # 171"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"About Sunset on 3 Aug 48, about 25 kilometers (20 miles) northwest of Moscow an experienced American newspaper reporter saw an unidentified object at very high altitude. It was long and narrow and proceeded at a high but not excessive speed in a generally south-west- northeast direction. It shone very brightly probably from reflected sunlight. No wings could be seen and no sound was heard. It looked like a rigid airship and was so identified by a Russian acquaintance who saw it at the same time. However, the reporter, in spite of the appearance of the object was of the opinion that it was not a rigid airship due principally to its high speed. He had no theory to offer\n\nNA COMMENT: This object might have been anything. Its speed seems insufficient for a guided missile, but it could have been either a jet or conventional airplane as unusual light conditions and fore-shortening frequently give aircraft a freakish appearance. The possibility that it was a dirigible should not be excluded. Reference \"A\" should not be excluded.\n\nREFERENCE \"A\": The upper winds in Russia are not published but it was noted that on the following morning there were high surface winds with storm predictions."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 172\n1. Date of Incident 1 Oct 1948\n2. Time of Incident 2100 hrs\n3. Place of observation Fargo, N. Dakota from plane over Fargo and vicinity\n4. Name of observer George F. Gorman\n5. Occupation of observer Mgr Constr Co. (Pilot of F-51 in Air Natl Guard)\n6. Address of observer 18 Fed Hous Proj Fargo N. Dakota\n7. Number of objects observed [illegible] 1\n8. Distance of object from observer 1000 yds\n9. Time in sight 27 minutes\n10. Altitude 1000 to 1400 ft\n11. Speed much faster than F-51\n12. Direction of flight various\n13. Tactics Several left turns, one right turn, diving and climbing\n14. Lights clear white light\n15. Sound none noted\n16. Size at closest observation 6 to 8 inches\n17. Color clear white\n18. Shape round at all times\n19. Odor detected none\n20. Apparent construction none noted\n21. Exhaust trails none seen\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds none\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance in steep climb\n26. Remarks: Northern lights were visible in the NE quadrant\n(over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"One object was observed over a period of 27 minutes. It consisted of a small round ball of clear white light with no physical form or shape attached. It was about 6 to 8 inches in diameter. At times this light traveled faster than the F-51 and performed maneuvers in both evasive and aggressive manner. When first sighted the object was traveling at about 250 MPH at 1,000 ft altitude. Under this condition the light was not continuous but blinked off and on. At higher performance the white light was continuous. Possibilities of other aircraft, meteorological balloon releases, Canadian Vampire Jets having been in immediate vicinity have been discredited. Geiger check now being performed on F-51 aircraft for comparison survey with unaffected aircraft. Technical studies have been initiated.\n\nThe closest Gorman ever got to the object was in a head-on pass at which time the object passed over him at less than 500 feet. It then appeared to him to be from 6 to 8 inches in diameter. It was white with no apparent glare and a clear cut edge. It apparently had depth. It did not seem an exact ball but appeared \"flat\".\n\nRealizing that the speed of the object was too much for him Gorman attempted to cut it off in turns. At this time his fighter was under full power. His speed varying from 300 - 400 MPH. The object circled to the left, he cut back to the right for a head-on pass. The pass was made at 5,000 ft, the object approaching head-on until a collision seemed inevitable. It then veered and passed 500 feet or less over the top of him. He chandelled around still without the object in sight. The object then made a 180° turn and initiated a pass at Gorman. This time Gorman watched it approach all the way and as it started to pull up he pulled up attempting to ram. The object went straight up with him following to 14,000 ft. Gorman stalled out at 14,000 ft with the object 2000 ft above him circling to the left. They then made two circles. The object then pulled away and made another head-on pass, but did not complete it, breaking off at quite some distance from Gorman and headed over Hector Airport at around 11,000 ft. Gorman gave chase circling to the left trying to cut it off until he was some 25 miles SE of Fargo. He was then at 14,000 ft, the object at 11,000 ft. Again giving his engine full power he tried to catch it in a diving turn. The thing turned around and made another head-on pass. This time when it pulled up he pulled up also but it outclimbed him, traveling straight up until lost from view. Gorman then returned to the field and landed.\n\nGorman states positively that there was \"thought\" behind the maneuvers."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIncident # 172A\n1. Date of Incident 1 Oct 48\n2. Time of Incident 2100 hrs\n3. Place of observation Fargo N. Dakota Airport - Control Tower of Fargo Airport\n4. Name of observer L. D. Jensen\n5. Occupation of observer Airport traffic controller\n6. Address of observer 1423 6th Ave Fargo N. N. Dakota\n7. Number of objects observed 1\n8. Distance of object from observer 1/2 mile\n9. Time in sight several seconds\n10. Altitude 4,000 to 5,000 ft\n11. Speed extremely fast\n12. Direction of flight W. S. W.\n13. Tactics horizontal flight\n14. Lights clear white light\n15. Sound none noted\n16. Size tail lamp of an airplane\n17. Color clear white\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected none noted\n20. Apparent construction none noted - \"light\"\n21. Exhaust trails none noted\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds none\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance straight out\n26. Remarks: (over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Jensen was on duty ~~since~~ during the time Lt Gorman sighted the light over Fargo. There was not much traffic during the evening hours on that day.With the exception of the F-51 Gorman was flying there was no other plane from Fargo Air Field in the air. at 2050 hours he was advised that a plane from a privately-owned field south of Fargo that Dr. Cannon had taken off in a Piper Cub and had asked permission to land at Fargo Air Field. At 2100 hours Lt Gorman called the tower asking if any other aircraft were in the air. He was given the position of the Piper Cub. Approximately 5 minutes later Gorman called again and stated that there was another aircraft in the air in approximately the same altitude as the Cub, but he stated that it could not be the Cub in view of its speed. He was advised that no other aircraft was in the air from Fargo and none other had signaled from other air fields. Lt Gorman advised then that he was going to follow the other aircraft. Mr. Jensen then stepped to the south window of the tower and saw the object approximately 1,000 ft from the tower in a northwestern direction passing very fast over the field. Taking a pair of binoculars he observed the object as it passed over the field. He was, however, unable to distinguish any shape or form other than what appeared to be the tailHight of a very fast-moving craft. He did now, however, see the maneuvers carried on by the object nor the F-51 of Lt Gorman. He saw the object only once and then only as it passed in a straight line over the field.\n\nMr Jensen heard no sound, noticed no odor and saw no exhaust streaks in the air.\nThe object appeared to be only a round light, perfectly formed, with no fuzzy edges or rays leaving its body. The edges were clear cut. No other attached shape was observed. The main identifying characteristic was the high rate of speed at which it was apparently traveling."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 172 b\n\n1. Date of Incident 1 Oct 1948\n2. Time of Incident 2100 hrs\n3. Place of observation Fargo, N. Dakota Airport - Control tower Fargo, N. D Arpt.\n4. Name of observer Manuel E. Johnson\n5. Occupation of observer Assistant Air-port Traffic controller\n6. Address of observer 1422 Broadway, Fargo, N.D.\n7. Number of objects observed 1\n8. Distance of object from observer 1 to 2 miles\n9. Time in sight several seconds\n10. Altitude 2000 to 2500 ft\n11. Speed extremely fast\n12. Direction of flight NNW\n13. Tactics one turn\n14. Lights clear white light\n15. Sound none\n16. Size of a lamp\n17. Color clear white\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected none noted\n20. Apparent construction none noted\n21. Exhaust trails none noted\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds none\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance straight line\n26. Remarks: Mr. Johnson was on duty at the Fargo Airport tower from around 1600 hours 1 Oct 48 and was in the tower at the time the F-51 called in requesting information about local traffic. When Lt Gorman called a second time about the object Johnson walked to the rear of the receiver and looked out the south window and saw the object and the Cub.. Object was a little higher than the \"Cub\" and seemed to be on a north heading, and then turning northwest. It seemed about 2,000 ft in the air and traveling at an excessive rate of speed. No definite outline could be identified. Both the object and the \"Cub\" were noticed at the same time."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 172c\n\n1. Date of Incident 1 Oct 1948\n2. Time of Incident 2100 hrs\n3. Place of observation Fargo, N. Dakota - from the Fargo control tower\n4. Name of observer Dr. Cannon\n5. Occupation of observer Occulist (amateur pilot with 2 yrs flying experience)\n6. Address of observer Goodmans Jewelers, Fargo, N. Dakota\n7. Number of objects observed 1.\n8. Distance of object from observer 1 mile\n9. Time in sight at intervals for seconds only\n10. Altitude 5000 to 6000 ft\n11. Speed very fast\n12. Direction of flight NNW SE and W\n13. Tactics straight line\n14. Lights clear white light\n15. Sound none\n16. Size tail light of plane\n17. Color clear white\n18. Shape round\n19. Odor detected none\n20. Apparent construction none noted\n21. Exhaust trails none seen\n22. Weather conditions CAVU\n23. Effect on clouds none\n24. Sketches or photographs none\n25. Manner of disappearance straight line\n26. Remarks: Object first observed when Dr. Cannon was landing his plane. He noticed what appeared to be the tail light of another ship going at considerable speed in a westerly direction. He landed his \"Cub\" at the Fargo Airport and delivered some bottles of coca-cola to the tower operators\n\n(over)"} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On entering he overheard the running commentary between Lt Gorman & Mr. Jensen. He stepped on the balcony and watched the maneuvers of the F-51 from the southeast corner of the tower. He saw the object twice. It was headed in a westerly direction, returning shortly, and then going into a steep bank, then disappearing in a northwestern by north direction\n\nNoticed no sound from the object at any time, no odor and no exhaust streaks in the sky."} {"doc_id":"8a9bc4d91d8c954c","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8ac91b088719244f","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. Department of Justice\n\n(MATERIAL MUST NOT BE REMOVED FROM OR ADDED TO THIS FILE)\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU\n\nof\n\nINVESTIGATION\n\nBureau File Number\n\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007\n\nDO NOT DESTROY FOR 5 YEARS A REQUEST 3/89\n\nAlso Nos.\n\nCLASSIFICATION NO.\n\nSerials 1 thru\n\nVolume Number 1\n\nNW 90692 DocId:34728149 Page 1"} {"doc_id":"8ac91b088719244f","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 MAY 1962 EDITION GSA GEN. REG. NO. 27\n5010-107-02\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : SAC, CHICAGO (100-44501)\nDATE: 9/22/67\n\nFROM : SA C. LEONARD TREVIRANUS\n\nSUBJECT: UFO SIGHTING - MISCELLANEOUS\n\nTOM MITCHELL, 7825 South Colfax, Chicago (375-9258) telephonically advised the writer at 9:10 PM on September 16, 1967, as follows:\n\nHe is eleven years of age. At approximately 8:30 PM he heard a \"weird\" noise and looked out the window of his residence and saw a \"flash of light going north in the sky.\" He could furnish no additional information but claimed this to be a UFO.\n\nThe above information was furnished to Sergeant EUGENE RIPKA, Army-Air Force 755th Radar Squadron, Arlington Heights, Illinois, telephone 763-8638.\n\nCLT/cah\n(1)\n\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan\n\nNW 90692 DocId:34728149 Page 2"} {"doc_id":"8ac91b088719244f","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2904 South 13th Road - Apt 2\nArlington, Virginia 22204\n\nSpecial Agent in Charge\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nChicago, Illinois\n\nFIRST CLASS U. S. MAIL\n\nNW 90692 DocId:34728149 Page 3"} {"doc_id":"8ac91b088719244f","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2904 South 13th Road - Apt 2\nArlington, Virginia 22204\nSeptember 30, 1974\n\nSpecial Agent in Charge\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nChicago, Illinois\n\nDear Sir:\n\nThrough inquiry of the Department of the Air Force, I've obtained a copy of a U. S. Army report of an alleged April 8, 1954 sighting of an occupied Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) which was pursued by U. S. Coast Guard personnel, landed briefly on the ground (discharging the occupant, who strolled about and returned to the object), and which was seen by at least three civilian observers before it departed. The report's distribution notation cites your office as receiving a copy.\n\nSo that I might complete my research into this case, will you please send me a copy of any documentation of all FBI follow-up actions that may have been taken on the matter? Also, does your office possess any other UFO-sighting case files covering the period January 1, 1954 through December 31, 1954; and, if so, will you please send me a copy of your records of same? Finally, will you please tell me the current mailing address and/or telephone number of the principal observer, Chicago resident Mrs. Lelah H. Stoker, in the aforementioned sighting of April 8, 1954?\n\nYours sincerely,\n\nLarry W. Bryant\n\n100-44501-2\n\nNW 90692 DocId:34728149 Page 4"} {"doc_id":"8ac91b088719244f","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"219 South Dearborn Street\nChicago, Illinois 60604\nOctober 10, 1974\n\nMr. Larry W. Bryant\n2904 South Thirteenth Road\nApartment 2\nArlington, Virginia 22204\n\nDear Mr. Bryant:\n\nI have received your letter dated September 30, 1974, regarding UFO sightings. I am sorry to advise you that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has no information regarding the UFO sighting you describe in your letter, and, in fact, the FBI does not collect information regarding UFO sightings in general. As you are probably aware, the FBI is the investigative arm of the United States Department of Justice, and is authorized to investigate only those matters specifically delegated to it by Congress. UFO sightings are not such matters.\n\nIn addition, our files contain no information regarding the current residence or telephone number of Mrs. Lelah H. Stoker, mentioned in your letter.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nRICHARD G. HELD\nSpecial Agent in Charge\n\n1 - Addressee\n2 - Chicago (100-44501)\n1 - 100-36363\n\nJMF:nss\n(3)\n\n100-44501-3\n\nNW 90692 DocId:34728149 Page 5"} {"doc_id":"8e4ede658c8d3cf2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Misrep undefined-9319618\n\nNarrative\n\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 0015Z, 1.4a TOOK OFF FROM AL DHAFRA (OMAM).\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 0030Z, 1.4a HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE.\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 0145Z, 1.4a RECEIVED A PROFESSIONAL GUARD CALL. SEE GUARD CALL LINE 1.\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) FROM 0150Z TO 2019Z, 1.4a COLLECTED SIGINT VIA AIRHANDLER.\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 0155Z, 1.4a WAS ON STATION IN SRO TRACK IRISH SICKLE.\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) FROM 0155Z TO 1837Z, 1.4a CONDUCTED IMINT ISO OP SPARTAN SHIELD (OP 1.4a SEE ISR LINE 1.\n\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT 0241Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X UAP. SEE UAP LINE 1.\n\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT 0322Z, 1.4a OBSERVED 1X UAP. SEE UAP LINE 2.\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 1837Z, 1.4a WAS CLEARED TO RTB.\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 1912Z, 1.4a WAS OFF STATION.\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 2019Z, 1.4a HANDED BACK TO THE LRE.\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 2058Z, 1.4a LANDED AT OMAM. FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS-2.\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\n\n(S/RELIDO) Mission Narrative"} {"doc_id":"8e4ede658c8d3cf2","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Admin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: NOFORN\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20481025\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: OP SPARTAN SHIELD\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): ACC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 50ATKS\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): UR\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• ATO Mission Number: 1.4a\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: 3.5c,(b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 50TH ATKS\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c,(b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c,(b)(6)"} {"doc_id":"8e4ede658c8d3cf2","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: Ctr\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Unit: PAROC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: 3.5c,(b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: ISRD/ACF/UnitSupport\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination: -"} {"doc_id":"8e4ede658c8d3cf2","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: -\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• MWS Name or Designator: -\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• IRCM Name or Designator: -\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• ECM Name or Designator: -\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• CMD Name or Designator: -\n• Chaff Designator: -\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: -\n• Flare Designator: -\n• Num Flares: 0\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator: -\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Num Towed Decoys: -\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Gun Name or Designator: -\n• Num Gun Rounds: -\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: -\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: ANDAS1\n• Additional Avionics: AH\\GMESH\n• Data Link: -\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OMAM\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 240015:00ZOCT23\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes):\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Mission Canceled:"} {"doc_id":"8e4ede658c8d3cf2","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Landing\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OMAM\n• Last Land Time: 242058:00ZOCT23\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 242108:00ZOCT23\n• Total Mission Time: 20 hours 43 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 240155:00ZOCT23\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• JTAC Callsign: -\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 241912:00ZOCT23\n• Total Time On Station: 17 hours 17 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nISR\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"8e4ede658c8d3cf2","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 12 September 2025\nFOUO/Privacy Act applies\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: (S//REL) FROM 0155Z TO 1837Z, [1.4a] CONDUCTED IMINT\nSUPPORTING NAVCENT ISO OP SPARTAN SHIELD IVO 40RBP52[1.4a]68[1.4a]\n\nPLEASE REFERENCE THE FOLLOWING LINK FOR POST MISSION ISR PRODUCTS[3.5c, (b)(6)]\n[3.5c, (b)(6)]\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: NAVCENT\n• Supported Operation: OP SPARTAN SHIELD (OP [1.4a]\n• Precoord Time: 154 MINUTES\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (S//REL) WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: No\n• Gentext:\n\nGUARDCALL\n\n• GUARDCALL DTG: 240145:00ZOCT23\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Ground Station Callsign: IRANIAN_AIR_DEFENSE\n• Aircraft Location: 40RBP00[1.4a]97[1.4a]\n• Aircraft Heading: 031M\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL230\n• Aircraft Airspeed: 158KIAS\n• Number of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\n• Guardcall Tone: Professional\n\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\n\n• Gentext: (S//REL) AT 0145Z, [1.4a] RECEIVED 1X GUARD CALL FROM\nIRANIAN AIR DEFENSE STATING \"MAINTAIN SAFE DISTANCE FROM BORDER\". CALL WAS\nPROFESSIONAL. [1.4a] RESPONDED \"THIS IS A COALITION AIRCRAFT CONDUCTING\nROUTINE OPERATIONS IN INTERNATIONAL AIRSPACE\". AT 0145Z, THE CALLS FROM\n\n[3.5c, (b)(6)]\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0104 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO/PA applies 09/12/25 000006"} {"doc_id":"8e4ede658c8d3cf2","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 12 September 2025\nFOUO/Privacy Act applies\n\nIRANIAN AIR DEFENSE CEASED.\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 240241:00ZOCT23\n• UAP Event Type: UAP Incident\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations: NONE\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions: UNK\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: UNK\n• Tail Number: [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 39RYJ90[1.4a]49[1.4a]\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: FL243\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory: 280 DEGREES\n• Observer Assessment of UAP: Benign\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: 162 KTAS\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns):: UNK\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters: UNK\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable): UNK\n• Operational Range: UNK\n• UAP Physical State: Solid\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n• UAP Propulsion Means: UNK\n• UAP Payload:\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Signatures: THERMAL SHOWED COLD\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNK\n• UAP RF Frequency: UNK\n• UAP RF Duration: UNK\n• UAP Event Serial Number: UNK\n• UAP Effects on Persons: NO\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNK\n• UAP Effects on Equipment: UNK\n• Full Name:\n• Rank/Grade:\n• Email:\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE):\n• Observer Engagement of UAP (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• First Coordinate: 39RYJ74[1.4a]72[1.4a]\n• First Seen Radius: 5\n• Last Accuracy: Estimated\n• Last Coordinate: 39RYJ74[1.4a]72[1.4a]\n• Last Seen Radius: 5\n\n[3.5c, (b)(6)]\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0104 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO/PA applies 09/12/25 000007"} {"doc_id":"8e4ede658c8d3cf2","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 12 September 2025\nFOUO/Privacy Act applies\n\n• Kinetic Altitude Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Altitude: UNK\n• Kinetic Depth Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Depth: UNK\n• Kinetic Velocity Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Velocity: 320 MPH\n• Kinetic Trajectory Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Trajectory: UNK\n• UAP Date of DoD Acquisition: 240241:00ZOCT23\n• UAP Reaction to Observation, Interrogation, Engagement (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNK\n• UAP Anomalous Characteristics/ Behaviors: UNK\n• First Accuracy: Estimated\n• Call Sign: [1.4a]\n• UAP First Seen Location:\n• UAP Last Seen Location:\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): UNK\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): (S//NF) AT 0241Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED 1X UAP IVO\n39RXK68[1.4a]65[1.4a]\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 240322:00ZOCT23\n• UAP Event Type: UAP Incident\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations: NONE\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions: UNK\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: UNK\n• Tail Number: [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 39RXK68[1.4a]65[1.4a]\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: FL243\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory: 280 DEGREES\n• Observer Assessment of UAP: Benign\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: 162 KTAS\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns):: UNK\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters: UNK\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable): UNK\n• Operational Range: UNK\n• UAP Physical State: Solid\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n\n[3.5c,(b)(6)]\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0104 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO/PA applies 09/12/25 000008"} {"doc_id":"8e4ede658c8d3cf2","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 12 September 2025\nFOUO/Privacy Act applies\n\n• UAP Propulsion Means: UNK\n• UAP Payload:\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Signatures: UNK\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNK\n• UAP RF Frequency: UNK\n• UAP RF Duration: UNK\n• UAP Event Serial Number: UNK\n• UAP Effects on Persons: NO\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNK\n• UAP Effects on Equipment: UNK\n• Full Name:\n• Rank/Grade:\n• Email:\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE):\n• Observer Engagement of UAP (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• First Coordinate: 39RXL60[1.4a]22[1.4a]\n• First Seen Radius: 5\n• Last Accuracy: Estimated\n• Last Coordinate: 39RXL60[1.4a]22[1.4a]\n• Last Seen Radius: 5\n• Kinetic Altitude Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Altitude: UNK\n• Kinetic Depth Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Depth: UNK\n• Kinetic Velocity Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Velocity: 440 MPH\n• Kinetic Trajectory Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Trajectory: UNK\n• UAP Date of DoD Acquisition: 240322:00ZOCT23\n• UAP Reaction to Observation, Interrogation, Engagement (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNK\n• UAP Anomalous Characteristics/ Behaviors: UNK\n• First Accuracy: Estimated\n• Call Sign [1.4a]\n• UAP First Seen Location:\n• UAP Last Seen Location:\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): UNK\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): (S//NF) AT 0322Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED 1X UAP IVO\n39RXK68[1.4a]65[1.4a]\n\n[3.5c, (b)(6)]\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0104 Approved for Release to AARO - FOUO/PA applies 09/12/25 000009"} {"doc_id":"8e8c346386af1812","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:20:41"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Department of Justice\n\nFROM OR ADDED TO THIS FILE\n\nBUREAU\n\nof\n\nINVESTIGATION\n\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nAPR 19 1978 BY\n\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nJAN 19 1979 BY\n\nSerial 322, 370\n\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nAPR 19 1977 BY R349\n\nDO NOT DESTROY\n\nUSE CARE IN HANDLING THIS FILE\n\nFOIPA # 993087\n\nTransfer-Call 421\n\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007.\n\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 7 302 343\n8/11/1274186\n\n62- HQ-83894\nSERIALS 302-343\nSECTION 7\n\nSECTION 7\nSERIALS 302-343\n\nSerial 343\n\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nMAR 1 1977 BY\n\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nMAY 14 1971"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPIED FOR FOIPA\n\nSERIALS | REQUESTERS FULL NAME | COMPUTER NUMBER | DATE | BY\n342 Richard Toronto 262,191 6/2/76 DN\n332 Rosenfeld 284/189 12/5/91 13"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nAUG 9 1952\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI, SAVANNAH 8-9-52 6-46 PM EST WED\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\n\nFLYING SAUCERS, SAVANNAH RIVER PLANT, AEC. SECURITY OFFICE OF AEC ADVISED THIS DATE THAT TWO EMPLOYEES OF THE E. I. DU PONT COMPANY SAW A BLUE LIGHT WITH AN ORANGE FRINGE SHAPED LIKE A SAUCER FLY OVER THE FOUR HUNDRED AREA OF THE SAVANNAH RIVER PLANT AT APPROXIMATELY NINE THIRTY PM AUGUST EIGHT, FIFTYTWO. OBJECT FLYING AT A HIGH RATE OF SPEED AND TRAVELING IN A NORTHEASTERN DIRECTION.\n\nSCHLENKER\nACK AND H O L D\n7-48 PM OK FBI WA NRB\n\nRECORDED - 68\nAUG 14 1952\n62-83894 302\n\n53 AUG 81 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED FBI COMMUNICATIONS Aug 9 7 48 PM '52\n\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nAUG 11 1 32 PM '52\n\nAUG 11 9 39 AM '52\nFBI\nRECD BELMONT\nAUG 9 8 39 PM '52"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 11, 1952\n\nMr. Edmond J. Kane\nMauston, Wisconsin\n62-83894-303\nDear Mr. Kane:\n\nYour letter dated August 1, 1952, has been received, and I appreciate the interest which prompted your bringing your observations to my attention.\n\nInasmuch as the matter of the flying saucers is being investigated by the United States Air Force, I am taking the liberty of forwarding a copy of your letter to the Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington, D. C. If you have further observations along this line, I would suggest that you may wish to communicate directly with him.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nCopy by form to Air Force Intelligence.\n\nNOTE: Special Agent Samuel Hardy, EOD 3-28-25, GS-12, $8760, assigned to Minneapolis.\nSpecial Agent Clinton W. Stein, EOD 4-6-31, GS-15, $10,800, assigned Division II as inspector.\n\nRHD:gr:mfo\n\nRECORDED - 119\nINDEXED 119\n\n62 AUG 20 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[mirrored/faint carbon copy of letter, largely illegible]\n\nAugust 1, 1952\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover, Director\nFBI\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nFlying Saucers\n\n(Reverse-image text; partially illegible)"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mauston, Wisconsin, 1 August 1952\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover, Director\nFBI\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nO Flying Saucers\n\nAs a retired member of the St Paul Police Force and having had numerous pleasant contacts with Agent Clintonstein and Samy Hardy, I take the liberty of an opinion that came to me that the flying saucers scare seems possible that the released energy of exploded Atomic Bombs could be soaring around in the atmosphere. I know you can channel this thought to the proper authorities and certainly would appreciate your comments on this thought.\n\nI am a Veteran of both World War #1 and #2 and also a member of the American Legion for 32 years. I am presently a member of The American Legion Post #81 of Mauston, wisconsin which is known as the Burton-Koppang Post.\n\nIf this thought is instrumental in tracking down the source of this scare thereby releaving some of the tension to our American Country, it may be worth following up at this time.\n\nThanking you very much for your cooperation and consideration in this matter and will you please acknowledge and advise your comments.\n\nYours very truly,\n\nEdmond J. Kane\nEdmond J. Kane\nMauston, Wisconsin\n\nCC: Personal file\n\nRECORDED - 119\n\n62-93894-303"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[mirrored/faint carbon copy of letter, largely illegible]\n\nMauston, Wisconsin, 1 August 1952\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover, Director\nFBI\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\n[illegible paragraphs]\n\nYours very truly,\n\nEdmond J. Kane\nMauston, Wisconsin\n\nMR. JONES\nF B I\nAUG 6 2 55 PM '52"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 12, 1952\n\nMrs. Ora A. Tygrett\nc/o Lou Merlaw Farm\nRural Route No. 1\nNew Palestine, Indiana\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nDear Mrs. Tygrett:\n\nYour letter dated July 31, 1952, addressed to the War Department, c/o Federal Bureau of Investigation, has been received.\n\nYour interest in furnishing your observation in this regard is appreciated.\n\nIn view of the contents of your communication which also appear to be of interest to the Department of the Air Force, I have taken the liberty of furnishing that Agency a copy of your letter.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nRECORDED-114\nINDEXED-114\nTOC:jdt\nEX. 73\nCOMM - FBI\nMAILED 20\n68 AUG 22 1952\n62-93894-304"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 12, 1952\n\nMrs. Ora A. Tygrett\nc/o Lou Merlaw Farm\nRural Route No. 1\nNew Palestine, Indiana\n\nDear Mrs. Tygrett:\n\nYour letter dated July 31, 1952, addressed to the War Department, c/o Federal Bureau of Investigation, has been received.\n\nYour interest in furnishing your observation in this regard is appreciated.\n\nIn view of the contents of your communication which also appear to be of interest to the Department of the Air Force, I have taken the liberty of furnishing that Agency a copy of your letter.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nRECORDED-114\nINDEXED-114\nAUG 13 1952\nEX. 73\nCOMM - FBI\nMAILED 20\n68 AUG 22 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: August 13, 1952\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING DISKS\n\nThere is attached a Photostat of a self explanatory letter dated August 5, 1952, at Pontiac, Michigan, received by this Bureau from Mr. W. H. Jennings, 3096 Hazelmary, Zone 17, Pontiac, Michigan, relating to the captioned matter.\n\nMr. Jennings' letter has been acknowledged and he has been informed that a copy of his letter has been furnished to your office for appropriate attention. No further action is contemplated in this matter by this Bureau.\n\nAttachment\nNOTE:\n\nRECORDED - 11\nEX. - 69\n62-83893-305\nAUG 15 1952\n\nThere is no record identifiable with Jennings in the files of the Bureau\n\nEHM:kc"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: August 13, 1952\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING DISKS\n\nThere is attached a copy of a self explanatory letter dated July 31, 1952, received by this Bureau from Mr. Benedicto Romero, 1647 Park Avenue, New York City, relating to the captioned matter.\n\nMr. Romero's letter has been acknowledged and he has been informed that a copy of his letter has been furnished to your office for appropriate attention. No further action is contemplated in this matter by this Bureau.\n\nAttachment\nNOTE:\n\nRECORDED - 11\nEX. - 69\n62-83894-306\nAUG 15 1952\n\nBureau files fail to reflect any information that can be identified with Mr. Romero.\n\nEHM:kc"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: August 14, 1952\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING DISKS\n\nThere is attached a copy of a self-explanatory letter dated August 1, 1952, received by this Bureau from Mrs. Fred Haufe, 606 Walnut Avenue, Fairmont, West Virginia, relating to the captioned matter.\n\nMrs. Haufe's letter has been acknowledged and she has been informed that a copy of her letter has been furnished to your office for appropriate attention. No further action is contemplated in this matter by this Bureau.\n\nAttachment\nNOTE:\n\nRECORDED - 11\nEX. - 69\n62-83894-307\nAUG 15 1952\n\nBureau files fail to reflect any information that can be identified with Mrs. Haufe.\n\nEHM:kc"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nDate: August 14, 1952\n\nRe: Director of Naval Intelligence\nSubject: [illegible]\n\nFrom: Assistant Director, Security Division\n\nReference is made to a letter [illegible] concerning the [illegible] of Mrs. Fred Haufe.\n\nThere is attached a copy of a [illegible] letter dated [illegible] received by [illegible] from [illegible], relative to [illegible].\n\n[illegible]\n\nEnclosures\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\n[illegible]\n\nDone by [illegible]"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SERVICE UNIT\nSEARCH SLIP\t4-22a\nSupervisor Cincinnati Room 3708\nSubj: Mrs. Fred Haufe\n\nExact Spelling\t\tSearchers\n✓ All References\t\tInitial\nSubversive Ref.\t\tDate\nMain File\nRestricted to Locality of\n\nFILE NUMBER\t\tSERIALS\n\nInitialed"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. R. T. HARBO\nFROM : C. F. DOWNING\nSUBJECT: ANONYMOUS COMMUNICATION WRITTEN\nIN GERMAN LANGUAGE RECEIVED BY\n\"CINCINNATI ENQUIRER\" PERTAINING\nTO \"FLYING SAUCERS\"\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nDATE: August 8, 1952\n\nReference is made to a letter from the Cincinnati Office dated August 6, 1952, submitting an anonymous letter in German concerning so-called \"Flying Saucers.\"\n\nAttached are 7 copies of a translation of this German material prepared in the Cryptanalysis-Translation Section.\n\nNo reply has been made by us to the August 6, 1952, letter from Cincinnati.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\nThat the Domestic Intelligence Division review the Cincinnati submission and accompanying Bureau translation, for appropriate handling, noting particularly a suggestion in the last paragraph of the Cincinnati letter to consider making this information available to other Governmental Agencies.\n\n62-83894\nIWN:jen\nAttachment\n\nEX. - 73"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AUG 18 1952\n\nAUG 11 9 56 AM '52\nREC'D ESPIONAGE\nF B I\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED-HARBO\n\nAUG 28 10 02 AM '52\nF B I\nLABORATORY DIVISION"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRANSLATION FROM GERMAN\n\nFlying Saucer,\na weapon tested in 1944, which is probably now being produced in series, and at this time causes a great stir, is a V-weapon which has a round body similar to a disk having a diameter of about 48-50 m. On the outer ring it has about 45-50 automatic circular nozzles which after the ignition of the disk circulate around a plexiglass sphere in the center in which the measuring and controlling devices for long-distance steering are located. In the sphere is still sufficient space for atom bombs. These weapons are in Russian hands and can have an effective range of 30-35,000 km. The constructor of V-weapons RIEDEL in Germany stated that it concerns a typical V-weapon on which he had worked himself. I am sure that the truth is better than a panic among ignorant people.\n\nH. SCH.\n\n\"TRANSLATED BY:\nFRIEDRICH G. NEUHAUSER:bad\nAUGUST 8, 1952.\""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: August 20, 1952\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nAPPROPRIATE AGENCIES AND FIELD OFFICES ADVISED BY ROUTING SLIP(S) OF 2046 DATE 9/1/77\n\nThere is attached a communication which was enclosed with a letter dated July 29, 1952, from Mr. John Galloway, 17 Clifton Place, Brooklyn 5, New York, relative to the captioned matter.\n\nMr. Galloway's letter has been acknowledged and he has been informed that this communication has been furnished to your office for appropriate attention. No further action is contemplated in this matter by this Bureau.\n\nAttachment\n\nMAILED 4 AUG 21 1952 COMM-FBI\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nCC: Mr. E. H. Mossburg, Room 3708\nCRD:buk\n\nRECORDED - 161\nAUG 21 1952\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE FBI\nRECEIVED-MAIL ROOM\nEX-18\n\n66 SEP 3 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI 8-18-52\n\nSAC, San Diego (100-8565)\n\nBORDERLAND SCIENCES, RESEARCH ASSOCIATES\nSan Diego, California;\nMEAD LAYNE - Director; MAX FREEDOM LONG - Director\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nReference is made to San Diego letter dated 8-5-52 concerning the captioned matter.\n\nFor the additional information of the Bureau, there is being transmitted herewith one copy each of the following which were made available to me by FRANCIS OHM, who is a member of the captioned organization:\n\n1. Mimeographed letter consisting of four pages addressed to His Excellency, The President of the United States.\n\n2. Mimeographed announcement consisting of three pages entitled \"For Information of the Public — and the Sake of the Record — A Synopsis of Important Data\".\n\nEnclosure (2)\nJFS:jec\n\nENCL.\n\n62-83894\nNOT RECORDED\n147 SEP 3 1952\n\nORIGINAL FILED IN 68-97814\n\n5 SEP 10 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 22, 1952\n\nRECORDED - 88 62-83894-310\nMr. William Hoffmeyer\nRoute 3\nJackson, Minnesota\n\nINDEXED - 88\nDear Mr. Hoffmeyer:\n\nEX - 73\n\nYour letter postmarked August 15, 1952, together with enclosure, has been received, and I want to thank you for bringing this matter to my attention.\n\nInasmuch as the contents of your communication do not reflect any violation within the jurisdiction of this Bureau, I am unable to comply with your request.\n\nI am taking the liberty of forwarding a copy of your letter and your original enclosure to the Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C., since these matters may be of interest to that agency.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nCopy of incoming to Dept. of Air Force.\n\nNOTE: In view of correspondent's reference to a \"steady white light\" circling their farm, his letter which is being referred to the U.S. Air Force branch interested in matters of this type. Correspondent's enclosure was a sample of what appeared to be shredded thin strips of tin foil.\n\nLH:mnf:ns\n\nMAILED 10 AUG 22 1952 COMM-FBI\n\n8 SEP 8 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AUG 22 5 59 PM '52\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED MAIL ROOM"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Jackson Minn\nAug 2, 1952\n\nFlying Saucers -\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nFederal bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D.C.\n\nWm Hoffmeyer\nJackson, Minn.\nR.R.3.\n\nDear Mr Hoover:\n\nI don't know if you analyze articles so will send you a sample of (something that looks like tinsel) because my uncle found it in a pasture in a round pile, underneath of it, it looks as tho the clover was burned. & there are 3 similar patches which are burned in a triangle form. Last Sunday Morning the Neighbors wife got up to get a drink of water & happened to see a steady white light circling their farm, but didn't pay any attention to it. Than Sunday morn. when my uncle went to get the cows, he saw this stuff shining in the sun light. It couldn't of been dropped out of a plane as it was loose & not in a container & the nearest road is about a 1/2 mile from the pasture & now we are wondering what it is. So would like to"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"have you analyze it & let me know.\nSincerely yours,\nWm Hoffmeyer"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE COPY\n\nJackson Minn\nAug 2, 1952\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nFederal bureau of Investigation.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr Hoover:\n\nI don't know if you analyze articles so will send you a sample of (something that looks like tinsel) because my uncle found it in a pasture in a round pile, underneath of it, it looks as tho the clover was burned. & there are 3 similar patches which are burned in a triangle form. Last Sunday Morning the Neighbors Wife got up to get a drink of water & happned to see a steady white Light circling their farm, but didn't pay any attention to it. Than Sunday morn. when my uncle went to get the cows, he saw this stuff shining in the Sun light. It couldn't of been dropped out of a plane as it was loose & not in a container & the nearest road is about a 1/2 mile from the pasture & now we are wondering what it is. So would like to have you analyze it & let me know.\n\nSincerely yours,\n/s/ Wm Hoffmeyer"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-311\nRECORDED - 126\nINDEXED - 126\n\nAugust 20, 1952\n\nMr. John E. Lang\n1413 South Vermont\nLos Angeles 6, California\n\nDear Mr. Lang:\n\nYour letter of August 12, 1952, has been received and I want you to know that I appreciate the interest prompting you to bring your observations to my attention.\n\nInasmuch as the matter to which you refer is of interest to the United States Air Force authorities, I am taking the liberty of making a copy of your communication available to The Honorable, The Secretary of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nLH:gr:bkh\n\nEX-73\nCOMM-FBI\nMAILED 20\n66 SEP 3 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 126\nEX. 73\nAUG 21 4 19 PM '52\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nFBI\nRECEIVED MAIL ROOM\nCOMM-FBI\nMAILED"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Los Angeles 6 California August 12th 1952\n\nDear Mr. Hoover\n\nLast sunday my wife and I attented a Moveing picture where they showed the Flying Saucers it looked like a spot of light\nIt gave me the impresion that there might be a plane up in the sky with a spot light or serch light that is send down from the plane and when our plan es make an affort to go up there to find them they turn off the light and there for we feel that they have made a fast getaway up into the sky at a very fast speed this plane goes back to its air field or to another place and fool the public\nIf our plane on its way up to find this plane would go up with all the lights turned off and stay farr away and try to come over the top of this plane they would be able to catch it but they should be prepaired to shoot it out if needed\nI think in order to prove this Idia we should send one of our own plane up and have them send down a spot light or serch light to find out if this is not true\nif this is of any help it will make me happy\nI dont think I am very Off\n\nSincerely\nJohn E. Lang\n1413 So. Vermont\nLos Angeles 6 California\n\nRECORDED - 126\nEX. 73\n62-83894 AUG 27 1952\n311"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tAugust 5, 1952\n\nSAC, San Diego\n\nBORDERLAND SCIENCES, RESEARCH ASSOCIATES\nSan Diego, California; MEAD LAYNE, Director;\nMAX FREEDOM LONG, Director\n\nIn view of the current hysteria concerning the so-called \"flying saucers\", I thought that the Bureau might be interested in the following information concerning the captioned organization.\n\nI am transmitting herewith certain literature concerning the captioned organization which was furnished to me by FRANCIS OHM, who operates the Businessmens Assurance Company in San Diego and who has his office in the same building housing the FBI office.\n\nIt is of interest to note that on Friday, August 1, 1952, at approximately 12:00 noon, FRANCIS OHM asked to see me urgently, which I did. As a member of the captioned organization, he advised me that they were having a meeting at 1:00 PM the same day, inasmuch as they had been advised that they had some very important information to discuss. He went on to relate that through the means utilized by his organization (which the enclosed literature will reflect borders on the occult), they were able to prognosticate well in advance the recent earthquake which occurred in Tehachapi, California. He advised that they have also been able to obtain the following information:\n\n1. That a very severe tidal wave will hit the Pacific Ocean sometime in the not too remote future and that most of the Japanese Islands will be washed away and disappear.\n\n2. That all fishes with scales in Japanese waters will soon leave these waters for other destinations, in view of the oncoming tidal wave.\n\n3. That this tidal wave will wash away the Hawaiian Islands.\n\n4. That the West Coast of the United States will likewise be affected by this tidal wave.\n\n5. That they prognosticated the appearance of a new island in the Pacific which was published in the newspapers within the past week.\n\nJFS:ha\nEncl.\n\nNOT RECORDED\nINITIALS ON ORIGINAL\n71 SEP 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Direcotr, FBI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t8-5-52\n\nRe: BORDERLAND SCIENCES, RESEARCH ASSOCIATES\nSan Diego, California; MEAD LAYNE, Director;\nMAX FREEDOM LONG, Director\n\n6. That the flying saucers are not fantasies; that they are factual and actual; that his associates in the captioned organization have been in conversation with the men operating the flying saucers, and that they have asked that high officials of the U. S. Government be informed that they are here on our planet on a peaceful mission and that they are not on a warlike mission. However, if the U. S. Government continues to send planes after these flying saucers and if these planes fire on the flying saucers, they have disintegrators which they will utilize and which will disintegrate these planes completely in no time flat.\n\nMr. OHM requested that either I myself attend the meeting at 1:00 PM or that I designate a stenographer to attend the meeting, so that she could take down all the minutes of the meeting. I told him that unfortunately this was very short notice, that I had another commitment and that our stenographers were pretty well occupied at that time. He said he would advise me of anything important that might transpire at the meeting. As of August 2, 1952, he has not advised me of anything which transpired at the meeting.\n\nI should like to point out that OHM appears to be a perfectly sane, sound individual; he operates a very large insurance business in San Diego, and is convinced in his own mind of the efficacy of this organization.\n\nNo investigation is being conducted concerning this matter and I do not contemplate attending any meetings of this organization.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED-14 62-83894-312\nINDEXED-14\nEX-32\n\nMr. C. S. Choinski\nKoshkonong, Missouri\n\nDear Mr. Choinski:\n\nYour letter dated August 14, 1952, has been received, and I want to thank you for affording me the benefit of your observations.\n\nInasmuch as the matter to which you refer is of interest to another governmental agency, I am taking the liberty of forwarding a copy of your communication to the Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nCopy of incoming sent to the Director of Special Investigations, the Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, by form letter.\n\nLH:pa:bkh\n\nMAILED\nAUG 25 1952\nCOMM-FBI\nSEP 8 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8/14-52\nMr Hoover\nFLYING SAUCERS For four year\nhave I claimed that\nthe flying Saucer was\na disease breeding the\nmichal disc which eve\nparato in the air\nThousands of them anemia\nbeing shot over the\nU.S. at [illegible] the\nRussians - Most of\nMail ack 8-22-52 LH\nRECORDED-14\nEX-32\n62-83894-317\n13 SEP 8 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED\nMR JONES\nAUG 19 4 52 PM '52\nREC'D RECORDS SEC\nAUG 19 3 59 PM '52"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\nthem evaporate before\ndaylight some do\nreba these we see-\nthe vapor only-\nProve the source and\nyou will have another\nCoup for your departmnt\nThaks\nC.S.Chrominski\nKoshitorouz\n2220"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Mr. A. H. Belmont\nFROM : Mr. W. A. Branigan\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nDATE: August 22, 1952\nPURPOSE:\nTo recommend existing instructions to the field re flying discs be called to the attention of the field.\nBACKGROUND:\nA review of communications received from the field indicates they are not observing existing instructions contained in Bureau Bulletin #57, paragraph D, dated 10/1/47, and SAC Letter #38, dated 3/25/49, to refer details of complaints regarding flying saucers to OSI locally.\nACTION:\nIt is recommended the attached SAC Letter be issued.\nEHM:kc:mes\nRECORDED - 34\nEX-129\n62-83894-313\nSEP 5 1952\n71 SEP 10 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n[REDACTED]\nTo recommend existing instructions to the field re flying discs be called to the attention of the field.\nACTION:\nIt is recommended the attached SAC Letter be issued.\nSEP 9 4 23 PM '52\nREC'D ESPIONAGE\nF B I\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nAUG 25 11 08 AM '52\nAUG 22 2 28 PM '52\nRECD-TO SAC'S OFFICE\nAUG 25 5 25 PM '52\nRECEIVED-LAB\nF B I\nAUG 22 1 33 PM '52\nAUG 26 10 53 AM '52\nREC'D BELMONT\nF B I"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : A. H. BELMONT\n\nFROM : W. A. BRANIGAN\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: August 18, 1952\n\nPURPOSE:\n\nTo advise all Supervisors engaged on night duty of instructions concerning the referral of flying disc information to OSI.\n\nBACKGROUND:\n\nCaptain William Deegan, OSI, 4th Air Force Base, Bowling Field, has requested that any information concerning the sighting of flying discs (saucers, etc.) be telephonically furnished immediately to his office, day or night, by dialling Code 1261, and asking for Extension 509. Captain Deegan advised the Air Force is greatly concerned about the captioned matter, and would appreciate the Bureau's cooperation in immediately advising of details received concerning such complaints.\n\nACTION:\n\nIt is recommended a copy of this memorandum be filed in the night and week-end Supervisor's book in your office for their information.\n\nEHM:drg\n\n58 SEP 18 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(C) FLYING DISCS -- Reference is made to Bureau Bulletin #57, Paragraph D, dated October 1, 1947, and SAC Letter #38, dated March 25, 1949, in the captioned matter.\n\nIt is noted that some Bureau field offices are not furnishing to OSI locally complaints regarding flying discs, pursuant to existing Bureau instructions.\n\nUpon receipt of information by your office relating to the sighting of a flying disc, you should endeavor to determine from the complainant details of the type referred to in the Air Force memorandum, which was furnished to your office as an enclosure to SAC Letter #38. The information should then be promptly furnished to OSI locally by your office. As you are aware, the investigation of so-called flying discs is the responsibility of the Department of the Air Force.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 6/20/83 BY Sp-8 BS/dg\n\n62-83894\nNOT RECORDED\n80 SEP 5 1952\n\nORIGINAL FILED IN 66-04-1649\n\nSAC Letter #83 8-29-52"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. HARBO\n\nFROM : D. J. PARSONS\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT ALLEGEDLY CITED BY MR. D. S. DESVERGERS, WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA\n\nDATE: August 29, 1952\n\nBy letter of August 26, 1952, the Air Force requested that we examine the cap of Mr. Desvergers, a scoutmaster at West Palm Beach, Florida, who claims that he observed an unidentified flying object in a desolate area. He reported that upon his investigation, a [REDACTED] object 30 feet in diameter hovered over his head and shot a \"red blob\" which caused him to lose consciousness. The cap has some holes burned in it and it is reported that the hair on Desvergers' arms was singed. The Air Force requested that we determine, if possible, from any residues left the nature of the residual material.\n\nThe Air Force desires an oral report on this tonight. We have finished the examination and are preparing to advise the Air Force as follows:\n\n1. There is no residue which would permit a determination as to the nature of the material which caused the burns in the cap. In addition to the obvious burns, there is one minute burned area which is probably too small to have been caused intentionally but more likely by a small hot ember.\n\n2. The bill and a large part of the edges of the cap are singed but the singeing is not uniform as would be expected if it had been caused at one time by a single flash of flame. The front edge of the cap bill is more severely singed than other portions of the cap. This condition would not be expected if the source of the flame was directly overhead.\n\n3. When the cap is observed from the front, the left edge of the insignia and the fold in the blue cloth, there is an absence of singeing noted under the fold suggesting the possibility that the cap was not being worn when the singeing took place. It is noted that this fold \"smooths out\" when the cap is placed on the head.\n\nRECOMMENDATION: That in response to the request, of Colonel Free of the Air Force, it is recommended that he be orally advised of the above.\n\ncc: Mr. Nichols\n\nDJP/mek\n\n8/29/52 6:30 PM READ TO L/C FREE OSI BY TELEPHONE\n\n62 SEP 18 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. HARBO\n\nFROM : D. J. PARSONS\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT ALLEGEDLY CITED BY MR. D. S. DESVERGERS, WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA\n\nDATE: August 29, 1952\n\nRECEIVED-HARBO FBI LABORATORY DIVISION\n\nRECEIVED-NICHOLS FBI U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED COVELL UNIT"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894 316\n\nSeptember 11, 1952\n\nRECORDED - 126\nINDEXED - 126\n\nMr. Roy Elwell\nRoadstown, New Jersey\n\nDear Mr. Elwell:\n\nYour letter postmarked September 6, 1952,\nhas been received, and I appreciate the interest\nprompting you to let me have the benefit of your\nobservations.\n\nSince the contents of your communication\nmay be of interest to other governmental agencies,\nI am taking the liberty of forwarding copies of it\nto the Administrator of Civil Aeronautics, Civil\nAeronautics Administration, Department of Commerce,\nWashington, D. C., and to The Honorable, The Secretary\nof Defense, The Pentagon, Washington, D. C.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nCopy by form sent to Civil Aeronautics Administration\nCopy by form sent to Secretary of Defense\nDIC:imz"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nCopy by form sent to Civil Aeronautics Administration\nCopy by form sent to Secretary of Defense\n\nRECEIVED MAIL ROOM\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nSEP 12 12 48 PM '52\n\nCOMM - FBI\nSEP 12 1952\nMAILED 19\n\n55 SEP 25 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Roadstown, N.J.\nAug. 32\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover,\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWash. D.C. FLYING SAUCERS\nDear Mr Hoover!-\nSince reading so much\nabout flying saucers and other\nobjects in the sky, I have\ndecided to write you about a theory\nwhich I came to belive in 1917\nOne evening about 10- I saw\nan object in the South western\nSky. It seemed to be falling toward\nthe Earth at about a 50° angle\nwhich would let it hit about\nsouth of us. It went behing some\nbuildings and when I ran out\nto see where it might hit, it\nwas moving horizontally with\nthe Earths' surface. Almost\nimmediately it started to rise\nand seemed to rise faster and\n\nRECORDED 126\n62-83894\n316"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MR. JONES\nSep 8 4 57 PM '52\nRECEIVED\nF B I\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nSEP 15 4 25 PM '52\nREC'D ESPIONAGE\nF B I\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"straighter until it disappeared (2)\ninto space in the South East as big as the\nMoon and was a pale yellow,\nbut since it was much smaller.\nI know it was much smaller,\na man about 70 sat here\nand saw it. He said his\nancestors had seen them\ngenerations back and had\ncalled them \"Jack o lanterns\" and also\n\"Jack O'lanterns\"\nI was very much concerned\nabout how this body had fallen\nhalf way to Earth from where I\nhad first been and vanished into space.\nI knew it was to far in Earths\ngravity to be pulled but by the\ngravity of the sun or moon, as\nthey were on the opposite side\nof the Earth. This object had\ngone in an entirely different\ndirection than either of them."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At the time I was studying magnets. They seemed to be very simple devices, with the following Characteristics. They attracted Iron. They attracted each other. They repelled each other. Some had much Pull and much Push. Some had much Pull and little Push. Some had little Pull and much Push and some had little Pull and little Push.\n\nNow Masses of Iron ore are suspended in mid air, by magnets, while the ore is melted and the impurities drop out leaving clear Iron.\n\nWhile studying magnets an idea came to me and I have not been able to get it out of my mind since. I will give a few examples to illustrate my theory:\n\nG = Gravity\n\nP + P = Push & Pull Of Gravity"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A complete G unit, such as Earth, contains a force which pulls all objects toward its center.\n\nIt also contains a force, similar to that of a magnet, which repels Pushes all objects away from its center.\n\nThe Pull of Earth the G minus its Push, equals the force of G as we know and feel it\n\nThe Earth as a unit contains this P + P force of G, but no rock or part of the Earth contains this force.\n\nA magnet attracts only certain metals and repels only magnets.\n\nA G unit attracts all other G units and also repels them in proportion to its P + P G. It also attracts or repels all loose objects that do not contain a center of G\n\nThus Earth with more Pull than Push attracts all objects and those without a center of G fall to its surface or are burned in the upper air as meteors or falling Stars."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Some G units contain more Push than Pull. For example the Stars which seem to be trying to run away from the universe contain much more Push than Pull and expel or Push all loose objects, on their surface, out onto space. That is up to a weight in proportion to the difference between their Push + Pull G.\n\nThe Sun and its Planets contain more Pull than Push.\n\nThe Planet nearest the Sun contains more Pull in relation to its Push than any other Planet.\n\nThe Planet farthest from the Sun contains less Pull in relation to its Push than any other Planet.\n\nIf each Planet had the atmosphere of Earth a man would weigh more on the Planet nearest the Sun and would weigh less on each Planet as he moved out from the Sun.\n\nThe Pull G of Mars may be much greater than Earths Pull G. But if it is, Mars Push is much greater also"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"There are many hundreds of small G units, with the right proportion of P + P G, moving around the Sun in smaller Orbits than the Earth.\n\nSome are probably smaller than a grain of sand and some are large enough that they will one day be found and their Orbit traced.\n\nSome are all Gas, some are all solids and some are solids with gas around them. Some may be composed entirely of metal and coming in contact with the air at high speed would take on the color of that metal when \"Red hot\" or burning the gases would present different colors.\n\nSome travel in Orbits close to that of the Earth.\n\nSome travel in Orbits around the Earth and are locked to it. (like the moon)\n\nThese small G units may travel alone or in groups of different numbers and formations\n\nAny one or any group of these small G units may be"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Pushed or Pulled near enough to the Earth to be seen\n\nThose attached to Earth travel around the Equator and are seen, mostly, in that section.\n\nThe G units that have to much Push in relation to their Pull to attach themselves to a Planet or the Sun are tossed about in space from Planet to Planet and, if seen, may be traveling in any direction and any speed.\n\nThese small G units do not fall to Earth but combine their P + P G with that of Earth and sail away into Space, whence they came.\n\nThe greatest Pull of Earths G is centered about the Equator. This great Pull keeps the Equator facing toward the Sun.\n\nThe greatest Push is at the Poles\n\nThus a man would weigh more at the Equator than at the Poles\n\nA Plane flies faster at its ceiling because the Push G makes up for the loss of Air lift\n\nThe Compass needle points north so a magnet and G must be related."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The Pull G. of the Moon is (8)\nmuch greater than its Push. This\nPull causes higher tides here on\nEarth than the Pull of the Sun. Not\nbecause it is greater than the Pull\nof the Sun, the sun may be many\ntimes greater, but because it is\nmuch greater in proportion to its\nPush. The greatest Pull of the Moon\nis centered on the side facing the\nEarth. This great Pull keeps the\nmoon from turning, except as it\nrotates around Earth. This great\nPull is locked with Earths G Pull at\nEquator and so the moon hangs\nover our Equator. But the great\nPush of Earths G combines with that of\nthe moon & holds them apart.\nAnother moon, or a comet, or any\nsmall G body, coming into the Solar\nsystem from Space; at the right\nangle; and with the right proportion\nof P & P G. Could attach itself to the\nSun or any of its Planets. If it were\nthe Earth it would circle us at"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the Equator due to the greater G\nG pull at that point.\nThe P & P G. of the Sun reaches\nout and holds the farthest Planet\nand that Planets P & P G. reaches\nto the Sun. Thus our Solar systems\nP & P G reaches out to hold its nearest\nneighbors just so close and no closer.\nMost likely no two G units have\never collided unless one first lost its\npower of P & P G.\nAs two magnets are pushed\ntogether they resist each other\nwith a twisting force. This may\nbe the answer to the rotation of\nthe Earth on its axis. The Great\nPull at Equator, with more Push at\npoles may be answer to Seasons.\nCreatures with the right\norgans can live in their own\nenvironment. Thus they could be\nmade to live on any Planet or\neven on any moon. This does\nnot mean that the same\ncreatures could live here\nin our air."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Any ship with a center of (10)\nGravity control could travel through\nany space at almost limitless\nspeed. It could also stand still. An\noccupant would have no sense of\nspeed or sudden change of direction.\nJust as Earth is surrounded by\nair, a G ship would have a layer\nof the same kind of gas as the\nPlanet or Star where it was made.\nThis would act as a buffer\nand keep the ship cool.\nBut I doubt if we have any\nsuch visitor from Space.\nI think the visitors seen\nare the small G units circling the\nEarth & Sun. and not one of them\nwill ever bring harm to our people.\nI wonder if any of the\nflying Saucers are man made\nG units. We have many Scientists\nworking in the Atomic field and\nalso in other fields with almost\nlimitless possibilities. Possibly\nsome type of balloon has been"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"bombarded with a cyclotron. (11)\nIf it has risen faster and higher\nand if it flies much longer. Then\nthese may be the first G units\nmade by man.\nI simply wish to convey\nthe idea that every Planet or\ngrain & sand containing a center\nof Gravity sends out a repelling\nforce as well as a pulling force.\nThese forces hold the Earth & Sun,\n\"Locked\", so the Earth may be\npulled many miles closer to the Sun\none day and Pushed many miles\naway the next, but can get only\nso close & only so far away.\nThus all G units are not only\nsafe from colliding with each\nother but are mostly locked in\ndefinite Orbits.\nSince this idea (or theory)\nfits in and explains many\nof the flying Saucers seen\nhere in the States I am"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"writing you because I feel (12)\nthat the present course of\nevents makes this idea\nworth investigating and I\nknow you will deliver it\nto the right person or group.\nWith the highest esteem\nfor you and your department\nI thank you for your very\nkind service.\n\nRoy Elwell.\nRoadstown,\nN.J."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Mr. A. H. Belmont\nFROM : C. E. Hennrich\nSUBJECT: STRANGE WHITE OBJECT SEEN OVER MONTANA ON SEPTEMBER 19, 1952\n\nDATE: September 20, 1952\n\nI talked with ASAC Plaxico of Butte on September 20, re the attached news releases indicating that the FBI was investigating a strange white object which reportedly streaked across the sky of Montana for about one hundred miles. Mr. Plaxico stated that while a report of this object had been received at the Butte Office, that no investigation was conducted regarding the matter and that none was contemplated.\n\nACTION:\n\nFor your information.\n\nAttachment\n\nCEH:meh\n\nNot attached\nValuable/ Ed"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Mr. A. H. Belmont\n\nFROM : C. E. Hennrich\n\nSUBJECT: STRANGE WHITE OBJECT SEEN OVER MONTANA ON SEPTEMBER 19, 1952\n\nI talked with ASAC Plaxico of Butte on September 20, re the attached news releases indicating that the FBI was investigating a strange white object which reportedly streaked across the sky of Montana for about one hundred miles. Mr. Plaxico stated that while a report of this object had been received at the Butte Office, that no investigation was conducted regarding the matter and that none was contemplated.\n\nACTION:\n\nFor your information.\n\nAttachment\n\nCEH:meh\n\nRECEIVED - NICHOLS\nSEP 22 1952 1:16 PM\nF.B.I.\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED - LADD\nSEP 20 3:47 PM 1952\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nSEP 22 10 28 AM '52\nRECEIVED-TOLSON\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nOCT 7 11 09 AM '52\nRECD ESPIONAGE\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nDATE: 10/3/52\n\nFROM : SAC, NEWARK (100-36998)\n\nSUBJECT: RE: SPECIAL INQUIRY\nUNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS;\nInspector General, USAF\n2nd District Office of Special Investigations\n67 Broad Street\nNew York 4, New York\n\nFlying Discs\n\nFor the information of the Bureau, on August 27, 1952, the Newark division received a request from the Inspector General, United States Air Force, 2nd District Office of Special Investigations, 67 Broad Street, New York 4, New York, that the background of a civilian photographer, JOHN R. RILEY, 571 Main Street, Paterson, N. J., and of GEORGE J. STOCK, 221 Brooks Avenue, Passaic, N. J., be investigated in an attempt to determine their reliability in view of the fact that they had allegedly observed and photographed an unidentified aerial object on July 31, 1952.\n\nThe appropriate credit and criminal checks were made in this matter as well as discreet neighborhood inquiries as to both individuals,and no information was received that either individual had criminal records or that they were known in the past to have perpetrated any kind of fraud.\n\nIt was ascertained that STOCK did photograph an allegedly unidentified aerial object and that RILEY witnessed the incident and developed and printed the exposed film which was subsequently forwarded to the 5th OSI District, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio by Mr. CHARLES GREGG, staff writer, \"The Herald News, Passaic, N. J.\"\n\nThe letter further requested that the photographer and the witness be questioned as to the circumstances under which the photographs were taken and that an attempt be made to locate other sources in the area that might determine the authenticity of the photos. No investigation of this type was made by the Newark division.\n\nIn accordance with SAC letter #83, Series 1952 dated 8/29/52, the results of the credit and criminal checks and the neighborhood investigations were forwarded to the local OSI Office, New York City and no further investigations have been made by this office.\n\nLWR:IMH\nRECORDED-12\nINDEXED-12\nAPPROPRIATE AGENCIES AND FIELD OFFICES ADVISED BY ROUTING SLIP(S) OF 10/10/52 DATE 9/11/77\nSECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL declassified\n67 OCT 13 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nDATE: 10/3/52\n\nFROM : SAC, Newark (100-36998)\n\nSUBJECT: RE: SPECIAL INQUIRY\nUNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS;\nInspector General, USAF\n2nd District Office of Special Investigations\n67 Broad Street\nNew York 4, New York\n\nFor the information of the Bureau, on August 27, 1952, the Newark division received a request from the Inspector General, United States Air Force, 2nd District Office of Special Investigations, 67 Broad Street, New York 4, New York, that the background of a civilian photographer, JOHN R. RILEY, 571 Main Street, Paterson, N. J., and of GEORGE J. STOCK, 221 Brooks Avenue, Passaic, N. J., be investigated in an attempt to determine their reliability in view of the fact that they had allegedly observed and photographed an unidentified aerial object on July 31, 1952.\n\nThe appropriate credit and criminal checks were made in this matter as well as discreet neighborhood inquiries as to both individuals,and no information was received that either individual had criminal records or that they were known in the past to have perpetrated any kind of fraud.\n\nIt was ascertained that STOCK did photograph an allegedly unidentified aerial object and that RILEY witnessed the incident and developed and printed the exposed film which was subsequently forwarded to the 5th OSI District, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio by Mr. CHARLES GREGG, staff writer, \"The Herald News, Passaic, N. J.\"\n\nThe letter further requested that the photographer and the witness be questioned as to the circumstances under which the photographs were taken and that an attempt be made to locate other sources in the area that might determine the authenticity of the photos. No investigation of this type was made by the Newark division.\n\nIn accordance with SAC letter #83, Series 1952 dated 8/29/52, the results of the credit and criminal checks and the neighborhood investigations were forwarded to the local OSI Office, New York City and no further investigations have been made by this office.\n\nRECEIVED\nOCT 10 11 42 AM '52\nF B I\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nOCT 13 9 11 AM '52\nRECD ESPIONAGE\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FRED. J. EEKHOUT LL.D.\n49, STADHOUDERSLAAN\nTHE HAGUE\nTHE NETHERLANDS\n\nTHE HAGUE, October 6th\n\nDepartment of Justice\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nPennsylvania Avenue\nWASHINGTON D.C.\n\nIn the care of Mr Bailey\nRm 1246\n\nDear Mr Bailey,\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nExcuse me please if I misspelled your name, but I never saw it in writing.\nOn May 5th at 2.15 P.M. of this year I paid you a visit in the F.B.I.offices, where I told you details on a certain subject you will surely remember. At the end of the conversation I promissed you not to talk about it until I had received word from you whether or not the proper authorities were interested. It was taken for granted that a few months might elapse before the answer could be given.\nFive months have passed by since then, and as the subject has now become active in Europe, I am really anxious to go ahead with it, I have ofcourse tried to check the theory on each aspect and while doing so I found various complementary as well as fundamental details.\nI have now reached the point however where I would like to discuss the whole with an expert and I would therefor certainly appreciate to know whether I have to consider our agreement on complete silence as still being valid and necessary or not\nIt might be that you are too busy to be able to write to me or that the authorities are not interested. As it is not my intention to bother you too much with it, I will take it that there is no longer any necessity for silence on my part if I do not receive any information to the contrary by the end of this month.\nBy this proposition I do not intend to force an issue but I would like to discuss a subject like this with scientists friends of mine, which I cannot do as long as I am bound by my promise to you.\nWith very kind regards,\n\nYours Truly\n\nF.J. Eekhout\n\nRECORDED - 76\nINDEXED - 76\n48-83894 319\nOCT 14 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEXED - 76\nJune 1952\n\nDepartment of Justice\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nPennsylvania Avenue\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\nIn the case of Mr Bailey\nFile 12346\n\nDear Mr Bailey,\n\nAllow me to please if I misspelled your name, but\nI never saw it in writing.\nOn May 5th at 2.15 p.m. of this year I paid you\na visit in the F.B.I. offices, where I told you details on\nthe conversation I mentioned you will surely remember. At the end of\nall I had received word from you whether or not the proper\nauthorities were interested. It was taken for granted that\na few months might elapse before the answer would be given,\nfive months have passed by since then, and as\nthe subject has now become active in Europe, I am really\nexplore to go ahead with it. I have otherwise tried to\nseek the theory on such a subject and while doing so I\nfound various complementary as well as fundamental details.\nI have now reached the point where I would like to discuss the whole with an expert and I\nwould therefore certainly appreciate to know whether I have\nbeing valid and necessary or not\nIt might be that you are too busy to be able to\nwrite to me or that the authorities are not interested, as\nit is not my intention to bother you too much with it. I\nwill take it that there is no longer any necessity for\nsilence on my part if I do not receive any information to\nthe contrary by the end of this month. I would like to force an\nsolution but I do not want to disregard the friends of mine, who cannot be as long as I\nbound by my promise to you.\nwith very kind regards."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"October 10, 1952\n\nAIR MAIL\n\nMr. Fred J. Eekhout\n49 Stadhouderslaan\nThe Hague\nThe Netherlands\n\nDear Mr. Eekhout:\n\nYour letter dated October 6, 1952, has been\nreceived.\n\nYou will perhaps recall being advised at the\ntime of your visit to this Bureau that the matter discussed\nwas not within the jurisdiction of the FBI. However, in\nview of your imminent departure from Washington the information\nwas accepted for transmittal to the appropriate\nagency, which was to contact you if interested.\n\nFull details were made available at that time to\nthe Department of the Air Force for evaluation and consideration.\nIn the absence of some arrangement between you and\nthe Air Force, your further use of the pertinent facts is,\nof course, a matter for your own determination.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNOTE ON YELLOW:\nBulet to OSI, Air Force, dated 5-7-52 transmitted data\nfurnished by Eekhout to the Bureau 5-5-52 concerning his ideas\nas to plans for a workable flying disc. Eekhout was informed\nthat further contact with him, if any, would come from the\ninterested Government agency rather than the Bureau. No mention\nwas made of his keeping the facts secret pending a reply from\nthe Bureau or the Air Force. (62-83894-273)\n\nVHB:rdm"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\n30 September 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: MR. COX\n\nSUBJECT: Comments on Article in The NEW YORKER\n\n1. A call was made to the Air Technical Intelligence Center,\n1330 this date, (Captain Ruppelt) regarding the attached article.\n\n2. ATIC did not in any way indicate to Mr. Lang that the\nFBI has an interest in flying saucers. Furthermore, Captain\nRuppelt stated that the FBI to his knowledge has never been called\nupon to furnish reports on flying saucers. ATIC is under the\nimpression that Mr. Lang made the story up or picked it up from\na magazine or newspaper article sometime back that definitely\nwas not associated with their organization.\n\n3. ATIC suggests that you check further with Mr. Al Chop,\nOffice of Public Information, and perhaps he can supply you with\nthe information you have requested.\n\n1 Incl:\nArticle fr NEW YORKER,\ndtd Sept 6, 1952\n\nC. M. YOUNG\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Policy & Management Group\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nUNRECORDED COPY FILED IN 94-3-4-230-1\n\nINDEXED - 50\nRECORDED - 50\n62-83894-320"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"21 September 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: MR. COX\n\nSUBJECT: Comments on Article in The NEW YORKER\n\n1. A call was made to the Air Technical Intelligence Center,\n1330 this date, (Captain Ruppelt) regarding the attached article.\n\n2. ATIC did not in any way indicate to Mr. Lang that the\nFBI has an interest in flying saucers. Furthermore, Captain\nRuppelt stated that the FBI to his knowledge has never been called\nupon to furnish reports on flying saucers. ATIC is under the\nimpression that Mr. Lang made the story up or picked it up from\na magazine or newspaper article sometime back that definitely\nwas not associated with their organization.\n\n3. ATIC suggests that you check further with Mr. Al Chop, Office of Public Information, and perhaps he can supply you with the information you have requested.\n\n1 Incl:\nArticle fr NEW YORKER,\ndtd Sept 6, 1952\n\nC. M. YOUNG\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Policy & Management Group\nDirectorate of Intelligence"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE\nOFFICE OF PUBLIC INFORMATION\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nRec'd from Mr\nAlbert Chop,\nOffice of Public Info.,\nOSD. - 10/6/52\nUmt\n\nThe following information concerning Air Force investigations of unusual\naerial phenomena is submitted in answer to your request.\n\nIn the Fall of 1947 the United States Air Force took official notice of\nreports of so-called \"flying saucers\" because the reports from the public\nindicated that the problem might be related to the Air Force responsibility for\nthe air defense of the United States.\n\nOn December 30, 1947 the Air Force directed its Air Materiel Command, at\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, to set up a project to collect and\nevaluate all available facts concerning \"flying saucer\" sightings.\n\nTo perform this task the Air Materiel Command obtained the services of\ncivilian and military astronomers, psychologists, electronic specialists,\nmeteorologists, aeronautical engineers, and physicists.\n\nOn December 27, 1949, after 375 reported sightings had been investigated, the\nAir Force, with the concurrence of the Army and the Navy, announced the findings\nof the \"flying saucer\" project.\n\nThe evidence at that time indicated that the majority of the reports of\nunidentified flying objects could be accounted for as misinterpretations of\nvarious conventional objects, a mild form of hysteria, meteorological phenomena,\nlight aberrations, or hoaxes.\n\nThere remained, however, a number of unexplained sightings, and the Air\nForce has continued its investigations inasmuch as it is an Air Force responsi-\nbility to identify and analyze aerial phenomena that could possibly be a menace\nto the United States.\n\nSubsequent to December 1949, these investigations have been conducted as\na normal intelligence function, rather than a special project, by the Air\nTechnical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\n\n62-83894-320\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"To date, the Air Force has undertaken to investigate and analyze about\n1500 reports dealing with these phenomena. As before, most of the reports were\nidentified and disposed of as friendly aircraft erroneously reported, known\nelectronic and meteorological phenomena, light aberrations, hoaxes, and other\nknown natural occurrences or man-made objects.\n\nThe unexplained reports, however, which are in the order of 20 percent of\nthe total, cannot be definitely associated with these familiar things.\n\nDifficulty in Evaluating Reports\n\nThe difficulty in disposing of these unexplained reports is based largely\nupon the insufficiency of accurate basic data such as size, shape, composition\nand flight characteristics (speed, acceleration, altitude, exact maneuver pattern,\netc.) of the objects.\n\nAlthough some instruments which are useful in obtaining more accurate data\nof this type have been available, the reports based on sightings with these\ninstruments have been very infrequent and comprise an extremely small percentage\nof the total. Moreover, even these reports have not included much of the\ninformation required.\n\nBecause of the inadequacy of this basic data, the Air Force has in the past\ndevoted its efforts primarily to determining whether these unexplained sightings\nindicated the existence of a menace to the United States. Initially it was\nbelieved that some pattern might evolve from the study of a large volume of\nreports. To date, no pattern has materialized to reveal anything whatsoever\nwhich can be interpreted as indicative of purpose or consistency or which can be\nconstrued as a menace to the United States. Nonetheless, since these unexplained\nsightings persist, the Air Force will continue its investigations, giving the\nproblem adequate but not frantic attention.\n\nIt is now felt, however, that reports from people whose training and\nexperience in observing aerial objects qualify them to obtain essential data\nare the only ones likely to produce material suitable for systematic analysis.\nThe Air Force is planning to provide additional tools to help these observers\nobtain the basic data it needs.\n\nReports of similar phenomena go back to Biblical times. There have been\nflurries of them in various centuries. The current series of sightings began\ngenerally in 1946.\n\nThere are many reasons why the volume of these reports has increased\nmaterially during the past few years. Aerial activity originated by man has\nincreased, and people today have a greater curiosity about this activity than\nbefore. Also, our present efficient communication facilities and news media\nprovide an incentive for reporting unusual observations, for publicizing them\nand for recording them. However, the ability to measure these phenomena does\nnot seem to have advanced in step with opportunities for observing them. The\nAir Force believes that most of these phenomena will gradually be understood\nas more is known about occurrences in the upper atmosphere.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Source of Reports\n\nThe majority of reports of aerial phenomena have come from civilians. About\n8 percent come from civil airlines pilots, while approximately 25 percent are\nreported by military personnel. Reports have been received also from highly\nqualified scientists. Although primary significance is attached to reports from\nqualified observers, there is no intention to discredit untrained observers.\n\nRadar Sightings\n\nThe Air Force has received many reports of unusual images on radar scopes.\nIt is fairly well established that some of these images are ground objects\nreflected from a layer of warm air above the earth (a temperature inversion).\n\nTemperature inversion reflections can give a return on a radar scope that\nis as sharp as that received from an aircraft. Speed ranges of these returns\nare reportedly from zero to fantastic speeds. The \"objects\" also appear to move\nin all directions.\n\nSuch radar sightings have resulted in hundreds of fruitless intercept\nefforts.\n\nOne scientific theory holds that light can be similarly reflected from a\nlayer of warm air above the earth and, if proven to be correct, this could\naccount for some visual sightings.\n\nBearing out the theory of temperature inversion reflection is an incident\nwhich occurred in January 1951 near Oakridge, Tennessee. Two Air Force aircraft\nattempted to intercept an unidentified \"object\" and actually established a radar\n\"lock\" on the object. Their altitude at the time was 7,000 feet. The unidentified\nobject, according to their radar, appeared to be at an elevation of ten to 25\ndegrees. Three passes were made in an attempt to close on the object. In each\ninstance the pilots reported that their radar led them first upward and then\ndown toward a specific point on the ground.\n\nIonized clouds are believed to be the cause of some unidentified radar\nreturns. Thunderstorm activity is identifiable by radar, and radar is used for\nthe purpose of avoiding thunderstorms. In addition, radar has picked up many\nobjects first reported as \"unidentified phenomena\" which were later identified\nas aircraft, birds, balloons, ice formations in the air, or other known aerial\nobjects or manifestations.\n\nPolicy Regarding Attempted Interception\n\nNo orders have been issued by the Air Defense Command to its fighter units\nto fire on unidentified aerial phenomena. The Air Defense Command is charged\nwith air defense of the United States, and its mission is to attack anything\nairborne which is known or appears to be hostile. This should not be interpreted\nto mean that our pilots will fire haphazardly on anything that flies.\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Attempts at interception are not made every time that unidentified images\nappear briefly on an Air Force radar scope. Current Air Force interceptors are\nshort-range, short-duration, high-speed aircraft and can be employed most\neffectively when it is possible to track a target by visual or radar means\nso that its position in the air at some future time may be predicted with a\nreasonable degree of accuracy.\n\nMethods of Evaluating\n\nThe first step in evaluating sightings of unusual aerial phenomena is to\ncollect all available data and check it against known airborne objects such as\nballoons, aircraft, missiles, meteors, and weather phenomena. If still unexplained,\nreports from reliable sources, with sufficient details, are turned over to\nspecialists in various scientific fields for further analysis.\n\nFuture Plans for Evaluating\n\nAs stated earlier, there is a need for better reports from trained observers\nusing adequate equipment. The Air Force intends to implement its present study\nwith instruments wherever possible.\n\nThe recent development of special photographic equipment may make it possible\nto gather data hitherto unobtainable through ordinary photographic methods. This\nequipment consists of a diffraction grating camera which separates light into its\ncomponent parts (spectrum) and registers them on film. The principle involved is\nthat used by astronomers in determining the composition of the stars. In this\nmanner Air Force scientists may be able to determine the characteristics of the\nphenomena and subsequently identify the source.\n\nAnother proposal involves the use of a continuously operating Schmidt\ntelescope equipped with a camera. This telescope has a wide aperture lens and\nis capable of covering a cone of 150 degrees or nearly the whole sky from horizon\nto horizon. This equipment will make it possible to get on a series of photo-\ngraphic plates a complete record of what happens in the sky at night.\n\nWhat \"Saucers\" Are Not\n\nThe Air Force has stated in the past, and reaffirms at the present time, that\nthese unidentified aerial phenomena are not a secret weapon, missile or aircraft,\ndeveloped by the United States. None of the three military departments nor any\nother agency in the government is conducting experiments, classified or otherwise,\nwith flying objects which could be a basis for the reported phenomena. As far as\nis known there is nothing in them that is associated with material or vehicles\nthat are directed against the United States, from another country or from other\nplanets.\n\nYour interest in this matter is greatly appreciated. Please call upon us if\nwe may be of further service.\n\nSincerely yours,"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":75,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":76,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":77,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"had behaved like a normal aircraft\nin the way it disapp[illegible] the line\nof sight.\n Here, the experts professed to hope,\nwas something Project Saucer could get\nits teeth into. The whole flying-saucer\nmystery might be explained. The first\nstep was to determine whether the ob-\nject was an aircraft that had been par-\ntially obscured by a cloud or whose\nappearance had been distorted by a rain-\nstorm. Two hundred and twenty-five\ncivilian and military flight schedules\nwere analyzed, and it was found that\none other plane, an Air Force C-47,\nhad been near the Eastern airliner at\nthe time the mysterious object was\nsighted. Conjecture about the C-47\nbegan to appear irrelevant, however,\nwhen the Macon ground crews agreed\nwith Chiles and Whitted that the thing\nthey had seen was going much faster\nthan two hundred miles an hour, and\nso, unless it dawdled around some-\nwhere, wouldn't have taken anything\nlike an hour to get from Macon to\nMontgomery.\n Astronomers went to work on the\nproblem. Dr. Hynek considered the\npossibility that a brilliant, slow-moving\nmeteor might be the explanation. Vari-\nous bits of the apparition's description\nencouraged this notion—\"orange-red\nflame,\" \"cigar-shaped,\" \"a tremendous\nburst of flame.\" Unfortunately, the\nflight schedules of meteors are not avail-\nable, and Dr. Hynek had no means of\ntesting his hypothesis. \"It will have to\nbe left to the psychologists to tell us\nwhether the immediate trail of a bright\nmeteor could produce the subjective im-\npression of a ship with lighted win-\ndows,\" he wrote in a report on his\nfindings. The psychologists expressed\nthe opinion that a meteor could indeed\nbe mistaken for a space ship. Dr. Fitts,\nthe Ohio State psychologist, observed\nthat both Chiles and Whitted were\nhuman and therefore as likely to be\nvictims of mass suggestibility as any-\none else. Dr. Fitts told me during a\ntalk I had with him that psychologists\nare used to the fact that even people of\nhigh mental calibre often make mis-\ntakes about what they see. \"Also, I\nwould like to make the point that pilots\nare trained to instruments,\" he said.\n\"They grow very dependent on those\ninstruments, and I don't know whether\n[illegible]re necessarily superior observers\n[illegible]out them. I do know that during\nthe war, when I was in the Air Force,\npilots frequently gave some pretty odd\nreports of what they'd seen while fly-\ning their missions.\" Chiles and Whitted\nreadily agreed that their report might\n\nIncomp\nNye-Wait\nAn utterly new carpet-\ncreating an unusual textu\nExtremely smart . . . for one-\nChosen by leading dec\nin carpet fashion and luxur\nAnd, of course, Nye-Wait N\nadvantages of being mothpro\nfor lasting fit to withstand\nwill outwear conventi\nWrite Nye-Wait for the\nNye-W\n295 Fifth\nNew Yor\nChicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, D\n*Illustrated is NYE-WAIT'S COR\nvisible depth, translucent color and\n\npage 69, 70"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":79,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":".many saucers .en I'm\nholding one in my ow[REDACTED] he said.\nThe rancher forwar[REDACTED] find to\nWright Field, where it was identified as\na remnant of one of the incendiary bal-\nloons the hopeful Japanese dispatched\nacross the Pacific during the war in an\neffort to start forest fires.\n Even pictures taken of supposed sau-\ncers failed to impress the experts. There\nwas the case of a man in Phoenix,\nArizona, who spotted a flat gray ob-\nject spiralling up and down in the sky\nat a speed that he estimated at between\nfour and five hundred miles an hour.\nHe snapped two pictures of it with his\nBrownie. Prints were rushed to Project\nSaucer, and Dr. Irving Langmuir, the\nphysicist and a Nobel Prize winner, was\nasked to study them. The distinguished\nscientist learned that a thunderstorm\nhad occurred just before the picture-\ntaking, and concluded that he was look-\ning at a couple of rather poor shots\nof a piece of paper being buffeted by\nthe wind.\n\nAS time went on and the skies, appar-\n ently, continued to teem with fly-\ning saucers, the generals in the Penta-\ngon, warming to their task, decided to\nenlarge the scope of the investigation.\nCommanders of all Air Force installa-\ntions in the country were ordered to\nassign Intelligence officers to look into\nsightings reported in their areas. The\nofficers were instructed to solicit the as-\nsistance of municipal police officials, who\nmight be familiar with the personalities\nof the saucer observers. The F.B.I. was\nalso called upon for assistance, and as-\nsigned agents to help interview people\nwho reported that they had seen discs.\nThe agents used a standard question-\nnaire, drawn up by Air Force Intelli-\ngence, which called for such informa-\ntion as the saucer's size, speed, color,\nand maneuvers. The information was\nusually transmitted to Wright Field,\nbut some stories were so obviously\nfalse and some \"evidence\" so obvious-\nly trifling that the F.B.I. men didn't\neven bother to fill out the question-\nnaire. In Seattle, for instance, an\nalarmed woman called the police to in-\nform them that a flaming disc had land-\ned on her roof. The object turned out\nto be a hollow, drum-shaped affair\nmade of plywood, with \"USSR\" crude-\nly daubed on it in paint. An F.B.I. man\nfound that a turpentine-soaked cloth\nhad caused the flame. A practical joke,\nhe decided. A farmer near Danforth,\nIllinois, reported that a saucer had\ncrash-landed in one of his fields and\nburned up a patch of weeds. The F.B.I.\n\npage 73, 74"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"on the retina and moving as the eye\nmoves.\n Other elements of the [illegible] problem\nwere studied by such men as Dr. George\nValley, a nuclear physicist at the Massa-\nchusetts Institute of Technology; staff\nmembers of the research firm of Rand\nCorporation; an assortment of physicists\nand aerodynamicists who specialize in\nthe study of the stratosphere and the\nspace beyond it; and the electronics ex-\nperts attached to the Cambridge Field\nStation. These men were all searching\nfor physical rather than psychological\nexplanations, and some fairly strange\ntheories occurred to them—the possibil-\nity that extraterrestrial animals were\nflying into our atmosphere, for example.\n(No data turned up to support that ar-\nresting idea.) The theory that the sau-\ncers were hostile aircraft was carefully\nstudied and rejected. \"The perform-\nances of these saucers not only surpass\nthe development of present science but\nthe development of present fiction-sci-\nence writers,\" one scientist noted. The\nspecialists also considered and rejected\nthe concept of discs capable of riding the\nair on beams or rays of some kind. They\neven speculated on whether the anti-\ngravity shield that H. G. Wells thought\nup for his novel \"The First Men in the\nMoon\" would work; it wouldn't, they\ndecided. The supposition that interplan-\netary craft were whizzing in at us was\nalso discredited, despite its popularity\nwith laymen. Space ships, the scientists\nthought, would have to be so large and\nunwieldy that they couldn't possibly zig-\nzag as frivolously as the reported saucers\ndid. Besides, a space ship, regardless of its\nsize, could not, in the opinion of these\nmen, carry sufficient fuel to remain for\nany length of time in the earth's dense\natmosphere. The scientists noted, too,\nthat the supposed spacemen showed a re-\nmarkable lack of interest in the rest of\nthe world, being, it would seem, almost\nunanimous in their desire to see America\nfirst. \"The small area covered by the\ndisc barrage points strongly to the belief\nthat the flying objects are of earthly\norigin, be they physical or psycholog-\nical,\" one of the scientists reported.\n From the report turned in by the\nastronomers, I learned that they, in ad-\ndition to seining out comets, meteors,\nbolides, and achondrites from the\nstream of objects people were seeing in\nthe skies, had also thoughtfully con-\nsidered our planetary neighbors. The\nold question of the possibility of life on\nMars took on a new urgency, and a new\ncorollary: If there are living creatures\non Mars, would they be capable of\nbuilding space ships? The astronomers\n\nFOR STORE NEAR\nWRITE HAYMAKERS BY AVON, C\n47 WEST 34TH ST., NEW YO\nOR SEND CHECK OR MONEY ORDER DIRECTLY T\n\npage 75, 76"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"that—that while the information they\ngive me may be made [illegible] their\nnames never will be.\" In most cases,\nCaptain Ruppelt said, investigation\nhas shown that the people he has inter-\nviewed had been deceived by things\nthat have been deceiving others all\nalong—balloons, planes, meteors, and\nso on—but a nettling residue of around\ntwenty per cent of the cases have wound\nup in that exasperating old pigeonhole\nlabelled \"Unidentified.\" Nothing, for\nexample, could be found to account\nfor the \"something silvery directly\noverhead\" reported by a mystified Civil\nAeronautics Administration inspector at\nTerre Haute. A commercial pilot who,\nflying near Battle Creek, Michigan,\nspotted \"an oval-shaped silver object\"\nahead of his ship, posed a similarly un-\nsolved problem, as did a highly respected\nnaval officer, stationed at the dirigible\nbase at Lakehurst, New Jersey, who re-\nported that he had stared through his\nbinoculars at a brilliant image making\nturns that were far too tight for any\nknown aircraft.\n Twenty-five per cent of the observ-\ners interrogated by the Aerial Phenom-\nena Officer in the last two and a half\nyears have been military pilots. Eight\nper cent have been commercial pilots,\nsome with as much as twenty years' ex-\nperience in the air, and at one stage in\nthe current phase of the investigation,\neven a few physicists at Los Alamos,\nNew Mexico, men who make a fetish\nof objectivity, were interviewed after\nthey reported having seen puzzling\nlights hovering above their atomic-\nenergy laboratories. \"If you took\nany one of these incidents by itself,\nit might not mean much,\" Captain\nRuppelt said. \"But in view of the\nnumber and calibre of the informants,\nyou couldn't help taking their claims\nseriously.\"\n In February, 1951, Dr. Urner\nLiddel, a nuclear physicist attached to\nthe Office of Naval Research, at Wash-\nington, D.C., declared that at last,\nthanks to the lifting of certain security\nrestrictions, he could provide the solution\nto the mystery of the flying saucers:\nThey were \"skyhooks,\" he said—bal-\nloons a hundred feet in diameter, which\nthe Navy had secretly been sending up\nfor the past four years in order to\nstudy cosmic rays. Dr. Liddel's asser-\ntion was immediately disputed by Dr.\nAnthony O. Mirarchi, who, as former\nhead of the Air Force's Atmospheric\nComposition Bureau, had assisted in the\ndiagnosis of Project Saucer reports. Dr.\nMirarchi said he thought the saucers\nmight be missiles from some foreign\n\nHAVE YOU GRASPED\nTHE Southwick IDEA?\n\nHere is tailoring so completely flexib\nnatural that the comfort contrast is re\nmarkable. Once you experience the blissf\nand casual distinction of SUPERFLEX co\ntion, you'll never go back to over-stuffed\nstyled clothes. Suits from $70. Sports\nfrom $55.\n\nAt these and oth\nPAUL STUART, INC.\nNew York City\nWARNER & COMPANY\nBaltimore, Md.\nSILVERSTONE'S\nMilwaukee, Wis.\nARTHUR L.\nBoston\nJOHN WANAMAK\nPhiladel\nROBERT K\nSan Franc\nFor stores in oth\nGRIECO BROS., Inc., 200 Fift\n\nHIGHLIGHTS IN 14K GOLD\nPresent her with a smart acce\nthe school year right and acc\nRing $40. 17J Movado w\n(Available in stainle\nPoodle charm $53.50\nCut-out initials (Allow one wee\nShown Actual Size • Fe\nMail and Phone Orders Filled\nBLACK, STARR\nFIFTH AVENUE AT 48TH STRE\nEAST ORANGE MANHASS\n\npage 77, 78"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":83,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":84,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"7-26a\n\nInvoice of Contents from\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nWASHINGTON, D. C.\n\nDate October 6, 1952 Case References INVESTIGATION OF POSSIBLE\nDirectorate of Special Invest. UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nConsigned to The Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force, The Pentagon\nWashington, D. C.\nAtt: Mr. Gilbert R. Levy\nList of Contents\nPC-33951DE\n\nMr. Harbo, 7625\nQ1 through Q6 Mr. Conrad, 7142\nMr. Downing, 6228 IB\nK1 through K3 497363 Mr. Bowles, 7601\nMr. Parsons, 7121\n\nMAILED 4\nOCT 23 1952\nCOMM-FBI\n\nREGISTERED MAIL\n\n68 MAR 3 1953\n\n62-83894-\n\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Mail Room, place date of shipment and registry number; Shipping Room, show date of shipment and initial this invoice; then return it to person whose name is checked in column at right. After this checked name has been initialed, invoice should be placed in administrative file."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: October 28, 1952\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nRECORDED - 143 62-83894-321\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nThere are attached for your information\na copy of a self-explanatory letter dated October 21,\n1952, and the enclosures thereto, received by this\nBureau from Mr. Marvel W. Reece.\n\nMr. Reece has been advised that his letter\nhas been referred to your Department. No further action\nis being taken in this matter by this Bureau.\n\nAttachment\n\nEHM:cem:mes\n\nMAILED 16 OCT 29 1952 COMM-FBI\n\n70 NOV5 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: October 28, 1952\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nRECORDED - 143\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nThere are attached for your information\na copy of a self-explanatory letter dated October 21,\n1952, and the enclosures thereto, received by this\nBureau from Mr. Marvel W. Reece.\n\nMr. Reece has been advised that his letter\nhas been referred to your Department. No further action\nis being taken in this matter by this Bureau.\n\nAttachment\n\nEHM:cem:mes\n\nMAILED 16 OCT 29 1952 COMM-FBI\n\nOCT 29 11 55 AM '52 FBI RECEIVE - MAIL ROOM\n\n70 NOV5 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Hotel Potomac\nCOCKTAIL LOUNGE DINING ROOM CAFETERIA STYLE\nWASHINGTON D.C.\n18TH AND H.ST. N.W\nPHONE NA 9216\n21-10-52\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nDear Sirs,\n\nOn Sunday, 5 october, my wife and I were walking towards the Smithsonian Institute when this picture was taken. Neither of us noticed anything unusual at the time, and I think that if the \"spot\" on the negative and picture, would be a \"thing\" of reality, we would certainly have noticed it.\n\n2 If we would never have heard anything about \"things\" and \"objects\", we wouldnt send this to you, beyond a doubt. But, what looks like a spot, could be something different. Better safe than sorry.\n\nRECORDED - 47\nINDEXED - 47\n\n162-83894-321\n\nOCT 23 1952\n\nRespectfully yours,\n\nMarvel W. Reece\n\nNARVEL W. REECE\n\nFrom to O.S.I. - with ends\nLet to Mr. Narvel Reece\n10-29-52 CNM\n\nEHM Mossburg"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MARVEL W. REECE 1578 VAN ZANDT ROAD CINCINNATI, 31 OHIO.\n\nP.S. If possible, and/or convenient, please return negative or picture, or acknowledge receipt of some.\n\nOCT 24 5 06 PM '52 RECEIVED FBI INTERNAL SECURITY SN NOV 3 5 03 PM '52"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: MR. A. H. BELMONT\nFROM: V. P. KEAY\nDATE: October 8, 1952\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nReference is made to an article which appeared in \"The New Yorker\" dated September 6, 1952, which is attached. This article which was written by Daniel Lang contained inaccurate information regarding FBI investigations, indicating that the FBI conducts certain inquiries regarding flying saucers at the request of the Air Force. It is pointed out here that, although the Bureau did at one time conduct some investigations regarding flying saucers, a present agreement has been set up with the Air Force whereby the Air Force conducts all investigations pertaining to flying saucers and the Bureau, upon receiving complaints of this nature, merely turns the complaints over to the Office of Special Investigations (OSI), which in turn transmits the information to Air Intelligence. Air Intelligence has set up the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, for the purpose of coordinating and handling of research pertaining to flying saucers.\n\nInquiry was conducted in order to determine, if possible, the source for the information appearing in the attached article regarding FBI investigations. Lieutenant Colonel L. L. Free in charge of the Espionage Branch, Counter-Intelligence Division, Office of Special Investigations, advised that no one in OSI has been contacted by Lang, and he suggested direct contact by the Bureau Representative with Air Intelligence to determine if Lang had been in touch with anyone in that organization in order to gather information for his article.\n\nColonel C. M. Young, Executive Officer to Major General John A. Samford, Director of Air Intelligence, advised that Lang has not contacted General Samford's office. Colonel Young also telephonically contacted Captain Ruppelt of the Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, on September 30, 1952. Captain Ruppelt advised Colonel Young that they have never indicated in any way to Mr. Lang that the FBI has an interest in flying saucers. Captain Ruppelt stated that the FBI to his knowledge has never been called upon to furnish reports on flying saucers. Ruppelt is under the impression that Mr. Lang made the story up or picked it up from some magazine or newspaper article sometime back. Both Colonel Young and Captain Ruppelt are thoroughly familiar with Bureau policy pertaining to flying saucers.\n\nAttachments (2)\n\nRECORDED - 116\nINDEXED - 116\n\n62-83894-322\n\nOCT 14 1952\n\nEX-60\n\n23\n\nMAILED OCT 29 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nDATE: October 8, 1952\n\nReference is made to an article which appeared in\nthe New Yorker dated September 6, 1952, which is attached.\nThis article which was written by Daniel Lang contained\ninaccurate information regarding FBI investigations, indi-\ncating that the FBI conducts certain inquiries regarding\nflying saucers at the request of the Air Force. It is\npointed out here that, although the Bureau did at one time\nconduct some investigations regarding flying saucers,\npresent agreement has been set up with the Air Force whereby\nthe Air Force conducts all investigations pertaining to flying\nsaucers and the Bureau, upon receiving complaints of this nature,\nmerely turns the complaints over to the Office of Special\nInvestigations (OSI), which in turn transmits the information\nto Air Intelligence. Air Intelligence has set up the Air\nTechnical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force\nBase, Dayton, Ohio, for the purpose of coordinating and handling\nmatters pertaining to flying saucers.\n\nInquiry was conducted in order to determine, if\npossible, the source for the information appearing in the\nattached article regarding FBI investigations. Lieutenant\nColonel [illegible] Free in charge of the Espionage Branch,\nCounter-Intelligence Division, Office of Special Investigations,\nadvised that no one in OSI has been contacted by Lang, and he\nsuggested direct contact by the Bureau representatives with\nAir Intelligence to determine if Lang had been in touch with\nanyone in that organization in order to gather information for\nhis article.\n\nColonel C. M. Young, Executive Officer to Major\nGeneral John A. Samford, Director of Air Intelligence, advised\nthat Lang had not contacted General Samford's office.\nColonel Young also telephonically contacted Captain Ruppelt\nof the Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson\nAir Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, on September 30, 1952. Captain\nRuppelt advised Colonel Young that they have never indicated\nto anyone, Mr. Lang that the FBI has an interest in flying\nsaucers. Captain Ruppelt stated that the FBI to his knowledge\nhas never been called upon to furnish reports on flying saucers.\nRuppelt is under the impression that Lang made the information\nup himself from some of the newspaper articles written\nback. Both Colonel Young and Captain Ruppelt are thoroughly\nfamiliar with Bureau policy pertaining to flying saucers.\n\nAttachments (2)\n\nRECEIVED-NICHOLS F.B.I. U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE Oct 10 10 34 AM '52\nRECD BELMONT F.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE Oct 8 4 02 PM '52\nOCT 23 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Memorandum for Mr. A. H. Belmont, 10/8/52\n\nColonel Young suggested that further contact be made with\nMr. Albert Chop of the Office of Public Information, Office of\nthe Secretary of Defense, who represents the Air Force in\npublic relations contacts pertaining to flying saucer matters.\n\n Mr. Chop was contacted and advised that he was familiar\nwith the attached \"New Yorker\" magazine article. He advised\nthat Lang had gathered most of the material about two years ago\nwhen considerable publicity regarding flying saucers had appeared\nin newspapers. He does not know where Lang gathered the material\nat that time but assumes that he gathered it from various sources,\nsuch as other newspaper articles. When the recent publicity\nregarding flying saucers appeared in newspapers, Lang renewed\nhis interest in flying saucers and attempted to bring his\narticle up to date. He contacted Mr. Chop for further current\ninformation. Mr. Chop advised that he gave Lang some routine\nitems of interest regarding flying saucer complaints and\ninvestigations by the Air Force, but that he instructed Mr. Lang\nnot to contact the Air Technical Intelligence Center for further\ninformation from that source. Mr. Chop also advised that at\nno time was the FBI mentioned and that he has no idea where\nLang obtained the information appearing in his article concerning\nFBI investigations. Mr. Chop advised that he is thoroughly\nfamiliar with Bureau policy pertaining to flying saucer investi-\ngations, and that he at no time has indicated to any writer or\nnewspaper representative that the FBI conducts investigations\npertaining to flying saucers. Mr. Chop advised that, if the\nBureau desires, he would be glad to contact Lang to discreetly\ndetermine where Lang obtained his information indicating that the\nFBI conducts investigations pertaining to flying saucers. He\nstated that he could make this contact without indicating in\nany way the Bureau has contacted him. He was advised that his\noffer of cooperation was appreciated, but that it was not\ndesired that he make such an inquiry at the present time.\n\n There is attached a current mimeographed form containing\ncurrent information regarding the whole flying saucer matter\nwhich was turned over by Chop. This is the information which\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Memorandum for Mr. A. H. Belmont, 10/8/52\n\nis ordinarily given to newspaper reporters or writers who\nmake inquiry in the Office of Public Information.\n\nACTION:\n\n None. For your information.\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. A. H. BELMONT\nFROM : V. P. KEAY\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\nDATE: October 27, 1952\n\nTolson\nLadd\nNichols\nBelmont\nClegg\nGlavin\nHarbo\nRosen\nTracy\nMohr\nTele. Rm.\nNease\nGandy\n\nSYNOPSIS:\n\n Air Intelligence advised of another creditable and\nunexplainable sighting of flying saucers. Air Intelligence\nstill feels flying saucers are optical illusions or atmos-\npherical phenomena but some Military officials are seriously\nconsidering the possibility of interplanetary ships.\n\nBACKGROUND:\n\n You will recall that Air Intelligence has previously\nkept the Bureau advised regarding developments pertaining to Air\nIntelligence research on the flying saucer problem. Air Intelligence\nhas previously advised that all research pertaining to this problem\nis handled by the Air Technical Intelligence Center located at\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio; that approximately\n90 per cent of the reported sightings of flying saucers can be\ndiscounted as products of the imagination and as explainable objects\nsuch as weather balloons, etc., but that a small percentage of\nextremely creditable sightings have been unexplainable.\n\nDETAILS:\n\n Colonel C. M. Young, Executive Officer to Major General\nJohn A. Samford, Director of Intelligence, Air Force, advised on\nOctober 23, 1952, that another recent extremely creditable sighting\nhad been reported to Air Intelligence. A Navy photographer, while\ntraveling across the United States in his own car, saw a number of\nobjects in the sky which appeared to be flying saucers. He took\napproximately thirty-five feet of motion-picture film of these\nobjects. He voluntarily submitted the film to Air Intelligence who\nhad it studied by the Air Technical Intelligence Center. Experts\nat the Air Technical Intelligence Center have advised that, after\ncareful study, there were as many as twelve to sixteen flying objects\nrecorded on this film; that the possibility of weather balloons,\nclouds or other explainable objects has been completely ruled out;\nand that they are at a complete loss to explain this most recent\ncreditable sighting. The Air Technical Intelligence Center experts\npointed out that they could not be optical illusions inasmuch as\noptical illusions could not be recorded on film.\n\nNWP/fjb\n\nRECORDED - 51 62-83894-323\n21 OCT 30 1952\nNOV 7 1952"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"RECD BELMONT\nF. B. I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nOct 28 9 23 AM '52\n\nOct 28 6 53 PM '52\nRECEIVED-TOLSON\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED-LADD\nFBI\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nOct 28 11 54 AM '52\n\nDIRECTOR\nS. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nOct 28 1 00 PM '52\n\nRECEIVED-NICHOLS\nF.B.I.\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nOct 28 7 21 PM '52\n\nNov 5 4 51 PM '52\nNov 6 8 57 AM '52"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memo to Mr. A. H. Belmont\t\tRE: FLYING SAUCERS\nfrom V. P. Keay\n\nColonel Young advised that Air Intelligence still feels\nthat the so-called flying saucers are either optical illusions or\natmospherical phenomena. He pointed out, however, that some\nMilitary officials are seriously considering the possibility of\ninterplanetary ships.\n\nACTION:\n\nNone. This is for your information.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"October 28, 1952\n\nMr. Narvel W. Reece, C.T.S.N.\n1578 Van Fandt Road\nCincinnati 31, Ohio\n\nDear Mr. Reece:\n\nI want to thank you for your letter and the\nenclosures which you forwarded to this Bureau.\n\nI have taken the liberty of forwarding a\ncopy of your letter and the enclosures thereto to\nthe Department of the Air Force, inasmuch as the\nmatter referred to in your letter is within the\njurisdiction of that Department.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nEHM:cem:mes\n\nEX-120\n\nNote: The Records Section has been unable to locate a cross\nreference on the name Narvel Woodrow Reece (64-32001-1-135,\nencl. page 7). In view of the information contained in 64-32001-1,\nit is not believed the reference will be pertinent in this instance.\nThis action is being taken to expedite the Bureau's reply to the\ncorrespondent. File mentioned above concerns name check requests."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"October 28, 1952\n\nMr. Narvel W. Reece, C.T.S.N.\n1578 Van Fandt Road\nCincinnati 31, Ohio\n\nDear Mr. Reece:\n\nI want to thank you for your letter and the\nenclosures which you forwarded to this Bureau.\n\nI have taken the liberty of forwarding a\ncopy of your letter and the enclosures thereto to\nthe Department of the Air Force, inasmuch as the\nmatter referred to in your letter is within the\njurisdiction of that Department.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNote: The Records Section has been unable to locate a cross\nreference on the name Narvel Woodrow Reece (64-32001-1-135,\nencl. page 7). In view of the information contained in 64-32001-1,\nit is not believed the reference will be pertinent in this instance.\nThis action is being taken to expedite the Bureau's reply to the\ncorrespondent. File mentioned above concerns name check requests."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NUMEROUS REFERENCE 4-22c\nSEARCH SLIP\nSupervisor Dressing Room 3708\nSubj: Narvel W. Reece\n\nExact Spelling Searchers\nAll References Initial AM\nSubversive Ref. Date 10-27-52\nMail File\nRestricted to Locality of\n\nFILE NUMBER SERIALS\nNR\nNarvel Woodrow\n64-32001-1-135 ENC 1 p 7\nNarvel\nNR\nN-\nNY 65-30966-3\n\nInitialed"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Jan 24, 1953\nLos Angeles, Calif\n\nMr John Edgar Hoover\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nThis is being written to you\nso that it may be forwarded to President Eisenhower\nif you feel it advisable; and to prevent any security\nleaks if such transmission of message is to be accomplished.\n\nPURPOSE:\n\nA PLAN FOR BRINGING DOWN ONE OF THE\nSTRANGE AIR VEHICLES AS SIGHTED OVER JAPAN\nAND ELSEWHERE IN THE WORLD; AND THEN\nTO BE STUDIED BY OUR SCIENTISTS.\n\nEQUIPMENT NEEDED:\n\n1. GUIDED MISSILES: that may be guided from the\nground or a Mother Ship or made to home on\nthese strange objects through Radar or Radio.\n\n2. A DEVICE which when sighted from Ground\nor Air in Twilight or Darkness resembles\nof these Craft as to: shape, size, lights and flying characteristics.\n\nMay be necessary to use a high flying Zeppelin,\nBalloon or Jet Craft, Helicopter or other.\n\nTHIS is the Decoy\n\nNext Sheet"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Equip. Needed (cont.)\n2.\n3. Below the Decoy = Highly accurate guns, cannons or other necessary weapons which are constantly trained on our Decoy or adjacent Area to decoy\n4. Highly Secret and Skilled Personnel = To prevent any leak as to plan; and able to carry out operation to be successful on the first trial if possible.\nPlan = Send Decoy up in an Area known to have consistently seen these strange objects. Sent to predetermined Altitude, and known flying patterns So that Gun Crews below are alert to let go instantaneously when strange Craft approaches to investigate our Decoy.\nDecoy and our Ground operators should be in an Area where we can retrieve the fallen object.\nOf course if it is known that these objects are from other planets the need for bringing one down is not immediately imperative.\nRespectfully submitted to be forwarded if you deem it advisable\nSam T. Kanter\n% Hollywood College\n2009 Ninth St.\nLos Angeles, Calif.\nCaly."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY:for\nTO: MR. A. H. BELMONT\nFROM: V. P. KEAY\nDATE: December 5, 1952\nSUBJECT: PROPOSED STUDY ON THE \"FLYING SAUCERS\" PHENOMENA; INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE\nPursuant to instructions, Supervisor M.W. Kuhrtz of the Liaison Section attended the Intelligence Advisory Committee (IAC) meeting on December 4, 1952.\nNone of the agenda items are of direct interest to the Bureau; however, Dr. H.M. Chadwell, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), directed the members' attention to some aspects of the \"flying saucers\" phenomena. He said that a recent presentation of a theory on \"saucers\" was made by a German atomic scientist, which fact has caused the British to initiate considerable intelligence effort into this matter. According to Mr. Chadwell, efforts are being made to obtain the German scientist's paper on this theory. Also, it was stated that a recent \"saucers\" observation in Africa presents some evidence that the \"saucers\" are not a meteorological phenomena, which theory has been held to date by the Air Force. Instead, this latter incident indicated the possibility of the \"saucers\" being a scientific development. The details of this African observation were not presented; however, appropriate contact will be made by the Bureau's Liaison Section with the Air Force to determine the details of this latter report.\nAs a result of the above, the Military members suggested a logical approach which would call for a group of scientists to make a study of the new \"saucers\" data in an effort to identify the phenomena. If an identification can be made by the scientists and it can be determined that the \"saucers\" are a scientific development, then IAC should determine a further course of action for the U.S. Government. It was further suggested that the IAC should only concern itself with this matter on the basis that a competent scientific group might determine the \"saucers\" to be a scientific development under the control of our enemy.\nDr. Chadwell was directed to draft a paper on this problem for IAC consideration. Upon receipt of this draft, appropriate Bureau recommendations will be made prior to IAC approval.\nACTION: Liaison will obtain the details of the \"flying saucers\" observation in Africa from the Air Force.\nMWK:lw\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/11/84 BY sp-1 gsk/alm Comp.# 245,536\n62-83894 NOT RECORDED JAN 6 1953 INITIALS ON ORIGINAL\n53 FEB 16 1953"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY:for\nTO: MR. A. H. BELMONT\nFROM: V. P. KEAY\nDATE: December 23, 1952\nSUBJECT: PROPOSED STUDY ON THE \"FLYING SAUCERS\" PHENOMENA; INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE\nFLYING\nReference is made to my memorandum December 5, 1952. You will recall that at an Intelligence Advisory Committee (IAC) meeting held December 4, 1952, Dr. H.M. Chadwell, Central Intelligence Agency(CIA) directed the members' attention to some aspects of the \"flying saucers\" phenomena. He made reference to a presentation of a theory on \"saucers\" which had been made by a German atomic scientist and which fact had caused the British to initiate considerable intelligence effort into the matter. Chadwell also made reference to a recent \"saucers\" observation in Africa. He did not furnish details on the African observation.\nThe Liaison Agent contacted Messrs. Ralph Clark, (b) (3) (A) and Richard Helms, all of the CIA, for the purpose of obtaining additional details concerning the \"saucers\" report which centered in Africa. These individuals furnished information reflecting that a few weeks ago an explosion of large proportion was picked up on several seismographs and it was indicated that the explosion was centered in central Africa. According to Helms and Clark, reports of unknown reliability were received indicating that the exploding might have emanated from a flying saucer. More recent reports received from a broad indicate that the seismographs had picked up an explosion of a meteor. (b) (3) (B) [REDACTED] (b) (3) (B)\nThe Liaison Agent inquired regarding the \"saucers\" theory which reportedly was presented by a German atomic scientist. Clark advised that the report on the scientist had not been received by the CIA as yet.\nACTION:\nThis matter will be followed by the Liaison Agent for the purpose of obtaining additional details concerning the \"saucers\" theory of the German scientist.\nSJP:lw\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/11/84 BY sp-1 gsk/alm Comp.# 245,536\n62-83894 NOT RECORDED JAN 6 1953\nINITIALS ON ORIGINAL\n56 JAN 12 1953"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED-84\n62-83894-326\nDate: February 11, 1953\nTo: Director of Special Investigations The Inspector General Department of the Air Force The Pentagon Washington 25, D. C.\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director Federal Bureau of Investigation\nSubject: FLYING DISCS MISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\nThere are attached for your information in the captioned matter a Photostat of a letter dated January 20, 1953, received by this Bureau from Mr. Robert D. Wolf, 19 North Forsythe Street, Franklin, Indiana, with the enclosures referred to therein, and a copy of this Bureau's reply to Mr. Wolf.\nNo investigation is being conducted by this Bureau in this matter.\nAttachment\nEHM:eme\nCOMM - FBI FEB 11 1953 MAILED 30\n30 FEB 19 1953"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"January 27, 1953\n\n62-93894-326\n\nRECORDED-84\n\nEX-105\n\nMr. Robert D. Wolf\n19 North Forsythe Street\nFranklin, Indiana\n\nDear Mr. Wolf:\n\nYour letter dated January 20, 1953, has been received, together with enclosures.\n\nAlthough I would like to be of service in connection with your request, I would like to point out that the FBI is strictly a fact-finding agency and it is not within the scope of its prescribed authority to make evaluations or draw conclusions as to the character or integrity of any organization or individual. I know you will understand the reason for this rule and will appreciate my inability to be of assistance to you in this regard.\n\nThe literature and letter you forwarded are being returned.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nEnclosures (2)\n\ncc - Indianapolis, with copy of incoming and copy of letter signed by Albert K. Bender.\ncc - New Haven, with copy of incoming and copy of letter signed by Albert K. Bender.\nATTENTION SAC's: (see next page)\n\nDIC:dep:bkh"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATTENTION SAC's: Correspondent also enclosed a copy of the January 19, 1953 issue of \"Space Review\", the publication of The International Flying Saucer Bureau, indicating the address as Post Office Box 241, Bridgeport, Connecticut. This small periodical contains news of various I.F.S.B. groups throughout the United States and England and news items relating to flying saucers.\n\nNo references can be located in Bufiles on the I.F.S.B.; \"Space Review\" or Albert K. Bender."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JOHNSON COUNTY\nDEPARTMENT OF CIVIL DEFENSE\nMONROE AND JACKSON STREETS\nFRANKLIN, INDIANA\n\nROBERT D. WOLF\nDirector\n\n20 January 1953\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\nDirector Federal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI would first like to apologize for writing to you direct, however, I have cleared this morning with our State Director and he suggests this procedure.\n\nWe have been having some success with our Ground Observation Corps as we have four (4) posts here in the county. I.F.S.B. Bridgeport, Connecticut\n\nLast Fall I was contacted by one of our local business men wanting to know if I would be interested in joining the International Flying Saucer Bureau. I told him that I would and did join with the idea fully in mind of having the local people who are interested in Flying Saucers also work in our Civil Defense Program. We are only too willing to co-operate in any way we can with Civil Defense. The city of Franklin is approximately twenty (20) miles southwest of Indianapolis, on the dual lane highway U S #31.\n\nI am enclosing a letter which was received last October, as well as the current issue of SPACE REVIEW. Would like to know if this organization has been cleared or is subversive in any way.\n\nI would appreciate your expediting this information back to us so that we will know what steps to take in further enlisting interested persons in our program.\n\nIf you do not require the enclosures please return them.\n\nROBERT D. WOLF\n\nHome Address:\n19 North Porsythe St.\nFranklin, Indiana.\n\nRECORDED-84\nINDEXED-84\nEX-105"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE\n62-83894-326"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"original returned to correspondent\n\nThe International Flying Saucer Bureau\n\"All is possible to one who believes\"\n\nALBERT K. BENDER President and Editor\nMAX KRENGEL Vice-Pres. and Treas.\nALAN C. RIEVMAN Secretary\nFRED J. BENDER Historian\n\nINTERNATIONAL COUNCIL\nROBERT N. WEBSTER Editor- \"Fate\" Magazine\nWILSON \"BOB\" TUCKER Author-Editor of Science Newsletter\nELLIOTT ROCKMORE Editor - Publisher \"Saucer Review\"\nGEORGE D. FAWCETT Lecturer - Saucerians Collection\nSTANLEY E. CROUCH Editor - Science and Culture Magazine\nFRANKLIN M. DIETZ Editor and Publisher \"Science - Fantasy and Science Fiction\"\n\nBRITISH REPRESENTATIVE\nE. L. PLUNKETT Retired Capt. 8th Army\n\nINTERNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS\nP. O. BOX 241\nBRIDGEPORT 2, CONN.\nU. S. A.\n\nGreat Britain Branch\n71 Chedworth Road\nHorfield, Bristol 7, England\n\nOctober 26, 1952\n\nMr. L. H. Frahm,\n949 S. Jefferson Street,\nFranklin, Indiana\n\nDear Mr. Frahm:\n\nOnce again I am happy to write to you about IFSB and your fine work in helping our organization grow larger and stronger.\n\nIn your last letter you asked what course of action your club should take in connection with IFSB. I would suggest the following:\n\n(1.) Appoint a local Chairman of the IFSB in Franklin, Indiana. Also appoint a local treasurer and secretary.\n\n(2.) Hold your meetings at least twice a month, where you can discuss saucer happenings and club activities. Use a local hall, or better yet, hold the meetings at each others homes.\n\nIf and when you form your own city group, a certain portion of the club membership fee may be retained by you to help your cause.\n\n(4.) Mr. Dick Campbell, is an International Officer in IFSB and should be paid such respect at all your gatherings.\n\n(5.) We will do any post card printing you desire or cards of similar size.\n\n(6.) You can print your club activities in \"Space Review\".\n\n(7.) Get contributions from your members to help you get formed."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":")II(\n\n(8.) Report to IFSB all reports and sightings in your area. However, first put the sightings before your group and let them judge whether they are authentic or not.\n\n(9.) Keep a record of all club members in your area and their activities as far as IFSB in concerned.\n\n(10.) Obtain if possible (merely a suggestion), a tape recorder so that you can send actual voice to IFSB headquarters. In this way, I as President, could send messages for you to play at your local meetings. In the future I may even pay your city a visit and attend one of our meetings.\n\nThese are all merely suggestions for you to ponder over and if you decide to adopt any of them please consult with your Indiana Representative, Mr. Campbell. After you have done this, get in touch with me at once.\n\nI sincerely hope that these suggestions will help you in deciding some move as to what your local group will do,\n\nForever Looking Up,\n\nAlbert K. Bender\nAlbert K. Bender\nPresident\n\nAKB/aer"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"orig. returned to Lorenzo 1-26-53\n\nSpace Review\nCopyright 1953 by ALBERT K. BENDER\n\nVOL. II, No. 1 January, 1953 Bridgeport, Conn., U.S.A.\n\nIFSB OF BRITAIN ORGANIZES\nCapt. E. L. Plunkett Appointed British Representative.\n\nThe IFSB has finally been organized in Great Britain with retired Capt. E. L. Plunkett, of the 8th Army as British Representative. Mr. Plunkett resides at 71 Chedworth Rd., Horfield, Bristol 7, England. Denis, son of Mr. Plunkett, is the assistant representative, but is now serving his country in the Royal Air Force.\n\nRep. Plunkett has shown great interest and foresight in forming the IFSB in the British Isles. Numerous articles have appeared in leading newspapers through his efforts. He is planning on using local halls and auditoriums to give lectures and show pictures with the aid of an edipiascope. He also plans to give talks at the local club of that city which is a semi-war veterans type of society.\n\nMany people in the British Isles have contacted Mr. Plunkett showing great interest in IFSB. Most of these people are very learned individuals such as officers in the Armed Forces, members of the British Inter-Planetary Society, Aero-Dynamists, newspaper reporters, and flying saucer enthusiasts.\n\nAt present Mr. Plunkett is holding weekly meetings at his home, where they discuss IFSB and flying saucers in general. For further information about our British Representative see page twelve of this issue.\n\nLUIS LUHRING NAMED PUERTO RICAN REPRESENTATIVE\n\nMr. Luis Luhring of Punta Santiago, Puerto Rico, has accepted the position of Representative for the island of Puerto Rico. He will handle all IFSB business in that place. Write to Box 23, Punta Santiago, Puerto Rico. Mr. Luhring is a very capable man and will aid the IFSB greatly.\n\nFRANKLIN, INDIANA JOINS EN MASSE\nBusiness Men and Public Officials Join IFSB To Form Own City Group.\n\nThe City of Franklin, Indiana, has gone out fully for the IFSB and is now the only city in the world that has the most members in our organization. Through the great efforts and work of Mr. Louis Frahm, business man; Mr. Jack W. Moore, policeman; Mr. Robert Wolf, civilian defense director, and Mr. Dick Campbell, IFSB Representative for Indiana, this great accomplishment was made possible. At this publication, Franklin can claim 20 members with ten from nearly towns, giving a total of 30. Since all this interest has been aroused Mr. Frahm plans to form a city group with their own chairman, secretary and treasurer. Among the members you will find policemen, librarians, mechanics, commercial pilots, business men, bus drivers, students, etc. The group plans to purchase a telescope of suitable power. In addition to this they plan to rig up a 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 Graflex camera with an optical type viewfinder and screen door handle on each side for easy handling. This is the equipment they plan to start with. Later, if finances permit, they may build a portable radar set.\n\nFranklin, Indiana, and nearby towns, have been fortunate in having had at least four sightings this past summer. Two were witnessed by Mr. Frahm and Mr. Moore. Reports of these sightings are reviewed in this issue of Space Review.\n\nOUR PRESIDENT HEARS FROM PROF. EINSTEIN\n\nMr. Al K. Bender, President of IFSB, received a letter from Professor Einstein with this message: \"Having no experience and only superficial knowledge in the field I regret not to be able to comply with your requests.\" Mr. Bender wanted his opinion on the flying saucers. This was the Professor's reply.\n\n62-83894-326"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2 SPACE REVIEW\n\nSAUCERS IN THE NEWS\n\nMAYAGUEZ, PUERTO RICO, Oct. 3, 1952-Strange objects were sighted by two persons in Mayaguez on Oct. 3, they were cruising East and were red in color. It was about 10:30 p.m. when they were sighted.\n\nNORWAY AND SWEDEN, Oct. 13, 1952-During October the Norwegian Government stated that a strange object resembling a saucer landed on Norwegian soil. German experts are claiming that the devices are of Russian origin, and the description given by Norway fits the description given by German experts. Stockholm, Sweden, has also been sighting strange objects.\n\nMELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA, Sept. 13, 1952-A young woman sighted a noiseless green ball flying too fast to be a plane or a meteor. She said it smelled like a rotten egg.\n\nSTUTTGART, GERMANY, Nov. 1, 1952-At the recent meeting of the third International Astronautical Congress in Germany where 200 scientists from 12 countries gathered they stated that saucers are not from Mars or any other planet. They said they are merely optical and atmospheric illusions.\n\nLONG ISLAND, NEW YORK-A terrific air explosion took place over a small area of Long Island N.Y., which broke windows, cracked sidewalks and caused general panic. There were no planes around or scheduled at that time, Oct. 1952.\n\nINTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, NEW YORK, Oct. 16, 1952-A blue flame flashed over International Airport at 7:33 p.m. It was a fiery ball-like object. Hayden Planetarium official stated it may have been the burn-out of a meteor.\n\nTORQUAY, YORK, ENGLAND, Sept. 20, 1952-During exercise \"Mainbrace\" RAF pilots sighted a white object at 15,000 feet. The object was silver in color and circular. It maintained a slow forward speed before beginning to descend, swinging like a pendulum. It followed the aircraft, revolved on its own axis at times, and then took off.\n\nWASHINGTON, D.C., Oct. 16, 1952-The Navy announced that it launched rockets from giant balloons, high above the North Geomagnetic Pole, and sent them to altitudes of about 40 miles. The balloons were as tall as a 10-story building.\n\nPARIS, FRANCE, Oct. 7, 1952 -A flying saucer was sighted over Southern France by two Air France pilots.\n\nWESTERN KOREA FRONT, Oct. 29, 1952-U.S. troops saw a half-dozen mysterious spark-throwing \"cartwheels\" over the western front of Korea. They were as the eyes, 18 inches in diameter, moving in a 15-foot circle.\n\nGAILLAC, SOUTH OF FRANCE, Oct. 29, 1952-For the second time in two weeks, 20 townspeople of Gaillac saw a series of white circular objects, slightly swollen at the center, spinning across the sky, they were flying in formation of two and were grouped around something that looked like a giant flying cigar. As the objects passed overhead they let fall a sort of string of bright white threads, which settled gently on trees and telephone lines. When the people tried to pick them up, they melted like ice. A police officer who picked up some of the thread said: \"It looked like glass wool and it melted away almost as soon as it was touched.\"\n\nOLORON, FRANCE, Oct. 17, 1952-About a dozen people, including a schoolmaster, saw flying saucers surrounding a long cigar like object flying through a clear sky at about 6,000 feet.\n\nNEW ZEALAND-The clippings and stories from New Zealand are swamping our office and are so numerous that we must devote a whole page to them in our April issue.\n\nFor more detailed information on any of the above, please write to IFSB.\n\nPlease date your clippings that you send to us, and note the source."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SPACE REVIEW 3\n\nSUTTON, WEST VIRGINIA MONSTER MAY BE \"COLLIER'S\" ROCKET!\n\nRev. S. L. Daw, Washington, D.C., Representative, IFSB\n\nI have personally photographed flying saucers six times and personally photographed the place where one landed in Charleston, West Virginia. I also talked to two eye-witnesses. I saw and talked to a police officer who was burned by one in Wheeling, West Virginia. My own cousin was the doctor who treated him.\n\nI attempted to photograph one going over Melessa Pass, 5000 feet up in the Blue Ridge mountains, as I was at a height of 2500 feet at Wahala Glen just directly opposite from Melessa Pass. The picture was not too good due to the mist from the mountains.\n\nThe object that landed at Charleston, West Virginia was described as a large metal ball, throwing off a white light and after landing, two small men in red emerged from a trap in the top and climbed up a tree to look around. Seeing people watching them, they got back in and took off. We can prove what this was: In the attempt to shoot rockets to the moon, there is a device with the motors on the wings and the body of the device is a jet propelled apparatus which throws off a large metal shaped disc which throws off a red color from the center which when reflected could easily be taken for some sort of a small person. This was described in Collier's magazine of October 11, 1952.\n\nAccording to the Washington Daily News, the monster seen at Sutton, West Virginia could be the rocket described in Collier's magazine. The picture on the cover of the magazine shows a sphere-headed, wide-bottomed, tank-bellied rocket craft spewing out burning hydrazine and nitric acid as it lands hind-end on the moon. The West Virginia people claimed to have seen: \"An object estimated at 10 feet tall, four feet wide at the bottom and in the shape of a man. Two lights flashed from side to side, the machine made a noise like gas escaping, and a sharp sickening odor as about.\" Sounds somewhat the same.\n\nThe United States may be experimenting with something that the public is not aware of, and it is doing its best to keep it a secret. The age of rocket ships is just around the corner.\n\nCIVILIAN SAUCER INVESTIGATION OF NEW ZEALAND CONTACTS IFSB\n\nThe Civilian Saucer Investigation of New Zealand was set up in New Zealand on October 15, 1952. They plan to prove or disapprove the existence of saucers. It has no affiliation with the Government, the armed forces, or to any society to which its members may belong. Most of the members have been studying flying saucer reports for at least five years. They represent all interested parties: astronomers, scientists, aviators, and the man in the street. The committee consists of Mr. H. H. Fulton, a sergeant in the R.N.Z.A.F. attached to engineering, who is the President of CSI of NZ; Mr. R. J. Lavaris, a member of the Territorial Air Force, who is the secretary of CSI of NZ; Mr. G. H. Gilmore, aviation engineering inspector; D. Lavaris, a student studying for a science degree; and E. J. Greager, an astronomer and engineer.\n\nAims of the committee are to correspond with kindred bodies overseas, and to ultimately find the origin of flying saucers and the comparison.\n\nMr. H. H. Fulton, and Mr. R. J. Lavaris have been made members of the International Council of IFSB. We hope to establish friendly relations with this society and get a representative in New Zealand. CSI sent to IFSB a large map of New Zealand showing all spots where saucers have been sighted with a story of each sighting. A complete report on this will be made in our next issue. CSI of New Zealand the best of luck and hope they will be a success."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4 SPACE REVIEW\n\nEDITORIAL\n\nIn 1492 Columbus discovered a new world after traveling thousands of miles across the great expanse of unknown waters called the Atlantic Ocean. It was a great adventure, yet one that was laughed at, ridiculed, and even spoke of as a \"folly\".\n\nHere was a small group of men searching for what lay beyond the known, endeavoring to unfold the mysteries of lands that were not supposed to exist. All they had were three small ships laden with provisions that they estimated would last the journey.\n\nThe seas were infested with monsters, so the skeptics said, and the world was flat with a dropping off place. Columbus proved these fallacies to be wront, when he landed in the West Indies.\n\nThe years directly ahead of us will see another great adventure such as this. A small group of men will assemble in a certain designated place, climb into their ship, a ship vastly different than that of Columbus's time. This ship will be a rocket shop, and its occupants will shoot off into the vast sea of space to find new worlds, new peoples, and new frontiers.\n\nThey will be laughed at, they will be ridiculed, and the whole thing will be called the greatest \"folly\" on earth, but will it be such? Time has proven that impossibilities become realities. The automobile, the airplane, radio, telephone, telegraph, television, and the smashing of the atom are definite proof. All is possible to one who believes,—and I am a sound believer!\n\n★\n\nFROM THE ASSOCIATE EDITOR'S DESK\n\nThe mysteries of space have long fascinated most people on earth. One need not be an astronomer to gaze in awe at the sight which unfolds before the eyes as we gaze sky-ward on any clear night.\n\nThe vastness of space is difficult to explain, even for astronomers. When distances are measured, it is simpler for learned men to use the term \"light years\" than miles. The number of celestial bodies suspended in space like our own earth are unknown. The guesses are from millions on up. But they remain just that—guesses.\n\nWe who make our home on a mere cinder of matter in the eyes of space, cannot be naive enough to think that intelligent life exists only here. Those who believe that there is a purpose for everything which happens, should agree that these millions of bodies in space must serve more of a purpose than just twinkling brightly on a clear night.\n\nPublished quarterly by Albert K. Bender, Editor; Max Krengel, Associate Editor; Printed by Reliable Press, Bridgeport, Conn. Subscription Price: four issues, to members, $1.00, to non members, $1.40 per year. Individual copies $.35. Exclusive publication of the IFSB, P.O. Box 241, Bridgeport 2, Conn., U.S.A. Send all news and articles to this address."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SPACE REVIEW 5\n\nSCIENCE FICTION NEWS\n\nAlan C. Rievman\n\nVictor Root, Illinois Rep. of IFSB, has some Science-Fiction mags for sale, or free in exchange. He is selling them for a small fee. Write to IFSB for address.\n\nThe DECEMBER, 1952, issue of FATE magazine is a must to all IFSB members and officers. It contains an article by Curtis Fuller, entitled, \"Let's Get Straight About the Saucers.\" A complete detailed story of the incident of the scoutmaster described in our January issue, is discussed with a picture of the scoutmaster. SUBSCRIBE TO FATE MAGAZINE AND KEEP UP TO DATE ON THE SAUCERS. Write to 806 Dempster Street, Evanston, Illinois.\n\nNew Pocket Books on Stands: Dell No. 627, When Worlds Collide by Philip Wylie and Edwin Balmer. Pocket Book No. 908, \"New Tales of Space and Time\", edited by Raymond J. Healy.\n\nThanks to Ray Palmer for our letter in the December issue of \"Other Worlds\" Clark Publishing Co., 806 Dempster St., Evanston, Illinois. Let's subscribe.\n\nNEW BOOK BY VIKING PRESS \"Across the Space Frontier\", edited by Cornelius Ryan, $3.95, Viking, New York.\n\nRANDOM HOUSE HAS DONE IT AGAIN WITH: \"By Space Ship to the Moon\", written by Jack Coggins and Fletcher Pratt, foreword by Willy Ley. $1.\n\nSCIENCE FICTION NEWS-LETTER, by our Council Member, \"Bob\" Tucker, P.O. Box 702, Bloomington, Illinois.\n\nTHE UNITED STATES ROCKET SOCIETY, Box 29, Glen Ellyn, Illinois.\n\nHollywood is coming out with two good movies: \"War of the Worlds\" and \"The Conquest of Space\".\n\nSAUCER REVIEW, by Elliott Rockmore, a member of our Council. P.O. Box 148, Wall St. Station, New York 5, N.Y\n\nOwners of tape recorders or wire recorders: Join T.R.I. (Tape-respondence International. Send your voice to your correspondents) 3488—22nd St., San Francisco 10, Calif.\n\nBORDERLAND SCIENCES RESEARCH ASSOCIATES located at 3524 Adams Ave., San Diego 16, California, would like to have IFSB members join their society.\n\nMany new Science Fiction Mags are hitting the newsstands and some are good while others are the usual run. A few of the better ones are: Tops in SF; Science Fiction Quarterly and Fantastic.\n\nTwo good S-F books: \"Robots Have No Tails\" by Lewis Padgett and \"Player Piano\" by Kurt Vonnegut. Both humorous line.\n\nThe officers of IFSB are planning on issuing a 12-page booklet sometime next year with a complete record on all saucer reports that they now have collected. This booklet will not be a regular issue of 'Space Review', but a separate issue and will sell for 50c to everyone. Our President, Mr. Bender, will write the foreword with comments throughout by officials of IFSB. The booklet will be entitled: IFSB REPORTS ON THE SAUCERS. If interested, write!\n\nWe would like members and officers to send in snapshots of themselves so that when the time comes for us to print pictures in Space Review, we will have the photos available.\n\nMENTION \"SPACE REVIEW\" when writing to any of above mentioned publications.\n\nThis page will be eliminated in future issues, and will be replaced by articles on saucers\"."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6 SPACE REVIEW\n\n\"MY THEORY\"\n\nby IFSB Members\n\nTHEORY NO. 6—Submitted by BARBARA KNORR, Member from Connecticut\n\nEverybody seems to believe that the \"saucers\", whatever they are, come from this Solar System. I do not believe any other planet but ours can support intelligent life. Perhaps plant life, but not human.\n\nI do believe that if our planet can support life, why not other planets in other Solar Systems. I do not believe that these people wish to destroy us because if they had they could have done so long ago. Also, how do we know that these things we see are not beings themselves.\n\nTHEORY NO. 7—Submitted by Representative LOUIE MASONICK, JR., of Minnesota\n\nMy theory is one most IFSB members seem to have. First, I believe they are from another planet. All those stars must have something going around them. All those celestial bodies must be up there for some reason, besides to look at. Then, also, they may even be from our Solar System.\n\nI do not think an official agency of our government should come out and say—\"we do not know what they are and whether or not they are a menace.\" The best way to reveal the objects would be through clubs like the IFSB. I do not believe that they are a menace. I think there is intelligent life on them and that they are just observing us.\n\nTHEORY NO. 8—Submitted by Representative ALAN RIEVMAN of Connecticut\n\nMy theory on the origin of the flying saucers\" is that they are definitely real and are from one of the planets of our Solar System. I do not believe that they are from one of the other Solar Systems. These \"neighbors\" probably thought that our planet could not have intelligent life upon it, but with the first atomic explosion they may have changed their minds.\n\nI am sure that they are not from Earth because if they were ours it would be impossible to keep it quiet and if they were from a foreign government they wouldn't be flying over the United States. They would risk being shot down and their secret revealed to us.\n\nTHEORY NO. 9—Submitted by Representative VICTOR ROOT of Illinois\n\nMy theory is that the \"flying saucers\" are manned ships controlled and operated by intelligent creatures who are scouting our world. They will not try to make contact with us for many reasons. One is that we are too warlike and emotional. Another is that we have diseases which may harm or even kill them. Some day when we reach out and touch the planets we may meet them. A race of intelligent creatures other than ourselves, certainly does exist.\n\nTHEORY NO. 10—Submitted by ALAN STAZER, Member from California\n\nI think that the \"flying saucers\" are from the solar system of ALPHA or PROXIMA CENTAURI. Most likely the 3rd or 4th planet. The planet is probably about 4000 miles in diameter and two-thirds as big as the earth. Some other reasons are that Centauri is too far distant for observation of such a small body as a planet. This star is of about the same size and the same spectral, type-GO, as the Sun. Editor's Note: WOW!\n\nAll theories become the property of IFSB and cannot be returned."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SPACE REVIEW 7\n\nHIGHLIGHTS ABOUT REPRESENTATIVES\n\nDICK CAMPBELL, Rep. Indiana—Rep. Campbell has written us many interesting letters and aided in making his home town of Franklin the only city in the world with the most IFSB members. At present it totals over twenty. He was assisted by Mr. Louis Frahm, and Mr. Jack Moore of that place.\n\n* * *\n\nJ. RONALD ALBERT, rep. Ontario, Canada—Will be appointed Representative of CANADA AT LARGE. Doing a fine job. Would like more Canadians to join club.\n\n* * *\n\nVICTOR ROOT, Rep. Illinois—One of our most valuable representatives. He has spent much time preparing a map of the United States showing the places where saucers have been sighted. He is quite a poet, too; see his poem in this issue. Mr. Root presented the IFSB with this saucer map. We are proud of it. We are sorry to say that Mr. Root may have to move to California in the near future. It will be very hard to replace such an ardent worker.\n\n* * *\n\nFARL BROADDUS, Rep. Kentucky—Obtained two new members for IFSB. One of them, Mrs. Glenn C. Fuller, saw a flying saucer. Her report will be in our next issue of Space Review\". Mr. Broaddus is spreading the word about IFSB.\n\n* * *\n\nDIANE HANAN, Rep. Iowa—Obtained a new member, and has clippings she intends to send in to IFSB.\n\n* * *\n\nGAIL SPRAGUE, Rep. Wisconsin—Gail is quite the cartoonist. She sent in a cartoon for us which really made the International Staff roll off their chairs. She showed the parlor of a home with the front door open, a strange looking creature that had walked in the door leaving muddy tracks on the floor. Outside can be seen a saucer parked on the lawn. A housewife approaches the creature and this is what she says: \"I don't care where you're from. Look at my clean rug.\" She also sent us a fine poem that appears in this issue. Gail obtained a new member for us also. She sure is showing fine interest.\n\n* * *\n\nALLAN LEVINSKY, Rep. Maine—Claims that very few people are seeing saucers in Maine. Is doing his best to get people interested in IFSB.\n\n* * *\n\nROBERT R. RITTER, Rep. Tennessee—Chalks up another member for IFSB.\n\n* * *\n\nLUIS LUHRING, Rep. Puerto Rico—Mr. Luhring has sent us numerous clippings from Puerto Rico about saucers. He plans to get as many people as possible to join IFSB. He says that the interest in saucers is as great in Puerto Rico as anyplace else.\n\n* * *\n\nS. L. DAW, Rep. Washington, D.C.—We are happy to have for our representative in Washington, D.C., the first member of the clergy, Reverend Daw. Mr. Daw, as he prefers to be called by club members, is doing great work for IFSB. We are anxiously awaiting to see his actual photos of saucers that he took himself.\n\n* * *\n\nRONALD KINNEAR, Rep. New York—Took upon himself to advertise in his own state and had 50 post cards printed and plans to mail them out, in his state.\n\n* * *\n\nWe are not getting any reports from some of our Representatives. It is absolutely necessary that we hear from you, so please do your best to get those monthly reports rolling in on time."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8\nSPACE REVIEW\nDIRECTORY OF REPRESENTATIVES\nThe following are additional representatives since our last publication.\nBRITISH REPRESENTATIVE—Edgar L. Plunkett, 71 Chedworth Rd., Horfield, Bristol 7, England; Assistant Representative for Britain—Denis Plunkett\nPUERTO RICAN REPRESENTATIVE—Luis Luhring, Box 23, Punta Santiago\nCOLORADO—Verna M. Hampton, 4245 Alcott St., Denver\nMAINE—Allan Levinsky, 59 Atlantic St., Portland\nMISSOURI—Ralph Hetzel, 6 Scarsdale, St. Louis 17\nNEW JERSEY—August C. Roberts, 443 Ogden Ave., Jersey City\nNORTH CAROLINA—David T. Benton, Box 430, E.C.C., Greenville\nOHIO—Robert C. Schnelle, Sr., 714 McMakin Ave., Cincinnati\nOREGON—G. L. McColly, 524 Jersey St., Silverton\nDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA—Rev. S. L. Daw, 5119-7th St., N.W., Washington\nWEST VIRGINIA—Gray Barker, Box 981, Clarksburg\nAbove names will not be published again. Additional names in future issues.\nAnyone that wishes to correspond with other members will please send us permission to print your name and address so that others will know that you desire correspondence. We do not publish lists of our members' names and addresses without permission from them.\nLET'S LOOK AT THE MAGAZINES\nREADERS DIGEST FOR JULY 1952—Two articles \"Have We Visitors from Space,\" and \"Flying Saucers—New in Name Only.\"\nTRUE MAGAZINE, SEPT. 1952—\"The Flying Saucers and the Mysterious Little Men.\"\nOCT. 1952—\"We Flew Above Flying Saucers.\"\nDEC. 1952—\"What Radar Tells About Flying Saucers.\"\nLOOK MAGAZINE, OCT. 20, 1952—\"Moonbound,\" Page 18.\nCOLLIER'S, OCT. 18, 1952—\"Man on the Moon.\"\nOCT. 25, 1952—\"More About Man on the Moon.\"\nPIC MAGAZINE, NOV. 1952—\"How Do Saucers Fly?\"\nSIR MAGAZINE, DEC. 1952—\"Flying Saucers and the Air Around Us.\"\nMR. MAGAZINE, JAN. 1953—\"Is Washington Afraid of Flying Saucers?\"\nMAN TO MAN MAGAZINE, JAN 1953—Flying Saucers Are Not New.\"\nTHE MYSTERY OF OTHER WORLDS REVEALED—A Fawcett Book No. 166. Excellent. A four star edition—one of the finest to date in the pulp line. Cost 75c. We advise all saucer-minded folk to get this magazine. It is only once in a great while that a publisher puts out such a fine publication. Contains news of Space Travel; Flying Saucers; and Rocket Development.\nThese magazines are in the IFSB LIBRARY as part of our collection. We will send written information to anyone that may have questions on above magazines.\nComing in April \"SPACE REVIEW\"—\"SAUCERITIS\" by John Armitage of England. An article that will make you really THINK!\nA COMPLETE LISTING OF ALL OF OUR OFFICERS AND COUNCIL MEMBERS"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SPACE REVIEW 9\nTO ALL MEMBERS OF THE I.F.S.B.—GREETINGS FROM ENGLAND\nCapt. Edgar L. Plunkett, British Representative\nAre we on the verge of a breath-taking discovery? Yes, I believe we really are! To quote Captain Eddie Rickenbacker, \"Too many good men have seen Flying Saucers for us to dismiss them lightly as hallucinations.\"\nThe nineteenth and twentieth centuries have produced a number of astonishing discoveries notably the dreaded atom bomb, and also has had to discard in many cases previously held convictions such as that \"matter is indestructible\".\nEven the average layman today, due to increased educational facilities, and access to literature of all kinds, has a very good idea that life in all its forms consists of \"energy\", and that this energy somehow links back to some form of pulsating orbital structure like unto the universe, but on an infinitesimally smaller scale. Therefore, it is—to me at least—quite believable that it is possible that somewhere—something—someone—has solved the riddle of this energy, etheric, electromagnetic, call it what you will. Having progressed so far, it follows that given elements capable of withstanding immense stresses and strains, the propulsion of what has become known as the \"Flying Saucer\" becomes a possibility. It is known that between the Sun, Moon, and our Earth, and presumably between other inter-planetary and possibly interstellar bodies there exists magnetic lines of force, thus if some form of aircraft or saucer has control of the means of attraction and repulsion, these lines of force which by the way never touch one another, would form the perfect highway along which to travel at the speed of light, and probably very much faster. It would also account for the capability of these so-called \"saucers\" to accomplish right-angled turns, inasmuch that these known magnetic waves emanate in all directions. Therefore, from the point of view of the average thinking man in the street, I say, \"I believe the flying saucer does exist, and that the coming years will vindicate such men as Captain Mantell, Kenneth Arnold, and countless other pioneers in this field.\" In conclusion, may I say to all IFSB members at home and abroad, \"carry on the good work, and above all, do not be disappointed, discouraged or deluded by the jeers and sneers of the ignorant so-called majority.\"\nThe best of everything for the New Year ahead!\nYours fraternally, E. L. PLUNKETT\nMYSTERIOUS CRAFT\nby Gail Sprague\nOut of the dark, mysterious, depths of space,\nCame strange looking craft at a tremendous pace.\nTheir course was true, the third planet from the sun,\nTheir orders: Don't return until your task is done.\nDown they descended; some got out.\n\"Be back in 24 hours,\" the commander told the scout.\nTime went fast, all returned.\nOff went the craft, bearing all they'd learned.\nThe decision was reached, never again,\nOn this small planet they'd ever land.\nWars, corruption, prejudice and greed,\nMade this the worst of all planets, all agreed.\nOUT THERE\nby Victor Root\nOut in space lies my destiny,\nOut there, beyond the clouds;\nWhere winds have not yet blown,\nWhere man has not yet gone;\nThat's where I long to roam.\nOut in space lies my destiny,\nOut there, among the stars;\nWhere night is forever ruling,\nWhere solitude is soothing;\nThat's where I long to roam.\nGive me a silver ship,\nTo make the happy trip;\nOut there, among the stars."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"10\nSPACE REVIEW\nSAUCER SIGHTINGS BY IFSB MEMBERS\nExclusive! From Franklin, Indiana and Surrounding Towns\nSIGHTING NO. 4—On the morning of July 28, 1952 in the skies to the southeast and at times directly over Franklin, Indiana appeared three strange objects. Their flight was watched by a large number of men of sound mind and character. The following is compiled from a Police report turned in by Capt. Lee Sloan, Patrolman Jack W. Moore and Patrolman Kenneth Rund of the Franklin, Indiana Police Department on Monday morning, July 28, 1952 at 6:00 a.m. These objects were witnessed by policemen, civilian authorities, and members of the United States Army. After notifying all proper authorities of the objects no definite steps were taken by the army or otherwise. The report is as follows:\nThere were three objects, one larger and brighter than the two smaller objects. The larger of the three seemed to cast off a white yellowish light. Its pattern of flight seemed to be that of a circle. It seemed to always be keeping track of the two smaller objects. The two smaller objects cast off a distinctive light of their own, one being an orange hue and the other a reddish color. The two smaller ones seemed to be in a dog fight all their own, since they executed barrel rolls, loops and spins. They made turns of 90 degrees and 45 degrees without losing any degree of speed, as well as dancing up and down as if someone was playing with a giant yo-yo. The objects made single sorties to the south completely out of sight, to return almost immediately into view again, joining the other in a neatly executed show of turns, loops and spins. We estimated their height at approximately 15,000 feet while their speed varied from an estimated 1500 miles per hour to an estimated 10,000 miles per hour. Even with a pair of binoculars it was almost an impossibility to determine any exact shape other than that they appeared to be round and flat as a saucer. They were observed for a period of four hours and fifteen minutes. Dawn came at 6:48 a.m. and all stars had gone around 5:00 a.m. At 5:03 a.m. it was bright day light—and the three objects were still visible. Their color did not change in daylight. At 5:11 a.m. the larger of the three objects was joined by the two smaller ones; the smaller objects one at a time disappeared above the larger, first the orange, then the red. After seeming to envelope the two smaller objects it moved up and to the west out of sight. The leaving of the three objects and the disappearance of the larger took exactly 40 seconds. These objects were verified by: Edinburg Police Dept., Camp Atterbury, Ind.; Columbus Dept.; Seymour State Police Dept., Greensburg Police Dept, North Vernon Police Dept., Connersville Police Dept, Connersville State Police Post, Fort Wayne, Ind.; and Madison, Ind. Mr. Moore and Mr. Rund are IFSB members now.\nSIGHTING NO. 5—Louie Masonick, Jr., Representative for Minnesota\nSighted a round object Northeast of Long Prairie, Minnesota about 2:30 p.m., April 20, 1952. It was a dull gray color, traveling about 250 MPH and when it ascended their was a low hum. It was about 5,000 feet high and was visable for about 45 seconds. Direction of flight was from East to West in one direct path.\nSIGHTING NO. 6—Alan K. Stazer, Member from California\nSighted a disc shaped object to the East of Los Angeles about 9:08 p.m. on September 22, 1952. It was a yellowish white in color and remained in a stationary position for about 4 seconds. It was about 15 degrees above the horizon. It was about 50 feet in diameter and traveling due north.\nWhen sending in your report on Saucer Sightings, please give the date that you saw the saucer. Thank you!"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SPACE REVIEW 11\nEXCERPTS FROM A SUMMARY OF A FIVE-YEAR FLYING SAUCER INVESTIGATION\nBy George D. Fawcett, International Council, IFSB\nI have just decided to stop investigation that I began a little over five years ago on one of the most fascinating mysteries of modern times, that being the well known \"Flying Saucer\" phenomena. Since the summer of 1947 when the first saucer scare broke out in the United States, I have spent much of my time, money and energy seeking a solution to this riddle. While carrying on my private investigations I was able to interview several astronomers, scientists, pilots and guided missile experts, who had spotted these saucers or at least had been investigating or studying these strange objects. In addition to these interviews I have talked to many eye-witnesses who had sighted these objects throughout the United States and have mailed questionnaires out to many others.\nI have kept bulletins and scrapbooks on the saucers for the past five years, and while going to college I wrote a six-page pamphlet entitled \"The Flying Saucer Phenomena\" for my friends, teachers, and classmates. I have lectured to several groups in Lynchburg. Though I have been interested in this phenomena from the very first, my sighting of an orange disk like globe which hovered for four minutes over the Lynchburg College administration building in Lynchburg, Virginia, on the morning of July 6, 1951, has increased my interest threefold since then. That is one of my reasons for stopping my investigation. It's really too big a job for one person to handle. We must realize that we are dealing with a phenomena that is as fantastic as it is fascinating. Many of the reports that I have been able to gather in my collection tend to back this statement.\nSome recent thoughts about the \"flying saucers\" are that perhaps there will be some landings soon. This doesn't seem too far fetched in that these flying saucers are still being seen everywhere, for longer periods of time and in groups instead of alone, as well as more reports of huge saucer or rocket ships. Then, too, they seem to come and go at will, perhaps being stationed as satellites themselves.\nI feel that our government must know something about these saucers because in my opinion at this very moment the United States Government is carrying on an educational program regarding interplanetary travel of our country. Perhaps space ships from other planets are already here! At any rate, whether they are trying to prevent religious controversy or panic or for any other motives which they might have, our government is still releasing, denying, suppressing and even plating reports at intervals for some reason.\nRegardless, the future will tell! In closing, I'd like to use a favorite phrase of Charlie Lineberry, Lynchburg College student who said, \"things are really looking up.\" I wonder if some things aren't looking DOWN, too; Sooner or later we're bound to find out, and to this all I can say is, \"the sooner, the better.\"\nEDITOR'S NOTE: Mr. Fawcett's discussions and opinions will be found in future issues of Space Review.\nATTENTION MEMBERS AND OFFICERS: If you would be interested in receiving an emblem to wear on your coat lapel with our club letters \"IFSB\" engraved on a saucer background, we would be interested in knowing. We cannot order these emblems unless we get enough people showing interest. The price would be approximately $1.00 each. Please let us know as soon as possible. Thank you"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12\nSPACE REVIEW\nWE WANT YOU TO MEET\nEDGAR L. PLUNKETT, BRITISH REPRESENTATIVE—Born at Bristol, Glos., England, on December 26, 1903. Covered most parts of the world as a radio operator at sea from 1922 to 1936, including the U.S.A., notably New York, Boston, Baltimore, Norfolk, Newport News, Tampa, Mobile and many other ports. Has many interesting memories of the prohibition days, the gangster era, Jack Dempsey, Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig and other notable highlights. Has worked for many years for Anglo-American friendship and still corresponds with friends here in U.S.A. Was called to service in 1939. Was rescued from Dunkirk Beaches by the French Destroyer L'Incomprise on June 1, 1940. Went to Middle East in 1941, and served through three Western Desert Campaigns with the British 8th Army. After fall of Tunis was commissioned in Palestine and was then posted in Egypt. Returned to England at the end of the war after four and a half years service overseas as a Captain. Now employed by his original firm as a clerk.\nHe has a wife and three children, three ages are Denis 21, now with the RAF, Diana 18, and Michael 14. Hobbies are writing and reading and other journalistic yearnings including poetry, plus an unabated desire to travel. Since the formation of Civil Defense a year or so ago, he has become a qualified instructor and lectures three evenings weekly to industrial personnel.\nMr. Plunkett has shown great interest in IFSB activities and will without a doubt prove to be our most valuable foreign representative.\nASSOCIATE EDITOR\n(Next Issue April 1, 1953)\nPOST OFFICE BOX 241\nBRIDGEPORT 2, CONN.\nU.S.A.\nReturn Postage Guaranteed\nTo\nMr. Robert D. Wolf\n19 N. Forsyth St.\nFranklin, Indiana\n101553"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\n\nAmerican Embassy\n1, Grosvenor Square\nLondon, W. 1\n\nRS\n\nSECRET - AIR COURIER\n\nDate: February 17, 1953\n\nTo: Director, FBI\n\nFrom: Legal Attache\nLondon, England\n\nSubject: \"FLYING SAUCERS\"\n\nMajor E. P. Walkers, Provo Marshall at the U. S. Air Force Base at Mildenhall, England, telephonically contacted writer on February 14, 1953, regarding the new or revived interest in \"flying saucers.\" He stated he did not have any new information to report but did know of an incident that took place several years ago and which the Bureau may desire to check.\n\nThis incident, according to Major Walkers, concerns an article or story on \"flying saucers\" which appeared in a small newspaper with limited circulation in the Township of Jeffersonville, Delaware Township, Sullivan County, New York. He was unable to recall the name of the newspaper but was certain it is the only one published in that area. The story appeared in one of the early 1947 issues or in one of the issues during the last three months of 1946. It was written by a member of the U. S.Armed Forces and of significance is the fact that subsequent issues failed to follow it up by carrying additional stories on \"flying saucers.\" Also significant is the fact that it appeared in a small and practically unknown newspaper.\n\nMajor Walkers states he is merely reporting this for what it may be worth and is being forwarded to the Bureau for any action considered appropriate.\n\n- RUC -\nJAC:CFJ\n\nRECORDED-60\n\n162-83894-327\nFEB 26 1953"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-327\nRECORDED-47\nDate: March 6, 1953\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nThe following information has been received by this Bureau from its representative in London, England, concerning the captioned matter:\n\nMajor E. P. Walkers, Provost Marshal, U. S. Air Force Base, Mildenhall, England, telephonically contacted the writer on February 14, 1953, regarding the new or revived interest in \"flying saucers.\" He stated he did not have any new information to report but he knew of an incident that took place several years ago which this Bureau might desire to check.\n\nThis incident, according to Major Walkers, concerns an article or story on \"flying saucers\" which appeared in a small newspaper with limited circulation located at Jeffersonville, Delaware Township, Sullivan County, New York. He was unable to recall the name of the newspaper but was certain it is the only one published in that area. The story appeared in one of the early 1947 issues or in one of the issues during the last three months of 1946. It was written by a member of the U. S. Armed Forces and of significance is the fact that subsequent issues failed to follow it up by"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"carrying additional stories on \"flying saucers.\" Also significant is the fact that it appeared in a small and practically unknown newspaper.\n\nMajor Walkers states he is merely reporting this for what it may be worth.\n\nThe above data is being furnished to you for your information and any action you desire to take in connection therewith, inasmuch as this Bureau is not conducting any investigations relating to the captioned matter.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : A. H. Belmont\nDATE: March 10, 1953\n\nFROM : L. H. Martin\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\nJOHN BAILEY, INFORMANT\n\nJohn Bailey called from Bowie, Maryland, at 9:05 P.M., 3/9/53, to advise that he had just seen a flying saucer near that city. He was vague as to details and nonresponsive as to where he was calling from and as to his residence. When asked where he planned to stay tonight, at least, in order that Air Force might interview him if deemed advisable, Bailey said the writer wanted to know too much and disconnected. Since no specific information was furnished and since the call may have been a prank, the Air Force was not advised. Since no identifying information was obtained, no attempt was made to check Bureau records.\n\nRecommendation:\n\nFile.\n\nLHM:dmd"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: March 12, 1953\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nAt 9:05 p.m. on March 9, 1953, an individual giving his name as John Bailey telephonically contacted this Bureau and advised he had just seen a flying saucer near Bowie, Maryland. Mr. Bailey was vague as to any details in this matter and would not furnish any information concerning his residence or the place from which he was making his telephone call. No additional pertinent information in this matter was furnished by Mr. Bailey.\n\nThe above is being furnished to you for your information and assistance in the captioned matter. No investigation is being conducted by this Bureau concerning this matter.\n\nEHM:elk"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRANSLATION FROM SPANISH\n\nValparaiso, March 4, 1953\n\nDirector of the Federal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington\nUnited States, North America\n\nSubject: Individual who may possibly be connected with flying saucers.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nIn writing to you who directs the influential Office of Investigation which has international connections, I would like to state the following:\n\n1°-a) I had the opportunity to read in a \"Chilean\" police magazine, in the section entitled, \"Perfect Escapes,\" the escape of Dr. LINKE (42 years old, widower, who sometime in 1950, in London, was arrested on the 8th floor of the Building of Departments (?). The reason for his detention was his possible collaboration with VLADIMIR VLASAV in \"divulging to foreign governments English aviation secrets\".)\n\nIn his attempt to get away, which occurred between 4 and 5 in the morning, a strange thing happened, \"when the police came near the 8th floor, the whole building became dark, the elevators stopped and the telephones and loudspeakers became silent. When the police arrived on the 8th floor with their flash lights, they immediately went off. (Nevertheless, he was arrested at 6 A.M.).\n\nb) Dr. LINKE escaped from the Kent Prison (a few days after he was imprisoned) and according to statements of the author of the article, which should be accurate, he did it in the following manner: Between 12 midnight and 2 A.M., in rainy weather, Dr. JULIUS LINKE disappeared under the following circumstances: the electricity, elevators, telephones, and flash lights of the guards would not function.\n\nTRANSLATED BY:\nMARY APOSTOL: bad\nMarch 12, 1953"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nSeptember [illegible], 1953\n\nDirector of the Federal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington\nUnited States, North America\n\nRe: Individual who may be engaged in connection with flying saucers\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI wish to call your attention to the information for your investigation for the international interest, and I should like to make the following:\n\n1st.- a) I had the opportunity to read in a Chilean police magazine, in a section entitled \"Perfect Escapes,\" the escape of Dr. Linke (42 years of age, widower), who in mid-1950 in London was detained in an apartment building, 8th floor. Reason for detention, his possible participation with Vladimir Vlasov in \"divulging to foreign governments secrets of English aviation.\"\n\nIn the raid for his detention, which took place between 04 and 05 hrs. in the morning, a strange event occurred: \"when the police approached the 8th floor, the whole building was in darkness and the elevators stopped, as well as the telephones and telephone lines silenced. The police, upon arriving at the 8th floor, had their electric flashlights, which were extinguished simultaneously.\" (However he was detained at 06 hrs., at dawn.)\n\nb) Dr. Linke escaped from the Kent prison (a few days after being confined) and according to statements of the author of the article, which should be trustworthy, he did so in the following circumstances: Between 12 midnight (24 hrs.) and 02 hrs. in the morning, in rainy weather, Dr. Julius Linke disappeared, with the aggravating circumstances of paralysis of lighting, elevators and telephones, non-functioning of pocket flashlights (of guards).\n\nThe guards among other things declared, according to the article, that between 24 and 02 hrs., rain fell in great torrents and at certain moments there was complete darkness, the lights went out. A guard tried to touch the alarm button which would sound the danger whistle and did not function; he shouted to another guard and got no answer and his voice was distant; to warn his chiefs personally he could not run or hasten the march (but walk slowly).\n\n2nd.- A little before the fall of Berlin, \"the motors of cars and trucks were unexpectedly stopped,\" without any apparent explanation; after one hour they succeeded in starting them again. On that occasion it was commented that \"something rare occurred in the atmosphere.\"\n\n3rd.- About three months ago I read in a local newspaper about the \"Flying Saucers\" with the reservation that perhaps they would be speculating about flying saucers, but it is also undeniable that they have told the truth, stating, according to an article from a news agency, that an officer and his companion who were piloting an airplane, saw a \"Flying Saucer.\" They pursued it, but it, as in previous cases, made many turns and did not allow itself to be reached. Nevertheless the Flying Saucer rose to a great height, then began an accelerated descent and stopped for a few moments over the officer's airplane, paralyzing the motors of the airplane (according to statements of the aviators). Afterward the Disc rose losing sight, the airplane motors functioning again.\n\nDeduction from the above stated - according to my way of thinking, that - when facts of this nature which seemed utopian occur, they are disproved by the statements of various witnesses in different circumstances and therefore are \"scientific\" facts.\n\nIf on two occasions the paralysis of electric force occurred - and let us say vital force (in the case of guards) - there is disclosed in said cases the \"interference of a person,\" Dr. Linke. Why could Dr. Linke not have interference in the other two cases, items 2nd and 3rd?"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"According to the article, among other statements of the guards, was the fact that between midnight and 2 o'clock rain fell in torrents and for a few moments there was complete darkness because the lights went off. A guard tried to ring the alarm which would set off the siren, and it did not work; he yelled to another guard but did not get an answer, and his voice sounded very \"distant\"; although he tried to warn his chiefs personally, he could not run or even walk fast (he had to walk slowly).\n\n2°).--A little before the fall of Berlin, \"the motors of autos and trucks stopped unexpectedly,\" without any apparent explanation; after one hour they succeeded in starting them again. During this occasion it was commented that \"something rare occurred in the atmosphere.\"\n\n3° - About three months ago I read in a local newspaper about the \"flying saucers,\" with the reservation that perhaps they would be speculating about the flying saucers; however, it is undeniable that they were telling the truth. It stated that, according to the article from a news agency, an officer and his associate who were flying a plane saw a \"flying saucer.\" They followed it, but it, as in previous cases, whirled about and could not be reached. However, the flying saucer flew very high and then it began a rapid descent; it stopped a few seconds on the officer's airplane, paralizing the motors of the airplane, (according to statements of the aviators). Later the disk flew very high and was lost from view, and the airplane motors began working.\n\nAny inference from the above statements — according to my way of thinking, — that these facts may appear to be imaginary, is dispelled by the statements of various witnesses on each occasion, and therefore they are \"scientific\" facts.\n\nIf on two occasions paralization of electricity occurred, as well as what we may call paralization of vital forces (in the case of the guards), and in said cases \"the interference of one person,\" Dr. LINKE, is inferred, why could not Dr. LINKE also be connected with the other two cases (2 and 3)?\n\nIt may be that all this is not in any way related and that the flying saucers are nothing more than what has been given as a scientific explanation, but the \"strange force,\" about which our ancestors have not spoken to us in history, we cannot deny.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I submit for your full consideration all I have said, my only motive being \"human interest for human affairs\" and my desire for the progress of humanity, for a good future full of dignity and cosmic evolution.\n\nWithout further particulars, I remain\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nS/ FRANCISCO TRONCOSO SILVA\nCasilla 1857. Valparaiso\nChile, South America\n\nP. S. Please acknowledge receipt of this letter.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Valparaiso, 4 de Marzo de 1953.\n\nSeñor\n\nDirector Federal Bureau of Investigation.\nWashington.\n\nEstados Unidos. Norte América.\n\nReferencia:- Persona con posible ingerencia en \"Discos Voladores\".\n\nEstimado señor:-\n\nMe permito dirigirme a Ud., que dirige una poderosa Oficina de Investigación de raigambre Internacional, para manifestar lo siguiente:-\n\n1º.- a) Tuve la oportunidad de leer en una revista policial \"chilena\", en una sección titulada \"Fugas Perfectas\", la fuga del Dr. Linke (de 42 años de edad, viudo, que a mediados de 1950 en Londres fué detenido en un Edificio de Departamentos, 8º piso. Motivo de detención, su posible participación con Vladimir Vlasav de \"divulgar a gobiernos extranjeros secretos de aviación Inglesa\").\n\nEn el allanamiento para su detención que se efectuó entre 04 y 05 hrs. de la madrugada, ocurrió un hecho extraño \"cuando la policía cercaba el 8º piso, todo el edificio quedó a obscuras y los ascensores detenidos como también los teléfonos y citáfonos silenciados. Los policías al llegar al 8º piso con sus linternas eléctricas, éstas se apagaron simultáneamente. (Sin embargo fué detenido a las 06 hrs., al alba).\n\nb) El Dr. Linke huyó del presidio de Kent (a pocos días de ser encerrado) y según declaraciones del autor del artículo, que deben ser fidedignas, lo hizo en la siguiente circunstancia:- Entre las 12 de la noche (24 hrs.) y 02 hrs. de la mañana, en lluvioso día desapareció el Dr. Julius Linke, con las agravantes de - paralización del alumbrado, ascensores y teléfonos, no funcionamiento de linternas de bolsillo (de vigilantes).\n\nLos vigilantes entre otras cosas declararon - según el artículo - que entre las 24 y 02 hrs., arreció en gran forma la lluvia y en ciertos momentos reinó completa\"obscuridad\", los focos se apagaron. Un vigilante trató de tocar el botón de alarma que hace sonar el silbato de peligro y no funcionó; gritó a otro vigilante y no obtuvo respuesta y su voz era \"lejana\"; para avisar personalmente a sus jefes no pudo correr ni apresurar la marcha (sino andar en forma lenta).\n\n2º.- Poco antes de la caída de Berlín, \"los motores de autos y camiones fueron inesperadamente detenidos\", sin encontrarse aparente explicación; después de una hora se logró ponerlos en movimiento. Se comentó en esa oportunidad \"que algo raro ocurría en la atmósfera\".\n\n3º.- Harán cerca de tres meses que leí en un periódico local, acerca de los \"Discos Voladores\" - haciendo la salvedad que tal vez se habrá especulado acerca de los platillos voladores, pero también es imegable que se han dicho verdades - declarando, según un artículo de una agencia noticiosa que, un oficial y su acompañante que piloteaban un avión, divisaron un \"Disco Volador\". Lo persiguieron, pero éste como en casos anteriores hizo bastantes pirustas y no se dejó alcanzar. Sin embargo el Disco Volador se elevó a gran altura, luego inició un acelerado descenso y se estacionó unos instantes por sobre el avión del Oficial, paralizándole los motores al avión (según declaraciones de los aviadores). Posteriormente el Disco se elevó perdiéndose de vista, funcionando nuevamente los motores del avión.\n\nDeducción de lo anteriormente manifestado - según mi modo de pensar, que - al ocurrir hechos de esta índole que parecieran utópicos, se desmiente por lo manifestado por varios testigos en distintas circunstancias y por lo tanto son hechos \"científicos\".\n\nSi en dos ocasiones ocurrió la paralización de la fuerza eléctrica - y digámoslo fuerza vital (en caso de vigilantes) - se desprende en dichos casos la \"ingerencia de una persona\", el Dr. Linke. ¿Porqué no podría tener ingerencia el Dr. Linke, en los otros dos casos, incisos 2º y 3º ?"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- 2 -\n\nPuede que todo esto no tenga relación y que los Discos Voladores no sean más que lo que han explicado ciertos científicos, pero lo de la \"fuerza extraña\", que no nos hablan nuestros antepasados en su historia, no lo podemos negar.\n\nDejo a su entera consideración todo lo dicho, no guiándome otro motivo que el \"interés humano por las cosas humanas\" y aspirando por el amplio progreso de la Humanidad, por un futuro benigno de dignidad y evolución cósmica.\n\nSin otro particular, saluda atentamente a Ud.\n\nFrancisco Troncoso Silva.\n\nCasilla 1857. Valparaiso.\n\nChile. Sud América.\n\nNota:- Ruego a Ud. contestarme de haber recibido la presente."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED\nINDEXED 62-83894-329\n\nMarch 23, 1953\n\nMr. Francisco Troncoso Silva\nCasilla 1857\nValparaiso, Chile\n\nDear Mr. Troncoso:\n\nI want to take this opportunity to thank you for your letter of March 4, 1953.\n\nThe interest which prompted you to make your observations available to me is sincerely appreciated. Since your communication may be of interest to another governmental agency, I am taking the liberty of forwarding a copy of it to The Honorable, The Secretary of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncc-Foreign Liaison Desk, with copy of incoming.\ncopy by form, Secretary of the Air Force.\nELT:blt\n\nTolson\nLadd\nNichols\nBelmont\nClegg\nGlavin\nHarbo\nRosen\nTracy\nGearty\nMohr\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nSizoo\nMiss Gandy\n\nCOMM - FBI\nMAR 24 1953\nMAILED 92\n\n78 APR 7 1953"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM: SAC, SAN JUAN (65-330)\nDATE: 4/28/53\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT OBSERVED\n11:30 AM, APRIL 8, 1953, FORT BUCHANAN, PUERTO RICO:\nMISCELLANEOUS\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nOn 4/27/53 a report was received from Major BRADFORD P. SHUMAN, Wing Intelligence Officer, Ramey Air Force Base, Puerto Rico. The substance of this report is as follows:\n\nFive persons observed an unidentified flying object at 11:30 AM on 4/8/53 at Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico. Statements were taken from all of the witnesses, among whom were three Captains and a Sergeant of the U. S. Army, as well as a civilian. They described the object as a bright star or a bright ball of fire at a great height, and it was moving rapidly at the time it was observed.\n\nAll of the witnesses observed one RB 36 aircraft which had been flying in the area at the time of the sighting of this unidentified object. The Wing Intelligence Officer reported that there were two RB 36 aircraft in the area at this time. These aircraft were reported to be flying at 12,000 and 21,000 feet respectively. None of the persons from whom statements were taken were able to accurately describe the object, other than by the statements set forth above.\n\nThis matter is being reported to the Bureau for information purposes.\n\nCLOSED.\n\nFDO'B:MD\n\n62-83894-330\nRECORDED-12\nINDEXED-12\nEX-102\n53 MAY 11 1953"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"May 14, 1953\n\nMrs. Robert H. Davisson\n26 Olcott Street\nWatertown, Massachusetts\n\nDear Mrs. Davisson:\n\nI have received your letter of May 9, 1953, and I want to thank you for making the information contained in your letter available to me.\n\nInasmuch as the information contained in your letter comes within the jurisdiction of the Department of the Air Force, I have furnished a copy of your letter to that Department for appropriate attention.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncc - 1 - Boston (FOR INFORMATION)\n\nEHM:mjh\n\nRECORDED-141\nINDEXED-141\n62-83894-331\nMAY 18 1953\n\nNOTE: Bureau files are negative re Mrs. Robert H. Davisson.\n\nCOMM - FBI\nMAY 15 1953\nMAILED 28"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: May 14, 1953\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nThere is attached for your information and assistance in this matter a copy of a self-explanatory letter dated May 9, 1953, received by this Bureau from Mrs. Robert H. Davisson, 26 Olcott Street, Watertown, Massachusetts. Mrs. Davisson's letter has been acknowledged by this Bureau and she has been informed that a copy of her letter has been referred to the Department of the Air Force for appropriate attention.\n\nAttachment\n\ncc - 1 - Boston (Under Separate Cover) (Attachment) (FOR INFO)\n\nNOTE: Bureau files are negative re Mrs. Robert H. Davisson.\n\nEHM:mjh\n\nRECORDED - 99\nINDEXED - 99\n62-82894-332\n\nMAILED 6\nMAY 15 1953\nCOMM - FBI"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 99\n\nReport\n\nDirector of Federal Bureau of Investigation\nInspector Dana Alcaner\nHeadquarters of the Air Force\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nFrom: Mrs. Robert H. Davisson\nSubject: Unidentified Flying Object\n\nDear Sir:\n\nThere is attached a copy of a letter dated May 9, 1953, received by this Bureau from Mrs. Robert H. Davisson, 26 Olcott Street, Watertown, Massachusetts, regarding the subject.\n\nAttachments\n\nEnc. 1 - Letter (Under Separate Cover) (Mass. Mail) (Dec. 1953)\n\nNote: Above files are negative on file - Director - Watertown - Newbury.\n\nFBI\n\nMay 14 1 55 PM 1953\nRECEIVED-LAD\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nMay 19 12 23 PM 1953\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED\nMAY 19 1953\nCOMM-FBI"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"26 Olcott Street\nWatertown, Mass.\nMay 9, 1953\n\nDear Sir:-\n\nThursday evening 9:25 PM as I left school (M.I.T.) and entered the parking lot along side of the school. I happened to look up and I saw what seems to be known as a flying saucer. I assure you it was not an air plane, a search light nor a falling star. It was round in shape & a rather orange color. It traveled horizontally at a rather slow speed for just a few seconds then disappeared just like that. I was not alone at the time, another student was with me & saw it. I can send 62-83894-333 you his name & address if you like it.\n\nWhen I arrived home I spent approximately one half hour calling C.D. & air force ground operations etc. finally after getting no answers I called the Watertown police who merely informed me they didn't know what I should do about it. It came as rather a surprise to me, I thought that there was supposed to be somebody on lookout at all times. I do not know to whom I should write & in desperation am writing to you. I do hope you will report this to the proper authorities for me and I hope you will suggest to the local C.D. that they should have someone that a person could call to report such findings. I would appreciate very much a reply from you. May I just add that I honestly don't know what the unknown object was. I never before saw anything like it. I would be very happy to supply any other information you would like.\n\nThanking you very much.\n\nSincerely yours\nMrs. Robert H. Davisson"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 99\nINDEXED - 99\n\nJuly 9, 1953\n62-83894-333\n\nMr. W. S. Woodfill\nPresident\nGrand Hotel\nMackinac Island, Michigan\n\nDear Mr. Woodfill:\n\nYour letter of June 30, 1953, has been received in Mr. Hoover's absence from the city, and I am taking the liberty of acknowledging its receipt.\n\nYour communication will be brought to his attention promptly following his return to Washington.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nHelen W. Gandy\nSecretary\n\ncc-Detroit, with copy of incoming.\n\ncc-Cincinnati, with copy of incoming.\n\nATTENTION SAC: You are instructed to thoroughly check your files in an effort to determine whether or not the Mr. Stevenson referred to by correspondent has been interviewed by an Agent of your office. You should also furnish the Bureau any information which might assist in clarifying the story set forth by Woodfill. Subject results no later than July 16, 1953 under caption \"Mr. W. S. Woodfill, President, Grand Hotel, Mackinac Island, Michigan, Research (Crime Records).\"\n\nFollow-up made for July 16, 1953.\nNOTE: Although inquiries regarding such phenomena are being handled by the Air Force at this present time, it is believed desirable to check the source of this rumor and following receipt of reply from Cincinnati, refer correspondent's inquiry to the Air Force. In 1939 and again in 1940 Woodfill invited the Director to attend the Michigan Hotel Convention, and both invitations were declined. An informant reported that in 1925 gambling on Mackinac Island was reserved for the Grand Hotel.\n\nHPL:blt"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 9, 1953\n\nMr. W. S. Woodfill\nPresident\nGrand Hotel\nMackinac Island, Michigan\n\nDear Mr. Woodfill:\n\nYour letter of June 30, 1953, has been received in Mr. Hoover's absence from the city, and I am taking the liberty of acknowledging its receipt.\n\nYour communication will be brought to his attention promptly following his return to Washington.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nHelen W. Gandy\nSecretary\n\ncc-Detroit, with copy of incoming.\n\ncc-Cincinnati, with copy of incoming.\n\nATTENTION SAC: You are instructed to thoroughly check your files in an effort to determine whether or not the Mr. Stevenson referred to by correspondent has been interviewed by an Agent of your office. You should also furnish the Bureau any information which might assist in clarifying the story set forth by Woodfill. Subject results no later than July 16, 1953 under caption \"Mr. W. S. Woodfill, President, Grand Hotel, Mackinac Island, Michigan, Research (Crime Records).\"\n\nFollow-up made for July 16, 1953.\nNOTE: Although inquiries regarding such phenomena are being handled by the Air Force at this present time, it is believed desirable to check the source of this rumor and following receipt of reply from Cincinnati, refer correspondent's inquiry to the Air Force. In 1939 and again in 1940 Woodfill invited the Director to attend the Michigan Hotel Convention, and both invitations were declined. An informant reported that in 1925 gambling on Mackinac Island was reserved for the Grand Hotel.\n\nHPL:blt\n\nCOMM - FBI\nJUL 10 1953\nMAILED 27"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Belmont\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Gearty\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Winterrowd\nTele. Room\nMr. Holloman\nMr. Sizoo\nMiss Gandy\n\nGrand Hotel\nWORLD'S LARGEST SUMMER HOTEL MACKINAC ISLAND · MICHIGAN\nW. S. Woodfill President\nJune 30, 1953\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D. C.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nA relative of mine living in Circleville, Ohio has advised me of the following account.\n\nTwo years ago a respected farmer living near Circleville saw a lighted object dancing around, flying around in the air near him late at night in a pasture or field, -- a flying saucer. In due time this came to have general knowledge in the community, and about one year ago the story appeared in the Circleville newspaper.\n\nSince then he is presumed to have been consulted with representatives of the F.B.I., so it is said there, and only three weeks ago or so it is said the F.B.I. representatives came to consult with him again. This time they brought pictures to show the farmer of various types of these flying saucers or space ships that have been apprehended by the government from time to time, and the farmer was able to identify one of them as the type of thing he had seen two years ago.\n\nThe farmer was told, as the story goes, by your representatives, that the particular flying saucer he identified is the type that is known to have been flown down from the planet Mars, and that similar ships have been captured, and that your agency or the government hold captive one man at least in California who was taken from one of these things from Mars. This Martian it is understood is now being taught how to speak English -- in California -- and taught American customs. It is said that it is apparent that this Martian comes from a civilization much more advanced than our own civilization.... and that this account has general knowledge as reported here in that community.\n\nI understand that the farmer is a Mr. Stevenson, that he is held in very high repute in the community, prosperous, conservative and of presumed sound mind."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. 2\n\nI can only believe that the account is a lot of nonsense, insofar as the F.B.I. telling the farmer that the government has captured several \"flying saucers\", and that they are from Mars, and that a Martian is being held captive in California. It would be apparent to me that if the government did have such knowledge, they would not confide such information to the farmer, -- and moreover that it is too utterly fantastic to credit with recognition as true. The farmer no doubt saw a \"flying saucer\", a light reflection or other light phenomenon such as the government has said all such things really are, and not a space ship from Mars or another place in outer space.\n\nI am writing to hopefully secure your advice, insofar as you can properly advise me publicly as a citizen, of what the truth is in this story. I should like to set my relative there straight. And I am curious personally to know what the real story is about this farmer - Mr. Stevenson of the Circleville, Ohio area.\n\nRespectfully yours,\n\nW. S. Woodfill\nPresident"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nJUL 8 1953\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI ATLANTA 7-8-53 11-0-2 AM JB\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\n\nFLYING SAUCERS, MR. TOM MCRAE, - ATLANTA CONSTITUTION- REPORTER, COMPLAINANT. THREE FORTYFIVE AM THIS DATE MCRAE TELEPHONICALLY FURNISHED FOLLOWING -FANTASTIC TALE - ASSURING THAT NEITHER HE NOR ANY MEMBER OF -CONSTITUTION- STAFF HAD BEEN DRINKING BUT HAD WITNESSED THIS STORY. MCRAE STATED EDWARD E. WATERS, ONE EIGHT FIVE FIVE PEACHTREE RD, NE, TELE ELGIN NINE FIVE SIX TWO, CALLED ON HIM AT NEWSPAPER OFFICE STATING HE ANDTWO OTHER COMPANIONS WHILE TRAVELING IN CAR ON BANKHEAD HIGHWAY ABOUT MABLETON, GA. ENCOUNTERED THREE SMALL ANIMALS WHICH THEY BELIEVED HAD LANDED FROM SOME PLACE IN FLYING SAUCER. WATERS INFORMED MCRAE THAT AS THEY APPROACHED THE THREE OBJECTS SSTARTING MAKING THEIR WAY BACK TO WHAT HE BELIEVED A FLYING SAUCER, THAT TWO OF THE ANIMALS ESCAPED IN SAUCER BUT THIRD WAS KILLED WHEN HIT BY THEIR AUTOMOBILE. WATERS DISPLAYED OBJECT OR ANIMAL TO MCRAE AT NEWSPAPER OFFICE. MCRAE STATED ANIMAL DID NOT RESEMBLE ANYTHING HE HAD EVER SEEN BEFORE BUT LOOKED AS IF IT BELONGED TO MONKEY FAMILY. ANIMAL MEASURED AND FOUND TO BE APPROXIMATELY TWENTYONE INCHES LONG, HAD RATHER POINTED HEAD, LARGE EARS AND SKIN WAS PINKISH. DUE TO EARLY MORNING HOUR MCRAE UNABLE TO LOCATE SCIENTIST TO EXAMINE ANIMAL BUT DID HAVE ONE OF LEADING VETERINARIANS THIS CITY EXAMINE IT.\n\nEX-103"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-&3 2\nMCRAE STATES VETERINARIAN WOULD NOT COMMIT HIMSELF BUT VET POINTED\nOUT HAD NEVER SEEN ANIMAL IN MONKEY FAMILY WITHOUT HAIR AS THIS ONE\nNOR HAD EVER NOTED A DEAD ANIMAL THAT DID NOT TURN PALE AT DEATH.\nVETERINARIAN STATED ANIMAL HAD HAD A TAIL BUT SAME WAS MISSING AND WHEN\nQUESTIONING WATERS ABOUT SAME WATERS SEEMED SOMEWHAT SURPRISED BUT STATE\nIT WAS POSSIBLY CUT OFF IN ACCIDENT. MCRAE ADVISED WHERE WAS BLOOD\nAROUND MOUTH OF ANIMAL CAUSED BY ACCIDENT WHICH RESEMBLED HUMAN BLOOD\nMCRAE FIRST THOUVHT WATERS POSSIBLY TRYING TO PULL PUBLICITY GAG DUE\nTO RECENT NEWSPAPER STORIES BUT BELIEVED HAD THIS BEEN HIS MOTIVE WATER\nWOULD HAVE TIMED HIS VISIT BETTER AS THEY WERE UNABLE TO PRINT ANYTHING\nAFTER MIDNIGHT. MCRAE STATED NEWSPAPER WOULD POSSIBLY RUN STORY ON\nABOVE FACTS TODAY. ATLANTA INDICES NEGATIVE ON WATERS. ABOVE\nFURNISHED IN VIEW OF POSSIBLE PUBLICITY THIS DATE. NO INVESTIGATION\nBEING CONDUCTED THIS OFFICE UCAB. MATTER REFERRED TO OSI OFFICE NINE\nAM EST TODAY.\nCARSON\nEND AND ACK\nLINE X SIX SHUD LAST THREE WORDS BE WHXX THERE WAS BLOOD\nYES THANKS ALSO LINE 10 SHUD IT BE THEY WERE UNABLE\nYES OK TU\n12-11 PM OK FBI WA RD\nV\nUC: MR. BELMONT AND SUPERVISOR DOM. INTEL. DIVISION"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JUL 8 1953\nTELETYPE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE COMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nFBI ATLANTA 7-8-53 11-0-2 AM JB\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\nFLYING SAUCERS, MR. TOM MCRAE, - ATLANTA CONSTITUTION- REPORTER, COMPLAINANT. THREE FORTYFIVE AM THIS DATE MCRAE TELEPHONICALLY FURNISHED FOLLOWING -FANTASTIC TALE - ASSURING THAT NEITHER HE NOR ANY MEMBER OF -CONSTITUTION- STAFF HAD BEEN DRINKING BUT HAD WITNESSED THIS STORY. MCRAE STATED EDWARD E. WATERS, ONE EIGHT FIVE FIVE PEACHTREE RD, NE, TELE ELGIN NINE FIVE SIX TWO, CALLED ON HIM AT NEWSPAPER OFFICE STATING HE ANDTWO OTHER COMPANIONS WHILE TRAVELING IN CAR ON BANKHEAD HIGHWAY ABOUT MABLETON, GA. ENCOUNTERED THREE SMALL ANIMALS WHICH THEY BELIEVED HAD LANDED FROM SOME PLACE IN FLYING SAUCER. WATERS INFORMED MCRAE THAT AS THEY APPROACHED THE THREE OBJECTS SSTARTING MAKING THEIR WAY BACK TO WHAT HE BELIEVED A FLYING SAUCER, THAT TWO OF THE ANIMALS ESCAPED IN SAUCER BUT THIRD WAS KILLED WHEN HIT BY THEIR AUTOMOBILE. WATERS DISPLAYED OBJECT OR ANIMAL TO MCRAE AT NEWSPAPER OFFICE. MCRAE STATED ANIMAL DID NOT RESEMBLE ANYTHING HE HAD EVER SEEN BEFORE BUT LOOKED AS IF IT BELONGED TO MONKEY FAMILY. ANIMAL MEASURED AND FOUND TO BE APPROXIMATELY TWENTYONE INCHES LONG, HAD RATHER POINTED HEAD, LARGE EARS AND SKIN WAS PINKISH. DUE TO EARLY MORNING HOUR MCRAE UNABLE TO LOCATE SCIENTIST TO EXAMINE ANIMAL BUT DID HAVE ONE OF LEADING VETERINARIANS THIS CITY EXAMINE IT."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-&3 2\nMCRAE STATES VETERINARIAN WOULD NOT COMMIT HIMSELF BUT VET POINTED\nOUT HAD NEVER SEEN ANIMAL IN MONKEY FAMILY WITHOUT HAIR AS THIS ONE\nNOR HAD EVER NOTED A DEAD ANIMAL THAT DID NOT TURN PALE AT DEATH.\nVETERINARIAN STATED ANIMAL HAD HAD A TAIL BUT SAME WAS MISSING AND WHEN\nQUESTIONING WATERS ABOUT SAME WATERS SEEMED SOMEWHAT SURPRISED BUT STATE\nIT WAS POSSIBLY CUT OFF IN ACCIDENT. MCRAE ADVISED WHERE WAS BLOOD\nAROUND MOUTH OF ANIMAL CAUSED BY ACCIDENT WHICH RESEMBLED HUMAN BLOOD\nMCRAE FIRST THOUVHT WATERS POSSIBLY TRYING TO PULL PUBLICITY GAG DUE\nTO RECENT NEWSPAPER STORIES BUT BELIEVED HAD THIS BEEN HIS MOTIVE WATER\nWOULD HAVE TIMED HIS VISIT BETTER AS THEY WERE UNABLE TO PRINT ANYTHING\nAFTER MIDNIGHT. MCRAE STATED NEWSPAPER WOULD POSSIBLY RUN STORY ON\nABOVE FACTS TODAY. ATLANTA INDICES NEGATIVE ON WATERS. ABOVE\nFURNISHED IN VIEW OF POSSIBLE PUBLICITY THIS DATE. NO INVESTIGATION\nBEING CONDUCTED THIS OFFICE UCAB. MATTER REFERRED TO OSI OFFICE NINE\nAM EST TODAY.\nCARSON\nEND AND ACK\nLINE X SIX SHUD LAST THREE WORDS BE WHXX THERE WAS BLOOD\nYES THANKS ALSO LINE 10 SHUD IT BE THEY WERE UNABLE\nYES OK TU\n12-11 PM OK FBI WA RD\nV\nORIGINAL-DIRECTOR"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The Little Man Who Wasn't\nEdward Watters and two friends said they saw a flying saucer on U.S. Highway 78 near Atlanta, Ga., and several small creatures running toward it. They ran over one but the others entered the saucer and flew off in a blaze of light. Mr. Watters exhibits the \"man from Mars\" but an anatomy professor called it a skinned monkey.\nENCLOSURE 62-83894-334\nWashington Daily News 7/9/53"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(SAUCER)\nATLANTA--TWO BARBERS AND A BUTCHER PRODUCED A 21-INCH LONG \"CREATURE\" TODAY TO BACK UP THEIR TALE THAT THEY HAD SEEN A FLYING SAUCER AND THREE ELUSIVE LITTLE MEN AFTER CONSUMING ONE BEER APIECE.\nAN ANATOMY PROFESSOR SAID, HOWEVER, THAT THE CORPSE THE EARTH MEN SUSPECTED WAS FROM OUTER SPACE APPEARED TO BE A MONKEY.\nTHE MEN WERE CONVINCED IT WAS FROM OUT OF THIS WORLD. THEY SAID THEY RAN INTO IT WITH THEIR AUTOMOBILE WHILE DRIVING ON A HIGHWAY NEAR HERE LAST NIGHT.\n\"RIGHT THERE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HIGHWAY WAS THIS THING, GLOWING RED ALL OVER,\" SAID EDWARD WATTERS, 28-YEAR-OLD BARBER. IT LOOKED LIKE A FLYING SAUCER PICTURE HE HAD SEEN IN A SCIENCE MAGAZINE, HE SAID.\n\"THREE LITTLE MEN WERE RUNNING FOR IT,\" WATTERS CONTINUED. \"THEY ALL JUMPED. TWO OF THEM MADE IT. I HIT THE OTHER ONE.\"\nWATTERS SAID THE MACHINE SOON ROSE INTO THE AIR AND ZOOMED AWAY. HE SAID IT WAS NOT MORE THAN WAIST HIGH AND ABOUT HALF AS WIDE AS THE ROAD.\nWATTERS' COMPANIONS, ARNOLD PAYNE, A BUTCHER, AND THOMAS WILSON, A BARBER, TOLD THE SAME STORY. WATTERS SAID THE INCIDENT OCCURRED ABOUT MIDNIGHT AFTER THEY HAD CONSUMED ONE BEER APIECE.\nDR. W.A. MICKLE, ANATOMY PROFESSOR AT EMROY UNIVERSITY, EXAMINED THE ANIMAL, WHICH HAD BECOME A VICTIM OF AN AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT. MICKLE SAID IT LOOKED LIKE A MEMBER OF THE \"RHESUS MONKEY FAMILY,\" ALTHOUGH IT HAD NO HAIR.\n\"IF IT'S A CREATURE FROM OUTER SPACE, THEY HAVEN'T INVENTED ANYTHING NEWS,\" HE SAID.\nWATTERS DECIDED TO FREEZE THE THING WITH DRY ICE AND PUT IT ON DISPLAY.\n7/8--N633P\nENCLOSURE 62-83894-334"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED-124 62-83874-334\nINDEXED-124\nEX-103\nDATE: July 10, 1953\nTO: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\nFROM: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nThe following information was furnished to the Atlanta Field Office of this Bureau at 3:45 A.M. on July 8, 1953, by Mr. Tom McRae, \"Atlanta Constitution\" reporter. Mr. McRae stated Mr. Edward E. Waters, 1855 Peach Tree Road, Northeast, Atlanta, Georgia, telephone number Elgin 9562, contacted him at the office of the \"Atlanta Constitution\" and advised as follows:\n\nAccording to Waters, he and two other companions, while travelling in an automobile on Bankhead Highway in the vicinity of Mableton, Georgia, encountered three small animals which they believed had landed from a flying saucer. Waters advised as he and his companion approached, the three animals started making their way back to what was believed to be a flying saucer. According to Waters, two of the animals escaped in the flying saucer but the third was killed when hit by the automobile in which Waters and his companions were riding.\n\nAccording to McRae, Waters displayed the animal which had been killed to him at the \"Atlanta Constitution\" newspaper office. McRae stated the animal did not resemble anything he had ever seen before but it looked as though it belonged to the monkey family. According to McRae, the animal was approximately 21 inches long, had a rather pointed head, large ears and pinkish skin. McRae stated because of the early morning hour he was unable to locate a scientist to examine the animal, but he did have one of the leading veterinarians of Atlanta, Georgia, examine it."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\nRECORDED-124\nINDEXED-124\nEX-103\n[illegible]\nJUL 10 5 54 PM '53\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nFBI\nRECEIVED MAIL ROOM\nCOMM — FBI\nJUL 1 0 1953\nMAILED 27\nTolson Ladd Nichols Belmont Clegg Glavin Harbo Rosen Tracy Gearty Mohr Winterrowd Tele. Room Holloman Sizoo Miss Gandy"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"McRae advised the veterinarian would not commit himself but the veterinarian pointed out he had never seen an animal in the monkey family without hair nor had he ever seen a dead animal that did not turn pale at death. According to McRae, the veterinarian stated the animal's tail was missing and that when he had questioned Waters about the missing tail Waters had seemed somewhat surprised and indicated it had possibly been cut off in the accident. McRae stated there was blood around the mouth of the animal, which resembled human blood.\n\nAt the time McRae furnished the above information to the Atlanta Office of this Bureau, he stated neither he nor any member of the \"Atlanta Constitution\" newspaper staff had been drinking but had witnessed the above. McRae stated he first thought Waters had tried to pull a publicity gag in this matter; however, it was McRae's opinion if this had been Waters' motive, Waters would have timed his visit to the newspaper office better as the newspaper was unable to print anything on the story after midnight. McRae informed the Atlanta Office of this Bureau the \"Atlanta Constitution\" newspaper would probably run a story concerning the information set forth above.\n\nIt is noted your office was telephonically contacted on the morning of July 9, 1953, by a Liaison representative of this Bureau concerning the above matter. The above is furnished for your information and no investigation is being conducted in this matter by this Bureau.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 24, 1953\n\nMr. W. S. Woodfill\nPresident\nGrand Hotel\nMackinac Island, Michigan\n\nDear Mr. Woodfill: 62-83894-335\nRECORDED-34\nYour letter of June 30, 1953, was brought to my attention upon my return to the city, and I want to thank you for making this information available to me.\n\nI wish to advise that the situation which you discuss in your letter does not pertain to any matter within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. Obviously, therefore, no representative of this Bureau conducted the interview with Mr. Stevenson which you describe relative to \"flying saucers.\"\n\nSincerely yours,\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\ncc - Cincinnati\nReurlet July 15, 1953.\n\nNOTE: Mr. Woodfill's letter of June 30, 1953, stated that a farmer named Stevenson of Circleville, Ohio, had reportedly seen a flying saucer and had been subsequently interviewed on the matter by representative of the FBI. Mr. Woodfill desired to know if this were true.\nBulet of July 9, 1953, to him was an \"in-absence\" reply, containing a note for SAC, Cincinnati to determine the basis of the rumor. Cincinnati letter of July 15, 1953, indicates that Stevenson was interviewed on July 14, 1953; at that time Stevenson indicated that he had been interviewed on the subject by one Jack W. Grant of Columbus, Ohio, who made the statement that he (Grant) had once been \"checked\" by the FBI. Cincinnati files reflect no prior interview with the farmer, who is Bruce Stevenson, Rural Route 2, Circleville, Ohio."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\nJUL 28 5 51 PM '53\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nFBI\nRECEIVED MAIL ROOM\nMAILED 11\nJUL 28 1953\nCOMM-FBI\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nDATE: July 15, 1953\n\nFROM : SAC, CINCINNATI (105-0)\n\nSUBJECT: MR. W. S. WOODFILL, President\nGrand Hotel\nMackinac Island, Michigan\nRESEARCH - CRIME RECORDS\n\nReBulet dated 7-9-53.\n\nSheriff CHARLES RADCLIFF, Circleville, Pickaway County, Ohio, advised he is cognizant of a \"flying saucer\" report made by Mr. BRUCE STEVENSON, Rural Route 2, Circleville, Ohio. According to Sheriff RADCLIFF, Mr. STEVENSON reported that a saucer-shaped object had landed on his farm some time ago, and this report eventually reached local newspapers. In June, 1953, an individual discussed the matter with Mr. STEVENSON. Sheriff RADCLIFF advised that this person did not, to his knowledge, represent himself to be an FBI Agent. The Sheriff further declared that he has known BRUCE STEVENSON all his life and that he is a prosperous, well-respected local farmer, who is considered trustworthy.\n\nMr. BRUCE STEVENSON, Rural Route 2, was interviewed 7-14-53 at which time he stated that shortly after he received some publicity regarding his report of sighting a saucer-shaped object, he was visited by one JACK W. GRANT, who gave his address as Post Office Box 5112, Tri-Village Station, Columbus, Ohio. According to Mr. STEVENSON, GRANT told him he was a salesman of television antennas, and that for over six years he had been pursuing the hobby of investigating \"flying saucer\" reports. He emphasized that he had no official connection with any part of the Government, but stated that he had once been \"checked\" by the FBI. Mr. STEVENSON declared that GRANT showed him pictures of \"flying saucers\" and told him he was writing a book on the subject, which would be published soon.\n\nA search of the Cincinnati indices revealed no information identifiable with either BRUCE STEVENSON or JACK W. GRANT.\n\nDOE:VD\n\nAMSD\n\nRECORDED - 43 162-83894-335\n\nINDEXED-43 JUL 17 1953\n\nlet to Woodfill (and)\n1-24-53\nMLL"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED\nJUL 23 11 21 AM '53\nMR JONES\n\nJUL 27 12 12 PM '53\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED - DIRECTOR"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-528\n\n62-83894 - 336,337\nCHANGED TO\n62-101030 - 13\n\nMAY 5 1954"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nDATE: 4/12/54\n\nFROM : SAC, Newark (62-0)\n\nSUBJECT: INFORMATION REGARDING NEW\nPRINCIPLES OF AERO-DYNAMICS\nALOIS PIVEC - INFORMANT\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nEnclosed herewith are photostats of parts of two letters furnished by ALOIS PIVEC and his wife, OLGA PIVEC, both of 164 Hallstead Street, East Orange, NJ.\n\nBoth photostats are in German and concern the development of a new principle in aero-dynamics and alleged attempts by the Communists in Austria to obtain this information.\n\nThere is also enclosed a blind memo, setting forth the summary of the information in the letters and the circumstances under which they were obtained.\n\nThis information is being furnished to the Bureau for whatever action is deemed appropriate.\n\nThe indices of the Newark Office are negative regarding ALOIS PIVEC, OLGA PIVEC and ADOLPH DORNIG.\n\nEncls. (7)\n\ncc NK 100-17007\n\nREGISTERED MAIL\n\nENCLOSURE ATTACHED\n\nRTH:gms\n\nRECORDED - 47 62-83894-338\n\nINDEXED - 47 APR 20 1954"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Adolf Dornig\nWaidmannsdorferstr. 8\nKlagenfurt-West\n\n21.I.54\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Pivec!\n\nIhren Brief vom 8.I. am 19.I. habe ich erhalten. Besten Dank für Ihre Bemühungen und nehme mit Freude zur Kenntnis, daß Sie bereits mit amerik. Behörden wegen meiner Erfindung in Verbindung getreten sind. Allerdings lege ich deswegen keine großen Hoffnungen da ich weiß, daß bei d. US der ganze Laden nicht stimmt genau so wie b. d. Engländer. – Beispiel: Ich schrieb schon vor langer Zeit an d. US Stellen nach Salzburg 2 oder 3 Briefe und war im Vorjahr selbst in Salzburg, alles zwecklos. Auf meine Briefe kommt höchstens eine rübriges Agent, aber das ist auch alles. Als ich vor 2 Jahren in der Schweiz erst an H. Präsident Truman und dann an H. Präsident Eisenhower schrieb, kam eine amtl. Stelle, war ebenfalls alles für die Katz. Am Ende kommen immer nur Agenten. Im Mai 53 kam eine riesen Dreckserl, der wollte mir weismachen er bringt mich mit Arbeit in eine Auswanderungsstelle für Österreicher in die Schweiz, der beachte mich decat in Wirt daß ich ihn dis fort ins Gerichtsbrig. Ich hatte aber noch Glück, weiß nicht recht wie es ging. Vor einigen Tagen war ein Mann auf der Scheibe bei mir, der zeigte allerdings mit dem Finger auf mich, sagte dabei \"Du\" und als ich ihn anschaute, war er express bei der Tür draussen, ich konnte ihn nicht erkennen, aber scheinbar hat er mich erkannt. – Dabei noch bloß sind die Engländer. Ich schreibe denen hiesigen Stellen, meine Erfindung (so wie Ihnen), antwort kam keine. Als ich aufgefallen einmal Radio Kanada hörte, erfuhr ich von meinen Angaben, die sagen, daß es endlich gelungen sei (vermutlich Torpedo Fluid) gewisse Angaben über die deutschen fliegenden Flugzeuge zu erhalten und engl. Fachexperten deswegen in Kanada eine Funkprogrammstation erhalten werden u. s. w. Ich greife mir an den Kopf, ist die ganze Welt verrückt, ich biete meine Erfindung einer Behörde und die machen sie zu einem Klamauk daraus. Ohne meine Angaben bringen die die Maschine nie fertig. Wissen wie ich da hier etwas schwierig angerichtet ist, Obwohl seit 1937 wegen unseren Adler auch Plötzlich genannt Hirsch Wappen, der AUSTRIA Vogel hat in seinen Krallen Hammer und Sichel und als ich 1947 öffentlich sagte, daß die Kommunisten den Symbole auch auf unserem Geld sind, da hat mich die Gendarmerie zuerst gesagt und man hat mir erklärt, ich bin verrückt. Als ich wiederholt erklärte, daß in der Regierung ganz geheim ein roter Hund sitzt mit dem ist es aus, aber daß seit dem eine Auskunft immer auf verrückt bleibt gleich ich nicht obwohl ich weiß, daß die Kommunisten mich stets streng bewacht. Außerdem habe ich die Teufel (Verwandtschaft) dahinter, welches die Grundlagen der nutzbaren Atomphysik sind (ein amerik. unbek. Nutzungsrecht) und darum werden seit 1933 alle meine Vorteile in die USA kommen pünktlich und genau verteilt. Ich komme wieder nach, da ich wissenden (Verwandtschaft) die geheimen wiss. Nachrichtenmethoden (Apparate) und den Typ ein ganz neues setze, setze mehr alles daran, daß ich mit USA nicht in Verbindung komme. Ich glaube kaum, daß es auf normalem Weg geht und in ein Flugzeug setze ich mich nicht mehr hinein. Die Amis wissen nicht wieviel wiss. Agenten sie dabei haben. Als ich in's Pentagon schrieb wegen meiner Erfindung kam eine Ablehnung, von Salzburg kam nie Antwort bei den Engländer ist scheinbar meine Adresse verschwunden und als ich hier der FBI den Antrag machte, ich böse die wiss. Apparate, da erhielt"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Am Herrn Alois Piwetz 164 Halsted Str. New Jersey U.S.A.\n\nSehr geehrter Herr Piwetz!\n\nEs wird Ihnen bereits Ihr Bruder von mir geschrieben haben, da wir uns hier auf einem Bau kennen lernten und ich Ihnen betreff Erfindungen oder Verwertung einiges erzählt. Sind Sie mir, sehr geehrter Herr Piwetz, nicht ungehalten, daß ich mich nun an Sie wende. Ich habe es lange gezögert, da meine Frau nicht gerne ins Ausland gehen will. Beiliegend sende ich Ihnen 2 Erfindungen, also Ideen, und ich überlasse es Ihrer Urteilskraft, ob eine oder beide oder gar keine Erfindung verwertbar ist. Sie wollen von Ihrem eigenen Namen aus die beste Form wählen und für mich 45% und für Ihren Bruder 10% des Reingewinnes. Ich gebe Ihnen volle Freiheit, da Sie bestimmt bestrebt sein werden den größtmöglichen Gewinn zu erzielen.\n\nUnd nun, sehr geehrter Herr Piwetz, bin ich so frei, Ihnen etwas zu erzählen über eine Erfindung, nach welcher die ganze Welt verlangt. Vor dem Krieg wollte ich ein Spielzeug machen, das fliegt, und entdeckte rein zufällig ein bisher unbekanntes aerodynamisches Gesetz. Ich experimentierte weiter, verbesserte und informierte einige Kameraden. Diese wurden begeistert und wanderten nach Südamerika aus. Dort versuchten sie es auf eigene Verantwortung. Es gab Tote und sie konnten die unvollendete Erfindung nicht vervollkommnen. Sie kamen wieder zu mir.\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRANSLATION FROM GERMAN\n\nItem #1\n\n12-21-53\n\nMr. ALOIS PIWETZ\n164 Halsted Str.\nNew Jersey, U. S. A.\n\nDear Mr. PIWETZ,\n\nYour brother will probably have communicated with you about me as we became acquainted with each other at a construction job. I told him a few things about inventions or utilization. Dear Mr. PIWETZ, be not angry with me because I am now turning to you. I hesitated such a long time as my wife does not wish to go abroad. Enclosed I am sending you 2 inventions, that is, ideas and I leave it to your own power of judgment whether one or both, or none of these inventions is suitable. If one seems to be profitable to you, you should apply for a patent in your own name as the best possible way and enter for me and for yourself 45% each of the net profit and 10% for your brother. I am giving you entirely a free hand, as you will undoubtedly try to attain the greatest possible profit.\n\nAnd now, dear Mr. PIWETZ, I am taking the liberty of telling you something about an invention which the entire world wants to have. (I am only writing the most important facts.) Before the war I intended to make a toy, something which flies, and purely accidentally I discovered a hitherto unknown aerodynamic law. I experimented further. I improved and informed several comrades. They were enthused and emigrated to South America. There they tried it on their own responsibility. People were killed and they failed to perfect the incomplete invention. They approached me again. As they were only artisans, these flying machines were, of course, built primitively. The first experiments to fly with a motorcycle motor attained the result of 250-300 km. Not bad for the years 1938-39! With a powerful motor they then flew 2600-2800 km. (hour kilometers)."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"After the war they came to me again and told me about their misfortune, that about 60% of all flights had been fatal. To make it very clear, they wanted to find out how I construct my flying apparatuses, because with a device, which endangers lives, they could not, of course, appear before the public, and, therefore, all this is still, so to speak, a private secret. In America, this flying machine is called \"flying saucer,\" and since among my former comrades a quarrel broke out and they distrust each other and none of them has the intelligence, which this invention demands, they have not progressed over there.\n\nI imagine that they have stubbornly adhered to some construction, that is, become involved in it that they cannot advance. It has taken me years to reach the point where I can already say with respect to the construction plan that now the machine is safe for flying. Thereby I am losing, however, some speed, but, in return for it, safety is secured and this is the main thing. This machine is so very simple in its construction that, if one gives me an engineer and experts, I can build this apparatus in 5 to 6 weeks at the most (but only experimentally for a crew of 1 to 3 men). Then this machine attains, with an automobile motor of 80 to 120 h.p. about 700 to 1,000 km. If a firm would exist, which does not shun the costs, I can, because of the simple construction of the machine, build the first machine immediately in such a manner that it exceeds the 2000 km. limit per hour.\n\nBecause of the new aerodynamic law it is possible without any difficulty (everything without propellers) to reach such speeds. Now the idea has come to me to build some kind of popular flying machine which is cheaper than an automobile. One does not need any starting or landing strip and one would have a travelling speed of about 500 to 700 km. per hour. I believe that America would be the most favorable place in the world for it. You will now understand that I am very anxious to establish contact with a firm which is greatly interested in this invention. But as I have no knowledge of English, it is for me, from the very beginning, an affair which will come to nothing. If you, dear Mr. PIWETZ, can start the matter, you will not have done it in vain. I am not niggardly and besides I want to go to the U. S. A. to realize there a still larger project for which I need co-workers. The circular flying machines shall bring me the money for my further future plans, for I believe popular flying machines, according to my model and besides 100% safe from crash, will be a gigantic business. I do not know the magnates over there; perhaps HENRY FORD or an airplane factory, possibly a helicopter plant would be interested in it.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"But I shall announce the names of my comrades only after\nI have received a contract pertaining to license or gratuities and\nafter my arrival in the U. S. However, it must be added that I shall\nnot lay out the money for the passage if some firm accepts me for the\nconstruction of the flying machines. But in addition to all that I\nneed someone who lives over there and who knows the English language,\nand now I am asking you, my dear Mr. PIWETZ,whether you c an\nfunction as my manager as they say in the U. S. A. Well, you know\nthat the manager receives payment, and I believe that you will\nenjoy working with me later on inventions when I am over there.\nIncidentally I mention that I took a course as a chemist.(The \"Do\" -\napparatuses, later called fog - or rocket-missiles, originated with me\nand also many other things.) I hope that you can decipher my\nhieroglyphic script. Such small writing is not in my line. So that\nyou may see that I am not exaggerating, I declare upon oath that the\ninvention, known by the name of \"flying saucer,\" is my own, that I know\nthe men who are building these machines in South America, and that I\ncan construct the above-described machine myself and attain at least\n2000 km.\n/s/ A. DORNIG.\nI hope that you will be interested in it. I am awaiting\nyour communication very hopefully.\nWith friendly greetings,\nRespectfully,\n/s/ ADOLF DORNIG\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Item #2\n1-21-54\nADOLF DORNIG\nWaidmannsdorferstr. 80\nKlagenfurt - West\nDear Mr. PIVEC,\nI have received your letter of 1-12, on 1-19. Many thanks\nfor your efforts. With joy I have taken cognizance of the fact that\nyou have already contacted American authorities concerning my invention.\nHowever, I have no great hopes, because I know that with the U. S.\neverything is defective, exactly as with the English. - Example:\nAlready a long time ago I wrote 2 or 3 letters to the U. S. authorities\nat Salzburg and I was in Salzburg myself during the past year, but\neverything was in vain. - At the most, in response to my letters, some\nRussian agent comes; that is all. When I wrote in Switzerland at\nfirst to President TRUMAN and then to President EISENHOWER through an\nofficial bureau, also everything was of no avail. In the end, always\nRussian agents come. In May 1953, a big dirty pig arrived who wanted to\nmake me believe that he would take me in an automobile to the emigration\noffice for Austrians in Switzerland. He enraged me to such an extent that\nI hit him in the face with my fist. But he had also helpers and I am\nnot sure how it ended. I awoke,lying on the ground, and all had disappeared.\nSeveral days ago a man approached me at my working place who only pointed\na finger upon me, saying: \"You!\" When I looked at him; he quickly ran\naway. I could not recognize him, but seemingly he knew me. - But\nthe English are even more stupid. I wrote to the local city commandant's\noffice about my invention (just like to you) but no reply came. When\nat one time I accidentally listened to \"Radio Canada,\" I learned about\nmy statements. Those people said that one had finally succeeded (possibly\nScotland Yard) to obtain exact data on the German flying saucers and\nthat one would, therefore, establish a research station in Canada with\nEnglish experts, etc. I wondered whether the entire world had gone crazy.\nI offer my invention for sale, and those people make such a noise about it!\nThey will never perfect the machine without my data. Well, I let you\nknow that I am somewhat in the bad books here; strictly speaking since 1937,\nbecause of our eagle, also called misfortune. Our coat of arms, the bird"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of Austria, has in its claws hammer and sickle, and when I announced\nin 193(?)7 in public that the communist symbols also appear on our\nmoney, the gendarmery arrested me and told me that I was crazy. Since\nI repeatedly declared that a \"red dog\" sits in the government in\ncomplete secrecy, everything has failed. But that since then an\ninformation has always been based upon the word crazy, I do not believe,\nalthough I know that the communists have always guarded me very strictly.\nFurthermore, I accidentally (relatives) discovered the fundamentals\nof Russian atom physics (a law of nature, unknown to America) and,\ntherefore, since 1933 all my attempts to get into the U. S. A. have\nbeen frustrated in every respect. I cannot journey to that country.\nSince I (relatives) also exactly know the most secret Russian\ncommunications methods (apparatuses) and the system, they are doing their\nutmost to prevent me from establishing contact with the U. S. A.\nI hardly believe that it will be possible by normal means. I shall not\nplace myself into an airplane again! The Americans do not know\nhow many Russian agents are with them. After I had written to the\nPentagon about my invention, a rejection arrived. From Salzburg I have\nnever received a reply. Seemingly, the English have lost my address and\nwhen I reported to the local FSS that I can construct the Russian\napparatuses, I received...*)\n*)Examiner's comment: This communication is incomplete.\n-5-"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ADOLPH DORNIG\nOn January 12, 1954, ALOIS PIVEC, 164 Hallstead Street, East Orange,\nNJ, appeared at the Newark Office and advised that he had received a letter\nfrom one ADOLPH DORNIG, Waidmannsdorferstr 80, Klagenfurt, West Austria,\non about December 20, 1953.\nPIVEC stated that the letter requested him to attempt to sell\na number of inventions, which he, DORNIG, had developed. PIVEC stated that\nthe request was to contact Aircraft Companies and Sewing Machine Companies\nin the United States and attempt to interest them in these devices.\nAccording to PIVEC, DORNIG requested that no governmental agencies\nbe contacted. PIVEC stated that the inventions, which DORNIG had developed\nwere new type of sewing machine and a flying saucer. PIVEC stated that he\ncame to this office because he felt that the flying saucer was of some\nimportance in the national defense of this country. PIVEC stated that he\nhas never met DORNIG but that DORNIG was given his name by PIVEC'S brother,\nFRITZ, who resides in Graz, Austria, and who is employed at Siemens-Halske\nBelggier Gasse 11, Graz, Austria. PIVEC stated that his brother workedwith\nDORNIG, at one time, and he believes that DORNIG is a chemist or some type\nof engineer. PIVEC stated that the contents of the letter seemed fantastic\nto him and that if the letter were not written in such an intelligent manner,\nhe would have doubted DORNIG'S sanity. He stated that DORNIG claims to\nhave sold a new principle of aero-dynamics, which made it possible to\nconstruct a practical flying saucer and that DORNIG had developed a model\nthat flies without the usual hazards. According to PIVEC, the letter\ncontinues by stating that DORNIG has been in contact with other men through-\nout the world, who have been attempting to develop the saucer and that he\nhas been the first to win real success.\nBy way of background, PIVEC stated that he was born in the\nvicinity of Leoben, Austria in 1925 and arrived in New York City on March\n29, 1952 from Bremerhaven, Germany. He is employed at the Public Service\nLaboratory in Maplewood, NJ.\nOn January 30, 1954, OLGA PIVEC, 164 Hallstead Street, East Orange,\nNJ, appeared at the Newark Office and advised that she was the wife of\nALOIS PIVEC. She stated that another letter had been received from ADOLPH\nDORNIG, by her husband, ALOIS PIVEC. She stated that her husband did not\nwant to furnish the information in this letter to the FBI. She stated that\nhe was not aware that she was furnishing this information and wished to keep\nthe interview confidential.\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 19 1964"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mrs. PIVEC stated that the letter received recently by her\nhusband, from DORNIG, contained information that DORNIG had been contacted\nby Communists in Austria, who wished to take him to Switzerland in order\nthat he might further develop his new principle of aero-dynamics. According\nto the letter, DORNIG has continued to refuse any offer by the Communists\nand wished PIVEC to increase his efforts to sell DORNIG'S new invention\nin the United States.\nBy way of background, OLGA PIVEC advised that she was born of\nGerman parents in South Russia and at the time of the German invasion of\nRussia, during World War II, she and her family were resettled in Germany.\nAfter the war, she married ALOIS PIVEC and came to the United States with\nhim.\n2"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date: May 13, 1954\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\n62-83894-338\n\nRECORDED-20\nEX-107\n\nThere is attached a copy of a memorandum dated April 12, 1954, captioned \"Adolph Dornig\" which contains information furnished to the Newark office of this Bureau by Alois Pivec and his wife, Olga Pivec, both of 143 Hallstead Street, East Orange, New Jersey. There is also attached a translation from the German language of the parts of the two letters furnished by Pivec and his wife to the Newark office.\n\nThe files of this Bureau fail to reflect that any investigation has been conducted by this Bureau of Adolph Dornig, Alois Pivec, or Olga Pivec. In view of the information set forth in the attached memorandum dated April 12, 1954, and the translation of the parts of the letters referred to herein, no investigation is contemplated by this Bureau in this matter.\n\nAttachment\n\ncc - 1 - Records Administration Branch (Attachment)\nAttention: Criminal Division\n(by O-6 form on same date)\n\nEHM:plu\n\nTelson\nLadd\nNichols\nBelmont\nClegg\nGlavin\nHarbo\nRosen\nTracy\nMohr\nTrotter\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nMiss Gandy\n\nMAY 17 1954\n\nMAY 13 1954\n\nFBI MAY 13 1954 MAILED 27"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nRECORDS SECTION\n4/23, 1954\n\nName Check Unit-Room 6523\nAttention Miss Igo\nService Unit-Room 6524\nForward to File Review\nReturn to Mrs. Mossburg Ext. 2104\nSupervisor\nRoom 4730\n\nAll References\nSubversive References, Nose\nMain References Only\nMain References Only\nRestrict to Locality of\nBreakdown Buildup Variations\nExact Name Only\nExact Spelling\nCheck for Alphabetical Loyalty Form\n\nSUBJECT Adolph Dornig\nAddress\n\nLocalities\nBirthdate & Place\n\nR# Date 4/23 Searcher Initial Hmm\n\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\n\nNR\n\nfile 5 EHm"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nRECORDS SECTION\n4/23, 1954\n\nName Check Unit-Room 6523\nAttention Miss Igo\nService Unit-Room 6524\nForward to File Review\nReturn to Moosburg Ext. 2104\nSupervisor\nRoom 4730\n\nAll References\nSubversive References, Nose\nMain References Only\nMain References Only\nRestrict to Locality of\nBreakdown Buildup Variations\nExact Name Only\nExact Spelling\nCheck for Alphabetical Loyalty Form\n\nSUBJECT Alois Pivec\nAddress\n\nLocalities\nBirthdate & Place\n\nR# Date 4/23 Searcher Initial Hmm\n\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\n\nNR\nA.\n25-27402-1"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nRECORDS SECTION\n4/23, 1954\n\nName Check Unit-Room 6523\nAttention Miss Igo\nService Unit-Room 6524\nForward to File Review\nReturn to Moosburg Ext. 2104\nSupervisor\nRoom 4730\n\nAll References\nSubversive References, Nose\nMain References Only\nMain References Only\nRestrict to Locality of\nBreakdown Buildup Variations\nExact Name Only\nExact Spelling\nCheck for Alphabetical Loyalty Form\n\nSUBJECT Olga Pivec\nAddress\n\nLocalities\nBirthdate & Place\n\nR# Date 4/23 Searcher Initial Hmm\n\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\n\nNR"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-528\n\n62-83894-339\nCHANGED TO\n62-101030-4\n\nMAY 15 1954\n\nC"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-340\nCHANGED TO\n62-101030-5\nMAY 26 1954\nRS\n4-528"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-341\nMiss Linda Butler\nBox 63\nMilton, Kentucky\nDear Linda:\nThank you very much for your letter of April 21, 1954.\nAlthough I would like to be of assistance, it is not possible for me to express an opinion regarding the subject you mentioned since it does not relate to a matter within the jurisdiction of the FBI.\nYou may desire, however, to communicate with The Honorable, The Secretary of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C., for whatever information he can give you.\nSincerely yours,\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nNOTE: First name salutation is being used since the correspondent indicates she is a seventh grade student. She requested the Director's opinion regarding Flying Saucers.\nTolson Ladd Nichols Belmont Clegg Glavin Harbo Rosen Tracy Gearty Mohr Winterrowd Tele. Room Holloman Miss Gandy\nGEM:ew\nRECEIVED FBI\nCOMM - FBI APR 28 1954 MAILED 31"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCERS\nApril 21, 1954\nMilton, Ky.\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington D.C.\nDear Sir,\nThe seventh grade of Milton are studying about Flying Saucers, and I would like to have your opinion on them.\nSincerely yours,\nLinda Butler\nMilton, Ky.\n62-83894-341\nRECORDED - 79\n10 APR 29 1954\nEX-123"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EX-133\nAPR 23 9 21 AM '54\nREC'D, RECORDS SEC\nRECEIVED - DIRECTOR FBI MR JONES U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nAPR 27 8 41 PM '54 APR 23 10 02 AM '54\nRECEIVED FBI U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE COPY\n\nApril-21-1954\nMilton, Ky.\n\nFederal Bureau\nof Investegation\nWashington\nD. C.\n\nDear Sir,\n\nThe seventh grade of Milton\nAre studying about Flying Saucers.\nand I would like to have your\nopinion on them.\n\nSincerely Yours,\n\n/S/ Linda Butler\nMilton, Ky.\n\nAddress on envelope\nBox 63\nMilton, Ky."} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nDATE: 6-8-54\n\nFROM : SAC, Cincinnati (100-0)\n\nSUBJECT: TRUMAN BETHURUM;\nFLYING DISCS\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nOn 6-7-54, Mr. THOMAS EICKHOFF, 3721 Tappan Avenue, Cincinnati 23, Ohio, and Mr. RALPH ZIMMERMANN, 2768 Highland Avenue, Cincinnati 12, Ohio, called at this office. Mr. EICKHOFF advised he is the operator of a beauty salon in the Neave Building, Cincinnati, and Mr. ZIMMERMANN advised he is President of the Zimmermann Packing Company in Cincinnati. Mr. EICKHOFF did all the talking for the two men and he furnished the following information:\n\nOn 6-3-54 an ad appeared in the \"Cincinnati Enquirer,\" a newspaper of general circulation, Cincinnati, Ohio, to the effect that on 6-11-54 a program would be presented at Taft Auditorium, Cincinnati, Ohio, on \"The Real Flying Saucer Story.\" The advertisement which Mr. EICKHOFF exhibited disclosed no sponsor for this program and it was only noted on the ad that tickets for the program sold for $2.00 per person and would be on sale at the Central Ticket Office in Cincinnati.\n\nMr. EICKHOFF advised that although he belongs to no organization interested in flying saucers, he has been interested in this subject and has been interested to the extent that he desired to know the sponsorship of the program. He stated that he found out from the Central Ticket Office that the ad had been placed by HENRY MADAY, 364 West Lewiston Avenue, Ferndale 20, Michigan. He advised that he telephonically contacted MADAY on 6-3-54 and MADAY stated that he was only the agent for renting the hall and that he was acting on behalf of TRUMAN BETHURUM and GEORGE HUNT WILLIAMSON. He stated that on 6-4-54 MADAY called him back and told him that there had been a disagreement between MADAY, BETHURUM and WILLIAMSON over MADAY's arrangements for the sale of tickets for the program and the renting of the hall.\n\nEICKHOFF advised that at this time MADAY said nothing to discredit either BETHURUM or WILLIAMSON and indicated that their disagreement only concerned his placing the ad in the newspaper prior to having the tickets for the program available in Cincinnati.\n\nRCD:CVM\n\nCC: Los Angeles (RM)\nIndianapolis (RM)\n\nREGISTERED MAIL\nAIR MAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 19 1964"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to Director\nJune 8, 1954\n\nMr. EICKHOFF continued that ten minutes after he had talked to MADAY on Friday, 6-4-54, he received a call from GEORGE HUNT WILLIAMSON and a Mr. MANSPEAKER, who confirmed to him that MADAY was no longer associated with them, and who asked that EICKHOFF meet with them at a luncheon at the Terrace Plaza Hotel on 6-7-54.\n\nMr. EICKHOFF, in explanation of his interest in this matter, advised that he had read such books as \"Flying Saucers From Outer Space,\" written by DONALD E. KEHOE, retired major, U. S. Marine Corps, which book was published by Harper's Publishers, and a book entitled \"Flying Saucers Have Landed,\" by GEORGE ADAMSKI, which book is published by Werner-Lowery Company in England, and is distributed by the British Book Center in New York City. He said that he has also heard broadcasts by persons he considers reputable news commentators, such as WALTER WINCHELL, FULTON LEWIS, JR., and FRANK EDWARDS, to the effect that reliable persons have reported observing flying discs or saucers. He said contrary to these reports, the U. S. Air Force has denied the existence of the flying saucer and he felt that persons such as TRUMAN BETHURUM and GEORGE HUNT WILLIAMSON, in presenting a program such as that contemplated, were either truthful or they were frauds. He stated that if they had a true story to tell, then he felt it was of such nature that it should be given as wide a distribution as possible, so that the people might learn the true facts regarding flying discs. He said, however, if their story was not true, then the holding of such a meeting as was contemplated would be a fraud on the general public. He estimated that such a meeting in Cincinnati might draw two thousand people, which, at $2.00 apiece, would result in a $4,000.00 take for the promoters.\n\nTo identify TRUMAN BETHURUM, Mr. EICKHOFF had with him two copies of the magazine \"Valor,\" which he stated he got from BETHURUM, this magazine being self-identified as the \"Golden Times Weekly,\" published by Soul Craft Chapels, Post Office Box 192, Noblesville, Indiana. The two issues which Mr. EICKHOFF had with him were numbers 15 and 16 of volume 6 of the publication, the number 15 being dated 2-6-54 and number 16 being dated 2-13-54. The number 15 issue contained an article concerning TRUMAN BETHURUM, in which he is identified as a truck driver from Redondo Beach, California, and it refers to an article dated 12-31-53, which appeared in the \"Daily Breeze,\" a newspaper at Redondo Beach, California, which allegedly contained a description of an encounter\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to Director\nJune 8, 1954\n\nwhich TRUMAN BETHURUM had with a crew of assumed space explorers under the supervision of a ravishing woman commandant in the Nevada desert. The article also reflects that TRUMAN BETHURUM allegedly was aboard flying saucers on eleven occasions. At the bottom of the first page of issue number 15 there appeared in what Mr. EICKHOFF stated was the handwriting of TRUMAN BETHURUM the statement \"This is a true story, a factual experience -- TRUMAN BETHURUM.\"\n\nThe above mentioned article in \"Valor\" also reflected that TRUMAN BETHURUM is 55 years of age and that his residence address is 519 North Gertruda Avenue, Redondo Beach, California.\n\nMr. EICKHOFF also had with him a letter addressed to TRUMAN BETHURUM from WILLIAM GILROY of the Saucers Research Foundation, which letter reflected that that organization was holding a three-day convention June 4, 5 and 6, 1954 at the Carthay Circle Theatre in Los Angeles, California, and that it had invited TRUMAN BETHURUM to this convention to say a few words concerning his experience. GILROY was identified in this letter as business manager of Criswell Predicts Your World of Tomorrow, 1922 North Highland, Hollywood 28, California.\n\nMr. EICKHOFF reiterated that he felt BETHURUM's story, if true, should be given wide publicity, but that if the story was false, then he should be prosecuted for fraud. He stated that he first took his information to the Air Force in the person of Lieutenant Colonel JOHN O'MARA of Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, whom EICKHOFF visited personally at O'MARA's home in Fairborn, Ohio, on Sunday, 6-6-54. EICKHOFF indicated that he asked Colonel O'MARA if there were such things as flying saucers and if BETHURUM's story could be true, and he said O'MARA denied that there was such a thing as a flying saucer and indicated to him that DONALD E. KEHOE, the author of \"Flying Saucers in Outer Space\" was a fraud and that information is available in Washington that KEHOE is a fraud. He said he was advised, however, by Colonel O'MARA that the Air Force could take no action with respect to BETHURUM or WILLIAMSON.\n\nEICKHOFF continued that it was his intention to aid in the promotion of a meeting for BETHURUM in Cincinnati. He advised that the original meeting scheduled for June 11 had been cancelled, and that he felt this meeting had such important information for the people as a whole that he was going to make every effort to make the meeting one of national\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to Director;\nJune 8, 1954\n\nsignificance. He said he intended to invite to the meeting all nationally prominent news commentators. He intended to try to get radio time to advertise the meeting but he did not wish to participate in this matter in any way if it would violate security regulations in any manner, or if BETHURUM and his associates were in any way fraudulent. He stated that he so informed BETHURUM, WILLIAMSON and Mr. MANSPEAKER at the luncheon meeting which was held at the Terrace Plaza Hotel on 6-7-54. They informed him that they were not afraid of an investigation; that BETHURUM's story was factual, and that they had no objection to EICKHOFF's advising Government authorities regarding it.\n\nMr. EICKHOFF stated that his report to this office was part of his plan to inform all the Federal agencies he thought should know about the activities of BETHURUM. He advised that in line with his contemplated plans that on the evening of 6-7-54 there was to be another meeting at the home of L. H. STRINGFIELD, 7017 Britton Avenue, Cincinnati 27, Ohio, at which meeting there would be Mr. STRINGFIELD, WILLIAMSON, MANSPEAKER, BETHURUM, RALPH ZIMMERMANN and Mr. EICKHOFF. He said at this meeting they would plan a method of operation and make arrangements for this meeting of national significance. He said he intended to set the date of the meeting far enough in advance so that if any Governmental agency determined that there was fraud involved that agency would have sufficient time to act prior to the holding of the meeting. He advised he intended to keep a detailed record of all actions taken by this group, and that he would voluntarily furnish such information to the FBI.\n\nEICKHOFF advised that he had not known and had not met either BETHURUM, WILLIAMSON or MANSPEAKER prior to the events described above. He said that GEORGE HUNT WILLIAMSON identified himself as an archeologist and a writer for the magazine \"Valor,\" who resides in Noblesville, Indiana.\n\nHe said that MANSPEAKER, whose first name he did not know, is also connected with \"Valor\" magazine in some way.\n\nHe was asked as to what interest \"Valor\" magazine has in BETHURUM, and whether BETHURUM was sponsored by any other organization. He advised that he did not know the interest of \"Valor\" magazine in BETHURUM, and so far as he knew, BETHURUM was acting on his own and had no organizational affiliations or sponsorship. He was asked as to what disposition would be made of receipts from a large meeting and he advised that he did not know what disposition would be made of the money. He said he understood that\n\n-4-"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to Director;\nJune 8, 1954\n\n\nBETHURUM had been on tour for some time and that the meeting scheduled for Cincinnati originally on 6-11-54 was to be the beginning of a new series of meetings.\n\nThe files of this office contain no information which can be identified with THOMAS EICKHOFF, TRUMAN BETHURUM, GEORGE HUNT WILLIAMSON, J. H. STRINGFIELD, and Lt. Col. JOHN O'MARA.\n\nThe indices reflect that by letter dated 2-7-52, Indianapolis file 61-5, the Indianapolis Office advised the Cincinnati Office under the caption of \"Silver Shirt Legion of America, Inc.; Internal Security - X,\" that the Silver Shirt Legion of America, Inc., whose leader is WILLIAM DUDLEY PELLEY, was at that time operating under the name ofSoul Craft Press, with headquarters and printing facilities in Noblesville, Indiana.\n\nWith regard to RALPH ZIMMERMANN, the indices of this office reflect that as of July, 1942, he was general manager of the Zimmermann Packing Company, a mechanical packing firm at 139-141 West Fourth St., Cincinnati.\n\nNo further action is being taken in this matter by this office, and the foregoing is for the Bureau's information and for the information of the Los Angeles and Indianapolis Offices.\n\n-5-"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 3\n\nEX-122\n\nSAC, Cincinnati\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tJune 22, 1954\n\nDirector, FBI (62-83894)\n\nTRUMAN BETHURUM;\nFLYING DISCS\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(ESPIONAGE)\n\nReurlet 6/8/54.\n\nYou are instructed to recontact Thomas Eickhoff, referred to in your referenced letter and advise him this Bureau has no jurisdiction concerning the investigation of matters relating to flying discs and that the United States Air Force has such jurisdiction. You are instructed to advise him this Bureau cannot approve or disapprove of his activities in connection with this matter and that the placing of this Bureau on notice as to his activities will not exonerate him in the event he engages in any fraudulent or criminal activities.\n\nYou are instructed to furnish the information set forth in your referenced letter to OSI locally and to the Bureau in a memorandum suitable for dissemination to OSI headquarters.\n\nNOTE: Thomas Eickhoff, Cincinnati, Ohio, advised the Cincinnati office he is interested in flying discs and has recently met several persons who claimed to have had experiences with flying discs. He stated he intended to assist such persons in arranging for public meeting in Cincinnati, at which matters relating to flying discs will be discussed and that he expects the meeting will result in a \"four thousand dollar take.\" He advised he believed the experiences alleged by the persons referred to above and that those persons would participate in the meeting. He stated he had been advised by the Air Force that it was it's opinion claims made by the persons referred to above concerning flying discs and their experiences with same were fraudulent. He stated he wanted to put all federal agencies on notice in order that they could act to prevent the planned meeting re flying discs if it was deemed necessary by the Government.\n\nTolson\nBoardman\nNichols\nBelmont\nGlavin\nHarbo\nRosen\nTamm\nTracy\nMohr\nWinterrowd\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nMiss Gandy\n\nEHM:egp\n\nCOMM - FBI\nJUN 22 1954\nMAILED 27\n\n5 JUN 25 1954"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nSAC, SEATTLE\n\nREPORTS ON ALLEGED SIGHTING OF SUBMARINES, PARACHUTE LANDINGS, FLASHING LIGHTS, ETC. ESPIONAGE\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nIt has been the experience of this office that during this season, from now until winter, there is received a considerable number of alleged reports on sighting of submarines, flashing lights, parachute landings, flying saucers, etc. In every instance when such reports are received, the information is immediately disseminated to DIO, 13 ND, U. S. Navy; OSI, USAF; and R-3, U. S. Army.\n\nInasmuch as Seattle is the District Headquarters for the Intelligence Agencies in the Pacific Northwest, reports received, usually from the USCG, concerning incidents in the state of Oregon are immediately reported to that office as well as the Intelligence Agencies.\n\nMany of the reports are of a nebulous type, impossible of corroborating, and of doubtful authenticity. Some, by preliminary inquiry and evaluation, prove to be without foundation. However, as stated above, reports of this type are immediately disseminated to the Intelligence Agencies without evaluation, followed by additional information as obtained.\n\nThis office has no control of the dissemination of these reports on a \"spot\" basis by the local intelligence offices to their Headquarters in Washington, D. C. The Bureau will recall the widespread dissemination given by the military agencies of \"Radio Message March 13, 1953, Interpreted as Calling for Mobilization of Communist Party\" (SAC Letter #23, dated 3/31/53).\n\nThe purpose of this letter is to advise the Bureau that in all instances immediate dissemination is made of all unusual incidents that appear to have any military significance. This office also acts as a coordinator on all reports to be certain that all interested agencies are cognizant.\n\nThe Bureau may be assured that it will be kept advised of all significant incidents as they arise but will not be bothered with every trivial incident that occurs unless instructed.\n\nLAD:hz\ncc: Portland\nEncls.\n\nNOT RECORDED\n87 JUL 9 1954\n\nINITIALS ON ORIGINAL\n\n53 JUL 19 1954"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI\nRE: REPORTS ON ALLEGED SIGHTING OF SUBMARINES, PARACHUTE LANDINGS, FLASHING LIGHTS, ETC.\nESPIONAGE\n\nSAC, SEATTLE\n6-18-54\n\nOSI advises us that they have no interest whatsoever themselves in connection with these matters and that Operations of the Air Force doesn't even advise them. Colonel S. W. RAYNOR, District Commander, OSI, states that there is an evaluation at Wright-Patterson Field where the data is correlated, that the reports are handled from the Air Force here to that point in a routine fashion and that OSI gives no credence whatsoever to it because they have never had any previous experience of any kind as to anything arising out of the situation.\n\nThere is attached hereto a copy of a communication marked \"CONFIDENTIAL\" requesting data concerning the situation as well as several recent publications, some of which are issued by the Air Force itself. It is the opinion of Colonel RAYNOR that the releases are a poor thing and create mass hysteria, but he says he has nothing whatsoever to do with the situation.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No Ack\nRequest forwarding only\nif deemed advisable\n1-29-53"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"22515\n\nJune 25, 1954\n\nRECORDED-88\n62-83894-343\nMr. Joseph Gunderson\n5677 North Las Casas Avenue\nChicago 30, Illinois\n\nEX-112\n\nDear Mr. Gunderson:\n\nI sincerely appreciate the interest which prompted your letter of June 21, 1954; however, I am not in a position, as a matter of policy, to comment regarding the book you mentioned since it does not deal with a matter within the jurisdiction of the FBI.\n\nIt is suggested that you consider the advisability of communicating with The Honorable, The Secretary of the Air Force, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C., for whatever information he can give you along the lines of your inquiries.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNOTE: Correspondent desired information concerning the book \"Flying Saucers Have Landed\" by Desmond Leslie and George Adamski.\n\nGEM:jas:bnl\nCOMM - FBI\nJUN 25 1954\nMAILED 31\nJUL 7 1954"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n\nJune 25, 1954\n\nMr. Joseph Gunderson\n\nEX-112\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNOTE: Correspondent desired information concerning the book \"Flying Saucers Have Landed\" by Desmond Leslie and George Adamski.\n\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nFBI\nRECEIVED-MAIL ROOM\nJUN 25 7 90 PM '54\nCOMM - FBI\nJUN 25 1954\nMAILED 31\nJUN 9 1954"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation,\nWashington, D. C.\n\n6/21/54\n\nGentlemen:\n\nA book was published in 1953 by\n\nDesmond Leslie and George Adamski\n\"Flying Saucers Have Landed\"\n\nPublishers - The British Book Centre,\nNew York City.\n\nIs this book fact or fiction, are there\nFlying Saucers from other planets landing\non the earth? Has the story told by George\nAdamski about his contact with the man from\nVenus any foundation in fact?\n\nPlease answer, many thanks,\n\nJoseph Gunderson,\n5677 N. Las Casas Avenue,\nChicago 30, Illinois.\n\nRECORDED-88\nINDEXED-88\n\n62-83894-343\n\nEX-112\n\n9 JUN 25 1954\n\nOriginal"} {"doc_id":"8e9af830c16945a6","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JUN 23 3 26 PM '54\n\nMR. JONES\nJUN 23 3 47 PM '54\nRECEIVED\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"8eaaeb73ed5dd056","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026\n\nTOP SECRET SECRET CONFIDENTIAL UNCLASSIFIED\n\n( SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF ATTACHED MATERIAL SHOULD BE CIRCLED TOP AND BOTTOM )\n\nACTION SHEET\n\nDATE REC'D IN IC IC #\n\nDESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED MATERIAL:\nTYPE OF MATERIAL DATED\nFROM TO\nSUBJECT\nDELIVERED TO DEADLINE DATE FOLLOW-UP DATE\n\nDIVISION ROUTING\n\nTO DATE ACTION REQUIRED INIT. COMMENTS*\n1. Ed/st\n2. ad DSD\n3.\n4.\n5.\n6.\n\nINSTRUCTIONS: Under each comment a line should be drawn across sheet and each comment numbered to correspond with the number in the \"TO\" Column.\n\n* If comments bear a higher classification than the attached material, the security classification of this sheet be changed.\n\nFORM 6-63 964 USE PREVIOUS EDITIONS\n\nUNCLASSIFIED CONFIDENTIAL SECRET TOP SECRET"} {"doc_id":"8eaaeb73ed5dd056","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\nCONTROL NO.\n\nProd-Proj UFO's\n11 Feb 65 1958/1960\n\nREFERRED TO OFFICE | RECEIVED SIGNATURE DATE TIME | RELEASED DATE TIME | SEEN BY NAME & OFFICE SYMBOL DATE\nADB/DSD/SI\n\nHandle Via Indicated Controls\n\nBYEMAN\n\nAccess to this document will be restricted to those persons cleared for the specific projects;\n\nOXCART\n\nWARNING\n\nThis document contains information affecting the national security of the United States within the meaning of the espionage laws U. S. Code Title 18, Sections 793 and 794. The law prohibits its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person, as well as its use in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States. It is to be seen only by personnel especially indoctrinated and authorized to receive information in the designated control channels. Its security must be maintained in accordance with regulations pertaining to BYEMAN Control System.\n\nTOP SECRET\n\nGROUP 1 Excluded from automatic downgrading and declassification"} {"doc_id":"8eaaeb73ed5dd056","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nBYE-35171/65\nCopy 7 of 8 Copies\n11 FEB 1965\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: Assistant Director for Special Activities\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Object\n\nREFERENCE: BYE-2081/65 and Attachments, 1 Feb 65\n\n1. Detailed analysis of the radar photography of 19 November 1964 and review of associated correspondence indicate that there was, in fact, no high altitude ultra-high-speed UFO north of Puerto Rico during the 16-24 November 1964 period. There were, however, apparently valid tracks and/or observations of unidentified aircraft in the vicinity of the Atlantic Fleet Weapon Range on 16, 17, 18, 19, and 24 November 1964.\n\n2. Relative to the incident during the evening of 19 November, the US Navy F-8C pilot was able to distinguish the object as a delta shape about the size of a jet fighter, reported it as having much higher performance, and estimated object speed to be in excess of Mach 3. The USS Gyatt reported a radar track in excess of 3600 knots.\n\na. During this incident, radar photographs were taken of the SPS-49 radar PPI presentation. Analysis of these photographs show a good track in excess of 300 n.m. for the object in question. The object was flying a course of about 165° relative to the Gyatt at a relative speed of about 400 knots.\n\nHANDLE VIA BYEMAN CONTROL SYSTEM PROJECT OXCART"} {"doc_id":"8eaaeb73ed5dd056","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Object\n\nb. At the time, the AN/SPS-49 radar aboard the Gyatt was undergoing an evaluation test program -- hence, the use of a recording camera.\n\n3. In view of the radar photographs and pilot observation, it is concluded that the so-called UFO on 19 November was probably a delta-wing fighter of a type having a significantly higher climb performance than the F-8C at the 50,000 foot altitude regime. Based on the limited information provided in the associated correspondence, other objects reported during the period of 16 to 24 November would appear to be unidentified aircraft.\n\n4. Apparently, missile test firings were scheduled for the AFWR during this time period, and it is conceivable that the area in question could have been an attractive target for reconnaissance. The USS Gyatt was located 325 n.m. from the eastern tip of Cuba during the 19 November incident, well within MiG-21 range. The USSR has a MiG-21 reconnaissance configuration with AFA-39 aerial camera and possibly SIGINT equipment. There is no evidence at hand to suggest or deny any MiG-21 reconnaissance activity based in Cuba, either with Soviet or Cuban pilots.\n\nDONALD F. CHAMBERLAIN\nAssistant Director\nScientific Intelligence\n\nAttachments:\nThree attachments to BYE 2081/65\n\nDistribution:\nCy 1 & 2 - Addressees (w/attach)\nCy 3 & 4 - AD/SI\nCy 5 & 6 - DSD/SI\nCy 7 & 8 - ADB/DSD/SI\n\nOSI/DSD/ADB: [REDACTED] Idl/6621 (10 Feb 65)\n\nHANDLE VIA BYEMAN CONTROL SYSTEM PROJECT OXCART"} {"doc_id":"8eaaeb73ed5dd056","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\nCONTROL NO. BYE 2081-65\n\nREFERRED TO OFFICE | RECEIVED SIGNATURE DATE TIME | RELEASED DATE TIME | SEEN BY NAME & OFFICE SYMBOL DATE\nAD/OSI\n\nHandle Via Indicated Controls\n\nBYEMAN\n\nAccess to this document will be restricted to those persons cleared for the specific projects;\n\nOXCART\n\nWARNING\n\nThis document contains information affecting the national security of the United States within the meaning of the espionage laws U. S. Code Title 18, Sections 793 and 794. The law prohibits its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any manner to an unauthorized person, as well as its use in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States. It is to be seen only by personnel especially indoctrinated and authorized to receive information in the designated control channels. Its security must be maintained in accordance with regulations pertaining to BYEMAN Control System.\n\nTOP SECRET\n\nGROUP 1 Excluded from automatic downgrading and declassification"} {"doc_id":"8eaaeb73ed5dd056","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Handle via BYEMAN Control System\n\nTOP SECRET\nOXCART\n\nBYE 2081-65\nCopy 1\n\n1 FEB 1965\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: Assistant Director for Scientific Intelligence\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Object\n\n1. OSI and OSA, we believe, received similar information regarding a UFO in the vicinity of Puerto Rico during period 18-24 November 1964. As you can see by the cable originated by the Commander, Caribbean Sea Frontier, to Commander in Chief Atlantic Fleet, date time group 01/2048Z December, CINCLANTFLT was informed that UFO identified by CO Ramey as being YF-12A. We think ONI finally convinced, through our efforts, that UFO in fact not YF-12A or similar category Lockheed Aircraft.\n\n2. Navy has provided, at our request, pertinent traffic on this subject, as well as original radar film, Attachment 1, with accompanying prints of same. Request OSI, possibly in conjunction with OEL, evaluate the radar photography to determine if any further information can be gotten through a thorough scientific analysis of the material relative to a high speed, high altitude UFO.\n\n3. Request on completion of OSI study that the attached documents, film and prints be returned to the TCO/BCO/OSA for return to Navy.\n\nJACK C. LEDFORD\nColonel USAF\nAssistant Director\n(Special Activities)\n\nAttachments -\nAs stated above\n\nOXCART\nTOP SECRET\n\nHandle via BYEMAN Control System"} {"doc_id":"8f9ce9ab0f7e99d0","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In late 2025, during early evening daylight hours, I – a senior U.S. intelligence officer – along with a colleague and two pilots, departed our Joint Operations Center (JOC) in a helicopter. Our mission was to investigate loud thuds heard in the mountains on the test range, which coincided with Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) sightings reported over the previous several nights. We aimed to search remote mountain areas for possible debris or objects that might explain the orb-like sightings.\n\nAfter leaving the JOC, we flew a low-altitude “nap-of-the-earth¹” route through the mountain range for several hours. Multiple times, we spotted debris on the ground and descended for closer inspection. Each time, we determined it was remnants from rockets and other projectiles that had crashed during years of weapons testing on the range. As we continued searching near areas of reported orb activity, we discovered a large cave entrance with no visible end in sight. The terrain around the entrance offered no safe landing spot, so I instructed the pilot to orbit it several times for observation. We noted the location and then pressed on.\n\nRunning low on fuel, we headed to a prearranged rendezvous point to meet a ground team and let my colleague disembark. The two pilots and I then proceeded to a prepositioned tanker on the range for refueling. Our plan was to return to base afterward, but the JOC radioed with a request to search a nearby mountain for debris spotted by one of the ground teams. By this time, the sun had set, and the pilots switched to Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) and Night Vision Goggles (NVG), while I continued using the unaided naked eye.\n\nAfter a brief search of the mountain yielded no findings, the pilots began navigating back to the JOC to end the mission. I then received a message from the JOC: radar had detected hits several miles up range from our position – the same area where UAP activity had been observed on prior nights. I relayed this to the pilots, and we altered course to intercept. What followed was a series of close UAP encounters lasting over an hour.\n\nEn route, ground teams reported spotting a UAP on FLIR, describing it as “super-hot,” low to the ground, and moving east then south at high speed. The object then split into two and changed direction. Upon arrival, we scanned the area using NVG, FLIR, and the naked eye. The ground team suddenly radioed that the object had risen from the ground, approached within ten feet of the helicopter, dropped below us, and then sped away. The pilots observed it through NVGs and saw it split into two as a smaller object emerged before it"} {"doc_id":"8f9ce9ab0f7e99d0","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"accelerated out of sight. We briefly pursued but broke off, unable to match its speed. At one point, the JOC informed us that several fighter jets had launched on a training mission in our operating area and requested their assistance in identifying the UAP.\n\nMinutes later, the JOC directed us to nearby radar detections. We took up a hovering position at approximately 700 feet above ground level (AGL). In the distance, we saw countless orange orbs swarming in all directions against the backdrop of the mountain. The display lasted several minutes before fading. The JOC then redirected us to our previous position based on fresh radar hits. I provided coordinates to the pilots, and we moved to intercept, hovering again at 700 feet AGL. Through NVGx, the pilots and I (using the naked eye) observed two large orbs flare up side-by-side, close to the helicopter – stationary and just above the rotor disk to our right. They were oval-shaped, orange with a white or yellow center, and emitted light in all directions.\n\nAfter a few seconds, a third orb flared up below the pair, followed by a fourth below that, forming a total of four or five in a “T” formation under the original two. Moments later, they dimmed in reverse order, remaining stationary until they vanished from view. The entire event lasted 10-15 seconds. I didn’t take photos, as I was focused on assessing what it was and whether it posed a threat.\n\nAfter this encounter, the pilots briefly considered landing due to the objects’ proximity but opted to remain hovering at 700 feet AGL for further observation. We then spotted the fighter jets entering visual range at about 23,00 feet AGL, identifiable by their blinking navigation lights. As watched from afar, the same type of orbs appeared directly above the fighters. They flared up one at a time in a horizontal formation, matching the jets’ speed and flight path. After 10-15 seconds, they dimmed sequentially and disappeared. This repeated several times as the jets transited the airspace and eventually landed. I remarked to the pilots that it seemed the same orbs we had encountered were now “chasing” the fighters. We also observed orange orbs flaring up and down around us for several minutes, forming a distinct triangle before vanishing.\n\nLow on fuel, the pilots decided to return to the JOC. After landing, I briefly spoke with them – mostly to express thanks. We were virtually speechless after these observations. I then entered the JOC for a quick debrief before driving home."} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret\nThis document consists of 2 pages, copy 1 of 4, series A.\n\nHEADQUARTERS, DETACHMENT D\n1100TH USAF SPECIAL REPORTING GROUP\nCampbell Air Force Base\nCamp Campbell, Kentucky\n\n3331\nSUBJECT: Security Inspection\n\n7 April 1949\n\nTO: Commanding General\nSandia Base\nAlbuquerque, New Mexico\n\n1. Reference is made to secret letter, your headquarters, dated 1 April 1949, Subject: Security Inspection.\n\n2. a. Guard Orders have been amended directing that the electric gate be closed between 1700 hours until 0700 hours the following day.\n\nb. Locks have replaced the bolts in all inspection access gates in the outer fence.\n\nc. Inspection ports on both bridges are now provided with locks.\n\nd. The final draft of our alert plan has been reviewed and will be published and distributed for study to operating personnel. It is desired to point out that the alert plan is incomplete. A stockpile custodian has not been assigned here; his part in the alert plan has been outlined only. Furthermore, since the 11th Airborne Division is not in place yet, only temporary arrangements for defense have been made. Final form of the overall alert plan will be submitted to your headquarters for approval as soon as conditions will allow. In the interim period, it is felt that the temporary alert plan we have prepared is adequate. A copy of this plan will be dispatched to your headquarters in the near future.\n\ne. All jeep radios are now installed in jeeps.\n\nf. Although not entirely satisfactory, radio communication with the Camp Campbell Military Police has been in effect for sometime and was in effect at the time of the Security inspection. Permanent arrangements for radio communication with Camp Campbell Military Police are delayed pending the arrival of radio frequency crystals that fit the Military Police net frequency."} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret\nThis document consists of 2 pages, copy 1 of 4, series A.\n\n7 April 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Security Inspection\n\n2. Cont'd.\n\ng. Pressure has been exerted to get the Post Engineers to keep the drainage system clear and to take measures to check the erosion. These efforts will be continued but little progress on erosion control can be expected until the rains diminish. Ditches have been filled, dirt moved and replaced, native grasses planted, but the rains return too soon and much of the effort invested is therefore wasted. Plans are prepared for an interim erosin control effort, and a study is being made to estimate the cost of resloping the cuts in order that the rainfall may be drained with less damaging results. Initial estimates run in the neighborhood of twenty thousand dollars ($20,000.00).\n\n3. With the exception of halting the erosion, all deficiencies listed in the security inspection report have been cleared away. It is therefore requested that the monthly report of action taken required by cited letter be discontinued.\n\nRICHARD W KLINE\nLt Col, USAF\nCommanding\n\nShort Title BC-10-0-214\nNND 58378"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nSANDIA BASE\nAlbuquerque, New Mexico\n\nReviewed DE 21 June 62\n\nAFSWP\nCLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS LIBRARY\n\n1949\n\nFILE NO. 333.5\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nSECRET\nNND 58378"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n380-01\n333.5\n\nRESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION - NEW MEXICO SCHOOL OF MINES - SOCORRO, NEW MEXICO\n\n10 August 1949\n\nDr. Lincoln LaPaz\nInstitute of Meteoritics\nUniversity of New Mexico\nAlbuquerque, N. M.\n\nDear Lincoln:\n\nI am inclosing two copies of the report you asked for, and hope that they serve their purpose.\n\nWe have made a preliminary examination of the eighteen collections taken at nine locations on my Monday-Tuesday trip. There was a large number of copper-bearing particles on one collection (R-104L) taken on Highway 84, seventeen miles north of Highway 66, and scattered occasional particles throughout the series. The collection taken at the same location immediately following R-104L shows practically no copper. A large part of the R-104L is of a granular material unfamiliar to us, and the copper indications originate principally in what are apparently aggregations of finely (one-micron) granular material of overall sizes in the neighborhood of thirty microns. Some copper particles, however, appear to be solid and opaque. The passage of two automobiles while this collection was being made is a complicating factor. It is hard to see how they might have been a source of copper, however, unless it was a question of stirring up some from dust on the pavement.\n\nWe intend to do some further chemical work with these collections, but I doubt if much new relevant information will be obtained.\n\nMy tentative conclusion is that no widespread significant dispersion of copper-bearing particles was present in the atmosphere in the region covered at the time the collections were made. No definite statement is possible about the one heavy copper collection: it should be presumed to be of local origin until some evidence to the contrary is found.\n\nThe route of the collecting trip included Pastura, Santa Rosa, junction of Routes 66 and 84, and Las Vegas on Monday afternoon. On Tuesday morning it included Las Vegas, Canoncito, Glorieta and Pecos.\n\nYours very truly,\n\nW.D. Crozier\n\nWDC*TW\n\nattachments (2)\n\nSECRET\nNND 58378"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"R/D-tw\n8-10-49\n\nAN ATTEMPT TO COLLECT AIRBORNE PARTICLES\nASSOCIATED WITH THE FIREBALL OF JULY 24, 1949\n\nBy\n\nW. D. Crozier\nand\nBen K. Seely\n\nNEW MEXICO SCHOOL OF MINES\n\nMETHOD\n\nA fireball was reported to have passed over the general neighborhood of Socorro, New Mexico, at 8:26 p.m., July 24, 1949. Impactment equipment, developed in connection with the aerosol research project of the New Mexico School of Mines, was available, and it was decided to make systematic collections of airborne material in the hope of obtaining material that could be associated with the fireball. For the present report it is sufficient to state that the equipment processed air at the rate of about 34 liters per minute, the particles being separated from the air by impactment against an adhesive-coated plate in an air jet. Approximately ninety per cent of airborne particles with diameters greater than one micron are collected.\n\nThe adhesive used on the collecting plates (microscope slides) was a glycerin-gelatin mixture with an addition of rubeanic acid (dithiooxamide.) This reagent was used to enable identification of copper or copper compounds; it also enables identification of nickel and cobalt. After making the collections, the slides were covered with a Saran film, after which they were exposed to strong ammonia vapor for fifteen minutes to effect partial solution of any copper or copper oxide particles.\n\nRESULTS\n\nThe first collection was made at 10:00 a.m., July 25, about thirteen and one-half hours after the fireball was seen. The air was taken about twelve feet above ground level, on the campus of the School of Mines. The first run was for three minutes, processing about 102 liters of air. Several large particles were found in it that gave positive copper tests. In at least one of these the copper reaction was seen before the ammonia treatment, indicating the presence of at least a trace of a soluble copper compound. The sizes of particles seen in the first collections ranged up to over one hundred microns in the largest dimension: the largest particles gave the impression of being fragments of a somewhat fibrous material, with the smaller\n\nSECRET\nNND 58378"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"dimension of the order of twenty or thirty microns. There were no small particles, that is, no particles with a maximum dimension below 15 microns.\n\nFollowing the first collection, additional collections were made, under similar conditions, over a period of eight days.\n\nThe accompanying table summarizes the conditions and copper counts for all these collections, including the first one described above. A number of the runs were for periods longer than three minutes, but the counts have, in these cases, been reduced to the three-minute equivalent. One collection showing several large copper indications, taken July 25, is omitted from the table because it was damaged in course of a test for radioactivity by exposure of a nuclear track plate (with negative results) and a definite count could not be made.\n\nThe counts are exhibited in three size classifications, and attention is directed to the fact that particles in the smallest size group (1 to 15 microns) are practically absent from the early collections, while in the later collections, particles in the largest (30 microns) and middle (15 to 30 microns) groups have become quite scarce. At the same time, the counts have become quite large in the smallest size group.\n\nSIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS\n\nIf it were possible to say that particles giving a copper test are generally very rare in collections near ground level in this locality, the above facts would be highly significant. It happens, however, that collections have been made at Socorro over only a short period, and not much attention has been given to identification of copper compounds. However, after the copper indications had been found in the present series of collections, some collections were found on file that had been made on plain glycerin-gelatin on July 14, 1949. These were covered with the Saran film and rubeanic acid and ammonia were applied by diffusion through the film. A few copper indications were found, almost all the particles being in the 30 micron size group. Some other collections were made early in July that will be examined for copper when they are freed from other tests. In addition, occasional collections will be examined for copper in the future, and it may be possible eventually to add something to the information now presented.\n\nCONCLUSIONS REGARDING COPPER\n\nIn view of the above facts, it seems very hazardous to draw any definite conclusion associating the copper-bearing particles collected with the fireball of July 24. There still is, however, a residuum of possibility of such associations when it is considered that particles of the smallest size group did not appear in large numbers until some 35 hours after the passage of the fireball."} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE\n\nCounts of Copper Particles in Collections at Socorro During Period July 25 to August 1, 1949 = (Reduced to Particles per 102 Liters of Air)\n\nCollec. Date | Time Hour | Elapsed time | Wind* Direction knots | Copper Counts 1-15 Micron Range | 15-30 Micron Range | 30 Microns\n7-25 | 10 AM | 13.5 | NNW - 9 | 1 / 0 | 4 / 2 | 1 / 2\n7-25 | 2 PM | 17.5 | ? ? | 4 / 1 | 1 / 0 | 1 / 0\n7-26 | 8 AM | 35.5 | W? - 9 | 8 / 20 / 0 | 0 / 0 / 2 | 0 / 0 / 2\n7-26 | 2 PM | 41.5 | W? - 7 | 20 (arrow) 18 / 1 / 22 (arrow) | 0 / 0 / 0\n7-27 | 7:30 AM | 71.0 | NE - 8 | 1 | 0 | 0\n7-27 | 1:30 PM | 77.0 | NE - 6 | 23 / 8 | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0\n7-28 | 7:30 AM | 95.0 | WSW - 3 | 0 / 28 (arrow) | 1 | 0 / 0\n7-29 | 7:30 AM | 119.0 | S - 7 | 4 | 0 | 0\n7-29 | 4 PM | 127.5 | ESE - 10 | 28 (arrow) 15 | 0 | 1 / 0\n7-30 | 10 AM | 145.5 | SE - 4 | 2 / 83 | 0 / 1 | 0 / 1\n7-31 | 10 AM | 169.5 | SSE - 5 | 4 / 3 / 2 | 0 / 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 / 0\n8-1 | 9:30 AM | 193.0 | N - 6 | 17 / 6 | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0\n\n*Surface Wind recorded by Weather Station at time nearest collection time."} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 3\n\nAttention is called particularly to the large number of small particles in one of the 145-1/2-hour collections. The actual number in the collection was 140, for the five-minute run. Most of these were in the size range of two to five microns, and the principal difficulty in associating them with the fireball is that a five-micron particle cannot fall much more than 10,000 feet in 145.5 hours. These particles could have come down from a greater height only if some downward motion had taken place in part of the air involved.\n\nIt should be mentioned that collections were taken during the afternoon of July 27, at several points south and east of Socorro, the farthest being near Bingham. These collections contained particles giving copper indications, the particles being in the same range of sizes as those collected in Socorro at about the same time.\n\nIt is perhaps noteworthy that the copper-bearing particles in all these collections were of opaque material. Most of the copper minerals that have previously come to our attention in collections from the air have been colored material, blue, green, red, or yellow.\n\nCOBALT AND NICKEL TESTS\n\nIn the 2:00 p.m. collection of July 26, three quite remarkable particles were found that gave very strong cobalt indications. The particles were apparently perfect spheres (at least they were perfectly circular in cross section), twelve microns in diameter. The reaction with rubeanic acid, after ammonia treatment, produced a dense yellow-tan halo, sixty microns in diameter. The color was not quite so clear as with pure cobalt: the appearance suggesting a high-cobalt composition with some metal present. Such particles are quite unique in the experience of the present. If these particles were of meteoritic origin they could, in the absence of vertical air movement, have fallen a distance of the order of 20,000 feet in an interval of 41.5 hours.\n\nTwo particles giving nickel indications were found. This is quite normal, however. If anything, the number is smaller than might have been expected in material of surface origin. The collections were not given acid treatment: additional nickel indications might have been found if this had been done.\n\nA SUGGESTION\n\nWhile the results of the present investigation should be regarded as negative or inconclusive, it is desired to call attention to the fact that a means is at hand that should make possible a definite demonstration of the presence or absence of copper particles associated with events of the July 24th type.\n\nParticle collection equipment, operating on the same principle as that used in the present investigation, and designed for airplane installation, is on hand and its successful operation has been demonstrated in numerous flights. Provision"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"could easily be made for quickly mounting this equipment in an airplane capable of ascending above the 40,000-foot level, which could take off soon after an event of the July 24th kind, and fly a pattern that would include with reasonable certainty some of the material originating at the meteor trajectory. A quick approximate determination of the trajectory would be required, of course, and if winds aloft were of considerable strength it would be necessary to make due allowance for them in planning the flight.\n\nNOTE ADDED ON AUGUST 10, 1949:\n\nAs this report was being finished, an attempt was made at an airplane collection following the event of August 6. The collecting equipment was installed in a B-25 from Kirtland Field and on the afternoon of August 8, a flight was made which it was hoped might intercept some of the meteoritic material.\n\nAn interval of 41 hours had passed before the take-off, and the maximum altitude reached was 23,000 feet. A rough attempt was made to include air that was under the trajectory, but distances of several hundred miles were involved. A few copper indications were obtained, but they seemed definitely to be associated with material of surface origin. No nickel or cobalt indications were found. An elaborate study, which may require more upper air data than is available, should be made before it is decided whether or not the flight did actually include air that should have borne particles from the meteor trajectory."} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 17, 1949\n\nTO: Colonel Doyle Rees\n\nFROM: Lincoln LaPaz\n\nSUBJECT: Anomalous Luminous Phenomena. Sixth Report (attempts to collect volatilization products from green fireballs)\n\n(1) In an earlier report it has been pointed out that in spite of air and ground searchs in early February along the well determined earth-trace of the green fireball of 1949, January 30th no fragments of this fireball were recovered. There remained the possibility that this fireball had been so completely volatilized during flight that only fine dust from it filtered down thru the atmosphere. Since, for several reasons, it seemed more probable that such dust would consist chiefly of copper or a copper alloy rather than of the ferromagnetic substances found for ordinary meteorites, the methods habitually employed by meteoriticists for the collection of \"cosmic dust\" (separation of the dust from the air by use of electromagnets or permanent magnets) would not be appropriate for use in connection with the green fireballs. It was therefore decided to enlist the aid of Dr. William Crozier, who was known to have developed a novel impactment dust collector for use on the Aerosol Project of the New Mexico School of Mines. (The writer had been closely associated, in 1943-44, with Dr. Crozier at New Mexico Proving Grounds while working on sabotaged and proximity fused shells and knew that he had satisfactory clearance.) Dr. Crozier not only agreed to participate in a ground-level search for dust possibly put down by the fireball of January 30th, but made the valuable suggestion that dust collections be made on plane flights routed back and forth at high altitudes through the air beneath green fireball paths as soon as possible after fireball fall. In this manner contamination of the dust collections by terrestrial particles would be reduced to a minimum. No immediate application was made of Dr. Crozier's dust collection techniques, in part because of the writer's return to full time academic work at the UNM on February 8th and in part because of Dr. Crozier's other research activities and the interruptions in Research and Development Division work incident to the A.E.C.'s taking over the Albuquerque quarters of the Division.\n\n(2) When it was determined that the green fireball of July 24th had descended in the immediate vicinity of Socorro, it was decided to ask Dr. Crozier to attempt collections even though he and his staff were then engaged in the final stages of moving from Albuquerque to their new quarters on the Campus of the New Mexico School of Mines. A long distance call to Dr. Crozier on July 26th brought the welcome news that he had been alerted by an appeal for observations issued by the Institute of Meteoritics on the evening of July 24th and had already made dust collections on the campus at Socorro on the morning of July 25. These collections, to Dr. Crozier's evident surprise, were found to contain not only the first copper particles he had found in air dust collections but these particles were of unusually large size -- up to 100 microns in maximum dimensions. On receipt of this exciting information, a party was dispatched from 17th District O.S.I. Hdqs. to confer with Dr. Crozier and to make a field search for the fireball of July 24th. This party consisted of Major Charles L. Phillips (courteously made available for the trip by Colonel Harold A. Gunn, C.O. of Kirtland Field) Mr. Paul Taft of the U.S. Weather Bureau in Albuquerque, S/A Jack Boling and the undersigned. A conference with Dr. Crozier and Mr. Ben Seely was held on the School of Mines campus in Socorro between"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-2-\nSECRET\n10:00 - 12:00 A.M. on July 26th. At this conference it became apparent that Dr. Crozier was inclined to attribute the unusually large copper fragments collected on July 25 at 10:00 A.M. (\"which because of their size could not have been blown very far by surface winds\") to particles blown off the roof or out of the gutters of the Assaying Building on the Campus. In answer to a question from the writer, Dr. Crozier replied that he would consider this possibility ruled out if copper particles showed up in collections made in the open country at considerable distances from the Campus. It was therefore recommended that such collections be made and Dr. Crozier and Mr. Seely rigged up a storage battery combination and small D.C. motor driven impactment collector which were loaded into the O.S.I. staff car and driven out through San Antonio, Carthage, and Bingham, New Mexico (this route passing, in Mr. Taft's opinion, through the region where particles from the fireball of July 24th would most probably have been carried by the very light winds prevailing in the region since the incident.) Four of the collections made on this trip were examined on the evening of July 26th by Mr. Ben Seely and all were found to contain copper particles indistinguishable from those collected in Socorro at about the same time.\n(3) Full details on the methods of collection employed by Dr. Crozier and Mr. Seely and on later examinations of the dust particles collected after the green fireballs of both July 24th and August 6th are given in Dr. Crozier's report (R/D - tw, 8-10-49) copies of which are hereto appended. Dr. Crozier's tentative conclusion from study of the collections made, not only in connection with the incident of July 24th,but also that of August 6th, is that \"the results of the present investigation should be regarded as negative or inconclusive.\" From analysis of his report (R/D - tw, 8-10-49) and from several phone conversations with Dr. Crozier, it is the writers belief that Dr. Crozier was led to the above conclusion by the following facts listed below in decreasing order of importance, and accompanied by critical comments:\n(3.1) The discovery by tests made on or about August 1 of \" a few copper indications\" in dust collected at Socorro on July 14, 1949, i.e. ten days before the green fireball incident of July 24th. (Dr. Crozier has informed the writer that the collection of July 14th was carefully wrapped up and could not have become contaminated by copped dust which blew in through the open windows of the R.D. &D. Building at Socorro after the incident of July 24th. However, there remains the possibility that an unobserved or unreported green fireball occurring in the Socorro neighborhood shortly before July 14th put down the copper dust found in the July 14th collection. To one familiar with the almost uninhabited country around Socorro and the fact that green fireballs as bright as the half moon occurring at times as favorable for observation as 7:30 -- 8:30 P.M. have gone almost unreported, it seems quite likely that a green fireball that fell after midnight or during the daytime or while most of the sky was overcast might go entirely unreported.)\n(3.2) The discrepancy between the computed and observed rates of descent of very fine copper particles. (As Dr. Crozier notes, such discrepancies are understandable \"if some downward motion had taken place in part of the air involved.\" Precisely such downward motion occurred in the air near the real paths of the fireballs of July 24th and August 6th for these falls were nearly vertical. Furthermore the best observations of the endpoints of these fireballs place that of July 24th at a hight of 10-12 miles and that of August 6th at 5-6 miles. The downward directed ballistic head wave therefore could very easily have carried Dr. Crozier's 145 hour particles to within 10,000 feet of the earth at\nSECRET\nNND 58378"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-3-\nSECRET\nthe time of fall. Since we cannot assume complete stagnation of the air masses in the Socorro neighborhood for 145 hours, it must be supposed that such air motions as occurred were approximately compensating and resulted in the return of Dr. Crozier's tiny \"five-micron particles\" to the Socorro neighborhood in approximately 145 hours. Only a detailed study of air mass motions for the time interval involved can settle this point.)\n(3.3) The long continued appearance of copper particles (however, as Dr. Crozier emphasizes, smaller and smaller in size) in the Socorro collections. (Precisely such a decrease in particle size has repeatedly been observed in connection with dust collections believed to be of meteoritic origin and is attributed to the slower and slower rate of descent of the particles as their average size decreases. Thus, L. Rudaux's results strongly indicate that particles from the Giacobinid shower of 1933, October 9, filtered down in smaller and smaller sizes for 100 hours or more. Furthermore, for the green fireballs of July 24th and August 6th, the nearly vertical real paths extended from altitudes of 100 miles or more down almost to ground level and therefore optimum conditions for long continued infall of dust particles were approached in these falls.)\n(3.4) Failure of the airplane collection of August 8th to detect airborne copper particles definitely not of terrestrial origin. (However, the airplane collections were all made at great distances (hundreds of miles) from the Vaughn region in which the fireball of August 6th fell; and, as Dr. Crozier points out, at the moment it can not be determined \"whether or not the flight did actually include air that should have borne particles from meteor trajectory.\" In this connection the results alluded to in paragraph 4. below, may be of considerable significance.)\n(4) At the time the airplane collection of August 8th was planned the writer recommended not only that the flight traverse the area from Vaughn northward to Raton and then NW-ward into the Durango, Colorado region (a recommendation based on advice received from Mr. Paul Taft of the U.S. Weather Bureau) but also that simultaneously a ground search with the portable impactment dust collecting equipment rigged up on July 27th be run from Vaughn through Pastura to Santa Rosa. The latter part of this recommendation was followed by Dr. Crozier who reported on the results obtained in his letter to me under date of August 10, copies of which are hereto attached. Dr. Crozier's letter makes clear that ground collections in the subfinal regions of the fireballs of both August 6th and July 24th resulted in the detection of unusual aggregations of copper particles. Apparently the copper particle aggregate obtained in collection R - 104L, within the subfinal region of the August 6th fall was the only such aggregate found in Dr. Crozier's lenghty ground search of August 8-9. It seems particularly significant to the writer that Dr. Crozier suspects that the copper dust found in this particular collection R-104L may have been stirred up from the pavement on Highway 84 ---- a likely catchment surface for dust put down by the green fireball of August 6th, in view of the information given me by Mr. Taft in regard to the wind direction prevailing during the hours immediately following this incident.\n(5)8 In spite of the critical comments made in paragraphs 3 and 4 above, the writer has no quarrel with Dr. Crozier's conclusion that the results so far obtained in the investigation of volatilization products possible put down by the green fireballs are negative or at best inconclusive. However, I do wish to stress most emphatically that if future more detailed work shows that the numerous copper particles found by Dr. Crozier and Mr. Seely are indeed floating down\nSECRET\nNND 58378"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-4-\nSECRET\nfrom green fireballs, then the fireballs are not conventional meteorites. Copper is one of the rarest of the elements found in meteorites (See G.P. Merrill, Memoirs National Academy of Science, vol. 14 (1925), Table facing p. 27; and Harrison Brown, Journal of Geology, vol. 56 (March 1948,) Table 1, p. 87.) In fact, I know of no case in which even the tiniest particle of copper has been reported in a dust collection supposedly of meteoritic origin. In view of present concern in regard to the true nature of the green fireballs, nothing could exceed in importance attainment of a definite conclusion in regard to the origin of the copper particles detected in the subfinal regions of the fireballs of July 24th and August 6th.\n(6) The writer therefore wishes to make the following recommendations:\n(6.1) That arrangements be made for dust collections on airplane flights at altitudes of 40,000 ft. or more through the region of the atmosphere lying beneath the real paths of green fireballs as soon as possible after the occurrence of such fireball incidents. Such arrangements presuppose a well coordinated observing network permitting the speediest possible determination of the location of the real paths in the atmosphere. (Dr. Crozier and Mr. Seely have both agreed to cooperate in carrying out dust collection at the highest altitudes attainable. In Dr. Crozier's opinion, a B-36 or B-50 should be made available for such work.)\n(6.2) That ground-level dust collections be made along the well determined earth-trace of the green fireball of January 30th, using the portable impactment equipment already rigged up by Dr. Crozier and Mr. Seely and used in the ground searches of July 27th and August 8-9th. If copper particles can be recovered along this earth-trace but do not appear in collections made 50 miles or so away from the trace, the result would be of much significance if not indeed decisive.\nSECRET\nNND 58378"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"P SECRET\nHEADQUARTERS. SANDIA BASE\nALBUQUERQUE. NEW MEXICO\nTHIS DOCUMENT CONSISTS OF 2 PAGE(S)\nNO. 1 OF 5 COPIES, SERIES a\n5 DEC 1949\nSBOP/4 333.1 Gen\nREFER TO FILE NO.\nSUBJECT: Board to Inspect Special Weapons Facilities at Strategic Air Command Stations\nTO: Commanding General\nStrategic Air Command\nOffutt Air Force Base\nOmaha, Nebraska\n1. Reference is made to Top Secret letter, your Headquarters, subject: \"Special Weapons Training Facilities at Strategic Air Command Stations,\" dated 29 November 1949, Short Title: B-3000, which proposed an inspection tour of Strategic Air Command stations to determine adequacy of station plans for Special Weapons training facilities and recommend a priority and time schedule for Special Weapons Unit assignment to Strategic Air Command stations.\n2. This Headquarters concurs in the basic objectives of the proposed board and its general plan of action. Capt. Barnes will represent the Plans and Operations Division of this Headquarters and Lt. Col. Olson, Commanding Officer of the 515th Aviation Squadron, will represent the 8460th Special Weapons Group. It is not possible at this time to comply with your suggestion that the 8460th Special Weapons Group be represented by the Commanding Officer of the Special Weapons Unit scheduled for assignment to the station being inspected.\n3. It is recommended that the work of this board be supplemented by a similar board, to visit the station concerned about thirty (30) days prior to movement of a Special Weapons Unit to that station. This second board could then verify the rate of progress of facilities preparation and the adequacy of the plans at that time, and solve many of the administrative problems inherent in the transfer of\nSHORT TITLE SBOP-0-3012\nNND 58378"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THIS DOCUMENT CONSISTS OF 2 PAGE(S)\nNO. 2 OF 5 COPIES, SERIES a\n5 DEC 1949\nSubj: Board to Inspect Special Weapons Facilities at Strategic Air Command Stations\nany unit to another command and station. It is suggested that this second board be empowered to recommend readjustment of movement schedule as circumstances indicate.\nFOR THE COMMANDING OFFICER:\nD. H. GUINN\nLCDR USN\nExecutive Officer\nDistribution:\n1a&2a - addressee\n2\nNND 58378"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nB/L from Sandia Base to SAC, dtd 5 Dec 49, subj: \"Board to Inspect\nSpecial Weapons Facilities at SAC Stations\n\nSAC 353 (5 Dec 49)\t\t1st Ind\t\t\tD02C\n\nHEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND, Offutt Air Force Base, Omaha, Nebraska\n19 DEC 49\nTO: Commanding General, Sandia Base, Post Office Box 5100, Albuquerque,\nNew Mexico\n\n1. This headquarters concurs, in general, with basic communication.\n\n2. Reference paragraphs 1 and 2, basic communication, inspection board has completed inspections.\n\n3. Reference paragraph 3, basic communication, this headquarters is directing the Eighth and Fifteenth Air Forces to designate personnel from units concerned to inspect aviation squadron facilities immediately upon receipt of notification from this headquarters. Notification will be in the form of an information copy of Strategic Air Command request for movement of aviation squadrons. Your headquarters will receive a copy of subject requests. Inspection will be completed no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of notification. Your command will be requested to furnish personnel for inspection teams.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n1 Incl\nCy of ltr fm SAC to 8 & 15 AF\n\nJ. B. MONTGOMERY\nBrigadier General, USAF\nDirector of Operations\n\n3\n\nSHORT TITLE: SBOP-0-3012\n\nSECRET\n\nNND 58378"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nHEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND\nOFFUTT AIR FORCE BASE\nOMAHA, NEBRASKA\n\nSUBJECT: Inspection of Special Weapons Facilities at Strategic Air Command Stations\n\nTO: Commanding General\nFifteenth Air Force\nMarch Air Force Base\nCalifornia\n\n1. Your attention is invited to the inclosed basic communication and first indorsement thereto. It is requested that your headquarters designate personnel to inspect aviation squadron facilities of your command immediately upon receipt of notification from this headquarters. Notification will be in the form of an information copy of Strategic Air Command request for movement of aviation squadrons. Inspection is to be completed not later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of notification. Sandia Base will furnish representative personnel for inspections, upon your request.\n\n2. Upon completion of inspections, any discrepancies noted will be forwarded to this headquarters together with any recommendations that would facilitate transfer of subject squadrons to this command.\n\n3. Direct communication with Sandia Base is authorized for the purpose of coordinating this matter.\n\nBY COMMAND OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL LeMAY:\n\n2 Incls\n1. b/1 from Sandia to SAC\n2. 1st Ind from SAC to Sandia\n\nIncl 1\n\nSHORT TITLE: SBOP-0-3012\n\nSECRET\n\nNND 58378"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority NW 91526\nBy DP DPL NARA, Date 5/2/21\n\nTHE INSPECTOR GENERAL USAF\n17TH DISTRICT OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS\nKIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO\n\nDR/ms\n\nFile No: (24-8)-28\t\t\t\t\t\t25 May 1950\n\nSUBJECT: Summary of Observations of Aerial Phenomena in the New Mexico Area, December 1948 - May 1950\n\nTO: Brigadier General Joseph F. Carroll\nDirector of Special Investigations\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\n1. In a liaison meeting with other military and government intelligence and investigative agencies in December 1948, it was determined that the frequency of unexplained aerial phenomena in the New Mexico area was such that an organized plan of reporting these observations should be undertaken. The organization and physical location of units of this District were most suitable for collecting these data, therefore, since December 1948, this District has assumed the responsibility for collecting and reporting basic information with respect to aerial phenomena occurring in this general area. These reports have been distributed to the Air Materiel Command, USAF, in accordance with Air Intelligence Requirements No. 4, and to other interested military and government agencies.\n\n2. There is attached, as a part of this summary, a compilation of aerial phenomena sightings that have occurred mostly in the New Mexico area and have been reported by this District Office subsequent to December 1948. This compilation of sightings is not a complete record of all reported observations, but includes only those in which sufficient information was available to justify their inclusion. The observers of these phenomena include scientists, Special Agents of the Office of Special Investigations (IG) USAF, airline pilots, military pilots, Los Alamos Security Inspectors, military personnel, and many other persons of various occupations whose reliability is not questioned. This compilation sets forth the most important characteristics with respect to each observation and evaluates each sighting into one of three classifications, (1) green fireball phenomenon, (2) disc or variation, and (3) probably meteoric.\n\n3. There is also attached an analysis of the green fireball occurrences in this area made by Dr. Lincoln LaPaz. Dr. LaPaz is the\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nFile No: (24-8)-28\nSubj: Summary of Observations of Aerial Phenomena in\nthe New Mexico Area, December 1948 - May 1950 25 May 1950\n\nDirector of the Institute of Meteoritics and Head of the Department of Mathematics and Astronomy at the University of New Mexico. He was Research Mathematician at the New Mexico Proving Grounds under an OSRD appointment in 1943 and 1944, and Technical Director of the Operations Analysis Section, Headquarters, Second Air Force, 1944-45. Since 1948, Dr. LaPaz has served on a voluntary basis as consultant for this District in connection with the green fireball investigations.\n\n4. On 17 February 1949 and again on 14 October 1949, conferences were held at Los Alamos, New Mexico, for the purpose of discussing the green fireball phenomena. Representatives of the following organizations were present at these meetings: Fourth Army, Armed Forces Special Weapons Project, University of New Mexico, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, University of California, U. S. Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, Geophysical Research Division Air Materiel Command USAF, and the Office of Special Investigations (IG) USAF. A logical explanation was not proffered with respect to the origin of the green fireballs. It was, however, generally concluded that the phenomena existed and that they should be studied scientifically until these occurrences have been satisfactorily explained. Further, that the continued occurrence of unexplained phenomena of this nature in the vicinity of sensitive installations is cause for concern.\n\n5. The Geophysical Research Division, Air Materiel Command, Cambridge, Massachusetts, has recently let a contract to Land-Air, Inc., Holloman AFB, Alamogordo, New Mexico, for a limited scientific study of green fireballs. The results of this scientific approach to the problem will undoubtedly be of great value in determining the origin of these phenomena.\n\n6. This summary of observations of aerial phenomena has been prepared for the purpose of re-emphasizing and reiterating the fact that phenomena have continuously occurred in the New Mexico skies during the past 18 months and are continuing to occur, and, secondly, that these phenomena are occurring in the vicinity of sensitive military and government installations.\n\n4 Incls\n1. Summary of Sightings\n2. Photo of Sighting No. 175 w/comments\n3. Ltr fr Dr. LaPaz to Lt Col Rees, dtd 23 May 50\n4. Graph indicating maximums\n\nDOYLE REES\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDistrict Commander\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nFile No: (24-8)-28\nSubj: Summary of Observations of Aerial Phenomena in\nthe New Mexico Area, December 1948 - May 1950 25 May 1950\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\n6 cys, Director of Special Investigations, Headquarters USAF\n1 cy, CG, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio\nATTN: Director of Technical Intelligence\n1 cy, CG, Special Weapons Command, Kirtland AFB, New Mexico\n1 cy, CG, Armed Services Special Weapons Project, Sandia Base, New Mexico. ATTN: J-2\n1 cy, CG, Headquarters, Fourth Army, Ft. Sam Houston, Texas\nATTN: AC of S, G-2\n1 cy, CO, Holloman AFB, New Mexico\n1 cy, CO, Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories, Cambridge, Mass.\n1 cy, Director, Security Division, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Los Alamos, New Mexico. ATTN: Mr. B. O. Wells\n1 cy, Federal Bureau of Investigation, El Paso, Texas\n1 cy, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Albuquerque, New Mexico\n1 cy, Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, Pentagon Building ATTN: Dr. Joseph Kaplan.\n1 cy, Research and Development Board, Pentagon Building ATTN: Dr. H. E. Landsberg, Executive Director, Committee on Geophysics and Geography\n1 cy, File\n\n3\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSUMMARY OF SIGHTINGS OF UNKNOWN AERIAL PHENOMENA\nReported by the 17th District Office of Special Investigations (IG), Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico\n\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal or Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance | **Evaluation\n1 | 1946 16 Jan | 2300 | 1 | R | Point of impact on line between Brest and Kiev | Almost vertical descent followed by bouncing N to S | | 35° above Horizon Descending | Brilliant white | | 2-3 secs. | None | | Compare w/planet Venus on unusually clear night. | | Disappeared | (1) (2)\n2 | Latter part 1947 | App. 2000 | 1 | R | Vaughn, New Mexico | | 400'-500' | Descending slowly in vertical manner | Bright white | | | None | Round | Larger than basketball | Descending slowly | Exploded | (3)\n3 | 1948 27 Jul | 0835 0845 | 1 | R | Albuquerque, New Mexico | | | | Duralumnum reflected light | | | None | Flat and round | | Stationary at times | | (2)\n4 | 4 Aug | 0200 & 0300 | 2 | Unk | North Powder, Oregon | NW to SE | 5500' | Horizontal line | Green | | | | | Softball | 720 mph | Extinguished | (1)\n\nLEGEND:\n*Reliability of Observers: VR - Very Reliable R - Reliable Unk - Unknown Reliability\n**Evaluation: (1) \"Green Fireball Phenomena\" (2) \"Disk\" or Variation (3) Probable Meteor\n\nPage 1\nCONFIDENTIAL\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 2\n\n5 | 1948 24 Oct | Night | 1 | Unk | Phoenix, Arizona | E to W | | | Green | | 75 hts. | | | Star | Very slow | Became very bright and fell apart | (1) & (2)\n6 | 3 or 4 Nov | App 2200 | 1 | R | Vaughn, New Mexico | | 400'-500' | Descending slowly in vertical manner | Bright white | | | None | Round | Larger than basketball | Descending slowly | Exploded | (3)\n7 | 23 Nov | App 2200 | 1 | R | Vaughn, New Mexico | | 400'-500' | Descending slowly in vertical manner | Bright white | | | None | Round | Larger than basketball | Descending slowly | Exploded | (3)\n8 | 5 Dec | 2135 | 2 | R | Las Vegas, New Mexico | W to E | Slightly above 9,000' | Horizontal slightly descending | Whitish orange | | Few secs | | | | | Disappeared | (1)\n9 | 5 Dec | App 2200 | 2 | R | Albuquerque, New Mexico | No movement noted | 10,500' | Parabolic curve | Green | Yes | 2 secs | None | Round | | | Faded out | (1)\n10 | 6 Dec | 2255 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | E to W | | Slight falling arch | Green | Yes | 2-3 secs | None | Round | 1/3 diameter of moon | Rapid | Vanished | (1)\n11 | 8 Dec | 1835 | 2 | VR | Las Vegas, New Mexico | ENE to WSW | 13,500' | Horizontal | Bright green | Yes | 2 secs | None | | Larger than a flare | Rapid rate of speed | Faded out | (1)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 3\n\n12 | 1948 11 Dec | 1930 | | Unk | Hood River, Oregon | | | | Blue & white | | | Yes | Flash | | | Flash w/noise like thunder | (1) (2)\n13 | 12 Dec | 2102 | 5 | VR | 15 miles south of Las Vegas, New Mexico | E to W | 8-10 miles | Horizontal | Very bright green | | 2.1-2.3 secs | None | Ball | Magnitude -4 | | Broke into 3 or 4 small fragments & disappeared | (1)\n14 | 20 Dec | 2054 | 4 | R | Los Alamos New Mexico | W to E | Great height descending | 20° to the horizon | Pale green or bluish white | Yes | 1-1/2 secs | None | Ball | Basketball | High speed | Disappeared behind mountain | (1)\n15 | 28 Dec | 0431 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | N to S | Descended from high alt to 6000' | Descending in vertical path | white | | Sev. secs | None | Star | Star | Blower than falling star | Disappeared w/greenish flash | (3)\n16 | 1949 6 Jan | 1730 | 1 | Unk | Albuquerque New Mexico | SE to NW | 1500'-2000' | Horizontal | Bright white | | | None | Diamond | App. 2' long | Much faster than a jet | Disappeared | (1)\n17 | 6 Jan | 0310 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | E to W | 3 to 5° from observer | Horizontal | Brilliant green | | 2 secs | None | | | High speed | Disappeared behind mountainous horizon | (1)\n18 | 30 Jan | 1754 | App 200 | Unk | El Paso, Texas | NW to SE | 3°-5° above horizon | Horizontal | Green | | | None | Ball | | | Broke into pieces | (1)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[CONFIDENTIAL]\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District CIC (cont) Page 4\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n19 1949 30 Jan 1755 App 200 Unk Roswell, New Mexico W to E 2000' Horizontal Blue-green None Moving slowly Disappeared to some. Disintegrated into shower of smaller lighted fragments (1)\n20 30 Jan App 1800 App 200 Unk & R Alamogordo, New Mexico N to S Angle of elev. 15°-30° from observer. Gentle descent Green 3-15 secs None Ball Seemed to fizzle out (1)\n21 30 Jan 1854 1900 10 Unk Ft. Worth, Texas N to S 13° above horizon 30° downward from horizon Green trailing sparks Yes 1-7 secs None 1/3 size of full moon Disintegration (1)\n22 14 Feb 1840 2 Unk Canado, New Mexico Somewhat above horizon Stationary then fell in slight curve to W Brilliant white slightly green color Yes None Stationary then fell in slight curve to W. (1)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[CONFIDENTIAL]\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District CIC (cont) Page 5\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n23 1949 17 Feb 1300 1 Unk Grants, New Mexico Southward Vertical climb then leveled off Gradual ascent White Yes None Oval Larger than meteor Disappeared (1)\n24 17 Feb App 100 VR Albuquerque, New Mexico W to E Brilliant white shifting to peach color 6 mts None Round shifting to ellipse 1 lunar diameter Disappeared (2)\n25 27 Feb 1905 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico W to E Parallel to earth Green-white 2 secs None Not as fast meteor Disappeared abruptly (1)\n26 2 Mar 0010 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico N to S \"Low in sky\" Horizontal Light 2 secs None Very fast Disappeared behind trees (1) (3)\n27 3 Mar 0159 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico Straight down Straight down Bright green Disappeared (1) (3)\n28 6 Mar 2100 2 Unk Camp Hood, Texas From N 74° W N 81° W From 6° 45' above horizon Blue-white light Yes None Oblong 2' by 1' Not known (1)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[CONFIDENTIAL]\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District CIC (cont)\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n29 1949 6 Mar 2020 2 Unk Camp Hood, Texas N 40° E 59° above horizon Blue-white light None Ball like flash Basketball \"Fixed flash\" (1)\n30 6 Mar 2045 1 Unk Camp Hood, Texas From S 81° W to S 60° W From 21° above horizon to 6°31' above Light colored head orange trail Yes None Round head with trail About 10° in length (1)\n31 7 Mar 0115 1 Unk Camp Hood, Texas N 40° E 63° 15' above horizon Brilliant blue-white None Like flash bulb Flash bulb (1) (3)\n32 7 Mar 0130 1 Unk Camp Hood, Texas N 16° W 27° 30' above horizon Bright blue-white None Like flash bulb Basketball \"Fixed flash\" (1) (3)\n33 7 Mar 0130 0200 2 Unk Camp Hood, Texas S 20° W 26° above horizon Bluish white None Ball like flash Flash bulb (1) (3)\n34 7 Mar 0145 1 Unk Camp Hood, Texas N 60° E Dropped vertically to ground Orange 2 secs None Teardrop 2' by 1' Disappeared behind trees (3)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District CIC (cont) Page 6\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n35 1949 7 Mar 1810 1 Unk Window Rock, Arizona N 40-45° to horizon Red (fire) in center shading to blue at edge Yes 6-8 secs None Ball round-spherical 3' in diameter 200-300 mph Disintegrated (1)\n36 8 Mar 1836 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico S to N 12,000' to 15,000' Horizontal Bright white with greenish tint 1-2 secs None App 800 mph Either went out or disappeared behind cloud (1)\n37 8 Mar 1835 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico S to N 4,000 above terrain Descending at 45° angle Intense white light aluminum colored Very short None Elliptical pointed at ends Slower than twin-engined plane Disappeared behind trees (1)\n38 8 Mar 0103 1 Unk Camp Hood, Texas from S 58° E to S 54° E From 58° above horizon to 54° above Traveled in arc Pale white light Yes None Roundish head w/hazy smoke trail (3)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District CIC (cont) Page 7\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n39 1949 8 Mar 0103 1 Unk Camp Hood, Texas From N 56° W S 64° W From 15° above horizon Traveled in arc Pale reddish nose whitish red trail Yes None Lemon w/tail Disappeared (3)\n40 13 Mar 2155 1 Unk Albuquerque, New Mexico NE to SW or SW to NE 20° above horizon Descending slightly Bluish or greenish white Yes 2-4 secs None Length twice diameter of ball 1/2 diameter of full moon (1)\n41 14 Mar 0900-1600Z 1 R Airplane enroute fr Honolulu to Canton Is 6°-12° above airplane at 9,000 Horizontal 10 secs None Nose like bullet 65° in 9 secs (1) (2)\n42 27 Mar 1800 1805 1 Unk Tucumcari, New Mexico E to W High in sky -app 30° above horizon Amber None 25 mts None Long & narrow Faded out in distance (2)\n43 27 Mar 1800 1 Unk Montoya, New Mexico E to W About 75° above Orange flame None 10 mts None Long & narrow Length-about 1/6 lunar diameter, width-about 1/5 length Faded out in distance (2)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary\nPage 9\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n1949\n44 27 Mar 1813 1 R Tucumcari, New Mexico E to W Close to 45° above horizon Bright orange None 15 mts None Long & narrow Faded out of sight in distance (2)\n45 27 Mar 1800 1 Unk Tucumcari, New Mexico E to W 60° above horizon Orange fire None 15 mts None Like kite tail About size of C-47 at 10,000 ft. Disappeared behind hills (2)\n46 31 Mar 2150 1 R Camp Hood, Texas SW Est. 2,000' Fire red to white Yes None Spherical App. size of basketball (3)\n47 5 Apr 2200 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico S to N App. 300' above S slope of Pejarito Mt. Arc Green w/red after glow 1/2 - 1 sec None Tremendous speed Disappeared behind mountain (1)\n48 6 Apr 1205 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico SE About 15,000' Between dk & lt green 3 - 5 secs None Very fast (1)\n49 7 Apr 0135 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico W About 200 yds fr top of hill Green App 45 secs None Moved very slowly (1) (2)\n50 7 Apr 0100 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico S to N Green 5 secs None Moving slowly (1)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (contd)\nPage 10\n51 1949 12 Apr 1930 1 Unk Albuquerque, New Mexico SE to NW 20° above horizon White None 8 secs None Round 1/8 size of moon 15° in 8 secs Extinguished (1)\n52 15 Apr 1630 1 Unk El Paso, Texas Straight up About 30° Grayish Yes 15 mts None Thin smoke trail Very thin Dissipated (2)\n53 18 Apr 0148 2 R Flagstaff & Williams, Arizona NW App 12,000' to one. 75 - 100 miles to other observer Greenish blue 1 - 2 secs None Ball - like 100 watt light bulb Disappeared behind obstacle (1) (3)\n54 22 Apr 0905 1 Unk Cliff, New Mexico W to E 20° dropping slowly Aluminum None 2 mts None Round, flat thin, disc-shape Over 15' in diameter Disappeared behind mountains (2)\n55 24 Apr 1033 5 VR White Sands, New Mexico W 25-29° White light yellow 60 secs None Ellipsoid Tremendous rate of speed Disappeared due to distance (2)\n56 25 Apr 0630 2 Unk Springer, New Mexico 2 groups going W 2 groups going E Well above 30,000' Silvery white None 4 grps totaling about 20 sec Yes Round Very small Very fast well above speed of sound Disappeared from view (2)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 11\n57 1949 28 Apr App 1745 3 Unk Tucson, Arizona NE to SE or SW Silver None 12 - 40 mts None Cigar or sausage shape From D-29 to a city block 300 - 600 mph Faded from view (2)\n58 30 Apr 2215 1 Unk Albuquerque, New Mexico E to W 59° above horizon Blue green None 2 secs 2° None Round Tenth of moon 2 seconds 2 degrees Went out (1)\n59 3 May 2143 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico S to N 10° - 15° above horizon Bright white light None 10 secs None Very fast up to 1,000 mph (1) (3)\n60 3 May 2126 2143 2205 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico S to N 10° - 15° above horizon White 3 - 7 secs each time None Large - similar to size of airplane landing lights Very fast (1) (3)\n61 3 May 2126 2140 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico ESE to NWN 10° - 15° above horizon 2126-white 2140-red 5 sec 1st; 2 sec 2nd None 2126-baseball diamond lights. 2140-slightly larger than firebox lights Same speed as aircraft landing (1) (3)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 12\n62 1949 6 May 2040 2130 1 R Camp Hood, Texas W and N App 1200' dropping to 440' Alternating pinkish to green None 50 mts None Round 1/2 dollar diminishing to short quarter size Very slow Faded from sight (2) (1)\n63 6 May 0105 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico N to S 5° above horizon Was going down at an angle of 30 - 35° Green Fraction of a sec None Round App 1/8 size of full moon Very high rate of speed Disappeared west of Jemez Mts. (1)\n64 7 May 2025 2105 4 R Camp Hood, Texas SE 1300' Green-white None 40 mts None Diamond shape 3 mils width Covered 15 mils in 40 mins horiz. Dimmed and went out (2) (1)\n65 7 May 1940 1 R Camp Hood, Texas N and E 1000' Reddish greenish white None 57 sec None Diamond shape 3 mils width Covered 20 mils in 57 secs horiz. Dimmed and went out (2) (1)\n66 8 May 2008 2017 1 R Camp Hood, Texas N and E 1600' Reddish greenish white None 9 mts None Diamond 2 mils width 10 mils in 9 mts Dimmed and went out (1) (2)\n67 8 May 0930 1100 4 Unk Tucson, Arizona W, 90° turn to the N 4000 to 20,000 Horizontal then rapid climb at 45° angle White None 10-20 mts None Metallic circular 40-75' in diameter Motionless to faster than jet Climbed at 45° angle until out of sight (2)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 13\n68 1949 9 May App 1430 1 R Tucson, Arizona SW to NE Silvery None 6-10 secs None Round & flat 25' in diameter 750-1000 mph Faded from view (2)\n69 12 May 2115 2130 1 VR Alamogordo, New Mexico 3° or 4° above horizon White with greenish tinge None 4 mins None 2 fuzzy stars 1/4 diameter of full moon Vanished (1) (2)\n70 16 May App 1700 1 Unk Tucson, Arizona E to W 5000' Horizontal Black None 8-10 secs None Round solid flat 3 - 4' in diameter 800-1000 MPH Behind aircraft hangar (2)\n71 2 Jun 0040 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico E to N 7000' - 10,000' Descending Green Yes 1 sec None Ball of light (1) (3)\n72 11 Jun 2057 1 R Los Alamos, SW to NE 25° above horizon Green then red at end of flight Yes 4 - 5 secs None Size of star (1)\n73 20 Jun 2010 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico W to E Green turned orange red before vanishing None 3 secs None Round Extinguished (1)\n74 20 Jun 2010 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico W to E Directly overhead Blue green None 1-1/2 secs None Vanished as the exting'd. (1)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL / Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 14 / Number Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation / 75 1949 24 Jun 1545 1630 2 Unk Mesa, Arizona 1 to SE 2 to E 3 to NE 4 vertical 5 to E 4 Horizontal 1 Vertical Steel gray 4 at 30 mts 1 at 25 secs None Disc w/2 flanges Max of 400 mph Faded from view (2) / 76 27 Jun 0130 1 R Albuquerque, New Mexico W to E 30° to 90° above horizon Similar to star Slightly more orange Yes 2 mts None Round Slightly larger than brightest star 140° in 2 mts. Went behind building (3) / 77 29 Jun 2010 1 Unk Flagstaff, Arizona E to W 30° from vertical Yellow in front Red behind None None Bullet shaped ½ size of small airplane Relatively slow Over a hill (1) (2) / 78 30 Jun 1630 1 R Seligman, Arizona N 30° above horizon Dull grey None 8 secs None Circle Appeared 1½\" diameter at 10,000' altitude 2,000 mph or faster Disappeared in distance (2) / 79 11 Jul 2110 1 Unk Camp Hood, Texas W by SW 30° above horizon Pale red None 2 secs None Ball - but not a perfect circle Twice as large as evening star Such as turning off flashlight (3) / CONFIDENTIAL NW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL / Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 15 / Number Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation / 80 1949 28 Jul 2045 1 Unk Killeen Base, Texas N to S 30° above horizon White w/tint of blue green Yes 3-5 secs None Round w/tail Size of evening star Unable to estimate Faded out (1) / 81 28 Jul 2259 1 Unk Killeen, Texas S to N 30° above horizon 2 predominately white. 1 had orange glow to tail Yes ⅟1 at 2-3 secs ⅟2 at 10-12 secs None Round w/tail Tennis ball Faded out (1) / 82 28 Jul 2250 1 Unk Killeen, Texas N to NW 30° above horizon Initially blue turning white None 15-20 secs None Round 3 times size evening star Went out like light (1) (3) / 83 30 Jul 2135 1 R Camp Hood, Texas SE to NW 35° to horizon Climbed in arc Blue-white Yes 2-2½ secs None Like rocket tail 2-2½ secs to cover arc of about 15° Faded out (1) / 84 30 Jul 2204 1 Unk Camp Hood, Texas SE to SW App 30° above horizon Straight flight losing altitude Predominately white w/blue tint Yes 2-3 secs None Round w/tail Evening star or planet Very fast Gradually faded out (3) / CONFIDENTIAL NW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL / Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 16 / Number Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation / 85 1949 6 Aug 2000 1 Unk Las Cruces, New Mexico E to W Curve going up then fell in almost vertical direction Bluish green Yes 1-2 secs None Round Bigger than falling star Disappeared behind building (1) / 86 6 Aug 2000 1 Unk Las Cruces, New Mexico E to W 3°28\" to 9°40\" above horizon Curve going up then fell in almost vertical direction Reddish blue & green Yes 4-5 secs None Round App 6\" in diameter Disappeared gradually (1) / 87 6 Aug 2000 1 Unk Alamogordo, New Mexico Vertical 2°20\" to 7°35\" above horizon Straight vertical flight Bright white slight reddish cast None 3 secs None Round ½ size of moon Exploded then pieces died out (1) / 88 6 Aug 2000 2005 1 Unk Alamogordo, New Mexico E to W 2°4\" to 12°7\" above horizon 10° off vertical White 2 secs None Large as auto spotlight at arm's length Disappeared behind building (1) / 89 6 Aug 2015 1 Unk Alamogordo, New Mexico SW Straight flight app 20° vertical decline Whitish yellow (red trail) Yes 1 sec None Round Twice size normal falling star Extremely fast - twice as fast as falling star Disappeared behind mountain (1) / CONFIDENTIAL NW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL / Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 17 / Number Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation / 90 1949 6 Aug 2030 1 Unk Alamogordo, New Mexico N Constant slight curve earthward White (bluish) Yes 1 sec None Round App smaller than clenched fist Similar to falling star Went out (1) / 91 6 Aug 2020 1 Unk Albuquerque, New Mexico Descending to earth vertically 15° above horizon Descending to earth vertically Green None 1-1½ secs None Round to pear shape 500 watt bulb about 1/5 mile away 10° in 1½ secs at 2 miles Dissipated (1) / 92 6 Aug 2000 1 Unk White Sands, New Mexico 40° above horizon Straight line to earth Observer color blind None 1 sec None Round Half size of fingernail at arm's length Slightly faster than ordinary falling star Disappeared behind sand dune (1) / 93 6 Aug 2000 1 R Alamogordo, New Mexico 200° 30° above horizon Long slow curve to earth Bluish green Yes 1 sec None Round Tip of thumb at arm's length Burned out (1) / 94 10 Aug 0010 2 Unk Killeen Base, Texas E to W 30° angle headed down 30° angle headed down Blue Yes 3-4 secs None Oval Head size Sudden disappearance (3) / 95 10 Aug 2030 1 Unk Killeen Base, Texas N to S 30° above horizon White Yes 5 secs None Similar to comet Disappeared (3) / CONFIDENTIAL NW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL / Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 18 / Number Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation / 96 1949 10 Aug 2035 1 R Camp Hood, Texas N to S Level flight Yellow to orange Yes 1-2 secs None Like headlight of old car 60° in 2 secs Cut out (3) / 97 10 Aug 2035 2207 2220 2240 1 Unk Camp Hood, Texas W to E 30° - 45° above horizon Level flight White Yes 3-4 secs None Round w/tail Large flare Greater speed than plane Burned out (3) / 98 10 Aug 2040 1 Unk Camp Hood, Texas N to S 30° above horizon Horizontal w/slight arc Orange w/white tail Yes 3-5 secs None Rocket 20 mm. tracer ammo. Very great similar to falling star Light gradually diminished (3) / 99 10 Aug 2100 1 Unk Killeen Base, Texas S 30° above horizon going up Continued climbing at 30° angle until disappearance Bright orange Yes 5 secs None Reddish ball with long firey tail Head size Disappeared (3) / 100 10 Aug 2100 2120 2215 2250 1 R Camp Hood, Texas 40° - 70° above horizon ⅟1, 3 & 4 almost horizontal ⅟2 almost vertical White with orange Yes 1 sec for each one None Round with trail Large star Great speed Went out like a light (3) / CONFIDENTIAL NW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\t\tPage 19\nNumber\tDate\tTime\tNumber of Observers\t*Reliability of Observers\tGeneral Area of Occurrence\tApparent Direction of Flight\tApparent Altitude\tCourse Horizontal to Vertical\tColor\tTrain or Trail\tDuration of Observation\tSound\tShape\tApparent Size\tApparent Speed\tManner of Disappearance\t**Evaluation\n101\t1949 10 Aug 2200 2230\t1\tUnk\tCamp Hood, Texas\tS to N\t30° above horizon\tLevel flight\tWhite w/yellow trail\tYes\t1 - 2 secs\tNone\tOval\tSize of shooting star\t300 mph or faster\tFaded out\t(3)\n102\t10 Aug 2240\t1\tUnk\tCamp Hood, Texas\tN to S\t8,000' or more\tStraight flight with gradual incline\tLight red diminishing to light yellow\tYes\t2 - 3 secs\tNone\tRound w/jagged trail\tMuch larger than evening star\t\tBurned up and disintegrated\t(3)\n103\t11 Aug 2030 2045 2052 2105 0010\tSev\tUnk\tCamp Hood, Texas\tN to S\t45 - 60° above horizon\tGenerally a level flight\tWhite\tYes\t3 - 5 secs\tNone\tFlash like a rocket or training flare\tStar size\tFaster than any plane observed\tWent out like a light\t(3)\n104\t12 Aug 0010\t2\tUnk\tKilleen Base, Texas\tDue W in arc\t45° above horizon\tStraight & level flight w/ascent descent describing arc\tBluish white\tYes\t10 secs\tNone\tBroken circle resembling signal flare\tHead size\t\tSudden disappearance\t(3)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\t\tPage 20\n105\t1949 12 Aug 0445\t1\tUnk\tKilleen Base, Texas\tSE to NW\t30° above horizon headed down\tHeaded down\tReddish\tYes\t2 - 3 secs\tYes\tTrail of flame\tFairly long streak of flame\t\tFaded away\t(3)\n106\t14 Aug 2135\t1\tR\tAlamogordo, New Mexico\t\tAppeared 25° Disappeared at 12°\t10 - 15° off vertical\tReddish orange\tYes\t2 secs\tNone\tRound\tLarger than Venus\t\tDisappeared\t(3)\n107\t20 Aug 2130\t2\tUnk\tDouglas, Arizona\tN to S\t8,000' - 10,000'\tFlat trajectory\t\tNone\t6 - 10 secs\tNone\tRound to oblong like inverted saucer\tAbout size of single engine airplane\t3500 to 4500 mph\tDisappeared in distance\t(2)\n108\t21 Aug 2115 2150\t5\tUnk\tNogales, Arizona\t\t45° at low level 90° at high level\tHorizontal to earth's surface\tDull orange\tNone\t10 secs\tNone\tWafer\tApp size of volley ball\t10 times speed of jet planes\tDisappeared in space\t(1) (3)\n109\t26 Aug 1345\t1\tR\tDavis-Monthan AFB, Arizona\tSE to NW\tApp. 50,000\tHorizontal at 50,000'\tBrownish hazy color\tNone\t60 secs\t\tSimilar to triangle with round edges\tEst. to be app 1/4 of inch when observed at 3 ft.\tTerrific rate of speed\tFaded from view\t(2)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\t\tPage 21\n110\t1949 30 Aug 2300\t1\tR\tLos Alamos, New Mexico\tAlmost straight fall\t90° overhead\tAlmost straight fall\tBright green w/reddish tail\tYes\t1 - 2 secs\tNone\t\tMuch larger than meteor\t\tBurned out\t(1)\n111\t15 Sep 0025\t1\tUnk\tAlbuquerque, New Mexico\t\t30° above horizon\t\tYellow red\t\t6 secs\tNone\tRound\tSize of baseball\t\tBurst & appeared to disintegrate\t(3)\n112\t16 Sep 0230\t1\tR\tLos Alamos, New Mexico\tW to E\t3,000'\tHorizontal\tOrange\tNone\t15 secs\tNone\tBall shape\tLarger than falling star\tFaster than airplane slower than falling star\tDimmed then disappeared completely\t(3)\n113\t18 Sep 2015\t1\tUnk\tSandia Base, New Mexico\tW to S\t45° above horizon\t\tDark yellow\tNone\t3 - 4 secs\tNone\tRound\tSize of baseball\t\tUnknown\t(1)\n114\t19 Sep 0900\t2\tUnk\tTucson, Arizona\tN\tApp 4000'\t\tGrayish white\tNone\t2 mts\tNone\t\t2 to 3 ft across\t600 mph\tFaded from view\t(2)\n115\t27 Sep 0300\t1\tUnk\tSandia Base, New Mexico\tFrom SE\t45° above horizon\tTraveling tangent to earth\tBright blue to white\tNone\t4 secs\tNone\tRound\tAbout size of softball at 300 yds.\t45° in 4 secs.\tObscured by building\t(3)\n116\t27 Sep 0300\t1\tUnk\tSandia Base, New Mexico\tTo the N\t10° above horizon\t\tYellow\tYes\t3 - 4 secs\tNone\tRound\tSize of baseball at 25 yds.\tSame rate as shooting star\tDied out\t(3)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\t\tPage 22\n117\t1949 27 Sep 0300\t1\tUnk\tSandia Base, New Mexico\tSE to NW\t15° - 20° above horizon\tTraveling in arc toward earth\tBright green\tNone\t2 secs\tNone\tRound\tSame size as perimeter fence light at distance of about 200 yds.\t45° in 2 secs.\tBrightened then went out\t(1)\n118\t27 Sep 0130\t1\tUnk\tSandia Base, New Mexico\tS to N\t20° above horizon\tMade a gentle arc toward earth\tDark blue\tYes\t2 secs\tNone\tConicicle w/tail twice its diameter\tLooked like a sky rocket\t50° in 2 secs.\tBurnt out\t(3) (1)\n119\t27 Sep 0130\t1\tUnk\tSandia Base, New Mexico\t\t45° above horizon\tMoving tangent to earth\tGreen\tNone\t1 sec\tNone\tRound\tFist at arm's length\t20° in 1 sec\tBurnt out\t(3) (1)\n120\t30 Sep 2257\t1\tUnk\tSandia Base, New Mexico\tS to W\t55° to horizon\t\tYellow orange\tNone\t2 - 3 secs\tNone\t\tSlightly larger than shooting star\t200 - 300 mph\t\t(1)\n121\t2 Oct 2110\t1\tR\tLos Alamos, New Mexico\t\t20,000 - 30,000'\tWent up & then down\tBright green\tYes\t3 secs\t\t\t\t\t(1)\n122\t6 Oct 1745\t1\tUnk\tMescalero, New Mexico\t\t15 1/2° above horizon\tDescended in slight arc\tDark green\tNone\t30 secs\tNone\tRound\tBig ball\t\tDisappeared behind hills\t(1)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\t\tPage 23\n123\t1949 6 Oct 1800 1845\t1\tUnk\tMescalero, New Mexico\t\t18° above horizon\t\tGreen\tNone\t7 - 9 secs\tNone\tRound\t1/2 size of thumb at arm's length\tMoving slowly\tDisappeared behind a hill\t(1)\n124\t6 Oct 1758\t1\tR\tAlamogordo, New Mexico\tE to W\t\tStraight angular descent\tBluish white possibly lt. green tinge\tNone\t4 secs\tNone\tCircular\t3 times the size of Jupiter or Venus\t5° per sec.\t\t(1)\n125\t6 Oct 1800\t1\tUnk\tAlamogordo, New Mexico\t\t4020' to 7?5'\t\tGreen\tNone\t5 - 6 secs\tNone\tRound\tSize of baseball at arm's length\t\t\t(1)\n126\t6 Oct 1750\t1\tR\tAlbuquerque, New Mexico\tE to W\t\tCurved descent approaching vertical\tGreenish white\tNone\t1 sec\tNone\tSimilar to very flare\t1/2 size of thumb at arm's length\t\tAbrupt\t(1)\n127\t6 Oct 1750\t1\tR\tWagon Mound, New Mexico\tE to W\t\tHorizontal\tGreenish white\tNone\t3 - 4 secs\tNone\tRound\t1 1/2\" - 2\" in diameter\tApp. that of meteor\tWent out like like electric light\t(1)\n128\t6 Oct 1758\t1\tUnk\tAlbuquerque, New Mexico\tNE to SW\t\tAt tail end of its ccurse it arched over and fell\tBrilliant green\tNone\t10 secs\tNone\tTear drop\t\t\tSeemed to burn out\t(1)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 24\nNumber | Date | Time | Number of Observers | *Reliability of Observers | General Area of Occurrence | Apparent Direction of Flight | Apparent Altitude | Course Horizontal to Vertical | Color | Train or Trail | Duration of Observation | Sound | Shape | Apparent Size | Apparent Speed | Manner of Disappearance | **Evaluation\n129 | 1949 7 Oct | 2120 | 1 | Unk | Albuquerque, New Mexico | Straight vertical drop | 35° above horizon | | Yellow to green | None | 1 sec | None | Round | Half a moon | Dropped 15° in 1 sec | Behind Sandia Mountains | (1)\n130 | 10 Oct | 0406 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | SE to NE | 3,000' above observation pt. | Parallel to surface of earth | Brilliant white | Yes | 4 - 5 secs | None | | Small | Appeared to be slower than a meteor | Disappeared | (3)\n131 | 10 Oct | 0107 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | W to E | 45° above horizon | | Bluish green | Yes | 15 secs | None | Round | Size of fist at arm's length | Slow | Died out | (1)\n132 | 10 Oct | 0107 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | SW to NE | 45° above horizon | Executed dives | Greenish blue w/red sparks trailing | Yes | 4 secs | None | Round | Size of fist at arm's length | Slow | Faded out | (1)\n133 | 10 Oct | 0107 | 1 | Unk | Sandia Base, New Mexico | N to NE | 45° above horizon | | Green | None | 15 secs | None | Round | Size of fist at arm's length | Slow | Burned out | (1)\n134 | 11 Oct | 2010 | 6 | Unk | Roswell, New Mexico | Appeared moving to N & angling slightly to E | | Maneuvered up & down | Light green turned orange | Yes | 45 mts | None | Round | Size of baseball | | | (1)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 25\n135 | 1949 11 Oct | 1045 1100 | 2 | Unk | Alamogordo, New Mexico | NW to SE | If size of B-29 appeared to be 150,000' | | White | None | 10-15 secs | None | Round dish shape | 2\" in diameter at arm's length | Very fast compared w/falling star | Faded from view | (2)\n136 | 12 Oct | 1115 | 3 | Unk | Roswell, New Mexico | S to NE | 3,500' | Smooth arc | White (silver) | None | 45-60 secs | None | Round probably elliptical | | Faster than jet aircraft | Went beyond range of vision | (2)\n137 | 12 Oct | 1115 | 3 | Unk | Alamogordo, New Mexico | Appeared from S & veared off to NE | If size of B-29 appeared to be 35,000' | Smooth arc | White or aluminum | None | 45-60 secs | None | Round ball | 35,000' 4\" in diameter | 1,500 mph | Faded from view | (2)\n138 | 12 Oct | 1340 | 4 | R | Tucson, Arizona | From NE to SW | 30,000' | Horizontal | White cr silver | None | 15 secs | None | Round | 50 - 100' in diameter | 1,000 mph | Faded from view | (2)\n139 | 14 Oct | 1420 | 3 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | W to E | 20,000' | Level flight just above horizon | Greenish blue-white trail | Yes | 2 secs | None | Round | Appeared as a 12\" disc | | Burned out | (1)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 26\n140 | 14 Oct | 2021 | 2 | R | Albuquerque, New Mexico | N to S | | Horizontal | Red orange | Yes | 10 secs | None | Round | 1/3 - 1/4 size of moon | | Broke into 2 pieces & disappeared | (1) (3)\n141 | 14 Oct | 1410 1415 | 1 | Unk | Los Alamos, New Mexico | S to N | | | Front-green & silver Rear - Pale blue | Yes | 3 - 4 secs | None | | 1/8 size of full moon | 500 mph or more | | (1)\n142 | 21 Oct | 2130 | 1 | Unk | Roswell, New Mexico | SE to NW | 30° above horizon | | Very bright white | None | 20-30 mts | None | | | Unknown | | (2)\n143 | 22 Oct | 0228 | 1 | R | Los Alamos New Mexico | NW to SE | On horizon | | Bright green | | 2 secs | None | | 4 times size of a flare | 150 mph | Disappeared behind a hill | (1)\n144 | 22 Oct | 0220 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Vertical | 50 - 100 ft. | | Green | | 1 sec | None | Like flare | Small | | Went out | (1)\n145 | 16 Nov | 1950 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Disappeared to N | | | 2 objects bluish green | | | None | | | Stationary but disappeared with speed of meteor | Disappeared from view | (1)\n146 | 19 Nov | 2152 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Vertical | | | Green then yellow | | 2 secs | None | | | | | (1)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 27\n147 | 1949 19 Nov | 2152 | 1 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | Vertical | | | Green | | 2 secs | None | | | | | (1)\n148 | 25 Nov | 2000 | 5 | R | Los Alamos, New Mexico | E to W | 15° - 10° above horizon | Downward 10° from the horizontal | Yellowish green | | 2 secs | None | | | | Disappeared behind mt. | (1)\n149 | 27 Nov | 1800 | 1 | Unk | McIntosh, New Mexico | Vertical | Less than 2,000' | Vertical descent | Green | None | 1 sec | None | Shaped like a flare | Same as a signal flare | Same as falling signal flare | Same as signal flare | (1)\n150 | 27 Nov | 1730 | 1 | Unk | Winslow, Arizona | E to W | 30° above horizon | | Bright blue-white | Yes | 3 - 4 secs | None | Egg shape | Egg held at arm's length | 3 - 4 secs to cover 15° - 20° of horizon | Dwindled out | (1)\n151 | 27 Nov | 1749 | 1 | R | Albuquerque, New Mexico | E to W | 3° - 5° above horizon | Sloping descent | Blue-white | None | 1 - 2 secs | None | Round | Pencil eraser at arm's length | 5° - 7° in 1 or 2 secs | Went out then on then out again | (1)\n152 | 27 Nov | 1749 | 1 | R | Socorro, New Mexico | E to W | 10° -40° above horizon | Arc | Pale green to pale blue | Yes | 5 secs | None | Round | Quite large | Slower than meteor | Faded out gradually | (1)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 28\n153 | 1949 3 Dec | 1805 | 1 | R | Alamogordo, New Mexico | E to W | | In an arc downward | Green fringe of orange light | None | 2 secs | None | Circular | Somewhat larger than Venus | | Disappeared behind building | (3)\n154 | 4 Dec | 1935 | 1 | Unk | Albuquerque, New Mexico | E to W | | Nearly horizontal | Green | None | 2 - 3 secs | None | Round | Marble at arm's length | | Went out like a candle | (1) (3)\n155 | 4 Dec | 1935 | 2 | Unk | Los Alamos, New Mexico | E to NE | | Sloping descent | Green | | 1/5 sec | Yes | Round | | | Disappeared behind mt. | (1) (3)\n156 | 5 Dec | 1930 1945 | 3 | Unk | Carrizozo, New Mexico | | 40° above horizon | In dive | Blue-green | | | None | Teardrop | | | Very slow | Disappeared | (1) (3)\n157 | 5 Dec | 2240 | 1 | Unk | Tularosa, New Mexico | E to W | | Smooth arc downward | Blue w/yellowish red toward tail | Yes | 1 sec | None | Streak of light | Appeared little longer than length of lead pencil at 6' | | Appeared to hit ground near Tularosa, New Mexico | (1) (3)\n158 | 9 Dec | 1330 | 1 | Unk | Farmington, New Mexico | Dropping vertically | 500 ft. | Vertically down | | | | None | Charred parachute or cargo net | | | | Disappeared | (2)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 29\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n159 1949 13 Dec 2005 3 R Alamogordo, New Mexico Stationary then began to move downward slowly and to right 5,000' White amber red green None 9 mts None Circular 1 - 1½ times size of average st. light at a distance of 8 miles Object took on brilliant green color, picked up speed and faded from view (1) (2)\n160 1950 6 Jan 2230 7 R Alamogordo, New Mexico E to W Up & down and horizontal White changed to green & red None 45 mts None Star like Slightly larger than planet Venus Moved app. 15° to 20° from E to W during 45 mins it was observed Stopped observation (1) (2)\n161 7 Jan 2215 2 Unk Corona, New Mexico From SW to SE Descending Yellowish white orange blue cr. Yes 10 secs None Round ball shape Same as cup 6\" in diameter at arm's length Compared w/fast jet fighter Disappeared behind mt. range (1)\n162 9 Jan 2226 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico Horizontal 80°-40° above horizon Horizontal Incandescent green Yes 2 secs None Oval with trail Disappeared behind trees (1)\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 30\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n163 1950 9 Jan 2220 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico Due W 60° above horizon Straight course Bluish white Yes 2 secs None Pointed Appeared as a point 10° per second Luminosity stopped suddenly (1)\n164 9 Jan 2225 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico 75°-80° above horizon Straight line Greenish white None 3 secs None Round -4 to -5 compared to Jupiter 25° per second Behind horizon (1)\n165 12 Jan 1900 3 Unk Holloman, New Mexico To W Changed altitude erratically White changed to green & red None 5 mts None Star like About same size of Venus Discontinued watching (1) (2)\n166 13 Jan 0605 3 Unk Holloman AFB, New E to W Erratically up & down White changed to green & red None Short time None Star like About same size as Venus Disappeared w/daylight (3)\n167 27 Jan 1715 1 Unk Scullville, New Jersey NW Ascending at about 60° angle White streak 30 mts ½ that of a fireworks rocket at close range Faded gradually (2)\n168 7 Feb 1950 2015 2 R Albuquerque, New Mexico SSE to E 40°-45° above horizon Horizontal Reddish green Yes 4-6 secs None Round elongated trail Twice size of evening star About same as falling star Faded out in atmosphere (1)\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 31\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n169 1950 7 Feb 1945 2000 2 R Between Tucumcari & Kirtland AFB, New Mexico Flat Trajectory Fireball white Yes 2-4 secs None Over 1,000 mph Faded out suddenly (1)\n170 15 Feb 1530 1 Unk Sandia Base, New Mexico From NW to W 45° downward above horizon Appeared red & green Yes 30 None Round That of a normal marble Like shooting star trail Faded out (1) (3)\n171 18 Feb 0510 5 R Holloman AFB, New Mexico Climbed White and orange None 1 hr 44 mts None Round to cone shape Size of coffee cup at arm's length Stopped observation (2)\n172 20 Feb 0530 2 Unk Holloman AFB, New Mexico Stationary 1,000' above 9,000' mt. Stationary White None 5 mts None Round App size of ½ dollar held at arm's length Stationary Disappeared from view behind cloud (2)\n173 24 Feb 1355 1 R Albuquerque, New Mexico To W or SW 20° to 23° above horizon Straight flight White None 1½ mts None Round Compared in size to upper dark portion of moon as it rises in E 1½ mts. to cover 2° (2)\nCONFIDENTIAL NW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 32\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n174 1950 24 Feb 1400 1 R Albuquerque, New Mexico E by SE About 20° above horizon Bright white None 20-30 secs None Round Compared w/size of weather ballon as it disappeared in distance Very slow Faded out of sight (2)\n175 *** 24 Feb 1930 1 R Datil, New Mexico NW White changing to red & green Yes 2 hrs 30 mts. None Round 1° per 2 mts. Disappeared (1) (2)\n176 24 Feb 1345 1 Unk Los Alamos, New Mexico E then turned W 25,000-30,000' Straight up White, kept flashing like mirror in sun None 20 mts None Very fast Went straight up out of sight (2)\n177 24 Feb 1340 1 Unk Los Alamos, New Mexico E to W W to E then st. up 30,000' Straight up Silvery white None 20 mts None Went straight up out of sight (2)\n178 24 Feb 1315 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico Erratic generally NE 20,000-30,000' Silvery None 15 mts None Saucer-shaped 100' across if at 20,000-30,000' As fast or faster than sound Disappeared (2)\n***See attached photograph.\nCONFIDENTIAL NW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nSummary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont) Page 33\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal to Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n179 1950 24 Feb Between 1315 1400 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico Circled then E Considerable altitude Aluminum Yes 2 None Spherical Rather large Erratic Unknown (1)\n180 25 Feb 1545 1555 12 R Los Alamos, New Mexico Heading toward ground 30°-35° above horizon Flashing silver None 3 secs to 2 mts None Circular like plane fuselage Small airplane From very slow to very fast (2)\n181 25 Feb 2115 1 Unk Albuquerque, New Mexico Toward S App. 20° above horizon Almost vertical Bright greenish white Yes 1½ secs None Teardrop 3 times size of a shooting star Slightly slower than falling star Appeared to burn out (1)\n182 25 Feb 0200 1 R Datil, New Mexico NW White changing to red & green Yes 30 mts None Round 1° per 2 mts Disappeared behind mountain (2)\n183 25 Feb 1410 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico S to N 1 to 3 miles at 30° above horizon Metallic None 2 mts None Oblong 10-15' 40 mph Went below horizon (2)\nCONFIDENTIAL NW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 34\nNumber Date Time Number of Observers *Reliability of Observers General Area of Occurrence Apparent Direction of Flight Apparent Altitude Course Horizontal or Vertical Color Train or Trail Duration of Observation Sound Shape Apparent Size Apparent Speed Manner of Disappearance **Evaluation\n184 1950 25 Feb 1545 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico N to SWS Very high White to silver None 30 secs None Circular About size of 50¢ piece at its height Very fast Disappeared into glare of sun (3)\n185 25 Feb 1550 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico S or SW 12,000' Metallic None Few secs None As large or larger than average plane Fast Faded from view (2)\n186 25 Feb 1545 1555 14 R Los Alamos, New Mexico NE to SW Overhead at from 4 to 10 miles Traveled w/a fluttering motion Silver None Few secs to 2 mts None Round Vary from 4\" to small airplane Very fast 500 - 1500 mph (2)\n187 25 Feb 1655 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico E to W Shiny silvery None 10-15 secs None Round About size of B-25 fuselage Slow speed Disappeared behind tree (2)\n188 10 Mar 1800 1830 6 Unk Phoenix, Arizona SE 40,000-50,000' Moved upward at 60° angle Aluminum or quick silver Yes 10 mts None Oval or oblong Size of moon Extremely high Disappeared (2)\n189 5 Mar 1135 1300 4 R Vaughn, New Mexico Traveled 195° Straight flight White None 1 hr 25 mts None Round Ping pong ball at arm's length 180 to 200 mph Ceased observation (2)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Summary of Sightings of Unknown Aerial Phenomena, 17th District OSI (cont)\nPage 35\n190 1950 11 Mar 0100 1 R Holloman AFB, New App 270° About 30° above horizon at distance of 50 miles Straight flight Changed from light orange to blood red to amber to light green None 5 mts None Ping pong ball Ping pong ball held at arm's length Disappeared from view (1) (2)\n191 16 Mar 1100 10 Unk Farmington, New Mexico N to NE Turned on their axis & maneuvered up & down Bright luminous as tin foil None 3-5 mts None Flat spheroidic 1 to 6\" Faster than conventional aircraft Discontinued observation (2)\n192 16 Mar 1000 10 Unk Farmington, New Mexico NE Over 20,000' Skyward at at 60°-80° Bright aluminum None 30 mts None Oval & oblong 1/16\" - 1/2\" held at arm's length Faster than conventional aircraft Gradually disappeared (2)\n193 17 Mar 0310 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico Toward earth Toward earth Reddish then green None 1 sec None Appeared to fall to earth (3)\n194 17 Mar 0300 1 R Los Alamos, New Mexico NE Level flight Greenish yellow None 3 secs None Round 1/4 size of full moon Moderate Like light going out (3)"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Sighting No. 175\n\nPhotograph of Unknown Aerial Phenomena taken at Datil,\nNew Mexico by Cpl Lertis E. Stanfield, Holloman Air Force\nBase, New Mexico on 24 and 25 Feb 1950. An analysis of\nthe above photograph was made by Dr. Lincoln LaPaz, Head\nof the Institute of Meteoritics, University of New Mexico,\nAlbuquerque, New Mexico, who reached the following con-\nclusions:\n\na. The angular diameter of the perfectly round\nluminous object Stanfield observed was approx-\nimately 1/4 of a degree.\n\nb. The angular velocity of the object in the sky\nwas greater than half a degree per minute.\n\nDr. LaPaz stated that on the basis of the results (a)\nand (b) above, the object seen by Stanfield was not the\nmoon (for the angular diameter is too small), it was not\nVenus or any other planet (for the angular diameter was\ntoo large), and it was not a bright fixed star slightly\nout of focus (for the observed rate of motion is double\nthat due to the diurnal rotation of the earth)."} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO\nALBUQUERQUE\n\nINSTITUTE OF METEORITICS\n\nMay 23, 1950\n\nTo: Lt. Colonel Doyle Rees, Commanding Officer\n17th District, O. S. I.\n\nFrom: Lincoln LaPaz, Director\nInstitute of Meteoritics\n\nSubject: Anomalous Luminous Phenomena (Seventh Report)\n\n1. In the second report of this series, dated 1948, December 20, the writer listed ten significant differences between the bright green horizontally-moving fireballs observed in the interval 1948, December 5-20, and typical meteors. These differences were the following:\n\n(1) The horizontal nature of the paths of most of the December fireballs is most unusual. Genuine meteors are rarely observed to move in horizontal paths.\n\n(2) Again the very low height of the December fireball discussed in section 2 above sets it off in sharp contrast from the genuine meteors for which heights of the order of 40 or more miles are normally observed.\n\n(3) The velocity determined for the fireball of December 12 is much less than the velocities determined from typical meteors (and yet is considerably greater than the speeds of the V-2 Rockets or jet planes or of conventional flares).\n\n(4) In the case of meteorites that penetrate to as low levels as that determined for the fireball of December 12, the observed luminous phenomena are always accompanied by very violent noises. No noises whatever have been observed in connection with the various December fireballs so far investigated. (Note added on 1950, May 23: Possible exceptions to the noiselessness of green fireballs are the incidents of 1949, January 30, and 1949, December 4.)\n\n(5) Genuine meteors normally show remarkable variations in brightness, beginning as fine thin hair lines, which are scarcely visible to the observer, and then brightening up to flash out near the end of their paths. In the case of the December fireballs most of the observers have reported that the green balls appeared almost instantly at their full brightness."} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"To: Lt. Colonel Doyle Rees - Page 2\nSubj: Anomalous Luminous Phenomena (Seventh Report) May 23, 1950\n\n(6) In the case of genuine meteors the paths are directed toward all points of the compass with equal frequency. On the contrary in the case of the green fireballs, plots of admissible approach sectors show that there is a very pronounced tendency for the paths to come in from the north half of the sky.\n\n(7) The three groups of anomalous greenish luminous phenomena show a curious association with well known meteor showers, although none of these meteor showers normally produce extremely bright green fireballs, such as those recently observed. For example, the observation mentioned by Mr. Monnig appeared near the maximum of the Quadrantid shower of early January, Mr. McCullough's observation of August was near the time of the Perseid shower and the December observations all fell in the interval covered by the Geminid shower. This relationship might indicate an attempt to render the green fireballs less conspicuous by causing them to appear only when there is considerable meteoric activity.\n\n(8) As noted in an earlier communication, the remarkably vivid green color reported for most of the December fireballs is rarely observed in the case of genuine meteors. By laboratory test this peculiar color seems to be identical with that given off by copper salts in the blowpipe flame. If this identification is correct, the wave length of the radiation from the green fireballs is near λ =5212Å.\n\n(9) The duration estimates of between 2 and 3 seconds reported for the green fireballs are considerably longer than those (0.4 - 0.5 seconds) for the ordinary visual meteors, but shorter than the duration estimates invariably reported in the case of a genuine meteorite fall (5 to 30 seconds or even longer).\n\n(10) For none of the green fireballs has a train of sparks or a dust cloud been reported. This contrasts sharply with the behavior noted in case of meteoric fireballs--particularly those that penetrate to the very low levels where the green fireball of December 12 was observed.\n\n2. In the year and a half since this list was prepared, many additional observations have been made, the total number of objects now accepted as belonging in the green fireball category being 72. (Although this number constitutes nearly 50% of the incidents listed in the accompanying Summary, it constitutes less than 5% of the total number of unscreened observations reported to the writer.) Critical analysis of all green fireball reports now available shows that only one of the statements in the list given in paragraph 1 needs to be modified, namely, item (1). Within the last year, a considerable number of the green fireballs have appeared to fall vertically downward rather than"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"To: Lt. Colonel Doyle Rees - Page 3\nSubj: Anomalous Luminous Phenomena (Seventh Report) May 23, 1950\n\nto move horizontally. However, a strictly vertical infall is also very rarely observed in the case of genuine meteor falls.\n\n3. An analysis just completed of the time distribution of the green fireballs so far observed permits us to add an 11th item to the list of differences given in paragraph 1 above. The graph of frequency versus local time which accompanies the present report shows that the maximum frequency of sighting of green fireballs (occurring at approximately 2030) coincides in time with neither the frequency maximum for ordinary meteors (occurring at approximately 0300) nor the frequency maximum for meteorite falls (occurring at approximately 1600).\n\n4. Inspection of the graph referred to in paragraph 3 also will show that most of the green fireballs have been sighted in a time interval extending from about 5 p.m. to 11 p.m. (MST). This concentration might be even more pronounced if it were possible to screen out of the secondary maximum, around 2 a.m. (MST), all ordinary meteors which have been mistakenly identified as green fireballs. That such misidentification has occurred is strongly suggested by the near coincidence in time of the secondary maximum of the green fireballs and the well established early morning maximum of the ordinary meteors.\n\n5. Some significance may attach to the fact that the time interval alluded to in paragraph 4 extends from about 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. in the Ural region of the USSR. Since missiles moving with velocities of the order of those found for the green fireballs for which real path determinations have been possible would travel from the southern Urals to New Mexico in less than 15 minutes, a possible interpretation of the concentration of sightings referred to in paragraph 4 is that the green fireballs result from guided missiles launched from bases in the Urals in the morning hours before cloudiness due to convection or blinding afternoon dust storms can interfere with non-radar tracking, such as has been used by the Optical Trajectory Section at White Sands Proving Ground.\n\n6. There is also a pronounced concentration of green fireball incidents on the four days, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, almost all of the most widely observed incidents having occurred on Saturday or Sunday.\n\n7. It is a curious and fairly well-established fact that there has been a distinct decline in the number of green fireball sightings during the last two months, within which the number of so-called \"flying saucer\" incidents in this region has attained an all-time high.\n\n8. Although I have recently received from Dr. Joseph Kaplan of the Scientific Advisory Board a letter containing the statement \"Frankly, I don't know of any U. S. experiments that would result in the appearance of these unconventional objects, and neither does Von Karman\". I still"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTo: Lt. Colonel Doyle Rees - Page 4\nSubj: Anomalous Luminous Phenomena (Seventh Report) May 23, 1950\n\nconsider the most probable explanation of the green fireballs to be the one given in the first of the three paragraphs below which are quoted from my letter of 1950, February 20, to Dr. P. H. Wyckoff, Chief Atmospheric Physics Laboratory, Base Directorate for Geophysical Research. The last two paragraphs quoted below well summarize my recommendations concerning the green fireball problem:\n\n\"As a preliminary to setting down the project recommendations which you requested, I have very carefully reviewed all available fireball data (observers' reports, transit measurements, calculated real paths, etc.) covering incidents from those of December 5, 1948 to the extraordinary incident of February 7, 1950, which has been under intensive investigation for the last two weeks. As a result of this comprehensive review, particularly as it relates to the incident of February 7, 1950, I feel compelled to write you in somewhat different terms concerning my own part in the proposed fireball project than I had in mind when we last discussed this matter. In brief, I have come to the conclusion that, on the basis of the evidence now available to me, I would not be justified in recommending a fireball project. In my opinion, this evidence proves conclusively that the fireballs reported on fall into one of two categories: Those of the first category (the majority) are meteorite falls of unusual, but certainly not of impossible, magnitude, frequency and other characteristics; those of the second category (the minority) are U. S. guided missiles undergoing tests in the neighborhoods of the sensitive installations they are designed to defend. This interpretation of the latter category is the one that I proposed in answer to a question raised by Dr. Teller at the first Los Alamos conference on February 17, 1949. It was not taken seriously then and I doubt that it will be taken seriously at the present time. However, even if my interpretation of the unconventional fireballs is the correct one, it is obvious that those in position to confirm it should refuse to do so.\"\n\n\"Only one other point need be stressed, namely, that if I am wrong in interpreting the guided missiles as of U. S. origin, then certainly intensive, systematic investigation of these objects should not be delayed until the termination of the present academic year. Recent international developments compel one to sense the imperative necessity of immediate investigation of the unconventional green fireballs, in case you are in possession of information proving that they are not U. S. missiles.\"\n\n\"If such an immediate investigation were to be undertaken, I would recommend that Dr. Fred L. Whipple, of Harvard College Observatory, be placed in charge of the photographic phase of the investigation; that Dr. Peter M. Millman, of the Dominion Observatory, be placed in charge of the spectrographic phase of the investigation;"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"To: Lt. Colonel Doyle Rees - Page 5\nSubj: Anomalous Luminous Phenomena (Seventh Report) May 23, 1950\n\nthat Dr. L. A. Manning, of Stanford, and Dr. Millman be placed in charge of the radar investigation; and, finally, that Dr. William Crozier, of the New Mexico School of Mines, be placed in charge of dust collection and identification. On the basis of many intensive field surveys, I do not anticipate that ground search will lead to any recoveries, but in case such ground search is to be attempted, it should be carried out on the scale stressed in my conversations with you and Major Oder last month.\"\n\n9. Although the above paragraphs were written some months ago, the recommendations contained in them are the ones I would urge you to consider at the present time. In conclusion, I should like to repeat the offer made at the end of my letter of February 20 to Dr. Wyckoff, namely to serve, if needed, as consultant on the green fireball project as suggested in Major Oder's letter to me under date of November 29, 1949, with the stipulation, however, that my service be on a voluntary basis rather than on the $40 per day contract specified in Major Oder's letter.\n\nLincoln LaPaz\nLincoln LaPaz, Director\nInstitute of Meteoritics\nUniversity of New Mexico"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"METEORITE MAXIMUM\nMETEOR MAXIMUM\nGREEN \"FIREBALL\" MAXIMUM\n\"DISK\" or VARIATION MAXIMUM\n\nLegend\nMeteorites\nMeteors\nGreen \"Fireballs\"\n\"Disks\" or Variations\n\nNumber of Observations\nTIME OF SIGHTINGS\nCONFIDENTIAL\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n\nTHE INSPECTOR GENERAL USAF\n17TH DISTRICT OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS\nKIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO\n\nDR/JIB/web\n\nFile No: 24-8 18 May 1949\n\nSUBJECT: UNKNOWN (Aerial Phenomena)\n\nTO: Commanding General\nSandia Base\nAlbuquerque, New Mexico\nATTN: Intelligence Officer\n\n1. Transmitted herewith is a Summary of Information relative to the aerial phenomena which have been observed in the New Mexico -- West Texas area.\n\n2. This investigation is being continued and your office will be kept informed of future developments.\n\nDoyle Rees\n1 Incl\nSummary of Information DOYLE REES\n Lt Col, USAF\n District Commander\n\nDISTRIBUTION OF SUMMARY:\n\n2 - Hq OSI\n1 - 3d OSI Region\n1 - CG, AMC\n1 - CO, Kirtland AFB\n1 - CO, 636th Acft Control & Warning Sq\n1 - AF Guided Missile Project\n1 - AF Field Office for Atomic Energy\n1 - CG, Sandia Base\n3 - Atomic Energy Security Service\n1 - CG, Fourth Army\n1 - BIO, Ft Bliss, Texas\n1 - FBI, Albuquerque\n1 - Dr Lincoln LaPaz, UNM\n12 - File\n\nSHORT TITLE: KF-5977\nSECRET\nFile: Incidents - Fireball Phen.\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority NW 91526\nBy DF NARA Date 5/13/86\n\nTHE INSPECTOR GENERAL USAF\n17th DISTRICT OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS\nKIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO\n\n19 April 1949\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION:\n\n1. This is a comprehensive summary of all observations of unidentified aerial phenomena possessing similar characteristics which have been observed in the New Mexico-West Texas area. The common characteristics of most of the incidents are:\n\na. Green color, sometimes described as greenish-white, bright green, yellow-green, or blue green.\n\nb. Horizontal path, sometimes with minor variations.\n\nc. Speed less than that of a meteor, but more than any known type of aircraft.\n\nd. No sound associated with observations.\n\ne. No persistent trail or dust cloud.\n\nf. Period of visibility from one to five seconds.\n\n2. All of the incidents reported do not possess all of the above characteristics, but in each case one or more are present. In none of the reported incidents has any natural or man-made object been determined to be responsible.\n\n3. The body of this summary consists of a tabulation of observations with notes attached to clarify or amplify certain of the more important observations. Note numbers 1, 3, and 5 are taken directly from reports compiled by Dr. Lincoln LaPaz, University of New Mexico. Dr. LaPaz is internationally known and respected as a meteoriticist, and has taken a great interest in these phenomena.\n\n4. The tabulation of sightings is not a complete record of all reported observations, but comprises only those in which interviews were conducted by OSI personnel. Many other persons were interviewed by Dr. LaPaz and his colleagues, but inasmuch as complete data is not available, these interviews are not taken into account in this summary. In addition, numerous reports have been received from individuals who could not provide\n\nSHORT TITLE: KV-5977\nSECRET\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION (Cont) 19 April 1949\n\nsufficient information to warrant inclusion of such facts as they did possess. Any interview where the veracity of the interviewee was doubted was discounted in the preparation of reports for transmittal.\n\n1 Incl\nTabular Summary w/notes\n\n- 2 -\nSECRET\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date Time Color Course Seen From Seen By\n\n5 Dec 48 1930 Green NE to SW Las Vegas, N.M. Civilian\n5 Dec 48 2000 Green N/S Albuquerque, N.M. Univ. of N.M. Student\n5 Dec 48 2105 Green N/S Near Las Vegas, N.M. Military Pilots\n5 Dec 48 2115 Green N/S Las Vegas, N.M. Civilian\n5 Dec 48 2115 Green N/S Las Vegas, N.M. Civilian\n5 Dec 48 2115 Green N/S Lucy, N.M. Civilian\n5 Dec 48 2127 Green N/S East of Albuquerque Military Pilots\n5 Dec 48 2135 Green N/S Near Las Vegas, N.M. Pilots, Pioneer Airlines\n5 Dec 48 2200 Green N/S Near Las Vegas, N.M. Civilian Pilot\n5 Dec 48 2220 Red-white NE to SW Levy, N.M. USAF Photographer\n5 Dec 48 2220 N/S N/S Onava, N.M. Railway Worker\n5 Dec 48 2315 Green N/S Near Las Vegas, N.M. Univ. of N.M. Student\n\n6 Dec 48 2255 Green N/S Sandia Base AEC Security Agent\n7 Dec 48 2145 Green N/S Los Alamos AESS Inspector\n8 Dec 48 1835 Green N/S Near Las Vegas, N.M. OSI Personnel\n\n12 Dec 48 2102 Note 1 Note 1\n12 Dec 48 2102 Note 1 Note 1\n\n13 Dec 48 2130 Note 2\n13 Dec 48 2215 Green N/S 20 mi. East of Las Vegas Civilian\n\n14 Dec 48 0100 Green N/S Wagon Mound, N.M. Civilian\n\n20 Dec 48 2054 Note 2 Note 3\n\n28 Dec 48 0431 White N to S Los Alamos AESS Inspector\n\n6 Jan 49 0310 Green E to W Los Alamos AESS Inspector\n6 Jan 49 1730 Note 4\n\n30 Jan 49 Note 5\n14 Feb 49 1840 White-Greenish NE to SW Near Ganado, Ariz. Dr. Salsbury\n17 Feb 49 Note 6\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date Time Color Course Seen From Seen By\n\n27 Feb 49 1905 Green W to S Los Alamos AESS Lieutenant\n2 Mar 49 0010 N/S W to S Los Alamos AESS Inspector\n3 Mar 49 0159 Green Down Los Alamos AESS Sergeant\n9 Mar 49 1836 White-Greenish 275 to 289 Los Alamos AESS Inspector\n8 Mar 49 1835 Note 7\n13 Mar 49 2153 Greenish-White NE or SW Sandia Base MPs\n27 Mar 49 1800 Note 6\n5 Apr 49 2200 Green S to N Los Alamos AESS Inspector\n6 Apr 49 0005 Green NW to SE Los Alamos AESS Inspector\n7 Apr 49 0100 Green S to N Los Alamos AESS Inspector\n7 Apr 49 0135 Green E to W Los Alamos AESS Inspector\n12 Apr 49 1930 White E to W Sandia Base MP\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXTRACT FROM REPORT SUBMITTED BY DR. LaPAZ ON 20 DECEMBER 1948:\n\nDecember 14:\n\n1:00 a.m., Mr. Mimo Sanchez (Wagon Mound, N.M.)\n\n2. The Real Path of the Only Green Fireball so Far Observed at Two Separate Stations. Among the numerous observations so far made, there is only one pair of corresponding observations i.e., those made simultaneously by different groups of observers at widely separated stations. The only such observations are those obtained on the night of December 12 by one group of observers near Starvation Peak (Bernal, New Mexico - see report on incident of 1948, December 12, 9h 2m plus or minus 30s), and a second pair of observers stationed within the Los Alamos reservation. By graphic reduction of the simultaneously made observations, the following facts have been determined: The green fireball of December 12, 9h 2m plus or minus 30s appeared very near a point with the coordinates latitude 35° 50', longitude 106° 40' and disappeared near a point with the coordinates latitude 35° 45', longitude 107° 5' traversing a nearly or exactly horizontal path with a length of very nearly twenty-five (25) miles at an altitude above the surface of the earth of approximately 8 to 10 miles, depending on the estimate of angular altitude employed in the reduction; the velocity with respect to the earth works out at between 8 and 12 miles a second, depending on the duration estimate used. It should be observed that the above results are obtained under the assumption that the points of appearance and disappearance of the fireball were seen simultaneously by both the Bernal and Los Alamos groups. In case this assumption is not fulfilled, the real path could very easily be no more than 10 to 12 miles long, the velocity with respect to the earth then working out at between 3 and 6 miles a second. While there is thus considerable undertainty because of the lack of confirming azimuth observations from a third station, concordance in the five (5) different estimates of angular elevation make it most unlikely that the linear height of the fireball was much less than 8 miles and much more than 10 miles. It is interesting to observe that the backward extension of the 25-mile path first given passes almost centrally across the Los Alamos reservation.\n\n3. Significant Differences Between the Fireballs Observed in the Interval December 5-13 and Typical Meteors.\n\n3.1 The horizontal nature of the paths of most of the December fireballs is most unusual. Genuine meteors are rarely observed to move in horizontal paths.\n\n3.2 Again the very low height of the December fireball discussed in section 2 above sets it off in sharp contrast from the genuine meteors for which heights of the order of 40 or more miles are normally observed.\n\n3.3 The velocity determined for the fireball of December 12 is much less than the velocities determined from typical meteors (and yet is considerably greater than the speeds of the V-2 Rockets or jet planes or of conventional flares).\n\nNOTE 1\nSECRET\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TO: Colonel Doyle Rees December 20, 1948\n\n3.4 In the case of meteorites that penetrate to as low levels as that determined for the fireball of December 12, the observed luminous phenomena are always accompanied by very violent noises. No noises whatever have been observed in connection with the various December fireballs so far investigated.\n\n3.5 Genuine meteors normally show remarkable variations in brightness beginning as fine thin hair lines, which are scarcely visible to the observers, and then brightening up to flash out near the end of their paths. In the case of the December fireballs most of the observers have reported that the green fireballs appeared almost instantly at their full brightness.\n\n3.6 In the case of genuine meteors the paths are directed toward all points of the compass with equal frequency. On the contrary in the case of the green fireballs, plots of admissible approach sectors show that there is a very pronounced tendency for the paths to come in from the north half of the sky.\n\n3.7 The three groups of anomalous greenish luminous phenomena show a curious association with well known meteor showers, although none of these meteor showers normally produce extremely bright green fireballs, such as those recently observed. For example, the observation mentioned by Mr. Louda appeared near the maximum of the Quadrantid shower of early January, Mr. McCullough's observation of August was near the time of the Perseid shower and the December observations all fell in the interval covered by the Geminid shower. This relationship might indicate an attempt to render the green fireballs less conspicuous by causing them to appear only when there is considerable meteoric activity.\n\n3.8 As noted in an earlier communication, the remarkably vivid green color reported for most of the December fireballs is rarely observed in the case of genuine meteors. By laboratory test this peculiar color seems to be identical with that given off by copper salts in the blowpipe flame. If this identification is correct, the wavelength of the radiation from the green fireballs is near 5,218 Angstrom Units.\n\n3.9 The duration estimates of between 2 and 3 seconds reported for the green fireballs are considerably longer than those (0.4 - 0.5 seconds) for the ordinary visual meteors, but shorter than the duration estimates invariably reported in the case of a genuine meteorite fall (5 to 30 seconds or even longer).\n\n3.10 For none of the green fireballs has a train of sparks or a dust cloud been reported. This contrasts sharply with the behavior noted in case of meteoric fireballs--particularly those that penetrate to the very low levels where the green fireball of December 12 was observed.\n\n4. On the basis of the various differences to which attention is called in section 3, the writer remains of the opinion that the fireball of December 12 was definitely non-meteoric and that in all probability the same is true of most, if not all, the other bright green fireballs, which the OSI has had under investigation.\n\nLINCOLN LaPAZ"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENTS OF 13 AND 20 DECEMBER 1948:\n\nThe unusual feature of these two incidents is that there were reported two red lights trailing the green fireball. In each case observers agreed that the trailing lights retained a constant position with respect to each other and to the green light. Also, these two sightings are the only two all the green fireballs where a sharp change of direction in the vertical plane was observed. One of these incidents, that of 20 December, was observed by Atomic Energy Security Service Inspectors, while the other was observed by a truck driver and his wife. That of 20 December was observed in the Los Alamos area, while that of the 13th of December was observed southwest of Las Vegas.\n\nNOTE 2"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nINCLOSURE #6\n\nThe University of New Mexico\n\nAlbuquerque\n\nInstitute of Meteoritics December 30, 1948\n\nTO: Lt. Colonel Doyle Rees, Commanding Officer\nDistrict No. 17\nOffice of Special Investigations\n\nFrom: Lincoln LaPaz, Director\nInstitute of Meteoritics\n\nSubject: Anomalous luminous phenomena (Third Report)\n\nIn the second report of this series, a description was given of the real path through the atmosphere of the green fireball of 1948, December 12, 9h 53m p.m. (plus or minus 30s). On the basis of corresponding observations made from one station near Starvation Peak, New Mexico, and a second station near Los Alamos, New Mexico, this fireball was found to have appeared near a point with the coordinates: latitude 35° 50' N, longitude 106°, 40' W, and to have disappeared near a point with the coordinates: latitude 35° 45' N, longitude 107° 05' W, traversing an almost horizontal path, at an elevation of about 10 miles above sea level, with a length of about 25 miles, at a velocity of approximately 10 miles per second. (The minimum path length consistent with the observations was found to be about 11 miles, the corresponding velocity then falling between 3 and 6 miles per second, depending on the duration adopted.)\n\nOn the basis of corresponding observations of the greenish-white fireball of 1948, December 20, 8h 54m p.m. made by two pairs of Los Alamos observers, it has now become possible to work out another approximate real path. As will be apparent from the original accounts of the observations made by AESS Inspectors William D. Wilson, Buford G. Truett, Clifford E. Strang, and Physical Security Inspector George S. Skipper, the fireball of 1948, December 20 was observed under less favorable conditions than the green fireball seen by five persons on the night of December 12. However, on the basis of the original accounts of the observers named above, of sketches supplied by these four individuals on December 29 and of transit observations made by Captain M. E. Dee and the undersigned on the same date at the points of observation (viz., 35° 48' .9, 106° 18' .4 for Strang and Skipper and 35° 55', 106° 23' .2 for Wilson and Truett), it has been possible to establish reasonable concordance between various points on the fireball path as seen by the two groups of observers. Because of the very short baseline (only 8 miles long) between the two points of observation and the difficult conditions under which the fireball of December 20 was observed, it is my opinion that the real path derived from the December 20 observations deserves considerably less weight than that obtained from the December 12 observations.\n\nNOTE 3"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lt. Col. Doyle Rees -2- December 30, 1948\n\nIt is found that the fireball doubly observed by Messrs. Wilson, Truett, Strang, and Skipper appeared at a height of at least 10 miles and descended at an angle of about 45° to the vertical (according to Truett's estimate) to a point C at an elevation of only 2.3 miles above the horizontal plane through the point from which Strang and Skipper observed. As the fireball approached the point C, its path levelled off and from C to its point of disappearance, E, the fireball followed a nearly horizontal path approximately 7.5 miles moving with a velocity of between 3.75 and 7.5 miles per second, depending on the duration estimate adopted. The coordinates of the projection of C on the earth are 35° 56', N, 106° 30' W, and those of the projection of E are 35° 57' N, 106° 23' W. The forward extension of the fireball's trace on the earth as determined by the above projections, passes some six miles to the north of the town of Los Alamos.\n\nIt should be noted that the descending branch of the path of the fireball was observed by Inspector Truett alone, but he was absolutely certain that his observation of this portion of the path was correct. It should also be noted that no sound was heard, although the distance from the observers to the fireball and from the fireball to the earth could have been only a few miles at most. I have no hesitancy in testifying that an object possessing the path and the other peculiarities observed by Messrs. Wilson, Truett, Strang, and Skipper was not a falling meteorite."} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TO: Director, Intelligence & Security Division 7 January 1949\n\nFROM: Chief, Physical Security Branch\n\nSUBJECT: Reported Observation of Unidentified Light or Flare Moving Across the Sky on 6 January 1949\n\n1. On 7 January 1949, the writer interviewed Pfc. Meredith J. Everitt, ASN 38552954, Headquarters, 8450th M.P. Group, concerning the unidentified light or flare which he had reportedly seen moving across the sky.\n\n2. Pfc. Everitt advised that on 6 January 1949 he was guarding a C-97 airplane at the landing strip, located adjacent to the Ordnance Area, when at approximately 1730 hours he noticed a bright object travelling across the sky, from the Southeast towards the Northwest. He related that the object was diamond shaped, approximately two feet long, and appeared to be much brighter in its center than at the edges. He estimated that the object was approximately 1500 to 2000 feet in the air and travelled approximately 500 feet, horizontal to the earth's surface, before he lost sight of it. Pfc. Everitt was unable to estimate the speed of the object but stated that he has seen low flying jet planes, and that this object travelled much faster than the jets that he has observed. There was no smoke or other vaporous material visible to Pfc. Everitt around or following the object.\n\n3. At the time Pfc. Everitt witnessed the object, he stated that the sky was clear, furnishing a light blue background, and that the object appeared to be a bright white light, with no other apparent visible color.\n\n4. Standing guard with Pfc. Everitt were Sgt. Richard Woleslegee and Cpl. Wilson, and according to Pfc. Everitt, neither of the other men saw the object. Everitt explained that he called to Sgt. Woleslegee, who was standing at the other end of the plane, and told him to look at the object in the sky, but by that time it had disappeared.\n\n5. Pfc. Everitt stated that he attended Flight School, under the G.I. Bill of Rights in Houston, Texas, during the year 1947, and that he has had some experience in observing aircraft.\n\n/s/ MATTHEW J. DOYLE\nChief, Physical Security Branch\nIntelligence & Security Division\n\nNOTE 4"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO\n\nALBUQUERQUE\n\nInstitute of Meteoritics\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tFebruary 21, 1949\n\nTO:\t\tLt Colonel Doyle Rees, Commanding Officer\n\t\tDistrict No. 17\n\t\tOffice of Special Investigations\n\nFrom:\t\tLincoln LaPaz, Director\n\t\tInstitute of Meteoritics\n\nSubject:\tAnomalous luminous phenomena (4th report)\n\n1. Several additional sightings of unexplained aerial light phenomena have occurred since the third report in this series was prepared. Outstanding among the as yet undescribed incidents was the green fireball of Sunday evening January 30, 1949, 5:54 p.m. MST. Within less than one minute after the appearance of the fireball, an eyewitness (Mr. Nesbett) called to report the impression of a group of persons who saw the fireball through an east window while seated about the dinner table in a brightly lighted room. Within twelve hours after the fireball appeared, more than 100 eyewitness accounts had been obtained by its director through personal interviews. An unusually high percentage of the reports came from military personnel (waiting out under the sky for Post Theaters to open), from guards and other special agents already alert to watch for anomalous luminous phenomena and from airplane pilots, control tower men and oilwell workers working on the late afternoon to midnight shift.\n\n2. On February 1st, a staff car was placed at the writer's disposal by Major William Godsoe of the Fourth Army and a field survey was begun of the region in New Mexico and Texas in which the majority of the observer's reports of the fall lived. This survey, carried out under unusually severe weather conditions, included visits to the following localities: Moriarty, Estancia, Vaughn, Ramon, Mesa, Roswell, Caprock, Tatum and other towns in New Mexico; and Lamesa, Brownfield, Plains, Lubbock, Muleshoe and other towns in Texas. (Several of these towns were visited two or more times.) At Roswell, where very effective cooperation was provided by the OSI group at Walker Air Base under Lt Paul Ryan, and the local CAP unit under Lt H. K. Cobean, Special Agent Bill Ricket was added to the survey party and gave much aid in later work. At Lamesa, Texas, the ground survey party was joined by an air search party consisting of Major Charles Phillips, USAF, Captain Melvin E. Neef and Special Agent Jack L. Boling, from the 17th District OSI office at Kirtland Field, and Corporal Cochran. On February 4th, the four persons just named flew a low-level air reconnaissance mission in a T-11 aircraft over the area surrounding the earth-point of the fireball of January 30th. At the same time a second ground survey party under Lt Paul Ryan made a careful field search along a route extending from Lamesa through Amherst, Texas, to Clovis, New Mexico."} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. As a result of the ground and air searches referred to above, and of an analysis of the very large amount of information obtained from eyewitnesses by personal interviews, by telephone conversations and by letter, it has now (three weeks after the fall) become clear that several thousand persons in New Mexico and Texas saw this great fireball leisurely traverse the sky. It has been possible to determine that the January 30th fireball became visible at an altitude of approximately twelve miles over a point at latitude 34° 5' longitude 102° 5', and disappeared at an altitude of approximately eight miles over a point at latitude 32° 48', longitude 102° 22', after traversing a nearly horizontal path approximately 143 miles long at a velocity of from seven to fourteen miles per second. Although the January 30th fireball must be rated among the brightest observed in the last quarter-century, and in spite of the fact that its real path lay closer to the earth throughout its entire extent than any other meteorite path of which the writer has knowledge (excepting the anomalous green fireballs of December 12th and 20th, 1948), the meteor detonations and long continued rumblings which without exception accompany large meteorite falls were not observed on January 30th by anyone in the very large region covered by the various ground surveys. However, what may have been Udden noises (anomalous whizzing and hissing sounds frequently reported by very distant observers as having been heard at the same time that a meteoritic fireball was seen) were heard at Roswell, New Mexico, and near Muleshoe, Texas.\n\n4. In addition to the absence of noise anomaly referred to in the last paragraph, the fireball of January 30th, 1949, shows several other features (e.g. nearly horizontal path, absence of long enduring luminous train or dust clouds, North to South direction, etc) characteristic of the green fireballs earlier described in this series of reports. However, the January 30th fireball was much brighter than any of those earlier reported and differed from the other green fireballs in that many of the Texas observers who were situated nearest its path reported its color as blue, orange, red and even purple instead of green.\n\n5. Up to the present time (February 21st), no evidence whatever supporting the belief that solid fragments fell to earth from the January 30th fireball has been discovered. However, as promptly as possible, a much more thorough ground search should be made in the probable area of fall as outlined by the earlier surveys, for, in my opinion, the fireball of January 30th is the only one of the anomalous luminous objects under investigation which gives any indication of having been a meteorite fall.\n\n6. With the present report, the writer's participation in the OSI's investigation of the puzzling fireball question must, to his regret, terminate. During the time I was on leave of absence from the University of New Mexico, I was glad to donate my time and services to this investigation. Now that I am again serving as Head of the Department of Mathematics with a full time teaching load, it is impossible for me to continue cooperating with the OSI.\n\nLINCOLN LaPAZ\nHead of Dept of Mathematics\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENTS OF 17 FEBRUARY AND 27 MARCH:\n\nIn each of these incidents the following description applies:\n\na. Color - Red, orange, pink, or amber.\n\nb. Shape - Elongated, about five to ten times as long as wide.\n\nc. Consistency - Apparently solid, but flexible. Did not appear to be vapor or smoke trail.\n\nd. Luminosity - Appeared to be self-luminous, and the varying attitude of flight and changes of position caused no change either degree or color of emitted light.\n\ne. Flight - Both objects performed various maneuvers, consisting of climbing and diving, with turning movements.\n\nf. Speed - Not accurately estimated, due to variation in time factors.\n\ng. Termination - Both objects appeared to disappear in the distance.\n\nh. Location - The 17 February incident was observed from the area of Albuquerque, New Mexico. The 27 March observations were made from the Tucumcari-Clovis area.\n\ni. Course - The 17 February object appeared to move from west to east, that of 27 March, from east to west.\n\nj. Sound - No sound was reported in conjunction with either incident.\n\nk. Remarks - In each case, reports indicated that the objects flowed around corners in vertical maneuvers, rather than swung around as would a rigid object. In neither case did investigation produce any evidence of a jet-propelled craft in the area. Observers in each case were found whose credibility is above average.\n\nNOTE 6"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT OF 8 MARCH 1949:\n\nThis incident was reported by an AESS Inspector on duty at Los Alamos. The object appeared to be an eliptical, rather stubby, aluminum body surrounded or covered with billowy flame. There may have been projections similar to stubby control surfaces and wings, but the observer could not be sure of this. The observer described the object as looking rather like the part of a war time German airplane from the cockpit aft. It disappeared behind the clouds. The path was slightly descending; there was no noise.\n\nNOTE 7"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"797\n\nREFER TO FILE NO.\nSBID/1\n\nHEADQUARTERS. SANDIA BASE\nALBUQUERQUE. NEW MEXICO\n\nMAR 31 1949\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority NW 91526\nBy DF/DM NARA, Date 5/13/24\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nTO:\tThe Chief\n\tArmed Forces Special Weapons Project\n\tP. O. Box 2610\n\tWashington 25, D. C.\n\nATTENTION: Chief, Intelligence & Security Division\n\n1. Reference is made to letter this Headquarters, file SBID/1, dated 31 December 1948, subject as above.\n\n2. Inclosed herewith are three (3) summaries of information from Fourth Army, dated 16 March, 18 March, and 24 March 1949, dealing with the reports of unidentified lights appearing in the vicinity of Camp Hood, Texas.\n\n3. A conference was held at Los Alamos on 16 February 1949, to consider the unnatural phenomena that have been reported. Commander Richard Mandelkorn represented this Headquarters at this conference. His report of this conference as well as a transcript of the minutes of the conference are attached hereto.\n\n4. It is requested that these inclosures be returned to this Headquarters for file, after they have served their purpose, inasmuch as they are the only copies on hand.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nMarvin F. Pound\nMARVIN F. POUND\nCapt., Infantry\nAdjutant\n\n5 Incls:\n1. Memo, 18 Feb. 49 (SBRD-0-2173)\n2. Sum. of Info, 24 Mar 49 w/sketch\n3. Sum of Info, 18 Mar 49 w/sketch\n4. Ltr 17 Mar 49 (HQS-4th 5577) w/4 Incls\n5. AEC Ltr 22 Mar 49 (in dup) w/Incl (HILL-5577)\n\nDistribution:\n1A & 2A - Addressee\n3A - I&S File\n4A & 5A - CI Doc Lib\n\nSECRET\nSHORT TITLE: SBID-0-2296"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SWPIN/380.01 1st Ind\n\nHeadquarters, Armed Forces Special Weapons Project, P. O. Box 2610, Washington 25, D. C., 27 April 1949.\n\nTO: Commanding General, Sandia Base, P. O. Box 5100, Albuquerque, N. M.\n\nInclosures listed in basic communication have been noted and are returned herewith.\n\nBY COMMAND OF MAJOR GENERAL NICHOLS:\n\n5 Incls:\nn/c\n\nJOHN C. HEALEY\nMajor, U. S. Air Force\nAdjutant General\n\nSECRET\nSHORT TITLE: SBID-0-2296"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18 February 1949\n\nREPORT OF TRIP TO LOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO, 16 FEBRUARY 1949, BY COMMANDER RICHARD S. MANDELKORN, U.S.N., RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION, SANDIA BASE.\n\nSubject: Project \"Grudge\".\n\n1. On 16 February, a conference was held at Los Alamos to consider the so-called green fireball phenomena which commenced about 5 December 1948. The following were present:\n\nFor Los Alamos:\n\nMr. N. E. Bradbury\nMr. Marshall Holloway\nMr. Fred Reines\nMr. John Manley\nMr. Edward Teller\nMr. Elmo Morgan (AEC)\nMr. Sidney Neuberger (Security)\nMr. Maxwell (AESS)\nMr. Hoyt\n\nFor the Fourth Army:\n\nMajor William A. Godsoe\nMajor Wynn\n\nFor the U. S. Air Force:\n\nCaptain Neef\n\nFor the University of New Mexico:\n\nDr. Lincoln LaPaz\n\nFor Sandia Base:\n\nCommander Richard Mandelkorn\n\n2. Captain Neef opened the meeting by saying that the problem was being presented to Los Alamos scientists in hopes that they would be able to indicate some mode of attack on the problem and offer some explanations for the phenomena observed. He stated that this question had been classified military SECRET under the name, Project \"Grudge\", and that the investigation was now the primary responsibility of USAF, Air Materiel Command, T-2. He then turned over the discussion to Dr. LaPaz.\n\nSHORT TITLE: SBRD-0-2173"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Report of Trip to Los Alamos, 16 Feb 49 (Cont.) 18 February 1949\n\n3. Dr. LaPaz stated that he had been assisting the Military for the past two months at their request in the investigation of the subject problem, and went on with the general discussion of phenomena attending normal meteorite fall, postulating the following important characteristics:\n\na. Random path of fall.\n\nb. Color and intensity variations in light emitted.\n\nc. Sound.\n\nd. Frightened animals.\n\n4. Dr. LaPaz then went on to discuss the number of observers reporting the subject phenomena and the diversity of their backgrounds, including commercial airlines' pilots, military pilots, special intelligence agents, Los Alamos personnel (Mr. Hoyt), and himself, as well as various and sundry previously uninformed citizens.\n\n5. Dr. LaPaz then described the \"Starvation Peak Incident\" which he observed himself, detailing the following characteristics which indicate that the phenomenon can not be classified as a normal meteorite fall:\n\na. Initial bright light (no period of intensity increase) and constant intensity during the duration of the phenomenon.\n\nb. Yellow-green color (about 5,200 angstroms).\n\nc. Essentially horizontal path.\n\nd. Trajectory traversed at constant angular velocity.\n\ne. Duration about two seconds.\n\nf. No accompanying noise.\n\n6. Since about 5 December 1948, there have been more than ten incidents analogous to the \"green fireball\" described, and some twenty more presenting minor deviations to the above, which should be considered in connection with them. In addition, there have been a number of normal shooting stars and meteors observed.\n\n7. There ensued a general discussion in which it was brought up that the majority of the observers whose reports were here under consideration were not subject to previous psychological influences or prior knowledge as to what they should look for. Furthermore, \"seeing\" conditions for meteor observation throughout the continental United States were at least"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Report of Trip to Los Alamos, 16 Feb 49 (Cont.) 18 February 1949\n\naverage during December, January, and February, yet no green fireballs have been reported in any other areas. They seemed to be confined to the Los Alamos, Las Vegas, and West Texas triangle.\n\n8. Mr. Teller then took over the discussion and showed that a material object travelling with the velocity of the subject phenomenon (about eight miles per second) would have to have a mass of about twenty grams, assuming all the kinetic energy could be converted to light, under the assumption that the light output is in the vicinity of 10^14 ergs per second. He then went on to show that the shock wave produced by the passage of an object of these dimensions or greater passing through the atmosphere at a height of eight to ten miles (the observer figures) with a velocity of eight miles per second would produce a loud noise easily audible ten kilometers from the source. No sound has been observed. Therefore, Mr. Teller has the tentative opinion they are not material objects passing through the air. We should look to electronics and optics for an explanation rather than in the field of hydrodynamics. In any event, it was apparently agreed by those present that it was almost incredible that a large object such as a guided missile or informer vehicle could pass through the atmosphere at a height of eight miles at a velocity of seven to eight miles per second without producing a loud noise which would have been audible to observers. Mr. Bradbury demurred so far as the electronic explanation was concerned, saying if it were assumed that the answer lay in that region, many more difficult problems would have to be solved.\n\n9. The following action seems in order:\n\na. Recalculation of the data outlined by Mr. Teller with a more accurate treatment to verify his tentative conclusions.\n\nb. The establishment of well-equipped and organized observation stations to give as thorough photometric and photographic coverage as is possible in the geographic area involved.\n\nc. Assuming that Mr. Teller's theories are borne out by recalculation, declassification of the Project to permit participation and thinking by scientists throughout the country.\n\n10. Dr. LaPaz and Captain Neef have fruitlessly attempted to obtain information from a meteorite observers' group now at White Sands, said to be performing work under contract for the Navy. Commander Mandelkorn offered to assist them in their endeavor to enlist the services of the group for observations in connection with Project \"Grudge\".\n\n11. Conclusion: It is my belief that these phenomena, *particularly if there are any further incidents, are deserving of serious consideration"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Report of Trip to Los Alamos, 16 Feb 49 (Cont.) 18 February 1949\n\nuntil their source and meaning have been satisfactorily explained. Although Mr. Teller's discussion tends to disprove the hypothesis that guided missiles or informer vehicles are responsible, there is cause for concern of the continued occurrences of unexplainable phenomena of this nature in the vicinity of sensitive installations.\n\n*Captain Neef reports blue fireball visible from Sandia at 0530, 17 February 1949, and a yellow-orange cigar-shaped light at 1759, visible until 1806, 17 February.\n\n/s/ Richard Mandelkorn\n\nRICHARD MANDELKORN,\nCommander, U.S.N.\n\nCopy Furnished:\nFourth Army, G-2 -- Major William A. Godsoe (2)\nUSAF -- Captain Neef\nUSAF FOFAE -- Brig. Gen. Howard G. Bunker\n\nDistribution:\nSeries B.\nCopy 1 -- Security and Intelligence Division, Sandia Base."} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"until their source and meaning have been satisfactorily explained. Although Mr. Teller's discussion tends to disprove the hypothesis that guided missiles or informer vehicles are responsible, there is cause for concern of the continued occurrences of unexplainable phenomena of this nature in the vicinity of sensitive installations.\n\n*Captain Neef reports blue fireball visible from Sandia at 0530, 17 February 1949, and a yellow-orange cigar-shaped light at 1759, visible until 1806, 17 February.\n\n/s/ Richard Mandelkorn\n\nRICHARD MANDELKORN,\nCommander, U.S.N.\n\nCopy Furnished:\nFourth Army, G-2 -- Major William A. Godsoe (2)\nUSAF -- Captain Neef\nUSAF FOFAE -- Brig. Gen. Howard G. Bunker\n\nDistribution:\nSeries B.\nCopy 1 -- Security and Intelligence Division, Sandia Base."} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION DATE 24 March 1949\n\nPREPARING OFFICE\nOffice of the AC of S, G-2, Headquarters Fourth Army, Fort Sam Houston, Texas\n\nSUBJECT: Unusual Lights 452.1 AKADB\n\nCODE FOR USE IN INDIVIDUAL PARAGRAPH EVALUATION\nOF SOURCE: COMPLETELY RELIABLE A; USUALLY RELIABLE B; FAIRLY RELIABLE C; NOT USUALLY RELIABLE D; UNRELIABLE E; RELIABILITY UNKNOWN F\nOF INFORMATION: CONFIRMED BY OTHER SOURCES 1; PROBABLY TRUE 2; POSSIBLY TRUE 3; DOUBTFULLY TRUE 4; IMPROBABLE 5; TRUTH CANNOT BE JUDGED 6\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION\n\nThe following information has been received in a report from the Office of the AC of S, G-2, Headquarters 2d Armored Division, Camp Hood, Texas:\n\nOn 181947 March 1949, four unidentified lights appeared in the vicinity of 915.26 - 855.19, the lights noticed at this time were three yellow and one red. A patrol of Killeen Base, in the \"Q\" Area noticed two of these lights. A patrol located on Crossville Mountain, which consisted of four enlisted men of the Alert Force saw four. Immediate investigation in the general area failed to reveal any cause or anything which would indicate that some person or thing had been in the area. (B-3) (see Exhibit I, Point #1)\n\nAt 181930 March 1949, another yellow light was seen in the approximate vicinity of 910.41 - 855.10. This light was reportedly seen by only one man. There was no indication from reports that these lights were moving, there was no noise, and the persons reporting were unable to make an estimate of the height. (B-3) (see Exhibit I, Point #2)\n\nAt 181947 March 1949, what appeared to be blinking lights appeared in the vicinity of the Rock Quarry, located at 905.82 - 855.61. Investigation by the Alert Force and patrols of Killeen Base failed to reveal any cause or person in that general area. Again at 181955 March 1949, lights were seen in this general area. (B-3) (see Exhibit I, Point #3)\n\nAt 190048 March 1949, blinking lights were seen in the same general area 905.82 - 855.61. Investigation failed to reveal the cause of these lights. All of the lights which appeared in the proximity of 905.82 - 855.61 were seen by patrols located in the \"Q\" Area and were seen from points between 910.20 - 855.36 and 905.44 - 855.41. (B-3) (see Exhibit I, Point #4)\n\nCaptain Horace McCulloch, Headquarters 2d Armored Division, and Mr. Raymond Schmidtlein, Special Agent, Killeen Base, spent several hours from an observation point located in the \"Q\" Area in an attempt to see these blinking lights.\n\nDECLASSIFIED Authority NW 91526\n\nDISTRIBUTION: DI, GSUSA; CG, AMC, Wright-Patterson AFB; CG, Sandia Base; FBI, Santex; OSI, Kirtland AFB; File.\n\nWD AGO FORM 568"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TANK DESTROYER CENTER CAMP HOOD, TEXAS\nSCALE 1:62,500 FIRST EDITION 1943"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Eight moving \"lights\" appeared in the atmosphere over or in the vicinity of the \"Q\" area, AFSWP, Camp Hood, Texas, on the evening of 17 March 1949. At the time of these sightings, the alert guard of the 2nd Armored Division, under the Assistant AC of S, G-2 of Camp Hood, was in the area concerned and prepared to fire flares and record instrument readings of elevation and azimuth. The purpose was to check the powers of observation of observers who had previously reported the phenomena observed on 6-7-8 March 1949 and heretofore reported in Summary of Information, this headquarters, dated 17 March 1949, subject: \"Unusual Lights.\" However, before this operation could be begun, the series of 8 unusual \"lights\" appeared.\n\nCoordinates of lights and time of sighting follow:\n\nCoordinates Time\n1. 910.40 - 855.14 1952\n2. 910.39 - 860.13 1958\n3. 910.42 - 860.14 1958\n4. 910.38 - 860.15 2000\n5. 910.32 - 855.20 2000\n6. 910.30 - 855.17 2010\n7. 910.36 - 855.06 2024\n8. 910.37 - 855.35 2152\n\nCoordinates were based on dual sightings of each light by sights on tanks of observers. Time was clocked at instant of sighting. Captain McCullough, the Assistant G-2, personally observed three of the lights. Physical characteristics of these \"lights\" were reported as \"quite different\" from those reported on 6-7-8 March 1949. One burst into a green cluster. One was reddish, another white. One observer described some of them as similar to Very Pistol flares. While this phenomena was occurring, a security detachment from the \"Q\" area arrived in the vicinity of the alert crew from the 2nd Armored Division."} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It was then determined that no one in the \"Q\" area was responsible for the phenomena. \"Q\" area then went on alert status. Ordnance check has shown that nothing in the way of pyrotechnic missiles has been issued or used in months. Investigation of whole area by ground crews is being made and additional reports will be rendered. As in the case of the 6-7-8 March \"lights,\" those of the 17th \"bracket\" the \"Q\" area. One group of 3 lights being North of the area and one group of 5 lights just South of the area. Overlay showing locations is attached. (EXHIBIT I)\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation, San Antonio, Texas, Office of Naval Intelligence, San Antonio, Texas, have been notified. Director of Intelligence; Air Materiel Command; Office of Special Investigations, Kirtland Air Force Base; and Commanding General, Sandia Base, are on distribution of this Summary.\n\nDISTRIBUTION\nFBI, Santex; ONI, Santex; DI, GSUSA; CG, AMC; OSI, Kirtland AFB; CG, Sandia Base; File"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"452.1 AKADB\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t17 March 1949\n\nSUBJECT: Unusual Lights\n\nTO:\t\tCommanding General\n\t\tSandia Base\n\t\tP. O. Box 5100\n\t\tAlbuquerque, New Mexico\n\t\tATTN: AC of S, G-2\n\nThe attached Summary of Information, this office, subject as above, 16 March 1949, re reports of \"lights\" observed over Camp Hood, Texas, is forwarded in duplicate for your information and any action deemed necessary.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n1 Incl (dup)\t\t\t\t\t\tEUSTIS L. POLAND\nAs stated, w/EXHIBITS I, II,\t\t\tColonel, GSC\nIII, and IV\t\t\t\t\t\tAC of S, G-2\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority NW 91526\nBy DPW NARA Date 5/13/26\n\nSECRET\nDupl #4\nSHORT TITLE Hqs 4th 5537\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION\t\t\t\t\t\t\tDATE 16 March 1949\n\nPREPARING OFFICE\nOffice of the AC of S, G-2, Headquarters Fourth Army, Fort Sam Houston, Texas\n\nSUBJECT\nUnusual Lights\n452.1 AKADB\n\nCODE FOR USE IN INDIVIDUAL PARAGRAPH EVALUATION\nOF SOURCE: COMPLETELY RELIABLE A; USUALLY RELIABLE B; FAIRLY RELIABLE C; NOT USUALLY RELIABLE D; UNRELIABLE E; RELIABILITY UNKNOWN F\nOF INFORMATION: CONFIRMED BY OTHER SOURCES 1; PROBABLY TRUE 2; POSSIBLY TRUE 3; DOUBTFULLY TRUE 4; IMPROBABLE 5; TRUTH CANNOT BE JUDGED 6\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION\n\nFollowing is an interim summary predicated on request of the Fourth Army Liaison Officer at Sandia Base for this headquarters to investigate and report on \"fireball\" phenomena reported to the Commanding General, Sandia Base, by AFSWP installation at Camp Hood, Texas. Report stated that several sightings of unusual \"light\" phenomena in the atmosphere above Site Baker (Q Area) had been made by security personnel there during the period 6 - 8 March 1949.\n\nAT CAMP HOOD, it was determined that this type of phenomena, hitherto unreported from the Camp Hood Area, has the same general characteristics of the phenomena observed during the past several months at Sandia Base. Because observers were in different locations and some were not certain as to time, it is possible that observation reported within the same hour on the same date are duplications. It should be noted that none of the observers had been instructed to look for or report any sort of atmospheric phenomena. All stated without equivocations that they had never before seen anything resembling the reported phenomena. All claimed to have seen \"falling stars\" nearly every night on the Camp Hood Reservation; but all were emphatic in stating that this phenomena was quite different. All men were interrogated separately and had no advance notice that they would be questioned. After the interrogation they were taken to the spot where the observations had been made. These points were numbered and then plotted on map, Camp Hood and vicinity, 1/62 500 1943. Overlays have been made and a copy is hereto attached. The observer was then told to aim a surveying instrument, brought along for the purpose, at the celestial points of origin and of termination of the phenomena. Vertical angles and magnetic azimuth of each point was then recorded. In most cases, the observer was able to fix azimuths by some terrain features. Vertical angles were of course estimated except where elevations of observations coincided with ridge on tree lines.\n\nObservations on 6 March 1949:\n\n1. From observation point #6 (see attached overlay)\n\na. Location of point: 909.7 - 857.5; Time: 2100 hours.\n\nb. Weather: Overcast (see attached weather report).\n\nc. Witnesses: Sgt Hubert J. Vickery, AF 34932926, 1st Provost Security Sq, Killeen Base, Camp Hood, Texas\n\nPfc John C. Ransom, AF 15252814, 1st Provost Security Sq, Killeen Base, Camp Hood, Texas\n\nDISTRIBUTION 1-DI, GSUSA; 2-CG, Sandia Base; 1-OSI, Kirtland AFB; File.\n\nWD AGO FORM 568 1 JUN 47\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-53396-1\nSECRET\nSHORT TITLE Hqs 4th 5537\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nS/I, Office of the AC of S, G-2, Headquarters Fourth Army, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, 16 March 1949, subj, \"Unusual Lights\"\n\nd. Object sighted:\n\n(1) Number: 1\n(2) Shape: Oblong\n(3) Size: Described as \"about 2 ft by 1 ft\"\n(4) Color: Pale blue-white light\n(5) Speed: Not known\n(6) Direction: From N 74° W to N 81° W\n(7) Maneuverability: No deviation from course\n(8) Altitude: From 6° above horizon to 45° above\n(9) Sound: None\n(10) Exhaust trail: Sgt Vickery reports none. Pfc Ransom reported a faint pinkish red trail extending about three times the length of the body.\n\n2. From observation point #1 (see attached overlay).\n\na. Location of point: 914.3 - 855.7; Time: About 2020 hours.\n\nb. Weather: Overcast (see attached weather report).\n\nc. Witnesses: Pvt Martin M. Fensterman, US 57122075, 42nd AIB, Company A, Camp Hood, Texas\n\nPvt Frank (NMI) Luisi, US 57100167, 42 AIB, Company A, Camp Hood, Texas\n\nd. Object sighted:\n\n(1) Number: 1\n(2) Shape: Ball like flash\n(3) Size: Looked like basketball\n(4) Color: Pale blue-white light\n(5) Speed: Not known\n(6) Direction: N 40° E\n(7) Maneuverability: None--was a \"fixed flash\"\n(8) Altitude: 59° above horizon\n(9) Sound: None\n(10) Exhaust trail: None\n\n2\n\nSECRET\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nS/I, Office of the AC of S, G-2, Headquarters Fourth Army, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, 16 March 1949, subj, \"Unusual Lights\"\n\n3. From observation point #3 (see attached overlay).\n\na. Location: 914.5 - 856.1; Time: About 2045 hours.\n\nb. Weather: Overcast (see attached weather report).\n\nc. Witness: Pvt Harold D. Moore, US 57410066, 42nd AIB, Company A, Camp Hood, Texas\n\nd. Object sighted:\n\n(1) Number: 1\n(2) Shape: Roundish head with trail\n(3) Size: About 10° in length\n(4) Color: Light colored head, orange trail\n(5) Speed: Not known\n(6) Direction: From S 81° W to S 60° W\n(7) Maneuverability: No deviation from course\n(8) Altitude: From 21° above horizon to 6° 31' above\n(9) Sound: None\n(10) Exhaust trail: Orange trail about 10° long\n(11) Remarks: Appeared to be going over Q area\n\nObservations on 7 March 1949:\n\n1. From observation point #1 (see attached overlay)\n\na. Location: 914.3 - 855.7; Time: 0115 hours.\n\nb. Weather: Clear (see attached weather report).\n\nc. Witness: Pfc Robert Gardner Black, US 57112155, 42nd AIB, Company A, Camp Hood, Texas\n\nd. Object sighted:\n\n(1) Number: 1\n(2) Shape: Like flash bulb\n(3) Size: Flash bulb\n(4) Color: Brilliant blue-white\n(5) Speed: None\n(6) Direction: N 40° E\n(7) Maneuverability: None--fixed flash\n(8) Altitude: 66° 15' above horizon\n(9) Sound: None\n(10) Exhaust trail: None\n\n3\n\nSECRET\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n(11) Remarks: This observer is a Harvard graduate. Used stars to mark bearing and elevation of sighting. Stated he had never seen anything like this phenomena before.\n\n2. From observation point #2 (see attached overlay).\n\na. Location: 915.1 - 856.1; Time: 0115 - 0130 hours.\n\nb. Weather: Clear (see attached weather report).\n\nc. Witness: Pvt Paul C. Bryant, US 57204806, 42nd AIB, Company A, Camp Hood, Texas\n\nd. Object sighted:\n\n(1) Number: 1\n(2) Shape: Like flash bulb\n(3) Size: Basketball\n(4) Color: Bright blue-white\n(5) Speed: None\n(6) Direction: N 16° W\n(7) Maneuverability: None--fixed flash\n(8) Altitude: 27° 30' above horizon\n(9) Sound: None\n(10) Exhaust trail: None.\n\n3. From observation point #5 (see attached overlay).\n\na. Location: 914.6 - 856.7; Time: 0130 - 0200 hours.\n\nb. Weather: Clear (see attached weather report).\n\nc. Witnesses: Pvt Francesca (NMI) Lenardo, US 57175045, 42nd AIB, Company A, Camp Hood, Texas\n\nPvt Savino E. Digni, US 57175036, 42nd AIB, Company A, Camp Hood, Texas\n\nd. Object sighted:\n\n(1) Number: 1\n(2) Shape: Ball like flash\n(3) Size: Like flash bulb\n(4) Color: Bluish white\n\nSECRET\nNW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nS/I, Office of the AC of S, G-2, Headquarters Fourth Army, Fort Sam Houston, Texas,\n16 March 1949, subj, \"Unusual Lights\"\n\n(5) Speed: Not known\n(6) Direction: S 20° W\n(7) Maneuverability: None--fixed flash\n(8) Altitude: 26° above horizon\n(9) Sound: None\n(10) Exhaust trail: None\n\n4. From observation point #7 (see attached overlay)\n\na. Location: 909.0 - 856.9; Time: 0145 hours.\n\nb. Weather: Clear (see attached weather report).\n\nc. Witness: Pfc Max Eugene Manlove, AF 15418997\n1st Provost Security Sq\nCamp Hood, Texas\n\nd. Object sighted:\n\n(1) Number: 1\n(2) Shape: Teardrop\n(3) Size: \"About 2 ft by 1 ft\"\n(4) Color: Orange\n(5) Speed: Not known\n(6) Direction: N 60° E\n(7) Maneuverability: No deviation\n(8) Altitude: 4 when first seen--dropped vertically\n(9) Sound: None\n(10) Exhaust trail: None\n(11) Remarks: Witness said this \"light\" dropped vertically to ground and disappeared behind trees directly in front of him. In view \"about 2 seconds.\"\n\nObservations on 8 March 1949:\n\n1. From observation point #1 (see attached overlay).\n\na. Location: 914.3 - 855.7; Time: About 0103 hours.\n\nb. Weather: Clear (see attached weather report).\n\nc. Witness: Pvt Charlie H. Payne, US 57211002\n42nd AIB, Company A\nCamp Hood, Texas\n\n5\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nS/I, Office of the AC of S, G-2, Headquarters Fourth Army, Fort Sam Houston, Texas,\n16 March 1949, subj, \"Unusual Lights\"\n\nd. Object sighted:\n\n(1) Number: 1\n(2) Shape: Roundish head with hazy smoke trail.\n(3) Size: Not known\n(4) Color: Pale white light at head\n(5) Speed: Not known\n(6) Direction: From S 58° E to S 54° E\n(7) Maneuverability: No deviation\n(8) Altitude: From 58° above horizon to 54° above\n(9) Sound: None\n(10) Exhaust trail: Left hazy white smoke trail\n(11) Remarks: Travelled in arc and visible \"long enough to snap your fingers.\"\n\n2. From observation point #4 (see attached overlay).\n\na. Location: 914.6 - 856.7; Time: About 0103.\n\nb. Weather: Clear (see attached weather report).\n\nc. Witness: Cpl Luke Burke Sims, RA 38753446\nCompany A, 42nd AIB\nCamp Hood, Texas\n\nd. Object sighted:\n\n(1) Number: 1\n(2) Shape: Lemon with tail\n(3) Size: Not known\n(4) Color: Pale reddish nose, whitish red trail\n(5) Speed: Not known, but very fast\n(6) Direction: From N 56° W to S 64° W\n(7) Maneuverability: No deviation\n(8) Altitude: From 15 above horizon at beginning and end of arc.\n(9) Sound: None\n(10) Exhaust trail: Whitish red trail\n(11) Remarks: Good observer. Stated that \"light\" started from point above horizon then arced upward and down to 15° when it disappeared. Was perfect arc. He was able to run 10 paces toward field telephone to report light before it vanished.\n\nThe following incident may or may not be connected: At about 1930 hours on 7 March 1949, a flashlight was seen moving about the Q Area fence line near the air strip. It could not be told by the observer whether the light was within or\n\n6\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nS/I, Office of the AC of S, G-2, Headquarters Fourth Army, Fort Sam Houston, Texas,\n16 March 1949, subj, \"Unusual Lights\"\n\nwithout the fence. The Security Officer of Site Baker is investigating. He stated the light was not carried by any of the APSMP personnel.\n\nInvestigation continues in an effort to determine cause of the \"lights.\" Last information is that 32 trip flares have been put into the general area by the 2nd Armored Division and that some may have been set off by wild animals. Subsequent summary will be rendered when more exact evidence on flares is obtained. It is presently known, however, that these flares explode on the ground and do not shoot into the air.\n\nNo conclusion is drawn from the data on attached overlay other than to note that the \"lights\" form a rough circle about the \"Q\" Area. Copy of surface weather observations for Camp Hood on the 6, 7, and 8 March 1949 are attached as a possible aid in analysis. This report covers only day hours since the USAF weather service at Camp Hood closes at 1700 hours and opens at 0730 hours.\n\n(B-2)\n\nEXHIBIT I - Overlay, Tank Destroyer Center, Camp Hood, Texas\nEXHIBIT II - Weather Report, 6 March 1949, Camp Hood, Texas\nEXHIBIT III - Weather Report, 7 March 1949, Camp Hood, Texas\nEXHIBIT IV - Weather Report, 8 March 1949, Camp Hood, Texas\n\n7\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TANK DESTROYER CENTER CAMP HOOD, TEXAS SCALE 1:62,500 FIRST EDITION 1943. LINES AS SHOWN ON OVERLAY HAVE BEEN CONVERTED FROM MAGNETIC TO GRID AZIMUTH. LENGTH OF RAY LINES DOES NOT INDICATE DISTANCE FROM OBSERVATION POINT TO OBJECT. DISTANCE FROM OBSERVATION POINT TO OBJECT IS UNKNOWN. EXHIBIT I"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U.S. A.F. AIR WEATHER SERVICE SURFACE WEATHER OBSERVATIONS WBAN FORM 10A WBAN FORM 10B Station DEC 24-27 Month Dec Day 6 Year 47 Lat 52°N Long 98°W Time entries on this form are 90 in meridian time. To convert to G.C.T. add 6 hours. Height of Barometer 926 ft (MSL). NW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U.S. A.F. AIR WEATHER SERVICE SURFACE WEATHER OBSERVATIONS WBAN FORM 10A WBAN FORM 10B Station Oct 24-27 Month Nov Day 2 Year 47 Lat 52°54' N Long 98°08' W Time entries on this form are 58 in meridian time. To convert to G.C.T. add 6 hours. Height of Barometer 926 ft (MSL). A TRUE CERTIFIED COPY Weather Station Officer, WBAN, U.S. Weather Bureau. NW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U.S. A.F. AIR WEATHER SERVICE SURFACE WEATHER OBSERVATIONS WBAN FORM 10A WBAN FORM 10B Station Dec 24-27 Month March Day 8 Year 48 Lat 52°54' N Long 98°07' W Time entries on this form are 90 in meridian time. To convert to G.C.T. add 6 hours. Height of Barometer 926 ft (MSL). A TRUE CERTIFIED COPY Weather Station Officer. NW 91526"} {"doc_id":"916a428e386673d3","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSECRET\nEXHIBIT IV\nSHORT TITLE\nNW 91526\n14\n34377373\n2/Jgs 4 Ch 5557"} {"doc_id":"91aede734ed0a3c6","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 968063\n\nFragments\n\nMay 29, 1963\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR DR. WELSH\n\nSubject: Conference with Frutkin -- Fragments\n\nI saw Frutkin (and his assistant Marvin Robinson) for more than an hour in his office on May 28. It was necessary to review the background and course of the meetings held last year because he was away at the time and now is very negative on the project.\n\nFrutkin seems to feel that:\n\n1. No public announcement is now needed;\n\n2. An Executive Order or statement from the White House would scare people needlessly;\n\n3. The problem is overseas and State would like to be able to point to NASA as the U. S. responsible agency (without a scary public announcement);\n\n4. DOD and AF want to use NASA for a \"cover\" but have no intention of letting NASA do anything but return some pieces;\n\n5. CIA and NASA get along fine and can do so in the future on this matter;\n\n6. NASA should wait to see what the USIB settles on (and would like to have us pass Frutkin's comments on the DOD paper to AEC (at staff levels for information); and\n\n7. Although NASA was drafting legislation, they (legal?) would oppose sending anything up to Congress in the foreseeable future because of the harmful debate it would touch off.\n\nR. W. Hale"} {"doc_id":"9250d2db1307569f","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\nMisrep 10194673\nNarrative\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) TAIL NUMBER 1.4a 1.4a TOOK OFF FROM\n1.4a AT 140222ZJUL24 VIA 1.4a AND ARRIVED ON STATION AT\n140300ZJUL24. 1.4a UTILIZED 1.4a THROUGHOUT MISSION BETWEEN HANDOVER\nAND HANDBACK. FROM 140334ZJUL24 TO 140925ZJUL24 1.4a CONDUCTED TARGET\nDEVELOPMENT ISO NAVCENT IVO 38P MT 51 1.4a 11 1.4a (SEE ISR 1). 1.4a OBSERVED 1X\nUAP AT 140517ZJUL24 IVO 38P MT 53 1.4a 17 1.4a (SEE UAP1). FROM 141041ZJUL24 TO\n142130ZJUL24, 1.4a CONDUCTED TARGET DEVELOPMENT ISO AFCENT IVO 38P MV 24 1.4a\n81 1.4a (SEE ISR 2). 1.4a CALLED OFF STATION AT 142142ZJUL24, 1.4a HANDED BACK TO\nTHE 1.4a AT 142238ZJUL24 AND LANDED AT 142259ZJUL24 VIA . FULL MOTION VIDEO WAS\nEXPLOITED BY 1.4a MISSION HOURS: 1.4a IMINT HOURS: 1.4a\n1.4a TARGETS PROSECUTED: 1, 1.4a\nRETASKED: FROM 141041ZJUL24 TO 142130ZJUL24, 1.4a CONDUCTED TARGET\nDEVELOPMENT ISO OP 1.4a IVO 38P MV 24 1.4a 81 1.4a (SEE ISR 2).\n(S//RELIDO) Mission Narrative\nAdmin\nCLASSIFICATION\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: REL TO USA, FVEY\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20490714\nOPERATION\n• Operation: OPERATION 1.4a\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY 06/02/2025 000001\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"9250d2db1307569f","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): ACC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\nMSGID\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 124 ATKS\n• Submit Date:\nMSNID\n• Tasking Order (ATO): 1.4a\n• Mission Type: 1.4a\n• ATO Mission Number: 1.4a\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\nPoc\nPOC\n• Rank: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 124 ATKS\n• Wing: 132 Wing\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\nQC\n• Rank: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 1.4a\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\nAPPROVER\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY 06/02/2025 000002\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"9250d2db1307569f","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n• Rank: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: 379 AEW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\nINGEST\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\nACEQUIP\nACEQUIP\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n1.4g\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY 06/02/2025 000003\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"9250d2db1307569f","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n1.4g\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4a\n1.4g\nTimeline\nTakeoff\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): 1.4a\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): 1.4a\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 1.4a\n• 1.4g\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Mission Canceled:\nLanding\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): 1.4a\n• Last Land Time: 1.4a\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 1.4a\n• Total Mission Time: 1.4g\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\nISR\n• Time-on Station DTG: 1.4a\n• Time-off Station DTG: 1.4a\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Msn Type: 1.4a\n• Primary Sensor: FMV\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY 06/02/2025 000004\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"9250d2db1307569f","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n• Sensors Available: 1.4g\n• Tasking Type: Planned\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): NAVCENT / OPERATION\n1.4a\n• BE Number (if NTISR):\n• Tasked Start Point: 38P MT 51 1.4a 11 1.4a\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR):\n• EEIs Observed:\n• Number of EEIs:\n• Global Campaign Plan:\nGENTEXT/ISR\n• Gentext: (S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 1.4a COORDINATED WITH NAVCENT 124\nMINUTES PRIOR TO TAKE OFF. PRECOORDINATION WAS EXCELLENT DUE TO RECEIVING\nMISSION PRODUCTS 124 MINUTES BEFORE TAKE OFF. 1.4a ARRIVED ON TARGET AT\n140334ZJUL24 FOR OPERATION 1.4a IVO 38P MT 51 1.4a 11 1.4a 1.4a\nOBSERVED 1X UAP AT 140517ZJUL24 IVO 38P MT 53 1.4a 17 1.4a (SEE UAP 1). AT 140925ZJUL24\n1.4a WAS CLEARED OFF TARGET AND PROCEEDED TO NEXT TASKING.\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n• Supported Unit: NAVCENT\n• Supported Operation: OPERATION 1.4a\n• Precoord Time: 124 MINUTES\n• Precoord Effectiveness: EXCELLENT\nWEATHER\n• Weather: (S//REL TO USA, FVEY) WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR\nEFFECTIVENESS\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?:\n• Gentext: (S//REL) 1.4a\nOn Station\n• Time On Station DTG: 140300:00ZJUL24\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• JTAR Number:\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY 06/02/2025 000005\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"9250d2db1307569f","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\n• Killbox (Location):\n• Mission Type: 1.4a\n• JTAC Callsign:\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 1.4a\n• Total Time On Station: 1.4g\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 1.4a\n• Time-off Station DTG: 1.4a\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Msn Type: 1.4a\n• Primary Sensor: FMV\n• Sensors Available: 1.4a\n• Tasking Type: Dynamic\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): AFCENT / OPERATION\n1.4a\n• BE Number (if NTISR):\n• Tasked Start Point: 38P MV 24 1.4a 81 1.4a\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR):\n• EEIs Observed:\n• Number of EEIs:\n• Global Campaign Plan:\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: (S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 1.4a COORDINATED WITH AFCENT 30 MINUTES PRIOR TO RETASKING. PRECOORDINATION WAS EXCELLENT DUE TO RECEIVING MISSION PRODUCTS 30 MINUTES BEFORE RETASKING. 1.4a ARRIVED ON TARGET AT 1.4a FOR OPERATION 1.4a IVO 38P MV 24 1.4a 81 1.4a NSTR. AT 142130ZJUL24, 1.4a WAS CLEARED OFF TARGET AND RETURNED TO BASE.\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: AFCENT\n• Supported Operation: OPERATION 1.4a\n\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY 06/02/2025 000006\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"9250d2db1307569f","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\n• Precoord Time: 30 MINUTES\n• Precoord Effectiveness: EXCELLENT\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (S//REL TO USA, FVEY) WEATHER DID NOT PREVENTED IMINT\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?:\n• Gentext:\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 140517:00ZJUL24\n• UAP Event Type: UAP Incident\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations: STRAIGHT FLIGHT PATH AT SAME ALTI\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions: UNKNOWN\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Tail Number: 1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 38P MT 64 1.4a 53 1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: 1.4g\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory: ALL\n• Observer Assessment of UAP: Benign\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: 1.4g\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns):: NO\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters:\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable):\n• Operational Range: 1.4g\n• UAP Physical State: 1.4g\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n• UAP Propulsion Means: UNKNOWN\n• UAP Payload:\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNKNOWN\n• UAP Signatures: 1.4g\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNKNOWN ABOUT ADVANCED CAPABILITIES AND/OR MATERIALS\n• UAP RF Frequency:\n• UAP RF Duration:\n• UAP Event Serial Number: 1.4a\n• UAP Effects on Persons: NO\n\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY 06/02/2025 000007\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"9250d2db1307569f","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nRecommendation by MG Brandon R. Tegtmeier\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nRecommended on: 2 June 2025\nFOUO / Privacy Act applies\n\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Effects on Equipment: NONE\n• Full Name: 3.5c, (b)(3)130b, (b)(6)\n• Rank/Grade: TSGT/E-5\n• Email: 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE): 3.5c, (b)(6)\n• Observer Engagement of UAP (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• First Coordinate: 38P MT 53 1.4a 17 1.4a\n• First Seen Radius: 5\n• Last Accuracy: Estimated\n• Last Coordinate: 38P MT 22 1.4a 49 1.4a\n• Last Seen Radius: 5\n• Kinetic Altitude Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Altitude: LOW\n• Kinetic Depth Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Depth: UNKNOWN\n• Kinetic Velocity Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Velocity: 1.4a\n• Kinetic Trajectory Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Trajectory: NW\n• UAP Date of DoD Acquisition: 140517:00ZJUL24\n• UAP Reaction to Observation, Interrogation, Engagement (yes/no; if yes, describe): 1.4a FOLLOWED THE UAP TILL THE DISTANCE BECAME TOO FAR TO FOLLOW\n• UAP Anomalous Characteristics/ Behaviors: UAP'S SPEED WAS FASTER THAN THE 1.4a, 1.4g FLYING SPEED\n• First Accuracy: Estimated\n• Call Sign: 1.4a\n• UAP First Seen Location:\n• UAP Last Seen Location:\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): UAP HAD\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): (S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 1.4a\n1.4a\n\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0072 SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY 06/02/2025 000008\nApproved for Release to AARO FOUO/PA"} {"doc_id":"93bc658a57e9c600","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 90/3\nPage 742\n\n05 19 14 58\tCC\tThat's affirmative. We're ready for the E-MOD.\n\n05 19 16 31\tCC\tIntrepid, Houston.\n\n05 19 16 35\tCDR-LM\tGo.\n\n05 19 16 37\tCC\tIf you will give us POO and ACCEPT, we'll give you a CSM state vector and RLS update.\n\n05 19 16 45\tCDR-LM\tYou have POO and ACCEPT.\n\n05 19 20 05\tCMP\tHello, Houston; Yankee Clipper.\n\n05 19 20 09\tCC\tYankee Clipper, Houston. Loud and clear.\n\n05 19 20 14\tCMP\tWell, hello there, stranger. How are you?\n\n05 19 20 22\tCC\tMorning, Dick. We are fine. How are you?\n\n05 19 20 27\tCMP\tWell, pretty good. I hope you would like to have some company for a change.\n\n05 19 20 31\tCC\tRoger. Got the house clean?\n\n05 19 20 36\tCMP\tAs a matter of fact, I just finished that. I sure do; got everything in order; ready to go towards the LM and bring back ... That's quite a chore; keeping this thing clean.\n\n05 19 20 53\tCC\tRoger. You got a couple of coal miners coming up to see you.\n\n05 19 20 59\tCMP\tThat's okay. I'll be glad to see them.\n\n05 19 21 10\tCC\tIntrepid, Houston. The computer is yours. Break. Yankee Clipper, if you will go POO and ACCEPT, we have an uplink.\n\n05 19 21 20\tCMP\tAll yours.\n\n05 19 23 14\tCDR-LM\tHouston, you got the lift-off time for me?\n\n05 19 23 20\tCC\tStand by.\n\n05 19 23 39\tCC\tIntrepid, Houston. Your lift-off time is 142:03:47.\n\n05 19 23 52\tCDR-LM\tI copy 142:03:47.00.\n\n05 19 23 57\tCC\tAffirmative.\n\n05 19 24 05\tCC\tClipper, Houston. Computer's yours."} {"doc_id":"93bc658a57e9c600","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 90/4\nPage 743\n\n05 19 24 11\tCMP\tOkay. And Jerry, will you find out what they want to do about this battery charge, because I'm using the bus ties during the rendezvous?\n\n05 19 24 23\tCC\tRoger.\n\n05 19 24 43\tCC\tYankee Clipper, Houston. Why don't you figure on terminating the battery charge at LOS?\n\n05 19 24 52\tCMP\tAll right; I could let it go until I ... just before lift-off. That way it might take it all the way up.\n\n05 19 25 33\tCC\tClipper, Houston. We prefer that you terminate at LOS on this pass.\n\n05 19 25 40\tCMP\tRoger.\n\n05 19 25 41\tCC\tRoger. That would be one less thing for us to keep track of prior to lift-off.\n\n05 19 25 48\tCMP\tOkay.\n\n05 19 27 17\tCDR-LM\tSay, Houston; Intrepid.\n\n05 19 27 20\tCC\tIntrepid, Houston. Go.\n\n05 19 27 25\tLMP-LM\tRoger. When you look out the AOT in the dark quadrant? You can see these lights - particles of light, flashes of light just seem to come from - in this case, I'm looking in quadrant 1 which is the left one. It's coming from behind me, the left, and they're just sailing off in space. I was thinking they're dropping from my water boiler, but it looks like some of those things are escaping the Moon. They really haul out of here and just press off at the stars.\n\n05 19 27 56\tCC\tRoger.\n\n05 19 28 25\tCC\tYankee Clipper, Houston with a P22 tracking PAD.\n\n05 19 28 42\tCMP\tGo ahead.\n\n05 19 28 44\tCC\tRoger. Your target is LM; T1 is 139:57:39; T2 is 140:02:38; south 05; latitude is minus 3 - -\n\n05 19 29 10\tCMP\tRoger. T 112 -"} {"doc_id":"93bc658a57e9c600","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"93bc658a57e9c600","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tape 90/9\nPage 748\n\n05 20 08 23\tCC\tClipper, Houston. We'll give that data a good evaluation before we do anything with it.\n\n05 20 09 25\tLMP-LM\tHouston, Intrepid.\n\n05 20 09 30\tCC\tIntrepid, Houston. GO.\n\n05 20 09 34\tLMP-LM\tGot sort of an interesting thing going on AGS right now. I didn't notice earlier, but it may just be because the lights are brighter now. I'm getting an all 8's flash on both the address and the information registers at about one-fifth the brilliance of the normal numbers. And a - It's pulsing every second.\n\n05 20 10 00\tCC\tRoger, Al.\n\n05 20 10 06\tLMP-LM\tIf I turn down the illumination level just a little bit, it's not noticeable.\n\n05 20 10 52\tLMP-LM\tHello, Houston; Intrepid. You ready for my RCS hot fire?\n\n05 20 10 59\tCC\tIntrepid, Houston. Roger. Fire away.\n\n05 20 11 03\tCDR-LM\tOkay.\n\n05 20 11 32\tCC\tIntrepid, Houston.\n\n05 20 11 37\tLMP-LM\tGo.\n\n05 20 11 39\tCC\tRoger, Al. Fredo is here. He and I have both seen that phenomena on your DEDA during testing of most all the spacecrafts up at Bethpage, and it's probably an EMI.\n\n05 20 11 56\tCDR-LM\tThat's what we've been talking about, but we thought we'd just tcuch in on it.\n\n05 20 11 59\tLMP-LM\tWhen you go to your roll rate, roll left, pitch up - -\n\n05 20 12 01\tCC\tRoger. I think TRW's got a workup on this problem.\n\n05 20 12 08\tCDR-LM\tOkay?\n\n05 20 12 11\tCDR-LM\tHere you go, Houston, with roll, pitch, and yaw.\n\n05 20 12 14\tCC\tRoger, Pete."} {"doc_id":"949f5c4526bec273","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:21:02"} {"doc_id":"95cdc3292ec9b444","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nSBU\n\nMRN: 23 MEXICO 2544\nDate/DTG: Sep 16, 2023 / 160150Z SEP 23\nFrom: AMEMBASSY MEXICO\nAction: WASHDC, SECSTATE Routine\nE.O.: 13526\nTAGS: PGOV, PREL, ASEC, TSPA, KJUS, KCRM, MX\nCaptions: SENSITIVE\nReference: A) 23 MEXICO 2468\nB) 23 MEXICO 2166\nC) 23 MEXICO 2346\nSubject: (U) Mexico: Weekly Political Blotter, Sep 11-15\n\n(U) Mexico: Weekly Political Blotter, Sep 11-15\n\n1. (SBU) This edition of Mission Mexico's Political Blotter features:\n\n• Ebrard Challenges MORENA Election, Threatens to Leave Party\n• INE Names Commission Members Ahead of 2024 Election\n• Mexico City Security Secretary Steps Down, Might Run for Mexico City Head of Government\n• Pablo Vazquez Becomes Mexico City's New Security Secretary\n• Former MORENA Senate Leader Ricardo Monreal Will Not Run for Mexico City Head of Government\n• Criminals Targeting and Killing Prosecutors in Guerrero\n• Guadalajara Mayor Launches Gubernatorial Campaign\n• Mexican Congress Hears Testimony on Alien Life\n\n(SBU) Ebrard Challenges MORENA Election, Threatens to Leave Party\n\n2. (SBU) Former Foreign Secretary Marcelo Ebrard announced September 11 he would challenge the results of MORENA's presidential contender selection\n\nReleased in Full\nJohn Powers, Acting-Director\nUS Department of State\n2/25/2026\n\nReleased in Full\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 1 of 7"} {"doc_id":"95cdc3292ec9b444","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nprocess, alleging irregularities. On September 10, Sonora Governor and MORENA National Council President Alfonso Durazo formally certified the results of the party's selection process; while Durazo indicated he would continue to examine Ebrard's complaints, he also indicated he did not assess that the end results would change in light of Ebrard's allegations. Ebrard said he expected the MORENA Honesty and Justice Committee (responsible for solving intra-party conflicts) to hear his challenge, but also added he would \"not be interested in remaining in MORENA\" if the party rejected his allegations. He announced he would travel across the country starting September 18 to meet with supporters and formalize the creation of a new national political movement. Some outlets reported Ebrard created a new political party, but electoral laws would not allow this until 2026.\n\n3. (SBU) Comment: Having moved on from its contender selection process, MORENA is unlikely to validate any of Ebrard's challenges and therefore his options seem limited: he could join Citizen's Movement (MC) as its presidential candidate (despite some strong opposition within MC, especially from the party's Jalisco wing), remain with and create a new \"Ebrardista current\" within MORENA, or join the opposition Broad Front alliance. He cannot form a new party in time for the June 2024 elections, and the last day to register as an independent candidate (September 8) came and went without his taking action. His latest statements and attacks on MORENA's leadership however, increasingly make it impossible for him to remain in the party: the party has certified Sheinbaum as its candidate, Sheinbaum has embarked on a nationwide tour, and there is no sign whatsoever that there will be a do-over of the poll, as Ebrard desires. Ebrard retains the support of dozens of MORENA and allied party legislators, but even they seem reluctant to leave the party, which limits his leverage. End comment.\n\n(SBU) INE Names Commission Members Ahead of 2024 Election\n\n4. (SBU) The INE council approved the designation of presidents and members of key INE commissions September 9 who will oversee the 2024 elections. After a contentious session where some councilors seemed at odds on the designations (pro-MORENA councilors opposing anti-MORENA councilors, according to analysts), INE agreed on the makeup of the commissions that will be in place until September 2024. Analysts considered the designations a defeat for MORENA because, although its bloc obtained the presidency of key commissions (for\n\nReleased in Full\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 2 of 7"} {"doc_id":"95cdc3292ec9b444","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nexample the auditing commission, tasked with reviewing party expenditures), the pro-MORENA bloc still does not have a majority in them. Notably, the complaints committee (tasked with analyzing electoral violations and which previously had a pro-MORENA majority) now has an anti-MORENA majority.\n\n(SBU) Mexico City Security Secretary Steps Down, Might Run for Head of Government\n\n5. (SBU) After expressing interest in a possible run for Mexico City head of government last week (ref A), Mexico City Security Secretary Omar Garcia Harfuch resigned September 9, saying in a video he would \"collaborate with Claudia Sheinbaum, who with her vision and leadership will give continuity to the country's transformation.\" Mexico City's constitution requires officials with a role in police forces to step down before the electoral process begins (September 10) if they intend to run for public office in the city. Garcia Harfuch leads potential MORENA and opposition candidates in almost every poll.\n\n(SBU) Pablo Vazquez Becomes Mexico City's New Security Secretary\n\n6. (SBU) Mexico City Head of Government Marti Batres announced September 9 Under Secretary of Citizen Participation and Crime Prevention Pablo Vazquez Camacho would replace Garcia Harfuch as Security Secretary. Vazquez has worked four years for Mexico City's Secretariat of Citizen Security (SSC). In his role as Under Secretary, Vazquez implemented and coordinated violence prevention and reintegration programs, including the \"Cease Fire\" program to reduce gun violence and homicides and the \"Reconnect\" program to prevent recidivism in first time criminal offenders, according to media outlets Milenio and La Silla Rota. Prior to SSC, Vazquez worked for the federal Security Secretariat (SSPC) and in the then-Prosecutor's General Office. Outside of government, he has been a guest criminology professor at the National Institute of Criminal Sciences in Mexico City. Vazquez has a bachelor's degree in international relations from the Mexico Autonomous Institute of Technology and a master's degree in criminology from the London School of Economics and Political Science, according to press reports. La Silla Rota reported Vazquez also studied organized crime in Sicily and Macedonia.\n\nReleased in Full\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 3 of 7"} {"doc_id":"95cdc3292ec9b444","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\n(SBU) Former MORENA Senate Leader Ricardo Monreal Will Not Run for Mexico City Head of Government\n\n7. (SBU) After finishing last in the MORENA presidential contender selection process and after Omar Garcia Harfuch's resignation and potential entry to the Mexico City head of government race, former MORENA Senate Leader Ricardo Monreal announced September 12 he would not run for Mexico City head of government. Predicting the candidate selection would come down to either Garcia Harfuch or Iztapalapa Mayor Clara Brugada and noting he had no chance of winning the MORENA nod, Monreal said he did not want to cause divisions within the party. In a series of interviews, Monreal also said he had no interest in serving as a cabinet member in a potential Sheinbaum administration and would now focus on teaching, writing, and \"hop[ing] for better times.\" Yet on the same day Sheinbaum announced Monreal as her campaign's organization and territorial coordinator, and former Interior Secretary Adan Augusto Lopez as her political coordinator.\n\n8. (SBU) Comment: Monreal went from being one of the most powerful figures in the ruling coalition to an outcast in only a few years, mostly because of his open disagreements with Lopez Obrador. His addition to Sheinbaum's campaign despite having a close relationship with her shows he is willing to collaborate, although likely in exchange for positions for his close advisors. On September 12, media reported Monreal's daughter would run for mayor of Cuauhtemoc, the Mexico City borough where Monreal served 2015-2018. Meanwhile current mayor of Cuauhtemoc Sandra Cuevas (PRD), who reportedly also has close ties with Monreal, is trying to secure the opposition's candidacy for Mexico City head of government. End comment.\n\n(SBU) Criminals Targeting and Killing Prosecutors in Guerrero\n\n9. (SBU) Criminals killed two Guerrero prosecutors within a week's time mid-September following attacks against two other prosecutors in July (ref B) and August. Criminals assassinated the state delegate of the Federal Attorney General's Office (FGR) in Guerrero, Fernando Garcia Fernandez, while he drove his vehicle to his office in Chilpancingo September 12. First reports noted armed men appeared to coordinate the attack as they shot at Garcia from two vehicles. In addition, criminals kidnapped from his home and then killed the\n\nReleased in Full\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 4 of 7"} {"doc_id":"95cdc3292ec9b444","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nrecently appointed Guerrero state attorney general's office (FGE) regional prosecutor for the Tierra Caliente region, Victor Manuel Salas Cuadras, in Coyuca de Catalan September 9, according to Proceso. Security officials found Salas' body with approximately 50 gunshot wounds. In a separate late August incident, media reported 20 armed commandos kidnapped Patricia Jacqueline Salgado, recently appointed as head FGE prosecutor in Coyuca de Catalan. Authorities later located Salgado alive but have made no arrests thus far. Interior Secretary Luisa Maria Alcalde said during the September 11 presidential press conference there was a pattern of attacks against prosecutors in Guerrero in recent months, which was related to recent law enforcement arrests and seizures.\n\n(SBU) Guadalajara Mayor Launches Gubernatorial Campaign\n\n10. (SBU) Guadalajara Mayor Pablo Lemus (MC) launched his campaign for Jalisco governor during his second annual mayoral address on September 12. \"I want to ask for your support to build a social and collective project,\" Lemus announced. He called for party unity, and specifically welcomed MC national coordinator Dante Delgado's representative despite the rift that emerged in August between Jalisco MC and the national party (ref C). Jalisco Governor Enrique Alfaro, Nuevo Leon Governor Samuel Garcia, Monterrey Mayor Luis Donaldo Colosio, and other MC leaders from Jalisco and Nuevo Leon (the two states MC governs) all attended the event. Lemus highlighted the presence of former Jalisco Governor Emilio Gonzalez (National Action Party - PAN) and University of Guadalajara (UdeG) Rector Ricardo Villanueva (Hagamos, affiliated with UdeG). Polls show Lemus holds a commanding lead over rivals from across the political spectrum.\n\n(U) Mexican Congress Hears Testimony on Alien Life\n\n11. (U) Congress heard testimony on unidentified aerial phenomenon (UAP) September 12, from experts including from Mexican journalist Jaime Maussan and former U.S. Navy pilot Ryan Graves, who previously testified before the U.S. Congress. The hearing was to debate language on UAP in the Aerial Space Protection Law which, if approved, would make Mexico the first country to formally acknowledge the presence of alien life on Earth. Experts asked legislators to recognize UAP, guarantee airspace security, and allow UAP to be studied. Experts also presented to Congress two alleged alien corpses and videos of Mexican pilots' encounters with fast-moving flying objects during flight. After\n\nReleased in Full\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 5 of 7"} {"doc_id":"95cdc3292ec9b444","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nthe hearing, Graves lamented the display took away from his and other pilots' experiences with UAP and expressed disappointment with Maussan's \"unsubstantiated stunt.\" Scientists have discredited previous alleged alien corpses Maussan presented as evidence of alien life.\n\n(U) Figure 1: Mexican journalist Jaime Maussan presented the alleged remains of non-human beings to Congress. (Photo credit: Reuters)\n\nSignature: SALAZAR\n\nDrafted By: MEXICO:Moreno, Sergio A\nPOL:Cortazar, Eduardo\nPOL:Karimi, Amanda\nEXEC:Tejeda, Maria de los Angeles\n\nCleared By: POL:Naranjo, Brian\nPOL:Karimi, Amanda\nECON:Conlon, Steven\nPD:Harder, J\nINL/PROG:Okwuje, Ifeoma\nCONS/AG:Bernsteen, Gregory\n\nApproved By: EXEC:Johnson, Mark\n\nReleased in Full\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\nPage 6 of 7"} {"doc_id":"95cdc3292ec9b444","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nReleased By: MEXICO:Moreno, Sergio A\nInfo: NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON DC Routine; WHITE HOUSE OFC OF THE VICE PRESIDENT WASHINGTON DC Routine; DNI WASHINGTON DC Routine; CIA WASHINGTON DC Routine; DIA WASHINGTON DC Routine; HQ USNORTHCOM Routine; DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC Routine; DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHINGTON DC Routine; HQ USSOUTHCOM MIAMI FL Routine; WESTERN HEMISPHERIC AFFAIRS DIPL POSTS Routine; ALL US CONSULATES IN MEXICO COLLECTIVE Routine\nXMT: CARACAS, AMEMBASSY\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\nSBU\n\nReleased in Full\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\nPage 7 of 7"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n11 March 2010\n\nICOD: 1 December 2009\n\nAnomalous Acute and Subacute Field Effects on Human Biological Tissues\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAnomalous Acute and Subacute Field Effects on Human\nBiological Tissues\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 81\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nPreface and Summary ........................................v\nPreface ........................................v\nSummary ........................................v\nChapter One: Definition of Topic and Domain of this Study ........................................ 1\nA. What is addressed in this review ........................................ 1\nB. What is not addressed in this review ........................................ 1\nChapter Two: Background: What is Thought to Cause Harm? ........................................ 2\nA. Setting the Stage: What others have said openly about injury caused by EMR Field Effects ........................................ 2\nB. Newly Unclassified Material ........................................ 3\nC. Field effects and hearing / communications ........................................ 5\nD. Relationships of Physics and Biophysics to Injuries ........................................ 7\nChapter Three: How Damage Occurs ........................................ 8\nA. The effects that burn ........................................ 9\nB. The enigma of \"non-thermal\" wheals and localized \"burns\" ........................................ 11\nC. Some thoughts on neurological correlates ........................................ 12\nChapter Four: Applicable Subacute Injury Effects ........................................ 13\nChapter Five: Cognitive and Neural Injury Mechanisms and Effects ........................................ 16\nReferences & Working Data Bases ........................................ 19\nAppendix A: Schuessler Catalog of UFO-Related Human Physiological Effects (Frequency Distribution) ........................................ 23\nAppendix B: Green/Morris Example to Show the Global Breadth of Available Older ICD Case Inputs From Multiple Data Sources (red =pending ICD classification) .. 25\nAppendix C ........................................ 27\n\nFigures\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 1. Variation of Normalised Specific Absorption Rate with Frequency and Related Absorption Characteristics in Living Organisms ........................................9\nFigure 2. Electromagnetic Spectrum ........................................14\n\nTables\n\n(U) Table 1: Limits for Maximum Permissible Exposure ........................................15\nError! Bookmark not defined.\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAnomalous Acute and Subacute Field Effects on Human Biological Tissues\n\nPreface and Summary\n\nPREFACE\n\nSeveral years ago three previous fit and active individuals experienced an anomalous [\"irregular, incongruous and inconsistent with their domain\"] aerospace-related event. Within 72 hours they suffered medical signs and symptoms [acute and subacute effects].\n\n• These included almost immediate erythema (heat and redness) over exposed [to the presumed source of an electromagnetic radiation] skin, and varying degrees of the following as a function of their body-surface exposure times: fever, pain, headaches, numbness and parasthesiae, malaise, diarrhea, loss of hair and alopecia, skin eruptions/boils, cardiac palpitations, beginnings of what were to become chronic headaches and symptoms of insomnia and other sleep and dream disturbances, moderate to occasional severe anxiety and insomnia. Two of the persons also experienced photophobia (extreme sensitivity to light), dry and scratchy-stinging eyes, and extreme inflamed blood-shot sclerae (whites of the eyes) with soft tissue swelling of the eyelids. One of the three experienced moderate blood dyscrasia and signs of radiation illness, and over several years developed signs of malignant transformations.\n\nExtensive, but controversial investigations revealed the three had been subjected to an accidental exposure in the near-field [meters] to a broad-band ultrahigh radiofrequency mixed radiation of RF (radio frequency), NIEMR (non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation) & microwave energies [including non-specific and un-measured induced ionizing effects, probably mixed UVA, UVB and UVC (Ultra Violet A, B, C)] centered at about 785 MHz.\n\n• These three persons were antennae engineers subjected to an anomalous \"accident\" [1]\n\nAn extensive review of the medical literature and a compilation of a database has revealed an additional relevant but less dramatic 42 cases from the peer-reviewed medical literature, and an additional un-published similar 300 cases, primarily when fields were measured or emitters were known of mixed exposures of from 1 –10 GHz at power densities of above 100 mW/cm².\n\nSUMMARY\n\nThis paper relates, summarizes, and analyzes evidence of unintended injury to human observers by anomalous advanced aerospace systems. Additionally, an argument is made that the subsequent work can inform (e.g., reverse engineer), through clinical diagnoses, certain physical characteristics of possible future advanced aerospace systems from unknown provenance that may be a threat to United States interests.\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe evidence discussed includes scientific material that has been peer-reviewed, contained in recently declassified government documents, and early emergent clinical medical analyses also underway in companion research studies.\n\n• Based on historical cases, humans have been found to have been injured from exposures to anomalous vehicles, especially airborne, and when in relatively close proximity.\n\n• The primary mechanisms of injury are related to electromagnetic radiation field effects (EMR field effects).\n\n• The biophysical characteristics of the injuries are well understood.\n\n• The energy related propulsion systems are not well understood.\n\n• The potential deployment of systems is thus important to understand.\n\n• Sufficient incidents/accidents have been accurately reported, and medical data acquired, as to support a hypothesis that some advanced systems are already deployed, and opaque to full US understanding.\n\n• Amongst the most important pathophysiological effects are:\n\n- Heating and burn injuries\n\no Ionizing and non-ionizing\n\no Thermally induced\n\n- Neurological effects\n\no Cognitive / central nervous system\n\no Neuromuscular / central & autonomic nervous systems\n\no Sensory / peripheral nervous system\n\no Neuropsychiatric / neuroendocrine\n\n- Auditory / cranial nerves VII & VIII\n\no Communication & disabling effects\n\no Noise and central neurocognitive\n\n• Analysis of clinical diagnostic codes together with environmental conditions observed during anomalous events are clustered in meaningful ways.\n\nvi\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• The medical analyses while not requiring the invention of an alternative biophysics, do indicate the use of (to us) unconventional and advanced energy systems.\n\nvii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter One: Definition of Topic and Domain of this Study\n\nThe objective of the overall program for which this paper has been prepared is to understand the physics and the engineering of advanced aerospace weapons system applications …into the future, e.g., from now through the year 2050. This study addresses the clinical medical signs and symptoms and biophysics of injury known and expected from unintended exposure to anomalous systems.\n\nA. WHAT IS ADDRESSED IN THIS REVIEW\n\nAdvanced aerospace technologies, as with current technologies, often involve exposure of humans to exceptionally strong, and in the future to likely exotic, fields. This review is meant to cover the clinical medical injurious effects, including harmful psychiatric / psychological effects on the human organism that may be induced. Specifically, we are interested both in the more narrow scope of certain near-field heating and burn effects on \"biological tissues\" [usually human] and also systemic or internal medical / neurological / psychiatric injury or sequelae, usually modulated by neural tissue.\n\n\"Near Field\" is a term we intentionally leave as subjective. That is, we include effects of possible exposures that are within sight of the injured, and which are acute [within hours] or subacute [within days], but not longer chronic effects. Our working distance from the putative emitter is '10s of meters, and injury times are less than 10 minutes. We thus focus on the acute and subacute high-level, not chronic low-level exposures and effects. The most important bandwidth of interest is the range with tissue effects on humans: from about 300 kHz to 300 GHz; that is, from about 1 km to 1 mm wave lengths.\n\nIn particular, we note that many of the effects on tissues {as currently with all environmental exposures of Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Radiation (NIEMR), toxic effluents, and noise / thermal effects} are initially incorrectly adduced to be \"subclinical\" until chronic effects of low-level effects and/or accumulative doses are recognized. We will be particularly cognizant to not miss this subtlety in determining harm to persons in the near-field of possible advanced aerospace systems. We will not (except by reference) discuss ionizing radiation tissue effects, unless they are adduced to be \"Mixed Field\", e.g. the Cash-Landrum case, vide infra).\n\nTherefore, since the potential deployment of advanced weapons technology is subsumed under this topic, of interest are not only side effects associated with possible lift/propulsion field mechanisms of advanced craft architectures, but also effects from advanced weapons systems as well. These include but are not limited to beam weapons, and active denial systems (ADS), including high powered microwaves (HPM).\n\nB. WHAT IS NOT ADDRESSED IN THIS REVIEW\n\nWe are aware of claims that some new and emergent systems may be intended to cause harm, and thus even be an intended weapon system. We make no attempt herein to validate any claims. There is ample precedent in US history for utilizing a separate analytic framework for Verification and Compliance issues, as in the lag in our recognizing Former Soviet Union and Chinese systems utilizing infrasonic, laser-blinding, and NIEMR weapons that went unappreciated by our intelligence agencies for two decades. Historically, the IC (Intelligence Community) adduces verification first,\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nclaims of injury secondly, and compliance after lengthy state-sponsored discursive. We will not make that mistake. Beyond this, from a sociological perspective, expansion of this theme may also include the effects on humans en masse, namely inducement of hysteria, alteration or solidification of belief systems, alteration/destruction of social structures, group dynamics, etc., the analyses of which would require expertise in a great number of fields including sociology, anthropology, psychology, etc.\n\nThis review will not critically evaluate epidemiological infectious disease or low-level electromagnetic radiation / RF aspects of certain exposures, except in passing.i We will not address psychophysics, paranormal, explicit pre-existing or chronic psychiatric, or abnormal psychological effects from exposures. {However, in the early draft of ICD-Code project in Appendix C, psychiatric diagnostic codes when made by a qualified physician, and medical sequelae from perceived abductions are included for completeness.}\n\nChapter Two: Background: What is Thought to Cause Harm?\n\nIt is well-understood that long-term exposure to even chronic \"low-strength\" as well as acute \"high-strength\" electromagnetic fields, ionizing radiation, intense lasers, etc., can have harmful effects on human physiology. {Terms defined vide infra} It is also known that EMR mechanisms can disrupt physiological and psychological functioning on a temporary basis. Emerging data support that some of the chronic low-level effects alter the ability of cells to function properly due to epigenetic effects {damage to the DNA / RNA protein regulatory pathways, independent of chromosome disruption}, and simultaneously alter the metabolism of dividing cells of (especially) the neuroimmune system [5,6]. The same holds true for exposure to toxic chemical, biological, or nuclear materials.\n\nA. SETTING THE STAGE: WHAT OTHERS HAVE SAID OPENLY ABOUT INJURY CAUSED BY EMR FIELD EFFECTS\n\nThere is relatively comprehensive literature on reported deleterious effects from exposure at close ranges to perceived anomalous aircraft of apparent advanced design [2,3,4,7]. Some of the claimed physiological effects include such phenomena as paralysis, electrical shocks, feeling of heat, burns, perception of odors, etc.\n\nWhether such effects are the result of unintended or intended harm to humans is yet to be determined, though evidence for the latter can be inferred in certain cases [8,9]. We will draw on that literature for selected cases, where exposure and emitter data are known or can be inferred, or where injury an be logically related to biophysical parameters.\n\nThat is, it is of particular interest in a threat analysis program, regardless of whether anomalous-craft-induced physiological effects of humans are intended or not, to ascertain probable mechanisms, field strengths, etc., involved in the generation of the\n\ni As an example, the enormous literature on the low-level and chronic exposure effects of ionizing, non-ionizing-UVA, UVB and UVC radiation will not be reviewed here. That literature is summarized well in http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ped/content/ped_1_3x_radiation_exposure\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nreported physiological effects. It is our contention that characteristics of the fields or mechanisms associated with close encounters with anomalous craft can even sometimes carefully be gleaned from archival records where effects on human physiology have been carefully reported.\n\nThis is true because the medical literature of such field effects {although not many related to craft} has been mature for decades, and is rich in peer-reviewed medical reports and papers. There are several professional societies within the Department of Health & Human Services (DHHS), National Science Foundation-National Institutes of Health) (NSF-NIH) domains, including the Centers of Disease Control Epidemiology Intelligence Service (EIS) that follow these effects, and numerous examples will be discussed.\n\nB. NEWLY UNCLASSIFIED MATERIAL\n\nA couple of years ago a citizen, who believed he was being targeted by the United States Government with harassing field effect weapons {edits and highlights below, are the author's}…\n\n\"…XXXX walked into an FBI field office with a two-page letter signed by him and addressed to Special Agent YYYY of the United States Secret Service.\n\n{His} letter stated, in part:\n\n'Agents of the U.S. Secret Service, as you already know, have been committing very serious crimes against me and other members of my family for a very long time, and I'm taking more direct action to prevent it from continuing. I am going to get an admissible confession from at least one of your agents one way or the other, and if I don't get what I am demanding from you today, I will use the method of torture described in the attached pages to obtain that confession and to punish the agent for his or her involvement in the illegal acts that your agents have been perpetrating against me and my family.'\n\nAfter he was arrested, the court found the evidence for the alleged electromagnetic assaults unconvincing.\n\nThe district court then held a competency hearing at which [he] testified, inter alia, that the back of a pair of his shoes were vaporized by an electromagnetic weapon fired at his feet in 2001. [He] presented the shoes in question to the district court, but it appeared to the court that the heel of the shoe had simply worn out due to ordinary use.\n\nInevitably, XXXX's mental status was questioned.\n\nAfter receiving this report, XXXX requested that he be examined by a medical professional of his own choosing. The psychologist chosen by XXXX concurred with the government's psychiatrist that XXXX \"is clearly psychotic and… precisely fits the diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia\" [5-a,b].\n\nThe story didn't end, then. It turned out that XXXX may have been crazy, and the Government wasn't harassing him, but his document was valid: it was a newly\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nunclassified US Government document that described precisely and accurately the nature of the Field Effects XXXX claimed existed [5].\n\nIt was a recent (1998), classified (until 2006) and controlled document: SECRET / NOFORN; Not to be disseminated to US Allies, NATO, or physically even be taken outside the United States except to secure US Embassy Military Attaché Facilities. It was from a unit in the Intelligence and Security Command {INSCOM}, the US Army Analytical Element responsible for coordinated National Intelligence Community Assessments of military threat potentials…based on current known worldwide (including US for benchmarking) research.\n\nIt remains a bit murky as to how Mr. XXXX was able to \"FOIA\" (\"use\" the Freedom of Information Act) and obtain the document. Other \"legitimate\" researchers had consistently not been able to obtain it.\n\nThe above vignette is offered, to make several points…both administrative and subjective, and scientific… and objective:\n\n• Classified information exists that is highly pertinent to the subject of this study, and only a small part of the classified literature has been released.\n\n• Yet, while directionally indicative of interest and intention to understand, the material does not rise to the quality of the initiative of the program in which this paper serves as one analytical example. ii\n\n• There is no evidence that the systems described in the document have been fielded.\n\n• The development of generators and aiming devices is not a rate-limiting issue. iii\n\n• There is no doubt that they would work.\n\n• The concerns, therefore, that individuals exposed to field effects as described in the document, and in this paper would suffer the claimed injuries…are legitimate.\n\nAmongst the systems described are those of special interest in this effort: claimed injury from near-field exposures to aerospace anomalous vehicles and systems. As will be described, the pattern and circumstances of injury very often belie nay-sayer attempts to discredit witnesses, analysts, and those who suffer directly or indirectly from the systems. Even those who are, from time to time, delusional…are not necessarily poor reporters of information outside their particular and personal delusion.\n\nExamples of systems the INSCOM analysis described as real and potential include precisely those asserted by good observers {and victims of injury} consistent with near-field RF / EM / NIEMR / Thermal / Infrasonic / and Coherent light-Laser effects:\n\nii This author once ran the INSCOM effort from which this FOIA'd document [5] derived, as the Assistant National Intelligence Officer for Science and Technology, and has recently chaired a DIA-sponsored 18-month Update Study at the National Academy of Sciences' NRC, [including classified research] published as \"The military application of neuroscience research\" [5-c] that encompasses virtually every aspect of the 2006 declassified INSCOM study.\n\niii An electric field strength of roughly 100 kV/m over a time period of 1 nanosecond is approximately the condition thought to be necessary to produce the desired effect when provided to an overall repetition rate of 15 Hz. Such a field may be developed using a radar- like, high-peak-power pulsed source or an electromagnetic pulse generator operated at 15Hz. These technologies exist today. Aiming devices are currently available. The effective range could be meters, or even hundreds of meters [5].\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Microwave communication / hearing / localized heating\n\n• CO2 Laser communication / hearing / localized heating\n\n• Ability to instill fear secondary to above, including with use of messaging and RF carrier-wave modulated intra-cranial \"voices\" through thermoelastic expansion of intracranial spaces at 5 kHz (vide infra)\n\n• Ability to direct thermal effects to include directed pain, erythema, and second-degree burns\n\n• Ability to cause frontal-temporal headache with mm waves\n\n• Pulses of RF (e.g. 2450 MHz / 12.4-1.24 Mev UHF 1.0 dm – 1.0 m pressure waves) to disorient and destabilize muscular coordination: at this frequency 40 J/cm and of microsecond duration pulses will cause thermoelastic expansion in brain (as well as the cochlear microphonics for hearing sensation at 0.5-32 micron pulse widths per-pulse thresholds are near 20 J/cm)\n\n• Use of mm waves to instigate cortical surface effects and seizures through delta-wave, EPSP & IPSP (excitatory and inhibitory post-synaptic potentials neocortical neuronal synchronization with high voltage 100 kV/m nanosecond pulsed 15 Hz {ELF}:through stimulation of the hippocampus CA3 pyramidal cells and cells of the pyriform cortex, sustained over 1 – 5 minutes for ictal development for petit mal or grand mal seizures\n\n• Loss of consciousness, muscle spasms, muscle weakness\n\n• Parasthesiae with UHF – SHF, lasting for minutes\n\n• Increase of core body temperature to above 41°C (105.8 °F) with VHF (e.g. 225 MHz) within 15 – 30 minutes {1-2 km waves at dose rates about 10 W/kg; 5 W/kg will increase a humans core body temperature within one to two hours\n\n• Use of pulsed-microwaves to temporarily interfere with short-term spatial memory\n\n• Nausea and vomiting, and disorientation can be easily induced with audible frequencies at 145 dB at selected frequencies of 100-500 Hz, within seconds up to a few minutes: combinations of infrasonic and sonic tones can be selected for specific effects on the vestibular apparatus to induce highly specific gastro intestinal and neural effects.\n\n• iv (see footnote)\n\nC. FIELD EFFECTS AND HEARING/COMMUNICATIONS\n\niv The INSCOM document also discusses another area of interest, but one beyond the scope of this review. That is, the effects of laser-radiation including inducement of photophobic and also acoustical-mechanical as well as thermal effects. As our area of focus does not include either actual accidental or anecdotal cases in this domain, we will not review laser-induced field effects.\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe Airborne Instruments Laboratory {AIL}v in 1956, reported for the first time anecdotal evidence that persons could \"hear\" RF frequencies [10]. The data were however, deemed important enough to be placed in a corporate advertisement and warning.\n\nYet, the first systematic review of evidence and experiment of what is now known to be human capability to \"hear\" modulations in ears or the temporal lobes, as well as in the apparatus of the inner ear (the \"cochlear microphonic\") was not published until 1961, followed by a series of eight peer-reviewed papers over the following decade. vi\n\nThe most comprehensive review that describes the biophysics and the methodology to modulate RF to incorporate purposive communications, and which also describes in detail injury patterns was published in 2003, by the Motorola Research Laboratories, and is still the seminal meta-analysis {of about 100 review articles} on these subjects [11].\n\nFor our purposes, it is sufficient at this point to summarize this and additional literature [esp. 11-15] in contexts narrowly related to claimants' description of effects when placed near (10-100 meters) of a presumed emitting large object, which may or may not have the appearance of containing an obvious RF antenna:\n\n• The mechanism of transduction of the RF may be to or through skin, bone, or the external auditory meatus.\n\n• Frequency and pulse width dependency may account for perceptions as coming from the ear, the temporal lobe on the same or contralateral side to the object.\n\n• The frequencies are amazingly broad: contained with the bandwidth of 2.4 – 10,000 MHz {MF, HF, VHF, UHF, SHF, EHF; wavelengths 1km – 1cm; incident energy densities of 10-20 mJ/kg threshold; 40 μJ/pulse, energy absorption per pulse 16 μJ/g}.\n\n• Thus, the character of the perceived sounds can be used to accurately \"back-calculate\" the emitter characteristics: many thousands of human experiments over the above ranges have been consistent and repeatable.\n\n• Simple shielding, including tin-foil hats (sic!) will attenuate and often block totally the sounds and communications.\n\nVoice frequencies of 5 kHz-20 kHz can be RF modulated, and transmitted covertly, with intelligible effect. However, it is absolutely required that to hear the sounds, a human must have a capability to hear a frequency acoustic wave in the kHz range above 5kHz through 20 kHz.\n\nv AIL was formed in 1945, in Mineola NY by then Defense Department contractors affiliated with MIT. It became the forerunner of virtually every subsequent application Radar and EM laboratory, especially for the Department of the Navy. It is known in folklore, as having been the site of the development of the technology for the controversial \"Philadelphia Experiment.\" http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/AIL_01.doc\n\nvi There are at the present time, over 240,000 peer-reviewed scientific papers on the phenomena of RF hearing and covert communication, with and without engagement of the inner ear, in the medical literature. Yet, to this day, persons who during experiencing of anomalous RF hearing and skin heating when confronted by unknown objects in the near-field are nonetheless ubiquitously {at first, at least} said to be paranoid, or paraphrenic, or paranoid schizophrenic.\n\n6\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThat said, it is not necessary that the cochlear microphonic versus ephaptic (electrical current transmissions through the intercellular spaces) modulation of the axons of the VIIth and VIIIth cranial nerves be stimulated directly: the hearing pathways and relay middle geniculate bodies and inferior colliculi may be stimulated by the RF, first. That is: while it is possible for energy transmission or transduction to \"bypass\" the tympanic membrane, organs of Corti, and cochleae…the hearing apparatus is necessary for at least penultimate stimulation to hear sounds in the voice range: thoughts and meaning can not be otherwise transmitted [12]. But, at the same time, thermoelastic expansion and contraction of fluid spaces in the brain can result in the perception of clicks, buzzing sounds, and humming.\n\nNotably, the above discussion is of non-hazardous \"effects.\" Harm and injury, including severe headache seizures or convulsions, motor ataxia and contractures, unconsciousness, and destabilizing psychiatric acute, subacute, and chronic outcomes can be induced. The use of very high intensity RF pulses at, for example, 915 MHz will cause an elevation in brain temperature of 8 °C, resulting in petit mal or grand mal seizures after one minute exposure, followed by 5 minutes of unconsciousness.\n\nRecovery occurs when brain temperature returns to within 1°C of normal (37 °C). The threshold for this stun effect is 680 J, regardless of peak power, pulse width, and equates to about 28 kJ in terms of expressed peak absorption. This adverse effect is about 1,000 times higher than the auditory threshold, which in humans is near 16mJ/kg as reported above. No adverse effects, in any event have been found at SARs (Specific Absorbed Rate is a measure of the rate at which energy is absorbed by the body when exposed to radio-frequency electromagnetic field. It is defined as the power absorbed per mass of tissue and has units of watts per kilogram) in the head of 0.2 W/kg (950 MHz) up to 1.0 W/kg (936 & 90 MHz) [13,14].\n\nIn summary, the evidence is solid that the military and aerospace industries' own classified, proprietary and unclassified literature, as well as the certain evidence of many aerospace RF-related microwave, antenna-related, high power (HP) microwave, infrasonic / sonic, and thermal (from any source) energy deposition accidents [vide infra] is congruent with the anomalous vehicle reports. This means that one can not discount the claimed and often observed injuries as being real-world (although current and likely advanced beyond public information) technologies, and which are causes of these effects and injuries.\n\nD. RELATIONSHIPS OF PHYSICS AND BIOPHYSICS TO INJURIES\n\nTo give but one hypothesis with regard to exotic mechanisms, there is the possibility that those are effects predicted by General Relativity Theory that would correlate with some of the reported data in which the blackbody heat spectrum of an object (an anomalous craft) would be blue-shifted (increased in frequency) under conditions of spacetime manipulation for lift and propulsion. Were a human exposed to blue-shifting at relatively close range, symptoms associated with broadband radiation - microwave, visible, UV, soft X-rays - could be expected. [Adapted from Technical Study 10.0 Human Effects]\n\nMedical data supports this option. That is, \"mixed NIEMR\" causes microwave tissue heating, and also disruption of clones of white blood cells to cause cessation of cell division. (Green & Schuessler, unpublished findings of a pair of well-documented human\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ncases…Cash-Landrum 1987). These cases and all other clinical data in this report are HIPAA – protected. vii\n\nOne of the outcomes from exposure to, say, ionizing radiation due to any of the above phenomena is damage to cellular DNA [16]. This hazard is one of the daunting challenges to be met and overcome even when it comes to consideration of such human-oriented activities as spaceflight for extended periods of time [17]. Fortunately, the understanding of DNA structure and mechanisms has progressed to the point that techniques for characterizing DNA are being routinely applied in such civilian applications as crime scene investigations and paternity testing [18].\n\nChapter Three: How Damage Occurs\n\nThe term radiofrequency when applied to the electromagnetic spectrum covers the frequency range 100 kHz-300 GHz; the term microwave is applied to the frequency range 300 MHz-300 GHz. The range 300 MHz-3 GHz (wavelengths 1 m-10 cm) is termed ultrahigh frequency and includes cellular telephones, television broadcasting, and microwave ovens (2-45 GHz). The range 3 GHz-30 GHz (wavelengths 10 cm-1 cm) is termed super high frequency and includes radar, satellite, and other microwave communication systems.\n\nThe effects on humans of ultrahigh frequency and superhigh frequency are primarily those of heating. The rate at which the energy of radiofrequency radiation is absorbed in body tissues is described as the specific absorption rate (SAR) expressed in watts per kilogram (W/kg) and depends on the frequency (Hz) and the power density expressed in watts per square meter (W/m2), which can be described as the power crossing unit area normal to the direction of wave propagation.\n\nAn area that is unique, and murky, is that of 60 Hz electric field induced by High Power (HP) generators presenting whole-body irradiation of 1,000 V/m and 5,000 V/m. Healing and rapidly dividing tissues were seen to have growth retarded, and anaplasia and disorganization in connective tissue fibroblasts and otherwise normal cells in the higher, but not the lower fields [19]. The study, part of a large effort by the DOE has been largely ignored: the data for the lower field effects that have created a large bone and tissue – healing industry.\n\nThe deposition of radiofrequency energy in body tissues varies with absorption characteristics, which depend to a considerable extent on water content. Tissues such as blood, skin, muscle, brain, and peripheral nerves will absorb much more energy than fat and bone. The result is that much of the incident radiofrequency energy tends to pass through the surface fatty tissue where it is deposited in the deeper tissues such as muscle and brain.\n\nThe figure below shows that based on the absorption characteristics of the human body radiofrequency can be subdivided into four regions. The frequency involved in the exposure of the antenna engineers introduced in the preface of this paper (785 MHz) is\n\nvii HIPAA = Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, passed in 1996 provides absolute privacy protection for written, electronic, and verbal medical information obtained by health professionals and systems. Additional examples of HIPAA and several hundred cases now being coded for clinical medical diagnoses in a parallel study by the author is underway and described in Appendix C.\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY the \"hotspot\" range which lies between 400 MHz and 2 GHz. The heating is highly nonuniform with typical ratios between spatial peaks and whole body average specific absorption rates of the order of 150:1 to 200:1.' {above and Figure One adapted from [1]} Figure One Subresonance range Resonance range Hot spot range Surface absorption range Whole body Partial body (head) Normalised specific absorption rate (W/kg per W/m2) 30 300 400 2000 f(MHz) Variation of normalised specific absorption rate with frequency and related absorption characteristics in living organisms: reproduced with the permission of WHO from: Electromagnetic fields (300 Hz to 300 Ghz)1993:76. (Environmental Health Criteria 137.) A. THE EFFECTS THAT BURN From the perspective of aerospace applications, the millimeter wave length of emitters has been of greatest interest for human effects, and there have been extensive reviews documenting effects at both low and high levels of incident energy [20,21]. For our purposes, the most basic biophysical information that pertains is clear: with dry clothing, 90-95 % of the energy is efficiently absorbed with or without an air gap acting as an impedance transformer. These millimeter waves (30-300 GHz) penetrate the skin to a depth of several millimeters. The ANSI (American National Standards Institute) safety guideline of 5 mW/cm2 for RF /NIEMR equates to a SAR of 65-357 W/kg. The depth of penetration involves the area of cutaneous receptors, and at and above these levels will be perceived first, as prickling sensation, then pain and finally erythema and even second degree burns if exposures last on the order of minutes: burning can occur in a non-linear dose-effect range above these SAR levels, as described elsewhere in this paper. The threshold of heat perception is near 0.7 mW/cm2, with power densities of about 9.0 mW/cm2 causing sensations of pain within one second of exposure. It is notable, that the non-liner effects apply; e.g. for 3 GHz {decimeter, not millimeter wave lengths}, the thresholds are on the order of 30 times less. Indeed, especially in the Former Soviet Union, there is substantial literature on these wavelengths at SARs below 10s of W/kg (as with Diathermy Machines in the US in the '50s) being exploited for a wide range of external and internal (gastrointestinal) therapies. Of interest here, in the context of incident RF that can produce heating injury, are a series of very early experiments done at Brooks Air Force Base and the Oak Ridge National Laboratories during the Cold War era intended to study potential weapons and 9 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY space application human effects [22,23]. In these experiments low energy proton effects on tissue were observed.viii In these experiments, incident energies were selected for skin surfaces that were very similar to the example of the RF / NIEMR 30 - 300 GHz millimeter wave experiments just described: 1-30 Mev. The ranges of skin penetration were the same: 0.5 - about 5.0 mm. At the highest doses selected (up to 2000 rads) no clinical effects were noted at or below equivalent Mev - levels found at millimeter waves, SARs of 10 mW/cm2. There have been several studies {encompassing about 100 reported cases during acute accidental exposures in military aerospace and communications situations} that have collected data on human exposures to RF of mixed and broad bandwidths [1,23]. Comparison of this medical literature presents striking overlaps to the claimed clinical injury patterns of several hundred near-field cases of anomalous and hostile events being currently analyzed for a companion study to this, as described in Appendices A, B, & C. The emergent findings are that in nearly all cases in which exposures are of the order of minutes or longer, including visible indications at distances of 10 meters, similar acute effects are observed. In order of their positive and negative clinical presentation the signs and symptoms [23,24,25,26] include: Warming/prickly sensation over exposed glabrous skin Sensation of burning, no itching or small myelenation injury Erythema, which progresses top 2nd-degree burns in 72 hours Headache, temporal: effect lasting three weeks Dizziness/vertigo, often with nausea/ vomiting at 24-72 hours Cardiac palpitations at 48-72 hours Neurasthenia and peripheral neuropathy absent fasciculation Absent evidence of neuromuscular small fiber disease Absent evidence of alpha-motor neuron involvement Malaise and low-grade fever, emotional liability Severe anxiety with high exposure over 10 or greater minutesix Corneal abrasion due to deoxygenating, \"gritty eye syndrome\" Scleral inflammation and iriditiis, photophobia viii Spaceflight and possible weapons applications were of great concern, and sources indicate, that there was concern of reported UFO/Anomalous effects at the time [24]). ix \"Severe Anxiety\" as assessed clinically to require medication and hospitalization is a marker for broadband RF/NIEMR [but not ionizing] radiation exposure greater than about 500 mW/cm2, or 5x10^3 W/m2. Thus, a neurological examination that can separate psychiatric from neuropathic and small nerve fiber damage can serve to demarcate exposure in SAR, and can help distinguish whole body, head, and/or hot-spot surface absorption. 10 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Beau's lines on fingernails Absent serum enzymes and CBC findings 30-60 day subacute persistent sleep disorder, dysphagia Parasthesiae (can last up to 3 years, and thus become chronic) It is particularly important to note that one can do a semi-quantitative dose-response determination of apparent anomalous events, by comparing the clinical reports, with what we know from the literature...at least as a first approximation of what one may adduce the power system effects at near field may have been. For example, from the peer-reviewed medical literature one can find cases inclusive of about a dozen patients and subjects exposed to one to ten minutes RF [HF through EHF] (of the '100s mentioned above): <10 mW/cm2 @ UHF-SHF = no effects [27] >50<100 mW/cm2 @ UHF-SHF = as above [28] <50 mW/cm2 (2.45 GHz) UHF-SHF (presumed) radial neuropathy and dyasthesia: 20 months duration, intermittent electromyography changes, multiple sensory neuropathy [25,29] >250 W/m2 @ HF (20-30 MHz) impaired 2-pt discrimination x <1 mW/cm2 (presumed) @ UHF (2140 MHz) double-blind / cross-over study in adolescents and adults: no neurological or cognitive signs and symptoms [30, and Figure Two vide infra] B. THE ENIGMA OF \"NON-THERMAL\" WHEALS AND LOCALIZED \"BURNS\" An observation made often, in the literature of aerospace related reports of anomalous object after-effects, clinically valid, but not linked to any observed heating effect, is the appearance of what appear to be 1-3 cm localized circumscribed erythematous, occasionally gangrenous, and sub-dermal wheals, boils, and serosanguinous abrasions. These injuries appear concomitantly with what are otherwise felt to be burns from microwave or other RF injuries, except they are often found on clothed parts of the body, at a distance from the worst second degree burns. And, dermatologically, they can't be diagnosed as thermal or RF-related injuries. A recent publication from the Bogoliubov Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna and Tashkent Russia; Faculty of Physics, Tashkent; and the Institut fur Physik, Rostock, may offer some first notions of an underlying pathophysiological mechanism. The study is said to be theoretical, but based on experimental data, and appears to be unrelated to any emitter concerns, RF or otherwise, and is not linked to an aerospace application, although funded by a x Note: the wavelength of this exposure would have been on the order of 10-50 km; in the previous UHF-SHF injuries, they would have been 1 cm - 1 dm; given equal incident energy dermal penetration is inversely proportional to wavelength. A companion study is attempting to further quantify these relationships, to permit additional inferences as to putative energy sources of anomalous events. 11 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY prestigious organization known to be interested in field effects. The authors consider the case when the charge carriers are ions in a fluid flowing through a tube. The ions are free to move but obviously confined within a specific volume. The team then poses the question: what happens when you apply a static magnetic field modulated by Johnson Noise (a function of calcium currents in closed tubes, non-linearly dependent on temperature in the presence of ULF). The answer, they say, is a resonance effect in which the ionic currents grow stronger. The strength of the resonance depends on the size of the capillary and the strength of the field. The authors have worked out how this effect might play out in the human body, and cause stasis under certain conditions and small vessel damage, as a function of the concentration of calcium in the microcirculation. A recent peer-review (well beyond the capabilities of this author) has found the work promising [31]. C. SOME THOUGHTS ON NEUROLOGICAL CORRELATES From this brief summary it can be seen that not only are incident energies, wavelengths, and durations of exposures independent variables of gross injury, but they also are variables as to tissue type. This might be expected, because the injury to nerve and other cell types must be secondary to alteration of the molecular and biochemical structures. In the case of nerves/neurons in peripheral or central nervous system components, the action potentials and subsequent release of end-plate, ephaphtic, or synaptic neurotransmitters are known to be related to the currents induced across the membranes by direct EMF, or induced B-Fields. The electrophysiology should allow inferences to be made as to incident energies and bandwidths to the extent we can infer or discover the near-field RF qualitative and quantitative measures. What can not be overly emphasized, is that when one looks at the literature of anomalous cases, including claims from the most reliable sources, the extent and degree of injuries are consistent across patients who are injured, compared to witnesses in the far-field, who are not. For example, in the cases this reviewer has studied, the directionality and the times of the known RF / EM exposures and the injury severity and patterns are highly consistent: There are no significant differences in either the reported acute effects (symptoms) or the physician-observed (signs) between the case of three antenna engineers and the Cash-Landrum cases. This pathophysiological observation is a convincing one: \"Something\" is causing these near fieldxi injuries, the energy deposition and conditions follow our \"real-world\" neurological experience. It seems highly unlikely that imagination or delusion of laypersons could mimic the science of thermal injury patterns, electrophysiology, immunology, and neurology in a non-linear dose-response manner...and incorporate the biophysics of wavelength and eV effects (1 eV = 1.6 x 10-19 joules). xi \"Near-Field\" as a term in this and companion studies refers to the subjective distance, in part, between the injured patient and the presumptive energy source, be it an RF / EM antenna, source of microwaves, or unidentified object. We use the term also to imply relatively limited spatio-temporal exposures (within 10s of meters), times before acute (minutes to hours to one day) or subacute (up to 72 hours) periods between exposure and signs and symptoms of actual injury. An object, or in this case a human body in the near field where electromagnetic waves are incident yet to be fully formed due to the perturbation. But to first and second orders, inferences and calculations of wavelength and energy depositions can sometimes be made with good reporting and data from the events. 12 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Indeed, there is even a small amount of literature (less than a dozen good peer-reviewed studies) that incorporates these ideas. McRee, Wachtel and associates have studied ionic gradients in nerves, and compared thermal versus non-thermal injury patterns. They have found the effects are independent of each other, and may be due to involvement of the Sodium-Potassium = ATP-ase pump, that subtends the functioning of all excitable tissues [27,32]. A very recent NATO meta-analysis has defined, on the other hand, low-thermal and non-thermal broad band effects in humans that can be induced by \"Non-lethal Weapons\" [33]. The development of an active denial system (ADS) in the mm-wave region (94 GHz) at a distance of within 100 meters will cause localized heating and discomfort.xii These wavelengths can not penetrate beneath the superficial layers of the skin. They do stimulate localized pain and stimulation of dermal receptors of the lateral spino-thalamic tract...which will afford direct and specific clues in evaluating claims of injury: the receptors for pain, tickle, itch, and prickling sensation are we believe unique to depth and frequency. Pulsed microwave weapons based on HPM (High Power Microwaves) represent another example of a directed energy system. Typical systems operate at 1-3 GHz {UHF-SHF; dm wavelengths}, and can penetrate deep into the human body, and do not generate heat. Several controversial {non-replicated and not to be reviewed here} studies do claim, however, that these frequencies will cause dissolution of the blood-brain-barrier (BBB) integrity, and hence can cause subacute injury. Changes in the cytoskeleton proteins occur only after higher than realistic pulse repetition rates for the US systems under development as weapons.xiii Chapter Four: Applicable Subacute Injury Effects There is additional rich and established literature that describes well the subacute level effects of {particularly} radio frequency and microwave fields (MF) on human and animal tissue. (Figure Two) It should also be mentioned, that beginning in the late '80s [34,35,36] low-level RF, clearly athermal in incident energy, of time varying magnetic fields called PEMF (pulsed electromagnetic fields) of 1-15 HZ, 2-8 Gauss began to be researched clinically for bone-union, pain management, depression alleviation, and dermal cell repair. These ELF multi-kilometer wave-length RF are excluded here, as the literature has shown no injury potential for this bandwidth. That said; numerous reports on both the anomalous event as well as the clinical medical literature describe the occasional \"effects\" experiencers or patients utilizing such therapy sometimes report. These effects include occasional mild and localized warmth when touching an object of unknown provenance, or under the electrode: a pleasant mild itch or tickle sensation {non-specific stimulation of paccinian and nociceptive skin receptors served by peripheral un-myelinated nerves} and pleasant cognitive effects and relaxation. Although we can hardly categorize such near-field effects as injuries, we note and catalogue them as non-specific neurological \"effects.\" There is no a priori reason to xii Unfortunately, the NATO study does not contain information on the power density, or the other technical parameters to accomplish the ADS effect. xiii We are, of course aware, that this series of studies is not to be limited to current technology, much less-only \"on-world\" technology. A theoretical examination of these claims is thus underway, but is not in-scope for this review. 13 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nbelieve that only injury patterns in the near-field will lead to diagnostics of emanations from unknown emitters related to aerospace objects.\nFigure Two http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_spectrum#cite_note-1\nCLASS FREQUENCY WAVELENGTH ENERGY\nY 300 EHz 1 pm 1.24 MeV\nHX 30 EHz 10 pm 124 keV\nSX 3 EHz 100 pm 12.4 keV\n300 PHz 1 nm 1.24 keV\nEUV 30 PHz 10 nm 124 eV\nNUV 3 PHz 100 nm 12.4 eV\n300 THz 1 µm 1.24 eV\nNIR 30 THz 10 µm 124 meV\nMIR 3 THz 100 µm 12.4 meV\nFIR 300 GHz 1 mm 1.24 meV\nEHF 30 GHz 1 cm 124 µeV\nSHF 3 GHz 1 dm 12.4 µeV\nUHF 300 MHz 1 m 1.24 µeV\nVHF 30 MHz 10 m 124 neV\nHF 3 MHz 100 m 12.4 neV\nMF 300 kHz 1 km 1.24 neV\nLF 30 kHz 10 km 124 peV\nVLF 3 kHz 100 km 12.4 peV\nVF/ULF 300 Hz 1 Mm 1.24 peV\nSLF 30 Hz 10 Mm 124 feV\nELF 3 Hz 100 Mm 12.4 feV\nγ= Gamma Rays MIR= Mid Infrared HF= High Frequency\nHX= Hard X-Rays FIR= Far Infrared MF= Medium Frequency\nSX= Soft X-Rays Radio waves LF= Low Frequency\nEUV= Extreme EHF= Extremely High VLF= Very low Frequency\nUltraviolet Frequency\nNUV= Near Ultraviolet SHF= Super High VF/ULF= Voice Frequency\nFrequency\nUHF= Ultra High SLF= Super Low Frequency\nNIR= Near Infrared Frequency ELF= Extremely Low\nVHF= Very High Frequency\nFrequency\nThe 2007 “Bioinitiative Report”, updated on-line often, is well-peer-viewed, comprehensive, and useful to make the point of relevance for us…indicates that acute effects primarily involve tissue heating from these modalities. However, as with well-over 99% of the medical literature on field effects of RF and NIEMR (Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Radiation), heating isn’t the current concern. Rather, it is low-level,\n14\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nnon-thermal, effects, and so much of the current literature is of little relevance for this review [37]. That said, the Standards of the FCC (Federal Communications Commission), WHO (World Health Organization), and other relevant industrial hygiene and safety organizations comprehend the effects {at the high end} of acute exposures. From [37] we see some interesting comments {Table One}\nTable 1. LIMITS FOR MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE EXPOSURE\nFrequency Electric Field Magnetic Field Power Density Averaging\nRange (MHz) Strength (E) Strength (H) (S) Time [E]2 [H]2\n(V/m) (A/m) (mW/cm2) or S (minutes)\n0.3-3.0 614 1.63 (100)* 6\n3.0-30 1842 4.89 (900)* 6\n30-300 61.4 0.163 1.0 6\n300-1500 6\n1500-100000 5 6\n*Plane-wave equivalent power density\nNOTE: Occupational/controlled limits apply in situations in which persons are exposed as a consequence of their employment, provided these persons are fully aware of the potential for exposure and can exercise control over their exposure. Limits for occupational/controlled exposure also apply in situations when an individual is transient through a location where occupational/controlled limits apply provided he or she is made aware of the potential for exposure. In the United States, the FCC enforces limits for both occupational exposures in the workplace and public exposures. The exposure limits are variable according to the frequency in megahertz and the duration of exposure time {6 minutes for occupational and 30 minutes for public exposures}. Table One shows exposure limits for occupational and uncontrolled public access to radiofrequency radiation such as is emitted from AM, FM, television and wireless sources through the air. As an example, 583 microwatts/cm2 (µW/cm2) is the public limit for the 875 MHz cell phone wireless frequency and 1000 µW/cm2 is the limit for PCS frequencies in the 1800 – 1950 MHz range averaged over 30 minutes.\nThat is: we understand well that for 6 minutes {the same order of magnitude for which we are interested in and concerned about unintended effects} of anomalous near-field exposures…six minutes at the above levels constitute the point at which {from other unquoted industrial hygiene definitions} for RF & NIEMR tissues heating of less than 0.5 degree C, locally to the dermis, will occur. Thus, when one hears reports that definitive heating and even erythema and later second-degree burns are suffered, one can reasonably infer these levels have been surpassed! [2,4, & Green, 2009 Technical Study 10].\nAlso, in June, 2007, the WHO ELF (Extremely Low Frequency) Environmental Health Criteria Monograph, EMF Program released its ELF Health Criteria Monograph. In the report, they stated: “Acute biological effects have been established for exposure to ELF electric and magnetic fields in the frequency range up to 100 kHz that may have adverse consequences on health. The metric for measurement is specific absorption rate (SAR) and is expressed in watts per kilogram of tissue.”\nThe limit for absorption of radiofrequency radiation is limited to 1.6 W/kG within 1 gram of human tissue. The SAR criteria to be used are specified below and apply for portable devices transmitting in the frequency range from 100 kHz to 6 GHz. The limits used for\n15\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nevaluation are based generally on criteria published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., (IEEE) for localized specific absorption rate (\"SAR\") in Section 4.2 of \"IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz,\" ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992.\nThese criteria for SAR evaluation are similar to those recommended by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP)xiv.\n(1) FCC Limits for Occupational/Controlled Exposure: 0.4 W/kg as averaged over the whole-body and spatial peak SAR not exceeding 8 W/kg as averaged over any 1 gram of tissue {defined as a tissue volume in the shape of a cube}. Exceptions are the hands, wrists, feet and ankles where the spatial peak SAR shall not exceed 20 W/kg, as averaged over any 10 grams of tissue.\n(2) FCC Limits for General Population/Uncontrolled Exposure: 0.08 W/kg as averaged over the whole-body and spatial peak SAR not exceeding 1.6 W/kg as averaged over any 1 gram of tissue. Exceptions are the hands, wrists, feet and ankles where the spatial peak SAR shall not exceed 4 W/kg, as averaged over any 10 grams of tissue (defined as a tissue volume in the shape of a cube) [37].\nThese, then, are the current {highly summarized} internationally accepted scientific standards for acceptance of the levels for acute injury, incorporating the “heating” criteria of acute injury for ELF through MHz bandwidths. In one sentence: acute injury of early burning is not likely to occur at any bandwidth in narrow or mixed frequencies below about 1.0 W/kg or 1.0 mW/cm2 at the low end, over minutes, incident to the human body in the near-field (feet to yards).\nAlthough low-level and chronic effects are not of special interest to us, a recent review by the American Cancer Society specifies the bandwidths of ELF / RF / Thermal / and Noise effects from “Fields” of interest [38].\nOf somewhat greater interest is the SAR versus frequency characteristics from which one can adduce the injuries described in the preface to three antenna engineers, the Cash-Landrum trio, and other cases. {Table Two, [1 p.281]}\nExposure of fibroblasts {cells used as sentinel cells in studies of RF and ionizing radiation damage} to UHF Fields {849 MHz}, at high SAR levels {e.g. 10 W/kg, 1 hr} do not result in any detectable damage. This includes endpoints of cell motility and viability, cell cycle, cell distribution, cellular invasiveness, or cell migration. These results hold even when exposures are extended to one hour per day for three days. [39] Thus, in the Cash-Landrum case…one must assume that the RF and tissue heating, clearly responsible for the erythema and burns, did not cause the cell dyscrasia and subsequent gastrointestinal and malignant transformations; one assumes the cells DNA damage was secondary to ionizing radiation [4,40].\nChapter Five: Cognitive and Neural Injury Mechanisms and Effects\nxiv \"Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields,\" NCRP Report No. 86, Section 17.4.5. Copyright NCRP, 1986, Bethesda, Maryland 20814.\"\n16\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nA good many reports from both the human and the animal literature inform us of the mechanisms by which RF can alter neurochemical processes. These RF effects are not always elucidated as being high-field, or near-field, but in the laboratory they are “real field.” Understanding the mechanisms is critical to understanding why some neuro-psychiatric effects, if not “injury” occur in non-specific unclear dose-response patterns: sleep disturbances, prolonged anxiety, acute and chronic headache including migraines, seizures, and sensations of peripheral numbness, tingling, and parasthesiae are reported often by workers near RF emitters that are “safe” and ubiquitously by persons who encounter anomalous aerospace objects.\nThere are four separate problems, and four separate approaches to their mitigation in attempting to analyze the medical literature.\n• Much of the literature is with animals, of necessity: humans can not be experimented upon at the levels of incident energy with which we are most interested. But the experiments are often well-done, and inform us what is occurring at the cellular level, from which we can make reasonable prediction and design of forensic investigations for event investigations.\n• By definition, the RF / EMF / NIEMR bandwidths are huge, as are the wavelengths that may {or may not} penetrate skin and skull to actually impinge upon the cells /neurons to cause putative injury, or sub-clinical effects in psychological and/or psychiatric effects. We have reason to believe in the real-world the emitters are complex, and the frequencies are multiple. But while there are currently approximately 300,000 discreet science citations on “RF injury and brain” and the good peer-reviewed exemplars number approximately 73, [41] the numbers will admit to a meta-analysis with careful selection; it is clearly possible to determine mechanism of action for discrete experimental condition, and analysis of inter-subject and intra-neurochemical findings should be fruitful.\n• There are often quite different effects, as a function of epidemiological study designs. Most of the effects across thousands of subjects show no injury. That is to be expected; Research is dominated by low-level dose effects {or not}. We should look for acute, mid-to-high dose experiments in animals, that are peer-reviewed and thus have been replicated, and which can be compared with accidental exposures with humans in terms of frequency / bandwidth and dose to tissue.\n• Sometimes the best research shows contradictory results. And, examination of the subtle differences can possibly lead to striking and testable hypothesis – generation.\n• There are sufficient behavioral studies in the literature to at least indicate in man and {other} primates what are the lowest broadband mixed frequency levels at which no acute effects occur. A seminal study done jointly by Syracuse University and the Armstrong-Brooks USAF Laboratory defined the levels below which standard exposures on the order of minutes did not alter neuropsychiatric test scores, or decision-related scores. Ultra Wide Band (UWB) RF at a pulse repetition rate of 60Hz and a bandwidth of 100 MHz to 1.5 GHz (peak power levels between 250-500 MHz) with peak E-Field strength of 250 kV/m in repeated exposures produced no detectable neuro effects [42].\nAs the purpose of this paper is to argue that data exists to “reverse engineer” propulsion systems of anomalous aerospace vehicles, independent of origin, based on\n17\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nbiology … two recent examples will be given. Both are from papers published in tier one medical journals, and both were published in the same month, and both were in the same species {shown to biochemically be a good surrogate for man} utilizing similar application methods in rat brain.\nCase One: [43]\nFifteen minutes of a high dose {6W/kg} @ UHF {900 MHz} was applied. Endpoints were measured acutely and sub-acutely, for ten days following a single exposure. Reactivity of the supporting and nutrient cellular matrix (the glia) was seen at two days, and less so at three days post exposure. The injury was of the form of an inflammatory reaction and increased elaboration of new protein {possibly a repair mechanism}. The areas affected were primarily the frontal cortex, and deeper areas of the brain {caudate, putamen, and cerebellum} and cerebellum where the cerebellum is responsible for signal integration.\nCase Two: [44]\nTen minutes of a high dose {5W/kg} @ UHF {1439 MHz} was applied. Endpoints were measured acutely. Blood-brain barrier {glial interface} permeability, leukocyte behavior, microcirculatory rate and volume changes, and vessel diameter were observed. There were no effects on these microcirculatory parameters.\nThese two cases are typical of hundreds this author has reviewed, and while confusing initially, they are actually consistent with observations made in patient examinations of real-world human cases:\n• Contact {exceptionally near-field} effects at these frequencies negate any conclusions as to wave-length effect: coupling may not occur in a “traditional” sense of induced current or voltage causing cell transport effects.\n• Generalized heating does occur, which dissipates over 48 hours. This is consistent with human effects, and could mean that near field effects of EM of propulsion systems at cm distances from the brain are served by the same mechanism of surface heating. Also, the decrease {not absence} in neurological effects in 72 hours, as reported frequently, may be supported by these animal experiments.\n• The inflammatory reaction is not the result of increased microcirculation, and this also may explain the paucity of data in human cases for acute and subacute evidence for brain edema.\n• One can hypothesize that in humans signs of erythema, but lack of overt burns and blisters, presence of cognitive clouding for 48 hours {relative frontal cortical sensitivity} and prolonged generalized sleep and anxiety complaints {but not respiratory, hypertensive, or other deep nuclei other than caudate and putamen} and muscle fasciculation’s and minor parasthesiae and motor coordination {cerebellar} are consistent with the animal studies at UHF.\n• The chronicity of neuropsychiatric and paucity of acute neurological signs continue support of the hypothesis of a [relatively!] narrow HF through EHF, non-ionizing, RF band of exposure.\n18\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFor completeness, we must mention that low-level, chronic {in excess of hours} exposure to low levels of RF {on the order of 0.1 - 1.0 W/kg} has shown a plethora of biological effects especially in animal studies, and mostly dealing with a neurochemical endpoint [such as mentioned above with neuro-transmitter protein elaboration]. It is of great interest, in the absence of injury per se that in the brain, differences can be found of measured SARs even millimeters apart. [45] Evidence exists that, therefore, measureable effects of as yet unknown importance exist. This data is complex, incontrovertible, and may be of later interest for us in evaluating neuropsychiatric and neurological claims of long-term chronic, low-level, or even \"off-world\" exposures to high magnetic fields, rotating RF fields, and unconventional equipment.\n\nNo effects, however, in fluorescein, sucrose transport, peroxidase permeability, or blood flow has been seen at acute SARs of 2.5 W/kg from 2450 MHz at 10 mW/cm2. But, for 1200 MHz at a SAR of 1.0W/kg, pulsed waves at 0.2 mW/cm2 or continuous wave for 30 minutes, permeability of the BBB does occur [46].\n\nReferences & Working Data Bases\n\n[1] C.J. Shilling, \"Effects of acute exposure to ultrahigh radiofrequency radiation on three antenna engineers\" Occup. Environ. Med 1997;54;281-284\n\n[2] J. Schuessler, UFO-Related Human Physiological Effects (Geo Graphics Printing Co., La Porte, TX, 1996).\n\n[3] P. A. Sturrock, \"Physical evidence related to UFO reports: The Proceedings of a workshop held at Pocantico Conference Center, Tarrytown, NY, Sept. 29 - Oct. 4, 1998,: Jour. Sci. Exploration 22, pp. 179-229 (1998). The results of this workshop were later published in detail in book form, P. A. Sturrock, The UFO Enigma (Warner Books, New York, 2000).\n\n[4] J. F. Schuessler, \"Cash-Landrum Radiation Case,\" MUFON UFO Jour. 165, p. 3 (November 1981).\n\n[5] Addendum to Nonlethal Technologies - Worldwide (NGIC-1147-101-98): \"Bioeffects of Selected Nonlethal Weapons,\" Army INSCOM (Intelligence and Security Command) Report (1998).\n\n[5-a] http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008/03/shoe-zapping-ra/\n\n[5-b] http://127.0.0.1:4664/cache?event_id=135227&schema_id=8&q=Bioengineering\n\n[5-c] http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/roundtables/the-military-application-of-neuroscience-research#rt4022\n\n[6] J. Alexander, Future War: Non-lethal Weapons in Twenty-First-Century Warfare (Thomas Dunne Books, New York, 1999).\n\n[7] J. McCampbell, \"Effects of UFOs upon people,\" in H. Evans and J. Spencer, UFOs 1947-1987, the 40-Year Search for an Explanation (Fortean Times, London, 1987).\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[8] J. Vallee, Confrontations (Ballantine Books, New York, 1990).\n\n[9] A partial summary of official Brazilian Air Force documentation concerning a months-long series of close-range, well-documented observations of anomalous craft at Colares in 1977, which includes description of a number of medical injuries, is available at the website: http://www.ufologie.net/htm/colaresgevaerd01.htm.\n\n[10] Airborne Instruments Laboratory 1956 An observation on the detection by the ear of microwave signals Proc IRE 44:2A\n\n[11] Elder JA & Chou CK 2003 Auditory response to Pulsed Radiofrequency Energy Bioelectromagnetics Supplement 6:S162-S173\n\n[12] Green C. 2009 & 1983 {Unpublished Personal Archives}\n\n[13] Guy AW & Chou CK 1982 Effects of High Intensity microwave pulse exposure of rat brain Radio Science 17(5S):169S-178S\n\n[14] Marino C. et.al. 2000 Effects of microwaves (900 MHz) on the cochlear receptor: Exposure systems and preliminary results Radiat Environ Biophys 39:141-147\n\n[15] Kanokov Z. et.al. 2006 On the Influence of Weak Magnetic and Electrical Fields on the Fluctuations of Ionic Electric Currents in Blood Circulation {Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG 436 RUS 113/705/0-3}\n\n[16] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizing_radiation\n\n[17] D. Bushnell, \"Imaginable technologies for human missions to Mars,\" Aerospace America (June 2007), p. 24.\n\n[18] J. Butler, Forensic DNA Typing: Biology, Technology, and Genetics of STR Markers - 2nd Edition (Academic Press, New York, 2005).\n\n[19] Marino AA, et.al. 1979 Power Frequency Electric Fields and Biological Stress: A Cause and Effect Relationship Biol. Effects of ELF: 18th Hanford Con pps 258-276\n\n[20] Ryan KL et. al. 2000 Radio frequency radiation of millimeter wave length: potential occupational safety issues relating to surface heating Health Physics 78:170-81\n\n[21] Gandhi O & Riazi I 1986 Absorption of millimeter waves by human beings and its biological implications Microwave Theory and Techniques, 34(2) 228-235 IEEE Transactions Feb.\n\n[22] Siegel AM, et. al. 1969 Some biological effects of Low-energy protons on Skin Radiation Research 37:323-333\n\n[23] Graham RB 1985 The medical records of human exposure to radiofrequency radiation. In: The impact of proposed radiofrequency radiation standards on military operations Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development (AGARD) 6-16-8 Lecture Series No. 138\n\n[24] Green C. 2009 & 1978 {Unpublished Personal Archives}\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[25] Machiori PE et.al. 1995 Acute multiple mononeuropathy after accidental exposure to oven microwaves Occup. Med 45:276-7\n\n[26] Hocking B et.al. 1988 Assessment of Health after radio-frequency radiation accident J. Microwave Power and electromagnetic energy 23:67-74\n\n[27] McRee DI & Wachtel H 1986 Elimination of microwave effects on the vitality of nerves after blockage of active transport Radiat Res 108:260-8\n\n[28] Forman SA et.al. 1982 Psychological symptoms and intermittent hypertension following acute microwave exposure\n\n[29] Wayne L et.al. 1984 Investigation of an active microwave - hand oven injury J. Hand Surgery 9A:132-5\n\n[30] Riddervold IS et. al. 2008 Cognitive function and symptoms in adults and adolescents in relation to RF radiation from UMTS base stations Bioelectromagnetics 29:257-67\n\n[31] arxiv.org/abs/0904.1198 2009 On the Influence of Weak Magnetic and Electric Fields on the Fluctuations of Ionic Electric Currents in Blood Circulation\n\n[32] McRee DI & Wachtel H 1982 Pulse Microwave effects on nerve vitality Radiat Res 91:212-8\n\n[33] Risling M 2009 Detailed Examples of Radio Frequency, Kinetic Energy, and Electro-Muscular Devices: a Meta Review NATO RTO-EN-HFM-145: 2-1-2-7\n\n[34] Bassett CA 1989 Fundamental and practical aspects of therapeutic uses of pulsed electromagnetic fields Crit Rev Biomed Eng 17(5): 415-529\n\n[35] PEMF current human effect literature Green C. 2009; 2,920 citations http://scholar.google.cn/scholar?q=PEMFs&hl=en&lr=&btnG=Search; 255 citations http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez\n\n[36] Loo CK et. al 2003 High (15 HZ) and low (1 HZ) frequency transcranial stimulation have different acute effects on regional cerebral blood flow in depressed patients Psychol Med 6:997-1--6\n\n[37] C.F. Blackman, et.al. 2007 http://www.bioinitiative.org/report/index.htm The BioInitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF)\n\n[38] American Cancer Society Radiation Exposures\" May, 2009 http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ped/content/ped_1_3x_radiation_exposure_and_cancer.asp\n\n[39] Lee JJ, et. al. 2008 Acute Radiofrequency irradiation does not affect cell cycle, migration, and invasion Bioelectromagnetics Dec. 29(8):615-25\n\n[40] Green, CC 2001, 2009 Unpublished HIPPA files\n\n[41] RF Injury and Brain literature Green C. 2009 8,006 citations\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nhttp://scholar.google.cn/scholar?as_q=RF+Brain+injury&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_allsubj=all&hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1 73 citations\nhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez\n\n[42] Sherry, CJ et.al. 1995 Lack of Behavioral Effects after exposure to ultra wide-band electromagnetic radiation in the microwave frequency range Radiation Research 143(1) 93-97\n\n[43] Brillaud E et. al. 2007 Effect of an acute 900 MHz GSM exposure on glia in the rat brain: a time-dependent study Toxicology 23891):23-33\n\n[44] Masuda H. et.al. 2007 Effects of acute exposure to a 1439 MHz electromagnetic field on the microcirculatory parameters in rat brain In Vivo 21(4):555-62\n\n[45] Lai, H 1998 Neurological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation Workshop on Biological and health effects of RF electromagnetic fields www.mapcruzin.com\n\n[46] Lai, H 1997 Neurological Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation relating to Wireless Communication Technology www.mapcruzin.com\n\n[47] About the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/otheract/icd9/abticd10.htm\n\n[48] Vallee Classification System http://www.yawp.com/3rd-i/rsrc/gloss/v/vallee.html\n\n[49] Definition of HIPAA http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=31785\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix A: Schuessler Catalog of UFO-Related Human Physiological Effects (Frequency Distribution)\n\nThe Schuessler catalog, UFO-Related Human Physiological Effects, was complied in 1996 by MUFON's past Director, John F. Schuessler. Covering the time period 1873 - 1994, the catalog comprises a summary of 356 selected cases of UFO-induced physiological effects on humans during close encounters. Physiological effects enumerated include such phenomena as paralysis, electrical shocks, feeling of heat, burns, perception of odors, etc. A compilation of the frequency distribution of these effects is enumerated below. The catalog thus constitutes a useful data base from which it is anticipated that certain physical source causes may be inferred.\n\nTable of Effects Frequency\n\nApparent abductions 129\nElectromagnetic effects on vehicle(s) 77\nParalysis 75\nPerceived time loss 75\nLight beam effects 61\nEye injuries (e.g., temporary blindness, conjunctivitis) 54\nHeat 43\nMedical exam 42\nBurns 41\nUnconsciousness 33\nMarks left on body 33\nSignificant sound effects (e.g., humming) 27\nElectrical shock 23\nPhysiological/emotional shock, intense fear 23\nPrickling, tingling sensations 22\nPain 22\nSkin sores, rash 18\nInduced headaches, migraines 18\nForce field impact 18\nNausea, vomiting 17\nSensation of cold 16\nDisorientation, confusion 14\nGround traces 10\nWeakness, fatigue 9\nAmnesia 9\nApparent experience of telepathy 9\nNumbness 8\nSignificant odors 8\nVoice loss 7\nAppetite loss 7\nInsomnia 7\nPerceived time suspension 7\nDehydration 6\nSwelling of tissues 6\nDizziness 5\nWeightlessness, levitation 5\nHealing 5\nSexual encounters 5\nDeaths 5\nDiarrhea 4\nHair loss 4\nNightmares 4\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n• Claimed ESP development 4\n• Nose bleeds 3\n• Tastes 3\n• Ringing in ears 3\n• Weight loss 3\n• Breathing problems 3\n• Urination problems 3\n• Gynecological problems 3\n• Claimed implant 3\n• Perceived teleportation 3\n• Stunned 2\n• Itching 2\n• Loss of taste 2\n• Loss of hearing 2\n• Induced feeling of calm, serenity 2\nAnd, in no particular order, one each of: EM effects on power system, involuntary muscle movement, induced body odor, wart growth, sooty deposit, mental enhancement, mental degradation, swallowing difficulty, teeth vibration, fillings crumbled, hair precipitously turned white, time sped up, unaccounted-for pregnancy, cancer, fever, stomach sickness, physiological energization, loss of smell, external control of vehicle, material evidence.\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAppendix B: Green/Morris Example to Show the Global Breadth of Available Older ICD Case Inputs From Multiple Data Sources (red =pending ICD classification)\n1. 1952 SOUTH AFRICA, WORCESTER CAPE\n2. 1952/07/22 AUSTRALIA, NSW, SYDNEY\n3. 1952/07/24 ITALY, VICO\n4. 1954/09/10 FRANCE, VALENCIENNES\n5. 1954/09/17 FRANCE, CENON\n6. 1954/09/28 FRANCE, BOUZAIS\n7. 1954/09/30 FRANCE, MARCILLY-SUR-VIENNE\n8. 1954/10/01 FRANCE, BRY\n9. 1954/10/05 FRANCE, LE MANS\n10. 1954/10/07 FRANCE, MONTEUX\n11. 1954/10/09 FRANCE, LAVOUX\n12. 1954/10/11 FRANCE, SASSIER\n13. 1954/10/13 FRANCE, BOURRASOLE\n14. 1954/10/16 FRANCE, BAILLOLET\n15. 1954/10/18 FRANCE, near COHEIX\n16. 1954/10/20 FRANCE, TURQUENSTEIN\n17. 1954/10/20 ITALY, PARRAVICINO D'ERBA\n18. 1954/10/21 ITALY, MELITO\n19. 1954/10/21 FRANCE, LA ROCHELLE\n20. 1954/10/21 FRANCE, POUZOU\n21. 1954/10/21 ENGLAND, RANTON, STAFFORDSHIRE\n22. 1954/10/26 FRANCE, LA MADIERE\n23. 1954/10/27 FRANCE, LINZEUX\n24. 1954/11/02 BRAZIL, SANTO AMARO\n25. 1954/11/05 FRANCE, LA ROCHE-EN-BRENIL\n26. 1954/11/08 FRANCE, LA-TESSOUALLE\n27. 1954/11/08 ENGLAND, CROYDON, SURREY\n28. 1954/11/13 FRANCE, near BUCHY\n29. 1054/11/14 ITALY, ISOLA\n30. 1954/12/19 VENEZUELA, VALENCIA\n31. 1955 VIRGINIA\n32. 1955/01/23 PENNSYLVANIA, DARBY TOWNSHIP\n33. 1955/03/30 ARIZONA, near TUCSON\n34. 1955/07/17 ENGLAND, KENT\n35. 1956/09 FRANCE, SERDON\n36. 1956/10/02 NEW JERSEY, TRENTON\n37. 1957/09 BRAZIL, CAMPINAS\n38. 1957/11/02 TEXAS, nr. LEVELLAND\n39. 1957/11/04 BRAZIL, FORT ITAIPU\n40. 1957/11/04 NEW MEXICO, near OROGRANDE\n41. 1957/11/05 TEXAS, SAN ANTONIO\n42. 1957/11/10 OHIO, MADISON\n43. 1957/12/07 TEXAS, DALLAS\n44. 1958 OHIO, MADISON\n45. 1958/01/27 PERU, AREQUIPA\n46. 1958 NEW HAMPSHIRE, BETHLEHEM\n47. 1958/10/26 MARYLAND, LOCH RAVEN DAM\n48. 1959/04/24 BRAZIL, PIATA\n49. 1959/04/27 BRAZIL, SAO PAULO\n50. 1959/09/27 OREGON, COOS BAY\n51. 1959/10 SWEDEN, MARIANNELUND\n52. 1960/03/02 AUSTRIA, LABUTTENDORF\n53. 1960/04 FRANCE, PUY-DE-DOME\n25\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n54. 1960/09FLORIDA, BRUNNEL/ST. AUGUSTINE\n55. 1961/03ENGLAND, PATERSON'S GROYNE, near DURHAN\n56. 1962/11ARGENTINA, SALTA/SAN MIGUEL DE TUCUMAN\n57. 1963/08/04ILLINOIS, WAYNE CITY\n58. 1963/10/12BRAZIL, MONTE-MAIZ\n59. 1964/04/14CALIFORNIA, nr. CHICO\n60. 1964/06/02NEW MEXICO, HOBBS\n61. 1964/06/29GEORGIA, nr. LAVONIA\n62. 1964/09/14FRANCE, VALENCIENNES\n63. 1965/03/15FLORIDA, nr. IMOKALLEE (110 miles from Ft. Myers)\n64. 1965/09/03TEXAS, nr DAMON\n65. 1965/09/14ENGLAND, nr MERSEA, ESSEX\n66. 1965/12/20MINNESOTA, nr HERMANN\n67. 1966CANADA, HAMILTON, ONTARIO\n68. 1966/04NEW YORK, nr SINCLAIRVILLE\n69. 1966/04/01OKLAHOMA, TANGIER\n70. 1966/04/17OHIO, nr AKRON\n71. 1966/04/25PENNSYLVANIA, nr TOWANDA\n72. 1966/04/28ENGLAND, SAWTRY\n73. 1967SOUTH DAKOTA, PIERRE\n74. 1968/01/02CANADA, WHITEHORSE, YUKON\n75. 1968/02/19 CANADA, BENGOUGH, SASKATCHEWAN\n76. 1968/03/19OHIO, BEALLSVILLE\n77. 1968/04/04 WISCONSIN, nr. COCHRANE\n78. 1968/06/25 ARGENTINA, SAN LORENZO\n79. 1968/07/01ARGENTINA, RICARDONE\n80. 1968/08FRANCE, COTE D'OR REGION\n81. 1968/08NEW YORK, CATSKILL MOUNTAINS, nr. ALBANY\n82. 1968/08/29NEVADA, nr. ELY\n83. 1968/09/01ARGENTINA, MENDOZA\n84. 1968/09/09BRAZIL, LINS\n85. 1968/11/01PERU\n86. 1969/2-4ENGLAND, nr. RAF FAIRFORD, WILTSHIRE\n87. 1969/02/06BRAZIL, PIRASSUNUNGA\n88. 1969/03/04MISSOURI, nr. ATLANTA\n89. 1969/03/06MISSOURI, GLENWOOD\n90. 1969/03/11BRAZIL, CAMPINAS, SAO PAULO\n91. 1969/06/19ENGLAND, DOCKING\n92. 1970/08/30BRAZIL, ITATIAIA\n93. 70/8 or 9AUSTRALIA, SYDNEY, NEW SOUTH WALES\n94. 1970/10/29NORWAY, JAEREN\n95. 1971/08/01AUSTRALIA, GLADSTONE, QUEENSLAND\n96. 1971/09/20SWEDEN, nr. ALVBYNVAGEN\n26\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAppendix C\nGreen /Morris ICD-Codes [47] versus Environmental Effects after Vallee CE2,CE4,CE5; AN5; MA5; FB5 Ratings [48] ; SVP (Source, Visit, Possible explanation and ratings not germane) in draft- progress.\nNOTES:\n1} The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), the Federal agency responsible for use of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th revision (ICD-10) in the United States, has developed a clinical modification of the classification for morbidity purposes.\nThe clinical modification represents a significant improvement over ICD-9-CM and ICD-10. Specific improvements include: the addition of information relevant to ambulatory and managed care encounters; expanded injury codes; the creation of combination diagnosis/symptom codes to reduce the number of codes needed to fully describe a condition [47]\n2} Vallee Ratings [48]\nAN RATING\nClassifies any anomalous behaviour.\nAN1 Anomalies which have no lasting physical effects. i.e. amorphous lights, unexplained explosions.\nAN2 Anomalies which do have lasting physical effects. i.e. poltergeists, materialized objects, areas of flattened grass, corn circles.\nAN3 Anomalies with associated entities. i.e. ghosts, yetis, spirits, elves and other mythical/legendary entities.\nAN4 Witness interaction with the AN3 entities. i.e. near-death experiences, religious miracles and visions, OBEs (out-of-body experiences).\nAN5 Anomalous reports of injuries and deaths. i.e. SHC(spontaneous human combustion), unexplained wounds as well as permanent healing that results from a paranormal experience.\n27\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nMA RATING\nDescribes behavior of a UFO. It is analogous to the Nocturnal Light, Daylight Disk and Radar Visual Hynek classifications.\nMA1 A UFO has been observed which travels in a discontinuous trajectory. i.e. vertical drops, maneuvers or loops.\nMA2 MA1 plus any physical effects caused by the UFO.\nMA3 MA1 plus any entities observed on board. i.e. the airship cases of the late nineteenth century.\nMA4 Maneuvers accompanied by a sense of reality transformation for the observer.\nMA5 A maneuver that results in a permanent injury or death of the witness.\nFB RATING\nFly-by rating.\nFB1 A simple sighting of a UFO traveling in a straight line across the sky.\nFB2 FB1 accompanied by physical evidence.\nFB3 A fly-by where entities are observed on board (rare).\nFB4 A fly-by where the witness experienced a transformation of reality into the object or its occupants.\nFB5 A fly-by which the witness would suffer permanent injuries or even death. i.e. CASH/LANDRUM CASE.\nCE RATING\nClose Encounter rating. Similar to the Hynek Close Encounter ratings.\nCE1 UFO comes within 500 feet of the witness, but no after effects are suffered by the witness or the surrounding area.\nCE2 A CE1 that leaves landing traces or injuries to the witness.\nCE3 Entities have been observed on the UFO.\nCE4 The witness has been abducted.\nCE5 CE4 which results in permanent psychological injuries or death.\n3} HIPAA Compliance of this Study - HIPAA: Acronym that stands for the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, a US law designed to provide privacy standards to protect patients' medical records and other health information provided to health plans, doctors, hospitals and other health care providers. Developed by the Department of Health and Human Services, these new standards provide patients with access to their medical records and more control over how their personal health information is used and disclosed. They represent a uniform, federal floor of privacy protections for consumers across the country. [49]\n28\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Auditory effects/injury\nLoss of Hearing H91.9\nTemporary deafness - left ear\nRinging in ears\nCardiovascular effect/injury\nMild Bradycardia\nCognitive/Emotional\nAmnesia R41.3\nDazed feeling F43.0\nDisorientation, confusion R41.0\nFear\nInduced feeling of calm, serenity\nInsomnia F51.0\nNervous Shock\nNightmares F51.5\nMemory loss\nMule R49.1, R49.8\nPerceived time loss\nPerceived time suspension/dilation\nStunned\nUnconsciousness\nDeath\nEpistaxis/Hemorrhage\nExternal Physical Force\nBodily Impact (Thrown Backwards)\nForce field impact\nThrown to ground\nGastrointestinal\nDiarrhea\nStomach Sickness\nVomiting R11\nHygiene R46.0\nSkin/Face R20\nNeurological/Sensory\nDizziness R42\nElectrical Charge\nStatic Electricity\nElectric Shock\nFelt Pressure\nBrain\nBurned headaches, migraines G43\nItching\nPerceived Abduction\nBright milky-white light\nHear Humming Sound\nHear Hissing Sound\nHear Whistling Sound\nHear Roaring Sound\nHear Buzzing Sound\nHear Shrieking Noise\nHear High-pitch White Sound\nHear Generator Noise\nHear Loud Unspecified Noise\nBright Light/Glow\nBright White Light/Glow\nRed Light/Glow\nOrange Light/Glow\nBlue Light/Glow\nPurple Light/Glow\nGreen Light/Glow\nPurplish-white Light/Glow\nRed-Orange Light/Glow\nSaw a \"flash\" of light\nBeam of Light\nBeam of white light\nStruck by beam of light\nStruck by a red beam\nStruck by a green beam\nStruck by a violet beam\nStruck by double blue beams\nSaw \"hanging\" amorphous\n\"Bright/luminous\" aimed object at victim\nOdor\nFelt UFO Presence\nVisual Contact: UFO\nApproached landed UFO\nBodily contact\nUFO taking off\nFast moving object (hurricane lamp)\nHit by ball of fire\n\"Phosphorescent\" object\nElectromagnetic effect on vehicle\nEM effects\nExperienced power failure\nBlue-yellow flames from rear\nFlames from object\nMaterial Evidence: Oddness all left on vehicle"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Loss of appetite\nLoss of smell R43\nLoss of Taste R43\nNausea R11\nNumbness\nFace\nPain\nBack aches\nParalysis\nArm (Unspecified)\nPrickling sensation R20.2\nPrickling in face\nPrickling in scalp\nPrickling from the waist down\nSensation of cold/cooling effect\nSensation of heat\nShuddering feeling\nAcidic Taste R43.8\nTingling sensation R20.2\nVibration\nVoice loss R49.1 (Aphonia)\nWeakness R53\nWeightlessness\nOptic\nBlindness (Temporary)\nBloodshot Eye\nRight Eye\nEye ache H57.1\nEye burns\nEye injuries\nEye irritation\nEyes swollen\nLight-sensitive"} {"doc_id":"965735a82758f666","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tearing (Both eyes)\nPhysiological effects\nDehydration E86\nFatigue R53\nGynecological problems\nHair loss L65-L66\nSwelling of tissue\nGlands\nFace & Lips R22.0\nTesticles\nUrination problems R30-R39\nWeight loss R63.4\nRespiratory\nBreathing problems\nSkin (R20-R23)\nMarks left on the body R21\nRed Spots on face and hands\nRash R21\nSkin blotches and peeling\nSkin red\nSkin sores R21\nFace & Hands\nUnspecified Location\nSpontaneous Healing\nHealing of Injured Tissue\nLife-threatening illness\nThermal effects/injury (T20-T32)\nFirst/Second/Unspecified Degree Burns\nArms\nBack of hands\nBody\nFace\nRight hand\nUnspecified Hand (3 inch burn)\nUnspecified Location\nThird Degree Burns/Charring\nBody\nFlesh appeared cooked\nHair singed L66\nRadiation-like\nSunburn-like"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Project Capella"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DOCUMATICA RESEARCH, LLC\nReport no.001\nto Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies, LLC (BAASS)\nProject CAPELLA:\n\nTowards the development of a data warehouse\nin support of research on unusual aerial phenomena\nand related anomalies\n\nBy AAP Person 5\nSan Francisco, California\n\nDecember 10, 2008\n\nAAP Person 5\nCAPELLA Data Warehouse\npage 1"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Project CAPELLA:\nTowards the development of a data warehouse\nin support of research on unusual aerial phenomena and related anomalies\nAAP Person 5\nDocumatica Research, LLC\n\nHow this report is organized\n\nThis report consists of the present overview proposal and three appendices (two of which summarize previously-published work). Together, these four documents describe a consistent methodology for the capture, processing and retrieval of parameters characterizing unusual aerial phenomena and related anomalies. The appendices address three specific implementation areas, describing the technical choices we have made in each area and the reasons for these choices:\n\n- A. Classification methodology and reliability measures for reported sightings\n- B. Modeling of information categories, including high-strangeness data elements\n- C. Data Structures and Software Platforms in support of Aerial Phenomena Research\n\nGiven the tools described hereafter, some of which have already been implemented and tested in prototype form in the course of prior research, we examine several scenarios for the long-term acquisition, exploitation and maintenance of a comprehensive data warehousing system that could serve the needs of a geographically diverse research community with a wide variety of information needs.\n\nHistorical Background\n\nAs we undertake this work we are building on a series of projects developed by many groups around the world, whose experiences contain important lessons. Over the last half century many researchers, both professional and amateurs, have undertaken to build catalogues (either on paper or in computer readable form) or data bases about the range of phenomena that interest us.\n\n- As early as 1953, the U. S. Air Force entrusted the Battelle Memorial Institute with the task of analyzing the reports that Project \"Blue Book\" had accumulated. Battelle used punched cards for this work, developed a coding system, and produced extensive statistics presented in Blue Book \"Report 14.\" Unfortunately this work was not pursued and the cards were not kept.\n\n- Following the Battelle study the Air Force never built a computer catalogue of Project Blue Book files, but the author and his wife compiled their own version of it using\n\nAAP Person 5\nCAPELLA Data Warehouse\npage 2"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"punched cards following a data scheme that had been first used in France in 1962 and expanded at the University of Texas and at Northwestern University in the period 1963-1967. This catalogue served as the source of a series of statistical studies that were published in several works.\n\n- Our database, which included all unidentified cases from Project Blue Book, was turned over to the Condon study at the University of Colorado in 1968 and eventually formed the basis for the catalogue (now known as UFOCAT) directed by 1843(a)(2) . This catalogue has been greatly expanded and is now maintained by the CUFOS organization 1843(a)(2) separately developed a catalogue of vehicle interference cases, and 1843(a)(2) compiled all known cases of physical traces.\n\n- In 1968 the author compiled and published the Magonia catalogue, a list of over 700 close encounter cases (landings) reported between 1868 and 1968.\n\n- Other groups, such as MUFON, have started to compile their own computer files, and AAP Person 8 assembled a catalogue of physiological effects.\n\n- In the 1980s an independent researcher 1843(a)(2) developed a catalogue called UNICAT in collaboration with 1843(a)(2)\n\nSeveral independent projects have been implemented around the world since that time.\n\n- In the United States 1843(a)(2) a private researcher working alone, developed a popular scheme to be run on PC platforms under DOS. His catalogue eventually reached almost 20,000 entries.\n\n- In France the GEPAN (now GEiPAN) group under the CNES, implemented an ACCESS database available to a \"College of Experts\" under password access control on the Internet. The system maintains the full text of over 3,000 official reports to the French Gendarmerie, in the form of scanned images. It is embedded in an online collaboration system that gives experts access to maps, Google Earth views, photographs and videos. Note that both the GEiPAN database and UFOCAT treat every report of a given case as a separate entry (if five witnesses in separate locations report sighting the same object, there are five entries in the file), while other catalogues, like the Hatch catalogue, give a single entry per sighting.\n\n- Also in France a database of pilot sightings has been built by 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) The file uses EXCEL and a set of special codes to facilitate retrieval. Every case has been scrupulously re-analyzed and transcribed. A larger set of pilot data, as\n\nAAP Person 5\nCAPELLA Data Warehouse\npage 3"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"well as specific investigation files, are maintained by the NARCAP group under [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2)\n\nIn recent years, easy access to personal computers and the Internet has made it much easier for interested groups to start their own files. There are at least 30 active catalogues at various points of development, with obvious overlap and widely-varying standards. Special catalogues exist for material trace analysis, abduction claims, ancient sightings, and also for particular countries or regions. Several groups are active through closed Internet conferences and have begun to develop and exchange information through wikis in various languages. Furthermore, the range of available data sources has been expanded as countries like the U.K. and Spain followed the example of the U.S. Project Blue Book in releasing their declassified files, although not in an organized, structured computer-readable format.\n\nLack of data validation and lack of standards has impeded progress among the researchers responsible for these databases. It is natural for people who have recently become aware of the field to launch into their own implementation of a file of selected cases in the hope of rapidly \"solving\" some of the problems raised by this puzzling phenomenon. Unfortunately, they rarely have the financial wherewithal or professional staff necessary to conduct field investigations or even elementary checks on the validity of the information they collect.\n\nAs time goes on, unfortunately, this reinventing of the wheel fails to generate new results. Every group has implemented its own way of indexing, which makes it impractical, if not impossible, to exchange data. Furthermore, these groups have often used software techniques that were overly complex and hindered research and ease of access instead of promoting it: These catalogues rely on ambitious coding systems that demand large editing and updating efforts. As the implementers get older and are constrained by family or professional requirements they tend to move on and lose interest, and the files get abandoned for lack of trained staff to maintain the overall structure.\n\n1. Implementation requirements\n\nThe new system to be developed needs (1) to support a family of catalogues of observations of unusual aerial phenomena whose nature or behavior suggest the presence of an unrecognized threat, (2) to be up and running within a short time, (3) to extend the search for such data to as many relevant regions of the world as possible to find out what knowledgeable researchers or authorities in those regions possess about such phenomena and (4) to allow sophisticated analyses and datamining to improve our own understanding of the extent, structure, and frequency of such events, as well as their potential correlation to known physical, environmental, biological or socio-political factors.\n\nThe project should avoid the major pitfalls identified above. It should not require any special hardware or network scheme. It has to serve a closed community of physicists and analysts\n\nAAP Person 5\nCAPELLA Data Warehouse\npage 4"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"with the need to test certain theories (and counter-theories) about the nature of the phenomena involved. Therefore the work cannot be limited to data acquisition, indexing and storage but extends to the essential tasks of dynamic data validation and of providing the ability for users in the project environment to apply their own interactive screens against the data.\nThe project should also be of service in contacting experts in other countries to validate certain findings from our teams and \"drill down\" deeper into certain hypotheses, archives or interesting sites around the world. Therefore it should be accessible anywhere through the Internet (under password protection when applicable).\n\nThe software should make it easy to convert existing data into a single standard structure, to search for specific natural language expressions or keywords, to sort according to specific criteria and to support statistical tables and graphs.\n\nThe system also must empower a community of researchers to propose and test their own hypotheses. Such testing is not possible today: Although many interesting theories have been advanced, they are limited by the poor selection of physical and social data available to us. The phenomenon is so diverse that any theory of it can be proven, provided one is free to select the \"right\" observations -- and ignore the rest! This is not good science, but in the absence of reliable data bases this selection bias is unavoidable. The large, scientifically-based effort that is contemplated here cannot afford to repeat the mistakes that, unfortunately, characterize the field.\n\nIn summary, in order to accomplish all this, the system has to be portable, frugal, easily implemented on various computer platforms, without the need for a dedicated system team for maintenance or special programming.\n\n2. Recommended platform(s) and structure\n\nGiven the variety of data sources we do not believe it is practical to design a single, massive chronological catalogue for sightings of unidentified phenomena. Nor is it practical to merge existing databases together since every one of them has its own social, demographic and cultural bias, and serves its own community and type of research (e.g., on pilot cases, on trace analysis, on vehicle interference, etc.) Instead we propose a data warehousing system that supersedes the individual databases, using a standard structure and coding system over the set of files.\n\nIn contrast to the patchwork of databases mentioned above, we propose to assemble a small specialized team and to train its members in data acquisition, data validation and quality control, using only standard, commercially-available software for storage and analysis as first step to reach rapid implementation.\n\nWe believe that this can be accomplished using a standard Microsoft package such as EXCEL, which is widely available (even on Apple computers) and benefits from a large\nAAP Person 5\nCAPELLA Data Warehouse\npage 5"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"population already trained in its use. Although EXCEL is not a database system, it has some advantages over ACCESS or other software in our case because it makes it very easy to find, sort, replace and tabulate significant amounts of data among a set of flat files.\n\nWe have mentioned above that many private efforts in this field have suffered from over-ambitious schemes and coding systems that were too complex. They also contain an\n\nDATA WAREHOUSE\nCatalog 1 Catalog 2 Catalog3 Links Photographs Radar data Recordings Videos Internal Data bases Maps Web Catalog 4 Catalog 5 Catalog 6 Satellite views\n\nFigure 1: Data Warehouse concept\n\nembedded bias as a consequence of the beliefs of those compiling the data, usually under the (unstated) assumption that all cases involve spacecraft from extraterrestrial origin, to the exclusion of any other hypothesis. In the three appendices below we propose a series of simple conventions that minimize such bias and can be applied widely across the various datasets.\n\nIt should be noted that the total number of available cases that have given rise to sighting reports is estimated to number only about 100,000. Even if we double or triple this number,\nAAP Person 5\nCAPELLA Data Warehouse\npage 6"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the resulting file is a small one by the standards of modern databases, and it does not require a sophisticated software system for editing and searching.\n\nThis framework, in our estimation, will be useful in supporting the various projects contemplated by BAASS over the first two years. When the size and quality of the available files reaches maturity, the project may wish to revisit the implementation scheme and extend it through a more sophisticated collaboration system that would integrate instant messaging and electronic mail as part of its structure. Another useful extension of CAPELLA would be the implementation of an artificial intelligence screening program (using a rules-based engine) that would simplify the work of the analysts and prioritize assignments to field investigation teams. However, such undertakings are not needed at the beginning and would only distract the staff from the immediate practical objectives of the project. It would require the addition of computer resources and personnel that are not needed in the initial stages.\n\n3. Priorities in data capture\n\nThe most direct way to test the proposed system is to implement it using already-available data such as the NIDS catalogue, developed in the 1990s by [REDACTED] and their colleagues in Las Vegas. Appendix C contains an example of such implementation. Since the original data is still available, converting it into the proposed format could be a straightforward way to train the new staff and test the system.\n\nAnother effort that could be started immediately involves the capture of new information in raw form. For instance the project could decide that, starting on January 1st, 2009, all cases coming to the knowledge of BAASS would be recorded in the new format by a staff person dedicated to this task. This person (a data analyst) would continue to maintain paper files and folders (to keep newspaper articles, photographs etc.) but would also enter the highlights of the case into a CAPELLA file.\n\nThese two efforts assume that a basic computer facility will be in place at BAASS. It is expected that it will use the same secure servers already installed for other user groups, and would take advantage of network-attached storage for back-up, etc. thus minimizing initial expense. The data project itself does not require an elevated system of security as long as access can be controlled by the database administrator.\n\nIn connection with the building of the full data warehouse, a separate effort needs to be initiated towards an extensive literature review, with books and reports available in the major languages. Internet links to selected remote experts need to be in place to facilitate quality assurance, consistency of data and access to photographs, videos and other items of interest.\nAAP Person 5\nCAPELLA Data Warehouse\npage 7"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4. Access to Foreign and Private Catalogues\n\nApart from capturing new data and converting the existing NIDS files, there is a need for integrating as many of the available catalogues as possible under the CAPELLA framework. Some of these files are publicly available, or are likely to be made available by authors interested in collaborating with BAASS, but other catalogues are jealously guarded or covered by intellectual property agreements restricting their use. In such cases it will be necessary to review the legal rules governing access and data conversion. These catalogues usually contain information obtained from published sources and cannot claim ownership of each case, only its representation in a computer format. To the extent that the same information can be converted by BAASS into a new format, and is not used in any commercial operation, any claims restricting the use of such data is debatable. This question should be examined on a case-by-case basis with the owners of the catalogues.\n\nA major decision to be made by BAASS concerns the external visibility of the CAPELLA effort. While it is entirely conceivable to keep it as an in-house effort, if only to prevent leaks of private information such as the names of witnesses or the conclusions reached by BAASS about certain cases, one can also argue for releasing the data structure used by CAPELLA and inviting other groups to use it in their own work. (Similarly our system of codification and reliability indicators was published in several languages years ago, and the [REDACTED] model in six layers has also been widely reviewed and translated). It would be a service to the field in general to publish our standards and to stimulate others to bring data to the surface in a format that was easily usable by everyone.\n\nIn connection with this phase of the work we would undertake two trips to present the project and its methods to knowledgeable researchers with their own databases in Western Europe, with initial emphasis on France, Switzerland, Spain and Italy where such catalogues are known to exist. This could later be extended to Scandinavia, Germany, Russia and the U.K. and (in a later stage) to other continents. We would expect the CAPELLA project to facilitate access to and serious discussion with responsible managers at the level of industry and foreign governments.\n\n5. Personnel\n\nIn the above presentation we have identified three important roles, namely:\n\n(i) A database administrator whose job is to decide which catalogues need to be integrated into the data warehousing structure, to maintain the consistency of the information, to insure the security and integrity of the files, to verify that regular backups are properly executed and kept, and to make the information easily accessible by the user community, including over the Internet. This person also needs to be in charge of access priorities, permissions and passwords. He or she will be expected to have a sound background in data processing with knowledge of networking standards and notions of programming, but he or she does not need to be a\nAAP Person 5\nCAPELLA Data Warehouse\npage 8"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"systems expert or computer scientist. Experience in serving a diverse community (such as a campus or multi-site company such as a bank) would be most useful.\n\n(ii) A data analyst who captures incoming data and reduces it intelligently to summary text. This person will need to interview witnesses on the phone and to interface with authors of external catalogues. He or she will need to be neat, very well organized, able to maintain a paper-based filing system as a back-up. General knowledge of standards for maps, weather reports and military and civilian aviation systems will be useful. This person could come from the military or from a major company, possibly as administrative assistant to an international manager.\n\nSoon after the start of implementation we need to add:\n\n(iii) A quality control coordinator who can challenge the information in the file, verify sources and codes, and check that all available information has been captured. This person should be an independent thinker with a good eye for noticing mistakes and inconsistencies. He or she could come from many backgrounds, such as copy-editing, paralegal, or technical work where close inspection is mandatory. Most importantly, this person must not report to others in the data warehouse team and must be protected from criticism when challenging the integrity of the data in the files.\n\nIn the second year the project needs to be completed with the addition of\n\n(iv) A statistician in charge of pattern analysis, data extraction for specific studies and reports, and advanced datamining. This person should have at least an M.S. degree in statistics and practical experience with hard field data (as opposed to economics, marketing or astronomy). Experience in geology, ecology, medicine (epidemiology) or other field involving sparse data sets with high variability will be helpful.\n\n(v) A second data analyst specialized in the large extant literature of aerial phenomena. This person would review the books and reports compiled over the last 50 years, including files released by various governments (the U.K., Spain, France and others) in order to improve the quality and consistency of the CAPELLA files. This person must have knowledge of foreign languages such as French and Spanish in addition to English. His or her background could be in library science, indexing or publishing, with a keen interest in literature research and impeccable mastery of reference systems and international library search techniques.\n\nAs a team the members of this group should be encouraged to review the cases on file and critique them, looking for missing data elements or inconsistencies in the information. In this author's experience, such mistakes are frequent and they naturally pollute any statistical result or physical theory developed on the basis of the system. Such collective review sessions would be the best training process for the group and would enhance its contribution to BAASS as a whole.\n\nWhether or not members of this group should be cleared is open to question. Most of the information on file will be from open sources and only sensitive in terms of individual\nAAP Person 5\nCAPELLA Data Warehouse\npage 9"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"privacy, unless BAASS has special access to recent military data. It would also be useful to setup a policy on foreign access. There are centers of excellence in this field outside the United States, notably in France and Spain. Establishing a channel of collaboration with the individuals there could be highly beneficial to BAASS, if it is consistent with the group's security requirements.\n\n6. Budget estimates\n\nAt this point we can only give a rough estimate (+ or – 30%) of the expense involved. The following assumes that the team uses an already-established, secure system of servers internal to BAASS, professionally-maintained. It also assumes that offices and basic furniture are already in place.\n\nFirst Year\n\nThree (3) persons at $120,000 fully-loaded average salary $ 360,000\nComputer equipment: 5 desktop computers + 5 laptops ... $ 40,000\nSoftware packages ... $ 5,000\nData acquisition (internal) ... $ 20,000\nCommunications, local travel, meetings ... $ 70,000\nFiling systems, supplies, projection system, media ... $ 15,000\nExternal contracts for information gathering ... $ 100,000\n$ 610,000\n\nSecond Year\n\nFive (5) persons at $120,000 fully-loaded average salary $ 600,000\nComputer hardware/software updates ... $ 10,000\nCommunications, travel, meetings ... $ 80,000\nDatamining and analysis software ... $ 20,000\nData acquisition (internal) ... $ 20,000\nExternal contracts for information gathering ... $ 100,000\n$ 830,000\n\nCAPELLA Data Warehouse page 10"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix A\n\nA System of Classification and Reliability Indicators for the Analysis of the Behavior of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena\n\nAAP Person 5\n\nWhen faced with hundreds or even thousands of reports of unusual aerial phenomena, no serious researcher can undertake any study or hazard any hypothesis before analyzing the patterns buried in the reports. These patterns only reveal themselves when the witnesses' accounts are classified into major categories whose prevalence and recurrence can then be computed. This is a time-consuming task that demands a great deal of rigor, which explains why so few research organizations have done it consistently. In our own work, we have used such classification systems for many years, in the context of very different data sets. We have learned from early mistakes, and this effort has led us to propose the current scheme based on the reported behavior of the phenomenon under observation. The purpose of this paper is to clarify the system and its practical use.\n\nBackground\n\nAny classification system for anomalous reports needs to start from the observed behavior of the phenomenon rather than any subjective feature special to the observer. At the same time, the classification system must be able to support the testing of hypotheses by researchers coming from \"skeptical\" as well as \"proponent\" positions with respect to popular interpretations of the phenomena in question. And it must not presuppose any particular theory.\n\nTo my knowledge, the first classification system of this type that was applied to unidentified aerial phenomena grew out of my work in 1961 and 1962 with 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) in Paris. I proposed to separate the massive collections of French sightings – notably those from the 1954 wave – into four major categories. Briefly summarized, they encompassed the following:\n\nAppendix A page 1"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Type I, which was further divided into three subgroups, gathered all the \"landing\" reports that [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) would later call \"close encounters.\" It may be hard for the modern reader to realize that until the late Sixties, American ufology did not admit that such reports existed. Among the major civilian organizations, only APRO, headed up by [REDACTED] and 1843(a)(2) recognized their significance. The Air Force's Project Blue Book automatically sent landing reports into the psychological file.\n\nType II reports were observations of the \"cloud cigars\" so prevalent in Europe in 1954, and whose apparent role in the development of major waves had been pointed out by 1843(a)(2) (+). Such reports became rare in the following years, and there is no longer a justification for this category.\n\nType III reports involved objects that exhibited a discontinuity in their trajectory; either they stopped and hovered, or they came towards the ground with a falling leaf motion before resuming their flight, or they performed some other maneuver that identified a specific point in space and time. This was important for us at the time because we were compiling a catalogue with longitudes and latitudes, recorded with as much precision as possible.\n\nType IV, by contrast, gathered all cases of objects in uninterrupted flight. This classification served its purpose for many years. It enabled us to uncover specific time and space patterns for various types of behavior, notably the \"law of the times\" for landing reports.\n\n1843(a)(2) classification\n\nIn 1972, on the basis of the work we had done together since the mid-sixties [REDACTED] built upon my earlier classification when he proposed (*) to divide all reports into two groups: the short-range sightings which corresponded to my \"Type I\" and which he called Close Encounters\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\nAppendix A page 2"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(a term later immortalized by 1843(a)(2) ); and the objects observed \"at some distance,\" which he further divided into three categories:\n\nNL for Nocturnal Lights\nDD for Daylight Disks\nRV for Radar-visual\n\n1843(a)(2) was well aware that these divisions were arbitrary, and he remarked himself that the categories \"may not be mutually exclusive.\" The major contribution of 1843(a)(2) classification was the clarity with which \"landings\" were now defined:\n\nCE1 was the class of objects seen on the ground or close to the ground\nCE2 was the class of cases where physical effects or traces were reported\nCE3 was the class of reports where \"occupants\" or \"entities\" were present, a category from which he excluded claims of repeated contact.\n\nThese definitions have stood the test of time. In recent years a new category has been invented. Called CE4, it encompasses the abduction reports in which the witness claims not only to have seen occupants but to have extensively interacted with them inside their vehicle or craft. Rather than taking an abduction claim as our reference, we prefer to use the term \"reality transformation.\"\n\nSerious complications arise, however, when one tries to use 1843(a)(2) categories of nocturnal lights, daylight disks and radar-visual cases, especially when the screening process works from a computerized database, as it needs to do in any sophisticated effort to attack the problem. Not only do these categories overlap (a \"disk\" may be seen in daylight and also tracked on radar, for instance) but many reports cannot be placed into any of these classes: What happens if an object is seen at night, but is not a light? Or when an object seen in daylight is not shaped like a disk? What about reports of objects seen at dusk or dawn?\n\nAppendix A page 3"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The work we have done in recent years with four parallel computer catalogues has led us to suggest a practical solution to the problem.\n\nA Classification System based on the Behavior of the Phenomenon\n\nThe major flaw in previous classification systems is that they take as their basis the position of the observer, which is arbitrary and changing, rather than the reported behavior of the phenomenon from which one could draw important conclusions in terms of patterns. In other words, it may be interesting to know that a particular witness described a disk while another saw a triangle or a square, but this is a purely subjective item that is a function of the percipient, not a behavioral attribute of the phenomenon: one person's \"disk\" is another person's \"ball of light.\" It is more relevant to know such stable facts as whether or not the object presented a discontinuity in flight or came close to the ground, items for which there is more consistent agreement.\n\nAnother flaw in existing systems is that they are too complicated and require constant reference to codebooks with overly-detailed definitions that are time consuming and error-prone. In order to encompass the full range of phenomena one finds in the reports from witnesses, it is important to acknowledge that what most people call \"UFOs\" are related in significant ways to other anomalies. It is the rule, rather than the exception, to find the observation of a flying object preceded or followed by other unusual phenomena. For that reason, I find it useful to begin with a classification of Anomalies that parallels 1843(a)(2) close encounter designations:\n\nAN1 events are anomalies like amorphous lights or unexplained explosions in the sky, that do not have lasting physical effects.\nAN2 reports involve lasting physical effects, such as poltergeist phenomena, anomalous photographs, flattened grass or \"apports.\"\nAN3 cases are anomalies with associated entities. This could involve reports of ghosts and instances of crytozoology, or even \"spirits.\"\nAN4 designates those anomalous reports in which witnesses describe personal interaction with entities in the reality of the entities themselves. This includes near-death experiences, claims of religious visions and some cases of out-of-body experiences.\n\nAAP Person 5 Appendix A page 4"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Finally, we place under AN5 the cases in which anomalous injuries or deaths are reported, such as unexplained wounds or spontaneous combustion. Claims of permanent healings would also fit within this category.\n\nWe now come to the UFO reports themselves, which we will divide, following 1843(a)(2) into close encounters and distant sightings.\n\nWe see no reason to change anything to the classification of close encounters that is in current use, from CE1 to CE4, although 1843(a)(2) was not responsible for creating the CE4 category and was not especially happy with this extension of his work. In recent years the need has arisen for a new category, CE5, which encompasses cases of close encounters in which the witnesses have suffered permanent injury or other physiological or pathological effects.\n\nNaturally, in introducing these classes of items, we make no assumption regarding the reality of the phenomenon as described by the witnesses, and we do not presuppose any physical explanation.\n\nThe distant sightings will be classified according to the apparent behavior of the object under two general categories, namely MA for \"maneuver\" and FB for \"flyby.\" Within these categories, the sub-definitions follow those of close encounters.\n\nManeuvers\n\nMA1 gathers those observations that involve an object with a discontinuous trajectory such as a drop, a maneuver, a hovering stop, or a loop.\nMA2 includes those cases that give rise to physical effects in addition to a discontinuity in trajectory. For instance, an official French report described an object that hovered close to a town's photocell, triggering an extinction of the street lighting system.\nMA3 contains the cases of objects with discontinuous trajectories when beings are observed on board.\n\nAppendix A page 5"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MA4 covers instances of maneuvers accompanied by a sense of transformation of reality for the percipient.\nMA5 involves reports of permanent injury or death related to a maneuvering object in the sky.\n\nFlybys\n\nThe classification continues with the \"Flyby\" cases:\n\nFB1 is a simple sighting of an unexplained object \"flying by\" in the sky without discontinuity. It is the most-frequently reported category.\nFB2 involves cases of flyby with physical evidence, such as a recorded sound or radar tracking.\nFB3 gathers cases of flyby where report of an object is accompanied by the observation of beings on board. Although rare, this type of sighting is occasionally reported.\nFB4 represents a flyby in connection with which the witness claims he or she has undergone a transformation of reality.\nFB5 has to do with cases where witnesses of a flyby suffer serious injuries, as in the well-documented \"Cash-Landrum\" medical incident near Houston, Texas, where two women and a boy were hurt as an unexplained, very bright object flew above them without stopping.\n\nThese four major categories, with their five variants, define a very simple system of 20 codes that are easy to remember and to handle statistically since very little overlap can occur among the categories. An additional benefit of a behavior-based classification system for the analyst is found in the fact that certain hypotheses to explain the observations are specific to each category. For instance, FB events should be examined for explanations involving meteors or airplanes, which are unlikely to apply to CE cases.\n\nThe SVP Credibility Rating\n\nNo classification system is complete without a way of assigning credibility or \"weight\" to an observation. While such a procedure is an integral part of any intelligence evaluation, UFO\n\nAppendix A page 6"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"researchers have rarely applied it in support of their work. (A notable exception is the \"quality index\" proposed by Spanish researchers 1843(a)(2) and 1843 (a)(2) but it may be too detailed for practical use on large databases.)\n\nThe system needs to be simple enough to be applied quickly, and with enough mnemonic value to insure it does not require constant reference to a thick codebook.\n\nIn our own work we now use a simple, three-digit code to indicate the weight of a UFO report. Each of the three digits has a value from zero to four, as follows:\n\nThe first digit, \"S\" indicates the reliability of the source:\n\n0 is used for an unknown source, or an unreliable source\n1 is for a report attributed to a source of unknown reliability\n2 is from a credible source, second hand\n3 is from a credible source, first hand\n4 is a firsthand personal interview with the witness, by a source of proven reliability\n\nThe second digit, \"V\" indicates whether or not a site visit took place:\n0 is used when there was no site visit, or the answer is unknown\n1 indicates a visit by a casual person unfamiliar with such phenomena\n2 flags a site visit by a personal familiar with the range of phenomena\n3 is a site visit by a reliable investigator with some experience\n4 indicates a site visit by a skilled analyst\n\nThe third digit, \"P\" indicates the probability of natural explanations:\n0 is used when the data is consistent with one or more natural causes\n1 means that a natural explanation only requires slight alteration of the data\n2 means that a natural explanation would demand gross alteration of one parameter\n3 means that a natural explanation demands gross alteration of several parameters\n4 means that no natural explanation is possible, given the evidence\n\nAppendix A page 7"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Thus a rating of 222 or better (meaning that each of the three digits is 2 or higher) indicates events reported through a reliable source, in which a site visit has been made, and where a natural explanation would require the gross alteration of at least one parameter.\n\nEquipped with this reliability code and the classification described above, it is possible to start making sense of the patterns extracted from the mass of unusual aerial phenomena reports.\nThis system has been used by several studies, notably by CUFOS in their UFOCAT catalogue, by the National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS) in its private database, and by the French study of pilot sightings conducted by 1843(a)(2) in connection with the GEIPAN (Groupe d'Etudes et d'Information sur les Phénomènes Aériens Non-identifiés) and the CNES in Paris.\nThus it is becoming possible to compare statistical data in cross-indexing among several databases, a significant first step towards international cooperation in the study of this puzzling phenomenon.\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\nAppendix A page 8"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix B\n\nA six-layer model for Anomalous Phenomena: Incommensurability, Orthodoxy and the Physics of Consciousness\n\nAAP Person 5 and AAP Person 58\n\nAbstract\n\nThe main argument presented in this paper is that the continuing study of unidentified aerial phenomena (\"UAP\") may offer an existence theorem for new models of physical reality. The current SETI paradigm and its \"assumption of mediocrity\" place restrictions on forms of non-human intelligence that may be researched. A similar bias exists in the ufologists' often-stated hypothesis that UAP, if real, must represent space visitors. Observing that both models are biased by anthropomorphism, the authors attempt to clarify the issues surrounding \"high strangeness\" observations by distinguishing six layers of information that can be derived from UAP events, namely (1) physical manifestations, (2) anti-physical effects, (3) psychological factors, (4) physiological factors, (5) psychic effects and (6) cultural effects. In a further step they propose a framework for scientific analysis of unidentified aerial phenomena that takes into account the incommensurability problem.\n\n(*) Based on a presentation at the Forum on \"Science, Religion and Consciousness\" at the University Fernando Pessoa, Porto (Portugal) 24 October 2003.\n\nPhysics of High Strangeness page 1"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The Challenge of High Strangeness\n\nThe rational study of reported cases of Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena (UAP) is currently at an impasse. This situation has as much to do with the incomplete state of our models of physical reality as it does with the complexity of the data. A primary objection to the reality of UAP events among scientists is that witnesses consistently report objects whose seemingly absurd behavior \"cannot possibly\" be related to actual phenomena, even under extreme conditions. Skeptics insist that intelligent extraterrestrial (ETI) visitors simply would not perpetrate such antics as are reported in the literature. This argument can be criticized as an anthropocentric, self-selected observation resulting from our own limited viewpoint as 21st century Homo Sapiens trying to draw conclusions about the nature of the universe. Nonetheless, the high strangeness of many reports must be acknowledged.\n\nAdvocates of UAP reality, on the other hand, generally claim that the Extra-Terrestrial Hypothesis (ETH) centered on interstellar travelers from extrasolar systems visiting the Earth is the most likely explanation for the objects and the entities associated with them. This argument, too, can be challenged on the basis of the witnesses' own testimony: Ufologists have consistently ignored or minimized reports of seemingly absurd UAP behaviors that contradict the ETH, by selectively extracting data that best fits their agenda or version of the ETH. Thus the ETH, just like the skeptical argument, is based on anthropocentric self-selection [AAP Person 5] Here we are witnessing an interesting overlap between the SETI and UAP paradigms: each excludes consideration of the other when laying claim to the legitimate search for and contact with potential non-human intelligence.\n\nIn the view of the authors, current hypotheses are not strange enough to explain the facts of the phenomenon, and the debate suffers from a lack of scientific information. Indeed, from the viewpoint of modern physics, our Cosmic Neighborhood could encompass other (parallel) universes, extra spatial dimensions and other time-like dimensions beyond the common 4-dimensional spacetime we recognize, and such aspects could lead to rational explanations for apparently \"incomprehensible\" behaviors on the part of visitors to our perceived continuum. As it attempts to reconcile theory with observed properties of elementary particles and with discoveries at the frontiers of cosmology, modern physics suggests that mankind has not yet discovered all of the universe's facets, and we must propose new theories and experiments in"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"order to explore these undiscovered facets. This is why continuing study of reported UAP events is important: It may provide us with an existence theorem for new models of physical reality.\n\nMuch of the recent progress in cosmological concepts is directly applicable to the UAP problem: Traversable wormholes (3-dimensional hypersurface tunnels) have now been derived from Einstein's General Theory of Relativity [1843(a)(2)] In particular, it has been shown that Einstein's General Theory of Relativity does not in any way constrain spacetime topology, which allows for wormholes to provide traversable connections between regions within two separate universes or between remote regions and/or times within the same universe. Mathematically it can also be shown that higher-dimensional wormholes can provide hypersurface connections between multidimensional spaces [1843(a)(2)] Recent quantum gravity programs have explored this property in superstring theory, along with proposals to theoretically and experimentally examine macroscopic-scale extra-dimensional spaces [1843(a)(2)] Thus it is now widely acknowledged that the nature of our universe is far more complex than observations based on anthropocentric self-selection portend. In this respect, ufologists and SETI researchers appear to be fighting a rear-guard battle. Both suffer from identical limitations in the worldview they bring to their own domains, and to their antagonism.\n\nAnthropocentric Bias in the SETI and UAP Paradigms\n\nThe anthropocentric biases in the SETI program are evident in the present search paradigm. Historically the founders of SETI defined the search paradigm from a series of complex arguments and assumptions that led to the creation of a \"SETI orthodox view\" of interstellar communication while applying the \"assumption of mediocrity\" to our known present technological capabilities [1843(a)(2)]\nThis approach was predicated on the notion that it was economically cheaper and technologically easier to generate and receive radio-wave photons for interstellar signaling rather than engage manned interstellar travel or robotic probes. Indeed the latter was considered economically and technologically improbable within the \"SETI orthodox view\". This has led to"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"four decades of the SETI program following a dominantly radio/microwave (RMW) oriented search scheme.\n\nGiven the failure of this initial approach, in the last two decades alternative SETI programs have been proposed. They exploit coherent laser optical/IR (COSETI), holographic signals and worldwide web detection schemes, as well as ideas to search for ETI artifacts (SETA, or astroarchaeology) and visiting probes (SETV, V=visitation) in the solar system or on Earth [1843(a)(2)]\n\nThere are new proposed search schemes based on the application of high-energy (particle) physics detection, such as modulated neutrino beams, X-rays, gamma rays, and cosmic rays, etc. Other search schemes propose looking for artificially generated excess radiation emissions from astronomical bodies in space or for high-energy radiation starship exhaust trails [1843(a)(2)] [1843(a)(2)]\n\nThese new programs have been at odds with members of the dominant RMW-SETI program, possibly because of concern over having to share scarce resources or compete with other non-RMW programs for the very limited private funding available for overall SETI research.\n\nThe community of UAP researchers is also driven by its own orthodoxy, which is only violated at great personal risk to the critic who proposes a deviant view, and by its own \"principle of mediocrity\" when attempting to categorize and hypothesize explanations for the phenomenon. For this reason we prefer to use the term \"UAP\" rather than the more common \"UFO\", which is immediately associated with the idea of space visitors in the mind of the public and media. Yet a bridge could be formed between the disparate SETI and UFOlogy communities if both would only recognize a simple fact: No experiment can distinguish between phenomena manifested by visiting interstellar (arbitrarily advanced) ETI and intelligent entities that may exist near Earth within a parallel universe or in different dimensions, or who are (terrestrial) time travelers.\n\nEach of these interesting possibilities can be manifested via the application of the physical principle of traversable wormholes since they theoretically connect between two different universes, two remote space locations, different times and dimensions [1843(a)(2)] Traversable wormholes are but one example of new physical tools that are available or on the horizon for consideration of interuniversal, interstellar, interdimensional or chronological travel."} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This leads the present authors to speculate that a new synthesis can be found by examining the full context of the UAP phenomenon -- including its apparently \"absurd\" characteristics -- in terms of a six-layer model. The model uses the framework of the incommensurability problem and concepts borrowed from semiotics.\n\nUAP - The Need for a Unified Approach\n\nWhat we present here is a new framework for UAP analysis that takes into account the lessons from SETI. In any scientific question it must be possible to ascertain to what extent a hypothesis, when tested and proven to be true, actually \"explains\" the observed facts. In the case of UAP, however, as in physics generally, a hypothesis may well be \"proven true\" while an apparently contradictory hypothesis is also proven true. Thus the hypothesis that the phenomenon of light is caused by particles is true, but so is the opposite hypothesis that it is caused by waves. We must be prepared for the time when we will be in a position to formulate scientific hypotheses for UAP, and then we may face a similar situation.\n\nThe framework we present here is based on such an apparent contradiction, because we will argue that UAP can be thought of both as physical and as \"psychic\". We hope that it will prove stimulating as a unified approach to a puzzling phenomenon that presents both undeniable physical effects suggesting a technological device or craft and psychic effects reminiscent of the literature on poltergeists and psychokinetic phenomena. Here we use the word \"psychic\" in the sense of an interaction between physical reality and human consciousness.\n\nThe feeling of absurdity and contradiction in these two aspects is not worse than scientific puzzlement during the particle/wave or, more recently, quantum entanglement and multidimensional transport controversies. The contradiction has to do with the inadequacy of our language to grasp a phenomenon that defies our attempts at classification.\n\nThe Six Layers of UAP Analysis\n\nLet us consider the characteristics of the sightings that are not explained by trivial natural causes; we can recognize six major \"layers\" in terms of our perceptions of these characteristics,"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"as they can be extracted from earlier works about UAP phenomenology [1843(a)(2)] or from the current NIDS database.\n\nLayer I: First of all is the physical layer, evident in most accounts describing an object that:\n\n> occupies a position in space, consistent with geometry\n> moves as time passes\n> interacts with the environment through thermal effects\n> exhibits light absorption and emission from which power output estimates can be derived\n> produces turbulence\n> when landed, leaves indentations and burns from which mass and energy figures can be derived\n> gives rise to photographic images\n> leaves material residue consistent with Earth chemistry\n> gives rise to electric, magnetic and gravitational disturbances\n\nThus UAP, in a basic physical sense, are consistent with a technology centered on a craft that appears to be using a revolutionary propulsion system.\n\nLayer II: For lack of an adequate term we will call the second layer anti-physical. The variables are the same as those in the previous category but they form patterns that conflict with those predicted by modern physics: Objects are described as physical and material but they are also described as:\n\n> sinking into the ground\n> shrinking in size, growing larger, or changing shape on the spot\n> becoming fuzzy and transparent on the spot\n> dividing into two or more craft, several of them merging into one object at slow speed\n> disappearing at one point and appearing elsewhere instantaneously\n> remaining observable visually while not detected by radar\n> producing missing time or time dilatation\n> producing topological inversion or space dilatation (object was estimated to be of small exterior size/volume, but witness(s) saw a huge interior many times the exterior size)\n> appearing as balls of colored, intensely bright light under intelligent control"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Layer III: The third layer has to do with the psychology of the witnesses and the social conditions that surround them. Human observers tend to see UAP while in their normal environment and in normal social groupings. They perceive the objects as non-conventional but they try to explain them away as common occurrences, until faced with the inescapable conclusion that the object is truly unknown.\n\nLayer IV: Physiological reactions are another significant layer of information. The phenomenon is reported to cause\n\n➢ sounds (beeping, buzzing, humming, sharp/piercing whistling, swooshing/air rushing, loud/deafening roaring, sound of a storm, etc.)\n➢ vibrations\n➢ burns\n➢ partial paralysis\n➢ extreme heat or cold sensation\n➢ odors (powerful, sweet or strange fragrance, rotten eggs, sulphurous, pungent, musky, etc.)\n➢ metallic taste\n➢ pricklings\n➢ temporary blindness when exposed to the objects' light\n➢ nausea\n➢ bloody nose and/or ears; severe headache\n➢ difficulty in breathing\n➢ loss of volition\n➢ drowsiness in the days following a close encounter\n\nLayer V: The fifth category of effects can only be labeled psychic because it involves a class of phenomena commonly found in the literature of parapsychology, such as\n\n➢ impressions of communication without a direct sensory channel\n➢ poltergeist phenomena: motions and sounds without a specific cause, outside the observed presence of a UAP\n➢ levitation of the witness or of objects and animals in the vicinity\n➢ maneuvers of a UAP appearing to anticipate the witness' thoughts\n➢ premonitory dreams or visions\n➢ personality changes promoting unusual abilities in the witness\n➢ healing\n\nAAP Person 5 and AAP Person 58 Physics of High Strangeness page 7"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Layer VI: The sixth category could be called cultural. It is concerned with society's reactions to the reports, the way in which secondary effects (hoaxes, fiction and science-fiction imagery, scientific theories, cover-up or exposure, media censorship or publicity, sensationalism, etc.) become generated, and the attitude of members of a given culture towards the concepts that UAP observations appear to challenge. The greatest impact of the phenomenon has been on general acceptance of the idea of life in space and a more limited, but potentially very significant, change in the popular concept of non-human intelligence.\n\nPossible Nature of UAP Technology\n\nA framework for scientific hypothesis on the UAP observations can be built on the identification (admittedly very coarse) of the six major layers of UAP effects. If we must formulate a view of the problem in a single statement at this point, that statement will be:\n\nEverything works as if UAPs were the product of a technology that integrates physical and psychic phenomena and primarily affects cultural variables in our society through manipulation of physiological and psychological parameters in the witnesses.\n\nThis single statement can be developed as follows:\n\na) The phenomenon is the product of a technology. During the observation, the UAP is a real, physical, material object. However, it appears to use either very clever deception or very advanced physical principles, resulting in the effects we have called \"anti-physical\", which must eventually be reconciled with the laws of physics.\n\nb) The technology triggers psychic effects either purposely or as a side effect of its manifestations. These consciousness phenomena are now too common to be ignored or\n\nAAP Person 5 and AAP Person 58 Physics of High Strangeness page 8"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"relegated to the category of exaggerated or ill-observed facts. All of us who have investigated close-range sightings have become familiar with these effects.\nc) The purpose of the technology may be cultural manipulation - possibly but not necessarily under control of a form of non-human intelligence - in which case the physiological and psychological effects are a means to that end. But the parapsychologist with a Jungian framework may argue that the human collective unconscious is also a potential source of such effects - without the need to invoke alien intervention.\n\nThe Incommensurability Problem\n\nThe above considerations bring us back to a discussion of the SETI paradigm. Many SETI workers now realize that we cannot be so presumptuous as to assume that ET cultures, possessing a cognitive mismatch with us, will behave as humans do in the 21st century. Specifically, there is no reason to restrict them to radio-based communications technology and to exclude travel through interstellar space or the sending of automated probes. Thus the SETV/SETA program overlaps ETH-based UFOlogy. Both are dedicated to detecting non-human intelligence on or near the Earth, demonstrating a paradigm shift away from the \"SETI orthodox view\" and principle of mediocrity.\n\nThe view that ETs and humans may have such divergent ways of conceptualizing the world that there can be no mutual understanding is referred to as the \"Incommensurability Problem\" in the SETI literature [1843(a)(2)]. The cognitive mismatch or Incommensurability Problem between human and ET cultures will guarantee that the latter will develop communication techniques other than radio. ET cultures may be sending radio and optical signals to Earth now but they may also be sending signals in a variety of other forms such as holographic images, psychic or other consciousness-related signals, modulated neutrinos, gamma ray bursters, wormhole-modulated starlight caustics, signals generated by gravitational lensing techniques, modulated X-rays, quantum teleported signals, or some quantum field theoretic effect, etc. The Incommensurability Problem even applies to the problem of understanding UAP manifestations within the framework of the ETH.\n\nAt the core of the Incommensurability Problem is the view that no intelligent species can understand reality without making certain methodological choices, and that these choices may\n\nAAP Person 5 and AAP Person 58 Physics of High Strangeness page 9"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"vary from civilization to civilization [1843(a)(2)] If ETs and UAP entities have different biologies and live in considerably different environments from humans, they may well have different goals for their science, and radically different criteria for evaluating the success of their science. Their explanatory mechanisms, their predictive concerns, their modes of control over nature might all be very different, and their means of formulating models of reality should be expected to differ drastically from ours [1843(a)(2)]\n\nIn this regard, there is one additional feature that needs to be mentioned in support of alternative SETI paradigms. The SETI program's encryption/decryption emphasis on pictorial images or messages is predicated on the assumption that ETs have sight like humans vis-a-vis the \"SETI orthodox view\" [1843(a)(2)] We observe that this emphasis is not so much a reflection of the primacy of vision in humans, but rather a reflection of the philosophical assumptions about the proper means of gaining knowledge. Hence, anthropocentric self-selection becomes manifest within the SETI and UFOlogy \"orthodox view\".\n\n[1843(a)(2)] asserts that human reliance on science is based on studying visible characteristics of objects [1843(a)(2)] The belief that true knowledge must be acquired from sight originated in the 17th century. This emphasis on sight led to eliminating the other senses as potentially valuable sources of scientific information.\n\nWithout even raising the question of whether ETs or UAP entities can \"see\", we may be wise not to overestimate the importance of pictorial representations for them. The same applies for ET/UAP transmissions to us. We can see and gain knowledge by sight, but ET/UAP signals potentially bombarding the Earth could be misunderstood, unrecognized or undetected because we are not employing paradigms involving our other modalities, such as psychic functioning. Many examples of this are found in interactions between humans from different cultures [1843(a)(2)]\n\nBecause we cannot be certain of the nature of ET/UAP recipients of our deliberate messages and they cannot be certain of our nature when sending us their messages a priori, it is difficult to construct pictures that will be unambiguous. To some extent, ET/UAP viewers of our pictograms may project characteristics from their own species-specific experiences onto our messages, and we certainly project our own species-specific experiences onto their messages. The former may be the cause for the lack of detected ET signals (save for those 100+ radio and\n\nAAP Person 5 and AAP Person 58 Physics of High Strangeness page 10"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"optical signals which were not false positives but also not repeated by their source) while the latter can be the cause of the current impasse in the study of UAP phenomena.\n\nSemiotics\n\nIn his analysis of the communication problem SETI Institute psychologist [1843(a)(2)] has advocated the application of semiotics, the general theory of signs [1843(a)(2)] [1843(a)(2)] where a sign is something that represents something else, the signified. For example the words \"the coin\" might represent the object you hold in your hand.\n\nIn interstellar messages, in terms of classical information theory, there is no innate relationship between the form of the message and the content borne by the message. Once the information of the message is decided upon, an efficient means of encoding it is sought. In this approach, there is a purely arbitrary connection between content and form of the message. Semiotic-based messages have a wider range of possibilities for relating form and content.\n\nSemioticians categorize signs according to the ways that the sign and signified are related to one another. In the association between the sign \"the coin\" and its signified object, this relationship is purely arbitrary. The sign for this object could have well been \"the poofhoffer\". This is a purely conventional association. In semiotics, when the association between sign and signified is arbitrary, the sign is referred to as a symbol. With symbols, there is no intrinsic connection between the form of expression (the sign) and the content that is expressed (the signified).\n\nThere are alternatives to the arbitrary connection between sign and signified that are seen in symbols. One alternative is the icon, a sign that bears a physical resemblance to the signified. With icons, the form of the message reflects its contents. For example, the profile of the man on a modern American quarter is an icon for a specific man who was the first President of the United States. We can also represent the same man with the symbol \"George Washington\". In the former case, the image of Washington is an icon because it physically resembles the signified. Icons can also be used when the signified is less concrete. For example, the scales of justice icon represents the concept of justice because there is similarity between the sign (scales that balance two weights) and the signified (concept of justice, which involves a balance between transgression and punishment).\n\nAAP Person 5 and AAP Person 58 Physics of High Strangeness page 11"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It is also helpful to realize that icons are not specific to the visual sensory modality. It is possible to have a sign that physically resembles the signified in a nonvisual way. For example, the fly Spilomyia hamifera beats its wings at a frequency very close to the wing-beat frequency of the dangerous wasp Dolichovespula arenaria. As a result, when one of these flies is in the vicinity of a group of these wasps, the fly gains some immunity from attack by insect-eating birds. The fly's mimicry of the wasps occurs within the auditory modality. It is not attacked by would-be predators because it sounds like the wasps. In short, the fly's defense strategy is based on producing an auditory icon, in which the fly's wing-beating (the sign) physically resembles the wing-beat of the wasps (the signified) 1843(a)(2) .\nIcons could function in any sensory modality. Given that we are not sure which sensory modality will be primary for ETs/UAP, a sign for communication that is not reliant on any particular sensory modality would be preferable. In SETI/CETI, electromagnetic radiation is used as an iconic representation, allowing a direct communication of concepts (Earth chemistry, solar system organization, human DNA, math, geometry, etc.) without encoding the message into a format specific to a particular sensory modality. In using icons, the message's recipients are pointed directly toward the phenomena of interest, and not toward our models of these phenomena.\nFrom a more complete perspective, the sign and the signified are in a triadic with the interpreter of the relationship. Thus, the similarity that exists between an icon and its referent does not exist independently of the intelligence perceiving this similarity. Although in iconicity there is a natural connection between the sign and the signified, this connection cannot exist without intelligence to observe the connection.\nUltimately, the problem of iconicity is that similarity is in the eye of the beholder. And because we do not know what ETs/UAP are really like, we cannot be sure that what to us seems an obvious similarity will be seen as such by an intelligence with a different biology, culture, and history, possibly originating in a different universe. Thus, judgment of similarity is not purely objective, but is influenced by a variety of factors that impact conventions of interpretation.\nPhysics of High Strangeness page 12"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The UAP and Abduction Problem\nThe aforementioned behavior of UAP is not fundamentally absurd. This apparent absurdity is merely a reflection of the cognitive mismatch or the Incommensurability Problem that exists between humans and the phenomenon.\nIn this particular case, UAP are sending the message and we are the recipients. The message(s) they are sending to us are icons, icons fashioned by the phenomenon and sent to us via various sensory modalities. The difference between our respective cultures, biologies, sensory modalities, histories, dimensional existence, physical evolution, models of nature and science, etc. is directly responsible for our lack of understanding of the phenomenon and its message. We cannot see what UAP believe to be (iconical) similarities in the message that is intended for us. These stated differences directly impact our conventions of interpretation in such a way as to impair our recognition of the \"similarity\" between the sign and the signified contained within the icons of the UAP message, further impairing our ability to \"see and understand\" the potential message.\nThe difference between the sensory modalities of UAP entities and humans is responsible for our inability to properly detect the UAP message (icons) and correspond with them. This difference may also prevent us from correctly interpreting what their icons are if we do in fact recognize them. In this regard, recall that we will project our own species-specific experiences onto their icons (messages) thus manifesting the appearance of \"absurdity\" during the human-UAP interaction.\nUFO abduction cases may exemplify this, in the sense that the \"absurd\" activities (or scenes) concurrent with abduction events could merely be the iconical defense mechanism deployed by the UAP to protect itself from the victim/subject much like the way Spilomyia hamifera protects itself from insect eating birds by mimicry. 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) suggest that ETs/UAP visiting Earth would find it necessary to hide themselves from our detection mechanisms until they have assessed our technological layer or potential threat and hazards. They would employ an adaptive multi-layer risk program to avoid danger. Low observable stealth such as simple camouflage through mimicry, which works well in nature, may be the technique of choice for visiting UAP/ETI experienced in surveillance 1843(a)(2) Examples of mimicry techniques are UAP/ETI entering the\nPhysics of High Strangeness page 13"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"atmosphere with either the look or trajectory of a meteor or hidden within a meteor shower, behaving like dark meteors without the associated optical signature, hiding within an artificial or natural cloud or a satellite reentry, behaving as pseudo-stars sitting stationary over certain regions, or mimicking man-made aircraft's aggregate features 1843(a)(2) Another possibility is mimicry techniques employed for the manipulation of human consciousness to induce the various manifestations of \"absurd\" interactions or scenery associated with the encounter.\nConclusion\nModern engineering has made us familiar with display technologies that produce three-dimensional images with color, motion and perspective through physical devices. We speculate that UAP are analogous to these display technologies but utilize a wider range of variables to operate on the percipients and, through them, on human culture. The long time scale and the global nature of the effects make it difficult to test hypotheses involving such cultural effects.\nScience fiction has familiarized us with the concept of machines (or beings) projecting an image of themselves that systematically confuses observers. One could imagine that UAP represent physical craft equipped with the means to interact both with the surrounding atmosphere and with the senses of observers in such a way as to convey a false image of their real nature. One could argue that such an object could use microwave devices to create perceptual hallucinations in the witnesses (including messages that are heard by a single individual in a group).\nEven such a complex scheme, however, fails to explain all the reported effects and the subsequent behavior changes in close-range witnesses. We must assume something more, the triggering of deep-seated processes within their personality. The question then becomes: to what extent are these effects evidence of a purposeful action of the operators? To answer this question, and to test more fully the hypothesis that UAP phenomena are both physical and psychic in nature, we need much better investigations, a great upgrading of data quality, and a more informed analysis not only of the object being described, but of the impact of the observation on the witnesses and their social environment.\nPhysics of High Strangeness page 14"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"References\nAAP Person 58\n1843(a)(2)\nAAP Person 5\nAAP Person 5 and AAP Person 58 Physics of High Strangeness page 15"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 5\nAAP Person 5 and AAP Person 58 Physics of High Strangeness page 16"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix C\n\nData Structures and Software Platforms\nin support of Aerial Phenomena Research:\nProposed Organization, with examples\n\nAAP Person 5\nDocumatica Research, LLC\n\nThe implementation of data bases for the purpose of research poses unusual challenges for the software analyst. While an industrial database might consist of millions of items in a rapidly-changing transaction environment, the data elements are well-defined and their characteristics are fixed. For example, a database of parts for a car company will consist of elements where composition, size, weight, price and availability are known at any given time. Furthermore, a team of specialists is in charge of maintaining the database and optimizing it for specific corporate departments whose requirements have been taken into account at the time of design.\n\nThe situation is very different in research: Not all the questions to be posed can be defined at the beginning of design; new elements, or novel ways of characterizing them, may appear in the course of the project; there may be different user communities to be served; and even the nature of the phenomenon under study may be in question. The problem of unexplained aerial phenomena is of particular complexity, because the database must accommodate not only initial hypotheses or mind frames of the designers, but those of future groups of users with unpredictable requirements. Some of the users may be strong believers in a particular interpretation of the data, or they may look for certain patterns, while researchers with opposing views (or skeptics) will need to access the same data to creatively challenge their colleagues' conclusions. The design must serve all these needs.\n\nIn prior work the author and his colleagues have defined a general classification system for reports based on the observed behavior of the phenomenon. This three-digit system was adopted years ago by several catalogues, notably by NIDS in the 1990s, by UFOCAT (a catalogue of the CUFOS organization) and by 1843(a)(2) in France in support of his"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"catalogue of pilot sightings. We propose to use it as one of the elements in the present work (see definitions in Appendix A).\n\nIn the same work we also established an \"SVP\" code for reliability indicators, tracking (S) the level of the source for the data, (V) the degree to which the site was visited or inspected and (P) the probability for a conventional explanation of the reported facts. This system is also described in detail in Appendix A.\n\nThe combination of the classification system and the reliability indicators enables a given user to define his or her own \"screen\" to place over the data to select a particular sample or subset of interest, or to split a catalogue into parts to be compared statistically against one another – an operation that is usually impossible in most extant catalogues because behavior and reliability are not clearly indicated.\n\nMore recently, AAP Person 58 and the author have proposed a six-layer system for the analysis of the phenomenon. This system (given in Appendix B) separates the various elements of the witnesses' narrative into sections that are relevant to specific scientific disciplines, from physics to medicine and psychology. Accordingly, the data structure we have defined is implemented in Excel in the form of ten pages or screens, which can be consulted and searched together, locally or globally. Each page is self-contained and designed to be printed out separately if needed.\n\nScreen 1: \"When-where-what\"\n\n1. Line number\n2. Catalog entry (case) number\n3. Day (1 to 31, blank if unknown)\n4. Month (1 to 12, blank if unknown)\n5. Year (such as 1845 if A.D., or -56 if B.C.)\n6. Location (usually town name and province or country)\n7. Narrative summary of the observation in plain English\n8. Classification (such as MA1 or CE3)\n9. Time of day (local time, such as 10:34 or 21:45)\n10. Duration of the observation in minutes\n\nAppendix C page 2"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Screen 2: \"Witnesses and references\"\n\n1. Catalog entry (case) number\n2. Location (repeated from Screen 1)\n3. Witness(es)\n4. Primary source\n5. Secondary reference\n\nScreen 3: \"Quality control\"\n\n1. Catalog entry (case) number\n2. Location (repeated from Screen 1)\n3. Regional code (three letters, such as NAM for N.America, WEU for Western Europe)\n4. Country code (three letters, such as USA for the U.S., ITA for Italy)\n5. Julian date\n6. Time zone (-12 to +12, with 0 for Greenwich, positive towards the West)\n7. Local time in decimal hours (10.50 means 10h 30m)\n8. Universal time in decimal hours\n9. Degrees of longitude\n10. Minutes of longitude\n11. Longitude East or West (E or W)?\n12. Degrees of latitude\n13. Minutes of latitude\n14. Latitude North or South (N or S)?\n15. Date-time accuracy: Y or N depending on the knowledge of the year, month, date and hour\n16. Location accuracy (radius in kilometers)\n17. Reliability indicator (SVP) as defined in Appendix A\n\nScreen 4: \"Layer I: Physics\"\n\n1. Catalog entry (case) number\n2. Location (repeated from Screen 1)\n3. Weather (clear, cloudy, overcast, rain, fog, storm, thunder)\n4. Terrain (country, urban, forest, mountain, ocean, desert etc.)\n5. Apparent nature of the object (metallic, light only, fuzzy, sharp etc)\n6. Shape\n7. Estimated size in meters\n8. Presence of sound (whirring, buzzing, melodious, whistling etc)\n\nAppendix C page 3"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Screen 5: \"Layer I: Physics, continued\"\n\n1. Catalog entry (case) number\n2. Location (repeated from Screen 1)\n3. Lights, beams or other projections\n4. Electromagnetic effects\n5. Ground traces (including vegetation effects)\n6. Material sample(s)\n7. Trajectory characteristics\n8. Radar return characteristics\n9. Photographs or video ? (Y/N)\n\nScreen 6: \"Layer II: anti-physics\"\n\n1. Catalog entry (case) number\n2. Location (repeated from Screen 1)\n3. Reported patterns conflicting with conventional physics\n\nScreen 7: \"Layer III: Psychological factors\"\n\n1. Catalog entry (case) number\n2. Location (repeated from Screen 1)\n3. Witnesses reactions, including disorientation, fear or terror, bliss or ecstasy, etc.\n4. Social parameters\n\nScreen 8: \"Layer IV: physiological factors\"\n\n1. Catalog entry (case) number\n2. Location (repeated from Screen 1)\n3. Physiological effects\n4. Pathological effects\n\nAppendix C page 4"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Screen 9: \"Layer V: Psychic effects\" and \"Layer VI: Cultural effects\"\n\n1. Catalog entry (case) number\n2. Location (repeated from Screen 1)\n3. Psychic effects: reports of out-of-body experiences, associated poltergeist or other phenomena before or after the sighting\n4. Cultural effects, including religious, social or media reactions\n\nScreen 10: Hyperlinks\n\n1. Catalog entry (case) number\n2. Location (repeated from Screen 1)\n3. Web links to specific catalogues, documents, experts or special databases about the case such as photographs, videos or special websites\n4. Final comments on documentation\n\nAn example of the proposed format is given in the Exhibit below, with the first two pages from the NIDS catalogue.\n\nConclusion\n\nThe requirements of a searchable, portable, easily-accessible series of databases capturing all six layers of information about unexplained aerial phenomena can be satisfied with a comprehensive data structure using nothing more complex than Microsoft Excel. The proposed 10-page structure, which can be started with a single page and expanded later as information is reviewed or becomes available, has already been tested on several catalogues in prototype form. It will support data sorting and the production of graphs, mathematical or statistical functions, and export to more specialized studies without requiring either new training of operators or new programming.\n\nThe resulting files, in most cases, will be small enough to be transferred via e-mail attachments. They will fit on most electronic media and even on portable devices.\n\nAppendix C page 5"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Catalog Entry | WHEN? Day Month Year | WHERE? Location | WHAT? Description | Classif. | time hh:mm | dur. min.\nN-301 7 1 1946 San Rafael (Outside Movie Theater) Size:10X plane disk with hump. Weather:CLEAR, sun setting Color:light brown on top, silent FB1 19:00 1\nN-223 7 1 1948 Orville (While Walking In The Woods) Shape:disk. Weather:hot, CLEAR, beautiful Color:bright white, almost translucent CE2 3\nN-163 1 1 1950 Riverside (Over The City) Size:a little bigger than a jet. Color:silvery/ silent MA1 18:00\nN-389 15 6 1950 San Diego Size:~50+ feet Shape:saucer. Weather:CLEAR and sunny Color:pale green, metallic CE1 22:00 2\nN-260 1 3 1951 Dulce (Stinking Lake, S Of Dulce) Size:737 jetSize Shape:cigar. Weather:CLEAR, sunny Color:silver/aluminum/ silent CE1 16:00\nN-412 7 1 1952 Sierra National Forest (Signal Peak) Size:600 ft X 200 ft Shape:(1/4 pie). Weather:Sunny, CLEAR Color:shiny metallic, like mirrors MA1 14:00 20\nN-490 1 3 1952 Salton Sea (Usaf Bombing Range) Size:30 ft to 50 ft diam. Shape:saucer (similar to Arnold's?). Weather:CLEAR Color:dull aluminum MA1 12:00 7\nN-731 1 7 1952 Deming (10 Miles S) Size:40 feet Shape:Egg-shaped. Weather:Clear Color:Silver/ silent MA1 16:00 10\nN-859 7 1 1952 Mountain Home Afb Reddish-orange \"star\" zipped at incredible speeds. Weather:Clear Dusk MA1 19:00 90\nN-866 1 1 1952 Salt Lake City Size:Seemed to fill 2' windows. Shape:Round Color:Glowing silver FB1 01:00 1-2\nN-016 1 10 1953 Hanford Shape:blips circular on radar screen / silent MA1 30\nN-608 1 1 1953 Duchesne Size:dime Shape:Disk-shaped. Weather:Clear, blue sky Color:Multi-colored/ silent MA1 1-2\nN-775 7 1 1953 Cottonwood (Shasta County) Size:Larger than a fist stretched out. Weather:Clear Color:Varied/ silent MA1 18:00 0\nN-458 1 1 1954 Spokane (Near) Shape:lights in triangular formation. Weather:CLEAR night Color:blue-green/ silent MA1 01:00 30\nN-010 1 1 1955 Asugi, Japan Large light, jerky movements seen 5 minutes. Weather:CLEAR / silent MA1 4\nN-336 8 2 1955 Navarre (10 Mi Sw Of Canton, Oh) Size:looked large Shape:cigar. Weather:CLEAR night, stars Color:orange/ silent MA1 21:00 120\nN-379 1 5 1955 Riverside (From 2Nd Floor Bedroom Window Size:27'x30' in diameter. Weather:CLEAR, full moon Color:golden/ silent CE1 21:00 8\nN-653 7 1 1956 Long Beach Size:100 ftx40 ft Shape:Disk-domes. Weather:Very clear Color:black-blue,metallic/HUM FB1 3\nN-434 1 9 1957 Fargo (Main Street) size:1-1/2X moon Shape:classic saucer. Weather:CLEAR, winter night Color:white or silver/ silent FB1 15\nN-809 7 1 1957 Chimayo (County Rd. #94) Size:1/2 football field (150 yards in diameter) Shape:Disk. Weather:Clear Color:Black/grey/ FB1 05:00 5\nN-055 7 1 1958 Shreveport (West Of Red River) Shape:round like a ball. Weather:CLEAR night Color:glowed green/ silent MA1 21:00 1\nN-216 1 1 1958 Caracas Size:like Venus Shape:bright star. Weather:CLEAR skies. Color:white/ silent MA1 21:00 15\nN-326 1 9 1958 Caribbean Sea (Aboard Uss Fdr) Size:75-100' long Shape:cigar. Weather:CLEAR & warmColor:red/orange glow/ silent CE3 20:00 5\nN-168 1 5 1959 Ashford Shape:plate shaped. Weather:Clear Color:white/ silent CE1 30\nN-190 7 1 1960 Raf Kirknewton 6952 Rsm Usaf Size:like a Boeing 747. Weather:Clear Color:dark/ silent CE1 10\nN-285 1 1 1960 Alamosa (1 Mi N) Size:headlights far away Shape:round. Weather:Clear Color:red & white/ silent AN1 09:00 5\nN-749 1 1 1960 San Francisco Size:100-150 feet Shape:Disk. Weather:Clear, calm Color:Silver/ silent CE1 13:00 0\nN-217 1 7 1961 Peru; Somewhere South, High Desert Size:15 meters diam. Shape:lens (saucer). Weather:blue sky. Color:silver/mercury/ silent CE1 12:00 11\nN-460 7 1 1962 Bc Border size:8 ftdiam Shape:Saturn. Weather:CLEAR Color:completely silver metallic/ silent CE1 12:00 0\nN-416 19 8 1963 Pitman (Open Church Field, Houses Around) size:each 25-30 ft in diameter Shape:circular lights. Weather:Clear Color:solid red/ silent CE1 02:00 10\nN-662 1 9 1963 Kincheloe Afb-B52 Alert Pad (Sault Ste.Marie) Size:Grapefruit at arm's length Shape:Discs. Weather:Clear Color:Silvery white/ silent MA1 01:00 0\nN-685 7 1 1963 Kamas (20 Miles E, In Uintah Mountains) Size:2 pickup trucks each Shape:Egg-shaped. Weather:Clear, calm Color:Silver/ silent FB1 16:00 4\nN-764 1 1 1963 Gulf Of Tonkin (At 20,000 Ft, 200 Mi Fm Ca Size:20-30 feet in diameter Shape:Saucer. Weather:Clear, cloud deck above 20,000 ft.Color:Dark CE1 21:00 2\nN-062 1 1 1965 Monterey Peninsula Size:football field Color:metallic/ silent MA1 17:00 1\nN-263 1 1 1965 Dulce Shape:domed disc / silent CE2 01:00 0\nN-413 7 1 1965 Show Low (On 77N Showlow-Holbrook) size:20 ft diameter Shape:ball of light. Weather:perfectly Clear Color:bright white/EME/HUM CE2 23:00 65\nN-563 1 8 1965 Cheyenne (Foxtrot Arena At F.E. Warren Afb size:Very big Shape:Boomerang. Weather:Clear, beautiful Color:Dark/EME/ silent FB1 08:00 18\nN-698 1 8 1965 York (Seen From Women'S Penitentiary) Size:50-cent piece Shape:Disk. Weather:Calm, Clear Color:Maybe silver (silhouette)/ silent MA1 2\nN-780 1 7 1965 Klamath Falls (Kingsley Field) Size:quarter at arm's length. Circular lights. Weather:Clear (night) Color:like aircraft landing lights/ silent AN1 02:00 20\nN-807 1 8 1965 Whittier Size:Like a VW Shape:Fireball. Weather:Clear Color:Green/ AN1 03:00 0\nN-067 16 8 1966 Prophetstown Size:1/2 $at arms length Weather:CLEAR Color:bright orange/ silent FB1 21:00 7\nN-177 7 1 1966 Eastern Size:car Shape:long, cigar-shaped Color:couldn't see a color/ silent CE1 18:00 90\nN-316 1 10 1966 Phoenix (44K-47K Ft Alt) Pilot USAF T-38 saw white light off right wing - off when approached. Weather:CLEAR night MA1 1-2\nN-327 1 7 1966 Nashville (Back Yard Of Residence) Weather:CLEAR /HUM/DRONE AN2 20:00\nN-337 1 5 1966 Canton (Her Home) Size:larger than full moon Shape:round. Weather:CLEAR, starry nightColor:pulsating orange/ silent CE1 02:00 15\nN-444 1 5 1966 Myton Shape:squashed ball. Weather:moon out Color:silver (polished stainless) red tint/EME/ silent\nN-640 9 5 1966 Deerfield Beach (From Grandparents' Yard) size:Dollar at arm's length Shape:Disc Frisbee. Weather:Clear, no clouds Color:Blue-green/ silent MA1 22:00 2\nN-235 1 1 1967 Myton Area Size:50' diameter Shape:round. Weather:Clear Color:red, dark to light/ silent MA1 21:00 30"} {"doc_id":"977c3287b6a211e0","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Catalog Entry | WHERE? Location | WHO SAW IT? Witnesses | WHO SAYS SO? Sources | OTHER REFERENCES?\nN-301 San Rafael (Outside Movie Theater) 1843(a)(2) \"on the radio\" 1843(a)(2)\nN-223 Orville (While Walking In The Woods)\nN-163 Riverside (Over The City)\nN-389 San Diego C2C radio program AAP Person 7\nN-260 Dulce (Stinking Lake, S Of Dulce)\nN-412 Sierra National Forest (Signal Peak) Radio interview by [REDACTED] AAP Person 7\nN-490 Salton Sea (Usaf Bombing Range) Art Bell radio program AAP Person 58\nN-731 Deming (10 Miles S) 1843(a) of Lumberton, NM 1843(a)(2)\nN-859 Mountain Home Afb SP Survey\nN-866 Salt Lake City AAP Person 7\nN-016 Hanford\nN-608 Duchesne Fox 13 News/nids@anv.net 1843(a)(2)\nN-775 Cottonwood (Shasta County) Radio [REDACTED] /e-mail\nN-458 Spokane (Near) C2C\nN-010 Asugi, Japan 1843(a)\nN-336 Navarre (10 Mi Sw Of Canton, Oh) C2C radio program AAP Person 58\nN-379 Riverside (From 2Nd Floor Bedroom Window) [REDACTED] radio program/e-mail 1843(a)(2)\nN-653 Long Beach Internet\nN-434 Fargo (Main Street) Personal contact\nN-809 Chimayo (County Rd. #94) historical\nN-055 Shreveport (West Of Red River)\nN-216 Caracas\nN-326 Caribbean Sea (Aboard Uss Fdr)\nN-168 Ashford\nN-190 Raf Kirknewton 6952 Rsm Usaf AAP Person 58\nN-285 Alamosa (1 Mi N) Roosevelt (UT) Standard newspaper 1843(a)(2)\nN-749 San Francisco\nN-217 Peru; Somewhere South, High Desert C2C\nN-460 Bc Border Local newspaper\nN-416 Pitman (Open Church Field, Houses Around) SP Survey\nN-662 Kincheloe Afb-B52 Alert Pad (Sault Ste.Marie) KUTV-TV news/e-mail\nN-685 Kamas (20 Miles E, In Uintah Mountains) Met [REDACTED] MUFON symposium AAP Person 58 1843(a)(2)\nN-764 Gulf Of Tonkin (At 20,000 Ft, 200 Mi Fm Carrie AAP Person 7\nN-062 Monterey Peninsula\nN-263 Dulce 1843(a)(2)\nN-413 Show Low (On 77N Showlow-Holbrook) AFSPA survey\nN-563 Cheyenne (Foxtrot Arena At F.E. Warren Afb) [REDACTED] e-mail\nN-698 York (Seen From Women'S Penitentiary) e-mail\nN-780 Klamath Falls (Kingsley Field) Internet/e-mail\nN-807 Whittier\nN-067 Prophetstown FBI seminar [REDACTED] was guest speaker\nN-177 Eastern\nN-316 Phoenix (44K-47K Ft Alt) 1843(a)(2)\nN-327 Nashville (Back Yard Of Residence)\nN-337 Canton (Her Home)\nN-444 Myton\nN-640 Deerfield Beach (From Grandparents' Yard)\nN-235 Myton Area"} {"doc_id":"9870e2db3c9ec70f","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20 March 2026\n\nRange Fouler Debrief Form\n\nPlease do not use the purple \"submit\" button above. Save and email the complete file manually (see below).\n\nPlease complete this form to the best of your ability. If you do not have the requested information, please leave the field blank. If there was more than one \"group,\" please report each on a separate form for data collection purposes. You should receive a response within 5 business days.\n\nLast Name, First Name | Rank | Squadron | SIPR Email Address | Crew Position\nO-3 | HSM-73 | Pilot\n\nThis information is for contact only. SPEAR sanitizes all reports of identifying information.\nAbsolutely no identifying information for aircrew or squadron will be recorded for analysis.\n\n08/24/20 | 00:04:30 | Night | 705 | 168122 | SSC | No\nDate (mm/dd/yy) | Time of detection (hh:mm:ss Z) | Day / Night | Side No. | Buno | Mission Description (CAS, BFM, etc) | LFE?\n\n21440 | 21440 | 1.4a | Yes | 310 | 5\nContact Working Area (Ex: W-72 1A) | Contact Latitude (DD:MM:SS) | N/S | Contact Longitude (DD:MM:SS) | E/W | Contact Altitude (Ex: 22000) | Altitude Constant? | Wind Dir at Contact Alt (From) | Wind Speed\n\nPlease attempt to determine a Lat / Long for the contact at initial detection. We recommend using JMPS to reference the sensor-derived bearing and range relative to the bullseye you had in use. If that method is not available, any reasonable derivation of location will work, but please be as specific as possible and make a note in the comments section. These locations may be used to cue other means of tracking.\n\nWas the contact moving? Yes\nDirection/Speed (Ex. 090/15) 270/UNK\n\nRadar Equipped: Other | AIM-9x Self-Track: \nStable Trackfile?: No | ATFLIR Autotrack: \n# of Contacts in \"Group\": 3 | Tally Achieved: \n\nPlease check all that apply:\nEA Indications (Check all that apply):\nRound: checked | Moving Parts:\nSquare: | Metallic:\nBalloon-shaped: | Markings:\nWings/Airframe: checked | Translucent:\nOther Shape: | Opaque:\nApparent Propulsion: | Reflective:\nECM Arc | Letter Identifier | False Trackfiles | Other/Ambiguous\n\nPlease use the field below to describe the contact and any interaction in your own words with as much detail as possible. Please be sure to include any detail not included in questions above.\n\n1.4a observed 3x possible unidentified small air contacts while conducting routine operations in the North Arabian Sea. Negative ES, radar track, and IFF track. Distance to contact was unknown. Speed of contact was unknown. Precise course of contact was unknown, but appeared to be on a westerly heading. No interaction took place between 1.4a and the unknown air contacts. Initially observed 1x unknown air contact and tracked it before losing sight as it went behind a cloud. When contact on the unknown air contact was regained, 2x additional unknown air contacts were seen due east of the location of the initial contact. All 3x unknown air contacts appeared to maintain their relative course, speed, and altitude.\n\nDon't use the purple \"submit\" button! Save this form with filename \"Date_Squadron_RF.pdf\" and email it to (b)(6) (Also in the global). For troubleshooting, call (b)(6)\n\nThank you for your time. Please ensure all display tapes are ripped for the entire time of interaction and saved as a .wmv (Example: 4 May VFA-106 HUD.wmv). Squadron intel personnel shall upload those files to the repository located at this link. (b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0038 to 26-0046 Approved for Release to AARO 03/27/26 000001"} {"doc_id":"98a8b90e1b25c193","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026\n\nSECRET\n\n17 December 1953\n\nMEMORANDUM TO: Assistant Director, Scientific Intelligence\n\nFROM : Chief, Physics and Electronics Division, SI\n\nSUBJECT : Current Status of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOB) Project.\n\n1. In accordance with the verbal request of Mr. Brent, Exec/SI, on 30 November, the following resume of the current status of unidentified flying objects activities has been prepared.\n\n2. P&E Division assumed responsibility for the OSI project on unidentified flying objects as a result of your memorandum of 27 May 1953. The project has been confined to maintaining awareness of the activities of other agencies (notably the USAF) in the unidentified flying objects business and to maintenance of files.\n\n3. Status of Department of Defense Activities.\n\na. Air Force. The Air Force continues to maintain, but with apparently decreasing emphasis, its interest in UFOB's. The present interest of the Directorate of Intelligence, Hq., USAF, is confined to a cursory cognizance of ATIC's project (Bluebook No. 10073). At ATIC the project is carried by one officer (Capt. Charles A. Hardin), one airman (A/1C Max G. Futch), and a secretary operating as the Aerial Phenomena Section of the Electronics Branch, Technical Analysis Division. In spite of this limited staff, as well as several changes of project officer, the project records appear to be up-to-date. ATIC personnel no longer conduct field investigations of UFOB sightings (these are requested from USAF intelligence officers [primarily Air Defense Command and Airways and Air Communications Service] nearer to the sightings), but confine their activities to receiving and checking reports as received, requesting additional field investigation where necessary, performing necessary checking against meteorological, astronomical, aircraft and balloon data, and recording their findings and conclusions in a cross-referenced system by date, location, source, type of observation and conclusion drawn. The Aerial Phenomena Section also deals directly with the Public Information Office of Hq., USAF, regarding information for public release. For about the past year, approximately ten percent of the reported sightings have been tagged as unsolved.\n\nOf particular interest is the fact that ATIC is in the process of transferring project Bluebook to Hq., Air Defense Command. According to Lt. Col. Harry Johnston, Chief, Electronics Branch, the reason for the transfer was that ADC had been doing most of the"} {"doc_id":"98a8b90e1b25c193","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"investigative work of the project and \"if it turns out that these things (UFOB's) are space ships or long range aircraft from another country, ADC is the (Air Force) Command that would have to take action.\" Col. Johnston followed this comment with the somewhat contradictory statement that the project transfer did not reflect any change in Air Force policy. It is undoubtedly true that ADC is the Air Force Command primarily concerned with UFOB's at the present time in that their interceptors are occasionally dispatched \"against\" reported UFOB's and that their reporting stations and communications systems are involved in a considerable portion of the UFOB activity. ATIC will maintain liaison with the project.\n\nApproximately a year and one half ago ATIC initiated a program to purchase cameras for selected ADC radar sites and AACS control towers in locations where consistent UFOB reports were received in the hopes of photographing UFOB's. One lens of the camera (a stereoscopic type) was to be covered with a simple grating to record the spectrographic nature of the UFOB photographed. One hundred \"Video\" 35 mm. cameras with \"stereon\" anastigmat f 3.5 lenses were purchased along with 100 gratings (15,000 line) from CENCO, Chicago. Seventy-four (74) cameras were distributed. Ninety percent of the gratings have \"gone bad\"--the actual grating separating from the plastic mounting plates. New gratings are expected shortly and ATIC expects to recall all of the 74 distributed cameras and re-equip them with the new gratings.\n\nSeveral months ago we were advised that ATIC planned to set up a concentrated instrumentation observational effort in the Albuquerque area. This has now been dropped.\n\nProject STORK (SECRET) has been preparing, at ATIC request a comprehensive statistical report on UFOB sightings during the period 1947 through 1952. This study is now expected to be completed by 1 December 1953.\n\nATIC issues status reports on Project Bluebook on a tri-monthly basis the most recent being Report No. 12 30 September 1953.\n\nb. Navy. The Navy in spite of press reports to the contrary, is presently devoting only part of one ONI analyst's time to maintaining cognizance of UFOB's.\n\nc. Army. The Army has evidenced little or no interest in UFOB's other than cooperating with the Air Force in reporting sightings and pertinent data using the Air Force format.\n\n4. Investigations or Interests of Foreign Governments.\n\na. Canada. Considerable attention in the U.S. press was recently given to reports that the Canadian Defence Research Board and Department of Transport had jointly and officially established a\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"98a8b90e1b25c193","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"laboratory\" for recording observable phenomena connected with UFOB's.\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nIt is interesting to note that in his recently published book \"Flying Saucers From Outer Space\" Mr. D. E. Keyhoe states that a Wilbur B. Smith of the Canadian Department of Transport had been conducting \"saucer\" investigations for three years before 1952, or beginning in 1949. If Keyhoe is correct and it is the same Wilbur B. Smith mentioned in his book as in the recent press releases one might wonder why the matter hit the press four years late. It is, of course quite possible that the press item was prompted by the information in Keyhoe's book. Several reports have been received [REDACTED] [REDACTED] that experiments on a flying saucer are actually being conducted at A. V. Roe, Ltd., Toronto.\n\nb. Great Britain. The subject of UFOB's was discussed briefly [REDACTED] during his recent visit. He stated that since [REDACTED] investigation of UFOB's of two and one half years ago, initiated [REDACTED] [REDACTED] the only British activity is the filing of reports as received by the RAF.\n\nc. Sweden. [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] No further information is available.\n\nd. Other. Aside from a few scattered reports, mostly old, which indicate interest in UFOB's by private individuals or groups, there is no information of concern or inquiries of consequence in other foreign countries.\n\n5. Results of OSI Panel Recommendations. The consultants who considered this problem in January 1953 recommended that UFOB's be stripped of special status and aura of mystery and that policies on intelligence, training, and public education pertinent to true indications of hostile intent or action be prepared. The definite drop in the number of \"sightings\" reported during 1953 over 1952 could be attributed to actions following these recommendations. Two recent books (\"Flying Saucers From Outer Space\" by Keyhoe and \"Flying Saucers Have Landed\" by Leslie and Adamski) take full advantage of \"official\" UFOB reports released by the Air Force to develop a central theme that UFOB's are extraterrestrial in origin. Fortunately, the latter book is so nonsensical and obviously fraudulent that it may actually help calm down public reaction. These books do, however, illustrate the risk taken by the present policy. There are no other as yet apparent results of these recommendations.\n\nTODOS M. ODARENKO\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"9a0ebdcae365d7dc","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES\nFOR THE\nADVANCED AEROSPACE WEAPON SYSTEM APPLICATIONS PROGRAM\n18 July 2008\nPAN: #\n\n1. BACKGROUND: The Acquisition Support Division (DWO-3) of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) has the responsibility to provide guidance and oversight to the Department of Defense (DoD) acquisition process along with leveraging the DoD Intelligence Community to coordinate, produce and maintain projections of the future threat environment in which U.S. air, naval, ground, space, missile defense and information systems operate. In order to accurately assess the foreign threat to U.S. weapon systems, a complete as possible understanding of potential breakthrough technology applications employed in future acrospace weapon systems must be obtained.\n\n2. OBJECTIVE: One aspect of the future threat environment involves advanced aerospace weapon system applications. The objective of this program is to understand the physics and engineering of these applications as they apply to the foreign threat out to the far term, i.e., from now through the year 2050. Primary focus is on breakthrough technologies and applications that create discontinuities in currently evolving technology trends. The focus is not on extrapolations of current aerospace technology. The proposal shall describe a technical approach which discusses how the breakthrough technologies and applications listed below would be studied and include proposed key personnel that have experience in those areas.\n\n3. REQUIREMENTS:\n\na) The contractor shall complete advanced aerospace weapon system technical studies in the following areas:\n\n1. lift\n2. propulsion\n3. control\n4. power generation\n5. spatial/temporal translation\n6. materials\n7. configuration, structure\n8. signature reduction (optical, infrared,\nradiofrequency, acoustic)\n9. human interface\n10. human effects\n11. armament (RF and DEW)\n12. other peripheral areas in support of (1-11)"} {"doc_id":"9a0ebdcae365d7dc","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"b) It is expected that numerous experts with extensive experience (minimum of 10 years) in breakthrough aerospace research and development will be required to meet the demands of the above program. The offeror should clearly identify their approach to obtaining the services of and their utilization of these scientific and technical experts. Management personnel must include a lead integrator to oversee the work of the various analytical teams, and to integrate their findings into final coherent products. At least one member of each analytical team must have a PhD, although that member can be on several teams. A technical plan for conducting the advanced aerospace weapon system studies described above must be included in the offeror's proposal.\n\n(c) Offeror must be able to produce integrated finished assessments in each of the above advanced aerospace weapon system technical areas. Finished reports and presentations, while highly analytical and technical, must be in a format suitable for dissemination at the highest levels of the federal government. In addition to the main technical section of each assessment, an executive summary utilizing clearly understandable (non-technical) language must also be contained in each report.\n\n(d) To assess relevant experience, offerors shall submit at least three (3) references, including a POC name and phone number, with a brief description of the business relationship with the Government or other corporations. In addition, offerors should provide examples, conducted within the past 7 years, of having performed, as a prime contractor, the analysis, design, construction, and flight testing of high performance aircraft and/or satellites. Success in this program is dependent upon this capability and experience.\n\n4. PLACE OF PERFORMANCE: The work under this contract shall be performed at the Contractor's facility.\n\n5. SECURITY REQUIREMENT: Contractor company and personnel proposed shall be clearable and able to obtain a security and facility clearance upon award of the contract. All requirements specified in this SOO may be based on materials classified at or below Top Secret with access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/ SCI). The contractor shall comply with the terms and conditions of the DD-254 BEFORE initiating any classified effort. The contractor shall notify the COR and Contracting Officer immediately upon the determination that higher classification requirements exist in order to accomplish the specified requirements. The contractor shall ensure that each individual assigned to this contract shall be identified, cleared, and approved through DIA/DAC-3 PRIOR to granting that individual access to, or authority to generate classified information in association with this effort.\n\n5.1. Contractor shall provide a work facility (including unclassified information systems) with a Top Secret Facility Clearance granted by the Defense Security Service (DSS). Cleared facilities are not required at contract inception. Offeror must provide personnel eligible for a Top Secret clearance level with further eligibility for SCI access. At least two personnel cleared at the Secret level are required at contract inception.\n\n6. GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY/EQUIPMENT: The Government will provide the contractor access to computers and peripherals such as printers as the Government deems necessary to access and produce classified information. These computers and peripherals remain the property of the Government."} {"doc_id":"9a0ebdcae365d7dc","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"7. GOVERNMENT FURNISHED INFORMATION/DATA: Data required by the contractor to fulfill the terms of this contract shall be requested from the Government Project Lead (GPL). A good faith effort will be made to fulfill any legitimate request (as assessed by the GPL), however, the responsibility to collect information and data necessary for the conduct of this effort remains with the contractor. Any classified data provided by the Government in support of this contract will remain the property of the Government and will be returned to the government not more than 30 days after contract conclusion.\n\n8. CONTRACTOR ACQUIRED / GOVERNMENT OWNED PROPERTY:\nAny accountable property acquired by the contractor with government funds during the execution of this contract shall become government owned property. The contractor shall obtain written permission from the CO or Contracting Officer Representative (COR) prior to any purchase of real property with government funds. The contractor shall establish and maintain an inventory of all such property. This property must be inventoried and returned to the government not more than 60 days after the end of the contract.\n\n9. EQUIPMENT LEASE OR PURCHASE:\nThe purchase of equipment is preferred, however, it may be more advantageous to the government to lease in certain circumstances. When it is contemplated a lease would be more advantageous to the government, contractor shall furnish the following information to the COR so the government can determine the best solution:\n1. Estimated length of time the equipment will be used and the extent of use within that period\n2. Financial and operating advantages of alternative types and makes of equipment\n3. Cumulative rental payments for the estimated period of use\n4. Net purchase price\n5. Transportation and installation costs\n6. Maintenance and other service costs\n\n10. TRAVEL: It is anticipated that travel will be required for this contract. The Government will pay up to the rates specified in the government Federal Travel Regulations for travel destination. Travel reservations will be made by the contractor and will be reimbursed for actual costs only, with supporting documentation/receipts attached to the invoice.\n\n11. DELIVERABLES: The contractor shall prepare the following deliverables:\n\na. Status Reports - monthly reports outlining accomplishments, milestones, and work in progress.\n\nb. Project Management Plan – For each technical area, the team lead shall submit, at the 60 day point, an overview paper identifying the scope of the final report; a Plan of Action and Milestones, and the composition of the analytical team.\n\nc. Research Reports For each technical area, a comprehensive report and briefing forecasting potential advancements and their impact is to be submitted to the GPL by the end of the tenth month. An executive version of each report should also be submitted. Format will be specified by the GPL.\n\nd. Integrated Threat Assessment – A final report and briefing that assesses the foreign threat from advanced aerospace platforms incorporating the technologies discussed in the individual research reports will be"} {"doc_id":"9a0ebdcae365d7dc","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"provided to the GPL at the end of the period of performance. An executive version of the report should also be submitted. Format will be specified by the GPL.\n\ne. Resumes - The Contractor shall submit resumes of all key personnel proposed for this effort. The Government reserves the right to review resumes and qualifications prior to acceptance of individuals for assignment.\n\n12. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: The term of this contract shall is anticipated to be 5 years which consists of a base year of 12 months from date of award plus four (4) 12 month option years.\n\n13. CONTRACT TYPE: The contract shall be firm fixed priced (FFP).\n\n14. KEY GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL: The Contracting Officer for this contract will be (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6) The COR and Government Project Leader will be [REDACTED]\n\n15. DEFINED TERMS:\n\nKey personnel - defined as proposed management and lead science and engineering staff.\n\nContracting Officer Representative (COR) – The government official appointed by the contracting officer and who is responsible for operations of the execution of the contract. The COR handles all aspects dealing with the interpretation and deliverables of the contract.\n\nContracting Officer – Procurement official who holds a contracting warrant and is authorized to obligate the government under the terms of a contract and make changes to the contract."} {"doc_id":"9b1c4d9b1b17e14b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026\n\nIntelligence Information Report\n\nThis material contains information affecting the National Defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S.C. Secs. 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\n\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOUNTRY USSR\nREPORT NO. OO-B-321/07709-72\nSUBJECT Speculative Paper by N Kardashev and A Sakharov on Charged Mass in Space at Conference on Origins of Life, Armenia, 6-8 September 1971/Low Scientific Level of Other Soviet Papers\nDATE DISTR. 10 Apr 72\nNO. PAGES 2\nREFERENCES DCS Case 57,026\nDATE OF INFO. 6-8 September 1971\nPLACE & DATE ACQ. BY SOURCE Yerevan/6-8 September 1971\nTHIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION\n\nSOURCE US citizen [REDACTED] This report consists of edited abstracts from a letter received from a reliable colleague who attended the Yerevan Conference.\n\n1. At the Conference on the Origins of Life in Yerevan, Armenia, SSR, 6-8 September 1971, N S Kardashev, Institute for Space Research, Moscow, read an interesting but highly speculative paper he had prepared on general relativity and the possibility of a body collapsing into a black hole in space. His co-author was the internationally famous theoretical physicist, Andrei D Sakharov. Kardashev is very much like his superior and former teacher at the Institute, I S Shklovskiy, in his approach to scientific problems. He is not afraid to speculate in his effort to find a solution.\n\n2. The Kardashev-Sakharov paper concerned the authors' study of what happens when a charged mass or body collapses in space. Kardashev stated that, if it were not charged, the mass would just collapse past the point of gravitational singularity and be gone forever. In other words, the mass would close in on itself and have no more contact with the outside world. The Soviets speculated on what would happen if the mass were charged. They stated that then the mass would be able to bounce. It would collapse but bounce back out. However, the mass will come back into a different part of space time.\n\n3. After his presentation, Kardashev told a US attendee that Sakharov was mostly interested in this charged mass phenomenon study because it indicates that the structure of space may be much more complicated than is presently thought. Kardashev was interested in the study from the viewpoint of what implications it has for astrophysics, provided the basic physics of the phenomenon is correct. The US attendee felt the authors' speculation was a little fantastic and they had taken off in a rather wild way. However, he believed their paper was grounded in good and sound physics."} {"doc_id":"9b1c4d9b1b17e14b","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n-2-\n\n4. The US attendee considers Kardashev to be very competent technically and further to be very self-possessed. He recalled an incident in the spring of 1971 when Kardashev, L I Matveyenko and he visited Academician Lev Artsimovich, secretary of the Academy's Department of General Physics and Astronomy. Matveyenko, Institute for Cosmic Research, is a Communist Party member and very expert in political matters. He was almost cringing in Artsimovich's presence whereas Kardashev was cool and confident in his business-like discussions with the senior Academician.\n\n5. In general, the scientific level of most of the Soviet papers at this Conference was not very high. One little known Soviet [source could not recall his name] gave a very naive paper on the detectability of planets. Another Soviet, who was a member of a committee the USSR has established to investigate unusual phenomena, in other words, flying saucers, gave a serious talk which was actually very humorous. His approach was, \"Well, of course, we know there isn't anything to this alleged phenomenon (flying saucers), but on the other hand---.\" During this talk Shklovskiy and other Soviets joked and laughed and obviously did not take the speaker's remarks seriously. Shklovskiy remarked later to a US attendee that the \"flying saucer committee\" consists of many politicians, theorists, historians and similar type people. It has little if any scientific talent.\n\n6. Shklovskiy gave a general, entertaining talk on some interesting but unimportant subject. Vitaliy L Ginzburg, one of the leading astronomers in the USSR, also gave a talk on the basis of physical theory, that is, the identification and comparison of fundamental assumptions in physics. Ginzburg has a first rate mind and is sounder in his physics knowledge than Shklovskiy. Ginzburg thinks realistically, which was shown in his answer to a US attendee's question about the Conference. The Soviet was asked whether the Conference was worthwhile in that it was mostly devoted to theoretical subjects, very remote from tangible goals. Ginzburg said, \"Well, if it helps to build up support for the Soviet researchers to get new astronomical equipment, then certainly the Conference makes sense.\"\n\n- end -"} {"doc_id":"9d8eb1682411a0d7","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nPlease do not use the purple \"submit\" button above. Save and email the complete file manually (see below).\n\nRange Fouler Debrief Form\n\nPlease complete this form to the best of your ability. If you do not have the requested information, please leave the field blank. If there was more than one \"group,\" please report each on a separate form for data collection purposes. You should receive a response within 5 business days.\n\nLast Name, First Name Rank Squadron SIPR Email Address Crew Position\n\nO-4 [REDACTED] Pilot\n\nThis information is for contact only. [REDACTED] sanitizes all reports of identifying information.\n\nAbsolutely no identifying information for aircrew or squadron will be recorded for analysis.\n\n[REDACTED] Day [REDACTED] Buno [REDACTED]\n\nDate (mm/dd/yy) Time of detection (hh:mm:ss Z) Day / Night Side No. Buno Mission Description (CAS, BFM, etc)\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nContact Working Area (Ex: W-72 1A) Contact Letitute (DD:MM:SS) N/S Contact Longitude (DD:MM:SS) E/W Contact Altitude (Ex: 22000) Altitude Constent? Wind Dir at Contact Alt (From) Wind Speed\n\nPlease attempt to determine a Lat / Long for the contact at initial detection. We recommend using [REDACTED] to reference the sensor-derived bearing and range relative to the bullseye you had in use. If that method is not available, any reasonable derivation of location will work, but please be as specific as possible and make a note in the comments section. These locations may be used to cue other means of tracking.\n\nWas the contact moving? Yes\n\nDirection/Speed (Ex. 090/15)\n\nPlease check all that apply:\n\nRound: [ ] Moving Parts: [ ]\nSquare: [ ] Metallic: [X]\nBalloon-shaped: [ ] Markings: [ ]\nWings/Airframe: [ ] Translucent: [ ]\nOther Shape: [ ] Opaque: [ ]\nApparent Propulsion: [ ] Reflective: [X]\n\n# of Contacts in \"Group\":\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] (Check all that apply):\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nPlease use the field below to describe the contact and any interaction in your own words with as much detail as possible. Please be sure to include any detail not included in questions above.\n\n[REDACTED] apparent object also captured with [REDACTED]\nAppeared quite small. Speed appeared to be [REDACTED] and continued in constant direction. Shape indiscernible but the bottom was reflective. [REDACTED]\n\nDon't use the purple \"submit\" button! Save this form with filename \"Date_Squadron_RF.pdf\" and email it to [REDACTED] (Also in the global). For troubleshooting, call [REDACTED].\n\nThank you for your time. Please ensure all display tapes are ripped for the entire time of interaction and saved as a .wmv (Example: [REDACTED] Squadron intel personnel shall upload those files to the repository located at\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"9d8eb1682411a0d7","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Department of the Navy\nDUSN (M) DRMD\nAuthority: FY 24 NDAA, now codified at 44 U.S.C. 2107\nDate: 5/19/2026\nReleased in Part: X\n\nAARO 44 U.S.C. 2107 § 1843(a)(3)\nAARO FY2024 NDAA § 1843(a)(1)(C);E.O. 13526, section 1.4(a)\nAARO FY2024 NDAA § 1843(a)(1)(C);E.O. 13526, section 1.4(e)"} {"doc_id":"9e445e3d49dd7a50","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A-86-014-91-3\nH. Bergman A-183\n5/20/86\n\nPajarito Astronomers\nP.O. Box 1092, Los Alamos NM, 87544\nPresident [REDACTED] MS K553\nVice President [REDACTED] MS E531\nTreasurer [REDACTED] MS F665\nSponsored by Club 1663\n\nEHF-100-334\n\nTuesday, May 20, 1986\n\nDear Members,\n\nOur next meeting will be Thursday, May 29, 1986, in the Ranch Room at Fuller Lodge, at 7:30 p.m. Guest speaker will be Dr. John Warren of AT-6, whose topic will be \"Why Should a Scientist be Concerned about UFO's?\"\n\nTo find the Ranch Room, go around (outside) to the south end of the Lodge (facing Central Ave.), and go upstairs. See you there.\n\nSincerely,\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\n0000 0000 0022 1184"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HS/HC 475 Flying Objects\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 917075\n\nRG 263 CIA E\nFOLDER 90\n\n10"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nFEDERAL CIVIL DEFENSE ADMINISTRATION\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nOFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR\n\nAPR 18 1953\n\nMr. Richard D. Drain\nSecretary\nIntelligence Advisory Committee\n2430 E Street, N. W.\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Drain:\n\nWe have carefully studied the report of the Panel of Scientific Consultants on the subject of \"Unidentified Flying Objects,\" which you sent this Agency on March 13.\n\nThe conclusions of the Panel and its recommendations, particularly in terms of public education, are of considerable interest in connection with the civil defense program. We appreciate your indicated willingness to assist in implementing the appropriate aspects of the Panel's report as applicable to Civil Defense, and suggest that a conference be arranged for a full discussion of the subject on a mutually satisfactory date.\n\nSincerely,\n\nVal Peterson\n\nTHE C.I.A. HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE DECLASSIFICATION OF THE DOCUMENT.\nAUTHORITY: HR 70-2\nREVIEWER 0233768 DATE 7 JUN 91\n\nSECRET\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\n400164"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\n13 March 1953\n\nMr. Edward T. Dickinson\nVice Chairman, National Security Resources Board\nRoom 211\nExecutive Office Building\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Dickinson:\n\nThe Director of Central Intelligence has asked that you be furnished a copy of the attached report prepared by a panel of scientists on the subject of \"Unidentified Flying Objects.\" This panel was convened at the direction of General Smith, following the recommendation of the Intelligence Advisory Committee.\n\nThe conclusions and recommendations may be of interest to you, in that they point out certain potential dangers to national security which are related to the subject and suggest ways of their elimination.\n\nAlthough this Agency does not consider problems arising from sightings of \"flying saucers\" primarily its concern, we shall be pleased to assist in any appropriate action that you may deem advisable.\n\nCopies of this report are also being sent to the Secretary of Defense and to the Chairman, National Security Resources Board. Federal Civil Defense Administration.\nSincerely yours,\n\nRICHARD D. DRAIN\nSecretary\nIntelligence Advisory Committee\n\nThis document has been approved for release through the HISTORICAL REVIEW PROGRAM of the Central Intelligence Agency.\n\nDate 7 JUN 91\nHRP 89-2\n\nEnclosure\n\nDistribution:\nOrig. and 1 - Addressee\n1 - DD/I\n1 - Admin Files\n1 - AD/SI\n1 - DCI\n\nThis material contains information affecting the national defense of the United States with the meaning of the espionage laws, Title 18, USC, Secs. 793 and 794, and transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\n\nSecurity Information\n\n400164"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Security Information\n\n13 March 1953\n\nThe Honorable\nThe Secretary of Defense\nDepartment of Defense\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Secretary:\n\nThe Director of Central Intelligence has asked that you be furnished a copy of the attached report prepared by a panel of scientists on the subject of \"Unidentified Flying Objects.\" This panel was convened at the direction of General Smith, following the recommendation of the Intelligence Advisory Committee.\n\nThe conclusions and recommendations may be of interest to you, in that they point out certain potential dangers to national security, which are related to the subject and suggest ways of their elimination.\n\nAlthough this Agency does not consider problems arising from sightings of \"flying saucers\" primarily its concern, we shall be pleased to assist in any appropriate action that you may deem advisable.\n\nCopies of this report are also being sent to the Secretary of Defense and to the Chairman, National Security Resources Board. Federal Civil Defense Administration.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nRICHARD D. DRAIN\nSecretary\nIntelligence Advisory Committee\n\nEnclosure\n\nDistribution:\nOrig and 1 -- Addressee\n1 -- DCI\n1 -- DD/I\n1 -- Admin Files\n1 -- AD/SI\n\nOIC:RDD:KR (13 March 1953)\n\nThis material contains information affecting the national defense of the United States with the meaning of the espionage laws, Title 18, USC, Secs. 793 and 794, and transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law."} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Security Information\n\n13 March 1953\n\nThe Honorable Val Peterson\nAdministrator, Federal Civil\nDefense Administration\n1930 Columbia Road, N. W.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Peterson:\n\nThe Director of Central Intelligence has asked that you be furnished a copy of the attached report prepared by a panel of scientists on the subject of \"Unidentified Flying Objects.\" This panel was convened at the direction of General Smith, following the recommendation of the Intelligence Advisory Committee.\n\nThe conclusions and recommendations may be of interest to you, in that they point out certain potential dangers to national security, which are related to the subject and suggest ways of their elimination.\n\nAlthough this Agency does not consider problems arising from sightings of \"flying saucers\" primarily its concern, we shall be pleased to assist in any appropriate action that you may deem advisable.\n\nCopies of this report are also being sent to the Secretary of Defense and to the Chairman, National Security Resources Board. Secretary of State.\nSincerely yours,\n\nRICHARD D. DRAIN\nSecretary\nIntelligence Advisory Committee\n\nEnclosure\n\nDistribution:\nOrig and 1 -- Addressee\n1 -- DCI\n1 -- DD/I\n1 -- Admin Files\n1 -- AD/SI\n\nOIC:RDD:KR (13 March 1953)\n\nThis material contains information affecting the national defense of the United States with the meaning of the espionage laws, Title 18, USC, Secs. 793 and 794, and transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law."} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\n[FORM LETTER]\n\n12 March 1953\n\nMr. C. D. Jackson\nSpecial Assistant to the President\nThe White House\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Jackson:\n\n\tMr. Robert Amory, Jr., Assistant Deputy Director/Intelligence, has asked me to forward to you for your information the enclosed report \"Report of the Scientific Panel on Unidentified Flying Objects\", dated January 17, 1953\n\n\tThis report was prepared by a panel convened in January 1953 at the direction of the former Director of Central Intelligence, General Walter B. Smith, with the concurrence of the Intelligence Advisory Committee\n\n\tCopies are being transmitted to the Secretary of Defense; the Director, Federal Civil Defense Administration; and the Chairman, National Security Resources Board.\n\n\tSincerely yours,\n\nRICHARD D. DRAIN\nSecretary\nIntelligence Advisory Committee\n\nOIC:RDD:KR (12 March 1953)\ncc - DD/I\nOSI"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nOne copy of the attached form letter sent to each of\nthe following:\n\nMr. Robert Cutler\n224 Executive Office Building\n\nMr. C. D. Jackson\nSpecial Assistant to the President\nThe White House\n\nMr. James S. Lay\nExecutive Secretary\nNational Security Council\n302-A Executive Office Building\n\nMr. George Morgan\nPsychological Strategy Board\n708 Jackson Place\n\nMr. Tracey Barnes\nPsychological Strategy Board\n708 Jackson Place"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nREPORT OF THE SCIENTIFIC PANEL\nON\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nJAN 17 1953\n\n1. Pursuant to the request of the Assistant Director for Scientific Intelligence, the undersigned Panel of Scientific Consultants has met to evaluate any possible threat to national security posed by Unidentified Flying Objects (\"Flying Saucers\"), and to make recommendations thereon. The Panel has received the evidence as presented by cognizant intelligence agencies, primarily the Air Technical Intelligence Center, and has reviewed a selection of the best documented incidents.\n2. As a result of its considerations, the Panel concludes:\na. That the evidence presented on Unidentified Flying Objects shows no indication that these phenomena constitute a direct physical threat to national security.\nWe firmly believe that there is no residuum of cases which indicates phenomena which are attributable to foreign artifacts capable of hostile acts, and that there is no evidence that the phenomena indicate a need for the revision of current scientific concepts.\n3. The Panel further concludes:\na. That the continued emphasis on the reporting of these phenomena does, in these parlous times, result in a threat to the orderly functioning of the protective organs of the body politic.\nWe cite as examples the clogging of channels of communication by irrelevant reports, the danger of being led by continued false alarms to ignore real\n\nThis document has been approved for release through the HISTORICAL REVIEW PROGRAM of the Central Intelligence Agency.\nDate 7 JUN 91 HRP 89-2\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nindications of hostile action, and the cultivation of a morbid national psychology in which skillful hostile propaganda could induce hysterical behavior and harmful distrust of duly constituted authority.\n4. In order most effectively to strengthen the national facilities for the timely recognition and the appropriate handling of true indications of hostile action, and to minimize the concomitant dangers alluded to above, the Panel recommends:\na. That the national security agencies take immediate steps to strip the Unidentified Flying Objects of the special status they have been given and the aura of mystery they have unfortunately acquired;\nb. That the national security agencies institute policies on intelligence, training, and public education designed to prepare the material defenses and the morale of the country to recognize most promptly and to react most effectively to true indications of hostile intent or action.\nWe suggest that these aims may be achieved by an integrated program designed to reassure the public of the total lack of evidence of inimical forces behind the phenomena, to train personnel to recognize and reject false indications quickly and effectively, and to strengthen regular channels for the evaluation of and prompt reaction to true indications of hostile measures.\n\n/s/ H. P. Robertson, Chairman, California Institute of Technology\n/s/ Luis W. Alvarez, University of California\n/s/ Lloyd V. Berkner, Associated Universities, Inc.\n/s/ S. A. Goudsmit, Brookhaven National Laboratories\n/s/ Thornton Page, Johns Hopkins University\n\nSECRET\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nTAB B\n\nSCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL ON\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n14 - 17 January 1953\n\nEVIDENCE PRESENTED\n\n1. Seventy-five case histories of sightings 1951 - 1952 (selected by ATIC as those best documented).\n2. ATIC Status and Progress Reports of Project GRUDGE and Project BLUE BOOK (code names for ATIC study of subject).\n3. Progress Reports of Project STORK (code name for Battelle Memorial Institute contract work supporting ATIC).\n4. Summary Report of Sightings at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico.\n5. Report of USAF Research Center, Cambridge, Mass., Investigation of \"Green Fireball\" Phenomena (Project TWINKLE).\n6. Outline of Investigation of U.F.O.'s Proposed by Kirtland Air Force Base (Project POUNCE).\n7. Motion Picture Films of sightings at Tremonton, Utah, 2 July 1952 and Great Falls, Montana, August 1950.\n8. Summary Report of 89 selected cases of sightings of various categories (Formations, Blinking Lights, Hovering, etc.).\n9. Draft of manual: \"How to Make a FLYOERPT\", prepared at ATIC.\n10. Chart Showing Plot of Geographic Location of Unexplained Sightings in the United States during 1952.\n11. Chart Showing Balloon Launching Sites in the United States.\n12. Charts Showing Selected Actual Balloon Flight Paths and Relation to Reported Sightings.\n13. Charts Showing Frequency of Reports of Sightings, 1948 - 1952.\n14. Charts Showing Categories of Explanations of Sightings.\n15. Kodachrome Transparencies of Polyethylene Film Balloons in Bright Sunlight Showing High Reflectivity.\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\nTAB B\n\n16. Motion picture of seagulls in bright sunlight showing high reflectivity.\n17. Intelligence Reports Relating to U.S.S.R. Interest in U. S. Sightings.\n18. Samples of Official USAF Reporting Forms and Copies of Pertinent\nAir Force, Army and Navy Orders Relating to Subject.\n19. Sample Polyethylene \"Pillow\" Balloon (54 inches square).\n20. \"Variations in Radar Coverage\", JANP 101 (Manual illustrating unusual\noperating characteristics of Service radar).\n21. Miscellaneous official letters and foreign intelligence reports\ndealing with subject.\n22. Copies of popular published works dealing with subject (articles\nin periodicals, newspaper clippings and books).\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\nTAB C\n\nSCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL ON\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n14 - 17 January 1953\n\nMEMBERS\nORGANIZATION\nFIELD OF COMPETENCY\n\nDr. H. P. Robertson (Chairman) California Institute of Technology Physics, weapons systems\nDr. Luis W. Alvarez University of California Physics, radar\nDr. Lloyd V. Berkner Associated Universities, Inc. Geophysics\nDr. Samuel Goudsmit Brookhaven National Laboratories Atomic structure, statistical problems\nDr. Thornton Page Office of Research Operations, Johns Hopkins University Astronomy, Astrophysics\n\nASSOCIATE MEMBERS\nDr. J. Allen Hynek Ohio State University Astronomy\nMr. Frederick C. Durant Arthur D. Little, Inc. Rockets, guided missiles\n\nINTERVIEWEES\nBrig. Gen. William M. Garland Commanding General, ATIC Scientific and technical intelligence\nDr. H. Marshall Chadwell Assistant Director, O/SI, CIA Scientific and technical intelligence\nMr. Ralph L. Clark Deputy Assistant Director, O/SI, CIA Scientific and technical intelligence\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\nTAB C\n\nINTERVIEWEES (con't)\nORGANIZATION\nFIELD OF COMPETENCY\n\nMr. Philip G. Strong Chief, Operations Staff, O/SI, CIA Scientific and technical intelligence\nMr. Stephan T. Poolsony Acting Chief, Special Study Group, D/I USAF Scientific and technical intelligence\nCapt. Edward J. Ruppelt, USAF Chief, Aerial Phenomena Branch, ATIC, USAF Scientific and technical intelligence\nMr. J. Dewey Fournet, Jr. The Ethyl Corporation Aero Eng.\nLt. R. S. Neasham, USN USN Photo Interpretation Laboratory, Anacostia Photo interpretation\nMr. Harry Woo USN Photo Interpretation Laboratory, Anacostia Photo interpretation\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET-SECRET\nIAC-D-67\n18 February 1953\n\nINTELLIGENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\n1. Transmitted herewith is a copy of the report (Tab A) of the scientific panel convened as a result of the action taken by the Intelligence Advisory Committee on 4 December (IAC-M-90, paragraph 3A) on this subject. Attached to the report are a summary of evidence presented (Tab B) and a list of the personnel participating (Tab C).\n\n2. It is proposed to transmit copies of this report to the Secretary of Defense; the Director, Federal Civil Defense Administration; and the Chairman, National Security Resources Board for their information and such action as they may feel necessary.\n\n3. The results of the panel's studies have moved CIA to conclude that no National Security Council Intelligence Directive on this subject is warranted.\n\n4. Please inform the undersigned by 25 February 1953 if you do not concur in the action and conclusions contained in paragraphs 2 and 3, above.\n\nJAMES Q. REBER\nSecretary\n\nMrs. Powell called 24 Feb and said that Mr. Amory said when approved for release to those mentioned in paragraph 2, copies should be sent to\nMr. Cutler\nMr. Tay\nC. D. Jackson\nTracey Barnes\nGeorge Morgan\n\nAir Force needs a few more days.\n\nSECRET-SECRET\nIAC-D-67\n18 February 1953"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nREPORT OF MEETINGS OF SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY PANEL\nON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nCONVENED BY OFFICE OF SCIENTIFIC INTELLIGENCE, CIA\nJanuary 14 - 18, 1953\n\nF. C. DURANT\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"S E C R E T\nSecurity Information\n\nINDEX\n\nPage\n\nPurpose 1\n\nPart I: History of Meetings of Panel 1\n\nPart II: Comments and Suggestions of Panel 7\n\nGeneral 7\n\nOn Lack of Danger 8\n\nAir Force Reporting System 9\n\nArtifacts of Extraterrestial Origin 10\n\nTremonton, Utah, Sighting 11\n\nPotential Related Dangers 15\n\nGeographic Locations of Unexplained\n Sightings 15\n\nInstrumentation to Obtain Data 16\n\nRadar Problem of Mutual Interference 18\n\nUnexplained Cosmic Ray Phenomena 19\n\nEducational Program 19\n\nUnofficial Investigating Groups 23\n\nIncrease in Number of Sightings 24\n\nReport of Panel Tab A\n\nList of Personnel Concerned with Meetings Tab B\n\nList of Documentary Evidence Presented Tab C\n\nS E C R E T\nSecurity Information"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"S E C R E T\nSecurity Information\n\nPART II: COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS OF PANEL\n\nGENERAL\n\nThe Panel Members were impressed (as have been others, includ-\ning O/SI personnel) in the lack of sound data in the great majority\nof case histories; also, in the lack of speedy follow-up due primarily\nto the modest size and limited facilities of the ATIC section concerned.\nAmong the case histories of significant sightings discussed in detail\nwere the following:\n\nBellefontaine, Ohio (1 August 1952); Tremonton, Utah (2 July 1952);\nGreat Falls, Montana (15 August 1950); Yaak, Montana (1 September\n1952); Washington, D. C. area (19 July 1952); and Haneda A.F.B.,\nJapan (5 August 1952), Port Huron, Michigan (29 July 1952); and\nPresque Isle, Maine (10 October 1952).\n\nAfter review and discussion of these cases (and about 15 others,\nin less detail), the Panel concluded that reasonable explanations\ncould be suggested for most sightings and \"by deduction and scientific\nmethod it could be induced (given additional data) that other cases\nmight be explained in a similar manner\". The Panel pointed out that\nbecause of the brevity of some sightings (e.g. 2-3 seconds) and the\ninability of the witnesses to express themselves clearly (semantics)\nthat conclusive explanations could not be expected for every case\nreported. Furthermore, it was considered that, normally, it would\nbe a great waste of effort to try to solve most of the sightings,\nunless such action would benefit a training and educational program\n(see below). The writings of Charles Fort were referenced to show\n\nS E C R E T\nSecurity Information\n-7-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"S E C R E T\nSecurity Information\n\nthat \"strange things in the sky\" had been recorded for hundreds of\nyears. It appeared obvious that there was no single explanation\nfor a majority of the things seen. The presence of radar and astro-\nnomical specialists on the Panel proved of value at once in their\nconfident recognition of phenomena related to their fields. It was\napparent that specialists in such additional fields as psychology,\nmeteorology, aerodynamics, ornithology and military air operations\nwould extend the ability of the Panel to recognize many more cate-\ngories of little-known phenomena.\n\nON LACK OF DANGER\n\nThe Panel concluded unanimously that there was no evidence of\na direct threat to national security in the objects sighted.\nInstances of \"Foo Fighters\" were cited. These were unexplained\nphenomena sighted by aircraft pilots during World War II in both\nEuropean and Far East theaters of operation wherein \"balls of light\"\nwould fly near or with the aircraft and maneuver rapidly. They were\nbelieved to be electrostatic (similar to St. Elmo's fire) or electro-\nmagnetic phenomena or possibly light reflections from ice crystals\nin the air, but their exact cause or nature was never defined. Both\nRobertson and Alvarez had been concerned in the investigation of\nthese phenomena, but David T. Griggs (Professor of Geophysics at\nthe University of California at Los Angeles) is believed to have\nbeen the most knowledgeable person on this subject. If the term\n\"flying saucers\" had been popular in 1943 - 1945, these objects would\n\nS E C R E T\nSecurity Information\n-8-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"S E C R E T\nSecurity Information\n\nhave been so labeled. It was interesting that in at least two\ncases reviewed that the object sighted was categorized by Robertson\nand Alvarez as probably \"Foo Fighters\", to date unexplained but not\ndangerous; they were not happy thus to dismiss the sightings by\ncalling them names. It was their feeling that these phenomena are\nnot beyond the domain of present knowledge of physical science, however.\n\nAIR FORCE REPORTING SYSTEM\n\nIt was the Panel's opinion that some of the Air Force concern\nover U.F.O.'s (notwithstanding Air Defense Command anxiety over fast\nradar tracks) was probably caused by public pressure. The result\ntoday is that the Air Force has instituted a fine channel for\nreceiving reports of nearly anything anyone sees in the sky and\nfails to understand. This has been particularly encouraged in popu-\nlar articles on this and other subjects, such as space travel and\nscience fiction. The result is the mass receipt of low-grade reports\nwhich tend to overload channels of communication with material quite\nirrelevant to hostile objects that might some day appear. The Panel\nagreed generally that this mass of poor-quality reports containing\nlittle, if any, scientific data was of no value. Quite the opposite,\nit was possibly dangerous in having a military service foster public\nconcern in \"nocturnal meandering lights\". The implication being,\nsince the interested agency was military, that these objects were\nor might be potential direct threats to national security. Accord-\ningly, the need for deemphasization made itself apparent. Comments\non a possible educational program are enumerated below.\n\nS E C R E T\nSecurity Information\n-9-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"S E C R E T\nSecurity Information\n\nIt was the opinion of Dr. Robertson that the \"saucer\" problem\nhad been found to be different in nature from the detection and\ninvestigation of German V-1 and V-2 guided missiles prior to their\noperational use in World War II. In this 1943-1944 intelligence\noperation (CROSSBOW), there was excellent intelligence and by June\n1944 there was material evidence of the existence of \"hardware\"\nobtained from crashed vehicles in Sweden. This evidence gave the\ninvestigating team a basis upon which to operate. The absence of any\n\"hardware\" resulting from unexplained U.F.O. sightings lends a \"will-\nof-the wisp) nature to the ATIC problem. The results of their investi-\ngation, to date, strongly indicate that no evidence of hostile act\nor danger exists. Furthermore, the current reporting system would\nhave little value in the case of detection of enemy attack by conven-\ntional aircraft or guided missiles; under such conditions \"hardware\"\nwould be available almost at once.\n\nARTIFACTS OF EXTRATERRESTIAL ORIGIN\n\nIt was interesting to note that none of the members of the\nPanel were loath to accept that this earth might be visited by extra-\nterrestrial intelligent beings of some sort, some day. What they did\nnot find was any evidence that related the objects sighted to space\ntravelers. Mr. Fournet, in his presentation, showed how he had elim-\ninated each of the known and probable causes of sightings leaving him\n\"extra-terrestial\" as the only one remaining in many cases. Fournet's\nbackground as an aeronautical engineer and technical intelligence\n\nS E C R E T\nSecurity Information\n-10-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nofficer (Project Officer, BLUEBOOK for 15 months) could not be\nslighted. However, the Panel could not accept any of the cases\nsighted by him because they were raw, unevaluated reports.\nTerrestrial explanations of the sightings were suggested in some\ncases and in others the time of sighting was so short as to cause\nsuspicion of visual impressions. It was noted by Dr. Goudsmit and\nothers that extraterrestrial artifacts, if they did exist, are no\ncause for alarm; rather, they are in the realm of natural phenomena\nsubject to scientific study, just as cosmic rays were at the time\nof their discovery 20 to 30 years ago. This was an attitude in\nwhich Dr. Robertson did not concur, as he felt that such artifacts\nwould be of immediate and great concern not only to the U. S. but\nto all countries. (Nothing like a common threat to unite peoples!)\nDr. Page noted that present astronomical knowledge of the solar\nsystem makes the existence of intelligent beings (as we know the\nterm) elsewhere than on the earth extremely unlikely, and the\nconcentration of their attention by any controllable means confined\nto any one continent of the earth quite preposterous.\nTREMONTON, UTAH, SIGHTING\n\nThis case was considered significant because of the excellent\ndocumentary evidence in the form of Kodachrome motion picture films\n(about 1600 frames). The Panel studied these films, the case history,\nATIC's interpretation, and received a briefing by representatives of\nthe USN Photo Interpretation Laboratory on their analysis of the\nfilm. This team had expended (at Air Force request) approximately\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information\n-11-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\n1000 man-hours of professional and sub-professional time in the\npreparation of graph plots of individual frames of the film, showing\ning apparent and relative motion of objects and variation in their\nlight intensity. It was the opinion of the P.I.L. representatives\nthat the objects sighted were not birds, balloons or aircraft,\nwere \"not reflections because there was no blinking while passing\nthrough 60° of arc\" and were, therefore, \"self-luminous\". Plots of\nmotion and variation in light intensity of the objects were displayed. While the Panel Members were impressed by the evident\nenthusiasm, industry and extent of effort of the P.I.L. team, they\ncould not accept the conclusions reached. Some of the reasons for\nthis were as follows:\na. A semi-spherical object can readily produce a reflection\nof sunlight without \"blinking\" through 60° of arc travel.\nb. Although no data was available on the \"albedo\" of birds or\npolyethylene balloons in bright sunlight, the apparent\nmotions, sizes and brightnesses of the objects were\nconsidered strongly to suggest birds, particularly after\nthe Panel viewed a short film showing high reflectivity\nof seagulls in bright sunlight.\nc. P.I.L. description of the objects sighted as \"circular,\nbluish-white\" in color would be expected in cases of\nspecular reflections of sunlight from convex surfaces where\nthe brilliance of the reflection would obscure other portions\nof the object.\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information\n-12-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nd. Objects in the Great Falls case were believed to have\nprobably been aircraft, and the bright lights such reflections.\ne. There was no valid reason for the attempt to relate the objects\nin the Tremonton sighting to those in the Great Falls sight-\ning. This may have been due to misunderstanding in their\ndirective. The objects in the Great Falls sighting are\nstrongly suspected of being reflections of aircraft known to\nhave been in the area.\nf. The intensity change in the Tremonton lights was too great\nfor acceptance of the P.I.L. hypothesis that the apparent\nmotion and changing intensity of the lights indicated extremely\nhigh speed in small orbital paths.\ng. Apparent lack of guidance of investigators by those familiar\nwith U.F.O. reports and explanations.\nh. Analysis of light intensity of objects made from duplicate\nrather than original film. The original film was noted to\nhave a much lighter background (affecting relative brightness\nof object) and the objects appeared much less bright.\ni. Method of obtaining data of light intensity appeared faulty\nbecause of unsuitability of equipment and questionable\nassumptions in making averages of readings.\nj. No data had been obtained on the sensitivity of Kodachrome\nfilm to light of various intensities using the same camera\ntype at the same lens openings.\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information\n-13-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nk. Hand \"jitter\" frequencies (obtainable from early part of\nTremonton film) were not removed from the plots of the\n\"single pass plots\" at the end of the film.\nThe Panel believed strongly that the data available on this\nsighting was sufficient for positive identification if further data\nis obtained by photographing polyethylene \"pillow\" balloons released\nnear the site under similar weather conditions, checking bird flight\nand reflection characteristics with competent ornithologists and\ncalculating apparent \"G\" forces acting upon objects from their apparent\ntracks. It was concluded that the results of such tests would prob-\nably lead to creditable explanations of value in an educational or\ntraining program. However, the Panel noted that the cost in technical\nmanpower effort required to follow up and explain every one of the\nthousand or more reports received through channels each year (1,900 in\n1952) could not be justified. It was felt that there will always be\nsightings, for which complete data is lacking, that can only be\nexplained with disproportionate effort and with a long time delay, if\nat all. The long delay in explaining a sighting tends to eliminate\nany intelligence value. The educational or training program should\nhave as a major purpose the elimination of popular feeling that every\nsighting, no matter how poor the data, must be explained in detail.\nAttention should be directed to the requirement among scientists that\na new phenomena, to be accepted, must be completely and convincingly\ndocumented. In other words, the burden of proof is on the sighter,\nnot the explainer.\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information\n-14-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nPOTENTIAL RELATED DANGERS\n\nThe Panel Members were in agreement with O/SI opinion that,\nalthough evidence of any direct threat from these sightings was\nwholly lacking, related dangers might well exist resulting from:\na. Misidentification of actual enemy artifacts by defense\npersonnel.\nb. Overloading of emergency reporting channels with \"false\"\ninformation (\"noise to signal ratio\" analogy-Barkner).\nc. Subjectivity of public to mass hysteria and greater vul-\nnerability to possible enemy psychological warfare.\nAlthough not the concern of CIA, the first two of those problems\nmay seriously affect the Air Defense intelligence system, and should\nbe studied by experts, possibly under ADC. If U.F.O.'s becomes dis-\ncredited in a reaction to the \"flying saucer\" scare, or if report-\ning channels are saturated with false and poorly documented reports,\nour capability of detecting hostile activity will be reduced.\nDr. Page noted that more competent screening or filtering of reported\nsightings at or near the source is required, and that this can best\nbe accomplished by an educational program.\nGEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS OF UNEXPLAINED SIGHTINGS\n\nThe map prepared by ATIC showing geographic locations of officially\nreported unexplained sightings (1952 only) was examined by the Panel.\nThis map showed clusters in certain strategic areas such as Los Alamos.\nThis might be explained on the basis of 24-hour watchful guard and\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information\n-15-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nawareness of security measures near such locations. On the other\nhand, there had been no sightings in the vicinity of sensitive\nrelated AE establishments while there were occasionally multiple\ncases of unexplained sightings in non-strategic areas. Furthermore,\nthere appeared to be no logical relationship to population centers.\nThe Panel could find no ready explanation for these clusters. It\nwas noted, however, that if terrestrial artifacts were to be observed\nit would be likely that they would be seen first near foreign areas\nrather than central U. S.\nINSTRUMENTATION TO OBTAIN DATA\nThe Panel was of the opinion that the present ATIC program to\nplace 100 inexpensive 35 mm. stereo cameras in the hands of various\nairport control tower operators would probably produce little valu-\nable data related to U.F.O.'s. However, it was recognized that\nsuch action would tend to allay public concern in the subject until\nan educational program had taken effect. It was believed that pro-\ncurement of these cameras was partly the result of public pressure\nin July 1952. With the poor results of the year-long Project\nTWINKLE program of 24-hour instrumentation watch (two frames of\nfilm showing nothing distinguishable), a widespread program of sky-\nwatching would not be expected to yield much direct data of value.\nThere was considerable discussion of a possible \"sky patrol\" by\namateur astronomers (Hynek) and by wide-angle cameras (Page). Dr. Page\nand Dr. Robertson pointed out that at present a considerable fraction\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information\n-16-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nof the sky is now--and has been for many years--under surveillance\nevery clear night in several meteor and aurora observing programs as\nwell as sky mapping programs at the various locations listed below.\nAlthough the attention of these astronomers is largely directed\ntoward identified rather than unidentified objects, no case of any\nstriking unidentified object is known to Dr. Page or Dr. Hynek. Such\nan object would most certainly be reported if found on patrol plates.\nA case was cited where an astronomer refused to interrupt his\nexposure in order to photograph an alleged sighting in a different\npart of the sky. This led Dr. Hynek to say that, if a program of\nwatching could be an adjunct of planned astronomical programs, little\ncost would be involved and that the trained astronomical personnel\nmight photograph a sighting of an unidentified object.\nThe location of some of these programs and their directors are\nbelieved to be:\n\na. Harvard University, Cambridge and New Mexico (meteor patrol)--\n Whipple.\nb. Yerkes Observatory, University of Chicago and Fort Davis, Texas\n (several programs)--Meinel (aurorae), Kuiper (asteroids),\n Morgan (wide angle camera).\nc. University of Alaska, Fairbanks (aurorae)--Elvey\nd. Dominion Observatory, Ottawa (meteors)--Millman\ne. Palomar Observatory, California (sky map)--Minkowski\nf. Lick Observatory, California (sky map)--Shane\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information\n-17-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nIt was agreed by the Panel that no government-sponsored program\nof optical nation-wide sky patrol is worthwhile at the present time,\nand that the encouragement of amateur astronomers to undertake such\na program might have the adverse effect of over-emphasizing \"flying\nsaucer\" stories in the public mind. However, the issue of radar scope\ncameras for recording peculiar radar echoes would serve several pur-\nposes, including the better understanding of radar interference as\nwell as identification of U.F.O.'s.\nRADAR PROBLEM OF MUTUAL INTERFERENCE\nThis characteristic problem of radar operation wherein the pulse\nsignal (of approximately the same frequency) from station A may be\npicked up on the screen of station B and show as a high-speed track\nor series of dots was recognized to have probably caused a number of\nU.F.O. reports. This problem was underlined by information received\nindicating ADC concern in solving this problem of signal identification\nbefore service use of very high-speed aircraft or guided missiles\n(1955-1956). Dr. Berkner believed that one answer to this problem\nwas the use of a \"doppler filter\" in the receiving circuit. Dr. Alvarez\nsuggested that the problem might be better solved by the use of a\n\"controlled jitter\" wherein the operator receiving \"very fast tracks\"\n(on the order of 1000- 10,000 m.p.h.) would operate a circuit which\nwould alter slightly his station's pulse frequency rate. If the signal\nreceived on the screen had been caused by mutual interference with\nanother station, the track would now show itself at a different distance\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information\n-18-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nfrom the center of the screen, if it still appeared at all. Dr. Alvarez\nfelt such a technical solution was simpler and would cost much less than\na \"doppler filter\".\nUNEXPLAINED COSMIC RAY PHENOMENA\nTwo reported cases were examined: one at Palomar Mountain, California,\nin October 1949, when cosmic ray counters went \"off scale for a few seconds\",\napparently while a \"V\" of flying saucers was observed visually; and two, a\nseries of observations by the \"Los Alamos Bird Watchers Association\" from\nAugust 1950 to January 1951, when cosmic ray coincidence counters behaved\nqueerly. Circuit diagrams and records were available for the latter, and\nDr. Alvarez was able quickly to point out that the recorded data were\nundoubtedly due to instrumental effects that would have been recognized\nas such by more experienced observers.\nThe implication that radioactive effects were correlated with\nunidentified flying objects in these two cases was, therefore, rejected\nby the Panel.\nEDUCATIONAL PROGRAM\nThe Panel's concept of a broad educational program integrating\nefforts of all concerned agencies was that it should have two major\naims: training and \"debunking\".\nThe training aim would result in proper recognition of unusually\nilluminated objects (e.g., balloons, aircraft reflections) as well as\nnatural phenomena (meteors, fireballs, mirages, noctilucent clouds).\nBoth visual and radar recognition are concerned. There would be many\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information\n-19-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nlevels in such education from enlisted personnel to command and research\npersonnel. Relative emphasis and degree of explanation of different\nprograms would correspond to the categories of duty (e.g., radar operators;\npilots; control tower operators; Ground Observer Corps personnel; and\nofficers and enlisted men in other categories.) This training should\nresult in a marked reduction in reports caused by misidentification\nand resultant confusion.\nThe \"debunking\" aim would result in reduction in public interest\nin \"flying saucers\" which today evokes a strong psychological reaction.\nThis education could be accomplished by mass media such as television,\nmotion pictures, and popular articles. Basis of such education would\nbe actual case histories which had been puzzling at first but later\nexplained. As in the case of conjuring tricks, there is much less\nstimulation if the \"secret\" is known. Such a program should tend to\nreduce the current gullibility of the public and consequently their\nsusceptibility to clever hostile propaganda. The Panel noted that the\ngeneral absence of Russian propaganda based on a subject with so many\nobvious possibilities for exploitation might indicate a possible Russian\nofficial policy.\nMembers of the Panel had various suggestions related to the plan-\nning of such an educational program. It was felt strongly that\npsychologists familiar with mass psychology should advise on the nature\nand extent of the program. In this connection, Dr. Hadley Cantril\n(Princeton University) was suggested. Cantril authored \"Invasion from\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information\n-20-"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mars\", (a study in the psychology of panic, written about the famous\nOrson Welles radio broadcast in 1938) and has since performed advanced\nlaboratory studies in the field of perception. The names of Don Marquis\n(University of Michigan) and Leo Rosten were mentioned as possibly\nsuitable as consultant psychologists. Also, someone familiar with\nmass communication techniques, perhaps an advertising expert, would be\nhelpful. Arthur Godfrey was mentioned as possibly a valuable channel\nof communication reaching a mass audience of certain levels. Dr. Berkner\nsuggested the U. S. Navy (ONR) Special Devices Center, Sands Point, L. I.,\nas a potentially valuable organization to assist in such an educational\nprogram. The teaching techniques used by this agency for aircraft\nidentification during the past war was cited as an example of a similar\neducational task. The Jam Handy Co. which made World War II training\nfilms (motion picture and slide strips) was also suggested, as well as\nWalt Disney, Inc. animated cartoons. Dr. Hynek suggested that the\namateur astronomers in the U. S. might be a potential source of enthusi-\nastic talent \"to spread the gospel\". It was believed that business\nclubs, high schools, colleges, and television stations would all be\npleased to cooperate in the showing of documentary type motion pictures\nif prepared in an interesting manner. The use of true cases showing\nfirst the \"mystery\" and then the \"explanation\" would be forceful.\nTo plan and execute such a program, the Panel believed was no\nmean task. The current investigatory group at ATIC would, of necessity,\nhave to be closely integrated for support with respect to not only the"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"historical cases but the current ones. Recent cases are probably much\nmore susceptible to explanation than older ones; first, because of\nATIC's experience and, secondly, their knowledge of most plausible\nexplanations. The Panel believed that some expansion of the ATIC effort\nwould certainly be required to support such a program. It was believed\ninappropriate to state exactly how large a Table of Organization would\nbe required. Captain Ruppelt of ATIC unofficially proposed, for purposes\nof analyzing and evaluating reports:\na. An analysts' panel of four officers\nb. Four officer investigators\nc. A briefing officer\nd. An ADC liaison officer\ne. A weather and balloon data officer\nf. An astronomical consultant\ng. A Group Leader, with administrative assistant, file clerks and\nstenographers.\nThis proposal met with generally favorable comment. The Panel\nbelieved that, with ATIC's support, the educational program of \"train-\ning and debunking\" outlined above might be required for a minimum of\none and one-half to two years. At the end of this time, the dangers\nrelated to \"flying saucers\" should have been greatly reduced if not\neliminated. Cooperation from other military services and agencies\nconcerned (e.g., Federal Civil Defense Administration) would be a\nnecessity. In investigating significant cases (such as the Tremonton,\nUtah, sighting), controlled experiments might be required. An example"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"would be the photographing of \"pillow balloons\" at different distances\nunder similar weather conditions at the site.\nThe help of one or two psychologists and writers and a subcontractor\nto produce training films would be necessary in addition. The Panel\nconsidered that ATIC's efforts, temporarily expanded as necessary,\ncould be most useful in implementing any action taken as a result of\nits recommendations. Experience and records in ATIC would be of value\nin both the public educational and service training program envisaged.\nDr. Robertson at least was of the opinion that after public gullibility\nlessened and the service organizations, such as ADC, had been trained\nto sift out the more readily explained spurious sightings, there would\nstill be a role for a very modest-sized ATIC section to cope with the\nresiduum of items of possible scientific intelligence value. This\nsection should concentrate on energetically following up (perhaps on\nthe advice of qualified Air Force Scientific Advisory Board members)\nthose cases which seemed to indicate the evidence of unconventional\nenemy artifacts. Reports of such artifacts would be expected to\narise mainly from Western outposts in far closer proximity to the\nIron Curtain than Lubbock, Texas!\nUNOFFICIAL INVESTIGATING GROUPS\nThe Panel took cognizance of the existence of such groups as the\n\"Civilian Flying Saucer Investigators\" (Los Angeles) and the \"Aerial\nPhenomena Research Organization (Wisconsin)\". It was believed that\nsuch organizations should be watched because of their potentially"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"great influence on mass thinking if widespread sightings should occur.\nThe apparent irresponsibility and the possible use of such groups\nfor subversive purposes should be kept in mind.\nINCREASE IN NUMBER OF SIGHTINGS\nThe consensus of the Panel was, based upon the history of the\nsubject, that the number of sightings could be reasonably expected\nto increase again this summer.\nF. G. DURANT III"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ACCESS RESTRICTED\nDOCUMENT NO. 400165 DATED 16 FEB 53\nHAS BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM THIS FILE AND IS LOCATED IN:\nCIA JOB NO. 84T00286R\nBOX NO. 4\nFOLDER NO. HS/HC 475\n(10)\n6 pp -- Memo\nTHIS ITEM HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BECAUSE IT CONTAINS SECURITY\nCLASSIFIED INFORMATION OR OTHERWISE RESTRICTED INFORMATION.\nNATIONAL SECURITY ACT OF 1947\nCIA ACT OF 1949 AS AMENDED\nAUTHORITY\nDOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL NOTICE\nFORM 8-90 4409"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dear Mr. Becker:\n\nConfirming our brief conversation in the hall the other day, I enclose a memorandum from General Maxwell on the subject. We will advise you when we receive the report referred to in this memo.\n\nSincerely,\n\nS/Walter G. Whitman\n\nWALTER G. WHITMAN\nChairman\n\nEnclosure (1)\n\nMr. Loftus E. Becker\nDeputy Director for Intelligence\nCentral Intelligence Agency\n2430 E Street, N.W.\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\n(This document may be declassified upon removal of Confidential Attachment.)"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n4 November 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR CHAIRMAN, RDB\n\nSUBJECT: Radar Phantoms\n\n1. At our conference here the other day with Mr. Becker, Mr. Clark and General Samford, it was agreed that we would evaluate the radar phantoms from the viewpoint of the seriousness of the problem to the Air Defense Command.\n\n2. Inquiries made to the appropriate sections of the Air Staff did not disclose any undue concern over the phantoms. I believe that this is because in war and in peace the problem of identifying the vast number of aircraft tracks seen by the Air Defense radars is a confusing factor of much greater magnitude. However, to make sure that we are not overlooking any important considerations, the Air Force has asked the Air Defense Command to study this problem and make recommendations.\n\n3. This, then, is an interim report to you, because it may be several weeks before the answer arrives from the Air Defense Command.\n\n4. Naturally there is general concern about the radar phantoms and the larger problem of the flying saucers because we are unable to explain a sizeable percentage of the reports. However, the concensus seems to be that a great deal of activity and study is going on in this field which will do much to clarify the situation. The subject of anomalous radar propagation has been under study for some time and will continue with appropriate emphasis. The Air Technical Intelligence Center, which analyzes \"saucer\" reports, will emphasize the radar confusion aspect. It is also my feeling that, whereas formerly this was a subject which scientific men did not wish to become involved in, it is now becoming \"respectable\" to study the subject and to discuss it publicly. If this trend continues and our astronomers and other scientists do turn their talents to the problem, I am sure that the answers will be expedited.\n\nALFRED R. MAXWELL\nBrig. General, USAF\nAir Force Secretary"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\n13 October 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director (Intelligence)\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Saucers\n\n1. Flying unidentified objects (Flying Saucers) have been the subject of Air Force observation and analysis because of the possibility that such objects might conceivably be an attack on the U.S. If they are not, it is conceivable that the enemy might take advantage of the confusion created by the by the Flying Saucers to use at his convenience some air weapon against the United States.\n\n2. Thus far Defense Department conducted research in this area has been confined to the effort by A-2 through ATIC with the result that an explanation has been provided on all but 20 per cent of the total 1500 reported sightings of Flying Saucers.\n\n3. Determination of the scientific capabilities of the USSR to create and control Flying Saucers as a weapon against the United States is a primary concern of the CIA/OSI. Its review of existing information does not lead to the conclusion that the saucers are USSR created or controlled. It is the view of OSI that collection of intelligence information on the capabilities of the USSR to produce, launch, and control Flying Saucers and the analysis of such data as might be collected cannot be very effective until there is adequate fundamental scientific research launched to clarify the nature and causes of Flying Saucers and to devise means whereby they might be instantly identified.\n\n4. The major scientific intelligence problems in respect to Saucers are:\n\na. What is the present level of Soviet knowledge regarding these phenomena?\n\nb. What are possible Soviet capabilities to utilize these phenomena to the detriment of US security interests?\n\nc. What effect do flying saucers have on our warning system.\n\nThis document has been approved for release through the HISTORICAL REVIEW PROGRAM of the Central Intelligence Agency.\nDate 7 JUN 91\nHRP 89-2\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority NND 917075\nBy Q. Fuchs NARA Date 7/31/97"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\n5. Conclusions:\n\na. The instigation of fundamental scientific research is the primary responsibility of the Defense Department.\n\nb. The DCI should dispatch to Secretary Lovett along the lines of the attached. The cover sheet explaining to the IAC why the proposed letter is submitted is also attached. [handwritten: after IAC] [handwritten: (accelerated/alternatively: the NSC)] (We should discuss this draft & the idea with A-2 before IAC)\n\nc. It is far too early in view of the present state of our knowledge regarding Flying Saucers for psychological warfare planners to start planning how the United States might use U.S. Flying Saucers against the enemy.\n\nd. When intelligence has submitted the National Estimate on Flying Saucers there will be the time and basis for a public policy to reduce or restrain mass hysteria.\n\nJAMES Q. RIBER\nAssistant Director\nIntelligence Coordination\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority NND917075\nBy Q. Fuchs NARA Date 7/31/97"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nDRAFT COVER SHEET\n\nINTELLIGENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE\n\nFlying Unidentified Objects (Flying Saucers)\n\n[alternatively: the NSC]\n\n1. Attached is a proposed letter to Secretary Lovett from the DCI recommending the initiation of fundamental scientific research with respect to the nature and causes of unidentified flying objects (Flying Saucers).\n\n2. While it is recognized that the implications of Flying Saucers are of primary concern to the Defense Department in carrying out its responsibility to defend the United States, it is also believed that intelligence must request of appropriate authority such assistance as it needs to carry out its responsibility. It is believed that the scientific research required and the intelligence research contingent thereon can be most fruitful if they go hand in hand.\n\n3. Recommendations:\n\na. That the IAC concur in the proposed letter to the Secretary of Defense.\n\nb. That the IAC request the Watch Committee to give close attention to indications which may reflect Russian actions are being taken with respect to or on the basis of cognizance of Flying Saucers or with respect to the state of United States public opinion in respect of Flying Saucers.\n\nThis document has been approved for release through the HISTORICAL REVIEW PROGRAM of the Central Intelligence Agency.\nDate 7 JUN 91\nHRP 89-2"} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DRAFT LETTER\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: Secretary of Defense [alternatively: The NSC]\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects (Flying Saucers)\n\n1. The IAC has reviewed the current situation concerning unidentified flying objects which have caused extensive speculation in the press and have been the subject of concern to Government organizations. The Air Force, within the limitations of manpower which could be devoted to the subject, has thus far carried the full responsibility for investigating and analyzing individual reports of sightings. Since 1947, approximately 1500 official reports of sightings have been received and, of these, about 20% are as yet unexplained.\n\n2. It is my view and that of the IAC that this situation has possible implications for our national security with respect to the vulnerability of the U.S. to air attack. Intelligence, however, cannot discharge its responsibilities with regard to estimating the capabilities of an enemy to create and use such phenomena against the U.S. unless we first determine through scientific research whether or not such phenomena can in fact be generated and controlled by humans.\n\n3. It is therefore recommended, that the Department of Defense (be directed to) undertake an expanded scientific research program to reveal the nature of the various phenomena which are causing these sightings and means by which these phenomena may be identified immediately. It is recommended that in such a project there be close cooperation between those conducting the research and scientific and technical intelligence. The IAC agencies are prepared to do their part in such a project."} {"doc_id":"a0df92d7a36a310c","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a0eb13a366e5663c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"a0eb13a366e5663c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"a0eb13a366e5663c","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"a0eb13a366e5663c","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"a0eb13a366e5663c","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"a0eb13a366e5663c","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"a0eb13a366e5663c","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): (SECRET//NOFORN)\n1X UAP DETECTED WITH DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION SUCH AS BEING A TRIANGLUAR AND METALLIC UAP.\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): (SECRET//NOFORN)\nDURING RTB AT 1319Z, 1.4(a) OBSERVED 1X UAP WHILE TRANSITING OVER 363453N 0255943E FLYING AT AN ALTITUDE OF 24,989FT MSL AND SPEED OF 168KTS.\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\n\n1.4(a)\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"a1df582eda395ad2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260710\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\nMisrep prod-dod-11604218\nNarrative\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT 291734:00ZJUL25, [REDACTED] TOOK OFF FROM [REDACTED] VIA SLR. [REDACTED] PROCEEDED TO FRAGGED TASKING TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED.\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT 292022:00ZJUL25 [REDACTED] OBSERVED AN UAP (SEE UAP 1).\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT 291554:00ZJUL25, [REDACTED] WAS 7-LINED TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED. AT [REDACTED] ARRIVED ON-STATION AND CHECKED IN WITH DATA MASKED AND PERFORMED FMV COLLECTION AT[REDACTED] (SEE ISR 1).\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT 300931:00ZJUL25, [REDACTED] RECIVED A NIB TASKING TO SUPPORT DATA MASKED (SEE NIB 1).\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT [REDACTED] RETURNED TO BASE. AT [REDACTED] LANDED AT [REDACTED] VIA SLR. [REDACTED] LAST ENGINE SHUTDOWN AT 301426:00ZJUL25. FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY GET. [REDACTED] TASKINGS PROSECUTED. [REDACTED] TASKINGS PROSECUTED. [REDACTED] [REDACTED].\n(S/RELIDO) Mission Narrative\nAdmin\nCLASSIFICATION\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: NOFORN\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MS\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20500729\nOPERATION\n• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Domain: AIR\n[REDACTED]\nDECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a1df582eda395ad2","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260710\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFSOC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\nMSGID\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 65 SOS\n• Mission Wing: 1 SOW\n• Submit Date:\nMSNID\n• Tasking Order (ATO): TM\n• Mission Type: [REDACTED]\n• ATO Mission Number: [REDACTED]\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: AIR FORCE\nPoc\nPOC\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: [REDACTED]\n• Wing: [REDACTED]\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\nQC\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: [REDACTED]\n• Wing: [REDACTED]\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nDECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a1df582eda395ad2","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260710\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\nAPPROVER\n• Rank: TSgt\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: Unit Support Team\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: [REDACTED]\nINGEST\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\nACEQUIP\nACEQUIP\n• Aircraft Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• Radar Name or Destination: [REDACTED]\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator:\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data:\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator:\n• Chaff Designator:\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges:\n• Flare Designator:\n• Num Flares:\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n[REDACTED]\nDECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a1df582eda395ad2","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260710\n(SECRET//NOFORN)\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM:\n• Num IR-Guided AAM:\n• Gun Name or Designator:\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each:\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: [REDACTED]\n• Additional Avionics: [REDACTED]\n• Data Link: [REDACTED]\n• Gentext:\nTimeline\nTakeoff\n• Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): [REDACTED]\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): [REDACTED]\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): [REDACTED]\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 291734:00ZJUL25\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): [REDACTED]\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Mission Canceled:\nLanding\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): [REDACTED]\n• Last Land Time: 301411:00ZJUL25\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 301426:00ZJUL25\n• Total Mission Time: [REDACTED]\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\nISR\n• Time-on Station DTG: 292236:01ZJUL25\n• Time-off Station DTG: 300930:00ZJUL25\n• Aircraft Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• Msn Type: [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nDECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a1df582eda395ad2","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260710\n• Primary Sensor: [REDACTED]\n• Sensors Available: [REDACTED]\n• Tasking Type: Planned\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): DATA MASKED\n• BE Number (if NTISR):\n• Tasked Start Point: [REDACTED]\n• Activity Description: [REDACTED]\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR):\n• EEIs Observed: Yes\n• Number of EEIs: 1\n• Global Campaign Plan: GCP - VEO (violent extremist group)\nGENTEXT/ISR\n• Gentext: (SECRET//NOFORN) AT 292236:00ZJUL25, [REDACTED] ARRIVED AT SP\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT 292236:00ZJUL25 [REDACTED] OBSERVED 1X[REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n(SECRET//NOFORN) FROM 2[REDACTED] OBSERVED [REDACTED]\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT 300911:01ZJUL25, [REDACTED] OBSERVED [REDACTED]\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT 300912:01ZJUL25, [REDACTED] OBSERVED [REDACTED]\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT 300914:01ZJUL25, [REDACTED] OBSERVED [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT 300930:01ZJUL25, [REDACTED] CALLED RTB\n(SECRET//NOFORN) FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY GET\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n• Supported Unit: DATA MASKED\n• Supported Operation: [REDACTED]\n• Precoord Time: [REDACTED]\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\nWEATHER\n• Weather: (UNCLASSIFIED) CLEAR WX\n• WX Mission Impact: No Impact\n• Location of WX Occurrence:\n• Cause of Impact:\nEFFECTIVENESS\n• Tasker:\n[REDACTED]\nDECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a1df582eda395ad2","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Intel Gap Filled?: No\n• Gentext: (UNCLASSIFIED) SATISFACTORY\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: [REDACTED]\n• Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• JTAR Number:\n• Killbox (Location):\n• Mission Type: [REDACTED]\n• JTAC Callsign:\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: [REDACTED]\n• Total Time On Station: [REDACTED]\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 292022:32ZJUL25\n• UAP Event Type: UAP Incident\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations: SEEMED TO BE AGILE, FREQUENTLY CHNAGING DIRECTION\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions: NONE\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: [REDACTED]\n• Tail Number: [REDACTED]\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: [REDACTED]\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: [REDACTED]\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory: NW\n• Observer Assessment of UAP: [REDACTED]\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: 120 KIAS\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns):: NO\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters: [REDACTED]\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable): UNK\n• Operational Range: UNK\n• UAP Physical State: Solid\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n• UAP Propulsion Means: UNKNOWN\n• UAP Payload:\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"a1df582eda395ad2","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe): UNKNOWN\n• UAP Signatures: [REDACTED]\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP RF Frequency: UNKNOWN\n• UAP RF Duration: UNKNOWN\n• UAP Event Serial Number: UNKNOWN\n• UAP Effects on Persons: NO\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Effects on Equipment: NONE\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Rank/Grade: SSGT/E5\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE): [REDACTED]\n• Observer Engagement of UAP (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• First Coordinate: [REDACTED]\n• First Seen Radius: 5\n• Last Accuracy: Estimated\n• Last Coordinate: [REDACTED]\n• Last Seen Radius: 5\n• Kinetic Altitude Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Altitude: FL220\n• Kinetic Depth Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Depth: UNKNOWN\n• Kinetic Velocity Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Velocity: 48OMPH\n• Kinetic Trajectory Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Trajectory: SE\n• UAP Date of DoD Acquisition: 292022:32ZJUL25\n• UAP Reaction to Observation, Interrogation, Engagement (yes/no; if yes, describe): NONE. FOLLOWED OF OWN ACCORD UNTIL LIST. REPORTED AFTERWARDS\n• UAP Anomalous Characteristics/ Behaviors: ABLE TO CHANGE DIRECTIONS QUICKLY AND SIMULTANEOUSLY\n• First Accuracy: Estimated\n• Call Sign: [REDACTED]\n• UAP First Seen Location:\n• UAP Last Seen Location:\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): 6X SMALL SPHERICAL OBJECTS GROUPED TOGETHER\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): [REDACTED] WHILE TRANSITING TO\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"a1df582eda395ad2","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nTGT [REDACTED] PERFORMED SCANS ON THE GROUND WHILE ENROUTE TO SUPPORT [REDACTED]\n\nNIB\n\n• Earliest Time Intelligence of Value: [REDACTED]\n• Latest Time Intelligence of Value: [REDACTED]\n• NIB ID: -\n• ISR Support or Effect: MULTI-INT\n• Target Name: [REDACTED]\n• Location of Interest (LOI): [REDACTED]\n• Location (MGRS): [REDACTED]\n• Requested Classification of Reports: SECRET//NOFORN\n• Dissemination POCs or Common File: -\n• EEIs: (SECRET//NOFORN) INTENT IS TO IDENTIFY VEHICLES ASW SP\n\nGENTEXT/NIB\n\n• Gentext: (SECRET//NOFORN) AT [REDACTED] ARRIVED AT NIB LOCATION AND OBSERVED NO EEI RELATED ACTIVITY [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nINT 2-2-7 UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFO)\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 974373\nBest Possible Image\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775\nPage 232"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nAIR TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nOHIO\n17 January 1955\nMajor General John A. Samford\nDirector of Intelligence\nHeadquarters, USAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear General Samford:\n\nI thought you might be interested in what is being done in the matter of the A. V. Roe (Canada) Project Y-2 (Secret) which we discussed recently and the subject of which was recently given \"popular\" treatment in the AID.\n\nWe have been thoroughly briefed by the Bombardment Aircraft Division, Director of Weapons Systems Operations, WADC, on their present knowledge. This Division of WADC has issued a one-year study contract, dated 29 December 1954, to A. V. Roe, Canada, on subject project. This study will attempt to develop sufficient analytical, design and test data to determine the practicability of utilizing the well known design principles which are employed,in the proposed vehicle.\n\nAs you know, we feel very strongly that some truly factual data must be obtained to correct (or substantiate) the picture so far presented on this device by the Press and by the Air Intelligence Digest, a picture which doubtless provides comfort and support to popular writers on the subject.\n\nAccordingly, we have initiated a joint WADC/ATIC project which will result in a Technical Report to be ready 15 February 1955. This report will assemble all available information on the subject and will present such conclusions as can safely be drawn, this far ahead of the A. V. Roe study. It will be forwarded to you, without delay, upon completion.\n\nSincerely,\n\nHAROLD E. WATSON\nBrigadier General, USAF\nCommander\n\nT55-0663\nSECRET\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775\nPage 233"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHeadquarters United States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nSCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD TO THE CHIEF OF STAFF, USAF\n\nSCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD REPORT ON AVRO PROJECT Y2\n\nNovember 1954\n\nThis document consists of 9 pages\nCopy Number 2 of 33 copies.\n\nSECRET\n\nDS 55-0323-2\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775\nPage 234"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHeadquarters United States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\n10 December 1954\n\nLieutenant General Donald L. Putt\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Development\nHeadquarters United States Air Force\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Don:\n\nIn response to your request for SAB comments on the Avro \"Saucer\" project, the SAB has taken the following action:\n\nThe Aircraft and Propulsion Panels were briefed on September 28 by representatives of Hq. ARDC, at the time of the Fall meeting of the Board in Omaha. The tentative conclusions of both panels immediately after this briefing were to the effect that this project warranted no more than limited support. However, to assure thorough consideration of this project, I requested representatives of these two panels to supplement the briefings given to them at Omaha by a visit to A. V. Roe Canada Ltd., Malton, Ontario.\n\nWith the advice of Clark Millikan and Dean Soderberg, a select committee was chosen to conclude this study. It was composed of Dean Soderberg, Chairman of the Propulsion Panel and senior member of the group; Professor Markham, of the Aircraft Panel; and Mr. Donovan, who has been serving both as a member of the Aircraft Panel and as liaison member with the Propulsion Panel.\n\nThe attached report of this group is forwarded with my approval, representing the results of the SAB's completed study.\n\nSincerely,\n\n/s/\n\nJ. H. DOOLITTLE\nActing Chairman\nScientific Advisory Board\nOffice of the Chief of Staff\n\nInclosure\n\nSECRET\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775\nPage 235"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nDecember 6, 1954\n\nGeneral James H. Doolittle, Acting Chairman\nScientific Advisory Board\nOffice of the Chief of Staff\nHeadquarters United States Air Force\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear General Doolittle:\n\nAt your request we constituted ourselves an ad hoc group to conclude the studies of the A.V. Roe Company project Y2, which was presented to the Scientific Advisory Board at the Omaha meetings in September of this year. We visited the A. V. Roe Company in Toronto on November 17 and 18. After considering the information available to us, we present the following report.\n\nWe wish to commend the officials of the A. V. Roe Company for a most courteous and well-planned reception, making the fullest possible use of the available time.\n\nThe Y2 is an airplane of circular plan form, originally built up around a radial flow turbojet with the exhaust capable of being deflected downward in an annular jet for take-off and hovering near the ground. The airplane is designed for supersonic flight at high altitude, under which condition the exhaust jet is directed horizontally rearwards. The air is taken in vertically from the above for\n\n1\n\nSECRET\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775\nPage 236"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nhovering; for level flight the intake is changed to a normal\nfrontal inlet by a set of slides and doors. In later versions the\nradial engine has been replaced by radially disposed axial flow\nturbojets of conventional type. This modification was originally\nconsidered as an intermediate version which might simplify the devel-\nopment procedures, but as the radial engine has been more realisti-\ncally appraised, it is now looked upon as an alternative form of\nequal promise.\n It is evident that the invention involves a whole array of for-\nmidable problems of research and development. Even in the smallest\nversions the outer diameter of the radial flow turbine is about\ntwenty feet. The entire rotor must be supported on air bearings in\nthe radial as well as the axial direction, and it is evident that\nthe accompanying problems of mechanical design are very difficult.\nThe design requires that very large air flow (a minimum of about\n800 lb/s) be regulated by a complicated system of mechanical shutters\non the inlet as well as on the outlet side. The problems of stability\nin hovering, in forward flight, and in the transition between the two\nmodes naturally demand considerable attention. The many structural\nproblems of an unconventional nature likewise require much study. It\nis evident, even with only a casual study, that the process of devel-\nopment would be lengthy and costly in the extreme, even by present\nstandards in military aircraft. The justification for entering into\n2\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nsuch an undertaking must depend on (a) the significance of the ob-\njectives which the new airplane claims to fill and (b) the sound-\nness of the means proposed to attain these objectives.\n The key feature on which the design of the Y2 is based is the\nutilization for hovering of the pressure built up in the center of\nan annular jet stream. This pressure build-up increases the lift\nat standstill close to the ground in such a fashion as to indicate\nthe practicability of hovering a few feet off the ground with en-\ngines whose static sea level thrust, without this augmentation from\nground effect, would be less than the airplane gross weight. Also,\nbecause of the nature of the ground effect, the aircraft would be\nstable with respect to height when hovering; that is, it would not\nrequire pilot attention to hold a height above the ground, although\nit would require control to maintain its attitude. The thrust aug-\nmentation for hovering obtained by A. V. Roe in small scale tests is\nof the order of 60 to 80%. Because the appropriate variables were\nnot investigated and the pertinent measurements not made during the\ntests, data are not available to extrapolate this result properly to\npredict accurately full scale augmentation factors. There are many\nfeatures which could make the full scale augmentation factors smaller\nbut very little likelihood of their being larger than in the model.\nThe possibility of stable hovering is, nevertheless, an engaging\nfeature. Unfortunately, it has dominated the evolution of the con-\n3\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nfiguration to such an extent that performance in level flight ap-\npears to have been seriously compromised. Since forward flight is,\nafter all, the important function of any airplane, we have attempted\nto examine into the inventor's claim for the flight characteristics\nwith particular care.\n The inventor has advanced claims for favorable forward flight\ncharacteristics on the basis that the radial flow engine has a very\nfavorable thrust to weight ratio (about .22), that the specific thrust\non the projected area of the plane (about 600, excluding air intakes)\nis unusually high, and that the drag characteristics of the plane are\nvery favorable. While not enough information is available to settle\nall of these points, we are compelled to take exception to all three\nof these claims. The specific engine weight is no longer unusual and\nwould not in itself justify the radial engine development. Moreover,\nthe radial engine possesses certain inherent limitations in pressure\nratio and component efficiencies which are detrimental to good fuel\nconsumption in comparison with the axial flow type. The shift to con-\nventional turbojets has, of course, altered the situation, but it has\nnot strengthened the claims based on the engine. The high thrust per\nfrontal area is in part due to the fact that all discussions so far\nhave been made around planes with no pay load. The situation with\nrespect to drag appears to us the most serious, however, since we feel\nthat the drag may have been underestimated by a factor of two. Very\n4\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nlengthy and expensive experiments are needed to settle these questions\nwith finality.\n The inventor has assumed that some improvement in the drag situ-\nation might be obtained through boundary layer suction. The alleged\ngain from this source is associated with the distribution of the ex-\nhaust jet over the trailing edge of the airplane. It is not wholly\nimpossible that such a gain might in fact be present, but no reliable\ntest information is available at the present time on this point. In\nthis respect this airplane differs from more conventional types only\nbecause the exhaust jet is distributed over the trailing edge of the\nwing. The circular plan form offers no particular advantage in this\nconnection.\n We are confronted, therefore, with an airplane development which\ndoes not appear to possess any intrinsic advantages either with the\noriginal radial engine or with the spoke arrangement of conventional\nturbojets. The pressure recovery on the induction side is certain\nto be poor for both alternatives; even with the utmost development\nof details it could not approach the performance of conventional air-\nplanes. The ducting on the exhaust side presents equally formidable\ndifficulties from the point of view of losses, and the gain due to\nboundary layer suction is only conjectural. These things might have\nbeen compensated for if the drag characteristics of the plane con-\nfiguration could be demonstrated to be favorable. There is no\n5\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\ninformation to indicate that this is so. No basic laws appear to have\nbeen transgressed in the design. It is merely a question of overempha-\nsis on the hovering characteristics without any assurance that the\nlevel flight characteristics would be tolerable.\n In arriving at a recommendation for action by the United States\nAir Force, we have attempted to bring into focus several considerations.\nThe kind of imaginative thinking about unconventional aircraft which\nthe inventor has displayed certainly has a place, and there is per-\nhaps not enough of it in the planning operations of the USAF. When a\nscheme of this kind is ready for more serious exploitation, however,\ncertain considerations are essential. The dreams must stand the test\nof hardheaded theoretical and experimental evaluation. The argument\nthat such a procedure, if applied to aircraft developments fifty\nyears ago, would have prevented powered flight is a specious one.\nThe development of an engine such as the Y2, if it is to be carried\nto a flight article of some kind, is an undertaking of such a magni-\ntude that it simply cannot be undertaken on a mere hunch. We do not\nfeel that the inventor can support the claims he has made for it,\nparticularly with reference to level flight. Moreover, we find a\nserious lack of attempt at a systematic exploration of the various\nkey aerodynamic phenomena involved. There must also be a set of\ngoals for the aircraft, which would place it in a class ahead of\n6\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S E C R E T other developments in performance, if the basic ideas should be capable of realization. We do not feel that the objectives of the development have been clearly formulated. In particular, we feel that there has been a preoccupation with the hovering characteristics to such an extent that the more direct essentials of the aircraft have been lost sight of. We do not question the ability of the A. V. Roe Company to undertake successfully any well-conceived project in the aircraft field which lies within their material resources. Our visit confirmed our high opinion of their design and production activities in jet aircraft and engines. We have developed the suspicion, however, that the responsible designers in the A. V. Roe engineering groups are not thoroughly sold on the Y2 project. It is manifestly impossible for us to prove this contention or to make this assertion officially with the company. We feel convinced, however, that the best talents of the A. V. Roe organization have not been drawn upon in the evaluation of this project. This statement is made without prejudice toward the inventor, who impressed us as a talented and sincere man with a great deal of imagination, but who for this very reason cannot be expected to present a fully impartial critique. Full support from some of the leading designers outside of this particular group could perhaps have presented a more convincing argument for support. 7 S E C R E T"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"S E C R E T On the basis of the above, we recommend against any contractual support for this project until much greater potentialities have been demonstrated by A. V. Roe's own analysis. Sincerely yours, Signed: Allen F. Donovan John R. Markham C. Richard Soderberg, Chairman 8 S E C R E T"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET AFOIN-2C1 Mr Bollum/erh/55867 1 October 1954 M/R MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD PROBLEM: 1. To make a final report on a special project assigned to Mr. C. W. Bollum, Sr., for the purpose of investigating possible Soviet capabilities for developing and producing a Vertical Take-Off Aircraft which might be similar in appearance to a \"Flying Saucer\". FACTS AND DISCUSSION: 2. In the Magazine Section of the Washington Post, dated 13 December 1953, there appeared an article which reported the development of a flying saucer by the A.V. Roe Canada, Limited of Toronto. The article stated that Lt. Gen. Donald L. Putt, Director of ARDC, had visited this company and had viewed this flying saucer. Other information given in the article impressed Mr. Bollum with the thought that here was the first factual evidence that it was possible to build a flying saucer. If it was possible for Canada to build a flying saucer, then it was also possible for the Soviets to build one. Mr. Bollum requested that he be authorized to initiate a special project for the purpose of determining Soviet capabilities in this field. Such permission was granted by Col. T. W. Wolfe, Chief of the Future Estimates Branch. 3. With the aid and assistance of Squadron Leader George C. Wainwright, RAF, the project was launched by going to the U.S. Patent Office and reading a patent filed by the A.V. Roe people on a device entitled \"A Gas-Turbine Engine Aircraft\". The patent application for this device was first filed in the U.K. on 21 August 1952. This patent pointed out the feasibility of the project. Bollum and Wainwright then traveled to Baltimore to discuss the project with personnel of ARDC. It was on this visit that Lt. Col. V. L. Gossick first disclosed the information regarding the application of the Coanda Effect to the Project \"Y\" design. Several more visits were made to ARDC and after discussing the project with several engineers and officers, Mr. Bollum and Squadron Leader Wainwright decided that there was little doubt that a \"state of the art\" capability did, in fact, exist, and that their next step was to investigate the possibility that the Soviets already had possession of such information. 4. Through contacts with intelligence officers in the Office of the Director of Air Intelligence, Ottawa, Canada, Squadron Leader Wainwright learned of the existence of intelligence information concerning possible German Flying Saucer projects. These were rumored to have existed at the end of World War II. TDY was authorized for Bollum and Wainwright to travel to Ottawa to discuss the subject with the Air Intelligence personnel. As a result of this trip copies of the pertinent information were forwarded to Mr. Bollum from D.A.I. Ottawa. In brief, there is information on four Germans. SECRET DS 55-0323-3"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET a. George Klein who, as of April 1953 resided in Hamburg, claims to have been chief engineer of all flying disc projects. However, his principal importance seems to be that he knew of the existence of such projects and has called attention to other Germans in this field. b. Otto Habermohl, who has not been heard of since the end of the war, is reported to have had a project for a 16 meter diameter flying saucer which was test flighted on 14 February 1945 at Holice. c. Rudolf Schriever, who died in 1945, was a designer/test pilot at BMW Works at Prague. He is reported to have constructed a flying saucer, which at a trial in April 1945 failed to leave the ground. d. Robert Miethe, who is supposed to have entered the U.S. in 1953, is reported to have constructed a 43 meter diameter flying saucer called the \"V-7\", which is reported to have flown with a crew of three in 1944. In August 1944 the Cesko-Moravske Works in Prague is reported to have received a production order for a short series, but none had been finished by the end of the war. Miethe remained in Breslaw, whence he escaped in an ME-163 one jump ahead of the Russians. The Russians captured three of Methe's principal assistants and his workshops. Miethe, according to the Canadians, came into this country as an emigrant. It is of interest to note that in March of 1954, a man using the name Bruno Berberich and who claims to have entered this country in 1953, forwarded to a Senator from Ohio a manuscript and drawings depicting how he would build a flying saucer. These were in turn forwarded to the Legislation and Liaison Division of Headquarters, USAF, who sent them to AFOIN. AFOIN forwarded the documents to ATIC for translation and evaluation. Mr. Bollum was assured by Mr. Arcier of ATIC that he would receive a copy of the results as soon as ATIC had completed the translation. To date no such information has been received and therefore Mr. Bollum is not able to report the results obtained. The big question would seem to be whether or not this man Berberich could be Miethe. 5. Upon return to Washington Bollum and Wainwright again went to ARDC Baltimore where they were briefed on the U.S. interest in Canada's project and informed of the political and international complication involved. At this time both were requested to handle the whole project on a sensitive basis until notified by ARDC that arrangements between U.S. and Canada had been completed. In accordance with such request, briefings were limited to General Samford, General Lewis, Colonel Morrow, Colonel Eriksen, Colonel True, Colonel Wolfe, Captain Rooney, USN, and Lt. Colonel Farrior. 6. In April Colonel True received permission for an Air Room briefing of key AFOIN personnel, which was attended by the Branch and Division Chiefs. About the 1st of May a request came for briefing the Classen Committee, who were considering the future material requirements for the Strategic Air Command. On 26 May 1954 key analysts of the Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, California, were briefed at the request of Colonel True and permission was SECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET given to brief the engineering personnel of the Los Angeles Air Force Development Office. 7. An \"Air Force Only\" restriction was dropped in June 1954 and the following have been briefed since: Chief of Naval Operations and Staff, Chief of Staff U.S. Army and Staff, Commandant of the Marine Corps and Staff, Key Personnel of CIA-OSI, Mr. Eiselstein of ATIC, Intelligence personnel of SAC, TAC, ADC, ARDC, AFSS, AFSSOP, NSA, and Requirements Officer of the Air War College. A copy of the briefing is attached as TAB A. 8. On 15 June 1954, Bollum and Wainwright visited the A.V. Roe Limited, Toronto, Canada. One day was spent discussing Project \"Y\" and information of German and/or Soviet interest in such unconventional aircraft. Mr. Frost, the Chief Engineer on the project and designer of the radial flow jet engine, demonstrated by use of laboratory models all the principles of the Coanda Effect, the air bearings, and the control system contemplated. Such demonstrations left little doubt in the minds of anyone present that the project would be a success. Mr. Frost had previously gone to Europe to interrogate George Klein and in addition had had access to many flying saucer reports from Europe. He firmly stated that there was no doubt in his mind that the Soviets are ahead of the Western Nations in the development of a true vertical take-off aircraft. 9. Recent news articles indicate that both the U.S. and U.K. have other projects in being which are in the field of Vertical Take-Off Aircraft (VTO). CONCLUSIONS: 10. In conclusion, it appears that the chances of success are good for Project \"Y\" or Project \"Ladybird\" as it is known in the USAF. If this is the case a breakthrough in the aeronautical \"State of the Art\" has occurred which will revolutionize aircraft design and air warfare. If we accept the possibilities of such designs then we must also conclude that the Soviets must at the least have the capability to have such aircraft almost as soon as the Western Nations. At the other end of the possibilities, we must consider the chance that the Soviets are several years ahead of the U.S. at this time. Perhaps one of the most important results of this investigation has been that such unconventional aircraft are not considered as fantastic as previous and the emphasis will shift from disproving flying saucer reports to proving such reports. The effect of a successful flight will be far reaching. A new look will have to be taken at the design of many categories of military equipment; i.e. radars, guided missiles, armament, antiaircraft artillery, etc. It is possible that such capabilities could very radically change estimates for the period of 1960-65. RECOMMENDATIONS: 11. In the last part of the briefing (Tab A) certain recommendations have been made. It was felt at the time that the various offices of the Directorate of Intelligence would take some action as a result of the briefing. As of this date Mr. Bollum is unaware of any action being taken by any other office to 3 SECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"assume any responsibility in this field. Informally, ATIC personnel have indicated to Mr. Bollum opinion that the success of Project \"Y2\" is very doubtful and that it is not expected that ATIC will show any great interest or take any action other than that normally taken by the Unidentified Flying Object (UFO) personnel. As a result of this inactivity, very little new has been accomplished in the last few months toward ascertaining Soviet capabilities. It is therefore recommended that the following actions be requested by the Director of Intelligence.\n\na. Inasmuch as Vertical Take-Off aircraft similar in appearance to a flying saucer will be test flown in a matter of 18 months with a possible production within three years, it is believed appropriate at this time to divorce the reports, analysis, and estimates of earth produced flying saucers from the UFO activity at ATIC. Such items of intelligence should be handled through normal material and equipment channels in the D/I.\n\nb. All reports of sightings of UFO's in areas immediately adjacent to the Soviet Union and Satellites should be re-examined in light of the possibility that the Soviets could be well ahead of the U.S. and Canada in the development and service testing of such an aircraft.\n\nc. A section should be inserted in the Basic Air Intelligence Requirement Manual and an AFM should be prepared on \"Intelligence Collection Guidance Manual on Vertical Take-Off Aircraft\".\n\nd. Necessary support should be requested of other government agencies in an attempt to locate Robert Miethe and Bruno Berberich. After location of the above men, steps should be taken to have them interrogated by personnel familiar with the entire background on this project.\n\ne. A project should be established to estimate probable military applications for such an aircraft and the extent to which requirements and designs for other military equipment would be affected. As a part of this project, a short discourse on airfield requirements might be included.\n\nf. A collection requirement should be placed on all agencies in the field including Attaches.\n\ng. All intelligence estimates for the 1960-65 period should include a statement on the possibility of operational use of saucer shaped aircraft and the effect of such use on other equipment estimates.\n\nh. To insure that intelligence information and requirements for action are properly integrated into the existing intelligence organization, it is suggested that an individual who is knowledgeable on the background of this project be appointed as coordinator for the Director of Intelligence, HQ, USAF, on Unconventional Vertical Take-Off Aircraft. This coordinator, in addition to his function with the Director of Intelligence, should also be the active liaison contact between the D/I and other interested commands and agencies when requests are received for briefings, etc."} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12. Subject matter will not be submitted for inclusion in the D/I Policy Book or the Daily Staff Digest.\n\nACTION:\n\n14. Inasmuch as Mr. Bollum is the most knowledgeable person in the D/I on the subject of this project, it is recommended that he be appointed coordinator for the Director of Intelligence and that he be authorized to proceed as necessary to accomplish the desired results on the recommendations made above.\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nCol. E. M. Kirton, AFOIN-2C1 - Ext. 56239\nFor:Col. V. L. Zoller, AFOIN-2C - Ext. 71577\nCol. J. J. Morrow, AFOIN-2 - Ext. 71110"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TAB \"A\"\n\nBRIEF ON AN UNCONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT POSSIBLE BY 1960\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\nThe purpose of this briefing is two-fold. First, I will attempt to tell you of a project being financed by the U.S. Air Force and as a result thereof to dispel to the greatest extent possible any doubt in your minds that such a project is feasible and desirable. Second, I will attempt to show that there is a very good possibility that we may not be the first nation to successfully fly such an aircraft. In order not to take up your time with uninteresting technical considerations and information, I will make the first part very brief. However, if anyone desires more information on the design, performance, operation, etc., I am prepared to go into a more detailed discussion complete with slides at the end of the regular briefing.\n\n* * * * * * * * * * * * *\n\nThe \"State of the Art\" being one of the most important considerations in a technical estimate, we have attempted to ascertain what effort is being made in this field. Through various sources it was determined that the foremost authority on the theories surrounding such an aircraft was a Mr. Jack Frost, an aeronautical engineer presently employed by the A.V. Roe Limited of Canada. Some indication of Mr. Frost's capability may be derived from the fact that he was project engineer on the CF-100 in Canada. The principal sources of information covered in this brief were ARDC, Baltimore; AFDRD, Washington; DAI, Ottawa; and A. V. Roe Limited of Canada. Before going any further, I wish to emphasize that the interest of the HQ, USAF D/I in this subject is solely from the foreign aspect and particularly as it concerns the Soviet capabilities. Any emphasis that we may give to the Research and Development program in this country is a bonus and not intentional.\n\n* * * * * * * * * * * * *\n\nThe project of which I am about to speak is known as Project \"Y2\" in Canada and as Project \"Ladybird\" by the USAF. This vehicle is designated as a \"Flat Vertical Take-Off Supersonic Gyroplane\" by the A.V.Roe Company. In appearance it is similar to the normal conception most people have of a flying saucer. This is probably the best reason for not calling this vehicle a flying saucer. This unconventional aircraft is not strictly a new idea. This particular idea has been in existence for several years and during the last four years attempts have been made in Great Britain,Canada, and the U.S.A. to interest someone in financing the development of the gyroplane. In January of 1954 the Canadian government agreed to finance the project to the extent of $2,000,000. However, due to some belief that Canada might be somewhat limited in facilities and finances to complete the development in the least possible time, and the"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"further possibility and danger that a foreign power not entirely friendly to the U.S. might achieve the desired results sooner, the USAF has made an agreement with the Canadian government and A.V. Roe Company to take over the complete development effort. The prime contract appears to be with the A.V. Roe Canada,Limited and upon my last visit to the factory, they were well along the way in the preparation of drawings and possibly at this time are starting fabrication of parts. As of the last report known to us, it was expected that the flight test of the first model would take place in the Spring of 1956. By this time some of you would like to see a picture of this aircraft. I have two artist conceptions (Slide 1). This slide is to depict landings and take-offs from other than established airfields. (Slide 2). This slide is for the purpose of showing a naval or marine use by launching from a submarine. An earlier model called Project \"Y\" or Project \"OMEGA\" which would have used the same engine (Slide 3) but would have been flat on the aft end similar in shape to the letter Omega. Two versions of small research type Vertical Take-Off aircraft, identified as Project \"Y\" and Project \"Y2\" have now been designed. Each project is essentially a simple proposal for the construction of a very large radial flow gas turbine engine, suitably shaped and covered to form a flying wing which is said to be the minimum aircraft that can be designed around a turbo-jet engine.\n\nThe engines are designed to fly \"edge-on\" to the wind instead of axially, as in the case of the more conventional types. Each engine is basically a large diameter airborne rotor disc, supported by an air bearing which employs compressor bleed air as its only form of lubrication. Stability and control, will be dominated by the gyroscopic reactions of the rotor.\n\nSuch an aircraft would have some very fundamental advantages; such as:\n\na. The manufacturing simplicity that results.\nb. The much greater than one thrust/weight ratio.\nc. The very high thrust/frontal area ratio.\nd. The gyroscopic stability.\ne. The ability to operate without prepared landing fields; this being the most important consequence of the thrust/weight ratio being much greater than one.\n\nThe Project \"Y\" design which utilized the same engine, but had a slightly different configuration was designed to take off and land with its longitudinal axis at an angle of approximately 60 degrees with the ground and was supported by a landing gear which gave it the appearance of a \"Praying Mantis\". The Project \"Y2\", unlike the earlier model, is designed to take off and land with its longitudinal axis parallel to the ground and has no landing gear whatsoever. One other great difference between the two designs is that the first design required surface controls or elevons while the latter design has no surface controls at all. The \"flat vertical take-off\" technique, in the Project \"Y2\" version, has a further fundamental advantage of great significance in that the peripheral jet using the Coanda Effect produces a powerful cushion of air between the"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"aircraft and the ground which eliminates the possibility of severe impact on landing. Tests have shown that the jet lift is increased several times over that of a flat disc near the ground. Advantages of such a technique are as follows:\n\na. It is safer and more acceptable to pilots.\nb. The gyroscopic plane is parallel with the ground.\nc. It improves the use of the aircraft in the transport category.\n\n(Slide 5). In general, the proposed aircraft consists of a very large radial flow gas turbine engine disposed between two concentric rings. It is estimated that the engine will produce nearly 50,000 lbs. Sea Level Static Thrust. Depending on the final design and balance the circular plan form may need to be modified to accommodate trim flaps. The air intakes are also circular in plan, the skins extending across the central part of the plane. The pilot, fuel and disposable loads are contained in the central compartment which is well insulated against aerodynamic heating by the fuel. The aircraft is shown in the take-off configuration with both air intakes closed and relieving doors on the top intake open all the way around. This arrangement permits the air to sink in and over into the intake annulus, then radially outwards to the jet exhausts which are normal to the surface around the whole periphery; about 15 inches from the edge.\n\n(Slide 6) Typical streamlines of the airflow through the aircraft are shown in this slide which represents any section through the circular form of the aircraft. This aircraft will have neither an oil system nor a hydraulic system, inasmuch as the engine is air lubricated and there is no retractible under carriage nor hydraulic operated controls employed. The control equipment in the cockpit will be much simpler. Normal flight and navigational instruments and equipment will be installed in the aircraft. A simplified form of ejector seat is fitted, as high ejection velocities are not considered necessary for this tailless aircraft.\n\nNow for a few general operational characteristics. The first model to be tested is expected to be able to have speeds up to Mach. 2.5, fly at altitudes up to 85,000 feet, and have a range of 1500 n.m. (one way). A later model with a diameter of 100 ft. and configured as a bomber, recon, or transport version is expected to have speeds up to Mach. 3.5 and ranges sufficient for intercontinental operations. Time to climb from the ground to 65,000 feet would be about 2 minutes.\n\nLet us now review briefly what we have in the offing. We have an aircraft capable of taking off and landing vertically climbing to altitude in an exceedingly short period of time, and able to cruise at very high speeds. In addition, it can hover, and has great lifting capabilities. And what does this mean? No requirements for long runways of concrete or other hard surface. No need for the new type aircraft carriers. Any naval vessel of sufficient size can carry an aircraft of this type. We have here an aircraft capable of great maneuverability and high altitudes. What would such capabilities mean to an invasion force. And how about its uses for pursuit, reconnaissance, ambulance, bomber, or transport. The artist conception of its use with a submarine is a particularly deadly combination. The installation of armament"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"is not seen to present any specific difficulty. Guns or rockets may be\nmounted in the nose, or to fire out of the intake. Similarly, radar may\nbe installed in a nose pod or if scan is considered adequate, inside the\nintakes, where the drag penalty will be less. New types of side look\nantennas may work very well on this type of configuration. Guided Missiles\nmay be carried externally. A larger bomber version of the aircraft is\nvisualized as having more available payload space in the central well.\nThe aircraft under study has an ample margine of thrust/weight to lift\nadditional military load from the ground. Performance penalty will there-\nfore only be felt at a somewhat reduced range and ceiling. Top speed is\nunlikely to be affected, since the drag due to lift is extremely small for\nthis condition. Larger aircraft may be expected to have a longer range,\nbut no detail figures are yet available. However, intercontinental ranges\ndo not appear to be impossible.\n\nWhen such an aircraft has been proven by tests, it will no doubt have\na great effect on the design and requirements for many other types of mili-\ntary equipment. Let us for a minute review some of the changes that might\nbe apparent.\n\nRADAR - Due to the speeds involved, it is possible that the present type\nof airborne radar will be entirely inadequate. And, due to the possible\nspeeds and altitudes, our presently designed ground radar equipment might\nbe useless for most purposes.\n\nANTIAIRCRAFT ARTILLERY - It is very doubtful that such weapons as now\navailable in this field would be very useful.\n\nSURFACE-TO-AIR GUIDED MISSILES - The presently known G/M designs would\nhardly be adequate for use against bombers with speeds up to Mach. 3.5\nflying at 80,000 ft. Especially if those bombers had a good capability\nfor maneuvering.\n\nAs one of the principal requirements for SAM appears to be to overcome the\ntime delay in getting interceptor A/C into the air and to the target, it\nis possible that the job could be done better with an interceptor model of\nthe gyroplane.\n\nAIR-TO-AIR GUIDED MISSILES - There is some doubt present designs would be\nvery useful against such bombers.\n\nSUB LAUNCH G/M - What would be better - a manned gyroplane flying from a\nsub from 500 n.m. out, or a guided missile launched from 200 to 300 n.m.\nwith the inherent errors of such a system?\n\nFrom an intelligence aspect this type of aircraft should be watched\nvery closely. Mr. Frost has stated that the idea is not entirely his own.\nAll of the basic information on the first model has been available to other\nnations for many years, especially those nations in Central Europe. Mr. Frost\nbelieves that other engineers could very easily have duplicated his effort.\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"While the application of the \"Coanda Effect\" appears to be Mr. Frost's idea,\nhe feels that such an application could have been apparent to engineers in\nGermany and the Soviet Bloc nations. Two particular reports, although of\nlow reliability, are of interest. The first deals with an individual who,\nwhile riding a bicycle down a country road in one of the Satellite countries,\nobserved a flying saucer descending from above and hovering above the ground.\nHe stated that suddenly the saucer accelerated rapidly and while gaining speed\nand altitude wobbulated with a slight counter clockwise rotation until a cer-\ntain speed was attained. Mr. Frost has been quoted as making the statement\nthat his prototype would act in the same manner if full thrust was applied\nafter hovering. The second report deals with a PW fieldhand who, with others,\nwas at work when a saucer-shaped aircraft landed in a nearby field. He re-\nported that the aircraft had Soviet markings on it and that one or more\npersons climbed out of the aircraft. Immediately police or some sort of\nauthority appeared on the scene, placed a cordon around the aircraft and\narrested this man's co-workers. The informant escaped and reported the\nincident. While it is admitted that such reports may be fabricated, the\npossibility cannot be overlooked that the information is essentially true.\nAs an example, in the electronic field a review of low reliability reports\nhas indicated that a large proportion of the sources gave an honest\ndescription of what they observed and that intelligence analysts failed to\nidentify the equipment from such descriptions. We have reports of the\nFrench interest in flying saucer designs and of reported German activities\nin this field during the World War. Of the Germans supposedly in this field\nof activity we have four names. George Klein, who in April 1953 resided in\nHamburg, claims to have been the chief engineer of all flying disc projects.\nHowever, his principal importance seems to be that he knew of the existence\nof such projects and has called attention to other Germans in the field.\nOtto Habermohl, who has not been heard of since the end of the war, is re-\nported to have had a project for a 16 meter diameter flying saucer which was\ntest flighted on 14 February 1945 at Holice. Rudolf Schriever, who died in\n1945, was a designer/test pilot at BMW Works at Prague. He is reported to\nhave constructed a flying saucer, which at a trial in April 1945 failed to\nleave the ground. Robert Miethe, who is supposed to have entered the U.S.\nin 1953, is reported to have constructed a 43 meter diameter flying saucer\n(V-7) which was flown with a crew of three in 1944. In August 1944, the\nCesko-Moravske Works in Prague is reported to have received a production\norder for a short series, but none was finished by the end of the war.\nMiethe remained in Breslaw, whence he escaped in an ME-163 one jump ahead\nof the Russians. The Russians captured three of Miethe's principal assist-\nants and his workshops. In March of 1954, a man by the name of Bruno\nBerberich, who claims to have entered this country in October 1953, forwarded\nto the Senator from Ohio a manuscript and drawings of how he would build a\nflying saucer. These were in turn sent to the Legislation and Liaison Division\nof Headquarters, USAF, who sent them to AFOIN. General Samford's office had\nthem sent to ATIC for translation from German to English. The big question\nis \"Could this man be Robert Miethe?\" Last, projects on the Coanda Effect\nhave existed at two Satellite universities. It has been said that Mr. Frost\nhas made the statement he personally believes that the Soviets could be as\nmuch as two years ahead of Canada at this time. If such be the case, the\ninterceptor application would have a serious effect on the effectiveness\nof the Soviet Air Defense capabilities.\n\n5"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PART IV\nSUMMARY\n\nWe have presented to you some evidence that flying saucers are within\nthe capabilities of the existing \"state of the art\" in this country and\nCanada. The \"state of the art\" is well known in European countries. The\nCoanda effect has been known to all countries and the application is not\nbeyond the capabilities of the Soviets. It is possible that German projects\nfor flying saucers existed at the end of the war. The man considered\npossible tops in this field is supposed to be in the U.S. now. We have\nreports on eye witnesses of flying saucers in Soviet territory.\n\nPART V\nRECOMMENDATIONS\n\nIt is recommended that:\n\n1. The entire intelligence community be alerted to a possible Soviet\nactivity in this field.\n\n2. All existing files on foreign flying saucers should be reviewed\nand analyzed.\n\n3. Bruno Berberich should be interrogated by intelligence analysts\nwho have a full background on existing intelligence.\n\n4. Robert Miethe should be found. Possibly Miethe could have changed\nhis name to Bruno Berberich or some other alias.\n\n5. A collection requirement should be placed on all agencies in the\nfield including the Attaches.\n\n6"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/tjc/54738\nWrtn 13 Jan 55\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL SAMFORD\n\nSUBJECT: Article \"The Flying Disc\" in December Issue of the Air\nIntelligence Digest\n\n1. During the latter part of November I was approached by\nMajor Hosford and asked for a new summary or statement of position\non UFO's, preferably classified, for use in the Air Intelligence\nDigest in connection with an article on a revolutionary new type\nof aircraft. I stated our position regarding UFO's and indicated\nthat our best efforts in this field were constantly directed to\ndiscouraging, minimizing, and playing down any and all attempts\nat publicity, not excluding classified vehicles such as AID.\n\n2. Major Hosford accepted this statement, indicating that\nthe article on the new aircraft would be published without the\ncompanion piece on UFO's and suggested that I glance at the final\ndraft.\n\n3. I read the final draft and since I had not been previously\nbriefed on this project I queried Major Hosford regarding AFOIN\nand Air Staff coordination. He replied in the affirmative and\nindicated that we were on solid ground but that the project hereto-\nfore had been handled very circumspectly. My final suggestion was\nto eliminate the last paragraph of the article with a UFO tie-in,\nwhich was probably overlooked before publication.\n\n4. Since the receipt of the memorandum from the Executive\nSecretary of the Scientific Advisory Board (Tab A), my investigations\nhave revealed the following:\n\na. The extent of coordination on the article in AID was\nas follows:\n\nMr. Bollum - 2C1\nMr Bachman - 2C1\nLt Colonel Farrior - 2C1\nColonel Zeller - 2C\nMr. Gilmore - 2B\nColonel Adams - 2A\n\nb. Mr. Bollum was under an erroneous impression that the\nproject had been favorably considered by the Air Council and so\nadvised Major Hosford.\n\nc. Colonel R. M. Wray, Chief of the Aeronautical Division,\nDirectorate of Research and Development, advises that the present\nstate of the project within DCS/D is as follows:"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1) Despite the unfavorable tone of the Scientific\nAdvisory Board, report responsible key technicians\nwithin DCS/D are split into two groups on the\nfeasibility of the project.\n\n(2) In view of this feeling within DCS/D, General\nPutt's letter to ARDC the last week in December\nwas, in effect, a compromised position. The\nletter directed ARDC to award a contract to\nA. V. Roe, Ltd., for certain wind tunnel tests,\nand further indicated that additional U. S.\ndevelopment funds would be decided on the\nbasis of the data analysis produced.\n\n5. During General Watson's last visit here he discussed with me\na letter (Tab D) which had been prepared for his signature by one of his\nstaff but which he refused to sign to you because of its tone. He feels\nstrongly, however, that the monitorship of this project should be the\nprovince of ATIC and differs greatly in his personal views with the\narticle in AID.\n\n6. The Memorandum for Record (Tab C) explains the full background\nof the entry of OIN-2 into this project which briefly was governed by\ntwo considerations:\n\na. A feeling in OIN-2C that this project was \"hot\" and that\nno one else was acting for OIN.\n\nb. Availability and \"entree\" afforded OIN-2 by Squadron Leader\nWainwright.\n\nNo action has been taken on any of the recommendations made\nin the M/R by Colonel Morrow and he has instructed Mr. Bollum verbally\nto discontinue further work and briefings on the project.\n\n7. In view of the above I offer the following recommendations:\n\na. Because of the divided opinions within and outside of the\nAir Staff on the feasibility of Project \"Y\", no further articles or\nbriefings on this project should be accomplished without your personal\napproval. (Colonel Adams and Colonel Morrow concur.)\n\nb. No attempt should be made in an early issue of AID to\nstate the case for Project \"Y\" in more objective terms since any attempt\nto do so would only serve to further \"muddy the waters.\" OIN-2 and\nDCS/D concur.\n\nc. At their earliest convenience, General Watson and Colonel\nMorrow should have a discussion directed toward the transition of\nresponsibility for monitorship of Project \"Y\" from OIN-2C to ATIC.\nColonel Morrow and General Watson concur.\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nd. No reply should be made to the memorandum from the\nExecutive Secretary of the Scientific Advisory Board.\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nv D/I File Cy, K2B2\n\nAFOIN-X\n\nLt Col Bloomer\n\n3\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nJAN 13 1955\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL SAMFORD\n\nSUBJECT: Article \"The Flying Disc\" in December Issue of the Air\nIntelligence Digest\n\n1. During the latter part of November I was approached by\nMajor Hosford and asked for a new summary or statement of position\non UFO's, preferably classified, for use in the Air Intelligence\nDigest in connection with an article on a revolutionary new type\nof aircraft. I stated our position regarding UFO's and indicated\nthat our best efforts in this field were constantly directed to\ndiscouraging, minimizing, and playing down any and all attempts\nat publicity, not excluding classified vehicles such as AID.\n\n2. Major Hosford accepted this statement, indicating that\nthe article on the new aircraft would be published without the\ncompanion piece on UFO's and suggested that I glance at the final\ndraft.\n\n3. I read the final draft and since I had not been previously\nbriefed on this project I queried Major Hosford regarding AFOIN\nand Air Staff coordination. He replied in the affirmative and\nindicated that we were on solid ground but that the project hereto-\nfore had been handled very circumspectly. My final suggestion was\nto eliminate the last paragraph of the article with a UFO tie-in,\nwhich was probably overlooked before publication.\n\n4. Since the receipt of the memorandum from the Executive\nSecretary of the Scientific Advisory Board (Tab A), my investigations\nhave revealed the following:\n\na. The extent of coordination on the article in AID was\nas follows:\n\nMr. Bollum - 2C1\nMr Bachman - 2C1\nLt Colonel Farrior - 2C1\nColonel Zoller - 2C\nMr. Gilmore - 2B\nColonel Adams - 2A\n\nb. Mr. Bollum was under an erroneous impression that the\nproject had been favorably considered by the Air Council and so\nadvised Major Hosford.\n\nc. Colonel R. M. Wray, Chief of the Aeronautical Division,\nDirectorate of Research and Development, advises that the present\nstate of the project within DCS/D is as follows:\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n(1) Despite the unfavorable tone of the Scientific\nAdvisory Board, report, responsible key technicians\nwithin DCS/D are split into two groups on the\nfeasibility of the project.\n\n(2) In view of this feeling within DCS/D, General\nPutt's letter to ARDC the last week in December\nwas, in effect, a compromised position. The\nletter directed ARDC to award a contract to\nA. V. Roe, Ltd., for certain wind tunnel tests,\nand further indicated that additional U. S.\ndevelopment funds would be decided on the\nbasis of the data analysis produced.\n\n5. During General Watson's last visit here he discussed with me\na letter (Tab B) which had been prepared for his signature by one of his\nstaff but which he refused to sign to you because of its tone. He feels\nstrongly, however, that the monitorship of this project should be the\nprovince of ATIC and differs greatly in his personal views with the\narticle in AID.\n\n6. The Memorandum for Record (Tab C) explains the full background\nof the entry of OIN-2 into this project which briefly was governed by\ntwo considerations:\n\na. A feeling in OIN-2C that this project was \"hot\" and that\nno one else was acting for OIN.\n\nb. Availability and \"entree\" afforded OIN-2 by Squadron Leader\nWainwright.\n\nNo action has been taken on any of the recommendations made\nin the M/R by Colonel Morrow and he has instructed Mr. Bollum verbally\nto discontinue further work and briefings on the project.\n\n7. In view of the above I offer the following recommendations:\n\na. Because of the divided opinions within and outside of the\nAir Staff on the feasibility of Project \"Y\", no further articles or\nbriefings on this project should be accomplished without your personal\napproval. (Colonel Adams and Colonel Morrow concur.)\n\nb. No attempt should be made in an early issue of AID to\nstate the case for Project \"Y\" in more objective terms since any attempt\nto do so would only serve to further \"muddy the waters.\" OIN-2 and\nDCS/D concur.\n\nc. At their earliest convenience, General Watson and Colonel\nMorrow should have a discussion directed toward the transition of\nresponsibility for monitorship of Project \"Y\" from OIN-2C to ATIC.\nColonel Morrow and General Watson concur.\n\n2\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nd. No reply should be made to the memorandum from the\nExecutive Secretary of the Scientific Advisory Board.\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n3\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n14 December 1954\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, AFOIN\n\nSUBJECT: Scientific Advisory Board Report on AVRO \"Flying Saucer\"\nProject.\n\n1. Attached for your information is a copy of a recent re-\nport of the Scientific Advisory Board on their study of the \"fly-\ning saucer\" project of A. V. Roe, Canada.\n\n2. Your attention is particularly invited to the generally\nnegative findings with regard to technical feasibility expressed\nin this report, in contrast to the general impression of techni-\ncal soundness and optimistic expectations conveyed in the article\non \"The Flying Disc\" published in the December, 1954, issue of\nthe Air Intelligence Digest.\n\n3. This report was submitted to Lt. Gen. D. L. Putt on\n10 December in response to his previous request for SAB comments.\n\nInclosure\n1. Avro rpt, cy 2\n\nCHESTER N. HASERT\nExecutive Secretary\nScientific Advisory Board\nOffice of the Chief of Staff\n\nAFCSA 631\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n27 December 1954\n\nMajor General John A. Samford\nDirector of Intelligence\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear General Samford:\n\nI am quite concerned about the article, \"The Flying Disc,\" and paragraph 1, \"Editor's Notes,\" which appeared in the December issue of the Air Intelligence Digest. It caused quite a bit of consternation in my organization.\n\nThis article was not submitted to my shop for technical coordination, probably on the basis that we were not interested.\n\nMr. Bollum, AFOIN-2G, in his Memorandum for Record, dated 1 October 1954, indicates that my organization had very little interest (technically) in this development. My personnel have been attempting to acquire all technical information on this subject since February 1953 and they have been told this project is very highly classified, \"stay out.\" Even with this roadblock, the Center has enough information to know that the technical information in the article is incorrect for the \"medium size\" vehicle. The AID range is 1500 NM, while A. V. Roe estimates 620 miles; the AID altitude was 90,000 ft, yet A. V. Roe states 80,600 feet to date. To make matters worse, the \"large size\" and the \"small size\" vehicle performance have no technical basis insofar as the WADC project engineer for SILVERBUG could determine.\n\nOur Air Force does not, at this date, have a development contract with A. V. Roe, Ltd., Canada, yet the article and Editor's Note will lead one to believe that we have this contract going full force.\n\nThe last item noted by my people concerns security. This project is still of a sensitive nature due to the present negotiations between ARDC and A. V. Roe, Ltd., Canada. I am advised that WADC has advised Headquarters ARDC that the article violates the \"need-to-know\" of existing security policies.\n\nT54-18661\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nMajor General John A. Samford 27 Dec 1954\n\nI, therefore, suggest that the monitorship of Project SILVERBUG (UNCL) be removed from AFOIN-2G, and that in the future all technical information on this project be acquired from my analysts.\n\nSincerely,\n\nH. E. WATSON\nBrigadier General, USAF\nCommander\n\nSECRET\n\nT54-18661"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A4 17 December 1954\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: CHIEF AFOIN-2A\n\nSUBJECT: Flying disc article, Air Intelligence Digest\n\n1. Reference the Scientific Advisory Board report throwing cold water on the idea of support for the Canadian project, I have contacted officers in DCS/D and the Secretariat, Air Force Council, and have talked with Mr. Bollum of AFOIN-2G, who submitted the article to us.\n\n2. Colonel R. M. Wray (x71510, 48341), chief of the Aeronautics Division, Director of Research and Development, DCS/D, says that he has prepared a letter for General Putt's signature addressed to ARDC on the subject. He does not wish to reveal the contents of the letter until he is sure that it has General Putt's approval. He suggested I contact him again next week.\n\n3. Major Linn (x79175, 50940), Secretariat, Air Force Council, informs me that the Council held a meeting on 14 June 1954, at which representatives of A. V. Roe presented the case for Project Y. The Council took no action and has taken none since then.\n\n4. Mr. Carl W. Bollum Sr. (x55867), AFOIN-2G1, holds strongly to his opinion that the project has merit. He points out that some of the material in the Scientific Advisory Board report does not disprove Project Y theories, but that the report instead states that it would take a good deal of expense to prove the theories. He feels that he is restricted in further pursuing this subject, since the word has come down to him verbally to discontinue work on it. He mentioned the Scientific Advisory Board report to Colonel Morrow this morning, and handed the colonel a copy of the report with the hope that he would be instructed to look into the matter.\n\n5. Recommendations:\n\na. That if a question comes from General Samford on this project, we advise waiting until we know the DCS/D decision before taking any action.\n\nb. That the DCS/D decision should strongly influence our own position on the subject.\n\nc. That, if the DCS/D decision is unfavorable, we consider additional material in the Digest modifying the original article. However, in view of the fact that the project is backed by a reputable aviation company and that there are divergent views on the subject, we should be cautious that we do not say the flying disc is impossible.\n\nBOWEN I. HOSFORD\nMajor, USAF\nDi..."} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A4\n\n28 December 1954\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: CHIEF, AFOIN-2A\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Disc Project\n\nColonel Wraye of DCS/D as yet (22 December 1954) has no final decision from General Putt on the above subject. When he receives the decision, he will notify me and has promised to get together in a discussion on it.\n\nBOWEN I. HOSFORD\nMajor, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nBollum 2G1\nBARGMAN 2G1\nFARRIOR 2G1\nZOLLER 2G\nGILMORE 2B\nADAMS 2A"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAFOCP 1 Coordination AFOIN-2G4\nAFODC 2 Signature\n\nL/Col Whitman/bps 58466\n\nJUL 28 1955\n\n1760\n\n(Secret) Request NEACFor Immediate Fighter Scramble Against Flying Objects\n\n1. On 6 July the crew of a KC-97 tanker reported the sighting of an unidentified airborne object in the Newfoundland area (4910N/5950W). At the time of the sighting a GCI radar in the same area obtained a radar return of an object which apparently was identical to the one the KC-97 crew had under visual observation. A committee, appointed by this Directorate to evaluate this sighting reviewed reports summarizing the incident by the Northeast Air Command. The committee tentatively attributed the sighting to electrical phenomenon and visual misinterpretation by aircrew members. At the same time, however, the committee discussed the possibility that the object might have been an high performance unconventional aircraft. This Directorate is of the opinion that the development of such an aircraft by an unfriendly nation would constitute a serious technological threat to the United States, and therefore every effort must be made to identify sightings in the future.\n\n2. In its discussion of methods to be used to obtain identification of objects sighted in a similar fashion in the future, the committee concluded that the method possessing the most likelihood of success would be interception of the object by fighter aircraft and recommended that in the event of future incidents of this nature fighters within range be scrambled without delay.\n\n3. Attached as Tab A is a proposed message to the Commander, Northeast Air Command, directing the scramble of fighters as recommended by the committee.\n\nRECOMMENDATION\n\n4. Signature of attached message.\n\nFRANK B. CHAFFEE\nColonel USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n1 Incl\nProposed Msg to\nCdr AAC\n\nCoord cy,OIN\nCmbk Cy OIN-2C4\nCy for AFODC\nCy for AFODO\nCy for AFOIN-2\nCy for AFOIN-2C\nSummary & Read Cy"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAFOCP 1 Coordination AFOIN-2C4\nAFODC 2 Signature\n\nLt Col Whitman/bps 52466\n\n(Secret) Request AAC and NEAC for Immediate Fighter Scramble Against Flying Objects.\n\n1. On 6 July the crew of a KC-97 tanker reported the sighting of an unidentified airborne object in the Newfoundland area (4910N/5950W). At the time of the sighting a GCI radar in the same area obtained a radar return of an object which apparently was identical to the one the KC-97 crew had under visual observation. A committee, appointed by this Directorate to evaluate this sighting reviewed reports summarizing the incident by the Northeast Air Command. The committee tentatively attributed the sighting to electrical phenomenon and visual misinterpretation by aircrew members. At the same time, however, the committee discussed the possibility that the object might have been an high performance unconventional aircraft. This Directorate is of the opinion that the development of such an aircraft by an unfriendly nation would constitute a serious technological threat to the United States, and therefore every effort must be made to identify sightings in the future.\n\n2. In its discussion of methods to be used to obtain identification of objects sighted in a similar fashion in the future, the committee concluded that the method possessing the most likelihood of success would be interception of the object by fighter aircraft and recommended that in the event of future incidents of this nature fighters if within range be scrambled without delay.\n\n3. Attached as Tabs A and B are two proposed messages to the Commanders, Northeast and Alaskan Air Commands, directing the scramble of fighters as recommended by the committee.\n\nRECOMMENDATION\n\n4. Signature of attached messages.\n\nIncls\n[REDACTED]\nMsg to CONAC\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2C4 AFOIN-2C AFOIN-2 AFOIN\nCol. MacDuff Col. Zoller\n\nCoord cy, AFOIN\nCmbk cy, AFOIN-2C4\ncy for AFODC\ncy for AFOCP\ncy for AFOIN-2\ncy for AFOIN-2C\nStdbk cy, AFOIN-2C4\n\nSECRET\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775 Page 267"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET SECRET\n\nSUSPENSE\n\nORIGIN OF BASIC DATE\nASSIGNED BY\nDATE TYPE NO.\n\nSUBJECT\n(Uncl) Memorandum for Record\n\nROUTING\n\nInitial \"IN\" column to denote review prior to action. Initial \"OUT\" column to denote review of completed action. (X for action; ✓ for coordination.)\n\nIN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\nOIN-1 OIN-2 OIN-3 AFOIN\nOIN-1X OIN-2X OIN-3X AFOIN-X\nAFOIN-X\nOIN-X1\nOIN-X2\nSR ARMY OFF\nSR NAVAL OFF\nCABLES\nM&R FILE\nDISPATCH\n\nTO: AFOIN-X DATE 25 JUL 1955\nFROM: AFOIN-2X COMMENT NO. 4\n\nCOMMENTS (Use reverse, if necessary)\n\nForwarded for your approval and signature.\n\nC. U. TRUE\nColonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n2 Incls\nn/c\n\nWhen incl(s) No. 1 & 2 as/are withdrawn (or not attached), the [REDACTED] classification of this correspondence will be downgraded to Unclassified in accordance with Par 26b, AFR 205-1.\n\nAFHQ FORM 14 JAN 53 0-86 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM MAY BE USED. SECRET GPO-888934\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775 Page 268"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET SECRET\n\nSUSPENSE\n\nORIGIN OF BASIC OIN-2C4\nDATE 12 Jul 55 TYPE C/8 NUMBER\nSUBJECT Memorandum for Record\n\nROUTING\n\nInitial \"IN\" column to denote review prior to action. Initial \"OUT\" column to denote review of completed action. (X for action; ✓ for coordination.)\n\nOIN-1 OIN-2 OIN-3 AFOIN\nOIN-1X OIN-2X OIN-3X AFOIN\nOIN-2C OIN-2C4 OIN-2C1 OIN-2C2 OIN-2C3 OIN-2C5 AFOIN-X AFOIN-X OIN-X1 OIN-X2 OIN-X3 OIN-X4 OIN-X5 CABLES FILE DISPATCH\n\nTO: AFOIN-2 DATE\nFROM: AFOIN-2C COMMENT NUMBER 3\nLt Col Whitman/bps/52466\n\nCOMMENTS (Use reverse, if necessary)\n\nAttached is an Air Staff Summary Sheet complying with paragraph 2.a. of Comment 2.\n\n2 Incls\nIncl 1 n/c\nAdded 1 Incl\nSumm. sheet w/2 incls\n\nVIRGIL L. ZOLLER\nColonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nWhen enclosure(s) No. 1 is (are) withdrawn or not attached, the classification of this correspondence will be cancelled or changed to Unclassified in accordance with Par. 26b, AFR 205-1.\n\nAFHQ FORM 15 JUL 54 0-86 PERVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM MAY BE USED. SECRET GPO 878528\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775 Page 269"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET SECRET\n\nSUSPENSE\n\nORIGIN OF BASIC OIN-2C4\nDATE TYPE NUMBER\nSUBJECT Memorandum for Record\n\nROUTING\n\nInitial \"IN\" column to denote review prior to action. Initial \"OUT\" column to denote review of completed action. (X for action; ✓ for coordination.)\n\nOIN-1 OIN-2 15 JUL 1955 OIN-3 AFOIN\nOIN-1X OIN-2X OIN-3X AFOIN\nOIN-2C OIN-2C4 OIN-2C1 OIN-2C2 OIN-2C5 AFOIN-X AFOIN-X OIN-X1 OIN-X2 OIN-X3 OIN-X4 OIN-X5 CABLES FILE DISPATCH\n\nTO: AFOIN-2 DATE (Rec'd 12 Jul)\nFROM: AFOIN-2C COMMENT NUMBER 1\nCol. MacDuff/bps/52466\n\nCOMMENTS (Use reverse, if necessary)\n\nTO: AFOIN-2C 15 July 1955\nFROM: AFOIN-2X COMMENT NO. 2\nCol Schneider/gmk/77175\n\n1. A copy of your attached M/R recommending collection action has been passed to AFOIN-1X and AFOIN-2A.\n\n2. It is desired that you take the following two actions;\n\na. Prepare a letter to the DCS/Operations, for General Samford's signature, containing the recommendation of paragraph 9 of your M/R.\n\nb. Prepare a paper for release to the RCAF containing the information included in paragraphs 1 through 6 of your M/R. This paper should be coordinated through AFOIN-2 prior to release.\n\n* Per telephone conversation with Col. Schneider 18 July an Air Staff Summary Sheet is M/R prepared by 2C4 submitted rather dtd 11 Jul 55 than a letter. ESC.\n\n1 Incl\n\nGEORGE E. SCHNEIDER\nColonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nSECRET\n\nAFHQ FORM 15 JUL 54 0-86 PERVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM MAY BE USED. GPO 878528\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775 Page 270"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAFOIN-2C4\nCol. MacDuff/bps/52466\nw/11 July 1955\n\nM/R\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To evaluate Kc 97 crew sightings and ground radar returns of object in the Newfoundland area (4910N/5950W).\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n2. OIN-2C directed the OIN-2C committee on 8 July to evaluate the 6 July Kc 97 sightings and GCI radar returns over Newfoundland as summarized and detailed in CAF IN 15592, dtd 6 July 55 and CAF IN 90703 dtd 7 July 55.\n\n3. In arriving at the following conclusions the committee reviewed reports summarizing the incident, the crew interrogations and the NEAC evaluation of the incident. In addition certain new U.S. and Canadian developments in high performance unconventional aircraft were considered.\n\nCONCLUSIONS:\n\n4. It was concluded that no intelligence is available to support or deny the existence of unconventional Soviet aircraft comparable to those under consideration in the US and Canada and providing performance such as reported.\n\n5. The committee was unable to explain the simultaneous ground radar returns and aircrew visual sightings, and tentatively accepts the NEAC evaluation attributing the incident to electrical phenomenon on the one hand and misinterpretation of the sightings by aircrew members on the other.\n\n6. It was further concluded that this incident should be classified as UFOB.\n\n7. This item is not considered suitable for inclusion in D/I Policy Book or the Daily Staff Digest.\n\nRECOMMENDATIONS:\n\n8. Due to the serious technological threat should unfriendly nations succeed in developing high performance unconventional aircraft increased effort should be made by all collection agencies to penetrate the Soviet Research and Development establishments and programs in order to give the U.S. adequate warning of any developments in this area.\n\n9. It is further recommended that in the event of future incidents of this nature fighter scrambles be effected without delay.\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2C4, Col. MacDuff, ext. 52466\nAFOIN-2C1, Lt. Col. Farrior, ext. 56239\nAFOIN-2C2, Col. Gould, ext. 56200\nAFOIN-2C5, Col. Gwynne, ext. 55538\n\nSECRET\n\nIncl 1\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775 Page 271"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF HQ-50 (Rev 21 June 48)\nHQI 10-5\nSECRET\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nOct 2-2-7X\nAIR STAFF SUMMARY SHEET\nTO | ROUTE | DESIRED ACTION | INITIALS | OFFICE OF PREPARATION\nAFOOP | 1 | Coordination | A/6 AUG 1955 | AFOIN-2C4\nAFODC | 2 | Signature | 8 AUG 1955 | GRADE - SURNAME | TEL.\nL/Col Whitman/bps | 52466\nDATE JUL 28 1955\nSUBJECT: (Secret) Request NEAC for Immediate Fighter Scramble Against Flying Objects\nSUMMARY\n1. On 6 July the crew of a KC-97 tanker reported the sighting of an unidentified airborne object in the Newfoundland area (4910N/5950W). At the time of the sighting a GCI radar in the same area obtained a radar return of an object which apparently was identical to the one the KC-97 crew had under visual observation. A committee, appointed by this Directorate to evaluate this sighting reviewed reports summarizing the incident by the Northeast Air Command. The committee tentatively attributed the sighting to electrical phenomena and visual misinterpretation by aircrew members. At the same time, however, the committee discussed the possibility that the object might have been an high performance unconventional aircraft. This Directorate is of the opinion that the development of such an aircraft by an unfriendly nation would constitute a serious technological threat to the United States, and therefore every effort must be made to identify sightings in the future.\n2. In its discussion of methods to be used to obtain identification of objects sighted in a similar fashion in the future, the committee concluded that the method possessing the most likelihood of success would be interception of the object by fighter aircraft and recommended that in the event of future incidents of this nature fighters within range be scrambled without delay.\n3. Attached as Tab A is a proposed message to the Commander NEACOM, directing the scramble of fighters as recommended by the committee.\nRECOMMENDATION\n4. Signature of attached message.\nFRANK B. CHAPPELL\nColonel USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n1 Incl\nProposed Msg to\nCdr NEAC\nHandwritten: Incl not sent red in M+R. KC\nHandwritten: File 2 B2 24/8/55\n1907\nSECRET\nAFODC CONTROL NO 55\nAFOOP 41703 1907\n50 12579\nNW 91198 DocId:34746775 Page 272"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OUT 4 AUG 1955 DIR/INT HQ USAF\nOIN- RECEIVED\n1955 AUG 17 14 54\nAFODC\nREC'D 23 AUG 1955 DIR/INT HQ USAF\n[illegible]\n1955 AUG 22 09 31 AFODC\nDISPATCHED\n[illegible]\nNW 91198 DocId:34746775 Page 273"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nAFOIN-2C4/LtCol Trites/bps/52466\nw/5 Aug 55\nINT 2-2-7\nINT 2-2-2\nCanada\n8 AUG 1955\nAFOIN\nSUBJECT: (Uncl) Transmittal of USAF Reports of Evaluation\nTO: Chief of Staff\nRoyal Canadian Air Force\nOttawa, Canada\nATTN: Director of Air Intelligence\n1. Inclosed are summaries (TAB A and TAB B) of the Headquarters USAF Committee that evaluated two incidents in which USAF aircraft crews reported unusual sightings. The incidents are as follows:\na. A series of sightings by B-47 aircraft crews over the Canadian Archipelago between 1 and 8 June 1955. (TAB A)\nb. 6 July 1955 sightings of Unidentified Object in the Newfoundland area by Kc-97 aircraft. (TAB B)\n2. If further information is desired in this matter, please address request to the attention of Director of Intelligence, Headquarters USAF.\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nC. U. TRUE\nColonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n2 Incls\n1. TAB A\n2. TAB B\nOUT 15 AUG 1955 DIR/INT HQ USAF 2001\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2C4 AFOIN-2C AFOIN-2\nCol MacDuff Col Zoller C. U. TRUE, Colonel USAF\nAFOIN Coord. cy\nAFOIN-2 cy\nAFOIN-2C4 file cy\nSECRET\nNW 91198 DocId:34746775 Page 274"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSUBJECT: (Uncl) Headquarters USAF Evaluation of 1-8 June 1955 Sightings by RB-47 Aircraft Crew Over Canadian Archipelago\n1. The Headquarters USAF Committee on 23 June 1955 considered all available information concerning 1-8 June 1955 sightings by RB-47 aircraft crews.\n2. The committee conclusions are as follows:\na. Subject to receipt of additional information, the visual sightings on 3 and 5 June 1955 by RB-47 crew members over the Canadian Archipelago were aircraft of unknown nationality.\nb. The significance of the radar scope presentations cannot be evaluated due to lack of detailed information concerning the characteristics of the returns received and the exact nature of the surface below.\nc. The Soviets have the capability of operating reciprocating engine aircraft from ice surfaces and this same capability could apply to jet operations, although no firm evidence of Soviet jet aircraft operations from ice is available.\nd. There is no firm evidence that Soviet aircraft were flying in the area in question during the time of these incidents.\ne. In the past few years (since 1950), there have been a number of aircraft sightings in the Arctic region between Alaska and Greenland that have not been identified. The sightings were derived from reports of contrails, actual aircraft, sounds of jets and reciprocating engines, and flying objects. One sighting has been identified as Soviet aircraft.\nSECRET\nNW 91198 DocId:34746775 Page 275"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSUBJECT: (Uncl) Headquarters USAF Evaluation of 6 July 1955 Sightings of Unidentified Object in the Newfoundland Area.\n1. The Headquarters USAF Committee on 8 July 1955 reviewed all available information regarding the 6 July 1955 sightings made by the crew of a Kc-97 in Newfoundland area (4910N/5950W).\n2. The committee findings are as follows:\na. After reviewing all reports received, and considering certain new U.S. and Canadian developments in high performance aircraft it is concluded that no intelligence is available to support or deny the existence of unconventional Soviet aircraft comparable to those under consideration in the U.S. and Canada and providing the performance as reported in this incident.\nb. The committee was unable to explain the simultaneous ground radar returns and aircrew visual sightings, and tentatively attributes the incident to electrical phenomenon and misinterpretation of the sightings by aircrew members.\nc. That this incident be classified as an Unidentified Flying Object.\nSECRET\nNW 91198 DocId:34746775 Page 276"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAFOIN-2C4\nLt Col Trites/bps/52466\nw/3 Aug 55\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To forward to RCAF the findings of the Hq USAF Committee.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n2. AFOIN-2 formed a committee to evaluate two incidents. The incidents were as follows:\n\na. Sightings by RB-47 crews in Canadian Archipelago between 1-8 June 1955.\n\nb. Sightings by Kc-97 crew near Newfoundland area on 6 July 1955.\n\n3. Results of the Committee findings were forwarded and approved by AFOIN-2. AFOIN-2 recommended that RCAF be appraised of the committee findings.\n\n4. Attached letter to Chief of Staff, RCAF, contains the committee findings.\n\n5. This item is not suitable for inclusion in the D/I Policy Book or the Daily Staff Digest.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\n6. That AFOIN-2 approve attached letter to Chief of Staff, RCAF.\n\n7. Letter should be forwarded to 1B4 for further transmission to RCAF.\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nAFOIN-2C4 Col. MacDuff, ext. 52466\nAFOIN-2C Col. Zoller, ext. 71577\nAFOIN-2 Col. Morrow, ext. 71110\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET AFOIN-1A3/Maj Bogan/3lr/76095 Wrtn 9 Sep 55, rewrtn 13 Sep 55 Rewrtn Col Richman/Maj Voorhees/mvr/75818 on 23 Sep 55\n\nINT2-2-7\n\nAFOIN-1A3\n\n29 SEP 1955 x a AFOIN-4\nx meteorite\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, AFOIN-4, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO\n\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17\n\n1. Reference is made to the attached letter from Rome Air Development Center, dated 6 July 1955, letter your Headquarters, dated 14 July 1955 and letter from Air Research and Development Command, dated 22 July 1955, all with subject as above.\n\n2. This Headquarters has notified Headquarters ARDC that your organization is responsible for distributing technical data from AN/FPS-17. If any unusual dissemination problems arise, which are not covered by current security policies, it is requested that they be referred to this Headquarters.\n\n3 Incls:\n1. Cy ltr fr Rome Air Development Center, 6 July 55.\n2. Cy ltr fr AFOIN-4, 14 July 55.\n3. Cy ltr fr ARDC, 22 July 55.\n\nFRANK B. CHAPPELL\nColonel USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nD/I File Copy\nAFOIN-1A3 Comeback Copy\n1A3 Operations Section File Cy\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET AFOIN-1A3/Maj Bogan/elr/76095 Wrtn 9 Sep 55, rewrtn 13 Sep 55\n\nAFOIN-1A3\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, AFOIN-4, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO\n\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17\n\n1. Reference is made to the attached letter from Rome Air Development Center, dated 6 July 1955, letter your Headquarters, dated 14 July 1955 and letter from Air Research and Development Command, dated 22 July 1955, all with subject as above.\n\n2. This office has notified Headquarters Air Research and Development Command by separate letter that your suggested distribution plan for technical data on radar returns from meteors and missiles is satisfactory.\n\n3. It is requested that your Center assume complete responsibility for the control of subject data for D/I Headquarters USAF with particular emphasis on the release to commercial firms. If the release to commercial firms should generate any \"need to know\" or security problems, these should be referred to this Headquarters for resolution.\n\n3 Incls:\n1. Cy ltr fr Rome Air Development Center, 6 July 55.\n2. Cy ltr fr AFOIN-4, 14 July 55.\n3. Cy ltr fr ARDC, 22 July 55.\n\nFile Copy - Directorate of Intelligence\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nRCDIL\n\nSUBJECT: (Unc) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17 JUL 6 1955\n\nTHRU: Commander\nAir Research and Development Command\nATTN: RDTDRR (Col. Edward Friedlander)\nPost Office Box 1395\nBaltimore 3, Maryland\n\nTO: Commander\nAir Technical Intelligence Center\nATTN: ATIAA (Lt. Col. James G. Mannatt)\nWright-Patterson AF Base, Ohio\n\n1. Radar Set AN/FPS-17 is obtaining a large quantity of technical data on radar returns from meteors and missiles. These data include frequency of meteor trail returns, height of meteor trails, duration and strength of meteor trail returns, echoing areas of missiles, characteristics of radar returns from missiles, etc. The great value of this information to groups working on improvements of Radar Set AN/FPS-17 and to those working on defense against Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles was discussed by the AN/FPS-17 Advisory Committee. This committee recommended that provisions be made to furnish the above type of technical data to those groups working on ICBM and on the AN/FPS-17. These groups include the Lincoln Laboratory, AFCRC, RADC, and several commercial companies.\n\n2. The technical information listed above is now being obtained by the General Electric Company. It is recommended that the General Electric Company be given permission by your office to provide RADC with meteor data obtained by Radar Set AN/FPS-17. RADC will arrange for the dissemination of these data to other agencies requiring the information. It is further recommended that missile data be furnished to the following: Professor Radford of the Lincoln Laboratory, Dr. Hollingsworth of AFCRC, and Mr. Howard Davis of RADC. The missile data could be furnished most\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nHq RADC RCDIL Subject: (Unc) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17\n\nconveniently by providing duplicates of the magnetic type and of the portions of the film containing the data.\n\n3. It is strongly recommended that the above action be expedited. The obtaining of the meteor and missile data by personnel working on the defense against ICBM will accelerate the program and may result in a savings to the Air Force of several million dollars.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDER:\n\nJAMES W. ANDERSON, JR.\nColonel, USAF\nDir, Directorate of Intel and EW\n\n2\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nR1109\n\nATIA\n\n14 Jul 1955\n\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17\n\nTHRU: Commander\nAir Research and Development Command\nATTN: RDDDR (Col Edward Friedlander)\nPost Office Box 1395\nBaltimore 3, Maryland\n\nTO: Commander\nRome Air Development Center\nATTN: RCDIL (Col James W. Anderson, Jr.)\nGriffiss Air Force Base\nRome, New York\n\n1. Reference is made to your letter of 6 July 1955, subject (U) \"Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17\".\n\n2. The release of data to RADC, AFCRC and Lincoln Laboratory, is concurred in. However, it is planned to release these data from this center rather than from the General Electric Company, which will continue to release data only to the Air Technical Intelligence Center.\n\n3. Since neither General Electric nor this center have facilities to reproduce the magnetic tape, Site 9 will be requested to provide pulse-to-pulse photography, which they can do with existing equipment.\n\n4. The Air Technical Intelligence Center will reproduce all \"live-data\" film and make distribution.\n\n5. With respect to meteor data, if your office will specify the number of copies required, and other supporting details needed, RADC will be furnished these for distribution.\n\n6. This center will release these data as expeditiously as possible.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDER\n\ncc: AFOIN-1A3\n\nT. J. CONNAIR, JR.\nMAJOR, USAF\nAdjutant\n\n355-11566\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nATIA\n\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17\n\nTHRU: Commander\nAir Research and Development Command\nATTN: RDDDR (Col Edward Friedlander)\nPost Office Box 1395\nBaltimore 3, Maryland\n\nTO: Commander\nRome Air Development Center\nATTN: RCDIL (Col James W. Anderson, Jr.)\nGriffiss Air Force Base\nRome, New York\n\n1. Reference is made to your letter of 6 July 1955, subject (U) \"Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17\".\n\n2. The release of data to RADC, AFCRC and Lincoln Laboratory, is concurred in. However, it is planned to release these data from this center rather than from the General Electric Company, which will continue to release data only to the Air Technical Intelligence Center.\n\n3. Since neither General Electric nor this center have facilities to reproduce the magnetic tape, Site 9 will be requested to provide pulse-to-pulse photography, which they can do with existing equipment.\n\n4. The Air Technical Intelligence Center will reproduce all \"live-data\" film and make distribution.\n\n5. With respect to meteor data, if your office will specify the number of copies required, and other supporting details needed, RADC will be furnished these for distribution.\n\n6. This center will release these data as expeditiously as possible.\n\nRECEIVED 14 JUL 1955 ATIC\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nRDTSI\n\nSUBJECT: (Uncl) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17\n\nTO: Director of Intelligence\nHeadquarters USAF\nATTN: AFOIN-1A3\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\n1. Reference is made to letter from Rome Air Development Center, subject as above, dated 6 July 1955, copy attached and letter from Air Technical Intelligence Center, same subject, dated 14 July 1955 in answer to the referenced 6 July letter, copy also attached. (UNCL)\n\n2. The procedure outlined by the Air Technical Intelligence Center on the subject matter is satisfactory to this Command. Request confirmation of this procedure and/or any additional guidance deemed necessary.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDER:\n\n2 Incls a/s\n\nJOSEPH J. PELLEGRINI\nLt Colonel, USAF\nCh, Intel, Recon & Supporting Sys Div.\n\nThis correspondence is classified SECRET because of the inclosures and will be downgraded to UNCLASSIFIED upon their removal.\n\nC5-46412\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAFOIN-1A3/Maj Bogan/elr/76095/9 Sep 55\nRewrtn 13 Sep 55\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) Meteor Data Obtained by AN/FPS-17\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To approve or disapprove the Air Technical Intelligence Center plan for distributing data obtained by AN/FPS-17 equipment.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n2. On 6 July 1955, Rome Air Development Center, reported that AN/FPS-17 equipment was obtaining large quantities of technical data on radar returns from meteors and missiles. Information is being gathered by General Electric Co. and is considered to be of great value to personnel working on the technical aspects of ICBM defense.\n\n3. ATIC, by letter dated 14 July 1955, recommended following distribution:\n\nFrom General Electric Co. to ATIC where further distribution will be made to RADC, AFCRC and the Lincoln Laboratory.\n\n4. ATIC will request Site 9 to provide pulse-to-pulse photography since available equipment is in position there.\n\n5. Headquarters Air Research and Development Command concurred in the above outlined plan and requested AFOIN-1A3 approval and/or guidance.\n\n6. Since the subject data is technical in nature, it was felt distribution was adequate. However, since General Electric Co. is collecting the data and the Rome Air Development Center letter mentioned \"several commercial firms\" as possible recipients of the information, it was felt that AFOIN should have a control point accountable to AFOIN, Hq USAF. It is recommended that AFOIN-4 be responsible for this control. The attached proposed letter points out this responsibility and establishes AFOIN as the point of contact for decision on release problems to civilian firms.\n\n7. Lt Colonel Adkins, AFOIN-1A2, concurs with above approach.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\n8. That the Chief, AFOIN-1A3, approve and sign the attached proposed letter to ARDC and memorandum to AFOIN-4.\n\nJOHN A. BOGAN\nMajor, USAF\nAFOIN-1A3\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nWrtn OIN-1A-P/Maj Buskey/ram/54555/wrtn 3 Nov 55\nRewrtn OIN-1Lt Col Green/mvr/71592/8 Nov 55\n\nSUBJECT: (Uncl) Importance of CIRVIS Program\n\nTO: Commander\nMilitary Air Transport Service\nAndrews Air Force Base, Maryland\n\n1. Attached copies of correspondence between this headquarters and Headquarters, Air Defense Command, are forwarded for your information and to point up the importance placed on the CIRVIS program by ADC as an aid in the early warning of a possible attack on the United States or its forces.\n\n2. This headquarters agrees with paragraph 3 of the 1st indorsement and takes this opportunity to recommend continuing emphasis on impressing CIRVIS' importance to the civilian agencies involved. We recognize that the MATS effort in indoctrinating the various commercial airlines, airline pilots, National Business Aircraft Association member companies and pilots, and others in similar organizations, has caused them to become active participants in the program.\n\n3. The high value which ADC has placed on the civilian effort in CIRVIS attests to the truly excellent job that has been done by MATS in this field. It is considered that continuing work with these agencies is warranted and will pay off by keeping them active in the CIRVIS program.\n\nBY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl\nCy 1st Ind fr\nHq ADC dtd 27 Oct 55\nw/cy B/Ltr dtd\n8 Sep 55 (SECRET)\n\nComeback Cy - 1A-P\nReader file - 1A-P\nD/I File Cy\n\nSee Coordination below\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OIN-1A-P/Maj Buskey/ram/54544\nWritten 3 Nov 55\n\nSECRET\n\nAFOIN-1A-P\n\nSUBJECT: (Uncld) Importance of CIRVIS Program\n\nTO: Commander\nMilitary Air Transport Service\nAndrews Air Force Base, Maryland\n\n1. Attached copies of correspondence between this headquarters and Headquarters, Air Defense Command, are forwarded for your information and to point up the importance placed on the CIRVIS program by ADC as an aid in the early warning of a possible attack on the United States or its forces.\n\n2. This headquarters agrees with paragraph 3 of the 1st indorsement and takes this opportunity to recommend continuing emphasis on impressing CIRVIS' importance to the civilian agencies involved. We recognize that the MATS effort in indoctrinating the various commercial airlines, airline pilots, National Business Aircraft Association member companies and pilots, and others in similar organizations, has caused them to become active participants in the program. The present high value placed by ADC on the civilian effort in CIRVIS attests to the truly excellent job that has been done by MATS in this field, one of which we are well aware. It is believed that continuing work with these agencies is warranted and will pay off by keeping them active in the CIRVIS program.\n\nBY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl\nCy 1st Ind fr\nHq ADC dtd 27 Oct 55\nw/cy B/Ltr dtd\n8 Sep 55 (SECRET)\n\nCc: Comeback cy - 1A-P\nReader file - 1A-P\nD/I file cy\n\nCH. C. ROGERS\nColonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL 1 OIN-1A-P 2 OIN-1A 3 OIN 1X1 4 5 6\nSignature of Responsible Officer\nInternal Office Coordination\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a285b611a308f9bc","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD\n\nNOV 3 1955\n\nSUBJECT: CIRVIS Program\n\n1. In accordance with AFR 200-3, Hq MATS, is responsible for contacting commercial airlines and pilots to indoctrinate them and secure their participation in the CIRVIS program as outlined in the JANAP 146 series.\n\n2. Intelligence Division, Hq MATS, has done an outstanding job in this indoctrination, having contacted commercial airlines, the National Business Aircraft Association, and the pilots in both. They have secured the cooperation of all companies and associations through writing a multitude of letters. They have gone into the field and personally lectured to regional pilots' meetings and have succeeded in getting a real interest in CIRVIS aroused for the first time. This has been a tremendous task and has only been accomplished by an exceptional effort. However, the only way to keep the interest at a peak is to keep emphasizing the importance of the CIRVIS program to them. MATS' efforts must continue.\n\n3. AFOIN-1A-P, wherein lies the responsibility for monitoring the CIRVIS program for AFOIN, and in part for Hq USAF, has long felt that MATS should be complimented in writing on their fine job, and at the same time be urged to continue their program. It is felt that any letter of recognition or commendation should come originally from CINCONAD and an informal suggestion has been made along these lines.\n\n4. However, this seems like a good opportunity for us to easily and naturally show our awareness of and satisfaction for a job well done. Hence, the forwarding of the correspondence from ADC by the letter indicating our appreciation. It is felt that we should take this chance to help them continue the good work.\n\nPaul G. Buskey\nPAUL G. BUSKEY\nMajor, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence"} {"doc_id":"a34181e53e5859e0","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:20:08"} {"doc_id":"a3791681d61447f3","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026\n\nS045028\n\nSEE BOTTOM OF PAGE FOR ADDITIONAL SPECIAL CONTROLS, IF ANY\nCONFIDENTIAL\nINFORMATION REPORT\nThis material contains information affecting the National Defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S.C. Secs. 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law. D450298\nPREPARED AND DISSEMINATED BY\nCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY\nCOUNTRY Hungary\nREPORT NO. OO- B-93674\nSUBJECT Report of Unusual Flying Object Sightings and Attendant Scientific Activity\nDATE DISTRIBUTED 17 Apr 56\nNO. OF PAGES 1 NO. OF ENCLS.\nSUPPLEMENT TO REPORT #\nPLACE ACQUIRED (By source)\nRESPONSIVE TO\nOO/c. Guide 15 BAIR\n201 SI-806\nDATE ACQUIRED (By source) Nov 55\nDATE OF INFORMATION (Date or dates, on or between which, events or conditions described in report existed) Nov 55\nTHIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION\nSOURCE Naturalized US citizen of Hungarian extraction. He corresponds regularly with two nieces living in Budapest.\n1. In November 1955 I received a letter from my niece in Budapest. This letter contained the following interesting item [free translation]:\n\"The so-called flying saucers (rockets) [sic] for several weeks kept the people in a nervous state. These very fast speeding flyers kept scientific groups very busy. I'm sure you heard already from the papers, 12 thousand km per hour was estimated on these flyers.\"\n2. Included with the letter was the following sketch indicating the formation and suspected course of the above objects:\nBudapest\nMoscow\n3. This is the first time my niece has mentioned such objects in her letters.\n4. [Available on loan from CIA Library is a photostatic copy of original letter in Hungarian, and an English translation. The excerpt quoted in para. 1 is marked in brackets in this letter. UNCLASSIFIED] - Duplicate\n- end -\nCODES\nDISTRIBUTION\nSTATE ARMY NAVY AIR FBI\nNOFORN NO DISSEM ABROAD LIMITED\nLIMITED: Dissemination limited to full-time employees of CIA, AEC and FBI; and, within State and Defense, to the intelligence components, other offices producing NIS elements, and higher echelons with their immediate supporting staffs. Not to be disseminated to consultants, external projects or reserve personnel on short term active duty (excepting individuals who are normally full-time employees of CIA, AEC, FBI, State or Defense) unless the written permission of the originating office has been obtained through the Assistant Director for Collection and Dissemination, CIA."} {"doc_id":"a4408e3d3453a953","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n-1 of 2-\n\n[REDACTED]/[REDACTED]\n\nOFFICIAL RECORD\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nDate of entry 10/[REDACTED]/2023\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED]) On September [REDACTED] 2023, [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] and FBI Special Agent [REDACTED] [REDACTED] interviewed [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] via Facetime video. [REDACTED] [REDACTED] a [REDACTED] [REDACTED] with [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] sat in on the interview ([REDACTED]) and [REDACTED] were in [REDACTED] at the time of the interview). After being advised of the identity of the interviewing agents and the nature of the interview, [REDACTED] provided the following information:\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED]) [REDACTED] was a [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] in the [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] He'd been an [REDACTED] since [REDACTED] and had ten to fifteen hours as a drone pilot.\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED]) On September [REDACTED] 2023 [REDACTED] was at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] with three other contractors and [REDACTED] [REDACTED] for LiDAR tests with [REDACTED] After receiving a [REDACTED] [REDACTED] the five of them got into three vehicles with [REDACTED] driving the first vehicle and [REDACTED] as her passenger.\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED]) The three vehicles began driving south around 7:30 am. The sun was in the east with good visibility.\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED]) The three vehicles came to a gate that was giving [REDACTED] trouble. At about three quarters of the windshield up, [REDACTED] saw a linear object with a super bright light on the east side of the object. The light was bright white and bright enough to see bands within the light. The object was metallic / gray in color. It did not have any wings or exhaust. The object was smaller than a 737, one to two Blackhawk helicopters in length and was definitely bigger than a drone. The object was approximately 5000 feet above ground level, and moved east to west parallel to the ground. The object was visible for five to ten seconds and then the light went out and the object vanished. The sky was clear and [REDACTED] couldn't find the object again.\n\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]/[REDACTED]\n\nInvestigation on 09/[REDACTED]/2023 at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] United States (Other (Facetime Video))\n\nFile # [REDACTED]-[REDACTED]-[REDACTED] Date drafted 10/[REDACTED]/2023\n\nby [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"a4408e3d3453a953","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n[REDACTED]/[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]-[REDACTED]-[REDACTED]\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] September [REDACTED] 2023 [REDACTED] [REDACTED] UAP\n\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] [REDACTED], On 09/[REDACTED]/2023, Page 2 of 2\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED]) The object stayed the same size and kept the same light intensity during the time [REDACTED] observed it. He did not see the object as they were coming over the small bridge at the gate until they were going through the gate. [REDACTED] did not notice any interference with their vehicles .\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] [REDACTED] was annoyed when she first saw the object because the air space had been restricted for the drone tests they were going to conduct. [REDACTED] [REDACTED] in the second vehicle tried to get [REDACTED] [REDACTED] to see the object but was unsuccessful.\n\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED]) That night a storm came through and the TV went out in [REDACTED] hotel room. He was still freaked out and went downstairs to make sure all the TVs were out in the hotel and not just his. [REDACTED] had weird dreams and had trouble sleeping for the first two nights after he saw the object.\n\n[REDACTED]/[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"a469bf7986936ef4","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 57597\n\nHEADQUARTERS\n2466th AIR FORCE RESERVE COMBAT TRAINING CENTER (CONAC)\nAtterbury Air Force Base\nColumbus, Indiana\n\nRIO\n\n13 JAN 1954\n\nSUBJECT: UFOB\n\nAF607182\n\nTO:\tDirector of Intelligence\n\tHeadquarters, United States Air Force\n\tWashington 25, D. C.\n\n1. In lieu of AF Form 112b as required by AFR 200-2, 26 August 1953, the following information is submitted to conform to paragraph 6b of cited regulation:\n\na. Description of the objects:\n\n(1) Shape: Circular ring of smoke; cloudy substance that stayed in a plane. No upper or lower structure could be seen.\n(2) Size: Observer would not estimate size with the exception of using the word, \"large\". No relative comparison.\n(3) Color: White, cloudy, gaseous.\n(4) Number: Two\n(5) Formation: Staggered like two jets in flight, tightly following each other.\n(6) Discernable features or details: Four bright or brilliant equidistant points of light within the same plane, rotating slowly clockwise and seeming to be the source of cloudy aura, white in color.\n(7) Tail, trail or exhaust: Compared favorably with Jet take-off when observed at night. Bluish white with vaporish trail.\n(8) Sound: None to the ear, although observers stood outside of car to make sure.\n(9) Other pertinent or unusual features: Controlled downward tilt from direction of approach to hovering point. Complete level stability while hovering. Take-off in upward tilt with bright points of light fixed, two to the rear and two forward. Incredible speed when disappearing."} {"doc_id":"a469bf7986936ef4","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a469bf7986936ef4","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Hq 2466th AFRCTC, Atterbury AFB, Columbus, Indiana., RIO, Subj: UFOB\n\nb. Description of course of objects:\n\n(1) Attention: Observers attracted by brilliant moving light.\n(2) Angle of flight: Observers were in moving car and travelling East. Looked North at approximately 20° elevation.\n(3) Angle of flight on disappearance: Undetermined by observers; spoken of as, \"sharp upward travel\", in southwesterly direction having approached from the North.\n(4) Flight path and maneuvers: In-line approach with steady decent; stationary attitude at one spot; then tremendous acceleration on in-line flight at an abrupt angle.\n(5) Manner of disappearance: Seemingly instantaneous surge to maximum speed, keeping formation.\n(6) Length of time observed: Approximately three (3) to four (4) minutes. Observation period included two (2) moves and one change of direction of car travel figured at about two (2) minutes elapsed time. Total time, then, was five to six minutes.\n\nc. Manner of observation:\n\n(1) Ground-visual. Area of final observation was flat, north of city congestion, with no buildings nearby.\n(2) No optical aids employed.\n(3) Not applicable.\n\nd. Time and Date of sighting:\n\n(1) Time: 0002 to 0008Z\nDate: Observers unable to remember exactly.\n(2) Light conditions: Between dusk and night.\n\ne. Location of observers:\n\n(1) 85° 49' East 39° 03' North Seymour, Indiana.\n\nf. Identifying information of all observers:\n\n(1) Civilians - Mr Hiram and Mrs Gladys Jones; Mr Jones, 60. 100 South Chestnut Street, Seymour, Ind. He is a drugist. Owner-operator of Jones Drug Store. Not prone to exaggeration; direct forthright attitude toward people; within his knowledge, he is truthful, honest."} {"doc_id":"a469bf7986936ef4","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Hq 2466th AFRCTC, Atterbury AFB, Columbus, Ind., RIO, Subj: UFOB\n\ng. Weather/wind conditions:\n\n(1) Period covers the week of 8 December to 15 December 1953.\n\n(a) Dec 8 - 10: Overcast\n10 - 12: Clear between 1800 to 2400, otherwise overcast.\n11 - 12: Overcast\n13 - 15: Overcast\nLight rain, drizzle, light snow, fog prevailed intermittently.\n\n(b) Dec 8 - 13: winds South thru West\n14 - 15: switched to North\nVelocity: 10 to 12 K\nVisibility: 1½ miles to 15 miles variable thruout week.\n\nh. Other unusual activity or conditions:\n\nNo noticeable disturbances or conditions in the area. Observation information provided by S/Sgt Billy R. Egger, Chief Observer, Detachment 21, Ninth Weather Group, Atterbury AFB.\n\ni. Physical evidence of the sighting:\n\nNone.\n\nj. Not applicable.\n\nk. Air traffic in area: None according to observers. Impossible to verify without exact date through ACS and 2466th Operations.\n\nl. Position, title, comments by preparing Officer (NCO).\n\nNo officer assigned at the time of report contact.\n\nS/Sgt Bruce C.F. Butler\nNCOIC, Reserve Information Office\n\nComments: Contact with Mr Jones developed on the advice of Dr W.S. Fisher, 422 Ninth St., Columbus, Ind., through a telephone call to Lt Marvin Satin, Adjutant, (at the time, OD) on 9 January at approximately 1650 (CST)"} {"doc_id":"a469bf7986936ef4","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Hq 2466th AFRCTC, Atterbury AFB, Columbus, Ind., RIO, Subj: UFOB\n\nComments: Mr Jones was a patient in the Bartholomew County Hospital and under the care of Dr. Fisher. He was to be released 10 January or 11 January after short convalescence.\nMr Jones stated that he had not told anyone of his experiences other than three personal friends desiring to avoid ridicule. He firmly believes in what he saw, however. His wife has the same attitude.\nDr Fisher uncovered the story by saying he had a letter from his son in the Air Force in Saudi, Arabia, who claimed to have seen a \"Flying Saucer\". Therupon, Mr Jones divulged his experiences.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDER:\n\n[signature]\n\nDIST:\nInfo Copy to AITC\n\nMARVIN S. SATIN\n2D LT., USAF\nAdjutant"} {"doc_id":"a469bf7986936ef4","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n\nDISPATCHED\nHEADQUARTERS\nATTERBURY IND\n13 JAN 1954"} {"doc_id":"a5336de4543bcfd9","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026\n\nCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY\n\n18 AUG 1967\n\nThis material contains information affecting the National Defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S.C. Secs. 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\n\nCONTROLLED DISSEM\t\tCONFIDENTIAL\t\tNO DISSEM ABROAD\n\nCOUNTRY USSR\nSUBJECT Report on Conversations With Soviet Scientists on Subject of Unidentified Flying Objects in the USSR\nDATE OF INFO. May 1967\nPLACE & DATE ACQ. USSR; May 1967\nREPORT NO. 00-B-321/23490-67\nDATE DISTR. 18 AUG 67\nNO. PAGES 2\nREFERENCES (351)\n\nTHIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION\n\nSOURCE US citizen; an astrophysicist on the staff of a large research institute. The information in this report was extracted from a memorandum he wrote for his superiors.\n[This report was developed by an Air Force (AFNIN) representative assigned to the office of preparation.]\n\n1. This report is an account of conversational exchanges on the subject of UFO's during the course of a one-month trip of a US scientist through the USSR in the spring of 1967, for the purpose of visiting several astronomical observatories having staff members engaged in planetary research. The only scientists contacted during the trip were astronomers, and inquiries concerning Soviet observations and interpretations of UFO's were a minor aspect of the trip. Within these limitations, an attempt was made to assess Soviet scientific thinking on this controversial topic.\n\n2. He visited V.I. Moroz, Sternberg Institute, Moscow, who was noncommittal on the subject of UFO's. The scientist who served as translator, a radio astronomer, emphatically stated that he knew of no sightings of UFO's in the USSR and added with a laugh that if they were only seen in the US, they must be of Soviet origin.\n\n3. At the Pulkovo Observatory, Leningrad, one of the astronomers mentioned that she had heard of some sightings of unidentified objects near the Caucasus. She was unaware of any study being made of them but was open-minded on the subject.\n\n4. The US scientist's main visit was to N.A. Kosyrev, who was very interested in the problem. He had read Menzel's book (which has been translated into Russian) but did not accept his conclusions. Kosyrev knew of some sightings in the northern part of the USSR, but said that reports of such sightings are not printed in Soviet newspapers because they are not regarded as scientific observations. (Comment: this is interesting in view of the readiness of Soviet newspapers to print rather fantastic reports of hypotheses and \"observations\" suggested by the more imaginative members of the scientific community. Apparently some official sanction is needed.) Kosyrev has been interested in US reports of UFO's and readily accepts their reality. In fact, it is his personal opinion that the UFO's may originate on Venus. He is well aware of the negative effect of \"enlightened\" scientific opinion on the interpretation of questionable observations as he has had personal"} {"doc_id":"a5336de4543bcfd9","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONTROLLED DISSEM\t\tCONFIDENTIAL\t\tNO DISSEM ABROAD\n- 2 -\t\t00-B-321/23490-67\n\nexperience of this effect. (Comment: Kozyrev is a controversial figure in the Soviet scientific community as well as internationally. Apparently one of his questionable observations (the activity of the central peak in the lunar crater Alphonsus) has turned out to be correct. On the other hand, it is really more accurate to say that this observation led to an intensive search for activity on the Moon that has produced some positive results. There may be no connection between the two sets of data, however.)\n\n5. At the Main Astronomical Observatory, Kiev, little interest is shown in the UFO question. I.K. Koval mentioned that he and several other astronomers had been out in the countryside one evening and had seen a curious, reddish object flashing through the sky that they were convinced was neither a satellite nor a meteorite. However, their immediate interpretation was that this object might have been a fragment of a satellite or rocket returning from orbit, burning up in the atmosphere. Koval thought that UFO's had been seen in the USSR but he could not be specific as to locations and characteristics.\n\n6. At the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory, Crimea, again little interest was shown. One of the astronomers, L.I. Galkin, was with the group mentioned by Koval and confirmed the observation of a peculiar object. He did not discuss the experience in detail but clearly had been struck by the possibility that the object might have been a \"saucer.\"\n\n7. At the Astrophysical Institute, Alma Ata, there was considerable interest. The institute includes an Atmospheric Optics Section presided over by G.S. Lifschitz. However, the initial discussion of the problem was with the director of the institute, G.M. Idlis. He too had read Menzel's book, but considered it an adequate treatment of the subject which he consequently felt was closed. He indicated that no observations of UFO's had been made by his staff and that they had received no reports of such observations. However, when the US scientist proceeded to indicate the results of McDonald's critical study of the problem, Idlis readily conceded that there might be more to it and concluded by stating that it was \"clearly still an open question.\"\n\n8. Another astronomer mentioned that in the northern part of Kazakhstan there had been repeated sightings of ball lightning. The University in Alma Ata had sent a team out to investigate and discovered that what was being seen were reflections of automobile headlights from an inversion layer.\n\n9. Later, a discussion was held with Lifschitz. He was not very impressed with Menzel's book, but was also not impressed with the significance of the phenomenon. It is possible that some interest was kindled that might lead to additional investigations.\n\n10. A stellar spectroscopist, Dr. FNU Kupo, was also interested in this problem, partly as an adjunct to her attempts to locate fragments from bolides. She was also dissatisfied with Menzel's book and felt that there was definitely an opportunity for additional research.\n\n11. The general feeling one gets is that no official treatment of the UFO problem has been given in the USSR. Instead people refer to the US work, principally Menzel's book, to demonstrate the absence of real scientific problems. At the same time, there is an almost universal awareness of the history and characteristics of the phenomenon often associated with considerable interest. The result is that a demonstration of the inadequacy of US Official explanations coupled with some proof of the reality of the observations might excite enthusiasm more rapidly among Soviet astronomers than among their US counterparts who are more strongly influenced by the official ridicule associated with UFO's in the US.\n\n- end -"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1377 /1415\nTremonton, Utah\n7/2/52\n2"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT 10073 RECORD CARD\n\nDATE\n2 Jul 52\n\nLOCATION\nTREMONTON, UTAH\n\nCONCLUSIONS\n[illegible]\n\nDATE/TIME GROUP\nLocal 02/1110 MST\nGMT 02/1810 Z\n\nTYPE OF OBSERVATION\nX Ground-Visual Ground-Radar\nAir-Visual Air Intercept Radar\n\nPHOTOS\nX Yes\nNo\n\nSOURCE\nCPO, USN\n\nLENGTH OF OBSERVATION\n\nNUMBER OF OBJECTS 10-12\n\nX Other BIRDS\nInsufficient Data for Study\nUnknown\n\nBRIEF SUMMARY OF SIGHTING\nCPO, USN, driving to Portland, Oregon, saw 10-12 objects in sky. Objects were sources of light or highly polished bodies. Observer exposed 30 feet of 16 mm color motion picture film. Objects seemed to be milling about in rough formation.\n\nCOMMENTS\n1. Source is naval photographer, considered an expert.\n\n2. Possible mirage effect.\n\n3. Possible migratory birds.\n\nSee Also: Film 7-3745-345\n\nAFIC FORM 329 (REV 26 SEP 52)"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JUL 11 09 56\n\n1952 JUL 11 08 53\nGREENMAN CONTROL\n\nBE095\nWPB065\nYMX063H\nXYA126\nXMX062\nXXB049\nJWPUK 019\nRR/NMNM JEPHQ JEDWP JEDEN JEDST JWFDL 555\nDE JWPUK 03\nR 102150Z\nFM HQ 127TH PLT TNG WG LUKE AFB ARIZ\nTO JEPHQ/D/I HQ USAF WASH 25 DC\nJEDWP/ATIC WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB OHIO\nJEDEN/CG ENT AFB COLORADO SPRINGS COLO\nJINFO JEDST/CG ATRC SCOTT AFB ILL\nJWFDL/CTAF RANDOLPH AFB SAN ANTONIO TEX\n[REDACTED] GB331G. ATTN:ATIAA-2C. FLYOBRPT\n(1) SEVEN INCH BALL OF FLAME WITH EIGHT FOOT TRAIL SIGHTED. NO SOUND OR LIGHTS RESEMBLING KNOWN FLYING OBJECTS.\n(2) SIGHTED AT 0420 ON 2 JULY 1952 FOR 3 TO 4 MINUTES.\n(3) VISUAL OVSERVATION FROM GROUND.\n(4) FROM 1717 NORTH 1ST AVE, PHOENIX, ARIZ. OBJECT APPEARED NORTHWEST, TRAVELED ARC TO SOUTHWEST. A GLE OF ELEVATION 40 DEGREES NORTHWEST, 30 DEGREES WEST, 15 DEGREES SOUTHWEST. ESTIMATED DISTANCE SEVEN TO TEN MILES.\n(5) OBSERVER MRS ARTHUR WOLF, WIFE OF ARMY ORDNANCE COLONEL.\n\nPAGE TWO JWPUK 03\n\n(6) WEATHER AT 0430 CEILING CLEAR: VISIBILITY 15 PLUS MILES: WIND 4 KNOTS FROM NORTH.\n(7 AND 8) NONE\n(9) PRESUME OBJECT MADE GROUND CONTACT SOUTHWEST OF PHOENIX. SEARCH HAS BEEN REQUESTED.\n(10) NO AIRCRAFT OR BALLONS REPORTED. POSSIBILITY OF CROP DUSTERS.\n101/2221Z JUL JWPUK\nUNCLASSIFIED\nC-1"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nSTAFF MESSAGE DIVISION\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGE\nRR JEDWP JEDEN JEPHQ JWPNL 444\nDE JWPNL 20F\nR 121650Z ZNJ\nFM CG 28TH AD HAFB CALIF\nTO JEDWP/CHIEF ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OHIO\nINFO JEDEN/CG ADC ENT AFB COLO SPRINGS COLO\nJEPHQ/USAF WASHINGTON 25 DC\nJWPNL/CG WADF HAFB CALIF\n[REDACTED] 9171. ATTN DIR OF INTEL. IN REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2 AND WADF MSG UDOID 29149 FOL INFO REQ BY HQ USAF HAS BEEN OBTAINED BY INTERVIEW WITH CPO DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, 177273, AVN SUP DEP, NAVAL SUP CEN, OAKLAND, CALIF REGARDING UNIDENTIFIED DLY OBJS AND MOVIE FILM ON SIGHTING 2 JUL 52 NEAR TREMONTON, UTAH. CPO NEWHOUSE, HIS WIFE, SON AND DAUGHTER WERE ALL INTERVIEWED AT THE NEWHOUSE HOME IN BERKELEY, CALIF ON 10 SEP 52 BY DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, 28TH AIR DIV (DEF). FOL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 1 THRU 13 IN USAF REQUEST ARE SUBMITTED:\n1. NO SOUND HEARD DURING OBSERVATION. 2. NO EXHAUST TRAILS OR\nCAF IN: 65202 (12 Sep 52) Page 1 of 3 pages\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\nRESTRICTED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nAFHQ FORM 19 JAN 51 0-309g\nPREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM MAY BE USED."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nSTAFF MESSAGE DIVISION\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGE\nPAGE TWO OF 20F\nOR CONTRAILS OBSERVED. 3. NO AIRCRAFT, BIRDS, BALLOONS, OR OTHER IDENTIFIABLE OBJECTS SEEN IN AIR IMMEDIATELY BEFORE, DURING, OR IMMEDIATELY AFTER OBSERVATION. 4. SINGLE OBJECT WHICH DETACHED ITSELF FROM GROUP DID HEAD IN DIRECTION OPPOSITE ORIGINAL COURSE AND DISAPPEARED FROM VIEW WHILE STILL TRAVELING IN THIS DIRECTION. 5. CAMERA POINTED AT ESTIMATED 70 DEGREES ELEVATION AND DESCRIBED AND ARC FROM APPROX DUE EAST TO DUE WEST THEN FROM DUE WEST TO APPROX 60 DEGREES FROM NORTHIN PHOTOGRAPHING DETACHED OBJ HEADING IN DIRECTION OPPOSITE ORIGINAL COURSE. 6. SUN WAS APPROX OVERHEAD OF OBSERVER. OBJECTS WERE AT APPROX 70 DEGREES ABOVE TRRAIN ON A COURSE SEVERAL MILES FROM OBSERVER. 7. WEATHER CONDITIONS: BRIGHT SUNLIGHT, CLEAR, APPROX 80 DEGREES TEMPERATURE, SLIGHT BREEZE FROM EAST NORTH EAST APPROX 3 TO 5 MPH. 8. NO METEOROLOGICAL ACTIVITY NOTED DURING THAT DAY. 9. OPINION REGARDING FOLLOWING CLN A. LIGHT FROM OBJECTS CAUSED BY REFLECTION: B. OBJECTS APPEARED APPROX AS LONG AS THEY WERE WIDE AND THIN, C. APPEARED IDENTICAL IN SHAPE, D. 12 TO 14 OBJECTS, E. ALL APPEARED LIGHT COLOR, F. NO OPINION, G. APPEARED TO HAVE SAME TYPE OF MOTION EXCEPT FOR ONE OBJECT WHICH REVERSED ITS COURSE, H. DISAPPEARED FROM VIEW BY MOVING OUT OF RANGE OF\nCAF IN: 65202 (12 Sep 52) Page 2 of 3 pages\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\nUNCLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nAFHQ FORM 19 JAN 51 0-309g\nPREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM MAY BE USED."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nSTAFF MESSAGE DIVISION\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGE\n\nPAGE THREE OF 20F\nEYESIGHT. 10. NO FILTERS USED. 11. ONE LOW HILL 2 OR 3 MILES TO\nRIGHT OF US HWY 30 DASH S WITH OBSERVER FACING NORTH.LOCATED\nAPPROX 10 MILES NORTH TREMONTON, UTAH. 12. OTHER PERSONS\nSIGHTING OBJECTS WERE: MRS D. C. NEWHOUSE, WIFE: DELBERT C.\nNEWHOUSE, JR, SON, AGE 14: ANNE NEWHOUSE, DAUGHTER, AGE 12. WHOLE\nNEWHOUSE FAMILY INCLUDED IN INTERVIEW. 13. CPO NEWHOUSE AND FAMILY\nHAVE NEVER SIGHTED UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS BEFORE. NEWHOUSE\nSTATED THAT HE NEVER BELIEVED HE WOULD JOIN RANKS OF THOSE\nREPORTING SUCH OBJECTS PRIOR TO THIS OBSERVATION. CPO NEWHOUSE\nAND MRS NEWHOUSE APPEARED TO BE EXTREMELY HONEST AND RELIABLE\nPERSONS. CPO NEWHOUSE STATED HE HAS BEEN IN THE NAVAL SERVICE FOR\nOVER 19 YEARS WITH SERVICE AS A COMMISSIONED OFFICER DURING\nWW 2. NEWHOUSE IS GRADUATE OF NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC SCHOOL IN 1935\nAND CLAIMS OVER 1000 HOURS IN THE AIR AS A PHOTOGRAPHER ON ACTUAL\nAERIAL PHOTOGRAPH MISSIONS. NEWHOUSE ALSO DOES CONSIDERABLE GROUND\nPHOTOGRAPHY. IT IS BELIEVED NEWHOUSE COULD BE CLASSIFIED AS AN\nEXPERT PHOTOGRAPHER.\n12/1650Z SEP JUPHL\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS;\nDECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.\nDOD DIR 5200.10\n\nNOTE : 29149 is not identified in SMD.\nINFO : OIN, OOP\n\nCAF IN : 65202 (12 Sep 52) Page 3 of 3 pages JHR/oo\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nAFHQ FORM 19 JAN 51 0-309g"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nSTAFF MESSAGE DIVISION\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGE\n\nSIDC027\nHQD019\nXTA018\nXDB016\nXKB006\nJUPHL 12\nRR JEDUP JEPHQ 222\nDE JUPHL 56J\nR 092328Z\nFM JUPHL/CG 28TH AIR DIV (DEF) HAMILTON AFB, CALIF.\nTO JEDUP/CHIEF, ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO\nINFO: JUPHQ/DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE\n\nHEADQUARTERS USAF, WASHINGTON 25,D.C.\n\n9171 IN REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2 FOLLOWING INFORMATION\nREQUESTED BY HQ. USAF HAS BEEN OBTAINED BY TELEPHONE CONVERSATION\nWITH CPO DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, 177273, AVN SUP DEP, NAVAL SUP CENTER,\nOAKLAND, CALIF. REGARDING AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION ABOUT MOVIE FILM ON\nUNIDENTIFIED OBJECT SIGHTING ON 2 JULY 1952. QUESTION: WAS TRIPOD USED\nTO PHOTOGRAPH MOUNTAIN SCENE IN IDAHO WHICH APPEARS ON FINAL FOOTAGE\nOF FILM IN QUESTION? ANSWER: NEGATIVE, ENTIRE ROLL OF FILM WAS HAND\nHELD.\n09/2328Z OCT JUPHL\nINFO : OIN\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS;\nDECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.\nDOD DIR 5200.10\n\nCAF IN: 74096 (10 Oct 52) SDM/mew\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\nRESTRICTED\nAFHQ FORM 19 JAN 51 0-309g"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ed.\nExcellent analysis by film lab!\nWoodmce mode analysis was \"on the ball\", done a thorough job.\nElgay\n\n8-25 film\n10 day track\n\nTREMONTON\nCASE (NEWHOUSE)\n28659-90"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISPOSITION FORM\n\nFILE NO.\nSUBJECT 35mm Film and Analysis\nTO AFOIN-2A2\nFROM ATIC\nDATE 15 OCT 1952 COMMENT NO. 1\nAttn : Major Fournet\nCapt Ruppelt/jos\n65365/B263D/PD28\n\n1. As per your request inclosed herein for your inspection is the 35mm film from Tremonton, Utah, showing unidentified aerial objects.\n\n2. Also inclosed is a photostatic copy of an analysis performed by the Photo Reconnaissance Laboratory, Wright Field.\n\n3. The 35mm roll is the original film and no duplicate has been made.\n\n4. It is the opinion of ATIAA-5 that the film should be submitted to an ornithologist, perhaps at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, to obtain an opinion as to whether the objects may not possibly be birds in flight.\n\n2 Incls\na/s\n\nROBERT E. KENNEDY, Major, USAF\nAir Adjutant General\nAir Technical Intelligence Center\n\nDD FORM 1 FEB 50 96 REPLACES NME FORM 96, 1 OCT 48. WHICH MAY BE USED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Re movies by CPO Newhouse 2 July 52, 7mi N. of Tremonton, U.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nHQ USAF, WASHDC\n\nROUTINE (Info)\n\nCG WADF\nHAMILTON AFB, CALIF\n\nAFOIN 57264\n\nCHIEF ATIC\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO\nATTN: DIR OF INTELL\n\nREPORT OF UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS AND INCLOSED MOVIE FILM ON SIGHTING 2 JUL 52 NEAR TREMONTON, UTAH RECEIVED THIS HEADQUARTERS 5 SEP 52 FROM CPO DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, 177263, USN, STATIONED AT AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT, NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, OAKLAND, CALIF. REQUEST NEWHOUSE BE INTERVIEWED AS SOON AS PRACTICAL BY AN INTELLIGENCE OFFICER AND THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION OBTAINED:\n\n(1) ANY SOUND HEARD DURING OBSERVATION? IF SO, DESCRIBE.\n\n(2) ANY EXHAUST TRAILS OR CONTRAILS SEEN AT ANY TIME DURING OBSERVATION? IF SO, DESCRIBE.\n\n(3) WERE ANY AIRCRAFT, BIRDS, BALLOONS OR OTHER IDENTIFIABLE OBJECTS SEEN IN AIR IMMEDIATELY BEFORE, DURING OR IMMEDIATELY AFTER OBSERVATION? IF SO, GIVE DETAILS.\n\n(4) DID SINGLE OBJECT WHICH DETACHED ITSELF FROM GROUP HEAD IN DIRECTION OPPOSITE TO ORIGINAL COURSE AND DID IT DISAPPEAR FROM VIEW WHILE STILL TRAVELLING IN THIS DIRECTION?\n\n1 3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\n(5) AT APPROXIMATELY WHAT ELEVATION AND IN WHAT DIRECTION (BEARING) WAS CAMERA POINTED DURING EXPOSURE OF FILM?\n\n(6) WHAT WAS POSITION OF SUN RELATIVE TO OBJECTS AND TO HIM?\n\n(7) WHAT WERE WEATHER CONDITIONS? APPROXIMATE TEMPERATURE? HAZY OR CLEAR? WIND DIRECTION AND SPEED?\n\n(8) ANY METEOROLOGICAL ACTIVITY NOTICED DURING THAT DAY?\n\n(9) DOES HE HAVE ANY OPINION REGARDING FOLLOWING:\n\n(a) WAS LIGHT FROM OBJECTS CAUSED BY REFLECTION OR WERE THEY SOURCE OF LIGHT?\n\n(b) SHAPE OF OBJECTS?\n\n(c) WERE THEY ALL APPROXIMATELY THE SAME SHAPE?\n\n(d) COLOR OF OBJECTS?\n\n(e) WERE THEY ALL SAME COLOR?\n\n(f) TYPE MOTION ATTRIBUTABLE TO OBJECTS, BOTH ABOUT OWN AXIS AND AXIS OF FLIGHT PATH?\n\n2 3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\n(g) DID ALL OBJECTS HAVE SAME TYPE MOTION?\n\n(h) HOW DID OBJECTS DISAPPEAR FROM VIEW?\n\n(10) WAS ANY FILTER USED ON CAMERA?\n\n(11) REMEMBER ANY LANDMARKS AROUND LOCATION WHICH WOULD FACILITATE FINDING IT IN FUTURE?\n\n(12) KNOW OF ANYONE ELSE WHO SIGHTED OBJECTS?\n\n(13) EVER SIGHTED UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS BEFORE? IF SO, OBTAIN DETAILS IAW PAR 7c OF AFL 200-5.\n\nADDITIONALLY, DESIRE INTERVIEWING OFFICER FURNISH ESTIMATE RELIABILITY AND PHOTOGRAPHIC PROFICIENCY OF NEWHOUSE. AFL 200-5 MAY AID IN CONDUCTING INTERVIEW. REQUEST INFORMATION BE FORWARDED BY ELECTRICAL MEANS AS SOON AS AVAILABLE TO ATIC WITH INFORMATION THIS HEADQUARTERS. IN RESPONSE REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2.\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\n3 3\n\nDEWEY J. FOURNET, JR., Major, USAF\nAFOIN-2A2 71016\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Copy TWX CAFIN 65202\n\nR 121650Z ZNJ\nFM CG 28TH AD HAFB CALIF\nTO CHIEF ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OHIO\nINFO CG ADC ENT AFB COLO SPRINGS COLO\nUSAF WASHINGTON 25 DC\nCG WADF HAFB CALIF\n\nRESTRICTED/9171. ATTN DIR OF INTEL. IN REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2 AND WADF MSG WDOID 29149 FOL INFO REQ BY HQ USAF HAS BEEN OBTAINED BY INTERVIEW WITH CPO DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, 177273, AVN SUP DEP, NAVAL SUP CEN, OAKLAND, CALIF REGARDING UNIDENTIFIED BLY OBJS AND MOVIE FILM ON SIGHTING 2 JUL 52 NEAR TREMONTON, UTAH. CPO NEWHOUSE, HIS WIFE, SON AND DAUGHTER WERE ALL INTERVIEWED AT THE NEWHOUSE HOME IN BERKELEY, CALIF ON 10 SEP 52 BY DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, 28TH AIR DIV (DEF). FOL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 1 THRU 13 IN USAF REQUEST ARE SUBMITTED:\n\n1. NO SOUND HEARD DURING OBSERVATION. 2. NO EXHAUST TRAILS OR CONTRAILS OBSERVED. 3. NO AIRCRAFT, BIRDS, BALLOONS, OR OTHER IDENTIFIABLE OBJECTS SEEN IN AIR IMMEDIATELY BEFORE, DURING, OR IMMEDIATELY AFTER OBSERVATION. 4. SINGLE OBJECT WHICH DETACHED ITSELF FROM GROUP DID HEAD IN DIRECTION OPPOSITE ORIGINAL COURSE AND DISAPPEARED FROM VIEW WHILE STILL TRAVELING IN THIS DIRECTION. 5. CAMERA POINTED AT ESTIMATED 70 DEGREES ELEVATION AND DESCRIBED AND ARC FROM APPROX DUE EAST TO DUE WEST THEN FROM DUE WEST TO APPROX 60 DEGREES FROM NORTH IN PHOTOGRAPHING DETACHED OBJ HEADING IN DIRECTION OPPOSITE ORIGINAL COURSE. 6. SUN WAS APPROX OVERHEAD OF OBSERVER. OBJECTS WERE AT APPROX 70 DEGREES ABOVE TRRAIN ON A COURSE SEVERAL MILES FROM OBSERVER. 7. WEATHER CONDITIONS: BRIGHT SUNLIGHT, CLEAR, APPROX 80 DEGREES TEMPERATURE, SLIGHT BREEZE FROM [REDACTED] NORTH EAST APPROX 3 TO 5 MPH. 8. NO METEOROLOGICAL ACTIVITY NOTED DURING THAT DAY. 9. OPINION REGARDING FOLLOWING CIN A. LIGHT FROM OBJECTS CAUSED BY REFLECTION: B. OBJECTS\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APPEARED APPROX AS LONG AS THEY WERE WIDE AND THIN. C. APPEARED IDENTICAL IN SHAPE. D. 12 TO 14 OBJECTS. E. ALL APPEARED LIGHT COLOR. F. NO OPINION. G. APPEARED TO HAVE SAME TYPE OF MOTION EXCEPT FOR ONE OBJECT WHICH REVERSED ITS COURSE. H. DISAPPEARED FROM VIEW BY MOVING OUT OF RANGE OF EYESIGHT. 10. NO FILTERS USED. 11. ONE LOW HILL 2 OR 3 MILES TO RIGHT OF US HWY 30 DASH S WITH OBSERVER FACING NORTH. LOCATED APPROX 10 MILES NORTH TREMONTON, UTAH. 12. OTHER PERSONS SIGHTING OBJECTS WERE: MRS. D. C. NEWHOUSE, WIFE; DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, JR, SON, AGE 14; ANNE NEWHOUSE, DAUGHTER, AGE 12. WHOLE NEWHOUSE FAMILY INCLUDED IN INTERVIEW. 13. CPO NEWHOUSE AND FAMILY HAVE NEVER SIGHTED UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS BEFORE. NEWHOUSE STATED THAT HE NEVER BELIEVED HE WOULD JOIN RANKS OF THOSE REPORTING SUCH OBJECTS PRIOR TO THIS OBSERVATION. CPO NEWHOUSE AND MRS. NEWHOUSE APPEARED TO BE EXTREMELY HONEST AND RELIABLE PERSONS. CPO NEWHOUSE STATED HE HAS BEEN IN THE NAVAL SERVICE FOR OVER 19 YEARS WITH SERVICE AS A COMMISSIONED OFFICER DURING WW 2. NEWHOUSE IS GRADUATE OF NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC SCHOOL IN 1935 AND CLAIMS OVER 1000 HOURS IN THE AIR AS A PHOTOGRAPHER ON ACTUAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH MISSIONS. NEWHOUSE ALSO DOES CONSIDERABLE GROUND PHOTOGRAPHY. IT IS BELIEVED NEWHOUSE COULD BE CLASSIFIED AS AN EXPERT PHOTOGRAPHER.\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FROM: HQ USAF 7 Oct 52 [REDACTED]\nACTION: ROUTINE INFO: ROUTINE\nTO: CG28th AIRDIV HAMILTON AFB CALIF CRYPTOPRECAUTION: NO\nINFO: CHIEF ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OHIO IDENTIFICATION: 9171 is CAF IN 65202 (12 Sep 52)\nCLASSIFICATION: [REDACTED]\nFROM: AFOIN 59782\nATTENTION: Director of Intelligence. Reference your message 9171 dated 12 Sep 52. Request CPO Newhouse be asked following additional question: Was tripod used to photograph mountain scene in Idaho which appears on final footage of film in question? Forward information by electrical means to ATIC with information this headquarters. In response reply to AFOIN-2A2\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2A2 AFOIN-2A\nDRAFTER'S NAME: RELEASING OFFICER'S SIGNATURE:\nMaj. Dewey J. Fournet DONALD E BEEBE, Captain, USAF Executive Officer, Topical Division Deputy Director for Estimates Directorate of Intelligence, DCS/O\nAFOIN-2A2\nTELEPHONE: 75990\nPAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nSTAFF MESSAGE DIVISION\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGE\nUNCLASSIFIED\nCAFIN 74096\nFM JWPML/CG 28th AIR DIV (DEF) HAMILTON AFB, CALIF.\nTO JEDWP/CHIEF, ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO\nINFO: JWPHQ/DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, HQ USAF, WASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n[REDACTED] 9171 IN REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2 FOLLOWING INFORMATION REQUESTED BY HQ USAF HAS BEEN OBTAINED BY TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH CPO DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, 177273, AVN SUP DEP, NAVAL SUP CENTER, OAKLAND, CALIF. REGARDING AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION ABOUT MOVIE FILM ON UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT SIGHTING ON 2 JULY 1952. QUESTION: \"WAS TRIPOD USED TO [REDACTED] PHOTOGRAPH MOUNTAIN SCENE IN IDAHO WHICH APPEARS ON FINAL FOOTAGE OF FILM IN QUESTION\"? ANSWER: NEGATIVE, ENTIRE ROLL OF FILM WAS HANDHELD.\nINFO: OIN\nCAF IN: 74096 (10 Oct 52)"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nHQ USAF, WASHDC\nROUTINE (Info)\nCO HILL AFB, OGDEN, UTAH\nX\nCHIEF ATIC, WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO\nATTN: WEATHER OFFICER\nREQUEST WEATHER SEQUENCE NEAREST 1810Z HOURS 2 JUL 52 FOR AREA INCLUDING TREMONTON, UTAH. PARTICULARLY DESIRE WINDS ALOFT AND TEMPERATURES FROM SURFACE TO MAXIMUM ALTITUDE AVAILABLE. ALSO ANY METEOROLOGICAL OR OTHER ACTIVITY WHICH MIGHT ACCOUNT FOR SIGHTING AND PHOTOGRAPHS OF 8 TO 12 UNIDENTIFIED OBJECTS WHICH APPEARED TO BE ROUND AND EITHER HIGHLY POLISHED BODIES OR SOURCES OF LIGHT TRAVELLING WEST ABOVE TREMONTON IN RAGGED FORMATION GENERALLY ABREAST. FORWARD INFORMATION BY ELECTRICAL MEANS TO ATIC WITH INFO THIS HEADQUARTERS. IN RESPONSE REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2.\nDEWEY J. FOURNET, JR., Major, USAF\nAFOIN-2A2 71016 UNCLASSIFIED\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n1 1"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"To Lt C Adams w/orig film 10/7/52\nRequirements\n1. 2 color duplicates and 1 black & white print (exclusive of portion with sound track whish is spliced to the end of the film).\n2. Request the original be handled with utmost care (it is already in fairly poor condition, and we are very anxious that it suffer no further damage).\n3. Request the original be cleaned as carefully as possible prior to duplication.\n4. Request utmost effort in controlling duplication to extent that resulting copies will be as identical to original as possible in image and color reproduction.\n5. The loose (unspliced) portion of 17 frames belongs at the end of the footage having a deep blue background and no sound track. The last frame of this loose portion is immediately adjacent to the splice with the broken frame having the sound track.\n6. Can the stripped sprocket holes in the loose portion of the original (see 5) be repaired in any way - sufficiently to make it possible to run this part along with the remainder of film without malfunction?"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nACTION\nOCT 7 22 46\nRFB261\nTYE263\nTDB241\nJEPHQ E004\nRR JWPML JEDWP 222\nDE JEPHQ 94A\nR 071806Z ZNJ\nFM HQ USAF WASHDC\nTO JWPML/CG28TH AIRDIV HAMILTON AFB CALIF\nINFO JEDWP/CHIEF ATIC WPAFB OHIO\n[REDACTED] FROM CLN AFOIN 59782 ATTENTION CLN DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE. REFERENCE YOUR MESSAGE 9171 DATED 12 SEP 52. REQUEST CPO NEWHOUSE BE ASKED FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL QUESTION CLN WAS TRIPOD USED TO PHOTOGRAPH MOUNTAIN SCENE IN IDAHO WHICH APPEARS ON FINAL FOOTAGE OF FILM IN QUESTION QUES FORWARD INFORMATION BY ELECTRICAL MENNS TO ATIC WITH INFORMATION THIS HEADQUARTERS. IN RESPONSE REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2.\n07/2034Z OCT JEPHQ\nACTION\nUNCLASSIFIED\n70ct52"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATIAA-5/JKR/vs\n\nIn reply refer to\nATIAA-5\n\n15 September 1952\n\nCPO Delbert C. Newhouse, 177283 USN\nAviation Supply Depot\nNaval Supply Center\nOakland 4, California\n\nDear Mr. Newhouse:\n\nYour 16 mm film of unidentified aerial phenomena has been forwarded to the Air Technical Intelligence Center for analysis. The final footage of mountain scenery will be detached and returned to you as soon as possible.\n\nIf it is agreeable to you, a duplicate of the aerial phenomena will be made and forwarded to you in lieu of the original. It is desired to retain the original for analysis. Please notify us immediately whether this arrangement is agreeable to you.\n\nYour cooperation and desire to be of service are greatly appreciated.\n\nYours very truly,\n\nROBERT E. KENNEDY\nMajor, USAF\nAir Adjutant General\n\nOFFICIAL FILE COPY\n\nAMC Form 8 (Rev 17 May 50) Supersedes AMC Form 8, Rev 1 Apr 48, which will be used.\n\nDESIGNATE AUTHD OFFICE OF RECORD"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ACTION\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nE\nRC34\nWPE024\nXYB019\nXDB016\nXXB006\nJWPML 12\nRR JEDWP JEPHQ 222\nDE JWPML 56J\nR 092328Z\nFM JWPML/CG 28TH AIR DIV (DEF) HAMILTON AFB, CLAIF.\n\nJEDWP/CHIEF, ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OHIO\nINFO:JWPHQ/DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE\nHEADQUARTERS USAF, WASHINGTON 25,D.C.\n\n[REDACTED] 9171 IN REPLY TO AFOIN-2A2 FOLLOWING INFORMATION REQUESTED BY HQ. USAF HAS BEEN OBTAINED BY TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH CPO DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, 177273, AVN SUP DEP, NAVAL SUP CENTER, OAKLAND, CALIF. REGARDING AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION ABOUT MOVIE FILM ON UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT SIGHTING ON 2 JULY 1952. QUESTION:\"WAS TRIPOD USED TO PHOTOGRAPH MOUNTAIN SCENE IN IDAHO WHICH APPEARS ON FINAL FOOTAGE OF FILM IN QUESTION\"? ANSWER: NEGATIVE, ENTIRE ROLL OF FILM WAS HAND HELD.\n\n09/2328Z OCT JWPML\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nACTION"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Applies to Fremonton, Utah 2 Jul 52\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nRB123 VO\nJWPHL F021\nRR JEDWP\nDE JWPHL 020D\nR 181630Z\nFM HQ OOAMA HILL AFB UTAH\nTO CG ATIC WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OHIO\n[REDACTED] FROM OOIP 11-15-E RE URMSG FM AFOIN-ATIAA-11-3-E\nPROJECT BLUE BOOK 1 WEA BLN EA RELSD 0200 AND 0800 2 JUL 52\nTRAJECTORY SW TO NE THENCE W TO E THENCE NW TO SE DURING ASCENSION\nWINDS GENLY FR W SPEED 10-12 KNOTS NO OTHER INFO AVAL THIS COMD ON\n2JUL52 RE UNIDENTIFIED OBJS\n18/1842Z NOV JWPHL\n\nRequested info on balloons launched\n\n1110 MST 2 Jul 52\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\n18 Nov 52"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JOINT MESSAGEFORM COMMUNICATIONS CENTER NO.\n\nHold- File under Fremonton, Utah, 2 Jul 52\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nFROM: (Originator)\nCG ATIC\n\nTO: CG, HILL AFB, UTAH\n\nINFO:\n\nDATE-TIME GROUP 101400Z NOV 52\nPRECEDENCE FOR: ROUTINE\nACTION INFORMATION\nBOOK MESSAGE ORIGINAL MESSAGE\nMULTIPLE ADDRESS\nCRYPTOPRECAUTION YES NO\nREFERS TO MESSAGE:\nIDENTIFICATION CLASSIFICATION\n\nFROM: AFOIN-ATIAA-11-3-E FOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICE\n\nRequest all available information, including flight tracks, of any balloons launched from area of your base on 2 Jul 52. This information is necessary for the analysis of a sighting of eight unidentified flying objects which occurred at 1110 MST on 2 Jul 52. Photographs of sighting indicate possibility that objects may be a cluster of balloons.\n\nIn reply cite Project Bluebook.\n\nCOORDINATION:\nATIAA\nATIA\nATI\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nDRAFTER'S NAME (and signature, when required)\nATIAA-5\nSYMBOL\nRELEASING OFFICER'S SIGNATURE\nROBERT E. KENNEDY, MAJOR, USAF\nOFFICIAL TITLE AIR ADJUTANT GENERAL\n\nDD FORM 1 MAY 49 173"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TO: Whom it may concern\nATIAA-5/Lt Flues/jos/65365/ 15 Dec 52\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\nTremonton, Utah, sighting.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n On 15 Dec 52 Lt A. G. Flues telephoned Lt Malcom Ross, USN, at the Office of Naval Research, University of Minnesota. The purpose was to determine whether pillow balloon releases could account for the Tremonton, Utah, incident of 2 Jul 52.\n\n Lt Ross had seen the Tremonton movies and it was his opinion, as well as that of Lt Lewis, ONR, that the objects photographed were pillow balloons. However, Lt Ross said that the Navy had not released any pillow balloons in or near that area at that time. Lt Ross pointed out that General Mills, Inc., Minneapolis, is, in so far as he knows, the sole manufacturer of pillow balloons and suggested that ATIC contact Mr. J. R. Smith of General Mills to determine what organizations and agencies had purchased pillow balloons. Lt Ross also stated that in the winter of 1952, the \"Crusade for Freedom\" purchased many pillow balloons from General Mills. These were sent to various cities in the United States and released periodically. Lt Ross did not know the exact times, dates, or points of these releases, but he suggested that ATIC contact the \"Crusade for Freedom\".\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\n That ATIAA-5 contact Mr. J. R. Smith and the \"Crusade for Freedom\"."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TO: Whom it May Concern\n\nSUBJECT: Tremonton, Utah, incident of 2 Jul 52\n\n On 16 Dec 52 Lt A. G. Flues called Mr. J. R. Smith, Director, Balloon Research, General Mills, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota, to determine whether or not a pillow balloon release could have caused the Tremonton incident.\n\n Mr. Smith pointed out that in the winter of 1951, his company, the only known manufacturer of this type balloon, produced a large number of pillows for the \"Crusade for Freedom\". These balloons were distributed to both national and local offices of that organization and GMI was unable to say exactly what the organization did with them after receipt. However, GMI did say that they were released sporadically for publicity purposes from widely separated areas in the United States.\n\n In the \"Crusade for Freedom\" organization there have since been 100% personnel shifts, top to bottom and J. R. Smith was not too encouraging when Lt Flues suggested contacting the organization. However, he agreed to forward all shipping lists which will tell ATIC who the consignees were and just what numbers each received.\n\n Mr. Smith pointed out that in 1951 and until Nov 52, helium and hydrogen gasses were in short supply. The two companies which furnish these gasses are Air Reduction Company and The Linde Company. Mr. Smith suggested contacting their distributors in the area of the sighting.\n\nRecommendations: That ATIC follow-up with the lists Mr. Smith will provide and that ATIC check distributors of hydrogen and helium in the Utah area."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Travel Report - Minneapolis, Minnesota\n\n29, 30, 31 December 1952\n\nOn 29 Dec 52, Lt A. G. Flues went to Minneapolis, Minnesota, to contact the Field Representative of ONR and the General Mills Corporation there. The purpose was to determine if the UFO's in the Tremonton, Utah, movies of 2 July 52 might be pillow balloons.\n\nOn 30 Dec the films were run off in the balloon room of the Physics Building, University of Minnesota. The following were in attendance:\n\nLt Malcolm Ross, USN\nS2C Leroy Harger, USN\nCPO Lewis, USN\nDr. Nye, U. of Minn. Balloon flights and geophysics\nDr. Winkler, U. of Minn. Balloon flights and geophysics\nFrank C. Jewett, Exec. Vice-President, Research Dept., General Mills, Inc.\nJ. R. Smith, Chief, Meteorology Dept., General Mills, Inc.\n\nThere were various others present all of whom have had experience in flying pillow balloons.\n\nThe films were run off eight times, at various speeds, and were frequently stopped at good frames. All were informed of the background data.\n\nIt was the consensus of opinion that the objects resembled pillow balloons in flight very closely and did nothing that pillows would not do in similar circumstances. J. R. Smith was the least convinced of this hypothesis; however, he felt that the objects were a bit too bright and maneuvered a bit too fast.\n\nThe head meteorologist of GMI pointed out that winds to 8,000 ft. at Hill AFB would probably be different from those at Tremonton because of topography and land-sea effect. The extreme stability of the atmosphere on that day would, he added, make ascent very slow and would tend to stabilize a pillow at a given altitude. Additionally, wind direction is capable of a 180° shift within perhaps"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"500 ft. of altitude which could account for a high or low balloon, with relation to the group, to proceed in an apparently opposite direction.\n\nIf the objects are pillows, the consensus was that they are not over 6,000' altitude, probably much less. If this is so, they cannot possibly have been aloft for more than 12 hours, and this only if filled with warm air or underinflated with gas or ballasted for a given altitude. There is a much greater probability that they are ascending and have been released from a nearly point not over 1/2 hour before.\n\nNone of the persons present placed much faith in the computations of angular velocity, since all were predicated upon Newhouse's holding the camera still.\n\nLt Flues went over to GMI later on and obtained from J. R. Smith the names and addresses of consignees who received pillow balloons during the period Sep 51 - 2 Jul 52. Also Lt Flues picked up some photos of pillow balloons and the flight tracks of three Navy Skyhooks released in Sept 52 from Tillamook, Ore. General Mills had no movies of pillows which approximated the Tremonton films as GMI's footage seemed to be shot against cloud background and when the balloons were lower. However, they will be launching pillows from Wendover, Utah, in Feb 53 and will make movies then.\n\nThe course of action recommended was for ATIC to check all persons in the western U.S. who received pillows. There were some other shipments to GMI home and farm appliance stores, and J. R. Smith agreed to send ATIC the names and addresses of such consignees.\n\nList of consignees:\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nITEM 2 AMC\n\nFROM: CAPT E J RUPPELT ATIAE-5\nTO: CAPT HARRY SMITH, AFOIN-2A2\nSECURITY INFO: REFERENCE TELEPHONE CALL FROM CAPT RUPPELT TO CAPT HARRY SMITH ON 2 FEB 53 REGARDING DATA FRO PRESS RELEASE ON TREMONTON MOVIES.REQUEST FINAL OF PRESS RELEASE BE FORWARDED BY TELECON TO ATIC FOR COORDINATION.\nMOVIES WERE TAKEN SEVEN MILES NORTH OF TREMONTON, UTAH, ON US HGHWAY 30S AT 1110 MST ON 2 JULY 52. CAMERA USED WAS A BELL AND HOWELL AUTO MASTER WITH THE THREE INCH TELEPHOTO LENS. CAMERA WAS HAND-HELD. FIRST FEW FEET OF FILM WERE TAKEN AT F-8; BALANCE AT F-16. SIXTEEN FRAMES PER SECOND WERE USED. MOVIES WERE TAKEN BY CHIEF PETTY OFFICER DELBERT C NEWHOUSE, 177273 AVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT, NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, OAKLAND, CALIF. NEWHOUSE WAS DRIVING FROM WASHINGTON, DC TO PORTLAND, OREGON, ON THE MORNING OF 2 JULY 52 WHEN HIS WIFE NOTICED A GROUP OF OBJECTS IN THE SKY THAT SHE COULD NOT IDENTIFY. SHE ASKED NEWHOUSE TO STOP THE CAR AND LOOK. THERE WERE A GROUP OF OBJECTS THAT BORE NO RELATION TO ANYTHING HE HAD SEEN BEFORE, HE STATED, MILLING ABOUT IN A ROUGH FORMATION AND PROCEEDING IN AN APPARENT WESTERLY DIRECTION. HE OPENED THE LUGGAGE COMPARTMENT OF HIS CAR, GOT A MOVIE CAMERA OUT OF HIS SUITCASE AND TOOK THE PICUTRES. THERE WAS NO REFERENCE POINT IN THE SKY SO IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR HIM TO MAKE ANY ESTIMATES AS TO SIZE, SPEED, OR DISTANCE. TOWARD THE END OF HIS OBSERVATION ONE OF THE OBJECTS REVERSED COURSE AND PROCEEDED AWAY FROM THE REST OF THE GROUP. HE HELD THE CAMERA STILL AND ALLOWED THIS SINGLE OBJECT TO PASS ACROSS THE FIELD OF VIEW OF THE CAMERA PICKING IT UP AGAIN LATER IN ITS TRAVEL. HE REPEATED THIS FOR TWO OR THREE PASSES. BY THIS TIME ALL THE OBJECT HAD DISAPPEARED. THE MOVIES HAVE BEEN STUDIED BY THE PHOTO RECONNAISSANCE LABORATOR, WRIGHT AIR DEVELOPMENT CENTER, WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB, OHIO, AND BY THE US NAVY PHOTO INTERPRETATION CENTER, WASHINGTON, DC. SINCE THERE WAS NO KNOWN OBJECT SUCH AS A CLOUD, TREE, OR MOUNTAIN IN THE FILM, IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE EVEN A ROUGH ESTIMATE AS TO THE SPEED, DISTANCE, OR SIZE. THE SIZE OF THE IMAGES ON THE MOVIE FILM WERE TOO SMALL TO SHOW ANY DETAILS. THE MOVIES HAVE BEEN STUDIED BY PERSONS ENGAGED IN WORK WITH BALLOONS. THESE BALLOONS ARE CALLED PILLOW BALLOONS DUE TO THEIR SIMILARITY\n\nPERSONS ENGAGED WORK WITH BALLOONS AND THE APPEARANCE AND ACTION OF THE OBJECT ARE SIMILAR TO THAT OF PILLOW BALLOONS.\n\nTHESE BALLOONS ARE CALLED PILLOW BALLOONS DUE TO THEIR SIMILARITY TO A PILLOW. HUNDREDS OF THESE BALLOONS WERE MADE AND FLOWN IN THE US AND OVERSEAS DURING THE CRUSADE FOR FREEDOM. ATTEMPTS TO TRACE THESE BALLOONS TO DETERMINE WHETHER ANY LEFT OVER FROM THE CRUSADE FOR FREEDOM COULD HAVE BEEN LAUNCHED IN THE TREMONTON AREA WERE NEGATIVE. ANOTHER STRONG POSSIBILITY IS THAT THE OBJECTS WERE SEA GULLS SOARING THERMAL AIR CURRENT. MOVIES OF SEA GULLS TAKEN UNDER SIMILAR LIGHTING CONDITIONS SHOWED THE SEA GULLS APPEARING AS BRIGHT SPOTS OF LIGHT VERY SIMILAR TO THOSE IN THE MOVIES. AT THE PRESENT TIME THE AIR FORCE CONTEMPLATES NO FUTURE ACTION WILL BE TAKEN TO IDENTIFY THE OBJECTS.\n\nEND ITEM 2 AMC"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS;\nDECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS.\nDOD DIR 5200.10"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ROUTING\nJOINT MESSAGEFORM\nCOMMUNICATIONS CENTER NO.\nUNCLASSIFIED\nSPACE ABOVE FOR COMMUNICATIONS CENTER ONLY\nFROM: (Originator)\nDATE-TIME GROUP 031500Z FEB 53\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION [REDACTED]\nCG ATIC\nPRECEDENCE FOR: ROUTINE\nACTION INFORMATION\nTO: CG 28TH AIR DIV (DEF) HAMILTON AFB CALIF\nBOOK MESSAGE\nORIGINAL MESSAGE\nMULTIPLE ADDRESS\nCRYPTOPRECAUTION YES NO\nREFERS TO MESSAGE:\nINFO:\nIDENTIFICATION 9171\nCLASSIFICATION [REDACTED]\nATIAE-5 File\nFROM: AFOIN-ATIAE-2-1-E FOR DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE\nReference your message 9171 dtd 121650Z Sep 52 which replied to a request from Hq USAF for an interrogation of Chief Petty Officer Delbert C. Newhouse, 177273 Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Oakland, Calif. Request you again contact Newhouse and determine whether he wants his original film back or whether he will accept a copy of the original. It is contemplated that the fact that the Air Force has this movie will be released to the press in the near future and ATIC plans to return these film so that if he has any offers from the press he can sell it. Movies will be shown to the press but not released to them. Also request that you determine whether Newhouse has any objection to using his name in the official release. Request answer be obtained immediately.\nIn reply cite Project Blue Book.\nCOORDINATION:\nUNCLASSIFIED\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION [REDACTED]\nPAGE 1 OF 1 PAGES\nDRAFTER'S NAME (and signature, when required)\nCAPT E.J. RUPPELT/vs\nRELEASING OFFICER'S SIGNATURE\nSYMBOL ATIAE-5\nTELEPHONE 59926\nOFFICIAL TITLE ROBERT G. BROWN, MAJOR, USAF AIR ADJUTANT GENERAL\nDD FORM 1 OCT 49 173 REPLACES NME FORM 173, 1 MAY 49. WHICH MAY BE USED."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1953 FEB 9 10:14\nFEB 7 28 39 1953\n1. ATIA\n2. ATI\n2. C files\nRB111\nWPB158\nYYC150\nXYA229\nXXB135\nJWPML 18Ø\nRR JEDWP\nDE JWPML 35F\nR Ø71831Z\nFM CG 28TH AIR DIV (DEF) HAMILTON AFB CALIF\nTO CG AIR TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB DAYTON OHIO\n28TH OID Ø1176. CITE: PROJECT BLUE BOOK. THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION REQUESTED BY AFOIN-ATIAE-2-1-E HAS BEEN OBTAINED BY TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH CHIEF PHOTOGRAPHER DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE, 177273, AVN SUP DEP, NAVAL SUP CENTER, OAKLAND, CALIF., REGARDING ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ABOUT MOVIE FILM ON UNIDENTIFIED SIGHTING ON 2 JULY 1952. QUESTION: \"DOES NEWHOUSE DESIRE HIS ORIGINAL FILM RETURNED OR WOULD HE ACCEPT A COYP OF THE ORIGINAL?\" ANSWER: HE WILL ACCEPT A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL. QUESTION: \"IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO USING YOUR NAME IN THE OFFICIAL RELEASE?\". ANSWER: NEGATIVE, BUT DESIRES HIS CORRECT OFFICIAL TITLE USED. CORRECT TITLE STATED BY NEWHOUSE\nPAGE TWO JWPML 35F\nIS CHIEF PHOTOGRAPHER, A COMMISSIONED WARRANT OFFICER IN USN.\nØ7/1840Z FEB JWPML\nACTION\nCy. 1"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TELECONFERENCE MESSAGE FORM\n(See instructions on reverse side of this page)\n1. ITEM NO.\n2. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION\n3. DATE TRANSMITTED 12 February 1953\n4. FROM: (Name & Symbol) Capt E. J. Ruppelt, ATIAE-5\n5. TO: (Name & Symbol) Capt Harry Smith, AFOIN-2A2\nSECURITY INFORMATION. For your information I am forwarding answers to questions we received on Tremonton movies. This is a wire from 28th Air Div. (Defense), Hamilton AFB, Calif., in response to query we sent them. Quote. The following information requested by AFOIN-ATIAE-2-1-E has been obtained by telephone conversation with Chief Photographer Delbert C. Newhouse, 177273, Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Oakland, Calif., regarding additional questions about movie film on unidentified sighting on 2 July 1952. Question: Does Newhouse desire his original film returned or would he accept a copy of the original? Answer: He will accept a copy of the original. Question: Is there any objection to using your name (ATIC Comment: Meaning Newhouse's name) in the official release? Answer: Negative, but desires his correct official title used. Correct title stated by Newhouse is Chief Photographer, a Commissioned Warrant Officer in USN. Unquote. Copy of film will be sent to Newhouse within three days.\n(If more space is needed, continue on a plain sheet of paper.)\n7. ORIGINATED BY: (Name, Symbol, Date) Capt E.J. Ruppelt, ATIAE-5, 12 Feb 53\n8. COORDINATED BY: (Name, Symbol, Date)\n9. AUTHORIZED BY:\nAir Adjutant General, ATIPA\nATIC Form 200 (11 Dec 51)"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING AND SUBMITTING FORM\n\n1. Submit ONE copy of the completed form to ATIPA by 1000 hours of day message is to be sent. Unless special arrangements are made with ATIPA for late submission, messages received after 1000 hours will not be sent until the following conference.\n\n2. Complete form as follows:\n\nBlock 1. Preparing office omit. Will be completed by telecon operator.\n\nBlock 2. If a classified message, stamp in security classification. If not a classified message, enter \"Unclassified\".\n\nBlock 3. Enter date the message will be sent, not date prepared.\n\nBlock 4. Enter name and symbol of sender.\n\nBlock 5. Enter name and symbol of receiver.\n\nBlock 6. If a classified message, enter as the first two words of the message \"Security Information,\" then proceed with the message. If not a classified message, omit the words \"Security Information\".\n\nBlock 7. Originator enter signature and symbol. (May or may not be the same person whose name appears in Block 4.)\n\nBlock 8. Coordinators enter name and symbol.\n\nBlock 9. Air Adjutant General Enter signature.\n\nBottom of form. If a classified message, stamp in security classification."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nMemorandum for Record\n\n1. During a trip to Washington, D. C., on 29 Jan 53 Capt Ruppelt was informed that the press had learned about the Tremonton, Utah, movies and that Mr. Al Chop of the Office of Public Information, Department of Defense, Col Teaberg of AFOIN-2, and others believe that the movies should be released in accordance with the promise made this summer to the press that no information on the subject of Unidentified Flying Objects would be withheld. Capt Ruppelt agreed with this point and it was decided that the factual data on the incident would be sent to Capt Harry B. Smith, AFOIN-2A2, who would pass it on to Mr. Chop who in turn would write the release. The telecon also requested that the release beforwarded to ATIC for coordination. The subject telecon is TT15, 5 Feb 53, Item 2.\n\n2. On 9 Feb 53 Mr. Chop called that he has written the release and showed it to Col Smith of AFOIN-2A. They believe that there would be a question asked as to the findings of the Air Force and Navy photo labs and that these reports would have to be released. If they weren't released, the press would begin to think they contained some \"hot\" material and that the Air Force was holding back some important data. ATIC concurred that this could happen., and that if it did happen it could create a great deal of excitement.\n\n3. The Air Force lab analysis concludes that:\n\na. They are reasonably certain that the brightness of the images on the film exceeds that of any bird.\n\nb. The objects are not spherical balloons.\n\nc. The objects could be aircraft. (Note: the absence of sound almost rules out aircraft. Aircraft in a \"dogfight\" can be heard at almost any altitude. In addition, the area of the sighting was not a restricted air space area and it is doubtful that such flying would be carried on in the airways.)\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nc. Have two aircraft do maneuvers at various altitudes and photograph them.\n\nd. Request that the Navy re-do the study using the methods of density measurement that are prescribed by the astronomers.\n\nConclusion\n\n6. If it is deemed advisable to release the movies quickly, state that the Air Force cannot positively identify the objects but they are reasonably sure that they are balloons or gulls consequently no further effort is going to be put into the incident. If the Navy and Air Force reports are requested, state that due to the meager data they used, the reports must be discounted. It would be rather poor policy to state that the Navy had made an error in the beginning of their analysis.\n\n7. If it is too much of a risk to do this (suggestion in paragraph 6) immediately go ahead with items a, b, and c of paragraph 5 on a high priority basis.\n\nRecommendations\n\n8. It is recommended that the above plan be given to AFOIN-2A2 and let them confer with the Director of Intelligence on the subject of a release.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nThe Navy report says the objects are:\n\na. Self-luminous or light sources\n\nb. Could not be aircraft or balloons\n\nc. No bird is known is reflect enough light to cause the images shown on the film.\n\nIt can be noted that the Navy people deduced this from their analysis of the brightness of the image on each frame. This required about a 1,000 manhours. It was brought out by two astronomers who heard a Navy briefing on the analysis of the movies that the method used to measure the brightness of each spot was wrong, therefore, the results of the entire study were wrong.\n\n4. The subject of the release was discussed with Lt Col Johnston and Col McDuffy and it was decided that the movies would be released without comment as to what they were and hope that no questions were asked about the Navy report. This is a \"calculated\" risk of another big \"flap\".\n\n5. The other alternative is to quickly get more data on the subject. Several things can be done and are listed below in the order of how soon they could be accomplished:\n\na. As far as gulls are concerned the big question is, how much light will be reflected? Can you see a gull reflecting light and not recognize that it is a gull? To check this it would be necessary to go to a location where you have a lot of gulls and bright sunlight and take movies with a 3-inch lens. It would be necessary to know how far the gulls were away each time a movie was taken. At this time of the year Florida is the only place where sunshine and gulls can be assured.\n\nb. Using special funds, have General Mills release a group of pillow balloons arranged in the same sequence as the objects are in the movies and measuring the distance at which the movies were taken.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CSAF ITEM 2\n\nFROM: CAPT HARRY B SMITH AFOIN-2A2\n\nTO: CAPT ED RUPPELT\n\nRELEASE OF TREMONTON FILMS STILL BEING STUDIED HERE. WILL FORWARD NEXT TELECON.\n\nEND CSAF ITEM 2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1) Definite flight pattern\n(2) 2-dimensional objects seeming to merge event behind other.\n(3) Undulating flight. (ok)\n(4) Angular velocity = 2.3°/sec ~\n@ 500 yds = 41 mph\n@ 1000 yds = 82 mph\n@ 5000 yds = 410 mph\n@ 10,000 yds = 820 mph\n(5) Controlled flight."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\nCSAF ITEM 2/[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nGENERAL GARLAND from COLONEL YOUNG\nTT-27\n26 Feb 1953\nATI\nReference Item 2 ATIC Telecon 15, 5 Feb 53 the following statement is for ATIC coordination prior to release to PIO:\n1. This color film provides an instance of a sighting being substantiated by motion pictures and confirms the faith of the USAF in the veracity of the many citizens who have reported sightings of unidentified objects or phenomena in the air. 2. The film was forwarded to the USAF by Warrent Officer Delbert C. Newhouse, Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Oakland, California. 3. Warrent Officer Newhouse stated that the film was exposed 7 miles North of Tremonton, Utah, on the U.S. Highway 30 at 11:00 a.m. MST, 2 July 52: and that he was using a Bell and Howell Auto Master(hand-held) with a three inch telephoto lens at F/8 for the first few feet of the film and the balance at F/16 all at sixteen frames per second.\n4. Examination of the film to date allows a deduction that the images were caused by surfaces having good reflective qualities, [such as seagulls or balloons], or by bodies or substances possessing high intensity light sources. Images appearing on the film are nonsufficiently defined to permit identification or determination of form or substance and should have been caused by unknown objects or undetermined known objects. The absence of any reference points, even clouds, in the background has made it impossible to estimate the distance of the objects from the camera, thus precluding a determination of size and linear speed. Measurements of angular velocity have not indicated true linear speed as the apparent motion is shown in only two dimensions.\nTo date the evidence on unidentified phenomena has shown no threat to the United States, and the majority of the sightings have been directly tied to known causes.\nEnd CSAF ITEM NBR 2//[REDACTED]//\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\nvelocity have not indicated true linear speed as the apparent motion is shown in only two dimensions.\nTo date the evidence on unidentified phenomena has shown no threat to the United States, and the majority of the sightings have been directly tied to known causes.\nEnd CSAF ITEM NBR 2//[REDACTED]//\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\nCOPY\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COORDINATION INSERT ORGNL CODE AND FULL SIGNATURE\nATIAE-5/EJR/vs\nIn reply refer to AFOIN-ATIAE-5\n17 FEB 1953\nWarrant Officer Delbert C. Newhouse\n177273\nAviation Supply Depot\nNaval Supply Center\nOakland, California\nDear Sir:\nA copy of the original movie film taken by you near Tremonton, Utah, on 2 July 1952 is being returned.\nThis Center and the Air Force wish to thank you for submitting the film, answering the many additional questions that arose during the analysis of the film, and for allowing the Air Force to keep the original film.\nYours very truly,\n1 Incl Movie film\nROBERT C. BROWN Major, USAF Air Adj. Gen.\nOFFICIAL FILE COPY\nDESIGNATE AUTHD OFFICE OF RECORD\nAMC Form 8 (Rev 17 May 50) Supersedes AMC Form 8, Rev 1 Apr 48, which will be used. Air Force-WPAFB-L-23 JUL 52 3600M"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC INTERPRETATION CENTER\nU. S. Naval Receiving Station\nWashington 25, D. C.\nIn reply refer to Code 082 J12-1 MAR 18 1954 326 Serial:\nFrom: Commanding Officer\nTo: Commanding Officer, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio\nSubj: Tremonton, Utah Film\nRef: (a) ATIC W-PAFB Ohio ltr AFOIN-ATIAE-5 dtd 27 Jan 1954\n1. Reference (a) requested information concerning the disposition of the original Tremonton, Utah film and whether or not any copies of the film are currently held by the Center.\n2. It is advised that this Center has never had possession of the original film and does not have information concerning its whereabouts. However, it is suggested that Major Fourney, an AF Special Investigator who was formerly stationed in this area, be contacted regarding this matter. Major Fourney at one time advised that the original would be made available to this Center for spectrophotometric analysis. This analysis never materialized, therefore the original was not requested.\n3. This Center is presently holding one 16mm color film copy which was received from the Air Force. In addition, 35mm color positive and 35mm black and white negative duplicate blowups are held.\n4. Reference (a) referred to the original film as being 35mm. It is understood that the photography was taken with a Revere, 16mm, magazine loading type, with an F1.9 wide-angle, telephoto lens.\nB. C. WHEATLEY Acting\nCopy to: CNO (Op 322V/jc"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COORDINATION\n\nINSERT\nORGNL CODE AND\nFULL SIGNATURE\n\nCAH/jos/73147\n\nIn reply refer to\nAFOIN-ATIAE-5\n\n27 JAN 1954\n\nSUBJECT: (Uncl) Tremonton, Utah Film\n\nTO:\tChief\nOffice of Naval Intelligence\nNavy Department\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\n1. The Air Technical Intelligence Center is attempting to locate the original of a 35 mm film of unidentified flying objects taken by a Mr. D. C. Newhouse near Tremonton, Utah, on 2 Jul 52. This film was analyzed by the USNPIC during the early part of 1953.\n\n2. In a report issued by USNPIC, Subj: \"Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects\", serial number 0105, dated 4 May 53, it is stated in part, \"The film exposed in Utah is in very poor condition; dry, brittle, and with a tendency to break. After initial viewing, duplication of the film was performed in order to preserve the film.\" There appears to be no reference as to whether the original film was destroyed or returned.\n\n3. It is requested that any available information be furnished to the Air Technical Intelligence Center as to the disposition of this film after the interpretation was completed.\n\n4. Information is further requested as to whether or not any copies of this film are on hand there.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDER\n\nBARBARA H. CONNERS\n1st Lt. USAF\nAssistant Adjutant\n\nCOORDINATION:\nATIAE-5 C.H. Hardin DATE 25 Jan 54\nCAPT HARDIN\nATIAE H.C. Johnston DATE 25 Jan 54\nLT COL JOHNSTON\nATIA O'Hern DATE 26 Jan 54\nCOL O'HERN\n\nOFFICIAL FILE COPY\n\nAMC Form 8 (Rev 17 May 50) Supersedes AMC Form 8, Rev 1 Apr 48, which will be used. Air Force-WPAFB-L-23 JUL 52 3600M"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COORDINATION\n\nINSERT\nORGNL CODE AND\nFULL SIGNATURE\n\nIn reply refer to\nAFOIN-ATIAE-5\n\nCAH/jos/73147\n\n23 FEB 1954\n\nMr. D. C. Newhouse\nChief Photographer, USN\n1948 Derby Street\nBerkeley, California\n\nDear Mr. Newhouse:\n\nWe are forwarding as Inclosure 1 one copy of your Tremonton, Utah, film as promised in our letter of 27 January 1954.\n\nThe Air Technical Intelligence Center hopes this will fulfill your requirements.\n\nSincerely,\n\n1 Incl\nEnv containing\nref film\nCOORDINATION:\n\nR. C. SCHUM\nCWO, USAF\nAsst. Adj.\n\nATIAE H.C. Johnston DATE 17 Feb 54\nLT COL JOHNSTON\nATIA O'Hern DATE 19 FEB 54\nCOL O'HERN\n\nOFFICIAL FILE COPY\n\nAMC Form 8 (Rev 17 May 50) Supersedes AMC Form 8, Rev 1 Apr 48, which will be used. AF-WP-L-25 MAR 53 3,130,000"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COORDINATION\n\nINSERT\nORGNL CODE AND\nFULL SIGNATURE\n\nCAH/jos/73147\n\nIn reply refer to\nAFOIN-ATIAE-5\n\n27 JAN 1954\n\nMr. D. C. Newhouse\nChief Photographer, USN\n1948 Derby Street\nBerkeley, California\n\nDear Mr. Newhouse:\n\nThe Air Technical Intelligence Center is not in immediate possession of the original of your Tremonton, Utah, film; however, correspondence has been initiated to recover it. It appears that the original may have deteriorated beyond the point where it could be successfully copied.\n\nThere are two copies of the film here. One of these has been sent to the Photographic Laboratory with a request for additional copies. Upon completion, which will take about three weeks, one of the copies will be mailed to you. It is hoped that this will fulfill your requirements.\n\nThe Air Technical Intelligence Center wishes to express again its appreciation to you for your cooperation throughout the entire investigation of the case.\n\nSincerely,\n\nGEO. L. WERTENBAKER\nColonel, USAF\nCommander\n\nCOORDINATION:\nATIAE-5 C.H. Hardin DATE 22 Jan 54\nCAPT HARDIN\nATIAE H.C. Johnston DATE 22 Jan 54\nLT COL JOHNSTON\nCOL O'HERN-ATIA Williamtsaff DATE 25 JAN 54\ncc: William A. Adams\nColonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nDESIGNATE AUTHD OFFICE OF RECORD 10073\n\nOFFICIAL FILE COPY\n\nAMC Form 8 (Rev 17 May 50) Supersedes AMC Form 8, Rev 1 Apr 48, which will be used. Air Force-WPAFB-L-23 JUL 52 3600M"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nAFOIN-2A\t\t\t\t\t\t29 December 1953\n\nBrigadier General William M. Garland\nCommander\nAir Technical Intelligence Center\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\n\nDear General Garland:\n\nInclosed is a copy of the letter sent, this date, to Mr. Newhouse who provided us with the Tremonton, Utah, unidentified flying object pictures.\n\nOur records show that the original of the film is in your files. If the original film is still of value to you, it may be more desirable to give Mr. Newhouse another duplicate rather than to risk the loss of it by loan.\n\nWith best personal wishes to you and your staff for a very successful and Happy New Year,\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n1 Incl\ncy of ltr dtd\n29 Dec 53 to\nMr. Newhouse"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t29 December 1953\n\nMr. D. C. Newhouse\nChief Photographer, USN\n1948 Derby Street\nBerkeley, California\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tRe: File No. 177283\n\nDear Mr. Newhouse:\n\n\tThe original of 16mm Kodachrome film taken of the unidentified flying objects near Tremonton, Utah, was forwarded to the Air Technical Intelligence Center with the understanding that they would provide you with a good reproduction copy since the original had been damaged somewhat by numerous showings. General Garland has custody of the film and I am sure that you will hear from him in response to your letter of 17 December.\n\n\tMay I take this opportunity of expressing to you once again how much we in the Air Force appreciate your cooperation in making the film available to us. It still remains one of the most interesting incidents that we have investigated.\n\n\t\t\t\t\tVery truly yours,\n\n\ncc: Brig Gen Garland\t\t\tWILLIAM A. ADAMS\n\t\t\t\t\t\tColonel, USAF\n\t\t\t\t\t\tDirectorate of Intelligence"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"17 December 1953\n\nColonel W. A. Adams, U.S.A.F.\nTopical Intelligence Division, U.S.A.F.\nRoom 4B865, The Pentagon\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\n\tAbout a year ago I mailed for evaluation a 16mm Kodachrome original film to the Commanding Officer, Hill Air Force Base in Utah. The film was of unidentified flying objects sighted by my wife, my children and myself near Tremonton, Utah on 2 July 1952. It was forwarded to the Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio; and, later, to your office.\n\n\tI gave the Air Force permission to retain the original for use in the investigation of UFOs and a duplicate copy was forwarded to me. My copy of the film has been damaged by showing in a defective projector.\n\n\tIf the Air Force has completed its evaluation of the film and has no further use for it, I would appreciate the return of the original to me at this time. If, however, there is a continuing need for the film, I would like to \"borrow\" the original film for a period of about four weeks to enable me to make a good duplicate print from it.\n\n\tI am forwarding a copy of this letter to the office of General Garland, in case the film is now located there.\n\n\tYour early attention to this request will be appreciated.\n\n\t\t\t\t\tSincerely,\n\n\t\t\t\t\tD. C. Newhouse\n\t\t\t\t\tChief Photographer, USN\n\t\t\t\t\tFile Number 177283\n\t\t\t\t\tUnited States Navy\n\t\t\t\t\t1948 Derby Street\n\t\t\t\t\tBerkeley, California\n\ncc: Major General Garland\n\tCommanding Officer\n\tAir Technical Intelligence Center\n\tWright-Patterson AFB\n\tDayton, Ohio"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MPH\n\nSlant Range in feet\nvs\nmph\nAssuming 21°/sec angular velocity\n\n10 X 10 to the inch\n\nKEUFFEL & ESSER CO.\nMADE IN U.S.A."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT 10073 WORKSHEET\nI. GENERAL\n1. DATE 2 Jul 52\n2. LOCATION Tremonton, Utah\n3. TIME Local: 1440 MST Zebra: 1810Z\n4. WAS OBJECT OBSERVED FROM THE GROUND? Yes No\nNaked Eye\nBinoculars\nTelescope\nTheodolite\n5. WAS OBJECT OBSERVED BY GROUND RADAR? Yes No\nBy One Set\nBy Two Sets\nBy Three Sets\n6. WAS OBJECT OBSERVED FROM THE AIR? Yes No\nA/C Observed Object\nInterception Attempted\nNo Intercept Attempted\n7. WERE AIRCRAFT SCRAMBLED TO INTERCEPT? Yes No\nA/C Scrambled\nVisual Contact Made\nA/I Contact Made\nNo Contact Made\n8. DID OBJECT CHANGE DIRECTION AT ANY TIME? Yes No\nNormal\nViolent\n9. IF OBJECT WAS A \"LIGHT\", WAS IT: Blinking Steady\n10. LENGTH OF TIME IN SIGHT: 1-15 Seconds 1-5 Minutes Over 10 Minutes\n11. REPORTING AGENCY (Unit Number and Mailing Address)\nCG, Hill AFB, Ogden, Utah\nII. ASTRONOMICAL DATA\n12. WHAT ASTRONOMICAL ACTIVITY WAS NOTED?\nNone\n13. DID OBJECT APPEAR TO ARCH DOWNWARD? Yes No\n14. DID OBJECT HAVE A TAIL? Yes No\n15. DID OBJECT APPEAR TO DISINTEGRATE? Yes No\n16. TIME OF SIGHTING RELATIVE TO SUNRISE OR SUNSET (Data From Air Almanac)\nNight\nDay\nSunrise\nSunset\nIII. AIRCRAFT DATA\n17. WERE AIRCRAFT NOTED IN AREA? Yes No\nOne Aircraft\nMore Than One Aircraft\n18. WAS ANY SOUND HEARD? Yes No\n19. WERE THERE INDICATIONS OF HIGH BACKGROUND NOISE? Yes No\n20. WAS THE OBJECT VIEWED ABOVE 45° ELEVATION? Yes No\nATIC Test Form 334 (13 Aug 52)"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IV. BALLOON DATA\n21. WERE BALLOONS RELEASED IN AREA? Yes No\n22. TIME SINCE SCHEDULED BALLOON RELEASE: ____ Minutes\n23. POSSIBLE BALLOON LAUNCH SITES DOWNWIND OF SIGHTING:\nLocation | Type | Launching Agency | Lighted? Yes No | Describe Lighting\na. Too many objects for balloons, unless there were many skytrains in area / mirages there\nb. skytrains in area\nc. mirages there\nd.\n(attach overlay)\nV. EVALUATION\n21. EVALUATION OF SOURCE: Excellent Good Fair Poor Unreliable Extremely Doubtful Hoax\n22. DETAILS OF REPORT: Good Fair Poor Insufficient to Evaluate\n23. FINAL EVALUATION: Was Balloon / Probably Balloon / Possibly Balloon / Was Aircraft / Probably Aircraft / Possibly Aircraft / Was Astronomical / Probably Astronomical / Possibly Astronomical / Other: ____ / Insufficient Data For Evaluation / Unknown\n24. COMMENTS:\nPossibilities:\n1. Mirage effect - no inversion layer, but there is an incredibly high lapse rate from 4-10,000 ft!\n2. Birds - snow geese migrating, or seagulls\n3. Aircraft - highly improbable\nATIC Test Form 334 (13 Aug 52)"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT 10073 WEATHER DATA SHEET\n1. DATE OF OBSERVATION 2 Jul 52\n2. TIME OF OBSERVATION 2100 Z\n3. STATION OBSERVING Hill AFB\n4. WINDS ALOFT:\nALTITUDE (feet) | VELOCITY (knots) | DIRECTION (degrees) | ALTITUDE (feet) | VELOCITY (knots) | DIRECTION (degrees)\n0 | | | 25,000 | 16 | 280\n1,000 | | | 30,000 | 15 | 290\n2,000 | | | 35,000 | 10 | 300\n3,000 | | | 40,000 | 29 | 240\n4,000 | Bare alt 4,000' | 350 | 45,000 | 06 | 250\n5,000 | 5 | 360 | 50,000 | none\n6,000 | 6 | 360 | 55,000 | none\n7,000 | 6 | 360 | 60,000 | 11 | 90\n8,000 | | | 65,000 | 5 | 90\n9,000 | | | 70,000 |\n10,000 | No Wind | | 75,000 |\n12,000 | | | 80,000 |\n14,000 | 22 | 270 | 85,000 |\n16,000 | 15 | 290 | 90,000 |\n18,000 | 13 | 280 | 95,000 |\n20,000 | 15 | 290 | 100,000 |\n5. WAS AN INVERSION LAYER NOTED? Yes No\n(If yes, at what altitude?)\n6. WERE ANY THUNDERSTORMS NOTED IN AREA? Yes No\n(If yes, at what quadrant?)\n7. CLOUD COVER: tenths at feet. tenths at feet.\n8. VISIBILITY WAS CAVU MILES.\n9. COMMENTS:\nATIC Test Form 333 (13 Aug 52)"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"approx 4000 ft stationalt. 350° at 6 knots\n5000 \" 5 knots\n6000 360° at 6 \"\n7000 \" \" \"\n8000 no wind \"\n9000 no wind\n10000 no wind\n12000 \"\n14000 270° 22 knots\n16000 290° 15\n18000 280° 13\n20000 290° 15\n25 280° 16\n30 290° 15\n35 300° 10\n40 240° 29\n45000 250° 06\n50000 none\n55000 \"\n60000 90° 11 knots\n65000 90° 05\nSalt Lake City at 2100Z time Pilot U.S. (weather service)\nsurface 330° 09 knots | 10000 260° 07\n6000 330 08 | 12000 260 11\n7000 300 05 | 14000 270 18\n8000 280 02 | 16000 280 13\n9000 270 03 | 18000 280 14\n| 20000 270 13"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"16 MM FILM\nJuly 2, 1952\nTREMONTON, UTAH; NEWHOUSE\nFILE # 1003345\nCustody OF Audio-Visual Archives\n1975"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Alt (MB) 2100 Z 2 JUL 52 Hill AFB, Utah\nBase Alt. 4,370'\nNo inversion layer present\nSurface temp 70° F\nC = 5/9 (F-32)\nC = 21°\nSurface evidently here\nLapse Rate approx 2.5°C/1000' (normal)\n20,000'\n10,000'\nNo lapse rate\n700 MB reading probably is +9°C (Surface lapse rate is normal) approx 2°C/1000'\nLapse rate approx 5°C/1000'\n6000'\nBase altitude\nTemp °C"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TREMONTON CASE\nBIRDS (SEAGULLS)\n2 JULY 52"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR: The Scientific Advisor\n\nSUBJECT: Report on Preview of Motion Picture \"Unidentified Flying Objects\"\n\n1. Through the personal assistance of Col. Cross, Chief, Office of Information Services, AMC, an advance copy of the film \"Unidentified Flying Objects\" was previewed by pertinent members of ATIC on Friday, 18 May 1956, in Bldg 167, Area B, Wright Patterson Air Force Base.\n\n2. The following represent the general comments and opinions with regard to the film previewed:\n\na. The film, purporting to be factual and documentary, appears to over dramatize each case sighting.\n\nb. The film strives, through its showing, to maintain the impression that an unknown menace or super-intelligent being, alien to this world, is constantly in the background.\n\nc. The case sightings and the individuals portrayed (the acting was very amateurish for a Hollywood production) was factual to a certain extent. However, the conclusions, specific or implied, are those of the producer's and not those of the Air Force.\n\nd. In each instance of the portrayal of a case, the film dramatically, and with great suspense, presents the incident and circumstances surrounding the sighting, then abruptly drops the matter in a \"lady or the tiger\" technique. This is, of course, the desired affect, calculated to let the viewer form his own (influenced) conclusions.\n\n3. The following represent the specific comments or conclusions with reference to each case portrayed by the film, as supported by official material or data:\n\na. Great Falls (Marianna Case): We do not agree with the films conclusion \"not aircraft, not balloons, not birds.\" An extremely able and very detailed analyses performed by the scientific laboratory of one of America's largest aircraft companies, indicated, in conclusion, that, \"aircraft reflections might possibly look like the images on the film.\" Supporting photos from the same analyses also indicate that an aircraft 100 feet in length, when observed from 10 to 12 miles looked exactly like the individual \"white blops\" shown. The absence of sound cannot be construed that the object is not an aircraft. As any personal experience will show, an aircraft may often be observed in the air at some distance, yet no sound may be heard.\n\nSee page 2 for comments on \"Tremonton Case\"\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"b. Tremonton Case:\n\n(1) We do not agree with the film's conclusion \"not aircraft, not balloons, not birds.\" A comparative analyses was made of a copy from the original film strip, and that shown by Green-Rouse by Major Willner and Major Buckmaster, ATIC photo specialists. The original film shows the presence of sea gulls on a number of frames. This is not shown in the Hollywood version.\n\n(2) Further, it is not necessary to state that a particular species of sea gull are prominent in certain parts of Utah. It should be pointed out that the Utah species is almost pure-white in color, in contrast to its smoky or grey-marked sea-coast cousin.\n\n(3) In the opinion of ATIC photo specialists, any under exposure of these sea gulls against a high-lighted sky would tend to \"wash out\" details of the body and wing outline of the gulls, giving them a white circular appearance at a distance. (Officer Newhouse openly admitted in the film that he under exposed his \"shots\".)\n\n(4) This is confirmed by the original analysis in our files, made in early 1953 by the Photo Reconnaissance Laboratory, WADC. These reports were not shown to Majors Willner and Buckmaster for review until after their analyses (items 1, 2, and 3 above) were completed.\n\nc. Mantell Case: Conclusions of the Air Force are that Capt. Mantell was apparently trying to intercept a fast riding \"Sky Hook\" balloon. The \"Sky Hook\" project was known only to few people at that time. Unlike weather balloons \"Sky Hook\" balloons were huge (100 feet in diameter), coinciding with Capt. Mantell's statement that \"it's tremendous in size!\" Capt. Ruppelt confirms the fact that it was a balloon in his book \"Report on UFOs\", page 60, 3rd paragraph.\n\nd. Fargo Case: Our files indicate that this was undoubtedly an erratic moving balloon which Lt. Gorman encountered. Capt. Ruppelt also confirms this in his book, page 67, top.\n\ne. Airline Pilots Case: As portrayed on the screen this is an apparent attempt to document the \"Chiles-Whitted Case\". If so, our comment: A description of the UFO alleged to have been closely observed by each of these veteran Eastern airlines pilots will be found in page 81 of the Project Bluebook's Report Nr. 14 \"Analysis of Unidentified Flying Objects\". Although both observers were sitting next to each other and observed the same object together, the sketch made by each pilot separately cannot be said to be similar."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"other than that both appeared to be wingless and somewhat cylindrical. This case is classed as an \"unknown\" by virtue of the high credibility given to observer's of this type.\n\nf. Washington Radar Sighting:\n\n(1) In the Department of Defense \"Minutes of Press Conference Held by Major General John A. Samford\", 29 July 1952, copy in file at both ATIC and PIO, it was explained to the press that these sightings (pages 5 through 17) may have been the result of a combination of factors: temperature inversions, moisture lapses, and atmospheric conditions which bend radar rays in such a manner that normally undetected ground targets become visible on the radar screen, in a random manner from one antenna rear to the next, thus allowing some misinterpretation that these stationary targets were moving.\n\n(2) It should be emphasized that no photos or motion pictures were ever made of the radar screen, as shown in the motion picture.\n\n(3) The attempt to represent the blips as possible interplanetary space ships, gleefully playing \"tag\" with our jet aircraft over Washington, undoubtedly will produce the desired dramatic mood and suspense. However, the incident over the radar scope was unscientific, not supported by fact, nor the conclusions of the Air Force.\n\ng. Sperry Case: This office has no file on this particular case, regarding an observer, an airline pilot.\n\nCOORDINATION: (In turn)\n\n/s/ O. D. Hill\nM/Sgt. O. D. Hill, AFOIN-4E4\n\n/s/ Robert M. Buckmaster\nMajor Robert M. Buckmaster\nChief, Photographic Branch\n\n/s/ William F. Willner\nMajor William F. Willner\nChief, Photo Analysis Branch\n\nGEORGE T. GREGORY\nCaptain, USAF\nProject Monitor - UFO\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\n/s/ Roy L. James\nMr. Roy L. James\nActg Chief, Electronics Division\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISPOSITION FORM\n\nFILE NO.\nSUBJECT (Uncl) Analysis of Photographs\n\nTO WCEFP FROM ATIAA-5 DATE 16 Sept 52 COMMENT NO. 1\nAttn: Mr. Chapman Lt Rothstein/jos 65365/B263D/PD28\n\nRequest following be completed as expeditiously as possible on 35mm film delivered by Lt Rothstein to Mr. Chapman:\n\na. A complete analysis of 35mm film to determine subject matter and to answer inclosed questions.\n\nb. A copy be made of the portion of film containing unidentified aerial phenomena.\n\nc. The portion containing the unidentified aerial phenomena be separated from the rest of the film and the remainder be returned.\n\n2 Incls\n1. Ques regarding film\n2. Statement by source\n\nDONALD L. BOWER, Colonel, USAF\nChief, Technical Analysis Division\nAir Technical Intelligence Center\n\nTO ATIAA-5 FROM WCLFP-2 DATE OCT 10 1952 COMMENT NO. 2\nAttn: Lt Rothstein Mr. J. Chapman/ms 31381/B17/R119\n\n1. The 16 mm. Kodachrome film has been examined in detail, and the best available answers to the submitted questions are inclosed, along with additional findings.\n\n2. The aerial phenomena portion of the film will be submitted for duplication as soon as the immediate need for inspection has passed. It is doubtful that the duplicate will be of much value for detailed inspection, as explained by the small spot size and general graininess of the film.\n\n3. The remainder of the film, not associated with the aerial phenomena, has been separated and has been forwarded to Captain Ruppelt of your office.\n\n4 Incls\nAdded 2 Incls\n3. Answers to stated questions\n4. Remainder of film (Und Sep Cov)\n\nMELVIN B. AVERY, Colonel, USAF\nChief, Photo Reconnaissance Lab\nDirectorate of Laboratories\n\nCONCURRENCE: WCLFP-2\n\nDD FORM 1 FEB 50 96 REPLACES NME FORM 96, 1 OCT 48, WHICH MAY BE USED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"QUESTIONS REGARDING ANALYSIS OF FILM\n\n1. Are images made by light source or reflection?\n\n2. Any indication of what kind of objects could have caused images? Is there any bird sufficiently actinic to cause images? Could they have been caused by aircraft or balloons?\n\n3. What causes the impression that some objects at times appear to become 2 or 3 objects, at times appear to merge into one?\n\n4. Do all objects have same characteristics?\n\na. Same apparent shape?\nb. Same relative size?\nc. Same Color?\nd. Same general motion?\n\n5. What are shape(s), color(s), and relative size(s) of objects?\n\n6. To what can the \"fade-in\" and \"fade-out\" of the objects be attributed?\n\n7. What type motion is attributable to the objects (about their own axis as well as about the axis of flight path)?\n\n8. Is there any acceleration evident in their motion along flight path axis?\n\n9. Can the motion of the camera (panning and joggling) be allowed for sufficiently to permit determination of the angular velocity of objects which cross the field of view? (Reference particularly the single object which crosses field; photographer states that camera was held motionless while object crossed field of view.)\n\n10. Determine patterns of flight from position plots for each frame, then:\n\na. Is there any recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects?\n\nb. Do they maintain same relative positions in formation during any maneuvers, particularly violent maneuvers?\n\nc. Is relative position maintained coincidental with movement about their axes?\n\nd. If undulating motion is present among a number of objects which are maintaining a semblance of formation, do those objects undulate in phase? Ditto for tumbling motion.\n\ne. Is there any indication of abrupt changes in direction of flight path through fairly large angles (e.g., 90 or more during interval of 2 or 3 frames)?"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STATEMENT BY SOURCE\n\nPlace:-\n\nAbout 7 miles north of Tremonton, Utah, on U.S. Highway No. 30S.\n\nTime:-\n\n1110, Wednesday, 2 July 1952.\n\nCamera:-\n\nB&H Automaster, magazine load, 3\" telephoto lens, 16 frames per second. Handheld.\n\nExposure:-\n\nFirst few feet - f:8. Balance - f:16. Clear sun, cloudless sky. EKCO Kodachrome film - Daylight. Exposure was changed with the mistaken idea of darkening the sky to gain greater contrast. The result was merely general underexposure.\n\nBackground:-\n\nDriving from Washington, D.C., to Portland, Oregon, on the morning of 2 July, my wife noticed a group of objects in the sky that she could not identify. She asked me to stop the car and look. There was a group of about ten or twelve objects that bore no relation to anything I had seen before, milling about in a rough formation and proceeding in a westerly direction. I opened the luggage compartment of the car and got my camera out of a suitcase. Loading it hurriedly, I exposed approximately thirty feet of film. There was no reference point in the sky and it was impossible for me to make any estimate of speed, size, altitude or distance. Toward the end one of the objects reversed course and proceeded away from the main group. I held the camera still and allowed this single one to cross the field of view, picking it up again and repeating for 3 or 4 such passes. By this time all of the objects had disappeared. I expended the balance of the film late that afternoon on a mountain somewhere in Idaho."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC INTERPRETATION CENTER\nU. S. NAVAL RECEIVING STATION\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nCode 01/HWW/lbh\nJ12 UNCLASSIFIED MAY 4 1953\nSerial: 0105\n[REDACTED]\n\nFrom: Officer in Charge\nTo: Director of Naval Intelligence (OP-322H4D)\n\nSubj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on\n\nRef: (a) Conf ltr DNI OP322Y5/rtm, dtd 27 Oct 1952 with enclosures thereto\n(b) Conf memo, Chief, Topical Division, USAF, AFOIN 2A2, dtd 24 Nov 1952 with enclosures thereto\n(c) PIC Conf ltr 01/HWW/gcl, ser 0263 dtd 5 Dec 1952\n(d) Rest memo, Chief, Topical Division, USAF, AFOIN 2A2, dtd 16 Feb 1953\n\nEncl: (1) Charts 2-13\n\n1. Reference (a) is a request from U. S. Air Force for the interpretation of movies of unidentified objects taken in Utah, 2 July 1952. Included among the enclosures are approximately 30 feet of processed, 16mm color motion picture film and a list of questions for guidance in determining the type of analysis desired. Reference (b) requested interpretation of additional movies taken in Montana, 1950. This report supercedes reference (c) and presents the test procedures and methods designed to answer the questions contained in enclosure 7 of reference (a). The results and analysis were performed by the Photogrammetry Division, Evaluation Department of this Center and do not necessarily represent the official attitude of the Department of the Navy or this Center.\n\n2. Tests and Procedure.\n\na. Plots.\n\nThe film exposed in Utah is in very poor condition; dry, brittle, and with a tendency to break. After initial viewing, duplication of the film was performed in order to preserve the film. In the duplication process some color correction was made to permit better viewing of the objects. To prepare plots of the objects, a stop frame projector was rigidly mounted at a fixed distance from a finely-ground glass screen. The magnification was 22 times giving a format size of 14.2\" wide. This proved very satisfactory and provided a shadow free image upon which overlay plots could be made.\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n[REDACTED]\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Code 01/HWW/lbh\nJ12\nSerial: UNCLASSIFIED 0105\nMAY 4 1953\n\nSubj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on\n\nA preliminary detailed study of the Utah film was made and it was decided that:\n\na. Brightly colored spots of red and green lasting only one or two frames were not to be considered.\n\nb. Water spots could be detected easily and eliminated from the study.\n\nc. The color of the objects was fairly constant as blue-white.\n\nd. Size and luminosity of an object varied through-out the film.\n\nFor convenience in interpretation, the film was divided into three parts, each part being considered an entity. Part I consisted of the footage taken at f8; Part II, the footage taken at f16 with a panning motion; and Part III, the footage taken at f16 during which the camera was held steady. Three definite groups of lights were observed throughout the film and plots were recorded as follows:\n\nTABLE I\n\nPLOTS OF POSITIONS\n\nUtah | Parts | Control | Chart\nI II III | Holding to lower group | Not enclosed\nI II | Holding to one object and azimuth of another | 2 and 3\nI | Arbitrary 1/2 inch correction per frame for panning | 4\nIII | Holding to frame outline | 5a and 5b\nI | One image held to base line. Every tenth frame to show changes within apparent formations | 6\nMontana\nTerrestial Objects | 7a and 7b\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Code 01/HWW/lbh\nJ12\nSerial: UNCLASSIFIED 0105\nMAY 4 1953\n[REDACTED]\n\nSubj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on\n\nb. Densitometric tests:\n\nDensitometric data were obtained with a Densichron, Model 2150 manufactured by the Welch Scientific Company. The Densichron has a scale range of 0-3. The procedure was to project each frame at approximately 22 times magnification onto a finely-grained-glass screen. The background (sky) was then measured at several places and the density set to 3.0 (variations in background densities were in the order of 0.02 and were regarded as uniform). A set of three readings were made of each of seven objects in Part I, and of the single object in Part III of the Utah Film. Readings were made of the entire Montana film.\n\nEnclosure (8a and 8b) are graphs of the density readings obtained of the two lower groups of objects in frames 1-129 of the Utah film. Enclosure (9) is a density graph of the single object (94 frames) in Part III. Enclosure (10) is a graph where six successive Densichron readings were averaged and advanced one reading each determinant.\n\nOf the Montana film, densities were plotted as above and are enclosures (11) and (12).\n\nThe results of the density readings may be questioned in that these objects varied in size so that at the minimum sizes the densichron probe was measuring the entire object, and at the maximum size the probe was measuring only a portion of the objects. Because of this situation only the largest readings obtained b scanning the objects were used. It is understood that normal procedure would be to read the entire object. This was impossible with the equipment on hand.\n\nIn addition the film, with which this investigation was conducted, is a duplicate of a copy. This raises the question as to whether the central portion of the objects were burnt out during the duplication processing. Density readings were made to compare the clear areas and the objects. It was found that the minimum difference is 0.4. This indicates that relative luminosity may still be obtained with the procedure used. Concurrent with the density readings, relative sizes of the objects were noted in order to correlate distance and luminosity. Enclosure (13) is a plot of the same object wherein the relationship of distance and luminosity can be detected in Utah film.\n\n3. Answers to Questions.\n\nAnswers keyed to the questions contained in enclosure (7) of reference (a) are hereby presented. They supercede those contained in reference (c) and present the final analysis as requested.\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\n3\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Code 01/HWW/lbh\nJ12\nSerial: UNCLASSIFIED 0105\nMAY 4 1953\n[REDACTED]\n\nSubj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on\n\n1. Analysis of the graph correlating luminosity and size indicate that as the luminosity of the objects increase, the size is larger also. This could be the effect of viewing directly, a reflecting surface. This is considered not probable because of the length of time they were viewed continuously on the film, approximately 90 seconds, and because of the angle through which they were photographed, approximately 60 degrees.\n\nIt is felt that if these images are reflective surfaces, blinking would occur during a period of 90 seconds while passing through an angle of 60 degrees when photographed at the rate of 16 frames per second. This premise would permit highly reflective balloons or spheroids to be a possibility. However, the velocity and acceleration computations (sub paragraph 8) rule this possibility out. It appears, therefore, that if these objects are a reflecting surface, they are of a design, speed, and power not commonly known. The velocity and acceleration attributed to the objects may be caused by light reflected off a highly reflective surface onto an atmospheric screen where a slight angular turn of the reflective surface would appear as high acceleration. This possibility is considered not probable because of the sun angle and atmospheric condition reported at the time of photography and because of the variations in luminosity which, under the above conditions would remain constant.\n\nIt is the majority opinion of the group conducting this analysis that these images are light sources. This will explain the non-blinking and variations in luminosity - but not the velocity or acceleration factors. In either case, light source or reflective surface, it appears as if the objects are of a nature which we are not able to identify in terms of natural phenomena or commonly known man-made objects.\n\n2. There is no indication of what kind of objects could have caused the images except that they must be of a construction, design, and material not commonly known. This is indicated by the computed acceleration rate and elocity (answer 8). For the same reasons, birds, aircraft and balloons are ruled out.\n\n3. An analysis of the charts relative to movement indicate that there were group and individual movement. Within a group it appears as if the individual objects were moving counter-clock-wise along an elliptical or similar track. Thus when two objects crossed the camera line of sight they will appear to fuse into one. As they continued along their paths it will appear as if one object became two. This occured at reglar intervals at approximately every 25th frame as plotted in charts 5a and 5b.\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\n4\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Code 01/HWW/lbh\nJ12\nSerial: UNCLASSIFIED 0105\n[REDACTED]\nMAY 4 1953\n\nSubj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on\n\n4. All objects appear to have the same characteristics in regards to shape, color, size and relative motion.\n\n5. The shape of the objects appears to be oblate or disk shaped, color; blue-white, and maximum and minimum size; 98 and 16 feet. The size is based on the assumption that the objects are five miles from the observer.\n\n6. Fade in and fade out of the objects were analyzed as in 3 above. In this case the group movement was such that the distance between the objects and camera was increased so that the objects could not be recorded on the film thereby causing the apparent fade-out. Fade-in as attributed to a shortening of the distance from the fade-out area to the camera station.\n\n7. Plots of the groups indicate that the objects move counter-clock-wise relative to the axis of flight path. However, nothing has been detected which indicates motion of the individual objects about their own axis although this motion appears to be likely.\n\n8. In determining the velocity of the objects three assumptions were made:\n\na. The camera was held steady during Part III of the film.\n\nb. The objects were moving perpendicular to the optical axis, and\n\nc. The objects were five miles from the camera.\n\nIt is obvious that (b) is a fallacy; however, this assumption will give the minimum velocity and the actual velocity is greater than computed. The assumption that the objects are five miles from the camera is an arbitrary one. However, based on the emulsion speed and focal length, an object 50 feet in diameter and five miles from the camera will be recorded on the film with sufficient resolution to identify major details of the object. It is felt that if these objects were closer than five miles at the time of recording, details would appear on the film.\n\nVelocity is computed to be 3780 mph for a shift of 1 mm per frame if the object is five miles from the observer. From 55 measurements taken from Part III of the Utah film, the maximum and minimum velocities\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\n5\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"were 2457 and 378 mph respectively. These figures differ from those given in reference (c) and were computed from measurements obtained under more controlled conditions. Acceleration was determined from the formula :\n\na = Vf - VO where:\n T\n\na = Acceleration\n\nVf = final velocity\n\nVO = initial velocity\n\nT = time = 1/16 second\n\nSince \"g\" is equal to 32.17 ft/sec2 it was computed that:\n\nMaximum acceleration = 21,168 mph/sec = 965 g\nMinimum acceleration = 1,104 mph/sec = 50 g\nMaximum deceleration = 32,448 mph/sec = 1479 g\nMinimum deceleration = 272 mph/sec = 12 g\n\nVelocity and acceleration determinations were also made from the Montana film. In this case, terrestial objects appeared in the film and were held to as control. Subsequently, the velocity and acceleration determinations are considered to be more reliable. On the assumption of (b) and (c) above the maximum and minimum velocities of the left object are 1374 and 361 mph respectfully. For the right object they are 1117 and 189 mph. Accelerations were computed as:\n\n Left Object Right Object\nMaximum acceleration mph/sec 14,016 = 639 g 12640 = 576g\nMinimum acceleration mph/sec 0 = 0 g 0 = 0g\nMaximum deceleration mph/sec 13,184 = 601 g 14288 = 651g\nMinimum deceleration mph/sec 0 = 0 g 0 = 0g\n\nThe above determinations were made from a total of 322 measurements. It was noted that the acceleration and determinations were in multiples of 12.5 approximately. This may be of significance although no study has been conducted to determine this.\n\n9. Velocity and acceleration were treated in sub-paragraph 8 above. Paragraph 2a indicates the controls used during this investigation."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Subj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Objects; progress report on\n\n10. a. There is no recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects in formation. It appears however, as if the shift in relative positions were regular and that the original formation would be recovered if the continuing action has been recorded.\n\nb. No. However, the same formation is maintained with objects changing positions.\n\nc. No detection of relative positions being maintained coincidental with movement about their axis.\n\nd. No detection of undulating motion of objects in phase either in formation or tumbling motion.\n\ne. There is evidence of abrupt changes in direction of flight path through fairly large angles.\n\nf. Certain objects do appear to remain motionless while other move about.\n\ng. Certain objects disappear while still well within the field of view. This is discussed in sub-paragraph 6 above.\n\n4. Discussion.\n\nDuring the study and investigation of the unidentified objects, the preliminary data uncovered were revealed to experts (with proper security clearance) in the fields of astronomy and physics. Although they presented certain natural phenomena theories to explain the cause of the objects under certain conditions they were not able to do so under the conditions during which the photography was taken, nor were they able to recognize these objects as man-made.\n\nAs to the results of the investigations being reported, no attempt was made to corroborate the opinions presented. Because of the lack of proper equipment, money and personnel, the investigation was limited. There are obvious tests which can be conducted to prove or disprove some of the findings presented. It is suggested that these be undertaken.\n\n5. Reference (d) requests spectrophotometric analysis of the Utah film be made. Preliminary plan of test is underway.\n\nL. W. KEITH\n\nCopy to:\nCNO (OP553)\nBuAer (PH)"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TELECONFERENCE MESSAGE FORM\n(See instructions on reverse side of the page)\n\n1. ITEM NO. 2. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 3. DATE TRANSMITTED\nUNCLASSIFIED [REDACTED] 3 February 1953\n4. FROM: (Name & Symbol) 5. TO: (Name & Symbol)\nCapt E. J. Ruppelt, ATIAE-5 Capt Harry Smith, AFOIN-2A2\n\nSecurity Information. Reference telephone call from Capt Ruppelt to Capt Harry Smith on 2 Feb 53 regarding data for press release on Tremonton movies. Request final of press release be forwarded by telecon to ATIC for coordination. Movies were taken seven miles north of Tremonton, Utah, on U.S. Highway 30S at 1110 MST on 2 July 52. Camera used was a Bell and Howell Auto Master with the three inch telephoto lens. Camera was hand-held. First few feet of film were taken at F-8; balance at F-16. Sixteen frames per second were used. Movies were taken by Chief Petty Officer Delbert C. Newhouse, 177273 Aviation Supply Depot, Naval Supply Center, Oakland, Calif. Newhouse was driving from Washington, D.C., to Portland, Oregon, on the morning of 2 July 52 when his wife noticed a group of objects in the sky that she could not identify. She asked Newhouse to stop the car and look. There were a group of objects that bore no relation to anything he had seen before, he stated, milling about in a rough formation and proceeding in an apparent westerly direction. He opened the luggage compartment of his car, got a movie camera out of his suitcase and took the pictures. There was no reference point in the sky so it was impossible for (If more space is needed, continue on a plain sheet of paper.)\n\n7. ORIGINATED BY: (Name, Symbol, Date) 8. COORDINATED BY: (Name, Symbol, Date)\nCapt E.J. Ruppelt, ATIAE-5, 3 Feb 53\n9. AUTHORIZED BY:\nAir Adjutant General, ATIPA\n\nATIC Form 200 (11 Dec 51)"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING AND SUBMITTING FORM\n\n1. Submit ONE copy of the completed form to ATIPA by 1000 hours of day message is to be sent. Unless special arrangements are made with ATIPA for late submission, messages received after 1000 hours will not be sent until the following conference.\n\n2. Complete form as follows:\n\nBlock 1. Preparing office omit. Will be completed by telecon operator.\n\nBlock 2. If a classified message, stamp in security classification. If not a classified message, enter \"Unclassified\".\n\nBlock 3. Enter date the message will be sent, not date prepared.\n\nBlock 4. Enter name and symbol of sender.\n\nBlock 5. Enter name and symbol of receiver.\n\nBlock 6. If a classified message, enter as the first two words of the message \"Security Information,\" then proceed with the message. If not a classified message, omit the words \"Security Information\".\n\nBlock 7. Originator enter signature and symbol. (May or may not be the same person whose name appears in Block 4.)\n\nBlock 8. Coordinators enter name and symbol.\n\nBlock 9. Air Adjutant General Enter signature.\n\nBottom of form. If a classified message, stamp in security classification."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nhim to make any estimates as to size, speed, or distance. Toward the end of his observation one of the objects reversed course and proceeded away from the rest of the group. He held the camera still and allowed this single object to pass across the field of view of the camera picking it up again later in its travel. He repeated this for two or three passes. By this time all the objects had disappeared.\n\nThe movies have been studied by the Photo Reconnaissance Laboratory, Wright Air Development Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, and by the U.S. Navy Photo Interpretation Center, Washington, D. C. Since there was no known object such as a cloud, tree, or mountain in the film, it was impossible to make even a rough estimate as to the speed, distance, or size. The size of the images on the movie film were too small to show any details. The movies have been studied by persons engaged in work with balloons and the appearance and action of the objects are similar to that of pillow balloons. These balloons are called pillow balloons due to their similarity to a pillow. Hundreds of these balloons were made and flown in the U.S. and overseas during the Crusade for Freedom. Attempts to trace these balloons to determine whether any left over from the Crusade for Freedom could have been launched in the Tremonton area were negative. Another strong possibility is that the objects were sea gulls soaring thermal air current. Movies of sea gulls taken under similar lighting conditions showed the sea gulls appearing as bright spots of light very similar to those in the movies. At the present time the Air Force contemplates no future action will be taken to identify the objects."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ROUTING JOINT MESSAGEFORM COMMUNICATIONS CENTER NO. 27 Feb 53 UNCLASSIFIED SPACE ABOVE FOR COMMUNICATIONS CENTER ONLY FROM: (Originator) CG ATIC DATE TIME GROUP 2719002 FEB 53 SECURITY CLASSIFICATION [REDACTED] PRECEDENCE FOR: ROUTINE ACTION INFORMATION TO: D/I HQ USAF WASH D C BOOK MESSAGE ORIGINAL MESSAGE MULTIPLE ADDRESS CRYPTOPRECAUTION YES NO REFERS TO MESSAGE: IDENTIFICATION CLASSIFICATION INFO: FROM: AFOIN-ATIAE-2-11-B FOR AFOIN-X Reference Telecon #27, 26 Feb 53, CSAF Item #2. ATIC concurs on proposed press release to accompany movies taken by Warrant Officer Newhouse. Suggest you might change fourth sentence to read, Quote: Examination of the film to date allows deduction that the images were caused by surfaces having good light reflective qualities, such as sea gulls, or balloons, or by bodies or substances possessing high intensity light sources. Unquote. Since many people who have been asked to comment on these films have stated that they firmly believed the objects to be sea gulls or balloons, wording the above sentence to include these items indicates the Air Force has given this possibility some thought yet it does not state that we can prove they are balloons or sea gulls. In reply cite Project Blue Book. COORDINATION: DOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10 ANALYSIS DIVISION FILE 10073 FILE NUMBER 200 INITIALS DATE PAGES DRAFTERS NAME UNCLASSIFIED RELEASING OFFICER'S SIGNATURE ROBERT C. BROWN, MAJOR, USAF AIR ADJUTANT GENERAL SYMBOL ATIAE-5 TELEPHONE 65365 OFFICIAL TITLE DD FORM 173 1 OCT 49"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Analysis of Photographic Material Serial 02 PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ANALYSIS OF THE \"UTAH\" FILM TRACKING UFO'S Several Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO's) were sighted and photographed at about 11:10 MST on July 2, 1952 by Delbert C. Newhouse at a point on State Highway 30, seven miles north of Tremonton, Utah (latitude 41° 50', longitude 112° 10'). Mr. Newhouse, a Chief Warrant Officer in the U. S. Navy *, was in transit from Washington, D. C. to Portland, Oregon. A map of the area is included as figure 1. He, his wife and their two children were making the trip by car. Shortly after passing through the city of Tremonton, his wife noticed a group of strange bright shining objects in the air off towards the eastern horizon. She called them to her husband's attention and prevailed upon him to stop the car. When he got out, he observed the objects (twelve to fourteen of them) to be directly overhead and milling about. He described them as \"gun metal colored objects shaped like two saucers, one inverted on top of the other\". He estimated that they subtended \"about the same angle as B-29's at 10,000 feet\" (about half a degree - i.e., about the angular diameter of the moon). Next, he ran to the trunk of his car, took out his Bell and Howell Automaster 16mm movie camera equipped with a 3\" telephoto lens, loaded it, focused it at infinity and began shooting. There was no reference point above the horizon so he was unable to estimate absolute size, speed or distance. He reports that one of the objects reversed its course and proceeded away from the rest of the group; he held the camera still and allowed this single object to pass across the field of view of the camera, picking it up later in its course. He repeated this for three passes. During the filming, Newhouse changed the iris stop of the camera from f/8 to f/16. The density of the film can be seen to change markedly at a point about 30% through the sequence (figure 5(b) at f/8 and the other blowups at f/16). The camera was operated at 16 fps. The color film (Daylight Kodachrome) after processing was submitted to his superiors. The Navy forwarded the film to the USAF-ATIC where the film was studied for several months. According to Al Chop (then with ATIC and presently with DAC) Air Force personnel were convinced that the objects were not airplanes; on the other hand the hypothesis that the camera might have been out of focus and the objects soaring gulls could neither be confirmed nor denied. Mr. Chop's remarks are essentially substantiated by Capt. Edward Ruppelt, reference (1) then head of Project \"Blue Book\" for ATIC. * At the time he had already logged some 2,200 hours as a chief photographer with the Navy."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photogrammetric -2- Serial 02 Analysis of \"Utah\" Film This \"Utah\" film clip together with a \"Montana\" UFO film clip (Analysis of Photographic Material, Serial 01) came into the possession of Green-Rouse Productions at Samuel Goldwyn Studios, 1041 North Formosa Street, Hollywood, who incorporated both film clips as significant evidence in a Documentary Film, \"Unidentified Flying Objects\" for release by United Artists to public theaters by May 9, 1956. A 35mm reprint of the Newhouse \"Utah\" film was submitted by the Studio to Douglas Aircraft Company for examination. Visual study of the reprints on the Recordak and astronomical plate measuring engine revealed the following: the film comprises about 1,200 frames; on most of the frames there appear many round white dots, some elliptical. The dots often seem clustered in constellations, or formations which are recognizable for as long as seventeen seconds. A relative motion plot (obtained from an overlay vellum trace on the Recordak) of two typical formations are presented in figures 2a and 2b. The objects seem to cluster in groups of two's and three's, see actual blowups, 4a, 5b, and 6c. On some frames they flare up and then disappear from view in 0.25 seconds or less and sometimes they appear as a randomly scattered \"twinkling\" of dots. The dot images themselves show no structure; they are white and have no color fringes. Examination under a microscope shows the camera to be well focused as the edges of the images are sharp and clear on many of the properly exposed frames. Angular diameters range from about 0.0016 to 0.0004 radians. Their pattern of motion is essentially a curvilinear milling about as shown in figure 2a and 2b. Sometimes the objects appear to circle about each other. There are no other objects in the field of view which might give a clue as to the absolute motion of the cluster. In the overlay trace, figure 2, the frame of reference is determined by a certain object whose relative motion during a sequence of frames remains rather constant (indicated in the figures). This object is used as a reference point and the lower edge of the frame as abscissa. Assuming the camera to have been kept reasonably uncanted, the abscissa would be horizontal and the ordinate vertical. In the overlay trace, figures 3a and 3b, the particular frame itself is used as the reference. Assuming the camera was held steady (there is an unconscious tendency to pan with a moving object) the coordinate system is quasi-fixed. It is realized that both of these coordinate systems are in actuality moving, possibly possessing both velocity and acceleration. No altitude or azimuth determination can be made because of lack of background. The only measurable quantities of interest are therefore the relative angular distances between the objects and their time derivatives. Graphs of two typical time variations of relative angular separation and velocity are included as figures 7 and 8. The relative angular velocity is seen to vary from zero to 0.0065 radians per second. The relative angular acceleration had a maximum value of 0.0036 radians per second squared. Supposing the camera was kept stationary the average angular velocities for the object moving across the field are 0.039 and 0.031 radians per second for figures 3a and 3b. The angular velocities in these sequences sometimes vary erratically from 0.07 to 0.01 radians per second. This variation may be attributed in part to camera \"jiggling\" and in part to the object's"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photogrammetric -3- Serial 02 Analysis of \"Utah\" Film motion. The decrease in average angular velocity between 3(a) and 3(b) could be due to the object's having regressed between filmings just as was reported by Newhouse. Also the average image diameter decreases about 30% over the entire film, indicating a possible over-all regression of the objects. The following tabulation indicates the hypothetical transverse component of relative velocities and accelerations at various distances. It is noted that the transverse velocity may be only a fraction of the total velocity so that the numbers actually indicate minimum values. If the object's distance was | Its transverse velocity was | Its transverse acceleration was | Velocity of single object was. 100 feet: 0.65 ft/sec or 0.44 mph; 0.36 ft/sec² or 0.011 g; 3.8 ft.sec or 2.7 mph. 1000 feet: 6.5 ft/sec or 4.4 mph; 3.6 ft/sec² or 0.11 g; 39 ft/sec or 27 mph. 2000 feet: 13 ft/sec or 8.8 mph; 7.2 ft/sec² or 0.22 g; 78 ft/sec or 54 mph. 1 mile: 23 mph; 0.56 g; 135 mph. 5 miles: 115 mph; 2.8 g; 670 mph. 10 miles: 230 mph; 5.6 g; 1300 mph. The objects in the \"Utah\" and \"Montana\" films can only be correlated on the basis of two rather weak points. First, their structure, or rather lack of it, is similar. Thus as shown in the \"blow-ups\", figures 6a and 6b, there are no recognizable differences between them *. Second, the objects on the \"Montana\" film are manifestly a single pair; on the \"Utah\" film perhaps 30% of the frames show clusters of objects seemingly also grouped in pairs. See figures 6c and 5b. The weather report was obtained by the author from the Airport Station at Salt Lake City. The nearest station with available data is Corinne which reported a maximum temperature of 84°, a minimum of 47° and no precipitation. A high pressure cell from the Pacific Northwest spread over Northern Utah during July 2, the pressure at Tremonton would have a rising trend, the visibility good, and the winds relatively light. The absence of clouds and the apparently excellent visibility shown on the films would seem to be in agreement with this report. Through use of references (2) and (3), the sun's azimuth N132°E altitude 65° was computed. No shadows were available to confirm the time of filming. * The images on the \"Utah\" film appear to be a little brighter. However, possible variations in development techniques would not allow quantitative analysis in this regard."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photogrammetric\t-4-\tSerial 02\nAnalysis of \"Utah\" Film\n\nThe image size being roughly that of the Montana film (a few of the objects being perhaps 10% larger than the largest on the Montana) the same remarks as to airplane reflections apply, i.e., they might have been caused by sun reflections from airplanes within one to three miles of the observer, although at these distances they should have been identified as conventional aircraft by the film or the observer. No specific conclusions as to sun reflection angles can be drawn since the line of motion of the objects cannot be confirmed. However, the reported E to W motion of the UFO and their passing overhead coupled with the SE azimuth of the sun would make the achievement of optimal sun reflections rather difficult.\n\nThat the images could have been produced by aluminum foil \"chaff\" * seems possible, at least on the basis of the images shown, as very intense specular sun reflections from ribbons of chaff might flare out to about the size of the UFO.\n\nExamination of figures 4b, 5a, and 5c, obtained from the photogrammetric experiment -- reference Analysis of Photographic Material, Serial 01, Appendix II, show that no significant broadening is produced by flat white diffuse reflectors such as birds, bits of paper, etc. at f/16 under the conditions of the filming. Actual measurements show a slight \"bleeding\" or flaring of about 10% to 20%.\n\nThe rectangular flat white cardboards of the aforementioned experiments represented very roughly the configuration of birds. The light reflected by such a surface is probably greater than that from a curved feather surface of a bird. Figure 4(b) shows the appearance of one and two foot birds. ** (See arrows.) as they might appear on a 16mm frame taken with a 3\" telephoto lens f/16 at a distance of 1200', figure 5(a) at 3000' and figure 5(c) at 3300'. Many of the images on the \"Utah\" film have an angular diameter of 0.0012 radians (some as large as 0.0016 radians), thus they might be interpreted as one foot birds at 600' to 800', two foot birds at 1200' to 1600' or three foot birds at 2400' to 3200'. At these distances, it is doubted if birds would give the appearance of round dots; also they would have been identifiable by the camera if not visually. However, actual movies of birds in flight would have to be taken to completely confirm this conclusion. The following type of gulls have been known to fly at times over this locality: California Herring Gull (a common summer resident), Ring-Billed Gull and the Fork-Tailed Gull, see reference (4).\n\nThe images are probably not those of balloons as their number is too great and the phenomenon of flaring up to a constant brightness for several seconds, and then dying out again cannot well be associated with any known balloon observations.\n\n* Bits of aluminum foil dumped overboard by planes, often utilized as a countermeasure against anti-aircraft radar. This material might possibly be in the form of large ribbons several feet long and several inches across.\n\n** The dimensions refer to wing spread. The actual exposed white area of a bird is usually less and depends upon the perspective of the observer. This difference has been roughly accounted for in the data given, however, if the body were the principal reflector the distance given should be reduced by a factor of 2 or 3."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photogrammetric\t-5-\tSerial 02\nAnalysis of \"Utah\" Film\n\nCertain soaring insects - notably \"ballooning spiders\" (reference (5) and (6)) produce bright moving points of light. The author has witnessed such a phenomenon. It is produced by sun reflections off the streamers of silken threads spun by many types of spiders. Caught by the wind, these streamers serve as a means of locomotion floating the spider high into the air. They occasionally have the appearance of vast numbers of silken flakes which fill the air and in some recorded instances extend over many square miles and to a height of several hundred feet. The reflection, being off silk threads, is not as bright as diffuse reflection from a flat white board. Thus no flaring of the images could be expected. The author noted that the sections of the \"web\" that reflected measured from 1/4\" to 1/2\" for the largest specimens. Thus the images might be attributed to ballooning spiders at distances of 50 to 100 feet. However, these web reflections ordinarily show up only against a rather dark background and it is doubted if their intensity would be great enough to produce the intense UFO images against a bright sky.\n\nNo quantitative densitometer examination of image brightness could be made, as the original film was not available. It is understood from Al Chop that the government analysts did make measurements of this kind on the original films and found the Utah images to be very intense *.\n\nBesides the above remarks, pertinent to the actual images, several facts can be gleaned from the motion of objects. The observations are not apt to support the supposition that the objects were conventional aircraft as the maneuvers are too erratic, the relative accelerations probably ruling out aircraft at distances of over five miles. Several observers familiar with the appearance of chaff have seen the film and concluded that the persistence of the nontwinkling constellations, their small quantity, and the reported absence of aircraft overhead makes chaff unlikely. Furthermore, the single object passing across the field of view would be most difficult to explain on the basis of chaff. These same remarks would apply also to bits of paper swept up in thermal updrafts.\n\nThe relative angular velocity might be compatible with soaring bird speeds at distances of less than one mile, the angular velocity of the single object could be attributed to a bird within about one thousand feet. There is a tendency to pan with a moving object - not against it - so the velocities in the table probably represent a lower bound. The motion of the objects is not exactly what one would expect from a flock of soaring birds (not the slightest indication of a decrease in brightness due to periodic turning with the wind or flapping) and no cumulus clouds are present which might betray the presence of a strong thermal updraft. On the other hand the single object might represent a single soaring bird which broke away in search of a new thermal -- quite a common occurrence among gulls -- see reference (7).\n\n* In fact, \"burned right down to the celluloid backing\". See also reference (1)."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photogrammetric\t-6-\tSerial 02\nAnalysis of \"Utah\" Film\n\nThat the air turbulence necessary to account for their movement if they were nearby inspects (even the single object's motion!) is possible, can be concluded from examination of reference (8). However, if the objects were nearby spider webs the lack of observed or photographed streamers is unusual. Furthermore, the fact that they were visible from a moving car for several minutes is hard to reconcile with localized insect activity.\n\nThe phenomenon of atmospheric mirages, reference (9), might conceivably account for the images. Such a hypothesis is hampered by the clear weather conditions and the persistence and clarity of the images. Also no \"shimmering\" can be detected and the motion is steady. Again the object which breaks away would be difficult to explain.\n\nIt has been suggested that spurious optical reflections or light leaks in the camera might be responsible. Examples of such effects have been examined and found to be quite different from the UFO's.\n\nThe evidence remains rather contradictory and no single hypothesis of a natural phenomenon yet suggested seems to completely account for the UFO involved. The possibility of multiple hypotheses, i.e. that the Utah UFO's are the result of two simultaneous natural phenomena might possibly yield the answer. However, as in the case of the \"Montana\" analysis, no definite conclusion could be obtained.\n\nR. M. L. Baker, Jr.\nMay 16, 1956"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photogrammetric\t-7-\tSerial 02\nAnalysis of \"Utah\" Film\n\nFIGURE 1"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 2\nRelative Motion of UFO System\n\na.) 0.25 Second Interval\n0.01 Radians/Inch\n\nb.) 1.00 Second Interval\n0.02 Radians/Inch\n\nReference Object for a.)\n\nReference Object for b.)\n\n-8-\n\nSerial 02\n\nPhotogrammetric\nAnalysis of \"Utah\" Film"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photogrammetric\nAnalysis of \"Utah\" Film\n-9-\nSerial 02\n\nFigure 3.\nMotion of UFO Across the Field of View\n1/16 Second Interval 0.01 Radians/Inch\na.)\nb.)"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photogrammetric\nAnalysis of \"Utah\" Film\n-10-\nSerial 02\n\nFIGURE 4\n\nEnlarged frames taken from 16mm Daylight Kodachrome film at f/16,\n16 fps.*\n\na) The array of objects\nphotographed.\n\nb) Photograph from the\nphotogrammetric experi-\nment.\n\nc) Actual shot taken from\nthe \"Utah\" film.\n\n* All frames are of the same magnification."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photogrammetric\nAnalysis of \"Utah\" Film\n-11-\nSerial 02\n\nFIGURE 5\n\nEnlarged frames taken from 16mm Dalyight Kodachrome film at f/16,\n16 fps. *\n\na) Photogram from the\nphotogrammetric experi-\nment.\n\nb) Actual shot taken from\nthe \"Utah\" film (at f/8).\n\nc) Photograph from the\nphotogrammetric experi-\nment.\n\n* All frames are of the same magnification."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photogrammetric\nAnalysis of \"Utah\" Film\n-14-\nSerial 02\n\nFIGURE 6\n\nEnlarged frames taken from 16mm Daylight Kodachrome film at f/16,\n16 fps. *\n\na) Actual shot taken from\nthe \"Utah\" film.\n\nb) Actual shot taken from\nthe \"Montana\" film (at\nf/22).\n\nc) Actual shot taken from\nthe \"Utah\" film.\n\n* All frames are of the same magnification."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FORM 25 BS (REV. 7-42)\nPhotogrammetric\nAnalysis of \"Utah\" Film\n-13-\nSerial 02\nPage\nPrepared by R.M.L. BAMENJR. DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT COMPANY, INC.\nModel\nDate APRIL 8, 1956\nPlant\nReport No. 02\n\nFIGURE 7\nGraph of Relative Angular Position\nGraph of Relative Angular Velocity\nseconds\nseconds\nRadians\nRadians/second\n0.020 0.025 0.030 0.035 0.010 0.005 0 0.0008 0.0016 0.0024 0.0032 0.0016 0.0008 0"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photogrammetric Analysis of \"Utah\" Film -14- PREPARED BY: R.M.L. Bank Jr. DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT COMPANY, INC. Serial 02 CHECKED BY: DIVISION PAGE: DATE: April 8, 1956 MODEL: TITLE: REPORT NO.: 02 FORM 25 B6 (REV. 3-54) FIGURE 8 Graph of Relative Angular Position Graph of Relative Angular Velocity seconds seconds Radians Radians / second DECLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-15- Photogrammetric Analysis of \"Utah\" Film Serial 02 REFERENCES (1) Ruppelt, E. J. \"The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects\". Doubleday and Co., 1956. (2) The \"American Nautical Almanac\", 1952. (3) H.O. No. 214, \"Tables of Computed Altitude and Azimuth for Latitudes 40° to 49°. (4) \"Report on Ornithological Specimens\", Engineering Department, U.S. Army, Washington, 1874. (5) Warburton, C. \"Spiders\", Cambridge 1921, p. 34. (6) McCook, \"American Spiders and Their Spinning Work\", Philadelphia, 1893. (7) Headley, F. W., \"The Flight of Birds\", Witherby and Co., 1912. (8) Geiger, Rudolf, \"The Climate Near the Ground\", Harvard Univ. Press, 1950. (9) Menzel, D. H., \"Flying Saucers\", Harvard Univ. Press, 1953."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANALYSIS OF 16 MM. MOTION PICTURE PHOTOGRAPHY OF UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS. INTRODUCTION The motion picture was examined both by normal and slow motion projection, and by low power microscope. At the start it was found that the images are much too small to show any detail in the objects; the only effect visible on the film by microscopic examination is a collection of small white spots. They are frequently elongated in the direction of motion with respect to the camera position, but no other significant shape features can be seen. A Bell & Howell Model D-1-B projector was used to examine the motion of the objects. This projector permits the operator to reverse the motion during motor-driven projection, or to examine any length of film frame-by-frame, by means of a hand crank and frame counter. It was found that the objects are ten in number, in every one but the last of the motion sequences photographed. Occasionally some of these objects moved out of the camera's field of view momentarily. A list of questions, accompanying the request for this evaluation, are answered below. ANSWERS TO STATED QUESTIONS 1. It cannot be stated definitely whether the objects are seen by reflected sunlight or because they are self-powered light sources. However, it can be deduced that, if they are light-reflecting only, they are decidedly non-spherical in shape. During part of their flight paths they shine brightly, while at other times they are so dim as almost to escape detection. Furthermore, those objects which are following similar courses show similar brightness fluctuations, which could be caused by their taking similar flight attitudes. 2. It is believed to be reasonably certain that the reflection brightness of these objects exceeds that of any natural diffusing type of reflecting object, such as white birds against the sky. Also, there is no known bird that could emit such a radiation as would be required to produce the observed brightness. Either a large metallic surface of nearly flat shape, or a self-luminous source, is thought to be responsible. This statement, and the deduction of a non-spherical shape, combine to rule out large translucent spherical balloons, but not bright aluminum-surfaced aircraft. 3. Slow motion studies of the objects disclose that, in several instances, two objects on a nearly parallel course pass very close to each other, producing the blending effect. However, in each instance the two separate objects reappear after a moment. 4. and 5. As stated above, the only detail that can be seen is the small bright spot on the blue film, so no object shape can be determined. However, the maximum brightness of all the different spots appears to be the same, when they do become bright. The color at maximum brightness appears to be a clear white. At reduced brightness the spots remain essentially a neutral or grayish"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"white; no strong colors are noted. As to similar motion, a definite grouping of objects is noticeable. The first two sequences, taken with the sky as a light blue, show what probably are two groups of three objects each, and two groups of two each. The final sequence, against the dark blue sky, shows four pairs of objects, with the fifth pair having drifted upwards, out of the camera's field of view.\n\n6. If the objects are reflecting, the \"fade-in\" and fade-out\" are caused by changes in attitude of decidedly non-spherical objects, as in Answer 1 above. On the other hand, if they are light sources, the variation could be associated with their maneuvering activity.\n\n7. and 8. As explained in the opening paragraph, the objects are only small bright spots on the film. When they dim sufficiently, they become invisible; no dark spots can be identified with these objects. The only visible motion in any single frame is with respect to the camera's field of view. Slow motion examination of successive frames suggests a general flight pattern of sweeping skew curves in space. This concept of object motions produces no sharp breaks in their apparent flight paths, and also makes it practically impossible to detect rapid accelerations or decelerations along these paths.\n\n9. In the sequences during which the camera was held motionless, to record the angular velocity of a single object, it is possible to measure this velocity. Three such passes can be seen. The first was incomplete, picking up the object near the center of the frame. The second and third passes were complete, from one edge of the field of view to the other.\n\nFigure I shows the actual tracings of the object from frame to frame for both Passes No. 2 and No. 3. The distance from lens to screen was 100 inches. The focal length of the projection lens was 2 inches. The enlargement of Figure I over the actual negative size is therefore 50 times. Camera and projector errors, plus small hand-held camera motions, probably account for the deviations from a straight line path. The average calculated angular velocity for both paths is about 2.1 degrees per second. Detailed computations are given in Appendix I.\n\n10a. A slow motion viewing, plus single frame position plots, suggest that the objects are maneuvering in definite formations. However, successive identical positions are not indicated when position plots from any two frames in a sequence are superimposed. For instance, the first sequence of movement lasts 160 frames or 10 seconds. During the first seven seconds, clear plots for all 10 objects can be made. These plots were made at half second intervals or 8 frames apart.\n\n10b. Figure II represents a possible set of flight paths for this interval, derived as explained in Appendix II. It should be remembered that Figure II very likely contains some indeterminate and non-constant camera motion, both horizontal and vertical, caused by tracking the formations. This means that the directions and curvatures as shown may be appreciably different from what a stationary camera would have recorded. However, Figure II does help visualize"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the type of motion shown by the objects, moving from right to left, or generally from east to west as the camera was situated. This agrees with Figure I, showing the single object reversing course from left to right, or west to east.\n\n10c and d. The relative positions of these objects in the first sequence follow a definite formation plan of either three pairs, a trio, and a single, or perhaps five pairs (if one of the trio and the single are actually a nearby pair). It appears that the objects tend to remain in position for curved path maneuvering. A possible shift in formation appears at the start of the trio paths. Otherwise, the objects definitely appear to undulate in phase in this sequence; as in the other sequences also.\n\n10e and f. Several repeated slow motion viewings of the entire film do not indicate clearly any abrupt changes in flight path of any part of the formation. At times the camera appears to lag in following the entire group, and some of the ten objects then move outside the field of view momentarily. Whether or not a particular object remains motionless for a moment depends upon the relationship of group movement to camera movement.\n\n10g. As explained in Paragraph 10f, sometimes objects may move out of the field of view. In a few instances, however, certain objects may change in brightness considerably, and practically appear or disappear well within the field of view. In the second sequence, which lasts about 14 seconds, the lower two pairs in Figure II flare up suddenly near the center of the field of view, being invisible a moment before. As they flare up, they appear to curve more rapidly to the left and upwards than the center trio. Reversing this sequence in slow motion shows that these four objects were faintly visible just before they disappeared at about the same position.\n\nA tabulation of flight sequences and durations is listed in Appendix III.\n\nCONCLUSIONS\n\n1. Subject motion picture film apparently records the motions of ten unknown aerial objects, all alike in observed characteristics of movement and size.\n\n2. The exact nature of these objects cannot be determined, because they are visible only as small spots of light. It can be deduced, however, that they are either non-spherical in shape and similar to bright metal in reflectance, or else variably self-luminous by some means.\n\n3. There is apparently a coordination of movement to some extent among these objects. They seem to move in formations which are probably three-dimensional in arrangement. The largest angular size of the entire group is on the order of 6 to 8 degrees of arc.\n\n4. The movements of these objects suggest flight paths consisting of skew curves in space. In one instance a single object changed course and followed a nearly straight line path with reasonable uniformity of motion at an angular velocity of about 2.1 degrees. During this straight line flight it remained reasonably uniform in brightness.\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5. It would probably be extremely difficult to imitate this photography for fraudulent purposes."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STATEMENT BY SOURCE\n\nPlace:-\n\nAbout 7 miles north of Tremonton, Utah, on U.S. Highway No. 305.\n\nTime:-\n\n1110, Wednesday, 2 July 1952.\n\nCamera:-\n\nB&H Automaster, magazine load, 3\" telephoto lens, 16 frames per second. Handheld.\n\nExposure:-\n\nFirst few feet - f:8. Balance - f:16. Clear sun, cloudless sky. EKCO Kodachrome film - Daylight. Exposure was changed with the mistaken idea of darkening the sky to gain greater contrast. The result was merely general underexposure.\n\nBackground:-\n\nDriving from Washington, D.C., to Portland, Oregon, on the morning of 2 July, my wife noticed a group of objects in the sky that she could not identify. She asked me to stop the car and look. There was a group of about ten or twelve objects that bore no relation to anything I had seen before, milling about in a rough formation and proceeding in a westerly direction. I opened the luggage compartment of the car and got my camera out of a suitcase. Loading it hurriedly, I exposed approximately thirty feet of film. There was no reference point in the sky and it was impossible for me to make any estimate of speed, size, altitude or distance. Toward the end one of the objects reversed course and proceeded away from the main group. I held the camera still and allowed this single one to cross the field of view, picking it up again and repeating for 3 or 4 such passes. By this time all of the objects had disappeared. I expended the balance of the film late that afternoon on a mountain somewhere in Idaho."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix II\n\nPlotting a Set of Flight Paths from Single Frame Position Plots, with no Reference Points\n\n1. In a case like this, it would be highly desirable if the movement of these objects could be recorded with a stationary motion picture camera. Position plots could be superimposed by observing proper registery of frame edges to indicate the speed and direction of object flight paths.\n\n2. However, it apparently was necessary in this case to follow the formation of objects, to keep them all in view. Therefore no position guide for registering the position plots is available, since no fixed points appear in the sky. Other principles must be used instead.\n\n3. It is stated that the general drift of the entire formation was to the west. A later sequence shows a single object, which had reversed course, moving from left to right in the camera's view. It can therefore be supposed that plotted paths should show a drift from right to left.\n\n4. This is one guide to be used. Another is that position plots should be superimposed without any rotation, since the frames were plotted without rotation. This assumes that the camera was not rotated; but merely moved in combined horizontal and vertical motions.\n\n5. Another general guide is that most of the objects should appear to move in smooth, continuous paths. Several plots, at least 4, should be superimposed on a viewing table, and should be shifted until all or nearly all paths are smooth and show reasonably uniform motion. This compound plot can be transferred to a single sheet, and further plots can be added in the same manner.\n\n6. Figure II was prepared in just this way, using the same 50 diameter enlargement as in Figure I. It will be noted that the final positions of two objects in the central trio are missing. They became so faint that they were lost; no further plotting of this sequence was tried."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix III\n\nSequence Number | Frame Start | Number Finish | Number of Frames | Approx time of Sequence in Seconds | Sky Color\n1 | 0 | 160 | 160 | 10 | Light\n2 | 161 | 386 | 225 | 14 | Light\n3 | 387 | 700 | 313 | 19 1/2 | Dark\n4 | 700 | 970 | 270 | 17 | Dark\n5 | 970 | 1010 | 40 | 2 1/2 | Dark\n6 | 1010 | 1080 | 70 | 4 1/2 | Dark\n7 | 1080 | 1140 | 60 | 4 | Dark"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"QUESTIONS REGARDING ANALYSIS OF FILM\n\n1. Are images made by light source or reflection?\n\n2. Any indication of what kind of objects could have caused images? Is there any bird sufficiently actinic to cause images? Could they have been caused by aircraft or balloons?\n\n3. What causes the impression that some objects at times appear to become 2 or 3 objects, at times appear to merge into one?\n\n4. Do all objects have same characteristics?\n\na. Same apparent shape?\nb. Same relative size?\nc. Same Color?\nd. Same general motion?\n\n5. What are shape(s), color(s), and relative size(s) of objects?\n\n6. To what can the \"fade-in\" and \"fade-out\" of the objects be attributed?\n\n7. What type motion is attributable to the objects (about their own axis as well as about the axis of flight path)?\n\n8. Is there any acceleration evident in their motion along flight path axis?\n\n9. Can the motion of the camera (panning and joggling) be allowed for sufficiently to permit determination of the angular velocity of objects which cross the field of view? (Reference particularly the single object which crosses field; photographer states that camera was held motionless while object crossed field of view.)\n\n10. Determine patterns of flight from position plots for each frame, then:\n\na. Is there any recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects?\n\nb. Do they maintain same relative positions in formation during any maneuvers, particularly violent maneuvers?\n\nc. Is relative position maintained coincidental with movement about their axes?\n\nd. If undulating motion is present among a number of objects which are maintaining a semblance of formation, do those objects undulate in phase? Ditto for tumbling motion.\n\ne. Is there any indication of abrupt changes in direction of flight path through fairly large angles (e.g., 90° or more during interval of 2 or 3 frames)?"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"f. Do any objects appear to remain motionless at the same time that others move about?\n\ng. Can all objects be accounted for at all times or do some literally disappear while still well within field of view?\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE I Plot of single object, stationary camera"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"① OPNAV Notice 3820\n② Temp inversion - reflection & ionization\n③ 30% - research (US)\n20% - unknown phenomena\n30% - psycho\n30% - extraterrestrial\n- Recomm[illegible], wait & study, collec data - - tracking\nsta[illegible] [illegible] [illegible] install infra radar & [illegible]\n[illegible]\n④ Telescopes scanning - prohibit extraterrestrial\n(a) Small angle of coverage\n(b) 5/40\n⑤ Atomic residue\n⑥ 6/44 explained —— % carried now\n(% psycho) → 95% psycho.\n⑦\n① Name function S. as editor of they looks.\n③ Dispose on plans for future."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"This CASE Includes\nONE (1) 7½\" X 11\" photo\nand ONE (1) 2¼\" X 2¼\"\nphoto."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Address Reply To\nOFFICER-IN-CHARGE\nAnd Refer To No.\nNT4-28/ 8310/177283\nAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER\nOAKLAND 4, CALIFORNIA\n11 August 1952\nFrom: Chief Photographer Delbert C. Newhouse, 177283, U. S. N.\nTo: Commanding Officer, Hill Air Force Base, Ogden, Utah\nSubj: Motion Pictures of Unidentified Objects in Air\nEncl: (1) One (1) fifty-foot roll of processed 16mm color motion\npicture film\n1. Enclosure (1) is forwarded herewith for whatever value it may have in connection with your investigation of the so-called \"Flying Saucers\". Pertinent data follows:\nPlace: About 7 miles north of Tremonton, Utah on U. S. Highway No. 30S.\nTime: 1110 Wednesday 2 July 1952.\nCamera: B&H Automaster, magazine load, 3\" telephoto lens, 16 frames per second. Handheld.\nExposure: First few feet - f:8. Balance - f:16. Clear sun, cloudless sky. EKCo Kodachrome film - Daylight. Exposure was changed with the mistaken idea of darkening the sky to gain greater contrast. The result was merely general under exposure.\nGeneral Background: Driving from Washington, D. C. to Portland, Oregon, on the morning of 2 July my wife noticed a group of objects in the sky that she could not identify. She asked me to stop the car and look. There was a group of about ten or twelve objects - that bore no relation to anything I had seen before - milling about in a rough formation and proceeding in a westerly direction. I opened the luggage compartment of the car and got my camera out of a suitcase. Loading it hurriedly, I exposed approximately thirty feet of film. There was no reference point in the sky and it was impossible for me to make any estimate of speed, size, altitude or distance. Toward the end one of the objects reversed course and proceeded away from the main group. I held the camera still and allowed this single one to cross the field of view, picking it up again and repeating for three or four such passes. By this time all of the objects had disappeared. I expended the balance of the film late that afternoon on a mountain somewhere in Idaho.\nDelbert C. Newhouse\n[REDACTED]\nDuplicate to ATIC w/ film by DF 9/8/52\nCy filed Incidents also\n7-3712-52"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n[REDACTED]\nNt4-28/8310/177283 Subj: Motion Pictures of Unidentified Objects in Air\nOOI (11 Aug 52) 1st Ind\nHQ OOAMA, Hill Air Force Base, Utah, 28 August 1952\nTO: Director of Intelligence, Headquarters, USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n1. This report of unidentified flying objects is submitted in accordance with AFL 200-5, dated 29 April 1952.\n2. This report is submitted in this form in lieu of submission of AF Form 112, Air Intelligence Information Report, since all information available on this subject is contained in the basic communication.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\nKERMIT R. KANN\nColonel, USAF\nInspector General\n1 Incl\n50' roll of processed film\nInfo cy: Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio\nTo ATIC by DF\nReceipt acknowledged by ltr 9/18/52\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n# C-143\n[REDACTED]\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"HILLFIELD, UTAH 1952 AUG 29 12:40\nREC'D DIRINT HQ USAF 3 SEP 1952"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISPOSITION FORM\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nFILE NO.\n\nSUBJECT (Restricted) Movie Film of Flying Objects Taken 2 Jul 52, Vicinity of Tremonton, Utah (near Salt Lake)\n\nTO\nChief, Air Technical Intelligence Center Wright-Patterson AFB\n\nFROM\nDept of the Air Force Hq USAF - AFOIN-2A2\n\nDATE 8 Sep 52\nCOMMENT NO. 1\nMaj Fournet/fh/ 71016\n\n1. Subject film, received this office 5 Sep 52, is inclosed for appropriate action. Duplicate of report submitted by the photographer, CPO Delbert C. Newhouse (177283, USN), is inclosed for your information in the event that the copy forwarded to you by the IG, Hill AFB, Utah has not been received.\n\n2. A message was dispatched to the CG, WADF on 6 Sep 52, with information copy to you, requesting that an intelligence officer interview CPO Newhouse and determine additional details of the sighting, if available.\n\n3. A message was also dispatched to the CO, Hill AFB, Utah requesting weather information for the period and vicinity in question. An information copy was dispatched to you.\n\n4. It has been ascertained from the Naval Observatory, Washington, D.C. that the position of the sun at the time(1810Z hours, 2 July 52) and the location (4145N - 11210W) in question was 64.5 degrees elevation and 131 degrees azimuth.\n\n5. Suggest the film be submitted to the WADC Photo Lab for complete analysis as soon as possible. The following are suggested questions for this analysis which, if answered, should facilitate evaluation of the incident:\n\na. Are images made by light source or reflection?\nb. Any indication of what kind of objects could have caused images? Is there any bird sufficiently actinic to cause images? Could they have been caused by aircraft or balloons?\nc. What causes impression that some objects at times appear to become 2 or 3 where there was originally one, or, conversely, 2 or 3 objects at times appear to merge into one.\nd. Do all objects have same characteristics?\n(1) Same apparent shape?\n(2) Same color?\n(3) Same relative size?\n(4) Same general motion?\ne. What are shape(s), color(s) and relative size(s) of objects?\nf. To what can the \"fade-in\" and \"fade-out\" of the objects be attributed?\ng. What type motion is attributable to the objects (about their own axis as well as about axis of flight path)?\nh. Is there any acceleration evident in their motion along flight path axis?\ni. Can the motion of the camera (panning and joggling) be allowed for\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nsufficiently to permit determination of the angular velocity of objects which cross the field of view? (Reference particularly the single object which crosses field; photographer states that camera was held motionless while object crossed field of view.)\n\nj. Determine patterns of flight from position plots for each frame, then:\n(1) Is there any recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects?\n(2) Do they maintain same relative positions in formation during any maneuvers, particularly violent maneuvers?\n(3) Is relative position maintained coincidental with movement about their axes?\n(4) If undulating motion is present among a number of objects which are maintaining a semblance of formation, do those objects undulate in phase? Ditto for tumbling motion?\n(5) Is there any indication of abrupt changes in direction of flight path through fairly large angles (e.g. 90 or more during interval of 2 or 3 frames)?\n(6) Do any objects appear to remain motionless at the same time that others move about?\n(7) Can all objects be accounted for at all times or do some literally disappear while still well within field of view?\n\n6. Although CPO Newhouse did not request that the film be returned to him, it is recommended that the final footage (of the mountain scenery) be returned to him immediately and that he be asked if he is willing to accept a duplicate of the initial footage in lieu of the original. If his reply is affirmative, suggest the duplicate be forwarded whenever available.\n\n7. Request advice of the analytical results as soon as available.\n\n2 Incls: (w/orig only)\n1. Cy of ltr fr CPO Newhouse, dtd 11 Aug 52\n2. Roll of exposed 16mm film.\n\nWILLIAM A. ADAMS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Topical Division\nDeputy Director for Estimates\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n2"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nNt4-28/8310/177283 Subj: Motion Pictures of Unidentified Objects in Air\n\n00I (11 Aug 52) 1st Ind\n\nHQ OOAMA, Hill Air Force Base, Utah, 28 August 1952\n\nTO: Director of Intelligence, Headquarters, USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\n1. This report of unidentified flying objects is submitted in accordance with AFL 200-5, dated 29 April 1952.\n\n2. This report is submitted in this form in lieu of submission of AF Form 112, Air Intelligence Information Report, since all information available on this subject is contained in the basic communication.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n1 Incl\n50' roll of processed film\n\nKERMIT R. KANN\nColonel, USAF\nInspector General\n\nInfo cy: Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nAVIATION SUPPLY DEPOT\nNAVAL SUPPLY CENTER\nOAKLAND 4, CALIFORNIA\nNT4-28/8310/177283\n11 August 1952\n\nFrom: Chief Photographer Delbert C. Newhouse, 177283, U. S. N.\nTo: Commanding Officer, Hill Air Force Base, Ogden, Utah\n\nSubj: Motion Pictures of Unidentified Objects in Air\n\nEncl: (1) One (1) fifty-foot roll of propessed 16mm color motion picture film\n\n1. Enclosure (1) is forwarded herewith for whatever value it may have in connection with your investigation of the so-called \"Flying Saucers\". Pertinent data follows:\n\nPlace: About 7 milesnorth of Tremonton, Utah on U. S. Highway No. 30S.\n\nTime: 1110 Wednesday 2 July 1952.\n\nCamera: B&H Automaster, magazine load, 3\" telephoto lens, 16 frames per second. Handheld.\n\nExposure: First few feet - f:8. Balance - f:16. Clear sun, cloudless sky. EKCo Kodachrome film - Daylight. Exposure was changed with the mistaken idea of darkening the sky to gain greater cort rast. The result was merely general under exposure.\n\nGeneral Background: Driving from Washington, D. C. to Portland, Oregon, on the morning of 2 July my wife noticed a group of objects in the sky that she could not identify. She asked me to stop the car and look. There was a group of about ten or twelve objects - that bore no relation to anything I had seen before - milling about in a rought formation and proceeding in a westerly direction. I opened the luggage compartment of the car and got my camera out of a suitcase. Loading it hurriedly, I exposed approximately thirty feet of film. There was no reference point in the sky and it was impossible for me to make any estimate of speed, size, altitude or distance. Toward the end one of the objects reversed course and proceeded away from the main group. I held the camera still and allowed this single one to cross the field of view, picking it up again and repeating for three or four such passes. By this time all of the objects had disappeared. I expended the balance of the film late that afternoon on a mountain somewhere in Idaho.\n\n/s/\nDelbert C. Newhouse"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CSAF ITEM NBR 7 /[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nTO ATIAA-5 RUPPELT FR AFOIN-2A2 FOURNET\nREF 2 JULY 52 MOVIES VIC TREMONTON UTAH.\nIN ADDITION TO PREVIOUSLY RECOMMENDED ANALYSES, SUGGEST CHECKING TIME INTERVAL BETWEEN INSTANTS OF MAXIMUM \"GLOW\" OF INDIVIDUAL OBJECT, I. E. BLINKING EFFECT. AND IF THIS IS OBTAINABLE, IS INTERVAL UNIFORM FOR A SINGLE OBJECT AND FOR ALL OBJECTS WHICH EXHIBIT THIS CHARACTERISTIC? IT SHOULD BE INTERESTING TO CORRELATE THESE RESULTS WITH OTHER RPTS WHICH MENTION BLINKING INTERVALS IN CONNECTION WITH SIGHTINGS OF LIGHTS AND/OR REFLECTIVE OBJECTS. END CSAF ITEM NBR 7 /[REDACTED]\nUNCLASSIFIED\nTT 314\n30 Sep 52\nACTION\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-2A2 Memo/Burnet/fh/75990/Rm 4B 864 wrtn 24 Oct 52\n\nAFOIN-2A2\n[REDACTED]\nUNCLASSIFIED\nMEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Naval Intelligence\nAttention: Op 322Y5\n\nSUBJECT: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Flying Objects\n\n1. The attached movies (see Incl. 1) are possibly the best documentary evidence yet obtained on unidentified flying objects. They have been analyzed by an Air Force photographic laboratory. However, it is our desire to obtain an independent analysis by a separate laboratory in order that we may better interpret the implications of these data. For this reason, it is requested that as complete an interpretation as possible be rendered by a Navy activity.\n\n2. Circumstances surrounding the photography are summarized in Inclosure 2. Additional details were requested by messages which are included as Inclosures 3 and 5 and were obtained in the replies attached as Inclosures 4 and 6. With regard to Inclosures 5 and 6, the final footage of film referred to has been detached and returned to CPO Newhouse. However, it was deduced from this portion that Newhouse obtained excellent results while handholding the camera; there was almost no camera motion evident. This deduction was applied to the analysis of that portion of the film depicting the motion of the single object which detached itself from the group as explained in Inclosure 2.\n\n3. A list of representative questions for the interpretation is attached as Inclosure 7. These questions are indicative of the type data desired. Any additional data which can be obtained would be most welcome, particularly as concerns the light intensity of the objects, the formations (including three-dimensional renditions, if possible), comments regarding the possibility that the images were caused by aircraft and the conditions which must have prevailed for aircraft to produce such images, etc.\n\n4. It was determined from the Naval Observatory, Washington, D.C. that the position of the sun at the time and location of the photography was 64.5 degrees elevation and 131 degrees azimuth.\n\n5. Your cooperation in satisfying this request at the earliest practicable time is earnestly solicited.\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\nAFOIN-2A2 Staybach copy"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nMemorandum for: Director of Naval Intelligence, Attn: Op 322X5\nSubject: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Flying Objects (continued)\n\n6. For additional data or referral of specific questions, Colonel W.H. Smith of the Current Intelligence Branch may be contacted direct. His telephone number is 71016.\n\n7 Incls.\n1. Movie (w/o ing only)\n2. Cy of ltr fr CPO Newhouse\n3. Cy of AFOIN 57264\n4. Cy of CAFIN 65202\n5. Cy of AFOIN 59782\n6. Cy of CAFIN 74096\n7. List of questions\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n2"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. M. A. Monts\nAir Force Press Room\nRoom 2E761, Pentagon\n\n1 June 1956\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE\nAttn: Lt Colonel T. R. Johnson, AFOIN-X\n\nSUBJECT: (Uncld) UFO Movie\n\n1. The following statements concerning two of the UFO sightings described in the recently released movie, are submitted in response to Mr. Monts' request of 29 May 1956.\n\na. The Marianna Case - Montana - 1950. The original Air Force conclusion, based on the interrogation of witnesses and the evaluation of the data, was that the UFOs were, in all probability, two Air Force F-94 fighter aircraft known to be in the vicinity at the time.\n\nSimulated photographs of aircraft at various distances, made by an aircraft manufacturing firm in a recent independent and unsolicited analysis of the Marianna film, show striking similarity to the two white blops in this film.\n\nBased on the degree of credibility accorded this early ATIC evaluation and the strong corroborative evidence supplied by the recent independent analysis, the Air Force has no compelling reason to alter its original conclusion.\n\nb. The Newhouse Case - Utah - 1952. The original film was analyzed by an Air Force Photo Reconnaissance Laboratory shortly after the sighting. The conclusion reached was that a strong possibility existed that the bright spots of light appearing on the film were caused by seagulls soaring in thermal air currents. The credibility of the conclusion was undoubtedly supported by the presence of identifiable seagulls in some of the frames.\n\nThis conclusion was further strengthened by movies of seagulls, taken at various distances, which showed them as bright spots of light similar to those in the Newhouse film."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memo to D/I (OIN-X), (U) UFO Movie, 1 Jun 56\n\nA recent analysis of the Newhouse film, made by Air Force photo specialists totally unaware of the previous history of this case, yielded the opinion that the bright spots of light on the film were bird reflections in the strong sunlight.\n\nThe unanimity of opinion present in all evaluations made in this case leaves little reasonable doubt that the UFOs in the Newhouse film were indeed seagulls.\n\n2. Attached is a copy of this memo to be given to Mr. M. A. Monts in the Air Force Press Room in the Pentagon.\n\nJOHN G. ERIKSEN\nColonel, USAF\nDeputy Commander\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nOFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\nUNCLASSIFIED\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nOp-322Y5/rtm\n\n5 December 1952\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nFIRST ENDORSEMENT on PIC ltr ser 0263 of 5 Dec 1952\n\nFrom: Director of Naval Intelligence\nTo: Chief, Topical Division, USAF, AFOIN 2A2\n\nSubj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Flying Objects; progress report on\n\nRef: (c) Dept of Air Force ltr file AFOIN-2A2 of 24 Oct 1952\n\n1. Readdressed and forwarded in compliance with the request contained in reference (c) above and reference (b) of the basic letter.\n\nJ. M. GALLAGHER\nBy direction\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nU. S. NAVAL PHOTOGRAPHIC INTERPRETATION CENTER\nU. S. Naval Receiving Station\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\n01/HWW:gcl\nAll\nSerial: 0263\n\nDEC 5 1952\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nFrom: Officer in Charge\nTo: Chief, Naval Operations\n\nSubj: Interpretation of Movies of Unidentified Flying Objects; progress report on\n\nRef: (a) Conf ltr DNI OP322Y5/rtm, dtd 27 Oct 1952 with enclosures thereto\n(b) Memo, Chief, Topical Division, USAF, AFOIN 2A2 dtd 24 Nov 1952 with enclosures thereto\n\nEncl: (1) Copy of enclosure 7 of reference (a)\n\n1. Reference (a) directed the interpretation of movies of unidentified objects taken in Utah, 1952. Included among the enclosures are approximately 30 feet of processed 16mm color motion picture film and a list of questions for guidance in determining the type of analysis desired. This progress report presents the procedures and methods designed to answer some of the questions contained in enclosure 7 and the results obtained as of this date by the Photogrammetry Division, Evaluation Department of this Center.\n\n2. Tests and Procedure. The film exposed in Utah is in very poor condition; dry, brittle and with a tendency to break. After initial viewing, duplication of the film was performed in order to preserve the one originally received. This consumed approximately two weeks. In the duplication process, some color correction was made to permit better viewing of the objects. For convenience in interpretation, the film was divided into three parts, each part being considered an entity. Part I consisted of the footage taken at f8; part II, the footage taken at f16 with a panning motion; and Part III, the footage at f16 during which the camera was held steady. Three definite groups of lights were observed throughout the film and plots were recorded as follows:\n\nArea | Control\nParts I and II | Holding to one group\nParts I and II | Holding to one light and direction of another\nParts I and II | Arbitrary 1/2 inch correction per frame for panning\nPart III | Holding to frame outline\nParts I and II | None. Every tenth frame to show changes in two apparent formations.\n\nIn addition to the above plots; blowups of exposures on opaque and transparent materials were made for stereoscopic study, assignment of magnitudes of light intensities were made frame by frame, and preliminary studies of colored lights conducted.\n\n3. Comments. From the above plots and studies, the following comments keyed to the list of questions contained in enclosure 1 are:\n\n1. It appears to be a light source rather than reflected light.\n\n2. No indication of kind of objects. No bird known to be sufficiently actinic. Could not have been caused by aircraft or balloons.\n\n3. Comments held in abeyance until further stereoscopic study.\n\n4. Objects have same apparent shape, color, and general motion. Relative size is still under study.\n\n5. Images are circular in shape and bluish-white in color.\n\n6. Comments in abeyance.\n\n7. Comments in abeyance.\n\n8. Acceleration is evident.\n\n9. Velocity was computed to be 3780 mph for a shift of 1mm per frame if the object is five miles from the observer.\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\n-2-\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nDEC 5 1952\n\n0263\n\nFrom 34 measurements taken from Part III of the film, the maximum and minimum per frame were 0.2889 and 0.0667mm respectively with a mean shift of 0.1729mm. On this basis the mean velocity is 653.5 mph. Differences in mean velocities due to assumption of variance in distance from the observer may be determined by x/5 times 653.5.\n\n10a. There is no recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects in formation. It appears, however, as if the shift in relative positions were regular and that the original formation would be recovered if the continuing action had been recorded. This should be substantiated or refuted upon completion of the stereoscopic study.\n\nb. Comments held in abeyance\nc. Comments held in abeyance\nd. Comments held in abeyance\ne. Yes\nf. Comments held in abeyance\ng. Certain objects disappear while still well within the field of view.\n\n4. Discussion. There are many theories and conditions concerning the images photographed which can be explained as natural phenomena. In the analysis conducted, no attempt is made to explain the phenomena nor are the comments tempered by knowledge of present day science (although its influence was felt). Comments are as seen, as analyzed, and as computed; and as such, are partly at variance with the natural phenomena theories.\n\na. Light Source. The opinion that these images are light sources is based on the time they can be viewed continuously on the film, approximately 90 seconds, and on the angle through which they were photographed, approximately 60 degrees. It is felt that if these images were reflected light, blinking would occur during a period of 90 seconds while passing through an angle of 60 degrees when photographed at the rate of 16 frames per second. Although this premise would permit aircraft and balloons to be the source, they are ruled out because of the velocity determination. If aircraft is assumed to be close enough to permit velocities of present aircraft, they would be close enough for positive identification. If they are too far away for positive identification, then the velocity is too great for any aircraft as we know them.\n\nb. Color. Colors were noted as shades of red, green, blue and bluish-white. It appears however, that except for\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\n-3-\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nDEC 5 1952\n\n0263\n\nthe bluish-white, the colors noted are due to color aberrations in the lens and to processing defects, and are not of the objects themselves which can be observed throughout the entire or major portion of the film. It should be pointed out at this point that unless an image appeared in at least five successive frames, it was regarded as a processing defect. This process of elimination left only 11 images analyzed as the objects.\n\nc. Velocity. In the determination of the velocity of the objects, two assumptions were made; (a) the camera was held steady during Part III of the film, and (b) the objects were moving perpendicular to the optical axis. It is obvious that (b) is a fallacy; however, this assumption will give the minimum velocity and that the actual velocity is greater than computed. It may be possible to apply a correction factor after the completion of the stereoscopic study, although this is doubtful. With these assumptions and knowing the focal length of the camera, the only unknown in the determination of the velocity is the distance from the observer to the object. This was arbitrarily set at five miles.\n\nd. Size, Pattern and Formation. Analysis has not progressed to the stage where the relative sizes of these images can be stated. This applies also to patterns and formations although it appears as if they do occur. It is expected that stereoscopic analysis of the objects will furnish much information on this subject.\n\n5. Reference (b) requested interpretation of additional movies, approximately 10 feet, taken in Montana, 1950. This film is also in poor condition but is suitable for analyzing the movie. One plot was made of the light path in the area where stationary objects are visible to hold to as control. Analysis of this movie is not sufficiently complete to offer any comment other than the path of light is undulating and is similar to that plotted for the Utah movie. In the analysis of the Montana movie it will be most helpful if the following information can be furnished:\n\na. Focal length of taking lens.\nb. Location and actual distance of observer to the center of the tower.\nc. Dimensions of the tower.\nd. Lengths of bracing on the tower.\ne. Vertical spacing of the bracing or the spacing between bracing measured along the legs of the tower.\nIt is felt that, since this movie was taken in 1950, the\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\n-4-\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nDEC 5 1952\n\n0263\n\nabove requested information has been obtained for other agencies to assist in their interpretation of the unidentified objects and therefore is available.\n\n6. Interpretation of movies of unidentified flying objects are continuing and upon completion of the analysis a final report will be prepared. Two copies of the report and reference (a) will be sent to your office.\n\n7. Conclusions: None.\n\n8. Recommendations: None.\n\nL. W. KEITH\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\n-5-\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUGGESTED POINTS FOR ANALYSIS\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nThe following questions are suggested for guidance regarding the general type of analysis desired:\n\n1. Are images made by light source or reflection?\n\n2. Any indication of what kind of objects could have caused images? Is there any bird sufficiently actinic to cause images? Could they have been caused by aircraft or balloons?\n\n3. What causes impression that some objects at times appear to become 2 or 3 where there was originally one or, conversely, 2 or 3 objects at times appear to merge into one.\n\n4. Do all objects have same characteristics?\na. Same apparent shape?\nb. Same Color?\nc. Same relative size?\nd. Same general motion?\n\n5. What are shape(s), color(s) and relative size(s) of objects?\n\n6. To what can the \"fade-in\" and \"fade-out\" of the objects be attributed?\n\n7. What type motion is attributable to the objects about their own axis as well as about axis of flight path)?\n\n8. Is there any acceleration evident in their motion along light path axis?\n\n9. Can the motion of the camera (panning and joggling) be allowed for sufficiently to permit determination of the angular velocity of objects which cross the field of view? (Reference particularly the single object which crosses field; photographer states that camera was held motionless while object crossed field of view.)\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\n10. Determine patterns of flight from position plots for each frame, then:\n\na. Is there any recurring pattern in the relative position of the objects?\nb. Do they maintain same relative positions in formation during any maneuvers, particularly violent maneuvers?\nc. Is relative position maintained coincidental with movement about their axis?\nd. If undulating motion is present among a number of objects which are maintaining a semblance of formation, do those objects undulate in phase? Ditto for tumbling motion?\ne. Is there any indication of abrupt changes in direction of flight path through fairly large angles (e.g. 90 degrees or more during interval of 2 or 3 frames)?\nf. Do any objects appear to remain motionless at the same time that others move about?\ng. Can all objects be accounted for at all times or do some literally disappear while still well within field of view?\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANALYSIS OF 16 MM. MOTION PICTURE PHOTOGRAPHY OF UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS.\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\nThe motion picture was examined both by normal and slow motion projection, and by low power microscope. At the start it was found that the images are much too small to show any detail in the objects; the only effect visible on the film by microscopic examination is a collection of small white spots. They are frequently elongated in the direction of motion with respect to the camera position, but no other significant shape features can be seen.\n\nA Bell & Howell Model D-1-B projector was used to examine the motion of the objects. This projector permits the operator to reverse the motion during motor-driven projection, or to examine any length of film frame-by-frame, by means of a hand crank and frame counter. It was found that the objects are ten in number, in every one but the last of the motion sequences photographed. Occasionally some of these objects moved out of the camera's field of view momentarily.\n\nA list of questions, accompanying the request for this evaluation, are answered below.\n\nANSWERS TO STATED QUESTIONS\n\n1. It cannot be stated definitely whether the objects are seen by reflected sunlight or because they are self-powered light sources. However, it can be deduced that, if they are light-reflecting only, they are decidedly non-spherical in shape. During part of their flight paths they shine brightly, while at other times they are so dim as almost to escape detection. Furthermore, those objects which are following similar courses show similar brightness fluctuations, which could be caused by their taking similar flight attitudes.\n\n2. It is believed to be reasonably certain that the reflection brightness of these objects exceeds that of any natural diffusing type of reflecting object, such as white birds against the sky. Also, there is no known bird that could emit such a radiation as would be required to produce the observed brightness. Either a large metallic surface of nearly flat shape, or a self-luminous source, is thought to be responsible. This statement, and the deduction of a non-spherical shape, combine to rule out large translucent spherical balloons, but not bright aluminum-surfaced aircraft.\n\n3. Slow motion studies of the objects disclose that, in several instances, two objects on a nearly parallel course pass very close to each other, producing the blending effect. However, in each instance the two separate objects reappear after a moment.\n\n4. and 5. As stated above, the only detail that can be seen is the small bright spot on the blue film, so no object shape can be determined. However, the maximum brightness of all the different spots appears to be the same, when they do become bright. The color at maximum brightness appears to be a clear white. At reduced brightness the spots remain essentially a neutral or grayish"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"white; no strong colors are noted. As to similar motion, a definite grouping of objects is noticeable. The first two sequences, taken with the sky as a light blue, show what probably are two groups of three objects each, and two groups of two each. The final sequence, against the dark blue sky, shows four pairs of objects, with the fifth pair having drifted upwards, out of the camera's field of view.\n\n6. If the objects are reflecting, the \"fade-in\" and fade-out\" are caused by changes in attitude of decidedly non-spherical objects, as in Answer 1 above. On the other hand, if they are light sources, the variation could be associated with their maneuvering activity.\n\n7. and 8. As explained in the opening paragraph, the objects are only small bright spots on the film. When they dim sufficiently, they become invisible; no dark spots can be identified with these objects. The only visible motion in any single frame is with respect to the camera's field of view. Slow motion examination of successive frames suggests a general flight pattern of sweeping skew curves in space. This concept of object motions produces no sharp breaks in their apparent flight paths, and also makes it practically impossible to detect rapid accelerations or decelerations along these paths.\n\n9. In the sequences during which the camera was held motionless, to record the angular velocity of a single object, it is possible to measure this velocity. Three such passes can be seen. The first was incomplete, picking up the object near the center of the frame. The second and third passes were complete, from one edge of the field of view to the other.\n\nFigure I shows the actual tracings of the object from frame to frame for both Passes No. 2 and No. 3. The distance from lens to screen was 100 inches. The focal length of the projection lens was 2 inches. The enlargement of Figure I over the actual negative size is therefore 50 times. Camera and projector errors, plus small hand-held camera motions, probably account for the deviations from a straight line path. The average calculated angular velocity for both paths is about 2.1 degrees per second. Detailed computations are given in Appendix I.\n\n10a. A slow motion viewing, plus single frame position plots, suggest that the objects are maneuvering in definite formations. However, successive identical positions are not indicated when position plots from any two frames in a sequence are superimposed. For instance, the first sequence of movement lasts 160 frames or 10 seconds. During the first seven seconds, clear plots for all 10 objects can be made. These plots were made at half second intervals or 8 frames apart.\n\n10b. Figure II represents a possible set of flight paths for this interval, derived as explained in Appendix II. It should be remembered that Figure II very likely contains some indeterminate and non-constant camera motion, both horizontal and vertical, caused by tracking the formations. This means that the directions and curvatures as shown may be appreciably different from what a stationary camera would have recorded. However, Figure II does help visualize"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the type of motion shown by the objects, moving from right to left, or generally from east to west as the camera was situated. This agrees with Figure I, showing the single object reversing course from left to right, or west to east.\n\n10c and d. The relative positions of these objects in the first sequence follow a definite formation plan of either three pairs, a trio, and a single, or perhaps five pairs (if one of the trio and the single are actually a nearby pair). It appears that the objects tend to remain in position for curved path maneuvering. A possible shift in formation appears at the start of the trio paths. Otherwise, the objects definitely appear to undulate in phase in this sequence; as in the other sequences also.\n\n10e and f. Several repeated slow motion viewings of the entire film do not indicate clearly any abrupt changes in flight path of any part of the formation. At times the camera appears to lag in following the entire group, and some of the ten objects then move outside the field of view momentarily. Whether or not a particular object remains motionless for a moment depends upon the relationship of group movement to camera movement.\n\n10g. As explained in Paragraph 10f, sometimes objects may move out of the field of view. In a few instances, however, certain objects may change in brightness considerably, and practically appear or disappear well within the field of view. In the second sequence, which lasts about 14 seconds, the lower two pairs in Figure II flare up suddenly near the center of the field of view, being invisible a moment before. As they flare up, they appear to curve more rapidly to the left and upwards than the center trio. Reversing this sequence in slow motion shows that these four objects were faintly visible just before they disappeared at about the same position.\n\nA tabulation of flight sequences and durations is listed in Appendix III.\n\nCONCLUSIONS\n\n1. Subject motion picture film apparently records the motions of ten unknown aerial objects, all alike in observed characteristics of movement and size.\n\n2. The exact nature of these objects cannot be determined, because they are visible only as small spots of light. It can be deduced, however, that they are either non-spherical in shape and similar to bright metal in reflectance, or else variably self-luminous by some means.\n\n3. There is apparently a coordination of movement to some extent among these objects. They seem to move in formations which are probably three-dimensional in arrangement. The largest angular size of the entire group is on the order of 6 to 8 degrees of arc.\n\n4. The movements of these objects suggest flight paths consisting of skew curves in space. In one instance a single object changed course and followed a nearly straight line path with reasonable uniformity of motion at an angular velocity of about 2.1 degrees. During this straight line flight it remained reasonably uniform in brightness."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5. It would probably be extremely difficult to imitate this photography for fraudulent purposes."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix I\n\nCalculation of Angular Velocity of Single Aerial Object:\n\nPass No. 2: 48 spot positions are plotted, representing an elapsed time interval of 47 frames. At 16 frames per second, this gives:\n\n47/16 = 3.0 seconds elapsed time\n\nThe measured distance on the screen is 15.1 inches. This gives approximately 15.1/3.0 or 5.0 inches per second for image velocity on the screen.\n\nPass No. 3: 44 spot positions are plotted, for 43 frames of elapsed time. This time is 43/16 = 2.7 seconds.\n\nThe distance travelled is 15.7 inches. This gives 15.7/2.7 = 5.8 inches per second on the screen. Average of these 2 values is 5.4 inches per second; with an estimated precision of ±15 per cent.\n\nConversion to Angular Velocity:\n\nDistance from projector lens to screen = 100 inches\nFocal length of projector lens = 2 inches\nEnlargement of film on screen = 50 times\nImage velocity on film = 5.4/50 = .11 inches per second\n\nFocal length of camera taking lens = 3 inches\n\nIt is adequately precise to divide the image velocity by the focal length to get the angular velocity in radians per second, then to convert to degrees. We have:\n\nAngular velocity = .11 x 57.3 / 3 = 2.1 degrees per second\n\nThe precision of this value is also conservatively set at ±15% or ±0.3 degrees per second."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix II\n\nPlotting a Set of Flight Paths from Single Frame Position Plots, with no Reference Points\n\n1. In a case like this, it would be highly desirable if the movement of these objects could be recorded with a stationary motion picture camera. Position plots could be superimposed by observing proper registery of frame edges to indicate the speed and direction of object flight paths.\n\n2. However, it apparently was necessary in this case to follow the formation of objects, to keep them all in view. Therefore no position guide for registering the position plots is available, since no fixed points appear in the sky. Other principles must be used instead.\n\n3. It is stated that the general drift of the entire formation was to the west. A later sequence shows a single object, which had reversed course, moving from left to right in the camera's view. It can therefore be supposed that plotted paths should show a drift from right to left.\n\n4. This is one guide to be used. Another is that position plots should be superimposed without any rotation, since the frames were plotted without rotation. This assumes that the camera was not rotated; but merely moved in combined horizontal and vertical motions.\n\n5. Another general guide is that most of the objects should appear to move in smooth, continuous paths. Several plots, at least 4, should be superimposed on a viewing table, and should be shifted until all or nearly all paths are smooth and show reasonably uniform motion. This compound plot can be transferred to a single sheet, and further plots can be added in the same manner.\n\n6. Figure II was prepared in just this way, using the same 50 diameter enlargement as in Figure I. It will be noted that the final positions of two objects in the central trio are missing. They became so faint that they were lost; no further plotting of this sequence was tried."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix III\n\nSequence Number | Frame Start | Number Finish | Number of Frames | Approx time of Seq in Seconds | Sky Color\n1 | 0 | 160 | 160 | 10 | Light\n2 | 161 | 386 | 225 | 14 | Light\n3 | 387 | 700 | 313 | 19 1/2 | Dark\n4 | 700 | 970 | 270 | 17 | Dark\n5 | 970 | 1010 | 40 | 2 1/2 | Dark\n6 | 1010 | 1080 | 70 | 4 1/2 | Dark\n7 | 1080 | 1140 | 60 | 4 | Dark"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE II Plot of first sequence, 7 second duration"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE I Plot of single object, stationary camera"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TREMONTON 9A50 1\n\nTHE UTAH PICTURES\n\nMAJOR DONALD E. KEYHOE, U.S. MARINE CORPS,RET., IN A TELEGRAM SENT TO BRIGADIER GENERAL SORY SMITH AND TO SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE HAROLD E. TALBOTT, TOLD THIS STORY: ON JULY 2, 1952, NAVY WARRANT OFFICER DELBERT C. NEWHOUSE WAS EN ROUTE TO PORTLAND, OREGON. AT 1:10 A.M., HE WAS AT A POINT ON HIGHWAY 30, SEVEN MILES NORTH OF TREMONTON, UTAH, SUDDENLY, HE SAW \"A GROUP OF ROUND, EXTREMELY BRIGHT OBJECTS MOVING WEST AT A VERY HIGH SPEED...\"\n\n\"AS A NAVAL AVIATION PHOTOGRAPHER, NEWHOUSE KNEW THEY WERE NOT AIRCRAFT. USING A BELL AND HOWELL AUTO MASTER MOVIE CAMERA WITH A THREE INCH TELEFOTO LENS, HE SHOT ABOUT 40 FEET OF FILM...\"\n\n\"NEAR THE END, ONE OF THE OBJECTS REVERSED ITS COURSE AND LEFT THE FORMATION...\"\n\n\"THE PICTURES WERE STUDIED FOR MONTHS BY THE AIR FORCE PHOTO-RECONNAISSANCE LABORATORY AT DAYTON, AND LATER BY THE NAVY PHOTO-INTERPRETATION CENTER AT WASHINGTON:\"\n\n\"THE LABORATORIES CAME TO THESE CONCLUSIONS:\"\n\n1. THE AVERAGE SPEED OF THE UNKNOWN OBJECTS WAS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 653 AND 980 M.P.H.\n2. ALL THE OBJECTS APPEARED ROUND, OF THE SAME SIZE, AND THEY GAVE OFF A BLUEISH WHITE GLOW OF VERY HIGH INTENSITY.\n3. THE OBJECTS SEEMED TO BE MANEUVERING IN A CIRCULAR OR ELIPTICAL PATTERN WITHIN THE GROUP AT VERY HIGH SPEEDS.\n4. BECAUSE OF THESE HIGH SPEEDS, THE OBJECTS OBVIOUSLY COULD NOT BE BALLOONS OR BIRDS.\n5. THEY WERE NOT ANY KNOWN TYPE OF AIRCRAFT.\n\n6. THE SIGHTING COULD NOT BE EXPLAINED BY ANY CONVENTIONAL ANSWER...\""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"THE AIR FORCE HAD...PLANNED TO SHOW THIS FILM TO THE PRESS AND TO MAKE A STATEMENT TO THE PUBLIC, THIS STATEMENT WOULD REVEAL THE OFFICIAL ANALYSIS...\"\n\"WHEN THE COMBINED AIR FORCE AND NAVY ANALYSIS SHOWED THAT THE SAUCERS COULD NOT BE ANY CONVENTIONAL OBJECTS, AIR FORCE OFFICIALS DISAGREED AS TO WHAT SHOULD BE TOLD THE PUBLIC. THE PLAN FOR A PUBLIC DISCLOSURE WAS THEN KILLED...\"\nPREPARE FOR A PRESS SHOWING AND PUBLIC STATEMENT CONCERNING THE UTAH PICTURES! YES, SIR!\nTHERE WILL BE NO PRESS SHOWING. CANCEL PLANS... YES, SIR.\nMAJOR KEYHOE, WHO HAD BEEN GIVEN THE AIR FORCE DATA ON THE UTAH PICTURES BEFORE THE OFFICIALS WHO FAVORED A PUBLIC STATEMENT HAD BEEN OVERRULED, THEN DECIDED TO INCLUDE THIS INFORMATION IN HIS BOOK, \"FLYING SAUCERS FROM OUTER SPACE\"...*\nIN A PRESS RELEASE, DATED SEPT. 28, 1953, 4 P.M., HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY ANNOUNCED...\nTHE AIR FORCE HAS SECRET MOTION PICTURES OF FLYING SAUCERS WHICH PROVE THEY ARE INTERPLANETARY CRAFT, MAJOR DONALD E. KEYHOE, A RETIRED MARINE CORPS OFFICER...DECLARED TODAY. HIS CLAIM, HE SAID, IS BACKED BY OFFICIAL AIR FORCE DOCUMENTS CONTAINED IN HIS FORTHCOMING BOOK...*\n*HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY, N.Y., PUBLISHERS.—EDS.\n*ACTUAL QUOTE FROM H.H.& CO. RELEASE.—EDS.\nTHE CAT WAS OUT OF THE BAG. IN IMMEDIATE RETALIATION, THE OFFICE OF AIR FORCE INFORMATION ISSUED A PRESS RELEASE ON SEPT. 29, 1953...\nTHE TREMOTON PICTURES WERE RETURNED TO WARRANT OFFICER NEWHOUSE. THEY WERE OF NO IMPORTANCE!\nTHIS WAS THE REASON FOR MAJOR KEYHOE'S TELEGRAM, HE SAID:\nON SEPT. 29, YOUR OFFICE PUBLICLY IMPLIED THAT I MISREPRESENTED THE AIR FORCE ANALYSIS OF THE UTAH FLYING SAUCER PICTURES IN MY BOOK...IF THIS IS TRUE, THEN AS A RETIRED MARINE CORPS OFFICER, I SHOULD BE SUBJECTED TO DISCIPLINARY ACTION...IF MY CLAIMS ARE INCORRECT, THEN I RESPECTFULLY SUGGEST THAT...I BE COURT-MARTIALED FOR MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS ABOUT THE AIR FORCE ANALYSIS.*\n*ACTUAL QUOTE—EDS.\nTHE TELEGRAM WAS DATED OCT. 2, 1953. MAJOR KEYHOE WAS NEVER BROUGHT UP FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION.\nWASN'T THE UTAH FILM RETURNED TO W. O. NEWHOUSE MERELY A POOR COPY?\nWEREN'T THERE MANY COPIES MADE AND STUDIED?\nWHERE IS THE ORIGINAL?\nWHAT NEWSPAPER CHAIN HAS BEEN DENIED A SHOWING WITH THE CLAIM THAT ALL COPIES WERE BURNED UP FROM OVERUSE?\n21"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This CASE Includes A roll of Motion picture F.Im. 7-3745-345"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"End of Tremonton, Wtah case 1377 7/2/53"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n1D-OSI 24-0-257 SPOT INTELLIGENCE REPORT\n\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) Reporting of Information on\nUnconventional Aircraft\nSPECIAL INQUIRY\n\nTO: Director of Special Investigations\nHeadquarters, USAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nSYNOPSIS:\n\nOn 2 July 1952, Captain ROBERT E. METCALF, 1001 Massachusetts Avenue, Lexington, Massachusetts, reported that he and two other persons observed one unidentified airborne object between 0730 and 0740 hours, EDT, on 1 July 1952. No activity or condition developed that accounts for sighting.\n\nDETAILS:\n\nAt approximately 2000 hours, 2 July 1952, Captain ROBERT E. METCALF, 1001 Massachusetts Avenue, Lexington, Massachusetts, reported the observation of one unidentified airborne object between 0730 and 0740 hours on 1 July 1952 to Special Agent LESLIE S. HUBBARD. On 3 July 1952, Captain METCALF was interviewed by Special Agent JULIUS B. POPPINGA, and furnished the following information:\n\na. Description of object: One (1) milky white object, shaped like an \"elongated oval\" but \"fatter than a cigar\", about 100 feet in length or slightly larger than a four-engine airliner, having indistinct outlines at the rear resembling either a very short exhaust or a blurred tail section, with a narrow ridge along the top side, but without wings or any clear aerodynamic features. Object produced no sound, and left no vapor trail or exhaust other than described above. Speed was estimated to be approximately that of jet aircraft, but observer believed the object \"hung\" in mid-air for a few seconds on two occasions and then proceeded."} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1D-OSI 24-0-257\n\nFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe course of the object was otherwise without variation in altitude or direction, proceeding at an estimated 40,000 feet toward the southwest.\n\nb. Object was sighted by Captain METCALF at 0730 hours EDT, 1 July 1952, and was observed by him for ten (10) minutes.\n\nc. Sighting was by visual observation through smoked glasses, with no optical or electronic aids.\n\nd. Observer sighted object while standing in the vicinity of Hangar \"B\" at Laurence G. Hanscom Field, Bedford, Massachusetts.\n\ne. Identifying information on observer: Captain ROBERT E. METCALF, AO 563825, Petroleum Officer, 6520th Supply Squadron, 6520th Test Support Wing, Laurence G. Hanscom Field, Bedford, Massachusetts, is 33 years of age, and has served six years of active duty and five years of reserve duty with the USAF. Captain METCALF is not rated, but appeared thoroughly familiar with all types of aircraft and advised that he has never seen a comparable object.\n\nf. Weather conditions: METCALF advised that at the time of the sighting the sky was perfectly clear, and a slight northeast wind was blowing. Weather conditions at 0730 hours EDT 1 July 1952 were reported by the U. S. Weather Department, Logan International Airport, Boston, Massachusetts, for the Boston area as follows: \"Thin scattered clouds at 26,000 feet, northwest wind at 6 miles per hour, visibility 12 miles, temperature 60 degrees.\"\n\ng. No activity or condition is known that might account for the sightings. However, METCALF stated that his attention was first drawn to the object while he watched the vapor trails of what appeared to be two (2) jet aircraft proceeding in a southeast direction. The object described intersected the jet vapor trails and continued to the southwest.\n\nh. No physical evidence exists, and no interception action was taken. METCALF advised however, that he proceeded to the base operations tower after having observed the object for a few minutes, and that attempts to locate the object with a pair of #750 Navy-type binoculars from that vantage point resulted negatively.\n\ni. Manner of disappearance: METCALF advised that he again saw the object while on the way to the tower, but that its distance had increased considerably, and that from the tower it was no longer visible, with or without binoculars.\n\nMETCALF further advised that upon sighting the object he called it to the attention of M Sgt JAMES STINER, AF 15120440, and M Sgt JOSEPH R. BOSH, AF 11031457, both of 6520th Air Police Squadron, Hanscom Field. On"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1D-OSI 24-0-257\n\nFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n3 July 1952, STINER and BOSH were separately interviewed by Special Agent JULIUS B. POPPINGA. Time, location, method of sighting, weather conditions, direction of flight, and disappearance were identical to that reported by METCALF. Several differences will be noted, however, relative to the description of the object.\n\nj. STINER described the object as resembling a small blimp, having a blunt front, cigar-shaped, and similar to an \"airplane without wings or tail assembly.\" STINER noticed no exhaust or noise, and no changes of altitude or course. Length of the object was estimated as two to three hundred feet, and no tail features, wings, or aerodynamic features of any kind were observed. STINER estimated the altitude of the object to be about 20,000 feet. He described its forward motion to be irregular, first barely moving, and then proceeding at \"about the speed of a C-47.\"\n\nk. BOSH advised that he could not estimate the size of the object, but described it as oval-shaped, and believed that it was trailed by two distinct vapor trails, similar to that associated with conventional aircraft at very great altitudes. BOSH noticed no variation in the speed, altitude, or line of flight, and estimated the speed to be about 130 miles per hour and the altitude to be \"over 30,000 feet.\" BOSH noticed no noise, and stated that he could distinguish no wing or tail surfaces. He added that while both STINER and METCALF used sun glasses while observing the objects, he did not, and that his vision was impaired by the brightness of the sky and the sun.\n\nl. Identifying information on STINER and BOSH: M Sgt STINER is 50 years of age, and has served 19 years with the ground forces and 4 years with the Air Force. He has never been on an air crew, and claims no special knowledge pertaining to aircraft, but advised that he has never observed an airplane in flight, at any angle, resembling the object described, and was aware of no known object which might account for it. M Sgt BOSH is 32 years of age, and has served 11 years with the Air Force, primarily in inspection and investigation work. BOSH advised he has done considerable reading in relation to unconventional aircraft, but could not account for the object described in any way.\n\nm. This sighting appears to be a verification and one and the same as sighting observed by ERWIN W. NELSON between 0731 and 0734 hours EDT on 1 July 1952 and reported in 1st District OSI file 24-0-256 on 3 July 1952.\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\n3\n\nFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1D-OSI 24-0-257\n\nFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nACTION:\n\nNo further action is contemplated by this District Office. Two (2) copies of this report will be forwarded to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Attention: MCIS.\n\nROBERT S. JONES\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDistrict Commander\n\ncc: CG, AMC (dup)\n\nFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20. Reference CIRVIS report 27231E July submitted by Wright-Patterson Flight Service Center. An unidentified object described as about the size of a house lamp and more brilliant than a star, at an altitude of about [illegible] feet, was sighted at an unknown time due east of Burlington, Ohio. The object hovered for 10 minutes then moved south at a terrific rate of speed.\n\n21. Weather unknown.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\n22. Witness unknown.\n\n23. Air traffic unknown.\n\n24. Reference CIRVIS report 030442Z July submitted by March Flight Service Center. An extremely bright object was observed for period of several minutes at 1945P on 2 July 1952. The observer plotted object with a protractor and estimated it to be 34 to 38 degrees above the horizon at an angle of 175 degrees. Object broke up into 6 or 8 pieces which appeared to descend toward the ground at a high rate of speed.\n\n25. Weather unknown.\n\n26. Witness: Mr. Sublette, member Los Angeles Police Department. Residence address: 1924 Lincoln Avenue, Highland Park, California. Telephone not given.\n\n27. Air traffic information not given.\n\n28. Comments of Preparing Officer:\n\na. The sighting reports listed above are unconfirmed, incomplete, and, in some cases, erroneously submitted. However, in the interest of maintaining continuity of flow of sighting reports through the many concerned agencies, it was considered desirable to submit all for information purposes. The evident lack of value of incomplete reports has been brought to the attention of CAA and Flight Service units and, within the Flight Service structure, special training programs have been instituted which should preclude future relay errors.\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS. DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"a5f03874dde9ca36","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\n2. [illegible]\n\n3. [illegible]\n\n5b. [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n\n6. [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n\n7. [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n\n8. [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n\n9. [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n\nRECEIVED\nHQ MATS\n20 AUG 1952 15 31\n\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS\nDECLASSIFIED DOD DIR 5200.10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nDECLASSIFIED Authority NND 923007"} {"doc_id":"a5fe6792217725af","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nApproved for Release 2026\nSIGNATURE RECORD AND COVER SHEET\n\nA\n\nDOCUMENT DESCRIPTION | REGISTRY\nSOURCE | CIA CONTROL NO.\nDOC. NO. | DATE DOCUMENT RECEIVED\nDOC. DATE | LOGGED BY\nCOPY NO.\nNUMBER OF PAGES\nNUMBER OF ATTACHMENTS\n\nATTENTION: This form will be placed on top of and attached to each Top Secret document received by the Central Intelligence Agency or classified Top Secret within the CIA and will remain attached to the document until such time as it is downgraded, destroyed, or transmitted outside of CIA. Access to Top Secret matter is limited to Top Secret Control personnel and those individuals whose official duties relate to the matter. Top Secret Control Officers who receive and/or release the attached Top Secret material will sign this form and indicate period of custody in the left-hand columns provided. Each individual who sees the Top Secret document will sign and indicate the date of handling in the right-hand columns.\n\nREFERRED TO | RECEIVED | RELEASED | SEEN BY\nOFFICE | SIGNATURE | DATE | TIME | DATE | TIME | SIGNATURE AND OFFICE | DATE\n\nOSI | 18 Oct 55 | 1150\nOSI/ASD | 18 Oct | 1150 | 1250\n| 19 Oct 55\n| 19 Oct 55\n| 19 Oct 55\n| 24 Oct | 1520 | 25 Oct 55\n| 26 Oct 55\n| 8 Nov 55\n| 30 Dec 55\n| APR 3 1956\n\nNOTICE OF DETACHMENT: When this form is detached from Top Secret material it shall be completed in the appropriate spaces below and transmitted to Central Top Secret Control for record.\n\nDOWNGRADED | DESTROYED | DISPATCHED (OUTSIDE CIA)\nTO | BY (Signature) | TO\nBY (Signature) | WITNESSED BY (Signature) | BY (Signature)\nDATE | DATE | OFFICE | DATE\n\nFORM NO. 26 USE PREVIOUS EDITIONS. 1 APR 55 TOP SECRET (40)"} {"doc_id":"a5fe6792217725af","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"a5fe6792217725af","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Central Intelligence\n\nSUBJECT : Flying Saucers or Unconventional Aircraft\n\n1. A dispatch from Prague, C-103, dated 13 October 1955, reported the sighting of two flying saucers or disc-like unconventional aircraft. An interview with Mr. Efron, one of the four observers of these aircraft, failed to confirm in several respects the information given in the dispatch.\n\n2. His observations were limited to sighting two lights which initially arose vertically and then approached the train and passed over head at a high altitude. He failed to observe the body of the object and had no feeling as to whether it was round, disc-like or even square. His only reason for describing an unconventional nature to the object was that it rose vertically and appeared to glide in a manner unlike any aircraft he had previously seen. However, in view of the fact that it was dusk, that he thought the aircraft quite high (9000 feet) and that his observations were undoubtedly conditioned by Senator Russell's remarks that he had seen a flying saucer, too much confidence cannot be given to his observation. The fact that no noise was heard may also have influenced his opinion on the unconventional characteristic of the object. He also failed to confirm the excitement of the train official following the incident. It is my belief that Efron's testimony alone could not confirm the existence of any unconventional aircraft. However, he was not in a position to have as good a look as were the other members of the party. A very careful interrogation of the other members is in order.\n\n3. Two years ago, Dr. Robertson headed a group which investigated U.S. sightings of flying saucers. This group was able to explain almost all the sightings and reached the conclusion that these phenomena represented no threat to the security of the U.S. Even if the present sightings"} {"doc_id":"a5fe6792217725af","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUBJECT: Flying Saucers or Unconventional Aircraft\n\nin Russia are confirmed, it should not be assumed that these unconventional aircraft have actually been flying around the U.S. and were the source of U.S. public speculation.\n\n4. The USAF is supporting a Project \"Y\" at Avro Aircraft Ltd. in Canada for the development of unconventional saucer-like aircraft. However, this development is still in the early research and development stages with three or more years being required before the production of a first prototype. If the development proves out successful, the calculations indicate that such an aircraft might have a very high ceiling (up to 100,000 feet) with speeds up to 1500 miles per hour, a range of 700 miles and rate of climb of 120,000 feet a minute. A vertical take-off characteristic would, of course, be extremely valuable. Project Y is being directed by John Frost. Mr. Frost is reported to have gotten his original idea for the flying machine from a group of Germans just after World War II. The Soviets may also have obtained information from this German group. (It is suggested that you ask General Samford to report on the progress of the Air Force project at the IAC meeting.)\n\nHERBERT SCOVILLE, JR.\nAssistant Director\nScientific Intelligence\n\ncc: DD/I\n\nDISTRIBUTION\nOrig & 1 - fwd\n1 - DD/I\n2 - AD/SI\n2 - ASD/SI\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 917033\n\nSECRET\n\nEndosures to R/S -S 02378 of 3-9-49\n\nIncident Summary Sheets\n\n173 - 233 Incl.\n\nSECRET\nEXHIBIT #529 Secret R/S S-02378 of 3-9-49 Hqd Air Material Command Dayton\nSubject: Transmittal of Incident Summary Sheets 173 thru 233.\nREPORT FILED M-5 AIRCRAFT - UNIDENTIFIED\nJONES\n2-27-50\nSECRET\n22 MAR 1949\n5-20300"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\n\nIncident # 173\n\n1. Date of Observation 18 September 1948.\n2. Time of Observation 1700 Central Standard Time\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted 3 miles SE of Shreveport, La.\n4. Observer's Position: ground\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer George Ahrens, 256 Columbia Ave., Shreveport, La.\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies\n7. Attention Attracted to Object(s) while scanning sky with binoculars.\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted one (1).\n9. Size of Object(s) Approximately 12 feet in diameter.\n10. Color of Object(s) Aluminum\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible)\n12. Nature of Luminosity\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer 2 1/2 miles laterally/.50° off horizon\n14. Speed of Object(s) 100-150 mph\n15. Time in Sight 10-15 seconds\n16. Tactics smooth horizontal flight\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) none\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) South\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) metallic\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail no clouds visible\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time 1/10 cumulus at 3500 ft, visibility 15 miles, winds 20 mph at 20,000 ft.\n22. Peculiarities Noted Object viewed with binoculars at an angle of 30-40 degrees above horizon, one object estimated to be 12 ft in diameter was seen, it appeared aluminum in color and was drifting to the south at an estimated 20,000 feet holding in transit and leaving no exhaust trail.\n23. Summary of Incident Apparent Rating: A reasonable release was made from Barksdale Field at 1900 Central Standard Time follows for 10 minutes and this of minutes was a successful failure. It is possible that this was the object sighted at 1700 CST (Object at 20,000 ft at 15-10 ft.)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)\nSECRET\n5-20300"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 174\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 1 Oct 48 (Friday morning) 0540\n2. Where Sighted: Ascension Parish, Township 10 South, Range 4 East 50 miles from New Orleans, La - ground\n3. Observer's Position: ground\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: E. B. Williams, Pres. United Land Co. 219 Dryades St., New Orleans. RA 0515\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: considerable flying experience\n6. Attention Attracted by: N/S\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): Approximately the length of a passenger aircraft\n9. Color of Object(s): white-hot\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) cone-shaped\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light) Seemed to be a white-hot cone. The object displayed no lights but seemed encased in flame. Did not light up the area.\n12. Altitude of Object: 1500 to 2000 ft (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: 3/4 miles away\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: Approx 200 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: Sufficiently long to enable Williams to make a fairly detailed observation. Approximately 10 seconds.\n16. Tactics: Straight and level flight\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): soundless\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) East\n19. Apparent Construction: \"flame\"\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): red flames\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: No clouds with wind fairly calm\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Object left no trail of any kind and did not light up the area (over)\n25. Summary of Incident: (See attached page)\n\nSECRET\n5-20300"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 174\n\nAt the time of the sighting observer was standing on a little ridge facing south in the midst of a clearing some twenty feet wide. It was too dark for hunting in the woods but was sufficiently light for him to see the time by his watch. At 0540 hours Williams was looking to the south and saw an object which resembled an ice cream cone traveling east with the larger end in front. The front end appeared white hot (like the mantels in a gasoline lantern) Toward the rear it got gradually darker red. There was no visible metal or other material and no projections of any kind, only fire. The object made absolutely no noise and left no trail of any kind. It was traveling in a straight line from west to east and did not gain or lose altitude. There was no visible means of propulsion. It appeared to be about 3/4 miles away and at an elevation of approximately 2500 feet. Mr Williams stated he was looking up at an angle of about 30° relative to the ground and observed the object for approximately 10 seconds before it was obscured by some trees. It appeared to be about the size of the average airliner and was traveling approximately 300 MPH. The larger end of the cone appeared thicker than the average airliner in through the fuselage but it was about the same length. The object displayed no lights other than it appeared encased in flame. It did not light up the area. There was no visible means of support and no control surfaces. There were no clouds and the wind was fairly calm.\n\nWilliams stated that he was a student pilot but could not get a pilot's license because of poor muscular coordination in his eyes. His color perception was normal and his hearing is excellent.\n\nInvestigative personnel stated that Mr Williams seemed a reliable level headed person. He appeared conscientious and desired no publicity stating that he did not desire his friends and business acquaintances to josh him concerning the matter."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Facing South\n\nEAST\n\nRED FLARE\n\nRED FLARE"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET Incident No. 175\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 23 Sept 1948 0945\n2. Where Sighted: Santa Fe, New Mexico\n3. Observer's Position: Ground, southwest from Plaza of Santa Fe, N. M.\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: A. Ruble Angier, 2620 Proctor St, Waco, Texas\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Neon Sign Manufacturer - own employer\n6. Attention Attracted by: A pilot since 1928 - not a hobby\nSaw object glint while watching another aircraft\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): At least 100 to 150 feet in diameter\n9. Color of Object(s): white\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible): perfectly flat in appearance - compared to dime in sky.\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?) - Sighted in daylight\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated) 25,000 to 30,000 feet\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: Stationary at time sighted\n15. Time in sight: 15 or 20 minutes\n16. Tactics: Very little movement if any noticed\n17. Sound made by Object(s): No sound determined at time of sighting\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s): Stationary - Seemed to move in a semi-circle, from S. to E. and finally to NE. May have been optical illusion.\n19. Apparent Construction: Not determined\n20. Effect on Clouds: No clouds\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of: No evidence of exhaust noticed\n22. Manner of Disappearance: Still in view when observer left\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: CAVU\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Gave the appearance of being flat\n25. Summary of Incident: (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident 175\n\nWhile watching a government plane come in for a landing at Los Alamos at 0940 hours 23 Sept 1948, witness noticed something glint in the sun. Focusing his attention on the object he perceived that it was perfectly white, neither transparent or translucent and that it had no metallic sheen. It was perfectly circular, the side visible to him being flat - much as a coin would appear when observed from a distance. It appeared no larger than a dime. Lining it up in relation to the tip of the radio tower he backed off to the north. The object appeared clear out of the picture in relation to the tower. Using this perspective he judged the altitude to be approximately 30,000 ft. At this altitude the object would necessarily be some 100 to 150 feet in size in order to be visible at all. There were no projections, air-trails, or exhaust of any kind. He called the object to the attention of Mr Fairchild, his companion. Both men then went into a building transacted their business and at the end of eight minutes they went outside and perceived the object in approximately the same position. From the time Angier first saw the object to his last observation was approximately 15 to 20 minutes.\n\nAGENTS NOTE: Mr Angier is approximately 50 years of age, well settled and conducts his own business. He is an experienced pilot, comes from a middle-class family, is a little above average in intelligence and is a good conversationalist. He told a straight-forward story and did not contradict himself. He appeared honest in his convictions in his belief that he saw an unconventional aircraft. He was convinced that the object was not a weather balloon since he is familiar with weather balloons."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET Incident No. 175a\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 23 Sept 48 0930\n2. Where Sighted: Santa Fe, N. M.\n3. Observer's Position: ground\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Mr John C. Fairchild\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Building Superintendent\ndrawing, mechanical inclinations also woodworking & photography\n6. Attention Attracted by: Glint of light\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): 150 - 200 feet estimated size\n9. Color of Object(s): bright silvery object\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible): oblong egg shape\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?) saw just a silver streak\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated) 30,000 feet\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: 7 miles\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: 700 or 800 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: Straight course\n17. Sound made by Object(s): None\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s): Northeast - Southwest\n19. Apparent Construction: Unknown\n20. Effect on Clouds: Clear sky\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of: Bluish appearance to rear\n22. Manner of Disappearance: Faded from view\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: CAVU\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Sort of a sunflower shape at the end of object seemed to be apart from object but close on its tail\n25. Summary of Incident: (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 175a\n\nStatement of Mr John C. Fairchild does not tally with that of A. Ruble Angier. See Incident 175\n\nMr Fairchild saw a bright silvery oblong or egg-shaped object which appeared to have a speed of 700 to 800 MPH and which seemed to have a sort of sunflower shape at the end of it but apart from the object and close on its tail. He perceived a bluish appearance to rear of the object which could have been exhaust. To him the object appeared silvery instead of white and oblong rather than round. Mr Angier thought the object remained stationary. However the discrepancy in time could have accounted for this. Apparently Mr Fairchild observed the object some 15 minutes before Mr Angier observed it. Also it would seem that he watched it for a greater length of time in that he mentions that it faded from view whereas Mr Angier stated that it was still in view when he left."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET Incident No. 176\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 23 Sept 48 Approx 1200\n2. Where Sighted: Castro's Ranch - 4 miles due east of San Pablo, Calif and 4.1 miles South of Pinole, Calif\n3. Observer's Position: ground\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Horace S. Makins, Col., U. S. Army (REF) 1024 Esther Drive, Walnut Creek, Calif.\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Retired army colonel formerly a veterinarian presently employed as a Meat Inspector by Calif State Dept of Agr.\n6. Attention Attracted by: Was observing an Army bomber when he observed an unknown object flying above the bomber\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): About the size of a 4-engine bomber - longer than wide\n9. Color of Object(s): Main part of body translucent and of a dirty gray color\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible): undulating with center portion appearing spherical having the shape and depth similar to a globe - like amoeba\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?) Did not reflect or give off light of any type\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated) Over a mile\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: Over a mile directly above\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: very fast speed\n15. Time in Sight: Could not estimate\n16. Tactics: Appendages seemed to flap or oscillate while center portion remained stable\n17. Sound made by Object(s): No noise\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s): Nearly due east\n19. Apparent Construction: Thought main part of object appeared like canvas\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): No evidence of exhaust\n22. Manner of Disappearance: just disappeared from sight in a very short time\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S Day was rather dull and hazy - there were very few clouds in the sky at the time.\n24. Peculiarities Noted: See drawing attached\n25. Summary of Incident: (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 176\n\nWhile watching an Army bomber which was flying rather low, Col Eakins observed above and going nearly due east an unknown object. He asked his companion, Mr Bentham, if he were seeing things. Bentham substantiated the fact that there was an object above the bomber. Col Eakins described the object as being approximately the size of a large four-engined bomber. It appeared undulating in shape resembling an ameeba (See sketch inclosed). The object appeared to have 3 appendages forward and 2 aft which seemed to be flapping or oscillating while the center portion remained stable. Col Eakins thought it was a mile or more above the bomber. In the center of the object there appeared a round, dark circle which, in Col Eakins' opinion, seemed to be above the main body of the object. Further it appeared that the main part of the object was translucent and of a dirty gray color and that the dark, circular portion appeared to grow more dense in color as it approached the center. From this observation Col Eakins concluded that the dark portion was spherical having the shape and depth of a globe. He further stated that the main part of the object appeared like canvas. He could not estimate the speed of the object but said it was traveling at a far greater speed than the bomber or anything else he had ever seen. There was no noise of any type and no evidence of exhaust or trail. The object did not reflect or give off light of any type.\n\nCol Eakins prior to his retirement in 1948 was on duty in Panama as a veterinarian with the Army mission. He retired because of personal reasons and not because of physical defects. However, Col Eakins is far-sighted and has to wear glasses. Neighbors and business associates established the fact that he is highly thought of and is reliable in all his dealings and associations with them. He impressed the investigator as being stable, intelligent and above average in common sense."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 176a\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 23 Sept 45 Approx 1230\n2. Where Sighted: Castro's Ranch - 4 miles due east of San Pablo, Calif & 4.1 miles south of Pinole, Calif.\n3. Observer's Position: ground (i.e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Mr Sylvester Bentham, 2655 Dam Road Richmond, Calif.\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: retired butcher\n6. Attention Attracted by: Col Eakins calling his attention to the object\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): Appeared from observer's viewpoint to be 2 inches by 1 inch by 1 inch.\n9. Color of Object(s): Buff or gray in color\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) rectangular outline with sharp corners (See attached drawing)\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?) N/S\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated) Very high\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: faster than any plane he had ever seen\n15. Time in Sight: At least 3 minutes\n16. Tactics: horizontal flight\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): no noise\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) northwest then turned north\n19. Apparent Construction: Seemed to be covered with a translucent material\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of: Left no exhaust or trail\n22. Manner of Disappearance: flew out of sight gradually fading from view.\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Seemed like a vegetable crate flying thru the air\n25. Summary of Incident: (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident 176\n\nOn 23 Sept 1945 Mr Sylvester Bentham was talking to Col Eakins when the Colonel called Bentham's attention to a single object in the sky. Object first appeared in the northeast and was moving faster than any airplane that Bentham had ever seen. Object appeared very high. Both Eakins and Bentham watched it for at least 3 minutes. It moved toward the northwest in a straight line at a constant speed finally turning to the North and faded from view.\nTo Bentham the object appeared to have a regular rectangular outline with sharp corners. It was buff or gray in color with several darker vertical lines like ribs. (See drawing attached.) Object appeared like a \"vegetable crate\" flying thru the air and seemed to be covered with a translucent material. It made no noise and left no exhaust or trail. Apparent size was approximately 2 inches by 1 inch by 1 inch.\n\nMr Bentham's description as to the shape, direction and overall appearance of this object is in direct contradiction with statements made by Col Horace Eakins.\n\nMr Bentham further stated that neither he nor Col Eakins were wearing glasses at the time and that he wears glasses only for reading. Mr. Bentham is 70 years of age. He is a retired butcher."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 177\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 5 Sept 45 between 3:00 and 3:30 P.M.\n2. Where Sighted: Kentwood, La.\n3. Observer's Position: ground (i.e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Mrs Elma McDaniel & daughter Mildred\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: N/S\n6. Attention Attracted by: Tangipahoa, La.\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: Object not seen\n8. Size of Object(s): N/S\n9. Color of Object(s): N/S\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) N/S\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?) N/S\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated) very high altitude\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: terrific\n15. Time in Sight: Object not seen\n16. Tactics: N/S\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): Unlike any made by known aircraft\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) west\n19. Apparent Construction: N/S\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of: N/S\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Unusual sound\n25. Summary of Incident: Object was not perceived as it was too high and going (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident 177\n\nat a terrific rate of speed. Witness states she has heard many planes but could not describe the sound.\n\nSubsequent investigation of this incident reveals that according to neighbors Mrs McDaniel possesses a vivid imagination and that the daughter was inclined to take after the mother. Neither of the neighbors heard any unusual noises in the vicinity."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 178\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 1705 - 1715 EST 18 October 1948\n2. Where Sighted: Honolulu, T. H., 158° W 21° 5' N\n3. Observer's Position: Ground\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: 2737 Pacific Hgts Rd, Honolulu\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Major, USAF - rated pilot\n6. Attention Attracted by: N/S\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1 seen intermittently 4 times or 4 separate sightings\n8. Size of Object(s): Appeared 4 or 5 inches in dia from observer's viewpoint\nEstimated size: 10 to 15 feet in diameter\n9. Color of Object(s): bright silver - comparable to aluminum in aircraft\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible): round or elliptical\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S No flame or lights observed\n(Directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: 10,000 to 14,000 feet\n(estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: 200 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: Observed intermittently, one time for 4 seconds, another for 10 seconds, the longest period.\n16. Tactics: No maneuvering - observed horizontal flight\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): No sound noticed\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s): Northeast on steady course\n19. Apparent Construction: metallic\n20. Effect on Clouds: cloud formation blocked vision of observer as object was at an altitude between the two cloud formations (See attached drwg)\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): No exhaust trail\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: High broken clouds 3,500 ft; 3/10s cumulas bases 3,500 ft; 2/10 alto cumulus 14,000 ft; 5/10s cirrus est. 30,000 ft\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Was not conventional craft Visibility: 15 m.\n25. Summary of Incident:\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 178\n\nOn the afternoon of 18 October 1948 at approximately 1705 hours Maj Robert C. Drum stated that he had observed a strangely shaped glistening object in the north sector of the sky which was moving in a northeasterly direction at an estimated altitude of 10,000 ft. A stratus layer of clouds was situated above the object at an approximate altitude of 14,000 feet. The disc or discs were moving below this layer of clouds in that it was noted that on two occasions that the highest formation of clouds was at a greater altitude than the object observed and that the lower cloud formation blocked the vision of the observer thus placing the object between the two cloud formations or levels. Because of this lower broken cumulus clouds at a very low altitude which was moving in a southwesterly direction, the Major could not ascertain whether he saw the same disc four different times or four different discs. Over a period of 10 minutes the disc or discs were sighted four times. The longest period of observation was estimated as 10 seconds. The object or object(s) appeared bright silver in color and circular or elliptical in shape. No vapor or exhaust was present and no flame or lights were observed. No sound was heard. Speed was estimated as 200 MPH by using an estimated 40 MPH factor in the swirling build-up of cumulus clouds. Maj Drum compared the discs with a silver dollar slightly turned from a flat position, giving the object a disc-shape when held at arms length at a 45° angle above eye level. Maj Drum thought that the elliptical effect could have resulted from the angle at which the observer and object were located. Maj Drum stated that he was certain the object was not a conventional craft.\nOne B-26 and one B-17 and one PBM5 were flying in the vicinity during the period 0230/Z to 0330/Z.\n\nThe above sighting was also observed by Mrs. Drum (Maj Drum's wife) and by his 8-yr old daughter. Both repeated precisely the same observations stated by the Major."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\nNo. 179\n1. Date of Observation: Around Oct 1947\n2. Time of Observation: N/S\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted: San Francisco, Calif\n4. Observer's Position: ground - 1/2 mile from the great highway and playgrounds\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer: John E. Pruitt\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies: student at Maj Rockwell School of Aviation\n7. Attention Attracted to Object(s) By: felt \"something like an electric arc\".\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted: 1\n9. Size of Object(s): N/S\n10. Color of Object(s): N/S\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible): N/S\n12. Nature of Luminosity: N/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: Seemed so near he could reach out and touch it\n14. Speed of Object(s): N/S\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: N/S -\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s): N/S\n19. Apparent Construction (Of Unit Material or Substance): \"mysterious light\"\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail: N/S\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time: N/S\n22. Peculiarities Noted: Seemed to fade\n23. Summary of Incident\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observer was walking thru the Golden Gate Park, when he observed a mysterious light that illuminated the entire ocean (insofar as he could see) He felt something \"like an electric arc\" which seemed to have the power to lower his hand \"like a sack of shot\". Observer states that he is subject to bruises and where the thing seemed to have contacted him he noticed a bruise the following day that had not been there before.\n\nHe stated that he couldn't find courage to report the incident since he didn't believe anyone would believe the story. He does not wish a further investigation.\n\nNOTE: The account is very incoherent and the observer apparently not well educated. An extremely unreliable account."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 180\n1. Date and Time of Observation:\n2. Where Sighted:\n3. Observer's Position:\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Mr White Smith\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Body Work Manager, Studebaker Plant, South Bend, Indiana\n6. Attention Attracted by:\n7. Number of Object( ) Seen:\n8. Size of Object(s):\n9. Color of Object(s):\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible)\n11. Nature of Luminosity:\n(Directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object:\n(estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer:\n14. Estimated Speed of Object:\n15. Time in Sight:\n16. Tactics:\n17. Sound Made by Object(s):\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s)\n19. Apparent Construction:\n20. Effect on Clouds:\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of):\n22. Manner of Disappearance:\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting:\n24. Peculiarities Noted:\n25. Summary of Incident:\n(See attached page)\nNo report on this as yet."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Date of Observation . 4 October 1948 . Incident 181\n2. Time of Observation . Approx 1430 hours local time\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . Near Dayton, Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n4. Observer's Position . From a C-47 at 6,000 feet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . Maj G. M. Smartt, Pilot, 2349 AF Ordnance, Hamilton AF Base\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . Pilot and Ordnance Officer\n7. Attention Attracted to Object(s) by . Came close enough to cause him to duck in order to avoid collision\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . Three or four\n9. Size of Object(s) . 1-1/2 feet long and 9 inches across\n10. Color of Object(s) . silver or silvery white\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . teardrop\n12. Nature of Luminosity . N/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . Seemed fairly close\n14. Speed of Object(s) . Appeared to be traveling very fast\n15. Time in Sight . a second\n16. Tactics . Traveled in straight line in gradual descent\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . None noticed\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . East\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) . Metallic\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . No evidence of exhaust except for slight tail on tear-drop object\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . Hazy visibility for 15 miles\n22. Peculiarities Noted . Disappeared under wing of aircraft\n23. Summary of Incident . (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Objects seemed to take no definite course but flew in a general easterly direction in a gradual descent. A few came close enough to cause the pilot & co-pilot to duck as it appeared they might come thru the nose of the plane. Maj Smartt's analogy is as follows: Take about 1/2 gallon of water and dump it 200 yards in front of an approaching aircraft about 200 feet above it, with the water taking the shape of a teardrop. These objects appeared to travel in a straight line toward the aircraft and gradually descended, passing from view under the wing of the C-47. The apparent speed of these objects appeared quite high as they remained in view for only a second. They were sighted one at a time at intervals of three or four minutes.\n\nDiscrepancies noted: In first report Maj Smartt reported seeing 15 to 20 objects. Later he reports seeing three or four.\n\nIn first report he states that they pursued no definite course in that some traveled downward and some traveled upward. In last report he does not mention that any pursued an upward course.\n\nThe analogy of comparing sighting of these objects to 1/2 gallon of water dumped approximately 200 yards in front of his aircraft and that teardrop objects were formed seems to indicate an impression of a group of objects seen at one time (as first reported) and not singly at intervals of three or four minutes."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\nIncident: 182\n1. Date of Observation . 4 October 1948\n2. Time of Observation . 2220 GMT to 2310 GMT\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . 74° 40' West by 36° 42' North\n4. Observer's Position . At sea - aboard the S/S Gulfport (i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . S/S Gulfport\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . Ship's captain\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By . N/S\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1\n9. Size of Object(s) . 1/4 size of full moon\n10. Color of Object(s) . bright\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . round\n12. Nature of Luminosity . N/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer N/S\n14. Speed of Object(s) . Could not estimate\n15. Time in Sight . 50 minutes\n16. Tactics . N/S\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . southeast\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) . N/S\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . N/S\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . N/S\n22. Peculiarities Noted . N/S Had distinct bright center\n23. Summary of Incident . (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 182\n\nA bright object similar in shape to the moon but with a distinct bright center was observed by the master of the S/S \"Gulfport\". The object gradually grew darker as daylight faded. Size was that of 1/4 of a full moon. It was traveling southeast by west.\nFirst bearing: 2220 GMT - [REDACTED] 350°\n2d bearing: 2230 GMT - [REDACTED] 358° 40.18\n3d bearing: 2254 GMT - 050° 57.05\n\nDisappeared at 2310 GMT."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 183\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 15 Oct 1948 - night\n2. Where Sighted: Fukuoka Area between Enigmo Shima 33° 40' N by 132° 00' E and Fukue Shima 32° 45' N - 128° 40' East, Japan\n3. Observer's Position: Air (i.e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: N/S\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Pilot and radar observer\n6. Attention Attracted by: blip of unknown aircraft appearing on airborne radar\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1 possibly 2\n8. Size of Object(s): Could not be estimated\n9. Color of Object(s): N/S\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) Could not be determined\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S (Directed beam of light)\n12. Altitude of Object: N/S (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: 9 miles to 12,000 ft\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: Much greater than F-61.\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: Evasive\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) N/S\n19. Apparent Construction: N/S\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): No exhaust flames or trails seen\n22. Manner of Disappearance: Accelerated speed and was lost to airborne radarscope\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: Fukuoka Area: Unlimited ceiling, wind calm, visibility 5 to 6 miles with heavy cloud coverage 12 to 14,000 ft scattered.\n24. Peculiarities Noted: High rate of acceleration, vertical ascent, cognizance of F-61's location at all times.\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 183\n\nA cable from FEAF reported that an unidentified aircraft was sighted both visually and by radar by the pilot and radar observer of an F-61 on 15 Oct 48. The observers think it possible that 2 unidentified aircraft were involved in the interception. The sightings occurred at night; however, there was sufficient moonlight to permit a silhouette to be discerned although no details were observed. It was impossible to estimate the size of the aircraft or whether it was jet or propeller driven. No trails or exhaust flames were seen. The speed of this aircraft was reported as much greater than that of the F-61. It also had a high rate of acceleration and could go almost straight up or down out of radar elevation limits. The object seemed cognizant of the whereabouts of the F-61 at all times which might indicate that it carried radar equipment.\n\nThe F-61 interceptor aircraft was visible to ground radar only periodically as it flew in and out of the permanent ground return area in which search was being conducted. The only object picked up by the ground radar was the F-61. Calculated distance between interceptor (F-61) and objects in each sighting is as follows: First picked up at 14 miles and lost at 10,000 feet. ....\nThird picked up at 3 miles and lost at 10 miles.\nFour, five and six: all picked up at 9 miles and lost at 1200 ft. The last three sightings took place during a 10 minute period. In each instance the F-61 detected the object approximately 9 miles ahead, slowly closed to within 12,000 feet when the object would suddenly accelerate speed, dive and disappear from the airborne radarscope. Interceptor attempted to effect a normal pickup by diving after object but in each case was unsuccessful. After six sightings had been lost, the object was not again detected although interceptor continued to search the area until approximately 0130."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 184\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 20 Oct 1948 0600\n2. Where Sighted: Winona, Minnesota\n3. Observer's Position: ground (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Dr F. T. Benoit & Paul Zenk.\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: N/S\n6. Attention Attracted by: N/S\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): 25 feet long by 8 feet wide\n9. Color of Object(s): N/S\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) N/S\n11. Nature of Luminosity: \"sparks\" (Directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: N/S (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of object from Observer:\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: Slow\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: Broke up into numerous bright particles\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) N/S\n19. Apparent Construction: \"a bunch of sparks with a tail\"\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color(s): tail\n22. Manner of Disappearance: broke up into numerous bright particles\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S\n24. Peculiarities Noted: slow speed and the fact that it broke into numerous bright particles\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 184\n\nTaken from Minneapolis Morning Tribune\n21 October 1948\n\n\"DUCK! IT'S THOSE SAUCERS AGAIN\"\n\n... At Winona, Minn., Paul Zenk and Dr. F. T. Benoit said they saw a slowly traveling object which broke up into numerous bright particles over the town at 6 A. M. 20 Oct 48.\n\nThey said it was about 25 feet long and eight feet wide and appeared to be a \"bunch of sparks with a tail.\"\n\nNOTE: The above witnesses were not contacted from Wold Chamberlain Fld, Minneapolis, Minn. See Incident 185 for report of L. A. Hansen and Harold Oliver."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 185\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 20 October 1948 at approx 0550 hours\n2. Where Sighted: Minneapolis, Minnesota\n3. Observer's Position: ground (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Lawrence A. Hansen, 1498 N. Albert St, St Paul; Harold Oliver, 2929 13th Ave, South, Minneapolis\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: L. Hansen: teletype operator; H. Oliver: Mailman\n6. Attention Attracted by: N/S\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1 (seen at two different locations, in Minneapolis)\n8. Size of Object(s): 6 feet\n9. Color of Object(s): orange flame colored\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) round with tail 1/3 again as long as diameter of object. See attached drawings\n11. Nature of Luminosity: that of boiling sheets of flame (Directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: From 5,000 to 10,000 feet (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: 3 times that of jet aircraft\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: Seemed to follow a straight course, in a horizontal attitude losing very little altitude.\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): No sound\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) South southwest to north northeast.\n19. Apparent Construction: \"flame\"\n20. Effect on Clouds: Disappeared behind cloud banks to the north northeast\n21. Exhaust Trail Color(s): boiling sheets of flame\n22. Manner of Disappearance: Behind cloud bank to the north northeast\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Front of the object seemed blurred as if enveloped in smoke - the rest of the main body was a fiery orange color\n25. Summary of Incident: orange color (over)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 185\n\nObject was sighted from 13th and Lake Street, Minneapolis & at 7th Street and 4th Ave., Minneapolis, by Lawrence A. Hansen, teletype operator and Harold Oliver, Mailman, at approximately 0550 hours 20 October 1948. Witnesses stories seem to conform in pattern throughout. The front of the object seemed blurred as if enveloped in smoke; whereas the rest of the main body was a fiery orange color. The tail seemed to be boiling sheets of flame which carried on back at variable distances and broke off dropping vertically for a short distance and then becoming indistinguishable. The object was last seen by both witnesses entering the cloud bank to the north-northeast and disappearing."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT JUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 186\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 16 Oct 1948 1145 in the morning\n2. Where Sighted: 1 mile south and 5 miles due east of Sterling, Utah\n3. Observer's Position: ground - from mountain ridge at 9,000 ft\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Mr Fred Nash, 20 East Crystal, Salt Lake City, Utah\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Used car dealer and airplane mechanic\nMember of Latter Day Saints Church (did missionary work in Hawaii)\n6. Attention Attracted by: sound of throbbing noise\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): 9 inches long, 6 inches wide and 3 inches thick\n9. Color of Object(s): silver and black (silver stripe running down the center of the underside) See drwg.\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) similar to a flat football\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated) 500 ft overhead\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: 500 ft\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: 300 mph\n15. Time in Sight: 4 seconds or longer\n16. Tactics: horizontal flight\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): throbbing noise or steady purr\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(e) north and a little west (in general direction of Salt Lake City, Utah)\n19. Apparent Construction: N/S\n20. Effect on Clouds: no clouds in the sky\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): no visible sign of exhaust; however, an opening could be seen in the center of the object from the rear.\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: calm with no clouds in the sky\n24. Peculiarities Noted:\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 186\n\nWhile Mr Nash was hunting for deer on the morning of the 16 Oct 48 he heard a throbbing noise or steady purr. Upon looking up he saw an object resembling a flattened football some 500 feet directly overhead. The object was silver and black, a silver stripe down the center (from front to rear) and on both sides of this center the object was black. It appeared about 9 inches long, 6 inches wide and 3 inches thick and was traveling in a straight line in a northerly direction a little to the west toward Salt Lake City, Utah, at an estimated rate of 300 mph. There was no visible sign of exhaust, but from the rear an opening could be seen in the center. Mr Nash thought he saw a movement like a \"paddlewheel\". The object sounded as it it were jet propelled and seemed to be driven from the rear. Mr Nash stated the sound wasn't like that of an aircraft engine nor any type gasoline engine, although there was a definite throb or \"put\", \"put\", \"put\". He said if it were a gasoline engine, it was muffled. It made a sound of steady clicking, like a \"shirt tail flapping in the wind.\" He thought the clicking might have been a camera. The object was in sight approximately 4 seconds or longer.\n\nNOTE: Character investigation of Mr Fred Nash seems to indicate reliability. He is a Used car dealer and an airplane mechanic and is in business for himself. Nash is a member in good standing of the Latter Day Saints Church (Norman) having done foreign missionary work in Hawaii.\n\nWhile Mr Nash claims to have excellent eyesight, his estimation of distances was found to be faulty - Agent asked Nash how high he thought a certain tree was - Nash stated that it was \"over one hundred feet high.\" Agent estimated the tree to be about 40 feet high as compared to a power pole which towered above it."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 187\n1. Date and Time of Observation: Aug 19, 1948 at 1050 Eastern\n2. Where Sighted: Godman AF Base, Ky\n3. Observer's Position: Godman AF Base, Ky\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Lt Col John Waugh, Executive Officer Godman Field\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Executive Officer, Godman Field\n6. Attention Attracted by: N/S\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): N/S\n9. Color of Object(s): bright silver color - reflecting sun\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) spherical\n11. Nature of Luminosity: reflection of sunlight on silver (directed beam of light)\n12. Altitude of Object: thought to be between 30,000 & 40,000 ft (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: Approximately Moving to the Southwest at scarcely discernible speed\n15. Time in Sight: Approx 2 hours\n16. Tactics: Seemed to appear stationary\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) Southwest\n19. Apparent Construction: metallic\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): N/S\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Similarity of Altitude and Azimuth readings taken to that of Planet Venus\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 187\n\nAt 1050E, 19 Aug 1948, the Wright-Patterson Flight Service Center was notified by Lt Col John Waugh, Executive Officer, Godman AF Base, Ky, that an unidentified flying object was visible from the ground at Godman AFB. The object was ascertained to be at approximately 30,000 to 40,000 feet altitude, spherical in shape, bright silver color and giving off a bright reflection from the sun. An F-51 was dispatched from Standiford AFB, Ky, to observe the object. At 1132E a message received from Godman stated no change in elevation of the object and reported that it seemed to be moving southwest from Godman AFB at approximately 235° at an elevation of 60° from Godman AFB. The F-51 was flying at 30,000 to 35,000 ft at the time and could not locate the object. However, the object was visible from the ground with the naked eye and azimuth and elevation readings were being taken by theodolite every minute and the progress of the object was being charted. At 1219 E 19 Aug 1948 Maj Mitchel, Operations Officer at Godman AFB, notified Wright-Patterson Flight Service Center that the unidentified object was ascertained to be the planet Venus. This information was given the Commanding Officer Godman AFB by Mr Moore, Head Astrologer, University of Louisville, Ky. This assumption was verified by MCI later the same day."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET (To be filled out and retained in file) Incident: 188\n1. Date of Observation . 29 Oct 1948 . . .\n2. Time of Observation . 0812Z, 0819Z and 0916Z\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . Plotted on radarscope which placed the sighting(s) in the Hamilton River Area, and Lake Melville & Dock Area.\n4. Observer's Position . ground.\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . Radar Operator at AAF Goose Bay Labrador\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . Radar Operator\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By . Object appeared on Ground Control Approach\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . Either 3 different objects were plotted or one object appeared three times\n9. Size of Object(s) . Size of a normal craft.\n10. Color of Object(s) N/S - was not seen.\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . N/S\n12. Nature of Luminosity . N/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . 2 miles\n14. Speed of Object(s) . 25 to 30 MPH\n15. Time in Sight 1st sighting: N/S; 2 sighting: 6 minutes; 3d sighting: N/S\n16. Tactics . That of an aircraft making approach for landing.\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) 1st sighting: 170°; 2d sighting: 090°. 3d sighting: 270°\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) . N/S\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . N/S\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . N/S\n22. Peculiarities Noted . None\n23. Summary of Incident . (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Radar Sighting of Unknown Aircraft\nReported from AAF Goose Bay, Labrador\nIncident: 155\n\nSighting occurred at 0812Z 29 Oct 1948 when an unidentified object appeared on Ground Control Approach. Scope was approximately two miles from center of field on a bearing of 170°. Object traveled about two miles and disappeared. No report on altitude was determined. Estimated rate of speed was 25 to 30 MPH. GCA operator called in another operator to verify his findings. Object again appeared at 0819Z and remained in scope until 0825Z. At 0819 the object appeared on a bearing of 090° and moved slowly in a wide arc to 270° and again disappeared. Object again appeared at 0916Z east of the field on a heading of 270° about 2 miles distant from the field in perfect alignment with runway 27. It appeared to be the same as an aircraft making approach for landing. Size appeared to be the same as that of an aircraft at either extremely low or extremely high altitude. Object was very clear on GCA scope at all times. Plotting on base map indicates that object was in vicinity of Hamilton River at the time of the first spotting. The second spotting placed it in the immediate vicinity of Lake Melville and Dock Area."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 189\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 22 Sept 1945 about 1530 hours\n2. Where Sighted: Near Turner AF Base, Albany, Ga\n3. Observer's Position: Air - while acting as co-pilot (i.e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Lt Martin G. Rubisch, Eglin Auxiliary Fld #2, Eglin AF Base, Fla.\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Asst Combat Operations Officer - Co-pilot\n6. Attention Attracted by: motion of an approaching object\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): Size of a radio-controlled model plane (5 to 10 ft)\n9. Color of Object(s): metallic and shiny\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible): Undetermined\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S - apparently none (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: Between 1500 and 2000 ft (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S - 1/2 mile horizontally Approximately 500' laterally.\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: about 250 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: N/S 3 seconds\n16. Tactics: N/S Level flight\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S - Unknown\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s): 335°\n19. Apparent Construction: Metallic\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S - CAVU\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): N/S\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: CAVU\n24. Peculiarities Noted: No wings or rudder\n25. Summary of Incident: (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 189\n\nWhile acting as co-pilot on a C-47 aircraft enroute from Eglin Auxiliary Field #2 to Turner AF Base at approximately 1530 hours EST 22 Sept 45, Lt Martin G. Rubisch observed an object approaching at an angle of about 25°. The C-47 at the time was approaching Turner Field from the Southwest at an altitude of about 2,000 ft. The object appeared to be about 500 feet lower and about 2,000 to 1500 feet away and traveling at an estimated speed of 250 MPH. Lt Rubisch stated that the object appeared about the size of a radio controlled model airplane (5 to 10 ft). He could not determine the shape but said he could not observe wings or rudder. He could give no other description other than it was a metallic shiny object. No one else aboard the C-47 observed the object.\n\nAbility to determine color, speed of moving objects and size at distance was determined excellent, however the observer's Squadron Commander was interviewed and he stated that Lt Rubisch is inclined to exaggerate and is a person whose opinion is not highly regarded by associate officers.\n\nObserver was able to closely corroborate information given by him at first interrogation, though the interrogating officer was inclined to think that Lt Rubisch was given to exaggeration. It was the opinion of the interrogating officer that the observer was of normal intelligence and sound character."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\nIncident: 190\n\n1. Date of Observation. 11 October 1948\n2. Time of Observation. 1300 hours.\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted. Neubiberg AF Base, Germany\n4. Observer's Position. ground (i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer. N/S - observed by 6 military personnel of 56th Fighter Wing, Neubiberg AF Base\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies. N/S\n7. Attention Attracted to Object(s) By. N/S\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted. 1\n9. Size of Object(s). N/S - but it caused an AF-80 craft flying between object and observer to appear small in relation to the size of the object\n10. Color of Object(s). silver and very shiny.\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible). Round - but unable to determine if disc or ballist shaped\n12. Nature of Luminosity. reflected light\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer. 40,000 ft altitude\n14. Speed of Object(s). Did not appear to move but got smaller - presumably because it continued to rise\n15. Time in Sight. 45 minutes\n16. Tactics. N/S - appeared stationary\n17. Sound Made by Object(s). N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s). Appeared on a 50° heading from Neubiberg AF Base\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance). metallic\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail. Object disappeared behind a thin layer of clouds\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time. Clouds at 20,000 ft - sunlight\n22. Peculiarities Noted. None.\n23. Summary of Incident. (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 190\n\nOn 11 October 1948 at approximately 1300 hours an unidentified object was observed by six military personnel of 56th Fighter Wing Neubiberg AF Base, Neubiberg, Germany. Object was estimated to be at 40,000 ft on a 50° heading from Neubiberg AF Base and was sighted continuously for 45 minutes, gradually becoming smaller and smaller - apparently rising but no change in compass direction was noted and it was apparently not influenced by the winds aloft. The visible circumference of the object appeared round but it could not be ascertained if it were disc-shaped or ballist-shaped. It was silver in color and very shiny in the rays of the sun. An AF-80 craft flying between the object and the observers on the ground appeared small in relation to the size of the object. The estimated altitude of the jet was 25,000 ft. Object was lost to view when a thin layer of clouds (estimated to be at about 20,000 ft) passed between the object and the ground observers.\n\nHigh reliability is given the personnel sighting this object."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Date of Observation 24 October 1948\n2. Time of Observation . 1545 CST\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted 10 miles Southwest of Junction City, Kansas\n4. Observer's Position . ground position\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer Captain Glenn A. Huber, Base S-3 Officer, Ft Riley, Kansas\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . Base S-3 Officer\n7. Attention Attracted to Object(s) By . M/S\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1\n9. Size of Object(s) . M/S\n10. Color of Object(s) . \"metallic\"\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . M/S\n12. Nature of Luminosity . M/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . [REDACTED] approx 7,000 ft.\n14. Speed of Object(s) . faster than any known aircraft\n15. Time in Sight . M/S\n16. Tactics . M/S\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . M/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . First West then turned South\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) metallic\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . M/S\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . CAVU Visibility 15 miles Wind SW\n22. Peculiarities Noted\n23. Summary of Incident . (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 191\n\nAt 1545 CST 24 Oct 1948 Capt Glenn Huber, Base S-3 Officer, Ft Riley, Kansas, sighted an unidentified metallic object proceeding in a general westerly direction. The object was viewed from a ground position 10 miles from Junction City, Kansas. Altitude appeared over 7,000 feet. It was traveling with the speed of a fast aircraft. It then turned south at a speed greater than any aircraft he had ever seen. Visibility was excellent. Wind South-Southwest."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\nIncident: 192\n\n1. Date of Observation 24 Oct 1948\n2. Time of Observation . early evening around 5:45 P.M.\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . From ground on route to Fargo, N.D. near Moorhead, Minnesota while traveling on Highway 52\n4. Observer's Position . ground\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . L. O. Sanders & Wife, 9th Street, North Fargo, North Dakota\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . N/S\n7. Attention Attracted to Object(s) By . light\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1\n9. Size of Object(s) . N/S\n10. Color of Object(s) . N/S\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . N/S\n12. Nature of Luminosity . N/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . N/S\n14. Speed of Object(s) . 2 or 3 times faster than a plane\n15. Time in Sight . N/S\n16. Tactics . horizontal flight\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . East to West direction\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) \"light\"\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . N/S\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . Visibility was good\n22. Peculiarities Noted . None\n23. Summary of Incident . (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 192\n\nWhile motoring on U. S. Highway 52 in a northwestern direction on the outskirts of Moorhead, Minnesota, Mr. L. O. Sanders & wife observed a light traveling in an east to west direction. Mr. Sanders first observed the light which was to his right and pointed it out to his wife who also clearly saw it. Visibility at the time was good. Observer estimated that he could have seen a plane at the distance he estimated the object to have been. The speed was two or three times faster than a plane. Both agreed that it could not have been a meteor because of the length of time it was visible and because the direction of flight was a slight rise rather than down."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Date of Observation . Oct 48\n2. Time of Observation . Between 1200 and 1430\nIncident 193\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . 2 miles west of Hembiberg AF Base\n4. Observer's Position . Ground - at housing project 2 miles west of the base\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . N/S\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . N/S\n7. Attention Attracted to Object(s) By . N/S\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1\n9. Size of Object(s) . N/S\n10. Color of Object(s) . black\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) [REDACTED] . Round\n12. Nature of Luminosity . N/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . N/S\n14. Speed of Object(s) . Faster than F-47 type plane\n15. Time in Sight . 3 minutes\n16. Tactics . N/S\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) southwest course\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) . N/S\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . N/S\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time N/S\n22. Peculiarities Noted . N/S\n23. Summary of Incident . (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident #193\n\nOn _____ October 1945 between 1200 and 1430 hours an unidentified flying object was sighted from a housing project 2 miles west of Neubiberg Air Force Base by men of the base. When sighted the object was between observer and ___________\nThe sun was high. Altitude of the object which was pursuing a southwest course could not be determined. Visible circumference was round but overall shape and size could not be determined. The color was black. Speed could not be estimated but appeared faster than P-47 type aircraft. Object sighted for approximately 2 minutes.\n\nEvaluation: B-2"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\n\n1. Date of Observation 1040 A.M. Incident 194\n2. Time of Observation 3 Nov 1945 now identified\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted Near Andrews Fld.\n4. Observer's Position Aircraft #37821\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer Lt Com Pain, Coast Guard Pilot (original report) and by 2 fighter pilots of the 52d Fighter Wing, who verified the sighting\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies pilot\n7. Attention Attracted to Object(s) by N/S\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted 8 balloons in a cluster\n9. Size of Object(s) N/S\n10. Color of Object(s) N/S\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) round - that of balloon\n12. Nature of Luminosity N/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer N/S\nElevation: 43,000 feet\n14. Speed of Object(s) 2 MPH\n15. Time in Sight N/S\n16. Tactics N/S\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) heading of approximately 45°\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) like that of balloon\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail N/S\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time good visibility - scattered to broken base of clouds approximately 5,000 feet\n22. Peculiarities Noted Resembled an intestine that had been inflated\n23. Summary of Incident (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Original report was classified top-secret. Strategic Air Command requested original messages be destroyed.\n\nAt 1040 A. M. on 3 Nov 45 two Mustang fighters of the 52d Fighter Wing were dispatched to investigate the sighting reported by Lt Com Pain, a Coast Guard pilot, who reported the original sighting. The pilots upon reaching 22,000 feet sighted the unidentified object. They kept on climbing until they reached 37,000 feet. They estimated the object to be another five or six thousand feet above them. At this height the object resembled an intestine that had been inflated and it appeared 5 to 6 times higher than wide. Sketches were not available. Speed was estimated to be about 2 mph. Heading approximately 45°.\n\nFirst report by Strategic Air Command identified the object tentatively as a heavenly body.\n\nSubsequent information received by Lt Roberkamper, Coast Guard Officer stationed at Salem identified the craft as a cosmic ray equipment carrier used by MIT. Later it was definitely established that the craft sighted was a cluster of eight balloons used by MIT for cosmic ray research.\n\nThis incident is considered closed in that definite identity has been established."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 195\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 31 October 1945 - 1545Z\n2. Where Sighted: Goose Bay Labrador\n3. Observer's Position: Goose Bay, Labrador from GCA Unit (i.e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: GCA Operator, Col Jones, Capt Verner Newfoundland Base Command, Ft Pepperell, Newfoundland\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: GCA Operator, Commanding Officer and Group Commander.\n6. Attention Attracted by: Target on PPI Scope\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): Undetermined\n9. Color of Object(s): N/C\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) N/S\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: N/S (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: 3 miles south of field\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: 25 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: N/S\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) Southwest\n19. Apparent Construction: N/S\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): N/S\n22. Manner of Disappearance: Went into ground clutter at 6 miles\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S\n24. Peculiarities Noted: N/S\n25. Summary of Incident: (Over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 195\n\nOn 31 Oct 1945 at 1545 Z, GCA Operator at Goose Bay, Labrador noticed a target on PPI Scope Number 1. It (the object) appeared to be about 3 miles south of the field and was traveling on a southwest heading. It went into a ground clutter at 6 miles. The blip traveled at a speed of approximately 25 MPH. This target sighting was verified by Base Commander C. D. Jones and by Group Commander Captain Verner, who were in the unit at the time."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\nIncident: 196\n1. Date of Observation . 1 Nov 1945. . . .\n2. Time of Observation . 2145 Z . . . . .\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . 3-3/4 miles from Ft McAndrew, Newfoundland . . .\n4. Observer's Position . GCA Scope\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . By 2 GCA operators, Ft McAndrew, Newfoundland\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . GCA operators\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By . blip . appeared on radarscope\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1\n9. Size of Object(s) . too large for a bird and too small for an aircraft\n10. Color of Object(s) . N/S - could not be ascertained\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . N/S could not be ascertained\n12. Nature of Luminosity . N/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . 3-3/4 miles at first\n14. Speed of Object(s) . estimated at almost a mile a minute - 60 MPH\n15. Time in Sight . 4 minutes and 7 seconds - timed with stop watch\n16. Tactics . N/S\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . On heading of 249. Disappeared on bearing of 182\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) N/S\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . Could not be ascertained\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . N/S\n22. Peculiarities Noted . N/S\n23. Summary of Incident (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident 196\nTarget picked up on GCA scope at 2145Z 1 Nov at 3-3/4 miles from station on a bearing of 123 from station. Traveled on a heading of approx 249 and disappeared at 7-1/2 miles on a bearing of 182 from the station. Blip traveled the 4 miles in 4 minutes and 7 seconds timed with a stop watch. A speed of approximately 60 MPH. Operator stated blip was too small at 7-1/2 miles to be an aircraft and too large to be a bird. Wind was from 270 to 300 and at 5 to 10 MPH. Target witnessed by 2 GCA operators."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\nIncident 197\n1. Date of Observation 0435-0455 5th Nov 1945\n2. Time of Observation . 0435-0455\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . Richmond, Indiana\n4. Observer's Position . From The Palladium-Item Building, Richmond, Indiana\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . Dale Stevens, Sports Editor for The Palladium Item . Richmond, Indiana\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . Sports Writer\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By . Telephone call which referred his attention to an object in the sky\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1\n9. Size of Object(s) . larger than a star\n10. Color of Object(s) . white\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . Round\n12. Nature of Luminosity . like that of a brilliant star\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . N/S - thought to be great distance\n14. Speed of Object(s) . Remained stationary\n15. Time in Sight . 20 minutes (from 0435 to 0455)\n16. Tactics . Remained stationary\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . None\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s)\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) . N/A\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . No exhaust trail - clouds caused object to appear a bit dimmer\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . Low overcast at about 1,000 ft, however when object was first observed the sky was clear with stars out.\n22. Peculiarities Noted . Ceased to flicker\n23. Summary of Incident . (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5th Nov 1945\nAt approximately 0435 A.M., a woman phoned The Palladium-Item, Richmond Indiana to ask if they had observed a light in the east which she stated resembled a flare hanging from a parachute. Mr. Dale Stevens, a sports writer, on the newspaper was in the office at the time and advised that he would check on it. Immediately after the woman hung up a man called with a similar statement. Mr. Stevens then looked out the window and saw a brilliant white light a bit south of east. It seemed to flicker a great deal and appeared much larger than a star so he discounted the possibility of it being a heavenly body. Lining it up with a corner of a certain building and observing it for a few minutes he perceived no movement. He then called the police but they knew nothing of it. He then went to the upper roof and watched it for some 10 minutes. Coming down he got a camera and took a time exposure of it. However, upon his return to the roof the object appeared dimmer due to an overcast. Within five more minutes the sky was overcast from low clouds estimated to be at about 1,000 feet. When the object was first observed the night was clear with stars out. Mr. Stevens thought the size of the object appeared about 5 to 10 times that of a normal star. He took two pictures of the \"floating light.\"\n\nMr. Stevens is considered to be a trustworthy person. His employer, Paul J. Ingels stated that he will attempt to obtain as many true facts as possible. He considers him honest and sincere. Mr. Stevens is a member of the local Junior Chamber of Commerce.\n\nAstronomer\nCheck with Professor David Telfair of Earlham College revealed that it was the Professor's opinion that it couldn't have been a star\n\nCheck with MCIAXE-33 elicited the statement that the approximate burning time of USAF Parachute Flares never exceeds 5 to 8 minutes and that they are mostly designed for a burning time of only 3 minutes. There is, however, a Tow Type Aerial Flare that consists of several three-minute flares which is towed as a chain behind an aircraft (but never dropped by a parachute) and which are designed to burn one at a time to facilitate night tracking and gunnery practicies. Suggested obtaining of TN 9-1981 to compare photographs of flare photographs with those taken by Mr. Stevens.\n\nIn \"Look\" magazine dated 22 Nov 48 there was an article describing an object in the first gray light of dawn on Nov 6. It was a bright white ball with a filmy white tail. Dr. Harley Wood, an astronomer in Sydney, flashed the word that one of the most spectacular comets yet to appear in this century had made its appearance in the sky over Australia. Three days later early risers in the southern and western parts of the U.S. were able to observe this body with the naked eye. The comet was visible for a brief 60 minutes before it was obscured by the sun's light."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 198\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 6 Nov 1945 1157 hrs\n2. Where Sighted: Immediately above Radar Site at Wakkanai, Japan\n3. Observer's Position: Ground - operating radarscope\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: N/S\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Radarscope operator\n6. Attention Attracted by: blip on the radarscope\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: Target at first appeared as single craft and at times as 2 aircraft\n8. Size of Object(s): normal for aircraft on radarscope\n9. Color of Object(s): N/S (Object was not observed visually at any time)\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) N/S\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S (Directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: Unknown (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: Could not be estimated\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: Varying - from 160 miles to 240 miles per hour\n15. Time in Sight: Circled radar site continuously for one hour and 5 minutes\n16. Tactics: Target at times gave impression of 2 fighter aircraft dog-fighting. Continuously changed course.\n17. Sound Made by Object(s):\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) Circling\n19. Apparent Construction: N/S\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): N/S\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: Low & high cloud formation forming very dense overcast of unknown height.\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Blip at times appeared single and at times gave appearance of 2 aircraft in vicinity\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Target appeared in ground clutter area during entire period of observation Target was not observed in station area, and was not observed visually at any time. At times the target appeared as 2 aircraft and at another time as a single aircraft. Gave impression of 2 fighter craft dog-fighting. Evaluated as Soviet aircraft conducting electronic reconnaissance mission. Thought to be a Soviet \"Ferret\" since the object was computed to have held a speed of 240 MPH and since the size of blip on radarscope was normal for an aircraft. The unidentified aircraft circled (20 mile radius) continuously for one hour and five minutes immediately above radar site installed at Wakkanai. No authorized aircraft was in the vicinity. Weather conditions precluded visual observation."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 199\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 30 Oct 1948 1430 PST\n2. Where Sighted: 15 miles northwest of Grays Harbor, Washington 10 miles off coast\n3. Observer's Position: Air while flying an F-82 type aircraft on a northerly (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.) course at 240 MPH\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Major Morris, Pilot and Lt Kunzman, 315th All Weather Fighter Sq, 325th Fighter Gp, McChord AF Base, Washington\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: As above\n6. Attention Attracted by: N/S\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: from 10 to 20\n8. Size of Object(s): No idea of size - could not be determined\n9. Color of Object(s): yellow then white\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) undetermined - thought they were egg-shaped\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S No outstanding reflection (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: Approx 8,000 ft (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: too far away to determine a definite shape\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: Could not be estimated\n15. Time in Sight: 20 seconds\n16. Tactics: horizontal flight with no apparent change of altitude - not trying to attack or to escape\n17. Sound made by Object(s): no sound\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) Westerly course for about 17 seconds, then changed to a northerly course and disappeared\n19. Apparent Construction: Seemed translucent\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): No evidence of exhaust\n22. Manner of Disappearance: Seemed to dissolve - they didn't go far enough to fade from view\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: 5 mile visibility - fog and smoke\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Appear translucent\n25. Summary of Incident: (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 199\nWhen Lt Kunzman saw the objects they appeared as a very small compact group. At that time they were at 1000 o'clock position. Later at a 1:00 o'clock position they seemed to string out to an in-line formation. At first Kunzman could not identify anything. At the time there were clouds up and down the coast but none in the observer's vicinity. The first color Kunzman noticed was yellow. At 1:00 position the color appeared white. At that time Kunzman thought they were seagulls. Thought there were from 10 to 20. At no time did Kunzman identify any object. He saw something and mentioned it to Maj Morris the pilot who was fairly busy at the time and didn't see the objects. Objects came around to a 3:00 o'clock position in approximately the same type formation and white in color, then made a turn back to a 2:30 position, paralleling the course of the F-82-F and then faded much as an exhaust fume from an airplane would. At first the object appeared yellow then changed to white. The shape seemed to change slightly. He thought that they looked egg-shaped. Part of the time they appeared rather translucent - immediately before disappearance. (In this respect it is pointed out that there was fog and smoke in the vicinity according to weather reports for the vicinity of Grays Harbor) No estimation could be made as to size. Objects disappeared on a northerly course. No evidence of aggressive or evasive tactics. Speed could not be estimated."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 200\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 17 Oct 48 1610Z\n2. Where Sighted: Crescent City, Calif\n3. Observer's Position: ground (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Edgar W. Allen, 3rd and Lauf Ave., Crescent City, Calif.\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Barber\n6. Attention Attracted by: Glint of light\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): 25 feet long\n9. Color of Object(s): silver\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) eggshaped with fins\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: (5,000 to 25,000 feet) - Mr Allen thought 10,000 ft. (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S 2 miles - was seen laterally at a 60° angle of elevation from horizon\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: 300 mph\n15. Time in Sight: 2 to 4 minutes\n16. Tactics: Made 1 short bank and then resumed course\n17. Sound made by Object(s): none\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) southerly\n19. Apparent Construction: solid construction - like nickel plated\n20. Effect on Clouds: None\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): None\n22. Manner of Disappearance: Faded from view\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: Ceiling: Unlimited - visibility 20 miles\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Object shaped like bullet - no wings being noticeable\n25. Summary of Incident: (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 200\nAbout 1610, 17 Oct 1948 while at his home at 3rd and Lauf Ave., Crescent City, Calif, E. W. Allen saw a silver colored object at an estimated height of about 10,000 ft which resembled a plane traveling at high speed. Object was shaped like a bullet, no wings being noticeable. However, a tail structure was visible. The object had the appearance of being nickel-plated. No smoke or noise was noticeable.\n\nMr Allen is a man between 45 and 50 yrs of age and has a good reputation among friends and neighbors, is of average intelligence and good character.\n\nLocal flight schedules revealed no known flights. No releases of test vehicles in vicinity at the time."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 200a\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 17 Oct 1948 - 1610\n2. Where Sighted: Crescent City Light Station\n3. Observer's Position: ground\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Andrew N. Siler, Grants Pass, Oregon\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Fisherman\n6. Attention Attracted by: sound which came from piper cub plane flying in vicinity\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): N/S\n9. Color of Object(s): silver\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) egg-shaped - similar to blimp\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: N/S (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: 300 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: N/S\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): None\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) South\n19. Apparent Construction: N/S\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S - no clouds\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): none\n22. Manner of Disappearance: did not notice\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: CAVU - visibility 20 miles\n24. Peculiarities Noted: No wings or tail structure\n25. Summary of Incident: (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 200a\n\nAt about 1610, 17 Oct 1948 Mr Andrew N. Siler, a fisherman, heard the sound of a plane. Looking up he saw a silver-colored egg-shaped object that had the appearance of a small blimp traveling south at about 300 mph. No wings or tail structure was visible nor was there any smoke visible. No noise was heard from the object. The sound which attracted observer's attention came from a small piper cub type plane. Mr Siler did not watch to observe where the object went."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 200b\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 17 Oct 48 1610\n2. Where Sighted: Crescent City, Calif\n3. Observer's Position: ground (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Ernest Haley Box 406, Crescent City, Calif\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Dry Cleaner\n6. Attention Attracted by: glint of light\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): Unknown\n9. Color of Object(s): Unknown Color\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) like small plane\n11. Nature of Luminosity: reflected light (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: Between 20 and 25,000 ft (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: N/S\n15. Time in Sight: 4 to 5 minutes\n16. Tactics: Made a 45° turn and bank to the right, then made sharp turn to the south\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): none\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) southerly\n19. Apparent Construction: metallic\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): none\n22. Manner of Disappearance: gradually disappeared\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: cavu\n24. Peculiarities Noted: None\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 200b\n\nAt about 1610, 17 Oct 1948 Mr Ernest Haley saw a small silver colored object resembling a small plane proceeding in a southerly direction S. E. of Battery Point, Crescent City, at an altitude between 20 and 25,000 feet. The object remained in view for 4 to 5 minutes. At one time it made a 45° turn and bank to the right, a sharp bright flash came from the object as the sun hit the topside, the object then made a sharp turn to the south and gradually disappeared.\n\nMr Haley is about 47 years of age, of good character and reputation and of average intelligence. He is considered reliable."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 200c\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 17 Oct 1948 1610\n2. Where Sighted: Crescent City, Calif\n3. Observer's Position: ground (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Mrs Elise Henggi, 150 S. A. St., Crescent City, Calif\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: housewife\n6. Attention Attracted by: Glint of light\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): \"small\"\n9. Color of Object(s): silver\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) elliptic\n11. Nature of Luminosity: reflected light as light against a mirror (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: N/S (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: \"very fast\"\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: Made a sharp bank of about 45° to the right, resumed course\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): none\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) [REDACTED] Southerly\n19. Apparent Construction: N/S - presumably metallic\n20. Effect on Clouds: [REDACTED] N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): none noticed\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S - disappeared at sea\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: CAVU\n24. Peculiarities Noted: [REDACTED] Brightness of the object\n25. Summary of Incident: (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 200C\n\nWhile conversing with Mr Ernest Haley on Battery Point, Crescent City, Calif, Mrs Elise Henggi, housewife, saw a small silver-colored object that reflected light. The object was elliptic in shape and was traveling very fast in a southerly direction and remained in sight for 2 minutes. It was traveling about 5,000 feet higher than a plane flying north. Shortly after sighting, the object made a sharp bank of about 45° to the right then resumed its course, disappearing to sea. No smoke or noise was heard from the object. At all times the object gave off a brilliant flash like that of sunlight on a glass mirror.\n\nMrs Henggi is 70 years of age, of Swiss extraction, and is a long-time resident of Crescent City. She is of average intelligence, and has a good character and reputation. She had no idea of speed, range or altitude. She thought the object different than any other airborne craft she had ever seen. The brightness of the object impressed her most."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET (To be filled out and retained in files) Incident: 201\n\n1. Date of Observation - 31 Oct 1948\n2. Time of Observation 0230Z\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted Overhead - Army Air Base, Azores\n4. Observer's Position ground (i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer Staff Sgt. Joseph J. Barnett, AF 13127245, APO 406 New York\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies US AF\n7. Attention Attracted to Object(s) By N/S\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted 1\n9. Size of Object(s) N/S\n10. Color of Object(s) pk pale yellow or light orange color\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) flat round shape\n12. Nature of Luminosity Not stated\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer N/S\n14. Speed of Object(s) approximate speed thought to be around 160 MPH\n15. Time in Sight 3 to 5 minutes\n16. Tactics weaving but maintaining course. Did not change altitude\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) none heard\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) northerly direction\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) N/S\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail N/S - no vapor trails\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time 3 stratocumulus at 2500 feet visibility 15 miles, winds from southwest at 7 & 8 MPH\n22. Peculiarities Noted \"weaving\" but forward motion. Disappeared behind clouds\n23. Summary of Incident (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 201\n\nStaff Sgt Joseph J. Barnett, AF 13127245, AAFS APO 406, N. Y. reported the following: On 31 Oct 48 at approximately 0230Z he noticed a flat round object weaving overhead but maintaining a northerly course at an approximate speed of 160 MPH. Object was pale yellow or light orange color and not bluewhite. Seemed to maintain the same altitude and disappeared behind clouds. The object was viewed from 3 to 5 minutes. No vapor trails were seen nor was any sound heard."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET (To be filled out and retained in files) Incident: 201A\n\n1. Date of Observation 31 Oct 1948\n2. Time of Observation 0230Z\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted overhead - Army Air Base, Azores\n4. Observer's Position Ground\n5. Name and Address of Observer PFC Robert R. Anderson, AF 11007513 of AAFS, APO 406, N. Y.\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies USAF\n7. Attention Attracted to Object(s) By S/Sgt Joseph J. Barnett\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted 1\n9. Size of Object(s) larger than a star\n10. Color of Object(s) orange\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) round\n12. Nature of Luminosity N/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer 2000-3000 above clouds which were at 2500 feet, or approx 4500 ft\n14. Speed of Object(s) 800 MPH\n15. Time in Sight Approximately 2 minutes\n16. Tactics would swing forward and then backward in same direction it was moving but always maintaining its forward velocity.\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) No sound heard\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) northerly direction\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) N/S\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail disappeared behind cloud. No vapor trails noticed\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time 3 stratus-cumulus at 2500 feet visibility 15 miles, winds from southwest at 7 & 8 MPH; Temperature: 69\n22. Peculiarities Noted. Object would swing forward and then backward in same direction but still maintained forward velocity.\n23. Summary of Incident (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 201A\n\nAt approximately 0230Z 31 Oct 48, Staff Sgt Joseph J. Barnett pointed out an object to PFC Robert R. Anderson who described it as being round, orange in color and larger than a star. Object was moving in a northerly direction at an estimated speed of 800 MPH. Altitude was estimated as 2000-3000 feet above the clouds which were reported to be at 2500 feet. This would give an approximate altitude of from 4500 to 5500 feet. Object would swing forward and then backward but always maintained its forward velocity. Object was seen for approximately 2 minutes before it disappeared behind a cloud. No sound was heard."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\n\n1. Date of Observation : 31 Oct 1948 . . . Incident: 201B\n2. Time of Observation . 0300Z to 0330Z. .\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted .Overhead at Army Air Base, Ancres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n4. Observer's Position . .ground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . PFC Theodor Vlas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . . . . USAF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By . . N/S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n9. Size of Object(s) . .of light bulb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n10. Color of Object(s) . .white with yellowish tint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . . .like light bulb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n12. Nature of Luminosity . . . N/S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . N/S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n14. Speed of Object(s) . . 30 MPH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n15. Time in Sight . N/S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n16. Tactics . . steadily gaining altitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . No sound heard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . . northerly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) . . N/S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . . disappeared behind cloud . . . . . . No vapor trails noticed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . . 3 stratus-cumulus at 2500 feet . . . visibility 15 miles, winds from SW at 7 & 8 MPH; Temperature: 69; dewpoint: 63.\n22. Peculiarities Noted .None . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n23. Summary of Incident . (over) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 201 B\n\nVlas described object as a light bulb moving upward and forward at an estimated speed of 25 to 30 MPH. Object was white with a yellowish tint and was proceeding in a northerly direction and steadily gained altitude. Object disappeared behind a cloud and could not be located again. No vapor trails noticed and no sound heard.\n\nIt was the opinion of A-2, that object sighted in each instance was a weather balloon with a light swinging from it."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 202\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 8 Nov 45 1850 EST\n2. Where Sighted: Newark AF Base, Newark, N. J. 40° 42' N 74° 10' W\n3. Observer's Position: ground\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Edmund J. Clark, 108-44 Liverpool St, Jamaica, Long Island\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Civilian Dispatcher, Newark AF Base. Regular participant in Reserve flying activities. Former Capt, USAFR.\n6. Attention Attracted by: Was preparing to scan the sky when object was observed\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): Same relative diameter as the moon but with little or no depth (thickness)\n9. Color of Object(s): pale luminous - 1/3 brightness of moon\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) disc - round with little or no depth\n11. Nature of Luminosity: Appeared as luminous object (Directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: 5,000 to 6,000 ft (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of object from Observer: Appeared at 45° angle above horizon.\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: 800 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: one second or less\n16. Tactics: made arc toward south southeast - performed comparatively horizontal flight\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): no sound\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s): south southeast\n19. Apparent Construction: N/S - luminous\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of: N/O\n22. Manner of Disappearance: Passed out of sight over another hangar.\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: Moonlit night - clear\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Object seemed to have no depth and maintained a steady luminosity\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\n\n1. Date of Observation . 17 Nov 1945 . . . Incident: 203\n2. Time of Observation . 1415 Z . . . . . .\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . 56° 10' North Latitude by 117° 30' West Longitude Peace River, Alberta Province - some 250 miles NW of Edmonton . . . . . . . . . . .\n4. Observer's Position . From 7,000 ft enroute to Kittigazuit, N. W. T., from Edmonton, (i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . . 1st Lt James Toomey, Edmonton, Alberta, Can. S/Sgt Onno C. Blink, AF 20715676, Radio Operator, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.\n(?) Pilot &\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . Radio Operator with crew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By . . N/S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n9. Size of Object(s) . Approximately 50' in height. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n10. Color of Object(s) . . flaming orange color . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . . egg shaped with tail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n12. Nature of Luminosity . flame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . N/S Altitude: Estimated at approximately 15,000 feet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n14. Speed of Object(s) . Unknown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n15. Time in Sight . Momentary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n16. Tactics . appeared to be in a shallow dive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) none . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . Southwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) . \"flame\" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . N/S but illuminated the sky momentarily behind it - had a tail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . Overcast with tops at approx 15,000 MSL. High deck of thin broken stratus clouds at approx 12,000 ft.\n22. Peculiarities Noted . N/S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n23. Summary of Incident (over) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)\nS-77627"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nIncident: 203\n\nA bright flaming orange object similar in shape to an egg with a tail was observed near Peace River, Alberta Province, some 250 miles NW of Edmonton, by 1st Lt James Toomey & S/Sgt Onno C. Blink, Radio Operator, while on first leg of flight from Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, to Kittigazuit, N. W. T. The object was momentarily sighted above a deck of broken stratus clouds. The crew were flying at 7,000 ft MSL on top of an overcast when the object was sighted. Altitude was judged as approximately 15,000 feet and the object appeared in a shallow dive. There was no sound. Object had a tail which tapered to a point. It was on a southwest heading at an unknown speed. As it passed it momentarily illuminated the sky behind it.\n\nSECRET S-77627"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAt 1850 hours, 8 Nov 48, Edmund J. Cisek was standing just outside Hanger #7, Newark AF Base, when glancing up toward the moon he perceived a pale luminous object race across the sky. It was about 1/3 the brightness of the moon, round like a disc with little or no depth (thickness). It appeared to be about the same relative diameter as the moon and was traveling from the north northwest in an arc toward the south southeast. Object was seen about one second or less. It passed out of sight over another hanger. No sound was heard. Speed was estimated at 800 MPH. Observer states that he had observed jet aircraft make tactical approaches at approximately 600 mph and judged the speed of the object was at least 200 mph faster. From where he stood Cisek could see approximately 75% of the path of the object. The peak of its arc was approximately 45° above the horizon to the west southwest of his position. Altitude was judged to be 5,000 to 6,000 feet.\n\nMr Cisek is a very reliable employee, highly intelligent and of excellent character.\n\nThere were no reports of commercial, private and military craft flying in the vicinity at the time.\n\nNo reports were received relative to possible releases of testing devices in the vicinity.\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\n\nIncident 204\n\n1. Date of Observation . . . . 6 Nov 1640\n2. Time of Observation . . . 1640 Sunrise\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . Panama\n4. Observer's Position . Weather Observer Ground - Panama\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . Solera\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . Weather observer\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By N/S\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1\n9. Size of Object(s) . Larger than planet Venus\n10. Color of Object(s) . like star\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . that of a comet\n12. Nature of Luminosity . that of comet\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . N/S\n14. Speed of Object(s) N/S -\n15. Time in Sight . 40 minutes\n16. Tactics . N/S\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) N/S\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) N/S\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . long cone of light\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . sunrise\n22. Peculiarities Noted . N/S\n23. Summary of Incident . (over)\n\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At 1640 Nov 5, 1948 Operator Solera when making a GCT weather report saw what appeared to be a comet in the southeast quadrant of the sky. It had a long cone of light which ended in a star larger than Venus. It remained visible to the naked eye for approximately 40 minutes until beginning of sunlight dimmed the brilliance of the phenomena and full sunrise obliterated it. Appeared to have about four grades of intensity in the tail\n\nOn Nov 6, 1948 (Nov 5 - USA time) Dr Harley Wood, astronomer in Sidney, Australia recognized a new and extraordinary comet which had a tail extending for 15 million miles.\n\nThree days later early risers in the southern and western parts of the U. S. were able to observe the rare celestial body with the naked eye. Moving close to the sun but away from it at a speed of about 128,000 mph, the comet was visible for a brief 60 minutes before obscured by the sun's light.\n\nSee attached reproduction taken from Life.\n\n(This to be submitted to Dr Hynek for his viewpoint as to whether the object reported and the comet mentioned in this article are one and the same.)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\n\n1. Date of Observation . N/S\nIncident: 205\n2. Time of Observation . 5 o'clock in the evening\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . Carthage, Missouri\n4. Observer's Position . ground while laying on his back\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . Wesley H. Long, 1026 Walnut St, Carthage, Mo.\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . N/S\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By . chanced to see an aluminum colored object sail northeast across the sky\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1\n9. Size of Object(s) . Estimated size: .30 to 40 ft. in diameter\n10. Color of Object(s) . aluminum-sky colored\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . N/S\n12. Nature of Luminosity . N/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . N/S\n14. Speed of Object(s) . very fast - thought about 1500 MPH\n15. Time in Sight . N/S\n16. Tactics . slowly rotating\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . None\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . northeast\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) metallic\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . N/S - no smoke\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . Sky clear and no wind at ground level\n22. Peculiarities Noted . Rotating movement\n23. Summary of Incident . (over)\n\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 205\n\nObserver reported seeing an aluminum colored object sail northeast across the sky while lying on his back in his yard. Object seemed about 30 to 40 feet in diameter. Could not ascertain height but thought object was moving very fast - estimated speed to be around 1500 MPH. Object seemed to be slowly rotating while remaining upright - like a flat top. Noticed no smoke or noise."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 206\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 12 Nov 1945 between 1300 and 1400\n2. Where Sighted: Northeast portion of Clark AF Base, Phillipine Islands\n3. Observer's Position: ground\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Sgt Fredrick M. Wright, 15th Maintenance Sq 15th Main & Supply Sp, Clark AF Base\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Sgt, USAF\n6. Attention Attracted by: white speck\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): Estimated Size: 300 ft / 35 ft body at wings; length of fuselage\nWings 47-1/2; width of wing 25 ft\n9. Color of Object(s): snow-white\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) See attached\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: 3 to 6 miles high (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of object from Observer: 20 to 30 miles\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: Faster than jet plane\n15. Time in Sight: N/S - observed intermittently thru cloud formation\n16. Tactics: Flying around Clark AF Base - no definite heading horisontal flight - apparently reconnaissance\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): single roar\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s): no definite heading - flew around Clark AF Base\n19. Apparent Construction: Similar to plane\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S - entered and broke out of cloud six times\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): appeared to leave an exhaust trail from tail-end of mentioned object - \"It appeared to be sky writing\"\n22. Manner of Disappearance: \n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: 4500 scattered, visibility 30 miles.\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Appeared to have no tail assembly - straight body tapering off from directly above the wings to small point\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 206\nSgt Wright stated he was watching some cloud formations in the Northeast portion of the sky when he observed a white speck materialize and lengthen out. At first he thought it was sky-writing but as it continued to advance he thought it appeared as a whole unit. Object pursued a northwestern direction and entered a very large cloud formation. As the object emerged on the northwest by north side the object appeared larger and he was able to get a clearer view. The object appeared snow-white. At one time Sgt Wright was able to obtain a side-view impression. It seemed as if the side surface was broken by windows. The nose, too, was short in comparison to the length. There was definitely a wing formation - low wing and very short in comparison to the length of the fuselage. Sgt Wright perceived the object six times thru the cloud formation, in various attitudes - see attached drawings. Sgt Wright in his drawing estimates the length of the fuselage to be 300 feet. however, he stated that it would be impossible for him to estimate the length of the object if the craft was using a rear type of propulsion and utilizing a fuel that left a white exhaust. Fuselage apparently had no tail assembly. It appeared as a straight body tapering off from directly above the wings to a very small point.\n\nEvaluation: D-5 - Sgt Wright's character and his honesty are questionable according to the interrogating officer."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 207\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 15 Nov 1945 2145 hours\n2. Where Sighted: Circling Andrews AF Base, Camp Springs, Md\n3. Observer's Position: Air\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: 2d Lt Kenwood W. Jackson, 1326 28th St, S.E., Washington, D. C.\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: 2d Lt AFR - telephone cableman\n6. Attention Attracted by: light\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): Undetermined\n9. Color of Object(s): N/S\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) Oval, no wings or tail surfaces\n11. Nature of Luminosity: Seemed to give off a dull glow (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: 1700 to 5,000 ft (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: N/S\n15. Time in Sight: 15 to 18 minutes\n16. Tactics: Evasive tactics - continued to circle field. Could climb vertically, then would drop behind and continue to circle field\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) Northeast - Southwest\n19. Apparent Construction: N/S\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): N/S\n22. Manner of Disappearance: Climbed out of sight toward northeast\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: CAVU - no clouds, haze or smoke\n24. Peculiarities Noted: No wings or tail surfaces - extreme maneuverability\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident 207\nObject first sighted at approximately 2145 15 Nov 45. It was flying from northeast to southwest across Andrews field at 1700 feet. Plane then descended from 4,000 ft to same altitude as object which was then coming back across Andrews Field from the Southwest on a Northeast heading. Object and plane then flew in circles, object on outer circle. Plane followed it to 7000 ft. While climbing plane made 3 to 4 passes at the object to identify it. As plane descended at approximately 240 MPH object would then climb vertically, drop below plane from behind and continued circling the field. In a last effort the plane switched on a landing light and the object momentarily gave off a dull glow. It appeared oval with no wings and no tail surfaces. After the object was sighted in the landing light, it headed to the Northeast climbing rapidly. Plane lost sight of object at 5,000 ft; the time was then 22:03\n\nWeather at the time: CAVU - no clouds, haze or smoke.\n\nTaken from signed statement of Kenwood W. Jackson, 2d Lt, AFRes, AO-944113\n\nStatement corroborated by Glen L. Stalker, 2nd Lt, USAFR."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 207A\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 15 Nov 45 2200 hours\n2. Where Sighted: East over Andrews AF Base, directly over Camp Springs, Md\n3. Observer's Position: Air\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Henry G. Combs, 2d Lt, USAFR\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: 511 S. Capitol St., Washington, D. C.\n6. Attention Attracted by: movement of lone moving lighted object\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): Smaller than a T-6 type aircraft\n9. Color of Object(s): dull gray (whitish grey)\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) Oblong ball, no wings or tail surfaces (oblong ovate)\n11. Nature of Luminosity: Seemed to have had one continuous glowing white light (directed beam of light?) Could not determine whether source of light emanated from entire object or was exhaust type in nature.\n12. Altitude of Object: 1700 ft to around 7500 ft (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: Approx 300 to 400 feet on one instance\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: 80 to 600 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: 10 to 12 minutes\n16. Tactics: Evasive controlled tactics and ability to perform tight circle quick variation of air speed. Vertical ascents. Evasive movements\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) East to West in circular pattern\n19. Apparent Construction: metallic\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): no exhaust flame\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: CAVU, no smoke, haze or fog. Full moon.\n24. Peculiarities Noted: No wings or tail structure; extreme maneuverability - highly evasive movements, high rate of acceleration.\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 207A\n\nAt approximately 2200 hours Lt Henry G. Combs sighted an object flying on a 360° from West to East over Andrews AF Base. The object had one continuous glowing white light. Combs thought it was an aircraft with the wing navigation lights turned off or burned out. He then made a pass to check. Object then took evasive action. First contact established at 1700 feet over Andrews AF Base. When object started taking evasive action, Combs switched wing and tail navigation lights off. Maneuvering his ship so that his exhaust flame would not be noticed in an effort to get the object on his left he proceeded to close in but the object quickly flew up and over his aircraft. Then Combs attempted to maneuver the object between his ship and the light of the moon. This was done by making very very tight 360° turns with flaps down while making a steady climb. Object was able to turn inside of Combs' aircraft even under this condition. Another amazing feature was the quick variation of airspeed from 80 MPH to 500 or 600 MPH. Combs remained in contact with the object for some 10 minutes with the object between the lights of Washington, D. C. and his aircraft. He could only see an oblong ball with one light and no wings and no exhaust flame. Trying to close in again he remained in sight of it up to 6000 feet, then down to 3500 feet to 4000 feet but it always easily evaded him. Then object and Combs flew climbed up to 7500 feet. Combs pulled back up sharply and came up underneath the object within 300 to 400 feet. He then turned his landing lights on it. It had a very dull gray glow to it and was oblong in shape as mentioned before. Object then performed a very tight curve and headed for the East coast at about 500 to 600 MPH.\n\nWitnesses agree that (1) Object was highly maneuverable, (2) Seemed aware of the presence of a following aircraft (3) Capable of almost vertical flight (4) Was smaller in size that T-6 type aircraft.\n\nWitnesses were uncertain as to whether source of light observed emanated from entire object or was exhaust type in nature."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\nIncident 207-B\n\n1. Date of Observation 16 Nov 48\n2. Time of Observation N/S\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted Over Andrews AF Base, Camp Springs, Md\n4. Observer's Position Ground while on duty\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer John J. Kushner, S/Sgt USAF, Andrews AF Base\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies S/Sgt USAF\n7. Attention Attracted to Object(s) by Noise\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted 1\n9. Size of Object(s) N/S\n10. Color of Object(s) N/S\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) N/S\n12. Nature of Luminosity N/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer Not very high\n14. Speed of Object(s) N/S\n15. Time in Sight N/S\n16. Tactics N/S\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) Twice as loud as P-47 but similar in sound\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) Cannot be ascertained from statement\ncame from direction 2238th Eng across field towards Hanger #1\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) Light\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail N/S - no exhaust seen\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time Night - moonlit - as gleaned from statements of pilots\n22. Peculiarities Noted did not look like an aircraft\n23. Summary of Incident (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident 207-B\n\nStatement of S/Sgt John J. Kushner corroborates account of 2d Lt Kenwood W. Jackson and 2d Lt Henry G. Combs. Sgt Kushner was on ground duty when he heard a noise. Turning his head in the direction of the sound he saw a shining object coming across the sky. It made a sound similar to a P-47 only twice as loud. It seemed to him to be coming from the direction of the 2238th Engineering Hangar across the field toward Hanger #1. It wasn't very high. It couldn't have been a P-47 and witness did not see an exhaust. Shortly afterwards, he heard the same noise only higher up over the field. He stated the object did not resemble an aircraft."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 208\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 17 Nov 48 1430 hours\n2. Where Sighted: Clark AF Base - eastern edge of\n3. Observer's Position: ground (i.e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: 1st Lt Everett L. Hundley & 1st Lt Max M. Feibelman, 44th Fighter Sq (SE) 18th Fighter Gp (SE) APO 74, U.S. Army\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: As above\n6. Attention Attracted by: N/S\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): N/S\n9. Color of Object(s): white\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) irregular mass - looked as if plane had exploded and left a white smoke column\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?) N/S\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated) 30,000 ft\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: 30,000 ft\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: N/S\n15. Time in Sight: Approximately 3 minutes - (Smoke trail)\n16. Tactics: Object seemed to have made a loop inasmuch as the smoke trail performed complete circle - resembling a corkscrew\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) Either 120 or 300° according to origin\n19. Apparent Construction: Object appeared like burst of flak\n20. Effect on Clouds: none - vicinity was a cloudless sky\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of: white exhaust trail extending some 1 to 10 miles\n22. Manner of Disappearance: trail evaporated after three minutes like smoke, scattering thinly throughout the atmosphere.\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: 4000 feet scattered, visibility 50 miles. High overcast\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Object had the appearance of flak burst sitting still in the atmosphere and connected to a curved trail of corkscrew appearance\n25. Summary of Incident: Did not have the appearance of a vapor trail.\n(See attached page) (over)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 208\n\nThe object sighted by the two fighter pilots had the appearance of a flak burst sitting still in the atmosphere and was connected to a curved trail of corkscrew appearance (See drawing attached) The trail was from 1 to 10 miles in length, and did not have the appearance of a vapor trail but rather that of a rocket or jet exhaust. Altitude was judged to be 30,000 ft. The mass and trail disappeared within approximately three minutes. The mass appeared white in color like an exhaust trail which had a sudden burst origin and then tapered off to nothing. Both parties remarked that it appeared as if an aircraft had exploded and left a white smoke column. The vapor substance dissipated in approximately in 3 minutes scattering thinly like smoke through the atmosphere. It is firmly believed by both witnesses that the object was not a cloud because of its shape and because the sky in the vicinity was cloudless.\n\nEvaluation: C-3"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET (To be filled out and retained in files) Incident: #209\n1. Date of Observation . 4 November 1948.\n2. Time of Observation . 1043 . . . . . .\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . South Korea -- 37° 57' north -- 125° 31' east . . .\n4. Observer's Position . Army Observation Post No. 1 & 2 . from ground . . . . .\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . N/S\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . N/S\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By . N/S\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1 object sighted from 2 posts\n9. Size of Object(s) . of twin-engine bomber\n10. Color of Object(s) . N/S\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . that of twin-engine bomber plane\n12. Nature of Luminosity . N/S\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . 5,000 ft.\n14. Speed of Object(s) . N/S\n15. Time in Sight . N/S\n16. Tactics . N/S\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) East to West\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) . Like twin-engine bomber\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . N/S\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . N/S\n22. Peculiarities Noted . N/S\n23. Summary of Incident . (over).\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 209\nUnidentified aircraft observed at 1043 14 Nov 1948 over Army Observation Post #1 at 37° 57' N - 125° 31' E, in South Korea, flying east to west at an altitude of 5000 feet. The same aircraft was sighted by army observation post #2 37° 51' N - 125° 17' E, 4, 37° 57' N - 125° 26' E and 5, 37° 56' N - 125° 29'.\nSubject aircraft circled observation post number 2, then headed north. Aircraft was twin engine bomber type, and is believed definitely to have been soviet."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET (To be filled out and retained in files)\n1. Date of Observation . Approx 10 Nov 1948\n2. Time of Observation . 5:00 A.M.\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . Over Charles River Basin, Boston\n4. Observer's Position . ground.\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . John D. Bearmain, 20 Louisburg Sq., Boston 8, Mass\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . N/S\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By . 3 fast flying single-engine planes\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 3.\n9. Size of Object(s) . N/S\n10. Color of Object(s) . N/S\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . single-engine plane\n12. Nature of Luminosity . N/S. No lights were observed - city lights made them visible\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . N/S\n14. Speed of Object(s) . \"fast\"\n15. Time in Sight . N/S\n16. Tactics . middle one seemed to weave back and forth\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . no sound\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . East to West\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) . Like single-engine plane\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . N/S\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . Starlight\n22. Peculiarities Noted . No sound was heard and the planes carried no lights\n23. Summary of Incident . (over).\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TELECON 7 Dec 7 1\nRDO TELETYPE CONFERENCE NBH 169\nFM CG AMC WRIGHT PAT AF BASE OHIO 071536Z\nTO CG USAF WASH D C\nSUBJECT SPECIAL A-2 CONFERENCE\nITEM 2 AND RELATED RECORD\nFROM Mr DEYARMOND TO MAJ BOGGS\nINVESTIGATION MADE OF SO-CALLED FLARING WHEEL REPORTED IN BELLFONTAINE DECEMBER. QUESTIONING OF WITNESSES AND EXAMINATION OF BURNED REMAINS INDICATE THAT OBJECT WAS PROBABLY A VERY PISTOL FLARE FIRED FROM GROUND PROBABLY BY PILOT WHO DID CARE TO ADMIT FIRING THE FLARE BECAUSE OF PUBLICITY CONNECTED WITH INCIDENT. BURNED REMAINS ARE BEING ANALYZED BY THE MATERIALS LAB TO DETERMINE COMPOSITION.\nEND ITEM 2 AND RELATED RECORD"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET (To be filled out and retained in files) Incident 212\n1. Date of Observation . 3 Dec 48\n2. Time of Observation . 1713 hours - twilight\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . Ground at Siebenthaler & Riverside while entering city limits of Dayton on Siebenthaler Ave.\n4. Observer's Position . In car\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . George H. Hoffman, 132 Elmwood, Dayton 5, Ohio\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . MCI - Intelligence Controls - Amateur photographer but is mostly interested in mechanics\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By . the object coming into line of vision.\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1 flash seen two times\n9. Size of Object(s) . 1 ... from observer's viewpoint. Approximately an inch long\n10. Color of Object(s) . yellowish shade of white - similar to star.\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . irregular\n12. Nature of Luminosity . like star - light must have emanated from object itself\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . Could not be estimated - thought to be some 10 miles and at an altitude from 10,000 to 20,000 feet\n14. Speed of Object(s) . Could not be estimated\n15. Time in Sight . 1/2 second for each pulse of light\n16. Tactics . Apparently traveling in an ascending arc\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . None noticeable\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . Seemed to be ascending - possibly in an eastern direction\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) . Flash of light\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . None\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . Sky clear, in vicinity of object.\n22. Peculiarities Noted . None\n23. Summary of Incident . (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident 212\n\nWhile Mr. George H. Hoffman and Roy E. Statzer were approaching the city limits of Dayton, Ohio, via Siebenthaler Ave., near Stillwater Bridge, the evening of 3 Dec 48 (Approximately 1715 hours), Mr. Hoffman observed an unusual pulse of light like that of a rocket. The light appeared in the Northwest section of the sky. He estimated this pulse to be visible for about 1/2 second. After observing it for this period it flashed off. The same period of time elapsed and it reappeared seemingly in an ascendent position (could have been traveling in an easterly direction). It again remained visible for about 1/2 second when it again flashed off. It was not seen again. Mr. Hoffman thought that Mr Statzer saw one of the pulses of light. The light appeared irregular in contour and seemed about an inch in length from the observer's viewpoint. Mr. Hoffman estimated it to be some 10 miles distant and stated that it was some 15° above the horizon. He thought the altitude could have been anywhere from 10,000 to 20,000 feet. The color appeared white with a yellowish tinge and was solid. There was no evidence of exhaust. The light remained constant during the 1/2 seconds observed. The part of the sky in which the light was observed appeared clear. There was no cloud interference. However, there was a layer of clouds along the horizon. There was some wind. No planes appeared to be in the air at the time.\n\nObserver states that he is mildly color-blind. Estimates his judgment of speed of moving objects as not too accurate. He believes he can distinguish size and shape at a distance fairly well. Observer is cleared for \"Secret\""} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 213\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 3 Dec 48-1715\n2. Where Sighted: Needmore Road, near Wagner Ford Road - Dayton, Ohio, outskirts\n3. Observer's Position: from car while driving west on Harshmanville Road (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.) (Needmore Rd)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: IT 6 6 Ratuc USNR Edgar S. Miller, Lt U. S. Navy, Ex 25163 Hq AMC\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Lt. U. S. Navy\n6. Attention Attracted by: bright strip of yellow-orange flame directly ahead\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): N/S\n9. Color of Object(s): yellow-orange flame\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) N/S\n11. Nature of Luminosity: Like that made by ram jet or rocket (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: in excess of 10,000 feet (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: 10 miles\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: N/S Appeared to climb at a fairly high rate of speed\n15. Time in Sight: N/S - Object seen intermittently over a period of time\n16. Tactics: observed a definite pattern of motion - both horizontal & vertical\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) N/S\n19. Apparent Construction: Flame\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): Object was possibly an exhaust flame Color: yellow-orange flame\n22. Manner of Disappearance: overhead presumably in clouds\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: Ceiling estimated less than 10,000 feet.\n24. Peculiarities Noted:\n25. Summary of Incident: (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Project Sign - Incident #213\n\nHQ USAF ATIAXO-3 17 December 48 1\nATTN: Operations Officer\n\n1. Project Sign is engaged in the collation, collection, compilation, evaluation and analysis of all information on unidentified flying objects, and is authorized under provisions of Technical Instructions 21-5, Addendum No. 3, dated 11 Feb 48, to obtain the assistance and cooperation of all agencies and facilities under the jurisdiction of the Air Material Command.\n\n2. In this connection, your cooperation is requested in reporting to this office, any flights which may have been made by the Flight Test Section with ram jets or other experimental types of propulsion emitting long pulses of flame, during the darkness hours of 3 December 48.\n\nR. E. LINDEMAN\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Air Intelligence Division\nIntelligence Department\n\nRETURNED NOT SENT\nsee"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 214\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 7 July 1948\n2. Where Sighted: Rt 202 West Ridge N.H.\n3. Observer's Position: Ground\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Chas N. Tasker. West Ridge N. H.\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Retired Vice President New England Tel & Tel Co.\n6. Attention Attracted by: Curls of Smoke.\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen:\n8. Size of Object(s):\n9. Color of Object(s):\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible)\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer:\n14. Estimated Speed of Object:\n15. Time in Sight:\n16. Tactics:\n17. Sound Made by Object(s):\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s)\n19. Apparent Construction:\n20. Effect on Clouds:\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of):\n22. Manner of Disappearance:\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting:\n24. Peculiarities Noted:\n25. Summary of Incident: (See attached page) Investigation continuing"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 215\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 3 Dec 1948 2015\n2. Where Sighted: Fairfield-Suisun AF Base, Calif - north of field\n3. Observer's Position: control tower (thru 8-power binoculars) (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Control Tower personnel\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: control tower personnel\n6. Attention Attracted by: N/S\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): 1 to 2 feet in diameter\n9. Color of Object(s): bright light\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) Circular\n11. Nature of Luminosity: like a ramp flood light (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated) When first sighted: 1 to 2,000 ft - climbed to 20,000 feet\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: 400 to 500 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: Began rapid climb but erratic - like change to pace\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): no sound heard\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) climbed toward southeast\n19. Apparent Construction: similar to a ramp floodlight\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): none\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: 15 miles visibility, wind west at 5 mph\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Intensity of the light\n25. Summary of Incident: (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 215\n\nControl tower personnel on duty at Fairfield Suisun AFB, Fairfield, Calif., first sighted object at 1,000 to 2,000 feet north of field in a 5° climb heading southeast over field. Started to climb at about 400 to 500 MPH to 20,000 feet. Climb seemed erratic like change to pace. Tower personnel put 8-power binoculars on object. All that could be seen was a circular light one to 2 feet in diameter. Light had intensity of a Ramp floodlight and was so bright that it blanked out any silhouette (if any) when sighted in binoculars. Weather balloon released 45 to 35 minutes previous to sighting but was lost ten minutes after released. Personnel inside tower could not hear any sound. No exhaust trail."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 216\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 8 December 1948 15:46\n2. Where Sighted: Chanute AF Base, Illinois - 40°-18' North 88° 7-1/2' East\n3. Observer's Position: ground while facing northeast (i.e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Sgt James E. Doty, Sgt Eugene E. Montag Det 16/IL, 16th Wea Sq, Chanute AFB, Rantoul, Illinois\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Weather Observers, 16th Wea Sq\n6. Attention Attracted by: glint of light\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): 15 feet long x 6 ft wide - size jet fighter type plane thick(?)\n9. Color of Object(s): white\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) Round\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated) Over 15,000 ft\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: over 350 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: 3 seconds\n16. Tactics: Seemed to be moving in upward path horizontal from 15° above horizon to 20 or 25°\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): No sound\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) Northeast to South Southwest\n19. Apparent Construction: N/S\n20. Effect on Clouds: No clouds\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): Statement of James E. Doty mentions that the object was leaving a trail\n22. Manner of Disappearance: flew out of sight\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: high scattered clouds visibility: 10 miles\n24. Peculiarities Noted: (\n25. Summary of Incident: (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 216\n\nOn 8 Dec 1948 at approximately 1846 hours Sergeant James E. Doty noticed what appeared to be either a sky rocket or meteor, and called the object to the attention of his companion, Sergeant Eugene E. Montag.\n\nSergeant Doty stated that the object did not appear to be a star because it was three or four times as large as a star and seemed closer than a star would be. It was sending from the northeast toward the south southwest and was moving upwards at about a 15 or 20 degree angle. As it moved it seemed to get larger. The object left a trail. In about two or three seconds it disappeared. The object was round, white and moved very fast.\n\nSergeant E. Montag's statement does not differ as to direction or color or angle of ascent. States that the object traversed about 2 to 3/10 of the sky while under observation and did not appear to him to be a falling star. He reported to the Duty Forecaster at the Base weather station. Sergeant Montag's statement does not mention seeing a trail."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 217\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 9 Dec 48 at 15:20 (Zonal by 24 hr clock)\n2. Where Sighted: 5 to 12 miles SE of Pittsburgh on heading of 300°\n3. Observer's Position: Air on a heading of 300° (i.e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Col J. K. Brown & Capt E. G. Mulling\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Pilot and co-pilot Guided Missile Group, DCS/O Hq, USAF, Washington\n6. Attention Attracted by: Capt Mulling called attention of Col Brown to the object\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): Appeared slightly smaller than a quarter on windshield of aircraft\n9. Color of Object(s): chalky white but not shiny\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) appeared perfectly round\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?) Was observed to shimmer - possibly due to extreme speed and to distortion of light waves\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated) Undetermined - 12 to 16,000 feet\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: Unknown - thought to be 4 to 5 miles when first sighted.\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: Unknown, but evidently very fast as during the 7 minutes of the sighting it moved from 60° above horizon in a straight line to 10° (time of disappearance)\n15. Time in Sight: 7 minutes\n16. Tactics: Moved in straight line - horizontal flight\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): Could not be determined\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) On a course of 270°\n19. Apparent Construction: Undetermined\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): A slight shimmer was observed - could have been exhaust\n22. Manner of Disappearance: Last seen 10° above horizon - became too small to see\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: Alto-stratus clouds around Akron\n24. Peculiarities Noted: A jittery motion or horizontal shimmer was noticeable at all times\n25. Summary of Incident: (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 217\n\nOn 9 December while on flight from Washington, D. C. to Patterson Field, shortly after leaving Pittsburgh range some 8 to 12 miles southeast of Pittsburgh Capt Mulling asked Col Brown if he were interested in seeing a flying disc! Col Brown removed his flight goggles, took a quick look and said \"Looks like a balloon to me\" Capt Mulling didn't agree since the object evinced a very definite movement and was proceeding in a southwest direction at a pretty fair rate of speed. Col Brown then decided to watch the object again. The object appeared perfectly round and of a chalky white color but did not appear shiny. It was whiter than the clouds and was seen against a background of strips of blue sky alternating with strips of thin broken stratus. It was much whiter than the clouds. It appeared to be traveling fairly rapidly through or above the clouds disappearing behind them and then reappearing but always pursuing a straight course. When first sighted it appeared at 60° above horizon and seemed from the observer's viewpoint to be about the size of a quarter - thought to be about 4 to 5 miles in front of the C-45. A horizontal shimmer or jittery motion was noticable at all times. The C-45 was pursuing a course of 300° and then changed to 270° with the object almost parallel on a course of 290°. The C-45 was cruising at 180 MPH at 6,000 feet. The object appeared to be 12 to 16,000 feet and was above clouds. Object last seen at about 10° above the horizon and was about the size of a beebee shot."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I. CIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\nIncident: 218\n1. Date of Observation N/S\n2. Time of Observation 2245 E\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . 40 miles northwest of Martinsburg, West Va.\n4. Observer's Position . Aircraft on 125° heading\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer Capt O. M. Legg, Capt R. H. Gandy & S/Sgt\nT. P. Turner of the Air Rescue Service, Fort Bragg, N. C.\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . Pilot & co-pilot and engineer\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) By . . seeing object in front of aircraft\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1\n9. Size of Object(s) Not determined\n10. Color of Object(s) Changing - red to blue to red\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . similar to parachute flare\n12. Nature of Luminosity . flare\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . 20 miles\n14. Speed of Object(s) Appeared to be stationary\n15. Time in Sight . 1 minute\n16. Tactics . remained stationary\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . none heard\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) Appeared stationary\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) . Like flare\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . N/S - no exhaust noticed\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . Weather in Martinsburg area reported as clear 7 miles visibility\n22. Peculiarities Noted . changed color\n23. Summary of Incident . . . (over)\n(Attach a Separate Sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 218\nObject sighted some 40 miles northwest of Martinsburg, West Va., by pilot of AF 5952 and crew. A brilliant red flare was sighted at an altitude of approximately 10,000 to 11,000 ft. It appeared to be 20 miles in front of the aircraft which was on a heading of 125°. The shape appeared similar to a parachute flare. The color was variable changing to red to blue to red. Appeared to be stationary. No sound heard and no exhaust trail noticed. No opinion was formed by any member of the crew as to identify of the object. The flare lasted approximately 1 minute."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n(To be filled out and retained in files)\nIncident: 219\n1. Date of Observation . 29 Nov 48\n2. Time of Observation . 8:00 P.M.\n3. Where was Object(s) Sighted . Newburgh, N. Y.\n4. Observer's Position . ground, 1st & Concord St. Newburgh, N. Y.\n(i.e. ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n5. Name and Address of Observer . Doris Croke, age 14, 325 First St., Newburgh\n. . . & two young friends\n6. Occupation and/or Hobbies . Ninth grade student at N. Junior High School\n7. Attention Attracted to Object (s) by . N/S\n8. Number of Object(s) Sighted . 1\n9. Size of Object(s) . . . . \"large as life\", \"large red ball\"\n10. Color of Object(s) . red\n11. Shape (Sketch if Possible) . ball\n12. Nature of Luminosity . Ball of Fire\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer . N/S\n14. Speed of Object(s) . N/S - but extremely fast\n15. Time in Sight . 2 seconds\n16. Tactics . horizontal flight. - went below horizon\n17. Sound Made by Object(s) . N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) . East to West\n19. Apparent Construction (Of What Material or Substance) . \"fire\"\n20. Effect of Objects on Clouds and/or Exhaust Trail . long tail\nWitness thought she saw a blue-tailed comet\n21. Weather Conditions Existing at the Time . N/S\n22. Peculiarities Noted . Thought it seemed unusual for a shooting star\n23. Summary of Incident . . . (over)\n(Attach a Separate sheet if Additional Space is Needed)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 219\nDoris Croke, age 14, a ninth grade student at North Junior High, Newburgh, N. Y., reported that on the night of 29 November 1948 at precisely 8:00 while standing with two young friends on the corner of Concord St & 1st Street, that she observed a ball of fire with a long tail in the north of the sky. Course of the object was from east to west. It was visible for two seconds and then went below the horizon. She stated that while she had seen many shooting stars that she had never seen anything like this. She also described the astral phenomenon as being a \"large red ball speeding thru the heavens.\" She was convinced that she had seen a blue-tailed comet."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Under investigation\nINCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 220\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 29 Nov 1948 2113\n2. Where Sighted: San Francisco, Calif\n3. Observer's Position: ground\n(i, e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Mr Robert Thatcher, 1739 38th Ave., San Francisco, Calif\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Science Teacher Francisco Jr High School\n6. Attention Attracted by: yellow light flashing across the sky\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): N/S\n9. Color of Object(s): yellow\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) N/S \"flash of light\"\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: N/S (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: \"too fast for plane\"\n15. Time in Sight: 7 seconds\n16. Tactics: 1st headed north then turned north-northwest\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) North Northwest\n19. Apparent Construction: flash of light\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): N/S - just flash of light was observed\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Extreme speed - too fast for plane but did not think it was a comet or shooting star\n25. Summary of Incident:\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr Robert Thatcher, an AF Veteran, now a Science teacher at the Francisco Jr High School, called Hq 4th AF to report a yellow light flash across the sky at approximately 2113 hours the night of 29 November 1948. Light was headed due North then turned North-Northwest and disappeared. It lasted for about 7 seconds and appeared to be traveling too fast for a plane. However, it did not appear to be a comet or shooting star."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 221\n\nCase under investigation\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation:\n2. Where Sighted: Midland, Michigan\n3. Observer's Position: (i.e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer:\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies:\n6. Attention Attracted by:\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen:\n8. Size of Object(s):\n9. Color of Object(s):\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible)\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer:\n14. Estimated Speed of Object:\n15. Time in Sight:\n16. Tactics:\n17. Sound Made by Object(s):\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s)\n19. Apparent Construction:\n20. Effect on Clouds:\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of):\n22. Manner of Disappearance:\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting:\n24. Peculiarities Noted:\n25. Summary of Incident: (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TT Conf 193\n23 Dec 48\n\nIncident 221\n\nCSAF ITEM 5 / RESTRICTED /\n\nREFERENCE AMC ITEM 4 PM TT 21 DECEMBER, FULL INFORMATION RELATIVE MIDLAND, MICHIGAN, INCIDENT WILL BE FORWARDED HQS AMC ATTENTION: PROJECT \"SIGN\" AND CSAF ITEM 5 / RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 223\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 23 Nov 1948 at 2220 hours\n2. Where Sighted: Furstenfeldbruck, Germany\n3. Observer's Position: from ground (i.e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Capt Hugh Slater, 23rd Fighter Sq Furstenfeldbruck AF Base, Germany\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: F-80 pilot\n6. Attention Attracted by: N/S\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1 possibly 2\n8. Size of Object(s): N/S\n9. Color of Object(s): like reddish star\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) N/S\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: 27,000 ft to 40,000 ft (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: from 200 to 500 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: horizontal flight, climbing and circling\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) southerly direction turning slightly to SW and then SE\n19. Apparent Construction: N/S\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): N/S\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: Sky: clear; moon shining; no cloud layers, visibility 3 miles with ground fog. Winds aloft: 56 knot per hour\n24. Peculiarities Noted:\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 223\n\nAt 2220 hours, local time, 23 Nov 48, Capt Hugh Slater saw an object in the air directly east of Furstenfeldbruck at an unknown altitude. It looked like a reddish star and was moving in a southerly direction across Munich turning slightly to the South-West and then South-East. Speed could have been between 200 and 500 MPH. Actual speed could not be estimated. Capt Slater called Base Operations from his barracks and they notified Racecard TF Station who reported nothing on the scope but stated they would look. Racecard Station then called Base Operations to report an unidentified object 27,000 ft up some 30 miles south of Munich. Later Racecard Station called Capt Slater to report that the object was climbing and was then believed to be at 40,000 ft altitude about 40 miles south of Munich and was circling.\n\nThere were no F-80's (Jets) flying on this night.\n\nCapt Slater (an F-80 pilot) is considered completely reliable and the facts stated above were verified by Capt Darwin R. Addis 23rd Fighter Sq (also an F-80 pilot) who was with Capt Slater at the time of the sighting."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 223\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 5 December 1948 2105 hours & 2127 hours\n2. Where Sighted: West of Las Vegas, New Mexico (2105) East slope of Sandia Mountains - near Albuquerque, N. M. (2127)\n3. Observer's Position: Air - pilot of a C-47 while flying at 15,000 ft.\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Captain A. Goade, AO-55483\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Pilot\n6. Attention Attracted by: flare\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): N/S\n9. Color of Object(s): green\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) similar to flare\n11. Nature of Luminosity: Like flare (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: 500 feet (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: N/S\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: N/S\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) N/S\n19. Apparent Construction: Like flare\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): N/S\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S\n24. Peculiarities Noted:\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At 2130 hours, 5 Dec 1948, Capt Goade, flying a C-47, No. AF 9921, enroute from Lowry AF Base, Denver, Colorado, to Williams AF Base, Chandler, Arizona, reported his position to the Control Tower, Kirtland AF Base, as being approximately 10 miles east of Albuquerque. Capt Goade stated he had seen a green flare arise from the ground to an altitude of approximately 500 ft on the east slope of the Sandia Mountains at about 2127 hours. He was flying at 15,000 ft. Stated he had just seen the same type flare at approximately 2105 hours just west of Las Vegas, New Mexico, at approximately 2105 hours.\n\nOther sightings of this flare are as follows:\n\nDec 5, 1948\n\n7:30 p. m. Mary & John Smith (Las Vegas, N. M.)\n9:05 P. M. (Capt Goade) west of Las Vegas, N. M.\n9:15 p. m. Mr & Mrs Lewis Martinez (Las Vegas, N. M.)\n9:15 - 9:30 p.m. Mr Roger Lewis (Las Vegas, N. M.)\n9:15 p. m. Rev & Mrs C. M. Wallace (Near Lucy, N. M.)\n9:27 p. m. Capt Goade & Major Carter (Incidents 223 & 223a) near Albuquerque, N. M.\n9:35 p. m. Mr Ernest Van Lloyd, Pilot and Co-Pilot James L. Smith (Las Vegas, N. M.)\n10:00 - 10:15 p.m. Mrs Woodrow House (Near Las Vegas, N. M.)\n10:20 p. m. Sgt. & Mrs Frank Henaley (Near Levy, N. M.)\n10:30 p. m. Mr Frank Green (Temporary Santa Fe RR Station ON VA, N.M.)\n11:15 p. m. George (Wm.?) Hirst (Near Las Vegas, N. M.)\n\nNOTE: Inquiry of local airfields both commercial and governmental unearthed no applicable explanation of this phenomena. Holloman AF Base performs no research work at night and on Sundays which involves the use of any lighting device or flares such as described."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 223a\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 5 December 1948 2135 hours\n2. Where Sighted: west of Las Vegas, N. M.\n3. Observer's Position: Air, pilot of a commercial plane while enroute from Tucumcari, N. M. to Las Vegas to Santa Fe, to Albuquerque, N.M.\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: (Capt Pioneer Air Flight #63 Capt VAN LLOYD\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Pilot\n6. Attention Attracted by: Object appeared to be coming straight to ship \"attempted to jerk plane from course to avoid the light\"\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): N/S\n9. Color of Object(s): pale green (first rpt) bright white changing to orange (interview with S/A NEFF)\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) N/S - similar to Very Pistol flare\n11. Nature of Luminosity: like shooting star (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: 500 feet altitude (1st rpt) slight above 9,000 ft (interview with NEFF)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S - thought object was coming straight to ship\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: N/S\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: N/S appeared to be coming straight to the ship - then trailed off to the ground\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) N/S\n19. Apparent Construction: flare-like\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): pale green trail (not mentioned in 2d rpt)\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Too near the ground for a shooting star & too far up for a Very Pistol flare\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 223a\n1st rpt At 2320 hours 5 December 1948, Captain VAN LLOYD, pilot of Pioneer Flight #63, reported by telephone to Kirtland AF Base Control Tower stating that he had seen a green light just west of Las Vegas at approximately 2135 hours. Pilot at first believed the light was a shooting star, but upon questioning thought it was too near the ground. Thought too it could have been a Very Pistol flare only it appeared much higher - about 500 ft. When he first observed the light it appeared to be coming straight toward the plane and he attempted to swerve to avoid the light; however, it then trailed off to the ground. The light was pale green and had a pale green trail, like that on a rocket.\n\nSee Report No. 223 for surrounding data.\n\n2d rpt Later Capt VAN LLOYD and his co-pilot James L. Smith, were interviewed by S/A MELVIN E. NEFF, at Pioneer Airline Operations, Kirtland AF Base, Kirtland Fld, N. M. VAN LLOYD and SMITH advised that at 2135 hours 5 Dec 48 as they were approaching Las Vegas, N. M. in a C-47 type plane at an altitude of 9,000 ft (compass heading of 272°), they observed directly ahead and slightly above their altitude - in the vicinity of Montezuma Mission a phenomena which first appeared as a bright white flash - then an object came into view which was described as being a whitish orange color. It first appeared to be coming directly toward their plane then arched downward and disappeared from sight. Was only in sight for a few seconds and no estimate could be made of size or distance.\n\nNOTE: It is to be noted that there is a discrepancy in the color (also in the altitude - in the second report he states the object was a little higher than his plane - which was flying at 9,000 ft) First report was made to Kirtland AF Base Control Tower & second report was obtained by S/A MELVIN E. NEFF in a personal interview."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 224\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 5 December 1948 1833\n2. Where Sighted: 20 miles east of Las Vegas, N. M.\n3. Observer's Position: Plane, 5000 ft above earth 35° 31' N - 104° 51' W\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: S/A STAHL and NEFF\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Special Agents and rated pilots\n6. Attention Attracted by: brilliant green light\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): considerably larger than that of a normal flare, meteor or shooting star\n9. Color of Object(s): intense green\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) N/S - similar to flare\n11. Nature of Luminosity: Light more intense than a normal flare (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: 13,500 above sea level. 7,000 ft above earth (estimated) (approximately 2,000 ft higher than plane)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: N/S\n15. Time in Sight: 2 seconds\n16. Tactics: observed a flat trajectory - almost parallel to the earth, trajectory dropped off rapidly and a trail of glowing fragments were observed to fall\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) 60° NE to 240° WSW\n19. Apparent Construction: meteor-like or flare-like\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): had trail of glowing fragments reddish orange in color which fell toward the ground\n22. Manner of Disappearance: disintegrated\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: CAVU - minimum of 75 miles - wind 30 MPH from 310°. Moon approx half-way to zenith and south or right of course\n24. Peculiarities Noted: See Incident 227 - Significant Differences between the Fireballs Observed in the Interval Dec 5-13 and Typical Meteors.\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"At 1745 on 5 Dec 46, Spec Agents STAHL & NEFF, both rated pilots, took off from Kirtland AF Base in a T-7 type aircraft. At 1833 while flying at an indicated altitude of 11,500 feet, mean sea level, approximately 5,000 feet above terrain, a strange phenomenon was observed. Exact position of the aircraft at time of observation was 35° 31' N - 104° 51' W, approximately 20 miles east of Las Vegas, N. M., radio sonde station. Aircraft was on a compass course of 90°, indicated air-speed was 160 MPH and ground speed approx 190 mph. S/A STAHL was pilot and seated on the left side of cockpit. S/A NEFF first observed the object and a split second later S/A STAHL saw it. It was 2,000 ft higher than the plane or 13,500 ft above mean sea level and was approaching the plane at a rapid rate of speed from approximately 30° to the left of course, from 60° NE, to 240° WSW. The object was similar in appearance to a burning green flare of common use in the Air Forces. However, the light was much more intense and the object appeared considerably larger than a normal flare. No estimate could be made of the distance or size of the object since no other object was visible upon which to base a comparison. It was definitely larger than a shooting star, meteor or flare. The trajectory of the object when first sighted was almost flat and parallel to the earth. The phenomenon lasted approximately 2 seconds at the end of which time the object seemed to burn out. The trajectory then dropped off rapidly and a trail of glowing fragments reddish orange in color was observed falling toward the ground. These fragments were visible for less than a second before disappearing. The phenomenon was of such intensity as to be visible from the very moment it ignited and was observed a split second later. It was not possible for the phenomenon to have been visible for longer than a split second before observation. (See \"e\" under\"Significant Differences Between the Fireballs Observed in the Interval Dec 5-13 & Typical Meteors\" - Incident 227)\n\nSee Incident 223"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nlatter part of 47\nIncident No. 225\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 3 or 4th Nov 48 - 2130 hours & 23 Nov 48 (All sightings occurred approx 2200 hours)\n2. Where Sighted: 10 miles east of Vaughn, N. M. - Highway 60 on 3 or 4th Nov 48\n3. Observer's Position: ground - while driving (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Col W. P. Hayes, Inf., Executive, New Mexico Military District\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: As above\n6. Attention Attracted by: N/S\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): 1 foot in diameter\n9. Color of Object(s): bright white changing to bright fiery red color as it exploded\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) ball\n11. Nature of Luminosity: \"like miniature sun\" (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated) From 500 ft when first observed to 100-200 ft from ground where it burst in a spray of reddish color\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: 40 to 60 yds on one sighting and about 400 yds at another\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: Slow descent\n15. Time in Sight: N/S - Had time to get out of car and watch object which appeared to explode 40 to 60 yds in front of him at an altitude of 200 ft.\n16. Tactics: slow vertical descent\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): none - although he was within 40 to 60 yds of obj. & outside of car. See \"Details\" at Albuquerque, N.M.\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) Vertical descent\n19. Apparent Construction: fireball\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S - weather clear\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): N/S\n22. Manner of Disappearance: exploded - fragments assuming a fiery red color which descended toward earth like numerous sparks but extinguished before reaching ground\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: Clear\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Noticed always around 2200 hours - in the vicinity of Vaughn - Highway 60\n25. Summary of Incident: (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 225\n\nColonel Hayes first observed an unusual aerial phenomena during the latter part of 1947. This occurred in the vicinity of Vaughn, N. M. The phenomena appeared approximately 400-500 ft above the ground when first observed and was descending slowly and steadily in a vertical manner toward the earth. It appeared slightly larger than a basketball, bright white in color like a miniature sun. At a point approximately 200 feet above the surface of the earth, the object appeared to explode although no noise was apparent. By this time the Colonel had stopped his automobile and had gotten out to watch the object. The explosion or disintegration appeared to be taking place some 40 to 60 yards distant and still no noise was noticed. At this time the fragments assumed a fiery red color and descended toward earth like numerous sparks being extinguished before touching the ground. At the time Col Hayes was on Highway 60, near a railroad and separated from the vicinity where the fragments were landing by a fence. He did not cross the fence or investigate further.\n\nOn 3 or 4 Nov 48 at approximately 2130 hours he observed a ball of light, reddish white in color, 1 foot in diameter, falling vertically. The ball burst 100-200 feet from the ground in a spray of reddish color which extinguished before reaching the ground - this occurred about 400 yards north of the road on which he was driving - 10 miles east of Vaughn, N. M. - Highway 60.\n\nOn 23 Nov 1948 at approximately 2130 hours, Col Hayes was driving west on Highway 60 - approximately 10 miles west of Vaughn, N. M. He again observed a ball of light descending vertically. It burst 100-200 feet from the ground - Conditions and appearance were the same as on 3 and 4th Nov.\n\nCol Hayes\nOn the last 2 sightings saw no aircraft and heard no sound which is understandable since he was traveling in a closed automobile. Weather conditions were clear.\n\nEVALUATION B-2."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 226\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 6 December 1948 approx 2255 in the evening\n2. Where Sighted: Sandia Base, Albuquerque, N. M.\n3. Observer's Position: ground - while driving west on \"D\" St. (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Mr Joe Toulouse, Security Section, Sandia Base, Albuquerque, N. M.\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: N/S - see above\n6. Attention Attracted by: Saw light on windshield\n7. Number of Object( ) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): Approximately 1/3 the diameter of the moon\n9. Color of Object(s): greenish\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) N/S - like flare\n11. Nature of Luminosity: Like flare (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: N/S (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: N/S\n15. Time in Sight: 2 to 3 seconds\n16. Tactics: Flight are falling from east to west\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) east to west\n19. Apparent Construction: like flare\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of): flaming tail appeared during arc\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Greenish hue\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 226\n\nAt approximately 2255 the evening of 6 December 1948, Mr Joseph H. Toulouse, A. E. C. Security, Sandia Base, observed a definite greenish flare in the sky almost directly overhead of Sandia Base. At the time he was driving west on \"D\" Street and had arrived at a Stop sign at Main Street. The flare appeared in the upper right hand corner of the windshield slightly to the northwest.\n\nIt was approximately 1/3 the diameter of the moon and a slight arc ensued falling from east to west. The flaming tail appeared during the arc. The entire phenomenon lasted possibly two to three seconds after which it vanished."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 227\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 12 Dec 1945 Approx 9:00 1 m. 30 s & 9:00 2 m. 30s.\n2. Where Sighted: Near Bernal, New Mexico\n3. Observer's Position: ground - right front seat of car\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Dr La Paz, Director, Institute of Meteorities, University of New Mexico\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Astronomer\n6. Attention Attracted by: indirect vision\n*7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): Apparent angular diameter 5'\n9. Color of Object(s): very bright green\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) ball\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (Directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: 5 to 10 miles altitude (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: Either 5 to 12 miles or 3 to 6 miles per second depending on the duration estimate used\n15. Time in Sight: 2.1 to 2.3 seconds\n16. Tactics: Observed almost exact horizontal flight until a 1/10th second before disappearance when a slight but definite curvature downward was noticed.\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): none noticed\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) east to west - very low on the horizon\n19. Apparent Construction: \"fireball\"\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): No trail noticed\n22. Manner of Disappearance: Exploded into four smaller bright green fragments which quickly disappeared\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: Clear\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Our Significant Differences Between the Fireballs Observed in the Interval 5-13 Dec and Typical Meteors by Dr La Paz.\n25. Summary of Incident: (over)\n(See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 227\nDr La Paz's attention was direction to an area about 15° west of L-Cygni when by indirect vision he became aware of a very bright green ball (apparent angular diameter 5') to the right of the area in his center field of view which was moving from east to west very low on the horizon. Shouting \"Look\" to his companions (Maj G. L. Phillips, AF-CAP Liaison Officer, Kirtland Fld., Lt Allan Clark, Intel Officer, N. Mex. Wing CAP, and Inspectors Jeffers and McQuigan, AEC Security Service (Los Alamos, N. M.) who then timed duration of fireball which ranged from 2.1 seconds to 2.3 sec. The path of the green ball was almost exactly horizontal (altitude estimated as only 3 or 4 degrees) until just a tenth of a second or so before it disappeared. During the last one or two tenths of a second of its visibility a slight but definite curvature downward developed in its path. From the very beginning the ball was very bright. Immediate comparison with Sirius (at a much greater altitude than the green fireball) indicates that during all but the last one or two tenths of a second of the fireball's visibility it was at least of apparent magnitude -4 (minus four). Just as curvature in its path developed, the magnitude of the fireball rose slightly and it broke up into three or four smaller but still bright green fragments which disappeared almost instantly. Although Lt Clark stopped the car the moment the fireball disappeared and the occupants then stood outside the car and listened for meteoritic detonations or rumblings, nothing was heard. Two night guards at Los Alamos had also witnessed the phenomena simultaneously. The green fireball of December 12th, 9 h 2m plus or minus 30s appeared very near a point with the coordinates latitude 35° 50' longitude 106° 40' and disappeared near a point with the coordinates latitude 35° 45', longitude 107° 5', traversing a nearly or exactly horizontal path with a length of very nearly twenty-five (25) miles at an altitude above the surface of the earth of approximately 5 to 10 miles, depending on the estimate of angular altitude employed in the reduction. The velocity with respect to the earth works out at between 5 to 12 miles a second - depending on the duration estimate used. It should be observed that the above results are obtained under the assumption that the points of appearance and disappearance of the fireball were seen simultaneously by both the Bernal and Los Alamos groups. In case this assumption is not fulfilled, the real path could very easily be no more than 10 to 12 miles long, the velocity with respect to the earth then working out at between 3 and 6 miles a second. While there is thus considerable uncertainty because of the lack of confirming azimuth observations from a third station, the concordance in the five (5) different estimates of angular elevation make it most unlikely that the linear height of the fireball was much less than 5 miles and much more than 10 miles. It is interesting to observe that the backward extension of the 25-mile path first given passes almost centrally across the Los Alamos reservation.\nDuring the entire night of the 12th, meteors of all magnitudes from the first to the fifth and of various colors (with white and yellow predominating and with no evidence of green) were occasionally seen emanating from the Geminid radiant. This radiant was well above the horizon even at the time of the Starvation Peak incident. (near Bernal, N. M.) Consequently, the apparent paths of the meteors from the radiant appeared as"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 227\nluminous arcs of great circles diverging from the radiant point and passing downward to intersect the horizon under angles always large and for the most part approaching 90° in value. In sharpest contrast, the path of the bright green fireball seen from near Starvation Peak was very nearly, if not exactly, parallel to the horizon. This green fireball certainly did not emanate from the Geminid radiant.\nSubject to discovery that a new (non-Geminid) meteoric radiant emitting numerous very bright fireballs of a vivid green color (deeper and richer than the green of the beacon at the New Municipal Airport south of Santa Fe, New Mexico) has suddenly become active during the first half of December, I am now convinced the various \"green Flare\" incidents reported to the O. S. I. are not meteoric in nature. See Incidents: 225, 226, 223, 223a, 224, 230\nSignificant Differences Between the Fireballs Observed in the Interval December 5-13 and Typical Meteors:\na. The horizontal nature of the paths of most of the December fireballs is most unusual. Genuine meteors are rarely observed to move in horizontal paths.\nb. The very low height of the December fireball discussed in Section 2 above sets it off in sharp contrast from the genuine meteors for which heights of the order of 40 or more miles are normally observed.\nc. The velocity determined for the fireball of December 12 is much less than the velocities determined from typical meteors (and yet is considerably greater than the speeds of the V-2 Rockets or jet planes or of conventional flares).\nd. In the case of meteorites that penetrate to as low levels as that determined for the fireball of December 12, the observed luminous phenomena are always accompanied by very violent noises. No noises whatever have been observed in connection with the various December fireballs so far investigated.\ne. Genuine meteors normally show remarkable variations in brightness beginning as fine thin hair lines, which are scarcely visible to the observer and then brightening up to flash out near the end of their paths. In the case of the December fireballs, most of the observers have reported that the green balls appeared almost instantly at their full brightness.\nf. In the case of genuine meteors the paths are directed toward all points of the compass with equal frequency. On the contrary in the case of the green fireballs, plots of admissible approach sectors show that there is a very pronounced tendency for the paths to come in from the north half of the sky.\ng. The three groups of anomalous greenish luminous phenomena show a curious association with well known meteor showers, although none"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 227\nof these meteor showers normally produce extremely bright green fireballs such as those recently observed. For example, the observation mentioned by Mr Monnig (Incident 231) appeared near the maximum of the Quadrantid shower of early January. Mr McCullough's observation of August was near the time of the Perseid shower (Incident 230) and the December observations (223, 223a 224, 226, 227, all fall in the interval covered by the Geminid shower. This relationship might indicate an attempt to render the green fireballs less conspicuous by causing them to appear only when there is considerable meteoric activity.\nh. As noted in an earlier communication the remarkably vivid green color reported for most of the December fireballs is rarely observed in the case of genuine meteors. By laboratory test this peculiar color seems to be identical with that given off by copper salts in the blowpipe flame. If this identification is correct, the wavelength of the radiation from the green fireballs is near λ = 5218 A.\n1. The duration estimates of between 2 and 3 seconds reported for the green fireballs are considerably longer than those (0.4 - 0.5 seconds) for the ordinary visual meteors, but shorter than the duration estimates invariably reported in the case of a genuine meteorite fall (5 to 30 seconds or even longer).\nj. None of the green fireballs seem to have a train of sparks or a dust cloud following. This contrasts sharply with the behavior noted in case of meteoric fireballs - particularly those that penetrate to the very low levels where the green fireball of December 12 was observed.\nNOTE: Inquiry at Holloman AF Base, Alamogordo, N. M., revealed that research work at night and on Sundays does not involve the use of any lighting device or flares such as described in the various reports submitted.\n3"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 228\n1. Date and Time of Observation:\n2. Where Sighted: New Brighton, Pa.\n3. Observer's Position: (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer:\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies:\n6. Attention Attracted by:\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen:\n8. Size of Object(s):\n9. Color of Object(s):\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible)\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer:\n14. Estimated Speed of Object:\n15. Time in Sight:\n16. Tactics:\n17. Sound Made by Object(s):\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s)\n19. Apparent Construction:\n20. Effect on Clouds:\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of):\n22. Manner of Disappearance:\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting:\n24. Peculiarities Noted:\n25. Summary of Incident:\n(See attached page)\nCase under investigation"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 229\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 13 Dec 45\n2. Where Sighted: South Bay, Florida\n3. Observer's Position: Ground (With Binoculars)\n(i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: n/s\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: n/s\n6. Attention Attracted by: n/s\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: n/s\n8. Size of Object(s): n/s\n9. Color of Object(s): Red Blue Yellow\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) Like circle or halo of stars surrounding a blazing star.\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer:\n14. Estimated Speed of Object:\n15. Time in Sight:\n16. Tactics:\n17. Sound Made by Object(s):\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s)\n19. Apparent Construction:\n20. Effect on Clouds:\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of):\n22. Manner of Disappearance:\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting:\n24. Peculiarities Noted:\n25. Summary of Incident: Complete investigation not being carried out due to [REDACTED] (...) meagerness of report."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 229A\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 14 Dec 1945\n2. Where Sighted: Rivera Beach Florida\n3. Observer's Position: (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.) Ground (with Binoculars)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: n/s\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: n/s\n6. Attention Attracted by: n/s\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: n/s\n8. Size of Object(s): 20 feet\n9. Color of Object(s): Silver with big white spot.\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) Like large kite.\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer:\n14. Estimated Speed of Object:\n15. Time in Sight:\n16. Tactics: Dodged skid and speeded up.\n17. Sound Made by Object(s):\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s)\n19. Apparent Construction:\n20. Effect on Clouds:\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of):\n22. Manner of Disappearance:\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting:\n24. Peculiarities Noted:\n25. Summary of Incident: (S[REDACTED]) Complete investigation not being made due to meagerness of initial report."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 230\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 4 Aug 1948 - Between 2 & 3 A. M.\n2. Where Sighted: North Powder, Oregon - 2-1/2 miles north of\n3. Observer's Position: ground (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: J. B. McCullough, P. O. Box 2776, Boise, Idaho\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: N/S\n6. Attention Attracted by: N/S\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): N/S\n9. Color of Object(s): High tensity of green possibly on light-green side\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) N/S - \"fireball\"\n11. Nature of Luminosity: (directed beam of light?) like meteor - had definite fluorescent glow circumventing it\n12. Altitude of Object: 5,500 ft elevation above sea level (estimated)\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: N/S\n15. Time in Sight: N/S\n16. Tactics: Performed a 5-1/2 mile trajectory and arched earthward in a natural down grade. Arc equal to approximately 90°\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): N/S\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) northwest to southeast\n19. Apparent Construction: \"fireball\"\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): Did not have much of a meteor type tail - but did have a definite fluorescent glow circumventing it.\n22. Manner of Disappearance: \"After reaching the 'nth' degree of the arc, it extinguished itself\"\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: N/S\n24. Peculiarities Noted: Green glow\n25. Summary of Incident: (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 230\n\"On August 4th, while traveling south on U. S. Highway No. 30, approximately two and one-half miles north of North Powder, Oregon, - somewhere between 2 & 3 A. M. - I was amazed to see in the heavens directly south of me, a fireball. This object appeared to come out of nowhere, but when first observed, was traveling in a horizontal line on an angle presumed to be northwest to southeast at an elevation above sea level of 5500' (absolute direction and elevation argumentative). It appeared to me - for a descriptive purpose - as having been ejected from a huge Roman candle, and this candle, by whatever power held, was on a horizontal plane with the earth. As the object in its trajectory, approximately five and one-half miles, became spent, it arched earthly in a natural down grade. As I recall it, this arc was equal to approximately 90 degrees. Immediately after reaching this 'nth' degree of the arc, it extinguished itself. I do not recall that there was much of a meteor type tail, but the object did have a definite fluorescent glow circumventing itself. As to the color, I can best describe it by referring your observation after dark to a high tensity neon sign of green - perhaps on the light green side.\"\nSee Incident # 223"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\nIncident No. 231\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 1 Jan 46 1:25 A. M. & 1:30 A.M.\n2. Where Sighted: Abilene, Texas\n3. Observer's Position: ground (i. e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Mr A. Schroeder, 1109 Highland Ave Abilene, Texas\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: N/S\n6. Attention Attracted by: glow on the horizon - due west of Abilene, Texas (direction of White Sands Proving Grounds)\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): N/S\n9. Color of Object(s): Bright blue green\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible) Like bell with a fan-shaped glow surrounding\n11. Nature of Luminosity: Like flare (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: N/S - observed on the horizon\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: N/S - could not be estimated\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: No apparent speed\n15. Time in Sight: 2 seconds\n16. Tactics: - remained stationary\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): No sound\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s) No flight perceived\n19. Apparent Construction: flare-like\n20. Effect on Clouds: Clear sky\n21. Exhaust Trail (Color of): Fan-shaped glow seemed to surrounded object\n22. Manner of Disappearance: N/S\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: Clear sky\n24. Peculiarities Noted: See\n25. Summary of Incident: (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Information regarding this sighting taken from a letter of Oscar Monnig addressed to Mr A. Schroeder of Abilene, Texas, in regard to Mr Schroeder's query regarding a phenomena he witnessed the night of 1 Jan 45 at approximately 1:25 A. M. and again at 1:30 A. M.\n\nObject was described as a fan-shaped glow which originated from a large bell on the horizon and which extended to the meridian due west of Abilene, Texas, in a perfectly clear sky. Phenomena was of 2 seconds duration. Five minutes later it was seen again for the same length of time. No sound was heard.\n\nMr Monnig thought the phenomena could possibly be attributed to:\n\n(1) Disturbance of an electrical system such as transformers blowing out, or\n\n(2) Experiments at White Sands Proving Grounds which are due west of Abilene.\n\nNOTE: Inquiry at Holloman AF Base, Alamagordo, N. M., revealed that research work at night and on Sundays does not involve the use of any lighting device or flares such as described in the various reports submitted. See Incidents"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHECK-LIST UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nIncident # 232\n\n1. Date of Incident 16 Nov 1945\n2. Time of Incident 1315 Hours\n3. Place of observation Derwood N.J. (25 Miles NW NYC) (House)\n4. Name of observer Marie S. Green\n5. Occupation of observer Housewife\n6. Address of observer County Rd., Derwood N.J.\n7. Number of objects observed 1\n8. Distance of object from observer\n9. Time in sight 1 min.\n10. Altitude of object 1000 ft.\n11. Speed\n12. Direction of flight North to South\n13. Tactics\n14. Lights\n15. Sound\n16. Size\n17. Color Aluminum or Silvery with dark color mixed in.\n18. Shape Ball Like\n19. Odor detected\n20. Apparent construction Metallic\n21. Exhaust trails\n22. Weather conditions\n23. Effect on clouds\n24. Sketches or photographs\n25. Manner of disappearance\n26. Remarks: No further investigation being made by this office due to fact only one person witnessed phenomena"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET\n\nIncident No. 233\n\n1. Date and Time of Observation: 1 Jan 1949 1700\n2. Where Sighted: 2 miles east of Jackson, Mississippi\n3. Observer's Position: from air at an altitude of about 1,800 ft (i.e., ground, air, control tower, etc.)\n4. Name and Address of Observer: Mr & Mrs Tom Rush, 402 Mitchell Ave., Jackson, Mississippi\n5. Occupation and/or hobbies: Pilot employed by Dixie Air Service at Jackson, Mississippi. Ex AAF pilot\n6. Attention Attracted by: something flying in front of them\n7. Number of Object(s) Seen: 1\n8. Size of Object(s): 60 ft long, 10 feet wide tapering to 4 ft\n9. Color of Object(s): Dark blue or black\n10. Shape (Sketch if Possible): cigar-shaped - not unlike sleeve target. (1st report mentioned short stubby wings)\n11. Nature of Luminosity: N/S (directed beam of light?)\n12. Altitude of Object: (estimated) 1500 to 1600 feet, then a gradual climb\n13. Estimated Distance of Object from Observer: 500 feet; after turn it was as close as 1,200 feet from them. Crossed path of plane at 500 feet\n14. Estimated Speed of Object: Approx 200 MPH when first sighted, then accelerating to approximately 400 to 500 MPH\n15. Time in Sight: 10 to 12 seconds\n16. Tactics: Made 50 degree turn and increased speed as it headed southwest\n17. Sound Made by Object(s): Similar to helicopter (1st report roar (2d report))\n18. Direction of Flight of Object(s): West then southwest\n19. Apparent Construction: Similar to tow target\n20. Effect on Clouds: N/S\n21. Exhaust Trail Color of: none visible\n22. Manner of Disappearance: climbed toward Southwest & disappeared\n23. Weather Conditions at Time of Sighting: Weather clear to southwest\n24. Peculiarities Noted: As object made turn object appeared to have no wings.\n25. Summary of Incident: (over) (See attached page)"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident: 233\n\nMr Tom Rush, a pilot with Dixie Air Service, Jackson, Mississippi, and his wife (private pilot), sighted an unidentified aerial object 2 miles east of Jackson, Mississippi, at 1700 C, 1 Jan 49 while coming in for a landing at the Dixie Airport. Object was first described as being cigar-shaped with short stubby wings resembling a rocket. (Second report states there were no wings) Mr Rush specifically states in a signed letter \"as the object made its turn, it was then that I noticed the object didn't have wings.\" Object was first thought to be a large tow target about 60 feet long and about 10 feet in diameter at one end and about 4 ft at the trailing end. The tail even fluttered like a target but there was nothing towing it and the object moved at greater speed than tow targets. When the object crossed in front of the plane Rush estimated the speed to be about 200 MPH and stated that the object crossed some 500 feet in front of them. After the turn, the object was within 1,200 feet of the plane. Mr Rush attempted to point out the object to the pilot but the pilot did not understand and apparently did not see the object. As the object turned to the southwest it accelerated its speed and flew out of sight. Object seen for some 10 to 12 seconds. Color was dark blue or black. Speed at first sighting - 200 miles per hour, later thought to have accelerated to between 400 to 600 mph.\n\nObject was sighted by the above persons who were passengers in a Stinson civilian aircraft. No photographs were taken since a camera was not available. The Stinson was flying at about 1,500 feet. Investigation of flight schedules of adjacent airfields could throw no light on the incident."} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nUNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS\n\nIncident No.\n\n1. Date of Observation Date of Interview\n2. Exact time of observation (local)\n3. Place of Observation: (Map Coordinates)\n4. Position of observer (air, car, bldg, location of - give details:\n5. What attracted attention to object:\n6. Number of objects and sketch of formation or grouping:\n7. Apparent size (compare to known object, i.e., sun, moon, thumb or fist at arms length):\n8. Color of object:\n9. Shape (give graphic description - compare with known object):\n10. Altitude (Angle of elevation above horizon - 0 degrees at horizon, 90 degrees overhead):\n11. Direction from observer (Angle clockwise from North):\n12. Distance from observer (Distance to town, bldg, etc., over which object appeared to be):\n13. Direction of flight of object(s):\n14. Time in sight:\n15. Speed (time to cover given angular distance):\n16. Sound and odor:\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 2\nGuide to Investigation\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nIncident No. ________\n\n17. Trail (color, length, width, persistance, etc.)\n\n18. Luminosity (visible by reflection, incandescence, other - degree of brilliance):\n\n19. Projections (fins, wings, rods, antennae, canopies, etc.):\n\n20. Maneuvers (turns, climbs, dives, etc - sketch of flight path):\n\n21. Manner of disappearance:\n\n22. Effect on clouds:\n\n23. Additional information concerning object:\n\n24. Weather conditions and light at time of sighting:\n\nName and address of observer:\n\nOccupation and hobbies:\n\nComments of Interrogator relative to intelligence and character of observer (Check neighbors, police dept., FBI records, employer, etc.):\n\nDid observer wear glasses, especially polaroid glasses at time of sighting, or was object viewed through canopy, window, or other transparent material?\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n5-20300"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 3\nGuide to Investigation\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nIncident No. ________\n\nRelative to Radar Sightings\n\n1. Re radars now operating on ground\n\na. Observations of direction, range, speed, altitude and size of target:\n\nb. Did target execute any turns? If so, what angle (180°), etc, and what radius of turn. If radius of turn was not observable, how long did the target stay in the turn and what was its speed:\n\nc. Note particularly any separation of distant target into several targets upon approach:\n\nd. Was radar blip on cathode ray tube well defined and consistent with size of object; faint; fading, pulsating at regular rate:\n\ne. Did radar echo signal disappear suddenly or gradually?\n\n2. If airbourne, when object was sighted\n\na. Were there any radar indications or extra noise on radio circuits:\n\nb. Give estimates of size, speed, mancuvers, etc.:\n\nGENERAL\n\n1. Teletype sequences of local weather conditions:\n\n2. Winds aloft report:\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nPage 4\nGuide to Investigation\n\nIncident No. ________\n\n3. Local flight schedules of commercial, private and military aircraft flying in vicinity at the time:\n(Check Canadian activity if close to border)\n\n4. Possible releases of testing devices in vicinity sent aloft by Ordnance Navy, Air Force, Army, Weather Units, Research Organizations or any other:\n\n5. If object contacted earth, obtain soil samples within and without depression or spot where object landed for purposes of making comparison of soils.\n\n6. Obtain photographs (or original negatives) where available; if not, secure sketches of:\na. Object\nb. Surrounding terrain where object was observed\nc. Place where object contacted earth (if this happened)\nd. Maneuvers\ne. Formation (if more than two)\n\n7. Secure signed statements.\n\n8. Obtain fragments or physical evidence where possible.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n5-22 3020"} {"doc_id":"a7ebd10d0c2f4809","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS\nBIGELOW AEROSPACE\nADVANCED SPACE STUDIES ®\n\nContract HHM402-08-C-0072\n\nProject Management Plan\n(Overview Paper)\n\nDecember 2, 2008\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Bigelow Aerospace\nAdvanced Space Studies\n\nContract HHM402-08-C-0072\n\nProject Management Plan\n(Overview Paper)\n\nDecember 2, 2008\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BIGELOW AEROSPACE ADVANCED\nSPACE STUDIES\n\nStaff\n\nAAP Person 4\nAAP Person 7\n\nAdministrator\n\nDeputy Administrator\n\nAdvisors\n\nAAP Person 57\nAAP Person 8\n\nPage i\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PREFACE\n\nImportance of the Work\n\nThere has been over six decades of intensive activity of advanced\naerospace craft in the skies over North America and around the world. These have\nbeen witnessed, photographed and chased by military pilots, witnessed by ground\ncrews, by commercial airline pilots and by thousands of military and civilian\nground based personnel. The importance of this study lies in the possibility that\nsome of these advanced aerospace craft may represent a threat to the security of\nthe United States including its airspace and nuclear facilities. It is thus a very high\npriority to further our understanding of the physics and engineering feasibility of\nadvanced aerospace weapon systems applications as they apply to the potential\nfuture capabilities of foreign threat systems out to the far term, i.e. from now out\nthrough the year 2050.\n\nAppreciation\n\nBAASS appreciates the high level of trust that has been bestowed on the\norganization by the sponsors/DIA in assigning us with the responsibility of\nfurthering our understanding of the physics and engineering feasibility of\nadvanced aerospace weapons system applications. BAASS understands the\nsobering importance and the long term implications of this project.\n\nPage ii\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS\n\nBAASS acknowledges the receipt of three sets of documents that were\nsubmitted in fulfillment of contracts 081006-1 to the Mutual UFO Network\n(MUFON), 080930-1 to Earthtech International and an assignment to [REDACTED]\na BAASS employee. These reports that were separately authored by:\n(1) MUFON, (2) Earthtech International AAP Person 57 and (3) AAP Person 8\nwere prepared and delivered to BAASS under serious time constraints. We\nappreciate the service of these people.\n\nPage iii\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nBAASS Staff and Advisors.........................................................i\nPreface.........................................................ii\nAcknowledgements.........................................................iii\nTable of Contents.........................................................iv\n\nSummary .........................................................1\nKey Recommendations .........................................................4\nIntroduction (scope of work).........................................................8\nPlans of Action and Milestones .........................................................10\nConcluding Comments .........................................................34\n\nPage iv\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUMMARY\n\nThis Project Manager Report (PMR) fulfills the requirement to submit a\nreport as part of the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Application contract\nHHM402-08-C-0072. The report comprises overview projects that are focused on\nand include the scope of the final report (due in September 2009) for the twelve\nfollowing areas: (1) Lift, (2) Propulsion, (3) control, (4) Power Generation, (5)\nSpatial/Temporal Translation, (6) Materials, (7) Configuration/Structure, (8)\nSignature Reduction (Optical/IR/RF/Acoustic), (9)Human Interface, (10) Human\neffects, (11) Armament (RF and DEW), and (12) Other areas in support of 1-11.\nThe PMR addresses a Plan of Action, Milestones and the composition of BAASS\nanalytical teams for these twelve technical areas.\n\nIn numerous places throughout the EarthTech report previously mentioned,\nAAP Person\n57 and others refer to the need for \"examining more exotic possibilities\nthat might account for reports of truly anomalous characteristics of high-\nperformance craft of unknown origin whose mode of operation appears to be\nwell advanced beyond that presently known.\"\n\nWith that in mind, we present the Plans of Action and Milestones in this\nreport comprising nine separate major projects which collectively address all\ntwelve of the technical areas. It should be emphasized that for each of the nine\nprojects, we envisage extension and expansion into 2010 and 2011. Accordingly,\nthe milestones for each of the nine projects described herein should include\nextensions into 2010, 2011 and beyond.\n\nPage 1\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The nine major projects are:\n\nProject Physics was mandated by the DIA to study the current research on\nall twelve technical areas. Earthtech and its subcontractors will deliver\napproximately 24 in depth position papers targeted to twelve technical areas by\nJuly 31, 2009.\n\nProject Engagement will locate and secure small geographic areas that\nexperience very frequent displays of advanced aerospace vehicles. The purpose is\nto directly observe and measure advanced aerospace vehicle performance.\n\nProject Cooperation requires the full cooperation between the DIA and\nBAASS and lays out the expected frameworks and specifics of this cooperation.\nThis necessitates the help and cooperation from the DIA in assisting BAASS to\nobtain the high value film, hardware, relevant materials and information that are\nessential to the successful completion of this project.\n\nProject Campus will seek to stimulate, motivate and encourage the senior\nlevels of the academic community in the United States to seriously study\nadvanced aerospace vehicles and their performances.\n\nProject Database will bring together all existing data from multiple\nseparate databases on advanced aerospace vehicle performances in the United\nStates, and ultimately in other countries for the past 60 years. This new database\nwill be searchable by keywords that address all twelve technical areas.\n\nPage 2\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Project Oral History will contact and record interviews with dozens of\nhighly placed individuals from industry and the military who have had direct\nknowledge of film evidence, physical material evidence, hardware itself, biological\ntissue and other material as they pertain to advanced aerial technology in the\nUnited States over the past several decades.\n\nProject Blue Book Materials will obtain the case files and associated trace\nmaterials with the help of DIA of multiple high value cases involving advanced\naerospace vehicles that were never included in Project Blue Book presumably\nbecause they were deemed too sensitive.\n\nProject Northern Tier will obtain all the information and case files\npertaining to dozens of cases in which advanced aerospace vehicles flew over\nrestricted air force bases containing nuclear weapons, hovered over weapon\nstorage depots and interfered with functional integrity of ICBM missile systems\nduring the 1960s and 1970s. All of these cases potentially provide evidence of a\nthreat to the national security of the United States.\n\nProject Colares will obtain materials and case files, with help from the DIA,\nfrom an extensive series of advanced aerospace incidents, many of which caused\ndeath and injury to indigenous inhabitants, occurring on Colares Island in the\nNorthern area of Brazil in 1977. The Brazilian Air Force conducted an investigation\nand obtained multiple photographs, instrumented detection and eyewitness\ntestimony, much of which pointed to potentially hostile activity by the advanced\naerospace vehicles.\n\nIn summary, we believe that combined, these nine projects will\ncomprehensively address the twelve technical areas outlined in contract #\nHHM402-08-C-0072.\n\nPage 3\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"KEY RECOMMENDATIONS\n\n1) In order for BAASS to provide the optimum result, it is essential that\nvarious BAASS staff acquire the necessary clearances as soon as possible. It is\nour understanding that vital information that is germane to all of the\ncontractor recommendations already resides in government hands. Without\nthese clearances, BAASS will not be able to access this vital information\nrelevant to very advanced spacecraft. Without access to this quality\ninformation, BAASS would be handicapped to more of a parochial study of the\ntwelve technical areas. We would like to see at least the clearances approved\nfor the BAASS Administrator by the end of January, if at all possible. We would\nhope that other clearances for which the names have already been submitted\nwould be forthcoming relatively soon thereafter.\n\n2) One example of acquiring quality information through Agency help is from\naccess to high quality film as soon as possible. Whether the film is from gun\ncameras, ground base sources or satellites, all of our scientists and analytical\nsources agree, this information has significant inherent value. We believe this\nsingle type of resource can influence data gathering on technical areas\n1,2,3,4,5, 7,8, and 11 as will be explained later.\n\n3) Other \"low hanging fruit\" in which the Agency can play a central role could\ninclude the obtaining of the best Blue Book files that were kept separate due\nto their \"high sensitivity\" from the more routine incident reports that were\ninvestigated. Project Blue Book (active in the 1960's) was a US Airforce/US\ngovernment program assessing among other things the performance of very\nadvanced spacecraft. What wasn't publicly known was that a significant\n\nPage 4\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"amount of information and trace material never reached the small \"official\" investigation office. We believe we may know exactly where some of that information currently resides. For DIA, the acquisition of the data files known to be excluded from Project Bluebook, on advanced aerospace technology that presently resides at LANL (BAASS affiliated personnel have the precise files numbers and locations of these files at LANL) will be of great importance in meeting the timelines for about 8/12 of the technical tasks.\n\n4) Another example involving data already in government hands, which the Agency can help us retrieve, concerns the effects upon humans (#10) who were in close proximity to the functioning of very advanced spacecraft in the Colares Island, Brazil incidents. In line with project Colares: it is recommended that the DIA contact the Brazilian Air Force by February 1, 2009 in order to secure an entire set of files, including medical records, pertaining to the three month \"invasion\" by advanced aerospace vehicles in 1977 off the North coast of Brazil. These files include photographs and instrumented recordings made by the Brazilian air force.\n\n5) Other important data for Agency acquisition pertain to effects upon nuclear facilities where anomalous spacecraft were in close proximity: such as those incidences at RAF Bentwaters, England, Malmstrom AFB in Montana and several others over the years. These would apply to #11, Armaments, #8, Signature Reduction, and #10, Human Effects.\n\n6) Additional possibilities of benefit from accessing government sources through Agency help pertain to the matter of #3, Control, as in the operators of these very advanced spacecraft and possibly the source or sources of these craft.\n\nPage 5\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"7) Agency officials should make efforts to be officially available to accompany BAASS senior management during the process of interviewing key participants. The oral history program will be the extraction of information from people about exotic spacecraft who were highly placed within government. In order for many of these people to talk, it is necessary for them to know they won't get into trouble and it is officially okay for them to speak up regarding novel spacecraft that were not \"black\" government programs. We are speaking here of government employees. These oral histories would relate to probably all twelve technical areas. Since many of these people are in advanced age, time is of the essence. BAASS affiliated personnel have a list of about ten individuals who have worked in various parts or have been affiliated with the programs involving retrieval of advanced aerospace hardware or of associated biological material. It will be of great importance for DIA to contact these individuals and to obtain the maximum information from them. BAASS can supply the names and contact information for each person.\n\n8) Agency should assist BAASS wherever, whenever possible in the long term program of outreaching and collaboration with select foreign sources including governments. Various foreign contact relationships already exist among several BAASS senior personnel and other outside associates. It is substantiated with testimony that several \"crashes\" of novel spacecraft have occurred outside of the United States. Our concern addresses the level to which other countries have already succeeded in understanding the technical aspects of these craft. Even more impressive, would be any successes concerning back-engineering of various components.\n\nIn so far as this \"crash\" information is decades old, we have no idea what progress has been accomplished to date. However, we do know that various heads of state in other countries have a different view toward this subject of novel spacecraft than do American heads of state. While \"official\" American\n\nPage 6\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"behavior has taken the \"head in the sand\" approach, we know that has not been the universal reaction in other countries. Our military future could be seriously influenced.\n\n9) Under the premise that biological material of potentially non-human origin has been recovered, at the earliest available opportunity DIA will lobby via interagency connections for access to medical samples for evaluation by BAASS affiliated forensic personnel with such laboratories as the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP); the various commands housed at Fort Detrick, e.g., U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command (USAMRMC) with its Bio-defense Agency, and the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID); Dugway Proving Ground's U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC).\n\n10) Via DIA contact with NORAD by February 15, 2009, with data on trajectory and speed from uncorrelated targets having been made available to BAASS analysts, we will conduct a detailed evaluation on said data to mine it for information pertaining to Lift, Propulsion, Control, Power Generation, Spatial Temporal Translation, Materials, Configuration/Structure, Signature reduction, or Armaments.\n\nPage 7\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INTRODUCTION\n\nScope of Final Report Incorporating each Technical Area\n\nThis Program Manager Report (PMR) accomplishes the requirement to submit a report as part of the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Application contract HHM402-08-C-0072. This report comprises overview papers identifying the scope of the final report (due in September 2009) for each of the 12 following areas: (1) Lift, (2) Propulsion, (3) Control, (4) Power Generation, (5) Spatial Temporal Translation, (6) Materials, (7) Configuration/Structure, (8) Signature Reduction (Optical/IR/RF/Acoustic), (9) Human Interface, (10) Human Effects, (11) Armament (RF and DEW) and (12) Other areas in Support of 1-11. Secondly this PMR addresses a Plan of Action and Milestones that encompasses the 12 areas. Finally, the PMR addresses the intended composition of the BAASS analytical teams that will work on these areas.\n\nThe objective of the overall program is to understand the physics and engineering of advanced aerospace weapon system applications as they apply to potential foreign threats out to the far term, e.g., from now through the year 2050.\n\nUnderlining the gravitas of the anomalous aerospace vehicle subject, according to Earthtech Report #7, page 2: \"With regard to yet more exotic possibilities for craft configurations and flight performance, it would be remiss to overlook observations of apparently advanced unconventional craft reported by credible observers (e.g. military and civilian pilots) for several decades [9,10]. The so-called UFO phenomenon. Despite the overreaction and sensationalism of the public which led to the CIA initiated policy via the 1843(a)(2) to debunk the subject as a safeguard against clogging of communication channels [11], the subject has been treated seriously in a congressional hearing-1968 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) [12]- and in a document prepared for\n\nPage 8\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"congressional briefings by the Congressional Research Service [13].\" Note: numbers inside parentheses refer to references in the Earthtech report #7.\n\nIn order to meaningfully tackle the subject areas outlined in the above 12 technical topics, BAASS has been compelled to focus on those projects that are feasible given the current timelines and budget allocations for this contract. The three sets of papers that have been submitted to the agency by MUFON, Earthtech and by AAP Person 8 covered an enormous number of possible directions as they sought to address the above 12 technical areas. BAASS personnel judged it impossible logistically to embrace all of the recommendations in these technical papers as reasonable achievables. Many of the projects could take greater than several decades to accomplish and possibly billions of dollars.\n\nAccordingly, BAASS has chosen eight specific projects to focus on during the first and second years of this contract. We consider that the probability of success of these nine projects within a 12 or 24 month time frame and within the allocated budgets is maximized. Therefore, the objectives, methodologies, milestones and team compositions for each of the nine projects are laid out in detail in the next section of this Project management Report. Very recently, DIA has mandated the creation of a ninth project, that we call Project Physics (see page 11), in which the current research in universities and research institutes on all twelve technical areas will be studied.\n\nIt should be stated at the outset that we deliberately adopted the stance that the most productive way to learn the maximum about the twelve technical areas was to study craft that are already displaying novel behavior in the twelve technical areas. Hence, with the exception of the DIA mandated Project Physics (see page 11) BAASS's resources will not be devoted to studying the current \"state of the art\" of technology in our university system and research institutes. This latter approach could prove fruitless and waste significant time and money.\n\nPage 9\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PLANS OF ACTION WITH MILESTONES\nAND TEAM COMPOSITIONS\n\nPROJECT PHYSICS\n\nThis project will cover all twelve technical areas.\n\nObjectives\n\nIn November 2008, Earthtech delivered 12 Technical Studies that\nrecommended a wide ranging array of approaches to address the physics and\nengineering feasibility of advanced aerospace weapons system application as they\napply to the potential future capabilities of foreign threat systems out to the far\nterm i.e. from now through 2050. The 12 Technical Studies addressed: Lift,\nPropulsion, Control, Power Generation, Spatial/Temporal Translation, Materials,\nConfiguration/Structure, Signature Reduction, Human Interface, Human Effects,\nArmament and Other Areas. Many of the approaches recommended in the 12\nEarthtech Technical Studies are highly theoretical. Even with virtually unlimited\nbuckets of time and money it is impossible to predict which, if any, of these\napproaches might yield a physical demonstration that parallels the behavior of\nnovel spacecraft already known to exist.\n\nHowever, through recent consultations between the DIA and BAASS, it has\nbeen decided that a new series of position papers shall focus on an in-depth\ntreatment of subsets of each of the twelve technical areas. For the sake of\nthoroughness, the Agency and BAASS have decided that on the remote chance a\nsix month exploratory effort may reveal significant progress in one or more of the\ntwelve technical areas, BAASS shall proceed with Project Physics. Perhaps this\n\nPage 10\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"research could explain some aspect of behavior over the last six decades of very\nadvanced spacecraft already known to exist. BAASS is contracting with Earthtech\nfor an in-depth six month study to locate through any sources at Earthtech's\ndisposal any information on these more prosaic approaches that have been\nkicked about for some period of years.\n\nAccordingly, the objective of Project Physics is for Earthtech and its\nsubcontractors to produce approximately 24 position papers that are\ncomprehensive treatments of more than one approach for each of the 12\ntechnical areas.\n\nMethodology\n\nEarthtech will choose the precise nature and scope of the approximately 24\nposition papers that will encompass the 12 technical areas (Lift, Propulsion,\nControl, Power Generation, Spatial/Temporal Translation, Materials,\nConfiguration/Structure, Signature Reduction, Human Interface, Human Effects,\nArmament and Other Areas).\n\nEither through in-house physicists or external physics/engineering\ncontractors, Earthtech will deliver the approximately 24 position papers that will\nbe based on expanding and focusing on strategically important sub-projects from\nthe 12 position papers that Earthtech already has delivered.\n\nMilestones\n\nEarthtech will deliver approximately 24 position papers to BAASS on or\nbefore July 31, 2009.\n\nPage 11\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Team Composition\nAAP Person 57\nAAP Person 58\nSelect Earthtech Subcontractors\n\nPage 12\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT ENGAGEMENT\n\nThis program shall endeavor to locate possible small geographical areas\nwhere novel spacecraft seem to frequent. This program would specifically relate\nto technical area #9 with possible collateral involvement of other technical areas.\n\nObjectives\n\nIn spite of having confirmation that a significant menu of very novel\nspacecraft have existed for over 60 years and travel anywhere, anytime, there is\nno officially reliable data as to who pilot these craft, how they are made, where is\ntheir place of origin and why they are here. Until actual materials are obtained,\nwe must rely on more indirect means. However, on the slim chance that some\ngeographic areas could be found where \"regular\" flights of these craft were\noccurring, it might be possible to implement a pro-active program, actually\nseeking some form of engagement. Members of BAASS have some previous\nexperience in this regard. This will be a very unpredictable program. It also could\nbe risky for the participants. And it could be financially expensive.\n\nHowever, the potential gain could be unlimited and that is why we are\noffering this plan.\n\nThe first objective would be to locate, choose and secure possible sites.\nConcurrent with this activity would be the engagement of BAASS staff and outside\ncontractors to properly strategize various approach scenarios. As new site\nopportunities were recognized by BAASS staff, possibly due to the immediate\nnature of the spacecraft performances, expansion of this program would occur\ndomestically and to foreign locations over time.\n\nThe second objective is to gather as much data as possible through\nobservation of the craft. This is not as easy as it sounds. The authors of this\n\nPage 13\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"overview paper can ratify this point. To successfully gather useful data from\nobservations requires cooperation from the spacecraft. Performances must\nnecessarily be continued. The acquisition and implementation of very\nsophisticated equipment is a challenge. Having the right people and enough\nhuman resources in vital. The entire effort requires flexibility, inventiveness and\npatience. But the rewards lead to the possibility of a successful third objective.\n\nThe third objective would be Communication and or Contact. (This is not,\nby the way, a novel idea. It is our understanding that select communications and\ncontact between the operators of these spacecraft and interested parties within\nthis country started many years ago.) The authors of this paper would suggest\napproaches that would encompass diverse methods.\n\nMethodology\n\nSome previous efforts produced effects that could be interpreted as\nmarginal but with positive results. Multiple human witnesses were involved in\nmany dozens of successful efforts. These intensified in 2007 and 2008. Hundreds\nof photographs, indoors and outdoors using multiple digital cameras, were taken\nshowing anomalistic features. With most of this activity, we were not the\ninitiators of these contacts. Our function was more catalytic in nature. In the vast\nmajority of contacts, we were acted upon. That is to say, having placed ourselves\nin residency at the location for a substantial period of time, we began to\n\"participate\" in what we considered games and demonstrations, but, usually we\nwere caught by surprise.\n\nThe methods of communication or contact could encompass a wide variety\nof approaches. From the use of various hardware to engaging people as cognitive\ninteractive subjects. We have previously tried both.\n\nPage 14\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Milestones\n\nWe shall initiate the process of identifying possible geographic locations of current or recent past activity during the first quarter of 2009. Also at that time, we shall convene one of several workshops as an ongoing process to plan and strategize approaches and program structure. Of necessity, it is anticipated that project engagement will require multiple years of focused resources and funding, potentially extending into and beyond 2011.\n\nAlso, we shall engage outside contractors during this time to conduct specific tasks.\n\nTeam Composition\n\nFinding and fitting the appropriate type of people to this assignment will be most difficult for many reasons. Fortunately, BAASS's sister company Bigelow Aerospace (in addition to BAASS) currently has in its employ a few people that already have some experience and can help initiate the program. However, numerous other people will be needed to augment BA's and BAASS's small force in addition to the BAASS Administrator and Deputy Administrator. Supplemental to eventually having several in house teams, contracting for outside assistance will be necessary. The BAASS Administrator and Deputy Administrator have had previous experience in contracting for this type of observation activity. This type of field work, while very awkward for the Agency to say the least, is something well suited for BAASS.\n\nPage 15\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT COOPERATION\n\nProject Cooperation is the program that could be the most important of all Plans of Action. As previously listed under Key Recommendations, in order to not waste time, in order to not waste money, in order to make this overall program the most productive for which the RFP was constructed and paid for by the Sponsors, the Agency needs to be successful in its ability to assist BAASS in the acquisition of film, hardware, relevant materials and information currently under Government and Agency influence and control. This should include other relationships the Agency has with other organizations. We acknowledge that we have been told several times this effort will be forthcoming with our help and look to this with great expectation.\n\nObjectives\n\nSince proper clearance activity has been initiated for the BAASS Administrator and others, the first step is something the Agency can take now. According to the schedule BAASS has been given, there is no time to waste. Concurrent with the clearance approval process, the Agency can begin to make inquiries within itself as the Agency has already said is the first logical place to begin.\n\nBy the time the Agency has dug down to discover its own the quality sources, clearance should be approved at least for the BAASS Administrator. The second step would be for a meeting between the Agency and the Administrator for discussion and creation of strategy purposes.\n\nThe third objective is for BAASS to marshal human and financial resources into this Cooperation Program.\n\nPage 16\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Methodology\n\nProject Cooperation will initiate with the receipt of clearances by the BAASS Administrator. However, while the clearance process is underway, the agency will be focused on uncovering the many sources of information and leads on the topic of anomalous aerospace vehicle performance that reside within its own data archives. This internal agency dataset could provide a very rich source of pertinent information.\n\nNext, the agency, the BAASS Administrator and other appropriately cleared BAASS personnel will cooperate in (a) seeking out and securing the materials that avoided Project Bluebook, (b) the high value people with valuable information for interviews, (c) the location and content of the files pertaining to the Northern Tier-missile AFB sightings, (d) the ground-based, satellite based and gun camera film/imagery residing at multiple locations and (e) the files from the Brazilian Colares Island incidents involving multiple injuries/deaths from anomalous aerospace vehicles in 1977. All of these directions are discussed in more detail in the subsequent sections of this report.\n\nMilestones\n\nThe first milestone is identified as the joint efforts of the Administrator acquiring needed clearance, hopefully by January 2009 and the Agency obtaining relevant substantive information etc. to share that requires SCI or Top Secret Clearance.\n\nThe second milestone would encompass the meeting previously mentioned. This meeting needs to occur as soon as possible after the first milestone is accomplished. Prior to this meeting there will be the necessity to develop a satisfactory procedure/process for the delivery of materials, information etc. to BAASS.\n\nPage 17\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This program phase called Project Cooperation cannot be over emphasized in its importance. A thorough data-mining of potential information location needs to begin immediately.\n\nIf successful this project would substantially contribute to all twelve technical areas.\n\nDepending on the speed of cooperation between DIA and BAASS, it is anticipated that this project will extend beyond 2009 and into 2010 and 2011.\n\nTeam Composition\n\nThe lead for this project shall be the BAASS Administrator as this may represent the most important Plan of Action. Supporting the Administrator in the beginning will be key individuals such as:\n\nDeputy BAASS Administrator\nAAP Person 57\nAAP Person 58\nAAP Person 5\nSelect BAASS Staff\n\nPage 18\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT CAMPUS\n\nThis program will seek to involve all twelve technical areas (Lift, Propulsion, Control, Power generation, Spatial/Temporal Translation, Materials, Configuration/Structure, Signature Reduction (Optical/IR/RF/Acoustic), Human Interface, Human Effects, Armament (RF and DEW), Other Areas.\n\nObjectives\n\nThe first objective is to stimulate, motivate and encourage the senior levels of the academic community within the United States to involve themselves in study and research of very advanced aerial spacecraft that is presently considered phenomenological.\n\nIn this effort, it is this program's intention to lay the seeds for serious exploration of this topic within the national academic community at its highest levels. After six decades of overt, blatant conspicuous and obtrusive global performance by very advanced anomalously behaving spacecraft, the academic community is still successful in maintaining the posture that these spacecraft either don't exist or are not worthy of serious research and study. Foundationally, there still remains a giggle factor which has been instrumental in squashing serious consideration and thought.\n\nThe second objective is to extract from this large untapped body of resource information not previously obtained.\n\nThe third objective is to stay ahead, or worse, catch up to the similar efforts that may already be underway in foreign countries. It is our opinion that such research efforts conducted on a significant scale in foreign countries could/would\n\nPage 19\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"eventually pose a threat to US national security. Such a significant program would/could provide a serious positive stimulus to academic research in science and math thus furthering the military capabilities of those countries.\n\nOur concern is that the top universities/technical institutes in some foreign countries MAY take this subject more seriously than we do in the United States and hence MAY already have devoted significant resources to their study. Project Campus will seek to help ameliorate this putative technological gap.\n\nMethodology\n\nThe first priority is for BAASS to create a sophisticated program of grants that is designed to stimulate the academic community to take the subject of advanced aerospace vehicles seriously. BAASS will engineer a series of RFPs that are directed at universities in the United States. The RFPs will unambiguously emphasize the urgent need to study unconventional advanced aircraft with respect to aerospace engineering, theoretical and applied physics, advanced materials science etc. All prospective applicants will file a statement of intent that will comprise a brief overview of what they intend to do. In this way, research that is proposed that is judged by BAASS to be insufficiently ground breaking, advanced or breakthrough will be quickly terminated without the need to waste precious resources in grant allocation.\n\nBAASS will appoint a grant monitors who will work with the PI to ensure that the submitted proposal is of the highest quality and importantly is on target to address one of the twelve criteria.\n\nMilestones\n\nThe first milestone, approximate delivery date February 28, 2009, will be for AAP Person 100 AAP Person 99 and team to formulate and present to the BAASS\n\nPage 20\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Administrator, the comprehensive detailed strategy for reaching out to the academic community in the United States. This will take the form of design of RFPs and design of Letter of Intent (LOI) solicitations.\n\nA realistic projection from BAASS is that the milestones in the project should encompass at least three years of effort. Academic turnaround is demonstrably slow.\n\nTeam Composition\n\nAAP Person 99\n\nAAP Person 100\n\nSelect BAASS Staff\n\nTimeline\n\nLong Term\n\nPage 21\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT DATABASE\n\nThis program will address all twelve technical areas.\n\nObjectives\n\nFor six decades there have been displays of advanced aerospace vehicles in the skies of North America and around the world that have been witnessed by thousands of people, including military pilots and ground crews, civil aviation pilots, law enforcement officers and members of the public. Because these displays have not been taken seriously, few significant resources have been allocated to gathering the data into a single place from all of these sightings. Instead, data is scattered through over twenty smaller databases in the United States and over a dozen more internationally. Because of a lack of resources (a) these data have never been brought into a single storage site and (b) consequently have never been analyzed using sophisticated search parameters. This BAASS project seeks to eliminate this shortcoming. The objective is to create the world's first comprehensive high quality searchable database of advanced aerial technology maneuvers.\n\nMethodology\n\nFor BAASS, the establishment of a \"meta-database\" of advanced aerospace technology interactions with humans, comprising a subset from over twenty known datasets from the public domain will be in place in the first year of operations. The BAASS database will include the highest quality, calibrated, close encounter datasets already merged and searchable by keywords from a subset of publicly available databases. It is anticipated that the end result of the worldwide database collection will results in thousands of different high quality aerospace\n\nPage 22\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"technology cases. The BAASS database will be searchable with keywords specifically designed to interrogate for: Lift, Propulsion, Control, Power Generation, Spatial temporal translation, Materials, Configuration/Structure, Signature Reduction (Optical/IR/RF/Acoustic), Human Interface, Human Effects, Armament, Other areas.\n\nExtending into 2010, BAASS will create a series of liaisons to obtain the highest quality cases of advanced aerospace vehicle activity from the Ministry of Defense (MoD) in the UK (release of some files into the public domain was initiated by the UK MoD in 2008), from high level officials in France, from military liaisons in Belgium. Secondly, we will establish contacts with high level individuals/ in the Brazilian, Peruvian, Chilean and Argentine air forces, all four of which have had multiple reports of activity in their air spaces, some of which have leaked into the public domain. Thirdly, BAASS will purchase, download, or otherwise acquire databases pertaining to advanced aerospace activity from Australia, Scandinavia, Germany and other countries.\n\nMilestones\n\nBy June 30 2009, BAASS will purchase, download or initiate negotiations to acquire a subset of the approximately 20 databases, including those created by NIDS, MUFON, UFOCAT, GEIPAN and NARCAP. Initially, these databases will be purged of all cases that do not conform to BAASS requirements. The objective is to use only the close encounter cases with multiple witnesses as starting points for database analysis. The milestones as a part of the international outreach in this project will likely extend into 2010 and 2011.\n\nPage 23\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Team Composition\n\nBAASS Deputy Administrator\n\nAAP Person 5\n\nAAP Person 8\n\nAAP Person 56\n\nSelect BAASS Staff\n\nPage 24\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ORAL HISTORY PROJECT\n\nThis program will involve all twelve technical areas.\n\nObjectives\n\nImportant information regarding the performance, properties, and even\ncomposition of advanced aerospace technology resides in the minds and\nmemories of dozens of highly placed retired individuals, many of whom are\nknown to BAASS affiliated personnel. These individuals because of their work\nplaces and special projects collectively have an in depth specific knowledge of the\nproperties of advanced aerospace technology. Many of these individuals are\ncurrently at an advanced age and under the appropriate circumstances will be\nwilling to transfer their information to BAASS affiliated personnel as a part of the\noral history project.\n\nMethodology\n\nA rigorous protocol for interviewing these high value people will be created\nby BAASS staff. The purpose of the protocol is to extract the maximum amount of\nrelevant information from these individuals. Since these interviewees may be\nrelatively unwilling to divulge all information in their possession, a great deal of\ncare will be taken in broaching the subject with these individuals.\n\nMilestones\n\nBy the end of the first six months of operations, BAASS staff, BAASS\naffiliated staff and DIA personnel will have identified and connected with a cadre\n\nPage 25\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of high value people and will have commenced recorded interviews with these\nindividuals. As more and more high value individuals are identified, contracted\nand interviewed, we view the milestones in this project extending into 2010/\n2011 and beyond.\n\nTeam Composition\n\nBAASS Administrator\n\nBAASS Deputy Administrator\n\nAAP Person 57\n\nSelect BAASS Staff\n\nBAASS affiliated personnel will accompany DIA personnel on these interview\nassignments. Wherever possible the interviews will be recorded/videotaped.\n\nPage 26\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT BLUE BOOK MATERIALS\n\nThis project will cover all twelve technical areas.\n\nObjectives\n\nIt is known to BAASS personnel that a comprehensive group of files of\nadvanced aerospace activity, documented by several branches of the United\nStates military, exists in a secure location at Los Alamos National Labs (LANL).\nThese files are known to have been excluded from Project Blue Book (the official\nAir Force project that studied advanced aerospace vehicles in the 1960s), and\nlikely represent that subset of cases that directly impacted United States military\npersonnel, equipment, armaments, and thus these files may constitute evidence\nof a threat. Secondly, BAASS sources indicate that there may be physical trace\nevidence associated with some of these incidents and that these materials are\nalso in the same location at LANL. Since some of these files are relevant to all\ntwelve technical study areas as they pertain to advanced aerospace vehicles, as a\nfirst priority DIA will secure these files in total and transmit them to appropriately\ncleared BAASS personnel.\n\nMethodology\n\nDIA personnel will be apprised of (by BAASS staff) the exact file names, file\nnumbers and precise locations of the documents in question. DIA personnel will\nthen secure these files.\n\nPage 27\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Milestones\n\nBy February 1, 2009, DIA staff will have been apprised by BAASS affiliated\npersonnel of the file numbers, exact locations of the advanced aerial phenomena\ncases that did not make it into Project Bluebook. It is difficult to estimate the\nlength of time required for DIA staff to secure these materials and to pass them in\na secure manner to appropriately cleared BAASS staff. Since we only know the\nprecise locations of a portion of these files, it may take significant time, possibly\nextending past 2010/2011 to locate and secure the remainder.\n\nTeam Composition\n\nBAASS Administrator\n\nBAASS Deputy Administrator\n\nDIA Staff\n\nAAP Person 57\n\nAAP Person 8\n\nPage 28\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT NORTHERN TIER\n\nThis project will cover technical study 11: Armament.\n\nObjectives\n\nBeginning in the 1960s, there were numerous well documented sightings\nby multiple AFB personnel and pilots of incursions into the airspace over the\n\"Northern Tier\" air force bases in the United States by advanced aerospace\nvehicles of unknown origin. Incursions into restricted air space, hovering over\nnuclear armament locations, interference with ICBM functional integrity or some\ncombination occurred at Malmstrom AFB MT, Loring AFB ME, Wurtsmith AFB MI,\nMinot AFB ND, and Kirtland AFB NM during the 1960's and 1970s. Subsequently, a\nwell known incursion event occurred at RAF Bentwaters under the jurisdiction of\nthe USAF in December 1980 in which allegedly trace radioactivity was measured\nat the site. All of these incursions by aircraft displaying advanced aerospace\ntechnology could have represented a threat to the United States.\n\nMethodology\n\nWith urgent effort, DIA will obtain the full set of Strategic Air Command\n(SAC)/other organization records from each of these AFB incursion incidents and\nwill have transmitted them to appropriately cleared BAASS personnel. It should\nbe noted that some of these incidents of incursions into Air Force bases were\npartially reported in Project Blue Book (for example an October 1968 incident\ninvolving a 300 foot long advanced aerospace vehicle at Minot AFB in North\nDakota was reported to Project Blue Book however, by far the most\n\nPage 29\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated\nor used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"salient information regarding national security was absent from Project Blue Book files of the Minot AFB incident), but significant amounts of the important details were elided, omitted or obscured.\n\nMilestones\n\nBy March 10, 2009 BAASS affiliated personnel in collaboration with DIA personnel will have located the files that pertain to the Northern Tier sightings. Since expurgated versions of some of these cases already exist in the Project Bluebook files, these cases will initially be used to identify the locations and accession numbers of the full datasets. BAASS personnel are already aware of over a dozen potential incidents involving over six AFB's. We anticipate that it will take over a year, potentially extending into 2010/2011 to locate, secure and transfer all pertinent data.\n\nTeam Composition\n\nBAASS Administrator\n\nBAASS Deputy Administrator\n\nDIA Staff\n\nAAP Person 57\n\nAAP Person 8\n\nSelect BAASS Staff\n\nPage 30\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT COLARES\n\nThis project will cover technical area 10: Human effects objective.\n\nObjectives\n\nIn 1977, the Brazilian island of Colares was the scene for some of the most aggressive close encounters ever recorded in the open literature. Only a minority of the Island's city of Colares' approximately 2,000 inhabitants would be spared the light beams shot to the ground by many various flying objects. A number of residents managed to take photographs of the flying aerospace vehicles, or \"chupa-chupas,\" as the locals called them. From June – December 1977, scores of reports of unknown, flying objects with many different variations of shape and size were collected. There were sightings of small and large aerospace vehicles of advanced design, cigar-shaped, saucer-shaped, and more. Some of the objects were luminous, some were not, but all of them had lethal potential. One of the physicians who had treated the victims was [REDACTED] [REDACTED] wrote: \"All of them had suffered lesions to the face or the thoracic area.\" The lesions, looking like radiation injuries, \"began with intense reddening of the skin in the affected area. Later the hair would fall out and the skin would turn black. There was no pain, only a slight warmth. One also noticed small puncture marks in the skin. The victims were men and women of varying ages, without any pattern.\" Therefore, many of the interactions between humans and advanced aerospace vehicles in the Colares Brazil sightings in the 1970s resulted in deaths and injuries. The Colares events unquestionably constituted a threat, in some cases a lethal threat, both to Brazilian air space and to Brazilian citizens. During the several month period, representatives from the Brazilian Air Force were dispatched to the area and they took photographs of the objects and\n\nPage 31\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"recorded voluminous data on the nature of the objects that displayed advanced aerospace properties. The objective of the present study is to obtain the files on these incidents.\n\nMethodology\n\nBeginning in January 2009, an effort will be made through DIA sources to arrange for access from the Brazilian air force of the full set of classified files concerning the Colares Island events, including their translation from Portuguese into English. The set of files should include all of the medical records from the individuals who died during this period as a result of interactions with the beams of light.\n\nSecondly, the physician [REDACTED] at the time of the Colares Island incidents in 1977. Hence, she is [REDACTED] BAASS personnel can ascertain her whereabouts and interview her in depth regarding the events of 1977, including receiving from her any medical records that she might have in her possession.\n\nThirdly, according to AAP Person 5 in \"Confrontations\", a portion of the extensive files from the Brazilian Air Force investigation may have been transferred to the United States. In collaboration with DIA people, BAASS researchers should elucidate the precise location and ownership of these files and determine whether they are transferable. If transferable, BAASS will arrange for the files to be translated from Portuguese to English.\n\nPage 32\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Milestones\n\nBy March 15, 2009 it is anticipated that DIA personnel in collaboration with BAASS staff will have located the files pertaining to the Colares events. As of December 2008, parts of the files are known to be in Brazil, and are the property of the Brazilian Air Force. Approximately 200 pages of these files, in Portuguese, have been posted on the Internet (http://www.ufo.com.br/documentop.php). BAASS staff will calibrate the chain of custody and provenance of these Internet files and if validated, they will be translated from Portuguese into English by BASS contract. This initial project will happen in the first quarter of 2009. Since these files are located in multiple areas, potentially in more than one country we anticipate that this process could extend into 2010/2011.\n\nTeam Composition\n\nBAASS Administrator\n\nBAASS Deputy Administrator\n\nAAP Person 81\n\nAAP Person 5\n\nAAP Person 8\n\nPage 33\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONCLUDING COMMENTS\n\nCountless numbers of very novel spacecraft of a wide variety of shapes and sizes have conducted intensive demonstration, exhibitions and interactions across this planet during the last sixty-five years. Therefore, we do not have to look too far to imagine what types of capabilities, and characteristics we would wish our own spacecraft possessed regarding the twelve technical areas: lift, propulsion, control, power generation, spatial/temporal translation, materials, configuration/structure, signature reduction, human interface, human effects, armament, and other peripheral areas in support that comprise the focus of this contract.\n\nIf we wish to have spacecraft that emulate the performance characteristics of these unknown spacecraft already moving freely in our public and secure airspace, then this program must necessarily acquire the ability to have a closer look.\n\nIt is imperative that physical access be obtained to actual hardware of the anomalous spacecraft that appear to be many decades or centuries beyond anything we have. Whatever country is able to reproduce first the type of spacecraft hardware that we see being exhibited in these \"paranormal\" spacecraft, shall secure its space explorations and military future.\n\nOur first concern is where on this planet has the most progress already been made in regard to efforts of reproduction.\n\nWe expect to implement in this first year an aggressive start in establishing this new program through Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies. As you have already seen in just this short time, we move very quickly.\n\nOur domestic efforts will rapidly expand this fiscal year and position BAASS for an aggressive push into foreign countries. We will need the money"} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"necessary to make purchases of hardware that we think is in foreign hands and to position BAASS to have a global reach. Should we make the opportunities happen where we can obtain physical hardware, we expect to mount a very targeted effort toward back-engineering these materials and/or devices.\n\nPage 35\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBITS\n\n(1) [REDACTED] memorandum\n\n1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(1)(B) [REDACTED]\n\n(2) [REDACTED] Affidavit\n\n1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(1)(B) [REDACTED]\n\n(3) United Kingdom, Ministry of Defense, F-86D incident – May 20, 1957\n\nPage 36\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESEARCH MATERIAL FROM:\n\nAAP Person 8\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\n\nSUBJECT: AMC Opinion Concerning \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(1)(B) [REDACTED]\n\n1. As requested by AC/AS-2 there is presented below the considered opinion of this Command concerning the so-called \"Flying Discs\". This opinion is based on interrogation report data furnished by AC/AS-2 and preliminary studies by personnel of T-2 and Aircraft Laboratory, Engineering Division T-3. This opinion was arrived at in a conference between personnel from the Air Institute of Technology, Intelligence T-2, Office, Chief of Engineering Division, and the Aircraft, Power Plant and Propeller Laboratories of Engineering Division T-3.\n\n2. It is the opinion that:\n\na. The phenomenon reported is something real and not visionary or fictitious.\n\nb. There are objects probably approximating the shape of a disc, of such appreciable size as to appear to be as large as man-made aircraft.\n\nc. There is a possibility that some of the incidents may be caused by natural phenomena, such as meteors.\n\nd. The reported operating characteristics such as extreme rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and action which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly aircraft and radar, lend belief to the possibility that some of the objects are controlled either manually, automatically or remotely.\n\ne. The apparent common description of the objects is as follows:-\n\n(1) Metallic or light reflecting surface.\n\nSECRET T-39952"} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Route 1st Ind to CG, AMC, WP, Wash. D.C. only AMC Opinion Concerning Flying Discs\n\n(2) Absence of trail, except in a few instances when the object apparently was operating under high performance conditions.\n\n(3) Circular or elliptical in shape, flat on bottom and domed on top.\n\n(4) Several reports of well kept formation flights varying from three to nine objects.\n\n(5) Usually no associated sound, except in three instances a substantial rumbling roar was noted.\n\n(6) Level flight speeds normally above 500 knots are estimated.\n\nf. It is possible within the present U.S. knowledge – provided extensive detailed development is undertaken – to construct a piloted aircraft which has the general description of the object in subparagraph (e) above which would be capable of an approximate range of 7,000 miles at subsonic speeds.\n\ng. Any developments in this country along the lines indicated would be extremely expensive, time consuming and at the considerable expense of current projects and therefore, if directed, should be set up independently of existing projects.\n\nh. One consideration must be given the following-\n\n(1) The possibility that these objects are of domestic origin – the product of some high security project not known to AC/AS-2 or this Command.\n\n(2) The lack of physical evidence in the shape of crash recovered exhibits which would materially prove the existence of these objects.\n\n(3) The possibility that some foreign nation has a form of propulsion possibly nuclear, which is outside of our domestic knowledge.\n\n3. It is recommended that:\n\na. Headquarters, Army Air Forces issue a directive assigning a priority, security classification and code name for a detailed study of this matter to include the preparation of complete data of all available and pertinent data which will then be made available to the Army, Navy, Atomic Energy Commission, JPRC, the Air Force Scientific Advisory Group, NACA, and the RAND and MIRA projects for comment and recommendations, with a preliminary report to be forwarded within 15 days of receipt of the data and a detailed report thereafter every 30 days as the investigation develops. A complete interchange of data should be effected.\n\nb. Issuing a specific directive AND will continue the investigation of this site to correct resources in order to more closely define the nature of the phenomenon. Detailed Essential Elements of Information will be formulated immediately for transmittal through channels."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APPENDIX 2\n\n2002 SEALED AFFIDAVIT OF 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(1)(B) [REDACTED]\n(ROSWELL ARMY AIR FORCE BASE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, 1947)\n\nDATE: December 26, 2002\nWITNESS: 1843(a)(2)\nNOTARY: [REDACTED]\n\n(1) My name is 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(1)(B) [REDACTED]\n\n(2) I was born on 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\n\n(3) My address is 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\n\n(4) I am retired.\n\n(5) In July, 1947, I was stationed at the Roswell Army Air Base in Roswell, New Mexico, serving as the base Public Information Officer. I had spent the 4th of July weekend (Saturday, the 5th, and Sunday, the 6th) at my private residence about 10 miles north of the base, which was located south of town.\n\n(6) I was aware that someone had reported the remains of a downed vehicle by midmorning after my return to duty at the base on Monday, July 7. I was aware that [REDACTED] was sent by the 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(1)(B) [REDACTED] to investigate.\n\n(7) By late in the afternoon that same day, I would learn that additional civilian reports came in regarding a second site just north of Roswell. I would spend the better part of the day attending to my regular duties hearing little if anything more.\n\n(8) On Tuesday morning, July 8, I would attend the regularly scheduled staff meeting at 7:30 a.m. Besides 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(1)(B) [REDACTED] were also in attendance. The main topic of discussion was reported by [REDACTED] regarding an extensive debris field in Lincoln County approx. 75 miles NW of Roswell. A preliminary briefing was provided by [REDACTED] about the second site approx. 40 miles north of town. Samples of wreckage were passed around the table. It was unlike any material I had or have ever seen in my life. Pieces which resembled metal foil, paper thin yet extremely strong, and pieces with unusual markings along their length were handled from man to man, each voicing their opinion. No one was able to identify the crash debris.\n\n(9) One of the main concerns discussed at the meeting was whether we should go public or not with the discovery. [REDACTED] proposed a plan, which I believe originated from his bosses at the Pentagon. Attention needed to be diverted from the more important site north of town by acknowledging the other location. Too many civilians were already involved and the press already was informed. I was not completely informed how this would be accomplished.\n\n(10) At approximately 9:30 a.m. [REDACTED] phoned my office and dictated the press release of having in our possession a flying disc, coming from a ranch northwest of Roswell, and [REDACTED] flying\n\n10"} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the material to higher headquarters. I was to deliver the news release to radio stations KGFL and KSWS, and newspapers the Daily Record and the Morning Dispatch.\n\n(11) By the time the news release hit the wire services, my office was inundated with phone calls from around the world. Messages stacked up on my desk, and rather than deal with the media concern, [REDACTED] suggested that I go home and \"hide out.\"\n\n(12) Before leaving the base, [REDACTED] took me personally to Building 84 [AKA Hangar P-3], a B-29 hangar located on the east side of the tarmac. Upon first approaching the building, I observed that it was under heavy guard both outside and inside. Once inside, I was permitted from a safe distance to first observe the object just recovered north of town. It was approx. 12 to 15 feet in length, not quite as wide, about 6 feet high, and more of an egg shape. Lighting was poor, but its surface did appear metallic. No windows, portholes, wings, tail section, or landing gear were visible.\n\n(13) Also from a distance, I was able to see a couple of bodies under a canvas tarpaulin. Only the heads extended beyond the covering, and I was not able to make out any features. The heads did appear larger than normal and the contour of the canvas suggested the size of a 10 year old child. At a later date in [REDACTED] office, he would extend his arm about 4 feet above the floor to indicate the height.\n\n(14) I was informed of a temporary morgue set up to accommodate the recovered bodies.\n\n(15) I was informed that the wreckage was not \"hot\" (radioactive).\n\n(16) Upon his return from Fort Worth, [REDACTED] described to me taking pieces of the wreckage to [REDACTED] office and after returning from a map room, finding the remains of a weather balloon and radar kite substituted while he was out of the room. [REDACTED] was very upset over this situation. We would not discuss it again.\n\n(17) I would be allowed to make at least one visit to one of the recovery sites during the military cleanup. I would return to the base with some of the wreckage which I would display in my office.\n\n(18) I was aware two separate teams would return to each site months later for periodic searches for any remaining evidence.\n\n(19) I am convinced that what I personally observed was some type of craft and its crew from outer space.\n\n(20) I have not been paid nor given anything of value to make this statement, and it is the truth to the best of my recollection.\n\nSigned: [REDACTED]\nDecember 26, 2002\n\nSignature witnessed by:\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ministry of Defence - MOD\nFrom the Files of British Archives\nActual case file copies as released by the British Archives [via UFO Newsclipping Service]\n\nOUR REF: HW/JP\nYOUR REF: For the attention of\nTelephone: [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] Solicitor\n20th July 1988.\nSecretariat Air Staff (2),\nRoom [REDACTED]\nMinistry of Defence,\nMain Building,\nWhitehall,\nLondon, SW1A 2HB.\nDear [REDACTED]\nRe: \"Radar Blip\"\nHerewith copy of a narrative which I have recently received from a former American Pilot for your consideration and comment.\nFILE 12/2\nMINISTRY OF DEFENCE SEC(AS)2 21 JUL 1988\n\nPAGE ONE OF REPORT\n\nThe instructions came to go \"gate\" to expedite the intercept. Gate was the term used to use maximum power (in the case of the F-86D that meant full afterburner) and to proceed to an initial Point at about 32,000 feet. By this time my radar was on and I was looking prematurely for the bogey. The instructions came to report any visual observations, to which I replied \"in the soup and it is impossible to see anything\". The weather was probably high alto stratus, but between being over the North Sea and in the weather, no frame of reference was available, i.e. no stars, no light, no silhouettes, in short nothing. GCI continued the vectoring and the dialogue describing the strange antics of the UFO.\n\nThe exact turns and manoeuvres they gave me were all predicated to reach some theoretical point for a lead collision course type rocket release. I can remember seeking the level off and requesting to come out of afterburner only to be told to stay in afterburner. It wasn't very much later that I noticed my indicated mach number was about .92. This is about as fast as the F-86D could go straight and level.\n\nThen the order came to fire a full salvo of rockets at the UFO. I was only a Lieutenant and very much aware of the gravity of the situation. To be quite candid I almost shit my pants! At my side I had my hands full trying to fly, search for bogeys, and now selecting a hot load on the switches. I asked for authentication of the order to fire, and I received it. This further complicated my difficulty as the matrix of letters and numbers to find the correct authentication was on a piece of printed paper about 5 by 8 inches, with the print not much bigger than normal type. It was totally black, and the lights were down for night flying. I used my flashlight, still trying to fly and watch my radar. To put it quite candidly I felt very much like a cone legged man in an ass kicking contest.\n\nThe authentication was valid, and I selected 24 rockets to salvo. I wasn't paying too much attention to [REDACTED], but I clearly remember him giving a \"Roger\" to all the transmissions. I can only suppose he was as busy as I was.\n\n(1) DELETE TO PROTECT WITNESSES\nIDENTITY"} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO OF REPORT\n\n(2)\n\nThe final turn was given, and instructions were given to lock 30 degrees to the Port for my bogey. I did not have a hard time at all. There it was exactly where I was told it would be at 30 degrees and at 15 miles. The bogey was turning a bit in the radar with its incredible intensity. It was similar to a ship that received from D-325 and seemed to be a magnet of light. These things I remember very clearly. I ran the range gun monitor over the blip, and the blip band faded to the monitor super-imposed over the blip. I had a look on that, and the proportions of a flying aircraft carrier. By that I mean the return on the radar was so strong that it could not be reproduced by the first control system on the F-86D. I got a comparison of a good return is very difficult and, in fact, type aircraft, a fact on exactly what the other fighter aircraft had obtained. The airliner is easy to get a lock on while the fighter not quite. 10 miles. The larger the airplane the easier the lock on. This blip almost locked itself. I could have remember locking on to. I had locked on in just a few seconds, and I locked on exactly 15 miles which was the maximum range for lock on. I called to the GCI \"radar\", which signified that I would take all further training information from my radar computer.\n\nLet me explain exactly what I saw on my radar screen. There was a complete circle in the center of the radar screen about six inches in diameter, the other about 3 inches in diameter with a half inch segment dimmed to indicate the overtake speed. If the dot segment was at 12 o'clock, that was about 600 knots of overtake. The overtake was 6 o'clock, that was 0 overtake. If the segment was at 6 o'clock, that was 0 overtake. The overtake was at 3 to 9 o'clock position, which indicates close to 600 knot overtake. I was really having fun. To complete the description of the radar scope there were two other significant pieces of data displayed. One is the horizontal indicator which gave a gyro stabilized reference to the horizon enabling the pilot to not have to refer to his flight instruments. The second is a steering dot, which was nothing more than computer data indicating which way the aircraft should fly to accomplish the intercept. I.e. if the dot was on the right to center, the pilot should be pulled back to climb, if it was to the right then turn to the right to center the dot. The idea was to have the dot centered in the smaller circle."} {"doc_id":"aa59d0af440f464b","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE THREE OF REPORT\n\nare him leaving, my 30 mile range. Again it appeared that he was gone only in the mind that he was now off their scope as well.\n\nWith the loss of the blip off their scope, the [REDACTED] was over. The crew was vectored back to home plate (Damon) and moved our switching only in three minutes, where they would contact us as they gained by hand line.\n\nI am sure that the first I talked to who was merely playing, that the blip had gone off the scope. In two steps at the GCI site and that they had instructions to tell me that the mission was considered classified. They also advised me that I would be contacted by some investigator at the next day before anybody moved up.\n\nI had not the slightest idea what had actually occurred, nor would anyone explain anything to me. In the newsletter operations area out of the hangar, to the end of the radar screen. Then just when I started to walk back to the base, the sun was up. All the fighter jets are quite hard to get down there, and I've to fly over the Atlantic. I had been nearly caught asleep and was certain I'd be asleep on the way. At the time I thought I'd made a mistake in that the ten-mile point was short of fuel as I was going through the \"wall\" at about 48,000 feet, and I was tired.\n\nMy impression was that whatever the aircraft (or spacecraft) was it must have been traveling in 2 digit mach numbers to have done what I had witnessed. Perhaps the check of memory may be lifted in this day of enlightenment and all of us can have all the facts. This is my account to the best of my memory."} {"doc_id":"aba6a07ad780dbf2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:11:34"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-595 (REV. 11-20-73)\n\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007.\n\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 5 186 245\n7/15/715510\nRRP0090UIO\n62- HQ-83894\nSERIALS 186-245\nSECTION 5\n*62-HQ-83894-5*\nnent of Justice\nVED FROM OR ADDED TO THIS FIL\nBUREAU\nDESTROY of\nFOIPA # 993087\nINVESTIGATION\nPICKETT STREET\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nJAN 19 1976\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nMAR 3 1978 BY\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nAPR 11 1976\nSerial -186, 197, 225\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nMAY 14 1976 BY\nUSE CARE IN HANDLING THIS FILE\nSECTION 5\nSERIALS 186-245\nTransfer-Call 3421"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"203\n206\n207\n214\n11\n11\nBuchholden\n2401 Bay Shore\nHazari\n2514 Fairlane 2047"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Director, FBI\nDATE: July 26, 1949\nFROM : SAC, San Antonio\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISKS\nINTERNAL SECURITY - R\nOn July 15, 1949, the Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, Fourth Army, advised that a small article which had appeared in the Galveston (Texas) News on July 10, 1949, advertised the fact that the Young Men's Business Club of Alexandria, Louisiana, announced that it was planning a convention for persons from all over the nation who have seen flying saucers. It was stated that the convention was planned so that members may compare notes. It was also stated that flying disks were reported twice inthe week preceding the article in Alexandria, Louisiana.\nThe above is furnished as a matter of information.\ncc: New Orleans\n100-7545\nJEJ:wjw\nRECORDED - 22 62-83894-186\nEX-112\n34 JUL 29 1949\n52 AUG 5 1949"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO: Director, FBI\nDATE: July 26, 1949\nFROM: SAC, San Antonio\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISKS\nINTERNAL SECURITY - R\nOn July 15, 1949, the Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, Fourth Army, advised that a small article which had appeared in the Galveston (Texas) News on July 10, 1949, advertised the fact that the Young Men's Business Club of Alexandria, Louisiana, announced that it was planning a convention for persons from all over the nation who have seen flying saucers. It was stated that the convention was planned so that members may compare notes. It was also stated that flying disks were reported twice inthe week preceding the article in Alexandria, Louisiana.\nThe above is furnished as a matter of information.\ncc: New Orleans\n100-7545\ndjw:jw\nAUG 4 1949 FBI RECEIVED\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF DIRECTOR\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nRecord of Telephone Call or Visitor\nMr. Flying Saucers\nMr. Ernest Cuneo called from New York City\nPhone No.\nHour 10:54am Date July 11, 1949\nTolson, Clegg, Glavin, Ladd, Nichols, Rosen, Tracy, Egan, Gurnea, Harbo, Jones, Mohr, Pennington, Tele. Room, Mr. Nease, Miss Holmes, Miss Gandy\nREMARKS\nWhen informed of Mr. Hoover's and Mr. Ladd's absence from their office, Mr. Cuneo declined to speak to anyone else and stated that he was just following up on a conversation he had with Mr. Ladd over the weekend. He asked that Mr. Ladd be informed of his call.\nRECORDED - 59 62-83894-187\n3 AUG 19 1949\n61 AUG 11 1949\nrjp"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED - FLETCHER\nAUG 8 7 26 PM '49\n\nJUL 11 | 10 PM '49\nRECEIVED-TOLSON\nFBI\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED - FLETCHER\nJUL 11 7 54 PM '49\n\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJul 11 | 58 PM '49"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF DIRECTOR\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nRecord of Telephone Call or Visitor\n\nMr. Ernest Cuneo thru. opr. from\ncalled-phoned. NYC\n\nPhone No.\n\nHour 10:29am Date July 12, 1949\n\nREMARKS\n\nWhen informed that Mr. Hoover was not in his office, Mr. Cuneo asked to speak with Mr. Ladd, and after checking the call was transferred, to Mr. Ladd.\n\nMr. Ladd advises that Mr. Cuneo was calling about the matter he discussed with Mr. Ladd on last Saturday re a flying saucer in California. Mr. Cuneo asked if he could release the story. He was told that this was up to him\n\nrjp/mhm\n\nRECORDED - 59\nINDEXED - 59\n\n62-83894-188\nF B I\n3 AUG 9 1949\n\n61 AUG 11 1949"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED FLETCHER\nJUL 12 1 41 AM\nAUG 8 7 26 PM\nRECEIVED-TOLSON\nFBI\nU S DEPT OF J\nAUG 5 RECEIVED - FLETCHER\nJUL 12 7 56 PM '49"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 21, 1949\n\nMr. Ernest Cuneo\n40 Wall Street\nNew York, New York\n\nDear Ernie:\n\nYou will recall the telephone conversations about Mr. Peter Camerlon Jones, 184 West 37th Street, Los Angeles 7, California, and information furnished by him on the subject of flying saucers.\n\nI thought you would like to know that efforts made to locate Mr. Jones have been unsuccessful and casual inquiry in the vicinity he mentioned did not develop information about any one who is acquainted with him.\n\nI thought you might wish to consider the possibility that the original letter in this matter may have been a prank.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nRECORDED - 59\nINDEXED - 59\n\n62-83594-189\nFBI\n3 AUG 9 1949\n\nJUL 22 1949 P.M.\n\n61 AUG 11 1949"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : THE DIRECTOR\n\nFROM : D. M. Ladd\n\nSUBJECT:\n\nDATE: July 12, 1949\n\nYou inquired as to what was being done with reference to the information concerning flying saucers, which information was furnished by Ernest Cuneo.\n\nI desire to advise that a letter is being prepared for the Los Angeles Office suggesting that they make a discreet check of the background of the individual who wrote the letter to Winchell and thereafter interview him for details.\n\nIt is believed that a letter is satisfactory inasmuch as it is noted that this alleged incident occurred in 1947.\n\nDML:dad\n\nThis should have been done the first thing monday instead of waiting until Wed to get it out.\n\nRECORDED - 59\nINDEXED - 59\n\n62-83894-190\nF B I\n3 AUG 9 1949\n\n61 AUG 11 1949"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JULY 18, 1949\n\nURGENT\n\nSAC, LOS ANGELES\n\nPETER CAMERLON JONES, INFORMATION CONCERNING.\n\nREMYTEL JULY TWELVE LAST. SUTEL RESULTS YOUR\n\nBACKGROUND INVESTIGATION AND INTERVIEW OF SUBJECT.\n\nHOOVER\n\nINITIALED DIRECTOR'S OFFICE\n\nEHM:jpa\n\nRECORDED - 59\nINDEXED - 59\n\n62-83894-191\n\n3 AUG 9 1949\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nJUL 18 1949\n\nRECEIVED\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n\nTELEMETER 270 NOV 18 1964\n\n102PM"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JULY 18, 1949\n\nURGENT\n\nSAC, LOS ANGELES\n\nPETER CAMERLON JONES, INFORMATION CONCERNING.\n\nREMYTEL JULY TWELVE LAST. SUTEL RESULTS YOUR\n\nBACKGROUND INVESTIGATION AND INTERVIEW OF SUBJECT.\n\nHOOVER\n\nINITIALED DIRECTOR'S OFFICE\n\nRECORDED - 59\nINDEXED - 59\n\n3 AUG 9 1949\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nJUL 18 1949\n\nRECEIVED - FLETCHER\n\nTELEMETER 270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nRoom 5744 7-20 1949\n\nTO: Director, Mr. Ladd, Mr. Clegg, Mr. Glavin, Mr. Harbo, Mr. Nichols, Mr. Rosen, Mr. Tracy, Mr. Fletcher, Mr. Mohr, Mr. Carlson, Mr. Nease, Miss Gandy, Personnel Files Section, Records Section, Mrs. Skillman\n\nSee Me For Appropriate Action\n\nSend File Note and Return\n\nPrepare note to Cuneo today\n\nClyde Tolson"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\n\nLos Angeles 13, California\nJuly 13, 1949\n\nDIRECTOR, FBI\n\nRe: PETER CAMERLON JONES\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDear Sir:\n\nRe your teletype July 12, 1949.\n\nPresent owner for one and one half years and former manager of court for six years, which includes 164 W. 37th Street, Los Angeles, do not know PETER CAMERLON JONES.\n\nOther investigation in an endeavor to locate JONES was not productive.\n\n- RUC -\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nR. B. HOOD, SAC\n\nTHM;jcw\n62-3364\nAMSD\n\nRECORDED - 59\nINDEXED - 59\n\n62-83894-192\n\n8 AUG 9 1949\n\n61 AUG 11 1949"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\n\nLos Angeles 13, California\nJuly 13, 1949\n\nDIRECTOR, FBI\n\nRe: PETER DAY ... JONES\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDear Sir:\n\nRe your letter July 12, 1949.\n\nPresent owner for one and one half years and former manager of coast for six years, which included 10l W. 37th Street, Los Angeles, do not know PETER CAMPBELL JONES.\n\nOther investigation in an endeavor to locate JONES was not productive.\n\n- END -\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nR. B. Hood\nSAC, LOS ANGELES"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CC - 150\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n------\n\nROUTINE\n\nJULY 12, 1949\n\nTO: COMMUNICATIONS SECTION. SAC, LOS ANGELES\n\nTransmit the following message to:\nPETER CAMPBELL JONES, us SKATEFOUR WEST THIRTYSEVENTH STREET, LOS ANGELES, INFORMATION CONCERNING. SUBJECT ADDRESSED A LETTER TO WALTER WINCHELL RELATING THAT IN AUGUST, NINETEEN FORTYSEVEN, HE WAS HIKING IN THE MOUNTAINS OUT OF LA AND HE OBSERVED ABOUT ONE HALF BLOCK AWAY FROM HIM A LARGE SILVER METAL OBJECT SHAPED LIKE A CHILD'S TOP ABOUT THE SIZE OF A BALLOON. HE GAINED THE IMPRESSION THERE WAS LIFE WITHIN THE OBJECT THOUGH HE SAW NO ONE. HE STOOD UP AND WAVED TOWARDS THE OBJECT AND WITHIN A SECOND IT TOOK OFF, KNOCKING HIM TO THE GROUND. DISCREETLY CHECK BACKGROUND OF JONES. THEREAFTER, INTERVIEW HIM FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING ANY FACTS IN HIS POSSESSION CONCERNING THE STATEMENTS SET OUT HEREIN.\n\nHOOVER\n\nHBF:CMW\n\nRECORDED - 59\nINDEXED - 59\n\n162-83894-193\n\nSENT VIA ____________ M Per C"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CC - 150\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n------\n\nJULY 12, 1949\n\nTO: COMMUNICATIONS SECTION. SAC, LOS ANGELES\n\nTransmit the following message to:\nPETER CAMPBELL JONES ... INFORMATION CONCERNING. SUBJECT ADDRESSED A LETTER TO WALTER WINCHELL RELATING THAT IN AUGUST, NINETEEN FORTYSEVEN, HE WAS HIKING IN THE MOUNTAINS OUT OF LA AND HE OBSERVED ABOUT ONE HALF BLOCK AWAY FROM HIM A LARGE SILVER METAL OBJECT SHAPED LIKE A CHILD'S TOP ABOUT THE SIZE OF A BALLOON. HE GAINED THE IMPRESSION THERE WAS LIFE WITHIN THE OBJECT THOUGH HE SAW NO ONE. HE STOOD UP AND WAVED TOWARDS THE OBJECT AND WITHIN A SECOND IT TOOK OFF, KNOCKING HIM TO THE GROUND. DISCREETLY CHECK BACKGROUND OF JONES. THEREAFTER, INTERVIEW HIM FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING ANY FACTS IN HIS POSSESSION CONCERNING THE STATEMENTS SET OUT HEREIN.\n\nHOOVER\n\nRECORDED - 59\nINDEXED - 59\n\nSENT VIA TELEMETER"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : THE DIRECTOR\n\nFROM : D. M. Ladd\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nDATE: July 12, 1949\n\nI took a call from Ernest Cuneo by reference from your office. He referred to his call of last Saturday relative to a letter Mr. Winchell received from a man in Los Angeles concerning flying saucers. He stated that Winchell wanted to do a column on this letter if the Bureau had no objection.\n\nI told him that whatever he did with reference to writing the story concerning this letter was entirely up to him and would in no way affect anything the Bureau was doing. I suggested that he might desire to check with the Air Corps inasmuch as the handling of flying saucers was a matter of primary interest to them. He stated, \"To hell with the Air Force. He just didn't want to release the information if it would affect the Bureau\".\n\nDML:dad\n\nRECORDED - 59\nINDEXED - 59\n\n162-83894-194\n\n61 AUG 11 1949"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : The Director\nFROM : Mr. Ladd\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nDATE: July 9, 1949\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Holmes\nMiss Gandy\n\nErnest Cuneo advised that Walter Winchell had received\na letter from Peter Camerlon Jones, 164 West 37th Street, Los\nAngeles 7, California. Mr. Cuneo read the letter to me and it\nwas very well written, obviously by a man of intelligence. In\nthis letter Jones stated that in August of 1947 he left Los Angeles\nfor the mountains and started hiking through the mountains. About\n10:00 A. M. he was lying on the ground when he observed about one-\nhalf block away from him a large silver metal, greenish in color,\nshaped like a child's top and about the size of the balloons used\nat County Fairs. He stated that there appeared to be two windows\nin the object and portions of metal appeared transparent and that he\ngained the impression that there was some life within this object\nalthough he saw no persons. The object appeared as though [REDACTED] as\na pressure chamber. He stood up and waved towards this object and\nthis so-called flying saucer was off the ground in a second, knocking\nJones to the ground. In its flight he stated that its power was\nsilent and he raised the question as to whether this was an\ninter-global landing on our planet. He thought that it might be a\ndevice to land in our planet because the occupants of another planet\nhad become curious as to the reaction caused by the explosion of the\natomic bomb causing trouble in an expanded universe. He [REDACTED] the\nquestion as to whether it was possible that the occupants of another\nplanet might have solved the theory of negative gravity.\n\nMr. Cuneo stated that this letter indicated a very good\nknowledge of physics and that he thought it would be interesting to\ncheck into Jones' background and then possibly interview him about\nthis alleged flying saucer. Mr. Cuneo stated that it would appear\nthat Jones may have actually seen a flying saucer, that in any event\nit made an awfully good story and he requested that the Bureau keep\nthe matter in confidence.\n\nI would recommend that the Los Angeles Office discreetly\ncheck into the background of Jones and thereafter interview him for\nthe purpose of determining any facts he possesses about flying\nsaucers in order that it may be determined whether his story is in\nany way accurate.\n\nDML:dhb\n\nRECORDED - 59\nINDEXED - 59\n62-83894\nFBI\n3 AUG 9 1949\n61 AUG 11 1949"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-LAND\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJul 11 11 17 AM '49\n\nRECEIVED-FLETCHER\nJUL 11 12 52 PM '49\n\nJUL 9 4 09 PM '49\nRECEIVED-TOLSON\nFBI\n\nAUG 8 2 24 PM '49\nRECEIVED-FBI\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED-FLETCHER\nJUL 13 9 38 AM '49\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nDivision Four\n\n1949\n\n___Director, 5633\n___Mr. Tolson, 5744\n___Mr. Ladd, 5734\n___Mr. Clegg, 5256\n___Mr. Glavin, 5517\n___Mr. Harbo, 7641\n___Mr. Fletcher, 1742\n___Mr. Nichols, 5640\n___Mr. Rosen, 5706\n___Mr. Tracy, 4130 IB\n___Mr. McGuire, 5640\n___Miss Gandy, 5633\n\n___Mr. Logue, 5263\n___Mr. Donohue, 3710\n___Fugitive Desk, 5720\n___Lab. Night Sup'r. 7619\n___Movement Section, 5266\n___Leave Clerk, 7623\n___Reading Room, 5531\n___Mail Room, 5533\n___Coding Unit, 4642\n___Routing, 7133\n\nTeletype Unit\nRoom 5644, Ext. 687"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nTele. Room\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nJUL 18 1949\nTELEMETER\n\nWASH 2 FROM LOS ANGELES 18 10-35 AM\nDIRECTOR URGENT\n\nPETER CAMERLON JONES, INFO. CONCERNING. REURTEL JULY EIGHTEEN.\nEFFORTS TO IDENTIFY OR LOCATE JONES NEGATIVE.\nHOOD\nACK PLS\n\nRECORDED - 77\nINDEXED - 77\n62-83894\nFBI\n3 JUL 21 1949\n196\nEX-1\n57 AUG 23 1949"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nJUL 18 2 56 PM '49\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nTELEMETER\n\nWASH 2 FROM LOS ANGELES 18 10-35 AM\nDIRECTOR URGENT\n\nPETER CAMERLON JONES, INFO. CONCERNING. REURTEL JULY EIGHTEEN.\nEFFORTS TO IDENTIFY OR LOCATE JONES NEGATIVE.\nHOOD\nACK PLS"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nN.N.I. 96-1943\nISSUED BY THE INTELLIGENCE DIVISION\nOFFICE OF CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nINTELLIGENCE REPORT\nSubject: Flying Discs\nFrom: DIO-11ND at San Diego Date 23 June 1949\nReference: CNO Conf Ser 04422P32 dtd 4 Nov 1948, subj: Flying Discs - Report Of.\nSource: See Below. Evaluation B-3\nSubject: Unidentified Flying Objects - Report Of.\nBELIEF: While flying north in a private plane source, who is believed to be reliable, saw 6 or 7 \"flying discs\" in southern Oregon 27 May 1949. The discs are described as elongated ovals, perhaps 20' in length; they flew in a steady file formation at between 200 to 250 MPH; they appeared to be made of unpainted metal; no smoke or exhaust trails were observed.\nSOURCE: LTJG Joseph C. SHELL, A(L), USNR (Inactive), Serial #348375, of 4575 Northridge Drive, Los Angeles, California. He was commissioned Ensign 5 January 1944. Served at Corpus Christia 30 days AF(V); in Dallas two months VRF-2(D). Ferried SNJ's from North American Company plants. Was at Willow Grove, Pennsylvania for 30 days. Served at check-out base for ferry squadron VRF(2) at Columbus; served at Columbus until August 1945. Source then was with VRF(3) at Terminal Island, California, where he became legal and personnel officer. Was discharged from the Navy in January 1946 as LTJG.\nSource holds Naval Aviator's Certificate #0-17945, plus a senior pilot's rating in the Ferry Wing of the Naval Air Transport Command. He also holds a commercial license, single and multi-engine, and flight instructor's ratings. His flight time began in 1934 and now totals over 5000 hours, of which time 1300 hours were in the U.S.Navy. Source secured a private license in 1935, a transport license in 1937, a commercial pilot's license in 1938, and a re-issue commercial pilot's license in 1945 (#184256). From March 1942 to September 1943 he was flight instructor for the Army Air Force (5 months as primary instructor at Cal-Aero, and the balance of the time as basic instructor at Lancaster, California). From September 1943 to January 1944 he flew for the Superior Oil Company of California.\nSince 1940 source has been Vice-President of the Royal Petroleum Company of California, Long Beach, a concern in which he and his relatives own all of the stock; he also is part-owner of three other oil producing concerns in Southern California.\nSource is married and has three children. He has a B.S. and B.S. degree from the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California; he also had two years of law at the University of Southern California. Source is thirty years of age, but appears to have a background of experience far more his age possess. He is believed to be conservative, sincere, absolutely reliable, and very competent.\nDIO(Original and Master Files): DIO-11ND\nCIA (8) DI USAF (4) (DaB) ID OSS&A (a)\nN 16047 OpS 22V S22F2 OH 15-5 US S21G(2) S22Y (4) S22H2 S22H2B5\nRECORDED - 60\nDeclassified by NIS letter 9/26/77 concerning request\nBRUCE S. MACCABEE 10/3/77\n52 AUG 22 1949\n62-83894-197"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED Aug 4 10 13 AM 1949 RECD ESPIONAGE F B I U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nFBI NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION DEPT OF JUSTICE RECEIVED Aug 4 4 18 PM 1949"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nDIO-11ND Serial 38-49 23 June 1949\nSubject: Unidentified Flying Objects - Report of.\nREPORT: Unidentified Flying Objects Observed in Oregon 27 May 1949:\nOn Friday, 27 May 1949, source was flying his own SNJ-type aircraft from Red Bluff, California to Burns, Oregon, a distance of 305 miles. He left Red Bluff at 1332 P.S.T. and arrived at Burns at 1458 P.S.T. (elapsed time: 1 hour 26 minutes). Source landed at Burns after circling the town twice, which consumed about ten minutes. While an SNJ's normal maximum speed is 170 MPH, source 'demilitarized' his plane (which he had purchased at War Surplus, lightening the plane by about 600 lbs.) and it makes around 200 MPH true air speed. While on this flight he made 212 MPH ground speed; source estimates he had a tail wind of 15 to 18 MPH.\nAt 1425 Pacific Standard Time, Friday, 27 May 1949, source observed the sun reflecting on an object or objects at a considerable distance ahead, a few points to the starboard. He continued to watch the source taken by the reflecting material expecting it to materialise into conventional aircraft as the distance lessened between him and the object or objects. As the objects reached the long bluffs (shown on the Boise (V-2) Aeronautical Chart as Hart Mountain) which run for a number of miles along the east side of some dry lakes (Swamp, Flagstaff, Campbell and Stone Corral Lakes) he saw that instead of a single object there were several, which seemed to be flying in formation.\nAt this point the objects appeared to have changed their course so that they were paralleling his course (southeast to his northeast) and were following the bluffs' rim at about 1000 to 1500 feet below source's altitude, at a distance which he estimates to have been 5 1/2 to 7 1/2 miles. Source is certain that it could not have been as far as 10 miles since the bluffs were less than 10 miles away and he could see the objects outlined against the bluffs.\nThe objects that source saw are described by him as follows:\nSize of each object: Considerably smaller than a fighter plane, probably less than 20' in length. All of the separate objects appeared to be the same in size.\nShape of objects: There was no break in the outline. Source is certain he would have recognized conventional aircraft configuration, and no great thickness. They had a solid. They were elongated oval, perhaps twice as long as wide, and perhaps five times as long as thick. Source points out he observed the objects from an angle from above and could not easily estimate their thickness; they could possibly have been egg-shaped, and could conceivably have been perfectly oval. The objects seemed definitely solid objects - there was nothing ethereal about them.\nSpeed of objects: Source is confident they were traveling at least as fast as source's own plane (212 MPH). Source had a tail wind of 15 to 18 MPH and the objects would therefore have been doing over 230 MPH air speed. The objects were traveling south/southwest, opposite to source's course. Calculating the speed of the objects, several different ways from the facts at hand, the speed of the objects varies between 190 to 260 MPH. Source concluded at the time of observation that he could not possibly have turned around and caught up with the objects. They were definitely traveling faster than a group of birds, and slower than jet planes. No trail of smoke or exhaust was observed. The speed of the objects appeared to be steady.\nTerrain, elevations, population, etc. in area: Source flew at 4000' MSL thick was between 4000' and 5000' above terrain. During most of the time of observation, the objects were 1000' to possibly 1500' below source's plane. Towards the end of sighting when source had begun to come down he was almost on a level with them in altitude."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nDIO-11ND Serial 38-49 23 June 1949\nSubject: Unidentified Flying Objects - Report of.\nThe valley through which source flew north, and the objects flew south, is roughly 12 miles wide. The floor of the valley is between 4000' to 5000' in elevation. The east side of the valley is dominated by Hart Mountain (8020' in elevation). Hart Mountain stands on an elongated bluff, which has an almost sheer drop of around 1000'. The bluff, and all the terrain, against which source saw the objects is quite dark in color. The objects stood out in contrast to the dark color. The objects appeared to be unpainted metal.\nThe rim of the bluff on the east side of the valley is about 7000' in elevation. From where source saw the objects (at 5000' elevation) they were roughly in line with the rim of the bluff (7000'). Assuming the objects were 1 to 2 miles away from the bluff-rim, they were probably flying at about 8000' MSL, and about 3000' above the valley floor.\nThe valley where source sighted the objects is sparsely populated; however, there are a number of ranches there - more than are indicated on the Boise (V-2) Aeronautical Chart. Source believes that if persons living in the valley were questioned, chances are several might be found who saw the objects from the ground. Source has flown through this valley many times in going between California and Oregon and does not recall ever having seen another airplane in the valley where he sighted the objects. The valley is not a commercial airway route, and is seldom used by private planes. Source does not recall ever seeing any automobiles on the dirt roads in the valley shown as such on the Boise (V-2) section of Aeronautical Charts.\nNumber and formation of objects: At the beginning of observation, when the objects were a few degrees to the starboard of dead ahead, source could not distinguish separate objects - all he saw were reflections; however, as he came closer and passed them by 5 1/2 to 7 1/2 miles he definitely saw 6 or 7 separate objects. To be on the safe side source states with positiveness that there were no less than 5 objects and no more than 8.\nThe objects were always in file formation (one behind the other) and there appeared to be no change in altitude of the formation. The space between the lead object and the next one was three or four times the length of one of the objects. The distance between the second and the following objects was between one-half and two-thirds the length of the objects. Accordingly, if the objects were 20' in length, the distance between #1 and #2 was 60 to 80 feet, and the distance between #2 and the others was between 10 and 17 feet. The distance between the objects appeared very constant. The objects were so close and appeared to keep their formation spacing in a manner which indicated they might have been under control by the leading object. At the distance of sighting, no connection, if there was any, could possibly have been observed. Source is positive that the objects were separate objects because he was able to see terrain between them. The formation did not fluctuate in flight; the objects flew very evenly and steadily. When source lost sight of the objects they were going out of visual range on the horizon.\nWeather and visibility at time of observation: Visibility was exceptionally good. Source could see Harney Lake, 50 miles away, and sea smoke rising from the ash mills at Burns, Oregon, 75 miles away. There were a few scattered clouds at between 14,000' and 18,000'. The weather report at the time indicated 'scattered clouds at 18,000''. The air was very smooth. Generally the air in the area is light to mildly turbulent. The sun was in front of source; that is, source's plane was between the sun and the objects.\nLocation of sighting objects: (Refer to Boise (V-2) Sectional Aeronautical Chart). Source's location when objects were first sighted, observed the objects. This position could possibly be as much as five miles SSW of the position given. Source's location when objects left his visual range was 42 41'N, 119 49'W. Source flew in a straight line between these coordinates:\nLocation of objects when first observed: 42 30'N, 119 43'W.\nLocation of objects when last seen: 42 28'N, 119 48'W.\nThe objects made a slight change of course from quartering to paralleling source's straight line of flight."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nDIO-11ND Serial 38-49 23 June 1949\nSubject: Unidentified Flying Objects - Report of.\nobserved the objects. This position could possibly be as much as five miles SSW of the position given. Source's location when objects left his visual range was 42 41'N, 119 49'W. Source flew in a straight line between these coordinates:\nLocation of objects when first observed: 42 30'N, 119 43'W.\nLocation of objects when last seen: 42 28'N, 119 48'W.\nThe objects made a slight change of course from quartering to paralleling source's straight line of flight.\nREPORTING OFFICER'S COMMENT: It is believed that conventional aircraft, birds, balloons, astronomical phenomena, and auto-hypnosis can be eliminated as an explanation for the objects sighted by source. Since source was not flying into the sun and since he is an expert pilot-instructor, VRF(2) does not appear to be a reasonable explanation; nor do reflections on, or irregularities of, the plexi-glass canopy through which source viewed the objects offer a reasonable explanation, because of the wide range of observance of the objects. As far as the reporting officer's comment is concerned (as well as source's own comment) the explanation of source's sighting of the strange flying objects remains a question mark."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tAugust 16, 1949\n\nSAC, San Antonio\n\nPROTECTION OF VITAL INSTALLATIONS\n\nI am attaching hereto a number of copies of reports being received in great numbers in this office concerning the so-called flying disks or unnatural phenomena being frequently observed around Camp Hood, Texas. This is, of course, a primary concern of the Air Corps. Consequently, this office is following the practice of reviewing these data and then destroying them in the event there appears to be nothing of FBI interest therein. It is pointed out that the filing of these would result in the rapid accumulation of very bulky files.\n\nUnless the Bureau believes this is unwise, this practice will continue.\n\n\nEncls.\n\nCEW:cs\n100-7545"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nAUG 20 1949\nTELEMETER\n\nWASHINGTON FROM LOSA 3 20 240 pm\n\nDIRECTOR URGENT\n\nRE FLYING DISKS. LA TIMES, AUG. TWENTY, ARTICLE DATELINED, WASHINGTON, AUG. NINETEEN, U.P. RELEASE, INDICATING U. S. AIR FORCE SEARCHING FOR JONATHAN CALDWELL WHO MADE FLYING DISKS DISCOVERED IN MARLEY PARK MD. INFO RECEIVED J. E. CALDWELL LOCATED AT ONE FOUR FIVE SIX - NINTH ST. MANHATTAN BEACH ; CALIF. THIS INFO BEING FURNISHED OSI, MAYWOOD, MONDAY UNLESS ADVISED TO CONTRARY.\n\nHOOD"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAug 20 7 11 PM '49\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nTELEMETER\n\nWASHINGTON FROM LOSA 3 20 240 PM\n\nDIRECTOR URGENT\n\nRE FLYING DISKS. LA TIMES, AUG. TWENTY, ARTICLE DATELINED, WASHINGTON, AUG. NINETEEN, U.P. RELEASE, INDICATING U. S. AIR FORCE SEARCHING FOR JONATHAN CALDWELL WHO MADE FLYING DISKS DISCOVERED IN MARLEY PARK MD. INFO RECEIVED J. E. CALDWELL LOCATED AT ONE FOUR FIVE SIX - NINTH ST. MANHATTAN BEACH ; CALIF. THIS INFO BEING FURNISHED OSI, MAYWOOD, MONDAY UNLESS ADVISED TO CONTRARY.\n\nHOOD"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"To: COMMUNICATIONS SECTION.\n\nTransmit the following message to:\t\t\tAUGUST 21, 1949\n\t\t\t\t\t\tSAC, LOS ANGELES\t\tURGENT\n\nFLYING DISKS. REURTEL AUGUST TWENTY LAST. BUREAU ADVISING OSI HEADQUARTERS TODAY OF ADDRESS J. E. CALDWELL, MANHATTAN BEACH, CALIFORNIA. YOU SHOULD ALSO FURNISH THIS ADDRESS OSI REPRESENTATIVE YOUR DIVISION TODAY. HOOVER.\n\nJEN:ed\n\ncc- Mr. Newby\n Mr. Sanders\n Mr. Whitson\n Mr. Fletcher\n\nEX-34\n\nSENT VIA\t\t\t\tCOPIES DESTROYED\nPer"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, INDIANAPOLIS\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nDATE: September 6, 1949\n\nELBERT W. FARRIS of OSI, Benjamin Harrison Air Base called at this office recently to ascertain if there was any current information on \"flying saucers\". He stated that he had been instructed recently to contact Dr. RICHARD K. PARRISH of Decatur, Indiana, with reference to a flying saucer he allegedly observed in the vicinity of Lake of the Woods, Canada, on or about July 1, 1949. An FBI Agent by the name of METCALF of the Omaha office was alleged to have seen the same saucer.\n\nWhen FARRIS conversed with Dr. PARRISH, the Dr. told him that when he returned from Canada, he found himself in the midst of a polio epidemic and that as a result he had read as much literature as possible with respect to polio, its symptoms, diagnosis, etc. Dr. PARRISH told FARRIS that in his opinion, the cases which were thought to be polio in the vicinity of Decatur, Indiana, were not polio, but possibly the result of uranium poisoning and that he felt the presence of flying saucers had direct bearing on the polio epidemic. Dr. PARRISH pointed out that flying saucers were observed in the Carolina's in 1948 and there was a polio epidemic in the vicinity at that time. FARRIS stated he had consulted one of the physicians at the Benjamin Harrison Air Base and had also checked the records with reference to allegations concerning the sighting of flying saucers and had done a little research with respect to correlating the presence of flying saucers and any polio epidemic. He further stated that he was reporting the matter to the proper Air Force authorities, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio.\n\nIt has also come to the attention of this office that FARRIS made inquiry of the Indiana University Medical School, Indianapolis, Indiana, where the doctors treated the entire matter as a big joke.\n\nFARRIS also stated that Dr. PARRISH had heard while in Canada that there had been some rather strange events somewhere in the interior with respect to finding what might have been remains of flying saucers.\n\nThe foregoing is furnished for the information of the Bureau. This office is taking no action in the matter.\n\nHAK/fjd\n100-0"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n[illegible]\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I RECEIVED\nOCT 10 1949 AM\nOCT 5 1949 PM\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-201\n\nOctober 12, 1949\n\nMr. Maurice E. Hatten\n419 East Main Street\nCircleville, Ohio\n\nDear Mr. Hatten:\n\nYour letter dated October 8, 1949, has been received and in response to your request I am returning it to you at this time.\n\nFor your information the jurisdiction of this Bureau does not extend outside the United States and its Possessions. It is therefore suggested that you may wish to communicate with the Division of International Press and Publications, Office of Public Affairs, United States Department of State, 21st Street and Virginia Avenue, Washington, D. C., with regard to the suggestion made in your letter.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nEnclosure\n\nNOTE: The enclosure is incoming letter being returned to correspondent at his request.\n\nARA:cjh\n\nTolson\nLadd\nClegg\nGlavin\nNichols\nRosen\nTracy\nHarbo\nMohr\nTele. Room\nNease\nGandy\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 11\nOCT 12 1949 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\n63 OCT 24 1949"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-COPY-\n\n419 East Main Street\nCircleville, Ohio\n1949 October 8\npermanent address: Route 2\nDelaware, Ohio\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nDepartment of Justice\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nIt is requested that this letter be returned to the above address and no record of it kept in FBI files.\n\nIf is it true that the Soviet leaders intend to use the flying disk in an attempt to confuse and terrify the American people, why should we not state to the United Nations that we believe this condition to exist and further request permission from United Nations to fly American printed statements into the USSR in the interests of peace and better understanding between the two nations? To prevent the belief that such a method would be used, be either nation, to carry bombs rather than paper, it should be pointed out that it is not necessary to employ airplanes for the purpose insofar as actually flying over enemy territory is concerned. There are several possible means of placing information at the disposal of citizens of either country via air; I mention small balloons incapable of carrying more than a few pounds, or finned, cardboard disks capable of drifting on wind currents for great distances after release from several miles height. (I reserve the right to claim patent rights to the latter \"flying newspaper\".)\n\nInasmuch as we have been told that the Communist Party is a very small minority in the USSR, it is impossible to prevent information, printed, from reaching many good people there if flown in by the millions. Of couse there would be a penalty in Russia for reading them if cought, but curiosity being curiosity, many would be read and remembered. And no one really believes that children could be prevented from picking up objects floating in from another country.\n\nINDEXED - 36 RECORDED - 36\n62-83894\n\nShall freedom of the press be defended in some countries at cost in lives, yet denied across nations, the latter being contrary to United Nations principles?\n\nYours sincerely,\n\ns/ Maurice E. Hatten"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, Pittsburgh\n\nDATE: October 2, 1949\n\nSUBJECT: GLEN SPROUSE, Informant\nFLYING DISCS, MISCELLANEOUS\n\nOn September 26, 1949, GLEN SPROUSE, 608 Montrose Drive, S. Charleston, West Virginia, appeared at the Charleston, West Virginia, resident agency and gave to Special Agent JOHN B. WOODRUFF the attached letter. Mr. SPROUSE stated that he had written the letter following a pleasure flight from Clark Field, St. Albans, West Virginia, to Parkersburg, West Virginia, on September 25, 1949. Mr. SPROUSE stated that after writing the letter, he did not know whether it would be of any interest to the FBI and decided that instead of mailing it directly to the Bureau at Washington, he would contact the local agent and turn it over to him if it were thought it would be of interest to the Bureau.\n\nMr. SPROUSE stated that he has set out the complete details of this incident in his letter and that there is nothing further that he can add. He further stated that he is certain this was not a mirage and that it actually occurred.\n\nNo further action is being taken by this office unless specified to do so by the Bureau.\n\nENCL\n\nJEW/jw\n62-0\n\nRECORDED 87 62-83894-202\nINDEXED - 87\nEX-119\n13 OCT 25 1949"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n[illegible]\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I RECEIVED\nOCT 5 1949 PM\nRECORDS SEC\nOCT 5 11 59 AM 1949"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"608 Montrose Drive\nS. Charleston, W. Va.\nSeptember 25, 1949.\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington D. C.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nAn incident happened this afternoon which after consideration I felt I should report. I most certainly do not want this incident disclosed, as I do not want any publicity concerning it. If you regard it of no special interest to the F.B.I. please disregard this correspondence.\nI was flying from (Clark Field) to Parkersburg, W. Va. this afternoon and about four miles airline, southwest of Parkersburg, I suddenly noticed a bright yellow object coming directly towards me. It came at me with such speed, added to my 100 m.p.h. forward speed that it startled me and had passed by in a matter of a couple of seconds. But it passed by about 100 feet under my ship and about 50 feet to my right, and because of the dark green background of the forests below I was able to get a very clear outline of the object, and what I believe is a very accurate description.\nColor - bright canary yellow\nLength- about 15 to 18 inches\nDiameter- About 4\" in the largest part\nIt resembled a rocket, in fact was about the same shape and proportions as the fuselage of a Lockheed Air Force X-90\nNo wings but vertical and horizontal fins on rear 1/3 of the rocket.\nNo visable means of propulsion such as propeller, vapor trail, smoke or exhaust.\nThe front of the rocket was very sharp with a needle nose, the needle looked about 6\" long and was the size of a lead pencil.\nThe rear end was blunt similar to the rear end of a jet fuselage.\n\nI was flying my ship, (a Luscombe 8A,NC 1440K) and was traveling about 100 m.p.h. at the time.\nI was at 3450 ft above sea level at the time.\nI was flying a compass course of 60 degrees, and the rocket was traveling almost west at 240 degrees.\nIt happened about 2:45 P.M. on the above date.\nThe visability was exceptionally good, about 30 miles.\nThe yellow object looked very sharp and clearly outlined because of the dark green background.\nIf you will refer to the Huntington sectional aerial map this object was sighted over a very small town named Lubeck, which is about 4 miles direct west of South Parkersburg.\nIt appeared to have spent it's force and seemed to be dropping slightly as it passed by, or had been fired or launched from a higher altitude than the altitude I was flying. end\nMy wife was with me but she did not see the object, and I did not tell her of the incident until we had landed at Parkersburg.\n\nVery truly yours,\nAllen Sprouse"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\n\n62-83894-202\n\nDate: October 19, 1949\n\nTo: Director\nOffice of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover - Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING DISCS\n\nThere is set forth the following unverified information relating to the captioned matter which was furnished to this Bureau by a confidential source whose reliability is unknown and who has requested that his identity not be revealed.\n\n\"I was flying from ... to Parkersburg, W. Va. this afternoon (September 25, 1949) and about four miles airline, southwest of Parkersburg, I suddenly noticed a bright yellow object coming directly towards me. It came at me with such speed, added to my 100 m.p.h. forward speed that it startled me and had passed by in a matter of a couple of seconds, but it passed by about 100 feet under my ship and about 50 feet to my right, and because of the dark green background of the forests below I was able to get a very clear outline of the object, and what I believe is a very accurate description.\n\n\"Color - bright canary yellow\n\"Length - about 15 to 18 inches\n\"Diameter - about 4\" in the largest part\n\n\"It resembled a rocket, in fact was about the same shape and proportions as the fuselage of a Lockheed Air Force X-90"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"No wings but vertical and horizontal fins on rear 1/3 of the rocket.\n\n\"No visable means of propulsion such as propeller, vapor trail, smoke or exhaust.\n\n\"The front of the rocket was very sharp with a needle nose, the needle looked about 6\" long and was the size of a lead pencil.\n\n\"The rear end was blunt similar to the rear end of a jet fuselage.\n\n\"I was flying my ship ... and was traveling about 100 m.p.h. at the time.\n\n\"I was at 3450 ft. above sea level at the time.\n\n\"I was flying a compass course of 60 degrees, and the rocket was traveling almost west at 240 degrees.\n\n\"It happened about 2:45 P.M. on the above date.\n\n\"The visability was exceptionally good, about 30 miles.\n\n\"The yellow object looked very sharp and clearly outlined because of the dark green background.\n\n\"If you will refer to the Huntington sectional aerial map this abject was sighted over a very small town named Lubeck, which is about 4 miles direct west of South Parkersburg.\n\n\"It appeared to have spent it's force and seemed to be dropping slightly as it passed by, or had been fired or launched from a higher altitude than the altitude I was flying.\"\n\nThe above has been furnished to you for your information and assistance in connection with the captioned matter.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nPRIORITY\n\nFROM: HQ 13TH OSI DST OFFUTT AFB, OMAHA, NEBRASKA\n\nTO : DIR OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS HQ USAF, WASH., D.C.\n\nINFO: DIST COMDR 14 OSI DIST LOWRY AFB, COLO (ZEN)\nDIST COMDR 17 OSI DIST KIRTLAND AFB, NEW MEXICO (ZEN)\n\nNR : OSI 8 16 January 1950\n\n(THIS IS REHAS OSI 8 DTD 14 JAN 50. CATEGORY BAKER MESSAGE).\n\nRudy Fick says Flying saucers from Venus came to earth by accident. Rudy Fick, well known Kansas City auto dealer stopped in Denver 2 weeks ago while returning from Ogden, Utah. At that time he called on the manager of Ford Agency. Their conversation was interrupted by some engineers arriving for a meeting; one of whom was a man named Coulter. Coulter revealed some startling information. He (Coulter) stated he \"Crashed the Gate\" at a radar station near New Mexico and Arizona borders, and while there he saw 2 of the highly secret \"Flying Saucers.\" Spot report details---the information contained herein was furnished from article which appeared in the Wyandotte Echo newspaper, Kansas City, Kansas, 6 January 1950. Of the two Flying saucers one was badly damaged and the other almost perfectly intact. They consisted of 2 parts, a cockpit or cabin about 6 feet in diameter. A ring 18 feet across and 2 feet thick surrounded the cabin. The cabin was constructed of metal resembling aluminum, but the actual make of the metal has defied analysis. Coulter had a piece of the metal in his possession and gave it to the Ford man to send to the Dearborne plant for analysis. This man (Coulter) showed the group, including Fick, a clock or automatic calendar which was taken from one of the Flying Saucers. This clock or automatic calendar consisted of 2 pieces of metal together with some unusual type of metal. On the face of 1 or 2 pieces of this metal there appeared an indentation which rotated around the disk completing a cycle each 28 days. According to the information given Coulter around 50 of these flying saucers have been found in the United States in a period of 2 years. Of these, 40 are in the 7 US Research Bureau in Los Angeles. Each of the craft had a crew of 2. The bodies in the damaged ship were charred, but the other ship's occupants were in a perfect state of preservation, although dead."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nPage 2\n\nAll were uniform height of 3 feet; blond, beardless and their teeth were completely free of fillings or cavities. They wore no under garments, but had their bodies taped and were dressed in a sort of wire. A quantity of food in tablet form was found in ship. Mr. Fick assumed that the reason behind the apparent lack of security was that the Government wanted the information spread from unofficial sources until people are more or less familiar with the facts. Mr. Fick feels that the security department of the military fear that the sudden shock of a surprise announcement that interplanitary travel is possible might cause mass hysteria. Fick is well known locally and has a number of friends at the Kansas City Star. OSI District 13 will interview Fick and will make additional inquiries at the Kansas City Star. Coulter not otherwise identified, but can be reached through Ford agency in Denver. Action: Information copies furnished OSI Districts 14 and 17 for action. The editor of the Kansas City Star stated that while they were aware of this story they did not dare publish it in the paper because it is too fantastic.\n\nACTION: DIRECTOR, SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS\n\nINFO : DCS/O DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE\nDCS/O DIRECTOR OF PLANS & OPERATIONS\nDCS/O POLICY DIVISION\nCHIEF OF STAFF'S LOG, USAF\n\nCAF IN: 7130 (16 Jan 50) DTG: 16/1430Z CVC/lws\n\nRC 28/16th\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nSTAFF MESSAGE DIVISION\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nPRIORITY\n\nFROM: 13 OSI DIST OFFUTT AFB, OMAHA NEBRASKA, SGD THOMPSON\n\nTO : OSAF, WASHINGTON 25, D.C.\nDIST COMDR 14TH OSI DIST LOWRY AFB, COLORADO\nDIST COMDR 17TH OSI DIST KIRTLAND AFB ALBUQUERQUE,\nNEW MEXICO\n\nNR : OSI 11. 17 January 1950\n\nThis refers to TWX from 13th OSI District, Offutt AFB, Omaha, Nebraska, dated 13 January and spot intelligence report dated 16 January, subject: \"Flying Saucers From Venus Come To Earth.\" For your information both TWX and spot report are downgraded to Confidential.\n\nNOTE: Reference TWX is CAF-IN-7130, 17 Jan 50 (OSI).\n\nACTION: CSI.\n\nINFO : ODS, OIN, OPO, OOP, OPY, CAG-30.\n\nCAF IN: 7 3 3 1. (18 Jan 50) DTG: 172110Z. RCW/jel.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL RO-NBR: 25/18."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-203\nENCLOSURE\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1953 Fitzgerald St\nPhila 45 Pa\n24-1-50 -\n\nRe:- Flying Saucers\n\nGentlemen:- With the persistant debates pro + con on the above. It sort of annoys me and since I have an opinion of international nature, I'd feel pretty bad if I happened to be right and it resulted in harm to my country. I realize I might be wasting your time (my theory perhaps having been considered and discounted) but on the other hand if it's a new angle it might bear investigation.\n\nVery Truly yours,\nFerdinand E. C. Pfeil.\n\nMy Store is open 6:30 am to 7 pm - (1 pm Wed) but lunch hour (1 to 2 pm.)\n\nFILE"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"January 30, 1950\n\nRECORDED - 128\n62-83874-204\nINDEXED - 128\n\nMr. Ferdinand E. C. Pfeil\n1953 Fitzgerald Street\nPhiladelphia 45, Pennsylvania\n\nDear Mr. Pfeil:\n\nYour letter of January 24, 1950, has been received and while I appreciate your offer to furnish me your observations concerning the flying saucers, this matter is not being investigated by the FBI.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNJC:aip"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED-128\nINDEXED-128\nFEB 2 4.01 PM '50\nRECEIVED-LADD\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"II\n01. Seeing any letter I send you it might be better if after a while as I send you I dale's that I really know. Something to find a better way to contact each other, for there are snoopers in the Postal service talking about Postal Service if you answer this letter please do not use letterhead just plain letter will do for. I don't want any Postal clerks getting ideas. the button is I do not want anyone but you to know where or the letters are from.\n\nThanking You Sincerely\nMr. Walter Fisher.\nR.D#1\nParinos\nP.S. If Saucer's Project wants to clear this up quick I share a idea of how they can do same and will be able to check and find out who really did see these, give them a list of dates. I send you the exact time, day and place. Then they can check My list of dates. I send you."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"February 20, 1950\n62-83894-205\n\nMr. Walter Fisher\nRoute 1\nParinos, Pennsylvania\n\nDear Mr. Fisher:\n\nYour letter of February 12, 1950, has been received and I appreciate your thoughtfulness in making available the information which you furnished.\n\nIf in the future additional data comes to your attention which you feel should be made available to the FBI please feel free to furnish it to Mr. A. Cornelius, Special Agent in Charge of our Philadelphia Office, 500 Widener Building, Philadelphia 7, Pennsylvania.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nCC: Philadelphia\n\nTolson\nLadd\nClegg\nGlavin\nNichols\nRosen\nTracy\nHarbo\nMohr\nTele. Room\nNease\nGandy"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 125\nINDEXED - 125\nFEB 21 1950\nRECEIVED-MAIL ROOM\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nMAILED 16\nFEB 21 1950\nCOMM - FBI"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI, DENVER\nDIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFLYING SAUCERS. TWO SOURCES ADVISED TODAY THAT UNIDENTIFIED INDIVIDUAL HAS GIVEN AT LEAST ONE AND POSSIBLY MORE LECTURES BEFORE CLASSES AT DENVER UNIVERSITY YESTERDAY OR TODAY IN WHICH HE DISCUSSED FLYING SAUCERS WHICH HE ALLEGEDLY PERSONALLY OBSERVED. THIS PERSON CLAIMS TO HAVE SEEN SEVERAL SUCH OBJECTS, ONE OF WHICH ALLEGEDLY LANDED IN NEW MEXICO. HE ALSO CLAIMS TO HAVE OBSERVED OCCUPANTS OF SAUCERS DESCRIBED BY HIM AS OF HUMAN FORM, BUT ABOUT THREE FEET TALL. THESE OCCUPANTS OF SAUCERS ALLEGEDLY DEAD AT TIME HE OBSERVED THEM. THIS LECTURER [REDACTED] REFUSED TO REVEAL IDENTITY, BUT IS KNOWN TO GEORGE KOEHLER, WHO IS [REDACTED] CONNECTED WITH RADIO STATION KMYR, DENVER. KOEHLER REPORTED TO HAVE MADE SOME PREVIOUS CLAIMS HIMSELF WITH RESPECT TO OBSERVING FLYING SAUCERS. LOCAL PRESS AND ALSO WIRE SERVICES CARRYING STORIES CONCERNING THESE LECTURES AT DENVER UNIVERSITY. OSI, DENVER, HAS NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION EXCEPT THAT GEORGE KOEHLER IN JANUARY THIS YEAR REPORTED TO HAVE MADE SIMILAR CLAIMS AND UPON INVESTIGATION WAS UNABLE TO PRODUCE ANY VERIFIABLE INFORMATION. OSI CONSIDERS KOEHLER AS PROBABLE MENTAL CASE. BUREAU ADVISE WHAT, IF ANY, ACTION DESIRED AT DENVER.\n\nKRAMER\n\nEND\n11-29 PM OK FBI WA HSU\nV\n\nRECORDED - 33\nINDEXED - 33\n62-83894-206\nMr. Belmont"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nMAR 9 11 31 PM '50\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nMAR 10 6 54 AM '50\nRECEIVED-FLETCHER\nMAR 10 3 PM '50\nRECEIVED\nMAR 10 1 55 PM '50"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MARCH 10, 1950 - ROUTINE\nSAC DENVER\n\nFLYING DISCS. REURTEL MARCH NINE LAST CAPTIONED FLYING SAUCERS AND RE BUREAU BULLETIN NUMBER FIVE SEVEN DATED OCTOBER ONE, NINETEEN FORTYSEVEN IN CAPTIONED MATTER. NO FURTHER ACTION DESIRED.\n\nHOOVER\n\nEHM:EWT"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLASSIFIED INCOMING MESSAGE\nCONFIDENTIAL\nDEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\nCONFIDENTIAL PRIORITY PARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED\n\nFrom: COMGENARMYTHREE Ft McPherson Ga\nTo: Dept of Army for Dir of Intelligence\nNr: AJACI 1-2 2 Mar 50\n\nTelephone call received from Lt Col Nunamaker Tennessee Military District 1130, 2 March. He stated that\n\nA. There is a radar station near Knoxville which has been in operation about 3 weeks. This radar station is being operated by station WROL of Knoxville.\n\nB. On 1 March at 2135 hours the station picked up an object 340 degrees and 18 miles from Knoxville altitude 40,000 feet. Direction and distance put the object directly over Oak Ridge. AEC Security Division Chief at Oak Ridge checked with Smyrna Air Base Nashville which reported it had no flight plan for any plane being in that vicinity and altitude.\n\nC. On 2 March at 1105 station picked up object at 335 degrees and 18 miles from Knoxville altitude 40,000 feet. AEC Security Div Chief checked with Smyrna Air Base with negative results.\n\nD. AEC Sec Div Chief is not certain as to operational efficiency of radar unit and requested Smyrna AB to send qualified radar operator. Smyrna has no personnel so qualified. Smyrna commander suggested Third Army send qualified radar operator to check equipment.\n\nE. Data from radar was limited to:\n1. Bearing, distance and altitude on each object.\n2. Third Army queried 14th Air Force to determine if 14th AF had training flights over the Knoxville area on 1 and 2 March. Answer was no.\n\nCM IN 12036 (3Mar 50)\nCONFIDENTIAL COPY NO."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLASSIFIED INCOMING MESSAGE\nCONFIDENTIAL\nDEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE\n\nNr: AJACI 1-2 Page 2\n\n3. Third Army has no radar operators.\n\n4. Inquiry of Lt Col Nunamaker revealed that Chief Security Div Oak Ridge is anxious to get qualified personnel check on the performance of the radar.\n\nACTION: G-2\n\nCM IN 12036 (3 Mar 50) DTG: 022030Z mlf/C\n\nCONFIDENTIAL COPY NO."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tulsa Okla.\nFeb. 28, 1950\n\nMr J. Edgar Hoover\nDirector of F.B.I.\nWashington D.C.\n\nDear Mr Hoover:- Flying Saucers\n\nYour acknowledgement of my letter in regard to your excellent & faithful service, rec'd Feb. 22 here. I've had something on my chest for seven years, and it may be the time and way to do something about it, now also. It was during a time of my seven years of Civil Service work here in Tulsa, while doing Engr. drafting for the Corps of Engineers, War Department. At this time I began to the matter serious thought.\n\nFor a number of intermittent nights at about the same time, I would hear a terrific very quick noise over the four unit apartment Bldg. at 44 East 17th St. where I had a small 3 roomed apartment on the top floor. The noise only lasted a second or less, and always traveled north & south. It was at great speed this missel or whatever over head that I could never get to the window to look into the night sky. I reported it to the F.B.I. here (local F.B.I.) & checked all the air ports. no one knew of any craft having been there at that time. I clocked it after hearing it 4 or 5 times, and as near as I can remember now it was about 11:21 P.M. Then the time I again reported to the F.B.I. I had long before found it was not street nor building noise. The second time I called the F.B.I. the party at the other end, said wait a moment; soon he said, a Lt. of the force had been telling him of hearing the same thing a few blocks south of me at the 21st bridge while out there on patrol duty!\n\nThen a few week after those noises over head, came the first word of people, seeing \"flying saucers\"\n\nSince living here at 1039 N. College, late last fall a flying saucer must have been what I saw that looked like a very round white cloud against a grey stormy overcast sky. It also rapidly drifted north & south, and while I wondered I looked at the (cloud?) sphere I saw it disintegrate and something that looked like envelopes or paper fell toward the earth but the round objects pieces seemed to melt into the grey sky."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\nIt was all so plain & clear for the object was in the\neastern sky & the sun just came from behind a cloud\nin the west at about sun down & shown upon it. I rushed\nto my east door to try & distinguish a plane motor or some\nsound of motor or a possible crash maybe a few blocks\naway. But I heard nothing so I again explained & reported\nto the 7th B.D. here. I could not judge the distance of the object.\nNow my own radio has not been working for about\n2 weeks, so that I've not recently caught all the news. But a\nfriend of mine tells me that according to radio news, the\nsaucers are again appearing and are now disintegrating.\nNow Mr. Hoover if this matter that I shall mention\nhere is by chance out of your jurisdiction, then I pray that\nyou either mail this to some one (the right one) or put it into\nthe hands (directly) to some responsible Gov. Official whom you\nare sure will give the matter serious study and consideration.\nWhen the two tornados hit Woodward Okla several\nyears ago within a few days or a few weeks of each other. From\nthat time on I have theorized that these \"flying saucers\" are\nbeing sent from a Russian base located somewhere near\nthe eastern edge of Siberia, Korea or Mongolia, but more\nlikely some place in Siberia, and are radar controlled. That\nthe first ones of about the year of the tornados came back to the\nbase there, and that they served a tri-purpose.\nNo.1. That the first ones contained instruments to\nphotograph & simultaneously record distance altitude & temperature. Thus with data returning via the \"saucers\" the Russians\nmay by this means have every foot of our U.S.A. photographed\nand our vital areas spotted. No doubt the \"saucers\" are\nbuilt round and like this view from the side would have\nonly one edge and spin like a top thru the air\nwith slots around the saucer where I have placed\nthe dots. Could be made to open automatically and scatter\ngerms, chemicals ice & etc.\nNo.2. That they may be able to effect our weather current\nthat have caused our heavy storms and unusual sudden"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3\nchanges in temperatures in spotted areas over the U.S.\nThey may be able from their data formally obtained &\nsend a saucer anywhere at most any time with most\nanything, depending on the setting of the automatic device\nwithin the saucer & the altitude & distance on their controls at\ntheir base. & the substance placed within.\nNothing now is impossible!\nNo.3. The sudden weather changes all this last fall\nand this winter especially have caused a \"flu\" & a chest\ncondition that lasts much longer and weakens those parts\nmuch more than even the oldfashioned \"flu\" did, so I've\nbeen told by the doctor & whom I go.\nHence it has put the vast majority of people in\na weakened condition, receptive of attack of a greater physical\nillness, something that may even be breathed from the\nair, & may put us into a helpless, weak or sleeping condition\nthat will give Russia a chance to walk in and take this\ncountry intact, without ever bombing & spoiling our\nrich oil and industrial supplies! (Russia has never yet\ngotten the oil she started out for.) If done in this manner\nwe would wake up or come to and find ourself possibly her\nslaves!\nIts something to think about, and as I see it a\nvery great possibility! so I'm praying that you place this\nmatter with those or one you are certain will give it a\nvery serious thot. If my theory is a true case, then if\nwe could locate that base, we could save a great deal\nof trouble to our nation. The above mentioned matter ties\nin with what I wrote before World War II to General Chief of Staff\nMarshall, President F.D.R. and Martin Dyes, about a\nseemingly fantastic dream I had three years or about that\nafter the first world war. In that dream which I had 3\nnights alike & the smallest detail and in succession. In\nthat dream the Russians, Germans, and a slant eyed people\ncame in the S. West & marched & swarmed over our country\nto the North East. and in the dream we stood like stone"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4\nimages stunned with surprise! In the dream it seemed\nthat I was a child again watching grandfather at his\nwork bench, and tho at the time of that strange dream\ngrandfather was then deceased, but as I seemed to be\nstanding beside him in the dream, he looked down at me\nand said \"Florence whatever I dream always comes true\".\nActually I had never, while he lived with us in all those years\never heard him claim he had dreamed; so my only interpretation of the dream & what he said in it would mean that\nwhat I dreamed & etc. when he was young he was ordered\nto \"goose-step\" into Prussia in the Franco-Prussian War, and\nhe often told me in German how he hated war, & I know\nhow much he loved the beautiful & how really kind he\nwas. He loved garden, flowers & did beautiful cabinet work.\nDoesn't it stand to reason that there is a very definite\npurpose in the disintrigation of the \"saucers\" now?\nThat we have advertised the fact that we think they\nare \"interplanetary\", and the country sending them are not\nafraid that we may find out different? That also there may\nbe chemicals or disease germs within them that if they return\nto the original base might accidently be scattered within\ntheir own boundaries and dangerous to their own welfare?!\nAnd besides after all we have found out that Mars\nis not inhabited! I might add now that I did not sign\nmy name to the letters I wrote about that dream to the three\nWashington gentlemen, I was afraid to for we were so close\nto war with Germany then. I mailed them from Tulsa, so you\nmight have heard of this happening at that time. We know\nthat dream of 3 nights did not then come true. But there\nis still time that something very similar may yet happen!\nEnclosed is postage for mailing this to the party\nyou know will consider it from a serious, possibility angle.\nalso a rough sketch that I've made, my idea of Russia's\nmethod. I would appreciate hearing your opinion\non the above scientific possibility mentioned. I know nothing\nof Science actually. I am Sincerely yours.\nwish I did. Mrs Florence B. Pervier\nI hope something will be done 1039 N. College.\ntime."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SIBERIA\nALASKA\n\"SAUCER\"\nBASE\nPossible\nRoute of Saucers\nThe \"saucer\" base may\nbe further South on\nin such a location as to\nallow them in their\ncourse, to pass thru'\nthe Alaskan weather\ncurrents, some where\nin their course between\nAlaska and U.S.A.\nAll:- Heavier is\nstorm area\nCANADA\nSo on\n& all\nover\nU.S.A.\nby:\nFlorence Pervier\nTulsa, Okla."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE\n62-83894-208"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"March 7, 1950\n\nMrs. Florence B. Pervier\n1039 North College\nTulsa, Oklahoma\n\nDear Mrs. Pervier:\n\n62-83894-208\n\nYour letter of February 28, 1950, has been received and I want to thank you for making your observation available to me. Your thoughtfulness in this connection is appreciated.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNOTE: Correspondent lengthly relates her observation concerning flying saucers and advised that she believes they are of Russia origin. It is noted that in her letter of February 14, she wrote to commend Mr. Hoover for his services as Director of the FBI.\n\nNJC:aij"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nMrs. Florence B. Pervier\n1039 North College\nTulsa, Oklahoma\n\nDear Mrs. Pervier:\n\nYour letter of February 28, 1950, has been received and I want to thank you for making your observation available to me. Your thoughtfulness in this connection is appreciated.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nNOTE: Correspondent lengthly relates her observation concerning flying saucers and advised that she believes they are of Russia origin. It is noted that in her letter of February 14, she wrote to commend Mr. Hoover for his services as Director of the FBI.\n\nRHK:VIM"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM : GUY HOTTEL, SAC, WASHINGTON\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nFlying Discs or Flying Saucers\n\nThe following information was furnished to SA R. H. KURTZMAN by KARL HOWE, Special Investigator, Sex Squad, Metropolitan Police Department:\n\nAn investigator for the Air Forces stated that three so-called flying saucers had been recovered in New Mexico. They were described as being circular in shape with raised centers, approximately 50 feet in diameter. Each one was occupied by three bodies of human shape but only 3 feet tall, dressed in metallic cloth of a very fine texture. Each body was bandaged in a manner similar to the blackout suits used by speed flyers and test pilots.\n\nAccording to Mr. HOWE'S informant, the saucers were found in New Mexico due to the fact that the Government has a very high-powered radar set-up in that area and it is believed the radar interferes with the controlling mechanism of the saucers.\n\nNo further evaluation was attempted by SA KURTZMAN concerning the above.\n\nRHK:VIM\n\nRECORDED - 3\nINDEXED - 3\n\n62-83894-209\nMAR 28 1950\n\n51 MAR 29 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\n[illegible]\n\nThe following information was furnished to SA R. H. KURTZMAN by KARL HOWE, Special Investigator, Sex Squad, Metropolitan Police Department:\n\nAn investigator for the Air Forces stated that three so-called flying saucers had been recovered in New Mexico. They were described as being circular in shape with raised centers, approximately 50 feet in diameter. Each one was occupied by three bodies of human shape but only 3 feet tall, dressed in metallic cloth of a very fine texture. Each body was bandaged in a manner similar to the blackout suits used by speed flyers and test pilots.\n\nAccording to Mr. HOWE'S informant, the saucers were found in New Mexico due to the fact that the Government has a very high-powered radar set-up in that area and it is believed the radar interferes with the controlling mechanism of the saucers.\n\nNo further evaluation was attempted by SA KURTZMAN concerning the above.\n\nRHK:VIM\n\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nFBI\nRECEIVED MAIL ROOM"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLASSIFIED\nINCOMING\nMESSAGE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nPRIORITY\n\nPARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED\n\nfrom: COMGENARMYTHREE Ft McPherson Ga\nTo : Dept of Army for Dir of Intelligence\nNr : AJACI-3-3 3206 3 Mar 50\n\nReference our TWX AJACI-1-2, 2nd Mar supplementary report follows:\n\n1. (A) At 2130 hours on 2nd Mar radar station picked up 2 objects 310 degrees, altitude 80000 feet, approximately 18 miles from Knoxville in general direction of Oak Ridge, moving in circular motion but in opposite directions.\n\n(B) At 2230 hours 2nd Mar and again at 0030 hours 3rd Mar station picked up object, moving same direction, locality and altitude.\n\n(C) Density of object similar to DC-3 airplane, speed not established but report as \"terrific\".\n\n2. CIA Radar Technician reportedly arrives Knoxville today to check radar set and operation.\n\n3. Arrangement reportedly made by FBI with Naval and Marine Reserve Unit Knoxville to set up radar equipment to verify reception of WROL radar station.\n\n4. All information on this subject this headquarters has been turned over to A-2 Fourteenth Air Force.\n\nNote: AJACI-1-2 is CM IN 12036 (3 Mar 50) G-2\n\nACTION: G-2\nINFO : G-3\n\nCM IN 12184\n(4 Mar 50)\nDTG: 031900Z ear/b\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDA SCO FORM 15 JAN 1949 22-3\nCOPY NO.\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1949—O-830430"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr: AJACI 1-2 Page 2\n\n3. Third Army has no radar operators.\n\n4. Inquiry of Lt Col Nunamaker revealed that Chief Security Div Oak Ridge is anxious to get qualified personnel check on the performance of the radar.\n\nACTION: G-2\n\nCM IN 12036 (3 Mar 50) DTG: 022030Z mlf/C\n\nCONFIDENTIAL COPY NO.\n\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1949—O-830430"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLASSIFIED INCOMING MESSAGE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE\n\nFBI\n\nRecd from IOA CWBcio 3-8-50\n\nCONFIDENTIAL PRIORITY PARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED\n\nFrom: COMGENARMYTHREE Ft McPherson Ga\n\nTo: Dept of Army for Dir of Intelligence\n\nNr: AJACI 1-2 2 Mar 50\n\nTelephone call received from Lt Col Nunamaker Tennessee Military District 1130, 2 March. He stated that\n\nA. There is a radar station near Knoxville which has been in operation about 3 weeks. This radar station is being operated by station WROL of Knoxville.\n\nB. On 1 March at 2135 hours the station picked up an object 340 degrees and 18 miles from Knoxville altitude 40,000 feet. Direction and distance put the object directly over Oak Ridge. AEC Security Division Chief at Oak Ridge checked with Smyrna Air Base Nashville which reported it had no flight plan for any plane being in that vicinity and altitude.\n\nC. On 2 March at 1105 station picked up object at 335 degrees and 18 miles from Knoxville altitude 40,000 feet. AEC Security Div Chief checked with Smyrna Air Base with negative results.\n\nD. AEC Sec Div Chief is not certain as to operational efficiency of radar unit and requested Smyrna AB to send qualified radar operator. Smyrna has no personnel so qualified. Smyrna commander suggested Third Army send qualified radar operator to check equipment.\n\nE. Data from radar was limited to:\n\n1. Bearing, distance and altitude on each object.\n\n2. Third Army queried 14th Air Force to determine if 14th AF had training flights over the Knoxville area on 1 and 2 March. Answer was no.\n\nCM IN 12036 (3Mar 50)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL COPY NO."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FROM DO-7\n\nOFFICE OF DIRECTOR, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nTO\nOFFICIAL INDICATED BELOW BY CHECK MARK\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Nease\nMiss Gandy\n\nSee Me\nNote and Return\nFor Your Recommendation\nWhat are the facts?\nRemarks:\n\nENCLOSURE\n62-83894-212"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : The Director\n\nDATE: March 28, 1950\n\nFROM : D. M. Ladd\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nReference is made to your inquiry on the attached routing slip:\n\n\"Just what are the facts re 'flying saucers'? A short memo as to whether it is true or just what Air Force etc. think of them.\"\n\nIn response to your inquiry, Special Agent S. W. Reynolds obtained the following information today (3/28/50) from Major Boggs and Lieutenant Colonel J. V. Hearn of Air Force Intelligence. The Air Force discontinued their intelligence project to determine what flying saucers are the latter part of last year. They publicly announced to the press in December, 1949, that the project had been discontinued. They advised that the press release had been concurred in by the Army and Navy. The reason for the discontinuance, according to Major Boggs and Lieutenant Colonel Hearn, was that after two years of investigation over three-fourths of the incidents regarding flying saucers proved to be misidentifications of a wide variety of conventional items such as lighted weather balloons and other air-borne objects.\n\nColonel Hearn pointed out that the Commanders of the various areas are charged with the security of those areas. Reports concerning flying saucers received at this time will be investigated by the Area Commander and his report submitted to the Air Force Intelligence Division as an intelligence item.\n\nMajor Boggs and Lieutenant Colonel Hearn made the observation that many of the reported sightings of flying saucers at this time appear to be an outgrowth of recent magazine articles. They reiterated that the Air Force is conducting no active investigation to determine whether flying saucers exist or what they might happen to be.\n\nYou will recall that the investigation of flying saucers was discontinued by the Bureau in October, 1947, in order that the Air Force could take over such investigations. (62-83894-141-160)\n\nAttachment\n\nEHM:jam,sd\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-NICHOLS\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nMAR 29 2 24 PM '50\n\nRECEIVED-TOLSON\nF B I\nMAR 29 11 01 AM '50\n\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\nMAR 28 1 33 PM '50\n\nMAR 28 3 46 PM '50\n\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nMAR 28 4 23 PM '50"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM : SAC, NEW ORLEANS\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: March 31, 1950\n\nSpecial Agent H. WARREN TOOL, JR., of the New Orleans Division, has a brother, J. K. TOOL, of the Wayne Welch, Inc., advertising agency, 202 Keith Building, 1025 14th St., Denver, Colorado. J. K. TOOL has advised Special Agent TOOL that an employee of the Wayne Welch, Inc., JEFFERSON B. ARMSTRONG, has been contacted by one GEORGE T. KOEHLER, 315 Franklin Street, telephone SPruce 2563, Denver, Colorado, regarding Flying Discs.\n\nKOEHLER is alleged to have told ARMSTRONG in January, 1950, that he (KOEHLER), knows a prominent Denver oilman named SILAS NEWTON, also known as a \"Mysterious Mr. X\", and an official of the Newton Oil Co., Equitable Building, Denver, Colorado. NEWTON is claiming that he leased land in the Mojave Desert in California and that on this land a flying disc had been found intact, with eighteen three-foot tall human-like occupants, all dead on it but not burned. Further, that the disc was alleged to be of very hard metal and near indestructible. KOEHLER is said to have exhibited a radio set to ARMSTRONG purported to be a souvenir of the space disc.\n\nAccording to ARMSTRONG, KOEHLER has been telling of this story off and on for the three month period prior to January, 1950, and is said to have notified ARMSTRONG of it weeks prior to the publication of a flying disc article published in the True Magazine, and one by FRANK SCULLY published in the Variety Magazine in January, 1950. KOEHLER claimed to have been visited by DONALD KEHOE, author of the article in the True Magazine.\n\nFurther data was furnished that KOEHLER had been telling the tale so prolifically in Denver that he claimed to have had telephone calls from Washington, D. C. and from the Federal Bureau of Investigation in which he was requested to keep the information to himself and that, thereafter, he became mysterious about the entire matter.\n\nIt is noted that considerable publicity regarding these discs has been found in Denver and other papers.\n\nThis information is being furnished the Bureau and the designated offices for informational purposes.\n\nHWT:mrg\n66-1199\n\ncc: Denver\nLos Angeles\n\nRECORDED - 28\nINDEXED - 28\nAPR 3 1950\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1974\n\nEX-94"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nMAR 30 1950\n\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI ALBUQUERQUE 3-30-50 7-55 PM MST TOH\n\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\n\nFLYING SAUCERS, INFO CONCERNING. JIM BARDEN, STUDENT, UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO AND REPORTER FOR SCHOOL PAPER FURNISHED THIS OFFICE WITH TRICK PHOTOGRAPH OF MOUNTIAN SIDE SHOWING A FLYINGSAUCER CRASHED AND BURNING ON THE SIDE OF THE MOUNTIAN, LITTLE MEN WALKING AWAY AND FOUR FLYING SAUCERS HOVERING AROUND THE CRASHED ONE, BARDEN, WHO HAS VOLUNTARILY FURNISHED INFORMATION TO THIS OFFICE PREVIOUSLY STATED HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THE TRICK PHOTOGRAPH. HE FIRST TOOK A PHOTOGRAPH OF A HILLSIDE NEAR ALBUQUERQUE, HAD THE FLYING SAUCERS, CRASHED SAUCER, SMOKE AND LITTLE MEN DRAWN IN AND THEN MADE THE FINAL PHOTOGRAPH. BORDEN STATED THIS PHOTOGRAPH AND A RIDICULOUS STORY WILL BE PRINTED IN THE UNIV. OF N.M. SCHOOL PAPER THIRTY FIRST INSTANT AND MAY BE CARRIED OVER ASSOCIATED PRESS LINES. BORDEN WAS ADVISED THAT THIS OFFICE GAVE NO SANCTION OR CLEARANCE TO HIS IDEA. THIS FOR BUREAU-S INFORMATION. LOCAL INTELLIGENCE REPRESENTATIVES ADVISED.\n\nINDEXED - 112\nRECORDED - 112\n52 APR 10 1950\n\nCORRECTION FIRST WORD FOURTH LINE BURNING\n\nEND AND ACK PLS.\n10-03 PM OK FBI WA NJ"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nMAR 30 10 08 PM '50\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nMAR 31 6 49 PM '50\n\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nMAR 31 5 04 PM '50\n\nRECEIVED-NICHOLS\nF B I\nAPR 3 1 02 '50\n\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nMAR 31 6 15 AM '50\n\nRECEIVED-TOLSON\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nMAR 31 3 51 PM '50\n\nFLYING SAUCERS, INFO CONCERNING. JIM BARDEN, STUDENT, UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO AND REPORTER FOR SCHOOL PAPER FURNISHED THIS OFFICE WITH TRICK PHOTOGRAPH OF MOUNTIAN SIDE SHOWING A FLYINGSAUCER CRASHED AND BURNING ON THE SIDE OF THE MOUNTIAN, LITTLE MEN WALKING AWAY AND FOUR FLYING SAUCERS HOVERING AROUND THE CRASHED ONE, BARDEN, WHO HAS VOLUNTARILY FURNISHED INFORMATION TO THIS OFFICE PREVIOUSLY STATED HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THE TRICK PHOTOGRAPH. HE FIRST TOOK A PHOTOGRAPH OF A HILLSIDE NEAR ALBUQUERQUE, HAD THE FLYING SAUCERS, CRASHED SAUCER, SMOKE AND LITTLE MEN DRAWN IN AND THEN MADE THE FINAL PHOTOGRAPH. BORDEN STATED THIS PHOTOGRAPH AND A RIDICULOUS STORY WILL BE PRINTED IN THE UNIV. OF N.M. SCHOOL PAPER THIRTY FIRST INSTANT AND MAY BE CARRIED OVER ASSOCIATED PRESS LINES. BORDEN WAS ADVISED THAT THIS OFFICE GAVE NO SANCTION OR CLEARANCE TO HIS IDEA. THIS FOR BUREAU-S INFORMATION. LOCAL INTELLIGENCE REPRESENTATIVES ADVISED.\n\nRECEIVED-FBI\nJ. EDGAR HOOVER\n\nAPR 6 1950 DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nFBI\nAPR 6 1950 DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. D. M. LADD\nFROM : MR. A. H. BELMONT\n\nSUBJECT: UNKNOWN OBJECT OVER OAK RIDGE, TENNESSEE, MARCH 1, 1950; STUART ADCOCK, COMPLAINANT; VITAL FACILITIES; INTERNAL SECURITY\n\nDATE: March 3, 1950\n\nAt 9:55 A.M. today, SAC Robey of Knoxville advised that Stuart E. Adcock, owner and operator of Radio Station WROL, Knoxville, had called the Knoxville Office at 11:15 P.M. on March 1. Adcock is a radio ham operator and has set up in his home in Knoxville an Army Surplus APN-7 radar set. Adcock advised that he had picked up on this set a \"pip\" indicating that an object was circling at an altitude of about 40,000 feet over Oak Ridge. Adcock stated that he customarily had followed the movement of airplanes through this set and he was sure this item was not a thunder cloud. Mr. Robey advised that the Knoxville Office had immediately notified the AEC Security Section following the receipt of the call from Mr. Adcock.\n\nAt 5:30 P.M. on March 2, Mr. Adcock again called to say that he had again picked up an object at 11:15 A.M. on March 2 about 100,000 feet up and about 18 miles from his home in Knoxville which would place the object over Oak Ridge. Mr. Robey advised that CIC Agents had been given the information coming from the Knoxville Office, as a result of which CIC Agents and OSI representatives went out last night and looked over Mr. Adcock's set. They did see an object on the screen about 11:00 or 12:00 P.M. last night. They reported this information to the Third Army. Mr. Robey was of the opinion that the Air Force probably has sent the information to Washington also. Army CIC has now informed that CIA is going to send a technician down from Washington to examine the set. Mr. Robey had no information as to how CIA had jurisdiction. Mr. Robey advised that the Army is also contemplating sending a man up from Atlanta with a portable radar set to check into this situation. In addition, the Naval Reserve has a set locally and is putting it into operation this morning in an effort to identify this object.\n\nMr. Robey advised that AEC and the Armed Forces' representatives are somewhat concerned about this matter and he wanted the Bureau to have the above information in case there were inquiries.\n\nACTION\n\nI advised Mr. Robey to keep in touch with the situation and let us know immediately of any developments and as to any information picked up by the Armed Forces or the CIA representative. I also requested that he ascertain who the CIA representative is and what action he took upon his arrival. Mr. Robey was advised that no investigation should be conducted by the Knoxville Office but that he should be kept advised of developments and should send a teletype to the Bureau tonight.\n\nAHB:mer\n\nRECORDED - 104\nINDEXED - 28\nMAR 17 1950\n57 APR 6 1950\n\nSE 8"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED – FLETCHER\nMAR 6 10 20 AM '50\nRECEIVED–TOLSON\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nMAR 3 4 32 PM '50\nRECEIVED – DI\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT OF JU\nMAR 3 1 20 P\nRECEIVED–LADD\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nMAR 3 11 57 AM '50\nRECEIVED\nMAR 7 10 19 AM '50\nINTERNAL SECURITY SN.\nFBI\nU.S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED–NICHOLS\nFBI\nU.S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nMAR 3 4 58 PM '50\nRECEIVED–FLETCHER\nMAR 4 11 29 AM '50"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : MR. LADD\nDATE: March 6, 1950\nFROM : A. H. BELMONT\nSUBJECT: UNKNOWN OBJECT OVER OAK RIDGE, TENNESSEE, MARCH 1, 1950; STUART ADCOCK, COMPLAINANT; VITAL FACILITIES; INTERNAL SECURITY\nMr. Tolson, Mr. Clegg, Mr. Glavin, Mr. Ladd, Mr. Nichols, Mr. Rosen, Mr. Tracy, Mr. Egan, Mr. Gurnea, Mr. Harbo, Mr. Mohr, Mr. Pennington, Mr. Quinn Tamm, Tele. Room, Mr. Nease, Miss Holmes, Miss Gandy\nReference is made to my memorandum of March 3, 1950, reflecting a call from SAC Robey, of Knoxville, in the above-entitled matter.\nOn the morning of March 6, 1950, I called SAC Robey to ascertain what he had found out concerning this matter. He advised that a teletype had been sent reflecting that there was some question of Adcock's reliability and knowledge on radar theory; that CIC and OSI are continuing their interest in the matter; and that the CIA technician from Washington had not arrived.\nSAC Robey will report any further developments.\nINDEXED\nSE 1\nRECORDED - 60\n62-83894-216\n11946\nMAR 17 1950\nAHB:tlc\nEX-93\n58 MAR 16 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · United States Government\nMAR 13 3 26 PM '50\nINTERNAL SECURITY SN\nFBI\nU.S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED\nMAR 7 9 33 AM '50\nFBI\nRECEIVED-LADD\nU.S DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI KNOXVILLE\n3-6-50\n12-03 PM\nATT. MR. A. H. BELMONT\nURGENT\nDIRECTOR, FBI\nUNKNOWN OBJECT OVER OAK RIDGE, TENN., MARCH ONE, NINETEEN FIFTY, STUART ADCOCK, COMPLAINANT, VITAL FACILITIES, IS. REMYCALL MARCH THIRD. EXISTENCE OF OBJECT REPORTED BY ADCOCK AS BEING DIRECTLY OVER OAK RIDGE AT ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND FEET ALTITUDE NOT VERIFIED. ADCOCK REPUTEDLY CAPABLE RADIO TECHNICIAN. ADCOCK CLAIMS TO HAVE DETECTED OBJECT WITH HIS RADAR EQUIPMENT ON FIVE OCCASIONS OVER THREE DAYS. NAVAL RESERVE RADAR EQUIPMENT AT KNOXVILLE DID NOT DETECT OBJECT ON ANY OCCASION, BUT TECHNICIANS STATE IT IS NOT CONSIDERED EFFICIENT FOR AIRCRAFT AT EXTREME ALTITUDES. QUALIFIED PERSONS FROM USAF AT NEPA, OAK RIDGE, TALKED WITH ADCOCK AND EXAMINED HIS RADAR EQUIPMENT. FOUND HIS EQUIPMENT NOT TOO RELIABLE AND FELT ADCOCK TECHNICALLY WRONG ON SOME RADAR THEORY. RELIABILITY OF ADCOCK QUESTIONED DUE TO SOME DEGREE OF INEBRIATION. THESE PERSONS DISCOUNT PROBABILITY. CIC AND OSI CONTINUE INTEREST BUT DO NOT CONTEMPLATE FURTHER ACTION. AEC TOOK STEPS TO HAVE RADAR TECHNICIAN SENT FROM WASH., BELIEVED FROM CIA, BUT NOT YET ARRIVED. ANY FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS WILL BE REPORTED TO BUREAU.\nROBEY\nEND\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964\n12-06 PM OK FBI WASH DC ED\nMAR 17 1950\n37\nCC: Mr. Belmont\nRECORDED"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI KNOXVILLE\n3-6-50\n12-03 PM\nATT. MR. A. H. BELMONT\nURGENT\nDIRECTOR, FBI\nUNKNOWN OBJECT OVER OAK RIDGE, TENN., MARCH ONE, NINETEEN FIFTY, STUART ADCOCK, COMPLAINANT, VITAL FACILITIES, IS. REMYCALL MARCH THIRD. EXISTENCE OF OBJECT REPORTED BY ADCOCK AS BEING DIRECTLY OVER OAK RIDGE AT ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND FEET ALTITUDE NOT VERIFIED. ADCOCK REPUTEDLY CAPABLE RADIO TECHNICIAN. ADCOCK CLAIMS TO HAVE DETECTED OBJECT WITH HIS RADAR EQUIPMENT ON FIVE OCCASIONS OVER THREE DAYS. NAVAL RESERVE RADAR EQUIPMENT AT KNOXVILLE DID NOT DETECT OBJECT ON ANY OCCASION, BUT TECHNICIANS STATE IT IS NOT CONSIDERED EFFICIENT FOR AIRCRAFT AT EXTREME ALTITUDES. QUALIFIED PERSONS FROM USAF AT NEPA, OAK RIDGE, TALKED WITH ADCOCK AND EXAMINED HIS RADAR EQUIPMENT. FOUND HIS EQUIPMENT NOT TOO RELIABLE AND FELT ADCOCK TECHNICALLY WRONG ON SOME RADAR THEORY. RELIABILITY OF ADCOCK QUESTIONED DUE TO SOME DEGREE OF INEBRIATION. THESE PERSONS DISCOUNT PROBABILITY. CIC AND OSI CONTINUE INTEREST BUT DO NOT CONTEMPLATE FURTHER ACTION. AEC TOOK STEPS TO HAVE RADAR TECHNICIAN SENT FROM WASH., BELIEVED FROM CIA, BUT NOT YET ARRIVED. ANY FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS WILL BE REPORTED TO BUREAU.\nRECEIVED – DIRECTOR\nMAR 6 12 37 PM '50\nMAR 6 7 32 PM '50\nRECEIVED – FLETCHER\nMAR 6 2 52 PM '50\nRECEIVED–CH. CLK.\nMAR 6 4 15 PM '50\nRECEIVED–TOLSON\nMAR 6 1 37 PM '50\nRECEIVED\nMAR 7 8 59 AM '50\nEND\n12-06 PM OK FBI WASH DC ED"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date:\tMarch 14, 1950\n\nTo:\tAtomic Energy Commission\nBuilding T-3\n16th and Constitution Avenue, N. W.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nAttention:\tMr. Francis R. Hammack\n\t\tActing Director\n\t\tDivision of Security\n\nFrom:\tJohn Edgar Hoover, Director - Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject:\tUNKNOWN OBJECT OVER OAK RIDGE, TENNESSEE, MARCH 1, 1950\nSTUART ADCOCK, INFORMANT\nVITAL FACILITIES\nINTERNAL SECURITY\n\nStuart E. Adcock, operator of Radio Station WROL, Knoxville, is reported to have detected on his radar equipment an object directly over Oak Ridge, Tennessee, at an altitude of 40,000 feet at 11:15 p. m., March 1, 1950. On March 2, 1950, he advised that his radar equipment recorded an object about 100,000 feet high and approximately 18 miles from his home in Knoxville at 11:15 a. m. on that date. It was reported that Naval Reserve radar equipment at Knoxville, Tennessee, did not detect an object on any occasion but stated that the equipment was not considered efficient for aircraft at extreme altitudes. It was further reported that qualified persons at Oak Ridge questioned Adcock and examined his radar equipment. They reportedly found his equipment not too reliable and felt that Adcock was technically wrong on some of his radar theory. The reliability of Adcock was also questioned due to some degrees of inebriation.\n\nThe above confirms information telephonically furnished to Mr. C. A. Rolander of your office. No investigation is being conducted by this Bureau but in the event additional information comes to our attention you will be promptly advised.\n\ncc - Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington, D. C.\ncc - Director of Intelligence\nGeneral Staff (G-2)\nDepartment of the Army\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C. Attention: Chief, Security and Training Group\nCONFIDENTIAL - REGISTERED MAIL\nKWD:al:mes"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLASSIFIED INCOMING MESSAGE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE\n\nFor: FBI\n\nPARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED\nPRIORITY\n\nFrom: COMGENARMYTHREE Ft McPherson Ga\nTo: Dept of Army for Director of Intel\nNr: AJACI-3-5 3206\t9 Mar 50\n\nReur TWX AJACI-3-3 subject reported radar sightings over Oakridge, additional info indicates radar operator inexperienced and radar set has been modified so as to cast doubt on reliability of reading. Chief Tennessee Mil Dist recommends expeditious action be taken to determine whether an unknown object has reappeared over Oakridge in the past few days. Chief Security Div at Oakridge requested info as to channels of communication with Air Force in connection with radar sightings.\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\n\nNote: Ref is CM IN 12184 (4 Mar) G-2\n\nACTION: G-2\nINFO: G-3\n\nCM IN 13022\t(10 Mar 50)\tDTG: 091430Z fmb/B\n\n20 MAR 10 50\n\n24\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY NO.\n\nREPLACES DA SCO FORM 22-3, 15 JAN 49, WHICH MAY BE USED."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Assistant Attorney General James M. McInerney\nCriminal Division\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nUNKNOWN OBJECT OVER OAK RIDGE, TENNESSEE, MARCH 1, 1950\nSTUART ADCOCK, INFORMANT\nVITAL FACILITIES\nINTERNAL SECURITY\n\nMarch 14, 1950\n\nStuart E. Adcock, operator of Radio Station WROL, Knoxville, is reported to have detected on his radar equipment an object directly over Oak Ridge, Tennessee, at an altitude of 40,000 feet at 11:15 p. m., March 1, 1950. On March 2, 1950, he advised that his radar equipment recorded an object about 100,000 feet high and approximately 18 miles from his home in Knoxville at 11:15 a. m. on that date. It was reported that Naval Reserve radar equipment at Knoxville, Tennessee, did not detect an object on any occasion but stated that the equipment was not considered efficient for aircraft at extreme altitudes. It was further reported that qualified persons at Oak Ridge questioned Adcock and examined his radar equipment. They reportedly found his equipment not too reliable and felt that Adcock was technically wrong on some of his radar theory. The reliability of Adcock was also questioned due to some degree of inebriation.\n\nNo investigation is being conducted by this Bureau but in the event additional information comes to our attention you will be promptly advised.\n\nKWD:al:mes"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A short time after receiving the above information, Special Agent E. L. SEAGRAVES, CIC, 3rd Army, stationed at Knoxville, telephonically communicated with this office to determine if any further information had been received regarding the matter reported by ADCOCK. Mr. SEAGRAVES was, at that time, given all of the information which had been received by this office. SEAGRAVES advised that he had been called by his headquarters, CIC, 3rd Army, Atlanta, Georgia, and had been told to look into the matter to determine if it had any basis in fact. Mr. SEAGRAVES continued that he had made arrangements with Mr. STUART ADCOCK to have him and Special Agent W. M. PRICE, OSI, U. S. Air Forces, to visit ADCOCK's home during the evening of March 2, 1950 and observe the radar indications with him. SEAGRAVES advised that neither he nor Mr. PRICE had any radar experience and were in no sense technicians or radar operators, but would make their observations merely to determine if a real reading was being made by ADCOCK.\n\nOn the morning of March 3, 1950, SEAGRAVES again telephonically communicated with this office and advised the Liaison Agent, Special Agent CHARLTON C. McSWAIN, that he and PRICE had been with ADCOCK during the previous evening and that they had observed on his radar screen some \"pips\" which, according to ADCOCK, indicated an object with the same general elevation and azimuth as previously reported by him. SEAGRAVES said they were unable to make any authoritative statement concerning the matter of the object or the reliability of the radar equipment, but they had seen sufficient to give them reason to believe it warranted investigation.\n\nGeneral inquiry at this time at Radio Station WROL and other readily available sources of information divulged the fact that STUART ADCOCK is generally recognized in this vicinity as a reputable and substantial citizen in Knoxville and, in addition thereto, is recognized as somewhat of a radio authority. It was found that he is credited with being a skilled radio technician and has done considerable development and research work in the field of radio.\n\nDue to the interest which was being portrayed by all agencies concerned with this matter, the Bureau at this time was apprised by telephone conversation with A. H. BELMONT at the Bureau concerning the facts known. As a result of this conversation, SA McSWAIN was instructed to follow the matter in the capacity of an observer and to advise the Bureau of any important developments.\n\nArrangements were made through Lieutenant Commander G. R. SHACKLETT, Commanding Officer, U. S. Naval Reserve Training Center, Alcoa Highway, Knoxville, for the Research Training Center to put into operation radar equipment which they have. At approximately 10:30 A. M. on the same day, this radar"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"equipment was in operation and continuous search being made. Special Agent McSWAIN, together with Special Agent SEAGRAVES, CIC, and Special Agent PRICE, OSI, observed this Navy equipment for some time but no object whatsoever could be detected. A telephone call was placed by SEAGRAVES to Mr. ADCOCK at approximately 11:00 A. M. and ADCOCK advised he had been picking up some indication of the object again. He indicated its elevation and direction as well as distance to be the same as previously reported. At the time of his conversation, the Navy equipment detected two aircraft at an elevation of approximately 2,000 feet and a general azimuth of approximately 300 degrees true and seemingly headed in the general direction of the Knoxville Municipal Airport. By way of a check, ADCOCK was asked if he detected on his equipment any objects other than those reported by him. ADCOCK stated that he had noticed two small aircraft headed in the general direction of the Knoxville Airport at a relatively low altitude but he had not paid much attention to them. ADCOCK then requested that he be allowed to view the radar equipment at the Naval Reserve Armory in order that he might coordinate his equipment with that equipment and thus obtain a better fix on the object should it again be located. The radar watch was continued and at about 11:30 A. M. ADCOCK called the armory and advised that the object being observed by him over Oak Ridge had started moving in an easterly direction and had, in a period of about twenty minutes, faded from the screen.\n\nOn the afternoon of March 3, 1950 at about 1:30 P. M., STUART ADCOCK, together with CIC, OSI and FBI agents, went to the Naval Armory where ADCOCK was allowed to look at the radar equipment of the Navy. It had been previously determined from Lieutenant Commander SHACKLETT that this equipment did not comprise any classified information. At this time, ADCOCK claimed familiarity with the equipment being used by the Navy and spoke of having assisted in its development at Harvard University during the early stages of the war. ADCOCK also made statements to the effect that he had traveled extensively for the Army during the war in adapting radar for specialized services. At this time, the presence of some alcohol was noted on the breath of ADCOCK, but he was not in an inebriated condition. After examining the equipment, ADCOCK stated he did not feel that this low frequency type of radar would be of much assistance in detecting the object reported by him for several reasons, such as the elevation of the antenna, the minimum fade area, etc. Those statements seemed to be in accord with the radar operator's opinion.\n\nAt 3:30 P. M. on the afternoon of March 3, 1950, a conference was had with Colonel C. D. GASSER, Engineering Officer, U. S. Air Force Material Command, NEPA Site, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Those present at the conference were Special Agent SEAGRAVES, CIC; Special Agent PRICE, OSI; Mr. CLYDE GORDJEN, U. S. Air Forces Security Officer; Captain ROBERT CROSS, USAF, and Special Agent CHARLTON C. McSWAIN of this office. At this conference, Colonel GASSER"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"stated that while it was highly improbable that aircraft could sustain flight at an altitude of 100,000 feet, it was absolutely possible from a scientific and engineering standpoint. Therefore, it was his opinion that the matter should be followed closely. He arranged for Captain CROSS, whom he termed a radar expert, to observe with ADCOCK during the evening of March 3, 1950 the radar equipment on which ADCOCK had detected the object.\n\nImmediately following this conference, Special Agent McSWAIN contacted Mr. CHARLES WHITE, Physical Security and Plant Protection Branch, U. S. AEC, and Mr. FRANK CALLAGHAN, Assistant Chief, Security Division, U. S. AEC, to advise them of the findings and to determine what action was being taken by AEC. Both WHITE and CALLAGHAN advised that the matter had been referred to 3rd Army authorities and that beyond this, no steps had been taken. It was their belief, however, that a radar technician was being sent down, probably from Washington, to inspect the equipment owned by ADCOCK. It was erroneously reported that a CIA technician would come to Oak Ridge.\n\nAlso, immediately following this conference above stated, Special Agent PRICE, OSI, called his headquarters at Maxwell Field, Alabama to determine if any action were being taken with regard to having radar equipment flown to this area to verify or disprove the findings of ADCOCK. PRICE was advised that he should act only in the capacity of an observer in the matter but that such radar equipment would be flown up, if requested by the AEC.\n\nSpecial Agent SEAGRAVES, CIC, stated he had also been advised by his headquarters at Atlanta to act in the capacity of an observer and that, accordingly, he had not as yet been advised whether or not the 3rd Army intended to send mobile radar equipment to the area to verify or disprove the findings of ADCOCK. Inquiry was made by Special Agent PRICE, OSI, of AEC as to whether or not they would request having radar equipment flown in by OSI authorities, and he was told by AEC that while the AEC was, of course, vitally interested in anything which directly affected the safety of the area, they nevertheless did not feel that they had the authority to make a specific request for such action inasmuch as the protection of the area from assault was the responsibility of the 3rd Army. Accordingly, they could not make any direct request for such equipment.\n\nDuring the evening of March 3, 1950, Special Agent CHARLTON C. McSWAIN and myself, together with SA PRICE (OSI), remained at the Naval Reserve Armory, Alcoa Highway, during which time search was being conducted by the radar equipment at this installation. Captain ROBERT CROSS, NEPA, and Special Agent SEAGRAVES, CIC,"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"were at the home of STUART ADCOCK observing his radar equipment during this search. No object was reported by ADCOCK during this evening and therefore Captain CROSS had no opportunity to observe his equipment in action, particularly in reference to the reported object at such phenomenal altitudes. No unusual objects were detected by the radar equipment of the U. S. Naval Reserve Armory during the entire evening.\n\nUpon abandoning the watch on this evening, a meeting was held with Captain CROSS after leaving ADCOCK's residence in order to ascertain CROSS' opinion. CROSS stated he had found ADCOCK to be technically incorrect in several matters relating to radar theory and practice and, in addition thereto, had very grave doubts as to the capabilities of the surplus AN-7 radar set which had been adapted by ADCOCK. He stated, however, that he had insufficient opportunity to observe the set in practice or to examine the radio equipment connected with the set to make any definite statements as to whether or not the detection of the unknown object would be possible with said equipment. He said, however, he did feel that ADCOCK was a capable person with pure radio techniques.\n\nOn the morning of March 4, 1950 at 10:30 A. M. ADCOCK again contacted Special Agent McSWAIN of this office and Special Agent SEAGRAVES, CIC, to advise that he had again received indications of the object at approximately 100,000 feet directly over Oak Ridge and that the intensity of the radar \"pip\" was stronger than noted at any time previous. At about 11:40 A. M. ADCOCK again called and advised he had watched the object until approximately 11:10 A. M., at which time he had noted it stopped circling and headed off in an easterly direction at approximately 200 miles per hour, at which time it had faded from the screen in slightly less than 20 minutes.\n\nOn the afternoon of March 4, 1950, Colonel C. D. GASSER and Captain ROBERT CROSS, both NEPA, visited the home of ADCOCK and carefully examined his radio and radar equipment, including the antenna and related mechanisms. After such examination and after talking at some length with ADCOCK, these two gentlemen met with Special Agent SEAGRAVES (CIC), PRICE (OSI) and McSWAIN (FBI), to give their opinions. Colonel GASSER advised they had found ADCOCK in a much inebriated condition and that they had had difficulty in making any determination as to his abilities in the field of radar. It was their belief that his equipment was haphazard at best and that no great degree of reliability could be placed therein. They did state, however, they intended to return during the morning of March 5, 1950, which was the usual time for the object to be detected.\n\nOn the morning of March 5, 1950, Colonel GASSER and Captain CROSS went to the home of Mr. ADCOCK and were unable to gain entry or to find anyone at the residence. After this experience, it was the belief of these two gentlemen"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that the reliability of ADCOCK was extremely dubious and they felt that the matter was worthy of little consideration.\n\nOn the morning of March 6, 1950, ADCOCK again contacted Special Agent SEAGRAVES, CIC, and advised he had again observed the object at about the same altitude over the Oak Ridge area and he estimated the object to be of approximately the same density as would be caused by a DC-4 at that altitude. Again, Colonel GASSER was contacted by Special Agent PRICE of OSI and Colonel GASSER said that he intended to take some electronic equipment to the home of ADCOCK with which they could actually check the electrical circuits of his radar equipment to determine whether or not it was accurate, particularly in view of the fact they had checked some of the findings of ADCOCK with regard to known aircraft detected during previous visits and found him to be off to a considerable extent regarding speed, elevation and azimuth. During the afternoon of March 6, 1950, all day of March 7, and the morning of March 8, 1950, attempts were made by Special Agent PRICE, OSI, to get in touch with ADCOCK to make an appointment with Colonel GASSER and Captain CROSS, and ADCOCK could not be located. According to his office at Station WROL, he had left town and it was not known when he would return.\n\nIn summary, therefore, it seems to be the general opinion that the actual existence of an object at such an exceptional altitude is quite improbable and no explanation is yet known as to just what was detected by ADCOCK on his screen or, in fact, whether anything was detected. On the afternoon of March 8, 1950, Special Agent SEAGRAVES telephoned Special Agent McSWAIN of this office and advised that two representatives of the 14th Air Forces with headquarters at Greenville, South Carolina, had arrived in Knoxville and contacted him with regard to making an appointment with ADCOCK to inspect his equipment. These representatives advised they did not feel it sufficiently important for them to remain or to make a return trip inasmuch as ADCOCK was unavailable.\n\nThis information is being furnished to the Bureau in detail inasmuch as it is the understanding of this office that Colonel C. D. GASSER was much perturbed in the manner in which this matter was handled and has written letters to his Commanding Officer, U. S. Air Forces Material Command, Wright Field, concerning it. These letters by Colonel GASSER apparently were prompted from the fact that the 3rd Army Intelligence representative and the Air Force Intelligence representative have both been instructed to act as observers only, with no authority to act in the situation. In addition thereto, AEC felt that their responsibility had been discharged upon notifying the 3rd Army. The Bureau was obviously interested only from an observer's viewpoint and no question of jurisdiction in this regard was raised."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On the morning of March 7, 1950, Special Agent McSWAIN of this office was advised by Mr. HOWARD WOODSIDE, U. S. AEC Security Division, of steps taken by AEC in this regard. Mr. WOODSIDE stated that immediately upon receiving the report from me, he had made the matter known to the proper authorities at AEC and early the following morning he had conversed with Colonel JOHN MEADE, 3rd Army Headquarters, Atlanta, Georgia, and apprised him of the matter. Mr. WOODSIDE stated he also conversed with 14th Air Force Headquarters at Greenville, South Carolina and advised them of the matter. He stated that this was strictly in accordance with the plans drawn up between AEC and the armed forces for protection against air or land assault. He continued that the AEC has neither the facilities nor the equipment with which to defend itself in such emergencies and that such responsibility had been assumed by these agencies of the military forces.\n\nIt would appear from the manner in which this incident was handled that despite the fact that all agencies seemed to be operating in the manner prescribed by agreement, and although each was apprised of the action being taken by the other and cooperating in every respect, there nevertheless seemed to be an impressive lack of any agency actually taking the responsibility for the situation and taking any action to verify or disprove the threat. Had a similar incident occurred wherein an actual threat against the physical security of the AEC Installation had been experienced, it is not implausible to believe that a similar confused fixing of final authority would have been found. It should be noted that many hours elapsed from the receiving of the first report until such time as any reasonable conclusion could be reached concerning the matter and nothing of a positive nature with regard to any action being taken had been had during all that time. While it is now felt that this entire matter was in a manner of speaking \"dry run\", it nevertheless warrants some consideration from a procedural standpoint and might be worthy of discussion at some liaison meeting in the future.\n\nThe Bureau will be immediately advised if there are any further developments in this matter.\n\n- 7 -"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U.S. News & World Report. The United States News. World Report. APRIL 7, 1950. 15 CENTS. U. S. Postage 4c PAID DAYTON, OHIO Permit No. 60. FLYING SAUCERS: THE REAL STORY. SPEAKER SAM RAYBURN. Congress at the Halfway Mark. HON. J. EDGAR HOOVER, 4936 30TH PL. N W, WASHINGTON D C."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894. APR 14 1950 RECORDED. 52 APR 20 1950. File in Flying Disc file file 5 Smm"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VOLUME XXVIII—No. 14 U.S. News & World Report WASHINGTON, D. C. FLYING SAUCERS—THE REAL STORY: U.S. BUILT FIRST ONE IN 1942. Jet-Propelled Disks Can Outfly Other Planes. Observers of \"flying saucers\" aren't just seeing things. They're real—aircraft that conform to accepted laws. Sky disks, manned by regular pilots, can hover aloft, spurt ahead at tremendous speed, outmaneuver conventional craft. No official announcements are being made yet. But about the only big secret left is who makes them. Evidence points to Navy experiments. The real story on \"flying saucers\" is finally coming to light. What the saucers are, how they operate, and how they have been tested in U. S., all can be told in detail at this time. That story, without violating present security regulations, points to these basic conclusions by engineers competent to appraise reports of reliable observers: Flying saucers, seen by hundreds of competent observers over most parts of U. S., are accepted as real. Evidence is that they are aircraft of a revolutionary type, a combination of helicopter and fast jet plane. They conform to well-known principles of aerodynamics. An early model of these saucers was built by U. S. engineers in 1942, achieved more than 100 successful test flights. That project then was taken over by the Navy in wartime. Much more advanced models now are being built. Just where present saucers are being built also is indicated by evidence now available. In more detail, the story pieced together from nonsecret testimony of responsible U. S. scientists, private observers and military officials, is this: Early models of the flying saucer, pictured on this page and the next, were built by U. S. Government engineers of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. Similar flying-saucer projects were begun in Germany and Italy at the same time, in 1942. The first U. S. model, designed by Charles H. Zimmerman, of NACA, was elliptical in shape, powered by two piston engines and driven by twin propellers. It had a maximum speed between 400 and 500 miles an hour. More important, it could rise almost vertically and its minimum speed for landing was only about 35 miles an hour, a great advantage in military and naval aircraft. And it was far more maneuverable than conventional military planes. Idea behind those original flying-saucer projects, both in U. S. and abroad in Germany and Italy, was to overcome basic drawbacks of conventional aircraft by new techniques. A plane that could rise almost straight would not need long airfields, could be used from any cleared area just behind front-line troops or from the deck of any Navy combat ship. If that plane, in addition, had great speed and more maneuverability, it could probably outfly any conventional aircraft. In United States, the first model seemed to fulfill these requirements, but the lessened stability of the wingless craft required more research. Present flying saucers apparently have overcome this problem of stability by use of very advanced design. An analysis of reports submitted by competent observers show this: What they look like, first, is described in well-documented accounts. Those accounts show saucers to be exactly 105 feet in diameter, circular in shape. They have what appear to be jet nozzles arranged all around the outer rim, just below the center of gravity. They are made of a metal alloy, with a dull whitish color. There are no rudders, ailerons, or other protruding surfaces. From the side, the saucers appear about 10 feet thick—there are no exact measurements from this angle in publicly available accounts. They are built in three layers, with the center layer slightly larger in diameter than the other two. That is the picture agreed on by qualified observers of saucers in flight—commercial aircraft pilots, fighter pilots who have chased these aircraft, trained airplane spotters, high-ranking Army and Air Force officers. It is backed by exact measurement made by a group of scientists last April near White Sands Proving Ground base, with instruments set up to observe high-altitude balloons, who suddenly observed a saucer and tracked it for several minutes, thereby getting reliable data on its size, speed, altitude and maneuverability. How they operate now can be told in some detail, too. Based on this description, the probable technique used by current saucers is explained by a top-level Government aeronautical engineer in this manner: Power for these aircraft, at their present stage of development, obviously is supplied by jet engines. Each saucer appears to have a series of variable-direction jet nozzles around its rim, with a complicated central control system. Fuel used is unknown—the exhaust flame has been observed to be red-orange in some cases, blue in others, missing in still others. The saucers appear to have the power to \"coast\" long distances, thus saving on fuel consumption. Direction of the aircraft and its velocity, in turn, evidently are controlled by the angle at which the jet nozzles are tilted, the number operating, the power applied. By choosing which nozzles to turn on or off and the angle of tilt, the pilot could make the saucer rise or descend vertically, hover, fly straight ahead, or make sharp turns. A right-angle turn, for example, could be made by turning off the rear jets, turning on the side and front nozzles. Great speed can be obtained by focusing to the rear all nozzles in the after half of the aircraft. With all nozzles pointed downward, the saucer could rise straight off the ground, and, with less power, could descend the same way. That is the explanation, based on accepted principles of aerodynamics, given by an authoritative engineer as the likely answer to how these saucer aircraft operate. As evidence that this explanation is correct, there are these actual cases of publicly observed saucer behavior: Rows of window-like openings around the rims of saucers traveling at more than 500 miles an hour are mentioned in several documented reports. In all cases, these \"windows\" glowed as if they were jet-nozzle openings. The most recent of these reports was made last month by two experienced pilots of the Chicago and Southern Air Lines, who passed within 1,000 feet of a saucer traveling over Arkansas. Another similar report was made by two Eastern Air Lines pilots who narrowly missed colliding with a saucer in July, 1948, while flying a DC-3 over Georgia. Saucers' ability to hover in mid-air, accelerate at tremendous speed, and then rise almost vertically is described in several reports, one documented by Air Force officers at Fort Knox, Ky. That saucer, seen by dozens of officers at the post, was chased by three military pilots flying fast F-51s. The saucer quickly outmaneuvered the planes. Speed of one saucer was measured by ground instruments in the White Sands case at well over the speed of sound, indicating the use of a number of jet engines. Cruising speed has been estimated in other cases at 200 to 600 miles an hour. What it all adds up to is this: Flying saucers being observed in many parts of the U. S. are not mysterious visitors from Mars. They are actual planes, soundly engineered on principles developed by U. S. in wartime. By using this new design, they can do things that no conventional aircraft can be expected to approach. Who's building the saucers now being observed in test flights over U. S. APRIL 7, 1950. 13. FIGURE: U. S. 'SAUCER'—1942 MODEL ... a combination of helicopter and fast jet plane. NACA photo"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U.S. News & World Report. FACT: THESE DESIGNS, AND LATER ONES ARE REAL. DISK-LIKE NAVY FLOUNDER PROJECT WAS 'DROPPED'. U. S. Navy. MOCK-UP OF EARLY MODEL IS TESTED IN WIND TUNNEL ... latest models are circular, faster, more maneuverable. NACA photo. 14. © U. S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"is not yet publicly disclosed. It cannot be proved until a public announcement is made or until a saucer crashes away from its home base—which is highly unlikely because of its jet helicopter action that makes take-offs and landings almost completely safe. But there are these factors that point to an answer:\nOfficial inquiry by the Air Force, in the face of overwhelming evidence that the saucers are real, was called off last December. This indicates clearly that top Air Force officials know where the saucers originate and are not concerned about them, as they would be if these aircraft were from Russia or Mars. These officials, at the same time, denied emphatically that a secret Air Force project is responsible.\nBest use of fully developed saucer aircraft, however, could be made in wartime not by the Air Force, but by the Navy. All fleet operations now require an air cover, even in antisubmarine warfare, and a plane that can rise like a helicopter could be used from any Navy combat ship, not only from big, expensive aircraft carriers. It was for that reason that the first U.S. flying saucer was purchased by the Navy after the original model was tested in 1942. That first full-size aircraft, built by Chance-Vought, was thoroughly tested by Navy engineers. Then a statement was released that this project had been dropped. Early experimenting with saucers, thus, centered in the Navy.\nBig spending on missile aircraft centers in the Navy now, too. More than twice as many dollars were spent by the Navy last year as by the Air Force on secret guided-missile research. There is no public accounting for these millions, the only Government funds aside from atomic-energy dollars that still are being spent with great secrecy.\nSurface indications, then, point to research centers of the U.S. Navy's vast guided-missile project as the scene of present flying-saucer development. That project has the scientists, the engineers, the dollars, the motive, and the background of early Navy development of saucer-type aircraft. This likelihood will remain, despite any future denials by the Navy front office, until secrecy is lifted on the big missile program.\nBut, regardless of just where these saucers are being built now, the evidence points to a U.S. development that will mean a radical change in aircraft design in coming decades. In war, this combination of helicopter and fast jet plane will easily outfly any present types of military aircraft. In peacetime, the safety of a nearly crash-proof aircraft may be expected to revolutionize civil air transport. It all points to a big advance in the science of flying.\nAPRIL 7, 1950\n15\nFANCY: SPACE SHIPS, MONSTERS, MARTIANS, MAYHEM\nNOCTURNAL 'INVASION'\nSURPRISE PACKAGE FROM MARS\nA PLANE DESIGNER'S DAYDREAM\nHOME-MADE SAUCER\n?????\n—photos from Bettman, Acme, Wide World\nThe real thing is strictly a one-planet proposition"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SERVICE UNIT SEARCH SLIP\n4-22a\nSupervisor Moseley Room 3708\nSubj: Miguel Angel Garcia Macias\nExact Spelling\nSearchers Initial\nAll References\nSubversive Ref.\nDate 5-16-50\nMail File\nRestricted to Locality of\nFILE NUMBER\nSERIALS\n62-83894-220\nFile 5 Ehm\nInitialed"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Director, FBI\nDATE: April 11, 1950\nFROM : SAC, New York\nSUBJECT: MIGUEL ANGEL GARCIA MACIAS\nThere is enclosed a letter directed to the \"President of the Commission of Scientific Investigation of the United States of North America,\" which was received at this office on April 7, 1950. This letter is dated at Veracruz, March 19, 1950, and is from a MIGUEL ANGEL GARCIA MACIAS. There is attached to this letter an English translation, together with a newspaper clipping in the Spanish language and four hand-drawn designs. Because of the technical language used, it is rather difficult to determine whether the information is authentic or whether the author of this material is either psychotic or neurotic.\nIt is suggested that the Bureau may desire to have the enclosed examined by some Government agency familiar with the language appearing therein for its ultimate dissemination.\nTGS:RAA\nEnclosures\nENCL\nENCLOSURE BEHIND FILE\n23\nRECORDED - 23\nINDEXED - 23\nAPR 12 1950\nFILE\nEHM\nMoseley\nEHM"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 96 62-83894-220\nEX-27\nDate: May 17, 1950\nTo: Director\nOffice of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nThe Pentagon\nWashington, D. C.\nFrom: J. Edgar Hoover - Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\nSubject: FLYING DISCS\nThere are attached hereto for your information in connection with the captioned matter a communication written in Spanish dated March 19, 1950, at Veracruz, Veracruz, Mexico, and enclosures addressed to the \"Presidente de la Comision de Investigacion Cientifica de Estados Unidos de Norte America.\"\nIn view of the fact that a translation of the above referred to communication reflects the correspondent's interest in flying discs, it is being furnished to your office for appropriate attention. The files of this Bureau contain no information which can be identified with the writer of this letter. No reply has been made to the writer of this letter by this Bureau in view of the fact that it was not addressed to this Bureau.\nAttachment\nEHM:eal\nAPPROPRIATE ACTION TAKEN AND FILED BY ROUTING SLIP(S) OF 9/1/77\nDATE\n58 MAY 26 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECORDED - 56\n\nDate: April 14, 1950\n\nDirector\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nDepartment of Justice\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nRe: Flying Saucer data\n\nSubject: Laura McClaskey\n\nAttention: Records Section\n\nEnclosed is a copy of the letter from the Chicago office regarding the sighting reported near Geneva, Illinois.\n\nAlso enclosed for your information is copy of communication\n\nRECEIVED RECORDS SEC.\nApr 6 3 27 PM '50"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT\nOFFICE OF DISTRICT SUPERVISOR\nDISTRICT NO. 9, ALCOHOL TAX UNIT\n734 NEW POST OFFICE BUILDING\nCHICAGO 7, ILL.\n\nApril 4, 1950\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D. C.\n\nThis is not an April Fool joke.\n\nSaturday, April 1, 1950 at about 6 P.M. I was driving north on Route 47, west of Geneva, Illinois and a little north of St. Charles, Illinois. Just ahead thru the windshield I saw a silvery white object in the sky. It was traveling west at about the speed of an air plane. It was shaped like this [drawing]. I was driving at 35 MPH and slowed down to 20 MPH to watch this object. It went behind a white cloud and I continued to watch but the object did not come out from behind the cloud as far as I could see.\n\nGeneva is 35 miles west of Chicago, and just north of Chicago is the Glenview Airport, operated I believe by the Navy. The Saturday Evening Post carried an article sometime ago about Flying Saucers and it said to report sightings like the above to the F.B.I.\n\nMiss Laura McClaskey\n201 N. 1st St. Geneva, Ill.\n\nNJC\nack 4/11/50\n\nRECORDED - 56"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"April 11, 1950\n\nMiss Laura McClaskey\n201 North First Street\nGeneva, Illinois\n\nRECORDED - 56 63-83894-221\n\nDear Miss McClaskey:\n\nINDEXED - 56 Your letter dated April 4, 1950, has been received and I want to thank you for furnishing me the data you related.\n\nI am taking the liberty of referring a copy of your communication to the Secretary of the Air Force, National Defense Building, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNOTE: Security Division, Espionage Unit, advised. \"Flying Saucer\" data is being referred to the Air Force.\n\nNJC:ok"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. A. H. BELMONT\nDATE: April 8, 1950\n\nFROM : W. T. BROOKING\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCER COMPLAINT\nELMIRA, NEW YORK PD INFORMANT\n\nTolson, Ladd, Clegg, Glavin, Nichols, Rosen, Tracy, Harbo, Mohr, Tele. Room, Nease, Gandy\n\nReference teletype dated April 8, 1950, from the Buffalo Office advising that information had been received from the Elmira Police Department regarding a flying saucer and advising that press inquiries are being answered by the Buffalo Office.\n\nMr. V. P. Keay was contacted and he advised that the Duty Officer at the Office of Special Investigations, Inspector General, Air Force, should be contacted and furnished the information regarding the flying saucer.\n\nCaptain Ralph C. Williams, Air Force, Duty Officer, was telephonically contacted and furnished the information regarding the flying saucer.\n\nSA J. J. McGuire was contacted and advised of the teletype and that a statement was contained therein that press inquiries had been received and were being answered. McGuire instructed that the Buffalo Office be telephonically contacted and advised that they should furnish the information regarding the flying saucer to the Air Force Office in that area and that any press inquiries regarding the flying saucer should be referred to the Air Force in that area.\n\nSA Robert Cryan of the Buffalo Office was telephonically contacted and advised of the above instructions.\n\nWTB:hke\n\n62-83894-222\n\nRECORDED - 53\n\nAPR 19 1950\n\n5-EHW"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-LAOD F B I U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nAPR 10 2 25 PM '50\n\nRECD BELMONT F.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nAPR 10 12 35 PM '50\n\nRECEIVED-LAOD F B I U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nAPR 10 2 06 PM '50\n\nCORRELATION-LIAISON F.B.I. U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI, BUFFALO 4-8-50 12-52 PM\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\n\nFLYING SAUCER COMPLAINT. INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM ELMIRA PD. THAT FLYING SAUCER HAD LANDED NEAR ELMIRA, NY AIRPORT. RESIDENT AGENT AT ELMIRA ADVISES \"FLYING SAUCER\" WAS CORRUGATED CARDBOARD BOX, FORTY INS. IN DIAMETER, ONE FOOT THICK AT CENTER. ENTIRE BOX PAINTED ALUMINUM. CROSLEY RADIO TUBE ATTACHED TO CENTER OF BOX WITH LOOSE WIRES HANGING FROM EACH SIDE OF TUBE, TRUCKER-S RED FLARE CONNECTED TO BOTTOM OF BOX, WHICH FLARE HAD SCORCHED GRASS AREA BENEATH BOX. NO WITNESSES AS TO ACTUAL FLIGHT AND BOX IS DESCRIBED AS TOO FRAGILE TO WITHSTAND FLIGHT. BUREAU BEING ADVISED AS PRESS INQUIRIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND ARE BEING ANSWERED ACCORDING TO THE ABOVE FACTS.\n\nMAYNOR\n\nRECORDED - 6\n\n62-83894-223\n\nAPR 19 1950\n\nCORRECTION\nFIFTH LINE FORTH WORD SHOULD BE \"ATTACHED\"\nS\n12-55 PM OK FBI WA LIR\nV\n\ncc Mr Belmont\n\n65APR26 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAPR 8 12 56 PM '50\n\nFBI, BUFFALO 4-8-50 12-52 PM\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\n\nFLYING SAUCER COMPLAINT. INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM ELMIRA PD. THAT FLYING SAUCER HAD LANDED NEAR ELMIRA, NY AIRPORT. RESIDENT AGENT AT ELMIRA ADVISES \"FLYING SAUCER\" WAS CORRUGATED CARDBOARD BOX, FORTY INS. IN DIAMETER, ONE FOOT THICK AT CENTER. ENTIRE BOX PAINTED ALUMINUM. CROSLEY RADIO TUBE ATTACHED TO CENTER OF BOX WITH LOOSE WIRES HANGING FROM EACH SIDE OF TUBE, TRUCKER-S RED FLARE CONNECTED TO BOTTOM OF BOX, WHICH FLARE HAD SCORCHED GRASS AREA BENEATH BOX. NO WITNESSES AS TO ACTUAL FLIGHT AND BOX IS DESCRIBED AS TOO FRAGILE TO WITHSTAND FLIGHT. BUREAU BEING ADVISED AS PRESS INQUIRIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND ARE BEING ANSWERED ACCORDING TO THE ABOVE FACTS.\n\nMAYNOR\n\nCORRECTION\nFIFTH LINE FORTH WORD SHOULD BE \"ATTACHED\"\nS\n12-55 PM OK FBI WA LIR\nV\n\nAPR 10 12 23 PM '50\n\nAPR 8 4 50 PM '50\n\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\n\nApr 13 1 42 PM '50\n\nRECEIVED-HOLD\n\n65APR26 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Keay Capt R. C. Williams advised Buffalo SA Robert Cryan advised to inform Buffalo to refer press to Airforce per instructions McGuire\n\nFBI, BUFFALO 4-8-50 12-52 PM\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\n\nFLYING SAUCER COMPLAINT. INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM ELMIRA PD. THAT FLYING SAUCER HAD LANDED NEAR ELMIRA, NY AIRPORT. RESIDENT AGENT AT ELMIRA ADVISES \"FLYING SAUCER\" WAS CORRUGATED CARDBOARD BOX, FORTY INS. IN DIAMETER, ONE FOOT THICK AT CENTER. ENTIRE BOX PAINTED ALUMINUM. CROSLEY RADIO TUBE ATTACHED TO CENTER OF BOX WITH LOOSE WIRES HANGING FROM EACH SIDE OF TUBE, TRUCKER-S RED FLARE CONNECTED TO BOTTOM OF BOX, WHICH FLARE HAD SCORCHED GRASS AREA BENEATH BOX. NO WITNESSES AS TO ACTUAL FLIGHT AND BOX IS DESCRIBED AS TOO FRAGILE TO WITHSTAND FLIGHT. BUREAU BEING ADVISED AS PRESS INQUIRIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND ARE BEING ANSWERED ACCORDING TO THE ABOVE FACTS.\n\nMAYNOR\n\nCORRECTION\nFIFTH LINE FORTH WORD SHOULD BE \"ATTACHED\"\nS\n12-55 PM OK FBI WA LIR\nV\n\nORIGINAL--DIRECTOR\n\nmemo from Mr. Brooking to Mr. Belmont 4/8/50 WTB"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAPR 8 12 56 PM '50\nFBI DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"April 11, 1950\n\nSecretary of the Air Force\nNational Defense Building\nThe Pentagon\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\no Flying Saucers\n\nMiss Laura McClaskey\n201 North First Street\nGeneva, Illinois\n\nEnclosed is a copy of a communication dated\nApril 4, 1950, from the captioned individual, which is\nfurnished to you for any action deemed appropriate.\n\nEnclosure\n\nNJC:ok\n\nRECORDED - 99\nINDEXED - 99\n162-83894-224\nAPR 13 1950\n80\nEX-136\nTolson, Ladd, Clegg, Glavin, Nichols, Rosen, Tracy, Harbo, Mohr, Tele. Room, Nease, Gandy\nAPR 12 1950 COMM-FBI\n5 8 MAY 9 1950\nAPR 11 7 19 PM '50 RECEIVED REARING ROOM\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APR 12 1950\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED-MAIL ROOM\nAPR 12 11 40 AM '50\nCOMM-FBI\n5 MAY 9 1950\n30\nRECORDED - 99\nINDEXED - 99\nEX-136"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nDATE: 4/18/50\nFROM : SAC, Phoenix\nSUBJECT: WILLIAM ALBERT RHODES\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nFLYING DISCS\n\nRebulet 6/30/49.\n62-83894-183\n\nOn 4/17/50 Mr. RHODES advised he had been contacted by True Magazine and would like to secure the photographs which he had made available to the Air Force Intelligence.\n\nHe was referred to OSI, Fourth Air Force Base, San Francisco, California, since the photographs desired were made available by him to a representative of A-2 of the Fourth Air Force on 8/30/47.\n\nWAM-kb\n62-213\n\nRECORDED - 49\nINDEXED - 49\n62-83894-225\nAPR 24 1950\n5 MAY 9 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Yuba City, California 4-8-1950\nN.C.\nF.B.I.\nP.O. Building\nNiagara sq.\nBuffalo N.Y.\n\"Flying Saucers\"\n\nGentlemen:-\n\nHere is a sketch of a \"flying saucer,\" as was given to me by Herman Ubalsky a free hand drawing by me after going over Ubalskys drawings I was very interested in same as to what made it \"tick\" and I will give you the sketches by me as I have a pretty good memory on what I see. Ubalsky said these \"saucers\" can attain tremendous speeds and says when one is launched near Leningrad it is but 3 hrs if not in to much of a hurry to New York, Washington, Boston, Albany and a lot of other citys on the atlantic coast.\n\nI am at Redwood Valley Jct. now in Calif on 101 highway 9 mi north of Ukiah. Will go back to Yuba City and Marysville and Stockton next week after Easter. I understand these \"saucers\" do not need much\n\nRECORDED - 25\nINDEXED - 25\n62-83894-226\nAPR 22 1950\nnme\nak 4-14-50 rgc"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3\npower to run them and Ubalsky says they can go over 5,000 mi per hr. and go as high as two hundred thousand feet and more. Well give these sketches to our army chiefs of staff and they can soon tell what is what about. I think Ubalsky lied some but it looks kinda good and that Russia has a lot of them\n[diagram labels: spreaders to hold cables apart; collar; weights revolving inside saucer; slides horizontal to keep weights centered as they revolve; center stanchion of saucer; slides horizontal to keep weights centered as they revolve; weights revolving inside saucer; long rod to fix; weights; ball bearing; collar; spreaders to hold cables apart; shaft to revolve; cable; bar to which weights against]\n11/14\nBase"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"weight revolves\ndouble cable sheave\ndouble cable sheave\ndouble cable sheave\nsheave plate holding sheave\na cable, also revolves\nweight revolves\nthis sheave revolves\nsheave double acts also as spacer or spreaders\nball bearing swivel & bolt\nthis plate revolves\nthis plate does not revolve\nstanchion in saucer\nsheave double\ncable lace up to weights\ncable anchor 2\ncross bar\nkeeper across sheave to hold cable on as it revolves\ncable lace up to weights\nthis shows lace of cable to weights and sheaves.\nthere are two of these set ups. one on each side this shows detail of one the other one is left out it would be at 3\nthe next sketch will show what makes it revolve that swivel plate is a cog wheel at 4. The sheave plate at 5 is made double and a bearing is between the two plates so it can move (over)\nhme ajk 4-18-50 ngo"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2 up and down a mile as the weights revolve the bearing moves lengthwise as well as revolves\nbearing\n2\nshaft\n3\nshaft support\none\n4\ncable\ncable\none\nengine shaft.\n4\none and one cog wheels make there is a sliding key and way in shaft at 2 and the cog wheel one on engine shaft turns the shaft 3 causing the weights to revolve. the cog wheels 4 & 4 drive swivel plate 4 & 4 and shaft 3 run even, 1,2. both the same R.P.M. This is the mechanism of the thing as near as I can remember it from the drawings.\nLHS\nEnd"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"this the Buffalo office. The story is to be the write it down to-day I feel jittery about this fellow Ubalsky as I think he is a very bad egg and etc. He was friendly to me and told me to do the best I could and when I get it done to let them know and my price will be paid pronto. This keeps me on a footing with them and I stall them off all the time.\nWell this is the saucers as I have it for you.\nYours Truly\nLewis A Ward\n336 Bird st\nYuba City\nCalif."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3 I do not know how the rudders go on he said they were manual control, hydraulic control and electronic control as they pulled hard at high speed.\nThe jet is fed by pellets carefully proportioned to the charge in the jet chamber and are fed to it fast by gadgets operated by electronics so as they go fast and accurate. I gave the idea that is all I cannot draw the gadgets as I do not know how. But I saw in the drawings electric control on them.\nHe says they can light on a pond and take off on a pond on even flat land he said they can light and take off if they have to but its damn rough going.\nI wonder if that is \"horse feathers\".\nwell that is all I know about it the rest you will have to dope out. I have looked my copies over after I left him and while the drawings were fresh in my head I can see nothing further to try and tell you about.\nIn case you do not know I am the fellow who reported to the Buffalo office when I lived at 164 Prospect Ave in Buffalo. I am working on an engine that goes by the cosmic ray. The Russians want to get this - rest assured they never will so they make contact with me and see what I got to say about this engine. You loilely know about it if you inquire"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4 The saucers are launched by a catapult...\n\n[diagram: catapult with labels: bolt, cable, slide guide, ball bearing for swivel, bolt, cable, ball bearing on bolt]\n\nThese saucers are 30 feet and more in dia and not very heavy Ubalsky says. The plane division of our army can soon figure this out I cannot as it is out of my line but I seen the mechanics of it I did not see any propellor on it in the drawings I saw they use a jet on it lo so Ubalsky says.\n\nThey use pellets in a case in the jet and it fires like a cannon and the recoil sends the saucer very fast"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5 this uses centrifugal force and is cable connected to weights that revolve at right angles to the pull on the \"saucer\" I presume engines are synchronized as to speed the wt of the revolving balls gives the pull to pull \"saucer\" and the whole mechanism is inside of the \"saucer\" there are a bottom and top saucer\n\nHe said there is an up and down rudder and a sideways rudder but very small and they are handeled by electronic gadgets at high speed\n\nThe saucers are made of magnesium and reinforced for strength they look something like this the saucers it looks are air tight\n\n[drawing of saucer]\n\nthese drawings are not much - but there is not mach to them as I cannot give dimensions our \"techs\" will have to figure that out as I am dam lucky to find this out and be all together."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6 Ubalsky says a high altitude jet will speed up to - well he don't know but it is a terrific speed he said he thought 10 thousand mi. per. hr.\n\nNow this does not look like a lot of horse feathers so I am putting it into your hands as if it is a trap for me its only you can get me in dutch and I know you won't do that - but get it into our army chiefs hands for I do not know if this will fly or not - but on the other hand it may be all O.K. so what.\n\nUbalsky is 5 feet 8\" tall wt. 175 square faced quite a large mouth gold teeth left side upper light hair sort of red cheeked big arms all around stout square hands short fat fingers and talks good english - blue eyes. has friends in Buffalo Iowa, is a Russian Pole and was in world two in Europe.\n\nHe has gone to Hatch icans he knows some folks there he said he got off a submarine and gave a fishermans a sum of money to get him ashore, near Eureka and he said he was drifting inshore in a drift boat made of rubber when picked up - he said there was nothing to it getting ashore.\n\nWhen you give this to the army chiefs keep my name out of it - I want to get a lot more information to give to you"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The jet\n\n[diagram of jet with labels: electronic plug in end of muzzle, plug for end of muzzle, air in this compartment 300 lbs p.s.i., electronic valve, vacuum or atmospheric press. in this compartment, charge up to 5 thous and to thirty thousand p.s.i., pellets in case, 4 times compr. = explosion, stanchion is center of saucers, stanchion in center of saucers, P.S. looks as the jet can swing around to any angle, electronic valve]\n\nThis jet is loaded with capsules by air door traps and the capsule containing the gasolene is put into a pressure of say 10,000 lbs p.s.i. the capsule is busted and out comes the gasolene in that high press. of air or something else to take place of air two electrodes set it off the capsule falls between the ends of the electrodes every time the charge leaving by the opening of the electronic valves goes thru the vacuum chamber and hits the air press. chamber the air in chamber is the bullet but just the eight split sec. the elect muzzel plug controlled by electronics is opened and the recoil when all is timed o.k sends saucer at good speed."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"so I guess this is all for now and will write you again as soon as I learn anything worth while\n\nYours Truly\nLewis a Ward\n336 Bird st.\nYuba City\nCalif.\n\nP.S.\nI have been in contact with the Buffalo Office and they can tell you more - so I decided to send this direct to you to the head office so no one cause the office with Buffalo on this letter as I deem it important enough to go direct to you If you write me do not forget to use perfectly plain envelope - no markings on it - just in case.\n\nI am putting this in your hands because I do not know who is a Comunist in Washington and who is not I leave that to you and I know you will not give me away."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I am nervous over this and if this trip the dope he gave me - well if it ever got out I am a dead duck sure as hell but the U.S.A. first and myself well I don't amount to much any how. Ubalsky said another party will contact me if he don't in due time not any particular date. He said Russia is very well prepared for war and will make damn short work of Europe and England, Spain, France & India, Japan & Philippines, and he said it will be soon and when Russia starts it will make Hitlers big-brook like a lot of school kids he says he thinks Russia has 350 atomic bombs. If you want any plainer drawings of them saucers - yes I can draw plainer lines of course but the air tech. engineers will dope it out - you see I am no good on electronic gadgets as required on this saucers but that is a good description of the drawings I saw.\n In case you write to me, put same in plain envelope and address it to me at 336 Bird St. Yuba City, Calif. The jet I pictured is just the same as was on the drawings Ubalsky had. I would like to hear about this as this will give me an idea if this Ubalsky is trying to give me horse feathers - I think tho it is not any baloney - but may be it is."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"April 17, 1950\n\nMr. L. A. Ward\n336 Bird Street\nYuba City, California\n\nDear Mr. Ward:\n\nYour letters of April 8, 1950, have been received and I want to thank you for writing to me as you did.\n\nIt is suggested, however, that you may wish to communicate directly with the Secretary of the Army, National Defense Building, Washington, D. C., with reference to the matter you mentioned.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNOTE: Correspondent advises he has been in contact with the Buffalo Office and states that he has deemed the information he has furnished with reference to flying saucers important enough to write direct to the Bureau. He advises that he desires us to use a plain envelope in connection with our reply and further stipulates that he does not desire that his name be furnished to \"Army Chiefs.\" He has stated that he \"wants to get a lot more information to give to you.\"\n\nNJC:mcq:bjc"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Yuba City Apr. 2 - 1950\n\nFederal Bureau Investigation\nWashington\nD.C.\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nGentlemen:\n\nI saw Ubalsky last Saturday in Willits, before he got on the bus to go to Eureka. I went to Willits for the mail for my son-in-law.\n\nIn our talk he said well if there is anything in the drawings of the mechanism of the saucer that will help you along on your cosmic ray engine use it - here are the drawings look them over and if you can find anything to help you o.k. Those drawings are made in Russian I think so I could not read the instructions or lettering but I did see and he explained to me the centrifugal force that pulls the saucer and the inside the saucer I seen the rudders of it just how they attached I really do not know our engineers can dope that out so I am sending a set of drawings free hand and these are in detail just exactly like the Russian drawings - so these look a lot better than those I mailed out Sat. and Ubalsky said after I studied them for quite a spell - that he was brushing me - and should I open my mouth or tell any one of the mechanics I saw in them saucers I would be taken care of an damn fast - so that's that. When you get these drawings go to the military officials and don't get me in dutch I know you will not for my life is the price I would pay - sooner or later if the commie agents figured I had gave this away and do not have any F.B.I. men tagging me that would look suspicious to the commie agents. I am taking a hell of a chance and I want some more information get from them and I will pass it along to you as fast as I get it"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4\nthe drawings show the saucers put together like this -\nstraight piece circulars between top and bottom of saucer - filled\nwith ball bearings in a groove top and bottom the center piece\nturns but top or bottom does not turn - Top and bottom obey the rudder\nthe up and down rudder and the sideways rudder.\n1.1.1. is for the jets to fire out side. from point 2 to point 2 on\na 30 foot diameter saucer is 10 feet making an overall diameter\nof 50 feet\n\ndrawing 4.\n\nof course it does not look like this drawing for curves and\netc - you know what I mean. All the floor in the saucer\nis fastened to the center piece as dotted line shows at 3. 3.\nI guess that is so saucer can be maneuvered or something\nmy wife or son - or son in law or daughter know nothing\nabout this - and do not tell them - or there would be hell to pay.\nI think the drawings are plain enough this time."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3 where the jets are fastened in I could not figure it out so will\nleave that to you the drawings I sent in sat. with the jet\nare O.K. That is the jet. - but some of the centrifugal power\nmechanism is wrong in design. Ubalsky had two or three sets\nof drawings and this copy I am sending you are plain and I\nbelieve better drawings.\nIn drawing #2 where turnbuckels are\nshown in cables - they are shortened or lengthened to suit - like\nthis as the weights fly or pull outward - the weights must pull the\ncable straight out or up and down - see no height in the line\nholding the weight - line must be straight when engines are in\nmotion and up to speed allowing everything else is in proportion O.K.\n\ndrawing 3."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6 P.S.\nI think I can get some information on the Russian submarine\nand what makes them go so deep downs. Ubalsky says he is sure\nour navy cannot locate them as they got dummies they put out\nsome how in the water and can fool anyone with the dummies.\nHe said they were making a long range rocket and\nputting this engine in it but that the saucer goes as fast\nas the rocket will. I was going to patent this engine\nevən if I did get it from Ubalsky - I placed my self\nin great danger to get it - and am in danger yet if\nanyone gives me away. But give it to the U.S.A.\nquick and the U.S.A. can give me something for my\nefforts, I do not think the U.S.A. will turn me\ndown - do you? and maybe I will ask a favor of the\nF.B.I. - who knows."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5\nI do not believe this is \"horse feathers\" so much as I did\nin the drawings sent you sat. Ubalsky said on the snow\nwith runners on this saucer like a sled centrifugal force will\npull her at a hell of speed. The jets are used on take off\nthere is wheels on the saucers there are 3 wheels they are pulled\nup into places in the saucer from the inside and some how or\nother a piece covers the spot on the out side the drawing shows\nthat but I cannot figure out how it done from the inside of\nthe saucer. Now I believe this is all the dope I can give you\non them. Ubalsky said the big saucers are oblong fore and aft\nbut round in the middle - just as the round saucers are\nsomething like this. You know what I mean only I cannot\ndraw it.\n\nI will mail this from Uriah monday 10th 1950 and\ntrust you will put this into the right hands\n\nYours Truly\nLewis A Wasted\n336 Bird st\nYuba City\nCalif."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Drawing #1\n\nThis drawing has no equalizers on I left them off at /+/ so as it will look plain\nThe equalizers are shown in drawing #2"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"cable anchor\nTurnbuckle\ncable anchor\ncable\ndoes not\nrevolve with shaft\ndoes not revolve\nwith shaft\nrevolves with shaft on\nsliding keys & ways\nKey ways & Keys\nthrust spring\nfloor\nKey ways in Keys\ndoes not revolve with\nshaft\nball bearings\nThis thrust bearing\ncannot revolve\nit is shown\nbolted to floor\nbut can slide\nback and ahead\nwith thrust.\ncable anchor in turnbuckle\ncable anchor\ncable\nTurnbuckle\nfloor\ndrawing # 7\nLa Ward"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Drawing 2\njust a rest bearing for shaft the shaft\ndoes not turn in this bearing - just slides a little\nequalizers\nrest bearing\nRudder having mast\nvertical\nRudder\nthrust bearing\ngear housing\ncable\nturnbuckle to cable ball bearing\nweights ... curved\nthis slides up and down\nshaft on sliding keys & ways\nin shaft and nets/rods with shaft\nthis does not revolve with shaft\nthrust plate does not revolve with shaft\ncollar does not revolve with shaft\nball bearing\nbearing\ngenerator D.C. electric\ncenter stanchion\nball bearings to turn on stanchion\nengines\nengines\ncable\nspring\nball bearing\nequalizers\njust a rest bearing for shaft\nshaft does not turn in this bearing\njust slides a little.\nRudder\nRudder\nthrust\nturnbuckles\nball bearing\ngear linkage\nDrawing 3"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"L. a Ward\n336 Bird St.\nYuba City\nCalif\nFrom\nFederal Bureau Investigation\nWashington\nD.C.\nREGISTERED\n4246\nVIA AIR MAIL\nSpecial Delivery\nSpecial Delivery\n10 CENTS\n10 CENTS\n10 CENTS\n25 CENTS\n3 CENTS\n3 CENTS"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CALIF\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\nAPR 11 1950\nP.O. DIV.\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\nAPR 11 1950 3PM\nSPECIAL DELIV"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, San Francisco\nApril 25, 1950\nDirector, FBI\nLEWIS A. WARD\n336 Bird Street\nYuba City, California\nRESEARCH\n62-83874-227\nRECORDED - 101\nINDEXED - 101\nBy letter dated April 9, 1950, captioned individual wrote to the Bureau with reference to matters pertaining to \"flying saucers.\" A photostatic copy of his communication is enclosed. It is noted that correspondent has referred to his contact with an individual named Ubalsky and reference is made to \"Russian drawings.\"\n\nIt is desired that you have an agent of your office contact correspondent to secure any data which may be of interest to the Bureau. It should be kept in mind, however, that the FBI is not conducting an investigation with reference to \"flying saucer matters\" and the correspondent should be advised that he may wish to communicate with the Secretary of the Air Force, National Defense Building, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nPlease furnish me all information concerning the handling of this matter.\n\nEnclosure\n\nNOTE: Correspondent advised that he has previously furnished data to the Bureau. It is believed this communication was referred to the Army Air Force. He has advised in his letter of April 9, that some drawings pertaining to flying saucers were executed in what he believes to be the Russian language, and it is deemed advisable to have him personally contacted to discourage further correspondence and to obtain any information he might have in his possession pertaining to matters which may be in the scope of our activities.\n\nNJC:lch:mms\n\nFollow-up made 5-24-50\n\nMAILED 10\nAPR 25 1950\nCOMM - FBI\n27 MAY 4 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Received from CNI through Liaison Channels\nDate 4/24/50 CDG\nHenry Ashe\nCONFIDENTIAL\nISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF NAVAL OPERATIONS\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nINTELLIGENCE REPORT\n(Reference to this report must specify Serial No, Place and Date.)\nFiled Flying Discs\nSerial No. 4-50 at Kodiak, Alaska Date 10 Feb. 1950\nFrom DIC/17TD Montgomery Field Co. (See note 2)\nReference\nSource OFFICIAL - U.S. Navy Evaluation A-2\nSubject Unidentified Phenomena in vicinity of Kodiak, Alaska\nBRIEF: ...\nNOTE: Information in this report is as of 23 January 1950\nENCL: (1) Completed CNCAL form containing information given by Lt. Smith, USN\n(2) Completed CNCAL form containing information given by MORGAN, WMC and CARVER, MC, USN\n(3) Sketch of radar interference characteristics experienced by Lt. Smith, USN\n(4) Completed CNCAL form containing information given by Lt. Barco, USN\n(5) Track chart of aircraft in which Lt. Barco, USN embarked 23 January 1950\n(6) Statements of MORGAN, WMC and CARVER, WL, USN\n(7) Statement of Lt. Barco\n(8) Winds aloft and balloon release data\n1. Enclosures (1), (2), and (4) are completed forms.\nCONFIDENTIAL\nDeclassified on NIS letter 9/20/77\nconcerning request 2 THIS REPORT CONSISTS OF THREE PAGES\nBRUCE S. MACCABEE TDR 7306 10/3/77\nCLASSIFICATION\nCIA (8) INDEXED - 74 83894-228\nNOT RECORDED 14 MAY 9 1950\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 23 1954\nthis document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nDIC/17TD No. 4-50 10 February 1950\nSubj: Unidentified Phenomena\n2. A summary of the information contained in enclosure (1) through (8) follows:\na. At 2202GW January LT Smith, USN, patrol plane commander of P2V3 No. 4 of Patrol Squadron One reported an unidentified radar contact 20 miles north of the Naval Air Station, Kodiak, Alaska. When this contact was first made, LT Smith was flying the Kodiak Security Patrol. At 2240, 6 minutes later a radar contact was made on an object 10 miles southeast of NAS Kodiak. Lt. Smith checked with the control tower to determine known traffic in the area, and was informed that there was none. During this period the radar operator, GASKEY ALC, USN reported intermittent radar interference of a type he had never before experienced. (See enclosure (3)). Contact was lost at this time, but intermittent interference continued.\nb. At some time between 0200 and 0300, MORGAN EMC, USN was standing watch on board the USS TILLAMOOK (ATA 192), which was anchored in the vicinity of buoy 19 in the main ship channel. Morgan reported sighting a \"very fast moving red glow light, which appeared to be of exhaust nature, seemed to come from the southeast, moved clockwise in a large circle in the direction of, and around Kodiak and returned out in a generally southeast direction.\" Morgan called Carver WL, USN, also on watch, to observe this object, and they both witnessed the return flight. The object was in sight for an estimated 30 seconds. No color or sound was detected, and the object was described to have the appearance of a ball of fire about one foot in diameter.\nc. At 2244GW, conducting routine Kodiak security patrol, Lt Smith reported a visual sighting of an unidentified airborne object at a radar range of 5 miles, on the starboard bow. This object showed indications of great speed on the radar scope. (The trailing edge of the blip gave a tail like indication.) At this time Lt Smith called the attention of all crew members to the object. An estimated ten seconds later, the object was directly overhead, indicating a speed of about 1500 MPH. Smith climbed to intercept, and attempted to circle to keep the object in sight. He was unable to do this, as the object was too highly maneuverable. Subsequently the object appeared to be opening the range, and Smith attempted to close the range. The object was observed to open out somewhat, then to turn to the left and come up on Smith's quarter. Smith considered this to be a highly threatening gesture, and turned out all lights in the aircraft. Four minutes later the object disappeared from view in a southeasterly direction.\nd. At 2304GW, the day following Lt Smith's sighting, Lt Causer and Lt Barco of Patrol Squadron One were conducting the Kodiak Security Patrol, and sighted an unidentified object. At the time of the sighting the aircraft in which these officers were embarked was approximately 62 miles south of NAS Kodiak. The object appeared to be on an ascending westerly course, and was in sight for ten minutes. During this period the object was observed by Lieutenants Causer and Barco, and PAULSON, ADl, plane captain. At no time was radar contact made on the object. Lt Causer was unable to close the object at 170 knots.\n2"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nDIC/17TD Serial No. 4-50 10 February 1950\nSubj: Unidentified Phenomena\n(e) The objects sighted have been described as follows:\n(1) To Lt Smith and crew it appeared as two orange lights rotating about a common center, like two jet aircraft making slow rolls in tight formation. It had a wide speed range.\n(2) To Morgan, EMC, and Carver, WL it appeared as a reddish orange ball of fire about one foot in diameter, travelling at a high rate of speed.\n(3) To Lt Causer, Lt Barco, and Paulson, ADl, it appeared to be a pulsating orange yellow projectile shaped flame, with regular period of pulsation on 3 to 5 seconds, off 3 to 5 seconds. Later, as the object increased the range the pulsations appeared to increase to on 7 to 8 seconds and off 7 to 8 seconds.\n3. A check with the Navy Weather Central, Kodiak, Alaska revealed that balloons were released at the following times:\n22 January - 0445 and 2200W (approximately)\n23 January - 0400 (approximately)\n4. On 23 January winds aloft at 1000 feet were reported at 0400W as from 310 T at 36 knots, and at 2000 feet from 240 T at 37 knots, while the object was reported to be on an ascending - westerly course.\nCOMMENT: In view of the fact that no weather balloons were known to have been released within a reasonable time before the sightings, it appears that the object or objects were not balloons. If not balloons the objects must be regarded as phenomena (possibly meteorites), the exact nature of which could not be determined by this office.\n3"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO: Director, FBI\nFROM: SAC, New Orleans\nDATE: May 31, 1950\nSUBJECT: MICHAEL HALFERY\nFLYING DISCS\nOn May 24, 1950, this office received from Major MERLE L. MENNIE, Intelligence and Security Officer, New Orleans Port of Embarkation, a report dealing with MICHAEL HALFERY of 2453 Urquhart Street, New Orleans, Louisiana. A copy of this report is attached to this letter for your information.\nThe report states that HALFERY sold for $1.00 two photographs to one JOHN R. ESPOSITO, 615 Piety Street, New Orleans, who in turn gave the photographs to an agent of CID, New Orleans Port of Embarkation. These photographs were of flying saucers and a man from Mars in the custody of two U. S. Army Military Policemen. A copy of one negative and a copy of one positive of these photographs are also enclosed herewith.\nEnclosures (3)\nDHB:mas\n66-1199\n[handwritten note: Matter discussed with Col. Gordon, OSI. He ordered that hundreds of such matters are received by A.F. they do not consider them worthy of investigation. 6-21-50 DHB]\nRECORDED - 5\nINDEXED 5\nEX-32\n62-83894-229\nJUN 22 1950\n361"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case # T4-15-0; 117th CIC Det FO, NOPE, New Orleans, La.\n\nPositive Photostat copy of document turned in to NOPE CID\n(Agent John F. Quinn) by John R. Esposito, 615 Piety Street,\nNew Orleans, La., who reported purchase of document from\nMichael HALFERY, 2453 Urquhart St, New Orleans, La.\nDate 22 May 1950\nReceived from Agent John F. Quinn, NOPE CID, by Louis\nRebillia, Jr., Criminal Investigator, Intelligence &\nSecurity Branch, NOPE; Date 23 May 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURES TO THE BUREAU\n\nCopy of report by Intelligence Branch, New Orleans\nPort of Embarkation, re MICHAEL HALFERY.\n\nOne negative copy and one positive copy of photographs\nof flying saucer and man from Mars in custody of two MP's.\n\nN.O. File 66-1199"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION\n\nDATE 23 May 1950\n\nPREPARING OFFICE\nIntelligence Branch, New Orleans Port of Embarkation, New Orleans 12, La.\n\nSUBJECT\nHALFERY, Michael\n2453 Urquhart Street\nNew Orleans, La.\n\nCASE NO. T4-15-0\n\nCODE FOR USE IN INDIVIDUAL PARAGRAPH EVALUATION\nOF SOURCE:\nCOMPLETELY RELIABLE . . . . . A\nUSUALLY RELIABLE . . . . . . B\nFAIRLY RELIABLE . . . . . . . C\nNOT USUALLY RELIABLE . . . . D\nUNRELIABLE . . . . . . . . . E\nRELIABILITY UNKNOWN . . . . . F\nOF INFORMATION:\nCONFIRMED BY OTHER SOURCES . . . 1\nPROBABLY TRUE . . . . . . . . 2\nPOSSIBLY TRUE . . . . . . . . 3\nDOUBTFULLY TRUE . . . . . . . 4\nIMPROBABLE . . . . . . . . . 5\nTRUTH CANNOT BE JUDGED . . . . 6\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION\n\nAt about 1430 hours, 22 May 1950, the attached (See Enclosure 1) \"photograph\" was turned over to Agent John F. Quinn, CID, New Orleans Port of Embarkation. The individual who turned this material over to Quinn told him that he had purchased the \"photograph\" from one Michael HALFERY, 2453 Urquhart Street, New Orleans, Louisiana, for the sum of $1.00. He stated that he thought this material \"should be placed in the hands of the Government\", as it was supposed to be pictures of \"flying saucers\" and \"a man from Mars in the United States\". The \"man from Mars\" was pictured as being in the custody of two military policemen. (B-2)\n\nThe individual turning this material over to Quinn gave his name as John R. Esposito, 615 Piety Street, New Orleans, Louisiana, and his telephone as Upater 5190. (B-3)\n\nAccording to Esposito, HALFERY is alleged to have served five (5) years in the Federal penitentiary at Leavenworth, Kansas. (B-3)\n\nNo interrogation of Esposito was conducted by Agent Quinn. (B-2)\n\n1 Incl:\nPhoto. (Original & Cy)\n\nCOMMENT: A literal translation of the caption under the alleged photographs stated that a special infra-red machine was used to take these photographs because the \"flying saucers\" were invisible to the human eye. Also, the sound emitted by the two pictured \"saucers\" was of such high frequency as to be above frequencies audible to the human ear. The caption continues by stating that an accident occurred to one of the \"saucers\" and the individual shown in custody of United States Military Police in the right hand photograph was a \"Mr. X\", a member of the crew of one of these \"flying saucers\". The location of both photographs was stated to be Weisbaden, Germany.\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED MAY 24 1950 FBI - NEW ORLEANS\n\nDISTRIBUTION\nCG, 44 (AGCO, G-2) (1) FBI, NOLa (2) (Including original)\nCG, 117th CIC Det (1) NIO, NOLa (1) La Mil Dist (1)\nCG, NOPE (1) ONI, NOLa (1) File (1)\n\nWD AGO FORM 568 1 JUN 47\nU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16-53396-1\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Das Infra-Rot-Kathodenstrahlrohr offenbart mit Bildaufnahmegerät und Spezialfilm Vorgänge, die dem menschlichen Auge unsichtbar bleiben müssen. Das beweist unsere linke Abbildung: Zwei \"fliegende Untertassen\" kreisten — von den Wiesbadenern unbemerkt — um die Marktkirche. Die Geräusche der sausenden Scheiben waren nicht bemerkbar, da Ultra-Kurzschallwellen bekanntlich vom menschlichen Gehör nicht aufgenommen werden. Unser rechtes Bild zeigt erstmalig Mister X, ein Besatzungsmitglied der \"fliegenden Untertasse\", die am Fuße des Bleidenstadter Kopfes zerschellt ist\n(3 Translag/USA-Fotos)"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Das Infra-Rot-Kathodenstrahlrohr offenbart mit Bildaufnahmegerät und Spezialfilm Vorgänge, die dem menschlichen Auge unsichtbar bleiben müssen. Das beweist unsere linke Abbildung: Zwei \"fliegende Untertassen\" kreisten — von den Wiesbadenern unbemerkt — um die Marktkirche. Die Geräusche der sausenden Scheiben waren nicht bemerkbar, da Ultra-Kurzschallwellen bekanntlich vom menschlichen Gehör nicht aufgenommen werden. Unser rechtes Bild zeigt erstmalig Mister X, ein Besatzungsmitglied der \"fliegenden Untertasse\", die am Fuße des Bleidenstadter Kopfes zerschellt ist\n(3 Translag/USA-Fotos)"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENA\n(Flying Saucers)\n\nReports of strange and mysterious objects seen in the sky over most of the countries of the world during the past five years have created quite a stir in the public press. The sighting of such objects has not been confined to the last five years. History records many instances of man's inability to explain what he saw or thought he saw. The prophet Ezekiel in the 6th century BC reported \"a whirl wind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire unfolding itself, and a brightness was about it.\" He then saw \"a wheel in the middle of a wheel\" and reported \"when they went, they went up on their four sides and they turned not when they went\". (Ezekiel 1:16)\n\nIn the past, these phenomena have usually been attributed to supernatural causes, and in more recent years to natural phenomena. However, the introduction of the atomic bomb and guided missiles in World War II has so caught the public imagination with their potentialities, actual and fanciful, that we now find the phenomena variously attributed to space ships from other planets and US or Soviet experiments with new and wonderful weapons.\n\nThe present flury of flying saucers, ghost rockets, etc., began in mid-1946 in Sweden. Hundreds of people reported seeing strange objects flying over the country. Newspapers speculated that they were Soviet guided missiles being tested over the Baltic Sea, either from the former German experimental station at Peenemunde, or from Dago Island off the Estonian Coast. The fact that an experimental V-2 fired by the Germans from Peenemunde had landed in Sweden in 1944 lent credence to their speculation. The Swedish defence staff made an investigation and may have deliberately allowed the public to believe this theory for some time for political reasons. Careful investigation by the US Ma and by an\n\n1\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"independent British team, failed to uncover any evidence to support the theory of Soviet missiles. By 1947 the thing had snowballed to such an extent that the Swedish Government finally issued a report identifying most of the incidents with natural phenomena and denying that any foreign power was involved. During this period sightings were reported from the remaining Scandanavian countries and most of Western Europe.\n\nIncidents were first reported over the US in 1947 and are still continuing. Much space in the press has been given to these reports and various semi-official opinions have been quoted. For example, on 16 May, Captain Eddie Rickenbacker was quoted as saying \"there must be something to them, for too many reliable persons have made reports on them. I am duty bound not to say what I know about them - or what I don't know about them. However, if they do exist, you can rest assured that they are ours.\" The USAF for a long time conducted a thorough investigation of each of the hundreds of incidents involved. It found that approximately 75% of the reports could definitely be related to known causes such as meteorological balloons, aircraft, meteors and other common phenomena. A public statement was issued debunking the entire existence of flying disks or saucers. This did little to cut down the flood of reports. It only resulted in convincing a large number of people that the National Military Establishment was trying to cover up our own experiments with new weapons.\n\nMany theories have been advanced to explain these reports of aerial phenomena over the US. These include:\n\n1. Space ships from other planets\n2. Soviet guided missiles or aircraft-, probably atomic-powered.\n3. US experiments with new weapons\n4. Natural phenomena\n5. Mass hysteria, or other psychological causes.\n\n2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"While it is not possible to categorically rule out theory No. 1 it is very easy to do so on reasonable grounds. The existence of any form of life on other planets is extremely tenuous and debatable. The level of technical achievement required to launch piloted or pilotless missiles from one planet to another and return is several orders of magnitude beyond that existing on the earth today and probably would have resulted in some firm contact prior to this, either through deliberate landings or unscheduled crashes. (Even these have been reported in the press - complete with descriptions of men only 18 inches tall! Such reports are sheer fabrication.)\n\nThere is absolutely no evidence that the Soviet Union possess either guided missiles or disc shaped aircraft capable of making round trip flights to the US, and the use of atomic energy for the propulsion of any aerial vehicle is still at least several years in the future. Even if the Soviets are that far ahead of us in such a program, there is no reason to expect the airplanes would be other than of conventional design. An atomic power plant, alone, would be sufficiently radical, without also designing a completely new vehicle to carry it.\n\nThe US is not experimenting with any new weapon that could reasonably be mistaken by identified as a flying disc or saucer. The US is launching large numbers of meteorological and cosmic ray balloons for experimental purposes and a fair number of the reports can be definitely attributed to sightings of these objects or reflections of other shiny objects such as aircraft.\n\nThe continued reporting of aerial phenomena must then be attributed to a mass hysteria caused by the present tenseness in the international situation; the public belief in the ability of science to accomplish miracles; and to statements in the press by \"name\" individuals hinting at\n\n3\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the existence of some new weapon. Such statements, of the type attributed to Rickenbacker, often solicited in the most sensation form by news reporters in order to make a good story, make people watch the sky and any object they cannot immediately recognize is called a \"flying saucer.\" This helps to maintain the \"chain reaction\" of such reports.\n\n4\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\n\nLOS ANGELES 24, CALIFORNIA\nGraduate Department of Journalism June 2, 1950\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover, director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nPennsylvania Avenue at 9th, NW\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover,\n\nI am currently engaged in research for a graduate dissertation which will attempt to analyze the sociological and psychological implications of the flying saucer phenomenon.\n\nIn the course of my research I am giving extensive consideration of the several magazine articles and the one book which have already been written on the subject. The book, in particular, and the magazine articles in general, hint at official restraints which have hampered the authors in their research. So far as I know none of those research projects attempted to probe as deeply into the background of the phenomena as I am, yet I have encountered no such \"official censorship\" as they mention. In fact I have been surprised at the openness with which some people have replied to my queries.\n\nI believe the fact that I have encountered no restrictions is significant when I attempt to analyze my total findings. It raises the question as to whether those previously mentioned authors aren't trying hard to sell something which really isn't there to sell.\n\nIs there any reason why the flying saucer situation should be \"played down?\" Is there any official attitude toward the matter?\n\nI wish to thank you in advance for your interest and help. You may be assured that I will appreciate any information you may be able to give me.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nDeWayne B. Johnson\nDeWayne B. Johnson"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"[illegible]\nUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\n[illegible]\nJune 2, 1950\n\n[illegible]\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n[illegible]\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\n[illegible]\n\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED\nJUN 5 4 46 PM '50\nJUN 6 9 45 AM '50 MR JONES\nMR JONES\nRECEIVED\nRECORDS SEC\nJUN 5 3 50 PM '50"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"June 8, 1950\n\nRECORDED - 5\n62-83894-230\nEX-32\n\nMr. DeWayne B. Johnson\nGraduate Department of Journalism\nUniversity of California\nLos Angeles 24, California\n\nDear Mr. Johnson:\n\nYour letter dated June 2, 1950, has been received, and I appreciate the interest which prompted your communication.\n\nWhile I would like to be of service, this Bureau has no information available for distribution with regard to the subject of your letter, and I suggest that you may wish to direct your inquiry to the Secretary of Defense, National Defense Building, Washington, D. C.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nARA:mvs\n\nTolson\nLadd\nClegg\nGlavin\nNichols\nRosen\nTracy\nHarbo\nMohr\nTele. Room\nNease\nGandy\n\n361\n56 JUN 22 1950\nMAILED 17\nJUN 9 1950\nCOMM - FBI\nU S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED READING ROOM\nF B I\nJUN 8 7 42 PM '50"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nDATE: June 15, 1950\nFROM : SAC, San Francisco\nSUBJECT: LEWIS A. WARD\n336 Bird Street\nYuba City, California\nRESEARCH\n\nRebulet 6-5-50.\n\nSubject was located 6-13-50 residing at 78 South Tenth Street, San Jose, California. He was interviewed by SA CHARLES J. PRELSNIK of this Office, who carefully explained the jurisdiction of the FBI to him and questioned him relative to any information he might have which would be of interest to this Bureau.\n\nMr. WARD had nothing to add to his previous story as submitted by letter to the Bureau on 4-9-50. He was advised that any information relative to \"flying saucers\" did not come within the jurisdiction of this Bureau and that he could communicate such information to the Secretary of the Air Force, National Defense Building, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nFor the further information of the Bureau, Mr. R. E. MC CARTHY, Secretary, Local 39, International Union of Stationary Engineers, 805 East Weber Street, was contacted in an effort to locate Mr. WARD. Mr. MC CARTHY described WARD as being \"odd\" but would not elaborate on this statement.\n\nIt was also ascertained from Mr. R. A. CHRISTIANSEN, Business Representative of the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 39, 57 East Santa Clara Street, San Jose, California, through whom WARD was located, that WARD was given to weird imaginings. Mr. CHRISTIANSEN stated that he would not exactly describe WARD as being insane but stated that he was getting along in years and was prone to exaggerate on queer imaginings.\n\nIt was the observation of the interviewing agent that Mr. WARD is abnormal mentally.\n\nCJP:eu\n94-492\n\nRECORDED - 71\nINDEXED - 71\n62-83894-231\nEX-55\n56 JUL 21 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: 7/19/50\nFROM : SAC, ALBUQUERQUE\nSUBJECT: SUMMARY OF AERIAL PHENOMENA IN NEW MEXICO\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nOF Flying Discs\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\n\nThere is being transmitted herewith a Summary of Observations of Serial Phenomena in New Mexico from December 1948 to May 25, 1950. This recapitulation of data summarizes previous individual sights that have been reported in this area. The summary was prepared by the Inspector General's Office of the 17th District of Special Investigations, Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico. (S-1)\n\nThe above information is being submitted for the completion of the Bureau's files.\n\npw:ush\nEncls.\n\nClassified by SP6 Bja/tcy\nDeclassify on: OADN\n\nFOI/PA # 245,974\nAPPEAL #\nCIVIL ACT. #\nE.O. # 12356\nDATE 5/22/85 INITIALS TCY\nS-1 = Air Force\n\n62-83894-\nNOT RECORDED\n53 JUL 27 1950\n\n55 JUL 21 1950\nORIGINAL COPY FILED IN 62-83557-"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n\nRGC/EJB/bls\nTHE INSPECTOR GENERAL USAF\n17TH DISTRICT OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS\nKIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE, NEW MEXICO\n\nFile No: 24-8-0\n5 July 1950\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nsighted on 29 June 1950\nat Phoenix, Arizona\nSPECIAL INQUIRY\n\nTO: Director of Special Investigations\nHeadquarters, United States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\n1. Reference is made to Spot Report TWX from this Headquarters dated 30 June 1950, making reference to an unidentified flying object sighted on 29 June 1950 at Phoenix, Arizona.\n\n2. An interview with 1st Lt. JOHN D. FINK, AO-823052, 93rd Fighter Squadron, Kirtland AFB reveals that on 29 June 1950 at approximately 1840 hours Lt. FINK sighted this object. Lt. FINK climbed to 47,000 while flying an F-86 aircraft and observed that the object was a bright balloon with instruments attached and was floating at an altitude of 50,000 feet.\n\n3. Lt. FINK described the speed of the balloon as being very slow and further described the balloon as being an \"inverted tear drop\".\n\n4. Inasmuch as the previously unidentified object has been positively identified as a balloon, further investigation will not be conducted in this incident.\n\nRICHARD G. COX\nMAJOR, USAF\nDistrict Commander\n\n63 AUG 2 1950\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO :\nDIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: June 29, 1950\nFROM :\nSAC, WASHINGTON FIELD\nSUBJECT:\nFLYING DISCS\nINTERNAL SECURITY - X\nThis is to advise the Bureau that on June 25, 1950, DOUGLAS HARRISON, 2337 Ashmead Place, N.W., telephone, DEcatur 2797, and who is employed at the Hot Shoppe, Connecticut Avenue, N.W., informed that at 9:25 am, that date, while looking out of the window of his residence he saw what he believed to be a flying saucer. He described this object as resembling a cigar, the end of which was tilted down toward the earth and presenting a silver appearance. He estimated the height of this object as from 20 to 25 thousand feet, and stated the size at that distance appeared to be about four inches. HARRISON could furnish no further details other than to state the object appeared to be moving in an easterly direction. He advised that this is the first flying saucer he has ever seen.\nThe foregoing is being furnished for the information of the Bureau and no action is being taken by this Office.\nKTD:bh\n100-0"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO :\nDIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: June 29, 1950\nFROM :\nSAC, WASHINGTON FIELD\nSUBJECT:\nFLYING DISCS\nINTERNAL SECURITY - X\nThis is to advise the Bureau that on June 25, 1950, DOUGLAS HARRISON, 2337 Ashmead Place, N.W., telephone, DEcatur 2797, and who is employed at the Hot Shoppe, Connecticut Avenue, N.W., informed that at 9:25 am, that date, while looking out of the window of his residence he saw what he believed to be a flying saucer. He described this object as resembling a cigar, the end of which was tilted down toward the earth and presenting a silver appearance. He estimated the height of this object as from 20 to 25 thousand feet, and stated the size at that distance appeared to be about four inches. HARRISON could furnish no further details other than to state the object appeared to be moving in an easterly direction. He advised that this is the first flying saucer he has ever seen.\nThe foregoing is being furnished for the information of the Bureau and no action is being taken by this Office.\nKTD:bh\n100-0"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, Washington Field\nJuly 19, 1950\nDirector, FBI\nFLYING DISCS\nINTERNAL SECURITY - X\nReurlet 6-29-50.\nAttention is directed to existing Bureau instructions wherein complaints received relating to the captioned matter should be promptly furnished to a local representative of the Office of Special Investigations, the Inspector General, U. S. Air Force by your office.\nYou are instructed to furnish the information contained in the referenced letter to OSI. In the future, such action should be taken promptly following the receipt of such information by your office.\n62-83894\nEHM:EHW\nRECORDED - 92\nEX-43"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: July 11, 1950\nFROM : SAC, CHICAGO\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISC\nReference is made to SAC letter #38, series 1949.\nMr. TAGE STENSIG, 4905 Bryan Place, Downers Grove, Illinois, telephone number - Downers Grove 1199 J, telephonically advised SA JOHN E. KEATING at 9:54 PM, July 4, 1950, that at 9:38 PM on July 4, 1950, he observed a large, bright, silvery object moving at an approximate altitude of 10,000 feet, in a north, north-westerly direction over Downers Grove. Mr. STENSIG said that his wife also observed this object. He stated that he estimated the speed of the object at 700 to 800 miles by comparing its rate of movement with that of commercial airplanes.\nMr. STENSIG advised that he is a meteorologist with United Air Lines and the object he observed was not a plane nor was it a fireworks display.\nThe above is being submitted for your information.\nJEK:BJB\n100-18999\nRECORDED - 129\nINDEXED - 129\nEX-81"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nJUN 30 1950\nTELETYPE\nWASH 8 FROM PHOENIX VIA LOSA 30 10-03 AM\nDIRECTOR FBI URGENT\nFLYING DISCS. AT FIVE FORTYFIVE PM, JUNE TWENTYNINTH LAST, AN OBJECT IN SKY WAS OBSERVED BY MANY CITIZENS OF PHOENIX INCLUDING FBI PERSONNEL. MATTER IMMEDIATELY REPORTED TO HERMAN MUNROE, OSI, WILLIAMS AFB, ARIZONA. MUNROE ADVISED TODAY OBJECT WAS PICKED UP BY RADAR SCOPE AT SIX PM, JUNE TWENTYNINTH, AT WHICH TIME IT WAS ESTIMATED OBJECT WAS THIRTY TO THIRTYFIVE THOUSAND FEET IN AIR. A B TWENTYNINE FROM FIVE HUNDRED NINTH BOMB GROUP, ROSWELL, NM, WAS ASSIGNED TO FOLLOW OBJECT AND PILOT REPORTED THAT WHILE TRAVELING AT TWENTYFIVE THOUSAND FEET HE ESTIMATED OBJECT TO BE ADDITIONAL TEN TO TWENTY THOUSAND FEET ABOVE HIM. PLANE WAS TRAVELING AT TWO HUNDRED NINETY MPH AND WAS ABLE TO CIRCLE BENEATH OBJECT. OBJECT WAS MOVING IN WESTWARDLY DIRECTION IN ABSENCE OF WIND. IT WAS LAST SIGHTED AT EIGHT FIFTYFIVE PM AT A POINT ABOUT TWENTY MILES NORTH OF BLYTHE, CALIFORNIA, WHEN IT WAS LOST DUE TO HEAVY THUNDERSTORM IN AREA. MUNROE ESTIMATED SIZE OF OBJECT TO BE VERY LARGE, INASMUCH AS WITH USE OF BINOCULARS HE COULD EASILY SEE OBJECT. NEVERTHELESS, THE B TWENTYNINE COULD NOT BE OBSERVED WITH BINOCULARS. OSI WILL SUBMIT FULL REPORT AFTER CONSULTATION WITH AIRPLANE CREW AND FURTHER STUDY. NO ACTION BEING TAKEN BY END OF PAGE ONE\nRECORDED - 15\n62-83594\nEX-43\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JUN 30 1950\n\nDIRECTOR, FBI\n\nRECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\n\nJUN 30 1 31 PM '50\n\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\n\nTHIS OFFICE AND ABOVE FOR YOUR INFO ONLY.\n\nMURPHY\n\nCORRECTION PLS 6TH LINE 7TH WORD SHOULD BE THIRTYFIVE\n\nEND\n\nPLS ACK\n\nHOLD PLS\n\ncc Mr. Belmont"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nDATE: July 18, 1950\n\nFROM : SAC, Chicago\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n(b) (7)(D) - INFORMANT\n\nThe following is submitted for information of the Bureau for whatever action it may deem advisable.\n\nOn July 1, 1950, (b) (7)(D) , of known reliability, advised that at 1:00 a.m. July 1, 1950, at North Chicago, Illinois, east intersection of 22nd Street and the Chicago, North Shore and Milwaukee Railroad and Chicago Northwestern Railroad tracks, (b) (7)(D) (b) (7)(D) , he observed one cigar-shaped object, about five feet in appearance from his viewpoint, traveling from northwestern to southeastern direction at an excessive rate of speed over the Great Lakes Naval Training Center, Great Lakes, Illinois. According to the informant, this object appeared almost directly overhead at an altitude which he estimated to be about 15,000 to 20,000 feet, and it remained in sight for about twenty to twenty-five seconds until it disappeared over the horizon.\n\nThis informant advised the object did not appear like any falling star or meteor he had ever seen, and that it proceeded in a straight and level flight. The informant continued that the front two-thirds of the object was a constant glow about the coloring of a burning kerosene lamp, and that the rear third was dark. He continued that the object left a bluish-white trail behind it, appearing to be about four inches in width, and about three times the length of the object. The informant advised that there were no wings or other type of support visible to him, and that the propulsion, control and stability were unknown to him. He advised that the speed of this object was much faster than any conventional type of aircraft he had ever seen, although it did not travel as fast as a falling star. He added that there was no sound discernible.\n\nWith regard to the informant, it is to be noted that(b) (7)(D) (b) (7)(D) [REDACTED]\n\nIt is to be noted that he advised there were no other witnesses who saw the aforementioned object.\n\nThis informant has furnished reliable information to the Chicago Division in the past, is of average intelligence, and considered of good character and reputation.\n\ncc: (b) (7)(D)\n\nJHS:RMS\n100-18999\n\nRECORDED - 118\n\n62-83894-235\n\nJUL 20 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, CHICAGO\n\nJuly 28, 1950\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nFLYING DISCS\nChicago File 100-18999\nBufile 62-83894\n\nReurlet July 18, 1950.\n\nYou are instructed to advise the Bureau whether the information contained in your reference letter has been furnished to the local office of OSI in Chicago, Illinois in accordance with existing Bureau instructions.\n\nRECORDED - 117\n62-83894 - 235\n\nEHM:DE\n\nMAILED 10\nJUL 25 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nJUL 4 1950\nTELETYPE\nFBI HOUSTON 7-4-50 2-35 PM CST\nSS4 DIRECTOR URGENT\nM\nFLYING DISC REPORTED TO HAVE BEEN FOUND NEAR ALICE, TEXAS JULY FOURTH INFORMATION CONCERNING. SAN ANTONIO TELEPHONICALLY ADVISED THIS OFFICE BUREAU BEING INFORMED THAT SUBJECT DISC DESCRIBED AS APPROXIMATELY FIVE FEET IN DIAMETER, ELYPTICAL IN SHAPE AND BEARING SERIAL NUMBER X DASH ONE FOUR SEVEN A AND INSTRUCTIONS QUOTE DO NOT TOUCH UNQUOTE. RESIDENT AGENT CORPUS CHRISTI STATES THAT LOCAL RADIO REPORTS THIS DISCOVERY TO BE A HOAX. FURTHER INQUIRY BEING MADE AND BUREAU WILL BE ADVISED. CAPTAIN O. C. WETZELL, SECURITY OFFICER ELLINGTON FIELD AIR FORCE ADVISED AND REPORTED HIS OFFICE HAD NO INFORMATION RE SUBJECT DISC. PRESS INQUIRIES OF THIS OFFICE WILL BE ANSWERED WITH NO COMMENT UACB.\nRECORDED - 118\nLORTON\nEND AC PLS\n441PM OK FBI WASH DC CCW\nM\n1-450 445PM Press release O.K. Per Mr. Nichols"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nJul 4 4 42 PM '50\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED\nJul 5 1 08 PM '50\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJul 5 9 33 AM '50\nJul 5 11 09 AM '50\nREC'D BELMONT\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJul 5 11 43 AM '50\nJul 5 10 30 AM '50\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nJUL 4 1950\nTELETYPE\nFBI HOUSTON 7-4-50 3-50 PM CST ICF\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\nFLYING DISC REPORTED TO HAVE BEEN FOUND NEAR ALICE, TEXAS JULY FOURTH, INFORMATION CONCERNING. STOKES MCENHEIMER, CHIEF OF POLICE ALUCE, TEXAS ADVISES THAT ON THIS DATE A SMALL ELYPTICAL CONTRAPTION WAS FOUND IN A FIELD ABOUT ONE HUNDRED YARDS NORTHWEST OF MUNICIPAL AIRPORT ALICE, TEXAS. UPON EXAMINATION IT WAS DETERMINED THAT OBJECT WAS CONSTRUCTED BY WELDING A PORTION OF TWO AIRPLANE WINGS TOGETHER. THE CONTRIVANCE WAS FRESHLY PAINTED AND BORE THE MARKINGS DESCRIBED IN REFERENCE TELETYPE, AND HAD NO MOTOR OR MEANS OF PROPULSION. THE CHIEF OF POLICE REMOVED THE OBJECT TO THE POLICE STATION AND UPON INQUIRY DETERMINED THAT IT HAD BEEN CONSTRUCTED BY A GROUP OF MECHANICS AT THE ALICE AIRPORT AS A PRACTICAL JOKE. AIR FORCE OFFICIALS ELLINGTON FIELD ADVISED. NO FURTHER INQUIRES TO BE MADE.\nLORTON\nCORRECTION LAST WORD ON LINE TWO IS \"ALICE\"\nEND ACK\n5-54 PM OK FBI WASH DC ED\nRECORDED - 118"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-NICHOLS\nF B I\nU.S DEPT OF JUSTICE\nJul 5 12 19 PM '50\nRECEIVED\nJul 5 4 46 PM '50\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED\nJul 5 10 34 AM '50\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJul 5 1 48 PM '50\nREC'D BELMONT\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJul 5 10 17 AM '50\nRECEIVED-TOLSON\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJul 4 5 54 PM '50\nRECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nJUL 4 1950\nTELETYPE\nFBI SAN ANTONIO 7-4-50 1-30 PM JMW\nDIRECTOR FBI\nFLYING DISC FOUND AT ALICE, TEXAS, JULY FOUR, FIFTY, INTERNAL SECURITY DASH R. CAA REPRESENTATIVES SAN ANTONIO, ADVISED THIS OFFICE AT TWELVE FIFTEEN P. M. THIS DATE THAT THEY HAD RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM THEIR REPRESENTATIVE AT ALICE THAT A FLYING DISC HAD BEEN FOUND BETWEEN THE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND THE CITY OF ALICE. DISC IS ELLIPITICAL SHAPE, FOUR TO FIVE FEET IN DIAMETER, HAS TWO RADIO AERIALS, SLOTS OR HOLES INDICATING JET OR ROCKET PROPULSION. DISC HAS NO. X ONE FOUR SEVEN A, PRINTED ON IT, TOGETHER WITH QUOTE DO NOT TOUCH UNQUOTE. LOCAL RADIO NEWSCAST QUOTES CHIEF OF POLICE, ALICE, TEXAS AS STATING FLYING DISC A HOAX. OSI, KELLY AFB AND HOUSTON OFFICE ADVISED.\nWEEKS\nEND\nACK PLS\n331PM OK FBI WASH DC CCW\nRECORDED - 118\ncc: Mr. Belmont"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nJUL 4 3 32 PM '50\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n[illegible]\nRECEIVED - DIRECTOR\nF B I\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nJUL 4 5 45 PM '50"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-239"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"To whom it may concern:\nI would like to know just how much truth is in Donald Keyhoe's book \"The Flying Saucers Are Real\", published this year by the Fawcett Publications, Inc. Keyhoe quotes a vast amount of information from the Air Force, and the F.B.I. Sincerely yours, J.L. Adams\nack 7-11-50 DDC\nRECORDED - 71\n62-83894-239\nJUL 18 1950\n3"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 11, 1950\n\nMr. Glenn Lee Adams\n921 South 40th Street\nLouisville 11, Kentucky\n\nDear Mr. Adams:\n\nYour card postmarked July 3, 1950, has been received and it is suggested that you may wish to correspond directly with the Secretary of the Air Force, National Defense Building, The Pentagon, Washington 25, D. C., since the matter to which you referred has been handled by that agency.\n\nI am sure you will find on a close examination of the book you mentioned that it contains no quotations from the FBI but merely mentions this agency.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNOTE: Correspondent refers to a book \"The Flying Saucers are Real\" by Donald Keyhoe, which has been read and will be reviewed by the Crime Records Section in the near future. The book mentions briefly that the FBI was investigating flying saucers and that two Bureau Agents witnessed saucers at Las Vegas, New Mexico, 12-8-48. It is not malicious in the references to the FBI, by Keyhoe who wrote the article on saucers for True Magazine.\n\nDDC:mjp:mad"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Director, FBI\nFROM: SAC, Louisville\nDATE: 8/2/50\n\nSUBJECT: ALF E. HIXENBAUGH's Photographs of Flying Saucers; INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nOn June 28, 1950, the Louisville Times, a newspaper of general circulation published at Louisville, Kentucky, carried a two column cut showing three frames of a movie camera film of what purported to be a moving picture of a flying saucer. The photographs, taken by ALF (AL) HIXENBAUGH, Times staff photographer, were taken, HIXENBAUGH said, on a 16 mm magazine-loading movie camera.\n\nThe news article, accompanying the photographs, stated HIXENBAUGH took 50 feet of film in which \"the bright flying object shows clearly.\" The photographer, according to the article, was at Longest and Everett Avenues near his home, 2205 Longest, at 4:15 p.m., June 27, 1950, on his way to take some moving pictures of birds. The article relates that HIXENBAUGH \"suddenly heard the roar of a big plane -- a twin-motored DC-3 -- and glanced overhead. At first he thought it was a jet plane then he looked to the west of the plant, which was flying southwest toward Standiford Field -- and saw the large disk. It had a slight corona around it and seemed to be lower than the plane.\"\n\nAccording to HIXENBAUGH, the object appeared \"motionless for about ten seconds ... then it began to get smaller, finally vanishing into the west.\" The article notes that while the \"saucer\" appeared on all the film HIXENBAUGH took, the airplane was out of the picture field quickly, appearing on only about 10 feet. HIXENBAUGH, according to the article, advised military officers at Godman Field who in turn notified flight headquarters at Wright-Patterson Field. A copy of the newspaper article and photographs are being forwarded to the Bureau as enclosures.\n\nA subsequent newspaper article stated that representatives of the military would fly to Louisville to examine the films. In addition to being printed in the Louisville Times, the movie film taken by HIXENBAUGH was carried on a national television network and received national comment from WALTER WINCHELL. HIXENBAUGH has received telephonic and written queries concerning subject matter of the picture\n\nHTH/whp\nLs #62\nEnclosures-3"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ls #62-O\n\nfrom various persons and organizations throughout the United States, he said.\n\nOn July 28, 1950, HIXENBAUGH telephonically communicated with the Louisville Division stating that he had been advised that a representative of one of the Army Intelligence Agencies would be in Louisville on Saturday, July 29, 1950, to view the film. He expressed fear that the persons who might be contacting him might be unauthorized individuals and asked if he could bring the film to the FBI office for clearance. HIXENBAUGH was advised that the Bureau did not clear employees of other agencies and if he had doubt as to their authenticity he should check with the agency they professed to represent. HIXENBAUGH was advised that in the event they were not representatives of the agency they professed to represent, the information should be furnished this office and appropriate action would be taken under the Impersonation Statute.\n\nOn July 29, 1950, ROBERT STEINAU, 1608 South Second Street, Louisville, staff photographer for the Courier-Journal, a newspaper of general circulation published in Louisville, Kentucky, personally called at the Louisville Office. STEINAU stated that he and WILLIAM DAVIS, who is in charge of photographers for both the Courier-Journal and Louisville Times, doubted the authenticity of the photographs taken by HIXENBAUGH and went on to state that approximately two years ago HIXENBAUGH took what he claimed was a night photograph of a \"flying disk\". The photograph was published at that time in the Louisville Times and showed a streak of light across the heavens. STEINAU said that he and DAVIS subsequently were advised by a friend of HIXENBAUGH that the picture was \"a fraud\". The friend related that HIXENBAUGH was lying on his back on the ground with his camera pointing toward the sky when the friend flipped one or more lighted matches across the focal plane of the camera.\n\nSTEINAU said that HIXENBAUGH enjoys a poor reputation among other staff photographers of the Courier-Journal and Louisville Times and he believes HIXENBAUGH perpetrated both the original hoax concerning the flying disk and this later \"hoax\" concerning the flying saucer to attract attention to himself. STEINAU produced a print made from three frames of the original motion picture negative submitted by HIXENBAUGH for television use. He also furnished an enlargement of one of the frames. He called attention to the fact that the trees appearing in the photograph and the airplane appearing in the center background both are out of focus and appear\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ls #62-O\n\n\"fuzzy\". STEINAU called attention to the fact that the dot appearing in the picture which was termed a \"flying saucer\" by HIXENBAUGH appears in sharp detail. This, according to STEINAU, would indicate that the disk was closer to the camera then either the trees or airplane. Although the pictures were taken at 64 frames per second, which is calculated, according to STEINAU, to produce slow motion action, the airplane appears in only the first few frames of the negative and then disappears. The \"saucer\" appears stationary during most of the frames but eventually appears to be growing smaller in the distance.\n\nSTEINAU says he does not know how HIXENBAUGH performed the \"trick photography\" but suggests that it could be done easily by focusing the camera at a spot on a window and then moving the camera in a straight line away from the window, thus giving the illusion that the spot was disappearing into the distance.\n\nFor the further information of the Bureau it should be noted that the photographic department of the Courier-Journal and The Louisville Times, under the direction of WILLIAM DAVIS, furnishes staff photographs for both the Courier-Journal and the Louisville Times, which newspapers are operated under one ownership.\n\nThe above is furnished for the Bureau's information.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2 THE LOUISVILLE TIMES\nMovies Snapped of Sky Disk\nBy Alert Times Photographer\nYes, we have some flying saucers today, and for the first time, here are moving pictures for proof.\nMany have reported seeing the saucers but it remained for Al Hixenbaugh to do something about it—with his trusty 16 mm. magazine-loading movie camera.\n\"Hix,\" Times staff photographer, took 50 feet of film in which the bright flying object shows clearly in all. Army officials have been informed and have indicated eagerness to examine the pictures.\nThe photographer was at Longest and Everett Avenues, near his home at 2205 Longest, at 4:15 p.m. yesterday. He was on his way to take some movies of birds.\n* * *\nSuddenly he heard the roar of a big plane—a twin-motored DC-3—and glanced overhead. At first he thought it was a jet plane. Then he looked to the west of the plane, which was flying southwest toward Standiford Field—and saw the large disk. It had a slight corona around it and seemed to be lower than the plane.\nHe aimed his camera and fired. While he ground out the film, he said, the object appeared motionless for about 10 seconds.\n\"It stood practically still, like a balloon,\" he said.\nThen it began to get smaller, finally vanishing into the west. While the \"saucer\" appears on all of the film he took, the plane was out of the picture field quickly, appearing only on about 10 feet. The disk was within his vision \"about a minute.\"\n* * *\n\"Hix\" contacted the newsroom at WHAS and from there Jerry Gammons called Standiford and Bowman Fields and weather officials. None had heard any reports of a \"flying saucer.\" He was advised to inform military officials at Godman Field.\nGodman said it would notify flight headquarters at Wright-Patterson Field which might send an aide to examine the films.\nHere's Real Flying Saucer, If There Is One\nBy Times Staff Photographer\nThis is what a \"flying saucer\" looks like, if there really is such a thing. Al Hixenbaugh, Times' photographer, snapped movies of the object yesterday. The object appears almost as big as the twin-motored DC-3 to the right.\nThe Louisville Times\nLouisville, Kentucky\nJune 28, 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Director, FBI\nFROM : SAC, Chicago\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n(Bufile 62-83894)\nDATE: August 2, 1950\nReBulet July 28, 1950.\nThe Bureau is advised that the information set forth in Chicago let dated July 18, 1950 and the information submitted to the Bureau by Chicago let dated July 31, 1950 entitled \"ROBERT R. PETRONE, INFORMANT, FLYING DISCS\" has been submitted to OSI.\nWJR-JCS\n100-18999\nRECORDED - 103\nEX-71\n62-83894\nAUG 4 1950\n63 AUG 10 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Director, FBI\nFROM : SAC, Chicago\nSUBJECT: ROBERT R. PETRONE, INFORMANT\nFLYING DISCS\nDATE: July 31, 1950\nAIR MAIL\nSPECIAL DELIVERY\nOn July 28, 1950, Mr. ROBERT R. PETRONE, Publisher, Midwest Times, 3437 West Chicago Avenue, Chicago, phone KEdzie 3-8400, brought to this office the original letter and envelope attached, postmarked July 25, 1950 at Chicago, which letter is quoted below:\n\"New Flying Saucer\n\"Since we are on the brink of a third world conflict, the world is more air concious than ever. Aviation in some phases is yet in its pioneering days. Much talk goes on about the flying saucers or discs. The saucer we speak about, is not a military secret, and is not yet owned by any government. The flying saucer which was seen over south Chicago last April is a large fuel tank with crystal glass wings. It has two large jet engines on both sides. It is radion controled. It resembles a saucer very much when in flight. The wings cannot be seen on a clear day. This is so it is a most difficult target for anti aircraft gunners. The reason for the large flat gas or fuel tank is to give the ship a long range for atomic bombing. The ship was designed by FRED SPAUNHOLDT, a former 'Linco' skywriter, FRANK HOOCHPAW, aircraft mechanic, and CARL TEICHMAN, German World War I ace. The ship was financed by HOWARD HUGHES, millionaire aviation enthusiast. It is now being tested by the Glen F. Martin Aircraft Co., makers of the Martin Marauder. The craft is only made for one way trips. It has a range of 4000 miles, ceiling of 25,000 feet, and a speed of 750 miles per hour. So far only a few of these craft have been made, and they usually are pitched in the lake or ocean as they cannot be landed. They are merely to carry a bomb of high destruction to enemy country. They have no wheels, but small steel rails on the bottom from which they take off. All other mechanism can be explained in detail. The man who welded the ship says it is by far the best long range bombing instrument he has ever seen. The name of the ship is the 'Danse Macabre'.\"\n\"Editor\n\"In a few weeks zinc cuts showing 3 views of craft will be sent to you.\"\nEnclosure\nKRS:bam\n100-18999\n\"Yours truly,\n\"/s/ ALBERT HOLMBERG\"\nRECORDED - 113\nINDEXED - 113\nAUG 4 1950\nEX-83\n62-83894-242\n55 AUG 11 1950"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI, 7/31/50\n\nMr. PETRONE states that no one connected with the Midwest Times knows of anyone named \"ALBERT HOLMBERG\", nor do they know of anyone who lives in the circulation area of their paper with that name. The Midwest Times has a circulation of 15,000 copies which papers are distributed in a small area in the northwest section of Chicago.\n\nMr. PETRONE stated he did not want to publish this letter as he felt the Army desired that the matter be kept confidential. He will contact this office again if he receives the \"zinc cuts\" or has any other correspondence from HOLMBERG. He felt that HOLMBERG might send the same information to other publishers who may print the story.\n\nThere was no return address for HOLMBERG on either the envelope or the letter. There is, however, an ALBERT HOLMBERG listed in the telephone directory at 2065 North Kedzie and an ALBERT F. HOLMBERG at 11328 South Prairie Street, Chicago.\n\nThis information is being transmitted to the Bureau for such action as it deems appropriate.\n\nThe Chicago indices are negative regarding HOLMBERG.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-242"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CHICAGO JUL 25 6 PM 1950 ILL.\n\nMIDWEST NEWS\n3435 W. CHICAGO AVE.\nCHICAGO, ILL.\n\n62-83894-242"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3\nMartin Aircraft Co. Makers of the Martin Marauder. The craft is only made for one way trips. It has a range of 4000 miles. Ceiling of 25000 feet, and a speed of 350 miles per hour. So far only a few of these craft have been made, and they usually are pitched in the lake or ocean, as they cannot be landed. They are merely to carry a bomb of high destruction to enemy country. They have no wheels, but small steel rails on the bottom from which they take off. del other mechanism can be explained in detail.\n\n4\nThe man who welded the ship says it is big for the best long range bombing instrument he has ever seen. The name of the ship is the \"Danse Macabre\".\n\nEditor\nIn a few weeks zinc cuts showing 3 views of craft will be sent to you.\n\nYours truly\nAlbert Holmberg"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"New Flying Saucer\nSince we are on the brink\nof a third world conflict, the\nwould is more air conscious\nthan ever. Aviation in some\nphases, is yet in its pioneering\ndays. Much talk goes on about\nthe flying saucers or discs.\nThe saucer we speak about,\nis not a military secret, and\nis not yet owned by any\ngovernment. The flying saucer\nwhich was seen over south\nChicago last april, is a large\nfuel tank with crystal glass\nwings. It has two large\njet engines on both sides.\nIt is radion controled. It\nresembles a saucer very\nmuch when in flight\n62-83894-242"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The wings cannot be seen\non a clear day. This is so\nit is a most difficult\ntarget for anti aircraft\ngunners. The reason for the\nlarge flat gas or fuel tank\nis to give the ship a\nlong range for atomic\nbombing. The ship was\ndesigned by Fred Spaunholtz,\na former \"Zeppo\" skywriter.\nFranks Hoochpaw, aircraft\nmechanic, and Carl Teichman\nGerman world war I ace.\nThe ship was financed by\nHoward Hughes, millionaire\naviation enthusiast. It is now\nbeing tested by the Glenn J.\n62-83894-242"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"To the F.B.I.\nJuly 20/50\nDear Sir:\nThe answer to your letter as near as I know\nThis letter is to the best of my Memory\nabout the Flast Sauser that hit the top\nof a fig ash tree my truck park under\nit at night. FLYING SAUCERS\nWhen I came to the to go to work\nI heard a whistly sound just as\nI was start to git in the truck\nand then the Sauser hit the top of\nthe tree an I taken of an left the truck\nand call Oak Park all Police at July 20/50\nat 6.29 am o'clock.\nThen a fort a month later I found\na note in the truck seat when I was call\nout on a trip at 930 o'clock at night\nI taken to the Police here.\nas near as I Can Remfer it Spict\nLeave the cote that is a Peal off Paper\nthat was in the Sauser leave it out\nwhere the Right Party can git.\non the Secon Paper it said the Sauser\nwas not ment for you that is a code\nof make of big city an atomic plant\nRECORDED - 108\nBisness dont mis.\n62-83894-"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"If that would seem Lookin to then\nit might seem a Grate iger now\nI sent it to the Republic Partie\nat Washington D.C.\nF Ray Turner\n217 Maple ave.\nOak Park Ill."} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-244\nCHANGED TO\n62-48563-7X\nNOV 13 1951\nmmb-\nC"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Walter D. Jones\n36 King Street, East\nToronto, Ontario, Canada\n\nDear Mr. Jones:\n\nI have received your letter of August 29, 1950, and want to thank you for bringing the information contained therein to the attention of this Bureau.\n\nThe Department of the Air Force is the Department of this Government engaged in coordinating and analyzing the type of information contained in your referenced letter. I have taken the liberty, therefore, in furnishing your letter to that Department for their attention.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\n62-83894-240\nEHM:eas\n\nNote: Bureau files reflect that a Walter D. Jones in 1944 was the Treasurer of the National Council for Canadian-Soviet Friendship located at 80 King Street, Toronto, Ontario. The RCMP advised in February, 1945 that Walter D. Jones was a prominent Canadian businessman and was not known to be connected in any way with the Labor Progressive Party (CP of Canada). The RCMP further advised that the National Council for Canadian-Soviet Friendship was formed primarily by persons prominent in the business life of Canada. According to the RCMP, the list of patrons included the Prime Minister of Canada, many of the Lieutenant Governors of the Provinces, the Premiers of the Provinces and several of the Chief Justices of Canada.\n(100-309856, serials 1 & 5)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ad4315bab06aa165","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WALTER D JONES\n36 KING STREET EAST\nTORONTO, ONT.\n\nAugust 29, 1950.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nIt has come to my attention that one of the Departments of the F.B.I. is collecting information from eyewitnesses of the phenomenon commonly termed 'Flying Saucers' and with this in view I have the following incident to relate.\n\nOn July 19th at 10:30 I was looking over my farm facing west. The moon was fairly full and there was a low ceiling of light clouds. Much to my amazement I saw through the clouds a hazy object of light coming towards the farmhouse with incredible speed. It circled before reaching the farmhouse and continued to do so, neither the height or the orbit of which I could determine. I could not distinguish its shape, as it was above the clouds and I could only see a filter of light.\n\nThis was an entity in itself or within itself. It did not come from a beam either above or below. At times it seemed to retard its speed and then would circle in the opposite direction. After watching this spectacle for about ten minutes I felt in justice to myself that I should have corroboration so I called to my houseman who was in bed who came out in slippers and bathrobe and watched it with me for about ten minutes with mouth agape. I continued to watch it in all for about thirty-five minutes, from 10:30 p.m. to 11:05 p.m. when it disappeared in a westerly direction.\n\nI am passing this along to you for what it is worth. If you are not interested throw it in the waste paper basket.\n\nYours very truly,\n\nRECORDED - 90\nINDEXED - 90\nWalter D Jones\n\nThe Federal Bureau of Investigation,\nDepartment of Investigation,\nWashington, D.C.,\nU.S.A.\nP.S. My farm is located twelve miles north east of City Hall, Toronto."} {"doc_id":"ad5ad6e24da7a7e3","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260608\nSECRET//NOFORN\nMisrep prod-dod-11937169\nNarrative\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 281732:00ZOCT25, [REDACTED] TASKED D[REDACTED] WITH 7 LINE.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 281953:00ZOCT25, [REDACTED] DEPARTED [REDACTED] VIA SLR.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT [REDACTED] ARRIVED ON STATION AND [REDACTED]\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 290025:00ZOCT25[REDACTED] CONDUCTED [REDACTED] ON [REDACTED] [REDACTED] STA IVO 3[REDACTED] (SEE ISR 1).\n(SECRET//NOFORN) AT 290141:00ZOCT25, [REDACTED] OBSERVED UAP IVO [REDACTED] (SEE UAP 1).\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT [REDACTED] RETURNED TO BASE.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT [REDACTED] WENT OFF STATION AND TERMINATED [REDACTED].\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 291605:00ZOCT25, [REDACTED] LANDED AT [REDACTED] VIA SLR.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 291615:00ZOCT25, [REDACTED] LAST ENGINE SHUTDOWN.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) FULL MOTION VIDEO WAS EXPLOITED BY [REDACTED].\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) [REDACTED].\n(S/RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n-\nAdmin\nCLASSIFICATION\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: NOFORN\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20501028\nOPERATION\n3.5C. (B)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nDECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"ad5ad6e24da7a7e3","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260608\nSECRET//NOFORN\n• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): ACC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\nMSGID\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 11 ATKS\n• Mission Wing: 432 AEW\n• Submit Date:\nMSNID\n• Tasking Order (ATO): FOUND IN ATO\n• Mission Type: [REDACTED]\n• ATO Mission Number: [REDACTED]\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: AIR FORCE\nPoc\nPOC\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: [REDACTED]\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\nQC\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: [REDACTED]\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n3.5C. (B)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nDECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"ad5ad6e24da7a7e3","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260608\nSECRET//NOFORN\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: [REDACTED]\nAPPROVER\n• Rank: SSgt\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: [REDACTED]\n• Wing: [REDACTED]\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: [REDACTED]\nINGEST\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\nACEQUIP\nACEQUIP\n• Aircraft Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• Radar Name or Destination: -\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: -\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• MWS Name or Designator: -\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• IRCM Name or Designator: -\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• ECM Name or Designator: -\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• CMD Name or Designator: -\n• Chaff Designator: -\n3.5C. (B)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nDECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"ad5ad6e24da7a7e3","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260608\nSECRET//NOFORN\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: -\n• Flare Designator: -\n• Num Flares: -\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator: -\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Num Towed Decoys: -\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Gun Name or Designator: -\n• Num Gun Rounds: -\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: [REDACTED]\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: [REDACTED]\n• Additional Avionics: [REDACTED]\n• Data Link: -\n• Gentext: (SECRET//REL TO USA, MESF) [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nTimeline\nTakeoff\n• Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): [REDACTED]\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): [REDACTED]\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): [REDACTED]\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 281953:00ZOCT25\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Mission Canceled:\nLanding\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): [REDACTED]\n• Last Land Time: 291605:00ZOCT25\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 291615:00ZOCT25\n• Total Mission Time: [REDACTED]\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\nISR\n3.5C. (B)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nDECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"ad5ad6e24da7a7e3","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260608\nSECRET//NOFORN\n• Time-on Station DTG: 290025:00ZOCT25\n• Time-off Station DTG: 291222:00ZOCT25\n• Aircraft Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• Msn Type: [REDACTED]\n• Primary Sensor: [REDACTED]\n• Sensors Available: [REDACTED]\n• Tasking Type: Planned\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: [REDACTED]\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed: Unknown\n• Number of EEIs:\n• Global Campaign Plan: GCP - VEO (violent extremist group)\nGENTEXT/ISR\n• Gentext: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) [REDACTED] COORDINATED WITH [REDACTED] [REDACTED] PRIOR TO TAKE OFF. PRE-COORDINATION WAS SATISFACTORY DUE TO TIMING/QUALITY OF PRODUCTS. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED 7-LINE FOR MISSION ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF INFORMATION (EEIS).\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) BACKGROUND: [REDACTED] REQUESTS [REDACTED] AND REPORTING ON THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS IOT COUNTER SMUGGLING OPERATIONS, ENABLE FORCE PROTECTION, AND TO COUNTER ISIS AND ITN [REDACTED].\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) FROM [REDACTED] ARRIVED ON TARGET ISO [REDACTED] AND CONDUCTED TARGET DEVELOPMENT IVO [REDACTED]\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) PLEASE SEE ATTACHED TARGET LOG AND POST MISSION PRODUCT FOR SPECIFIC ACTIVITY DURING MISSION.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 291222:00ZOCT25, [REDACTED] STA CLEARED [REDACTED] OFF TASKING AND [REDACTED] RETURNED TO BASE.\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n• Supported Unit: [REDACTED]\n• Supported Operation: [REDACTED]\n• Precoord Time: [REDACTED]\n3.5C. (B)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nDECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"ad5ad6e24da7a7e3","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260608\nSECRET//NOFORN\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: -\n• WX Mission Impact: No Impact\n• Location of WX Occurrence:\n• Cause of Impact:\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: Unknown\n• Gentext: -\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: [REDACTED]\n• Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: AREC\n• JTAC Callsign: -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: [REDACTED]\n• Total Time On Station: [REDACTED]\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 290141:00ZOCT25\n• UAP Event Type: UAP Incident\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations: FAST MOVING SPEEDS UP TO 500MPH\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions: -\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: [REDACTED]\n• Tail Number: [REDACTED]\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: [REDACTED]\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: ~22,500 FT\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory: -\n\n3.5C. (b)(6)\nDECLASSIFIED\nSECRET//NOFORN\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"ad5ad6e24da7a7e3","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260608\nSECRET//NOFORN\n• Observer Assessment of UAP: [REDACTED]\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: -\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns):: -\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters: [REDACTED]\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable): -\n• Operational Range: -\n• UAP Physical State: Solid\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n• UAP Propulsion Means: -\n• UAP Payload:\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe): -\n• UAP Signatures: -\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): -\n• UAP RF Frequency: -\n• UAP RF Duration: -\n• UAP Event Serial Number: -\n• UAP Effects on Persons: NO\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe): -\n• UAP Effects on Equipment: -\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Rank/Grade: A1C / E-3\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE): [REDACTED]\n• Observer Engagement of UAP (yes/no; if yes, describe): -\n• First Coordinate: [REDACTED]\n• First Seen Radius: 5\n• Last Accuracy: Estimated\n• Last Coordinate: [REDACTED]\n• Last Seen Radius: 5\n• Kinetic Altitude Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Altitude: -\n• Kinetic Depth Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Depth: -\n• Kinetic Velocity Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Velocity: -\n• Kinetic Trajectory Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Trajectory: -\n• UAP Date of DoD Acquisition: 290145:00ZOCT25\n• UAP Reaction to Observation, Interrogation, Engagement (yes/no; if yes, describe): -\n• UAP Anomalous Characteristics/ Behaviors: -\n• First Accuracy: Estimated\n• Call Sign: [REDACTED]\n\n3.5C. (b)(6)\nDECLASSIFIED\nSECRET//NOFORN\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"ad5ad6e24da7a7e3","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260608\nSECRET//NOFORN\n• UAP First Seen Location:\n• UAP Last Seen Location:\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): (SECRET//NOFORN) FROM 290141:00ZOCT2025 TO 290150:00ZOCT25, [REDACTED] OBSERVED A UAP ON FEED WHILE ON TGT, [REDACTED] STATED IT LOOKED LIKE A WHITE ROUND ORBIT, TRACKED FOR[REDACTED] OBSERVED UAP MOVING AS FAST AS 500MPH, AND [REDACTED] LOST UAP IVO [REDACTED]\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): (SECRET//NOFORN) FROM 290141:00ZOCT2025 TO 290150:00ZOCT25, [REDACTED] OBSERVED A UAP ON FEED WHILE ON TGT, [REDACTED] STATED IT LOOKED LIKE A WHITE ROUND ORBIT, TRACKED FOR [REDACTED] OBSERVED UAP MOVING AS FAST AS 500MPH, AND [REDACTED] LOST UAP IVO 3[REDACTED] THERE IS NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED AT THIS TIME.\n\n3.5C. (b)(6)\nDECLASSIFIED\nSECRET//NOFORN\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"ad84e65932b65439","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Misrep 4782130\nNarrative\n[REDACTED] AT 2302Z, [1.4a] TOOK OFF FROM OKAS. AT 2313Z, [1.4a] HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE. FROM 2346Z TO 1902Z, [1.4a] COLLECTED SIGINT VIA AIRHANDLER. FROM 0318Z TO 1829Z, [1.4a] SUPPORTED NAVCENT FOR OPERATION [1.4a] IVO ARABIAN GULF, STRAIT OF HORMUZ AND GULF OF OMAN. SEE ISR LINE 1. AT 0408Z, [1.4a] RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARD CALL LINE 1. AT 0421Z, [1.4a] RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARD CALL LINE 2. AT 1141Z, [1.4a] RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARD CALL LINE 3. AT 1248Z, [1.4a] LOST LINK. SEE EMI LINE 1. AT 1414Z, [1.4a] LOST LINK. SEE EMI LINE 2. AT 1732Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED A UAP. SEE OBS LINE 1. AT 1829Z, [1.4a] WAS CLEARED TO RTB. AT 1923Z, [1.4a] HANDED BACK TO THE LRE. AT 1958Z, [1.4a] LANDED AT OKAS. FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS1. 20.9 MISSION HOURS, 15.2 IMINT HOURS, 1 IMINT TASKING PROSECUTED, 19.3 SIGINT HOURS, 1 SIGINT TASKING PROSECUTED, 2 TOTAL TASKINGS PROSECUTED\nAdmin\nCLASSIFICATION\n• Classification: [REDACTED]\n• Associated Caveats: [REDACTED]\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20450301\nOPERATION\n• Operation: [1.4a]\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): ACC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\nMSGID\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 482ATKS\n• Submit Date (Auto-generated):\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 001"} {"doc_id":"ad84e65932b65439","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MSNID\n• Tasking Order (ATO) [1.4a]\n• Mission Type: AREC\n• ATO Mission Number: [1.4a]\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\nPoc\nPOC\n• Rank: SSgt\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 482ATKS\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\nQC\n• Rank: Ctr\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 12AF, Det 3, PAROC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\nAPPROVER\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: [3.5c, (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 609th A0C\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [3.5c,(b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c,(b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 002"} {"doc_id":"ad84e65932b65439","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INGEST\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\nACEQUIP\nACEQUIP\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Radar Name or Destination: -\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: -\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• MWS Name or Designator: -\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• IRCM Name or Designator: -\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• ECM Name or Designator: -\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• CMD Name or Designator: -\n• Chaff Designator: -\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: -\n• Flare Designator: -\n• Num Flares: -\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator: -\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Num Towed Decoys: -\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Gun Name or Designator: -\n• Num Gun Rounds: -\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4(a)\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: ANDAS4\n• Additional Avionics: AH_GMESH\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 003"} {"doc_id":"ad84e65932b65439","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Data Link: -\n• Gentext: -\nTimeline\nLanding\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Last Land Time: 161958:00ZSEP20\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 162008:00ZSEP20\n• Total Mission Time: 20 hours 56 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\nTakeoff\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): [1.4a]\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 152302:00ZSEP20\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Mission Canceled:\nOn Station\n• Time On Station DTG: 152313:00ZSEP20\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: AREC\n• JTAC Callsign: -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\nISR\n• Time-on Station DTG: 160318:00ZSEP20\n• Time-off Station DTG: 161829:00ZSEP20\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Msn Type: AREC\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 004"} {"doc_id":"ad84e65932b65439","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Primary Sensor: ANDAS4\n• Sensors Available: AH\\GMESH\n• Tasking Type: PLANNED\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 40RCQ31[1.4a]05[1.4a]\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\nGENTEXT/ISR\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] [1.4a] COORDINATED WITH NAVCENT 24 HOURS PRIOR TO TAKE OFF. PRECOORD WAS SATISFACTORY. AT 0318Z, [1.4a] ARRIVED ON STATION ISO NAVCENT FOR OPERATION [1.4a] TO CHARACTERIZE IRIN\\IRGCN VESSELS, UAS ACTIVITY, ACTIVITY OUTSIDE OF PORTS, AND TO ESTABLISH PATTERN OF LIFE. FROM 0318Z TO 1829Z, [1.4a] CONDUCTED SCANS IAW THE TARGET DECK IN THE ARABIAN GULF (AG). AT 0930Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED AN IR-SA-5 LAUNCHER IVO 40RCP03[1.4a]61[1.4a] ON ABU MUSA ISLAND. AT 1321Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED 2X POSSIBLE HOUDONG WPTG IVO (39RXL60[1.4a]26[1.4a]) DOCKED PIERSIDE. AT 0408Z, [1.4a] RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARD CALL LINE 1. AT 0421Z, [1.4a] RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARD CALL LINE 2. AT 1141Z, [1.4a] RECEIVED A GUARD CALL. SEE GUARD CALL LINE 3. AT 1732Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED NOTEWORTHY ACTIVITY. SEE OBS LINE 1. AT 1829Z, [1.4a] WAS CLEARED OFF TASKING AND RETURNED TO BASE (RTB)\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n• Supported Unit: NAVCENT\n• Supported Operation: OPERATION [1.4a]\n• Precoord Time: 24 HOURS\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\nWEATHER\n• Weather: (U) WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR\nEFFECTIVENESS\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: No\n• Gentext: -\nOff Station\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 005"} {"doc_id":"ad84e65932b65439","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Time Off Station DTG: 161923:00ZSEP20\n• Total Time On Station: 20 hours 10 minutes\n\nGUARDCALL\n\n• GUARDCALL DTG: 160408:00ZSEP20\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Ground Station Callsign: IRANIAN AIR DEFENSE\n• Aircraft Location: 40RCP76[1.4a]96[1.4a]\n• Aircraft Heading: 360T\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL180\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Number of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\n• Guardcall Tone: DIRECTIVE\n\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 0408Z, [1.4a] WAS HAILED ON GUARD [1.4g] FREQ BY IRANIAN AIR DEFENSE. STANDARD ORDERS GIVEN. [1.4a] RESPONDED WITH THE STANDARD RESPONSE. NO IMPACT TO MISSION\n\nGUARDCALL\n\n• GUARDCALL DTG: 160421:00ZSEP20\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Ground Station Callsign: IRANIAN AIR DEFENSE\n• Aircraft Location: 40RCP76[1.4a]96[1.4a]\n• Aircraft Heading: 010M\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL180\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Number of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\n• Guardcall Tone: DIRECTIVE\n\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 0421Z, [1.4a] WAS HAILED ON GUARD [1.4g] FREQ BY IRANIAN AIR DEFENSE. STANDARD ORDERS GIVEN. [1.4a] RESPONDED WITH THE STANDARD RESPONSE. NO IMPACT TO MISSION\n\nGUARDCALL\n\n• GUARDCALL DTG: 161141:00ZSEP20\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]"} {"doc_id":"ad84e65932b65439","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Ground Station Callsign: IRANIAN AIR DEFENSE\n• Aircraft Location: 40RCP2 [1.4a]80[1.4a]\n• Aircraft Heading: 277 T\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL040\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Number of Calls Noted from the Same Agency: 1\n• Guardcall Tone: PROFESSIONAL\n\nGENTEXT/GUARDCALL\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 1141Z, [1.4a] WAS HAILED ON GUARD 243.000 FREQ BY IRANIAN AIR DEFENSE. STANDARD ORDERS GIVEN. [1.4a] RESPONDED WITH STANDARD RESPONSE. NO IMPACT TO MISSION\n\nEMI\n\n• EMI Start DTG: 161248:00ZSEP20\n• EMI End DTG: 161259:00ZSEP20\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Type of EMI: UNKNOWN\n• EMI Duration: 11 minutes\n• Aircraft Location: 39RXK01[1.4a]56[1.4a]\n• Aircraft Heading: 290 T\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL180\n• Aircraft Airspeed: 89 KIAS\n• Mission Changed: Flight Path Deviation\n• EMI Impact to System: Complete\n• EMI Location: 39RXK01[1.4a]56[1.4a]\n• Affected System: [1.4g]\n• Frequency Affected: [1.4g]\n• Mission Impact: MEDIUM\n\nGENTEXT/EMI\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 1248Z, [1.4a] EXPERIENCED LOST LINK TO POSSIBLE [1.4g] [1.4a] REGAINED LINK AT 1259Z. THIS RESULTED IN A MEDIUM IMPACT TO THE MISSION\n\nJSIR ID330412\n\nEMI\n\n• EMI Start DTG: 161414:00ZSEP20\n• EMI End DTG: 161441:16ZSEP20"} {"doc_id":"ad84e65932b65439","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Type of EMI: UNKNOWN\n• EMI Duration: 27 minutes\n• Aircraft Location: 39RVM92[1.4a]89[1.4a]\n• Aircraft Heading: 264 T\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL180\n• Aircraft Airspeed: 120KIAS\n• Mission Changed: Flight Path Deviation\n• EMI Impact to System: Complete\n• EMI Location: 39RVM92[1.4a]89[1.4a]\n• Affected System: [1.4g]\n• Frequency Affected: [1.4g]\n• Mission Impact: MEDIUM\n\nGENTEXT/EMI\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 1414Z, [1.4a] EXPERIENCED LOST LINK TO POSSIBLE [1.4g] [1.4a] REGAINED 1441Z. THIS RESULTED IN A MEDIUM IMPACT TO THE MISSION\n\nJSIR ID330414\n\nOBSERVATION\n\n• Observation DTG: 161732:00ZSEP20\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Aircraft Location: 39RVM51[1.4a]70[1.4a]\n• Aircraft Heading: -\n• Aircraft Altitude: FL180\n• Aircraft Airspeed: 90 KIAS\n• Relative Bearing or Clock Position: -\n• Range: -\n• Killbox & Keypad: -\n• Observed Activity Location: 39RVM51[1.4a]70[1.4a]\n• Observed Activity Description: UAP\n• Method of Observation: FMV\n\nGENTEXT/OBSERVATION\n\n• Gentext: [REDACTED] AT 1732Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED A UAP IVO 39RVM51[1.4a]70[1.4a]\n\nWEATHER"} {"doc_id":"ad84e65932b65439","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Weather: (U) WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n12 January 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-0912-008\n\nMaterials for Advanced Aerospace Platforms\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMaterials for Advanced Aerospace Platforms\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 66\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ....................................................................................iv\n\nLaunch Vehicles ...................................................................................... 1\n\nReusable Crew Modules.......................................................................... 9\n\nReusable Single-Stage-to-Orbit Vehicles ...................................................... 10\nAdvanced Al Alloys ................................................................................ 11\nPolymer Matrix Composites ..................................................................... 11\nAl Matrix Composites............................................................................... 12\nTi Alloys .................................................................................................. 12\nTi Matrix Composites ............................................................................... 14\nNi-base Alloys ......................................................................................... 16\nRefractory Metal Alloys ........................................................................... 18\nCeramic Matrix Composites ..................................................................... 18\nCarbon-Carbon Composites ..................................................................... 19\nTitanium Aluminides ............................................................................... 20\n\nPropulsion Systems................................................................................. 21\n\nSummary and Recommendations ............................................................. 22\n\nFigures\n\n1. Schematic Diagram of Friction Stir Welding ........................................... 2\n2. Specially Modified 747 Transporter Unloading a Boeing 787 Composite\nFuselage Barrel Section ........................................................................ 4\n3. Micrograph Showing Phase Formation at the Surface of a Ti Alloy That has\nBeen Exposed to Air at Elevated Temperature ................................... 13\n4. Cross-Section Micrograph of a Ti Matrix Composite ........................... 15\n\nTables\n\n1. Potential Materials by Use Temperature Regime and Property ........................ 10\n2. Example of Properties of Ti Matrix Composites ................................. 14\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMaterials for Advanced Aerospace Platforms\n\nIntroduction\n\n\"Advanced aerospace platforms\" is a broad topic that can be divided into several narrower subtopics to enable a more concise discussion of materials advances, challenges, and opportunities. Consequently, this document discusses the areas of launch vehicles, space vehicles, and space propulsion systems separately because their key requirements are often application specific, which affects materials selection decisions. In addition, single-use and reusable boosters have different durability requirements that directly impinge on design and materials selection. Furthermore, current engineering practice has evolved to the point that design synthesis must integrate the structure and construction materials to achieve optimum product performance. For example, the space shuttle was designed to meet customer-imposed mission requirements (range, payload, empty weight, landing capability, and so forth) without significant real-time consideration of materials capability. This approach led to significant compromises at later stages in the shuttle's development and maturation. (Arguably, the shuttle could be designed as a more efficient vehicle today.) In the extreme, a spectacular engineering failure was the National Aerospace Plane (also dubbed the Orient Express), which was launched as a military project and was intended to be a mach 12 reusable strike vehicle. This project rapidly became materials limited and was canceled in 1993, after about $750 million in federal R&D expenditures and a substantial private sector investment. The point is that any \"clean sheet of paper design\" must start with an assessment of the requirements for construction materials and be accompanied by a realistic assessment of the capability of currently available materials to meet these needs. If these two assessments indicate a gap between requirements and existing materials capability, a risk assessment and a risk-mitigation plan must be developed before expending engineering hours and funds.\n\nSince the inception of manned space flight, the approach to design has changed to include the concept of damage tolerance. This shift in design philosophy was prompted by the (eventual) recognition that complex structures cannot be designed and produced with zero defects. With the maturation of fracture mechanics and means of reducing these concepts to practice, the transition from zero defects to defect tolerance became the norm. This new approach in turn led to recognition that high-performance materials required not only high specific strength and stiffness but pacing increases in strength with simultaneous improvements in fracture toughness and fatigue crack growth resistance. The introduction of damage tolerance was accompanied by a renewed emphasis on nondestructive inspection capabilities. This latter thrust was driven by the need to demonstrate the capability to reproducibly locate small flaws that could become failure initiation sites, either because of static or because of cyclic loading conditions. In the case of atmospheric flight, the U.S. Air Force has introduced standards for airframes (the Aircraft Structural Integrity Program) and propulsion systems (the Engine Structural Integrity Program) that tie structural life and reliability to\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthis demonstrated inspections capability. Implementation of these standards, starting with the B-1 bomber and the F-100 and F-110 engines, has dramatically reduced (but not eliminated) the incidence of catastrophic failures of critical components that endanger crews, vehicles, or both.\n\nTaking these changes into account, this document outlines the current situation regarding the design and production of high-performance structures for aerospace platforms, including launch vehicles, space vehicles, and propulsion systems for transporting space vehicles (and payloads) into orbit.\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMaterials for Advanced Aerospace Platforms\n\nLAUNCH VEHICLES\n\nFor the purposes of this document, launch vehicles are defined as the structure that supports and/or encloses the propulsion system, the fuel supply, and the crew or payload module. Launch vehicles today are either single use or multiple use after recovery and extensive refurbishment. This approach adds considerably to the cost of transporting a pound of payload into earth orbit, regardless of whether an unmanned satellite or a manned orbiting crew module that must withstand the temperatures and loads associated with safe reentry to earth. Furthermore, the larger the payloads are, the greater are the reaction forces the launch vehicle must withstand during launch. With the total weight of the payload, the empty weight of the launch vehicle, and fuel all needing to be lifted initially, fuel-efficient propulsion and lightweight launch vehicles are essential to maximizing the payload. Except in the area around the propulsion system exhaust, the temperatures experienced by launch vehicles during launch are not demanding. Therefore, advanced, high-strength aluminum (Al) alloys and polymer matrix carbon fiber composites (PMCs) are prime candidates for the parts of the structure that experience aerodynamic loads and where aerodynamic heating does not exceed about 125 °Celsius. One class of advanced Al alloys is the lithium (Li)-bearing alloys, such as Al alloy 2090. This alloy contains enough Li to reduce its density by 8 percent while increasing the elastic modulus (E) by 10 percent. Other, newer advanced Al alloys, such as 7050 and 2050, have been developed to have improved damage tolerance. These alloys have excellent specific strength at or near room temperature and experience no major loss of ductility at cryogenic temperatures. The newer variants of the 2000 and 7000 Al alloys also have substantially improved resistance to most types of corrosion, including exfoliation and stress corrosion cracking. This can be important in a reusable vehicle.\n\nPerhaps the most important aspect of the improved Al alloys is their higher fracture toughness, accomplished through a combination of alloy composition control and improved processing. In alloy composition control, the concentrations of the residual elements iron (Fe), chromium (Cr), manganese (Mn), and silicon (Si) are reduced at the ingot stage. These elements combine with Al to form hard, brittle intermetallic compounds known as constituent phases. The advanced alloys contain fewer, smaller constituent phases, leading to improved fracture resistance and higher fracture toughness values. In applications such as body skins for commercial aircraft, this improved toughness has enabled an increase in the spacing of the circumferential fuselage frames, or \"hat sections,\" that serve both as stiffeners and as crack stoppers to prevent a catastrophic failure during pressurization. For any given operating stress—in this case the pressurization stress—the spacing of the frames is directly related to the critical crack size of the body skin. Higher toughness alloys have larger critical crack sizes, and the frames can be spaced further apart without increasing the risk of catastrophic failure. The increased spacing ultimately allows a fuselage design that requires fewer frames. Consequently, the airplane benefits from a commensurate reduction both in weight and in manufacturing cost. Similar possibilities exist for the design of a fail-safe launch vehicle that has a lower empty weight. Clearly, the advanced Al alloys offer intrinsic improvements over the alloys used in the Saturn launch vehicle and introduce the prospect of new, more efficient launch vehicle designs.\n\n1"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe newer Al alloys also can be specially processed to render them superplastically formable. This capability opens a realm of possibilities to replace structures that, in the absence of this capability, are machined from thick plate. Very large structures are produced in sections that must be joined. Conventional fusion welding techniques do not work for high-strength Al alloys such as 7075, 7050, 2024, or 2050 because either the welds lead to cracks or the welds made under conditions that avoid cracking have greatly reduced tensile properties. Because these alloys are not amenable to welding, heavier, fatigue-prone mechanically fastened joints must be used. Recently, scientists developed a joining process that permits joining of Al alloys such as 7050. This process, called friction stir welding (FSW), allows joint designs in a variety of configurations that were not considered possible when fusion welding was the only alternative.\n\nIn FSW, a rotating steel tool is inserted into the seam between the two Al alloy pieces to be joined. As the rotating tool is driven forward, the friction between the tool and the work piece generates enough heat to soften the Al alloy without melting it. A schematic of this process is shown in Figure 1.\n\n[Figure 1 diagram: tool rotation; advancing side; retreating side; Tool velocity]\n\nFigure 1. Schematic Diagram of Friction Stir Welding\n\nThe combined action of the rotation and the traversing of the tool essentially kneads the two pieces together, leaving a mechanically sound joint. Although the weld properties may be somewhat inferior to those of the base metal, they are good enough that a relatively small increase in thickness at the joint position can compensate. Although substantial development of the FSW process is ongoing, FSW already has been put into practice. For example, the current external propellant tank on the space shuttle is made from an Al-Li alloy fabricated through FSW. The weight advantage of using welded as opposed to bolted joints in a large structure such as a launch vehicle is considerable. With earlier high-strength alloys such as 7075, concerns about fracture toughness in conjunction with monolithic structures would have caused a welded\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nconstruction to be considered too risky. Today, the combination of higher toughness alloys and FSW opens up the possibility of greater design flexibility resulting in lighter large structures with equal or greater reliability than earlier ones.\n\nIn sum, metallic, nonreusable (at least nominally so) launch vehicles made from advanced Al alloys and fabricated through FSW constitute an incremental but significant improvement over earlier versions.\n\nIn recent years, PMCs have matured significantly. For many components that are not exposed to elevated temperatures, PMCs provide a degree of design flexibility not readily available in metals. Consequently, PMC materials have begun to supplant Al alloys in the construction of commercial subsonic aircraft. The use of PMCs in the empennage of the Boeing 777 was one of the first examples of Al alloys being displaced. Subsequently, the new Boeing 787 has more structure made from composites than from metallic materials. Once PMCs are introduced into a structure in significant quantities, a constraint related to galvanic incompatibility between the PMC structure and any adjoining Al alloys also is introduced. When a PMC structure is in direct contact with an Al alloy structure, catastrophic corrosion of the Al alloy components can occur. In the Boeing 787, the remedy for this concern is the use of titanium (Ti) alloys in areas where there is direct contact between the metallic and the PMC structures. This is directly analogous to the plastic bushing a plumber puts in the joint between copper and iron piping. Notwithstanding this constraint, the specific strength and stiffness of PMC structures make a compelling argument for their application in high-performance structures, such as launch vehicles.\n\nComposite structures can be manufactured using one of three methods: hand layup of pre-preg, automated tow placement, and resin transfer molding.\n\n• The most rudimentary of these, but also the most flexible, is hand layup of pre-preg. This method uses sheets of material that contain both the fiber and the polymeric matrix (called pre-preg). The polymeric matrix can be either a thermoset (for example, epoxy) or a thermoplastic. Individual plies are cut from the pre-preg typically using a numerically controlled laser or mechanical cutting device and are laid up to form the desired shape. Areas that have heavier loads contain more plies locally, and the plies are cut in an orientation with respect to the fiber direction in the pre-preg to achieve the desired strength relative to the principal load path. These plies are carefully placed according to a drawing (blueprint), making hand layup a labor-intensive process and, therefore, making parts made using this method expensive. During ply placement, it is critical that no ply wrinkles are introduced, as these create severe reductions in the local load-bearing capability of the final component. Once all the plies are in their proper places, the article is placed in a vacuum-tight bag that is evacuated and placed in an autoclave for curing of the epoxy matrix or fusing of the thermoplastic. A disadvantage of a pre-preg whose matrix is a thermoset is limited shelf life. In practice, this is managed to a degree by storing the pre-preg in a freezer to slow the rate of chemical reaction that sets the epoxy. However, this does not completely halt the reaction, causing these materials to have a shelf life beyond which they are not easily manipulated during layup and do not develop full strength after curing in the autoclave. An additional issue is out time—the time the pre-preg can be out of the freezer during layup before the reaction proceeds at an accelerated rate and reaches a point at which the\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nmaterial is not suitable for the reasons stated earlier. Clearly, the time required for layup places practical limitations on component size.\n\n• In automated tow placement, thin ribbons of a pre-preg are fed off a drum or rolled into a computer numerically controlled machine that places them in the desired position. In principle, this process trades recurring labor cost for up-front capital investment (the tow placement machine) and programming time. If the anticipated volume of identical parts is high enough to amortize the capital investment and, particularly, the programming cost, this can be an attractive means of reducing manufacturing costs. For axisymmetric shapes, such as cylinders, this essentially becomes a winding process and is quite efficient. An example of a finished composite fuselage barrel section for the Boeing 787 is shown in Figure 2. For more irregular three-dimensional shapes, such as a spar or a strut, placing the tows becomes much more difficult and presents a fundamental limitation. Consequently, PMC structures with complex shapes are still for the most part made using the hand layup process. A variant of automated tow placement is compression, whereby a preform, made by automated tow placement, is forced by a press into a preshaped die. This process allows fabrication of more complex shapes, but the rigidity of the fiber and the extreme anisotropy of the tows can lead to wrinkles, which are not acceptable because of the reductions in properties these cause.\n\n[Figure 2 photograph: Specially Modified 747 Transporter Unloading a Boeing 787 Composite Fuselage Barrel Section]\n\nFigure 2. Specially Modified 747 Transporter Unloading a Boeing 787 Composite Fuselage Barrel Section\n\n• The third main composite fabrication method, resin transfer molding (RTM), begins with a woven fiber mat or preform. The polymeric matrix is injected into this mat to create a fully dense composite. The major benefit of RTM is that it permits use of a three-dimensional weave that minimizes the risk of delamination between plies. Note that, with the other two methods, the material is reinforced in only two dimensions (the plane of the pre-preg or tows). RTM's limitations include the viscosity of the resins used. If the resin is too viscous, injecting it will either distort the fiber architecture of the woven preform or not fully penetrate the preform,\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nleaving voids. This limitation makes it difficult to use many thermoplastic resins that are otherwise attractive because they are recyclable and have much longer shelf lives than thermosets (epoxies). Another, more obvious limitation of RTM is component size. This is in part because weaving of very large fiber preforms is challenging and requires a very large weaving machine. It also requires a large injection machine capable of multiple injection sites to ensure the complete infiltration necessary to avoid formation of voids.\n\nIn practice, there are several significant challenges associated with manufacturing large PMC structures today. Among these, perhaps the most significant are manufacturing cost and the difficulty associated with making large, nonaxisymmetric components. Large axisymmetric components that can be produced by winding tows of pre-preg are clearly possible today, as demonstrated by the Boeing 787 fuselage whose section is shown in Figure 2. For other shapes, because the load-bearing capability of PMCs depends on the transfer of externally imposed loads to the strong, stiff fibers, joints that intersect the principal load path become problematic. This is because the fibers and, as a direct consequence, the load path are discontinuous, requiring local section size adjustments to offset this local structural inefficiency. Thus, achieving the most structurally efficient use of PMCs requires monolithic structures with continuous fibers. In large structures, this is at best a challenge. Even in the Boeing 787's PMC fuselage, mechanically fastened joints are used to connect adjacent barrel sections. In the fuselage, as in any cylindrical pressure vessel, the principal stresses are hoop stresses stemming from pressurization during flight. However, the compromise in structural efficiency is minimized by the circumferential orientation of the joints. Although these bolted joints add weight, the overall structural efficiency of the PMC structure is still better, albeit considerably more expensive, than a longitudinally and circumferentially stiffened Al structure. The circumferential joints also create discontinuous longitudinal crack paths that improve the structure's damage tolerance. Some of the added expense of the PMC fuselage stems from the use of Ti alloy fasteners because of the galvanic coupling issues that would accompany Al or steel fasteners.\n\nFor other applications, which are limited by different material properties, the PMC system can be tailored to optimize structural performance. This is possible because both the matrix and the fiber can be independently selected. Moreover, the fiber \"architecture\" (fiber orientation, weave geometry, and fiber volume fraction) can be varied spatially to optimize load-bearing capability under complex stress states. For example, again drawing on recent applications in commercial aircraft, the fan blades of the large, high-bypass-ratio turbofan engine (GE90) produced by General Electric for the Boeing 777 are made from PMCs. The limiting design consideration for these fan blades is resistance to bird strikes. To optimize the PMCs' impact resistance, a medium-modulus, high-tensile-strength carbon fiber was selected in combination with a thermoplastic toughened epoxy matrix. Furthermore, the fiber architecture was set to optimize the bending strength under the impact of a bird. The GE90 fan blades are produced by hand layup and are quite costly to produce. In the 10-plus years that these fan blades have been in service, not a single unscheduled engine removal related to the PMC fan blades has occurred. The competitive fan blade technology for B-777-class engines is hollow Ti, which is used by both Pratt & Whitney and Rolls Royce. By all informal accounts, these blades are cost intensive. This example supports the unwritten rule that the pathways leading to high-performance, high-value structures typically are\n\n5"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nnot technology dependent but are cost intensive, no matter what technology is employed to meet the requirements.\n\nAn additional characteristic of PMC structures—one related to the laminated construction of components made by hand layup or automated tow placement methods—is their susceptibility to formation of delaminations when impacted perpendicular to the plane of the plies. This is due to the mismatch in bending stiffness between adjacent plies that have different unidirectional fiber orientations. This mismatch causes shear stresses to develop that can exceed the shear strength of the interlaminate bonds, causing small, embedded cracks to form. Under subsequent inplane compression loading, the laminates bow because of the Poisson stresses and separate because of the lack of an interlaminar bond to hold them together. In significant compression loads, the laminates buckle, and this leads to structural failure. This phenomenon, called compression after impact, is an insidious failure mode because the delaminations are not externally detectable unless ultrasonic inspection methods are used. Sources of such an impact include dropped tools, foreign objects (for example, meteorites), and, perhaps most commonly, hail storms. Ultrasonic inspection, if required, is expensive and time consuming. The latter concern in turn affects vehicle availability and turnaround time. PMC parts made using RTM typically have reinforcing fibers in the through-thickness direction, so concerns about compression after impact are minimal.\n\nThe maximum temperature at which PMCs can be used is limited by PMCs' susceptibility to oxygen degradation of the polymeric matrix. The maximum-use temperature for prolonged exposure is determined by the thermal oxidative stability (TOS) of a particular resin. The TOS, like any chemical reaction, is determined by both time and temperature. The glass transition temperature (Tg) of the polymeric matrix also imposes strength and dimensional stability limitations independent of the TOS limits. This is particularly true for thermoplastics. However, the TOS limits usually impose lower temperature limits than Tg if prolonged thermal exposure is contemplated. Three distinct classes or groups of resins exist, each with a successively higher temperature capability. These are conventional epoxies and most thermal plastics, bismaleimides (BMIs), and linear polyimides. The first class is limited by TOS to about 125° Celsius. BMIs can be used to about 175° Celsius. Linear polyimides, such as the in situ polymerization of monomer reactants (PMR) group of thermosetting formulations, can be used to about 300° Celsius. Many of the PMR resins contain the hazardous compound methylenedianiline, which requires special care during use, including protective clothing to limit personnel exposure (for example, during ply cutting and hand layup). This requirement reduces productivity, adds cost, and creates a degree of liability concern for the manufacturer of the PMC components. For RTM, the BMIs and PMR resins typically have higher viscosity and require commensurately higher injection temperatures to reduce the viscosity to manageable levels for reasons discussed earlier. New resins are constantly being developed, including some with attractive properties. However, many of the sources of these resins are startup companies that exist on R&D funding, often in the form of U.S. government SBIR (Small Business Innovative Research) projects. Such companies are good at innovation but often have limited experience transitioning new products from the laboratory to large-scale production. Furthermore, in the current economic climate, access to sufficient capital to set up production-scale capacity can be a formidable problem for a small company. Larger companies (for example, BASF, DuPont, GE Plastics) typically are not interested\n\n6\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nin materials with small annual sales volume, so even licensing the new material to one of these companies may not be commercially feasible.\n\nThis foregoing discussion highlights a commonly encountered inconsistency between technical innovation and commercial progress. Until a production-scale source exists, pricing of new materials is at best highly uncertain and potentially unstable over time. This is in part due to the uncertainty surrounding demand and the associated volume of material that will be required. Taken together, these factors act as a clear deterrent to the adoption of new materials of literally all classes (polymers, metals, and ceramics).\n\nFor heavily loaded structures or structures that will experience temperatures higher than about 200 °Celsius, Ti alloys are the preferred material class. Ti alloys are about half as dense as steel or Ni-base alloys and possess a density-corrected strength and stiffness competitive with that of other metallic materials. Numerous grades of Ti alloys are in use today, and a strong domestic industrial base of suppliers exists for nearly all these grades. Ti alloys for structural applications can be divided into three groups based on their metallurgy: near α alloys, α+β alloys, and metastable β alloys (commonly called β alloys for short). Both the aircraft and propulsion original equipment manufacturers and several private engineering firms have extensive design experience with Ti alloys. Although most of this experience is with Ti-6Al-4V (Ti-6-4), other alloys also are widely used, particularly in jet engines and liquid-fueled rocket engines. The alloy most likely to be used in a launch vehicle, Ti-6-4, has been available and in use for more than 40 years but is still highly competitive with newer grades in large part because of its versatility. Potential applications of other alloys that have particularly attractive characteristics, such as a higher temperature capability, are discussed in the Reusable Reentry Vehicle and Propulsion Systems sections of this document.\n\nThe most commonly used structural grade of Ti alloy today, Ti-6-4, can be readily fusion welded, formed both by forging and as a sheet product, and conventionally machined, although each of these operations requires special precautions. In addition, the feasibility of friction stir welding has been demonstrated. Ti-6-4 also can be superplastically formed and diffusion bonded, enabling synthesis of innovatively shaped components. For launch vehicles, the most likely application for Ti alloys is in the structure that carries the reactions from the propulsion system to the vehicle itself. These applications typically involve heavy sections to accommodate the large loads, and the main property requirements are high strength, fatigue resistance, and fracture toughness. Ti alloys have been used in both military and commercial aircraft. Heavily loaded components in service today include the wing box of the B-1B bomber (Ti-6-4), the landing gear beam in the B-747 (Ti-6-4), and the landing gear truck beam in the B-777 (higher strength Ti-10V-2Fe-3Al [Ti-10-2-3]). The choice of Ti-10-2-3 for the landing gear truck beam reflects the time-based maturation of the newer β-Ti alloys, such as Ti-10-2-3. These alloys have the advantage of being “deep hardenable”—compared with Ti-6-4, they can develop full strength in thicker sections during heat treatment. For example, that the B-777's truck beam is up to 6 inches thick in some locations factored significantly in the choice of Ti-10-2-3. Because Ti alloys are about half as dense as steel, they are very competitive on a density-corrected basis. However, mass is not the only driver for some applications; the volume of a component also must be compatible with the space available for it. This factor also is a consideration in the choice of Ti-10-2-3 for the B-777 truck beam. And it also applies to an application such as landing gear, because it is retracted into the fuselage for aerodynamic reasons.\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nβ-Ti alloys would be an attractive option for a launch vehicle with a very heavy payload. These alloys can be processed and heat-treated to ultimate tensile strengths greater than 1,300 mega-Pascals (MPa), making them very efficient structural alloys. However, at these strength levels, the fracture toughness is decreased to about 40 MPa-m0.5, making damage tolerance marginal. For example, using a design stress that is two-thirds that of ultimate tensile strength, the critical crack size for an alloy with these properties is about 4 millimeters. Such a small critical crack size poses a challenge to any required field inspections associated with reusability requirements. β-Ti alloys' stiffness also is as much as 10 percent lower than that of α+β alloys. Ten percent lower stiffness generally is not an issue in a tension-loaded structure, but it can be an issue for a compression-loaded structure because of the potential for buckling. Designs with a higher section modulus can eliminate this concern, but the additional shape complexity will almost certainly add cost. In extreme circumstances, Ti alloys can be reinforced with ceramic fibers (typically silicon carbide) to increase their intrinsic stiffness, as will be discussed later.\n\nTi alloys are reactive when exposed to air at temperatures of 550 °Celsius or above. Consequently, any manufacturing operations that exceed this temperature limit must be performed in a protective atmosphere of argon (Ar) or helium (He) gas. An exception occurs during forging if enough excess material is left on the raw forging to contain the oxygen-contaminated layer so it can be machined away during the final machining of the finished component. How to deal with this reactivity issue is well understood, and it poses no concern other than the additional costs associated with the excess material and additional machining. In other operations, such as welding, use of specially designed fixtures incorporating inert shielding gas also effectively eliminates concerns about oxygen contamination. In hot-forming applications, the as-formed part is typically chemically milled to remove the oxygen-rich surface layer because this layer typically has lower ductility and can cause fatigue cracking in service. The practice of eliminating all oxygen-contaminated material has served the aerospace industry well over the years but is quite conservative and restrictive. This matter is discussed in greater detail in the Reusable Reentry Vehicle section of this document.\n\nIn summary, although the choices of materials for launch vehicles are in principle numerous, in practice these choices are reduced by a variety of application-specific considerations that include manufacturing capability for large components and manufacturing cost. The foregoing discussion has attempted to examine the prospects for advanced Al alloys, PMCs, and Ti alloys in light of these perceived practical constraints. On a case-by-case basis, a variety of requirements are imposed by design constraints, which some materials meet more readily than others. In all cases, discussion of available material options was constrained by the assumption that the maximum service temperatures would be relatively low. Consequently, the material classes discussed here are all intended for relatively low-temperature use. The separate case of a reusable single-stage-to-orbit vehicle, where operating temperature requirements are considerably higher, is discussed in a later section of this document. Ultimately, materials are selected to optimize structural performance, and a coordinated approach of materials selection and geometric design is essential to this. Going forward, a design using a synthesis process that treats form, fit, function, and materials capability as equal constraints is needed to achieve true optimum structural efficiency.\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nREUSABLE CREW MODULES\n\nThe concept of manned orbital crew modules has evolved from the Mercury capsules to the Gemini and Apollo programs to the space shuttle, the first fully reusable crew module. The shuttle also has a combined payload bay used for transporting satellites into orbit and hardware for developing the International Space Station and for repairing and refurbishing the Hubble telescope, among other uses. The reusable nature of the shuttle crew module introduced a number of design and materials selection challenges. Perhaps foremost among these is the requirement for a thermal protection system (TPS) that would protect the crew during reentry and also minimize the intermission refurbishment requirements of the spacecraft itself. During the early days of the shuttle development program, there was much initial interest in a metallic TPS because it appeared to better meet the program's needs. Ultimately, however, ceramic tiles were used on the underbody and carbon-carbon composites (C-CCs) were used on the leading edges of the wings. The shuttle design itself can therefore be characterized as a \"cold structure\" with an insulating TPS. For example, much of the shuttle load-bearing structure is made of the Al alloy 2219, in part because it is fusion weldable and in part because it retains its strength at moderately elevated temperatures better than other high-strength Al alloys can. The refurbishment needs of the ceramic shuttle tiles after each flight reputedly are considerable and increase with vehicle age. The C-CC wing leading edges are basically not repairable but require scrutiny. Hindsight shows that C-CCs \"age\" and lose much of their fracture toughness during repeated thermal exposure. (This loss of toughness was a prime factor in the Columbia disaster. Had a metallic heat shield that included the wing leading edges been used, this disaster arguably could have been avoided.) If the discussion of a metallic TPS were held today, the outcome might not be much different. Certainly any serious consideration of a reusable single-stage-to-orbit vehicle today would need to reopen the discussion of a metallic TPS. The challenges and opportunities associated with a metallic TPS are discussed later.\n\nThe design efficiency of an integrated TPS and load-bearing structure is extremely attractive. Such a design requires availability of high-temperature alloys that also have good strength at the moderate temperatures to withstand the aerodynamic and vibrational loads encountered during launch and orbital insertion. Any attractive alloy also must have reasonable intrinsic resistance to oxidation at the reentry temperatures and should be capable of being fabricated into sheet gauges at reasonable cost. Meeting these various requirements in combination becomes quite daunting. Earlier programs such as the DynaSoar reusable reentry glider devoted considerable time and resources to examining the use of refractory alloys such as Mo-0.5%Ti (Moly half Ti) and several Columbia-based alloys for the TPS and some hot structure. All the refractory metal alloys are solid solution strengthened and, consequently, have relatively low ambient temperature strengths. They also are quite dense, making the density-corrected strength even less attractive. Refractory metals and their alloys react extensively when exposed to air at elevated temperatures. Therefore, even if the mechanical property limitations could be overcome, any hot structure would require an oxidation-resistant protective coating. In the case of the DynaSoar program, scientists extensively investigated a surface conversion coating of MoSi2 formed by reacting the Moly half-Ti alloy with Si powder in a high-temperature fluidized bed. With the benefit of hindsight, it is now unclear how a large structure could have been successfully coated in this manner. This is particularly true when the brittle nature of MoSi2 is\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nconsidered in light of the thermal stresses that were certain to develop in a large structure placed in the fluidized bed.\n\nReusable Single-Stage-to-Orbit Vehicles\n\nA reusable single-stage-to-orbit (SSO) vehicle will require metallic materials for the TPS and for much of the other hot structure. This will be challenging from the standpoint of an empty vehicle weight. With the exception of military applications, which are outside the scope of this document, empty vehicle weight is a critical metric because every additional pound of empty weight reduces the payload by the same amount (assuming a fixed propulsion capability). As mentioned earlier, the key to a lightweight vehicle is the use of design methods that integrate the TPS and the load-bearing structure to minimize structural redundancy and single-function structure (for example, a TPS that is not load bearing). Achieving this goal will require new design paradigms that incorporate true synthesis of new structural concepts. In reality, such designs can be completed only if they are based on a detailed set of mission requirements, including the number of missions and expectations for turnaround time between missions. Furthermore, operational parameters such as the value of inserting a pound of payload into orbit are needed to bound the cost of the initial vehicle and the maintenance cost per mission (translated into cost per pound of payload). Absent such specific data, the following discusses possibilities for materials systems that can enable a reusable SSO vehicle. It is perhaps more efficient to discuss these materials according to their principal capability and the anticipated temperature regime in which they can be used most productively. This categorization method is illustrated in Table 1.\n\nTable 1. Potential Materials by Use Temperature Regime and Property\n\nTemperature Regime | Specific Strength | Specific Stiffness | Fatigue Resistance | Fracture Toughness | Creep Resistance\nAmbient up to 250 °C | PMCs; Advanced Al alloys; AMCs*; Ti alloys; TMCs* | PMCs; AMCs; TMCs | PMCs; AMCs; Ti Alloys; TMCs | PMCs; Ti alloys | Ti alloys; TMCs\n250 °C up to 550 °C | Ti alloys; TMCs | TMCs | Ti alloys; TMCs | Ti alloys | Ti alloys; TMCs\nAbove 550 °C | Ni-base alloys; Ti aluminides; Refractory metal alloys; CMCs*; C-C Cs* | Ti aluminides; CMCs; C-CCs | Ni-base alloys; Refractory metal alloys | Ni-base alloys; CMCs; Refractory metal alloys | Ni-base alloys; Ti aluminides; CMCs; Refractory metal alloys; C-C Cs\n\nAMCs = Al matrix composites; TMCs = titanium matrix composites; CMCs = ceramic matrix composites; C-CCs = carbon-carbon composites\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 1 shows there are essentially 10 distinct classes of candidate materials for use in a reusable SSO vehicle. Their usefulness for specific applications and components depends on the operating temperature regime and the design-limiting material property. Some background and characteristics of each of these materials are described in this section. Applications of some of these materials have already been addressed, so the discussion here is limited to applications for a reusable SSO vehicle.\n\nAdvanced Al Alloys\n\nThis class of materials is limited by its temperature capability because, even if used in an embedded structure, the thermal soakback from the hot external structure can lead to softening in real time or overaging during extended exposure (that is, after several missions). Scientists have worked to develop high-temperature powder-metallurgy Al alloys, mainly alloys containing Fe, cobalt (Co) and cesium (Ce) or Mn and Si. These alloys are not routinely produced today owing to a lack of demand stemming in part from their cost and their relative lack of maturity as judged by the high variability in mechanical properties between lots of material. Consequently, the main application for Al alloys is in the crew compartment itself, where temperatures must be maintained at levels that are tolerable for the human occupants. Al alloys have marginal stiffness, even on a density-corrected basis. However, using fabricated panels with Al face sheets and a lightweight core can minimize this limitation. Such panels have a high section modulus, which increases the structural stiffness without adding much weight. Earlier uses of phenolic honeycomb cores experienced only limited success because of the tendency of the core to absorb water from the environment if a breach of the face sheet or the face sheet core bond occurred. Today, Al phenolic honeycomb sandwich construction is unpopular among aircraft and spacecraft designers because of this earlier, unfavorable experience. However, a new possibility for lightweight stiff structures—Al face sheets with a foamed Al alloy core—is worthy of consideration. Considerable progress in making uniform-density Al and other metallic foams has been realized in the past 10 years. This new class of sandwich materials is sufficiently different from the earlier versions to merit a careful evaluation.\n\nPolymer Matrix Composites\n\nAs described in the Launch Vehicle section, polymer matrix composites have excellent strength, stiffness, fatigue resistance, and fracture toughness. All polymeric materials are to some degree susceptible to degradation when exposed to ultraviolet (UV) radiation. For an orbiting vehicle, a major limitation is the effects of UV radiation on the polymer matrix. Given their limited time at altitude, this vulnerability is not an issue for launch vehicles; however, it is a concern for structures that remain in orbit for an extended time at altitudes where the UV intensity is much greater. Although there are coatings that protect substrates (PMCs in this case) from UV radiation, the risk of these coatings being breached and the uncertainty about their effectiveness in orbit make UV exposure an ongoing concern. Any consideration of using PMCs for exterior applications would need to include an evaluation of their effectiveness. As discussed for Al alloys, PMCs also could be considered for interior applications where temperatures are within the material capabilities. As discussed earlier, some polyimide resins are usable up to about 300 °Celsius; therefore, the low density and excellent specific stiffness of PMCs make them viable candidates for some components. As also discussed, some polyimides, such as PMR-15, contain methylenedianiline, and care must be taken to"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nensure that any outgassing that occurs in space would not liberate any of this toxic material—at least not where it could be ingested by the crew.\n\nAl Matrix Composites\n\nAl matrix composites (AMCs) are typically made by mixing short fibers or even particulate silicon carbide (SiC) with Al alloy powder and hot-pressing or mechanically consolidating the mixture by extrusion or forging. AMCs have higher modulus and strength but suffer ductility losses owing to the hard, nondeforming SiC second phase. They also are much better in fatigue because the SiC particles or short fibers mitigate the effects of planar slip in precipitation-hardening alloy matrices. Machining, fusion-welding, or cold-forming AMCs is difficult. Mechanical fastening is possible, but drilling fastener holes is difficult and expensive because the wear caused by the hard, reinforcing phases shortens tool life.\n\nMost of the AMCs produced to date have used relatively simple Al matrix alloys such as 6061 and 5083. This presumably is because of the conventional wisdom that AMCs are not heat treatable and the perception that no benefit is gained by using more complex alloy matrices. This is probably the case for a conventional solution treat-and-age approach. Consequently, there has been little effort to optimize AMC systems. For the right application where AMCs could provide a significant benefit, this could present an opportunity. For example, using the high-temperature Al-Fe-Co-Ce alloy powder as the matrix could prove interesting and might permit use of AMCs at up to 200 °Celsius—a temperature at which Ti alloys do not provide any significant advantage, but one that is too high for conventional Al alloys to be suitable.\n\nIn sum, while AMCs are not really a commercial materials system today, sufficient research has been performed to establish proof of concept. If an adequate market for AMCs were to emerge, the time and cost to make them commercially available could prove acceptable.\n\nTi Alloys\n\nTi alloys also have been discussed earlier, but mainly in the context of heavy-section, large-load-bearing applications for launch vehicles. Here, the potential of Ti alloys for lighter gauge applications in the warm structure and the TPS is considered. Table 1 shows that at intermediate temperatures, Ti alloys are attractive in all aspects except for specific stiffness. What this table does not capture is Ti alloys' propensity to react with oxygen in the air to form an oxygen-stabilized α phase layer on the surface known as α case. An example of α case is shown in Figure 3."} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 3. Micrograph Showing α Phase Formation at the Surface of a Ti Alloy That has Been Exposed to Air at Elevated Temperature\n\nThe α case is harder than the matrix because oxygen is a potent α-phase solid-solution strengthener. As with almost all other strengthening reactions, the increased strength is accompanied by reduced ductility. Again, drawing on conventional wisdom, the presence of α case in sheet structures has been forbidden by specification, design practice, or whatever means a company uses to manage its hardware. Less clear is how truly detrimental α case is to properties. Essentially no effort has been made to determine whether it can be tolerated if the affected hardware is allowed to operate at a modestly reduced stress. The industry standard for α case has essentially been one of zero tolerance. Given the significant potential weight advantage associated with use of Ti alloys in portions of the TPS and warm structure, this conservative approach needs to be revisited. Several key questions related to this are:\n\n• Is α case truly detrimental to the load-bearing capability of Ti alloy sheet structures?\n\n• If so, is there a limiting amount that can be tolerated without significantly degrading the structural capability?\n\n• Which properties are the most severely degraded?\n\n• Are α case formation and property degradation alloy dependent?\n\n• If so, which alloys are the most tolerant of α case formation?"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Once α case is present, can the structure be repaired (for example, by fusion or friction stir welding)?\n\nThe Air Force Materials and Manufacturing Directorate is starting a new project intended to address these questions. The motivation for this program is hypersonic flight vehicles. The results from this U.S. Air Force program should prove highly useful to the design of future reusable SSO vehicles.\n\nEarlier uses of Ti alloys at high temperatures included the skin and much of the load-bearing structure of the SR-71 Blackbird. This airplane flew successfully at peak speeds in excess of mach 3.2 for 34 years (1964-1998). While the maximum skin temperatures are not readily available, they were in excess of 300 °Celsius. There were no known issues involving α case during the SR-71's service. Notably, the primary alloy used for the SR-71 was one of the original β-Ti alloys, B-120 VCA, the composition of which is Ti-13V-11Cr-3Al. The primary reason for choosing this alloy was that it is much easier than any of the α+β Ti alloys are to roll into sheet gauges. Today there are newer β-Ti sheet alloys featuring a better balance of properties that could be used in the same way as B-120 VCA. The most common of these is Ti-15V-3Cr-3Sn-3Al. However, the successful use of B-120 VCA raises the question of whether β-Ti alloys are more resistant than α+β alloys such as Ti-6-4 are to α case formation.\n\nThe attraction to using Ti alloys, in addition to their structural efficiency, is the extensive industrial base for making the material in a variety of product forms and the extensive knowledge base resulting from the many successful applications of Ti alloys in high-performance products. For example, the ability to superplastically form Ti alloys such as Ti-6-4 creates the opportunity for design of a structure that functions both as load bearing and as thermal protection.\n\nTi Matrix Composites\n\nAs Table 1 showed, Ti alloys are not especially attractive for their specific stiffness. One way to overcome this limitation is to reinforce a Ti alloy matrix with SiC fibers. In this case, the fibers are \"long\" fibers—they have sufficient length for the matrix to transfer the maximum possible fraction of the external load to the fiber. The fibers are essentially monofilaments and must be carefully placed so adjacent fibers do not touch one another. Areas of contact between fibers essentially are incipient cracks that degrade the mechanical strength. As Table 2 shows, TMCs have excellent properties.\n\nTable 2. Example of Properties of Ti Matrix Composites\n\nProperty | Property Value (English / Metric Units)\nUltimate tensile strength | 276 ksi / 1902 MPa\nYoung's modulus | 32.8 msi / 226 GPa\nStrain to fracture | 0.95%\nDensity | 0.16 lb/in3 / 4.43 g/cm3\nFiber Volume fraction | 0.39"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 4 shows an example of a TI matrix composite (TMC) cross section.\n\nFigure 4. Cross-Section Micrograph of a Ti Matrix Composite. Small, dark centers of fibers are C monofilament substrates for deposition of SiC (light micrograph). Material system: Matrix alloy - Ti-6242; Fiber - SiC about 5.6-mil-diameter SCS-6\n\nTable 2 shows that the strength and stiffness properties of TMCs can exceed those of the Ti matrix (or other α+β Ti alloys) by more than a factor of two with no increase in density. So why are TMCs not in widespread use? The foremost reason is cost. Another reason is the availability of SiC fiber for TMCs.\n\n• During the 1990s, when the U.S. government (mainly DoD) was interested in and provided development money for TMC R&D, the most attractive reinforcing fiber was SCS-6™, which was produced exclusively by Textron Specialty Materials (TSM) in Lowell, MA.\n\n• Unfortunately (at least in hindsight), TSM made a business decision not to sell fiber and to instead forward-integrate and sell TMC components or finished TMC mill products. This decision stemmed in part from TSM's negative business experience with development of B-based fiber (Boro-SiC™) for first-generation TMCs.\n\n• Prior to making this business decision, TSM did not develop sufficient TMC-manufacturing expertise to properly position itself as a producer of TMC products with consistent properties."} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n• A couple of costly and highly visible TMC component test failures using TSM materials called into question the viability of TMCs. In truth, the real issue was one of quality and not the fundamental viability of the TMC material concept.\n• These failures led to extreme caution by the government, which promptly imposed stringent quality requirements on TSM. Consequently, TSM became a serious bottleneck for availability of TMCs with acceptable quality. As a result, numerous large, government-funded R&D programs fell behind schedule to the point that some were canceled and others were abandoned.\n• Other, less attractive SiC fibers were being developed during this period, including Nicalon in Japan and Sigma in the United Kingdom. Because SiC fiber and TMCs were deemed strategic materials and neither of these alternate fibers was produced in the United States, there was reluctance to experiment with them, and the U.S. government occasionally prohibited their use in federally funded R&D programs.\n• The issue of fiber availability became a major distraction from the real business at hand—that is, improving the consistency and reducing the cost of the TMC product.\n• In the end, TSM partially relented, but by then such limited interest in TMCs existed that the original opportunity was lost. Furthermore, there still was no concrete evidence that TMCs could be produced with sufficiently consistent properties that they could be considered an engineering material (at any cost).\n• In the mid-1990s, a cost study that assumed fiber availability showed that TMCs that meet specification properties could be manufactured for about $500/lb (in 1995 $) if the use volume was about 10,000 lb/year. Finding enough low-risk, high-value applications to consume this quantity of TMCs was not deemed possible.\n• Consequently, work on TMCs halted after an investment of about $500 million of U.S. government funds and a (presumably) comparable, but less well known private sector (mostly independent R&D $) investment.\n• One lesson from this is that a credible market and cost study should be undertaken before embarking on a major R&D program to develop revolutionary materials such as TMCs.\nThe foregoing discussion exemplifies the challenges associated with developing and commercializing a revolutionary new materials system. New material concepts originating from nonproduction sources such as national laboratories or research universities should be approached with caution and never be put on the critical path of product design. Even if a new material is vetted through an established production source, the timing of full commercialization should be carefully examined.\nNi-base Alloys\nNi-base alloys have been considered real engineering materials for at least 40 years. Because of their relatively low rate of strength loss with increasing temperature, Ni-base alloys are also called \"superalloys.\" They are commonly used at temperatures well in excess of half of their melting point (Tm), which is the accepted useful limit for most structural metallic materials. There is no other class of structural alloys for which this is true. Ni-base alloys have been used in turbine engines of all types almost since their\n16\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ninception. In fact, Ni-base alloys are a prime enabler of the modern gas turbine engine. As a result, this class of materials has a well-established industrial base for the production of literally all product forms. There is a second class of Ni-base alloys that has excellent resistance to attack in aggressive environments, such as those encountered in petroleum recovery, but these alloys are not of interest for high-temperature applications. To avoid any confusion, the term Ni-base alloys is used in this document to mean high-temperature Ni-base alloys.\nNi-base alloys have a high elevated temperature strength because they typically contain Al and Ti, which enable them to be precipitation strengthened. The alloys with the highest temperature capability are strengthened by precipitates of Ni3Al (called γ'), which have a positive temperature coefficient of strength up to about 1,000 °Celsius. This unusual characteristic accounts for Ni-base alloys' elevated temperature capability. In combination with the ordinary temperature dependence of the matrix strength, the overall temperature dependence is quite low compared with that of any other class of structural alloys. Ni-base alloys also contain alloying additions of refractory elements such as tungsten (W), tantalum (Ta), and niobium (Nb). These additions also improve the elevated temperature strength because they diffuse slowly and strengthen the matrix. Because Ni-base alloys are used at elevated temperatures, they contain Cr additions in significant concentrations to improve their oxidation resistance. The tailoring of the properties of Ni-base alloys has been studied extensively and is quite well understood empirically, albeit less so in a fundamental sense. Current-generation Ni-base alloys contain as many as 10 alloying additions, and interelement interactions make gaining a fundamental understanding of alloying effects a major challenge.\nProduction of Ni-base alloys has evolved over several decades. Both ingot metallurgy and powder metallurgy methods are used to produce a full range of mill products. New alloys have periodically been introduced in response to specialized needs. Sometimes these alloy development efforts have been so focused on the \"specialized need\" that retention of other generally accepted Ni-base alloy properties has been overlooked. An example of this is the development of early \"low coefficient of thermal expansion\" (α) alloys (the so-called low-α alloys). An example of an application for which low-α alloys are attractive is structures in which there are two or more concentric rings connected by radial struts. In the presence of a radial temperature gradient, these alloys tend to crack during thermal cycling situations owing to \"thermal fatigue.\" In principle, the availability of an \"Invar type\" alloy with structural characteristics reduces the thermal strains and improves the thermal fatigue life. Invar is so named because it uses the magnetic characteristics of Ni to offset normal thermal expansion, resulting in much lower α values. It was recognized that this concept could also be adapted to Ni-base structural alloys. The first-generation low-α alloy, Inco 903, had about half the coefficient of thermal expansion compared with ordinary Ni-base alloys up to the Curie temperature. This remarkable alteration of a physical property was achieved by removing the Cr from the alloy to intensify the magnetic effects of magnetostriction. An unfortunate, unintended consequence of this composition alteration was that the oxidation resistance was seriously degraded. In particular, Inco 903 had a propensity for intergranular cracking in air under stress, rendering it of limited utility as a structural alloy. In fact, the cracking was so severe it was given a name: stress-assisted grain boundary oxidation (SAGBO). A second-generation low-α alloy, Inco 909, contained Si to help improve the oxidation resistance, but this alloy has not gained widespread acceptance, possibly because Inco 903 problems were so severe. Low-α\n17\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nalloys' superior thermal fatigue resistance gives them great potential for use in TPS; thus, it would be appropriate to revisit this class of alloy after addressing its past problems.\nMany of the Ni-base alloys are fusion weldable, but the higher strength grades are prone to cracking without special precautions such as preheating the work piece. Most alloys capable of being processed into sheet also can be processed to create a fine-grained structure. The fine-grained material can be superplastically formed, which is potentially of very important benefit to making light-gauge, load-bearing structures and TPS components. Finally, although almost all Ni-base alloys contain Cr and Al, both of which improve oxidation resistance by forming a stable, protective scale, this scale begins to lose its effectiveness above about 1,000 °Celsius. A number of effective environmental coatings have been developed by the gas turbine industry for Ni-base alloys. The only concern or unknown for application in a reusable SSO vehicle is the durability of these coatings under very high mass flow conditions, such as during reentry.\nRefractory Metal Alloys\nRefractory metal alloys were discussed briefly earlier in connection with the DynaSoar project. Subsequent to this, there has been limited systematic interest in designing aerospace structures that incorporate refractory metal alloys. There has been interest in using these alloys for high-temperature gas-cooled nuclear reactors, where the operating environment is benign and well controlled, but this has limited relevance to the current discussion of space vehicles required to withstand reentry into the earth's atmosphere. The attraction of refractory metals as a class is the high melting temperature of Mo, Nb, and Ta. Although alloys of these metallic elements exhibit \"normal\" temperature dependence of mechanical strength, 0.5Tm of Nb or Mo is still a higher temperature than Ni-base alloys can withstand. Of the three metals, Nb is by far the most attractive because of its lower density, lower elastic modulus, and better (but not good) oxidation resistance. The clear barrier to use of Nb alloys is their reactivity in air at high temperatures. There are coatings for these alloys, but at 1,250 °Celsius, a breach in the coating will cause immediate, catastrophic failure.\nA reasonable design practice for critical structure, such as the TPS, is to disallow use of any coated material if the material fails catastrophically when the coating is breached. If this practice were the norm, then refractory metal alloys would not be usable in the TPS or other critical hot structure in a reusable SSO vehicle.\nCeramic Matrix Composites\nCeramic matrix composites (CMCs) are attractive because they are much tougher than, but retain the high-temperature capability of, monolithic ceramics. CMCs' toughness is derived from the fibers used to reinforce the ceramic matrix. When a CMC is loaded in tension and the stress in the ceramic matrix reaches a critical value, microcracks develop. This stress level is known as the matrix microcrack stress. In a monolithic ceramic such as silicon carbide (SiC) or silicon nitride (Si3N4), microcracks would propagate rapidly, causing immediate failure. For this reason, monolithic ceramics are not suitable for tension-loaded applications. This characteristic is mitigated in CMCs by reinforcing the ceramic matrix with high-strength ceramic fibers, typically Al2O3 or SiC, whose role is to bridge and arrest the cracks. Under continued loading, the fibers also\n18\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nwill eventually fracture at their weakest points, which, statistically, is often somewhere in the matrix rather that at the mouth of the crack. These fractured fibers then must be pulled out of the matrix during crack extension under continued loading, an action that dissipates additional energy. Therefore, the total energy expended during fracture of a CMC is much greater than it would be in the case of a monolithic specimen of the ceramic matrix. The crack bridging and pullout mechanisms of toughening, with the attendant increase in energy dissipation during fracture, are the conceptual foundation for CMCs. In SiC fiber-reinforced SiC matrix (called SiC-SiC) CMCs, the toughness can be as high as 10 times that of the unreinforced matrix. Clearly, the nature of the fiber-matrix interface determines the resistance to fiber pullout after fracture and controls the toughness. In high-temperature CMCs, the fibers are coated to achieve an intermediate fiber-matrix interfacial bond strength that optimizes pullout toughening. If the interface is too weak, the fibers pull out too easily. If it is too strong, the fibers break without any pullout. Neither of these situations maximizes the toughness. Therefore, the challenge in creating a tough CMC is not only creating this interface but also finding a coating that will remain stable over time during exposure to elevated temperatures. As service temperature increases, this latter requirement becomes more challenging. For extended service, SiC-SiC CMCs currently are limited to about 1,400 °Celsius, but this is higher than the capability of metallic materials.\nThe matrix microcrack stress is also significant because once the matrix develops microcracks, it allows the environment to gain access to the fiber-matrix interfaces. The role of environment can be to alter the nature of the interface and reduce the extent of pullout toughening. The obvious difficulty with this is that the properties are better initially than after a period of exposure in service. This leads to a nonconservative design that is dangerous. Absent an arbitrary knockdown, there currently exists no means of estimating the reduced toughness as a function of service life.\nNevertheless, CMCs are the material class that holds the greatest promise of defeating the temperature limits of current metals. An important issue at present is the limited industrial base for producing CMCs and the even more restrictive range of suitable ceramic fibers available for use as the reinforcement in CMCs. The cost of CMCs is currently very high but should come down with increased demand, as happened with TMCs. Even so, CMCs will always be expensive, making development of efficient designs that make optimal use of this class of material important.\nCarbon-Carbon Composites\nCarbon-carbon composites (C-CCs) consist of carbon fibers in a typically amorphous carbon matrix. In principle, this class of materials is very attractive because it has very low density and high strength at elevated temperatures. C-CCs also have good oxidation resistance at very high temperatures (1,200 °Celsius) because they use an Si-rich coating that forms a stable, protective SiO2 film on the surface. This coating system is \"self healing\" if breached because, among other things, it is glassy (viscous) and reforms over cracks. The principal vulnerability occurs at intermediate temperatures where the viscosity of the glass is high enough that it may not flow rapidly enough to heal a breach, exposing the reactive C substrate to the damaging oxidizing environment. As with CMCs, there also are some questions concerning long-term changes in the fiber-matrix interfaces that are at least partially responsible for the loss of impact toughness over time, as experienced in the Columbia accident.\n19\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nTherefore, instabilities that cause time-dependent reductions in toughness must be understood before these materials can be considered candidates for future TPS applications.\nTitanium Aluminides\nTitanium aluminides are intermetallic compounds that form between Ti and Al. There are three such compounds—Ti3Al, TiAl and Al3Ti—but the one of principal interest is TiAl, often referred to as gamma titanium aluminide or γ-TiAl. This compound contains about 35 weight % Al, but ternary and quaternary alloys based on TiAl typically contain somewhat less than this amount. γ-TiAl is interesting for intermediate-temperature applications for several reasons. These include a lower density, at least a 125 °Celsius higher temperature capability, and better surface stability (oxidation resistance) compared with conventional Ti alloys. The surface scale that forms during oxidation of γ-TiAl is Al rich and is more protective than the TiO2 scale that forms on conventional Ti alloys. Like most other intermetallic compounds, γ-TiAl has very limited ductility at temperatures up to about 600 °Celsius but is not brittle in the classical sense; that is, it has the capability to deform plastically before fracturing. The ductility increases as temperatures increase and is quite good at normal service temperatures.\nγ-TiAl alloys' limited ductility poses manufacturing problems for any wrought products. These issues are manageable but reduce product yields, which in turn impacts cost. Recent work in Austria has demonstrated that some γ-TiAl alloys can be made into sheet. This is particularly relevant to applications such as metallic TPS. Other work has demonstrated that some γ-TiAl alloys can be conventionally forged, albeit with care. Should one or more of the efforts currently under way to produce low-cost, prealloyed Ti powder prove successful, the availability of affordable γ-TiAl alloy powder could be a major cost breakthrough.\nThe development and maturation of γ-TiAl alloys has taken more than 30 years. This is in part due to the lack of actual production applications because of designer's concerns regarding the limited low-temperature ductility of all the γ-TiAl alloys. Today, finally, there are several applications of alloys based on γ-TiAl, the most significant of which are two stages of low-pressure turbine blades in the engine General Electric is providing for the Boeing 787 and the growth 747 (called the 747-8). These blades are cast to near net shape and will operate at temperatures up to about 750 °Celsius. Another application is a cast γ-TiAl turbocharger rotor Mitsubishi uses in a production auto because it has half the mass of an equivalent Ni-base alloy component.\nA potentially ideal, high-volume application of γ-TiAl alloys is exhaust valves for autos. If the low-cost powder mentioned earlier becomes a reality, this factor, coupled with the current pressure to improve fuel consumption in American cars, could make this prospect a reality. The point of this short discussion of non-space-related applications of γ-TiAl alloys is that realization of any or all of these applications will create a stronger production base for this class of alloy, which in turn will make their introduction into future space platforms easier and more cost effective.\n20\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPROPULSION SYSTEMS\n\nAmong propulsion systems, only reusable rocket engines are considered here because they hold potential for significant progress that could reduce the cost of placing payloads into orbit.\n\nThe basic concept of the space shuttle main engine is still viable, but the durability of the materials used to make the hardware has been a major expense and source of concern for NASA. Much of the concern is related to the effects of hydrogen on the Ni-base alloys used in the turbo pumps. The turbo pumps are the heart of a liquid-fueled hydrogen-oxygen rocket engine because they deliver the fuel and oxidizer to the thrust chamber. The turbo pumps rotate at a very high speed—up to 35,000 rpm. Such speeds create enormous centrifugal stresses in the rotating components, particularly the disks that hold the air foils used to extract work from the hot gas stream. One side of the turbo pump rotor operates in the hot gas stream created by the combustion of the oxygen-hydrogen mixture; the other end is a cryopump that operates at cryogenic temperatures, either in liquid oxygen (90 K) or in liquid hydrogen (20 K). The hot side, a turbine, resembles the turbine rotor in a gas turbine engine and is made of many of the same Ni-base alloys. The cryopump is made of Ti alloys.\n\nThe turbine essentially operates in a hydrogen-rich supercritical steam environment at a maximum temperature of about 1,050 °Celsius. The turbine disk is a forged Ni-base alloy, and the air foils are single-crystal investment castings. Neither material is well suited to operate in a hydrogen-rich environment; however, no other material class can withstand the operating temperatures and has better hydrogen tolerance—a situation that still prevails today. The mechanism of hydrogen-induced cracking is much better understood today as the result of extensive research over the past 25 years. Therefore, it would be very useful to use this improved understanding to design a Ni-base alloy that has improved hydrogen tolerance. If successful, a turbine that has improved resistance to hydrogen cracking would greatly reduce the intermission refurbishment time and cost.\n\nTraditionally, the cryopump rotating parts have been made from forgings of the near-α-phase Ti alloy Ti-5Al-2.5Sn (Ti-5-2.5). This alloy has been chosen for its superior notched tensile strength compared with Ti-6-4 when tested at cryogenic temperatures. Hindsight suggests it is unclear that notched tensile strength is the best criterion for selecting a cryogenic rotor material. The use of notched tensile strength originated with steels. Here, the hydrostatic stress state at the notch root could trigger the onset of brittle fracture of the type seen in smooth tensile tests below the ductile brittle transition temperature (DBTT). Ti alloys do not exhibit a DBTT; therefore, true fracture toughness measured at the relevant temperature is a more accurate indication of the fracture resistance of the rotor. An examination of the limited available fracture toughness data for the two alloys shows no clear advantage in using Ti-5-2.5. Because Ti-5-2.5 is more difficult to produce than Ti-6-4, using Ti-5-2.5 adds cost to the cryopump. Other, newer, higher strength Ti alloys—for example, several of the newer β-Ti alloys—may be even better suited than Ti-6-4 is for this application. The critical question of how much toughness is really required cannot be answered at present because the notched tensile ratio has been the deciding criterion. Therefore, a new\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"adb2a420a7ef5be2","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndesign of a cryopump potentially can benefit from these new materials and from abandoning the use of notched strength as a design paradigm.\n\nThe combustion chamber of a rocket engine is made from a copper alloy and is cooled by passing liquid hydrogen through channels in the outer wall. The space shuttle main engine combustion chamber is made of NARloy-Z, a Cu-3%Ag-0.5%Zr alloy that has excellent thermal conductivity and better strength than the commercially available Cu-0.15%Zr alloy known as AMZIRC. While a lighter combustion chamber would be welcome, developing hydrogen-resistant turbine materials would be a much better use of available rocket engine alloy development resources.\n\nSUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS\n\nThis document has attempted to review a range of materials that may have promise for all aspects of aerospace platforms. Because of the breadth of this topic, discussion has focused on opportunities and associated risks, but with little technical detail. Practical issues such as manufacturing capabilities and costs and the availability of materials also have been addressed where appropriate. Another recurring issue is the ability to achieve better design efficiency through a design synthesis process that concurrently treats form, fit and function, manufacturing capability, and materials capability as equally important design constraints. Although this approach has yet to be successfully used for a major high-performance structure project, engineering is nearing a state of development where it may now be feasible.\n\nIf the space shuttle is used as a benchmark, it is clear that numerous opportunities will exist to improve structural efficiency. This possibility reflects the progress made since the shuttle and its engine were designed. Improved durability and reduced operating cost also are possible. The issue of long lead time holding back these improved design methods is most often one of timely availability of new, attractive materials that are mature enough to be used in a system without increasing the risk of failure. The materials community is actively developing and using computational models and simulation methods to address this concern. Despite some progress, further advances are required to bring computational materials engineering to the desired level of maturity.\n\n1. Hatch, J. ed. Aluminum, Properties and Physical Metallurgy. American Society for Metals, 1984.\n\n2. Chawla K. Composite Materials, Science and Engineering 2nd edition. Springer, 1998.\n\n3. Baker, A., Dutton, S. and Kelly, D. Composite Materials for Aircraft Structures 2nd edition. AIAA, 2002.\n\n4. Lütjering, G and Williams, J. Titanium, 2nd edition. Springer, 2007.\n\n5. Sims, C. and Hagel, W. The Superalloys. Wiley, 1972.\n\n6. Mishra, R. and Ma, Z. Friction Stir Welding and Processing, Materials Science and Engineering. v.50, pp. 1-78, 2005.\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ae8cfdc954820bd5","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"ae8cfdc954820bd5","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"ae8cfdc954820bd5","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"ae8cfdc954820bd5","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"ae8cfdc954820bd5","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"ae8cfdc954820bd5","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a) [REDACTED]\n1.4(a) [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): LOOKS LIKE A BALLOON, SIMILAR TO PREVIOUSLY REPORTED UAP FROM 48FW.\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): (SECRET) OBSERVED A WEAPONS QUALITY 1 TRACK OF A UAP TRAVELING WITH THE WINDS AT 31,000 FT MSL IVO 323'S. 1.4(a) [REDACTED] WAS ABLE TO MAKE A NEXT TO SHOOT ON THE TRACK AND VISUALLY ID THE UAP IN THE TFLIR.\n\n1.4(a) [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"b11152dc9b787d50","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"25 June 1952\n1200 PST\nCAMP FOX, CALIFORNIA\n3 Boy Scouts\nCno\nSilver object faster than jet, which apparent-\nly made a climbing turn before disintegrating.\nDisintegrated."} {"doc_id":"b11152dc9b787d50","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112--PART I\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\nCOUNTRY United States REPORT NO. MAFB-1 (LEAVE BLANK)\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nSUBJECT Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting\nAREA REPORTED ON Southern California FROM (Agency) 807th Air Base Group, March Air Force Base\nDATE OF REPORT 28 August 1952 DATE OF INFORMATION 0/A 25 June 1952 EVALUATION None\nPREPARED BY (Officer) E. D. H. Maddox, Lt Colonel, USAF SOURCE Civilian\nREFERENCES (Control number, directive, previous report, etc., as applicable) AF Letter 200-5 dated 29 April 1952\nSUMMARY: (Enter concise summary of report. Give significance in final one-sentence paragraph. List inclosures at lower left. Begin text of report on AF Form 118--Part II.)\n1.8 This report of alleged \"Flying Saucers\" in the vicinity of Santa Catalina, which is just off the coast of Southern California, was reported by three (3) Boy Scouts in summer camp (Camp Fox) on 25 June 1952. No report has been made by electrical means due to the time lag in the receipt of the information at this installation.\n2. A summary of the description follows:\na. The object was silver in color, altitude is uncertain, and speed estimated to be faster than a conventional Jet. There was no sound observed. One (1) maneuver was observed which was apparently a climbing turn immediately prior to its disappearance by disintegration.\nb. The occurrence was at 1200 hours (PSDT). Length of time observed is not recorded.\nc. The sighting was made by three (3) Boy Scouts during a hike up one of the mountains on Santa Catalina Island.\nd. No observing instruments of any sort were available. The three (3) observers were all in the same group at the time.\ne. No estimate of the reliability can be attempted by the reporter. The experience of the observers is probably meager at best.\nf. Sky conditions were clear and unlimited. No reports on wind conditions.\ng. A rough sketch is inclosed on two (2) of the Inclosures of what the observers saw.\nDOWNGRADED AT 8 YEAR INTERVALS; DECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS DOD DIR 5200.10\n4\nINCLS.\nIncl 1. Ltr fr Clyde Vrooman\n2. Ltr fr Howard Howell\n3. Ltr fr Sam Gates\n4. Ltr fr Forrest E. Spriggs dtd 1 Jul 52\nDISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR\nCC: CG, SAC\nCG, 15th AF\nCO, 12th Air Div\nCC: Chief, Air Tech. Intel. Center\nATTN: ATIAA-2c, Wright-Patterson AFB\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nUNCLASSIFIED\n16-58569-1 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"b11eed7da18c035a","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:18:58"} {"doc_id":"b237e6adc0efb007","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n-1 of 2-\n[REDACTED]\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nDate of entry [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] On or about [REDACTED]/2026, FBI [REDACTED], [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] received from [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] Special Agent [REDACTED] a written\nstatement signed by [REDACTED]Special Agent [REDACTED]. The statement will\nbe attached to this FD-302 and is provided verbatim below for ease of\nreading:\n\"Unidentified Aerial Object Observation Report evening of [REDACTED]/26\n\"On [REDACTED], 2026, at approximately 2100 hours, I, [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] Special Agent [REDACTED], was\npositioned in the same general observation area referenced in my prior\nstatement from [REDACTED]. While conducting observation in the area, I\nobserved a thermally elevated aerial object in the same general western\nsector and along a similar heading as the object observed the previous\nnight.\n\nThe object appeared approximately two ridge lines farther west than the\nlocation where the [REDACTED] object was observed. Due to the increased\ndistance and terrain separation, I was unable to identify specific physical\ncharacteristics of the object or determine its exact configuration. However,\nthe object presented as a hot aerial object through thermal observation and\nappeared to be flying southbound, consistent with the general direction of\ntravel observed during the prior night's sighting.\n\nDuring this same operational period, I also recorded video of a U.S. Army\nBlack Hawk helicopter operating in the same general area. The purpose of\nrecording the helicopter was to establish a visual and thermal reference\npoint for scale, flight characteristics, and comparative size assessment.\nBased on my observation and comparison to the Black Hawk helicopter, the\nunidentified aerial object appeared to be approximately half the size of the\nBlack Hawk. This size comparison is an estimate only, based on observed\nappearance, distance, and available reference footage.\n\nI was unable to determine the object's make, model, propulsion type, or"} {"doc_id":"b237e6adc0efb007","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] , On [REDACTED] , Page 2 of 2\nStatement of [REDACTED] SA [REDACTED]\nwhether it was a fixed-wing, rotary-wing, or other unmanned aerial system\ndue to the distance and limited observable detail. The object continued\nsouthbound and was eventually lost from observation due to terrain and\ndistance.\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"b39a0b89e5b40448","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT 10073 RECORD CARD\n1. DATE\n2. LOCATION\nCalifornia\n12. CONCLUSIONS\n15 March 1955\nAvalon, Catalina Isle\nWas Balloon\nProbably Balloon\nPossibly Balloon\n3. DATE-TIME GROUP\n4. TYPE OF OBSERVATION\nLocal\nXX Ground-Visual\nGround-Radar\nWas Aircraft\nProbably Aircraft\nPossibly Aircraft\nGMT unknown\nAir-Visual\nAir-Intercept Radar\n5. PHOTOS\n6. SOURCE\nWas Astronomical Meteor\nProbably Astronomical\nYes\nPossibly Astronomical\nCivilian\nNo\n7. LENGTH OF OBSERVATION\n8. NUMBER OF OBJECTS\n9. COURSE\nOther\n2 seconds\none\nstraight down\nInsufficient Data for Evaluation\nUnknown\n10. BRIEF SUMMARY OF SIGHTING\n11. COMMENTS\nRound. Changed from orange to red.\nProbable meteor.\nVery bright. Fell straight down.\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 923007\nATIC FORM 329 (REV 26 SEP 52)"} {"doc_id":"b39a0b89e5b40448","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UFOB INDEX CARD\n1. DATE\n2. LOCATION\n15 March 1955\nCatalina Isle, California\n12. CONCLUSIONS\n3. DATE-TIME GROUP\n4. TYPE OF OBSERVATION\nWas Balloon\nProbably Balloon\nPossibly Balloon\nLocal\nGround-Visual\nGround-Radar\nWas Aircraft\n15/2231 Z Mar 55\nProbably Aircraft\nPossibly Aircraft\nGMT\nAir-Visual\nAir-Intercept Radar\nWas Astronomical\n5. PHOTOS\n6. SOURCE\nProbably Astronomical\nYes\nCivilian\nPossibly Astronomical\nNo\n7. LENGTH OF OBSERVATION\n8. NUMBER OF OBJECTS\n9. COURSE\nOther\napprox 2 seconds\none (1)\nstraight down\nInsufficient Data for Evaluation\nUnknown\n10. BRIEF SUMMARY OF SIGHTING\n11. COMMENTS\nOne (1) object, approx the size of a nickel held at arm's length, very bright and orange in color, was observed to fall straight down in the vicinity of Catalina Isle.\nPossibly astronomical, but due to the brevity of the sighting, no further investigation was deemed worthwhile by this organization (4602d AISS)\nAISOP Form 5 (15 Oct 54)"} {"doc_id":"b39a0b89e5b40448","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DE JWPJB 6D\nR 151900Z\nFM COC 670TH ACWRON SPEDRO CALIF\nTO JWPJB/COC 27TH AD DEF NORTON AFB CALIF\nJEDEN/COMDR ADC ENT AFB COLO\nJEDWP/COMDR AIR TECH INT CEN WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OHIO\nJEPHQ/COMDR DIR OF INT HQ USAF WASH 25 DC\nBT\n/UNCLASSIFIED/670TAC C-001 PD IN ACCORD WITH AFR 200-2 PAR 7D CMA\nREPT OF UNID FLY OBJ THE FOLG IS SUBM CLN\n1. A. ROUND B. NICKLE C. ORANGE TO RED D. ONE E. N/A F. NONE G. UNK\nH. NONE IL VERY BRIGHT\n2. A. JUST HAPPEN TO NOTICE B. 45 AT 340 C. 10 AT 340 D. STRAIGHT\nDOWN E. FADE OUT OF SIGHT F. TWO SECONDS\n3. A. GROUND VISUAL B. NONE C. N/A\n4. A. NIGHT\n5. A. BAKER DOG 3920 AVALON, CATALINA ISLE\n6. A. CARR, PAUL J. 222 DESCANSO ST, BOX 622 AVALON, PHONE 5540 OCCUP\nProb. Meteor\nPAGE TWO JWPJB 6D\nUNK\n7. A. CLEAR DRY AND COOL B. 10A 260-25K 16A 260-25K 20A 260-40K\n30A 270-80K 40A 270-70K 80A 270-30K C. UNLIMITED D. UNRESTRICTED\nE. THIN F. NONE\n8. A. NONE\n9. A. NONE\n10. A. NONE"} {"doc_id":"b39a0b89e5b40448","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"11. A. FLIGHT PATH AND LENGTH OF TIME IN SIGHT, SUGGEST UFOB WAS\nPROBABLY A METEOR. BRANT, CLIFFORD E. CAPTIAN USAF INTELLIGENCE OFFICER\n12. A. NONE\nBT\n15/2231Z MAR JWPJB\n16 MAR 1955 09 24\nNI\n[REDACTED]\n1 Witness\nINFORMATION\n16 MAR 1955 00 42\nRR JWPJB JEDEN JEDWP JEPHQ"} {"doc_id":"b50b0b1c7fed67ad","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n950328\n\nCopy No. 597\n\nINTELLIGENCE REVIEW\n\nNumber 47 9 Jan 1947\n\nRECORDED\n\nINTELLIGENCE DIVISION, WDGS\nWAR DEPARTMENT • WASHINGTON, D. C.\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority NND58658\nBy BKT, NARA, Date 6/16/26\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"b50b0b1c7fed67ad","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nCONTENTS\n\nPage\nWORLD IN REVIEW 1\n\"GHOST ROCKETS\" OVER SCANDINAVIA 17\nRECONSTITUTION OF THE BRITISH TERRITORIAL ARMY 21\nUNITED NATIONS TRUSTEESHIP 27\nMILITARY IMPLICATIONS OF SOVIET FOREIGN POLICY DURING 1946 41\nGUIDED MISSILE COUNTERMEASURES 50\nWORLD-WIDE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MAGNETIC AMPLIFIER 56\nSIGNIFICANT PERSONALITIES 63\nCALENDAR OF FORTHCOMING EVENTS 64\n\nWARNING\n\nThis Document Contains Information Affecting the National Defense of the United States Within the Meaning of the Espionage Act, 50 U.S.C., 31 and 32, as Amended. Its Transmission or the Revelation of Its Contents in Any Manner to Any Foreign Agency or Other Unauthorized Person Is Prohibited by Law. Reproduction of the Intelligence in This Publication Is Prohibited Without Special Authority From the Director of Intelligence WDGS, War Department."} {"doc_id":"b50b0b1c7fed67ad","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nFEATURE SECTION\n\n\"GHOST ROCKETS\" OVER SCANDINAVIA\n\nFlying missiles were first reported over southern Sweden in late May 1946 by the press, which gave the missiles the name of \"Ghost Rockets.\" In June, the missiles also had been reported over Finland and Denmark. By July, the number of sightings over Sweden had greatly increased, and several also had been reported over Norway. The great majority of these reports were made by untrained observers and, as would be expected, varied widely in the description of the actual missiles as well as, of their course, altitude, and speed.\n\nDescriptions of the Missile\n\nThe two most common descriptions of the missiles were \"a ball of fire with a tail\" and a \"shiny cigar-shaped object.\" The reported direction of flight covered all points of the compass, with a northerly direction being slightly predominant. Variations in altitude ranged from treetop height to 160,000 feet, the higher altitudes almost exclusively being reported from Finland. Speeds reported were from 65 m. p. h. to \"lightning fast,\" with the majority described as having great or very great speed. The missiles generally have been described in horizontal flight; a few have been reported as diving into the ground or into lakes, or exploding in the air. In no case have fragments been found other than bits of material described as \"nonmetallic slag.\"\n\nOne of the few reports available from an individual who should be more reliable and competent than the average\n\nSECRET 17"} {"doc_id":"b50b0b1c7fed67ad","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GHOST ROCKETS SECRET\n\nlayman is that of a Swedish Air Force pilot. On 14 August, at 1000 hours, he was flying at 650 feet over central Sweden when he saw a dark, cigar-shaped object about 50 feet long and 3 feet in diameter flying 200 feet above and approximately 6,500 feet away from him at an estimated speed of 400 m. p. h. The missile had no visible wings, rudder, or other projecting part; and there was no indication of any flame or light as has been reported in the majority of other sightings. His report states that the missile was maintaining a constant altitude over the ground and, consequently, was following the large features of the terrain. The last statement casts doubt on the reliability of the entire report because of the inability of a missile, without wings, to maintain a constant altitude over hilly terrain. However, the pilot does imply that there may have been wings which he was unable to see, because he stated that it could not have been a Swedish jet plane as there was none flying in the vicinity at that time.\n\nThe Scandinavian press, with the exception of the Communist papers, initially reported the incidents in some detail and openly attributed them to missiles fired by the U. S. S. R. In August, a partial censorship was imposed on the press, restricting the publication of exact details or localities where missiles were seen. The Communist press has continued to ridicule the entire matter and claims that there was no basis for the reports that the missiles were of Soviet origin. In fact, a charge was made that they came from the United States and that Gen. Doolittle was sent over to observe the effects of the missiles!\n\nOfficial Investigations\n\nOfficial investigations of these reports were begun by the Swedish authorities in June. The Defense Staff requested the public to report any unusual observations, and by the\n\n18 SECRET"} {"doc_id":"b50b0b1c7fed67ad","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET GHOST ROCKETS\n\nend of July almost 1,000 such reports had been received. The investigation has been carried out by the Swedish Defense Staff in a very peculiar manner. In the beginning, many of the key personnel were on summer leave, and they were not recalled to deal with the problem. Spokesmen for the Defense Staff repeatedly have told the United States Military Attaché that they definitely believed there were rockets over Sweden, and that they were launched by the Soviets from Peenemünde on the German Baltic coast. However, they have not been able to produce any evidence to support these statements. To date, no United States military or naval personnel in Sweden have seen any fragments, points of impact, or other direct evidence to prove that guided missiles have appeared over Sweden.\n\nThe official communiqués issued to the press by the Defense Staff have not reflected the same tone as the statements made by individual officers in conversations. In fact, the communiqués themselves have varied. The last one, issued on 10 October, very strongly indicated that the great majority of the reported incidents were of celestial origin, which is a complete change from the one of 6 August when it was reported that, except in a few cases, they could not be meteorites.*\n\nAttitude of Swedish Officials\n\nTo arrive at any definite conclusion from the conflicting evidence available on these reported missiles is impossible. The contradictory attitude of Swedish officialdom would tend to indicate that it was doing very little to arrive at a definite conclusion, perhaps for political purposes. The complete change in attitude between the communiqués issued on\n\n*In September and October, flying objects were reported over widely separate points in Europe and Africa, including Belgium, Greece, Italy, Morocco, and Austria. In the main, these reports have not been confirmed and appear to be due to explainable causes, such as meteors or Very flares, fireworks, etc.\n\nSECRET 19"} {"doc_id":"b50b0b1c7fed67ad","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GHOST ROCKETS SECRET\n6 August and 10 October indicates that the Swedish Staff was trying to minimize the entire matter which had grown to such a size that the Staff was afraid of its having official repercussions on Swedish-Soviet relations.\nConclusions\nThe Soviets are known to be working on various guided missiles. They have the ability to produce, and probably have tested, missiles of the V-1 type. Without warheads and with slightly improved motors, these missiles could have a range of 500 miles, and are the only available German missiles believed capable of horizontal flight at low altitudes. There is some evidence that such work has been carried out at Stolp (in Polish-administered Germany) or on the Baltic islands of Oesel or Dago. Three of the people reporting sightings have mentioned the noise of an outboard motor, a characteristic of the impulse duct motor used on the V-1 by the Germans; and one of them stated that what he saw looked like the V-1 he had seen over London during the war. Others have reported little or no sound, a condition which may indicate the use of a turbo-jet instead of a pulse-jet.\nThe best evidence, at present, is that there have been only 2 or 3 real incidents, perhaps as many as 5 or 10, of low-flying missiles of the V-1 type. The high-altitude missiles reported seem definitely to have been meteors or fireworks. The Swedish Defense Staff probably has taken advantage of the situation for political purposes and allowed the newspapers to make a big story out of the missiles, without admitting that the Staff had any evidence to indicate that there actually were any such missiles. This was done at a time when the Swedish public was demanding reductions in defense expenditures.\n20 SECRET"} {"doc_id":"b50b0b1c7fed67ad","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Notice\nThe intelligence contained in this report has been produced by the Intelligence Division as a result of careful research and analysis of information received from all sources. Any reader possessing information which appears to modify or contradict the intelligence contained herein is requested to forward it promptly to:\nDirector of Intelligence, WDGS, War Department, Washington 25, D. C.\nCommunications should refer to this publication, setting forth item and page to which reference is made. In reporting information, the contributor should identify and evaluate his sources and give the dates of incidents mentioned.\nDISTRIBUTION\nUSFET 11 IADB 1 USMA 3\nMTOUSA 9 OSW 1 CSC 10\nCINCFE 12 OUSW 1 ICAF 2\nPHILRYCOM 2 OASW 1 NWC 12\nMARBO 1 OCS 1 AFSC 5\nAGFPAC 3 PAD 3 AIS 2\nArmy Adv Gp China 2 OTD 2 Nav War Col 1\nPeiping Hqs Gp 2 SSPD 1 ONI 22\nUSF., Austria 2 POD 9 CinCLantFlt 1\nACC, Bulgaria 2 RDD 1 ComNavEu 1\nACC, Hungary 1 CAD 4 ComNavMed 1\nACC, Rumania 1 Hist Div 1 ComSoLantFor 1\nOMG, Germany 18 OCCWS 11 CinCPacFlt 1\nCDC 2 OQMG 3 ComNavJap 1\nPCD 3 OCSigO 7 ComFirstTaskFlt 1\nAnt. Dept 1 OCE 1 ComNavWesPac 1\nCINCAL 1 OCO 12 USMC 29\nAlaskan Dept 2 OCT 5 FMFPAC 1\nMAs 58 OSG 1 State Dept 16\nWhite House 2 OTIG 1 SWNCC 1\nCIG 12 MDW 2 FBI 3\nJIS 2 AAF 141 ID 129\nJSC 1 Add AAFPAC 1\nJWPC 1 AGF 67"} {"doc_id":"b50b0b1c7fed67ad","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n31 March 2010\n\nICOD: 1 December 2009\n\nDIA-08-1003-020\n\nBiosensors and BioMEMS: A Survey of the Present Field\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBiosensors and BioMEMS: A Survey of the Present Field\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 65\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ........................................................................................vi\n\nWhat is BioMEMS? ........................................................................ 1\nCharacteristics of BioMEMS ........................................................ 2\nCategories of BioMEMS ............................................................... 3\nBioMEMS Micromachines ............................................................ 3\nBrain-Implanted BioMEMS Micromachine Neuroelectrodes ................................ 4\nFluidic BioMEMS ......................................................................... 6\nDrug-Delivery Pumps ................................................................... 7\nWhat is a Biosensor? .................................................................... 9\nBioMEMS Implantable Sensors ................................................... 10\nMEMS Blood Glucose Sensors ................................................... 13\nCommercial Blood Glucose Sensors ........................................... 14\nEnzyme-Based Biosensors ......................................................... 14\nThermopile Implantable Glucose Sensors ................................... 15\nNeuroengineering by BioMEMS ................................................. 20\nBioelectric Events ....................................................................... 20\nBionics and Neurointerfaces ....................................................... 22\nBioelectrodes and BioMEMS ..................................................... 22\nMicroelectrode Array Fabrication .............................................. 24\nBrain-Machine Interfaces ........................................................... 25\nPolymer BioMEMS Electrodes .................................................. 26\nRetinal Devices Using BioMEMS ............................................... 27\nMicroscale in Therapeutic Neurostimulation ............................. 30\nMEMS in Microfluidics .............................................................. 32\nLab Chips ................................................................................... 33\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nNASA Space Applications for Microfluidic Systems ........................................... 34\n\nMicrocantilever MEMs Sensors ........................................................................ 36\n\nConclusion........................................................................................................... 39\n\nFigures\n\n[Figure list 1-29 with page references as printed, omitted here for brevity in transcription; see list on page iv of source]\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 30. Microfluidics in Glass. ........................................................................ 32\nFigure 31. Commercial Lab-Chip Devices That Allow Analysis for Biomarkers of\nVarious Diseases Using On-Chip Electrophoresis in Microscale. .......... 34\nFigure 32. Design of an Automated Cell Culture System for NASA Space\nApplications Incorporating Microfluidics and Integrated Optical\nComponents ........................................................................................ 35\nFigure 33. NASA Space Application of Microfluidic Cell Culture System Made by\nMicromachining. ................................................................................ 36\nFigure 34. Principle of a Microcantilever That Bends When It is Loaded With an\nAdherent Mass ................................................................................... 37\nFigure 35. Scanning Electron Micrograph Showing a Cantilever Beam With a Single\nVaccinia Virus Particle ...................................................................... 38\nFigure 36. Antibodies Attached to a Cantilever Array Create Different Specificities\nto Substances in Blood That are Indicative of Cancer .......................... 38\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBiosensors and BioMEMS: A Survey of the Present Field\n\nIntroduction\n\nBiomedical sensors and implantable devices employing micro-electromechanical technology will be important to the future of biomedicine. Once just science fiction, the notion of a bionic man is now becoming a reality through the application of microscale technologies. Today it is not unusual to have a friend or family member who has an implantable device, such as a pacemaker, defibrillator, cochlear implant, biosensor, neurostimulator, or insulin pump.\n\nWe have only seen the beginning of this technology development, and today's state-of-the-art implantable devices will be seen as crude and cumbersome tomorrow. With the rapid pace of development, it is probable that within the next two decades we will have as many medical treatments based on microdevices as there are pharmaceutical solutions today. This paper examines some of the most recent advances in the field, as well as the technologies that are likely to appear in the next few years.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nvi"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nWhat is BioMEMS?\n\nBioMEMS stands for biomedical micro-electro-mechanical systems. It is a name applied to biological and medical devices that are created using advanced fabrication processes that allow the devices to be very small relative to comparable devices produced by traditional techniques. BioMEMS devices can also exploit the microscale to provide new functions that are not practical or possible in large-scale devices.\n\nThe name applies to an exceptionally wide variety of engineered devices that derive from electrical, mechanical, chemical, and molecular engineering. The name distinguishes these from nanoMEMS which are submicron in scale such as carbon nanotube structures.\n\nRecently BioMEMS has become something of a misnomer as many of the latest technologies are being designed and developed based on nanoscale technologies which are many times smaller than microscale technologies. While current devices are manufactured mostly on the microscale, many of the functioning parts and the materials they operate on are at the nanoscale level.\n\nNanoMEMS for biomedical applications are mostly carbon-based materials that have emerged as prime materials because of their favorable mechanical and electrical properties. Carbon-based nanostructures such as graphene exhibit a high Young's modulus (stiffness), high strength, low density, low friction and large surface area. The low friction of a carbon nanotube allows production of practically frictionless bearings and has thus been a huge motivation towards applications such as nanomotors. Carbon nanostructures are much stronger than steel, which allows carbon-based materials to meet high-stress demands in biomedical applications such as weight-bearing prosthetics (like hip-joint or bone replacements), where other materials would fail.\n\nThe field of BioMEMS encompasses micro devices that are often but not exclusively made by the same photolithographic techniques used to make computer chips. Their applications include neuroprosthetics, sensors and actuators, and microchemistry systems. A microchemistry system, often called a lab on a chip, can analyze chemical properties of a very small quantity of material such as a tiny blood sample. Advanced systems can perform several tests on the sample at one time.\n\nThere are also drug-delivery systems, miniature hearing aids, artificial retinas, DNA analysis systems, cancer diagnostics, and an amazing variety of devices which support the function of the human body. Figure 1 shows some devices that were developed by the faculty of Biomedical Engineering at Arizona State University.\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Figure: Varieties of BioMEMs and Sensors]\n\nFigure 1. Varieties of BioMEMS and Sensors. These BioMEMS devices were made at Arizona State University (ASU). They represent many of the areas of BioMEMS research.\n\nCHARACTERISTICS OF BIOMEMS\n\nConceiving and designing BioMEMS devices requires a different perspective of the physical world. These devices can operate on principles such as capillary force, van der Waals forces, and electric-field forces. These forces become relatively strong when the size scale reaches very small dimensions. In the realm of the very small, the force of gravity is far less important than electrical charge and viscosity.\n\nFrom the perspective of microscale devices, engineers need to think about accomplishing tasks on an extremely subtle scale but with an exceptionally effective result. BioMEMS employs engineering sciences in ways that are more than just scaling down familiar devices used in biomedical applications. Rather, employment of new structures and new materials including polymers and biological components is necessary. In addition we need to be concerned about things like biocompatibility (the effect of the device on body tissue) as well as the degradation effects of tissues and body fluids on the device itself.\n\nDevelopment of a new product that is targeted for implantation into the human body is particularly expensive due to federal regulation of medical devices. Devices must be shown to be effective for their intended use, and above all devices must be proved safe. Bringing a new device to market is not unlike the development of a new drug. In order\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nto gain federal approval there may be biocompatibility issues to resolve, clinical trials to perform, and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requirements to satisfy.\n\nCATEGORIES OF BIOMEMS\n\nWe divide the BioMEMS field into several subcategories. Some devices are targeted to be implanted into the human body or are applied to the body. Many of these are being developed as alternatives to drugs which therapeutically treat illness or disease. There is also activity in using microscale stimulation devices to treat neurological disorders such as epilepsy and Parkinson's disease and to treat neurological injuries such as stroke or trauma to the spinal cord.\n\nAnother promising field of research is directed towards integration of the human brain with microelectrical components. For example implants are being developed which allow volitional (thought) control of machines. Most of this effort is targeted towards rehabilitation of individuals who are quadriplegics in order to allow them some control over their environment.\n\nThen there are devices being developed for clinical applications such as rapid blood analysis, and there are those targeted for benchtop biological research. In this review, the focus is on specific microscale and MEMS-based devices that are used in medicine and biology.\n\nThese include:\n\n• Micromachines that interface to brain electrodes.\n• Blood glucose sensors.\n• Microfluidics.\n• Neural Interfaces.\n• Neurostimulators.\n• Microbeam sensors.\n\nSeveral of these technologies have been the subject of research by the present author and by colleagues at Arizona State University.\n\nBioMEMS Micromachines\n\nMicromachines made by photolithography are among the most complex and sophisticated of all MEMS devices. They have seen some application in various forms of biomedical devices where motion must be achieved with an implantable device. Motion within the human body by a device is difficult since it implies sliding surfaces, a need for electrical power, and long term reliability and stability. Biomedical implants are usually introduced by surgery and so once implanted cannot be easily removed for servicing.\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nOnly a few BioMEMS applications are well known for implanted devices and these are used for positioning and repositioning of sensors. A specific example is application to brain-electrode systems.\n\nBRAIN-IMPLANTED BIOMEMS MICROMACHINE NEUROELECTRODES\n\nThere are applications in biomedicine and research where very small electrodes are implanted into the brain. These microelectrodes are used in the cortex (surface layer) to detect electrical activity associated with the volitional desire to move some part of the body. Electrical activity is recorded as a very small change in voltage within the tissue.\n\nNear the top of the human head and about 2 cm beneath the scalp lie the parts of the brain where nerve cells (neurons) are found which control the muscles of the body. Specific locations in the cortex are associated with specific parts of the body. When a person moves a limb, there can be detected a corresponding electrical activity of these neurons. Neuroscientists have recorded these signals and developed a kind of map of the brain that defines what brain cells actuate certain muscles of the body.\n\nAn interesting phenomenon occurs in which some of these brain cells become active even when there is intent to move a limb but no actual movement occurs. In a healthy person the intent to move can be detected by measurement of microvolt signals from the brain cells about 120 milliseconds before any muscle movement occurs. In a person who has lost a limb or has become paralyzed, the intent to move can still be detected in the brain even though there is no limb movement.\n\nThus in principle there is an ability to electrically record from the brain and determine a person's intent to move. Monitoring of the brain is accomplished by using an array of implanted microelectrodes whose signals anticipate movement of specific limbs. These signals can in turn be used to control machines. This is the idea behind advanced devices that allow quadriplegics to interact with their environment. Signals from implanted electrodes are used by computers to control robotic actuators.\n\nA problem recording the signals occurs because the body naturally tends to encapsulate the electrodes with scar tissue, meaning the electrodes lose electrical contact with the neurons. A solution to this problem incorporates a very small electromechanical actuator attached to the electrode. This device allows the implanted electrodes to change their position occasionally in order to continue to monitor neural events. By moving the thin rod-like electrode up or down a small distance after several months of implantation, the useful lifetime of the electrode array can be greatly extended.\n\nThe BioMEMS device described here is meant to be implanted under the skull and on top of the brain cortex. It allows fine adjustment of less than a millimeter in order to make sure the electrode system, once implanted, is able to contact the desired brain cells even after the electrode has been encapsulated by scar tissue over time.\n\nFigure 2 shows a photomicrograph of a gear-driven micromachine that was made through collaboration between ASU and Sandia National Laboratories. The device is driven by an electrostatic vibrating comb motor. Under a microscope it can be seen that the combs move in an oscillatory fashion at about 40 Hz when energized. Electrostatic forces between two blade-like combs a few tens of microns apart are operative with about 15 volts as the electric field source.\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe Neural Probe chip enables precise bi-directional positioning of the microelectrodes in the brain with a step resolution in the order of 8.8 μm. The thermal microactuators allow for a movement of the microelectrodes of up to 5 mm in either direction making it suitable for positioning microelectrodes in deep structures of a rodent brain.\n\nThe rest of the mechanism converts an oscillatory motion to a linear motion through a ratchet-type configuration. Figure 3 illustrates the basic unit where there are two comb-like arrays on either side. These generate the actual force. They are connected to a cross piece that converts oscillatory motion in concert with a spring to a pulsatile linear motion of the vertical shaft. This connects to some gears which do a mechanical transformation.\n\nFigure 2. Functional MEMS Micromachines Attached to Sensing Bioelectrodes. The gears have features as small as 50 microns, less than the size of a period on a printed page. (Courtesy of Dr. J. Muthuswamy, Bioengineering Department, ASU)\n\nFigure 3. Schematic Diagram of a MEMS Motor Complete With a Method of Converting Oscillatory Motion to Linear Motion. (Courtesy of Dr. J. Muthuswamy, Bioengineering Department, ASU)\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 4 illustrates the basic physics where the force is generated. A voltage V, is applied to the horizontal sliding shaft. There arises an electrical field (shown as the curved arrow) that tends to pull the shaft into the cavity between the two outer combs. This is the basic motive force of the device. The force generated by each comb is very small so there are constructed many similar structures that form a comb-array. All of the forces act in parallel.\n\nFigure 4. Illustration of the Basic Physical Principle of the BioMEMS Motor (Muthuswamy et al.)\n\nThe device is fabricated by using Sandia's Ultraplanar Multi-level MEMS Technology (SUMMiTV) process, a 5-layer polysilicon micromachining technology. The layers are chemically sensitive to different processes and can be selectively removed by etching with different reagents.\n\nFor example silicon can be removed using an etchant which preferentially removes silicon only along certain crystalline planes. Other layers can be undermined through the use of acids. The components of the micromachine are patterned on the silicon using photoresist masks. A mask is a covering which prevents parts of the silicon from being etched away. Figure 5 gives an idea of the sophistication of this MEMS fabrication technique.\n\nThe end result is that the long rod at the right of the picture in Figure 3 moves up and down with a speed of about 1-2 mm per second. The speed can be adjusted through the number of teeth designed on the reduction gears.\n\nFigure 5. Close-Up Views of the Micro-Motor Gears (Sandia National Labs)\n\nSingle unit recordings were obtained from the somatosensory cortex of adult rats over a period of three days demonstrating the feasibility of this technology. This device has been implanted in rats and its development supported by the neuroprostheses program of the US National Institutes of Health.\n\nFluidic BioMEMS\n\nThe application of microscale fabrication techniques has allowed the manipulation of very small volumes of fluids on the nanoliter and even picoliter scales. This allows\n\n6\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nchemical processes such as separations, reactions, and analysis to be conducted with very small amounts of sample.\n\nAccording to a forecast by the Nexus Task Force, the market for BioMEMS is expected to reach $18 Billion in 2005. The commercial success of these devices and the technical potential of other BioMEMS has driven research in a number of areas. As a result, over the past few years, fluidic BioMEMS devices have become the largest and most diverse applications of MEMS devices.\n\nFluidic BioMEMS now include:\n\n• Drug-delivering neuroprobes.\n• Biosensors (general).\n• Bioreactors.\n• Cell-handling devices.\n• Drug-delivery devices.\n• Micro-chromatography systems.\n• Microfluidics.\n• Molecular detection/handling.\n• Neural interface devices.\n• Optical/retinal sensing.\n• Surgical devices.\n• Tissue-handling devices.\n\nThere are obviously application overlaps within these devices and some are integrated with others to create system-level or multi-sensing devices. Applications run the gamut of the imagination including identification of bacterial or viral agents, drug testing, home testing, environmental safety and security, and drug-delivery technologies.\n\nDRUG-DELIVERY PUMPS\n\nDrug delivery to the human body for medical therapeutic purposes has long been by swallowing substances or by injection. However this approach creates rapid rises and falls in drug concentration in the blood stream because the dose is typically introduced all at one time. The blood titer of a drug may thus peak at undesirably high levels in an effort to sustain the drug action over a longer period of time.\n\nTreatment of many medical conditions, such as cancer by chemotherapeutic drugs would best be accomplished by a steady and long sustained infusion of the drug into the blood. This would keep the tumor-fighting drug at some optimal concentration and so make it maximally effective. High levels of chemotherapeutic drug levels in the blood are toxic and levels that are below some threshold are ineffective.\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMethods of creating a more sustained blood concentration of a given drug are desirable to increase drug effectiveness. Similarly there are other medical applications for controlled-release drug-delivery systems, such as that for insulin, where it is desirable to maintain a more sustained dose over a period of hours.\n\nThere has been the application of MEMS technologies in the creation of better ways to deliver drugs to the human body by way of small implantable reservoirs that can slowly release their drug over a prolonged period of time. Figure 6 shows a MEMS-based insulin-delivery pump for the treatment of diabetes. This is perhaps one of the largest applications of BioMEMS in medicine.\n\nFigure 6. An Insulin MEMS Pump. An implantable drug-delivery device.\n\nDiabetes is a disorder in which glucose (blood sugar) is not properly taken into the cells of the body. This process is normally mediated by the hormone insulin, which is produced by the islet cells of the pancreas. Insulin circulates in the blood to actuate a receptor on tissue cells that causes them to uptake glucose from the blood stream. If there is too little insulin (as in Type 1 diabetes) the cells will not uptake glucose from the blood, the cells will starve, and blood sugar levels become too high from unabsorbed glucose. Alternatively, cells may not respond properly to normal insulin levels (as in Type 2 diabetes) and require artificially higher levels of insulin to uptake glucose. This is called insulin resistance. In either case, blood insulin levels can be increased by using insulin injection devices.\n\nBrittle diabetes is a condition where blood glucose levels fluctuate wildly with eating or fasting causing hyperglycemia (too high a blood glucose—more than about 100 mg percent) or too low (hypoglycemia—less than about 60 mg percent). Brittle diabetics\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nhave a significant problem in controlling their blood sugar and sometimes insulin doses are not adjusted finely enough or frequently enough to maintain the blood glucose at healthy levels. This form of diabetes is responsible for fainting (ketoacidosis) and other serious symptoms such as poor blood circulation to the limbs. Poor circulation can result in diabetic ulcers and may sometimes necessitate amputation of the limb.\n\nInsulin pumps are often worn by brittle diabetics because a slow infusion of insulin works better in stabilizing blood glucose levels rather than periodic injections. A belt-worn insulin-delivery system looks something like an old-style audio player. These systems are typically controlled by a small screw-type pump powered by batteries. The reservoir carries several milliliters of insulin for dispensing over an extended period of time. The injection needle is connected (underneath the clothes) to a catheter and then to the pump. The systems are reasonably effective but are cumbersome and require the needle to continuously reside subcutaneously in the abdomen.\n\nA MEMS implanted insulin pump is a less cumbersome and perhaps more convenient means of slowly infusing insulin at a programmed rate. The implanted device is refilled periodically by introducing a needle through the skin and tissue to a septum in the device.\n\nThe MEMS insulin pump shown in Figure 6 is surgically placed under the skin. It has a rubber septum on the top for filling with insulin. This implementation has a piezoelectric element that moves in response to electrical charge. When actuated by a timer the element oscillates, creating a pressure inside the device that dispenses insulin. The device is programmable for dispensing at various rates.\n\nAlthough the implantable MEMS pump was developed for diabetes, the pump has application to the slow measured delivery of many other drugs including 5-fluoruracil used for cancer therapy and theophyllne for treatment of asthma.\n\nWhat is a Biosensor?\n\nA primary application of BioMEMS is in the creation of sensors for blood chemistry and other biophysical parameters of the human body.\n\nWe can define a Biosensor as:\n\n• A sensor whose application is primarily in the measurement of quantities within a biological system, such as chemical, electrical, and physical parameters.\n• A sensor incorporating a biological component (enzymes, living cells, antibodies) typically used to measure chemical concentration. This definition does not require that the sensor be deployed within a biological system.\n\nThe two definitions which are somewhat different have their origin with different influential investigators who wrote textbooks in the early days of this field. The latter definition is prevalent in Europe.\n\nA biosensor is normally constructed by immobilizing a biologically active material (such as an enzyme) onto an electrical sensor that measures a fundamental physical quantity like electrical current, voltage, mechanical strain, temperature, or frequency. The specific sensor material is chosen because it reacts to a desired measurand (such as\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nconcentration of glucose) and thus causes a change in one of these fundamental quantities. Electrical sensors can be inherently small and so we have a combination device with biology and electrical sensing in a small and compact form.\n\nWhen compared to much larger bench top machines, microscale configurations of sensors usually have a superior performance because they are less prone to various interferences such as power-line noise and they have much shorter diffusion distances for sensed molecules. Some physical quantities such as micro-degrees of temperature change are much easier to measure over small distances.\n\nBioMEMS Implantable Sensors\n\nBiosensors placed inside the body, or in-vivo, measure biological parameters such as blood pH, oxygen, carbon dioxide, and blood glucose. (Blood pH is a measure of the acidity of the blood.) These parameters are the most important in medicine since these are all independent blood chemistries that give a moment-to-moment insight into the physiological state of a living being.\n\nSince the early days of the space program NASA has been interested in ways of noninvasively monitoring these blood parameters in astronauts for the instant assessment of their physiological condition. Until recently, blood withdrawal was the only accurate and reliable way to obtain such information. Indwelling sensors that use needle penetrations are now available but still have trouble with accuracy and longevity.\n\nThe military has also been interested in the assessment of the state of readiness of a soldier which is reflected in his blood chemistry. An exhausted solider will show a highly acidic blood pH (less than about 7.3). Remote electronic readout of biosensor information of a soldier to a central command center is presently the stuff of science fiction movies but reflects real desires of the military.\n\nFigure 7 shows a photo of a pH sensor (which measures concentration of hydrogen ions). It is designed as a needle for tissue insertion or placement at the end of a catheter for introduction into the blood stream. The pointed tip is inserted into the medium to be measured, and the electrical signal and power supply are connected to the device at the gold film contacts at the base.\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 7. An ISFET (Ion Sensitive Field Effect Transistor) Needle-Type pH Sensor for Monitoring Tissue Physiologic Status (http://www.ee.seikei.ac.jp/~seiichi/lecture/Biomedical/09/09-biosensor.html)\n\nThe sensor element is an ion sensitive field effect transistor (ISFET). This device is micromachined from silicon by using standard semiconductor photolithography processes. The actual active sensor surface is near the tip of the device where there is a thin film of silicon nitride covering the gate region of the transistor. The gate is sensitive to very small changes in electric field, and these in turn cause relatively large changes (or gain) in the current flow through the transistor.\n\nAt the center in Figure 7 is a standard transistor diagram showing the gate and its relation to the other contacts. On the right is shown the pH sensitive ISFET system that measures an electric field change across the nitride membrane. The membrane is placed directly in contact with the liquid to be measured. It is not known the exact process that occurs at the membrane that gives rise to electric field shifts on the gate. Presumably hydrogen ions reversibly adsorb onto the interface between the nitride membrane and the solution causing local electric field changes on the gate.\n\nThis device is not meant for permanent implantation but rather short term applications in research or medical surgery where the sensor is used over just a few hours. Proteins and other biological molecules adhere to the gate region of the ISFET and cause a slow\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndrift and offset in the reading and so shifting the calibration. Depending on its exact construction some versions however can be effective for as much as a few days.\n\nFigure 8 shows the latest in microdevice oxygen sensors. (This particular version is not specifically a MEMS device since it is not made by photolithography and it is neither electrical nor mechanical in nature.) It represents however the trend in oxygen sensors towards optical measurement techniques that are evolving towards optical systems based on MEMS. These sensors can be implemented in small sizes with optical fibers that transmit and receive light from the sensor surface at the tip. Variations on this basic principle are used for indwelling blood oxygen catheters during surgery.\n\nFigure 8. A Fiber Optical Oxygen Sensor Showing Two Optical Fibers Mated to Plastic Prisms That are Coated With an Oxygen-Sensor Coating, Usually a Fluorescent Ruthenium Compound (http://www.imtek.de/content/projekte_en.php?ls=11)\n\nThe oxygen sensors respond to changes in absorption of oxygen into the special coating at the tip, or in some versions, they respond to fluorescence of a thin oxygen-sensitive coating placed on the prism surface. The secret to good performance lies in the proprietary selection of the specific chemical species selected for the coating.\n\nBlue light is usually transmitted down the optical fiber and the coating glows orange in proportion to the amount of oxygen present. The light from the glow is conducted back toward the supporting instrumentation system. The intensity of the orange light then indicates oxygen levels in the solution. The particular sensor shown in Figure 8 uses two optical fibers. The one on the left side is not sensitive to oxygen, but rather acts as a reference system that is used to compensate for changes temperature, ambient light, and other system variables.\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSo far, despite decades of work, no continuous monitoring sensor that is self contained and implantable has been successful for long term usage. The human body is an exceptionally hostile environment for foreign materials. Even our most advanced biosensors fail over a period of days or weeks if continuously exposed to the body environment. This failure is mostly due to the sensor chemistry wearing out in one way or another or attack of the sensor interface by the body's immune system. Failure is not generally attributed to the materials of which the sensor is made.\n\nMEMS Blood Glucose Sensors\n\nDiabetes is an enormous world problem. A significant fraction of the annual world health care expenditures can be traced back to diabetes, and its cousin, obesity. Measurement of blood glucose on a regular basis, usually 3-4 times a day, allows a diabetic to regulate his diet and insulin dose to achieve normal glucose levels.\n\nPerhaps one of the most needed biosensors is that for an in-vivo blood glucose sensor. These could be used to automatically control of the output of an insulin-delivery pump. This would constitute a major improvement in the treatment of diabetes by automatically using blood glucose concentration feedback to stabilize the blood glucose levels with the exact level of needed insulin. This kind of system is sometimes called an artificial endocrine pancreas since it mimics the normal function of the pancreas in regulating insulin release.\n\nThere are several attempts at using MEMS devices to produce indwelling glucose sensors. These are presently on the market, but currently the sensors have relatively short lifetimes, are disposable, and require replacement every few days.\n\nFigure 9 shows this basic idea. An implantable sensor produces an electrical output that reports the blood glucose concentration. Its signal is transmitted to a receiver and then processed by a computer to drive a belt-worn pump.\n\nThe creation of such a sensor has been a daunting problem from more than 30 years. The most recent attempts have been in the use of micromachining to produce optical devices of very small size and to produce wireless transmitting electrochemical sensor devices small enough to be injected into the body.\n\nCoincident with the development of sensors has been the need to develop very small wireless telemetry systems that transmit the sensor data to outside the body.\n\nFigure 9. Control of an Insulin-Delivery System by an Implantable Glucose Sensor (Medtronic Inc.)\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCOMMERCIAL BLOOD GLUCOSE SENSORS\n\nThe present method of blood glucose monitoring depends on a needle puncture of the skin to withdraw a drop of blood to place on a color changing test strip. The test strip is read by a small handheld reader. Glucose test strips do not have to necessarily be small, but by making the sensor very small the amount of blood required for the test is reduced. The sensors often are made by techniques of photolithography or in some cases by microscale screen printing in order to achieve reproducibility.\n\nThe skin-puncture test is painful and time consuming, and thus noninvasiveness is the key desired characteristic of glucose sensors. Research is being directed at a noninvasive glucose sensor that is accurate enough to work external to the body and through the skin. Short term (a few days) wearable needle glucose sensors are available from major companies like Medtronic Inc. but fall short of the convenience of a noninvasive sensor.\n\nENZYME-BASED BIOSENSORS\n\nThe key component in most biosensors is a reactive chemistry on the sensor surface. The sensor chemistry is chosen to give it specificity to only one analyte (such as glucose). The concentration of the analyte is determined by a sensor that can directly measure the analyte reaction products reacting with the sensor surface. For example sensor chemistries to measure glucose are often based on glucose oxidase enzyme which promotes a chemical reaction at the sensor surface. Glucose oxidase enzyme complex structure is seen in Figure 10.\n\nGlucose oxidase catalyzes the reaction:\n\nglucose + O2 (glucose oxidase) -> gluconolactone + H2O2 + heat (79 kJ/mole)\n\nFigure 10. Glucose Oxidase Enzymes Like Glucose Oxidase are Large Folded Molecules That Act as Catalysts for a Chemical Reaction (http://www.innovations-report.de/bilder_neu/17279_gluc.jpg)\n\nThis reaction of glucose with oxygen (from the air) occurs in the presence of glucose oxidase enzyme. The enzyme itself is a catalyst to the reaction and so is not consumed. Rather it presents favorable conditions and ability to transfer electrons on its molecular structure for glucose and oxygen to come together to react. Figure 10 shows the enzyme structure.\n\nTypically in a sensor the enzyme is a large molecule and can be trapped in a porous gel and thus is not able to diffuse away from the sensor surface. Glucose and oxygen, being small molecules, can diffuse through the gel to the enzyme whereby the reaction occurs and the reaction products will diffuse away. The enzyme is unconsumed and the reaction process is continuous as long as glucose is present.\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAn enzyme-gel is applied in a thin layer over a electrically biased metal electrode. An electrical current flows through the electrode when the hydrogen peroxide produced by the glucose reaction is decomposed and causes an electrical current to flow. If there is a fixed concentration of glucose present, a corresponding amount of peroxide will be produced, and this can be measured by the electrical current flow. The amount of peroxide measured is an indicator of the glucose concentration. The actual amount of analyte consumed by a small BioMEMS sensor is exceedingly small and has no significant effect on the local concentration.\n\nFigure 11 shows a MEMS implementation of a blood glucose sensor using this kind of approach (Advanced Biosensors Inc). The fine needle geometry is generally meant for insertion into tissue. This device is comprised of multiple independent small sensors and is actually a system of components that adds signal processing and interface electronics to allow its communication with insulin pumps for automated delivery of insulin based on patient need.\n\nAdvanced BioSensors blood glucose sensor\n- Flip chip assembly\n- ASICs, power sources and circuit components\n- Separate sensors, mount with electrical connections, add the biocompatible polymer, assemble the sensor patch.\n- The sensor based on glucose oxidase reaction with blood plasma from capillaries in the dermis.\n- biochemical coating - sensor in place 3 - 7 days\n- Docking port for electronics assembly with amplifier, ADC, wireless transceiver, power source\n- encrypted digital data to wristwatch-sized monitor/recorder module\n- In future combine the CGMS with an insulin pump to produce a closed-loop system—an artificial pancreas.\nSource: http://www.devicelink.com/mddi/archive/03/06/003.html\n1 mm long x 200 um wide\n\nFigure 11. An Experimental MEMS Blood Glucose Sensor\n\nGlucose sensors based on electrical measurement of hydrogen peroxide products have been found to have the significant problem of a drifting baseline over time. It is difficult to maintain calibration of the sensors, and the electrode is affected by proteins and other substances in the blood stream. Although this sensing approach has had some success, its longevity in the body is much less than desired; sensors based on this approach decay after a few days of use.\n\nTHERMOPILE IMPLANTABLE GLUCOSE SENSORS\n\nTowe et al. at Arizona State University have been working on an improved approach to blood glucose sensing. It depends on the fact that the glucose oxidase reaction generates a small amount of heat as indicated in the above chemical reaction. The\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nreleased chemical energy warms the surrounding environment to a degree that depends on the energy released in the exothermic reaction, which is characteristic of the particular chemistry and the amount of reactants. The heating is then dependent on the glucose concentration.\n\nFigure 12 shows these devices. They are made by MEMS techniques involving the processes of using patterning by exposure to light through a mask (photolithography), metal deposition by evaporation, and sputter etching. The result is the fabrication of sensors in large arrays with many identical sensors on a single substrate. The figure is a photomicrograph of a part of a wafer production run with nine identical devices. Each one of the devices is less than 1 mm in size and would be cut apart and used independently. The darker rectangular areas at the top of each device are the electrical bonding pads where wires attach to the device to readout its electrical response.\n\nFigure 13 shows the basic process in the sensor operation. The sensor is planar and composed of a layered structure consisting of an enzyme gel and a thermoelectric temperature sensor. Glucose from the local medium naturally diffuses to the gel and the temperature sensor underlies a thin film of enzyme gel that contains the glucose oxidase. A second enzyme called catalase is used to secondarily break down hydrogen peroxide produced by the first reaction.\n\nFigure 12. Photomicrograph 3 x 3 Array of Thermoelectric Glucose Sensors Constructed by Towe et al. at ASU\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThermoelectric Enzyme Sensor Schematic\nGlucose + O2 ---------> H2O2 + Gluconic Acid + 79 kJ\nH2O2 ---------> H2O + 1/2 O2 + 100 kJ\nOxygen Gluconic Acid Glucose Enzyme Gel Glucose Oxidase & Catalase Heat Thin Mylar Reference Junctions Sensing Junctions Reference Junctions Insulation\n\nFigure 13. A MEMS Thermopile Glucose Sensor (Towe et al., Arizona State University)\n\nHeat energy released in the gel is measured by the thermopile and is characterized in terms of kiloJoules (kJ) per mole of glucose consumed. At concentrations of glucose that are common in the blood stream, the temperature rise is very small, on the order of a hundredth of a degree (10 millidegrees).\n\nMeasuring this temperature change in the presence of ambient body heat or room-temperature changes of a few degrees is a daunting task, but can be done.\n\nThe measurement of the small reaction temperature in the face of possible ambient temperature shifts is accomplished by the use of a differential temperature measurement system.\n\nThis sensor employs what is known as the Seebeck Effect whereby dissimilar metals heated at their junction produce a voltage that is proportional to temperature. This concept is shown in Figure 14. This principle is then implemented as an array of metal junctions that when connected in series produce a higher output in order to detect smaller temperature changes.\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBlood Glucose Sensors for Diabetic Monitoring and Biochemical Analyses\nEric Guilbeau and Bruce Towe\nMetal A\nMeasuring Junction T1 T2 Reference Junction\nMetal B\nSeebeck Voltage\nSeebeck Voltage = Thermoelectric EMF (T1 - T2)\nThermoelectric EMF of Antimony/Bismuth = 119 µV/°C\n\nFigure 14. Illustration of the Thermocouple Principle (Guilbeau and Towe, ASU)\n\nFigure 15 on the left panel shows a photomicrograph of a thermopile temperature sensor that is made from the metals antimony and bismuth. These metals are vacuum deposited as alternating thin films using a masking process to form horizontal lines of conductive metal. Each pair of lines has a sensing junction and a reference junction. When they are heated on their sensing junction with respect to their reference end (that is exposed to the ambient temperature), they generate a small electrical voltage.\n\nEach junction is only a few tens of microns in size so it is possible to place dozens of junctions in series in order to increase the voltage signal. Figure 15 on the right panel shows that there are two banks of thermoelectric sensors with the central common junctions supporting an enzyme gel. Thermopiles are thin film temperature sensors and are differential in nature in that they measure temperature differences, and are thus sensitive enough to detect exceedingly small temperature rises.\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAntimony Thin Mylar Substrate Bismuth Enzyme Reference Junctions Measuring Junctions Reference Junctions\n\nFigure 15. Thermopile Glucose Sensor (left) With Functional Illustration (right) are Made Using Photolithographic Techniques. This larger device is about 8 mm in length but has approximately 50 micron minimum geometries. (Towe et al.)\n\nAt ASU the glucose sensor has been constructed on a thin mylar plastic substrate and so can be curved into a cylinder to form a small tube. This tube is then sensitive to glucose concentrations on its outside exposure to the blood stream. Figure 16 shows a photograph and an illustration of a glucose sensor implemented in the form of a catheter. The electrical output signal is routed by wires down the length of the catheter for a remote readout. The device was implanted in a pig over a short duration and the decrease in blood glucose concentrations in response to administration of insulin were recorded and are shown in the right hand panel of Figure 16.\n\nGlucose Catheter Sensor\nInsulin\nConcentration, mg%\nTime\n10 min\n\nFigure 16. Photograph and Illustration of the Thermopile Glucose Sensor in a Catheter. Its configuration is shown (left) and its response in detecting changes in blood glucose in a pig as a result of insulin administration to the animal. (ASU research.) Towe et al.\n\nThis glucose sensor approach has been found to have limitations in stability when introduced into tissue or blood. Primarily the problems, as with many sensors, arise from the system chemistry and not as much from the electronic portion of the sensor. The glucose oxidase enzyme slowly decays over time and thus the sensor sensitivity and calibration drifts making it eventually unusable.\n\nThese problems have no easy solution. Investigators have been working with various forms of blood chemistry sensors for forty years or more. Microfabricated\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthermoelectric sensors have improved reproducibility of the sensors, but there has only been limited success in applications of implantation into the body.\n\nNeuroengineering by BioMEMS\n\nBioMEMS types of devices, as we understand them today, were used first in neuroscience. There has been a long history of the study of the electrical nature of body tissue dating back to the days of Galvani and Volta. Frog nerves were found to be electrically stimulatable and the first recordings of bioelectrical events were accomplished very early with the invention of the string galvanometer.\n\nMore recently, pointed wires inserted into muscle, nerve and brain have given way to MEMS electrode systems that are made on silicon supporting substrates and the processes of photolithography used to define electrical current pathways. Figure 17 shows a modern electrode system for detecting and recording electrical signals from living things. Each of the square regions is an exposed film of platinum while the thinner conductors that contact the pads are insulated by a thin layer of a plastic and conduct the detected electrical signals to a connector system (not shown).\n\nFigure 17. A MEMS Biopotential Electrode System. It is approximately 100 microns in width. Each square pad is an electrically sensitive region. (Wikipedia)\n\nBIOELECTRIC EVENTS\n\nThe living processes of biology can in some ways be likened to that of a battery. The metabolism of life produces the charging of the battery while it discharges through a myriad of bioelectrical events that produce movement, thought, and cognition.\n\nThe transfer of electrical charge in the form of ions, mostly sodium, potassium and chloride is initiated by bioelectrically excitable cells of the nerves, muscles, and neurons of the brain. Collectively they constitute the wiring of the body. These ions result from the salts that are part of the composition of living things that have evolved from the sea.\n\nThe movements of these ions constitutes the flow of an electrical current in tissues and are called bioelectrical currents. These currents give rise to electrical potentials that can be detected from the skin or by biopotential electrodes inserted into organs or muscle.\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBioelectrical events are generated in tissues when there is an electrochemical change in the membranes of specialized cells of the brain and nervous systems.\n\nNeuroelectrical devices interface to the brain and nervous systems through electrodes that touch excitable cell membrane and convert ionic current flows to electron flow in a wire. Conversely current flows in a wire are converted by electrodes to ionic flows in tissue.\n\nThe function of the entire human body is under control of the brain and the nervous system. So the use of electrodes of various types as a method of monitoring and controlling the function of the nervous system through bioelectrical currents and electrodes is potentially a very powerful method of treating in therapeutic ways. Figure 18 suggests the idea of an excitable cell of the brain having many tendrils or dendrites that extend outward to interconnect with other cells. Essentially these cells are the relay points of the bioelectrical wiring of the human body.\n\nFigure 18. A Neural Cell Showing Dendritic Inter-Connections That are Electrically Active With Other Cells (artist's illustration)\n\nAn electrical interface to body tissues typically occurs through the use of microelectrode systems. These electrodes are often on the order of tens of microns to millimeter-order in sizes depending on their function. For example electrodes that simply measure bioelectrical activity of the nervous system can resemble needles insulated along their length having micron order tips both because they carry only small electrical currents and also because they need to be placed in very specific places and they contact just a single or few cells that control specific functions.\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBionics and Neurointerfaces\n\nNeuroprosthetics (also called neural prosthetics) is a discipline related to neuroscience and biomedical engineering concerned with developing neural prostheses. Neural prostheses are devices that attempt to substitute for a motor, sensory or cognitive modality that might have been damaged as a result of an injury or a disease.\n\nBionics and neurointerfacing are relatively new concepts. A neurointerface is a combination of software and hardware that translates electrode signals to something which is understood by an electronic system. The term bionics is used when we connect organic matter with something artificial (human-made).\n\nThe design and development of neural interface electrodes to the brain or peripheral nerve has been going on for more than twenty years. Figure 19 shows a mockup of a neuroprosthetic electrode system for the human brain that is meant to tap into brain signals and then through the use of a computer allow a quadriplegic to control his environment.\n\nFigure 19. A Neuroprosthetic Interface. Adapted to the needs of a quadriplegic for control of his environments (Duke University)\n\nBIOELECTRODES AND BIOMEMS\n\nElectrodes that interface to the brain or nervous system are the most important components of neuroprosthetic systems. There are basically of two classes of electrodes. One class does recording of bioelectric events and the other provides current to stimulate bioelectrical responses.\n\nBoth classes of electrodes need to be designed to be very robust for long term survival in the hostile environment of the human body. For this reason only the noble metals of platinum, iridium, gold, and to some extent the resistant metal tungsten are used for electrodes. Nearly all other metals would corrode in the warm saline environment of living tissues. Electronic exchange reactions occur at the electrode surfaces in both recording and stimulation modes.\n\nMany bioelectrodes are nothing more than fine wires insulated down their length and then exposed at a needle tip where an electrical contact exists to tissue. These are usually used in research for trying to understand brain function. Sometimes a single electrode performs both recording as well as stimulation but more frequently the electrode size and material is optimized to do one function or the other.\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nElectrode arrays are sometimes used, such as in the case of deep brain stimulation for late-stage Parkinson's disease, which is characterized by tremors of hands. There is a \"brain pacemaker\" that sends electrical impulses to specific parts of the patient's brain via permanently inserted electrodes. This can stop the tremors for reasons that are not exactly known and for which the best location in a given patient to place the electrode is also not known beforehand. Thus introducing multiple electrodes and stimulating each one in-turn until the best result is found allows a greater degree of possible effectiveness and therapeutic result. MEMS techniques are being employed in this application to permit a greater number of contacts and to reduce the size of the lead wire on the electrodes.\n\nMEMS multichannel electrode stimulating and recording electrode systems are also used in brain interface applications to record or stimulate the activity of many neural circuits. Such electrodes allow ability to record or stimulate complex muscle movements associated with the limb such as in walking or in grasping objects with the hands. Figure 20 shows an electrode system looking much like a bed of nails.\n\nFigure 20. Scanning Electron Micrograph of a Brain Electrode Array Manufactured From Titanium and Produced by a Process of Electrodischarge Machining (\"Electrical Discharge Machining and Chemical Etching\", Fofonoff*, Martel, Hatsopoulos, Donoghue, Hunter)\n\nAll muscles of the body are activated by nerves that route to the brain. It is known from careful studies conducted by many investigators over the years that there is a wiring and physical mapping of the muscles to certain clusters of specialized cells in the motor cortex of the brain.\n\nIt is also known that when a person plans or strongly imagines moving part of his body, there is a complex electrical activation of the corresponding regions of the brain involving many cells over a local area.\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nOver the years, investigators have figured out how to interpret precursor bioelectrical events in the brain involved in planning of movements. The result is that if enough recording electrodes are placed in the brain in the motor cortex area, it is possible to determine planned muscle motion. This works even if the muscles ultimately do not move, as in the case of a quadriplegic with spinal cord injury.\n\nThus quite a remarkable possibility presents in that a computer program can be taught to interpret large numbers of bioelectrodes signals and so can determine a person's intent to move and then, for example, control a robotic limb that actually performs the operation.\n\nCrude forms of these thought-controlled devices have been shown in research laboratories to be feasible, even if they are at present not practical. Among other things, the electrode interface to the brain is not yet sufficiently developed to provide large numbers of functioning electrodes that can work over prolonged periods of time.\n\nMICROELECTRODE ARRAY FABRICATION\n\nNeuroengineering applications in the brain can require tens to hundreds of electrodes to make contact with a similarly large numbers of cells in the brain. Large numbers of electrodes in arrays inserted into the surface of the brain cortex thus become sensitive to the timing and patterns of cell firings.\n\nBioMEMS has been a critical part of this development. The electrode array in Figure 20 is made by a electrochemical process of using a long but stiff wire that acts like a machine tool. Electrical discharge machining (EDM) is a process that makes use of computer-aided design (CAD), that runs under computer numerical control (CNC), and that is capable of batch processing.\n\nA block of titanium metal that will ultimately be the array is placed in an electrolyte solution and the working electrode initiates a submerged electrochemical arc. It finely removes metal by a chemical process that does not involve a lot of heat. It can generate intricate features with high aspect ratios and is capable of machining a large variety of conductive materials.\n\nIn this case, the electrode shaft thicknesses are on the order of 50-100 microns and the entire device is less than a centimeter square with 96 electrode channels. When this device is encapsulated in a polymer at its base and pressed into the brain cortex, each electrode then records from a specific set of neurons that are local to its placement.\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBRAIN-MACHINE INTERFACES\n\nA specific development in MEMS based neuroengineering has been the brain-machine interface (BMI). These devices use computers to interpret brain signals from implanted neural arrays and then use the information to control machines and setup an automated environment.\n\nThe development of such devices can have a profound impact on the quality of life for those individuals practically isolated because of their disabilities. Connected machines will enable them to enjoy the everyday things we take for granted.\n\nFor example, a visual prosthesis could potentially restore partial vision to a blind patient by stimulating neurons in the visual cortex using an input BMI. Signals could be recorded from the motor cortex using an output BMI in order to bypass a neural injury and restore some movement to a paralyzed patient. Even a simpler device that would allow a patient to move a cursor on a screen would make a significant impact.\n\nIt is generally recognized that clinical applications of such BMIs may require the activities of hundreds or thousands of neurons to be simultaneously sampled. Figure 21 is an SEM photograph of a dense array of electrodes directed towards BMI applications.\n\nFigure 21. Scanning Electron Micrograph of a 1141 Electrode Array Made to Be Inserted Into the Surface of the Human Brain (University of Utah)\n\nA significant problem with these devices is that when they get too densely disposed, blood flow and disruption of the natural wiring of the brain causes decline of tissue function.\n\nAnother very important issue is the biocompatibility of the material that the implants are coated with. The more biocompatible these materials are the less tissue reaction they will cause thus resulting less implant risk and longer implant period.\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPOLYMER BIOMEMS ELECTRODES\n\nPolymer materials like polyimide are widely used for neuroprostheses because they are inert, flexible and metal films adhere well to them.\n\nManufacturing of neural electrodes can be achieved by metal vacuum deposition through photolithographic masks and by a process of RF ablation or etching. Figure 22 shows some products of NeuroNexus Inc that result from this process. These electrodes are batch fabricated and have a high reproducibility of geometrical shape, electrical properties, and mechanical properties.\n\nFigure 22. Polymer-Based Cortical Penetrating Neuroelectrodes Made by Processes of Thin Film Deposition and RF Etching (Neuronexus Inc)\n\nThey also have the advantage of small size, resulting in minimal displacement of the neural tissue and their long leg lengths give a high spatial resolution at various depths up to 1 cm. The multiple parallel shanks, provide horizontal spatial sampling and independent recording/stimulation among sites.\n\nFigure 23 shows one of these devices introduced into the cortex of an exposed rat brain.\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 23. A MEMS Microelectrode Array Implanted Into the Cortex of a Rat Brain. The lead wires from the device can be seen. (NeuroNexus Inc.)\n\nRETINAL DEVICES USING BIOMEMS\n\nAn example of MEMS being used in conjunction with wireless implantable systems is the retinal implant.\n\nThese devices attempt to augment vision where it has failed due to problems such as macular degeneration and retinitis pigmentosa. The basic idea is to use a miniature video camera and connect it to an electrode array in the eye such that the scene in view is converted to electrical impulses used to stimulate the sensation of sight by direct stimulation of the receptors in the eye. Figure 24 shows this idea.\n\nFigure 25 shows a microelectrode array that has been manufactured on a polymer substrate such that it is exceedingly thin and flexible. The flexibility is needed so that it conforms to the curved shape of the back of the eye. The electrode pads seen are attached by a flexible cable.\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 24. A Representation of the Retinal Prosthesis: (A) camera in the glass frame, (B) wireless transmitter, (C) extraocular electronic case (receiver), and (D) intraocular implant electrode array (http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BI108/2006-108websites/group03retinalimplants/interoccular.htm)\n\nFigure 25. A BioMEMS-Fabricated 4x4 Microelectrode Retinal Array (http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BI108/2006-108websites/ group03retinalimplants/interoccular.htm)\n\nA retinal based neuroprosthesis is designed to use electrical pulse stimulation of the remaining viable retinal cells to evoke the sensation of light at discrete points within the visual field. These apparent points of light are called phosphenes.\n\nThe strategy is to pulse the retina with sufficiently close-spaced electrodes such that the phosphenes would combine to present an organized pattern to the patient's perceptions. A completely implanted device is desired that has the electrode array connected to a pulse driver circuit, power, and signal processing. All of these components must be miniaturized as much as possible so the entire device can be implanted.\n\nMicroimplantable devices based on BioMEMS structures are being developed that capture their power from outside the body by wireless techniques. Bidirectional communication is often needed to provide feedback on device function. Some communication links need a wide bandwidth for real-time data transmission and this is challenging since such types of communication are inherently of a high power drain. Figure 26 is an artist's conception of the retinal implant designed by the Boston group.\n\n28\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 26. An Illustration of the Retinal Neuroprosthesis Created by the Boston Implant Project (http://www.bostonretinalimplant.org/implant.php?fontsize=normal&hicontrast)\n\nThe signal processing circuits are on the left while the power induction coil is the circular structure. The MEMS stimulating microelectrode array projects out towards the bottom of the picture.\n\nThe minimal size of the implant means batteries are impractical and forms of wireless power by magnetic induction, ultrasound, or solar energy are required. In addition the tissue surrounding the implant is usually very sensitive to temperature rise so the implant must have very low power consumption to ensure it will not harm the tissue.\n\nPower by magnetic induction is widely used because it allows relatively larger amounts of power transfer compared to ultrasound and solar energy techniques. Parallel coils of wire, one inside the body and one outside, exchange energy by magnetic field coupling in accordance with Faraday's law of induction. Figure 27 is an artist's conception of the magnetic induction method of power transmission. There are two coaxial coils that couple magnetically, one on the inside of the body and one external. The energy of the magnetic field is shown as the curved lines passing through the tissue.\n\nA disadvantage of this method is that the coils are relatively large compared to the size of micro-implants and so tends to define the minimum size. The coil size depends on the amount of energy that needs to be induced and on the implant depth with larger diameter coils being required.\n\nThis type of technology is giving way to improved methods of energy transmission into tissue for implant power by using microscale devices that, although not strictly MEMS, share many of their characteristics.\n\n29\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 27. Power Transfer by Magnetic Induction to an Implanted BioMEMS Retinal Prosthesis. This is the Boston Retinal Implant Project.\n(http://www.bostonretinalimplant.org/retinalapproach.php?fontsize=normal&hicontrast)\n\nMICROSCALE IN THERAPEUTIC NEUROSTIMULATION\n\nSome of the biggest excitement in medical neuroprosthetics has been in the notion that we can use micro-implantable devices rather than drugs to reduce or better control the effects of stroke, heart disease, epilepsy, and other disorders of the human condition. Bioelectrical stimulation has effects which are very specific on local tissues rather than indiscriminately affecting all tissues and so may offer fewer side effects of drugs. Such devices can be finely controlled in their effects and provide a greater flexibility in terms of treatment.\n\nAny implanted device has to be small in order to be minimally invasive, especially in the brain. Powering of implanted devices by batteries is only practical in a few biomedical situations. Also implants may need to communicate with the outside world wirelessly. Having wires penetrating the skin is uncomfortable and could lead to infection in the tissue.\n\nThe notion of placing bioelectronic stimulation devices inside of the body for therapeutic reasons goes back to the early invention of the pacemaker. These kind of devices have internal batteries to support an electrical pulse generator that paces the rhythm of the heart.\n\nBecause the amount of energy in each pulse is relatively small the power drain is low and the pacemaker batteries can last years. The difficulty is that they are bulky, must be eventually replaced on the order of seven years, and their placement is invasive.\n\n36"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nVariations of pacemaker devices are used in brain neurostimulation for treatment of Parkinson's disease characterized by the involuntary tremors of the hands and body. In this case the battery pack must be placed outside the brain, typically in the upper chest and a long catheter wire tunneled through tissues to the specific parts of the brain to be treated.\n\nResearch at Arizona State University has been directed towards overcoming the problems of bulk and need for battery replacement through an approach where the implanted neurostimulation devices are made exceptionally small and where they derive their power by a process of induction from the outside of the body. Figure 28 shows one of these devices. The tiny size of the device reduces tissue trauma upon insertion. Small electrodes at either end of the device contact neural tissue and apply electrical stimulating pulses.\n\nThe patient wears a type of powering-patch on his body over the micro-implant and is supplied by a small cell-phone like device having batteries that provides the energy for driving the patch.\n\nFigure 28. A New Generation of Implantable Neurostimulation Devices Can Pass Through the Lumen of a Syringe Needle. This device was made at ASU and is powered by ultrasound energy. (Towe et al.)\n\nA coin-sized transducer on the skin directs ultrasound energy at about 1 MHz frequency towards an implanted microdevice.\n\nA type of piezoelectric plastic material known as PVDF is configured as a ultrasound receiver and works to change pulses of the sound wave energy into a rectified electrical current. This current is then used to stimulate tissues.\n\nDue to the fact that ultrasound is a mechanical vibration and carries significant energy in a vibrating wave, the energy transfer across the skin can be more easily achieved than magnetic induction to a similar depth and size and so provide the needed currents for neurostimulation.\n\nFigure 29 shows a bioelectrical stimulator configuration. The implanted device is 0.9 mm x 1.2 mm and contains a Schottky diode. The piezoelectric output current response of PVDF to the ultrasound is increased by stacking thin 25 micron sheets of the material connected so they are in electrical parallel. With bonding layer thicknesses in-between, the overall thickness of the stack is on the order of 250-350 microns and forms a solid structure.\n\n31"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 29. Illustration of the Internal Construction of the Ultrasound Powered Neurostimulator Developed at ASU. Platinum ball electrodes at either end are the contacts to the tissue. (Towe et al.)\n\nThis device has been implanted in rats and shown effective in neurostimulation under a wide variety of conditions. It appears suited to near-surface neurostimulations for relief of pain, and in the potential treatment of a variety of nervous system disorders.\n\nMEMS in Microfluidics\n\nAnother major area of application of BioMEMS is the control of fluids on very small scales and quantities. This capability is important in rapidly testing blood chemistry from single drops of whole blood, in the laboratory for clinical chemistry, and in working with very small amounts of DNA derived from cellular extracts.\n\nManufacturing small channels that conduct fluids is relatively straight forward using photolithography. A computer generated optical mask is used to expose patterns onto photoresists, then a process of etching by plasma or chemicals is used to carve out parts of the substrate.\n\nSubstrates are often glass since it is cheap, easily formed, and is a reasonably inert and biocompatible surface. Figure 30 shows some of these kinds of configurations. Glass is easily etched by hydrofluoric acid, but also forms of sandblasting with a fine grit have recently been developed to cut holes in glass.\n\nFinely carved capillaries in glass can allow nanoliters or even picoliters of fluid to\n\nFigure 30. Microfluidics in Glass. Microfluidics in glass take advantage of MEMS to produce microscale devices that can do complex chemical analysis. (http://www.i-micronews.com/interviews/Micronit-Microfluidics-discusses-product-diversification.html)\n\n32"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nmove through the channels where processes of separation, filtering, mixing, heating, reaction, and waste disposal can occur in a programmed sequence. Color changes after a sequence of chemical steps might be used to indicate the presence and concentration of an analyte. Optical absorbance or transparency can be read by a simple light emitting diode (LED) and photodetector system that measures light passing through the glass sample cell.\n\nLAB CHIPS\n\nA class of microfluidic devices known as lab-chips or Lab-on-a-Chip (LOC) have made their appearance in the market place. These devices are miniature chemical analysis systems that replace many of the manual and laborious steps associated with analytical chemistry. They are generally produced by MEMS techniques and often, but not always, incorporate electrical systems on the devices.\n\nAutomated MEMS-based lab-on-a-chip platforms have become an established system for basic life science research and drug discovery. They are used to assess the characteristics of isolated DNA or proteins.\n\nOne of the most useful products of bioMEMS instrumentation is the ability to manipulate small quantities of DNA using microfluidic pathways to perform chemistry with only the content from a single cell. BioMEMs enable new techniques in genomics (the study of sets of genes, gene products, and their interactions) and proteomics (the study of proteins, the expression of genes in health and disease).\n\nThese systems are being made now by companies including Affymetix, Caliper, Nanogen, and Agilent for processing samples on a microfluidic chip for separation and detection. Figure 31 shows the variety of such systems currently on the market.\n\nSuch devices can replace a number of gel electrophoresis operations and substantially improve work flow sample handling and analysis, lower per sample analysis by 10X and minimize sample and reagent use.\n\nThe physics of these microfluidic systems enable some unique features, including smooth laminar flow through the microchannels, high surface area to volume ratios, small thermal mass, and strong effects by electric fields. Microfluidic devices also lend themselves to enhancements for single cell detection, fluorescence detection, sorting schemes, and unique fluid separation methods.\n\nThe advantages of lab-on-chip devices include:\n\n- Improved fluid transport by electrokinetic effects and miniaturized pumps.\n- Efficient molecular and particle separation and immobilization.\n- Smaller sample requirements and carrier volumes.\n- Reduced reagent consumption and expense.\n- Integration of channels, mixers, separators, reaction chambers, electrodes, and detectors into single devices.\n\n33"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 31. Commercial Lab-Chip Devices That Allow Analysis for Biomarkers of Various Diseases Using on-Chip Electrophoresis in Microscale (collage from manufacturers listed)\n\nThese MEMS devices incorporate micro-scale fluidic components, sensors, actuators, and customized surfaces created by chemical modification or coating with inorganic and organic materials; enabling tissue engineering and cell patterning studies along with the microfluidic control of the culture environment.\n\nNASA SPACE APPLICATIONS FOR MICROFLUIDIC SYSTEMS\n\nNASA has supported at Arizona State University, the development of new types of microfluidic systems directed towards growing cell cultures on a chip. The specific application is detecting the effects of space flight and microgravity on living things at the cellular scale.\n\nSpace presents a number of stresses on the cells of the astronaut's body from electromagnetic fields, microgravity, and space cabin environments, which in combination have effects that are likely different than any single stress. Beyond affecting the astronaut directly, space flight can change any organism, and actually makes some bacteria more dangerous.\n\nCells can be grown to represent the cells of the astronaut's body. Changes in DNA expression or molecular stress markers in cultured cells can be used to infer effects of space.\n\nCulturing mammalian cells in the laboratory generally requires constant attendance and adjustment, but astronauts have little time for routine culture procedures. Thus NASA supported the design of an automated microfluidic system to perform all the steps\n\n34"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\needed to culture living cells, in volumes of less than a milliliter. The device contains thermopneumatic micropumps, microvalves, culture media reservoirs, cell culture chamber, and optical readout systems to detect fluorescent markers that the cells express when subjected to certain types of stress.\n\nSensors for glucose, oxygen, and pH monitor the culture medium and work with a servo system to keep culture conditions within a narrow range. One of the designed cell culture systems can be seen in Figure 32. The system is made from micromachined acrylic, and has fluidic pathways defined as channels in the plastic. The entire system is first laid out using a CAD (computer aided design) system and then machined to fine tolerances and chemically polished.\n\nFigure 32. Design of an Automated Cell Culture System for NASA Space Applications Incorporating Microfluidics and Integrated Optical Components (Towe et. al.)\n\nFigure 33 shows a more compact version of the device which contains two integrated optical cells designed to monitor the expression of green fluorescent protein (GFP) and\n\n35\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nred fluorescent protein (RFP) in E. Coli bacterial cells genetically engineered by ASU microbiologist Dr. Valerie Stout. These bacteria glow when the rec-A gene is active, indicating a certain type of stress or damage to the bacteria due to the space environment.\n\nFigure 33. NASA Space Application of Microfluidic Cell Culture System Made by Micromachining (Towe - ASU research)\n\nMicrocantilever MEMs Sensors\n\nThe microcantilever is one of the simplest MEMS based biosensor devices, with wide applications in detection of very small amounts of specific chemicals through a process known as affinity sensing. This can detect gas composition, antigens in the air, toxic gases and particulates.\n\nThe use of microcantilevers as transducers for chemical and biochemical sensing has only become widespread in the last few years, mainly due to their use in the development of microsensor arrays. The idea is quite simple: the surface of the cantilever, a thin rectangular beam clamped at one end, is chemically modified to react with specific compounds. The mass deposition that follows the chemical reaction causes a stress, and this leads to a detectable bending of the cantilever as illustrated in Figure 34.\n\n36\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMicrocantilever based sensors fall into two categories: static sensors and vibrational sensors. Static sensing microcantilevers are usually covered with a gold film, which is then coated with a substance having a specific affinity. Upon binding the specific analyte (such as a protein), stress is generated resulting in bending of the microcantilever.\n\nThe deflection is often measured using a narrow light beam from a small laser. Light reflected off the bottom of the cantilever falls onto a surface, where a position sensitive detector (PSD) can determine how much the beam bends. Typically the bend is exceedingly slight, but the sensitivity of the optical readout system is high enough that small amounts (nanograms to picograms) of adsorbed material can be detected. These devices are mostly used for measuring things in the air and not well suited for immersion in fluids.\n\nIn vibrational sensing, an external motor is used to vibrate the microcantilever through a certain range of speeds, and a sensing mechanism then reads out the amplitude of the vibration. By seeing at what speed the cantilever vibrates best, the resonant frequency is obtained. As bioparticles bind to the microcantilever, the resonant frequency will be slower due to the increased mass.\n\nThe mass of attached analyte can be determined from the frequency of the microcantilever. The microcantilever has its own natural frequency ω. When a biomolecule binds to the microcantilever, it changes the mass of the microcantilever. This in turn affects the resonant frequency. We can use that change to determine the mass that has been attached to the microcantilever.\n\nIn some sense it is like a tuning fork that changes its pitch when touched. The surface has an affinity for adhesion of a certain material and nothing else. When these materials are present, they adhere and increase the mass and so the pitch moves lower.\n\nThe sensitivity of these systems to the loaded mass increases as the mass of the cantilever beam decreases and with it the resonant frequency increases. Decreasing the overall dimensions of the beam results in an corresponding increase in their sensitivity.\n\nFigure 34. Principle of a Microcantilever That Bends When It is Loaded With an Adherent Mass\n\n37\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThus the trend has been to employ MEMS technology to reduce the size of the cantilever beams to microscopic proportions. In such cases, even the mass of cells or virus particles can be measured. Figure 35 shows a microcantilever system that is on the order of one micron in width and 10 microns in length. This cantilever beam was used as a mass detector, with sensitivity to a single vaccinia virus particle (vaccinia virus forms the basis of the smallpox vaccine).\n\nBiomolecular sensors with the ability to \"multiplex,\" or to detect a large number of different molecular species at the same time, are being developed for cancer diagnostics and therapy monitoring.\n\nFigure 35. Scanning Electron Micrograph Showing a Cantilever Beam With a Single Vaccinia Virus Particle\n\nThe secret to good performance is finding a coating that has a high sensitivity for a specific material of interest. Antibodies are often used as coatings since they can be tailored to bind to many different molecules. Even so, there are often problems of antibody shelf-life and they are not perfectly specific and so experience interference from other chemicals in the test sample.\n\nFigure 36 illustrates the affinity coating. Antibodies for different proteins are coated onto different micro-cantilever beams, making each beam a sensor.\n\nFigure 36. Antibodies Attached to a Cantilever Array Create Different Specificities to Substances in Blood That are Indicative of Cancer\n\n38\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b58673805017c985","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nConclusion\n\nMEMs are characterized by small dimensions, enabling new applications of physical principles to make sensors and actuators of superior characteristics.\n\nPhysical properties like surface tension and electrostatic charge dominate the operation of the devices, and new fabrication approaches are required to make them. The economic driving forces for this miniaturization are strong for health care and biology.\n\nAdvanced fabrication processes are still being discovered to further miniaturize electromechanical systems and to bring us into the realm of nanomechanical systems (NEMS). The new class of NEMS devices are expected to provide a higher performance in applications such as sensors, medical diagnostics and in the electronics industry. Some devices will enable experiments on the structure and function of individual biomolecules.\n\nThis field is expanding rapidly. Searches of the scientific literature show new ideas being developed in a number of laboratories throughout the world.\n\n39\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"b59a910b6c2a7ee8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260710\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nMisrep 7467030\nNarrative\n(SECRET\\REL TO USA, FVEY) AT 2149Z, [REDACTED] TOOK OFF FROM [REDACTED]\nAT 2158Z, [REDACTED] HANDED OVER WITH[REDACTED] WITH FULLY MISSION CAPABLE SENSORS.\nAT[REDACTED]\n\nFROM 0057Z TO 1552Z, [REDACTED] CONDUCTED TARGET DEVELOPMENT ON O[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] ISO [REDACTED] (SEE ISR 1).\nAT 0524Z, [REDACTED] OBSERVED [REDACTED] PROB UAPS TRAVELING SW AT ROUGHLY 80-180 MPH. (SEE\nOBSERVATION 1)\n\nAT[REDACTED] RETURNED TO BASE.\nAT [REDACTED].\nAT [REDACTED]\n\nFULL MOTION VIDEO WAS EXPLOITED BY [REDACTED]\n\nAT 1924Z, [REDACTED] LANDED AT [REDACTED] WITH A LAST ENGINE SHUT-DOWN TIME OF 1934Z.\n\n[REDACTED] TASKING PROSECUTED,[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] TASKING PROSECUTED, [REDACTED] TOTAL TASKINGS PROSECUTED\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: REL TO USA, FVEY\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MS\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20470504\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFCENT\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n3.5C. (B)(6)\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nDECLASSIFED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"b59a910b6c2a7ee8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260710\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 20 ATKS\n• Submit Date (Auto-generated):\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): ZZ\n• Mission Type: [REDACTED]\n• ATO Mission Number: [REDACTED]\n• Country Tasked: US - United States\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: (b) (6)\n• Unit: (b) (6)\n• Wing: (b) (6)\n• Phone Number: (b) (6)\n• Email: (b) (6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: (b) (6)\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: SSgt\n• Full Name: (b) (6)\n• Unit: (b) (6)\n• Wing: (b) (6)\n• Phone Number: (b) (6)\n• Email: (b) (6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations (b) (6)\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: SSgt\n• Full Name: (b) (6)\n• Unit: (b) (6)\n3.5C. (B)(6)\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nDECLASSIFED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"b59a910b6c2a7ee8","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260710\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n• Wing: (b) (6)\n• Phone Number: (b) (6)\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: (b) (6)\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: (b) (6)\n• Radar Name or Destination:\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator:\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data:\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator:\n• Chaff Designator:\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges:\n• Flare Designator:\n• Num Flares:\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM:\n3.5C. (B)(6)\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nDECLASSIFED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"b59a910b6c2a7ee8","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260710\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM:\n• Num IR-Guided AAM:\n• Gun Name or Designator:\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: -\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: [REDACTED]\n• Additional Avionics: [REDACTED]\n• Data Link:\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• Number of Aircraft: [REDACTED]\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): [REDACTED]\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): [REDACTED]\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): [REDACTED]\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 042149:00ZMAY22\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes):\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: [REDACTED]\n• Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: [REDACTED]\n• JTAC Callsign: -\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: [REDACTED]\n• Total Time On Station: [REDACTED]\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nLanding\n3.5C. (B)(6)\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nDECLASSIFED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"b59a910b6c2a7ee8","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFED\nUNCLASSIFIED\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260710\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): [REDACTED]\n• Last Land Time: 051924:00ZMAY22\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 051934:00ZMAY22\n• Total Mission Time: [REDACTED]\n• Gentext/Additional Details: -\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 050057:00ZMAY22\n• Time-off Station DTG: 051552:00ZMAY22\n• Aircraft Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• Msn Type: [REDACTED]\n• Primary Sensor: [REDACTED]\n• Sensors Available: [REDACTED]\n• Tasking Type: PLANNED\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: [REDACTED]\n• Activity Description: TARGET DEVELOPMENT\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed:\n• Number of EEIs:\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) [REDACTED] CONDUCTED TARGET\nDEVELOPMENT ON [REDACTED] MISSION INTENT FOR THE TASKING WAS TO\nCONDUCT POL, IDENTIFY PID OF WEAPONS AND WEAPONS/AMMO STORAGE AREAS, AS\nWELL AS IDENTIFY PERSONNEL WITHIN THE COMPOUND. LOOKING FOR PID OF [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] CONDUCTED EEI RELATED ACTIVITY AND OBSERVED NO\nSIGNIFICANT/NEFARIOUS ACTIVITY UNTIL RTB.\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: [REDACTED]\n• Supported Operation: [REDACTED]\n• Precoord Time: [REDACTED]\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) DUE TO DUST STORMS SOME COLLECTION ON\nUAPS WAS AFFECTED BETWEEN 0524Z AND 0704Z.\n3.5C. (B)(6)\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nDECLASSIFED\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"b59a910b6c2a7ee8","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFED\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nDeclassified by:\nMG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20260710\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: Yes\n• Gentext: -\n\nOBSERVATION\n\n• Observation DTG: 050524:00ZMAY22\n• Aircraft Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• Aircraft Location: [REDACTED]\n• Aircraft Heading: -\n• Aircraft Altitude: -\n• Aircraft Airspeed: -\n• Relative Bearing or Clock Position:\n• Range: -\n• Killbox & Keypad: -\n• Observed Activity Location: [REDACTED]\n• Observed Activity Description: [REDACTED]\n• Method of Observation: FMV\n• EEIs Observed:\n• Number of EEIs:\n\nGENTEXT/OBSERVATION\n\n• Gentext: FROM 0524Z-0704Z, [REDACTED] WAS SCANNING VARIOUS POIs IVO [REDACTED] AND PERIODICALLY OBSERVED [REDACTED] UAPS FLYING SPORATICALLY WITHIN THE TARGET AREA AND IN THE NE PORTION OF [REDACTED] ACCORDING TO THE [REDACTED] , THE UAPs WERE TRAVELLING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS BETWEEN 80-180 MPH. WE WERE UNABLE TO DETERMINE ALTITUDE. THE SIZE OF THE UAPs WERE APPROXIMATELY 1-2 METERS. DURING THE OBSERVATION PERIOD, [REDACTED] WOULD REACQUIRE THE UAPs AFTER RETURNING THE SENSOR BACK TO THE ORIGIONAL POI LOCATIONS. THE UAPs DID NOT HINDER THE MISSION. WSV IS ATTACHED BELOW\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather:\n\n[REDACTED] 3.5C. (B)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nDECLASSIFED\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"b5fdede7fdf59533","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nOFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR\n5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON\nWASHINGTON, DC 20301-5000\n\nINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY\n\n02 June 2026\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nSUBJECT: Narrative from Witness 3 - Western U.S. Event\n\nReferences: (a) https://www.war.gov/ufo/#Western-US-Event,VIRIN: 260508-D-D0360-1052, 08-MAY 2026.\n\n1. Executive Summary.\n\nThis memorandum presents the first-hand narrative from Witness 3 provided to the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO). Witness 3 was one of several United States (U.S.) federal law enforcement special agents who reported observing unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) over a period of two days in October 2023 in the western United States.\n\n2. Witness Narrative.\n\nIn response to AARO's request to provide a free-form narrative of the sequence of events exactly as they remember them, Witness 3 submitted the following text:\n\n\"In mid-Oct 2023, I was with agents from our office at our work location. We were out of the office conducting work related activities. Traveling and working with one other agent, at approximately 1900, roughly dusk with a clear sky, I was looking east when I saw a large orange orb in the sky seemingly coming in my direction. I recall my partner asking, \"are you seeing this?\" I couldn't tell how large the orb was because I could not determine how far away it was. I recall that it was alternating between clear and orange with maybe two or three seconds in each colored cycle. When it was orange, the outline was well defined, but when it was clear, it did not seem to disappear as I vaguely recall still being able to see an outline of the orb although it was clear. In terms of speed, I'd estimate the orb moved approximately 20 degrees in the sky in about three to five seconds. When the orb was at approximately 45 degrees (halfway between the horizon and directly overhead), it expelled three smaller red orbs. The expulsion appeared to be mechanical. The red orbs then moved to the south in a straight line spaced about one second apart, also at 45 degrees (from directly overhead to the horizon) until I could no longer see them. I did not pay attention to what the orange orb was doing after it released the red orbs. However, I don't recall seeing it any longer. I do not recall any sound associated with what I saw. Also, there were no exhaust trails coming from either the orange or the red orbs. Although I could not tell how large the orange orb was, the red orbs were a lot smaller than the orange orb. Comparatively, I'd say the red orbs were like grapes being expelled from a basketball. The time frame for this explanation was maybe 30-45 seconds.\n\nIn a second occurrence, also in mid-Oct 2023, either the same night or the next night, I was out with my partner again but at a different location. It was nearing full darkness, so I'd say the time was probably ~2000-2030 and the sky was clear. I was using NVGs to scan the sky when I saw"} {"doc_id":"b5fdede7fdf59533","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"red lights coming from the north, heading south. Their speed was difficult to gauge but I'd say they moved from right to left in my vision in about five to ten seconds covering roughly 90 degrees across the sky. These four red lights stopped above an airfield and hovered in what appeared to be a square over each corner of the airfield. At about the same time, looking south, I also observed orange orbs (possibly two) coming from the same direction (east) I saw the first orange orb (in the para above). They seemed to be hovering near a slope of a west facing ridgeline as the four smaller red orbs hovered over the airfield. I don't recall if the orange orbs released red orbs in the same manner the first orange orb did. Looking back toward the four hovering red lights, I noticed what appeared to be a vehicle down below me and my partner. We were sitting higher up on a road that sloped upward so the vehicle was below us. As the red lights hovered, the vehicle was flashing its headlights at a slow, methodical tempo, possibly two-three seconds between switching off and on. Again, I don't recall there being any sound associated with any of this. My partner and I decided to speed down the hill toward the vehicle as it seemed evident that it was involved with whatever was happening over the airfield and with the other light orbs. I turned off the lights in our vehicle to hide our approach. (I used NVGs to drive down the road.) The vehicle appeared to be sitting still, and I recall my heart beating heavily as we approached it. As we approached the vehicle, its lights remained on. As we approached, it seemed like we could get no closer than what seemed to be about 100 yards away so it seemed like the vehicle was responding to our approach. As we thought we would overtake the vehicle, it managed to keep its distance from us. Just as we thought we were at the closest point, the vehicle then seemingly floated off the road to the south, across rough terrain. There were no roads and later we searched for tire tracks but didn't find anything. We stopped where we thought the vehicle had originally been and saw it out in the brush in the rough terrain with a single light on. The light then faded out and we didn't see it anymore. At that point, we were fixed on the vehicle so I didn't notice the lights any longer. I am not sure what they did as we tried to catch up with the vehicle. When the vehicle was gone, so were the orbs. The time frame for this occurrence was about 2-3 minutes.\"\n\nJon T. Kosloski\nDirector, AARO\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"b6e92232d062b048","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 24 October 2025\n\nMisrep undefined-10541508\n\nNarrative\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nAT 0823Z, (b)(1)1.4a TOOK OFF FROM OJMS VIA SLR. (b)(1)1.4a PROCEEDED TO FRAGGED TASKING.\n\nAT 0649Z, (b)(1)1.4a WAS 7-LINED. (b)(1)1.4a ARRIVED ON-STATION AT 1102Z AND PERFORMED FMV/SIGINT COLLECTION AT 37S FV 85 (b)(1)1.4a (SEE ISR 1).\n\nAT 1158Z, (b)(1)1.4a WAS 7-LINED. (b)(1)1.4a ARRIVED ON-STATION AT 1230Z AND PERFORMED FMV/SIGINT COLLECTION AT 37S FU 36 (b)(1)1.4a (SEE ISR 2).\n\nAT 1559Z, (b)(1)1.4a OBSERVED AN UNIDENTIFIED ARRIEAL PHENOMENON (SEE UAP 1).\n\nAT 2252Z, (b)(1)1.4a WAS 7-LINED. (b)(1)1.4a ARRIVED ON-STATION AT 2318Z AND PERFORMED FMV/SIGINT COLLECTION AT 37S FU 85 (b)(1)1.4a (SEE ISR 3).\n\nAT 0124Z, (b)(1)1.4a RETURNED TO BASE. AT 0447Z, (b)(1)1.4a CONDUCTED SLR AND LANDED AT OJMS. FULL MOTION VIDEO WAS EXPLOITED BY GET. 20:24 MISSION HOURS, 14:22 FMV HOURS, 3X FMV TASKINGS PROSECUTED, 13:02 SIGINT HOURS, 3X SIGINT TASKINGS.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\n\n(S/RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: REL TO USA, FVEY\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MS\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20491020\n\nOPERATION\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 001\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"b6e92232d062b048","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFSOC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 12 SOS\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): IP\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• ATO Mission Number: (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: 27 SOW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: 1LT\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 56 SOIS\n• Wing: 27 SOW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 002\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"b6e92232d062b048","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: SSgt\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination:\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator:\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data:\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator:\n• Chaff Designator:\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges:\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 003\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"b6e92232d062b048","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n• Flare Designator:\n• Num Flares:\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM:\n• Num IR-Guided AAM:\n• Gun Name or Designator:\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4(a)\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: AN/DAS-4\n• Additional Avionics: AH/GMESH/SANTA FE\n• Data Link: LINK 16\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OJMS\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 200823:00ZOCT24\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): 33300\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 201102:00ZOCT24\n• Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• JTAR Number:\n• Killbox (Location):\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• JTAC Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 004\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"b6e92232d062b048","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 210124:00ZOCT24\n• Total Time On Station: 14 hours 22 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OJMS\n• Last Land Time: 210447:00ZOCT24\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 210457:00ZOCT24\n• Total Mission Time: 20 hours 24 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 201102:00ZOCT24\n• Time-off Station DTG: 201200:00ZOCT24\n• Aircraft Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Msn Type: AREC\n• Primary Sensor: FMV\n• Sensors Available: SANTA FE\n• Tasking Type: Planned\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): DATA MASKED\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 37S FV 85 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Activity Description: TARGET DEVELOPMENT\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed: No\n• Number of EEIs:\n• Global Campaign Plan: GCP - VEO (violent extremist group)\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nUPON ARRIVAL TO SP AT 1102Z, (b)(1)1.4a OBSERVED 3X ADMS AND ONE MOTO IVO SP. FROM 1102Z TO 1200Z, (b)(1)1.4a CONDUCTED POL AT THE SP AND OBSERVED NSTR. AT 1158Z, (b)(1)1.4a RECIEVED NEW 7L.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: DATA MASKED\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 005\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"b6e92232d062b048","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 24 October 2025\n\n• Supported Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Precoord Time: 1HR 26MIN\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nCLEAR WX\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: Yes\n• Gentext: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nSATISFACTORY\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 201230:00ZOCT24\n• Time-off Station DTG: 202318:00ZOCT24\n• Aircraft Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Msn Type: TARGET DEV\n• Primary Sensor: FMV\n• Sensors Available: SANTA FE\n• Tasking Type: Dynamic\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): DATA MASKED\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 37S FU 36 79\n• Activity Description: TARGET DEVELOPMENT\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed: Yes\n• Number of EEIs: 1\n• Global Campaign Plan: GCP - VEO (violent extremist group)\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nUPON ARRIVAL TO SP AT 1230Z, OBSERVED 1X VEH NO FURTHER EEI RELATED ACTIVITY. FROM 1230Z-1313Z, WENT EYES FREE PENDING SI CONDCUTING SF PASSES. FROM 1313Z-1410Z, CONDUCTED A 3X STOP FOLLOW ON 1X ADM MOUNTED MOTO. FROM 1559Z-1644Z, OBSERVED UAP ACTIVITY (SEE UAP 1). FROM 1447Z-1518Z, 3X"} {"doc_id":"b6e92232d062b048","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 24 October 2025\n\nSTOP FOLLOW ON 1X ADM IN TRAD WEAR ON MOTO AND DEP W. NO FURTHER EEI RELATED ACTIVITY WAS OBSERVED UNTIL RETASKING AT 2252Z.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: DATA MASKED\n• Supported Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Precoord Time: -\n• Precoord Effectiveness: -\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nCLEAR WX\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: Yes\n• Gentext: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nSATISFACTORY\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 201559:00ZOCT24\n• UAP Event Type: UAP Incident\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations: LIGHT/GLARE FLASHED OF UNK ORIGIN FLASHED ACCROSS FMV CAMERA FEED\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions: NO CHANGE\n• MDS Type / Asset Type:\n• Tail Number:\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 37SFU44 97\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: 20,088FT\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory: ORBIT\n• Observer Assessment of UAP: Benign\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: 144 KNOTS\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns):: NO\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters: -\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable): N/A"} {"doc_id":"b6e92232d062b048","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 24 October 2025\n\n• Operational Range: -\n• UAP Physical State: Plasma\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n• UAP Propulsion Means: UNKNOWN\n• UAP Payload:\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Signatures: LIGHT\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP RF Frequency: -\n• UAP RF Duration: -\n• UAP Event Serial Number: 201559ZOCT2024\n• UAP Effects on Persons: NO\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Effects on Equipment: -\n• Full Name:\n• Rank/Grade: E-4\n• Email:\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE):\n• Observer Engagement of UAP (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• First Coordinate: 37SFU36 19\n• First Seen Radius: 5\n• Last Accuracy: Estimated\n• Last Coordinate: 37SFU36 09\n• Last Seen Radius: 15\n• Kinetic Altitude Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Altitude: -\n• Kinetic Depth Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Depth: -\n• Kinetic Velocity Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Velocity: -\n• Kinetic Trajectory Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Trajectory: -\n• UAP Date of DoD Acquisition: 201559:00ZOCT24\n• UAP Reaction to Observation, Interrogation, Engagement (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Anomalous Characteristics/ Behaviors: LIGHT/GLARE FROM UNKNOWN ORIGIN FLASHED ACCROSS FMV CAMERA FEED. AIRCREW ASSESSED THIS NOT TO BE A LASING EVENT.\n• First Accuracy: Estimated\n• Call Sign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• UAP First Seen Location:\n• UAP Last Seen Location:\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):"} {"doc_id":"b6e92232d062b048","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 24 October 2025\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): MISHAPEN AND UNEVEN BALL OF WHITE LIGHT.\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nFROM 1559Z-1644Z, OBSERVED MULTIPLE GLARES OR LIGHT FROM UNKNOWN ORIGIN AT DIFFERENT ANGLES AND DIRECTIONS. AT 1559Z, 1602Z AND AT 1644Z, OBSERVED 1X LIGHT/GLARE CROSSED DIRECTLY ON THE FMV CAMERA. AT 1609Z AND 1620Z, OBSERVED A LIGHT/GLARE HALO EFFECT AT THE TOP OF FMV FEED. AIRCREW CONSIDERED THIS NO MISSION IMPACT OR CHANGE AND UAP WAS BENIGN.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 202318:00ZOCT24\n• Time-off Station DTG: 210124:00ZOCT24\n• Aircraft Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Msn Type: TARGET DEV\n• Primary Sensor: FMV\n• Sensors Available: SANTA FE\n• Tasking Type: Dynamic\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): DATA MASKED\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 37S FU 85 81\n• Activity Description: TARGET DEVELOPMENT\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed: No\n• Number of EEIs:\n• Global Campaign Plan: GCP - VEO (violent extremist group)\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\nUPON ARRIVAL TO SP AT 2318Z, OBSERVED 1X MOTO PARKED ON S SIDE OF BLDG SLANT 0/0/0. FROM 2318Z-0124Z, CONDUCTED POL PENDING ADM ACTIVITY. NO FURTHER EEI RELATED ACTIVITY WAS OBSERVED UNTIL RTB AT 0124Z.\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY)\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: DATA MASKED\n• Supported Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Precoord Time: -"} {"doc_id":"b6e92232d062b048","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 24 October 2025\n\n• Precoord Effectiveness: -\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nCLEAR WX\n(UNCLASSIFIED)\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: Yes\n• Gentext: (UNCLASSIFIED)\nSATISFACTORY\n(UNCLASSIFIED)"} {"doc_id":"b79fd82630ebd5e8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nOFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR\n5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON\nWASHINGTON, DC 20301-5000\n\nINTELLIGENCE\nAND SECURITY\n\n02 June 2026\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nSUBJECT: Narrative from Witness 2 - Western U.S. Event\n\nReferences: (a) https://www.war.gov/ufo/#Western-US-Event,VIRIN: 260508-D-D0360-1052,\n08-MAY 2026.\n\n1. Executive Summary.\n\nThis memorandum presents the first-hand narrative from Witness 2 provided to the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO). Witness 2 was one of several United States (U.S.) federal law enforcement special agents who reported observing unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) over a period of two days in October 2023 in the western United States.\n\n2. Witness Narrative.\n\nIn response to AARO's request to provide a free-form narrative of the sequence of events exactly as they remember them, Witness 2 submitted the following text:\n\n\"Incident 1\n\nIn October 2023, my partner and I were tasked to survey an area for individuals launching drones. My partner and I were positioned in a valley, with mountain ranges to the west and east and more distant ranges to the north; we had teams positioned throughout the area as well. The weather was clear; we sat [and] watched the sunset as dusk transitioned into darkness. At approximately 1900 hours, I observed a bright circular orb-like light approximately 35-45 degrees above the northern/northeastern horizon. Originally, the light was not dissimilar to that of a luminescent planet observed in the night sky but grew slowly brighter. The bright orb-like light had a smaller red orb-like light within it. As the bright orb-like light grew larger, it expelled three or four red lights from it. The red lights accelerated instantly and maneuvered with perfect, smooth coordination into a horizontal formation. The red lights were approximately 1/15 the size of the orb-like light. The bright orb-like light did not appear to be an artificial neon glow, but rather a bright natural light with a slight halo effect. The red lights were less luminescent and appeared to be more like artificial lights (e.g., taillights). Following the expulsion of the smaller red lights, the bright orb-like light dimmed and faded from sight. From approximately 1900 hours to approximately 1930 hours, I witnessed the process repeat approximately five times across the northern, northeastern, and eastern horizon. Our teams confirmed they observed the same objects. The last grouping of red lights moved in a horizonal pattern to the southern horizon where they remained the rest of the evening. The three red lights were all aligned and remained equally spaced. From approximately 1930 hours until approximately 2300 hours, the red lights hovered above the southern horizon. The red lights sometime dipped below the horizon, out of sight but consistently rose back up. At"} {"doc_id":"b79fd82630ebd5e8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\napproximately 2300 hours we departed the area. There were no acoustics, interreference or physiological effects experienced during the incident.\n\nThe objects appeared to move with purpose in a coordinated fashion, but it did not appear to be a defensive countermeasure. It looked like a mix of mechanical deployment and biological division; it appeared too smooth and agile to be mechanical, but too structured/coordinated to be a biological division. To offer an obscure yet similar description, I find the characterization of portals oddly comparable to the event I witnessed. The bright orb-like light was small, grew larger, appeared to project objects out of it, and then it dimmed until it was no longer visible; not dissimilar to the opening and closing of a portal through which objects travel and deploy forward. I am not saying or suggesting that was what we observed but rather offering that as a similar/applicable description.\n\nIncident 2\n\nIn October 2023, my partner and I were tasked to survey an area for individuals launching drones. My partner and I drove northwest on a rural highway and turned right onto a dirt road heading north/northeast up a valley toward a mountain range. We drove for approximately 10 miles before parking a small hill at approximately 1800 hours. The weather was clear; we sat [and] watched the sunset as dusk transitioned into darkness. At approximately 1845 hours, I observed two circular orb-like lights appearing to be headlights of a vehicle to the south approximately five to seven miles away. The headlights sat still in the valley while we sat and continued to observe the area. At approximately 1900 hours, I observed a row of red lights appearing to hover approximately 15 degrees above the southern horizon (I do not recall how the lights entered the area). The lights were consistent with the glow of a taillight and appeared to be arranged in a triangular formation or attached to unobservable vehicle of some sort; they appeared to cover the area of a football field, hovering over a significant portion of the horizon. The object floated with an impossible, eerie stillness. At that same time, I observed the vehicle to the south of our location flash its lights toward us; the flashing appeared to be consistent with a white pulse. Soon after, what appeared to be headlights of a second vehicle approximately one mile east of the first vehicle, still approximately five to seven miles from our location. The second vehicle flashed their lights in the same manner as the first vehicle. The two vehicles appeared to hover within, approximately, a six-mile by six-mile box between the southern tips mountains ranges surrounding the valley. While the two vehicles moved in between the mountain ranges, the row of red lights remained in place, appearing to still hover above the southern horizon. At approximately 1915 hours, one of the vehicles appeared to move north toward our location. We decided to drive toward the objects. One set of lights turned off but the other remained in view. We drove with our headlights off only utilizing night vision equipment; at one point reaching approximately 70 miles per hour. At some point while driving toward it, the headlights morphed into one bright white/orange orb-like light with a halo-like glow. Around two or three miles north of the original highway we exited from, we appeared to be gaining on the object; at approximately 50 yards away we thought were going to encounter it. The object then accelerated instantly to the south, traveling at least one mile south in less than a minute across the rugged terrain. We continued south toward the object for a short distance; the object shifted east and continued eastward until it stopped at the base of the mountain range, dimmed and turned off. The object's travel was inconsistent with a vehicle's travel over rugged terrain; the object appeared to hover and floated smoothly across rugged terrain. We parked on"} {"doc_id":"b79fd82630ebd5e8","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nthe road and watched in the direction the light had been. After a short while, the light turned back on, and the object began to move west across the valley. Again, the object appeared to hover over the terrain as it moved across in a gliding motion approximately half a mile south of our location. After passing the dirt road we were parked on, the light transformed into a group of orange and purple lights in the shape of a box (not dissimilar to a semi-truck in shape and opaqueness). We started to drive south toward the highway. The box of lights continued uninterrupted north/northwest toward the mountain range on the west side of the valley. The object glided smoothly across the rugged terrain as if traveling at a high rate of speed on a non-existent road. The object covered approximately four miles of rugged terrain within approximately one minute. The object came in proximity to the mountain range, the lights turned off, and the object was not seen again. Once the lights near the mountain range were no longer visible, the row of red lights hovering above the southern horizon were gone as well. The incident concluded at approximately 2000 hours. There were no acoustics, interreference or physiological effects experienced during the incident.\n\nThe objects in the valley appeared to stay within 20 feet of the ground and did not extend beyond that. The objects appeared highly reactive to our interaction with them. The objects initially appeared to mimic vehicles (my best example is the flying car from the Harry Potter book series). The object then appeared to mimic a box truck (superficially) but was inconsistent with what an actual vehicle travel. The object appeared to \"toy\" with us (flashing headlight on and off and moving abruptly once we came in proximity). The movements appeared very controlled, and the sudden transition of the object felt very purposeful. The \"headlights\" and \"box-truck\" did not appear organic; the orb-like light is harder to define. All the objects did appear significantly technologically advanced, and their behavior was inconsistent with physics. The triangle/red lights over the horizon were reminiscent of the Phoenix lights event/incident in the 1990s.\n\nIncident 3\n\nIn October 2023, my partner and I were tasked to survey an area for individuals launching drones. Sometime between approximately 2100 and 2300 hours, my partner and I pulled off onto a side of the road to observe an orb-like light we saw sitting on the on the road at the crest of a hill. The night was clear and dark. At this point we had seen several unusual objects and so we stopped to observe the object. The object was on a rural highway approximately one to two miles northwest of us just sitting on the road. It was similar to a single headlight but was a bit brighter and larger in size. It caught our attention because, if it were headlights, the lights should theoretically be moving west to east. We decided to drive towards to catch up with it and observe the object more closely. As we started driving towards it, the object began to travel west on the road as if it were a vehicle. It hovered above the right lane at approximately the height of a vehicle. It was unusual because if it were an actual vehicle we would expect to see taillights, there would be two lights not one, we would be gaining on it, and gravity would force the vehicle to follow the road pattern exactly; the object we saw only has one center light and loosely followed the road pattern, gliding very smoothly. If I recall correctly, on several occasions the bright orb-like light dimmed out and transitioned to what appeared to be a single red taillight but then transitioned back to the single bright orb-like light. The object maintained this behavior for approximately 10 to 15 miles. We travelled approximately 80 miles an hour and could not catch up to it. Towards the end of the interaction, we saw the object abruptly transition into an orange light/orb-like-disk with a halo glow and glide to the side of the road at the base of a hill. The"} {"doc_id":"b79fd82630ebd5e8","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nroad we were driving on curved to the left where the orb-like-disc landed. As we neared it, what appeared to be a semi-truck came around the corner and was driving right toward us. If I recall correctly, at that moment we were not sure if this was the same object that had transitioned into a semi-truck coming at us or if this was an actual vehicle on the road. In the video footage, I believe we say something about thinking it was going to hit us. The apparent semi-truck passed us at a high rate of speed and appeared to continue down the highway eastward. Having focused our attention back to the side of the road, we saw that the orb-like-disc was no longer there. There were no acoustics, interreference or physiological effects experienced during the incident.\n\nThe object appeared highly reactive to our interaction with it. It sat still on the road and did not start moving until we pulled onto the road and began driving toward it. The object appeared to mimic a car (my best example is the flying car from the Harry Potter book series, if it had a single center headlight); the mimicking felt specific and off-putting. Other vehicles passed heading east and no one appeared to react to the object we were seeing (i.e., no vehicles pulled over or stopped abruptly). The sudden transition/appearance of the object felt very purposeful. I do not know if the semi-truck that came around the corner had anything to do with the object disappearing, but it felt similar to when we approached the other object on the dirt road, and it appeared to move far away instantly as soon as we thought we were going to encounter it. It felt like it was drawing us in and had control to disappear instantly. The video footage captures some of it, but more valuable is the audio of our reactions.\"\n\nDrawings or Sketches\n\nThe following are AI-generated images of the three incidents based on prompts and descriptions I provided. The images make no reference to a specific location or geological features and contain only generic landscape features. The lights/orbs displayed are merely a rendering of relative size but are not to exact scale. Also, please note, these are being generated two and a half years after the events.\"\n\nIncident 1\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"b79fd82630ebd5e8","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"b79fd82630ebd5e8","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nIncident 2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\n6"} {"doc_id":"b79fd82630ebd5e8","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"b79fd82630ebd5e8","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nIncident 3\n\nJon T. Kosloski\nDirector, AARO\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"b80fe9b45fc08328","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n- 1 of 2 -\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nDate of entry [REDACTED]\n\nOn February [REDACTED], 2026, [REDACTED], email address: [REDACTED], [REDACTED], was interviewed by [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED], [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED], [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] [REDACTED] via videoconference on Microsoft Teams. Also present for the interview was [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]. After being advised of the identity of the interviewing agents and the nature of the interview, [REDACTED] provided the following information:\n\n[REDACTED] received a Bachelor's Degree in Economics & Finance from [REDACTED] [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] previously worked as [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] then became an [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] currently is the [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED].\n\n[REDACTED] was at [REDACTED] residence at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED], [REDACTED] [REDACTED], [REDACTED] returned home that night at approximately 9:15PM EST. As [REDACTED] was pulling into their driveway, which slopes downhill towards their residence, [REDACTED] noticed an intense bright light hovering below the tree line in the middle of their backyard. [REDACTED] got out of [REDACTED] vehicle and stared at the strange light for a few moments before reaching back into [REDACTED] vehicle to retrieve [REDACTED] phone so [REDACTED] could take a video of what [REDACTED] was seeing.\n\nAt the same time, [REDACTED] was sitting inside expecting [REDACTED] [REDACTED] to arrive home. [REDACTED] checked [REDACTED] security camera and saw [REDACTED] standing next to [REDACTED] vehicle looking into the backyard. [REDACTED] then went outside to join [REDACTED] and see what [REDACTED] was looking at. [REDACTED] described the light as a red sphere that was about one meter in diameter. [REDACTED] described the red color as being brilliant and beautiful, and that [REDACTED] had never seen anything that color of red before. [REDACTED] stated that inside the red sphere, at the center, there appeared to be what [REDACTED] described as a \"white plasma sun\" about the size of a basketball.\n\nAs [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] [REDACTED] watched, the orb UAP moved up and to their left. They then noticed there was a second, identical orb, hovering above the"} {"doc_id":"b80fe9b45fc08328","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED], On [REDACTED], Page 2 of 2\n\nfirst one. The orbs then moved together towards the west above the tree line. [REDACTED] stated that from the start of the observation to when the orbs traveled out of sight, they exhibited both a change in altitude and a change in direction. The orbs were silent and moved in a smooth motion. They moved in tandem as if they were flying in formation or were tethered together. As they moved out of sight, [REDACTED] saw the orbs merge together into one orb, or were so close together that [REDACTED] could only see one orb.\n\n[REDACTED] and [REDACTED] captured a video of the orbs beginning at the point when they were above the trees and moving away from their backyard. The video is contained as an attachment to this interview document.\n\nA few weeks later, [REDACTED] stated that [REDACTED] saw several white orbs travel over [REDACTED] house from the west to the east. These white orbs were traveling much higher in altitude than the prior red orbs. [REDACTED] described them as appearing the size of a dime held at arm's length."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FORM 2250 6-64 Approved for Release 2026 Under Section 1842 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024\n\n(PLACE FORM 490 HERE)\n\nOFFICIAL RECORD COPY\n\nThe attached document(s) must be safeguarded. It is the Agency's Official Historical Record and must be preserved in accordance with the Federal Records Act of 1950. For additional information, call the Chief, CIA Archives and Records Center, extension 2468.\n\nRETURN IMMEDIATELY AFTER USE TO THE CIA ARCHIVES AND RECORDS CENTER"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FORM 6-64 2250\n\n(PLACE FORM 490 HERE)\n\nOFFICIAL RECORD COPY\n\nWARNING\n\nThe attached document(s) must be safeguarded. It is the Agency's Official Historical Record and must be preserved in accordance with the Federal Records Act of 1950. For additional information, call the Chief, CIA Archives and Records Center, extension 2468.\n\nRETURN IMMEDIATELY AFTER USE TO THE CIA ARCHIVES AND RECORDS CENTER"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT BLUE BOOK\n\nSPECIAL REPORT NO.14\n\n(ANALYSIS OF REPORTS OF UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS)\n\nPROJECT NO. 10073\n\n5 MAY 1955\n\nFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (AFR 190-16)\n\nAIR TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nOHIO\n\nCopy No. 35"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROJECT BLUE BOOK\n\nSPECIAL REPORT NO. 14\n\n(ANALYSIS OF REPORTS OF UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS)\n\nPROJECT NO. 10073\n\n5 MAY 1955\n\nFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (AFR 190-16)\n\nAIR TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nOHIO\n\nNo copyright material is contained in this publication."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nPage\n\nSUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii\n\nINTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1\n\nORIGIN AND NATURE OF DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3\n\nREDUCTION OF DATA TO MECHANIZED COMPUTATION FORM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4\n\nQuestionnaire . . . 4\nCoding System and Work Sheet . . . 6\nIdentification of Working Papers . . . 7\nEvaluation of Individual Reports . . . 10\n\nANALYSIS OF THE DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14\n\nFrequency and Percentage Distributions by Characteristics . . . 14\nGraphical Presentation . . . 16\nAdvanced Study of the Data . . . 16\nPosition of the Sun Relative to the Observer . . . 16\nStatistical Chi Square Test . . . 60\nThe \"Flying Saucer\" Model . . . 76\n\nCONCLUSIONS . . . 94\n\nAPPENDIX A. TABULATION OF FREQUENCY AND PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTIONS BY CHARACTERISTICS . . . 95\n\nAPPENDIX B. WORKING PAPER FORMS . . . 255\n\nLIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS\n\nFigure 1 Frequency of Sightings by Year for Object, Unit, and All Sightings . . . 17\n\nFigure 2 Distribution of Evaluations of Object, Unit, and All Sightings for All Years . . . 18\n\nFigure 3 Distribution of Object Sightings by Evaluation for All Years With Comparisons of Each Year for Each Evaluation Group . . . 19\n\nFigure 4 Distribution of Object Sightings by Evaluation for All Years and Each Year . . . 20\n\nFigure 5 Distribution of Object Sightings by Evaluation Within Months for All Years . . . 21\n\nFigure 6 Distribution of Object Sightings by Certain and Doubtful Evaluations for All Years and Each Year . . . 22\n\nFigure 7 Frequency of Object Sightings and Unknown Object Evaluations by Months, 1947-1952 . . . 23\n\nFigure 8 Distribution of Object Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups With Evaluation Distributions for Each Group . . . 24\n\nFigure 9 Distribution of Object Sightings Among the Four Sighting Reliability Groups for All Years and Each Year . . . 25\n\nFigure 10 Distribution of All Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, Segregated by Military and Civilian Observers, With Evaluation Distribution for Each Segregation . . . 26\n\nFigure 11 Distribution of Object Sightings by Reported Colors of Object(s) With Evaluation Distribution for Each Color Group . . . 27\n\nFigure 12 Distribution of Object Sightings by Number of Objects Seen per Sighting With Evaluation Distribution for Each Group . . . 28\n\nFigure 13 Distribution of Object Sightings by Duration of Sighting With Evaluation Distribution for Each Duration Group . . . 29\n\niii"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS\n(Continued)\nPage\nFigure 14 Distribution of Object Sightings by Months Among the Eight Duration\nGroups for All Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30\nFigure 15 Distribution of Object Sightings by Shape of Object(s) Reported With\nEvaluation Distribution for Each Shape Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31\nFigure 16 Distribution of Object Sightings by Reported Speed of Object(s) With\nEvaluation Distribution for Each Speed Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32\nFigure 17 Distribution of All Sightings by Observer Location for All Years and Each Year . . . . . . . . 33\nFigure 18 Comparison of Known and Unknown Object Sightings by Color, 1947-1952 . . . . . . . . . . 34\nFigure 19 Comparison of Known and Unknown Object Sightings by Number of Objects\nper Sighting, 1947-1952 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35\nFigure 20 Comparison of Known and Unknown Object Sightings by Speed, 1947-1952 . . . . . . . . . . 36\nFigure 21 Comparison of Known and Unknown Object Sightings by Duration, 1947-1952 . . . . . . . . . 37\nFigure 22 Comparison of Known and Unknown Object Sightings by Shape, 1947-1952 . . . . . . . . . . 38\nFigure 23 Comparison of Known and Unknown Object Sightings by Light Brightness, 1947-1952 . . . . . . 39\nFigure 24 Comparison of Monthly Distribution of Object Sightings Evaluated as Astronomical\nVersus Total Object Sightings Less Astronomical. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40\nFigure 25 Comparison of Monthly Distribution of Object Sightings Evaluated as Aircraft\nVersus Total Object Sightings Less Aircraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41\nFigure 26 Comparison of Monthly Distribution of Object Sightings Evaluated as Balloon\nVersus Total Object Sightings Less Balloon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42\nFigure 27 Comparison of Monthly Distribution of Object Sightings Evaluated as Insufficient\nInformation Versus Total Object Sightings Less Insufficient Information . . . . . . . . . . 43\nFigure 28 Comparison of Monthly Distribution of Object Sightings Evaluated as Other\nVersus Total Object Sightings Less Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44\nFigure 29 Comparison of Monthly Distribution of Object Sightings Evaluated as Unknown\nVersus Total Object Sightings Less Unknown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45\nFigure 30 Characteristics Profiles of Object Sightings by Total Sample, Known Evaluations,\nand Individual Known Evaluations, With Unknown Evaluations Superimposed . . . . . . . . . 46\nFigure 31 Frequency of Object, Unit, and All Sightings Within the U. S., 1947-1952, by\nSubdivisions of One Degree of Latitude and Longitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47\nFigure 32 Distribution of Object Sightings by Evaluation for the Twelve Regional Areas of\nthe U. S., With the Strategic Areas Located . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48\nFigure 33 Comparison of Evaluation of Object Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the\nCentral East Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49\nFigure 34 Comparison of Evaluation of Object Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the\nCentral Midwest Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50\nFigure 35 Comparison of Evaluation of Object Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the\nCentral Farwest Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51\nFigure 36 Comparison of Evaluation of Object Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the\nSouth Midwest Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52\nFigure 37 Comparison of Evaluation of Object Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the\nSouth West Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS\n(Continued)\nPage\nFigure 38 Comparison of Evaluation of Object Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the\nSouth Farwest Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54\nFigure 39 Diagram of a Celestial Sphere. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56\nFigure 40 Frequency of Object Sightings by Angle of Elevation of the Sun, Intervals\nof 10 Degrees of Angle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57\nFigure 41 Frequency of Object Sightings by Local Sun Time, Intervals of One Hour . . . . . . . . . 59\nTable I Object Sightings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60\nTable II Chi Square Test of Knowns Versus Unknowns on the Basis of Color . . . . . . . . . . . . 62\nTable III Chi Square Test of Knowns Versus Unknowns on the Basis of Number . . . . . . . . . . . 63\nTable IV Chi Square Test of Knowns Versus Unknowns on the Basis of Shape . . . . . . . . . . . . 64\nTable V Chi Square Test of Knowns Versus Unknowns on the Basis of Duration of Observation . . . . . . 65\nTable VI Chi Square Test of Knowns Versus Unknowns on the Basis of Speed . . . . . . . . . . . . 66\nTable VII Chi Square Test of Knowns Versus Unknowns on the Basis of Light Brightness . . . . . . . . 67\nTable VIII Chi Square Test of Revised Knowns Versus Unknowns on the Basis of Color . . . . . . . . 70\nTable IX Chi Square Test of Revised Knowns Versus Unknowns on the Basis of Number. . . . . . . . . 71\nTable X Chi Square Test of Revised Knowns Versus Unknowns on the Basis of Shape . . . . . . . . . 72\nTable XI Chi Square Test of Revised Knowns Versus Unknowns on the Basis of\nDuration of Observation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73\nTable XII Chi Square Test of Revised Knowns Versus Unknowns on the Basis of Speed . . . . . . . . 74\nTable XIII Chi Square Test of Revised Knowns Versus Unknowns on the Basis of Light Brightness. . . . . . 75\nv and vi"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUMMARY\nReports of unidentified aerial objects (popularly termed \"flying\nsaucers\" or \"flying discs\") have been received by the U.S. Air Force\nsince mid-1947 from many and diverse sources. Although there was no\nevidence that the unexplained reports of unidentified objects constituted\na threat to the security of the U.S., the Air Force determined that all\nreports of unidentified aerial objects should be investigated and evaluated\nto determine if \"flying saucers\" represented technological developments\nnot known to this country.\nIn order to discover any pertinent trend or pattern inherent in the\ndata, and to evaluate or explain any trend or pattern found, appropriate\nmethods of reducing these data from reports of unidentified aerial objects\nto a form amenable to scientific appraisal were employed. In general, the\noriginal data upon which this study was based consisted of impressions and\ninterpretations of apparently unexplainable events, and seldom contained\nreliable measurements of physical attributes. This subjectivity of the data\npresented a major limitation to the drawing of significant conclusions, but\ndid not invalidate the application of scientific methods of study.\nThe reports received by the U.S. Air Force on unidentified aerial\nobjects were reduced to IBM punched-card abstracts of the data by means\nof logically developed forms and standardized evaluation procedures.\nEvaluation of sighting reports, a crucial step in the preparation of the data\nfor statistical treatment, consisted of an appraisal of the reports and the\nsubsequent categorization of the object or objects described in each report.\nA detailed description of this phase of the study stresses the careful\nattempt to maintain complete objectivity and consistency.\nAnalysis of the refined and evaluated data derived from the original\nreports of sightings consisted of (1) a systematic attempt to ferret out any\ndistinguishing characteristics inherent in the data of any of their segments,\n(2) a concentrated study of any trend or pattern found, and (3) an attempt\nto determine the probability that any of the UNKNOWNS represent observa-\ntions of technological developments not known to this country.\nThe first step in the analysis of the data revealed the existence of\ncertain apparent similarities between cases of objects definitely identified\nand those not identified. Statistical methods of testing when applied indicated\na low probability that these apparent similarities were significant. An\nattempt to determine the probability that any of the UNKNOWNS represented\nobservations of technological developments not known to this country necessi-\ntated a thorough re-examination and re-evaluation of the cases of objects not\noriginally identified; this led to the conclusion that this probability was very\nsmall.\nThe special study which resulted in this report (Analysis of Reports\nof Unidentified Aerial Objects, 5 May 1955) started in 1953. To provide the\nstudy group with a complete set of files, the information cut-off date was\nestablished as of the end of 1952. It will accordingly be noted that the\nstatistics contained in all charts and tables in this report are terminated\nvii"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"with the year 1952. In these charts, 3201 cases have been used.\nAs the study progressed, a constant program was maintained for\nthe purpose of making comparisons between the current cases received\nafter 1 January 1953, and those being used for the report. This was done\nin order that any change or significant trend which might arise from\ncurrent developments could be incorporated in the summary of this report.\nThe 1953 and 1954 cases show a general and expected trend of\nincreasing percentages in the finally identified categories. They also show\ndecreasing percentages in categories where there was insufficient information and those where the phenomena could not be explained. This trend had\nbeen anticipated in the light of improved reporting and investigating procedures.\nOfficial reports on hand at the end of 1954 totaled 4834. Of these,\n425 were produced in 1953 and 429 in 1954. These 1953 and 1954 individual reports (a total of 854), were evaluated on the same basis as were\nthose received before the end of 1952. The results are as follows:\nBalloons - 16%\nAircraft - 20%\nAstronomical - 25%\nOther - 13%\nInsufficient Info - 17%\nUnknown - 9%\nAs the study of the current cases progressed, it became increasingly\nobvious that if reporting and investigating procedures could be further improved,\nthe percentages of those cases which contained insufficient information and\nthose remaining unexplained would be greatly reduced. The key to a higher\npercentage of solutions appeared to be in rapid \"on the spot\" investigations\nby trained personnel. On the basis of this, a revised program was established by AF Reg. 200-2 Subject: \"Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting\"\n(Short Title: UFOB) dated 12 August 1954.\nThis new program, which had begun to show marked results before\nJanuary 1955, provided primarily that the 4602d Air Intelligence Service\nSquadron (Air Defense Command) would carry out all field investigations.\nThis squadron has sufficient units and is so deployed as to be able to arrive\n\"on the spot\" within a very short time after a report is received. After\ntreatment by the 4602d AISS, all information is supplied to the Air Technical\nIntelligence Center for final evaluation. This cooperative program has resulted, since 1 January 1955, in reducing the insufficient information cases\nto 7% and the unknown cases to 3%, of the totals.\nThe period 1 January 1955 to 5 May 1955 accounted for 131 unidentified\naerial object reports received. Evaluation percentages of these are as follows:\nviii"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Balloons - 26%\nAircraft - 21%\nAstronomical - 23%\nOther - 20%\nInsufficient Info - 7%\nUnknown - 3%\nAll available data were included in this study which was prepared by\na panel of scientists both in and out of the Air Force. On the basis of this\nstudy it is believed that all the unidentified aerial objects could have been\nexplained if more complete observational data had been available. Insofar\nas the reported aerial objects which still remain unexplained are concerned,\nthere exists little information other than the impressions and interpretations\nof their observers. As these impressions and interpretations have been\nreplaced by the use of improved methods of investigation and reporting, and\nby scientific analysis, the number of unexplained cases has decreased rapidly\ntowards the vanishing point.\nTherefore, on the basis of this evaluation of the information, it is\nconsidered to be highly improbable that reports of unidentified aerial objects\nexamined in this study represent observations of technological developments\noutside of the range of present-day scientific knowledge. It is emphasized\nthat there has been a complete lack of any valid evidence of physical matter\nin any case of a reported unidentified aerial object.\nix"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INTRODUCTION\n\nIn June, 1947, Kenneth Arnold, a Boise, Idaho, businessman and private pilot, publicly reported the now-famous sighting of a chainlike formation of disc-shaped objects near Mount Rainier, Washington. Resulting newspaper publicity of this incident caught the public interest, and, shortly thereafter, a rash of reports of unidentified aerial objects spawned the term \"flying saucers\". During the years since 1947, many reports of unidentified aerial objects have been received by the Air Force from many and diverse sources.\n\nThe unfortunate term \"flying saucer\", or \"flying disc\", because of its widespread and indiscriminate use, requires definition. Many definitions have been offered, one of the best being that originated by Dr. J. Allen Hynek, Director of the Emerson McMillin Observatory of The Ohio State University, who has taken a scientific interest in the problem of unidentified aerial objects since 1949. Dr. Hynek's definition of the term is \"any aerial phenomenon or sighting that remains unexplained to the viewer at least long enough for him to write a report about it\"(1). Dr. Hynek, elaborating on his definition, says, \"Each flying saucer, so defined, has associated with it a probable lifetime. It wanders in the field of public inspection like an electron in a field of ions, until 'captured' by an explanation which puts an end to its existence as a 'flying saucer'\"(1).\n\nThis definition would be applicable to any and all of the sightings which remained unidentified throughout this study. However, the term \"flying saucers\" shall be used hereafter in this report to mean a novel, airborne phenomenon, a manifestation that is not a part of or readily explainable by the fund of scientific knowledge known to be possessed by the Free World. This would include such items as natural phenomena that are not yet completely understood, psychological phenomena, or intruder aircraft of a type that may be possessed by some source in large enough numbers so that more than one independent mission may have been flown and reported. Thus, these phenomena are of the type which should have been observed and reported more than once.\n\nSince 1947, public interest in the subject of unidentified aerial objects fluctuated more or less within reasonable limits until the summer of 1952, when the frequency of reports of sightings reached a peak, possibly stimulated by several articles on the subject in leading popular magazines.\n\nEarly in 1952, the Air Force's cumulative study and analysis of reported sightings indicated that the majority of reports could be accounted for as misinterpretations of known objects (such as meteors, balloons, or aircraft), a few as the result of mild hysteria, and a very few as the result of unfamiliar meteorological phenomena and light aberrations. However,\n\n(1) Hynek, J. A., \"Unusual Aerial Phenomena\", Journal of the Optical Society of America, 43 (4), pp 311-314, April, 1953.\n\n1"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"a significant number of fairly complete reports by reliable observers remained unexplained. Although no evidence existed that unexplained reports of sightings constituted a physical threat to the security of the U. S., in March, 1952, the Air Force decided that all reports of unidentified aerial objects should be investigated and evaluated to determine if \"flying saucers\" represented technological developments not known to this country.\n\nOriginally, the problem involved the preparation and analysis of about 1,300 reports accumulated by the Air Force between 1947 and the end of March, 1952. During the course of the work, the number of reports submitted for analysis and evaluation more than tripled, the result of the unprecedented increase in observations during 1952. Accordingly, this study is based on a number of reports considered to be large enough for a preliminary statistical analysis, approximately 4,000 reports.\n\nThis study was undertaken primarily to categorize the available reports of sightings and to determine the probability that any of the reports of unidentified aerial objects represented observations of \"flying saucers\". With full cognizance of the quality of the data available for study, yet with an awareness of the proportions this subject has assumed at times in the public mind, this work was undertaken with all the seriousness accorded to a straightforward scientific investigation. In order to establish the probability that any of the reports of unidentified aerial objects represented observations of \"flying saucers\", it was necessary to make an attempt to answer the question \"What is a 'flying saucer'?\". However, it must be emphasized that this was only incidental to the primary purpose of the study, the determination of the probability that any of the reports of unidentified aerial objects represented observations of \"flying saucers\", as defined on Page 1.\n\nThe basic technique for this study consisted of reducing the available data to a form suitable for mechanical manipulation, a prerequisite for the application of preliminary statistical methods. One of International Business Machine Corporation's systems was chosen as the best available mechanical equipment.\n\nThe reduction of data contained in sighting reports into a form suitable for transfer to IBM punched cards was extremely difficult and time consuming.\n\nFor this study a panel of consultants was formed, consisting of both experts within and outside ATIC. During the course of the work, guidance and advice were received from the panel. The professional experience available from the panel covered major scientific fields and numerous specialized fields.\n\nAll records and working papers of this study have been carefully preserved in an orderly fashion suitable for ready reference. These\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"records include condensations of all individual sighting reports, and the IBM cards used in various phases of the study.\n\nORIGIN AND NATURE OF DATA\n\nReports of sightings were received by the U. S. Air Force from a representative cross section of the population of the U. S., and varied widely in completeness and quality. Included were reports from reputable scientists, housewives, farmers, students, and technically trained members of the Armed Forces. Reports varied in length from a few sentences stating that a \"flying saucer\" had been sighted, to those containing thousands of words, including description, speculation, and advice on how to handle the \"problem of the 'flying saucers'\". Some reports were of high quality, conservative, and as complete as the observer could make them; a few originated from people confined to mental institutions. A critical examination of the reports revealed, however, that a high percentage of them was submitted by serious people, mystified by what they had seen and motivated by patriotic responsibility.\n\nThree principal sources of reports were noted in the preliminary review of the data. The bulk of the data arrived at ATIC through regular military channels, from June, 1947, until the middle of 1952.\n\nA second type of data consisted of letters reporting sightings sent by civilian observers directly to ATIC. Most of these direct communications were dated subsequent to April 30, 1952, and are believed to be the result of a suggestion by a popular magazine that future reports be directed to the Air Technical Intelligence Center. As could be expected, a large number of letters was received following this publicity.\n\nA third type of data was that contained in questionnaire forms completed by the observer himself. A questionnaire form, developed during the course of this study, was mailed by ATIC to a selected group of writers of direct letters with the request that the form be completed and returned. Approximately 1,000 responses were received by ATIC.\n\nIn general, the data were subjective, consisting of qualified estimates of physical characteristics rather than of precise measurements. Furthermore, most of the reports were not reduced to written form immediately. The time between sighting and report varied from one day to several years. Both of these factors introduced an element of doubt concerning the validity of the original data, and increased its subjectivity. This was intensified by the recognized inability of the average individual to estimate speeds, distances, and sizes of objects in the air with any degree of accuracy. In spite of these limitations, methods of statistical analysis of such reports in sufficiently large groups are valid. The danger lies in the possibility of\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"forgetting the subjectivity of the data at the time that conclusions are drawn from the analysis. It must be emphasized, again and again, that any conclusions contained in this report are based NOT on facts, but on what many observers thought and estimated the true facts to be.\n\nAltogether, the data for this study consisted of approximately 4,000 reports of sightings of unidentified aerial objects. The majority were received through military channels or in the form of observer-completed questionnaires; a few were accepted in the form of direct letters from unquestionably reliable sources. Sightings made between June, 1947, and December, 1952, were considered for this study. Sightings alleged to have occurred prior to 1947 were not considered, since they were not reported to official sources until after public interest in \"flying saucers\" had been stimulated by the popular press.\n\nREDUCTION OF DATA TO MECHANIZED COMPUTATION FORM\n\nAs received by the Air Technical Intelligence Center, the sighting reports were not in a form suitable for even a quasi-scientific study. A preliminary review of the data indicated the need for standardized interrogation procedures and supplemental forms for the reduction of currently held and subsequently acquired data to a form amenable to scientific appraisal.\n\nThe plan for reduction of the data to usable form consisted of a program of development comprising four major steps: (1) a systematic listing of the factors necessary to evaluate the observer and his report, and to identify the unknown object observed; (2) a standard scheme for the transfer of data to a mechanized computation system; (3) an orderly means of relating the original data to all subsequent forms; and (4) a consistent procedure for the identification of the phenomenon described by the original data.\n\nQuestionnaire\n\nThe first reports received by ATIC varied widely in completeness and quality. Air Force Letter 200-5(2) and Air Force Form 112(1) were attempts to fix responsibility for and improve the quality of the reports of sightings. To coordinate past efforts and to provide standardization for the\n\n(1) A modified Air Force Form 112 lists pertinent questions to be answered in regard to an unidentified-object sighting.\n(2) Air Force Letter 200-5 places responsibility with the Air Force for the investigation, reporting, and analysis of unidentified aerial objects. This letter is dated 29 April 1952.\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"future, it was imperative to develop a questionnaire form listing the factors necessary for evaluation of the observer and his report, and identification of the unknown objects. In addition, it was decided that such a questionnaire should be designed to serve as an interrogator's guide, and as a form for the observer himself to complete when personal interrogation was not possible or practicable.\n\nIdeally, a questionnaire for the purposes required should contain questions pertaining to all technical details considered to be essential for the statistical approach, and should serve to obtain a maximum of information from the average individual who had made a sighting in the past or would be likely to be reporting sightings in the future. Besides these discrete facts, an integrated written description of a sighting would be required, thus enabling the reported facts of the sighting to be corroborated. Also, a narrative description might allow subtle questions to be answered concerning the observer's ability, such as indirect questions that would reveal his reasoning ability, suggestibility, and general mental attitude. As a whole, then, the information contained in a questionnaire should make possible the classification and evaluation of the sighting, the rating of the observer, the probability of accuracy of reported facts, and the identification of what was reported by the observer as unidentified.\n\nDuring the course of this project, three questionnaire forms were developed, each intended to be an improved revision of the one preceding. The improvements were suggested and confirmed by members of the panel of consultants connected with this project.\n\nThe original form was evolved by the panel of consultants as their first work on this project. It was intended to allow the start of the reduction of reports to discrete data, and was immediately subjected to extensive review and revision by the panel. The revised (second) form was subjected to a trial test before adoption. ATIC sent a copy to observers reporting sightings, with the request that the form be completed and returned. Of the first 300 questionnaires returned during July and August, 1952, 168 were analyzed by a consulting psychologist. On the basis of this analysis, plus the experience gained in working with past reports, the final form of the questionnaire - the U. S. Air Force Technical Information Sheet - was evolved. Copies of the three forms of the questionnaire, in the order of their development, are shown as Exhibits B1, B2, and B3 in Appendix B.\n\nIn order to implement the transcription of data from past sighting reports, each succeeding form was put to use as soon as it was developed and approved. Accordingly, experience was obtained with each form in relation to past data, an important factor in the improvement of the quality and completeness of the later reports included in this study.\n\n5"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Coding System and Work Sheet\n\nThe reduction of non-numerical data to numerical form is mandatory in the machine handling of data. Thus, the selection of the IBM punched-card system for analysis of data forced the adoption of a master coding plan. Since it was impracticable to transfer detailed data of an exact nature from the questionnaire to the IBM card, an intermediate transfer form, coordinated with the master code, was necessary.\n\nThe master coding plan was evolved during the early stages of the preliminary analysis of data, and was reviewed by the panel of consultants before use. It was recognized that this system of coding would be the heart of the analysis, that is, the completeness of the facility for translation of data could make or break the study. Accordingly, every conceivable factor that might influence the identification of unidentified aerial objects was included, together with a wide range of variations within each factor. The original coding system (with minor corrections) was used throughout the translation of the original data with marked success. A copy of this system, called CODES, is enclosed as Exhibit B4, Appendix B.\n\nTo facilitate the preparation of the punched-card abstract, an intermediate form called the WORK SHEET (later, the CARD BIBLE) was developed. Referenced to both the data from the questionnaire and the system of report identification, the WORK SHEET permitted an orderly transcription of data simultaneously by several people. In conjunction with the CODES, the WORK SHEET was used during the reduction of the original data to code form necessary for transfer to punched cards. A sample is included as Exhibit B5, Appendix B.\n\nAfter the analysis was under way, it became apparent that the mechanics of machine processing could be improved by incorporating in the IBM card system group classifications of certain factors requiring more than one column for discrete expression. In addition, the inclusion of certain data relating to the evaluation and bearing of the sun with respect to the observer was considered necessary. Finally, a critical examination of certain segments of the data indicated the need for the definition of a new factor relating to the maneuvers of the object or objects sighted. Prior to the start of the analytical study, it had been assumed that a combination of stated factors would, by inference, define the maneuver pattern.\n\nAll these additions have been incorporated in a revised set of CODES and CARD BIBLE that are illustrated as Exhibits B6 and B7, Appendix B. However, at the time that the maneuver factor was determined to be critical, it was physically impracticable to make the required definitions and re-evaluate the original data. Therefore, no code for maneuverability has been included in the CODES, CARD BIBLE, or IBM cards.\n\n6"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Identification of Working Papers\n\nThe actual reduction of data to IBM punched-card form presented a problem of mass transfer of figures by several workers. Recognizing that an orderly system of relating the original data to the questionnaire, the WORK SHEET, and the IBM card was imperative, a scheme of SERIAL NUMBERS was developed to answer this need.\n\nThe first data consisted of a series of letter-file folders identified by the year and location of the sighting or sightings they contained. The number of reports of sightings in a single folder varied from 1 to over 20. Under these conditions, there was a great possibility for incorrect transcription of data, duplication of transcription, or misplacement of intermediate forms. Further, it was considered desirable to relate all sightings of the same object or objects to one another. The concept of a four-digit serial number (major), followed by a two-digit subserial number (minor), was adequate to fulfill these requirements.\n\nTo expedite handling of the data, temporary serial numbers were assigned until each report had been evaluated and the phenomenon had been placed in a category of identification. The use of temporary serial numbers permitted the consolidation of duplicate reports from apparently diverse sources, such as a teletype message and an Air Force Form 112. However, this consolidation was made ONLY when it could be proved conclusively that the sources of the two documents were one and the same. Factors of the observer's location, date and time of observation, description of the phenomenon, and finally, the name of the observer were considered. In this manner, the assignment of major serial and minor subserial numbers in continuous series was made only to the reports accepted for the statistical study. It is believed that the reports accepted represent unique and unduplicated instances of sightings.\n\nIn the establishment of the serial-number system, it was necessary to define certain terms, so that a standard interpretation could be achieved. The terms and corresponding definitions were:\n\nOBSERVER - Any witness reporting to a proper authority that he had seen unidentified aerial objects.\n\nSIGHTING - The report or group of reports of the same observed phenomenon that remained unidentified to the observer or observers, at least until reported.\n\n7"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SINGLE OBSERVATION - A SIGHTING consisting of a single report from (1) one OBSERVER with no knowledge of additional OBSERVERS of the same phenomenon, or (2) a group of witnesses of the same phenomenon, each cognizant of the others. The witness who made the report is called a SINGLE OBSERVER.\n\nMULTIPLE OBSERVATION - A SIGHTING consisting of several reports from OBSERVERS of the same phenomenon who were cognizant of each other. The witnesses who made reports are called MULTIPLE OBSERVERS.\n\nALL SIGHTINGS - (1) The group of reports consisting of one report for each OBSERVER, including both SINGLE and MULTIPLE OBSERVERS. (2) The questionnaire, work sheet, and IBM card representing the report from each OBSERVER - in other words, the representation of each report accepted for the statistical study.\n\nUNIT SIGHTINGS - (1) The group of reports consisting of one report for each SIGHTING, including all the reports of SINGLE OBSERVATIONS and the one most representative report from each MULTIPLE OBSERVATION. (2) The questionnaire, work sheet, and IBM card representing the report for each SIGHTING accepted for the statistical study.\n\nA major serial number (four digits) was assigned to each sighting, segregating the year of occurrence by selection of limits for each year, as follows:\n\n0001 to 0500 reserved for 1947\n0501 to 1000 reserved for 1948\n1001 to 1500 reserved for 1949\n1501 to 2000 reserved for 1950\n2001 to 2500 reserved for 1951\n2501 to 4900 reserved for 1952\n\nWhile this scheme would serve to identify any individual sighting, identification of each report and its subsequent forms was necessary. The minor subserial numbers (two digits) fulfilled this requirement. For all SINGLE OBSERVATIONS, a major serial number followed by two (2) zeros, for example, 2759.00, was sufficient identification. For MULTIPLE OBSERVATIONS, the major serial number followed by a series of two-digit numbers ranging from 00 to 99 was used to identify the individual reports. In general, the most complete report from the most reliable observer of that\n\n8"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MULTIPLE OBSERVATION was identified with the .00 subserial number. As an example, a MULTIPLE OBSERVATION consisting of six sighting reports would have the following serial numbers:\n\n1132.00 representing the best report and observer\n1132.01 representing an additional observer\n1132.02 representing an additional observer\n1132.03 representing an additional observer\n1132.04 representing an additional observer\n1132.05 representing an additional observer\n\nDuring the course of the transcription of the data to machine card form, it became obvious that certain reports could have been independent observations of the same phenomenon. So, if the presentation of an analysis based on one report for each sighting was valid (the concept of UNIT SIGHTINGS), a presentation of an analysis based on one report for each phenomenon should be valid also. Further, the examination of data relating to the actual number of phenomena was considered to be the proper basis for assessing the probability of technological developments outside the range of present-day scientific knowledge. Therefore, a designation of OBJECT SIGHTINGS was established, with the following definition:\n\nOBJECT SIGHTING - (1) The group of reports consisting of one report for each phenomenon. (2) The questionnaire, work sheet, and IBM card representing a report for each phenomenon accepted for the statistical study.\n\nIn brief review, ALL SIGHTINGS refer to all reports, UNIT SIGHTINGS refer to actual sightings, and OBJECT SIGHTINGS refer to the assumed number of phenomena.\n\nIt must be recognized that the process of identifying OBJECT SIGHTINGS was deductive, while that for UNIT SIGHTINGS was definitive. A conservative approach was adopted in the determination of OBJECT SIGHTINGS, using the factors of date and time of observations, location of observers, duration of observations, and range, bearing, track direction, and identification of the phenomena. Any error of selection of OBJECT SIGHTINGS will tend to be in the direction of reducing the actual number of phenomena observed (several instances of UNIT SIGHTINGS that might be one OBJECT SIGHTING were noted, but the evidence was not conclusive enough to justify consolidation of the reports).\n\nFollowing the determination of OBJECT SIGHTINGS, a series of serial numbers, called the INCIDENT SERIAL NUMBERS, was established to facilitate any future study of a specific object sighting. Each reported sighting that relates to an OBJECT SIGHTING received the same incident serial number, a four-digit code paralleling the major serial number series.\n\n9"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"For machine manipulation, it was desirable to be able to select the sample of cards (all reports, all sightings, or all phenomena) to be included in a particular study. The concept of a SIGHTING IDENTIFICATION NUMBER was evolved to fill this desire. Using one column of the IBM card, and the correlated working papers, the code for this function was developed. Multiple punching eliminated the need to use several columns for discrete expression of the variations. Selection of the proper number in this column thus permitted selection of the desired sample of cards.\n\nEvaluation of Individual Reports\n\nEvaluation of sighting reports was recognized as a crucial step in the preparation of data for statistical treatment; inconsistent evaluations would have invalidated any conclusions to be derived from this study. A method of evaluation was, therefore, determined simultaneously with the development of the questionnaire, the coding system, and the work sheet. It is emphasized that all phases of evaluation, even including the tedious preparation of the original data for statistical treatment, were entrusted only to selected, specially qualified scientists and engineers.\n\nEvaluation consisted of a standardized procedure to be followed for: (1) the deduction of discrete facts from data which depended on human impressions rather than scientific measurements, (2) the rating of the observer and his report as determined from available information, and (3) the determination of the probable identification of the phenomenon observed. Categories of identification, established upon the basis of previous experience, were as follows:\n\nBalloon\nAstronomical\nAircraft\nLight phenomenon\nBirds\nClouds, dust, etc.\nInsufficient information\nPsychological manifestations\nUnknown\nOther\n\nThe first step in evaluation, the deduction of discrete facts from subjective data, required certain calculations based on the information available in the sighting report. An example was the finding of the approximate angular velocity and acceleration of the object or objects sighted. Care was taken during this phase of the work to insure against the deduction of discrete facts not warranted by the original data. Thus, even though there was a complete lack of any valid evidence consisting of\n\n10"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"physical matter in any case of a reported unidentified aerial object, this was not assumed to be prima facie evidence that \"flying saucers\" did not exist.\n\nIn those cases in which an attempt to reduce the information to a factual level failed completely, the report was eliminated from further consideration, and thus not included in the statistical analysis. About 800 reports of sightings were eliminated or rejected in this manner. Most of these reports were rejected because they were extremely nebulous; the rest were rejected because they contained highly conflicting statements.\n\nThe second step in evaluation, the rating of the observer and his report, logically followed the first step, the reduction of the data to usable form. Ratings were assigned on the basis of the following factors of information, considered in relation to one another:\n\n(1) The experience of the observer, deduced from his occupation, age, and training;\n\n(2) The consistency among the separate portions of the description of the sighting;\n\n(3) The general quality and completeness of the report;\n\n(4) Consideration of the observer's fact-reporting ability and attitude, as disclosed by his manner of describing the sighting.\n\nIn cases in which insufficient information was available to make a judgment of the observer or report, none was made, but the report was accepted for the statistical study.\n\nThe third step in the process of evaluation, the attempted identification of the object or objects sighted, was done twice, first by the individual who made the transcription of the data (the preliminary identification), and later (the final identification) by a conference of four persons, two representatives from ATIC and two from the panel of consultants. Although representatives of ATIC participated in making the final identifications, it must be emphasized that any previous identification of a sighting made by ATIC was not introduced or referred to in any way.\n\nIn the coding system, the choices provided for final identifications were based on ATIC's previous experience in analysis of the data. They had found that the majority of sightings could be classified as misinterpretations of common objects or natural phenomena. Accordingly, categories for objects most frequently present in the air were provided. Balloons, aircraft, astronomical bodies (such as meteors), birds, and clouds or dust were recognized as major categories. The less frequent, but common objects, such as kites, fireworks, flares, rockets, contrails, and"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"meteorological phenomena like small tornadoes, were collected into a category called OTHER. A separate category for the uncommon natural phenomena associated with light reflections or refractions, such as mirages, sun dogs, inversion-layer images, and distortions caused by airborne ice, was established with the title of LIGHT PHENOMENON. Categories for INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL MANIFESTATIONS, and UNKNOWN were provided for the sightings that could not be fitted into the preceding identifications. An explanation of their use follows:\n\nINSUFFICIENT INFORMATION - This identification category was assigned to a report when, upon final consideration, there was some essential item of information missing, or there was enough doubt about what data were available to disallow identification as a common object or some natural phenomenon. It is emphasized that this category of identification was not used as a convenient way to dispose of what might be called \"poor unknowns\", but as a category for reports that, perhaps, could have been one of several known objects or natural phenomena. No reports identified as INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION contain authenticated facts or impressions concerning the sighting that would prevent its being identified as a known object or phenomenon;\n\nPSYCHOLOGICAL MANIFESTATIONS - This identification category was assigned to a report when, although it was well established that the observer had seen something, it was also obvious that the description of the sighting had been overdrawn. Religious fanaticism, a desire for publicity, or an over-active imagination were the most common mental aberrations causing this type of report;\n\nUNKNOWN - This designation in the identification code was assigned to those reports of sightings wherein the description of the object and its maneuvers could not be fitted to the pattern of any known object or phenomenon.\n\nFor the purposes of this study, two groups of identifications were recognized, the KNOWNS (including all identification categories except the UNKNOWNS) and the UNKNOWNS.\n\nAll possible identifications provided in the code system, except INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION and UNKNOWN, could be assigned according to two degrees of certainty, designated \"Certain\" and \"Doubtful\".\n\n12"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A \"Certain\" identification indicated a minimum amount of doubt regarding the validity of the evaluation. By \"rule-of-thumb\" reasoning, the probability of the identification being correct was better than 95 per cent. A \"Doubtful\" identification indicated that the choice was less positive, but that there was a better than even chance of being correct.\n\nIt is emphasized again that, as was true for other phases of evaluation, preliminary and final identification was entrusted only to scientists and engineers who, in addition to their broad scientific background, had received instruction, where necessary, in specialized subjects. The panel of consultants provided background information for this instruction. Many of the cases representing unusual features or maneuvers were submitted to and discussed with various members of the panel of consultants prior to the final identification.\n\nConsistency in the application of the knowledge necessary for making identifications was maintained by frequent collaboration among the personnel involved, and systematic spot checks of the work. In addition to the general fund of knowledge required to identify satisfactorily a reported unidentified aerial object, an attempt was made to correlate specific data such as flight plans of aircraft, records of balloon releases, weather conditions, and an astronomical almanac with the reported sighting.\n\nThe procedure followed in making final identifications deserves explanation because of the importance assumed by the identification as a basis for statistical treatment. As was mentioned, a conference of four qualified persons, two from ATIC and two from the panel of consultants, decided upon the final identification for each sighting report. This work was done at ATIC, periodically, as reports became ready.\n\nDuring an identification conference, each sighting report was first studied, from the original data, by one person. If that person arrived at a decision, it was checked against the preliminary identification; if the two identifications were the same, the report was appropriately marked and considered finished. If the two identifications did not agree, the report was considered later by everyone participating in the conference until a group decision could be made.\n\nIf an evaluator was unable to categorize the report as one of the common objects or as a natural phenomenon, and his opinion was that the sighting should be recorded as UNKNOWN, a group decision was also required on that report before it was considered finished. A group decision was necessary on all reports finally recorded as UNKNOWN, regardless of what the preliminary identification had been. In cases where a group decision was not made within a reasonable time, the report was put aside and later submitted to certain members of the panel of consultants for their opinions. If, after this, disagreement continued to exist, the report of the sighting was identified as UNKNOWN.\n\n13"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Upon completion of final identifications, all data were transferred to IBM cards, preparatory to analysis.\n\nANALYSIS OF THE DATA\n\nBroadly stated, the problem at this point consisted of the judicious application of scientific methods of categorizing and analyzing the subjective data in reports of sightings of unidentified aerial objects. It was recognized that an approach to this problem could best be made by a systematic sorting and tabulation program to give frequency and percentage distributions of the important characteristics of sightings. A suggestion that an attempt be made to anticipate all questions that might be asked in the future about a sighting or a group of sightings, and to provide answers, was rejected. The systematic approach also made it possible to develop a detailed reference manual of the attributes of the sightings included in this study.\n\nThus, at the beginning of the analysis, a detailed plan was developed for sorting, counting, and tabulating the information from the punched-card abstracts of reports of sightings. It was believed at the time, and later substantiated, that the results of the program for sorting and tabulating would serve as a guide for the more sophisticated treatment involving statistical methods.\n\nAlso, it was anticipated that any patterns or trends that might be found could be subjected to concentrated study in the hope of discovering significant information relating to the characteristics of \"flying saucers\". Further, it was believed that these trends could serve as certain of the criteria of validity for any concepts (models) developed in the attempt to discover a class of \"flying saucers\".\n\nThe three parts of this study (1) the sorting and tabulation program, (2) the advanced study of the results of that program, and (3) the investigation of the possibility of conceiving a model of a \"flying saucer\" from descriptions reported, are discussed in sections entitled \"Frequency and Percentage Distributions by Characteristics\", \"Advanced Study of the Data\", and \"The 'Flying Saucer' Model\".\n\nFrequency and Percentage Distributions by Characteristics\n\nThe original conception of this study assumed the availability of sufficient data to describe adequately the physical appearance, maneuver characteristics, range, direction, and probable path of the object or objects observed. However, familiarity with the data, acquired during the\n\n14"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"translation and transcription from reports to punched cards, indicated that there would be relatively few specific variables or factors that would yield meaningful correlation studies. Either the original data were too subjective, or the incompleteness of the original reports would seriously reduce the sample of a specific variable.\n\nPreliminary tabulations of various sortings substantiated the impossibility of deriving statistical results from certain variables, such as movement of the observer during the sighting, sound, shape parameter, size, angular velocity and acceleration, appearance and disappearance bearing, initial and final elevation, altitude, and orientation of the object. The statistically usable variables presented in this study include the date, time, location, duration, reliability, and method of observation of the sighting, and the physical attributes of number, color, speed, shape, light brightness, and identification of the objects sighted.\n\nThe presentation of frequency and percentage distributions of any of the variables must be interpreted in the light of the sample of incidents represented. For example, the analysis of the reported colors of the objects sighted, based on ALL SIGHTINGS, could lead to misrepresentation of the distribution of the reported color of the objects, because of the multiplicity of reports on some of the phenomena. On the other hand, the percentage distribution of the light brightness reported by each observer is more likely to be correct than a distribution based on one report for each phenomenon. To assure that the most nearly correct presentation was made, and to avoid the possibility of failure to uncover any pattern or trend inherent in the data, the variables were studied on five different bases or samples. These samples, and their numerical relation to each other, were as follows:\n\nALL SIGHTINGS (all reports) - 3,201 cards\nUNIT SIGHTINGS, all observers - 2,554 cards\nUNIT SIGHTINGS, single observer - 2,232 cards\nUNIT SIGHTINGS, multiple observers - 322 cards\nOBJECT SIGHTINGS - 2,199 cards\n\nThe preliminary tabulations indicated that the samples based on UNIT SIGHTINGS, single observer, and UNIT SIGHTINGS, multiple observers, would not add materially to this study. Accordingly, although the frequency distributions were recorded and are available for study, they are not presented in this report.\n\nThe bases of ALL SIGHTINGS, UNIT SIGHTINGS (referring to all observers), and OBJECT SIGHTINGS are presented in Appendix A as Tables A1 through A240. A critical study of these tabulations reveals that there is no apparent change in the distribution of any variable from one basis to another, and that no marked patterns or trends exist in any sample.\n\n15"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Graphical Presentation\n\nGraphical representation of the important information contained in\nthe tables is presented in Figures 1 through 38. These figures present the\ndistributions of the important variables only by the total number of cases\nin each identification category, since no significant differences were found\nbetween the distributions of \"Certain\" and \"Doubtful\" identifications of\nobjects with respect to the variables. A chronological study of these\nfigures will afford a broad picture of the tabulated information, without the\nnecessity of a detailed study of the tables.\n\nA critical examination of the figures will show that no trends, patterns,\nor correlations are to be found, with the exception of Figures 18 through 30.\nThe apparent similarity of the distributions shown by these mirror graphs,\nFigures 18 through 23, was tested by statistical methods which showed that\nthere was a low probability that the distributions of the KNOWNS and\nUNKNOWNS by these characteristics were the same. These tests and their\ninterpretation are discussed in the following section. For purposes of this\nstudy, the strategic areas, shown in Figures 32 through 38, and Tables\nA223 through A240, Appendix A, were designated on the basis of concen-\ntration of reports of OBJECT SIGHTINGS in an area. No other interpre-\ntation of the tables or remaining charts was deemed necessary.\n\nAdvanced Study of the Data\n\nIt was recognized that the lack of any patterns or trends, as shown by\nthe tabulations and graphs, provided an insecure basis for drawing definite\nconclusions. Accordingly, shortly before the sorting and tabulation pro-\ngram was concluded, a program of study of the data was developed to\nutilize statistical and other mathematical methods, which could lead to a\nmore concrete interpretation of the problem.\n\nPosition of the Sun Relative to the Observer\n\nThe first thing that was done was to calculate the angle of elevation of\nthe sun above the horizon and its bearing from true north as seen by the\nobserver at the time of each sighting. With this information, it could then\nbe determined whether there was a possibility that the reported object\ncould have been illuminated by light from the sun. In addition, it could be\ndetermined whether an object could be a mock sun (sun dog) or whether\nthere was a possibility of specular reflection from an aircraft at the posi-\ntion of the object, which would give the appearance of a \"flying disc\".\n\nA program of computation was set up and carried out to obtain the\nangle of elevation and the bearing of the sun for each sighting. All informa-\ntion needed for this calculation was available on the deck of IBM cards.\n\n16"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE 1 FREQUENCY OF SIGHTINGS BY YEAR FOR OBJECT,\nUNIT, AND ALL SIGHTINGS\n\nA-7479\n\n17\n\nObject sightings 2199 =100%\nAll sightings 3201 = 100%\nUnit sightings 2554 =100%\n\n1952 1501= 68.3%\n1952 1722= 67.4%\n1952 2018= 63.0%\n1947 117= 3.7%\n1948 205= 6.4%\n1947 97= 3.8%\n1948 153= 6.0%\n1947 79= 3.6%\n1948 143= 6.5%\n1949 186= 8.5%\n1949 236= 9.2%\n1949 395= 12.3%\n1950 169= 7.7%\n1950 209= 8.2%\n1950 306= 9.6%\n1951 121= 5.5%\n1951 137= 5.4%\n1951 160= 5.0%"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE 2 DISTRIBUTION OF EVALUATIONS OF OBJECT,\nUNIT, AND ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS\n\nA-7480\n\n18\n\nUnknown 434=19.7%\nOther 233=10.3%\nInsuf. info. 240=10.9%\nBalloon 339=15.4%\nAircraft 474=21.5%\nAstronomical 479=21.8%\n689= 21.5%\n497= 19.5%\n251=\n305= 9.9%\n9.6%\n298= 9.3%\n261= 10.2%\n379=14.8%\n450=14.0%\n527= 20.6%\n642= 20.1%\n639=\n817=\n25.0%\n25.5%\nObject sightings 2199=100%\nAll sightings 3201=100%\nUnit sightings 2554=100%"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE 3 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY EVALU-\nATION FOR ALL YEARS WITH COMPARISONS OF\nEACH YEAR FOR EACH EVALUATION GROUP\n\nA-7481\n\n19\n\nUnknown 434=19.7%\nOther 233=10.3%\nInsuf. info. 240=10.9%\nBalloon 339=15.4%\nAircraft 474=21.5%\nAstronomical 479=21.8%\n1947-51\n1952\n1947-51\n1952\n1952\n1949-51\n1948\n1947\n1952\n1947-48\n1949\n1950\n1951\n1952\n1952\n1951\n1950\n1949\n1948\n1947\n1951\n1950\n1949\n1948\n1947\n1952"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. of object sightings\n2199 79 143 186 169 121 1501\n\nPer Cent\n\n100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0\n\nUnknown\nOther\nInsuf. info.\nBalloon\nAircraft\nAstronomical\n\nAll years 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952\n\nFIGURE 4 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY EVALUATION FOR ALL YEARS AND EACH YEAR\n\nA-7482"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. of object sightings\n70 55 83 127 129 183 638 407 166 125 106 105\n100 100\n90 90\n80 80\n70 70\n60 60\n50 50\n40 40\n30 30\n20 20\n10 10\n0 0\nJan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec\nPer Cent of Each Months Object Sightings\nFIGURE 5 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY EVALUATION WITHIN MONTHS FOR ALL YEARS\nA-7483"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"30 20 10 0 10 20 30\nAstronomical\nAll years\n1947\n1948\n1949\n1950\n1951\n1952\nAircraft\nAll years\n1947\n1948\n1949\n1950\n1951\n1952\nBalloons\nAll years\n1947\n1948\n1949\n1950\n1951\n1952\nInsuf. info.\nAll years\n1947\n1948\n1949\n1950\n1951\n1952\nUnknown\nAll years\n1947\n1948\n1949\n1950\n1951\n1952\nOther\nAll years\n1947\n1948\n1949\n1950\n1951\n1952\n30 20 10 0 10 20 30\nCertain Per Cent Doubtful\nFIGURE 6 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY CERTAIN AND DOUBTFUL EVALUATIONS FOR ALL YEARS AND EACH YEAR\nA-7484\n22"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE 7 FREQUENCY OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS AND UNKNOWN OBJECT EVALUATIONS BY MONTHS, 1947-1952\nC-7485\n23"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Excellent\nPoor\nDoubtful\nGood\n435 = 100 %\nUnknown 72=16.6%\nAstronomical 99=22.8%\nAircraft 69=15.9%\nBalloon 56=12.9%\nInsuf. info. 93=21.4%\nOther 46=10.6%\n213 = 100 %\nUnknown 71=33.3%\nAstronomical 52=24.4%\nAircraft 41=19.2%\nBalloon 25=11.8%\nOther 15=7.0%\nInsuf. info. 9=4.2%\n2199 = 100 %\n435=19.8%\n213=9.7%\n757=34.5%\n794=36.0%\n794 = 100 %\nUnknown 103=13.0%\nAstronomical 154=19.4%\nAircraft 198=24.9%\nBalloon 131=16.5%\nInsuf. info. 111=14.0%\nOther 97=12.2%\n757 = 100 %\nUnknown 188=24.8%\nAstronomical 174=23.0%\nAircraft 166=22.0%\nBalloon 127=16.8%\nOther 75=9.9%\nInsuf. info. 27=3.6%\nFIGURE 8 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS WITH EVALUATION DISTRIBUTIONS FOR EACH GROUP\nA-7486\n24"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. of object sightings\n2199 79 143 186 169 121 1501\nExcellent Good Doubtful Poor\nPer Cent\nAll years 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952\nFIGURE 9 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS AMONG THE FOUR SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS FOR ALL YEARS AND EACH YEAR\nA-7487\n25"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE 10 DISTRIBUTION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS. SEGREGATED BY MILITARY AND CIVILIAN OBSERVERS WITH EVALUATION DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH SEGREGATION\nA-7488\nPer Cent\nExcellent\nGood\nDoubtful\nPoor\nCivilian\nMilitary\nCivilian\nMilitary\nCivilian\nMilitary\nCivillan\nMilitary"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE 11 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY REPORTED COLORS OF OBJECT(S) WITH EVALUATION DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH COLOR GROUP\nA-7489\n27\nWhite 23.5 %\nMetallic 17.7 %\nNot stated 12.3 %\nOrange 10.0%\nRed 8.1%\nOther 28.4 %\nUnknown\nOther\nInsuf. info.\nBalloon\nAircraft\nAstronomical"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE 12 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS SEEN PER SIGHTING WITH EVALUATION DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH GROUP\nA-7490\n28\n3-10 objects 255= 11.6 %\n11 or more objects 66=3.0 %\n2199= 100 %\n2 objects 196= 8.9 %\n1 object 1636= 74.4 %\nNumber of objects not stated 46= 2.1 %\nUnknown\nOthers\nInsuf. info.\nBalloon\nAircraft\nAstronomical"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE 13 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING WITH EVALUATION DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH DURATION GROUP\nA-7491\n29\nNot stated 24.9%\nOver 30min 7.8 %\n6-30 min 17.1 %\n61 sec - 5 min 16.7 %\n31-60 sec 6.8 %\n11-30 sec 8.5 %\n6-10 sec 5.1 %\n5 sec or less 13.0 %\nDuration\nEvaluations in Per Cent\nPer Cent\nAstronomical\nAircraft\nBalloon\nInsuf. info.\nOther\nUnknown"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No. of object sightings\n70 55 83 127 129 183 638 407 166 125 106 105\nFIGURE 14 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY MONTHS AMONG THE EIGHT DURATION GROUPS FOR ALL YEARS\nA-7492\n30\nPer Cent of Each Months Object Sightings\nPer Cent\nJan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec\nNot stated\nOver 30min\n6-30 min\n61 sec to 5 min\n31-60 sec\n11-30 sec\n6-10 sec\n5 sec and less"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"31\nPer Cent\n100\n90\n80\n70\n60\n50\n40\n30\n20\n10\n0\nNot stated\nOther\nFlame\nLenticular conical or teardrop\nMeteor or comet\nRocket and aircraft\nElliptical\nShape\n23.5%\n11.2%\n4.8%\n5.7%\n2.7%\n5.1%\n47.0%\nAstronomical\nAircraft\nBalloon\nInsuf. info.\nOther\nUnknown\n0\n10\n20\n30\n40\n50\n60\n70\n80\n90\n100\nEvaluation in Per Cent\nFIGURE 15 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT(S) REPORTED WITH\nEVALUATION DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH SHAPE GROUP\nA-7493"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"32\nPer Cent\n100\n90\n80\n70\n60\n50\n40\n30\n20\n10\n0\nSpeed\nnot-stated\n37.8%\nMeteor-like\n4.5%\nOver\n400 mph\n24.9%\n100-400\nmph\n10.9%\nLess than\n100 mph\n8.2%\nStationary\n13.7%\nSpeed\nAstronomical\nAircraft\nBalloon\nInsuf. info.\nOther\nUnknown\n0\n10\n20\n30\n40\n50\n60\n70\n80\n90\n100\nEvaluation in Per Cent\nFIGURE 16 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY REPORTED SPEED OF OBJECT(S) WITH\nEVALUATION DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH SPEED GROUP\nA-7494"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"33\nPer Cent of All Sightings Reported\nNo. of all sighting\n3201\n117\n205\n164\n306\n160\n2018\n100\n90\n80\n70\n60\n50\n40\n30\n20\n10\n0\nLocation not stated\nOutdoors\nOther\nIn bldg.\nIn plane\nIn car\nAll years\n1947\n1948\n1949\n1950\n1951\n1952\nFIGURE 17 DISTRIBUTION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY OBSERVER LOCATION FOR ALL YEARS AND\nEACH YEAR\nA-7495"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"34\nTotal Less Unknown\nPer Cent\n30\n25\n20\n15\n10\n5\n0\nUnknown\nPer Cent\n0\n5\n10\n15\n20\n25\n30\nWhite\nMetallic\nNot stated\nOrange\nRed\nOther\nFIGURE 18 COMPARISON OF KNOWN AND UNKNOWN OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY COLOR, 1947-1952\nA-7496"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"35\nTotal Less Unknown\nPer Cent\n80\n70\n60\n50\n40\n30\n20\n10\n0\nUnknown\nPer Cent\n0\n10\n20\n30\n40\n50\n60\n70\n80\nOne\nTwo\nThree\nto\nten\nEleven\nor\nmore\nNot stated\nFIGURE 19 COMPARISON OF KNOWN AND UNKNOWN OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY NUMBER OF\nOBJECTS PER SIGHTING, 1947-1952\nA-7497"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"36\nTotal Less Unknown\nPer Cent\n40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 | 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40\nUnknown\nPer Cent\nStationary\nLess than\n100 mph\n100 to 400\nmph\nMore than\n400 mph\nMeteor-like\nNot stated\nFIGURE 20 COMPARISON OF KNOWN AND UNKNOWN OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY SPEED, 1947-1952\nA-7498"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"37\nTotal Less Unknown\nPer Cent\n30 25 20 15 10 5 0 | 0 5 10 15 20 25 30\nUnknown\nPer Cent\n5 seconds\nor less\n6-10\nseconds\n11-30\nseconds\n31-60\nseconds\n61 seconds-\n5 minutes\n6-30\nminutes\nMore than\n30 minutes\nNot stated\nFIGURE 21 COMPARISON OF KNOWN AND UNKNOWN OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION, 1947-1952\nA-7499"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"38\nTotal Less Unknown\nPer Cent\n50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 | 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50\nUnknown\nPer Cent\nElliptical\nRocket\nand\naircraft\nMeteor or\ncomet\nLenticular,\nconical or\nteardrop\nFlame\nOther shapes\nNot stated\nFIGURE 22 COMPARISON OF KNOWN AND UNKNOWN OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY SHAPE, 1947-1952\nA-7500"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"39\nTotal Less Unknown\nPer Cent\n60 50 40 30 20 10 0 | 0 10 20 30 40 50 60\nUnknown\nPer Cent\nSunlight on\nmirror or\naluminum\nSunlight on\nplaster,\nstone or soil\nBrighter\nthan moon\nLike moon\nDuller\nthan moon\nNot stated\nFIGURE 23 COMPARISON OF KNOWN AND UNKNOWN OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY LIGHT BRIGHTNESS,\n1947-1952\nA-7501"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"40\nTotal Less Astronomical\nPer Cent\n40 30 20 10 0 | 0 10 20 30 40\nAstronomical\nPer Cent\nJanuary\nFebruary\nMarch\nApril\nMay\nJune\nJuly\nAugust\nSeptember\nOctober\nNovember\nDecember\nFIGURE 24 COMPARISON OF MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS EVALUATED AS\nASTRONOMICAL VERSUS TOTAL OBJECT SIGHTINGS LESS ASTRONOMICAL\nA-7502"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Total Less Aircraft\nPer Cent\n40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40\nAircraft\nPer Cent\nJanuary\nFebruary\nMarch\nApril\nMay\nJune\nJuly\nAugust\nSeptember\nOctober\nNovember\nDecember\nFIGURE 25 COMPARISON OF MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS EVALUATED AS\nAIRCRAFT VERSUS TOTAL OBJECT SIGHTINGS LESS AIRCRAFT\nA-7503"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Total Less Balloon\nPer Cent\n40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40\nBalloon\nPer Cent\nJanuary\nFebruary\nMarch\nApril\nMay\nJune\nJuly\nAugust\nSeptember\nOctober\nNovember\nDecember\nFIGURE 26 COMPARISON OF MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS EVALUATED\nAS BALLOON VERSUS TOTAL OBJECT SIGHTINGS LESS BALLOON\nA-7504"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Total Less Insufficient Information\nPer Cent\n40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40\nInsufficient Information\nPer Cent\nJanuary\nFebruary\nMarch\nApril\nMay\nJune\nJuly\nAugust\nSeptember\nOctober\nNovember\nDecember\nFIGURE 27 COMPARISON OF MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS EVALUATED AS\nINSUFFICIENT INFORMATION VERSUS TOTAL OBJECT SIGHTINGS LESS INSUFFI-\nCIENT INFORMATION\nA-7505"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Total Less Other\nPer Cent\n40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40\nOther\nPer Cent\nJanuary\nFebruary\nMarch\nApril\nMay\nJune\nJuly\nAugust\nSeptember\nOctober\nNovember\nDecember\nFIGURE 28 COMPARISON OF MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS EVALUATED AS\nOTHER VERSUS TOTAL OBJECT SIGHTINGS LESS OTHER\nA-7506"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Total Less Unknown\nPer Cent\n40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40\nUnknown\nPer Cent\nJanuary\nFebruary\nMarch\nApril\nMay\nJune\nJuly\nAugust\nSeptember\nOctober\nNovember\nDecember\nFIGURE 29 COMPARISON OF MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS EVALUATED AS\nUNKNOWN VERSUS TOTAL OBJECT SIGHTINGS LESS UNKNOWN\nA-7507"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Total Per Cent Knowns Per Cent Astro Per Cent Aircraft Per Cent Balloon Per Cent Other Per Cent Number of objects Color Speed Shape Duration Unknown\n\nFIGURE 30 CHARACTERISTICS PROFILES OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY TOTAL SAMPLE, KNOWN EVALUATIONS, AND INDIVIDUAL KNOWN EVALUATIONS, WITH UNKNOWN EVALUATIONS SUPERIMPOSED\n\nB-7508\n\n46"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"KEY: IN EACH SUBDIVISION THE TOP FIGURE INDICATES THE FREQUENCY OF ALL SIGHTINGS, THE MIDDLE FIGURE UNIT SIGHTINGS, AND THE BOTTOM FIGURE OBJECT SIGHTINGS\n\nCANADA\n\nMEXICO\n\n47\n\nFIGURE 31 FREQUENCY OF OBJECT, UNIT, AND ALL SIGHTINGS WITHIN THE UNITED STATES 1947-1952, BY SUBDIVISIONS OF ONE DEGREE OF LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NORTH FARWEST 95 = 100%\nNORTH WEST 26 = 100%\nNORTH MIDWEST 62 = 100%\nNORTH EAST 37 = 100%\nCENTRAL FARWEST 131 = 100%\nCENTRAL WEST 59 = 100%\nCENTRAL MIDWEST 374 = 100%\nCENTRAL EAST 393 = 100%\nSOUTH FARWEST 103 = 100%\nSOUTH WEST 223 = 100%\nSOUTH MIDWEST 391 = 100%\nSOUTH EAST 22 = 100%\nCANADA\nMEXICO\n\n48\n\nFIGURE 32 DISTRIBUTION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY EVALUATION FOR THE TWELVE REGIONAL AREAS OF THE UNITED STATES, WITH THE STRATEGIC AREAS LOCATED (STRATEGIC AREAS WERE DETERMINED ON THE BASIS OF CONCENTRATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS)"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Unknown 11.5% Astro 26.2% Other 9.8% Balloon 21.3% Aircraft 29.5% Insuf. Info 1.6% 61 object sightings Harrisburg New York 105 object sightings Washington 146 object sightings Unknown 10.5% Astro 16.2% Other 12.3% Insuf. info. 16.2% Aircraft 30.5% Balloon 14.3% Unknown 26.7% Astro 15.1% Other 5.5% Insuf. info. 6.8% Balloon 15.8% Aircraft 30.1% Unknown 14.8% Astro 18.5% Other 14.9% Insuf. info. 12.3% Balloon 17.3% Aircraft 22.2% Balance of Central East Region 81 object sightings\n\n49\n\nFIGURE 33 COMPARISON OF EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE CENTRAL EAST REGION B-7511"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chicago 66 object sightings Dayton 144 object sightings Unknown 13.6% Astro 16.7% Other 16.7% Aircraft 27.3% Insuf. info. 15.2% Balloon 10.6% Unknown 20.7% Astro 20.8% Other 11.4% Aircraft 13.4% Insuf. info. 16.5% Balloon 17.0% Balance of Central Midwest Region 164 object sightings Unknown 9.7% Astro 22.2% Other 12.6% Aircraft 25.7% Insuf. info. 13.9% Balloon 16.0%\n\n50\n\nFIGURE 34 COMPARISON OF EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE CENTRAL MIDWEST REGION B-7512"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE 35 COMPARISON OF EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE CENTRAL FARWEST REGION\nB-7513\nSan Francisco\n93 object sightings\nBalance of Central Farwest Region\n38 object sightings\n51"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE 36 COMPARISON OF EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE SOUTH MIDWEST REGION\nB-7514\nWaco\n82 object sightings\nSan Antonio\n36 object sightings\nAtlanta\n63 object sightings\nBalance of South Midwest Region\n210 object sightings\n52"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE 37 COMPARISON OF EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE SOUTH WEST REGION\nA-7515\nAlbuquerque\n98 object sightings\nBalance of South West Region\n125 object sightings\n53"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FIGURE 38 COMPARISON OF EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE SOUTH FARWEST REGION\nB-7516\nLos Angeles\n84 object sightings\nBalance of South Farwest Region\n19 object sightings\n54"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This information consisted of:\n(1) Time and date of observation in Greenwich Civil Time\n(2) Latitude and longitude of the observer at the time of observation.\nFigure 39 shows a celestial sphere on which Z represents the observer's zenith, s represents the sun, and N represents the north celestial pole.\nUsing the date and time of the observation, the longitude and declination (S) of the sun were obtained from an ephemeris of the sun and corrected for the equation of time. The difference between the longitudes of the sun and the observer was taken, and called the hour angle (HA on Figure 39).\nThen, using the declination of the sun (S), the latitude of the observer (lat), and the hour angle (HA), the angle (ZS) between the observer's zenith and the sun can be calculated from the law of cosines of spherical trigonometry. Thus, cos ZS = cos (90 - lat) cos (90 - S) + sin (90 - lat) sin (90 - S) cos (HA).\nSince the angle ZS is measured from the observer's zenith, the angle of elevation of the sun above the horizon for daytime sightings was found by taking 90 - ZS. When the sun was below the horizon, the angle of depression of the sun below the horizon was found by taking ZS - 90.\nHaving found the angle ZS, the bearing of the sun (angle B) was obtained from the formula:\nsin (B) / sin (90 - S) = sin (HA) / sin (ZS)\nAll of the above calculations were made with IBM equipment. Sines, cosines, and their inverses were obtained from a deck of 9,000 IBM cards on which seven-place Peter's tables of the sines, cosines, and tangents of angles had been punched for each 0.01 of a degree from 0 to 90 degrees.\nUpon completion of these calculations, the cards representing OBJECT SIGHTINGS were sorted on the sign of the sine of the bearing angle. This separated the cards into two groups: (1) sightings which occurred between noon and midnight, for which the sine of the bearing angle was positive; and (2) sightings between midnight and noon, for which the sine of the bearing angle was negative. Then each of these groups was sorted into groups for intervals of 10° in angle of elevation of the sun from -90° to +90°. A count was made of the number of cards in each group and from this a histogram was constructed (Figure 40). The UNKNOWN OBJECT SIGHTINGS were then sorted out, counted in the same manner, and a histogram was made (again see Figure 40).\n55"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Z\n90-Lat\nHa\nB\n90-δ\nS\nN\nEquator\nEarth\nHorizon\nFIGURE 39 DIAGRAM OF A CELESTIAL SPHERE\nA-7535\n56"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Number of Object Sightings\n57\n300\n275\n250\n225\n200\n175\n150\n125\n100\n75\n50\n25\n0\nSun set\nSun rise\nAll object sightings\nUnknown object sightings\n-90 -60 -30 0 +30 +60 +90 +60 +30 0 -30 -60 -90\nAngle of Elevation of The Sun\nFIGURE 40 FREQUENCY OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY ANGLE OF ELEVATION OF THE SUN, INTERVALS\nOF 10 DEGREES OF ANGLE\nA-7536"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The following points should be carefully noted about these histograms:\n(1) The negligible number of sightings when the sun is within 10° of the zenith and nadir (angle of elevation of the sun = ±90°) of the observer is due to the fact that the southernmost latitude of the U. S. is greater than the declination of the sun at the summer solstice, so that it would be impossible for the sun to reach the zenith or nadir of any observer in the U. S. (where most of the sightings were made).\n(2) The time of day at which a particular angle of elevation of the sun occurs does not remain fixed but varies from day to day. Consider, for example, the variation in sunrise and sunset times over the course of a year.\nThus, there are only two inferences to be made from this histogram: (1) the high peak of sightings soon after sunset, and (2) the lack of increase in the UNKNOWNS relative to the KNOWNS near either sunset or sunrise. This would seem to discount the possibility that atmospheric phenomena such as mock suns were the primary cause of the unknown reports, since such phenomena usually occur when the sun is near the horizon.\nThe Local Sun Time was computed as a step in the calculation of the angle of elevation of the sun. It is related to the hour angle by the equation: Local Sun Time (L.S.T.) = HA/15 + 12.00, where L.S.T. is in hours and HA in degrees.\nThe cards were grouped on the basis of L.S.T. in intervals of one hour, and the number of cards in each interval was counted. Again the UNKNOWNS were sorted out and similarly treated. Histograms were constructed with the results of these tabulations of OBJECT SIGHTINGS (Figure 41). Here, again, there is a peak in the early evening hours.\nThe cards were then broken up into seven groups on the basis of the angle of elevation of the sun, as follows:\nGroup 1 - Daylight sightings for which the sun was more than 10° above the horizon.\nGroup 2 - Sunset sightings for which the sun was between 0° and 10° above the horizon.\nGroup 3 - Sunset sightings for which the sun was between 0° and 10° below the horizon.\nGroup 4 - Evening sightings for which the sun was between 10° and 40° below the horizon.\n58"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Number of Object Sightings\n59\n300\n275\n250\n225\n200\n175\n150\n125\n100\n75\n50\n25\n0\nMidnight\nMidnight\nNoon\nAll object sightings\nUnknown object sightings\n0 0300 0600 0900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400\nLocal Sun Time\nFIGURE 41 FREQUENCY OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY LOCAL SUN TIME, INTERVALS OF ONE HOUR\nA-7537"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Group 5 - Night sightings for which the sun was more than 10° below the horizon and which were not included in Group 4.\nGroup 6 - Sunrise sightings for which the sun was between 0° and 10° below the horizon.\nGroup 7 - Sunrise sightings for which the sun was between 0° and 10° above the horizon.\nThese group numbers were punched on the cards and incorporated into the coding system. The number of OBJECT SIGHTINGS in each group for each identification was then tabulated and is given in Table I.\nTABLE I OBJECT SIGHTINGS\nIdentification 1 2 3 4 5 6 7\nBalloon 156 17 28 83 40 0 2\nAstronomical 52 6 43 236 118 9 6\nAircraft 187 23 49 144 60 5 2\nLight phenomena 8 2 4 25 7 0 0\nInsufficient information 72 12 26 76 28 2 0\nUNKNOWN 134 14 25 150 86 6 7\nOther 64 8 12 50 36 3 7\nTotal 673 82 187 764 375 25 24\nAccording to this table, a large majority of the KNOWN OBJECT SIGHTINGS in Group 1 (343 out of 467) were either aircraft or balloons. In Groups 4 and 5 combined, a large majority (681 out of 899) were either balloons, aircraft, or astronomical. Accordingly, a re-evaluation of the UNKNOWNS in these three groups was planned with the objective of determining which of the UNKNOWNS in Group 1 might possibly be aircraft or balloons and which of the UNKNOWNS in Groups 4 and 5 might possibly be balloons, aircraft, or astronomical objects. More will be said of this project later.\nStatistical Chi Square Test\nIn the meantime, mirror graphs had been constructed from the frequency tabulations which seemed to show that, when the KNOWNS (total less UNKNOWNS) and the UNKNOWNS were grouped according to one of six characteristics, the percentage of KNOWNS and the percentage of\n60"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNKNOWNS in each characteristic group showed the same general trend.\nIn other words, on the basis of these graphs, it looked as though there was\na good possibility that the UNKNOWNS were no different from the KNOWNS,\nat least in the aggregate. It was decided to investigate this by the use of a\nstatistical procedure called the \"Chi Square Test\".\n\nThe Chi Square Test is a statistical test of the likelihood that two\ndistributions come from the same population, that is, it gives the proba-\nbility that there is no difference in the make-up of the two distributions\nbeing measured.\n\nThe method is outlined as follows:\n\n(1) Adjust the distributions by multiplying the KNOWNS in each\ncharacteristic group by the ratio of the total number of\nUNKNOWNS to the total number of KNOWNS. (The Chi\nSquare Test is applicable only to distributions which have\nthe same total number of elements.)\n\n(2) Take the difference between the number of UNKNOWNS and\nthe adjusted number of KNOWNS in each characteristic\ngroup.\n\n(3) Square the remainder from Step 2.\n\n(4) Divide the result of Step 3 by the corresponding number of\nadjusted KNOWNS.\n\nThis is the chi square for the particular group. Summing the indi-\nvidual chi squares over the groups of a characteristic gives the chi square\nfor that characteristic. This number is then compared with a table of the\ndistribution of chi square which can be found in many texts on elementary\nstatistics.\n\nIt will be noted that chi square is tabulated in terms of degrees of\nfreedom which in this case is one less than the number of groups of sight-\nings for each characteristic.\n\nThe tabulations of KNOWNS and UNKNOWNS against the six char-\nacteristics and the Chi Square Test as it was applied are shown in Tables\nII through VII. In each case, the number of degrees of freedom is given,\nas is the value of chi squares corresponding to probabilities of 5 per cent\nand 1 per cent that two distributions with this number of degrees of freedom\ncome from the same population. Since the greater the value of chi square\nthe smaller the probability of homogeneity of two distributions, a calculated\nvalue of chi square greater than either the 5 per cent or 1 per cent values\nwill indicate a probability less than 5 per cent or 1 per cent, respectively,\nthat the two distributions are homogeneous. The term homogeneity is used\nhere to indicate that two distributions could have come from the same\npopulation.\n\n61"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE II CHI SQUARE TEST OF KNOWNS VERSUS\nUNKNOWNS ON THE BASIS OF COLOR\n\nColor Number of KNOWNS Adjusted Number of KNOWNS (K) Number of UNKNOWNS (n) X2, (K-n)2 / K\nWhite 405 100 112 1.44\nMetallic 313 77 76 0.01\nNot stated 209 51 62 2.37\nOrange 172 42 49 1.17\nRed 146 36 33 0.25\nYellow 128 31 31 0\nGreen 130 32 14 10.13\nBlue 67 17 26 4.76\nOther 195 48 31 6.02\nTotal 1765 434 434 26.15\n\nDegrees of freedom 8\n5% 15.5\n1% 20.1\n\n62"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE III CHI SQUARE TEST OF KNOWNS VERSUS\nUNKNOWNS ON THE BASIS OF NUMBER\n\nNumber of Objects Per Sighting | Number of KNOWNS | Adjusted Number of KNOWNS (K) | Number of UNKNOWNS (n) | X2, (K-n)2 / K\n1 1339 329 297 3.11\n2 159 39 37 0.10\n3-10 185 46 70 12.52\n11 or more 41 10 25 22.50\nNot stated 41 10 5 2.50\nTotal 1765 434 434 40.73\n\nDegrees of freedom 4\n5% 9.5\n1% 13.3\n\n63"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE IV CHI SQUARE TEST OF KNOWNS VERSUS\nUNKNOWNS ON THE BASIS OF SHAPE\n\nShape Number of KNOWNS Adjusted Number of KNOWNS (K) Number of UNKNOWNS (n) X2, (K-n)2 / K\nElliptical 838 206 195 0.59\nRocket and aircraft 80 20 33 8.45\nMeteor or comet 55 14 4 7.14\nTeardrop, lenticular, or conical 103 25 22 0.36\nFlame 96 24 10 8.17\nOther 193 47 54 1.04\nNot stated 400 98 116 3.30\nTotal 1765 434 434 29.05\n\nDegrees of freedom 6\n5% 12.6\n1% 16.8\n\n64"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE V CHI SQUARE TEST OF KNOWNS VERSUS UNKNOWNS\nON THE BASIS OF DURATION OF OBSERVATION\n\nDuration of Observation | Number of KNOWNS | Adjusted Number of KNOWNS (K) | Number of UNKNOWNS (n) | X2, (K-n)2 / K\n5 sec or less 259 64 27 21.39\n6-10 sec 92 23 21 0.17\n11-30 sec 153 38 33 0.66\n31-60 sec 108 26 42 9.85\n61 sec-5 min 269 66 99 16.50\n6-30 min 305 75 71 0.21\nOver 30 min 135 33 37 0.48\nNot stated 444 109 104 0.23\nTotal 1765 434 434 49.49\n\nDegrees of freedom 7\n5% 14.1\n1% 18.5\n\n65"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE VI CHI SQUARE TEST OF KNOWNS VERSUS\nUNKNOWNS ON THE BASIS OF SPEED\n\nSpeed | Number of KNOWNS | Adjusted Number of KNOWNS (K) | Number of UNKNOWNS (n) | X2, (K-n)2 / K\n\nStationary 249 61 53 1.05\nLess than 100 mph 154 38 26 3.79\n100 to 400 mph 181 45 58 3.76\nOver 400 mph 403 99 145 21.37\nMeteor-like 83 20 16 0.80\nNot stated 695 171 136 7.16\nTotal 1765 434 434 37.93\n\nDegrees of freedom 5\n5% 11.1\n1% 15.1"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE VII CHI SQUARE TEST OF KNOWNS VERSUS UNKNOWNS\nON THE BASIS OF LIGHT BRIGHTNESS\n\nLight Brightness | Number of KNOWNS | Adjusted Number of KNOWNS (K) | Number of UNKNOWNS (n) | X2, (K-n)2 / K\n\nSunlight on mirror 47 11 14 0.82\nSunlight on aluminum 151 37 28 2.19\nSunlight on plaster, stone, or soil 76 19 16 0.47\nBrighter than moon 273 67 61 0.55\nLike moon or duller than moon 68 17 22 1.47\nNot stated 1150 283 293 0.35\nTotal 1765 434 434 5.85\n\nDegrees of freedom 5\n5% 11.1\n1% 15.1"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In five of the six cases, the probability is less than 1 per cent that the distributions are the same. In the sixth case, Light Brightness, the classifications are too nebulous to be of real value. However, these tests do not necessarily mean that the UNKNOWNS are primarily \"flying saucers\" and not aircraft, balloons, or other known objects or natural phenomena. The UNKNOWNS might still be unidentified KNOWNS if either of the following cases occurred:\n\n(1) The characteristics which were observed for the UNKNOWNS were different from those observed for the KNOWNS because of the psychological make-up of the observer or because of atmospheric distortion. This assumes the distribution of objects in KNOWNS and UNKNOWNS is the same.\n\n(2) The UNKNOWNS may be known objects in different proportions than the group identified as KNOWNS. (That is, a greater percentage of the UNKNOWNS could be aircraft than the percentage of aircraft in the identified KNOWNS.)\n\nThe second case is the more probable one. In this connection, it is interesting to note the factors which contributed to a large chi square result in the tests made above:\n\n(1) Color\n\nThe major contribution to chi square in color is from the color green. There is a large excess of green sightings among the KNOWNS over the UNKNOWNS. Of the 130 known objects in this classification, 98 are astronomical, and are due mostly to the green fireballs reported from the Southwest U. S.\n\n(2) Number\n\nThe large chi square is due to a greater proportion of UNKNOWNS in the multiple object classification. Apparently these are harder to identify.\n\n(3) Shape\n\nIn this case, there is a higher percentage of UNKNOWNS in the rocket-aircraft-shape classification. These might be familiar objects for which unusual maneuvers were reported.\n\nThere is a higher percentage of KNOWNS in the flame and in the meteor- or comet-shape category, which in both cases appears to result mainly from excesses of astronomical sightings.\n\n68"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(4) Duration of observation\n\nHere there is an excess of KNOWNS in the less-than-5-second group. Again, the majority of KNOWNS in this group are astronomical. The greater proportion of UNKNOWNS in the 31- to 60-second and 61-second to 5-minute groups cannot be explained.\n\n(5) Speed\n\nThe major contribution to chi square for this characteristic is due to a large excess of UNKNOWNS in the over 400-mph class. It can be assumed that some of the excessive speeds are inaccuracies in estimates by observers. However, some radar sightings, which are practically impossible to identify, show objects with speeds of 1,000 to 2,000 mph and over, and these reports account for a number of these UNKNOWNS.\n\n(6) Light brightness\n\nSince this chi square was not significant, it is not necessary to discuss it here.\n\nAn examination of these discrepancies thus brings up a very interesting point. In every case for which there is a significant excess of KNOWNS over UNKNOWNS, the excess can be attributed to an excess of identifiable astronomical phenomena. This would seem to lead to the conclusion that astronomical phenomena are easy to identify and there are very few left in the UNKNOWNS. Accordingly, the astronomical object sightings were deleted from the KNOWN object sightings and the Chi Square Test was again applied. The results are shown in Tables VIII through XIII, where in this case the KNOWNS do not contain astronomical sightings.\n\nIt will be noted that some groups were combined when the adjusted number of KNOWNS was ten or less, except for the case for which the number of objects per sighting was the characteristic studied. These were borderline cases, and no good combination of groups existed.\n\nIt is apparent that the deletion of astronomical sightings gives a better fit, although the decision is not clear cut, since for two cases (light brightness and speed), the chi square increased. However, it can again be pointed out that the reporting of these two characteristics is highly subjective and is open to question. The estimation of speed is especially open to question because of the impossibility of accurately determining it visually.\n\n69"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE VIII CHI SQUARE TEST OF REVISED KNOWNS VERSUS UNKNOWNS ON THE BASIS OF COLOR\n\nColor | Number of KNOWNS | Adjusted Number of KNOWNS (K) | Number of UNKNOWNS (n) | X2, (K-n)2 / K\n\nWhite 281 95 112 3.04\nMetallic 298 101 76 6.19\nNot stated 189 64 62 0.06\nOrange 117 39 49 2.56\nRed 92 31 33 0.13\nYellow 90 30 31 0.03\nGreen 32 11 14 0.82\nBlue 29 10 26 } 0.57\nOther 158 53 31 }\nTotal 1286 434 434 13.40\n\nDegrees of freedom 7\n5% 14.1\n1% 18.5\n\n70"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE IX CHI SQUARE TEST OF REVISED KNOWNS VERSUS UNKNOWNS ON THE BASIS OF NUMBER\nNumber of Objects Per Sighting | Number of KNOWNS | Adjusted Number of KNOWNS (K) | Number of UNKNOWNS (n) | X2, (K-n)2 / K\n1 913 308 297 0.39\n2 142 48 37 2.52\n3-10 168 57 70 2.96\n11 or more 34 11 25 15.36\nNot stated 29 10 5 2.50\nTotal 1286 434 434 23.73\nDegrees of freedom 4\n5% 9.5\n1% 13.3\n71"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE X CHI SQUARE TEST OF REVISED KNOWNS VERSUS UNKNOWNS ON THE BASIS OF SHAPE\nShape | Number of KNOWNS | Adjusted Number of KNOWNS (K) | Number of UNKNOWNS (n) | X2, (K-n)2 / K\nElliptical 632 213 195 1.52\nRocket or aircraft 72 24 33 3.37\nMeteor or comet 9 3 4 1.32\nFlame 47 16 10 1.32\nTeardrop, lenticular, or conical 79 27 22 0.93\nOther 151 51 54 1.76\nNot stated 296 100 116 2.56\nTotal 1286 434 434 11.46\nDegrees of freedom 5\n5% 11.1\n1% 15.1\n72"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE XI CHI SQUARE TEST OF REVISED KNOWNS VERSUS UNKNOWNS ON THE BASIS OF DURATION OF OBSERVATION\nDuration of Observation | Number of KNOWNS | Adjusted Number of KNOWNS (K) | Number of UNKNOWNS (n) | X2, (K-n)2 / K\n5 sec or less 92 31 27 0.52\n6-10 sec 47 16 21 1.56\n11-30 sec 118 40 33 1.23\n31-60 sec 92 31 42 3.90\n61 sec-5 min 252 85 99 2.31\n6 min-30 min 259 87 71 2.94\nOver 30 min 91 31 37 1.16\nNot stated 335 113 104 0.72\nTotal 1286 434 434 14.34\nDegrees of freedom 7\n5% 14.1\n1% 18.5\n73"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE XII CHI SQUARE TEST OF REVISED KNOWNS VERSUS UNKNOWNS ON THE BASIS OF SPEED\nSpeed | Number of KNOWNS | Adjusted Number of KNOWNS (K) | Number of UNKNOWNS (n) | X2, (K-n)2 / K\nStationary 196 66 53 2.56\nLess than 100 mph 128 43 26 6.72\n100 to 400 mph 156 53 58 0.47\nOver 400 mph 291 98 145 28.54\nMeteor-like 24 8 16 28.54\nNot stated 491 166 136 5.42\nTotal 1286 434 434 43.71\nDegrees of freedom 4\n5% 9.5\n1% 13.3\n74"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE XIII CHI SQUARE TEST OF REVISED KNOWNS VERSUS UNKNOWNS ON THE BASIS OF LIGHT BRIGHTNESS\nLight Brightness | Number of KNOWNS | Adjusted Number of KNOWNS (K) | Number of UNKNOWNS (n) | X2, (K-n)2 / K\nSunlight on mirror 24 8 14 2.67\nSunlight on aluminum 136 46 28 2.67\nSunlight on plaster, stone, or soil 63 21 16 1.19\nBrighter than moon 143 48 61 3.52\nLike moon or duller than moon 42 15 22 3.27\nNot stated 878 296 293 0.03\nTotal 1286 434 434 10.68\nDegrees of freedom 4\n5% 9.5\n1% 13.3\n75"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Another interesting aspect of these new tests is that there are only\ntwo large discrepancies in all of the groups. These are for the 11 or more\ngroups in the classification by number of objects per sighting and for the\nover-400-mph and meteor-like group for the classification by speed. The\nfirst was relatively unchanged by deletion of the astronomical sightings\nprincipally because of the concentration of sightings in the single-object\ncategory. The second was slightly increased by the removal of the astro-\nnomical sightings from the meteor-like classification. However, the main\ndiscrepancy, that of the excess of UNKNOWNS in the over-400-mph class,\nwas little changed.\n\nThe results of these tests are inconclusive since they neither confirm\nnor deny that the UNKNOWNS are primarily unidentified KNOWNS, although\nthey do indicate that relatively few of the UNKNOWNS are actually astro-\nnomical phenomena.\n\nIt was decided that this process would not be carried to its logical\nconclusion (that is, the determination of a linear combination of KNOWNS\nthat would give a negligible chi square when compared with the UNKNOWNS),\nsince it was felt that the inaccuracies in the reports would give a distorted\nand meaningless result.\n\nThe \"Flying Saucer\" Model\n\nThe importance of the problem dictated a second approach, should the\nstatistical results prove inconclusive. It was decided that an attempt\nwould be made to describe the physical appearance, flight characteristics,\nand other attributes (that is, construct a model) of a class or classes of\n\"flying saucers\".\n\nPreparatory to this attempt, a re-evaluation of the UNKNOWNS was\nnecessary. This re-evaluation was accomplished by a panel composed only\nof persons previously associated with the work. Using all the UNKNOWNS\nreports available at ATIC, the panel made a careful study of the reports for\nthe UNKNOWN SIGHTINGS in angle-of-sun-elevation Groups 1, 2, 3, 6, and\n7 - those groups for which the sun was either above the horizon or less than\n10° in elevation below the horizon.\n\nThis study had two purposes. The first was to determine, with\nadditional information such as the angle of elevation of the sun, how many\nof the UNKNOWNS might be ascribed to known phenomena. The second was\nto obtain those UNKNOWNS which were described in sufficient detail that\nthey might be used to construct a model or models of \"flying saucers\".\n\nIt was decided to put any of the UNKNOWNS which might be known\nphenomena into a \"possible KNOWN\" category to denote the slightly lower\nconfidence level which could be ascribed to these new evaluations. The"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNKNOWNS with sufficiently detailed description would be called \"good\nUNKNOWNS\", while the remainder would simply be called UNKNOWNS.\nOne hundred sixty-four folders of a total of 186 OBJECT SIGHTINGS in\nGroups 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7 were examined. There were 18 possible aircraft,\n20 possible balloons, 7 good UNKNOWNS, 100 UNKNOWNS, and 19 others\nwhich were identified as being possible KNOWNS of various types. It is\ninteresting to note that two of these were established as mock suns on the\nbasis of the angle of sun elevation and the sun bearing angle, together with\nthe direction of the object from the observer. In addition, the UNKNOWNS\nin angle-of-sun-elevation Groups 4 and 5 (nighttime sightings) were scanned\nwith no attempt at identification, but to find any possible \"good UNKNOWNS\".\nThere were five sightings that could be put into this category.\n\nOf the UNKNOWNS, there were approximately 20 sightings that were\nobserved in such a way that they should have been recognized easily if they\nhad been familiar objects, that is, there was little possibility that their\nshapes, as seen, could have been distorted sufficiently by one cause or\nanother to render them unrecognizable. There were a very few that would\nhave been identified as guided missiles or rockets, but that were not so\nidentified because of the geographical location in which they were seen.\n\nAll of the remaining UNKNOWNS were classified as such solely be-\ncause they were reported to have performed maneuvers that could not be\nascribed to any known objects. In these cases, the shape might have been\nunrecognizable also, but it was felt that this was because of distortion and\ndistance, or because of darkness.\n\nThis is a very important point. To put it differently, if these\nUNKNOWNS, which represent all but about 40 of the UNKNOWN SIGHTINGS,\nwere reported to have performed maneuvers which could be ascribed to\nknown phenomena, they would probably have been identified as KNOWNS.\nWith the exception of some radar sightings, all of these maneuvers were\nobserved visually. The possibilities for inaccuracies are great because\nof the inability of an observer to estimate visually size, distance, and\nspeed.\n\nReports of sightings by radar usually were of high-speed objects,\nsome at extremely high altitudes. Some were identified as UNKNOWNS\nbecause there was no object to be seen visually at the point indicated by the\nradar set. It cannot be said with any assurance what these radar sightings\nmean, but the most logical explanation is that they are ground targets re-\nflected by an atmospheric temperature inversion layer. The validity of this\nstatement cannot be established. It is felt that radar sightings in this study\nare of no significance whatsoever unless a visual sighting of the object also\nis made.\n\nTaken in conjunction with the Chi Square Tests discussed earlier,\nthe results of the re-evaluation of reports identified as UNKNOWN\nSIGHTINGS would seem to indicate that the majority of them could easily"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"have been familiar objects. However, the resolution of this question with\nany degree of certainty appears to be impossible.\n\nThus, out of the 434 OBJECT SIGHTINGS that were identified as\nUNKNOWNS by the data reduction process, there were only 12 that were\ndescribed with sufficient detail that they could be used in an attempt to\nderive a model of a \"flying saucer\". The following is a summary of the 12\ngood UNKNOWN SIGHTINGS:\n\nCase I (Serial 0573.00)\n\nTwo men employed by a rug-cleaning firm were driving across a\nbridge at 0955 hours on July 29, 1948, when they saw an object glide across\nthe road a few hundred feet in front of them. It was shiny and metallic in\nconstruction, about 6 to 8 feet long and 2 feet wide. It was in a flat glide\npath at an altitude of about 30 feet and in a moderate turn to the left. It was\nseen for only a few seconds and apparently went down in a wooded area,\nalthough no trace of it was found.\n\n6' to 8'\n\n1-1/2' x 2'\n\nThese are round cups which protrude\n\nCase II (Serial 4508.00)\n\nA naval aviation student, his wife, and several others were at a\ndrive-in movie from 2115 to 2240 hours on April 20, 1952, during which\ntime they saw several groups of objects fly over. There were from two to\nnine objects in a group and there were about 20 groups. The groups of"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"objects flew in a straight line except for some changes in direction\naccomplished in a manner like any standard aircraft turn.\n\nThe objects were shaped like conventional aircraft. The unaccount-\nable feature of the objects was that each had a red glow surrounding it and\nwas glowing itself, although it was a cloudless night.\n\nLight glow\n\nFuzzy area\n\nCase III (Serial 2013.00, 2014.00, and 2014.01)\n\nTwo tower operators sighted a light over a city airport at 2020 hours\non January 20, 1951. Since a commercial plane was taking off at this\ntime, the pilots were asked to investigate this light. They observed it at\n2026 hours. According to them, it flew abreast of them at a greater\nradius as they made their climbing turn, during which time it blinked some\nlights which looked like running lights. While the observing plane was still\nin its climbing turn, the object made a turn toward the plane and flew across\nits nose. As the two men turned their heads to watch it, it instantly\nappeared on their other side flying in the same direction as they were\nflying, and then in 2 or 3 seconds it slipped under them, and they did not\nsee it again. Total time of the observation was not stated. In appearance,\nit was like an airplane with a cigar-shaped body and straight wings, some-\nwhat larger than a B-29. No engine nacelles were observed on the wings."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case IV (Serial 4599.00)\n\nA part-time farmer and a hired hand were curing tobacco at midnight\non July 19, 1952, when they looked up and saw two cigar-shaped objects.\nOne hovered while the other moved to the east and came back, at which\ntime both ascended until out of sight. Duration of observation was 3 to 4\nminutes. Both had an exhaust at one end, and neither had projections of any\nkind. It was stated that they appeared to be transparent and illuminated\nfrom the inside.\n\nLighted\n\nExhaust"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case V (Serial 0565.00 to 0565.03)\n\nA pilot and copilot were flying a DC-3 at 0340 hours on July 24, 1948,\nwhen they saw an object coming toward them. It passed to the right and\nslightly above them, at which time it went into a steep climb and was lost\nfrom sight in some clouds. Duration of the observation was about 10\nseconds. One passenger was able to catch a flash of light as the object\npassed. The object seemed powered by rocket or jet motors shooting a\ntrail of fire some 50 feet to the rear of the object. The object had no wings\nor other protrusion and had two rows of lighted windows.\n\nCockpit windshield?\n\nPilot\n\nWindows with white light\n\nBlack\n\nCopilot"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case VI (Serial 4822.00)\n\nAn instrument technician, while driving from a large city toward an\nAir Force base on December 22, 1952, saw an object from his car at 1930\nhours. He stopped his car to watch it. It suddenly moved up toward the\nzenith in spurts from right to left at an angle of about 45°. It then moved\noff in level flight at a high rate of speed, during which maneuver it appeared\nwhite most of the time, but apparently rolled three times showing a red\nside. About halfway through its roll it showed no light at all. It finally\nassumed a position to the south of the planet Jupiter at a high altitude, at\nwhich position it darted back and forth, left and right alternately. Total\ntime of the observation was 15 minutes. Apparently, the observer just\nstopped watching the object.\n\nWhite\n\nNo light\n\nDeep red\n\n82"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case VII (Serial 2728.00)\n\nA Flight Sergeant saw an object over an Air Force base in Korea at\n0842 hours on June 6, 1952. The object flew in a series of spinning and\ntumbling actions. It was on an erratic course, first flying level, then\nstopping momentarily, shooting straight up, flying level and again tumbling,\nthen changing course and disappearing into the sun. It reappeared and was\nseen flying back and forth across the sun. At one time an F-86 passed\nbetween the observer and the object. He pointed it out to another man who\nsaw it as it maneuvered near the sun.\n\nRotation\n\nBlack lines evenly spaced\n\nProportion 7 to 1\n\n(Dimensions are as shown in observer's original drawing)\n\n83"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case VIII (Serial 0576.00)\n\nAn electrician was standing by the bathroom window of his home,\nfacing west, at 0825 hours on July 31, 1948, when he first sighted an object.\nHe ran to his kitchen where he pointed out the object to his wife. Total\ntime in sight was approximately 10 seconds, during which the object flew\non a straight and level course from horizon to horizon, west to east.\n\nNoted shadow\n\n6' to 8'\n\n20'\n\n(Ratio approx. 3:1)\n\n84"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case IX (Serial 0066.00)\n\nA farmer and his two sons, aged 8 and 10, were at his fishing camp\non August 13, 1947. At about 1300 hours, he went to look for the boys,\nhaving sent them to the river for some tape from his boat. He noticed an\nobject some 300 feet away, 75 feet above the ground. He saw it against\nthe background of the canyon wall which was 400 feet high at this point. It\nwas hedge hopping, following the contour of the ground, was sky blue,\nabout 20 feet in diameter and 10 feet thick, and had pods on the side from\nwhich flames were shooting out. It made a swishing sound. The observer\nstated that the trees were highly agitated by the craft as it passed over.\nHis two sons also observed the object. No one saw the object for more\nthan a few seconds.\n\nSide view\n\nEnd view\n\n85"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Case X (Serial 1119.00)\n\nAn employee in the supersonic laboratory of an aeronautical lab-\noratory and some other employees of this lab, were by a river, 2-1/2\nmiles from its mouth, when they saw an object. The time was about 1700\nhours on May 24, 1949. The object was reflecting sunlight when observed\nby naked eye. However, he then looked at it with 8-power binoculars, at\nwhich time there was no glare. (Did glasses have filter?) It was of\nmetallic construction and was seen with good enough resolution to show\nthat the skin was dirty. It moved off in horizontal flight at a gradually in-\ncreasing rate of speed, until it seemed to approach the speed of a jet\nbefore it disappeared. No propulsion was apparent. Time of observation\nwas 2-1/2 to 3 minutes.\n\nSomething equivalent\nto a patch\nSmoother in\nfront\nDirection\nof motion\nRough and wrinkled\nin rear\nSurface appeared dirty\nand spotty in color\n\n86"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Case XI (Serial 1550.00)\n\nOn March 20, 1950, a Reserve Air Force Captain and an airlines\nCaptain were flying a commercial airlines flight. At 21:26, the airline\nCaptain directed the attention of the Reserve Air Force Captain to an object\nwhich apparently was flying at high speed, approaching the airliner from\nthe south on a north heading. The Reserve Air Force Captain focused his\nattention on the object. Both crew members watched it as it passed in front\nof them and went out of sight to the right. The observation, which lasted\nabout 25 to 35 seconds, occurred about 15 miles north of a medium-sized\ncity. When the object passed in front of the airliner, it was not more than\n1/2 mile distant and at an altitude of about 1000 feet higher than the airliner.\n\nThe object appeared to be circular, with a diameter of approximately\n100 feet and with a vertical height considerably less than the diameter,\ngiving the object a disc-like shape. In the top center was a light which was\nblinking at an estimated 3 flashes per second. This light was so brilliant\nthat it would have been impossible to look at it continuously had it not been\nblinking. This light could be seen only when the object was approaching\nand after it had passed the airliner. When the object passed in front of the\nobservers, the bottom side was visible. The bottom side appeared to have\n9 to 12 symmetrical oval or circular portholes located in a circle approxi-\nmately 3/4 of the distance from the center to the outer edge. Through these\nportholes came a soft purple light about the shade of aircraft fluorescent\nlights. The object was traveling in a straight line without spinning. Con-\nsidering the visibility, the length of time the object was in sight, and the\ndistance from the object, the Reserve Air Force Captain estimates the\nspeed to be in excess of 1000 mph.\n\n87"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Flashing light\nPortholes\n\n88"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Case XII (Serial 3601.00)\n\nAt 0535 on the morning of August 25, 1952, a musician for a radio\nstation was driving to work from his home when he noticed an object\nhovering about 10 feet above a field near the road along which he was\ndriving. As he came abreast of the object, he stopped his car and got out\nto watch. Having an artificial leg, he could not leave the road, since the\nsurrounding terrain was rough. However, he was within about 100 yards\nof it at the point he was standing on the road. The object was not absolutely\nstill, but seemed to rock slightly as it hovered. When he turned off the\nmotor of his car, he could hear a deep throbbing sound coming from the\nobject. As he got out of the car, the object began a vertical ascent with a\nsound similar to \"a large covey of quail starting to fly at one time\". The\nobject ascended vertically through broken clouds until out of sight. His\nview was not obscured by clouds. The observer states that the vegetation\nwas blown about by the object when it was near the ground.\n\nDescription of the object is as follows:\n\nIt was about 75 feet long, 45 feet wide, and 15 feet thick, shaped like\ntwo oval meat platters placed together. It was a dull aluminum color, and\nhad a smooth surface. A medium-blue continuous light shone through the\none window in the front section. The head and shoulders of one man, sitting\nmotionless, facing the forward edge of the object, were visible. In the\nmidsection of the object were several windows extending from the top to the\nrear edge of the object; the midsection of the ship had a blue light which\ngradually changed to different shades. There was a large amount of activity\nand movement in the midsection that could not be identified as either human\nor mechanical, although it did not have a regular pattern of movement.\nThere were no windows, doors or portholes, vents, seams, etc., visible\nto the observer in the rear section of the object or under the object (viewed\nat time of ascent). Another identifiable feature was a series of propellers\n6 to 12 inches in diameter spaced closely together along the outer edge of\nthe object. These propellers were mounted on a bracket so that they\nrevolved in a horizontal plane along the edge of the object. The propellers\nwere revolving at a high rate of speed.\n\nInvestigation of the area soon afterward showed some evidence of\nvegetation being blown around. An examination of grass and soil samples\ntaken indicated nothing unusual. Reliability of the observer was considered\ngood.\n\n89"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"20' to 25'\nheight\nApproximately\n75' long\n\n90"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"These 12 sightings can be classed into four categories on the basis of\ntheir shapes, as follows:\n\n(1) Propeller shape – Case I\n\n(2) Aircraft shape – Cases II and III\n\n(3) Cigar shape – Cases IV and V\n\n(4) Elliptical or disc shape – Cases VI to XII\n\nThe criterion for choosing the above sightings was that their descrip-\ntions were given in enough detail to permit diagrams of the objects to be\ndrawn. It might be noted here that in all but one of these cases (Case XI)\nthe observer had already drawn a diagram of what he had seen.\n\nThe objective of this section of the study was the conceiving of a\nmodel, or models. The requirement that the description be detailed is an\nimportant one, and was the easiest to determine in the re-evaluation pro-\ngram. However, a good model ought to satisfy the following conditions as\nwell:\n\n(1) The general shape of the object and the maneuvers it\nperformed should fit the reports of many of the UNKNOWNS\nand thus explain them.\n\n(2) The observer and the report should be reliable.\n\n(3) The report should contain elements which should have\nbeen observed with accuracy, and which eliminate the\npossibility that the sighting could be ascribed to a\nfamiliar object or to a known natural phenomenon.\n\n(4) The model should be derived from two or more good\nUNKNOWNS between which there is no essential conflict.\n\nIt can be shown that it is not possible to deduce a model from the 12\ncases that will satisfy all of these conditions. The following case-by-case\ndiscussion of the 12 good UNKNOWNS will illustrate this point:\n\n(1) Case I does not satisfy Conditions 1 and 4. The reported\nshape of this object is not duplicated in any of the other\nUNKNOWNS.\n\n(2) Case II does not satisfy Conditions 1 and 3. There are\nvery few UNKNOWNS in the aircraft shape classification.\nIn addition, the unusual characteristic of this sighting\n(i.e., the red glow) could have been reflection of the\nlights of Flint from the objects if they were either birds\nor aircraft.\n\n91"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"(3) Case III does not satisfy Condition 1. It also does not\nsatisfy Condition 4 when Case II is eliminated as a\ngood UNKNOWN.\n\n(4) Case IV does not satisfy Conditions 1 or 2. There are\nfew cigar-shaped or rocket-shaped objects reported in\nthe literature. In addition, this observer is not con-\nsidered to be well-qualified technically.\n\n(5) Case V does not satisfy Condition 1. It also does not\nsatisfy Condition 4 when Case IV is eliminated as a\ngood UNKNOWN.\n\nIt might be argued here that many of the UNKNOWNS might actually\nhave shapes similar to these good UNKNOWNS. It will be noted, however,\nthat each of these five cases does not satisfy one of the other three condi-\ntions.\n\n(6) Case VI does not satisfy Condition 2. In the description\nof the object, it was stated that at certain times there\nwas no light seen from the object. Apparently, the\n\"band of no light\", as diagrammed by the observer, was\nan attempt to explain this. However, if the object were\nconstructed as shown in the diagram, light should have\nbeen seen at all times. Because of this conflict the\ndrawing is not considered reliable, and without the draw-\ning, there is not enough detail in the description to make\nit useful for this study.\n\n(7) Case VII violates Conditions 1 and 4. Although the shape\nis disc-like, the maneuvers performed by the object are\nunique both among the UNKNOWNS and among the good\nUNKNOWNS.\n\nCases VIII to XII satisfy Conditions 1 through 3, but they do not\nsatisfy Condition 4. The features which make them different from each\nother are as follows:\n\n(8) Case VIII. The object is smooth, with no protrusions\nor other details.\n\n(9) Case IX. The object had rocket or jet pods on each\nside that were shooting out flames.\n\n(10) Case X. The object had a fin or rudder.\n\n(11) Case XI. The object had a series of portholes, or\nwindows, on its under side.\n\n92"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"(12) Case XII. The object had windows in its top and front\nand its top midsection. It also had a set of propellers\naround its waist.\n\nIt is not possible, therefore, to derive a verified model of a \"flying\nsaucer\" from the data that have been gathered to date. This point is im-\nportant enough to emphasize. Out of about 4,000 people who said they saw\na \"flying saucer\", sufficiently detailed descriptions were given in only 12\ncases. Having culled the cream of the crop, it is still impossible to develop\na picture of what a \"flying saucer\" is.\n\nIn addition to this study of the good UNKNOWNS, an attempt was made\nto find groups of UNKNOWNS for which the observed characteristics were\nthe same. No such groups were found.\n\nOn the basis of this evidence, therefore, there is a low probability\nthat any of the UNKNOWNS represent observations of a class of \"flying\nsaucers\". It may be that some reports represent observations of not one\nbut several classes of objects that might have been \"flying saucers\";\nhowever, the lack of evidence to confirm even one class would seem to make\nthis possibility remote. It is pointed out that some of the cases of KNOWNS,\nbefore identification, appeared fully as bizarre as any of the 12 cases of\ngood UNKNOWNS, and, in fact, would have been placed in the class of good\nUNKNOWNS had it not been possible to establish their identity.\n\nThis is, of course, contrary to the bulk of the publicity that has been\ngiven to this problem. The reason for the nature of this publicity was\nclearly brought out during the re-evaluation study. It is a definite fact that\nupon reading a few reports, the reader becomes convinced that \"flying\nsaucers\" are real and are some form of sinister contrivance. This reaction\nis independent of the training of the reader or of his attitude toward the\nproblem prior to the initial contact. It is unfortunate that practically all of\nthe articles, books, and news stories dealing with the phenomenon of the\n\"flying saucer\" were written by men who were in this category, that is,\nmen who had read only a few selected reports. This is accentuated by the\nfact that, as a rule, only the more lurid-sounding reports are cited in these\npublications. Were it not for this common psychological tendency to be\ncaptivated by the mysterious, it is possible that no problem of this nature\nwould exist.\n\nThe reaction, mentioned above, that after reading a few reports, the\nreader is convinced that \"flying saucers\" are real and are some form of\nsinister contrivance, is very misleading. As more and more of the reports\nare read, the feeling that \"saucers\" are real fades, and is replaced by a\nfeeling of skepticism regarding their existence. The reader eventually\nreaches a point of saturation, after which the reports contain no new infor-\nmation at all and are no longer of any interest. This feeling of surfeit was\nuniversal among the personnel who worked on this project, and continually\nnecessitated a conscious effort on their part to remain objective.\n\n93"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONCLUSIONS\n\nIt can never be absolutely proven that \"flying saucers\" do not exist.\nThis would be true if the data obtained were to include complete scientific\nmeasurements of the attributes of each sighting, as well as complete and\ndetailed descriptions of the objects sighted. It might be possible to demon-\nstrate the existence of \"flying saucers\" with data of this type, IF they were\nto exist.\n\nAlthough the reports considered in this study usually did not contain\nscientific measurements of the attributes of each sighting, it was possible\nto establish certain valid conclusions by the application of statistical\nmethods in the treatment of the data. Scientifically evaluated and arranged,\nthe data as a whole did not show any marked patterns or trends. The in-\naccuracies inherent in this type of data, in addition to the incompleteness of\na large proportion of the reports, may have obscured any patterns or trends\nthat otherwise would have been evident. This absence of indicative relation-\nships necessitated an exhaustive study of selected facets of the data in order\nto draw any valid conclusions.\n\nA critical examination of the distributions of the important char-\nacteristics of sightings, plus an intensive study of the sightings evaluated\nas UNKNOWN, led to the conclusion that a combination of factors, prin-\ncipally the reported maneuvers of the objects and the unavailability of\nsupplemental data such as aircraft flight plans or balloon-launching records,\nresulted in the failure to identify as KNOWNS most of the reports of objects\nclassified as UNKNOWNS.\n\nAn intensive study, aimed at finding a verified example of a \"flying\nsaucer\" or at deriving a verified model or models of \"flying saucers\" (as\ndefined on Page 1), led to the conclusion that neither goal could be attained\nusing the present data.\n\nIt is emphasized that there was a complete lack of any valid evidence\nconsisting of physical matter in any case of a reported unidentified aerial\nobject.\n\nThus, the probability that any of the UNKNOWNS considered in this\nstudy are \"flying saucers\" is concluded to be extremely small, since the\nmost complete and reliable reports from the present data, when isolated\nand studied, conclusively failed to reveal even a rough model, and since\nthe data as a whole failed to reveal any marked patterns or trends.\n\nTherefore, on the basis of this evaluation of the information, it is\nconsidered to be highly improbable that any of the reports of unidentified\naerial objects examined in this study represent observations of technologi-\ncal developments outside the range of present-day scientific knowledge.\n\n94"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"APPENDIX A\n\nTABULATIONS OF FREQUENCY AND PERCENTAGE\nDISTRIBUTIONS BY CHARACTERISTICS\n\n95 and 96"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEX OF TABLES\n\nPage\n\nTable A1. Evaluation of All Sightings by Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107\nTable A2. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107\nTable A3. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108\nTable A4. Evaluation of All Sightings by Month of Year, All Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109\nTable A5. Evaluation of All Sightings by Month of Year, 1947 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110\nTable A6. Evaluation of All Sightings by Month of Year, 1948 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111\nTable A7. Evaluation of All Sightings by Month of Year, 1949 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112\nTable A8. Evaluation of All Sightings by Month of Year, 1950 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113\nTable A9. Evaluation of All Sightings by Month of Year, 1951 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114\nTable A10. Evaluation of All Sightings by Month of Year, 1952 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115\nTable A11. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Month of Year, All Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116\nTable A12. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Month of Year, 1947 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117\nTable A13. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Month of Year, 1948 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118\nTable A14. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Month of Year, 1949 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119\nTable A15. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Month of Year, 1950 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120\nTable A16. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Month of Year, 1951 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121\nTable A17. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Month of Year, 1952 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122\nTable A18. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Month of Year, All Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123\nTable A19. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Month of Year, 1947 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124\nTable A20. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Month of Year, 1948 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125\nTable A21. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Month of Year, 1949 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126\nTable A22. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Month of Year, 1950 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127\nTable A23. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Month of Year, 1951 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128\nTable A24. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Month of Year, 1952 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129\nTable A25. Evaluation of All Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, All Years . . . . . . . . . . 130\nTable A26. Evaluation of All Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1947 . . . . . . . . . . . 130\nTable A27. Evaluation of All Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1948 . . . . . . . . . . . 130\nTable A28. Evaluation of All Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1949 . . . . . . . . . . . 130\nTable A29. Evaluation of All Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1950 . . . . . . . . . . . 131\nTable A30. Evaluation of All Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1951 . . . . . . . . . . . 131\nTable A31. Evaluation of All Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1952 . . . . . . . . . . . 131\nTable A32. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, All Years . . . . . . . . . 132\nTable A33. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1947 . . . . . . . . . . . 132\n\n97"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEX OF TABLES\n(Continued)\n\nPage\n\nTable A34. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1948 . . . . . . . . . . . 132\nTable A35. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1949 . . . . . . . . . . . 132\nTable A36. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1950 . . . . . . . . . . . 133\nTable A37. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1951 . . . . . . . . . . . 133\nTable A38. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1952 . . . . . . . . . . . 133\nTable A39. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, All Years . . . . . . . . . 134\nTable A40. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1947 . . . . . . . . . . 134\nTable A41. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1948 . . . . . . . . . . 134\nTable A42. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1949 . . . . . . . . . . 134\nTable A43. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1950 . . . . . . . . . . 135\nTable A44. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1951 . . . . . . . . . . 135\nTable A45. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Sighting Reliability Groups, 1952 . . . . . . . . . . 135\nTable A46. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nMilitary Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136\nTable A47. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nCivilian Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136\nTable A48. Evaluation of All Sightings for 1947 by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nMilitary Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136\nTable A49. Evaluation of All Sightings for 1947 by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nCivilian Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136\nTable A50. Evaluation of All Sightings for 1948 by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nMilitary Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137\nTable A51. Evaluation of All Sightings for 1948 by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nCivilian Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137\nTable A52. Evaluation of All Sightings for 1949 by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nMilitary Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137\nTable A53. Evaluation of All Sightings for 1949 by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nCivilian Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137\nTable A54. Evaluation of All Sightings for 1950 by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nMilitary Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138\nTable A55. Evaluation of All Sightings for 1950 by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nCivilian Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138\nTable A56. Evaluation of All Sightings for 1951 by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nMilitary Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138\nTable A57. Evaluation of All Sightings for 1951 by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nCivilian Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138\nTable A58. Evaluation of All Sightings for 1952 by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nMilitary Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139\n\n98"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEX OF TABLES\n(Continued)\n\nPage\n\nTable A59. Evaluation of All Sightings for 1952 by Sighting Reliability Groups,\nCivilian Observers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139\nTable A60. Reported Colors of Objects Sighted by Years, All Sightings . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140\nTable A61. Reported Colors of Objects Sighted by Years, Unit Sightings . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140\nTable A62. Reported Colors of Objects Sighted by Years, Object Sightings . . . . . . . . . . . . 140\nTable A63. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141\nTable A64. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported . . . . . . . . . . . . 142\nTable A65. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported . . . . . . . . . . . 143\nTable A66. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nOne Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144\nTable A67. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nTwo Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144\nTable A68. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nThree to Ten Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145\nTable A69. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nEleven or More Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145\nTable A70. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nNumber of Objects Not Stated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146\nTable A71. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nOne Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147\nTable A72. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nTwo Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147\nTable A73. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nThree to Ten Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148\nTable A74. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nEleven or More Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148\nTable A75. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nNumber of Objects Not Stated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149\nTable A76. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nOne Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150\nTable A77. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nTwo Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150\nTable A78. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nThree to Ten Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151\nTable A79. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nEleven or More Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151\nTable A80. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting,\nNumber of Objects Not Stated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152\nTable A81. Evaluation of All Sightings by Duration of Sighting, All Years . . . . . . . . . . . . 153\nTable A82. Evaluation of All Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1947 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153\n\n99"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEX OF TABLES\n(Continued)\n\nPage\n\nTable A83. Evaluation of All Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1948 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154\nTable A84. Evaluation of All Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1949 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154\nTable A85. Evaluation of All Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1950 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155\nTable A86. Evaluation of All Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1951 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155\nTable A87. Evaluation of All Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1952 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156\nTable A88. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Duration of Sighting, All Years . . . . . . . . . . . . 157\nTable A89. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1947 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157\nTable A90. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1948 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158\nTable A91. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1949 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158\nTable A92. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1950 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159\nTable A93. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1951 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159\nTable A94. Evaluation of Unit Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1952 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160\nTable A95. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Duration of Sighting, All Years . . . . . . . . . . . 161\nTable A96. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1947 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161\nTable A97. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1948 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162\nTable A98. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1949 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162\nTable A99. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1950 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163\nTable A100. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Duration of Sightings, 1951 . . . . . . . . . . . . 163\nTable A101. Evaluation of Object Sightings by Duration of Sighting, 1952 . . . . . . . . . . . . 164\nTable A102. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Five Seconds or Less . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165\nTable A103. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Six to Ten Seconds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166\nTable A104. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Eleven to Thirty Seconds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167\nTable A105. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Thirty One to Sixty Seconds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168\nTable A106. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Sixty One Seconds to Five Minutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169\nTable A107. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Six to Thirty Minutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170\nTable A108. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Over Thirty Minutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171\nTable A109. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Duration Not Stated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172\n\n100"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEX OF TABLES\n(Continued)\n\nPage\n\nTable A110. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Five Seconds or Less . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173\nTable A111. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Six to Ten Seconds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174\nTable A112. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Eleven to Thirty Seconds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175\nTable A113. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Thirty One to Sixty Seconds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176\nTable A114. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Sixty One Seconds to Five Minutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177\nTable A115. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Six to Thirty Minutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178\nTable A116. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Over Thirty Minutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179\nTable A117. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Duration Not Stated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180\nTable A118. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Five Seconds or Less . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181\nTable A119. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Six to Ten Seconds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182\nTable A120. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Eleven to Thirty Seconds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183\nTable A121. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Thirty One to Sixty Seconds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184\nTable A122. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Sixty One Seconds to Five Minutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185\nTable A123. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Six to Thirty Minutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186\nTable A124. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Over Thirty Minutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187\nTable A125. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Duration of Sighting for Months\nof Year, Duration Not Stated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188\nTable A126. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Elliptical . . . . . . . . . 189\nTable A127. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Rocket and Aircraft . . . . . . 189\nTable A128. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Meteor or Comet . . . . . . 190\nTable A129. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Lenticular, Conical,\nor Teardrop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190\nTable A130. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Flame . . . . . . . . . 191\nTable A131. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Other Shapes . . . . . . . 191\nTable A132. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Shape Not Stated . . . . . . 192\n\n101"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEX OF TABLES\n(Continued)\nPage\nTable A133. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Elliptical 193\nTable A134. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Rocket and Aircraft 193\nTable A135. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Meteor or Comet 194\nTable A136. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Lenticular,\nConical, or Teardrop 194\nTable A137. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Flame 195\nTable A138. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Other Shapes 195\nTable A139. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Shape Not Stated 196\nTable A140. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Elliptical 197\nTable A141. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Rocket and Aircraft 197\nTable A142. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Meteor or Comet 198\nTable A143. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Lenticular,\nConical, or Teardrop 198\nTable A144. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Flame 199\nTable A145. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Other Shapes 199\nTable A146. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Shape of Object, Shape Not Stated 200\nTable A147. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects, Stationary 201\nTable A148. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects, Less\nThan One Hundred Miles per Hour 201\nTable A149. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects, One\nHundred to Four Hundred Miles per Hour 202\nTable A150. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects, Over\nFour Hundred Miles per Hour 202\nTable A151. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects,\nMeteor-Like Speeds 203\nTable A152. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects,\nSpeed Not Stated 203\nTable A153. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects, Stationary 204\nTable A154. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects, Less Than\nOne Hundred Miles per Hour 204\nTable A155. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects, One Hundred\nto Four Hundred Miles per Hour 205\nTable A156. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects, Over\nFour Hundred Miles per Hour 205\nTable A157. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects,\nMeteor-Like Speeds 206\nTable A158. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects,\nSpeed Not Stated 206"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEX OF TABLES\n(Continued)\nPage\nTable A159. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects, Stationary 207\nTable A160. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects, Less\nThan One Hundred Miles per Hour 207\nTable A161. Elevation of Object Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects, One\nHundred to Four Hundred Miles per Hour 208\nTable A162. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects, Over\nFour Hundred Miles per Hour 208\nTable A163. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects,\nMeteor-Like Speeds 209\nTable A164. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Reported Speeds of Objects,\nSpeed Not Stated 209\nTable A165. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Light Brightness 210\nTable A166. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Light Brightness 211\nTable A167. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Light Brightness 212\nTable A168. Location of Observers During Sighting by Months for All Sightings, All Years 213\nTable A169. Location of Observers During Sighting by Months for All Sightings, 1947 214\nTable A170. Location of Observers During Sighting by Months for All Sightings, 1948 215\nTable A171. Location of Observers During Sighting by Months for All Sightings, 1949 216\nTable A172. Location of Observers During Sighting by Months for All Sightings, 1950 217\nTable A173. Location of Observer During Sighting by Months for All Sightings, 1951 218\nTable A174. Location of Observers During Sighting by Months for All Sightings, 1952 219\nTable A175. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, White or Glowing White Objects 220\nTable A176. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Metallic Objects 220\nTable A177. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Object Color Not Stated 221\nTable A178. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Orange or Glowing Orange Objects 221\nTable A179. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Red or Glowing Red Objects 222\nTable A180. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Green or Glowing Green Objects 222\nTable A181. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Yellow or Glowing Yellow Objects 223\nTable A182. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Objects of Other Colors 223\nTable A183. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, White or Glowing White Objects 224"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEX OF TABLES\n(Continued)\nPage\nTable A184. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Metallic Objects 224\nTable A185. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Object Color Not Stated 225\nTable A186. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Orange or Glowing Orange Objects 225\nTable A187. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Red or Glowing Red Objects 226\nTable A188. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Green or Glowing Green Objects 226\nTable A189. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Yellow or Glowing Yellow Objects 227\nTable A190. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Objects of Other Colors 227\nTable A191. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, White or Glowing White Objects 228\nTable A192. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Metallic Objects 228\nTable A193. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Object Color Not Stated 229\nTable A194. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Orange or Glowing Orange Objects 229\nTable A195. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Red or Glowing Red Objects 230\nTable A196. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Green or Glowing Green Objects 230\nTable A197. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Yellow or Glowing Yellow Objects 231\nTable A198. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Colors Reported for Duration\nof Sighting, Objects of Other Colors 231\nTable A199. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, One Object 232\nTable A200. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, Two Objects 232\nTable A201. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, Three to Ten Objects 233\nTable A202. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, Eleven or More Objects 233\nTable A203. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, Number of Objects Not Stated 234\nTable A204. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, One Object 235\nTable A205. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, Two Objects 235"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEX OF TABLES\n(Continued)\nPage\nTable A206. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, Three to Ten Objects 236\nTable A207. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, Eleven or More Objects 236\nTable A208. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, Number of Objects Not Stated 237\nTable A209. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, One Object 238\nTable A210. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, Two Objects 238\nTable A211. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, Three to Ten Objects 239\nTable A212. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, Eleven or More Objects 239\nTable A213. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Number of Objects per Sighting\nfor Duration of Sighting, Number of Objects Not Stated 240\nTable A214. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by Geographic Location 241\nTable A215. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by Geographic Location 241\nTable A216. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by Geographic Location 242\nTable A217. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by North American Location 243\nTable A218. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by North American Location 243\nTable A219. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by North American Location 244\nTable A220. Evaluation of All Sightings for All Years by United States Regional Location 245\nTable A221. Evaluation of Unit Sightings for All Years by United States Regional Location 246\nTable A222. Evaluation of Object Sightings for All Years by United States Regional Location 247\nTable A223. Evaluation of All Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the Central East Region 248\nTable A224. Evaluation of All Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the Central Midwest Region 248\nTable A225. Evaluation of All Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the Central Farwest Region 248\nTable A226. Evaluation of All Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the South Midwest Region 249\nTable A227. Evaluation of All Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the South West Region 249\nTable A228. Evaluation of All Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the South Farwest Region 249\nTable A229. Evaluation of Unit Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the Central East Region 250\nTable A230. Evaluation of Unit Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the Central Midwest Region 250\nTable A231. Evaluation of Unit Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the Central Farwest Region 250\nTable A232. Evaluation of Unit Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the South Midwest Region 251"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEX OF TABLES\n(Continued)\nPage\nTable A233. Evaluation of Unit Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the South West Region 251\nTable A234. Evaluation of Unit Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the South Farwest Region 251\nTable A235. Evaluation of Object Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the Central East Region 252\nTable A236. Evaluation of Object Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the Central Midwest Region 252\nTable A237. Evaluation of Object Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the Central Farwest Region 252\nTable A238. Evaluation of Object Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the South Midwest Region 253\nTable A239. Evaluation of Object Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the South West Region 253\nTable A240. Evaluation of Object Sightings in the Strategic Areas of the South Farwest Region 253"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A1 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY YEARS\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952\nEvaluation Number Certain Doubtful Total Per Cent Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 270 180 450 8.4 5.6 14.0\n1-Astronomical 476 341 817 14.9 10.6 25.5\n2-Aircraft 354 288 642 11.1 9.0 20.1\n3-Light Phenom. 32 24 56 1.0 0.8 1.8\n4-Birds 19 10 29 0.6 0.3 0.9\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 12 13 25 0.4 0.4 0.8\n6-Insuffic. Info. 298 0 298 9.3 0.0 9.3\n7-Psychological 38 10 48 1.2 0.3 1.5\n8-Unknown 689 0 689 21.5 0.0 21.5\n9-Other 112 35 147 3.5 1.1 4.6\nTotal 2300 901 3201 71.9 28.1 100.\n108"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A2 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY YEARS\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952\nEvaluation Number Certain Doubtful Total Per Cent Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 228 151 379 8.9 5.9 14.8\n1-Astronomical 383 256 639 15.0 10.0 25.0\n2-Aircraft 292 235 527 11.4 9.2 20.6\n3-Light Phenom. 32 21 53 1.3 0.8 2.1\n4-Birds 19 10 29 0.5 0.4 0.9\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 3 7 10 0.1 0.3 0.4\n6-Insuffic. Info. 261 0 261 10.2 0.0 10.2\n7-Psychological 36 9 45 1.4 0.4 1.8\n8-Unknown 497 0 497 19.5 0.0 19.5\n9-Other 92 28 120 3.6 1.1 4.7\nTotal 1837 717 2554 71.9 28.1 100.\n109"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A3 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY YEARS\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952\nEvaluation Number Certain Doubtful Total Per Cent Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 207 132 339 9.4 6.0 15.4\n1-Astronomical 274 205 479 12.5 9.3 21.8\n2-Aircraft 265 209 474 12.0 9.5 21.5\n3-Light Phenom. 30 18 48 1.4 0.8 2.2\n4-Birds 12 10 22 0.5 0.5 1.0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 3 7 10 0.1 0.3 0.4\n6-Insuffic. Info. 240 0 240 10.9 0.0 10.9\n7-Psychological 35 9 44 1.6 0.4 2.0\n8-Unknown 434 0 434 19.7 0.0 19.7\n9-Other 85 24 109 3.9 1.1 5.0\nTotal 1535 614 2149 70.1 27.9 100.\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A4 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, ALL YEARS\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\nEvaluation Number Certain Doubtful Total Per Cent Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 3 3 6 2.2 2.2 4.4\n1-Astronomical 29 46 75 21.3 33.8 55.1\n2-Aircraft 6 3 9 4.4 2.2 6.6\n3-Light Phenom. 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\n4-Birds 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 8 0 8 5.9 0.0 5.9\n7-Psychological 2 0 2 1.5 0.0 1.5\n8-Unknown 26 0 26 19.5 0.0 19.5\n9-Other 9 1 10 6.6 0.7 7.3\nTotal 83 53 136 61.0 39.0 100.\n110"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A5 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1947\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\nEvaluation Number Certain Doubtful Total Per Cent Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nNO DATA\n111"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A7 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1949\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total (repeated for each month)\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 27 32 59 45.8 54.2 100. 11 7 18 61.1 38.9 100. 33 19 52 63.4 36.6 100. 46 1 47 97.9 2.1 100.\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 36 9 45 80.0 20.0 100. 19 6 25 76.0 24.0 100. 7 13 20 35.0 65.0 100. 7 45 52 13.5 86.5 100.\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 3 0 3 100.0 0.0 100. 8 5 13 61.5 38.5 100. 12 22 34 35.3 64.7 100. 22 5 27 81.5 18.5 100.\n112"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A8 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1950\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total (repeated for each month)\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 14 5 19 73.7 26.3 100. 29 4 33 87.9 12.1 100. 61 11 72 84.7 15.3 100. 29 0 29 100.0 0.0 100.\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 15 5 20 75.0 25.0 100. 7 0 7 100.0 0.0 100. 23 1 24 95.8 4.2 100. 18 7 25 72.0 28.0 100.\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 13 0 13 100.0 0.0 100. 8 2 10 80.0 20.0 100. 13 10 23 56.5 43.5 100. 20 11 31 64.5 35.5 100.\n113"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A9 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1951\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total (repeated for each month)\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 19 8 27 70.4 29.6 100. 10 5 15 66.7 33.3 100. 4 2 6 66.7 33.3 100. 3 0 3 100.0 0.0 100.\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 4 1 5 80.0 20.0 100. 1 0 1 100.0 0.0 100. 6 3 9 66.7 33.3 100. 18 2 20 90.0 10.0 100.\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 17 1 18 94.4 5.6 100. 25 3 28 89.3 10.7 100. 11 6 17 64.7 35.3 100. 10 1 11 91.9 9.1 100.\n114"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A10 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1952\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total (repeated for each month)\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 11 4 15 73.3 26.7 100. 15 3 18 83.3 16.7 100. 14 13 27 51.9 48.1 100. 91 12 103 88.4 11.6 100.\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 94 19 113 83.2 16.8 100. 140 36 176 79.6 20.4 100. 593 189 782 75.8 24.2 100. 274 123 397 69.0 31.0 100.\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 99 63 162 61.1 38.9 100. 50 42 92 54.4 45.6 100. 38 29 67 56.7 43.3 100. 41 25 66 62.1 37.9 100.\n115"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A11 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, ALL YEARS\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total (repeated for each month)\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 56 24 80 70.0 30.0 100. 44 20 64 68.8 31.3 100. 71 36 107 66.4 33.6 100. 128 14 142 90.1 9.9 100.\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 116 34 150 77.3 22.7 100. 159 42 201 79.1 20.9 100. 585 190 775 75.5 24.5 100. 291 158 449 64.8 35.2 100.\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 129 63 192 67.2 32.8 100. 93 54 147 63.3 36.7 100. 79 41 120 65.9 34.2 100. 86 41 127 67.7 32.3 100.\n116"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A12 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1947\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nNo Data (handwritten in January, February, March and April)\n\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nNo Data (handwritten in May)\n\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A13 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1948\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A14 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1949\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A15 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1950\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A16 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1951\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A17 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1952\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A18 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, ALL YEARS\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A19 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1947\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nNO DATA NO DATA NO DATA NO DATA\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A20 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1948\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A21 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1949\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A22 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1950\nJANUARY\nFEBRUARY\nMARCH\nAPRIL\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY\nJUNE\nJULY\nAUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER\nOCTOBER\nNOVEMBER\nDECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n127"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A23 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1951\nJANUARY\nFEBRUARY\nMARCH\nAPRIL\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY\nJUNE\nJULY\nAUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER\nOCTOBER\nNOVEMBER\nDECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n128"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A24 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY MONTH OF YEAR, 1952\nJANUARY\nFEBRUARY\nMARCH\nAPRIL\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY\nJUNE\nJULY\nAUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER\nOCTOBER\nNOVEMBER\nDECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n129"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A25 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, ALL YEARS\nExcellent Good Doubtful Poor\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A26 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1947\nExcellent Good Doubtful Poor\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A27 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1948\nExcellent Good Doubtful Poor\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A28 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1949\nExcellent Good Doubtful Poor\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n130"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A29 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1950\nExcellent Good Doubtful Poor\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A30 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1951\nExcellent Good Doubtful Poor\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A31 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1952\nExcellent Good Doubtful Poor\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n131"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A32 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, ALL YEARS\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 186 57 243 76.5 23.5 100 621 250 871 71.3 28.7 100 629 275 904 69.6 30.4 100 401 135 536 74.8 25.2 100\nTABLE A33 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1947\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 16 1 17 94.1 5.9 100 23 6 29 79.3 20.7 100 30 5 35 85.7 14.3 100 16 0 16 100.0 0.0 100\nTABLE A34 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1948\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 14 6 20 70.0 30.0 100 37 14 51 72.6 27.4 100 42 32 74 56.8 43.2 100 6 2 8 75.0 25.0 100\nTABLE A35 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1949\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 12 8 20 60.0 40.0 100 22 30 52 42.3 57.7 100 55 22 77 71.4 28.6 100 51 36 87 58.6 41.4 100"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A36 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1950\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 29 6 35 82.9 17.1 100 39 15 54 72.2 27.8 100 28 9 37 75.7 24.3 100 74 9 83 89.2 10.8 100\nTABLE A37 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1951\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 14 3 17 82.4 17.6 100 30 6 36 83.3 16.7 100 36 11 47 76.6 23.4 100 29 8 37 78.4 21.6 100\nTABLE A38 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1952\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 101 33 134 75.4 24.6 100 470 179 649 72.4 27.6 100 438 196 634 69.0 31.0 100 225 80 305 73.8 26.2 100"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A39 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, ALL YEARS\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 167 46 213 78.4 21.6 100 544 213 757 71.9 28.1 100 552 202 754 69.3 30.5 100 322 113 435 74.0 26.0 100\nTABLE A40 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1947\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 13 1 14 92.9 7.1 100 16 6 22 72.7 27.3 100 23 5 28 82.1 17.9 100 15 0 15 100.0 0.0 100\nTABLE A41 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1948\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 12 5 17 70.6 29.4 100 35 13 48 72.9 27.1 100 40 30 70 57.1 42.9 100 6 2 8 75.0 25.0 100\nTABLE A42 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1949\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 12 5 17 70.6 29.4 100 17 20 37 46.0 54.1 100 42 16 58 72.4 27.6 100 45 29 74 60.8 39.2 100"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A43 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1950\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 26 6 32 81.2 18.8 100 29 9 38 76.3 23.7 100 24 6 30 80.0 20.0 100 60 9 69 87.0 13.0 100\nTABLE A44 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1951\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 10 3 13 76.9 23.1 100 26 6 32 81.2 18.8 100 32 10 42 76.2 23.8 100 27 7 34 79.4 20.6 100\nTABLE A45 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, 1952\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 94 26 120 78.3 21.7 100 421 159 580 72.6 27.4 100 391 175 566 69.1 30.9 100 169 66 235 71.9 28.1 100"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A46 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, MILITARY OBSERVERS\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 142 42 204 69.4 20.6 100 378 136 514 73.5 26.5 100 210 95 305 69.0 31.0 100 94 49 143 65.7 34.3 100\nTABLE A47 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, CIVILIAN OBSERVERS\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 82 22 104 78.8 21.2 100 376 180 556 67.6 32.4 100 636 297 933 68.2 31.8 100 302 80 382 78.9 21.1 100\nTABLE A48 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR 1947 BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, MILITARY OBSERVERS\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 8 1 9 88.9 11.1 100 11 0 11 100.0 0.0 100 2 2 4 50.0 50.0 100 4 0 4 100.0 0.0 100\nTABLE A49 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR 1947 BY SIGHTING RELIABILITY GROUPS, CIVILIAN OBSERVERS\nEXCELLENT | GOOD | DOUBTFUL | POOR\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nTotal 10 0 10 100.0 0.0 100 19 6 25 76.0 24.0 100 38 3 41 92.7 7.3 100 13 0 13 100.0 0.0 100\n136"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A50 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR 1948 BY SIGHTING\nRELIABILITY GROUPS, MILITARY OBSERVERS\nEXCELLENT GOOD DOUBTFUL POOR\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 0 1 1 8 3 11 2 3 5 0 0 0\n1-Astronomical 6 3 9 8 1 9 2 2 4 0 0 0\n2-Aircraft 2 0 2 1 0 1 5 1 6 1 0 1\n3-Light Phenom. 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 1 1 0 0 0\n4-Birds 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 2\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n9-Other 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0\nTotal 10 5 15 22 6 28 12 7 19 4 0 4\n\nTABLE A51 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR 1948 BY SIGHTING\nRELIABILITY GROUPS, CIVILIAN OBSERVERS\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 2 1 3 1 5 6 4 7 11 0 0 0\n1-Astronomical 1 2 3 5 6 11 13 24 37 1 1 2\n2-Aircraft 0 0 0 2 0 2 4 4 8 1 0 1\n3-Light Phenom. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0\n4-Birds 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 0 0 0 2 0 2 12 0 12 1 0 1\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 3 0 3 14 0 14 4 0 4 1 0 1\n9-Other 0 0 0 1 2 3 0 6 6 1 0 1\nTotal 6 3 9 26 14 40 39 45 84 5 1 6"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A54 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR 1950 BY SIGHTING\nRELIABILITY GROUPS, MILITARY OBSERVERS\nEXCELLENT GOOD DOUBTFUL POOR\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 3 0 3 1 0 1 9 1 10 1 1 2\n1-Astronomical 6 4 10 10 6 16 9 0 9 2 0 2\n2-Aircraft 0 0 0 2 4 6 0 0 0 2 0 2\n3-Light Phenom. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n4-Birds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 2 2 0 2\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 19 0 19 3 0 3 15 0 15 5 0 5\n9-Other 1 0 1 0 3 3 2 3 5 1 0 1\nTotal 28 4 32 17 13 30 37 8 45 13 1 14\n\nTABLE A55 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR 1950 BY SIGHTING\nRELIABILITY GROUPS, CIVILIAN OBSERVERS\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 1 0 1 2 0 2 9 4 13 7 1 8\n1-Astronomical 1 3 4 3 2 5 3 8 11 8 2 10\n2-Aircraft 4 1 5 4 1 5 17 5 22 10 0 10\n3-Light Phenom. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n4-Birds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 3 0 3 0 0 0 23 0 23 17 0 17\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4\n8-Unknown 4 0 4 9 0 9 7 0 7 11 0 11\n9-Other 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 0 1\nTotal 13 4 17 26 3 29 60 18 78 58 3 61"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A56 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR 1951 BY SIGHTING\nRELIABILITY GROUPS, MILITARY OBSERVERS\nEXCELLENT GOOD DOUBTFUL POOR\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 1 0 1 4 1 5 1 1 2 1 1 2\n1-Astronomical 1 1 2 9 2 11 1 1 2 2 1 3\n2-Aircraft 3 0 3 4 0 4 1 1 2 2 3 5\n3-Light Phenom. 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0\n4-Birds 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2\n8-Unknown 7 0 7 2 0 2 12 0 12 9 0 9\n9-Other 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 2\nTotal 13 1 14 19 4 23 19 4 23 16 5 21\n\nTABLE A57 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR 1951 BY SIGHTING\nRELIABILITY GROUPS, CIVILIAN OBSERVERS\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 3 0 0 0\n1-Astronomical 0 1 1 4 3 7 2 3 5 4 5 9\n2-Aircraft 0 1 1 3 0 3 1 3 4 2 0 2\n3-Light Phenom. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0\n4-Birds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 5 0 5\n7-Psychological 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 0 0 0 1 0 1 13 0 13 2 0 2\n9-Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3\nTotal 2 2 4 15 3 18 27 8 35 17 5 22"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A58 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR 1952 BY SIGHTING\nRELIABILITY GROUPS, MILITARY OBSERVERS\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 8 7 15 34 29 63 21 18 39 10 8 18\n1-Astronomical 11 8 19 53 22 75 37 8 45 11 2 13\n2-Aircraft 21 12 33 25 28 53 18 10 28 3 3 6\n3-Light Phenom. 0 0 0 3 1 4 1 0 1 2 0 2\n4-Birds 0 0 0 3 0 3 4 0 4 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 7 1 8 2 1 3 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 2 0 2 8 0 8 8 0 8 9 0 9\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2\n8-Unknown 42 0 42 143 0 143 53 0 53 10 0 10\n9-Other 6 0 6 23 2 25 11 0 11 0 10 10\nTotal 90 27 117 299 83 382 155 37 192 45 25 70\n\nTABLE A59 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR 1952 BY SIGHTING\nRELIABILITY GROUPS, CIVILIAN OBSERVERS\nEvaluation Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 3 4 7 43 23 66 40 42 82 28 13 41\n1-Astronomical 6 0 6 57 28 85 72 29 101 13 23 36\n2-Aircraft 6 4 10 57 66 123 94 90 184 26 19 45\n3-Light Phenom. 2 0 2 4 7 11 11 9 20 3 0 3\n4-Birds 0 0 0 1 2 2 3 3 6 2 1 3\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 1 9 10 2 2 4 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 2 0 2 14 0 14 71 0 71 52 0 52\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 2 0 2 18 4 22 6 1 7\n8-Unknown 18 0 18 85 0 85 67 0 67 37 0 37\n9-Other 1 0 1 8 4 12 16 2 18 0 2 2\nTotal 38 8 46 272 138 410 394 181 575 147 59 226"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A60 REPORTED COLORS OF OBJECTS SIGHTED BY YEARS, ALL SIGHTINGS\nWHITE OR GLOWING WHITE 775 24.2\nMETALLIC 549 17.2\nCOLOR NOT STATED 436 13.6\nORANGE OR GLOWING ORANGE 298 9.3\nRED OR GLOWING RED 253 7.9\nGREEN OR GLOWING GREEN 224 7.0\nLIGHT GLOW, COLOR NOT KNOWN 219 6.8\nYELLOW OR GLOWING YELLOW 208 6.5\nBLUE OR GLOWING BLUE 145 4.5\nBLACK OR GLOWING BLACK 69 2.1\nLIGHT GLOW, INDETERMINATE COLOR 13 0.4\nVIOLET OR GLOWING VIOLET 8 0.3\nGLOWING GRAY 8 0.3\nTotal 3201 100.\n\nTABLE A61 REPORTED COLORS OF OBJECTS SIGHTED BY YEARS, UNIT SIGHTINGS\nWHITE OR GLOWING WHITE 610 23.9\nMETALLIC 422 16.5\nCOLOR NOT STATED 325 12.7\nORANGE OR GLOWING ORANGE 253 9.9\nRED OR GLOWING RED 203 7.9\nGREEN OR GLOWING GREEN 175 6.9\nLIGHT GLOW, COLOR NOT KNOWN 178 7.0\nYELLOW OR GLOWING YELLOW 185 7.2\nBLUE OR GLOWING BLUE 121 4.7\nBLACK OR GLOWING BLACK 59 2.3\nLIGHT GLOW, INDETERMINATE COLOR 10 0.4\nVIOLET OR GLOWING VIOLET 7 0.3\nGLOWING GRAY 6 0.2\nTotal 2554 100\n\nTABLE A62 REPORTED COLORS OF OBJECTS SIGHTED BY YEARS, OBJECT SIGHTINGS\nWHITE OR GLOWING WHITE 517 23.5\nMETALLIC 389 17.7\nCOLOR NOT STATED 271 12.3\nORANGE OR GLOWING ORANGE 221 10.0\nRED OR GLOWING RED 179 8.1\nGREEN OR GLOWING GREEN 144 6.6\nLIGHT GLOW, COLOR NOT KNOWN 152 6.9\nYELLOW OR GLOWING YELLOW 159 7.2\nBLUE OR GLOWING BLUE 93 4.2\nBLACK OR GLOWING BLACK 57 2.6\nLIGHT GLOW, INDETERMINATE COLOR 7 0.3\nVIOLET OR GLOWING VIOLET 5 0.2\nGLOWING GRAY 5 0.2\nTotal 2199 100\n\nTABLE A63 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SIGHTING COLORS REPORTED\nTotals 8300 901 9201 71.9 28.1 100.\nWHITE OR GLOWING WHITE 544 229 773 17.0 7.2 24.2\nMETALLIC 418 131 549 13.1 4.1 17.2\nCOLOR NOT STATED 368 68 436 11.5 2.1 13.6\nORANGE OR GLOWING ORANGE 224 74 297 7.0 2.3 9.3\nRED OR GLOWING RED 193 60 253 6.0 1.9 7.9\nGREEN OR GLOWING GREEN 116 108 224 3.6 3.4 7.0\nLIGHT GLOW, COLOR NOT KNOWN 157 62 219 4.9 1.9 6.8\nYELLOW OR GLOWING YELLOW 156 52 208 4.9 1.6 6.5\nBLUE OR GLOWING BLUE 106 39 145 3.3 1.2 4.5\nBLACK OR GLOWING BLACK 46 21 67 1.4 0.7 2.1\nLIGHT GLOW, INDETERMINATE COLOR 6 7 13 0.2 0.1 0.4\nVIOLET OR GLOWING VIOLET 5 3 8 0.2 0.1 0.3\nGLOWING GRAY 6 2 8 0.2 0.1 0.3"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A64 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED\nTOTAL / WHITE OR GLOWING WHITE / METALLIC / COLOR NOT STATED\n0-Balloon 228 151 379 8.9 5.9 14.8 61 50 111 2.4 2.1 4.5 65 32 97 2.5 1.3 38 28 21 49 1.1 0.8 1.9\n1-Astronomical 983 256 639 15.0 10.0 25.0 42 67 109 3.6 2.6 6.2 8 9 17 0.3 0.4 0.7 23 16 39 0.9 0.6 1.5\n2-Aircraft 292 235 527 11.4 9.2 20.6 49 54 103 1.9 2.1 4.0 88 54 142 3.4 2.1 5.5 32 16 48 1.3 0.6 1.9\n3-Light Phenom. 32 21 53 1.3 0.9 2.1 3 8 11 0.1 0.3 0.4 3 4 7 0.1 0.2 0.3 0 1 1 0.0 0.1 0.1\n4-Birds 13 10 29 0.5 0.4 0.9 4 2 6 0.2 0.1 0.3 3 1 4 0.1 0.1 0.2 4 1 5 0.2 0.1 0.3\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 3 7 10 0.1 0.3 0.4 1 3 4 0.1 0.1 0.2 1 0 1 0.1 0.0 0.1 1 0 1 0.1 0.0 0.1\n6-Insuffic. Info. 261 0 261 10.2 0.0 10.2 54 0 54 2.1 0.0 2.1 40 0 40 1.6 0.0 1.6 70 0 70 2.7 0.0 2.7\n7-Psychological 36 9 45 1.4 0.4 1.8 8 2 10 0.3 0.1 0.4 8 1 9 0.3 0.1 0.4 6 0 6 0.2 0.0 0.2\n8-Unknown 497 0 497 19.5 0.0 19.5 131 0 131 5.1 0.0 5.1 84 0 84 3.3 0.0 3.3 71 0 71 2.8 0.0 2.8\n9-Other 92 28 120 3.6 1.1 4.7 19 1 20 0.7 0.1 0.8 15 6 21 0.6 0.2 0.8 29 6 35 1.1 0.2 1.3\nTotal 1537 717 2554 71.9 28.1 100. 403 187 610 16.6 7.3 23.9 315 107 422 12.3 4.2 16.5 244 61 325 10.3 2.4 12.7\n\nORANGE OR GLOWING ORANGE / RED OR GLOWING RED / GREEN OR GLOWING GREEN / LIGHT GLOW, COLOR NOT KNOWN\nTotal 177 76 253 6.9 3.0 9.9 150 53 203 5.9 2.1 7.9 95 80 175 3.7 3.1 6.9 129 49 178 5.1 1.9 7.0\n\nYELLOW OR GLOWING YELLOW / BLUE OR GLOWING BLUE / BLACK OR GLOWING BLACK / LIGHT GLOW, INDETERMINATE COLOR\nTotal 136 49 185 5.3 1.9 7.2 94 27 121 3.7 1.1 4.7 40 19 59 1.6 0.7 2.3 6 4 10 0.2 0.2 0.4\n\nVIOLET OR GLOWING VIOLET / GLOWING GRAY\nTotal 4 3 7 0.2 0.1 0.3 4 2 6 0.2 0.1 0.2\n\n[Table entries for remaining color categories are rows of numbers with the same evaluation labels as above.]"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A65 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED\nTOTAL / WHITE OR GLOWING WHITE / METALLIC / COLOR NOT STATED\n0-Balloon 267 132 399 9.4 6.0 15.4 56 45 101 2.5 2.0 4.5 56 28 84 2.5 1.3 3.9 24 16 40 1.1 0.7 1.8\n1-Astronomical 274 205 479 12.5 9.3 21.8 66 58 124 3.0 2.6 5.6 7 8 15 0.3 0.4 0.7 11 9 20 0.5 0.4 0.9\n2-Aircraft 265 209 474 12.1 9.5 21.6 41 44 85 1.9 2.0 3.9 85 52 137 3.9 2.4 6.3 28 16 44 1.3 0.7 2.0\n3-Light Phenom. 30 18 48 1.4 0.8 2.2 3 7 10 0.1 0.3 0.4 3 4 7 0.1 0.2 0.3 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\n4-Birds 12 10 22 0.5 0.5 1.0 4 2 6 0.2 0.1 0.3 3 1 4 0.1 0.1 0.2 4 1 5 0.2 0.1 0.3\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 3 7 10 0.1 0.3 0.4 1 3 4 0.1 0.1 0.2 1 0 1 0.1 0.0 0.1 1 0 1 0.1 0.0 0.1\n6-Insuffic. Info. 240 0 240 10.9 0.0 10.9 48 0 48 2.2 0.0 2.2 38 0 38 1.7 0.0 1.7 62 0 62 2.8 0.0 2.8\n7-Psychological 35 9 44 1.6 0.4 2.0 8 2 10 0.4 0.1 0.5 8 1 9 0.4 0.1 0.5 6 0 6 0.3 0.0 0.3\n8-Unknown 434 0 434 19.7 0.0 19.7 112 0 112 5.1 0.0 5.1 76 0 76 3.5 0.0 3.5 62 0 62 2.8 0.0 2.8\n9-Other 85 24 109 3.9 1.1 5.0 16 1 17 0.7 0.1 0.8 14 4 18 0.6 0.2 0.8 26 5 31 1.2 0.2 1.4\nTotal 1585 614 2199 72.1 27.9 100. 355 162 517 16.1 7.4 23.5 291 98 389 13.2 4.5 17.7 224 47 271 10.2 2.1 12.3"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A66 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, ONE OBJECT\nALL YEARS / 1947 / 1948 / 1949\n0-Balloon 228 147 375 9.5 6.1 15.6 5 0 5 7.0 0.0 7.0 15 19 34 9.0 11.4 20.4 14 5 19 4.3 1.5 5.8\n1-Astronomical 436 311 747 18.1 12.9 31.0 29 6 35 40.8 8.4 49.2 34 34 68 20.3 20.3 40.6 64 128 192 19.7 39.4 59.1\n2-Aircraft 227 197 424 9.4 8.2 17.6 0 2 2 0.0 2.8 2.8 9 5 14 5.4 3.0 8.4 28 12 40 8.6 3.7 12.3\n3-Light Phenom. 19 11 30 0.8 0.5 1.3 2 0 2 2.8 0.0 2.8 1 1 2 0.6 0.6 1.2 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\n4-Birds 1 1 2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 1 2 0.6 0.6 1.2 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 9 12 21 0.4 0.5 0.9 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 215 0 215 8.9 0.0 8.9 5 0 5 7.0 0.0 7.0 16 0 16 9.6 0.0 9.6 22 0 22 6.8 0.0 6.8\n7-Psychological 34 0 34 1.4 0.0 1.4 2 0 2 2.8 0.0 2.8 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 0 1 0.3 0.0 0.3\n8-Unknown 463 0 463 19.2 0.0 19.2 12 0 12 16.9 0.0 16.9 23 0 23 13.8 0.0 13.8 40 0 40 12.3 0.0 12.3\n9-Other 99 0 99 4.1 0.0 4.1 8 0 8 11.3 0.0 11.3 8 0 8 4.8 0.0 4.8 10 0 10 3.1 0.0 3.1\nTotal 1731 679 2410 71.8 28.2 100. 63 8 71 88.7 11.3 100. 107 60 167 64.1 35.9 100. 179 145 324 55.3 44.7 100.\n\n1950 / 1951 / 1952\nTotal 209 45 254 82.3 17.7 100. 110 26 136 80.9 19.1 100. 1063 395 1458 72.9 27.1 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A67 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, TWO OBJECTS\nALL YEARS / 1947 / 1948 / 1949\n0-Balloon 22 21 43 8.0 7.6 15.6 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 1 2 6.7 6.7 13.4 2 0 2 10.0 0.0 10.0\n1-Astronomical 12 13 25 4.4 4.7 9.1 2 2 4 22.2 22.2 44.4 2 1 3 13.3 6.7 20.0 6 4 10 30.0 20.0 50.0\n2-Aircraft 53 43 96 19.3 15.6 34.9 1 0 1 11.1 0.0 11.1 0 3 3 20.0 0.0 20.0 2 4 6 10.0 20.0 30.0\nTotal 195 80 275 70.9 29.1 100. 7 2 9 77.8 22.2 100. 13 2 15 86.7 13.3 100. 12 8 20 60.0 40.0 100.\n\n1950 / 1951 / 1952\nTotal 18 1 19 94.7 5.3 100. 5 0 5 100.0 0.0 100. 140 67 207 67.6 32.4 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A68 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, THREE TO TEN OBJECTS\nALL YEARS / 1947 / 1948 / 1949\n0-Balloon 15 10 25 4.2 2.8 7.0 1 0 1 4.0 0.0 4.0 1 0 1 4.7 0.0 4.7 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\n2-Aircraft 67 38 105 18.8 10.6 29.4 1 0 1 4.0 0.0 4.0 3 0 3 20.0 0.0 20.0 1 9 10 3.8 34.7 38.5\nTotal 273 84 357 76.5 23.5 100. 24 1 25 96.0 4.0 100. 7 8 15 46.7 53.3 100. 16 10 26 61.5 38.5 100.\n\n1950 / 1951 / 1952\nTotal 26 2 28 92.9 7.1 100. 8 3 11 72.7 27.3 100. 192 60 252 76.2 23.8 100.\n\nTABLE A69 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, ELEVEN OR MORE OBJECTS\nTotal 81 14 95 85.3 14.7 100. 7 1 8 87.5 12.5 100. 3 1 4 75.0 25.0 100. 17 1 18 94.4 5.6 100.\n\n1950 / 1951 / 1952\nTotal 2 0 2 100.0 0.0 100. 4 1 5 80.0 20.0 100. 49 10 58 82.8 17.2 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A7I EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY\nNUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, ONE OBJECT\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nTable continues: 1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nTABLE A7II EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY\nNUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, TWO OBJECTS\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A7III EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY\nNUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, THREE TO TEN OBJECTS\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nTABLE A7IV EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY\nNUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, ELEVEN OR MORE OBJECTS\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A7V EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY\nNUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, NUMBER OF OBJECTS NOT STATED\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A7VI EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY\nNUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, ONE OBJECT\nTOTAL 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nTABLE A7VII EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY\nNUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, TWO OBJECTS\nTOTAL 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A7VIII EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY\nNUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, THREE TO TEN OBJECTS\nTOTAL 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\nTABLE A7IX EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY\nNUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, ELEVEN OR MORE OBJECTS\nTOTAL 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A80 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING, NUMBER OF OBJECTS NOT STATED\nAll Years 1947 1948 1949\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n40 6 46 87.0 13.0 100. 3 0 3 100.0 0.0 100. 2 2 4 50.0 50.0 100. 5 0 5 100.0 0.0 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A81 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, ALL YEARS\n5 Seconds and Less\n6-10 Seconds\n11-30 Seconds\n31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n249 188 437 57.0 43.0 100. 115 52 167 68.9 31.1 100. 183 82 265 69.1 30.9 100. 148 48 196 75.5 24.5 100.\n61 Seconds-5 Minutes\n6-30 Minutes\nOver 30 Minutes\nNot Stated\nTotal\n370 138 508 72.8 27.2 100. 371 156 527 70.4 29.6 100. 199 50 249 79.9 20.1 100. 665 187 852 78.1 21.9 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A82 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING 1947\n5 Seconds and Less\n6-10 Seconds\n11-30 Seconds\n31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n10 1 11 90.9 9.1 100. 6 2 8 75.0 25.0 100. 14 2 16 87.5 12.5 100. 6 2 8 75.0 25.0 100.\n61 Seconds-5 Minutes\n6-30 Minutes\nOver 30 Minutes\nNot Stated\nTABLE A83 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING 1948\n5 Seconds and Less\n6-10 Seconds\n11-30 Seconds\n31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n20 14 34 58.8 41.2 100. 11 7 18 61.1 38.9 100. 7 5 12 58.3 41.7 100. 6 8 5 100.0 0.0 100.\n61 Seconds-5 Minutes\n6-30 Minutes\nOver 30 Minutes\nNot Stated\nTotal\n8 7 15 53.3 46.7 100. 13 10 23 56.5 43.5 100. 12 0 12 100.0 0.0 100. 48 38 86 55.8 44.2 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A84 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING 1949\n5 Seconds and Less\n6-10 Seconds\n11-30 Seconds\n31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n17 88 105 16.2 83.8 100. 7 7 14 50.0 50.0 100. 14 6 20 70.0 30.0 100. 27 1 28 96.4 3.6 100.\n61 Seconds-5 Minutes\n6-30 Minutes\nOver 30 Minutes\nNot Stated\nTotal\n30 8 38 78.9 21.1 100. 28 17 45 62.2 37.8 100. 15 2 17 88.2 11.8 100. 93 35 128 72.7 27.3 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A85 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING 1950\n5 Seconds and Less\n6-10 Seconds\n11-30 Seconds\n31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n17 8 25 68.0 32.0 100. 5 2 7 71.4 28.6 100. 17 4 21 81.0 19.0 100. 8 2 10 80.0 20.0 100.\n61 Seconds-5 Minutes\n6-30 Minutes\nOver 30 Minutes\nNot Stated\nTotal\n51 5 56 91.1 8.9 100. 49 11 60 81.7 18.3 100. 19 6 25 76.0 24.0 100. 86 16 102 84.3 15.7 100.\nTABLE A86 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING 1951\nTABLE A87 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING 1952\n5 Seconds and Less\n6-10 Seconds\n11-30 Seconds\n31-60 Seconds\nTotal\n170 75 245 69.4 30.6 100. 79 33 112 70.5 29.5 100. 121 64 185 65.4 34.6 100. 99 41 140 70.7 29.3 100.\n61 Seconds-5 Minutes\n6-30 Minutes\nOver 30 Minutes\nNot Stated\nTotal\n250 113 363 68.9 31.1 100. 257 113 370 69.5 30.5 100. 146 41 187 78.1 21.9 100. 338 78 416 81.2 18.8 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A88 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, ALL YEARS\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation | Number Certain Doubtful Total | Per Cent Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 212 84 356 59.5 40.5 100. 94 41 135 69.6 30.4 100. 119 69 218 68.3 31.7 100. 118 45 143 72.4 27.6 100.\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 294 121 405 72.1 29.9 100. 303 118 421 72.0 28.0 100. 153 74 197 77.7 22.3 100. 524 135 659 79.5 20.5 100.\nTABLE A89 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, 1947\n5 SECONDS OR LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 7 1 8 87.5 12.5 100. 2 2 4 50.0 50.0 100. 12 2 14 85.7 14.3 100. 5 2 7 71.4 28.6 100.\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 7 0 7 100.0 0.0 100. 4 0 4 100.0 0.0 100. [none] 48 6 53 90.6 9.4 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A90 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, 1948\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 16 9 25 64.0 36.0 100. 9 5 14 64.3 35.7 100. 5 4 9 55.6 44.4 100. 4 6 4 100.0 0.0 100.\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 9 2 9 77.8 22.2 100. 8 7 15 53.3 46.7 100. 12 0 12 100.0 0.0 100. 38 27 65 58.5 41.5 100.\nTABLE A91 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, 1949\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 10 59 69 14.5 85.5 100. 4 3 7 57.1 42.9 100. 7 3 10 70.0 30.0 100. 12 0 12 100.0 0.0 100.\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 20 7 27 74.1 25.9 100. 19 5 24 79.2 20.8 100. 9 2 11 81.8 18.2 100. 59 17 76 77.6 22.4 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A92 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, 1950\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 15 5 20 75.0 25.0 100. 4 2 6 66.7 33.3 100. 12 4 16 75.0 25.0 100. 7 2 9 77.8 22.2 100.\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 31 5 36 86.1 13.9 100. 32 7 39 82.1 17.9 100. 8 3 11 72.7 27.3 100. 61 11 72 84.7 15.3 100.\nTABLE A93 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, 1951\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 13 2 15 86.7 13.3 100. 6 0 6 100.0 0.0 100. 7 1 8 87.5 12.5 100. 3 2 5 60.0 40.0 100.\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 18 5 23 78.3 21.7 100. 18 5 23 78.3 21.7 100. 7 1 8 87.5 12.5 100. 37 12 49 75.5 24.5 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A94 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, 1952\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 151 68 219 68.9 31.1 100. 69 29 98 70.4 29.6 100. 106 55 161 65.8 34.2 100. 87 39 126 69.0 31.0 100.\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 201 102 303 66.3 33.7 100. 222 94 316 70.3 29.7 100. 117 38 155 75.5 24.5 100. 281 63 344 81.7 18.3 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A95 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, ALL YEARS\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 169 117 286 59.1 40.9 100. 78 35 113 69.0 31.0 100. 124 62 186 66.7 33.3 100. 110 40 150 73.3 26.7 100.\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 262 106 368 71.2 28.8 100. 274 102 376 72.9 27.1 100. 131 41 172 76.2 23.8 100. 437 111 548 79.7 20.3 100.\nTABLE A96 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, 1947\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 4 1 5 80.0 20.0 100. 1 2 3 33.3 66.7 100. 10 2 12 83.3 16.7 100. 4 2 6 66.7 33.3 100.\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 7 0 7 100.0 0.0 100. 3 0 3 100.0 0.0 100. [none] 38 5 43 88.4 11.6 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A97 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, 1948\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation | Certain | Doubtful | Total | Per Cent Certain | Doubtful | Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal 15 8 23 65.2 34.8 100.0 9 4 13 69.2 30.8 100.0 5 4 9 55.6 44.4 100.0 4 0 4 100.0 0.0 100.0\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other, Total 7 2 9 77.8 22.2 100.0 8 7 15 53.3 46.7 100.0 9 0 9 100.0 0.0 100.0 36 25 61 59.0 41.0 100.0"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A98 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, 1949\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 6 41 47 12.8 87.2 100.0 4 3 7 57.1 42.9 100.0 6 3 9 66.7 33.3 100.0 11 0 11 100.0 0.0 100.0\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 17 5 22 77.3 22.7 100.0 15 5 20 75.0 25.0 100.0 6 1 7 85.7 14.3 100.0 57 12 63 81.0 19.0 100.0"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A99 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, 1950\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 11 4 15 73.3 26.7 100.0 2 2 4 50.0 50.0 100.0 7 3 10 70.0 30.0 100.0 7 2 9 77.8 22.2 100.0\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 29 3 32 90.6 9.4 100.0 29 7 36 80.6 19.4 100.0 8 1 9 88.9 11.1 100.0 46 8 54 85.2 14.8 100.0\nTABLE A 100 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, 1951\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 10 2 12 83.3 16.7 100.0 5 0 5 100.0 0.0 100.0 5 1 6 83.3 16.7 100.0 3 2 5 60.0 40.0 100.0\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 16 5 21 76.2 23.8 100.0 15 4 19 78.9 21.1 100.0 6 1 7 85.7 14.3 100.0 35 11 46 76.1 23.9 100.0"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A101 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING, 1952\n5 SECONDS AND LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 123 61 184 66.8 33.2 100.0 57 24 81 70.4 29.6 100.0 91 49 140 65.0 35.0 100.0 81 34 115 70.4 29.6 100.0\n6 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | NOT STATED\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 186 91 277 67.1 32.9 100.0 204 79 283 72.1 27.9 100.0 102 38 140 72.9 27.1 100.0 231 50 281 82.2 17.8 100.0"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A102 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING FOR MONTHS OF YEAR, FIVE SECONDS OR LESS\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 8 22 30 26.7 73.3 100.0 5 6 11 45.5 54.5 100.0 8 8 16 50.0 50.0 100.0 17 1 18 94.4 5.6 100.0\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 20 4 24 83.3 16.7 100.0 18 9 27 66.7 33.3 100.0 68 41 109 62.4 37.6 100.0 33 53 86 38.4 61.6 100.0\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 17 4 21 81.0 19.0 100.0 23 13 36 63.9 36.1 100.0 14 15 29 48.3 51.7 100.0 18 12 30 60.0 40.0 100.0\nTABLE A103 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING FOR MONTHS OF YEAR, SIX TO TEN SECONDS\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 3 6 9 33.3 66.7 100.0 1 0 1 100.0 0.0 100.0 6 0 6 100.0 0.0 100.0 10 1 11 90.9 9.1 100.0\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 10 2 12 83.3 16.7 100.0 10 10 20 50.0 50.0 100.0 30 11 41 73.2 26.8 100.0 21 11 32 65.6 34.4 100.0\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other\nTotal 5 5 10 50.0 50.0 100.0 12 3 15 80.0 20.0 100.0 6 1 7 85.7 14.3 100.0 1 2 3 33.3 66.7 100.0"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A104 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING FOR MONTHS OF YEAR, ELEVEN TO THIRTY SECONDS\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation | Number Certain Doubtful Total | Per Cent Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation | Number | Per Cent\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation | Number | Per Cent\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n167"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A105 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING FOR MONTHS OF YEAR, THIRTY ONE TO SIATY SECONDS\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation | Number Certain Doubtful Total | Per Cent Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation | Number | Per Cent\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation | Number | Per Cent\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n168"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A106 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING FOR MONTHS OF YEAR, SIXTY ONE SECONDS TO FIVE MINUTES\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation | Number Certain Doubtful Total | Per Cent Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation | Number | Per Cent\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation | Number | Per Cent\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n169"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A107 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING FOR MONTHS OF YEAR, SIX TO THIRTY MINUTES\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation | Number | Per Cent\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation | Number | Per Cent\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation | Number | Per Cent\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n170"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A108 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING FOR MONTHS OF YEAR, OVER THIRTY MINUTES\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation | Number | Per Cent\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation | Number | Per Cent\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation | Number | Per Cent\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n171"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A109 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR, DURATION NOT STATED\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nJANUARY Total: 24 19 43 55.8 44.2 100.\nFEBRUARY Total: 25 9 34 73.5 26.5 100.\nMARCH Total: 48 17 65 73.8 26.2 100.\nAPRIL Total: 54 8 62 87.1 12.9 100.\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nMAY Total: 41 9 50 82.0 18.0 100.\nJUNE Total: 52 4 56 92.9 7.1 100.\nJULY Total: 212 43 255 83.1 16.9 100.\nAUGUST Total: 78 26 104 75.0 25.0 100.\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nSEPTEMBER Total: 38 5 43 88.4 11.6 100.\nOCTOBER Total: 30 16 46 65.2 34.8 100.\nNOVEMBER Total: 30 18 48 62.5 37.5 100.\nDECEMBER Total: 33 13 46 71.8 28.2 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A110 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR, FIVE SECONDS OR LESS\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nJANUARY Total: 5 10 15 33.3 66.7 100\nFEBRUARY Total: 4 6 10 40.0 60.0 100.\nMARCH Total: 6 6 12 50.0 50.0 100.\nAPRIL Total: 11 1 12 91.7 8.3 100.\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nMAY Total: 16 3 19 84.2 15.8 100.\nJUNE Total: 18 9 27 66.7 33.3 100.\nJULY Total: 60 32 92 65.2 34.8 100.\nAUGUST Total: 31 46 77 40.2 59.8 100.\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nSEPTEMBER Total: 16 4 20 80.0 20.0 100.\nOCTOBER Total: 18 10 28 64.3 35.7 100.\nNOVEMBER Total: 13 8 21 61.9 38.1 100.\nDECEMBER Total: 14 9 23 60.9 39.1 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A111 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR, SIX TO TEN SECONDS\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nJANUARY Total: 3 2 5 60.0 40.0 100.\nFEBRUARY Total: 1 0 1 100.0 0.0 100.\nMARCH Total: 5 0 5 100.0 0.0 100.\nAPRIL Total: 8 1 9 88.9 11.1 100.\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nMAY Total: 8 2 10 80.0 20.0 100.\nJUNE Total: 10 8 18 55.6 44.4 100.\nJULY Total: 26 9 35 74.3 25.7 100.\nAUGUST Total: 18 9 27 66.7 33.3 100.\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nSEPTEMBER Total: 5 5 10 50.0 50.0 100.\nOCTOBER Total: 6 3 9 66.7 33.3 100.\nNOVEMBER Total: 4 0 4 100.0 0.0 100.\nDECEMBER Total: 0 2 2 0.0 100.0 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A112 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR, ELEVEN TO THIRTY SECONDS\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nJANUARY Total: 5 1 6 83.3 16.7 100.\nFEBRUARY Total: 2 0 2 100.0 0.0 100.\nMARCH Total: 4 7 11 36.4 63.6 100.\nAPRIL Total: 12 3 15 80.0 20.0 100.\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nMAY Total: 12 3 15 80.0 20.0 100.\nJUNE Total: 13 4 17 76.5 23.5 100.\nJULY Total: 51 23 74 68.9 31.1 100.\nAUGUST Total: 23 12 35 65.7 34.3 100.\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nSEPTEMBER Total: 8 7 15 53.3 46.7 100.\nOCTOBER Total: 8 4 12 66.7 33.3 100.\nNOVEMBER Total: 4 0 4 100.0 0.0 100.\nDECEMBER Total: 7 5 12 58.3 41.7 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A113 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR, THIRTY ONE TO SIXTY SECONDS\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nJANUARY Total: 1 0 1 100.0 0.0 100.\nFEBRUARY Total: 3 2 5 60.0 40.0 100.\nMARCH Total: 6 1 7 85.7 14.3 100.\nAPRIL Total: 14 2 16 87.5 12.5 100.\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nMAY Total: 7 0 7 100.0 0.0 100.\nJUNE Total: 5 3 8 62.5 37.5 100.\nJULY Total: 32 15 47 68.1 31.9 100.\nAUGUST Total: 22 10 32 68.7 31.3 100.\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nSEPTEMBER Total: 9 4 13 69.2 30.8 100.\nOCTOBER Total: 7 0 7 100.0 0.0 100.\nNOVEMBER Total: 2 3 5 40.0 60.0 100.\nDECEMBER Total: 10 5 15 66.7 33.3 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A114 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR,\nSIXTY ONE SECONDS TO FIVE MINUTES\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A115 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR,\nSIX TO THIRTY MINUTES\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A116 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR,\nOVER THIRTY MINUTES\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A117 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR,\nDURATION NOT STATED\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A118 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR,\nFIVE SECONDS OR LESS\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A119 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR, SIX TO TEN SECONDS\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A120 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR, ELEVEN TO THIRTY SECONDS\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A121 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR, THIRTY ONE TO SIXTY SECONDS\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A122 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR, SIXTY ONE SECONDS TO FIVE MINUTES\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A123 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING\nFOR MONTHS OF YEAR, SIX TO THIRTY MINUTES\nJANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY JUNE JULY AUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A124 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING FOR MONTHS OF YEAR, OVER THIRTY MINUTES\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nNumber: Certain, Doubtful, Total | Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A125 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY DURATION OF SIGHTING FOR MONTHS OF YEAR, DURATION NOT STATED\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nNumber: Certain, Doubtful, Total | Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A126 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, ELLIPTICAL\nALL YEARS | 1947 | 1948 | 1949 | 1950 | 1951 | 1952\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A127 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, ROCKET AND AIRCRAFT\nALL YEARS | 1947 | 1948 | 1949 | 1950 | 1951 | 1952\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A128 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, METEOR OR COMET\nALL YEARS | 1947 | 1948 | 1949 | 1950 | 1951 | 1952\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A129 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, LENTICULAR, CONICAL OR TEARDROP\nALL YEARS | 1947 | 1948 | 1949 | 1950 | 1951 | 1952\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A130 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, FLAME\nALL YEARS | 1947 | 1948 | 1949 | 1950 | 1951 | 1952\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A131 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, OTHER SHAPES\nALL YEARS | 1947 | 1948 | 1949 | 1950 | 1951 | 1952\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A132 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS\nBY SHAPE OF OBJECT, SHAPE NOT STATED\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A133 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS\nBY SHAPE OF OBJECT, ELLIPTICAL\nALL Years 1947 1948 1949\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\nTABLE A134 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS\nBY SHAPE OF OBJECT, ROCKET AND AIRCRAFT\nALL Years 1947 1948 1949"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A135 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS\nBY SHAPE OF OBJECT, METEOR OR COMET\nALL Years 1947 1948 1949\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\nTABLE A136 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS\nBY SHAPE OF OBJECT, LENTICULAR, CONCAL OR TEARDROP\nALL Years 1947 1948 1949"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A137 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS\nBY SHAPE OF OBJECT, FLAME\nALL Years 1947 1948 1949\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\nTABLE A138 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS\nBY SHAPE OF OBJECT, OTHER SHAPES\nALL Years 1947 1948 1949"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A139 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS\nBY SHAPE OF OBJECT, SHAPE NOT STATED\nALL Years 1947 1948 1949\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A140 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, ELLIPTICAL\nALL YEARS / 1947 / 1948 / 1949\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\n(Table values as printed in the scanned image.)\n197"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1950 / 1951 / 1952\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\nNumber / Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nTABLE A141 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, ROCKET AND AIRCRAFT\nALL YEARS / 1947 / 1948 / 1949\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n1950 / 1951 / 1952\n(Table values as printed in the scanned image.)"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A142 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, METEOR OR COMET\nALL YEARS / 1947 / 1948 / 1949\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n1950 / 1951 / 1952\nTABLE A143 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, LENTICULAR, CONICAL OR TEARDROP\nALL YEARS / 1947 / 1948 / 1949\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n1950 / 1951 / 1952\n(Table values as printed in the scanned image.)\n198"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A144 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, FLAME\nALL YEARS / 1947 / 1948 / 1949\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n1950 / 1951 / 1952\nTABLE A145 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, OTHER SHAPES\nALL YEARS / 1947 / 1948 / 1949\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n1950 / 1951 / 1952\n(Table values as printed in the scanned image.)\n199"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A146 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY SHAPE OF OBJECT, SHAPE NOT STATED\nALL YEARS / 1947 / 1948 / 1949\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n1950 / 1951 / 1952\nTABLE A147 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED SPEEDS OF OBJECTS, STATIONARY\n1947 / 1948 / 1949 / 1950 / 1951 / 1952\nTABLE A148 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED SPEEDS OF OBJECTS, LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED MILES PER HOUR\n1947 / 1948 / 1949 / 1950 / 1951 / 1952\n(Table values as printed in the scanned image.)\n201"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A149 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED\nSPEEDS OF OBJECTS ONE HUNDRED TO FOUR HUNDRED MILES PER HOUR\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\nEvaluation Number Certain Doubtful Total Per Cent Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A150 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED\nSPEEDS OF OBJECTS OVER FOUR HUNDRED MILES PER HOUR\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A151 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED\nSPEEDS OF OBJECTS METEOR-LIKE SPEEDS\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A152 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED\nSPEEDS OF OBJECTS SPEED NOT STATED\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A153 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED\nSPEEDS OF OBJECTS STATIONARY\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A154 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED\nSPEEDS OF OBJECTS, LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED MILES PER HOUR\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A155 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED\nSPEEDS OF OBJECTS, ONE HUNDRED TO FOUR HUNDRED MILES PER HOUR\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A156 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED\nSPEEDS OF OBJECTS, OVER FOUR HUNDRED MILES PER HOUR\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A157 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED\nSPEEDS OF OBJECTS METEOR-LIKE SPEEDS\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A158 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED\nSPEEDS OF OBJECTS, SPEED NOT STATED\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n1950 1951 1952\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A159 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED SPEEDS OF OBJECTS STATIONARY\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\nTable with rows 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, and Total.\n1950 1951 1952\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total.\nTABLE A160 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED SPEEDS OF OBJECTS, LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED MILES PER HOUR\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total.\n1950 1951 1952\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A161 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED SPEEDS OF OBJECTS, ONE HUNDRED TO FOUR HUNDRED MILES PER HOUR\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total.\n1950 1951 1952\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total.\nTABLE A162 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED SPEEDS OF OBJECTS, OVER FOUR HUNDRED MILES PER HOUR\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total.\n1950 1951 1952\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A163 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED SPEEDS OF OBJECTS, METEOR-LIKE SPEEDS\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total.\n1950 1951 1952\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total.\nTABLE A164 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY REPORTED SPEEDS OF OBJECTS, SPEED NOT STATED\nALL YEARS 1947 1948 1949\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total.\n1950 1951 1952\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A165 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY LIGHT BRIGHTNESS\nSUNLIGHT ON MIRROR; SUNLIGHT ON ALUMINUM; SUNLIGHT ON PLASTER; SUNLIGHT ON STONE\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total.\nSUNLIGHT ON SOIL; BRIGHTER THAN MOON; LIKE MOON; DULLER THAN MOON\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total.\nBARELY VISIBLE; NOT STATED\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A166 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY LIGHT BRIGHTNESS\nSUNLIGHT ON MIRROR; SUNLIGHT ON ALUMINUM; SUNLIGHT ON PLASTER; SUNLIGHT ON STONE\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total.\nSUNLIGHT ON SOIL; BRIGHTER THAN MOON; LIKE MOON; DULLER THAN MOON\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total.\nBARELY VISIBLE; NOT STATED\nTable with rows 0-Balloon through 9-Other and Total."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A167 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY LIGHT BRIGHTNESS\nSUNLIGHT ON MIRROR | SUNLIGHT ON ALUMINUM | SUNLIGHT ON PLASTER | SUNLIGHT ON STONE\nNumber: Certain, Doubtful, Total | Per Cent: Certain, Doubtful, Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nSUNLIGHT ON SOIL | BRIGHTER THAN MOON | LIKE MOON | DULLER THAN MOON\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nBARELY VISIBLE | NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A168 LOCATION OF OBSERVERS DURING SIGHTINGS BY MONTHS FOR ALL SIGHTINGS ALL YEARS\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nNumber: Const, Variable, Total | Per Cent: Const, Variable, Total\n0-\n1-IN CAR\n2-OUTDOORS\n3-IN PLANE\n4-IN BLDG.\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER\nNOT STATED\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\n0-\n1-IN CAR\n2-OUTDOORS\n3-IN PLANE\n4-IN BLDG.\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER\nNOT STATED\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\n0-\n1-IN CAR\n2-OUTDOORS\n3-IN PLANE\n4-IN BLDG.\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER\nNOT STATED\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A169 LOCATION OF OBSERVERS DURING SIGHTINGS BY MONTHS FOR ALL SIGHTINGS 1947\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\nNO DATA | NO DATA | NO DATA | NO DATA\n0-\n1-IN CAR\n2-OUTDOORS\n3-IN PLANE\n4-IN BLDG.\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER\nNOT STATED\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\nNO DATA\n0-\n1-IN CAR\n2-OUTDOORS\n3-IN PLANE\n4-IN BLDG.\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER\nNOT STATED\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\n0-\n1-IN CAR\n2-OUTDOORS\n3-IN PLANE\n4-IN BLDG.\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER\nNOT STATED\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A170 LOCATION OF OBSERVERS DURING SIGHTINGS BY MONTHS FOR ALL SIGHTINGS 1948\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\n0-\n1-IN CAR\n2-OUTDOORS\n3-IN PLANE\n4-IN BLDG.\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER\nNOT STATED\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\n0-\n1-IN CAR\n2-OUTDOORS\n3-IN PLANE\n4-IN BLDG.\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER\nNOT STATED\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\n0-\n1-IN CAR\n2-OUTDOORS\n3-IN PLANE\n4-IN BLDG.\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER\nNOT STATED\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":225,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A171 LOCATION OF OBSERVERS DURING SIGHTINGS BY MONTHS FOR ALL SIGHTINGS 1949\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\n0-\n1-IN CAR\n2-OUTDOORS\n3-IN PLANE\n4-IN BLDG.\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER\nNOT STATED\nTotal\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\n0-\n1-IN CAR\n2-OUTDOORS\n3-IN PLANE\n4-IN BLDG.\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER\nNOT STATED\nTotal\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\n0-\n1-IN CAR\n2-OUTDOORS\n3-IN PLANE\n4-IN BLDG.\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER\nNOT STATED\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":226,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A172 LOCATION OF OBSERVERS DURING SIGHTINGS BY MONTHS\nFOR 446 SIGHTINGS, 1950\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\n0-\n1-IN CAR 2 0 2 10.5 0.0 10.5 | 4 0 4 12.1 0.0 12.1 | 5 0 5 6.9 0.0 6.9 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\n2-OUTDOORS 2 1 3 10.5 5.3 15.9 | 5 1 6 15.2 3.0 18.2 | 18 0 18 25.0 0.0 25.0 | 8 0 8 27.6 0.0 27.6\n3-IN PLANE 8 0 8 42.1 0.0 42.1 | 4 0 4 12.1 0.0 12.1 | 8 0 8 11.1 0.0 11.1 | 5 0 5 17.2 0.0 17.2\n4-IN BLDG. 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 1 0 1 3.0 0.0 3.0 | 5 0 5 6.9 0.0 6.9 | 4 0 4 13.8 0.0 13.8\n5-\n6-\n7-\n8-\n9-OTHER 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 1 0 1 3.0 0.0 3.0 | 2 0 2 2.8 0.0 2.8 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\nNOT STATED 6 0 6 31.6 0.0 31.6 | 17 0 17 51.5 0.0 51.5 | 34 0 34 47.2 0.0 47.2 | 12 0 12 41.4 0.0 41.4\nTotal 18 1 19 94.7 5.3 100. | 32 1 33 97.0 3.0 100. | 72 0 72 100.0 0.0 100. | 29 0 29 100.0 0.0 100.\n\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\n1-IN CAR 2 0 2 10.0 0.0 10.0 | 1 0 1 14.3 0.0 14.3 | 4 5 9 16.7 20.8 37.5 | 1 0 1 4.0 0.0 4.0\n2-OUTDOORS 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 1 0 1 14.3 0.0 14.3 | 4 0 4 16.7 0.0 16.7 | 10 0 10 40.0 0.0 40.0\n3-IN PLANE 2 0 2 10.0 0.0 10.0 | 2 0 2 28.6 0.0 28.6 | 2 0 2 8.3 0.0 8.3 | 3 0 3 12.0 0.0 12.0\n4-IN BLDG. 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 2 0 2 8.3 0.0 8.3 | 2 0 2 8.0 0.0 8.0\n9-OTHER 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 1 0 1 4.2 0.0 4.2 | 3 0 3 12.0 0.0 12.0\nNOT STATED 16 0 16 80.0 0.0 80.0 | 3 0 3 42.9 0.0 42.9 | 6 0 6 25.0 0.0 25.0 | 6 0 6 24.0 0.0 24.0\nTotal 20 0 20 100.0 0.0 100. | 7 0 7 100.0 0.0 100. | 19 5 24 79.2 20.8 100. | 25 0 25 100.0 0.0 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":227,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A173 LOCATION OF OBSERVERS DURING SIGHTINGS BY MONTHS\nFOR ALL SIGHTINGS, 1951\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\n1-IN CAR 2 0 2 7.4 0.0 7.4 | 1 2 3 6.7 13.3 20.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 1 0 1 33.3 0.0 33.3\n2-OUTDOORS 6 2 8 22.2 7.4 29.6 | 2 0 2 13.3 0.0 13.3 | 3 1 4 50.0 16.7 66.7 | 2 0 2 66.7 0.0 66.7\n3-IN PLANE 9 0 9 33.3 0.0 33.3 | 9 0 9 60.0 0.0 60.0 | 1 0 1 16.7 0.0 16.7 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\n4-IN BLDG. 1 0 1 3.7 0.0 3.7 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\n9-OTHER 1 0 1 3.7 0.0 3.7 | 1 0 1 6.7 0.0 6.7 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\nNOT STATED 6 0 6 22.2 0.0 22.2 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 1 0 1 16.7 0.0 16.7 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\nTotal 25 2 27 92.6 7.4 100. | 13 2 15 86.7 13.3 100. | 5 1 6 83.3 16.7 100. | 3 0 3 100.0 0.0 100.\n\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\n1-IN CAR 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 1 0 1 11.1 0.0 11.1 | 3 1 4 15.0 5.0 20.0\n2-OUTDOORS 3 0 3 60.0 0.0 60.0 | 1 0 1 100.0 0.0 100.0 | 2 0 2 22.2 0.0 22.2 | 12 1 13 60.0 5.0 65.0\n3-IN PLANE 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 1 0 1 11.1 0.0 11.1 | 2 0 2 10.0 0.0 10.0\n4-IN BLDG. 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 4 0 4 44.4 0.0 44.4 | 1 0 1 5.0 0.0 5.0\n9-OTHER 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\nNOT STATED 0 2 2 40.0 0.0 40.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 1 0 1 11.1 0.0 11.1 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\nTotal 5 0 5 100.0 0.0 100. | 1 0 1 100.0 0.0 100. | 9 0 9 100.0 0.0 100. | 18 2 20 90.0 10.0 100.\n\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\n1-IN CAR 1 1 2 5.6 5.6 11.2 | 2 0 2 7.1 0.0 7.1 | 2 1 3 11.9 5.9 17.7 | 3 0 3 27.3 0.0 27.3\n2-OUTDOORS 4 0 4 22.2 0.0 22.2 | 15 0 15 53.6 0.0 53.6 | 4 0 4 23.5 0.0 23.5 | 1 0 1 9.3 0.0 9.3\n3-IN PLANE 9 0 9 50.0 0.0 50.0 | 5 0 5 17.9 0.0 17.9 | 7 0 7 41.2 0.0 41.2 | 3 0 3 27.3 0.0 27.3\n4-IN BLDG. 2 0 2 11.1 0.0 11.1 | 2 1 3 7.1 3.6 10.7 | 1 0 1 5.9 0.0 5.9 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\n9-OTHER 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 3 0 3 10.7 0.0 10.7 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\nNOT STATED 1 0 1 5.6 0.0 5.6 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 2 0 2 11.8 0.0 11.8 | 1 0 1 9.1 0.0 9.1\nTotal 17 1 18 94.4 5.6 100. | 27 1 28 96.4 3.6 100. | 16 1 17 94.1 5.9 100. | 11 0 11 100.0 0.0 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":228,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A174 LOCATION OF OBSERVERS DURING SIGHTINGS BY MONTHS\nFOR ALL SIGHTINGS, 1952\nJANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL\n1-IN CAR 3 0 3 20.0 0.0 20.0 | 1 0 1 5.6 0.0 5.6 | 3 0 3 11.1 0.0 11.1 | 14 2 16 13.6 1.9 15.5\n2-OUTDOORS 2 1 3 13.3 6.7 20.0 | 1 0 1 5.6 0.0 5.6 | 3 1 4 11.1 3.7 14.8 | 47 3 50 45.6 2.9 48.5\n3-IN PLANE 4 0 4 26.7 0.0 26.7 | 10 0 10 55.6 0.0 55.6 | 6 0 6 22.2 0.0 22.2 | 6 0 6 5.8 0.0 5.8\n4-IN BLDG. 1 0 1 6.7 0.0 6.7 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 9 0 9 33.3 0.0 33.3 | 11 0 11 10.7 0.0 10.7\nOTHER 2 0 2 13.3 0.0 13.3 | 1 0 1 5.6 0.0 5.6 | 1 0 1 3.7 0.0 3.7 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0\nNOT STATED 2 0 2 13.3 0.0 13.3 | 5 0 5 27.8 0.0 27.8 | 4 0 4 14.8 0.0 14.8 | 20 0 20 19.4 0.0 19.4\nTotal 14 1 15 93.3 6.7 100. | 18 0 18 100.0 0.0 100. | 26 1 27 96.3 3.7 100. | 98 5 103 95.2 4.8 100.\n\nMAY | JUNE | JULY | AUGUST\n1-IN CAR 11 0 11 9.7 0.0 9.7 | 15 1 16 8.5 0.6 9.1 | 54 7 61 6.9 0.9 7.8 | 41 2 43 10.3 0.5 10.8\n2-OUTDOORS 51 2 53 45.1 1.8 46.9 | 92 3 95 52.3 1.7 54.0 | 377 3 380 48.2 0.4 48.6 | 197 7 204 49.4 1.8 51.2\n3-IN PLANE 25 0 25 22.1 0.0 22.1 | 19 0 19 10.9 0.0 10.8 | 68 1 69 8.6 0.1 8.7 | 29 2 31 7.3 0.5 7.8\n4-IN BLDG. 8 0 8 7.1 0.0 7.1 | 8 0 8 4.5 0.0 4.5 | 71 3 74 9.0 0.4 9.4 | 34 4 38 8.5 1.0 9.5\nOTHER 2 0 2 1.8 0.0 1.8 | 2 0 2 1.1 0.0 1.1 | 13 0 13 1.7 0.0 1.7 | 5 0 5 1.3 0.0 1.3\nNOT STATED 14 0 14 12.4 0.0 12.4 | 36 0 36 20.4 0.0 20.4 | 185 0 185 23.5 0.0 23.5 | 76 0 76 19.1 0.0 19.1\nTotal 111 2 113 98.2 1.8 100. | 172 4 176 97.7 2.3 100. | 768 14 782 98.2 1.8 100. | 382 15 397 96.2 3.8 100.\n\nSEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER\n1-IN CAR 15 1 16 9.3 0.6 9.9 | 9 1 10 9.5 1.1 10.9 | 5 2 7 7.5 3.0 10.5 | 2 3 5 3.0 4.5 7.5\n2-OUTDOORS 80 5 85 48.8 3.1 52.5 | 43 0 43 46.7 0.0 46.7 | 19 2 21 28.3 3.0 31.3 | 15 1 19 23.9 1.5 38.4\n3-IN PLANE 12 0 12 7.4 0.0 7.4 | 15 0 15 16.3 0.0 16.3 | 8 0 8 11.9 0.0 11.9 | 3 0 3 27.3 0.0 27.3\n4-IN BLDG. 8 2 10 4.9 1.2 6.1 | 14 0 14 15.2 0.0 15.2 | 21 0 21 31.3 0.0 31.3 | 10 0 10 15.2 0.0 15.2\nOTHER 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 2 0 2 2.2 0.0 2.2 | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 | 1 0 1 1.5 0.0 1.5\nNOT STATED 39 0 39 24.1 0.0 24.1 | 8 0 8 8.7 0.0 8.7 | 10 0 10 14.9 0.0 14.9 | 5 0 5 7.6 0.0 7.6\nTotal 154 8 162 95.1 4.9 100. | 91 1 92 98.9 1.1 100. | 63 4 67 94.0 6.0 100. | 61 5 66 92.4 7.6 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":229,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A175 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, WHITE OR GLOWING WHITE OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 1 5 6 | 0 2 2 | 2 4 6 | 0 1 1\n1-Astronomical 36 40 76 | 10 9 19 | 13 3 16 | 2 2 4\n2-Aircraft 9 11 18 | 4 5 9 | 11 8 19 | 10 4 14\n3-Light Phenom. 0 2 2 | 1 0 1 | 0 1 1 | 0 0 0\n4-Birds 1 1 2 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 4 1 5\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 3 0 3 | 3 0 3 | 5 0 5 | 6 0 6\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 1 1 | 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 12 0 12 | 9 0 9 | 17 0 17 | 19 0 19\n9-Other 3 1 4 | 0 0 0 | 2 0 2 | 0 0 0\nTotal 63 60 123 | 27 16 43 | 50 17 67 | 41 8 49\n\n61 Seconds-5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\n0-Balloon 20 19 39 | 21 20 41 | 16 3 19 | 17 9 26\n1-Astronomical 5 4 9 | 13 5 18 | 12 5 17 | 26 15 41\n2-Aircraft 12 9 21 | 4 14 18 | 5 12 17 | 12 6 18\n3-Light Phenom. 0 0 0 | 2 5 7 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n4-Birds 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 1 0 1\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 1 4 5 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 2 0 2\n6-Insuffic. Info. 5 0 5 | 9 0 9 | 1 0 1 | 25 0 25\n7-Psychological 1 1 2 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 2 1 3\n8-Unknown 39 0 39 | 21 0 21 | 22 0 22 | 36 0 36\n9-Other 4 0 4 | 2 0 2 | 4 0 4 | 11 0 11\nTotal 87 37 124 | 73 44 117 | 60 20 80 | 132 31 163\n\nTABLE A176 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, METALLIC OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\n0-Balloon 2 1 3 | 0 2 2 | 1 4 5 | 2 2 4\n1-Astronomical 1 2 3 | 0 2 2 | 2 0 2 | 0 2 2\n2-Aircraft 2 6 8 | 8 1 9 | 19 16 35 | 17 7 24\n3-Light Phenom. 1 0 1 | 0 1 1 | 0 1 1 | 0 1 1\n4-Birds 1 0 1 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 1 0 1\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 1 0 1 | 1 0 1 | 1 0 1 | 2 0 2\n7-Psychological 1 0 1 | 0 0 0 | 2 1 3 | 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 6 0 6 | 4 0 4 | 9 0 9 | 9 0 9\n9-Other 2 0 2 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 1 0 1\nTotal 17 9 26 | 13 6 19 | 34 22 56 | 33 12 45\n\n61 Seconds-5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\n0-Balloon 21 10 31 | 26 12 38 | 11 4 15 | 16 4 20\n1-Astronomical 1 0 1 | 0 1 1 | 3 1 4 | 1 0 1\n2-Aircraft 20 15 35 | 10 20 30 | 2 2 4 | 23 8 31\n3-Light Phenom. 1 1 2 | 0 1 1 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n4-Birds 1 0 1 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 1 1\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 3 0 3 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 17 0 17 | 9 0 9 | 0 0 0 | 28 0 28\n7-Psychological 1 0 1 | 1 0 1 | 2 0 2 | 1 0 1\n8-Unknown 26 0 26 | 15 0 15 | 27 0 27 | 29 0 29\n9-Other 2 3 5 | 4 2 6 | 0 2 2 | 9 0 9\nTotal 90 29 119 | 65 36 101 | 48 9 57 | 111 16 127"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":230,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A177 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, OBJECT COLOR NOT STATED\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\n0-Balloon 0 1 1 | 1 1 2 | 0 1 1 | 3 2 5\n1-Astronomical 15 11 26 | 8 1 9 | 6 1 7 | 2 1 3\n2-Aircraft 4 2 6 | 4 2 6 | 1 8 9 | 4 2 6\n3-Light Phenom. 0 0 0 | 0 2 2 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n4-Birds 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 1 0 1 | 0 0 0 | 0 1 1 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 5 0 5 | 1 0 1 | 7 0 7 | 2 0 2\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 1 0 1 | 2 0 2 | 10 0 10 | 14 0 14\n9-Other 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 2 8 10 | 0 1 1\nTotal 26 14 40 | 14 6 20 | 30 15 45 | 25 6 31\n\n61 Seconds-5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\n0-Balloon 14 5 19 | 9 12 21 | 7 7 14 | 13 10 23\n1-Astronomical 2 0 2 | 13 0 13 | 9 1 10 | 44 15 59\n2-Aircraft 16 7 23 | 13 6 19 | 1 3 4 | 23 23 46\n3-Light Phenom. 2 1 3 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 2 2 4\n4-Birds 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 3 0 3 | 1 0 1\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 | 1 0 1 | 3 0 3 | 1 0 1\n6-Insuffic. Info. 7 0 7 | 12 0 12 | 14 0 14 | 55 0 55\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 | 2 0 2 | 3 0 3 | 3 1 4\n8-Unknown 31 0 31 | 10 0 10 | 26 0 26 | 49 0 49\n9-Other 5 0 5 | 7 0 7 | 4 1 5 | 19 1 20\nTotal 75 15 90 | 59 21 80 | 70 12 82 | 213 53 266"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":231,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A181 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED\nFOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, YELLOW OR GLOWING YELLOW OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other\nTotal 19 8 27 70.4 29.6 100. | 11 2 13 84.6 15.4 100. | 15 5 20 75.0 25.0 100. | 15 5 20 75.0 25.0 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":232,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A179 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED\nFOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, RED OR GLOWING RED OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other\nTotal 17 10 27 63.0 37.0 100. | 9 1 10 90.0 10.0 100. | 14 7 21 66.7 33.3 100. | 6 5 11 54.5 45.5 100.\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nTotal 27 6 33 81.8 18.2 100. | 35 7 42 83.3 16.7 100. | 23 9 32 71.9 28.1 100. | 59 17 76 77.6 22.4 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":233,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A183 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED\nFOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, WHITE OR GLOWING WHITE OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other\nTotal 51 47 98 52.0 48.0 100. | 23 15 38 60.5 39.5 100. | 36 12 48 75.0 25.0 100. | 28 8 36 77.8 22.2 100.\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nTotal 69 35 104 66.3 33.7 100. | 72 38 110 65.5 34.5 100. | 38 11 49 77.6 22.4 100. | 106 21 127 83.5 16.5 100.\nTABLE A184 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED\nFOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, METALLIC OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nTotal 14 8 22 63.6 36.4 100. | 13 6 19 68.4 31.6 100. | 33 21 54 61.1 38.9 100. | 30 11 41 73.2 26.8 100.\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nTotal 62 21 83 74.7 25.3 100. | 59 24 83 71.1 28.9 100. | 25 5 30 83.3 16.7 100. | 79 11 90 87.8 12.2 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":234,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A185 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED\nFOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, OBJECT COLOR NOT STATED\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nTotal 21 8 29 72.4 27.6 100. | 11 3 14 78.6 21.4 100. | 22 12 34 64.7 35.3 100. | 19 6 25 76.0 24.0 100.\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nTotal 53 14 67 79.1 20.9 100. | 56 20 76 73.7 26.3 100. | 42 6 48 87.5 12.5 100. | 169 41 210 80.5 19.5 100.\nTABLE A186 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED\nFOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, ORANGE OR GLOWING ORANGE OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nTotal 29 16 45 64.4 35.6 100. | 14 1 15 93.3 6.7 100. | 13 6 19 68.4 31.6 100. | 12 6 18 66.7 33.3 100.\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nTotal 31 18 49 63.3 36.7 100. | 29 7 36 80.6 19.4 100. | 9 6 15 60.0 40.0 100. | 40 16 56 71.4 28.6 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":235,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A187 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED\nFOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, RED OR GLOWING RED OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nTotal 13 9 22 59.1 40.9 100. | 9 1 10 90.0 10.0 100. | 12 6 18 66.7 33.3 100. | 6 5 11 54.5 45.5 100.\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nTotal 21 6 27 77.8 22.2 100. | 29 7 36 80.6 19.4 100. | 13 8 21 61.9 38.1 100. | 47 11 58 81.0 19.0 100.\nTABLE A188 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED\nFOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, GREEN OR GLOWING GREEN OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nTotal 36 36 72 50.0 50.0 100. | 5 10 15 33.3 66.7 100. | 8 3 11 72.7 27.3 100. | 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 100.\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nTotal 5 7 12 41.7 58.3 100. | 8 3 11 72.7 27.3 100. | 6 0 6 100.0 0.0 100. | 25 21 46 54.3 45.7 100."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":236,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A189 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, YELLOW OR GLOWING YELLOW OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":237,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A190 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, OBJECTS OF OTHER COLORS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\nTABLE A191 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, WHITE OR GLOWING WHITE OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":238,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A192 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, METALLIC OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\nTABLE A193 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, OBJECT COLOR NOT STATED\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":239,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A194 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, ORANGE OR GLOWING ORANGE OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\nTABLE A195 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, RED OR GLOWING RED OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":240,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A196 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, GREEN OR GLOWING GREEN OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\nTABLE A197 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, YELLOW OR GLOWING YELLOW OBJECTS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\nTABLE A198 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY COLORS REPORTED FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, OBJECTS OF OTHER COLORS\n5 Seconds or Less | 6-10 Seconds | 11-30 Seconds | 31-60 Seconds\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total\n61 Seconds - 5 Minutes | 6-30 Minutes | Over 30 Minutes | Duration Not Stated\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon; 1-Astronomical; 2-Aircraft; 3-Light Phenom.; 4-Birds; 5-Clouds, Dust, etc.; 6-Insuffic. Info.; 7-Psychological; 8-Unknown; 9-Other; Total"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":241,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A199 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, ONE OBJECT\n5 SECONDS OR LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 3 5 8 | 3 4 7 | 4 6 10 | 9 11 20\n1-Astronomical 136 138 274 | 43 26 69 | 46 15 61 | 15 8 23\n2-Aircraft 20 16 36 | 14 13 27 | 28 28 56 | 30 18 48\n3-Light Phenom. 2 0 2 | 1 1 2 | 1 1 2 | 0 0 0\n4-Birds 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 1 1 2 | 0 0 0 | 0 2 2 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 12 0 12 | 7 0 7 | 14 0 14 | 12 0 12\n7-Psychological 2 0 2 | 0 0 0 | 3 1 4 | 2 0 2\n8-Unknown 23 0 23 | 22 0 22 | 44 0 44 | 51 0 51\n9-Other 8 3 11 | 2 0 2 | 4 8 12 | 3 2 5\nTotal 207 163 370 | 92 44 136 | 144 61 205 | 122 39 161"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":242,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A200 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, TWO OBJECTS\n5 SECONDS OR LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\n0-Balloon 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 2 4 6 | 0 0 0\n1-Astronomical 2 4 6 | 0 2 2 | 0 0 0 | 0 1 1\n2-Aircraft 1 5 6 | 4 1 5 | 7 5 12 | 1 3 4\n3-Light Phenom. 0 1 1 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 1 1\n4-Birds 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 2 0 2 | 1 0 1 | 2 0 2 | 1 0 1\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 2 0 2 | 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 6 0 6 | 5 0 5 | 5 0 5 | 2 0 2\n9-Other 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 1 1 2 | 0 0 0\nTotal 11 10 21 | 10 3 13 | 19 10 29 | 4 5 9"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":243,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A201 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, THREE TO TEN OBJECTS\n5 SECONDS OR LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\n0-Balloon 0 2 2 | 0 0 0 | 0 2 2 | 0 0 0\n1-Astronomical 3 0 3 | 1 0 1 | 0 1 1 | 0 1 1\n2-Aircraft 5 5 10 | 5 0 5 | 10 3 13 | 0 0 0\n3-Light Phenom. 0 1 1 | 0 3 3 | 0 1 1 | 0 1 1\n4-Birds 2 4 6 | 0 1 1 | 1 0 1 | 1 1 2\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 2 0 2 | 1 0 1 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 1 1 | 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 7 0 7 | 4 0 4 | 7 0 7 | 5 0 5\n9-Other 2 0 2 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\nTotal 22 11 33 | 11 4 15 | 18 8 26 | 13 4 17"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":244,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A203 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING NUMBER OF OBJECTS NOT STATED\n5 SECONDS OR LESS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\n0-Balloon 0 0 0 | 1 0 1 | 0 0 0\n1-Astronomical 2 0 2 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n2-Aircraft 0 1 1 | 1 0 1 | 0 0 0\n3-Light Phenom. 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n4-Birds 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 1 0 1\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n7-Psychological 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n9-Other 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\nTotal 2 1 3 | 2 0 2 | 1 0 1"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":245,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A206 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING ONE OBJECT\n5 SECONDS OR LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\n0-Balloon 3 3 6 | 3 3 6 | 3 6 9 | 9 10 19\n1-Astronomical 115 101 216 | 36 21 57 | 38 12 50 | 14 6 20\n2-Aircraft 16 15 31 | 13 10 23 | 25 25 50 | 23 18 41\n3-Light Phenom. 2 0 2 | 1 0 1 | 1 1 2 | 0 0 0\n4-Birds 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 0 1 1 | 0 0 0 | 0 2 2 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 12 0 12 | 6 0 6 | 14 0 14 | 10 0 10\n7-Psychological 2 0 2 | 0 0 0 | 3 1 4 | 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 19 0 19 | 16 0 16 | 28 0 28 | 34 0 34\n9-Other 7 3 10 | 2 0 2 | 4 5 9 | 3 2 5\nTotal 176 123 299 | 77 34 111 | 116 52 168 | 95 36 131"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":246,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A208 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, NUMBER OF OBJECTS NOT STATED\n5 SECONDS OR LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-20 SECONDS | 21-60 SECONDS\nNumber | Per Cent\nCertain Doubtful Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | DURATION NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":247,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A209 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, ONE OBJECT\n5 SECONDS OR LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | DURATION NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A210 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, TWO OBJECTS\n5 SECONDS OR LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | DURATION NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":248,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A211 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, THREE TO TEN OBJECTS\n5 SECONDS OR LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | DURATION NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A212 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, ELEVEN OR MORE OBJECTS\n5 SECONDS OR LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | DURATION NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":249,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A213 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NUMBER OF OBJECTS PER SIGHTING FOR DURATION OF SIGHTING, NUMBER OF OBJECTS NOT STATED\n5 SECONDS OR LESS | 6-10 SECONDS | 11-30 SECONDS | 31-60 SECONDS\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n61 SECONDS - 5 MINUTES | 6-30 MINUTES | OVER 30 MINUTES | DURATION NOT STATED\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":250,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A214 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION\nTOTAL | NORTH AMERICA | SOUTH AMERICA | EUROPE\nNumber | Per Cent\nCertain Doubtful Total\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nASIA | AFRICA | AUSTRALIA\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A215 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION\nTOTAL | NORTH AMERICA | SOUTH AMERICA | EUROPE\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nASIA | AFRICA | AUSTRALIA\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n* SEE FOOTNOTE ON NEXT PAGE."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":251,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A216 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION\nTOTAL | NORTH AMERICA | SOUTH AMERICA | EUROPE\nEvaluation | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 207 131 338 | 193 126 319 | 0 0 0 | 7 1 8\n1-Astronomical 274 205 479 | 266 187 452 | 2 0 2 | 3 4 7\n2-Aircraft 265 209 474 | 254 191 445 | 2 0 2 | 5 7 12\n3-Light Phenom. 30 18 48 | 29 17 46 | 0 0 0 | 0 1 1\n4-Birds 12 10 22 | 10 9 19 | 0 0 0 | 0 1 1\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 3 7 10 | 2 7 9 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 240 0 240 | 215 0 215 | 2 0 2 | 14 0 14\n7-Psychological 35 9 44 | 35 8 43 | 0 1 1 | 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 434 0 434 | 395 0 395 | 1 0 1 | 10 0 10\n9-Other 85 24 109 | 74 17 91 | 0 0 0 | 3 5 8\nTotal 1585 613 2198 | 1462 575 2037 | 7 1 8 | 42 19 61\n* TOTALS DO NOT AGREE WITH PREVIOUS TOTALS BECAUSE TWO SIGHTINGS OCCURRED AT UNKNOWN LOCATIONS.\nASIA | AFRICA | AUSTRALIA\nTotal 60 15 75 | 14 6 20 | | \n* TOTALS DO NOT AGREE WITH PREVIOUS TOTALS BECAUSE TWO SIGHTINGS OCCURRED AT UNKNOWN LOCATIONS."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":252,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A217 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NORTH AMERICAN LOCATION\nNORTH AMERICA | UNITED STATES | CANADA | ALASKA\nEvaluation | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 251 149 400 | 241 163 404 | 3 4 7 | 2 1 3\n1-Astronomical 443 329 772 | 403 310 713 | 9 8 17 | 12 0 12\n2-Aircraft 348 260 608 | 329 256 585 | 10 1 11 | 8 0 8\n3-Light Phenom. 31 23 54 | 29 23 52 | 0 0 0 | 1 0 1\n4-Birds 14 9 23 | 14 8 22 | 0 1 1 | 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 9 13 22 | 9 12 21 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 271 0 271 | 261 0 261 | 4 0 4 | 2 0 2\n7-Psychological 38 9 47 | 37 9 46 | 1 0 1 | 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 638 0 638 | 582 0 582 | 22 0 22 | 22 0 22\n9-Other 97 22 119 | 88 21 109 | 3 1 4 | 4 0 4\nTotal 2135 834 2969 | 1893 802 2795 | 66 15 81 | 46 1 47\nMEXICO | HAWAII\nTotal 12 3 15 | 18 13 31"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":253,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A218 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NORTH AMERICAN LOCATION\nNORTH AMERICA | UNITED STATES | CANADA | ALASKA\nEvaluation | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 214 143 357 | 205 137 342 | 3 4 7 | 2 1 3\n1-Astronomical 359 246 605 | 328 228 556 | 17 7 24 | 9 0 9\n2-Aircraft 281 213 494 | 272 210 482 | 5 0 5 | 3 0 3\n3-Light Phenom. 31 20 51 | 29 20 49 | 0 0 0 | 1 0 1\n4-Birds 11 9 20 | 11 8 19 | 0 1 1 | 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 2 7 9 | 2 6 8 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 236 0 236 | 226 0 226 | 4 0 4 | 2 0 2\n7-Psychological 36 8 44 | 35 8 43 | 1 0 1 | 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 455 0 455 | 418 0 418 | 15 0 15 | 13 0 13\n9-Other 79 20 99 | 72 19 91 | 2 1 3 | 3 0 3\nTotal 1704 666 2370 | 1598 636 2234 | 47 13 60 | 33 1 34\nMEXICO | HAWAII\nTotal 9 3 12 | 16 12 28"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":254,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A219 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY NORTH AMERICAN LOCATION\nNORTH AMERICA | UNITED STATES | CANADA | ALASKA\nEvaluation | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 199 126 319 | 184 121 305 | 3 3 6 | 2 1 3\n1-Astronomical 255 197 452 | 237 182 419 | 9 5 14 | 5 0 5\n2-Aircraft 254 191 445 | 246 188 433 | 5 0 5 | 3 0 3\n3-Light Phenom. 29 17 46 | 27 17 44 | 0 0 0 | 1 0 1\n4-Birds 10 9 19 | 10 8 18 | 0 1 1 | 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 2 7 9 | 2 6 8 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 215 0 215 | 205 0 205 | 4 0 4 | 2 0 2\n7-Psychological 35 8 43 | 34 8 42 | 1 0 1 | 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 395 0 395 | 359 0 359 | 14 0 14 | 13 0 13\n9-Other 74 17 91 | 67 16 83 | 2 1 3 | 3 0 3\nTotal 1462 572 2034 | 1370 546 1916 | 38 10 48 | 29 1 30\nMEXICO | HAWAII\nTotal 9 3 12 | 16 12 28"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":255,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A220 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY UNITED STATES REGIONAL LOCATION\nTOTAL | NORTH EAST | CENTRAL EAST | SOUTH EAST\nEvaluation | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total | Certain Doubtful Total\n0-Balloon 241 163 404 | 9 1 10 | 52 39 91 | 1 0 1\n1-Astronomical 403 310 713 | 6 9 15 | 86 32 118 | 5 1 6\n2-Aircraft 329 256 585 | 5 6 11 | 100 65 165 | 7 4 11\n3-Light Phenom. 29 23 52 | 1 1 2 | 4 8 12 | 1 1 2\n4-Birds 14 8 20 | 0 0 0 | 5 0 5 | 0 0 0\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc. 9 12 21 | 0 0 0 | 0 9 9 | 0 0 0\n6-Insuffic. Info. 261 0 261 | 3 0 3 | 44 0 44 | 2 0 2\n7-Psychological 37 9 46 | 1 0 1 | 8 3 11 | 0 0 0\n8-Unknown 582 0 582 | 9 0 9 | 112 0 112 | 4 0 4\n9-Other 88 21 109 | 0 0 0 | 13 2 15 | 6 0 6\nTotal 1993 802 2795 | 34 17 51 | 424 158 582 | 26 6 32\nNORTH MIDWEST | CENTRAL MIDWEST | SOUTH MIDWEST\nTotal 51 22 73 | 357 124 481 | 417 212 629\nNORTH WEST | CENTRAL WEST | SOUTH WEST\nTotal 45 4 49 | 69 17 86 | 250 136 386\nNORTH FARWEST | CENTRAL FARWEST | SOUTH FARWEST\nTotal 69 24 93 | 118 48 166 | 107 34 141"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":256,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A222 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS FOR ALL YEARS BY\nUNITED STATES REGIONAL LOCATION\nTOTAL\nNORTH EAST\nCENTRAL EAST\nSOUTH EAST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A222 continued: NORTH MIDWEST, CENTRAL MIDWEST, SOUTH MIDWEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nNORTH WEST, CENTRAL WEST, SOUTH WEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nNORTH FARWEST, CENTRAL FARWEST, SOUTH FARWEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n247"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":257,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A223 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS IN THE CENTRAL EAST REGION\nNEW YORK\nHARRISBURG\nWASHINGTON\nBALANCE OF CENTRAL EAST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A224 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE CENTRAL MIDWEST REGION\nCHICAGO\nDAYTON\nBALANCE OF CENTRAL MIDWEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A225 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE CENTRAL FARWEST REGION\nSAN FRANCISCO\nBALANCE OF CENTRAL FARWEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n248"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":258,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A226 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE SOUTH MIDWEST REGION\nATLANTA\nWACO\nSAN ANTONIO\nBALANCE OF SOUTH MIDWEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A227 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE SOUTH WEST REGION\nALBUQUERQUE\nBALANCE OF SOUTH WEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A228 EVALUATION OF ALL SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE SOUTH FARWEST REGION\nLOS ANGELES\nBALANCE OF SOUTH FARWEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n249"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":259,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A229 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE CENTRAL EAST REGION\nNEW YORK\nHARRISBURG\nWASHINGTON\nBALANCE OF CENTRAL EAST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A230 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE CENTRAL MIDWEST REGION\nCHICAGO\nDAYTON\nBALANCE OF CENTRAL MIDWEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A231 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE CENTRAL FARWEST REGION\nSAN FRANCISCO\nBALANCE OF CENTRAL FARWEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n250"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":260,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A232 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE SOUTH MIDWEST REGION\nATLANTA\nWACO\nSAN ANTONIO\nBALANCE OF SOUTH MIDWEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A233 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE SOUTH WEST REGION\nALBUQUERQUE\nBALANCE OF SOUTH WEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\nTABLE A234 EVALUATION OF UNIT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE SOUTH FARWEST REGION\nLOS ANGELES\nBALANCE OF SOUTH FARWEST\nEvaluation\n0-Balloon\n1-Astronomical\n2-Aircraft\n3-Light Phenom.\n4-Birds\n5-Clouds, Dust, etc.\n6-Insuffic. Info.\n7-Psychological\n8-Unknown\n9-Other\nTotal\n251"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":261,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A235 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE CENTRAL EAST REGION\nNew York | Harrisburg | Washington | Balance of Central East\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nColumns: Number (Certain, Doubtful, Total); Per Cent (Certain, Doubtful, Total)\n\nTABLE A236 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE CENTRAL MIDWEST REGION\nChicago | Dayton | Balance of Central Midwest\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nColumns: Number (Certain, Doubtful, Total); Per Cent (Certain, Doubtful, Total)\n\nTABLE A237 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE CENTRAL FARWEST REGION\nSan Francisco | Balance of Central Farwest\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nColumns: Number (Certain, Doubtful, Total); Per Cent (Certain, Doubtful, Total)"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":262,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TABLE A238 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE SOUTH MIDWEST REGION\nAtlanta | Waco | San Antonio | Balance of South Midwest\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nColumns: Number (Certain, Doubtful, Total); Per Cent (Certain, Doubtful, Total)\n\nTABLE A239 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE SOUTH WEST REGION\nAlbuquerque | Balance of South West\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nColumns: Number (Certain, Doubtful, Total); Per Cent (Certain, Doubtful, Total)\n\nTABLE A240 EVALUATION OF OBJECT SIGHTINGS IN THE STRATEGIC AREAS OF THE SOUTH FARWEST REGION\nLos Angeles | Balance of South Farwest\nEvaluation: 0-Balloon, 1-Astronomical, 2-Aircraft, 3-Light Phenom., 4-Birds, 5-Clouds, Dust, etc., 6-Insuffic. Info., 7-Psychological, 8-Unknown, 9-Other, Total\nColumns: Number (Certain, Doubtful, Total); Per Cent (Certain, Doubtful, Total)"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":263,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APPENDIX B\n\nWORKING PAPER FORMS"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":264,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEX OF FORMS\n\nPage\n\nExhibit B1. Tentative Observers Data Sheet . . . . . . . . . 259\nExhibit B2. Tentative Observers Questionnaire . . . . . . . . 267\nExhibit B3. U. S. Air Force Technical Information Sheet. . . . 277\nExhibit B4. Codes for Work Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289\nExhibit B5. Work Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297\nExhibit B6. Codes for Card Bible. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301\nExhibit B7. Card Bible . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309\nExhibit B8. Example of an IBM Card . . . . . . . . . . . 313"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":265,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBIT B1\n\nTENTATIVE OBSERVERS DATA SHEET"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":266,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TENTATIVE\nOBSERVERS DATA SHEET\n\nWhere Choice is Given, Circle Proper\nAnswers, or Insert Answer\n\n1. Date of your observation: Day Month Year\n2. Date you reported the observation: Day Month Year\n3. What time was it when you sighted the object: Hours Minutes\nA.M. P.M. Daylight Standard\nZone: Eastern, Central, Mountain, Pacific, Other\n4. Length of time object was observed. Estimate: Hours Minutes Seconds\n5. Where observed:\nPostal Address City or Town State Country\n6. Where were you at time of observation:\nInside building, In Car, Outdoors, Other\n7. Were you moving at any time during this sighting: Yes or No\n8. Did you stop at any time during this sighting: Yes or No\n9. If you were moving - give Direction and Speed miles per hour.\n10. How was object observed: Naked eye\nEye glasses\nOther glass (Window or Windshield)\nBinoculars, Telescope, Theodolite\nOther\n11. How did you happen to notice the object:\n\n261"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":267,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12. Describe what you saw as briefly as possible in the following spaces:\na. Sound b. Shape\nc. Color d. Size\ne. Number f. Light brightness\ng. Light color h. Motion\ni. Speed j. Other\n13. How did object disappear from view: Suddenly or Gradually\nCircle One\n14. At any time did the object:\na. Change direction. b. Change speed. c. Move behind something; Cloud, House, Tree, Other d. Blend with background. e. Decrease in size. f. Decrease in brightness. g. Move in front of something.\nh. Other\n15. When you first looked at the object, what direction were you facing?\n16. When you last saw the object, what direction were you facing?\n17. In the following Sketch A, draw lines from the observer's eye to the circular arc to show the apparent elevation of the object in the sky.\nA. When first seen, label a.\nB. When last seen, label b.\nDirectly Overhead\nObserver's Eye Horizon SKETCH A\n\n262"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":268,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18. On the following Sketch B, label a at the apparent position of the object when first seen and b at point last seen. Trace the apparent path of the object between points a and b.\nIf possible label 1, 2, 3, etc., along the traced path to show the successive positions of the object after equal intervals of time during the sighting.\nOverhead\nHorizon Observer's Eye Horizon SKETCH B\n19. In Sketch C please show the observed features of the object such as;\nA. Apparent shape, (were edges pointed or rounded),\nB. Apparent direction of motion (show by arrow), and\nC. Other details, exhaust, trails, tails, surfaces, etc. SKETCH C\n20. The sun and the moon are shown below as they appear in their correct relative size. In this sketch D, show the apparent size of what you saw.\nSUN OBJECT MOON\nSKETCH D\n\n263"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":269,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"21. In your own words please describe the sighting you observed. Use sketches if desired. All observations from the time of first sighting to the time of dissappearance are important. Include a description of the weather, wind, and cloud conditions at the time of this sighting.\n\n264"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":270,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"22. Your full name:\n23. Your address:\n24. Your occupation:\n25. Last school you attended:\n26. Year of last attendance at this school:\n27. Please list the names and addresses of persons who discussed this sighting with you. It is not necessary to list the names of officials or investigators.\n28. Further comments which you believe are important should be entered here. Use additional sheets of the same size if necessary.\n\n265 and 266"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":271,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBIT B2\n\nTENTATIVE OBSERVERS QUESTIONNAIRE\n\n267 and 268"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":272,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TENTATIVE\nOBSERVERS QUESTIONNAIRE\n\nSECTION A\n\n1. When did you see the object:\n\n1.1 Date: Day Month Year\n\n1.2 Time of Day: Hrs. Min. A.M. or P.M. (Circle One)\n\n1.3 Time Zone: (Circle One):\na. Eastern d. Pacific\nb. Central e. Other\nc. Mountain\n\n(Circle One): a. Daylight Saving\nb. Standard\n\n1.4 Circle one of the following to indicate how certain you are of your answer to the above question 1.2:\na. Certain c. Not very sure\nb. Fairly certain d. Just a guess\n\n2. Where were you when you saw the object:\n\nPostal Address City or Town State Country\n\nAdditional Remarks:\n\n3. Where were you located when you saw the object:\n\n(Circle One): a. Inside a building d. In an airplane\nb. In a car e. At sea\nc. Outdoors f. Other\n\n3.1 Were you:\n\n(Circle One): a. In the business section of a city?\nb. In the residential section of a city?\nc. In open countryside?\nd. Flying near an airfield?\ne. Flying over a city?\nf. Flying over open country?\ng. Other\n\n269"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":273,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4. How did you happen to notice the object?\n\n5. When did you report to some official that you had seen the object?\n\nDay Month Year\n\nSECTION B\n\n6. What were you doing at the time you saw the object?\n\n6.1 What had you been doing for the 30 minutes before you saw the object? Try to list the activity or activities and the approximate amount of time spent on each.\n\n7. Were you moving at any time while you saw the object? (Circle One):\n\nYes or No\n\nIF you answered YES, then complete the following questions:\n7.1 What direction were you moving?\n(Circle One): a. North e. South\nb. Northeast f. Southwest\nc. East g. West\nd. Southeast h. Northwest\n\n7.2 How fast were you moving? miles per hour.\n\n7.3 Did you stop at any time while you were looking at the object?\n\n(Circle One): Yes or No\n\n8. What direction were you looking when you first saw the object?\n\n(Circle One): a. North e. South\nb. Northeast f. Southwest\nc. East g. West\nd. Southeast h. Northwest\n\n270"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":274,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8.1 What direction were you looking when the object disappeared?\n\n(Circle One): a. North e. South\nb. Northeast f. Southwest\nc. East g. West\nd. Southeast h. Northwest\n\n8.2 Circle one of the following to indicate how certain you are of your answer to the above question and preceding question (8 and 8.1).\na. Certain c. Not very sure\nb. Fairly certain d. Just a guess\n\n9. Were you wearing eye glasses when you saw the object? (Circle One):\n\nYes or No\n\n10. How was the object seen?\n\n(Circle One): a. Through window glass e. Through theodolite\nb. Through windshield f. Through sunglasses\nc. Through binoculars g. Through open space\nd. Through telescope h. Other\n\n11. What do you remember about the weather conditions at the time you saw the object?\n\n11.1 CLOUDS (Circle One)\na. Clear sky\nb. Hazy\nc. Scattered clouds\nd. Thick or heavy clouds\ne. Don't remember\n\n11.2 WIND (Circle One)\na. No wind\nb. Slight breeze\nc. Strong wind\nd. Don't remember\n\n11.3 WEATHER (Circle One)\na. Dry\nb. Fog, Mist, or light rain\nc. Moderate or heavy rain\nd. Snow\ne. Don't remember\n\n11.4 TEMPERATURE (Circle One)\na. Cold\nb. Cool\nc. Warm\nd. Hot\ne. Don't remember\n\nSECTION C\n\n12. Estimate how long you saw the object?\n\nHours Minutes Seconds\n\n271"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":275,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12.1 Circle one of the following to indicate how certain you are of your answer to Question 12:\na. Certain c. Not very sure\nb. Fairly sure d. Just a guess\n\n13. Did the object look: (Circle One) Solid or Transparent\n\n14. Did the object at any time:\n\n(Circle One for each question)\n\n14.1 Change direction? Yes No Don't know\n14.2 Change speed? Yes No Don't know\n14.3 Change size? Yes No Don't know\n14.4 Change color? Yes No Don't know\n14.5 Break up into parts or explode? Yes No Don't know\n14.6 Give off smoke? Yes No Don't know\n14.7 Change brightness? Yes No Don't know\n14.8 Flicker, throb, or pulsate? Yes No Don't know\n14.9 Remain motionless? Yes No Don't know\n\n15. Did the object give off a light? (Circle One): Yes No Don't know\n\n15.1 IF you answered YES, what was the color of the light?\n\n16. Tell in a few words the following things about the object?\n\n16.1 Sound\n\n16.2 Color\n\n17. IF there was MORE THAN ONE object, then how many were there?\nDraw a picture of how they were arranged and put an arrow to show the direction they were traveling.\n\n18. Did the object at any time:\n\n18.1 Move behind something? (Circle One) Yes No Don't know\n\nIF you answered YES, then tell what it moved behind.\n\n272"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":276,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18.2 Move in front of something? (Circle One) Yes No Don't know\nIF you answered YES, then tell what it moved in front of.\n\n_____________________________________________\n18.3 Blend with the background? (Circle One) Yes No Don't know\n19. Which of the following objects is about the same actual size as the object you saw? (Circle One):\na. Pea f. Automobile\nb. Baseball g. Small airplane\nc. Basketball h. Large airplane\nd. Bicycle wheel i. Dirigible\ne. Office desk j. Other ____________\n19.1 Circle one of the following to indicate how certain you are of your answer to Question 19.\na. Certain c. Not very sure\nb. Fairly certain d. Uncertain\n20. Try to tell the following things about the object:\n20.1 How high above the earth was it? ____________feet.\n20.2 How far was it from you? __________feet or __________miles.\n20.3 How fast was it going? ____________miles per hour.\n20.4 Circle one of the following to indicate how certain you are of your answer to the above questions:\na. Certain c. Not very sure\nb. Fairly certain d. Just a guess\n21. How did the object disappear from view?\n(Circle One): a. Suddenly c. Other ____________\nb. Gradually d. Don't remember\n_____________________________________________\nSECTION D\n22. In the following sketch, imagine your eye at the point shown. Place an \"A\" on the curved line to show how high the object was above the horizon (skyline) when you first saw it. Place a \"B\" to show where it was when you last saw it.\nOverhead\nHorizon\nYou\n273"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":277,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"23. In the following sketch place an \"A\" at the position the object was when you first saw it, and a \"B\" at its position when you last saw it.\nOverhead\nHorizon Horizon\nYou\n24. Draw a picture that will show the motion that the object made. Place an \"A\" at the beginning of its path and a \"B\" at the end of its path.\n25. Draw a picture that will show the shape of the object. Label and include in your sketch any details of the object that you saw and place an arrow beside the drawing to show the direction the object was moving.\n274"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":278,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECTION E\n26. Was this the first time that you have seen an object like this?\n(Circle One): Yes or No\n26.1 IF you answered NO, then when, where, and under what conditions did you see other ones?\n_____________________________________________\n_____________________________________________\n27. In your opinion what do you think the object was and what might have caused it?\n28. Give the following information about yourself:\nNAME ________________ ________________ ________________\nLast Name First Name Middle Name\nADDRESS ________________ ________________ ______ ________________\nStreet City Zone State\nTELEPHONE NUMBER ________________\nWhat is your present job? ________________________________\nAge ____________\nSex ____________\n29. Was anyone else with you at the time you saw the object?\n(Circle One): Yes or No\n29.1 IF you answered YES, did they see the object too?\n(Circle One): Yes or No\n29.2 Please list their names and addresses:\n275"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":279,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"30. Please add here any further comments which you believe are important. Use additional sheets of the same size paper, if necessary.\n276"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":280,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBIT B3\nU. S. AIR FORCE TECHNICAL INFORMATION SHEET\n277 and 278"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":281,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. AIR FORCE TECHNICAL INFORMATION SHEET\n\nThis questionnaire has been prepared so that you can give the U. S. Air Force as much information as possible concerning the unidentified aerial phenomenon that you have observed. Please try to answer as many questions as you possibly can. The information that you give will be used for research purposes, and will be regarded as confidential material. Your name will not be used in connection with any statements, conclusions, or publications without your permission. We request this personal information so that, if it is deemed necessary, we may contact you for further details.\n\n1. When did you see the object?\nDay Month Year\n\n2. Time of day: Hour Minutes\n(Circle One): A.M. or P.M.\n\n3. Time zone:\n(Circle One): a. Eastern b. Central c. Mountain d. Pacific e. Other\n(Circle One): a. Daylight Saving b. Standard\n\n4. Where were you when you saw the object?\nNearest Postal Address City or Town State or Country\nAdditional remarks:\n\n5. Estimate how long you saw the object. Hours Minutes Seconds\n\n5.1 Circle one of the following to indicate how certain you are of your answer to Question 5.\na. Certain c. Not very sure\nb. Fairly certain d. Just a guess\n\n6. What was the condition of the sky?\n(Circle One): a. Bright daylight d. Just a trace of daylight\nb. Dull daylight e. No trace of daylight\nc. Bright twilight f. Don't remember\n\n7. IF you saw the object during DAYLIGHT, TWILIGHT, or DAWN, where was the SUN located as you looked at the object?\n(Circle One): a. In front of you d. To your left\nb. In back of you e. Overhead\nc. To your right f. Don't remember"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":282,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8. IF you saw the object at NIGHT, TWILIGHT, or DAWN, what did you notice concerning the STARS and MOON?\n8.1 STARS (Circle One): 8.2 MOON (Circle One):\na. None a. Bright moonlight\nb. A few b. Dull moonlight\nc. Many c. No moonlight — pitch dark\nd. Don't remember d. Don't remember\n\n9. Was the object brighter than the background of the sky?\n(Circle One): a. Yes b. No c. Don't remember\n\n10. IF it was BRIGHTER THAN the sky background, was the brightness like that of an automobile headlight?:\n(Circle One) a. A mile or more away (a distant car)?\nb. Several blocks away?\nc. A block away?\nd. Several yards away?\ne. Other\n\n11. Did the object:\n(Circle One for each question)\na. Appear to stand still at any time? Yes No Don't Know\nb. Suddenly speed up and rush away at any time? Yes No Don't Know\nc. Break up into parts or explode? Yes No Don't Know\nd. Give off smoke? Yes No Don't Know\ne. Change brightness? Yes No Don't Know\nf. Change shape? Yes No Don't Know\ng. Flicker, throb, or pulsate? Yes No Don't Know\n\n12. Did the object move behind something at anytime, particularly a cloud?\n(Circle One): Yes No Don't Know. IF you answered YES, then tell what it moved behind:\n\n13. Did the object move in front of something at anytime, particularly a cloud?\n(Circle One): Yes No Don't Know. IF you answered YES, than tell what it moved in front of:\n\n14. Did the object appear: (Circle One): a. Solid? b. Transparent? c. Don't Know.\n\n15. Did you observe the object through any of the following?\na. Eyeglasses Yes No e. Binoculars Yes No\nb. Sun glasses Yes No f. Telescope Yes No\nc. Windshield Yes No g. Theodolite Yes No\nd. Window glass Yes No h. Other"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":283,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"16. Tell in a few words the following things about the object.\na. Sound\nb. Color\n\n17. Draw a picture that will show the shape of the object or objects. Label and include in your sketch any details of the object that you saw such as wings, protrusions, etc., and especially exhaust trails or vapor trails. Place an arrow beside the drawing to show the direction the object was moving.\n\n18. The edges of the object were:\n(Circle One): a. Fuzzy or blurred e. Other\nb. Like a bright star\nc. Sharply outlined\nd. Don't remember\n\n19. IF there was MORE THAN ONE object, then how many were there?\nDraw a picture of how they were arranged, and put an arrow to show the direction that they were traveling."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":284,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20. Draw a picture that will show the motion that the object or objects made. Place an \"A\" at the beginning of the path, a \"B\" at the end of the path, and show any changes in direction during the course.\n\n21. IF POSSIBLE, try to guess or estimate what the real size of the object was in its longest dimension.\nfeet.\n\n22. How large did the object or objects appear as compared with one of the following objects held in the hand and at about arm's length?\n(Circle One): a. Head of a pin g. Silver dollar\nb. Pea h. Baseball\nc. Dime i. Grapefruit\nd. Nickel j. Basketball\ne. Quarter k. Other\nf. Half dollar\n\n22.1 (Circle One of the following to indicate how certain you are of your answer to Question 22.\na. Certain c. Not very sure\nb. Fairly certain d. Uncertain\n\n23. How did the object or objects disappear from view?\n\n24. In order that you can give as clear a picture as possible of what you saw, we would like for you to imagine that you could construct the object that you saw. Of what type material would you make it? How large would it be, and what shape would it have? Describe in your own words a common object or objects which when placed up in the sky would give the same appearance as the object which you saw."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":285,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"25. Where were you located when you saw the object? (Circle One):\na. Inside a building\nb. In a car\nc. Outdoors\nd. In an airplane\ne. At sea\nf. Other\n\n26. Were you (Circle One)\na. In the business section of a city?\nb. In the residential section of a city?\nc. In open countryside?\nd. Flying near an airfield?\ne. Flying over a city?\nf. Flying over open country?\ng. Other\n\n27. What were you doing at the time you saw the object, and how did you happen to notice it?\n\n28. IF you were MOVING IN AN AUTOMOBILE or other vehicle at the time, then complete the following questions:\n\n28.1 What direction were you moving? (Circle One)\na. North c. East e. South g. West\nb. Northeast d. Southeast f. Southwest h. Northwest\n\n28.2 How fast were you moving? miles per hour.\n\n28.3 Did you stop at any time while you were looking at the object?\n(Circle One) Yes No\n\n29. What direction were you looking when you first saw the object? (Circle One)\na. North c. East e. South g. West\nb. Northeast d. Southeast f. Southwest h. Northwest\n\n30. What direction were you looking when you last saw the object? (Circle One)\na. North c. East e. South g. West\nb. Northeast d. Southeast f. Southwest h. Northwest\n\n31. If you are familiar with bearing terms (angular direction), try to estimate the number of degrees the object was from true North and also the number of degrees it was upward from the horizon (elevation).\n\n31.1 When it first appeared:\na. From true North degrees.\nb. From horizon degrees.\n\n31.2 When it disappeared:\na. From true North degrees.\nb. From horizon degrees."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":286,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"32. In the following sketch, imagine that you are at the point shown. Place an \"A\" on the curved line to show how high the object was above the horizon (skyline) when you first saw it. Place a \"B\" on the same curved line to show how high the object was above the horizon (skyline) when you last saw it.\n\n33. In the following larger sketch place an \"A\" at the position the object was when you first saw it, and a \"B\" at its position when you last saw it. Refer to smaller sketch as an example of how to complete the larger sketch."} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":287,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"34. What were the weather conditions at the time you saw the object?\n\n34.1 CLOUDS (Circle One)\na. Clear sky\nb. Hazy\nc. Scattered clouds\nd. Thick or heavy clouds\ne. Don't remember\n\n34.2 WIND (Circle One)\na. No wind\nb. Slight breeze\nc. Strong wind\nd. Don't remember\n\n34.3 WEATHER (Circle One)\na. Dry\nb. Fog, mist, or light rain\nc. Moderate or heavy rain\nd. Snow\ne. Don't remember\n\n34.4 TEMPERATURE (Circle One)\na. Cold\nb. Cool\nc. Warm\nd. Hot\ne. Don't remember\n\n35. When did you report to some official that you had seen the object?\n\nDay Month Year\n\n36. Was anyone else with you at the time you saw the object?\n\n(Circle One) Yes No\n\n36.1 IF you answered YES, did they see the object too?\n(Circle One) Yes No\n\n36.2 Please list their names and addresses:\n\n37. Was this the first time that you had seen an object or objects like this?\n\n(Circle One) Yes No\n\n37.1 IF you answered NO, then when, where, and under what circumstances did you see other ones?\n\n38. In your opinion what do you think the object was and what might have caused it?"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":288,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"39. Do you think you can estimate the speed of the object?\n\n(Circle One) Yes No\n\nIF you answered YES, then what speed would you estimate? ______________ m.p.h.\n\n40. Do you think you can estimate how far away from you the object was?\n\n(Circle One) Yes No\n\nIF you answered YES, then how far away would you say it was? ______________ feet.\n\n41. Please give the following information about yourself:\n\nNAME Last Name First Name Middle Name\n\nADDRESS Street City Zone State\n\nTELEPHONE NUMBER ______________\n\nWhat is your present job? ______________\n\nAge ______________ Sex ______________\n\nPlease indicate any special educational training that you have had.\n\na. Grade school ______________\nb. High school ______________\nc. College ______________\nd. Post graduate ______________\n\ne. e. Technical school ______________\n(Type) ______________\nf. Other special training ______________\n______________\n\n42. Date you completed this questionnaire: Day Month Year"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":289,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. AIR FORCE TECHNICAL INFORMATION SHEET\n(SUMMARY DATA)\n\nIn order that your information may be filed and coded as accurately as possible, please use the following space to write out a short description of the event that you observed. You may repeat information that you have already given in the questionnaire, and add any further comments, statements, or sketches that you believe are important. Try to present the details of the observation in the order in which they occurred. Additional pages of the same size paper may be attached if they are needed.\n\nNAME ______________ (Please Print)\nSIGNATURE ______________\nDATE ______________\n\n(Do Not Write in This Space)\nCODE:"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":290,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":291,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBIT B4\n\nCODES FOR WORK SHEET\n\n289 and 290"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":292,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CODES\n\nCODE 1. GENERAL\n\na. Every column must have at least one entry. If no data are available for any column, the Y should be used.\n\nb. If a number in any column is used to enter data, then X qualifies the data as indicated in the Code for the specific column.\n\nCODE 25 DURATION UNITS\nX\nY\n0 Days\n1 Hours\n2 Minutes\n3 Seconds\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n\nCODE 28 LATITUDE\nX South latitude\nY\n0\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n\nCODE 32 LONGITUDE\nX East longitude\nY\n0\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n\nCODE 41 POSITION\nX Variable\nY\n0\n1 In car\n2 Outdoors\n3 In plane\n4 In building\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9 Other\n\nCODE 42 MOVEMENT OF OBSERVER\nX\nY\n0 Wasn't moving\n1 Was moving - stopped\n2 Was moving - didn't stop\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":293,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CODE 43 OBSERVATION METHOD\nX Variable\nY\n0 Naked eye\n1 Eye glasses\n2 Window\n3 Windshield\n4 Binocular\n5 Telescope\n6 Theodolite\n7 Radar\n8 Photographic\n9 Other\n\nCODE 44 SOUND\nX Variable\nY\n0 Motors\n1 Jet or rockets\n2 Explosion\n3 Unlike aircraft\n4 Hiss, swishing, whining\n5 Rumbling\n6 Humming or buzzing\n7 None\n8 Not stated\n9 Other\n\nCODE 45 COLOR\nX Variable\nY\n0 Metallic\n1 Light-glow-luminous\n2 Red\n3 Orange\n4 Yellow\n5 Green\n6 Blue\n7 Violet\n8 Black\n9 White\n\nCODE 46 NUMBER\nX\nY\n0 - 1\n1 - 2\n2 - 3\n3 - 4\n4 - 5\n5 - 6\n6 - 7 - 10\n7 - 11 - 20\n8 - 20 - 30\n9 - 31 or more\n\nCODE 47 LIGHT-COLOR\nX Variable\nY\n0 White\n1 Black\n2 Grey\n3 Red\n4 Orange\n5 Yellow\n6 Green\n7 Blue\n8 Violet\n9 Other\n\nCODE 48 SPEED\nX Variable\nY\n0 Hovering, stationary\n1 Less than 100 m.p.h.\n2 100-400 m.p.h.\n3 More than 400 m.p.h.\n4 Meteor like\n5 Not stated\n6\n7\n8\n9 Other\n\nCODE 49 SHAPE\nX Variable\nY\n0 Ellipse\n1 Rocket\n2 Conventional aircraft\n3 Unconventional aircraft\n4 Meteor, comet\n5 Lenticular\n6 Conical\n7 Tear drop\n8 Flame, tails, fire\n9 Other\n\n292"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":294,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CODE 50 SHAPE PARAMETER a/b\nX - Variable\nY\n0 - 0.0\n1 - 0.05\n2 - 0.1\n3 - 0.2\n4 - 0.3\n5 - 0.5\n6 - 0.75\n7 - 0.9\n8 - 1.0\n9 - Other\n\nCODE 51 SUBTENDED VISUAL ANGLE\n(Referred to sun diameter)\nX - Decreased in size\nY\n0 - 0.1\n1 - 0.2\n2 - 0.5\n3 - 0.75\n4 - 1.0\n5 - 1.5\n6 - 2.0\n7 - 4.0\n8 - 4.0 to 10.0\n9 - Other\n\nCODE 52 LIGHT BRIGHTNESS (Intensity)\nX Decreased\nY\n0 Sunlight on mirror\n1 Sunlight on aluminum\n2 Sunlight on plaster\n3 Sunlight on stone\n4 Sunlight on soil\n5 Brighter than moon\n6 Like moon\n7 Duller than moon\n8 Barely visible\n9 Other\n\nCODE 53 ANGULAR VELOCITY\nX Variable\nY\n0 Zero\n1 Very slow, 1° per second\n2 Slow, 3° per second\n3 Moderate, 6° per second\n4 Rapid, 12° per second\n5 Very fast, 30° per second\n6 Extremely fast, 90° per second\n7 More than 90° per second\n8\n9 Other\n\nCODE 54 ANGULAR ACCELERATION\n(Change in Angular Velocity)\nX Variable\nY\n0 Zero, V=constant\n1 Increasing slowly\n2 Decreasing slowly\n3 Increasing fast\n4 Decreasing fast\n5 Increasing very fast\n6 Decreasing very fast\n7\n8\n9\n\nCODE 55 APPEARANCE BEARING\nX\nY\n0 - N\n1 - NE\n2 - E\n3 - SE\n4 - S\n5 - SW\n6 - W\n7 - NW\n8\n9\n\n293"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":295,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CODE 56 DISAPPEARANCE BEARING\nX - Disappeared suddenly\nY\n0 - N\n1 - NE\n2 - E\n3 - SE\n4 - S\n5 - SW\n6 - W\n7 - NW\n8\n9\n\nCODE 57-58 ELEVATION\nWITH RESPECT TO GROUND, DEGREES\nInitial: X Variable, Y 0 0-9, 1 10-19, 2 20-29, 3 30-39, 4 40-49, 5 50-59, 6 60-69, 7 70-79, 8 80-89, 9\nFinal: X Variable, Y 0 0-9, 1 10-19, 2 20-29, 3 30-39, 4 40-49, 5 50-59, 6 60-69, 7 70-79, 8 80-89, 9\n\nCODE 61 OBJECT ORIENTATION\nApparent inclination of principal axis of object from horizontal\nX Variable\nY\n0 +90 to 60\n1 +60 to 30\n2 +30 to 10\n3 +10 to 0\n4 0\n5 0 to -10\n6 -10 to -30\n7 -30 to -60\n8 -60 to -90\n9\n\nCODE 62-63-64 CIVILIAN OCCUPATION\nDictionary of Occupational Titles, Vol. II, 2nd Edition, pp. XIX-XXVI. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Employment Security. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1949. See pp. XIX-XXVI.\n\nCODE 65 SERVICE\nX\nY\n0 Army\n1 Navy\n2 Marine\n3 Air Force\n4 Coast Guard\n5 Merchant\n6 Commercial Air\n7 CAA\n8 Gov't. Contractor\n9 Other\n\nCODE 66 DUTY\nX\nY\n0 Pilot\n1 Weather tech.\n2 Radar tech.\n3 Tower op.\n4 Balloon obs.\n5 Tech. spec.\n6 Guards, lookouts\n7 Ground or deck crews\n8 Navig. or bombardier\n9 Other\n\n294"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":296,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CODE 67 RANK EQUIVALENT\n\nCODE 76 EVALUATION OF OBSERVER RELIABILITY\n\nX Officer X\nY Y\n0 Lt. 2nd 0 Private X\n1 Lt. 1st 1 Private, 1st Cls. Y\n2 Capt. 2 Corp. 0 Complete\n3 Maj. 3 Serg. 1 Quite\n4 Lt. Col. 4 S. T. Serg. 2 Fair\n5 Col. 5 M. Serg. 3 Doubtful\n6 Brig. Gen. 6 Warrant Off. 4 Poor\n7 Maj. Gen. 7 Chief Warrant 5 Not\n8 Lt. Gen. 8 6\n9 General 9 7\n8\n9 Can't be judged\n\nCODE 77 EVALUATION OF REPORT RELIABILITY\n\nCODE 78 PRELIMINARY IDENTIFICATION\n\nX X Possibly\nY Y\nO Complete 0 Balloon\n1 Quite 1 Astronomical\n2 Fair 2 Aircraft\n3 Doubtful 3 Light phenomenon\n4 Poor 4 Birds\n5 Not 5 Clouds, dust, etc.\n6 6 Rocket or missile\n7 7 Psychological manifestations\n8 8 Electromagnetic phenomenon\n9 Can't be judged 9 Other\n\nCODE 79-80 FINAL IDENTIFICATION\n\nX Probably\nY\n0 Balloon\n1 Astronomical\n2 Aircraft\n3 Light Phenomenon\n4 Birds\n5 Clouds, dust, etc.\n6 Rocket or missile Insufficient information\n7 Psychological manifestations\n8 Electromagnetic phenomenon Unknown\n9 Other\n\n295 and 296"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":297,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBIT B5\n\nWORK SHEET\n\n297 and 298"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":298,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":299,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WORK SHEET\n\nObserver's Data Sheet Question | Punched Card Column | Code | Description\n\n1* Serial No. Incident serial number\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6 Serial No. Insertion\n7\n8 Day\n9\n10 Month\n11\n12 Year Observed\n13\n14 Day\n15\n16 Month Reported\n17\n18 Day\n19\n20 Month Rec'd ATIC\n21\n22 Hrs. Time of observation Greenwich C. T.\n23\n24 Min.\n25* Time Units Duration of observation\n26\n27 Duration\n28*\n29\n30\n31 Latitude\n32*\n33\n34\n35\n36 Longitude Location\n37\n38\n39\n40 Cosine latitude\n\n* Denotes separate code key is needed.\n\n299"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":300,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Observer's Data Sheet Question | Punched Card Column | Code | Description\n\n6. 41* Where observer was\n7. 8. 42* Moving - Stopped\n10. 43* How observed\n12a. 44* Sound\n12c. 45* Color\n12e. 46* Number\n12. 12g. 47* Light-color Appearance\n12i. 14b. 48* Speed Description\n12b. 19 49* Shape\n12b. 19 50* a/b\n12d. 14e.20 51* Size\n12f. 14f. 52* Light brightness\n53* Angular velocity\n4. 12h. 14. 18. 19 54* Angular acceleration Motion\n15. 55* Describe appearance\n13. 14. 16 56* Describe disappearance\n57* Initial elevation\n17. 58* Final elevation Elevation\n59\n12i. 21. 60 Altitude, 1000 ft. Altitude\n18. 19. 61* Object orientation\n62*\n63\n24. 64 Civilian occupation\n65* Observer\n66*\n24. 67* Service occupation\n68\n69\n70\n71\n72\n73\n74\n75\n76* Observer\n77* Report Evaluation\n78* Preliminary\n79* Identification\n80* Final\n\n* Denotes separate code key is needed.\n\n300"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":301,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CODES\n\nCODE 1. GENERAL\n\na. These cards (and the corresponding WORK SHEETS) contain data from several sources. Columns referenced to the U. S. Air Force Technical Information Sheet (Form A) must have at least one entry. If no data are available for any column, the Y (or 12 punch) should be used.\n\nb. Columns 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, and 51 are calculated from data appearing in the U. S. Air Force Technical Information Sheet (Form A). If the basic data for these calculations are not available, the appropriate columns are left blank.\n\nc. If a number in any column is used to enter data, then X (or 11 punch) qualifies the data as indicated in the Code for the specific column.\n\nCODE 7 SIGHTING IDENTIFICATION (This column may or may not contain multiple punches)\n\nCODE 22 LOCAL SUN TIME (Refers to date of G.C.T. observation)\n\nX\nY\n0\n1 All sightings\n2 Unit sightings, all observers\n3 Unit sightings, single observers\n4 Unit sightings, multiple observers\n5 Object sightings\n6\n7\n8\n9\n\nX\nY\n0 Same day\n1 Previous day\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n\nCODE 23-26 LOCAL SUN TIME (Calculated from G.C.T., date, latitude, and longitude)\n\nCODE 27 LATITUDE\n\nCODE 31 LONGITUDE\n\nX South Latitude\nY\n0\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n\nX East Longitude\nY\n0\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n\n303"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":302,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. Air Force Technical Information Sheet Question | Punched Card Column | Code | Description\n\n38\n39\n40 Hour Angle\n41\n42*\n43* Angle of Elevation of the Sun\n44\n45\n46\n47* Group Classification\n48 Sun Bearing Angle\n49\n50\n51*\n52* Time Units\n53 Duration of Observation\n54\n55* Group Classification\n5.\n56* How Observed\n15.\n57* Sound\n16a.\n58* Object Color\n16b.\n59* Light Color Physical\n16b. 17.\n60* Color Group Classification\n61* Number\n19.\n62* Speed\n11a. 11b. 39.\n63* Shape Description\n17. 18. 24.\n64* Size\n11f. 21. 22. 24.\n65* Light Brightness\n10. 11e.\n66* Angular Velocity Motion\n5. 11. 17. 20.\n67* Angular Acceleration\n33.\n68* Appearance Bearing\n29. 31. 1.\n69* Disappearance Bearing\n23. 30. 31. 2.\n70* Initial Elevation\n31. 32.\n71* Final Elevation Description\n72* Orientation\n73* Maneuvers\n74* Observer Occupation\n41.\n75* Observer Rating Observer\n76* Report Rating\n77* Reliability Group Classification\n78* Final Identification\n\n* Denotes that separate code key is needed.\n\n304"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":303,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CODE 47 GROUP CLASSIFICATION (Derived from the angle of elevation)\n\nCODE 48-51 SUN BEARING ANGLE (Calculated)\nCODE 51 SUN BEARING ANGLE\n\nX\nY\n0\n1 -79.99° to + 79.99°\n2 +80.00° to +89.99°\n3 +90.00° to +100.00°\n4 +100.01° to 130.00°\n5 +130.01° to +180.00 and -180.00° to -100.01°\n6 -100.00° to -90.01°\n7 -90.00° to -80.00°\n8\n9\n\nX East of the Meridian\nY\n0\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n\nCODE 52 DURATION TIME UNITS\n\nCODE 55 DURATION GROUP CLASSIFICATION\n\nX\nY\n0 Days\n1 Hours\n2 Minutes\n3 Seconds\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n\nX\nY\n0 5 second and less\n1 6 - 10 seconds\n2 11 - 30 seconds\n3 31 - 60 seconds\n4 61 seconds - 5 minutes\n5 6 - 30 minutes\n6 Over 30 minutes\n7\n8\n9\n\nCODE 56 OBSERVATION METHOD\n\nCODE 57 SOUND\n\nCODE 58 OBJECT COLOR\n\nX Variable\nY\n0 Naked eye\n1 Eye glasses\n2 Window\n3 Windshield\n4 Binocular\n5 Telescope\n6 Theodolite\n7 Radar\n8 Photographic\n9 Other\n\nX Variable\nY\n0 Motors\n1 Jets or rockets\n2 Explosion\n3 Unlike aircraft\n4 Hiss, swishing, whining\n5 Rumbling\n6 Humming or buzzing\n7 None\n8\n9 Other\n\nX Variable\nY\n0 Metallic\n1 Light, glow, luminous\n2 Red\n3 Orange\n4 Yellow\n5 Green\n6 Blue\n7 Violet\n8 Black\n9 White\n\n305"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":304,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CODE 59 LIGHT COLOR\n\nCODE 60 COLOR GROUP CLASSIFICATION\n\nCODE 61 NUMBER\n\nX Variable\nY\n0 White\n1 Black\n2 Grey\n3 Red\n4 Orange\n5 Yellow\n6 Green\n7 Blue\n8 Violet\n9 Other\n\nX Light glow\nY\n0 White\n1 Metallic\n2 Red\n3 Orange\n4 Yellow\n5 Green\n6 Blue\n7 Violet\n8 Black\n9 Other\n\nX\nY\n0 1\n1 2\n2 3\n3 4\n4 5\n5 6\n6 7 -10\n7 11-20\n8 21-30\n9 31 or more\n\nCODE 62 SPEED\n\nCODE 63 SHAPE\n\nCODE 64 SUBTENDED VISUAL ANGLE (Referred to sun diameter)\n\nVariable\n\nHovering, stationary\nLess than 100 mph\n100 - 400 mph\nMore than 400 mph\nMeteor-like\nNot stated\n\nOther\n\nX Variable\nY\n0 Ellipse\n1 Rocket\n2 Conventional aircraft\n3 Unconventional aircraft\n4 Meteor, comet\n5 Lenticular\n6 Conical\n7 Teardrop\n8 Flame, tails, fire\n9 Fire\n\nX Decreased in size\nY\n0 0.1\n1 0.2\n2 0.5\n3 0.75\n4 1.0\n5 1.5\n6 2.0\n7 4.0\n8 4.0 to 10.0\n9 Other\n\nCODE 65 LIGHT BRIGHTNESS (Intensity)\n\nCODE 66 ANGULAR VELOCITY\n\nX Decreased\nY\n0 Sunlight on mirror\n1 Sunlight on aluminum\n2 Sunlight on plaster\n3 Sunlight on stone\n4 Sunlight on soil\n5 Brighter than moon\n6 Like moon\n7 Duller than moon\n8 Barely visible\n9 Other\n\nX Variable\nY\n0 Zero\n1 Very slow, 1° per second\n2 Slow, 3° per second\n3 Moderate, 6° per second\n4 Rapid, 12° per second\n5 Very fast, 30° second\n6 Extremely fast, 90° per second\n7 More than 90° per second\n8\n9 Other\n\n306"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":305,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CODE 67 ANGULAR ACCELERATION (Change in angular velocity)\n\nCODE 68 APPEARANCE BEARING\n\nX Variable\nY\n0 Zero, V = constant\n1 Increasing slowly\n2 Decreasing slowly\n3 Increasing fast\n4 Decreasing fast\n5 Increasing very fast\n6 Decreasing very fast\n7\n8\n9\n\nX\nY\n0 N\n1 NE\n2 E\n3 SE\n4 S\n5 SW\n6 W\n7 NW\n8\n9\n\nCODE 69 DISAPPEARANCE BEARING\n\nCODE 70-71 ELEVATION WITH RESPECT TO GROUND, DEGREES\n\nInitial\nFinal\n\nX Disappeared suddenly\nY\n0 N\n1 Ne\n2 E\n3 Se\n4 S\n5 SW\n6 W\n7 NW\n8\n9\n\nX Variable\nY\n0 0-9\n1 10-19\n2 20-29\n3 30-39\n4 40-49\n5 50-59\n6 60-69\n7 70-79\n8 80-89\n9\n\nX Variable\nY\n0 0-9\n1 10-19\n2 20-29\n3 30-39\n4 40-49\n5 50-59\n6 60-69\n7 70-79\n8 80-89\n9\n\nCODE 72 OBJECT ORIENTATION\nApparent inclination of principal axis of object from horizontal\n\nCODE 73 MANEUVERS\n\nCODE 74 OBSERVER OCCUPATION\n\nX Variable\nY\n0 +90° to 60°\n1 +60° to 30°\n2 +30° to 10°\n3 +10° to 0°\n4 0°\n5 0° to -10°\n6 -10° to -30°\n7 -30° to -60°\n8 -60° to -90°\n9\n\nX\nY\n0\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n\nX\nY Civilian, occupation not stated\n0 Army, military\n1 Navy, military\n2 Marine, military\n3 Air force, military\n4 Coast guard, military\n5 Merchant marine, military\n6 Commercial air, civilian\n7 CAA, civilian\n8 Government contractor, civilian\n9 Civilian, other\n\n307"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":306,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DE 75 EVALUATION OF OBSERVER RELIABILITY\nX\nY\n0 Complete\n1 Quite\n2 Fair\n3 Doubtful\n4 Poor\n5 Not\n6\n7\n8\n9 Cannot be judged\nCODE 76 EVALUATION OF REPORT RELIABILITY\nX\nY\n0 Complete\n1 Quite\n2 Fair\n3 Doubtful\n4 Poor\n5 Not\n6\n7\n8\n9 Cannot be judged\nCODE 77 RELIABILITY GROUP CLASSIFICATION\n(Based on observer and report ratings)\nExcellent (Observer 0 or 1 and Report 0 or 1)\nGood (Observer 0 or 1, Report 2, 3, or 4;\n Observer 2, 3, or 4, Report 0 or 1; Observer\n 2, Report 2)\nDoubtful (Observer 0 or 1, Report 5 or 9;\n Observer 2, Report 3, 4, 5, or 9; Observer\n 3 or 4, Report 2, 3, 4, 5, or 9; Observer 5\n or 9, Report 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4)\nPoor (Observer 5, 9, or Y, Report 5, 9, or Y)\nCODE 78 FINAL IDENTIFICATION\nX Probably\nY\n0 Balloon\n1 Astronomical\n2 Aircraft\n3 Light phenomenon\n4 Birds\n5 Clouds, dust, etc.\n6 Insufficient information\n7 Psychological manifestations\n8 Unknown\n9 Other\n308"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":307,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBIT B7\n\nCARD BIBLE\n\n309 and 310"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":308,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CARD BIBLE\n\nU. S. Air Force Technical Punched Card Code Description\nInformation Sheet Question Column\n1\n2 Serial\n3 No. Identification Serial\n4 Number\n5 Sub-\n6 Serial No.\n7* Sighting Identification\n8\n9 Serial Incident\n10 No. Serial\n11 Number\n12\n13 Day\n1. 14\n15 Month Observed\n16\n17 Year\n18 Time of\n19 Hours Observation\n20 Greenwich\n2. 3. 21 Minutes C. T.\n22* Key\n23 Local\n24 Hours Sun\n25 Time\n26 Minutes\n27*\n28.\n29 Latitude\n30\n31* Location\n32\n4. 33 Longitude\n34\n35\n36* Regional Area\n37 Strategic Area\n* Denotes that separate code key is needed.\nCard Deck No. ___ is identified by an X (or 11 Punch) in Column ___.\n311"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":309,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBIT B8\n\nEXAMPLE OF AN IBM CARD\n\n313 and 314"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":310,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U. S. Air Force Technical Punched Card Code Description\nInformation Sheet Question Column\n38\n39\n40. Hour\n41 Angle\n42*\n43* Angle of\n44 Elevation\n45 of the\n46 Sun\n47* Group Classification\n48 Sun\n49. Bearing\n50 Angle\n51*\n52* Time Units\n53 Duration\n5. 54 of Observation\n55* Group Classification\n15. 56* How Observed\n16a. 57* Sound\n16b. 58* Object Color\n16b. 17. 59* Light Color Physical\n60* Color Group\nClassification\n19. 61* Number\n11a. 11b. 39. 62* Speed\n17. 18. 24. 63* Shape Description\n11f. 21. 22. 24. 64* Size\n10. 11e. 65* Light Brightness\n5. 11. 17. 20. 66* Angular Velocity Motion\n33. 67* Angular Acceleration\n29. 31. 1. 68* Appearance Bearing\n23. 30. 31. 2. 69* Disappearance Bearing\n70* Initial Elevation\n31. 32. 71* Final Elevation Description\n72* Orientation\n73* Maneuvers\n41. 74* Observer Occupation\n75* Observer Rating Observer\n76* Report Rating\n77* Reliability Group\nClassification\n78* Final Identification\n* Denotes that separate code key is needed.\n312"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":311,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EXHIBIT B8\nEXAMPLE OF AN IBM CARD\n315 and 316"} {"doc_id":"b834da6c330b55e9","page":312,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n(AFR 190-16)"} {"doc_id":"b8cebd6e10da923c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONTRACT DIRIBUTION LIST\n\nVIRGINIA CONTRACTING ACTIVITY\nBuilding 6000, Bolling AFB\nWashington, D.C. 20340-5100\n\nDATE: 18 May 2010\nPIIN: HHM402-08-C-0072\nDelivery Order /Task Order:\nMOD: P00004\nREQ: Admin Mod\nCS:\nKO: [REDACTED]\n\nTO:\tCOPY SENT:\tADDRESS:\tNO. OF COPIES\n1. Contractor Stamp the copy—\"Duplicate Original Contractor Copy\"\tX\tBigelow Aerospace Advanced\n4640 S. Eastern Ave\nLas Vegas, NV 89119\n[REDACTED]\t1\n2. Payment Office\nNSA\tX\tNSA FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING OFFICE\nP.O. Box 1685 ATTN: DF2211\nFT George Meade, MD 20755-6000\n\nPhone: 410-854-7657 & 410-854-8742 (for Invoice status)\nNIPR: operationpayment@nsa.gov (for Invoice status)\n(b) (6)\t1\n4. COR/POC\tX\t[REDACTED]\t1\n5. DI FE Representative\tX\t[REDACTED]\t1\n6. Report Copy DD-350\tX\tAE-2A\t1\n7. Contract File (Original)\tX\tD.O. File\t1\n8. Other\n\nCOPIES:\tTOTAL NO.\t7\n\nDISTRIBUTION COMPLETED: [REDACTED]\n(Date)"} {"doc_id":"b9966003ecfddebf","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ACTION COPY\nPERMANENT RECORD COPY\n59\nINCOMING TELEGRAM\nDepartment of State\n59\nUNCLASSIFIED\nAction\nSCI\nInfo\nG\nARA\nIO\nP\nUSIA\nNSC\nINR\nCIA\nNSA\nNSF\nRMR\nESA129SUA075\nRR RUEHC\nDE RUESUA 264 14/1740Z\nZNR\nR 141522Z\nFM AMEMBASSY RIODEJANEIRO\nTO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC\nZEN/AMCONSUL SALVADOR\nSTATE GRNC\nBT\nUNCLAS ACTION SALVADOR 94 INFO DEPT 1054 FROM RIO FOURTEENTH\nDEPARTMENT PASS DEFENSE AND NASA\nFROM SCIATT SIMONPIETRI\nSINCE RADIOTELEPHONE CONNECTION LAST NIGHT WAS WEAK, PLEASE\nCONFIRM OR CORRECT MY UNDERSTANDING OF YOUR UNQUALIFIED\nNEGATIVE ON LOCAL NEWSPAPER REPORT TO EFFECT THAT LARGE METAL\nMANNED BALLOON HAD BEEN FOUND VICINITY SALVADOR APPROXIMATELY\nNOVEMBER 8, DEAD CREWMAN ABOARD WEARING UNIFORM OR SPACESUIT\nWITH STRANGE MARKINGS, THAT FOUR-METER-DEAP CRATER FORMED\nUPON IMPACT.\nCFN 94 1054\nPAGE TWO RUESUA 264\nI UNDERSTAND FURTHER THAT AN OBJECT HAD BEEN SIGHTED ALOFT\nIN THAT VICINITY AROUND THAT DATE, THAT SAID OBJECT HAD BEEN\nTENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED AS WEATHER-TYPE BALLOON, BUT THAT NO\nREPEAT NO SUCH OBJECT HAD BEEN FOUND AGROUND.\nAIR AND SCIENCE ATTACHES APPRECIATE COOPERATION. GORDON\nBT\nNOTE: PASSED DEFENSE AND NASA AT 2:20 PM 11/14/63\nINTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC AFFAIRS\nNOV 14 1963\nThis copy must be returned to RM/R central files with notation of action taken.\nACTION ASSIGNED TO: SCI NAME OF OFFICER: DILLEMY OFFICE SYMBOL ACTION TAKEN: NOTE UNCLASSIFIED DATE OF ACTION 11/14/63 DIRECTIONS TO RM/R: FILE\nREPRODUCTION FROM THIS COPY IS PROHIBITED UNLESS \"UNCLASSIFIED\"\nDECLASSIFIED NND 939551"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n2 April 2010\n\nICOD: 1 December 2009\n\nDIA-08-1004-001\n\nWarp Drive, Dark Energy, and the Manipulation of Extra Dimensions\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nWarp Drive, Dark Energy, and the Manipulation of Extra\nDimensions\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthors:\n\nAAP Person 74, AAP Person 58\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ........................................................................................v\n2. General Relativistic Warp Drives ........................................ 1\n2.1 Warp Drive Requirements ........................................ 2\n3. The Cosmological Constant ........................................ 4\n3.1 Einstein's Equation and the Introduction of Λ ........................ 4\n4. Casimir Energy and the Quantum Vacuum ........................ 5\n4.1 The Casimir Effect ........................................ 6\n5. Extra Space Dimensions ........................................ 8\n5.1 Kaluza-Klein Theory ........................................ 8\n5.2 Large Extra Dimensions ........................................ 10\n5.3 Randall Sundrum Brane Models ........................................ 11\n5.4 Extra Dimension Summary ........................................ 12\n6. Dark Energy as a Higher Dimensional Artifact ........................ 12\n7. Warp Drive and Higher Dimensional Manipulation ........................ 15\n7.1 Adjusting Higher Dimensions for Propulsions ........................ 16\n7.2 The Geometry of Extra Dimensions ........................ 17\n7.3 Higher Dimensions and Stabilization ........................ 17\n7.4 Elementary Warp Drive Calculations ........................ 20\n7.5 Future Experiments ........................ 22\n7.6 The Development of the Technology ........................ 23\n8. Summary ........................................ 24\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. York Extrinsic Time (θ) Plot ........................ 1\nFigure 2. The Interior Region of Parallel Conducting Plates ........................ 7\nFigure 3. Internal Structure of a Seemingly One-Dimensional Object ........................ 9\nFigure 4. Manipulated Extra Dimension ........................ 15\n\niii\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 5. Artist's Conception of a Futuristic Warp Drive Spacecraft ..................... 16\nFigure 6. A Toroidal Higher Dimension ........................ 17\nFigure 7. A Combination of Phenomenologically Viable Fields ........................ 19\nFigure 8. False Vacuum Minima ........................ 19\nFigure 9. Thick and Thin Shell Warp Bubble ........................ 21\n\nTables\n\nTable 1. Transit Times to Various Exotic Destinations at 100 Times the Speed of\nLight ........................................................................................vi\nTable 2. Negative Energy Required for Warp Bubble (Larger Negative Energy) ..... 3\nTable 3. Negative Energy Required for Warp Bubble ........................ 22\n\niv\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nWarp Drive, Dark Energy, and the Manipulation of Extra Dimensions\n\nIntroduction\n\nIf one is to realistically entertain the notion of interstellar exploration in timeframes of a human lifespan, a dramatic shift in the traditional approach to spacecraft propulsion is necessary. It has been known and well tested since the time of Einstein that all matter is restricted to motion at sublight velocities (<< 3 x 10^8 m/s, the speed of light, or c), and that as matter approaches the speed of light, its mass asymptotically approaches infinity. This mass increase ensures that an infinite amount of energy would be necessary to travel at the speed of light, and, thus, this speed is impossible to reach and represents an absolute speed limit to all matter traveling through spacetime.\n\nEven if an engine were designed that could propel a spacecraft to an appreciable fraction of light speed, travel to even the closest stars would take many decades in the frame of reference of an observer on Earth. Although these lengthy transit times would not make interstellar exploration impossible, they would certainly dampen the enthusiasm of governments or private individuals funding these missions. After all, a mission whose success is perhaps a century away would be difficult to justify. In recent years, however, physicists have discovered two loopholes to Einstein's ultimate speed limit: the Einstein-Rosen bridge (commonly referred to as a \"wormhole\") and the warp drive. Fundamentally, both ideas involve manipulation of spacetime itself in some exotic way that allows for faster-than-light (FTL) travel.\n\nEssentially, the wormhole involves connecting two potentially distant regions of space by a topological shortcut. Theoretically, one would enter the wormhole and instantaneously be transported to the exit located in a distant region of space. Although no observational evidence of wormholes exists, theoretically they can exist as a valid solution to general relativity.\n\nThe warp drive—the main focus this paper—involves local manipulation of the fabric of space in the immediate vicinity of a spacecraft. The basic idea is to create an asymmetric bubble of space that is contracting in front of the spacecraft while expanding behind it. Using this form of locomotion, the spacecraft remains stationary inside this \"warp bubble,\" and the movement of space itself facilitates the relative motion of the spacecraft. The most attractive feature of the warp drive is that the theory of relativity places no known restrictions on the motion of space itself, thus allowing for a convenient circumvention of the speed of light barrier.\n\nAn advanced aerospace platform incorporating warp drive technology would profoundly alter the capacity to explore—and potentially to colonize—the universe. Because a warp drive is not limited by the speed of light, one can only guess the top speeds such a technology might be capable of achieving. For the sake of argument, let's consider the duration of trips taken by a\n\nv\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nspacecraft capable of 100c1 for an array of exotic destinations of possible interest. As Table 1 shows, trips to the planets within our own solar system would take hours rather than years, and journeys to local star system would be measured in weeks rather than hundreds of thousands of years.\nTable 1. Transit Times to Various Exotic Destinations at 100 Times the Speed of Light\nDestination Transit Time\nMars 193 seconds\nJupiter 36 minutes\nNeptune 4 hours\nAlpha Centauri 15 days\nEpsilon Eridani 38 days\nThe Orion Nebula 1.3 years\nUntil recently, the warp drive was a concept reserved for science fiction. However, a 1994 paper by Miguel Alcubierre placed the idea on a more solid theoretical footing. Alcubierre (Reference 1) demonstrated that a specific Lorentzian manifold could be chosen that exhibited bubble-like features reminiscent of the warp drive from the popular Star Trek television series. The bubble allowed for the surrounding spacetime to move at FTL speeds, and the inhabitants of the bubble would feel no acceleration effects because spacetime itself would be in motion instead of the spacecraft and its inhabitants.\nA number of papers have emerged in recent years that build on this original idea. However, these papers do not typically address how one might actually create the necessary spacetime bubble. Our own research directly addresses this question from a new and unique perspective and introduces a novel paradigm shift in the field of warp drive study (Reference 2). More formally, our work approaches the physics of warp drive from the perspective of quantum field theory; this diverges from the more traditional approach to warp drives, which utilizes the physics of general relativity. One of the improvements the model introduces is a dramatic reduction in the overall energy required to create such a phenomenon.\nThe roadmap to this new idea was the observation that spacetime is currently known to be in a state of accelerated expansion, as demonstrated by the redshifting of galaxies, and the belief that if the mechanism for this expansion could be understood, then it might ultimately be controlled. A popular term used by cosmologists today is “dark energy,” an exotic and ubiquitous form of energy that is believed to constitute over 70 percent of the matter-energy content of the universe (Reference 3-6). One salient feature of dark energy is its intrinsic ability to generate negative pressure, causing the fabric of space to expand in the way that is currently observed (Reference 7).\n1 This speed, while somewhat arbitrary, highlights the fact that our galaxy would become far more accessible if or when one discovers how to surpass the speed of light barrier.\nvi UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAlthough we know what dark energy does, we do not yet fully understand its nature. We do not understand why it exists or how it is created; we simply know it provides an ever-present force on spacetime, causing the universe to expand. Indeed, recent high-precision experimental observations indicate dark energy may be a cosmological vacuum energy (Reference 8-10). These observations are based on the magnitudes of high-redshift supernova and have been a source of high research activity of late owing to the unexpected discovery that the rate of expansion of the universe is increasing (commonly referred to as accelerated expansion).\nOne tantalizing aspect of dark energy is that if it were fully understood, and if a technology were developed that could generate and harness the exotic effects of dark energy on the fabric of space, then a warp drive would be one step closer to technological reality. While a full understanding of the true nature of dark energy may be many years away, it is entirely feasible that experimental breakthroughs at the Large Hadron Collider or developments in the field of M-theory could lead to a quantum leap in our understanding of this unusual form of energy and perhaps help to direct technological innovations.\nOur own research focuses on gaining an understanding of the physical origin of dark energy. By exploring novel ideas at the forefront of theoretical physics, one is able to propose a physically viable model incorporating some of the cutting-edge ideas emerging from string theory and quantum field theory. This leads to a deeper understanding of the possible origin of dark energy and allows consideration of a mechanism that would allow a sufficiently advanced technology to control the dark energy density in any region of space, and thus the expansion of space. This work has clear implications for the advancement of warp drive research.\nThis paper is structured as follows: Section 2 reviews the more traditional general relativistic warp drives, the energy required to create them, and the physics required to understand them. Section 3 discusses the cosmological constant, a term featured in Einstein's equation that regulates the contraction and expansion of the spacetime. Section 4 introduces the Casimir energy, which, under certain conditions, may be the phenomenon that physically generates the cosmological constant. Section 5 discusses higher dimensions in physics and their importance in the context of Casimir energy calculations. Section 6 introduces the formulas that demonstrate that the Casimir energies in higher dimensions may in fact be the dark energy that is responsible for the accelerated expansion of the universe. Section 7 relates all the previous concepts together and introduces the novel warp drive paradigm. Section 8 performs original calculations of the energy required to create a superluminal warp drive. Finally, the paper speculates about the technological progress that would be necessary to turn this model into a reality.\nvii UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n2. General Relativistic Warp Drives\nAlcubierre (Reference 1) derived a spacetime metric motivated by cosmological inflation that would allow arbitrarily short travel times between two distant points in space. The “warp drive” metric uses coordinates (t, x, y, z) and curve (or worldline) x = xsh(t), y = 0, z = 0, lying in the t-x plane passing through the origin. Note that xsh is the x-axis coordinate position of the moving spaceship (or warp bubble) frame. The metric1 specifying this particular spacetime geometry is (Reference 1):\nds2 = -c2dt2 + [dx - vsh(t) f(rsh(t)) dt]2 + dy2 + dz2, (2.1)\nwhere c is the speed of light, vsh(t) is the speed associated with the curve (or warp bubble speed), and rsh(t) is the Euclidean distance from the curve. The warp bubble shape function f (rsh) is any smooth positive function that satisfies f (0) = 1 and decreases away from the origin to vanish when rsh > R for some distance R. The geometry of each spatial slice is flat, and spacetime is flat where f (rsh) vanishes but is curved where it does not vanish.\nThe driving mechanism of Equation (2.1) is the York extrinsic time, 9. This quantity is defined as (Reference 1):\n9 = (vsh/c)(xsh/rsh)(df/drsh). (2.2)\nThe 9 behavior of the warp drive bubble provides for the simultaneous expansion of space behind the spacecraft and a corresponding contraction of space in front of the spacecraft. Figure 1 illustrates the 9 behavior of the warp drive bubble geometry. Thus the spacecraft is enveloped within a warp bubble and can be made to exhibit an arbitrarily large faster-than-light (FTL) speed (vsh >> c) as viewed by external coordinate observers. Even though the worldlines inside the warp bubble region are spacelike for all external observers, the moving spaceship (warp bubble) frame itself never travels outside of its local comoving light cone and thus does not violate special relativity.\nFigure 1. York Extrinsic Time (9) Plot\n1 A spacetime metric (ds2), or line element, is a Lorentz-invariant distance function between any two points in spacetime that is defined by ds2 = gµvdxµdxv, where gµv is the metric tensor which is a 4x4 matrix that encodes the geometry of spacetime and dxµ is the infinitesimal coordinate separation between two points. The Greek indices (µ, v = 0...3) denote spacetime coordinates, x0...x3, such that x1...x3 = space coordinates and x0 = time coordinate.\n1\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n2.1 WARP DRIVE REQUIREMENTS\nImplementation of FTL interstellar travel via warp drives requires engineering of spacetime into very specialized local geometries as shown by Equation (2.1). The analysis of these via the general relativistic field equation plus the resultant source matter equations of state demonstrates that such geometries require the use of “exotic” matter in order to produce the requisite FTL spacetime modification. Exotic matter is generally defined by general relativity (GR) physics to be matter that possesses (renormalized) negative energy density and/or negative stress-tension (= positive outward pressure, aka gravitational repulsion). The term is widely misunderstood and misapplied by the non-GR community. Also, it has been claimed that FTL spacetimes are not plausible because exotic matter violates the general relativistic energy conditions.2 However, this has been shown to be a spurious issue (Reference 11).\nThe energy density for the Alcubierre (Reference 1) warp drive that is derived from the general relativistic field equation is complex, so we instead use a more simple formula to express the net energy required, Ewarp, to build a warp bubble around a spaceship (Reference 12):\nEwarp = -(vwarp2 c4 R2 sigma)/G = -(1.21x1044) vwarp2 R2 sigma, (2.3)\nwhere G is Newton's universal gravitation constant (6.673 x 10-11 N.m2/kg2), vwarp is the dimensionless speed of the warp bubble, R (> 0) is the radius of the warp bubble, and sigma (> 0) is proportional to the inverse of the warp bubble wall thickness Delta (i.e., sigma ~ 1/Delta). Equation (2.3) characterizes the amount of negative energy that one needs to localize in the walls of the warp bubble. Table 2 presents a tabulation of the required negative energy as a function of the “warp factor,” vwarp. One can compare the values of Ewarp in the table with the (positive) rest-energy contained in the Sun (1.79 x 1047 J). The consequence of Equation (2.3) and Table 2 is that if one wants to travel at hyperlight speeds, then the warp bubble energy requirement will be an enormous negative number. And this remains true even if one engineers an arbitrarily low sublight speed warp bubble. Engineering a warp drive bubble is quite daunting given these results.\n2 The condition for ordinary, classical (non-exotic) forms of matter that we are familiar with in nature is that rhoE > p and/or rhoE >= 0, where rhoE is the energy density and p is the pressure/stress-tension of some source of matter. These conditions represent two examples of what are variously called the “standard” energy conditions: Weak Energy Condition (WEC: rhoE >= 0, rhoE + p >= 0), Null Energy Condition (NEC: rhoE + p >= 0), Dominant Energy Condition (DEC), and Strong Energy Condition (SEC). These energy conditions forbid negative energy density between material objects to occur in nature, but they are mere hypotheses. The energy conditions were developed to establish a series of mathematical hypotheses governing the behavior of collapsed-matter singularities in the study of cosmology and black holes.\n2\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nTable 2. Negative Energy Required for Warp Bubble (Larger Negative Energy)\nWarp Factor, vwarp Ewarp (J)\n10-5 (= 3 km/s) -3.03 x 1040\n10-4 (= 30 km/s) -3.03 x 1042\n0.01 (= 3,000 km/s) -3.03 x 1046\n0.5 (= 150,000 km/s) -7.59 x 1049\n1 (= light speed) -3.03 x 1050\n2 (= 600,000 km/s) -1.21 x 1051\n10 (= 3.0 x 106 km/s) -3.03 x 1052\n100 (= 3.0 x 107 km/s) -3.03 x 1054\nAssume: R = 50 m, sigma = 10^3 m-1\nLobo and Visser (Reference 12) constructed an improved model of the warp drive spacetime by applying linearized gravity to the weak-field warp drive case and testing the energy conditions to first and second orders of vwarp. The fundamental basis of their model is that it specifically includes a finite mass spaceship that interacts with the warp bubble. Their results verified that all warp drive spacetimes violate the energy conditions and will continue to do so for arbitrarily low warp bubble speed. They also found that the energy condition violations in this class of spacetimes is generic to the form of the geometry under consideration and is not a side effect of the superluminal properties. Based on these facts plus Equation (2.3) and Table 2, it appears that for all conceivable laboratory experiments in which negative energy can be created in minute amounts, the warp bubble speed will be absurdly low.\nCoupling of the finite spaceship mass with the warp bubble leads to the (quite reasonable) condition that the net total energy stored in the warp bubble be less than the total rest-energy of the spaceship itself, which places a strong constraint upon the (dimensionless) speed of the warp bubble (Reference 3):\nvwarp <= [G/c2 (Mship Rship Delta / (Rship R2))]^(1/2) <= [(7.41x10-28)(Mship Delta / R2)]^(1/2), (2.4)\nwhere Mship and Rship are the mass and size of the spaceship, respectively, and R is the radius of the warp bubble. Equation (2.4) indicates that for any reasonable values of the engineering parameters inside the brackets, vwarp will be absurdly low. This result is due to the intrinsic nonlinearity of the general relativistic field equation. To illustrate this point, the example starship parameters from Table 2 (R = 50 m, Delta ~ 1/sigma = 10-3 m) are inserted into Equation (2.4) and assume Mship = 106 kg to find that vwarp <= 1.72 x 10-14 (or 5.16 x 10-6 m/s). Garden snails can crawl faster than this. And if R and Mship\n3\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nare kept constant, then Δ = 3.37 × 10^24 m (or 3.57 × 10^8 light-years) in order for v_warp ≤ 1, which is an unrealistic requirement on the warp bubble design.\nBecause this energy requirement is so phenomenally high one finds it of paramount importance to explore new ideas in the field of warp drive technology. What now follows is a pedagogically rich review of the novel warp drive concept that we have been developing since 2005.\n3. The Cosmological Constant\nEinstein is famous for a multitude of achievements in the field of physics. Arguably his most notable contribution is the General Theory of Relativity, a geometric description of gravitation whose fundamental idea relates the matter and the energy content of the universe to the geometry of spacetime. Simply put, the presence of matter and energy causes spacetime to curve, and this curvature controls how matter and energy move through spacetime. General relativity has been the prevailing theory of gravitation since 1915 and thus far has unambiguously passed observational and experimental tests. It remains an active area of research and technology is still being developed to test certain features of the theory. Gravitational waves, for example, are one prediction from GR; however, technology is only now reaching the stage of maturity to allow for the detection of these waves.\n3.1 EINSTEIN'S EQUATION AND THE INTRODUCTION OF Λ\nUpon completion of GR, Einstein applied his theory to the entire universe. He firmly believed in Mach's principle, and the only way to satisfy this was to assume that space is globally closed and that the metric tensor should be determined uniquely from the energy-momentum tensor (Reference 13). He also assumed that the universe was static, which was a reasonable assumption at the time because observational astronomy had not advanced to a level that contradicted this paradigm. In 1917, when a static solution to his equations could not be found, he introduced the cosmological constant Λ (Reference 14): 3\nR_μν − ½ R g_μν = (8πG/c^4) T_μν + Λg_μν. (3.1)\nIn this equation R_μν is the Ricci curvature tensor, R is the Ricci curvature scalar, T_μν is the stress-energy-momentum tensor,4 and g_μν is the spacetime metric. The left-hand side of Equation (3.1) encodes the curvature in the geometry of spacetime, and the right-hand side encodes the source of matter-energy that curves spacetime.\nThe addition of Λ can be understood as a term in the equation which allows one to adjust theory to match observation. In Einstein's case, he chose to add Λ to ensure that the universe was static and unchanging. In later years, he often referred to this amendment to his equations as his \"biggest blunder.\" Several years after GR had been formulated, the astronomer Edwin Hubble discovered the phenomenon of galactic redshifting, which strongly indicated that the universe was indeed expanding. This\n3 Pronounced \"lambda.\"\n4 T_μν encodes the density and flux of a matter source's energy and momentum.\n4\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ntheoretical prediction from GR was ignored by Einstein because of his belief in a static universe.\nEven though Einstein retracted the addition of Λ into his equations, it is now known that it does indeed play a role and is typically included in GR equations. Data from precise astronomical observations strongly suggest that an extremely small, yet non-zero Λ is a necessary feature of GR and is responsible for the expansion of the universe that is observed.\nFrom a physical perspective, Λ represents an inherent energy density associated with empty space. One way to envision this is to take a perfectly insulating box into deep space, and then to remove all matter and all energy from this box so that it encloses a perfect void. Even in this emptiness, a residual energy field would remain. According to GR, the effect of this energy would be to cause the region of space to expand, albeit at an extremely small rate. To summarize, Λ is a ubiquitous, ever present feature of space, and its presence causes space to expand.\nIn the late 1990s it emerged that not only is the universe expanding, but the rate of expansion is, in fact, increasing. Since then, it has become more popular to refer to Λ as dark energy, and the remainder of this paper will follow this convention.\nAlthough the role of dark energy is extremely well understood mathematically, and in the context of its effects on spacetime, its physical nature is still a mystery. One knows that it is homogeneous, not particularly dense, and that it does not interact with any of the fundamental forces of nature. One also knows that it exerts negative pressure on spacetime, which explains the observed accelerated expansion (Reference 15, 16). As there is yet to be a reasonable explanation for the fundamental origin of dark energy, the problem is considered serious and has been tackled by a large number of eminent and respected physicists, including previous Nobel prize winners (Reference 17).\nBecause dark energy is intimately related to the expansion of space, and because this expansion is exactly the feature that would allow for a warp drive to function, an understanding of this mysterious energy is of paramount importance in the development of this novel propulsion technology.\n4. Casimir Energy and the Quantum Vacuum\nA central theme in this paper is the notion of the quantum vacuum. To a particle physicist, the term \"vacuum\" means the ground state of a quantum field in some quantum theory for matter. In general, this ground state must obey Lorentz invariance, at least with regards to three spatial dimensions, meaning that the vacuum must look identical to all observers.\nAt all energies probed by experiments to date, the universe is accurately described as a set of quantum fields. To a non-physicist a quantum field may, at first, be a strange concept to grasp. This is because one generally likes to visualize the things one thinks about; for example, an electron and even a photon provides something one can, on some level, picture in one's minds. Simply put, a quantum field is an intangible mathematical object whose properties are ideal in explaining nature. Theories have reached such an advanced level that the familiar physical images that one appreciates\n5\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nmust be abandoned for more erudite mathematical constructions which are better suited at describing the building blocks of nature (Reference 18-20).\nIf one takes the Fourier transform of a free quantum field,5 each mode of a fixed wavelength behaves like a simple harmonic oscillator. A quantum mechanical property of a simple harmonic oscillator is that the ground state exhibits zero-point fluctuations as a consequence of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. One way to understand these zero-point fluctuations is to imagine releasing a pendulum and watching as dissipative forces slowly try to bring the pendulum to a stop. The uncertainty principle would ensure that the pendulum was never able to come to a complete rest, but instead would exhibit microscopic oscillations around the equilibrium position indefinitely. Of course, for a real macroscopic pendulum, these fluctuations would be miniscule and all but impossible to detect; however, the analogy with a quantum harmonic oscillator holds well. The expectation value of the energy associated with the ground state energy of a quantum oscillator is:\n⟨E⟩ = (c/2) Σ_{n=1}^{∞} ħk_n (4.1)\nIn this formula c and ħ are the speed of light and Planck's reduced constant (1.055 × 10^-34 J·s), respectively, and k is the wave-vector related to the momentum of the quantum field. One of the features of this ground state energy is that the wave vector has an infinite degree of freedom. Clearly this sum is divergent; however, this is a common feature of quantum field theory, and an array of mathematical techniques known as renormalization exists to deal with the infinities that arise.\n4.1 THE CASIMIR EFFECT\nThe quantum fluctuations of the vacuum fields give rise to a number of phenomena; however, one is particularly striking. The Casimir Effect, which will be explored in more detail in this paper, is arguably the most salient manifestation of the quantum vacuum. In 1948, H. Casimir published a profound paper where he explained the van der Waals interaction in terms of the zero-point energy of a quantized field (Reference 19). In its most basic form, the Casimir Effect it is realized through the interaction of a pair of neutral parallel conducting plates (with separation distance d). The presence of the plates modifies the quantum vacuum, and this modification causes the plates to be pulled toward each other with a force:\nF = −ħcπ² / (240d^4) (4.2)\nThis is a profound result in the sense that the origin of this force cannot be traced back to one of the four fundamental forces of nature (gravity, electromagnetism, and the two nuclear forces), but is a force that is entirely due to a modification of the quantum vacuum.\n5 By \"free\" we mean that the field does not interact with other fields.\n6\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n[Figure 2. The Interior Region of Parallel Conducting Plates.]\nFigure 2. The Interior Region of Parallel Conducting Plates. The region experiences a reduced quantum vacuum energy density owing to the boundary condition the plates impose on the fields. This generates a measurable attractive force that pushes the plates together.\nFor many years, the paper remained unknown (Reference 22), but from the 1970s onward the Casimir effect received increasing attention, and over the last decade it has become very popular (Reference 23). The Casimir effect is a purely quantum effect. In classical electrodynamics the force between the plates is zero. The ideal scenario occurs at zero temperature when there are no real photons (only virtual photons) between the plates; thus, it is the ground state of the quantum electrodynamic vacuum which causes the attraction. The most important feature of the Casimir effect is that even though it is purely quantum in nature, it manifests itself macroscopically. For example, for two parallel plates of area A = 1 cm² separated by a distance of d = 1 μm the force of attraction is F ≈ 1.3 x 10^-7 N. This force is certainly within the range of laboratory force-measuring techniques.\nTypically, the calculations of the expectation value of the vacuum are divergent,6 so some form of renormalization must be performed. A full review of the experimental verifications of the Casimir effect are beyond the scope of this paper, but it is certainly worth mentioning that experiments at Washington University using ultra-sensitive Atomic Force Microscopes have experimentally verified the theoretical predictions of the Casimir force to within 1 percent accuracy (Reference 24, 25). Needless to say, many physicists consider this to be a real and well established phenomenon.\n6 Divergent meaning the equation predicts an infinite result. Divergences are typical in many calculations using quantum field theory, and an array of ingenious tools is used by physicists to extract finite and meaningful results.\n7\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nIn summary, quantum field theory predicts that the vacuum is an interlaced cobweb of quantum fields which are never strictly at rest, and which exhibit zero-point fluctuations. These fluctuations give rise to real and measurable phenomenon, with the Casimir effect being the most poignant. It seems only natural to attempt to relate the ideas from the previous section regarding a ubiquitous dark energy field to this quantum vacuum energy. If a relationship can be established, one would be a step closer to the technological realization of warp drive.\n5. Extra Space Dimensions\nIn connection with the Casimir effect, extra dimensions provide a rich arena for one to generate models that explain the origin of dark energy. Technically speaking, the Casimir effect is a direct consequence of the non-trivial boundary conditions that the presence of the conducting plates imposes upon the quantum vacuum. The quantum modes on the interior region of the plates are restricted, and there is a pressure difference when compared to the quantum vacuum on the exterior region of the plates. It is this pressure difference that causes the plates to attract.7\nA very similar phenomenon to the Casimir effect can occur when the quantum vacuum energy in extra space dimensions are considered. The exploration of this idea has important ramifications in the context of explaining dark energy. Before one can address these ideas it is necessary to review the role of higher space dimensions in physics.\nIt was Riemann, with his development of differential geometry in the 19th century, who provided the necessary tools to study higher dimensional descriptions of the world (Reference 26). Riemann held the belief that 3-dimensional space was not enough to provide an adequate description of nature. Improvements in physics led to Maxwell's unified theory of electricity and magnetism, and then GR, which unified space and time with Special Relativity (SR). Inspired by these unifications, physicists of the early 20th century wanted to unify gravity and electromagnetism. The first attempt was by Nordstrom in 1914, who used a scalar potential for the gravitational field. Later Weyl and Kaluza, using Einstein's tensor potential, followed two separate paths. Weyl's attempt involved an alteration of the geometry of spacetime in four dimensions. His early attempts had physical consequences which did not match experimental data. However, Weyl's work was extended by Einstein and Schrodinger independently in the Einstein-Schrodinger non-symmetric field theory, which is widely regarded as the most advanced unified field theory based on classical physics.\n5.1 KALUZA-KLEIN THEORY\nIn 1919 Kaluza (Reference 27) offered a unique approach to unifying gravity and electromagnetism which involved adding an additional spatial dimension to GR, and populating this extra dimension with two mathematical objects called a vector potential A_μ and a scalar potential φ. The line element in this theory is given by:\n7 This analogy is not strictly true as different geometries can, in fact, create repulsive Casimir forces and so the pressure analogy breaks down. It is, however, a useful visualization tool.\n8\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nds² = φ^(-1/3)(g_μν + A_μA_νφ)dx^μdx^ν + 2φ^(2/3)A_μdx^μdy + φ^(2/3)dy² (5.1)\n\nwhere the Greek indices run from 0 to 3 (0 represents the time coordinate and 1...3 the space coordinates), and where the higher dimension is expressed using y. The powers of φ are selected for later convenience. Upon solving Einstein's equation in this higher dimensional space using this metric, Kaluza was able to accurately reproduce both GR and electromagnetic theory. However, the theory made an additional prediction which was not consistent with observation and was somewhat of an embarrassment for Kaluza.\n\nThe main failure of Kaluza's idea, and an issue that caused Einstein to delay his endorsement of the paper by two years, was the very obvious fact that we clearly exist in three spatial dimensions and not four. This issue was tackled in 1926 by Oskar Klein (Reference 28), who suggested that the 5th dimension compactifies, so as to have the geometry of a circle of extremely small radius. One way to envisage this additional dimension is to imagine a garden hose. It is only when one magnifies the image the toroidal structure is visible. From a long distance it looks like a 1-dimensional line, but a closer inspection reveals that every point on the line is, in fact, a circle (see Figure 3 for an illustration).\n\nFigure 3. Internal Structure of a Seemingly One-Dimensional Object\n\nWhile Kaluza-Klein (KK) theory is considered elegant in its simplicity, it is not without problems. One obvious criticism is that the theory is non-predictive, in that it does not extend Einstein's or Maxwell's theories, but merely synthesizes the formalism within a new mathematical framework. A more serious criticism regards the introduction of the 5th dimension, which was, and still is, seen as an artificial construct since our universe is apparently 4-dimensional.8\n\nKK theory remained largely ignored and was considered somewhat obscure for the first half of the twentieth century, as were the speculations regarding additional spatial dimensions. However, the birth of string theory generated a renewed interest in the idea, largely due to string theory's promise of being a quantum theory of gravity.9\n\nUnification is one of the main themes in the history of science and is a guiding principle in theoretical physics. Countless examples exist where diverse and seemingly unrelated phenomena have been understood in terms of a small number of underlying principles. In the 1940s, it was demonstrated that quantum mechanics and electromagnetism could be accurately described by quantum field theory, and by the 1970s the weak and\n\n8 Including time, of course.\n9 Quantum gravity is considered somewhat of a \"holy grail\" within the theoretical physics community.\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nstrong nuclear forces could also be described using QFT. The full theory, called the Standard Model of particle physics, is arguably the most successful physical theory to date.\n\nDespite the successes of the Standard Model, incorporating gravitational interactions using the methods of QFT has proven to be one of the most challenging problems facing theoretical physics today. String theory is currently the best candidate for a quantum theory of gravity (Reference 29). The divergences associated with point particle gravitational interactions are removed in string theory via the extended nature of the string. A review of string theory falls far outside the scope of this paper; however, the theory contains numerous compelling features that deserve mention here. One of the most discussed aspects of string theory is its prediction that additional dimensions of space exist, and are indeed required for string theory to work. One of the predictions of string theory is that these additional dimensions are extremely small, on the order of 10^-35 m. However, there are also popular models which attempt to explain certain aspects of nature that involve large extra dimensions which we will briefly introduce.\n\n5.2 LARGE EXTRA DIMENSIONS\n\nModels with large extra dimensions have enjoyed a revived interest in physics. This began with the Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos, and Dvali (ADD) proposal to lower the quantum gravity scale to the 10 to 100 TeV scale10 (accessible to the next generation of particle accelerators) by embedding the Standard Model fields in a 3+1 dimensional brane existing in a higher dimensional bulk spacetime (Reference 30, 31). Gravity is free to propagate in the bulk, which effectively dilutes its strength. This idea was inspired by M-theory, where it was recognized that the scale of quantum gravity could be lowered from the Planck energy scale to the Grand Unification Theory (GUT) energy scale (Reference 32-35).11 The assumptions underlying the ADD model are:\n\n• n-extra dimensions compactified on a torus with volume Vn = (2πr)^n.\n\n• Standard Model fields are localized to the brane.\n\n• Gravity can propagate in the bulk.\n\n• There is no cosmological constant in the bulk or on the boundary.\n\n• The brane is stiff.\n\nThe bulk action for this model can be given by:\n\nS_bulk = -1/(2∫d^(4+n)x√(-g^(4+n))) M^(n+2)R. (5.2)\n\nwhere g is the matrix determinant of the metric and the two tilde-quantities are the 4+n dimensional Planck mass and Ricci scalar, respectively. By integrating out the extra dimensions, it is simple to show that:\n\n10 1 TeV = 10^12 eV (1 eV = 1.602 × 10^-19 J) is a mass-energy scale used in elementary particle physics.\n11 Planck energy (ħc⁵/G)^1/2 ≈ 10^28 eV; GUT energy > 10^14 GeV (1 GeV = 10^9 eV).\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nM²_Pl = (2πr)^n M^(n+2) (5.3)\n\nM_Pl is the Planck mass12 (in our usual 4-dimensional spacetime) and r is the size of the extra space dimensions. This remarkable result indicates that the Planck scale is, in fact, a quantity that is derived from a more fundamental quantum gravity scale and also the volume of the extra dimensions. Physically, this implies that the graviton is diluted across the bulk with a diminished intersection with the familiar 3+1 dimensional brane.\n\nIn this type of model the size of the internal space is of order 1/M and the effective cosmological constant is on the order Λ_eff ~ 8πM_Pl^-2 × 10^-2/a^4 (Reference 36, 37). Setting the value of the corresponding energy density equal to the known density of dark energy, one finds that the extra-dimensional radius is r ~ 10^-3cm. Similar results are found in models with more complicated internal spaces. This is an important result in the context of dimensional manipulation.\n\nNote that extra dimensions that are accessible to all the Standard Model fields can also be realized. These models are known as Universal Extra Dimensions (UED). In the case of recent experimental constraints, a compactification scale as low as 1 TeV is allowed.\n\n5.3 RANDALL SUNDRUM BRANE MODELS\n\nThe idea that the universe can be modeled as a (mem)brane existing in a higher dimensional bulk spacetime has received a huge amount of attention in recent years (Reference 38-46). It is possible that the brane energy density affects the spacetime curvature, and an approximation can be achieved by first considering a model where branes are located at the two ends of a periodic 5th dimension. To ensure stability of the model two branes are required to balance the bulk energy. To get a stable metric, the effects of the brane on the spacetime must be compensated by a negative cosmological constant in the bulk. Thus, the 5th dimension can be considered a slice of Anti-deSitter (AdS)13 space bounded by flat branes, and the price of keeping the branes flat is to introduce curvature into the 5th dimension. Such models are termed warped extra dimensions.\n\nThe Randall-Sundrum (RS1) model (Reference 47, 48) proposes a novel geometrical solution to the hierarchy problem. The hierarchy problem questions why gravity is so much weaker than the weak force (which is 10^32 times stronger), and why the Higgs boson is so much lighter than the Planck mass. In the RS1 setup, the Standard Model fields are now confined to one of two 3-branes which lie at the endpoints (i.e., fixed points) of an S¹/Z₂ orbifold,14 except for the Higgs field. One of the branes physically corresponds to \"our\" universe and is sometimes referred to as the IR or \"visible\" brane. The closer a Standard Model field is to the visible brane, the greater its coupling to the\n\n12 2.18 × 10^-8 kg.\n13 Anti-deSitter space is a Lorentzian manifold with a constant negative scalar curvature. In terms of General Relativity, this is a solution to Einstein's field equation with an attractive cosmological constant.\n14 An S¹/Z₂ corresponds to a circular extra dimension with an additional symmetry. This type of projection is popular in a number of higher dimensional models due to its ability to mathematically \"project\" out certain phenomenologically undesirable fields.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nHiggs, and therefore the greater the mass. The second brane is the UV or \"hidden\" brane. The line element in RS1 is described by the metric:\n\nds² = e^(-2kr|φ|)η_μν dx^μ dx^ν - r²dφ² . (5.4)\n\nη_μν is the metric tensor for the D-dimensional Minkowski spacetime, the AdS curvature radius is given by 1/k and the interbrane separation is given by r. The 5th dimension is compactified on the orbifold of length a, where a < φ < a. The orbifold fixed points located at φ= 0 and φ= a correspond to the location of the visible and the hidden brane.\n\nThe exponential factor is referred to as the warp factor and is an appealing feature in the RS1 model, as it can both generate a TeV mass scale from the Planck scale in the higher dimensional theory and reduce the effective gravitational strength on the visible brane through the suppression factor e^(-2kr|φ|) while retaining a bulk width that is only a couple of orders of magnitude above the Planck scale. In addition to the stabilization of the interbrane separation, the quantum effects from the bulk fields (aka the Casimir energy) can also provide a mechanism for the generation of dark energy on the visible brane.\n\n5.4 EXTRA DIMENSION SUMMARY\n\nAlthough there is still no direct evidence of extra spatial dimensions, there is the possibility that the experiments planned at the Large Hadron Collider could detect particle decay signatures that would indicate the presence of higher dimensions. In fact, all the theoretical groundwork has been performed by theorists, and as soon as the LHC is running smoothly it could, in principle, demonstrate the existence of higher dimensions in a relatively short period of time. Any such discovery would represent a truly radical alteration of our understanding of nature, and many new questions will emerge regarding the potential role extra dimensions could play in advanced technologies (which will be discussed in more detail later in this paper).\n\n6. Dark Energy as a Higher Dimensional Artifact\n\nAs discussed earlier, the vacuum of spacetime can be visualized as a sea of quantum fields never fully at rest due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The oscillations of the vacuum radiate energy over a range of frequencies in much the same way that an oscillating electron emits electromagnetic energy, and in this way, there exists a ground state energy associated with space itself. The vacuum potential for a periodic scalar field in the ADD model described above is given by (Reference 48-50):\n\nV+ = (ηc/2) Σ(n=-∞ to ∞) ∫0^∞ (d⁴k/(2π)⁴) log[k² + (nπ/R)² + m²]. (6.1)\n\nwhere k is the momentum modes of the quantum fields, R is the radius of the 5th dimension, and m is the mass of the field. The prime on the summation indicates the n = 0 term is excluded. The integral over the continuous momentum modes of the\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nquantum fields is divergent, as is the infinite summation over the extra-dimensional KK modes; however, as mentioned earlier, dimensional regularization (a form of renormalization) can be used to extract a finite result. This equation differs from Equation (4.1) in that the quantum field that we consider has both mass and a degree of freedom in the higher dimension. Working with a scalar field, the result can later be extended simply for the case of more phenomenologically viable fields (fermions, for example).\n\nOur own research focuses upon exploring a new way to handle the infinities arising from Equation (6.1), and after performing a novel regularization it was discovered that:\n\nV+ = -(ζ(5/2) m^(5/2))/(32π²r^(5/2)) Σ(n=1 to ∞) K_(5/2)(2mrn) (6.2)\n\nwhere ζ is the Riemann zeta function, and K5/2(2mrn) is the modified Bessel function of the second kind. Although the summation is infinite, the function converges rapidly and so a good approximation is obtained by performing the sum up to n = 10. Since discovering this formula, the result agrees with derivations of this energy based on different regularization methods and so one is confident in the validity of Equation (6.2).\n\nIt is relatively straightforward to calculate the contributions to the vacuum energy density coming from each field in the Standard Model of particle physics. For example, the electron is a fundamental quantum field whose ubiquitous ground state energy contributes to the vacuum energy density. Similarly, the photon is a fundamental quantum field whose ubiquitous ground state energy also contributes to the vacuum energy density. In fact, all Standard Model fields contribute a finite and calculable component to the overall energy density of space.\n\nEquation (5.1) expresses the vacuum energy density for a periodic massive scalar field. Using knowledge of supersymmetry multiplets it is possible to enumerate this energy for all fields occurring in the Standard Model (Reference 49):\n\nV+_fermion(r) = -4V+(r),\nV-_fermion(r) = (15/4)V+(r),\nV+_higgs(r) = 2V+(r). (6.3)\n\nAlso, knowledge of the vacuum energy density for a massless field:\n\nV+_massless = -3ζ(5)/(64π²r⁴), (6.4)\n\nwill allow one to fully articulate the energy density of the vacuum in terms of the building blocks of nature. This is expressed algebraically as:\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n⟨E_vac⟩=∑_i=1 Ṽ_i⁺ +V_higgs+V_massless, (6.5)\n\nwhere the index i runs over the spectrum of Standard Model fermions. Using Equation (6.5), and slight variations, we are able to computationally build a model which demonstrates how the vacuum energy density varies as a function of higher dimensional radius. It cannot be overstated that a full understanding of the vacuum structure is of critical importance when attempting to understand the nature of dark energy and to investigate its possible manipulation.\n\nIt is important to appreciate that, for example, a physical electron does not actually have to be present at a specific point in space for it to contribute to the vacuum energy density. But that the vacuum always has the potential to allow an electron to exist at any point in space. Thus, at all points in space a virtual electron exists. This virtual electron is a basic and fundamental feature of the intrinsic makeup of spacetime itself. In this way, empty space has a ground state energy that is due to the virtual contributions of all fields that occur in nature: electrons, quarks, photons, and indeed, the entire particle zoo.\n\nMany attempts have been made to relate this vacuum energy to dark energy; however, because these quantum fields are free to oscillate over a wide range of possible frequencies, when one calculates the sum^15 of all the contributions from all possible frequencies of the vacuum, an energy density far in excess of that seen in nature is recovered (Reference 50).\n\nOur own work (Reference 51, 53) has demonstrated that when the contribution due to the extra-dimensional quantum vacuum fields is included, it is possible to \"tune\" the theoretical energy density of the universe to agree with experimental observations using extensions of Equation (6.5), provided allowance for certain exotic fields to exist within the higher dimension. Although this may at first appear counterintuitive, one novel feature of the quantum vacuum energy is that it can contribute both positive and negative energy to the vacuum. The sign of the contribution is fundamentally due to the nature of the underlying virtual quantum field. For example, virtual fermionic fields (e.g., electrons) contribute an overall positive energy to the vacuum, whereas virtual bosonic fields contribute an overall negative energy. In this way, certain field combinations allow for energy cancellations. The additional freedom encountered in higher dimensional theories means that it is a fairly straightforward matter to adjust the overall vacuum energy density to agree with the experimentally measured value for the cosmological constant.\n\nEssentially, this means that one is immediately presented with a natural explanation for the existence of dark energy. Previous attempts to link dark energy to the vacuum energy had yielded grossly high theoretical predictions far in excess of that observed in nature; however, by including the contributions from higher dimensional fields we have shown that the taming of this dark energy density is entirely possible. The significance of this result is that it provides a foundation upon which to explore possibilities relating to warp drive propulsion. More simply, once one knows why space expands, it becomes possible to explore technological possibilities to potentially make space expand.\n\n15 Technically we integrate over all the possible frequencies.\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTo summarize, the existence of dark energy may be attributed to the combined effects of vacuum fluctuations in \"normal\" 3+1 dimensional spacetime plus higher dimensional contributions. If this model proves to be correct, then ideas extending from this paradigm could provide one with intriguing opportunities for technological intervention.\n\n7. Warp Drive and Higher Dimensional Manipulation\n\nBoth our own research and previous work in higher dimensional Casimir energy^16 demonstrate that the magnitude of the vacuum energy is intimately related to the size of the extra dimension. More precisely, the smaller the extra dimension, the greater the Casimir energy (and vice versa: the bigger an extra dimension, the smaller the Casimir energy). In fact, the energy is related to the radius of the higher dimension raised to the fourth power, which means that very small changes in the radius of the extra dimension generate dramatic changes to the vacuum energy density.\n\nFigure 4. Manipulated Extra Dimension. A sufficiently advanced technology with the capacity to directly interact with and manipulate an extra dimension would be able to locally adjust the dark energy density in a given region of spacetime.\n\nWhat this means is that if an advanced technology was able to influence the radius of an extra dimension, then it would acquire direct control over dark energy, and hence the expansion and contraction of space itself. As tremendous a feat as this may sound, at this early stage in the research it is one of the only viable mechanisms to generate a warp drive.\n\n16 Quantum vacuum energy and Casimir energy are often used interchangeably in the literature.\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIt is worthwhile to expand more on the concept of what we mean by adjusting the radius of the extra dimension.\n\n7.1 ADJUSTING HIGHER DIMENSIONS FOR PROPULSIONS\n\nFigure 4 should assist in the visualization of what a higher dimensional space might look like. In this 1-dimensional example one can see that all points have an associated higher dimension. One assumes that generally the radius of the extra dimension is fixed. It is this fixed radius which generates the observed dark energy density and is responsible for the homogeneity in the observed expansion of the universe.\n\nIf one were to locally adjust the higher dimensional radius then the dark energy density would also change locally. More specifically, if one were to adjust the radius of the extra dimension in the direct vicinity of a spacecraft, then the dark energy density would also change only in the vicinity of the spacecraft, as would the expansion of space. It is important at this point to appreciate that globally, the universe would continue to expand at the rate we observe today, but that only in the proximity of the spacecraft would space be \"stimulated\" to expand at some modified rate.\n\nFigure 5. Artist's Conception of a Futuristic Warp Drive Spacecraft. By locally adjusting the size of the extra space dimension, the spacecraft is able to generate the necessary warp bubble required to surpass the light speed barrier.\n\nOf course, obvious questions present themselves. Can one really assume that a higher dimension is circular? Also, if dark energy is responsible for the expansion of space, can we assume that it can somehow be used to contract space, and not just expand it?\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n7.2 THE GEOMETRY OF EXTRA DIMENSIONS\n\nTo answer the first question, our most developed higher dimensional theory (M-theory) works in seven additional spatial dimensions. The shape is believed to be what mathematicians call a Calabi-Yau manifold - a complex object that is notoriously challenging to work with. Physicists often like to work with simpler models (a single extra dimension, for example) with an uncomplicated shape like the circle. Although this may at first appear to be a gross simplification, often these simplistic higher dimensional models both reflect the flavor of the physics involved, and give accurate predictions that are believed to deviate from nature only at extremely high energies.^17\n\nFor this reason, many of the research papers investigating higher dimensions choose to work in the simpler circular higher dimensional space. A smaller fraction of papers explore two additional higher dimensions, which are commonly toroidal (see Figure 6), and an even smaller fraction of papers work in the full M-theoretic Calabi-Yau manifold. At these early stages of investigation, the additional circular dimension represents an adequate approximation. Should the research progress to a more highly developed phase, then it may become necessary to work within the Calabi-Yau manifold.\n\nFigure 6. A Toroidal Higher Dimension. This is one of the many possible topologies explored in higher dimensional theories.\n\nWith regards to the question of whether space can be made to contract, it seems possible if one can make the energy density of a given region of space negative instead of positive. This type of space has been well explored by physicists, and is known as anti-deSitter space. One of the unique features of Casimir energy is that under many conditions it is known to be negative, and thus with a careful manipulation of the higher dimensional fields it is, in principle, possible to generate the required contraction of space.\n\n7.3 HIGHER DIMENSIONS AND STABILIZATION\n\nOur goal in this section is to explore the possibilities of manipulating a higher dimension, which will influence the local dark energy density and thus the expansion and contraction of spacetime in the vicinity of a spacecraft.\n\nBefore the issue of how to manipulate a higher dimension can be addressed, first one must understand why an additional spatial dimension holds some fixed radius. This is a well know problem in higher dimensional physics and is commonly called the problem of \"modulus stabilization.\" Broadly stated, the question is as follows: if there are additional spatial dimensions, why do they not perpetually expand, like our familiar dimensions of space, or alternatively, why do they not perpetually contract? What\n\n17 For example, in the vicinity of a black hole, or in the first moments of the big bang.\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nmechanism is it that allows for this higher space to remain compact and stable? Of the handful of theories that attempt to answer this problem, one is particularly appealing due to its naturalness.\n\nA recurring theme throughout this paper is Casimir energy. This energy is compelling due to the fact that it is a natural feature intrinsic to the fabric of space itself. Casimir energy in higher dimensions not only offers the promise of explaining the nature of dark energy, as discussed in previous sections, but can also be utilized as a mechanism to stabilize the compact extra dimension.\n\nWe have discovered in our research that with a natural combination of fields, and a single exotic component, we are able to generate a stable extra dimension (Reference 51, 53). The way to understand this is as follows: as mentioned earlier, each field in nature contributes a component to the ground state of the vacuum (that is, the state of minimum energy of space) due to the virtual particle contributions. When this energy is calculated for the case of three large and one compact spatial dimension, one discovers that this energy is a strong function of the size of the 5th dimension.\n\nIn our research, we summed the contributions from all the known fields in nature using extensions of Equation (6.5). We discovered that with the addition of one additional exotic field confined to exist in only the 5th dimension, a stable higher dimensional configuration was found. Our motivations for the addition of extra exotic fields have a strong phenomenological foundation, and these exotic fields been studied successfully in the context of explaining solar neutrino oscillations (Reference 54-56). A full discussion, however, is beyond the scope of this paper.\n\nTo understand what is meant by a stable higher dimensional configuration we refer to Figure 7, which is a plot illustrating the vacuum energy density as a function of higher dimensional radius.\n\nThe x-axis represents the radius of the higher dimension and the y-axis the energy density of spacetime.^18 We have shown the contributions to the energy density coming from the different fields of the Standard Model, and also the additional exotic field. The overall energy density is illustrated as a thick black line. The most important feature of this graph is the mathematical minimum. A good physical analogy here is to imagine releasing a ball from the far left of the black line: the ball would roll down the line and become stuck in the minimum. The ball becoming stuck in this minimum is an excellent analogy to the dynamics of the higher dimension, which begins at some unstable state, but evolves into a stable configuration.\n\n18 We work in \"normalized\" units.\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 7. A Combination of Phenomenologically Viable Fields Generates a Stable Minimum of the Vacuum Energy Density at a Fixed Higher Dimensional Radius. This stable minimum, located at a positive energy, indicates a stable deSitter type spacetime and reflects a realistic dark energy model. Note in this plot that the radius of the extra dimensions is shown on the x-axis, and the energy density on the y-axis (normalized units are used).\n\nFigure 8. False Vacuum Minima are Created Around a Spacecraft. The different minima create an asymmetric dark energy pressure on 3-space which generates the warp bubble. In this plot the x-axis represents the radius of the extra dimension, and the y-axis represents the energy density (normalized units are used).\n\nThe key to creating a warp drive is to create a false vacuum minimum, i.e., to modify the vacuum spectrum and inject some field which creates a deSitter minimum at the rear of the craft and an anti-deSitter minimum at the front of the craft. What this requires is a technology that would allow us to artificially manipulate the field content illustrated in Figure 7, shifting the location of the minimum. In this basic representation, the spacecraft would sit in a stable region of space corresponding to the natural minimum of the extra dimension. At the front and rear of the craft, regions of\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nfalse minima would be artificially created via the adjustment of the extra dimension (see Figure 8). These modified regions would correspond to increased and negative dark energy densities, thus creating the warp bubble previously discussed.\n\n7.4 ELEMENTARY WARP DRIVE CALCULATIONS\n\nThis section will explore the calculations relevant to propulsion. Specifically, it will determine the energy required to accelerate a spacecraft to the speed of light. By associating the cosmological constant with the higher dimensional Casimir energy, a straightforward relation between Λ and the radius of the extra dimensions can be determined:\n\nρvac = Λ ~ 1/R^4 (7.1)\n\nA simpler way of developing the relationship between the energy density of space and the expansion of space is to express Λ as a function of Hubble's constant, H:\n\nH ∝ √Λ, (7.2)\n\nwhich is a standard result obtained from GR. From these two formula, a relationship between the expansion of space and the radius of the extra dimension can be shown:\n\nH ~ 1/R^2. (7.3)\n\nThis formula really expresses the foundation of this novel warp drive concept: that a sufficiently advanced technology with the ability to adjust the radius of the extra dimension locally would be able to locally adjust the expansion and contraction of spacetime around a spacecraft. This asymmetric expansion creates the warp bubble illustrated in Figure 1. The spacecraft would always move within its own light cone and thus would not contradict any law of special relativity. The possibility that the higher dimensional radius might vary from place to place has been explored in the context of string theory (Reference 57), and so is a valid academic pursuit. However, it has never before been suggested that this might facilitate a new and exotic form of propulsion.\n\nEquations (7.1) and (7.2) used together express a relationship between the expansion of space and the energy density of space. A sufficient increase in the energy density of space would generate a proportional increase in the expansion of space. Thus calculate the energy density of space that would be necessary to generate a local expansion of space at the speed of light. A local expansion at the speed of light, Hubble's constant must be increased by a factor of:\n\nHc = 10^26 H, (7.4)\n\nwhere Hc represents the modified Hubble's constant, and the subscript c indicates that it is the Hubble's constant for the case of light speed expansion. H must be increased by a factor of 10^26 to achieve a local expansion of space equivalent to the speed of light.\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAnother relevant calculation regards the local energy density required to generate this expansion. A similar calculation to the one just performed indicates that the cosmological constant, an expression which characterizes the energy density of space, must be increased by a factor of 10^52. This implies an energy density of:\n\nρc = 10^42 J/m^3 (7.5)\n\nThis is, indeed, an incredible number. However, the total energy requirement would be reduced if we assumed a \"thin shell\" of modified spacetime. Figure 9 illustrates the case where the warp bubble thickness is reduced. More detailed research is necessary before we could accurately predict the minimum shell thickness that would be necessary to support a stable warp field. However, if a shell could be produced that was merely a single Planck length in thickness, then the energy requirements would be reduced immensely.\n\nFigure 9. Two Images Illustrating the Contrast Between a Thick (left) and Thin (right) Shell Warp Bubble. A thin shell warp drive model has the capacity to dramatically reduce the energy requirements of a warp drive.\n\nUnder this new paradigm of warp drive, where the necessary contracting and expansion of spacetime is generated by a manipulation of the radius of the extra dimension, one can clearly see that the energy requirements are reduced immensely when compared to the calculations of Lobo and Visser (Reference 12). Table 3 illustrates the energy requirements for a range of multiple of the speed of light. All calculations are order-of-magnitude.\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 3. Negative Energy Required for Warp Bubble\n\nWarp Factor, vwarp | Ewarp (J)\n10^-5 (= 3 km/s) | -1.00 x 10^32\n10^-4 (= 30 km/s) | -1.00 x 10^34\n0.01 (= 3,000 km/s) | -1.00 x 10^38\n0.5 (= 150,000 km/s) | -2.50 x 10^41\n1 (= light speed) | -1.00 x 10^42\n2 (= 600,000 km/s) | -4.00 x 10^42\n10 (= 3.0 x 10^6 km/s) | -1.00 x 10^44\n100 (= 3.0 x 10^7 km/s) | -3.03 x 10^46\n\nUpon comparing Tables 2 and 3, immediately one can see the drastic energy reductions that are apparent when one uses the dimensional warp drive paradigm. The energy requirements are reduced by a factor of 10^8. This energy is based on a warp bubble that encompasses 100 m^3 of space. As discussed earlier, this is a \"worst case\" scenario, and the energy requirements could be further reduced, perhaps by many orders of magnitude, by utilizing the thin shell model illustrated in Figure 9.\n\nThese are, perhaps, the most important numerical results of this paper, as they set an upper limit on the energy requirements necessary to generate a warp bubble, and also on the energy requirements necessary to surpass the speed of light. Even though this energy requirement is a vast improvement on the calculations of Visser and Lobo, the energies are still far in excess of those available in the foreseeable future.\n\nOne interesting prospect to test this theory is to consider the maximum energy density that is achievable by modern technology, and to calculate the expansion of space that this energy would generate. One could then conceivably contemplate a table-top experiment if the numbers allowed. What follows is a description of how this might work.\n\n7.5 FUTURE EXPERIMENTS\n\nAt this point we take a diversion into pure speculation as to what technological advancements may be necessary to build a device that might test our dark energy theory. One knows from the Friedmann equations of cosmology that normal matter and energy generate:\n\na-bar/a = -(4πG/3)(ρ + 3p), (7.6)\n\nwhere a is the so-called cosmological scale factor, ρ is the energy density and p is the pressure. If one defines the quantity \"w = ρ/p\", one sees immediately that an accelerated expansion of spacetime requires negative pressure. Currently, all known matter and energy generate w > 1; however, dark energy has w = -1. If it were possible to technologically create dark energy in the lab, then this would assist with our\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nunderstanding and experimentation with warp drive technology. To understand how, first discuss an analogy with energy w > 1.\n\nIn a handful of labs scattered around the country, petawatt lasers are being built and tested. These are lasers of profound capability, able to generate short laser pulses of intensity >> 10^15 W/m^2, with peak focused power densities of >> 10^27 W/m^3, and energy densities of >> 10^16 J/m^3. If it were possible to construct an exotic device whose energy output had w < 1, then using calculations identical to those to generate Table 3, it would seem straightforward to show that the energy density produced by an analogous dark energy laser would translate into a local expansion of space corresponding to vwarp = 10^-13 or ~ 10^-5 m/s for every meter of space that the laser travels. It may be possible to construct an experiment that could measure the modified expansion of space along the length of such a laser to test the predictions of this paper.\n\n7.6 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TECHNOLOGY\n\nAlthough a practical warp drive could be many years away from realization, there are a number of technological developments that may, in fact, be necessary in order to allow prototype experiments to begin. First, a more complete understanding of dark energy is of paramount importance. As mentioned earlier, dark energy contributes approximately 70 percent of the overall energy density of the universe, and is responsible for the expansion of space. As one acquires deeper understanding of this energy, attempts to generate dark energy in the lab would no doubt be a critical component to a working warp drive.\n\nOther crucial developments include determining whether extra dimension are, in fact, real. Once this has been determined with absolute certainty, the role of extra dimensions and their relationship with the universe that we are more familiar with will become a more serious focus of scientific research and attention.\n\nAs has been discussed, the stabilization of the extra dimensions and the accelerated expansion of the remaining four dimensions can be realized via the Casimir energy. The acceleration of the 3-dimensional subspace is a naturally occurring phenomenon which occurs when the extra dimensions are stabilized.\n\nAn important feature of the higher dimensional model is the dependence of the dark energy density on the size of the extra dimensions. In models with large extra dimensions, the interaction of the graviton KK tower with the Standard Model fields are suppressed by the higher dimensional Planck scale and the corresponding couplings are inverse TeV in strength. This can be seen more clearly when we consider the expansion of the metric tensor in models with large extra dimensions computed within linearized gravity models:\n\ng_MN = η_MN + (1/M_D^(D/2-1)) h_MN, 7.7\n\nwhere the capital letter indices indicate summation over the higher dimensions, M is the modified Planck mass, η_MN corresponds to flat (Minkowski) spacetime and h_MN corresponds to the bulk graviton fluctuations. The graviton interaction term in the action is expressed by:\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nS_int = 1/M_D^(D/2-1) ∫ d^D x h_MN T^MN , 7.8\n\nwhere T^MN is the higher dimensional energy-momentum tensor. The interaction of the graviton with the graviton KK states and with the SM fields are obtained by integrating the action over the extra coordinates. Because all these states are coupled with the universal strength 1/M_Pl this leads to the compelling possibility of the control of the size of the extra dimensions by processes at energies that will be accessible via the particle accelerators of the near future. Although the coupling is extremely small, the effective coupling is enhanced by the large number of KK states.\n\nReferring to Figure 7, additional energy in the form of matter or radiation with the TeV energy scale can alter the shape of the effective potential. In particular, the extrema determining the size of the extra dimensions are modified with the change of the Casimir energy density and hence, the dark energy density, in the models under consideration.\n\nIn the ADD model discussed in Section 5.2, the Standard Model fields are confined to a 4-dimensional brane and a new gravity scale M_D = G^(1/(2-D)) >> TeV is introduced in the D = 4 + d dimensions, where d is the number of extra dimensions. This is determined quite easily by forming the higher dimensional action and integrating out the extra dimension.\n\nThe Atlas experiment at CERN's Large Hadron Collider will have the capability to probe the ADD type extra dimensions up to M_D ~ 8 TeV. In the Randall Sundrum scenario, the hierarchy is explained by the warp factor in the AdS5 bulk geometry. A lower bound can be placed on the lowest KK mass by electroweak precision tests (masses on the order of 1 TeV are allowed). In the Universal Extra Dimension scenario, Tevatron results constrain the compactification scale to M_C > 400 GeV. Because the Atlas experiment will be sensitive to M_C ~ 3 TeV, the estimates in this section indicate that if nature is in fact described by one of these higher dimensional scenarios, then the additional dimensions can be probed.\n\nEven more exciting is the possibility that their size may be controlled at the energies accessible to the Large Hadron Collider. When the Casimir energy to play the role of dark energy is involved, one can see that the possibility for the direct control of the local dark energy density by controlling the size of the additional dimensions is possible.\n\n8. Summary\n\nThe idea that a sufficiently advanced technology may interact with, and acquire direct control over, the higher dimensions is a tantalizing possibility, and one that is most certainly worthy of deeper investigation. Control of this higher dimensional space may be a source of technological control over the dark energy density and could ultimately play a role in the development of exotic propulsion technologies; specifically, a warp drive.\n\nOf course, this may not be actualized until many years in the future, but consider the many spectacular physical phenomena that are believed to be true at this early point in\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the 21st century. One believes that an energy field called the Higgs boson permeates spacetime and that the interaction of matter with this field is what is responsible for particles acquiring mass. One believes that an exotic ubiquitous energy source, unimaginatively named dark energy, is responsible for the current accelerated expansion of the universe based on observation of supernova in galaxies billions of light years from Earth. One also believes that the universe may not consist of the three spatial dimension of length, breadth, width, and one of time, but that, in fact, there may be as many as seven additional compactified dimensions assuming the topology of a Calabi-Yau manifold, and that the fundamental building blocks of the universe are, in fact, extended string-like entities.\n\nModern physics is full of many exciting and marvelously imaginative creations. Because one understands these curiosities, one could potentially harness these elements of nature for one's own technological ends. This is by no means a certainty, but if we may make predictions based on the innovative history of scientific pioneers of the past, then it seems entirely possible that the creative minds of the future may indeed find ways to accomplish what, to us, may seem like magic.\n\n__________\n1 Alcubierre, M., \"The warp drive: hyper-fast travel within general relativity,\" Classical and Quantum Gravity, vol. 11, 1994, pp. L73-L77.\n2 Obousy, R and Cleaver, G., \"Warp drive: A new approach,\" J. Brit. Interplanetary Soc., vol. 61, pp. 149, 2008.\n3 Wood-Vasey, W., \"Observational constraints on the nature of dark energy: First cosmological results from the essence supernova survey,\" Astrophys. J., vol. 666, pp. 694, 2007.\n4 Davis, T., \"Scrutinizing exotic cosmological models using essence supernova data combined with other cosmological probes,\" Astrophys. J., vol. 666, pp. 716, 2007.\n5 Carroll, S., and Press, W., \"The cosmological constant,\" Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., vol. 30, pp. 499-542, 1992.\n6 Perlmutter, S., \"Measurements of the cosmological parameters ω and λ from 42 high-redshift supernovae,\" Astrophys. J., vol. 517, pp. 565, 1999.\n7 Straumann, N., \"The mystery of the cosmic vacuum energy density and the accelerated expansion of the universe,\" European J. Phys., vol. 20, pp. 419-427, 1999.\n8 Schwarzschild, B., \"High-redshift supernovae indicate that dark energy has been around for 10 billion years,\" Physics Today, Vol. 60, 2007, pp. 21-25.\n9 Riess, A. G., et al., \"New Hubble Space Telescope Discoveries of Type Ia Supernovae at z ≥ 1: Narrowing Constraints on the Early Behavior of Dark Energy,\" Astrophys. J., Vol. 659, 2007, pp. 98-121.\n10 Astier, P., et al., \"The Supernova Legacy Survey: measurement of ΩM, ΩΛ and w from the first year data set,\" Astron. Astrophys., Vol. 447, 2006, pp. 31-48.\n11 Davis, E. W., \"Chapter 15: Faster-Than-Light Approaches in General Relativity,\" Frontiers of Propulsion Science, eds. M. G. Millis and E. W. Davis, Progress in Astronautics & Aeronautics Series, Vol. 227, American Inst. of Aeronautics & Astronautics Press, Reston, VA, 2009, pp. 473-509.\n12 Lobo, F. S. N., and Visser, M., \"Fundamental limitations on 'warp drive' spacetimes,\" Classical and Quantum Gravity, Vol. 21, 2004, pp. 5871-5892.\n13 Einstein, A., The Meaning of Relativity, Princeton Univ Press, Princeton, USA, 1955.\n14 Einstein, A., Kosmologische betrachtungen zur allgemeinen relativittstheorie, Die Naturwissenschaften, vol. 7, pp. 232, 1919.\n15 Sahni, V., and Starobinsky, A., \"The case for a positive cosmological lambda-term,\" Int. J. Mod. Phys., vol. D9, pp. 373, 2000.\n16 Guth, A., \"Ination,\" MIT-CTP-3416, 2004.\n17 Weinberg, S., \"The cosmological constant problem,\" Rev. Mod. Phys., vol. 61, pp. 1-23, 1989.\n18 F. Mandl and G. Shaw, Quantum Field Theory Revised Edition, Wiley Press, USA, 1984.\n19 Peskin. M., and Schroeder, D., An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory, Perseus Books, Cambridge Massachusetts USA, 1995.\n20 Ryder, L., Quantum Field Theory Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, 1995.\n21 Casimir, H., \"On the attraction between two perfectly conducting plates,\" Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wetensch.B, vol. 51, pp. 793, 1948.\n22 Bordag, M., \"New developments in the Casimir effect.\" Phys. Rept., vol. 353, pp. 222, 2001.\n23 Milton, K., \"The Casimir effect: Recent controversies and progress,\" J. Phys. A, vol. 37, pp. R209, 2004.\n24 Lamoreaux, S.K., \"Demonstration of the Casimir force in the 0.6 to 6 μm range,\" Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 78, pp. 5, 1997.\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bbe13cc3d4d94bdb","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n25 Roy, A., Lin, C., and Mohideen, U., \"Improved precision measurement of the Casimir Force,\" Phys. Rev. D., vol. 60, pp. 12-16, 1999.\n26 Kaku, M., Hyperspace: a scientific odyssey through parallel universes, time warps and the tenth dimension., Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, UK, 1994.\n27 Kaluza, T., \"Zum unitatsproblem in der physik (on the problem of unity in physics),\" Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin. (Math. Phys.), pp. 966-972, 1921.\n28 Klein, O., \"Quantum theory and the five-dimensional theory of relativity,\" Z. Phys., vol. 37, pp. 895-906, 1926.\n29 Polchinski, J., String Theory, Volume I. An introduction to the bosonic string, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, USA, 2001.\n30 Antoniadis, I., Arkani-Hamed,N., Dvali, G., and Dimopoulos, S., \"New dimensions at a millimeter to a fermi and superstrings at a TeV,\" Phys. Lett. B, vol. 436, pp. 257-263, 1998.\n31 Arkani-Hamed, N., Dimopoulos, S., and Dvali, G., \"Phenomenology, astrophysics and cosmology of theories with sub-millimeter dimensions and TeV scale quantum gravity,\" Phys. Rev. D, vol. 59, pp. 086004, 1999.\n32 Antoniadis, I., Arkani-Hamed, N., Dvali S., Dimopoulos, S., \"New dimensions at a millimeter to a fermi and superstrings at a tev,\" Phys. Lett. B, vol. 436, pp. 257-263, 1998.\n33 Witten, E., \"String theory dynamics in various dimensions,\" Nucl. Phys. B, vol. 443, pp. 85, 1995.\n34 Horava P., and Witten, E., \"Heterotic and type I string dynamics from eleven dimensions,\" Nucl. Phys. B, vol. 460, pp. 506-524, 1996.\n35 Lykken, J., \"Weak scale superstrings,\" Phys. Rev. D, vol. 54, pp. 3693-3697, 1996.\n36 Saharian, A., \"Fermionic Casimir effect in de Sitter spacetime,\" Talk given at International Workshop on 60 Years of Casimir Effect, Brasilia, Brazil, 23-27 Jun 2008\n37 Saharian, A., \"Bulk Casimir densities and vacuum interaction forces in higher dimensional brane models\" Phys. Rev. D, vol. 73, 064019, 2006.\n38 Russell, J., \"Classical and quantum brane cosmology,\" CERN-TH-2000-372.\n39 Maartens, R., Geometry and dynamics of the brane-world, Reference Frames and Gravitomagnetism, vol 1. World Scientific, city, state, pp. 93-119, 2001.\n40 Langlois, D., \"Gravitational and cosmological properties of a brane universe,\" Int. J. Mod. Phys. A, vol. 17, pp. 2701-2706, 2002.\n41 Deruelle, N., \"Cosmological perturbations of an expanding brane in an anti-de sitter bulk: a short review,\" Astrophys. Space Sci., vol. 283, pp. 619-626, 2003.\n42 Binetruy, P., Defayet, C., and Langlois, D., \"Non-conventional cosmology from a brane-universe,\" Nucl. Phys. B, vol. 565, pp. 269-287, 2000.\n43 Khoury, J., Ovrut, B., Steinhardt, P., and Turok, N., \"The ekpyrotic universe: Colliding branes and the origin of the hot big bang,\" Phys. Rev. D, vol. 64, 123522, 2001.\n44 Tziolas, A., and Wang, A., \"Colliding branes and formation of spacetime singularities,\" JHEP, vol 0904, p. 038, 2009.\n45 Dvali, G., and Tye, H., \"Brane ination,\" Phys. Lett. B, vol. 450, pp. 72-82, 1999.\n46 Binetruy, P., De_ayet, C., and Langlois, D., \"The radion in brane cosmology,\" Nucl. Phys. B, vol. 615, pp. 219-236, 2001.\n47 Randall, L., and Sundrum, R., \"A large mass hierarchy from a small extra dimension,\" Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 83, pp. 3370-3373, 1999.\n48 Randall, L., and Sundrum, R., \"An alternative to compactification,\" Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 83, pp. 4690-4693, 1999.\n49 Ponton, E., and Poppitz, E., \"Casimir energy and radius stabilization in five dimensional orbifolds and six-dimensional orbifolds,\" JHEP, vol. 0106, p. 019, 2001.\n50 Ito, M., \"Casimir energies due to matter fields in T² and T²/Z₂ compactifications,\" Nucl. Phys. B, vol. 668, pp. 322-334, 2003.\n51 Obousy, R., and G. Cleaver, \"Casimir energy and brane stability,\" accepted to Int. J. Mod. Phys. A, March 2009. arXiv: 0810.1096.\n52 Zel'dovich, B., \"The cosmological constant and the theory of elementary particles,\" Soviet Physics Uspekhi, vol. 11, pp. 381-393, 1968.\n53 Obousy, R., \"Investigation into Compactified Dimensions: Casimir Energies and Phenomenological Aspects,\" Ph.D. Dissertation, Baylor University, Waco, TX, 2008, arXiv: 0901.3640.\n54 Caldwell, D., Mohapatra, R., and Yellin, S., \"Large extra dimensions, sterile neutrinos and solar neutrino data,\" Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 87, pp. 041601, 2001.\n55 Caldwell, D., Mohapatra, R., and Yellin, S., \"A new fit to solar neutrino data in models with large extra dimensions,\" Phys. Rev. D, vol. 64, pp. 073001, 2001.\n56 Dienes, K., Dudas, E., and Gherghetta, T., \"Neutrino oscillations without neutrino masses or heavy mass scales: A higher dimensional seesaw mechanism,\" Nucl. Phys. B, vol. 557, pp. 25, 1999.\n57 Giddings, S., \"Gravity and strings,\" Lecture given at 32nd SLAC Summer Institute on Particle Physics, vol. SSI, 2004.\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bd22256ff18071fb","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nPlease do not use the purple \"submit\" button above. Save and email the complete file manually (see below).\n\nRange Fouler Debrief Form\n\nPlease complete this form to the best of your ability. If you do not have the requested information, please leave the field blank. If there was more than one \"group,\" please report each on a separate form for data collection purposes. You should receive a response within 5 business days.\n\nLast Name, First Name\nRank\nSquadron\nSIPR Email Address\nCrew Position\nO-3\nWSO\n\nThis information is for contact only. [REDACTED] sanitizes all reports of identifying information.\nAbsolutely no identifying information for aircrew or squadron will be recorded for analysis.\n\n[REDACTED]\nDusk\nDate (mm/dd/yy)\nTime of detection (hh:mm:ss Z)\nDay / Night\nSide No.\nBuno\nMission Description (CAS, BFM, etc)\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nContact Working Area (Ex: W-72 1A)\nContact Latitute (DD:MM:SS)\nN/S\nContact Longitude (DD:MM:SS)\nE/W\nContact Altitude (Ex: 22000)\nAltitude Constant?\nWind Dir at Contact Alt (From)\nWind Speed\n\nPlease attempt to determine a Lat / Long for the contact at initial detection. We recommend using [REDACTED] to reference the sensor-derived bearing and range relative to the bullseye you had in use. If that method is not available, any reasonable derivation of location will work, but please be as specific as possible and make a note in the comments section. These locations may be used to cue other means of tracking.\n\nWas the contact moving? Yes\nDirection/Speed (Ex. 090/15)\n\n[REDACTED]\n# of Contacts in \"Group\": 1\nPlease check all that apply:\nRound: [X] Moving Parts: [ ]\nSquare: [X] Metallic: [X]\nBalloon-shaped: [X] Markings: [ ]\nWings/Airframe: [ ] Translucent: [ ]\nOther Shape: [X] Opaque: [X]\nApparent Propulsion: [ ] Reflective: [X]\n\nCheck all that apply):\n[REDACTED]\n\nPlease use the field below to describe the contact and any interaction in your own words with as much detail as possible. Please be sure to include any detail not included in questions above.\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nDon't use the purple \"submit\" button! Save this form with filename \"Date_Squadron_RF.pdf\" and email it to [REDACTED] (Also in the global). For troubleshooting, call [REDACTED]\n\nThank you for your time. Please ensure all display tapes are ripped for the entire time of interaction and saved as a .wmv (Example: [REDACTED]. Squadron intel personnel shall upload those files to the repository located at [REDACTED]\n\nSECRET//NOFORN"} {"doc_id":"bd22256ff18071fb","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n[REDACTED] we were operating in the [REDACTED] airspace, when [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] it traveled with the wind, the closer we came to it. It was hard to assess the true direction of travel, but it was generally in a southern direction. [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] We noted no maneuvers or change in direction from the object [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] The object itself was a darker, maroonish color, approximately 12-15ft in height. Structurally, it appeared as a large, somewhat deformed balloon, but we were unable to verify that as we passed at the merge. [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] We then proceeded back to the ship, landing uneventfully."} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n6 April 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-1004-007\n\nConcepts for Extracting Energy From the Quantum Vacuum\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nConcepts for Extracting Energy From the Quantum Vacuum\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 58\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nI. Summary ........v\nII. Historical Concepts for Extracting Energy and Thermodynamic Considerations 1\nIII. Origin of Zero-Point Field Energy ........4\nElements of QED Theory ........4\nElements of SED Theory ........6\nIV. Review of Selected Experiments ........7\nVoltage Fluctuations in Coils Induced by ZPF at High Frequency ........7\nZPF Energy Extraction by Ground State Energy Reduction ........10\nTunable Casimir Effect ........14\nEV Phenomenon ........17\nV. Theoretical Considerations and Issues ........22\nQED Vacuum Revisited ........22\nQED Vacuum as a Plenum ........22\nQED Vacuum as a Mathematical \"Placeholder\" for Fluctuating Matter Fields 23\nCasimir Effect Revisited ........24\nCasimir Effect in the Plenum Picture ........24\nCasimir Effect in the Fluctuating Matter Fields Picture ........24\nType I (Transient) and Type II (Continuous) Machines ........25\nDegradability of the Vacuum ........25\nAlternatives to QED ........26\nNeoclassical Theories of QED Vacuum Fluctuation Effects ........26\nSED Model Revisited ........27\nQED Without Second-Quantized Fields ........28\nExamples of Degradable of Decaying Vacuum ........28\nGravitational Squeezing of the Vacuum ........29\nRedshifting the Vacuum ........29\nVacuum Field Stress: Negative Vacuum Energy from the Casimir Effect ...... 30\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSqueezed Quantum Vacuum ........32\nDirac Vacuum Decay: \"Sparking the Vacuum\" ........33\nMagnetically Induced Decay of the Dirac Vacuum ........34\nMelting the QCD Vacuum ........35\nSummary: ZPF Modes and Vacuum Field Energy ........37\nVI. Conclusion: The Way Forward to 2050 ........37\nAcknowledgements ........41\nAppendix: The QCD Bag Model ........42\nReferences ........44\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Illustration of the Casimir Effect ........1\nFigure 2. Vacuum-Fluctuation Battery ........1\nFigure 3. ZPE Resonant Dielectric Spheres Electrical Power Generation ........3\nFigure 4. Theoretical Voltage Spectral Density of a Tungsten Coil. ........9\nFigure 5. Energy Released from Ground State Suppression of Hydrogenic Atom in a Microcavity ........11\nFigure 6. Apparatus for Ground State Energy Suppression: Casimir Segmented Tunnels ........13\nFigure 7. Alternative Apparatus for Ground State Energy Suppression: Casimir Strip and Spacer-Channels ........13\nFigure 8. Experimental Apparatus for Ground State Energy Reduction Tests ....... 14\nFigure 9. Tunable Casimir Effect: Conductor vs. Dielectric. ........15\nFigure 10. Tunable Casimir Effect: Engine Cycle ........16\nFigure 11. Schematic of EV (Pulse Discharge Source) Device. ........18\nFigure 12. SEM of EV Damage to Ceramic Plate. ........19\nFigure 13. SEM of EV Damage to Palladium Target ........20\nFigure 14. EV Moving at Downward Angle Away From Its Source. ........21\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nConcepts for Extracting Energy From the Quantum Vacuum\n\nI. Summary\n\nQuantum theory predicts that the vacuum of space throughout the universe is filled with electromagnetic waves, random in phase and amplitude, propagating in all possible directions, and with a cubic frequency distribution. This differs from the cosmic microwave background radiation and is referred to as the electromagnetic quantum vacuum, which is the lowest energy state of otherwise empty space. When integrated over all frequency modes up to the Planck frequency, νp (~ 10^43 Hertz [Hz]), it represents an energy density of as much as 10^113 J/m3, which is far in excess of any other known energy source, even if only an infinitesimal fraction of it is accessible. Even if one is constrained to integrate over all frequency modes only up to the nucleon Compton frequency (~ 10^23 Hz),1 this energy density is still enormous (~ 10^35 J/m3). In addition, the electromagnetic quantum vacuum is not alone; it intimately couples to the charged particles in the Dirac sea of virtual fermion particle-antiparticle pairs (aka the Dirac vacuum) and thereby couples to the other interactions inherent in the Standard Model (weak and strong force vacua). However, in the Standard Model of particle physics, the weak force vacuum is essentially the electromagnetic vacuum, because photons serve as the massless eigenstates of (unified) electroweak theory with an \"effective\" coupling constant that is in fact electromagnetic in strength.2 And we can safely ignore any coupling of the quantum electromagnetic vacuum to the quantum chromodynamic vacuum in this paper because the latter coexists in two phases: (1) the ordinary vacuum exterior to the hadron, which is impenetrable to quark color, and (2) the vacuum interior of the hadron,3 in which the Yang-Mills fields that carry color (gluons) propagate freely. Both vacuum phases are separated by a boundary at the surface of the hadron on which the Yang-Mills and quark fields satisfy boundary conditions.\n\nEven though this zero-point field (ZPF) energy seems to be an inescapable consequence of quantum field theory, its energy density is so enormous as to make it difficult to reconcile. Instead, many quantum calculations subtract the ZPF energy by ad hoc means (for example, renormalization). However, the effects of the quantum vacuum ZPF that are responsible for a variety of well-known physical effects are observed, such as:\n\n• Lamb shift.\n\n• Spontaneous atomic emission.\n\n1 The characteristic frequency associated with the size of nucleons.\n2 The weak force coupling constant is merely the quantum electrodynamic/electromagnetic coupling constant (i.e., the fine structure constant, α) that is \"suppressed\" by a simple inverse-quadratic ratio of the virtual weak force particle mass to the proton mass (a factor of 10-4).\n3 Hadrons are the class of strongly interacting elementary particles which are a bound state of quarks. This class of particles has two subclasses: baryons (e.g., protons and neutrons comprised of three quarks) and mesons (comprised of two quarks).\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Low-temperature van der Waals forces.\n\n• Casimir effect.\n\n• Source of photon shot and fluctuating radiation-pressure noise in lasers.\n\n• Astronomically observed cosmological constant (aka dark energy, a form of Casimir energy according to the Schwinger-DeWitt quantum ether prescription [Reference 1-4]).\n\nRather than eliminate the ZPF energy from the equations, there is much left to be learned by exploring the possibility that it is a real energy. From this perspective, the ordinary world of matter and energy is like foam atop the quantum vacuum sea. If the ZPF is real, then there is the possibility that it can be tapped as a source of power or be harnessed to generate a propulsive force for space travel. This notion of exchanging energy with the quantum vacuum is the focus of this paper.\n\nAn aircraft propeller or jet engine can push air backwards to propel the aircraft forward. A ship or boat propeller does the same thing in water. On Earth there is air or water to push against. But a rocket in space has no material medium to push against, and so it needs to carry and eject propellant in order to provide momentum. A deep-space rocket must start out with all the propellant it will ever require, and this quickly results in the need to carry additional propellant just to propel the propellant. The breakthrough desired in space travel is to eliminate the need to carry propellant at all, that is, to generate a propulsive force without carrying and ejecting propellant?\n\nvi\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nII. Historical Concepts for Extracting Energy and Thermodynamic Considerations\n\nThe Casimir force is a force associated with the electromagnetic quantum vacuum (Reference 5). This force is an attraction between parallel uncharged metallic plates that has now been well measured and can be attributed to a minute imbalance in the ZPF energy (ZPE) density inside the cavity between the plates versus the region outside the plates as shown in Figure 1 (Reference 6-8). As shown in the figure, the vacuum is full of virtual photons (that is, zero-point vacuum fluctuations), but photons with wavelengths, λ, more than twice the plate separation, d, are excluded from the space between them, which causes the imbalance that pushes the plates together.\n\nThe primary requirement for space travel is energy. It is sometimes assumed that attempting to extract energy from the vacuum ZPF would somehow violate the laws of thermodynamics. Fortunately, it turns out that this is not the case. A thought experiment published by Forward (Reference 9, 10) demonstrated how the Casimir force could in principle be used to extract energy from the vacuum ZPF. Forward showed that any pair of conducting plates at close distance experiences an attractive Casimir force that is due to the electromagnetic ZPF of the vacuum. A \"vacuum-fluctuation battery\" can be constructed by using the Casimir force to do work on a stack of charged conducting plates as shown in Figure 2. By applying a charge of the same polarity to each conducting plate, a repulsive electrostatic force will be produced that opposes the Casimir force. If the applied electrostatic force is adjusted to be always slightly less than the Casimir force, the plates will move toward each other and the Casimir force will add energy to the electric field between the plates. The battery can be recharged by making the electrical force slightly stronger than the Casimir force to re-expand the foliated conductor.\n\nCasimir plates\nVacuum fluctuations\nElectrostatic Repulsion\nVacuum Fluctuation Attraction\n\nFigure 1. Illustration of the Casimir Effect\nFigure 2. Vacuum-Fluctuation Battery (Reference 9)\n\nCole and Puthoff (Reference 11) verified that (generic) energy extraction schemes are not contradictory to the laws of thermodynamics. For thermodynamically reversible processes, no heat will flow at temperature T = 0. However, for thermodynamically\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nirreversible processes, heat can be produced and made to flow, either at T = 0 or at\nany other T > 0 situation, such as by taking a system out of mechanical equilibrium.\nMoreover, work can be done by or done on physical systems, either at T = 0 or T > 0\nsituations, whether for a reversible or irreversible process. However, if one is\nconsidering a net cyclical process on the basis of, say, the Casimir effect, then energy\nwould not be able to be continually extracted without a violation of the second law of\nthermodynamics. Thus, Forward’s process cannot be cycled to yield a continuous\nextraction of energy. Here, the recharging of the battery would, owing to frictional and\nother losses, require more energy than is gained from the ZPF. There is no useful\nengine cycle in this process; nonetheless, the plate-contraction phase of the cycle does\ndemonstrate the ability to cause “extraction” of energy from the ZPF. It does reflect\nwork done by the ZPF on matter.\n\nAnother illustrative example of an early scheme for extracting energy from the ZPF is\ndescribed in a patent by Mead and Nachamkin (Reference 12). They propose that a set\nof resonant dielectric spheres be used to extract energy from the ZPF and convert it\ninto electrical power. They consider the use of resonant dielectric spheres, slightly\ndetuned from each other, to provide a beat-frequency downshift of the more energetic\nhigh-frequency components of the ZPF to a more easily captured form. Figure 3 shows\ntwo embodiments of the invention. The device includes a pair of dielectric structures\n(items 12, 14, 112, 114 in the figure) that are positioned proximal to each other and\nwhich intercept incident ZPE radiation (items 16, 116 in the figure). The volumetric\nsizes of the structures are selected so that they resonate at a particular frequency of\nthe incident radiation. But the volumetric sizes of the structures are chosen to be\nslightly different so that the secondary radiations emitted from them (items 18, 20, 24,\n118, 120, 124 in the figure) at resonance interfere with each other, thus producing a\nbeat frequency radiation that is at a much lower frequency than that of the incident\nradiation, and that can be converted into electrical energy. A conventional metallic\nantenna (loop or dipole type, or a RF cavity structure; items 22, 122 in the figure) can\nthen be used to collect the beat frequency radiation. This radiation is next transmitted\nfrom the antenna to a converter via an electrical conductor or waveguide (items 26,\n126 in the figure) and converted to electrical energy. The converter must include: 1) a\ntuning circuit or comparable device so that it can effectively receive the beat frequency\nradiation, 2) a transformer to convert the energy to electrical current having a desired\nvoltage, and 3) a rectifier to convert the energy to electrical current having a desired\nwaveform (items 28, 30, 32, 34, 128, 130, 132 in the figure).\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 3. ZPE Resonant Dielectric Spheres Electrical Power Generation (Reference 12)\n\nThe receiving structures are composed of dielectric material in order to diffract and scatter the incident ZPE radiation. The volumetric sizing requirements for the receiving structures are selected to enable them to resonate at a high frequency corresponding to the incident ZPE radiation, based on the parameters of frequency of the incident ZPE radiation, and the propagation characteristics of the medium (vacuum or otherwise) and the receiving structures. Since the ZPE radiation energy density increases with increasing frequency, greater amounts of electromagnetic energy are potentially available at higher frequencies. Consequently, the size of the receiving structures must be miniaturized in order to produce greater amounts of energy from a system located within a space or volume of a given size. Therefore, the smaller the size of the receiving structures, the greater the amount of energy that can in principle be produced by the system.\n\nAlthough a computer model study performed at the Air Force Research Laboratory (Edwards AFB, CA) indicates that the invention could work, no experimental study has been performed to validate this in the lab (F. B. Mead, private communication, 2002). Regarding critiques, it is not clear how the beat frequency can be picked up by the receiving loop antenna. There is no nonlinear method in the invention showing that an electromagnetic beat frequency can be generated and coupled to the loop. Without a nonlinear coupling method there will be no sidebands, one of which would be frequency down-shifted and called the beat frequency. The coupling method requires the generation of sidebands in the mixing of two different frequencies via a nonlinear technique. However, an easy resolution to this potential deficiency is that the resonant dielectric spheres could be constructed of a nonlinear dielectric material.\n\nAlthough several novel ZPF energy extraction mechanisms have been proposed in the popular and technical literature, no practicable technique has been successfully demonstrated in the laboratory. To better understand how ZPE extraction methods\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":10,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThis ZPE term is added to the classical blackbody spectral radiation energy density ρ(ω)dω (that is, the energy per unit volume of radiation in the frequency interval (ω, ω + dω)) (Reference 14):\n\nρ(ω) dω = (ω²/π²c³) [ hω/(exp(hω/kT) − 1) + hω/2 ] dω\n= (hω³/2π²c³) coth(hω/2kT) dω,\n\n(1)\n\nwhere c is the speed of light (3.0 × 10⁸ m/s), k is Boltzmann's constant (1.3807 × 10⁻²³ J/K), T is the absolute temperature, and ω = 2πν is the angular frequency. The factor outside the square brackets in the first line of Equation (1) is the density of mode (or photon) states (that is, the number of states per unit frequency interval per unit volume); the first term inside the square brackets is the standard Planck blackbody radiation energy per mode; and the second term inside the square brackets is the quantum zero-point energy per mode. Equation (1) is called the Zero-Point Planck (ZPP) spectral radiation energy density. Planck first added the ZPE term to the classical blackbody spectral radiation energy density in 1912, although it was Einstein, Hopf, and Stern who actually recognized the physical significance of this term in 1913 (Reference 14). Direct spectroscopic evidence for the reality of ZPE was provided by Mulliken's boron monoxide spectral band experiments in 1924, several months before Heisenberg first derived the ZPE for a harmonic oscillator from his new quantum matrix mechanics theory (Reference 15).\n\nFollowing this line of reasoning, quantum physics predicts that all of space must be filled with electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations (aka the zero-point field) creating a universal sea of zero-point energy. The density of this energy depends critically on where the frequency of the zero-point fluctuations ceases. Since space itself is currently thought to break up into a kind of \"quantum foam\" at the Planck length, λp (~ 10⁻³⁵ m), it is argued that the ZPF must cease at the corresponding νp. If true, then the ZPE density would be ~ 10¹¹³ J/m³, 108 orders of magnitude greater than the radiant energy at the center of the Sun! Formally, in Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) theory, the ZPE energy density is taken as infinite; however, arguments based on quantum gravity considerations yield a finite cutoff at νp. Therefore, the spectral energy density is given by ρ(ω)dω = (ℏω³/2π²c³)dω, which integrates to an energy density, ρE = ℏνp⁴/8π²c³ ≈ 10¹¹³ J/m³. As large as the ZPE is, interactions with it are typically cut off at lower frequencies depending on the particle coupling constants or their structure. Nevertheless, the potential ZPF energy density predicted by quantum physics is enormous.\n\nMany experts have claimed that an enormous vacuum ZPF energy density would produce a corresponding enormous gravitational force of attraction (via Einstein's General Theory of Relativity) that would cause the immediate collapse of the entire universe. Thus they argue that such enormous vacuum energy cannot be real due to the fact that our universe is observed to be undergoing accelerated expansion. However, such arguments are spurious because numerous studies in quantum field theory show that it is the low-frequency ZPF modes that contribute significantly to the physical vacuum energy, because 1) only the low-frequency modes are affected by the\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\npresence of cosmological spacetime curvature, and 2) the high-frequency modes are\nunaffected by the presence of cosmological spacetime curvature so they take the flat\nMinkowski spacetime form; that is, these modes contribute nothing to the physical\nvacuum energy (Reference 4). This then enforces a very low-frequency cutoff that\nrenormalizes the total vacuum energy, leading to a minute residual cosmological\nvacuum energy density of 10⁻⁹ J/m³, which has been observed. Also, investigators\nstudying supersymmetric and superstring quantum gravity theories have proposed the\nlimited cancellation of some positive energy electromagnetic ZPF modes by some\nnegative energy fermionic (Dirac vacuum) ZPF modes as an explanation for the\nobserved minute vacuum energy density.\n\nELEMENTS OF SED THEORY\n\nAn alternative to QED, stochastic electrodynamics (SED) identifies the origin of the ZPF\nas a direct consequence of a classical ZPF background. SED begins with the ordinary\nclassical electrodynamics of Maxwell and Lorentz, but instead of assuming the\ntraditional homogeneous solution of the source-free differential wave equations for the\nelectromagnetic potentials, one instead considers that due to multiple charged particles\nmoving throughout the universe, there is always a random electromagnetic radiation\nbackground present that affects the particle(s) in any experiment. This new boundary\ncondition (random radiation background) replaces the prior null background of\ntraditional classical electrodynamics. Moreover, the principle of relativity dictates that\nidentical experiments performed in different inertial frames must yield the same result,\nand that this random classical electromagnetic radiation must be isotropic in all inertial\nframes; it is invariant under scattering by a dipole oscillator, invariant under redshift\n(Doppler, cosmological, gravitational, no Einstein-Hopf drag force), and must therefore\nhave a Lorentz-invariant energy density spectrum. The only energy density spectrum\nthat obeys such conditions is one that is proportional to the cubic power of the\nfrequency. Interestingly, this is exactly the same frequency dependence as that of the\nQED spectral ZPF energy density described above, when the temperature T is set to\nzero in Equation (1). Thus in SED, the random radiation assumes the role of the ZPE of\nQED, and is termed the classical electromagnetic ZPE. Planck's constant appears then in\nSED as an adjustable parameter that sets the scale of the ZPE spectral density.\n\nThe formulation of the SED model has evolved over time, beginning with the work of\nNernst in 1916 and the later foundational work of Marshall and Boyer in the 1960s\n(Reference 14). The original Standard SED model was based on random phases with\nfixed electric-field mode amplitudes. The more recent Modified SED model employs\nrandom phases with random electric-field mode amplitudes and a full probability\ndistribution for the ground state amplitude, in agreement with quantum theory\n(Reference 16). A comparison of SED with quantum theory shows that the first and\nsecond moments of the spectral energy distribution are identical, but beyond that, the\ndistributions diverge widely. Nevertheless, several quantum theory results have been\nreproduced by means of the SED approach, such as (Reference 14, 17):\n\n• Quantum mechanical harmonic oscillator.\n\n• Lamb shift.\n\n• Blackbody radiation.\n\n6\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Van der Waals forces.\n• Casimir forces.\n• Diamagnetism.\n• Davies-Unruh Effect.\n\nThe strength of the SED model is that it is heuristically appealing, with transparent derivations, and it is applicable to linear systems. SED calculations have also been shown to be in one-to-one correspondence with the expectation values of the Heisenberg quantum equations of motion for linear systems. Both SED and QED will play a role in the discussions to follow.\n\nIV. Review of Selected Experiments\n\nIn what follows, is an outline each of the proposed experimental concepts that were selected for theoretical and laboratory investigation. A subset of our proposed concepts has undergone preliminary evaluation by Lockheed-Martin review panels involving both internal R&D personnel and outside experts on theory and experimentation (V. Teofilo, private communication, 2005).\n\nVOLTAGE FLUCTUATIONS IN COILS INDUCED BY ZPF AT HIGH FREQUENCY\n\nIn a series of experiments, Koch et al. (Reference 18-20) measured voltage fluctuations in resistive wire circuits that are induced by the ZPF. The Koch et al. result is striking corroboration of the reality of the ZPF and proves that the ZPF can do real work (cause measurable currents). Although the Koch et al. experiment detected minuscule amounts of ZPF energy, it shows the principle of ZPF energy circuitry to detect vacuum fluctuations and opens the door to consideration of means to extract useful amounts of energy. The secondary consequences on other phenomena, if energy can be successfully extracted, have not yet been investigated.\n\nBlanco et al. (Reference 21) have proposed a method for enhancing the ZPF-induced voltage fluctuations in circuits. Theoretically treating a coil of wire as an antenna, they argue that the antenna-like radiation resistance of the coil should be included in the total resistance of the circuit, and suggest that this total resistance should be used in the theoretical computation of ZPF-induced voltage fluctuations. Because of the strong dependence of the radiation resistance on the number of coil turns (quadratic scaling), coil radius (quartic scaling), and frequency (quartic scaling), any enhanced ZPF-induced voltage fluctuations should be measurable in the laboratory at readily accessible frequencies (100 MHz compared to the 100 GHz range necessary in the Koch et al. experiments).\n\nIn the theory of Blanco et al., random voltage fluctuations are conveniently described by their frequency spectrum. That is, given a sufficient time interval of measured voltages, the measurements are Fourier transformed to the frequency domain to determine how the voltage fluctuations are distributed (for example, quantity of low-frequency, long duration fluctuations relative to high-frequency, short-duration\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nfluctuations). Theoretically, the spectrum of voltage fluctuations, S(ω,T), of a resistive circuit is given by (Reference 21):\n\nS(ω,T) = R(ω,T)/π · ħω/2 coth(ħω/2kT) (2)\n\nwhere R(ω,T) is the total resistance (ohmic plus radiative), ω is the (angular) frequency, and T is the absolute temperature. The resistance R(ω,T) is temperature dependent through its ohmic contribution.⁶ Note the similar hyperbolic cotangent functions appearing in Equation (2) and in the second line of Equation (1). The postulate of Blanco et al. is that the total resistance must include the radiation resistance of the circuit (Reference 21):\n\nR(ω,T) = R_ohmic(ω,T) + R_rad(ω) (3)\n\nUnder the assumption that the wavelengths of the ZPF modes of interest are larger than the dimensions of the circuit, the radiation resistance of a coil is given by (Reference 21):\n\nR_rad(ω) = 2/3 · π²N²/c · (aω/c)^4 (4)\n\nwhere N is the number of coil turns, and a is the radius of the coil winding.\n\nAccording to Blanco et al., large enhancements in ZPF-induced voltage fluctuations are possible. By reducing the temperature to minimize ohmic resistance, making the coil of many turns and large radius, and performing measurements at high frequency, it should be possible to investigate this amplification effect. The predicted coil-enhanced voltage spectrum can readily be computed. The result is shown in Figure 4 for a 1 cm diameter coil of 2000 turns, made of 38 AWG tungsten wire, and kept at a temperature of 3 K. In Figure 4, the upper (blue) curve represents the predicted voltage spectral density for the combined ohmic plus radiation resistance. The lower (red) curve is the predicted result when radiation resistance is ignored. If the postulate of Blanco et al. is correct, the enhancement in voltage fluctuations due to the antenna-like nature of the coil should be easily measured at frequencies as low as 100 MHz (where the coil enhancement effect is ~ 100-fold for tungsten).\n\n⁶ The radiation resistance depends only on frequency.\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n10-17\n10-18\nMaterial: W\nN coil: 2000\n10-19\na coil: 1 cm\nS(f,T) (V²/Hz)\n10-20\nb coil: 0.01 cm\n10-21\nT: 3 Kelvin\n10-22\n10-23\n107\n108\n109\nf (Hz)\n\nFigure 4. Theoretical Voltage Spectral Density of a Tungsten Coil\n\nTo successfully measure the ZPF-induced voltage fluctuations, the requirements of low temperature, large coil, and high frequency must be met. The low-temperature requirement is met by performing the experiment in a cooled dewar. Existing high-quality cryogenic dewars (pumped down to 3 K) and sensitive laboratory instruments are suitable for the measurements. The cold spot in one particular dewar under consideration is cylindrical, 2.5 cm in both diameter and height. The largest coil that can be installed will thus have a coil radius of approximately a = 1 cm. To keep the linear dimension of the coil small will require a small wire thicknesses, perhaps b = 0.01 cm (gauge 38 AWG). By winding the coil in a number of layers (10 or 12 layers), a large number of turns can be accommodated, perhaps N = 2,000 turns. To minimize ohmic resistance, wire made of tungsten (W) is preferred; however, copper (Cu) is a suitable alternative.\n\nVoltage fluctuations in the 100 MHz range are easily detected using commercially available laboratory equipment; hence this experiment could be performed using tungsten without resorting to the more sophisticated Josephson junction techniques required by Koch et al. for their higher frequency measurements. For a copper wire coil, the magnitude of the enhancement effect is reduced somewhat compared to the tungsten results shown in Figure 4. But for frequencies approaching the GHz regime, the radiation resistance enhancement effect in copper wire is still predicted to be over\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nfour orders of magnitude larger. Commercial equipment readily allows measurements of the voltage spectrum in the GHz regime. Therefore, given a cost tradeoff of copper vs. tungsten coil fabrication, the use of copper coils may be preferred. Suitable coils can be fabricated by a custom coil-winding vendor. A second coil can be used in a control experiment constructed with the same parameters as the first coil, but with half of its turns wound in the reverse direction. This will make the coil non-inductive so that its voltage spectral density should correspond to the lower red curve in Figure 4.\n\nZPF ENERGY EXTRACTION BY GROUND STATE ENERGY REDUCTION\n\nAs first analyzed by Boyer (Reference 22), and later refined by Puthoff (Reference 23), the following paradox was addressed: even though atomic ground states involve electrons in accelerated motion, such states are nonetheless radiationless in nature - even though it is well known from classical electrodynamics that charged particles undergoing acceleration must always emit radiation. For the standard Bohr ground state orbit of the hydrogen atom, this was interpreted as an equilibrium process in which radiation by the electron in its ground state orbit was compensated by absorption of radiation from the background vacuum electromagnetic ZPE. This interpretation has recently been strengthened by the analyses of Cole and Zou (Reference 24, 25) using a SED model for the vacuum ZPE. Since the balance between emitted orbital-acceleration radiation and absorbed ZPE radiation is modeled as taking place primarily at the ground state orbital frequency, one can consider the possibility of using this feature in some type of mechanism to extract energy from the ZPF. One fundamental difference between the SED interpretation and that of quantum mechanics is that in quantum mechanics the 1s state of the electron is regarded as having zero angular momentum, whereas in the SED interpretation the electron has an angular momentum of m_e c r_e /137 .7\n\nThe Bohr radius of the hydrogen atom in the SED view is 0.529 Å. This implies that the wavelength (λ) of zero-point radiation responsible for sustaining the orbit is 2π · 0.529 · 137 = 455 Å (or 0.0455 μm). It has been conjectured by Puthoff and Haisch (private communication, 2004) that suppression of zero-point radiation at this wavelength (and at shorter wavelengths) inside a Casimir microcavity could result in the decay of the electron to a lower energy state determined by a new balance between classical emission of an accelerated charge and absorption of zero-point radiation at λ < 455 Å, where λ depends on the microcavity plate separation (d). Since the frequency of this orbit is 6.6 × 10^15 Hz, no matter how quickly the atom were to be injected into a Casimir microcavity, one would assume that the decay process would be a slow one as experienced by the orbiting electron. Figure 5 shows a schematic representation of a hydrogenic atom in free space and inside a microcavity.\n\n7 m_e = electron mass (9.11 × 10^-31 kg), r_e = electron radius, atomic fine structure (a.k.a. QED coupling) constant α = 1/137, and c/137 is the classical orbital velocity of the ground state electron.\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 5. Energy Released from Ground State Suppression of Hydrogenic Atom in a Microcavity. (r_b = free-space Bohr orbit radius, r_b' = suppressed Bohr orbit radius, λ = resonant wavelength of Bohr orbit, and E_out = released energy).\n\nConsider the possibility that the decay to a new sub-Bohr ground state would involve gradual release of energy in the form of heat, rather than a sudden optical radiation signature. Since the binding energy of the electron is 13.6 eV,8 it is estimated that the amount of energy released in this process could be on the order of 1 to 10 eV for injection of the hydrogen atom into a Casimir cavity of d = 250 Å. Furthermore, consider the possibility that when the electron exits the cavity it would reabsorb energy from the zero-point field and be re-excited to its normal state. If these conjectures were to be verified by experiment, then the energy extracted in the process comes at the expense of the zero-point field, which in the SED interpretation propagates at the speed of light throughout the universe. In effect the energy would be extracted locally and replenished globally. The secondary consequences on other phenomena, if this energy conversion were to succeed, have not yet been investigated. However, on a cautionary note, the conflicts between SED and QED theories (discussed in Section V) raise questions as to whether the conjectured approach discussed here is viable. This issue is perhaps best addressed by experiment for its resolution.\n\nIn terms of an experimental test, consider using monatomic gases or liquids flowing in a block with Casimir tunnels, which has the following attributes: 1) no dissociation process is required for monatomic gases or liquids, 2) heavier element atoms are approximately two to four times larger than hydrogen and thus can utilize and be affected by a larger Casimir cavity, 3) heavier elements have numerous outer shell electrons, several of which may be simultaneously affected by the reduction of zero-point radiation in a Casimir cavity.\n\nAll of the noble gas elements contain ns electrons. He (Z = 2, r = 1.2 Å) has two 1s electrons. Ne (Z = 10, r = 1.3 Å) has two each of 1s and 2s electrons. Ar (Z = 18, r = 1.6 Å) has two each of 1s, 2s, and 3s electrons. Kr (Z = 36, r = 1.8 Å) has two of each\n\n8 1 eV = 1.602 × 10^-19 J.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nof 1s, 2s, 3s, and 4s electrons. Xe (Z = 54, r = 2.05 Å) has two of each of 1s, 2s, 3s, 4s and 5s electrons. Larger Casimir cavities would also be expected to have an effect on the energetics of the outer electron shells (at larger radii). One could therefore expect that a Casimir cavity having d = 0.1 μm could have an effect on reducing the energy levels of the outermost pair of s electrons, and possibly also p electrons and intermediate shell s electrons as well.\n\nContinuing with this model, it is reasonable to expect that a 0.1 μm Casimir cavity could result in a release of 1 to 10 eV for each injection of a He, Ne, Ar, Kr or Xe atom into such a cavity. According to Maclay (Reference 26), a long cylindrical Casimir cavity results in an inward force on the cavity walls due to the exclusion of interior ZPF modes. In the \"exclusion of modes\" interpretation of the Casimir force, this implies that a cylindrical cavity of diameter 0.1 μm could yield the desired decay of outer shell electrons and subsequent release of energy. If one lets the length of the cylinder be 100 times the width, this results in λ = 10 μm for the length of the Casimir tunnel. Taking advantage of this effect, Puthoff (private communication, 2004) and Haisch and Moddel (Reference 27) propose a segmented tunnel consisting of alternating conducting and non-conducting materials, each 10 μm in length. In a length of 1 cm, there could be 500 such pairs in segments, resulting in 500 energy releases (each yielding 1 to 10 eV) for each transit of an atom through the entire 1 cm-long Casimir tunnel.\n\nNow consider a 1 cm3 block that is built up of 10 μm thick alternating layers as described above (see Figure 6 for an illustration of this apparatus). Assume that tunnels of 0.1 μm diameter could be drilled through the cube perpendicular to the layers (this is not physically possible, of course; tunnel manufacture must be done differently). If 10 percent of the cross section comprises entrance to some 1.3 billion tunnels, then the amount of energy released would be proportional to the flow rate of the gas through the tunnels (for the number of entrances and exits through Casimir segments). A flow rate of 10 cm/s through a total cross sectional area of 0.1 cm2 yields 1 cm3 of gas per second flowing through the tunnels, which at STP would be 2.7 × 10^19 atoms. A very simple sealed, closed-loop pumping system could maintain such a continuous gas flow. Since each atom interacts 500 times during its passage, there would be 1.3 × 10^22 transitions per second in the entire cube of 1 cm3. An energy release of 1 to 10 eV per transition corresponds to 2,150 to 21,500 W of power released from the entire Casimir cube of tunnels. This can also be achieved by using a pair of plates with conducting strips creating Casimir cavities (via 5000 strip pairs) that are separated by 0.1 μm spacers, through which Hg liquid or monatomic gases (for example, He, Ne, Ar, Kr, or Xe) flow (Reference 27). See Figure 7 for an illustration of this apparatus. However, again, all of this assumes that the chain of conjectures detailed above is correct. Fortunately, this can be experimentally tested.\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 6. Apparatus for Ground State Energy Suppression: Casimir Segmented Tunnels\n\nFigure 7. Alternative Apparatus for Ground State Energy Suppression: Casimir Strip and Spacer-Channels\n\nMicrocavity fabrication to match the atomic ground states is daunting because there will potentially be fabrication irregularities that cause edge and surface effects which act upon the particles as they enter or exit the Casimir region. And it is not possible to drill 1.3 billion tunnels having diameters of 0.1 μm. However, it should be feasible to use microchip technology to etch holes into the individual layers first and then assemble the stack. Extremely fine coregistration and alignment of stacks would be an issue, but a surmountable one. A much smaller number of layer pairs and tunnels would suffice for a measurable demonstration of release of ZPE by this process. If such a small-scale demonstration succeeds, larger versions that convert more energy could be built that also take advantage of more efficient thermal-to-electrical energy conversion methods. Also if successful, such apparatuses could be used to explore for secondary effects of converting quantum vacuum energy into thermal, then electrical energy.\n\nFurther investigation by Puthoff et al. (Reference 28) was based on the premise that the above principle is broadly applicable to other than just atomic ground states. In their experiment, H2 gas was passed through a 1 μm Casimir cavity to suppress the ZPE radiation at the vibrational ground state of the H2 molecule. The anticipated signature for such a process would be an increase in the dissociation energy of the molecule. Initial experiments, shown in Figure 8, were carried out at the Synchrotron Radiation Center at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, where an intense UV beam is available to disassociate gas molecules. Unfortunately, problems with the synchrotron beam (unrelated to the experiment) prevented a definitive result from being obtained, so the efficacy of this ZPE-extraction approach remains undetermined at the present time. Further experimentation to investigate this hypothesis has yet to be completed.\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 8. Experimental Apparatus for Ground State Energy Reduction Tests\n\nTUNABLE CASIMIR EFFECT\n\nAs previously discussed, the Casimir Effect is a unique ZPF-driven quantum force that occurs between closely-spaced conductive cavity walls (or plates). If left unfettered, the plates will collapse together and energy is converted from the ZPF into heat (or other forms of energy) in accordance with the expression E/A = -π²hc/720d³, where E/A is the energy per unit area of the plates and d is the plate separation. Investigation of this mechanism by Cole and Puthoff (Reference 11) showed that this process fully obeys energy conservation and thermodynamic laws.\n\nAlthough the Casimir force is conservative, and thus the Casimir device might appear to be a one-shot device, the fact that the attractive Casimir force is weaker for dielectric plates compared to conductive plates raises the possibility of the use of thin-film switchable mirrors to obtain a recycling engine (Reference 29-31). Figure 9 shows a comparison of the strength of the Casimir force in a conductive cavity with that in a dielectric cavity. In such an application the plates are drawn together by the stronger force associated with the conducting state and withdrawn after switching to the dielectric state. The engine cycle for this concept is shown in Figure 10. Assuming optimistic conditions for practical devices (negligible energy required for switching; plate separation oscillations between 30 nm and 15 nm for 1 cm2 plates; driving circuit\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n≈ 10 times the weight of the Casimir plates, and so forth), an estimate of the achievable power might be obtained. Based on the described parameters, and assuming a switching from a purely conductive state to a dielectric constant of K = 4, yields a figure of merit of ≈ 35 × f(MHz) W/kg (f = switching rate) for the power density (Reference 29). This can be compared to the power density of ≈ 5 W/kg achieved by current radioisotope thermoelectric generators. The predicted output power per unit area for this experimental device is ≈ 10⁻⁶ f (MHz)/4[d(μm)]³ W/cm².\nSpacing, d (μm)\n0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0\n0 5 10 15 20 25 30\nK = 4\nconductor\nEnergy/Unit Area × 10¹⁰ (J/m²)\nFigure 9. Tunable Casimir Effect: Conductor vs. Dielectric\n15\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nSpacing, d (μm)\n0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0\n0 5 10 15 20 25 30\ninput energy\nK = 4\nconductor\noutput energy\nEnergy/Unit Area × 10¹⁰ (J/m²)\nFigure 10. Tunable Casimir Effect: Engine Cycle\nAnother \"tunable\" conductive-type plate experiment under consideration involves the use of plates consisting of three-dimensional photonic crystals, with the bandgap of the photons that can transmit through the structure being a \"tunable\" value. Using microelectromechanical processing methods, Sandia National Laboratory has produced such crystals and is researching methods of actively modifying the structures while in use (Reference 32). The technology requirements for this concept are the nano-fabrication of microcavities with thin-film deposited surfaces, RF-driven piezoelectric mounts for cavity oscillation, mirror-switching modality (for example, hydrogen pressure modulation), and calorimetric measurement of energy/heat production.\nAn initial experiment to explore this concept was recently performed by Iannuzzi et al. (Reference 33). They investigated the effect of hydrogen switchable mirrors (HSMs) on the Casimir force. HSMs are shiny metals in their \"as deposited\" state. However, when they are exposed to a hydrogen-rich atmosphere, they become optically transparent. Because the electromagnetic ZPF depends on the optical properties of the surfaces, the Casimir force of attraction between two HSMs in air should be different than the attraction between the same HSMs immersed in a hydrogen-rich atmosphere. That is because one expects that the Casimir force will be much weaker when the HSM is in the\n16\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ntransparent state rather than in the reflective state. The experiment tested this for plate separations of 70 - 400 nm.\nIannuzzi et al.'s experimental results showed that the Casimir force did not noticeably decrease after filling the experimental apparatus with hydrogen. This may have occurred for two reasons. First, the dielectric properties of the HSMs used in the experiment are only known only in a limited range of wavelengths spanning 0.3 - 2.5 μm, while the experiment measured the transparency of the HSMs over a wavelength range of 0.5 - 3 μm. This narrower wavelength span excludes the rest of the electromagnetic ZPF modes having wavelengths shorter than 0.5 μm and longer than 3 μm. The ZPF modes lying outside this narrow wavelength span were not affected by the hydrogenation-induced transparency of the HSMs, hence their contribution to the total Casimir force acting between the HSMs was not included. One would expect to see a significant decrease of the Casimir force if the hydrogenation-induced transparency of the HSMs had affected all of the ZPF mode wavelengths ranging from IR to UV (ZPF modes with λ >> 2.5 μm will not give rise to large contributions to the force). Second, the experiment demonstrated a property of the Lifshitz theory (see Reference 33 for more detail), that in order to significantly change the Casimir force between surfaces at separations on the order of 100 nm it is not sufficient just to change their optical (IR and visible) reflectivity, but it is necessary to modify their dielectric functions over a much wider spectral range. This comports with the first reason, and indicates that more theoretical and experimental work is needed to overcome the shortcomings of this experiment, and allow for the design and testing of new experiments that can achieve Casimir plate transparency over a wider spectral range.\nA notion similar to the tunable Casimir Effect involves changing the dimensions of a rectangular \"Casimir box.\" Forward (Reference 34) proposed a paradox in which energy could be extracted by altering the aspect ratio of a conductive rectangular Casimir cavity over a specific cycle of dimension changes (for example, varying width while holding length constant). It was subsequently shown by Maclay (Reference 26, 35), that the Casimir energy inside the box is not isotropic, varying in such a way that more work is expended in cycling the box dimensions than can be extracted. It appears that no net gain of energy is theoretically possible in this scheme. Whether such considerations apply to the tunable Casimir cavity concept remains to be assessed.\nEV PHENOMENON\nShoulders (Reference 36) developed an experimental program to explore the physics of microscopic plasma vortices (aka force-free plasmoids), which are thought to be a form of ball lightning (Reference 37). This study was motivated by the earlier experimental work of Wells at the Princeton University Plasma Physics Laboratory, Bostick and Nardi at the Stevens Inst. of Technology, and their collaborators (Reference 38-45). Shoulders became interested in the possibility of stable, quantized force-free structures that could be taken apart by some process to yield a net energy gain for power generation. The foundation for this speculation was Nardi et al.'s (Reference 45) observation of strange electron concentrations they called vortex filaments that formed in an electron beam made by plasma focus or relativistic electron beam machines, which exhibited electron concentrations that appeared to violate the space charge law. Furthermore, Nardi et al. observed that the vortex filaments were striking exposed materials (for example, metals, dielectrics, ceramics, glass), boring smooth channels straight through them, and sometimes exploding with such a large force that they\n17\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ncreated impact craters or holes in the materials. Piestrup et al. (Reference 46) performed more recent experiments to investigate this unusual phenomenon. This discovery inspired Shoulders to consider vortex filaments as a potential new source of energy, and hence he named them electromagnetic vortices or \"EVs.\" However, given that he could not experimentally verify the vortex nature of the phenomenon, he later redefined EV to mean Electrum Validum (roughly translated as strong electron).\nBostick and Shoulders began collaborating and realized that EVs were much easier to generate and observe using micro-arc discharge devices because they are usually obscured by surrounding plasma in large high-power plasma machines. This led Shoulders to design a series of low-voltage, low-power micro-arc discharge (or condensed-charge emission) devices to produce EVs in the lab. Figure 11 shows a schematic diagram for one embodiment of an EV (pulse discharge source) device. The EVs are generated at the cathode tip and then follow the path (dashed line above the dielectric) to the impact site on the ground plane (in the figure, C = capacitor and V = voltage). The EVs generated by such devices were able to reproduce the material damage observed in Nardi et al.'s earlier experiments.\n-V\nCATHODE\nPATH\nDIELECTRIC\nIMPACT SITE\nGROUND PLANE\nC\nFigure 11. Schematic of EV (Pulse Discharge Source) Device (Reference 47)\n18\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 12 shows a scanning electron microscope (SEM) photograph of the damage inflicted by a single EV burst fired along an aluminum-oxide ceramic plate. The EV bored through the ceramic forming a smooth symmetrical channel along its path.\nFigure 12. SEM of EV Damage to Ceramic Plate (20 um scale) (Reference 36)\n19\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 13 shows a SEM photo of a single EV shot on a Palladium (Pd) target from a 40 pF capacitor charged to 3,000 Volts (containing 7.5 × 10^11 electrons). At least 100 tiny craters were formed in the target. The larger craters formed in the Pd target as seen in the photo suggest a very energetic impact that melted the Pd locally, making a small hole surrounded by a crater wall.\n\nFigure 13. SEM of EV Damage to Palladium Target (Reference 36)\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 14 shows an example of an EV moving away from its source and shedding\nelectrons while giving off light as it was decaying.\n\n01:00:19:91\n\nFigure 14. EV (large blob at bottom) Moving at Downward Angle Away From Its Source (smaller blob\nnear center of photo) (Reference 36)\n\nShoulders' experimental studies claim that EVs have physical characteristics\ncorresponding to the phenomenon observed by Nardi et al. His conclusions were that\nEVs are compact spherically shaped balls (diameter ≈ 1 - 20 μm) of condensed high-\ndensity charge (~ 10^30 electrons/m^3) with an internal electric field > 10^8 V/m, a charge-\nto-mass ratio of 1.7588 × 10^11 Coulomb/kg (≈ electron's charge-to-mass ratio), and a\nsurface current density of 6 × 10^15 Amps/m^2 (Reference 36). Shoulders also reported\nthat EVs are a source of (copious) X-rays; a single EV discharge gun can produce\nmultiple EVs in which the coupling between adjacent EVs produces quasi-stable\nstructures (chains); and EVs respond like an electron under deflection by external fields\nof known polarity.\n\nSince electrons would not be expected to bind together due to their mutual Coulomb\nrepulsion, a speculative model based on the vacuum electromagnetic ZPF was formed\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nto explain the existence of EVs. The emerging laboratory evidence led investigators to consider the hypothesis that the Casimir effect may be a major contributing mechanism to the formation of EVs in micro-arc discharges. This conjecture is based on models by Casimir (Reference 48) and Puthoff and Piestrup (Reference 49) suggesting that the generation of a relatively cold, dense, non-neutral (charged) plasma results in charge-condensation effects that may be attributable to a Casimir-type pinch effect (that is, ZPF-induced pressure forces) in which the inverse square-law Coulomb repulsion is overcome by an attractive inverse fourth-law Casimir force to yield a stable configuration of bound charges at small dimensions. This is a derivative of Casimir's semi-classical model of the electron in which a dense shell-like distribution of charge might suppress vacuum fields in the interior of the shell (Reference 48). However, initial application of Casimir's model found that the vacuum field inside the modeled electron was found to augment rather than offset the divergent Coulomb field thus rendering the electron's self-energy divergent. Puthoff (Reference 50) later resolved this problem by developing a self-consistent vacuum-fluctuation-based model in which the net contribution to the point-like electron's self-energy by its Coulomb and vacuum fields vanishes thus rendering a stable finite-mass electron.\n\nShoulders and collaborators subsequently investigated different approaches to extracting useful energy from the vacuum ZPF by way of exploiting EV phenomenon. Even though EVs can be easily produced in the lab, efforts to test this hypothesis have not met with success due to technical problems. However, this topic is ideal to pursue for future research.\n\nV. Theoretical Considerations and Issues\n\nQED VACUUM REVISITED\n\nQED Vacuum as a Plenum\n\nContinued theoretical and experimental research has revealed that the vacuum constitutes an active agent that contributes to a host of phenomena ranging from microscopic level shifts of atomic states to possible connections to the cause of cosmological expansion (Reference 14, 51). As more of its attributes are explored, the vacuum has been found to exhibit phenomena characteristic of an optical medium, such as induced birefringence in the presence of an applied magnetic field (Reference 52), and breakdown (decay) in the presence of external electric fields (Reference 53-55). The current view is that the vacuum has structure, and can be considered much like a medium of classical physics. However, the vacuum differs significantly from that of a classical medium due to the existence of quantum fluctuations. A primary attribute of quantum theory is the concept of matter and field fluctuations, rooted in Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.\n\nIn second-quantized QED theory, the theory that applies to the electromagnetic vacuum, the canonical approach to representing fluctuations of the free vacuum electromagnetic field is to express the field distribution in terms of standing- or traveling-wave normal modes. Section I suggested that the large value of the integrated ZPE density fuels the concept of potentially useful vacuum energy conversion to other forms, should even some small part of the spectral energy distribution be accessible for conversion by technological means.\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nQED Vacuum as a Mathematical “Placeholder” for Fluctuating Matter Fields\n\nThe treatment of the QED vacuum as a fluctuating plenum with (formally) infinite energy density has caused some physicists to call into question the viability of the second-quantized QED formalism. Jaynes, for example, in considering the consequences for calculation of the Lamb shift of the 2s level of the hydrogen atom under the assumption of a much more modest electron Compton frequency cutoff (~ 10²¹ Hz), calculates a fluctuating power flow for the Poynting vector of 6 × 10²⁰ MW/cm² – comparable in every square centimeter to the total power output of the sun – and states that “real radiation of that intensity would do a little more than just shift the 2s level by 4 microvolts” (Reference 56). However, despite alternatives to the formalism of QED that have been suggested (more on this later), second-quantized QED cannot be lightly dismissed; and this is so even though the infinities that must be dealt with by such procedures as renormalization caused even one of its founders, Paul Dirac, to remark: “This is just not sensible mathematics. Sensible mathematics involves neglecting a quantity when it turns out to be small – not neglecting it because it is infinitely great and you do not want it” (Reference 57).\n\nA second argument that can be raised against using the QED formalism to further explore vacuum fluctuation physics is that, despite the magnitude of the energy density potentially associated with vacuum electromagnetic fluctuations, observation of the cosmological constant—a measure of net vacuum energy density—has a value that is only on the order of the average energy density of (ordinary + dark) matter in the universe ≈ 10⁻⁹ J/m³ (Reference 58, 59). This leads to what is often referred to as the 120 orders-of-magnitude problem, or “cosmological coincidence.” In the mainstream view, rather than the QED value being discounted, the resolution of this problem is thought to lie in the domain of infinity (or divergent integral) cancellations, requiring instead an accounting for the fine-tuning requirements of such cancellations (Reference 60, 61).\n\nAgain, the root cause of the difficulties that accompany second quantization of the vacuum field is that an unbounded plenum possesses an infinite number of degrees of freedom, each with its assigned ground-state fluctuation energy. In an attempt to circumvent the difficulties associated with an unbounded, second-quantized plenum, alternative approaches to QED have been explored in the literature in some detail, a few of which are discussed in Section V. A number of these alternative viewpoints interpret the second-quantized QED vacuum with its infinite degrees of freedom as simply an over-idealized mathematical placeholder for “real” fields that originate in matter fluctuations whose number of degrees of freedom is necessarily always limited. Nevertheless, though the alternative formalisms and associated interpretations differ significantly from the canonical approach, detailed calculations yield results identical to those generated by the second-quantized field formalism. As a result, even treated as a mathematical placeholder for matter fluctuation fields, at this point in our discussion the QED value must be taken seriously. The proposed corollary concerning the potentially significant conversion of QED vacuum energy to other forms is further evaluated in the sections that follow.\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCASIMIR EFFECT REVISITED\n\nThe most-quoted quintessential configuration for the conversion of vacuum energy to other forms of energy is the Casimir effect. As previously discussed, when parallel conducting plates are placed in a vacuum, they attract one another by a very weak force that varies inversely as the fourth power of the distance between them. First computed by Casimir in terms of van der Waals forces (a matter-fields approach – see below), he soon realized that, because the force turns out to be independent of the molecular details of the conductors, it could be computed as a problem in vacuum energy, and that is the way it is now generally presented in the literature (the \"plenum approach\") (Reference 5, 62).\n\nCasimir Effect in the Plenum Picture\n\nOne begins with the free quantum vacuum electromagnetic field fluctuations, and then determines their modification due to the insertion of two parallel plane conductors (that is, plates) as additional boundary conditions, which constrain a discrete set of intra-cavity modes of integer half-wavelengths. Aside from an unobservable, high-frequency-cutoff-dependent, free-field term that remains from the mathematical regularization procedure, the resulting (renormalized) vacuum stress-energy tensor⁹ is given by\n⟨T^μν_vac⟩ = (π²hc/720d⁴) diag(−1,1,1,−3), where the angular brackets denote the quantum\n(vacuum state) expectation value of the tensor T^μν_vac, d is the plate separation, and\ndiag(−1,1,1,−3) denotes the diagonal elements of a 4×4 matrix (Reference 1-3, 62).¹⁰\n⟨T^μν_vac⟩ represents the real physical stress carried by the vacuum field fluctuations in the presence of the parallel plane conductors, and it encodes the Casimir effect in terms of\n(1) an interaction energy per unit area, E/A = −π²hc/720d³, and (2) a corresponding\nforce per unit area, F/A = −π²hc/240d⁴. If free to move in response to the attractive Casimir force, the motion of the plates toward each other is understood in the plenum approach to progressively eliminate intra-cavity modes, converting their associated ground-state energies first into kinetic energy, and then, upon collision of the plates, into heat. Section II described the Casimir-force-driven collapse of Forward's charged slinky as a Casimir-type configuration for building up an electric field to charge a battery, and how such processes were shown not to violate either conservation of energy or thermodynamic constraints.\n\nCasimir Effect in the Fluctuating Matter Fields Picture\n\nComplementary to the vacuum mode description (plenum approach), the Casimir effect can be described, like van der Waals attraction, as arising from correlations in the state of electrons in the two plates through the intermediary of their coupled fields. From this standpoint (matter-fields approach) there is no requirement for the high energy density vacuum field of the plenum approach to reside throughout all space.\n\n⁹ The stress-energy-momentum tensor, T^μν, is a matrix quantity that encodes the density and flux of a matter source's energy and momentum. Greek indices denote the matrix components over the spacetime coordinates.\n¹⁰ For this derivation, the vacuum fluctuations of other quantum fields are essentially undisturbed by the presence of the conductors or are affected only in the immediate vicinity of the atomic nuclei that they contain.\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nUnfortunately with regard to energy generation, though the Casimir forces involved can be of significance for MEMS applications (Reference 63), the associated Casimir energies involved are too small to be considered of significance for energy applications, so if the possibility for vacuum energy conversion exists, one must look elsewhere to other types of matter-vacuum interactions.\n\nTYPE I (TRANSIENT) AND TYPE II (CONTINUOUS) MACHINES\n\nA key feature of the Casimir process just described, regardless of viewpoint (plenum or matter-fields), is that it is a \"one-shot,\" transient, energy-producing machine. That is, after delivering its energy, E, the matter that comprises the machine is in a \"used\" state (this used matter is commonly referred to as \"ash\") and cannot be restored to the original state without an input of energy that is greater than or equal to E. This \"one-shot\" feature can be generalized to define a category of machine called a Type I transient machine, with the Casimir machine constituting the prototypical representative. Should gravitation eventually be traced to a vacuum ZPF origin as proposed by Sakharov (Reference 64), then the fall of an object of mass m through a height h in a gravitational field (g = acceleration of gravity at Earth's surface), delivering its gravitational energy mgh upon impact with the ground, would constitute another example.\n\nIn contrast, one can envision a Type II (continuous) machine in which vacuum ZPF energy is converted to a useful form on a recycling basis without net alteration to its own matter state. A hypothetical example is the tunable Casimir device that was reviewed in Section IV. The cycle of energy generation would consist of the collapse of conducting plates with delivery of energy, followed by separation of plates switched to insulating mode for which the attractive force is considerably weaker, only to be switched back to conducting mode for the next cycle, and so forth. Provided the input switching energy required per cycle is less than the output energy delivered per cycle, a continuous generation of energy without a net change in matter configuration would result. A second example would be a nonlinear oscillator that continuously, on a steady-state basis, down-shifted high-frequency components of the vacuum ZPF spectrum to lower frequencies for convenient collection and application, without a net change in its own operation.\n\nClearly a Type II machine would be far more useful than a Type I machine for energy extraction. Type II machines would constitute a fuel-less energy source, with the ambient vacuum ZPF providing essentially unlimited energy. For this to be the case, however, another requirement needs to be satisfied, which the next section will address.\n\nDEGRADABILITY OF THE VACUUM\n\nThe possibility of continuous conversion of vacuum ZPE to other forms (that is, by a Type II machine) requires that, in principle, vacuum energy must be degradable (that is, continuously consumable), not just that there be a surfeit of energy in place to harvest. This perspective leads to a remarkable question for deeper explorations of QED. It turns out that the mathematical structure of QED is based on a formalism in which the vacuum mode structure and vacuum fluctuation energy per mode are quantized in what could be called a \"hard-wired\" fashion; that is, they possess fixed immutable values. Therefore, at the end of a cycle of a hypothetical Type II machine, in\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nwhich both matter and vacuum mode structure have been returned to their original states, the vacuum modes must of necessity contain at a minimum the same, \"hard-wired,\" energetic content as before the cycle. Therefore, assuming local detailed-balance energy conservation, continuous conversion of vacuum ZPE to other forms via a Type II machine is, from the QED viewpoint, forbidden in principle since the vacuum as described by the QED formalism is non-degradable. (Globally, vacuum energy is not conserved during cosmological expansion, with work being done by the negative vacuum pressure to maintain positive constant vacuum energy density and therefore increasing the vacuum energy (Reference 65) This outcome of second-quantized QED theory permits of but two interpretations with regard to continuous vacuum energy conversion: 1) QED theory, despite criticisms that can be leveled against it, is correct in its description of vacuum fluctuation dynamics, and even though vacuum ZPE exists, it cannot be continuously converted to other forms, or 2) the axiomatic inconvertibility is an artifact of an over-idealized mathematical structure, and therefore the possibility of conversion remains an open question.11 What is not in question, however, is that QED, as an axiomatic, quantum formalism based on the concept of an immutable, non-degradable vacuum, does not support the concept of continuous vacuum energy conversion.\n\nALTERNATIVES TO QED\n\nAs noted in Section V, despite its successes the second-quantized QED formalism with its infinite vacuum degrees of freedom and associated infinite energy density has been the subject of criticism and, as a result, alternatives have been proposed and investigated in the literature. The alternatives run the gamut from neoclassical theories in which matter is quantized but the fields are not (for example, the voluminous work of E. T. Jaynes), through classical theories where both matter and fields are treated classically, with vacuum fluctuations fields taken to be real but of a classical nature (for example, SED), to formalisms which eliminate the concept of vacuum fields altogether (for example, direct-action approaches investigated by A. O. Barut and others; see the references cited below). Each of these will be examined briefly with regard to the possibility of useful \"vacuum energy conversion.\"\n\nNeoclassical Theories of QED Vacuum Fluctuation Effects\n\nA major proponent of the neoclassical approach has been E. T. Jaynes, who has questioned whether the quantized vacuum field is physically real or merely an artifice of the second-quantized QED formalism. Based on the fact that the QED formalism permits expression of effects in terms of quantized \"self\" or \"source\" fields as an alternative to expression in terms of quantized vacuum fluctuation fields, Jaynes advanced the hypothesis that QED effects can be attributed to the self-fields of quantized matter without considering independent quantization of the vacuum fields, expressions in terms of the latter just being a placeholder for the former. Pointedly, with regard to QED being \"the jewel of physics because of its extremely accurate predictions,\" Jaynes' position is that \"those accurate experimental confirmations of QED come from the local source fields, which are coherent with the local state of matter,\" and that \"the quantized free field only tags along (Reference 66).\" Jaynes nonetheless arrived at a conclusion that one might call Jaynes' Axiom, namely, \"This complete\n\n11 A number of publications by E. T. Jaynes, A. O. Barut and their collaborators are based on the premise that second quantization is an unnecessary artifact of an over-idealized formalism.\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ninterchangeability of source-field effects and vacuum-fluctuation effects...shows that source-field effects are the same as if vacuum fluctuations were present.\" Applied to the case of a radiating atom, Jaynes provides a specific example of his conclusion with the statement \"The radiating atom is indeed interacting with an electromagnetic field of the intensity predicted by the zero-point energy, but this is just the atom's own radiation reaction field (Reference 67).\" As a result, with the axiomatic second-quantized field formalism set aside, in the neoclassical approach any consideration of the conversion of vacuum ZPE for use must be displaced to consideration of the conversion and degradability of source or matter-fields fluctuation energy for use, issues yet to be addressed in the literature.\n\nSED Model Revisited\n\nSED is a classical (that is, non-quantized) theory of particle-field interactions that assumes the existence of classical particles and a classical random background electromagnetic field distribution whose Lorentz-invariant spectral energy density is chosen to match that originally appearing in second-quantized QED. Given SED's heuristic value of classical-like modeling and ease of calculation and its seeming ability to address many quantum mechanical problems with success (as outlined in Section III), the SED approach has been employed in the literature to explore vacuum energy conversion. In the absence of a formalism for vacuum field quantization, there are no fundamental immutability constraints that would mitigate against vacuum energy degradability, so that issue is not testable under this formalism.\n\nInvestigations to date have included the use of cavity-QED techniques to suppress atomic or molecular ground states (Reference 28), and evaluation of the use of a nonlinear oscillator to continuously downshift high-frequency components of the vacuum fluctuation spectrum to lower frequencies for convenient collection and use. With regard to the latter, the result of a nonrelativistic SED analysis is that the downshifting process acts to convert an initial hypothetical cubic-frequency vacuum fluctuation spectrum towards a Rayleigh-Jeans rather than a Planck heat spectrum (the former being a low energy approximation of the latter) (Reference 68, 69). Extension of the analysis to the relativistic regime does not alter this conclusion (Reference 70, 71). Though further work remains, these considerations lead one to conclude that SED in its present form is incomplete, and may not be useful for the assessment of the potential conversion of vacuum energy to other forms; its predictions concerning such must be treated with caution.\n\nAdditional shortcomings of the SED model include convoluted attempts to derive interference effects or Schrödinger's equation, and the difficulty in explaining sharply-defined stationary states (that is, sharp atomic spectra), though there have been many attempts (Reference 17). QED and SED do not in general yield the same results for nonlinear systems, although they are in agreement for the range of linear systems examined. The apparent disagreements between SED and QED are quite serious, and occur in areas in which QED is highly successful. Perhaps the source of these difficulties lies in accurately dealing with the nonlinear stochastic differential equations in SED for these problems. Even still, it is likely that differences will remain, which should clearly be testable by experimental means (Reference 72). For a very thorough, detailed and scholarly review of SED, see (Reference 17) and the corresponding review by Cole and Rueda (Reference 73).\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nGiven the heuristic value of certain aspects of SED modeling, but with the shortcomings outlined above noted, SED theorists de la Pena and Cetto have proposed a modification to SED they call LSED (linear SED) (Reference 74). The modification consists of the addition of three new constraining principles that result in a form of convergence with nonrelativistic quantum mechanics while retaining some of the appealing attributes of standard SED (for example, quantum states being stable on the basis of a dynamic balance between absorption and emission of background vacuum fluctuation fields). The added constraints (for example, an added constraint that invokes detailed energy balance for separate frequencies) result in correcting several known problems with standard SED. For example, now the equilibrium spectrum is Planck's, not Rayleigh-Jeans, and wavelike behavior of matter and nonlocality issues can be addressed, and so forth. The issue of continuous vacuum energy conversion has yet to be addressed in this new formalism, however, so that remains for the future.\n\nQED Without Second-Quantized Fields\n\nAs yet another alternative to canonical second-quantized QED, Barut (Reference 75) has proposed that effects attributable to vacuum ZPF can be derived with a theory in which there are source (matter) fluctuation fields but no vacuum fluctuation fields, and that even the former can be eliminated. Barut's approach is developed in considerable detail as an independent, self-consistent, formulation of QED in its own right. Barut argues that effects normally attributed to vacuum fluctuations in the second-quantized, linear theory of the radiation field can be equally well computed within the framework of a non-second-quantized, nonlinear theory which is based entirely on matter wave functions alone. His program is to assess how far one can go in understanding radiative processes without second quantization or vacua that fluctuate. Barut and his collaborators have successfully applied the theory to the Lamb shift and spontaneous emission (Reference 76, 77), problems of cavity QED (Reference 78), Casimir-Polder and van der Waals forces (Reference 79), calculations of the electron's ge-2 factor (Reference 80-82),12 and the Davies-Unruh effect (Reference 83) among others.\n\nGiven that the formalism of second-quantized field operators are not used at all in the Barut approach, the seemingly quantized properties of fields are taken to simply reflect first quantization of the sources. Therefore, in the absence of the independent existence of second-quantized field fluctuations, the QED arguments concerning immutability and nondegradability of quantized vacuum fluctuation fields, and the corollary proscription against potential conversion of energy from such fields, do not apply. As in the neoclassical approach, the question of the conversion of quantum ZPE to other forms must be diverted to consideration of the global properties of matter fluctuation interactions in the as-yet-incomplete development of the Barut approach.\n\nEXAMPLES OF DEGRADABLE OF DECAYING VACUUM\n\nIn closing, several examples of a degradable vacuum that are predicted by quantum field theory, quantum field theory in curved spacetime, and the Standard Model of elementary particle physics will be reviewed. It turns out that the vacuum in QED theory is in fact degradable in spite of its \"hardwired\" ZPF modes.\n\n12 ge is the electron's gyromagnetic ratio.\n\n28\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nGravitational Squeezing of the Vacuum\n\nIn their study of traversable wormholes, Hochberg and Kephart (Reference 84) discovered that the gravitational field of any astronomical body produces a zone of negative energy around it by \"dragging\" some of the virtual quanta (a.k.a. vacuum ZPF) downward. They applied their discovery to the problem of creating and stabilizing traversable wormholes. Their quantum optics analysis showed that there is a distortion of the vacuum electromagnetic ZPF due to the interaction with a prescribed gravitational background, which results in \"squeezed\" vacuum states that possess a negative energy density. Squeezing of the vacuum is a quantum process that is roughly analogous to the compression of an ordinary fluid. This means that as the vacuum field is continuously being squeezed by the gravitational field of a body, its energy is continuously being degraded with respect to the undisturbed remote vacuum field.\n\nThe magnitude of the gravitational squeezing of the vacuum can be estimated from the quantum optics squeezing condition for given transverse (to the direction of gravitational acceleration) momentum and (equivalent) energy eigenvalues, j = 8πrs/λ,13 of two electromagnetic ZPF field modes, subject to the squeezing condition j → 0, where λ is the ZPF mode wavelength and rs is the Schwarzschild radius of the astronomical body under study (Reference 84).14 This condition simply states that substantial gravitational squeezing of the vacuum occurs for ZPF field modes with λ ≥ 8πrs. The corresponding local vacuum state energy density that this effect produces is ρE-gsvac = −2π²ηc/λ⁴.\n\nIt is not clear whether this mechanism can be exploited to extract energy from the vacuum. Conservation of energy suggests one of two possible outcomes: 1) the lost energy is injected into the gravitational energy of the body, or 2) the lost energy reappears as an accumulation of positive energy density ZPF modes elsewhere in the universe. Further research will be needed to address this question.\n\nRedshifting the Vacuum\n\nCalloni et al. (Reference 85, 86) explored the possibility of verifying the equivalence principle for the zero-point energy of QED. They used semi-classical quantum gravity theory to evaluate the net force produced by the quantum vacuum ZPF acting on a rigid Casimir cavity in a weak gravitational field which is modeled using the standard Schwarzschild spacetime metric geometry.15 They evaluated the regularized (or renormalized) stress-energy tensor ⟨T^μν_vac⟩ of the quantized vacuum electromagnetic field between two plane-parallel ideal metallic plates lying in a horizontal plane. ⟨T^μν_vac⟩ encodes the Casimir effect, which has a negative energy density and a negative pressure along the vertical (gravitational acceleration) axis between the plates. Bimonte\n\n13 Note that j contains an extra factor of two (compared to the j derived in Reference 84) in order to account for the photon spin.\n14 rs = 2GM/c² is the critical radius at which a body of mass M collapses into a black hole. It is used here as a convenient distance parameter to simplify the inequality, but there is no actual black hole collapse involved in this mechanism. G is Newton's universal gravitation constant (6.673 × 10⁻¹¹ Nm²/kg²).\n15 A spacetime metric is a Lorentz-invariant distance function between any two points in spacetime, which is defined in terms of a metric tensor, gμν, that encodes the geometry of spacetime (Greek indices μ,ν = 0...3 denote spacetime coordinates, x⁰...x³, such that x¹...x³ = space coordinates and x⁰ = time coordinate).\n\n29\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\net al. (Reference 87-89) also studied this problem using Green-function techniques in the Schwinger-DeWitt quantum ether prescription for ⟨T^μν_vac⟩ in a curved spacetime. The results from these studies agreed with the equivalence principle and showed that quantum vacuum ZPF does gravitate since the energy of each ZPF mode is redshifted by the factor (-g00)^1/2 = [1 - (2GM/c²r)]^1/2 even though the modes remain unchanged (M is the mass of a gravitating body, r is the radial distance from the body, and g00 is the time-time component of the Schwarzschild metric tensor).\n\nThese studies suggest that cavity electromagnetic vacuum states are continuously degrading inside a background gravitational field. The total energy (E_CasGrav) stored in the Casimir device is given by (Reference 87, 89):\n\nE_CasGrav = -(π²Ahc/720d³)(1 + (5/2)(gd/c²)) (J) (5)\n\nwhere A is the area of the plates, d is their separation, and g is the acceleration of gravity at Earth's surface (9.81 m/s²). But can one extract energy from this mechanism? The answer to this question is not known at present, but consideration of the conservation of energy suggests that the same two possible outcomes given in the previous section would seem to apply: 1) the lost energy is injected into the gravitational energy of the body, or 2) the lost energy reappears as positive energy density ZPF modes elsewhere in the universe. Further research will be needed to address this question as well.\n\nVacuum Field Stress: Negative Vacuum Energy from the Casimir Effect\n\nAs this report has already discussed, the standard Casimir effect (neglecting spacetime curvature, a.k.a. background gravitational fields) is by far the easiest and most well known way to produce negative vacuum energy. Therefore, the vacuum within certain types of Casimir cavity geometries is degraded. It turns out that there are many different types of Casimir effects found in quantum field theory (Reference 1-3, 62, 90). For example, if one introduces a single infinite plane conductor into the Minkowski (flat spacetime) vacuum by bringing it adiabatically from infinity so that whatever quantum fields are present suffer no excitation but remain in their ground states, then the vacuum (electromagnetic) stresses induced by the presence of the infinite plane conductor produces a Casimir effect. This result holds equally well when two parallel plane conductors (with separation distance d) are present, which gives rise to the familiar Casimir effect inside a cavity. Note that in both cases, the spacetime manifold is made incomplete by the introduction of the plane conductor boundary condition(s). The vacuum region put under stress by the presence of the plane conductor(s) is called the \"Casimir vacuum.\" The generic expression for the energy density of the Casimir vacuum is ρ_CE = -A_D hcd^-4, where A_D = ζ(D)/8π² in spacetimes of arbitrary dimension D (Reference 1-3). The appearance of the zeta-function ζ(D) is characteristic of expressions for vacuum stress-energy tensors, T^μν_vac. In our familiar 4-dimensional spacetime (D = 4), A_D = π²/720. To calculate T^μν_vac for a given quantum field is to calculate its associated Casimir effect.\n\n30\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nWhen the plates in a Casimir cavity are put into non-uniform accelerated motion, it is possible in principle to create real photons out of the vacuum. This effect is referred to in the literature as the \"dynamical Casimir effect,\" or motion-induced radiation (Reference 62, 91). One version of the dynamical Casimir effect provides a way to degrade the vacuum whereby negative vacuum energy is produced by a single moving reflecting (conducting) surface (a.k.a. a moving mirror). A mirror moving with increasing acceleration generates a flux of negative vacuum energy that emanates from its surface and flows out into the space ahead of the mirror (Reference 4, 92). This is essentially the simple case of an infinite plane conductor undergoing acceleration perpendicular to its surface. If the acceleration varies with time, the conductor will generally emit or absorb photons (that is, exchange energy with the vacuum), even though it is neutral. This is an example of the well-known quantum phenomenon of parametric excitation. The parameters of the electromagnetic field oscillators (for example, their frequency distribution function) change with time owing to the acceleration of the mirror (Reference 93).\n\nAnalogs of the Casimir effect also exist for fields other than the electromagnetic field. When considering the vacuum state of other fields, one must consider boundary conditions that are analogous to the perfect-conductor boundary conditions for the electromagnetic field at the surfaces of the plates (Reference 1-3, 62, 91). Other fields are not electromagnetic in nature; that is to say they are non-Maxwellian, and so the perfect-conductor boundary conditions do not apply to them. It turns out that complete manifolds exhibit what is called the \"topological Casimir effect\" for any non-Maxwellian fields. In order to define boundary conditions for other fields replace the conductor boundary conditions and Minkowski spacetime by a manifold of the form ℜ × Σ (that is, a product space), where ℜ is the real line defining the time dimension for this particular product space and Σ is a flat 3-dimensional manifold having any one of the following topologies: ℜ² × S¹, ℜ × T², T³, ℜ × K², and so forth, ℜ being the real line that defines any linear space dimension (for example, ℜ = line, ℜ² = 2-dimensional plane), Tⁿ being the n-torus, K² the 2-dimensional Klein bottle, S¹ the circle, and so forth.\n\nThe case Σ = ℜ² × S¹ has the closest resemblance to the electromagnetic Casimir effect, the difference being that instead of imposing conductor boundary conditions, one imposes periodic boundary conditions on some of the space coordinates in the 3-dimensional manifold. When imposing this topological constraint on the field theoretic calculation of the topological Casimir effect (for linear massless fields), one finds that the generic expression for the energy density is also ρ_CE = -A_dif hcd^-4, where A_dif = ±d_f(π²/90), d_f is the number of degrees of freedom (for example, helicity states) per spatial point, the plus sign holds for boson fields (giving a negative energy density) and the negative sign for fermion fields (giving a positive energy density).\n\nIf one were to admit spin structure in the manifolds described above and the field is spinorial, then there is another important subtlety that must be taken into account when evaluating T^μν_vac. However, this introduces an additional complexity involving the relationship between the spin structure and the global structure (that is, the configuration space or fibre bundle) of the field in question whereby the topology not only of the base manifold, but of the fibre bundle itself has an effect on T^μν_vac. In addition to this, there are (compactified) extra-space dimensional quantum field (that is, D-\n\n31\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nBrane or \"brane world\") analogs of the Casimir effect yet to be explored. But a detailed consideration of these is beyond the scope of this report and will be left for future investigation.\n\nSqueezed Quantum Vacuum\n\nIt was discovered in 1965 that quantum field theory has the remarkable property of allowing states of matter containing local regions of negative (vacuum state) energy density or negative fluxes (Reference 94). In general, the local (vacuum state) energy density in quantum field theory can be negative due to quantum coherence effects (Reference 94). A primary byproduct of this discovery is the \"squeezed quantum vacuum,\" which later gave rise to new phenomenon such as the gravitationally squeezed vacuum discussed previously. Substantial theoretical and experimental work has shown that in many quantum systems the limits to measurement precision imposed by the quantum vacuum ZPF can be breached by decreasing the noise in one observable (or measurable quantity) at the expense of increasing the noise in the conjugate observable; at the same time the variations in the first observable, say the energy, are reduced below the ZPF such that the energy becomes \"negative.\" \"Squeezing\" is thus the control of quantum fluctuations and corresponding uncertainties, whereby one can squeeze/reduce the variance of one (physically important) observable quantity provided the variance in the (physically unimportant) conjugate variable is stretched/increased. The squeezed quantity possesses an unusually low variance, meaning less variance than would be expected on the basis of the equipartition theorem. One can in principle exploit quantum squeezing to extract energy from one place in the ordinary vacuum at the expense of accumulating excess energy elsewhere.\n\nThe squeezed state of the electromagnetic field is a primary example of a quantum field that has negative energy density and negative energy flux. Such a state became a physical reality in the laboratory as a result of the nonlinear-optics technique of \"squeezing\"; that is, of moving some of the quantum-fluctuations of laser light out of the cos[ω(t - z/c)] part of the beam and into the sin[ω(t - z/c)] part (Reference 95-100).¹⁶ The observable that gets squeezed will have its fluctuations reduced below the vacuum ZPF. The act of squeezing transforms the phase space circular noise profile characteristic of the vacuum into an ellipse, whose semimajor and semiminor axes are given by unequal quadrature uncertainties (of the quantized electromagnetic field harmonic oscillator operators). This applies to coherent states in general, and the usual vacuum is also a coherent state with eigenvalue zero. As this ellipse rotates about the origin with angular frequency, ω, these unequal quadrature uncertainties manifest themselves in the electromagnetic field oscillator energy by periodic occurrences, which are separated by one quarter cycle, of both smaller and larger fluctuations compared to the unsqueezed vacuum.\n\nCaves (Reference 101) points out that if one squeezes the vacuum—that is, if one puts vacuum rather than laser light into the input port of a squeezing device—then one gets at the output an electromagnetic field with weaker fluctuations and thus less energy density than the vacuum at locations where cos²[ω(t - z/c)] ≅ 1 and sin²[ω(t - z/c)] << 1; but with greater fluctuations and thus greater energy density than the vacuum at locations where cos²[ω(t - z/c)] << 1 and sin²[ω(t - z/c)] ≅ 1. Since the vacuum is\n\n¹⁶ ω is the angular frequency of light, t is time, and z denotes the z-axis direction of beam propagation.\n\n32\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ndefined to have vanishing energy density, any region with less energy density than the vacuum actually has a negative (renormalized) expectation value for the energy density - hence, this is a degradable vacuum. Therefore, a squeezed vacuum state consists of a traveling electromagnetic wave that oscillates back and forth between negative energy density and positive energy density, but has positive time-averaged energy density.\n\nFor the squeezed electromagnetic vacuum state, the energy density ρ_E-sqvac is given by (Reference 102):\n\nρ_E-sqvac = (2hω/L³) sinh ξ [sinh ξ + cosh ξ cos(2ω(t - z/c) + δ)] (J/m³) (6)\n\nwhere L³ is the volume of a large box with sides of length L (that is, put the quantum field in a box with periodic boundary conditions), ξ is the squeezed state amplitude (giving a measure of the mean photon number in a squeezed state), and δ is the phase of squeezing. Equation (6) shows that ρ_E-sqvac falls below zero once every cycle when the condition cosh ξ > sinh ξ is met. It turns out that this is always true for every nonzero value of ξ, so ρ_E-sqvac becomes negative at some point in the cycle for a general squeezed vacuum state. On another note, when a quantum state is close to a squeezed vacuum state, there will almost always be some negative vacuum energy densities present.\n\nDirac Vacuum Decay: \"Sparking the Vacuum\"\n\nFulcher et al. (Reference 53), Rafelski and Müller (Reference 54), and Rafelski (Reference 55) describe a phenomenon whereby the QED vacuum¹⁷ behaves like a nonlinear dielectric medium and undergoes breakdown (or decay) in the vicinity of super-heavy (supercritical) atomic nuclei¹⁸ or in the presence of externally applied electric or magnetic fields of critical (or supercritical) strength.¹⁹ This decay results in the spontaneous production of electron-positron pairs from the vacuum. This phenomenon is known as the Heisenberg-Euler-Schwinger mechanism, which Rafelski and collaborators euphemistically call \"sparking the vacuum.\" Ringwald (Reference 104) prefers to call it \"boiling the vacuum.\" Supercritical atomic nuclei can be created by the slow collision of two uranium (or heavier) nuclei while critical/supercritical electric or magnetic fields can be produced by ultrahigh intensity chirped-pulse amplification lasers (with power intensities on the order of 10¹⁹ to 10³⁰ W/m²).\n\nTo be more precise, when an electric field is made sufficiently strong so that the vacuum polarization (that is, virtual electron-positron pairs, aka ZPF) becomes real, then, due to charge conservation, the balancing charge must be eliminated, and so during the process of changing the vacuum from a neutral to a charged state, some charge must be emitted. And if in the vicinity of the electric field of a super-heavy nucleus or of an externally applied electric or magnetic field, the vacuum carries the charge of an electron, the emitted particle must always be a positron. Studies have\n\n¹⁷ For historical reasons, the QED vacuum is also called the \"Dirac sea\" or \"Dirac vacuum\" (Reference 103).\n¹⁸ Supercritical atomic nuclei have an electric charge (proton number) of Z > 173, which produces supercritical electric fields.\n¹⁹ The critical QED vacuum breakdown electric field strength is E_c = 2m_e²c³/ηe ≈ 10¹⁸ V/m, where e is the electron charge (1.602 × 10⁻¹⁹ C). This quantity is defined by the total rest-energy of an electron-positron pair created from the vacuum divided by the electron's Compton wavelength. And the critical QED vacuum breakdown magnetic field strength is B_c = E_c/c ≈ 10¹⁰ Tesla. Supercritical fields have strengths greater than E_c or B_c.\n\n33\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nshown that this positron must have a very well defined energy. The applied electric field determines how large this energy will be. If the electric/magnetic field is increased above critical strength, then more electron-positron pairs will be produced from the vacuum.\n\nClearly, the charged vacuum is a new ground state of space and matter. The normal, undercritical, electrically neutral vacuum is no longer stable in supercritical fields: it decays spontaneously into the new stable but charged vacuum. Thus the standard definition of the vacuum, as a region of space devoid of real elementary particles, is no longer valid in very strong external fields. The vacuum is better defined as the energetically deepest and most stable state that a region of space can have while being penetrated by certain fields.\n\nMagnetically Induced Decay of the Dirac Vacuum\n\nXue (Reference 105, 106) developed a Dirac vacuum decay mechanism that is different from the Heisenberg-Euler-Schwinger mechanism and proposed that energy could be continuously extracted from it. He modeled his decay mechanism after the (vacuum electromagnetic) Casimir effect wherein the vacuum state is modified by boundary conditions. From an energetic point of view, the Casimir effect can be physically understood as the following: 1) the continuous energy spectrum of vacuum electromagnetic fields is modified by boundary conditions to be discrete; 2) the vacuum energy of the \"final\" vacuum state, computed from the discrete energy spectrum in a given finite volume, is smaller than the vacuum energy of the \"initial\" vacuum state, computed from the continuous energy spectrum in the same volume; 3) as a result, the vacuum gains energy and becomes energetically unstable and has to decay from the \"initial\" vacuum state to the \"final\" vacuum state by quantum field fluctuations. This difference of vacuum energies between two vacuum states must be released, and this leads to the attractive and macroscopic force observed in the Casimir effect. Xue suggests that instead of modifying the energy spectrum of virtual photons by boundary conditions as in the Casimir effect, one should attempt to vary the vacuum energy by modifying the negative energy spectrum of virtual fermions (in the Dirac vacuum) by an externally applied magnetic field (of strength B). In this case, the externally applied magnetic field acts as a boundary condition on the Dirac vacuum.\n\nXue defines the vacuum state with B = 0 as the \"initial\" vacuum state and the vacuum state with B ≠ 0 as the \"final\" vacuum state. The negative energy spectrum²⁰ of the initial vacuum state is modified to the negative energy spectrum²¹ of the final vacuum state, due to the external magnetic field. If the vacuum energy of the final B ≠ 0 vacuum state made by virtual fermions fully filling its negative energy spectrum is\n\n²⁰ The negative and nondegenerate energy spectrum of free virtual charged fermions in the Dirac vacuum is: ε_F(|p|) = -(p_x² + p_y² + p_z² + m²)^1/2, where p is the magnitude of the fermion's momentum, (p_x, p_y, p_z) are the spatial momentum components, and m is the fermion's mass. This spectral energy density is integrated over all possible momentum states of the quantum field fluctuations in order to give the total (negative) Dirac vacuum energy.\n²¹ The energy spectrum of virtual charged fermions in the presence of an external constant magnetic field (a.k.a. the Landau levels) is: ε_L(p_z,n,h) = -(p_z² + m² + |e|B(2n+1) - eBh)^1/2, where e is the fermion's bare charge, h = ±1 is the fermion's helicity, n = 0,1,2,3,..., and the magnetic field B is along the z-axis. This negative energy spectrum is degenerate in the phase space of (p_x, p_y). This spectral energy density is integrated over all possible momentum states of the quantum field fluctuations in order to give the total (negative) Dirac vacuum energy.\n\n34\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nsmaller than that of the initial B = 0 vacuum state made by virtual fermions fully filling\nits negative energy spectrum, then the vacuum state gains energy and must decay\nfrom the initial vacuum state to the final vacuum state by quantum field fluctuations.\nThe difference in vacuum energies between the two vacuum states must be released.\nXue makes all the usual vacuum expectation value renormalization calculations upon εF\nand εL, and found that the energetic difference between the vacuum states B = 0 and B\n≠ 0 is negative, indicating that the vacuum energy of the B ≠ 0 state is smaller than the\nvacuum energy of the B = 0 state; that is, the vacuum state gains energy when the\nexternal magnetic field is applied to it. He shows that this effect occurs because in a\nfinite volume of space and with a finite momentum cutoff at the Planck scale ΛP, the\ntotal number of fermion states in the vacua of negative energy spectra εF and εL are\nfinite and all these fermion states of negative energy levels from –ΛP to –mc² are fully\nfilled. The negative energy spectrum εF is not degenerate, while the negative energy\nspectrum εL is degenerate, and the total numbers of fermion states in both cases are\nthe same. On the basis of quantum field fluctuations toward the lowest energy state\nand the Pauli principle, when the external magnetic field is applied upon the vacuum,\nthe vacuum reorganizes itself by fully filling all fermion states according to the\ndegenerate negative energy spectrum εL, instead of the nondegenerate εF. As a\nconsequence, the vacuum makes its total energy lower. The energy released by this\ndecay process is: ΔE = −8αB²V / 3π, where V is the volume of space occupied by the\nexternal magnetic field, and α is the electromagnetic fine structure constant.\nIn principle, this effect can occur for any value of the applied magnetic field, and in this\nparticular decay process a non-critical magnetic field is required. Xue predicts possibly\nobservable effects such as the vacuum acting like a paramagnetic medium that\neffectively screens the strength of the external magnetic field to a smaller magnitude;\nthe associated ZPF could lead to the emission of neutrino-antineutrino pairs from the\nvacuum; and photons will be spontaneously emitted. He estimated that the released\nvacuum energy (ΔE) will be about 1 percent of the total energy stored in the external\nmagnetic field, so it is not yet clear whether this vacuum decay mechanism will lead to\nany beneficial energy extraction.\nMelting the QCD Vacuum\nThe idea of supercriticality as discussed in Section V also has applications in other field\ntheories, such as those of pion fields, gluon fields (quantum chromodynamics or QCD),\nand gravitational fields (general relativity). Static fields that are strong enough to cause\nthe normal vacuum, which is devoid of real particles, to break down into a new vacuum\nin which real particles exist is also predicted for these fields. A review a vacuum decay\nconcept that is different from supercriticality in QCD theory follows.\nIn their study of the structured vacuum, Rafelski and Müller (Reference 54) and Rafelski\n(Reference 55) analyze the nature of the strongly interacting (QCD) vacuum and\nelucidate its character from the Standard Model of particle physics and high energy\nparticle accelerator data. They concluded that in addition to the electroweak vacuum\n(that is, the unified electromagnetic and weak force vacua) there exists a dual QCD\nvacuum structure: one vacuum structure that is everywhere in space and consists of a\ncomplicated soup of interacting gluons which confine the quarks – this is called the\nordinary or “frozen” vacuum; and another vacuum structure that is found inside\n35\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nelementary particles (for example, hadrons), and which behaves like the dielectric\nvacuum of electrodynamics. In this second vacuum structure, particles that have a\nstrong charge (such as quarks or gluons) can move freely, but are confined by the\nfrozen vacuum that is everywhere else. This is called the perturbative, or gluon, or\n“melted” vacuum, which can also be pictured as a quark-gluon plasma. They estimate\nthat there is a “latent heat” of ~ 1 GeV/fm³ (or 10³⁵ J/m³)²² associated with the phase\nchange of transforming from one vacuum structure to another when the gluonic\nstructures of the perturbative vacuum are melted. It is important to point out here that\nthis is a degradable vacuum structure.\nThis unusual dual vacuum structure led Rafelski and Müller to speculate on a\nmechanism for the “burning of matter” as the ultimate source of energy in which it\nmight be possible that the energy contained within baryons could be converted into\nuseful energy. Their idea is to remove or destroy the three quarks residing inside a\nbaryon in order to gain energy, the latent heat, from the melted vacuum inside the\nbaryon. This process also entails the decay of the quarks via lepton-quark interactions,\nwhich is a topic that is beyond the scope of this chapter. They suggest that it might be\npossible that producing a quark-gluon plasma in high energy nuclear collisions could be\na very efficient source of energy. In this process atomic nuclei would be collided at high\nenergy in order to form a compressed high density zone in the region where the two\nnuclei overlap. This would lead to the melting of the vacuum and the subsequent direct\nconversion of matter into radiation, thus releasing ~ 10³⁵ J/m³ of energy density. This\nmagnitude of energy density would be very useful as a source of energy for space\npropulsion applications.\nRafelski and Müller point out that the commonly held view that the centers of neutron\nstars are dead and cold, due to their nuclear fuel having burnt out and the energy of\ngravitational collapse having been expended for the conversion of the collapsed star\ninto a gigantic atomic nucleus, is not the complete story. They hold open the possibility\nthat the entire rest-mass of all the baryons inside neutron stars might become available\nand converted into heat. In their scenario, the core of a neutron star is actually\ncomposed of condensed quark matter, and the rest-mass of baryons is burnt up into\nradiation inside the quark core. They also point out that supernovae explosions, gamma\nray bursts, positron emission from the center of our galaxy, quasars, and galactic nuclei\nhave been observed to emit extreme amounts of thermal energy, the mechanisms of\nwhich are still not understood today.\nGogohia (Reference 107, 108) modeled Rafelski and Müller’s idea by using an effective\npotential approach for composite condensate²³ operators to formulate a general\nmethod of calculating the non-perturbative (NPC) Yang-Mills vacuum energy density\n(aka the QCD bag model constant, Bg)²⁴ in the covariant gauge QCD vacuum-ground\nstate. His result that Bg = 1.84 GeV/fm³ (or 2.95 × 10³⁵ J/m³) found very good\nagreement with its phenomenological value and with Rafelski and Müller’s naïve\nestimate. Gogohia also calculated the contribution of the gluon condensate energy\ndensity to Bg: ⟨αsΓ²/π⟩ = 1.82 GeV/fm³ (or 2.92 × 10³⁵ J/m³), where αs is the strong\n_______________\n²² 1 GeV = 10⁹ eV; 1 fm = 10⁻¹⁵ m.\n²³ In quantum field theory, the vacuum expectation value (of a quantum operator) is also called a “condensate,”\nand this is denoted by placing angular brackets around the quantum operator.\n²⁴ See Appendix A for a detailed explanation of the QCD bag model.\n36\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ncoupling strength (aka quark-gluon coupling) and Γ is the gluon field strength tensor\n(tensor indices suppressed). The quark condensate energy density contribution to Bg is\ndown by two orders of magnitude from this estimate. Gogohia argues that the bag\nconstant determines the energy which can be released from the NPC vacuum, which he\nconsiders to be a “perpetuum source of infinite energy.” He did not propose a detailed\nphysical mechanism that specifies how to release a finite portion of the bag constant\nenergy or whether one could introduce some type of cyclic process to extract energy.\nThis requires further research in order to resolve this question.\nSummary: ZPF Modes and Vacuum Field Energy\nThe previous examples illustrate how the vacuum becomes degradable or can decay\nwhen perturbed under certain conditions. In each of the examples, the vacuum ZPF\nmodes were perturbed by boundary conditions, quantum optics effects, or\ninteracting/externally applied fields in such a way as to drive the QED field’s vacuum\nstate energy below zero, or the QED vacuum undergoes decay along with the\nspontaneous production of particle-antiparticle pairs, or the vacuum undergoes a phase\nchange and releases energy as in the QCD case. The (electromagnetic) Casimir effect is\nan example in which certain ZPF modes are excluded by physical boundary conditions\nthat perturb the free-space vacuum ZPF modes, thus driving the vacuum\nelectromagnetic field energy below zero inside a Casimir cavity.\nIn accordance with the discussion in Sections III and V, the ZPF modes serve only as a\nplaceholder for a quantum field’s vacuum state calculations. Therefore, the “hardwired”\nZPF modes cannot be driven below the ground state. It is only a quantum field’s overall\n(renormalized) vacuum state energy that can be driven down to or below the ground\nstate. The QED vacuum (in both of its incarnations: virtual bosonic electromagnetic\nvacuum and virtual fermionic Dirac vacuum) and the QCD vacua are degradable while\nboth can also undergo decay via numerous mechanisms. Energy release is predicted for\nsome of the decay mechanisms while it has already been observed via the Casimir\neffect and the inflationary expansion of the universe.\nTherefore, one can conjecture that the key to exploring the possibility of extracting\nenergy from the vacuum is to invent new boundary conditions or new combinations of\nboundary conditions as well as new methods of modifying the quantum vacuum\nboundary conditions that perturb the ZPF modes of any quantum field under study.\nQuantum vacuum boundary conditions can take many different forms: they can be\nphysical boundaries like the conductor or dielectric plates used in Casimir cavities,\nwhich can also involve complex cavity geometries; they can be topological—that is,\ncomplex spacetime geometries with special coordinate constraints; or they can be in\nthe form of interacting or externally applied fields such as gravitational,\nelectromagnetic, electroweak, scalar, QCD, massive fields or dense, moving nuclear\nmatter on the quantum vacuum, and so forth. This is a topic that is in need of\ndedicated theoretical and experimental research (Reference 62, 91, 103).\nVI. Conclusion: The Way Forward\nWhat are the conclusions that can be drawn from the considerations presented in this\nreport regarding the concept of continuous conversion of energy from the quantum\nelectromagnetic vacuum, the Dirac vacuum, or even the QCD vacua?\n37\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFirst, one sees that although the original inspiration for the concept of continuous\nvacuum energy extraction came from second-quantized QED theory, it must be\nacknowledged that QED, as an axiomatic, quantized formalism based on the concept of\nan immutable, non-degradable vacuum, does not support the concept of continuous\nvacuum energy conversion. Given that second-quantized QED is our most\ncomprehensive quantum theory to date, its lack of support for continuous vacuum\nenergy conversion must be given serious consideration.\nSecond, SED as an alternative theory, whose formalism has been taken to support the\nconcept of continuous vacuum energy conversion, has enough shortcomings in its\ncurrent state of development that one must conclude that it is not at present an\nadequate tool for the assessment of potential vacuum energy conversion. SED\npredictions must thus remain suspect in the absence of experimental confirmation. The\npurpose of the experimental program outlined in Section IV is meant to address this\nneed.\nThird, the concept of the conversion of energy from vacuum fluctuations is in principle\nnot falsifiable, given the unknowns which present theory has yet to resolve (for\nexample, cosmological dark energy, multiple vacuum structures), and the numerous\napproaches currently being brought to bear in the development of quantum theory.\nFinally, even though experimental efforts at energy extraction from the vacuum have\nbeen proposed or are already under way at various laboratories, definitive theoretical\nsupport underpinning the concept of useful extraction of energy from quantum\nfluctuations is not yet in place. Such support awaits theoretical developments that\neither posits a plenum that (unlike second-quantized QED) can be shown to be\ndegradable, or posit conversion of energy associated with matter fluctuations, also in a\ndegradable fashion. Since the quantum fluctuations of interest are associated with\nquantum ground states, what is minimally required are particle-vacuum or particle-\nparticle interactions that result in the formation of alternate lower-energy, ground\nstates of matter/field configurations. Suggested approaches to be explored are those\nwhich are known to yield results consistent with the existence of vacuum fluctuation\nfields, but without the formalism of independently postulated second-quantized vacuum\nfields. Whether useful conversion of energy from quantum fluctuations can be\naccomplished, and identifying the unequivocal conditions under which this can be\nachieved, are yet to be determined.\nIt has been shown that the QED vacuum is in fact degradable under the action of a\nvariety of Casimir effects, quantum optical vacuum squeezing, gravitation-induced\nvacuum squeezing, or gravitational redshifting. There is also QED vacuum decay via the\ncritical/supercritical electric fields of superheavy atomic nuclei, X-ray free-electron\nlasers, or externally applied (non-critical) magnetic fields. However, it is not known\nwhether these effects can be exploited for the continuous extraction of useful energy\nfrom the vacuum. The concept of a dual, degradable vacuum structure in QCD can\npossibly lead to the generation of useful energy via the release of latent heat from\nmelting the QCD vacuum.\nA game changer may appear that could dramatically accelerate or alter the direction of\ntheoretical and experimental programs. Such a game changer could entail a complete,\ncomprehensive unified field theory (that is, a finalized quantum superstring theory, or\nsome other theory that replaces it), or a completely new theory for the quantum\n38\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nvacuum and its related spacetime physics (for example, “emergent” spacetime/gravity\ntheories (Reference 109-111)). New materials or combinations of materials, such as\ncondensed matter (superconductors), semiconductors or metamaterials, would also be\nan important game changer because of the unique ways that quantum fields would\ninteract with them to produce phenomena of interest.\nIn going forward to the potential demonstration of continuous energy extraction from\nthe vacuum, one should consider the following additional action items for further R&D:\n• The quantum vacuum electromagnetic effects outlined in Section IV were computed\nto scale with Planck’s constant and are therefore very small. In order to have a\npractical device based on quantum vacuum properties, it would be preferable that\nthe vacuum effects the scale, meaning that the effects are essentially independent\nof Plank’s constant and consequently may be much larger. By itself this requirement\ndoes not guarantee a large enough magnitude, but it certainly helps.\nElectromagnetic Casimir effects are typically small and difficult to measure. In fact,\nmeasurements have only been made for simple geometries such as the parallel\nplate or the sphere-plate geometries. This fact raises a question: Is it possible to\namplify these effects and bring them into a useful range? This is certainly one of the\nchallenges of vacuum engineering. The experiment described in Section IV could\naddress this question.\n• Experiments are needed to explore some of the issues that are beyond the present\ncomputational ability of QED; for example, the effect of complex geometries on\nvacuum forces, or the effect of interacting or externally applied fields or dense,\nmoving nuclear matter on the quantum vacuum. Is it possible to make a stable\nvacuum field that has a large variation in energy density? Can energy density\ngradients be found on a length scale that is useful for technological applications?\nOne needs to greatly increase our knowledge of the quantum vacuum. The\ndevelopment of a very sensitive small probe that provides a frequency\ndecomposition of the local vacuum energy density would very useful.\n– A first step in this direction was recently proposed by Marecki (Reference 112)\nwho generalized the analysis of the output of balanced homodyne detectors\n(BHDs). The most important feature of these devices is their ability to quantify\nthe quantum vacuum fluctuations of the electric field because the output of BHDs\nprovides information on the one- and two-point functions of arbitrary states of\nquantum fields. Marecki computed the two-point function and the associated\nspectral density for the ground state of the quantum electric field in Casimir\ngeometries, and predicts a position- and frequency-dependent pattern of BHD\nresponses if a device of this type is placed inside a Casimir cavity. The proposed\ndevice allows for the direct detection of quantum vacuum fluctuations and\nprovides a spatial mapping of the vacuum energy contained inside the cavity.\nThis offers a potential new characterization of ground states in Casimir\ngeometries, which would provide an understanding of the vacuum energy\ndensities present in some regions in these geometries.\n• From the status of current research in Casimir forces, it is clear that one is at the\ncusp of describing the properties of the quantum vacuum for real systems with real\nmaterial properties. For example, there is no general agreement regarding the\ncalculations of static vacuum forces for geometries other than infinite parallel plates\n39\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nof ideal or real metals at a temperature of absolute zero. Non-zero temperature corrections for flat, real metals are uncertain. There are fundamental disagreements about the computation of vacuum forces for spheres or rectangular cavities, and about how to handle real material properties and curvature in these and other geometries. Indeed, it is very difficult to calculate Casimir forces for these simple geometries and to relate the calculations to an experiment. Calculations have yet to be done for more complex geometries. The usual problems in QED (for example, divergences due to unrealistic boundary conditions, to curvature, to interfaces with different dielectric coefficients) abound. These problems require theoretical and experimental resolution.\n\n• As stated in Section V, there is need to find new boundary conditions for the vacuum that can alter the vacuum energy density by orders of magnitude more than with the current boundary conditions, which are primarily metallic or dielectric surfaces. Perhaps the use of new materials (for example, those with a negative index of refraction, or an ultra-high electrical carrier density, either steady state or transient), or novel condensed matter (superconducting) materials may open the door to new Casimir phenomena. Recently the use of (negative index) metamaterials was proposed to make a repulsive Casimir force (Reference 113). With significantly increased funding for research, some breakthroughs in this area might be possible.\n\n• There are several important experiments that can aid our understanding of vacuum energy and Casimir forces that may lead to significant improvements in our engineering capability:\n\n– Experiments measuring the Casimir forces for semiconductor surfaces would be helpful in the development of new applications of vacuum forces and to demonstrate that it is possible to alter the Casimir force by altering the carrier density.\n\n– The measurement of Casimir forces and energies for different geometry and composition objects, such as rectangular cavities or spheres, would provide data for theoretical modeling. Measurements of Casimir forces between separate, nonplanar surfaces are also needed. There may be surfaces that have larger forces than the classic parallel plates.\n\n– New boundary conditions or new methods of modifying the known quantum vacuum boundary conditions may be needed to generate the large changes in free-field vacuum energy required if \"vacuum engineering\" as proposed in this report is ever to become practical. For example, the vacuum energy density difference between parallel plates and the region outside them in free space is simply not large enough in magnitude for large-scale engineering purposes. Energy densities, positive or negative, that are orders of magnitude greater are required. Such energy density regions may be possible, at least in some cases. For example, a region appeared in the one-dimensional dynamic system in which the energy density was below that of the Casimir parallel plate region (Reference 114).\n\n– Experiments to verify the adiabatic Casimir effect have been suggested in the literature. This is an important theoretical issue that has ramifications in different\n\n40"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nfields, including astrophysics and elementary particle physics. Clever experimental approaches should be developed to explore the adiabatic Casimir effect.\n\n• There are numerous potential ways in which the ground state of the vacuum electromagnetic field might be engineered for use in MEMS and NEMS applications.\n\n• Dirac vacuum decay via external (non-critical) magnetic fields requires further evaluation, and it should become possible to experimentally test this in the laboratory within two to five years.\n\n• Theoretical and laboratory studies of the dual QCD vacuum have been underway for over 20 years. The progress in experimental particle physics is such that one gains an order of magnitude in the resolution (that is, energy) of elementary particle structures roughly every decade. It is hoped that the commissioning of the Large Hadron Collider will lead to higher resolution probing of the dual QCD vacuum structure, and help to determine whether there are deeper grand unified and/or Higgs vacuum structures residing within quarks. Future accelerator experiments should be designed to explore Rafelski and Müller's and Gogohia's proposal to extract energy from the \"melted\" QCD vacuum.\n\nAcknowledgements\n\nThe author wishes to thank colleagues H. E. Puthoff (EarthTech, Int'l), V. Teofilo (Lockheed Martin), B. Haisch (ManyOne Networks), L. J. Nickisch (Northwest Research Assoc.), A. Rueda (California State University-Long Beach), D. C. Cole (Boston University), M. Ibison (Inst. for Advanced Studies at Austin), S. Little (EarthTech Int'l), and M. Little (EarthTech Int'l), for their technical contributions to this report. We also thank J. Newmeyer (Lockheed Martin), E. H. Allen (Lockheed Martin), T. W. Kephart (Vanderbilt Univ.), and P. C. W. Davies (Arizona State Univ.) for their very useful input.\n\n41"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix: The QCD Bag Model\n\nWhen considering the effective masses of quarks bound within hadrons, it is common to think of the constituent masses of the quark and antiquark pair as their zero-point energy (ZPE) when they are bound by the confining potential25 (acting between a quark and an antiquark) with an energy spectrum that corresponds to the masses of the observed mesons. For charm, and heavier quarks, it appears that the total ZPE is not much different from the masses of the lowest-lying meson states. This picture also holds true for baryons. The quark-gluon model for hadrons is called \"the bag model.\"\n\nEven in an \"empty\" bag—that is, one containing no quarks—there will be nonzero fields present because of quantum zero-point fluctuations (ZPF). This gives rise to a zero-point (ZP) or Casimir energy inside the empty bag. The estimated total ZP/Casimir energy of the confined gluon field inside a spherical bag is EZP ≈ +0.7/a (or +0.7ħc/a in MKS units), where a is the radius of the bag in GeV-1 units. EZP is numerically the entire story because the ZPE contribution of the confined fermion (quark) field is far smaller than EZP (the leading approximation per degree of freedom is down by two orders of magnitude). A typical empty bag has an estimated radius a ≈ 2.6 GeV-1 (0.5 fm), so EZP ~ 10-1 GeV (or 10-11 J), and this result remains approximately true if one uses a = 5.07 GeV-1 (1 fm) for a nucleon-sized bag. If the bag contains quarks, then this result does not change because the quarks don't affect the ongoing quantum ZPF inside the bag due to asymptotic freedom.\n\nThe inventor of the empty bag model (Ken Johnson) proposed that space is filled with closely packed empty bags, and that the energy of space filled with contiguous bags is simply the sum of the field energies contained within each bag. But this is not widely accepted since the phenomenologically preferred model for the exterior \"ordinary\" vacuum is given as follows.\n\nQCD color confinement in hadrons is approximated by the phenomenologically successful \"bag model.\" In this model, the \"ordinary\" vacuum external to hadrons is a perfect color magnetic (or chromomagnetic) conductor; that is, the chromomagnetic permeability μ is infinite, while the chromomagnetic vacuum in the interior of the bag is characterized by μ = 1. This implies that the color electric (EQCD) and magnetic (BQCD) fields are confined to the interior of the bag, and that they satisfy the following boundary conditions on its surface S: n · EQCD | s = 0, n × BQCD | s = 0, where n is a unit normal vector to S. In other words, this model defines QCD vacua that coexist in two phases: 1) an ordinary vacuum exterior to the bag, impenetrable to color; and 2) a vacuum interior of the bag, in which the Yang-Mills fields that carry color (gluons) propagate freely. Both phases are separated by the surface boundary of the bag upon which the Yang-Mills and fermion (quark) field satisfy the aforementioned boundary\n\n25 Quarks carry \"color charge\" as well as electric charge. Color charge is considered to be the \"true\" charge of strong interactions. Gluons are the \"photons\" of strong interactions, and color is exchanged by eight bicolored gluons, which are massless and have spin 1. Color interactions are assumed to be a copy of electromagnetic interactions. Theoretical and phenomenological studies found that the confining potential V(r) lies between a Coulomb and a harmonic oscillator potential: V(r) = -(4αs / 3r) + kr, where r is the radial distance between confined quarks, k is a constant parameter, and 4/3 is the color factor associated with αs for the case of quark-antiquark pair confinement in mesons. For the case of baryons (qqq), the color factor in V(r) is replaced by 2/3.\n\n42"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nconditions. It is always assumed that perturbation theory is valid inside the bag, while the remainder of space is occupied by a \"non-perturbational\" chromomagnetic vacuum.\n\n43"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nReferences\n\n[1] DeWitt, B. S., \"Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime,\" Physics Reports, Vol. 19C, 1975, pp. 295-357.\n\n[2] DeWitt, B. S., \"Quantum gravity: the new synthesis,\" General Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey, edited by S. W. Hawking and W. Israel, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1979, pp. 680-745.\n\n[3] DeWitt, B. S., \"The Casimir Effect in Field Theory,\" Physics in the Making, Essays on Developments in 20th Century Physics, In Honour of H. B. G. Casimir, edited by A. Sarlemijn and J. Sparnaay, North-Holland Elsevier Science Publ., New York, 1989, pp. 247-272.\n\n[4] Birrell, N. D., and Davies, P. C. W., Quantum fields in curved space, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1984.\n\n[5] Casimir, H. B. G., \"On the Attraction Between Two Perfectly Conducting Plates,\" Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wetensch., Vol. 51, 1948, pp. 793-796.\n\n[6] Lamoreaux, S. K., \"Demonstration of the Casimir Force in the 0.6 to 6 μm Range,\" Physical Review Letters, Vol. 78, 1997, pp. 5-8.\n\n[7] Mohideen, U., \"Precision Measurement of the Casimir Force from 0.1 to 0.9 μm,\" Physical Review Letters, Vol. 81, 1998, pp. 4549-4552.\n\n[8] Chen, F., et al., \"Theory confronts experiment in the Casimir force measurements: Quantification of errors and precision,\" Physical Review A, Vol. 69, 2004, 022117.\n\n[9] Forward, R. L., \"Alternate Propulsion Energy Sources,\" Air Force Rocket Propulsion Laboratory, Air Force Space Tech. Ctr. Space Div., Air Force Systems Command, Final Report AFRPL TR-83-067, Edwards AFB, CA, 1983, pp. A1-A14.\n\n[10] Forward, R. L., \"Extracting Electrical Energy from the Vacuum by Cohesion of Charged Foliated Conductors,\" Physical Review B, Vol. 30, 1984, pp. 1700-1702.\n\n[11] Cole, D. C., and Puthoff, H. E., \"Extracting energy and heat from the vacuum,\" Physical Review E, Vol. 48, 1993, pp. 1562-1565.\n\n[12] Mead, Jr., F. B., and Nachamkin, J., United States Patent No. 5,590,031 for \"System for Converting Electromagnetic Radiation Energy to Electrical Energy,\" 1996.\n\n[13] Peres, A., Quantum Theory: Concepts and Methods, Kluwer, Dordrecht, Holland, 1993.\n\n[14] Milonni, P. W., The Quantum Vacuum: An Introduction to Quantum Electrodynamics, Academic Press, New York, 1994, Chaps. 1, 2, 8.\n\n[15] Mulliken, R. S., \"The Band Spectrum of Boron Monoxide,\" Nature, Vol. 114, 1924, p. 349.\n\n[16] Ibison, M., and Haisch, B., \"Quantum and classical statistics of the electromagnetic zero-point field,\" Physical Review A, Vol. 54, 1996, pp. 2737-2744.\n\n44"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n[17] de la Peña, L., and Cetto, A. M., The Quantum Dice: An Introduction to Stochastic Electrodynamics, Kluwer, Dordrecht, Holland, 1996. [18] Koch, R. H., Van Harlingen, D. J., and Clarke, J., “Quantum-Noise Theory for the Resistively Shunted Josephson Junction,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 45, 1980, pp. 2132-2135. [19] Koch, R. H., Van Harlingen, D. J., and Clarke, J., “Observation of Zero-Point Fluctuations in a Resistively Shunted Josephson Tunnel Junction,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 47, 1981, pp. 1216-1219. [20] Koch, R. H., Van Harlingen, D. J., and Clarke, J., “Measurements of quantum noise in resistively shunted Josephson junctions,” Physical Review B, Vol. 26, 1982, pp. 74-87. [21] Blanco, R., França, H. M., Santos, E., and Sponchiado, R. C., “Radiative noise in circuits with inductance,” Physics Letters A, Vol. 282, 2001, pp. 349-356. [22] Boyer, T. H., “Random electrodynamics: The theory of classical electrodynamics with classical electromagnetic zero-point radiation,” Physical Review D, Vol. 11, 1975, pp. 790-808. [23] Puthoff, H. E., “Ground state of hydrogen as a zero-point-fluctuation-determined state,” Physical Review D, Vol. 35, 1987, pp. 3266-3269. [24] Cole, D. C., and Zou, Y., “Quantum Mechanical Ground State of Hydrogen Obtained from Classical Electrodynamics,” Physics Letters A, Vol. 317, 2003, pp. 14-20. [25] Cole, D. C., and Zou, Y., “Analysis of Orbital Decay Time for the Classical Hydrogen Atom Interacting with Circularly Polarized Electromagnetic Radiation,” Physical Review E, Vol. 69, 2004, 016601. [26] Maclay, G. J., “Analysis of zero-point electromagnetic energy and Casimir forces in conducting rectangular cavities,” Physical Review A, Vol. 61, 2000, 052110. [27] Haisch, B., and Moddel, G., “Quantum Vacuum Energy Extraction,” United States Patent No. 7,379,286 B2, May 2008. [28] Puthoff, H. E., Little, S. R., and Ibison, M., “Discussion of experiment involving lowering of ground state energy for oscillation in a Casimir cavity,” Int'l Conf. on Squeezed States and Uncertainty Relations (ICSSUR 2001): Special Session on Topics of Physics Related to Stochastic Electrodynamics, Boston University, 2001. [29] Puthoff, H. E., “Vacuum energy extraction by conductivity switching of Casimir force,” Technical Memo, Inst. for Advanced Studies at Austin, Austin, TX, 1985 (unpublished). [30] Lipkin, R., “Thin-film mirror changes into a window,” Science News, Vol. 149, 1996, p. 182. [31] Pinto, F., “Engine cycle of an optically controlled vacuum energy transducer,” Physical Review B, Vol. 60, 1999, pp. 14740-14755.\n45\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n[32] Lin, S. Y., Moreno, J., and Fleming, J. G., “Three-dimensional photonic-crystal emitter for thermal photovoltaic power generation,” Applied Physics Letters, Vol. 83, 2003, pp. 380-382. [33] Iannuzzi, D., Lisanti, M., Munday, J. N., and Capasso, F., “The design of long range quantum electrodynamical forces and torques between macroscopic bodies,” Solid State Communications, Vol. 135, 2005, pp. 618-626. [34] Forward, R. L., “Apparent Endless Extraction of Energy from the Vacuum by Cyclic Manipulation of Casimir Cavity Dimensions,” NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Workshop Proceedings, NASA/CP-1999-208694, NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, 1999, pp. 51-54. [35] Maclay, G. J., “Unusual Properties of Conductive Rectangular Cavities in the Zero Point Electromagnetic Field: Resolving Forward's Casimir Energy Extraction Cycle Paradox,” Proceedings of the STAIF-1999: Conference on Applications of Thermophysics in Microgravity and Breakthrough Propulsion Physics, edited by M. S. El-Genk, AIP Conf. Proc. Vol. 458, AIP Press, New York, 1999, pp. 968-973. [36] Shoulders, K. R., EV: A Tale of Discovery, Jupiter Technologies, Austin, TX, 1987. [37] Stenhoff, M., Ball Lightning: An Unsolved Problem in Atmospheric Physics, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publ., New York, 1999. [38] Bostick, W. H., “Experimental Study of Ionized Matter Projected Across Magnetic Field,” Physical Review, Vol. 104, 1956, p. 292. [39] Bostick, W. H., “Experimental Study of Plasmoids,” Physical Review, Vol. 106, 1957, p. 404. [40] Bostick, W. H., Prior, W., and Farber, E., “Plasma Vortices in the Coaxial Plasma Accelerator,” Physics of Fluids, Vol. 8, 1965, p. 745. [41] Wells, D. R., “Observation of Plasma Vortex Rings,” Physics of Fluids, Vol. 5, 1962, p. 1016. [42] Wells, D. R., “Axially Symmetric Force-Free Plasmoids,” Physics of Fluids, Vol. 7, 1964, p. 826. [43] Wells, D. R., “Injection and Trapping of Plasma Vortex Rings,” Physics of Fluids, Vol. 9, 1966, p. 1010. [44] Wells, D. R., and Schmidt, G., “Observation of Plasma Rotation Produced by an Electrodeless Plasma Gun,” Physics of Fluids, Vol. 6, 1963, p. 418. [45] Nardi, V., Bostick, W. H., Feugeas, J., and Prior, W., “Internal structure of electron-beam filaments,” Physical Review A, Vol. 22, 1980, pp. 2211-2217. [46] Piestrup, M. A., Puthoff, H. E., and Ebert, P. J., “Measurement of Multiple-Electron Emission in Single Field-Emission Events,” Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 82, 1997, pp. 5862-5864.\n46\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n[47] Shoulders, K. R., United States Patent No. 5,054,046 for “Method and apparatus for production and manipulation of high density charge,” 1991. [48] Casimir, H. B. G., “Introductory remarks on quantum electrodynamics,” Physica, Vol. 19, 1953, pp. 846-849. [49] Puthoff, H. E., and Piestrup, M. A., “On the Possibility of Charge Confinement by van der Waals/Casimir-type Forces,” Cornell University Library E-Print Physics Abstracts Archive arXiv.org Database (online database), URL: http://arxiv.org/physics/papers/0408/0408114.pdf (cited Aug. 2004, revised 2005). [50] Puthoff, H. E., “Casimir Vacuum Energy and the Semiclassical Electron,” International Journal of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 46, 2007, pp. 3005-3008. [51] Volovik, G. E., The Universe in a Droplet of Helium, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2003. [52] Zavattini, E., et al., “Experimental Observation of Optical Rotation Generated in Vacuum by a Magnetic Field,” Physical Review Letters, Vol. 96, 2006, 110406. [53] Fulcher, L. P., Rafelski, J., and Klein, A., “The decay of the vacuum,” Scientific American, Vol. 241, 1979, pp. 150-159. [54] Rafelski, J., and Müller, B., The Structured Vacuum: Thinking About Nothing, Verlag Harri Deutsch Publ., Frankfurt, Germany, 1985. [55] Rafelski, J., “Vacuum Structure – An Essay,” Vacuum Structure in Intense Fields, edited by H. M. Fried and B. Müller, NATO ASI Series, Series B: Physics Vol. 255, Plenum Press, New York, 1991, pp. 1-28. [56] Jaynes, E. T., “Survey of the Present Status of Neoclassical Radiation Theory,” Coherence and Quantum Optics, edited by L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Plenum Press, New York, 1973, pp. 35-81. [57] Dirac, P. A. M., in Directions in Physics, edited by H. Hora and J. R. Shepanski, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1978. [58] Schwarzschild, B., “High-redshift supernovae indicate that dark energy has been around for 10 billion years,” Physics Today, Vol. 60, 2007, pp. 21-25. [59] Particle Data Group, “Review of Particle Physics,” Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics, Vol. 33, 2006, pp. 210-232. [60] Weinberg, S., “The Cosmological Constant Problem,” Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol. 61, 1989, pp. 1-23. (See also, “The Cosmological Constant Problems,” Cornell University Library E-Print Physics Abstracts Archive arXiv.org Database (online database), URL: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0005/0005265.pdf (cited 12 May 2000). [61] Volovik, G. E., “Vacuum Energy: Myths and Reality,” International Journal of Modern Physics D, Vol. 15, 2006, pp. 1987-2010.\n47\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n[62] Milton, K. A., The Casimir Effect: Physical Manifestations of Zero-Point Energy, World Scientific, Singapore, 2001, p. 13. [63] Chan, H. B., et al., “Quantum Mechanical Actuation of Microelectromechanical Systems by the Casimir force,” Science, Vol. 291, 2001, pp. 1941-1944. [64] Sakharov, A. D., “Vacuum Quantum Fluctuations in Curved Space and the Theory of Gravitation,” Soviet Physics Doklady, Vol. 12, 1968, pp. 1040-1041. [65] Peacock, J. A., Cosmological Physics, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1999, pp. 25-26. [66] Jaynes, E. T., “Probability in Quantum Theory,” Complexity, Entropy, and the Physics of Information, edited by W. Zurek, Addison-Wesley, New York, 1990, pp. 381-403. [67] Jaynes, E. T., “Electrodynamics Today,” Coherence and Quantum Optics, edited by L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Plenum Press, New York, 1978, pp. 495-509. [68] Boyer, T. H., “Equilibrium of Random Classical Electromagnetic Radiation in the Presence of a Nonrelativistic Nonlinear Electric Dipole Oscillator,” Physical Review D, Vol. 13, 1976, pp. 2832-2845. [69] Pesquera, L., and Claverie, P., “The Quartic Anharmonic Oscillator in Stochastic Electrodynamics,” Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 23, 1982, pp. 1315-1322. [70] Blanco, R., Pesquera, L., and Santos, E., “Equilibrium Between Radiation and Matter for Classical Relativistic Multiperiodic Systems. Derivation of Maxwell-Boltzmann Distribution from Rayleigh-Jeans Spectrum,” Physical Review D, Vol. 27, 1983, pp. 1254-1287. [71] Blanco, R., Pesquera, L., and Santos, E., “Equilibrium Between Radiation and Matter for Classical Relativistic Multiperiodic Systems. II. Study of Radiative Equilibrium with Rayleigh-Jeans Radiation,” Physical Review D, Vol. 29, 1984, pp. 2240-2254. [72] Cole, D. C., “Simulation Results Related to Stochastic Electrodynamics,” Proceedings of the Int'l Conference on Quantum Theory: Reconsideration of Foundations-3, edited by G. Adenier, A. Khrennikov, and T. M. Nieuwenhuizen, AIP Conference Proceedings Vol. 810, No. 1, New York, 2005, pp. 99-113. [73] Cole, D. C., and Rueda, A., “The Quantum Dice: An Introduction to Stochastic Electrodynamics,” Foundations of Physics, Vol. 26, 1996, pp. 1559-1562. [74] de la Peña, L., and Cetto, A. M., “Contribution from stochastic electrodynamics to the understanding of quantum mechanics,” Cornell University Library E-Print Physics Abstracts Archive arXiv.org Database (online database), URL: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0501/0501011.pdf (cited 4 Jan. 2005). [75] Barut, A. O., “Quantum electrodynamics based on self-energy versus quantization of fields: Illustration by a simple model,” Physical Review A, Vol. 34, 1986, pp. 3502-3503.\n48\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n[76] Barut, A. O., and van Huele, J. F., “Quantum electrodynamics based on self-energy: Lamb shift and spontaneous emission without field quantization,” Physical Review A, Vol. 32, 1985, pp. 3187-3195. [77] Barut, A. O., et al., “Relativistic theory of the Lamb shift in self-field quantum electrodynamics,” Physical Review A, Vol. 45, 1992, pp. 7740-7745. [78] Barut, A. O., and Dowling, J. P., “Quantum electrodynamics based on self-energy: Spontaneous emission in cavities,” Physical Review A, Vol. 36, 1987, pp. 649-654. [79] Barut, A. O., and Dowling, J. P., “Quantum electrodynamics based on self-energy, without second quantization: The Lamb shift and long-range Casimir-Polder van der Waals forces near boundaries,” Physical Review A, Vol. 36, 1987, pp. 2550-2556. [80] Barut, A. O., Dowling, J. P., and van Huele, J. F., “Quantum electrodynamics based on self-fields, without second quantization: A nonrelativistic calculation of g-2,” Physical Review A, Vol. 38, 1988, pp. 4405-4412. [81] Barut, A. O., and Dowling, J. P., “Quantum electrodynamics based on self-fields, without second quantization: Apparatus dependent contributions to g-2,” Physical Review A, Vol. 39, 1989, pp. 2796-2805. [82] Barut, A. O., and Dowling, J. P., “QED based on self-fields: A relativistic calculation of g-2,” Zeitschrift für Naturforschung, Vol. A44, 1989, p. 1051. [83] Barut, A. O., and Dowling, J. P., “Quantum electrodynamics based on self-fields: On the origin of thermal radiation detected by an accelerated observer,” Physical Review A, Vol. 41, 1990, pp. 2277-2283. [84] Hochberg, D., and Kephart, T. W., “Lorentzian wormholes from the gravitationally squeezed vacuum,” Physics Letters B, Vol. 268, 1991, pp. 377-383.) Calloni, E., et al., “Gravitational effects on a rigid Casimir cavity,” International Journal of Modern Physics A, Vol. 17, 2002, pp. 804-807. [86] Calloni, E., et al., “Vacuum fluctuation force on a rigid Casimir cavity in a gravitational field,” Physics Letters A, Vol. 297, 2002, pp. 328-333. [87] Bimonte, G., et al., “Energy-momentum tensor for a Casimir apparatus in a weak gravitational field,” Physical Review D, Vol. 74, 2006, 085011. [88] Bimonte, G., et al., “Erratum: Energy-momentum tensor for a Casimir apparatus in a weak gravitational field,” Physical Review D, Vol. 75, 2007, 089901(E). [89] Bimonte, G., et al., “Novel features of the energy-momentum tensor of a Casimir apparatus in a weak gravitational field,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, Vol. 41, 2008, 164056. [90] Brown, L. S., and Maclay, G. J., “Vacuum Stress between Conducting Plates: An Image Solution,” Physical Review, Vol. 184, 1969, pp. 1272-1279. [91] Mostepanenko, V. M. and Trunov, N. N., The Casimir Effect and its Applications, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007.\n49\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[92] Walker, W. R., \"Negative energy fluxes and moving mirrors in curved space,\"\nClassical and Quantum Gravity, Vol. 2, 1985, pp. L37-L40.\n\n[93] Moore, G. T., \"Quantum Theory of the Electromagnetic Field in a Variable-Length\nOne-Dimensional Cavity,\" Journal of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 11, 1970, pp. 2679-\n2691.\n\n[94] Epstein, H., Glaser, V., and Jaffe, A., \"Nonpositivity of the Energy Density in\nQuantized Field Theories,\" Nuovo Cimento, Vol. 36, 1965, pp. 1016-1022.\n\n[95] Drummond, P. D., and Ficek, Z. (eds.), Quantum Squeezing, Springer-Verlag,\nBerlin, 2004.\n\n[96] Slusher, R. E., et al., \"Observation of Squeezed States Generated by Four-Wave\nMixing in an Optical Cavity,\" Physical Review Letters, Vol. 55, 1985, pp. 2409-2412.\n\n[97] Slusher, R. E., and Yurke, B., \"Squeezed Light,\" Scientific American, Vol. 254,\n1986, pp. 50-56.\n\n[98] Robinson, A. L., \"Bell Labs Generates Squeezed Light,\" Science, Vol. 230, 1985,\npp. 927-929.\n\n[99] Robinson, A. L., \"Now Four Laboratories Have Squeezed Light,\" Science, Vol. 233,\n986, pp. 280-281.\n\n[100] Saleh, B. E. A., and Teich, M. C., Fundamentals of Photonics, Wiley Series in Pure\nand Applied Optics, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1991, pp. 414-416.\n\n[101] Caves, C. M., \"Quantum-mechanical noise in an interferometer,\" Physical Review\nD, Vol. 23, 1981, pp. 1693-1708.\n\n[102] Pfenning, M. J., \"Quantum Inequality Restrictions on Negative Energy Densities in\nCurved Spacetimes,\" Ph.D. Dissertation, Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, Tufts Univ.,\nMedford, MA, 1998.\n\n[103] Saunders, S., and Brown, H. R. (eds.), The Philosophy of Vacuum, Clarendon\nPress, Oxford, 1991.\n\n[104] Ringwald, A., \"Boiling the Vacuum with an X-Ray Free Electron Laser,\" Cornell\nUniv. Library arXiv.org e-Print Archive, URL: http://arxiv.org/hep-ph/0304139.pdf\n[cited 15 April 2003).\n\n[105] Xue, S.-S., \"Possible vacuum-energy releasing,\" Physics Letters B, Vol. 508,\n2001, pp. 211-215.\n\n[106] Xue, S.-S., \"Magnetically induced vacuum decay,\" Physical Review D, Vol. 68,\n2003, 013004.\n\n[107] Gogohia, V., et al. (1999), \"Vacuum energy density of chiral QCD in the zero\nmodes enhancement quantum model,\" Phys. Lett. B, vol. 453, pp. 281-288.\n\n50\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bde0eacd4075e309","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[108] Gogohia, V., \"Energy From The Nonperturbative QCD Vacuum,\"\nhttp://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/0508224.pdf (cited 22 Aug. 2005, revised 7\nMarch 2008).\n\n[109] Novello, M., Visser, M., and Volovik, G. (eds.), Artificial Black Holes, World\nScientific, New Jersey, 2002.\n\n[110] Volovik, G. E., The Universe in a Droplet of Helium, Clarendon Press, Oxford,\n2003.\n\n[111] Wilczek, F., The Lightness of Being: Mass, Ether, and the Unification of Forces,\nBasic Books, New York, 2008.\n\n[112] Marecki, P., \"Balanced homodyne detectors and Casimir energy densities,\"\nJournal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, Vol. 41, 2008, 164037.\n\n[113] Leonhardt, U., and Philbin, T. G., \"Quantum levitation by left-handed\nmetamaterials,\" New Journal of Physics, Vol. 9, 2007, p. 254.\n\n[114] Law, C. K., \"Resonance Response of the Quantum Vacuum to an Oscillating\nBoundary,\" Physical Review Letters, Vol. 73, 1994, pp. 1931-1934.\n\n51\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"be705aca1c09baaf","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on 22 January 2026\n\nPlease do not use the purple \"submit\" button above. Save and email the complete file manually (see below).\n\nRange Fouler Debrief Form\n\nPlease complete this form to the best of your ability. If you do not have the requested information, please leave the field blank. If there was more than one \"group,\" please report each on a separate form for data collection purposes. You should receive a response within 5 business days.\n\nLast Name, First Name Rank Squadron SIPR Email Address Crew Position\n\nThis information is for contact only. SPEAR sanitizes all reports of identifying information.\nAbsolutely no identifying information for aircrew or squadron will be recorded for analysis.\n\n05/14/20 20:40:00 Night ISR\nDate (mm/dd/yy) Time of detection (hh:mm:ss Z) Day / Night Side No. Buno Mission Description (CAS, BFM, etc) LFE?\n\n28314 28314 N 49524 E 20000 Yes\nContact Working Area (Ex: W-72 1A) Contact Latitude (DD:MM:SS) N/S Contact Longitude (DD:MM:SS) E/W Contact Altitude (Ex: 22000) Altitude Constant? Wind Dir at Contact Alt (From) Wind Speed\n\nPlease attempt to determine a Lat / Long for the contact at initial detection. We recommend using JMPS to reference the sensor-derived bearing and range relative to the bullseye you had in use. If that method is not available, any reasonable derivation of location will work, but please be as specific as possible and make a note in the comments section. These locations may be used to cue other means of tracking.\n\nWas the contact moving? Yes\nDirection/Speed (Ex. 090/15)\n\nRadar Equipped: AIM-9x Self-Track:\nStable Trackfile?: Intermittent ATFLIR Autotrack:\n# of Contacts in \"Group\": 1 Tally Achieved:\n\nEA Indications (Check all that apply):\nECM Arc Letter Identifier False Trackfiles Other/ Ambiguous\n\nPlease check all that apply:\nRound: [checked] Moving Parts:\nSquare: Metallic:\nBalloon-shaped: Markings:\nWings/Airframe: Translucent:\nOther Shape: Opaque:\nApparent Propulsion: Reflective:\n\nPlease use the field below to describe the contact and any interaction in your own words with as much detail as possible. Please be sure to include any detail not included in questions above.\n\nWhile preforming an ISR tasking (ULTN/Black Hot/Lin), a solid white object flew through the FOV. There was a temporarily lose of the object but re-acquired shortly there after. The crew was able to follow the object as it appeared to make erratic moments above the water. During the follow, crew was able to obtain 4x zoom on the object but lost the object due to poor track placement. While following, the sensor operator was continuously manipulating the sensor to maintain eyes on the object. This is apparent by the waves of the water in the background being visible and not being visible.\n\nDon't use the purple \"submit\" button! Save this form with filename \"Date_Squadron_RF.pdf\" and email it to [3.5c, (b)(6)] (Also in the global). For troubleshooting, call [3.5c, (b)(6)]\n\nThank you for your time. Please ensure all display tapes are ripped for the entire time of interaction and saved as a .wmv (Example: 4 May VFA-106 HUD.wmv). Squadron intel personnel shall upload those files to the repository located at this link.\n\n[3.5c, (b)(6)]\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0019 Approved for Release to AARO 01/26/26 001"} {"doc_id":"be8fc93d5d564f47","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Files 1377 & 1415\nJuly 7, 1952\nTremonton, Utah\n2 photos"} {"doc_id":"be8fc93d5d564f47","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CPO Delbert C. Newhouse\n7 miles north of Tremonton, Utah\n1110 MST 2 July 1952\nDriving on highway -- Wife noticed objects\nGroup of objects milling about in rough formation\nNo reference points by which to estimate speed, distance or size\nSize to small on photo to show detail\nPossible Explanation -- Pillow balloons or Birds\nPILLOW BALLOONS"} {"doc_id":"be8fc93d5d564f47","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"be8fc93d5d564f47","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"be8fc93d5d564f47","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"General Mills Research Laboratories\n2010 E. HENNEPIN AVE.\nMINNEAPOLIS 13, MINN.\nPhoto Laboratory No. 259\nDate\nThese are \"pillow balloons\" 2'x2'. At altitudes and with a cloud or obscure background these would give a \"saucer\" appearance when lying in a flat, horizontal position\n1377"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS BIGELOW AEROSPACE ADVANCED SPACE STUDIES ® June Report July 9, 2009"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"June 2009 Report Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS) This information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PREFACE This Progress report summarizes BAASS activities and progress for the period June 1-June 30, 2009. TABLE OF CONTENTS Topics covered in this report are the following: Progress on Recruiting Staff..........Page 3 Progress on New BAASS Facilities..........Page 6 Progress on EarthTech Contract to Deliver 24-30 papers..........Page 8 Summary of MUFON Investigative Activity for June 2009..........Page 11 BAASS Deployment to Brazil..........Page 97 Project Northern Tier Update..........Page 116 BAASS Continues Study of the Information on UAP Activity Released by the British, Canadian, French and Danish Governments..........Page 129 Conclusion..........Page 131 2"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Progress on Staff Recruitment • Between June 1-30, 2009 in response to job advertisements in multiple on-line locations, BAASS received a total of 461 resumes. • The first level of screening (removal of applications on the basis of too frequent job changes, those obviously inexperienced to work at BAASS, non-US citizens etc) was conducted on all resumes. • Between three and four dozen phone and face-to-face interviews were conducted during the month of June. • As a result of intensive interviewing and the transfer of some engineers from Bigelow Aerospace to BAASS, as of June 30, 2009 BAASS has forty five full time employees and six part time employees in addition to the administrator (see table on page 3 below). Fulltime BAASS employees now include senior investigative personnel (backgrounds in law enforcement and AFOSI), engineers (specializing in electrical, software and astronautics), scientists (with expertise in physics and biology) as well as support personnel and security guards. 3"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS Employees Administrator: AAP Person 4 Deputy Administrator: AAP Person 7 Fulltime BAASS Employees: AAP Person 8 Senior Analyst level V; AAP Person 9 Lead Program Manager; AAP Person 10 Lead Program Manager; AAP Person 11 Senior Project Manager; AAP Person 12 Senior Project Manager; AAP Person 13 Senior Project Manager; AAP Person 14 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 15 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 16 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 17 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 18 Lead Scientist level V; AAP Person 19 Lead Scientist level V; AAP Person 20 Engineer Specialist; AAP Person 21 Lead Engineer; AAP Person 22 Engineer Specialist; AAP Person 23 Lead Engineer; AAP Person 24 Lead Scientist level IV; AAP Person 25 Subject Matter Expert I; AAP Person 26 Subject Matter Expert I; AAP Person 27 Subject Matter Expert I; AAP Person 29 Subject Matter Expert I; AAP Person 30 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 31 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 32 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 33 Subject Matter Expert I; AAP Person 34 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 35 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 36 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 110 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 38 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 39 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 40 Mission Analyst; AAP Person 41 Mission Analyst. Significant Part-time BAASS Employees: AAP Person 52 Senior Engineer level III; AAP Person 53 Executive Assistant RTB; AAP Person 54 Corporate Attorney; AAP Person 55 Accountant; AAP Person 56 Subject Matter Expert IV. 4"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 42 Executive Secretary\nAAP Person 43 Receptionist\nAAP Person 44 Director of security\nAAP Person 45 Security Officer\nAAP Person 46 Security Officer\nAAP Person 47 Security Officer\nAAP Person 48 Security Officer\nAAP Person 49 Security Officer\nAAP Person 50 Security Officer\nAAP Person 51 Security Officer\nUtah Ranch Security Officers\n\nWe are optimistic that in the next month we can hire the first year's full\ncomplement of staff (approximately 50-60 personnel to begin the 2nd year) that\nwill make BAASS the most maximally productive organization in this field.\nHowever, this will give BAASS a foundational base that will partially cover the\ninvestigative and analytical needs within the United States.\n\n5"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Progress on New BAASS Facilities\n\nDuring the month of June AAP Person 4 the BAASS administrator,\nmade substantial progress on two major real estate projects in line with\nanticipated future BAASS needs.\n\n(1) Underground Vault: The need for a highly secure underground vault\noperated by BAASS became apparent in line with a BAASS priority to\npursue and acquire recovered hardware and biological samples from the\ncorporate world and/or from private individuals and groups located\nelsewhere, including in Brazil. It was recognized by the BAASS\nadministrator that there was no highly secure facility at BAASS to store\nexotic material or tissue that the organization could obtain. Accordingly,\nthe BAASS administrator designed an underground facility to be located\nin North Las Vegas at the Bigelow Aerospace facility. The chosen\nlocation is exceptionally well protected by perimeter fencing and razor\nwire, surveillance cameras and 24 hour armed guards who are retired or\ncurrent military. Further, the BAASS administrator during the month of\nJune designed and created architectural plans for a 5000 sq.ft\nunderground vault with 3 foot thick walls, ceiling and floor with a\nconcrete access tunnel leading to multiple security doors, at least one of\nwhich comprises a thick vault steel door. The entire facility will be\nlocated underground at the Bigelow Aerospace facility with over 15-20\nfeet of earth above the structure. Any surface structures protruding\nfrom the ground will be extensively camouflaged. It is anticipated that\nsubject to building permits, the new underground facility will be capable\nof being occupied by late 2009 or early 2010. More details on this\nproject will be reported in the June 2009 BAASS monthly report.\n\n(2) New Buildings Purchased for BAASS: Because of the extremely rapid\npace of BAASS personnel expansion (see previous section), the\n\n6"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"organization is close to outgrowing the current BAASS facility.\nAccordingly, the BAASS administrator began planning for this eventuality\nlate last year (2008) and in the past several months has personally\nvisited and inspected close to fifty separate buildings for sale located in\ndifferent areas of the Las Vegas Valley with a view to purchasing a new\nfacility for the rapidly expanding organization. This lengthy, time\nconsuming process culminated in the purchase of five new office\nbuildings which will be customized for BAASS personnel use. As of June\n31, 2009 these five buildings are now in escrow. It is intended that the\nbuildings will include a 5000 sq ft laboratory and secure physical\nevidence storage facility and a second building will contain a secure\nconference room (SCIF) and adjacent office space for multiple\npersonnel. These new buildings should be capable of being occupied by\nBAASS personnel by the end of 2009.\n\n7"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Progress by Earthtech on Production\nof 24-30 Position Papers on Physics of\nAdvanced Aerospace Vehicles\n\nOn December 31, 2008 BAASS awarded a contract to Earthtech\nInternational AAP Person 57 to deliver 24-30 position papers that will be based\non expanding and focusing on strategically important sub-projects from the 12\nposition papers previously delivered by the subcontractor on twelve (12) technical\nareas: 1.) Lift, 2.) Propulsion, 3.) Control, 4.) Power Generation, 5.)\nSpatial/Temporal Translation, 6.) Materials, 7.) Configuration/Structure, 8.)\nSignature Reduction (optical, infrared, radiofrequency, acoustic), 9.) Human\nInterface, 10.) Human Effects, 11.) Armament (RF and DEW), 12.) Other peripheral\nareas in support of (1-11).\n\nAccording to an update from AAP Person 57 progress is being made.\nDelivery of all 24-30 papers is scheduled for July 2009. Several drafts and even\nfinal papers have been already received by [REDACTED] and are in various stages of AAP Person 57 being scrutinized. The following is an update from [REDACTED] on the individual contributors and the titles of their reports as of the end of June 2009. As of the AAP Person 57 end of June 2009, Earthtech have taken delivery of approximately 24 papers.\n\n8"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Contributor | Organization | Topic | Due Date\nAAP Person 58 | EarthTech Intern'l | Antigravity Studies | 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 75 | [REDACTED] Consulting | SC-mediated gravity experimentation | 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 69 | Positronics Research | Matter-antimatter energy source | 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 74 | [REDACTED] Cons. | Warp drives | 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 73 | Wayne State Univ. | Brain-machine interfaces | 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 65 | Univ. of Arizona | Novel MEMS-based biosensors | 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 70 | Univ. of Illinois | IEC fusion as a compact energy source | 6/15/2009\nAAP Person 58 | EarthTech Intern'l | Vacuum energy applications | 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 57 | EarthTech Intern'l | Spacetime modification | 5/30/2009\nAAP Person 58 | EarthTech Intern'l | Wormholes in spacetime | 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 66 | Ohio State Univ. | Advanced metallic alloys | 5/30/2009\nAAP Person 63 | Johns Hopkins Univ. | Metallic glass materials | 6/10/2009\nAAP Person 90 | Programmable Matter Corp. | Programmable matter | 6/10/2009\nAAP Person 65 | Univ. of Arizona | Novel biomaterials | 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 71 | Univ. of Texas/Austin | Metallic spintronics | 6/10/2009\n\n9"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 78 Univ.of Texas/Austin Metamaterials/signature reduction 6/10/2009\nAAP Person 80 Intern'l Acad. Astronautics Statistical Drake equation 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 81 Wayne State Univ. Field effects/biological tissues 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 79 DoD consultant Laser weapons 5/31/2009\nAAP Person 64 Northrop Grumman (ret.) Pulse-power-based weaponry 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 77 GravWave, LLC Gravity wave communication 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 76 Univ. of Washington FTL/quant entanglement communicatio 5/31/2009\nAAP Person 72 University of Nevada Reno Advanced Nuclear Space Propulsion 6/30/2009\nAAP Person 75 Consulting Maverick vs. corporate inventor culture 5/1/2009"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS has Contracted to Purchase Information on UAPs from MUFON\n\nIn February 2009, BAASS executed a Purchase order with MUFON that entitles BAASS to: (a) receive notification of significant reports on UAP sightings from anywhere in the United States within hours, (b) receive timely reports from MUFON investigators regarding investigations of these incidents (c) receive physical evidence (including photographs, digital recordings, samples of soil, insects, plants, and animals) for scientific analysis. BAASS has multiple laboratories that are ready to conduct forensic, photographic, metallurgic, chemical, isotope, biological, chemical analysis of any specimens that BAASS receives from MUFON.\n\nBAASS has already hired a team of high quality top investigators with extensive intelligence and law enforcement investigative experience. These investigators are currently located in Las Vegas and are trained to deploy as \"special forces\" rapid reaction investigative teams that are deployable anywhere in the United States if BAASS determines that high value UAP cases warrant additional investigations. However this investigative group is still too small to cover the geographic area needed in both the United States and overseas.\nThroughout the months of March through June, it became apparent that the number of cases that MUFON was providing BAASS was significantly lower than first agreed at the beginning of the purchase agreement contract. At the same time, it became apparent that MUFON was only spending about 50% of their allotted stipend per month. Accordingly, at the end of June 2009 AAP Person 4 proposed to reduce MUFON's monthly stipend by 50% while encouraging the organization to begin to use the money that remained unspent to make up the difference. BAASS proposed, as per the purchase agreement, that there would be a further review of MUFON's performance by the end of October 2009. AAP Person 105 penned the following reply addressed to AAP Person 4 on June 29, 2009. The following is the text of the letter from MUFON to BAASS"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mutual UFO Network, Inc.\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\nJune 29, 2009\n\nBAASS\n\nAAP Person 4\n\nDear AAP Person 4\n\nWe are in receipt of your letter dated June 25, 2009 regarding the Purchase Agreement Contract and suggested changes.\n\nLet me begin by saying that we at MUFON are very pleased with the positive changes we have been able to implement as a result of our agreement. More importantly because of the dedication of our two organizations we now, for the first time, have a defined and repeatable process for quickly analyzing new cases, triaging them to determine their level of importance, and quickly responding to key cases within hours of being reported. This is a HUGE step forward for Ufology"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and would not have happened without BAASS and MUFON working together towards a common goal of rapid response.\n\nIn regards to your suggestion to move funding to a mid-term level, we certainly understand your rationale for wanting to do so. Please understand that as we aggressively pursue other avenues of finding, and attracting, new cases that our support and deployment costs will rise accordingly. Four months is a very short timeframe to measure incident and expense results considering we were at ground zero just four months ago.\n\nMUFON accepts the reduction in payments for the next four months with supplemental monies to come from the initial funds allocated from February to June 2009. We hope that BAASS can reevaluate our monthly allocation in October 2009 based on the expected increase in expenses not only resulting from recent changes to deployment criteria but also to increased MUFON public exposure.\n\nAgain, we are pleased to be providing services to BAASS and working together to solve the UFO mystery. Our goal at MUFON is to make this a mutually beneficial relationship for many years to come.\n\nSincerely,\n\nAAP Person 105"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"June 25, 2009\n\nDear AAP Person 105\n\nThis letter is to address the status of the MUFON Purchase Agreement contract that was executed between BAASS and MUFON in February 2009.\n\nFirstly, we are pleased to see that MUFON is moving ahead with plans to execute contracts with TV and other media as a means of raising its national profile.\n\nWith regard to BAASS's viewpoint on MUFON's performance to date, Section 7.0 of the purchase agreement defines three alternative scenarios based on this June performance review:\n1.1 Immediate termination effective June 30, 2009, of the contract for Seller's failure to provide the quality and quantity of information to the satisfaction of Buyer.\n1.2 Continuation of the Agreement under the same terms and conditions as agreed.\n1.3 Continuation of the Agreement with a merit-based increase in price for the Product.\n\nThere are two aspects that have emerged from MUFON's monthly reports that have caused BAASS significant concern. They are:\n\n(1) We note that for the month of February/March, MUFON spent $11,014.37 out of $74,666.67 allocated; in April, MUFON spent $23,803.95 out of $56,000 allocated; and in May, MUFON spent $23,812.00 out of $51,000 allocated. Therefore, it appears that BAASS is sending excessive sums to MUFON on a monthly basis.\n\n(2) We feel that MUFON's productivity does not match the monthly contract award. As of mid-to late June, BAASS has not received adequate number of cases to justify spending $51,000 per month, nor has MUFON ramped up its hiring rate to accommodate the monthly $51,000 stipend as evidenced by the fact that the monthly expenditures by\n\n1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MUFON from April and May 2009 have reached a plateau at $23,803.95 and $23,812.00 respectively.\n\nFor these reasons, we propose a Phase II funding level between July 1 and October 31, 2009 of $25,500 per month. This sum, when added to the unspent MUFON allocations (estimated at approximately $120,000 for February/March, April and May 2009) should be more than sufficient to almost double MUFON's present horsepower.\n\nRegardless of the above, we believe that the accumulation of large sums of unspent money was not in the spirit of the BAASS-MUFON purchase agreement.\n\nIt may be argued that MUFON has taken some time to ramp up to the present levels and hence could not spend the allocated money. In response we propose that from July 1-October 31, if MUFON combines the monthly stipend ($25,500) with a monthly portion of the unspent BAASS money, then a net monthly sum of approximately $55,000 is available for MUFON's operations. We believe that this mechanism will be adequate for MUFON to expand to a higher level of performance between July 1 and October 31, 2009.\n\nBy October 27, 2009, we will have another opportunity to examine the monthly contract award in light of MUFON's progress in expanding its organizational productivity.\n\nSincerely\n\nAAP Person 4\n\nAdministrator, BAASS\n\n1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUMMARY AND INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS FROM MUFON FOR MAY and JUNE 2009\nAs requested, the following cases are investigative summaries from MUFON of cases for which they deployed SIP team members during May and June 2009.\n\nCase # 16421 AAP Person 109\n\nGPS Coordinates: 1843(a)(3)\n\nLocation : Scammon, Kansas CAT 2 Deployment\n\nDate of Event: 4-04-2009\n\nOn April 7, 2009 a STAR team CAT 2 Deployment was activated on this case. STAR team Investigator AAP Person 109 was assigned as lead investigator.\n\nAAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Coordinator / Manager\nAAP Person 59\n\nINVESTIGATOR REPORT: 04/07/09 ***** ***** case #16421\n10:00 am I visited the witness ***** ***** and her 17 year old son, *****. We met at\n*****'s place of employment in Pittsburg KS, which is a 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2)\n\nAfter brief introductions, I asked ***** and her son to describe what they saw. They drew sketches describing the size and shape of the craft. ***** and ***** chose to draw their description using the same sheet of paper. ***** also showed me the picture she had taken of the craft with her\n\n14"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Razzor\" cell phone. 10:30 am I followed ***** and ***** out to the sight of the encounter.\n\nWe drove from Pittsburg, Kansas to Scammon where they live, and the sighting occurred. Scammon is about 10 miles down Hwy 160. We decided that the best way to re-enact the night of the sighting was for me to enter their vehicle sitting in the front seat and have ***** drive, taking the same route as that night. ***** sat in the back seat. While I video taped,\n\n***** drove as they both described the craft, where they saw it, and it's placement in the sky and over the trees. They described the craft as being as large as a small house hovering over the tree tops about 200 feet in the air. I asked them to describe the size by their arm at length showing my fist as a size comparison, and they said bigger. I spread my fingers, and they said bigger, more the size of both of my hands side by side. The color was an orange light undefined. ***** said it looked like the center was dark, and the light was coming from a tube light surrounding the craft. ***** didn't see that from her angle, but saw one large round/oval odd shape indescribable light with what looked like an army net attached above it. It made no sound, had no smell, they followed the craft with their car and there was no electromagnetic effects. There were dogs barking, but they claimed that there are a lot of dogs in the area and that they bark all the time. I asked them what made them notice the object?\n\nThey were out at 1:23 in the morning looking for *****'s missing 14 year old son. He ended up being at the *****'s residence who is a neighbor down the street a couple of blocks away. The boys were in the basement working on a car. Both boys were thought to be missing. What made ***** look in the direction they did was the train. A Burlington Northern freight train passes through the edge of town quite frequently. There are 3 intersections so as it passes them, the train blows its whistle in 3 separate bursts. That night there was one long whistle burst. They though the kids might be in trouble on the tracks so with hearts beating fast they headed that way. That is when they spotted the large craft hovering at the end of the street.\n\nAs they drove towards it, the craft moved about 1 mile an hour to the left, and as they approached closer, it shot off / backwards out of sight. They described the craft as being as big as a small house, hovering 200 feet over the tree tops, and only about 4 to 5 blocks away. ***** was afraid that her missing son may be aboard the craft because he wasn't answering his\n\n15"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"phone. They decided to drive home and retrieve *****'s phone to see if the younger son would answer a call from his older brother. When ***** came out ofthe house, he noticed that the craft was back. This time he said \"mom let's chase it!\" They raced towards it and found it at the end of the street. They were at 1843(a)(2) and it was 5 blocks down dead center at the end of 1843(a)(2) As they slowly moved forward, it moved slowly to the left behind some trees. They drove faster to get a better look and it was gone.\n\n***** and ***** pointed out the houses where the possible other witnesses lived. The first was ***** *****, the father of the other missing boy. They didn't think he saw anything but showed me his house which had a green van parked in front. The other witness was ***** ***** Sr., grandfather of the other missing boy. ***** ***** Sr. had claimed to have seen a Chinese lantern in the distance, float by his window while he was in bed.\n\nThe elder *****s live at 1843(a)(2)\n11:00-11:30 am I re-entered my jeep and followed the witnesses to a small neighborhood park where we did an on-camera interview.\n12:00 pm ***** had to get back to work, so she left her son with me. I promised to deliver him safely back to her at her work place when we were done. This was totally her idea, and made me a little nervous. ***** was to take me to the field where they thought the craft had hovered over. This was the same field where a craft had been seen on the ground by ***** 3 months before. The teen and I tried several entry access points but were blocked first by a no trespassing sign, and further down by a creek. There was access from the road between cut trees, but not without permission which I would get tomorrow.\n12:30 pm I decided it was time to take the teen back to his mother's place of employment.\n1:30 pm As I walked ***** in, I was met by *************, a witness of prior area and Joplin Missouri sightings. I videotaped 1843(a)(2) description of past events and expenences.\n\n2:25 pm I thanked *****, *****, and 1843(a)(2) and then I left.\n\n16"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2:30 pm I decided to visit the Crawford County Sheriff's department where I was told the dispatched officer on scene was from.\n3:30 pm I left the sheriff's department to head for the actual Sheriff's Department where the dispatch came from, Cherokee county. There was some confusion by the locals as to what Sheriff Department had jurisdiction over the town of Scammon.\n4:30 pm I arrived at the Cherokee Co. sheriff's department. I had to ring in for access, explaining to the dispatcher that I was there to check on information concerning a dispatched officer to Scammon on April 4th or 5th at 1:00 - 2:00 am. I was given entry and asked to wait at the window in plain view of the dispatcher.\n5:00 pm I met with and spoke to a retired county sheriff *********who lived in Scammon. He didn't hear or see anything either night. I received the following info from him:\n\n> No nearby military bases\n> An army ammo plant is located in Parsons 10-15 miles away.\n> HM Plant formally Slurry, is in the area. During 9/11, there were military soldiers and police surrounding its perimeter guarding it. There was 11 million lbs of high grade explosives stored there; which was rocket fuel. It has since been renamed HM Plant and downgraded in size of inventory.\n> Cherokee County pays no oil or gas taxes.\n> The area has the largest coal shovel in existence standing 760 ft high.\n> The train traveling through Scammon was a Burlington/NorthernlSanta\n> Heart of the Heartland Railroad Museum is nearby.\n> This area is the home of Deep Shaft Whiskey.\n\n5:50 PM: I was finally able to speak to the Police dispatcher ********. She wasn't clear about whether or not a police officer was dispatched to Scammon that night. I next spoke to Sheriff ***********who first told me that it was fireworks seen that night, and when I said \"fireworks\", he said well actually it was a guy who set off 3 Chinese\n\n17"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"lanterns. I asked the sheriff the name of the individual who told him it was Chinese lanterns and the name of the person that had set them off. Sheriff *******told me he would get those names for me later. I also asked the sheriff the name of the officer that was dispatched that night and he said it was Deputy *******. Then, the Sheriff left.\n\nApril 8, 2009\n\n9:00 AM: I arrived back in Scammon to take some still shots, interview area witnesses, and get a GPS reading of the suspected landing/hovering site.\n1843(a)(2) 9:45 AM: I visited the home of [REDACTED] *********located at 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\nacross the street from the school and adjacent to the field described by ***** as where the craft had landed. I was hoping for access to the field for soil samples, a quick sweep with my metal detector and a walk through with my Geiger counter. The brother of [REDACTED] *********, greeted me at the door [REDACTED] and his wife ****were both at work and the brother [REDACTED] was from out of town. ****had arrived Sunday night April 5th and not seen anything unusual. I asked for his brother's phone number but *****claimed that he didn't know it. I knew I could find it later so I thanked him and left.\n10:00 AM: I drove through town trying to find other witnesses on my list who might be home, but had no luck.\n10:30 AM: I decided that it was time to leave Scammon. I had about a 325 mile trip and I could finish my research on-line or by phone.\n\n04/23/09: To date, no new information has been obtained. I called Burlington/Northern and made inquiries about April 5th from 1:00 to 1:30 am and the engineers pattern of whistle blasts, but was told that whistle blasts vary. After several requests for the police report on April 5th, I still have not received an answer. Nor, has the Sheriff provided me with the name of the person who set off Chinese Lanterns or the name of the person reporting this action. I have also made several attempts to call the *******and Officer *******but have had no answer.\n\nI don't believe that the *****s saw Chinese Lanterns. What they saw they described as being as large as a small house. They viewed this from 4 to 5 street blocks away hovering at times about 200 ft above the tree tops. They watched this object leave at a high rate of speed, and then return, finially disappearing behind trees and out of sight. Conclusion: UAV unknown\nI will add any new information as it becomes available."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 109\n\nCONTACTS:\n1. Officer *********\n2. Train engineer of Burlington/Northern\n3. Sheriff *********\n4. ***** ***** Sr.\n1843(a)(2) 5. [REDACTED] and **************\n6. Sheriff's witness who reported Chinese Lanterns\n7. Person Sheriff claimed Set off 3 Chinese lanterns that night\n\nWind direction 01 :23 am: 58.1 degrees/42.4 degrees\nDew pointl29.60in pressure/\nWind calm/gust 0.8mph/humidity 56%/rainfall 0.00\nWind out of NE /wind gusts out of SE\nISS Not visible that night at that time.\n\nWhere are the major Planets/Stars\nMoon: west 9.17 days old\nAltitude 29* Azimuth 271 *\nVega: North East 59* 26, Azimuth 25* 35, Altitude\nNorth American Nebula: (NGC 7000\nDiffuse Nebula: Azimuth 38* 10, Altitude 7* 42,\n\nCase #16644 AAP Person 103\n\nGPS Coordinates: 1843(a)(3) 1843(a)(3)\n\nLocation: Dardanelle Arkansas - Cat 2 Deployment\n\nDate of Event: April 20, 2009"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On April 25, 2009 a STAR team CAT 2 Deployment was activated on this case. STAR team Investigator AAP Person 103 was assigned as lead investigator.\n\nAAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Coordinator / Manager\nAAP Person 59\n\nWITNESS NARRATIVE: (Witness: 1843(a)(2) \"******\" *****) i left my house in ola arkansas, at approx. 520 am to pay a bill at danville at the drop off box, internet bill. i took i believe it is hwy 27, you can look on the map , it may be hwy 28, but as i got on the long quiet hwy that seems to take forever to get to dardanelle, long boring road, i noticed a star in the sky that had a tail attached, it seemed to be way out in the universe, a few minutes later , i saw the same star alot closer up to the upper left of my drivers side window, and it appeared to be alot closer,... as in hovering over the nebo mountain. i thought oh its the radio tower but still felt on edge and watched as it moved within a 100 feet of me and i could see florescent lights 3 , on each side of a triangular figure. i kept thinking i am close to nebo mountain that has to be their lights, but the lights moved closer, i became really scared... rolled up my windows, ran off the road twice trying to get a good look and i saw the same rotating lights 3 on each side of a triangle. my car started a constant vibrating sound (sound like a flat tire)i started to call 911 and my phone was dead, it was fully charged . then all of a sudden there was a flash, like a light bulb had totally illuminated the road and my vehicle. and then the drive home was non-eventful, my car was driving sound and secure and as i drove futher i was nowhere near mt, nebo.although i watched my vehicles clock the entire time , there was no missing time in the event./ what also i would like to add is that this is the second encounter of ufo activity i hve encountered, and 3 other people in 3 different places can back me up, because in or around 2003 or sometime in that area, 3 different people have seen what i have seen in three different places at the same time. also we have a nuclear plant in london arkansas, it is not far from us, we are in the evacuation route area if this helps any.also when i got to work i checked my tires and all were fully inflated, no signs of a flat. my phone did not work the rest of the day , i had to fully recharge when i got home, i didnt think it was gonna work for a while, took alot of charging."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Discussion with Dispatcher: late this afternoon uncovered the following:\nAt 5:20 am witness was on way to work Apr. 20-09 . The witness is a Nurse.\nWitness was driving on highway encountered large Triangular Shaped craft - proximity within 100 feet at closest point. Witness said triangular vehicle was size of a B-1 bomber (her husband was in US Air force and she has been to many air shows)\nHeard loud rumbling sound, describes as like when you get a flat tire. (were no flat tires on vehicle after event)\nAs vehicle was directly over her car, there was a Bright flash of light that illuminated road surrounding her vehicle and lit up inside of car, the ran car off the road twice.\nEvent Blew out her cell phone - battery dead (was fully charged before incident) would not hold charge after for a long time. She tried to call for help without success\nWitness experienced physical effects upon arriving at work. Co-workers indicated she looked very ill; she tried to speak and could not talk (no voice - hoarseness) for a while and the co-workers voices were very loud (so loud sound reverberated in her head) caused pain.\n\nInterim Report - Arkansas, Case No. 16644 - AAP Person 103\nWitness1843(a)(2) *****\nOur plane on the way out was cancelled due to an auto pilot failure. We were able to get a later flight out through Atlanta. Our flight from Atlanta was also delayed so that we arrived in Little Rock late and by the time we drove to Dardanelle it was 6:00 p.m..\nwe met with:\nState Coordinator,\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\n\nSince it was due to rain on Monday, we felt it best to go immediately to the site. ***** had driven the road again in the morning to determine just where she was when this happened and she was able to go right to the spot where she saw the flash. [REDACTED] marked the fence with duct tape at the site so we could go right back to it. As we drove out, we noticed power"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"lines which sometimes crossed over the road. ***** had not even noticed them.\n\nThere is also a power plant nearby, Arkansas Nuclear One AAP Person 59 has instructed us to contact the security department there.) [REDACTED] talked to 1843(a)(2)\n***** about signing the media release. ***** does not want her name used or her image. We may use her voice and refer to her as 1843(a)(2) because no one here calls her that.\n\nThe first thing ***** saw looked like a distant star but what drew her attention to it was that there was a straight line in back of it. It got larger as she watched it. She also started thinking that her right rear tire was getting a flat because she heard a noise but she didn't really feel anything different. The car wasn't swaying. It seemed to her like dashboard wasn't lit up as it should have been. Her headlights weren't illuminating like they should have either. She got concerned for her safety and rolled up her windows. She tried to call 911 but her phone wouldn't work. She had used it the night before and that morning and believed it to be fully charged. As the craft got even closer, all of a sudden she could see three silverish, metallic blue rotating lights on each side of two sides. She started running off onto the side of the road trying to watch it. She watched the lights for approximately 20 minutes. At first she thought the light was from coming from Mt. Nebo. In the early morning light, she could see the line of the hill but the object was lower than that. The body of the craft was black, dark. There were 3 lights on each side of two sides on the bottom of the craft. She couldn't see anything on the back side but there is no doubt in her mind that the craft was triangular. When she held her hand out in front of her, the size of the object was larger than a baseball. The craft appeared to be tilted. She was then absolutely stunned by a flash...it reminded her of a camera flash and illuminated everything below it....going several feet in front of her car. She wondered to herself if she was having her picture taken and if they could read her thoughts. The craft was hovering but made no noise. After the flash, she looked back and the craft was gone. Her tires are just as they were with no apparent damage.\n\nAt the time, ***** was fearful of being stranded and alone on a deserted road that she's not familiar with. Later, she felt she was in shock. She walked into work and one of the girls came up to her and said what's wrong with you? The night nurse's voice was killing her ears. She went to say good morning and couldn't; her throat felt like it was choked up from the"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"experience (rather than something that was done to her.). She went out and had a cigarette. She felt very irritable....with raw nerves. She managed to get through the day and forgot about it until noon.\n\nWhen she got home from work, she started researching on the internet. She didn't tell her son until a couple of days later. It was [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) who encouraged her to file a report.\n\nWe video taped ***** talking about the event at the site. We then all returned to Russellville to go to dinner. After dinner, we went out to look at *****'s 2004 Santa Fe compact SUV. ***** had felt that the problem that she was experiencing was on the right hand side but a compass showed about an 80 degree change in direction when the compass was brought close to the back left panel. She also gave us her phone to look at.\n\n***** initially told us that she was off of work on Monday. At the end of Sunday night, however, she told us that she had to work on Monday and would be off on Tuesday. She agreed to call us after work. [REDACTED] also 1843(a)(2) had to work on Monday but ***** was available and wanted to join us.\n\nOn Monday, we went back out to the site and approached the farmhouse at the site [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) No one answered the door but there was a sign saying that if no one answered to look for them in the barn. We went into the backyard where we met [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) and her elderly father,********. ***** was extremely friendly and seemed quite interested in hearing about the event. She had left home on April 19th, the day before the event and hadn't seen anything. She added, however, that the pasture in back of her home (close to where we believe the flash went off) was a Cherokee Indian campground many, many years ago and that some strange things have happened there. Her daughter has taken pictures on the property which, when developed, show orbs. ***** believes that her daughter also saw orbs with her own eyes. She will talk to her and see what information she can get for us. ***** herself is part Cherokee. She also added that there was a medicine man years ago in Chickalah (pronounced chick key la)- which is not far away.\n\n***** talked with *****'s father, [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) He said that they have quite a few deer every day in the pasture. Once or twice a week they will all of a sudden bolt for cover in the trees and then will quickly return to where they"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"were and continue grazing. This appears to be quite abnormal behavior for deer.\n\nThe weeds in the pasture were curled but this was explained by the fact that they had used weed killer. [REDACTED] took a number of pictures, particularly of the power lines. They are 180,000 KV power lines – a direct feed from Arkansas Nuclear One. In one of the pictures, he zoomed in and believes he captured the number on the tower. He checked the ground radiation level here and found it to be lower than normal. We also drove along the road, before and after the mark on the fence, taking video as we went.\n\nArkansas Nuclear One: We had been unable to get a telephone number for Arkansas Nuclear One so we drove there. We were met by a guard who contacted the security department by telephone [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] talked with ********, the Security Officer on Duty. *******said he was in the middle of something and couldn't make any inquiries at the time. He said he would find out if anything such as that could be monitored by the control room. If it was not being monitored by the control room then it would be monitored in the delivery section, another part of the facility. He would try to get back to [REDACTED] tomorrow.\n\nWe had lunch and then returned to our room where [REDACTED] downloaded video and pictures to his computer, including *****'s. [REDACTED] and ***** went 1843(a)(2) off to a local Hyundai dealer. They used a compass on the 2009 Santa Fee and found that there was a significant movement of the compass needle on the back left panel of this vehicle and some other areas of the car. The salesman said that the body has changed quite a bit since 2004, but we felt this brought our findings on the experiencer's vehicle into question.\n\n***** and [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) met us back at the Best Western after work. We did another video with ***** in the room. At the end she also talked just a bit about another sighting in 2003. At that time she saw three triangular shaped crafts (which flew in a triangular formation) about 1:00 a.m. in the morning. She talked to two other people who weren't with her at the time but whom she believes may have seen the same craft at the same time. We've asked her at least three times if we couldn't meet with one of her co-workers and she continues to be resistant to this idea."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"***** drew a picture of the craft that she saw. [REDACTED] also checked *****'s sinus cavity area with a magnet to see if she might have had an implant there but found nothing abnormal.\n\n[REDACTED] did look at the cell phone and it appears that the cell phone was functional however the battery's internal fuse was blown. This is not a common occurrence and is usually the result of a high voltage insult.\n\nAlthough ***** was very friendly, she said it would be better to talk more in the morning. We will return there with ***** and ***** tomorrow. We also hope to obtain more information from the Security Officer and perhaps obtain more documentation on the Indian presence in this area.\n\nOur conclusion at this point is that this was a real event. At this point [REDACTED] has several thoughts regarding the cause of the flash. It could be that the craft got too close to the high voltage wires or it could have been extracting energy from the wires or unknown (awaiting report from Arkansas Nuclear One). The object is definitely unknown and does not appear to be a military craft. There is also the thought that the noise that ***** thought was a bad tire on her car could actually have been an extremely low resonant frequency emitted by the craft, which went away when the vehicle disappeared.\n\n4/28/09 ***** arrived at the designated time of 8:30 a.m. We waited at the motel for ***** until about 8:40 and then called her. ***** said that she wasn't coming...her daughter had taken her car and she wouldn't be able to join us. It seemed quite unusual that she hadn't called us to tell us this earlier. ***** called her back and said he would be willing to pick her up. ***** agreed to this so ***** went to get her and we drove out to the site so that we wouldn't be too late.\n\nI talked to ***** about using her image and name. She did not want her name or image used because of her job. She did sign a release allowing us to use her voice and said that we could refer to the property as the *********property. ***** bought the property in 1994 (bringing it back into the family). At the time or shortly after she bought the property, she was asked if she really bought the property as the previous owner said that nothing would grow there and that their animals were sterile. She has not had any problems with growing things or raising her horses and cattle."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"***** did say that there have been some other strange events though. Most notably for her are the significant number of people who have gone off the road and hit her fence. There have also been two occasions when whole sections of her fence have been pulled up and moved. In 9/06, a large section of a fence was just pulled out and laid down, That fence included railroad ties and solid oak boards. There were no storms or bad weather. Then towards the end of March of this year, she got up at 5:00 a.m. to leave the house early. There had been a storm and there was no electricity. As she left the house she saw that 40-50 feet of fence had been picked up and laid down. In this case, she noticed that the landscape timbers broke off under the ground. Her horses could not do this. She also mentioned that they do get static on the radio in this area. She does not get cell phone coverage in her house except in one of the rooms. Sometimes they will have a huge storm out in back and the front of the house will be totally still. They have experienced shocks underneath the high voltage lines even though the energy company claims that can't happen. *****'s e-mail address is [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2)\n\nNeighbors also report strange things. One of the neighbors reported (to *****) seeing a big black panther - even though there aren't supposed to be any panthers in this area.\n\n*****'s brother dropped in by chance while we were there even though ***** hadn't told him anything about the incident. He works at Arkansas Nuclear One in calibration and maintenance. He was not aware of any recent line disturbances but he believes that he will be able to obtain that information. What he did say was that he saw a dark helicopter flying very close to the plant within the last two weeks. He has never seen this before and said that they must have had approval for them to be flying that close. He will get back to us with whatever information he can obtain. The tape recorder was running when he came in and we didn't think to mention it to him until we were well into the conversation. He did not feel he could sign a media release because of his job. He also talked about getting shocked near the high voltage wires saying that he had been knocked down to his knees.\n\nWe said good-bye to ***** and drove ***** home and checked out of our motel. In the meantime, ***** went on to talk to the deputy sheriff of [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) The deputy sheriff was very interested in hearing about the event; he had not heard of any similar events in the area but took *****'s and [REDACTED] cards to contact in the future in the event that"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"anything else arises. We are going to ask [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) to check out the Heritage Room of the Dardanelle Public Library regarding Indian activities in this area..\n\nThe GPS location is [REDACTED] 1843(a)(3) [REDACTED] 1843(a)(3)\n\nIn order to complete this report we would like to send a FOIA to both the power plant and the FAA. We want to find out if we can learn any more about Indian activity in the area and also search for information on ley lines in Arkansas. We will enter the additional information onto CMS.\n\nAAP Person 103 (Chief Tech Advisor)\nAAP Person 104 (Field Investigator)\n\nCase Report MUFON SIP Deployment\n\nCase # 17097 and # 16814 Case Type: CAT\nInvestigator: AAP Person 111\n\nGPS COORDINATES : Latitude: Not available\nLongitude:\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: Witnesses were not able to direct investigator to exact location of event. According to witness testimony the event occurred approximately 50 miles south of Marathon, TX on Rt.385 (heading south)\n\nLOCATION: Marathon Texas (county of Brewster)\nDATE OF EVENT: 2009-04-22\nTIME OF EVENT: 12:49 PM ( x ) Exact ( ) Approximate\n\nOn May 8, 2009 a STAR team CAT 3 Deployment was activated on this case. STAR team Investigator AAP Person 111 was assigned as lead investigator.\n\nAAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STAR Team Coordinator / Manager\nAAP Person 59\n\nInvestigator Report:\n\nI. Initial Meeting with Witnesses\nI set up an interview with ***** ***** and ***** ***** at 12:00 P.M. on Monday June 3, 2009. I called to let them know I was on the way. There was no answer so I left a message. I arrived at their apartment on time and knocked on the door. There was no answer there as well. Their neighbor was outside smoking a cigarette; so to make sure I had the correct apartment number I asked if ***** and ***** were home. She said yes and that she had just spoken to them 15 minutes ago. She said that they were inside. I found that kind of odd.\nI decided to grab a quick lunch and come back. As soon as I left ***** gave me a call. The first thing he said was \"How long is this gonna take?\" Second, he wanted to meet in a public place. There was an outside Bar and Grill across the street so that's were we decided to meet.\n\nWhen I met ***** and ***** I could tell right away that they were highly paranoid. ***** refused to shake my hand and ***** kept his distance. ***** seemed distracted as he was cautiously watching everyone in the restaurant. I suspected that he was checking to see if there was any surveillance being carried out on them.\n\nBefore I could conduct a proper investigation, ***** started his own integration. To make them feel as comfortable as possible I allowed him to fire away questions until he was satisfied. But that wasn't enough. ***** wrote down my MUFON ID number and TX DL information. It seemed as though he was going to do a full background check on me once he returned home. ***** refused to do the interview with my digital voice recorder. He also did not want me to take any notes. Through much difficulty I was able to persuade him to let me take notes. Twice during the interview he checked to make sure my recorder was off. He also wanted to catch me in a lie, as he would ask specific questions to which he already knew the answers. I believe his main concern was to make sure that I was"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"not apart of some rouge intelligence organization. ***** wanted to dominate the investigation. So for a little while I was the \"punching bag\". But after 15 minutes or so he became comfortable enough that I could conduct a proper interview.\n\nII. The Prairie Dogs\nShortly before the incident while ***** was driving he noticed a prairie dog sticking its head out of a small hole in the middle of the road. After a near miss, he decided to pull over and take few pictures of it. To his astonishment there were around 20 or 30 prairie dogs scattered around both sides of the road. One thing I found interesting was during this part of the interview ***** would repeatedly argue with ***** about the size of the prairie dogs. While ***** insisted to me that the animals were at the normal size of 12 to 15 inches, ***** was absolutely certain that they were at least two or three times that size. While taking the pictures ***** felt a weird sensation. He described it as \"a feeling of being watched\". His intuition was telling him to get in the car and leave. ***** also felt uneasy at this particular moment but when ***** and he got back in the car they both felt better. They traveled some distance down the road but ***** could not be sure of exactly how far. He estimated it could have been from 1 to 20 miles. It was somewhere between there where the close encounter occurred.\n\nIII. Close Encounter\nIn both descriptions their story stayed consistent with a few minor differences. Listed below are the short descriptions of the UFO event taken from the CMS: case #17097 and case # 16814:\nBelow are the un-edited witness narratives submitted by ***** ***** and ***** ***** in their respective case reports.\n[CASE 17097]\n\nA: ***** ***** <> On a recent trip with my partner heading towards Big Bend State Park, just past Marathon Texas. While driving around noon on a sunny day ,I noticed a shadow cross over the hood of the car. I thought it was probably a bird casting a shadow . Within seconds out of the corner of my right eyes I saw something very bright heading towards the passenger side of the window at a rapid speed . I turned my head towards the passenger window and noticed that my companion was staring out at the same object. It looked like a extremely bright form with blowing arm like extensions faster than seconds it appeared to pass thru the car. The entire car interior was white , absolute white , I could not"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"see anything outside nor inside, although I was still facing the passenger .The stereo was on but I don't remember any sound either just glowing bright light.\nI have no idea how long the form took to pass completely thru the car . The car seemed to move back and forth with a jolt. The next thing that I remember is that my hands grabbed the steering wheel and I turned towards my partner and said \" Why are we doing this .\" We apparently were still facing each other, he has a terrified look on his face and shakes his head. I said \"What happened ?\" He said something hit the car. I reached out and stopped the swinging motion of the cross hanging from the rear veiw mirror . Realizing that the swinging motion supported the fact that the car had moved violently. I look in the rear view mirror to see if anything was behind the car , as if I had hit something. There is nothing behind us .Both of us turn and look out of the window trying to determine what had slammed into the automobile . Nothing around us behind us . I almost stopped but thought that whatever had hit the car might somehow somewhere be outside . I slowed down still visually searching for some kind of animal , object , thing but nothing seemed visible. Let me mention that it was around noon on a clear day. I had a CLEAR mind and was in a calm mood . I am a logical person and do not seek fiction in life . Factual and sensible. This is a occurrence that both my partner and myself witnessed at the exact same time\n[CASE 16814]\n\nB: ***** ***** <> My Partner and I were driving to Big Bend National Park on vacation. We were about 50 miles south of Marathon, Tx on 385 heading south. It was a clear day, and we were both well rested and excited about our trip. I was gazing out the window at the mountains and the desert terrain. We had to be doing about 85 mph. I was in the passenger seat. I noticed out of the corner of my eye something extremely bright and moving fast toward the car. I saw what looked like a teardrop shaped head for lack of better words with a thin line of what appeared to be a shiny band of silver wrapped around the center. I thought I saw what looked like a figure in a running man pose supporting the teardrop head, but I couldn't be absolute because the entire thing was engulfed in an indescribable white light, and was followed by light tracers. I don't know if the figure or thing moved through the vehicle but as quickly as i saw the thing the cab of the SUV was filled with the light. The vehicle moved in an upward circular motion but never left the ground kind. The light exited the vehicle on the driver side. I saw my partner who was driving look at me. He was pale white and disoriented, and he said to me \"What are we doing?\". I said, \"I don't know.\" And"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that was it. A Few things:#1. The radio was playing in the car quite loud, however when the light moved through the vehicle there was no noise, not even the sound of the car on the road. #2 When the light was in the vehicle, it was all you could see. No definition to anything, just white light. After it was over I did not see spots like one normally would after being exposed to UV lights. #3 My partner was driving the whole time, and never lost control. #4 It was not cloudy, it was broad daylight. #5 There were no other cars in sight.#6 There were no bumps or dips in the road to excuse the motion of the vehicle.#7 No dust devils in sight before or after.#8 The vehicle was not damaged in any manner.#9 We were completely sober.#10 We had the same experience with slight detail differences. #11 We were panicked right after it occurred, but shortly after we were very giddy.#12 We didn't discuss it much after the vacation was over, however when we got home, every time we discussed it together we would get extreme anxiety. When we discussed it separately with our friends we were okay.\nIV. Additional Details\nThere were several details which I was able to obtain from the interview that were not mentioned in the CMS narratives. During the close encounter when the light engulfed the vehicle, ***** described it as \"being inside a mayonnaise jar but still able to breathe.\" He also noticed tiny \"dot sized\", metallic objects which appeared to be floating in the light.\nIn *****'s description of the incident he said that\" it was like having white paper surrounding him.\" They also said that once the encounter was over, they felt strange or \"sort of out of it\". As they continued to drive it was several hours before the full realization of what had happened occurred to them. According to the witnesses description it might indicate that they were an altered state of conscienceless as a result of the encounter. Sometimes referred to as the Oz phenomenon as described in UFO literature.\nThe type of vehicle that was rented was a 2008 Black Nissan Rouge Mini SUV. It was rented from Hertz at one of the two Airports in Houston, Texas. I have been trying to obtain the receipt for the rental, but ***** was unable to locate it as he has just recently moved. He suspects that it's in a box mixed in with other personal papers. When he finds it he will contact me.\nDue to the fact that they do not know exactly where the encounter occurred, there is no way to obtain exact GPS coordinates of the site.\nWitness testimony indicates that ***** and ***** had an unusual encounter. They appeared to be sincere and truthful in their testimony to this investigator, although no physical evidence was obtainable at this time."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"END Report\n\nCase Report MUFON SIP Deployment\n\nCase # 17125 Case Type: Cat 3\nInvestigator: AAP Person 112 MUFON ID# 12509\n\nGPS COORDINATES: 1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: Exact location of witness at the time of the encounter which was within 100 feet south of the touchdown zone.\n\nLOCATION: Buffalo, Oklahoma\nDATE OF EVENT: 5/18/2009\nTIME OF EVENT: 12:30AM (x)\nExact ( ) Approximate\n\nOn May 26, 2009 a STAR team CAT 3 Deployment was activated on this case. STAR team Investigator AAP Person 112 was assigned as lead investigator.\n\nAAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Coordinator / Manager\nAAP Person 59\n\nBackground Summary:\n\n• Witness was feeding horses 5/18/2009 Sunday about 12:30am. facing west"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Witness first noticed that lights were flying very low (going way to slow to be an airplane) and appeared to have just flown over Buffalo\n• Witness described object with blue, red, and white strobe lights (were large and in line with each other) with quite a bit of distance in between all three. The middle light was white and strobe very slowly, and the red/blue lights were on the ends.\n• The lights turned and were coming directly towards witness at a diagonal angle, the white light was covered with a round, concave, clear, glass-type covering which appeared to be very thick glass, and had some type of circular design on it.\n• The red and blue lights were different than the center light. They were tall and cylinder shaped, more like beacons, and they appeared to be sitting on top of something, and appeared to be covered by a different type of material, it looked more like some type of colored plastic, but transparent enough that the lights underneath could shine through.\n• Witness never saw a shape or even any type of structure behind the lights.\n• Within 10-15 seconds the lights had reached the dirt road in front of witness, and where crossing over the top of the power lines. It became apparent that the lights were slowing down as they got closer, and were now nearly at a complete stop.\n• Witness ran from the corral to pickup and jumped inside, which took about 15 seconds, (wearing flip flops) Once in the pickup truck witness was now facing north, and the lights had moved just behind the corral and had turned south, facing witness again. THE LIGHTS WERE SITTING COMPLETELY STILL, HOVERING, ABSOLUTELY NO MOVEMENT, other than the strobeing white light. The distance from witness and the lights at this point was estimated around 150'.\n• Witness thought it was a single craft, and judging by the distance of the lights from end to end, would have been anywhere from 40-50'.\n• For about another 5 seconds witness fumbled trying to find cell phone, and staring at the lights in disbelief.\n• Witness indicated this was the most terrifying moment she ever experienced.\n\n• Witness drove forward, and got to the gate leading out of the pasture, stopped looked over shoulder, the lights were still sitting in the same place, NOT MOVING. Witness couldn't go towards town without passing close by the lights, so turned south. (And laid the pedal down)."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• About a 1/4 mile down the road, witness turned and looked over shoulder, and the lights were no where in sight.\n• Witness indicates behind the corral a large portion of the grass is laid down, and Witness took some pictures of that area.\n\nWitness Narrative\n\nI was feeding my horses last Sunday about 12:30am. I was standing facing west, all of the sudden some very low flying lights caught my eye. I first noticed that the lights were flying very low, and then that they were going way to slow to be an airplane. There was a blue, red, and white strobing light and they appeared to have just flown over Buffalo. The lights were large and inline with each other, with quite a bit of distance in between all three. The middle light was white and strobed very slowly, and the red/blue lights were on the ends. The lights turned and were coming directly towards me at a diagonal angle. The white light was covered with a round, concave, clear, glass-type covering which appeared to be very thick glass, and had some type of circular design on it. The red and blue lights were different than the center light. They were tall and cylinder shaped, more like beacons, and they appeared to be sitting on top of something. They appeared to be covered by a different type of material; it looked more like some type of colored plastic, but transparent enough that the lights underneath could shine through. I never saw a shape or even any type of structure behind the lights. Within 10-15 seconds the lights had reached the dirt road in front of me, and where crossing over the top of the power lines. It became apparent that the lights were slowing down as they got closer, and were now nearly at a complete stop. I turned and ran from the corral to my pickup and jumped inside, which took about 15 seconds, because I was wearing flip flops. Once in the pick up I was now facing north, and the lights had moved just behind the corral and had turned south, facing me again. THE LIGHTS WERE SITTING COMPLETELY STILL, HOVERING, ABSOLUTELY NO MOVEMENT, other than the strobing white light. The distance between me and the lights at this point was probably around 150'. I felt it was a single craft, and judging by the distance of the lights from end to end, would have been anywhere from 25' to 50', I cannot judge distance very well, plus I was busy running to my vehicle. I lean more toward 40-50'. For about another 5 seconds I fumbled trying to find my cell phone, and staring at the lights in disbelief. This was the most terrifying moment I have experienced, I threw the pick up in reverse, then drove forward, and when I got to the gate leading out of the pasture, I"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"stopped looked over my shoulder, the lights were still sitting in the same place, NOT MOVING. I couldn't go towards town without passing close by the lights, so I turned south and laid the pedal down. About a 1/4 mile down the road, I turned and looked over my shoulder, and the lights were no where there or anywhere in sight. Since the incident I have driven behind the corral and a large portion of the grass is laid down, which maybe due to wind current, I took some pictures of that area. I have been fascinated by the UFO phenomenon since the massive sightings in TX/PA in 2008, and thought if I ever saw one, that I would be brave and take pictures and size it up. I was so scared and I had an innate feeling that if I didn't leave fast, something bad was going to happen. This is a very small town and I do not want any notoriety, if you wish to do an investigation or speak to anybody from this area about this incident, please contact me first. Thank you.\n\n\nInvestigator Narrative: 5/29/2009\n\n Arrived in Woodward OK. At 2:30 PM CDT. Woodward is 35 miles South of Buffalo OK. This is where the sighting took place. Contacted the witness and made arrangements to meet at the site. Arrived on scene at 5:30 PM CDT.\n\nUpon meeting the witness her sincerity and creditability was very evident. So was her fear and apprehension. It appeared that the witness experienced something traumatic. Introductory discussion ensued followed by site evaluation. Initial photographs of the affected area were taken and measurements of that same area were acquired. As dark fell it became apparent that a lot can be seen in the dark sky and the witness appeared nervous over every moving light but all observed that night was explainable.\n\nInitial evaluation of the site showed a definite disruption of the area where the alleged Craft hovered or landed. The entire area appears dead with three areas where the vegetation is crushed in a swirled pattern. A scan using a handheld Geiger counter showed no abnormal reading and no evidence of radiation. Photos were taken and clearly show the condition of the affected area.\n\n\nAnimal Reaction"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Two of her horses had a material \"splattered\" on their backs. It did not appear to be lather as the horses were not worked or ridden. Further more, \"Red\" the alpha horse had developed 4 perfectly round, white spots on its coat. Three on her front flank in the form of a triangle and one lone spot on her rear flank. Now, the witness knows her animals and swears that the spots literally \"appeared\". It was not a stain but rather the hair had changed or had lost its color. According to the witness there were behavioral changes as well. The horse generally eats uninterruptedly but now will just stop in mid-chew as if pondering or sensing something, stand perfectly still, then shiver and continue eating. Furthermore, the witness contends that her dog, which was present during the event, refuses to return to the site. It will not even willingly get in the car and if forced to go just lies on the floor and quivers.\nThis investigator has consulted with an equestrian expert who advised that horses do not lather on their backs but they do sweat. Also after reviewing the white spots it was determined that it could be something called a \"Freeze Fire\" which occurs as a result of a medical procedure whereby an extremely cold instrument is applied for whatever purpose. However, it must be noted that this type of phenomenon can also be cause by certain bug bites.\n\nIt was now too dark to continue so arrangements were made to revisit the sight the following morning. Arrived back at the motel at 11:00PM.\n\n5/30/2009\n\nArrived at the site at 10:30 am. This investigator chooses to arrive early so as to collect samples and specimens alone. Samples of the affected grass were taken as well as control samples from an area about 200ft. removed from the subject area. The same procedure was used to acquire soil samples. Investigator then proceeded to the witness home to begin the formal debriefing. Following a detailed discussion in which the witness repeated the events sited in the background report and also revealed her growing sense of apprehension we proceeded back to the site to attempt a video interview and to acquire additional video of the area of concern. We also wanted to take specimens of the anomalies on the horse's coat.\nEverything was accomplished with the exception of the horse samples. Seems they were not willing to return to the corral until their nighttime feeding. That"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"necessitated another trip to the field tomorrow. Arrived back at the motel at about 6:00 PM.\n\nIt should be noted at this time that the area (Buffalo, Oklahoma located in the county of Harper) is completely surrounded by hundreds of wind turbines. These things seem to be constantly working.\n\n5/31/09\n\n I met with the witness about 8:30 AM. and secured specimens. Then after a final discussion in which the stated details of the case were reaffirmed I returned to the motel to check out. Enroute from Woodward to Oklahoma City I contacted the Harper County Sheriff Dept. to inquire as to any other reports or sightings in the area. I was told no, but the person who answered the telephone, talking on the promise of anonymity, revealed that starting around 2000 or 2003 there were multiple cases of cattle mutilation. The town of Seilman in Harper Co. was mentioned as well as Dobby Springs and the Appleton Ranch all of these are in the same general area.\n\nDevelopments to date\n\nThis investigator found the witness to be intelligent, creditable and sincere. Given the testimony, photographic evidence, and a variety of specimen samples, this is a potential CE3 case. Supporting photographic evidence and test analysis will be posted to CMS when available\n\nAccording to witness testimony (in subsequent telephone conversations) she claims to be experiencing recall and shadowy memories. She apparently was a lot closer than she initially reported. She remembers actually standing next to the craft but still cannot recall specific details of the craft. She is also remembering strange markings and bruises on her body that she didn't recall at the time she reported the event.\nThis concludes her testimony to date.\n\nSamples for analysis taken by Investigator: [REDACTED]\n\nChain of custody: Samples were taken personally and held by investigator, transported on airline in carry-on luggage, which was in sole possession of"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"investigator. Investigator hand carried samples through security and they were not X-rayed. Samples were placed in new clean zip lock bags and transported and stored at ambient temperature (no refrigeration). (Knife and scissors were used to collect samples and were cleaned and dried with alcohol swab after use, for each sample taken)\n\nSoil Samples:\n\n➢ Control sample of soil taken 200 feet away from affected area, approximate size of teaspoon. Sample was extracted from ground with a Knife and placed in a clean new Zip lock bag 3\" X 3\" and it was labeled \"control sample Soil 5-30-09\"\n➢ Soil Sample taken in center of affected area (middle of swirled area) approximate size of teaspoon. sample was extracted from ground with a Knife and placed in a clean new Zip lock bag 3\" X 3\" and was labeled \"Soil Sample 5-30-09\"\n\nVegetation Samples:\n\n➢ Control sample of vegetation (grass / grain) taken 200 feet away from affected area approximate size (cut with knife) one strain with grain placed in a clean new Zip lock bag 3\" X 3\" and was labeled \"Control Grass 5-30-09\"\n➢ Sample of vegetation (grass / grain) taken (cut with knife) in center of affected area (middle of swirled area) one strain with grain placed in a clean new Zip lock bag 3\" X 3\" and was labeled \"Grass Specimen 5-30-09\"\n\nHorse hair samples:\n\nFirst Horse - identified by the name RED\n\n➢ Control sample of hair taken from horses back, cut with scissors approximately 100 pieces 1/4\" placed in a clean new Zip lock bag 3\" X 3\" and was labeled \"Control Sample RED 5-31-09\" Horse is identified by the name RED\n➢ Hair sample taken from white spots on horse, cut with scissors approximately 100 pieces 1/4\" placed in a clean new Zip lock bag 3\" X 3\""} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and was labeled \"White Spot RED 5-31-09\" Horse is identified by the name RED\n➢ Hair sample taken from splatter area on horse, cut with scissors approximately 100 pieces 1/4\" placed in a clean new Zip lock bag 3\" X 3\" and was labeled \"Splatter Sample RED 5-31-09\" Horse is identified by the name RED\n\nSecond horse - identified by TRESSIE\n\n➢ Hair sample taken from splatter area on horse, cut with scissors approximately 100 pieces 1/4\" placed in a clean new Zip lock bag 3\" X 3\" and was labeled \"Splatter Sample TRESSIE 5-31-09\" Horse is identified by the name TRESSIE\n\nEnd Report\n\nAAP Person 112\n\nCase #s 17360, 17478 CAT 2 MUFON Deployment\n\nInvestigators: AAP Person 103 AAP Person 104\n\nGPS COORDINATES : 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: 100%. Home of witness.\n\nLOCATION: 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3)"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE OF EVENTS: #17360 various dates prior to 6/2/09\n\n#17478 on 6/13/09\n\nTIME OF EVENT: #17360 Various times, generally 10:30 p.m. - 11:30 p.m.\n\n#17478 11:30 p.m. ( ) Exact (X) Approximate\n\nOn 6/14/09, a STAR team CAT 2 Deployment was activated on a case in the Trego, WI area (Case #s 17360 and 17478). STAR Team Investigator AAP Person 103 was assigned as lead investigator. STAR Team Investigator AAP Person 104 assisted.\n\nAAP Person 59\n\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Coordinator / Manager\n\nInvestigator Report:\n\n6/16/09\n\n11:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. Left home to drive to northern Wisconsin and home of experiencer. Checked into motel in Spooner, WI and called ***** *******.\n\n5:30 p.m. - 10:30 p.m. Traveled to ***** 's home; ascertained GPS coordinates; obtained signature on both release forms; filmed interview; reviewed some of her pictures on her home computer; utilized magnetic detection device and radio frequency analysis equipment (0-10 GHz) to check for any potential implants, skywatched until it began to rain and then returned to motel.\n\n6/17/09"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. E-mail to ***** , watched video which ***** provided to us regarding 1843(a)(2)\n9:30 a.m. - 10:15 a.m. Work on report.\n5:30 p.m. - 12:15 a.m. Met with ***** , significant other 1843(a)(2) and son, *******. Further examination of her pictures and skywatched. Took approximately 150 photos which will be examined at home using adobe photoshop or NX2. Did radiation survey (low background readings). Obtained disc of her pictures. E-mail sent to State Director and AAP Person 59\n\n6/18/09\n\n10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Worked on report. Drove to Washburn County Sheriff's office to advise them of area sighting and request that they inform any future witnesses to file a report on our Case Management System at www.mufon.com.\n\n7:00 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. – Met with witness. Conducted additional interview to resolve questions, particularly related to first report. Skywatched and took photos. We received a telephone call on the way home from ***** , saying that she and [REDACTED] had both seen a large object after we left. Narrative follows.\n\n6/19/09\n\n9:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m. Traveled home. E-mailed and spoke on telephone with witness. Provided website info on 1843(a)(2) a Minnesota hypnotherapist who has assisted MUFON witnesses in the past.\n\n6/21/09\n\n6:00 p.m. - 11:45 p.m. Worked on report.\n\nNarrative:\n\nThe investigators met ***** ******* on the farm which serves as a not-for-profit animal rescue facility. ***** 's primary interest is rescuing horses but we also saw many dogs, cats and a couple of emus."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"***** was born on 1843(a)(2) and was raised in 1843(a)(2) Her immediate family was comprised of her mother, father and a brother who is two years older. She described her brother as highly intelligent, despite the fact that he is autistic. She attributes her patience, acceptance and ability to look at things in a different way from growing up with an autistic brother.\n\n1843(a)(2)\n\n***** 's father had an experience when he was at a drive-in theater in Coon Rapids, MN. He and half of the people there saw a huge disk (about the size of a football field) with multicolored lights going around it. It stayed over the theatre for a while and then zoomed off. That would probably have been in the 1950s.\n\n***** feels that she has always been psychic since she was 8 or 9 years of age. Around that time, she had a dream that she was being held in a humungous ball of light, under enormous pressure. Everything was completely white. It was like she had been scooped up and captured and held there. In the dream, she couldn't move her arms or legs and was totally paralyzed. She felt suffocated. She woke up scared and crying and immediately went to her mother. Her mother more or less dismissed the dream but ***** says that she has always carried that experience in the back of her mind. She gets a \"feed\" (communication) from something but she can't pin it down to one kind of thing. Sometimes the communication is very negative. 1843(a)(2) has helped her try to figure out how to \"shut out the bad energy.\"\n\n***** says that she has seen small balls of light for years. 1843(a)(2) stated that he himself had seen one in their bedroom."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The tavern across the street burned down several months ago (it continues to operate out of a garage) and ***** felt a \"huge release of negative energy\" afterwards. Her life changed; she slept better and she wasn't getting negative images or voices anymore. It was after this that she got the idea to go outside and take pictures of the sky.\n\n***** tries to focus on the same area of the sky every night. Her \"meeting point\" is the Corona Borealis and the Vega star system. She really didn't know what she was looking at but that's where she saw activity so she looked that area up on the internet to identify it. ***** states that if she concentrates on one area and flashes her camera, things start happening. [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) is usually in bed as he gets up early for work.\n\n***** actually spoke about 3 particular sightings. She did not report the first sighting which took place about three months ago and was the start of her sky watching. The first object she saw was bright white oval light that came over the barn, traveling from West to East. It then shot straight up. This object was larger than the one in her second report – ***** estimated that it was about the size of a semi-trailer. [REDACTED] was in the house. She went in to get him but the object was gone and they didn't see anything else. ***** states that she never turned her eyes to the sky prior to this event. She knew it wasn't a plane because of her pilot training. (***** has 20 hours of flying to complete before she can solo and get her license. We believe she said that she flew out of the airfield at Rice Lake, WI. She seems to be questioning whether she wants to continue. She apparently told the MUFON dispatcher that she was a licensed pilot and entered \"licensed professional\" in case no. 17360. We found this discrepancy to be troublesome.)\n\nAfter that, she started going out every night. ***** feels she was \"told\" to keep her focus steady on the Corona Borealis and Vega Star System. For some reason, she feels she \"understands that constellation.\" Some nights she doesn't see any lights moving and then feels like maybe she should be checking herself \"into a white shirt.\" At these times, she might call [REDACTED] crying.\n\nTwo weeks prior to our visit, ***** had a dream early in the morning. In the dream, she is watching the sky and there is a taller individual with her. She was watching two particular lights but then there was one. It started circling her; it felt like as if the light was \"scanning\" her. The tall person told her to put her hand"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"on the light and she remembers feeling a tingle and a pulse similar to the machine gun sound that she heard and reported in case no. 17478.\n\nIn the dream, ***** said that \"they\" communicated with her saying that they were going to give her a lot of information. They said that there was so much information that they were going to program it so that she wouldn't get it all at once; if she got it all at once it might destroy her. They did say that they were going to be \"turning it up.\" She initially felt that there was a suggestion that she shouldn't share the information she receives but then she \"asked\" about talking to us and felt that it was okay.\n\n***** feels that she will get important information. We humans are going to destroy ourselves and \"they are trying to find a way to shake us up a little bit. Instead of being idle, they want us to look up and get a better perspective and learn some things that will help us save ourselves.\" According to ***** , there is a purpose for the people that they are contacting and she feels she has a rapport of some sort with them.\n\nShe wonders what it is about herself that they that they have chosen to communicate with her. She described herself as a \"caretaker to the max\" and thinks that they may be coming to her because she is so compassionate.\n\nRegarding Case No. 17360, the investigators were quite confused about this report until they realized that it actually represented a composite of sightings that had taken place over a number of evenings. ***** related that she usually goes out to watch the sky between 10:30 p.m. and 11:30 p.m., sometimes later. Her first report included the things that she found particularly interesting. She says that she has become aware of particular patterns in the past month and a half. She believes that she gets a significant light source which is followed by a significant event. She sets off the flash on her camera as a signal to \"them.\" She can see lights moving back and forth but is not able to catch that on her simple Cannon SLR camera. ***** says that she was told to \"play with your contrast because what you see isn't what's there.\" She then began using a photo editor on her computer, playing with the contrast and brightness to see if she could get a clearer picture of the light source. She usually sees one bright circle and says that \"if you step it down,\" often there may be more than one component. Sometimes you get a circle, sometimes a triangle, etc.; there may also be other colors. Interestingly, she told us that one of the shapes she sees most often is an"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"acorn shape, yet she did not include this shape in case no. 17360. ***** reads what other people have seen on the MUFON website and feels that she sees many of those things. Sometimes when she sees certain shapes, she feels that they're trying to make her understand something but she's \"not getting it.\" She feels there is content in what she is capturing with her lens.\n\nThe investigators observed ***** \"stepping down\" some of her pictures and did find a few of them to be quite interesting. ***** realizes that there may be dust particles on the lens and that she may also catch an occasional firefly on film but believes her pictures represent more than that. ***** avers that she is trying to represent things \"in all honesty.\" For example, she stays away from the trees to avoid fireflies.\n\n***** referred to her sighting, reported in case no. 17478, as the \"big one.\" On June 13, 2009 at 11:30 p.m. (99% sure of the date and 90% sure of the time), ***** had taken her camera outside. [REDACTED] son and the son's girlfriend were sleeping in the camper near the house so she went down to a mounting stand near the barn. As she laid there, she could see many, many stars (however, see the weather report below which indicates that it was cloudy). There were moving lights but they were very small and her eyes were getting tired and blurred. She felt like they picked up on her thoughts. She remembers thinking in her head that everything was too far away, when she started to hear a roar off to the North. Because of her flying experience, she knew it wasn't a helicopter. It got so loud that it was \"shake rattle and roll time.\" The object came over the tree tops. It was predominately red with brilliant green and brilliant blue lights, and the whole object gyrated around like a gyroscope. The roar seemed like a machine gun hitting the ground and it definitely was in front of the object (This reminded the investigators of the onion drive theory of propulsion). Per ***** , it wasn't going that fast...\"it was moving with power, with purpose.\" At its closest, it was about the height of the barn 100 – 150 feet. Her first impression was that it was absolutely incredible....huge, beautiful lights. There was no impression of translucence; this was a solid group of lights. The noise itself was impressive. At one point she thought it might be a triangle...believes it was but it had different things going on with it so there was never any one shape. It was about the size of [REDACTED] pickup truck. ***** tried to take pictures but when it got over her, she got the communication that \"it's not going to do you any good because it won't turn out.\" Every time she flashed her camera she couldn't see it, then it would come back. She felt the whole event like it was similar in nature to somebody"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"coming up to her giving her a handshake....meeting her. The object then took off to the south. They \"left with a message that they would be back.\"\n\nThe only picture ***** got was of horizontal red lights as it left. [REDACTED] came out of the house and he said that he felt an intense vibration. [REDACTED] didn't pick anything up. The length of the event was five minutes at most. [REDACTED] thought it was more like 45 seconds....he could feel as well as hear it; he said that random stuff shook within the house. ***** could hear people at the bar before and after the event and they seemed totally unaffected. The couple that was staying in the camper weren't aware of anything either.\n\nWhen asked about effects on equipment, ***** said that she has had computer problems but does not know what to attribute it to. She didn't seem to link the problems with her sightings although she did enter \"computer\" on her form in case no. 17360. As far as her camera, she feels like the batteries have lasted a lot longer than she expected them to. She still feels that the lights affect the radio and TV. ***** has tried to find static on the radio just like in the movie \"Contact.\" One of the examples she gave was that she got a lot of static on the radio, it fuzzed out and then the song \"Don't Stop Believing\" by Journey came on. After a little bit of that, the song faded out and went back to the static. She said she thought that was her \"thank you.\" ***** believes that the lights were communicating with her.\n\nContrary to her comment in Case no. 17360 (\"excited\"), ***** informed us that none of the animals seemed to be affected. She said that the dogs didn't even bark, \"in fact everything seemed suppressed. \"\n\n[REDACTED] asked us whether we had heard about [REDACTED] who resides near Van Couver, Canada. They loaned us a book, which [REDACTED] read, and a tape about AAP Person 104 [REDACTED] photographs entitled [REDACTED] which we both viewed. It appears that ***** feels she is experiencing something very similar to what [REDACTED] experiences.\n\nShortly after we left ***** 's house on Thursday night, she called to say that both 1843(a)(2) she and [REDACTED] had seen a large object. ***** said it was red in color; [REDACTED] felt that 1843(a)(2) AAP Person 104 he could also see some pink. [REDACTED] asked [REDACTED] to send in his observations, in his 1843(a)(2) own words, by e-mail. We have not received that."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"We have now also been informed that [REDACTED] saw moving lights since we left. We still have to go through the pictures which we took during the skywatch.\n\n***** is very emotional and drained after these experiences. She feels that she's loosing time – and says that it's hard to explain. [REDACTED] however, has not noticed anything in ***** that reflected a different sense of time. We have provided information regarding two potential hypnotherapists and are trying to contact another experiencer who might be willing to communicate with, and be supportive to, ***** .\n\n6/19/09 Weather for Hayward, WI\n\nHourly Observations\nTime (CDT): Temp.: Dew Point: Humidity: Sea Level Pressure: Visibility: Wind Dir: Wind Speed: Gust Speed: Precip: Events: Conditions:\n12:53 AM 48.0 °F 43.0 °F 89% 29.98 in 10.0 miles Calm Calm N/A Mostly Cloudy\n1:53 AM 48.0 °F 45.0 °F 89% 29.98 in 10.0 miles Calm Calm N/A Overcast\n2:53 AM 50.0 °F 46.0 °F 86% 29.99 in 10.0 miles Calm Calm N/A Overcast\n3:53 AM 50.0 °F 46.0 °F 86% 29.99 in 10.0 miles Calm Calm N/A Scattered Clouds\n4:53 AM 45.0 °F 44.1 °F 97% 30.00 in 10.0 miles Calm Calm N/A Clear\n5:53 AM 45.0 °F 43.0 °F 93% 30.01 in 10.0 miles Calm Calm N/A Clear\n6:53 AM 53.1 °F 48.9 °F 86% 30.01 in 10.0 miles South 3.5 mph N/A Clear\n7:53 AM 57.0 °F 48.9 °F 74% 30.02 in 10.0 miles Variable 4.6 mph N/A Clear\n8:53 AM 62.1 °F 51.1 °F 67% 30.01 in 10.0 miles Variable 4.6 mph N/A Clear\n9:53 AM 66.0 °F 51.1 °F 59% 30.02 in 10.0 miles Variable 5.8 mph N/A Partly Cloudy\n10:53 AM 70.0 °F 48.9 °F 47% 30.01 in 10.0 miles Variable 4.6 mph N/A Partly Cloudy\n11:53 AM 71.1 °F 46.9 °F 42% 30.02 in 10.0 miles West 8.1 mph 16.1 mph N/A Clear\n12:53 PM 73.0 °F 48.0 °F 41% 30.01 in 10.0 miles Variable 6.9 mph N/A Clear\n1:53 PM 73.0 °F 48.9 °F 42% 29.99 in 10.0 miles Variable 6.9 mph N/A Partly Cloudy\n2:53 PM 73.9 °F 48.9 °F 41% 29.96 in 10.0 miles SW 6.9 mph N/A Mostly Cloudy\n3:53 PM 73.9 °F 48.9 °F 41% 29.96 in 10.0 miles Variable 5.8 mph N/A Mostly Cloudy\n4:03 PM 73.4 °F 48.2 °F 41% 29.96 in 10.0 miles Variable 4.6 mph N/A Mostly Cloudy\n4:22 PM 71.6 °F 50.0 °F 46% 29.98 in 10.0 miles North 11.5 mph 20.7 mph N/A Overcast\n4:53 PM 60.1 °F 55.9 °F 86% 30.04 in 3.0 miles Variable 4.6 mph 0.06 in Rain Rain\n4:57 PM 60.8 °F 55.4 °F 82% 30.02 in 2.5 miles Variable 5.8 mph 0.04 in Rain Light Rain\n5:06 PM 58.0 °F 55.4 °F 88% 30.03 in 3.0 miles NW 8.1 mph 0.06 in Rain Light Rain\n5:41 PM 57.2 °F 53.6 °F 88% 30.01 in 8.0 miles Variable 4.6 mph 0.09 in Rain Light Rain\n5:53 PM 57.0 °F 53.1 °F 87% 30.01 in 5.0 miles Calm Calm 0.11 in Rain Rain\n6:53 PM 57.9 °F 55.0 °F 90% 29.99 in 8.0 miles SE 3.5 mph 0.05 in Rain Light Rain\n7:53 PM 57.9 °F 54.0 °F 87% 29.99 in 10.0 miles Variable 5.8 mph 0.01 in Rain Light Rain\n8:53 PM 57.0 °F 53.1 °F 87% 29.96 in 10.0 miles South 3.5 mph 0.05 in Mostly Cloudy\n9:48 PM 53.6 °F 51.8 °F 94% 29.97 in 1.5 miles Calm Calm N/A Partly Cloudy\n9:53 PM 53.1 °F 52.0 °F 96% 29.97 in 1.2 miles Calm Calm N/A Partly Cloudy\n10:04 PM 51.8 °F 51.8 °F 100% 29.97 in 0.8 miles Calm Calm N/A Clear\n10:19 PM 51.8 °F 50.0 °F 94% 29.97 in 0.5 miles Calm Calm N/A Fog Fog\n10:31 PM 51.8 °F 50.0 °F 94% 29.98 in 1.2 miles Calm Calm N/A Partly Cloudy\n10:35 PM 50.0 °F 50.0 °F 100% 29.97 in 0.8 miles Calm Calm N/A Scattered Clouds\n10:48 PM 50.0 °F 50.0 °F 100% 29.97 in 1.2 miles Calm Calm N/A Mostly Cloudy\n10:51 PM 51.8 °F 50.0 °F 94% 29.97 in 3.0 miles Calm Calm N/A Mostly Cloudy\n10:53 PM 51.1 °F 50.0 °F 96% 29.98 in 3.0 miles Calm Calm N/A Mostly Cloudy\n11:00 PM 51.8 °F 51.8 °F 100% 29.97 in 2.0 miles Calm Calm N/A Overcast\n11:09 PM 51.8 °F 51.8 °F 100% 29.97 in 9.0 miles Calm Calm N/A Overcast\n11:53 PM 51.1 °F 50.0 °F 96% 29.98 in 5.0 miles Calm Calm N/A Mostly Cloudy"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Military installations: Military areas (with red route indicating low level flight areas) are noted below. Spooner is in the center and Trego, the location of the witness, is only 9 miles away from that location.\n\nWeather report: Visibility > 7 Miles"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On the next page, you will find the Google Earth view of the location where the object flew over on 6/13/09 (indicated by the yellow stick pin.)\n1843(a)(3)"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Below is the barn as viewed from the witness' perspective when the sighting occurred. It is also the object indicated with the yellow stick pin on the above map.\n1843(a)(3)"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case Report MUFON SIP CAT 3 Deployment\n\nCase numbers 16818 and 16819\n\nField Investigators: AAP Person 113\n\nGPS Coordinates: 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3)\n\nLocation: Fallon, Nevada\n\nDate of Event: 07 May, 2009.\n\nTime of Event: 9:30 P.M. Approximate (21:30)\n\nOn Friday May 8, 2009 a STAR team CAT 3 Deployment was activated on these cases. STAR Team Investigator AAP Person 113 was assigned as lead investigator.\n\nAAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Coordinator / Manager\n\nBackground: Case numbers 16818 and 16819 were reported by two individuals who were together (in same vehicle) at time of event. Witnesses were ***** ***** and ***** ***** ."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"***** ***** (age 18) is a High School Student and is near graduation. ***** 's father is a security officer, 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2)\n\n***** ***** (age 18) is a High School graduate and is currently unemployed. ***** 's mother is a 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2)\n\nBoth witnesses are well-adjusted young adults and are not given to fabrication. Both witnesses are living with their respective parents and have resided in Fallon all of their lives.\n\nInvestigator Report: Investigators met with ***** ***** and ***** ***** at 4:15 PM (09 May, 2009) this meeting lasted until 12:45 AM (10 May, 2009). Investigators took a break from 8:00 PM to 9:15 PM for dinner and after dinner went with ***** and [REDACTED] in their truck to the area where the sighting first occurred and then on to the site of alleged encounter at Depp Rd, and SR-95.\n\nInvestigator noted that both witnesses appeared to still be in mild shock after this event. They were both very excitable and \"babbling\" at times, both talking excitedly at the same time. It was difficult to slow them down and have them talk one at a time.\n\nThe event itself occurred on 05/07/2009 around 9:18 PM. Witnesses were parked off of Sandhill Rd, near the Fallon Naval Air Station bombing range, an area frequented by couples and party goers. Witnesses were alone and no other witnesses were present. They were at GPS coordinates:\n1843(a)(3)\n\nwhen they first saw strange lights to the east of their location.\n\nThey saw three boomerang shaped objects with five lights on each, one on the center, one on the middle of each side and one on both ends of each object. As they watched intently, one of the objects separated, shut off three lights and"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"appeared to be landing or crashing 50 degrees magnetic north on an azimuth of the above GPS coordinates, which would put it in the vicinity of Depp Rd (see further down report.)\n\n***** was very emphatic and noted to investigators that he grew up in Fallon near the Naval Base area all of his life and has seen \"every type\" of aircraft, and these did not resemble the usual normal aircraft by any means.\n\n***** decided to chase the objects at that time. He drove North on Sandhill Rd. 3.5 miles to Lone Tree, then went east when one of the objects (boomerang shaped) came along side to his left and began pacing their truck.\n\nAccording to witness testimony, the object was about 100 yards away, and about 20 ft off of the ground. There was also an object behind them following them. ***** drove about 30 miles an hour and the object stayed alongside then he accelerated to 50 mph and the object stayed with them increasing its speed to match his. At this time ***** noted that the objects appeared to be about fifty feet across. He could not determine the thickness of the objects. ***** drove about five miles on Lone Tree to Interstate 95, crossed I-95 which became Depp Rd, drove approximately 1000 yards to a dead end, and turned around. (actually it is not a dead end, but continues on private drive to a dairy farm.) They went to about 300 yards within SR-95 and stopped. They pulled off on soft dirt next to an irrigation canal which was on the right side or the north.\n\nGPS coordinates at this location are:\n\n1843(a)(3)\n\nAt this time witnesses indicated there was an object behind their location (east of their location) on Depp Rd at an altitude of about 50 ft, and an object above them, at about 50 ft which was circling them. ***** noted that the main body of the craft appeared silvery, but when it banked and turned it appeared to be transparent. She remembered this because it is usually cloudy in Fallon according to both witnesses, but this night it was very clear, because she could see the stars through the hull of the craft. ***** also confirmed seeing this phenomenon.\n\n53"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Also ***** noted that when the object passed them, she could see two horizontal \"grills\" on the back of the object. Investigator questioned her further, she said, \"Yeah, like the grills on a toaster or heater\" meaning red glowing heating elements.\n\nInvestigator notes that the objects were shaped almost horse shoe, having two rear ends and a \"grill\" on each end. Also ***** noted that the object \"banked like a plane would\" and \"made smooth movements like a plane would\". They both also noted that one of the objects stayed to the rear of them at all times as if to be watching. Also it should be noted that the moon was nearing full and was up that night according to the witnesses.\n\nAt this point, ***** decided to grab his dad's spotlight and shine it on the circling object. In clarification to his original report, the spotlight was actually a million candle power light (not a three million candle power light) as it was examined by investigator ***** [REDACTED] ***** then took his hand and shaded the light off and on to \"signal\" the object and the object descended and approached even closer while circling above them at about 20 ft altitude. At this point in the witness's conversation, they immediately began to discuss how they were driving down SR-95 to the North and saw the object behind them. Investigators stopped them and asked to go back and review their motions and emotions step by step. It was then they realized that they could not remember what had transpired after the light was directed to the object and they began signaling it. ***** said the next thing she remembered was being afraid and jumping in the truck. ***** said he remembers doing the same and starting to turn the key in the ignition, looking over at ***** and then he can remember no more until he was traveling north on SR-95 about five miles from Depp Rd.\n\nInvestigator and Witnesses – at alleged encounter site Depp Rd near I-95\n\nLater that evening (09 May, 2009) the investigators and witnesses went to the site and examined the truck tracks on Depp Rd. in the soft dirt. We noted that the tracks stopped on the dirt, but DID NOT continue back to the pavement. Investigator tried to get photos during the day the next day, but the tracks had been covered up as the witnesses kept driving back to the site.\n\n54"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Investigator made note of the fact that according to witnesses, the objects were almost completely silent except for a slight hum at all times. The lights were a bright yellow/orange.\n\nAlso noted is the fact the Depp Rd. location is near a dairy farm with several hundred head of Holstein dairy cattle, a herd of llamas, goats, dogs, etc. Both ***** and ***** noted very strongly that there was not a sound coming from any of the animals during the incident, which is uncharacteristic for farm animals at night. Usually they are very \"chatty\" and are constantly making sounds. Farm dogs bark almost constantly at night.\n\nAlso, since the irrigation canal is always full, there are a lot of insects, (mosquitoes, gnats, moths, etc) during this season, and that night NO insects were seen or heard during the event. They remember this because when the spotlight hit the canal and illuminated the area, there was nothing. Moths should have been attracted to the spotlight, but there were none.\n\nThey demonstrated this to investigators on evening of 09 May, 2009 when they were with witnesses at Depp Rd and SR 95 (9:45 PM). They shined the spotlight on the water of the canal and flying insects could be seen above the water and landing on top of the water. Also moths were attracted to the spotlight at that time. The witnesses are farm kids and are very well aware of nature and sounds of natural activity.\n\nInvestigator noted that ***** indicated he had an IPod and the cable for the IPod did not work prior to the incident, but for some reason it was plugged into the cigarette lighter in the truck during the event. ***** told investigator that suddenly music began playing during the event. After this event was over the cable was once again malfunctioning as before.\n\nAccording to witness testimony, the next recollection that both ***** and ***** had was of driving North on SR 95, about three to five miles from Depp Rd. ***** looked back in the rear view mirror and the driver's side mirror and noted that one of the objects was back behind them to the south at a considerable\n\n55"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"distance. There was a semi truck behind them, and the object was behind and above that. Then the object disappeared.\n\nIt takes about 10 to 15 minutes to go from Sandhill Rd to town. (Sandhill Rd is about 8.5 miles from Depp Rd) ***** and ***** noted that it took them an hour and twenty minutes to get back to town that night. They thought they parked on Depp Rd for only five minutes. They now think they had to have been there for at least an hour. They had originally put in their report that the event lasted for one hour, but it was one hour from the beginning of the Depp Rd. event to when they remember driving into town, so the whole event was closer to one hour and twenty minutes.\n\n***** took ***** home and went to his house. (approximate time 11pm) They both told their parents what had happened. At first their parents thought the witnesses were joking, but then changed their minds when their children were obviously still in shock at what had just occurred. This emotional state carried over to when the witnesses met with Investigator. *****'s mom called [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) and asked if there had been any other calls on the event. She was told there was not.\n\nIncident Reported to Fallon Naval Air Station: *****'s dad (Mr. ***** who 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] called Fallon Naval Air Station Security (sometime after 11pm) and asked if there had been anything unusual on radar. He was told there were \"three C 130s in formation\" (***** said her father said that was \"a crock\"). Mr. ***** (confirmed to investigator) that he was told by Base Security that \"There had been an \"unspecified aircraft incident\" in addition to the three C 130s on Radar.\n\nMr. ***** went back to Sandhill Rd with his son ***** that night (night of incident about an hour after the witnesses initially arrived home) and the area was being combed by military helicopters and black SUVs with dark windows. Military personnel were also combing the area on foot with flashlights. The witnesses and Mr. ***** decided not to approach the area further. The helicopters were using spotlights to examine the area from the air. This shows\n\n56"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"possible confirmation of an \"unspecified aircraft incident\". This may be the new code words used by our military in place of UFO.\n\nInvestigator later tried to talk to ***** 's father, but he did not want to discuss the event.\n\nBy the next day it seemed as if the kids were becoming reluctant to talk any further. Since we had all the information we needed, we decided to spend the rest of the time taking photos and GPS Coordinates.\n\nSite Survey: No unusual radioactivity was noted at the alleged encounter site at Depp Rd near SR95. The Geiger counter arrived Monday around 11 AM so we had had to wait until then to take the Geiger readings at the encounter site which were within normal limits.\n\nNewspaper Search: Investigator checked local newspaper for any reporting of the incident over a three day period, but did not find any.\n\nInquiry Fallon Naval Air Station: Investigator spoke with Public Affairs duty officer on 5-14-09 requesting information about \"unspecified aircraft incident\" that occurred at 9:30pm on May 7, 09.\n\nDuty officer confirmed that there was an \"unspecified aircraft incident\" that occurred between 12 Midnight and 1AM. Investigator requested specific information about event and was referred to [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n\nFOIA: MUFON will be formally submitting a FOIA request to the Fallon Naval Air Station for information specific to the \"unspecified aircraft incident\" on the night of the event and a specific information request about the alleged security response to the area where the incident occurred.\n\nPhysical / Biological: On Saturday evening the 9th of May should be noted that Investigator suggested to both witnesses to get a black light and scan their bodies for any abnormalities.\n\n57"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"***** did not have anything show up (Black Light scan) . ***** then noted she had three \"itchy\" bumps on her left leg, which she did not want to show investigator since she was wearing slacks. (embarrassed to show body area)\n\n***** 's right forearm had several glowing areas. (Black Light scan). He scrubbed very hard twice trying to get these marks off, but they would not come off. He also noted that they were very \"itchy\". Investigator advised him to see a doctor if this did not go away.\n\nInvestigator asked the witnesses if they had any trouble sleeping since the incident. ***** noted that he has insomnia frequently, but that night he slept peacefully as he felt gratified by the whole event. ***** on the other hand was fearful and has had trouble sleeping since the incident, but at the same time she keeps going out with ***** who is watching and hoping for a return of the objects.\n\nAlso noteworthy is the fact that both witnesses have told all of their friends, family and acquaintances of the incident.\n\nInvestigator provided both witnesses with business card with e-mail and phone contact information in case they want to add anything further.\n\nEnd of Report\n\nRespectfully submitted,\n\nAAP Person 113 (lead investigator)\n\nCase 17163\nCAT 3 Deployment in Bowling Green, *****ucky (county of Warren)\nInvestigator AAP Person 115\nState Coordinator: AAP Person 112\nDeployment date: 5-27-09\nIn Progress no GPS coordinates available\nNote: Lead investigator is only 17 miles from witness."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NOT COMPLETE\n\nSummary\n\n• Dispatcher notes 5-26-09 - ***** ***** called back,\n\n• Witness: doesn't know why he woke up except he felt immediate fear and compelled to go outside.\n\n• The light was up high, large as a baseball with colored bars on all four sides (light blue on each side, red on top, blue on bottom), they did not change size or shape, object in the middle did change shape continually. Smaller objects kept going in and out of it constantly. The object was baseball size and seemed to emit some kind of energy, \"like looking through a prism\".\n\n• jets all over sky, stayed in sky for over 3 hours, Object moving 3 to 4 times faster than the other jets,\n\n• lost connection to internet during the observation,\n\n• Object was so bright (example when you look at the sun you see spots) same thing, Witness had red patches on his arm, his chest is red and patchy, the top of his head is very red, look like red skin, not a burn,\n\n• seemed to witness like it was only 15 – 20 minutes that he was watching this but as he thinks back at it now he first saw it about 3 am and finished at 6 am it took 3 hours but didn't seem like it missing sometime\n\n• 2nd Witness was involved\n\n• He did feel some dizziness, heart rate increased exactly like he had too much caffeine, at other times he was calm, other times afraid.\n\n• He is not adverse to an investigator going to speak to him. Dispatcher: 1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) Case # 16539\n\nCMS Log Number US-04162009-0016\n\nDate of CMS report: April 20, 2009\n\nDate of events: April 16, 2009\n\nPlace of sighting: Residence - 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3) 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3)\n\nCase Category 2\n\nReport by: AAP Person 108 STAR Field Investigator\n\nBACKGROUND INFORMATION OF THE WITNESSES:\n\n1843(a)(2) is a laboratory director and has been living in his newly renovated 1,635 sqft. single-family home since September of 2008 along"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"with his fiancée ***** ***** , a radiology technician, both have degrees in chemistry.\n\nINTERVIEW - SEQUENSE OF EVENTS:\n\nApril 16th, 2009, approximately 03:15 AM in the morning, ***** was awakened by loud humming and she than woke up ***** to have him check out where this strange sound was coming from. ***** walked from bedroom to bedroom to look through the windows to see what was causing this humming, thinking to himself that it may be a street cleaner sweeping the area roads or some sort of utility truck working on something. He returned to the master bedroom to look through the window that was next to ***** and he noticed a very large triangular craft hovering above. The craft was totally black with no lights and from his point of view, had a boomerang shape resembling a very large \"stretched out\" F117 Nighthawk about 300 feet wingspan. The UFO was hovering slowly heading towards SE and took about 17 minutes to pass over their house and to fade at a distance. ***** said that the humming was very loud, constant and sounded like an electrical transformer. That Saturday, ***** mentioned to one of his neighbor [REDACTED] about the strange incident that occurred early Thursday morning and [REDACTED] did state that he heard the humming and was reluctant to continue the conversation. Upon my on-site investigation, I did notice a parked squad car belonging to Ann Arundel County PD on the same street 1843(a)(2) that belonged to an officer that resides there.\n\nSOURCES THAT WERE CONTACTED:\n\n• BWI (In process)\n\n• Email 4/18: Anne Arundel County Department of Public Works, northern district (Mountain Road Yard) Citizens Info. Center [Street Sweepers]:"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Question: \"Were 1843(a)(2) area streets cleansed/swept on the night or early morning around 03:00am on April 16th?\"\n\nReply from DPW 4/20: \"We definitely would not sweep/clean during those hours.\"\n\n• Called 4/21: 7-Eleven (24hrs) 1843(a)(2) Store attendant 1843(a)(2) stated that nothing strange was heard or seen.\n\n• Called 4/21: Exxon/Shop (24hrs) 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) stated that nothing strange was heard or seen.\n\n• Email 4/17: Capitol Gazette Newspaper (no replies)\n\n• Email 4/18 and 4/23: Anne Arundel County PD Northern District (no replies).\n(Note: I notice an AAPD squad car parked on 1843(a)(2) upon my on site investigation; an officer resides on that same street. Second email was sent on the 23rd.)\n\n• Email 4/19: Baltimore Sun Newspaper (no replies)\n\n• Email 4/19: Chesapeake Bay Newspaper (no replies)"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\n\nArea military bases and airports (from Pasadena):\n\n• Baltimore Washington International Airport (BWI) 8 miles NW\n• Fort Meade – 9 miles W/SW\n• Patuxent Naval Air Systems Command– 50 miles South\n• Dover Air Force Base, DE – 95 miles East.\n\nAREA TEMPERATURE / NIGHT OF THE SIGHTING April 16th\n\nTemperature: 39.0 ◦F\nDew Point: 36.0 ◦F\nHumidity: 89%\nPressure: 30.20\nVisibility: 9.0 miles\nWind Direction: WNW\nWind Speed: 3.5 mph\nConditions: Mostly Cloudy"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2)\nlooking through\nbedroom window where he saw triangular UFO hover above."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MUFON 4/20/2009 AAP Person 108\n\nArtist rendition of the UAV seen by 1843(a)(2) – Illustration by AAP Person 108\n\nCONCLUSION:\n\n***** was perplexed and a bit shaken by this incident and wondered if this was an US military aircraft, why would they built such a thing! He also stated that most of the home occupants who reside on his street are either with the military, law enforcement agencies or working as government contractors. I found 1843(a)(2) to be very credible, logical and he really isn't into the whole sci-fi scene or the UFO phenomena.\n\nA similar case involving a black triangular craft sans lights was witnessed five years ago in Owings Mills, Maryland, about 20 miles NNW from Pasadena, MD. February 9, 2005, 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) witnessed a low altitude triangle, about 500 to 800 feet above ground with no lights.\n\nEND\n\nCase Report MUFON SIP Deployment CAT 3"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case # 17526\n\nInvestigator: AAP Person 114\n\nGPS COORDINATES: 1843(a)(3) 1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: Driveway of witness' house. Six feet from where sighting occurred. Entity was seen 43 yards from sighting location.\n\nLOCATION: Grants Pass, Oregon\n\nDATE OF EVENT: June 16, 2009\n\nTIME OF EVENT: 10:30 pm local (Pacific Time) ( ) Exact ( x ) Approximate\n\nEvent Background:\n\n• Witness went outside to smoke a cigar and take the dog out.\n\n• Half way through smoking the cigar he noticed \"flickers\" of light off in the distance in the western sky.\n\n• Witness sees 6-10 whitish-yellow orbs and sees a crescent-like object that quickly disappears.\n\n• As a car approached from the south end of the road, his dog was reacting to something on the other side of the road."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• As the car got closer; across the street the witness saw a pair of eyes as if an animal's eyes were reflecting in the light except they were a deep purple.\n\n• After the car passed, the witness looked back to the spot where he saw the eyes, and was shocked to see a whitish humanoid figure stand up and walk along the neighbor's fence across the street.\n\n• Witness got unnerved and called his wife outside to tell her what he had seen and to point out to her the continuing \"light show\" of orbs that were appearing and disappearing.\n\n• She confirmed the \"flickering and flashing\" of orbs in multiple spots.\n\n• Both witnesses became nervous and went into the house.\n\nInvestigator Narrative: 6/22/09\n\nI contacted the witness by phone on 6/18/09 and set up an interview for 6/19/09 at 3:00pm PST.\n\nI arrived in Grants Pass, Oregon on 6/19/09 at around 2:00pm PST. I met the witness and his wife at their residence. I asked permission to tape record the interview and he agreed. He began his narrative, and spoke of seeing six to ten whitish-yellowish lights/orbs the size of aspirins at arm's length, between two"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"tree lines. (See photos attached) He said they flashed and flickered appearing and disappearing in multiple spots but in the same general location in the western sky.\n\nUsing a compass, I verified the location of the orbs were southwest.\n\nAll the orbs were diffused, appearing in the clouds and under the cloud deck. The witness also saw a crescent shaped object about the size of a half-dollar that seemed to \"thrust out of the cloud then disappear\".\n\nThe witness stated, \"It was a dark night\".\n\nThe night of the 16th was a moonless night, for the moon had set at 2:18 pm that day. The only planet that could be seen in the southwestern sky during that time was Saturn, but it's only a magnitude of +0.9 to +1.0, and is reported as \"dimmer than usual\" based on the fact that Saturn's rings are currently visible \"edge on\".\n\nHe watched this \"light display\" from his front porch for about 10-15 minutes before seeing a car approaching from the south end of the road. As the car came closer, it was then that he noticed a pair of deep purple eyes from across the street. When the car passed by the witness, he looked back at the spot where he saw the eyes and was shocked to see a whitish humanoid shape stand up and quickly walk along the neighbor's yard this side of the fence. The witness said the entity's head seemed larger than the rest of the body and he could not see its feet.\n\nNOTE: The witness said that the neighbor across the street does not occupy the house on a regular basis. The night of the 16th, the witness noticed no lights on, and assumed they were not at home."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The road between the two properties is paved higher and the ditch is not apparent from his front porch. I took pictures of the area across the street from the sighting location and measured the distance with a laser rangefinder. The distance from the witness to where the entity was sighted is 43 yards. I walked across the street and saw where the \"eyes\" were seen. There is a ditch that runs along the road and the fence of the neighbor's property. The ground is overrun with grass and is uneven, but is relatively flatter closer to the fence. The witness was not sure how far from the fence the entity was, only that from his perspective, the top of its head was a little higher than the fence. The fence is approximately five feet high.\n\nThe witness lost sight of the entity because a telephone pole on his property obstructed his view of it. He became unnerved by what he saw and called his wife outside to tell her about it. He also wanted confirmation from her that she could see the lights in the sky that were still continuing to flash and flicker in various spots. She said she saw them and also noticed a large red light lower in the sky that was like \"turning on a flashlight\". The witness saw the objects in various degrees, the highest location being 45 degrees. His wife saw the red light at about 25 degrees above the horizon.\n\nI had the witness draw a drawing of the orbs and crescent object, and his wife added where she saw the red object. He also drew a drawing of the entity he saw. (See drawings attached)\n\nBoth the witness and his wife remained outside watching the orbs for about 10 minutes. The witness said he observed the lights/orbs for about 20 minutes total. Afterwards, while still outside, they heard a low flying jet. It was not actually seen by either one of them, but they both agreed that a jet flying that low was unusual.\n\nThe interview ran 1-1/2 hours."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The nearest military installation is Klamath Falls about 120 miles to the east. Medford International is about 30 miles to the south, and Grants Pass Airport is to the north.\n\nOn 6/22/09 I called the Grants Pass Sheriff's office to ask if there were any reports made on 6/16/09 of anything unusual seen that night. I was told no reports were logged in for anything unusual for that night and time.\n\nBoth the witness and his wife could not sleep that night. The witness said he woke up the next morning extremely drained and both had headaches that lasted a couple of days.\n\nI found the witness and his wife down to earth people who seemed credible, sincere and intelligent. I saw no signs of fabrication of their sighting through body language or facial expression. The witness is an 1843(a)(2) The witness said he has had other experiences in his life.\n\nAnimal Reaction:\n\nThe witness said it was his dog that initially saw something across the street before he actually saw the purple eyes. The dog was raising and lowering her head, staring in the direction of where the witness ultimately saw the eyes. The dog tried to edge closer to the road but ran back to the witness in fear. The dog stayed close by the witness and showed signs of fear the rest of the evening.\n\nThis concludes the investigation.\n\nMUFON CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM\nInvestigator: AAP Person 114\nAAP Person 114\nCase Number: 17526"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BALLESTER-GUASP RESULTS\n\n-----\n\nINFORMATION QUALITY INDEX => 100% = 1\n\nInformation Acquisition\n1. At the site < 2 hrs\n2. Person to person Interview >= 1 hr\n\n-----\n\nRELIABILITY INDEX => 63.5% = 0.635\n\nNumber Of Witnesses => 2\n\nWitness Profession => College Graduate or Military\n\nFamilial/Social Relationship => Family or Single Witness\n\nGeographical Relationship => Together or Single Witness\n\nWitness Activity => Recreational\n\nAge Of Witness => 35 to 64\n\n-----\n\nSTRANGENESS INDEX => 57.14% = 0.5714\n\nSelected Characteristics\n1. Anomalous appearance\n2. Existence of anomalous movements\n3. Close encounter (500 feet or less)\n4. Presence of beings associated with the UFO\n\n-----\n\nCERTAINTY INDEX => 36.29% = 0.3629"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-----\n\nCase # 16720 CAT 2 MUFON Deployment\n\nInvestigators: AAP Person 103 AAP Person 104\n\n1. GPS COORDINATES : 1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: (Approximate point of reference for descent)\n\n2. GPS COORDINATES : 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: (Exact location of home of Witnesses, 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3)\n\n3. GPS COORDINATES : 1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: (Close approximation of where Witness ***** ***** was on the road when he saw lights near or on the ground on Ak-Chin Indian Reservation)\n\nDATE OF EVENT: 4/28/09\n\nTIME OF EVENT: 10:00 p.m. ( ) Exact (x) Approximate"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On Friday May 2, 2009 a STAR team CAT 2 Deployment was activated on three cases in the ***** AZ area. Cases 16720 – 16721 – 16726 STAR Team Investigator [REDACTED] was assigned as lead investigator.\n\n[REDACTED]\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Coordinator / Manager\n\nInvestigator Report:\n\n5/3/09\n\n5:30 p.m. [REDACTED] talked with ***** ***** to discuss issue of getting access to possible site on Ak-Chin Indian Reservation\n\n6:05 p.m. [REDACTED] tried to reach ***** ***** by telephone. No answer, left message, [REDACTED] sent e-mail to him.\n\n\n\n5/4/09\n\n\n\n9:00 a.m. – Tried to telephone ***** ***** again. Left message.\n\n9:30 a.m. – Drive to Ak-Chin Indian Reservation area. Saw high voltage power lines along the way. Power lines crossed the road around mile marker 183. There was some kind of mining pit on the left as we drove South. [REDACTED] went in on computer to try to obtain phone number for house by reverse address; number was unlisted.\n\n10:20 a.m. – After some difficulty locating it, we arrived at ***** residence. Before we went to the door, the witness in Case 16726 called to set up meeting time. ***** ***** also called to advise us that he had talked with a former"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director of AK-Chin Law Enforcement for Gaming Control. He obtained the name of [REDACTED]\nWe were also informed that nothing could be picked up from the ground and that we should be very careful not to do anything which might be disrespectful to the residents of this area. We then went to the ***** residence. An older woman, who identified herself as ***** 's mother, advised us that ***** , his father [1843(a)(2)] and sister [1843(a)(2)] had all gone to Colorado for a family funeral. She indicated that they had relayed information about the event to her and she was sorry that we had missed them. We left a card and asked ***** to get back to us by phone or e-mail as soon as possible (dark-colored, 2002, Honda? parked in front of house)\n\n11:15 a.m. - Headed out in search of Police Dept., passing and stopping at Tribal Council Office.\n\n11:45 a.m. – Left message and card at Police Department. We went back to the Casino for lunch and to await telephone call from Chief of Police.\n\n12;50 p.m. – There was no word from the Chief of Police, so headed back to motel.\n\n5/5/09\n\n\n\n9:30 a.m. – Drove to ***** residence. No one answered the door. Dark-colored car in same position as day before.\n\n10:10 a.m. – Drove to Ak-Chin Casino. Made phone calls and ate lunch.\n\n12:00 p.m. – Drove back to ***** residence. Car in same place.\n\n\n\n5/6/09"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8:20 a.m. – Received call from [REDACTED] left to meet for breakfast.\n\n9:05 a.m. – Arrived at IHOP where we met with [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]. We discussed the fact that we had been to the police department and were working with local people who have ties to Indian security to gain access to Indian lands. [REDACTED] gave GPS Coordinates and range finder result for ***** ***** case to [REDACTED]\n\n10:55 a.m. – Arrived at the ***** residence and again attempted to speak with someone in the residence (we were accompanied by [REDACTED]. There was sound emanating from the residence which we felt was either a TV or radio that was on. We drove to the Ak-Chin Casino and inquired as to whether Mrs. ***** was working. According to [REDACTED] he asked one of the security personnel whether or not they had heard of any unusual events and was told no. The BAASS team decided to stop at the police station en route to ***** and their interview with ***** *****. Approximately 15 minutes after they left, [REDACTED] called [REDACTED] to ask directions to ***** ***** ' home. [REDACTED] then asked [REDACTED] if they were able to get in to see the police chief and was advised that they had gotten in. No other information was provided. We drove back to the ***** household to see if [REDACTED] (alone this time) would have any better luck getting Mrs. ***** to come to the door. Although the dark-colored car was still there and the TV/radio was still playing, no one came to the door. We went to get gas, called ***** ***** , and then drove back to the witnesses' house. At this time, [REDACTED] left a card and a hand-written note asking Mrs. ***** to please have ***** call us as soon as possible. Now, the TV/radio was no longer on and a package of cigarettes had been removed from a table outside of the door. The Honda was still in front of the house.\n\n3:30 p.m. – Unable to get any further without a witness, we started back to *****."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4:30 p.m. – Arrived back at motel. Started writing reports of daily events. Contacted [REDACTED] about continuing inability to contact witness.\n\n5/7/09\n\n\n\n10:00 a.m. – Once again drove out to the ***** home.\n\n10:35 a.m. - As we approached the home this time, we noticed that the dark-colored car was gone and a red truck and another car were parked near the home. [1843(a)(2)] came out of the door and approached us as we walked up the driveway to the home. [1843(a)(2)] indicated that they had just gotten home and invited us in. ***** was in the shower but came out a few minutes later. Both [1843(a)(2)] and ***** agreed to sign both release forms.\n\nWe asked ***** to give a narrative of what he saw as we video taped him. ***** said it was too bad that his sister, [REDACTED] wasn't there as she saw what they saw (later we asked ***** to send his sister an e-mail and ask her to send us her recollections from the sighting).\n\nWe asked ***** to start relating his experience by starting with what was going on right before the sighting. He said that the first time he saw the light, he was coming\n\nhome from getting some food and saw the light sitting in the sky. It was similar to lights he had seen on other side of the mountain (but never saw on this side.) He went home."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"***** said that his father [1843(a)(2)] was on the couch and called ***** in to go out and watch the event that was going to happen that night with the moon and Venus. ***** said he saw the moon but not Venus. What he did see was an amber colored (\"like sodium vapor street lights\") light, but that it appeared much larger than a street light and it \"was dimming and coming back bright\" so he ran in and called his dad to come out. [1843(a)(2)] looked and he noticed the light too. Then the light started to reappear in different areas and then he saw more, smaller lights that seemed as if they were coming from the original light source. ***** then ran in to get his sister and he states that she saw the same thing. [1843(a)(2)] and at some point decided to go back into the house. [REDACTED] and ***** continued to watch; in [1843(a)(2)] fact [REDACTED] got on the roof of the red truck in order to see better. ***** told her to get down and that they would drive south. They headed to the Ak-Chin Casino. As one faces the Casino from the road, the area where they saw the lights would be in back and to the right of the Casino. ***** estimated the lights to be about a mile behind the casino (see Google picture which is included). He thought that the lights were spaced about a 100 yards from each other. Some of the lights looked like emergency type lights (\"orange....pulsating lights\") but he did not see any vehicles. ***** made a U-turn at the Casino and the lights were still there. Since there was no way to get back onto the reservations property, ***** and [REDACTED] went home. The lights were still there when they left. When they got home, they couldn't see anything. ***** said that amber lights have been showing up everywhere in this area but prior to this time, appeared to be on the mountain. [REDACTED] added that those lights stayed in the same spot and as they moved they lost sight of the lights.\n\n***** has no hearing or visual problems. [REDACTED] does wear glasses and was wearing glasses at the time but then took them off. [REDACTED] says that he can still see road signs at a distance better than ***** can. [REDACTED] also said that he has had more experience with lights because he was in the Navy. He said that he knows that there is a difference if you look at something directly vs. seeing something in the periphery of your vision. He did admit, however, that he does"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"not have a good sense of direction. He looked at the lights and tried to calculate\ntheir distance and felt they were much further away than ***** did. [REDACTED] felt 1843(a)(2)\nthat the lights were 10-12 miles away from where they were standing. He said\nthe lights moved around and while they were somewhat like streetlights \"they\nseemed brighter and mellower at the same time.\" They were totally round.\n***** said that when he first saw one, he could think of something that would\nmake that kind of light but you could see one, and then one might appear to the\nleft, and then one might appear to the right - and this happened three times.\n1843(a)(2) Spatially, [REDACTED] felt that the lights were hundreds of feet apart. He felt that they\ndefinitely were distinguishable from a helicopter. He thought that some of the\nlights were smaller, sharper and moving around the other lights so felt that they\n1843(a)(2) were faster. [REDACTED] tried to determine a trajectory but had no reference points\nto do so in the dark.\n\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] stated that they sometimes sit out and night and he'll see lights and say\n\"that's a plane.\" In this case, when he looked at the lights he said \"wait a minute,\n1843(a)(2) that's different.\"[REDACTED] said that he was emotionally stunned to see something \"I\nhaven't seen in all of my years.... my mouth was open.\"[REDACTED] said that he 1843(a)(2)\nrationalizes things and this event he couldn't rationalize. His first inclination was\nto say that these were flares like the ones they have seen at Gila Bend Air Force.\n1843(a)(2) However,[REDACTED] was in the Navy and on the Kitty Hawk Aircraft Carrier from\n1970-1972 and also managed some businesses in Pendleton. He has seen flares\nmany, many times...and knows what they look like.\n\n***** said he was shocked. When he was 7-8 years old ('91 or' 92) and was\nliving in Las Vegas, he was looking directly west and saw the \"weirdest craft.\" It\ndid not look like an airplane. He didn't know about the stealth aircraft at that\ntime but now he thinks it looked like a bronze-colored stealth. He ran in and told\nhis mother but no one believed him. ***** said that he had filed a report on that\nwith MUFON."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"We then went out to the front yard so that [REDACTED] could take pictures, use the\nrange finder and get the GPS coordinates. The distance from where [REDACTED] was 1843(a)(2)\nstanding to the top of the roof of the house down the street where the light was\nsighted was 187 feet, with a 13.8 degrees angle.\n\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] said that when he originally stood on the lawn and looked up at the sky,\nhe couldn't see anything. He then walked back, closer to the house, which was\nabout 2 feet higher in elevation. Then he could see the light between the second\nand third house (on the street which is perpendicular to[1843(a)(2)] ) in the very low\nsky, appearing just a foot above the rooftop. He said that it did move a little but\nnot much above that height.\n\n1843(a)(2) At this point, [REDACTED] went back into the house and ***** rode in our car with us\nto the actual place on the Ak-Chin Reservation where he saw the lights He didn't\nsee any lights on the way the night of the event. He said that they made a U-turn\nat the Casino and they saw the lights on or near a berm. They then slowed down\nAAP Person 103 (we parked our car there to allow[REDACTED] to take pictures.) There was a larger light\nright in the middle – a\" light like could have been on an airplane but it was\npulsing.\" ***** pointed towards a red-colored building as the approximate\ndirection where he saw the lights. There were red/ orange and yellow emergency\ntype lights; he thought that there were two on the left and one on right. There\nwere smaller lights just sitting there pulsating or flashing. ***** assumed that\nthere were vehicles there but didn't actually see any.\n\n1843(a)(2) He and[REDACTED] then drove home. ***** does not know of anyone else that saw\nanything that night. ***** thought it was about 10:30 p.m. when they arrived\nhome and they reported the sighting within perhaps 20 minutes."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"After the event, ***** went on Google Earth and felt that the lights were near\nthe Estrella Mountain area.\n\nAfter ***** showed us where he saw the lights, we drove to the police\ndepartment to tell them that we now had the actual witness with us and that we\nknew where the lights were sighted. As we drove along the side road we looked\nat the area where ***** thought he saw the lights. We saw tractor tracks in the\ndry dirt but did not see any evidence that a number of vehicles had gone to a\nparticular area. The clerk at the police department suggested that we go over to\nthe Tribal Council's office to let them know – which we did.\n\nWe drove back to ***** 's house and dropped him off.\n\n1:00 p.m. – Drove back to motel in *****.\n\nWeather conditions: Visibility > 10 Miles\n\nTemperature Dew Point Normal High/Low\nBarometric Pressure\nWind Speed Wind Gust"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case # 16721 CAT 2 MUFON Deployment\n\nInvestigators: [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n\nGPS COORDINATES : [REDACTED]\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: Exact spot where Witness stood on\n[REDACTED] observing lights\n\nLOCATION: [REDACTED]\n\nDATE OF EVENT: 4/28/09\n\nTIME OF EVENT: 9:45 p.m. ( ) Exact ( X ) Approximate\n\nOn Friday May 2, 2009 a STAR team CAT 2 Deployment was activated on three\ncases in the ***** AZ area. Cases 16720 – 16721 – 16726 STAR Team\nInvestigator[AAP Person 103] was assigned as lead investigator.\n\n[AAP Person 59]\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Coordinator / Manager"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Investigator Report:\n\n5/3/09\n\n6:30 p.m. – [REDACTED] called ***** to try to set up meeting time. ***** was\nuncertain of when she will be available; to call again.\n\n5/4/09\n\n12:55 p.m. – Called ***** ; unable to set anything firm as she is waiting for doctor\nto call her to come in. To check back with her in a.m.\n\n5/5/09\n\n9:00 a.m. – Telephone message left on ***** 's tape.\n\n5:00 p.m. – Travel to [REDACTED] t/c to ***** .\n\n5:45 p.m. – 6:20 p.m. Met with ***** and son, ***** , at site. Obtained\nsignature on both release forms. Checked driver's license.\n\n***** noticed some lights before she went into a store on Olive Street. When\nshe came out of the store about 5 minutes later, three lights were in the same\nspot and hovering. She crossed the street to where there is an open field.\nAlthough Olive Street can be quite busy during the day, it was about 9:45 p.m.\nand the traffic was light. As we approached the spot where she stood to watch,\n***** immediately pointed out a tall palm tree saying \" it was about there.\"\n\nWhen asked what drew her attention to the lights, ***** said that there were\nthree lights above the skyline and that they were similar in color to the amber"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"color of streetlights. It seemed odd because the lights were stationary, not\nmoving left or right. She felt sure it wasn't a helicopter because it was far too big\nfor that. She also noticed that the lights were pulsating \"slightly.\" The lights\nweren't high, being just above the horizon and didn't seem normal. She waited\nand watched to see if they would move. Eventually, she tried to get her son,\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] on the phone but he couldn't see the lights because of the trees at his\nlocation. At the edge of the field where she stood, however, there was nothing\nobstructing her view. ***** knows the general area, and said that it was near\nEstrella Mountain peak. She knew it wasn't South Mt. and it was only 5-10\ndegrees off of the ground. It just was there. She thought she might have seen a\nglimmer of a red light but didn't seem certain. She said that the middle light\nflickered and then went out...then the other two went out. ***** 's family is\n\"into aircraft\" and technology. They watch the skies and have attended air shows\nfor many years. She said that this wasn't something usual that you would see in\naircraft around this area and it was too large to be anything routine. She saw a\nnormal size plane and it was dwarfed in comparison to these lights.\n\n***** commented on Goldwater Military Range where they do testing but that's\noff of the reservation area. She also said that some people have seen flares.\n***** was quite confident in stating \"I've seen flares...these didn't have the\nbehavior of flares...even in their alignment, and there was no trailing smoke.\" She\nsaid that it had to be three lights on one craft or three crafts traveling together.\nThey were in the exact same spot minutes after she first saw it. She stared at it.\n\nWhen questioned about her eyesight, ***** said that she wears glasses and was\nwearing them that night. She's nearsighted with no other visual impairments. She\ndid say that her eyes are \"extremely sensitive to light because I'm so fair\" and she\nwas wearing large sunglasses over her regular glasses when we met.\n\n83"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Relative to her hearing, ***** said that she does not have any hearing problems\nand she heard nothing related to this event.\n\nRegarding the sky on that evening, ***** said there was a \"little bit of light\ncovering ...nothing major...moon not bright or light enough to see anything.\" It\nwas clear without much humidity. When asked about the size of the object if she\nheld her hand out in front of herself, ***** said the object would be about an\ninch wide across the three different lights. She didn't see a craft or form or\nobject. She didn't see anything land. She saw three distinct lights, pulsating.\nThere were no other pulsating lights.\n\n***** said that she doesn't know of anyone else who saw the lights. She did call\nthe police. They didn't want to take her report but they did come out to her\nhouse about an hour later. ***** said that she is not seeking publicity or\nanything like that but she understands \"how important it is to figure trajectories\"\nand she realizes that data is important.\n\nLuke Air Force is nearby, as is Goldwater Military Range. ***** said that they do\ntrain at Goldwater but that they are aware of those craft. She also advised that\nthey make Apaches in AZ. When asked about any nuclear power plants, *****\nsaid that there is a plant which is quite far away as you are going out of town.\nThere is a smaller substation. Not much is out there in the area that she saw the\nlights; there are farms, and housing, no mining- mostly Indian reservation land.\n***** didn't know what Indian nation resided there but knew that Ak-Chin was\n\"right over there.\" She said that it's a very different community and if you have a\nweapon they can arrest you.\n\nThe distance from the site where ***** stood to the palm tree was 1,348 feet.\nThe field is an acre, with each side being 1/4 mile in length, according to ***** .\n\n84"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Weather report: Visibility >10 Miles\n\nEnd Report\n\nCase #16726 CAT 2 MUFON Deployment\n\n85"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Investigators: AAP Person 103 AAP Person 104\n\nGPS COORDINATES : 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: Home of Witnesses, Marana, AZ\n\nLOCATION: Home of Witnesses, Marana, AZ\n\nDATE OF EVENT: 4/28/09\n\nTIME OF EVENT: 9:05 p.m. ( X ) Exact ( ) Approximate\n\nOn Friday May 2, 2009 a STAR team CAT 2 Deployment was activated on three\ncases in the ***** AZ area. Cases 16720 – 16721 – 16726 STAR Team\nInvestigator AAP Person 103 was assigned as lead investigator.\n\nAAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Coordinator / Manager\n\nInvestigator Report:\n\n5/3/09\n\n5:00 p.m. – Arrived at hotel. Called [REDACTED] for phone numbers and instructions.\n\nAAP Person 59\n\n86"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 104\n5:30 to 6:00 p.m. – [REDACTED] and then [REDACTED] talked with ***** ***** on the\ntelephone; ***** advised us of need for confidentiality in this case.\n7:00 p.m. – Telephone conversation with AAP Person 59\n\n5/4/09\n\n6:00 a.m. - Telephone call from ***** ***** re new sightings in area.\n\n6:10 a.m. – Telephone call from AAP Person 59\n\n10:45 a.m. - Arrived at Ak-Chin Casino and spoke with ***** ***** on the\ntelephone re plans to meet witnesses in 16726.\n\n11:00 a.m. – Update AAP Person 59 by telephone.\n\n3:40 p.m. – Left for meeting with witnesses in Marana. Noticed big power plant\nabout 17 miles before the Cortero exit.\n\n5:20 p.m. – Arrived at home of Case 16726 witnesses, referred to here as\n“Husband” and “Wife.” Husband is a retired police officer and Wife previously\nworked for the same police department. Husband has a back injury and is in a\nconsiderable amount of pain much of the time. He adamantly denies using any\npain medications other than things similar to aspirin. Wife has problems with her\nneck. They lead a quiet life.\n\nHusband went out on the porch to let their dog out at 9:05 p.m. on 4/28/09.\nWhen he went out the door, he noticed 3 lights in the shape of “perfect” triangle\n– with each point having a bright white light. The lights flashed in synch,\napproximately every second. Husband feels that they were about one mile away.\nThe distance between his porch and\n\n87"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the neighbor's house, obtained with a range finder, was 174 feet. The GPS\ncoordinates are 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3) The object was\njust about at the height of the moon. No stars or other objects could be seen\nbetween the three lights even with binoculars; witness therefore feels that it was\na solid object. The object appeared to be very large, about the size of a football\nfield. Husband is a football fan and is well-acquainted with the size of a football\nfield; he therefore felt comfortable in reporting that as its size. Husband could see\nthe object right over the top of the house next door. He said it was just left of the\ncenter of roof, past the rim of the hills.\n\nHusband banged on the sliding door of the house to get Wife's attention. He\nmotioned her forward with his arm so that he did not have to turn and lose sight\nof the object. Wife didn't comment much on the event but she did confirm the\nsighting and said they were \"amazed.\"\n\nHusband said that he felt a little \"goofy\" relating this to us but also added that he\n\"all of a sudden was back on the job,\" using his powers of observation so that he\nwould be able to accurately describe what he saw. He also drew a picture for us\nprior to our arrival.\n\nAs Wife was coming out onto the porch, the lights started changing formation and\nmoving towards the northwest. They went into a straight line and then into what\nHusband referred to as a backwards \"C,\" adding 4-5 more lights. To illustrate this\nform, Husband held up both hands, using his thumbs and pointer fingers to form a\ntriangle. He then rotated his hands so that the top of the triangle came down. He\nsaid that it was his impression that the object turned down as opposed to\nsomething that was completely breaking up, but admitted that he was not sure.\n\n88"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Husband then described how the lights would come on and off again. He\ndescribed the lights going on and off in a \"violent\" manner. Three lights might go\non then \"bang\" there were two, then three, then two. He said that at this time he\ngot a \"scary\" feeling because it seemed \"synchronized, as if it was one.\"\n\nThe usual flight pattern from Tucson is from North to South, and the planes fly\njust behind Sombrero Mountain. On the evening of the event, the object was in\nthat area moving towards the northwest so that a plane flying the usual pattern\nmight cross paths with the object. At the end of the event, Husband saw a plane\nwhich flew east of the flight pattern, so that it would go right over the couple's\nhouse. He wondered whether the plane might have changed its path in order to\navoid the course the object was on. Husband said that the entire event may have\ntaken longer than he originally reported – possibly as long as 10 minutes. There\nwas no sound associated with this event.\n\nHusband tried to contact Marana Airport and KOLD news site; he could not obtain\nany information about the sighting.\n\nIn addition to the information submitted on CMS, the next night (and on a couple\nof subsequent nights) Husband noticed two identical helicopters flying about a 5-\nmile radius which included an area over the Sombrero Mountain area, hour and\nafter hour. This is seen only at night and according to our witnesses there is\nnothing there (other than a mine and cotton fields). Husband did see a helicopter\ncockpit fully lit up.\n\n7:00 p.m. – We spoke very briefly (she was just about ready to drive away) with\nthe Witnesses' neighbor who does not want her name or contact information\nmade available to anyone else. At about 9 p.m. that same night, Neighbor was\ntalking on the telephone and looking at the moon at the same time. Neighbor\n\n89"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"said that it was a 1/3 or a crescent moon. What drew her attention was that she\nsaw lights that seemed to her like sparklers – like her uncle used to light for her.\nShe said that it was really pretty like the 4th of July. She did not feel there was any\npattern to the lights but that they were \"all over the place under the moon.\" She\nstarted talking on the telephone again, and then the lights went away. Next, she\nsaw them to the right of their original position and then they seemed to form a\nbackwards C shape; after that she \"lost it.\" She didn't hear any noise associated\nwith the sighting. It seemed as though this witnesses was distracted from\nobserving the lights closely by her telephone conversations. Neighbor advised us\nthat the mine is located at Picture Rock on the other side of the mountain.\n\n7:30 p.m. – Left to find a quiet area to watch the sky in hopes that we might see a\nhelicopter. Sat for awhile at intersection of Pima Farm and Scenic Drive. Left\nafter AAP Person 59 advised us to go back to our motel. Spoke briefly on the\ntelephone with 1843(a)(2) (acquaintance of Husband) who did not\nhave a sighting at the same time. He did confirm, however, that on the night of\n5/3/09, he saw black helicopters in the air near his home between 8:30 p.m. –\n9:00 p.m.\n\n9:50 p.m. – Arrived back at motel.\n\n5/5/09\n\n8:00 a.m. – Sent thank you note via e-mail to primary witnesses.\n\nWeather report: Visibility >10 Miles\n\n90"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Case # 17546 CAT 2 MUFON Deployment\n\nInvestigators: AAP Person 103 AAP Person 104\n\nGPS COORDINATES : 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3)\n\nCOORDINATES ACCURACY: (100%) Location of Home of witness.\n\n91"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LOCATION: 1843(a)(2), 1843(a)(3)\n\nDATE OF EVENT 6/18/09\n\nTIME OF EVENT: 12.54 a.m. (X) Exact ( ) Approximate\n\nOn 6/19/09, a STAR team CAT 2 Deployment was activated on a case in the\nPoynette, WI area (Case #17546). STAR Team Investigator AAP Person 103 was\nassigned as lead investigator. STAR Team Investigator AAP Person 104 assisted.\n\nAAP Person 59\nMUFON (Mutual UFO Network)\nSTAR Team Coordinator / Manager\n\nNote: Witness has signed a release for her personal information to be\nrelayed to BAASS but does not want same posted on CMS, including GPS\nCoordinates)\n\nInvestigator Report:\n\n6/19/09\n\nTalked with AAP Person 59 and 1843(a)(2) . Obtained Google Earth photo\nof area and contacted witness by telephone to arrange meeting.\n\n6/20/09\n\n9:30 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. Investigators traveled to Poynette, WI to meet with the\nwitness, 1843(a)(2) Obtained signature on form to release personal\ninformation to BAASS (no further release without written authorization).\nInterviewed witness. Obtained GPS coordinates, checked radiation levels\n(normal) in driveway and on car tarp removed from vehicle which had been in the\ndriveway, checked for magnetic anomalies around shed, obtained distances with\n\n92"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"laser range finder (driveway which faces south = 415 feet long). Verified sensor light on garage facing south and up (range set for 30 feet). Multiple calls to State Director and AAP Person 59\n\n******* (DOB 8/10/58) lives in a very nice home which is about 200 feet from a river with her fiancée, *****, who is currently in Pakistan. *****was the one that suggested that ***** contact MUFON. *****worked as a deputy sheriff from 1976 until she retired in 1987. She volunteers as a German Shepherd rescuer and currently has seven dogs in her care. She also trains dogs for service work with the disabled. A friend of *****was at the home, sleeping on a lower floor at the time of the incident but was not aware of anything.\n\n***** allowed us to audio-tape her interview but does not want the tape released without further authorization. She authorized us to release her personal information to BAASS but again, did not want BAASS to release that information to any other individual or organization without her express written authorization.\n\n***** says that she has \"not a clue\" what she saw. She describes herself as open minded -she says she is not a skeptic and not a believer. On the morning of June 18, 2009, ***** got all of the dogs settled and went to bed at about 12:30 a.m. and was just falling off to sleep. She heard a hovering noise - something sort of like a helicopter, but different, that awoke her. She is familiar with the sound of a med-vac helicopter but said this object had a lower volume. It was a low hum but it was not as deep in tone as our sample and was not cyclic.\n\nTwo of the dogs that were with her were quiet but had gotten up and gone to the window. She was in the master bedroom on the second floor, which faces the road. The drapes were closed. Her first thought was \"what idiot is out in the driveway\" as that had happened before. The noise seemed to be getting louder as she went into the bathroom where she could see better. There is one small, low-voltage light in the driveway and then next to that is a motion sensor. She saw that the motion sensor light was on. It had rained the night before but she didn't see any animals or car tracks in the driveway to explain the fact that the motion sensor was on. The motion sensor works at about 30 feet and is not super sensitive."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"She then looked up and thought \"what in God's name is that?\" She saw 3 white lights moving in a straight line up her driveway; they were \"perfectly spaced, perfectly linear.\" She initially thought of Orion's belt but the spacing was far bigger. There was also a red/white flashing light that was on the left hand rear side – at about a 45 degree angle to the last of the three white lights. There was no circular pattern to the lights; they were \"pretty bright, like an LED plus that illuminated the driveway.\" She saw no reflection and didn't see any edges. Her impression of what she could see was that it was a flat bottom of something rather than a side and it appeared dark gray or metallic. Recalling her \"radar speed days,\" ***** estimates that the lights moved at about 30 miles an hour. The object wasn't floating or coasting; it wasn't swaying or jerky. There was no deviation from the pathway at all; ***** therefore discounted a helicopter or blimp. The lights were not like those seen on a plane. The object was moving straight forward, like a machine that was driving south towards the highway. It didn't increase in speed or noise. She could see that the middle light was over the telephone lines so she estimated that the object was approximately 300 – 375 feet long. The object was about 50-75 feet above the tree line (tree height measured with a range finder at 80-89 feet), definitely lower than what she would consider a safe flight pattern. She felt the distance between the white lights was 90 to 100 feet apart, starting with the first light being in about 10 feet. She assumes that the lights were attached because they never moved. She felt that the red/white (red-white-red-white = no blips in combination) light also was attached to the vehicle (as opposed to her written report). The incident lasted about 3 minutes.\n\n***** wears reading glasses but sees distant objects fine without them. She did not have her glasses on at the time of the sighting. Her hearing is normal and she is in good health. She denies the use of any medications that would impair her state of mind or ability to recognize objects.\n\nRegarding her emotions at the time, ***** referred to her training as a deputy sheriff and her desire to identify and document the object. She looked at the clock in her bathroom and it was exactly 12:54 a.m. She wasn't afraid or anxious but she did feel in awe and wanted to know what she was seeing. She has never seen anything like this before."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"When asked about her emotions after the event, ***** said that she has been shot at so this didn't seem scary to her. She thought to herself \"well this is weird, this is kind of cool.\" She was, however, very impressed at the size of the object and kept looking to see if she could see anything going up. She decided that she needed to consult with [REDACTED] in the morning and went back to sleep. ***** stated that she doesn't get rattled easily. Everyone comes to her when they have a problem because she has a lot of common sense.\n\nMilitary installations: In Baraboo, there is an old ammo dump, Fort McCoy, Camp Douglas but none are particularly close. They do get F-16s flying over for maneuvers and National Guard choppers which ***** is familiar with.\n\nPower Plants: Portage has a power plant 20 minutes NW of *****'s location; there are no large power lines that run close to her. They are putting in a new utility district on Smith Road.\n\n6/21/09\n\n1:00 p.m. – 5:15 p.m. Sent e-mail to County Sheriff re sighting and MUFON contact info for future reports. Called witness and played sample sound for her to compare to what she heard. Spoke with AAP Person 59 and completed report. Sent thank you note to witness. Sent FOIA to FAA.\n\nWeather report: Visibility< 6Miles\n\n\n\ncontinued on next page"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS Deployment to Brazil\n\nBeginning at the end of June, and spanning early June, several BAASS personnel were deployed to Brazil. The purpose of the deployment was two-fold: (a) a team was dispatched to the South of Brazil to meet with multiple organizations and individuals in Sao Paolo and Brasilia who were considered important future contacts for BAASS and (b) a team was dispatched to Fortaleza (Northern Brazil) to investigate recent reports of UAP activity in the Itatira region in Ceara County. It should be emphasized that BAASS deployed in a very low key way with specific instructions to maintain a very low profile and they were also instructed to mitigate and dampen all media inquiries. BAASS personnel were in possession of pre-approved talking points and limited information to give to all groups and individuals in Brazil. BAASS personnel were under strict instructions not to draw attention to the organization or its membership. Enclosed is the Northern team.\n\nSummary Report\n\nBrazil\n\nLocation(s)\n\nFortaleza\nSobral\nCachoeira\n\nMay 25, 2009- June 3 2009\n\nCase: 090525-1\n\n98"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"North Team\n\nSenior Investigator(s)\n\nAAP Person 12\nAAP Person 11\n\nTranslators(s)\n\nAAP Person 32\nAAP Person 31\n\nSynopsis:\n\nOn May 25, 2009 the north team comprised of AAP Person 11 [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) AAP Person 31 and I deployed to Brazil. The mission was to meet with the established contacts and interview as many witnesses to the UAP phenomena as possible. The team was able to meet with the leaders of the CPU and CSPU and a public officer for the municipality of Itatira. While the trip also included interviews with additional witnesses supplied through a reporter identified as 1843(a)(2) those contacts were not made as a result of her absence or failure to cooperate. An interview with 1843(a)(2) was also scheduled; however, due to his lack of cooperation the interview never took place. The north team's focus shifted to acquiring as much documentation as possible from each of the ufologist groups. The north team secured approximately 70+GB of information to include video, investigative reports and photographs.\n\nNarrative:\n\nOn May 25, 2009 the north team comprised of Senior Investigator AAP Person 11 Translator [REDACTED] Translator AAP Person 32 Translator AAP Person 31 and I traveled to Brazil to meet with local ufologist groups in an attempt to gather as much information and conduct interviews of eye witnesses to recent UAP activity.\n\n99"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On May 26, 2009 the north team arrived in Fortaleza. Contact was made with 1843(a)(2) to announce our arrival and confirm the meeting time and location. 1843(a)(2) advised that he would meet us at the hotel in the morning and spend the day with us at the CPU headquarters. Contact was made with 1843(a)(2) to announce our arrival; however, due to her position as a reporter with the O POVO Newspaper we did not give her our location. 1843(a)(2) agreed to meet with AAP Person 11 and me on Thursday the 28th. Attempts were made to contact 1843(a)(2) to announce our arrival and confirm the meeting with him; however, his phone had been disconnected.\n\nOn May 27, 2009 1843(a)(2) and two of his colleagues later identified as 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) met us at the hotel and then escorted us to the CPU headquarters. Upon arriving at the CPU headquarters the team was introduced to another male adult identified as 1843(a)(2) all of which are members of the CPU.\n\nThe team spent the entire day with 1843(a)(2) and the CPU group. 1843(a)(2) allowed the team to take photographs of some of the paraphernalia he had acquired through some of his investigations. Due to the language barrier AAP Person 31 and [REDACTED] talked more in-depth with the group about the recent events in the State of Ceara. AAP Person 32\n\nOne of the recent incidents that occurred in the Corrego do Salgado area, which was investigated by 1843(a)(2) and [REDACTED] was an incident involving 1843(a)(2) three young boys where a \"Frisbee\" shaped object landed and two \"Beings\" 1843(a)(2) exited the object and assaulted one of the boys named [REDACTED]. Both 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) and [REDACTED] agreed that the statements given by the three boys were inconsistent and they thought it appeared to be an incident of abuse or related to a fishing accident, due to the family being in the fishing industry.\n\nApparently 1843(a)(2) and [REDACTED] spent some time in the Colares area with [REDACTED] however they would not go into much detail. [REDACTED] did 1843(a)(2) state that he has seen objects in the Belem Region between the time frames of 2001 and 2007 and believes Colares is still happening and people are just not reporting it because of the community's acceptance to the activity. [REDACTED] told us 1843(a)(2) he would write us a statement of all his recent sightings in the Colares area and send it to us.\n\n100"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"With the permission from 1843(a)(2) the team continued to take photographs of various types of objects to include: some type of chip taken out of a human, which was planted by an \"alien\", meteors, angle hair, burned rocks taken from landing sites, metal fragments taken from a crash site and dirt samples taken from landing sites. The CPU group also opened several cases they investigated in reference to abductions and injuries people had sustained as a result of the encounters they had experienced with UAPs. The information was so overwhelming that it was a task just to keep up; however, at the conclusion of the day 1843(a)(2) told us that we could have copies of all his work to include some 3418 case files.\n\nDue to the time constraints and the other meeting established with [REDACTED] 1843(a)(2) I informed 1843(a)(2) that we would return on Saturday May 30th to start copying his files after we returned from Sobral. (Supplemental Report to follow from interviews conducted by AAP Person 31 and AAP Person 32\nOn May 28, 2009 Investigator [REDACTED] and I were to meet with 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) is a news reporter for the O POVO Newspaper. Prior to the trip and upon arrival in Fortaleza she agreed to meet with us and provide witness location. She would not release that information without having a face to face interview with us. 1843(a)(2) was a no-show and would not return our attempts to contact her which included, calls made to her cell phone, office phone and the messages we left at the newspaper for her.\n\nThe meeting scheduled with 1843(a)(2) had the same result, which altered the team's itinerary. Due to the meeting established with 1843(a)(2) at 1200 hours and her not responding to our attempts to locate, the team prepared for the trip to Sobral in the morning.\n\nOn May 29, 2009 the team traveled to Sobral. Upon arriving in Sobral the team met with 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) who is also a member of the CSPU. 1843(a)(2) took us to a local restaurant where we met an additional CSPU member later identified as 1843(a)(2) After having lunch with the members of the CSPU, 1843(a)(2) escorted us to the hotel he had set up to accommodate us while we were in Sobral.\n\n101"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"About 1630 hours 1843(a)(2) returned to the hotel to escort us to the conference. Upon arriving at the conference, it was clear that we were the center of the night. I noticed what appeared to be a television camera crew set up as well as a reported from a local radio station filming and recording the entire night. During the conference several people stood up and talked about incidents with UAP's that affected them and their lives to include abductions.\n\nAt the conclusion of the night, 1843(a)(2) gave us a copy of the CSPU's investigations for the past two years. 1843(a)(2) and members of the CSPU AAP Person 31 accompanied us to dinner where [REDACTED] talked in depth with one of the members identified as 1843(a)(2) who claimed to have been abducted and now has special powers to include the ability to communicate and write in \"alien\". (Supplemental reports of witness interviews to follow from AAP Person 31\n\nFiles obtained from Sobral, Brazil:\n\nSobral CD - 252 MB\n\n- Given to AAP Person 31 on May 22, 2009 by 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) after CSPU Meeting\n- This CD-R contains 56 files\n - 1 Word document\n - 55 .cdr (image files)\n- 1 Word Document has 13 pages of cases:\n - About a paragraph regarding each case with dates ranging from 1992-2009\n - Cases blurb very similar to GEIPAN Summary of case, it usually has a time, date, event description, and sometimes contact information.\n\n102"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"■ Cases are titled usually by the name of the\nwitness:\n1. [REDACTED] – 8/10/1997\n2. [REDACTED] – 02/11/1999\n3. [REDACTED] – researched 06/01/2000\n4. [REDACTED] occurred in Nov./1999\nresearched 06/01/2000\n5. [REDACTED] - 25/11/1997\n6. [REDACTED] - researched 14/12/1998\n7. [REDACTED] – occurred 20/11/1998\nresearched 16/12/1998\n8. [REDACTED] – 24/05/1999\n9. [REDACTED] – July/1992 report\ngathered in July/2000\n10. [REDACTED] – 12/06/2001\n11. [REDACTED] – 13/06/2000\n12. [REDACTED] – 26/02/1999\n13. [REDACTED] – weekend in\nApril/1997\n14. [REDACTED] – 1990/1998 Report\ngathered 24/04/1999\n15. [REDACTED] – 15/06/2001\n16. [REDACTED] – Mid-August 2008\n17. [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] 3/12/2008"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18. [REDACTED] – a Friday of\nNovember 1992\n19. [REDACTED]\n24/05/2009 [REDACTED]\n• 55 .CDR Files (Image files)\no For the moment these files have not been able to\nbe opened on BAASS computers\no Each file varies in size\no Preliminary analysis: They are bi-weekly reports\non regarding cases the CSPU is or has investigated\no Possible content:\n▪ Images\n▪ Name of the team of ufologist who did the\nresearch\n▪ Details of their research\no Files are labeled as Edition #, 1st or 2nd fortnight of\nMonth and year\n▪ These files date back to the second fortnight\nof December 2006\n▪ The most current edition being the second\nfortnight of July 2008\n▪ The files are:\n1. Edição 46, 2ª Quinzena de Dezembro de 2006.cdr\na. Title w/ English Translation\ni. Essas pessoas viram OVNIs"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. These people saw OVNIs\n2. Edição 47, 1ª Quinzena de Janeiro de 2007.cdr\n3. Edição 48, 2ª Quinzena de Janeiro de 2007.cdr\n4. Edição 49, 1ª Quinzena de Fevereiro de 2007.cdr\n5. Edição 50, 2ª Quinzena de Fevereiro de 2007.cdr\n6. Edição 51, 1ª Quinzena de Março de 2007.cdr\n7. Edição 52, 2ª Quinzena de Março de 2007.cdr\n8. Edição 53, 1ª Quinzena Abril de 2007.cdr\n9. Edição 54, 2ª Quinzena de Abril de 2007.cdr\n10. Edição 55, 1ª Quinzena de Maio de 2007.cdr\n11. Edição 56, 2ª Quinzena de Maio de 2007.cdr\n12. Edição 57, 1ª Quinzena de Junho de 2007.cdr\n13. Edição 58, 2ª Quinzena de Junho de 2007.cdr\n14. Edição 59, 1ª Quinzena de Julho de 2007.cdr\n15. Edição 60, 2ª Quinzena de Julho de 2007.cdr\n16. Edição 61, 1ª Quinzena de Agosto de 2007.cdr\n17. Edição 62, 2ª Quinzena de Agosto de 2007.cdr\n18. Edição 63, 1ª Quinzena de Setembro de 2007.cdr\n19. Edição 64, 2ª Quinzena de Setembro de 2007.cdr\n20. Edição 65, 1ª Quinzena de Outubro de 2007.cdr\n21. Edição 66, 2ª Quinzena de Outubro de 2007.cdr\n22. Edição 67, 1ª Quinzena de Novembro de 2007.cdr\n23. Edição 68, 2ª Quinzena de Novembro de 2007.cdr\n24. Edição 69, 1ª Quinzena de Dezembro de 2007.cdr\n25. Edição 70, 2ª Quinzena de Dezembro de 2007.cdr\n26. Edição 71, 1ª Quinzena de Janeiro de 2008.cdr\n27. Edição 73, 1ª Quinzena de Fevereiro de 2008.cdr\n28. Edição 74, 2ª Quinzena de Fevereiro de 2008.cdr\n29. Edição 76, 2ª Quinzena de Março de 2008.cdr\n30. Edição 77, 1ª quinzena de abril de 2008.cdr\n31. Edição 78, 2ª Quinzena de Abril de 2008.cdr\n32. Edição 79, 1ª Quinzena de Maio de 2008.cdr"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"33. Edição 80, 2ª Quinzena de Maio de 2008.cdr\n34. Edição 81, 1ª Quinzena de Junho de 2008.cdr\n35. Edição 82, 2ª Quinzena de Junho de 2008.cdr\n36. Edição 83, 1ª Quinzena de Julho de 2008.cdr\n37. Edição 84, 2ª Quinzena de Julho de 2008.cdr\n38. Edição 85, 1ª Quinzena de Agosto de 2008.cdr\n39. Edição 86, 2ª Quinzena de Agosto de 2008.cdr\n40. Edição 87, 1ª Quinzena de Setembro de 2008.cdr\n41. Edição 88, 2ª Quinzena de Setembro de 2008.cdr\n42. Edição 90, 2ª Quinzena de Outubro de 2008.cdr\n43. Edição 91, 1ª Quinzena de Novembro de 2008.cdr\n44. Edição 92, 2ª quinzena de novembro de 2008.cdr\n45. Edição 93, 1ª quinzena de dezembro de 2008.cdr\n46. Edição 94, 2ª quinzena de dezembro de 2008.cdr\n47. Edição 95, 1ª quinzena de janeiro de 2009.cdr\n48. Edição 96, 2ª quinzena de Janeiro de 2009.cdr\n49. Edição 97, 1ª Quinzena de Fevereiro de 2009.cdr\n50. Edição 98, 2ª Quinzena de Fevereiro de 2009.cdr\n51. Edição 99, 1ª Quinzena de Março de 2009.cdr\n52. Edição 100, 2ª Quinzena de Março de 2009. CDR\n53. Edição 101, 1ª Quinzena de Abril de 2009. CDR\n54. Edição 102, 2ª Quinzena de Abril de 2009. CDR\n55. Edição 104, 2ª Quinzena de Maio de 2009.CDR\nOn May 30, 2009 the team traveled back to Fortaleza. During our travel [REDACTED] was able to make contact with the public officer in Cacheoira later identified as [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] conducted several UAP sightings in the Itatira region and agreed to meet with us on Sunday May 31, 2009. Upon arriving in Fortaleza [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] returned to the hotel and attempted to make contact with [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] which was still unsuccessful. [REDACTED] and I returned to the CPU headquarters and started the process of copying [REDACTED] files."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On May 31, 2009 [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] returned to the CPU headquarters and spent the day scanning [REDACTED] case files. [REDACTED] and I traveled to Cachoeira to meet with [REDACTED] Upon arriving we met with [REDACTED] who had already prepared a DVD for us, apparently with all the cases he had investigated in the Itatira Region.\nIn speaking with [REDACTED] he told us that he as well as his neighbors has seen lights, but had no photographs of them. He stated that he has spoken to several people that have seen objects and lights in the sky. [REDACTED] stated that he believes that there is an earthly explanation for all the sightings and thinks that maybe there is a connection to the nearby “uranium mine”. [REDACTED] stated that the sightings are really prevalent when the mine is open and being worked. [REDACTED] stated the best time to see a UAP is when the weather is clear and not in the rainy season. [REDACTED] stated the best time to witness a UAP is between July and November.\n[REDACTED] agreed to take us to see some of the witnesses. We traveled to a small town identified as Lagoa do Mato, where we picked up a teenage boy. The boy led us to one of the witnesses identified as [REDACTED] who is an 18 year old female that witnessed a UAP near her residence just outside of the town. [REDACTED] took a picture of the UAP with as Panasonic DMC-LS80 camera. [REDACTED] described the UAP to be a bright white light with a circle of colored light at the base. She also stated that in the middle of the light was a beam of light emitting down towards the ground; however, it was not strong enough to reach the ground. She stated the object was fixed in the sky and then moved slightly from side to side. She stated she observed the light for a while and then went inside her residence. She stated that the next morning the light was gone. It appeared to me the more we asked questions about her sighting, she would close up as if she did not want to talk about it anymore.\nDue to the time frame, location and no communication with [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] I decided it would be best to head back to Fortaleza. We informed [REDACTED] that we may return to interview more witnesses and asked for his assistance in locating them. [REDACTED] agreed to help us with whatever we needed.\nFiles obtained from Cachoeira:"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Files from 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\n\nDVD is broken into 9 different files:\n\n1. Appearances in Contendas\n2. Expedition to Felão\n3. Expedition with [REDACTED] from O POVO\n4. Astrological Images\n5. Images from 1843(a)(2)\n6. Images of Object\n7. Observation in Cisterna\n8. O POVO Report\n9. Videos (Video Testimony & TV Reports)\n• The first 8 files only contain photos. Include photos of witnesses, the surrounding area where sightings occurred and original photos of objects.\n• The Video folder contains 6 videos of the following:\no 3 Interviews with witnesses in the Itatira region.\n▪ 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\n• Riding his motorcycle on the way home when a red and yellow light appeared behind and off the side of him. It followed him for a period of time and changed sides twice. He arrived at his house and it hung in the sky outside his home (does not specify distance or altitude). Shows the size with his hands creating a circle with his pointer fingers and thumbs. About the diameter of a softball or grapefruit.\n▪ 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\n• Light appeared outside their home in Madalena\n• Various colors but primarily red.\n• Emitted a heat.\n• Did not make any sound (though the boy first says that it “wasn’t very loud” then changes it to “no sound at all”)"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Need better headphones in order to hear dialogue. DVD is recorded at a very low volume.\n▪ 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\n• On his way home when a light appeared (was either walking with his horse or riding it. Does not specify)\n• About 1.5-2m in diameter\n• About 3 m in altitude\n• Very bright. So bright he could not look directly at it.\n• Does not know where it came from.\n• The object stopped for about 30 seconds\n• He was not scared though his horse shook with fear\n• Later had a fever and took medicine for it\n• Says he is not a liar\n• When asked if he had been drinking he replied “no one knows when I’ve been drinking”\no 1 Brazilian TV report on sightings in the region as well as interviews with ( ) people\n▪ Short interviews and clips of witnesses in the region including 1843(a)(2)\n▪ BAASS has seen this clip before online.\no 1 video taken of a video captured on a cell phone of a light in the sky.\n▪ Poor quality since it is basically a video taken of a clip playing on the screen of a cell phone. The object appears to move on the clip but after questioning 1843(a)(2) he said that the object was actually stationary and the person filming moved the cell phone while recording.\no 1 clip labeled “Object in the USA” which shows a TV clip of an apparent sighting in the US. TV announcer mentions that it happened in Austin, TX and says the US authorities have not confirmed whether this could be part of a satellite collision between US and Russian satellites that occurred on February 15, 2009."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On June 1, 2009 Due to the amount of information 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] had and the time we had left in Brazil, I decided the team would return to the CPU and copy as much information as possible to take back with us. The rest of the day was spent at the CPU gathering 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] files. All the team members utilized personal computers to accomplish the task, primarily due to the BAASS computer’s memory space was being consumed by a vast amount of electronic files.\n\nThe files obtained from the CPU, 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\n\n• 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\n• 1843(a)(2) Case, ‘94\n• ChupaCabra\n• Colares\n• Fortaleza Sighting ‘86\n• French Docs\n• 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\n• 1843(a)(2) ‘86\n• Statements\n• [REDACTED] FAB Case 96\n• UFOs in Sao ***** o, ‘86\n• 1843(a)(2) Case\n• Cases by CPU Form\no CE (No info)\no Plantao do DRMI\no 58 May 18 Parambu\no July 59, 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\no July 59 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\no April 26, 1962, Facamha\no 64, Jaminguagusa\no July 71 Fort\no June 74 Fort"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"o Oct. 5, Icarai\no Jan 24, 1976 Oiticica\no Dec. 19, 1977, Sao Luiz do Curu\no Oct. 28, 1978, Goias\no August 16, 1980, Quixeramobim\no July 17, 1980 Paraiba\no May 20, 1982 Canoa Quebrada\no July 9, 1983, Horizonte\no Aug 83, Fortaleza\no Aug 83, 1843(a)(2) [REDACTED]\no Nov. 3, 1984, Morro Branco\no April 10, 1986, Fortaleza\no Oct. 18, 1986, Fortaleza\no February 8, 1987 Mucuripe\no Sept 88, Fortaleza\no Dec. 13, 1992, Fortaleza\no June 2, 1993, Fortaleza\no May 28-29, 1993, Fortaleza\no March 20, 1993, Fortaleza\no March 24, 1993, Fortaleza\no June, Pacajus\no Jan 67 Iguatu\no Oct. 75 Nova Iguaçu\no Jan 20, 1986, Tabuleiro\no Caioba Seahorse Case\no Strange Visitors Doc\no 65+ GB of recorded footage of investigations.\n\nOn June 2, 2009 the north team packed up and traveled home.\n\nConclusion/Recommendations for Brazilian trip:\n\nThe north team was able to obtain a lot of information from the CPU, CSPU and the Public Officer from Cachoeira. The above listed material will have to be"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"translated and analyzed to see where it fits in with BAASS guidelines. There is still a tremendous amount of information at the CPU headquarters in Fortaleza, which is available only to BAASS.\n\nIssues with CPU, Fortaleza:\n\n1. The CPU has investigated some 3418 case which BAASS has been given permission to access and copy; however, the CPU files are in total disarray. By this I mean all the case files are mixed together and spread throughout different rooms at the CPU. Total collection would take at least 3 to 4 weeks to copy everything.\n2. The CPU has several items of evidence; however, it is unknown if there is a chain of custody associated with any of the items and at this time the CPU has not authorized BAASS to analyze anything.\n\nRecommendation: Since the CPU has opened the entire UAP files investigated for the past 50 plus years to BAASS, I recommend that we maintain our contacts with 1843(a)(2) and return in the future to retrieve the rest of the files.\n\nIssues with CSPU, Sobral:\n\n1. The CSPU is in my opinion too commercial. They utilize their investigations to sell newspapers. Some of the incidents the CSPU has investigated and reported about, the CPU has identified as false and or misleading as a result of media hype.\n\nRecommendations: BAASS has established a rapport with the director of the CSPU. I suggest we stay in contact with the CSPU and monitor what type of reports they are receiving and determine on a case by case basis if BAASS wished to be involved.\n\nRecommendations for Cachoeira:\n\nA uranium mine is located in the Itatira Region. According to the public officer in the Cachoeira area, the mine in Itatira is going to be re-opened again under a new contractor. Due to the time frame of the sightings, which coincide with past"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"construction at the mine, BAASS may want to stay in contact with the public officer to learn of new sightings.\n\nRecommendations for Colares area:\n\nDue to the limited statements made by the CPU about the ongoing activity in the Coloares area. My recommendation would be that when the weather forecast is good, a team of BAASS investigators deploy to the area to set up surveillance in hopes to capture footage of UAP activity and to interview any eyewitnesses. This task could be accomplished by utilizing members of the CPU as guides.\nPortuguese Translation Priorities\n\nBoth teams met and discussed the levels of priority for translating the documentation gathered while in Brazil. Below is a copy of the priority sheet [REDACTED] put together on the recommendation for translation in order from very high priority to very low priority.\n\nVery High Priority\nOngoing communications (e-mail/phone) with Brazilian contacts shall continue\n1. Military Documents pertaining to Colares/Operation Saucer\na. Validate previous translation of Leaked military documents (205 pages paper)\nb. Release 3 - Envelope 10 (195 pages electronic) - translate\nc. Release 2 – File \"ACE_3370.83.pdf\" (86 pages electronic) – Visually scan for Colares documents and translate them\nd. Release 3 – Envelope 8 (24 pages electronic) – Visually scan for Colares documents and translate them\ne. Translate 1843(a)(2) copies of [REDACTED] notes (4 pages electronic)\n2. Finish translating [REDACTED] interview transcript with 1843(a)(2) (12 pages paper)\n3. Visually scan Military Documents received from 1843(a)(2) to determine contents and set priority (63; 4; 7 pages electronic)\n4. Translate 1843(a)(2) copies of [REDACTED] notes (4 pages electronic)\n\nHigh Priority\n1. [REDACTED] – Vet 1843(a)(2) electronic acquired information"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2. 1843(a)(2) recent (< 5 years old) cases information (pages/size – TBD) - translate\n3. High Pri Mil Released Documents\na. Release 3 – Envelope 2 (22 pages electronic) – Visually scan for 1843(a)(2) documents and translate\nb. Release 3 – Envelope 5 (69 pages electronic) – Visually scan for 1843(a)(2) documents and translate\nc. Release 3 – Envelope 8 (24 pages) – Visually scan for and translate the Brazilian Generals' report on legitimate UFO sighting(s)\nd. Release 3 – Envelope 7 (30 pages electronic) – Visually scan for and translate 1843(a)(2) related documents\n\nMedium Priority\n1. 1843(a)(2) photocopied article on the \"Night of the UFOs\" – full translation – according to 1843(a)(2) this is the best report on the \"known\" details of the incident (11 pages paper)\n\nLow Priority\n1. Low Pri Mil Released Documents\na. All other released documents not previously translated (100s of pages electronic)\n2. 1843(a)(2) older (> 5 years old) cases information (pages/size – TBD) - translate\n\nVery Low Priority\n1. Five copies of Brazil UFO Magazine – Visually scan to determine if any significant information is within to subsequently translate (5 @ ≈42 pages paper each)\n2. Five Books published by CBPDV - Visually scan to determine if any significant information is within to subsequently translate (186; 213; 226; 372; 221 pages paper)\n3. 1843(a)(2) recommended articles on various UFO sighting events (all historical and dated) (1; 16; 13; 9; 12; 6; 2; 3; 4; 7 pages paper/web links electronic)\n\nContacts:"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n\nNote: Detailed reports of information gathered to follow.\n\nRespectfully Submitted\n\nAAP Person 12"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Project Northern Tier Summary\n\nNORTHERN TIER INFO 29 June 2009 – AAP Person 11\n\nThe Northern Tier team was formed in late April 2009. The team originally consisted of me and AAP Person 95 who has since left BAASS). The Team was expanded to four additional personnel with geographic areas of responsibility. That breakdown is as follows:\n\nAAP Person 39 – Wurtsmith AFB, MI\nAAP Person 17 – Minot AFB, ND\nAAP Person 41 – Loring AFB, ME\nAAP Person 40 – Malmstrom AFB, MT\nAAP Person 34 – Assist with research\n\nAn investigative plan was developed and in its original version as of 5 May 2009. The Plan was broken down in tasks applicable to each of the geographic areas. Below is a summary of the main points of the Investigative Plan:\n\nAttempt to identify a SME and ascertain the following STATUS=PENDING/IN PROGRESS\nAre there ATC (ground based systems) records maintained this long?\nIf so FOIA for these records\nAre the A/C logs (any recorded media) maintained?\nIf so FOIA for these records\n\nIdentify a KC-135 SME to discuss 135 capabilities in 1975 STATUS=PENDING/IN PROGRESS\nWhat systems were in use in 1975?\nWhat were the capabilities of those systems?"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Was there any local law enforcement involvement? STATUS=PENDING/IN PROGRESS\nOpen Source searching?\nAttempt to determine what documentation the local Police completed\nOnce identified requests copies\nThe AFOSI reporting indicates \"civil police\" were notified and responded. This could be the Oscoda Police Department; Iosco County Sheriff's Office; or the Michigan State Police\n\nWas there any local media involvement? STATUS=PENDING/IN PROGRESS\nOpen Source searching\n\nForward specific FOIA requests to all affected major Commands and organizations involved in the events at each base. STATUS=Wurtsmith/Malmstrom – Accepted by the agencies and pending their response\nMinot – One returned for narrowing of scope/Others pending response\n*****ng – In draft and pending refinement\n\nIdentify and locate other nuclear facilities in the NT AOR (those operated by USA, USN, DOE, etc.) STATUS=PENDING/IN PROGRESS\n\nContinue mapping of all events in the NT AOR during the targeted period STATUS=PENDING/IN PROGRESS\n\nUltimately cross reference the NT events with those in the Canadian Archive release STATUS=PENDING/IN PROGRESS\n\nOn 11 June 2009 additional guidance was provided to the Team. Contents from that memo are included below:"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Project Northern Tier is one of the sponsor's top priorities, making it one of AAP Person 4 and hence one of ours. The following is provided as a Road Map as of this date for the effort on Northern Tier (NT). The hope is this will allow some amount of focus of effort as we move forward. The end game for NT is for us to provide the sponsor with a comprehensive analysis of the events associated with NT. We all know there has been numerous studies of these events over the years; [REDACTED] AAP Person 127 AAP Person 8 1843(a)(2) etc. Our goal is to focus on the totality of these events, and ultimately provide a \"One Stop Shop\" for an analysis of them as a whole. The direction, as of this date, is to press on with efforts to identify known witnesses of the major events of NT. An independent gathering of the facts as these individuals relate the story. During these interviews every effort must be made to identify independent, newly identified (by BAASS) witnesses and obtain their stories. During all interviews we must focus on the BAASS core Technology Areas and try to determine the cause or any other significant aspect of any NT event. Keep in mind this is a sponsor requirement, and therefore, is not solely focused on the BAASS tech areas. Contacting these individuals, as we all well know, is not going to be easy. That said we should use every asset available to us. The 1843(a)(2) email, my BAASS email, telephone, and if necessary snail mail, should be utilized to the fullest extent possible to make contact with these people. Let's not leave any stone unturned. If you need to send emails do not hesitate to let me know and I will make it available to you. As we identify potential witnesses we should make every effort to filter the list as much as possible; however, do not discount a name discovered without verification. This may make it necessary to make a considerable number of telephone calls. If that is the case press on smartly and beat the bushes.\""} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"We must ensure all our efforts are properly documented. Obviously all interviews will be fully documented. Efforts to locate a specific witness should also be documented to indicate the number of calls or emails forwarded. All levels of effort, even those which are not successful must be properly recorded. Level of effort is what I am getting at here. We must demonstrate the level of effort to accomplish this task.\" Below please find a summary of the efforts for each geographic area. This summary is intended to answer questions regarding the level of effort to reinvestigate the historical events as well as, hopefully, independently develop new witnesses and events //Signed// AAP Person 11 Senior Investigator"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Project NORTHERN TIER - Minot Air Force Base - AAP Person 17 Minot AFB had a variety of suspicious or unusual incidents occur at or near their air base being documented since 1956. The first report documented supposedly occurred on 10/28/1956 and involved a B52 crew observing a bright light while on a training mission NW of Minot. In researching the data, I believe this was actually an event that occurred on 10/24/1968. The contents of the initial report are identical to the aspects of the 1968 report; just the date is in error. Attached to this report is a printout that I completed showing the various reports that I have been given or located during my research. March 5, 1967 - Several reports of UFO's observed by Security personnel, other ground personnel and radar sightings at the NORAD facility. The number of witnesses varies depending upon the report being read. There were up to three truckloads of security personnel (six minimum up to possibly nine or more) were involved as visual witnesses. The NORAD facility had an undetermined number of witnesses (estimate at least two and possibly three) involved and two reports list the same witness as one of those \"inside\" officers in one of the silo launch control facilities. That witness was identified as 1843(a)(2) and he has been interviewed already. The only name that I could locate was 1843(a)(2) The total number of witnesses is a minimum of ten but possibly up to twenty witnesses involved. Unknown date 1966 or 1967 - This incident involved at least one UFO flying over several missile silos. The event was being observed by an unknown number of security personnel. The information was being passed to the SAC headquarters over the PAS (Primary Alerting System) which is basically an open line between the silos and SAC headquarters. This event involved one identified person 1843(a)(2) and he was interviewed by 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) According to www.siloworld.com, there are at least 150 Minuteman sites under direction of the Minot AFB. According to 1843(a)(2) information, the event above was relayed from SAC back to the silos and each silo heard what was being advised by SAC - it was an open line. Each silo had two officers assigned and that means there are at least"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"300 unidentified witnesses listening to the event. There was at least one security person observing the UFO and there are an unknown number of witnesses at SAC headquarters aware of the incident. 1843(a)(2) is alive and living in Maryland but he said his crew commander has passed away. Total witnesses are least three hundred unidentified missile silo officers, an undetermined and unidentified number of SAC witnesses and one unidentified security officer. Three hundred plus unidentified witnesses. June 6, 1968 - An MP Sergeant and two men were sent to a missile silo in regards to a reported UFO at the facility. Upon arrival, the Sergeant found \"the guards were like statues\" and the Sergeant had contact with \"the officers down in the silo\". So far there are three arriving MPS', two or more on-scene 'statue' MP's and two or more on-scene silo officers at this location. The MP Sergeant was given an order by someone to investigate this incident so there is at least one additional unidentified involved person. No names are listed anywhere that I could find in any of these reports I collected. The total number of potential witnesses is eight and probably more - all are unidentified. Oct. 24, 1968 - This is the event that is listed initially in this document. It involves the B-52 crew whose members are partially identified. The training co-pilot is 1843(a)(2) and some other crew members are identified as 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) I used Westlaw to try and locate 1843(a)(2) and located one that was possibly the right age but unfortunately he was dead. There were 41 listings in Westlaw for the name 1843(a)(2) but only one other 1843(a)(2) and that second one was too young. The report listed that there were at least 20 witnesses - 14 on the ground with none being identified and the 6 crew members of the B52 of which only four are somewhat identified. The report said that the UAP was being tracked by both ground radar and weather radar. That means that there are at least two and probably more unidentified people and the B52 was talking with the air traffic controllers and their names are numbers are unknown. Potential number of witnesses is twenty two but probably more."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Nov. 10, 1975 - This last event involved at least one UFO 'buzzing' the base and the ICBM's and the radar facility. The documentation stated that there were three unidentified people that observed this activity. They were from the site or locals according to the reports. The report was sent to NORAD by an unidentified person at the Minot AFB. The report was documented in a letter signed by 1843(a)(2) and listed him as 1843(a)(2) This same documentation states that there is at least one NORAD document that is still listed as classified and has not been reviewed. The potential number of witnesses for this event is four but probably more like five or six. I conducted a search on-line and located one roster of personnel that included a listing of 94 AAMS personnel stationed at Minot and some listings showed the dates they were stationed there. I managed to track down 30 potential witnesses on that list. Using a couple of web sites, I learned that two of the witnesses were deceased, several were no longer at the phone number provided and some had no phone listing. Of the remaining people available, 13 did not answer the phone or they had an answering machine pickup. I did obtain telephone interviews with 5 of the AAMS personnel. I also located a website that listed 6 A43 helicopter pilots stationed at Minot AFB in the 1960's. I was able to interview two of the pilots and I learned that they never went to the silos. It was recommended that I try and identify the Huey Attack helicopter pilots. I have not been able to locate any names associated with that group of pilots. The time spent on this project varies due to other tasks that I have also been working on. This included the fact that I examined the MUFON website on a daily basis and have investigated a few of the complaints that were filed. I also check other potential websites for additional UFO reports. I have compiled a UFO listing document that shows the different important sites I check on an occasional basis. Sometimes these investigations can take two or three hour's minimum time to look in to. I also have been compiling data regarding weather balloon information and sighting locations. I have been compiling information on other aviation web sites that I research including the FAA, NATB, NASA and See and Avoid along with some European Air Traffic Control facilities. Out of a typical 40"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"hour work week, I have probably spent an average of 25 hours on the Minot research and the remaining time on the other tasks that I work on.\n\nProject NORTHERN TIER - Wurtsmith Air Force Base – AAP Person 39\n\nWITNESSES AND PHONE CALLS\n\nIn reviewing the initial WAFB case, twelve (12) known witnesses were identified. To date, writer has made 20-25 phone calls in an effort to locate and re-interview some of those witnesses.\n\nIn researching some of the names, with assistance from Inv. AAP Person 34 there are somewhere between 900-5000 responses. This is probable due to how 'common' the name is. The search on those names is presently trying to be refined, so as to lower that number.\n\nIn addition to the known witnesses, when reviewing the case files, three more witnesses were identified as being needed to interview, as their reports are not present in the files.\n\nRESULTS OF PHONE CALLS\n\nOf the phone calls made so far, only two people have returned calls indicating they were not the Individual writer was seeking. Four of the phone numbers were found to be disconnected or no longer in service. Two witnesses were located, and interviewed.\n\nRESULTS OF INTERVIEWS\n\nOf the two witnesses interviewed to date, one stated that he had difficulty in remembering the incident, as it occurred almost 35 years ago. Though he gave a statement, he also indicated that it was not a 'big thing'. He stated as he recalls, there were several of these a month, as small planes would often 'buzz' the Base.\n\n123"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The other witness, related that he was not sure if he could talk about the incident, and would not give a statement. He did inform writer that he did make an 'official' report, which could be obtained through the FOIA.\n\nWITNESSES THAT ARE DECEASED\n\nDuring the on-set of this investigation, while trying to locate various witnesses, it was discovered two of the witnesses are deceased.\n\nFREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT\n\nTo date, three letters have been addressed to various Agencies, in regards to obtaining copies of the reports covering the incident. Though those letters were received by those Agencies, our specific requests have not been 'addressed' by those Agencies at this time.\n\nA fourth FOIA is being drafted at this time, in regards to discovering if a possible Congressional Inquiry/Hearing was started in 1979 regarding WAFB.\n\nINTERRUPTION TO INVESTIGATION\n\nOn 6-1-09, writer was assigned to investigate an incident that occurred in Liberty County, Texas (BAASS case number 090602-1). This investigation involved travelling to Texas, and travel arrangements had to be organized. Time was also used in an attempt to set up meetings with various Law Enforcement Agencies in that area.\n\nWriter was also to assist Inv. AAP Person 40 in an investigation out of Marathon, Texas (BAASS case number 090527-3). Travel time, June 9-11,2009, was spent in Texas investigating the above listed cases. Prior to travelling, time was needed to confer with AAP Person 18 as to get his instructions on how possible evidence in one of the cases, should be handled. AAP Person 18 also instructed investigators on specific questions which needed to be asked of the witnesses. Upon returning from Texas, evidence had to be processed and submitted for analysis. Various reports, i.e. expenses, evidence, Executive Summaries, and closing report, had particular time frames to be submitted.\n\n124"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Based on all currently available research and previously evaluated United States Air Force and Department of Defense documents received via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests; the following statistical – demographic information has been obtained for identification of potential witnesses to the UAP sightings which occurred from October 27 – 31, 1975.\n\nA total of fifteen (15) witnesses have been identified with sufficient information to conduct an investigation into obtaining contact information (i.e. first and last name with middle initial)\n\nOf these identified fifteen (15) individuals a total of 7,428 individuals were identified\n\nSources used in the identification of these individuals include the following\n\nLexis Nexis\nWestlaw\n411.com\nPeoplefinder.com\nObitlinkspage.com\nVetfriends.com\nMilitary.com\nVa.gov\nAf.mil\nAirforce.com\n\nUpon further research of the above captioned websites and with utilization of additional investigative resources (pay sites), the previously identified 7,428 individuals was narrowed to 588 when filtering out individuals who were not age appropriate for either military service or the held rank for identified parties.\n\nOf the 588 age appropriate individuals:\n\nFifty-seven (57) have been identified as deceased.\n\nNinety-six (96) have no viable contact information available.\n\nProject NORTHERN TIER -Loring Air Force Base – AAP Person 41\n\n125"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"One hundred ninety-two (192) have either non-working or disconnected telephone numbers\n\nOne hundred fifty-seven were identified as being either the wrong person entirely or individuals who never served in the United States Air Force or United States military\n\nEighty-six (86) individuals have been identified as needing additional information to make a viable contact\n\nTwo (2) individuals have been contacted and verified their identity.\n\nOne (1) individual advised he did not have any additional information he could remember from an incident he encountered nearly 34-years ago.\n\nOne (1) individual initially identified himself and confirmed I was speaking with the correct individual, however upon further discussion and identifying the purpose of my call, the caller then advised I had the wrong person, and purposefully terminated the call.\n\nDuring this time frame for the Loring investigation I was also tasked with investigation of current / ongoing sightings of Waterbury, CT; Bowling Green, KY and the United Kingdom.\n\nOngoing task into software development into the new investigators reporting database.\n\nProject NORTHERN TIER – Research Assistance – AAP Person 34\n\nI conducted 14 witness locate searches for Wurtsmith Air Force Base.\n\nUtilizing West Law search database I found over 14,938 potential matches. (Note 7 of the searches maxed out the search quota of 2000.)\n\nUtilizing my personal search database Locateplus I was able to narrow 11 of the searches down to 26 and 3 of the searches came to 7,760 potential matches.\n\nI conducted 15 witness locate searches for Loring Air Force Base.\n\n126"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Utilizing West Law search database I found over 18,726 potential matches. (Note 8 of the searches maxed out the search quota of 2000.)\n\nUtilizing my personal search database Locateplus I was able to narrow 12 of the searches down to 35 and 3 of the searches came to 4,000 + potential matches.\n\nSummary\n\nUtilizing the two databases I find Locateplus to be more effective for the type of searches we are conducting for the Northern Tier project. Westlaw search database returned a total of 33,664 results for a total of 29 witnesses. Westlaw's search parameters are much too narrow. Westlaw doesn't allow for date/year of birth. The cost of searches utilizing Westlaw is unknown to me not to mention the countless hours of investigative time spent on phone calls and additional research.\n\nLocateplus search database returned a total of 61 witnesses for 23 of the searches and 11,760 witnesses for the remaining 6. Locateplus allows me to search by birth range. (e.g. 1935 to 1945) Utilizing this database would allow the SID to narrow the amount of potential witnesses. The cost of the searches came to a total of $31.50. It took me approximately 16 hours of investigative research.\n\nProject NORTHERN TIER - Malmstrom Air Force Base – AAP Person 40\n\nI have just now taken over this assignment from AAP Person 95 and I met with him on Thursday, June 25, 2009 to go over the work he had done thus far. He provided me with a binder of material he had put together and showed me in his folder on the network, where to locate additional information. I was advised to read all the files from 1843(a)(2) because he investigated a lot of these sightings as a law enforcement official in the area. I spent most of Friday, June 26 reading the 1843(a)(2) files. It is my understanding from my conversations with AAP Person 95 he had not had any contact with any witness in these sightings.\n\n127"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"After my initial review the documents supplied by [REDACTED] and the timeline provided by Senior Investigator [REDACTED] the following numbers of witnesses have been identified for locating and possible follow up investigation:\n\n• During the time frame of August through December 1975, there are six (6) names discovered in the various documents from Malmstrom AFB that need to be located and contacted for follow up investigation. It is not known if these people are still living or can be located with the limited information we have.\n\n• There are a number of witnesses that are not named in the reports of these incidents, however effort should be made to identify these witnesses through whatever means possible, whether by interviewing the named parties or an FOIA request to identify servicemen assigned to Malmstrom AFB during the time of these events."} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS Continues Study on Information on UAPs released by the British, Canadian, French and Danish Governments\n\n• Over the past eighteen months, The Ministry of Defense (MoD) in the United Kingdom has released approximately 7297 pages of files pertaining to the performance of alleged UAPs in British air space. More recently the British MoD released a second group of files on March 21, 2009 comprising 1200 separate UFO cases in approximately 2000 additional pages. BAASS analysts have initiated the process of downloading, organizing and analyzing these files to determine the quality and quantity of reports that have been released by the UK government, particularly those reports that might pertain to events with national security implications.\n\n• In February 2009, the Canadian government authorized the release of 9500 pages of files pertaining to the behavior of alleged advanced aerospace vehicles in Canadian air space. The files cover the period 1947-1980. Many of the cases were investigated by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. BAASS analysts have initiated the process of downloading, printing, organizing and analyzing these files. The aim is to delineate the extent of high quality evidence pertaining to the topic of advanced aerial vehicle performance in the 9500 pages of Canadian files.\n\n• On January 29, 2009 the Danish Air Force released 329 pages of reports on unusual aerial phenomena. All reports are in Danish; therefore BAASS contracted a Danish-English translator to produce English translations of all 329 pages of released files. The translation will be complete by March 13, 2009. Once the files are translated, BAASS analysts will examine them to delineate whether there are any cases that merit further study.\n\n132"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Throughout 2005-2008, GEIPAN, a department of CNES (French civilian space agency), released about 100,000 pages comprising the investigative reports from approximately 1650 cases, including 6000 eyewitness interviews involving UAPs, the majority of which have been investigated by the Gendarmerie. BAASS translators/analysts are currently sorting and codifying the cases so that only the highest value cases for BAASS will be translated and entered into the BAASS database.\n\n133"} {"doc_id":"bf3d29c784bdca66","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conclusion\n\nSignificant progress has been made in training and initially deploying BAASS field investigative teams during the month of June. Further, especially following the recent deployment of BAASS personnel to Northern and Southern Brazil, BAASS has begun to acquire significant information on UAP activity in Brazil. Recently, BAASS has initiated contact with Air Force personnel in Uruguay (CRIDOVNI). The BAASS MUFON relationship is being closely monitored especially since the case numbers that MUFON are alerting BAASS with are still considerably lower than originally expected. However, in BAASS's estimation, MUFON are entering the next several months with a much clearer sense of purpose regarding executing the deliverables of the contract with BAASS. The BAASS database of cases is now larger than any other database owned by UAP organizations in North America.\n\nSecondly BAASS is currently accelerating the acquisition of all information pertaining to advanced aerospace technology topic in the open literature, increasingly from other countries.\n\n134"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\nAcquisition Threat Support\n11 March 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-1003-007\nAdvanced Nuclear Propulsion for Manned Deep Space Missions\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAdvanced Nuclear Propulsion for Manned Deep Space Missions\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 72\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nContents\nPreface.....v\nIntroduction.....1\nDeuterium, Argon Ion Lasers, and KeV Superexplosives.....1\nMagnetic Insulation and Inductive Charging.....3\nMagnetic Insulation.....3\nInductive Charging.....4\nDeuterium as the Preferred Nuclear Rocket Fuel.....5\nMagnetic Entrapment of the Charged Fusion Products and the Stopping of the Proton Beam in Dense Deuterium.....6\nSolution in Between Two Extremes.....10\nThe Nonfission Ignition of Small Deuterium Nuclear Explosives.....13\nDelivery of a Gev Proton Beam Onto the Deuterium Fusion Explosive.....15\nLifting of Large Payloads Into Earth Orbit.....16\nNeutron Entrapment in an Autocatalytic Thermonuclear Detonation Wave - a Means to Increase the Specific Impulse and to Solve the Large Radiator Problem.....18\nTesting the Deuterium Microdetonation Concept.....20\nConclusion.....25\nAppendix: Conjectured Metastable Superexplosives Formed Under High Pressure for Thermonuclear Ignition.....26\nBombardment of a Solid Target With an Intense Relativistic Electron or Ion Beam.....28\nHypervelocity Impact.....28\nBombardment of a Solid Target With Beams or By Hypervelocity Impact, Followed By a Convergent Shock Wave.....28\nReferences.....30\niii\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigures\nFigure 1. Ignition With 10^7-Ampere GeV Proton Beam.....11\nFigure 2. Pure Deuterium Fusion Explosion Ignited With an Intense Ion Beam.....14\nFigure 3. Screening of the Spacecraft.....14\nFigure 4. Superconducting \"Atomic\" Spaceship.....15\nFigure 5. Argon Ion Laser Igniter.....17\nFigure 6. Autocatalytic Thermonuclear Detonation Using a Soft X-ray.....18\nFigure 7. Ordinary Marx Generator.....21\nFigure 8. Super Marx Generator.....21\nFigure 9. Artist's Conception of a 1.5-km-Long Super Marx Generator.....21\nFigure 10. Detail View of a Section of the Super Marx Generator.....22\nFigure 11. Injection of GeV - 10 MA Proton Beam.....22\nFigure 12. Showing a Few Elements of the Super Marx Generator.....22\nFigure 13. The Superconducting Toroidal Capacitor and Its Discharge Onto the Target.....24\nFigure 14. Explosives.....26\nFigure 15. With Increasing Pressure, Electron-Bridges are Formed Between Shells Inside Shells Melting Into Common Shells.....26\nFigure 16. p-d, Pressure.....29\nFigure 17. Inertial Confinement Fast-Ignition Configuration.....30\nTables\nTable 1. The Charged Fusion Products of a Detonation in Deuterium: Their Energy and Velocity.....5\nTable 2. Critical Ignition Currents for Thermonuclear Reactions.....8\niv\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAdvanced Nuclear Propulsion for Manned Deep Space Missions\nPreface\nMy interest in space flight dates to when I was about 10 years old and received as a birthday gift a popular book about the feasibility of space flight. From it I learned for the first time about Oberth and Goddard and of the possibility of reaching the Moon with a multistage rocket. This occurred at the same time that Hahn and Strassmann announced the discovery of nuclear fission, with the possibility of an atomic bomb by a fission chain reaction.\n\nHaving been born in Germany in 1929, I received my Ph.D. in physics under Heisenberg in 1955. Inspired by the 15-megaton hydrogen bomb test conducted by the United States in 1952, I have been deeply interested in the nonfission ignition of thermonuclear reactions by inertial confinement since 1954. At the time all fusion research in the United States was still classified, but I had quite independently discovered the basic principles of inertial confinement, the Guderley convergent shock wave, and the Rayleigh imploding shell solutions. In 1956 I presented my findings at a meeting organized by Von Weizsacker at the Max Planck Institute in Goettingen. The abstracts of this meeting reside today in the University of Stuttgart library.\n\nIn 1958 I had delivered a paper at the 2nd United Nations Conference on the Peaceful Use of Atomic Energy on Nerva-type nuclear rocket reactors. The paper turned out to be of some importance as I was invited by the U.S. government to come to the United States under \"Operation Paperclip.\" In San Diego I met Ted Taylor and Freeman Dyson, who were working on the famous \"Orion\" nuclear bomb propulsion concept. This concept is generally credited to Stanislaw Ulam, but I know from conversations I had with Heisenberg that a similar idea had been presented to Heisenberg by Wernher von Braun in Berlin in or around 1942. Because of my idea to use the Guderley convergent shock wave solution for thermonuclear ignition, Ted Taylor and Freeman Dyson were interested in my joining their group. But because at that time this work was classified and I was not yet a U.S. citizen, this was not possible.\n\nIn 1967 I saw a new possibility for the nonfission ignition of thermonuclear microexplosions by intense relativistic electron and ion beams, driven by a high-voltage Marx generator. This ignition concept could be used not only to control the release of energy by nuclear fusion, but also to propel a spacecraft, replacing the pusher plate of the Orion concept with a magnetic mirror, reflecting the plasma-fireball of the thermonuclear microexplosion (Reference 1, 2). This idea was adopted by the British Interplanetary Society in its 1978 Project Daedalus starship study, replacing a neutron-rich deuterium-tritium (DT) thermonuclear explosive with a neutron-poor deuterium-helium3 (DHe3) explosive (Reference 3). Unlike the DT reaction, in which 80 percent of the released energy goes into neutrons, most of the energy in the D-He3 reaction goes into alpha particles, which can be deflected by a magnetic mirror. But\nv\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nbecause He3 is not abundantly available everywhere, it was proposed to\n“mine” it from Jupiter’s atmosphere.\n\nStudies have been conducted on spacecraft propulsion with the matter-\nantimatter annihilation reaction, however, it is an enormous technical\nchallenge to produce antimatter in appreciable quantities. The idea of using\nnano-gram amounts of antimatter for the ignition of fission-fusion\nmicroexplosions appears to have credible potential, but even there the\nproduction and storage of nano-gram quantities of antimatter pose serious\ntechnical problems (Reference 4).\n\nWe have little reason to expect that new fundamental laws of physics that\ncould lead to a breakthrough in propulsion still await discovery. Very much as\nAmerica was discovered only once, it is quite possible that all the fundamental\nlaws of physics relevant to propulsion have been discovered, challenging our\nimagination to find out if they are sufficient to invent propulsion systems that\nultimately might bring us to Earthlike planets of nearby solar systems.\n\nI conclude this preface with an imaginary talk by Ted Taylor to Freeman Dyson\nas recorded by the latter’s son, George Dyson, in his book Project Orion – The\nTrue Story of the Atomic Spaceship (Reference 5), followed by a dream of Ted\nTaylor’s. “Freeman’s hope for the Orion had rested on the fact that there\nseems to be no law of nature forbidding the construction of fission-free\nbombs,” and on the belief that “improvements in the design of the nuclear\ndevices (by reducing the fraction of total yield due to fission) might achieve\nreduction factors of 10² to 10³. This belief in small, fission-free bombs has\nlargely evaporated.” “One exception is Ted (Taylor). He remains convinced\nthat small, clean bombs could propel Orion - but he still fears more than ever\nthat such devices would be irresistible as weapons, until we outgrow the habit\nof war. There are lots of different routes to that final result of a very clean\nbomb.” “Could you make a one-kiloton explosion in which the fission yield was\nzero, which is bad news on the proliferation front, but could turn Orion into\nsomething quite clean?” “Freeman thinks Ted is wrong – and Ted hopes\nFreeman is right.” I for my part think Freeman is wrong.\n\nMany years later, shortly before his death, Ted Taylor reported: “I had a dream\nlast night, about a new form of nuclear weapon, and I am really scared of it.”\nHe reported that when he woke up, he wrote down his dream, and it appeared\nscientifically sound and feasible. What was it? We never will know with\ncertainty, but I have a guess: it is the possibility of chemical superexplosives\n(explained in the appendix) powerful enough to ignite a thermonuclear bomb.\n\nvi\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIntroduction\n\nAs Hermann Oberth proved for chemical rockets in his 1923 book The Rocket into\nPlanetary Space (Reference 6), this paper will try to prove for thermonuclear rockets\nthe following:\n\n• At the present state of science and technology one can build spaceships driven by\ndeuterium thermonuclear reactions, able to reach the outer limits of the solar\nsystem.\n\n• Such spaceships permit the manned exploration of the entire solar system and\nbeyond, with the ultimate potential to reach nearby solar systems.\n\n• The cost in research and development to build such spaceships will be high but still\nwell within what is economically feasible.\n\n• Using the same physical principles as for deuterium fusion rockets will also lead to\nthe realization of clean nuclear energy, justifying the expenditures for these large\nprojects.\n\nDeuterium can be used as the rocket fuel of choice in addition to any inert material that\nis suitable as a propellant. This propellant material is available on most planetary\nbodies and particularly on the comets of the Oort cloud. The main idea is that by\ngradual radial expansion from the Sun by building bridges over the Oort clouds, which\npresumably surround all suns, Earthlike planets in neighboring solar systems can\neventually be reached.\n\nThe first and most important step toward this goal is to reach the focus of the Einstein\ngravitational lens at 550 AU (astronomical units). At this location, one can use the Sun\nas the lens of a super telescope, an idea first proposed by Claudio Maccone in 1993.\nPresent knowledge is that there are planets in nearby solar systems that are likely\nEarthlike planets. It is only with this gigantic telescope that one can determine if life on\nthese planets is possible. But because of the complexity of this task, a manned mission\nto the Einstein gravitational lens focus is likely to be needed, possible only with\nadvanced nuclear rocket propulsion.\n\nDeuterium, Argon Ion Lasers, and KeV Superexplosives\n\nThe goal is a spacecraft that can be refueled while landing on a planetary body, which\ncan be a planet, an asteroid, or a comet. With heavy water available on many planetary\nbodies but in particular on comets, this suggests the use of deuterium (D) as the\nthermonuclear rocket fuel. Ignition of deuterium though, is more difficult than ignition\nof the deuterium-tritium (DT) reaction or of the deuterium-helium3 (DHe³) reaction.\n\nThe DT reaction is the easiest to ignite, but 80 percent of the energy goes into\nneutrons, which cannot be deflected by a magnetic mirror. In the DHe³ reaction all the\nenergy goes into charged fusion products, but in a mixture of D with He³ there are still\nsome neutron-producing deuterium-deuterium (DD) reactions. More important is the\nfact that, unlike deuterium, He³ is largely unavailable. There is some indication of He³\non the surface of Moon. In the Daedalus starship study by the British Interplanetary\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSociety, it was proposed to “mine” He³ from the atmosphere of Jupiter. In either case,\nthe cost to recover appreciable amounts of He³ would be very high.\n\nFor the DD reaction, the situation is quite different because there the instantaneous\nburn with deuterium of the T- and He³- reaction products of deuterium makes possible\na detonation wave in dense deuterium. In this detonation wave, only 38 percent of the\nenergy released goes into neutrons, compared with 80 percent for the DT reaction.\n\nDeuterium can be extracted from water with relative ease in three steps:\n\n• Water is electrolytically split into hydrogen and oxygen.\n\n• The hydrogen gas, composed of H₂ and HD, is cooled down until it liquefies,\nwhereby the heavier HD is separated by the force of gravity from the lighter H₂.\n\n• The newly produced HD is heated and passed through a catalyst, splitting HD into\nH₂ and D₂, according to the equation (Reference 7) 2HD → H₂ + D₂.\n\nSince the gravitational field on the surface of a comet or small planet, from which the\nD₂ shall be extracted, is small, the apparatus separating the liquid HD from H₂ must be\nset into rapid rotation.\n\nThe comparatively small amount of energy needed for the separation can ideally be\ndrawn from a ferroelectric capacitor (for example, a barium-titanate capacitor with a\ndielectric constant ε ≈ 5,000), to be charged up to many kilovolts by a small fraction of\nthe electric energy drawn from the deuterium fusion explosions through a magneto\nhydrodynamic loop (Reference 2). One can also draw this energy from a small on-board\nnuclear reactor requiring only a small radiator, slowly charging the capacitor.\nAlternatively, one may store the needed energy in the magnetic field of a\nsuperconductor.\n\nFor the launching of the spacecraft into Earth orbit, a very different scheme is\nproposed. It requires special materials that are readily available on Earth but not on\nextraterrestrial bodies serving as landing points to refuel the spacecraft. There the\nprimary resource is water from which deuterium is obtained.\n\nIn the Orion bomb propulsion project, a large number of fission bombs, or fission-\ntriggered fusion bombs, were proposed to lift the spacecraft into space. Since this\nwould release a large amount of highly radioactive fission products into the\natmosphere, it was one of the causes that killed Orion. Even though large payloads can\nbe brought into Earth orbit by chemical rockets, this remains very expensive, and an\nacceptable less expensive nuclear alternative is highly desirable.\n\nThere appear to be two possibilities:\n\n• A laser driven by a high explosive, powerful enough to ignite a DT microexplosion,\nwhich in turn can initiate a thermonuclear detonation in deuterium (Reference 8).\n\n• A second, more speculative possibility is the conjectured existence of chemical\nkiloelectronvolt (keV) superexplosives. These are chemical compounds formed under\nhigh pressure, resulting in keV bridges between inner electron shells and able to\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nrelease intense bursts of keV X-rays capable of igniting a DT thermonuclear reaction,\nwhich in turn could ignite a larger deuterium detonation.\n\nTo realize the first possibility, one might consider pumping a solid argon rod with a\nconvergent cylindrical shock wave driven by a high explosive (Reference 9). If the\nargon rod is placed in the center of convergence and reaches a temperature of 90,000\n°K, the upper ultraviolet laser level of the argon will be populated. Following this\nheating, the argon cylinder radially expands and cools, with the upper laser level frozen\ninto the argon. The energy thus stored in the upper laser level can then be removed\nfrom the rod by a small Q-switched laser, the resulting powerful laser pulse optically\nfocused onto a thermonuclear target.\n\nTo realize the second possibility, one would have to subject suitable materials to very\nhigh pressure (Reference 10, 11). These energetic states can be reached only if during\ntheir compression the materials are not appreciably heated, because such heating\nwould prevent the electrons from forming the bridges between the inner electron shells.\nDetails of the second possibility are provided in the appendix.\n\nMagnetic Insulation and Inductive Charging\n\nTwo concepts are of great importance for the envisioned realization of a deuterium\nfusion-driven starship:\n\n• The concept of magnetic insulation, which permits the attainment of ultrahigh\nvoltages in high vacuum (Reference 1).\n\n• The concept of inductive charging, by which a magnetically insulated conductor can\nbe charged up to very high electric potentials (Reference 12).\n\nMAGNETIC INSULATION\n\nIn a greatly simplified way, magnetic insulation can be understood as follows: if the\nelectric field on the surface of a negatively charged conductor reaches a critical field on\nthe order of E_c ~ 10⁷ V/cm, the conductor becomes the source of electrons emitted by\nfield emission. The critical electric field for the emission of ions from a positively\ncharged conductor is ~ 10⁸ V/cm. Therefore, if in a high-voltage diode the electric field\nreaches ~ 10⁷ V/cm, breakdown will occur by electric field emission from the cathode to\nthe anode. But if a magnetic field of strength B measured in gauss is applied in a\ndirection parallel to the negatively charged surface, and if B > E, where E (like B) is\nmeasured in electrostatic cgs units, the field-emitted electrons make a drift motion\nparallel to the surface of the conductor with the velocity.\n\nv_d = c (E × B)/B² = c E/B (1)\n\nTo keep v_d/c < 1 then requires that E < H. Let us assume that H ≈ 2×10⁴ G, which can\nbe reached with ordinary electromagnets, means that E ≤ 2×10⁴ esu = 6×10⁶ V/cm.\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFor a conductor with a radius of λ~10m = 10³ cm, an example for a small starship\nconfiguration, one can reach a voltage on the order of Eλ ≤ 6 ×10⁹ volts.\n\nINDUCTIVE CHARGING\n\nTo charge the spacecraft to the required gigavolt potentials, we choose for its\narchitecture a large but hollow cylinder, which at the same time acts as a large\nmagnetic field coil. If thermionic electron emitters are placed inside this coil and the\nmagnetic field of the coil rises in time, Maxwell’s equation ∇×E = −(1/c)∂B/∂t induces\nan azimuthal electric field inside the coil:\n\nE_φ = −(r/2c) Ḃ_z (2)\n\nwhere B = B_z is directed along the z-axis, with r the radial distance from the axis of the\ncoil. In combination with the axial magnetic field, the electrons from the thermionic\nemitters make a radial inward-directed motion\n\nv_r = c E_φ/B_z = −(r/2) Ḃ_z/B_z (3)\n\nBy Maxwell’s equation div E = 4πner, this leads to the buildup of an electron cloud inside\nthe cylinder, resulting in the radial electric field\n\nE_r = 2πner (4)\n\nThis radial electric field leads to an additional azimuthal drift motion\n\nv_φ = c E_r/B_z (5)\n\nsuperimposed on the radially directed inward drift motion v_r.\n\nFor the newly formed electron cloud to be stable, its maximum electron number density\nmust be below the Brillouin limit:\n\nn < n_max = B²/4π mc² (6)\n\nwhere mc² = 8.2 × 10⁻⁷ erg is the electron rest mass energy. For B = 2×10⁴G, one\nfinds that n_max ≈ 4×10¹³ cm⁻³. To reach with a cylindrical electron cloud of radius R a\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\npotential equal to V requires an electron number density n ≈ V/πeR². For V = 10⁹ volts ≈ 3×10⁶ esu and R = 10³cm, one finds that n ~ 2×10⁹ cm⁻³, well below n_max.\n\nDeuterium as the Preferred Nuclear Rocket Fuel\n\nTo appreciate the importance of deuterium as the preferred and abundantly available nuclear rocket fuel, one must consider the secondary reactions with D of the He³ and T reaction products from D-D fusion. Taking these reactions into account, one obtains from 6 deuterium nuclei an energy of 26.8 megaelectronvolts (MeV) in charged fusion products, made up of He³ and H, and an energy of 16.55 MeV in neutrons. This means 62 percent of the energy is released into charged fusion products and 38 percent into neutrons—a substantial improvement over the DT reaction, in which only 20 percent of the energy goes into He⁴.\n\nOf interest also is the average velocity, averaged over the momentum of the charged fusion products, because it is a measure of the maximum specific impulse, respectively the maximum exhaust velocity:\n\nv̄ = (Σ(i=1 to 6) m_i v_i) / (Σ(i=1 to 6) m_i) (7)\n\nFor the six charged fusion reaction products (given in Table 1), one obtains v̄ = 1.5×10⁹ cm/s.\n\nTable 1. The Charged Fusion Products of a Detonation in Deuterium: Their Energy and Velocity\n\nFusion Product | Energy [MeV] | Velocity 10⁹ [cm/s]\nHe³ | 0.8 | 1.23\nH | 3.0 | 2.40\nH | 14.7 | 5.30\nHe⁴ | 3.6 | 1.31\nHe⁴ | 3.7 | 1.33\nT | 1.0 | 0.80"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBecause the 6 charged fusion products are accompanied by 9 electrons, they have to share their kinetic energy with 9 electrons. This reduces the maximum specific impulse by the factor √((6+9)/6) = √2.5 to v̄ = 0.95×10⁹cm/s.\n\nA reduction of the specific impulse does not occur if the electrons have enough time to escape the burning plasma behind the detonation front; that is, in a time shorter than the time for them to be heated by the charged fusion products.\n\nThe time needed for the electrons to be heated by the charged fusion reaction products can be computed from the range λ0 of the charged fusion products and their velocity v in a plasma at the temperature T. For the He⁴ fusion products, the range is given by\n\nλ0 = a(kT)^(3/2) / n, a = 2.5×10³⁴ [cgs] (8)\n\nThis time is\n\nτ = λ0/v = a(kT)^(3/2)/(nv) (9)\n\nIt then has to be compared with the time the electron can escape the burning plasma behind the detonation front, given by\n\nt_esc ≈ r0/v_e (10)\n\nwhere r0 is the radius of the burning deuterium cylinder, and v_e the electron velocity. One thus has\n\nt_esc/τ = (v/v_e)(nr0/(a(kT)^(3/2))) (11)\n\nPutting n = 10²³ cm⁻³, T ≈ 10⁸ K with v_e ~ 10⁹ cm/s, v ~ 10⁹ cm/s, one finds t_esc/τ ~ 2.5 r0. Therefore, t_esc < τ requires that r0 < 0.4 cm.\n\nTo reach the highest specific impulse possible, one should make the deuterium cylinder as thin as possible.\n\nMagnetic Entrapment of the Charged Fusion Products and the Stopping of the Proton Beam in Dense Deuterium\n\nIf a fission bomb is used to trigger a thermonuclear detonation, so much energy is available that almost any radiation implosion configuration is likely going to work. As an example, one may place a fission bomb and a sphere of solid deuterium in a shell of"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ngold, in the two foci of an ellipsoidal cavity. The radiation released by the exploding fission bomb, by ablating the gold, launches a convergent shock wave into the liquid deuterium. With the temperature in the shock wave approximately rising as 1/r, where r is the distance of the shock wave from the center of the deuterium sphere, the ignition temperature is reached at some distance from the center. But only if this distance is larger than the stopping length of the DD fusion reaction products, typically a few cm, is a radially outward-moving detonation wave ignited. This configuration is essentially the same kind of \"hohlraum\" (cavity) configuration used in the indirect drive mode of laser fusion for a small DT sphere.\n\nA configuration of this kind can still be used to burn deuterium if the DT microexplosion is used to trigger a larger deuterium explosion. For a starship that will depend on deuterium as its only rocket fuel, this possibility is excluded.\n\nBut another possibility arises if the ignition is done with a 10⁷-ampere gigaelectronvolt (GeV) proton (or deuterium) beam. If focused onto one end of a slender, cylindrical deuterium rod, the beam not only can be made powerful enough to ignite the deuterium, but its strong azimuthal magnetic field entraps the charged DD reaction fusion products within the deuterium cylinder, launching a deuterium detonation wave propagating with supersonic speed down the cylinder (Reference 13). There the fusion gain and yield can in principle be made arbitrarily large, depending only on the length of the deuterium rod.\n\nThe range of the charged fusion products is determined by their Larmor radius\n\nr_l = α/B (12)\n\nwhere\n\nα = (c/e)(2MAE)^(1/2)/Z (13)\n\nIn equation (13), c, e are the velocity of light and the electron charge, M the hydrogen mass, A the atomic weight, and Z the atomic number. E is the kinetic energy of the fusion products.\n\nIf the magnetic field is produced by the proton beam current I, one has at the surface of the deuterium cylinder the azimuthal magnetic field\n\nB_φ = 0.2 I/r (14)\n\nCombining equation (12) with equation (14) and requiring that r_l < r, one finds that"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nI > I_c (15)\n\nwhere I_c = 5α. In Table 2, the values for α and I_c for all the charged fusion products of the DD reaction are compiled. For all of them, the critical current is below I_c = 3.84 ×10⁶ A. Therefore, with the choice I ~ 10⁷ A, all the charged fusion products are entrapped inside the deuterium cylinder.\n\nTable 2. Critical Ignition Currents for Thermonuclear Reactions\n\nReaction | Fusion Product | Energy [MeV] | α [G cm] | I_c [A]\nDT | He⁴ | 3.6 | 2.7×10⁵ | 1.35×10⁶\nDD | He³ | 0.8 | 1.12×10⁵ | 5.6×10⁵\nDD | T | 1.0 | 2.5×10⁵ | 1.25×10⁶\nDD | H | 3.0 | 2.5×10⁵ | 1.25×10⁶\nDHe³ | H | 14.65 | 5.56×10⁵ | 3.84×10⁶\nDHe³ | He⁴ | 3.66 | 2.78×10⁵ | 1.39×10⁶\n\nFor the argon ion laser configuration proposed for the launch into Earth orbit, where a small amount of DT serves as a trigger for the ignition of a larger amount of deuterium, the ignition of a magnetic field supported detonation wave in deuterium is possible there with an auxiliary high-explosive-driven megampere current generator, setting up an axial magnetic current around the rod. The charged fusion products there are spiraling down the rod. The current needed to entrap the charged fusion products are there on the same order of magnitude; that is, ~ 10⁷ A.\n\nFor the deuterium-tritium thermonuclear reaction, the condition for a propagating burn in a sphere of radius r and density ρ, heated to a temperature of 10⁸ K, is given by ρr ≥ 1 g/cm². This requires energy of about 1 megajoule (MJ). For the deuterium reaction, this condition is ρr ≥ 10 g/cm², with an ignition temperature about 10 times larger. That a thermonuclear detonation in deuterium is possible at all is due to the secondary combustion of the T and He³ DD fusion reaction products (Reference 8). The energy required would be about 10⁴ times larger, or about 10⁴ MJ—for all practical purposes out of reach for nonfission ignition. However, if the ignition and burn are along a deuterium cylinder, where the charged fusion products are entrapped by a magnetic field within the cylinder, the condition ρr ≥ 10 g/cm² is replaced by\n\nρz ≥ 10 g/cm² (16)\n\nwhere z is the length of the cylinder."} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIf the charged fusion products are entrapped within the deuterium cylinder, and if the condition ρz > 10 g/cm² is satisfied, and finally, if the beam energy is large enough that a length z > (10/ρ) cm of the cylinder is heated to a temperature of 10⁹ K, a thermonuclear detonation wave can propagate down the cylinder. This then leads to large fusion gains.\n\nThe stopping length of single GeV protons in dense deuterium is much too large to fulfill inequality (Reference 16). But this is different for an intense beam of protons, where the stopping length is determined by the electrostatic proton-deuteron two-stream instability (Reference 14). In the presence of a strong azimuthal magnetic field, the beam dissipation is enhanced by the formation of a collisionless shock (Reference 15) with the thickness of the shock by order of magnitude equal to the Larmor radius of the deuterium ions at a temperature of 10⁹ K, which for a magnetic field on the order of 10⁷ G is on the order of 10⁻² cm. For the two-stream instability alone, the stopping length is given by\n\nλ ≅ 1.4c / (ε^(1/3) ω_i) (17)\n\nwhere c is the velocity of light, ω_i the proton ion plasma frequency, and ε = n_b/n, with n the deuterium target number density and n_b = 2×10¹⁶ cm⁻³, the proton number density in the beam. For a hundredfold compressed deuterium rod, one has n = 5×10²⁴ cm⁻³, with ω_i = 2×10¹⁵ s⁻¹. One finds that ε = 4×10⁻⁹ and λ ≅ 1.2×10⁻² cm. This short length, together with the formation of the collisionless magneto-hydrodynamic shock, ensures the dissipation of the beam energy into a small volume at the end of the deuterium rod. For a deuterium number density n = 5×10²⁴ cm⁻³, one has ρ = 17 g/cm³, and to have ρz > 10 g/cm² requires that z ≥ 0.6 cm. With λ < z, the condition for the ignition of a thermonuclear detonation wave is satisfied. The ignition energy is given by\n\nE_ign ~ 3nkTπr²z (18)\n\nwhere T ≈ 10⁹ K.\n\nFor hundredfold compressed deuterium, one has πr² = 10⁻³ cm², where initially it was πr² = 10⁻¹ cm². With πr² = 10⁻³ cm² and z = 0.6 cm, one finds that E_ign ≤ 10¹⁶ erg or ≤ 1GJ. This energy is provided by the 10⁷-ampere GeV proton beam lasting 10⁻⁷ seconds. The time is short enough to ensure the cold compression of deuterium to high densities. For a 10³-fold compression, found feasible in laser fusion experiments, the ignition energy is 10 times less.\n\nIn hitting the target, a fraction of the proton beam energy is dissipated into X-rays by entering and bombarding the high Z material cone, focusing the proton beam onto the deuterium cylinder. The X-rays released fill the hohlraum surrounding the deuterium"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ncylinder, compressing it to high densities, while the bulk of the proton beam energy heats and ignites the deuterium cylinder at its end, launching in it a detonation wave.\n\nIf the GeV -10^7-ampere proton beam passes through background hydrogen plasma with a particle number density n, it induces in the plasma a return current carried by its electrons, where the electrons move in the same direction as the protons. But because the current of the proton beam and the return current of the plasma electrons are in opposite directions, they repel each other. Since the stagnation pressure of the GeV -10^7-ampere proton beam is much larger than that of the electron return current, the return current electrons will be repelled from the proton beam toward the surface of the proton beam.\n\nThe stagnation pressure of a GeV proton beam is (M_H proton mass)\n\np_i ≅ ρ_i c^2 = n_b M_H c^2 (19)\n\nFor n_b ≅ 2×10^16 cm-3, one obtains p_i ≅ 3×10^13 dyn/cm3. For the electron return current, one has (m electron mass)\n\np_e = n_e m v^2 (20)\n\nWith the return current condition n_e e v_e = n_i e v_i, where for GeV protons v_i ≅ c, one has\n\nv_e/c = n_i/n_e (21)\n\nTaking the value n_e = 5×10^22 cm-3, valid for uncompressed solid deuterium, one obtains v_e ≅ 10^4 cm/s and hence p_e ≅ 5×10^3 dyn/cm². This is negligible against p_i, even if n_e is 10^3 times larger, as in highly compressed deuterium. The assumption that the magnetic field of the proton beam is sufficiently strong to entrap the charged fusion products within the deuterium cylinder is therefore well justified.\n\nSolution in Between Two Extremes\n\nWith chemical propulsion, manned space flight to the Moon is barely possible and only with massive multistage rockets. For manned space flight beyond the Moon, nuclear propulsion is indispensible. Nuclear thermal propulsion is really not much better than advanced chemical propulsion. Ion propulsion, using a nuclear reactor to drive an electric generator, has a much higher specific impulse but not enough thrust for short interplanetary transit times needed for manned missions. This leaves propulsion by a chain of fission bombs (or fission-triggered fusion bombs) as the only credible option. There the thrust and specific impulse are comparatively huge, but a comparatively small explosive yield is desirable. Making the yield too small, the bombs become\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nextravagant in the sense that only a small fraction of the fission explosive is consumed. This problem can be overcome through the nonfission ignition of small fusion explosions. A first step in this direction is the nonfission ignition of deuterium-tritium (DT) thermonuclear microexplosions, expected to be realized in the near future. This reaction was chosen for the first proposed thermonuclear microexplosion propulsion concept, with the ignition done by an intense relativistic electron beam (Reference 1, 2). But because in the DT reaction 80 percent of the energy is released into neutrons that cannot be reflected from the spacecraft by a magnetic mirror, it was proposed to surround the microexplosion with a neutron-absorbing hydrogen propellant, increasing the thrust at the expense of the specific impulse. For this reason, in the \"Daedalus\" interstellar probe study by the British Interplanetary Society (Reference 3), the neutron-less helium3-deuterium (He3-D) reaction was proposed, because for such a mission the specific impulse should be as high as possible. But even in a He3-D plasma, there are a some neutron-producing DD reactions. There is no large source of He3 on Earth, though it might exist on the surface of the Moon and in the atmosphere of Jupiter. In the DD reaction, much less energy goes into neutrons, but it is more difficult to ignite.\n\nThe situation is illustrated in Figure 1. On the upper left side is the experimentally verified ignition of a DT pellet with the X-rays generated in an underground test from a fission bomb (Centurion Halite experiment at the Nevada Test Site). For the ignition of the DT reaction with propagation thermonuclear burn (that is, detonation), one requires a few megajoules, with a density×radius target product, ρr ≥ 1g/cm². On the upper right side is the 15-megaton \"Mike\" test, where with the Teller-Ulam configuration a large amount of liquid deuterium is ignited with a fission bomb. For the DD reaction propagating thermonuclear burn (that is, detonation), one requires that ρr ≥ 10g/cm². At the bottom is the proposed hypothetical deuterium target, where a detonation wave in a thin cylindrical deuterium rod is ignited by a pulsed 10^7-ampere GeV proton beam, utilizing the strong magnetic field of the beam current.\n\nSolution in between two extremes\n\nFigure 1. Ignition With 10^7-Ampere GeV Proton Beam (Reference 16)\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTo estimate the order of magnitude of what is needed, we consider a spacecraft with a mass of M_0 = 10^3 ton = 10^9 g, to be accelerated by one g ≅ 10^3 cm/s², with a thrust T = M_0 g ≅ 10^12 dyn. To establish the magnitude and number of fusion explosions needed to propel the spacecraft to a velocity of v = 100 km/s = 10^7 cm/s, we use the equation\n\nT = c dm/dt (22)\n\nwhere we set c ≅ 10^8 cm/s, equal to the expansion velocity of the fusion bomb plasma.\n\nWe thus have\n\ndm/dt = T/c = 10^4 g/s = 10 kg/s (23)\n\nThe propulsion power is given by\n\nP = (c^2/2)(dm/dt) = (c/2)T (24)\n\nwhich in our example is P = 5×10^19 erg/s.\n\nWith E = 4×10^19 erg equivalent to the explosive energy of one kiloton of TNT, P is equivalent to about one nuclear kiloton bomb per second.\n\nFrom the rocket equation\n\nv = c ln(M_0/M_1) (25)\n\nwhere M_0 is the initial and M_1 the final mass, and setting M_1 = M_0 - ΔM, where ΔM << M_0 is the mass of all used up bombs, one has\n\nv ≅ c ln(1 + ΔM/M_0) ≅ c ΔM/M_0 (26)\n\nHere v is the velocity reached by the spacecraft after having used up all the bombs of mass ΔM. If one bomb explodes per second, its mass according to equation (23) is m_0 = 10^4 g.\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAssuming the spacecraft reaches a velocity of v = 100 km/s = 10^7 cm/s, the velocity needed for fast interplanetary travel, one has ΔM = 10^8 g, requiring N = ΔM/m_0 = 10^4 1-kiloton fusion bombs, releasing the energy E_b = 5×10^19 ×10^4 = 5×10^23 erg. By comparison, the kinetic energy of the spacecraft E_s = (1/2)M_0 v^2 = 5×10^22 erg is 10 times less. In reality it is still smaller, because a large fraction of the energy released by the bomb explosions is dissipated into space.\n\nOne can summarize these estimates by concluding that a very large number of nuclear explosions are needed, which for fission explosions, as well as for deuterium-tritium explosions, would become very expensive. This strongly favors deuterium, which is more difficult to ignite than a mixture of deuterium with tritium but is abundantly available. The following text tries to show how bomb propulsion solely with deuterium might be possible.\n\nThe Nonfission Ignition of Small Deuterium Nuclear Explosives\n\nWith no deuterium-tritium (DT) microexplosions yet ignited, the nonfission ignition of pure deuterium (DD) fusion explosions seems to be a tall order. An indirect way to reach this goal is by staging a smaller DT explosion with a larger DD explosion. There the driver energy, but not the driver, may be rather small. A direct way requires a driver with order of magnitude larger energies.\n\nThe generation of GeV potential wells, made possible with magnetic insulation of conductors levitated in ultrahigh vacuum (in a laboratory on Earth), has the potential to lead to order of magnitude larger driver energies (Reference 1). It is the ultrahigh vacuum of space that enables this to be achieved without levitation. Therefore, the spacecraft, acting as a capacitor, can be charged up to GeV potentials.\n\nIf the spacecraft is charged to a positive GeV potential, a gigajoule intense relativistic ion beam below the Alfvén current limit can be released from the spacecraft and directed to the deuterium explosive for its ignition. If the current needed for ignition is below the Alfvén limit for ions, the beam is \"stiff.\" The critical Alfvén current for protons is I_A = 3.1×10^7 βγ [A], where β = v/c, γ = (1-β^2)^(-1/2), with v the proton velocity and c the velocity of light. For GeV protons, I_A is well in excess of the critical current (Reference 15) to entrap the DD fusion reaction products, the condition for detonation (Reference 13).\n\nIn a possible bomb configuration shown in Figure 2, the liquid (or solid) D explosive has the shape of a long cylinder, placed inside a cylindrical \"hohlraum\" h. A GeV proton beam I coming from the left, in entering the hohlraum, dissipates part of its energy into a burst of X-rays compressing and igniting the D bomb-cylinder. With its gigajoule energy lasting less than 10^-7 seconds, the beam power is greater than 10^16 watts, sufficiently large to ignite the D explosive. The main portion of the beam energy is focused by the cone onto the deuterium rod, igniting at its end a detonation wave.\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 2. Pure Deuterium Fusion Explosion Ignited With an Intense Ion Beam. D deuterium rod, h hohlraum, I ion beam, B magnetic field, R miniature target rocket chamber, H2 solid hydrogen, L laser beam to heat hydrogen in miniature rocket chamber.\n\nBecause the condition for thermonuclear burn and detonation depends only on the critical current (Reference 15) and not on the radius of the deuterium cylinder, one may wish to make the diameter of the deuterium cylinder as small as possible, because as it was shown above, the specific impulse can become largest, with the electrons not taking away kinetic energy from the charged fusion products. Therefore, the yield of the deuterium fusion explosions can be made much smaller, eliminating the need for Orion-type shock absorbers, but the thrust there is also much smaller. For very-deep-space missions, that would not be a disadvantage.\n\nA problem in either case is that 38 percent of the energy is released as neutrons. In hitting the spacecraft, they lead to its heating, requiring a presumably large radiator. For a long and thin deuterium rod, this problem can likely be reduced by a boron diaphragm on the deuterium rod, as shown in Figure 3, because boron is a good neutron absorber. It can be enhanced by a hydrogen moderator, because the absorption cross section for neutrons is greatly increased with a reduced neutron kinetic energy. Both the boron and the hydrogen there simply become part of the propellant, reducing the specific impulse but increasing the thrust.\n\nFigure 3. Screening of the Spacecraft, SC, Against the Neutrons, n, By a Boron Diaphragm, b, With Solid\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Hydrogen H2 as a Neutron Moderator to Increase the Neutron Absorption Cross Section of Boron, With the Neutrons Released From Deuterium Cylinder d. As noted earlier, in comets there is a large amount of deuterium readily available for mining. And we know comets also contain nitrogen and carbon. From this knowledge we can assume that very likely other light elements, such as boron, exist in relatively high concentrations in comets. Although the waste heat radiator remains a problem, it favors large explosions, because most of the waste heat accompanies the propellant into space. Droplet radiators, with the droplets slowly evaporating, are unlikely to work. Placing the neutron-absorbing radiators near the shock absorber, permitting them to get red-hot, and thermally insulating the rest of the spacecraft from the radiators may solve the problem. Delivery of a Gev Proton Beam Onto the Deuterium Fusion Explosive The spacecraft is inductively charged against an electron cloud surrounding the craft, and, with a magnetic field on the order of 10^4 G, easily reached by superconducting currents flowing in an azimuthal direction around the craft, is magnetically insulated against the electron cloud up to GeV potentials. The spacecraft and its surrounding electron cloud form a virtual diode with a GeV potential difference. To generate a proton beam, it is proposed to attach a miniature hydrogen-filled rocket chamber R to the deuterium bomb target at the position where the proton beam hits the fusion explosive (see Figure 2). A pulsed laser beam from the spacecraft is shot into the rocket chamber, vaporizing the hydrogen, which is emitted through the Laval nozzle as a supersonic plasma jet. If the nozzle is directed toward the spacecraft, a conducting bridge is established, rich in protons between the spacecraft and the fusion explosive. Protons in this bridge are then accelerated to GeV energies, hitting the deuterium explosive. Because of the spacecraft's large dimensions, the jet does not have to be aimed at the spacecraft very accurately. The original idea for the electrostatic energy storage on a magnetically insulated conductor was to charge up a levitated superconducting ring to GeV Figure 4. Superconducting Atomic Spaceship, Positively Charged to GeV Potential, With Azimuthal Currents and Magnetic Mirror M By Magnetic Field B. F fusion minibomb in position to be ignited by intense ion beam I, SB storage space for the bombs, BS bioshield for the payload PL, C coils pulsed by current drawn from induction ring IR. e electron flow neutralizing space charge of the fusion explosion plasma. 15 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY potentials, with the ring magnetically insulated against breakdown by the magnetic field of a large toroidal current flowing through the ring. It is here proposed to give the spacecraft a topologically equivalent shape, using the entire spacecraft for the electrostatic energy storage (see Figure 4). There toroidal currents flowing azimuthally around the outer shell of the spacecraft not only magnetically insulate the spacecraft against the surrounding electron cloud but also generate a magnetic mirror field that can reflect the plasma of the exploding fusion bomb. In addition, the expanding bomb plasma can induce large currents, and if these currents are directed to flow through magnetic field coils positioned on the upper side of the spacecraft, electrons from there can be emitted into space surrounding the spacecraft by thermionic emitters placed on the inner side of these coils, inductively charging (Reference 12) the spacecraft for subsequent proton beam ignition pulses. A small high-voltage generator driven by a small onboard fission reactor can make the initial charging, ejecting from the spacecraft negatively charged pellets. With the magnetic insulation criterion E < B (E,B, in electrostatic units, esu), where B is the magnetic field surrounding the spacecraft measured in gauss, then for B≅10^4G, E = 3x10^3 esu = 9x10^5 V/cm, one has E ~ (1/3)B, hence E < B. A spacecraft with the dimension l ~ 3x10^3 cm can then be charged to a potential El ~ 3x10^9 volts, with the stored electrostatic energy on the order of ε ~ (E^2/8π) l^3. For E = 3x10^3 esu and l = 3x10^3 cm, ε is on the order of 1 gigajoule. The discharge time is on the order of τ ~ l/c, where c = 3x10^10 cm/s is the velocity of light. In our example, we have τ ~ 10^-7 sec. For a proton energy pulse of 1 gigajoule, the beam power is 3x10^16 erg/s = 30 petawatts, large enough to ignite a pure deuterium explosion. Lifting of Large Payloads Into Earth Orbit To lift large payloads into Earth orbit remains the most difficult task. For a launch from the Earth's surface, magnetic insulation inside the Earth's atmosphere fails, and with it the proposed pure deuterium bomb configuration. A different technique is suggested here, one I had first proposed in a classified report dated January 1970 (Reference 9), declassified in July 2007, and thereafter published (Reference 17). A similar idea was proposed in a classified Los Alamos report, dated November 1970 (Reference 18) and declassified in July 1979. In both cases the idea is to use an expendable laser for the ignition of each nuclear explosion, with the laser material thereafter becoming part of the propellant. The Los Alamos scientists had proposed to use an infrared carbon dioxide (CO2) or chemical laser for this purpose, but this idea does not work, because the wavelength is too long and therefore unsuitable for inertial confinement fusion. I had suggested an ultraviolet argon ion laser instead. However, since argon ion lasers driven by an electric discharge have a small efficiency, I had suggested a quite different way of pumping it, illustrated in Figure 5. There the efficiency can be expected to be quite high. It was proposed to use a cylinder of solid argon, surrounding it by a thick cylindrical shell of high explosive. If simultaneously detonated from outside, a convergent cylindrical shockwave is launched into the argon. For the high explosive, one may choose hexogen with a detonation velocity of 8 km/s. In a convergent cylindrical shockwave, the temperature rises as r^-0.4, where r is the distance from axis 16 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY of the cylindrical argon rod. If the shock is launched from a distance of ~1 m onto an argon rod with a radius equal to 10 cm, the temperature reaches 90,000 K, just right to excite the upper laser level of argon. Following its heating to 90,000 K, the argon cylinder radially expands and cools, with the upper laser level frozen into the argon. This is similar to a gas dynamic laser, where the upper laser level is frozen in the gas during its isentropic expansion in a Laval nozzle. To reduce depopulation of the upper laser level during the expansion by superradiance, one may dope to the argon with a saturable absorber, acting as an antiknock additive. In this way, megajoule laser pulses can be released within 10 nanoseconds. A laser pulse from a small Q-switched argon ion laser placed in the spacecraft can then launch a photon avalanche in the argon rod, igniting a DT microexplosion. Figure 5. Argon Ion Laser Igniter, to Ignite a Staged DT →DD Fusion Explosion in a Mini-Teller-Ulam Configuration. A solid argon rod. HE cylindrical shell of high explosive, d detonators. Q Q-switched argon ion laser oscillator. Employing the Teller-Ulam configuration, by replacing the fission explosive with a DT microexplosion, one can then ignite a much larger DD explosion. As an alternative, one may generate a high current linear pinch discharge with a high-explosive-driven magnetic flux compression generator. If the current I is on the order of I = 10^7A, the laser can ignite a DT thermonuclear detonation wave propagating down the high current discharge channel, which in turn can ignite a much larger pure DD explosion. If the craft is launched from the Earth's surface, one has to take into account the mass of the air entrained in the fireball. The situation resembles a hot-gas-driven gun, albeit one of rather poor efficiency. There the velocity gained by the craft with N explosions, each setting off the energy E_b, is given by v = sqrt(2N E_b / M_0) (27) 17 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY For E_b = 5x10^19 erg, M_0 = 10^9 g, and setting for v = 10 km/s = 10^6 cm/s the escape velocity from Earth, one finds that N ≥ 10. Assuming an efficiency of 10 percent, about 100 1-kiloton explosions would therefore be needed. Neutron Entrapment in an Autocatalytic Thermonuclear Detonation Wave – a Means to Increase the Specific Impulse and to Solve the Large Radiator Problem The principal reason why neutrons released by thermonuclear reactions pose such a serious problem is that they cannot be repelled from the spacecraft by a magnetic field. However, choosing a neutron-absorbing target as shown in Figure 3, one can reduce the flux of neutrons hitting the spacecraft. Besides inflicting material damage on the spacecraft, the neutrons release heat that must be removed by a very large radiator. The idea of the autocatalytic thermonuclear detonation wave (Reference 13) presents a solution, which if feasible would very much reduce the magnitude of this problem. For its implementation, it requires very large bremsstrahlung flux densities in the burn zone behind the thermonuclear detonation front. Such large bremsstrahlung flux densities will occur in deuterium detonation burn, at the highest temperature for all the thermonuclear reactions. In an autocatalytic thermonuclear detonation, explained in Figure 6, soft X-rays generated through the burn of the thermonuclear plasma behind the detonation front compress the still unburned thermonuclear fuel ahead of the front. The increase in the fuel density, both in the Teller-Ulam configuration and in the autocatalytic thermonuclear detonation wave, is of crucial importance, with the reaction rate proportional to the square of the density. Figure 6. Autocatalytic Thermonuclear Detonation Using a Soft X-ray Precursor From the Burn Zone BZ to Precompress the Thermonuclear Fuel TF Ahead of the Detonation Front DF. The soft x-rays travel through the gap G between the tamp T and the liner L. 18 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY From the burning plasma behind the detonation front, energy flows into all spatial directions. Part is by bremsstrahlung and part by electronic heat conduction. Roughly half of the energy flows into the liner, one-quarter into the still unburned fuel ahead of the wave, and one-quarter into the opposite direction. The bremsstrahlung emission rate is given by ε_r = 1.42x10^-27 n^2 √T [erg/cm3s] (28) For T = 10^9 K, one has ε_r ≈ 3.2x10^-23 n^2 [erg/cm3s]. The flux of the bremsstrahlung that goes into the liner is ε_r r/2, where r is the radius of the deuterium rod just behind the detonation front. About one-half of this radiation runs ahead of the detonation front, where it precompresses the deuterium. Its intensity is: ε_r r / 4 ≈ 10^-23 n^2 r [erg/cm2s] (29) with nr ≈ 3x10^24 cm^-2 (corresponding ρr ≈ 10 g/cm2), one has ε_r r / 4 ≈ 30n [erg/cm2s] (30) We are aiming at a density where the neutrons are absorbed in the burning plasma cylinder of radius r. If the neutron-deuteron collision cross section is σ, then the neutron path length λn must be smaller than r: λ_n = 1/(nσ) ≤ r (31) or nr ≥ 1/σ (32) One typically has σ ≈ 10^-24 cm2, hence nr ≥ 10^24 cm2 (33) If r = 0.01 cm, then n ≥ 10^26 cm^-3 = 5x10^3 n_o, where n_o = 5x10^22 cm^-3, the particle number density of liquid deuterium. With n=10^26 cm^-3, one finds that ε_r r/4 ≈ 3x10^27 erg/cm2s. The flux on a deuterium tube of radius r and length z, where for the burn zone r ≈ z, one obtains onto its surface (ε_r/4)2πrz ≈ 10^24 erg/s = 10^17 watts 19 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n= 100 petawatts, certainly powerful enough to compress the deuterium to more than thousandfold density.\n\nWith the entrapment of the neutrons comes an increase of the specific impulse. With 38 percent of the energy going into the kinetic energy of the neutrons and 62 percent into charged fusion products, the specific impulse is increased by the factor √(1+38/62) = √(10/6.2) = 1.275. This increases the maximum exhaust velocity from v =1.5×10^9 cm/s to v =1.9×10^9 cm/s = 0.063c.\n\nIn the course of the thermalization in the supercompressed plasma, the neutron absorption cross section is greatly increased, both in the liner and tamp, with the liner also compressed to high densities. If the liner and tamp are made from boron, which has a large neutron-absorption cross section, the spacecraft is heated only by a greatly reduced thermal neutron flux, and only this much smaller amount of heat must be removed by a radiator.\n\nTesting the Deuterium Microdetonation Concept\n\nFor the Orion bomb propulsion concept, testing was a serious problem. If tested on the Earth, it would have resulted in the large fallout of fission products. These tests would have been needed to study the survival of the pusher plate under the repeated exposure of kiloton fission explosions (or fusion-boosted explosions). Of course, the tests could have been carried out in space, but this would have been extremely expensive, because it would have required launch by chemical rockets of the huge Orion spaceship into space. Fortunately, this is not necessary for the deuterium microdetonation propulsion concept because there exists an alternative way to generate a 10^7-ampere GeV proton beam: replacing the huge spaceship used as a large capacitor to be charged up to gigavolt potentials with a \"Super Marx generator\" (Reference 16). This Super Marx generator can achieve on Earth what the huge spaceship can achieve in space: the generation of gigavolt 10^7-ampere proton beams. Since the realization of pure deuterium beams would obviously be a breakthrough in fusion, the expenditure for the development of a Super Marx generator would be well justified.\n\nUp until now nuclear fusion by inertial confinement has been achieved only using large fission explosives as a means (driver) for ignition. From this experience we know that the ignition is easy with sufficiently large driver energies, difficult to duplicate with lasers or electric pulse power by an ordinary Marx generator. The problem therefore is not the configuration of the thermonuclear explosive but the driver, be it for the ignition of pure deuterium (D) as in the Mike Test or for the ignition of deuterium-tritium (DT) as in the Centurion-Halite experiment, because for sufficiently large driver energies the target configuration is of secondary importance.\n\nSubstantially larger driver energies can be reached with the \"Super Marx generator.\" It can be viewed as a two-stage Marx generator, where a bank of ordinary Marx generators assumes the role of a first stage. If the goal is the much more difficult ignition of a pure deuterium microexplosion, the Super Marx generator must in addition deliver a much larger amount of energy (compared with that of the most powerful lasers) and also generate a magnetic field in the thermonuclear target that is strong\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nenough to entrap the charged DD fusion products within the target. Only then is the condition for a propagating thermonuclear burn fulfilled.\n\nFigure 7. Ordinary Marx Generator. In an \"ordinary\" Marx generator n capacitors C charged up to the voltage v, and are over spark gaps switched into series, adding up their voltages to the voltage V = nv.\n\nFigure 8. Super Marx Generator. In a Super Marx generator, N Marx generators charge up N fast capacitors FC to the voltage V, which switched into series add up their voltages to the voltage NV.\n\nFigure 9. Artist's Conception of a 1.5-km-Long Super Marx Generator. Composed of 100 x 15-meter-long high-voltage capacitors, each designed as a magnetically insulated coaxial transmission line. The coaxial capacitors/ transmission lines are placed inside a high-vacuum vessel. Each capacitor/transmission line is charged up by two conventional Marx generators symmetrically to 10 MV (± 5 MV). After charge-up is completed, the Marx generators are electrically decoupled from the capacitors/transmission lines. The individual capacitors/transmission lines are subsequently connected in series via spark gap switches (that is, the \"Super Marx\" generator), producing a potential of 1 GV.\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 7 shows the circuit of an ordinary Marx generator, and Figure 8 that of a Super Marx. An artist's view of a mile-long Super Marx generator, charged up by about 100 ordinary Marx generators and connected to the chamber in which the thermonuclear target is placed, is shown in Figures 9–11.\n\nFigure 10. Detailed View of a Section of the Super Marx Generator. Two conventional Marx banks charge up one coaxial capacitor/transmission line element to 10 MV.\n\nFigure 11. Injection of GeV – 10 MA Proton Beam. Drawn From Super Marx generator made up of magnetically insulated coaxial capacitors into chamber with cylindrical deuterium target.\n\nAs shown in Figure 12, the Super Marx is made up of a chain of co-axial capacitors with a dielectric that has to withstand the potential difference of 10^7 volts between the inner and outer conductor.\n\nFigure 12. Showing a Few Elements of the Super Marx Generator\n\nFollowing their charging up of the Super Marx generator, the Marx generators are disconnected from the Super Marx. If the capacitors of the Super Marx can hold their charge long enough, this can be done by mechanical switches.\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTo erect the Super Marx, its capacitors C are switched into series by circular spark gap switches S. The capacitors of the Super Marx are magnetically levitated inside an evacuated tunnel and magnetically insulated against the wall of the tunnel by an axial magnetic field B, generated by superconducting external magnetic field coils M. The magnetic insulation criterion requires that B > E, where B is measured in gauss and E in electrostatic cgs units. If B=3×10^4 G, for example, magnetic insulation is possible up to E=3×10^4 esu ≈ 10^7 V/cm, at the limit of electron field emission. To withstand a voltage of 10^9 volts between the outer positively charged surface of the capacitors in series and the tunnel wall then requires a distance somewhat greater than 1 meter.\n\nThe capacitance of one co-axial capacitor with the inner and outer radius R0 and R1 of length l and filled with a dielectric of dielectric constant ε is\n\nC = ε l / (2 ln(R1/R0)) [cm] (34)\n\nAssuming a breakdown strength of the dielectric larger than 3×10^4 V/cm and a potential difference of 10^7 volts between the inner and outer conductor, the smallest distance of separation d between both conductors has to be d = R1 – R0 ≅ 3×10^2 cm. If, for example, l =1.6×10^3 cm, R1 = l/2 = 8×10^2 cm, and ε ≅ 10, one finds that C ≅ 2×10^4 cm. For these numbers, the energy e stored in the capacitor (V =10^7 volts ≅ 3×10^4 esu) is\n\ne = (1/2) CV^2 ≅ 10^13 erg (35)\n\nwhich for the 100 capacitors of the Super Marx add up to e ~ 10^15 erg. About 10 times more energy can be stored if the radius of the capacitor is about 3 times larger, if there is a larger dielectric constant, or if a combination of these conditions exists. This means that for about 100 capacitors, energy 10^16 erg = 1 GJ can be stored in the mile-long Super Marx.\n\nAnother idea, proposed by Fuelling (Reference 19), is to place the ordinary Marx generators of the first stage inside the coaxial capacitors of the Super Marx. The advantage of this configuration is that it does not require disconnection of the Marx generators from the capacitors of the Super Marx prior to its firing. Because the charging and discharging of the Super Marx can be done very fast, one can use compact water capacitors where ε ≅ 80. And instead of magnetic insulation of the capacitors of the Super Marx against the outer wall, one can perhaps use transformer oil for the insulation. Giving each inner segment of the Super Marx enough buoyancy, for example by adding air chambers, these segments can be suspended in the transformer oil. There the outer radius of the co-axial capacitors is much larger. This permits storage of gigajoule energies in the Super Marx.\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAs shown in Figure 13, the last capacitor of the Super Marx is a superconducting ring with a large toroidal current. There the large azimuthal magnetic field set up by the toroidal current magnetically insulates the ring against breakdown to the wall. The load is the deuterium target shown in Figure 13. It consists of a solid deuterium rod covered with a thin ablator placed inside a cylindrical hohlraum. To the left of the hohlraum and the deuterium rod is a mini-rocket chamber filled with solid hydrogen.\n\nThe method of discharging the energy from the Blumlein transmission line to the target then goes as follows (see Figure 13):\n\n• A short laser pulse is projected into the mini-rocket chamber through a hole of an electrode at the center of the ring.\n\n• By heating the hydrogen in the mini-rocket chamber to a high temperature, a supersonic hydrogen jet is emitted through the Laval nozzle toward the electrode at the center of the ring, forming a bridge to the target.\n\n• A second laser pulse then traces out an ionization trail inside the hydrogen jet, facilitating an electric discharge to the target, with the space charge neutralizing plasma pinching the proton beam down to a small diameter.\n\nFigure 13. The Superconducting Toroidal Capacitor (a) and Its Discharge Onto the Target (b)\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe Super Marx generator therefore can accomplish on Earth what the spacecraft acting as a large capacitor can do in space.\n\nThe testing of an Argon ion laser driven by high explosives can, of course, be done on Earth, and the same applies to the conjectured superexplosives.\n\nConclusion\n\nIf large-scale manned spaceflight has any future, a high-specific-impulse, high-thrust propulsion system is needed. The only known propulsion concept with this property is nuclear bomb propulsion. However, since large-yield nuclear explosions are for obvious reasons undesirable, the nuclear explosions should be comparatively small. But because of what Freeman Dyson described as the \"tyranny of the critical mass,\" small fission bombs or fission-triggered fusion bombs become extravagant, with only a fraction of the nuclear material consumed.1\n\nIn the original Orion bomb propulsion concept, the propulsive power was through the ablation of a pusher plate. There the energy is delivered to the pusher plate by the black-body radiation of the exploding bomb. The propulsion by non-fission-triggered fusion bombs not only has the advantage that it is not subject to the \"tyranny of the critical mass,\" but the propulsive power is there delivered by the kinetic energy of the expanding hot plasma fireball repelled from the spacecraft by a magnetic mirror. This is particularly true for a pure deuterium bomb, where, compared with DT, more energy is released into charged fusion products (in a DT bomb, 80 percent of the energy goes into neutrons).\n\nWhereas in a fission explosion most of the energy is lost into space by the undirected black-body radiation, much more propulsive energy can be drawn from the plasma of a pure deuterium fusion bomb explosion, in conjunction with a magnetic mirror.\n\nManned space flight requires lifting large masses into Earth orbit, where they are assembled into a large spacecraft. While this can be done with chemical rockets, it would be much more economical if it could be done with a chain of small nuclear explosions. Without radioactive fallout, this can be done with a chain of laser-ignited fusion bombs, with one laser for each bomb, where the lasers become part of the exhaust. Ignition can be done not by infrared chemical or CO2 lasers, as was suggested by the Los Alamos team (Reference 18), but rather by an ultraviolet laser driven by high explosives, as suggested by the author (Reference 9).\n\nLooking to the future, using deuterium—widely available on most planets of the solar system and in the Oort cloud outside the solar system—as the nuclear rocket fuel would make manned space flight to the Oort cloud possible, at a distance at about one-tenth of one light year.\n\n1 The same is true for nuclear fission gas core rocket reactors, where much of the unburned fission fuel is lost in the exhaust.\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix: Conjectured Metastable Superexplosives Formed Under High Pressure for Thermonuclear Ignition\n\nUnder normal pressure, the distance of separation between two atoms in condensed matter is typically on the order of 10-8 cm, with the distance between molecules formed by the chemical binding of atoms of the same order of magnitude. As illustrated schematically in Figure 14, the electrons of the outer electron shells of two atoms undergoing a chemical binding form a \"bridge\" between the reacting atoms. The formation of the bridge is accompanied in a lowering of the electric potential well for the outer-shell electrons of the two reacting atoms, with the electrons feeling the attractive force of both atomic nuclei. Because of the lowering of the potential well, the electrons undergo under the emission of electronvolt (eV) photons a transition into lower energy molecular orbits. At higher pressures, bridges between the next inner shells are formed under the emission of soft X-rays.\n\nGoing to still higher pressures, a situation can arise as shown in Figure 15, with the building of electron bridges between shells inside shells.\n\n[Figure 14 and Figure 15 diagrams]\n\nFigure 14. Explosives. In an ordinary explosive, the outer-shell electrons of the reacting atoms form \"eV\" molecules accompanied by the release of heat through eV photons. In a superexplosive, the outer-shell electrons \"melt\" into a common outer shell with inner electron shells forming \"keV\" molecules accompanied by the release of X-ray keV photons.\n\nFigure 15. With Increasing Pressure, Electron Bridges are Formed Between Shells Inside Shells Melting into Common Shells\n\nThere the explosive power would be even larger. Now consider a situation where the condensed state of many closely spaced atoms is put under high pressure making the distance of separation between the atoms much smaller, and where the electrons from the outer shells coalesce into one shell surrounding both nuclei, with the electrons from inner shells forming a bridge. Because there the change in the potential energy is much larger, the change in the electron energy levels is also much larger, potentially on the order of keV. There then a very powerful explosive is formed, releasing its energy in a\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nburst of keV X-rays. This powerful explosive is likely to be very unstable, but it can be produced by the sudden application of a high pressure at just the moment when it is needed. Because an intense burst of X-rays is needed for the ignition of a thermonuclear microexplosion, it could be used as an alternative to the argon ion laser for the ignition of a pure fusion bomb. The energy of an electron in the ground state of a nucleus with the charge Ze is\n\nE1 = −13.6 Z2 [eV] (36)\n\nWith the inclusion of all the Z electrons surrounding the nucleus of charge Ze, the energy is\n\nE1* ≈ −13.6 Z2.42 [eV] (37)\n\nwith the outer electrons less strongly bound to the nucleus.\n\nNow, assume that two nuclei are so strongly pushed together that they act like one nucleus with the charge 2Ze onto the 2Z electrons surrounding the 2Ze charge. In this case, the energy for the innermost electron is\n\nE2 = −13.6 (2Z)2 [eV] (38)\n\nOr if the outer electrons are taken into account,\n\nE2* ≈ −13.6 (2Z)2.42 [eV] (39)\n\nFor the difference, one obtains\n\nδE = E1* − E2* = 13.6Z2.42 (22.42 −1) ≈ 58.5Z2.42 [eV] (40)\n\nUsing the example Z = 10, which is a neon nucleus, one obtains δE ≈15 keV. Of course, it would require a very high pressure to push two neon atoms that close to each other, but this example shows it is plausible that smaller pressures exerted on heavier nuclei with many more electrons may result in a substantial lowering of the potential well for their electrons.\n\nA pressure of p ≈ 100 megabars (Mb) = 1014 dyn/cm2 can be reached with existing technology in sufficiently large volumes, with at least three possibilities:\n\n• Bombardment of a solid target with an intense relativistic electron or ion beam.\n\n• Hypervelocity impact.\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Bombardment of a solid target with beams or by hypervelocity impact, followed by a convergent shock wave.\n\nBOMBARDMENT OF A SOLID TARGET WITH AN INTENSE RELATIVISTIC ELECTRON OR ION BEAM\n\nThis possibility was considered by Kidder (Reference 20), who computes a pressure of 50 Mb, if an iron plate is bombarded with a 1-MJ – 10-MeV – 10^6 A relativistic electron beam, focused down to an area of 0.1 cm2. Accordingly, a 2-MJ beam would produce 100 Mb. Instead of an intense relativistic electron beam, one may use an intense ion beam. It can be produced by the same high-voltage technique, replacing the electron beam diode by a magnetically insulated diode (Reference 21).\n\nUsing intense ion beams has the additional benefit that the stopping of the ions in a target is determined by a Bragg curve, generating the maximum pressure inside the target, not on its surface.\n\nHYPERVELOCITY IMPACT\n\nA projectile with the density ρ ≈ 20 g/cm3 accelerated to a velocity v = 30 km/s would, upon impact, produce a pressure of p ≈ 100 Mb. The acceleration of the projectile to these velocities can be done by a magnetic traveling wave accelerator.\n\nBOMBARDMENT OF A SOLID TARGET WITH BEAMS OR BY HYPERVELOCITY IMPACT, FOLLOWED BY A CONVERGENT SHOCK WAVE\n\nIf, upon impact of either a particle beam or a projectile, the pressure is less than 100 Mb (for example, only on the order of 10 Mb) but is acting over a larger area, a tenfold increase in the pressure over a smaller area is possible by launching a convergent shock wave from the larger area on the surface of the target onto a smaller area inside. According to Guderley, the rise in pressure in a convergent spherical shock wave goes as r -0.9, which means 100 Mb could be reached by a tenfold reduction in the radius of the convergent shock wave.\n\nWhile it is difficult to reach 30 km/s with a traveling magnetic wave accelerator, it is easy to reach a velocity of 10 km/s with a two-stage light gas gun.\n\nWe assume an equation of state of the form p/p0 = (n/n0)^γ. For a pressure of 100 Mb = 1014 dyn/cm2, we may set γ= 3 and p0 = 1011 dyn/cm2, p0 being the Fermi pressure of a solid at the atomic number density n0, with n being the atomic number density at the elevated pressure p > p0. With d = n-1/3, where d is the lattice constant, one has\n\nd/d0 = (p/p0)^(-1/9) (41)\n\nSuch a lowering of the inneratomic distance is sufficient for the formation of molecular states.\n\n28\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCalculations done by Muller, Rafelski, and Greiner (Reference 22) show that for molecular states 35Br- 35Br, 53I- 79Au, and 92U- 92U, a twofold lowering of the distance of separation leads to a lowering of the electron orbit energy eigenvalues by ~ 0.35 keV and 1.4 keV, respectively. At a pressure of 100 Mb = 1014 dyn/cm2 where d/d0 ≅ 1/2, the result of these calculations can be summarized by (δE in keV)\n\nlog δE ≅ 1.3 x10-2 Z - 1.4 (42)\n\nreplacing equation (40), where Z is here the sum of the nuclear charge for both components of the molecule formed under the high pressure.\n\nThe effect the pressure has on the change in these quasi-molecular configurations is illustrated in Figure 16, showing a p - d (pressure-lattice distance) diagram. This diagram illustrates how the molecular state is reached during the compression along the adiabat a at the distance d = dc where the pressure attains the critical value p = pc. In passing over this pressure, the electrons fall into the potential well of the two-center molecule, releasing their potential energy as a burst of X-rays. Following its decompression, the molecule disintegrates along the lower adiabat b.\n\nIf the conjectured superexplosive consists of just one element, as in the case of the 35Br - 35Br reaction or the 92U - 92U reaction, no special preparation for the superexplosive is needed. But as the example of Al-FeO thermite reaction shows, reactions with different atoms can release a much larger amount of energy compared with other chemical reactions. For the conjectured superexplosives, this means they have to be prepared as homogeneous mixtures of nano-particle powders, bringing the reacting atoms as close together as possible.\n\nFor the ignition of a thermonuclear reaction, one may consider the following scenario illustrated in Figure 17. A convergent shock wave launched at the radius R = R0 into a spherical shell of outer and inner radius R0, R1 reaches near the radius R = R1 at a pressure of 100 Mb. After the inward-moving convergent shock wave has reached the radius R = R1, an outward-moving rarefaction wave is launched from the same radius R = R1, from which an intense burst of X-rays is emitted. One can then place a thermonuclear DT target inside the cavity of the radius R = R1, with the target bombarded, imploded, and ignited by the X-ray pulse. The ignited DT can there serve as a \"hot spot\" for the ignition of deuterium.\n\n29\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 17. Inertial Confinement Fast-Ignition Configuration\n\nReferences\n\n[1] F. Winterberg, Phys. Rev. 174, 212 (1968).\n\n[2] F. Winterberg, Raumfahrtforschung 15, 208-217 (1971).\n\n[3] Project Daedalus, A. Bond, A.R.Martin et al., J. British Interplanetary Society, Supplement, 1978.\n\n[4] R. Lewis, K. Meyer, G. Smith, S. Howe,\nhttp://www.engr.psu.edu/antimatter/papers/AIMStar_99.pdf.\n\n[5] G. Dyson, Project Orion, The True story of The Atomic Spaceship, Henry and Holt Company, New York, 2002.\n\n[6] H. Oberth, Die Rakete zu den Planetenräumen, R. Oldenbourg, Berlin 1923.\n\n[7] K. Clusius and K. Starke, Z. Naturforsch. 4a, 549 (1949).\n\n[8] F. Winterberg, J. Fusion Energy 2, 377 (1982).\n\n30\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"bfda7feb0d46c30a","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[9] F. Winterberg, \"Can a Laser Beam ignite a Hydrogen Bomb?\", United States Atomic Energy Commission, classified January 27, 1970, declassified, July 11, 2007, S-RD-1 (NP – 18252).\n\n[10] F. Winterberg, J. Fusion Energy, DOI 10.1007/s10894-008-9143-4.\n\n[11] Y.K. Bae, Y.Y Chu, L. Friedman Phys. Rev. 54, R1742 (1995).\n\n[12] G.S. Janes, R.H. Levy, H.A. Bethe and B.T. Feld, Phys. Rev. 145, 925 (1966).\n\n[13] F. Winterberg, Atomkernenergie, 39, 265 (1981).\n\n[14] O. Buneman, Phys. Rev. 115, 503 (1959).\n\n[15] L. Davis, R. Lüst and A. Schlüter Z. Naturforsch. 13a, 916 (1958).\n\n[16] F. Winterberg, J. Fusion Energy, DOI 10.1007/s10894-008-9189-3.\n\n[17] F. Winterberg, Laser and Particle Beams, 26, 127 (2008).\n\n[18] J.D. Balcomb et al. \"Nuclear Pulse Space Propulsion System,\" Los Alamos scientific Laboratory, classified November 1970, declassified July 10, 1979, LA – 4541 – MS.\n\n[19] S. Fuelling, private communication.\n\n[20] R. Kidder in the Proceedings \"Physics of High Energy Density\", Academic Press, New York 1971.\n\n[21] F. Winterberg, in the same Proceeding p. 398.\n\n[22] B. Müller, J. Rafelski, W. Greiner, Phys. Lett. 47B(1), 5(1973).\n\n31\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c1d9d7eaa25efb22","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:12:16"} {"doc_id":"c2cbb77c72f639eb","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nMisrep undefined-8584059\n\nNarrative\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 311901ZMAR23 - [1.4a] ([1.4a] FLT), A 2-SHIP OF F-16CM, TOOK OFF FROM PRINCE SULTAN AIR BASE (OEPS) ISO OPERATION INHERENT RESOLVE. [1.4a] FLT WAS FRAGGED TO CONDUCT DCA IN THE ESSA (2100-0000). MISSION WAS FLOWN AS FRAGGED.\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 2007Z-[1.4a] FLT ENTERED IZ AIRSPACE. NFTR.\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 2058Z - [1.4a] FLT ENTERED SY AIRSPACE AND CHECKED ONSTA W/ KINGPIN TO CONDUCT DCA IN THE ESSA.\n\n(S//NF) 2302Z - [1.4a] FLT OBSERVED MULTIPLE POSS UAPS. (SEE UAP)\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0000Z - [1.4a] FLT CHECKED OFFSTA W/ KINGPIN AND PROCEEDED TO RTB (OEPS). NSTR.\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0046Z - [1.4a] FLT EXITED IZ AIRSPACE.\n\n(S//REL TO USA, FVEY) 0148Z - [1.4a] FLT LANDED AT OEPS W/ ESD AT 0215Z. NFTR.//\n\n(S//RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: NOFORN\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MS\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20480401\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 001\n\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"c2cbb77c72f639eb","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFCENT\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 77 EFS\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): MT\n• Mission Type: DCA\n• ATO Mission Number: [1.4a]\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: 1LT\n• Full Name: [FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: 77 EFS\n• Wing: 378 AEW\n• Phone Number: [FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: SSgt\n• Full Name: [FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: 378 AEW\n• Phone Number: [FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 002\n\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"c2cbb77c72f639eb","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: TSgt\n• Full Name: [FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Email: [3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Radar Name or Destination: [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: 8070 / MMC 7.3\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: ALR-56M\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: 102 / SY0730\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator: ALQ-184\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data: C01856\n• CMD Name or Designator: ALQ-213\n• Chaff Designator: RR-180\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: 60\n• Flare Designator: MJU-53, MJU-66\n• Num Flares: 45\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator: ALE-50\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 003\n\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"c2cbb77c72f639eb","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: MTP AA51\n• Num Towed Decoys: 2\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: AIM-120\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: 2\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: AIM-9X\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: 2\n• Gun Name or Designator: M61A1\n• Num Gun Rounds: 510\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: [1.4a]\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: SNIPER LDP\n• Additional Avionics: HTS-P R7.85\n• Data Link: LINK 16\n• Gentext:\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Radar Name or Destination: [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: 8070 / MMC 7.3\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: ALR-56M\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: 102 / SY0730\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator: ALQ-184\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data: C01856\n• CMD Name or Designator: ALQ-213\n• Chaff Designator: RR-180\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: 60\n• Flare Designator: MJU-53, MJU-66\n• Num Flares: 45\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator: ALE-50\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: MTP AA51\n• Num Towed Decoys: 2\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: AIM-120\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: 2\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: AIM-9X\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: 2\n• Gun Name or Designator: M61A1\n• Num Gun Rounds: 510\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: [1.4a]\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: SNIPER LDP\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 004\n\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"c2cbb77c72f639eb","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\n• Additional Avionics: HTS-P R7.85\n• Data Link: LINK 16\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• Number of Aircraft: 2\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): [1.4a, 1.4g]\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OEPS\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 311901:00ZMAR23\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): 6266\n• Gentext/Additional Details: (U) NSTR.\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OEPS\n• Last Land Time: 010148:00ZAPR23\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 010215:00ZAPR23\n• Total Mission Time: 6 hours 47 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details: (U) NSTR.\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 312058:00ZMAR23\n• Callsign: [1.4a]\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): ESSA\n• Mission Type: DCA\n• JTAC Callsign: KINGPIN\n• Gentext/Additional Details: (U) NSTR.\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 010000:00ZAPR23\n• Total Time On Station: 3 hours 2 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//NOFORN\n\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 005\n\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"c2cbb77c72f639eb","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//NOFORN\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 8 October 2025\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 312302:05ZMAR23\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Tail Number: 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 37SGA13 1.4a 72 1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: FL265\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: 293\n• Friendly Aircraft State: N/A\n• Training Range (If applicable):\n• Operational Range: NE OF RLZ\n• UAP Physical State:\n• Number of UAP Sighted: POSS 10X-20X\n• UAP Signatures: No\n• UAP RF Frequency:\n• UAP RF Duration:\n• UAP Effects on Persons: (U) NONE.\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE): FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• UAP First Seen Location: DATA MASKED\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured): FL600+\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): (S//NF) STARTING AT 2302:05Z 1.4a FLT OBSERVED SEVERAL BRIGHT OBJECTS MANUEVERING QUICKLY WEST TO EAST NE OF RLZ. 1.4a FLT WOULD OBTAIN POSS UAP ON TARGETING POD (TV MODE) FOR APPROX 20S BEFORE OBJECT WOULD BECOME DIM AND DISAPPEAR FROM TARGETING POD. NONE OF THE OBJECTS WERE SEEN IN ANY FORMATIONS AS PREVIOUSLY SEEN IN PRIOR SORTIES. NFTR.\n\nANALYST COMMENT: 1.4a FLT COMPARED TARGETING POD BETWEEN POSS UAP AND STAR. RESULTS WERE DIFFERENT.\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//NOFORN\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 006\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"c466e1e0b4220c68","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6/1/22, 11:23 AM\nRecord Preview\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20 March 2026\nDocument View XML\n[REDACTED]\nIIR - Intelligence Information Report\nPrint Close\nCore Metadata\nIIR NUMBER: 3024(i)\nCOLLECTOR\nCOLLECTOR NAME COLLECTOR NUMBER\nAFSOC A2OX - MOTHERSHIP 6600\nOVERALL CLASSIFICATION: [REDACTED]\nPRIMARY KEY 50005165458\nVERSION NUMBER 1\nORIGINATING SYSTEM NAME 1.4(c)\nORIGINATING SYSTEM ID\nLAST MODIFICATION SYSTEM:\nCREATE DATE 2022-04-27T13:29:17.651Z\nLAST CHANGE DATE 2022-04-27T13:18:21.087040000+00:00\nMESSAGE FROM ADDRESS: 1.4(c) WASHINGTON DC//AFSOC HURLBURT FLD FL/AFSOC//\nDTG 271329ZAPR22\nDATE 2022-04-27Z\nTITLE: [REDACTED] 1.4c Multiple Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon Observed Maneuvering Erratically and In Formation Over Gulf of Oman During AC-130 Gunship Live Fire Training on 8 September 2021 - Attachment\nSUMMARY: [REDACTED] On 8 September 2021 a USSOF AC-130 Gunship observed approximately 25 instances of UAPs while conducting a live fire exercise in the Gulf of Oman. The UAPs were observed as cold orbs flying at lower altitudes between 250 to 1300 MPH in different formations as well as maneuvering aggressively. UAPs also appeared to react to the aircraft firing its main cannon.\nTARGET: Portion Mark: U Country: OM Non State Entity:\nTOPICS: Portion Mark: U NIPF FMCC TECH\nIFC/ICC IFC150B IFC220L IFC150A\nKEYWORD\nNHCD ID:\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0049 to MDR 26-0061 Approved for Release to AARO 03/26/26 000001\n(b)(6)\n1/7"} {"doc_id":"c466e1e0b4220c68","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IIR DOI: 2021-09-08Z\nREQUIREMENT NUMBER: NTRI200AJ002421\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20 March 2026\nSOURCE: Classification Source Identifier Source Description Context Statement\n(U/ [REDACTED] 1.4c 1.4(c),130b (S//NF) Source had direct access to the reported information via the conduct of official duties. Source was aware information would be provided to the US government.\nMESSAGE: [REDACTED] INITIAL OBSERVATION. On 8 September 2021 a United States Special Operations Forces (USSOF) AC-130 Gunship was conducting live fire training the Gulf of Oman in the vicinity of (IVO) //MGRS: 40REN68 1.4a 13 1.4a// during period of darkness. The AC-130 first observed Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAPs) when the aircraft dropped a water-activated flare to use as a mock target. The AC-130 entered an orbit around the flare and the Combat Systems Officer (CSO) conducted collateral scans with the aircraft's Electro Optical/Infrared (EO/IR) sensor IVO the flare. When the CSO slewed the sensor in IR mode back to the flare they observed two approximately four-foot diameter cold orbs between 0 to 20 feet above the surface of the water stationary over the flare for approximately 15 seconds. After those 15 seconds passed, the CSO pulled the trigger firing the aircraft's 105mm cannon. Immediately upon pulling the trigger, during the slight delay between trigger pull and the cannon's recoil, the CSO observed the pair of UAPs rapidly fly away from the flare and out of the sensor feed without changing altitude.\n[REDACTED] SUBSEQUENT OBSERVATIONS. The AC-130 crew observed approximately 25 instances of UAPs viewed in IR as cold orbs in both white-is-hot and black-is-hot mode during the sortie. Two UAPs were observed flying in a loose but coordinated formation increasing and decreasing altitude like a wave while maneuvering around, over, and under each other in a manner similar to how dolphins playfully swim in a pod. (SOURCE COMMENT: They [The UAPs] knew they were flying together). UAPs were also separately observed flying in a formation of three and separately observed flying erratically and maneuvering aggressively. The attached videos depict a smoothly slewing EO/IR sensor or a stationary EO/IR sensor with multiple UAPs darting around the sensor feed. The AC-130's crew attempted to save entirety of the EO/IR footage of the UAP observations but the aircraft's Digital Video Recorder (DVR) inexplicably failed and the video data became corrupted.\n[REDACTED] ESTIMATED SPEED. The CSO calculated the UAP's approximate speeds using the aircraft's TACTOOL and clocked their maximum observed maneuvering speed at 1300 miles per hour (MPH) and the UAPs minimum observed maneuvering speed at 250 MPH. No means of propulsion were observed.\nCOMMENT: [REDACTED] 1.4c is the tag line for AFSOC personnel conducting 1.4c debriefing. (U/ [REDACTED] This IIR was coordinated with USDAO Muscat and SOCCENT J2X without comment. (U) Source A is available for recontact about information in this report. (U/ [REDACTED] Geographic coordinates were derived from AC-130 sensor feed GPS data. (U [REDACTED] requests concerning foreign disclosure and release of the information contained in this report should be sent to the AFSOC FDO at 3.5c, (b)(6) Include the justification, serial number, subject line of the report and the proposed request in the initial correspondence. (U/ [REDACTED] IIR Evaluations and Source Directed Requirements regarding this report are highly encouraged to assist in assessing collection efforts and requirements. Evaluations and Source Directed Requirements can be created using 1.4(c) 3.5c, (b)(6) Any questions concerning this report should be\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0049 to MDR 26-0061 Approved for Release to AARO 03/26/26 000002\n3.5c, (b)(6)\n2/7"} {"doc_id":"c466e1e0b4220c68","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20 March 2026\ndirected to 3.5c, (b)(6) Please reference IIR number along with any final product or brief the IIR information was utilized.\nFULL MESSAGE TEXT:\nR 271329Z APR 22\nFM 1.4(c) WASHINGTON DC//AFSOC HURLBURT FLD FL/AFSOC//\nTO AFIAA AMHS BOLLING AFB DC\nAFSOC HURLBURT FLD FL\nAMC INTEL CEN SCOTT AFB IL\nAMEMBASSY MUSCAT\nCDR AOG FT GEORGE G MEADE MD\nCDR FORSCOM DCS G2 ANALYSIS DIV FT BRAGG NC\nCDR FORSCOM DCS G2 OPS DIV FT BRAGG NC\nCDR JSOC FT BRAGG NC\nCDR SOTF FT BRAGG NC\nCDR USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL\nCDR USSOCOM MACDILL AFB FL\nCDR USTRANSCOM INTEL CELL SCOTT AFB IL\nCDRINSCOM AGO FT GEORGE G MEADE MD\nCDRINSCOM FT BELVOIR VA\nCDRINSCOMIOC FT BELVOIR VA\nCDRNGIC CHARLOTTESVILLE VA\n6.2(d) WASHINGTON DC\nCJCS NMCC WASHINGTON DC\nCJSOTF\nCMO513THMIBDE FT GORDON GA\nCNO WASHINGTON DC\nCOMJSOC FT BRAGG NC\nCOMSOCCENT INTEL MACDILL AFB FL\nCOMSOCCENT J2 MACDILL AFB FL\nCOMSOCCENT J3 MACDILL AFB FL\nCOMSOCCENT J5 MACDILL AFB FL\nCOMSOCCENT TASK FORCE MACDILL AFB FL\nCSG SOCOM MACDILL AFB FL\nDA AMHS WASHINGTON DC\nDCDR USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL\nDEFENSE JIOC WASHINGTON DC\nDEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC\nDEPT OF STATE WASHINGTON DC\nDIA WASHINGTON DC\nDIRMSIC REDSTONE ARSENAL AL\nDIRNCMI FT DETRICK MD\nDIRNSA FT GEORGE G MEADE MD\nDIRNSA FT MEADE MD\nDNI WASHINGTON DC\nFBI WASHINGTON DC\nFORSCOM ACE FT MCPHERSON GA\nHQ AFOSI QUANTICO VA\nHQ AFSOC A2 HURLBURT FLD FL\nHQ AFSOC A3 HURLBURT FLD FL\nHQ AFSOC HURLBURT FLD FL\nHQ AFSOC INTEL HURLBURT FLD FL\nHQ ICE INTEL WASHINGTON DC\nHQ INSCOM G2X FT BELVOIR VA\nHQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL\nHQ USSOCOM MACDILL AFB FL\nHQDA AOC G2 INTEL WATCH DAMI FIW WASHINGTON DC\nHQDA DIR G2X HUMINT WASHINGTON DC\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0049 to MDR 26-0061 Approved for Release to AARO 03/26/26 000003\n3/7"} {"doc_id":"c466e1e0b4220c68","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20 March 2026\nHQDA DIR G2X WASHINGTON DC\nJAC MOLESWORTH RAF MOLESWORTH UK\nJAC MOLESWORTH UK\nJICCENT MACDILL AFB FL\nJOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC\nJPRA FT BELVOIR VA\nJWAC DAHLGREN VA\nNASIC WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB OH\nNCTC WASHINGTON DC\nNGA WASHINGTON DC\nNGIC INTEL OPS CHARLOTTESVILLE VA\nNGIC SRD FT GEORGE G MEADE MD\nONI WASHINGTON DC\nPENTAGON WASHINGTON DC\nUSASOC INTEL CTR FT BRAGG NC\nUSCENTCOM CCJ2 MACDILL AFB FL\nUSCENTCOM CCJ3 MACDILL AFB FL\nUSCENTCOM JOC MACDILL AFB FL\nUSSOCOM J2 INTEL MACDILL AFB FL\nUSSOCOM J3 OPERATIONS DIRECTORATE MACDILL AFB FL\nUSSOCOM J5 STRATEGY PLANS AND POLICY MACDILL AFB FL\nUSSOCOM JTF DEPLOYED\nUSSOCOM SOFM MACDILL AFB FL\nUSSTRATCOM INTEL DIRECTORATE OFFUTT AFB\nINFO 1.4(c) WASHINGTON DC\nCIA WASHINGTON DC\nSECRET//NOFORN\nQQQQ\nSERIAL: (U 1.4c\nDATE OF PUBLICATION: 271329Z APR 22.\nUS Air Force\nINFORMATION REPORT, NOT FINALLY EVALUATED INTELLIGENCE\nCOUNTRY OR NONSTATE ENTITY: (U) Oman (OMN).\nSUBJECT: (S//NF) 1.4c Multiple Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon Observed Maneuvering Erratically and In Formation Over Gulf of Oman During AC-130 Gunship Live Fire Training on 8 September 2021 - Attachment\nDATE OF INFORMATION: (U) 08 SEP 2021.\nCUTOFF: (U) 08 Sep 2021.\nSUMMARY: (S//NF) On 8 September 2021 a USSOF AC-130 Gunship observed approximately 25 instances of UAPs while conducting a live fire exercise in the Gulf of Oman. The UAPs were observed as cold orbs flying at lower altitudes between 250 to 1300 MPH in different formations as well as maneuvering aggressively. UAPs also appeared to react to the aircraft firing its main cannon.\nSOURCE NUMBER A: (U//FOUO) 1.4c\n1.4(c), 130b\nCONTEXT A: (S//NF) Source had direct access to the reported information via the conduct of official duties. Source was aware information would be provided to the US government.\nWARNING: (U) THIS IS AN INFORMATION REPORT, NOT FINALLY EVALUATED\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0049 to MDR 26-0061 Approved for Release to AARO 03/26/26 000004\n3.5c,(b)(6)\n4/7"} {"doc_id":"c466e1e0b4220c68","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 20 March 2026\nINTELLIGENCE. REPORT CLASSIFIED SECRET//NOFORN. TEXT: (U)\n[REDACTED] INITIAL OBSERVATION. On 8 September 2021 a United States Special Operations Forces (USSOF) AC-130 Gunship was conducting live fire training the Gulf of Oman in the vicinity of (IVO) //MGRS: 40REN68 1.4a 13 1.4a// during period of darkness. The AC-130 first observed Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAPs) when the aircraft dropped a water-activated flare to use as a mock target. The AC-130 entered an orbit around the flare and the Combat Systems Officer (CSO) conducted collateral scans with the aircraft's Electro Optical/Infrared (EO/IR) sensor IVO the flare. When the CSO slewed the sensor in IR mode back to the flare they observed two approximately four-foot diameter cold orbs between 0 to 20 feet above the surface of the water stationary over the flare for approximately 15 seconds. After those 15 seconds passed, the CSO pulled the trigger firing the aircraft's 105mm cannon. Immediately upon pulling the trigger, during the slight delay between trigger pull and the cannon's recoil, the CSO observed the pair of UAPs rapidly fly away from the flare and out of the sensor feed without changing altitude.\n([REDACTED] SUBSEQUENT OBSERVATIONS. The AC-130 crew observed approximately 25 instances of UAPs viewed in IR as cold orbs in both white-is-hot an black-is-hot mode during the sortie. Two UAPs were observed flying in a loose but coordinated formation increasing and decreasing altitude like a wave while maneuvering around, over, and under each other in a manner similar to how dolphins playfully swim in a pod. (SOURCE COMMENT: They [The UAPs] knew they were flying together). UAPs were also separately observed flying in a formation of three and separately observed flying erratically and maneuvering aggressively. The attached videos depict a smoothly slewing EO/IR sensor or a stationary EO/IR sensor with multiple UAPs darting around the sensor feed. The AC-130's crew attempted to save entirety of the EO/IR footage of the UAP observations but the aircraft's Digital Video Recorder (DVR) inexplicably failed and the video data became corrupted.\n([REDACTED] ESTIMATED SPEED. The CSO calculated the UAP's approximate speeds using the aircraft's TACTOOL and clocked their maximum observed maneuvering speed at 1300 miles per hour (MPH) and the UAPs minimum observed maneuvering speed at 250 MPH. No means of propulsion were observed.\nCOMMENTS: 1. (Field Comment) (S//NF) 1.4c is the tag line for AFSOC personnel conducting 1.4c debriefing. 2. (U/ [REDACTED] This IIR was coordinated with USDAO Muscat and SOCCENT J2X without comment. 3. (U) Source A is available for recontact about information in this report. 4. (U/ [REDACTED] Geographic coordinates were derived from AC-130 sensor feed GPS data. 5. (U// [REDACTED] Requests concerning foreign disclosure and release of the information contained in this report should be sent to the AFSOC FDO at 3.5c, (b)(6) Include the justification, serial number, subject line of the report and the proposed request in the initial correspondence. 6. (U/ [REDACTED] IIR Evaluations and Source Directed Requirements regarding this report are highly encouraged to assist in assessing collection efforts and requirements. Evaluations and Source Directed Requirements can be created using 1.4(c)\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0049 to MDR 26-0061 Approved for Release to AARO 03/26/26 000005\n3.5c, (b)(6)\n5/7"} {"doc_id":"c466e1e0b4220c68","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6/1/22, 11:23 AM\n\nRecord Preview\n\n3.5c,(b)(6)\tAny questions concerning this\nreport should be directed to 3.5c,(b)(6)\nPlease reference IIR number along with any final product or brief the\nIIR information was utilized.\nATTACHMENTS: (U) To follow - 1 ATTACHMENTS.\n1. Video, 8 September 2021 UAPs [REDACTED], Powerpoint containing six\nembedded videos of 8 September 2021 UAPs captured via AC-130\n(SECRET//NOFORN).\nTOPIC: (U) FMCC; TECH.\nFUNCTIONAL CODE: (U) IFC150B; IFC220L; IFC150A.\nREQUIREMENT: (U) NTRI200AJ002421.\nMGT CODE: (U) BG; BK; RD; DF; DG.\nINSTR: (U) U.S. NO.\nPREP: (U) 3.5c, (b)(6)\nJOINT REP: (U) None.\nDATE OF ACQUISITION: (U//[REDACTED]) 20220407; USA, Cannon AFB, New Mexico\nPOC: (U//FOUO) Direct all questions to AFSOC A2H, Hurlburt Field FL\nat SVOIP 3.5c, (b)(6) or TSVOIP 3.5c, (b)(6) or email to\n3.5c, (b)(6)\nWARNING: (U) THIS IS AN INFORMATION REPORT, NOT FINALLY EVALUATED\nINTELLIGENCE REPORT CLASSIFIED SECRET//NOFORN.\n=============================DISSEMINATION==============================\nAGENCY: (U) Central Intelligence Agency (CIA); Defense Intelligence\nAgency (DIA); Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA); Department of\nDefense; Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); National Aeronautics\nand Space Administration (NASA); US Air Force; US Army; US Marine\nCorps; US Navy.\nU.S. MISSION: (U) None.\nMILITARY: (U) Air Force; CENTCOM; SOCOM; Navy; Army; Marine Corps.\nSTATE/LOCAL: (U) None.\n=============================CLASSIFICATION==============================\nCLASSIFIED BY: AFSOC A2OH\nDERIVED FROM: DO SCG JUL 2017\nDECLASSIFY ON: 50X1-HUM\n[REDACTED]\n#0000\nCOLLECTION MANAGEMENT CODE:\nBG\nBK\nRD\nDF\nDG\nU.S. CITIZEN:\nU.S. NO\nClassification\tInstruction\nREPORTER:\n1.4c\nExtended Metadata\nPUBLIC NOTE:\nINTERNAL NOTES:\nBE NUMBER:\nLATITUDE/LONGITUDE:\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0049 to MDR 26-0061\tApproved for Release to AARO\t03/26/26 000006\n3.5c, (b)(6)\n6/7"} {"doc_id":"c466e1e0b4220c68","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6/1/22, 11:23 AM\n\nRecord Preview\n\nLatitude\tLongitude\nUTM:\nENCL NOTE:\n[REDACTED]\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0049 to MDR 26-0061\tApproved for Release to AARO\t03/26/26 000007\n3.5c, (b)(6)\n7/7"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-245 (REV. 1-21-80)\n\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007.\n\nU. S. Department of Justice\n\n(MATERIAL MUST NOT BE REMOVED FROM OR ADDED TO THIS FILE)\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU\n\nof\n\nINVESTIGATION\n\nBureau File Number\n\nCLASSIFICATION NO. 100-36998\n\nSerials\n\nVolume Number\n\nCOPIED FOR - FOIPA\n\nSERIALS | REQUESTERS FULL NAME | COMPUTER NUMBER | DATE | BY\n\nSee also Nos.\n\nACL Charest, Michael R. 245, 974 6-3-85 bcc\n\nNEWARK\n\nFile Front is to be maintained\n\nNW 91149\nDocId:34742114 Page 1"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-160\n\nINDICES SEARCH SLIP\n\nTO CHIEF CLERK: DATE\n\nSUBJECT\n\nALIASES\n\nADDRESS\n\nDATE & PLACE OF BIRTH\n\n___Exact Spelling\n___All References\n___Subversive References\n___Main File\n___Restricted to Locality of\n\nFILE & SERIAL NO. REMARKS FILE & SERIAL NO. REMARKS\n\n25-4765 John Riley NT\nLocal Board 1 Cincinnati\n91-341-16 O'Keefe\n100-19807 AM-4-58 NI\n250-2379 UI\n61-6-103 No way to deduct\n52-6170-41-25 NI\n25-10043-9 1-4 NI\n\nSearched by Clerk Agent\n\nReferences Reviewed by\n\n100-36998-1\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED\nSERIALIZED FILED\nAUG 29 1952\nFBI - NEWARK\nSquad\n\nNW 91149\nDocId:34742114 Page 2"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Seven photostats of Flying Saucers. Received from Department of the Air Force, Headquarters United States Air Force 8-27-52.\n\nenvelope ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED on this HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY Lafayette\n\n100-36998-17\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED\nSERIALIZED FILED\nSEP 5 1952\nFBI ARK\n\nNW 91149\nDocId:34742114 Page 3"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date Received 8/22/52\n\nFrom Dept of the Air Force\n(Name of contributor)\nU.S.A.F.\n(Address of contributor)\n\nBy\n(Name of person must)\n\nTo be Returned ( ) No ( )\n\nDescription: 7 photostats of Flying Saucers.\n\nFile No. 100-36998-14-1\n\nenvelope ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED on this HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY Lafayette\n\nNW 91149\nDocId:34742114 Page 4"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION-CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: ISOO GUIDANCE 2024-02\nBy: SH NARA Date: 3/5/24\n\nTHE INSPECTOR GENERAL USAF\n2D DISTRICT OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS\n67 BROAD STREET\nNEW YORK 4, NEW YORK\n\nIN REPLY\nREFER TO: 24-300\n\n22 AUG 1952\n\nMr. S. K. McKee\nSpecial Agent-in-Charge\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n1836 Raymond-Commerce Bldg.,\nNewark 2, New Jersey\n\nRE: JOHN H. RILEY\n178 Bogert Road\nRiver Edge, N. J.\nSPECIAL INQUIRY\n\nDear Mr. McKee:\n\nTransmitted herewith are copies of a restricted memorandum dated 12 August 1952, addressed to the 5th OSI District by the Chief, Technical Analysis Division, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio; a letter, with inclosure, dated 2 August 1952, addressed to ATIC, Wright Patterson AFB, Dayton, Ohio, by Mr. CHARIES GREGG, Staff Writer, \"The Herald-News, Passaic, N. J.\"; and seven (7) photographs allegedly of unidentified aerial objects. The Air Technical Intelligence Center has requested that the background of subject civilian photographer, JOHN H. RILEY, 28, 571 Main Street, Paterson, N. J. and of known witness GEORGE J. STOCK, 221 Brooks Ave., Passaic, N. J., be investigated in an attempt to determine their reliability; that the photographer be questioned as to the circumstances under which he took the pictures; that an attempt be made to locate other sources in the area; and that any other data pertinent to determining the authenticity of the photos be obtained.\n\nThis office will appreciate receiving copies of your reports of investigation of this matter.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nPAUL L. MC COY\nMajor, USAF\nActing District Commander\n\n10 Incls:\nAs indicated above.\n\ncc: Hq OSI\n\n100-36998-2\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED\nSERIALIZED FILED\nAUG 29 1952\nFBI - NEWARK\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION-CONFIDENTIAL\n\nNW 91149\nDocId:34742114 Page 5"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n(Unal) Investigation of Unidentified Aerial Object Photos\n5DOSI ATIAA-5 AUG 1 2 1952\nCapt Ruppelt/vs\n66361/B 2630/P 4-28\n1. Attached are several photographs taken by Mr. John H. Riley of 178 Bogert Road, River Edge, N. J. He claims that these are authentic photos of an unidentified aerial object and is apparently attempting to sell them to East Coast newspapers.\n2. The newspaper which forwarded the photos, the Newark-Star Ledger, has been very cooperative, and it is requested that the fact that they sent the photos to ATIC not be mentioned.\n3. ATIC does not believe these photos are authentic because:\na. They were apparently taken in a populated area at 10:15 a.m. and the object was supposedly visible for seven minutes. Yet, no one else reported seeing it.\nb. The relative sizes of the objects in the foreground indicate that the object would be about the size of a lady's sun hat at 30 ft. to 40 ft. away. If the object were farther away, it would be extremely large and again it should have been observed by other people.\n4. It is requested that the background of the observer and photographer be investigated in an attempt to determine their reliability; that the photographer be questioned as to the circumstances under which he took the pictures; that an attempt be made to locate other sources in the area; and that any other data be obtained that OSI believes to be pertinent in determining the authenticity of the photos.\n3 Incls\n1. Ltr fm Herald-News dtd 8/2/52 DONALD L. BOWER, Colonel, USAF\n2. Rpt fm Herald-News Chief, Technical Analysis Division\n3. Photos (7) Air Technical Intelligence Center\nRESTRICTED\nSECURITY INFORMATION\nIncl #1\n100-36998-3\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED AUG 29 1952 FBI - NEWARK"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PRESCOTT 7-6000 EXT. 126\nTHE HERALD-NEWS PASSAIC, N. J.\nHERALD-NEWS 0 PROSPECT STREET PASSAIC, NEW JERSEY\nUNITED PRESS AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS WIRE SERVICES DIRECT AP WIREPHOTO\nCHARLES GREGG STAFF WRITER HU 7-5731\nAugust 2, 1952\nATIC\nWright Patterson AFB\nDayton, O.\nAttention: ATIAA-5\nGentlemen: As per our telephone conversation yesterday, I am enclosing seven photographs of flying objects, pertinent data and a clipping of article we ran recently outlining the saucer situation in Passaic and Bergen Counties during the past several weeks.\nHoping I have been of some service to you, I am\nSincerely,\nCharles Gregg\nStaff Writer\nIncl #2"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TO: A.T.I.C., WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OHIO ATT: ATIAA-5\nDATA ON SAUCER PHOTOGRAPHED JULY 31, 1952 IN PASSAIC, N.J.\nPhotographer: John H. Riley, 28, 571 Main Street, Paterson, N.J.\noccupation: photographer.\nKnown witness: George J. Stock, 221 Brooks Avenue, Passaic, N.J.\nDate: 31 Jul 52\nTime: 10:15 a.m.\nPlace: 200 block, Brooks Avenue, Passaic, N.J.\nWeather: Clear, in mid 80's\nColor of saucer: greyish\nAltitude: 200 feet at lowest point\nRiley says he was visiting Stock, his friend, and talked to him in front of Stock's home. Stock first saw it. Riley says it travelled southeast at a \"leisurely\" speed. \"As it drew nearer it came to a complete stop and hovered overhead for several moments about 200 feet from the ground.\"\n\"It was near enough to shoot at with a rifle.\" He described the disk as about 30 feet in diameter and greyish in color with a large dome jutting from its center. The saucer made no sound when hovering and moving. Before taking off again in a southwest direction, it tilted \"as though to observe the ground. \"An antenna--or something like it--darted out of the dome's top for a moment and then was withdrawn.\" He snapped several pictures with Stock's camera. Saucer was in sight about seven minutes. Disappeared very rapidly to the southeast.\nNo \"fixed\" negatives but Riley will not part with them. Could not have thrown object in air because one foto shows object very high.\nRiley took his negatives and was away (probably trying to sell them in NYC) today so no data available on camera, its speed etc. Three other witnesses reported but unable to canvass neighborhood today for names etc..\nResidence:\n178 Bogert Road, River Edge, N.J.\nCharles Gregg Staff Writer The Herald-News Passaic, N.J.\nThe Dixon - Night City Editor Newark Star Ledger Newark, N.J."} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\nDIRECTOR, FBI 10/3/52\nSAC, NEWARK (100-36998)\nRE: SPECIAL INQUIRY UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS; Inspector General, USAF 2nd District Office of Special Investigations 67 Broad Street New York 4, New York\nFor the information of the Bureau, on August 27, 1952, the Newark division received a request from the Inspector General, United States Air Force, 2nd District Office of Special Investigations, 67 Broad Street, New York 4, New York, that the background of a civilian photographer, JOHN R. RILEY, 571 Main Street, Paterson, N. J., and of GEORGE J. STOCK, 221 Brooks Avenue, Passaic, N. J., be investigated in an attempt to determine their reliability in view of the fact that they had allegedly observed and photographed an unidentified aerial object on July 31, 1952.\nThe appropriate credit and criminal checks were made in this matter as well as discreet neighborhood inquiries as to both individuals,and no information was received that either individual had criminal records or that they were known in the past to have perpetrated any kind of fraud.\nIt was ascertained that STOCK did photograph an allegedly unidentified aerial object and that RILEY witnessed the incident and developed and printed the exposed film which was subsequently forwarded to the 5th OSI District, Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio by Mr. CHARLES GREGG, staff writer, \"The Herald News, Passaic, N. J.\"\nThe letter further requested that the photographer and the witness be questioned as to the circumstances under which the photographs were taken and that an attempt be made to locate other sources in the area that might determine the authenticity of the photos. No investigation of this type was made by the Newark division.\nIn accordance with SAC letter #83, Series 1952 dated 8/29/52, the results of the credit and criminal checks and the neighborhood investigations were forwarded to the local OSI Office, New York City and no further investigations have been made by this office.\nLWR:INH\nSECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\n100-36998-6"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\n1836 Raymond-Commerce Building Newark 2, New Jersey\nIn reply please refer to 100-36998 October 3, 1952\nInspector General, United States Air Force 2nd District Office of Special Investigations 67 Broad Street New York 4, New York\nDear Sir:\nIn reply to your communication on August 27, 1952 with this office relative to one JOHN H. RILEY, 571 Main Street, Paterson, N. J., a commercial photographer, and of GEORGE J. STOCK, 221 Brooks Avenue, Passaic, N. J., who allegedly observed and photographed an unidentified aerial object on July 31, 1952, the following is submitted for your information.\nJOHN H. RILEY is self-employed at the Belmont Photograph Service, 571 Main Street, Paterson, N. J., as a photograph finisher and printer. His business does not include the taking of photographs on a commercial basis, however, RILEY may have a working knowledge of photography other than the processing of exposed film.\nA check was made relative to JOHN H. RILEY with the Paterson, N. J. Police Department Record Bureau and the Passaic and Bergen County Credit Bureau. Both checks proved negative concerning RILEY.\nThe Paterson Chamber of Commerce Better Business Bureau Records disclosed no complaints having been filed against the Belmont Photograph Service or JOHN H. RILEY.\nHARVEY BASKINGER, co-owner of Baskinger Hardware Store, 557 Main Street, Paterson, N. J., stated that he had known RILEY for approximately one year but was not familiar with RILEY'S background. BASKINGER did, however, indicate that he did not\nLWR:IMH\nSECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\n100-36998-7"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to Inspector General, USAF 10/3/52\nbelieve RILEY to be reliable in that he had some trouble with him\nin his hardware store and consequently watches him closely when he,\nRILEY, comes into the hardware store. BASKINGER did not elaborate\nfurther on this point.\n\nDr. JOSEPH DI STEPHANO, 553 Main Street, Paterson, N. J.,\nRILEY'S landlord stated that to his knowledge RILEY had a photo-\ngraph service route which he covered daily to solicit business from\nfirms receiving film to be processed. DI STEPHANO stated that he\nknew very little about RILEY except for information coming to him\nthrough personal contact. Dr. DI STEPHANO stated that RILEY had\nrented from him for approximately two years and although RILEY'S\nbusiness does not appear to be too prosperous, he had never been\nin arrears in his rent. RILEY is single, approximately 29 to 30\nyears old, 5' 5\"-6\" tall, 130 pounds, brown hair, and medium build.\n\nDr. DI STEPHANO further stated that only on one occasion\nhas he had any complaint relative to RILEY and that was regarding a\ntenant's complaint that RILEY had been seen taking women and men\ninto his photograph laboratory late at night and the tenant was\ncurious as to what was going on at those late hours.\n\nThe Passaic and Bergen County Credit Bureau and the\nPassaic, N. J. Police Department records were negative as to infor-\nmation concerning GEORGE J. STOCK. STOCK is employed by the City\nof Passaic, N. J. Park and Recreation Department.\n\nMr. THOMAS CAVANAUGH, Recreation Director, Department of\nParks and Recreation, Passaic, N. J., stated that STOCK was employed\nby him as a grounds keeper and had been with the City of Passaic\na number of years. CAVANAUGH stated that he had known STOCK person-\nally for ten to fifteen years and he has never come upon information\nthat would be derogatory to STOCK'S moral reputation or his integrity.\nCAVANAUGH stated that STOCK lives with his father at 221 Brooks\nAvenue, Passaic, N. J., and they both enjoy a very simple life.\n\nCAVANAUGH stated that STOCK'S main interest was mechanics\nand that he had a very modern and completely equipped machine shop\nin a shed on the rear of his property that took up most of his\nextra time. CAVANAUGH stated that STOCK also has peculiarities and\ndoes not get along with his fellow employees too well. He, STOCK,\nconfides in CAVANAUGH and seems to lean on him for whatever help he\nmight require. CAVANAUGH went on to say that he had discussed the\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"flying saucer\" incident with STOCK and that he had actually seen\nthe original negatives of the photographs that were taken of the\naerial object which are presently in the possession of STOCK.\n\nMr. CAVANAUGH stated that STOCK had related to him the\nfull details of the incident and stated that he, STOCK, had taken\nthe photographs rather than RILEY. STOCK related to CAVANAUGH\nthat he had been advised by RILEY on the day of the occurrence and\nthat he had given the exposed film to RILEY for developing and\nprinting, whereas RILEY then took the film and made copies for him-\nself which he sold to the local Paterson newspaper and possibly\nother publications.\n\nMr. CAVANAUGH stated that STOCK finally recovered his\nnegatives and that he had examined the negatives closely and they\ndid not appear to be \"touched up\". CAVANAUGH stated that in order\nto appreciate the situation, one would have to know STOCK for a\nnumber of years to realize that he has little or nothing to gain\nfrom any publicity received through these photographs and that in\neffect, he would not endeavor to publicize the incident. CAVANAUGH\nstated that STOCK'S father also witnessed the incident as did RILEY\nand that he, CAVANAUGH, thoroughly believed both STOCK and his\nfather to be perfectly reliable especially with him, CAVANAUGH.\n\nThis information is being furnished your office for what-\never action you so desire and no further investigation is being\ncontemplated in this matter by this office. Interviews of RILEY\nand STOCK are being left to your discretion, inasmuch as further\ninvestigation in this matter is within your jurisdiction.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nS. K. MC KEE\nSpecial Agent-in-Charge\n\nSECURITY INFORMATION - CONFIDENTIAL\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : SAC, NEWARK DATE: 11/15/57\nFROM : SA JOHN T. MURPHY\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n\nMrs. J.J.Henry Muller, III, 38 Douglas Road, Glen Ridge, N.J., telephone PI 8-5676, telephonically advised on the above date that in the middle of the afternoon of November 5, 1957, her husband, herself and 2 children were on the lawn of their property.\n\nFrom a southwesterly direction they observed a long, cylindrical, dark silver object with no wings but fins on the rear, moving along toward the northeast. There were no markings on the object, it was not flying high nor fast and they could not tell if it made any noise since there was a plane flying nearby at the same time.\n\nShe recalled there were no other neighbors out at the time and they apparently were the only ones who saw it.\n\nShe stated that the object returned from the direction it had gone about dusk and it seemed as though there was some motor noise from it. It flew into the southwest at a higher altitude but at about the same speed.\n\nAdvise OSI.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY SP-6 ltr\n\nHarold Peck OSI advised 11/15/57 by SA RG Mohr\n\n100-36998-8\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED NOV 15 1957 FBI - NEWARK"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Indices Search Slip\nFD-160 (Rev. 6-11-56)\n\nDate\nTO: CHIEF CLERK\nSubject 1) Flying Objects Unidentified\nAliases 2) UFO's\nAddress Birth Date Birthplace\n\nExact Spelling Main Criminal Case Files Only Restrict to Locality of\nAll References Criminal References Only\nMain Subversive Case Files Only Main Subversive (If no Main, list all Subversive References)\nSubversive References Only Main Criminal (If no Main, list all Criminal References)\n\nFile & Serial Number Remarks File & Serial Number Remarks\n1) 100-17009-179 no ident. data\n2) 62-0-13323 seen near Glen Ridge, N.J. in 1956 object sighted\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY SP-6 ltr\n\nRequested by Squad Extension File No.\nSearched by (date)\nConsolidated by (date)\nReviewed by Phil Berbick 8/30/57 (date)\nFile Review Symbols\nI - Identical ? - Not identifiable\nNI - Not identical U - Unavailable reference\n2"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : SAC, NK (62-0) DATE: 8/28/57\nFROM : SA DONALD H. ROBERTS\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT 8/27/57\n\nLEONARD SCHEY, US Air Force Reserve Captain, 24 Day Street, Clifton, N. J., telephonically contacted this office at 8:46 p.m., 8/27/57, to advise that he had seen an unidentified flying object (UFO) at 8:30 p.m., 8/27/57. SCHEY stated that he observed this object in the sky due west of Clifton, N. J. According to SCHEY, the object had a shape resembling that of an underwater demolition bomb and light, in the shape of a cross, was coming from within this UFO. SCHEY stated that he, with the use of his field glasses, was able to see what looked like diamond-shaped holes in the UFO from which the light emitted.\n\nAgent GEORGE WERTZ, OSI Duty Officer, was telephonically contacted at his home at 8:51 p.m., 8/27/57, and advised of the above.\n\nDHR:MCR\n(1)\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY SP-6 ltr\n\nCONSOLIDATE\nTransfer to 100-36998\n100-36998-9\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED AUG 28 1957 - NEWARK"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Indices Search Slip\nFD-160 (Rev. 6-11-56)\n\nDate\nTO: CHIEF CLERK\nSubject\nAliases\nAddress\nBirth Date\nBirthplace\n\nExact Spelling\nAll References\nMain Subversive Case Files Only\nSubversive References Only\nMain Criminal Case Files Only\nCriminal References Only\nMain Subversive (If no Main, list all Subversive References)\nMain Criminal (If no Main, list all Criminal References)\nRestrict to Locality of\n\nFile & Serial Number\nRemarks\nFile & Serial Number\nRemarks\n\n42-4909 * (corr)\n24-11818 *\n[REDACTED] *\n42-3463 *\n76-218 * (corr)\n104-3363-6 (corr)\n\nRequested by\nSquad\nExtension\nFile No.\n\nSearched by\n(date)\nConsolidated by\n(date)\nReviewed by\n(date)\nFile Review Symbols\n1 - Identical\n? - Not identifiable\nNI - Not identical\nU - Unavailable reference"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Indices Search Slip\nFD-160 (Rev. 6-11-56)\n\nDate\nTO: CHIEF CLERK\nSubject\nAliases\nAddress\nBirth Date\nBirthplace\n\nExact Spelling\nAll References\nMain Subversive Case Files Only\nSubversive References Only\nMain Criminal Case Files Only\nCriminal References Only\nMain Subversive (If no Main, list all Subversive References)\nMain Criminal (If no Main, list all Criminal References)\nRestrict to Locality of\n\nFile & Serial Number\nRemarks\nFile & Serial Number\nRemarks\n\n25-0-A -1212 (corr)\n100-313Y-1861-13\n25-4912 *\n\nNumerous other nine variations\n\nRequested by\nSquad\nExtension\nFile No.\n\nSearched by\n(date)\nConsolidated by\n(date)\nReviewed by\n(date)\nFile Review Symbols\n1 - Identical\n? - Not identifiable\nNI - Not identical\nU - Unavailable reference"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: SAC, NK (62-0)\nDATE: 11/13/57\n\nFROM: SA DONALD H. ROBERTS\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n\nWILLARD JONES, 284 Chestnut Street, Kearny, N. J., telephone, Kearny 3-0722, telephonically contacted this office at 11:25 p.m., 11/12/57, to advise that he had seen an unidentified flying object (UFO) over New York City from 11:15 p.m. to the time of this call. JONES stated that the UFO had fast fluctuating red and blue lights and remained in a stationary position. JONES stated he was unable to describe the shape of the UFO. JONES stated he was using a 7x50 lense in observing the UFO.\n\nAgent GEORGE H. WERTZ, OSI, was telephonically appraised of the above at 11:35 p.m.\n\nDHR:MCR\n(1)R\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY SP-6 pbjeffey\n\n100-36998-10\nSEARCHED SERIALIZED NOV 13 1957 FBI NEWARK"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: SAC, NK (62-0)\nDATE: 11/15/57\n\nFROM: SA DONALD H. ROBERTS\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n\nAt 7:15 p.m., 11/5/57, Mr. MARINO, 29 Windsor Place, Glen Ridge, N. J., telephonically advised this office that at 4:45 p.m., this date, his wife observed an unidentified low flying object over Glen Ridge, N. J. MARINO stated his wife described this object as being a brilliant white, cigar shaped with delta wings toward the tail and was unable to hear any noise coming from this object. According to Mrs. MARINO, this object was flying from the south to the north.\n\nSA LAWRENCE W. VAN LIERE, OSI, was telephonically apprized of the above at 7:50 p.m, 11/5/57.\n\nDHR:MCR\n(1)\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY SP-6 pbjeffey\n\n100-36998-11\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED NOV 15 1957 FBI NEWARK"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: SAC, NEWARK (100-36998)\nDATE: 2/14/58\n\nFROM: SA RICHARD G. MOHR\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n\nAt 1:10 p.m., 2/11/58, Mrs. MARY JANE KACZYNSKI, 2630 Vauxhall Road, Union, N. J., phone MU 6-0912, telephonically advised this office that at 12:25 p.m., 2/11/58, she observed an unidentified flying object from the kitchen window of her home. She described this UFO as bullet-shaped, silver, no wings, flying south at a very high altitude with vapor trail. She stated it flew much higher than commercial aircraft and she heard no noise.\n\nHAROLD PECK. OSI, was notified 4:00 p.m., 2/11/58.\n\nRGM:AM\n(1)\n\n100-36998-12\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FEB 14 1958 FBI NEWARK"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, NEWARK\nDATE: 4/14/58\n\nFROM : SA BILL WILLIAMS\n\n100-369988\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT SIGHTED\nNEAR PERTH AMBOY BRIDGE ON 4/12/58\nAT ABOUT 3:30 PM.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE 5/15/85 BY Sp4 Lafferty\n\nMrs. Edward Barry, 232 Dwight St., Jersey City, phone HE-5-0331 telephonically advised on this date that she and her husband observed the subject object which appeared as a flaming rocket coming down from the sky. They were in their car at the time coming home(North) from the shore on RT. 35 and were passing over a small bridge just before going on to the large bridge at Perth Amboy.\n\nvan lear\nOSI advr.\nh.\n\nIndex\n\n100-36998-L3\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED\nFBI - NEWARK\n\nNW 91149\nDocId:34742114 Page 21"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC W.G. SIMON\nDATE: 12-14-58\n\nFROM : Clerk William P. Nugent\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE 5/15/85 BY Sp4 Lafferty\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT SEEN BY JERSEY CITY P.D. DETECTIVES LANGREHR & SHERRY ON 12-14-58, and HERMAN TAUBMAN'S ON SAME DATE; and ALSO THE A.G. DOWER'S.\n\nchange this.\n\nThe writer was telephonically contacted on this date by Det. George Langrehr of the Jersey City P.D., at 12:55 AM. Det. Langrehr informed the writer that at 12:43 AM on this date he and his partner, Det. Edward Sherry viewed in the sky exhaust of an object which Det. Langrehr stated traveled at a speed of 300 or 400 miles an hour at an altitude of 1,000 to 3,000 feet. He described this object as having an exhaust of a brilliant bluish white flame about 40 feet long and he stated he saw this object for about 30 seconds. He stated that it wasn't a fallen star in his opinion as it traveled in a flight manner. He and Det. Sherry saw this object at Communipaw and Pacific Ave.'s in Jersey City, while they were in a car traveling due west. They stated this object traveled in a North, Northwest direction. They lost sight of it when it traveled behind some buildings in Jersey City. They stated that Ptl. John WHEAMEN of the same precinct also viewed it. These three officers are all attached to the Fourth (4 th) Precinct in Jersey City. Det. Langrehr resides at 55 Bleecker St., Jersey City, N.J. and Det. Sherry resides at 56 Gates Ave., Jersey City, N.J.\n\nAt 1:05 AM, the writer received a phone call from Mr. Herman Taubman, who stated that he had viewed an object which he described as a metorite or comet in the sky above Woodbridge, N.J., on Helm Ave., in that city. They stated (He and his wife Betty) that they were on a hill above the Curtiss-Wright Plant in that city and this object flew over this plant in a left to right direction at a height of 1,000 to 3,000 feet but he said it traveled at a speed of 10,000 mph., and his wife said it traveled much slower than that speed, that this object was of a tremendous size and that the object had a bluish-white flame and he saw it for some 30 seconds. Besides himself and his wife, he stated the following people saw this object: Doris and Bob Ostroff of Roselle, N.J.; the Richard Morgan's of Passaic, N.J. (Mr. Morgan is a lawyer); Harold and Janet Packer of Woodridge, N.J. (Mr. Packer is a lawyer); and other witnesses whose names he will give upon request. Just before he concluded the conversation with the writer at about 1:05 AM he stated he saw another UFO. He stated he saw the first object at 12:13 AM. Mr. Taubman informed the writer that he resides at 470 Piaget Ave., Clifton, N.J.\n\n100-36998-14\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED\nDEC 15 1958\nFBI - NEWARK\n\nJohn Murphy\n\nNW 91149\nDocId:34742114 Page 22"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The writer telephonically contacted SA John Murphy, who is in charge of liaison with other government agencies in the Newark office, at 1:10 AM. The writer wished to know whether he should immediately contact OSI or if SA Murphy should do so. SA Murphy told the writer that the procedure as he understood it was to send a letter to the interested agency and not make an immediate contact with the agency at night. SA Murphy did suggest that the writer inform the Sunday morning duty agent of the contents of this memo and leave it to his discretion as to whether OSI should be contacted at that time.\n\nMrs. A.G.Dower telephonically contacted the Newark office at 1:35 AM on this date. She informed the writer that she and her husband had seen a UFO that had passed over her residence in a South to North direction; that it had lasted for only two or three seconds; that to her it appeared to be a white hot point of light, with a tail of predominantly orange coloring; that this tail was at least ten times as large as the object; that the tail was fan shaped; that it was at an altitude of greater than 3,000 feet; that it was unlike a falling star; and that when they first saw the object it appeared to them that it had burst into flames. Mrs. Dower advised that she resides at 8 Harvard Terrace, West Orange, N.J.\n\nJohn G. Caton, OSI, ORANGE 5-3512 was telephonically advised of above at 8:56 AM 12/14/58 J.G.C.\n\nNews reports on radio 12/14/58 revealed the Air Force had received numerous calls concerning above and they had checked with the Hayden Planetarium, N.Y.C. They advised that the UFO were extremely bright meteors that were falling and were not any type aircraft.\n\nNo need to advise Bureau or U.S.A.F.\n\nJTM\n\nNW 91149\nDocId:34742114 Page 23"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, Newark\nDATE: 1/3/59\n\nFROM : SA Walter A. Wangenheim\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT SEEN BY WILLIAM KNOERER, 14 STONY BROOK DRIVE, OLDBRIDGE, N.J. TELEPHONE # CLIFFORD 4-6302\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY Sp4 Lafferty\n\nWriter telephonically contacted this date by captioned individual at 10:23pm. This individual stated he and wife saw object, approximately six foot long, orange in color, flying in north east direction from the front of his house which faces in same direction. Knoerer saw object at about 4:55pm. It flew for about five minutes in NE direction then reversed its course to a south west direction and flew for about five minutes more before disappearing.\n\nKnoerer had no idea as to its speed or altitude. He mentioned that for a couple of minutes in each direction it actually appeared to be two objects flying side by side. he explained that there was a patch of blue sky between both orange objects.\n\nKNoerer stated he hesitated to report incident for fear of being sounding foolish but after thinking about it realized it should be reported\n\nOSI representative Harold N. Peck, Nutley 2-9062 was advised of facts, 10:30pm, same date.\n\n100-36998-15\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED\nJAN 1959\nFBI - NEWARK\n\nJohn Murphy\n\nNW 91149\nDocId:34742114 Page 24"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, NEWARK\nDATE: 2-26-59\n\nFROM : Clerk William P. Nugent\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Object\n\n62-0-13812\n\nThe writer received a telephone call from Mrs. Robert Schrann, at 6:37 PM on this date. Mrs. Schrann was very nervous and subsequently admitted to being scared, as she was the only one at home and she saw a UFO in the air outside her home. She stated it was a considerable distance from her home and only could identify it as a \"silver object\". OSI advised at 6:55 PM.\n\nMrs. Schrann's address is 65 Shetland Lane, Levittown, New Jersey.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/5/85 BY Sp4 Lafferty\n\n100-36998-16\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED\nFEB 27 1959\nFBI - NEWARK\n\nNW 91149\nDocId:34742114 Page 25"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC\n\nDATE: 4-22-59\n\nFROM : CLERK WILLIAM P. NUGENT\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\n\n100-36998X\n\nThe writer was telephonically contacted by Mr. OSCAR R. GRAHAM, WHO RESIDES AT 266 NORTH AVE., FANWOOD, N.J., at 10:15 PM this date. MR. GRAHAM stated that he was viewing a series of lights in the air that came out of the Southern Horizon and traveled as fast as the satellites sent up by this country. He stated these lights changed color, and also divided in the air and came together again. He stated he had called the local police and there was a local policeman in his home at the time of his call. The writer advised Mr. Johnson that he would furnish his information to the OSI and upon the termination of Mr. Johnson's call, the writer telephonically contacted Agent BLALOCK of the OSI and informed him of Mr. Johnson's call. Agent BLALOCK told the writer that he would handle the matter.\n\nMR. JOHNSON'S TELEPHONE NUMBER IS FANWOOD 2-6756.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY SP6 Lafferty\n\n100-36998-17\n\nAPR 23 1959 FBI-NEWARK\n\nBlalock advised at 10:36 PM upon"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, NEWARK\n\nDATE: 7/6/59\n\nFROM : GEORGE H CHRISTIAN (CLERK)\n\nSUBJECT: REPORT OF UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT in Sky over Pompton Plains, N.J., 7/6/59.\n\n62-0-13812\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY SP6 Lafferty\n\nAt 10:15 pm this date Mr. THOMAS SCALZA, Rt. #23, Pompton Plains, N.J. telephonically contacted this office and reported seeing an Unidentified Flying Object in the sky over the general area of his home.\n\nInformation was secured from Mr. SCALZA re the exact location of this Object,its distance from him, size and any other distinguishing characterists that the object had.\n\nAt 10:25 pm the writer contacted Mr. HAROLD N. PECK,2nd Dist. OSI, U.S.A.F. and supplied him with the above information.\n\n100-36998-8\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED JUL - 6 1959 FBI-NEWARK"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC\n\nDATE: 10/28/59\n\nFrom : Clerk William P. Nugent\n\nSUBJECT: UFO SIGHTED ON 10/28/59 AT APPROXIMATELY 5:40 PM\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY SP6 Lafferty\n\nBetween 5:40 and 6:45 PM on this date, this office was in receipt of some seven calls in regard to captioned matter. The object sighted was generally described as a very bright object with a number of twinkling lights around it; was surrounded by a haze or cloud like mist; had a vapor trail which dispated very quickly and which was of great area in the vicinity of the object. It is to be noted that the individuals calling claimed to have numerous witnesses to this phenomena. The following is a list of those who contacted the office and the time which they called is noted above the name, address, and telephone number:\n\n5:55 PM Mr. Walter Ecker, P.O. Box 327, Bedminister, N.J., Tel. # PE8-1106\n\nMr. Ecker called again at 7:25 AM to state that it was not the balloon release in Va. that he reported last night but rather the object\n\n6:01 PM Mr. Leonard Connors, 210 19th Street, Surf City, N.J., Tel. # HY 4-9333\n\n6:05 PM Mr. Martin Arman, 25 Valley St., East Orange, N.J. (Business Address) Tel. # SO 2-8460\n\n6:10 PM Col. Vernon A Peterson; Village Road, Greenwich, N.J. (Phonetic) Tel. # FR 7-5826\n\n6:45PM Mr. Richard Stoner 130 Verbon Rd., Hamilton Square, N.J. (near Trenton)\n\n100-36998-19\n\nOCT 28 1959 FBI-NEWARK"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It is to be noted that the above telephone calls were received by the writer.\n\nSA Gay R. Shahan was in receipt of the following calls:\n\n5:50 PM Mr. Arthur D. Lockwood, 561 Oregon Ave., Palisades Park, N.J. Tel. # WH 5-9282\n\n6:30 PM (Tel. # PI 6-8049 Mrs. Richard La Bonte, 11 Norwood Ave., (Upper Montclair), N.J.\n\nMr. PETER C. GREY, OSI duty agent for 10/28/59, was advised of the calls received by the writer and SA Shahan at 6:17 PM. (That is the calls received before that time.) At 6:40 PM, he telephonically contacted the office and requested that any calls received pertaining to this incident should be placed on a list which an OSI representative would pick up or acquire by telephone on 10/29/59.\n\n10/29/59 - No call was received\nJohn T. Murphy"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC\n\nDATE: 1/16/60\n\nFROM : SA WILLIAM H. ROCKETT\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Object Observed 5:45 PM January 16, 1960\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY SP6 Lafferty\n\nAt approximately 5:50 PM this date, STEPHEN KLYCE, 541 W 113 St, N.Y.C., telephonically advised that he is the organist at the First Presbyterian Church, Broad St., Bloomfield, N.J. PI 3-1796. While at the church at about 5:45 PM this date, he and others heard what sounded like a roar of a jet. On going out and looking at the sky they saw a bright object in the sky with a hazy outline around it. It appeared to be stationary and was east in the direction of N.Y.C. A plane was passing overhead at the same time and the UFO was about 5,000 feet up in the sky. The UFO disappeared after about 5 minutes.\n\nAt 6:00 PM, RALPH LAVELLA, 10 Hillcrest Avenue, West Paterson, N.J., telephonically advised that at about 5:45 PM he had seen a jet plane flying SE, heard an explosion, saw an object leave the plane and move in an easterly direction. A bright light emanated from the object and after several minutes it appeared to drop from the sky in the vicinity of N.Y.C.\n\nAt 6:03 PM, Agent M.A. SRODA, OSI, Camp Kilmer, N.J., KI 5-8286 was telephonically advised of the above information.\n\nAn anonymous caller furnished similar information at 5:47 PM and at 6:27 PM ALBERT DOUGLAS, 202 Morris Avenue, Springfield, N.J., DR 6-3997, advised that at 5:45 PM, while sitting in his car in a supermarket at Springfield, N.J., he had observed a vapor trail in the Southern sky. At the end of it there was a bright object travelling at jet speed, then it seemed to stop, and remain stationary for 5 minutes and disappeared, then disappeared.\n\n100-36998-20\n\nJAN 15 1960 FBI-NEWARK\n\nBallson Va. from h."} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC (100-36998)\n\nDATE: 2/27/60\n\nFROM : Clerk William P. Nugent\n\nSUBJECT: UFO SIGHTED ON 2/27/60 by S.M. KAPLAN OVER BLOOMFIELD, N.J.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY Sealgefey\n\nThe writer received a telephonic contact from MR. S. M. KAPLAN, 19 Alfred Lane, Bloomfield, N.J. [REDACTED] at 6:35 PM this date. He advised a group of neighbors and himself had seen an UFO and reported the details concerning it.\n\nThe writer telephonically contacted OSI agent La Belle, the duty man for this date, and advised him of the incident. He stated that he did not want the details as he would get them first hand from Kaplan, thanked the writer, and terminated the conversation.\n\n100-36998-21"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 5010-104-01\n\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nMemorandum\n\nTO : SAC NEWARK\n\nDATE: 10/7/60\n\nFROM : IC D.LOUIS BARRA JR.\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT OBSERVED EARLY MORNING 9/5/60\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY S6 Sealgefey\n\nAlethea Charney, 464 Jefferson Ave. Elizabeth, New Jersey, telephonically contacted the Newark office on 10/7/60.\n\nComplainant indicated, that she had telephonically advised the Newark office 9/5/60, that she had seen a flying saucer in the early morning.\n\nOn 10/7/60 she received a call from a person who identified himself as a Federal officer, and he indicated that he was coming to see her,, regarding the information she had concerning the flying saucer. The caller never keep his apointment with her. Charney desired to know if it had been a FBI agent who had made this call.\n\nA search of the indicies by the writer failed to disclose any record of the above mentioned call. A check with OSI Newark, failed to reflect any more light on the problem.\n\nCharney was contacted an advised, that it was not an FBI agent that had contacted her, but it could have been one of several federal agencies. She was requested to advise the Newark office if she received any more information. She indicated she would do so.\n\nThe above information is recorded for filing purpose.\n\nHandwritten marginalia: She called again at 5:00 PM 10/7/60 & stated she had been recontacted by investigator Gray, Federal Aviation Agency. He made an appointment for a later date.\n\n100-36998-22"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 5010-104\n\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nMemorandum\n\nTO : SAC, NEWARK (62-0)\n\nDATE: 2/8/61\n\nFROM : SA WILLIAM E. GAGNON\n\nSUBJECT: JOHN MURPHY Information Concerning\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY Sealgefey\n\nMR. JOHN MURPHY, 1054 Seward Avenue, Westfield, New Jersey, telephone AD 2-6277, telephonically contacted this office on the evening at which time he furnished the following information:\n\nHe stated that while driving home in his car last Sunday, 2/5/61, around 7:00 p.m., he noticed an extremely bright object in the sky. He stated that this object,which is not a star, appeared to be round in shape and much larger than a star. He stated that this object, which he could not further describe, appeared to the Northwest of his residence.\n\nHe stated that he saw this same object on Monday and Tuesday evenings, and that tonight there were three similar type objects in the sky. He stated that one object appeared to be Northwest of his residence; one to the West and the other to the North of his residence. He stated that these objects, however, had changed from a round shape to lateral shape and appeared to be much like a spectrum.\n\nHe stated that his wife told him he had been drinking and imagining things. He stated that he had his daughter who is a school teacher, his son, his wife and a neighbor out looking at these objects and they had verified his findings. He stated that he didn't understand these objects and for this reason wanted to report this matter to this office. He stated he had reported this matter to the Westfield, N.J. Police Department but they were too busy to check on this because they were shoveling snow. He stated he tried to report the matter to Civilian Defense but there was no answer.\n\nHe stated that since he did not understand these objects and he did not know whether they were weather balloons or foreign objects, he wanted to report this matter to the FBI for whatever action deemed appropriate.\n\nNo action recommended.\n\n(1) WEG\n\nHandwritten marginalia: Note Telephone Directory lists T.G. MURPHY at 1050 Seward Ave, Westfield, Tel. AD 2-6277.\n\n2-10-61 Lubr Dempsey OSI nvb. advsd\n\n100-36998-23"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, NEWARK\n\nDATE: 2/6/61\n\nFROM : SA JAMES R. LAUGHLIN\n\nSUBJECT: UNSUB: Bright Object in Sky, West of Paterson, N.J. 7:50pm 2/6/61\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY Sealgefey\n\nAt 7:50 pm 2/6/61 Mrs. BERNICE ABRAMS, 174 Elmwood Drive, East Paterson, N.J. telephone SW 6-4442 telephonically contacted the writer at the Paterson Resident Agency. She advised that there is a very bright object in the sky west of Paterson, N.J. She did she has never seen this object before and does not believe it is a star since she is accustomed to viewing the stars. Her husband, CARL, got on the phone and advised he first saw this object this evening while driving from Newark on the Garden State Parkway; that first it was west of him and then south of him.\n\nThey advised they did not know whom to call but felt the Federal Government should be made aware of this peculiar object in the sky.\n\nHandwritten marginalia: Lubr Dempsey OSI NC. advsd 2-10-61 F.L.\n\n100-36998-24"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 5010-104\n\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nMemorandum\n\nTO : SAC NEWARK\n\nDATE: 1/16/61\n\nFROM : IC D. LOUIS BARRA JR.\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY Sealgefey\n\nMrs. George Doarcke, 122 Main Street, Franklin, New Jersey, telephonically contacted the Newark office today. She indicated that she has seen objects in the sky on several occasions which she was unable to identify.\n\nComplainant related that she has other information she would like to furnish to a FBI agent, but was unable to explain any further on the phone.\n\nDoarcke was very vague concerning her complainant and would not discuss the information she desired to furnish the FBI, while she was on the phone.\n\nThe above data is recorded for information and is suggested that a agent contact complainant to determine if she has any information of any value to the FBI.\n\nHandwritten marginalia: Transfer to 100-36998. R.C. Lee (contact Doarcke) 1/16\n\n100-36998-25"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\n5010-104\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : SAC, NEWARK (62-0-15013)\n\nDATE: 2/14/61\n\nFROM : SA RICHARD C. LEE\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nRe memo of SC. D. Louis Barra Jr. dated 1/16/61 at Newark.\n\nOn 2/13/61 Mrs. George Goarcke, 122 Main St. Franklin, N.J. advised that she had approximatley one month ago seen an article in the Newark News concerning unidentified flying objects that were a matter of concern to the U.S. She stated that as a result of this article she recalled that in either 1938 or 1939 she attended the Newark Art School and had a teacher by the name of John Grabach, who resided at 915 Sanford Ave. Irvington, N.J. Mrs. Goracke stated that on one occasion in 1939 Grabach had requested her to do a drawing of Boulder Dam which was to be used for purposes of reprinting. She stated that she had never been paid for this drawing and that she has had no contact with Grabach since that time.\n\nMrs. Goarcke also stated that she believed that these unidentified flying objects could be used to obtain pictures of such installations as Boulder Dam which idea occured to her as a result of the above mentioned article in the Newark News. Mrs. Goarcke also stated that in 1939 Grabach was in sympathy with communism and dammed the American Way of life.\n\nMrs. Goarcke was during the course of the interview inclined to wander in her thought process and appeared on occasions to be in a daze. She could not furnish any information other than that she believed that unidentified flying objects could be used to take pictures of Boulder Dam.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY Plabyjtey\n\nNW 91149 Docld:34742114 Page 36"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, NEWARK (100-36998)\n\nDATE: 9/13/61\n\nFROM : SA FRED V. CROWLEY\nNight Supervisor\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nOBSERVED 8 pm, 9/13/61.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY Plabyjtey\n\nFrom 8:10 pm to 9:00 pm, 9/13/61, the following persons called to report that at approximately 8 pm, they had observed a very bright object about midway elevation above the horizon in the sky, slightly South of East.\n\nThe object appeared to have a reddish or tangerine color and increased in size as if some type of explosion. There was no apparent movement or noise connected.\n\nWILLIAM BRANDT\n753 Jersey Ave.,\nElizabeth, N.J.\n\nMIKE HARTTEN\nFords, N.J.\n\nGORDON SCHACHER,\nPhysics Dept.,\nRutgers University,\nNew Brunswick, N.J.\n\nThe above calls were reported to Duty Agent PETER MARTIN, Hqrs. 2d Dist., OSI (IG)USAF, 111 East 16th St., New York, N.Y., OR 7-2800. MARTIN requested that OSI, Newark, be advised through liaison, as verification.\n\n9/14/61\nAbove info. furnished to Jack Labllee, OSI, Newark.\nJohn T. Murphy\n\nFVC\n\nNW 91149 Docld:34742114 Page 37"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NEW JERSEY ASSOCIATION ON AERIAL PHENOMENA\n\nstate filter center #1\n69 hobart street\nHACKENSACK, N.J\n\nDI. 2-6500\n\nSEPTEMBER 19,1962\n\nDEAR SIRS:\n\nThe New Jersey Association on Aerial Phenomena is extremely interested in the recent sighting of an unidentified flying object by officers Rudloff and Troy. We would appreciate any information available.\n\nSincerely,\nJohn Nove'\nJohn Nove', Secretary\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY Plabyjtey\n\n100-36998-28\n\nNW 91149 Docld:34742114 Page 38"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\n5010-104-01\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : SAC, NEWARK\n\nDATE: 3/12/64\n\nFROM : SAC, NEW YORK\n\nSUBJECT: JOHN NOVE\n69 HOBART STREET\nHACKENSACK, NEW JERSEY\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nMr. SAM NOVE telephonically contacted this office on 3/9/64, in an attempt to obtain an opinion concerning his son's membership in an organization.\n\nMr. NOVE's son, JOHN, age 16, who attends School in Hackensack has joined some type of peace organization contrary to his father's wishes. This organization has been given permission to hold meetings in the school and to recruit students. The organization is sponsoring a students peace march from Hackensack to Newark.\n\nMr. NOVE was advised of the confidential nature of FBI files and that his call would be made a matter of record.\n\n2 - Newark\n1 - New York\n\nKRS:MAH\n(3)\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY Plabyjtey\n\n100-36998-28a\n\nNW 91149 Docld:34742114 Page 39"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nDEPARTMENT OF POLICE\nWESTWOOD, NEW JERSEY\n\nJOHN C. LINDEMANN, CHIEF\n\nPHONES:\nHEADQUARTERS: NORTH 4-7000\nCHIEF: NORTH 4-7040\n\nSept. 24, 1962\n\nSpecial Agent, Mc Grail,\nF.B.I. Office,\nP.O. Box #336,\nHackensack, N.J.\n\nDear Sir :-\n\nPer your request, letter received by this Dept. from N.J. Association on Aerial Phenomena, State Filter Center # 1, 69 Hobart St., Hackensack, N.J. signed by JOHN NOVE' Secretary, herewith enclosed.\n\nVery truly yours,\nCapt. H.E. Voorhis.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY Plabyjtey\n\n100-36998-29\n\nNW 91149 Docld:34742114 Page 40"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nMAY 1962 EDITION\nGSA GEN. REG. NO. 27\n5010-106\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\nTO : SAC, NEWARK (62-0) DATE: 3/8/63\nFROM : SA LOUIS F. HIBAN, JR.\nSUBJECT: WILLIAM STOCKS,\n45 Kipp Avenue,\nLodi, New Jersey\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE 5/15/85 BY SP6 Lifftey\n\nOn 3/1/63, the subject telephonically contacted the Hackensack, New Jersey Resident Agency and advised that he is employed as a guard for a detective agency and last night, he observed flying objects in the air over Lodi, New Jersey. STOCKS believes that these flying objects were flying saucers and he would like to furnish this information to the appropriate federal agency.\n\nSTOCKS advised that he observed flying saucers over Lodi, New Jersey, on 9/15/62 and notified the local police department of this event. STOCKS stated that on this date, two patrol cars from the Lodi, New Jersey Police Department arrived at the scene, but they did nothing about this occurrence. STOCKS stated that he has documents and affidavits that he sent to the United States Air Force in Washington, D.C., regarding this event.\n\nAt the conclusion of the interview, STOCKS advised that he would contact the United States Air Force in Newark, New Jersey, and advise them of these flying objects he observed for their information and any action they deem appropriate.\n\nNo action is deemed warranted in this matter, and it is suggested that the subject's name be indexed inasmuch as he may contact the FBI in the future regarding flying saucers.\n\nLFH:mjf\n(1)\n100-36998-30\nSEARCHED INDEXED\nSERIALIZED FILED\nMAR 8 1963\nFBI - NEWARK"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Indices Search Slip\nFD-160 (Rev. 10-1-59)\nTO: CHIEF CLERK\nDate\nSubject James Mosely\nAliases\nAddress Birth Date Birthplace Race Sex Male Female\nExact Spelling Main Criminal Case Files Only Restrict to Locality of\nAll References Criminal References Only\nMain Subversive Case Files Only Main Subversive (If no Main, list all Subversive References)\nSubversive References Only Main Criminal (If no Main, list all Criminal References)\nFile & Serial Number Remarks File & Serial Number Remarks\n100-4284-14-8\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE 5/15/85 BY SP6 Lifftey\nRequested by Squad Extension File No.\nSearched by (date)\nConsolidated by (date)\nReviewed by (date)\nFile Review Symbols\nI - Identical ? - Not identifiable\nNI - Not identical U - Unavailable reference"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\nOFFICE OF THE SECRETARY\n20 February 1963\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nIt has been some length of time since I've written you on a subject of mutual interest---Unidentified Flying Objects. When I last contacted you, I was then Department of Defense spokesman for Project Blue Book, the organization responsible for investigation of UFO sightings, a part of our Foreign Technology Division located at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. I turned over my responsibilities as spokesman to Major Carl Hart of our Division a year ago last month, when I was moved up to Deputy Chief of the Operations Branch, Public Information Division.\n\nI thought the Bureau might be interested in the inclosed \"burn\" copy of a letter which was printed in the March 1963 issue of \"Saucer News\" (now in its tenth year of publication). This Publication is printed quarterly by the \"Saucer and Unexplained Celestial Events Research Society\"---James W. Mosely, Editor. It takes a middle-of-the-road editorial policy, printing views of non-believers, believers, contactees, etc., and reviews books on the \"flying saucer\" subject.\n\nWith best wishes, I am,\n\nSincerely,\n\nWILLIAM T. COLEMAN, JR.\nMajor, USAF\nDeputy Chief, Operations Branch\nPublic Information Division\nOffice of Information\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n9th & Pennsylvania Ave., N. W.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nIncl\n\"Saucer News\"\nThe cartoon is a bonus item! C.\n100-36998-32"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VOLUME 10, NUMBER 1 (Whole Number 51)\nSTARTING OUR TENTH YEAR OF PUBLICATION!\nMARCH 1963\nSAUCER NEWS\nOFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE SAUCER AND UNEXPLAINED CELESTIAL EVENTS RESEARCH SOCIETY\nMAILING ADDRESS: P. O. BOX 163, FORT LEE, N. J.\nOFFICE: ROOM 1009, 303 FIFTH AVE., NEW YORK, N. Y.\nTELEPHONE: MURRAY HILL 6-3743\nEDITOR: JAMES W. MOSELEY\n\nThere has been a delay in the publication of my forthcoming book, \"The Second Coming of Christ and Flying Saucers\"! I had plans to have it printed instead of mimeographed. I took it to a printer and he obtained legal advice that didn't recommend its publication. I was told by the attorney that the book was too harshly critical of the U.S. Government, particularly the FBI, and that this might bring legal trouble; and that other parts of the manuscript are so controversial that they might cause libel suits. He felt that you might sue me. I tried others, but after reading the manuscript, they would not print it.\n\nThis meant I had to send out notices to purchasers of the book that I would have to put out a mimeographed edition, and this would not come out before March. \"Flying Saucer Review\" turned down my ad, but so far, other magazines plan to publish it in January and February. All will be given a chance to order it, and all orders will be shipped the same day. The book will mean my arrest and so I plan to release all copies in one day. If I were to fill orders as they came in, then someone on the list might be a secret Government agent, or would turn it over to the authorities as a book that threatens the national security of the U.S.; and the rest of the copies would be confiscated. This is based on the advice of the attorney who read the manuscript. After getting that advice, I am keeping the contents of the book secret until its release in March. Thus, the Government has no idea just what I intend to release, until too late! After the orders are shipped in that one mailing, they can come and arrest me for all I care. My life's mission for Jesus Christ will have been fulfilled, and my goal accomplished. The truth, even if it should violate man-made law, will be sent out to seekers of truth. ....So I risk personal ruin to get this thing out; but one must make sacrifices in the name of Christ if one is worthy to enter the kingdom of Heaven. In the eyes of the Government, the book will be considered dangerous, but in the eyes of God, it will be considered Truth.\n\nRICHARD OGDEN\nP.O. Box 9005, Seattle, Washington\n\n(Editor's Note: We will be looking forward to Mr. Ogden's book with interest and avid curiosity, though from the tone of this and other letters he has sent us on the subject, we doubt if it will ever be published.)"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"February 26, 1963\nMajor William T. Coleman, Jr.\nDeputy Chief, Operations Branch\nPublic Information Division\nOffice of Information\nDepartment of the Air Force\nWashington, D. C.\nDear Major:\n\nThank you for your letter of February 20th, with enclosure. Your thoughtfulness in writing and furnishing me a copy of a letter printed in the March, 1963, issue of \"Saucer News\" is indeed appreciated.\n\nSincerely yours,\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\n1 - Seattle - Enclosures (2)\n1 - Newark - Enclosures (2)\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE 5/15/85 BY SP6 Lifftey\n100-36998-33"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"XEROX COPY XEROX COPY XEROX COPY\n\n7 Idlewild Lane\nMatawan, New Jersey\nJanuary 15, 1964\n\nState of Arizona\nDepartment of Law and Public Safety\nDivision of State Police\nState House\nPhoenix, Arizona\n\nDear Sirs:\n\n I am a member of the National Investigations\nCommittee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP), headquarters\nWashington, D.C., and would greatly appreciate your\nanswering the following questions:\n\n 1- Has the United States Air Force compelled\nyou in any way, thru official orders or otherwise, to\nwithhold from the press media and the general public\nany information you might obtain from investigating\nan unidentified flying object sighting reported to\nyou or any county or local police force in the State\nof Arizona?\n\n 2- If the answer to question #1 is in the\nnegative what is the Arizona State Police policy re-\ngarding UFO sightings reported to you in releasing\ninformation on said sightings to the press media and\ngeneral public?\n\n 3- Have you investigated any recent UFO re-\nports and, if so, what were the results of those in-\nvestigations?\n\n Thank you.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Laval\nNICAP member\n\nNW 91149 DocId:34742114 Page 46"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\n\nPhoenix, Arizona\n\nFebruary 14, 1964\n\nRE: JOHN LAVAL\nMEMBER, NATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS\nCOMMITTEE ON AERIAL PHENOMENA\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nAttached is copy of letter received by\nthe Arizona Highway Patrol from JOHN LAVAL, 7 Idle-\nwild Lane, Matawan, New Jersey, in which he states\nhe is a member of the above organization the NICAP,\nWashington, D. C., and requesting information.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE 5/22/85 BY SP6 Batty\n\n100-36998-35\n\nNW 91149 DocId:34742114 Page 47"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI 2/14/64\n\nSAC, PHOENIX (62-0)\n\nJOHN LAVAL,\nMEMBER, NATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS\nCOMMITTEE ON AERIAL PHENOMENA\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nFor the information of the Bureau and possible dissemi-\nnation, there is enclosed letterhead memorandum con-\ncerning communication from the above individual to\nthe Arizona Highway Patrol in Phoenix.\n\nNewark is being furnished copy of letterhead memo-\nrandum for information, since LAVAL gave his address\nas 7 Idlewild Lane, Matawan, New Jersey.\n\n2 - Bureau (5)\n1 - Newark (enc 1)\n1 - Phoenix (62-0)\n\nELB-kb\n(4)\n\nNW 91149 DocId:34742114 Page 48"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-159 (Rev. 6-29-59)\n\nRECORD OF INFORMATION FURNISHED OTHER AGENCIES\n\nOrally ____ date By Telephone 4/2/64 date Written Communication ____ date\n\nInformation concerning:\nNational Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomenon\n\nInformation furnished from File, Serial, and Page Number:\n100-36998-\n\nInformation furnished was obtained:\n\n☐ during course of Bureau investigation\n☐ from informants\n☒ from complainants or other sources\n\nInformation furnished to:\nJoseph Clark, OSI\n\nRemarks: Was advised there was no derogatory information in file re above.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE 5/15/85 BY SP6 Batty\n\n100-36998-37\n\nJohn T. Murphy\nSpecial Agent\n\nNW 91149 DocId:34742114 Page 49"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Post Office Box #1158\nNewark, New Jersey 07101\n\nJune 8, 1964\n\nLt. Col. Robert S. Hermann\nDistrict Commander\nHeadquarters 2nd OSI District (I.G.)\nU. S. Air Force\n111 East 16th Street\nNew York 3, New York\n\nDear Lt. Col. Hermann:\n\n On the evening of May 30, 1964, Theodore John\nRubitz, age 13, of 167 West 19th Street, Bayonne, New\nJersey, telephone Federal 9-8733, telephonically advised\nthis office that at about 9:50 PM on May 30, 1964, he was\nwalking along 22nd Street in Bayonne between Avenue A and\nNewark Bay when he observed five unidentified flying objects.\n\n He described these objects as being round and gray\nin color, flying north to south in a diamond-shaped formation,\nwith the fifth object just in back and to the right of the\nlast object in the diamond. He stated that they were very\nhigh up, looking like they might be lights but traveled\nacross the sky faster than the speed of a plane and he\nwas certain that these were not just planes or search lights.\nRubitz was unable to further identify these objects.\n\n Mrs. Theodore Rubitz, mother of Theodore, advised\nthat her son was not given to fanciful stories and that from\nwhat he had told her, she was sure that he had seen the\nobjects described by him.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nR. W. Bachman\nSpecial Agent in Charge\n\nRegistered Mail\n\n2-OSI, New York\n1-Newark (100-36998)\nGPH:rac\n\n100-36998-38\n\nNW 91149 DocId:34742114 Page 50"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nMAY 1962 EDITION\nGSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101-11.6\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\nTO : SAC, NEWARK (62- )\nDATE:7/11/66\nFROM : SA JOHN J. CREAMER, JR.\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nWest Orange, N.J., 7/11/66.\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE 5/15/85 BY sp6 bjt/ty\nAt 10:18pm, 7/11/66, NANCY RAUCH, 141 Old Short Hills Rd., West Orange, NJ., telephone 731-8336, advised that she and her girl friend saw three white objects in the sky at about 10:00PM. Two planes came towards the objects from two opposite directions as if they were chasing them. As the planes drew near them, the objects disappeared.\nRAUCH'S friend is SUSAN SHAW, 18 Maplewood Dr., Livingston, N.J.\nOfficer Murphy, W.Orange N.J. P.D. was contacted and he advised that there has been no reports of unidentified objects in the area.\nRecommendation: Notify proper authorities.\nJJC/jjc\n(1)\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-350 (Rev. 7-16-63)\n(Mount Clipping in Space Below)\nSAC\nCI\nC-2\nC-3\nC-4\nC-5\nS-1\nS-2\nNight Supervisor\nChief Clerk\nChief Steno\nSAC Secretary\nSA\nRA\n(Indicate page, name of newspaper, city and state.)\n53\nNEWARK EVENING NEWS, NEWARK, N.J.\nDate: 10/11/66\nEdition: WALL ST.\nAuthor:\nEditor: WILLIAM R. CLARK\nTitle:\nCharacter:\nor\nClassification:\nSubmitting Office NEWARK, N.J.\nBeing Investigated\nUFO Sightings\nObjects Seen in Wanaque, Newark\nA large shining unidentified flying object hovered over the Wanaque reservoir and was seen by police and more than a dozen residents last night. Another sighting was reported in Newark.\nAt about 9:25 p.m., the reservoir police were swamped with phone calls, which reported a mysterious flying object had flown over the Wolf Den Dam and landed in the reservoir in Upper Passaic County.\nReservoir Police Sgt. Ben Thompson who investigated radioed back to headquarters reporting that a large object, about the size of an automobile was hovering over the reservoir at a height of about 150 feet.\n\"It's lighting up practically the whole southern end of the reservoir\" Thompson told Patrolmen Edward Webster and William Pastor who were at headquarters at the time.\nObject Disappears\nThompson then turned on the red light atop his police car. The object disappeared.\nBoth Webster and Pastor said they saw the object fly off in a northerly direction.\n\"It definitely wasn't a plane,\" said Pastor.\nPastor explained that the object which flew away at a height of several hundred feet, would sometimes stop and hover in one spot for several seconds and then move off with great speed.\n\"Sometimes it would disappear for a second or two and then you could see it again,\" he said, adding:\n\"We finally lost sight of it shortly before 10 p.m. It was heading north over the upper end of the reservoir toward New York State.\"\nHad Been Seen Before\nPastor said the object had been seen several times before but it had not gotten this close to the water recently.\nHe said that Air Force officials had taken pictures of the object in January, after it was seen one night by about 50 persons in the area.\nHe added that the Air Force officials who investigated the January sightings made no comment on the UFO.\nAir Force officials at bases in this state and New York said they knew nothing about UFO reports last night.\nNorvel Wilson of 33 Burnet St., Newark, reported his attention was attracted to the sky over his home by a whirring noise which he found hard to describe and spotted what appeared to be a large kite with a string of lights several hundred feet in the air. He said the object disappeared as it headed southward.\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY sp6 bjt/ty\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED OCT 12 1966 FBI — NEWARK\n100-36898-40"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"25 Clifton Ave;\nNewark, N.J. 07104\nDec. 10, 1966\nF.B.I.,\nFederal Sq.\nNewark, N.J.\nDear Sir:\nThis \"AFSCA\" is definitely a Communist Organization. If you read the lines I have underlined in red, I'm sure you will agree.\nHope something can be done to stop them.\nSincerely Yours,\nMrs. M. Stein\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY sp6 bjt/ty\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED DEC 12 1966 FBI — NEWARK\n100-36998-41"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Post Office Box 1158\nNewark, New Jersey 07101\nDecember 14, 1966\nMrs. M. Stein\n25 Clifton Avenue\nNewark, New Jersey 07104\nDear Mrs. Stein:\nI have received your letter dated December 10, 1966, and the enclosure contained therein.\nThank you for making this publication available.\nVery truly yours,\nR. W. Bachman\nSpecial Agent in Charge\n1 - Addressee\n1 - Newark\nWVM:aas\n(2)\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY sp6 bjt/ty\n100-36998-42"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"International Flying Saucers\n100-0-R-7516-a\n100 ref\n100-36998 X cov\n62 ref.\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY sp6 bjt/ty\nFLYING SAUCERS\nINTERNATIONAL\nOfficial Journal of the Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc.\nSPECIAL AFSCA THIRD NATIONAL FLYING SAUCER CONVENTION ISSUE\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED\nISSUE NO. 24 JULY, 1966 50c\n100-36998 y"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SPECIAL AFSCA CONVENTION MESSAGE BRIGHT WORLD IN HANDS OF SAUCER MOVEMENT (Editor's Note: This special message was received from Master Kalen-Li Retan (head of the planet Korendor, about 400 light years distant) on May 4, 1966 via special directional short-wave radio by Bob Renaud, the young electronic-technician whose remarkable story we printed in issues #18, 19, 20, 21, and 22, and which will be continued in our next issue. Since Bob's initial radio contact in 1961, he has talked with the crew of a spacecraft as he watched them on his special TV screen in his home and eventually met his contacts in-person; visited their undersea and underground bases on our planet; was taken aboard many of their spaceships; and was actually allowed to pilot two of their small scout craft one on a short solo flight.) \"Kalo (Hello), friends. We will get directly to the point of our message to you. Frankly, we are appalled at the state of Earth at present. Despite our constant warnings and even our actual intervention in some instances, the condition upon your planet grows steadily worse. One subject on everyone's lips these days is Vietnam. From a little civil war, it has grown steadily and inexorably into a full scale conflict between the world's three major powers: the United States, the Soviet Union, and Communist China. Many influential people have used the approach of patriotism and love of Country to twist decent human feelings into dangerous channels of thought and action. With their charges of treason and sympathy with the enemy, they have aroused a good portion of the populace to a state of fear, distrust, and hatred of those who seek peace and love. Unfortunately, because some unconventional individuals have been associated with the peace movement, that entire operation has been seriously hindered. Your government is a military puppet, a mere parrot of the monstrosity that is the Military-Industrial complex. Your senators, except for a few, are robots, speaking what they are told to say. Your President is, unfortunately, a pawn of their needs and demands. We have contacted him several times concerning the state of affairs, and he has said that he could do nothing to change them, for if he were to speak out against the Asian conflict, he would be removed. This is what happened to the late Mr. Kennedy who, in his great humanitarianism, was reluctant to sacrifice his ideals and his visions for the sake of the military industrial octopus. He paid the supreme penalty for his efforts in behalf of humanity. Make no mistake. Your government is not in the White House or the Congress. IT IS IN THE PENTAGON, AND IN THE HEADQUARTERS OF THE VAST DEFENSE-ORIENTED INDUSTRIES. It is THEY, not the President or the Congressmen, who run the United States. The facade government is merely to allay undue alarm or suspicion of the people. Examine another aspect of the war, the ECONOMIC side. Do you recall that, in the stock reports just recently, the Dow-Jones average dropped sharply BECAUSE OF A RUMOR THAT NORTH VIETNAM HAD MADE A PEACE BID? Does the staggering implication of this news evade you? Stock prices suffering a heavy loss because of a rumor that peace might come to pass? This thought is most distressing. Your economy relies so heavily upon war and destruction, that if it were to stop, THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY WOULD SUFFER A MASSIVE DEPRESSION! Your money system would collapse like a house of cards. Millions would be unemployed, sick, hungry and homeless. Tremendous industrial complexes would close their doors. The utterly appalling fact is this: WAR IS PROFITABLE. Highly so! Every major conflict has been accompanied by a strong peak in your monetary prosperity. Peace has usually been economically painful! After World War 1, the nation coasted for a while upon the fat put on during the boom of the war years. In 1929, the bottom fell out. After the Korean War, in the 1950's came another recession. What comes after Vietnam? No one knows, and no one wants to find out. The war in Vietnam is bringing an unheard-of degree of affluent States. Why kill a good thing by ending the war? The philosophy, in essence, is this: It is economically expedient to send military forces to Vietnam and elsewhere in Asia in order to wage war, because in doing so, the United States' economy is bolstered and maintained at a high level of prosperity; human life is secondary to the preservation of economic well-being! It is thus evident that, unless a drastic change is made in the structure of your economy, war will never end because the Military-Industrial complex WON'T LET IT! Many of you fear Communism. Where did that fear come from, I ask you? From within yourself? NO! It was brainwashed into you by the Military-Industrial complex. Who controls all your news media? The government and the advertisers. Who, then, is in a position to dictate what shall be printed? The Military-Industrial complex, by designation of control through the use of psycho-politics (brainwashing by controlled news management). Consider this: In order to survive, a commercial medium, such as a newspaper or magazine, requires a vast amount of advertising revenue. The mere subscription fees will not cover the costs. Thus, they depend for their continued existence upon money paid by advertisers. Suppose, then, that the editor of a certain newspaper decides that he is opposed to the Vietnam policy, and says so in his paper. The advertisers simply may be to editor. \"Either you toe the mark and print what we want, or we'll withdraw our advertising.\" Such pressures are a fact of life. The newsmen are torn between their higher devotion to Truth, and also to the lower level of their physical needs. Rather than jeopardize their security and their futures they, in turn, simply may not be to editor. Their actions are fully understandable, and we do not hold them responsible. We throw the blame directly on the Military-Industrial complex which, by its underhanded dealing, threats of force, and economic pressure and retaliation, has crushed the spirit of American journalism and turned it from a dynamic motivating force in American life into a weak-willed, subservient mouthpiece for the power-masters. We blame them for the death of journalistic freedom and individuality! One more comment on this topic: May I say that a better economic system is already known to the leaders of the Flying Saucer Movement. It is the system known on Universal economy. As we have said over and over before, it is the non-money economic system which MUST be applied on your planet before you can start to resolve most of your major problems and thus begin to establish a highly-advanced, non-destructive state of existence on Earth, such as we of more advanced planets have enjoyed for so long. INVESTIGATE THIS SYSTEM to evaluate it for its merit then ACT to apply it! YOUR VERY SURVIVAL AS A CIVILIZATION MAY DEPEND UPON IT! Perhaps this is an opportune time to clarify a few questions which have been asked about us. Do we of Korendor work with the local planets in our operational work? Yes, we do cooperate with them a great deal. However, our work on Earth is relatively independent of the local planets. We have many times overstepped what is considered to be the limit of interference upheld by Venus, Mars, and other planets. This has caused a good deal of debate between them and us. Each time we have pointed out that we of Korendor are basically anti-romantic in nature. Although we do respect the laws of self-destiny, we feel also that where stepping in is required to prevent disaster, it is our right and our duty to do so. We have interfered in such places as the United States, China, Russia, and on a large scale in Vietnam. This has caused no end of consternation in the local Trifonal of Planets. We are sympathetic to their viewpoint, but we do feel that their policy is limited in its capacity to achieve the desired goals. It is our opinion that one cannot stand on the sidelines and achieve any noticeable results. As I have said before, we have infiltrated your planet. We are directly involved in Earth's life. You might say that you have been invaded a strong way of phrasing it, to be sure, but nonetheless factual, since we walk and work amongst you daily! We have been asked about our physical appearance. We are humanoid, indistinguishable from yourselves, except that in our natural form we average three to four feet in height. Every other dimension is proportionately scaled, so that photographs of us would not reveal our origin in any way. We are able to decrease our height while on Earth through a technical process related to teleportation. It is concerned with recording the atomic and molecular structures of our bodies, and then reproducing them individually on a larger scale. Differences in our internal structure are adjusted by the computer which controls the reproducer. Our most common skin color is a little darker than yours, although we have skin colors which vary as yours do all over the Earth. Usually, however, we would look tan to you. We are NOT green, blue, or heliotrope, as has been suggested. Concerning our language, we generally use one of two tongues and we are fairly familiar with a third. On Korendor itself we speak the native language, Korendian. It is similar in many ways to your own languages since it, like yours, was originally derived from Galingua, one of the two universal tongues. The other is Olee Mal, which is more familiar to you, since it is used by your local Solar System planets. It is seldom heard now in our sector of space, as Galingua has replaced it almost completely. Unlike your own, however, the Korendian-Galinguan speech is very rhythmic, and has few sibilant sounds, such as s or z. Some of the sharper sounds like c and k are minimized. It is a beautiful language which is very musical and pleasant to hear. Perhaps you would be surprised to learn that ancient Latin was liberally taken from Galingua. There are many similarities in the two languages. Even modern English has roots on other worlds! In conclusion, let me say that I say people of Earth: open up your minds and your hearts to the world around you. There is so much to be learned, so much to be discovered. Don't waste precious hours and days in bigotry and ignorance, and in senseless fighting and killing. To do so is truly a crime against nature and humanity. As this stage is set, you have the very stars almost in your grasp, how irrational and barbaric it is to spend futile hours warring with your brothers. As an old saying on your world puts it: You make your bed, so shall you lie in it. The decision does not seem difficult. Here are the alternatives: A world living in harmony, justice, security and abundance for all, or a world continuing to reap the bloody harvests that grow from the seeds of hatred and mistrust. If left to their own devices, the majority of mankind will forge onward to a destiny of destruction and annihilation, oblivious to the danger in their actions. They are short-sighted; they care little for the future. It is you who are the young people, dedicated to the welfare of all mankind, and having the vision and understanding of the ways to build the better world of tomorrow, who must lead the way. You have the future in YOUR hands, if you will but shoulder your responsibilities. The Flying Saucer Movement, as you call it, belongs to you. Support it in every way possible. Help it to grow until it is influential throughout your world. Go out into the world and guide the misguided, find the lost, and recover the strays. We are behind you all the way. As we have said many times before, we will take two steps for every one that you take to help yourselves. The time has come for nations to bury the hatchet, to clasp hands, and plunge into the future together in co-operation toward mutual goals. Look to the heavens and realize that your destiny is not in bleak atomic desolation, but in the magnificent greatness that you can achieve if you will but work for it. Choose the right path and you will soon qualify to join with us in our journeys amongst the stars. Va i Luce (Go in Light). Kalen-Li Retan 3"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFSCA CONVENTION SPEAKERS 1. WAYNE S. AHO; The New Age Foundation, Inc.; 8 Smith St.; Seattle, Wash. 98109. Publish: The Aquarian Dawn (Donation basis). 2. CARL A. ANDERSON; 2522 E. Pearson Ave.; Fullerton, Calif. 3. ORFEO ANGELUCCI; 4160 Verdugo Road; Los Angeles, Calif. 90065. Phone: 464-0441. 4. MICHAEL BARTON; 5949 Gregory Ave.; Hollywood, Calif. 90038. Phone: 464-0441. 5. WESLEY BATEMAN; Mental Investigations of New Dimensions (M.I.N.D.); 4916 Franklin Ave.; Hollywood, Calif. 90027. Phone: 661-1731. 6. MARIANNE FRANCIS; Solar Light Center; Rt. 2, Box 572-C; Central Point, Oregon 97501. 7. DR. DANIEL W. FRY; Understanding, Inc.; P.O. Box 105; Merlin, Oregon 97532. 8. CALVIN G. GIRVIN; 6711 Yucca St.; Hollywood, Calif. 90028. 9. GABRIEL GREEN; Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc.; 2004 N. Hoover St.; Los Angeles, Calif. 90027. Phone: 662-4404. 10. DR. GEORGE KING; The Aetherius Society; 6202 Afton Place; Hollywood, Calif. 90028. 11. JOHANNES HANNO MAYBERRY; Unified Research Center, Inc.; P.O. Box 764; Selma, Oregon 97538. 12. HOWARD MENGER; 202 Schumann Drive; Sebastian, Florida 32958. 13. LAURA MUNDO; The Interplanetary Center; 27359 Cranford Lane; Dearborn Heights, Mich. 14. MEL NOEL; 2760 Hollyridge Drive; Hollywood, Calif. 90028. 15. SIDNEY FADRICK; 196 Hidden Valley Road; Watsonville, Calif. 16. CHIEF FRANK B. STANDING HORSE; P.O. Box 194; Perris, Calif. 92570. 17. DR. FRANK E. STRANGES; International Evangelism Crusades, Inc.; P.O. Box 252; Venice, Calif. 90293. 18. MOLLIE THOMPSON; Linton, Astley Bank, Darwen, Lancs., England. 19. HOPE TROXELL; School of Thought; P.O. Box 458; Independence, Calif. 93526. 20. GEORGE W. VAN TASSEL; Ministry of Universal Wisdom, Inc.; P.O. Box 458; Yucca Valley, Calif. 92284. 21. HAL WILCOX; Institute of Parapsychology; 871 Gower St.; Hollywood, Calif. 90038. SPACE AGE SONGS by Mollie Thompson. THE COCKEYED BALLAD. There's a cockeyed feeling in the world today. That power politics is here to stay. But China, Russia and the U.S.A. Boy don't let them fool you! Take a look at this world of ours. Just one mud ball in the sea of stars. Other planets have no color-bars, 'Cause they've got perspective. Yanks and Ruskies put men into space, It's one-up-manship in this Year of Grace. SPACE-TALK. The powers that be will tell us we're alone. They'll tell us that in space we are unique."} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NEW SAUCER PHOTOS: These remarkable photos of Flying Saucers were taken by Dr. Daniel W. Fry, President of Understanding, Inc., of P. O. Box 76, Merlin, Oregon 97532. Your editor enlarged them from the original 16mm color movie film. Spots on the photos are due to the extreme enlargement of scratches and dust spots on the film. Of special interest is the fact that the same type of craft was photographed near Merlin, Oregon in a wooded section, and again near Joshua Tree, Calif. on the desert."} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GOLDEN GATE Handicap Results. Oakland Tribune. Friday, March 25, 1966. Flying Saucers Are Poppin' Up All Over. One Shot By Man In Maine. Flying swamp gas? Air Force UFO report refuted. Airliner Detours To Chase U.F.O. Ohio Police Trail UFO 86 Miles. Portland Oregon Journal, March 21, 1966. 40 See 'Flying Saucer'. Asks Probe of Flying Saucers. Ford Says U.S. Public Should Get Answers. Now those flying saucers come to Canadian skies. Michigan UFO Lands In Swamp. Mystery Objects In Sky. Flying saucer pics on show. Hong Kong Standard, May 14, 1966. Brewer Welcomes UFOs, Landing Sites Available, Signed Barry Ivers, Mayor. QPP Chase First UFO No Arrest."} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"World Flying Saucer Believers Convene. 2 South African Policemen Report Sighting of Saucer. It'll Be Long Before Saucer Is Forgotten. New Fireball Raises An Old Question: Do Flying Saucers Exist? 100 Watch UFO. Flying saucers mystery. Civil Defense Director Watches Flying Saucer. Who's in All Those Saucers? Eerie 1896 Sighting. 87 Coeds Observe Object. More Than 5 Million People Say They Saw Flying Saucers. UFO Plays Tag With Deputies in 85-Mile Chase. Mysterious Sky Objects Have Texans in Dither. PC REPORTS 'I SAW 6 FLYING SAUCERS'. Police Kept Busy Spotters Jam Up-County Roads for UFO Glimpse. UFO spotted. Flying Object Sighted in Illinois. UN Watch For Saucers Urged. Strange Object Over Mt. Wilson."} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Would You Believe 'Saucer' Visits Wichita?\nBy FRAN KNOWLING\nTimes Staff Writer\n\nTracked by Radar\nUFOs Sighted Over Wide Section of District\n\nObject In Sky Near Bloomdale\n\nPlanet Pluto Saucers Seen, Talked With?\nBy AUSTIN CONOVER\n\nUFO Sighting Reported Here\nNot a Star -- Not an Aircraft, Says Louis S. Smith Family of North Bend\n\nBoy Is Burned By 'Flying Ship'\n\nFlying Saucers Quakes Linked\n\nNot star, says collector of flying saucer photos\n\nSwamp gas still 'flying'\n\nPhotographed Flying Saucer, Picture Censored\n\nSix Teens Tell of 'Chase' by Buzzing, Lighted UFOs\nBy ROBERT KISTLER\n\n'Mysterious UFO' Escorts Burns Plane\n\nBRILLIANTLY LIGHTED Police Follow Saucer 85 Miles\n\n'The Thing' Sets Britons Speculating Anew\n\nA Second UFO Seen in Michigan\n\nSAUCER BLAST? SIX TOWNS SEE MYSTERY\n\n5 At Pierre Sight UFO\n\nRealtor Spots Saucer-Like UFO\n\nBALL OF FIRE IN HOLLYWOOD 'LIKE SAUCER'\n\nArea UFO Buffs Report Skies Clear of Saucers\n\nSuper-Space World Sought By Soviets\n\nDeputy Gets Too Close to 'Saucer'"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCER NEWS IN BRIEF\n\nCOMING 1966 FLYING SAUCER CONVENTIONS\n\nJULY 8,9,10: AFSCA's 3rd National Convention, Centennial Coliseum, Reno, Nev. (See details on back)\nJULY 15,16,17: WAYNE AHO sponsors the Northwest's 5th Annual Interplanetary Age Convention. Lectures, exhibits and New Age topics. Advance registrations -- $1.00 per day for adults, 50c for students. Write to: Mrs. Lorena Vogt; 815 N.E. 110th; Seattle, Wash. Phone: Emerson 3-0956.\nAUGUST 6 thru 14th: DR. NEVA DELL HUNTER'S 12th Annual Quimby Conference of Transluation. Lectures and discussions on New Age Topics, including the stars, science and metaphysics. In lovely scenic country at a beautiful, modern motor-hotel. $2.50 per day, attendance. Information from: Quimby Center; P.O. Box 453; Alamogordo, N.M.\nAUGUST 19,20,21: SPACE RESEARCH, Inc.'s Second Annual Convention, at the North Branch YMCA in Spokane, Washington. Scenic location near the Spokane River. Indoor and outdoor convention activities. For information, write to: Space Research Inc., No. 6815 Julia, Spokane, Wash.\nOCTOBER 22,23: GEORGE VAN TASSEL'S 13th Annual Spacecraft Convention at Giant Rock, Calif. in the desert 17 miles north of Yucca Valley. Bring your own camping equipment and enjoy the outing.\nOCTOBER 29,30: 10th ANNUAL NORTHERN CALIFORNIA SPACECRAFT CONVENTION, Claremont Hotel, Berkeley, Calif. Info: Angela Hilsby; 1265 Montgomery Blvd.; San Francisco, Calif. 94127.\nOUR NEW NAME: Our magazine, formerly called 'UFO International', has now become 'Flying Saucers International', which we feel to be a more appropriate title, since Flying Saucers are no longer Unidentified Flying Objects as far as we are concerned. Flying Saucers have become a serious issue with thinking people all over the world. We believe that most of the objects which have been sighted have been of extraterrestrial origin, controlled by intelligent beings who, in form, are very much like us. Therefore, we hope you will understand our reasons for changing titles, and that you will continue to enjoy reading our publication under its new banner.\nDR. RAYMOND BERNARD, founder of the Biosophical Society of Santa Caterina, Brazil, passed away on Sept. 10, 1965. He was the author of 'The Hollow Earth' and several other books concerned with the hollow earth theory.\nMARIA ELLIOTT, contactee, psychic and founder of Maria Creative Womanhood Foundation, was a recent guest on the Bob Grant Radio Show, and the Pamela Mason TV Show. Glamorous Maria now has her own program every Tuesday afternoon at 2:30 p.m. on KTYM radio. She may be seen in person every Wed. evening at Holland House Restaurant, 8:00 p.m. in the downstairs meeting room. An interesting program may be heard on New Age Topics, and free readings are given. For more information about Maria's appearances, classes, etc., phone 657-1631, or write: Dr. Maria Elliott; 1543 Sunset Plaza Drive; Los Angeles, Calif. 90069.\nDR. GEORGE KING, founder of the Aetherius Society, was host at the official opening of the Society's new headquarters at 6202 Afton Place; Los Angeles, Calif. 90028; on March 5, 1966. After the program Dr. King personally escorted us around the attractive quarters. He also reported that a high Space Being in physical form had visited there recently for an hour and fifteen minutes and, after walking around the premises, left his blessing on the Aetherius Society and its work. For further information call 465-9652, or write to the above address.\nDELLA LARSON, who for over a decade was the guiding light and main instigator of Flying Saucer meetings and activities in the San Francisco Bay Area, passed away on October 25, 1965. She was 70 years old. She will be remembered for her energetic and enthusiastic dedication to the goals of the Flying Saucer cause, as well as for the highly successful annual Northern California Space Craft Conventions which she organized for nine years. (Della, we salute you!)\nMAX MILLER, former publisher of the now-defunct 'Saucers' magazine, and author of 'Flying Saucers: Fact or Fiction' (now out of print), has a new role. He is now editor-publisher of 'Reall' magazine which may be found on the newstands for 50c. The August '66 issue devotes about half of its space to the Flying Saucer subject and will be well worth your investigation.\nWILBUR MILLER, one of the early researchers in the Flying Saucer Movement, passed away on March 5, 1966. He was known for his fine channel contacts with several Space Beings, including Monka of Mars. He also was the co-author -- with his wife, Evelyn -- of the book 'We of the New Dimension.' Although he was a native of Missouri he had, in recent years, been a resident of Los Angeles and of Morongo Valley, Calif. (Good journey, Wil!)\nHOPE TROXELL, founder of the School of Thought, now situated in Independence, Calif. (P.O. Box 458), reported recently that the neighboring towns of Bishop and Lone Pine had partial blackouts during an evening channel (teltpathic) session she was having with the Space Brothers. The lights in Independence went out completely for several minutes by a gradual fade-out, and then came on again in the same manner. During this time, the Space Being speaking through Hope said to those present: 'Be not afraid. We are guardians of the race. Protection will be given to those in the area.'\nHAL WILCOX made a fine guest appearance on the Joe Pyne TV Show, April 30, 1966. Hal passed the lie-detector test with flying colors and conducted himself with dignity and fortitude, which isn't always easy on the Joe Pyne Show. During the test, Hal stated that he had taken a saucer ride to visit the second planet from the star, Alpha Centauri.\nM.I.N.D. stands for Mental Investigations of New Dimensions, an entity recently formed by Wesley and JoNell Bateman. Their activities include meetings, courses and public appearances. They have demonstrated on several occasions for groups of up to 20 people, their ability to telepathically direct the movements of visible spacecraft overhead. Writer: M.I.N.D., 4916 Franklin Ave.; Hollywood, California 90027. Phone: 661-1731.\nHELEN & GABRIEL GREEN contributed their bit to the education of nearly 300,000 young people to the saucer subject at the Teen-Age Fair, April 1 thru 10 at the Hollywood Palladium, where AFSCA had a booth to exhibit saucer photos, slides, and to disseminate information. We handed out over 13,000 brochures and saucer photo post cards, and talked ourselves hoarse answering questions for 12 hours each day. Gabriel also made over a dozen radio and TV appearances and interviews during the Fair.\nWe also had another booth at the National Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition at the Pan Pacific Auditorium, May 17 thru 22. Yes, we've been busy!"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFSCA's (Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America)\n3rd National\nFLYING SAUCER CONVENTION\nSAUCER\n* MOVIES\n* SLIDES\n* EXHIBITS\n* BOOKS\n* LITERATURE\nAt The Beautiful, New CENTENNIAL COLISEUM (4590 S. Virginia St.)\nREGISTER - 9 A.M. - $2.00 per day\nReno, Nevada - July 8,9,10, 1966\nProgram: 10 A.M. to 11 P.M.\nSPEAKERS ARE: Wayne S. Aho, Carl A. Anderson, Orfeo Angelucci, Michael \"X\" Barton, Wesley Bateman, Marianne Francis, Dr. Daniel W. Fry, Calvin C. Girvin, Gabriel Green, Dr. George King, Hanno Mayberry, Howard Menger, Laura Mundo, Mel Noel, Sidney Padrick, Chief Standing Horse, Dr. Frank E. Stranges, Mollie Thompson, Hope Troxell, George W. Van Tassel, Hal Wilcox.\nHEAR: Amazing experiences with spacecraft from other planets and their occupants by the greatest assembly of contactee-speakers since our Los Angeles convention in 1959 at the Statler-Hilton.\nSEE: Startling new photographic evidence -- the biggest collection of Flying Saucer photos on display in the history of the saucer movement. Actual color movies and new still photos of Flying Saucers.\nMEET: IN PERSON, PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD ACTUAL CONTACTS WITH SPACESHIPS AND THEIR CREWS FROM OTHER WORLDS.\nLEARN: About this important subject which is so vital to the welfare and survival of humanity in our times.\nATTEND: AFSCA's 3rd National Convention. You'll be glad you did! Fill out the Advance Registration form below. Do it Now!\nFor Motel & Hotel room information, write to: The Greater Reno Chamber of Commerce P.O. Box 2109; Reno, Nevada\nAFSCA 3rd NATIONAL CONVENTION ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM\nTo: AFSCA Headquarters; 2004 N. Hoover St., Los Angeles, Calif. 90027. Phone: 662-4404.\nYes, count me in! I don't want to miss joining with you at this important convention and helping to support this vital movement. Here is my $________. Please send me _______ Advance Reservation tickets ($5.00 for the 3 days, or $2.00 per day). IMPORTANT: I am also enclosing a stamped, self-addressed envelope for the return of my tickets. ADVANCE REGISTRATIONS must be received at AFSCA Headquarters no later than JUNE 30th!!!\nName__________ Street__________\nCity__________ State__________ Zip Code__________"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Post Office Box 1158\nNewark, New Jersey 07101\n\nJanuary 24, 1967\n\nOliver P. Hedgepeth\nDetachment Commander\nNorthern New Jersey Detachment\n2nd OSI District (I.G.) USAF\nRoom 518\n1060 Broad Street\nNewark, New Jersey 07102\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY SP-6 Bg/tley\n\nDear Sir:\n\nOn the afternoon of January 22, 1967, Mr. A. Mackevich, 15 Forest Drive, Florham Park, New Jersey (377-6553) telephonically contacted a Special Agent of this office and furnished the following information:\n\nAt 7:00 am, January 21, 1967, his son, Peter N. Mackevich, age 11, observed an object hovering from ten to twelve feet above the ground at the intersection of Deerfield Drive and Forest Drive, adjacent to his home. He described this object as shaped like an inverted saucer approximately twenty-five feet in diameter with a turret on the top surface.\n\nMr. Mackevich said his son took two photographs of this object from the son's bedroom window which faces in a northerly direction. The first photograph shows a cloud of smoke with the turret on top, and the other photograph shows the entire object.\n\nMr. Mackevich was requested to furnish any information relative to this matter to your office.\n\nVery truly yours,\nR. W. Bachman\nSpecial Agent in Charge\n\n2 - Addressee\n1 - Newark (100-36998)\nWFF:jsk\n(3)\n\n100-36998-44"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-159 (Rev. 11-25-64)\n\nRECORD OF INFORMATION FURNISHED OTHER AGENCIES\n\nOrally ______ date By Telephone ______ date Written Communication 1/24/67 date\n\nInformation concerning:\nUnidentified Flying Objects\n\nInformation furnished from File, Serial, and Page Number:\n100-36998 Sec 44\n\nInformation furnished was obtained:\n[ ] during course of Bureau investigation\n[ ] from informants\n[ ] from complainants or other sources\n\nInformation furnished to:\nLocal Office OSI, Newark, N.J.\n\nRemarks:\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/15/85 BY SP-6 Bg/tley\n\ncc 100-36998\nWilliam F. Flynn\nSpecial Agent\n\n100-36998-44A\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED JAN 30 1967 FBI - Newark"} {"doc_id":"c5d14d0fc58f2bba","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-159 (Rev. 11-25-64)\n\nRECORD OF INFORMATION FURNISHED OTHER AGENCIES\n\nOrally ____ By Telephone ____ Written Communication 1/24/67\ndate date date\nInformation concerning:\nUnidentified Flying Object\nInformation furnished from File, Serial, and Page Number:\n100-36998 Sec 44\nInformation furnished was obtained:\n☐ during course of Bureau investigation\n☐ from informants\n☒ from complainants or other sources\nInformation furnished to:\nLoran Coffier OSI\nRemarks:\nOriginal file sent to the Bureau\nper 190-552 Bureau airtel dated 9/11/84\nXerox copy is to be destroyed when\noriginal file is returned. ____\n\ncc 100-36998\n\nWilliam J. Hoover\nSpecial Agent\nc3\n\n100-36998 44 A\nSEARCHED INDEXED\nSERIALIZED FILED\nJAN 30 1967\nFBI - NEW YORK\n\nNW 91149\nDocId:34742114 Page 66"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense Intelligence Reference Document\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n7 January 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-0912-006\n\nBiomaterials\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBiomaterials\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 65\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ........................................................................................vi\nImportance of Biocompatibility ........................................................vii\nScience of Biomaterials ....................................................................vii\nBiomaterials for Biosensors ............................................................. 1\nBiomaterials for Biomedicine ............................................................ 2\nBiomedical Silicones - Polydimethylsiloxanes ................................... 2\nSilicone Chemistry ............................................................................ 4\nSilicone in Biomedical Products ........................................................ 4\nTeflon ............................................................................................... 6\nBiodegradable Polymers ................................................................... 7\nBiodegradation Advantages .............................................................. 8\nDegradable Biomaterials ................................................................... 8\nPolylactic Acid and Polyglycolic Acid ................................................ 8\nPolyethylene Glycol or Polyethylene Oxide...................................... 10\nHydrogels ........................................................................................ 10\nTitanium – Hip and Knee Joints ...................................................... 11\nBioCeramics ..................................................................................... 11\nDental Ceramics ............................................................................... 13\nTissue Constructs as Biomaterials ................................................... 13\nCardiovascular Biomaterials ............................................................ 15\nStent Biomaterials............................................................................ 18\nNitinol as a Biomaterial ................................................................... 19\nContact Lenses ................................................................................ 19\nDrug Delivery Polymers ................................................................... 20\nMedical Titanium as a Biomaterial .................................................. 22\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBiomaterials in Dialysis ................................................................... 24\n\nSummary and Recommendations ..................................................... 25\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Biomaterial Applications in Medical Devices ............................vi\nFigure 2. Common Medical Devices That Use Biomaterials ....................viii\nFigure 3. Biomaterials Such as Polycarbonates, Cellulose, and Silicones Used in Membranes for Sensors, Dialyzers, and Oxygenators .............................. 1\nFigure 4. Photograph of Silicone (polydimethyllsiloxane) Biomedical Implants Used in Breast Reconstructive Surgery ....................... 3\nFigure 5. Silicone Chemical Groups ........................................................ 4\nFigure 6. Silicone Tracheostomy Tube ..................................................... 5\nFigure 7. Silicone Sheets Used Under the Skin as a Physical Supporting Layer for Repair of Scar Tissue ........................................................ 5\nFigure 8. Teflon Structure ........................................................................ 6\nFigure 9. Expanded PTFE (Gore-Tex or ePTFE) Used in Lip Implants ....................... 7\nFigure 10. Biodegradable Polymers ........................................................ 7\nFigure 11. Structure of Polylactic Acid (a Biodegradable Polymer) ........................ 9\nFigure 12. Biodegradable PLA as an Antiadhesion Barrier after Open-Heart Surgery ........................................................................ 9\nFigure 13. Biodegradable Polymers Based on Copolymers of Polylactic Acid and Polyethylene Glycol (Polysciences Inc) ............................................. 10\nFigure 14. Dots of Hydrogel..................................................................... 10\nFigure 15. Various Titanium Components Used in Hip Joint Replacement ............ 11\nFigure 16. Hydroxyapatite Porous Bone-Like Structure After Commercial Processing ................................................................................ 12\nFigure 17. Bioceramic Used in Artificial Hip Replacement Component .................. 12\nFigure 18. Computer-Based Sculpted Ceramic Teeth ........................................... 13\nFigure 19. Scaffold-Guided Tissue Regeneration ................................................ 14\nFigure 20. Biodegradable Material CSLG Deposited in a Honeycomb Structure to Allow Infiltration by Living Cells While in a Submerged Cell Culture ... 15\nFigure 21. Some of the More Popular Biomedical Devices and Duration of Their Blood Contact ............................................................................... 16\nFigure 22. Gore Medical Teflon Foam Used in Vascular Grafts ............................ 16\nFigure 23. Illustration of Treatment of an Atrial Septal Defect Using a Teflon-Based Product Manufactured by Gore, Inc. ............................... 17\nFigure 24. Stainless Steel and Teflon Bjork Shiley Heart Valve ........................... 18\nFigure 25. Illustration of Stent Placement ............................................... 18\nFigure 26. Nitinol Stent ........................................................................... 19\nFigure 27. Contact Lens........................................................................... 20\nFigure 28. Schematic Representation of Biodegradable (Bioerodible) Drug Delivery Device ............................................................... 21\nFigure 29. Photomicrograph of Titanium Metal (Appears Black in This Photo) in an Intimate Integration With Living Bone ........................................ 23\nFigure 30. Illustration (Left) and Photograph (Right) of a Blood Dialyzer as Used in Medicine ............................................................... 24\nFigure 31. Cuprophane Membrane Passes Blood Waste Products (Violet and Orange Dots) Through Pores and Blocks Passage of Red Blood Cells .. 25\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBiomaterials\n\nIntroduction\n\nBiomaterials are metals, ceramics, polymers, glasses, carbons, and composite materials intended to interface with biological systems. They are often used to treat, augment, or replace bodily tissues, organs, or functions. Such materials are used in various forms, including molded or machined parts, coatings, fibers, films, foams, and fabrics. Biomaterials are usually nonliving, but recent definitions also include living skin and tissues produced in culture.\n\nA biocompatible material is different from a biological material produced by a biological system, such as bone. Artificial hips, vascular stents, artificial pacemakers, and catheters are all made of biocompatible materials that typically have a synthetic origin. An extraordinarily wide range of medical devices are made from biomaterials. Figure 1 shows some representative examples of medical devices that use biomaterials.\n\nFigure 1. Biomaterial Applications in Medical Devices\n\nEncompassing elements of medicine, biology, chemistry, and materials science, biomaterials science has experienced steady and strong growth over its approximately half-century history.\n\nAlthough biomaterials are used primarily for medical applications, they are also used to grow cells in culture, to assay for blood proteins in the clinical\n\nvi\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nlaboratory, in processing biomolecules in biotechnology, for fertility regulation implants in cattle, in diagnostic gene arrays, in the aquaculture of oysters, and for investigational cell-silicon \"biochips.\" The common thread in these applications is the interaction between biological systems and synthetic or modified natural materials.\n\nBiomimetic materials, in contrast, are not made by living organisms but have compositions and properties similar to materials made by living organisms. For example, the calcium hydroxyapatite coating found on many artificial hips—used as metal-bone interface cement to make it easier to attach implants to bone—is similar to the coating found in mollusk shells.\n\nIMPORTANCE OF BIOCOMPATIBILITY\n\nBiocompatibility is an important issue in biomedical implants and sensors. A material-tissue interaction that results from implanting a foreign object in the body is a major obstacle to developing stable and long-term implantable devices and sensors.\n\nThe processes that occur when sensors are placed in the complex living environment of the human body are sometimes known as biofouling. In biofouling, the physical or chemically sensitive portion of the sensor interface becomes coated with proteins, blood-formed elements, adherent immunological cells, and sometimes forms of scar tissue that tend to isolate the sensor from the rest of the body environment. This response of tissue is a foreign body reaction to any object introduced in tissue that does not express surface characteristics that identify it as part of the host tissues.\n\nExperiences of many investigators (more than 600 reported studies since 1996) with the biocompatibility of biomaterials related to the function of implanted biosensors have been poor such that many companies have abandoned implantable sensor devices altogether. Rather, the recent trend in medical biosensors is toward placing them outside the body. Newer sensors are often based on optical principles in an effort to obviate the biocompatibility and biomaterial issues of placing sensors inside the human body.\n\nSCIENCE OF BIOMATERIALS\n\nThe study and use of biomaterials bring together researchers from diverse academic backgrounds who must communicate clearly. Professions that intersect in the development, study, and application of biomaterials include bioengineer, chemist, chemical engineer, electrical engineer, mechanical engineer, materials scientist, biologist, microbiologist, physician, veterinarian, ethicist, nurse, lawyer, regulatory specialist, and venture capitalist.\n\nThe number of medical devices used each year in humans is very large. Figure 2 estimates usage for common devices, all of which employ biomaterials.\n\nvii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nNumbers of Medical Devices/yr. Worldwide\nintraocular lens 7,000,000\ncontact lens 75,000,000\nvascular graft 400,000\nhip and knee prostheses 1,000,000\ncatheter 300,000,000\nheart valve 200,000\nstent (cardiovascular) >2,000,000\nbreast implant 300,000\ndental implant 500,000\npacemaker 200,000\nrenal dialyzer 25,000,000\nleft ventricular assist devices 100,000\nMillions of lives saved. The quality of life improved for millions more.\nA $100 billion industry\n\nFigure 2. Common Medical Devices That Use Biomaterials\n\nThe development of biomaterials is the junction of materials science and chemistry. Medical devices may be composed of a single biomaterial or a combination of several materials. A heart valve might be fabricated from polymers, metals, and carbons. A hip joint might be fabricated from metals and polymers (and sometimes ceramics) and will be interfaced to the body through a polymeric bone cement.\n\nBiomaterials by themselves do not make a useful clinical therapy but rather have to be fabricated into devices. This is typically an engineer's role, but the engineer might work closely with synthetic chemists to optimize material properties and with physicians to ensure the device is useful in clinical applications.\n\nBiomaterials must be compatible with the body, and there are often issues that must be resolved before a product can be placed on the market and used in a clinical setting. Because of this, biomaterials are usually subjected to the same very stringent safety requirements as those of new drug therapies.\n\nviii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBiomaterials for Biosensors\n\nImplantable biosensors for the human body place some of the greatest functional demands on biomaterials. Biosensors monitor the physiologic state of tissues for medical therapeutics or for assessing human performance. Sensors for glucose, oxygen, blood pH, adrenal hormones, nervous activity, heart performance, and blood pressure monitors are all of interest.\n\nBlood biochemistry sensors are the most difficult sensors to keep functioning over time primarily because the sensor interface materials provoke low-level foreign-body reactions in tissues. These types of responses are not specifically important to implantable devices that have structural rather than sensing functions, such as heart valves, but they can completely render a biosensor for blood glucose, for example, useless after a few days.\n\nChemically sensitive biosensor interfaces to tissue and body environments employ membranes in an effort to protect the biosensor active-sensing surface from possible body reactions. The membrane allows small molecules of interest to pass through its pores while excluding larger proteins, blood-formed elements, and cells like macrophages that would engulf the sensor.\n\nThe membrane's biomaterial composition, pore size, and long-term physical integrity are critical components in the functioning of the sensor. If the biomaterial chosen retards the adhesion of proteins and does not provoke a biological response, then this improves sensor longevity. Figure 3 shows some representative biomembranes.\n\nNo one biomaterial is best for all sensor applications, primarily because different biomaterials behave differently relative to the substance being sensed. Membranes that pass glucose, for example, may not pass oxygen that is needed for a sensor to function. Membrane biofouling starts immediately upon contact of the sensor with the body cells. Proteins and other biological components adhere to the sensor surface, and in some cases, impregnate the pores of the material. This process retards diffusion of the molecules of interest to the sensor surface and either slows the sensor's response to changes in concentration or reduces the overall response to the point where the sensor falls out of calibration.\n\nFigure 3. Biomaterials Such as Polycarbonates, Cellulose, and Silicones Used in Membranes for Sensors, Dialyzers, and Oxygenators\n\nThe design of sensor membrane materials has been found to be critically dependent on subtle features of the membrane's chemistry, material thickness, and porosity, as well as, more generally, where in the human body the sensor is located. The blood stream is\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthe most hostile location both for sensor performance and in terms of the potential for danger to the patient through the provocation of blood clotting.\n\nThe most successful biomembrane materials have been porous forms of Teflon, polyurethanes, and cellulose-based materials such as cellulose acetate. As important as the material composition is for sensors, so are aspects of a membrane's structure and mechanical properties, such as its ability resist abrasion and adhere to sensor surfaces.\n\nBiomaterials for Biomedicine\n\nIn this review, we look at representative biomaterials as well as representative applications. These biomaterials are among the most popular of those used in medicine today, and the applications in some cases represent multibillion-dollar-a-year markets.\n\nSome of the best known of the biomaterials are:\n\n• Silicone\n• Teflon\n• Biodegradable polymers\n• Hydrogels\n• Titanium alloys\n• Ceramics\n• Tissue constructs\n\nSome of the largest applications are:\n\n• Cardiovascular – stents, synthetic blood vessels, heart valves\n• Hip and knee joints\n• Contact lenses\n• Drug delivery devices\n• Kidney dialysis\n\nBIOMEDICAL SILICONES- POLYDIMETHYLSILOXANES\n\nPerhaps the most well known of all biomaterials are the silicones—soft, pliable, and semitransparent materials that are used in many different applications in modern society, ranging from water sealants to fibrous insulations.\n\nSilicone is often mistakenly called \"silicon.\" Although silicones contain silicon atoms, they are an organic material of greater complexity and are not made up exclusively of silicon. Silicone is used in an exceptionally large number of biomedical applications. It is blood compatible, sterilizable, rugged, and strong but flexible. Its mechanical properties\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ncan be tailored to varying degrees of hardness and strength for stiffness in catheter applications.\n\nBiomedical silicones attracted notoriety in 1995 when a class-action lawsuit against Dow Corning, Inc., brought a huge settlement resulting from the supposed dangers of silicone breast implants.\n\nAfter reviewing years of evidence and research concerning silicone gel-filled breast implants, the national Institute of Medicine found that \"evidence suggests diseases or conditions such as connective tissue diseases, cancer, neurological diseases or other systemic complaints or conditions are no more common in women with breast implants than in women without implants.\" Dow moved out of the medical silicone business and has since been replaced by an array of smaller companies offering specialized silicone products.\n\nFigure 4 shows the present form of silicone used for reconstructive surgery following a mastectomy, particularly after breast cancer in women.\n\nFigure 4. Photograph of Silicone (polydimethyllsiloxane) Biomedical Implants Used in Breast Reconstructive Surgery\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSILICONE CHEMISTRY\n\nSilicone is actually a common name for the chemical compound polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS), a class of synthetic polymers with repeating units of silicon and oxygen. Figure 5 shows the polymeric repeating structure of medical silicones. Various functional groups—often methyl—can be attached to that backbone to change the material properties. Silicone polymers can easily be transformed into linear or cross-linking materials without using any toxic plasticizers. The resulting materials are elastic at body temperature.\n\nFigure 5. Silicone Chemical Groups\n\nThe simultaneous presence of different groups attached to the silicon-oxygen backbone gives silicones a range of viscous and mechanical properties that allow their use as fluids, emulsions, compounds, resins, and elastomers in numerous applications. Thus, silicone is a versatile polymer, although its use is often limited by its relatively poor mechanical strength. However, this limitation can be overcome by reinforcing silicone with a silica filler or by chemically modifying the backbone.\n\nThe stability, lack of toxicity, and excellent biocompatibility of PDMS make these materials well suited for use in personal care, pharmaceutical, and medical device applications. Silicone is easily molded and cast using room temperature curing (known as RTV) or through the use of an organic catalyst.\n\nSILICONE IN BIOMEDICAL PRODUCTS\n\nSilicone membranes are made by casting the silicone liquid precursor into thin sheets. Such membranes are often used in oxygen and carbon dioxide blood biosensors because membranes made of this material are highly transmissive to these gases while they block most other chemical substances present in the blood stream. In addition, silicone's resistance to protein adhesion and its excellent overall biocompatibility make it one of the most commonly used materials for encapsulating biosensors for tissue or blood contact.\n\nRecent formulations of silicone can be patterned with ultraviolet light and, thus, lend themselves to manufacture with biosensors made by photolithography.\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 6. Silicone Tracheostomy Tube\n\nFigure 6 is a representative example of silicone-based medical products involving tubes or catheters. A tracheostomy tube, or \"trach tube,\" is a 2- to 3-inch-long curved metal or plastic tube placed in a surgically created opening (tracheostomy) in the windpipe to keep it open. Versions of these products are used in cases where patients have difficulty breathing on their own, such as in a spinal cord injury.\n\nA product known as Mepiform™ is an example of silicone use in a sheet form for the management of scars, particularly keloid scars. Figure 7 shows this product.\n\nFigure 7. Silicone Sheets Used Under the Skin as a Physical Supporting Layer for Repair of Scar Tissue\n\n5"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTEFLON\n\nBiomedical materials must be inert to the complex chemistry of biological fluids so they neither suffer nor instigate change in tissue. Teflon™ admirably fulfills these requirements. Teflon is a trade name for polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), a fluorocarbon-based polymer. It is made by free radical polymerization of tetrafluoroethylene and has a carbon backbone chain in which each carbon has two fluorine atoms attached to it.\n\nThis polymer is hydrophobic (water hating), biologically inert, and nonbiodegradable and also has low friction characteristics and excellent \"slipperiness.\" The chemical inertness (stability) of PTFE is related to the strength of the fluorine-carbon bond that makes it resistant to adhesion. Figure 8 shows the structure of this material. It is a long chain of repeating chemical units, as shown in the right of the figure.\n\nFigure 8. Teflon Structure\n\nGoretex® is a medical form of Teflon (PTFE) that, when stretched and extruded, entraps air cells in its microstructure much like foam does and, thus, is relatively soft and repellant to most liquids. This material is known as e-PTFE (expanded PTFE).\n\nPTFE can be fabricated in many forms, including pastes, tubes, strands, and sheets, while ePTFE can be woven into a porous, fabric-like mesh. When implanted in the body, this strong mesh allows tissue to grow into its pores, making it ideal for medical devices such as vascular grafts.\n\n6"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPreformed ePTFE subcutaneous implant materials have been used to improve facial reconstruction and cosmetic surgery outcomes. Figure 9 is a manufacturer's product information showing the utility of using ePTFE in cosmetic surgery.\n\nPTFE has relatively low wear resistance, but under compression or in situations where rubbing or abrasion can occur, it can produce wear particles. These can result in a chronic inflammatory reaction, an undesirable outcome. For a given application, the biomaterials engineer must consider many aspects of the physical and biological properties of the materials. Thus, although PTFE is highly inert in the body, applying it in the wrong circumstances (for example, to a device that is under compression or exposed to wear) may lead to a reaction that no longer qualifies as \"biocompatible.\"\n\nFigure 9. Expanded PTFE (Gore-Tex or ePTFE) Used in Lip Implants. This is a synthetic implant that has been used in the face and body for many years. The main advantage is that it is not absorbed over time and the results are permanent.\n\nBEFORE AFTER BEFORE AFTER\n\nBIODEGRADABLE POLYMERS\n\nBiodegradable polymers are an important and relatively large category of biomaterials that are used extensively in the medical and food industries. In the latter, they are used as food wrappings and other packaging derived from natural food substances that slowly degrade—by evaporation into water vapor and carbon dioxide—when exposed to the sun and outdoor environments, thus minimizing waste disposal. Figure 10 shows a complex shape made from polylactide (PLA), a biodegradable polymer.\n\nBiodegradable polymers can be either natural or synthetic. In general, synthetic polymers offer greater advantages than do natural materials in that they can be tailored to give a wider range of properties and more predictable lot-to-lot uniformity than can materials from natural sources. Synthetic polymers also represent a more reliable source of raw materials—\n\nFigure 10. Biodegradable Polymers. Polymers such as PLA are much like conventional plastics and, as such, have qualities of clarity, flexibility, and strength.\n\n7"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\none free from concerns of immunogenicity. These polymers can be optically clear, exhibit good flexibility, and have strength comparable to that of many plastics.\n\nBIODEGRADATION ADVANTAGES\n\nIn the human body, biodegradable polymers have good compatibility but also decompose to harmless materials and over time dissolve altogether. Biodegradable polymers undergo a chemical hydrolysis in the salty and wet environment of tissues by way of a labile chemical backbone of the polymer. The degradation starts immediately upon water exposure and occurs in two steps.\n\nIn the first step, the material thoroughly hydrates, and the water attacks the polymer chains, converting long chains into shorter, water-soluble fragments. The desirable aspect of this process is a reduction in molecular weight without a loss in physical properties, since the device matrix is still held together, even with the shorter chains.\n\nIn the second step, the shorter polymer chains are attacked by enzymes that are naturally present in tissues. Basically, a metabolization of the fragments by the body tissues results in a rapid loss of polymer mass, what is referred to as bulk erosion. All the commercially available synthetic devices and sutures degrade by bulk erosion.\n\nDEGRADABLE BIOMATERIALS\n\nDifferent biodegradable polymers have different lifetimes in tissues, ranging from a few days to years. Combining two different biopolymers—for example, short-lived (days) PLA (polylactide) and longer lived (months) PGA (polyglycolide)—reveals that polymers can be produced with intermediate decomposition times. Thus, their decay times can be custom determined through their formulation.\n\nBiodegradable polymers fulfill a physician's desire to have an implanted device that will not require a second surgical intervention for removal, which is desirable in many applications. In orthopedic applications, for example, a fractured bone that has been fixated with a rigid, nonbiodegradable stainless implant has a tendency for refracture upon removal of the implant, making removal undesirable. This refracturing results from the offloading of the stress on the bone by the stainless steel support because the bone has not carried a sufficient load during the healing process. However, a fixation system prepared from a biodegradable polymer can be engineered to degrade at a rate that will slowly transfer the load to the healing bone, thereby avoiding the risk of refracture and eliminating the need to remove the implant.\n\nPOLYLACTIC ACID AND POLYGLYCOLIC ACID\n\nPolylactic acid (PLA), polyglycolic acid (PGA), and their copolymers are the most widely used of the biodegradable polymers. These materials, when exposed to the sun and weather, will degrade into water and carbon dioxide and essentially vanish, given sufficient time.\n\nIn the human body, combinations of PLA and PGA are used to control the longevity of a material by controlling its degradation rate when exposed to tissues. The degradation products in the human body are also water and carbon dioxide.\n\n8"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PLA, or polylactide, is a thermoplastic, long-chained organic material derived from renewable resources, such as corn starch (in the United States) or sugarcanes (in the rest of the world). PLA has been recognized for more than a century and is of commercial interest primarily because of its biomedical applications. Figure 11 shows the chemical structure of PLA. Figure 11. Structure of Polylactic Acid (a Biodegradable Polymer) These materials are popular because they have already been used in many approved medical implant devices and have been shown to be safe, nontoxic, and biocompatible. They have been used in the development of several commercially available medical products, including sutures, tissue screws and tacks, guided tissue-regeneration membranes for dentistry, internal bone-fixation devices, microspheres for implantable drug delivery systems, and meniscus and cartilage repair systems. These polymers can potentially be used in the design of vascular and urological stents and skin substitutes. This is possible through the manipulation of the polymer characteristics of these materials, such as their three-dimensional architecture, their mechanical and structural integrity, and their biodegradability. The materials can also be used as scaffolds for tissue engineering and for tissue reconstruction. A medical application of these materials in thin-sheet form is their placement as a thin barrier layer that prevents entry of debris into wounds and as an underlayer to the skin and body tissue. Figure 12 is an artist's conception of a layer of PLA polymer being placed over the heart after open-heart surgery. The PLA sheet acts as a barrier and spacer to prevent the healing heart wall from growing an attachment to the chest wall and from forming adhesions onto the overlying 9 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY tissues. The barrier remains in place only for a week or so during the healing process before biodegrading so no foreign body is left inside of the body. POLYETHYLENE GLYCOL OR POLYETHYLENE OXIDE Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a widely used material in biomedicine, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and agriculture. Its chemical compatibility, water solubility, nontoxicity, biocompatibility, and multiple physical states allow it be used as coatings and in solid form to create surfaces that are very acceptable to biology. Figure 13 shows the marketing of PEG to broad markets that include biodegradable polymers. One of PEG's major applications is in the creation of \"nonfouling\" surfaces when exposed to blood or biological environments. The nonfouling, or cell- and protein-resistant, properties of surfaces containing PEG are due to the material's highly hydrated state. Figure 13. Biodegradable Polymers Based on Copolymers of Polylactic Acid and Polyethylene Glycol PEG is used in drug delivery systems to improve the solubility of drugs and to help stabilize immunogenic or unstable protein drugs. This can enhance the circulation times and stabilities of drugs in the body. HYDROGELS Hydrogels are liquid or semisolid materials that have a strong affinity for water. Poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylic) acid, or poly(HEMA), is one of the most important hydrogels in the biomaterials world because it has many advantages over other hydrogels. These include a water content similar to living tissue, inertness to biological processes, resistance to degradation, permeability to metabolites, and resistance to absorption by the body. Poly(HEMA) can easily be manufactured into many shapes and forms and be easily sterilized. This is due to its structure, which is Figure 14. Dots of Hydrogel 10 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY composed of long-chain molecules crosslinked to one another to create many small empty spaces that can absorb water or other liquids like a sponge. Hydrogels can be extruded into nearly any shape. Figure 14 shows them as small dots. If the spaces are filled with a drug, the hydrogel can dispense the drug gradually as the structure biodegrades. Hydrogels are also used for tissue engineering and tissue repair, where the spaces in the gel might be filled with stem cells, tissue-growth factors, or a combination of the two. Hydrogels are cross-linked polymer networks that are insoluble in body fluids but are able to swell and often have a water content of up to 90 percent. These can be formed by crosslinking one or several types of monomer units into a network, forming a homopolymer, copolymer, or multipolymer. With the incorporation of different monomers, gels with wide-ranging chemical and physical properties can be formed. The gels can be neutral or charged, soft or stiff, strong or brittle. Hydrogels are routinely used for biomedical and pharmaceutical applications such as drug release, artificial tendons, wound-healing bioadhesives, artificial kidney membranes, artificial skin, and contact lenses. TITANIUM - HIP AND KNEE JOINTS Titanium-based hip and knee implants are quite successful and are among the most common orthopedic procedures. When a hip replacement is performed, the arthritic, damaged hip joint is removed. The ball-and-socket hip joint is then replaced with an artificial implant. Hip implants often show no visible sign of their existence in either walking gait or functionality. In adults, they can last a lifetime. Knee implants are also known to be successful. Figure 15 shows an assortment of titanium hip joint assemblies. The long shaft part of the device fills a drilled hole in the long bone of the femur. Figure 15. Various Titanium Components Used in Hip Joint Replacement BIOCERAMICS Ceramic materials are sometimes used directly or modified for use in applications in the human body and, so, become known as bioceramics. The most common applications are in bone repair, dentistry, and the use of ceramics in hip and knee joint replacements, where their exceptional hardness can be put to advantage in wear joints. Bioceramics range in biocompatibility from the ceramic oxides, which are inert in the body, to the other extreme of resorbable materials, which are eventually replaced by the materials they were used to repair. 11 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Two common ceramics used in dentistry and hip prostheses are alumina and hydroxyapatite (HA). HA is a major component of the inorganic compartment of bone. Commercially prepared HA is processed using a technique of phosphoric acid and hydrothermal exchange that produces a porous, \"bone-like\" morphology in the resulting structure. Figure 16 shows this result. When implanted into bone defects, HA supports bone growth through the pores and, thus, becomes an intermediate scaffold, as well as an eventual support matrix. Hydroxyapatite composites have been successfully used to repair, reconstruct, and replace diseased or damaged body parts, especially bone. They have been used in vertebral prostheses, intervertebral spacers, bone grafting, middle-ear bone replacements, and jawbone repair. Figure 16. Hydroxyapatite Porous Bone-Like Structure After Commercial Processing Aluminum oxide, or alumina (Al2O3), has been used in orthopedic surgery for more than 20 years as the joint surface in total hip prostheses because of its exceptionally low coefficient of friction and minimal wear rates. Alumina has excellent corrosion resistance, good biocompatibility, high strength, and high wear resistance, making it ideal for orthopedic applications. Other bioceramics include coral skeletons, which can be transformed into hydroxyapatite by high temperatures. Their porous structure allows relatively rapid ingrowth of living cells at the expense of initial mechanical strength. The high temperature also burns away any organic molecules, such as proteins, preventing graft-versus-host disease and rejection. Bioceramics made from a calcium phosphate material containing tiny pores have been used to coat metal joint implants or as unloaded space fillers for bone ingrowth. Tissue ingrowth into the pores occurs, with Figure 17. Bioceramic Used in Artificial Hip Replacement Component 12 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY an increase in the interfacial area between the implant and the tissues. This tissue ingrowth results in an increased resistance to device movement within the tissue. As in natural bone, proteins adsorb to the calcium phosphate surface to provide the critical intervening layer through which the bone cells interact with the implanted biomaterial. Figure 17 shows an example of this. DENTAL CERAMICS Dental ceramics are a major subclass of biomaterials. Porcelains are hard ceramic materials that are based on a glass of silica and alumina, with fluxes used to lower their fusion temperature. Dental porcelains can have a hardness that exceeds that of the enamel of natural teeth, but they are often more brittle and more likely to fracture. They also do not have the same optical properties, thermal conductivity, or natural fluorescence as biological materials. Full-porcelain (ceramic) dental materials include porcelain, ceramic, or glasslike fillings and crowns (a metal-free option known as a jacket crown). They are used as inlays, onlays, crowns, and aesthetic veneers. A veneer is a very thin shell of porcelain that can replace or partially cover tooth enamel. Full-porcelain (ceramic) restorations are particularly desirable because their color and translucency mimic natural tooth enamel. Zirconium oxide is a very strong and refractory material that has recently appeared as a dental material. With a three-point bending strength exceeding 900 megapascals, zirconium oxide is expected to be applicable to many new applications in dentistry, including bridges, implant suprastructures, and root dowel pins. Casting the shape of a broken tooth into a natural shape or one that resembles the fragment of the broken tooth is greatly facilitated by the use of computerized CAD/CAM technologies. These technologies are used to make molds for the casting of dental ceramics. Figure 18 illustrates natural-looking teeth made from dental porcelains defined by a computer-generated mold. TISSUE CONSTRUCTS AS BIOMATERIALS Figure 18. Computer-Based Sculpted Ceramic Teeth Living tissues are sometimes considered biomaterials if they have been cultured prior to application to the human body or utilized much the same way as a synthetic material would be utilized. The formation of living tissues into constructs is sometimes called tissue engineering. This is a bit of a misnomer in that it is an advanced form of cell culture and cellular biology and has little in common with engineering in the classical sense of application of mathematics and physics to problems. Rather, tissue engineering is the application of biological and cell culturing techniques to encourage the growth of tissues in certain ways and in the development of viable substitutes that restore and maintain the function of human tissues. This is a form of 13 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nmedical therapeutics and differs from standard drug therapy or permanent implants in that the culture becomes integrated within the patient, affording a potentially permanent and specific cure of the disease state.\n\nThere are many approaches to tissue engineering, but all involve one or more of the following key ingredients: harvested cells, introduction of specialized signaling molecules, and three-dimensional matrices.\n\nThe approach involves seeding highly porous biodegradable matrices (or scaffolds) in the shape of the desired bone or tissue, with cells and signaling molecules (for example, protein growth factors), then culturing and implanting the scaffolds into the defect to induce and direct the growth of new bone or tissue. The goal is for the cells to attach to the scaffold, multiply, differentiate (that is, transform from a nonspecific or primitive state into cells exhibiting the specific functions), and organize into normal, healthy tissue as the scaffold degrades. The signaling molecules can be adhered to the scaffold or incorporated directly into the scaffold material. Figure 19 illustrates the sequence of steps in this process.\n\nCells\nSignaling molecules\n3D matrix\nCulture\nImplant\nHealty bone\nFigure 19. Scaffold-Guided Tissue Regeneration\n\nPerhaps the biggest challenge for tissue engineering is how to ensure angiogenesis in a timely fashion within the scaffold construct; without a blood supply, cells will die, and mass infection will occur.\n\nIn biology, \"autologous\" refers to cells, tissues, or even proteins that are reimplanted into the same individual they were taken from. Bone marrow, skin biopsy, cartilage, and bone can be used as autografts. In contrast, cells or tissues transplanted from a different individual are referred to as allogeneic, homologous, or an allograft.\n\nTISSUE SCAFFOLD BIOMATERIALS\n\nAn intriguing idea in tissue engineering is the use of biodegradable polymers as a scaffold for growing tissues of a certain defined shape—for example, the cartilage of an ear pinna lost in an accident.\n\n14\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nBiodegradable polymers have been used with computer-based rapid prototyping machines to form porous shapes where tissue cells can ingrow. The result after many weeks of submersion in tissue culture is that the polymer slowly degrades, leaving the cultured tissue in the shape of the predefined scaffold. Although this approach cannot grow complex organs, like a heart or kidney, that have many different tissues, it can be used to create simple structures of cell products—for example, of cartilage excreted by fibroblast cells. These structures do not create their own networks of blood vessels, a problem whose solution lies in the future.\n\nFigure 20 shows CSLA (Crosslinkable Star Lactide-co-Glycolide), a biodegradable polymer deposited into a honeycomb structure by a process not unlike ink-jet printing. The ink-jet pen is supplied with a hot liquid form of the CSLA polymer, which then hardens when it cools and is exposed to the air. Using a computer to rewrite successive layers on top of one another, a three-dimensional structure is built.\n\nFigure 20. Biodegradable Material CSLG Deposited in a Honeycomb Structure to Allow Infiltration by Living Cells While in a Submerged Cell Culture\n\nCARDIOVASCULAR BIOMATERIALS\n\nBiomaterials are often made into medical devices rather than being sold in raw form. Among the largest and most demanding of all biomaterial applications are devices that come into direct contact with blood. In general, various derivatives of Teflon and silicone are the most widely used for blood contact, while metals and ceramics are more often used in tissues.\n\nCardiovascular (heart and blood vessel) applications are one of the most important categories of implant biomaterials. Biomaterials for cardiovascular applications are usually prepared using polymers, because polymers are available in a wide variety of compositions with adequate physical and mechanical properties and can easily be manufactured into products with the desired shape. In addition, some metals and ceramics are used in the blood stream. Figure 21 lists some of the common cardiovascular devices and how long they are in contact with blood.\n\n15\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nMedical Devices Used in the Bloodstream\nBlood contact time\nCatheters Min-days\nGuidewires Min-hrs\nSensors Min-months\nPacemaker 10 yrs\nVascular Graft lifetime\nHeart Valve lifetime\nStent lifetime\nExtracorporeal Oxygenation hrs\nArtificial Kidney (hemodialyzer) hrs\nTotal Artificial Heart 10 yrs\nLeft Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) Days-yrs\nFigure 21. Some of the More Popular Biomedical Devices and Duration of Their Blood Contact\n\nBiomaterials are used as vascular grafts for artery replacements in which they are connected (grafted) onto natural blood vessels at both ends. When arteries, particularly the coronary arteries and the vessels of the lower limbs, become blocked by fatty deposits (atherosclerosis), segments in some cases can be replaced with grafts. Figure 22 shows commercial vascular grafts made by Gore Medical (Flagstaff, Arizona, USA).\n\nFigure 22. Gore Medical Teflon Foam Used in Vascular Grafts. These are artificial blood vessels used to replace blood vessels in the human body damaged by accident, atherothrosclerosis, or diabetic vascular disease.\n\n16\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nA problem most materials cause when in blood contact is that they trigger the rapid formation of thrombus (an aggregation of blood cells). The formation of a thrombus is dangerous, as the thrombus could either adhere to the surface of the biomaterial or be detached. If a thrombus is detached, it can travel in the blood stream and occlude smaller vessels in the brain (called a stroke) or lungs (called an embolism). Some small-diameter vascular grafts (< 5-millimeter internal diameter) and prostheses for reconstruction of diseased veins are \"safe\" only when anticoagulant drugs are used.\n\nIn addition to thrombus formation, biomaterials can become colonized with infection-causing bacteria. Some microorganisms found in hospitals are extremely resistant to antibiotic therapy, and infections cannot be fully resolved until the biomaterial is removed. This is particularly a problem with hip and knee implants, where there is poor blood flow near the joint and the body's immune system has limited access. Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus infections are dangerous in these situations.\n\nThe high tolerance of the body for woven and formed Teflon allows it to be used as a flexible patch material for other blood-contacting surfaces, in addition to blood vessels. For example, Gore, Inc., makes a Teflon-based material that is used to patch holes in the heart of infants born with atrial septal defects. Figure 23 is an artist's conception of how the patch is inserted into the hole in the atrial wall using a catheter.\n\nFigure 23. Illustration of Treatment of an Atrial Septal Defect Using a Teflon-Based Product Manufactured by Gore, Inc.\n\n17\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nHeart valves are another application of biomaterials in which the materials are in direct contact with blood. They are typically constructed using a form of stainless steel and woven Teflon (or Dacron) as a suture ring to anchor the device. Figure 24 shows one of these devices.\n\nSTENT BIOMATERIALS\n\nA stent is a metal mesh tube that looks something like a Chinese finger puzzle and is used to prop open a clogged artery. These are delivered to the heart in a catheter on the end of a wire usually inserted into an artery in the groin.\n\nThe stent is collapsed to a small diameter and placed over a balloon catheter. It is then surgically moved into the area of the blockage. When the balloon is inflated, the stent expands, locks into place, and forms a scaffold that holds the artery open. Figure 25 shows an artist's conception of this process.\n\nThe stent stays in the artery permanently, holds it open, improves blood flow to the heart muscle, and relieves symptoms (usually chest pain). Within a few weeks after the stent was placed, the inside lining of the artery (the endothelium) grows over the metal surface of the stent.\n\nStents are often made from a form of stainless steel that is ductile enough to be expanded by a balloon and then resist closure forces of the vessel wall after the balloon is removed.\n\nThe insertion and use of the balloon to expand the stent involves some hazards that can be overcome if the stent is made from a self-expanding metal called Nitinol™. With a nitinol stent, the stent is placed into the body collapsed while it is held cold by a flow of refrigerated saline through the catheter. When allowed to heat up to body temperature by shutting off the cold water to the catheter, the stent expands and more reproducibly applies a calibrated amount of pressure to the blood vessel walls.\n\nFigure 24. Stainless Steel and Teflon Bjork Shiley Heart Valve\nFigure 25. Illustration of Stent Placement. The stent is used to expand the luminal opening of a clogged blood vessel.\n\n18\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nNITINOL AS A BIOMATERIAL\n\nThe use of nitinol metal in stents is a clever application of the properties of a class of materials called shape memory alloys (SMAs). SMAs are mixtures of metals that, after being stress treated, can be deformed significantly but then triggered to return to their original shape.\n\nSMAs have a rather remarkable property: they remember their shape. This \"smart\" property is the result of the substance's ability to undergo a phase change. This occurs at the atomic level, where atoms in the solid subtly shift their positions in response to a stimulus, such as a change in temperature or the application of mechanical stress.\n\nOnce the metal is formed at a high temperature it remembers this shape. Subsequent distortions of the material when it is cold remain locked in place while the material remains at a low temperature. However, warming the material to a specific temperature that is relatively closer to its formation temperature will trigger a return to its original formed shape.\n\nIn stents, the web is collapsed while it is cold for easy insertion into a blood vessel and held cold by a flow of cold saline out of the catheter. When the stent warms up as the catheter is removed, it expands itself and the surrounding blood vessel. Figure 26 shows a Nitinol stent.\n\nFigure 26. Nitinol Stent. Nitinol is an alloy of titanium. It is biocompatible and also a shape memory material.\n\nCONTACT LENSES\n\nContact lenses are used to correct vision in the same way as worn glasses but are lightweight and virtually invisible. Their practicality and popularity ultimately depend on the biomaterials of which they are made.\n\nModern soft contact lenses were invented by Czech chemist Otto Wichterle and his assistant, Drahoslav Lím who also invented the first gel used for their production. However, it was not until the employment of poly-methyl-methacrylate, known as PMMA (a cousin of acrylic plastics, such as Plexiglas™), that they began to enjoy mass appeal. Figure 27 shows a gas-permeable contact lens.\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPMMA, however, is not an ideal contact lens material since no oxygen is transmitted through the lens to the conjunctiva and cornea. This can cause a number of adverse clinical effects. To solve this problem, a range of oxygen-permeable but rigid materials were developed. These materials, referred to as \"rigid gas-permeable\" or \"RGP\" materials or lenses, were made by synthetically adding dimethylsiloxane (a form of silicone) to acrylate plastics. Silicones have a very high level of oxygen transport, and amalgamating them with plastics adds this quality, while the acrylics provide strength and hardness. The easy diffusion of oxygen across silicones is thought to be a result of an intermediate solubility of oxygen in the gas phase with the gel phase of silicone.\n\nFigure 25. Contact Lens. Modern contact lenses are made of a mixture of acrylics and silicones that readily pass oxygen to the cornea.\n\nOccasionally, the term \"gas permeable\" is used to describe RGP lenses, but this is potentially misleading, as soft lenses are also gas permeable in that they allow oxygen to move through the lens to the ocular surface.\n\nIn 1999, first silicone hydrogels were launched on the contact lens market. These new materials had the advantage of high oxygen permeability, with the comfort and clinical performance of the conventional hydrogels that had been used for the previous 30 years. These lenses were initially advocated primarily for extended (overnight) wear, although more recently, daily (no overnight) wear silicone hydrogel contact lenses have been launched.\n\nDRUG DELIVERY POLYMERS\n\nOne area of biomaterials research is the use of biodegradable materials in the design of systems for controlled drug delivery. Much of this work is driven by the need for the slow release of insulin for the control of brittle diabetes. Mechanical insulin delivery pumps are moderately successful but usually are worn on the outside of the body and are cumbersome.\n\nThe ability to introduce insulin and other drugs in a controlled-release manner using biopolymers has clear advantages in terms of user convenience. Similarly, the slow release of other drugs, such as chemotherapeutic agents, is necessary to maintain the drug in the desired therapeutic range with just a single dose.\n\nThe basic strategy with some of these systems is to encapsulate drugs in membranes, capsules, microcapsules, liposomes, and hollow fibers. Another approach is to disperse\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthe active agent in a biodegradable polymer, as shown in Figure 28. The polymer host to the drug dissolves, releasing the drug in a controlled manner over time.\n\npolymer\n\ndrug\n\ntime - 0\n\ntime - t\n\nFigure 26. Schematic Representation of Biodegradable (Bioerodible) Drug Delivery Device\n\nThe use of biodegradable materials allows the drug to be introduced without much concern for the build-up of the polymer carrier. The carrier is eventually absorbed by the body and, thus, need not be removed surgically.\n\nDrug diffusion through the polymer matrix can also determine the drug dosage rate without actual loss of the polymer. This rate is determined by the choice of polymer, the size of its pores, and the rate at which the drug diffuses from the pores.\n\nThe three key advantages polymeric drug delivery products can offer are:\n\n• Localized Delivery of Drugs: The polymer-drug combination can be implanted directly at the site where drug action is needed and, hence, whole-body exposure of the drug can be reduced. This becomes especially important for toxic drugs, such as the chemotherapeutic drugs.\n\n• Sustained Delivery of Drugs: Once injected, the encapsulated drug is released over extended periods, thereby eliminating the need for multiple injections. This feature can improve patient compliance, especially with drugs for chronic indications that require frequent injections (such as for deficiency of certain proteins).\n\n• Stabilization of the Drug: The polymer can protect the drug from the physiological environment and hence improve its stability in vivo. This particular feature makes this technology attractive for the delivery of labile drugs, such as proteins.\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAn appropriate selection of the polymer matrix is necessary in order to develop a successful drug delivery system. The most commonly used polymers for this application, polylactide (PLA) and poly(lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA), have been used in biomedical applications for more than 20 years and are known to be biodegradable, biocompatible, and nontoxic. A vast amount of literature is available on the characterization of these polymers and their biodegradation and drug-release properties.\n\nMEDICAL TITANIUM AS A BIOMATERIAL\n\nTitanium metal has qualities of strength, inertness, and a biological compatibility that make it desirable as a biomaterial. Essentially all pacemakers, neurostimulators, and various other implanted medical devices use titanium as a packaging case material.\n\nTitanium metal exposed briefly to the atmosphere oxidizes to form a microscopically thin layer of titania (titanium oxide). Titania is a hard, adherent, and inert ceramic-like compound and is thought to be largely responsible for titanium's acceptability in biomedical applications where metal corrosion in warm, salty body fluids ordinarily would be a problem.\n\nTitanium is used for its high strength in replacement hip and knee joints. In these cases, it is important how the metal integrates with living tissue and bone because load must be transferred from the metal to the bone. Titanium generally does exceedingly well and is used as the metal of choice in nearly all biomedical applications where high strength and impact resistance is important.\n\nTitanium has a particular ability among the various metals that might otherwise be chosen in that it can integrate itself well with living bone. The recognition of this dates back to 1952, when Swedish Professor Per-Ingvar Brånemark conducted an experiment in which he studied blood flow in living rabbit bone. The bone was fixed in a roughly machined titanium holder. At the conclusion of the experiment, after many days, he found that the bone had integrated so completely with the titanium that removing it was impossible. He called this osseointegration and saw the possibilities for human use.\n\nFigure 29 shows a photomicrograph of a titanium-bone interface. The close approximation of the titanium (black) to the tissue is an indicator of a close-metal-tissue integration. Osseointegration was first implemented in dentistry to fixate teeth. It is now also is used for head and jaw reconstruction.\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 27. Photomicrograph of Titanium Metal (Appears Black in This Photo) in an Intimate Integration With Living Bone. The intersection of the two materials shows a thin barrier layer and then healthy tissue very close to the metal. It does not show inflammation or scar tissue formation.\n\nOptimization of the bone integration with titanium has been much studied over the years. It has been found that if single cells can nestle into pores on the metal surface and then can reach out and attach to their neighbors, this forms a particularly good adhesive interface. This observation has led to new types of surface treatments for titanium to improve its ability to attach to bone. The need for a particular porosity size scale for optimal bone integration has only recently been recognized.\n\nSand blasting of the titanium surface has long been done, but, recently, plasma etching and pitting with the use of acids have been found effective. Some of the more recent (2008) innovations have been the use of lasers to create a surface modification by melting pits.\n\nAnother good approach is to coat metal implants with bioactive materials, such as hydroxyapatite (HA). HA has excellent biocompatibility, bioactivity, and bone-binding properties. It forms a bond with titania thin films on the surface of titanium implants and so prepares the surface for adhesion. Researchers recently determined that making this layer thick (about 1 micron) encourages cell proliferation and bonding.\n\nRecent improvements in HA have included manufacturing it in the form of a spherical nanopowder that is more acceptable to tissues than are spicule forms of its natural occurrence. Using HA in the form of a nanopowder stimulates bone formation leading to a natural, as well as chemical, adhesion, much like glue.\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAnother recent discovery is that treating the titanium surface with a silane compound will create a surface chemistry that attracts certain biomaterials known as proteoglycans. From this point, it is possible to lay down layers of collagen on the surface from which connective tissues will form.\n\nTitanium metal used for implants is usually a biomedical alloy, Ti-6Al-4V, since biomedical alloys provide good corrosion resistance and reasonable fatigue life and are much stiffer than cortical bone. The Ti-6Al-4V alloy is more suitable than is the Co-Cr alloy for coating with HA because it has less potential proximal stress shielding and bone resorption.\n\nBIOMATERIALS IN DIALYSIS\n\nMedical therapeutic dialysis, often called hemodialysis, is a method of removing uric acid and other waste products from blood, a necessity when the kidneys fail. It is also useful in removing exogenous poisons like ethanol, aspirin, barbiturates, and boric acid from the blood in cases of poisoning.\n\nHemodialysis accesses the blood stream through the use of two large needles—one in an artery and one in a vein—in order to flow a patient's blood through a series of hair-thin, hollow-membrane, tube-like fibers.\n\nA dialyzer is composed of thousands of tube-like hollow fiber strands encased in a clear plastic cylinder several inches in diameter. Blood flows on the inside of the membrane fiber, and a dialysate (extraction stream) flows across the outside. Low-molecular-weight waste products pass out through the membrane, while blood cells and other large molecules in the blood are retained. Figure 30 shows an illustration (left) and photograph (right) of dialyzers used to treat kidney failure.\n\nBlood inlet\nHeader\nTube sheet\nSolution outlet\nFibers\nJacket\nSolution inlet\nBlood outlet\n\nFigure 28. Illustration (Left) and Photograph (Right) of a Blood Dialyzer as Used in Medicine\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c60b55e1ed41fd25","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDialysis works on the principles of natural diffusion of metabolic waste products in the blood across a semipermeable membrane. Waste products in high concentration in the blood will diffuse across the membrane. The membrane allows the passage of certain-sized molecules across it but prevents the passage of other, larger molecules of the blood, thus helping to get rid of waste products. Figure 31 illustrates this idea. The blood cells are kept on the outside of the membrane (orange) while waste product solutes (violet and yellow dots) pass through.\n\nFigure 29. Cuprophane Membrane Passes Blood Waste Products (Violet and Orange Dots) Through Pores and Blocks Passage of Red Blood Cells\n\nAdvances in bioengineering and in the technical aspects of dialysis machines have made hemodialysis a safe and effective procedure.\n\nThe design of dialyzers is primarily an exercise in biomaterial selection. Biomembrane materials play the critical role in cleansing the blood, but they must not damage the blood or provoke thrombus. The most common biomaterial used in dialyzers is a semipermeable membrane made of cellulose acetate trade-named Cuprophane™.\n\nDialyzer membranes come with different pore sizes. Nanotechnology is being used in some of the most recent high-flux membranes to create a uniform pore size. The goal of high-flux membranes is to pass relatively large molecules, such as beta-2-microglobulin (MW 11,600 daltons), but not albumin (MW ~ 66,400 daltons). Dialysis membrane materials are crucial to the practical performance of medical hemodialysis systems. These systems/materials support the survival of millions of people in kidney failure that undergo routine dialysis, usually for several hours during the day and three to four times a week.\n\nSummary and Recommendations\n\nThe performance of biomaterials underlies the success of many medical devices that must be acceptable to body tissues. These materials often serve critical—perhaps life-and-death—functions and, so, require large amounts of money and time to rigorously test. This appears to be the reason the biomedical industry is slow to produce and accept new materials.\n\nExisting materials for implants are generally based on materials that have been available for more than 20 years. Biodegradable materials, particularly the polylactide and glycolide, have a long history of safe and effective use. Building on this solid foundation, most of the innovation is occurring in devising new ways to embody the materials and apply them to new applications. Thus, the markets are expanding for biomaterials, and physicians can look forward to new products that will help speed patient recovery.\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 57563\n\nAFOIN/Maj Gen Cabell/mcm/5613/2 Nov 48\nSECRET\n3 NOV 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Object Incidents in the United States\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\n\n1. By letter dated 30 December 1947 from the Director of Research and Development, Headquarters USAF, your Headquarters was required to establish Project \"SIGN\".\n\n2. The conclusion appears inescapable that some type of flying object has been observed. Identification and the origin of these objects is not discernible to this Headquarters. It is imperative, therefore, that efforts to determine whether these objects are of domestic or foreign origin must be increased until conclusive evidence is obtained. The needs of national defense require such evidence in order that appropriate countermeasures may be taken.\n\n3. In addition to the imperative need for evidence to permit countermeasures, is the necessity of informing the public as to the status of the problem. To date there has been too little data to present to the public. The press, however, is about to take it into its own hands and demand to be told what we do or do not know about the situation. Silence on our part will not long be acceptable.\n\n4. Request immediate information as to your conclusions to date and your recommendations as to the information to be given to the press. Your recommendation is requested also as to whether that information should be offered to the press or withheld until it is actively sought by the press.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nP105530\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL\nGRADE AND SURNAME OF COORDINATING OFFICERS\n1. AFOIR\n2. AFOAI\n3. AFOIN\n4.\n5.\nHQ USAF 4-NOV 1948 ADMIN BRANCH\n16-29242-2 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"See TS-2-3931 for Cover Sheet & MIR.\nSECRET\nAFOIN/Maj Gen Cabell/mcm/5613/2 Nov 48\n3 NOV 1948\n\nclassified files\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Object Incidents in the United States\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\n\n1. By letter dated 30 December 1947 from the Director of Research and Development, Headquarters USAF, your Headquarters was required to establish Project \"SIGN\".\n\n2. The conclusion appears inescapable that some type of flying object has been observed. Identification and the origin of these objects is not discernible to this Headquarters. It is imperative, therefore, that efforts to determine whether these objects are of domestic or foreign origin must be increased until conclusive evidence is obtained. The needs of national defense require such evidence in order that appropriate countermeasures may be taken.\n\n3. In addition to the imperative need for evidence to permit countermeasures, is the necessity of informing the public as to the status of the problem. To date there has been too little data to present to the public. The press, however, is about to take it into its own hands and demand to be told what we do or do not know about the situation. Silence on our part will not long be acceptable.\n\n4. Request immediate information as to your conclusions to date and your recommendations as to the information to be given to the press. Your recommendation is requested also as to whether that information should be offered to the press or withheld until it is actively sought by the press.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nDispatched 11-4 Gaining\n\nNote: C/S #1,2,3+4 are TS No 2-3931, and are filed in TS central file under 1 this file\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n11-214\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n3 NOV 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Object Incidents in the United States\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\n\n1. By letter dated 30 December 1947 from the Director of Research and Development, Headquarters USAF, your Headquarters was required to establish Project \"SIGN\".\n\n2. The conclusion appears inescapable that some type of flying object has been observed. Identification and the origin of these objects is not discernible to this Headquarters. It is imperative, therefore, that efforts to determine whether these objects are of domestic or foreign origin must be increased until conclusive evidence is obtained. The needs of national defense require such evidence in order that appropriate countermeasures may be taken.\n\n3. In addition to the imperative need for evidence to permit countermeasures, is the necessity of informing the public as to the status of the problem. To date there has been too little data to present to the public. The press, however, is about to take it into its own hands and demand to be told what we do or do not know about the situation. Silence on our part will not long be acceptable.\n\n4. Request immediate information as to your conclusions to date and your recommendations as to the information to be given to the press. Your recommendation is requested also as to whether that information should be offered to the press or withheld until it is actively sought by the press.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence, Office of\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\n\nT-73017\nSECRET\n238"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nL-10-78\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nb. CLASSIFICATION: RESTRICTED\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO. OIN- 12935\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT 28 OCT 1948\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\n(Use other side this sheet for additional remarks)\nd. TO DOWN, BR. TO UP, TO DOWN, DIV. TO UP, TO DOWN, DIR/INT TO UP\nOIP-PP OIP-FL OIP-SP OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-SR OIR-RC OAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV PERS M & R B & F CABLE\nAFOIP AFOIR AFOAI ADMIN\nASST EXEC ASST EXEC EXECUTIVE DIR/INT\nAction Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 29 OCT 1948 ACTION ASGD TO GDW DATE SIGNED DATE 15-11-48\nf. DISPATCH FILE DISPATCHED BY Garwig TO EG DATE DISPATCHED 11-15-48 4MC\nAFOIN FORM 4 22 SEP 48 9-1748, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO."} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"See TS-2-3931\nfor cover Sheet\n& MR of Basic\nSECRET\n8 Nov 48\nBasic ltr fr Hq USAF, 3 Nov 48 to CG, AMC, \"Flying Object Incidents in\nthe United States\"\n\n1st Ind MCIAT/ABD/amb\n\nHq AMC, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio. 8 Nov 48\n\nTO: Chief of Staff, United States Air Force, Washington 25, D. C., ATTN:\n AFOIR\n\n1. In attempting to arrive at conclusions as to the nature of uniden-\ntified flying object incidents in the United States, this Command has made\na study of approximately 180 such incidents. Data derived from initial re-\nports have been supplemented by further information obtained from check\nlists submitted by mail, from interrogations of other field agencies, and\nby personal investigation by personnel of this Command in the case of in-\ncidents that seem to indicate the possibility of obtaining particularly\nsignificant information.\n\n2. The objects described fall into the following general classifica-\ntion groups, according to shape or physical configuration:\n\na. Flat disc of circular or approximately circular shape.\n\nb. Torpedo or cigar shaped aircraft, with no wings or fins visible\nin flight.\n\nc. Spherical or balloon shaped objects.\n\nd. Balls of light with no apparent form attached.\n\n3. Some of the objects sighted have definitely been identified, upon\nfurther investigation, as weather or upper air scientific balloons of some\ntype. A great many of the round or balloon shaped objects indicated in\nparagraph 2c above are probably of the same nature, although in most cases,\ndefinite confirmation of that fact has been impossible to obtain.\n\n4. Some of the objects have been identified as being astro-physical\nin nature. For example, in daylight sightings, the planet Venus has been\nreported as a round, silvery object at extremely high altitude. Action is\nbeing taken to obtain the services of a prominent astro-physicist as a con-\nsultant, to study all of the incidents to determine whether some can be\nidentified as meteors, planets or other manifestations of astral bodies.\n\n5. Arrangements for accomplishing a study of the psychological problems\ninvolved in this project are being made in coordination with the Aero-Medical\nLaboratory at this Headquarters. The possibility that some of the sightings\nare hallucinations, optical illusions or even deliberate hoaxes has been con-\nsidered.\nFile - 6 Jan 48\nMaj Jones\n\n2\n\nSECRET\nT-73017"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n1st Ind\nBasic ltr fr Hq USAF, 3 Nov 48 to CG, AMC, \"Flying Object Incidents in\n the United States\"\n\n6. Although explanation of many of the incidents can be obtained from\nthe investigations described above, there remains a certain number of re-\nports for which no reasonable everyday explanation is available. So far,\nno physical evidence of the existence of the unidentified sightings has\nbeen obtained. Prominent scientists, including Dr. Irving Langmuir of the\nGeneral Electric Company, have been interviewed to determine whether they\ncould advance any reasonable explanation for characteristics exhibited by\nthe objects sighted. In an early interview, Dr. Langmuir indicated that\nthese incidents could be explained, but insufficient data were available\nat that time on which to base definite conclusions. It is planned to have\nanother interview with Dr. Langmuir in the near future to review all the\ndata now available, and it is hoped that he will be able to present some\nopinion as to the nature of many of the unidentified objects, particularly\nthose described as \"balls of light.\"\n\n7. All information that has been made available to this Headquarters\nindicates that the discs, the cigar shaped objects, and the \"balls of light\"\nare not of domestic origin. Engineering investigation indicates that disc\nor wingless aircraft could support themselves in flight by aerodynamic means.\nIt is probable that the problems of stability and control could also be\nsolved for such aircraft. However, according to current aerodynamic theory\nin this country, aircraft with such configurations would have relatively\npoor climb, altitude and range characteristics with power plants now in\nuse.\n\n8. The possibility that the reported objects are vehicles from another\nplanet has not been ignored. However, tangible evidence to support con-\nclusions about such a possibility are completely lacking. The occurrence\nof incidents in relation to the approach to the earth of the planets Mercury,\nVenus and Mars have been plotted. A periodic variation in the frequency of\nincidents, which appears to have some relation to the planet approach curves,\nis noted, but it may be purely a coincidence.\n\n9. Reference is made to \"The Books of Charles Fort\" with an introduc-\ntion by Tiffany Thayer, published 1941, by Henry Holt & Co., New York, N. Y.\nIt appears that simular phenomena have been noted and reported for the past\ncentury or more.\n\n10. In view of the above, the following conclusions are drawn:\n\n a. In the majority of cases reported, observers have actually\nsighted some type of flying object which they cannot classify as an air-\ncraft within the limits of their personal experience.\n\n3\n\nT-73017\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n1st Ind\nBasic ltr fr Hq USAF, 3 Nov 48 to CG, AMC, \"Flying Object Incidents in\n the United States\"\n\n b. There is as yet no conclusive proof that unidentified flying\nobjects, other than those which are known to be balloons, are real aircraft.\n\n c. Although it is obvious that some types of flying objects have\nbeen sighted, the exact nature of those objects cannot be established until\nphysical evidence, such as that which would result from a crash, has been\nobtained.\n\n 11. It is not considered advisable to present to the press information\non those objects which we cannot yet identify or about which we cannot pre-\nsent any reasonable conclusions. In the event that they insist on some\nkind of a statement, it is suggested that they be informed that many of\nthe objects sighted have been identified as weather balloons or astral\nbodies, and that investigation is being pursued to determine reasonable\nexplanations for the others.\n\n 12. A report, summarizing the results obtained from analysis of the\ndata and a technical investigation of the engineering aspects of the objects\ndescribed, is nearly complete, and a copy will be forwarded to your Head-\nquarters in the near future.\n\n FOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nH. M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Intelligence Department\n\n4\nSECRET\n\nT-73017"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nAFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/dw/4544\n12 Nov 48\n15 Nov 48\n\nB/L fm Hq USAF, 27 Aug 48, subj: Project \"SIGN\"\n\nAFOIR-CO-5 (L-10-78) 2nd Ind\nNOV 15 1948\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air\n Force Base, Wright Field, Ohio\n ATTN: MCIAXO-3\n\n1. Basic letter's reference to the contacting of the Air Transport\nAssociation was with the understanding that such arrangements were to be\nmade, or had been made, by Project SIGN personnel. This was the decision\nmade as a result of the conference held at this Headquarters 27 July 1948.\nJANAF 146 was forwarded merely as being of possible value in the estab-\nlishment of a direct reporting system by airline pilots.\n\n2. It is therefore requested that Project Sign personnel make ar-\nrangements to enlist the services of the Air Transport Association in\norder to develop a system whereby U. S. airline pilots could make flash\nreports of any unusual aerial sightings direct to your Headquarters.\n\n3. In this connection it is suggested that the \"Essential Elements\nof Information\" inclosed with 1st Indorsement may prove too detailed for\npractical use by airline pilots in forwarding initial reports to your\nHeadquarters.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n/s/\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n1 Incl:\nn/c\n\nRef: Ltr fm Hq USAF, 27 Aug 48, subject as above. (Already in file)\n 1st Ind fm Hq AMC, MCIAXO-3, 26 Oct 48, same subject.\n\n319.1 JANAP\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\n\n000.9 Flying Disc\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt.Col.Garrett/dw/4544\n26 Aug 1948\n27 Aug 48\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\n27 AUG 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Project \"SIGN\"\n\nTO : Commanding General\nAir Material Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nWright Field, Ohio\nATTN: MCI\n\n1. At the conference in this Headquarters 27 July 1948 on subject project, it was agreed that the Air Transport Association would be contacted in an effort to enlist the cooperation of United States airlines in reporting sightings of unusual aerial phenomena direct to your Command.\n\n2. The attached publication JANAP 146, although not specifically developed by the Joint Communications-Electronics Committe for the reporting of \"flying disc\" sightings, is forwarded with the suggestion that you may wish to consider its use for this purpose by commercial airline pilots.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl:\nJANAP 146\n\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nAMC\nSubject: \"Project 'Sing'\"\n\n1st Ind MCIAXO-3/RRS/ej\n\nHq AMC Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, 26 Octo 48\n\nTO: Chief of Staff, United States Air Force, Washington 25, D C.\nATTN: AFOIR-CO-5\n\n1. With reference to paragraph 1 above, the efforts to enlist the cooperation of United States airlines in reporting sightings of unusual aerial phenomena directly to this Command are greatly appreciated.\n\n2. This Headquarters further requests cooperation in effecting distribution and use by commercial airlines of an \"Essential Elements of Information\" check list, copies of which are inclosed. This list may be used as a supplement to the publication JANAP 146, developed by the Joint Communications-Electronics Committee for the reporting of \"flying disc\" sightings.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n1 Incl:\n6 cys EEI form\n\n/s/ W. E. Goll\nfor H. M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Intelligence Department\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Investigation by United States Air Force of reports on so-called flying saucers has led to the identification of some of these objects as weather balloons and astral bodies. The investigation of such reported incidents is continuing at the Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\n\nIncl 2"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 8 Nov 48 SECRET\nFROM: OIN\n\nSUSPENSE DATE: 22 Nov 48 NO.: 13078\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE: 009 Flying Discs\n\nTYPE: 1st Ind to Gen C Mil Ltr of\nSMRY: 3 Nov 48\n\nFLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS IN THE US. (Cover Sheet fr OIN)\n\nDO NOT REMOVE THIS COPY\n\nTO: OAI TO: OIN TO: DIR/INT TO: TO:\nDATE: 12 Nov 48 DATE: 11-19-48 DATE: 1-6-49 DATE: DATE:\n\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO: FILED (PLACE): OTHER ACTION:\n\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: Hq. AMC DATE: 8 Nov 48\nTYPE: 1st Ind to Gen. C. Mil Ltr of 3 Nov 48\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION: SECRET\n\nSUMMARY:\nFlying Object Incidents in the United States\n\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 22 Nov 48\nASGD BY O. Thiley for\nNO. OIN-13078\n\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT: Del'd to AFOIN by Col. McCoy in person\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nOAI:\nWould appreciate your verbal comments at an early date.\nCPc\nDATE 11 Nov\nNO. 1\n(Use other side this sheet for additional remarks)\n\nd. TO BR. TO DIV. TO ASST EXEC, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, DIR/INT\n\nAFOIN FORM 4 22 SEP 48. PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. 9-1748,AF\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR f. DISPATCH FILE\nACTION ASGD TO DATE DISPATCHED BY TO\nSIGNED DATE DATE DISPATCHED"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: Chief D.A. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\n\nfor verbal comment to Chief, OAI O/C 17 NOV.\n\nDATE 15 NOV\nNO. 2\n\nJ.H. Walsh\nOAI\n\nh. TO: General Cabell\nDATE 19 Nov 48\n\n1. AFOAI recommends that no statement be released NO. 3\nto the press on flying object incidents until press demands make such release\nimperative.\n\n2. If the statement to the press is required it is recommended that Incl 2\nform the basis of the statement.\n\n3. We are prepared for the verbal comments at your convenience.\n\nJ.H. Walsh\nfor\nGen Moore\n\n13028"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt.Col.Garrett/ab/4544\n28 Oct. 48\n\n000.9 Shook, Ruth\n\nB/L fm Mrs. Ruth Shook, dtd 14 Sep. 48, subj: Request for Information\nConcerning Strategic Aircraft.\n\nAFOIR-CO-5 (L-10-64) 2nd Ind.\n\n28 OCT 1948\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson\nAir Force Base, Wright Field, Ohio.\nATTN: MCI\n\nForwarded as a matter pertaining to your Command.\n\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nJ095 SHOOK, RUTH\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"C-O-P-Y\"\n\nHiawarree, Ga.\nSept. 14, 1948\n\nThe War Dept.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nGentlemen,\n\nPlease inform me what those things are that the people in North\nGeorgia have been seeing flying through the sky.\n\nThey are round and long some what like a giant cigar. They\nhave a motor that sounds like a motorcycle.If they are foreign machine\nyou should know about it.\n\nIf they are American military machines I do not need to know\nabout them.\n\nYours truly,\n\ns/ Mrs. Ruth Shook\n\nP.S. The Atlanta Constitution stated that no one in Atlanta knew\nwhat they were.\n\nSUBJECT: Request for information concerning strange aircraft.\n\nAGAO-C 095 Shook\nRuth Mrs. (14 Sep 48) 1st Ind PRW/wcw/1D-860\n\nAGO, DEPT OF THE ARMY, Washington 25, D. C., 13 October 1948\n\nTO: Chief of Staff, United States Air Force, Washington 25, D. C.\n\ns/E.F.P.\n\nE.F.Pegraw"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 13 Oct 48\nFROM: AG\nSUSPENSE DATE: NO.:\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTYPE: 1st Ind\nSMRY:\nRequest for information concerning strange aircraft. (Route #1, Bx 27)\nB/L fr Mrs. Ruth Shook, Hiawassel, Ga. dtd 14 Sep 48.\nekp\nTO: SPR TO: DIN TO: TO: TO: TO:\nDATE: 15 Oct 48 DATE: 22 Oct DATE: DATE: DATE: DATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO: FILED (PLACE): OTHER ACTION:\n2nd Ind CG AMC 29/10/48 HQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET L70-67\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST b. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM: Admin. Assistant DATE: 20 Oct 48\nAir Information Division TYPE: R/S\n(Maj. Phipps)\nSUMMARY:\nRequest for Information Concerning Strange Aircraft.\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 1 Nov 48\nASGD BY\nNO. DIN 12550\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT 21 OCT 1948\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\n(Use other side this sheet for additional remarks)\nd. TO BR. TO DOWN UP / TO DIV. TO DOWN UP / TO DIR/INT TO DOWN UP\nOIP-PP OIP-FL OIP-SP AFOIP ASST EXEC\nOIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-SR OIR-RC AFOIR 22 OCT ASST EXEC\nOAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV AFOAI EXECUTIVE\nPERS M & R B & F CABLE ADMIN DIR/INT\nAction Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 22 OCT 1948 ACTION ASGD TO DATE SIGNED DATE 28-10-48\nf. DISPATCH DISPATCHED BY DATE DISPATCHED 29 OCT 1948 FILE 2nd Ind CO AMC\nAFOIN FORM 4 22 SEP 48 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. 9-1748,AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n\nTS220"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nAFOIR-CO/Lt.Col.Garrett/as/4544\n27 October 1948\nSee Ltr 12 Jan 50 (Res)\n280.44\n28 OCT 1948\nAFOIR-CO\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena\n1. The Air Materiel Command is currently engaged in an intelligence investigation of all reported unidentified aerial phenomena.\n2. To date, no concrete identity of any of the reported objects has been received. Similarly, the origin of the so-called \"flying discs\" remains obscure. The possibility exists that some of the sighted objects are of domestic origin, i.e., unrecognized configurations of some of our latest aeronautical attainments, or that they are objects not readily recognized by the public - test vehicles in various stages of development, etc.\n3. It is requested that your Agency submit to the Directorate of Intelligence any available evidence that may come to your attention which might serve to indicate that these objects have a domestic origin.\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nGEORGE D. GARRETT, JR.\nLieutenant Colonel, USAF\nActing Chief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n1840.9 Central Intelligence Agency\nDISPATCHED BY CIG COURIER\nDIN NO. 335-B DATE 23 OCT 1948 1155 hrs\nSECRET\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 7 Oct 48\nFROM: AMC, Ohio\nTYPE: ltr T-63070\nSMRY: Project \"SIGN\"\n1 Incl\nmjp\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.:\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTO: CIN\nDATE: 11 Oct 48\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nHeadquarters\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nWright Field, Ohio\n7 October 1948\nSUBJECT: Project \"SIGN\"\nTO: Chief of Staff, USAF\nWashington 25, D.C.\nDirector of Intelligence\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\nATTN: AFOIR\nIt is requested that your office forward the attached letter to the Central Intelligence Agency, Washington 25, D.C.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n/s/ H.M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\n1 Incl\nLtr to CIA\nDECLASSIFIED E.O. 13526, Sec. 3.3 NND 934267 by JDS NARA, Date 5-4-16\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nMCIAXO-3\nMCIAXO-3/SZH/aw\nOCT 7 1948\nCentral Intelligence Agency\nWashington, D. C.\nSUBJECT: Project \"SIGN\"\nGentlemen:\nThis Headquarters is currently engaged in an intelligence investigation of all reported unidentified aerial phenomena. To date, no concrete evidence as to the exact identity of any of the reported objects has been received. Similarly, the origin of the so-called \"flying discs\" remains obscure. The possibility exists that some of the sighted objects are of domestic origin, i. e., unrecognized configurations of some of our latest aeronautical attainments, or that they are objects not readily recognized by the public - test vehicles in various stages of development, etc.\nWhere security regulations will permit, it is requested that your office submit to Hq, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson AF Base, Wright Fld., Ohio, Attn: MCIAXO-3, THRU: Chief of Staff, USAF, Washington, 25, D. C., DIRECTOR OF INTEL, Deputy Chief of Staff, Operations, ATTN: AFOIR, any available evidence which might serve to indicate that these objects have a domestic origin.\nYour cooperation in so doing might greatly assist in identifying our own domestic developments from possible inimical foreign achievements.\nVery truly yours\nH. M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\nT-63070-A\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nL-10-29\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSECRET\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 21 Oct 48\nASGD BY\nNO. OIN- 12098\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT 11 OCT 1948\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\n(Use other side this sheet for additional remarks)\nd. TO DOWN / BR. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIV. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIR/INT / TO UP\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nOIP-SP\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-SR\nOIR-RC\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nPERS\nM & R\nB & F\nCABLE\nAFOIP\nAFOIR\nAFOAI\nADMIN\nASST EXEC\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nDIR/INT\nDISPATCHED BY CIG COURIER\nOIN NO. 335-B DATE 28 OCT 1948\n1155-Esg\nX Action\n✓ Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 11 OCT 1948\nACTION ASGD TO\nDATE\nSIGNED\nDATE 27-10-48\nf. DISPATCH\nDISPATCHED BY\nDATE DISPATCHED\nFILE Memo\nTO CIA\n28 OCT 1948\nAFOIN FORM 4 22 SEP 48\nPREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE.\n9-1748, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO."} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nOct 48\n953\n10235\nTransmittal of Investigation Regarding Report of Flying Discs\n1 Encl il\nMES\nTO: OIN\nTO: OAI\nTO:\nTO:\nDATE: 1 Nov 48\nDATE: 11-15-48\nDATE:\nDATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE): LTR to Cen files encl to AFOAI-DA files 11/19/48\nOTHER ACTION: 6EJ\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 26 Oct 48\nFROM AMC, Ohio\nTYPE: 1st Ind\nSMRY: Project \"SIGN\" B/L fr OIN, dtd 27 Aug 48 1 Incl ald\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.:\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTO: OIN\nDATE: 28 Oct 48\nTO:\nDATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO: 2nd Ind CG\nFILED (PLACE): AMC\nOTHER ACTION: 11-15-48\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 26 Oct 48\nFROM AMC, Ohio\nTYPE: 1st Ind\nSMRY: Project \"SIGN\" B/L fr OIN, dtd 27 Aug 48 1 Incl ald\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.:\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTO: OIN\nDATE: 28 Oct 48\nTO:\nDATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO.\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nNOV 1948\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE 10 November 48\nAFOAI:\nNO. 1\nYou your info.\nG.D.G.\nOIR-CO\n(Use other side this sheet for additional remarks)\nd. TO DOWN / BR. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIV. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIR/INT / TO UP\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nOIP-SP\nAFOIP\nASST EXEC\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-SR\nOIR-RC\nAFOIR\nASST EXEC\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nAFOAI\nEXECUTIVE\nDIR/INT\nPERS\nM & R\nB & F\nCABLE\nADMIN\n......\n......\n......\nAction\nCoordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR\nACTION ASGD TO\nSIGNED\nDATE\nDATE\nf. DISPATCH\nFILE\nDISPATCHED BY\nTO\nDATE DISPATCHED\nAFOIN FORM 4 22 SEP 48\nPREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE.\n9-1748, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO."} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n220046\n600.9 Flying Discs\nMCIAXS\nMCIAXS/LHT/mak\nOCT 22 1948\nSUBJECT: Request for Study by Rand Project\nTHRU: Chief of Staff United States Air Force Washington 25, D. C. ATTN: AFOIN\nTO: Chief of Staff United States Air Force Washington 25, D. C. ATTN: AFMRD\n1. It is requested that the special study, described in the inclosure be approved and the Rand Corporation be authorized to establish a study of 3A priority, consistent in scope and degree of treatment with the described requirements.\n2. It is further requested that Air Materiel Command be assigned to monitor the project in conformance with Air Corps Letter 80-10, 21 July 1948, Section 3, Paragraph J.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n1 Incl Exhibit \"A\" Project Sign Study Requirements\nW. R. CLINGERMAN Colonel, USAF Actg Chief, Intelligence Department\n350.05 Project-Rand\nT-65382\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nEXHIBIT \"A\"\nProject Sign Study Requirements\nThe possibility that some of the unidentified aerial objects that have been reported both in the United States and in foreign lands may have been experimental spaceships, or test vehicles for the purpose of assisting in the development of spaceships, has been given consideration by this Command.\nIf such craft actually have been sighted, it is believed more likely that they represent the effort of a foreign nation, rather than a product from beyond the Earth.\nPresent world knowledge, techniques and resources are probably adequate to meet the requirements for spaceship construction, or at least to establish the preliminary experimental foundation for such an accomplishment in the near future.\nIn any case, the design and performance parameters of the craft would necessarily be in conformance and consistent with the established principles of our sciences.\nTo assist in the collection of information, relating to unidentified aerial objects that may possibly represent spaceships or spaceship test vehicles, and to assist in the analysis and evaluation of such reported craft, technical information that includes the distinguishing design and performance parameters for spaceships is considered necessary.\nWhile such information is contained outright, or implicitly, in the series of Rand Project reports, it would be of much value to this Command to have a list of the special design and performance characteristics that are believed to distinguish spaceships, together with any further scientific clues that might assist in their detection and identification, prepared by Rand scientific personnel.\nT-65382\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 22 Oct 48\nFROM: AMC, Ohio\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.:\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTYPE: Ltr. T-65382\nSMRY:\nRequest for Study by Rand Project.\n1 Incl. 11\nTO: OIN\nTO: [illegible]\nDATE: 27 Oct 48\nDATE: 12 Nov\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nA3803\n* *\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 8 Nov '48\nASGD BY\nNO. OIN- 12810\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT 27 OCT 1948\nc. AFOAI :\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE 3 November 48\nNO. 1\nFor your information and please pass to AFMRD.\nG.D.G.\nOIR-CO\n(Use other side this sheet for additional remarks)\nd. TO DOWN / BR. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIV. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIR/INT / TO UP\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nOIP-SP\nAFOIP\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-SR\nOIR-RC\nAFOIR\nASST EXEC\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nAFOAI\nPERS\nM & R\nB & F\nCABLE\nADMIN\nDIR/INT\n......\n......\n......\nX Action\n✓ Coordination\nOriginal sent to AMC\ne. DATE REC'D BR 29 OCT 1948\nACTION ASGD TO Garrett DATE\nSIGNED Garrett DATE 3-11-48\nf. DISPATCH FILE\nDISPATCHED BY DP TO\nDATE DISPATCHED 11-16-48\nAFOIN FORM 4 22 SEP 48\nPREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE.\n9-1748, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: DA\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nFor any comment\nDATE 4 Nov 48\nNO. 2\nTO: OAI\n8 Nov 48\nDA Concurs with atchd proposal.\n(Lt Col Neill)\nTo: AFMRD:\nfor action.\nAFOIR-CO - 12 Nov. 48\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO."} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS FIFTH ARMY\n1660 East Hyde Park Boulevard\nChicago 15, Illinois\nAFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/dw/4544\n10 Nov 48\n12 Nov 48\nALFGF-I\n25 October 1948\nSUBJECT: \"Reported Flying Disc\"\nTO: Director of Intelligence\nGSUSA\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Chief, Intelligence Group\n1. Attached herewith is a copy of a newspaper clipping from the Minneapolis Morning Tribune dated 21 October 1948, on so called \"flying discs.\"\n2. No further investigation is being conducted by this Headquarters.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n/s/ PRENTICE G. MORGAN\nMajor, GSC\nChief, Intelligence Division\nOffice of AC of S, G-2\nIncl:\nAs stated above\nAFOIR-CO-5 1st Ind\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n12 NOV 1948\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Wright Field, Ohio\nForwarded as a matter pertaining to your Command.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nIncl:\nn/c\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nDispatched 11-12-48\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19 Oct 48\nSubj: Project \"SIGN\"\n1st Ind MCIAXO-3/HMS/dw\nHq AMC, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio OCT 19 1948\nTO: Chief of Staff, United States Air Force, Washington 25, D. C.\nATTN: AFOIR-CO-5 (L-10-1)\nRequest to investigate the sighting reported in letter attached as Inclosure 1 to basic communication, has been forwarded to Branch Intelligence Office, 112th CIC Detachment, New Orleans, Louisiana.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n1 Incl\nw/d\nW. R. CLINGERMAN\nColonel, USAF\nActg Chief, Intelligence Department\nOver"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt.Col.Garrett/ab/61067\n6 Oct. 48\n7 Oct 48\nAFOIR-CO-5\n(L-10-1)\n7 OCT 1948\nSUBJECT: Project \"SIGN\"\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: MCI\nForwarded as a matter pertaining to your Command.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n1 Incl.\nltr dtd 9 Sep 48\nfm Elma McDaniel\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nX 095. McDaniel, Elma\nRef: Incl w/d and forwarded with B/L.\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: Ser 19 Oct 48\nFROM: AMC, Ohio\nTYPE: 1st Ind\nSMRY: Project \"SIGN\".\nB/L fr OIN dtd 7 Oct 48.\nekp\nSUSPENSE DATE: NO.:\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTO: OIN TO: TO: C.E. 26 Oct 48 TO: TO:\nDATE: 21 Oct 48 DATE: DATE: 26 Oct 48 DATE: DATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO: FILED (PLACE): OTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nL-10-1\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO. OIN- 12601\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT 22 OCT 1948\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nTo file\nC.D.C. 25-10-48\nDATE\nNO.\n(Use other side this sheet for additional remarks)\nd. TO DOWN BR. TO UP; TO DOWN DIV. TO UP; TO DOWN DIR/INT TO UP\nOIP-PP OIP-FL OIP-SP OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-SR OIR-RC OAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV PERS M & R B & F CABLE\nAFOIP AFOIR AFOAI ADMIN\nASST EXEC ASST EXEC EXECUTIVE DIR/INT\nLegend: X Action, √ Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 22 OCT 1948 ACTION ASGD TO CDC DATE 25-10-48 SIGNED\nf. DISPATCH DISPATCHED BY DATE DISPATCHED 25 OCT 1948 FILE TO\nAFOIN FORM 4 22 SEP 48 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. 9-1748, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO."} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 23 Sept 48\nFROM: AG\nTYPE: ltr\nSMRY: Report of a \"Mysterious Plane\".\n1 Incl\nms\nSUSPENSE DATE: NO.:\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTO: OIN TO: TO: TO: TO:\nDATE: 30 Sept 48 DATE: DATE: DATE: DATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO: FILED (PLACE): OTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nL-10-1\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 11 Oct 48\nASGD BY\nNO. OIN- 11665\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT 30 SEP 1948\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\n(Use other side this sheet for additional remarks)\nd. TO DOWN BR. TO UP; TO DOWN DIV. TO UP; TO DOWN DIR/INT TO UP\nOIP-PP OIP-FL OIP-SP OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-SR OIR-RC OAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV PERS M & R B & F CABLE\nAFOIP AFOIR AFOAI ADMIN\nASST EXEC ASST EXEC EXECUTIVE DIR/INT\ne. DATE REC'D BR 1 OCT 1948 ACTION ASGD TO DATE 7-10-48 SIGNED\nf. DISPATCH DISPATCHED BY 10.7.48 DATE DISPATCHED FILE Lt TO CG AMC\nAFOIN FORM 4 22 SEP 48 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. 9-1748, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO."} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"000.9 Flying Discs\nRESTRICTED\n319.1 JANP\n319.21 Dissemination - Air Attaches\n350.05 Intelligence Collection Plan\n9 Sep 1948\nFROM: AFOIR-CO\nTO: Director of Communications, DCS/O\nR&R #2\nSUBJECT: Communication Instructions for Reporting Military Intelligence Sightings (CIRMIS) --JANAP 146\n1. It is requested that the Air Force member of the Joint Communications-Electronics Committee take whatever steps may be necessary to amend Par. 101, Chapter 1, of subject publication so as to include commercial domestic airlines within its provisions.\n* * *\n3. Procedure instructions in connection with JANAP 146 have been included in this Directorate's \"Intelligence Collection Instructions\", which is being distributed to Major Air Commands and Air Attaches. Effective date of the \"ICI\" is 1 Sept 1948.\n4. It is further requested that the distribution of subsequent issues of JANAP 146, or any changes or amendments thereto, include, in addition to the original distribution, 102 copies to be sent to this Directorate - Attn: AFOIR-AA. These are for onward transmission to Air Attaches. Extra Copies of the first issue have already been secured for this prupose.\n* * *\nFILED UNDER: 311. Communications 26 Oct 48\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET\n19 SEP 1948\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT 8 SEP 1948\nb. CLASSIFICATION: RESTRICTED 1 Sep 46\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO. OIN- 10518\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nAFOAI-DA\n\"for your info. & retention.\"\nDATE 13 Sep 48\nNO.\nG.D.L.\nOIR-CO\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / BR. / TO DOWN / TO UP / DIV. / TO DOWN / TO UP / DIR/INT\nOIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, AFOIP, ASST EXEC\nOIR-CO, OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, AFOIR, ASST EXEC\nOAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, AFOAI, EXECUTIVE\nOCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI, AFOCI, DIR/INT\nAction Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR ACTION ASGD TO DATE SIGNED DATE\nf. DISPATCH FILE DISPATCHED BY DATE DISPATCHED 10-12-48 TO\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 1 Sep 48\nFROM: March AFB, Calif.\nTYPE: ltr\nSMRY: Unidentified Flying Objects\nrmd\nSUSPENSE DATE: NO.:\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTO: TO: TO: TO: TO:\nDATE: OIN 7 Sep 48 DATE: DATE: DATE: DATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO: FILED (PLACE): AFOAI-DA OTHER ACTION: 11 Oct 48\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAFOIR CO/Capt. Eldridge/dw/6282\n11 Aug 1948\n\n18 Aug 48\n\nB/L fm AMC, MCIAXF-2, dtd 21 Jul 48, subject: Falling Stars\nObserved in Norway\n\nAFOIR-CO-2 (AMC-88) 1st Ind\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq USAF, Washington 25, D. C. 18 AUG 1948\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air\nForce Base, Wright Field, Ohio\nATTN: MCIAXF\n\n1. The report referred to in basic letter described a falling star observed by the sixteen (16) year old daughter of the Military Attache. It is felt that no useful purpose would be served by questioning a (16) sixteen year old girl eight months after the incident.\n\n2. A requirement is in effect requesting that all unidentifid flying objects be reported.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl\nn/c\n\nGEORGE D. GARRETT, JR.\nLieutenant Colonel, USAF\nActing Chief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nRef: Ltr fm AMC, MCIAXF-2, dtd 21 Jul 48, subject as above.\n\n210.681 Norway\n\nSECRET\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\nWRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nWRIGHT FIELD, OHIO\n\nMCIAXF-2/HAM/jc JUL 21 1948\n* REFERENCE NO.\nAMC-88\n\nMCIAXF\n\nFalling Stars Observed in Norway\n\nChief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: AFOIR\n\n1. Reference is made to CMA Norway Report No. 365-47 describing falling stars observed by an employee of that office on 15 December 1947.\n\n2. It is requested that the Office of the Military Attache, Oslo, Norway be contacted for the purpose of completing the inclosed form and securing a signed statement from the person reported to have seen these objects. The statement should be as complete and accurate as possible and returned to this Command at earliest date.\n\n3. Comments by qualified personnel, particularly from the University of Oslo will be most helpful with regard to incidents of 12th and 13th December and any others which might occur. The questions on the form can be used as a guide in reporting phenomena which might be observed in the future.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n/s/ James J. Hausman Lt Col USAF\nfor W. R. CLINGERMAN\nColonel, USAF\nActg Chief of Intelligence\n\n1 Incl:\nCheck List - Unidentified\nFlying Objects\n\n* Reference this number on all replies\n\nT-7477-B\n\nSECRET\n\nPLEASE RETURN TO AFOIR-CO, ROOM E 207"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 21 Jul 48\nFROM: AMC, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio\nTYPE: ltr (RN # T-7477-B)\nSMRY: Falling Stars Observed in Norway\n1 Incl.\nmft\n\nTO: OIN\nDATE: 23 Jul 48\n\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO: 1 ind 1 AMC\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\n\nHQ AAF\n\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 277624\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET AMC-88\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT 23 JUL 1948\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION: SECRET\n\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 4 Aug 48\nASGD BY\nNO. OIN 8398\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\n\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / BR. / DIV. / DIR/INT\nOIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, OIR-CO (X), OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, OAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, OCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI\nAFOIP, AFOIR, AFOAI, AFOCI\nASST EXEC, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, DIR/INT\n\nX Action ✓ Coordination\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR 28 JUL 1948\nACTION ASGD TO GDC DATE\nSIGNED Eldridge DATE 11 Aug 48\n\nf. DISPATCH: DISPATCHED BY Eng DATE DISPATCHED 18 AUG 1948\nFILE TO AMC\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt.Col.Garrett/as/4544\n9 August 1948\n\n9 AUG1948\n\nAFOIR-CO-5(L-8-31)\n\nSUBJECT: Project \"SIGN\"\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nWright Field, Ohio\nATTN: MCI\n\n1. Attached civilian communication is forwarded as a matter pertaining to your Command.\n\n2. This letter has been acknowledged by the Adjutant General, Department of the Army, but not by this Headquarters. It is assumed that your Command will make proper acknowledgement.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 incl\nLtr fr J. Jamnicky\ndtd 9 July 1948 w/2 Incls.\n\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n0.95. JAMNICKY, JOHN, JR.\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nBox 227\nDravasburg, Pa\n9 July 1948\n\nUS War Department\nWashington, D.C.\n\nTO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:\n\nDear Sir:\n\nOn the Fourth of July (July 4, 1948) my wife and I were sitting on a bench on our lawn and we were watching the stars, planes, etc., At 11:15 P.M. D.S.T. we saw something very strange.\n\nWe thought we saw a star moving. There was a slight in the sky the same color and size of a star and it was moving. We decided it was a plane but ut made no noise. We soon changed our minds because this \"thing\" moved across the sky then stopped for about 8 seconds then changed its course a bit and went straight and stopped again for about 5 seconds, changed its course a bit and went straight for awhile and stopped again this time for at least 15 seconds then it went across the sky a little ways and disappeared completely. When this \"thing\" stopped in the sky, if you didn't know where it was at, you could not tell it from a star as the resemblance was identical to a star.\n\nAfter reading in the paper on July 8, 1948, about two women seeing \"Flying Saucers\" in the day light July 8, I believe I saw a \"Flying Saucer\" or something in the night July 4, because I know it was no star or an airplane because neither can travel and stop in the air like this \"thing\" did. I live about 2 1/2 miles from these women who have seen the \"disc\" in the daylight.\n\nHas the War Department any comments on these strange \"discs?\" They are now reported in the heart of the steel industry. \"PITTSBURGH DISTRICT\".\n\nYours\n/s/ John Jamnicky, Jr.\nBox 227\nDravasburg, Pa.\n\n2 Incls.\nNewspaper Clipping dtd 8 July 48\nChart"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF HQ-12 (REV. 10 NOV 1947)\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nROUTING SLIP\nTO:\n1. OFFICE AFOI12 ATTENTION Lt Col Shelley DATE 4 Aug\n2. OFFICE ATTENTION DATE\n3. OFFICE ATTENTION DATE\nFOR: FOLLOWING ACTION(S) AS CHECKED\nCOORDINATION NOTE AND RETURN INFORMATION\nNECESSARY ACTION RECOMMENDATION FILE\nSEE OR PHONE ME APPROVAL SIGNATURE\nCOMMENT\nFROM: JACKSON M. PHIPPS\nMajor, USAF\nAdministrative Assistant\nAir Information Division\nROOM NO.\nPHONE 4760\n8-6898, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nAFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\nL-8-31\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM: Maj. Jackson Phipps, Admin Asst, Air Info Div DATE: 4 Aug 48\nTYPE: Ltr w/2 Incls\nSUMMARY: Concerning Flying Saucers\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 16 Aug '48\nASGD BY\nNO. OIN 8944\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT 5 AUG 1948\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / BR. / TO DOWN / TO UP / TO DIV. / TO DOWN / TO UP / DIR/INT\nOIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, OIR-CO (X), OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, OAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, OCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI\nAFOIP, AFOIR, AFOAI, AFOCI\nASST EXEC, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, DIR/INT\nAction X Coordination check\ne. DATE RECD BR 6 AUG1948 ACTION ASGD TO DATE 9 Aug\nSIGNED Garrett\nf. DISPATCH FILE\nDISPATCHED BY\nDATE DISPATCHED 20 August 1948\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAVE AGAO-CY\n\nPRW/dmc/1D-860\n\nWAR DEPARTMENT\nTHE ADJUTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C. 2 August 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Concerning Flying Disc.\n\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nThe attached correspondence is transmitted as a matter of primary interest\nto your agency. The writer has been advised of this reference.\n\n1 Incl\nLtr dtd 9 Jul 48, fm\nJohn Jamnicky Jr.\nBox 227, Dravasburg, Penna.\nw/2 Incls.\n\nEDWARD F. WITSELL\nMajor General\nThe Adjutant General\n\n25-51533-2250"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544\n9 July 48\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n(L-6-121)\n\n9 July 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Explosion in the Sky Near Norcatur, Kansas\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nWright Field, Ohio\n\nForwarded as a matter pertaining to your Command.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl\nCy ltr, 20\nFeb 48\n\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nMobilization Branch\nRequirements Division\n\n695 MARKHAM, N. G.\n\nRef: Ltr frm N. G. Markham dtd 20 Feb 48, subject: \"Explosion in the sky near\nNorcatur, Kansas, 4:00 p.m. (MST) February 18, 1948.\n(forwarded w/orig as incl)\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"L-6-121\n\nAFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: Norman Harold Markham\nDATE: 20 Feb 48\nTYPE: Ltr\nSUMMARY: Explosion in the sky near Norcatur, Kansas, 4:00 p.m. (MST) Feb 18, 1948\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT 23 Jun 48\nDATE / ASGD BY / NO.\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nNO. 00787\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO BR. / TO DIV. / TO DIR/INT\nOIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, AFOIP, ASST EXEC\nOIR-CO (X), OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, AFOIR, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE\nOAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, AFOAI, DIR/INT\nOCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI, AFOCI\nX Action ✓ Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 25 JUN 1948 ACTION ASGD TO Garrett DATE 9 July SIGNED\nf. DISPATCH Mail FILE DISPATCHED BY OIR TO AMC DATE DISPATCHED 7-9-48\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO. 00181\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nAFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n11 June 48\n15 June 48\n15 JUN 1948\nAFOIR-CO-5\nSUBJECT: Report of \"Flying Discs\"\nTO: Commanding General, Eleventh Air Force, 1612 South Cameron\nStreet, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania\nATTN: AC/S, A-2\n1. Receipt is acknowledged of your undated letter, above subject,\nand inclosures thereto, which was received at this Headquarters 4 June.\n2. It is requested that future reports under this subject be for-\nwarded direct to Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-\nPatterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCI.\n3. This procedure is in accordance with the provisions of this\nHeadquarters' letter dated 6 February 1948, subject \"Reporting of\nInformation on Flying Discs\", as amended 26 February 1948.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n(s) Wr\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nAFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n14 June 48\nBasic Ltr fm Hq. Eleventh Air Force, Harrisburg, Pa., dtd (undated),\nsubj: Report of \"Flying Discs\"\nAFOIR-CO-5 (L-6-29) 1st Ind.\n15 JUN 1948\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air\nForce Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: MCI\n4 Incls.\nn/c\nw/inc\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCOPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nHEADQUARTERS ELEVENTH AIR FORCE\n1612 South Cameron Street\nEAFD Harrisburg, Pennsylvania\nSUBJECT: Report of \"Flying Discs\"\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Director of Intelligence,\nRequirements Division\n1. In compliance with paragraph 1a, ADC Letter 45-5, 25 March\n1948, the following information relative to \"Flying Discs\" is hereby\nsubmitted. The attached report was received this Headquarters 27 May\n1948, from Special Agent, B.K. Brown, Federal Bureau of Investigation,\nCleveland, Ohio. This Headquarters has no further information and is\nnot initiating any investigation in accordance with paragraph 2, ADC\nLtr. 45-5. Any additional information received by this Headquarters\nwill be immediately forwarded to your Headquarters. Copies of report\nhave been forwarded to Hq. Air Materiel Command and Hq. Air Defense\nCommand as directed in above mentioned directive.\na. Location and time of sighting - Hobson, Ohio; night of\n8 May 48.\nb. Weather at the time - unknown by this Hq.\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses - Addresses\nBen Rupe, New York Central System Car Inspector unknown.\nEarl Roush, \" \" \" \"\nBob White, Yard Clerk, N.Y.C.\nC. K. Hite, Patrolman, N.Y.C.\nd. Photographs of objects, if available - unknown this Hq.\ne. Sketches of objects configuration - unknown this Hq.\nf. Objects sighted:\n(1) Number - not known this Headquarters\n(2) Shape - round\n(3) Size - appeared to be nine inches in diameter from\nground level.\nDECLASSIFIED Authority NW 3276 By DM/AMW NARA, Date 13 Mar 2014\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nEAFD\nSubj: Report of \"Flying Discs\"\n(4) Color - phosphorescent\n(5) Speed & Great amount of speed\n(6) Heading - 90°\n(7) Manueverability - not known\n(8) Altitude - 6 to 8 miles\n(9) Sound - unknown to this Hq.\n(10) Exhaust trail or not - Phosphorescent trail in the sky\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n/s/ H. B. WAX\nLt Col., USAF\nAC of S, A-2\n4 Incls.\n1. FBI Ltr., Cleveland, Ohio, 25 May 48\n2. N.Y. Central System Ltr., Columbus, Ohio\n3x 15 May 48\n3. N.Y. Central System Ltr., Hobson, Ohio\n4. N.Y. Central System Ltr., 21 May 48\nFile 22.00\nC\nO\nP\nY\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: n/d\nFROM: 11th AF, 1612 South Cameron St. Harrisburg, Pa.\nTYPE: ltr\nSMRY: Report of \"Flying Discs\" 4 Incls. mft\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 271651\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTO: OTR\nDATE: 4 Jun 48\nTO: DATE: TO: DATE: TO: DATE: TO: DATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO: FILED (PLACE): OTHER ACTION: HQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\nCOVER SHEET\nL-6-29\n* *\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY 00423\nNO.\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / BR. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIV. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIR/INT / TO UP\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nADMIN\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-CM\nOIR-RC\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nOCI-IS\nOCI-RR\nOCI-CI\nAFOIP\nAFOIR\nAFOAI\nAFOCI\nASST EXEC\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nDIR/INT\nAction\nCoordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 4 JUN 1948\nACTION ASGD TO Garrett DATE\nSIGNED DATE\nf. DISPATCH FILE\nDISPATCHED BY TO\nDATE DISPATCHED 6-15-48\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 9 Jun 48\nFROM: AMC, Ohio\nTYPE: ltr\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: A 868337\nSMRY: Special Report--Project \"SIGN\" rmd\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTO: OIR\nDATE: 10 Jun 48\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE): OIR-CO\nOTHER ACTION:\nPATENTED\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"9 June 48\nAFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\nCOVER SHEET\n666.9 Flying Discs\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY 00535\nNO.\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\nFiled in OIR-CO\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / BR. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIV. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIR/INT / TO UP\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nADMIN\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-CM\nOIR-RC\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nOCI-IS\nOCI-RR\nOCI-CI\nAFOIP\nAFOIR\nAFOAI\nAFOCI\nASST EXEC\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nDIR/INT\nAction\nCoordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR\nACTION ASGD TO Garrett DATE\nSIGNED DATE\nf. DISPATCH FILE OIR-CO\nDISPATCHED BY TO\nDATE DISPATCHED\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n00232\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n4 June 48\n\nBasic ltr 24 Sept 47, subj: \"Flying Disc\", from Hq AMC (TSNAD-2B/ACL:eec) to CG, AAF, attn: AC/AS-2 Major General George McDonald - signed by Col H.M. McCoy, Deputy CG, Intelligence,(T-2)\nCOPY in Central Files\n\nIn compliance with Gen McDonald's telephone conversation 24 Sep 47 to Col McCoy, AMC, copy of drawing entitled \"Loedding Flying Disc\" designated LD-2; was forwarded to this Hq. Because of patent rights involved, record must be kept of all persons reviewing drawing. Ltr also inclosed report by Royal Aircraft Establishment, Technical Note, AERO 1703, which describes the Horten tailless aircraft. T-2 report \"German Flying Wings Designed by Horten Brothers\" was forwarded for retention by AC/AS-2.\n\nCorres. rec'd thru A-2 TS Control Officer due to patent rights involved with drawing. Corres. dispatched thru A-2 TS Control officer and courier to AMC.\n\n3 Incls\n1. Drawing\n2. RAE Tech Note, AERO 1703\n3. T-2 Rpt, No. F-SU-1110-ND\n\nAFOIR\nLt Col Earle/mcb/6548\n/t/ 4 June 48\n\n0 95. HORTEN BROS\n\nAFOIR 1st Ind.\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C. 4 - JUN 1948\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\n\nT-2 Report \"German Flying Wings Designed by Horten Brothers\" has been retained by this office.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nWILTON H. EARLE, Jr.\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n2 Incls.\n1 & 2 n/c\n3 w/d\n\nSECRET\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REGISTER OF PERSONNEL HANDLING TOP SECRET MATERIAL\nAF HQ - 6\n1 Dec 1944\nDATE 25 Sept 1947\nDIVISION Executive\nOFFICE AC/AS-2\nSUBJECT & DESCRIPTION OF ENCLOSURES: 2 cys AMC Ltr to CG/AAF dtd 24 Sep 47, subj: FD #1 - Drawing; #2 RAE Tech Note, AERO 1703; #3 T-2 Rpt, No. F-SU-1110-ND\nNO. OF ENCLOSURES 3\nINSTRUCTIONS\nThe above described Top-Secret document has been received in this office this date. The circulation of this material will be limited to the minimum number of persons necessary for completion of the required action. The names of all persons handling or having knowledge of the subject document will be recorded below as indicated.\nThe document will be returned to the Top-Secret Control Officer (Room 3E 160) for record prior to dispatch from this office or other disposition. This form will not be removed from the subject document except by him when forwarding.\nNAME | DATE | TIME | PURPOSE | ALL PAPERS ATTACHED\nEdward Shelley 25 Sep 10:45 Review | check\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DOCUMENT RECEIPT\nAF HQ - 5 1 Dec 1944\n2-416\nDATE 25 Sep 47\nRECEIVED FROM (NAME) (OFFICE)\nTS Control Officer, ACAS-2, Hq AAF, 3E-160, Pentagon\nDOCUMENT\n2 cys AMC Ltr to CG/AAF dtd 24 Sep 47, subj: F D, w/3 incls\nENCLOSURES NUMBER OF ENCLOSURES 3\n#1 - Drawing; #2 RAE Tech Note, AERO 1703; #3 T-2 Rpt, No. F-SU-1110-ND\nSIGNATURE GRADE OFFICE\nINSTRUCTIONS: This form will be used as a hand receipt for a single document. Only short titles, file numbers, etc. will be used as identification in order that the receipt may remain unclassified.\n4-7540, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DOCUMENT RECEIPT\nAF HQ - 5 1 Dec 1944\n2-416\nDATE 25 Sep 47\nRECEIVED FROM (NAME) (OFFICE)\nTS Control Officer, ACAS-2, Hq AAF, 3E-160, Pentagon\nDOCUMENT\n2 cys AMC Ltr to CG/AAF dtd 24 Sep 47, subj: F D, w/3 incls\nENCLOSURES NUMBER OF ENCLOSURES 3\n#1 - Drawing; #2 RAE Tech Note, AERO 1703; #3 T-2 Rpt, No. F-SU-1110-ND\nSIGNATURE GRADE OFFICE\nINSTRUCTIONS: This form will be used as a hand receipt for a single document. Only short titles, file numbers, etc. will be used as identification in order that the receipt may remain unclassified.\n4-7540, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFBEX-4 (Rev. 13 Aug 47) AC/AS-2 COVER SHEET\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: Air Materiel Command DATE: 24 Sep 47 TYPE: letter\nb. CLASSIFICATION: SECRET\nSUSPENSE DATE ASGD BY NO.\nSUMMARY: subj: F D, 2/3 incls\nDATE RECEIVED AC/AS-2 25 Sep 47\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nNOTE: Drawing should be signed by all persons reviewing. 3AS\nDrawing and Blue Book to be returned to AMC.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS.\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP: BEX-PP, BEX-AD, BEX-CI, BIR-CO, BIR-DD, BIR-AA, BIR-PH, BIN-OA, BIN-DA, BIN-AE, BIN-AF, BIN-SV; AFBEX, AFBIR, AFBIN; ASST EXEC, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, DEPUTY, AC/AS-2\nAs of 4 receipt to AS Mail Room 4 Jun 48\ne. DATE REC'D BR; ACTION ASGD TO; SIGNED; DISPATCH; DISPATCHED BY BIN-Cables TO AMC; DATE DISPATCHED 4 June 48; FILE\nsent by Top Secret Courier 7-1187, AF (X-010)"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n7-1187, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544\n2 June 48\nAFOIR-CO-5\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n2 June 1948\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: MCI\nForwarded as a matter pertaining to your Command. Request acknowledgement be made to Mr. Bonneville.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n1 Incl\nLtr frm Wm. Bonneville\ndtd 23 May 48\nGEORGE D. GARRETT, JR.\nLieutenant Colonel, USAF\nActing Chief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nmailed\n6-3-48\npes\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt/Col.Garrett/as/4544\n21 May 1948\nRESTRICTED\nAFOIR-CO-5 (5-61)\n21 May 1948\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nAttn: MCI\nAttached is a report of a flying disc sighting by an officer on duty in the Offensive Air Branch of this Directorate.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n1 Incl.\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nRESTRICTED\nPLEASE RETURN TO DIR of INTELL"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n4 May 1948\nMEMO FOR LT. COL. THOMAS\nThe undersigned officer was participating as pilot on a local flight on Friday, 30 April 1948, in Navy aircraft, SNJ Buno 90731. At approximately 1015 local time, at an altitude of about 5500 feet, on a magnetic Leading of about 180 degrees, just south of Anacostia Naval Air Station, an object was sighted ahead to the left and about 1000 feet below at a distance of about 1 mile. The object resembled a yellow sphere estimated at 25-40 feet in diameter. The flight path of the object was in approximately a South to North direction (despite upper wind from North Northwest) and apparently followed a constant altitude. Pilot did not pursue object further because it was entering the prohibited flying area, U.S. Capitol, White House Area.\nThe object appeared to pilot to be a yellow (or bright colored) balloon and attracted attention principally because of its flight path. No external fittings or attachments were observed on the object. The speed of the object was estimated to about 100 MPH.\n/s/ Marcus L. Lowe, Jr.\nLt. Cdr. US Navy"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\nCOVER SHEET\n5-61\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: AFOAI-AE\nDATE: 10 May 48\nTYPE: R/S w/longhand memo\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nSUMMARY: Memo from Lt. Commander Lowe for Lt. Colonel Thomas re object sighted on flight South of Anacostia Naval Air Station, 30 April 48.\n(forwarded to Gen Cabell by R/S from Col Walsh, AFOAI-AE)\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO.\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT OIR 11 May 48\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nOIR-CO\nHere we go again. Will you send this to AMC WRE\nDATE\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO BR. TO / DOWN UP / TO DIV. TO / DOWN UP / TO DIR/INT TO / DOWN UP\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nADMIN\nAFOIP\nASST EXEC\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-CM\nOIR-RC\nAFOIR\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nAFOAI\nDIR/INT\nOCI-IS\nOCI-RR\nOCI-CI\nAFOCI\nAction\nCoordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 12 MAY 1948\nACTION ASGD TO\nSIGNED\nDATE 21-5\nf. DISPATCH mailed\nDISPATCHED BY\nDATE DISPATCHED 5-21-48\nFILE TO AMC\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/6282\n12 May 48\nAFOIR-CO-5\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force, Dayton, Chio\nATTN: MCI\nForwarded for your information.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n1 Incl.\nID No. 456982\n(4 copies)\nGEORGE D. GARRETT, JR.\nLieutenant Colonel, USAF\nActing Chief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n6 May 48\nAFOIR-CO-5\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: MCI\n1. The attached correspondence from Miss Ethel Evans, of Wildwood, New Jersey, pertaining to Flying Discs, is forwarded for your information.\n2. Attached herewith is copy of this Headquarters' direct reply to her letter of 23 April.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n2 Incls.\n1 - cy of ltr to Ethel Evans dtd 6 May\n2 - ltr fm Ethel Evans dtd 23 Apr. w/incls.\nGEORGE D. GARRETT, JR.\nLieutenant Colonel, USAF\nActing Chief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/4544 - 6 May 48\nRewrtn: AFOIR/Col Mallory/mcb/6548 - 10 May 48\n12 MAY 1948\nMrs. Ethel Evans\nPost Office Box 119\nWildwood, New Jersey\nDear Mrs. Evans:\nYour letter of April 23rd to Mr. Symington, with its inclosures, has been referred to this office during his temporary absence and we wish to thank you very much for your patriotic interest.\nWe assure you, Mrs. Evans, that rather than being treated lightly, your reports of information concerning unusual aerial phenomena have in every case been studied by those persons concerned with such matters.\nWe sincerely hope that you will continue to send any further reports of these sightings, should they occur, to the Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nVery truly yours,\nJOEL E. MALLORY\nColonel, USAF\nActing Chief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nCC: Air Materiel Command\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n6 May 48\nMay 6, 1948\nMiss Ethel Evans\nPost Office Box 119\nWildwood, New Jersey\nDear Miss Evans:\nYour letter of April 23rd to Mr. Symington, with its inclosures, has been referred to me during his temporary absence, and I wish to thank you very much for your patriotic interest.\nI assure you, Miss Evans, that, rather than being treated lightly, your reports of information concerning unusual aerial phenomena have in every case been studied by those persons concerned with such matters.\nWe sincerely hope that you will continue to send any further reports of these sightings, should they occur, to the Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.\nVery truly yours,\nGEORGE D. GARRETT, JR.\nLt. Colonel, USAF\nActing Chief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n6 May 48\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM\n\n1. To reply direct to a Mrs. Ethel Evans of Wildwood, N. J., who wrote direct to Mr. Symington, under date of 23 April, concerning flying discs.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n\n2. This woman is an old friend. She has been writing to just about everybody in the Government concerning the strange lights she has seen over the Jersey Coast. Her Senator, President Truman, The F.B.I., AMC, and various radio commentators have been the objects of her attention for some time.\n\n3. Her correspondence with AMC finally reached such a crescendo that an officer was sent down to Wildwood especially to interview her. After talking with her, it was decided to pursue the matter no farther. To play safe, however, the officer made arrangements with the Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington, in coordination with this Directorate, to report any unusual aerial phenomena to AMC. As far as is known, nothing has come in from this official source.\n\nACTION\n\n4. Attached letter to Miss MRS. Evans thanking her for her interest, and attached letter to AMC forwarding the correspondence for their information.\n\nCOORDINATION\n\nNone"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5-26\n\nAFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: Ethel Evans\nDATE: 23 Apr 48\nTYPE: Letter to Sec AF w/s Parks\nSUMMARY: Flying Saucers in Vicinity of Wildwood, N.J.\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT: 5 May 48\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 14 May 48\nASGD BY 7432\nNO. OIX\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nSuspense OCS/O Tally 5/24\nDate 1400 - 17 May 48\nSecy AF # 7138\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO BR. / TO DOWN / TO UP / TO DIV. / TO DIR/INT (offices routing: OIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, OIR-CO (X), OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, OAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, OCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI; AFOIP, AFOIR, AFOAI, AFOCI; ASST EXEC, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, DIR/INT)\n\nLegend: X Action; check Coordination\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR 6 MAY 1948; ACTION ASGD TO GDC; SIGNED; DATE\nf. DISPATCH; DISPATCHED BY OIN MRS TO dg AWC; DATE DISPATCHED 13 May 48\n\nAFOIN-4 form 8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nAFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrstt/jh/4544\n28 Apr 48\n\nLtr frm Hq AMC, MCIAXD, dated 13 Apr 48, subject: \"Interrogation of Horten Brothers\"\n\nAFOIR-CO-5 1st Ind.\n\n28 APR 1948\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: MCIAXD\n\n1. This Headquarters has received no information, as yet, resulting from interview of subject brothers.\n\n2. As soon as received, it will be forwarded to your Headquarters.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n095. HORTEN, REIMAR\n\nReference: Ltr frm Hq AMC, MCIAXD, dtd 13 Apr 48, subject as above.\nLtr frm JIOA, dtd 31 Mar 48, subject: \"German Scientists (Civil), Reimar Horten.\"\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\n\nMCIAXD\n\nMCIAXD/HWS/dw\nWright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n\nApr 13, 1948\nREFERENCE\nA 4062\n\nSUBJECT: Interrogation of Horten Brothers\n\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: AFOIR\n\nIt is requested that this Headquarters be advised of any information available as a result of the interrogation of the Horten Brothers, referred to in letter, your Headquarters, AFOIR-CO-5, dated 24 February 1948, subject \"Flying Discs\".\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n/S/ James J. Hansman, Lt. Col. USAF\nfor H. M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nSECRET\n\nTHE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nJoint Intelligence\nObjectives Agency\n\n31 March 1948\n\nJIOA 1068\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR Collection Branch, Air Intelligence Requirements Division\nAttn: Directorate of Intelligence\n\nSUBJECT: German Scientists (Civil), Reimar Horten.\n\n1. Reference is made to the recent telephone request of Captain Macken that Dr. Reimar Horten, allocated to the U.K on the U.K. 15th Civil List, be made available to the Department of the Air Force for interview.\n\n2. The British Joint Services Mission has agreed to the interview of Horten by the Department of the Air Force at some future date.\n\n/S/ BOSQUET N. WEV\nCaptain, USN\nDirector"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 13 Apr 48\nFROM: AMC, Wright Fld, Ohio\n\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 261792\n\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\n\nTYPE: ltr (RN # T-8411-B)\nSMRY:\n\nInterrogation of Horten Brothers\nmft\n\n1st Ind\n\nTO: AMC\nDATE: 28 Apr\n\nTO: DATE: 14 Apr 48\n\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\n\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\nCOVER SHEET\nA-4062\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION: SECRET\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 22 April\nASGD BY O/R\nNO. 4-259\nSUMMARY:\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / BR. / TO DIV. / TO DIR/INT\nOIP-PP OIP-FL ADMIN OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-CM OIR-RC AFOIP AFOIR OAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV AFOAI OCI-IS OCI-RR OCI-CI AFOCI ASST EXEC ASST EXEC EXECUTIVE DIR/INT\nAction X Coordination ✓\ne. DATE REC'D BR 16 APR 1948 ACTION ASGD TO Garrett DATE 22-4-48 SIGNED Garrett DATE 28-4-48\nf. DISPATCH Mail FILE\nDISPATCHED BY OIR TO AMC\nDATE DISPATCHED 29 April\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544\n16 Feb 48\n24 Feb 48\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\n24 FEB 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO : Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\n\n1. Attached, for your information, is copy of Collection Memorandum Number 7, which was forwarded to field collection agencies for action on above subject.\n\n2. This Directorate has been advised that contact has been made with the Horton Brothers, and the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, of European Command has accordingly been advised by Telecon to use this Memorandum as the basis for interrogation.\n\n3. The results of this interrogation will be forwarded to your Headquarters as soon as received.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl\nCol Memo #7\ndtd 21 Jan 48\n\nC.P. CABELL\nMajor General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nONE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM\n\n1. To forward to AMC a copy of Collection Memo #7, and advise action being taken.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n\n2. Collection Memo #7, outlines our intelligence requirements in the field of unconventional a/c, as they pertain to overseas agencies.\n\n3. Of particular interest in this Memo is the desire to contact the Horton Bros, designers of a flying disc type a/c.\n\n4. Scientific Branch, ID, advises that EUCOM has made contact with the Horton Bros., and this Office has therefore asked ID to instruct the G-2 of EUCOM to arrange an interrogation of the Hortons, using Collection Memo #7, as the basis for the interrogation.\n\n5. Col. McCoy has been advised of this contact and proposed interrogation. He feels that further possible exploitation of the Hortons should await the results of this first interrogation.\n\nACTION\n\n6. Attached letter to AMC advising them of above facts.\n\nCOORDINATION\n\n7. Col. McCoy, T-2, AMC"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\n\nAFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: AFOIR-CO-5\nDATE: 16 Feb 48\nTYPE: Letter\nSUMMARY: Flying Discs\nb. CLASSIFICATION: SECRET\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO.\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / BR. / TO DOWN / DIV. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIR/INT / TO UP\nOIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, AFOIP, ASST EXEC\nOIR-CO, OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, AFOIR, ASST EXEC\nOAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, AFOAI, EXECUTIVE\nOCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI, AFOCI, DIR/INT\nAction / Coordination\ne. DATE RECD BR; ACTION ASGD TO GDG; DATE; SIGNED; DATE 16 Feb 48\nf. DISPATCH mail; FILE TO AMC; DISPATCHED BY OIR; DATE DISPATCHED 2/24/48\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n28 Apr 48\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\n28 APR 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Clipping Service for Project \"SIGN\"\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: MCI\n\n1. Reference is made to your letter dated 15 March 1948, subject as above.\n\n2. Based on past experiences of other Government intelligence agencies which have been contacted, and taking into consideration the necessity for additional handling which would result if another agency subscribes to the service for you, it is recommended that your Headquarters subscribe to the desired service, rather than have the service contracted for you.\n\n3. It is suggested that the simplest method to avoid compromising the Air Force in a program of this kind would be for a civilian member of your Intelligence staff to secure a Post Office box in Dayton, contract for the service in his own name, and pay the cost by money order or certified check secured with funds furnished him by the Government.\n\n4. Coverage of general domestic newspapers can be obtained through Consolidated Press Clipping Bureaus, 431 South Dearborn St., Chicago, with branches in New York, Kansas City and Minneapolis; Henry Romeike, Inc., 220-30 West 19th St., New York, and American Press Clipping Service, 119 Nassau St., New York. Any one of these should give good coverage, but it might be desirable to query each of them before making a choice. Consolidated is probably the largest.\n\n5. For coverage of the domestic trade press, American Trade Press Clipping Bureau, 15 East 26th St., New York, is recommended.\n\n6. The International Press Clipping Bureau, 5 Beekman St., New York, provides coverage of the foreign press.\n\n7. As to rates, Consolidated charges 10¢ a clipping with a minimum charge of $10.00 a month. American Trade Press Clipping Bureau charges 15¢ a clipping, with a minimum of $12.00 a month. This Office does not have specific rates for the other bureaus, but it is believed that the general newspaper clipping charges run about"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n28 April 48\n\nLtr to AMC, subj: Clipping Service for Project \"SIGN\", dtd\n\nthe same, i.e., 10¢ a clipping, with a minimum of $10.00 a month. The general magazine rates are around 15¢ a clipping with a minimum of $15.00 a month.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nRef: Ltr AMC dtd 15 Mar 48, subj: as above\nand ltr fm AMC dtd 20 Feb 48, subj: Clipping Service"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nMCIA/JCB/amb\n\nMCIA\n\nMAR 1 5 1948\n\nClipping Service for Project \"SIGN\"\n\nChief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: AFOIR, Lt Col George D. Garrett, Jr.\n\n1. It is believed that the initiation of a clipping service on the subject of flying discs would be of considerable value to this Command relative to the accomplishment of Project \"SIGN\".\n\n2. The Research Division of Plane Facts Magazine, Dayton, Ohio was contacted in an attempt to negotiate such a contract. This company has submitted a few courtesy articles which proved highly useful. However, in view of the factors involved, indications are that such a contract negotiated directly by this Headquarters with a private company would carry no assurance that the USAF would not be compromised.\n\n3. It is requested, therefore, that your Headquarters investigate the possibility to contract for this service through some other Government agency. This contract should contain the following coverages:\n\na. U. S. newspapers\n\nb. U. S. periodicals\n\nc. Leading foreign newspapers (including translations)\n\nd. Leading foreign periodicals (including translations)\n\nThe cost of such a contract would be furnished from the budget of the Intelligence Department, this Command.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nH. M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nMCI/JSH/dm\n\nMCI\n\n20 February 1948\n\nClipping Service\n\nChief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nAttention: Director of Intelligence\n\n1. Your attention is invited to the attached proposal from the Research Division of PLANE FACTS magazine to furnish this Headquarters with a clipping service as explained in the attached correspondence.\n\n2. This matter was previously discussed informally with your Headquarters and the undersigned was notified that since the responsibility for a review of the world press was vested in the CIA, such matters should be referred to that authority.\n\n3. The service proposed by PLANE FACTS would be highly desirable in that the material furnished would be organized in a manner that would facilitate processing within this Headquarters with a minimum of delay. The ability of the PLANE FACTS organization to successfully furnish such a service is, however, unknown to this office, and no attempt has been made to ascertain its capabilities in this direction in view of C.I.A. responsibility.\n\n4. Since it is manifestly true that it would be impracticable, if not impossible, for this Headquarters to set up a world wide coverage of the press and trade journals in the aeronautical field without outside assistance, it is requested that efforts be made to make necessary arrangements with C.I.A. whereby this service may be furnished this Headquarters.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nIncl:\nLtr. 26 Jan 48\nw/Incl.\n\nH. M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\n\nT-4272-A\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDATE: 15 Mar 48\nFROM: AMC, Ohio.\nTYPE: Ltr.\nSMRY: Clipping Service for Proj. \"SIGN\"\n\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 257078\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\n\nTO: OIR 16 Mar 48\n\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET\n\n3-237\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION: CONFIDENTIAL\n\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 23 Mar\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. 3-552\n\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\n\nWright Field wishes to subscribe to a clipping service on flying discs, without compromising USAF. Attached letter gives info on services and suggests AMC civilian handle.\n\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP: OIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, OIR-CO (Action), OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, OAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, OCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI; DIV: AFOIP, AFOIR, AFOAI, AFOCI; DIR/INT: ASST EXEC, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, DIR/INT\n\nAction X Coordination ✓\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR 19 MAR 1948; ACTION ASGD TO Garrett; DATE 28-4-48; SIGNED Garrett\n\nf. DISPATCH; DISPATCHED BY OIR; DATE DISPATCHED 4-28-48; FILE TO AMS\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 20 Feb. 48\nFROM: AMC Ohio.\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 252251\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTYPE: Ltr. T- 4272-A\nSMRY:\nClipping Service\nRe:\"Plane Facts Magazine\"\nIncl.\nTO: OIR\nDATE: 25Feb48\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"a. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nb. CLASSIFICATION: [REDACTED]\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 5 May\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. 3-106\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc. To Record.-\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE 8 March 48\nMajor FAULK (AMC-MCI) said that AMC Comptroller has disapproved any use of Plane Facts and that we should disregard this and wait for another letter which MCI is presently preparing regarding\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / TO DOWN / TO UP / TO DOWN / TO UP\nOIP-PP OIP-FL ADMIN AFOIP ASST EXEC\nOIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-CM OIR-RC AFOIR ASST EXEC\nOAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV AFOAI EXECUTIVE\nOCI-IS OCI-RR OCI-CI AFOCI DIR/INT\nAction Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 27 FEB 1948 ACTION ASGD TO Reg. SIGNED DATE\nf. DISPATCH DISPATCHED BY DATE DISPATCHED"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nclipping services.\nGDG OIR-10\nDATE\nNO. 1 (cont'd.)\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL AFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544 26 Apr 48\nBasic ltr, subj: Report of Information on \"Flying Disc\" dated 12 Apr 48\n1st Ind G/fhc/R\nHEADQUARTERS, THE AIR UNIVERSITY, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama APR 14 1948\nTO: Chief of Staff, USAF, Washington 25, D. C., Attn: Dir of Intelligence\nForwarded in accordance with paragraph 4 of letter cited in basic communication.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n1 Incl: n/c (1 cy w/d)\n4399 /s/ F. E. LANKSTON MAJOR, AGD ASS'T. ADJ. GEN.\nAFOIR-CO-5 2nd Ind. 27 APR 1948\nDepartment of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio ATTN: MCI\n1 Incl n/c\n/s/ R.T.\nReference: Ltr frm Hq Tyndall AFB, dated 12 Apr 48, subject as above. 1st Ind frm Hq Maxwell Air FB, to C/S, USAF, dated 14 Apr 48.\n2\nCONFIDENTIAL\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY CONFIDENTIAL\nHEADQUARTERS 500th AIR UNIVERSITY WING TYNDALL AIR FORCE BASE PANAMA CITY, FLORIDA (H-4) MEJ/al/R 12 April 1948\nSUBJECT: Report of Information on \"Flying Disc\"\nTHRU: Commanding General Air University Maxwell Air Force Base Montgomery, Alabama ATTN: AC of S, A-2\nTO: Commanding General United States Air Force Washington 25, D. C. ATTN: Director of Intelligence\nThe attached information is forwarded in compliance with USAF Letter, subj: \"Reporting of Information on \"flying Discs\", dtd 6 February 1948.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n1 Incl - MOIC and Exhibit I. (in dup) /s/ J. B. PRICE Major, USAF Adjutant\nDistribution: 1 cy ea: C/S USAF CG, AMC CG, AU\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nDATE: 14 Apr 48\nFROM: Air Univ, Maxwell AFB, Ala.\nTYPE: 1st Ind.\nSMRY:\nReport of Information on \"Flying Disc\" dtd 12 Apr48\nBasic ltr fr Tyndal AFB, Panama City, Fla. dtd 12 Apr 48\n1 Incl.\nmft\nTO: OIR\nDATE: 16 Apr 48\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 261438\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET 4-143\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 23 april\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. 4-293\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / TO DIV. / TO DOWN / DIR/INT / TO UP\nOIP-PP OIP-FL ADMIN OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-CM OIR-RC AFOIP AFOIR ASST EXEC ASST EXEC EXECUTIVE DIR/INT\nOAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV AFOAI\nOCI-IS OCI-RR OCI-CI AFOCI\nX Action ✓ Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 19 APR 1948 ACTION ASGD TO GDG DATE SIGNED DATE 26-4-48\nf. DISPATCH mail FILE DISPATCHED BY DATE DISPATCHED 4/27/48 TO HC\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO-5\nAFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544 27 Apr 48\nRESTRICTED\n3 7APR 1948\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, ATTN: MCI\nThe attached Coast Guard instructions to its field agencies, relative to the reporting of information on flying discs, are forwarded for your information.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n1 Incl Instructions\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd Colonel, USAF Chief, Collection Branch Air Intelligence Requirements Division Directorate of Intelligence\nRESTRICTED\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 16 Apr 48 FROM US Coast Guard Washington, DC TYPE: ltr SMRY: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\" Incl ms\nTO: OIR DATE: 19 Apr 48\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO: FILED (PLACE): OTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF\nSUSPENSE DATE: NO.: A 834899\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2FOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\n\nCOVER SHEET\n\n4-155\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\n\nFROM:\n\nDATE:\n\nTYPE:\n\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 26 april\nASGD BY O1R\nNO. 4-318\n\nSUMMARY:\n\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\n\nDATE\n\nNO.\n\nRoutine - No M/R required.\n\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO DOWN BR. TO UP TO DOWN DIV. TO UP TO DOWN DIR/INT TO UP\n\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nADMIN\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-CM\nOIR-RC\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nOCI-IS\nOCI-RR\nOCI-CI\n\nAFOIP\nAFOIR\nAFOAI\nAFOCI\n\nASST EXEC\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nDIR/INT\n\nX Action\n✓ Coordination\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR 19 JAN 1948\nACTION ASGD TO ODC DATE\nSIGNED Garrett DATE 27-4-48\n\nf. DISPATCH mail FILE\nDISPATCHED BY O/R TO AMC\nDATE DISPATCHED 4/27/48\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\n\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\n\nDATE\n\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\n\nDATE\n\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544\n2 Apr 48\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\n5 APR 1948\n\nTO : Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: MCI\n\nForwarded for your information.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl\nLtr frm CSGID, 25 Mar\n(dup)\n\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nReference: DF frm Hq USAF, Comment No. 1 to CSGID dtd 27 Feb 48. (in file)\nDF frm CSGID, Comment No. 2, to Hq USAF, dtd 25 Mar 48.\n\nAIR CORP - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nCSGID 350.05\n\nSUBJECT: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: HQ, USAF, AFOIR FROM: D/I, GSUSA DATE: 25 Mar 48 COMMENT NO. 2\nLt. Col. Smith/2931/jes\n\n1. Action on Comment No. 1 has been completed by request for information at Inclosure 1.\n\n2. It is requested that Air Materiel Command be directed to transmit to the Director of Intelligence, GSUSA, an information copy of each communication received from or sent to commands subordinate to the Department of the Army in connection with so-called \"flying disc\" reports.\n\nFOR THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE:\n\nA. D. MacLEAN\nColonel, GSC\nAsst Exec, Intelligence Group\n\nR. F. ENNIS\nColonel, GSC\nChief, Intelligence Group\n\n2 Incls:\n1. Req for Info (10 copies)\n2. ICM 7 (2 copies)\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 25 Mar 48\nFROM: GID\n\nSUSPENSE DATE:\n\nNO.: 259444\n\nTYPE: D/F No. 2 (PMM # 46478)\nSMRY:\n\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\n\nReporting of Information on \"Flying Discs.\"\nBasic D/F fr OIR dtd 27 Feb 48\n2 Incls.\n\nmft\n\nTO: OIR\nDATE: 29 Mar 48\n\nTO:\nDATE:\n\nTO:\nDATE:\n\nTO:\nDATE:\n\nTO:\nDATE:\n\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\n\nFILED (PLACE):\n\nOTHER ACTION:\n\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\n\"RESTRICTED\"\nCOVER SHEET\n2-134\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\n\"RESTRICTED\"\nSECRET\nG.D.G.\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 5 April\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. H-48\nSUMMARY:\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN BR. TO UP\nTO DOWN DIV. TO UP\nTO DOWN DIR/INT TO UP\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nADMIN\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-CM\nOIR-RC\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nOCI-IS\nOCI-RR\nOCI-CI\nAFOIP\nAFOIR\nAFOAI\nAFOCI\nASST EXEC\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nDIR/INT\nX Action\n✓ Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 31 MAR 1948\nACTION ASGD TO GDG DATE\nSIGNED Garrett DATE 2-4-48\nf. DISPATCH FILE\nDISPATCHED BY TO AMC\nDATE DISPATCHED 4/5/48\n\"RESTRICTED\"\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544\n2 Apr 48\nAFOIR-CO-5\n5 APR 1948\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\nTO : Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nForwarded for your information.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n1 Incl\nCy Ltr frm Dept of Justice, 27 Feb w/1 incl\nROBERT TAYLOR 3rd\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Collection Branch\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nFile No. 600.9 Flying Saucers\nRE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"File No 312.1 Date 16 March 48\nTally No 16/181\nDCS/O Suspense Date 1400\nSUBJECT: Letter regarding \"Flying Saucers\"\nDIGEST: Ltr to Mr. Symington 27 Feb 48\n1 Incl s/Quinn\nLtr to the President 8 Feb s/Ethel Evans\nTO: OPO OTR X OIN OGM ODR\nFOR: X Necessary or Appropriate Action\nCoordination or Comment\nDirect Reply\nInformation/File\nDispatch\nHENRY B. SAYLER\nMajor, USAF\nAssistant Executive\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations\nDeputy Chief of Staff, Operations"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFCVC-1 (Rev 10 Feb 48)\nHEADQUARTERS U.S. AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Vice Chief of Staff\nREFERRAL SLIP\nDate 15 March\nTO: AFCVC AFAAC AFOPO AFCAV AFPDC AFMDC AFCIG AFPMP AFMRD AFCAB AFPCP AFMPI AFCHC AFODC AFMAI AFCSS AFOIN AFMSS AFCAG AFOTR\nATTENTION:\nFOR: NECESSARY ACTION\nCOMMENT AND/OR RECOMMENDATION\nDIRECT REPLY\nINFORMATION ON WHICH TO BASE REPLY\nPREPARATION OF REPLY TO OSAF\nPREPARATION OF REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OSAF\nPREPARATION OF REPLY FOR SIGNATURE U/SAF\nPREPARATION OF REPLY FOR SIGNATURE A/SAF\nPREPARATION OF REPLY FOR SIGNATURE AFCCS\nPREPARATION OF REPLY FOR SIGNATURE AFCVC\nCOPY OF REPLY TO UNDERSIGNED\nNOTE AND FORWARD\nNOTE AND RETURN\n✓ INFORMATION AND/OR FILE\nTRANSMITTAL TO COORDINATION\nAny action appropriate\nB DIRECTION OF THE VICE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nC.D.B. SMITH\nLt. Col., U.S. Air Force\nExecutive\n8-5033, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\n5616\nMar 15 4 19 PM '48\nAIR ADJUTANT GENERAL\nSPECIAL CORRESPONDENCE BRANCH"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\n3-218\nAFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM: asst Atty Gen\nDATE: 27 Feb 48\nTYPE: Ltr w/2 Incls\nSUMMARY:\nFlying Saucers\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 25 Mar\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. 3-578\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT 17 Mar 48\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE 18 Mar\nNO.\nSuspense none\nDate 16/181\nCO Argus McCoy see this before departure\nForwarded to A.M.C. They already know this party.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / TO BR. / TO DIV. / TO DIR/INT\nOIP-PP OIP-FL ADMIN OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-CM OIR-RC AFOIP AFOIR AOI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV AFOAI OCI-IS OCI-RR OCI-CI AFOCI ASST EXEC ASST EXEC EXECUTIVE DIR/INT\nAction Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 19 MAR 1948 ACTION ASGD TO Garrett DATE SIGNED Garrett DATE 23-3\nf. DISPATCH mail FILE AMO DISPATCHED BY DATE DISPATCHED 8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued) DATE NO.\nh. TO: DATE NO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nAFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544 2 Apr 48\nLtr frm Hq 4th AF, dated 11 Mar 48, subject: \"Investigation of Flying Disc\"\nAFOIR-CO-5 1st Ind.\n2 APR 1948\nDepartment of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\n1st R.T.\nFlying Saucers\nCONFIDENTIAL\n2\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\nCONFIDENTIAL\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n4AFDA-3/1208-I Mar 11, 1948\nSUBJECT: Investigation of Flying Disc.\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Forces\nWashington, D. C.\nATTN: Directorate of Intelligence\nAir Intelligence Requirements Division\n1. Incident reported on 9 March 1948, this headquarters, per telephone call from Sgt. A. M. Larsen, Sheriff's office, Bakersfield, California.\na. Observation by Mr. Les Buchner, Bakersfield, California, of two objects falling to earth from unknown source on 5 March 1948 between 1610 and 1655 hours. Description of objects similar to falling aircraft with smoke and debris trailing. Observation made at Bakersfield with objects sighted southwest toward Buena Vista Lake, California.\nb. Observation by Mr. Denio, employee of the Pacific General Electric Company, Bakersfield, California, of two objects which fell to earth from unknown source north of Bakersfield, California, 8 March 1948. One object seemed to be on fire with red and black smoke trailing behind.\n2. Informant Larsen stated that searching parties, aircraft and rescue units have made numerous attempts to locate these reported objects without success.\n3. Investigation of incident has been initiated by this headquarters. Report will follow.\n/s/ DONALD L. SPRINGER Lt. Colonel, USAF AC of S, A-2\nInformation to:\nADC, Mitchel Fld, N.Y.\nFBI, San Francisco\nG-2, Sixth Army\nDIO, San Francisco (12th Nav. Dist.)\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: CONFIDENTIAL\nFROM: 11 Mar. 48\nHqs. 4th Air Force,\nHamilton Fld, Calif.\nTYPE: Ltr.\nSMRY:\nInvestigation of Flying Disc\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 257088\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTO: OIR\nTO:\nTO:\nTO:\nTO:\nDATE: 16March48\nDATE:\nDATE:\nDATE:\nDATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"a. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nb. CLASSIFICATION: CONFIDENTIAL\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 23 Mar\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. 3-557\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE 2-4-48\nNO. 1\nRoutine - Go toward report of flying disc sighting to AMC. G.D.G.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / BR. / DIV. / TO DIR/INT\nOIP-PP OIP-FL ADMIN OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-CM OIR-RC AFOIP AFOIR 16 Mar AFOAI AFOCI ASST EXEC ASST EXEC EXECUTIVE DIR/INT\nOAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV OCI-IS OCI-RR OCI-CI\nAction Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 19 MAR 1948 ACTION ASGD TO Garrett DATE 2-4-48 SIGNED\nf. DISPATCH FILE DISPATCHED BY TO AMC DATE DISPATCHED 4/2/48\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nAFOIR-CO-5/Lt.Col.Garrett/dk/4544 9 March 48\nAFOIR-CO-5\n17 MAR 1948\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\nTO: Commanding General Air Materiel Command Wright-Patterson Air Force Base Dayton, Ohio ATTN: MCI\n1. Reference is made to Colonel McCoy's informal proposal that certain fighter aircraft be maintained on a continuous alert status, within the Zone of the Interior, to aid in gathering information on Flying Discs.\n2. This proposal is considered unfeasible for the following reasons:\na. The outlay of aircraft and personnel would be too great in relation to the results obtained.\nb. Proper interception is not possible, except by accident, without complete radar coverage. The Air Force is incapable of providing such coverage.\nc. It is doubtful if fighter aircraft would be able to follow up reports emanating, for the most part, from civilian sources.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nGEORGE C. McDONALD Major General, USAF Director of Intelligence, Office of Deputy Chief of Staff, Operations\nSECRET\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\n000.9 Flying Discs"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE SECRET\nFlying Discs\nDirector of Intelligence\nDirector of Plans and Operations\n3 MAR 1948\nMajor Cook:csk 72233\n1. The proposal of Air Materiel Command for stationing fighter aircraft at all bases on a continuous alert status is not considered feasible for the following reasons:\nA. The outlay of aircraft and personnel would be too great consistent with the results to be obtained.\nb. Proper interception is not possible, except by accident, without complete radar coverage which the Air Force is not capable of providing.\nc. It is doubtful if fighter aircraft would be able to follow up reports emanating, for the most part, from civilian sources.\n2. It is recommended that Air Materiel Command's responsibility for \"collecting\" information on unusual phenomena in the atmosphere be confined to the establishment of direct channels for the receipt of such information.\n3. It is further recommended that in lieu of the proposal of Air Materiel Command, all other major commands be directed to cooperate with Air Materiel Command and to channel information directly to that command.\nS. E. ANDERSON Major General, U.S.A.F. Director of Plans and Operations.\nRef: R&R, to Dir/P&O, dtd 12 Feb 48, subj: Flying Discs (already in files)\nSECRET\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM\n\n1. To answer AMC's informal request that fighter aircraft be kept on a continuous alert status at air installations within the Zone of the Interior for the purpose of intercepting and gathering information on flying discs.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n\n2. Colonel McCoy of AMC verbally requested that the possibility of the above proposal be taken up with Director of Plans and Operations.\n\n3. Plans and Operations has turned down the proposal as being unfeasible.\n\nACTION\n\n4. Attached letter to AMC informing it of negative decision.\n\nCOORDINATION\n\n5. None required.\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 3 Mar. 48\nFROM: OPO\nR&R# 2\nTYPE:\nSMRY:\nFlying Discs\nR&R# 1 from OINm 12 Feb.48\n\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 254450\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\n\nTO: OIR\nDATE: 4Mar48\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\n\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION: SECRET\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 11 May\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. 3-301\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\nPBO coordination contained in attached R&R\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / BR. / DIV. / DIR/INT\nOIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, OIR-CO, OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, OAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, OCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI\nAFOIP, AFOIR, AFOAI, AFOCI\nASST EXEC, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, DIR/INT\n\nX Action ✓ Coordination\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR 5 MAR 1948\nACTION ASGD TO Garrett DATE 9-3-48\nSIGNED\nf. DISPATCH FILE\nDISPATCHED BY OIN MCS TO AGCMC\nDATE DISPATCHED 17 Mar 48\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nSee LTR 12 Jan 50 (Relc) this file 15 MAR 1949\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\nSUBJECT: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Commandant (INT) United States Coast Guard 1300 E Street NW Washington, D. C. ATTN: Chief, Intelligence and Law Enforcement Division\n\n1. It is Air Force policy not to ignore reports of sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere, but to recognize that part of its mission is to collect, collate, evaluate, and act on information of this nature.\n\n2. In implementing this policy the Air Materiel Command has been designated as the Air Force agency to collect, collate, evaluate, and distribute to interested government agencies and contractors all information concerning sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere which can be construed to be of concern to the national security.\n\n3. All Air Force installations within and outside the Zone of Interior and Alaska have been instructed to report all sightings, or information concerning sightings which comes to their attention, direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCI.\n\n4. Air Materiel Command has been authorized direct contact with all Air Force installations whenever required to develop additional information on the flying discs.\n\n5. It will be appreciated if all Coast Guard installations also can be instructed to report such occurrences directly to Air Materiel Command, and if they can be informed that Air Materiel Command is authorized to contact them direct when necessary in connection with such occurrences.\n\n6. Whenever possible, reports to Air Materiel Command should include the following information:\n\na. Location and time of sighting\nb. Weather at the time\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\n\nFlying Discs 000.9"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\n\nAFOIR-CO-5, ltr, dtd 9 March 48, subj:Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\n\nd. Photographs of objects, if available\ne. Sketches of object's configuration\nf. Object sighted:\n\n(1) Number (5) Speed (9) Sound\n(2) Shape (6) Heading (10) Exhaust trail\n(3) Size (7) Maneuverability or not\n(4) Color (8) Altitude\n\ng. General remarks.\n\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM\n\n1. To request that all Coast Guard installations make any reports on \"flying discs\" direct to Air Materiel Command, Attn: MCI.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n\n2. By letter from Dir/Research and Development, USAF, to CG, AMC, dated 30 Dec 47, AMC was assigned responsibility for the collection, collation, evaluation, and distribution of all information and intelligence pertinent to flying discs.\n\n3. In accordance with that letter, therefore, and at the verbal request of Major Faulk, AMC \"SIGN\" project officer, it is believed desirable that Coast Guard installations be requested to pass all subject reports and information direct to MCI, AMC.\n\n4. Maj. Faulk visited Coast Guard Hq on 4 March 1948 and made arrangements with the Chief, Intelligence and Law Enforcement Division for such direct reporting.\n\nACTION\n\n5. Attached letter to Coast Guard requesting that they instruct their installations to forward any \"flying disc\" information direct to MCI, AMC.\n\nCOORDINATION\n\n6. Major Faulk MCI, A.M.C.\nCmdr. Hammond Coast Guard Hq Code 172,Ext. 2981"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST b. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM: AFOIR-CO-5 DATE: 9 March 1948 RESTRICTED\nTYPE: Letter\nSUMMARY: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO.\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS DATE NO.\n\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP, BR., DIV., DIR/INT: OIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, OIR-CO, OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, OAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, OCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI, AFOIP, AFOIR, AFOAI, AFOCI, ASST EXEC, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, DIR/INT\n\nAction / Coordination\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR. ACTION ASGD TO LtColGarrett DATE SIGNED Garrett DATE 9-3-48\nf. DISPATCH mail FILE DISPATCHED BY O/R TO USCG DATE DISPATCHED 3/15/48\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued) DATE NO.\n\nh. TO: DATE NO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nAMC 2nd Ind MCIA/JCB/amb\nSubject: Project \"SIGN\" MAR 10 1948\n\nHq, AMC, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\n\nTO: Chief of Staff, United States Air Force, Washington 25, D. C.\nATTN: AFOIR\n\nIn accordance with instructions, the 44 reports listed in 1st Ind, your Hq, are returned for your files.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n44 Incls For A. J. Hemstreet, Jr.\nn/c H. M. McCOY Lt. Col. USAF\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\n\nIncls w/d\nby OIR-DD\nFile W. B. Mickley\nMaj. USAF\nJS\nOriginal to Calssified Files-\n17 Mar 1948\n\nV X OVER"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO-2/Maj Tolbert/hrf/6282\nwtn 5 Feb 48\nSECRET\nB/L fr Hq, AMC, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\ndated 23 Jan 48, subj: Project \"SIGN\"\nAFOIR-CO-2 1st Ind.\nA-2641\n12 FEB 1948\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq, USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio ATTN: MICA\n1. Forwarded herewith on a loan basis for a period of thirty (30) days are the following listed documents:\nKO 54851 KO 70820 KO 61960\nKO 58833 KO 68030 KO 61859\nKO 56280 KO 66307 KO 64982\nKO 70007 KO 67141 KO 61895\nKO 66691 KO 67097 KO 61986\nKO 68332 KO 66129 KO 63350\nKO 67999 KO 63300 KO 61681\nKO 69518 KO 67122 KO 61943\nKO 73874 KO 66335 KO 62298\nKO 75893 KO 66115 KO 60556\nKO 75634 KO 64613 KO 57213\nKO 61180 KO 62556 KO 57670\nKO 86615 KO 63570 KO 57652\nKO 73577 KO 62008 KO 90250\nKO 70535 KO 63079\n2. It is requested that any future correspondence pertaining to this request bear reference to Control No. A-2641.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n44 Incls as listed above\nRef: (1) AMC ltr (MCIA) dated 23 Jan 48, subj: Project \"SIGN\"\n(2) Documents on loan from OIR-DD.\n10 Mar 48\n3.9.1 Accession list\n3.9.21 Dissemination\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\nIn reply address both communication and envelope to Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Attention following office symbol:\nMCIA\nMCIA/ACL/amb\nWright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n23 January 1948\nSUBJECT: Project \"SIGN\"\nTO: Chief of Staff, United States Air Force, Washington 25, D. C. ATTN: AFOIR, Lt Col George Garrett\n1. In connection with the investigation of flying discs, Project \"SIGN\", it is believed that the various unidentified flying objects seen over Sweden (so-called \"Swedish Incidents\") might be helpful. It is our understanding that a comprehensive file of these incidents accumulated during the past two years is located at your Headquarters.\n2. It is requested, therefore, that the entire file \"Swedish Incidents\" be forwarded to this office for review as soon as possible. If extra copies are not available, reproduction copies will be made at this Command so that the originals can be promptly returned.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n/s/ W. R. Clingerman Col USAF\nfor H. M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 10 Mar 48 SECRET\nFROM: AMC Ohio\nTYPE: 2d Ind T 6618\nSUSPENSE DATE: NO.: 257308\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nSMRY: Project SIGN KO 54851 B/Ltr AMC Ohio dtd 23 Jan 48 44 Incl: vbg\nTO: OIR DATE: 11Mar48\nTO: AFOIP\nTO: OI\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO: FILED (PLACE): OTHER ACTION: HQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET A-2647\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST b. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM: DATE: TYPE:\nSUMMARY: SUSPENSE DATE ASGD BY NO.\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nTO: McCourey For file CO-12\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP, BR., DIV., DIR/INT\nOIP-PP OIP-FL ADMIN OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-CM OIR-RC AFOIP Files AFOIR AFOAI AFOCI ASST EXEC ASST EXEC EXECUTIVE DIR/INT\nOAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV OCI-IS OCI-RR OCI-CI\nAction Coordination Completed\ne. DATE REC'D BR ACTION ASGD TO SIGNED f. DISPATCH FILE DISPATCHED BY TO DATE DISPATCHED\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued) DATE NO.\nh. TO: DATE NO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: CONFIDENTIAL SUSPENSE DATE: NO.: 239333 FROM: 23 Jan 48 AMC, W/Fld, Ohio. FILE DESIGNATION AND DATE: TYPE: Ltr. SMRY: Project \"SIGN\" TO: OIR DATE: 26Jan48 TO: DATE: TO: DATE: TO: DATE: TO: DATE: REPLIED OR INDORSED TO: FILED (PLACE): OTHER ACTION: HQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A-2641 1-164 COVER SHEET AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) a. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST FROM: DATE: TYPE: SUMMARY: b. CLASSIFICATION: CONFIDENTIAL SUSPENSE DATE 3 Feb ASGD BY OIR NO. 2-34 DATE RECEIVED DIR/INT c. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS DATE NO. USE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS d. TO DOWN TO UP BR. TO DOWN DIV. TO UP TO DOWN DIR/INT TO UP OIP-PP OIP-FL ADMIN AFOIP ASST EXEC OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-CM OIR-RC AFOIR ASST EXEC OAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV AFOAI EXECUTIVE OCI-IS OCI-RR OCI-CI AFOCI DIR/INT Action Coordination e. DATE REC'D BR 27 JAN 1948 ACTION ASGD TO CDG DATE SIGNED DATE DATE f. DISPATCH mail FILE DISPATCHED BY OIR TO AMC DATE DISPATCHED 2/12/48 8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued) DATE NO. h. TO: DATE NO. 8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt. Col Garrett/lwd/4544 4 March 48 CONFIDENTIAL 9 Mar 48 B/L fm Hq. Tenth Air Force, Brooks Fld, San Antonio, Texas, dtd 7 Jan 48, subj: \"Flying Disks\" AFOIR-CO-5 1st Ind. Dept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C. 9 MAR 1948 TO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio ATTN: TSDIN Forwarded as a matter pertaining to your Command. BY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF: 1 Incl n/c DOUGLASS W. EISEMAN Lt. Colonel, U.S.A.F. Executive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div. Directorate of Intelligence Ref: B/L fm 10th A.F/ dtd 7 Jan 48, subj: as above CONFIDENTIAL FILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL HEADQUARTERS TENTH AIR FORCE BROOKS FIELD, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS D 333.5 7 January 1948 SUBJECT: \"Flying Disks\" TO: Chief of Staff United States Air Force Washington 25, D. C. ATTN: Director of Intelligence Commanding General Air Defense Command Mitchel Field, New York ATTN: Asst Chief of Staff, A-2 Commanding General Fourth Army Ft. Sam Houston, Texas ATTN: Asst Chief of Staff, G-2 Inclosed is Summary of Information prepared by the Tenth Air Force Resident Agent at Houston, Texas covering a report of \"Flying Disks\" received by the FBI Office at Houston, Texas. FOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL: 1 Incl Summary of Inform, subj: \"Flying Disk\" 175th AFBU, Ellington Fld, dtd 19 Dec 47 /s/ RAYMOND D. STEPHENS Major, USAF Actg Asst Chief of Staff, A-2 COPY CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 7 Jan 48 CONFIDENTIAL SUSPENSE DATE: NO.: 244288 FROM: 10th AF Brooks Fld Tex FILE DESIGNATION AND DATE: TYPE: ltr SMRY: \"Flying Disks\" 1 Incl: wbg TO: OCI AFOIR-CO TO: TO: TO: TO: DATE: 13Jan48 DATE: 14 Jan DATE: DATE: DATE: REPLIED OR INDORSED TO: FILED (PLACE): OTHER ACTION: HQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) 1-131 COVER SHEET CONFIDENTIAL 1-131 a. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST b. CLASSIFICATION: FROM: DATE: TYPE: CONFIDENTIAL SUMMARY: SUSPENSE DATE ASGD BY NO. DATE RECEIVED DIR/INT c. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS Capt. Will O Brimberry's cousin, Texas Tall Tales. DATE NO. USE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS d. TO DOWN BR. TO UP TO DOWN DIV. TO UP TO DOWN DIR/INT TO UP OIP-PP OIP-FL ADMIN AFOIP ASST EXEC OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-CM OIR-RC AFOIR ASST EXEC EXECUTIVE DIR/INT OAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV AFOAI OCI-IS OCI-RR OCI-CI AFOCI Action Coordination e. DATE REC'D BR ACTION ASGD TO DATE SIGNED DATE f. DISPATCH mail FILE DISPATCHED BY TO AMC DATE DISPATCHED 8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued) DATE NO. h. TO: DATE NO. 8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Col Garrett/lwd/4544 2 March 48 AFOIR-CO-5 4 MAR 1948 SUBJECT: Flying Discs TO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio ATTN: TSDIN Attached report from Military Air Attache, Canada, closes the incident reported by Johnson and Harrison. BY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF: 1 Incl. MAA Canada Rpt. dtd 2 Feb 48 DOUGLASS W. EISEMAN Lt. Colonel, U.S.A.F. Executive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div. Directorate of Intelligence FILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET 3-23 a. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST b. CLASSIFICATION: FROM: AFOIR-CO DATE: 2 March 48 TYPE: Mil ltr SECRET SUMMARY: Flying Discs SUSPENSE DATE: ASGD BY NO. DATE RECEIVED DIR/INT c. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS DATE NO. USE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS d. TO DOWN BR. TO UP TO DOWN DIV. TO UP TO DOWN DIR/INT TO UP OIP-PP OIP-FL ADMIN AFOIP ASST EXEC OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-CM OIR-RC AFOIR ASST EXEC EXECUTIVE DIR/INT OAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV AFOAI OCI-IS OCI-RR OCI-CI AFOCI Action Coordination e. DATE REC'D BR ACTION ASGD TO AFOIR-CO-5 DATE 2 March 48 SIGNED Garrett DATE 2-3-48 f. DISPATCH mail FILE DISPATCHED BY TO AMC DATE DISPATCHED 3/4/48 8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND\nANDREWS FIELD\nWASHINGTON 20, D. C.\nA2B\nSAC 350(2 Mar 48)\n2 March 1948\nSUBJECT: Reporting of Information on Flying Discs.\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Director of Intelligence\nThe attached copy of report pertaining to the above subject is forwarded in compliance with letter, USAF, subject as above, 6 Feb 48.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\nMONTIE THOMPSON, JR.\n1st Lt, USAF\nAsst Adj Gen\n1 Incl )Filed in OIR-CO\nRpt, subj: \"Smoking Object\"\n26 Feb 48\nNo action necessary\nFile\nGeo. D. Garrett, Jr.\nLt. Col. USAF\nJ.S.\nOriginal to Central Files -\n15 Mar 1948"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND\nANDREWS FIELD\nWASHINGTON 20, D. C.\nA2B\nSAC 350(2 Mar 48)\n2 March 1948\nSUBJECT: Reporting of Information on Flying Discs.\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Director of Intelligence\nThe attached copy of report pertaining to the above subject is forwarded in compliance with letter, USAF, subject as above, 6 Feb 48.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\nMONTIE THOMPSON, JR.\n1st Lt, USAF\nAsst Adj Gen\n1 Incl Filed in OIR-CO\nRpt, subj: \"Smoking Object\"\n26 Feb 48\nNo action necessary\nFile\nGeo. D. Garrett, Jr.\nLt. Col. USAF\nJ.S.\nOriginal to Central Files -\n15 Mar 1948\nRECEIVED\nMAR 2 3 42 PM '48\nHQ INTELLIGENCE\nHDQTRS, AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 2 Mar 48\nFROM: SAC\nTYPE: ltr\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: A 800541\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nSMRY: Reporting of Information on Flying Discs\n1 Incl: wtg\nTO:\nTO:\nTO: Cent Files\nTO:\nTO:\nDATE:\nDATE:\nDATE: 15 Mar 48\nDATE:\nDATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nPATENTED\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\nCOVER SHEET\n3-137\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nb. CLASSIFICATION: RESTRICTED\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 10 mos\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. 3-264\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc. AFOIR-\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE 12-3-48\nNO. 1\nEnclosure filed in OIR-CO. No action required.\nG.D.G.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / BR. / TO DOWN / TO UP / DIV. / TO DOWN / TO UP / DIR/INT\nOIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, OIR-CO, OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, OAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, OCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI\nFiled AFOIP AFOIR AFOAI AFOCI\nASST EXEC ASST EXEC EXECUTIVE DIR/INT\nX Action ✓ Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 11 MAR 1948\nACTION ASGD TO Garrett DATE 12-3-48\nSIGNED\nf. DISPATCH FILE\nDISPATCHED BY TO\nDATE DISPATCHED\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO-5\nCSGID\nAttn: Plans & Collection\nBranch\nLt.Col. Smith\nReporting of Information on \"Flying Discs.\"\nHQ. USAF - AFOIR\n27 FEB 1948\nLt.Col.Garrett/dk/4544\n1. It is Air Force policy not to ignore reports of sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere, but to recognize that part of its mission is to collect, collate, evaluate, and act on information of this nature.\n2. In Implementing this policy the Air Materiel Command has been designated as the Air Force agency to collect, collate, evaluate, and distribute to interested government agencies and contractors all information concerning sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere which can be construed to be of concern to the national security.\n3. All Air Force installations within and outside Zone of Interior and Alaska have been instructed to report all sightings, or information concerning sightings which comes to their attention, direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCI.\n4. Air Materiel Command has been authorized direct contact with all Air Force installations whenever required to develop additional information on the flying discs.\n5. It is requested that all Department of the Army installations also be instructed to report such occurrences directly to Air Materiel Command and that they be informed that Air Materiel Command is authorized to contact them direct when necessary in connection with such occurrences.\n6. If possible, reports to Air Materiel Command should include the following information:\na. Location and time of sighting\nb. Weather at the time\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses\nd. Photographs of objects, if available\ne. Object sighted:\n(1) Number (4) Color (7) Maneuverability (10) Exhaust trail\n(2) Shape (5) Speed (8) Altitude or not\n(3) Size (6) Heading (9) Sound\ng. General remarks\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nC. P. CABELL\nBrigadier General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/dk/4544\n25 Feb 48\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\nPROBLEM\n1. To request that all Army and Navy installations make any reports of \"flying discs\" direct to AMC, Attn: T-2.\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n2. By letter from Dir/Research & Development, USAF, to CG, AMC, dated 30 Dec 47, AMC was assigned responsibility for the collection, collation, evaluation and distribution of all information and intelligence pertinent to flying discs.\n3. In accordance with this letter, therefore, and at the verbal request of Col. McCoy, it is believed desirable that Army and Navy installations be requested to pass all subject reports and information direct to T-2, AMC.\nACTION:\n4. Attached D/F to CSGID and Letter to ONI requesting that they instruct their installations to forward flying discs information to T-2, AMC.\nCOORDINATION:\n5. Col. McCoy, MCI, AMC"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO-5\nLt.Col. Garrett/dk/4544\n25 Feb 48\nSee chr 12 Jan 50\n27 FEB 1948\nSUBJECT: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs.\"\nTO: Chief of Naval Intelligence\nDepartment of the Navy\nWashington 25, D. C.\n1. It is Air Force policy not to ignore reports of sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere, but to recognize that part of its mission is to collect, collate, evaluate, and act on information of this nature.\n2. In implementing this policy the Air Materiel Command has been designated as the Air Force agency to collect, collate, evaluate, and distribute to interested government agencies and contractors all information concerning sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere which can be construed to be of concern to the national security.\n3. All Air Force installations within and outside the Zone of Interior and Alaska have been instructed to report all sightings, or information concerning sightings which comes to their attention, direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attn: MCI.\n4. Air Materiel Command has been authorized direct contact with all Air Force installations whenever required to develop additional information on the flying discs.\n5. It is requested that all Department of the Navy installations also be instructed to report such occurrences directly to Air Materiel Command, and that they be informed that Air Materiel Command is authorized to contact them direct when necessary in connection with such occurrences.\n6. If possible, reports to Air Materiel Command should include the following information:\na. Location and time of sighting\nb. Weather at the time\nc. Names, occupations, and addresses of witnesses\nd. Photographs of objects, if available\ne. Sketches of object's configuration"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO-5 Ltr to Chief of Naval Intelligence, subj: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs.\"\nf. Object sighted:\n(1) Number (5) Speed (9) Sound\n(2) Shape (6) Heading (10) Exhaust trail or not\n(3) Size (7) Maneuverability\n(4) Color (8) Altitude\ng. General remarks\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nC. P. CABELL\nBrigadier General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\n\nCOVER SHEET\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\n\nFROM:\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\nDATE: 26 Feb 48\n\nTYPE: D/F and Letter\n\nSUMMARY:\n\nReporting of Information on \"Flying Discs.\"\n\nSUSPENSE\n\nDATE\n\nASGD BY\n\nNO.\n\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\n\nDATE\n\nNO.\n\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO DOWN / BR. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIV. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIR/INT / TO UP\n\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nADMIN\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-CM\nOIR-RC\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nOCI-IS\nOCI-RR\nOCI-CI\n\nAFOIP\nAFOIR\nAFOAI\nAFOCI\n\nASST EXEC\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nDIR/INT\n\nX Action\n✓ Coordination\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR\nACTION ASGD TO GDG DATE\nSIGNED DATE 26 Feb 48\n\nf. DISPATCH FILE\nDISPATCHED BY TO\nDATE DISPATCHED\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\n\nDATE\n\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\n\nDATE\n\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n\n26 February 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Commanding General, Caribbean Air Command\nCommanding General, United States Air Forces in Europe\nCommanding General, Far East Air Forces\nCommanding General, Pacific Air Command\nCommanding General, Air Materiel Command\n\n1. It is Air Force policy not to ignore reports of sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere but to recognize that part of its mission is to collect, collate, evaluate, and act on information of this nature.\n\n2. In implementing this policy the Air Material Command has been designated as the Air Force Agency to collect, collate, evaluate, and distribute to interested government agencies and contractors all information concerning sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere which can be construed to be of concern to the national security.\n\n3. Any information pertaining to the sighting of so-called flying discs, which is secured by or comes to the attention of any installations under your command, will be forwarded, through channels, to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attention: MCI.\n\n4. In observing this procedure for reporting information on flying disc sightings, every effort will be made to include the following items:\n\na. Location and time of sighting.\nb. Weather at the time.\nc. Names, occupations and addresses of witnesses.\nd. Photographs of objects, if available.\ne. Sketches of object's configuration.\nf. Object sighted:\n(1) Number (2) Shape (3) Size (4) Color (5) Speed (6) Heading (7) Maneuverability (8) Altitude (9) Sound (10) Exhaust trail or not.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nLtr, Hq USAF, dated 26 February 1948, Subj: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\n\ng. General remarks.\n\n5. A copy of all reports or summaries of information sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with the above provisions will be forwarded at the same time to this Headquarters, Attention: Director of Intelligence.\n\n6. Headquarters, Air Materiel Command, is authorized direct contact with installations of the addressees of this letter in connection with the development of information on flying discs.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nRESTRICTED\n2"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/nc/4544\n26 Feb 48\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To instruct the overseas air commands to report all flying disc sightings direct to AMC.\n\nFACTS & DISCUSSION:\n\n2. By letter dated 30 December 1947 this Hqs assigned AMC the responsibility for the collection, collation, evaluation, and production of intelligence concerning the so-called flying discs.\n\n3. It is therefore desirable to instruct that all such occurences which come to the attention of installations within the overseas air commands be reported direct to AMC.\n\n4. Air Commands within the ZI and Alaska have already been instructed to report this information direct to AMC.\n\nACTION:\n\n5. Dispatch of attached letter to overseas air commands.\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\n6. None.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\n\nCOVER SHEET\n\n15 copies\n\n* *\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\n\nFROM:\nAFOIR-CO\n\nDATE: 25 Feb 48\nTYPE: Letter (Ditto)\n\nSUMMARY:\nReporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\n\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO.\n\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\n\nc.\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\n\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO DOWN / BR. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIV. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIR/INT / TO UP\n\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nADMIN\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-CM\nOIR-RC\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nOCI-IS\nOCI-RR\nOCI-CI\nAFOIP\nAFOIR\nAFOAI\nAFOCI\nASST EXEC\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nDIR/INT\n\nX Action\n✓ Coordination\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR\nACTION ASGD TO GDG DATE\nSIGNED Garrett DATE 25 Feb 48\n\nf. DISPATCH\nDISPATCHED BY OIR-CO TO EACH Comd\nDATE DISPATCHED 27 Feb 48\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n\nExamined by ltr 12 Jan 50 for this file\n\n26 February 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Commanding General, Strategic Air Command\nCommanding General, Air Defense Command\nCommanding General, Tactical Air Command\nCommanding General, Air Training Command\nCommanding General, Air University\nCommanding General, Alaskan Air Command\nCommanding General, Air Transport Command\nCommanding General, Air Materiel Command\n\n1. Reference is made to letter from this Headquarters dated 6 February 1948, subject as above.\n\n2. Paragraph 1 of subject letter is changed to read as follows:\n\n\"1. Any information pertaining to the sighting of so-called flying discs, which is secured by or comes to the attention of any installation under your command, will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attention: MCI.\"\n\n3. Hereafter any sightings of flying discs will be reported under the provisions of this letter whether they occur within or outside the United States and Alaska.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nC. P. CABELL\nMajor General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\n\nfile 000.9 Flying Discs"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nAFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/nc/4544\n25 Feb 48\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To change text of Para. 1 of this Headquarters' letter dated 6 February 1948, subject, \"Reporting of Information on Flying Discs.\"\n\nFACTS & DISCUSSION:\n\n2. Subject letter, addressed to all air commands in ZI and Alaska, instructed that information on the sightings of \"flying discs\" occuring within the ZI and Alaska be forwarded direct to Air Materiel Command.\n\n3. It is felt that the reporting of information on this subject should not be limited to occurences within the US and Alaska only, but that all instances, in no matter what part of the world, should be reported direct to AMC.\n\n4. Accordingly, the necessary correction should be made to basic letter.\n\n5. A separate letter is being sent to Caribbean Air Command, USAFE, Air Div. US Army Forces Austria, FEAF, Pacific Air Command, and 1st Air Div.\n\nACTION:\n\n6. Dispatch of attached letter to addressees of our letter of 6 February 1948.\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\n7. None required.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544\n16 Feb 48\n20 FEB 1948\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\n\nForwarded for your information.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl\nNewspaper clipping\n\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\n\nCOVER SHEET\n\n* *\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\n\nFROM:\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\nDATE:\n16 Feb 48\n\nTYPE:\nLetter\n\nSUMMARY:\n\nFlying Discs\n\nSUSPENSE\n\nDATE\n\nASGD BY\n\nNO.\n\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\n\nDATE\n\nNO.\n\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO BR. TO / DOWN UP / TO DIV. TO / DOWN UP / TO DIR/INT TO / DOWN UP\n\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nADMIN\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-CM\nOIR-RC\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nOCI-IS\nOCI-RR\nOCI-CI\nAFOIP\nAFOIR\nAFOAI\nAFOCI\nASST EXEC\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nDIR/INT\n\nX Action\n✓ Coordination\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR\nACTION ASGD TO GDG DATE\nSIGNED DATE 16 Feb 48\n\nf. DISPATCH\nDISPATCHED BY\nDATE DISPATCHED\nFILE TO AMC\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\n\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\n\nDATE\n\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\n\nDATE\n\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"000.9 Flying Discs\n\n471.94 Rockets\n\n17 Feb 1948\n\nFROM: AFOIR-AA\n\nMemo\n\n* * *\n\ne. Dr. Wilkenson described efforts of the Swedish government and his company to perfect V-1 type guided missiles and stated that they were experiencing considerable difficulty in matters of fuel consumption and that they had called in a German scientist who was an expert on the V-1. This German scientist in all of his calculations showed that their V-1 model should be actually getting five times as much range as they were getting in their experiments.\n\n3. Dr. Wilkenson apparently had very definite ideas with regard to the much-discussed \"meteors\" that have been seen over their country, but Colonel von Schinkel got into a very excited discussion in Swedish with Dr. Wilkenson, which apparently changed his ideas about making any statement on the subject.\n\n* * *\n\nFILED UNDER: 470. Armament & New Weapons\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt. Col. Garrett/jh/4544\nCONFIDENTIAL 10 Feb 48\n\nLtr frm AMC MCIA, dtd 4 Feb 48, subject: \"Project SIGN\"\n\nAFOIR-CO-5 1st Ind.\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\n13 FEB 1948\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSD-N\n\n1. No information has been received from field agencies, as yet, in connection with subject guide.\n\n2. As such information is received it will be forwarded promptly to your Headquarters.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n000.9 Flying Discs\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\n\nMCIA\n\nMCIA/EHL/amb\nWright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n4 February 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Project \"SIGN\"\n\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTN: AFOIR, Major Samuel Tolbert\n\n1. Reference is made to AMC letter dated 7 October 1947, subject: \"Flying Discs\" (Project \"SIGN\") pertaining to the distribution of the Air Intelligence Guide for Alleged Flying Saucer Type Aircraft.\n\n2. It is requested that a follow-up be made to determine the availability of any pertinent information as a result of this inquiry. Expeditious action is requested so that these findings may be considered in a new guide now being prepared.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n/S/ W. R. Clingerman Col USAF\nfor H. M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Intelligence\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDATE: 4 Feb 48 SUSPENSE DATE: NO.: 248660\n\nFROM: AMC, Ohio\nWright-Patterson\nAFB, Dayton, Ohio\nltr\n\nTYPE:\n\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\n\nSMRY: Project \"SIGN\" (Flying Discs)\nmjp\n\nTO: OIR TO: TO: TO: TO:\nDATE: 5 Feb 48 DATE: DATE: DATE: DATE:\n\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO: FILED (PLACE): OTHER ACTION:\n\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET 2 62 A\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: DATE: TYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION: [REDACTED]\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 13 Feb\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. 2-282\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS DATE NO.\n\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / TO BR. / TO DIV. / TO DIR/INT\nOIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, OIR-CO, OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, AFOIP, AFOIR, OAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, AFOAI, OCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI, AFOCI, ASST EXEC, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, DIR/INT\n\nAction / Coordination\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR 8 FEB ACTION ASGD TO 3 DG DATE SIGNED DATE 11-2-48\nf. DISPATCH mail FILE\nDISPATCHED BY OIR TO AMR\nDATE DISPATCHED 2/13/48\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt. Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n11 Feb 48\n\nFlying Discs\n\nDirector of Plans and Operations\nDirector of Intelligence Lt. Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n\n12 FEB 1948\n\n1. By letter from this Headquarters, dated 30 December 1947 with subject as above, the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command is instructed to \"set up a project whose purpose is to collect, collate, evaluate and distribute to interested government agencies and contractors all information concerning sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere which can be construed to be of concern to the national security\".\n\n2. The Commanding General, Air Materiel Command feels that the responsibility assigned to him for collecting and developing information and intelligence on the \"flying discs\" should be complemented by a requirement that all Air Force installations in the United States and Alaska provide a minimum of one each fighter or night interceptor type aircraft, with necessary crews, on a continuous alert basis. These aircraft should be equipped with gun camera, and such armament as deemed advisable, in order to secure photographs necessary to the obtainment of all possible data on any reported and sighted unusual phenomena, of the \"flying disc\" type, in the atmosphere.\n\n3. It is envisaged that each Air Force installation maintaining aircraft on an alert basis for this purpose would investigate all unusual flying objects reported from any source in any area over which it has cognizance. Such a program would obviously require a detailed Standard Operating Procedure, in the preparation of which Air Materiel Command should cooperate.\n\n4. Your comments and/or concurrence are requested.\n\nC. P. CABELL\nBrigadier General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n320.2 Air Material Command\n413.53 Photographic Equipment\n452.1 Intercept Aircraft\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET 2-60\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: AFOIR-CO DATE: 6 Feb 48 TYPE: R&R\nSUMMARY: Sgt. Howard \"Flying Discs\"\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION: [REDACTED]\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO.\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nCO\nPls reconsider for Gen C's signature\nDATE 9 Feb\nNO.\n\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. (routing block as on previous cover sheet) AFOIR x clc 12 Feb\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR\nACTION ASGD TO Garrett DATE 6-2-48\nSIGNED\nf. DISPATCH mail FILE AFCPO\nDISPATCHED BY OIR TO\nDATE DISPATCHED 2/13/48\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n6 Feb 48\nB/Ltr fm AMC dated 16 Jan 48, subject: \"Flying Discs\"\nAFOIR-CO-5(A-2523)\n1st Ind.\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C. 9 - FEB 1948\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\n1. The Central Intelligence Agency has contacted the New York office of Ziff-Davis Publishing Company in connection with basic letter's request for information on \"Amazing Stories\" and their publication of items regarding Flying Discs.\n2. The Central Intelligence Agency representative states that the letters from readers, in the possession of the publishing company, are of no value inasmuch as they are from school children, illiterates, \"crackpots\", etc. None had a sensible report in connection with sightings, and most bordered on the fantastic side.\n3. The feature article which was to have appeared on Flying Discs was written by a man who claims the discs emanate from a buried underground city in the bowels of the earth, which he has visited. However, Ziff-Davis Publishing Company have cancelled this story because it is not amazing enough, and instead are going to run a story about a huge red spider which comes down to earth from Mars and captures humans for a Martian museum.\n4. This Office has instructed the Central Intelligence Agency Representatives to stop any further efforts in this matter (to their relief) and assumes that your command will wish no further steps taken in this direction.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n040.9 Central Intel Agency\n095. AMAZING STORIES\n095. ZIFF-DAVIS PUBLISHING COMPANY\n(par 1-4)"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS\nAIR MATERIEL COMMAND\nMCI/HMM/dm\nWright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n16 Jan 48\nMCI\nSUBJECT: \"Flying Discs\"\nTO: Chief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nAttention: Lt. Col. George Garrett\nCollection Branch, Air Intelligence Req. Div.\nOffice, Director of Intelligence\n1. An employee of this Department recently called the attention of the undersigned to a number of letters appearing in AMAZING STORIES Magazine on the subject of flying discs. Several past issues of the magazine were then reviewed, and it does appear that the readers of AMAZING STORIES have reported a number of such incidents which were not previously available to the Air Forces. It is understood that a feature article on this subject is under preparation by AMAZING STORIES. A preprint copy of this article, together with a copy of the letters available on this subject, would be of considerable interests\n2. Due to the nature of the publication AMAZING STORIES and the unfavorable publicity which might accrue to the Air Force if an official request were made for such material, this Headquarters, cannot contact the publisher directly. It is therefore requested that arrangements be made through appropriate channels whereby the desired information may be obtained.\n3. It is realized that the above request is unusual, however, until such time as the so-called \"Flying Disc\" phenomenon is laid to rest, all possible sources of information should be utilized.\n4. AMAZING STORIES is published monthly by the Ziff-Davis Publishing Company at 185 North Wabash Avenue, Chicago 1, Illinois. The New York office is located in the Empire State Building, New York 3, New York.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n/s/ H.M. McCOY\nColonel, USAF\nChief of Intelligence"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE: 16 Jan 48 CONFIDENTIAL\nFROM: AMC Ohio\nTYPE: ltr\nSMRY: Flying Discs wbg\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 247405\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTO: OIR\nDATE: 20 Jan 48\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\nCOVER SHEET\nCONFIDENTIAL\nA-2523\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 28 Jan\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. 1-1162\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\n\"Amazing Stories are not publishing the flying disc story because it is not amazing enough. Instead, will run story about a red spider which comes down from Mars to capture humans for a Martian museum. letters from readers contained nothing of value. (This info secured by C.I.A. NY office)\" G.S.G.\nDATE 5-2\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO BR. TO DOWN UP / TO DIV. TO DOWN UP / TO DIR/INT TO DOWN UP\nOIP-PP OIP-FL ADMIN G. AFOIP\nOIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-CM OIR-RC AFOIR 9 Feb\nOAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV AFOAI\nOCI-IS OCI-RR OCI-CI AFOCI\nASST EXEC ASST EXEC EXECUTIVE DIR/INT\nX Action ✓ Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 21 JAN 1948 ACTION ASGD TO CDG Carter DATE 5-2-48 SIGNED\nf. DISPATCH FILE DISPATCHED BY OIR 2/9/48 TO AMC DATE DISPATCHED\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n6 Feb 48\n9 Feb 48\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR DEFENSE COMMAND\nMITCHEL AIR FORCE BASE, NEW YORK\nMitchel Air Force Base, New York\nIN REPLY\nREFER TO:\nD 319.1 ID\nJAN 28 1948\nSUBJECT: Transmittal of Report of Flying Discs.\nTO: Chief of Staff, United States Air Force, Washington 25, D. C.\nATTN: Director of Intelligence, Air Intell. Requirements Div.\nInclosed herewith is a copy of letter, Fourth Air Force, subject: \"Report of Flying Discs,\" 15 January 1948, with 1 Inclosure, for your information and file.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\nR. H. SMITH\nColonel, USAF\nAC/S-Intell.\n1 Incl.\nLtr, 4AF, subj:\n\"Rpt of Flying Discs,\"\n15 Jan 48, w/1 Incl.\nAFOIR-CO-5\n1st Ind.\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n9 - FEB 1948\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\nForwarded as a matter pertaining to your command.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n1 Incl.\nn/c\nCONFIDENTIAL\n2 COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nDATE: 29 Jan.48\nFROM: ADC Mitchel AFB, N.Y.\nL4r.\nTYPE:\nSMRY:\nTransmittal of Intelligence Information.\n\"Spot Rpt. on Possible Missile Sighting\"\n1 Incl.\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 250001\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nTO: OIR\nTO:\nTO:\nTO:\nTO:\nDATE: 2Feb48\nDATE:\nDATE:\nDATE:\nDATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\nCOVER SHEET\n2-9\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nCONFIDENTIAL\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 9 Feb\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. 2-15\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO BR. TO DOWN UP\nOIP-PP OIP-FL ADMIN OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-CM OIR-RC\nOAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV\nOCI-IS OCI-RR OCI-CI\nTO DIV. TO DOWN UP\nAFOIP\nAFOIR\n2 Feb 9 Feb\nAFOAI\nAFOCI\nTO DOWN UP DIR/INT TO\nASST EXEC\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nDIR/INT\nAction\nCoordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 8 FEB 1948\nACTION ASGD TO OIR DATE\nSIGNED Garrett DATE\nf. DISPATCH mail FILE\nDISPATCHED BY OIR TO AMC\nDATE DISPATCHED 2/9/48\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nAFOIR-CO/Lt. Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n6 Feb 48\n6 Feb 46\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR DEFENSE COMMAND\n[REDACTED] MITCHEL FIELD, NEW YORK\nMitchel Air Force Base, New York\nIN REPLY\nREFER TO:\nD 319.1 ID\nJAN 2 5 1948\nSUBJECT: Transmittal of Intelligence Information.\nTO: Chief of Staff, United States Air Force, Washington 25, D. C.\nATTENTION: Directorate of Intelligence, Air Intelligence Requirements Division.\nInclosed herewith is a carbon copy of letter, Fourth Air Force, subject as above, 6 January 1948, with 1 inclosure, for your information and file.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL;\nR. H. SMITH\nColonel, USAF\nAC/S-Intell.\n1 Incl.\nLtr, 4AF, subj:\n\"Trans. of Intell. Info,\" 6 Jan 48, w/1 Incl.\nAFOIR-CO-5 1st Ind. 6 FEB 1948\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\nForwarded as a matter pertaining to your command.\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n1 Incl.\nn/c\nw/orig cover\nCONFIDENTIAL\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nDATE: 28 Jan 48\nFROM: ADC Mitchell Fld, N.Y.\nTYPE: Ltr.\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 247842\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\nSMRY: Transmittal of Rpt. of Flying Discs.\n1 Incl.\nTO: OIR\nDATE: 30 Jan 48\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47) COVER SHEET 2-2\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nb. CLASSIFICATION: CONFIDENTIAL\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 7 Feb\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. 2-2\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nRoutine transmission of \"flying discs\" report to A.M.C.\nDATE\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / BR. OIP-PP OIP-FL ADMIN OIR-CO OIR-DD OIR-AA OIR-CM OIR-RC OAI-OA OAI-DA OAI-AE OAI-AF OAI-SV OCI-IS OCI-RR OCI-CI\nDIV. AFOIP AFOIR AFOAI AFOCI\nTO DIR/INT: ASST EXEC, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, DIR/INT\nX Action\n✓ Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 23 Feb 48 ACTION ASGD TO GDG DATE SIGNED\nf. DISPATCH MAIL DISPATCHED BY DATE DISPATCHED 2/6/48 FILE TO AMC\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nAmended by Ltr fr D/I, USAF -26 Feb 48\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n6 February 1948\nSUBJECT: Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\nTO: Commanding General, Strategic Air Command\nCommanding General, Air Defense Command\nCommanding General, Tactical Air Command\nCommanding General, Air Training Command\nCommanding General, Air University\nCommanding General, Alaskan Air Command\nCommanding General, Air Transport Command\nCommanding General, Air Materiel Command\n1. Any information pertaining to the sighting of so-called flying discs, which is secured by or comes to the attention of Air Force installations within the United States and Alaska, will be forwarded direct to the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, Attention: TSDIN.\n2. Such reports will be sent direct, and not through ordinary channels, but copies of all such information may be supplied the Command Headquarters of the installation concerned.\n3. In observing the above procedure for reporting information on flying disc sightings, every effort will be made to include the following items:\na. Location and time of sighting\nb. Weather at the time\nc. Names, occupations and addresses of witnesses\nd. Photographs of objects, if available\ne. Sketches of object's configuration\nf. Object sighted:\n(1) Number (5) Speed (9) Sound\n(2) Shape (6) Heading (10) Exhaust trail or not\n(3) Size (7) Maneuverability\n(4) Color (8) Altitude\ng. General Remarks\n4. A copy of all reports or summaries of information sent to Air Materiel Command in accordance with the above provisions will be forwarded at the same time to this Headquarters, Attention: Director of Intelligence.\n5. Headquarters, Air Materiel Command is authorized direct contact with installations of the addressees of this letter in connection with the development of information on flying discs.\nRESTRICTED\n320.2 Air Materiel Command\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nLtr to CG, Major Commands, Subj: \"Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\",\ndtd 6 Feb 48, cont'd\n\n6. The Air Materiel Command will furnish this headquarters with such\nreports as are called for by Paragraph 4 of this Headquarters letter dated\n30 December 1947, subject: \"Flying Discs\".\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nC. P. CABELL\nBrigadier General, U.S.A.F.\nChief, Air Intel. Req. Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nRESTRICTED\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nPROBLEM\n\n1. To direct all AF installations in the ZI and Alaska to make any\nreports of \"flying Disc\" sightings direct to T-2, AMC.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n\n2. By letter from Dir. of Research & Development, USAF, to CG, AMC,\ndated 30 Dec 47, AMC was assigned responsibility for the collection, colla-\ntion, evaluation, and distribution of all information and intelligence\npertinent to flying discs.\n\n3. In accordance with this letter, therefore, and with verbal arrange-\nments between Col. McCoy, AMC, and Lt.Col. Garrett, OIR-CO, it is necessary\nthat AF field installations in the ZI and Alaska be directed to pass all\nsubject reports and information direct to T-2 AMC.\n\n4. Overseas agencies are being advised of our requirements in this\nfield by means of a Collection Memoranda through normal ID channels.\n\nACTION\n\n5. Attached letters to all Major Air Commands, ZI, and Alaskan Air\nCommand.\n\nCOORDINATION\n\n6. Col. McCoy, TSDIN, HQ AMC\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OIR-CO\n\nCOVER SHEET\n\nAFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: AFOIR-CO\nDATE: 5 Feb 48\nTYPE: Dittp\nSUMMARY: \"Reporting of Information on \"Flying Discs\"\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO.\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nRemove Tissue before signing.\nDATE\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO DOWN / BR. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIV. / TO UP / TO DOWN / DIR/INT / TO UP\nOIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, OIR-CO, OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, OAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, OCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI\nAFOIP, AFOIR, AFOAI, AFOCI\nASST EXEC, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, DIR/INT\n\nX Action ✓ Coordination\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR / ACTION ASGD TO / SIGNED / DATE / DATE 5-2-48\nf. DISPATCH / DISPATCHED BY / DATE DISPATCHED / FILE / TO\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nAFOIR-CO-5\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Material Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\n\nAttached is additional subject material which was formerly in files\nof Dr. Garrell, Air Intelligence Division.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl\nFile material on\nFlying Discs\n\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\nCOVER SHEET\nRESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL\n2-G\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM:\nDATE:\n6 Feb 48\nOIR-CO\nTYPE:\nLtr\nCONFIDENTIAL\nRESTRICTED\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nFlying Discs\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO.\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc.\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nRoutine transmission of \"flying disc information to AMC.\nDATE\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN BR. TO UP | TO DOWN DIV. TO UP | TO DOWN DIR/INT TO UP\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nADMIN\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-CM\nOIR-RC\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nOCI-IS\nOCI-RR\nOCI-CI\nAFOIP\nAFOIR\nAFOAI\nAFOCI\nASST EXEC\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nDIR/INT\nX Action\n✓ Coordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR\nACTION ASGD TO\nSIGNED Garrett\nDATE\nDATE 6-2-48\nf. DISPATCH mail\nDISPATCHED BY OIR\nDATE DISPATCHED 2/6/48\nFILE TO AMC\nCONFIDENTIAL\nRESTRICTED\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Lt Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n23 Jan 48\n29 Jan 48\n29 JAN 1948\nAFOIR-CO-5\nSUBJECT: Flying Disc Information\nTO: Commanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\n1. Attached is the informational file on flying discs which was formerly maintained in the Air Intelligence Division, this Headquarters.\n2. This file is sent you in accordance with this Headquarters' letter dated 30 December, subject \"Flying Discs\".\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n1 Incl.\nFile on Flying Disc Information\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n3.3.2 Index & File Burals\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\n6990 Flying Discs"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\nCOVER SHEET\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nFROM:\nDATE: 23 Jan 48\nAFOIR-CO\nTYPE: Mil letter\nSECRET\nSUMMARY:\nSUSPENSE\nFlying Disc Information\nDATE\nASGD BY\nNO.\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\nc.\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN BR. TO UP | TO DOWN DIV. TO UP | TO DOWN DIR/INT TO UP\nOIP-PP\nOIP-FL\nADMIN\nOIR-CO\nOIR-DD\nOIR-AA\nOIR-CM\nOIR-RC\nOAI-OA\nOAI-DA\nOAI-AE\nOAI-AF\nOAI-SV\nOCI-IS\nOCI-RR\nOCI-CI\nAFOIP\nAFOIR\nAFOAI\nAFOCI\nASST EXEC\nASST EXEC\nEXECUTIVE\nDIR/INT\nX Action\n✓ Coordination\ne. DATE RECD BR\nACTION ASGD TO AFOIR-CO-5 DATE 23 Jan 48\nSIGNED Garrett DATE 23-1-48\nf. DISPATCH mail\nDISPATCHED BY OIR\nDATE DISPATCHED 1/30/48\nFILE TO AMC\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR/CO/Lt Col Garrett/rdh/73605/Wtn 20 Jan 48\n\n21 JAN 1948\n\nAFOIR-CO\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nTO: Commanding General\nAir Materiel Command\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base,\nDayton, Ohio\nATTN: TSDIN\n\nThe attached correspondence is forwarded as a matter pertaining\nto your command.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n2 Incls\n1. Ltr dtd 11 Jan 48\nfr R. Halligan\n2. Ltr dtd 15 Jan 48\nfr Ethel Evans\n\nWrong order\n\n095 HALLIGAN, R.\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF HQ-12 (REV. 10 NOV 1947)\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nROUTING SLIP\nTO:\n1. OFFICE AFOIN\nATTENTION Col Sheley - Rm 3E152\nDATE 19 Jan\n2. OFFICE\nATTENTION\nDATE\n3. OFFICE\nATTENTION\nDATE\nFOR: FOLLOWING ACTION(S) AS CHECKED\nCOORDINATION | NOTE AND RETURN | INFORMATION\nNECESSARY ACTION | RECOMMENDATION | FILE\nSEE OR PHONE ME | APPROVAL | SIGNATURE\nCOMMENT\nper phone conversation\nFROM:\nOFFICE AFSPR-2 ROOM NO. 3D1041\nINDIVIDUAL Maj Philips PHONE 2760\n3-218, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFCAG-1 (Rev 10 Nov 47)\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nOffice of Air Adjutant General\nROUTING SLIP\nDATE 15 Jan\nTO:\nSECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE\nCHIEF OF STAFF\nVICE CHIEF OF STAFF\nASST. VICE CHIEF OF STAFF\nSECRETARY OF THE AIR STAFF\nDC/S PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATION\nDC/S OPERATIONS\nDC/S MATERIEL\nAIR BOARD\nAIR COMPTROLLER\nAIR INSPECTOR\nDIRECTOR OF PUBLIC RELATIONS\nHEADQUARTERS COMMANDANT\nFOR:\nAPPROVAL\nCOORDINATION\nCORRECTION AS INDICATED\nDIRECT REPLY\nINFORMATION\nNECESSARY ACTION\nNOTE PRIOR TO DISPATCH\nPLEASE RETURN SUSPENSE SLIP WITH COPY OF REPLY\nPREPARATION OF REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF\nSIGNATURE\nH. G. CULTON\nCOLONEL, USAF,\nAIR ADJUTANT GENERAL\n8-2120, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nAFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: Dir/Pub Rel\nDATE: 20 Jan '48\nTYPE: Ltrs\nSUMMARY:\nRe Flying Saucers\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT 20 Jan '48\nb. CLASSIFICATION:\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 29 Jan 48\nASGD BY\nNO. 01N 6396\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nThis is routine forwarding of 2 letters from civilians re: Flying Discs. Under provisions of this HQs' letter dated 30 Dec 47, \"Flying Discs\", A.M.C. has primary interest in the subject.\nG.D.G.\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / TO DIV. / DIR/INT\nOIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, OIR-CO (X, G.), OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, OAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, OCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI\nAFOIP, AFOIR, AFOAI, AFOCI\nAction\nCoordination\ne. DATE REC'D BR 20 Jan\nACTION ASGD TO CG DATE\nSIGNED Garrett DATE 20-1-48\nf. DISPATCH 2 Jan\nDISPATCHED BY OIN MES\nDATE DISPATCHED 22 Jan 48\nFILE TO AFAMC\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":225,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":226,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nAFCIR-CO/Col. Garrett/jh/4544\n4 Feb 48\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA-1208-I\nJan 15 1948\n\nSUBJECT: Report of Flying Disc.\n\nTO:\tChief of Staff\n\tUnited States Air Forces\n\tWashington, D. C.\n\tATTN: Director of Intelligence\n\nAttached report for your information.\n\n/S/ Donald L. Springer\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, USAF\nAC of S, A-2\n\n1 Incl\nRpt of Flying Disc.\n\nAFCIR-CO-5\t1st Ind.\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C. 6 - FEB 1948\n\nTO:\tCommanding General, Air Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio\n\tATTN: TSDIN\n\nForwarded as a matter pertaining to your Command.\n\nBY COMMAND OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl\nn/c\n\nDOUGLASS W. EISEMAN\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":227,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DATE:15 Jan 48 CONFIDENTIAL\nFROM: Hamilton Fld Calif\n(4th Air Force)\nTYPE: ltr\nSMRY:\nReport of Flying Disc\n1 Incl: wbg\n\nSUSPENSE DATE:\nNO.: 247424\nFILE DESIGNATION AND DATE:\n\nTO: OCI\nDATE: 20Jan48\nTO: OIR-CO\nDATE: 22 Jan 48\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\nTO:\nDATE:\n\nREPLIED OR INDORSED TO:\nFILED (PLACE):\nOTHER ACTION:\nHQ AAF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":228,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 5 Dec 47)\tCOVER SHEET\t1-215\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM:\nDATE:\nTYPE:\nSUMMARY:\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION: CONFIDENTIAL\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 29 Jan\nASGD BY OIR\nNO. 1-493\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nDATE\nNO.\n\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / BR. / DIV. / DIR/INT\nOIP-PP, OIP-FL, ADMIN, OIR-CO, OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, OAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, OCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI\nAFOIP, AFOIR, AFOAI, AFOCI\nASST EXEC, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, DIR/INT\n\nLegend: X Action; Coordination\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR 23 JAN 1948\nACTION ASGD TO OIR\nDATE\nSIGNED\nDATE\n\nf. DISPATCH: Mail\nFILE\nDISPATCHED BY OIR\nTO AMC\nDATE DISPATCHED 2/6/48\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":229,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\tSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":230,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\t1-3\t1 Jan 48\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: AFMRS\nDATE: 1 Jan. 48\nTYPE: ltr\nSUMMARY: Flying Discs\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\n\nb. CLASSIFICATION: Secret\nSUSPENSE\nDATE 12 Jan 48\nASGD BY Col. Lewis\nNO. OIN 6239\n\nc. OIR\nFor acting, reference my conversations with Lt Col Eiseman and Gen Cabell\nCol. Taylor - Please see me efc\nDATE 1 Jan'48\nNO. 1\n\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. Routing table with entries including OIR-CO marked X, AFOIR marked Ck, dates 14 Jan, ASST EXEC, EXECUTIVE, OIN, ADMIN, AFOIP, AFOAI, AFOCI\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR\nACTION ASGD TO Garrett\nDATE 1-5-48\nSIGNED\nDATE 15-1-48\n\nf. DISPATCH OIN MES\nFILE\nDISPATCHED BY\nTO\nDATE DISPATCHED 19 January"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":231,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO:\n\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\n\nAFOIR -\n\nDATE 13 Jan. 48\n\nThe letter originally attached (copy\nof D/R & B's letter to AMC assigning them responsibility\nfor flying disc's) has been retained in OIR-CO.\nGDG.\n\nh. TO:\n\nDATE\n\nNO.\n\nNO.\n\n2\n\n8-3477, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":232,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"000.9 Flying Discs\n\n30 Dec 47\n\nFROM: HDGRS, USAF\n\nTO AMC\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Discs\n\nLtr from this Headquarters, dated 30 Dec 47 with subject as above, the Commanding General, Air Materiel Command was instructed to \"set up a project whose purpose is to collect, collate, evaluate and distribute to interested government agencies and contractors all information concerning sightings and phenomena in the atmosphere which can be construed to be of concern to the national security\".\n\nSigned by General Craigie\n\nSee R&R 1 to Director of Plans & Operations under date 12 Feb 48\n\nSee Central Files for file copy of this letter\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":233,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n22 Dec 47\n\nAFOAI-CA\n\nWritten: 18 Dec. 1947\n\n\"Analysis of 'Flying Disc' Reports\"\n\nDirector of Research and Development\nDirector of Intelligence\n\n22 DEC 1947\n\nLt.Col.Thomas/mac/6625.\n\n1. Attached are two papers, one prepared by the Directorate of Intelligence, USAF, Subject: \"Analysis of 'Flying Disc' Reports,\" and one prepared by the Air Material Command, Subject: \"AMC Opinion Concerning 'Flying Discs'.\"\n\n2. The Directorate of Intelligence paper summarizes present information and observations concerning 'flying discs' and indicates the lines of investigation which have been pursued since the first sightings were reported.\n\n3. As part of these investigations the AMC was requested to make an independent study, and the attached reply indicates that \"it is possible within the present U. S. knowledge--provided extensive detailed development is undertaken--to construct a piloted aircraft which has the general description ... (of the flying discs) ... which would be capable of an approximate range of 7,000 miles at subsonic speeds.\"\n\n4. The AMC report recommends the issuance of \"a directive assigning a priority, security classification and code name for a detailed study of this matter to include the preparation of complete sets of all available and pertinent data\" which would be made available to all interested agencies.\n\n5. In view of the conclusions reached as a result of the study of the problem made in this office, the Director of Intelligence concurs in the AMC recommendation and forwards it for your consideration and reply to the CG, AMC. Request reply be coordinated with this Directorate.\n\n2 Incls.\n1. Subj:\"Analysis of 'Flying Disc' Reports.\"\n2. Subj: \"AMC Opinion Concerning 'Flying Discs',\" dtd Sep 23 1947.\n\nGEORGE C. McDONALD\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence\n\nFILE COPY - DIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":234,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOAI-CA\n\nTSDIN/HMM/ig/6-4100\n\nSEP 23 1947\n\nTSDIN\n\nAMC Opinion Concerning \"Flying Discs\"\n\nCommanding General\nArmy Air Forces\nWashington 25, D. C.\nATTENTION: Brig. General George Schulgen\nAC/AS-2\n\n1. As requested by AC/AS-2 there is presented below the considered opinion of this Command concerning the so-called \"Flying Discs\". This opinion is based on interrogation report data furnished by AC/AS-2 and preliminary studies by personnel of T-2 and Aircraft Laboratory, Engineering Division T-3. This opinion was arrived at in a conference between personnel from the Air Institute of Technology, Intelligence T-2, Office, Chief of Engineering Division, and the Aircraft, Power Plant and Propeller Laboratories of Engineering Division T-3.\n\n2. It is the opinion that:\n\na. The phenomenon reported is something real and not visionary or fictitious.\n\nb. There are objects probably approximating the shape of a disc, of such appreciable size as to appear to be as large as man-made aircraft.\n\nc. There is a possibility that some of the incidents may be caused by natural phenomena, such as meteors.\n\nd. The reported operating characteristics such as extreme rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and action which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly aircraft and radar, lend belief to the possibility that some of the objects are controlled either manually, automatically or remotely.\n\ne. The apparent common description of the objects is as follows:-\n\n(1) Metallic or light reflecting surface.\n\nU-39552\n\nSECRET\n\nInc1 #2"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":235,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nBasic Ltr fr CG, AMC, WF to CG, AAF, Wash. D. C. subj \"AMC Opinion Concerning \"Flying Discs\".\n\n(2) Absence of trail, except in a few instances when the object apparently was operating under high performance conditions.\n\n(3) Circular or elliptical in shape, flat on bottom and domed on top.\n\n(4) Several reports of well kept formation flights varying from three to nine objects.\n\n(5) Normally no associated sound, except in three instances a substantial rumbling roar was noted.\n\n(6) Level flight speeds normally above 300 knots are estimated.\n\nf. It is possible within the present U. S. knowledge -- provided extensive detailed development is undertaken -- to construct a piloted aircraft which has the general description of the object in subparagraph (e) above which would be capable of an approximate range of 7000 miles at subsonic speeds.\n\ng. Any developments in this country along the lines indicated would be extremely expensive, time consuming and at the considerable expense of current projects and therefore, if directed, should be set up independently of existing projects.\n\nh. Due consideration must be given the following:-\n\n(1) The possibility that these objects are of domestic origin - the product of some high security project not known to AC/AS-2 or this Command.\n\n(2) The lack of physical evidence in the shape of crash recovered exhibits which would undeniably prove the existence of these objects.\n\n(3) The possibility that some foreign nation has a form of propulsion possibly nuclear, which is outside of our domestic knowledge.\n\n3. It is recommended that:-\n\na. Headquarters, Army Air Forces issue a directive assigning a priority, security classification and Code Name for a detailed study of this matter to include the preparation of complete sets of all available and pertinent data which will then be made available to the Army, Navy, Atomic Energy Commission, JRDB, the Air Force Scientific Advisory Group, NACA, and the RAND and NEPA projects for comments and recommendations, with a preliminary report to be forwarded within 15 days of receipt of the data and a detailed report thereafter every 30 days as the investi-\n\n-2-\n\nU-39552"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":236,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Basic Ltr fr CG, AMC, WP to CG, AAF, Wash. D.C. subj \"AMC Opinion Concerning \"Flying Discs\"\n\ngation develops. A complete interchange of data should be effected.\n\n4. Awaiting a specific directive AMC will continue the investigation within its current resources in order to more closely define the nature of the phenomenon. Detailed Essential Elements of Information will be formulated immediately for transmittal thru channels.\n\nN. F. TWINING\nLieutenant General, U.S.A.\nCommanding"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":237,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\n18 December 1947\n\nPROBLEM:\n\n1. To prepare for signature of the Director of Intelligence an R&R for the Director of Research and Development outlining available information and recommendations concerning problems proposed by \"flying discs.\"\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION:\n\n2. At the request of the Chief, Air Intelligence Division, an earlier memorandum dated 6 October 1947, Subject: \"Recommendations Relative to Unidentified Flying Objects,\" was reanalyzed and rewritten as a memorandum.\n\n3. This memorandum together with a letter from Headquarters, Air Materiel Command, Subject: \"AMC Opinon Concerning 'Flying Discs',\" dated 23 September 1947, were attached to an R&R addressed to the Director of Research and Development. Note was made in this R&R that the Director of Intelligence concurred with the recommendations of AMC concerning a specific project to study the \"flying disc\" situation.\n\nACTION:\n\n4. R&R forwarded for signature of Major General MacDonald.\n\nCOORDINATION:\n\nColonel J. F. Olive, Chief, Air Intelligence Division - Ext. 2542\nLt. Colonel J. E. Thomas, Offensive Air Branch - Ext. 6625"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":238,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-4 (Rev 30 Oct 47) COVER SHEET\n\na. RECORD OF BASIC CORRESPONDENCE OR REQUEST\nFROM: AFOAI DATE: 18 Dec. 47 TYPE:\nSUMMARY: R & R, Subject: \"Analysis of 'Flying Disc' Reports\"\nb. CLASSIFICATION: SECRET\nSUSPENSE DATE ASGD BY NO.\nDATE RECEIVED DIR/INT\n\nc. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS\nTo: AFOIN\nFrom: AFOAI\n1. Forwarded for signature. Col. Olive - 2542\nDATE 18 Dec. NO. 1\nUSE OTHER SIDE THIS SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL REMARKS\n\nd. TO DOWN / TO UP / BR. / TO DIV. / TO DOWN / TO UP / DIR/INT / ASST EXEC / ASST EXEC / EXECUTIVE / ASST D/I / DIR/INT\nOIP-PP, OIP-FL, AFOIP\nOIR-CO, OIR-DD, OIR-AA, OIR-CM, OIR-RC, AFOIR 23 Dec\nOAI-OA, OAI-DA, OAI-AE, OAI-AF, OAI-SV, AFOAI\nOCI-IS, OCI-RR, OCI-CI, AFOCI\nLegend: X Action, ✓ Coordination\n\ne. DATE REC'D BR / ACTION ASGD TO / SIGNED / DATE / DATE\nf. DISPATCH / FILE TO Der Rec'd / DISPATCHED BY OIN MEL / DATE DISPATCHED 23 Dec 47\n8-2469, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":239,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"g. TO: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS - REMARKS (Continued)\nDATE\nNO.\n\nh. TO:\nDATE\nNO.\n\n8-2469, AF"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":240,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\n\"ANALYSIS OF 'FLYING DISC' REPORTS\"\n\n1. Summary of Information\n\na. During the past six months reports from several areas of the world have indicated that unidentified flying objects, variously identified in flying discs, lights, smoke trails, etc., have been observed by separate and unrelated sources.\n\nb. Sightings of \"flying discs\" in the United States occurred principally in the far west. Observers have been indicated to be reliable and in some instances several observers have corroborated separate observations of the same phenomenon at the same time.\n\nc. Outside the continental United States, an object and its trail were seen over Newfoundland; a light which had the appearance of a twin ram-jet was observed near Necker Island from an aircraft en route between Midway and Honolulu; a flying disc reputedly larger than a DC-3 was sighted near Bethel, Alaska.\n\nd. In the Far East, three radar intercepts of rapidly moving, unidentified objects were made by United States radars operating in Japan.\n\ne. No connection has been indicated between the \"ghost rocket\" sightings in Sweden, some of which conceivably might have been the result of guided missile operations, and the unidentified flying objects sighted in the United States and Pacific areas.\n\n2. Discussion of Reports\n\na. Study of the various reports describing unidentified flying objects, lights, and smoke trails discloses that certain features are common to many of the observations as follows:\n\n(1) In shape the objects are a thin disc, rounded on top and flat on the bottom, perhaps approximating a C-54 in size. The front half of the disc is often circular, sweeping back to a square tail across the full width.\n\n(2) The surface is described as metallic or light reflecting.\n\n(3) Extreme maneuverability, coupled with high lateral stability, is noted. Speed is high, with a snaking motion or a lateral oscillation. A few reports indicate an ability to hover; to appear suddenly as if from a dive; to disintegrate or to disappear, perhaps by\n\n1\n\nIncl #1"} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":241,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"increasing speed; to group quickly in a tight formation, and to take evasive action. Good control of flight is indicated.\n\n(4) Trail is absent, except in a few instances when the object apparently is operating under high performance conditions. The trail, when seen, seems to be very hot, as indicated by night observations of a glowing trail, and a daytime observation of a trail that cut a wide, clean swath in a cloud.\n\n(5) Sound is normally not associated with the sightings, although a hum or rumbling roar was heard in two or three instances. No connection between sound and trail is indicated.\n\n(6) Estimated level speed is normally greater than 300 knots.\n\n(7) Formation flights of three to nine objects are reported by several observers.\n\n(8) During one night observation, a change in glow from blue-white when approaching to a reddish glow when withdrawing was observed. This could indicate ram-jets.\n\nb. The following are typical reports of observations of discs, and indicate the type and variety of the sources of information:\n\n(1) On 7 July, 1947, five Portland, Oregon, police officers saw varying numbers of discs flying over different parts of Portland. All observations were made within a minute or two of 1305 hours.\n\n(2) On 7 July, 1947, William Rhoads of Phoenix, Ariz., saw a disc in the glow of sunset and took two photographs. The resultant picture showed a round front and square tail in plan form.\n\n(3) On 10 July, 1947, a Mr. Woodruff, PAA mechanic, observed a circular object flying at high velocity and leaving a trail. The sighting occurred near Harmon Field, Newfoundland. Two other persons also saw the trail.\n\n(4) On 11 July, 1947, three persons at Codroy, Newfoundland, saw a disc flying at high velocity and leaving a smoke trail.\n\n(5) On 29 July, 1947, Kenneth Arnold, while flying near Tacoma, Washington, saw a formation of flying objects. His sketch of their shape corresponds closely to that shown in the photographs made by Mr. Rhoads. On the same day, two United States Air Force pilots at Hamilton Field, Calif., saw two flying discs trailing a P-80, following it toward Oakland, Calif."} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":242,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(6) On 4 August, 1947, the pilot and co-pilot of a DC-3, flying for Al Jones, were near Bethel, Alaska, when they saw a flying disc larger than their DC-3. Their airplane was flying 170 mph, but the disc flew out of sight in four minutes.\n\n(7) On 12 November, 1947, two flying discs trailing jet-like streams of fire were sighted from the bridge of the tanker Ticonderoga, according to Second Officer Claude Lee Williamson. The Ticonderoga was 20 miles off the Oregon shore. Williamson said the two discs were in sight 45 seconds, moving at a speed estimated at 700-900 mph out of the north horizon and curving westerly in a long, low arc.\n\nc. Typical of the observations made of lights and trails rather than discs or objects, are these three:\n\n(1) On 28 June, 1947, four USAF officers observed a light from some object which did not fly like a conventional aircraft. The light was sighted over Maxwell Field, Alabama.\n\n(2) On 6 July, 1947, several persons, including a USAF sergeant, saw a strangely moving light over Birmingham, Alabama. A photograph was taken.\n\n(3) On 12 September, 1947, the pilot and co-pilot of a Pan American aircraft, passing Necker Island at 0558 GCT, on route from Midway to Honolulu, saw a blue-white light approaching, changing to a reddish glow upon withdrawal. The pilot estimated speed of the light at about 1,000 knots.\n\nd. The three United States radar intercepts of unidentified radar targets flying near or over Japan are as follows:\n\n(1) On 1 July, 1947, a GCA radar at Chitose AAB, Hokkaido, Japan picked up a target at 16 miles, speed in excess of 500 mph. This target split up into two targets, each larger than a P-51.\n\n(2) On 28 August, 1947, a MEW radar at Fukuoka, Japan picked up a target at 26 miles in instrument weather. Target withdrew in a climb to 54 miles before it faded.\n\n(3) On 16 September, 1947, the same MEW radar at Fukuoka, Japan picked up a target at 89 miles and tracked it in to 19 miles, where it faded. Speed was 840 to 900 miles per hour. This observation indicates use of a homing receiver; fading at short range further indicates the possibility of good radar evasion technique. The speed measurement is believed accurate, since it was made by a good crew, through a 70-mile long track."} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":243,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. Investigations made\n\na. In addition to analyzing the reports concerning flying discs and other phenomena observed both in the United States and elsewhere in the world, the Directorate of Intelligence, USAF, has taken the following action:\n\n(1) Requested the Air Material Command to conduct an independent investigation. The results of this study are contained in a Headquarters, AMC letter, Subject: \"AMC Opinion Concerning 'Flying Discs',\" dated 23 September 1947, which includes recommendations for further study of this problem.\n\n(2) Sought information from appropriate agencies to determine whether the phenomena might be the result of highly classified project being conducted under United States auspices. Responses to date have not indicated existence of any American developmental work which might explain the reported observations.\n\n(3) Submitted to a group of scientists the question whether the \"flying saucer\" observations might be the result of some natural phenomenon, such as falling meteors. While it was admitted there was a possibility some few of the incidents could have been caused by natural phenomena, the scientists concluded that such phenomena could not have been responsible for all of the observations.\n\n(4) Requested the Federal Bureau of Investigation to check the possibility that the \"flying saucer\" episodes might be the result of a deliberately planned subversive effort to create mass hysteria, possibly Communist-inspired. Backgrounds of the first four persons who had reported sightings of flying disc were investigated by the FBI, with negative results in each case.\n\n(5) Forwarded to the Air Weather Service a list of the first ten sightings reported by responsible persons for comparison with dates and locations of the release of meteorological balloons. The resultant check indicated there was no connection, or coincidence, between meteorological balloons aloft and the times, dates, and locations of the selected sightings.\n\n(6) Investigated the possible existence of foreign aircraft projects which might be related to these observations. Of interest in this regard are two German designs that could be under current exploitation by the U.S.S.R.\n\n(a) The Horten Brothers' \"Parabola,\" a flying wing of low aspect ration and a very low induced drag. The plan forms of this design were crescent shaped."} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":244,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(b) The XF-130, a long range bomber, was a flying wing design that could satisfy the few indicated features of the \"flying discs.\"\n\n(7) Analyzed the possibility that the flying objects were operated or controlled by representatives of a foreign nation--perhaps for photo reconnaissance purposes, or to ferret out our defensive capabilities, or to test the American psychological reaction. Principal sightings were near the borders of the United States, which lends credence to a foreign source of origin. Sightings were not reported, however, at or near the principal strategic target areas of the United States. Moreover, it is difficult to conceive why any foreign nation, if it possessed such an unconventional aircraft or missile, would risk sending it near or over the United States for anything short of an attack. Even if the disc contained a self-destroying device, any crash landing would disclose a certain amount of information which the nation possessing such an aircraft or missile would desire to keep secret. This would be particularly true if the form of propulsion was one outside American knowledge. The final answer still has not been obtained from this line of inquiry.\n\n4. Conclusions\n\na. Flying discs, as reported by widely scattered observers, probably represent something real and tangible, even though physical evidence, such as crash-recovered exhibits, is not available. While a portion of the observations may be the result of natural phenomena, such as meteors, or may have other conventional explanation, the likelihood that some observers actually saw disc-shaped objects sufficiently large to be compared in size with known aircraft cannot be dismissed.\n\nb. Considering the described conduct of these disc-like objects when sighted, it must be considered a possibility that they may have been humanly controlled, either manually or remotely, or by pre-set automatic controls.\n\nc. On the basis of presently available information, if these discs actually exist they are foreign in origin, so investigation of the possible country of development and the place of origin should continue.\n\nd. The Directorate of Intelligence, USAF, will continue to collect and analyze all reports of sightings of flying objects, lights, trails, etc., in an effort to develop an answer to the puzzling problem which they present."} {"doc_id":"c67796c2d8958489","page":245,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIR-CO/Col Garrett/lwd/4544\n18 Dec '47\n22 Dec 47\n\nBasic Ltr fr Hq. Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Fld, Calif., dated 5 Dec '47, subject: Flying Disc.\n\nAFOIR-CO-5 1st Ind.\n\nDept. of the Air Force, Hq. USAF, Washington 25, D. C. 22 DEC 1947\n\nTO: Commanding General, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California\n\n1. The marks appearing on the photographs inclosed in basic letter are believed to be defects in the film, paper, or camera and not pictures of \"flying discs\".\n\n2. It is requested that no further investigation be made of this incident.\n\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nDOUGLAS [REDACTED]\nLt. Colonel, U.S.A.F.\nExecutive, Air Intelligence Requirements Div.\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nIncls.\nn/c\n\nx 095. Herren, Mary L.\n\nFile ref:\nB/L fr Hq. Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Fld, Calif. dated 5 Dec '47\nsubj: as above"} {"doc_id":"c7f1b115b1524b9c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-1057 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\nOFFICIAL RECORD\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nElectronic Communication\nTitle: [REDACTED] Site survey of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Date: 12/[REDACTED]/2024\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nFrom: [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] 1\nContact: [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nApproved By: [REDACTED]\nDrafted By: [REDACTED]\nCase ID #: [REDACTED] [REDACTED]rnidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) - [REDACTED]\nSynopsis: [REDACTED] Site survey of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nEnclosure(s): Enclosed are the following items:\n1. Photos around [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Photos taken on SA [REDACTED] FBI issued phone.\n2. Photos around [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Photos taken on SA [REDACTED] FBI issued phone.\n3. Photos around [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Photos taken on SA [REDACTED] FBI issued phone.\n4. Photos around [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Photos taken on SA [REDACTED] FBI issued phone.\n5. Photos around [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Photos taken on SA [REDACTED] FBI issued phone.\n6. Photos around [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Photos taken on SA [REDACTED] FBI issued phone.\nDetails:\n[REDACTED] On 12/[REDACTED]/2024, Special Agents (SA) [REDACTED] SA [REDACTED], and SA [REDACTED] surveilled the area around [REDACTED] in [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"c7f1b115b1524b9c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nTitle: [REDACTED] Site survey of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nRe: [REDACTED] 12/[REDACTED]/2024\n\n[REDACTED] The purpose of the surveillance was to take photographs and survey the locations where SA [REDACTED] and SA [REDACTED] observed Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon (UAP) activity on 11/[REDACTED]/2024.\n\n[REDACTED] Agents walked the perimeter of [REDACTED] in a clockwise direction at approximately 10:30am. Agents followed a marked trail which was approximately a two mile loop around [REDACTED] and departed from the trail in areas to the West and North of [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] On the Northwest side of [REDACTED] at approximately 11:00am, Agents departed from the marked trail and descended to the water's edge. Facing South, Agents were able to see [REDACTED]' property at [REDACTED] without any obstruction and full line of sight. In the vicinity where Agents viewed UAP activity on 11/[REDACTED]/2024, there did not appear to be anything unusual present on the ground or at treetop level.\n\n[REDACTED] Agents continued toward the North side of [REDACTED] also in the vicinity of UAP activity observed on 11/[REDACTED]/2024, there did not appear to be anything unusual present on the ground or at treetop level. There was an area that appeared to be a once used as a fire pit, but there did not appear to be any evidence of recent burns as the ground was blanketed with leaves. As Agents departed the marked trail and descended to the water's edge, Agents had line of sight to multiple homes on [REDACTED] to the East of [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] Tree cover throughout the area around [REDACTED] was moderate and Agents assessed that it would be unrealistic for someone to fly a drone or other craft at night without the risk of crashing into tree limbs.\n\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n\n♦♦\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"c832cff90093d2f6","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF606521\nAF FORM 112\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n[REDACTED]\n(CLASSIFICATION)\nUNCLASSIFIED\nCOUNTRY\nFrench Morocco\nREPORT NO.\nDI-1-53\nLEAVE BLANK\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nSUBJECT\nUFOB\nAREA REPORTED ON\nNorth Fr Morocco and Mediterranean Sea\nFROM (Agency)\n316th Air Division (Defense)\nDATE OF REPORT\n23 December 1953\nDATE OF INFORMATION\n16 December 1953\nEVALUATION\nA-1\nPREPARED BY (Officer)\nEdward O. Wittmer, Major, USAF\nSOURCE\nDetachment 2, 737th AC&W Squadron\nREFERENCES (Control number, directive, previous report, etc., as applicable)\nPrimary Report: TWX 12-177\nSUMMARY: (Enter concise summary of report. Give significance in final one-sentence paragraph. List inclosures at lower left. Begin text of report on AF Form 118-Part II.)\n1. Unidentified flying objects were observed on radar by personnel of Detachment \"2\" 737th AC&W Squadron. The return varied in shape from a V shape to W shape to M shape. It faded after several minutes of observation.\n2. It is the opinion of electronics personnel in this Division that such a return might have been caused by:\na. Anomalous Propagation\nb. Ship-Borne radar jamming Detachment \"2\" radar\nc. Geese or Storks in flight.\n3. Logical deduction is that one of above mentioned possibilities is the cause for this radar return.\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 57597\nLIBRARY SUBJECT & AREA CODES\n603 13P\n59A1768\n31\n21-R-33-3\nINCLS.\nClassified by SUBJECT TO GENERAL DECLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 11652 AUTOMATICALLY DOWNGRADED AT TWO YEAR INTERVALS. DECLASSIFIED ON 31 DECEMBER 69.\nAPPROVED:\nFRANK H. RHOADS\nLt Col, USAF\nDirector of Operations\nDISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR\n1 Info copy ATIC\nUNCLASSIFIED\nReg#N279\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\n[REDACTED]\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n12-820"} {"doc_id":"c832cff90093d2f6","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n[REDACTED]\n(CLASSIFICATION)\nUNCLASSIFIED\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nFROM (Agency)\n316th Air Division (Defense)\nREPORT NO.\nDI-1-53\nPAGE 2 OF 3 PAGES\nThe following report is rendered in compliance with AFR 200-2. Reference paragraph six (6) of this regulation for formats.\n1. Discription of the Objects\n(a) Varing shapes, series of V's, W's, and M's.\n(b) Size- N/A as referred to in this regulation. Approximately two (2) or three (3) degrees wide.\n(c) Color-N/A\n(d) Number-Varied with sweep from one (1) to twelve (12).\n(e) Formation-Straight line on azimuth of 250 from 20 to 40 miles out (Approximately Geo-ref MJFF 1535).\n(f) N/A\n(g) N/A\n(h) N/A\n(i) Frequent change in shape. Each object was more distinct at times.\n2. Discription of course of objects:\n(a) Scope presentation.\n(b) 25 degrees azimuth. Height finder was out so information concerning angle of elevation was not available.\n(c) Last observed on azimuth of 25 degrees.\n(d) Comparatively stationary.\n(e) Faded out.\n(f) Several minutes.\n3. Manner of observations:\n(a) Observed by radar TPS-1D\n(b) Optical aids N/A\n(c) N/A\n4. Time and date of sighting:\n(a) 16/1754Z/Dec 53\n(b) Night\n5. Location of Observations:\nGeo-ref MJNF 4105\nUNCLASSIFIED\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\n[REDACTED]\n(CLASSIFICATION)"} {"doc_id":"c832cff90093d2f6","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\n[REDACTED]\n(CLASSIFICATION)\nUNCLASSIFIED\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nFROM (Agency)\n316th Air Division (Defense)\nREPORT NO.\nDI-1-53\nPAGE 3 OF 3 PAGES\n6. Identifying information of all observers:\n(a) N/A\n(b) A/3C V.A. Kay, AF 12 437 411, Air Surveillance Operator, Detachment 2, 737th AC&W Squadron. Capt T.S. White, Detachment Commander. Lt V. Baker, Controller.\n7. Weather conditions:\n(a) Overcast with limited visibility but no rain.\n(b) Negative.\n(c) Ceiling-8000' (estimated)\n(d) Five (5) miles visibility\n(e) Amount of cloud cover 9/10\n(f) Thunderstorms: negative\n8. Any other unusual activity or condition, meterological, astronomical or otherwise, which might account for the sighting. Negative.\n9. Existance of physical evidence of sighting, such is photography. Negative.\n10. Negative.\n11. Negative.\n12. Chief of Intelligence, 316th Air Division (Defense).\nCOMMENTS of Preparing Officer:\nAlthough radar maintenance personnel at the Site of observation have offered no possible cause for the sighting, it is the opinion of several qualified electronics personnel at this division that the return may have been cause by one of the following:\na. Anomalous propagation.\nb. Shir-borne radar jamming Detachment 2 radar.\nc. Geese or storks in flight.\nThis Division recommends distribution to:\nD/I - USAFE\nD/I - Seventeenth Air Force\nUNCLASSIFIED\nEDWARD O. WITTMER\nMajor, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\n[REDACTED]\n(CLASSIFICATION)"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nDefense Futures\n\n01 November 2010\n\nICOD: 20 July 2010\n\nDIA-08-1011-004\n\nAneutronic Fusion Propulsion\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n(U) Aneutronic Fusion Propulsion\n\nThe Defense Intelligence Reference Document provides nonsubstantive but authoritative reference information related to intelligence topics or methodologies.\n\nPrepared by:\n\nTechnology Warning Division (DWO-4)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthors:\n\nAAP Person 85, AAP Person 88, AAP Person 89\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one of a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2010 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: JUIAF - DI/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington D.C. 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nChapter 1: Concept Overview ... 1\nChapter 2: Fusion Plasma Physics ... 3\n2.1 Magnetic Confinement ... 5\n2.2 Inertial Confinement ... 7\n2.3 Electrostatic Confinement ... 8\n2.4 Magneto-Inertial Confinement ... 9\nChapter 3: Fusion Propulsion ... 11\n3.1 Fusion Reactors for Propulsion ... 11\n3.2 Air Propulsion ... 13\n3.3 Ion Propulsion ... 14\n3.4 Plasma Thruster ... 14\nChapter 4: Applications ... 17\n4.1 Near Space ... 17\n4.2 Earth Orbit ... 17\n4.3 Interplanetary ... 18\n4.4 Interstellar ... 19\nChapter 5: Recent Developments ... 21\n5.1 U.S. DOE Programs ... 21\n5.2 International Programs ... 21\n5.3 NASA Programs ... 23\n5.4 Privately Funded Programs ... 23\nChapter 6: Future Developments ... 25\n6.1 Near-Term Developments ... 25\n6.2 Mid-Term Developments ... 27\n6.3 Far-Term Development ... 28\nChapter 7: Conclusions ... 30\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 8: Endnotes ... 31\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Fusion Reaction Cross Sections vs. Temperature ... 4\nFigure 2. Magnetic Mirror Confinement ... 6\nFigure 3. a) Tokamak and b) Stellarator Confinement ... 6\nFigure 4. Field-Reversed Configuration ... 7\nFigure 5. IEC Fusor and Polywell Confinement Configurations ... 8\nFigure 6. Magnetized Target Fusion Experiment at LANL ... 10\nFigure 7. Dense Plasma Focus (Lawrenceville Plasma Physics) ... 10\nFigure 8. Specific Power as a Function of Plasma Temperature of Fusion Rocket. 11\nFigure 9. Colliding Beam Fusion Reactor ... 12\nFigure 10. DPF Thruster System With Direct Conversion ... 12\nFigure 11. Magnetized Target Fusion Reactor ... 13\nFigure 12. MHD Air-Breathing and Fusion Rocket Aerospace Plane ... 13\nFigure 13. Design of an IEC Jet Thruster - Experimental Device ... 18\nFigure 14. Comparison of Fusion, Nuclear-Thermal, and Chemical Propulsion for Same Payload ... 19\nFigure 15. Thrust-to-Weight Ratio and Exhaust Velocity Regimes for Various Long-Range Space Propulsion Options. ... 19\nFigure 16. Bussard Ram Jet ... 20\nFigure 17. Progress in Tokamak Magnetic Confinement Fusion ... 22\nFigure 18. ITER Design Concept With BWR Size and Blanket Segment ... 23\nFigure 19. Experiments To Prove a Plasma Fusion Propulsion Concept ... 28\nFigure 20. Roadmap to Aneutronic Fusion Propulsion Development ... 29\n\nTables\n\nTable 1: Principal Fusion Reactions ... 3\nTable 2: Fusion Peak Interaction Temperatures and Fusion Energy to X-rays ... 4\nTable 3: Fusion Ignition Temperatures ... 5\nTable 4: Advanced Fusion Concept Reactor Companies ... 24\nTable 5: Emerging Technologies ... 26\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAneutronic Fusion Propulsion\n\nSummary\n\nControlled fusion energy production has been under development for 60 years. The primary objective has been gaining the ability to create terrestrial power plants using deuterium and tritium as fuel. Unfortunately, this objective has been eluded for both technical and economic reasons. However, the threshold for achieving success in applying fusion to propulsion is considerably relaxed, especially if fuels are used that do not use tritium. Tritium has to be continuously bred; these reactions yield fast neutrons, which require shielding and cause structural materials to be periodically replaced. Such \"aneutronic\" fusion fuels, such as hydrogen fusing with Boron-11, have been studied extensively for space propulsion applications since the 1980s.\n\nThis report reviews the basic fusion plasma physics, design concepts that apply aneutronic fusion for propulsion, and the requirements for transitioning to space. The predominant concepts studied include magnetic field reversed configuration, dense plasma focus and inertial electrostatic confinement. All of these concepts have venture capital funded programs for terrestrial fusion power. When applied to space or near-space propulsion, they can exceed the performance of any conventional electric thruster.\n\nThe future technology development of aneutronic fusion propulsion will initially be motivated by the very large GEO satellites that will be developed in the next 20 years for commercial and military broadband communication. Further development of very-high-power propulsion systems (> 100 kW) to Mars and beyond will require major developments in all technology areas for confinement pulsed power and ion fuel beam accelerators.\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 1: Concept Overview\n\nControlled thermonuclear fusion has been the aspiration for nuclear scientists and engineers for the last 60 years. During that time, tens of billions of dollars have been invested in this endeavor with the expected fruition being pushed even further into the future. When Lyman Spitzer invented the Stellarator in 1951, it was expected to take only 5 years of concentrated plasma physics experiments to harness the fusion of hydrogen ions confined by magnetic fields. However, the numerous new instabilities that arose under increasing higher magnetic confinement pressures have been a roadblock to the success of controlled fusion.\n\nIn 1983, a rediscovery was made by Robert Bussard of a fusion device invented by Robert Hirsch in his 1966 Ph.D. thesis. The Fusor, as Hirsch named it with his thesis advisor and famous inventor Philo Farnsworth, simply used spherically concentric electrodes in a vacuum chamber. When a deuterium gas was supplied to the chamber and a few-microsecond pulse at 30 kV was applied to the electrodes, D-D fusion occurred, releasing He and neutrons. Although it released less energy than was needed to supply the initial electric pulse, it provided the evidence for a method to obtain supplementary heating to ignition of magnetically confined plasmas.\n\nThe Fusor led to continued development of what is now called Inertial Electrostatic Confinement (IEC) devices. Amongst these was the Dense Plasma Focus (DPF), a plasma production tube invented in 1961, and several other devices. Magnetic confinement devices utilized the IEC method with imploding layers of lithium or applying intense beams from either end of a linear magnetic pinch device. This resurgence of alternate confinement concepts was immediately applied to fusion space propulsion since it was recognized that there would be an advantage over nuclear fission propulsion with its costly safety requirements. For mitigating shielding mass and tritium fuel launch-safety concerns, non-neutron-generating “aneutronic” fusion fuels were also adopted.\n\nAneutronic fusion fuels include those isotopes of light elements that when fused produce no neutrons or a very few from the fusion of daughter products. Although there are eight such reactions for light nuclei, the most practical for fusion reactors include the following:\n\nD + 3He → 4He + p\n\nP + 7Li → 24He\n\np + 11B → 3 4He\n\nIn Chapter 2, we will review the fusion plasma physics needed to apply these aneutronic reactions to a confinement device to make a fusion reactor practicable for propulsion, which is described in Chapter 3. In Chapter 4, the relevance of these aneutronic fusion propulsion concepts will be reviewed and assessed for aerospace applications including near-space, orbital, and interplanetary propulsion, as well as the potential for interstellar use. In Chapter 5, we will summarize the recent national, international, and privately funded R&D that may expedite development, while in Chapter 6, we outline an R&D path forward for the aneutronic fusion technologies and systems needed for the next 50 years. Finally, we provide a summary in Chapter 7 that that conveys aneutronic fusion propulsion:\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• May have near-term applications to replace current satellite ion thrusters and extend application to interplanetary flight.\n• Requires extensive technology development for air and near-space applications.\n• Will not be practical beyond the solar system unless breakthrough propulsion physics can assist the flight to the next stellar system, where fusion “ion thrusters” can then be used.\n\nDespite the attention propulsion has gotten from the scientific community, the problem has been insufficiently addressed by the space science community. Although it is certainly true that the fusion drive train must be successful from a theoretical and experimental perspective before consideration for adaptation to the space environment, many critical aspects such as Earth-based launch, space-based assembly, space materials science, safe flight operations, and mission success need to be introduced early in the design phase. More importantly, now that these fusion propulsion concepts are starting to look both feasible and attractive, the transition to space and the inherent aerospace application development need considerable focus.\n\nToward this consideration, we now begin with a background on plasma physics that includes fusion efficiencies and confinement schemes for aneutronic fusion, which leads us to the application to the propulsion concept discussions that follow.\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 2: Fusion Plasma Physics\n\nAt the most basic level, nuclear fusion occurs by forcing atomic nuclei close enough so that the attractive strong force (which binds nuclei together) overwhelms the very powerful electromagnetic repulsion force. Under such circumstances the nuclei fuse together to form a single nucleus, creating an atom of a different element (along with byproducts such as radiation and neutrons). Because the strong force dominates over such short-length scales (~10-15 meter, the diameter of a medium-sized nucleus), the fusion of heavier nuclei are inherently more unstable, with smaller binding energies. For light nuclei, the binding energies of the individual nuclei are significantly smaller than that of the fused nucleus; it is the released energy of the fusion process (in the form of high-energy photons or kinetic energy of nuclear products such as neutrons) that is sought as an energy source. Table 1 shows Fusion reactions including the relevant aneutronic fusion reactions.\n\nTable 1: Principal Fusion Reactions\n\nMain controlled fusion fuels E (MeV)\nD + T → α + n 17.59\nD + D → T + p 4.04; 3He + n 3.27; α + γ 23.85\nT + T → α + 2n 11.33\nAdvanced fusion fuels\nD + 3He → α + p 18.35\np + 6Li → α + 3He 4.02\np + 7Li → 2α 17.35\np + 11B → 3α 8.68\n\nTo fuse a sufficient number of nuclei within a span of time for practical use, it is generally necessary to heat an ensemble of atoms to the very high energies shown in Table 1. These energies (temperatures) are high enough that electrons are stripped from their associated nuclei, producing a plasma of free electrons and ions. The fusion reaction cross sections (σ), the probability of interaction for these reactions in barns = 10-28 m2, is shown in Figure 1. For the maximum reaction rate temperature, the ratio of the total amount of energy (kinetic plus radiation) released in the fusion reaction relative to the bremsstrahlung radiation released is shown in Table 2.\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n102\n\nFigure 1. Fusion Reaction Cross Sections vs. Temperature\n\nTable 2: Fusion Peak Interaction Temperatures and Fusion Energy to X-rays\n\nfuel Ti (keV) Pfusion/PBremsstrahlung\n2D-3T 50 140\n2D-2D 500 2.9\n2D-3He 100 5.3\n3He-3He 1000 0.72\np+6Li 800 0.21\np+11B 300 0.57\n\nIf the ratio is low, it takes more confining energy to sustain the reaction. The largest fusion output is obtained when the temperature is chosen so that <σv>/T2 is a maximum (known as the Lawson Criteria), which for plasma ignition is achieved when the fusion reactions produce enough power to maintain the temperature without external heating. This is shown in Table 3 for the most relevant neutronic and aneutronic fusion fuels. While the ignition temperature is up to a factor of 10 higher for the aneutronic fusion reactions, the confinement power required for ignition will be one to two orders of magnitude greater. This will therefore require some unique confinement concepts to achieve ignition.\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIn order to facilitate efficient fusion, it is also necessary to constrain the motions of the charged particles (i.e., confine the plasma) in an attempt to maximize the likelihood of ion collisions. Therefore, the net energy produced by the fusion process is more realistically the released energy minus the energy consumed for plasma heating and confinement. The fusion energy gain factor, usually expressed with the symbol Q, is the ratio of fusion power produced in a nuclear fusion reactor to the power required to maintain the plasma temperature; for the Lawson Criterion, breakeven Q = 1. However, to provide sufficient energy to convert that power to a useful level, a minimum Q >5 is needed, and for a power plant to generate electricity the Q should be >30.\n\nFor the fusion reactions shown in Table 3, the (D,3He) will produce a few fusion neutrons which can be minimized by running hot and deuterium-lean; however, the application may be limited by the availability of 3He. Other reactions to consider will be the (p,6Li) and (p,11B). First, a review the most commonly used plasma confinement methods is needed.\n\nTable 3: Fusion Ignition Temperatures\n\nfuel T [keV] <σv>/T2 [m3/s/keV2]\n2D-3T 13.6 1.24x10-24\n2D-2D 15 1.28x10-26\n2D-3He 58 2.24x10-26\np+6Li 66 1.46x10-27\np+11B 123 3.01x10-27\n\nMAGNETIC CONFINEMENT\n\nMagnetic confinement is an often-used method for constraining the motion of the plasma “fuel,” increasing the efficiency of nuclear collisions and the fusion process. The plasma is composed of charged particles and is, therefore, affected by electric and magnetic fields. Charged particles spiral along magnetic field lines with electrons spiraling faster and in smaller radii and in opposite directions than their heavier ion counterparts. As the magnetic field increases at the ends of a magnetic mirror, the charged particles will reverse direction along the field lines and thus become trapped. A chamber can be designed such that an appropriate magnetic field configuration can be produced that guides and constrains the motion of the plasma (see Figure 2). The pressures (thermal, kinetic, magnetic) of the plasma “gas” are balanced by the high pressure of the imposed magnetic field—the plasma is “contained” by the magnetic field. One obvious advantage of this approach is that the imposed magnetic field prevents (or at least delays) much of the plasma (at energies of tens of keV or temperatures of several hundred millions of degrees Kelvin) from coming into contact with the structural elements of the chamber. The pressures are typically on the order of one bar, and depending on the design, confinement times can span a few seconds to minutes. Although magnetic confinement designs are in principle steady-state systems, their primary difficulty is maintaining the strong damping of the various modes of plasma instabilities that arise in these systems.\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY magnetic mirror pole regions serve as a magnetic mirror or bottle that traps and reflects charged particles – the particles gain energy Figure 2. Illustration of Magnetic Mirror Confinement in Vicinity of Jupiter A second, related magnetic method is to join the ends of the solenoid together as a toroid, confining the plasma to a ring. A simple toroidal (i.e., circular) field, however, provides poor confinement because the radial gradient of the magnetic field strength results in plasma drift. A method to reduce drift and produce a stable plasma equilibrium is to superpose a poloidal magnetic field with the toroidal field, thus driving a current through the plasma itself. This provides a path for the plasma moving along the outer edge of the toroid to migrate to the inner edge and vice versa. This is the method used in tokamak systems (shown in Figure 3). Another solution has been to structurally modify the toroid chamber into a figure-eight configuration. This allowed plasma to spend half of the time on the inner portion of the tube, and half of the time on the outer portion of the tube. Such systems are called stellarators. This configuration has eventually evolved back into a (non-axially symmetric) toroidal configuration; rotating the windings in such a manner produces a stable plasma equilibrium while eliminating the need for a toroidal magnetic field. The fundamental issue with these confinement systems is that they require superconducting magnetic coils, pressure vessels, and neutron-energy-absorbing blankets for a 6-meter major radius by 6-meter high plasma, an enormous technological undertaking—and that is just for an ignition demonstration (see Chapter 5). a) Tokamak b) Figure 3. a) Tokamak and b) Stellarator Confinement UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY A spheromak is a tokamak in a spherical chamber that uses only a single set of coils in conjunction with plasma currents that self-generate a confining magnetic field. However, this design is thought to be less promising than the previously described technologies for generating significant fusion energy. An FRC (field-reversed configuration) is an elongated plasma ellipsoid conducting an azimuthal current that reverses the direction of an externally applied magnetic field. The resultant field provides toroidal plasma confinement without requiring a toroidal vacuum vessel or coil set (shown in Figure 4). It has the potential of achieving much higher stable plasma configurations in much smaller volumes than a tokamak using supplementary laser or neutral beam heating from its ends. The FRC is susceptible, however, to a tilting mode instability where the confined plasma ring can flip over and fly apart as the previously confining forces shift radially outward rather than inward. This can be overcome by magnetic field design. A significant augmentation of power density for this concept is to inject the fuel through the ends with high energy ion or neutral particle beams. Such a system can allow the very high plasma energy density, temperatures, and confinement times needed for aneutronic fusion. Field Reversed Configuration Plasma Separatrix B=0 Axial Field Coils Closed Poloidal Field Line Open Magnetic Field Line Figure 4. Field-Reversed Configuration INERTIAL CONFINEMENT Inertial confinement fusion (ICF) is a process by which nuclear fusion is initiated by heating and compressing a fuel target. Such targets are usually pellets containing a “fuel” of deuterium and tritium atoms. Typical pellets are about the size of a pinhead, holding ~10 mg of fuel. The process of compressing and heating the pellet is usually accomplished by one of two methods: using high-energy lasers or using particle beams (electrons or ions). The vast majority of ICF devices use lasers. The lasers heat the pellet's outer layer, which explodes this layer outward and produces a reaction force against the remainder of the target. The lasers either impact the pellet simultaneously from multiple symmetrically arranged directions or illuminate the inner wall of a metal cylinder (a hohlraum) containing the pellet (the hohlraum then produces thermal x-rays which impact the pellet). This force accelerates the fuel inward, sending shock waves into the pellet's center. If the shock waves are strong enough, they are able to compress and heat the fuel at the center to such an extent that fusion can occur. The released energy then heats the surrounding fuel, which may also undergo fusion. In comparison with magnetic confinement, ICF results in much higher pressures, but at the expense of a much shorter confinement time. The goal of ICF is to get a sufficient percentage of the fuel to undergo fusion such that more energy is released than is used to produce the reaction. Early attempts, however, have demonstrated that ICF efficiency was much lower than expected. Recent advances in materials technology and techniques have shown that considerable improvements in performance are possible; such a test at the DOE National Ignition Test Facility (NIF) will use 50 TW of laser energy in 192 beams to compress a pellet to achieve ignition. UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY The perennial challenge for developing such a device into a power reactor is the feat of manufacturing and compressing 10 such 1-mm DT fuel pellets per second. One significant problem is maintaining equal pressure on the pellets repeatedly to permit energy production. ELECTROSTATIC CONFINEMENT This simple method of confinement is composed of concentric spheres (or sometimes cylinders) acting as anode and cathode in a vacuum known as a Farnsworth-Hirsch Fusor or, more commonly, Inertial Electrostatic Confinement (IEC). As shown in Figure 5, the inner sphere (cathode) is not solid, but rather is composed of a wire grid. Ions entering the vacuum chamber between the anode and cathode are accelerated through a large potential difference toward the cathode. Passing through the cathode, the ions collide in the central region, with a small portion of the plasma population undergoing fusion.1, 2, 3 However, using this simple setup, it has been argued that net energy production is not viable for anything other than deuterium-tritium fusion, in part because the fusion-collision cross section is several orders of magnitude smaller than the Coulomb-collision cross section.4 An additional difficulty is that some of the plasma interacts directly with the cathode, contaminating the plasma with heavy sputtered ions. A method for mitigating this problem is to eliminate the cathode grid and instead use magnetic (and electrostatic) fields to create a virtual cathode composed of electrons. Such devices include the Polywell5 and the Penning trap.6 One such Penning trap design developed at Los Alamos injects electrons into the central region in such a manner as to produce a harmonic oscillator potential. Called a Periodically Oscillating Plasma Sphere (POPS), ions in this chamber then also undergo harmonic oscillations and can become phase-locked with the use of an externally applied radiofrequency electric field.7, 8 This allows the ions to reach very high densities and temperatures as they collide at the center of the chamber. This promising design eliminates any power loss due to Coulomb collisions and substantially increases the efficiency of fusion-power generation. Figure 5. IEC Fusor and Polywell Confinement Configurations UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY MAGNETO-INERTIAL CONFINEMENT This method of confinement is an adaptation of the inertial confinement system (ICF) described above, but also uses some of the methods developed for magnetic confinement in an attempt to lower the fusion ignition requirements for implosion velocity and power density.9 This concept uses a strong magnetic field within a conducting shell (a magnetic flux conserver). The inertial fusion target plasma lies within the conducting shell. As the shell is imploded, the magnetic intensity increases dramatically, constraining and heating the plasma and facilitating fusion. This concept is being pursued in the United States by the Office of Fusion Energy Sciences of the Department of Energy. Currently there are two classes: High-gain magneto-inertial fusion (MIF) and low-to-intermediate-gain magneto-inertial fusion. High-Gain MIF The heating power directed into a hot spot for fusion ignition must be greater than the rate of heat energy loss, and this implies that a high implosion velocity is needed for high-yield fusion. However, a higher implosion velocity actually lowers the efficiency of fusion, since less of the cold fuel is assembled (the higher velocity increases the breakdown of density barriers or growth rate of the Rayleigh-Taylor instability). As described above, lasers are typically used for direct implosion of the fuel pellet but, to date, this is not very efficient and the cost per unit energy is high. With a magnetized target, however, the implosion velocity need not be so high to initiate fusion ignition, thus lowering the input energy cost without sacrificing efficiency. Low-to-Intermediate MIF For low-yield fusion, electromagnetic pulsed power can be substituted for lasers or particle beams to compress the target. A lower implosion velocity implies that a larger shell can be used, leading to longer burn duration and a much lower density target. It is thought that by using an imposed magnetic field, a solid or liquid shell (liner) and a gaseous target can be used, rather than the usual cryogenic solid fuel pellets. Such is the case for the Magnetized Target Fusion experiment being performed at LANL (shown in Figure 6). A similar pulsed compression of a fusion fuel gas can be achieved without a target by instead using Dense Plasma Focus (DPF) having annular electrodes (shown in Figure 7). In this case a capacitor bank is discharged into the electrodes driving a nanosecond to microsecond pulse that will heat the plasma created to ignition temperatures. This by far is the simplest and least elaborate magnetic confinement concept to achieve aneutronic fusion ignition. UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Compressed to thermonuclear conditions Preheated fuel Liner Implosion System Plasma Injector Figure 6. Magnetized Target Fusion Experiment at LANL Figure 7. Dense Plasma Focus (Lawrenceville Plasma Physics) UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 3: Fusion Propulsion\n\nFUSION REACTORS FOR PROPULSION\n\nControlled nuclear fusion reactors have been seriously studied since the late 1960s after tokomaks demonstrated a very promising improvement in temperature and confinement time that had potential to become power-producing reactors. After 15 years, such studies predicted that the size and complexity of a DT (deuterium tritium)-fueled Tokomak would be prohibitively too large to be considered for aerospace applications. However, in the early 1990s when it became clear from large tokomak experimental results that controlled fusion for terrestrial power generation would require an indeterminate time to develop, a surge of interest in fusion-powered propulsion grew. All such studies abandoned the use of DT fusion fuels because of the need for heavy shielding for the 14-MeV neutrons and the requirement for launch safety and the additional complexity of breeding tritium. Only (D,3He) (deuterium helium-3) and (p,11B) (hydrogen boron) fuels have been considered because of the higher specific powers achievable for air and space flight.\n\nField-Reversed Configuration Reactors\n\n(U) The seminal study on fusion propulsion that developed specific design parameters was performed in 1993.10 It reviewed previous studies and used a generic cylindrical fusion plasma model for analyzing the specific power for such a system using (D,3He) fuel (shown in Figure 8). The estimated gross mass of the 968-MW reactor was 112 Mg with a corresponding mass of 999 Mg for a DT-fueled system, (1Mg=1 metric ton). Optimization of this conceptual design using the FRC plasma confinement using colliding beams has led to a much more compact configuration of 33 Mg producing 100 MW (shown in Figure 9).11 This reactor's plasma confinement chamber has a length of 7 meters and diameter of 0.84 meters. Half of the plasma fusion products and unfused fuel is circulated through the magnetic separatrix to a direct converter while the other half is diverted and expelled to provide propulsive thrust.\n\nFigure 8. Specific Power as a Function of Plasma Temperature of Fusion Rocket\n\nChart: Specific Power (kW/kg) versus Plasma Temperature (keV), 0 to 200 keV, with curves labeled D-3He Long-Term, D-3He Mid-Term, and D-T Mid-Term.\n\n11"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 9. Colliding Beam Fusion Reactor [Cheung et al. 2004]\n\nDense Plasma Focus Reactors\n\nThe Dense Plasma Focus (DPF) designs that operate at extremely high plasma pressure because of the intense electrostatic pulse have been evaluated for (p,B11)-fueled propulsion systems. A parametric analysis by Knecht12 has shown that a system of 16 to 24 Mg can produce 400-900 MW of power with thrusts of 500-1000 kN at Isp of 1,500-2,000 seconds. More detailed analyses of this design indicate that for a 16-Mg system using direct energy conversion coils at the thruster nozzle, (Figure 10) producing an Isp of about 1300 seconds at 800 MW could generate about 1000 kN of thrust.13\n\nThis system is continuously fueled with H2 and boron gas, and the electrodes are pulsed at a 10-Hz rate or higher with the >100 keV plasma fusion products and unfused fuel expelled to provide thrust after passing through a direct-energy converter cooled by a separate H2 coolant that is also expelled in the plasma stream.\n\nMagneto- Inertial Confinement Reactors\n\nThe concept of magnetized target fusion using field-reversed configuration plasmoids has been tested.14 A high-density compressed plasmoid is formed by a staged axial and radial compression of two colliding/merging FRC plasmas where the energy that is required for the implosion compression and heating of the magnetized target plasmoid is stored in the kinetic energy of the plasmas used to compress it. The confinement properties are expected to achieve ignition for aneutronic fuels and may lead to the smaller reactor mass for propulsion of 20 Mg producing 300 MW (shown in Figure 11).\n\nFigure 10. DPF Thruster System with Direct Conversion\n\nDiagram labels: Hydrogen, p, B11, Focus, Magnetic Nozzle.\n\n12"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 11. Magnetized Target Fusion Reactor\n\nDiagram labels: Magnetic Expansion Chamber, BURN CHAMBER (Dch ~ 5 cm), Fuel Beam Injection, 5 m, ~10 m, 1 m.\n\nAIR PROPULSION\n\nThe reactor propulsion concepts described in the previous section were limited to space propulsion. The DPF reactor is the lightest concept at 16 Mg (16 metric tons) and could produce 800 MW of power with thrust levels of 1000 kN for space propulsion through ejection of high-energy ions. The application of this fusion reactor for propelling aircraft from ground to hypersonic speeds would be very difficult since converting the 800 MW of power to propellant thrust through a thermodynamically driven gas turbine would provide 15N/MW or 1.53 kg of force per MW, which is only 1,224 kg of thrust for lifting a 16,000 kg vehicle. The thrust per kilogram of reactor weight would have to go up a factor of 50 to 100 in order to lift the reactor and the aircraft it is powering.\n\nThe assistance of conventional rocket technology plus air-breathing magnetohydrodynamic (MHD)-assisted propulsion to augment aneutronic fusion plasma propulsion has been studied as depicted in Figure 12. In this concept, rocket- and turbine-based combined-cycle air-breathing engines are used for accelerating the vehicle to Mach 14.15 MHD power generation is used during Mach 7-14 air-breathing flight because it may produce hundreds of megawatts of electrical power for DPF fusion rocket system ignition. The DPF fusion rocket system could then provide additional propulsion, power, and acceleration outside the atmosphere at speeds above the Mach 14 air-breathing MHD threshold. A thrust-vectoring chemical rocket system provides additional thrust and control any time during vehicle flight.\n\nFigure 12 graphic labels: A neutronic fusion power and rocket propulsion from Mach 14 to orbit; 2025 time period; Air-breathing propulsion and MHD power from Mach 7 to Mach 14; Chemical rocket and air-breathing propulsion from 0 to Mach 7; Propellants: Liquid Hydrogen; Liquid Oxygen (or Liquified Air).\n\nFigure 12. MHD Air-Breathing and Fusion Rocket Aerospace Plane\n\n13"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nION PROPULSION\n\nIon propulsion is a method by which the principles of electromagnetics are exploited to accelerate an ionized gas in a controlled manner. The forces involved to accelerate the plasma, by Newton's third law, act to propel an object such as a rocket or spacecraft along a given path. The classification of the different plasma propulsion designs is somewhat difficult. Some designs involve electrostatic fields only, some use magnetic fields for ionization purposes but not for ion acceleration, and some designs use both electric and magnetic fields for ion acceleration and thrust. In addition, some designs emit ions from a material anode, while other designs use electric and magnetic fields to ionize a gas by one of several methods, for example, by enhancing collisions or by using radiofrequency (RF) waves, to create a plasma. The different classes of plasma propulsion are described in the following subsections. The use of fusion reactions in an ion propulsion device could significantly enhance the energy of the accelerated ions augmenting the net thrust per watt expended. We will examine the methods of plasma ion propulsion that may benefit from aneutronic fusion.\n\nIon Thrusters\n\nIon thrusters typically emit charged particles from an anode or cathode to create an ion population. This population is then accelerated by an electric (and sometimes magnetic) field to generate thrust. Examples of ion thrusters include gridded electrostatic thrusters, Hall effect thrusters, and field-emission electric propulsion systems:\n\nGridded Electrostatic Thrusters. Gridded electrostatic thrusters were originally derived from a duoplasmatron design (which uses electrons from a cathode filament to ionize an introduced gas). Such designs then accelerate and focus ions into a beam, using an electrostatic potential, with a force equal to the ion mass times the strength of the electric field (Coulomb force). An external (to the plasma chamber) electron gun expels electrons into the exhaust to neutralize the system (to keep the spacecraft from charging up, pulling the ions [exhaust] back toward the spacecraft and lowering efficiency dramatically). These designs are typically low thrust and low specific impulse (Isp).\n\nHall Effect Thruster. Hall thrusters use a magnetic field to trap electrons (which are used to ionize the gas) and use an electric field to accelerate ions to create thrust. The electrons also form a virtual cathode, in place of a physical grid, which is used to accelerate the ions. Lastly, electrons are used to neutralize the exhaust. About 30 percent of the discharge current is an electron current, which does not produce thrust. This limits the energetic efficiency of the Hall effect thruster. This design can produce a specific impulse of ~1,500 seconds and thrusts of several tens of mN up to ~3 N.\n\nField-Emission Electric Propulsion Systems. A field-emission electric propulsion (FEEP) system uses a very strong electric field to cause metal ions to be emitted from a metal tip. These ions are then electrostatically accelerated to provide thrust. An electron gun neutralizes the exhaust. This is typically a very-low-thrust system.\n\nPLASMA THRUSTER\n\nPlasma thruster designs usually ionize a gas contained within a chamber, which is then accelerated using electric and magnetic forces (Lorentz force). Examples of plasma thruster designs discussed in the following subsections include magnetoplasmadynamic and Lithium Lorentz Force Accelerator (LiLFA) thrusters, electrodeless thrusters, helicon\n\n14"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndouble layer designs, and the VASIMR thruster. Such systems typically have larger specific impulses (up to ~10,000 seconds) but have lower thrust per kW expended.\n\nMagnetoplasmadynamic Thrusters\n\nThe magnetoplasmadynamic (MPD) thruster uses a gaseous fuel that is ionized in one chamber and then fed into an acceleration chamber. Electric and magnetic fields then propel the plasma through the exhaust chamber. The specific impulse and thrust both increase with power input, while the thrust per kW decreases. Exhaust velocities can reach 110,000 m/s, about 20 times greater than liquid rockets.\n\nElectrodeless Plasma Thrusters\n\nIn this design, the plasma is accelerated by magnetized ponderomotive forces, for which nonuniform static magnetic fields and high-frequency electromagnetic fields are applied. The ponderomotive force accelerates positive ions and electrons in the same direction; thus, no dedicated exhaust neutralizer is needed. Since there are no grids and there is no physical contact between the plasma and electrodes, corrosion and spacecraft contamination issues are minimized. Because of the multiple stages involved, the thruster at constant power can also be varied to deliver either higher specific impulse and/or higher thrust.\n\nOne form of electrodeless thruster is the Pulsed Inductive Thruster (or PIT). A PIT uses perpendicular electric and magnetic fields to accelerate an ionized gas. Capacitors release an approximately 10-µsec pulse of electric current, which generates a radial magnetic field. A circular electrical field is thus induced in the gas, causing ions to travel in the direction opposite that of the original current pulse. Since this motion is perpendicular to the magnetic field, the ions are then accelerated outward to provide thrust.\n\nHelicon Double Layer\n\nThis design introduces gas into a tube (open at one end), which is then converted into a high-density plasma through the use of a helical antenna. Solenoid coils are also used to confine the created plasma. In the case of the helicon double layer, the plasma is then accelerated to supermagnetosonic speeds by traversing an electric double layer, which is created very close to the open end of the tube by a rapidly expanding magnetic field. The European Space Agency (ESA) has tested this design using argon gas and found that the double layer is stable enough to reliably accelerate ions. ESA is currently pursuing this technology for possible use in future missions.\n\nVASIMR Thruster\n\nThe Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket (VASIMR) is an electromagnetic thruster for spacecraft propulsion. This design is an electrodeless configuration and operates in three stages. The first stage uses RF helicon antennas to transform the gas into a plasma. The second stage uses an ion cyclotron resonance frequency (again in the radio band) to energize the plasma. The third stage uses electromagnets to create a magnetic nozzle, which converts the thermal energy of the plasma into thrust. Magnetic shielding protects all parts of the VASIMR from direct contact with the contained plasma, mitigating corrosion. The method for heating plasma in VASIMR was originally developed as a result of research into nuclear fusion. With the energy used for RF heating and the amount of propellant delivered for plasma generation, VASIMR is\n\n15"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ncapable of either generating low-thrust, high-specific-impulse exhaust or relatively high-thrust, low-specific-impulse exhaust. The intention of the VASIMR design is to bridge the gap between high-thrust, low-specific-impulse propulsion systems and low-thrust, high-specific-impulse systems. AdAstra is currently testing the VX-200 engine (a 200-kW engine). The power distribution is as follows: A helicon discharge uses 30 kWe (kilowatts, electrical)for ionizing the argon gas using RF waves and uses 170 kWe for powering the ion cyclotron resonance to heat and accelerate plasma in the second part of the engine. The specific impulse is optimally ~5,000 seconds, with a specific power of ~1.5 kg/kW. The mass of the VX-200 engine is estimated at ~300 kg. NASA intends to test this engine on the International Space Station using a large battery to power it during the tests.\n16\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 4: Applications\nNEAR SPACE\nAlthough aneutronic fusion thrusters will not be able to achieve liftoff for single-stage orbit vehicles as discussed in Chapter 3 above Mach 14, they can provide the necessary thrust to insert an air vehicle into orbit. In fact, any vehicle in orbit could benefit from such a propulsion device to dip down and maneuver in the atmosphere and return to orbit with the aid of fusion propulsion as long as it does not slow below Mach 14. This capability will allow a host of missions that include the following:\n• Antisatellite threat avoidance.\n• Unpredictable Earth or space target reconnaissance.\n• Unpredictable Earth or space target neutralization.\nThe details of such applications will be the subject of separate studies. Undoubtedly current propulsion technologies are significantly limited in N/kW in propulsion capability to perform such missions for long durations. However, they may be sufficient due to the threats and targets needed to be countered at this time.\nEARTH ORBIT\nSpace thrusters for orbital insertion and station keeping have been using hydrazine propellant and, more recently for large GEO satellites, arc jet thrusters, which electrostatically enhance the hydrazine propellant. High-power Hall Current Thrusters (HCT) that electrostatically accelerate Xe ions have been developed by NASA with discharge power levels ranging from 6.4 kilowatts to 72.5 kilowatts.16 Such devices produce thrust ranging from 0.3 to 2.5 Newtons and specific impulses up to 4,500 seconds at 1 kV. More recently, AeroJet together with Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company have qualified a 4.5-kW Hall Thruster Propulsion System (HTPS) that demonstrated 244 mN of thrust with a specific impulse of 1,981 seconds incorporating a 400-volt acceleration potential. These thrusters were flown in 2010 on military communication and surveillance satellites. Expected enhancements of these HCTs will provide higher Isp near 3,000 seconds at the expense of significant lower thrust, ~10 mN/kW. Future broadband communication commercial and military satellites of 20- to 50-kW broadcast power will require much more efficient thruster performance in terms of mN/kW in order to satisfy the operational performance needs of their solar power systems. This provides the motivation for the development of aneutronic fusion enhanced ion thrusters.\nSuch a development has been proposed by transforming a conventional ion thruster into a spherical form.17 Using the IEC configuration shown in Figure 13, ions are produced in the gas discharge region through the injection and oscillation of electrons about a guide grid that is held to a slightly positive potential. The grid extracts ions from the discharge region and accelerates them toward the center of the device. It is estimated to provide 35 mN of thrust for 750 watts of input power at 500 volts, providing an Isp of 3,000 seconds or 45 mN/kW superior to the advanced HCT thrusters. The addition of a 150-kWe ion beam for heating a (p,11B) plasma close to ignition (Q~1) using a magnetic guide system to redirect the nearly isotopic velocity distribution of\n17\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nthe MeV alpha particles for the (p,11B) into a direct thrust would increase the Isp to >5,000 seconds with thrust levels >5 N/kW.\nFigure 13. Design of an IEC Jet Thruster - Experimental Device (left)\nINTERPLANETARY\nMany of the fusion reactor applications described in Chapter 3 have been specifically applied to space propulsion. The key reason for the benefits of such systems lies in the fundamentally different nature of fusion propulsion compared to chemical or nuclear-thermal propulsion. Fusion propulsion systems pay a mass penalty for carrying their power source. However, a propellant mass savings results from the high thrust per unit mass that arises from high exhaust velocity that overcomes the power-source mass penalty. These potential performance enhancements are shown in Figure 14, which illustrates fusion propulsion's capabilities for fast transport of humans or efficient transport of cargo between circular solar orbits for Earth-Mars one-way rendezvous missions.18\nIn order to achieve the efficient solar system travel shown in Figure 14, propulsion systems must achieve specific powers of at least 1 kW/kg at exhaust velocities of ~10^5-10^6 m/s, leading to thrust-to-weight ratios of ~10-3. The required range of parameters and a comparison with chemical and nuclear thermal propulsion options appears in Figure 15.19 The capability of tuning the exhaust velocity over factors of 10-100 is a desirable feature that facilitates energy intensive missions. For the same delivered payload the fraction of the propellant and nonpayload mass is significantly minimized for fusion propulsion as compared to the other propulsion options.\n18\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nTrip time (days)\nPayload (incl. structure) fraction\nFigure 14. Comparison of Fusion, Nuclear-Thermal, and Chemical Propulsion for Same Payload.\nFigure 15. Thrust-to-Weight Ratio and Exhaust Velocity Regimes for Various Long-Range Space Propulsion Options.\nINTERSTELLAR\nThe ability of fusion propulsion to carry payloads or travelers to a habitable star tens of light-years away will be limited by the amount of fusion fuel it can transport or gather along its route. A simple calculation of the amount of energy to move a space-shuttle-sized vehicle (100 Mg) to the nearest star, Alpha Centauri, indicates a minimum amount of energy in the mass equivalent of 10^6 kg. However, in 1960 Robert Bussard proposed the use of magnetic fields to scoop interstellar hydrogen to fuel a fusion rocket to propel a spacecraft now know as the Bussard Ram Jet (shown in Figure 16).20 Although interstellar hydrogen does not fuse, Bussard proposed the use of the stellar carbon-nitrogen-oxygen (CNO) cycle in which carbon is used as a catalyst to burn hydrogen through the strong nuclear reaction. However, the size of the scoops and the fusion power required to maintain them makes this concept unlikely to be realized.\n19\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFusion Exhaust\nFusion Shield Assembly\nCompression Assembly\nIgniters\nHabitation Section\nCommand Antenna\nPower Distribution\nCollector Head\nPrecompressor\nMagnetic Torus\n500m\nFigure 16. Bussard Ram Jet (www.bibsos.com)\n20\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 5: Recent Developments\n\nU.S. DOE PROGRAMS\n\nThe current U.S. Department of Energy fusion program is administered by the Office of Fusion Energy Sciences (http://www.science.doe.gov/ofes/). The FY2010 budget was $421 million, with over half devoted to tokomak plasma physics and experimental facilities at Princeton Plasma Physics Lab, MIT, and General Atomics. The Advanced Concepts and High-Energy-Density Laboratory Plasma Physics (HEDLPP) programs, which support plasma confinement theory and experiments for innovative fusion reactor concepts and fusion propulsion, are funded at ~$20 million. The HEDLPP program covers the following areas:\n\n• Radiative hydrodynamics.\n\n• Laser-plasma and beam-plasma interaction.\n\n• Fusion burn.\n\n• Materials under extreme conditions.\n\n• Dense plasmas in ultrahigh fields.\n\n• Laboratory astrophysics.\n\nTechnology development funding is directed toward tokomak-related reactors with $135 million contributed to ITER. The National Ignition Test Facility is funded by DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration and is dedicated for nuclear weapons simulation. The NNSA-funded research also includes Magneto Target Fusion experiments at Sandia and Lawrence Berkeley National Labs.\n\nINTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS\n\nThe International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) is a joint undertaking of the European Union, China, India, Japan, Korea, Russia, and the United States. The goal is to demonstrate deuterium-tritium (DT) fusion ignition in a minimum-sized tokomak confined plasma. The initial plans were to operate ITER as early as 2002 some 10 years after the planned TFTR and JET experimental results shown in Figure 17. However, delays in TFTR and JET test results, which augmented the size of the ITER plasma to 6 meters in major radius and 6 meters in height, had pushed the ITER operation out to 2020 at a cost of $20 billion. It has since been downscaled in operating requirements due to the cost and problems associated with tritium fuel and containment with a 2025 operating date and cost of $25B. The operating time of an ignition burn will be limited to minutes. These constraints have been imposed due to the excessive costs for the 200 MW power plant needed to supply the energy to ignite the tokomak plasma as well as the 36 kg of tritium needed for its initial fueling. In order to compensate for this a Demonstration Power reactor is planned to follow 5 yrs later at a substantially higher cost.\n\n21"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Figure 17 graphic: Progress in tokamak magnetic confinement fusion plot and cross section comparison of EU D-shape tokamaks with ITER]\n\nFigure 17. Progress in Tokomak Magnetic Confinement Fusion\n\nThe issues of tokomaks as a potential source of fusion power are dramatized by the recent graphic (Figure 18) published in the American Nuclear Society's Fusion Energy Division Newsletter (Dec 2007) depicting the GE Next-Generation Boiling-Water Reactor (Economic Simplified BWR). The reactor, which costs about $3 billion, will produce enough thermal energy to generate 1.2 GWe (gigawatt electrical), . Its fuel rods will have to be replaced every 3 years. In an operating fusion tokomak reactor, the first wall and neutron absorbing and tritium breeding thermal blanket would have to be replaced every 5 years. Two orders of magnitude more volume and an extremely complex thermal transport system will be at a considerably greater cost and down time for the plant. With the recent and predicted escalation of fossil fuel costs, nuclear power has become economically competitive with coal and oil plants. It is clear that a tokomak power plant could not compete with the fission plant at current market energy prices.\n\n22"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Figure 18 graphic: ITER design concept with ESBWR vessel and blanket segment]\n\nITER\n\nFigure 18. ITER Design Concept With BWR Size and Blanket Segment\n\nNASA PROGRAMS\n\nFrom 1995 until 2002, NASA had funded advanced space propulsion studies through Marshall Space Flight Center. These studies included the application of fusion and matter-antimatter propulsion for space exploration missions. Recently, NASA has initiated a 5-year high-power electric propulsion demonstration program to develop the technologies for manned missions to Mars in a 20-plus-year timeframe. The program funding may allow initiatives for (p,11B) fusion-assisted propulsion, which may provide significant gains in thrust and Isp without reductions in thrust per watt expended.\n\nPRIVATELY FUNDED PROGRAMS\n\nThere are a number of capital investment startups that have been developing fusion reactor technology with funding of several million dollars to greater than $50 million each. All these companies are basing their development on unique concepts or those described in Chapter 3. Table 4 summarizes these companies. Both Lawrenceville Plasma Physics (which uses DPF, dense plasma focus, confinement) and TriApha (which uses beam-heated FRC, field reversed configuration) have been shown conceptually to have low-mass aneutronic fusion propulsion systems that could use direct conversion for power and plasma ion for propulsion. Their success in the next few years may accelerate the implementation of aneutronic fusion propulsion.\n\n23"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 4: Advanced Fusion Concept Reactor Companies\n\nCOMPANY | CONCEPT | FUEL | FUNDING\nLawrenceville Plasma Physics | Dense Plasma Focus | (p,11B) | Current: $4M Needed: $4M\nElectron Power Systems | Colliding Plasma Tori | DD | Current: $6M Needed: $8M\nGeneral Fusion | Pb-Li spun liquid compression | DT | Current:$10M Needed: $10M\nEMC2 | Polywell Electrodeless IEC | DD, (p,Li), (p,11B) | Current: $11M Needed:$100M\nTriAlpha | Beam-Heated Field Reversed Conf. | (p,11B) | Current : $50M Needed: $100M\n\n24"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 6: Future Developments\n\nNEAR-TERM DEVELOPMENTS\n\nNear-term developments of fusion propulsion will include the timeframe from 2010 to 2020. It will leverage the privately funded developments in DPF, FRC, and IEC for commercial fusion reactors, as well as the DOE developments of magneto-inertial fusion, including magnetized target fusion and high-density plasma physics experiments. During this timeframe, it is expected that one or more of these fusion concepts will develop sufficient experimental data or even achieve sustained ignition breakthroughs that will allow the technology push to proceed into aerospace propulsion applications. The IEC thruster described in Chapter 4 is a near-term candidate to replace HCTs with high Isp and thrust augmented by aneutronic fusion. At the same time, associated technology development from the mainline DOE programs and ITER tokomak programs will contribute to the import areas of the following:\n\n• Super conducting magnets.\n\n• Energy storage supercapacitors.\n\n• Fuel storage systems.\n\n• Fuel ion injection accelerators.\n\n• Compact high-voltage converters.\n\n• Direct ion energy converters.\n\n• Plasma propulsion systems.\n\nExperiments and system analyses to validate the applicability of aneutronic fusion propulsion should be conducted early on, since they may bias the path taken for the various reactor and propulsion combinations.\n\n25"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Table 5: Emerging Technologies Technology | Application | Supports | Status High-temperature plasma containers | Aiding confinement, supporting fusion architecture, surviving sustained reactions / lifetime | ALL | Need lightweight materials to withstand the fusion-burning environments repeatedly. Plasma injection schemes | To supply plasma for startup, sustained reactions, symmetry, energy deposition | ALL | There needs to be an efficient and effective way to get fuel stored, delivered, and ignited. Stable magnet configurations | Needed for sufficient confinement times / ignition densities, minimize instabilities, optimal propulsion profiles | CBFR, IEC, DPF | Some experiments are in progress, but designs will evolve as limitations are encountered. Lightweight high-strength magnets | Needed for aerospace application, cost effective launch and deployment, thermal tolerance, superconductivity at workable temperatures. | IEC, CBFR | High-temperature ceramics still need to be molded to a launch and deployment survivable standard. Much material science and testing are needed. Propulsion nozzles for efficient energy channeling | Optimizes efficiency of propulsion, supports direct conversion, support viable missions | ALL | This is the result of current studies and is specific to design limitations and support. Lightweight particle accelerators for aerospace applications | For particle beam injection, energy deposition, confinement, and fusion support | IEC, CBFR | Most experiments are currently ground oriented - need to transition to flight. Direct-energy conversion schemes | Needed for high Q and efficient propulsion schemes | ALL | Currently under study for recovering energy from charged particle beams, magnetic fields, thermal recycling. High-energy-density batteries and supercapacitors | Needed for energy storage and startup operations | ALL | Application of nano materials and thin film manufacturing have accelerated development Fuel storage systems | Cryogenic H2, D2 and B gas storage | ALL | Development of solid fuel storage will reduce mass and costs. 26"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY MID-TERM DEVELOPMENTS Mid-term developments for the timeframe 2020 to 2030 will include engineering designs and ground testing of the selected aneutronic reactor concepts that have the highest probability of success. Universities, national labs, and private companies all contribute designs. Some will be further along by 2020 than others due to funding, investments, scientific breakthroughs, or evolutionary modifications. Systems engineering analysis for aerospace applications must accompany the ground-based experiments, material science, and physical analysis to achieve a solution that can transition to viable aerospace engineering prototypes from plasma fusion propulsion research. Development of high-temperature superconductors that can be machined into multi-Tesla capable confinement magnets is a current area of research. Recent advances in high-temperature superconductors are driven by the sensitivity of semiconductor quantum interference device (SQUID) circuits, the desire for improvements in MRI, improved energy storage, transformers and delivery systems for utility companies, and generators and motors for submarines for the Navy. Here, the materials must not only be compatible with lightweight cryogenics (such as pulse tube compressors), but they must be less brittle and capable of molding into coil geometries with material compatibilities across a broad range of temperatures and stress loads. A suitable substitute for the Nb3SnCu or NbTi in ground-based reactor designs with lighter weight components for both the superconducting materials and the above critical temperature conductor substrates must be found. Building a one-of-a-kind coil geometry large enough to integrate into a plasma fusion engine and able to survive the local environment will likely be an expensive proposition. In the near term, although scale models are useful, the physics and densities change with size. Although this estimate may be optimistic, with concerted efforts by the magnet companies it should be achievable. Energy efficiency is paramount to effective propulsion, fuel consumption, and affordability. Experiments for direct energy conversion might include the following: Strategic electrode placement to recover power from unconfined charge particle emanation. Inductive coils for recovery of excess magnetic field energy. Channeling of thermal energy to heat exchangers or augmented electric power generators. Fusion experiments such as Vlasov modeling, magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) models, and electrodynamic relaxation models for particle transport, fluid/plasma dynamics, collision-dominated transport, and fusion cross-section predictions need to be applied. Figure 19 summarizes all of these proposed development paths. 27"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY HTS Technology High Temperature Superconductor research needs to be scaled up and made to withstand the fusion environment Energy Recovery Alpha particle production needs to be recycled via beam direct conversion with electron escape or redirected back into reactor for maximum thrust Physical Modeling External Current H Beam Conducting Wall Rotating Plasma Reaction Products 4He 4He 4He Magnetic Field (FRC) Plasma Current 11B Beam Plasma Physics The magnetic field separatrix must be shaped for optimal confinement, minimal leakage and maximum stability Plasma rings must be made stable and achieve the right mix of density and temperature for sustained fusion and power recycling Figure 19. Experiments To Prove a Plasma Fusion Propulsion Concept FAR-TERM DEVELOPMENT In the far term timeframe from 2030 to 2050, design integration of the optimized aneutronic fusion reactors and propulsion systems into aeronautical platforms must be conducted followed by prototype flight tests. Although it is difficult at this point to say which technology will ultimately transition to application, ultimately, industrial collaboration will be necessary to bring forth the propulsion system experience with the fusion plasma physics and sustained ignition engineering and the right mix of material science. The platforms will be launched from the ground, air, or space depending on ease of design integration, availability of secondary boosting technology, and ultimate funding limitations. A roadmap to the development of aneutronic fusion propulsion is shown in Figure 20. The journey begins with a series of experiments specifically designed to address the functionality and practicality of fusion propulsion concepts. These experiments should consist of magnetic field plasma interactions, quenching of induced instabilities, and supplemental analysis to indicate feasibility for basic energy transport and sustainment. After the physics has been demonstrated with numerous field plasma interaction and confinement experiments, the focus can then be more on practical considerations. Although this transition is certainly not abrupt, a set of success criteria including plasma beta greater than unity, successful ignition, sustained ignition, power balance (at least theoretical), and basic concept designs should be well established. 28"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PHYSICS DEMO Tech Development Ground DEMO FLIGHT DEMO MANNED MISSION 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 Figure 20. Roadmap to Aneutronic Fusion Propulsion Development Design trades and evaluation can then ensue with confinement vessel design (including fuel supply and introduction), basic exhaust control modeling for regulation and maximum efficiency, crew and equipment safety concepts, effective launch and deployment concepts, and complete end-to-end power train and energy recovery concept implementation. Ground demonstrations have been conducted during all of the previous phases, but a complete end-to-end demonstration of the working concept is necessary before deployment. This demonstration is the culmination of the design physics and engineering models with a complete simulation from launch, execution, and return to Earth. The estimated date for a manned mission is contingent upon the successful execution of the prior technology phases and again, success depends upon thorough execution, complete analysis, proven concepts, engineering models, and significant and careful investment strategies. 29"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Chapter 7: Conclusions Much of the groundwork (literally) for aneutronic fusion propulsion has been accomplished, including conducting fusion experiments, development of design concepts, and the analysis of applications to aerospace propulsion. Transitioning these concepts to space is an immense challenge given the large mass, power requirements, and support engineering for power conversion, energy recovery, and fuel storage. This transition, however, may depend upon the success of the developments of privately funded ventures attempting to develop terrestrial power. Notwithstanding such developments, their application for both military and space or near-space applications requires a much lower threshold for return on investment than terrestrial power. Pulsed-powered DPF or IEC aneutronic fusion thrusters may have near-term applications to replace current satellite ion thrusters. This could be extended to the very high-power domain of beam-assisted FRC for manned interplanetary flight. The near-space domain will require major improvements in technology to reduce system mass since the size enters the MW range. The application to the aircraft domain will require further developments in technology to reduce system mass and/or the use of DT fuels, which present other potential safety issues. Aneutronic fusion propulsion will not be practical beyond the solar system unless breakthrough propulsion physics is developed that can assist the flight to the next stellar system where fusion thrusters can then be used. Whether it is reducing rows and rows of capacitor banks to pulse generators, shrinking immense superconducting magnets to a more compact and lightweight geometry, or engineering integrated fusion propulsion systems to fit onto a booster rocket, the physicists who pioneered much of the reactor and propulsion technology must now work side-by-side with the space systems companies to explore viable propulsion systems from implementation to on-orbit maintenance and attitude control. The future needs to be focused more on science and engineering and less on science fiction. 30"} {"doc_id":"c87287aa209863e5","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 8: Endnotes\n\n1 Elmore, W.C., J.L. Tuck, and K.M. Watson, \"On the inertial-electrostatic confinement of a plasma,\" Phys. Fluids, 2, 239, 1959.\n2 Farnsworth, P.T., \"Electric Discharge Device for Producing Interactions Between Nuclei, U.S. Patent No. 3,358,402, issued June 28, 1966, initially filed May 5, 1956, reviewed Oct. 18, 1960, filed Jan. 11, 1962.\n3 Hirsch, R.L., Experimental studies of a deep, negative, electrostatic potential well in spherical geometry,\" Phys. Fluids, 11, 2486, 1968.\n4 Rider, T.H., \"A general critique of inertial-electrostatic confinement fusion systems,\" Phys. Plasmas 2 (6), 1853, 1995.\n5 Bussard, R.W., \"Some physics considerations of magnetic inertial-electrostatic confinement: A new concept for spherical converging-flow fusion,\" Fusion Tech., 19, 273, 1991.\n6 Barnes, D.C., R.A. Nebel, and L. Turner, \"Production and application of dense Penning trap plasmas,\" Phys. Fluids, B 5, 3651, 1993.\n7 Nebel, R.A. and D.C. Barnes, \"The periodically oscillating plasma sphere,\" Fusion Tech., 38, 28, 1998.\n8 Park, J., R.A. Nebel, S. Stange, and S. Krupakar Murali, \"Experimental observation of a periodically oscillating plasma sphere in a gridded inertial electrostatic confinement device,\" Phys. Rev. Lett., doi: 10.1103/Phys. Rev Lett., 95.015003, 2005.\n9 Thio, Y.C.F., \"Status of the US program in magneto-inertial fusion,\" J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 112 042084, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/112/4/042084, 2008.\n10 J.F. Santarius and B.G. Logan, \"Generic Magnetic Fusion Rocket Model,\" Journal of Propulsion and Power 14, 519 (1998); Propulsion and Power 14, 519 (1998);UFDM-914 April 1993 presented at 29th AIAA Joint Propulsion Conf, paper AIAA-93-2029, June28-30, 1993. Monterey, CA\n11 F.J. Wessel, M.W. Binderbauer, N. Rostoker, H.U. Rahman, and J.O'Toole, \"Colliding Beam Fusion Reactor Space Propulsion System,\" Space Technology and Applications International Forum--2000 (American Institute of Physics, Albuquerque, NM, 2000), p. 1425.\n12 Knecht, S.D., R.H. Thomas, F.B. Mead, G. H. Miley and D. Froning, \"Propulsion and Power Density Capabilities of Dense Plasma Focus (DPF) Fusion Systems for Military Aerospace Vehicles\", in Proceedings of Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF-006), edited by M. El-Genk, AIP Conference Proceedings, p. 1232-1239.\n13 Thomas, R., Yang, Y., Miley, G.H., Mead, F.B.., \"Advancements in Dense Plasma Focus for Space Propulsion,\" in Proceedings of Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF-005), edited by M. El-Genk, AIP Conference Proceedings 746, Melville, New York, 2005 pp. 536-543.\n14 J. Slough, R. Milroy, T. Ziemba and S. Woodruff., \"Compression, Heating and Fusion of Colliding Plasmoids by a Z-theta Driven Plasma Liner,\" J. of Fusion Energy 26, 191, (June 2007).\n15 H. Froning, \"Combining MHD Air breathing and Aneutronic Fusion for Aerospace Plane Power and Propulsion,\" 14th AIAA/AHI Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, June 2006.\n16 K. DeGrys, B. Welander, J. Dimicco, S. Wenzel, B. Kay, V. Khayms, and J. Paisley \"4.5 kW Hall Thruster System Qualification Status,\" Proc. 41st AIAA/ASME-SAE-ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, July, 2005\n17 G. Miley, H. Momota, L. Wu, M. Reilley, V. Teofilo, R. Dell, and R. Hargus, \"Space Probe Application of IEC Thrusters,\" Fusion Science and Technology 56 1, 533-539 July 2009.\n18 F. Thio et al., \"A Summary of the NASA Fusion Propulsion Workshop 2000\", Proc. 37th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference , July 2001.\n19 J. Santarius and F. Thio, \"Fusion Propulsion: Attractiveness and Issues,\" Proc. of 31st AIAA Plasmadynamics and Lasers Conference, June 2000.\n20 Bussard, R. W., \"Galactic Matter and Interstellar Flight,\" Astronautica Acta, 6, 179-194, 1960.\n\n31\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"c8b0840895f2eef3","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Range Fouler Reporting Form\n\nPlease complete this form to the best of your ability. If you do not have the requested information, please leave the field blank. If there was more than one \"group,\" please report each on a separate form for data collection purposes. You should receive a response within 5 business days.\n\nLast Name, First Name\tRank\tSquadron\tSIPR Email Address\tCrew Position\n\tO-2\t172 ATKS\t\tOther\n\nThis information is for contact only. SPEAR sanitizes all reports of identifying information.\nAbsolutely no identifying information for aircrew or squadron will be recorded for analysis.\n\n10/15/20\t14:18:39\tDay\t\tISR\nDate (mm/dd/yy)\tTime of detection (hh:mm:ss Z)\tDay / Night\tSide No.\tBuno\tMission Description (CAS, BFM, etc)\tLFE?\n\nN\tE\nContact Working Area (Ex: W-72 1A)\tContact Latitude (DD:MM:SS)\tN/S\tContact Longitude (DD:MM:SS)\tE/W\tContact Altitude (Ex: 22000)\tAltitude Constant?\tWind Dir at Contact Alt (From)\tWind Speed\n\nPlease attempt to determine a Lat / Long for the contact at initial detection. We recommend using JMPS to reference the sensor-derived bearing and range relative to the bullseye you had in use. If that method is not available, any reasonable derivation of location will work, but please be as specific as possible and make a note in the comments section. These locations may be used to cue other means of tracking.\n\nWas the contact moving? Yes\nDirection/Speed (Ex. 090/15) 261/30\n\nRadar Equipped:\tAIM-9x Self-Track:\nStable Trackfile?:\tATFLIR Autotrack:\n# of Contacts in \"Group\": 1\tTally Achieved:\n\nEA Indications (Check all that apply):\nECM Arc\tLetter Identifier\tFalse Trackfiles\tOther/ Ambiguous\n\nPlease check all that apply:\nRound: ✓\tMoving Parts:\nSquare:\tMetallic:\nBalloon-shaped:\tMarkings:\nWings/Airframe:\tTranslucent:\nOther Shape:\tOpaque:\nApparent Propulsion:\tReflective:\n\nPlease use the field below to describe the contact and any interaction in your own words with as much detail as possible. Please be sure to include any detail not included in questions above.\n\nContact at 14:18:39Z to 14:19:52Z on 15OCT2020. MGRS location 40Q BD 63 1.4a 19 1.4a (estimated lat/long 1.4a . While at 19,073 HAT over the Gulf of Aden we tracked a round, cold object in IR traveling 319 degrees at 20 mph. It made a few abrupt directional changes during the 1 minute contact. Our sensor was aimed -50 degrees below our altitude with a slant range of 4.06NM and ground range of 4.78KM. The IR sensor was set to black hot and the object in question was a bright white.\n\n(b)(6)\n\nDon't use the purple \"submit\" button! Save this form with filename \"Date_Squadron_RF.pdf\" and email it to (b)(6) (Also in the global). For troubleshooting, call (b)(6)\n\nThank you for your time. Please ensure all display tapes are ripped for the entire time of interaction and saved as a .wmv (Example: 4 May VFA-106 HUD.wmv). Squadron intel personnel shall upload those files to the repository located at this link.\n(b)(6)\n\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0038 to MDR 26-0046 Approved for Release to AARO 03/27/26 000001"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECTION 10\nSERIALS 448-\n62-\nHQ-83894\nSec. 10\nSerials 448-\n62-HQ-83894-10\nBUREAU\nINVESTIGATION\nPICKETT STREET,\nUSE CARE IN HANDLING THIS FILE\nTransfer-Call 3421\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 10 448 OPEN\n8/11/1274176\nRRP003IXGI\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"September 6, 1966\n62-83894-448\nMrs. Levi J. Dow\nGoffstown, New Hampshire 03045\nFLORENCE C.\nDear Mrs. Dow:\nYour letter of August 31st, with enclosures, has been received and I appreciate the interest which prompted you to write.\nIn response to your inquiry, this Bureau is strictly an investigative agency of the Federal Government and, as such, neither makes evaluations nor draws conclusions as to the character or integrity of any organization, publication or individual. I am sorry I cannot be of assistance to you; however, you may be sure your communication will be made a matter of record.\nSincerely yours,\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nNOTE: Bufiles contain no record of correspondent or Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc.\nED:jeg (3)\nTolson\nDeLoach\nMohr\nWick\nCasper\nCallahan\nConrad\nFelt\nGale\nRosen\nSullivan\nTavel\nTrotter\nTele. Room\nHolmes\nGandy\n70 SEP 16 1966\n56 SEP 1966"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"September 6, 1966\nMrs. Levi J. Dow\nGoffstown, New Hampshire 03045\nDear Mrs. Dow:\nYour letter of August 31st, with enclosures, has been received and I appreciate the interest which prompted you to write.\nIn response to your inquiry, this Bureau is strictly an investigative agency of the Federal Government and, as such, neither makes evaluations nor draws conclusions as to the character or integrity of any organization, publication or individual. I am sorry I cannot be of assistance to you; however, you may be sure your communication will be made a matter of record.\nSincerely yours,\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nNOTE: Bufiles contain no record of correspondent or Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc.\nED:jeg (3)\nREC'D DE LOACH\nFBI\nSEP 7 2 16 PM '66\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nFBI\nSEP 6 2 59 PM '66\nSEP 6 11 26 AM '66\nSEP 7 11 56 AM '66\n70 SEP 16 1966\n56 SEP 11 1966"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE COPY\nAugust 31, 1966\nJ. E. Hoover, F.B.I. Director\nWash. D. C.\nDear Sir:\nI am a member of \"Nicap\" and am very much interested in U. F. O. (Flying Saucers)\nSeveral weeks ago a fellow employee received a letter (business) from Arizona with a stamp on the back (see enclosed)\nBeing interested in U. F. O's I asked for the stamp & sent $3.00 for the 12 issues of AFSCA.\nHaving received & read my first issue I feel it isn't just what it appears on the surface. I can't say just why, but with my limited idea of how communists operate it strikes me it is backed by them.\nMy reason for writing this is that I consider myself a true American, I am told my ancestors go back to a Gr Gr Gr Grandmother who was an Indian Squaw & I'm proud of it. If, by writing for this AFSCA Report, my name could in anyway be aligned with the communist party, I would like to know if there is any way I can get things straightened out.\nI may be all wrong about my interpretation of this report but I'd like to be sure since I expect I will get the other issues as they come up.\nI will be 63 yrs old in a few days. My husband passed away 4-30-65 I have worked as Mgr of Reins Dept for the N. H. Ins Co in Manchester N. H 44 years this month\nMrs. Levi J. Dow\nGoffstown\nNew Hampshire 03045\nVery truly yours,\n(Mrs) Florence C. Dow\nSEP 8 1966"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 31, 1966\nJ. E. Hoover, F.B.I. Director\nWash. D.C.\nDear Sir:\nI am a member of \"Nicap\" and am very much interested in U.F.O. (Flying Saucers)\nSeveral weeks ago a fellow employee received a letter (business) from Arizona with a stamp on the back (see enclosed)\nBeing interested in U.F.O's I asked for the stamp & sent 3.00 for the 12 issues of AFSCA.\nHaving received & read my first issue I feel it isn't just what it appears on the surface. I can't say just why, but with my limited idea of how Communists operate it strikes me it is backed by them.\nMy reason for writing this is that I consider myself a true American, I am told my ancestors go back to a Gr Gr Gr Grandmother who was an Indian Squaw & I'm proud of it. If, by writing for this AFSCA Report, my name could in anyway be aligned with the Communist party, I would like to know if there is any way I can get things straightened out.\nI may be all wrong about my interpretation of this report but did like to be sure since I expect I will get the other issues as they come up.\nENCLOSURE\nI will be 63 yrs old in a few days.\nMy husband passed away 4-30-65\nI have worked as Mgr of Reins Dept for the N.H. Ins Co in Manchester N.H. 44 years this month\nVery truly yours,\n(Mrs) Florence C. Dow\nCORRESPONDENCE\nMRS Levi J. Dow\nGoffstown\nNew Hampshire 03045\nSEP 1 3 53 PM '66\nFBI\nRECD-COMM & FOURS"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - SC hw 9/2/66\nack: BD/jeg 9/6/66\n\"ENCLOSURE ATTACHED\""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-448"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFSCA's (Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America)\n3rd National\nFLYING SAUCER CONVENTION\nSAUCER\n* MOVIES\n* SLIDES\n* EXHIBITS\n* BOOKS\n* LITERATURE\nAt The Beautiful, New CENTENNIAL COLISEUM (4590 S. Virginia St.)\nREGISTER - 9 A.M. - $2.00 per day\nReno, Nevada - July 8,9,10, 1966\nProgram: 10 A.M. to 11 P.M.\nSPEAKERS ARE: Wayne S. Aho, Carl A. Anderson, Orfeo Angelucci, Michael \"X\" Barton, Wesley Bateman, Marianne Francis, Dr. Daniel W. Fry, Calvin C. Girvin, Gabriel Green, Dr. George King, Hanno Mayberry, Howard Menger, Laura Mundo, Mel Noel, Sidney Padrick, Chief Standing Horse, Dr. Frank E. Stranges, Mollie Thompson, Hope Troxell, George W. Van Tassel, Hal Wilcox.\nHEAR: Amazing experiences with spacecraft from other planets and their occupants by the greatest assembly of contactee-speakers since our Los Angeles convention in 1959 at the Statler-Hilton.\nSEE: Startling new photographic evidence - the biggest collection of Flying Saucer photos on display in the history of the saucer movement. Actual color movies and new still photos of Flying Saucers.\nMEET: IN PERSON, PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD ACTUAL CONTACTS WITH SPACESHIPS AND THEIR CREWS FROM OTHER WORLDS.\nLEARN: About this important subject which is so vital to the welfare and survival of humanity in our times.\nATTEND: AFSCA's 3rd National Convention. You'll be glad you did! Fill out the Advance Registration form below. Do it Now!\nFor Motel & Hotel room information, write to: The Greater Reno Chamber of Commerce P.O. Box 2109; Reno, Nevada\nAFSCA 3rd NATIONAL CONVENTION ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM\nTo: AFSCA Headquarters; 2004 N. Hoover St., Los Angeles, Calif. 90027. Phone: 662-4404.\nYes, count me in! I don't want to miss joining with you at this important convention and helping to support this vital movement. Here is my $________. Please send me Advance Reservation tickets ($5.00 for the 3 days, or $2.00 per day). IMPORTANT: I am also enclosing a stamped, self-addressed envelope for the return of my tickets. ADVANCE REGISTRATIONS must be received at AFSCA Headquarters no later than JUNE 30th!!!\nName ____ Street ____\nCity ____ State ____ Zip Code ____"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SPECIAL AFSCA CONVENTION MESSAGE\nBRIGHT WORLD IN HANDS OF SAUCER MOVEMENT\n(Editor's Note: This special message was received from Master Kalen-Li Retan (head of the planet Korendor, about 400 light years distant) on May 4, 1966 via special directional short-wave radio by Bob Renaud, the young electronic-technician whose remarkable story we printed in issues #18, 19, 20, 21, and 22, and which will be continued in our next issue.)\nSince Bob's initial radio contact in 1961, he has talked with the crew of a spacecraft as he watched them on his special TV screen in his home - and eventually met his contacts in-person; visited their undersea and underground bases on our planet; was taken aboard many of their spaceships; and was actually allowed to pilot two of their small scout craft - one on a short solo flight.)\n\"Kalo (Hello), friends. We will get directly to the point of our message to you. Frankly, we are appalled at the state of Earth at present. Despite our constant warnings and even our actual intervention in some instances, the condition upon your planet grows steadily worse.\nOne subject on everyone's lips these days is Vietnam. From a little civil war, it has grown steadily and inexorably into a full scale conflict between the world's three major powers: the United States, the Soviet Union, and Communist China.\nMany influential people have used the approach of patriotism and love of God and Country to twist decent human feelings into dangerous channels of thought and action. With their charges of treason and sympathy with the enemy, they have aroused a good portion of the populace to a state of fear, distrust, and hatred of those who seek peace and love. Unfortunately, because some unconventional individuals have been associated with the peace movement, that entire operation has been seriously hindered.\nYour government is a military puppet, a mere parrot of the monstrosity that is the Military-Industrial complex. Your senators, except for a few, are robots, speaking what they are told to say.\nYour President is, unfortunately, a pawn of their needs and demands. We have contacted him several times concerning the state of affairs, and he has said that he could do nothing to change them, for if he were to speak out against the Asian conflict, he would be removed. This is what happened to the late Mr. Kennedy who, in his great humanitarianism, was reluctant to sacrifice his ideals and his visions for the sake of the Military Industrial octopus. He paid the supreme penalty for his efforts in behalf of humanity.\nMake no mistake. Your government is not in the White House or the Congress. IT IS IN THE PENTAGON, AND IN THE HEADQUARTERS OF THE VAST \"DEFENSE\"-ORIENTED INDUSTRIES. It is THEY, not the President or the Congressmen, who run the United States. The facade government is merely to allay undue alarm or suspicion of the people.\nExamine another aspect of the Asian war, the ECONOMIC side. Do you recall that, in the stock reports just recently, the Dow-Jones average dropped sharply BECAUSE OF A RUMOR THAT NORTH VIETNAM HAD MADE A PEACE BID? Does the staggering implication of this news evade you? Stock prices suffering a heavy loss because of a rumor that peace might come to pass!\nThis thought is most distressing. Your economy relies so heavily upon war and destruction, that if it were to stop, THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY WOULD SUFFER A MASSIVE DEPRESSION! Your money system would collapse like a house of cards. Millions would be unemployed, sick, hungry and homeless. Tremendous industrial complexes would close their doors.\nThe utterly appalling fact is this: WAR IS PROFITABLE. Highly so! Every major conflict has been accompanied by a strong peak in your monetary prosperity. Peace has usually been economically painful!\nAfter World War I, the nation coasted for a while upon the fat put on during the boom of the war years. In 1929, the bottom fell out. After the Korean War, in the 1950's came another recession. What comes after Vietnam? No one knows, and no one wants to find out. The war in Vietnam is bringing an unheard-of degree of affluence in the United States. Why kill a good thing by ending the war? The philosophy, in essence, is this: It is economically expedient to send military forces to Vietnam and elsewhere in Asia in order to wage war, because in doing so, the United States' economy is bolstered and maintained at a high level of prosperity; human life is secondary to the preservation of economic well-being!\nIt is thus evident that, unless a drastic change is made in the structure of your economy, war will never end because the Military-Industrial complex WON'T LET IT!\nMany of you fear Communism. Where did that fear come from, I ask you? From within yourself? NO! It was brainwashed into you by the Military-Industrial complex. Who controls all your news media? The government and the advertisers. Who, then, is in a position to dictate what shall be printed?\nThe Military-Industrial complex, by opinion-control through the use of psycho-politics (brainwashing by controlled news management).\nConsider this: In order to survive, a commercial medium, such as a newspaper or magazine, requires a vast amount of advertising revenue. The mere subscription fees will not cover the costs. Thus, they depend for their continued existence upon money paid by advertisers. Suppose, then, that the editor of a certain newspaper decides that he is opposed to the Vietnam policy, and says so in his paper. The advertisers simply say to the editor, \"Either you toe the mark and print what we want, or we'll withdraw our advertising.\"\nSuch pressures are a fact of life. The newsmen are torn between their higher devotion to Truth, and also to the lower level of their physical needs. Rather than jeopardize their security and their futures they, of course, submit meekly to power. Their actions are fully understandable, and we do not hold them responsible.\nWe throw the blame directly on the Military-Industrial complex which, by its underhanded dealing, threats of force, and economic pressure and retaliation, has crushed the free American journalism and turned it from a dynamic motivating force in American life into a weak-willed, subservient mouthpiece for the power-masters. We blame them for the death of journalistic freedom and individuality!\nOne more comment on this topic: May I say that a better economic system is already known to the leaders of the Flying Saucer Movement. It is the system known as Universal Economics. As we have said over and over before, it is the non-money economic system which MUST be applied on your planet before you can start to resolve most of your major problems and thus begin to establish a highly-advanced, non-destructive state of existence on Earth, such as we of more advanced planets have enjoyed for so long. INVESTIGATE THIS SYSTEM to evaluate it for its merit - then ACT to apply it! YOUR VERY SURVIVAL AS A CIVILIZATION MAY DEPEND UPON IT!\nPerhaps this is an opportune time to clarify a few questions which have been asked about us.\nDo we of Korendor work with the local planets in our operations? Yes, we do cooperate with them a great deal. However, our work on Earth is relatively independent of the local planets. We have many times overstepped what is considered to be the limit of interference upheld by Venus, Mars, and other planets. This has caused a good deal of debate between them and us. Each time we have pointed out that we of Korendor are basically pragmatic in nature. Although we do respect the laws of self-destiny, we feel also that where stepping in is required to prevent disaster, it is our right and our duty to do so.\nWe have interfered in such places as the United States, China, Russia, and on a large scale in Vietnam. This has caused no end of consternation in the local Tribunal of Planets. We are sympathetic to their viewpoint, but we do feel that their policy is limited in its capacity to achieve the desired goals. It is our opinion that one cannot stand on the sidelines and achieve any noticeable results.\nAs I have said before, we have infiltrated your planet. We are directly involved in Earth's life. You might say that you have been invaded - a strong way of phrasing it, to be sure, but nonetheless factual, since we walk and work amongst you daily!\nWe have been asked about our physical appearance. We are humanoid, indistinguishable from yourselves, except that in our natural form we average three to four feet in height. Every other dimension is proportionately scaled, so that photographs of us would not reveal our origin in any way.\nWe are able to increase our height while on Earth through a technical process related to teleportation. It is concerned with recording the atomic and molecular structures of our bodies, and then reproducing them identically on a larger scale. Differences in our internal structure are adjusted by the computer which controls the reproducer.\nOur most common skin color is a little darker than yours, although we have other skin colors which vary as yours do all over the Earth. Usually, however, we would look \"tan\" to you. We are NOT green, blue, or heliotrope, as has been suggested!\nConcerning our language, we generally use one of two tongues and we are fairly familiar with a third. On Korendor itself we speak the native language, Korendian. It is similar in many ways to your own languages since it, like yours, was originally derived from Galingua, one of the two universal tongues. The other is Solex Mal, which is more familiar to you, since it is used by your local Solar System planets. It is seldom heard now in our sector of space, as Galingua has replaced it almost completely.\nUnlike your own, however, the Korendian-Galinguan speech is very rhythmic, and has few sibilant sounds, such as \"s\" or \"t\". Some of the sharper sounds like \"c\" and \"k\" are minimized. It is a beautiful language which is very musical and pleasant to hear.\nPerhaps you would be surprised to learn that ancient Latin was liberally taken from Galingua. There are many similarities in the two languages. Even modern English has roots on other worlds!\nIn concluding my message to you, may I say - people of Earth: open up your minds and your hearts to the world around you. There is so much to be learned, so much to be discovered. Don't waste precious hours and days in bigotry and ignorance, and in senseless fighting and killing. To do so is truly a crime against nature and humanity.\nAt this stage where you have the very stars almost in your grasp, how irrational and barbaric it is to spend futile hours warring with your brothers. As an old saying on your world puts it: \"As you make your bed, so shall you lie in it.\" The decision does not seem difficult. Here are the alternatives: A world living in harmony, justice, security and abundance for all, or a world continuing to reap the bloody harvests that grow from the seeds of hatred and mistrust. If left to their own devices, the majority of mankind will forge onward to a destiny of destruction and annihilation, oblivious to the danger in their actions. They are short-sighted; they care little for the future.\nIt is you New Age people, dedicated to the welfare of all mankind, and having the vision and understanding of the ways to build the better world of tomorrow, who must lead the way. You have the future in YOUR hands, if you will but shoulder your responsibilities. The Flying Saucer Movement, as you call it, belongs to you. Support it in every way possible. Help it to grow into an influential throughout your world. Go out into the world and guide the misguided, find the lost, and recover the strays. We are behind you all the way. As we have said many times before, we will take two steps for every one that you take to help yourselves.\nThe time has come for nations to \"bury the hatchet\", to clasp hands, and plunge into the future together - in cooperation and toward mutual goals.\nLook to the heavens and realize that your destiny is not in bleak atomic desolation, but in the magnificent greatness that you can achieve if you will but work for it. Choose the right path and you will soon qualify to join with us in our journeys amongst the stars.\nVa i Luce (Go in Light).\" Kalen-Li Retan 3"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCER NEWS IN BRIEF\nCOMING 1966 FLYING SAUCER CONVENTIONS\nJULY 8, 9, 10: AFSCA's 3rd National Convention, Centennial Coliseum, Reno, Nev. (See details on back)\nJULY 15, 16, 17: WAYNE AHO sponsors the Northwest's 5th Annual Interplanetary Age Convention. Lectures, exhibits and New Age topics. Advance registrations - $1.00 per day for adults, 50c for students. Write to: Mrs. Lorena Vogt; 815 N.E. 110th; Seattle, Wash. Phone: Emerson 3-0956.\nAUGUST 6 thru 14th: DR. NEVA DELL HUNTER'S 12th Annual Quimby Conference of Translation. Lectures and discussions on New Age topics, including the stars, science and metaphysics. In lovely scenic country at a beautiful, modern motor-hotel. $2.50 per day, attendance. Information from: Quimby Center; P.O. Box 453; Alamogordo, N.M.\nAUGUST 19,20,21: SPACE RESEARCH, Inc.'s Second Annual Convention, at the North Branch YMCA in Spokane, Washington. Scenic location near the Spokane River. Indoor and outdoor convention activities. For information, write to: Space Research Inc., No. 6815 Julia, Spokane, Wash.\nOCTOBER 22,23: GEORGE VAN TASSEL'S 13th Annual Spacecraft Convention at Giant Rock, Calif. in the desert 17 miles north of Yucca Valley. Bring your own camping equipment and enjoy the outing.\nOCTOBER 29,30: 10th ANNUAL NORTHERN CALIFORNIA SPACECRAFT CONVENTION, Claremont Hotel, Berkeley, Calif. Info: Angela Kilsby; 1265 Montgomery Blvd.; San Francisco, Calif. 94127.\nOUR NEW NAME: Our magazine, formerly called \"UFO International\", has now become \"Flying Saucers International\", which we feel to be a more appropriate title, since Flying Saucers are no longer Unidentified Flying Objects as far as we are concerned. Flying Saucers have become a serious issue with thinking people all over the world. We believe that most of the objects which have been sighted have been of extraterrestrial origin, controlled by intelligent beings who, in form, are very much like us. Therefore, we hope you will understand our reasons for changing titles, and that you will continue to enjoy reading our publication under its new banner.\nDR. RAYMOND BERNARD, founder of the Biosophical Society of Santa Caterina, Brazil, passed away on Sept. 10, 1965. He was the author of \"The Hollow Earth\" and several other books concerned with the hollow earth theory.\nMARIA ELLIOTT, contactee, psychic and founder of Maria Creative Womanhood Foundation, was a recent guest on the Bob Grant Radio Show, and the Pamela Mason TV Show. Glamorous Maria now has her own program every Tuesday afternoon at 2:30 p.m. on KTYM radio. She may be seen in person every Wed. evening at Holland House Restaurant, 8:00 p.m. in the downstairs meeting room. An interesting program may be heard on New Age Topics, and free readings are given. For more information about Maria's appearances, classes, etc., phone 657-1631, or write: Dr. Maria Elliott; 1543 Sunset Plaza Drive; Los Angeles, Calif. 90069.\nDR. GEORGE KING, founder of the Aetherius Society, was host at the official opening of the Society's new headquarters at 6202 Afton Place; Los Angeles, Calif. 90028; on March 5, 1966. After the program Dr. King personally escorted us around the attractive quarters. He also reported that a high Space Being in physical form had visited there recently for an hour and fifteen minutes and, after walking around the premises, left his blessing on the Aetherius Society and its work. For further information call 465-9652, or write to the above address.\nDELLA LARSON, who for over a decade was the guiding light and main instigator of Flying Saucer meetings and activities in the San Francisco Bay Area, passed away on October 25, 1965. She was 70 years old. She will be remembered for her energetic and enthusiastic dedication to the goals of the Flying Saucer cause, as well as for the highly successful annual Northern California Space Craft Conventions which she organized for nine years. (Della, we salute you!)\nMAX MILLER, former publisher of the now-defunct \"Saucers\" magazine, and author of \"Flying Saucers: Fact or Fiction\" (now out of print), has a new role. He is now editor-publisher of \"Real\" magazine which may be found on the newstands for 50c. The August '66 issue devotes about half of its space to the Flying Saucer subject and will be well worth your investigation.\nWILLIE MILLER, one of the early researchers in the Flying Saucer Movement, passed away on March 5, 1966. He was known for his fine channel contacts with several Space Beings, including Monka of Mars. He also was the co-author - with his wife, Evelyn - of the book \"We of the New Dimension.\" Although he was a native of Missouri he had, in recent years, been a resident of Los Angeles and of Morongo Valley, Calif. (Good journey, Will!)\nHOPE TROXELL, founder of the School of Thought, now situated in Independence, Calif. (P.O. Box 458), reported recently that the neighboring towns of Bishop and Lone Pine had partial blackouts during an evening channel (teltpathic) session she was having with the Space Brothers. The lights in Independence went out completely for several minutes by a gradual fade-out, and then came on again in the same manner. During this time, the Space Being speaking through Hope said to those present: \"Be not afraid. We are guardians of the space. Protection will be given to those in the area.\"\nHAL WILCOX made a fine guest appearance on the Joe Pyne TV Show, April 30, 1966. Hal passed the lie-detector test with flying colors and conducted himself with dignity and fortitude, which isn't always easy on the Joe Pyne Show. During the test, Hal stated that he had taken a saucer ride to visit the second planet from the star, Alpha Centauri.\nM.I.N.D. stands for Mental Investigations of New Dimensions, an organization recently formed by Wesley and JoNell Bateman. Their activities include meetings, courses and public appearances. They have demonstrated on several occasions for groups of up to 20 people, their ability to telepathically direct the movements of visable spacecraft overhead. Write: M.I.N.D.; 4916 Franklin Ave.; Hollywood, California 90027. Phone: 661-1731.\nHELEN & GABRIEL GREEN contributed their bit to the education of nearly 300,000 young people to the saucer subject at the Teen-Age Fair, April 1 thru 10 at the Hollywood Palladium, where AFSCA had a booth to exhibit saucer photos, show slides, and to disseminate information. We handed out over 13,000 brochures and saucer photo post cards, and talked ourselves hoarse answering questions for 12 hours each day. Gabriel also made over a dozen radio and TV appearances and interviews during the Fair.\nWe also had another booth at the National Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition at the Pan Pacific Auditorium, May 17 thru 22. Yes, we've been busy!\nNEW BOOKS NOW AVAILABLE FROM AFSCA: (Price includes 15c mailing charge. California residents also add 4c sales tax.)\n1. COUNCIL OF SEVEN LIGHTS by George Van Tassel, now reprinted - $3.65.\n2. THE ADVENT OF THE COSMIC VIEWPOINT by Bryant Reeve - $6.15.\n3. FLYING SAUCERS THROUGH THE AGES by Paul Thomas - $4.15.\n4. OTHER TONGUES, OTHER FLESH by George Hunt Williamson, now reprinted - $6.10.\n5. SECRET OF THE ANDES by Brother Philip - $4.\n6. FLYING SAUCERS AND THE THREE MEN by Albert K. Bender - $4.15.\n7. FLYING SAUCERS - SERIOUS BUSINESS by Frank Edwards - $6.10.\n8. INCIDENT AT EXETER by John G. Fuller - $6.10.\n9. THE HOLLOW EARTH by Dr. Raymond Bernard, now available again in soft cover for $3.15.\nPAST CONVENTIONS & SAUCER ACTIVITIES: FEBRUARY 5,6, 1966: Dr. Frank E. Stranges' 4th Annual UFO Space and Science Convention was held at the Blarney Castle Inn Annex in Los Angeles. JUNE 4,5,6, 1966: Dr. Daniel W. Fry's Man in Space Symposium took place at Dunsmuir, near Mt. Shasta in Northern California. JUNE 25,26,27, 1966: Buck Nelson's 10th Annual Spacecraft Convention was held at Buck's Mountain View Ranch; Route 1, Box 236; Mountain View, Mo.\nBACK ISSUES of UFO INTERNATIONAL are now selling 11 issues for $3.00, while they last (issue #11 is now out of print). There is much timeless and valuable information available in these magazines.\nOUT OF PRINT: 1. FLYING SAUCERS: TOP SECRET by Major Donald E. Keyhoe is now out of print, although it is listed in our new brochure. (Some saucer books have occasionally gone out of print without notice.)\n2. BACK ISSUES #6 and 11 are now out of print. We still have only a few copies left of #9 which we have priced at $1.00 each in an effort to preserve them for serious researchers and collectors. Please do not order these items, or any other materials which we do not advertise.\nPRICE CHANGE: The price has gone up on two of the better known books in the saucer field, which we must now order from England: 1. THE SKY PEOPLE by Brinsley le Poer Trench, was $4.65. It is now $5.10, postpaid. 2. ROAD IN THE SKY by George Hunt Williamson, was $4.15. It is now $5.10, postpaid. California residents please add 4c tax.\n\"UFO!\" ISSUE #23 CORRECTIONS: Page 4, line 3: the date should be April 24, 1964, instead of 1965. On page 4, line 1 of the 7th paragraph, insert \"later, via telepathy\" after \"They told him ---.\"\nSEATTLE, WASHINGTON area residents please note: AFSCA Unit #25 meets every 4th Friday at the Seattle Public Library, Room 325 at 7:30 P.M. under the capable direction of Mr. Leverett G. Tallman. Our meeting is free, and all who are interested in the Flying Saucer subject are invited to come to listen and to participate in the discussion.\nZIP CODES ARE IMPORTANT: If the address label on this magazine does not have your zip code number on it, please notify us as to what your number is. If you don't know your number, call your local Post Office and then let us know. Thanks!\nAFSCA BROCHURES AND SAUCER-PHOTO POST CARDS, sent to friends and acquaintances, are a good way to help spread the word about Flying Saucers. Brochures are 1c each (this just about pays the postage to mail them to you). Saucer post cards are 50 for $1.00.\nWHEN WRITING AFSCA, if you wish a personal reply to a specific inquiry, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed envelope. No replies can otherwise be sent. General information may be obtained via our brochures and magazines. We are sorry that we cannot have a lengthy correspondence with all the hundreds of persons who would like us to do so, but unfortunately we have neither the time nor the staff for it - and our mail has been greatly increased in the last few months.\nSAUCER NEWS CLIPPINGS: Your response has been wonderful! We've received so many clippings from you helpful people that we simply hadn't enough space to print all your individual names and cities. So we say a big and sincere THANKS to all of you. And please do keep 'em coming! (One reminder: please DON'T write on or near the clippings.)\nWEDDING BELLS rang on Saturday, June 4, 1966 for contactee Elary J. Willsie and Sophia Martinez Olivares of Mexico City. The ceremony took place at Los Angeles, California. Among those present were Sophia's parents and her younger sister, all of Mexico City; Mrs. Maud Willsie, mother of the groom; and your editor, who was also official photographer for the occasion. Mr. and Mrs. Willsie will live in Los Angeles. Congratulations and best wishes, Elary and Sophia!\nMEL NOEL, former Air Force Lieutenant and fighter pilot, is fast becoming very well known for his lectures on his amazing experiences with Flying Saucers while on active duty in the service. He has been speaking to capacity crowds wherever he goes. On Thursday, June 23, 1966, the personable Mr. Noel spoke to a standing-room only crowd at the Aeronautical Sciences Building on Beverly Blvd. in West Los Angeles. We hear that he is booked to speak at 57 colleges across the nation! Recently he appeared on the Louis Lomax TV Show, and has been heard on many radio shows. He leaves shortly for Mexico City, where he has been invited by an official government group to speak. He has been promised some interesting experiences by a local contactee there, and we look forward to hearing his report on his return! Good work, Mel, and good luck!\nSID PADRICK, contactee from Watsonville, Calif., who spent two hours aboard a space craft, was recently in Los Angeles when he was guest speaker at the regular monthly meeting of the Inglewood Unit of Understanding on Saturday, June 25, 1966. Meetings are held on the 4th Saturday of every month at the Inglewood Business and Professional Woman's Club; 803 Java St., Inglewood, at 8:00 P.M. Donation is $1.00. Information: Mrs. Roberta T. Forrester, Program Chairman; P.O. Box 146; Inglewood, Calif. 90306. Phone: 677-5214. Also, Mr. and Mrs. Lee Yates. Phone: 293-4743.\nNEW AFSCA UNITS:\n45. AFSCA Unit #45; Everett, Washington; Ray and Jean Sebring, Co-Directors; 1032 S.W. 126th St.; Seattle, Wash. 98146.\n46. AFSCA Unit #46; Ben Blazs, Director; 3057 Electric; Lincoln Park, Mich. 48146.\nSeveral other new AFSCA Units have been formed and will be listed in the next issue (#25). Persons interested in forming AFSCA Units in their cities should contact AFSCA Headquarters for information.\n15"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THIRD NATIONAL CONVENTION RENO, NEVADA CENTENNIAL COLISEUM JULY 8,9,10,1966 Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America. FRIDAY, JULY 8, 1966 SATURDAY, JULY 9, 1966 SUNDAY, JULY 10, 1966 REGISTRATION ($2.00 per day). Exhibits, books, & literature on display. INVOCATION: Dr. Frank E. Stranges. Keynote Address: GABRIEL GREEN, Some Interesting Things Happening. WAYNE AHO, Flying Saucer Council Meeting. HOPE TROXELL, Evolved Man of the Stars. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, contact: AFSCA HEADQUARTERS; 2004 N. Hoover St.; Los Angeles, California 90027. Phone: 662-4404."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Would You Believe--'Saucer' Visits Wichita? By FRAN KENTLING Beacon Staff Writer. UFO Sighting Reported Here. Not a Star -- Not an Aircraft, Says Louis S. Smith Family of North Bend. Boy Is Burned By 'Flying Ship'. 'Mysterious UFO' Escorts Burns Plane. Brilliantly Lighted Police Follow 5 Saucers. Saucer Blast? Six Teens Tell of 'Chase'. AFSCA CONVENTION SPEAKERS. 1. WAYNE S. AHO; The New Age Foundation, Inc.; 8 Smith St.; Seattle, Wash. 98109. 2. CARL A. ANDERSON. 3. ORFEO ANGELUCCI. 4. MICHAEL 'X' BARTON. 5. WESLEY BATEMAN. 6. MARIANNE FRANCIS. 7. DR. DANIEL W. FRY. 8. CALVIN C. GIRVIN. 9. GABRIEL GREEN. 10. DR. GEORGE KING. 11. JOHANNES 'HANNO' MAYBERRY. 12. HOWARD MENGER. 13. LAURA MUNDO. 14. SIDNEY PADRICK. 15. CHIEF FRANK B. STANDING HORSE. 16. DR. FRANK E. STRANGES. 17. MOLLIE THOMPSON. 18. HOPE TROXELL. 19. GEORGE VAN TASSEL. 20. HAL WILCOX. 21. SPACE AGE SONGS by Mollie Thompson. There's a cockeyed feeling in the world today. Take a look at this world of ours."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE WALL STREET JOURNAL Monday, December 13, 1965. New 'Fireball' Raises An Old Question: Do Flying Saucers Exist? Californian, Who 'Talks' to Men From the Stars, Says 'Yes'; Scientists Assail Air Force. By ELLIOT CARLSON. NEW SAUCER PHOTOS: These remarkable photos of Flying Saucers were taken by Dr. Daniel W. Fry, President of Understanding, Inc., of P.O. Box 76, Merlin, Oregon 97532. London, Ontario Free Press 3-26-66. 100 Watch UFO. Disc-Like Object Hovers, Rises For Two Hours East of Kettle Point. Hong Kong China Mail. Flying saucers mystery. 2-3-66. UN Watch For Saucers Urged. STRANGE OBJECT OVER MT. WILSON. Los Angeles Herald-Examiner, Thursday, April 21, 1966."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Oakland Tribune. Friday, March 25, 1966. World Flying Saucer Believers Convene. 2 South African Policemen Report Sighting of 'Saucer'. It'll be Long Before 'Saucer' Is Forgotten. Flying Saucers Are Poppin' Up All Over. Mystery Objects in Sky. One Shot By Man In Maine. Airliner Detours To Chase U.F.O. Ohio Police Trail UFO 86 Miles. Air Force UFO report refuted. Flying saucer' pics on show. 40 See 'Flying Saucer'. Asks Probe of Flying Saucers. Michigan UFO Lands In Swamp. Who's in All Those Saucers? Head Saucer Believes Martians Are Watching Us. Police Kept Busy. Spotters Jam Up-County Roads for UFO Glimpse. Pc REPORTS 'SAW 6 FLYING SAUCERS'. Brewer Welcomes UFOs. Landing Sites Available."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Civil Defense Director Watches 'Flying Saucer'. Oakland Tribune. Tuesday, March 22, 1966. Eerie 1896 Sighting. 87 Coeds Observe 'Object'. ENCOUNTER WITH A SPACE SHIP. 'I Know What I Saw': Egg-Shaped Craft. More Than 5 Million People Say They Saw Flying Saucers. Gallup Poll. Sheriff Aides Chase UFO; Were 'Close'. UFO Plays Tag With Deputies in 85-Mile Chase. Mysterious Sky Objects Have Texans in Dither. Two In County Claim They Saw 'Cloking' UFO. The Ventura County (Calif.) Star-Free Press."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCERS ARE REAL!\n\nREAD \"AFSCA WORLD REPORT\"\n12 ISSUES - $3.00\n\nAMALGAMATED FLYING SAUCER CLUBS of AMERICA\nGabriel Green, Pres., 2004 N. Hoover St., Los Angeles, Calif."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894- 448"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM : SAC, LOS ANGELES (100-24442-40/)\nDATE: 10/3/66\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS INTERNATIONAL, OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMALGAMATED FLYING SAUCER CLUBS OF AMERICA, INC. IS - MISCELLANEOUS\n\nO FLYING SAUCERS\n\nThe Philadelphia Division by letter dated 9/22/66, furnished the Los Angeles Division with Issue No. 24 dated July, 1966, entitled \"FLYING SAUCERS INTERNATIONAL\", which is the official journal of the Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc. The Philadelphia Division received the magazine from Mr. JARVIS H. COOPER, IRS, 401 North Broad Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on 9/19/66. Mr. COOPER stated he subscribed to the magazine because his son had exhibited an interest in flying saucers and outer space. He said that on pages 2 and 3 of Issue No. 24 was an article which he believed expounded the Communist Party (CP) line.\n\nFor the information of the Bureau, the International Headquarters of the Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc. is located at 2004 North Hoover Street, Los Angeles, California. The article, on pages 2 and 3, were allegedly written by Master KALEN-LI RETAN, Head of the plant KORENDOR, which was received on 5/4/66 by special directional short-wave radio by BOB RENAUD.\n\nThe indices of the Los Angeles Division contain no information identifiable with RENAUD, and no investigation has ever been conducted on captioned organization.\n\nNo further action is contemplated in this matter by the Los Angeles Office, UACB.\n\nThe foregoing is furnished to the Bureau for information.\n\n2 - Bureau (RM)(ENCLOSURE)\n1 - Los Angeles\nJST:gcw\n(3)\n\nREC-6 62-83894-449\nEX-114\n4 OCT 5 1966\nCRIME RESEARCH\n61 OCT 13 1966"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI DATE: 10/3/66\n\nSAC, LOS ANGELES (100-24442-40/)\n\nFLYING SAUCERS INTERNATIONAL, OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMALGAMATED FLYING SAUCER CLUBS OF AMERICA, INC. IS - MISCELLANEOUS\n\nThe Philadelphia Division by letter dated 9/22/66, furnished the Los Angeles Division with Issue No. 24 dated July, 1966, entitled \"FLYING SAUCERS INTERNATIONAL\", which is the official journal of the Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc. The Philadelphia Division received the magazine from Mr. JARVIS H. COOPER, IRS, 401 North Broad Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on 9/19/66. Mr. COOPER stated he subscribed to the magazine because his son had exhibited an interest in flying saucers and outer space. He said that on pages 2 and 3 of Issue No. 24 was an article which he believed expounded the Communist Party (CP) line.\n\nFor the information of the Bureau, the International Headquarters of the Amalgamated Flying Saucer Clubs of America, Inc. is located at 2004 North Hoover Street, Los Angeles, California. The article, on pages 2 and 3, were allegedly written by Master KALEN-LI RETAN, Head of the plane KORENDOR, which was received on 5/4/66 by special directional short-wave radio by BOB RENAUD.\n\nThe indices of the Los Angeles Division contain no information identifiable with RENAUD, and no investigation has ever been conducted on captioned organization.\n\nNo further action is contemplated in this matter by the Los Angeles Office, UACB.\n\nThe foregoing is furnished to the Bureau for information.\n\nFBI - JUSTICE\nREC'D - SULLIVAN\nOCT 5 3 25 PM '66\nOCT 5 2 56 PM '66\nOCT 5 1 26 PM '66\nMR. JONES\nOCT 6 1966\nFBI RECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC-65 62-83894-450\nEX-113\n\nOctober 17, 1966\n\nMr. Paul L. Wright\n1331 Lucile Avenue, Southwest\nAtlanta, Georgia 30310\n\nDear Mr. Wright:\n\nYour letter of October 9th has been received.\n\nWith respect to your inquiry, matters pertaining to sightings of Unidentified Flying Objects or Flying Saucers are not within the jurisdiction of the FBI.\n\nInasmuch as your communication is of interest to another governmental agency, I am referring a copy of it to the Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, Washington, D. C. 20333.\n\nSincerely yours,\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nNOTE: We have had one outgoing to correspondent dated 3/10/66 in response to his letter regarding the TV program, \"The FBI.\" A copy of his letter is being sent by form to the Department of the Air Force.\n\nDFC:rlf (3)\n\nMAIL ROOM ☐ TELETYPE UNIT ☐\n\nRECD-READING ROOM FBI OCT 17 3 44 PM '66\nMAILED 11 OCT 17 1966 COMM-FBI"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"October 17 1966\n\nMr. Paul L. Wright\n1331 Lucile Avenue, Southwest\nAtlanta, Georgia 30310\n\nDear Mr. Wright:\n\nYour letter of October 9th has been received.\n\nWith respect to your inquiry, matters pertaining to sightings of Unidentified Flying Objects or Flying Saucers are not within the jurisdiction of the FBI.\n\nInasmuch as your communication is of interest to another government agency, we are referring a copy of it to the Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, Washington, D.C. 20330.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nNOTE: We have had one outgoing to correspondent dated 3/10/66 in response to his letter regarding the TV program, \"The Flying Saucers.\" A copy of his letter is being sent by form to the Department of the Air Force.\n\nBDC:ao\n(5)\n\nBUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nRECD-CORR & TCURS\nOCT 13 1966"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1331 Lucile Ave. S.W.\nAtlanta, Ga. 30310\nOct. 9,1966\n\nOffice of the Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States\nDept. of Justice\nWashington,D.C.20535\n\nSir:\n\nFor the past twenty years the United States has been having an increase in the problem of the U.F.O. or \"Flying Saucers\" and nothing is being done about it,as it should be.\n\nThe Air Force has maintained that the sightings have been gas,light,weather,etc. but by talking to some of the people that have seen U.F.O.'s I'm wondering if the Air Force isn't lying.\n\nI'm not the only one wondering this, for the people that I have talked to say that after the Michigan sightings and the others they would not report it to the Air Force if they did see a U.F.O..\n\nReports say that even F.B.I. Agents have seen U.F.O.'s and this has been denied by the Air Force.\n\nThe report recently about the police officer in Ohio or Penn. having serious family trouble as well as being ridiculed by people because of his sighting,along with a fellow police officer,of a U.F.O..\n\nI see by this that the faith in our Air Force is beginning to decline and if this is so then we may be putting our selves in the terrible position,as did Nazi Germany in the 1930's.\n\nI wish to know if your agents have seen any U.F.O's\n\nSincerely,\n\nPaul L. Wright"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office of the Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Dept. of Justice\nWashington, D.C. 20535\n\nOCT 13 10 52 AM '66\nFBI\nRECD-CORR & TCURS\n\nOCT 13 1966"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\n5010-114\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nDATE: 10/19/66\n\nFROM : SAC, SAN FRANCISCO (62-2927)\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nIS - X\n\nRe Bureau Bulletins No. 57 dated 10/1/47, and No. 38 dated 3/25/49, entitled \"FLYING DISCS.\"\n\nEnclosed are copies of an article entitled \"Armed Forces - Focus on UFO\", which was published in the This World supplement of the San Francisco Examiner & Chronicle, Sunday, October 16, 1966.\n\nThis article deals with the current controversy over the existence or nonexistence of flying saucers or Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs), and quotes Michigan's Congressional Representative GERALD FORD as suggesting that Congress look into UFOs; also it announces that the Air Force, which is charged with investigating UFOs, has commissioned the University of Colorado and Physics Professor EDWARD U. CONDON to conduct an in-depth study of flying saucers for the next 18 months, at an estimated cost of $300,000.\n\nThe article also points out that since last summer pressure has been mounting for the establishment of an independent, civilian controlled investigative agency to look into the UFO problem.\n\nAlso, for the Bureau's information, there was recently published (first printing June 1966) a book entitled \"Flying Saucers - Serious Business\", Lyle Stuart, Inc., publishers, authored by Frank Edwards. This book is now in its third edition and is available in paperback, published by Bantam Books, and it is probably a contributing factor to the current controversy.\n\nIn this book author Edwards points out that flying saucers were observed in the spring of 1946, in Scandinavia and Russia (which he points out is about a year from the date of the testing of the Alamogordo atomic bomb), and the book\n\n3 - Bureau (Encls. 3)\n1 - Denver (Encl. 1)\n1 - San Francisco\nDET:lms\n(5)\n\nENCLOSURE\nREC 53\n62-83894\n3 OCT 21 1966\nEX-114\nNAT. INT. SEC."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM\n\nTO: SAC, Denver (Sic)\n\nFROM: SAC, San Francisco (62-2927)\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nRe: Book by Gordon Edwards\n\nA review of the book entitled \"UFOs: Are They Here?\" by Gordon Edwards (Pyramid Publications, New York, 1966) was made and the following is noted:\n\nThe book is a compilation of reported sightings of unidentified flying objects (UFOs) in which the author presents a summary of various cases. It is noted that the author discusses the Air Force investigation and the Condon study. Dr. Edward U. Condon is noted as a physicist who is at the University of Colorado and was in charge of the UFO study conducted there under contract with the U.S. Air Force, at a cost of $300,000.\n\nAccording to the book, the Air Force has failed to investigate reports of UFOs adequately and has classified many of the reports as having been caused by natural phenomena or misidentification of known objects. Reports of multiple sightings are described in the book.\n\nThe Bureau has been advised of the above for information."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SF 62-2927\nDET:lms\n\ndocuments many reports throughout the world of UFOs since that date, and claims that 1965 was the year of the greatest number of UFO sightings and that these were observed by multiple witnesses. It is author Edwards' contention that UFOs are space vehicles sent to observe activities on earth and the Air Force, which is charged with the responsibility of investigating UFOs, has deliberately withheld information and given misleading explanations because it fears a mass panic by the public if the public were told the truth.\n\nThe book describes UFOs as polished metal objects, radiating heat and light (sufficient to have burned witnesses who were too near), and emitting some force field that interferes with electromagnetic instruments and power sources. Colors range from brilliant white to dull reds and brilliant orange. Some objects have carried blinking lights. There are three basic shapes: 1) zeppelin-shaped ships up to 300 feet long; 2) disk-shaped objects ranging from a few feet in diameter to 100 feet, with many reported at about 30 feet diameter; and 3) egg-shaped objects, which according to the author are the ones most recently sighted.\n\nAccording to the book, the objects move silently and attain fantastic speeds, yet can hover motionless in mid-air; they have been reported to land and to take off with great speed, usually with a burst of light from the underside, which in some cases has left the ground beneath them scorched.\n\nMany of the persons named in the book who have reported them are reliable individuals, including law enforcement officers, military personnel on official duty, military pilots, commercial airline pilots, civilian defense officials, etc. A number of photographs of the objects have been reproduced in the book, some reportedly taken by reputable persons. Many reported sightings are from atomic and missile research areas.\n\nWreckage of crashed saucers has been reportedly recovered on at least three occasions, in one case described as a magnesium alloy, in another as pure magnesium, and in a third case, attributed to an official of the Canadian government, the material was described as an exceptionally hard unknown metal, actually a matrix of magnesium orthosilicate which contained thousands of 15-micron metal spheres throughout, and showing evidence of micro-meteorites on its surface.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SF 62-2927\nDET:lms\n\nA few witnesses have reported seeing crewmen who had landed from the objects, who are described as three and a half to four feet tall, wearing what appear to be space suits and helmets.\n\nAuthor Edwards concludes this book with a prediction that in the near future UFOs will make an \"overt landing\" or deliberate contact with earth.\n\nA copy of this letter is being directed to Denver, in view of the contract awarded to Dr. EDWARD U. CONDON.\n\nThe above is being called to the Bureau's attention in view of the press report of mounting pressure for a civilian controlled investigative agency to handle UFO matters.\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ARMED FORCES\nFocus on UFO\n\nWinking, blinking and nodding — red lights over Pasadena, blue lights over Greensboro, silver cigars over Detroit — people kept seeing strange flying objects, and officials kept saying nothing was out there.\n\nBut in recent years, and particularly since last summer, the pressure had been mounting for either a full-scale Congressional investigation or for the establishment of an independent, civilian-controlled investigatory agency.\n\nIt had been a big year for Unidentified Flying Objects. The sightings had come in bunches, the bulk of them last spring and summer. And the reports had come from all over.\n\n\"Like Neon Lamps\"\n\nAmong the most intriguing items in this year's crop:\n\n• At Milan, Michigan, 15 miles south of Ann Arbor, bluish-yellow bars of light were spotted, looking \"like neon lamps dangling in the sky.\"\n\n• In East Delhi, Mich., a 15-year-old boy called in to report seeing lights in the sky alternately standing still and moving, sometimes flashing on and off.\n\n• In Altadena and San Marino, Calif., police switchboards logged dozens of calls after a pair of red lights in the sky were reported by residents.\n\n• In Toledo, Ohio, officials at the local airport received seven calls from persons who said they saw a glowing object that was red, green and white.\n\n• In suburban Detroit, a man saw a noiseless, wingless, cigar-shaped flying object.\n\n• In Bryan, Texas, residents said they heard a star-like object purr.\n\n• Over Valdese, N.C., a \"glowing blue thing\" exploded, then lit up the town like a giant flashbulb.\n\nSometimes the alleged sightings spilled over into the bizarre. A space ship full of little men allegedly landed in a farm yard near Hopkinsville, Kentucky. The little men glowed, and they were described as \"three feet tall, with eyes like saucers and hands like claws.\"\n\nA grain buyer in Nebraska said he was invited into a space ship where he chatted with four men and two women. They spoke only broken English—but fluent High German which, as it happened, was the grain buyer's native tongue.\n\nSilvery Cigar\n\nNor did America have any corner on the UFO market. In Northern Ireland, Tom Hutchinson saw a saucer drop into a peat bog near his home in Moneymore. It was eggshaped, three feet in diameter, 18 inches high. It began to spin and Hutchinson grabbed it. He was carrying it to the police, who described him as \"level-headed and God-fearing,\" when the thing twisted out of his hands and got away.\n\nAnd in Warminster, England, a city council worker said he saw a silvery cigar shape drifting over the village downs. After a time, he said, it seemed to stretch. Then it seemed to divide amidships with a flash of orange light, although there was no noise.\n\nFlaming Object\n\nNot all the sightings could be easily written off as the phantasmagoria of kooks, cranks and drunks. And, unless one subscribed to a theory of mass hallucination, it was difficult to explain away simultaneous sightings confirmed by many rational witnesses — such as the flaming object that was seen last April by thousands of East Coast residents from Washington to Boston and even temporarily disrupted a ball game between the Chicago White Sox and the Washington Senators in Washington, D. C.\n\nOr the incident in Hillsdale, Michigan last March, in which a Civil Defense Director, an assistant dean, and 87 coeds reported that they had seen a glowing object zip past their college dormitory and hover in a swamp for hours. Witnesses said they watched from the second floor of the Hillsdale College girls dormitory as the object wobbled, wavered, glowed eerily and once zipped right at a dormitory window before stopping suddenly.\n\nA Meteor?\n\nThe Air Force, charged with investigating every one of the 11,000 sightings since 1947, did have some explanations. The mysterious flaming object in the East was \"probably a meteor.\"\n\nAs for Michigan's much-publicized and plentiful unidentified flying objects, they turned out to be monkeyshines instead of moonships: \"Unidentified college boys\" playing pranks with flares to frighten the girls in the dormitories, came the august report from a distinguished astronomer called in by the Air Force to investigate the Hillsdale affair.\n\nEvery report of a \"flying saucer\" had ostensibly been checked out by the Air Force's special squad known as \"Project Blue Book,\" although the staff was woefully small. Of the 10,147 sightings since 1947, the Air Force insisted that only 646 remain unexplained — and most of these because of insufficient information. The others have been attributed to planes, balloons, astronomical causes, missiles, swamp gas, meteors, fireworks and, in some cases, to hallucinations and psychological reasons.\n\nBall Lightning?\n\nPhilip Klass, avionics editor of Aviation Week & Space Technology magazine, recently proposed some other explanations. Klass, an electronics engineer, said a form of \"ball lightning,\" generated by high tension power lines, could explain the phenomena.\n\nMany of the sightings, said Klass, occurred along or very near high-tension lines where luminous balls of ionized air could be generated under certain conditions."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"No Threat\"\n\nThe main conclusions reached by the Air Force were:\n\n• \"No unidentified flying objects reported, investigated and evaluated by the Air Force have ever given any indication of a threat to our national security.\"\n\n• \"There has been no evidence submitted to or discovered by the Air Force that sightings represent technological developments or principles beyond the range of present day scientific knowledge.\"\n\n• \"There has been no evidence that sightings categorized as unidentified are extraterrestrial vehicles.\"\n\nMajor Donald Keyhoe, however, was unconvinced. Major Keyhoe, USMC (retired), director of the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP), a private space watching organization, accused the Air Force of conducting a long-term whitewash on the UFO question.\n\nIt was Keyhoe's theory that the Air Force was withholding information for fear of causing public panic. UFOs, insisted the Major, who had never seen one, were of extraterrestrial origin and the Air Force feared that the public could not accept this knowledge. \"They won't give you details,\" he complained. \"If they did, many of their explanations would fall flat.\"\n\nAnd Keyhoe could also claim a powerful ally in Michigan's Gerald Ford, the House Republican leader, who suggested it would be \"a very wholesome thing\" for Congress to look into unidentified flying objects. Such an investigation. Ford suggested, would make the American people \"feel better.\"\n\nStudy in Depth\n\nWhether or not that was so, the Air Force last week took definite steps to make itself feel better. Fed up with investigating reports of glowing, flying, zooming, winking, awesome, blinking, streaking, hovering things, the Air Force last week decided to bail itself out of all responsibility for future conclusions concerning UFOs.\n\nThe Air Force announced that it had commissioned the University of Colorado to conduct an \"in-depth\" study of flying saucers for the next 18 months. The director of the study (expected to cost $300,000) would be Dr. Edward U. Condon, former director of the National Bureau of Standards, and now a physics professor at Colorado.\n\nTo satisfy the skeptics, and insure the study's objectivity, Colorado would select several other universities to take part in the independent investigation, with about 100 scientists participating.\n\nAnd in case that wasn't enough, the National Academy of Sciences also agreed to appoint a panel to review the Colorado report."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nMAY 1962 EDITION\nGSA GEN. REG. NO. 27\n5010-106\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\nTO : Mr. Wick\nDATE: 10-24-66\nFROM : M. A. Jones\nSUBJECT: JOHN MOSS\nFREE-LANCE WRITER\n4811 ILLINOIS AVENUE, NORTHWEST\nWASHINGTON, D. C.\n\nOn October 21, 1966, captioned individual telephonically contacted the Bureau and spoke with SA Thomas B. Coll of the Crime Research Section.\n\nHe advised that he is a free-lance writer and is working on a story for a TV production concerning unidentified flying objects. He stated that he has been in personal contact with a former Air Force officer who uses the alias of Mel Noel concerning unidentified flying objects and that it is the TV producer's intention to use this individual in the forthcoming TV show. He advised that Noel is not the individual's true name and inquired as to whether the FBI could advise him of Noel's real identity.\n\nMoss was advised that the FBI could not be of any assistance to him and that all information in FBI files is confidential. He was also advised that the investigation of unidentified flying objects is not, and never has been, a matter within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI.\n\nBufiles contain no information which can be identified with Moss.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\nFor record purposes.\n\n1 - Mr. DeLoach\n1 - Mr. Wick\n1 - 62-83894 (Unidentified flying objects)\n\nTBC:jer (6)"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Oct 24 5 16 PM '66\nOct 24 1 39 PM 66\nFBI\nREC'D WICK\nOct 24 2 25 PM '66\nREC'D DELOACH\nFBI"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"November 30, 1966\nAIRMAIL\nMr. J. A. Hennessey\n10 Manson Place\nSouth Kensington\nLondon, S. W. 7, England\nDear Mr. Hennessey:\n\nI have received your letter of November 26th.\n\nIn response to your inquiry, the policy of this Bureau regarding the investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects has not changed since I wrote to you on January 26, 1965. Also, it is contrary to my long-standing policy to express an opinion on such matters.\n\nSince my prior communication to you has been destroyed, I am enclosing another for your files and trust this will be of help to you in reconstructing your records.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nEnclosure\n\n1 - London - Enclosure\n1 - Foreign Liaison Unit - Enclosure\n\nNOTE: Bufiles disclose one prior letter from correspondent and a reply made to him 1-26-65.\n\nHRH:mjb\n(5)\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"November 30, 1966\nAIRMAIL\nMr. J. A. Hennessey\n10 Manson Place\nSouth Kensington\nLondon, S. W. 7, England\nDear Mr. Hennessey:\n\nI have received your letter of November 26th.\n\nIn response to your inquiry, the policy of this Bureau regarding the investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects has not changed since I wrote to you on January 26, 1965. Also, it is contrary to my long-standing policy to express an opinion on such matters.\n\nSince my prior communication to you has been destroyed, I am enclosing another for your files and trust this will be of help to you in reconstructing your records.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nEnclosure\n\n1 - London - Enclosure\n1 - Foreign Liaison Unit - Enclosure\n\nNOTE: Bufiles disclose one prior letter from correspondent and a reply made to him 1-26-65.\n\nHRH:mjb\n(5)"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Best Possible Image\n\nJanuary 26, 1965\nAIRMAIL\n\nREC-131 62-83894-42\n\nMr. J. A. Hennessey\n10, Manson Place\nSouth Kensington\nLondon, S.W. 7, England\n\nDear Mr. Hennessey:\n\nYour letter of January 20th has been received.\n\nIn response to your inquiry, the FBI has not conducted an investigation as you mentioned inasmuch as this would not come within our investigative jurisdiction. The presence of an Agent was simply to determine whether or not any violation may have occurred in which the FBI would have an interest, and for no other reason.\n\nWhile I would like to be of assistance to you, the files of the FBI must be maintained as confidential in accordance with regulations of the Department of Justice and are available for official use only. In view of this, I am sure you will understand why I cannot be of any further assistance in this instance.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\n1 - London - Enclosure\n1 - Albuquerque - Enclosure\n1 - Mr. Sullivan - Enclosure\n1 - Foreign Liaison Unit - Enclosure\n\nWAM:pem\n(7)\n\n(See NOTE next page)\n\nENCLOSURE\n62-83894-453"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. J. A. Hennessey\n\nNOTE: Bufiles reflect that an unidentified flying object was sighted near Socorro, New Mexico, on April 24, 1964. Captain Holder, United States Air Force, along with SA D. Arthur Byrnes, Jr., interviewed one Lonnie Zamora of the Socorro Police Department who had observed the phenomena. SA Byrnes typed such a statement from Zamora which was later included in a memo for dissemination. The Albuquerque Office did not conduct any investigation other than to keep the Bureau advised and maintain liaison with the Air Force. This is apparently the situation to which the correspondent is referring. Bufiles contain no information identifiable with the correspondent.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"December 21, 1966\n\nREC-4 62-83894-454\n\nMr. Joe Thorn\nChief of Police\nPrinceton, West Virginia 24740\n\nMy dear Chief:\n\nYour letter was received on December 19th.\n\nAlthough I appreciate the motives prompting you to write me, unidentified flying objects do not come within the scope of this Bureau's authority. I am, however, referring a copy of your letter to the Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, Washington, D. C., whose agency has conducted related studies.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\n1 - Pittsburgh - Enclosure\nAttention SAC: Correspondent is not identifiable in Bureau indices.\n\nNOTE: Copy of incoming sent to OSI by form.\n\nDCL:sep (4)\n\nMAILED 19\nDEC 21 1966\nCOMM-FBI"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Princeton, West Virginia\nNovember 29, 1966\n\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\nChief Federal Bureau Of\nInvestigation.\n\nDear Sir;\n\nI have been Police Chief of Princeton, W. Va. for a number\nof years and have been a member of that department for 22\nyears.\n\nSir I mention the above so that you will not think an idiot\nis writing.\n\nYou seemingly do not know or utterly disreguard the following\nsubject. I had hoped that you might make a statement before\nnow on this subject. I have waited many years to see your\nopinion in print, but nothing of the sort has happened.\n\nI am speaking of the UFO's or unidentified flying objects\nbefore long and it is a matter of time you are going to be\nscooped so to speak on this subject. Sir I happen to know\nthey exist and I have personally seen two of them. One of these\nsightings under low cloud cover in daylight. (I am not sure\nas to the cloud height). The other at prehaps two thousand\nfeet altitude and appx.one mile off.\n\nYou may not be interested ? But I think this may be vital to\nthe security of the United States and if it is vital I am\nsure that you are now familiar with and working on this\nproblem.\n\nIf I am correct and these things do land I am greatly con-\n-cerned as to what kind of reception they might receive from\nthe inhabitance of this country. I am convinced after a great\ndeal of thought that someone of your standing in this country\nshould let the people know what is happening as reguards these\nthings.\n\nPS. If this is out of your line\nof duty I am sorry to bother you.\n\n\nSincerely Yours\nJoe Thorn\nPolice Chief\nPrinceton, West Virginia."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"December 27, 1966\n\nMiss Judith Goodman\n12 Williams Street\nBradford, Pennsylvania 16701\n\nDear Miss Goodman:\n\nI have received your letter of December 20th.\n\nAlthough I would like to be of assistance, matters\npertaining to Unidentified Flying Objects are not within the juris-\ndiction of the FBI.\n\nInasmuch as your communication is of interest\nto another governmental agency, I am referring a copy of it to\nthe Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General,\nDepartment of the Air Force, Washington, D. C. 20333.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nNOTE: Bufiles contain no record of correspondent. A copy of\nher letter was sent to the Department of the Air Force by form\nreferral this date.\n\nBGH:gda (3)\n\nTolson\nDeLoach\nMohr\nWick\nCasper\nCallahan\nConrad\nFelt\nGale\nRosen\nSullivan\nTavel\nTrotter\nTele. Room\nHolmes\nGandy\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT\n\nMAILED 19\nDEC 27 1966\nCOMM-FBI\n\nDEC 27 1966 FBI"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nFBI\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nDEC 28 1 48 PM '66\nDEC 27 4 03 PM '66\nREC'D DE LOACH\nDEC 29 11 29 AM '66"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF DIRECTOR\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\n(December 23, 1966)\n\nJudith Goodman\n12 Williams St.\nBradford, Pa. 16701\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\n4936 30th Place\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover,\n\nI am doing my Science Fair project on\nU. F. O. s. Could you please send me any and\nall imformation you have on this subject?\nI would also appreciate any imformation you\nmay have as to how many planes we have lost\nchasing U. F. O. s. Why has this imformation\nbeen kept a secret? Why is it important to\nnational defense?\n\nAlso would you happen to know if any other\npeople besides ourself have spotted U. F. O. s in\nour area?\n\nJudith Goodman.\n\nack:12-21-66\nbgh/gda\n\nMR. TOLSON\nMR. DELOACH\nMR. MOHR\nMR. WICK\nMR. CASPER\nMR. CALLAHAN\nMR. CONRAD\nMR. FELT\nMR. GALE\nMR. ROSEN\nMR. SULLIVAN\nMR. TAVEL\nMR. TROTTER\nMR. JONES\nTELE. ROOM\nMISS HOLMES\nMRS. METCALF\nMISS GANDY\n\nBRADFORD PA. DEC 20 1966\n\nEX-108\nREC-48\n62-83894-455\n12 DEC 29 1966"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEC 23 10 52 AM 66\n\nFBI\nREC-D WICK\n\nDEC 28 1 48 PM '66\n\n[illegible]\n\nJudith Goodman\n12 Williams St.\nBradford, Pa. 16701\n\n(December 23, 1966)"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Judith Goodman\n12 Williams St.\nBradford, Pa.\n16701\n\nMr. J. Edgar Hoover\n4936 30th Place\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover,\n\nI am doing my Science Fair project on U.F.O.s. Could you please send me any and all information you have on this subject? I would also appreciate any information you may have as to how many planes we have lost chasing U.F.O.s. Why has this information been kept a secret? Why is it important to national defense?\n\nAlso would you happen to know if any other county besides ourself have spotted U.F.O.s in recent times?\n\nJudith Goodman.\n\nAck:12-27-66\nBgh/gdy"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED - DIRECTOR\nFBI\nDec 22 5 26 PM '66\n\nDec 23 11 17 AM '66\nFBI"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0-20 (Rev. 1-26-66)\n\nTolson\nDeLoach\nMohr\nWick\nCasper\nCallahan\nConrad\nFelt\nGale\nRosen\nSullivan\nTavel\nTrotter\nTele. Room\nHolmes\nGandy\n\nO Flying Saucers\n\nfile\n\nUPI-133\n(FLYING SAUCER)\nBOULDER, COLO.--DR. EDWARD CONDON, HEAD OF A GOVERNMENT-FINANCED SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFO), SAID TODAY HE HAD RECEIVED A LETTER TELLING HIM WHEN AND WHERE A FLYING SAUCER WOULD LAND ON EARTH.\nCONDON, PROFESSOR OF PHYSICS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO, SAID HE WOULD WRITE TO THE MAN AND ASK HIM ON WHAT BASIS HE MADE THE PREDICTION.\n\"HE GAVE ME THE EXACT DATE AND THE EXACT LOCATION THE SAUCER WOULD LAND SAID IT WOULD BE MANNED BY PERSONS FROM ANOTHER PLANET,\" CONDON SAID.\n\"HE SUGGESTED WE CONTACT THE SPACE TRAVELERS AND MAKE FRIENDS WITH THEM.\" THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO PROFESSOR SAID.\nCONDON WOULD NOT DISCLOSE THE NAME OF THE PERSON WHO WROTE THE LETTER, SAY WHERE THE PREDICTED LANDING WOULD TAKE PLACE OR THE DATE. HE DID SAY IT WOULD BE SOMETIME THIS SPRING.\n\"I'M GOING TO ANSWER THE LETTER TO TRY AND FIND OUT WHAT THE BASIS IS FOR THE MAN'S PREDICTION,\" CONDON SAID.\nCONDON ALSO DISCLOSED THAT DR. ROBERT M. LOW, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE CU FLYING OBJECTS INVESTIGATION PROJECT, WAS IN THE JOPLIN, MO.-PITTSBURGH, KAN., AREA TODAY CHECKING OUT REPORTS OF UFO SIGHTINGS.\nHE SAID LOW PROBABLY WOULD RETURN TO BOULDER TONIGHT.\n1/18--TS329PES\n\nCondon is a \"publicity hound\".\n62-83853-456\nWASHINGTON CAPITAL NEWS SERVICE\n79 JAN 23 1967"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D DGM INTELL DIV.\nJAN 19 11 29 AM '67\n\nJAN 19 11 42 AM '67\nRECEIVED-SULLIVAN\nFBI\n\nJAN 18 6 09 PM '67\nFBI\nREC'D WICK\n\nJAN 18 5 05 PM '67\nRECEIVED TOLSON\nFBI\n\nJAN 18 4 01 PM '67\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nFBI\n\nJAN 19 9 39 AM '67\nRECD-CORR & ROUTE\nFBI\n\nJAN 18 5 21 PM '67\nREC'D DE LOACH\nFBI\n\nJAN 18 7 23 PM '67\nRECEIVED\nMR. JONES\nFBI\n\n79 JAN 23 1967"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - Mr. DeLoach\n1 - Mr. Gale\n1 - Liaison Section\n1 - Mr. McAndrews\n1 - Mr. Ware\n\nJanuary 18, 1967\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nALLEGEDLY SIGHTING, JANUARY 17, 1967\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nAt 4:10 a.m., January 18, 1967, James C. Collins, 212 Sharon Drive, Chesapeake, Virginia, telephone 547-4648, advised that he desired to report that he had observed a large oblong-shaped object which alighted in the street in front of him when he was on his way home from his television repair shop, the Oak Grove T. V., 6424 Great Bridge Road, Chesapeake, Virginia. He believes that he was taken into this craft which he recalls as being made of a glass like substance and being transparent. It was manned by several individuals who appeared to be undersized creatures similar to members of the human race, probably not more than 4 feet tall. They were allegedly wearing regular trouser pants and T-Shirts. Collins believes that he was transported by this craft for an undetermined distance and returned to his point of take-off approximately one hour later.\n\nCollins spoke in a coherent manner although he appeared to be under certain emotional strain. He claimed he had not been drinking any intoxicants but he was unable to account for the time between 8:00 p.m. and 4:00 a.m.. He stated he was telephoning from his workshop but had no recollection of being elsewhere between 8:90 p.m. and 4:00 a.m.\n\nThe above is being furnished for your information.\n\nNOTE: Collins furnished information to night supervisor SA A. R. Ware, Special Investigative Division. A check of Bureau indices did not disclose any information which could be identified with Collins.\n\nARW:djg\n(9)\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency.\n\nMAIL ROOM\nTELETYPE UNIT\n\n62 JAN 26 1967\n\n19 JAN 20 1967"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - Mr. DeLoach\n1 - Mr. Gale\n1 - Liaison Section\n1 - Mr. McAndrews\n1 - Mr. Ware\n\nJanuary 18, 1967\n\n[illegible]\n\nRECEIVED-GAGE\n\nJAN 18 12 PM 1967\n\n19 JAN 20 1967"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO: Director, FBI\nFROM: Legat, Mexico City (105-5844) (RUC)\nSUBJECT: W. R. HANAWALT\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDATE: 1/30/67\n\nSECRET\n\n[REDACTED] furnished the following information on 12/30/66, classified \"SECRET\" with instructions that it not be disseminated in whole or in part outside the Bureau without prior approval [REDACTED].\n\n\"Attached for your information and retention is a copy of the text of a telegram addressed to the Federal Security Police, Mexico, D.F. The telegram was sent from Harlingen, Texas, by W. R. Hanawalt on 20 December 1966.\n\n\"The files of this office contain no information on Hanawalt other than the information contained herein.\"\n\nThe telegram is set out as follows:\n\n\"Federal Security Police\nMexico DF Mex\nFollowing letter sent to Officer in Charge, Texas Dept. of Public Safety, Harlingen, Texas\n\nDear Sir, this letter is in way of clarification and to enlarge upon my accident report and the remarks contained therein dated this date and delivered to you personally.\n\n\"The laser ray, or cobalt ray is a self engrossing ray, and is similar in use to a cocoon around a silk worm. The entire body is enclosed and the entire nervous system can be manipulated to a lesser or greater degree of proficiency than is normal. Visions of flying objects are merely faulty vision-fully controlled and is very real to that individual experiencing the phenomena. Breathing and heartbeat can be\n\nREC 11\nEX 101\n\n62-83894-458\n\nBureau\n(1 - Liaison Section)\n(1 - San Antonio)\n1 - Mexico City\nEDR:ako\n(5)\n\nSECRET\n\nCRIME RESEARCH\n\n9 FEB 21 1967\n\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEX 105-5844\n\nSECRET\n\nabsolutely manipulated-your lie detector tests can be positively controlled without your knowledge.\n\n\"Any smell, taste, hearing by sound or word, sight can be controlled by vision blocks or intensity of clarity or pin point control of eye direction itself. Any physical sensation can be duplicated. Mental and conversational blocks can be created at any time. Usually with public embarrassment to that person. Naturally mathematics, typing, book keeping can be manipulated to the extremes of frustration or nervous or mental collapse. Sexual climax can be made to most any individual anywhere or anytime.\n\n\"Any type machine can be manipulated, destroyed or damaged from unexplainable reasons or sources. This means any part or component of any part of that machine or motor--regardless of kind or type. Any ignition system can be shorted at random. Previously the method used was connecting the ray to electric or telephone lines, which gave access to the monitoring of anyones thoughts wherever he may be, particularly while at work at your desk. Thoughts used on the highway while driving were monitored by equipment carried in trucks, rental trailers, autos, etc. Much of this equipment is from out of state, particularly California, used in the valley by non-tourists who are here for reasons extending over 30 days and who do not pay for Texas plates.\n\n\"They have infiltrated almost every business level.\n\n\"Any man in business cannot realize the reason so many company secrets or confidences are lost. A business competitor can eventually bankrupt any or all of his competition how can a defense attorney present a defense when his strategy is known to the opposing attorney previously. In an intensive review of my driving record, particularly accidents, I believe most are premeditated, all since 1946, because I learned too much in the Navy, while at war, concerning political appointments of some members of the armed forces with political influence.\n\n-2-\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEX 105-5844\n\nSECRET\n\n\"I saw unidentified flying objects in 1945 on combat missions. They were not the enemy. SAUCERS\n\n\"I further believe that I will possibly experience forgery and very possibly be convicted for it, from valid signatures made at service stations using credit cards. The customer gets the copy, the station keeps the hard copy, and the clear carbon with the valid signature is purchased or given away for framing purposes. These signatures are entirely valid and in court will be so appraised by any handwriting expert. This involves betrayal of a trust involving state taxes.\n\n\"I have stated the possibility of premeditated murder from the standpoint of the operator, his vehicle and add to this the same conditions for the other vehicles involved. These are manipulated by the 'rotten apples' in the barrel of any Federal security arm, who are untouchable because of betrayal of Federal top secrets they have sworn to defend. I suspect especially the C.I.A. and the space arms. Is Federal intervention necessary at State levels or business levels in domestic engagement.\n\n\"I further believe this letter will be seized by the Post Office authorities, who already know its contents, if mailed, for what I consider obsolete security reasons. It must be transmitted by teletype, telephone or private carrier.\n\n\"I believe it is mandatory for the prevention of crime, public safety, and many other reasons that the cobalt or laser process be made public. I believe it has been used in Harlingen for eight (8) years by a select few in all walks of life.\n\n\"I further believe that the yielding of this information does not constitute a breach of trust in any way, and that the present equipment is obsolte, having been replaced by the satalite samos, our spy in the sky, and similar devices, most of which were publicly announced to the press and/or magazines.\n\n\"I further suspect that most if not all National Congressmen or Senators know of the method and have used it for personal\n\n-3-\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEX 105-5844\n\nSECRET\n\npurposes in election races, and possibly on the state level. I will enlarge upon these views, at your convenience, if necessary at my own expense, and stand trial for the contens herein. (X)\n\n\"In this matter I expressly ask the co-operation of the Departments of Public Safety of Texas, Pennsylvania and California, and if the State of Texas prefers, with them alone. Any medical or mental examinations to be conducted by the Mayo Clinics, Rochester, Minn., by doctors of all Western nations. (X)\n\n\"I submit myself as of sound mind and body, and that the above is true and correct or my sound opinions. There is no proof of a tangible nature other than public access of the same equipment for the same use it was invented for --- National and public safety. (X)\n\n[W R. Hanawalt\"] (X)\n\nNo information was located in the indices of the Mexico City Office identifiable with the Subject.\n\nThe foregoing is furnished for information of the Bureau and San Antonio.\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-22 (Rev. 1-22-50)\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nRecords Branch\n19\n\nName Searching Unit - Room 6527\nService Unit - Room 6524\nForward to File Review\nAttention Douglas\nReturn to Haskell 606 D\nSupervisor Room Ext.\n\nType of References Requested:\nRegular Request (Analytical Search)\nAll References (Subversive & Nonsubversive)\nSubversive References Only\nNonsubversive References Only\nMain ____ References Only\n\nType of Search Requested:\nRestricted to Locality of ____\nExact Name Only (On the Nose)\nBuildup Variations\n\nSubject (W. R. Hanawalt) (X)\nBirthdate & Place\nAddress\n\nLocalities\nR# Date 2-9 Searcher Initials\nProd.\n\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\nNR\nWayne\nNI 116-145841 (Classified)\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE.\n\nClassified your letter dated 11/22/91\n9505 EDD/TAP/CAD 9/24/92\n90-2167\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 MAY 1962 EDITION GSA GEN. REG. NO. 27\n5010-107-02\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\nDeclassified Case: NW# 90986 Date: 04-14-2025\n\nTO Director, FBI\nDATE: 5/5/67\n\nFROM Legat, London (105-2871) (RUC)\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nSUBJECT: J.J.A. HENNESSY\nIS - CH\n\nEnclosed are 3 copies of a (b) (7)(D) letter dated 4/27/67, classified SECRET, contents self-explanatory.\n\nThe Bureau may desire to furnish a copy of enclosed letter to Denver for information purposes.\n\n3 - Bureau (Enc. 3)\n1 - Liaison (sent direct)\n1 - London\nLM:vw\n(5)\n\nClassified by 2040\nExempt from GDS, Category\nDate of declassification indefinite\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nCorrespondence to this address must be under double cover. The outer envelope should be addressed to:\nTHE SECRETARY, BOX 500, PARLIAMENT STREET S.O., LONDON, S.W.1. and not to any individual.\n\nTelephone Nos. 01-734 6050 Ext. [REDACTED]\n01-930 6789 Ext.\n\nOur Ref. [REDACTED]\nYour Ref.\n\nBOX No. 500, PARLIAMENT STREET S.O., LONDON, S.W.1.\n\nEO50x1 STATE\nEO50x6 STATE\n\n27th April, 1967\n\nDear Tom,\n\nYou may be interested to know that we have learnt from a delicate source that J.J.A. Hennessy, 36 Kingston Place, South Kensington S.W.7., claiming to be an Associate Member of the National Investigating Committee on Aerial Phenomena has been in contact in mid April, 1967 with [REDACTED]\n\n2. He has drawn attention to the U.S. Government grant to the University of Colorado to investigate unidentified flying objects with a view to establishing whether there is any pattern in the evidence available to suggest that interplanetary vehicles are reaching this planet from some extraterrestrial source. The investigations are being conducted under the Chairmanship of Dr. Edward U. Condon of the Physics and Astrophysics Dept. of the University.\n\n3. He is known to have asked that a questionnaire in connection with this investigation be forwarded to the appropriate [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nJohn T. Hinnigh, Esq., Legal Attache, American Embassy.\n\nIn Duplicate\n\nRPR/GV\n\nSECRET\n\nDeclassified Case: NW# 90986 Date: 4-14-2025"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-22 (Rev. 1-22-50)\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nRecords Branch\n19\n\nName Searching Unit - Room 6527\nService Unit - Room 6524\nForward to File Review\nXX Attention J. D. MAURICE\nXX Return to Rm 792 9AD EXT 2005\nSupervisor Room Ext.\n\nType of References Requested:\nRegular Request (Analytical Search)\nAll References (Subversive & Nonsubversive)\nXX Subversive References Only\nNonsubversive References Only\nMain ____ References Only\n\nType of Search Requested:\nRestricted to Locality of\nExact Name Only (On the Nose)\nBuildup Variations\n\nSubject Dr. Edward M. Condon\nBirthdate & Place\nAddress (UNIVERSITY OF DENVER)\n\nLocalities\nR# Date 5/11 Searcher Initials\nProd.\n\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\n1 62-58854\nEdward Uhler Condon\nNI 116-624\nNI 121-2673\n62-58854-22 Ltr 3/13/46\n-276 Ltr 4/17/48\n-287 Ltr 3/22/48\n-337 Ltr 7/8/49\n-349 Ltr 6/4/52\n-386 Ltr 10/23/54\n-430 Ltr 6/21/57\n-444 Ltr 5/17/64\n121-2673-264 Ltr 6/13/51\nType of search: Subversive references only from the Denver Field Office, not limited\n\nDeclassified Case: NW# 90986 Date: 04-14-2025"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-22 (Rev. 1-22-60)\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nRecords Branch\n19\n[ ] Name Searching Unit - Room 6527\n[ ] Service Unit - Room 6524\n[ ] Forward to File Review\nXX Attention J. D. MAURICE\nXX Return to Rm 702 SAD EXT 2065\nSupervisor Room Ext.\nType of References Requested:\n[ ] Regular Request (Analytical Search)\n[ ] All References (Subversive & Nonsubversive)\nXX Subversive References Only\n[ ] Nonsubversive References Only\n[ ] Main ____________ References Only\nType of Search Requested:\n[ ] Restricted to Locality of ____________\n[ ] Exact Name Only (On the Nose)\n[ ] Buildup [ ] Variations\nSubject J. J. A. HENNESSY\nBirthdate & Place\nAddress KENSINGTON, ENGLAND\n(ATTENDS UNIVERSITY OF DENVER)\nLocalities\nRe ____ Date 5/11 Searcher Initials\nProd.\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\nNR\nJ. a.\n1 60 - 83894 - 442\n-453\nJulian J. a. (?)\nST\nDeclassified Case: NW# 90386\nDate: 04/14/2026"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nMAY 1962 EDITION\nGSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101-11.6\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: 6/8/67\nFROM : SAC, MIAMI (62-0-11328)\nSUBJECT: PAUL L. PEYERL\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nFLYING SAUCERS\nA review of the Miami indices revealed information reflecting subject appeared at the Miami Office on July 24, 1959, and volunteered to return to Austria as an intelligence agent. His expressed motivation was to do something to repay the debt he felt he owed the United States. He was afforded the Washington, D. C. Headquarters address of the Central Intelligence Agency and told his inquiry should be directed there.\nAlso, on July 4, 1961, he appeared at the Miami Office and gave an incoherent story of recently meeting an individual who asked him to kill his mother. PEYERL appeared to be somewhat bewildered and continuously gazed away from the interviewing Agent.\nDuring his most recent visit to the Miami Office, PEYERL seemed genuinely concerned about the existence of the object he allegedly photographed during November, 1944. He exhibited no emotional nor mental disorder and appeared to be rational.\nIn view of recent publicity afforded UFO sightings, some apparently by responsible sources, this information is submitted to the Bureau for consideration of transmittal to the U. S. Air Force.\nREC-40 62-83894-460\n2 - Bureau (Enc. 4)\n1 - Miami\nLB/bab\n(3)\nENCLOSURE\nJUN 27 1967\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nIn Reply, Please Refer to File No. 62-0-11328\nMiami, Florida\nJune 8, 1967\nRE: PAUL L. PEYERL\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nBorn May 3, 1924 in Austria\nOn April 26, 1967, PAUL L. PEYERL, 1430 Southwest 76th Street, Miami, Florida, appeared at the Miami Office and furnished the following information relating to an object, presently referred to as an unidentified flying object, he allegedly photographed during November, 1944:\nSometime during 1943, he graduated from the German Air Academy and was assigned as a member of the Luftwaffe on the Russian Front. Near the end of 1944, he was released from this duty and was assigned as a test pilot to a top secret project in the Black Forest of Austria. During this period he observed the aircraft described above. It was saucer shaped, about twenty-one feet in diameter, radio controlled, and mounted several jet engines around the exterior portion of the craft. He further described the exterior portion as revolving around the dome in the center which remained stationary. It was PEYERL's responsibility to photograph the object while in flight. He asserted he was able to retain a negative of a photograph he made at 7,000 meters (20,000 feet). A Xerox copy of the negative, as furnished by PEYERL, appears on the last page of this communication. Also, a still photograph he allegedly made \"at the risk of my life\", illustrating the object parked in a hanger, appears on the last page.\nAccording to PEYERL, the above aircraft was designed and engineered by (First Name Unknown) KUEHR, a German engineer whose present whereabouts is unknown to him. He assumed KUEHR was taken into custody by Allied Forces upon the termination of hostilities. PEYERL stated KUEHR unsuccessfully attempted to avoid the German draft, but was apprehended by the Gestapo\nENCLOSURE\n62-83894-460"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RE: PAUL L. PEYERL\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nin Vienna, Austria, sometime during late 1943 or early 1944. PEYERL also assumed the secrets pertaining to this aircraft were captured by Allied Forces. He said this type of aircraft was responsible for the downing of at least one American B-26 airplane. He furnished the following fuel and engine data:\n\"....Fuel mixture of N2H4O in Methyl Alcohol (CH3OH) rather than 'oxygen-holding' mixture of hydrogen peroxide H2O2 in water. 7m 1,3m high two rocket motors; smooth flow, rotary drive over 2,000 meters per second....\"\nPEYERL said he copied this data from a board located in the hanger area.\nPEYERL asserted he was shot down by the British on March 14, 1945, after having been reassigned to the Western Front. He was held prisoner by the British in London and later in Brussels until his release in 1946. He departed for the United States from Bremerhaven, Germany, on December 26, 1951; entering the United States in New Jersey on January 7, 1952, and was subsequently naturalized in Miami during 1958. He is presently employed as a mechanic at Eastern Airlines, Miami, Florida. He related he was born May 3, 1924, in Austria.\nPEYERL stated he has withheld this information because he assumed the United States possessed it. He has become increasingly concerned because of the unconfirmed reports concerning a similar object and denials the United States has such an aircraft. He feels such a weapon would be beneficial in Vietnam and would prevent the further loss of American lives which was his paramount purpose in contacting the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).\nPEYERL reiterated he has the original negatives of both photographs. He said the shots were taken at a thirty second time exposure.\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency.\n2"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nIn Reply, Please Refer to File No. 62-0-11328\nMiami, Florida\nJune 8, 1967\nRE: PAUL L. PEYERL\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nOn April 26, 1967, PAUL L. PEYERL, 1430 Southwest 76th Street, Miami, Florida, appeared at the Miami Office and furnished the following information relating to an object, presently referred to as an unidentified flying object, he allegedly photographed during November, 1944:\nSometime during 1943, he graduated from the German Air Academy and was assigned as a member of the Luftwaffe on the Russian Front. Near the end of 1944, he was released from this duty and was assigned as a test pilot to a top secret project in the Black Forest of Austria. During this period he observed the aircraft described above. It was saucer shaped, about twenty-one feet in diameter, radio controlled, and mounted several jet engines around the exterior portion of the craft. He further described the exterior portion as revolving around the dome in the center which remained stationary. It was PEYERL's responsibility to photograph the object while in flight. He asserted he was able to retain a negative of a photograph he made at 7,000 meters (20,000 feet). A Xerox copy of the negative, as furnished by PEYERL, appears on the last page of this communication. Also, a still photograph he allegedly made \"at the risk of my life\", illustrating the object parked in a hanger, appears on the last page.\nAccording to PEYERL, the above aircraft was designed and engineered by (First Name Unknown) KUEHR, a German engineer whose present whereabouts is unknown to him. He assumed KUEHR was taken into custody by Allied Forces upon the termination of hostilities. PEYERL stated KUEHR unsuccessfully attempted to avoid the German draft, but was apprehended by the Gestapo"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RE: PAUL L. PEYERL\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nin Vienna, Austria, sometime during late 1943 or early 1944. PEYERL also assumed the secrets pertaining to this aircraft were captured by Allied Forces. He said this type of aircraft was responsible for the downing of at least one American B-26 airplane. He furnished the following fuel and engine data:\n\n\"....Fuel mixture of N2H4O in Methyl Alcohol (CH3OH) rather than 'oxygen-holding' mixture of hydrogen peroxide H2O2 in water. 7m 1,3m high two rocket motors; smooth flow, rotary drive over 2,000 meters per second....\"\n\nPEYERL said he copied this data from a board located in the hanger area.\n\nPEYERL asserted he was shot down by the British on March 14, 1945, after having been reassigned to the Western Front. He was held prisoner by the British in London and later in Brussels until his release in 1946. He departed for the United States from Bremerhaven, Germany, on December 26, 1951; entering the United States in New Jersey on January 7, 1952, and was subsequently naturalized in Miami during 1958. He is presently employed as a mechanic at Eastern Airlines, Miami, Florida. He related he was born May 3, 1924, in Austria.\n\nPEYERL stated he has withheld this information because he assumed the United States possessed it. He has become increasingly concerned because of the unconfirmed reports concerning a similar object and denials the United States has such an aircraft. He feels such a weapon would be beneficial in Vietnam and would prevent the further loss of American lives which was his paramount purpose in contacting the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).\n\nPEYERL reiterated he has the original negatives of both photographs. He said the shots were taken at a thirty second time exposure.\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency.\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No. 62-0-11328\n\nMiami, Florida\nJune 8, 1967\n\nRE: PAUL L. PEYERL\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nOn April 26, 1967, PAUL L. PEYERL, 1430 Southwest 76th Street, Miami, Florida, appeared at the Miami Office and furnished the following information relating to an object, presently referred to as an unidentified flying object, he allegedly photographed during November, 1944:\n\nSometime during 1943, he graduated from the German Air Academy and was assigned as a member of the Luftwaffe on the Russian Front. Near the end of 1944, he was released from this duty and was assigned as a test pilot to a top secret project in the Black Forest of Austria. During this period he observed the aircraft described above. It was saucer shaped, about twenty-one feet in diameter, radio controlled, and mounted several jet engines around the exterior portion of the craft. He further described the exterior portion as revolving around the dome in the center which remained stationary. It was PEYERL's responsibility to photograph the object while in flight. He asserted he was able to retain a negative of a photograph he made at 7,000 meters (20,000 feet). A Xerox copy of the negative, as furnished by PEYERL, appears on the last page of this communication. Also, a still photograph he allegedly made \"at the risk of my life\", illustrating the object parked in a hanger, appears on the last page.\n\nAccording to PEYERL, the above aircraft was designed and engineered by (First Name Unknown) KUEHR, a German engineer whose present whereabouts is unknown to him. He assumed KUEHR was taken into custody by Allied Forces upon the termination of hostilities. PEYERL stated KUEHR unsuccessfully attempted to avoid the German draft, but was apprehended by the Gestapo"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RE: PAUL L. PEYERL\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nin Vienna, Austria, sometime during late 1943 or early 1944. PEYERL also assumed the secrets pertaining to this aircraft were captured by Allied Forces. He said this type of aircraft was responsible for the downing of at least one American B-26 airplane. He furnished the following fuel and engine data:\n\n\"....Fuel mixture of N2H4O in Methyl Alcohol (CH3OH) rather than 'oxygen-holding' mixture of hydrogen peroxide H2O2 in water. 7m 1,3m high two rocket motors; smooth flow, rotary drive over 2,000 meters per second....\"\n\nPEYERL said he copied this data from a board located in the hanger area.\n\nPEYERL asserted he was shot down by the British on March 14, 1945, after having been reassigned to the Western Front. He was held prisoner by the British in London and later in Brussels until his release in 1946. He departed for the United States from Bremerhaven, Germany, on December 26, 1951; entering the United States in New Jersey on January 7, 1952, and was subsequently naturalized in Miami during 1958. He is presently employed as a mechanic at Eastern Airlines, Miami, Florida. He related he was born May 3, 1924, in Austria.\n\nPEYERL stated he has withheld this information because he assumed the United States possessed it. He has become increasingly concerned because of the unconfirmed reports concerning a similar object and denials the United States has such an aircraft. He feels such a weapon would be beneficial in Vietnam and would prevent the further loss of American lives which was his paramount purpose in contacting the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).\n\nPEYERL reiterated he has the original negatives of both photographs. He said the shots were taken at a thirty second time exposure.\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency.\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: 7/25/67\nFROM : SAC, NEWARK (47-0)\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL OBJECTS\nIVAN SANDERSON, COMPLAINANT\nALLEGED IMPERSONATION OF FBI AGENTS\nAND MILITARY PERSONNEL\nIMPERSONATION\nFlying Saucers\nEnclosed herewith for the Bureau are Chapters 13 and 14 of a book now being prepared by IVAN SANDERSON. The book relates to Unidentified Aerial Objects (UAO) which SANDERSON states will soon be published in magazine form on a nation-wide basis.\nSANDERSON, who claims to have written several books, is a graduate of Oxford in England and has various degrees. He states that he has appeared on the Gary Moore Show and other types of television projects. He relates that he has been extremely concerned about UAOs and in the submitted material he eludes briefly to the FBI and the CIA.\nThere does not appear to be a violation of the Impersonation Statute or any other violation over which this Bureau now has jurisdiction. The enclosed information is submitted only for the Bureau's interest and no further action is contemplated by Newark.\n2 - Bureau (Enc)\n1 - Newark\nNSI:JMP\n(3)\nNOT RECORDED\n152 JUL 28 1967\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 24, 1967\n62-83894-462\nREC-14\nMr. Theodore Gray Hullett\n561 37th Avenue\nSan Francisco, California 94121\nDear Mr. Hullett:\nMr. Hoover received your letter of August 19th, with enclosure, and wanted you to know he appreciates your best wishes. He asked me to thank you for sending the publication you forwarded to him.\nSincerely yours,\nHelen W. Gandy\nSecretary\nMAILED 19 AUG 24 1967 COMM-FBI\nNOTE: Bufiles contain nothing identifiable regarding correspondent and no record of the publication, \"ufo contact.\" Inasmuch as correspondent might possibly use a letter from the Director in some manner to promote this magazine, an in-absence reply is deemed advisable.\nSAW:mjl\n(3)"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 19, 1967\nUnidentified Flying Objects\nDirector J. Edgar Hoover\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D. C.\nDear Mr. Hoover:\nA very Happy Birthday....... July 1967.\nI am very Lucky to have the opportunity this afternoon to be able to Introduce to you the ufo contact igap journal. This magazine has been dedicated to Mr. George Adamski.\nMy letter to you and the enclosed magazine is a project of my own. I am a reporter for ufo contact, and in this way I hope to bring to the attention of V.I.P. of our country, our magazine and the message that it contains, to the reader. I don't sell the magazine, but plan to give it to the person I write to as a gift. The cost is my own, and the experience I will gain will be my reward, perhaps an advancement to the position of co-worker for IGAP in the future.\nThank you very much for giving me a moment of your time. I am sure you will find our magazine interesting.\nMay I again wish you a very Happy Birthday! (Walter Winchell)\nYour Friend,\nTheodore Gray Hullett\nTheodore Gray Hullett\n561 37th Avenue\nSan Francisco, California\nZIP CODE: 94121\nEXP. PROC.\nAUG 22 1967\nNotice Pgs 134-135\nConvincing UFO pictures\n62-83894-462\nREC-14\n16 SEP 12 1967"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. DeLoach\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Bishop\nMr. Casper\nMr. Callahan\nMr. Conrad\nMr. Felt\nMr. Gale\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Sullivan\nMr. Tavel\nMiss Holmes\nMiss Gandy\n\nAugust 19, 1967\n\nDirector J. Edgar Hoover\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nA very happy birthday.......July 1967.\n\nI am very lucky to have the opportunity this afternoon to be able to introduce to you the u/fo contact igap journal. This magazine has been dedicated to Mr. George Adamski.\n\nMy letter to you and the enclosed magazine is a protest of my own. I am a reporter for ufo contact, and in this way I hope to bring to the attention of U.F.O. of our country, our magazine and the message that it contains, to the reader. I doubt sell the magazine, but plan to have the person I write to as a gift. The cost is my own, and the experience I will gain will be my reward, perhaps an advantage to the position of co-worker for IGAP in the future.\n\nThank you very much for giving me a moment of your time. I am sure you will find our magazine interesting.\n\nMay I again wish you a very Happy Birthday! (Walter Winchell)\n\nYour friend,\n\nTheodore Gray Mullett\n561 37th Avenue\nSan Francisco, California\nZIP CODE 94121"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE\n62-83894-462"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"114 ufo contact\n\nOnce before, a gracious lady was willing, against much advice, to listen to the sincere words of a man who was still to battle for many years to come for the truth which he propounded. We ask again for that First Lady's gracious attention to certain matters which we believe, as in years gone by, will be of interest to her, also today.\nOur Open Letter we respectfully address to –\nHer Majesty, Queen Juliana of the Netherlands.\n\nAn open Letter\n\nSOESTDIJK PALACE,\nSOESTDIJK,\nHOLLAND. JUNE 1967.\n\nTo Her Majesty, Queen Juliana.\nYour Majesty,\nWe venture to approach you on a matter which we believe will be of some interest to you, the subject being one of immense importance, bearing as it does implications of a nature which might well affect in the future every aspect of human endeavour on this Earth.\nThe subject of which we speak has once before been brought to Your Majesty's attention, and, we understand, received careful consideration; in fact, it is in the belief that Your Majesty has shown more than usual interest that we make this approach to-day.\nMay we, with respect, ask you to cast your mind back 8 years. In May of 1959, Your Majesty was pleased to request the presence of Mr. George Adamski, of California, at Soestdijk Palace. Mr. Adamski was at that time on a world lecture-tour.\nThis gentleman had an unusual story to tell. He spoke of visitations to this planet by human beings from outer space. He spoke of kind human beings who had travelled in their spaceships, often called \"flying saucers\", from their home planets in our solar system, from Venus, from Saturn, Mars and others.\nTheir understanding was far ahead of our own, their sincere interest in our welfare was part of a philosophy of brotherhood and love for all of the Creator's Works.\nThis was George Adamski's story.\nIn 1959, the subject of flying saucers was considered by the majority to be laughable. Any attempt to discuss the possibility of beings technologically superior to us, visiting Earth in space craft travelling at fantastic speeds, was to dismiss all the scientific concepts of the day. Indeed, in 1959, scientists were\n\nonly beginning to accept the remote possibility of \"some form\" of life, – and a one-cell life, at that, – existing anywhere at all outside of Earth. And any suggestion that intelligent beings existed who had progressed past the stages of wars and poverty and racial intolerance, was to speak of Heaven itself.\nNow, in 1967, many things have changed. The majority still laughs, yes. But one sees in the ever-expanding minority a level of radical but intelligent thought which would have been branded a \"heresy\" against the whole Establishment just a few years ago. With our own greatly-increased space activity and the near-proximity of an Earthman's landing on the Moon, ideas have had to change along with the immense changes in the means of travel.\nWhat modern science has yet to discover, however, is an antidote to the enormously swollen ego of \"Earth-man\" which has gained nothing from the discoveries of Galileo other than a list of changed astronomical data and some very basic facts concerning the solar system in which we live.\nWhat they have not yet learned from the \"heretical\" revelations of Galileo is that scientific \"fact\" of today is not necessarily scientific \"fact\" of to-morrow; that they, too, these modern scientists, may be called upon – and perhaps very soon – to change all previous concepts of astronomical physics and to accept that Earth-man is not, after all, alone in the Universe.\nOne of the pioneers in this school of thought was George Adamski. Since his passing, in April 1965, others have come forward to carry on his work.\nMadam, on several occasions in the years since 1959, Mr. Adamski was given the opportunity of photographing some of these space craft on movie-film. These films have been shown widely in the United States and in certain countries in Europe. They have been viewed by persons in authority, including experts in many fields, as well as by millions of the general public by way of television.\nThe extraterrestrial human beings of whom Mr. Adamski spoke are still operating in the same pattern. Several of his helpers have been privileged to meet these people. New colour movies have been taken of their ships, on occasion with the deliberate connivance of the pilots of the craft concerned.\nAn American lady, Mrs. Madeleine Rodeffer, and two Germanborn, naturalised Americans, Mr. and Mrs. Fred Steckling, have been privileged not only to meet these friends from other planets but they have also been enabled to photograph the movement of their craft on colour-film.\nAll of these films have been viewed by persons in authority, including photographic experts of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Agency, (NASA), and they have yet to be faulted.\nMadam, the reason for our approach in this Open Letter is this. Having heard from Mr. Adamski first-hand of his experiences, would Your Majesty care once more to hear of the visitations of the Brothers and Sisters who befriended him? They have made themselves known to others; there are courageous\n\nmessages to trusted UFO workers on Earth, and for other specific purposes. Most of us have read accounts written by people claiming to have received messages, both garbled and clear, from the Space Brothers via ham radios, tensor-coil experiments, etc., or of seeing spacemen or other unidentified phenomena on their television screens. There was one amusing story of a man who fell asleep while watching a late, late movie on television and awoke several hours later to find himself staring at a strange, other-world face on his TV screen! He was so scared, he snapped off the TV set – and sold it the next day! Then there are cases of people hearing messages and celestial music on their tape recorders. Only recently, Fate magazine published a letter received from Myra Dee Hina of Sacramento, California, in which she stated that while attempting to record a new song she had created with the help of numerology, i.e., »notes forming the vibration of each word«, on a brand-new tape bought at a local store, she proceeded to pick the notes out on an organ and sing them on to the tape. She goes on to say: »I then went to turn off the tape recorder and found it had stopped. I reset it and played the notes over again. When I returned to the recorder to stop it, some sort of a force field seemed to appear. I could see it and feel it with my hands. It gave me the same sensation as if I held two repelling magnets. Wondering why such a condition existed, I stood and let the machine run on. When I no longer felt the force field, I ran the tape back to replay. My voice was clear, the notes were clear – but I was shocked beyond words when a beautiful orchestra began playing the very theme I had created. it lasted a long period, over 35 minutes. It is possible that the recorder somehow picked up music out of the air. There was no other instrument in the house, the tape was new and I ran it around 12 o'clock midnight. I've tried to repeat this strange incident several times, but nothing has happened. In addition to the music on the tape, a voice speaks in a language I never heard before. Several persons who have listened to the tape say they have a weird feeling while it is playing«.\n\nA Warning Via Ham Radio.\n\nWhile, even with an open mind, we cannot, understandably, vouch for the veracity of all these claims, we can quote a couple of experiences of this nature which happened to our founder, the late Wilbert B. Smith, during his long and intensive study of the UFO Mystery.. WBS, as most of you know, was first and foremost a scientist, and he never accepted anything without careful checks and cross-checks and only by this method was he reasonably sure of his ground. But undoubtedly, he received clear-cut messages and confirmations on a variety of scientific and philosophical matters from his space friends, the »Boys from Topside«, through a number of different media. One of these\n\nsources was a local ham radio operator who, it must be clearly stressed, knew little if anything about Mr. Smith's work or scientific experiments and most of the messages he received for Wilbert Smith, on an unidentified waveband, were completely unintelligible to him – although they made a lot of sense to WBS.\nBy this means and with the usual, requested confirmation from other sources, Wilbert Smith received a lot of invaluable guidance in his scientific work. The most dramatic incident, however, occurred when WBS and a small working party of the then Ottawa Flying Saucer Club were preparing to test out an experimental machine they had built. Just prior to this test, the Boys from Topside broke into the ham radio operator's listening, blanking out all other stations and repeating insistently that they had an urgent message for Wilbert Smith which the operator was to pass on to him without delay – and this he did. The message, couched in scientific terms, might be translated into layman's language as saying that a certain flywheel in the experimental machine would not stand the stress of the r.m.p. about to be placed on it and that it would shatter under the strain; precaution should be taken. Heeding this advice, WBS and his co-workers built a protective wooden covering around the machine, after which they set it in motion and, as predicted, the flywheel shattered, embedding the wooden boards with its shrapnel!\n\nIntervention on a Tape Recording.\n\nAnother strange experience occurred during an exchange of tape recording letters between WBS and another UFO worker in the U.S. At the time, WBBS was in possession of certain scientific data which the Boys from Topside had asked him to keep confidential for the time being. Inadvertently, WBS, more by implication than direct statement, let slip a few clues to this scientific problem in a tape-letter to his colleague. A week or so later, he received the tape back from his friend, with a message asking if he would fill in the blank spaces on the tape. Puzzled, WBS examined the tape carefully and played it over, only to discover that in the places where he had let slip the tell-tale clues, the sound had been neatly erased and there was a slightly sticky substance on the tape in these areas! The only possible conclusion he could reach was that it was the work of the Boys from Topside.\nHere then, are two authentic cases of the Space Brothers using their electronic equipment for a specific purpose.\n\nUse of Television.\n\nRecently, the English magazine »Week-End« carried the following article, and while it is written in a humorous, tongue-in-cheek vein, its writer may have been a lot closer to the truth than he imagined! To quote: »Tonight you will probably sit down\n\nufo contact 139"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"138 ufo contact\n\nphotosynthetic process to produce at least simple plant forms.\n\"The significance of my findings, if correct\", Dr. Johnson declared, \"is that a case for life chemistry in space can not only be inferred but the end product can be looked upon as a form of life similar to that on earth\".\nJohnson made his discoveries by observing the spectral lines of light absorption of interstellar dust. He found that the dust absorbed light at a certain range of wavelength.\nIdentifying an element or compound by spectral information is similar to identifying a human by his fingerprints.\nIt has been known that star-light contains many colors. Scientists also know that molecules or atoms in the path of star-light are capable of absorbing a part of it.\nThis means that individual molecules can be identified positively by the particular spectral portion of the light they absorb on a one-to-one basis.\n\nIN MILLIONS.\nPrevious like studies of spectral lines indicated the presence of hydrocarbons. But since the combinations of known hydrocarbon compounds extends into the millions, further extensive study was required to identify the major components of dust from this spectral information.\nRandom testing of the possible hydrocarbon components of the interstellar dust would take several lifetimes. By systematic elimination of possibilities, Dr. Johnson reduced the field to porphyrins and carbotenoids, which are closely associated with chlorophyll. He compared the absorption band spectra of these substances in laboratory conditions simulating the extra-terrestrial environments of the dust and found that they matched.\nFurther investigation through both spectroscopic studies and lasar research at the Electro-Optical Systems revealed the substance in question to be chlorophyll.\nIf some of this dust should reach a planet like Mars, could the chlorophyll photosynthesize?\n\"We have indications that life started here (on earch) from outside\", Dr. Johnson declared. \"The same thing could happen there\".\nTo illustrate the point, Dr. Johnson said he conducted some experiments on rocks estimated to be 4½ billion years old. He found porphyrins, a \"skeleton\" form of chlorophyll.\nDr. Johnson speculated that the same mechanism – condensation of dust into meteors, which are then attracted to planets – can be at work now as well as in the past when earth was born.\n\nCredit: – Mrs. Merna Lindermayor,\nCan Bernadino, California.\n\nThe space brothers - and Earth's electronic equipment\n\nUnavoidable Interference.\n\nOne of the commonest occurrences indicating the close presence of a UFO is the unavoidable interference with Earth's radio, electrical and electronic equipment, believed to be brought about by the different force field in which the UFO operates. Temporarily stalled cars, »dead« radios, distorted television screens and disrupted electronic equipment are among the features most frequently met with in a close encounter with a flying saucer. One of our correspondents in Westford, Mass., U.S.A., where there has been a record number of sightings this year, tells us that when a UFO passes near her home, a most extraordinary pattern of horizontal lines of small vees's (thus: vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv) appears on her television screen and that frequently when she goes outside to investigate, there is the culprit UFO! Included among the many reports of the increased world-wide UFO activity in recent months are typical ones such as the report from Azores published July 11 which reads: »Flying Object Stops Watches. A spokesman for Santa Maria Airport claimed today that a mysterious flying object apparently stopped all electro-magnetic watches at the airport when it flew slowly over the island yesterday. He said a white cylindrical object was seen flying slowly in a north-westerly direction at a height of 33,000 feet«. Another report from Canberra, Australia, published soon after Mariner II was photographing Mars, reads: \"Did Mysterious Object Distort Mars Signals? A mysterious glowing object – hovering near Canberra Airport while the U.S. Mariner space probe was taking pictures of Mars – has baffled experts in Canberra. Six members of the traffic control tower crew said the object hung suspended at about 5,000 feet for 40 minutes. It disappeared when an air force plane was sent out to identify it. Experts now are wondering if it was coincidence that the object was sighted shortly before nearby Tidninbilla tracking station was scheduled to pick up Mariner signals. The station had unusual difficulty in locking on to Mariner at the time«.\n\nDeliberate Control.\nIt is believed that most of the aforegoing incidents are more or less of an accidental nature. But there is steadily-mounting evidence over the years that our space visitors are able to and actually do use our electronic equipment to make their presence known to their earth brothers, to convey\n\nufo contact 115\n\npeople still who battle against great odds for what they know to be right.\nWe believe that, with Your Majesty's approval, further evidence can be produced for your consideration which will help greatly your understanding of these matters, thereby encouraging others to seek the truth of these visitations from outer space. It is our sincere belief that there is far too much at stake for the world to continue to supress or ignore news of events of such magnitude.\nShould Your Majesty so desire, George Adamski's friends would be honoured to tell their own stories and show their own films in Your Majesty's presence.\nWith respect,\nSincerely\nThe Editors.\n\nThe evidence of the quiet contacts\nby RONALD CASWELL.\n\n\"THEY'LL NEVER GET CLOSE ENOUGH when I've got this in my hand, you know, Ronald\", said Fred with some conviction, looking down at the gleaming object he held on his knee. He had a slightly rueful smile on his face. He reminded me of a youngish Bob Hope in looks except that his nose was not so sharp and his face a little more rounded. \"It's a power zoom lens, see. It's fully automatic. – They know that if I get them on this, NO-ONE will be able to deny it\".\nWe sat near to the open French window of the lounge with the sun streaming in, I on the comfortable old settee, Fred on a highbacked chair, one knee crossed over the other, looking thoughtfully at his own fingers idly adjusting the lens-piece of the cine-camera.\nMay Morlet was somewhere in the house, probably ringing through to some of the guests we were expecting later in the day – or maybe she had driven into Antwerp with Ingrid, Fred's wife, who had a hairdressing appointment that afternoon. Tomorrow we were to run through to The Hague to meet some of our Dutch friends who were arranging Fred's lecture and film-show there.\nHans was about somewhere in the big old house. He had arranged for a few days' leave and travelled down from Copenhagen some days before. Hans is Major Petersen of the Royal Danish Air Force, organiser of the European and Asian sections of IGAP. He may never live it down, but, much-travelled man that he is, he had left his passport back home! He gave a huge chuckle as he described to us how he had managed to talk himself across the German frontier. Luckily his wife had now sent the passport on.\nI had flown across to Brussels a few days before, on September 1st, and drank coffee in the airport lounge with Pat Morlet, May's elder son, whilst we\n\nwaited an hour or so for the Steckling's plane to come in from Washington, via New York and Cologne. They were flying LUFTHANSA.\nPatrick had them paged as the Cologne flight began to stream into the arrival bay, everyone on the look-out for the baggage coming up on the wide moving belt from below. Mrs. Suzy Peeters, May's lifelong friend, and Treasurer for the Belgian groups, arrived in her tiny Volksvagen and smilingly greeted us, together with Philip, May's younger son, who had been filming the aircraft from the airport roof. We were all old friends. Suzy was to help with extra transport back to Antwerp.\nWe looked at the people who were coming over to the inquiries desk; and the floor clattered with luggage-loaded trollies as the passengers came away from Customs and began passing through the barriers, some hurrying, some looking lost, others being greeted enthusiastically by waiting friends. The huge hall rang with sound, and above all were the disembodied voices speaking loftily from many hidden loudspeakers. We wondered what Fred and Ingrid would look like.\nA neat-looking couple with a boy of about seven spoke to one of the clerks at the inquiries desk. They turned and faced us as the man pointed our way.\nFred was about 5 feet 10, Ingrid about 5-7. Glenn was looking around him at the high roof of the foyer. Ingrid was an attractive young woman with natural blonde hair, slim and wearing a white, two-piece suit. She did not look the type one would expect to see at a special private meeting of members of the United States Senate Aeronautics and Space Committee.\nFred seemed a rather serious-faced young man. Both were in their early thirties. Both were German-born, naturalised Americans. They had lived in Canada for some time prior to their arrival in the States. Only little Glenn's voice was totally American.\nSo this was Fred Steckling, the young man who had not wished to \"take over\", as George Adamski had hoped during the last few days of his illness in Washington. D.C. As Fred said, no-one could take G.A.'s place. So it was left at that. And George had died, not knowing. Or did he know, that wise old man?\nMadeleine and Fred and Ingrid had just gone on working as before, only much harder. Telling G.A.'s story, showing his films, bothering the officials on Capitol Hill. And now they had Madeleine Rodeffer's film to show as well, the amazing close-up shots of the scout-craft hovering over her \"front yard\", which was in reality, the long sloping, grassy bank running from her house down to the road. At the most, a hundred feet in the air, level with the tall tree-tops.\nMadeleine and Ingrid had faced a chilly reception committee at the private Senate hearing of January 1965, a couple of months before George died; and at the end of the showing of George's film sequences and a 45-minute verbal barrage from some sarc-"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"116 ufo contact\n\nastic senators, Madeleine, who had worked in a Government office for many years, just stood up and told them that she wouldn't like to be in THEIR shoes when people found out what was being kept from them.\nDid they think the public was blind?\nMany had seen the planes chasing the saucers. Even children.\nAnd Madeleine had come out of the committee-room seething with anger. A few weeks afterwards she had filmed a scout-ship over her own \"front yard\".\nFred loosened up a little as we sped along the road Brussels-Antwerp. Patrick, who studied at Brussels University, and who himself lectured on flying saucers, was a good driver, but fast!\n\"Madeleine was at the airport as we left Washington. Oh, and Linda, her friend, was with her. You know, that young woman who had some sightings. She's written to you, I think. A nice girl. There were two Brothers standing back a bit in the crowd. They weren't with Madeleine. Maybe she knew they were there.\"\nHe went on talking about some of the Brothers he had met. Ingrid joined in occasionally, her eyes bright and shining.\n\"Oh, Ronald!\" she said, in her German-accented American, drawling the words. \"If you only could meet them! There is this wonderful feeling of goodness that seems to reach out to you.\"\nFred's rather serious face relaxed a little as he spoke. One could see he was no fanatic. Fred Steckling and Ingrid were not money-grabbing \"contactees\" making a fast buck. They spoke quietly, but forcefully at times. Perhaps Fred could not quite shake off this feeling of having to convince someone all the time.\n\"Ronald,\" he said, after a rather long, somewhat tired silence. They'd been travelling for many, many hours. \"Ronald, do you know, it's just as if they have our frequencies. I had a birthday a while back –\" Ingrid was about to burst in with wife-like enthusiasm but Fred's voice stopped her. \"I had a birthday a while back,\" Fred went on. \"Ingrid and I were watching T.V. I don't remember the show. Suddenly –\" and again Ingrid was bursting with agreement, \"– suddenly it went doot-di-di-doot-doot, on the T.V. just like that, maybe ten or a dozen times. Doot-di-di-doot-doot. Ingrid and I just looked at each other – and then we both DASHED out onto the porch.\"\nPatrick swerved among the traffic on a bumpy patch of road.\n\"There over the house was the saucer. It just swayed there, back and forward. Then it seemed to swing down low as the light showed from the porch and then shot off over in the direction of Washington Airport.\"\nIngrid couldn't hold herself any longer. \"And do you know, Ronald!\" she burst in, \"Madeleine had the same thing happen on her birthday! Linda and some more friends were just being seen off from the house and they called out to Madeleine to look. And there\n\nwas this red, glowing light swaying over the house!\"\nFred smiled knowingly.\n\"You can bet, they've got our wave-lengths!\" he said.\nAs we looked out at May's long lily-pond in the spacious lawn, the big, leafy trees almost overhanging the house and splashing the ground with shadow, Fred gave a little laugh to himself and glanced up at me. He was so often serious, especially when he talked to the people who gathered at May's house, guests, reporters etc, – it was nice to see him with a, somewhat twisted, grin. There were no gimmicks with Fred.\n\"I saw a saucer close overhead some while ago. – There are a LOT of them around that area – I had my camera with me, this camera – and I ran off some film and I felt so gosh-darned pleased with myself! D'you know something? I left the dust-cap on!\"\nHe told me of his talks with the Brothers.\n\"D'you know, Ronald, when you're with them, you don't ASK questions. You don't think of it. You just listen. It's as if you are not meant to ask of things maybe they don't want you to know.\"\nFred bit his lip thoughtfully.\n\"One of them I can see several times a week. I know where he's working. I can tell you what sort of work he does, but not where.\" Fred told me.\n\"It's only once in a while we have a chance to talk. Maybe over a cup of coffee some place.\"\nHe paused, then went on.\n\"This one's from Venus.\"\nFred's trip over had been delayed. Hans and I had to change our bookings. Fred had told me on the trip up from the airport how someone, – he didn't know who – had contacted the bank where Fred had arranged credit for the trip.\n\"I have to do it on the instalments,\" he said. \"A cook doesn't earn all that much money.\" Fred works at an hotel in Virginia, near where he lives.\nThe strange thing was that Fred had previously had credit arrangements with the same bank, and had had no bother. Maybe someone had tried to stop his trip to Europe. It had taken several days to clear up the matter.\nHe was speaking first in Antwerp, staying with May for some days, then The Hague, then Frankfurt and Mannheim, then in Austria – Vienna and Linz – then on to West Berlin for the last six days to stay with his family.\nWhether Fred was helped with money at the German or Austrian lectures, I don't know. I know he received nothing in Antwerp and Den Haag, except hospitality from good friends. That certainly did not pay the Stecklings fare across the Atlantic.\nFred's first lecture was on the evening of our arrival in Antwerp, at May Morlet's home. Of the 50-60 in the audience, which included reporters, I noticed a young woman. I shall not describe her.\nLater that night, in fact at 3.30 in the morning, – we had sat talking, all of May's house-guests, until the small hours, as we were to do every night of our visit – I walked with Hans Petersen around some\n\nufo contact 137\n\nThere is no doubt that a great number of the meteoric falls actually are remains of \"natural\" objects in space – but not by any means all of them.\nNo doubt also, some of the falls of ice are from aircraft de-icing or breaking off by some other means; the theory about ice from the toilets is very doubtful, but even if we give this theory a certain chance, then it still explains only a very small part of the total number of reported falls.\nUntil the Rocket-age's attempts to explain conditions in the Space around us began, a remarkable attitude prevailed within certain scientific circles in regard to that Space.\nEarth was the navel of the Cosmos, around which and about which everything turned. The moon and the planets and the stars were hung in the sky for Earth's sake, and between all the bodies outside of Earth's atmosphere was this great empty Space, in which was to be found – absolutely nothing.\nBut the rockets told another story – they had been out there. We can say then, that now it is proven that Space is not empty. Among other things, dust has been registered. And it has become dusty in the space-capsule when the capsule door has stood open.\nIt is proven also, that certain chemical reactions can, in the course of a few seconds, form solid matter. (Einstein).\nAs all the planets are born in the same Cosmos, this means to say that the same elements or units which make up the \"creation\" are to be found in invisible form in this so-called empty Space. It \"only\" needs the right chemical reaction to take place for the whole to take solid form and to build up as planets, comets, meteorites or ice – or for that matter, as many other things.\nIt is therefore quite plain to see that science can, and must, soon add a new chapter to that book about the \"factual\" conditions in Space, which it is writing at this time. In this \"book\" it will be stated that, under certain conditions, solid matter is formed in empty Space – as well as much else – matter that can later fall onto this planet or others as \"shooting-stars\" or as ice from an airplane's toilet.\nAnd it will be enormously difficult, – yes, almost impossible, – to differentiate between what are remains of solid bodies, such as planets, comets or asteroids, and what is produced by some other means. One might point to evidence of bacteria, but this will not do, because bacteria can be gathered up from anywhere in the Cosmos. For example, our planet, just the same as other planets, has, during its journey through space, trailed behind itself a long tail of dust and bacteria. This dust and these bacteria are caught up at some time or another by other heavenly bodies, in the same manner that we collect dust and bacteria from other worlds.\nIn fact, we need not go to all the great amount of trouble that we do, to sterilize the space-ships and probes which are to be sent up; – our bacteria has long been present on our sister planets and many\n\nother planets, just as \"their bacteria\" has been a long, long while living with us.\nThus there exists great unexplored areas of research with which science can come to grips and learn from; and when, finally, these are explained, the next natural step will be to learn how one can come to live without being \"infected\" by bacteria.\nWe are on the way; but for a while yet we shall be \"infected\" by bacteria, and believe that we can \"infect\" our sister planets' inhabitants with our bacteria. For a while yet we shall only find meteorites that originate from planets, comets or asteroids, and ice which falls from the toilet-systems of airplanes.\nOctober 1966.\n\n– ★ –\n\nHere, in a report just received from the United States, is an important break-through into the area of research mentioned in the afore-going article. With precision timing, we now perceive that \"– through condensation this dust eventually forms meteorites which are dense enough to be attracted to a planet –\".\nFrom: Los Angeles \"Herald-Examiner\", Sunday, January 22nd 1967.\n\n»L. A. Man finds Life in Space«\n\nTHERE IS LIFE IN SPACE!\nChlorophyll, key compound of life on earth, exists abundantly in outer space.\nThese findings have been reported to a gathering of experts on Astronomy and Biodynamics meeting at the University of California at Berkeley by Dr. Fred Johnson of Electro-Optical Systems in Pasadena.\nBased on his findings, Dr. Johnson told the Berkeley colloquium the possibility that man is not alone in the universe is excellent.\nThe physicist, astronomer and biochemist told the Berkeley sessions, which opened Friday, that after 13 years of research he had been able to identify interstellar dust and had found it is composed largely of the solid molecular substance chlorophyll and not ice or graphite as had been previously believed.\n\"There is no reason to believe that we on this planet are unique\", Dr. Johnson told the Herald-Examiner. \"There is very good evidence, on the other hand, that there may be similar forms of life throughout the universe\".\nDr. Johnson reported that although interstellar dust is very small with each grain having an average density of 10 to 26 grams per cubic centimeter, he speculates that through condensation this dust eventually forms meteorites which are dense enough to be attracted to a planet.\n\nSIMPLE PLANTS.\nThese meteorites, he said, then deposit the life substance chlorophyll and, as on earth, undergo the"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"136 ufo contact\n\nthe principles involved in weight-distribution and surface manipulation, i.e. expert engineers producing the revolutionary Hovercraft.\n\"Some of my readers will have been way ahead of me in these past assessments and no doubt will have anticipated my next intention. Yet others will be a trifle impatient that the following correlation should be made. But I must stress, I try very hard not to be biased, science is far more interesting left as it is. Therefore I am sincere in my next analysis. I trust the reader will be, too. I have purposely chosen the following title for the evidence which I hope may help shed some truer light on one who may be a very maligned man.\" UNQUOTE.\n\nYes, the \"very maligned man\" is George Adamski.\n12 years ago Leonard G. Cramp produced the orthographic projections which showed how young Stephen Darbishire's \"Coniston\" saucer, as photographed, was identical in shape and proportion to Adamski's classic \"scout-craft\".\nToday, in his book \"Piece For A Jig-saw\", Mr. Cramp produces startling evidence of a highly-technical nature which shows how, following along purely engineering principles as a result of analyses of hundreds of reported saucer-sightings, with accompanying detail of manoeuvre and flight patterns, he arrives at the ideal form, in all respects, for a visiting \"saucer\". The saucer he finally produces, after progressive line-drawings and photographs by the score, is the Adamski scout-craft.\nIn his concluding chapter, not only does the author quote details of engineering data provided by Adamski in his controversial books, but Mr. Cramp confesses that, until the time of writing this last chapter, he had not yet read completely Adamski's \"Inside The Space Ships\"! Realising perhaps certain readers' scepticism about this belated admission, Mr. Cramp goes on to describe points outlined in that book concerning Adamski's alleged trips in the scout-craft, whereby his (Cramp's) own scientifically arrived-at data receives startling corroboration!\n\"At this juncture I can almost hear many an Adamski sceptic breathing a sigh of incredulity, hardly able to believe that I should dare to include such material in a semi-technical work of this nature.\" Unquote.\nWith many detailed international sighting reports analysed scientifically, with his own photographed experiments showing the intensive study he has made of all aspects of \"saucer\" manoeuvres and flight, and accompanied by scores of finely-executed line-drawings, Leonard Cramp provides food for thought for all those of an open mind.\nHere, biased or un-biased as we may seem, we would like to recommend to other biased and unbiased UFO researchers one of the best flying saucer contributions since \"Inside The Space Ships\". That the author is not biased can be witnessed by the 360 pages of this book which are not about George Adamski.\nIn expressing the hope that certain UFOlogist sceptics will not now refrain from purchasing and reading this excellent book, we would like to conclude with an excerpt from the summing-up by Leonard G. Cramp himself.\n\"Out of the confusion and the shadow surrounding this most enigmatic of flying saucer contact stories, emerges one or two, but nevertheless very important facts.\n(a) Adamski type saucers are not uncommon among UFO reports.\n(b) On purely engineering grounds the configuration of the \"scout ship\" offers the best all-round compromise which could embody the functions required by the gravitational propulsion theory.\n(c) Adamski's description of inside a saucer is not inconsistent with the theory, on the contrary, theory seems to support it.\n(d) Thus on these grounds alone I for one feel inclined to accept the first part of his experience as fact, and in my opinion any inconsistencies which appear in his subsequent claims are insufficient to invalidate the previous conclusions.\"\n\"PIECE FOR A JIG-SAW\" - 27 sh. 6 d.\nSOMERTON PUBLISHING COMPANY,\nCOWES. ISLE OF WIGHT.\n\nMiscellaneous\n\nOut of the clear, blue sky\nby MAJOR H. C. PETERSEN.\nWE ALL KNOW of accounts of objects which, during the past couple of hundred years, have been reported as falling down from the sky, - and, often enough, from a clear, cloudless sky.\nScientists and other experts have sought to explain such \"falls\" as meteorites, meteors, or - nowadays - as something in connection with flying, atomic tests or the like.\nIn the book \"Le Matin des Magiciens\", by the Frenchmen, Louis Pauwels and Jacques Bergier, volume One gives reference to 40,000 notations of falls of such extraordinary things.\nIf we concern ourselves solely with two groups of objects - meteorites and ice - then we find ourselves in an area where science and various other expert sources are quite positive in their conclusions.\nMeteoric stones originate from comets and planets which have disintegrated, or from larger or smaller asteroids. The ice comes from airplanes - either formed outwardly or from the toilet.\n\nufo contact 117\n\nquiet, deserted, leafy avenues near to May's house. Hans had suggested a walk before turning in. It was our first opportunity to talk alone together since our meeting in Denmark three or four weeks before.\nHe also wanted to tell me something. About a young lady of rather special appearance who had, during the course of the evening, moved out of the audience and was sitting on a settee very close to the speaker's table. Just before the guests left, - some of them were unknown to May Morlet - the young woman spoke a few words with Hans.\n\"Ron\", said Hans, \"I am wondering about that young woman.\"\nSome days after Fred and Ingrid and Glenn had left Vienna for Berlin, for a very short family re-union, the Co-workers received a letter from our Austrian friend and Co-worker, Dora Bauer, who told us of the lectures Fred had given in Vienna and Linz. She also wrote that Fred had told her of two space people, a Brother and a Sister, who were at May's house on that first evening - -\nAnd going through Germany he had filmed a strange formation in the sky. It was on September 7th 1966.\nIn February this year I received photostats of correspondence and some still pictures from the film that Fred Steckling took whilst travelling by train between Mannheim and Frankfurt, in West Germany. The stills he had obtained by photographing from the screen, he said. He did not dare have the stills professionally made. (Both George Adamski and Madeleine Rodeffer have had \"accidents\" happen to film in the past. A greater part of the Rodeffer close-up saucer film was stolen from an hotel room when G.A. was taking the original to be copied. Copies of his own film loaned to T.V. net-works and others have returned badly disfigured with chemicals, \"with great regret -\")\nA letter from Fred to Thomas G. Corbin, Major-General U.S.A.F. Director Legislative Liaison, Department of the Air Force, Washington, D.C., read:\n\"Dear Sir,\nWhile with my family in Germany September 7, 1966, I had the rare opportunity to film a \"Armada\" of about 40 to 50 UFO's appearing and disappearing in the middle of the blue sky.\nThe 23 feet of Kodakcolour film were taken out of an open window of a speeding express train, Mannheim-Frankfurt, approximately at 11.40 a.m.\nMy camera is an automatic 8 mm Revere power zoom, 30 mm lens. The objects, which can be seen, look like white cigarettes on the motion-picture behind trees, railroad stations and powerlines, which were flying by and blocking their sight on occasions while filming. This rules out light reflections from any excusable source.\nI would be willing indeed to show this rare film (personally) to Air Force officials here in Washington D.C., if they are interested.\n\nAny Monday would be fine for showing the film, I am looking forward to your answer,\nsincerely, Fred Steckling.\" UNQUOTE.\n\nSimilar letters were sent to Senator Clinton P. Anderson, of the Senate Space and Aeronautics Committee, and to Dr. Paul D. Lowman Jnr. at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (NASA).\nThe reply from Dr. Lowman reads: (see inside back cover).\n\"NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION\nGODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER\nGreenbelt, Maryland 20771\nFILE 17232\nMr. Fred Steckling, Feb. 20 1967\n------\nAlexandria, Virginia 22312.\nDear Mr. Steckling:\nThank you very much for your letter and for your offer to show us your film. I am not really qualified to pass judgement on it, but it would be good to have the people here at Goddard who are, look at it. May I suggest, then, that you give Mr. Penn Stevens, phone - -, a call. He will make an appointment for you to come out to Goddard and show the Photographic Branch and me your film. Unfortunately we have no 8 mm projector here, so I must ask you to bring your own. Thank you again for your offer.\nSincerely yours,\nsigned. Paul D. Lowman, Jr.\nGeochemistry Laboratory\nLaboratory for Theoretical Studies.\" UNQUOTE.\n\nOf the visit, which took place in Building A.I. at 10.30 a.m. on February 27th 1967, Fred said this:\n\"- We took Madeleine along so the 22 NASA officials could see G.A.'s and her film, too. They seemed to be quite impressed, but would not make an open statement concerning the film, naturally. The 2 hour meeting took place in Building A.I. They treated us very nice and seemed to know much more of what we had to show and tell. One thing they said, however, and that is concerning Dr. Hynek. His swamp-gas explanations are nonsense, we were told.\n\"But despite the evidence of the 3 films they still would like to have more positive proof, we were told, for it still does not prove these ships to be extraterrestrial, as one official put it. However, he was not able to tell us just where these strange crafts come from otherwise. But they were quite impressed about the exact formation of the many ships on the film of Sept. 7th. 66. Reflection, any fake, and cloud formation, including Skyriders, was ruled out. It left only 23 feet of UFO's.\n\"They said nothing about G.A.'s film and on Madeleine's they commented, - the ship is smaller, and anticipated it to be about 27 feet in diameter. They were interested in how far the trees in the back-"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"118 ufo contact\n\nground were and all in all said, to be convinced that what we had shown them are ships of extraterrestrial origin they needed more positive proof or evidence. One person came up with the scout being a volkswagen, you know how they have to make jokes. But we were treated very nice and in respect, – one person said to Ingrid, you have something there, – meaning the films –\n\"I could see that they had much knowledge, but could not give themselves away. They did not ridicule us, nor the films, nor the whole UFO idea. I did not go to NASA to convince them, but to consult them.\"\nHe added:\n\"This meeting with NASA was a different matter altogether than the Senate Space committee 2 years ago with Madeleine and Ingrid, where they received more \"Hell\" than anything else –\"\nUNQUOTE.\n\nOn March 20th, Fred sent me a photostat letter from the UFO spokesman at the Pentagon in Washington D.C. (see back pages)\n\n\"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nWashington 20330\nOffice Of The Secretary\nMar 17 1967\nDear Mr. Steckling:\n\nYour letter concerning your unidentified flying object (UFO) film finally reached my office – – – Office of Information for Project Blue Book, the Air Force UFO program.\nThe Air Force would be very interested in reviewing your film. If you would get in touch with me at the Pentagon, we will arrange a showing for any Monday which is convenient for you. My number is 0 – – – – or 0 – – – –.\n\nThank you for offering to show your film; I am looking forward to hearing from you.\n\nSincerely\nsigned. George P. Freeman, Jr.\nLt. Colonel, USAF.\nChief, Civil Branch\nCommunity Relations Division\nOffice of Information.\n\nMr. Fred Steckling,\n\nAlexandria, Virginia 22312.\"\nUNQUOTE.\n\nFred wrote of the visit:\n\"Our Pentagon visit was Monday March 20th at 2 p.m. at Colonel Freeman's office. – Madeleine came along – Several high commission officers reviewed the Sept. 7th film three times, and Colonel Freeman stated: \"This is the best film I've seen yet.\" and \"I have never seen anything like this before.\" He told me to inform the UFO investigation committee in Colorado – (– the new University of Colorado\n\nUFO investigation study, – R.C.) – and send them some pictures.\n\"Madeleine's and G.A.'s films were already known to them – from T.V. – and no comment was made on them. They seemed to know all three of us – Ingrid was there – they gave this impression.\n\"The Colonel said: \"What about the scoutships we are supposed to have in Dayton?\" so we answered, \"What about and how about it?\" They did not confirm anything or otherwise. But here too we were treated respectfully, and returned the same to them –.\"\nUNQUOTE.\n\nLater, I received a fuller description of events.\n\"When I took the film September 7th, we were between Mannheim and Frankfurt traveling North. The time was about 11.45 a.m., no clouds, about seventy degrees, Fahrenheit. Although power-lines and trees were flying by, while I took the film, If there was a station it surely swished by so fast that it was impossible to make out any signs, etc. In this case you have to take my word for it. I was already before alerted of the Brothers before the film, and became aware of a group of 10 to 12 cigarette shaped objects high in the sky (12 o'clock up.) I jumped back to grab the camera, a 8 mm Revere, 30 mm powerzoom, Chicago build and opened the window all the way to eliminate any reflections and started filming. All in all, 6 groups of ten to twelve spacecraft appeared one after another and moved along the sky like Dolphins in the water, as an example. Appearing and disappearing, the armada traveled to about 9 o'clock (position) and disappeared completely, giving me the privilege to take about 23 feet of Kodak color film.\n\"There were quite some people on the train, some of them looking out of their windows, becoming aware of the objects. As we could see they all had big question-marks on their faces. They had never seen anything like this before. I might add, there was no fear on their faces. Ingrid and myself also Glenn, we could hardly believe it, ever to be presented with such an opportunity of taking that many ships on film and all at once. We stood on the window, Ingrid saying only, \"oh, my God\" and our every hair was standing up at this wonderful sight. We will never forget this experience and are surely grateful for it. –\"\nUNQUOTE.\n\nI wrote to Fred, asking him if I could use his pictures and correspondence in UFO CONTACT. He wrote back:\n\"You can go ahead and use what you feel is right concerning my visit to NASA and the pictures –\n\"As you know, my work in this cause has no connections in pleasing my Ego, and therefore it does not matter to me if my name is used or not. Important is the work, not us. –\n\"We all know George Adamski has given much to this world in knowledge and information and I feel\n\nufo contact 135\n\nAt that time the Air Force termed the Heflin picture a hoax.\nThe \"Bluebook\" report said Heflin's photo did not correspond to his description of the round, saucer-like object.\nBut since then the Air Force has commissioned the independent study by the University of Colorado at Boulder.\nFrom: \"San Francisco Chronicle\",\nFriday, March 10, 1967.\nCredit: Theodore Gray Hullett, San Francisco, California, U.S.A.\n\nTwo PC s spot a »saucers«\n\nTwo policemen saw an oval-shaped object flash through the sky yesterday. The officers said the saucer-like object flew over Strood, Kent, at about 1,000 feet – and had a tail of blue and silvery stars.\nLater there was a similar report from Sevenoaks. (Kent.)\nPolice at Rochester said: \"The authorities have been told.\"\nFrom: \"Daily Sketch\", London, March 25th, 1967.\n\n»The flying saucer that Andrew saw in Stamford Sky«\n\nAndrew, the eight-year-old son of Mr. and Mrs. T. H. Hyde, of 59 Scotgate, Stamford, claims to have seen a \"flying saucer\" over Stamford on Tuesday, Aug. 2. He was in his back garden at the time, and this is how he sketched and described what he saw:\n\"I saw this object in the sky twice this morning between about half-past ten and a quarter to eleven. It was going very quickly above the clouds. The first time I saw it, it was travelling in a N. W. direction, and then about ten minutes later it came back.\n\"It was then going in a S. E. direction, and it made no sound. the shape was round, with black circles looking like ship's port-holes round the middle. There were little things looking like landing wheels on the bottom.\n\"There was a cloud of yellow stuff coming out of the back and there was a ring round the middle of the object.\"\nUNQUOTE.\nFrom: A Stamford paper, Lincs. England.\nAugust 1966.\n\nA friend is a person who knows all about you — and still likes you. Elbert Hubbard.\n\nLiterature\n\n»Piece for a jig-saw«\n\nBy LEONARD G. CARMP., M.S.I.A. A.R.Ae.S.\nauthor of \"Space, Gravity and the Flying Saucer.\"\n\nHere is a book about \"flying saucers\" which can be of immense interest to both the »converted\" and to the \"open-minded\", to the lay-person looking for more corroboration to back up his beliefs in the reality of visiting space-ships, and to the technically-minded man who may well be rather surprised at the wealth of detail of a highly technical nature included in this work.\nLeonard Cramp, who for many years has worked in both aerodynamics and, more recently, with the new design principles of the Hovercraft, has succeeded in writing a bookunderstood, by any person of normal intelligence who can read the English language.\n\"Piece For A Jig-saw\" does, in truth, offer a piece – a very large piece – of that enigmatic jig-saw puzzle which has undulated and returned along 180 degrees through head-lines of the world's press for the past 20 years. Cramp himself has worked on material for this book for over half that time. It is 12 years since he submitted to the public \"Space, Gravity and the Flying Saucer\"; – this book is a natural and elevating follow-up.\nWritten in a style which is as open and as lacking in pomposity as the author himself, one finds a pattern developing from each chapter to the next, as he takes us from his brief but concise \"background material\" of orthodox aerodynamics, curves into a high trajectory through the experimental X-15 and the family of rockets, and into the deep blue. One is almost shocked to find with what ease Cramp brings us down – not in a capsule supported by great billowing parachutes, but gently landing in a field, any field, ready for instant take-off to a far-off hovering mother-ship.\nAt least, the mother-ship is there by implication, because Mr. Cramp, as he says, having \"set myself the task of discovering the truth as an engineer\", arrives, after a volume full of investigation and experimentation, at the last chapter which is entitled: \"Vindication Of A Scout Ship.\"\nThe last paragraph of the second from last chapter might well sum up a very large part of the UFO story. It also sums up the author, a man who succeeded in forming a large group of UFO enthusiasts from a very hard core of technology, men who know"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"134 ufo contact\n\nities of the dark shape behind them. There was a tiny white light behind which did not seem to be attached to the object in any way; but as the night was very dark, she admits that this could also have been a star. The colored lights were not blinking, and the object seemed not to move, although she of course was moving towards it in her car. She described the object (which, she admits, she saw very indistinctly in the almost complete darkness), as a black wing-like thing which made no noise. Then she suddenly thought \"Surely it can't be a plane, this low. Perhaps it is a flying saucer\". The size of the 2 colored lights was small, about the size of ordinary car blinker-lights. If the witness had stopped to investigate, this could have been a most important sighting. Unfortunately, she preferred to continue on her way, and thus lost a great opportunity.\n\nThursday April 13th around 8.15 p.m., Victoria's lights suddenly all dimmed for a couple of seconds, and at that moment, witnesses in town chanced to see a colored object streak across the sky. The Press tried to 'explain' this dimming to lightning up at Campbell River, some 200 miles away: this, however, would seem unconvincing, in view of the numerous past cases where a certain type of UFO has repeatedly caused the dimming, and indeed the blackout, of electric lights in widely separated areas. It is also well-known to researchers that other types of UFO's do not affect electrical installation: on the other hand, it is possible that all UFO's may have the ability to affect such installations, or to refrain from doing so, at will.\n\nReport from: P. M. H. Edwards, Victoria, B.C., Canada.\nCredit: Tommy Helmer, Bromma, Stockholm, Sweden.\n\n- ★ -\n\nFrom: The Mexican newspaper \"EL HERALDO\", February 26th, 1967.\n\n(There are three photographs of flying saucers produced in the article, which unfortunately we cannot reproduce here. However, here are the captions to the photographs. - Ed.)\n\nNr. 1. \"This photograph of a strange space object was taken by Dr. Jose A. Lanuza, professor at the Sorbonne in Paris and at the Autonomous National University of Mexico, when he travelled aboard an airplane of the Compañia Mexicana de Aviación from Mexico City to Guadalajara.\" (- It will be remembered by some readers that many times George Adamski spoke of a saucer base in the mountains around Guadalajara. - Ed.)\n\nNr. 2. \"Dr. Lanuza was able to take this picture above the Valley of Mexico. It shows in our sky the presence of another flying object. It is of a circular shape and has in its upper part a transparent dome. The ship seemed to be made of some metal of aluminium color.\"\n\nNr. 3. \"This UFO photo was taken by Dr. Lanuza at a distance of about 100 metres from the machine\n\nand only a few metres above the surface of Mexico Valley. Note at the bottom of the picture the power-lines, which give an idea of how low the saucer was. Dr. Lanuza has the negatives in his possession, which have been carefully examined by photo experts, who stated that no fake was involved.\"\n\n- ★ -\n\nAlso in \"EL HERALDO\".\n\nFlying saucers are seen in clear daylight\n\nThey were observed near Montevideo.\nMontevideo (UPI) - Unidentified Flying Objects were observed in this capital in clear daylight, stated the director of the Astronomical Observatory ANTARES, Juan Reyes Febles, who succeeded in taking 21 color photos of said objects.\n\nHe added that from one saucer were ejected into space some smaller objects of the same shape whose colors varied from blue to violet and orange.\n\nAccording to Mr. Reyes and other witnesses' observations is was an oval UFO seen at a height of about 6 km to the North of the City. It had an indented rim. One could see a dark dome with a distinctly white rim and one open porthole in the upper part.\n\nFinally Reyes said: \"It could be proved that it was a \"mothersaucer\", i.e., a giant space-ship which ejected from its interior other little ships that shot away at a vertiginous speed\".\n\nThe sighting was made the day before yesterday and lasted for one hour and 40 minutes.\"\n\n(We should remind readers that this sighting was made from an astronomical observatory, and that an open porthole at a height of 6000 metres or 20,000 feet could well be in view with certain types of telescopes. Whether it was in fact a porthole that was open at that cold height and in that thin air might be a point of conjecture perhaps, but we are not reckoning with terrestrial aircraft here, of course. - Editor.)\n\nCredit: Mrs. Maria Cristina de Rueda, IGAP-MEXICO.\nTranslation: Mrs. Dora Bauer, IGAP-AUSTRIA.\n\n- ★ -\n\n»Convincing« UFO pictures\n\nSANTA ANA. - A University of Colorado professor conducting a study of unidentified flying objects says that \"Photographic evidence of UFOs, when available, is very convincing.\"\n\nRobert J. Low, project co-ordinator of a Government-sponsored UFO study, is in Santa Ana to study a controversial 1965 UFO photo previously discredited by the Air Force.\n\nLow termed the picture, taken by Rex Heflin of Santa Ana, as \"among the top four or five\" items of photographic evidence of UFOs.\n\nHeflin, 37, a project inspector for the Orange County Highway Department, took his picture August 3, 1965, just off the Santa Ana freeway.\n\nufo contact 119\n\nthat the people should become aware first of his work and contacts. When your readers have become acquainted with the idea of the brothers being under us this very moment and that everyone has the chance to talk to them if he becomes aware of them, then you may talk about my contacts in connection with G.A. Ronald, I cannot tell you what to do, for you must use your own judgement in this matter. When ever you feel to use it then go ahead and do so. I am not afraid to face the people or what ever comes with it, neither is Madeleine. -\"\nUNQUOTE.\n\nThat is the story of the Quiet Contacts.\nWhy have I told you all this? Because I know that those who read these words will feel the sincerity of Fred and Ingrid Steckling, and of Madeleine Rodeffer.\n\nThe sceptics talk always of people \"making a fast buck\". Maybe they are right about some. But not about the Stecklings or Madeleine. They are losing money fast, but they are doing the job that George Adamski left them to do, with steadfastness and courage.\n\nWhat is the lesson from this?\nFirst, - you will make up your own minds as to the truth of their stories, - as George Adamski said so often: \"I'm not here to convince you, - just to tell you.\"\n\nSecond, - you are invited to look again at the picture which is painted for you in these sequences of events.\nGEORGE ADAMSKI took his story and his films to ANYONE - including authority - and was prepared to face all criticism and expert analysis.\nMADELEINE RODEFFER was enabled to take close-up shots of a flying saucer over her garden. This was arranged with the Brothers, and she was expecting them. She has shown this film, with G.A.'s, on nation-wide net-works, - she has faced the officials on Capitol Hill. She has met the Brothers.\nFRED STECKLING has taken a unique movie-film which has impressed NASA's photographic experts and the men at the Pentagon. He has met the Brothers.\nCan it be CO-INCIDENCE all the time? Can they FAKE unique and impressive evidence ALL THE TIME?\nAt this point I might add that whilst George Adamski was on his 1959 world-tour, many separate witnesses in Australia and New Zealand reported activities and formations of saucers over some of the very cities and towns where G.A. lectured.\nAll this is for the record.\nAs Fred Steckling wrote in simple words which held a world of meaning:\n\nIMPORTANT IS THE WORK - NOT US.\n\nUFO - PICTURES"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"120 ufo contact\n\nThese still photographs are taken from the screen projection of the 8 mm colour film of september 7th 1966.\n\nTaken with a REVERE 8 mm cine-camera, automatic 30 mm powerzoom lens, by Fred Steckling of Alexandria, Virginia, U.S.A.\n\nThe 23 feet of colour film was exposed from a speeding train travelling from Mannheim to Frankfurt in West Germany.\n\nThis aerial \"armada\" of UFO's is shown in impressive formation in the cloudless sky.\n\nShown to photographic experts of NASA.\n\nOf the film, Pentagon UFO spookesman said: \"This is the best film I've seen yet!\"\n\nufo contact 133\n\n\"MANY TIMES I HAVE SEEN FLYING DISCS FOLLOWING AND OVERTAKING MISSILES IN FLIGHT AT THE EXPERIMENTAL BASE AT WHITE SANDS, NEW MEXICO, WHERE, AS IS KNOWN, THE FIRST AMERICAN ATOM BOMB WAS TRIED OUT.\" COLONEL MACLAUGHLIN.\nMissile expert.\n(Statement in 1949.)\n\n- ★ -\n\n29 sight UFO's over White Sands Range\n\nby Dorrance Guy.\n\nAlamogordo, N.M. – At least 29 White Sands Missile Range personnel were eyewitnesses to one or more Unidentified Flying Objects between 10.30 and 11 a.m. Thursday.\n\nNews concerning the UFOs has been cutoff by orders from the Pentagon.\n\nAll service personnel and civilians working for the services have been forbidden to discuss the sightings.\n\nAn investigation is under way at Holloman Air Force Base, N.M., with Maj. James Stephens, UFO officer, in charge. He, too, is not allowed to discuss the sightings.\n\nTerry Clark, president and general manager of radio station KALG, Alamogordo, said the UFOs first were spotted near Ruidoso, N.M., then went near Holloman AFB, then south toward Orogrande, N.M., and then disappeared over the Sacramento Mountains.\n\nInformation officers at Holloman AFB and WSMR were contacted by Clark and he was told the Flight Safety Office at Kirtland AFB at Albuquerque, N.M., would handle the investigation. Kirtland would make no comment exept that all information would have to come from the Pentagon.\n\nClark called the assigned number at the Pentagon and was told that no information was available.\n\nCapt. Frank J. Morris, director of information at Holloman AFB, Saturday night said that Maj. Stephens is handling the investigation. He said the results would be sent to Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, and from there would go to the Pentagon. He said no information wculd be released except through the Public Information Office under the Secretary of the Air Force.\n\nNeither WSMR nor Holloman AFB personnel has any authority in the case.\n\nClark said eyewitnesses, when they could be identified, would not allow use of their names because of the Air Force regulation.\n\nHowever, these witnesses estimated that the \"silvery discs\" were flying at an altitude of \"20,000 to 25,000 feet\" and moving at a speed of \"approximately 2,000 miles per hour.\"\n\nThere were several Air Force planes in the air over WSMR at the time of the sightings. While it took a few minutes to transfer from Army to Air Force communications, the pilots were notified of the UFOs. They circled around, but none of the pilots was able to see anything unusual.\n\nMissile firings at WSMR were checked. There were none at this time. There was little cloud cover during the half hour involved and, at this time of day, it would be impossible to see a meteor. The objects were moving much faster than a balloon.\n\nOne WSMR individual said the UFOs were tracked on radar. There is no accurate estimate of the number of objects spotted. There may have been one – may have been more.\n\nThere is no indication when the Pentagon will release any information on the sightings – if ever.\nFrom: The El Paso Times, El Paso, Texas.\nSunday, March 5th, 1967.\n\nCOMMENT: We understand from our source of information that this news item appeared only in El Paso, Texas. Inquiries showed that the Air Force had stopped the incident being reported in the national newspapers. To quote the above news report: \"There is no indication when the Pentagon will release any information on the sightings – if ever.\" UNQUOTE.\n\nAnd so, life goes on . . .\n\n- ★ -\n\nUFO's over British Columbia\n\nOn April 14th, 1967, at about 8.05 p.m., Ian Squire and Scott McNeill (two boys aged about 14) were on their cycles going along Cedar Hill Crossroads, Virginia, B.C. They crossed over Cadboro Bay Road into Upper Terrace Road (Uplands residential district), and proceeded down into Ripon Road as far as the Circle. From there, they saw a red and a green light hovering over what they thought was probably the area of the Uplands Golf Clubhouse on Cadboro Bay Road. They were on their way down to the Yacht Club, and didn't stop to investigate, however. The two lights were not blinking, and seemed stationary (but it must be remembered that on their cycles, they were moving, which prevented their being certain about this last point). The sky was dark and starry: there was hardly any wind at all.\n\nAt 8.10 p.m. the same evening, i.e. five or six minutes later, Ian Squire's grandmother (name withneld at witness' request) was driving uphill along Cadboro Bay Road southwards towards the northern gates into The Uplands district, when suddenly she saw a red and a green light over the roadway, i.e. higher than the height of a very tall tree. The witness, who is personally known to me through her daughter and grandson, unfortunately did not stop to investigate. Instead, she continued on right underneath the object which, she said, seemed to be spread entirely over the width of the wide roadway. The two colored lights seemed to be shining only forwards, and to be from 4 to 6 feet from the extrem-"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"132 ufo contact\n\nLIFE'S GIFTS.\nEach of us receives life's gifts on Earth. A belief in a continued spiritual life after the comparitively short time of 70 years of physical life here on Earth, compared with the endless cycle of eternity, makes the actions of the moment an investment with far-reaching consequences.\nThe certainty that Man can choose between good and evil should lead him nearer to his Creator. Further, it should lead to an understanding that Man's life here and later, is more likely to depend on his relation to the spiritual than to the scientific.\nOur decisions now will unavoidably determine future actions. Nature around us will hold more unsolved than solved mysteries. But science has won itself sufficient power so that it can open up a Golden Age for Mankind, providing this power is used for good – or destroy it, if the power is used negatively.\nReligion's ethical guide-lines are the bonds that can hold civilisation together. Without it Man cannot reach his dearest goal – peace with himsefl, his God and his neighbour. Wernher von Braun.\nFrom: \"Jyllands-Posten\", Denmark, Dec 11th 1966.\nCredit: IGAP-DENMARK.\nTranslation: RONALD CASWELL.\n\nUFO-reports\n\nSoviet radar spots UFOs\n\nMOSCOW – (AP) – A Soviet scientist says there may really be such things as flying saucers from outer space.\nSoviet radar screens have detected unidentified flying objects (UFOs) for 20 years, he says.\nBut Soviet scientists, like their colleagues in the West, are still puzzled about what such UFOs really\nThe scientist, identified only as F. Zigel, was writing in the current issue of the illustrated Soviet youth magazine Cmena.\nHe offered five possible explanations for UFOs, including visitors from outer space. He called this alternative \"extremely speculative.\"\n\"But,\" he added, \"as the UFO problem has not yet been solved, different explanations, including extremes, are possible.\"\nThe article took the lid off a subject rarely discussed in the press here.\nIn the 1950s the Soviet press scoffed at American reports of flying saucers as just so much cold war propaganda.\nBy those Soviet accounts, the Americans tried to explain away the \"saucers\" as some sort of new, secret Soviet weapon.\n\nReports of flying saucers sighted in the Soviet Union, in the Caucasus and in Central Asia, also were ridiculed here.\nThen for several years the Soviet press remained silent on the whole question; the Cmena article showed that the UFO issue is being reopened, this time as an object of serious scientific study.\nZigel was identified as one of the editors of a book, \"Inhabited Cosmos,\" being prepared for publication here. The book will discuss the possibility of living beings in space and efforts to communicate with them.\nThe chief editor of the book is B. P. Konstantinov, who, as a vice president of the Soviet Academy of Science, is one of this country's most respected scientists.\nIn his magazine article, Zigel said the \"Angel Echo,\" a UFO detected by radar, is constantly observed by scientists at the Central Aerological Observatory near Moscow.\nSimilar observations, he said, have been made in the United States, Australia, India and Japan.\n\"The phenomena of the UFO today should be considered as global,\" he added.\nHe rejected the idea that birds, insects or plant seeds could cause such reactions on radar screens.\nZigel said there could be no doubt that UFOs exist \"but the nature of these objects is still not understandable today.\"\nThen he listed these five possible explanations:\n1. NONSENSE or invention. He said there was some untruth here, citing reports of people who claimed to have ridden in flying saucers and others who threw hats in the air and then photographed \"saucers\". But he rejected this alternative as killing the question rather than solving it.\n2. AN OPTICAL illusion related to the distribution of light in the earth's atmosphere, such as a rainbow. The UFO, he said, is more complicated than that, however.\n3. A NEW SECRET flying apparatus of one of the military powers on earth. \"No one holds this view now,\" he said.\n4. AN UNKNOWN phenomena of nature, just as radioactivity was unknown until the end of the last century. In this context, ionized particles and charged particles of dust in the atmosphere were given as a possible explanation. But Zigel said, this does not explain the color or maneuverability of UFOs or their appearance in good weather.\n5. SPACESHIPS from an advanced civilization on another planet. Zigel said the speed of UFOs supports this theory. So does what he called \"the fact\" that no UFOs were ever reliably reported to have landed.\nZigel called for \"an all-sided, thorough, scientific exploration\" to clear up the origin of UFOs once and for all.\nFrom: The Miami News, Wed, April 19th, 1967.\nCredit: Mrs. Jane McEvoy, Florida, U.S.A.\n\nufo contact 121\n\nWhat Adamski said...\n\nGEORGE ADAMSKI WAS MANY TIMES ACCUSED of being a charlatan, – that is, a person who pretends to have more knowledge or skill than he does have, – an impostor or a cheat. He has been called a faker, because he has produced photographs of so-called space-ships which he claimed to have taken himself. He was a liar, taking money from the credulous with stories of fantasy, saying they were true.\nMost of these names were given to him by people who would not have had the courage to say it to his face, or within the presence of a lawyer. If Adamski had invoked the law of libel in every case such as this, not one of his detractors could have proven that the name he had used was applicable, and Adamski could have indeed made money from those claims! But Adamski was not that kind of man. He knew the truth, and therefore no-one could harm his integrity. On this integrity all his subsequent actions rested.\nMany incidents is his later life were mis-reported, sometimes out of malice, at other times because of expediency, when insufficient detail was at hand. Many were the garbled reports circulated about one very special occasion. Here, below, is WHAT ADAMSKI SAID about:\n\nThe royal audience\n\nDuring my stay in Brisbane I received a letter from Rey d'Aquila of The Hague, Netherlands, requesting me to attend an interview with Queen Juliana on May 18th, 1959. The letter requested an immediate reply. I sent a cable confirming receipt of the letter and consenting to the interview.\nToward the end of April, when I returned to London from lectures in outlying cities of the British Isles, the rumor was out that I was to have an interview with Queen Juliana. I was at the home of Desmond Leslie when the telephone rang. It was a reporter asking for verification of the interview. I admitted only that such a rumor existed, and did not confirm anything.\nThe reporter was cautioned not to publish anything until it had been confirmed. He agreed to await confirmation, out of respect for Queen Juliana, but his respect was apparently short-lived.\nThe Daily Herald of April 29th, 1959, London, published the following article under the heading, \"Juliana's New Joy – Flying Saucers\". The reporter gave this account: \"I checked with Juliana's secretary. 'Yes,' the secretary said over the phone from Holland. 'Her Majesty has asked Mr. Adamski to confidential talks. More than that I cannot disclose. The talk will be between the two of them alone.' \"\n\nThe newspaper accounts which claimed I told reporters of the forthcoming meeting with Queen Juliana were entirely false. One thing is certain: the press was furious. The reporters could not get any information from me so they fabricated stories to save face (and perhaps to protect their jobs!). Newspapers all over the United States copied these false reports and added comments as they passed them on.\nAn article in the Los Angeles Examiner of May 19th, entitled \"In Dutch On Saucer Discussion,\" stated: \"The press has given Adamski, from Los Angeles, a chilly reception. The Catholic People's Party newspaper De Volkskrant, said, for example: 'We are not opposed to a court jester on the green lawns of the Royal Palace, provided he is not taken for an astronomical philosopher.' \"\nSoon after the newspaper De Volkskrant criticized my interview with Queen Juliana, several other Dutch papers followed suit and began to speak in a critical vein. The more dignified papers, however, presented straightforward accounts like the following:\n\"QUEEN JULIANA SEES U.S. WRITER, Hour's Discussion on Space Travel, from our correspondent.\nTHE HAGUE, May 19th. Queen Juliana and the Prince of the Netherlands today received, at Soestdijk Palace, Mr. George Adamski, the American author of several books on space travel. The Queen and Prince Bernhard had a talk lasting about an hour with Mr. Adamski. It is understood that the talk was of a purely informative character. The Queen and Prince Bernhard wanted to become acquainted with Mr. Adamski and his views.\n\"Those who were present at the conversation included Mr. C. Kolff, president of the Royal Netherlands Society for Aviation, Lieutenant-General H. Schaper, Chief of the Royal Netherlands Air Staff, Professor Jongbloed, of Utrecht University, an expert in medical science dealing with aviation, and Professor Rooy, of Amsterdam University, who gives lectures on mass communication.\n\"Mr. Adamski, who claims to have flown round the moon in a flying saucer and to have been in contact with inhabitants of the planet Venus, is lecturing in The Hague and Amsterdam.\"\nAs I am a common man with no title or position, some newspapers questioned the Queen's right to invite me to the palace. A true ruler, or representative of the people, can gain knowledge from the lowest as well as the highest sources.\nThe press called the Queen gullible and accused her of falling for strange things. This is not true. She is only interested in all new things of life, as a ruler should be. We are living in times when on every hand things are changing. Unless the rulers are well informed, they cannot serve their people well.\nQueen Juliana has the welfare of her people at heart. Therefore she has an open mind that permits her to look at all facets of life, not bowing to the dictates of the few; and so she was not persuaded to cancel the appointment.\nAt this time I will relate the true facts of my inter-"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":89,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":90,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"124 ufo contact ufo contact 129\n\nThe scientists of all nations called upon the military in every other nation to aim their atomic missiles at the asteroid and to fire simultaneously. In this way the asteroid was destroyed by the same weapons that had caused its creation.\nRepresentatives of the press were present at the showing. After it was over, I was asked if such a thing could happen in real life. I replied that it could and gave the following explanation:\n\"The lightning bolt is created from invisible particles of matter that are fused together by the terrific heat of a natural electrical discharge. It is entirely possible for the millions of tons of debris that have been blown into the upper regions of the earth's atmosphere to come together and form an artificial asteroid. The larger the mass of debris, the more attraction it would have for additional particles.\"\nThis picture alerted me to the possibility that radiation and fallout are not the only dangers we might be facing from our atomic explosions.\nReports have come from Mexico stating that a huge fireball crashed into a mountain just before the disastrous earthquake there in August of 1959.\nRecently several planes have reportedly hit objects from space. Some have survived; others have crashed to their doom. Could they have crashed into some of the high-energy pockets left by our explosions?\nSome of these man-made asteroids burn and glow, and could be mistaken for ordinary meteorites. This may also be the answer to some of the fireballs that have been reported.\nBy the way of closing this chapter, I would like to reproduce in part a letter concerning the lecture in Amsterdam, sent to co-workers in The Netherlands area. It was written by Miss Rey d'Aquila, dated June 13th, 1959, and reads as follows:\n\"At the end of the lecture in Amsterdam, Professor E. L. Seelliger of Bergen (NH), physicist and former Delft Professor, stepped on the platform and thanked 'our friend Adamski' in public for the things that he had brought us. Quoting him exactly: 'The things that we have heard may sound strange to most of us, if not all, but strange things happen every day, if our eyes are open. I hope that we will be open-minded and benefit from the things we have heard today.'\n\"The audience applauded heartily. (Inside information: Professor Seelliger is in good relation to the Queen and if we take his mental courage and her interest and deep understanding, we may conclude that after all George Adamski's visit to our country has been a successful one and the stepping stone to a better future.)\"\nRegarding my interview with the Queen, I will again quote from the report: \"But one thing we can say for sure, no press reporters were present. So what the press had further to say about his audience was a big lie from the first to the last line! Paris Match, for instance, carried a wholly imaginative 'Interview With The Queen', complete with questions and answers!\"\n\nI wish those imaginative reporters could have been present during my interview with Queen Juliana. They might have learned something of dignity, kindness and gentility, from a great woman who rules her country with wisdom and love.\n\nFrom: \"Flying Saucers Farewell\" 1961,\nby George Adamski.\n\nUFOLOGY\n\nA proposal to UNO\nPRESS RELEASE NO. 6.\nFebruary 2nd, 1967. New York.\nRELEASED BY\nIntercontinental UFO Observer and Analytic Network,\nColman VonKeviczky representative, 33-50\n75th Street 1C., Jackson Heights, N.Y. 11372. U.S.A.\nSUBJECT.\nThe Intercontinental UFO Observer and Analytic Network, representing the globally united scientific UFO research analysts /Press Rel., Jan. 11th, 1967/, have requested U.N. Secretary General U Thant, for invitation of the world leading scientists pioneering in UFO studies, pioneer UFO expert researchers, to the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space Conference, to be held September, 1967 in Vienna; to study first hand the evidence and earthly reconnaissance of unidentified power/s/ by UFOs from other celestial bodies.\nRepresentation should be headed by the nations-wide awarded space and rocket scientist \"father of astronautics\" Prof. Dr. Hermann Oberth and a world wide documentation should be furnished and exhibited by the Intercontinental UFO Network, supporting the statements of the scientists' representation.\nRequest based on a resolution of the General Assembly 21st Session /Dec. 19 and 21, 1966/ that the UN is privileged to invite Special Agencies to the Conference related to the subject.\nFollowing is the next of the Memorandum addressed on February 1st, 1967 to His Excellency U Thant, Secretary General of the United Nations:\nMy dear Secretary General – Your Excellency,\nThe Intercontinental UFO Observer and Analytic Network respectfully request that you, chairman of the Outer Space Affairs Committee, his Excellency, Dr. Kurt Waldheim, Ambassador of Austria to the U.N. and the General Assembly, invite a representation of the world's leading scientists pioneering in UFO studies, expert UFO research pioneers to the Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space to be held September, 1967 in Vienna. Our request is in relation to the resolution of the General Assembly, 21st Session, which took place on 20 and 22 December, 1966, and whose privilege it is to invite\n\nFresco in the Dechany Monastery (Yugoslavia). The angels look as if they were flying in spacecraft.\nThe icon, \"The Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ\". (17th century) from the Moscow Theological Academy. \"The House of the Lord\" resembles a space ship."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"128 ufo contact ufo contact 125\n\nfantasy, others think that initially it had some meaning. Two centuries ago the mystery attracted the German astronomer, Johan Kepler, while more recently, scientists held an international symposium to discuss the matter.\nBut neither Kepler nor contemporary scientists found the key to the problem, which may turn out to have an altogether unexpected solution.\nIn antiquity and the Middle Ages human imagination was stirred by an unusual star, now believed to be the Star of Bethlehem. The star was alleged to be able to move and stop.\nFrom that let us turn to the Christian Apocryphabooks banned by Church censorship from services and religious reading. The Apocrypha reflects man's efforts to explain the most dramatic mysteries of life. These books sometimes stand in direct contradiction of Church-approved texts.\nA familiar one about early Christianity is called \"The Tale About the Three Magi\". The original version must have been written in Latin in the middle of the third century at the earliest, and later translated into many languages. A 15th-century Byelorussian translation made five centuries before the space era contains a highly unusual interpretation of the tale. The star, it says, was watched by astronomers (this is the actual word used) in many Oriental countries. Once it appeared at night and \"lit up the whole of the sky as the sun does.\" Then the star hung over Mount Vans for a whole day, after which it alighted on the mountain like an eagle.\nThe text contains a reference to \"certain books\" which claim that Christ came down from that star. \"But it was different from the one pictured in our churches. It had wings, the kind an eagle has, and many long rays.\", which sent it moving in a circle when it descended upon Mount Vans.\nThis version of the old story unexpectedly introduces a new image and a new idea, both sharply at variance with the church texts. Without question, the apocryphal version is fantastic. But it is hardly more fantastic than the approved canonic version. What was at the basis of the author's fantasy? That, too, is shrouded in mystery.\n\nANGELS IN FLYING MACHINES.\nThe Dechany Monastery in Kosovskaya Metehia, southern Yugoslavia, was built in the first half of the 14th century, and by 1350 contained numerous frescoes on subjects from the Old and New Testaments.\nIn the spring of 1964 more frescoes were found in the monastery. The Yugoslav magazine Svet published photographs entitled: \"Spaceships on the Dechany Crucifix, Sputniks in our frescoes, Could ancient icon-painters have depicted spaceships in Dechany?\" It did not take a journalist's imagination to think up titles like these. Dechany frescoes actually depict angels flying in spaceships like the present sputniks.\nTwo ships are shown flying one after the other from west to east. Sitting in the lead ship is a man\n\nwithout an angel's halo. He holds an unseen \"control column\" and looks behind him as if watching the flight of his fellow-spaceman. Sitting in the spaceship following is another man, who also has nothing in common with the traditional angel and also has one hand on the \"controls\".\nBoth ships have streamlined bodies. Clearly visible jets in their wake accentuate the impression of speed. \"The saints in the flying machines are in the position of pilots\", says the magazine.\nAngels watching the flight cover their eyes and ears with their hands and seem to be backing away for fear of being blinded of deafened. Below, two groups are pictured, every face portraying surprise, fear, or perplexity. The central figure represents the crucified Christ.\nThe fresco depicting the Resurrection of Christ looks just as odd. The Messiah looks as if he is in a rocket which has not yet begun to move, explains the Yugoslav magazine. Indeed, the vehicle looks very much like a space rocket, with a two-wing stabilizer in its upper part. With his right hand Christ is trying to lift aboard the ship one of the people standing on the ground before starting on his way to the heavenly kingdom.\nMonks at Dechany, to whom experts turned for an explanation, replied that apparently the drawings of \"ships\" are pictures of the Sun and the Moon. According to New Testament legend, Christ was crucified during a solar eclipse. But why the \"sun\" is depicted rising in the west the monks could not say.\nOne of the papers on the Dechany miracle refers to a hypothesis saying that Christ was a man who came down to Earth from space. The magazine comments that such ideas are \"overbold\", that the hypothesis, if confirmed, \"would basically alter the Biblical story about Christ\". The frescoes, it is noted, showing objects obviously resembling sputniks, \"baffle layman and specialist alike.\"\nThe Dechany \"Miracle\" is not unique. An icon in the Church Archaeology Study of the Moscow Theological Academy, called The Resurrection of Jesus Christ and dating back to the 17th century, shows Christ in a streamlined container which vaguely resembles a spaceship standing on the ground. Smoke billows from both sides of the container's lower part, enveloping the legs of the angels who watch from the sidelines. Just as on the Dechany fresco, Christ's right hand lifts a man (the church version identifies him with Adam). Eve waits for her turn on the other side.\nThe icon is surely of an apocryphal nature. There may have been a written version presenting a noncanonical view of Christ's resurrection and ascension, but if there is, nothing is known about it. Possibly it was destroyed by Church censors or else it disappeared with time. Or perhaps the manuscript exists undiscovered, in which case it may have inspired icon (or mural) painters to present space episodes. (Continued).\n\nto the Conference Special Agencies related to the subject.\nThe proposed representation should be headed by the world's most highly honored, awarded and respected scientist in the field of Space and Rockets – the \"father of astronautics\" Prof. Dr. Hermann Oberth. The team of scientists should be completed according to enclosure No. 1. with highly competent scientific UFO researchers whose statements can be screened and verified on the basis of various documentation media in possession of our world-wide analytic network, such as; existing records of the UFO observers, embracing continental documentation by historical background, statistics, photographs, motion pictures, and other documentations exhibited and witnessed by originators, about the UFOs and their global reconnaissance activities.\nAs a former international civil servant on your staff, and founder of the Intercontinental UFO Network, supporting our request, may I call your attention to the constructive and progressive values of my proposals, submitted during the last year, to your cabinet, assisting voluntarily the UFO problem within the framework of the UN, which have already been realized during the past 11 months.\n1) The PROJECT UN-UFO, the organization scheme of an international analytic team within your staff, to keep under control the UFO global surveillance, and its 135 documentation, has been objected to by the government of the United States of America as \"nonsense\" . . . but in spite of this, the same government, instead of investing money in the investigation at the U.N. has, three months later, invested 300 thousand dollars for the same purpose in the Colorado University. The U.S. government has casually been investigating UFO cases, classified as \"Confidential\" since 1944, under project names, such as, Sigma, Grudge, and Bluebook. Valuated backwards this represents budgetary expenditures amounting to more millions of dollars.\n2) The INTERCONTINENTAL SPACE SECURITY PACT proposal, submitted to your cabinet on May 10, 1966 has been accepted in part, in the Articles No., 1. II. V. and Par., 1,2.3.4.5. 14., therein have been transferred to the Governing Principles of Peaceful Uses of Outer Space Treaty, which was negotiated in the Outer Space Committee, – a resolution adopted by acclamation by the General Assembly last December 19, and signed by 62 nations, exploring in outer space. The transplanted articles of the mentioned Security Pact are as follows:\na. earth and earthman security – supreme constitutional authority of UN in relation to outer space in articles No. I.III.V.IX.\nb. establishment of international responsibility for damages by exploring nations in articles No. VI. and VII.\nc. astronauts to be considered envoys of the UN., expressed as \"envoys of mankind\" in articles No. V.\nd. not prohibited of high explosive weapons in manned space crafts for self defense in outer\n\nspace and celestial bodies, in article No. VI.\ne. all \"phenomena\" observed in space and celestial bodies to be reported to the Secretary General in article No. V. is exactly an \"unexplained UFO Article\" from article No. V.\nThe enclosure No. 2. clearly shows, that these articles were not proposed in the original issues of the \"Treaty Draft\" by the United States filed 24 hours before, – while the USSR filed 20 days after my Space Security Pact proposal, which had been filed and issued to all the UN Missions on June 27, 1966. See the enclosed letter to the Perm. Mission of Italy to the UN. /Enclosure No. 2./ (Enclosures No's 2 and 3 are not included as we have dealt at length with these items in previous issues of UFO CONTACT – Ed.)\nIn the enclosure No. 3 you will find the constitutional build up for the Intercontinental UFO Observer & Analytic Network. The Press Release for which, dated January 11, 1967, was usually silenced as . . . \"not in the public interest\".\nIn spite of all this, there has been an increase of UFO appearances in the past year and a growing impatience on the part of the public with the governments' policies in this regard. We are convinced now more than ever that this proposal to accept information from world famous authorities will meet with the wholehearted approval of the United Nations. For the first time perhaps, an opportunity will be afforded to study first hand the voluminous evidence that has heretofore been suppressed.\nIt is a special honor for us to assist the United Nations through our continental representation in the UFO problem.\nWe are awaiting your information regarding our proposal. In behalf of our continental representatives, I remain\nvery respectfully yours\nsignature\nColman VonKeviczky\n3 enclosures.\n\nICUFON ENCLOSURE NO. 1.\nThe Intercontinental UFO Observer and Analytic Network proposes to invite, to the Outer Space Conference, /Sept., 1967, Vienna/ the following:\n\nA. SCIENTISTS.\nProf. Dr. Hermann Oberth internationally acclaimed rocket scientist, UFO researcher. GERMANY.\nProf. Dr. Gabriel Alvial director of Cosmic Radiation Institute, Santiago. CHILE.\nProf. Dr. Alexander Kazantsev Soviet radio astronomer and archeologist. USSR.\nProf. Dr. Carl Sagan noted astronomer and astro physicist, member of NASA. USA.\nProf. Dr. Mitrovan Zverer radio astronomer. USSR.\nRepresentative of Colorado University, UFO research project. USA.\n\nB. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCHERS.\nKnut Hammarskjöld general director of the Intern'l Air Transport Association. CANADA."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"126 ufo contact ufo contact 127\n\nProf. Dr. Allen J. Hynek astronomer, UFO investigator since 20 years at Air Force. USA.\nDonald E. Keyhoe US major ret., pioneer UFO researcher, founder of NICAP. USA.\nJacques Vallee mathematician and astronomer of Northwestern University, Mars Map Project. USA.\n\nC. PIONEER UFO RESEARCHERS IN GLOBAL COVERAGE.\nArduino Albertini Italian research analyst, editor of \"Clypeus\". SOUTH EUROPE & ASIA MINOR.\nDr. Walter Bühler research analyst investigator, Pres. of Brazilian UFO Res. Org. SOUTH AMERICA & ANTARCTIC.\nRonald Caswell editor of \"UFO CONTACT\". International research analyst. NORTH EUROPE.\nEng. Leonard G. Cramp noted technical analyst and technical writer. British Interplanetary Society.\nCoral E. Lorenzen founder of the APRO /Aerial Phenomena Research Organization/. NORTH AMERICA AND ARCTIC.\nYusuke Matsumura Japanese pilot, UFO expert photogr. and analyst, Pres. of Cosmic Brotherhood Ass. FAR EAST – ASIA.\nEng. Aimé Michel French mathematician, scientific researcher, noted writer. M. EAST, EUROPE.\nHans C. Petersen Danish Air Force major, researcher, co-editor of \"UFO CONTACT\" bi-monthly. MIDDLE EUROPE.\nEdgar Sievers scientific research analyst. AFRICA.\nBrinsley Le Poer Trench pioneer British researcher, chairman of the Intern'l Sky Scouts. FAR EAST – OCEANIA.\nKarl L. Veit Pres. of DUIST, noted European UFO analyst, writer-publisher and editor of \"UFO Nachrichten\". EUROPE.\n\nD. DOCUMENTATION.\nGlobally collected documentation should be exhibited and carried out by the Intercontinental UFO Observer and Analytic Network – classified in three parts:\n1. The UFO Evidence. 2. The Space Ships.\n3. The Planetarians.\n\nA Soviet contribution\n\nIT IS RARE INDEED that we read or hear of the Russian views on \"Flying Saucers\", although, in the fifties they were referred to as an example of American \"war psychosis\". However, in this issue of UFO CONTACT, you can read an account of recent Soviet moves regarding the UFO-case. (See \"Soviet Radar Spots UFO\".)\nHere, below, we bring you a Russian writer's account of his research into the problems and mysteries of extraterrestrial visitations. Condensed from the book \"Na Sushe i na more\" – \"On Land and at Sea\" – we can see how the writer has followed many of the same threads of Biblical and pre – History as\n\nhave a number of his Western contemporaries. The author has spent 30 years collecting evidence to back up his thesis that intelligent beings from outer space have had contact with our Earth. He has written two books, \"Cosmic Reminiscences in Written Relics of the Past\", and \"The Evolution of the Universe and Intelligent Beings.\"\nWith acknowledgements to the \"SPUTNIK\" monthly digest, Jan. 1967, we present the article in two parts. Here is Part One, of –\n\nVisitors from outer space\nby\nVyacheslav Zaitsev.\n\nExpanding knowledge about the Universe usually means more puzzles than discoveries. As man unravels each new mystery, he is assailed by fresh doubts and torments, for he has caught a glimpse of another mystery lying ahead. For the explorer – in any field – it is probably this yet undiscovered territory vaguely seen in the distance that sparks the search for knowledge.\nA report by a Chinese archaeologist startled the world when it was published in 1965, for he had out of old bits of knowledge pieced together an amazing theory of space-ships on a visit to the earth 12,000 years ago. The German magazine, \"Das Vegetarische Universum\", wrote of his research:\n\"For a quarter of a century archaeologists exploring caves in the Bayan-Kara-Ula Mountains, on the border of China and Tibet, have been finding old-looking stone discs covered with unreadable patterns and hieroglyphs. A total of 716 such discs have been discovered, apparently dating back several thousand years.\n\"Like a gramophone record, each disc has a hole in its centre from which a double groove spirals its way to the circumference. The grooves are not sound-tracks, but the oddest writing in China and indeed the rest of the world.\"\nArchaeologists and decipherers of ancient writing racked their brains trying to solve the secret of the spirals. The result of the research by the Chinese archaeologist was so shattering that the Peking Academy of Pre-History banned publication of his work. Eventually permission was obtained and the professor and his four colleagues published their collective effort under the intriguing title \"Groove Writing Relating to Spaceships which, as Recorded on the Discs, Existed 12,000 Years Ago.\"\nThe caves high up in the Bayan-Kara-Ula Mountains are inhabited by the Ham and Dropa tribes – frail, stunted men averaging four feet two inches in height. So far they have defied ethnic classification. In fact, any detailed information about the tribes is extremely scarce.\nWhen deciphered, one of the hieroglyphs presumably set down by an ancient member of the Ham tribe read: \"The Dropas came down from the clouds in their gliders. Our men, women and children hid in\n\nthe caves ten times before the sunrise. When at last they understood the sign language of the Dropas, they realized that the newcomers had peaceful intentions . . .\"\nAnother Ham hieroglyph expresses regret over the loss of the tribe's own spaceships during a dangerous landing in high mountains, and the failure to build new ones.\nIn the opinion of Chinese archaeologists, the Bayan-Kara-Ula hieroglyphs are so mysterious that their interpretation and use for scientific research require the utmost care.\nTo obtain further information, the discs were scraped free of adhering rock particles and sent to Moscow for study. Scientists there made two important discoveries. The discs were found to contain a large amount of cobalt and other metals – a shaking discovery. Further investigation revealed that the discs vibrate in an unusual rhythm, as if they carried an electric charge or were part of an electric circuit. The 12,000 year-old discs remain a challenge to science.\nLegends of ancient China say that small, gaunt, yellow-faced men came down from the clouds. But earthly tribesmen felt a revulsion for the visitors, whose enormous heads and extremely thin, weak bodies made them look ugly, and \"some people on fast horses\" beat them.\nReality seems to confirm the legends. In some of the Bayan-Kara-Ula caves archaeologists and speleologists have found 12,000 year-old vestiges of graves and skeletons. The remains belong to human beings with huge craniums and underdeveloped skeletons. The Chinese expeditions which discovered the grounds reported they had found \"an extinct species of ape.\" But so far as is known apes do not bury each other in graves or write hieroglyphic symbols on stone discs.\nWhat makes the issue doubly involved is that the inner walls of the caves are covered in many places with pictures of the rising sun, the moon, and the stars, spaced by a multitude of pea-sized dots (possibly tiny pictures) which seem to be approaching the Earth in a mountain area.\n\nCELESTIAL EGGS.\nPeruvian legend has it that the ancient inhabitants of Peru were born from bronze, gold and silver eggs which had fallen from heaven. The tale is cited but left without comment in Jean Elisee Reclus' famous book \"La Terre.\"\nA variant of the egg legend is featured in the famous Tassili frescoes, which were found in the heart of the Sahara by a French lieutenant named Brenand. Shortly afterwards the place was examined by a French expedition led by Henri Lotte, who later wrote The Search for the Frescoes of Tassili. In addition to pictures of animals and hunting scenes, the frescoes depict strange figures dressed in what looks like spacesuits and spherical helmets. The helmets are definitely attached to the suits, which evoke no associations with ritual headdress or hunting gear. Nor is there any association with the hunters who, as some scholars assume, used ostrich egg-shells for helmets. Lotte called the enigmatic figures Martians.\nDescribing the ancient drawings on the cave walls the French explorer says that one of them depicts \"a man appearing from an egg-shaped object covered with concentric circles. The object resembles an egg, or possibly a snail.\"\nSo the Peruvian legend and the Tassili frescoes seem to have much in common. But the parallel does not end there. At a later date, in yet another part of the world, the same subject was treated by ancient Greek sculptors, certain of whom portrayed Castor and Pollux of Dioscuria, as well as Helen and Nemesis, with remnants of egg-shells on their heads, for according to Greek mythology they arose from celestial eggs.\nHow did the odd idea of man's birth from an egg take shape? Perhaps by analogy with birds or fish? But why falling from the sky? One Latin American legend says that eggs dropped down from the sky on dandelions! The absence of any existing interpretation of this art leaves the door open for what must seem a fantastic assumption: that the legend of the celestial eggs, like any other myth or legend, could have originated from bonafide impressions of an actual event. An ancient man may once have seen a container with a human being in it descend from the sky, and imagined that the visitor was emerging from a celestial egg.\n\n\"VISITING CARDS\" OF SPACE TRAVELLERS.\nDuring excavations at different times in Japan archaeologists found figurines (dogu) depicting a kind of human or anthropoid in odd-looking \"space suits\" and with helmets wholly covering their heads. On the helmets were visible marks of something like slit-type glasses, breath-filters, antennae, hearing aids and even nightsight devices.\nReviewing the latest Soviet space achievements, the German magazine Freie Welt in issue No. 12, 1966, printed a selection of rock drawings and photographs of dogu under the humorous title, \"Visiting Cards?\", declaring that such drawings and figurines might be construed as proof that the Earth was once visited by space beings.\nMany similar rock pictures have been discovered throughout the world. There are pictures of spacemen on cave walls in the Val Comonique, the Swiss Alps, in Australia, close to Fergana and near the city of Navoi, in Soviet Central Asia.\nPuzzles that may have started with a space visit are contained in legends and myths. Legends of Australia, the Near East, South and Central America and the Far East all tell of the descent of gods from the sky. They offer food for thought.\n\nTHE STAR OF BETHLEHEM.\nThe phrase \"Star of Bethlehem\" is twenty centuries old. Some regard it as a product of sheer"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"REC-64 62-83894-463 October 3, 1967\n\nEX-108\n\nMr. Ray Robinson\n809 South Stewart Street\nWinchester, Virginia 22601\n\nDear Mr. Robinson:\n\nYour letter of September 27th, with enclosure, has been received.\n\nThe investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects is not and never has been a matter that is within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. I can assure you the photograph you mentioned does not represent employees of this Bureau.\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nEnclosed is some material relating to the work of this Bureau which I hope will be of interest to you. Also, the photograph you forwarded is being returned.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nMAILED 19\nOCT 3 1967\nCOMM-FBI\n\nEnclosures (3)\nKnow Your FBI\nThe Story of the Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nNOTE: Correspondent is not identifiable in Bufiles. The photograph in question has previously come to the Bureau's attention and is known to have appeared in a publication in Europe concerning unidentified flying objects. A caption under the photograph alleges two FBI Agents are leading a person from outer space down the street.\n\nJRP:kcf (3)\n\nTolson\nDeLoach\nMohr\nBishop\nCasper\nCallahan\nConrad\nFelt\nGale\nRosen\nSullivan\nTavel\nTrotter\nTele. Room\nHolmes\nGandy\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE COPY\n\nDear Sirs:\n\nWould you please comment on the enclosed\npicture that is marked with an \"X\" and return the picture\nwith your reply. Thank you.\n\n/s/ Ray Robinson\n809 S. Stewart St.\nWinchester, Va. 22601\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D.C.\n\nREC-64\n62-83894-463\n9 OCT 5 1967\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dear Sirs:\n\nWould you please com-\nment on the enclosed picture\nthat is marked with an \"x\"\nand return the picture with\nyour reply. Thank you.\n\nRay Robinson\n809 S. Stewart St.\nWinchester, Va. 22601\n\nITC\n9/29/67\nBEC-D BISHOP\nFBI\nENCLOSURE\nach\nIRP/Ref\n10/3/67\nCORRESPONDENCE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nF.B.I.\nSEP 28 9 57 AM '67\nSEP 28 10 29 AM 67\nSEP 28 10 58 AM '67\nOCT 2 1 09 PM '67\nRECD-DIRECTOR\n22 DIRECTOR\nCORRESPONDENCE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nMAY 1962 EDITION\nGSA GEN. REG. NO. 27\n5010-107-02\n\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, DALLAS (62-0)\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS;\nANONYMOUS INFORMANT\nDALLAS, TEXAS, 10/9/67\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDATE: 10/10/67\n\nEnclosed are six copies of an LHM containing information\nof interest to the Air Force. One copy has been furnished to\nOSI, Tinker AFB, Oklahoma.\n\nThe information in the enclosed LHM was received by\nSA EARL O. CULLUM.\n\nNo further information is being taken.\n\n2 - Bureau (encls-6)\n1 - Dallas\nEOC:jeg\n(3)\n\nREC 45\nEX 109 62-83894-464\n18 OCT 1967\nNAT. SEC.\nENCLOSURE\nEXP: PROC.\nOCT 19 1967\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Memorandum\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI DATE: 10/10/67\nFROM : SAC, DALLAS (62-0)\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS;\nANONYMOUS INFORMANT\nDALLAS, TEXAS, 10/9/67\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nEnclosed are six copies of an LHM containing information\nof interest to the Air Force. One copy has been furnished to\nOSI, Tinker AFB, Oklahoma.\n\nThe information in the enclosed LHM was received by\nSA EARL O. CULLUM.\n\nNo further information is being taken.\n\n2 - Bureau (encls-6)\n1 - Dallas\nEOC:jeg\n(3)\n\nOCT 12 1:30 PM '67\nBOM INTELL DIV.\nREC'D\nOCT 19 1967\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan\nENCLOSURE\nREC 45\nEX-104\n18 OCT 12 1967\nMAR. INT. SEC.\nEXH. EBOC"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\n\nDallas, Texas\nOctober 10, 1967\n\nRe: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS;\nANONYMOUS INFORMANT\nDALLAS, TEXAS\nOCTOBER 9, 1967\n\nA young white female, who refused to give her name,\nappeared at the Dallas FBI Office on October 9, 1967. She\nstated she is interested in Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs)\nand has received a quantity of information concerning beings\nfrom outer space. She stated she will not reveal her identity\nas she would feel like a fool if this information is not true.\nShe stated if it is true, however, she will meet with interested\nofficials and furnish all the information she has, provided\nnothing is done to endanger her safety.\n\nShe stated in July, 1967, she met a being from another\nplanet who had assumed earthly form. He gave her certain\ninformation, then he was picked up and departed from the earth\non August 21, 1967. She stated she then received messages from\nnon-earthly sources in a manner she refused to discuss. She\nstated these sources told her of the following:\n\n(1) An antimissile missile was fired at a UFO\nover Africa on May 22, 1962, but the UFO\nwas protected by its \"force field.\"\n\n(2) A UFO was detected 22,000 miles from earth by\nradar about August 6, 1967.\n\n(3) A UFO was detected over Antartica August 20,\n1967.\n\n(4) A UFO was detected over the \"Dewline\" in the\npast week and was shot down, and beings from\nouter space are trying to recover it.\n\nInformant would furnish no further details. She stated\nif this information is true, she will know other information\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations\nnor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property\nof the FBI and is loaned to your agency. It and\nits contents are not to be distributed outside\nyour agency.\n\n62-83894-464\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"United States Department of Justice\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nDallas, Texas\nOctober 10, 1967\n\nRe: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS;\nANONYMOUS INFORMANT\nDALLAS, TEXAS\nOCTOBER 9, 1967\n\nA young white female, who refused to give her name,\nappeared at the Dallas FBI Office on October 9, 1967. She\nstated she is interested in Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs)\nand has received a quantity of information concerning beings\nfrom outer space. She stated she will not reveal her identity\nas she would feel like a fool if this information is not true.\nShe stated if it is true, however, she will meet with interested\nofficials and furnish all the information she has, provided\nnothing is done to endanger her safety.\n\nShe stated in July, 1967, she met a being from another\nplanet who had assumed earthly form. He gave her certain\ninformation, then he was picked up and departed from the earth\non August 21, 1967. She stated she then received messages from\nnon-earthly sources in a manner she refused to discuss. She\nstated these sources told her of the following:\n\n(1) An antimissile missile was fired at a UFO\nover Africa on May 22, 1962, but the UFO\nwas protected by its \"force field.\"\n\n(2) A UFO was detected 22,000 miles from earth by\nradar about August 6, 1967.\n\n(3) A UFO was detected over Antartica August 20,\n1967.\n\n(4) A UFO was detected over the \"Dewline\" in the\npast week and was shot down, and beings from\nouter space are trying to recover it.\n\nInformant would furnish no further details. She stated\nif this information is true, she will know other information\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations\nnor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property\nof the FBI and is loaned to your agency. It and\nits contents are not to be distributed outside\nyour agency.\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Re: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS;\nANONYMOUS INFORMANT\nDALLAS, TEXAS\nOCTOBER 9, 1967\n\nshe received is true, and will furnish full details. This will\ninclude information regarding the destruction of a moon explorer\nvehicle by beings from outer space, and how those beings shot\ndown the Russian Cosmonaut.\n\nShe stated she fears for her life if it becomes known\nshe contacted officials, as persons who saw UFOs have died\nmysteriously in the past. She stated if Air Force officials\nwant to contact her she can be reached by a message to a telephone\nnumber she has given an FBI Agent, and she will meet officials\nat the Dallas FBI Office only.\n\n- 2* -"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\n\nDallas, Texas\nOctober 10, 1967\n\nRe: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS;\nANONYMOUS INFORMANT\nDALLAS, TEXAS\nOCTOBER 9, 1967\n\nA young white female, who refused to give her name,\nappeared at the Dallas FBI Office on October 9, 1967. She\nstated she is interested in Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs)\nand has received a quantity of information concerning beings\nfrom outer space. She stated she will not reveal her identity\nas she would feel like a fool if this information is not true.\nShe stated if it is true, however, she will meet with interested\nofficials and furnish all the information she has, provided\nnothing is done to endanger her safety.\n\nShe stated in July, 1967, she met a being from another\nplanet who had assumed earthly form. He gave her certain\ninformation, then he was picked up and departed from the earth\non August 21, 1967. She stated she then received messages from\nnon-earthly sources in a manner she refused to discuss. She\nstated these sources told her of the following:\n\n(1) An antimissile missile was fired at a UFO\nover Africa on May 22, 1962, but the UFO\nwas protected by its \"force field.\"\n\n(2) A UFO was detected 22,000 miles from earth by\nradar about August 6, 1967.\n\n(3) A UFO was detected over Antartica August 20,\n1967.\n\n(4) A UFO was detected over the \"Dewline\" in the\npast week and was shot down, and beings from\nouter space are trying to recover it.\n\nInformant would furnish no further details. She stated\nif this information is true, she will know other information\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations\nnor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property\nof the FBI and is loaned to your agency. It and\nits contents are not to be distributed outside\nyour agency."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Re: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS;\nANONYMOUS INFORMANT\nDALLAS, TEXAS\nOCTOBER 9, 1967\n\nshe received is true, and will furnish full details. This will include information regarding the destruction of a moon explorer vehicle by beings from outer space, and how those beings shot down the Russian Cosmonaut.\n\nShe stated she fears for her life if it becomes known she contacted officials, as persons who saw UFOs have died mysteriously in the past. She stated if Air Force officials want to contact her she can be reached by a message to a telephone number she has given an FBI Agent, and she will meet officials at the Dallas FBI Office only.\n\n- 2* -"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\n\nDallas, Texas\nOctober 10, 1967\n\nRe: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS;\nANONYMOUS INFORMANT\nDALLAS, TEXAS\nOCTOBER 9, 1967\n\nA young white female, who refused to give her name, appeared at the Dallas FBI Office on October 9, 1967. She stated she is interested in Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) and has received a quantity of information concerning beings from outer space. She stated she will not reveal her identity as she would feel like a fool if this information is not true. She stated if it is true, however, she will meet with interested officials and furnish all the information she has, provided nothing is done to endanger her safety.\n\nShe stated in July, 1967, she met a being from another planet who had assumed earthly form. He gave her certain information, then he was picked up and departed from the earth on August 21, 1967. She stated she then received messages from non-earthly sources in a manner she refused to discuss. She stated these sources told her of the following:\n\n(1) An antimissile missile was fired at a UFO over Africa on May 22, 1962, but the UFO was protected by its \"force field.\"\n\n(2) A UFO was detected 22,000 miles from earth by radar about August 6, 1967.\n\n(3) A UFO was detected over Antartica August 20, 1967.\n\n(4) A UFO was detected over the \"Dewline\" in the past week and was shot down, and beings from outer space are trying to recover it.\n\nInformant would furnish no further details. She stated if this information is true, she will know other information\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency. It and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Re: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS;\nANONYMOUS INFORMANT\nDALLAS, TEXAS\nOCTOBER 9, 1967\n\nshe received is true, and will furnish full details. This will include information regarding the destruction of a moon explorer vehicle by beings from outer space, and how those beings shot down the Russian Cosmonaut.\n\nShe stated she fears for her life if it becomes known she contacted officials, as persons who saw UFOs have died mysteriously in the past. She stated if Air Force officials want to contact her she can be reached by a message to a telephone number she has given an FBI Agent, and she will meet officials at the Dallas FBI Office only.\n\n- 2* -"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nDallas, Texas\nOctober 10, 1967\n\nRe: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS;\nANONYMOUS INFORMANT\nDALLAS, TEXAS\nOCTOBER 9, 1967\n\nA young white female, who refused to give her name, appeared at the Dallas FBI Office on October 9, 1967. She stated she is interested in Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) and has received a quantity of information concerning beings from outer space. She stated she will not reveal her identity as she would feel like a fool if this information is not true. She stated if it is true, however, she will meet with interested officials and furnish all the information she has, provided nothing is done to endanger her safety.\n\nShe stated in July, 1967, she met a being from another planet who had assumed earthly form. He gave her certain information, then he was picked up and departed from the earth on August 21, 1967. She stated she then received messages from non-earthly sources in a manner she refused to discuss. She stated these sources told her of the following:\n\n(1) An antimissile missile was fired at a UFO over Africa on May 22, 1962, but the UFO was protected by its \"force field.\"\n\n(2) A UFO was detected 22,000 miles from earth by radar about August 6, 1967.\n\n(3) A UFO was detected over Antartica August 20, 1967.\n\n(4) A UFO was detected over the \"Dewline\" in the past week and was shot down, and beings from outer space are trying to recover it.\n\nInformant would furnish no further details. She stated if this information is true, she will know other information\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency. It and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Re: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS;\nANONYMOUS INFORMANT\nDALLAS, TEXAS\nOCTOBER 9, 1967\n\nshe received is true, and will furnish full details. This will include information regarding the destruction of a moon explorer vehicle by beings from outer space, and how those beings shot down the Russian Cosmonaut.\n\nShe stated she fears for her life if it becomes known she contacted officials, as persons who saw UFOs have died mysteriously in the past. She stated if Air Force officials want to contact her she can be reached by a message to a telephone number she has given an FBI Agent, and she will meet officials at the Dallas FBI Office only.\n\n- 2* -"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nMAY 1962 EDITION\nGSA GEN. REG. NO. 27\n5010-107-02\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: 1/23/68\nFROM : SAC, DALLAS (62-1311)(C)\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nMISCELLANEOUS -\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nThere is enclosed for the Bureau one Xerox copy of a letter dated 11/20/67, from Mr. ROBERT G. EDWARDS, 1736 Northaven Court, Arlington, Texas 76010, received by the Dallas Office on 1/19/68 in an envelope postmarked at Arlington, Texas, 1/17/68.\n\nThe enclosed letter reflects the formation of a subcommittee of the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) in the Dallas - Fort Worth area, the purpose of which organization is to conduct scientific investigation of unidentified flying objects. TEXAS\n\nThis letter has been acknowledged and a copy of same has been furnished OSI, Tinker AFB for its information.\n\nThe acknowledgement to Mr. EDWARDS pointed out to him that information concerning unidentified flying objects received by this bureau is, by requirement, currently furnished to the U. S. Air Force.\n\n2 - Bureau (encl-1)\n1 - Dallas\nRPG:jeg\n(3)\nREC-74\nEX-105\n62-83894-465\n30\n1968\n5 FEB 2 1968\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: 1/23/68\nSAC, DALLAS (62-1311)(C)\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nMISCELLANEOUS -\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nThere is enclosed for the Bureau one Xerox copy of a letter dated 11/20/67, from Mr. ROBERT G. EDWARDS, 1736 Northaven Court, Arlington, Texas 76010, received by the Dallas Office on 1/19/68 in an envelope postmarked at Arlington, Texas, 1/17/68.\n\nThe enclosed letter reflects the formation of a subcommittee of the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) in the Dallas - Fort Worth area, the purpose of which organization is to conduct scientific investigation of unidentified flying objects.\n\nThis letter has been acknowledged and a copy of same has been furnished OSI, Tinker AFB for its information.\n\nThe acknowledgement to Mr. EDWARDS pointed out to him that information concerning unidentified flying objects received by this bureau is, by requirement, currently furnished to the U. S. Air Force.\n\n2 - Bureau (encl-1)\n1 - Dallas\nRPG:jeg\n(3)\nREC-74\nEX-105\nJAN 29 1968\nREC'D BISHOP\nREC'D DE LOACH\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20 November 1967\nTo:\nFrom: Robert G. Edwards\n1736 Northaven Court\nArlington, Texas 76010\nSubj: Request for Information on Sightings of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena in the Dallas-Ft. Worth Area\n1. A subcommittee of the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, (NICAP), has recently been established in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area. NICAP is a private, non-profit organization directed by Major Donald E. Keyhoe, USMC (Ret) from the National Headquarters in Washington, D. C. The purpose of the organization is to conduct scientific investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects. It now has 14,000 associate members in 50 states. The organization is not interested in the alleged psychic, occult, mystical, or religious aspects of UFO phenomena.\n\n2. NICAP subcommittees, of which there are 30 in the United States, are composed of qualified individuals in technical or investigative fields, who are selected and appointed by the Washington office.\n\n3. NICAP is currently working closely with the Colorado Project, a comprehensive study of UFO's begun in November 1966, by a group of distinguished scientists at the University of Colorado under a U. S. Air Force contract.\n\n4. The local subcommittee earnestly solicits your support in reporting to the Committee Chairman any UFO sightings occuring in this area. It is especially important that the NICAP committee be contacted immediately in cases of reported UFO sightings where photographs have been taken or physical evidence remains after the observation.\n\nRobert G. Edwards\nSubcommittee Chairman\nTexas Unit #2\nPhone CR 5-1784\nENCLOSURE 62-83894-465"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC-20\n62-83894 466\nMarch 19, 1968\nMr. Glenn Evans\nRoute 4\nWaterloo, Illinois 62298\nDear Mr. Evans:\n\nYour letter of March 14th, with enclosure, has been received.\n\nThe investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects is not and never has been a matter that is within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. I can assure you the photograph you mentioned does not represent employees of this Bureau.\n\nSincerely yours,\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nMAILED 9 MAR 19 1968 COMM-FBI\nNOTE: Bufiles contain no record of correspondent. The photograph in question has previously come to the Bureau's attention and is known to have appeared in a publication in Europe concerning an unidentified flying objects. A caption under the photograph alleges two FBI Agents are leading a person from outer space down the street.\nED:mew\n(3)\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT\nMAR 20 1968"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC-20\nMarch 19, 1968\nMr. Glenn Evans\nRoute 4\nWaterloo, Illinois 62298\nDear Mr. Evans:\n\nYour letter of March 14th, with enclosure, has been received.\n\nThe investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects is not and never has been a matter that is within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. I can assure you the photograph you mentioned does not represent employees of this Bureau.\n\nSincerely yours,\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nNOTE: Bufiles contain no record of correspondent. The photograph in question has previously come to the Bureau's attention and is known to have appeared in a publication in Europe concerning an unidentified flying objects. A caption under the photograph alleges two FBI Agents are leading a person from outer space down the street.\nREC'D BISHOP\nREC'D DE LOACH\nMAR 19 1968"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE COPY\n\nDear Sir OFLYING SAUCERS\n\nMy name is Glenn Evans I work for the United Saucer Hunter Organization, I am writting this in regard to a report that the FB. I had captured a saucer occupant this was published in a flying saucer mag. along with a photo of two alleged FBI agents and a saucer occupant. is this true? does the FBI really have a saucer man?\n\nVery truly U.S.A\n\n/s/\n\nGlenn Evans\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nunited states Dept of Justice\nWashington D.C.\n\nENCLOSURE ATTACHED\nITC 3/18/68 mew\nAch: 3/19/68\nED: mew\nnme\n\nREC-20\n\n62-83894-466\n\nMAR 19 1968"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dear Sis\nMy name is Glenn Evans\nI work for the United Saucer\nHunter Organization, I am\nwritting this in regard to\na report that the FBI\nhad captured a saucer\noccupant this was published\nin a flying saucer mags.\nalong with a photo of two\nalleged FBI agents and\na saucer occupants. is this\ntrue? does the FBI\nreally have a saucer man?\nVery truly\nGlenn Evans\n\nITC: 3/18/68 mew\nAch: 3/19/68\nED: mew\nnme\n\nENCLOSURE\n\nCORRESPONDENCE\n\nRECD-CORR. & INC. FBI"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U.S.H.O.\nUNITED SAUCER HUNTER ORGANIZATION\n\nBOB ZANOTI\nWFMC RADIO\nW. VIRGINIA\n\nGLENN EVANS\nRURAL ROUTE 4\nWATERLOO, ILLINOIS\n\n62248"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-466"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ST 109\n62-83894-467\nMarch 18, 1968\nAIRMAIL\nMiss Jane Ferry\n1304 Descanso Drive\nLa Canada, California 91011\nDear Miss Ferry:\nI have received your letter of March 15th.\nAlthough I would like to be of assistance, matters pertaining to Unidentified Flying Objects are not within the jurisdiction of the FBI.\nI am referring a copy of your communication to the Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, Washington, D. C. 20333 for any help he is in a position to offer you.\nSincerely yours,\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nNOTE: Correspondent could not identified in Bufiles.\nSAW:mer (3)\nTolson\nDeLoach\nMohr\nBishop\nCasper\nCallahan\nConrad\nFelt\nGale\nRosen\nSullivan\nTavel\nTrotter\nTele. Room\nHolmes\nGandy\nMAIL ROOM\nTELETYPE UNIT\nMAR 21 1968"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mar 18 3 11 PM '68\nREC'D-READING ROOM\nFBI\nMar 18 11 50 AM '68\nREC'D DeLOACH\nFBI\nRECEIVED DIRECTOR F.B.I. Mar 18 3 43 PM '68\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE COPY\nDear Sir,\nUFLYING SAUCERS\nI am a student at Glendale City College in Glendale, California. This semester I'm doing a research paper on U. F. O.'s. I was wondering if you could send me any information you might have regarding the U. F. O. controversy. I would appreciate it very much if you could send me this information before March 20th as I would like to get started as soon as possible. Thank you very much for your time.\nSincerely yours,\nJane Ferry\n1304 Descanso Drive\nLa Canada, Calif. 91011\nP.S. If you can't possibly get the information to me by the 20th, I would appreciate it if it was sent to me as close to that date as possible.\nITC 3-18-68 mm\nAck SAW:mer 3-18-68 mmd\nFederal Bureau of Investigation Washington D.C. Department of U.F.O.'s Washington"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dear Sir,\nI am a student at Glendale city College in Glendale, california. This semester I'm doing a research paper on U.F.O.'s. I was wondering if you could send me any information you might have regarding the U.F.O. controversy. I would appreciate it very much if you could send me this information before march 20th as I would like to get started as soon as possible. Thank you very much for your time.\nSincerely yours,\nJane Ferry\n1304 Descanso Drive\nLA Cañada, Calif. 91011\nP.S. - If you can't possibly get the information to me by the 20th, I would appreciate it if it was sent to me as close to that date as possible.\nITC 3-18-68 mm\nAck SAW:mer 3-18-68 mmd\nCORRESPONDENCE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-528\n\n62-83894-468, 469\n\nCHANGED TO\n62-112246-3, 2\n\nMAY 29 1968\nmt / vc\n\nC"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"March 19, 1969\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nUnited States Department of Justice\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nDecember 7, 1963, I observed in the sky at Moorestown, New Jersey, an unusual object and its unusual behavior. On December 8, 1963, just 24 hours later at Elkton, Maryland, the Pan American Aircraft with 73 passengers and a crew of eight perished when this aircraft exploded in mid air and crashed.\n\nI sent a tape recording of the observation I had made on December 7, to Mr. J. Edgar Hoover and associated this object with the crash of this plane. Mr. Hoover informed me that the Civil Aeronautics Board was investigating this disaster and what I had sent to him would be forwarded to them, the C.A.B.\n\nIn the month of March, 1965, the C.A.B., released a report that this accident and cause was due to a lightning strike.\n\nI protested to Senator Case of New Jersey. Senator Case mailed me the official report by the C.A.B., along with a letter by a Mr. John Dregge, Director Community and Congressional Relations.\n\nUpon reading the Official C.A.B. report on this accident and also this letter I have come to the conclusion that neither the C.A.B. or the writer of this letter know what they are talking about and have missed the point completely.\n\nI claimed that the object which I seen was laying air mines and that this aircraft was destroyed by contact with one of these mines.\n\nTo substantiate my claim I would refer you to page 8 line 20 to line 24 inclusive of this report File #1-0015. Boeing 707-121 N709PA Pan American World Airways, Inc., near Elkton, Maryland, December 8, 1963.\n\nREC-128 62-83894-470\n62-83894\n\n25 MAR 27 1969\n\n53APR4 1969"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 8 line 20 to line 25 inclusive reads as follows:\n\n(Metal splatters on the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer were identified by spectrographic analysis as being formed from two different aluminum alloys. However, these alloys could not be identified since the chemical composition of the deposits did not conform to any alloy used in the airplane. The long axis of the deposits varied from 18 degrees inboard to 4 degrees outboard.)\n\nOn July 18, 1964, I made another observation, the details of which I sent to Harvard College Observatory, Cambridge, Mass. (This sighting was Astronomical not a man made object), a copy of their return letter is enclosed.\n\nSomehow both of these observations had something in common, the color. I proceeded to experiment and have arrived at the following conclusions, after several hundred experiments had taken place.\n\nI have bought books on Astronomy and also books on Flying Saucers. I know that this object was not astronomical in any way nor was it a Flying Saucer.\n\nThis object was a cleverly design missle camouflaged to appear as a Meteor or as a Flying Saucer.\n\nHowever, this missle failed to operate as planned that is how I was able to see the complete details of the color and also the design, which I furnished to the government. I also know why this design was used and also why the colors were arranged as they were. My experiments proved this.\n\nThru my experiments I have been able to determine the following:\n\n1. Where they get the tremendous speed from.\n2. The wobbling effect they have on occasion.\n3. Appearing to oscillate about their vertical axis.\n4. Why they make no noise, condensation, or exhaust.\n5. Whoshing and wheezing, humming noise on occasions.\n6. Different colors they have.\n7. Pulsating light.-Luminous appearance.\n8. Different forms and shape.\n\nThese objects are constantly being sent over both the North and South Americas by Russia. Anyone seeing these objects are instantly responsive as to a flying saucer. Subjected to ridicule if this be mentioned to any one, and/or reported to the authorities."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Russia is well aware of this fact and has capitalized upon this fact. They have in this way been able to penetrate our Radar System undetected.\n\nTo conclude:\n\nThe present situation can be blamed upon the various governmental agencies who in the past have scoffed at and ridiculed people who have reported these sightings.\n\nNow we are about to pay with 60,000,000 American lives or more. \"Some price\".\n\nOur one hope is that Russia and China will go to war against one another. This then will give us time to created an effective and efficient Radar system that cannot be penetrated.\n\nI am not a Phophet of Doom, just an American Citizen who is concerned about the future of America.\n\nSincerely yours,\nEdward A. Stewart Jr.\n152 Mt Holly Ave\nMt Holly N.J.\n\nA copy of this letter is being sent to the following people:\n\nPresident Nixon\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nSenator Case of New Jersey\nSenator Charles H. Percy of Illinois\nMelvin Laird, Secretary of Defense\n\nEdward A Stewart Jr.\n152 Mt. Holly Ave\nMt. Holly, N.J."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HARVARD COLLEGE OBSERVATORY\nCAMBRIDGE 38, MASSACHUSETTS\nJuly 28, 1964\n\nMr. Edward A. Stewart, Jr.\n152 Mount Holly Avenue\nMount Holly, New Jersey\n\nDear Mr. Stewart:\n\nThe object you saw was a bright meteor, sometimes called a \"fireball\" or a\"bolide\". Almost all very bright meteors are small bodies moving in orbits rather like the orbits of asteroids, and probably are fragments of asteroids. The direction of motion of your meteor is consistent with that sort of orbit. A good many bright meteors strike the earth each day, but most go unnoticed. We have received another report of the same meteor from Wilmington, Delaware.\n\nI am sending your observation to the Moonwatch Division of the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory here in Cambridge, which has a continuing program for analysis of visual observations of bright meteors. Since it is very rarely possible for the professional astronomer to observe these meteors, most of what is known about them depends on this sort of lucky chance.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nRichard B. Southworth\n\nRBS:lrw\n\n62-83894-470\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"May 7, 1969\n\n62-83894-471\n\nMr. Lon M. Cerame\nEastern Representative\nNational Investigations Committee\non Unidentified Flying Objects\n77 Gless Avenue\nBelleville, New Jersey 07109\n\nDear Mr. Cerame:\n\nI have received your letter of April 30th concerning an article you are preparing on Aerial Phenomena.\n\nAlthough I would like to be of assistance, matters pertaining to Unidentified Flying Objects and Aerial Phenomena are not within the jurisdiction of the FBI. I regret we are unable to be of help.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nNOTE: Our files contain no information identifiable with correspondent.\n\nJCF:pls (5)\n\nMAILED 10\nMAY 7 - 1969\nCOMM-FBI\n\n55MAY 14 1969\nTELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"National Investigations Committee\nON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nLON M. CERAME - EASTERN REPRESENTATIVE\n77 Gless Avenue\nBelleville, N. J. 07109 Phone: 759-4036\n\nApril 30, 1969\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D.C. 20535\n\nAttention: Director\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nSir:\n\nI am doing an article for an Air Force magazine concerning Aerial Phenomenon and other so-called flying objects.\n\nTo help me out, I would like to know if the Bureau has ever received any such reports concerning the sightings or investigations of such objects. If so, would it be possible to send me some reports for use in my article.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nLon M. Cerame\nEastern Rep. NICOUFO\n\nEX-102\n\nREC-21\n62-83894-471\n10 MAY 8 1969\n\nCORRESPONDENCE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nMAY 1962 EDITION\nGSA GEN. REG. NO. 27\n5010-106\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\nTO : Mr. Gale\nFROM : W. V. Cleveland\nDATE: 5/16/69\nSUBJECT: FORREST E. WOOD\n4267 E. Compton Boulevard\nCompton, California\nTelephone No. 635-6372\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nMr. Wood telephonically contacted the Bureau at 12:50 a.m. 5/16/69 and spoke with SA Stephen F. McInerney, Special Investigative Division.\n\nWood stated he is a former CIA Agent and wanted to report to the Director that recently he has been seeing flying objects. He requested that the Director call him on 5/16/69 concerning this matter. He was advised that Mr. Hoover would be unavailable.\n\nFrom Wood's tone of voice it appeared he was intoxicated. He advised that he was recently discharged as a patient from the psycho ward of a Veteran's hospital.\n\nInformation in Bureau indices (66-3182-8679) indicates individual possibly identical with captioned subject called Bureau 5/1/69, at which time he rambled about numerous subjects and his speech indicated he had been drinking. At that time no record identifiable with Wood was located in Bureau files.\n\nACTION: For information. A check is being made with CIA to determine if they have a former agent identical with Wood.*\n\n1 - Miss Holmes\n1 - Mr. DeLoach\n1 - Mr. Bishop\n1 - Mr. Gale\n1 - Mr. Cleveland\n1 - Mr. McInerney\n\nSFM:jb\n(7)\n\n* Liaison Agent Papich caused complete search of CIA indices regarding Wood with negative results. WVC:pnh\n\n10 MAY 1969\nST-103\n51 MAY 26 1969"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Gale\nW. V. Cleveland\nFORREST E. WOOD\n4267 E. Compton Boulevard\nCompton, California\nTelephone No. 635-6372\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nMr. Wood telephonically contacted the Bureau at 12:50 a.m. 5/16/69 and spoke with SA Stephen F. McInerney, Special Investigative Division.\n\nWood stated he is a former CIA Agent and wanted to report to the Director that recently he has been seeing flying objects. He requested that the Director call him on 5/16/69 concerning this matter. He was advised that Mr. Hoover would be unavailable.\n\nFrom Wood's tone of voice it appeared he was intoxicated. [illegible]\n\nMAY 16 1969\nFBI\nREC'D BISHOP\nRECEIVED-GALE\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"May 21, 1969\n\nREC-124\n62-83894-473\nEX-100\n\nMr. Larry Stephens\nRoute 12, Box 206\nDel City, Oklahoma 73115\n\nDear Mr. Stephens:\n\nMr. Hoover read your letter received on May 19th.\n\nHe asked that I advise you that the FBI has no information it can send to you regarding the rumors you have heard. He also asked that I furnish you the enclosed publications concerning our organization.\n\nA copy of your communication is being forwarded to the Office of Special Investigations, Department of the Air Force, Washington, D. C., to which its contents may be of interest.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nHelen W. Gandy\nSecretary\n\nEnclosures (2)\nKnow Your FBI\n99 facts about the FBI\n\n1 - Oklahoma City - Enclosure\nAttention SAC: Correspondent is not identifiable in Bufiles.\n\nNOTE: A copy of correspondent's letter is being furnished to the Office of Special Investigations, Department of the Air Force, by form.\n\nDCL:llk (4)\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT\n\nTolson\nDeLoach\nMohr\nBishop\nCasper\nCallahan\nConrad\nFelt\nGale\nRosen\nSullivan\nTavel\nTrotter\nTele. Room\nHolmes\nGandy"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Larry Stephens\nRoute 12, Box 206\nDel City, Oklahoma 73115\n\nDear Mr. Stephens:\n\nMr. Hoover read your letter received on May 19th.\n\nHe asked that I advise you that the FBI has no information it can send to you regarding the rumors you have heard. He also asked that I furnish you the enclosed publications concerning our organization.\n\nA copy of your communication is being forwarded to the Office of Special Investigations, Department of the Air Force, Washington, D. C., to which its contents may be of interest.\n\nHelen W. Gandy\nSecretary\n\n1 - Oklahoma City - Enclosure\n\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nFBI\nMAY 21 1969\nREC'D BISHOP\nREC'D DELOACH\nFBI\nMAY 20 1969\nMAY 21 1969"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE COPY\n\nMay 14, 1969\n\nRt. 12 Box 206\nDel City, Okla. 73115\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nPenn. Ave. & 9th. NW.\nWash., D.C. 19806\n\nDear Sirs;\n\nThere currently are rumors over the grapevine and in print that suggest men with oriental features wearing dark clothes go around terrorizing people who have had close-up views of UFO's. It is also rumored these creatures have impersonated armed forces officers and FBI investigators. They are supposed to ride around in black or dark automobiles that either have old licence tags or none at all. Several are reported to have attempted to run down witnesses of UFO sightings, made disturbing almost macabre phone calls, silenced several investigators who were supposed to have learned some dark secret about extraterrestial craft or mission plans and opened mail, tapped telephones and even taken pictures of several homes where UFO witnesses lived.\n\nCan you give me any information on such rumors? Or can you refer me to a source whose facilities can answer my questions?\n\nthis information will help settle some disturbing questions the readers of my articles. Personally I am not sure at all whether I can fully accept these rumours as facts. I need more information.\n\nAny information you supply can ease the worries of people who feel that the objects unknown they see in the sky may portend the visit of a mysterious visitor.\n\nYours Truly,\n/s/ Mr. Larry Stephens\n\nP.S. If there are any pamphets covering the FBI's functions you feel I will need, please send them along.\n\nEX-100\nREC-124\n62-83894-473\n5 MAY 22 1969"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"May 14, 1969\nRt.12 Box 206\nDel City, Okla.\n73115\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nPenn. Ave. & 9th. NW\nWash., D.C. 19806\n\nDear Sirs;\n\nThere currently are rumors over the grapevine and in print that suggest men with oriental features wearing dark clothes go around terrorizing people who have had close-up views of UFO's. It is also rumored these creatures have impersonated armed forces officers and FBI investigators. They are supposed to ride around in black or dark automobiles that either have old license tags or none at all. Several are reported to have attempted to run down witnesses of UFO sightings, made disturbing almost macabre phone calls, silenced several investigators who were supposed to have learned some dark secret about extraterrestrial craft or mission plans and opened mailed, tapped telephones and even taken pictures of several homes where UFO witnesses lived.\n\nCan you give me any information on such rumours? Or can you refer me to a source whose facilities can answer my questions?"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8 MAY 19 1969\nREC'D - CORR & TOURS\nMAY 19 9 52 AM '69"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This information will help settle some disturbing questions the readers of my articles. Personally I am not sure at all whether I can fully accept these rumours as facts. I need more information.\n\nAny information you supply can ease the worries of people who feel that the objects unknown they see in the sky may portend the visit of a mysterious visitor.\n\nYours Truly,\nMr. Larry Stephens\n\nP.S. If there are any pamphlets covering the FBI's functions you feel I will need, please send them along."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassified Case: NW# 90986 Date: 04-14-2026\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nAugust 7, 1969\n\n1 - Liaison\n\nRE: J. A. HENNESSEY\n\nFlying Saucers\n\n62-83894-474\n\nBy letter dated January 20, 1965, J. A. Hennessey of 10, Manson Place, South Kensington, London, S.W. 7, wrote to the FBI asking whether it is the usual procedure for FBI Agents to investigate reports of unidentified flying objects which have been seen on the ground. Mr. Hennessey's letterhead indicated that he was a \"UFO Research Investigator\" and \"Member National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena.\" By letter dated January 28, 1965, Mr. Hennessey was informed that such matters did not come within our investigative jurisdiction. (62-83894-442)\n\nOn November 26, 1966, Mr. Hennessey again wrote the FBI stating that the response to his earlier letter had been destroyed in a recent fire in his home and asking whether FBI policy concerning investigation of UFO's remained unchanged. His letter was written on a new letterhead containing the same address and the same reference to membership in the \"National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena\" and adding \"Associate Member of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.\" He was informed by letter of November 30, 1966, that our policy remained unchanged, and he was furnished a copy of our prior communication.\n\nDelivered to Washington Representative of [REDACTED] (b) (7)(D) on 8-6-69 by [REDACTED].\n\n1 - London\n1 - 100-769 (b) (7)(D) CONTROL FILE)\n1 - Foreign Liaison Unit (detached)\n\nGAD:pdr\n(7)\n\nREC 29\n\nNOTE:\n\n[REDACTED] (b) (7)(D) stated that J. J. A. Hennessey, 2 Chesham Street, Belgravia, London, S.W. 1, has made inquiries regarding UFO's and, when told he should make his inquiries through official channels has responded that he is accustomed to receiving replies directly from U.S. agencies.\n\nE050x1 STATE\nE050x6 STATE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nNW 90986 DocId: 34736067"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC- 30 62-83894-475\n\nOctober 13, 1969\n\nMr. Paul Brassington\nUFO Astronomer Club\n94 Dreyer Drive\nAjax, Ontario, Canada\n\nDear Paul:\n\nThe letter from you, Stephen Smith and Gary Hargreaves was received on October 8th.\n\nThe investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects is not and never has been a matter that is within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. I can assure you the photograph you mentioned does not represent employees of this Bureau.\n\nEnclosed is some material relating to the work of this Bureau which I hope will be of interest to you.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nMAILED 4 OCT 13 1969 COMM-FBI\n\nEnclosures (6)\n3 copies of The Story of the FBI\n3 copies of 99 Facts About the FBI\n\nNOTE: Correspondents are not identifiable in Bufiles. The photograph in question has previously come to the Bureau's attention and is known to have appeared in a publication in Europe concerning unidentified flying objects. A caption under the photograph alleges two FBI Agents are leading a person from outer space down the street.\n\nDCL:eaf (3)\n\n51 OCT 20 1969\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\nOctober 13, 1969\n\nMr. Paul Brassington\nUFO Astronomers Club\n94 Dreyer Drive\nAjax, Ontario, Canada\n\nDear Sir:\n\nThe letter from your Steve Smith and Gary Hargreaves was received by the Bureau. [illegible]\n\nThe Bureau has never had a [illegible] of Unidentified Flying Objects is not and has never been a matter that is within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. I am sure you appreciate that the FBI does not represent employees of this Bureau.\n\nEnclosed is some [illegible] material relating to the work of this Bureau which I hope will be of interest to you.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nEnclosures (3)\n\nREC-30\nEX-114\nFBI\nREC'D BISHOP\nOCT 10 9 53 AM '69\nREC'D DELOACH\nOCT 10 10 15 AM '69\nRECEIVED DIRECTOR\nF.B.I.\nOCT 13 10 54 AM '69\nMAILED 4\nOCT 13 1969\nCOMM\nOCT 10 4 46 PM '69\nOCT 13 10 19 AM '69\nFBI\nREC'D-READING ROOM\n\n83 OCT 20 1969"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UFO Astronomer\n94 Dreyer Drive\nAjax,Ontario.\nCanada.\n\nDear Sirs,\n\nOur club is very interested in the study of Unidentified Flying Objects.We were studying a magazine called UFO'S A Pictorial and on one of the pagesthere was a picture of a supposedly man from outer space who was being held by two men.Above the picture it stated the the two men were FBI agents who had captured this man and were walking down an American street.It had also stated that the picture had first been published in an XXXXXXXGerman newspaper.There was no other additional information.We would appreciate it if you would send us a letter telling us whether this is true or untrue.Could you please send us the information.\n\nWe have three members in our club they are Steve Smith,13,GaryHHargreaves,12,and Paul Brassington,13.\n\nSincerely yours the members of the UFO Astronomers.\n\nPaul Brassington\nSteve Smith\nGary Hargreaves\n\nack 10-13-69\nmme\nOCL:eaj\n\nCORRESPONDENCE\n\nFederal Bureau Of Investigation\nWashington D.C.\n\nUFO Astronomer Club 94 Dreyer Drive Ajax Ontario Canada\n\n62-83894-425\nREC-30\nOCT 13 1969\nEX-114"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"June 24, 1970\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nDear Sir,\n\nJust out of curiosity, if a person were to stumble across, build, or invent, a, shall we say, central drive unit that would power a flying saucer without the need of an exhaust or outward that that jets need, and I don't mean a fan or anything like that. But an engine like thing that could be placed in a completely sealed craft and would hang suspended in air or travel at speeds beyond mans comprehension, would it be considered top secret or anything? Also what should a person do with it?\n\nAn answer to this letter would be greatly appreciated by me.\n\nSincerely,\n\nVictor J. Hous\nP.O. Box 630\nMonteseano, Wash.\n98563\n\nack by Form Straight Nojuris\nEFT:ahr 7/1/70\n\nVictor J. Hous\n\nCORRESPONDENCE\nFILE\n\nREC-87\nJUL 2 1970\n62-83894-47"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC-87\n\nJUN 29 10 3 AM '70\n\nRECD-CORR & TOURS\n\n10 JUN 29 1970\n\nCORRESPONDENCE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"60 JUL 10 1970\n\n8\n\n96"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"June 20, 1972\n\nTO: ACS\n\nFOR Appropriate Action\nOCofSA\n\nTHE PENTAGON\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Sirs:\n\nIn approximately seven months or January, 1972, certain copies of top-secret documents shall be sent to the New York Times as well as two other newspapers. These documents are related to and will be an ostentation of the involvement of the pentagon in the controversial \"Unidentified Flying Objects\" or \"Flying Saucer\" subject. It will show that not only the U.S. Air Force was involved in UFO research but the other military branches as well.\n\nAnalysis and the actual conclusions of the classic UFO cases shall be revealed. This shall be accomplished by zeroxed documents and photographs that General Wolfe had reviewed when he was head of the Army's UFO support program in the Pentagon during the Eisenhower years.\n\nSorry, but it is concluded here that this is the best course to take because we feel that the secret UFO investigations are parallel in nature to the Times-Pentagon Vietnam controversy. If we are wrong in taking this action, time will tell.\n\nREC-4 62-83894-477\n\n22 AUG 3 1971\n\n5-cyrs\n\n62-83894\n\nCC R/S & encl Returned to ACSI - NO ACTION CONTEMPLATED. 7/29/71\n\n51 AUG 9 1971"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC-5 62-83894-478\nEX-115\n\nMiss Mary Beth Martine\nBox 463, Oak Street\nWestmoreland City, Pennsylvania 15692\n\nDear Miss Martine:\n\nI regret that I am unable to comment as you requested in your letter of February 15th. The investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects is not and never has been a matter that is within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nMAILED 21 FEB 23 1972 FBI\n\nNOTE: Bufiles reflect no record of correspondent.\n\nMLN:jc (3)\n\n60 MAR 2 1972\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE COPY\n\nBox 463 Oak Street\nWestmoreland City, Pa.\n15692\nFebruary 15, 1972\n\nDear Mr. Hoover,\n\nI would please like your opinion on U.F.O's. whether or not you think they exist or not.\n\nSincerely,\n\nMary Beth Martine\n\nTRUE COPY\n\nEX-115 REC-5 62-83894-478\n\nFEB 24 1972"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Box 463 Oak Street\nWestmoreland City Pa 15692\nFebruary 15, 1972\n\nDear Mr. Hoover,\nI would please like your opinion on U.F.O's. whether or not you think they exist or not.\n\nSincerely\nMary Beth\nMartine\n\nCORRESPONDENCE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dear Mr. Day:\n\nSincerely,\n\nHandwritten notes, largely illegible."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nOFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT CHIEF OF STAFF FOR INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20310\n\nDAMI-DOI-S\t\tDate: 23 July 1971\n\nTO: [X] FBI Attn: LNO\tMR. GRAHAM DAY, RM 1012, 9th & D\n[ ] CIA Attn: LNO\n[ ] USSS Attn: LNO\n[ ] CIAD\n[ ] NIS\n[ ] OSI\n[ ] USAINTC Attn: Dir of Inves\n[ ] USAIRR\n[ ] DIA Attn: DS-6A\n[ ] USASA Attn: Dir of Security\n[ ]\n\n[X] Attached forwarded for your information.\n\n[X] Attached forwarded for appropriate action.\n\n[ ] No further action contemplated by this office.\n\n[ ] Your office will be kept informed of status of this case.\n\n[ ]\n\nCys Furnished:\nOSI\n\nALFRED G. KEGGINS\nLTC, GS\nCHIEF, CI DIVISION\n\nACSI Form 343\n21 Jan 71\n\nThe office symbols for OACSI which will appear in AR 340-12 are obsolete due to a reorganization of OACSI. Please use office symbol that appears on this correspondence in correspondence addressed to this office."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nDOM INTELL DIV\nREC'D\nJUL 26 1971 JUL 29 PM 1 29 PM '71\nDOM INTELL DIV\nREC'D"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nMAY 1962 EDITION\nGSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101-11.6\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO: ACTING DIRECTOR, FBI\t\tDATE: 3/20/73\n\nFROM: SAC, SAN ANTONIO (62-0) (C)\n\nSUBJECT: DAVE T. OZANNE\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nOO: SAN ANTONIO\tFlying Discs\n\nEnclosed for the Bureau are four copies of an LHM reflecting information provided by Sgt. PAUL STIGLIANO, United States Air Force, Recruiting Depot, Waco, Texas concerning the subject. One copy of LHM is also being furnished to Dallas.\n\nThis information is being furnished to the Bureau for proper dissemination to the military due to the particular request made by the subject concerning UFO (unidentified flying objects).\n\nInterview of Sgt. STIGLIANO was conducted by SA RICHARD T. JESINGER of the FBI in Waco, Texas on 3/9/73.\n\nEX-114\nREC-2\n62-83894-479\n22 MAR 23 1973\n\n2 - Bureau (Encl. 4)\n1 - Dallas (Encl. 1)\n1 - San Antonio\nRTJ/jak\n(4)\n\ncopy of encl. given to Bernie Johnson national Agency Check Center upon nature on 3-27-73 MS\n\n57 MAR 2 1973\n\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FRONT OFFICE TRAINING DIVISION\nMAR 23 2 43 PM '73\n\nRECEIVED F.B.I.\n\nFRONT OFFICE TRAINING DIVISION\nMAR 23 1 46 PM '73\nRECEIVED F.B.I.\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nSan Antonio, Texas\nMarch 20, 1973\n\nDAVE T. OZANNE\n\nOn March 9, 1973, Sergeant Paul Stigliano, United\nStates Air Force, Recruiting Office, Professional Building,\nWaco, Texas, advised that a man identifying himself as Dave\nT. Ozanne contacted the night-shift supervisor at the Waco\nTribune Newspaper, and inquired regarding any information\nthe newspaper could be able to furnish him concerning any\nunidentified flying objects observed in the Waco, Texas area.\nOzanne had identified himself as a Captain in the United States\nAir Force. Ozanne was described as having on an Air Force\nuniform with a chaplain's badge on the uniform. Ozanne also\nhad in his possession at the time a folder marked Top Secret\nwhich contained pictures of various military installations.\nNo specific information concerning these photos could be\nprovided by Sergeant Stigliano.\n\nSergeant Stigliano stated that when Ozanne was\ninformed that they could provide no information to him he\nleft his card which contained his name and the following\ninformation:\n\nAddress:\nPhone:\n\nDAVE T. OZANNE\n3911 Bowser, Apartment 209,\nDallas, Texas\n526-5908\n\nSergeant Stigliano advised that the individual did\nnot act in any strange manner, and did not attempt to obtain\nanything other than information from the newspaper. Sergeant\nStigliano advised that this information was being furnished\nto the proper authorities only for information purposes as\nthey do not suspect any unlawful activity.\n\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor\nconclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and\nis loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be\ndistributed outside your agency.\n\n1*\n62-83894-479\nENCLOSU"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nSan Antonio, Texas\nMarch 20, 1973\n\nDAVE T. OZANNE\n\nOn March 9, 1973, Sergeant Paul Stigliano, United\nStates Air Force, Recruiting Office, Professional Building,\nWaco, Texas, advised that a man identifying himself as Dave\nT. Ozanne contacted the night-shift supervisor at the Waco\nTribune Newspaper, and inquired regarding any information\nthe newspaper could be able to furnish him concerning any\nunidentified flying objects observed in the Waco, Texas area.\nOzanne had identified himself as a Captain in the United States\nAir Force. Ozanne was described as having on an Air Force\nuniform with a chaplain's badge on the uniform. Ozanne also\nhad in his possession at the time a folder marked Top Secret\nwhich contained pictures of various military installations.\nNo specific information concerning these photos could be\nprovided by Sergeant Stigliano.\n\nSergeant Stigliano stated that when Ozanne was\ninformed that they could provide no information to him he\nleft his card which contained his name and the following\ninformation:\n\nAddress:\nPhone:\n\n3911 Bowser, Apartment 209,\nDallas, Texas\n526-5908\n\nSergeant Stigliano advised that the individual did\nnot act in any strange manner, and did not attempt to obtain\nanything other than information from the newspaper. Sergeant\nStigliano advised that this information was being furnished\nto the proper authorities only for information purposes as\nthey do not suspect any unlawful activity.\n\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor\nconclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and\nis loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be\ndistributed outside your agency.\n\n1*"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nSan Antonio, Texas\nMarch 20, 1973\n\nDAVE T. OZANNE\n\nOn March 9, 1973, Sergeant Paul Stigliano, United\nStates Air Force, Recruiting Office, Professional Building,\nWaco, Texas, advised that a man identifying himself as Dave\nT. Ozanne contacted the night-shift supervisor at the Waco\nTribune Newspaper, and inquired regarding any information\nthe newspaper could be able to furnish him concerning any\nunidentified flying objects observed in the Waco, Texas area.\nOzanne had identified himself as a Captain in the United States\nAir Force. Ozanne was described as having on an Air Force\nuniform with a chaplain's badge on the uniform. Ozanne also\nhad in his possession at the time a folder marked Top Secret\nwhich contained pictures of various military installations.\nNo specific information concerning these photos could be\nprovided by Sergeant Stigliano.\n\nSergeant Stigliano stated that when Ozanne was\ninformed that they could provide no information to him he\nleft his card which contained his name and the following\ninformation:\n\nAddress:\nPhone:\n\n3911 Bowser, Apartment 209,\nDallas, Texas\n526-5908\n\nSergeant Stigliano advised that the individual did\nnot act in any strange manner, and did not attempt to obtain\nanything other than information from the newspaper. Sergeant\nStigliano advised that this information was being furnished\nto the proper authorities only for information purposes as\nthey do not suspect any unlawful activity.\n\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor\nconclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and\nis loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be\ndistributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC-26 62-83894-480\nOctober 25, 1973\n\nEX-111\n\nMr. Ron Fraide\n130 East Francis Avenue\nLa Habra, California 90631\n\nDear Mr. Fraide:\n\nIn reply to your letter received on October 23rd,\nthe investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects is not and\nnever has been a matter that is within the investigative\njurisdiction of the FBI. Therefore, I cannot comment as you\nsuggested. I regret that I am unable to be of assistance in\nthis instance.\n\nSincerely yours,\nC. M. Kelley\n\nClarence M. Kelley\nDirector\n\nNOTE: Correspondent is not identifiable in Bufiles.\n\njkb:cmc (3)\n\nMAILED 4\nOCT 25 1973\nFBI\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT\n\nNOV 9 1973"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nWASHINGTON D.C.\nZIP CODE 20535\n\nOFlying Saucers\n\nMiscellaneous - Non Subversive\n\nRON FRAIDE\n130 E. FRANCIS AVE\nLA HABRA, CALIFORNIA\nTHURSDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1973\n\nLA HABRA 90631\n\nDEAR SIR,\n\nI WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THESE\nUFO SIGHTINGS IN THE SKY ARE\nTRUE OR FALSE. THERE HAVE BEEN\nNUMEROUS SIGHTINGS RIGHT HERE\nIN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. WHAT\nKIND OF BEINGS OR PEOPLE FLY\nTHESE FAST MOVING MACHINES? I FEEL\nTHAT THESE SIGHTINGS ACROSS THE\nUNITED STATES FROM THE ATLANTIC\nCOAST TO THE PACIFIC COAST AND\nIN THE GULF OF MEXICO SHOULD\nBE REPORTED TO PRESIDENT NIXON,\nMAYBE HE KNOWS WHY THEY ARE\nSCARING CERTAIN PEOPLE IN THIS\nCOUNTRY. THE F.B.I. SHOULD BE\nON THE LOOKOUT FOR MORE OF THESE\nSIGHTINGS RIGHT AROUND WASHINGTON\nD.C.. PLEASE LET ME KNOW OF\nYOUR ANSWER. THANK YOU.\n\nYOURS SINCERELY\nRon Fraide\n\nCORRESPONDENCE\n\nack 10-25-73\nfrkcmc\ncc: Director of Space Unit\nDept of Air Force"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"April 15, 1974\n1 - Mr. Mintz\n\nREC-10 62-83894 481\n\nMr. Larry W. Bryant\nApartment 2\n2904 South 13th Road\nArlington, Virginia 22204\n\nDear Mr. Bryant:\n\nYour letter was received on April 3rd.\n\nIn response to your request for information from FBI files regarding your activities in the unidentified flying objects research field, please be advised that we have no such information in our files except copies of prior correspondence with you and a record of your September 17, 1963, interview. Therefore, we have no documents to send to you and cannot further comply with your request.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nClarence M. Kelley\nDirector\n\n1 - Norfolk - Enclosure\n Attention: Special Agent Steve Boyle.\n1 - Bufile 62-115530 (FOI-REPLIES)\nNOTE: Bufiles reflect prior correspondence with Bryant regarding UFO's of which copies have been made and are being furnished to him. Data pertaining to the interview is contained in an incoming airtel from Norfolk dated 9/24/63. SA Steve Boyle of the Norfolk Office was contacted and apparently the interview of Bryant in 1963 was initiated because of voluminous correspondence which Bryant had sent to Federal and military as well as law enforcement agencies.\ned:cmc (5)\n\nMAILED 20 APR 15 1974 FBI\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nREC-10\n\nF B I\nREC'D CORRESPONDENCE REVIEW\nAPR 15 1 43 PM '74\n\nASSOCIATE DIRECTOR\nRECEIVED APR 15 9 16 AM '74\n\nMAILED 20 APR 15 1974 FBI\n\nLEGAL COUNSEL\nAPR 12 4 01 PM 1974\nRECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2904 South 13th Road - Apt 2\nArlington, Virginia 22204\nMarch 31, 1974\n\nDirector\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nOFlying Saucers\n\nOn September 17, 1963, Mr. John S. Castles, an FBI agent of the Newport News, Va. contingent, visited me at my place of employment (Ft. Eustis, Va.) to interview me as to my interest in the subject of unidentified flying objects (UFO's). I understand that Mr. Castles prepared a formal report of that interview.\n\nSince President Nixon recently has expressed his intention to assure that the privacy and civil liberties of individual citizens receive the protection they deserve under our form of government, it is in the spirit of that assurance that I respectfully request that you send me a copy of Mr. Castles' report along with a copy of all other documents in your files pertaining to my activities in the UFO-research field.\n\nEX-111 REC-10 62-83894 481\nYours sincerely,\n\nLarry W. Bryant\n\n4 APR 16 1974\n\nCopy furnished to: Director, Washington, D. C. Office, American Civil Liberties Union\n\nack\n4-15-74\nadjena\n\nLEGAL COUNSEL\nCORRESPONDENCE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D-CORR & TOURS\nAPR 3 12 47 PM 1974\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-22 (Rev. 6-26-73)\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nRecords Section\n4/4, 1974\n\n☐ Name Searching Unit - Room 6527\n☐ Service Unit - Room 6524\n☐ Forward to File Review Joe\n☐ Attention ____________\n☐ Return to 4704\nSupervisor Room Ext.\n\nType of References Requested:\n☐ Regular Request (Analytical Search)\n☐ All References (Subversive & Nonsubversive)\n☐ Subversive References Only\n☐ Nonsubversive References Only\n☐ Main ____________ References Only\n\nType of Search Requested:\n☐ Restricted to Locality of VA.\n☐ Exact Name Only (On the Nose)\n☐ Buildup ☐ Variations\nLarry W. Bryant\n\nSubject ____________\nBirthdate & Place ____________\nAddress ____________\nLocalities Arlington Va.\nR# ____________ Date ____________ Searcher Initials Bell\nProd. ____________\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\n140-0-92050\n62-83894-431, 430, 439\n402\nclled\nB+R\nInvest file Inv\nprivacy"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nMAY 1962 EDITION\nGSA GEN. REG. NO. 27\n5010-106\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n1 - Mr. W. R. Wannall\nTO: Mr. W. R. Wannall\nDATE: 8/22/74\nFROM: T. J. Smith\nSUBJECT: MILITARY INQUIRY REGARDING UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT THAT FELL FROM SKY AT MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN 8/21/74; INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nAt 12:07 a.m., 8/22/74, Security Patrol Clerk (SPC) Charles F. Halty, Intelligence Division received a call via Command Center telephone from a Major Horn, NMCC (National Military Command Center). Major Horn asked for any information the FBI might have concerning a report that an unidentified object which fell from the sky at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, had been recovered by local police and turned over to the Milwaukee Office of the FBI.\n\nNo information available at Intelligence Division. Night Duty Supervisor Harry E. Morris, Jr., called SPC Robert Koller, Milwaukee Office, who advised an unidentified object had been recovered by Milwaukee police at about 5:55 p.m., 8/21/74, but that it was still in possession of police. He said a Captain Wills of the Milwaukee Police Department had called the Milwaukee FBI Office to report the recovery. Very little was known about the object which was described as about 13 x 8 x 5 inches, metallic in substance and color, jagged on one side and had an \"internal heat source.\" Police notified military locally.\n\nAbove information was relayed to Major Horn with suggestion he might like to contact Captain Wills, Milwaukee Police Department.\n\nThis matter received United Press International coverage on morning of 8/22/74.\n\nACTION:\nFor information.\n\nHEM:ldf\n(2)\nREC-101\n62-83894\n482"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dear Mr. Malmfeldt:\n\nThis office recently received a public inquiry regarding UFOs, referred to us from the Bureau. As the inclosed fact sheet indicates, the Air Force's \"Project Blue Book\" investigation of UFOs was terminated on December 17, 1969, and all related documentation was turned over to the National Archives and Records Service.\n\nThe inquirer referred to us has been apprised of these events. Hopefully, the inclosed fact sheet will be of help in responding to any future inquiries on this subject.\n\nSincerely,\n\nH. A. McCLANAHAN, Lt Col, USAF\nChief, Civil Branch\nCommunity Relations Division\nOffice of Information\n\nAttachment\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nAttention: Mr. Malmfeldt, Room 7825\nWashington, D. C. 20535\n\nREC-26\n62-83894-483\nENCLOSURE\nCORRESPONDENCE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D-CORR & TOURS JAN 17 1 54 PM 1977\nREC'D-CORR & TOURS JAN 17 3 08 PM 1977\nREC'D-CORR & TOURS JAN 25 2 12 PM 1977\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"There are a number of universities and professional\nscientific organizations such as the American Association for\nthe Advancement of Science, which have considered UFO\nphenomena during periodic meetings and seminars. In addition,\na list of private organizations interested in aerial phenomena\nmay be found in Gale's Encyclopedia of Associations (Edition 8,\nVol I, pp. 432-3). Such timely review of the situation by\nprivate groups insures that sound evidence will not be over-\nlooked by the scientific community.\n\n\n2 Atchs\n1. Sighting Summary\n2. UFO-related Materials"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UFO FACT SHEET\n\nOn December 17, 1969 the Secretary of the Air Force\nannounced the termination of Project Blue Book, the Air Force\nprogram for the investigation of UFOs.\n\nThe decision to discontinue UFO investigations was based\non an evaluation of a report prepared by the University of\nColorado entitled, \"Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying\nObjects;\" a review of the University of Colorado's report by\nthe National Academy of Sciences; past UFO studies; and Air\nForce experience investigating UFO reports during the past\ntwo decades.\n\nAs a result of these investigations and studies, and\nexperience gained from investigating UFO reports since 1948,\nthe conclusions of Project Blue Book are: (1) no UFO reported,\ninvestigated, and evaluated by the Air Force has ever given\nany indication of threat to our national security; (2) there\nhas been no evidence submitted to or discovered by the Air\nForce that sightings categorized as \"unidentified\" represent\ntechnological developments or principles beyond the range of\npresent day scientific knowledge; and (3) there has been no\nevidence indicating that sightings categorized as \"unidentified\"\nare extraterrestrial vehicles.\n\nWith the termination of Project Blue Book, the Air Force\nregulation establishing and controlling the program for investigating\nand analyzing UFOs was rescinded. All documentation\nregarding the former Blue Book investigation has been permanently\ntransferred to the Modern Military Branch, National\nArchives and Records Service, 8th and Pennsylvania Avenue,\nWashington, D.C. 20408, and is available for public review\nand analysis.\n\nAttached for your information is the Project Blue Book\nsighting summary for the period 1947-1969. Also included is\na listing of UFO-related materials currently available.\n\nSince the termination of Project Blue Book, no evidence\nhas been presented to indicate that further investigation of\nUFOs by the Air Force is warranted. In view of the considerable\nAir Force commitment of resources in the past, and the\nextreme pressure on Air Force funds at this time, there is\nno likelihood of renewed Air Force involvement in this area.\n\n62-83894/ 483\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOTAL UFO SIGHTINGS, 1947 - 1969\n\nYEAR TOTAL SIGHTINGS UNIDENTIFIED\n1947 122 12\n1948 156 7\n1949 186 22\n1950 210 27\n1951 169 22\n1952 1,501 303\n1953 509 42\n1954 487 46\n1955 545 24\n1956 670 14\n1957 1,006 14\n1958 627 10\n1959 390 12\n1960 557 14\n1961 591 13\n1962 474 15\n1963 399 14\n1964 562 19\n1965 887 16\n1966 1,112 32\n1967 937 19\n1968 375 3\n1969 146 1\n\nTOTAL 12,618 701"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UFO MATERIALS\n\nScientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects. Study\nconducted by the University of Colorado under contract\nF44620-76-C-0035. Three volumes, 1,465 p. 68 plates.\nPhotoduplicated hard copies of the official report may\nbe ordered for $6 per volume, $18 the set of three,\nas AD 680:975, AD 680:976, and AD 680:977, from the\nNational Technical Information Service, U.S. Department\nof Commerce, Springfield, VA 22151.\n\nReview of University of Colorado Report on Unidentified\nFlying Objects. Review of report by a panel of the National\nAcademy of Sciences. National Academy of Sciences,\n1969, 6p. Photoduplicated hard copies may be ordered for\n$3 as AD 688:541 from the National Technical Information\nService, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA 22151."} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL GOVERNMENT\n\nJanuary 24, 1977\n\nLieutenant Colonel H. A. McClanahan, USAF\nChief, Civil Branch\nCommunity Relations Division\nOffice of Information\nDepartment of the Air Force\nWashington, D. C. 20330\n\nUnidentified Flying Objects\nDear Colonel McClanahan:\n\nMr. Malmfeldt has brought your letter of January 14th, with enclosure, to my attention. I join him in thanking you for sending us a copy of your UFO Fact Sheet and for apprising us of the termination of your project.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nDonald W. Moore, Jr.\nAssistant Director\nExternal Affairs Division\n\nAWT:bak:mlc (4)\n\nDE-6\nREC-26\n62-83894-484\n22 JAN 27 1977\n\nMAILED 10\nJAN 24 1977\nFBI\n\nAssoc. Dir.\nDep. AD Adm.\nDep. AD Inv.\nAsst. Dir.:\nAdm. Serv.\nExt. Affairs\nFin. & Pers.\nGen. Inv.\nIdent.\nInspection\nIntell.\nLaboratory\nLegal Coun.\nPlan. & Eval.\nRec. Mgmt.\nSpec. Inv.\nTraining\nTelephone Rm.\nDirector Sec'y\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT\n\nGPO : 1976 O - 207-526"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nJanuary 4th, 1977\n\n\nMr. [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n\n\nDear [illegible]:\n\n\nWe are very happy to enclose our report on the matter of unidentified\nflying objects and wish you success in your further investigations.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\n\n[illegible]\nAssistant Director\nTechnical Services Division\n\n\nEnclosure\n\nDE-8\n\nREC-20\n\nJAN 21 1977"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nJULY 1973 EDITION\nGSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101-11.6\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : MR. MC DERMOTT\nFROM : J. COCHRAN, JR.\nSUBJECT: WHITE HOUSE INQUIRY RE\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFO)\n\nDATE: 6/14/77\n\nStanley Schneider of the Office of Science and Technology, White House, telephonically contacted me today to inquire as to the Bureau's procedure for handling information received from the public or otherwise, relating to sightings of UFOs. He advised that Jody Powell of the President's staff has raised the question as to whether or not there is any coordination within the Executive Branch relating to information concerning this subject. He stated that the U.S. Air Force had closed their investigation of these matters several years ago and currently does nothing but refer such information to appropriate local authorities.\n\nI advised him that as far as the FBI is concerned there appears to be no conceivable jurisdiction for us to conduct any inquiries upon receipt of information relating to a UFO sighting and, in the absence of some investigative jurisdiction based upon the information furnished, that information would be referred to the Department of the Air Force without any action being taken by the Bureau.\n\nHe thanked me for the information and stated that if any further contact was necessary he would call back.\n\nACTION: REC-64 N-36 DE-59 62-83894 486\n\nNone. For information.\n\n1 - Mr. Adams\n1 - Each Assistant Director\n1 - Mr. Boynton\n\nJC:jo* (16)\n\nBuy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan\n\n5010-110\n\nFBI/DOJ"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE FRONT OFFICE JUN 15 2 02 PM 1977 F.B.I. U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE DIVISION JUN 14 4 09 PM '77 ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FBI\n\nJUL 12 1977\n\nJUL 8 4 31 PM'77 F.B.I. U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED JUL 21 3 35 PM'77 F.B.I. LABORATORY DIVISION"} {"doc_id":"c9e0a1b0698a6018","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HQ - HEADQUARTERS\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 9 385 447\n8/11/1274182\nRRR0003KGO\n62-HQ-83894\nSERIALS 385-447\nSECTION 9\nDESTROY\nFOIPA# 404718\nINVESTIGATION\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nUSE CARE IN HANDLING THIS FILE\nDO NOT DESTROY\nFOIPA# 993087\nTransfer-Call 3421"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · United States Government\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM: SAC, Dallas (62-1311)\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\nDATE: 11-14-57\nRe Kansas City letter 11-8-57.\nThis matter is being referred to OSI without investigation and no other action is being taken in accordance with existing instructions.\n2 Bureau\n1 Kansas City (66-2995)\n1 Dallas\nMCC:FB\n(4)\nRECORDED 9\n62-83894-385\n16 NOV 18 1957\nEX-139"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · United States Government\nTO: Director, FBI\nFROM: Legal Attache, Havana, Cuba\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\nFOREIGN MISCELLANEOUS\nDATE: November 20, 1957\nThe following information is submitted as of interest to the Bureau in the event reports of flying discs are still desired.\nThe Havana daily newspaper \"Diario de la Marina\" November 12, 1957, carried a dispatch datelined November 11, 1957, at Pinar del Rio, Cuba, reporting that JOSE MARIA NIETO and CARMELO GUZMAN, who had just arrived in that town from the Matahambre Mines in Pinar del Rio Province, claimed that they had seen a flying disc in the shape of a man's hat hovering over the general area of Matahambre for several minutes. They claimed that this disc was larger than ordinary airplanes normally seen in that area and that it was completely silent in its flight. They said that it disappeared at a very high speed towards the sea. There was no further descriptive information furnished in this newspaper article. It is noted that Matahambre is located approximately 90 miles to the west of Havana. No other reports corroborating the above were received and no inquiry has been made by this office.\nJJW:ptm\n(3)\nRECORDED-46 INDEXED-46\n62-83894-386\n25 NOV 22 1957\n60 NOV 27 1957"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. A. H. BELMONT\nDATE: November 12, 1957\n\nFROM : MR. R. R. ROACH\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (FLYING SAUCERS)\n\nEver since the Russians released \"Sputnik\" there has been a great increase in the number of \"flying saucers\" and other unidentified flying objects (UFO) reportedly seen by people all over the U. S. On October 10, 1957, the Air Force was flooded with calls and the newspapers were full of reports that an unknown object described as \"looked like the moon\" and trailing a \"blue flame that pulsed like a heart\" had landed in the vicinity of Vernal, Utah. The Air Force immediately investigated these reports with negative results, inasmuch as no object was located nor was there any evidence of an object having fallen in Utah.\n\nWithin the past two weeks reports in these cases have increased tremendously and some of the more serious have been described as follows: An object had landed in Nebraska with six people aboard, the persons had talked to a Nebraska farmer and then sped off into space; a firey object was seen flashing across the southern skies from Albany, Georgia, to Miami, Florida; a Coast Guard cutter had sighted a huge object flying over the Gulf of Mexico, and persons in the Southwestern states while driving their cars have allegedly seen UFO's that caused the engines in their automobiles to stop. In view of the number of these reports, the Bureau's Liaison Representative discussed these various sightings with officials of Air Force Intelligence and was advised that all the cases mentioned above have for all practical purposes been resolved as being nonauthentic or there was no basis for the sightings. Investigating details that the Air Force had out in the field investigating these matters have not submitted their complete reports but have advised that they are all more or less negative. The Air Force is following these sightings closely and all reports are submitted to the Air Technical and Intelligence Center, at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio where they are evaluated and analyzed. In the event any of the future reports appear to be authentic, the Air Force will immediately notify the Bureau, keeping in mind our particular interest in matters concerning espionage and sabotage.\n\nWTW:jlk (7)\n1 - Mr. Belmont\n1 - Mr. Branigan\n1 - Mr. Baumgardner\n1 - Mr. Whitson\n1 - Liaison Section\n1 - Mr. Holmes"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMO ROACH TO BELMONT RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (FLYING SAUCERS)\n\nACTION:\n\nFor information.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - Mr. Branigan\n1 - Mr. Baumgardner\n\nRECORDED - 63\n62-83894 - 388\n\nDate: January 23, 1958\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nBuilding Tempo E\n4th and Adams Drive, S. W.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: ROBERT T. STONE;\nINTER CONTINENTAL AERIAL\nRESEARCH FOUNDATION\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nOn December 20, 1957, Mr. B. B. Watson, City Editor, Hannibal Courier-Post, Hannibal, Missouri, advised an agent of this Bureau at Hannibal that he was in receipt of an undated letter signed by R. T. Stone. This letter bears the letterhead \"Inter-Continental Aerial Research Foundation\" and in the upper right corner there is typed \"MISSOURI FILTER CENTER, Robert T. Stone, Director, 10717 E. 27th Terr., Independence, Missouri.\"\n\nThe letter furnished by Mr. Watson is as follows:\n\n\"Dear Editor:\n\n\"The enclosed notice is self-explanatory. We would like to request this public service in the name of Truth, which the newspapers of our great countries so proudly defend and uphold.\n\n1 - St. Louis\n1 - Kansas City\n\nNOTE FOR SAC, KANSAS CITY: Re St. Louis letter 1/6/58. Advise Bureau results of your indices check but conduct no investigation.\n\nESS:dmn (7)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - Division\n1 - Mr. Rogers\n\n383\n\nRECORDED - 63\n\nDate: January 23, 1958\n\nDirector of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, Building Tempo E, 4th and Adams Drive, S. W., Washington, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: ROBERT T. STONE; INTER CONTINENTAL AERIAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION; MISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nOn December 20, 1957, Mr. B. B. Watson, City Editor, Hannibal Courier-Post, Hannibal, Missouri, advised an agent of this Bureau at Hannibal that he was in receipt of an undated letter signed by R. T. Stone. This letter bears the letterhead \"Inter-Continental Aerial Research Foundation\" and in the upper right corner there is typed \"MISSOURI FILTER CENTER, Robert T. Stone, Director, 10717 E. 27th Terr., Independence, Missouri.\"\n\nThe letter furnished by Mr. Watson is as follows:\n\n\"Dear Editor:\n\n\"The enclosed notice is self-explanatory. We would like to request this public service in the name of Truth, which the newspapers of our great countries so proudly defend and uphold."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director of Special Investigations\n\n\"As a civilian body of investigators, we hope to unravel the snarled mess that shrouds the U.F.O. question, and with the help of the newspapers and the public, where can we fail?\n\n\"We will be grateful if you will publish the enclosed appeal on the front page of your newspaper, in a conspicuous enough manner that no one will fail to notice it. It is the public we must depend upon to get thoroughly organized, and with this co-operation we are certain that we can find the answer to the riddle of the 'Flying Saucers.'\n\n\"If a Filter Center has been established in your state or province, this form letter will carry its address which should replace the headquarters address given on the enclosed 'Public Notice.' If no such filter center address is given, then the original headquarters address should be used.\n\n\"We wish to thank you for any assistance you may be able to give us in this respect. Later established filter center addresses will be sent to you for public attention in the event of unusual sightings, that may come to your attention.\n\n\"Respectfully,\n\n/S/ R. T. STONE\n\"For the Inter Continental Aerial Research Foundation\"\n\nAttached to the letter was the notice which it was requested be published. This notice is as follows:\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director of Special Investigations\n\n\"Inter Continental Aerial Research Foundation\n\n\"NOTICE!\n\"To All Concerned:\n\n\"If anyone has seen any unidentified flying objects--known also as flying saucers--or knows anyone who has seen them since January 1st, 1957, please contact us immediately, giving full names and addresses of the witnesses to these sightings.\n\n\"We are in the process of setting up UFO observer Posts all over the United States, Canada, Europe, Alaska, Australia, Japan, England, Africa, and South America. And each state, province or region will have its own filter center which will serve as a receiving station for all UFO reports and other associated data, a distribution point for material from headquarters, and as a general secretary for ICARF.\n\n\"Our filter-observer network is expanding by leaps and bounds, but we are still far from our goal.\n\n\"The Air Force investigation has either gone underground, or else they have the answer and are hiding the fact from the public. The fact remains that millions of people continue to see these UFOs and the public still doesn't know what they are.\n\n\"It is our purpose in organizing ICARF to find the answer to the UFO mystery, and give the facts to the public. And in order to do this we will need the assistance of every person concerned. Persons with movie and still cameras are particularly needed, for the emphasis is on photographic data, despite the fact that sightings with binoculars and telescopes, sound detector and ham radio stations are also very important in the process of our research.\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director of Special Investigations\n\n\"All persons interested in setting up observer posts who can devote from one to three hours a day on skywatch, and who can be relied upon to have their cameras loaded and ready to photograph these objects should immediately contact us for full information. Adult Skywatch clubs, high school groups, science clubs, industrial groups, and individuals in general are all particularly asked to join us in our search for the answer to the UFOs.\n\n\"Contact us at the address above.\"\n\n\"INTER CONTINENTAL AERIAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION\n\n\"FORM OP-2\"\n\nAlso attached was a three inch by five inch plain card with the handwriting \"Please confirm publication or return forms with reason for refusal. Thank you.\" Signed \"Missouri Filter Center; ICARF.\"\n\nMr. Watson stated that this is a peculiar request and therefore he was bringing it to the attention of the Federal Bureau of Investigation as he questioned the motives behind this organization's purpose.\n\nNo further action in this matter is contemplated by this Bureau. Should additional information be received, however, it will be forwarded promptly to you. The files of this Bureau contain no information identifiable with Robert T. Stone or the Inter Continental Aerial Research Foundation.\n\n- 4 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM : SAC, ST. LOUIS (62-0)\nSUBJECT: ROBERT T. STONE; INTER CONTINENTAL AERIAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION; INFORMATION CONCERNING\nDATE: 1/6/58\n\nMr. B. B. WATSON, City Editor, Hannibal Courier-Post, Hannibal, Missouri, on 12/20/57 advised the Resident Agent at Hannibal that he was in receipt of an undated letter signed R. T. STONE. This letter bears the letterhead Inter-Continental Aerial Research Foundation and in the upper right corner there is typed the following \"MISSOURI FILTER CENTER, Robert T. Stone, Director, 10717 E. 27th Terr., Independence, Missouri\". Below this in pencil is a notation made by Mr. WATSON which is \"Air Defense Identification Zoning.\"\n\nThe letter is as follows:\n\n\"Dear Editor:\n\n\"The enclosed notice is self-explanatory. We would like to request this public service in the name of Truth, which the newspapers of our great countries so proudly defend and uphold.\n\n\"As a civilian body of investigators, we hope to unravel the snarled mess that shrouds the U.F.O. question, and with the help of the newspapers and the public, where can we fail?\n\n\"We will be grateful if you will publish the enclosed appeal on the front page of your newspaper, in a conspicuous enough manner that no one will fail to notice it. It is the public we must depend upon to get thoroughly organized, and with this co-operation we are certain that we can find the answer to the riddle of the \"Flying Saucers.\"\n\n\"If a filter center has been established in your state or province, this form letter will carry its address which should replace the Headquarters address given on the enclosed \"Public Notice.\" If no such\n\n2 - BUREAU (ENC. 3)\n2 - KANSAS CITY\n1 - ST. LOUIS (62-0)\nJAD:njj\n(5)\n\nRECORDED - 63\nINDEXED - 63\nEX-144"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SL 62-O\n\nfilter center address is given, then the original\nheadquarters address should be used.\n\n\"We wish to thank you for any assistance\nyou may be able to give us in this respect. Later\nestablished filter center addresses will be sent to\nyou for public attention in the event of unusual\nsightings, that may come to your attention.\n\n\"Respectfully,\n\n/S/ R. T. STONE\n\"For the Inter Continental Aerial\nResearch Foundation\"\n\nAttached to this letter is the notice.\nit was requested to be published. This notice is as\nfollows:\n\n\"Inter Continental\nAerial Research\nFoundation\n\n\"NOTICE!\n\"To All Concerned:\n\n\"If anyone has seen any unidentified flying objects--\nknown also as flying saucers--or knows anyone who has\nseen them since January 1st, 1957, please contact us\nimmediately, giving full names and addresses of the\nwitnesses to these sightings.\n\n\"We are in the process of setting up UFO Observer Posts\nall over the United States, Canada, Europe, Alaska,\nAustralia, Japan, England, Africa, and South America.\nAnd each state, province or region will have its own\nfilter center which will serve as a receiving station\nfor all UFO reports and other associated data, a distribution point for material from headquarters, and\nas a general secretary for ICARF.\n\n\"Our filter-observer network is expanding by leaps and\nbounds, but we are still far from our goal.\n\n\"The Air Force investigation has either gone underground,\nor else they have the answer and are hiding the fact from\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SL 62-O\n\nthe public. The fact remains that millions of people\ncontinue to see these UFOs and the public still\ndoesn't know what they are.\n\n\"It is our purpose in organizing ICARF to find the\nanswer to the UFO mystery, and give the facts to\nthe public. And in order to do this we will need\nthe assistance of every person concerned. Persons\nwith movie and still cameras are particularly needed,\nfor the emphasis is on photographic data, despite\nthe fact that sightings with binoculars and telescopes,\nsound detector and ham radio stations are also very\nimportant in the process of our research.\n\n\"All persons interested in setting up observer posts\nwho can devote from one to three hours a day on skywatch,\nand who can be relied upon to have their cameras loaded\nand ready to photograph these objects should immediately\ncontact us for full information. Adult Skywatch clubs,\nhigh school groups, science clubs, industrial groups and\nindividuals in general are all particularly asked to\njoin us in our search for the answer to the UFOs.\n\n\"Contact us at the address above.\"\n\n\"INTER CONTINENTAL AERIAL\nRESEARCH FOUNDATION\"\n\n\"FORM OP-2\"\n\nAlso attached is a 3 in. by 5 in. plain\ncard with the handwriting \"Please confirm publication\nor return forms with reason for refusal. Thank you.\"\nSigned \"Missouri Filter Center; ICARF\".\n\nMr. WATSON stated that this is a peculiar\nrequest and therefore he was bringing it to the\nattention of the FBI as he questioned the motives\nbehind this organization's purpose.\n\nThe original letters are being submitted\nto the Director.\n\nKansas City Division is requested to\ncheck its indices on ROBERT T. STONE and the Inter\nContinental Aerial Research Foundation, and conduct\nsuch inquiry as it deems appropriate.\n\nInasmuch as there is no further investigation,\nin the St. Louis area, Kansas City is being considered\nthe Office of Origin.\n\n- RUC -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"callbd\n3:15\n9/27"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE TO BUREAU FROM ST. LOUIS (3)\n\nSL 62-0\n\nROBERT T. STONE;\nINTER CONTINENTAL AERIAL\nRESEARCH FOUNDATION;\n\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\n1 letter from Inter Continental Aerial\nResearch Foundation\n1 3 x 5 card\n1 newspaper notice"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INTER CONTINENTAL\nAERIAL RESEARCH\nFOUNDATION\n\nNOTICE!\nTO ALL CONCERNED:\n\nIF ANYONE HAS SEEN ANY UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS--KNOWN ALSO AS FLYING SAUCERS--OR KNOWS ANYONE WHO HAS SEEN THEM SINCE JANUARY 1ST, 1957, PLEASE CONTACT US IMMEDIATELY, GIVING FULL NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE WITNESSES TO THESE SIGHTINGS.\n\nWE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF SETTING UP UFO OBSERVER POSTS ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES, CANADA, EUROPE, ALASKA, AUSTRALIA, JAPAN, ENGLAND, AFRICA, AND SOUTH AMERICA. AND EACH STATE, PROVINCE OR REGION WILL HAVE ITS OWN FILTER CENTER WHICH WILL SERVE AS A RECEIVING STATION FOR ALL UFO REPORTS AND OTHER ASSOCIATED DATA, A DISTRIBUTION POINT FOR MATERIAL FROM HEADQUARTERS, AND AS A GENERAL SECRETARY FOR ICARF.\n\nOUR FILTER-OBSERVER NETWORK IS EXPANDING BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS, BUT WE ARE STILL FAR FROM OUR GOAL.\n\nTHE AIR FORCE INVESTIGATION HAS EITHER GONE UNDERGROUND, OR ELSE THEY HAVE THE ANSWER AND ARE HIDING THE FACT FROM THE PUBLIC. THE FACT REMAINS THAT MILLIONS OF PEOPLE CONTINUE TO SEE THESE UFOS AND THE PUBLIC STILL DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE.\n\nIT IS OUR PURPOSE IN ORGANIZING ICARF TO FIND THE ANSWER TO THE UFO MYSTERY, AND GIVE THE FACTS TO THE PUBLIC. AND IN ORDER TO DO THIS WE WILL NEED THE ASSISTANCE OF EVERY PERSON CONCERNED. PERSONS WITH MOVIE AND STILL CAMERAS ARE PARTICULARLY NEEDED, FOR THE EMPHASIS IS ON PHOTOGRAPHIC DATA, DESPITE THE FACT THAT SIGHTINGS WITH BINOCULARS AND TELESCOPES, SOUND DETECTOR AND HAM RADIO STATIONS ARE ALSO VERY IMPORTANT IN THE PROCESS OF OUR RESEARCH.\n\nALL PERSONS INTERESTED IN SETTING UP OBSERVER POSTS WHO CAN DEVOTE FROM ONE TO THREE HOURS A DAY ON SKYWATCH, AND WHO CAN BE RELIED UPON TO HAVE THEIR CAMERAS LOADED AND READY TO PHOTOGRAPH THESE OBJECTS SHOULD IMMEDIATELY CONTACT US FOR FULL INFORMATION. ADULT SKYWATCH CLUBS, HIGH SCHOOL GROUPS, SCIENCE CLUBS, INDUSTRIAL GROUPS, AND INDIVIDUALS IN GENERAL ARE ALL PARTICULARLY ASKED TO JOIN US IN OUR SEARCH FOR THE ANSWER TO THE UFOS.\n\nCONTACT US AT THE ADDRESS ABOVE.\n\nINTER CONTINENTAL AERIAL RESEARCH\nFOUNDATION\n\nFORM OP-2"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MOTICE\nTO ALL CONCERNED:\n\nIF ANYONE HAS BEEN ANY UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS-KNOWN ALSO AS FLYING SAUCERS-OR ANYONE WHO HAS BEEN THERE SINCE JANUARY 1ST, 1952, PLEASE CONTACT US IMMEDIATELY, GIVING FULL NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE WITNESSES TO THESE SIGHTINGS.\n\nAND IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING OUR UFO OBSERVERS PEOPLE ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES, CANADA, EUROPE, ALASKA, AUSTRALIA, JAPAN, ENGLAND, AFRICA, AND SOUTH AMERICA, AND EACH STATE, PROVINCE OR REGION STILL HAVE TYPE OUR FILTER CENTER WHICH WILL SERVE AS A RECEIVING STATION FOR ALL UFO REPORTS AND OTHER ASSOCIATED DATA, A DISTRIBUTION POINT FOR MATERIAL FROM HEADQUARTERS, AND AS A GENERAL SECRETARY FOR ICARF.\n\nOUR FILTER/RECEIVER NETWORK IS EXPANDING BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS, BUT WE ARE STILL FAR FROM OUR GOAL.\n\nTHE AIR FORCE INVESTIGATION HAS EITHER DONE UNDERGROUND, OR ELSE THEY HAVE THE ANSWER AND HIDDEN THE FACT FROM THE PUBLIC. THE FACT REMAINS THAT WILLFUL OF PEOPLE CONTINUE TO SEE THESE UFOS AND THE PUBLIC STILL DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE.\n\nIT IS OUR PURPOSE IN ORGANIZING ICARF TO FIND THE ANSWER TO THE UFO MYSTERY, AND GIVE THE FACTS TO THE PUBLIC, AND IN ORDER TO DO THIS WE MUST FILL NEED THE ASSISTANCE OF EVERY PERSON CONCERNED, PRESSING WITH MOVIE AND STILL CAMERAS ARE PARTICULARLY NEEDED, AND THE ORIGINAL ENFORCEMENT ON PHOTOGRAPHIC DATA, DESPITE THE FACT THAT SIGHTINGS WITH UNUSUAL RADAR, SOUND DETECTORS AND MAN RADIO STATIONS ARE ALSO VERY IMPORTANT IN THE PROCESS OF OUR RESEARCH.\n\nALL PERSONS INTERESTED IN MAKING OBSERVATION VISITS WHO CAN DEVOTE FROM ONE TO THREE HOURS A DAY ON SKYWATCH, AND WHO CAN OF RELIED UPON TO HAVE THEIR CAMERAS LOADED AND READY TO PHOTOGRAPH THESE OBJECTS SHOULD IMMEDIATELY CONTACT US FOR FULL INFORMATION. ASSIST OBSERVATION GROUPS, HIGH SCHOOL GROUPS, SCIENCE CLUBS, INDUSTRIAL GROUPS, AND INDIVIDUALS IN GENERAL ARE ALL PARTICULARLY ASKED TO JOIN US IN OUR SEARCH FOR THE ANSWER TO THE UFOS.\n\nCONTACT US AT THE ADDRESS ABOVE.\n\nINTER CONTINENTAL AERIAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INTER-CONTINENTAL AERIAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION\n\nMISSOURI FILTER CENTER\nRobert T. Stone, Director\n10717 E. 27th Terr.\nIndependence, Missouri\n\n(Air Defense Identification Zoning)\n\nDEAR EDITOR:\n\nTHE ENCLOSED NOTICE IS SELF-EXPLANATORY. WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THIS PUBLIC SERVICE IN THE NAME OF TRUTH, WHICH THE NEWSPAPERS OF OUR GREAT COUNTRIES SO PROUDLY DEFEND AND UPHOLD.\n\nAS A CIVILIAN BODY OF INVESTIGATORS, WE HOPE TO UNRAVEL THE SNARLED MESS THAT SHROUDS THE U.F.O. QUESTION, AND WITH THE HELP OF THE NEWSPAPERS AND THE PUBLIC, WHERE CAN WE FAIL?\n\nWE WILL BE GRATEFUL IF YOU WILL PUBLISH THE ENCLOSED APPEAL ON THE FRONT PAGE OF YOUR NEWSPAPER, IN A CONSPICUOUS ENOUGH MANNER THAT NO ONE WILL FAIL TO NOTICE IT. IT IS THE PUBLIC WE MUST DEPEND UPON TO GET THOROUGHLY ORGANIZED, AND WITH THIS CO-OPERATION WE ARE CERTAIN THAT WE CAN FIND THE ANSWER TO THE RIDDLE OF THE \"FLYING SAUCERS.\"\n\nIF A FILTER CENTER HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN YOUR STATE OR PROVINCE, THIS FORM LETTER WILL CARRY ITS ADDRESS WHICH SHOULD REPLACE THE HEADQUARTERS ADDRESS GIVEN ON THE ENCLOSED \"PUBLIC NOTICE.\" IF NO SUCH FILTER CENTER ADDRESS IS GIVEN, THEN THE ORIGINAL HEADQUARTERS ADDRESS SHOULD BE USED.\n\nWE WISH TO THANK YOU FOR ANY ASSISTANCE YOU MAY BE ABLE TO GIVE US IN THIS RESPECT. LATER ESTABLISHED FILTER CENTER ADDRESSES WILL BE SENT TO YOU FOR PUBLIC ATTENTION IN THE EVENT OF UNUSUAL SIGHTINGS THAT MAY COME TO YOUR ATTENTION.\n\nRESPECTFULLY,\n\n[signature]\n\nFOR THE INTER CONTINENTAL AERIAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEAR EDITOR:\n\nTHE ENCLOSED NOTICE IS SELF-EXPLANATORY. WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THIS PUBLIC SERVICE IN THE NAME OF TRUTH, WHICH THE NEWSPAPERS OF OUR GREAT COUNTRIES SO PROUDLY DEFEND AND UPHOLD.\n\nAS A CIVILIAN BODY OF INVESTIGATORS, WE HOPE TO UNRAVEL THE SNARLED MESS THAT SHROUDS THE U.F.O. QUESTION, AND WITH THE HELP OF THE NEWSPAPERS AND THE PUBLIC, WHERE CAN WE FAIL?\n\nWE WILL BE GRATEFUL IF YOU WILL PUBLISH THE ENCLOSED APPEAL ON THE FRONT PAGE OF YOUR NEWSPAPER, IN A CONSPICUOUS ENOUGH MANNER THAT NO ONE WILL FAIL TO NOTICE IT. IT IS THE PUBLIC WE MUST DEPEND UPON TO GET THOROUGHLY ORGANIZED, AND WITH THIS CO-OPERATION WE ARE CERTAIN THAT WE CAN FIND THE ANSWER TO THE RIDDLE OF THE \"FLYING SAUCERS.\"\n\nIF A FILTER CENTER HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN YOUR STATE OR PROVINCE, THIS FORM LETTER WILL CARRY ITS ADDRESS WHICH SHOULD REPLACE THE HEADQUARTERS ADDRESS GIVEN ON THE ENCLOSED \"PUBLIC NOTICE.\" IF NO SUCH FILTER CENTER ADDRESS IS GIVEN, THEN THE ORIGINAL HEADQUARTERS ADDRESS SHOULD BE USED.\n\nWE WISH TO THANK YOU FOR ANY ASSISTANCE YOU MAY BE ABLE TO GIVE US IN THIS RESPECT. LATER ESTABLISHED FILTER CENTER ADDRESSES WILL BE SENT TO YOU FOR PUBLIC ATTENTION IN THE EVENT OF UNUSUAL SIGHTINGS THAT MAY COME TO YOUR ATTENTION.\n\nRESPECTFULLY,\n\nFOR THE INTER CONTINENTAL AERIAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Please confirm publication or return forms with reason for refusal. Thank you.\n\nMissouri Filter Center\n1CARF"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nDATE: January 30, 1958\n\nFROM : SAC, KANSAS CITY (62-7386)\n\nSUBJECT: ROBERT T. STONE;\nINTER-CONTINENTAL AERIAL\nRESEARCH FOUNDATION;\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\nFlying Saucers\n\nRe St. Louis letter to Bureau 1-6-58 and Bureau letter to Director of Special Investigations, Department of the Air Force, dated 1-23-58.\n\nThe files of the Kansas City Office contain no information identifiable with ROBERT T. STONE or the Inter-Continental Aerial Research Foundation.\n\nIt should be noted that the 1957 Independence, Missouri Directory does not list ROBERT T. STONE. This directory lists TERRELL O. STONE, wife IVA, an ice cream maker at Velvet Freeze, as residing at 10717 E. 27th Street Terrace, Independence, Missouri. The files of the Kansas City Office contain nothing identifiable with TERRELL O. STONE.\n\nRUC.\n\n2 - Bureau\n1 - St. Louis (62-0)(info)\n1 - Kansas City (62-7386)\n\nRHA:MEJ\n(4)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OKLAHOMA CITY (62-7386)\n\nROBERT T. STONE;\nINTER-CONTINENTAL AERIAL\nRESEARCH FOUNDATION;\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nRe St. Louis letter to Bureau 1-6-58 and Bureau letter to Director of Special Investigations, Department of the Air Force, dated 1-23-58.\n\nThe files of the Kansas City Office contain no information identifiable with ROBERT T. STONE or the Inter-Continental Aerial Research Foundation.\n\nIt should be noted that the 1957 Independence, Missouri Directory does not list ROBERT T. STONE. This directory lists TERRELL O. STONE, wife IVA, an ice cream maker at Velvet Freeze, as residing at 10717 E. 27th Street Terrace, Independence, Missouri. The files of the Kansas City Office contain nothing identifiable with TERRELL O. STONE.\n\nRUC.\n\n2 - Bureau\n1 - St. Louis (62-0)(info)\n1 - Kansas City (62-7386)\n\nRHA:MEJ\n(4)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - Edison\n1 - Mr. Sanders\n\n62-83894-390\n\nREC-92\n\nDate: March 17, 1958\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nBuilding Tempo E\n4th and Adams Drive, S. W.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nEnclosed for your information is a copy of a letter forwarded to this Bureau by Mrs. Harold Ferguson of Elkhart, Indiana, which is self-explanatory.\n\nNo action in this connection is contemplated by this Bureau.\n\nEnclosure\n\n1 - Director of Naval Intelligence (Enclosure)\n\n1 - Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (Enclosure)\nDepartment of the Army\n\nAttention: Chief, Security Division\n1 - Indianapolis (Enclosure)\n\nESS:dmn\n(7)\n\nNOTE: Mrs. Ferguson relates having seen flying saucers and expresses her belief that outer spacemen have been landing in the vicinity of her home and taking newspapers and magazines which she left out for them. No action for the Bureau other than the dissemination indicated. Bufiles negative re Ferguson. No reply desirable in view indications she is mental case. AF has unit for checking such reports.\n\n6-1 MAR 24 1958"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D ESPIONAGE-NAT. INT. MAR 14 1958\n\nDate: March 17, 1958\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: FLYING SAUCERS\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nEnclosed for your information is a copy of a letter forwarded to this Bureau by Mrs. Harold Ferguson of Elkhart, Indiana, which is self-explanatory.\n\nNo action in this connection is contemplated by this Bureau.\n\nEnclosure\n\n1 - Director of Naval Intelligence (Enclosure)\n\n1 - Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence (Enclosure)\nDepartment of the Army\n\nAttention: Chief, Security Division\n1 - Indianapolis (Enclosure)\n\nNOTE: Mrs. Ferguson relates having seen flying saucers and expresses her belief that outer spacemen have been landing in the vicinity of her home and taking newspapers and magazines which she left out for them. No action for the Bureau other than the dissemination indicated. Bufiles negative re Ferguson. No reply desirable in view indications she is mental case. AF has unit for checking such reports."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This is the true story of our visitors from outer space 5 or 6 years ago.\n\nMany people wonder whether there are people living in other worlds and many people wish they knew for sure and some people wish they could contact them.\nOf course there are people living in another world at least and probably many worlds.\nMy husband and three daughters and I were living on our farm in Michigan (in the sticks). Our oldest daughter was working as a waitress about seven miles from our place at the Country Club, that summer vacation to help pay her college expenses. I would go after her at midnight then wait untill she was ready to go home. One night right soon after we left the highway we noticed this moving object a little ahead of us along the side of the road. It had tiny lights blinking on and off and for just a second when the lights were off we could see a dark moving object or shape is a better word. There was absolutely no noise whatever but I realized at once there were human beings guiding it. I was three miles"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MAR 10 1 39 PM '57 REC'D - ESPIONAGE\nF B I\nMAR 10 2 03 PM '58"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"from the highway to our home which made\nsix home driveways and three roads\nleading off of our road that we were traveling.\nat each place this outer flame would hover\nuntil they knew whether we were turning\noff or going on by, then they would swiftly\nglide on ahead of us, they staid just above\nthe trees and a little ahead of us showing\nthey were very intelligent people because had\nthey staid behind us we would have speeded\nup and panicked. When we came to our place\nthey hesitated until we turned in then they\nturned in over our garden beside the drive\naway. My daughter got out on her side and I\ngot out on my side of the car. They were only a\nshort distance from from us and down much\nlower. They were motionless and noiseless\nno motors at all. We stared at each other\na long time, the thot crossed my mind that they\nwere probably taking our picture. I was completely\nspeechless and awed. I felt the enormity of this\nthing that was happening. They came from endless\ntime endless distance I felt that it was out\nof eternity itself. After some time they moved\nfirst on across the field down towards\nthe river. Silently we went in to the house"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and on to bed without saying a word about\nit. It was no time for words I didn't\nwant to break the wonderment of this little\npiece of sacred time in my life. Every night\nfrom now on our dog which was tied nights\nto his dog house in the back yard would\nbark just a few minutes when the last light\nwas turned off. I could tell by his bark that\nit was not just another animal but a\nperson out there. The old orchard at the\nedge of the yard was wild and grown\nup with grass and bushes and small trees\nand six or eight old big trees. There on\nthe edge behind high bushes of lilacs\nstood our indispensable little square\n(library). I noticed that the newspapers\nand magazines were missing every morning.\nI had a good idea of what was going on so\nI purposely put out newspapers and magazines\nevery evening then checked in the morning\nand they were always gone. One day our\nyoungest daughter mentioned that every night\nwhen she turns off her light the dog would\nbark and she'd see a peculiar red round\nlight out there in the back yard. That\nnight when the dog started to bark I opened"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"her door to see what it looked like. The light\nwas the size of a pie plate it was red but\nit didn't throw a beam of light like our\nflashlights but it did have depth. There\nwere at least two people one waited outside\nand watched while the other one went inside\nto get the papers. We lived right on the\nstate line and we got Indiana papers so\nevery evening I'd put out The Elkhart Truth,\nthe South Bend Tribune and Chicago Sunday\nTribune and magazines.\nOne night the dog was not tied and he\nstarted to bark but his bark was sliced\noff. I'll never forget the sound of it. I suppose\nthat they killed him but I was not brave\nenough to go out and look. I got up early\nthe next morning to see he had run half\nway across the yard and he had fallen\nover just as he ran. he was unconscious\nbut not dead. I walked right by him but he\ndidn't move. This was another proof of their\ngoodness and human qualities because\ntheir flashlight was a ray light and\nthey could have killed him had they\nwanted to. He came to enough to pull him-\nself into a more comfortable position before"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the girls got up. It was noon before he could\nwalk and three months before he was well\nagain. One morning at the end of the six\nweeks I found a strange newspaper on the\nshelf in our (library). On top of the paper was\na good quality sheet of white paper with\nthe key to the print in the newspaper.\nThese letters are almost like ours a couple\nexactly like ours however they use three letters\ntogether instead of one alone.\nooo ooo ooo ooo\nooo ooo ooo ooo\nooo ooo ooo ooo\nooo ooo ooo ooo\nooo ooo\nI suppose to hear them read it would sound\nlike a sing song of phrases. They didn't use end\nof sentence dots or punctuations of any kind.\nNo capital letters either. I know that they must\nhave learned to read our printed matter\nbut if we heard them read it we wouldn't\nunderstand it I mean our own language.\nI'm sure that they get the right meaning\ntho. I hid the newspaper until I could decide\nwhat to do with it but someone found it and\nburned it up. I feel terrible about it I know it"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"is unforgiveable but that is what did happen anyway. The morning that I found the newspaper I went upstairs and looked down across the orchard to the river and there was the flying saucer. It was made of transparent material like glass it was dome shaped like an eskimo hut. Inside was a large ring (like a napkin ring) only huge and every thing was inside this ring and as I looked the whole ring was lit up in colors and I could no longer see inside the ring. It rose straight up and showed very plainly against the trees but after it was above the trees it looked just like a star. Pilots probably saw them many times and didn't realize what they were looking at. They probably didn't use this for outer space travel but had a huge ship plane somewhere and used this only for travel on this earth, they probably had more of them somewhere. My husband died two years ago so I rented the farm and my daughters and I live in Elkhart and now. So I don't know if they ever come back or not. I know that I have no proof that this is true but I thought I'd see if the government did believe any of it. Outer space people can read"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"our print if they would put up a station with our print in neon lights they could understand what it is and that it would be for an exchange of newspapers. I imagine that they are quite disgusted with our sputniks and they could give us much knowledge that we need if we could contact them.\nIf you think that there is nothing to this and you don't believe it don't answer if you want to answer send a letter to a friend of mine you can't write to my home because my own relatives would lock me up if they knew that I wrote to you because they definitely would not believe it so I never talked about this to anyone (Oh yes our picture was inside)\nmy name Mrs. Harold Ferguson put your letter in a sealed envelope with my name on it and put it in another envelope and address to\n\nmrs. Lester Ramsby\n2506 Pleasant Plain Ave\nElkhart, Indiana."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - Liaison\n1 - Sanders\n\nREC- 65 62-83894 391\n\nDate: October 2, 1958\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nBuilding Tempo E\n4th and Adams Drive, S. W.\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: DELMAINE H. OVESON\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(Nationalities Intelligence)\n\nReference is made to letter dated September 22, 1958, signed by Mr. F. L. Welch, your reference 24-185-483, re \"Unidentified Flying Object, Torrington, Conn., 5 December 1957.\"\n\nEnclosed for your information is a copy of a memorandum dated July 9, 1958, at Denver, Colorado, relating to the subject. The other Government agency referred to in the memorandum is the Office of Special Investigations, Lowry Air Force Base, Denver, Colorado. Also enclosed for your information is a copy of a memorandum dated July 3, 1958, at San Francisco, California. The representative of another Government agency referred to therein is Colonel William E. Zuerner, USAF District Commander, Travis Air Force Base, California, who furnished information concerning the subject developed by OSI.\n\nSince it appears that the subject is a member of the Air Force, no further action in this matter is contemplated by this Bureau.\n\nEnclosures - 2\n\nNOTE: This memo is classified \"Confidential\" inasmuch as it transmits letterhead memos so classified. This classification is proper since material received from the Canadian Government was so classified and also the information received from Col. Zuerner was so classified.\n\nTolson\nBoardman\nBelmont\nMohr\nNease\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nTrotter\nClayton\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy\n\nESS:jas (5)\nMAIL ROOM\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nDate: October 2, 1958\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: DELMAINE H. OVESON\n\nFBI - JUSTICE\nRECD BELMONT\n\nOCT 3 1958\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\nReceived from\nSEP 22 1958 OSI PHF\n\n24-185-483\n\nHonorable J. Edgar Hoover\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nRE: Unidentified Flying Object,\nTorrington, Conn.,\n5 December 1957\n\nDear Sir:\n\nInclosed is a copy of a letter from a Delmaine H. Oveson, who identifies himself as Director of Operations, Electronics Service Unit 4, Roseau, Minnesota. This letter requests information concerning the reported sighting of an unconventional Aerial Object on or about 5 December 1957 at Torrington, Connecticut.\n\nThis letter was furnished the Office of Special Investigations by the Ground Observer Corps (GOC) Coordinator for the State of Connecticut. That individual has advised that an alleged sighting of an unidentified flying object near Torrington, Connecticut, was reported on or about 5 December 1957, but that neither he nor the addressee have any knowledge of the author of the inclosed letter.\n\nInformation has been received from the U. S. Army, and Air Force Postal Service that no military units are located at Roseau, Minnesota. Therefore, this matter is being referred to your Bureau for any action you deem appropriate.\n\nAdvice if any information of interest to the Air Force is developed by your Bureau in this matter will be appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nF. L. WELCH\nAssistant Chief\nCounterintelligence Div.\nDir of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\n\n1 Incl\nCy of Envelope & Ltr fr Hq. Electronics Service Unit 4, Roseau, Minn.\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE 62-83894-391"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director of Operations\nElectronics Service Unit 4\nRoute 2\nRoseau, Minnesota\n\nROSEAU MINN. JUL 21 730AM 1958\nU.S. POSTAGE 3¢ LIBERTY\n\n183 Hamilton Ave\n\nMr Domonic Gerardi\nTorrington, Connecticut\n\nB-2"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Headquarters\nElectronics Service Unit 4\nRoseau, Minnesota\n\nD/O\n\nMr Pomonic Gerardi\nTorrington, Connecticut\n\nDear Sir:\n\nIt has been reported that you did, on or about December 5, 1957, sight an Unconventional Aerial Object at or near Torrington, Connecticut, at approximately 8:05 p.m., in company with friends.\n\nWe respectfully request your assistance in this matter. Please describe the object, giving approximate altitude, color, shape, direction of flight if any, approximate position in sky, time, date, approximate size in comparison to any coin held at arms length and duration of sighting. Did you notice any infraction of flight safety? Subject material will be held strictly confidential.\n\nYour assistance will be immensely appreciated.\n\nSincerely:\n\nDelmaine H Oveson\nElectronics Service Unit 4\nEXETOR RPAF\nDirector of Operations\n\nJUL 1 9 1958"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-'03581 o/Flying Saucers\n\nDate: October 2, 1958\n\nTo: Director of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nBuilding Tempo E\n4th and Adams Drive, S. W.\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nSubject: DONALD E. KEYHOE\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(Nationalities Intelligence)\n\nFor your information, there are enclosed two Photostats of a letter dated September 22, 1958, addressed to this Bureau by the subject and two copies of this Bureau's reply dated September 26, 1958.\n\nEnclosures - 4\n\n1 - WFO (Enclosure - copy of Bureau reply to Keyhoe dated September 26, 1958)\n\nNOTE:\n\nSubject's letter made pointed inquiries relating to Bureau's participation in investigations relating to unidentified flying objects. Our reply was general in nature. Copies of incoming and are reply being furnished to OSI since Air Force coordinates matters relating to unidentified flying objects.\n\nESS:jas\n(6)\n\n2 ENCLOSURE\n\n66 OCT 6 1958\n\nFile 62-83894\n62-83894-\nNOT RECORDED\n128 OCT 6 1958"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MR. A. H. BELMONT\n\nSeptember 26, 1958\n\nS. B. DONAHOE\n\n1 - Nease\n1 - Belmont\n1 - Donahoe\n1 - Sanders\n\nDONALD E. KEYHOE\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(Nationalities Intelligence)\n\nSubject, Director of National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena, by letter of 9/22/58 requested particulars of Bureau's participation concerning unidentified flying objects. The committee he heads is described on letterhead as \"A privately supported fact finding civilian committee serving the public interests\" and he lists several prominent individuals among \"our Board members and Special Advisers.\" He is a retired Marine.\n\nKeyhoe has been known to the Bureau since 1935 and was, and may still be, a free-lance writer. In 1948 he was described by Mr. Nichols as \"a flamboyant writer and we have found from previous experience that much of his material is irresponsible.\" In 1951 the Director concurred with Mr. Nichols' statement that \"We should not get involved with him.\"\n\nAs an example of his writing, the January, 1941, issue of \"Cosmopolitan\" magazine carried an article written by Keyhoe and John J. Daly entitled \"Hitler's Plan to Seize the United States Merchant Marine.\" This article indicated the Bureau had in its possession documents concerning such a plan by Hitler which indication was completely false.\n\nThe attached suggested letter to Keyhoe responds in a very general way to his questions, some of which are extremely pointed such as \"Have FBI Agents told witnesses not to talk about UFO sightings?\" and \"Does the Bureau make character investigations of UFO witnesses in some cases?\" The answers which have been furnished are designed to avoid the charge we have not answered questions yet they are broad in nature to avoid his apparent pointed inquiries. His request for an interview with a Bureau official concerning our policy concerning unidentified flying objects has been side-stepped since there appears to be no point in discussing this matter further with him. JANAP 146 is Defense document re reporting intelligence sightings.\n\nACTION:\n\nThat the attached suggested letter be forwarded to Keyhoe. In view of Air Force interest, copy of incoming with copy of our reply being sent Air Force separately.\n\n62-103581\nEnclosure\nESS:jas\n(5)\n\nENCLOSURE 62-83894-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- 1 - Mr. Nease\n- 1 - Mr. Belmont\n1 - Mr. Donahoe\n1 - Mr. Sanders\n\nSeptember 26, 1958\n\nMajor Donald E. Keyhoe, Director\nNational Investigations Committee\n on Aerial Phenomena\n1536 Connecticut Avenue\nWashington 6, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\n In response to your letter of September 22, 1958,\nthe following requested information is furnished:\n\n The Federal Bureau of Investigation does\nnot investigate sightings of unidentified flying\nobjects. When the details of such a sighting\nare reported to representatives of this Bureau,\nthe information is forwarded to the Air Force.\n\n Representatives of this Bureau do not issue\ninstructions to individuals who have sighted un-\nidentified flying objects that they should not\ntalk about such sightings.\n\n It is not a function of this Bureau to make\ncharacter investigations of individuals who have\nwitnessed unidentified flying objects.\n\n This Bureau does not have information on\nunidentified flying objects which can be re-\nleased. This does not imply that this Bureau\nhas information concerning unidentified flying\nobjects which cannot be released.\n\n It is understood that JANAP 146 is a Department\nof Defense document and is not, as such, applicable\nto the operations of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.\n\n Possible communication with extraterrestrial\nvehicles from another planet, should the unidentified\n\nESS:jas See cover memo Donahoe to Belmont, captioned\n(6) \"Donald E. Keyhoe, Miscellaneous - Information\n Concerning (Nationalities Intelligence),\" dated\n 9/26/58. ESS:jas.\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Major Donald E. Keyhoe\n\nflying objects prove to be extraterrestrial, is not\na function of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.\nThis Bureau is, of course, interested in any aspect\nof any development which would affect the internal\nsecurity of the United States.\n\n Your letter of September 22, 1958, requested an\ninterview with an official of this Bureau concerning the\nmatter of unidentified flying objects and this Bureau's\npolicy in connection therewith. Since this Bureau's policy\nin connection with unidentified flying objects has been\nfully set forth above, you may feel that the requested\ninterview is not now necessary.\n\n Sincerely yours,\n\n John Edgar Hoover\n Director\n\n - 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. S. B. DONAHOE\nFROM : E. S. SANDERS\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nDATE: October 13, 1958\n\nThis memorandum summarizes Bureau policy regarding\nunidentified flying objects commonly referred to as \"flying\nsaucers.\"\n\nReports of \"flying saucers\" became prevalent in 1947 and at\nrequest of Army Air Forces Intelligence, Bureau agreed to cooperate in\ninvestigation of flying discs. By Bureau Bulletin Number 42, 7-30-47,\nfield instructed to investigate each instance to determine if bona fide\nsighting, a prank, or hallucination. Coordination with Army through\nliaison channels in field and at SOG.\n\nBy letter 9-3-47 from Headquarters Air Defense Command addressed\nto Commanding Generals of the various Air Forces it was noted original\nintent of Air Force was that Air Force would interview responsible ob-\nservers and Bureau would investigate incidents of so-called discs found\non ground. Letter stated services of the FBI were enlisted in order to\nrelieve the numbered Air Forces of the task of tracking down all the\nmany instances which turned out to be \"trash can covers, toilet seats\nand what not.\" As result, Bureau Bulletin Number 57 of 10/1/47 instructed\n\"all future reports connected with flying discs should be referred to\nthe Air Forces and no investigative action should be taken by Bureau\nAgents.\" Letter of 9-27-47 advised Air Force that personnel and time\nof FBI could not be dissipated in this manner (62-83894-121).\n\nSAC Letter Number 38, 3-25-49, advised that from reliable\nsource it had been determined the USSR had been experimenting for four\nyears on unknown type of flying disc. SAC Letter listed for field data\ndesired by Air Force in connection with reports of sighting of flying\nsaucers. Letter again called attention to fact no investigation should\nbe conducted by Bureau but if reports made, information should be taken\nand furnished to Air Force.\n\nSAC Letter Number 83, 8-29-52, referred to prior Bulletins\nand SAC Letters and cautioned that the type of information desired by\nAir Force should be obtained from complainants and furnished promptly\nto OSI locally. This SAC Letter again reminded field investigation is\nresponsibility of Air Force.\n\nESS:jas (3)\n1 - Mr. Donahoe\n1 - Mr. Sanders\n\nREC-77\n\n62-83894-392\n\n67 OCT 17 1958"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memorandum to Mr. Donahoe\nRE: FLYING SAUCERS\n\nNeither Agents Handbook nor manuals contain instructions regarding handling of reports of sightings of unidentified flying objects although policy has been well established by above Bureau bulletins and SAC Letters and no problems have arisen in connection with this matter. Air Force has on several occasions assured that Bureau will be advised of any developments of interest to us. Last such assurance given 11-12-57 (62-83894-387).\n\nOur liaison with Air Force on this matter is with OSI although within Air Force this matter is handled by Air Technical and Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.\n\nACTION:\n\nFor your information. There appears to be no necessity for further instructions to the field or insertions in the Handbook or manuals at this time.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-22 (Rev. 12-19-56)\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nRecords Branch\n9-29, 1958\nName Check Unit - Room 6523\nService Unit - Room 6524\nForward to File Review\nAttention Richards\nReturn to Sanders 1519\nSupervisor Room Ext.\nType of References Requested:\nRegular Request (Analytical Search)\nAll References (Subversive & Nonsubversive)\nSubversive References Only\nNonsubversive References Only\nMain ____ References Only\nType of Search Requested:\nRestricted to Locality of Minn.\nExact Name Only (On the Nose)\nBuildup Variations\nCheck for Alphabetical Loyalty Form\nSubject Delmaine H. OVESON\nBirthdate & Place\nAddress\nLocalities\nR#____ Date 9-29 Searcher Initials JO\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\nI 64-42544"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Mr. Tolson\nFROM : G. A. Nease\nSUBJECT: WILLIAM ALBERT RHODES\nREPORT OF FLYING DISCS\nDATE: 11/18/58\nFor record purposes, SAC McMahon of the Phoenix Office advised at 3:21 p.m., 11/17/58, that on April 30, 1947, the above-captioned person reported to the Phoenix Office that he had taken photographs of what he believed to be flying discs, but he did not have the negatives of the pictures with him, promising he would bring them into the office the following day. On August 30, 1947, Rhodes brought negatives of the photographs he allegedly took at that time into the Phoenix Office and he was advised by SA J. Bailey Brower that the negatives were being accepted by the FBI for Air Force intelligence; that there was a question as to whether he would ever get the negatives back. With this understanding Rhodes left the negatives which were in turn turned over to George Fugate, Jr., military representative.\n\nOn April 17, 1950, Rhodes contacted the Phoenix Office for the return of the negatives at which time he was advised of the statement made to him in 1947 that the negatives were accepted for Air Force intelligence and it was doubtful if they would be returned, but that he should contact the Office of Special Investigations of the Air Force, San Francisco, California.\n\nSAC McMahon advised that today the Arizona Republic newspaper was doing a column about flying saucers having been reported over the years and had interviewed Rhodes since their clips showed that he had been talked to back in 1947. Rhodes told the Arizona Republic that the FBI had borrowed the negatives of films he had taken but had never returned them. SAC McMahon desired advice as to what he should tell the Arizona Republic and he was informed that he should advise the paper that the negatives were received in 1947 from Rhodes with the understanding they would be turned over to Air Force intelligence and that there was doubt as to whether the negatives would ever be returned to Rhodes; that with this understanding Rhodes released the negatives; that the negatives in question were immediately turned over to Air Force intelligence representatives; and that should any further information be desired concerning the matter the Arizona Republic should contact the Office of Special Investigations of the Air Force. SAC McMahon was referred to the Domestic Intelligence Division for its concurrence.\n\nJJM:hpf\n(4)\n1 - Mr. Belmont\n1 - Mr. Jones\nEX-135\nREC-15\n23 NOV 20 1958\nCRIME REC\n66 NOV 25 1958\nI talked with McMahon about action taken by McGuire.\n62-83894-393"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Nov 18 11 50 AM 58 FBI RECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nNov 18 11 29 AM 58 FBI RECEIVED-TOLSON\nNov 20 9 53 AM 58 RECEIVED-RELEASE FBI\nNov 18 2 04 PM 58 RECD BELMONT FBI-JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-394\nREC-35\nDecember 2, 1958\nMr. James Maney\n1007 North West 14th Street\nOklahoma City 6, Oklahoma\nDear Mr. Maney:\nYour letter dated November 22, 1958, has been received, and I am instructing a Special Agent of our Oklahoma City Office to contact you concerning the matter you mentioned.\nSincerely yours,\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nMAILED 30 DEC 3 - 1958 COMM-FBI\n2 - Oklahoma City - Enclosures (2)\nATTENTION SAC: Background as described not identifiable in Bufiles. An Agent of your office should contact Maney immediately and secure copies of or information concerning the periodicals described. Inform Maney that the FBI has not taken the action he suggested, and we have conducted no investigation concerning unidentified flying objects. The suggestion should be made that he may wish to contact the Office of Special Investigations of the Air Force, which has made some related studies. Sulet with requested data under caption \"Mr. James Maney, 1007 North West 14th Street, Oklahoma City 6, Oklahoma, Research (Crime Records)\" no later than December 9, 1958.\nFollow-up 12-11-58\nNOTE: One reference appears in Bufiles wherein one Jimmy Maney of the same address requested general material on the FBI and stated that his hobby was collecting letterhead stationery. There is a Special Agent Joseph A. Bender, EOD 4-9-51, GS-12, assigned to the New York Office. No other possibly pertinent references located.\nDCL:mfz\n(6)\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT\n53 DEC 19 1958"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"James Maney,\n1007 N. W. 14th Street,\nOklahoma City 6, Oklahoma,\n22 November 1958\n\nThe Honorable J. Edgar Hoover, Director,\nFederal Bureau of Investigation,\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nI am Acting Deputy Director of a local Oklahoma City know which is known as the Interplanetary Intelligence of Unidentified Flying Objects, which is interested in the serious investigation of UFO.\n\nRecently many rumors have been printed in UFO periodicals, concerning reports that Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation have discouraged certain saucer investigators, particulary Mr. A. Bender of Bridgeport, Connecticut, from furthur research into the secret of these elusive discs. Since, you are the Director of the F.B.I., I would like to know whether or not these reports are factual or whether they are just rumors.\n\nThank you very much. Trusting to hear from you in the near future, I remain.\n\nVery truly yours,\nJames Maney\nfor IIOUFO"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. M. A. Wolcott\nEditor - Publisher\nThe Daily Iberian\nPost Office Box 458\nNew Iberia, Louisiana\n\nDear Mr. Wolcott:\n\nYour letter dated December 3, 1958, with enclosures has been received.\n\nSince the contents of your communication are of primary concern to another governmental agency, I am taking the liberty of forwarding a copy of it, as well as copies of your enclosures, to the Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, Building Tempo E, 4th and Adams Drive, Southwest Washington, D. C., who would be in the best position to answer your inquiry.\n\nSincerely yours,\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nNOTE: Bufiles reflect that a citizen in Bartow, Florida, forwarded similar data concerning the Aerial Phenomena Research Club in 1957. Referral to OSI was made at that time. No indication in Bufiles that this Group is any governmental agency. (62-83894-373) No record Bufiles on either correspondent or his newspaper.\n\nDCL:mrh\n(3)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE DAILY IBERIAN\n\nM. A. WOLCOTT\nEditor-Publisher\n\nDecember 3, 1958\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation,\nWashington, D.C.\n\nGentlemen: Flying Saucers\n\nEnclosed you will find \"News Releases\" from a group calling itself Aerial Phenomena Research Group, in Seattle, Washington.\n\nI am wondering if this is a legitimate organization or a phoney, particularly because it is indicated that certain \"flying objects\" might originate from \"other planets.\"\n\nIf you have any information as to the reliability of this organization would you please so inform me?\n\nWith all best wishes, I am,\n\nSincerely,\nM. A. Wolcott"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"December 1, 1958\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nEnclosed you will find \"News Release\" from a group calling itself Aerial Phenomena Research Group in Seattle, Washington.\n\nI am wondering if this is a legitimate organization or whether it is a racket, particularly because it is annotated with \"flying objects\" which originate from \"other planets.\"\n\nIf you have any information on the reliability of this organization would you please so inform me?\n\nYours very truly,\n\nSincerely,\n\nDEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nF B I\nRECEIVED\nDEC 5 3 23 PM '58\nMR JONES\nDEC 5 3 18 PM"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aerial Phenomena Research Group\nNational Headquarters\n5103 Findlay Street\nSeattle, Washington\n\nDear Sir:\n\nWe are advised that, on 10-13-58, unidentified flying objects were seen over your area, and we would greatly appreciate your assistance in locating witnesses to this aerial phenomenon.\n\nIf policy and space permit, we would appreciate an article in your publication, asking that all persons witnessing aerial phenomenon during this period contact our office.\n\nWe are a non-profit organization whose purpose is to investigate and determine the nature of unidentified flying objects and related phenomena.\n\nThanking you in advance,\n\nAerial Phenomena Research Group\nBob Gribble, National Director\n\nForm #4 Revised 5/1/57--500\n\n62-83894 395\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Aerial Phenomena Research Group\nNational Headquarters\n5108 Findlay Street\nSeattle, Washington\n\nNews Release July 1, 1958\n\nUnidentified Flying Objects Interplanetary\n\nThere is now sufficient information based on data compiled from eyewitness accounts that a high percentage of aerial phenomena such as those popularly described as unidentified flying objects are \"intelligently controled craft whose ports of origin are outside Earths atmosphere.\"\n\nThis is the conclusion reached as the result of a study begun by Aerial Phenomena Research Group in Seattle, Washington on January 1, 1954 into the field of unidentified flying objects and possibly related incidents.\n\nCommenting on this study, National Director of Aerial Phenomena Research Group Robert J. Gribble said: \"Although the accounts considered in this study did not contain scientific measurements of each sighting, it was possible to establish certain valid conclusions by the application of statistical methods in the treatment of the data. Analyzed and arranged, the data did show a marked pattern.\n\n\"On the basis of this marked pattern of the data, A.P.R.G. has concluded that a high percentage of the more than 5,000 accounts of unidentified flying objects examined in this study represent observations of technological developments outside the range of present-day scientific knowledge.\n\n\"Therefore, it is highly probable that many of the unidentified flying objects considered in this study are 'spacecraft from other planets'.\"\n\nA.P.R.G. highly recommends that all national security agencies take immediate steps to strip the unidentified flying objects of the special \"secrecy status\" they have been given and the aura of mystery they have unfortunately acquired. END.\n\nENCLOSURE\n62-83894 395"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nRecords Branch\n\n12-10, 1958\n\nName Check Unit - Room 6523\nService Unit - Room 6524\nForward to File Review\nAttention\nReturn to Wacks 1515\nSupervisor Room Ext.\n\nType of References Requested:\nRegular Request (Analytical Search)\nAll References (Subversive & Nonsubversive)\nSubversive References Only\nNonsubversive References Only\nMain References Only\n\nType of Search Requested:\nRestricted to Locality of\nExact Name Only (On the Nose)\nBuildup Variations\nCheck for Alphabetical Loyalty Form\n\nAlbert K. Bender\n\nSubject\nBirthdate & Place\nAddress\n\nLocalities\n\nR# Date 12-10 Searcher Initials\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\n\nI 62-83894-326\nNR Gribble\nAlbert\nNI 138-113\nMF 79-5422-2\nNI 67-535759-24\nMF 70-14848-3\nNI 100-3-45-82\nNI 100-148159-1\nMF 52-29255-1\nNI 79-1-2253\nNI 100-264270-1\nNI 105-50262-11\nNI 88-3277-2108\nNI 61-7559-2795X\nNI 61-7559-2-455\nNI 100-190625-133p61\nNI 100-3-23-x6p41\nL 100-15252-39 encl p399\nV 32-2972-2324\nfile not rec'd yet"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NUMEROUS REFERENCES\nSEARCH SLIP\n\nSubj: Albert K. Bender\nSupervisor Wacks Room 1515\nR# Date 12-10 Searcher Initial\n\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\n\nalbert\nNI 100-103204 18\nA.K.\nNR"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-22 (Rev. 5-7-58)\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nRecords Branch\n12-10, 1958\n\n[ ] Name Check Unit - Room 6523\n[ ] Service Unit - Room 6524\n[ ] Forward to File Review\n[ ] Attention\n[✓] Return to Wacks 1515\nSupervisor Room Ext.\n\nType of References Requested:\n[ ] Regular Request (Analytical Search)\n[✓] All References (Subversive & Nonsubversive)\n[ ] Subversive References Only\n[ ] Nonsubversive References Only\n[ ] Main ____ References Only\n\nType of Search Requested:\n[ ] Restricted to Locality of ____\n[ ] Exact Name Only (On the Nose)\n[✓] Buildup [ ] Variations\n[ ] Check for Alphabetical Loyalty Form\n\nC.H. Marck\n\nSubject\nBirthdate & Place\nAddress\n\nLocalities\n\nR# ____ Date 12-10 Searcher Initials lam\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\n\nNR\nCaroline\n147-4240\nClaire\n39-0-24335\nClara\n64-1306-24p2\nClaudia\n40-82562\nlisted twice 40-82562-1 Photo\n64-1306-24p2\n100-343242-64p16\n100-60850-1p6\n\nC.H. Marck\nis a jr."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-22 Federal Bureau of Investigation\nRecords Branch\n12-11, 1958\n\n[ ] Name Check Unit - Room 6523\n[ ] Service Unit - Room 6524\n[ ] Forward to File Review\n[✓] Attention Yates\n[✓] Return to Wacks 1515\nSupervisor Room Ext.\n\nType of References Requested:\n[ ] Regular Request (Analytical Search)\n[✓] All References (Subversive & Nonsubversive)\n[ ] Subversive References Only\n[ ] Nonsubversive References Only\n[ ] Main ____ References Only\n\nType of Search Requested:\n[ ] Restricted to Locality of ____\n[✓] Exact Name Only (On the Nose)\n[ ] Buildup [ ] Variations\n[ ] Check for Alphabetical Loyalty Form\n\nInternational Flying Saucer Bureau\n\nSubject\nBirthdate & Place\nAddress\n\nLocalities\n\nR# ____ Date 12-11 Searcher Initials JO\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\n\nI 62-83894-326"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Director, FBI\nDATE: December 9, 1958\n\nFROM: SAC, Oklahoma City 62-2044\nSUBJECT: Mr. JAMES MANEY, 1007 N.W. 14th St., Oklahoma City 6, Oklahoma\nRESEARCH (CRIME RECORDS)\n\nReBulet 12/2/58 to JAMES MANEY of Oklahoma City, with copy to the Oklahoma City Office.\n\nOn 12/8/58 JAMES MANEY, 1007 N.W. 14th St., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, was contacted by SA J. A. GRIMES and advised that the FBI has not discouraged the investigation of flying saucers and that the FBI does not conduct investigation concerning unidentified flying objects (UFO).\n\nJAMES MANEY, who advised he is 13 years of age, stated he had read reports in some of the literature concerning UFO which indicated that the FBI had discouraged some of the investigators from carrying out their research. He exhibited a copy of a publication entitled \"The Saucerian Bulletin\" which could not be given to the interviewing Agent since he had borrowed the publication from an unidentified friend. An examination of the publication reflected it to be Vol. 3, #4, Released October 15, 1958, edited and published by GRAY BARKER, Box 2228, Clarksburg, West Virginia. The publication consisted of approximately 30 pages, contained several book reviews and advertisements for books pertaining to UFO. Page 20 of the publication contained an editorial by BARKER consisting in part of a letter which BARKER stated he had received from a researcher in the western part of the U. S. This letter stated in part as follows:\n\n\"Dear Mr. Barker\n\n\"You have often wondered where the 3 men came from that silenced Bender. I can give you the answer because 3 men tried to silence George Adamski. Adamski tells me that the 3 men were from the FBI, Air Force Intelligence, and the Central Intelligence Agency. It was the man from the CIA who made the threats that were designed to shut Adamski up.\"\n\n2-Bureau AM\n1-Oklahoma City\n\nJAG:PM\n(3)\n\n62-83894-396"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Director, FBI\nDATE: December 9, 1958\n\nFROM: SAC, Oklahoma City 62-2044\nSUBJECT: Mr. JAMES MANEY, 1007 N.W. 14th St., Oklahoma City 6, Oklahoma\nRESEARCH (CRIME RECORDS)\n\nReBulet 12/2/58 to JAMES MANEY of Oklahoma City, with copy to the Oklahoma City Office.\n\nOn 12/8/58 JAMES MANEY, 1007 N.W. 14th St., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, was contacted by SA J. A. GRIMES and advised that the FBI has not discouraged the investigation of flying saucers and that the FBI does not conduct investigation concerning unidentified flying objects (UFO).\n\nJAMES MANEY, who advised he is 13 years of age, stated he had read reports in some of the literature concerning UFO which indicated that the FBI had discouraged some of the investigators from carrying out their research. He exhibited a copy of a publication entitled \"The Saucerian Bulletin\" which could not be given to the interviewing Agent since he had borrowed the publication from an unidentified friend. An examination of the publication reflected it to be Vol. 3, #4, Released October 15, 1958, edited and published by GRAY BARKER, Box 2228, Clarksburg, West Virginia. The publication consisted of approximately 30 pages, contained several book reviews and advertisements for books pertaining to UFO. Page 20 of the publication contained an editorial by BARKER consisting in part of a letter which BARKER stated he had received from a researcher in the western part of the U. S. This letter stated in part as follows:\n\n\"Dear Mr. Barker\n\n\"You have often wondered where the 3 men came from that silenced Bender. I can give you the answer because 3 men tried to silence George Adamski. Adamski tells me that the 3 men were from the FBI, Air Force Intelligence, and the Central Intelligence Agency. It was the man from the CIA who made the threats that were designed to shut Adamski up.\"\n\n2-Bureau AM\n1-Oklahoma City\n\nJAG:PM\n(3)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OC 62-2044\n\nThis letter indicated that it was written by an individual who has been writing books on UFO and that his publisher is ROBERT J. GRIBBLE, 5108 Findlay St., Seattle, Washington.\n\nJAMES MANEY advised that the above letter had also been printed in a publication originating in England and that the writer's name was listed as RICHARD OGDEN, Seattle, Washington. MANEY advised he is unable to recall the name of this publication and does not have a copy at the present time. He stated that the BENDER referred to in OGDEN's letter was A. BENDER of Bridgeport, Connecticut, who had conducted some research concerning UFOs and had allegedly been deterred from his investigation by three unidentified men. According to MANEY there has been a great deal of speculation regarding the identity of the men who tried to silence BENDER. He stated that GRAY BARKER, editor of \"The Saucerian Bulletin,\" had written a book concerning the matter entitled \"They Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers.\""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"7834 North Loma Land Drive\nScottsdale, Arizona\nDecember 7, 1958\n\nC. H. MARCK JR.\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI am extremely interested in the \"Bender Affair,\" and I will be most grateful if you could help clear up the mystery in this affair. The reason I am writing you is because I have learned recently that a researcher of the flying saucer mystery said the FBI is involved in this affair.\n\nA civilian investigating agency was formed in Bridgeport, Conn., in 1952, to look into the flying saucer mystery by Albert K. Bender. He called the organization The International Flying Saucer Bureau. And, during his study of the saucer mystery Bender ran across something important. This information was evidently the solution to the mystery for in 1953 Bender stated bluntly, \"I know what the saucers are.\" Then, \"three men in black suits\" silenced him. Even today Bender will not discuss the matter of his \"hush-up\" with anyone. However, I have learned that the secret of the saucers lies the \"dreadful underground menace\" that is threatening the world. And, I am also extremely interested in this \"menace.\"\n\nI have some very important information concerning this \"dreadful underground menace\" that I would like to discuss with Bender very much. For the story concerning this \"menace\" is certainly a \"hellish Horror\" one, which reveals a fantastic situation, so fantastic, that it would be hardly conceivable by the public. Yes indeed, I would appreciate it very much if you could help me get in touch with Bender.\n\nI have also been getting information regarding \"certain\" ship tragedies that have occurred on the high seas for a very long time, and \"certain\" aircraft accidents and disappearances. For these tragedies reveal evidence that gives proof that such a \"menace\" really \"exists.\"\n\nI certainly will be looking forward in hearing from you.\n\nSincerely yours\nC. H. Marck, Jr."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, Phoenix\n\nDirector, FBI\nREC-37 62-83894-398\nALBERT K. BENDER\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(Nationalities Intelligence)\n\nEnclosed is a copy of a letter received from C. H. Marck, Jr., 7834 North Loma Land Drive, Scottsdale, Arizona.\n\nBufiles contain no information pertaining to the \"Bender Affair\" nor to the \"hush-up\" of Bender as alleged in paragraph two of the enclosed letter. The only identifiable data in Bureau files on Bender is a letter he wrote on 10/26/52 on the letterhead of the International Flying Saucer Bureau to a Mr. L. H. Frahm, Franklin, Indiana, in which he suggested how Frahm could organize a chapter of the Saucer Bureau in Franklin. Also in Bufiles is a copy of the January, 1953, magazine \"Space Review\" which apparently was put out by the Saucer Bureau. This magazine contains numerous articles and squibs concerning the sighting of flying saucers throughout the world. It does not appear to have any security significance.\n\nUnless information in your files would indicate an interview with Marck is undesirable, immediately contact him and orally acknowledge the receipt of his letter by the Bureau. At the same time thoroughly interview Marck and obtain all data in his possession concerning the \"hush-up\" of Bender as well as what part the FBI was alleged to have played in the \"Bender Affair.\" In the event it is apparent that the Bureau was not so involved, so advise Marck. Submit results of this interview to reach the Bureau no later than 12/23/58. It is permissible to advise Marck that the Bureau is not cognizant of Bender's whereabouts and has no record of involvement in the \"Bender Affair.\"\n\nEnclosure\n\nNOTE: See cover memo Donahoe to Belmont, same caption, dated December 12, 1958, JFW:jas.\n\nJFW:jas\n(6)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: MR. A. H. BELMONT\nFROM: MR. S. B. DONAHOE\nDATE: December 12, 1958\nSUBJECT: ALBERT K. BENDER\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(Nationalities Intelligence)\n\nBy letter 12/7/58 Mr. C. H. Marck, Jr., inquired whether we could furnish him any information concerning the \"Bender Affair\" and advised he was asking the Bureau since he had recently learned that the FBI is involved in this affair. Marck explained that Bender formed the International Flying Saucer Bureau in Bridgeport, Connecticut, in 1952 to look into the flying saucer mystery. In 1953 Bender allegedly stated that he knew what the saucers are. Then according to Marck \"three men in black suits\" silenced Bender to the extent that even today Bender will not discuss the matter of his \"hush-up\" with anyone. Marck pointed out he has learned that \"the secret of the saucers lies the 'dreadful underground menace' that is threatening the world\" and that he has important information concerning this menace. Marck also requested our help in getting in touch with Bender.\n\nBufiles contain no information on Marck. The only identifiable data in our files on Bender is a letter he wrote on 10/26/52 on the letterhead of the International Flying Saucer Bureau to a Mr. L. H. Frahm, Franklin, Indiana, in which he suggested how Frahm could organize a chapter of the Saucer Bureau in Franklin. Also in Bufiles is a copy of the January, 1953, magazine \"Space Review\" which apparently was put out by the Saucer Bureau. This magazine contains numerous articles and squibs concerning the sighting of flying saucers throughout the world. It does not appear to have any security significance.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\nThere is a possibility that Marck may be suffering from delusions; however, in view of the fact that he stated the FBI is involved in a matter of which we are not cognizant as well as the implications in his description of the \"hush-up\" of Bender, it is recommended he be interviewed and all information in his possession concerning this incident be obtained so that we can decide whether the facts warrant investigation. At the same time his letter will be orally acknowledged.\n\nA letter to Phoenix is enclosed.\n\nEnclosure\nJFW:jas\n(4)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nRECD BELMONT\nFBI - JUSTICE\n\nDEC 15 3 44 PM '58\n\nDEC 17 10 01 AM '58\n\nDEC 12 2 22 PM '58\n\nDEC 15 5 09 PM '58\n\nFBI - JUSTICE\nRECD BELMONT"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, PHOENIX (62-667)\n\nSUBJECT: ALBERT K. BENDER\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(Nationalities Intelligence)\n\nRe Bureau letter 12/16/58.\n\nOn 12/19/58, CLAUDE HAROLD MARCK, JR., 7834 No. Loma Land Drive, Scottsdale, Arizona, stated to SAs GEORGE HOLLINGSWORTH and WILLIAM M. DREW that he had a hobby of gathering information concerning flying saucers and also gathering information concerning mysteries of the sea. He stated that any literature written he obtains in order to pursue this hobby. He referred agents to books written by Major DONALD E. KEYHOE entitled \"Flying Saucers from Outer Space\" and a book entitled \"Flying Saucers Conspiracy.\" Both of these books were published by Henry Holt Company, 383 Madison, New York, 17, New York. Major KEYHOE is a retired Major of the U. S. Marine Corps.\n\nConcerning the \"Bender Affair\", he referred agents to the book entitled \"They Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers\", written by GRAY BARKER and published by University Books Publisher, April, 1956, third printing June, 1956. According to MARCK, GRAY BARKER resides at Clarksberg, West Virginia, P. O. Box 2228 and is a person with whom MARCK corresponds concerning flying saucers as BARKER is alleged to have a civilian investigative agency handling investigations concerning flying saucers.\n\nMARCK related that he has corresponded with various harbor masters and the U. S. Navy relative to the \"dreadful underground menace which relates to the disappearance of crew and passengers of various ships found floundering in the open seas out of control.\" He stated that BARKER has also shown interest in this subject matter, however, was unable to furnish any further amplifying details. The \"Bender Affair\" is related in the book published by BARKER.\n\n2 - Bureau (AM)\n1 - Phoenix\nWMD/mdc\n(3)\n\nREC-7 62-83894-399\nEX-108\nNATIONAL\n\nFLYING DISCS"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM : SAC, PHOENIX\nSUBJECT: ALBERT K. BENDER\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(Nationalities Intelligence)\n\nRe Bureau letter 12/16/58.\n\n[illegible]\n\nDEC 15 3 08 PM '58\n\nRECD BELMONT\nFBI - JUSTICE\n\nDEC 17 10 01 AM '58\n\n2 - Bureau (AM)\n1 - Phoenix\n(3)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PX 62-667\n\nAgents observed at the time they contacted the residence of MARCK, while he was absent therefrom, that his sister, SHIRLEY E. MARCK, carried on exclusive conversation concerning her brother relating that he had been taken out of high school while living in Denver, Colorado, and had been in the service until several months ago. She stated that her brother never had an opportunity since then to complete his schooling and that as of the present time, he was 33 years of age. This information was reiterated several times by her while waiting the arrival of her brother who was with his parents on a local shopping tour. After conversation with MARCK, it was apparent to agents that he is obsessed with gathering information concerning flying saucers and mysteries of the sea. He was admonished severely by his mother for having written to the Bureau without her knowledge.\n\nInquiry was made as to the length of time MARCK spent in the U. S. Army and he was unable to furnish the duration of his enlistment and date of discharge nor furnish his serial number. MARCK made available his discharge paper reflecting that he was inducted in 1943 and discharged in 1946 as Private First Class, Army Serial No. 37-703-300. His discharge papers showed that he attended East High School for a period of two years and that he was born 1/21/25.\n\nAfter conversation with MARCK, it was apparent that the only reason he wrote to the Bureau was in an effort to locate the present whereabouts of ALBERT K. BENDER and he and his family were informed that this Bureau was unable to institute an investigation to ascertain the whereabouts of BENDER.\n\nFrom the admonishment given him by his mother for writing letters to such agencies as the FBI, it would appear that CLAUDE HAROLD MARCK is a \"chronic\", living in a dream world of flying saucers and stories of the sea. He was informed that the agents' contact was an acknowledgment of the Bureau's receipt of his letter.\n\nNo further investigation is being made in this matter.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI\n\n12/19/58\n\nSAC, PHOENIX (62-667)\n\nALBERT K. BENDER\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(Nationalities Intelligence)\n\nRe Bureau letter 12/16/58.\n\nOn 12/19/58, CLAUDE HAROLD MARCK, JR., 7834 No. Loma Land Drive, Scottsdale, Arizona, stated to SAs GEORGE HOLLINGSWORTH and WILLIAM M. DREW that he had a hobby of gathering information concerning flying saucers and also gathering information concerning mysteries of the sea. He stated that any literature written he obtains in order to pursue this hobby. He referred agents to books written by Major DONALD E. KEYHOE entitled \"Flying Saucers from Outer Space\" and a book entitled \"Flying Saucers Conspiracy.\" Both of these books were published by Henry Holt Company, 383 Madison, New York, 17, New York. Major KEYHOE is a retired Major of the U. S. Marine Corps.\n\nConcerning the \"Bender Affair\", he referred agents to the book entitled \"They Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers\", written by GRAY BARKER and published by University Books Publisher, April, 1956, third printing June, 1956. According to MARCK, GRAY BARKER resides at Clarksberg, West Virginia, P. O. Box 2228 and is a person with whom MARCK corresponds concerning flying saucers as BARKER is alleged to have a civilian investigative agency handling investigations concerning flying saucers.\n\nMARCK related that he has corresponded with various harbor masters and the U. S. Navy relative to the \"dreadful underground menace which relates to the disappearance of crew and passengers of various ships found floundering in the open seas out of control.\" He stated that BARKER has also shown interest in this subject matter, however, was unable to furnish any further amplifying details. The \"Bender Affair\" is related in the book published by BARKER.\n\n2 - Bureau (AM)\n1 - Phoenix\nWMD/mdc\n(3)\n\n62-83894 - 399"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PX 62-667\n\nAgents observed at the time they contacted the residence of MARCK, while he was absent therefrom, that his sister, SHIRLEY E. MARCK, carried on exclusive conversation concerning her brother relating that he had been taken out of high school while living in Denver, Colorado, and had been in the service until several months ago. She stated that her brother never had an opportunity since then to complete his schooling and that as of the present time, he was 33 years of age. This information was reiterated several times by her while waiting the arrival of her brother who was with his parents on a local shopping tour. After conversation with MARCK, it was apparent to agents that he is obsessed with gathering information concerning flying saucers and mysteries of the sea. He was admonished severely by his mother for having written to the Bureau without her knowledge.\n\nInquiry was made as to the length of time MARCK spent in the U. S. Army and he was unable to furnish the duration of his enlistment and date of discharge nor furnish his serial number. MARCK made available his discharge paper reflecting that he was inducted in 1943 and discharged in 1946 as Private First Class, Army Serial No. 37-703-300. His discharge papers showed that he attended East High School for a period of two years and that he was born 1/21/25.\n\nAfter conversation with MARCK, it was apparent that the only reason he wrote to the Bureau was in an effort to locate the present whereabouts of ALBERT K. BENDER and he and his family were informed that this Bureau was unable to institute an investigation to ascertain the whereabouts of BENDER.\n\nFrom the admonishment given him by his mother for writing letters to such agencies as the FBI, it would appear that CLAUDE HAROLD MARCK is a \"chronic\", living in a dream world of flying saucers and stories of the sea. He was informed that the agents' contact was an acknowledgment of the Bureau's receipt of his letter.\n\nNo further investigation is being made in this matter.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, Phoenix (62-667)\nDecember 30, 1958\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nALBERT K. BENDER\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(Nationalities Intelligence)\nFlying Discs\n\nReurlet 12/19/58. In paragraph two thereof reference is made to a book written by Gray Barker and published by University Books Publisher entitled \"They Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers.\" Reference books at the Seat of Government fail to reflect the location of this publisher and since the Bureau is desirous of obtaining a copy of this book, it is requested that you recontact Claude Marck, Jr., to obtain the correct address of the publisher. In the event Marck volunteers to make a copy of this book available, it is permissible for you to accept same and furnish it to the Bureau.\n\nJFW:jac\n(4)\n\nNOTE: By letter 12/7/58 Marck inquired whether we could furnish him any data concerning the \"Bender Affair.\" He explained that Bender formed the International Flying Saucer Bureau in Connecticut in 1952 to look into the flying saucer mystery. In 1953 Bender allegedly stated he knew what the saucers are; then, according to Marck, \"Three men in black suits\" silenced Bender to the extent that even today Bender will not discuss the matter of his \"hush-up\" with anyone. Marck explained that he recently learned that the FBI is involved in the \"Bender Affair.\" On 12/19/58 Marck was interviewed to obtain all information in his possession concerning the \"hush-up\" of Bender as well as what part the FBI was alleged to have played in the \"Bender Affair.\" Concerning the \"Bender Affair\" he referred the interviewing Agents to the book set out above. In addition to information regarding this incident it is possible this book may contain other data of interest. Accordingly, not only to resolve this matter but also to ascertain whether any allegations of interest to the Bureau are contained in the book, we should if possible obtain a copy. Upon receipt, it will be reviewed with the Bureau's interest in mind.\n\n67 JAN 8 1959"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - J. F. Wacks\n\nSAC, Chicago\nJanuary 22, 1959\n\nDirector, FBI (62-83894)\n\nALBERT K. BENDER\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(Nationalities Intelligence)\n\nThe Bureau desires to obtain a copy of the book written by Gray Barker entitled \"They Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers.\" Reportedly, this book was published by University Books, Inc., 806 Dempster Street, Evanston, Illinois. Contact this publishing house and if possible, obtain a copy of this book.\n\nNOTE:\n\nBy letter 12/7/58 Claude Marck, Jr., Phoenix, Arizona, wrote the Bureau inquiring about the \"Bender Affair.\" He explained that Bender formed the International Flying Saucer Bureau in Connecticut in 1952 to look into the flying saucer mystery. In 1953 Bender stated he knew what the saucers are; then, according to Marck, \"3 men in black suits\" silenced Bender to the extent that even today Bender will not discuss the matter of his \"hush-up\" with anyone. Marck was interviewed 12/19/58 and with respect to the \"Bender Affair\" he referred the interviewing Agents to the book set out above. In addition to information regarding this incident it is possible this book may contain other data of interest. Accordingly, Phoenix was instructed to reinterview Marck to obtain a copy of the book and/or the true name of the publisher which Marck had stated was \"University Books Publisher,\" with no address indicated. In Phoenix letter 1/5/59 it is pointed out that Marck has moved to Denver, exact address not available but that University Books, Inc., is located at the above address.\n\nJFW:jac\n(4)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: 1/5/59\n\nFROM: SAC, PHOENIX (62-667)\n\nSUBJECT: ALBERT K. BENDER\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(Nationalities Intelligence)\n\nRe Bulet to Phoenix dated 12/30/58.\n\nCLAUDE MARCK, Jr. and his family have moved to Denver, Colorado and their exact address is not available.\n\nIt was determined through the Phoenix Public Library that University Books, Inc., is located at 806 Dempster Street, Evanston, Illinois.\n\n2 - Bureau\n1 - Phoenix\n\nWMD/hpw\n(3)\n\nFlying Discs"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tolson\nBoardman\nBelmont\nMohr\nNease\nParsons\nRosen\nTamm\nTrotter\nClayton\nTele. Room\nHolloman\nGandy\nMAIL ROOM\n1 - Mr. Wacks\n1 - Liaison\n\nFebruary 9, 1959\n\nMr. Larry W. Bryant\n1002 Arnold Street\nNewport News, Virginia\n\nDear Mr. Bryant:\n\n\tI am in receipt of your letter dated February 1, 1959. In response to your request, I wish to advise that information in the files of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is confidential and available for official use only. I know you will understand the reason for this rule and will not infer either that we do or that we do not have the data you desire.\n\n\tI am at liberty, however, to advise that the investigation of unidentified flying objects is not within the jurisdiction of this Bureau. This matter is of primary interest to the Department of the Air Force and, accordingly, I am sending a copy of your letter to the Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, Building Tempo E, 4th and Adams Drive, S. W., Washington, D. C., to whom you may desire to direct further inquiries in this matter.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\n1 - Norfolk - Enclosure\nNote for Norfolk: Enclosed for information only. Bufiles negative re Bryant.\n1 - Director of Special Investigations (by form 0-14)\nThe Inspector General\nDepartment of the Air Force\nBuilding Tempo E\n4th and Adams Drive, S. W.\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nJFW:mtb\n661 dmd\n\nSEE NOTE PAGE 2"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Larry W. Bryant\n\nNOTE: Writer advised he understood FBI has participated in the Government's program of investigation of unidentified flying objects and he asked for information concerning these phenomena. He also asked whether FBI ever made analysis of unidentified flying object maneuvers and if FBI representative ever gave testimony before Congressional committees on this subject.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1002 Arnold Street\nNewport News, Virginia\nFebruary 1, 1959\n\nDirector of Field Investigations,\nUnidentified Flying Objects\nThe Federal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nIt is my understanding that the F.B.I. has participated in the Government's program of investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO).\n\nHow many UFO sighting reports involving alleged photographs or films of unconventional aerial objects has your organization collected, evaluated, or analyzed since January 1, 1952 to present? Has the F.B.I. ever been furnished with an analysis of maneuvers of UFO's ?\n\nI understand that congressional closed-door hearings are being held on the UFO subject. Has any F.B.I representative ever given testimony in these hearings ?\n\nYours sincerely,\n\nLarry W. Bryant"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nRecords Branch\n2-3, 1959\n\nName Check Unit - Room 6523\nService Unit - Room 6524\nForward to File Review\nAttention\nReturn to Wacks 1515\nSupervisor Room Ext.\n\nType of References Requested:\nRegular Request (Analytical Search)\nAll References (Subversive & Nonsubversive)\nSubversive References Only\nNonsubversive References Only\nMain ____ References Only\n\nType of Search Requested:\nRestricted to Locality of Va\nExact Name Only (On the Nose)\nBuildup Variations\nCheck for Alphabetical Loyalty Form\n\nSubject Larry W. Bryant\nBirthdate & Place\nAddress\n\nLocalities\nR#____ Date 2-3 Searcher Initials pde\nFILE NUMBER SERIAL\nNR\nBufs\nNR\nLarry\nLTH\nNR\n5 refs out of Loc\nL.W.\nNR\n\nno Vars Searched"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI (62-83894) DATE: 2/12/59\n\nFROM : SAC, CHICAGO (62-5494)\n\nSUBJECT: ALBERT K. BENDER\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(NATIONALITIES INTELLIGENCE)\n\nRebulet to CG, 1/22/59.\n\nPer Bureau request, enclosed herewith is a copy of the book entitled \"They Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers\", by GRAY BARKER, noting this book was published by University Books, Inc., 404 Fourth Avenue, New York 16, N.Y.\n\nRUC.\n\n2 - Bureau (Encl.)\n1 - Chicago\nHBL:tmk\n(3)\n\nEX. - 133\n\n24 FEB 26 1959\n\n51 FEB 26 1959"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI (62-83894) DATE: 2/12/59\n\nFROM : SAC, CHICAGO (62-5494)\n\nSUBJECT: ALBERT K. BENDER\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(NATIONALITIES INTELLIGENCE)\n\nRebulet to CG, 1/22/59.\n\nPer Bureau request, enclosed herewith is a copy of the book entitled \"They Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers\", by GRAY BARKER, noting this book was published by University Books, Inc., 404 Fourth Avenue, New York 16, N.Y.\n\nRUC.\n\n2 - Bureau (Encl.)\n1 - Chicago\nHBL:tmk\n(3)\n\nEX. - 133\n\n24 FEB 26 1959\n\n51 FEB 26 1959"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI DATE: April 21, 1959\n\nFROM : SAC, Birmingham (62-0)\n\nSUBJECT: AERIAL PHENOMENA RESEARCH GROUP\nMISCELLANEOUS\n\n\"The Anniston Star\", Anniston, Alabama, daily newspaper, published an article on April 2, 1959, entitled, \"Flying Saucer Witnesses Urged to Send in Data\". This article said that the Aerial Phenomena Research Group, 5108 Findlay Street, Seattle 18, Washington, would like to get a report from people who have seen \"Flying Saucers\".\n\nOn April 3, 1959, Lt. Colonel OLIVER R. HERTEL, Fort McClellan, Alabama, advised that 5108 Findlay Street, Seattle 18, Washington, is believed by him to be the address of the chauffeur for the Russian Consul in Seattle, Washington. HERTEL advised a Special Agent of the 111th CIC Group at Fort McClellan that about five months ago he looked over a list of Russians and their addresses when he visited the office of the Chief Chemical Officer, Department of the Army, Washington, D. C.\n\nThe Seattle Office is requested to ascertain who lives at 5108 Findlay Street, Seattle, Washington, and whether this address has any connection with a chauffeur for the Russian Consul.\n\n2 - Bureau (RM)\n2 - Seattle (RM)\n1 - OSI, Birmingham, Ala. (info.) (RM)\n2 - BH\nCBS-fmb\n(7)\n\n52 APR 30 1959"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI DATE: May 5, 1959\n\nFROM : SAC, Seattle (62-1729)\n\nSUBJECT: AERIAL PHENOMENA RESEARCH GROUP\nMISCELLANEOUS\n\nRe Birmingham letter 4-21-59.\n\nThe address of 5108 Findlay Street, Seattle 18, Washington, is the residence of ROBERT GRIBBLE, who is the so-called national director of the Aerial Phenomena Research Group. In connection with inquiries made concerning this group in 1957, GRIBBLE advised that he was regularly employed as a fireman for the City of Seattle and that his hobby is acquiring information regarding unidentified flying objects. He advised that the Aerial Phenomena Research Group has a national and an international membership of about 350 members, and that they charge a membership fee of $5.00 per year for the purpose of defraying the expenses of a publication which the group issues periodically and for other incidental expenses of the organization. According to GRIBBLE the organization is a non-profit one and was established primarily as a hobby for persons like himself who were interested in acquiring information regarding flying objects. GRIBBLE stated that the organization was centered in Seattle, and he provided the names of other officers, all of whom were residents of this city.\n\nTwentieth District OSI, McChord Air Force Base, is aware of the existence of this group and has been furnished all pertinent information in our files regarding it.\n\nThere is no Russian Consulate or other establishment of the U.S.S.R. in the City of Seattle. Lt. Col. HERTEL's recollection of the address of 5108 Findlay Street, Seattle, having something to do with the residence of a chauffeur for the Russian Consul in Seattle is completely erroneous.\n\nNo information regarding the activities of the Aerial Phenomena Research Group has come to the attention of the Seattle Office since June 1958.\n\n2 - Bureau\n1 - Birmingham (62-0)(Info)\n1 - Seattle\nCHD:msd\n(4)\n\n67 MAY 15 1959\n\nEX - 124"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nDate: May 22, 1959\n\nSAC, Birmingham (100-0-6898)\n\nAERIAL PHENOMENA RESEARCH GROUP\nMISCELLANEOUS\n\nRe Birmingham letter 4-21-59.\n\nThe address of 2726 Northwest 34th Street, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, Interplanetary Intelligence of Unidentified Flying Objects, was checked in the Washington, D. C. area and the Seattle office. In connection with inquiries made concerning this group, [illegible] advised that he was employed as a clerk in the City of Seattle and in the lobby in connection with the investigation regarding unidentified flying objects. He advised that the Aerial Phenomena Research Group is a national and international organization of about 350 members and they charge a membership fee of $5.00 per year for the purpose of defraying the expenses of a publication which is issued to members. Accounting to the organization is a non-profit one and has been established primarily as a body for persons like himself who were interested in acquiring information regarding flying objects. Oklahoma City was contacted and the names of other residents of this city were reviewed.\n\nThe Birmingham District Office, Redstone Arsenal, is aware of the existence of this group and has been furnished all pertinent information in our files regarding it.\n\nThere is no located Oklahoma organization or other establishment of the U.S.A.F. in the city of Seattle, Washington, or the area of Pine Creek, Seattle, Washington, that may have anything to do with the Oklahoma City group. For the Houston branch in Seattle is completely unknown.\n\nNo information regarding the activities of the Aerial Phenomena Research Group in the City of Seattle was obtained prior to June 1959."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nDATE: May 22, 1959\n\nFROM : SAC, Birmingham (100-0-6898)\n\nSUBJECT: AERIAL PHENOMENA RESEARCH GROUP\nMISCELLANEOUS\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nRe BH let to Bureau, 4/21/59, and Seattle letter to Bureau, 5/5/59.\n\nIn view of the information set forth in referenced Seattle letter, no further investigation or action is being taken by the Birmingham Office in this matter.\n\nThe local OSI office has been advised concerning this matter.\n\n2 - Bureau\n1 - BH\nCBS:fmb\n(3)\n\nREC-15\n\n62-83894-406\n\n18 MAY 25 1959\n\nEX-113\n\nNAT. INT. SEC.\n\n62 JUN 8 1959"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nDate May 22, 1959\n\nSAC, Birmingham (100-0-6898)\n\nAERIAL PHENOMENA RESEARCH GROUP\nMISCELLANEOUS\n\nRe BH let to Bureau, 4/21/59, and Seattle letter to Bureau, 5/5/59.\n\nIn view of the information set forth in referenced Seattle letter, no further investigation or action is being taken by the Birmingham Office in this matter.\n\nThe local OSI office has been advised concerning this matter.\n\n2 - Bureau\n1 - BH\nCBS:fmb\n(3)\n\nREC-15\n\nRECD\nPIONAGE NAT'L\n\nNAT. INT. SEC.\n\n62 JUN 8 1959"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-407\n\nREC-40\n\nEX 109\n\nAugust 31, 1959\n\nMr. Hayden Hewes\nAssociate Director\nInterplanetary Intelligence of\nUnidentified Flying Objects\n2726 Northwest 34th Street\nOklahoma City, Oklahoma\n\nDear Mr. Hewes:\n\nYour letter dated August 24, 1959, has been received.\n\nAlthough I would like to be able to help you, in view of the many similar requests and the pressure of my official duties, I am unable to comply with your wishes.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nMAILED 30\nSEP 1 - 1959\nCOMM-FBI\n\nRECD-READING ROOM\nAUG 31 6 04 PM '59\nFBI\n\nNOTE: No record Bufiles on correspondent or his organization.\n\nDCL:lln\n(3)\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EX 109\n\n407\n\nAugust 31, 1959\n\nMr. Hayden Hewes\nAssociate Director\nInterplanetary Intelligence of\nUnidentified Flying Objects\n2726 Northwest 34th Street\nOklahoma City, Oklahoma\n\nDear Mr. Hewes:\n\nYour letter dated August 24, 1959, has been received.\n\nAlthough I would like to be able to help you, in view of the many similar requests and the pressure of my official duties, I am unable to comply with your wishes.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nMAILED 30\nSEP 1 - 1959\nCOMM-FBI\n\nNOTE: No record Bufiles on correspondent or his organization.\n\nRECD-READING ROOM\nAUG 31 5 00 PM '59\nFBI\n\nSEP 2 1959\nRECD OF LYNCH\nAUG 31 6 40 PM 59\nFBI\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\nSEP 1 9 42 AM '59"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INTERPLANETARY INTELLIGENCE OF UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nI.I.O.U.F.O.\nOKLAHOMA CITY, OKLA.\nRESEARCH INVESTIGATION ANALYSIS\nW. F. RIEF Director\nH. C. HEWES Associate Director\nJ. MANEY Deputy Director\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Belmont\nMr. DeLoach\nMr. McGuire\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Parsons\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tamm\nMr. Trotter\nMr. W.C.Sullivan\nTele. Room\nMr. Holloman\nMiss Gandy\nAugust 24,1959\nUnited States Dept. Of Justice\nFederal Bureau Of Investigation\nWashington 25, D.C.\nATTENTION: J.Edgar Hoover\nDear Mr. Hoover:\nFlying Saucers\nThe purpose of our organization is to investigate and study UFO ( Unidentified Flying Objects ) or flying saucer reports.\nAlso we are planing to publish a publication on the same subject some time in September ( I hope ).\nI was wondering is you would take the time to write an artical for our publication? It may be on the subject you care too write on, typed, and about 350 words long.\nThank you, trusting to hear from you in the near future.\nVery truly yours,\nHayden Hewes,\nEX 109\nREC 40\n62-83894-407\n8 MAR 26 1959\nEXP PROC\nAUG 26 1959\n23 SEP 3 1959"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Very truly yours,\nHayden Hewes,\nRECD DELOACH\nAUG 26 5 02 PM '59\nFBI\nRECEIVED F B I\nAUG 31 8 56 AM '59\nMR JONES\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nAUG 26 5 02 PM 59\n15 DIRECTOR\n8/26/59"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : S. B. Donahoe\nFROM : J. F. Wacks\nDATE: October 5, 1959\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (FLYING SAUCERS)\nMemo Sanders to Donahoe 10-13-58 pointed out that our policy concerning unidentified flying objects (flying saucers) is to conduct no investigation but immediately refer facts to the Air Force (Bureau Bulletin Number 57, 10-1-47); that SAC Letter Number 38, 3-25-49, reiterated this policy and set out data desired by Air Force to be obtained when complaint received; that SAC Letter Number 83, 8-29-52, again pointed out our policy; that Air Force, as late as 11-12-57, assured Bureau would be advised of any developments in this field of interest to us; and that there appeared to be no necessity for further instructions to field or insertion in Agents' Handbook or Manual of Instructions of our policy relating to flying saucers.\nDuring past 12 months no complaints regarding flying saucers have been referred to Bureau. During this period we have received two inquiries regarding this alleged phenomena and on both occasions the person making the inquiry has been referred to OSI.\nACTION:\nFor your information. At this time there appears to be no necessity for additional instructions for the field or insertion in the FBI Handbook or Manuals relative to flying saucers. This matter will again be reviewed on or about 10-5-60.\n1 - Mr. Donahoe\n1 - Mr. Wacks\n62-83894\nJFW:tw\n(3)\nREC-57 62-83894-408\n14 OCT 7 1959\nEX-109\n58 OCT 9 1959"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D BELMONT FBI-JUSTICE\nOct 6 9 50 AM '59\nREC'D ... NAGE-NAT.INT.\nOct 6 11 50 AM '59"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-36 (Rev. 12-13-56)\nFBI\nDate: 3/9/60\nTransmit the following in (Type in plain text or code)\nVia AIR TEL AIR MAIL (Priority or Method of Mailing)\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM: SAC, DETROIT (65-2677)\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/7/85 BY 8166jafcy Comp # 245914\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT; JOSEPH PERRY, Grand Blanc, Michigan - Complainant\n3079 Edwards St\nRe Detroit tel 3/9/60.\nB. APPROX. 1916\nEnclosed herewith are five copies of letterhead memo captioned as above and a newspaper clipping from the \"Detroit Times\", dated today.\nA copy of this letterhead memo along with two 35 mm slides were furnished to the 25th OSI District (IG), Selfridge Air Force Base, Mt. Clemens, Mich., by letter this date. The Air Force was requested to return the slides to Mr. PERRY.\nThe Bureau was furnished with information pertaining to press inquiries received in connection with the enclosed newspaper article by retel. OSI, SAFB, was advised of this information orally on 3/9/60, and in the cover letter to OSI they were advised that no action was contemplated by this office and it was referred to them for any action they deemed advisable.\n3 - Bureau (Encls. 6)\n1 - Detroit\nWLS/mac (4)\nREC-51 62-83894-409\nEX 105\n7 MAR 10 1960\nApproved: Special Agent in Charge Sent M Per\n51 MAR 24 1960"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURES TO BUREAU FROM DETROIT\nFive copies of letterhead memo.\nNewspaper clipping from \"Detroit Times\" dated 3/9/60.\nRE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT;\nJOSEPH PERRY, Grand Blanc, Mich. - COMPLAINANT\n(Defile 65-2677)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\nDetroit, Michigan\nMarch 9, 1960\nRe: Unidentified Flying Object;\nJoseph Perry, Grand Blanc,\nMichigan - Complainant\nMr. Joseph Perry, 3079 Edwards Street, Grand Blanc,\nMichigan, was contacted at his request by Agents of this office\non March 5, 1960.\nMr. Perry advised that he operates a Pizza House\nat 3075 Edwards Street, Grand Blanc, and that he has been a\nprofessional photographer for thirty years. He explained\nthat he has a hobby of taking photographs of the moon through\na home-made telescope. At about 1:00 a.m. on February 21,\n1960, he took some photographs of the moon and after developing\nsame, he put them in his viewer and in one photograph he\nobserved what appears to be a flying object somewhere between\nthe end of his telescope and the surface of the moon. He said\nthat when blown up, this object is flat on the bottom, is\noval shaped, and appears to have a fluorescent glow around\nthe entire object, and that it is apparently moving as it\nhas a vapor trail running behind it. He has taken over one\nthousand pictures of the moon and has never seen anything\nresembling this object.\nPerry said that due to his thirty years' experience\nin photography, he is sure that what appears on the picture\nis actually a flying object, and is not a malfunction of the\ncamera, is not a blur on his telescope, and is not anything\nthat appears on the photo because of the manner in which he\ndeveloped the film. Perry took about twenty pictures of the\nmoon on February 21, 1960, and after developing them, he\nobserved that most of the pictures were under-exposed, so he\njust cut off the two that appeared to be properly exposed and\ndestroyed the rest. He furnished both of these pictures to\nthe FBI.\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE 5/7/85 BY SP6 bjd/ky\nComp# 245974"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Perry advised he took the pictures with a 35 mm\nRetna German Camera using Super Ansco Color Film, and he\ntook these pictures through his home-made telescope which\ncan go to 2,840 power. He estimates that at the time he\ntook the picture showing the flying object, that his scope\nwas set at between 350-400 power.\nThis confirms information furnished to Special\nAgent Louis Woiwade, 25th OSI District, who also was advised\nthat the information was being furnished for any action he\ndeemed appropriate and no further action was contemplated\nby the Detroit Office of the FBI.\nThis document contains neither recommendations\nnor conclusions of any kind. It is the property of the\nFBI, and is a loan to your agency; it and/or its contents\nare not to be distributed outside your agency.\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\nDetroit, Michigan\nMarch 9, 1960\nRe: Unidentified Flying Object;\nJoseph Perry, Grand Blanc,\nMichigan - Complainant\nMr. Joseph Perry, 3079 Edwards Street, Grand Blanc,\nMichigan, was contacted at his request by Agents of this office\non March 5, 1960.\nMr. Perry advised that he operates a Pizza House\nat 3075 Edwards Street, Grand Blanc, and that he has been a\nprofessional photographer for thirty years. He explained\nthat he has a hobby of taking photographs of the moon through\na home-made telescope. At about 1:00 a.m. on February 21,\n1960, he took some photographs of the moon and after developing\nsame, he put them in his viewer and in one photograph he\nobserved what appears to be a flying object somewhere between\nthe end of his telescope and the surface of the moon. He said\nthat when blown up, this object is flat on the bottom, is\noval shaped, and appears to have a fluorescent glow around\nthe entire object, and that it is apparently moving as it\nhas a vapor trail running behind it. He has taken over one\nthousand pictures of the moon and has never seen anything\nresembling this object.\nPerry said that due to his thirty years' experience\nin photography, he is sure that what appears on the picture\nis actually a flying object, and is not a malfunction of the\ncamera, is not a blur on his telescope, and is not anything\nthat appears on the photo because of the manner in which he\ndeveloped the film. Perry took about twenty pictures of the\nmoon on February 21, 1960, and after developing them, he\nobserved that most of the pictures were under-exposed, so he\njust cut off the two that appeared to be properly exposed and\ndestroyed the rest. He furnished both of these pictures to\nthe FBI.\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE 5/7/85 BY SP6 bjd/ky\nComp# 245974"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Perry advised he took the pictures with a 35 mm Retna German Camera using Super Ansco Color Film, and he took these pictures through his home-made telescope which can go to 2,840 power. He estimates that at the time he took the picture showing the flying object, that his scope was set at between 350-400 power.\n\nThis confirms information furnished to Special Agent Louis Wolwade, 25th OSI District, who also was advised that the information was being furnished for any action he deemed appropriate and no further action was contemplated by the Detroit Office of the FBI.\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of any kind. It is the property of the FBI, and is a loan to your agency; it and/or its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\n\nDetroit, Michigan\nMarch 9, 1960\n\nRe: Unidentified Flying Object;\nJoseph Perry, Grand Blanc,\nMichigan - Complainant\n\nMr. Joseph Perry, 3079 Edwards Street, Grand Blanc, Michigan, was contacted at his request by Agents of this office on March 5, 1960.\n\nMr. Perry advised that he operates a Pizza House at 3075 Edwards Street, Grand Blanc, and that he has been a professional photographer for thirty years. He explained that he has a hobby of taking photographs of the moon through a home-made telescope. At about 1:00 a.m. on February 21, 1960, he took some photographs of the moon and after developing same, he put them in his viewer and in one photograph he observed what appears to be a flying object somewhere between the end of his telescope and the surface of the moon. He said that when blown up, this object is flat on the bottom, is oval shaped, and appears to have a fluorescent glow around the entire object, and that it is apparently moving as it has a vapor trail running behind it. He has taken over one thousand pictures of the moon and has never seen anything resembling this object.\n\nPerry said that due to his thirty years' experience in photography, he is sure that what appears on the picture is actually a flying object, and is not a malfunction of the camera, is not a blur on his telescope, and is not anything that appears on the photo because of the manner in which he developed the film. Perry took about twenty pictures of the moon on February 21, 1960, and after developing them, he observed that most of the pictures were under-exposed, so he just cut off the two that appeared to be properly exposed and destroyed the rest. He furnished both of these pictures to the FBI.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/7/85 BY 8-6 Dyaltcy Comp# 245974"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Perry advised he took the pictures with a 35 mm Retna German Camera using Super Ansco Color Film, and he took these pictures through his home-made telescope which can go to 2,840 power. He estimates that at the time he took the picture showing the flying object, that his scope was set at between 350-400 power.\n\nThis confirms information furnished to Special Agent Louis Wolwade, 25th OSI District, who also was advised that the information was being furnished for any action he deemed appropriate and no further action was contemplated by the Detroit Office of the FBI.\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of any kind. It is the property of the FBI, and is a loan to your agency; it and/or its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\n\nDetroit, Michigan\nMarch 9, 1960\n\nRe: Unidentified Flying Object;\nJoseph Perry, Grand Blanc,\nMichigan - Complainant\n\nMr. Joseph Perry, 3079 Edwards Street, Grand Blanc, Michigan, was contacted at his request by Agents of this office on March 5, 1960.\n\nMr. Perry advised that he operates a Pizza House at 3075 Edwards Street, Grand Blanc, and that he has been a professional photographer for thirty years. He explained that he has a hobby of taking photographs of the moon through a home-made telescope. At about 1:00 a.m. on February 21, 1960, he took some photographs of the moon and after developing same, he put them in his viewer and in one photograph he observed what appears to be a flying object somewhere between the end of his telescope and the surface of the moon. He said that when blown up, this object is flat on the bottom, is oval shaped, and appears to have a fluorescent glow around the entire object, and that it is apparently moving as it has a vapor trail running behind it. He has taken over one thousand pictures of the moon and has never seen anything resembling this object.\n\nPerry said that due to his thirty years' experience in photography, he is sure that what appears on the picture is actually a flying object, and is not a malfunction of the camera, is not a blur on his telescope, and is not anything that appears on the photo because of the manner in which he developed the film. Perry took about twenty pictures of the moon on February 21, 1960, and after developing them, he observed that most of the pictures were under-exposed, so he just cut off the two that appeared to be properly exposed and destroyed the rest. He furnished both of these pictures to the FBI.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/7/85 BY 8-6 Dyaltcy Comp# 245974"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Perry advised he took the pictures with a 35 mm Retna German Camera using Super Ansco Color Film, and he took these pictures through his home-made telescope which can go to 2,840 power. He estimates that at the time he took the picture showing the flying object, that his scope was set at between 350-400 power.\n\nThis confirms information furnished to Special Agent Louis Wolwade, 25th OSI District, who also was advised that the information was being furnished for any action he deemed appropriate and no further action was contemplated by the Detroit Office of the FBI.\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of any kind. It is the property of the FBI, and is a loan to your agency; it and/or its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"URGENT 3-9-60 4-31PM ALF\nTO DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM SAC DETROIT /65-2677/ 2P\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT., JOSEPH PERRY, GRAND BLANC, MICHIGAN - COMPLAINANT. FOLLOWING BEING SUBMITTED BUREAU IN VIEW OF ARTICLE APPEARING DETROIT TIMES TODAY, DATELINE GRAND BLANC, MICHIGAN, REFLECTING THE FBI FLINT RESIDENT AGENCY WAS FURNISHED SLIDES OF PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN BY JOSEPH PERRY ALLEGEDLY SHOWING A SAUCER-LIKE OBJECT SILHOUETTED AGAINST THE MOON. ARTICLE INDICATES FBI IS INTERESTED IN THE PICTURE. JOSEPH PERRY, THREE NAUGHT SEVEN NINE EDWARDS STREET, GRAND BLANC, MICHIGAN, ON MARCH FOUR LAST TELEPHONICALLY CALLED THE FLINT RESIDENT AGENCY AND ADVISED AGENTS HE HAS BEEN A PROFESSIONAL PHOTOGRAPHER THE PAST THIRTY YEARS. HE HAS A HOBBY OF TAKING PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE MOON THROUGH A HOMEMADE TELESCOPE, AND AT ABOUT ONE A.M., FEBRUARY TWENTYONE LAST, TOOK PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE MOON, AND AFTER DEVELOPING SAME NOTED IN ONE WHAT APPEARED TO BE A FLYING OBJECT. CUSTOMERS OF HIS PIZZA PIE RESTAURANT SUGGESTED THE PHOTOGRAPH MAY REFLECT FLYING SAUCER. INFORMATION FURNISHED PRESS BY JOE PERRY REFERRED TO ABOVE. FLINT END PAGE ONE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\nRESIDENT AGENCY RECEIVED PRESS INQUIRY, AND ADVISED ONLY THAT PERRY HAD TURNED TWO SLIDES OVER TO THE FBI, AND THEY WERE BEING MADE AVAILABLE TO APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES. DETROIT TIMES ADVISED TODAY FBI HAS NOT AND IS NOT CONDUCTING INVESTIGATION CONCERNING SLIDES BUT HAS TURNED OVER THE INFORMATION TO THE AIR FORCE, SELFRIDGE FIELD, MICHIGAN. THIS MATERIAL WAS TURNED OVER TO TWENTYFIFTH OSI DETACHMENT, SELFRIDGE AFB, FOR REFERRAL TO APPROPRIATE AIR FORCE OFFICIALS. AIRTEL WITH DETAILS FOLLOWS.\nEND\nWA 4-36 PM OK FBI WA MS\nTU DISCO\nCC-MR. BELMONT"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-36 (Rev. 12-13-56)\nFBI\nDate: 3/28/60\nTransmit the following in\nVia AIRTEL AIR MAIL\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM: SAC, DETROIT (65-2677)\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT;\nJOSEPH PERRY, Grand Blanc, Michigan-\nCOMPLAINANT\nRe Dearirtel, 3/9/60 and Detel, 3/9/60.\nAn article appeared in the \"Flint Journal\", Flint, Mich., dated 3/27/60 by Reporter ALLAN R. WILHELM. This article appeared on Page 13. The article reflects an interview with PERRY and in part states that PERRY had received at least 50 letters and calls in regard to the photograph he had taken. One letter was from National Investigation Committee on Aerial Phenomenon. The article contains the following quote from this letter, \"From past experience with photographic evidence we consider it unlikely that you will ever see your picture again.\" PERRY had advised the newspaper that all he knew was that the picture was in Air Force hands. He says that it is in \"proper hands\", according to PERRY. The article continued, \"So last week PERRY wrote to the President telling him he can't find out where his slide is and asking assurance that he will get it back.\" PERRY was quoted as saying, \"The only way I will be satisfied if I don't get it back is if the Government tells me it is top secret.\"\nThe photograph referred to above was a .35 mm slide which was furnished to OSI, SAFB, by letter dated 3/9/60.\nOSI, Selfridge Air Force Base, Mt. Clemens, Mich., advised of the above. Additional information follows which will include a copy of clipping.\n3 - Bureau\n1 - Detroit\nWLS/mac\n(4)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-36 (Rev. 12-13-56)\n\nFBI\n\nDate: 3/31/60\n\nTransmit the following in\n(Type in plain text or code)\n\nVia AIRTEL\nAIR MAIL\n(Priority or Method of Mailing)\n\nTO: Director, FBI\n\nFROM: SAC, Detroit (65-2677)\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT;\nJOSEPH PERRY, Grand Blanc, Michigan -\nCOMPLAINANT\nAka Joe\"\n\nReDetroit airtel dated 3/28/60.\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nEnclosed herewith is one copy of the news article referred to in realrtel. This article appeared in the \"Flint Journal\", Flint, Mich., Sunday, 3/27/60, and was written by ALLAN R. WILHELM. A copy of the article is also being furnished to OSI, Selfridge AFB, Mt. Clemens, Mich. No inquiries have been received from the press or radio in addition to the inquiries set forth in myairtel and teletype of 3/9/60.\n\nThe above is for the information of the Bureau and no further action is being contemplated by this Office inasmuch as the Air Force (OSI) has been furnished all facts in our possession.\n\n3 - Bureau (Encl.)\n1 - Detroit\nWLS:SMC\n(4)\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/23/85 comp#045977\n\nREC-78 62-83894-412\n\n23 APR 1 1960\n\n5 -\n\nCRIME REC.\n\nApproved: Special Agent in Charge Sent M Per\n\n62 APR 13 1960"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Grand Blanc Man Makes Plea to Ike\nFilm of Flying Saucer Up in Air\n\nBy Allan R. Wilhelm\n\nThe scene is a very good address on Pennsylvania Ave. in Washington, D. C. The time is late last week.\n\nA balding gentleman of distinguished bearing picks up a letter, blinks a few times in obvious astonishment and then pushes the button on his intercom.\n\n\"Get hold of White (Gen. Thomas D., Air Force chief of staff) and Hoover (J. Edgar, FBI chief) and tell them to give Joe Perry back his flying saucer,\" he orders.\n\nIf such a scene did not take place, it's not because a Grand Blanc Township pizza merchant didn't write the letter. He did.\n\nIt all started because Perry, operator of Perry's Pizza Grill, 3079 Edward St., likes to take pictures of the moon through his big homemade telescope. Because he usually doesn't open until well after the sun is set, he does most of his celestial sight-seeing between pizzas.\n\nA color shot he took about 1 A. M. on a cold night last month caused him no end of consternation. Looming against the full moon on the slide was a \"saucer-like\" object.\n\nPerry showed the slide to a number of his patrons. When they saw it projected on a screen he has built into the wall of his grill, he said, most of them agreed that it looked like a flying saucer-or what most folks think a flying saucer looks like.\n\nThen he read a newspaper\n\nDETROIT DIVISION Detroit, Mich.\n\n( ) Detroit Free Press Editor: Lee Hills\n( ) Detroit News Editor: Martin S. Hayden\n( ) Detroit Times Editor: John C. Manning\n(X) The Flint Journal Editor: Ralph S. Curry\n\nDate: 3/27/60\nEdition: SUNDAY\nPage: 13 Col: 2-5\nTitle of Case:"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Joe Perry and His Telescope (Journal Photo)\n\nreport that the Air Force was interested in all reports of unidentified flying objects (UFO's). So he gave it to the FBI office, which said the slide was sent to the Washington office of the Air Force, which deals with UFO's."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"When word got around that Perry had the slide, things began to happen. Since then he's had at least 50 letters and calls about it.\n\nOne of the letters concerned him greatly. It was from the National Investigation Committee on Aerial Phenomena. The committee had noticed an article about Perry's find in a Detroit paper.\n\n\"From past experience with photographic evidence,\" the letter continued, \"we consider it unlikely that you will ever see your picture again.\" The letter said NICAP wanted the picture made public.\n\nAll Perry knew about the whereabouts of the picture was that it was in Air Force hands. The FBI would only say that it was in \"proper hands,\" Perry said.\n\nSo last week Perry wrote to the President telling him he can't find out where his slide is and asking assurance that he will get it back.\n\n\"The only way I'll be satisfied if I don't get it back is if the Government tells me it's top secret,\" said Perry later.\n\nHe has had offers for the slide from groups that indicate they would go into court to gain possession of it from the Government.\n\nFor those who want to buy it, Perry has a stock answer: \"It's not for sale.\"\n\nPerry, whose hobby is expensive, admits that some financial gain wouldn't be a bad idea but he declared \"if I get it back, it's for everybody.\" He said he was informed a national magazine wants to use it.\n\nPerry is confident that his slide shows some sort of space vehicle.\n\nHe bristled with indignation when asked if anyone had suggested that the saucer might help sell pizza. His pizza, he declared, is its own best advertisement.\n\nPerry said it shouldn't take an expert long to tell if the slide is legitimate. The Government, he believes, wouldn't look kindly on a hoax and would make a fool of a person trying to fake such a picture.\n\nPerry said he did not see the object through the scope. He was unaware of it until the slide was processed. He does his own processing.\n\nThe object, Perry said, looked as if photographed from the side. It is surrounded by blue-green radiation and has the appearance of being in motion.\n\n\"Everybody who has contacted me about it seems to know more about it than I do,\" he commented.\n\nAll these people sounded serious, he observed, even the fellow who called long-distance and said he had ridden in a flying saucer and wanted a picture of one to show his friends. Perry said he didn't take him seriously, however.\n\nAsked if he had advice for others who might come up with a picture of an unidentified flying object, he said:\n\n\"Yes, make a copy.\""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - Mr. Wacks\n1 - Liaison\n\nREC- 80\nEX-112\n\nDate: April 6, 1960\n\nTo: Office of Special Investigations\nAir Force\n\nAttention: Chief, Counter Intelligence\nDivision\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\n\nSubject: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nJOSEPH PERRY, GRAND BLANC,\nMICHIGAN - COMPLAINANT\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(NATIONALITIES INTELLIGENCE)\n\nReference is made to this Bureau's memorandum\ndated March 9, 1960, at Detroit, Michigan, captioned as\nabove, a copy of which has been furnished your agency.\n\nBy letter dated March 21, 1960, Mr. Richard\nHall, Secretary of the National Investigations Committee\non Aerial Phenomena, 1536 Connecticut Avenue, N. W.,\nWashington, D. C., referred this Bureau to an article\nappearing in the \"Detroit Times,\" issue of March 9, 1960,\na copy of which is enclosed, and requested to be advised\nwhether there had been any change in our policy with\nrespect to unidentified flying objects; whether this\nBureau gathered evidence of unidentified flying objects for the\nDepartment of the Air Force; and whether the photograph\ndescribed in the article had been analyzed at FBI\nlaboratories or for FBI purposes. This Bureau's letter\nto the afore-mentioned organization of September 26, 1958,\nhad pointed out that we do not investigate incidents\ninvolving unidentified flying objects but furnished data\nreceived concerning them to the Department of the Air Force.\n\nThis Bureau advised Mr. Hall in our letter\ndated March 25, 1960, that there has been no change in\nour policy in regard to unidentified flying objects;\n1 - Detroit (Enclosure)(See note pages 2 and 3)\n\nSEE NOTE PAGE 3."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nFBI\nApr 7 9 47 AM '60\n\nREC'D BUREAU\nFBI-JUSTICE\nApr 6 AM '60\n\nREC'D MAIL ROOM\nFBI\nApr 7 10 49 AM '60\n\nApr 6 11 37 AM '60\n\nApr 6 5 42 PM '60\n\nREC'D\n\nApr 6 6 42 PM '60\nRECEIVED JOLSON\nFBI\n\nREC'D\n\n#3"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office of Special Investigations\nAir Force\n\nthat we do not gather evidence concerning unidentified\nflying objects for the Department of the Air Force,\nalthough any information volunteered is, of course,\naccepted; and that the photograph mentioned in the\n\"Detroit Times\" article was not examined by the FBI\nLaboratory or anyone else for FBI purposes. Mr. Hall\nwas further advised that this Bureau furnished two\nphotographs obtained from Joseph Perry to a representative\nof the Department of the Air Force for whatever action\nwas deemed appropriate by that agency.\n\nOn March 31, 1960, the Department of Justice\nfurnished this Bureau a letter dated March 21, 1960,\nfrom Joseph F. Perry, directed to the President. This\nletter had been referred to the Department of Justice\nby the White House. A copy of this letter is enclosed.\nOur Detroit Office will contact Perry and advise him\nthat his letter directed to the President has been\nreferred to this Bureau; that the photographs in question\nwere furnished to the Office of Special Investigations,\nDepartment of the Air Force, Selfridge Air Force Base,\nMount Clemens, Michigan; and that a copy of his letter\nto the President has been furnished to you.\n\nEnclosures - 2\n\nNOTE FOR SAC, DETROIT:\n\nEnclosed is copy of letter from Perry to the\nPresident. Assure that Perry is contacted immediately\nand advised that his letter to the President was referred\nto us by the Department of Justice which had received it\nfrom the White House and you are acknowledging receipt\nthereof. Point out to Perry that the contents of his\nletter have been carefully noted and for his information\nthe photographs he voluntarily turned over to agents of\nyour office were immediately furnished to the Office of\nSpecial Investigations, Department of the Air Force,\nSelfridge Air Force Base, Mount Clemens, Michigan. Also\ninform him that the Department of the Air Force has been\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office of Special Investigations\nAir Force\n\nfurnished a copy of his letter to the President. Make\ncertain that Perry is aware that the Bureau is taking\nno investigative action in this matter.\n\nNOTE: Perry, proprietor of a restaurant in Grand Blanc,\nMichigan, and an amateur photographer with a hobby of taking\npictures of the moon, on 3-5-60 advised Detroit Office that\ntwo of his pictures showed a foreign object which he believed\nto be flying saucers. At his request, Bureau agents contacted\nhim and he furnished them the film which our agents turned\nover to local OSI representatives. No further action was\ntaken by us. The \"Detroit Times\" article pointed out that\nwe were investigating this matter. SAC, Detroit, contacted\nappropriate officials at the newspaper and advised them\nthat this was not the case.\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\n\nMarch 26, 1960\n\nRespectfully referred to the\nDepartment of Justice for attention\nand acknowledgment.\n\nWILTON B. PERSONS\nThe Assistant to the President\n\nMr. Tolson\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Parsons\nMr. Belmont\nMr. Callahan\nMr. DeLoach\nMr. Malone\nMr. McGuire\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tamm\nMr. Trotter\nMr. W.C.Sullivan\nTele. Room\nMr. Ingram\nMiss Gandy\n\nBureau files reflect SAC, Detroit, 3/9/60, advised of\narticle (which is attached to Perry's letter of 3/21/60)\nappearing in Detroit Times reflecting Flint, Michigan,\nResident Agency furnished slides of photographs taken\nby Perry allegedly showing a saucer-like object\nsilhouetted against the moon. Perry contacted Flint RA\n3/4/60 advising he had been professional photographer,\nhad taken photographs of moon and after developing same\nnoted what appeared to be flying object in one of them.\nPerry furnished information to press. Flint RA\nreceived press inquiry, advised only that Perry had\nturned 2 slides over to FBI and they were being made\navailable to appropriate authorities. Detroit Times\nadvised 3/9/60 FBI has not and is not conducting\ninvestigation concerning slides but turned over the\ninformation to the Air Force. When slides turned over\nto Air Force, they were requested to return slides to\nPerry and advised that no action contemplated by the\nBureau and was being referred to them for any action\nthey deemed advisable."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D BELMONT\nFBI - JUSTICE\n\nMAR 31 6 23 PM '60"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3079 Edward Street\nGrand Blanc, Michigan\nMarch 21, 1960\n\n\nMr. D. Eisenhower, President U.S.A.\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear President Eisenhower:\n\nAs I can't find out any information from anyone, I am writing to you.\n\nThe first part of March I turned over to the F.B.I. a colored transparency of the moon and a unidentified flying object for identification. Up to this point I have not been able to locate where it is except that it is supposed to be in the proper hands.\n\nQuoting from a letter of March 14 from Major Donald E. Keyhoe, \"From past experience with photographic evidence, we consider it unlikely that you will ever see your picture again.\"\n\nAlso, from other U.F.O. societies I have received the same perdictions.\n\nI would like the assurance that this colored transparency will be returned to me within a short time, as it would be financially profitable in the pursuit of my hobby, (cameras and equipment).\n\nI am enclosing a clipping from The Detroit Times in regards to this item.\n\nRespectfully yours,\n\nJoseph F. Perry\nJoseph F. Perry\n\nJFP/rp\nEnc: 1"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MAR 31 4 26 PM '60\nRECEIVED-MOHR\nFBI\n\nMar 31 5 22 PM '60\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED-TOLSON\nFBI\nMAR 31 3 55 PM '60\n\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nFBI\nMAR 31 12 20 PM '60\n\n3/31/60\nDIRECTOR"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF WANTS TO KNOW\nPizza Pie-Or Flying Saucer?\n\nGRAND BLANC, March 9 -The FBI today probed into a color photograph of the moon taken by Joe Perry, a talented pizza pie maker, who also takes potshots at the sky with a home-made telescope-camera.\n\nThe FBI is interested in the picture Joe snapped last month on the second night of the full moon.\n\nThe picture shows a saucer-like object silhouetted against the moon.\n\nThe \"thing\" radiates a trail in green and appears nearer to the earth than the moon,\" Joe said. \"It is round, much smaller than the moon, and it has a dome.\"\n\nJOE DID not think anything of the photograph until customers in his restaurant asked to see it again and again.\n\n\"It's a flying saucer,\" they said.\n\nThe FBI got wind of it last Friday and the next day two agents from the Flint office visited Joe's place here.\n\n\"I showed them several slides of photographs I took on that particular night,\" Joe said. \"They did not seem to be interested until I showed this particular one and then both of them jumped up.\"\n\nThe agents took the photograph and several others.\n\nJOE, A grandfather at 44, hopes he has been of some service to government experts in their search for answers in outer space.\n\n\"But I hope I get that picture back,\" he said.\n\nENCLOSURE 62-83894-413"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO: Director, FBI\nDATE: April 12, 1960\n\nFROM: SAC, Detroit (65-2677)\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nJOSEPH PERRY, GRAND BLANC, MICHIGAN - COMPLAINANT\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING (NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE)\n\nRe Bureau letter to Office of Special Investigations, Air Force, dated April 6, 1960, and Detroit airtel to Bureau, dated 4/11/60.\n\nOn April 12, 1960, JOSEPH PERRY, 3079 Edwards Street, Grand Blanc, Michigan, was personally contacted at his home by SA RAYMOND E. MOOMEY and SA MARTIN A. MC NERNEY.\n\nHe was advised that his letter to President EISENHOWER dated March 21, 1959, had been referred to the FBI by the Department of Justice and that the FBI was acknowledging receipt of that letter.\n\nMr. PERRY was advised that the contents of his letter had been carefully noted and that for his information the photographs he had voluntarily turned over to the FBI had been immediately furnished to the Office of Special Investigations, Department of the Air Force, Selfridge Air Force Base, Mt. Clemens, Michigan; further, that the Department of the Air Force had been furnished a copy of his letter to the President.\n\nMr. PERRY was advised that the FBI was taking no investigative action in this matter and he said he was fully aware of the Bureau's policies in matters of this nature.\n\nMr. PERRY expressed his appreciation for the cooperation of the FBI.\n\n2 - Bureau\n1 - Detroit\n\nREC-46 62-83894-414\n\nMAM:hs\n(3)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mirror-image (upside-down/reversed) typed letter, largely illegible in reproduction. Legible fragments: \"Director, FBI\" ; \"April 13, 1960\" ; \"Grand Blanc, Michigan\" ; \"Re: Joseph Perry\" ; \"Office of Special Investigations, Air Force\" ; \"Air Force, Detroit\" ; \"Dear Mr. Perry\" ; \"Sincerely yours\" ; \"John Edgar Hoover\" ; \"Director\" ; \"Enclosure\" ; \"REC'D\" ; \"APR 19 12 26 PM '60\" ; \"62-83894\" ; \"APR 21 1960\" [illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-36 (Rev. 12-13-56)\n\nFBI\n\nDate: 4/11/60\n\nTransmit the following in ________________ (Type in plain text or code)\n\nVia AIRTEL AIR MAIL - REGISTERED (Priority or Method of Mailing)\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM: SAC, DETROIT (65-2677)\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nJOSEPH PERRY, GRAND BLANC, MICHIGAN - COMPLAINANT\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE)\n\nReBulet to Office of Special Investigations, Air Force, dated 4/6/60.\n\nOn Saturday, 4/9/60, Agents of the Flint, Mich., Resident Agency attempted to contact JOSEPH PERRY at his home, 3079 Edward St., Grand Blanc, Mich., with negative results.\n\nOn 4/9/60 he was located telephonically at approximately 6:30 P.M. He advised that he would not be available for interview that night or over the weekend; therefore, he was advised that his letter to the White House had been referred to the FBI by the Dept. of Justice, and we desired to acknowledge the letter and to see him personally. Mr. PERRY advised that he would arrange to contact the Agents at the earliest possible date.\n\nOn 4/11/60 appointment was made to see PERRY on 4/12/60, at which time Bureau's complete instructions will be complied with.\n\n3 - Bureau\n2 - Detroit\n\nWLS:jrc\n(5)\n\nAIRTEL\n\nApproved: ____ Sent ____ M Per ____\nSpecial Agent in Charge"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Text of a reversed/upside-down typed page, largely illegible. Legible fragments: \"Date: 4/11/60\" ; \"Transmit the following in\" ; \"AIRTEL\" ; \"AIR MAIL - REGISTERED\" ; \"FBI\" ; \"TO: DIRECTOR, FBI\" ; \"FROM: SAC, DETROIT (65-2677)\" ; \"UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\" ; \"JOSEPH PERRY, GRAND BLANC, MICHIGAN - COMPLAINANT\" ; \"MISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\" ; \"(NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE)\" ; \"ReBulet to Office of Special Investigations, Air Force, dated 4/6/60.\" ; \"On Saturday, 4/9/60, Agents of the Flint, Mich., Resident Agency attempted to contact JOSEPH PERRY at his home, 3079 Edward St., Grand Blanc, Mich., with negative results.\" ; \"On 4/9/60 he was located telephonically at approximately 6:30 P.M.\" ; \"On 4/11/60 appointment was made to see PERRY on 4/12/60, at which time Bureau's complete instructions will be complied with.\" ; \"3 - Bureau\" ; \"2 - Detroit\" ; \"WLS:jrc (5)\" ; \"REC'D\" ; \"APR 19 1960\""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - Mr. Wacks\n\nREC-68\n62-83894-416\nEX-105\n\nApril 21, 1960\n\nMr. Joseph F. Perry\n3079 Edward Street\nGrand Blanc, Michigan\n\nDear Mr. Perry:\n\nI am in receipt of your letter dated April 13, 1960, and I wanted you to know that I have taken the liberty of furnishing the Department of the Air Force with a copy of your letter so that agency could reply to you concerning the return of the photographs you furnished to Special Agents of this Bureau. As you have been previously advised, these photographs when received from you were immediately furnished to the Office of Special Investigations, Department of the Air Force, Selfridge Air Force Base, Mount Clemens, Michigan.\n\nIt is suggested that you direct further inquiries in this matter to the Department of the Air Force.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\n1 - Detroit (Enclosure - copy letter dated 4-13-60 from Perry)\n1 - Office of Special Investigations\nAir Force (By separate letter)\nJFW:tp (5) Attn: Chief, Counterintelligence Division\n\nNOTE: Perry, proprietor of a restaurant in Grand Blanc and an amateur photographer with a hobby of taking pictures of the moon, on 3-5-60 advised Detroit Office that two of his pictures showed a foreign object which he believed to"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Upside-down/reversed typed page, largely illegible. Legible fragments: \"April 21, 1960\" ; \"Mr. Joseph F. Perry, 3079 Edward Street, Grand Blanc, Michigan\" ; \"Dear Mr. Perry:\" ; \"I am in receipt of your letter dated April 13, 1960...\" ; \"Sincerely yours,\" ; \"John Edgar Hoover, Director\" ; \"1 - Detroit\" ; \"1 - Office of Special Investigations, Air Force\" ; \"Attn: Chief, Counterintelligence Division\" ; \"NOTE:\" ; \"REC'D\" ; \"APR 20 1960\" ; \"FBI-JUSTICE\" ; \"67 APR 27 1960\""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Joseph F. Perry\n\nNOTE CONTINUED:\n\nbe flying saucers. At his request Bureau agents contacted him and he furnished them the photographs which were turned over to local OSI representatives. Perry reported incident to the press which carried articles indicating FBI was investigating. We straightened out the \"Detroit Times\" on this point. Perry by letter dated 3-21-60 wrote to President Eisenhower pointing out he did not know where his photographs were but he would like assurance that they would be returned to him. Special Agents of Detroit Office on 4-12-60 informed Perry that the photographs he had voluntarily turned over to them had been furnished to OSI, Selfridge Air Force Base, and that the Department of the Air Force had been furnished a copy of his letter to the President. Perry in his 4-13-60 letter thanked the Director for relaying the message from the White House and indicated he was looking forward to the completion of Air Force analysis of his photographs so that \"your office\" would be able to return them to him. He pointed out that \"thousands are looking forward\" to viewing the photographs. A copy of the instant letter and a copy of Perry's 4-13-60 letter are being furnished Air Force for its reply to Perry.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3079 Edward Street\nGrand Blanc, Michigan\nApril 13, 1960\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover, Director\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI wish to thank you for relaying the message from\nThe White House on my colored transparency of an unidentified flying object.\nAm looking forward to the completion of their analysis\nso as your office will be able to return the transparency to me as thousands are looking forward to\nviewing it.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/7/85 BY SP6 bjaltey\n\nYours truly,\n\nJoseph F Perry\n\nEX-105\n\nREC-68 62-83894-416\n\n18 APR. 22 1960\n\nAcknowledged 4-21-60 1-OSI 1-Detroit (w/ commoning)\n\nLtr to OSI (w/commoning) 4-21-60 JFW:pp\n\nCorrespondence 5-US"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - Mr. Wacks\n1 - Liaison\n\nDate: April 21, 1960\n\nTo: Office of Special Investigations\nAir Force\n\nAttention: Chief, Counterintelligence Division\n\nFrom: John Edgar Hoover, Director\n\nSubject: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nJOSEPH PERRY, GRAND BLANC, MICHIGAN - COMPLAINANT\n(NATIONALITIES INTELLIGENCE)\n\nReference is made to this Bureau's letter dated April 6, 1960, captioned as above.\n\nThere is enclosed for your information a copy of a letter dated April 13, 1960, written by Perry. There is also enclosed for your appropriate action a copy of our answer to Perry. It is requested that you furnish this Bureau a copy of your reply to him.\n\nEnclosures - 2\n\n1 - Detroit\n\nJFW:tp\n(6)\n\nTolson, Mohr, Parsons, Belmont, Callahan, DeLoach, Malone, McGuire, Rosen, Tamm, Trotter, W.C. Sullivan, Tele. Room, Ingram, Gandy\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED DATE 5/7/85 BY SP6 bjaltey\n\n62-83894 - 417\n\n18 APR. 22 1960"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: 5/4/60\nFROM : SAC, DENVER (62-0)\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION\nCONCERNING\n\nEnclosed is a letterhead memorandum regarding a\nspeech given by Mr. VAN TASSEL. One copy of this memorandum\nhas been made available to the Office of Special Investiga-\ntions (OSI), Lowry Air Force Base, Denver.\n\nThe enclosed memorandum is being furnished for\nthe information of the Bureau and the Los Angeles, San\nDiego, and San Francisco Offices, as VAN TASSEL is alleged\nto be from Giant Rock, California, which town is not located\nby Denver in the Postal Guide or available maps.\n\nSA THOMAS STEPHEN KELLY attended this lecture\non Sunday, 4/17/60, after hearing of its impending\npresentation over the radio. He recognized no one at this\nmeeting and was known to no one at the meeting.\n\nOn 4/19/60 Phipps Auditorium, Denver, was tele-\nphonically contacted and they advised that arrangements for\nthe speech of Mr. VAN TASSEL had been made with LLOYD ARNOLD,\ntelephone BElmont 7-5775. The 1959 Lakewood, Colorado City\nDirectory reflects LLOYD L. ARNOLD, Arnold Engineering\nAssociates, 1940 Sims, telephone BElmont 7-5775.\n\n2 - Bureau (Encls.-5)\n1 - Los Angeles (Encl.-1) (Info.)\n1 - San Diego (Encl.-1) (Info.)\n1 - San Francisco (Encl.-1) (Info.)\n1 - Denver\nTSK:imb\n(6)\nREC- 61\n62-83894-418\nAGENCY OSI\nDATE FORW. 5-18-60\nHOW FORW. R/S\nBY JFW/amy\nENCLOSURE\n52 MAY 20 1960\n18 MAY 1960"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\nDenver, Colorado\nApril 26, 1960\n\nRe: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\n\nOn April 17, 1960, a lecture was given by GEORGE\nW. VAN TASSEL at Phipps Auditorium, City Park, Denver,\nColorado, which was advertised to be a lecture, movie film,\nand discussion of unidentified flying objects. The audience\nwas comprised of a majority of older individuals and also\na majority of the audience was female. There were few\nyoung people, although some family groups.\n\nThe program was sponsored by the Denver Unidenti-\nfied Flying Objects Investigative Societies, one of which\nmeets monthly at the Jefferson County Bank, Lakewood,\nColorado, whose executive officer was the Master of Ceremonies.\nThe program consisted of a 45 minute movie which included\nseveral shots of things purported to be flying saucers, and\nthen a number of interviews with people from all walks of\nlife regarding sightings they had made of such unidentified\nflying objects. After the movie GEORGE W. VAN TASSEL gave a\nlecture which was more of a religious-economics lecture\nrather than one of unidentified flying objects.\n\nVAN TASSEL stated that he had been in the \"flying\ngame\" for over 30 years and currently operates a private\nCivil Aeronautics Authority approved airfield in California.\nHe said he has personally observed a good many sightings and\nhas talked to hundreds of people who have also seen flying\nsaucers. He said that he has also been visited by the people\nfrom outer space and has taken up the cause of bringing the\nfacts of these people to the American people. He said it\nis a crusade which he has undertaken because he is more or\nless retired, his family is grown and gone from home, and\nhe feels he might be doing some good by this work.\n\nPROPERTY OF FBI - This memorandum is loaned to you by the\nFBI, and neither it nor its contents are to be distributed\noutside the agency to which loaned.\n62-83894-418\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\n\nThe major part of his lecture was devoted to\nexplaining the occurrences in the Bible as they related\nto the space people. He said that the only mention of God\nin the Bible is in the beginning when the universe was being\nmade. He said that after that all references are to \"out\nof the sky\" or \"out of heaven.\" He said that this is due\nto the fact that man, space people, was made by God and\nthat in the beginning of the world the space people came\nto the earth and left animals here. These were the pre-\nhistoric animals which existed at a body temperature of 105\ndegrees; however, a polar tilt occurred whereby the poles\nshifted and the tropical climates became covered with\nice and vice versa. He said that then the space people\nagain put animals on the earth and this is depicted in the\nBible as Noah's Ark. He said that after the polar tilt\nthe temperature to sustain life was 98.6 degrees, which was\nsuitable for space people, so they established a colony\nand left only males here, intending to bring females at a\nlater date on supply ships. This is reflected in ADAM's\nnot having a wife. He said that ADAM was not an individual\nbut a race of men. He said that this race then inter-\nmarried with \"intelligent, upright walking animals,\" which\nrace was EVE. Then when the space people came back in the\nsupply ships they saw what had happened and did not land\nbut ever since due to the origin of ADAM, they have watched\nover the people on earth. He said that this is recorded in\nthe Bible many times, such as MOSES receiving the Ten\nCommandments. He said the Ten Commandments are the laws of\nthe space people and men on earth only give them lip service.\nAlso, the manna from heaven was bread supplied by the space\npeople. He also stated that this can be seen from the native\nstories such as the Indians in America saying that corn and\npotatoes, unknown in Europe, were brought here by a \"flaming\ncanoe.\" He said this refers to a space ship and the Indians'\nhighest form of transportation was the canoe, so they likened\nit unto that. He said this can be shown also by the old\nstories of Winged Chariots and Winged White Horses, which\ncame from out of the sky. He said that JESUS was born of\nMARY, who was a space person sent here already pregnant in\norder to show the earth people the proper way to live. He\nsaid the space people have watched over us through the years\nand have tried to help us. He said they have sent their\nagents to the earth and they appear just as we do; however,\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\n\nthey have the power to know your thoughts just as JESUS did.\nHe said this is their means of communication and many of the\nspace people are mute, but they train a certain number of\nthem to speak earth languages.\n\nHe said that the space people here on earth are\nequipped with a \"crystal battery\" which generates a magnetic\nfield about them which bends light waves so that they, the\nspace people, appear invisible. He said this has resulted\nin ghost stories such as footsteps, doors opening, and other\nsuch phenomena.\n\nHe stated that the space people are now gravely\nconcerned with our atom bombs. He said that the explosions\nof these bombs have upset the earth's rotation and, as in\nthe instance of the French bomb explosion in North Africa,\nhave actually caused earthquakes. He said that the officials\non earth are aware of this and this was the reason for the\nrecent Geophysical Year in order to try to determine just\nwhat can be done. He said these explosions are forcing the\nearth toward another polar tilt, which will endanger all man-\nkind. He said that the space people are prepared to evacuate\nthose earth people who have abided by the \"Golden Rule\" when\nthe polar tilt occurs, but will leave the rest to perish.\n\nHe advised that the space people have contacted\nthe officials on earth and have advised them of their concern\nbut this has not been made public. He also said that the\nradioactive fallout has become extremely dangerous and\nofficials are worried but each power is so greedy of their\nown power they will not agree to make peace.\n\nVAN TASSEL also spent some time saying that the\nU. S. Air Force, who are responsible for investigations on\nunidentified flying objects, has surpressed information;\nand as they are responsible only to the Administration, not\nto the public, as elected officials are, they can get away\nwith this. He said that also the Air Force is afraid that\nthey will be outmoded and disbanded if such information gets\nout.\n\nHe said that the Administration's main concern in\nnot making public any information is that the economy will be\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\n\nruined, not because of any fear that would be engendered\nin the public. He said this is due to the number of scien-\ntific discoveries already made and that will be made which\nare labor saving and of almost permanency so that replacements\nwould not be needed.\n\nIn summation, VAN TASSEL's speech was on these\nsubjects:\n\n(1) Space people related to occurrences in\nBible.\n\n(2) Atom Bomb detrimental to earth and universe.\n\n(3) Economy is poor and would collapse under\nideas brought by space people.\n\nThroughout his lecture, VAN TASSEL mentioned only\nthe U. S. economy and Government and the U. S. Air Force. He\ndid refer to the human race numerous times but all references\nto Government and economy could only be taken as meaning the\nU. S. One question put to him was whether sightings had been\nmade in Russia or China. He answered this by saying sightings\nhad been reported all over the world, but then specifically\nmentioned only the U. S., Australia, New Zealand, and New\nGuinea.\n\nHe also mentioned that he was not advocating or\nasking for any action on the part of the audience because he\nsaid evil has a way of destroying itself. He did say that\nhe felt that the audience, of about 250 persons, were the\nonly intelligent people in Denver and he knew they had not\ncome out of curiosity but because they wanted to do the right\nthing. He said that they were above the average in intelligence\nand when the critical time came, the world would need people\nsuch as this to think and guide.\n\nAn application blank was distributed at the meeting\nfor membership in the Denver society of this organization.\n\n- 4 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\n\nDenver, Colorado\nApril 26, 1960\n\nRe: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\n\nOn April 17, 1960, a lecture was given by GEORGE\nW. VAN TASSEL at Phipps Auditorium, City Park, Denver,\nColorado, which was advertised to be a lecture, movie film,\nand discussion of unidentified flying objects. The audience\nwas comprised of a majority of older individuals and also\na majority of the audience was female. There were few\nyoung people, although some family groups.\n\nThe program was sponsored by the Denver Unidenti-\nfied Flying Objects Investigative Societies, one of which\nmeets monthly at the Jefferson County Bank, Lakewood,\nColorado, whose executive officer was the Master of Ceremonies.\nThe program consisted of a 45 minute movie which included\nseveral shots of things purported to be flying saucers, and\nthen a number of interviews with people from all walks of\nlife regarding sightings they had made of such unidentified\nflying objects. After the movie GEORGE W. VAN TASSEL gave a\nlecture which was more of a religious-economics lecture\nrather than one of unidentified flying objects.\n\nVAN TASSEL stated that he had been in the \"flying\ngame\" for over 30 years and currently operates a private\nCivil Aeronautics Authority approved airfield in California.\nHe said he has personally observed a good many sightings and\nhas talked to hundreds of people who have also seen flying\nsaucers. He said that he has also been visited by the people\nfrom outer space and has taken up the cause of bringing the\nfacts of these people to the American people. He said it\nis a crusade which he has undertaken because he is more or\nless retired, his family is grown and gone from home, and\nhe feels he might be doing some good by this work.\n\nPROPERTY OF FBI - This memorandum is loaned to you by the\nFBI, and neither it nor its contents are to be distributed\noutside the agency to which loaned."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\n\nThe major part of his lecture was devoted to\nexplaining the occurrences in the Bible as they related\nto the space people. He said that the only mention of God\nin the Bible is in the beginning when the universe was being\nmade. He said that after that all references are to \"out\nof the sky\" or \"out of heaven.\" He said that this is due\nto the fact that man, space people, was made by God and\nthat in the beginning of the world the space people came\nto the earth and left animals here. These were the pre-\nhistoric animals which existed at a body temperature of 105\ndegrees; however, a polar tilt occurred whereby the poles\nshifted and the tropical climates became covered with\nice and vice versa. He said that then the space people\nagain put animals on the earth and this is depicted in the\nBible as Noah's Ark. He said that after the polar tilt\nthe temperature to sustain life was 98.6 degrees, which was\nsuitable for space people, so they established a colony\nand left only males here, intending to bring females at a\nlater date on supply ships. This is reflected in ADAM's\nnot having a wife. He said that ADAM was not an individual\nbut a race of men. He said that this race then inter-\nmarried with \"intelligent, upright walking animals,\" which\nrace was EVE. Then when the space people came back in the\nsupply ships they saw what had happened and did not land\nbut ever since due to the origin of ADAM, they have watched\nover the people on earth. He said that this is recorded in\nthe Bible many times, such as MOSES receiving the Ten\nCommandments. He said the Ten Commandments are the laws of\nthe space people and men on earth only give them lip service.\nAlso, the manna from heaven was bread supplied by the space\npeople. He also stated that this can be seen from the native\nstories such as the Indians in America saying that corn and\npotatoes, unknown in Europe, were brought here by a \"flaming\ncanoe.\" He said this refers to a space ship and the Indians'\nhighest form of transportation was the canoe, so they likened\nit unto that. He said this can be shown also by the old\nstories of Winged Chariots and Winged White Horses, which\ncame from out of the sky. He said that JESUS was born of\nMARY, who was a space person sent here already pregnant in\norder to show the earth people the proper way to live. He\nsaid the space people have watched over us through the years\nand have tried to help us. He said they have sent their\nagents to the earth and they appear just as we do; however,\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\n\nthey have the power to know your thoughts just as JESUS did.\nHe said this is their means of communication and many of the\nspace people are mute, but they train a certain number of\nthem to speak earth languages.\n\nHe said that the space people here on earth are\nequipped with a \"crystal battery\" which generates a magnetic\nfield about them which bends light waves so that they, the\nspace people, appear invisible. He said this has resulted\nin ghost stories such as footsteps, doors opening, and other\nsuch phenomena.\n\nHe stated that the space people are now gravely\nconcerned with our atom bombs. He said that the explosions\nof these bombs have upset the earth's rotation and, as in\nthe instance of the French bomb explosion in North Africa,\nhave actually caused earthquakes. He said that the officials\non earth are aware of this and this was the reason for the\nrecent Geophysical Year in order to try to determine just\nwhat can be done. He said these explosions are forcing the\nearth toward another polar tilt, which will endanger all man-\nkind. He said that the space people are prepared to evacuate\nthose earth people who have abided by the \"Golden Rule\" when\nthe polar tilt occurs, but will leave the rest to perish.\n\nHe advised that the space people have contacted\nthe officials on earth and have advised them of their concern\nbut this has not been made public. He also said that the\nradioactive fallout has become extremely dangerous and\nofficials are worried but each power is so greedy of their\nown power they will not agree to make peace.\n\nVAN TASSEL also spent some time saying that the\nU. S. Air Force, who are responsible for investigations on\nunidentified flying objects, has surpressed information;\nand as they are responsible only to the Administration, not\nto the public, as elected officials are, they can get away\nwith this. He said that also the Air Force is afraid that\nthey will be outmoded and disbanded if such information gets\nout.\n\nHe said that the Administration's main concern in\nnot making public any information is that the economy will be\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\n\nruined, not because of any fear that would be engendered\nin the public. He said this is due to the number of scien-\ntific discoveries already made and that will be made which\nare labor saving and of almost permanency so that replacements\nwould not be needed.\n\nIn summation, VAN TASSEL's speech was on these\nsubjects:\n\n(1) Space people related to occurrences in\nBible.\n\n(2) Atom Bomb detrimental to earth and universe.\n\n(3) Economy is poor and would collapse under\nideas brought by space people.\n\nThroughout his lecture, VAN TASSEL mentioned only\nthe U. S. economy and Government and the U. S. Air Force. He\ndid refer to the human race numerous times but all references\nto Government and economy could only be taken as meaning the\nU. S. One question put to him was whether sightings had been\nmade in Russia or China. He answered this by saying sightings\nhad been reported all over the world, but then specifically\nmentioned only the U. S., Australia, New Zealand, and New\nGuinea.\n\nHe also mentioned that he was not advocating or\nasking for any action on the part of the audience because he\nsaid evil has a way of destroying itself. He did say that\nhe felt that the audience, of about 250 persons, were the\nonly intelligent people in Denver and he knew they had not\ncome out of curiosity but because they wanted to do the right\nthing. He said that they were above the average in intelligence\nand when the critical time came, the world would need people\nsuch as this to think and guide.\n\nAn application blank was distributed at the meeting\nfor membership in the Denver society of this organization.\n\n- 4 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\nDenver, Colorado\nApril 26, 1960\nRe: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\nOn April 17, 1960, a lecture was given by GEORGE\nW. VAN TASSEL at Phipps Auditorium, City Park, Denver,\nColorado, which was advertised to be a lecture, movie film,\nand discussion of unidentified flying objects. The audience\nwas comprised of a majority of older individuals and also\na majority of the audience was female. There were few\nyoung people, although some family groups.\nThe program was sponsored by the Denver Unidenti-\nfied Flying Objects Investigative Societies, one of which\nmeets monthly at the Jefferson County Bank, Lakewood,\nColorado, whose executive officer was the Master of Ceremonies.\nThe program consisted of a 45 minute movie which included\nseveral shots of things purported to be flying saucers, and\nthen a number of interviews with people from all walks of\nlife regarding sightings they had made of such unidentified\nflying objects. After the movie GEORGE W. VAN TASSEL gave a\nlecture which was more of a religious-economics lecture\nrather than one of unidentified flying objects.\nVAN TASSEL stated that he had been in the \"flying\ngame\" for over 30 years and currently operates a private\nCivil Aeronautics Authority approved airfield in California.\nHe said he has personally observed a good many sightings and\nhas talked to hundreds of people who have also seen flying\nsaucers. He said that he has also been visited by the people\nfrom outer space and has taken up the cause of bringing the\nfacts of these people to the American people. He said it\nis a crusade which he has undertaken because he is more or\nless retired, his family is grown and gone from home, and\nhe feels he might be doing some good by this work.\nPROPERTY OF FBI - This memorandum is loaned to you by the\nFBI, and neither it nor its contents are to be distributed\noutside the agency to which loaned."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\nThe major part of his lecture was devoted to\nexplaining the occurrences in the Bible as they related\nto the space people. He said that the only mention of God\nin the Bible is in the beginning when the universe was being\nmade. He said that after that all references are to \"out\nof the sky\" or \"out of heaven.\" He said that this is due\nto the fact that man, space people, was made by God and\nthat in the beginning of the world the space people came\nto the earth and left animals here. These were the pre-\nhistoric animals which existed at a body temperature of 105\ndegrees; however, a polar tilt occurred whereby the poles\nshifted and the tropical climates became covered with\nice and vice versa. He said that then the space people\nagain put animals on the earth and this is depicted in the\nBible as Noah's Ark. He said that after the polar tilt\nthe temperature to sustain life was 98.6 degrees, which was\nsuitable for space people, so they established a colony\nand left only males here, intending to bring females at a\nlater date on supply ships. This is reflected in ADAM's\nnot having a wife. He said that ADAM was not an individual\nbut a race of men. He said that this race then inter-\nmarried with \"intelligent, upright walking animals,\" which\nrace was EVE. Then when the space people came back in the\nsupply ships they saw what had happened and did not land\nbut ever since due to the origin of ADAM, they have watched\nover the people on earth. He said that this is recorded in\nthe Bible many times, such as MOSES receiving the Ten\nCommandments. He said the Ten Commandments are the laws of\nthe space people and men on earth only give them lip service.\nAlso, the manna from heaven was bread supplied by the space\npeople. He also stated that this can be seen from the native\nstories such as the Indians in America saying that corn and\npotatoes, unknown in Europe, were brought here by a \"flaming\ncanoe.\" He said this refers to a space ship and the Indians'\nhighest form of transportation was the canoe, so they likened\nit unto that. He said this can be shown also by the old\nstories of Winged Chariots and Winged White Horses, which\ncame from out of the sky. He said that JESUS was born of\nMARY, who was a space person sent here already pregnant in\norder to show the earth people the proper way to live. He\nsaid the space people have watched over us through the years\nand have tried to help us. He said they have sent their\nagents to the earth and they appear just as we do; however,\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\nthey have the power to know your thoughts just as JESUS did.\nHe said this is their means of communication and many of the\nspace people are mute, but they train a certain number of\nthem to speak earth languages.\nHe said that the space people here on earth are\nequipped with a \"crystal battery\" which generates a magnetic\nfield about them which bends light waves so that they, the\nspace people, appear invisible. He said this has resulted\nin ghost stories such as footsteps, doors opening, and other\nsuch phenomena.\nHe stated that the space people are now gravely\nconcerned with our atom bombs. He said that the explosions\nof these bombs have upset the earth's rotation and, as in\nthe instance of the French bomb explosion in North Africa,\nhave actually caused earthquakes. He said that the officials\non earth are aware of this and this was the reason for the\nrecent Geophysical Year in order to try to determine just\nwhat can be done. He said these explosions are forcing the\nearth toward another polar tilt, which will endanger all man-\nkind. He said that the space people are prepared to evacuate\nthose earth people who have abided by the \"Golden Rule\" when\nthe polar tilt occurs, but will leave the rest to perish.\nHe advised that the space people have contacted\nthe officials on earth and have advised them of their concern\nbut this has not been made public. He also said that the\nradioactive fallout has become extremely dangerous and\nofficials are worried but each power is so greedy of their\nown power they will not agree to make peace.\nVAN TASSEL also spent some time saying that the\nU. S. Air Force, who are responsible for investigations on\nunidentified flying objects, has suppressed information;\nand as they are responsible only to the Administration, not\nto the public, as elected officials are, they can get away\nwith this. He said that also the Air Force is afraid that\nthey will be outmoded and disbanded if such information gets\nout.\nHe said that the Administration's main concern in\nnot making public any information is that the economy will be\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\nruined, not because of any fear that would be engendered\nin the public. He said this is due to the number of scien-\ntific discoveries already made and that will be made which\nare labor saving and of almost permanency so that replacements\nwould not be needed.\nIn summation, VAN TASSEL's speech was on these\nsubjects:\n(1) Space people related to occurrences in\nBible.\n(2) Atom Bomb detrimental to earth and universe.\n(3) Economy is poor and would collapse under\nideas brought by space people.\nThroughout his lecture, VAN TASSEL mentioned only\nthe U. S. economy and Government and the U. S. Air Force. He\ndid refer to the human race numerous times but all references\nto Government and economy could only be taken as meaning the\nU. S. One question put to him was whether sightings had been\nmade in Russia or China. He answered this by saying sightings\nhad been reported all over the world, but then specifically\nmentioned only the U. S., Australia, New Zealand, and New\nGuinea.\nHe also mentioned that he was not advocating or\nasking for any action on the part of the audience because he\nsaid evil has a way of destroying itself. He did say that\nhe felt that the audience, of about 250 persons, were the\nonly intelligent people in Denver and he knew they had not\ncome out of curiosity but because they wanted to do the right\nthing. He said that they were above the average in intelligence\nand when the critical time came, the world would need people\nsuch as this to think and guide.\nAn application blank was distributed at the meeting\nfor membership in the Denver society of this organization.\n- 4 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\nDenver, Colorado\nApril 26, 1960\nRe: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\nOn April 17, 1960, a lecture was given by GEORGE\nW. VAN TASSEL at Phipps Auditorium, City Park, Denver,\nColorado, which was advertised to be a lecture, movie film,\nand discussion of unidentified flying objects. The audience\nwas comprised of a majority of older individuals and also\na majority of the audience was female. There were few\nyoung people, although some family groups.\nThe program was sponsored by the Denver Unidenti-\nfied Flying Objects Investigative Societies, one of which\nmeets monthly at the Jefferson County Bank, Lakewood,\nColorado, whose executive officer was the Master of Ceremonies.\nThe program consisted of a 45 minute movie which included\nseveral shots of things purported to be flying saucers, and\nthen a number of interviews with people from all walks of\nlife regarding sightings they had made of such unidentified\nflying objects. After the movie GEORGE W. VAN TASSEL gave a\nlecture which was more of a religious-economics lecture\nrather than one of unidentified flying objects.\nVAN TASSEL stated that he had been in the \"flying\ngame\" for over 30 years and currently operates a private\nCivil Aeronautics Authority approved airfield in California.\nHe said he has personally observed a good many sightings and\nhas talked to hundreds of people who have also seen flying\nsaucers. He said that he has also been visited by the people\nfrom outer space and has taken up the cause of bringing the\nfacts of these people to the American people. He said it\nis a crusade which he has undertaken because he is more or\nless retired, his family is grown and gone from home, and\nhe feels he might be doing some good by this work.\nPROPERTY OF FBI - This memorandum is loaned to you by the\nFBI, and neither it nor its contents are to be distributed\noutside the agency to which loaned."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\n\nThe major part of his lecture was devoted to\nexplaining the occurrences in the Bible as they related\nto the space people. He said that the only mention of God\nin the Bible is in the beginning when the universe was being\nmade. He said that after that all references are to \"out\nof the sky\" or \"out of heaven.\" He said that this is due\nto the fact that man, space people, was made by God and\nthat in the beginning of the world the space people came\nto the earth and left animals here. These were the pre-\nhistoric animals which existed at a body temperature of 105\ndegrees; however, a polar tilt occurred whereby the poles\nshifted and the tropical climates became covered with\nice and vice versa. He said that then the space people\nagain put animals on the earth and this is depicted in the\nBible as Noah's Ark. He said that after the polar tilt\nthe temperature to sustain life was 98.6 degrees, which was\nsuitable for space people, so they established a colony\nand left only males here, intending to bring females at a\nlater date on supply ships. This is reflected in ADAM's\nnot having a wife. He said that ADAM was not an individual\nbut a race of men. He said that this race then inter-\nmarried with \"intelligent, upright walking animals,\" which\nrace was EVE. Then when the space people came back in the\nsupply ships they saw what had happened and did not land\nbut ever since due to the origin of ADAM, they have watched\nover the people on earth. He said that this is recorded in\nthe Bible many times, such as MOSES receiving the Ten\nCommandments. He said the Ten Commandments are the laws of\nthe space people and men on earth only give them lip service.\nAlso, the manna from heaven was bread supplied by the space\npeople. He also stated that this can be seen from the native\nstories such as the Indians in America saying that corn and\npotatoes, unknown in Europe, were brought here by a \"flaming\ncanoe.\" He said this refers to a space ship and the Indians'\nhighest form of transportation was the canoe, so they likened\nit unto that. He said this can be shown also by the old\nstories of Winged Chariots and Winged White Horses, which\ncame from out of the sky. He said that JESUS was born of\nMARY, who was a space person sent here already pregnant in\norder to show the earth people the proper way to live. He\nsaid the space people have watched over us through the years\nand have tried to help us. He said they have sent their\nagents to the earth and they appear just as we do; however,\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\n\nthey have the power to know your thoughts just as JESUS did.\nHe said this is their means of communication and many of the\nspace people are mute, but they train a certain number of\nthem to speak earth languages.\n\nHe said that the space people here on earth are\nequipped with a \"crystal battery\" which generates a magnetic\nfield about them which bends light waves so that they, the\nspace people, appear invisible. He said this has resulted\nin ghost stories such as footsteps, doors opening, and other\nsuch phenomena.\n\nHe stated that the space people are now gravely\nconcerned with our atom bombs. He said that the explosions\nof these bombs have upset the earth's rotation and, as in\nthe instance of the French bomb explosion in North Africa,\nhave actually caused earthquakes. He said that the officials\non earth are aware of this and this was the reason for the\nrecent Geophysical Year in order to try to determine just\nwhat can be done. He said these explosions are forcing the\nearth toward another polar tilt, which will endanger all man-\nkind. He said that the space people are prepared to evacuate\nthose earth people who have abided by the \"Golden Rule\" when\nthe polar tilt occurs, but will leave the rest to perish.\n\nHe advised that the space people have contacted\nthe officials on earth and have advised them of their concern\nbut this has not been made public. He also said that the\nradioactive fallout has become extremely dangerous and\nofficials are worried but each power is so greedy of their\nown power they will not agree to make peace.\n\nVAN TASSEL also spent some time saying that the\nU. S. Air Force, who are responsible for investigations on\nunidentified flying objects, has surpressed information;\nand as they are responsible only to the Administration, not\nto the public, as elected officials are, they can get away\nwith this. He said that also the Air Force is afraid that\nthey will be outmoded and disbanded if such information gets\nout.\n\nHe said that the Administration's main concern in\nnot making public any information is that the economy will be\n\n- 3 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"RE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS,\nINVESTIGATIVE SOCIETY;\nGEORGE W. VAN TASSEL\n\nruined, not because of any fear that would be engendered\nin the public. He said this is due to the number of scien-\ntific discoveries already made and that will be made which\nare labor saving and of almost permanency so that replacements\nwould not be needed.\n\nIn summation, VAN TASSEL's speech was on these\nsubjects:\n\n(1) Space people related to occurrences in\nBible.\n\n(2) Atom Bomb detrimental to earth and universe.\n\n(3) Economy is poor and would collapse under\nideas brought by space people.\n\nThroughout his lecture, VAN TASSEL mentioned only\nthe U. S. economy and Government and the U. S. Air Force. He\ndid refer to the human race numerous times but all references\nto Government and economy could only be taken as meaning the\nU. S. One question put to him was whether sightings had been\nmade in Russia or China. He answered this by saying sightings\nhad been reported all over the world, but then specifically\nmentioned only the U. S., Australia, New Zealand, and New\nGuinea.\n\nHe also mentioned that he was not advocating or\nasking for any action on the part of the audience because he\nsaid evil has a way of destroying itself. He did say that\nhe felt that the audience, of about 250 persons, were the\nonly intelligent people in Denver and he knew they had not\ncome out of curiosity but because they wanted to do the right\nthing. He said that they were above the average in intelligence\nand when the critical time came, the world would need people\nsuch as this to think and guide.\n\nAn application blank was distributed at the meeting\nfor membership in the Denver society of this organization.\n\n- 4 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"FD-36 (Rev. 12-13-56)\n\nFBI\n\nDate: 5/20/60\n\nTransmit the following in\n(Type in plain text or code)\n\nVia AIRTEL\nAIRMAIL\n(Priority or Method of Mailing)\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nFROM: SAC, Detroit (65-2677)\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT;\nJOSEPH PERRY, GRAND BLANC,\nMICHIGAN - COMPLAINANT\n(NATIONALITIES INTELLIGENCE)\n\nReBulet to Office of Special Investigations, Air Force, dated\n4/21/60.\n\nEnclosed herewith are 5 copies of a letterhead memo explaining\na telephone call from the \"Detroit Times\" at Detroit, Mich.,\nto the Flint, Mich., Resident Agency on 5/20/60.\n\nIt is noted that the Flint RA immediately advised Detroit upon\nreceipt of this call from Reporter JERRY CHIAPPETTA of the\n\"Detroit Times\". The ASAC in turn immediately contacted JERRY\nCHIAPPETTA to determine the extent of his inquiry of our RA\nand it was determined he had merely had a call from DAVE DOWNEY,\nreferred to in letterhead memo, and DOWNEY, by inference, had\nstated it was his understanding that the FBI Agents in Flint\nhad previously \"snatched\" the 2 photos from JOSEPH PERRY.\nCHIAPPETTA stated he knew that the FBI did not operate that way\nand inasmuch as he was doing a research on his morgue files\nhe wanted to clarify this information.\n\nCHIAPPETTA's attention was directed to a previous contact by\nthe Detroit Office with the \"Detroit Times\" at the time the\nincident occurred and it was reiterated to this Reporter that\nthe FBI did not investigate this case and does not investigate\n\n3 - Bureau (Encls. - 5)\n1 - Detroit\nMAM:sva\n(4)\n\nApproved: Special Agent in Charge\nSent M Per"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"DE 65-2677\n\ncases of this type but that we were called by PERRY concerning\nthis matter inasmuch as PERRY volunteered information to the\nFBI and asked for our assistance in getting this information\nto the appropriate agency. It was made very clear to the\nReporter that the FBI immediately transmitted these photos\nto the Office of Special Investigations, Dept. of Air Force,\nSelfridge AFB, and that Mr. PERRY was advised at the time\nthat the FBI did not examine these photos, neither did we\nconduct any investigation, but that we did see the appropriate\nagency was furnished these photos. It is noted that our\nFlint Agents on subsequent contacts with PERRY, already known\nto the Bureau, that PERRY fully understands the situation\nas far as the FBI's position in this matter.\n\nMr. CHIAPPETTA was also advised that when Mr. PERRY turned\nthese photos over to the FBI, he said that the Air Force\ncould retain them until they had served the purpose and\nthen he would like them returned to him. This information\nwas made available to the Air Force when the photos were\nturned over to them. Mr. CHIAPPETTA stated he realized the\nFBI handled this matter properly in accordance with our\nestablished procedure and that he merely wanted to straighten\nthe record so that he did not, by inference, indicate other\nthan the facts should he desire to write another story on\nthis matter.\n\nImmediately upon receiving information from the Flint RA\nconcerning this matter, the Office of Special Investigations\nat Selfridge AFB was telephonically contacted by the Detroit\nOffice to alert them to this new inquiry in the event they\nshould receive newspaper inquiry or contact from DAVE DOWNEY,\nreferred to in the letterhead memo.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nDetroit, Michigan\nMay 20, 1960\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\nUnidentified Flying Object;\nJoseph Perry, Grand Blanc,\nMichigan - Complainant\nAt 3:58 p.m. on May 20, 1960, Jerry Chiappetta,\nwho advised that he was on the City Desk for the \"Detroit\nTimes\" at Detroit, Michigan, telephoned the Flint, Michigan,\nResident Agency and advised that he had just received a\ntelephone call from Dave Downey, who resides in Wayne County,\nMichigan.\nDowney reportedly advised the \"Detroit Times\" that\nhe is the District Director of the Aerial Phenomenon Investiga-\ntion Society. Downey stated that Joseph Perry, of Grand Blanc,\nMichigan, received a slide from Selfridge Air Force Base,\nMt. Clemens, Michigan, on May 3, 1960. This slide is the\nproperty of Joe Perry, of Grand Blanc, and Perry had claimed\nthis slide contained a photograph of the moon and that it\nshowed what appeared to be a flying object somewhere in the\nvicinity of the moon. Downey said when the Air Force returned\nthe photograph, they gave Perry a letter explaining that\nwhat appears to be a flying object in this slide is actually\na part of the negative which was not properly developed.\nDowney reportedly told the \"Detroit Times\" that he does not\nbelieve this story as he knows that Joe Perry is very\nmeticulous when he develops pictures; therefore, he feels\nthe slide actually does contain a picture of a flying object\nand that he intends to obtain this slide and forward it to\nthe Eastman Kodak Company for further analysis.\nThis document contains neither recommendations\nnor conclusions of any kind. It is the property of the\nFederal Bureau of Investigation, and is a loan to your\nagency; it and/or its contents are not to be distributed\noutside your agency.\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE BY\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n2-7-0 NOV 19 1964\n62-83894-419\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nDetroit, Michigan\nMay 20, 1960\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No.\nUnidentified Flying Object;\nJoseph Perry, Grand Blanc,\nMichigan - Complainant\nAt 3:58 p.m. on May 20, 1960, Jerry Chiappetta,\nwho advised that he was on the City Desk for the \"Detroit\nTimes\" at Detroit, Michigan, telephoned the Flint, Michigan,\nResident Agency and advised that he had just received a\ntelephone call from Dave Downey, who resides in Wayne County,\nMichigan.\nDowney reportedly advised the \"Detroit Times\" that\nhe is the District Director of the Aerial Phenomenon Investiga-\ntion Society. Downey stated that Joseph Perry, of Grand Blanc,\nMichigan, received a slide from Selfridge Air Force Base,\nMt. Clemens, Michigan, on May 3, 1960. This slide is the\nproperty of Joe Perry, of Grand Blanc, and Perry had claimed\nthis slide contained a photograph of the moon and that it\nshowed what appeared to be a flying object somewhere in the\nvicinity of the moon. Downey said when the Air Force returned\nthe photograph, they gave Perry a letter explaining that\nwhat appears to be a flying object in this slide is actually\na part of the negative which was not properly developed.\nDowney reportedly told the \"Detroit Times\" that he does not\nbelieve this story as he knows that Joe Perry is very\nmeticulous when he develops pictures; therefore, he feels\nthe slide actually does contain a picture of a flying object\nand that he intends to obtain this slide and forward it to\nthe Eastman Kodak Company for further analysis.\nThis document contains neither recommendations\nnor conclusions of any kind. It is the property of the\nFederal Bureau of Investigation, and is a loan to your\nagency; it and/or its contents are not to be distributed\noutside your agency.\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nDATE 5/7/85 BY S6 bya/TCJ"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4-528\n62-83894-420,421\nCHANGED TO\n63-6137-X,X1\nAUG 23 1960\nBc / MB"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\nTO : A. H. Belmont\nDATE: September 30, 1960\nFROM : S. B. Donahoe\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (FLYING SAUCERS)\nAt this time there appears to be no necessity for additional instructions for the field or insertion in the FBI Handbook or Manuals relative to flying saucers.\nMemorandum 10-5-59 pointed out that our policy concerning unidentified flying objects is to conduct no investigation but immediately refer facts to the Air Force (Bureau Bulletin Number 57, 10-1-47); that SAC Letter Number 38, 3-25-49, reiterated this policy and set out data desired by Air Force to be obtained when complaint received; that SAC Letter Number 83, 8-29-52, again pointed out our policy; that Air Force on 11-12-57 assured that Bureau would be advised of any developments in this field of interest to us; and that there appeared to be no necessity for further instructions to field or insertion in agents' Handbook or Manual of Instructions of our policy relating to flying saucers.\nDuring the past twelve months only one complaint regarding flying saucers has been referred to the Bureau. That immediately was turned over to Air Force, both in the field and at the Seat of Government.\nACTION:\nFor your information. There appears to be no necessity for additional instructions for the field or insertion in the FBI Handbook or Manuals relative to flying saucers. This matter will again be reviewed on or about 10-1-61.\n62-83894\n1 - Mr. Belmont\n1 - Mr. Donahoe\n1 - Mr. Wacks\nJFW:tp\n(4)\nREC-5 62-83894-422\nEX 109\nOCT 5 1960\n50 OCT 10 1960"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A. H. Belmont September 30, 1960\nS. B. Donahoe\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (FLYING SAUCERS)\nAt this time there appears to be no necessity for additional instructions for the field or insertion in the FBI Handbook or Manuals relative to flying saucers.\nMemorandum 10-5-59 pointed out that our policy concerning unidentified flying objects is to conduct no investigation but immediately refer facts to the Air Force (Bureau Bulletin Number 57, 10-1-47); that SAC Letter Number 38, 3-25-49, reiterated this policy and set out data desired by Air Force to be obtained when complaint received; that SAC Letter Number 83, 8-29-52, again pointed out our policy; that Air Force on 11-12-57 assured that Bureau would be advised of any developments in this field of interest to us; and that there appeared to be no necessity for further instructions to field or insertion in agents' Handbook or Manual of Instructions of our policy relating to flying saucers.\nDuring the past twelve months only one complaint regarding flying saucers has been referred to the Bureau. That immediately was turned over to Air Force, both in the field and at the Seat of Government.\nFor your information. There appears to be no necessity for additional instructions for the field or insertion in the FBI Handbook or Manuals relative to flying saucers. This matter will again be reviewed on or about 10-1-61.\nREC'D BELMONT FBI - JUSTICE\nSEP 30 4 10 PM '60\nREC'D\nOCT 3 8 56 AM '60"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"October 17, 1960\n\nREC-92 62-83894-423\n\nMr. Alfred Zigler\n2842 West 57th Street\nSeattle 7, Washington\n\nDear Mr. Zigler:\n\nYour letter of October 10, 1960, has been received, and I appreciate the interest which prompted you to write.\n\nI am having one of our Special Agents contact you regarding this matter in the very near future.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\n1 - Seattle (sent with let to Seattle)\n\nMAILED 31\nOCT 17 1960\nCOMM-FBI\n\nNOTE: See Letter of same date to SAC, Seattle entitled \"Alfred Zigler, Complaint Concerning \"Dr. Stranges.\"\n\nHHA:ldg\n(4)\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2842 W. 57th St.\nSeattle 7, Washington\nOctober 10, 1960\n\nPersonnel Section,\nFederal Bureau of Investigation,\nU. S. Dep't of Justice,\n9th & Pennsylvania,\nWashington, D. C.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nThere is a gentleman, a \"Dr.\" Stranges, who has published, or caused to be published, a book dealing with \"Flying Saucers\".\n\nIn public and in private the man infers that he is a former member of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.\n\nIs this true?\n\nThis \"Dr.\" Stranges (Doctor of What? -- has never been explained.) is very careful of his wording, in speech and in writing, inferring many things, yet doing so in a manner that will allow him to deny them, if necessary.\nHe quite skilfully avoids answering directly to direct questions.\nAll of this is done in a manner indicating that he is rather careless of the truth, yet the sort of thing that is pretty hard to pin down.\n\n\"Dr.\" Stranges has coupled his \"Flying Saucers\" with a religious theme in such a manner that he is invited to occupy the pulpit in churches around the land.\n\nIt is my personal opinion that the man is using the churches for his private gain. (Tax free, no doubt.)\nI am not aware that he has broken the law in any respect, but from a moral standpoint, he is, I feel, worse than a lawbreaker.\n\nHe will be coming again to my church in a few weeks, and on the occasion of his other visit told several quite patent lies.\n\nIf this man is either by law, or morally, a fraud I am quite opposed to his appearance in my church.\n\nI would appreciate knowing if he is, in truth, a former member of your organization.\n\nSincerely,\nAlfred Zigler\nAlfred Zigler\n\n62-83894-423\nEX-108 15 OCT 18 1960"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, Seattle\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nALFRED ZIGLER\n2842 WEST 57TH STREET\nSEATTLE 7, WASHINGTON\nCOMPLAINT CONCERNING\n\"DR. STRANGES\"\nRESEARCH (CORRESPONDENCE AND TOURS)\n\nOctober 17, 1960\n\nEnclosed are copies of a letter dated October 10, 1960, which was received from captioned individual and my reply to him, all of which are self-explanatory. Bureau files contain nothing identifiable with Mr. Zigler.\n\nOn the basis of information furnished by him, it is not possible to identify the \"Dr. Stranges\" he is referring to in his correspondence. The possibility exists that he may be identical with Dr. Frank E. Stranges, President, International Evangelism Crusades, 7847 61st Street, Glendale, New York. Since October, 1957, the Bureau has received several communications from Dr. Stranges on the letterhead of the American Evangelistic Association of which he was listed as Vice President. These communications primarily requested information from the Bureau to be used in their monthly publication, \"Vision.\" Stranges was identified as Vice President of the Baltimore Bible College, as well as Vice President of the American Evangelistic Association. In 1957 a brief inquiry concerning the Baltimore Bible College revealed that the school was organized in that year and had an enrollment of 121 students. It was indicated to be affiliated with the Baltimore Revival Center, and its principal officers were ministers of the Church of God. Dr. Stranges reportedly holds a Doctor of Divinity degree and is a graduate of LaSalle Law University. Stranges has been given permission to reprint two of my previously published articles and various Bureau publications have been sent to him. It has been necessary to decline several requests from him in the past, including one for an article, a proposal to make a speech and a request that a Bureau representative be designated to speak before the National Evangelistic Center in Washington, D. C. The last two communications received from him indicate he is President of the International Evangelism Crusades. Bureau records do not reflect that Frank E. Stranges was ever an employee of the FBI.\n\nEnclosures (3)\n\nFollow-up made for 10-26-60\n\nHHA:ldg (6)\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT\n\n62-83894-423"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nDirector, FBI\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nFollowing is the record of [illegible]\n\n(b)(6)\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to Seattle\nRe: Alfred Zigler\n\nI desire that you have Mr. Zigler interviewed by a Special Agent in an attempt to determine if the \"Dr. Stranges\" of Mr. Zigler's letter is identical with Dr. Frank E. Stranges. Ascertain also Mr. Zigler's reasons for believing the individual he referred to is giving the impression that he is a former member of the FBI. I would also like to know the date \"Dr. Stranges\" is expected to reappear at Mr. Zigler's church. Furnish the results of your inquiry to the Bureau by 10-26-60.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : W. C. Sullivan\nFROM : S. B. Donahoe\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (FLYING SAUCERS)\n\nDATE: 10/2/61\n\nTolson\nBelmont\nMohr\nCallahan\nConrad\nDeLoach\nEvans\nMalone\nRosen\nSullivan\nTavel\nTrotter\nTele. Room\nIngram\nGandy\n\nAt this time there appears to be no necessity for additional instructions for the field or insertion in the FBI Handbook or Manuals relative to flying saucers.\n\nMemorandum 9-30-60 pointed out that our policy concerning unidentified flying objects is to conduct no investigation but immediately refer facts to the Air Force (Bureau Bulletin Number 57, 10-1-47); that SAC Letter Number 38, 3-25-49, reiterated this policy and set out data desired by Air Force to be obtained when complaint received; that SAC Letter Number 83, 8-29-52, again pointed out our policy; that Air Force on 11-12-57 assured that Bureau would be advised of any developments in this field of interest to us; and that there appeared to be no necessity for further instructions to field or insertion in agents' Handbook or Manual of Instructions of our policy relating to flying saucers.\n\nDuring the past 12 months only one complaint regarding flying saucers has been received. The facts in this complaint were immediately referred to the Air Force.\n\nACTION:\n\nFor your information. There appears to be no necessity for additional instructions for the field or insertion in the FBI Handbook or Manuals relative to flying saucers. This matter will again be reviewed on or about 10-1-62.\n\n62-83894\n\n1 - Mr. Sullivan\n1 - Donahoe\n1 - Wacks\n\nJFW:jes\n(4)\n\nREC- 32\n\n64 OCT 9 1961"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI (62-83894)\nFROM : SAC, CINCINNATI (100-11671)\nSUBJECT: Civilian Research, Interplanetary Flying Objects, Leonard H. Stringfield, Director, Cincinnati, Ohio\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDATE: 10/17/61\n\n4412 Grove Avenue Cincinnati, Ohio\n\nFor the information of the Bureau, there is a letterhead memorandum captioned as above relative to information received from LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD on September 25, 1961, and on October 2, 1961, by SA GEORGE J. MC QUAID. One copy of letterhead memorandum has been disseminated locally to OSI, Cincinnati, Ohio.\n\nFor completion of the Bureau's file concerning matters relating to LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, the following is set forth:\n\nA newspaper article captioned Death and Funerals, L.R. \"PAT\" STRINGFIELD; decorated war hero\", appeared in the Cincinnati Enquirer, a newspaper of general circulation in the Greater Cincinnati, Ohio, area, dated June 15, 1960, reflects that LEONARD R. \"PAT\" STRINGFIELD, a much decorated veteran of World War I, and one of the chapter members of Chapter 1 of the disabled American Veterans in Cincinnati, died at his home, 2495 Harrison Avenue, at age 62.\n\nThis article further reflects that one of his sons, LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, Mariemont, is known nationally for his researches into the study of unidentified flying objects, and holds views on the subject which have attracted the attention of the Federal Government. The article identified Mr.\n\nC\n\n2 - Bureau (Enc. 5)\n1 - Cincinnati\n\nGJM:amt\n(4)\n\nREC- 69 62-83894\n\n64 OCT 31 1961\n\nCRIME RESEARCH"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CI 100-11671\n\nStringfield as an Advertising Executive of the DuBois Chemical Company, and further shows that his study of reports on flying saucers, however, have convinced him they are from other planets.\n\nAdditionally, a news article appeared in the Cincinnati Post and Times Star, a daily newspaper of general circulation in the Cincinnati, Ohio, area, under date of June 4, 1960, page 5, captioned, \"Tell Secrets on Saucers, Expert Says\", which article is set forth verbatim as follows:\n\n\"Leonard Stringfield, Cincinnati's flying saucer expert, believes the United States could take the space spotlight away from Russia by opening up secret files on unidentified flying objects.\n\n'It could be the start of co-operation among all governments of the world,' he says. 'If all governments would pool their information on unidentified flying objects and work in unison on this it would help to ease world tensions.'\n\nStringfield, advertising manager for DuBois Chemicals, Inc., believes the unidentified flying objects are from outer space and that they are controlled by intelligent beings who are observing earth.\n\n'I don't believe there is any hostile intent,' he said. 'I believe they have been using planets in our solar system for bases, even the moon. Astronomers for years have observed shifting spots on the moon.'\n\nStringfield said he believes U.S. Air Force secret files contain evidence 'or near evidence' that the objects are from outer space, but that officials are afraid that it would cause panic if released.\n\nForeign governments, too, have such evidence, he said, but are keeping it secret for the same reason.\n\nStringfield, who heads Cincinnati's Unidentified Flying Object Society, became interested in unidentified flying objects in 1945 while in the Air Force. He said\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"he saw a formation of them from a bomber.\n\nSince then he has served as a spotter for the Air Defense Command, published a magazine about the objects, and written a book on them.\"\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nCincinnati, Ohio\nOctober 17, 1961\n\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No. 100-11671\n\nRE: CIVILIAN RESEARCH, INTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS, LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, DIRECTOR, CINCINNATI, OHIO\n\nLeonard H. Stringfield, Advertising Manager, DuBois Chemical Company, Inc., 7th and Broadway, Cincinnati, Ohio, residence, 4412 Grove Avenue, Mariemont, Cincinnati, Ohio, advised on September 25, 1961, that he is active in unidentified flying objects research, that he has published a bulletin concerning these matters, that he is well known in this field, and that he has worked with the Air Defense Command concerning matters relating to unidentified flying objects.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that he recently appeared on a television program known as Impact News on television station WCPO-TV, Cincinnati, Ohio, appearing on Sunday, September 10, 1961, at which time he was questioned by a panel of three members concerning matters relating to unidentified flying objects.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that at approximately 9:00 A.M. on September 25, 1961, he had received an anonymous telephone call, being male caller, whose voice he described as firm, clear, and who spoke good English. The caller related that he had very important information to relate to Mr. Stringfield, whom he asked for by name in his call, relating to unidentified flying objects. Mr. Stringfield related that the caller\n\nTHIS IS LOANED TO YOU BY THE FBI, AND NEITHER IT NOR ITS CONTENTS ARE TO BE DISTRIBUTED OUTSIDE THE AGENCY TO WHICH LOANED.\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\nNOV 1961\n\nENCLOSURE\n62-83894\n426"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"stated in effect, \"We are calling all key and responsible people on this matter\", after the caller had established that he was speaking with Mr. Stringfield, which call was placed to Mr. Stringfield's place of employment, mentioned above, telephone GA 1-5100. The caller would not identify himself, and in the phone call alerted Mr. Stringfield to expect, \"the biggest flury of unidentified flying objects sightings as a result of Russian nuclear explosions in the one hundred megaton range\". Mr. Stringfield advised that the caller said to be prepared when confusion begins resulting from these sightings. The caller related that these sightings would be seen between certain dates, and that to the best of Mr. Stringfield's recollection, the caller stated, \"Mark these dates, October 15 to October 19, during which will be the greatest incident in UFO (Unidentified Flying Objects) activity over the years\". According to Mr. Stringfield, the caller remarked further, \"I'll remain in touch with you, and will call back after the nineteenth\".\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that the caller refused to identify himself, and according to Mr. Stringfield seemed to speak intelligently in the message he had to relate to Mr. Stringfield.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that he was concerned about this telephone call in that if there were any truth in the matter, and if such sightings should occur, that it may cause panic among the populous in this country, and that further, that the caller seemed to speak very seriously, and there was no indication in the caller's voice or message to indicate that it was a joke or a prank.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that it is not unusual that he receives telephone calls concerning unidentified objects, inasmuch as he, Stringfield, is authorized to report sightings of unidentified objects to the headquarters, Air Defense Command, at Columbus, Ohio. He stated further that it is not unusual that he might receive such a call inasmuch as he is publicly known as a person who is interested in matters relating to unidentified flying objects.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that he is an advisor to the National Investigations Committee on aerial phenomena, which committee is located on Connecticut\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Street, Washington, D.C., Major Donald Keyhoe, Director. Mr. Stringfield noted that the personnel of this committee are made up of civilian personnel.\n\nOn October 2, 1961, Mr. Stringfield advised the Cincinnati Office, FBI, Cincinnati, Ohio, that he had noted an article in the Sunday edition of the Cincinnati Enquirer, October 1, 1961, on page 1, section E, under the caption, \"Offbeat Washington\", which contained one paragraph, \"Some Defense Department bigwigs are apprehensive that Russia will climax its campaign of intimidation by a spectacular explosion in space--an immense nuclear blast visible to hundreds of millions of people. These officials believe that the Soviet Union has the capability of setting off such an explosion 200 miles or so above the earth where it could be seen from many countries.\"\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that the above paragraph was printed as a reprint from the Herald Tribune News Service, Washington, D.C., and that this article seemed to tie in well with what the caller had related to Mr. Stringfield in the anonymous telephone call on September 25, 1961.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nCincinnati, Ohio\nOctober 17, 1961\n\nIn Reply, Please Refer to\nFile No. 100-11671\n\nRE: CIVILIAN RESEARCH, INTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS, LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, DIRECTOR, CINCINNATI, OHIO\n\nLeonard H. Stringfield, Advertising Manager, DuBois Chemical Company, Inc., 7th and Broadway, Cincinnati, Ohio, residence, 4412 Grove Avenue, Mariemont, Cincinnati, Ohio, advised on September 25, 1961, that he is active in unidentified flying objects research, that he has published a bulletin concerning these matters, that he is well known in this field, and that he has worked with the Air Defense Command concerning matters relating to unidentified flying objects.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that he recently appeared on a television program known as Impact News on television station WCPO-TV, Cincinnati, Ohio, appearing on Sunday, September 10, 1961, at which time he was questioned by a panel of three members concerning matters relating to unidentified flying objects.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that at approximately 9:00 A.M. on September 25, 1961, he had received an anonymous telephone call, being male caller, whose voice he described as firm, clear, and who spoke good English. The caller related that he had very important information to relate to Mr. Stringfield, whom he asked for by name in his call, relating to unidentified flying objects. Mr. Stringfield related that the caller"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"stated in effect, \"We are calling all key and responsible people on this matter\", after the caller had established that he was speaking with Mr. Stringfield, which call was placed to Mr. Stringfield's place of employment, mentioned above, telephone GA 1-5100. The caller would not identify himself, and in the phone call alerted Mr. Stringfield to expect, \"the biggest flury of unidentified flying objects sightings as a result of Russian nuclear explosions in the one hundred megaton range\". Mr. Stringfield advised that the caller said to be prepared when confusion begins resulting from these sightings. The caller related that these sightings would be seen between certain dates, and that to the best of Mr. Stringfield's recollection, the caller stated, \"Mark these dates, October 15 to October 19, during which will be the greatest incident in UFO (Unidentified Flying Objects) activity over the years\". According to Mr. Stringfield, the caller remarked further, \"I'll remain in touch with you, and will call back after the nineteenth\".\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that the caller refused to identify himself, and according to Mr. Stringfield seemed to speak intelligently in the message he had to relate to Mr. Stringfield.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that he was concerned about this telephone call in that if there were any truth in the matter, and if such sightings should occur, that it may cause panic among the populous in this country, and that further,that the caller seemed to speak very seriously, and there was no indication in the caller's voice or message to indicate that it was a joke or a prank.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that it is not unusual that he receives telephone calls concerning unidentified objects, inasmuch as he, Stringfield, is authorized to report sightings of unidentified objects to the headquarters, Air Defense Command, at Columbus, Ohio. He stated further that it is not unusual that he might receive such a call inasmuch as he is publicly known as a person who is interested in matters relating to unidentified flying objects.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that he is an advisor to the National Investigations Committee on aerial phenomena , which committee is located on Connecticut"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Street, Washington, D.C., Major Donald Keyhoe, Director. Mr. Stringfield noted that the personnel of this committee are made up of civilian personnel.\n\nOn October 2, 1961, Mr. Stringfield advised the Cincinnati Office, FBI, Cincinnati, Ohio, that he had noted an article in the Sunday edition of the Cincinnati Enquirer, October 1, 1961, on page 1, section E, under the caption, \"Offbeat Washington\", which contained one paragraph, \"Some Defense Department bigwigs are apprehensive that Russia will climax its campaign of intimidation by a spectacular explosion in space--an immense nuclear blast visible to hundreds of millions of people. These officials believe that the Soviet Union has the capability of setting off such an explosion 200 miles or so above the earth where it could be seen from many countries.\"\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that the above paragraph was printed as a reprint from the Herald Tribune News Service, Washington, D.C., and that this article seemed to tie in well with what the caller had related to Mr. Stringfield in the anonymous telephone call on September 25, 1961."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nIn Reply, Please Refer to File No. 100-11671\nCincinnati, Ohio\nOctober 17, 1961\nRE: CIVILIAN RESEARCH, INTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS, LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, DIRECTOR, CINCINNATI, OHIO\n\nLeonard H. Stringfield, Advertising Manager, DuBois Chemical Company, Inc., 7th and Broadway, Cincinnati, Ohio, residence, 4412 Grove Avenue, Mariemont, Cincinnati, Ohio, advised on September 25, 1961, that he is active in unidentified flying objects research, that he has published a bulletin concerning these matters, that he is well known in this field, and that he has worked with the Air Defense Command concerning matters relating to unidentified flying objects.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that he recently appeared on a television program known as Impact News on television station WCPO-TV, Cincinnati, Ohio, appearing on Sunday, September 10, 1961, at which time he was questioned by a panel of three members concerning matters relating to unidentified flying objects.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that at approximately 9:00 A.M. on September 25, 1961, he had received an anonymous telephone call, being male caller, whose voice he described as firm, clear, and who spoke good English. The caller related that he had very important information to relate to Mr. Stringfield, whom he asked for by name in his call, relating to unidentified flying objects. Mr. Stringfield related that the caller\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nTHIS IS LOANED TO YOU BY THE FBI, AND NEITHER IT NOR ITS CONTENTS ARE TO BE DISTRIBUTED OUTSIDE THE AGENCY TO WHICH LOANED."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"stated in effect, \"We are calling all key and responsible people on this matter\", after the caller had established that he was speaking with Mr. Stringfield, which call was placed to Mr. Stringfield's place of employment, mentioned above, telephone GA 1-5100. The caller would not identify himself, and in the phone call alerted Mr. Stringfield to expect, \"the biggest flury of unidentified flying objects sightings as a result of Russian nuclear explosions in the one hundred megaton range\". Mr. Stringfield advised that the caller said to be prepared when confusion begins resulting from these sightings. The caller related that these sightings would be seen between certain dates, and that to the best of Mr. Stringfield's recollection, the caller stated, \"Mark these dates, October 15 to October 19, during which will be the greatest incident in UFO (Unidentified Flying Objects) activity over the years\". According to Mr. Stringfield, the caller remarked further, \"I'll remain in touch with you, and will call back after the nineteenth\".\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that the caller refused to identify himself, and according to Mr. Stringfield seemed to speak intelligently in the message he had to relate to Mr. Stringfield.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that he was concerned about this telephone call in that if there were any truth in the matter, and if such sightings should occur, that it may cause panic among the populous in this country, and that further,that the caller seemed to speak very seriously, and there was no indication in the caller's voice or message to indicate that it was a joke or a prank.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that it is not unusual that he receives telephone calls concerning unidentified objects, inasmuch as he, Stringfield, is authorized to report sightings of unidentified objects to the headquarters, Air Defense Command, at Columbus, Ohio. He stated further that it is not unusual that he might receive such a call inasmuch as he is publicly known as a person who is interested in matters relating to unidentified flying objects.\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that he is an advisor to the National Investigations Committee on aerial phenomena , which committee is located on Connecticut"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Street, Washington, D.C., Major Donald Keyhoe, Director. Mr. Stringfield noted that the personnel of this committee are made up of civilian personnel.\n\nOn October 2, 1961, Mr. Stringfield advised the Cincinnati Office, FBI, Cincinnati, Ohio, that he had noted an article in the Sunday edition of the Cincinnati Enquirer, October 1, 1961, on page 1, section E, under the caption, \"Offbeat Washington\", which contained one paragraph, \"Some Defense Department bigwigs are apprehensive that Russia will climax its campaign of intimidation by a spectacular explosion in space--an immense nuclear blast visible to hundreds of millions of people. These officials believe that the Soviet Union has the capability of setting off such an explosion 200 miles or so above the earth where it could be seen from many countries.\"\n\nMr. Stringfield advised that the above paragraph was printed as a reprint from the Herald Tribune News Service, Washington, D.C., and that this article seemed to tie in well with what the caller had related to Mr. Stringfield in the anonymous telephone call on September 25, 1961."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Cincinnati, Ohio October 17, 1961 In Reply, Please Refer to File No. 100-11671 RE: CIVILIAN RESEARCH, INTERPLANETARY FLYING OBJECTS, LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD, DIRECTOR, CINCINNATI, OHIO Leonard H. Stringfield, Advertising Manager, DuBois Chemical Company, Inc., 7th and Broadway, Cincinnati, Ohio, residence, 4412 Grove Avenue, Mariemont, Cincinnati, Ohio, advised on September 25, 1961, that he is active in unidentified flying objects research, that he has published a bulletin concerning these matters, that he is well known in this field, and that he has worked with the Air Defense Command concerning matters relating to unidentified flying objects. Mr. Stringfield advised that he recently appeared on a television program known as Impact News on television station WCPO-TV, Cincinnati, Ohio, appearing on Sunday, September 10, 1961, at which time he was questioned by a panel of three members concerning matters relating to unidentified flying objects. Mr. Stringfield advised that at approximately 9:00 A.M. on September 25, 1961, he had received an anonymous telephone call, being male caller, whose voice he described as firm, clear, and who spoke good English. The caller related that he had very important information to relate to Mr. Stringfield, whom he asked for by name in his call, relating to unidentified flying objects. Mr. Stringfield related that the caller"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"stated in effect, \"We are calling all key and responsible people on this matter\", after the caller had established that he was speaking with Mr. Stringfield, which call was placed to Mr. Stringfield's place of employment, mentioned above, telephone GA 1-5100. The caller would not identify himself, and in the phone call alerted Mr. Stringfield to expect, \"the biggest flury of unidentified flying objects sightings as a result of Russian nuclear explosions in the one hundred megaton range\". Mr. Stringfield advised that the caller said to be prepared when confusion begins resulting from these sightings. The caller related that these sightings would be seen between certain dates, and that to the best of Mr. Stringfield's recollection, the caller stated, \"Mark these dates, October 15 to October 19, during which will be the greatest incident in UFO (Unidentified Flying Objects) activity over the years\". According to Mr. Stringfield, the caller remarked further, \"I'll remain in touch with you, and will call back after the nineteenth\". Mr. Stringfield advised that the caller refused to identify himself, and according to Mr. Stringfield seemed to speak intelligently in the message he had to relate to Mr. Stringfield. Mr. Stringfield advised that he was concerned about this telephone call in that if there were any truth in the matter, and if such sightings should occur, that it may cause panic among the populous in this country, and that further, that the caller seemed to speak very seriously, and there was no indication in the caller's voice or message to indicate that it was a joke or a prank. Mr. Stringfield advised that it is not unusual that he receives telephone calls concerning unidentified objects, inasmuch as he, Stringfield, is authorized to report sightings of unidentified objects to the headquarters, Air Defense Command, at Columbus, Ohio. He stated further that it is not unusual that he might receive such a call inasmuch as he is publicly known as a person who is interested in matters relating to unidentified flying objects. Mr. Stringfield advised that he is an advisor to the National Investigations Committee on aerial phenomena, which committee is located on Connecticut Street, Washington, D.C., Major Donald Keyhoe, Director. Mr. Stringfield noted that the personnel of this committee are made up of civilian personnel. -2-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On October 2, 1961, Mr. Stringfield advised the Cincinnati Office, FBI, Cincinnati, Ohio, that he had noted an article in the Sunday edition of the Cincinnati Enquirer, October 1, 1961, on page 1, section E, under the caption, \"Offbeat Washington\", which contained one paragraph, \"Some Defense Department bigwigs are apprehensive that Russia will climax its campaign of intimidation by a spectacular explosion in space--an immense nuclear blast visible to hundreds of millions of people. These officials believe that the Soviet Union has the capability of setting off such an explosion 200 miles or so above the earth where it could be seen from many countries.\" Mr. Stringfield advised that the above paragraph was printed as a reprint from the Herald Tribune News Service, Washington, D.C., and that this article seemed to tie in well with what the caller had related to Mr. Stringfield in the anonymous telephone call on September 25, 1961. -3-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT Memorandum TO: W. C. Sullivan DATE: 10/2/62 FROM: W. R. Wannall SUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (FLYING SAUCERS) At this time there appears to be no necessity for additional instructions for the field or insertion in the FBI Handbook or Manuals relative to flying saucers. Memorandum 10/2/61 pointed out that our policy concerning unidentified flying objects is to conduct no investigation but immediately refer facts to the Air Force (Bureau Bulletin Number 57, 10/1/47); that SAC Letter Number 38, 3/25/49, reiterated this policy and set out data desired by Air Force to be obtained when complaint received; that SAC Letter Number 83, 8/29/52, again pointed out our policy; that Air Force on 11/12/57 assured that Bureau would be advised if any developments in this field of interest to us; and that there appeared to be no necessity for further instructions to field or insertion in agents' Handbook or Manual of Instructions of our policy relating to flying saucers. During the past 12 months only one complaint regarding flying saucers has been received. The facts in this complaint were immediately referred to the Air Force. ACTION: For your information. There appears to be no necessity for additional instructions for the field or insertion in the FBI Handbook or Manuals relative to flying saucers. This matter will again be reviewed on or about 10/1/63. 62-83894 1 - Mr. Sullivan 1 - Wannall 1 - Wacks JFW:jes:bjs (4) REC-11 62-83894-427 OCT 8 1962 56 OCT 8 1962"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC-D INSPECTOR ESP., N.I., C.R. BRANCH OCT 2 10 47 AM '62 [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC- 36 62-83894-428\n\nJune 27, 1963\n\nMr. R. G. Mastroberte\n427 Washington Street\nCarlstadt, New Jersey\n\nDear Mr. Mastroberte:\n\nYour letter postmarked June 24th has been received.\n\nMatters relating to unidentified flying objects do not fall within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. You may wish to communicate with the Foreign Technology Division, U. S. Air Force, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, for such assistance as may be forthcoming.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nMAILED 31\nJUN 27 1963\nCOMM-FBI\n\nNOTE: No record of correspondent in Bufiles. Referral as noted suggested by the Liaison Section.\n\nRMW:bis\n(3)\n\nRECD MAIL ROOM FBI\n\nMAIL ROOM ☐ TELETYPE UNIT ☐"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"427 Washington Street\nCarlstadt, New Jersey\n\nF.B.I.\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nDear Sirs:\n\nI would appreciate it very much if you could give me the answers to two questions. The questions are as follows:\n\n(1) Are you under orders to withold information dealing with unidentified flying objects and the occupants therein? If not, are the files on these cases open to public inspection?\n\n(2) Are you under orders to withold information dealing with mysterious disappearanes, especially those linked with the afore mentioned ufos? If not, are the files on these cases open to public inspection?\n\n(2a) If the answer to question #1, part a is no could you please answer the following:\nHas a flying saucer, or interplanetary craft of any kind, been captured by the US Government? If yes, were there any occupants and where were they taken.\n\nAny help would be welcomed.\n\nYours truly,\n\nRG Mastroberte\nDirector: FSRO\n\nREC- 36 62-83894-428\n8 JUL 2 1963\n\nCORRESPONDENCE\n8-RMW"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dear Sir;\n\nCould you tell me if the Federal Bureau of Investigation has an official interest in reports of unidentified flying saucers?\n\nI would also like to know if the FBI assists the USAF Project Bluebook in its investigation of unidentified flying objects.\n\nThank you,\n\nJohn L. Black\n2688 Bell Way\nSacramento 21, California\n\nREC- 23 62-83894-429\n12 JUL 19 1963\nCORRESPONDENCE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D-CORR & TOURS\nFBI\nJul 15 9 19 AM '63\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n3 JUL 15 1963"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-429\nREC'D\nMr. John L. Black\n2688 Ball Way\nSacramento 21, California\nJuly 17, 1963\nDear Mr. Black:\nYour letter postmarked July 10, 1963, has been received.\nFor your information, the investigation of unidentified flying objects does not come within the scope of this Bureau's authority. I am, however, referring a copy of your letter to the Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General, Department of the Air Force, Building Tempo E, Fourth and Adams Drive, S. W., Washington 25, D. C., for whatever assistance he might be able to render.\nSincerely yours,\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\nNOTE: Correspondent is not identifiable in Bufiles. Copy of incoming sent by form referral to OSI.\nCJJ:mek\n(3)\nMAILED 25\nJUL 17 1963\nCOMM-FBI\nTolson\nBelmont\nMohr\nCasper\nCallahan\nConrad\nDeLoach\nEvans\nGale\nRosen\nSullivan\nTavel\nTrotter\nTele. Room\nHolmes\nGandy\nMAIL ROOM\nTELETYPE UNIT\n6 3 JUL 25 1963\nJUL 17 2 30 PM '63\nFBI\nRECD MAIL ROOM"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC- 31\n62-83894-430\nLarry William\nSeptember 27, 1963\nEX-116\nBorn 2-23-38 Shenandoah Va.\nSoc. Sec. # 230-44-9093\nMr. Larry W. Bryant\n5603 Madison Avenue\nNewport News, Virginia 23605\nDear Mr. Bryant:\nWhen Mr. Hoover returned to the office, he read your letter of September 17th.\nHe instructed me to advise you that the confidential nature of our files will preclude complying with your request.\nSincerely yours,\nHelen W. Gandy\nSecretary\nMAILED 31\nSEP 27 1963\nCOMM-FBI\nSEP 27 2 40 PM '63\nRECD-READING ROOM\nFBI\n1 - Norfolk (62-720)\nReurairtel 9-24-63.\nNOTE: The Norfolk Office advised that correspondent is employed as editorial clerk at the United States Army Transportation School, Fort Eustis, Virginia. He has been writing to various agencies concerning unidentified flying objects (UFO). The G-2 Section of Second Army, Fort Meade, Maryland is conducting a background check of Bryant because he has directed voluminous correspondence to military officials in the area and because he is employed by the Army.\nCJJ:jls\n(4)\n59 OCT 8 1963\nMAIL ROOM\nTELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD 3 (Rev. 12-13-56)\n\nFBI\n\nDate: 9/24/63\n\nTransmit the following in ____________________\n(Type in plain text or code)\n\nVia AIRTEL REGULAR\n(Priority or Method of Mailing)\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM: SAC, NORFOLK 62-720 -C-\n\nSUBJECT: LARRY W. BRYANT\nNEWPORT NEWS, VIRGINIA\nRESEARCH (CORRESPONDENCE AND TOURS)\n\nRe Buairtel to Norfolk, 9/20/63.\n\nA review of Norfolk files reflects that BRYANT directed a letter to the Commanding Officer, Cape Charles Air Force Station, Cape Charles, Virginia, 8/7/58, requesting information concerning unidentified flying objects (UFO). A copy of that correspondence was directed to the FBI, Norfolk, by Cape Charles Air Force Station officials.\n\nRecords also reflect that BRYANT had directed a letter to the FBI, 2/1/59, which correspondence was answered by the Bureau, 2/9/59. BRYANT directed a letter to Commanding Officer, Headquarters, Aircraft Fleet, Marine Force Atlantic, U. S. Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia, 6/15/60, requesting information concerning UFOs. That agency submitted a copy of that correspondence to the FBI, Norfolk.\n\nFiles further reflect that BRYANT directed a letter to Commander, U. S. Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia, 8/8/63, concerning restrictions that command has against the publicizing of flying saucer sighting reports made by Navy personnel. A copy of this correspondence was directed to the FBI Office, Norfolk, Virginia.\n\nThere is also in file a copy of a letter received by Sheriff's Office, Sussex County, Virginia, Stony Creek, Virginia, in which BRYANT requested information concerning UFOs. This correspondence was postmarked at Fort Eustis, Virginia, on 7/23/63.\n\n(3) - Bureau\n1 - Norfolk\nJSC:jw (4)\n\nApproved: ____ Sent ____ M Per ____\nSpecial Agent in Charge"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NF 62-720\n\nThis letter was forwarded to the Norfolk Office by the Richmond Division.\n\nOn 9/17/63, Mrs. BEVERLY EARLEY, Secretary to Personnel Officer, Civilian Personnel Records Section, Fort Eustis, Virginia, advised SA JOHN S. CASTLES that files in her possession reflect that LARRY WILLIAM BRYANT, who was born, 2/23/38, Shenandoah, Page County, Virginia, and who has Social Security Number 230-44-9093, was employed at Fort Eustis as a clerk-typist on 5/22/58 and is presently employed as editorial clerk (typing) Transportability Branch, Technical Manuals Division, Directorate of Training Literature, United States Army Transportation School, Fort Eustis, Virginia. Mrs. EARLEY said her records reflect that BRYANT resides 5603 Madison Avenue, Newport News, Virginia, and formerly resided at 1002 Arnold Street, Newport News, Virginia.\n\nOn 9/17/63, BRYANT was interviewed by SA JOHN S. CASTLES in Room 206, United States Army Transportation School, Fort Eustis, Virginia. BRYANT advised that he had become interested in UFO while he was a member of the Ground Observer Corps for the Civil Defense in the old City of Warwick, Virginia. He said since this time he has become intensely interested in UFOs and has done considerable research through reading and writing and obtaining information through directing letters to different military agencies and civilian agencies who have reported sighting UFOs in the past. He said his interest in UFOs is a personal one and has no official status with his current job. He said presently he has prepared a research paper on UFOs and has directed it to Department of Defense for clearance so that he might offer it for publication to a magazine or newspaper. He said this research paper is an essay-type paper.\n\nWhile being questioned, BRYANT stated that he had previously written to the FBI concerning UFOs and asked did the interviewing agent know the date which he wrote, to which he was advised that it was in 1959 that he had directed a letter to the FBI.\n\nAt the conclusion of the interview, BRYANT asked what was going to be done with the information obtained from the interview, to which he was told that a memorandum would be prepared for the file."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NF 62-720\n\nFor the information of the Bureau on 9/17/63, Lt. GILBERT KLEINKNECHT, Provost Marshal's Office, Fort Monroe, Virginia, advised SA CASTLES that the G-2 Section of Second Army, Fort George G. Meade, Maryland, has conducted a background check of BRYANT, since BRYANT has directed voluminous correspondence to military officials in the area and because BRYANT is employed by the Department of the Army.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Airtel\n\nREC-31\n\nTo: SAC, Norfolk\n\nFrom: Director, FBI\n\nLARRY W. BRYANT\nNEWPORT NEWS, VIRGINIA\nRESEARCH (CORRESPONDENCE AND TOURS)\nBUDED 9-25-63\n\nEnclosed are two copies of a letter from the above individual. You should submit a summary of information in your files pertaining to Larry W. Bryant. This should include an account of his interview with Special Agent John S. Castles.\n\nThis information should reach the Bureau, under the above caption, no later than 9-25-63.\n\nEnclosures (2)\n\nFollow-up made for 9-25-63\n\nNOTE: Bufiles indicate one prior letter to Mr. Bryant on 2-9-59 advising him that we have no authority to investigate reports on unidentified flying objects. Form in-absence reply sent, no yellow or abstract prepared.\n\nCJJ:nlb (6)\n\nTolson, Belmont, Mohr, Casper, Callahan, Conrad, DeLoach, Evans, Gale, Rosen, Sullivan, Tavel, Trotter, Tele. Room, Holmes, Gandy\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5603 Madison Avenue\nNewport News, Virginia 23605\nSeptember 17, 1963\n\n\nDirector\nU. S. Federal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\n This morning, your Newport News agent John S. Castles visited\nme at my office at Fort Eustis, Virginia, and questioned me about\n10 minutes regarding my interest in reports of sightings of Unidenti-\nfied Flying Objects (UFO) -- namely a letter which I wrote to you in\n1959 and two of my recent letters to local state and Federal agencies\nregarding the role of those agencies in processing UFO reports.\n\n Mr. Castles stated that the objective of this interview was to\ndetermine my official identity and my motive for writing as a private\ncitizen the letters in question. He also told me he was going to\nprepare a \"memorandum for the files\" on this interview. I request\nthat you furnish me a copy of this memorandum or report.\n\n Yours very truly,\n\n Larry W. Bryant\n Larry W. Bryant\n\nREC- 31 62-83894 431\n\nMAILED 31\nSEP 20 1963\nCOMM-FBI\n\nREC'D - READING ROOM\nFBI\nSEP 30 1963\nCORRESPONDENCE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-DIRECTOR FBI\nSEP 20 12 03 PM '63\nRECD MAIL ROOM FBI\nSEP 20 1 13 PM '63\nSEP 20 11 48 AM '63\nRECD-READING ROOM FBI\nSEP 18 1 28 PM '63\nRECORDS BRANCH\nSEP 18 1963"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nMAY 1962 EDITION\nGSA GEN. REG. NO. 27\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : W. C. Sullivan\nFROM : W. R. Wannall\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n(FLYING SAUCERS)\n\nDATE: 10/4/63\n\n1 - Belmont\n1 - Sullivan\n1 - Wannall\n1 - Wacks\n\nThere appears to be no advantage to our continuing our\nyearly review of captioned matter.\n\nIn 1958 we adopted the practice of once a year reviewing\ncomplaints received concerning existence of flying saucers for the\npurpose of determining whether instructions in addition to those\nalready issued to the field were necessary. The last memorandum\ndated 10/2/62 pointed out that our policy concerning unidentified\nflying objects was to conduct no investigation when received in\nthe field but the field should submit the facts immediately to\nthe Air Force. Our SAC Letters dated in 1949 and in 1952 emphasized\nthe afore-mentioned policy and it does not appear that at this\ntime further instructions to the field are necessary.\n\nDuring the past 12 months we have received no complaints\nregarding flying saucers and during the past 24 months only one\ncomplaint was received, the facts of which were immediately\nreferred to the Air Force.\n\nACTION:\n\nSince it does not appear that continuation of our yearly\nreview of the flying saucer situation is warranted, no further\nanalysis or review of matters coming within this field will be\nconducted in the future. Action with respect to any complaints\nreceived, of course, will follow our policy.\n\nJFW:klw\n(5)\n\n62-83894\n\nREC- 103\n62-83894 432\nOCT 8 1963\n53 OCT 11 1963"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D - SULLIVAN FBI - JUSTICE\nOCT 9 2 32 PM '63\nREC'D DOM INTELL DIV.\nOCT 4 5 13 PM '63\nINSPECTOR REC-D ESPN.L.L.C.R.BRANCH\nOCT 7 4 20 PM '63\nREC'D BELMONT FBI-JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Have just sent the original to addressee. It might be well to see that it don't get into the wrong hands.\nSTORM-JADE MOUNTAIN MINES\nTHE LOST MAYAN JADE MINES\nCHIRIACO SUMMIT VIA INDIO, CALIFORNIA\n22nd Nov. 1963\n\nSTORM-JADE\n\"Treasure Jewel of the Southwest\"\nNephrites\nJadeites\nJadeitic-jades\n\n\"ROCKHOUND RARITIES\"\nPre-Jades\nMeta-Jadeites\nOrphicalcite\nCalifornite\nPrecious Epidote\nThulites\nPastelites\nCabbing Garnets\nAgatized Opalite\nColor & Wood Agates\nSpiderweb-lace Agate\nJasper-Agate\nCabbing Feldspars\nColor Chalcednies\nColor Dolomites\nMoss-Adventurine\nRose & Crystal Quartz\nVerde Antigue\nSerpentine\nPyroxenite\nWonderstone\nMagnetite\nColor Hemitite\nGlossularite Crystals\nDiopside Crystals\nActinolite\nAll Combinations\n\nSTORM-JADE BUILDING & DECORATIVE STONE\nMassive Epidote\nColor Dolomites\nLight \"Driftwood\"\nPolka-Dot Monzonite\nColor Iron Ores\n\nNational Aeronautics And Space Administration\nOffice of Scientific And Technical Information\nWashington, D. C.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nI qualify myself as a layman, and amateur scientist in my own fields who has read your public documents, \"Nuclear Rocket Propulsion,\" etc. I am also a person who has seen several unidentified flying objects. One of huge saucer shape performed certain feats at incredible speeds, far beyond the power of any propulsion system which we currently use. I am also familiar with the reported sightings of such craft for many centuries and in various places. I am also aware that the connecting link between energy and matter, the proton nucleus of hydrogen, was probably created by the electro-magnetic fusion of radio galaxies in an original electron atmosphere. Quite naturally I have at various times researched pertinent subjects in an attempt to figure out how such interstellar space craft operate. Perhaps I'm like a lot of others who can't see the forest because of the trees. Yet I may have hit upon a workable system capable of being created with our present technology, materials and methods. In the interest of the United States first, I pass these on to you. They are embodied in a treatise upon which I am working titled \"The Worlds And You In The Making.\" I quote:\n\n\"Were the unseen passengers of these space craft then borne along on atomic fusion motors which burned elemental matter, hydrogen, from interstellar space? Could they use a hydrogen motor flow sheet which begins with hydrogen intakes and suction compressors into a liquid hydrogen fuel tank? That from this continually unlimited fuel reserve second stage compressors convert the hydrogen into an expanding gas fed into a second semi-ready heater tank, with compressors upon each end to force the semi-ready fuel flow from the tank's center. And into a \"pod\" of four thermal reactors angled to fire to a central point behind outside thrust plates similiar to the feed end of a gaseous cavity reactor? That into this superheated hydrogen gas vortex another thermal reactor fires fissioning uranium vapor thereby creating the heat for controlled hydrogen fusion?\n\n\"Or is it possible that hydrogen fusion motors are composed of so simple a thing as the four thermal reactors angled to fire to a central point closely behind the outside\n\n-- over --\n\nREFERENCE:-- U. S. Bureau of Mines 1961 Minerals Yearbook, Vol. 3\nREC- 39 62-83894 433\n4 DEC 5 1963"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"page two.\n\nthrust plates. And that into the vastly superheated hydrogen gas\nvortex side streams of hydrogen are impacted together by\naccelerator guns to cause controlled fusion? Is it possible that\na saucer shaped craft with such motors fore and aft and upon each\nside could hover, set down and take off upon the downward thrust\nof the upper exhausting reactors alone and otherwise perform such\ninstant changes in speed and direction as to leave human passengers\nunaffected by gravity considerations? Obviously these space\ntravelers must have surpassed our own evolutionary stage of\ndevelopement by thousands of years. They were as far ahead of us\nwith their sight-barrier-breaking space craft as our own jet planes\nare ahead of the Pharoh boats of five thousand years ago.\"\n\nAll this might boil down to the following concept combinations\nwhich involve (1) four thermal reactors fire to one point (2)\nagainst an outside thrust plate from behind and similiar in\nmodified concept to the feed end of a gaseous cavity reactor, and,\n(3) into which superheated hydrogen vortex fissioning unrenium\nvapor is fed to cause controlled hydrogen fusion for propulsive\npower, or into which vortex streams of impacting hydrogen atoms\nare fired by accelerator guns.\n\nA rough sketch, sufficient to convey the idea might look like\nthis:\n\n[diagram labels: Thermal reactors; heavy tank; U235; gaseous cavity reactor pattern; thrust plate; steering fins by release of pressure]\n\nIn this critical time, and even if the concept only partly\nworks, it may result, militarily, in being able to put an atomic\nwarhead on Moscow in a matter of minutes instead of hours.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\n[signature]\nBarry Storm\nCalif"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC-18 62-83894-434 January 22, 1964\n\nMr. Ray Montello\n2201 Rockefeller Road\nWickliffe, Ohio 44092\n\nDear Mr. Montello:\n\nI have received your letter of January 15th.\n\nIn response to your inquiry, I cannot speak for the Central Intelligence Agency; however, the FBI has not conducted an investigation such as you mentioned inasmuch as this would not come within our investigative jurisdiction.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nMAILED 10 JAN 22 1964 COMM-FBI\n\nNOTE: Correspondent is not identifiable in Bufiles.\n\nSAW:med\n(3)\n\nTolson Belmont Mohr Casper Callahan Conrad DeLoach Evans Gale Rosen Sullivan Tavel Trotter Tele. Room Holmes Gandy\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nJanuary 22, 1964\n\nMr. Ray Montello\n2201 Rockefeller Road\nWickliffe, Ohio 44092\n\nDear Mr. Montello:\n\n[illegible]\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nMAILED 10 JAN 22 1964 COMM-FBI\n\nNOTE: Correspondent is not identifiable in Bufiles.\n\nSAW:med\n(3)\n\nJAN 22 5 25 PM '64\nRECEIVED DIRECTOR\nF B I"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2201 Rockefeller Rd.\nWickliffe, Ohio 44092\nJan. 15, 1964\n\nFBI\nOffice of Public Information\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nDear Sir;\n\nA research group that I am in is presently engaged in the study of the subject of UFOs (Unidentified Flying Objects), sometimes ludicrously termed \"flying saucers\".\n\nSince our research takes us into every aspect of the subject, certain rumors and statements appear which we feel justify an examination to the fullest. One such statement is that, certain federal agencies, namely the FBI and CIA, have carried on private investigations of UFOs and/or that such agencies have, at times, worked in conjunction with the Air Force on its own study of the subject. Another such statement is that, agents of the intelligence bureaus (FBI and CIA) have, at times, pressured private citizens to keep quiet about the \"mysterious objects\" that they saw.\n\nMy group would be very glad if your agency would either confirm or deny the above statements regarding, of coarse, only the FBI and its agents (a similar letter to this will be written to the CIA). Your answer will be greatly appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nRay Montello\nRay Montello\n\nCORRESPONDENCE\n\nack 1-22-64 SAW:med"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D-CORR. & TOURS FBI JAN 20 9 21 AM '64\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"P 8XJTW@\\Z @\nFBI WASH DC\n3:06 AM MST DEFERRED 4/27/64 JNS\nTO DIRECTOR\nFROM ALBUQUERQUE 62-1028 3P\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT, SOCORRO, N.M., APRIL TWENTYFOUR SIXTYFOUR\nINFORMATION CONCERNING.\n\nRE ALBUQUERQUE TEL FOUR TWENTYFIVE LAST.\n\nOSI, ALBUQUERQUE ADVISES INCIDENT NOT KNOWN TO BE CONNECTED\nWITH MILITARY OR OPERATION CLOUD GAP.\n\nAN ADDITIONAL INCIDENT HAS BEEN REPORTED AS HAPPENING AT\nONE AM, FOUR TWENTYSIX LAST, AT LA MADERIA, N.M., ABOUT SEVENTY MILES\nNORTH OF SANTA FE, N.M.\n\nCAPTAIN MARTIN VIGIL, NMSP, ESPANOLA, N.M., ADVISES HE\nINTERVIEWED ANLY KNOWN WITNESS, ORLANDO GALLEGOS, AGE THIRTYFIVE, SOBER\nAND FRIGHTENED, OF SANTA FE, N.M. ORLANDO WAS VISITING HIS FATHER\nFRANK GALLEGOS AT LA MADERIA, ORLANDO WENT OUT TO TEND SOME\nNOISY HORSES AT ABOUT ONE AM, FOUR TWENTYSIX LAST AND NOTED,\nLOCATED ABOUT THREE HUNDRED FEET FROM HOUSE, SOMETHING SHAPED LIKE A\nBUTANE TANK, POSSIBLY TWELVE TO FOURTEEN FEET HIGH, AND \"LONG AS\nA TELEPHONE POLE\". APPARENTYLY ON THE GROUND AND SURRONDED WITH\nEND PAGE ONE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\nBLUE WHITE FLAME, WHICH APPEARED TO COME FROM PORT HOLES.\n\nHE WATCHED SCENE FOR ABOUT ONE MINUTE, WHEN FLAME WENT OUT.\nOBJECT NOT NOTED TO MOVE, WAS SILENT AT ALL TIMES, ORLANDO WNET\nINTO HOUSE, TOLD FATHER, WHO LAUGHED AT HIM. NEW MORNING HE\nVISISTED SITE., SAW SMOLDERING AREA. LATER IN DAY SAW A STATE POLICE\nOFFICER AND RELATED INCIDENT TO HIM.\n\nCAPTAIN VIGIL CONTINUED THAT HE CHECKED SITE AT SEVEN THIRTY PM\nFOUR TWENTYSIX LAST, NOTED SCORCHED CIRCULAR AREA ABOUT THIRTY TO\nFORTY FEET IN DIAMETER. HE NOTED ONE RECTANGULAR, V SHAPED\nINDENTATION IN GROUND, EIGHT BY TWELVE INCHES, AND ABOUT THREE\nTO FOUR INCHES DEEP. A FELLOW OFFICER, WHO WAS THERE EARLIER,\nPOINTED TO PLACES@ OF THREE MORE INDENTATIONS, INDICATING THE\nINDENTATIONS WERE RECTANGULAR.\n\nCAPTAIN VIGIL FURTHER STATED HE SAW SEVERAL SMOOTH\nCIRCULAR PRINTS ON GROUND ABOUT THREE AND ONE HALF INCHES IN\nDIAMETER AT SITE.\n\nNO OTHER WITNESSES KNOWN TO HAVE OBSERVED THE OBJECT.\n\nPROPER MILITARY AUTHORITIES AT KERTLAND AFB, ALBUQUERQUE\nEND PAGE TWO"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ADVISED. NO INVESTIGATION BEING CONDUCTED BY FBI, ALBUQUERQUE.\nLIAISON BEING MAINTAINED.\n\nMILITARY OFFICERS CONTACTED ADVISE THE TWO INCIDENTS REPORTED\nARE NOT A PART OF A MILITARY EXERCISE TO THEIR KNOWLEDGE AND TO\nDATE HAVE NOEXPLANATION.\n\nBUREAU WILL BE ADVISED OF ANY PERTENENT DEVELOPMENTS.\n\nEND\n\nLLD\n\nFBI WASH DC\n\nP\n\nCC-Mr. DeLoach"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":225,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":226,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI ALBUQUEE\n537 PM MST URGENT 4-25-64 RGL\nTO DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM SAC, ALBUQUERQUE 62-NEW\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT, SOCORRO, N.M. APR TWENTY FOUR, SIXTYFOUR\nINFORMATION CONCERNING.\n\nINFORMATION RECEIVED APR TWENTY FOUR AND TWENTY FIVE, FROM LONNIE ZAMORA, CONSIDERED SOBER, DEPENDABLE, MATURE, NOT OF FANTASY, OFFICER OF POLICE DEPARTMENT SOCORRO, N.M. THAT AT ABOUT FIVE FIFTY PM MST, WHILE IN SOUTH AREA OF SOCORRO NOTED FLAME IN SKY TO SOUTHWEST, WHICH HE DECIDED TO CHECK OUT IN BELIEF DYNAMITE SHACK IN AREA HAD BLOWN UP.\n\nWHILE TRAVELING IN ISOLATED AREA APPROXMATELY ONE MILE SOUTH AREA OF SOCORRO, NOTED IN DEPRESSION ABOUT EIGHT HUNDRED FEET AWAY WHITISH OBJECT WHICH, UPON GLANCING AT SAME, APPEARED TO BE OVERTURNED AUTOMOBILE. TWO PERSONS IN APPARENT WHITE COVERALLS WERE ADJACENT TO OBJECT.\n\nTHEN TRAVELED OVER ROUGH ROAD TO SPOT ABOUT ONE HUNDRED THREE FEET FROM OBJECT AND ABOUT TWENTY TO TWENTY FIVE FEET HIGHER. NO PERSONS VISIBLE. HEARD TWO OR THREE LOUD THUMPS, LESS THAN A SECOND APART, THEN WITH A ROAR AND BLUISH AND ORANGE FLAMES, OBJECT SLOWLY VERTICALLY ROSE TO ABOUT CAR HEIGHT, THEN NOISE AND FLAME STOPPED AND OBJECT TOOK OFF AT HIGH SPEED IN STRAIGHT LINE AND ALMOST HOROZONTALLY TO DISAPPEAR OVER DISTANT MOUNTAIN.\n\nZAMORA, GREATLY FRIGHTENED, RADIOED HIS OBSERVATIONS AND NMSP SERGEANT AND SOCORRO COUNTY UNDERSHERIFF, QUICKLY ON SCENE, NOTED FOUR SMALL IRREGULARLY SHAPED SMOULDERING AREAS AND FOUR REGULAR DEPRESSED AREAS APPROXIMATELY SIXTEEN BY SIX INCHES IN END PAGE ONE\nMR. MOHR FOR THE DIRECTOR"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":227,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":228,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECTANGULAR TYPE PATTERN AVERAGING ABOUT TWELVE FEET APART.\n\nZAMORA STATES OBJECT WAS OVAL SHAPED, SIMILAR TO FOOTBALL, POSSIBLY TWENTY FEET LONG, AND HAD A RED INSIGNIA ABOUT THIRTY INCHES HIGH AND TWO FEET WIDE, CENTERED ON OBJECT. NO OTHER WITNESSES KNOWN TO NOISE, FLAME OR OBJECT.\n\nCAPTAIN R. T. HOLDER, UP RANGE COMMANDER, STALLION RANGE CENTER, SOCORRO, N.M., ADVISED AT ONCE APRIL TWENTY FOUR AND IS HANDLING.\n\nMILITARY PRESENTLY CONDUCTING OPERATION KNOWN AS CLOUD GAP WHICH IS JOINT OPERATION DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND ARMY CONTROL, DISARMAMENT AGENCY IN SOUTHWEST STATES INCLUDING NEW MEXICO. NOT KNOWN IF ABOVE INCIDENT RELATES TO CLOUD GAP.\n\nCONSIDERABLE INTEREST OF PRESS IN MATTER. ALBUQUERQUE CONDUCTING NO INVESTIGATION, IS MAINTAINING LIAISON WITH MILITARY. BUREAU WILL BE ADVISED OF ANY PERTINENT DEVELOPMENTS.\nEND\nWA NHH\nFBI WASH DC\nTUP\ncc De Loach"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":229,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI ALBUQUEE\n537 PM MST URGENT 4-25-64 RGL\nTO DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM SAC, ALBUQUERQUE 62-NEW\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT, SOCORRO, N.M. APR TWENTY FOUR, SIXTYFOUR\nINFORMATION CONCERNING.\n\nINFORMATION RECEIVED APR TWENTY FOUR AND TWENTY FIVE, FROM LONNIE ZAMORA, CONSIDERED SOBER, DEPENDABLE, MATURE, NOT OF FANTASY, OFFICER OF POLICE DEPARTMENT SOCORRO, N.M. THAT AT ABOUT FIVE FIFTY PM MST, WHILE IN SOUTH AREA OF SOCORRO NOTED FLAME IN SKY TO SOUTHWEST, WHICH HE DECIDED TO CHECK OUT IN BELIEF DYNAMITE SHACK IN AREA HAD BLOWN UP.\n\nWHILE TRAVELING IN ISOLATED AREA APPROXMATELY ONE MILE SOUTH AREA OF SOCORRO, NOTED IN DEPRESSION ABOUT EIGHT HUNDRED FEET AWAY WHITISH OBJECT WHICH, UPON GLANCING AT SAME, APPEARED TO BE OVERTURNED AUTOMOBILE. TWO PERSONS IN APPARENT WHITE COVERALLS WERE ADJACENT TO OBJECT.\n\nTHEN TRAVELED OVER ROUGH ROAD TO SPOT ABOUT ONE HUNDRED THREE FEET FROM OBJECT AND ABOUT TWENTY TO TWENTY FIVE FEET HIGHER. NO PERSONS VISIBLE. HEARD TWO OR THREE LOUD THUMPS, LESS THAN A SECOND APART, THEN WITH A ROAR AND BLUISH AND ORANGE FLAMES, OBJECT SLOWLY VERTICALLY ROSE TO ABOUT CAR HEIGHT, THEN NOISE AND FLAME STOPPED AND OBJECT TOOK OFF AT HIGH SPEED IN STRAIGHT LINE AND ALMOST HOROZONTALLY TO DISAPPEAR OVER DISTANT MOUNTAIN.\n\nZAMORA, GREATLY FRIGHTENED, RADIOED HIS OBSERVATIONS AND NMSP SERGEANT AND SOCORRO COUNTY UNDERSHERIFF, QUICKLY ON SCENE, NOTED FOUR SMALL IRREGULARLY SHAPED SMOULDERING AREAS AND FOUR REGULAR DEPRESSED AREAS APPROXIMATELY SIXTEEN BY SIX INCHES IN END PAGE ONE\nMR. MOHR FOR THE DIRECTOR"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":230,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":231,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECTANGULAR TYPE PATTERN AVERAGING ABOUT TWELVE FEET APART.\n\n ZAMORA STATES OBJECT WAS OVAL SHAPED, SIMILAR TO FOOTBALL, POSSIBLY TWENTY FEET LONG, AND HAD A RED INSIGNIA ABOUT THIRTY INCHES HIGH AND TWO FEET WIDE, CENTERED ON OBJECT. NO OTHER WITNESSES KNOWN TO NOISE,- FLAME OR OBJECT.\n\n CAPTAIN R. T. HOLDER, UP RANGE COMMANDER, STALLION RANGE CENTER, SOCORRO, N.M., ADVISED AT ONCE APRIL TWENTY FOUR AND IS HANDLING.\n\n MILITARY PRESENTLY CONDUCTING OPERATION KNOWN AS CLOUD GAP WHICH IS JOINT OPERATION DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND ARMY CONTROL, DISARMAMENT AGENCY IN SOUTHWEST STATES INCLUDING NEW MEXICO. NOT KNOWN IF ABOVE INCIDENT RELATES TO CLOUD GAP.\n\n CONSIDERABLE INTEREST OF PRESS IN MATTER. ALBUQUERQUE CONDUCTING NO INVESTIGATION, IS MAINTAINING LIAISON WITH MILITARY. BUREAU WILL BE ADVISED OF ANY PERTINENT DEVELOPMENTS.\n\nEND\n\nWA NHH\n\nFBI WASH DC\n\nTUP\n\ncc Dr Roach"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":232,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1 - Wacks\n\n4/28/64\n\nAirtel\n\nTo: SAC, Albuquerque\n\nFrom: Director, FBI\n\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSOCORRO, NEW MEXICO\nAPRIL 24, 1964\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(NATIONALITIES INTELLIGENCE)\n\nReurtel 4/25/64. Assure facts this matter are furnished to local Air Force. Submit letterhead memorandum.\n\nJFW:gew\n(4)\n\nNOTE:\n\nA police officer described as sober, dependable, mature, and not known to engage in flights of fantasy reported seeing an unidentified flying object rise from the earth with a roar, emitting bluish and orange flames and disappear over a distant mountain. When he reported his observations, representatives of the local law enforcement agencies searched the scene and noted four small irregularly shaped smouldering areas and four regular depressed areas at the site. The unidentified flying object was described as oval shaped; about twenty feet long; with a red insignia; there is no indication in the referenced teletype that Air Force had been advised. Our policy is not to investigate but assure that Air Force is cognizant. Military is investigating and Albuquerque Office is maintaining liaison.\n\nTolson\nBelmont\nMohr\nCasper\nCallahan\nConrad\nDeLoach\nEvans\nGale\nRosen\nSullivan\nTavel\nTrotter\nTele. Room\nHolmes\nGandy\n\nMAILED 5\nAPR 28 1964\nCOMM-FBI\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":233,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-36 (Rev. 10-29-63)\n\nFBI\n\nDate: 4/28/64\n\nTransmit the following in PLAIN\n(Type in plain text or code)\n\nVia AIRTEL AIRMAIL\n(Priority)\n\nTO: DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM: SAC, ALBUQUERQUE (62-1028) (P)\n\nRE: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT, SOCORRO, NEW MEXICO, 4/24/64\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nRe Albuquerque teletypes to the Bureau 4/25/64 and 4/27/64.\n\nLt. Col. L. B. KING, OSI, Kirtland Air Force Base (KAFB), Albuquerque, New Mexico, on 4/26/64, advised that he cannot explain the observations described by Officer LONNIE ZAMORA at Socorro, New Mexico.\n\nMajor WILLIAM R. CONNER, Safety Officer, KAFB, Albuquerque, advised that he is the proper officer to handle such reports.\n\nMajor CONNER advised that he and T/Sgt. D. N. MOODY had examined the site at Socorro, New Mexico, and interviewed Officer LONNIE ZAMORA. They were impressed by Officer ZAMORA's sincerity. They noted no radio activity at the site. They cannot explain Officer ZAMORA's observations. He did learn that the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology at Socorro does some blasting in its work, however, their blasting is not in the area of this incident.\n\n4 - Bureau\n(1 - FBI Laboratory)\n2 - Albuquerque\nDAB/rae\n(6)\n\nApproved: Sent M Per\nSpecial Agent in Charge"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":234,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":235,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AQ 62-1028\n\nMajor CONNER, on 4/27/64, advised that on 4/26/64, he had met ORLANDO GALLEGOS at Santa Fe, New Mexico, and both proceeded to La Madera, New Mexico. to check out GALLEGOS' observations. He stated that at the scene there was still some smoldering material. He noted that there was miscellaneous rubbish in the area and the site may have been a dump at one time. In his opinion, some material, such as a can of paint, could have caught fire and exploded. He also noted that GALLEGOS had an odor of alcohol about him. Major CONNER stated he would advise the FBI, Albuquerque, of any pertinent developments.\n\nIt may be noted that New Mexico State Police Sergeant M. S. CHAVEZ and Socorro County Undersheriff JIM LUCKIE on 4/24/64, advised that they answered ZAMORA's radio calls and went to the site quickly. They noted several small burning areas at the site and the indentations. No one else was noted in the area. Officer ZAMORA, a well regarded and capable officer, was noted to be perfectly sober and thoroughly frightened.\n\nSA D. ARTHUR BYRNES, JR. was at Socorro, New Mexico, 4/24/64, and had noted the four irregular burned spots and the four indentations at the site. SA BYRNES immediately advised Captain R. T. HOLDER, Up Range Commander, Stallion Range Center, Socorro, New Mexico. Captain HOLDER, along with Officer ZAMORA and SA BYRNES checked the Socorro site and interviewed Officer ZAMORA at length. Officer ZAMORA's observations were taken in the form of a statement. A copy of this lengthy statement is retained at the Albuquerque FBI Office as well as a small sample of charred material taken at the scene.\n\nAn unusual observation made at the Socorro scene was that there appeared to be no \"blast\" effects. Between the burned spots were unburned areas, including patches of unburned brown range grass.\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":236,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AQ 62-1028\n\nIt may be noted that Captain HOLDER immediately contacted proper militarypersonnel concerning this incident.\n\nLiaison will be maintained with Major CONNER, who advised he has received several more reported incidents to which he will give attention.\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":237,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\n5010-104\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nDATE: 5/8/64\nFROM : SAC, ALBUQUERQUE (62-1028) (C)\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSOCORRO, NEW MEXICO\nAPRIL 24, 1964\nMISCELLANEOUS - INFORMATION CONCERNING\n(NATIONALITIES INTELLIGENCE)\n\nRe Albuquerque airtel to Bureau, 4/28/64, and Bureau airtel to Albuquerque, 4/28/64.\n\nAs noted in Albuquerque airtel, Captain R. T. HOLDER, Up Range Commander, Stallion Range Center, Socorro, N. M., was immediately advised, 4/24/64, of the facts in this case. He observed the site of the incident, 4/24/64, and made measurements while SA D. ARTHUR BYRNES, JR. was placing rocks around the four earth indentations and around one other mark at the site.\n\nLate 4/24/64 and into 4/25/64, Captain HOLDEN, who is with the U. S. Air Force, and SA BYRNES interviewed Officer LONNIE ZAMORA of the Socorro Police Department.\n\nSA BYRNES typed up a statement like account from Officer ZAMORA as given by ZAMORA under lengthy interrogation. Captain HOLDER diagramed his measurements of the scene.\n\nEarly 4/25/64, Captain HOLDER and SA BYRNES delivered the original and a copy of ZAMORA's statements and Captain HOLDER's diagrams to the authorities at Stallion Site, approximately 30 miles southeast of Socorro.\n\nTwo letterhead memorandums are enclosed, one from Officer ZAMORA and one of observations of SA BYRNES. Also enclosed is a copy of charts made by Captain HOLDER of the pertinent area.\n\n2 - Bureau (Encls. 10)\n1 - Albuquerque\nDAB/dac\n(3)\n\nREC-41 62-83894-438\n\n56 MAY 26 1964\n\nNAT. SEC."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":238,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AQ 62-1028\n\nCalls concerning subject matter are being referred immediately to Major WILLIAM R. CONNER, Safety Officer, Kirtland Air Force Base, Albuquerque.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":239,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10\nMAY 1962 EDITION\nGSA GEN. REG. NO. 27\n5010-106\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nMemorandum\n\nTO : Mr. DeLoach\nDATE: 5-23-64\nFROM : M. A. Jones\nSUBJECT: LARRY W. BRYANT\nNEWPORT NEWS, VIRGINIA\nARTICLE ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nBACKGROUND:\n\nOn 5-21-64 the Department of Defense delivered at the Bureau a manuscript by captioned individual entitled \"Let's Challenge the UFO (Unidentified Flying Objects) Censors.\" The Department of the Army, according to the transmittal form from the Department of Defense, has no objection to the publication of the article. The FBI's attention was directed to page 6. Also included with the manuscript was a copy of the author's transmittal letter to the Department of the Army stating he would like to know the name, rank/grade, title and office of each person who actually conducts the review of Bryant's article. A review of the article revealed it is a criticism of the Department of Defense's policy with regard to issuing clearances of articles relative to Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO), particularly when the author is employed by the U. S. Army as in the case of Bryant. The article is in essence a history of Bryant's problems in getting articles published on UFO.\n\nReferences to the FBI are as follows: On page 2, Bryant indicates he will reveal the role played by the FBI in monitoring UFO research activities of Army civilian employees. On page 6, Bryant refers to his being interviewed on 9-17-63 by Special Agent John S. Castles of our Norfolk Office. Bryant states SA Castles contacted him in response to Bryant's letter of 7-23-63 to the Sheriff of Sussex County, Virginia, requesting UFO sighting data. Bryant alleged that SA Castles inquired about Bryant's letter to the Sussex County Sheriff as well as to a similar letter dated 8-8-63 to the Commander of the Norfolk, Virginia, Naval Base. Bryant claims he asked SA Castles if it was customary for the FBI to question people who expressed an interest in UFO. SA Castles replied in the negative and added that \"Since his office was queried by the addressees of the two letters he was just seeking information on which he could write a 'memorandum for the files.'\" Bryant also states that SA Castles volunteered the following: \"If the FBI has any such data (on UFO sightings), it is probably of an intelligence nature and thus would be unavailable to the public and to private individuals.\"\n\nINFORMATION IN BUREAU FILES:\n\nBureau files reveal an inquiry from Bryant to the Director in February, 1959, regarding the investigation of UFO. He was informed the FBI does not investigate matters of this nature and the jurisdiction of UFO is within the Department of the Air Force.\n\n1 - Mr. Tolson\n1 - Mr. Sullivan\nJMM:par\n(7)\n\n1 - Mr. DeLoach\n1 - Liaison Section\n\nREC-26\n62-83894-439\n\nENCLOSURE\n\nCRIME RESEARCH"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":240,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":241,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"M. A. Jones to DeLoach\nRe: LARRY W. BRYANT\n\nBy letter dated 9/17/63, Bryant advised he had been interviewed on that date by SA Castles (Senior Resident Agent, Newport News, Virginia, assigned Norfolk Office, EOD 2/2/48, GS-13) regarding Bryant's interest in reports of sightings of UFO. According to Bryant, Castles stated he was contacting him in connection with his inquiries and that he intended to prepare \"a memorandum for the files.\" Bryant requested a copy of SA Castles memorandum. Prior to responding to Bryant, the Norfolk Office advised as follows: Bryant has directed a voluminous amount of correspondence to military officials in the area and as Bryant was employed by the Department of the Army, Fort Eustis, Virginia, the G-2 Section of the Second Army, Fort Meade, Maryland, was conducting a background check of Bryant. The Norfolk Office was in receipt of several letters directed to other government agencies which were subsequently forwarded to the Norfolk Office. This included a letter to the Commanding Officer, Headquarters, Aircraft Fleet, Atlantic U. S. Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia, 6/15/60; Commanding Officer, Cape Charles Air Force Station, Cape Charles, Virginia, 8/7/58; Commander, U. S. Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia, 8/8/63; Sheriff's Office, Sussex County, postmarked Fort Eustis, Virginia, 7/23/63.\n\nBryant was interviewed on 9/17/63 by SA Castles in order to obtain background information concerning him in order to reply to the correspondence from the Sussex County Sheriff's Office and the U. S. Naval Base, Norfolk, Virginia, mentioned above. At the conclusion of the interview, Bryant wanted to know what would be done about the information he furnished SA Castles at which time he was told that the information he furnished would be made a matter of record in FBI files.\n\nBryant was subsequently advised by in-absence letter of 9/27/63 that the confidential nature of our files would preclude complying with his request (the copy of SA Castles' memorandum concerning his interview with Bryant.)\n\nIt appears that the reference to the FBI on page 6 of Bryant's manuscript is not completely true. However, it has the effect of leaving the wrong impression; the FBI was not investigating Bryant but was merely interviewing him in order to respond to inquiries directed to us from other agencies. SA Castles did not interview Bryant merely for the purpose of writing \"a memorandum for the files\" but that his interview of Bryant would be made a matter of record in FBI files. Also, the phraseology used by Bryant regarding SA Castles' reference to the confidential nature of FBI files could be misleading. These points should be brought to the attention of the Department of Defense.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\nThat Bryant's manuscript on UFO be returned to the Department of Defense by our liaison representative with that agency at which time that agency can be informed that the FBI does not agree with Bryant's portrayal of his interview by the FBI or his misrepresentation of the Bureau's role in investigating of UFO. However, the Department of Defense should not attribute these comments to the FBI and we are deferring to their judgments as to authorizing publication of the article.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":242,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LET'S CHALLENGE THE UFO CENSORS\nby\nLarry W. Bryant\n\nBefore you see this article in print, it will have been submitted to appropriate Defense Department authorities for security review and clearance. Why? Because, under U. S. Army regulations, its author is in duty bound to have its contents examined for adherence to accuracy, propriety, and security. And the process applies not just to this article, but to any others he might write on the military aspect of Unidentified Flying Objects.\n\nWhile employed as a Department of the Army civilian, I have been writing for the past six years unofficial critiques of the Federal Government's role in UFO research. I have confronted and withstood the obvious objections to my writing on such a controversial subject (e.g., \"biting the hand that feeds you\"), and I can only say to my detractors: \"Someone must do it. Someone must challenge the UFO censors, assuming they exist.\" Proof of their existence has been offered by at least two of my previously cleared manuscripts and by one that failed to hurdle the review-clearance obstacle. As to exactly how much longer I can speak out freely for what I believe without bringing\n\n3576\n\n62-83894-439\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":243,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the censors directly upon my head is your guess.\n\nMeantime, if this gets cleared, you may share in this, my latest quasi-official challenge. You will share by becoming informed of the existing policies and methodology of the Defense Department's public information program -- that part of the program which covers the review-clearance of manuscripts written for personal publication by the department's employees. You will share in my evaluation of the roles played by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Army's intelligence body (G-2) in monitoring the UFO research activities of an Army civilian employee.\n\n* * *\n\nWe return first to 1958, to Fort Monroe, Va., headquarters of the U. S. Continental Army Command (USCONARC), where I was employed for two years. As part of my early interest in aerial phenomena, I had an unofficial notice published in the Fort Monroe Daily Bulletin for September 22, 1958. The notice requested USCONARC personnel to report their UFO sightings to me for analysis. It developed that fulfillment of my request would be in violation of two classified Army directives covering the official processing\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":244,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of such reports. During my ensuing interrogation by two Army Counter-Intelligence Corps members at Fort Monroe, I became fully aware that UFO's, or flying saucers, were being treated with grave respect by our military intelligence experts; so, I decided to reveal their official, behind-the-scenes attitude to the public, doing so in a lengthy report issued in 1960. The report 1 had taken five months to make the rounds of the review-clearance mill, but was finally cleared for publication in February 1960.\n\nDespite a subsequent admonition from the Civilian Personnel Officer at Fort Monroe to give up my campaign of seeking the truth about UFO secrecy, I have continued to amass evidence against the censors. And the censors still persist in making themselves known to me. It is certainly a vicious cycle of verbal pushing and pulling, with the victor of the conflict being not really myself or the censors but you readers, who represent the general public.\n\n* * *\n\nThe next episode concerns a draft newspaper \"letter to the editor\" that I wrote in the spring of 1959, and which I duly submitted to USCONARC for review and clearance. USCONARC declined to clear the manuscript, asserting, among other things, the following nonconcurrences:\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":245,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(1) \"The 'official censorship, ridicule and silence' as stated are not true, nor is the statement 'conceal vital UFO data'. Instead it would be more correct to state that the policy of the Department of Defense is not to release UFO data not substantiated by fact.\n\n(2) \"Inference is made of chastism in efforts to obtain information about UFO when in fact the control of such information follows an established policy. The Department of Defense must maintain such controls to insure that data released is based on fact.\"\n\n(3) \"Attempts to extract UFO data from this headquarters USCONARC cannot be met. Suggest contact be made with . . . the U. S. Air Force. Any matter received should be considered privileged information and not for release to the public.\n\n(4) \"The statements contained herein are not an attempt at 'censorship'. The Army encourages its . . . personnel to speak and write, as long as they stick to the facts, do not reveal classified information, and meet standards of propriety.\" 2\n\n* * *\n\nShortly after I transferred from Fort Monroe to the U. S. Army Transportation School at Fort Eustis, Va., I again pulled my end of our tug of war. I wanted to squelch rumors that UFO's were secret terrestrial weapons. Pursuing this angle, I wrote privately to the Combat Development agency at Eustis on March 13, 1960, and asked whether\n\n-4-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":246,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"they had been engaged in producing or testing a saucer-like craft during the 1952 sighting crisis. I never got an answer; instead the post G-2, Col. Frank O. Adams, summoned me to his office and instructed me to explain the motives for my inquiry.\n\nAfter assuring Col. Adams that I had not intended to undermine local security measures, but had merely posed an honest question, he recommended I be more prudent in the future. Here, we mustn't reproach Col. Adams too severely, because his job was to abide by the military intelligence axiom of \"never underestimate a potential enemy.\" This axiom no doubt inspired the following Eustis policy, a policy which was probably the basis for Col. Adams's investigation:\n\n\"A great part of the information sought by people who do not have the best interests of the United States at heart is obtained from unclassified sources through apparently innocent requests. Any unusual request for information concerning the installation, our personnel, or other data, should be brought to the attention of the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2.\" 3\n\n* * *\n\nYou may see now that the sources as well as the fruits of my UFO research are subject to scrutiny by all interested authorities. This fact became even clearer several months\n\n-5-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":247,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ago when I was finishing the groundwork for my recently published article, \"A Hard Look at UFO News Management,\" 4 which was cleared by the Defense Department on October 10, 1963.\n\nHere is how it began. On July 23, 1963, I wrote to the Sheriff of Sussex County, Va., requesting any UFO sighting data that he might possess. While on duty at Fort Eustis the afternoon of September 17, I received a 10-minute visit from local FBI agent John S. Castles. Not only did Mr. Castles inquire about the Sussex letter, but also about a similar letter I sent on August 8, 1963, to the Commander of the Norfolk (Va.) Naval Base. Upon furnishing Mr. Castles the information he desired on my Civil Service position and my UFO writings, I asked if it were customary for the FBI to interrogate anybody who expresses an interest in UFO's. He said no, that since his office was queried by the addressees of the two letters he was just seeking information on which he could write a \"memorandum for the files.\" Mr. Castles volunteered the following: \"If the FBI has any such data [on UFO sightings], it is probably of an intelligence nature and thus would be unavailable to the public and to private individuals.\"\n\nAgain, the \"authorities\" have shown a serious, persuasive concern about the writings of a private citizen on objects\n\n-6-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":248,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"which supposedly do not warrant such attention -- objects which, officially, are identifiable for the most part as natural aerial phenomena or some other familiar, harmless manifestation.\n\nHow can the over-all review-clearance system be manipulated by the UFO censors? Take as an authoritative answer the following excerpt from a letter written to me by a local USAF official:\n\n\". . . Chapter 4, Section B, paragraph 2a(7), of Air Force Manual 190-4, 6 June 1960, says in part: 'When the . . . manuscript concerns military subjects, national, or foreign affairs, it will be submitted to SAF-OI to review for accuracy, propriety . . . and to obtain final clearance from the Department of Defense. This policy applies to Air Force active duty personnel, retired personnel, civilian employees, and members of the civilian components.' SAF-OI is the symbol for the Office of Information, Secretary of the Air Force.\n\n\"Another directive, Air Force Regulation 200-2, governs activities as they relate to Unidentified Flying Objects. This regulation says only that base Information Officers may examine manuscripts which are submitted to them to be sure they are factual and accurate. The same groups of persons as indicated above, according to this regulation, may not use Air Force material on Unidentified Flying Objects for their writings.\" 5\n\nQuite a challenge, isn't it? But as long as you and I are willing to meet it, there is still the hope that the censors will admit defeat and capitulate. You may be asking yourself, \"If the censors do exist, then why is Bryant allowed to continue publishing his manuscripts?\" That has been my question, too, and the only solution I can offer is that freedom of information has yet to perish entirely in America.\n\n-7-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":249,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REFERENCES\n\n1. From Within the Blackout: An Analysis of Secrecy on the Local UFO Scene; dated April 1, 1960; 52 pp., mimeographed, published by the Air Research Group, 5603 Madison Avenue, Newport News, Va. 23605.\n2. Contained in an interoffice Disposition Form, titled \"Request for Clearance to Publish Letter-to-the Editor.\" The two-page reply originated from the USCONARC Information Section on August 26, 1959, and was written by a Mr. Burkert and signed by Col. L. J. M. Mulhall.\n3. As prescribed by the Fort Eustis Daily Bulletin for March 9, 1964.\n4. Fate Magazine (Evanston, Ill.), February 1964.\n5. The letter is dated October 3, 1963; it is signed by Lt. Col. Robert E. Hervey, Chief, Community Relations Division, U. S. Air Force Tactical Air Command, Langley Air Force Base, Va.\n\nLarry W Bryant\n\n-8-"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":250,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-440\n\nJuly 13, 1964\n\nMr. Hayden Hewes\nAssociate Director\nInterplanetary Intelligence of Unidentified Flying Objects\n3005 West Eubanks\nOklahoma City, Oklahoma\n\nDear Mr. Hewes:\n\nYour letter of July 5th has been received.\n\nIt has been the FBI's long-standing policy not to conduct investigations regarding information this Bureau receives about unidentified flying objects since such matters are not within our jurisdiction. All such data is immediately sent to the Department of the Air Force for its consideration.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nNOTE: Bufiles contain nothing derogatory concerning Hewes and we have had one prior communication from him in which he requested an article by the Director for inclusion in a publication he was inaugurating in connection with his organization. His request was refused. Bufiles reflect that an individual who claimed to have sighted an unknown flying object was interviewed by a representative of this Bureau in the company of a United States Air Force officer. The individual interviewed was a police officer of the Socorro, New Mexico, Police Department. No additional investigation was conducted by this Bureau with regard to that incident. Correspondent was not advised that a copy of his communication was sent to the Department of the Air Force since he indicates he has special authorization to review Air Force files. We do not know whether or not this is true and it is believed a copy should be sent to the Air Force in order that they will be placed on notice that this correspondent is making this statement to obtain information from other agencies. Referral made by form.\n\nJBH:mlk (3)\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":251,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nF B I\nJul 13 12 54 PM '64"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":252,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INTERPLANETARY INTELLIGENCE\nor\nUNIDENTIFIED\nFLYING I.I.O.U.F.O. OBJECTS\nOKLAHOMA CITY, OKLA.\n\nRESEARCH\nINVESTIGATION\nANALYSIS\n\nW. F. RIEFER\nDirector\nH. C. HEWES\nAssociate Director\nJ. MANEY\nDeputy Director\n\nJuly 5, 1964\n\nMr. John Edgar Hoover\nDirector, Federal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nAgain thank you for your letter of August 31, 1959.\n\nThe IIOUFO has been investigating UFO and flying saucer sightings since August 1958. We have a State Representative in most of the 50 states, and in seven foreign countries. We have a Scientific Panel of known scientist and a Technial Advisory Board of known saucer researchers.\n\nI have received special authorization from the Department of the Air Force in Washington to visit Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio for the purpose of viewing the Air Force Files on their saucer investigation since 1948. Among the sightings we are interested in is one recent one, Soccorro, New Mexico, April 25, 1964. This sighting was observed by several different people in different towns in New Mexico. According to the AP , it was stated that the FBI was investigating this sighting.\n\nWould it be possible to obtain the results of your investigation? I was appreciate any information you could give us.\n\nThank you. Trusting to hear from you in the near future.\n\nVery truly yours,\nHayden Hewes,\nAssociate Director\n\nHaydenHewes\nAssociate Director\nIIOUFO\n3005 W. Eubanks\nOklahoma City, Oklahoma"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":253,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D-CORR & TOURS\nFBI\nJul 10 10 58 AM '64\n\nREC'D-CORR & TOURS\nFBI\nJul 9 3 12 PM '64\n\n18 JUL 8 1964\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":254,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"November 16, 1964\n\nMr. Charles E. Bilbo\nPost Office Box 594\nOrange, Texas 77631\n\nDear Mr. Bilbo:\n\nYour letter of November 9th, with enclosure, has been received.\n\nWhile I would like to be of assistance in connection with your inquiry, I must advise that information contained in the files of the FBI is confidential and available only for official use, pursuant to regulations of the Department of Justice. Please do not infer either that we do or do not have information of the type you mentioned. I hope you will understand my inability to be of aid.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\n1 - Los Angeles - Enclosures (2)\nAttention SAC: Bufiles contain nothing identifiable regarding Harold T. Wilkins or his book, \"Flying Saucers On The Attack.\"\n\nSAW:des (3)\n\nTolson Belmont Mohr DeLoach Casper Callahan Conrad Evans Gale Rosen Sullivan Tavel Trotter Tele. Room Holmes Gandy\n\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":255,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"November 16, 1964\n\nMr. Charles E. Bilbo\nPost Office Box 594\nOrange, Texas 77631\n\nDear Mr. Bilbo:\n\nYour letter of November 9th, with enclosure, has been received.\n\nWhile I would like to be of assistance in connection with your inquiry, I must advise that information contained in the files of the FBI is confidential and available only for official use, pursuant to regulations of the Department of Justice. Please do not infer either that we do or do not have information of the type you mentioned. I hope you will understand my inability to be of aid.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\n1 - Los Angeles - Enclosures (2)\nAttention SAC: Bufiles contain nothing identifiable regarding Harold T. Wilkins or his book, \"Flying Saucers On The Attack.\"\n\nSAW/des (3)\n\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nF.B.I.\nNov 16 5 06 PM '64"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":256,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Monday, November 9, 1964\nPost Office Box 594\nOrange, Texas 77631\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nDepartment of Justice\n9th Street and Pennsylvania Ave.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover:\n\nEnclosed with this letter is a sheet of condensed facts concerning two supposed visitors from outer space, which is taken from Harold T. Wilkins book \"Flying Saucers On The Attack.\" Since the F. B. I. was reportedly involved in the investigation I would like to know if the story concerning the supposed visit is true, a possiblity, or just plain science fiction.\n\nIf the story is true and/or if the F. B. I. has a report on this case in its files, I would appreciate a copy of that report. If it is impossible to forward me a complete copy of the report please sendd a summary of the report.\n\nI realize this story sounds fantastic but I would appreciate a reply, since it is actually suppose to have occurred.\n\nSincerely yours,\nCharles E. Bilbo\nCharles E. Bilbo"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":257,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":258,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Monday, November 9, 1964\n\nFACTS concerning two mysterious visitors from outer space as reported in Harold T. Wilkins \"Flying Saucers On The Attack,\" published by Citadel Press (New York) 1954.\n\nINTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Concerns two men hired on or about January 20, 1953 in Los Angeles, California by official in attorneys office concerned with tracing lost and missing persons (legal inquiry bureau).\n\nTHEIR (visitors) STORY: They came from another planet about the middle of December 1952. They landed on Mojave (or Mohove) Desert in a small flying saucer, 200 miles east of Los Angeles. They learned to speak English by listening (persumably in outer space?) to broadcasts of radio and television.\n\nCHARACTERISTICS: a) 6 foot 6 inches in height; b) emaciated; c) not well clothed; d) bluish-green in complexion; e) prick ears; and f) extremely successful investigators.\n\nADDITIONAL FACTS: One of the above mentioned two men leaned over steel top of filing cabinet and with his curiously curved hand, made an indentation in the steel at least 1/2 inch deep. The indented steel was sent to a metallurgical chemist, who said that, to produce such indentation, would require a force of some 2,000 lbs. to the inch. He also added that traces of more than a dozen unknown elements were found in the dents.\n\nCONCLUDING REMARKS: a) It was reported that the F.B.I. sent several agents to investigate these two men, but by the time the agents arrived the two visitors from outer space had disappeared (in mid-February 1953.)\n\nb) The steel filing cabinet is suppose to be locked in a vault.\n\nc) The story is suppose to have been related to the author, Wilkins, by a Los Angeles reporter, who wished to remain anonymous.\n\nThe above is a condensed version of the facts presented in an article , which appeared in the apendix of the previously mentioned Harold T. Wilkins' book.\n\nSincerely yours,\nCharles E. Bilbo\nCharles E. Bilbo"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":259,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Sincerely yours,\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\n1 - London - Enclosure\n1 - Albuquerque - Enclosure\n1 - Mr. Sullivan - Enclosure\n1 - Foreign Liaison Unit - Enclosure\n\nWAM:pem\n(7)\n\nJanuary 26, 1965\nAIRMAIL\n\nMr. J. A. Hennessey\n10, Manson Place\nSouth Kensington\nLondon, S.W. 7, England\n\nDear Mr. Hennessey:\n\nYour letter of January 20th has been received.\n\nIn response to your inquiry, the FBI has not conducted an investigation as you mentioned inasmuch as this would not come within our investigative jurisdiction. The presence of an Agent was simply to determine whether or not any violation may have occurred in which the FBI would have an interest, and for no other reason.\n\nWhile I would like to be of assistance to you, the files of the FBI must be maintained as confidential in accordance with regulations of the Department of Justice and are available for official use only. In view of this, I am sure you will understand why I cannot be of any further assistance in this instance.\n\n(See NOTE next page)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":260,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED DIRECTOR\nF.B.I.\nJAN 26 4 30 PM '65\n\n1 XEROX COPIES\nDATE 11-29-06"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":261,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. J. A. Hennessey\n\nNOTE: Bufiles reflect that an unidentified flying object was sighted near Socorro, New Mexico, on April 24, 1964. Captain Holder, United States Air Force, along with SA D. Arthur Byrnes, Jr., interviewed one Lonnie Zamora of the Socorro Police Department who had observed the phenomena. SA Byrnes typed such a statement from Zamora which was later included in a memo for dissemination. The Albuquerque Office did not conduct any investigation other than to keep the Bureau advised and maintain liaison with the Air Force. This is apparently the situation to which the correspondent is referring. Bufiles contain no information identifiable with the correspondent."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":262,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. J. A. Hennessey\n\nNOTE: Bufiles reflect that an unidentified flying object was sighted near Socorro, New Mexico, on April 24, 1964. Captain Holder, United States Air Force, along with SA D. Arthur Byrnes, Jr., interviewed one Lonnie Zamora of the Socorro Police Department who had observed the phenomena. SA Byrnes typed such a statement from Zamora which was later included in a memo for dissemination. The Albuquerque Office did not conduct any investigation other than to keep the Bureau advised and maintain liaison with the Air Force. This is apparently the situation to which the correspondent is referring. Bufiles contain no information identifiable with the correspondent."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":263,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"J. A. HENNESSEY\nUFO RESEARCH INVESTIGATOR\nMEMBER NATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS COMMITTEE ON AERIAL PHENOMENA\n10, MANSON PLACE, SOUTH KENSINGTON, LONDON, S.W. 7\nTELEPHONE: KEN. 4200\n\nJanuary 20, 1965\n\nMy ref. 11-4\n\nRe: Unidentified Flying Objects.\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation,\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nDear Sirs,\n\nWould you be so kind as to advise me whether or not it is the usual procedure for agents of the FBI to investigate reports of unidentified flying objects which have been seen on the ground.\n\nIn several recent cases, agents of the FBI have been present when USAF investigators from local AFBs in the vicinity of the landing site have carried out their investigations. Would you also advise me whether it would be possible to obtain copies of reports made by agents of their findings. One case which I do have a personal interest in was the La Madera April 26, 1964 case where a Orlando Gallegos, age 35, of La Madera and Santa Fe, New Mexico, reported to Officer Marvin Romero that he had observed an unidentified object approximately 300 feet from his home. The following day, Agent Byrnes of the FBI and Major Connors of Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque inspected the site. Can you advise me of Agent Byrnes findings at the site?.\n\nI realise that your department is probably more concerned with federal crime, however, I cannot understand why it has concerned itself with cases which are normally undertaken by the USAF as a matter of National Defence.\n\nThis letter is not intended as a letter of criticism but more of a general inquiry.\n\nTrusting that this will receive your early attention.\n\nYours faithfully,\nJ.A. Hennessey"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":264,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":265,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC-13 62-83894-443\n\nFebruary 26, 1965\n\nMr. Joe Caldwell\n1011 Dellwood Drive\nTalladega, Alabama\n\nDear Mr. Caldwell:\n\nYour letter of February 21st has been received.\n\nIn response to your request, I would like to point out that information in our files must be maintained as confidential pursuant to regulations of the Department of Justice. I am, however, enclosing a copy of a list of organizations designated as subversive by the Department of Justice.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nEnclosure\nList of Subversive Organizations\n\nNOTE: Correspondent is not identifiable in Bufiles.\n\nCJJ:rls (3)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":266,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECTION 1 OF 1 (mirrored stamp text) RECEIVED-DIRECTOR F.B.I. Feb 26 4 15 PM '65 CRIMINAL (S) NOTE: Correspondent is not identifiable in files. List of subversive organizations or publications [REDACTED] Hoover Bureau of Investigation. (Mirrored and partially illegible; remaining text in reverse orientation.) Department of Justice [illegible] Yours truly [illegible] 62-83894-443 REC 18 18 MAR 2 1965"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":267,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE COPY 1011 Dellwood Dr. Talladega, Ala. February 21, 1963 Dear Sir: I am writing to ask about Flying Saucer reading material that is being sent through the mail. I am wondering if some of this material might be communist inspired, or is it alright to receive. If you would please send me a list that might be subversive I would appreciate it-since I certainly do not want to receive any such communists inspired material. Yours Truly, Joe Caldwell"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":268,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1011 Dellwood Dr. Talladega, Ala. February 21, 1963 Dear Sir: I am writing to ask about Flying Saucer reading material that is being sent through the mail. I am wondering if none of this material might be communist inspired, or is it alright to receive. If you would please send me a list that might be subversive I would appreciate it - since I certainly do not want to receive any such communists inspired material. Yours Truly, Joe Caldwell CORRESPONDENCE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":269,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED-BOARD & TOURS FBI Feb 24 2.31 PM '65 [handwritten letter in reverse orientation, largely illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":270,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":271,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EX 109\n\nApril 28, 1965\n\nREC-7\n62-83894-444\n\nMr. Mark Powell\n539 South Cedar Street\nPalatine, Illinois 60067\n\nDear Mr. Powell:\n\nYour letter of April 22nd, with enclosure, has\nbeen received.\n\nIn connection with your inquiry pertaining to\nunidentified flying objects, it is suggested that you correspond\nwith the Director of Special Investigations, The Inspector General,\nDepartment of the Air Force, Washington, D. C. 20333.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nNOTE: Based on information furnished, correspondent could not be\nidentified in Bufiles.\n\nSAW/ufp\n(3)\n\nTolson\nBelmont\nMohr\nDeLoach\nCasper\nCallahan\nConrad\nFelt\nGale\nRosen\nSullivan\nTavel\nTrotter\nTele. Room\nHolmes\nGandy\n\nMAIL ROOM\nTELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":272,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D MAIL ROOM\nFBI\n\nAPR 28 5 23 PM '65\nRECEIVED-DIRECTOR\nF.B.I."} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":273,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"EX 109\n\nTRUE COPY\n\nLONG GROVES COUNTY CLUB ESTATES\n\nF.B.I.\nGentlemen:\n\nPlease tell me the name and address of the\nBureau or agency that investigates unidentified flying objects\n\nRespectfully,\n\nMark Powell\n\nHome address: 539 S. Cedar St.\nPalatine, Ill 60067\n\nENCLOSURE\n\n1TC 4-27-65 ufp\n\n62-83894\n16 APR 30 1965"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":274,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Property Office:\nRoute 53,\nLong Grove, Illinois\nGE 8-2622\n\nLong Grove Country Club Estates\n\nMain Office:\n111 S. Northwest Hwy.\nPalatine, Illinois\nFLanders 8-0192\n\nF B I\n\nGENTLEMEN:\n\nPLEASE TELL ME THE NAME AND\nADDRESS OF THE BUREAU OR AGENCY THAT\nINVESTIGATES UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nRESPECTFULLY,\n\nMark Powell\n\nHOME ADDRESS: 539 S. CEDAR ST.\nPALATINE, ILL\n60067\n\n1 ENCLOSURE\n\nCORRESPONDENCE\n\nAPR 22 PM 1965 PALATINE ILL"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":275,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":276,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROPERTY OFFICE: RT. 53, LONG GROVE, ILL. GE 8-2622\n\nLong Grove Country Club Estates\n\nMain Office:\n111 S. Northwest Hwy.\nPalatine, Illinois\nFLanders 8-0192\n\nMark Powell\nVice-President"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":277,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APR 15 1966\n\nREC'D READING ROOM\nFBI\n\nMr. Paul G. Snigier\n360 Pleasant Street\nRaynham, Massachusetts 02767\n\nDear Mr. Snigier:\n\nYour letter of April 11th has been received.\n\nWith respect to your inquiry, sightings of Unidentified Flying Objects are not a matter within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. Inasmuch as your communication is of interest to another governmental agency, I am referring a copy of it to the Office of Special Investigations, Department of the Air Force.\n\nSincerely yours,\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\n1 - Boston - Enclosure\nNOTE: Snigier is not identifiable in Bufiles. Joseph F. Perry of Grand Blanc, Michigan, was contacted by Bureau Agents from our Detroit Office at his request in March, 1960, regarding photographs he had taken of what he believed to be unidentified flying objects. These photographs were turned over to the Office of Special Investigations of the United States Air Force by our Detroit Office. Perry reported to the local paper that the FBI was conducting an investigation and it was necessary for this Bureau to straighten the record with that newspaper. Perry was advised that we had furnished his photographs to the Air Force and he subsequently wrote to the Director in April, 1960, indicating he was looking forward to the completion of the Air Force analysis of his photographs and their return to him. A copy of his letter was referred to the Air Force for a reply to him.\nDFC:rks\n(4)\n\nMAILED 4 APR 15 1966 COMM-FBI\n\nTolson\nDeLoach\nMohr\nWick\nCasper\nCallahan\nConrad\nFelt\nGale\nRosen\nSullivan\nTavel\nTrotter\nele. Room\nolmes\nndy\n\n54 APR 22 1966\nMAIL ROOM TELETYPE UNIT"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":278,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":279,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Paul G. Snigier\n360 Pleasant St.\nRaynham, Mass.\nApril 11, 1966\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\n\nIt is the responsibility of the Air Force's Project Blue Book to investigate and analyze UFO sightings. At times local or state law enforcement officials have been requested to make investigations of such cases.\n\nAfter a number of recent sightings in Rehoboth, Mass., Police Chief Oscar Berghman announced that the FBI had questioned at least two of the witnesses.\n\nI am also aware of similar past cases. The color photographs taken at Grand Blanc, Michigan by Joe Perry, amateur astronomer, on February 13, 1960 is one past case. After notifying the Air Force he was referred to the FBI and an investigation was conducted by two agents from the Flint office. The photographs were subsequently furnished to the Air Force for analysis.\n\nWhat is the FBI's policy with respect to this matter of investigation of such cases? Is there an official FBI regulation pertaining to FBI UFO investigatory policy, and if so, I request a copy. If this is not possible could you please inform me as to the regulation number of such documents. Thank you.\n\nVery truly yours,\nPaul G. Snigier\nPaul G. Snigier\n\nREC 20 62-83894-445\n5 APR 13 1966\nCORRESPONDENCE"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":280,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5 DIRECTOR\n\nAPR 13 10 25 AM '66\nFBI\nRECD-CORR & FCURS"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":281,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 20, 1966\n\nREC 22 62-83894 446\n\nMr. Ronnie Fox\n1348 Edgehill Drive\nPomona, California 91767\n\nDear Mr. Fox:\n\nI received your letter on July 15th, with enclosure, which is being returned herewith.\n\nFor your information, the investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects is not and never has been a matter that is within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. I can assure you the photograph which you forwarded does not represent employees of this Bureau and the FBI has never had custody of an occupant from a foreign planet.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\n\nEnclosure\nNOTE: Correspondent is not identifiable in Bufiles. Enclosure was a photograph of an apparently emaciated child holding the hand of two male adults. Relations with \"Real\" magazine have not been desirable. The article which appeared in a recent issue of this magazine purported to be an actual report of unidentified flying objects and has been brought to the attention of the Bureau previously. In view of the fictional aspects of the article and the relations with \"Real\" magazine no contact was made with the magazine regarding the representation of FBI Agents.\nBGH:lwp\n(4)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":282,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":283,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 9, 1966\n\nFederal Bureau\nof Investigation\nWashington, D.C.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nFlying Saucers\n\nRecently I found this picture in Real Magizine, Volume 17, Number 3, August 1966. It is as the magizine states a Cladion occupant from a foreign plant. The two men next this \"Visitor\" are F.B.I. Agents.\n\nCould you please send me any information pertaining to this picture. I'd appreciate any information and/or pictures that you could possible send me.\n\nSend it to:\n\nRonnie Fox\n1348 Edgehill Drive.\nPomona, California\n91767\n\nCould you please return the picture that I am enclosing for it is the only one like it.\n\nThank you for any help you could give me.\n\nSincerely Yours,\n\nRonnie Fox\n\nREC 22\n62-83894-446\nJUL 22 1966\nCORRESPONDENCE\nENCLOSURE\nack 7-22-66\nBgh:lwp NML"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":284,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":285,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"July 21, 1966\n\nST-101\nREC- 18 62-83894-447\n\nMr. Steven G. Gray\n903 Forest Avenue\nCleburne, Texas 76031\n\nDear Mr. Gray:\n\nYour letter of July 16th has been received.\n\nSaucers\nFor your information, the investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects is not and never has been a matter that is within the investigative jurisdiction of the FBI. I can assure you the photograph you mentioned does not represent employees of this Bureau and the FBI has never had custody of an occupant from a foreign planet.\n\nEnclosed are some booklets pertaining to our activities which I hope you will enjoy reading.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJohn Edgar Hoover\nDirector\n\nEnclosures (2)\nKnow your FBI\nStory of the FBI\nNOTE: Correspondent is not identifiable in Bufiles. The Bureau has had other inquiries concerning this photograph. The article which appeared in a recent issue of this magazine purported to be an actual report of unidentified flying objects and has been brought to the attention of the Bureau previously. In view of the fictional aspects of the material and our relations with \"Real\" magazine no contact was made with the magazine regarding the representation of FBI Agents.\nEFT:jss (3)"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":286,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":287,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TRUE COPY\n\nSteven G. Gray\n903 Forest Ave.\nCleburne, Tex.\nJuly 16, 1966\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nU. S. Department of Justice\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover,\n\nJust recently I bought a copy of the magazine, \"Real.\" This issue had a great deal of pictures about unidentified flying objects and it also had a photo of two F.B.I. agents leading a silver-clad man, about one and a half to two feet tall, down an american street. I know this sounds extraordinary, but this is what it had. The photo was probably faked but I wanted to be doubly sure. Please write me and tell me if there is any truth to this photo. Also this photo was first published by some odd chance in a Cologne, Germany newspaper.\n\nYours truly,\n\n/s/ Steven G. Gray"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":288,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Steven G. Gray\n903 Forest Ave.\nCleburne, Tex.\nJuly 16, 1966\n\nJ. Edgar Hoover\nU. S. Department of Justice\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Mr. Hoover,\n\nJust recently I bought a copy of the magazine, \"Real.\" This issue had a great deal of pictures about unidentified flying objects and it also had a photo of two F.B.I. agents leading a silver-clad man, about one and a half to two feet tall, down an american street. I know this sounds extraordinary, but this is what it had. The photo was probably faked but I wanted to be doubly sure. Please write me and tell me if there is any truth to this photo. Also this photo was first published by some odd chance in a Cologne, Germany newspaper.\n\nYours truly,\nSteven G. Gray"} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":289,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ca190243fcb6d14e","page":290,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"cb16e9d1a7a8a989","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026 Under Section 1842 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information\n\n18 December 1952\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nSUBJECT: British Activity in the field of \"Unidentified Flying Objects\"\n\n1. On 15 December, the recently arrived messenger from Britain reported the following. He had talked with R. V. Jones and [REDACTED]\n\n2. The British have had a standing committee created about sixteen months ago on flying saucers. Presumably this is now under Dr. Jones through inheritance. The RAF are action people. The group has concluded that the observations are not enemy aircraft and that none have been over Britain.\n\n3. The activity has been quiet and normal up to about ten to twelve days ago, at which time the Yorkshire incident took place. In some RAF field, there was some sort of demonstration to which high officials of the RAF in London had been invited. During the show, a \"perfect flying saucer\" was seen by these officials as well as RAF pilots. So many people saw it that many articles appeared in the public press. This is disturbing to Jones because he realizes that the creation of the correction of public opinion is a part of his responsibilities.\n\n4. Jones reminded us of the Swedish incident (presumably he refers to the one in 1946), and reminds us of a paper on the origin of meteorites published in the French Academy of Sciences between 1760 and 1780 by Chladni.\n\n5. The traveler told Jones of our interest at this time, mentioned the film which had been taken by the Naval non-commissioned officer (Tremonton incident). It is possible that Jones will write asking for a copy of the film or further on the same subject.\n\nH. MARSHALL CHADWELL\nAssistant Director\nScientific Intelligence\n\nDistribution:\nOpns/SI - 1\nP&E/SI - 1\nW&E/SI - 1\nAD/SI - 2"} {"doc_id":"cb16e9d1a7a8a989","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nWhile there is no indication that these objects represent a direct threat to the national defense, there are certain potential dangers which are related to these sightings. These are:\n\n1. The difficulty and delay in positive identification which could weaken the early warning system in alerting defense in the event of commencement of hostilities.*\n\n2. The possibility of mass hysteria which might be purposely induced by an enemy at a critical time by faked reports.\n\n3. The possibility that the emergency communications systems to command headquarters might be seriously overloaded at a critical time by such reports.\n\nIt is believed that the problems of communications confusion and overload and the serious effects of mass hysteria must be dealt with outside the intelligence community, and it is planned to bring these matters to the attention of those agencies with whom the prime responsibility appears to rest. With respect to mass hysteria, it is believed this problem would lie with the Federal Civil Defense Administration and/or the Interdepartmental Committee on Internal Security. Accordingly, it is planned to bring this to the attention of the FCDA and ICIS through established channels. With respect to emergency communications overloading, it is believed that each of the individual Military Services should examine this problem. Accordingly, we intend to introduce the subject at a meeting of the Joint Communications and Electronics Committee.\n\n* According to Brig. Gen. A.R. Maxwell (ROB) ADC is \"cognizant of this potential danger\", and does \"express concern\"\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\nDefense Futures\n\n01 November 2010\nICOD 30 August 2010\nDIA-08-1011-001\n\nLaser Lightcraft\nNanosatellites\n\nLaser Lightcraft Nanosatellites\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe Defense Intelligence Reference Document provides non-substantive but authoritative reference information related to intelligence topics or methodologies.\n\nPrepared by:\nTechnology Warning Division (DWO-4)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 58\n\nAdministrative Notes:\n\n(U) COPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2010 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to [REDACTED] AAP Person 1 AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: JUIAF - DI/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nChapter 1: Nanosatellite Technologies........................................................... 3\nChapter 2: Laser Lightcraft Nanosatellite Propulsion..............................................11\nChapter 3: Laser Lightcraft Weapon Mission Selection Study ..................................27\nChapter 4: Summary of Multi-Megawatt Laser Study for Lightcraft Propulsion Applications............................................................................................42\nChapter 5: Conclusion ..........................................................................................68\nReferences...................................................................................................................71\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Air Force X-25LR Laser Lightcraft .........................................................12\nFigure 2. AFRL Test Vehicle in Vertical Flight .......................................................14\nFigure 3. Time-Lapse Photo of a Lightcraft Undergoing an Outdoor Vertical Flight Test 15\nFigure 4. Lightcraft Flight-Test Vehicle Used in Horizontal Guide-Wire Flight Tests......16\nFigure 5. Lightcraft Undergoing Horizontal Guide-Wire Flight Test ...........................16\nFigure 6. Lightcraft Undergoing Horizontal Guide-Wire Flight Test ...........................17\nFigure 7. Lightcraft Concept ....................................................................................18\nFigure 8. Lightcraft Trajectory and Associated Pointing Angles ...............................19\nFigure 9. Lightcraft Vehicle Evolution ......................................................................20\nFigure 10. Attenuation Effects on Captured Laser Beam Power. ..............................22\nFigure 11. Influence of Trajectory and Laser Wavelength on Captured Power .............22\nFigure 12. Captured Laser Power vs. Increasing Range from 11.2 μm CO2 Laser ........23\nFigure 13. Influence of Lightcraft Range and Pointing Angles on Captured Power.......24\nFigure 14. Ground/Sea-to-Space Concept.................................................................27\nFigure 15. Air-to-Space Concept. ............................................................................28\nFigure 16. Schematic of Power Oscillator Optics .......................................................44\nFigure 17. Schematic of MOPA ...............................................................................45\nFigure 18. Schematic of the Laser N2/CO2/H2 Gas Flow System...............................45\nFigure 19. Northrop Grumman's Joint High Power Bulk Slab Solid-State Laser ...........48\nFigure 20. DARPA's High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System .........................50\nFigure 21. Phase Change Materials Allow Storage of Large Intermittent Heat Loads\nWhile Slow Regeneration Removes Heat from Aircraft ........................................52\nFigure 22. Typical HPFL MOPA Design. .................................................................54\nFigure 23. Fiber Laser Beam Combining Techniques ................................................54\nFigure 24. Pumping Fiber Lasers. ............................................................................56\nFigure 25. Large and Small Diameter Fiber Lasers ...................................................56\nFigure 26. Single Mode Fiber Laser Modules ...........................................................57\nFigure 27. Multimode HPFLs ..................................................................................57\nFigure 28. Free-Electron Laser. ................................................................................58\nFigure 29. Free-Electron Laser Mechanism ..............................................................58\nFigure 30. Free-Electron Laser Electron Beam Phase-Space Evolution .......................59\nFigure 31. Recirculating-Beam FEL System ..............................................................60\nFigure 32. High-Power FEL Optical Resonator ........................................................62\nFigure 33. Notional Long Range HEL Beam Control System. ....................................64\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 34. HEL Beam Pointer/Tracker.......................................................................65\nFigure 35. Basic Shared Aperture Beam Control System .........................................66\nFigure 36. HEL Adaptive Optics System.....................................................................67\n\nTables\n\nTable 1. Laser Lightcraft Model Cost Summary ......................................................25\nTable 2. Performance and Estimated Weights for a Hybrid Rocket and Lightcraft ........30\nTable 3. Estimated Costs for Hybrid Rocket and Lightcraft Launch Vehicles for ETO\nFlight. ...................................................................................................................32\nTable 4. Influence of Target Velocity and Intercept Angle on Impact Energy and\nRequired Mass.......................................................................................................33\nTable 5. Influence of Lightcraft and Target Velocity on Impact Energy and Required\nMass ......................................................................................................................35\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nLaser Lightcraft Nanosatellites\n\nSummary\n\nMiniaturized satellites are spacecraft of unusually low mass and small size, usually under 500 kg in total mass. The term \"minisatellite\" refers to a spacecraft with a wet mass (including onboard propellant) of 100 kg to 500 kg. Microsatellite or \"microsat\" is a spacecraft with a wet mass of 10 kg to 100 kg. Nanosatellite or \"nanosat\" is a spacecraft with a wet mass below 10 kg. Picosatellite or \"picosat\" is a spacecraft with a wet mass of 0.1 kg to 1.0 kg. Picosats are also called sub-nanosats.\n\nThe primary reason for miniaturizing satellites is to reduce cost. Heavier satellites require larger launch vehicles of greater cost while smaller, lighter satellites require smaller and cheaper launch vehicles and can sometimes be launched in multiples or \"piggyback\" using excess capacity on larger launch vehicles. Miniaturized satellites allow for cheaper designs as well as ease of mass production. However, few satellites of any size other than communications constellations, where dozens of satellites are used to cover the globe, have been mass produced in practice.\n\nBesides the cost issue, the main rationale for the use of miniaturized satellites is the opportunity to enable missions that a larger satellite cannot accomplish, such as:\n\n• Constellations for low data rate communications.\n• Using formations to gather data from multiple points.\n• In-orbit inspection of larger satellites.\n\nMany of these missions require numerous small spacecraft in a constellation or \"swarm.\" These include orbital communications networks and swarms of small satellites to conduct remote sensing, and to provide unique perspectives on astronomical bodies of interest. For instance, 100 or more nanosats could be deployed from a mother ship to their final destination in space for deployment.\n\nProvisions for orbital maneuvers as well as attitude control, multiple sensors, and instruments, and full autonomy will yield a highly capable miniaturized satellite. All onboard electronics will survive a total radiation dose rate of several hundred kilorads over a several year mission lifetime (at least 100 kilorads over two years). Nanosats developed for in-situ measurements will be spin-stabilized, and carry a complement of particles and fields instruments. Nanosats developed for remote sensing measurements (MASINT) or surveillance and eavesdropping (SIGINT) will be three-axis stabilized, and carry a complement of imaging and radio wave instruments. Autonomy both onboard the nanosats and at the ground stations will minimize the mission operational costs for tracking and managing a constellation.\n\nTo reduce overall mission cost, advanced technology components and a novel laser propulsion system will be used to make nanosats and their onboard instruments compact, lightweight, low power, low cost, and able to survive their radiation environment over a several year lifetime. Each nanosat will be manufactured and tested for a recurring cost not to exceed $500k. By producing a large quantity of nanosats for a given mission, the per-unit cost will be reduced to a small fraction of\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"satellite procurements for traditional missions. Mission operation costs will be minimized by the incorporation of both onboard and ground autonomy and use of heuristic systems."} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 1: Nanosatellite Technologies\n\nOVERVIEW\n\nNanosats require technologies that radically reduce the mass and power of components without compromising performance. In addition to miniaturizing components, methods to integrate similar functions across subsystems are being evaluated. For example, all subsystem electronics, including instruments, could be integrated within the Command and Data Handling (C&DH) subsystem. Multifunctional solutions also offer significant savings over traditional approaches. Technology investments are required to develop or adapt components to accommodate the expected radiation environment. Simple, effective methods of thermal control are essential to keep the nanosat operational during extreme temperature variations. Autonomy is a critical technology that impacts every subsystem. Constellations with tens to thousands of nanosats must be highly autonomous to be practical. The nanosat ground system must be kept inexpensive, simple, and made inter-operable with other missions.\n\nPROPULSION\n\nIn the baseline mission, nanosat propulsion is needed for two distinct functions: 1) each nanosat must raise its orbit apogee to the appropriate radius, 2) and it must reorient the axis of the spinning nanosat from the velocity direction (within the orbit plane) to its science mission attitude (perpendicular to the ecliptic plane). These maneuvers present challenging velocity change (Δv) and attitude-control (ACS) requirements.\n\nRequirements for the Δv Thruster:\n\n• Total impulse: 3,000 to 7,000 N-sec.\n• Thrust: 445 N maximum.\n• Input power (during burn): < 1 watt.\n• Specific impulse: 280 seconds.\n\nRequirements for the ACS Thruster:\n\n• Total impulse: ≤ 2.4 N-sec.\n• Minimum impulse bit: 0.044 N-sec.\n• Response time: < 0.005 sec.\n• Pulse rate: 1 Hz.\n\nIt turns out that the Δv and ACS thrusters can have independent systems. We propose a new innovation whereby the nanosat launch vehicle propulsion system also serves double duty as the Δv thruster system, and this can be done without having to carry the propulsion energy source into orbit. This can only be achieved via laser propulsion in which the laser beam energy that is used to launch a nanosat into orbit is also used to provide Δv thrust in orbit. This novel innovation dramatically reduces the mass, size, cost, and complexity of nanosats because they will only need to carry minimal onboard ACS thrusters and propellant to carry out routine, minor attitude adjustments. The innovative nanosat laser propulsion concept is presented in Chapter 2."} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Miniaturized solid propellant gas generators could be used as ACS thrusters. Forty-eight 50 mN-sec pulses are required to reorient the nanosat after it achieves the required orbital altitude. Although this could be achieved either by a monopropellant or a cold gas thruster, it could also be achieved using an array of gas generators. Such miniaturized gas generators have already been successfully built and commercialized by companies such as MOOG and Lockheed-Martin Space Systems. By incorporating micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) techniques, the devices have been produced relatively inexpensively. Miniaturized electric propulsion ACS thrusters, such as pulsed plasma and MEMS field-emission electric propulsion (MEMS FEEP) thrusters, have been developed and are now emerging into widespread commercialization.\n\nGUIDANCE, NAVIGATION AND CONTROL\n\nGuidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) subsystem key technologies and concepts have been identified to enable successful altitude determination of spin-stabilized and three-axis-stabilized nanosats for future missions. They include miniaturization of a sun sensor and horizon crossing indicator. The miniature precision \"fan\" sun sensor will pinpoint the sun virtually everywhere in the entire celestial sphere with every satellite rotation. The sun sensor will be required to weigh less than 0.25 kg, draw less than 0.1 watt, operate on no greater than a 3.3 volt bus, and meet a 0.1° resolution requirement. The miniature horizon crossing indicator has a small bore-sight field of view that is mounted at an angle off the spin axis. As the spacecraft rotates, a cone of coverage is formed. The sensor must be capable of detecting Earth over a range of orbital radii with a pointing accuracy of 0.05°. Total horizon crossing indicator weight and power will be less than 0.2 kg and 0.1 watt, respectively.\n\nOf particular interest to Constellation missions is the incorporation of GPS onboard the nanosats, to eliminate ground-based ephemeris generation. This allows for increased autonomy and simpler, more accurate time resolution onboard the spacecraft. For GPS to fit within the constraints of a nanosat, the receiver electronics need to be miniaturized into a layer within the C&DH module.\n\nCOMMAND AND DATA HANDLING\n\nDeveloping the C&DH subsystem for a nanosat presents some unique challenges, with low mass (0.25 kg) and low power (0.5 W) requirements being the biggest drivers. Advanced microelectronic solutions are being developed to meet these challenges. The microelectronics developed must be modular and of scalable packaging to both reduce cost and meet the requirements of various missions. This development will utilize the most cost effective approach, whether infusing commercially driven semiconductor devices into spacecraft applications or partnering with industry in the design and development of high capacity data processing devices. The major technologies will include: lightweight, low power electronics packaging; radiation hard, low power processing platforms; high capacity, low power memory systems; and radiation hard, reconfigurable, field programmable gate arrays (RHrFPGA).\n\nThe C&DH requirements are as follows:\n\n• Power: 0.5 watts."} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Weight: 0.25 kg.\n• Input data rate: 2 kbits/sec.\n• Output data rate: 100 kbits/sec.\n• Data storage: 2 Gbits.\n• Encoding: advanced convolutional.\n• Processing speed: 12 MIPS.\n• Radiation tolerance: > 100 krads total dose.\n\nIn order to develop a low mass C&DH, a lightweight and low power electronics packaging method must be used. The packaging method that will be chosen must have a small volume and small footprint (6 cm × 6 cm × variable height). The packaging technique must provide data on programmable substrates and data on a compliant interconnects for space use. A multi-chip module (MCM) has been successfully produced by Pico Systems Inc.\n\nA combined effort to reduce mass, power, size and cost led to the development of the CMOS Ultra Low Power Radiation Tolerant (CULPRiT) system on a chip, and \"C&DH in your Palm\" are technologies that enable the power reduction required for nanosats. The goals of these technologies are a 20:1 power reduction over current 5-volt technology, foundry independence of die production, and radiation tolerance.\n\nAnother technology enabling a decrease in volume is the RHrFPGA, which reduces volume by replacing many logic functions/circuits with one die. The RHrFPGA also allows concurrent design by decoupling the logic design from the module, shortens the design schedule, lowers the part count, and eases rework.\n\nThe above technologies allow for higher levels of electronic integration, effectively combining spacecraft subsystem electronics and instrument electronics into the smallest possible mass, power, and volume.\n\nPOWER SYSTEMS\n\nTotal spacecraft power is limited by the small satellite size. The Sun's power density is 1.35 kW/m². Assuming 15% conversion efficiency for a 0.3 m × 0.1 m disk shaped nanosat (cross section of 0.03 m²), with a 67% area coverage, this results in a total electric power of only 4.0 watts. Lightweight, efficient solar array panels that minimize the effective array mounting area are needed. Dual or triple junction GaAs solar cells that give 18% conversion efficiency at end of life (EOL), and assuming a more optimistic area factor of 85%, will result in only 6.2 W at EOL. Small satellites that do not have extended solar panels simply do not intercept a large solar power density and must use the available power very efficiently. For a small spinning satellite, it is expected that three solar cells will be connected in series along the spin axis, and groups of three will be connected in parallel around the circumference. Each section will generate 3.3 volts and rotate into and out of sunlight as a unit. Voltage drops at 3.3 volts, bus regulation, circuit protection (e.g., fuse or circuit breaker) and Lithium ion battery discharge characteristics are being studied.\n\nHighly elliptical orbits in the ecliptic plane where the apogee velocity is very low will cause a several hour eclipse during part of the year. Spacecraft batteries to cover this eclipse period presents a significant mass impact. However, only a 10° orbit plane"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"inclination relative to the ecliptic, will reduce the maximum eclipse period to about one hour. Inclusion of spacecraft batteries is then justified. Passive thermal control will be used to keep the spacecraft electronics within 10°C of ambient temperature, and hence will not require electric power for heating. Using such a scenario, a battery requirement of about 2 amp-hours at 3.3 volts will allow full spacecraft functionality during an eclipse. Twelve AA size Lithium-ion batteries meet the requirement and only weigh 480 grams.\n\nCircuits that have high current demands, such as thruster solenoids and fuses, need to be augmented with components that have a lower power density than batteries, but also have lower internal resistance. Ultra-capacitors are being explored for this application.\n\nMiniaturization of the power system electronics (PSE) to meet the weight and size requirements of the nanosats is a considerable challenge. The ideal approach is to eliminate the PSE completely, by having a fixed electrical load and batteries provide the needed bus regulation. This yields a simplified system consisting of solar cells, batteries, and minimal circuitry. A more immediate approach to miniaturization is to produce hybrid modules that measure approximately 5.08 cm × 3.17 cm × 1.27 cm and weigh 100 grams for each PSE component, namely the solar array regulator, battery regulator, and low voltage power converter. The combination of these three components into one module will reduce the size and weight another order of magnitude.\n\nTHERMAL\n\nAlthough an inclination change by 10° renders maximum shadows below two hours, we evaluate the case of a maximum eight hour shadow for the purpose of generality. Three thermal configurations are considered: (1) top and bottom of the nanosat are insulated, the inside of the cylindrical solar array is not insulated, allowing internal heat transfer between the internal equipment and the array; (2) the entire nanosat is insulated, top and bottom as well as inside the solar arrays, except for a radiator on top, sized to radiate the internal electrical dissipation; and (3) the internal equipment is thermally isolated as well as possible from an \"outside shell\" with a controllable two-phase heat transport device which can be \"shut off\" during Earth shadows, serving as the only thermal coupling between the equipment and a radiator on the outside surface.\n\nThe key advantage of configuration (1) is its reliability, or robustness. Since the temperature of the nanosat is set by a high energy balance (heat in – heat out) dominated by the absorbed solar energy, the operational temperature of the nanosat is relatively insensitive to top and bottom multilayer insulation (MLI) properties, or, largely, to internal heat dissipation. However, the feature that yields the operational reliability, i.e., the high energy balance, also results in a rapid drop in temperature when the solar load disappears during the Earth shadow. During the maximum eight hour eclipse used for this evaluation, it was found that internal temperatures dropped by about 60°C, which would result in internal temperatures in the range of −30°C to −40°C. At the same time, the solar arrays dropped to a temperature of about 60°C. Based on past experience, these end-of-eclipse temperatures are reasonable."} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Because configuration (2) has a much smaller overall energy balance than configuration (1), it is much more sensitive to MLI properties and to internal power dissipation. However, eclipse performance improves. During the ~ 8 hour eclipse, internal temperatures drop by only 20°C, a marked improvement, with end-of-eclipse temperatures well within the range of most spacecraft components. It should be noted that the solar arrays, since they are now isolated from the body of the nanosat, drop to temperatures of about −110°C. Even these solar array temperatures should not pose a problem. For example, the solar arrays of many geosynchronous satellites drop routinely to temperatures of about −150°C during the 72 minute eclipse experienced by these spacecraft at each equinox season.\n\nThe key feature of configuration (3) is that the equipment is coupled to an external radiator only with a two-phase heat transport device, such as a capillary pumped loop (CPL) or loop heat pipe (LHP). Operational temperatures are again maintained to temperatures of about 20°C nominal with a properly sized radiator. However, the temperature is also totally dependent on the proper operation of the two-phase \"loop.\" The two-phase heat transport device can be made redundant by the addition of a second loop if single fault tolerance is desired. Note that redundancy is not a consideration for the other two configurations. During the ~ 8 hour eclipse, further improvement is realized, with internal temperatures dropping by as little as 6°C if the internal payload is well insulated from the exterior of the nanosat. As in configuration (2), the solar array temperatures drop to about −110°C. For certain equipment or science instruments, the temperature control afforded by this type of \"active\" design may be necessary.\n\nA moderate amount of technology development has been underway since 2000 to enable a two-phase heat transport system for use in a nanosat. The small size and low heat transport requirements of the nanosat will necessitate significant downsizing of today's flight qualified two-phase systems. This reduction will be accomplished by leveraging recent successful tests of a small cryogenic two-phase CPL.\n\nRF COMMUNICATIONS\n\nThe onboard RF subsystem must be small, low mass, and low power. The system specifications are:\n\n• Mass: 0.5 kg.\n• Power consumption: 0.5 watt.\n• Transmission data rate: up to 100 kbits/sec.\n• Command reception data rate: 1 kbit/sec.\n• Range: 3 to 5 Earth radii.\n• Channel type: BPSK.\n• Effective isotropic radiated power: 0.15 watt (−8.2 dbW).\n• Carrier frequency: 8,470 MHz.\n\nThe tracking system should be coupled with this communication subsystem to maximize efficiency in mass and power."} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The communications subsystem is further complicated by constellations requiring spin-stabilized nanosats. A spinning nanosat cannot easily point an antenna toward Earth. Therefore, a low gain omni antenna is assumed and communications must take place near perigee, when the range is 3 to 5 Earth radii. A large ground antenna and high data rate compression must be used to achieve reasonable data rates with minimum power. This places an additional burden on the ground stations for both sensitive receivers/bit synchronizers and advanced decoders. These same considerations limit data rate for satellite-to-satellite communication.\n\nAlthough the inclusion of an onboard command receiver is highly desired, it puts an additional strain on an already challenged nanosat mass and power budget. For this reason, the concept of a totally autonomous, receiverless nanosat design appears most attractive. However, \"receiver-on-a-chip\" technology has advanced to the point where including a receiver onboard looks feasible. The biggest disadvantage of a receiver now becomes the ground personnel and software needed to support the ability to command the nanosat. Command actions taken onboard will of course be limited to basic functions such as \"transmit data\" because of the lack of redundancy and mechanical functions. Although scenarios have been defined to allow nanosats to autonomously determine when to transmit their stored data, utilizing a receiver to control the telemetry downlink from the ground still has value. The capability of uploading flight software changes, as well as sending a master reset if necessary, would also exist with such an onboard command receiver.\n\nMECHANICAL AND STRUCTURES\n\nThe nanosat mechanical system will be kept as simple as possible. The ideal nanosat mechanical design should consist of a one-piece structure on which all other components are mounted.\n\nMultifunctional structures can provide thermal control, shielding and serve as substrates for printed circuit boards. For example, diamond facesheet honeycomb panels can serve as a structure, thermal conductor and radiator, and printed circuit board substrates. The diamond facesheet provides ten times greater thermal conductivity than aluminum and can dissipate heat from high power density electronics modules with a low mass comparable to carbon fiber composites. Another example is the structural battery system. It consists of a honeycomb panel whose core is filled with the cells of a nickel-hydrogen battery (or other flight qualified cell technology).\n\nConcurrent engineering and fabrication techniques will be used to create a single computer model for the design, analysis (structural, thermal, and dynamic), and fabrication of the nanosat and its components. Dynamic modeling capabilities to simulate nanosat deployments will provide faster designs and a reduction in the amount of deployment testing required. This approach will significantly lower development costs by reducing duplication of effort, chances of errors, the number of drawings and paperwork required.\n\nMass production techniques not traditionally used for spaceflight hardware will be used, such as casting and injection molding. Options being considered for the nanosat structure material are: cast aluminum; cast aluminum-beryllium alloy; injection molded"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"plastic; fiber reinforced plastic; flat stock composite construction; and carbon nanotubes (a.k.a. \"Buckytubes\") or carbon nanotubes composited with other materials. The material will be selected based on mass, cost, manufacturability, ease of assembly and integration, and suitability for the space environment.\n\nStreamlined testing is needed for up to 100 or 1000 nanosats per mission. Performing a complete test program on each unit would be prohibitively expensive and time consuming. We need to reduce the quantity of testing required while assuring product quality to meet program cost and schedule goals. Lot testing and statistical quality control methods should be developed to verify quality and structural performance by testing a small subset of the total number of nanosats.\n\nINSTRUMENTS\n\nInstruments for in-situ and remote measurements must be miniaturized to fit within the mass and volume constraints of a nanosat. Power consumption must also be scaled down accordingly. Instrument sensitivities cannot be compromised in the process. Instrument electronics need to be combined with nanosat subsystem electronics to achieve higher degrees of integration yielding reduced mass and volume. Instrument software will be designed to evaluate the onboard data and adjust instrument data rates and modes to efficiently capture the data of highest priority.\n\nGROUND SYSTEMS\n\nThe large number of nanosats in a constellation is a challenge to the ground system in getting all of the data to the users. In a typical baseline mission, there are times when up to ten (or more) nanosats would be within communications range of a ground station at a single time. A minimal model for the ground station contacts shows that they can support a nanosat constellation with only two ground stations located on opposite sides of the Earth. The schedulers will prioritize the contacts, with the nanosats in the higher period orbits getting priority. Nanosats in the lower period orbits have more opportunities to dump their data, and therefore can have lower priority without risking any data loss.\n\nSince the nanosats are autonomous, the operations concept for a mission requires only a few operators to determine the nanosat orbits, schedule the ground stations, and to investigate anomalies on the spacecraft. Automated systems will monitor the housekeeping data from the spacecraft and they will flag problems for the spacecraft engineers to investigate. The large number of nanosats allows the risk management to be different for this mission than for single spacecraft missions.\n\nExcept for commands to initiate the data downlink, the ground system will not command the nanosats for normal operations. The only commands that the ground system sends would be program loads to resolve or work around problems and failures.\n\nThe large number of nanosats in a constellation is a configuration control challenge for the data tracking, the schedules, the command loads, the science or intelligence data, and the engineering data. The ground system will use IDs, colorcoded user interfaces, and other techniques to ensure that the operators and users can keep track of the data"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"associated with a particular nanosat. Constellations that fly in close formation can benefit by the use of inter-nanosat communications to reduce ground station contention. The data would flow from a single nanosat to the ground instead of coming from every nanosat. Communications protocols for inter-nanosat communications must be developed.\n\nAUTONOMY\n\nSupport costs are high if single-satellite mission operations and data analysis practices are scaled to a constellation mission. Autonomy onboard the spacecraft and on the ground is therefore required to ensure that mission objectives are efficiently and inexpensively met.\n\nNanosat autonomy will make use of onboard and ground-based remote agents with the overarching goal of maximizing the scientific or intelligence return from each nanosat during the mission lifetime. The remote agents achieve this goal by monitoring and appropriately controlling nanosat subsystems. Additionally, the onboard agent monitors the full complement of spacecraft sensors and instruments to heuristically separate scientific or intelligence events of interest from background events, thereby intelligently fitting the science/intelligence data within allocated spacecraft storage resources.\n\nNanosats with distant orbits are out of communications range of a ground station for nearly a week. Nanosat subsystems could be compromised if faults occurring during this blackout period were not readily addressed. An unacceptable loss of scientific or intelligence data could also occur. Therefore, the onboard agent will incorporate the capability to detect, diagnose, and recover from faults.\n\nCertain failure scenarios may not be correctable by the onboard agent. These faults will be deferred to the ground agent for handling. Each nanosat will include data in its telemetry on the health and status of each subsystem and a history of commands autonomously issued since the last ground contact. The ground system will then attempt to diagnose problems based on this data. Additionally, collective knowledge of actions taken by all nanosats in the constellation will reside within the ground system by virtue of the data dumps made during each contact. From this data the agent can detect trends and systematic conditions not otherwise observable onboard the nanosat.\n\nThese highly autonomous systems will present a unique set of challenges not only to the system designers, but also to those involved in spacecraft testing. Careful consideration must be given to the design of the test program to ensure that the state-space of the remote agents is validated and verified. It is equally important to implement this program in a cost-effective manner. However, we could likely justify deploying considerable resources to address this issue since the methods developed to solve these challenges can be applied to numerous missions."} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 2: Laser Lightcraft Nanosatellite Propulsion\n\nLaser propulsion is a new and exceptional method for reaching space. By launching spacecraft on a beam of electromagnetic radiation, researchers will have developed the first new method of achieving orbit since the late 1950's. In this concept, a remote or ground-based energy source, such as a ground- or space-based laser beam generator, transmits power to a spacecraft via a beam of electromagnetic radiation [1-8]. The spacecraft collects the beam energy and uses it to power the propulsion system. This concept has the advantage of using the ambient air as the working fluid in the atmosphere and carrying propellant only for use outside the atmosphere, leaving the energy source for heating the propellant on the ground. This results in a tremendous weight reduction and improved performance benefit for the spacecraft because a large propellant mass and heavy energy source are not carried onboard.\n\nThe laser-propelled vehicle, called \"Lightcraft\" because it flies on a beam of laser light, is designed to harness the energy of a laser beam and convert it into propulsive thrust. In the earliest laser-propelled rocket designs, beamed energy from a ground-based laser (with near-visible wavelengths) is absorbed by a heat exchanger onboard a rocket, and is transferred to a working fluid. The heated fluid (hydrogen, ammonia, etc.) then produces thrust by expansion through a nozzle as in a conventional chemical rocket. An alternative to this scheme is to use the beamed-energy to ablate an onboard solid propellant (such as Delrin) to generate thrust. However, a more recent incarnation of this concept, developed by the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) at Edwards AFB, CA, is for the Lightcraft to operate in two propulsion modes: airbreathing (detonation wave) and rocket ablation (deflagration). The Lightcraft operates in air breathing mode up to Mach 5 and 30 km altitude, and in laser thermal rocket mode (using liquid, gaseous, or Delrin ablation propellant) in space [7, 8, 9-16]. Figure 1 shows the Air Force X-25LR (25 cm diameter) Lightcraft concept. The Air Force X-50LR Lightcraft has twice the diameter as the X-25LR."} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 1. Air Force X-25LR Laser Lightcraft (courtesy of F. Mead, AFRL/PRSP, Edwards AFB, CA).\n\nIn the two-mode propulsion concept, a forebody aeroshell acts as an external compression surface for the airbreathing engine inlet. Affixed to the bottom of the craft is a parabolic-shaped afterbody mirror, which serves as a primary receptive optic for the laser beam and as an external plug nozzle expansion surface. The primary thrust structure is the centrally located annular shroud, which provides air through the inlet and also acts as a ring-shaped energy \"absorption/propulsion\" chamber for plasma formation. The air inlet is closed when the Lightcraft operates in the rocket mode.\n\nThe Lightcraft is very lightweight and uses its shape to facilitate vertical flight. The craft has the appearance of a fat acorn when viewed from the side. The lower portion of the craft is a very highly polished metal mirror, whereby the lower point of the acorn-shape is the midpoint of a stretched-out parabolic mirror (see Figure 2). The Lightcraft receives kilojoule pulses from a ground-based infrared laser at a rate of 25 times per second. The axisymmetric, off-axis parabolic collection mirror facilitates flight by concentrating the pulsed laser light into an annular focus. The laser beam's pulse interacts with the mirror, spreading out and focusing into an annular area inside the circumference of the craft. The intensity of the 18 microsecond pulsed laser is sufficiently high that atmospheric breakdown occurs in the annular area causing inlet air to momentarily burst into a highly luminous plasma (10,000 - 30,000 K), thereby producing a superheated plasma shock wave (with instantaneous pressures reaching tens of atmospheres) that generates thrust in the direction of the laser beam. A lip around the craft's circumference, akin to a plug nozzle, directs the expansion of the\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nplasma, creating downward thrust expansion. Multiple laser pulses and an atmospheric refresh of breakdown air generate the flight. This airbreathing pulsed-detonation engine concept owes its origins to the German V-1 \"Buzz Bomb\" of WW II which ran on aviation fuel.\n\nFor the purpose of this report, we envision a Lightcraft Earth-to-Orbit (ETO) transportation system that operates according to the following scenario. The airbreathing engine mode develops quasi-steady thrust by pulsing at a variable rate that depends on the Mach number and altitude flown along the flight trajectory to orbit. Once the Lightcraft reaches very high altitude and climbs above the atmosphere, it begins to operate in the thermal rocket mode using onboard propellant to convert and expand the laser energy for propulsion. The Lightcraft is spin-stabilized and can be launched vertically upward or on a slant upward trajectory, hover in mid-air, and undergo powered descent and landing. The ground-based laser beam generator system consists of the following: 1) power supply; 2) high-power (megawatt-class) laser beam generator/transmitter using novel beam optics; and 3) automated tracking, hand-off and safety systems.\n\nHISTORY OF THE LIGHTCRAFT TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM\n\nThe laser Lightcraft project originally grew out of the Lightcraft Technology Demonstration Program funded by the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) Laser Propulsion Program in the late 1980's. In the 1990's, a joint program involving the NASA-Marshall Space Flight Center and the Propulsion Sciences and Advanced Concepts Division of the AFRL Propulsion Directorate developed and tested an experiment to determine the feasibility of using high-power pulsed lasers to launch a spacecraft into orbit. Successful tests at the White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) High Energy Laser Systems Test Facility (HELSTF) demonstrated the first passively controlled vertical free flight of an object that was propelled by the U.S. Army's 10 kW Pulsed Laser Vulnerability Test System (PLVTS) infrared CO2 laser. Laser boost capability was demonstrated at the HELSTF with a Lightcraft reaching 43 m vertically in 2-second gyroscopically stabilized free flights, which was followed by horizontal guide-wire flights of 121.9 m lasting 10 to 20 seconds (see Figure 2 through Figure 6). A subsequent series of test flights achieved an altitude of 38.7 m. L. Myrabo (private communication, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., Troy, NY, 2009) recently reported vertical Lightcraft test flights achieving 68 m altitude.\n\nThis achievement can be compared to the first successful flights of Robert Goddard's liquid propellant chemical rocket, which attained a height of 12.5 m after a 2.5 second burn in March 1926. In sharp contrast with Goddard's rockets, there is absolutely no fuel on board the prototype Lightcraft, which has a diameter of 10 cm, mass of 20 to 40 g, and is machined from a solid block of 6061-T6 aluminum. Five different Lightcraft designs have been flight-tested using the pointing and tracking system on the PLVTS laser. Current Lightcraft designs are limited to about 60 g mass and 15 cm in diameter by the PLVTS laser. A megawatt-class laser will be necessary for a larger kilo-class Lightcraft to reach orbit and components for these lasers exist, which would demonstrate the feasibility of this technology for low cost access to space.\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 2. AFRL Test Vehicle in Vertical Flight (courtesy of F. Mead, AFRL/PRSP, Edwards AFB, CA).\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 3. Time-Lapse Photo of a Lightcraft Undergoing an Outdoor Vertical Flight Test (courtesy of F. Mead, AFRL/PRSP, Edwards AFB, CA).\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 4. Lightcraft Flight-Test Vehicle Used in Horizontal Guide-Wire Flight Tests (the top of vehicle is to the right and the laser beam strikes the stretched-out parabolic mirror/propulsion section on the left) (courtesy of F. Mead, AFRL/PRSP, Edwards AFB, CA).\n\nFigure 5. Lightcraft Undergoing Horizontal Guide-Wire Flight Test (courtesy of F. Mead, AFRL/PRSP, Edwards AFB, CA).\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 6. Lightcraft Undergoing Horizontal Guide-Wire Flight Test (courtesy of F. Mead, AFRL/PRSP, Edwards AFB, CA).\n\nSUMMARY OF TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE AND BENEFITS\n\nWe outline below the propulsion performance features of the laser Lightcraft launch system:\n\n• The system is single-stage-to-orbit and completely reusable.\n\n• Almost no onboard propellant is required (the reaction mass is free air), except for the small internal amount of propellant needed for final ascent to orbit and orbital maneuvering.\n\n• Vehicle specific impulse (Isp) is essentially infinite (≈ several × 10³ seconds in rocket mode).\n\n• Payload mass fractions are ≈ 50 - 95%.\n\n• These systems are simple, reliable, safe, environmentally clean, and could have a very high all azimuth on-demand launch rate.\n\n• Reduces space launch costs by two to three orders of magnitude below today's levels: estimated launch costs are $20/kg to $600/kg of payload (not including life cycle and launch operations costs).\n\n• The feasibility and physics principles have been proven by the AFRL's Lightcraft Concept Demonstration Program [11, 16-25].\n\nLightcraft systems have sufficient power density to operate as ETO launch systems. It requires a beam power of 0.1 to 1 MW per kg of vehicle mass, while orbit-to-orbit\n\n17"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"propulsion requires a modest 0.1 to 10 MW of total beam power. The ground-based megawatt-class laser beam generator is state-of-the-art technology. The cost of generating electrical power for the ground-based laser beam generator is ~ $0.10/kWh, which translates to < $2/kg of payload. An SDIO study [10, 11] showed that all launch to orbit conditions for a Lightcraft could be satisfied by a single, high-power ground-based laser – with or without the aid of a low altitude laser relay mirror or space-based laser beam generator system. The majority of the system mass required to launch a payload to orbit is left on the ground in the form of the beam generators and their electrical power sources. The dry spacecraft mass can be further reduced by two orders of magnitude, and thus the operating costs reduced by a factor of 10 (to < $2/kg of payload), if Buckytubes are used to construct the vehicle and its subsystems.\n\nLIGHTCRAFT NANOSATELLITE CONFIGURATION\n\nAs shown in Figure 7, the Lightcraft nanosat configuration consists of: 1) a conically shaped \"forebody\" for lift and aerodynamic compression of ingested airflow (prior to its detonation by laser heating during atmospheric flight); 2) an annular \"cowl\" or \"shroud\" within which air detonation or propellant ablation (by intense laser heating) occurs; and 3) a parabola-shaped \"afterbody\" whose mirrored surface focuses beamed laser energy into regions of sufficient smallness for intense air or propellant heating to occur. And as shown in Figure 8, the vehicle is powered by laser airbreathing propulsion (by detonation of air) until hypersonic speed within the sensible atmosphere is reached; and then the vehicle is powered by laser rocket propulsion (by heating of propellant) during flight above the sensible atmosphere, until cut-off velocity for orbital flight is reached.\n\nFigure 7 labels: Shroud (Cowl): within which Laser Heating of Airflow and Propellant Occurs; Laser Airbreathing Flight from Zero Velocity to Hypersonic Speed; Afterbody: with Mirrored Surface for Focusing Laser Energy into the Shroud (Cowl); Laser Beam; Forebody: for Lift and Compression of Airflow during Atmospheric Flight; Axi-Symmetric Body; Laser Rocket Flight from Hypersonic to Orbital Speed\n\nFigure 7. Lightcraft Concept [26].\n\n18"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 8 labels: End of Laser Rocket Propulsion; Lightcraft Earth-to-Orbit Trajectory; Zenith; End of Laser Airbreathing Propulsion; Vertical; Maximum (Cut-Off) Velocity; Lightcraft Launch; Sensible Atmosphere; Ground Based Laser; (Not to Scale)\n\nFigure 8. Lightcraft Trajectory and Associated Pointing Angles [26].\n\nThe low vehicle propellant fraction for laser powered Lightcraft (~ 0.5 of vehicle takeoff mass) resulted in vehicle takeoff masses that were approximately 45, 80, and 360 times less than those of conventional rockets for placing masses of 10 kg, 5.0 kg, and 1.0 kg into low Earth orbit (LEO). And preliminary life-cycle cost estimates made during the AFRL study by Froning and Davis [26] indicated that transportation system costs for placing 10 kg, 5.0 kg, and 1.0 kg of mass into orbit using Lightcraft and ground-based lasers would be approximately 3, 5, and 15 times less than with conventional rockets.\n\nOne of the two most important findings from the Froning and Davis study is the significant influence of Lightcraft drag on airbreathing laser propulsion performance, and the consequence of this on laser rocket propulsion performance during the latter phase of Lightcraft flight. As indicated in Figure 9, a significant reduction in both Lightcraft size and drag coefficient (CD) – as compared to that of the initial government baseline design – was needed for acceptable airbreathing thrusting acceleration during atmospheric flight. Figure 9 shows that both size and drag coefficient reduction were accomplished in several steps – with both size and CD reduction accomplished during the first step, and further CD reduction (by increased forebody fineness ratio) during the second step.\n\nIt was also found that sufficient Lightcraft airbreathing thrust required thrust variation with altitude, somewhat comparable to that achievable by contemporary airbreathing propulsion systems – whose flight dynamic pressure (q) and thrust remain constant with increasing vehicle altitude and speed until constant q can no longer be maintained. Here, acceptable airbreathing thrust minus drag performance was needed to reach maximum airbreathing speed (Mach 10) within acceptably short flight times and distances. And such short times and distances were required to ensure adequate receipt of beamed power by the Lightcraft out to the longest ranges associated with laser rocket propulsion flight; where beamed power would travel the longest distances through the atmosphere and space, and collected power would drop to lowest values.\n\n19"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Froning and Davis [26] also determined that the ground-based laser selected (λ = 1.62 μm, 10 MW radiated power, 10 m diameter aperture) would enable a Lightcraft takeoff mass of 8 kg and Lightcraft propellant mass of 4 kg. Therefore, this would allow approximately 4 kg of mass to be placed into orbit with the selected ground-based laser. And vehicle synthesis work determined that the remaining masses for the Lightcraft airframe, propulsion, and control systems would be 0.63 kg, 0.46 kg, and 0.45 kg, respectively, together with a 30 percent contingency (of 0.47 kg).\n\nFigure 9. Lightcraft Vehicle Evolution (in 3 steps) [26].\n\nFroning and Davis [26] further indicated that small COTS chemical propulsion systems, with sufficient thrust, would be about a factor of 7 to 12 heavier than those needed to meet Lightcraft orbit circularization needs. However, such mass reductions were\n\n20"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"deemed possible with emerging MEMS technologies being developed under the National Nanotechnology Initiative for both chemical and FEEP thrusters (see Chapter 2 for details). It was also found that the currently configured composite structure for the Lightcraft forebody must be reduced from 2-ply to 3-ply (with the same ply-thickness) to meet Lightcraft airframe mass requirements.\n\nAnother important finding in the study was the significant influence of the ground-based laser wavelength (λ) on Lightcraft performance. Figure 8 illustrates the adverse beam propagation geometry associated with ETO laser propulsion by means of ground-based lasers. It is seen that beam propagation distances through the Earth's atmosphere are short during initial flight phases when the path length traveled by laser energy to the Lightcraft is least. But during latter flight phases (when the vehicle itself is above the sensible atmosphere) the beam propagation path within the atmosphere is much longer, and power losses due to atmospheric attenuation become ever greater with increasing range. And since power losses due to laser beam spreading – even in vacuo – also increase with increasing distance from the laser, power losses are greatest at the end of laser propulsion (when vehicle distance from the laser is greatest).\n\nFor a ground-based laser with given aperture diameter, adaptive optics, atmospheric conditions, and radiated power, the laser power collected by the Lightcraft was found to be extremely sensitive to laser wavelength. Here, λ determined the amount of radiated laser power lost through \"thermal blooming,\" turbulence, and \"extinction\" during beam passage through the Earth's atmosphere in addition to the power lost from \"diffraction\" (beam spreading at longer ranges) during propagation through the vacuum of space. And since each loss mechanism was a function of λ, Froning and Davis considered each loss mechanism in their estimation of lost power for the six different laser wavelengths associated with the six different ground-based laser candidates that were evaluated in the study.\n\nShown in Figure 10 (without dimensions) is the fraction of radiated laser power collected by the Lightcraft at maximum laser propulsion range (when necessary \"cut-off\" velocity for orbital flight is achieved) for the spectrum of wavelengths investigated. It is seen that a significant fraction of laser-radiated power is lost, even if there were no atmospheric transmission losses at all. And additional losses associated with beam propagation through the atmosphere are seen to result in power losses on the order of 75% to 99%. Figure 11 shows that significantly more power would be available at the end of laser airbreathing flight than at the end of laser rocket flight. This might benefit surface-to-air Lightcraft missions that would mainly entail airbreathing flight.\n\n21"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 10. Attenuation Effects on Captured Laser Beam Power [26].\n\nFigure 11. Influence of Trajectory and Laser Wavelength on Captured Power [26].\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 12 shows, for a given laser aperture diameter, adaptive optics, and atmospheric conditions, the decrease in laser power collected by the Lightcraft with increasing range from a 11.2 μm wavelength CO2 laser. The decrease is shown for a vertical laser-pointing angle and for a final laser-pointing angle of 83° (from the vertical) that occurs at maximum laser propulsion range (about 500 km), where the Lightcraft reaches maximum speed.\n\nFigure 12. Captured Laser Power vs. Increasing Range from 11.2 μm CO2 Laser [26].\n\nFigure 13 shows the significant difference in the laser power collected by the Lightcraft during its laser propulsion phase of flight for the selected laser wavelength of 1.62 μm, and for the 11.2 μm CO2 laser wavelength chosen for a government baseline Lightcraft. This comparison is for a Lightcraft trajectory determined from optimization work during the latter phases of the Froning and Davis study. It was also for the highest radiated power (10 MW) and the largest laser aperture (10 m) that was deemed practical for Air Force operations and systems.\n\nUnfortunately the demonstrated laser beam power levels for the attractive 1.62 μm wavelength, which suffered the least propagation losses, are relatively modest. This attractive laser wavelength is associated with the wavelength-tunable free-electron laser (FEL), whose maximum beam power is currently in the 20 kW range. Thus, there is the need for a 500-fold increase in FEL beam power to achieve the 10 MW beam power required for (10 kg-class) Lightcraft ETO propulsion. However, 100 kW beam FEL designs are being proposed by the Navy for prototyping and testing in FY 2011 and 2012.\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 13. Influence of Lightcraft Range and Pointing Angles on Captured Power [26].\n\nThe physics and technology of FELs will allow beam power to be scaled up to 1 MW or higher as long as thermal loading of the beam optics and electron losses in the electron beam recirculation loop can be mitigated using engineering solutions. Beam combining of several 1 MW (or higher) FELs can achieve a total combined beam output power of 10 MW (or higher). Other newly emerging high-power laser technology that show promise for achieving megawatt-class beam power include bulk slab solid-state and high-power fiber lasers; the former has already achieved over 100 kW of beam power while the latter is getting close to it. Present megawatt-class lasers that are based on available proven technology include a proposal for a 5-beam, 2.5 MW per beam, electron gun-driven CO2/gas mixture laser which combines five laser beams to achieve 10 MW of total beam output power. These systems will be described further in Chapter 4.\n\nLIFE CYCLE OF LIGHTCRAFT SYSTEM\n\nFroning and Davis [26] found that ground-based laser costs comprised the major portion of a Lightcraft ETO transportation system – with ground-based laser costs comprising about 80% of the total laser Lightcraft system life-cycle cost (LCC). The LCC of a laser Lightcraft ETO transportation system was estimated using Lightcraft vehicle and ground-based laser cost inputs from AFRL/PRSP together with programmatic cost inputs from another cost database. Table 1 shows the programmatic assumptions together with the system acquisition and operation costs for the various Lightcraft vehicle and ground-based laser system elements. Laser acquisition and operation costs were assumed to be shared with another user and all operations costs are reduced to one-half those values estimated from historical data. Launch costs are seen to be extremely low (only $74,141 per flight) with laser-\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nassociated costs comprising approximately 92% of the laser-powered Lightcraft ETO transportation system LCC.\n\nTable 1. Laser Lightcraft Model Cost Summary [26].\n\nLaser Lightcraft Model Cost Summary | Share Solid-State Laser Cut Ops Costs by 50%\nMission Model Length (Years) 10\nLaunch Rate Per Year 1,000\nPayload Per Launch (kg) 2.0\nMission Flight Time (s) 221.52\nTotal Program Cost ($M) 741.410\nDDT & E / Acquisition Costs ($M) 680.358 91.77%\nOperations Costs ($M) 61.053 8.23%\n\nAverage Cost Per Flight ($) 74,141\nAverage Cost Per kg (based on operations costs) ($) 3,052\n\nDDT & E / Acquisition Costs ($M) 680.358\n Laser Lightcraft (LCC) Development Cost ($M) 18.000 2.65%\n Laser Lightcraft (LCC) Acquisition ($M) 37.596 5.53%\n 10 MW Ground-Based Laser Acquisition ($M) 624.762 91.83%\n Launch Site Facility Costs (Construction) ($M) 5.000 0.73%\n\nOperations Costs, Annual ($M) 6.105\n Laser Annual Operations Cost ($M) 3.750 61.42%\n Laser Refurbishment, Annual ($M) 0.750 12.28%\n Laser Consumables, Annual ($M) - 0.00%\n Energy Cost, Annual ($M) 0.101 1.65%\n Launch Site Facility Cost, Annual ($M) 0.250 4.09%\n USAF Sys Prgrm Office (SPO) Cost, Annual ($M) 0.250 4.09%\n NORAAD Coordination Cost, Annual ($M) 0.500 8.19%\n FAA Coordination Cost, Annual ($M) 0.250 4.09%\n Range (Safety, Tracking, Telemetry), Annual ($M) 0.255 4.17%\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 3: Laser Lightcraft Weapon Mission Selection Study\n\nThe objective of the Froning and Davis [26] study was to examine crucial future Air Force launch vehicle missions and select at least one that might be performed very cost-effectively by Lightcraft vehicles powered by beamed electromagnetic energy from airborne or ground/sea-based lasers. It entailed identification and analysis of promising launch vehicle missions for laser-propelled Lightcraft, and assessments of the identified and analyzed missions by experts in the mission areas. See Figure 14 and Figure 15 for Lightcraft missions that have been identified and explored.\n\nIt was concluded that the most promising Air Force mission for a laser-propelled Lightcraft is the placement of Earth and space observing nanosats of up to 3 kg mass into LEO. Such a laser-propelled Lightcraft would also serve as a \"Lightsat,\" because it would use the Lightcraft's laser propulsion optics as a telescope for observing military targets on Earth and in space. Additional estimated mass for performing the Lightsat function is no more than about 1 kg, if the Lightcraft forebody structure panels can be unfurled in orbit and used as solar power collectors. Such a Lightcraft system appears capable of reaching LEO at 1/5th to 1/10th the cost required for placing a similar Lightsat system into LEO using multistage chemical rocket systems.\n\nGround-to-Space\n(Earth-to-Orbit)\nPico or Nano\nSatellites\n\nFigure 14. Ground/Sea-to-Space Concept: Appropriate rotation of a high-energy laser beam, emanating from a ground/sea-based laser, guides and propels an integral Lightcraft pico-/nano-satellite along an ETO ascent path until orbital conditions are reached, or until beamed laser energy can no longer be transformed into Lightcraft thrust [26].\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Air-to-Space\n(Ballistic Threats)\nEnemy Ballistic Missiles\nAir Launch:\nH ~ 12 km\nV ~ M 0.8\n\nFigure 15. Air-to-Space Concept: Appropriate rotation and translation of a high-energy laser beam, emanating from a moving aircraft, guides and propels a Lightcraft toward a nearly head-on collision with an incoming ballistic missile; intermittently, the laser illuminates the target for guidance updates and for terminal semi-active seeker homing and end-game maneuvering [26].\n\nASSUMED LASER AND LIGHTCRAFT LIMITATIONS\n\nBeamed power levels achievable with envisioned high-energy laser technology are assumed to be no more than about 10 MW for ground/sea-based lasers, and no more than about 2.0 MW for the much lighter and smaller airborne lasers installable on Boeing 747, B-1 Lancer, or C-130 subsonic aircraft. Lightcraft takeoff masses no more than about 20 kg can be accelerated to orbital velocities by maximum ground/sea-based laser power levels, and Lightcraft takeoff masses no more than about 4 kg to 8 kg, depending on the magnitude of velocity and acceleration needed, can be accelerated to very high velocities by the lower allowable masses and power levels of airborne lasers.\n\nLIGHTCRAFT TRAJECTORY AND MISSION LIMITATIONS\n\nIdentified trajectory and mission limitations [26] are:\n\n• Small allowable angle between centerlines of the laser beam and Lightcraft vehicle axes before significant thrust reduction occurs.\n• Small allowable angles-of-attack (angle between Lightcraft centerline and velocity vector) before significant thrust reduction occurs.\n• Limited capability for engaging multiple missile or aircraft threats in allowable time interval because of relatively long laser beam-riding time against each threat.\n\nAdditional Lightcraft hardware needed for some tactical missions [26] include:\n\n28\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Terminal seeker guidance for hit-to-kill accuracy against missiles and maneuvering aircraft.\n• Axial-/lateral-propulsion and control for missile and maneuvering aircraft interception.\n• Additional mass along Lightcraft centerline for hardened target penetration.\n\nLIGHTCRAFT MISSION INVESTIGATIONS: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS\n\nGround/Sea to Space (ETO) [26]\n\nIf laser propulsion can provide nearly all Lightcraft Δv needed to reach LEO, then Lightcraft nanosat systems, which combine both launch vehicle and nanosat subsystems within a single vehicle, may be achievable with launch masses in the 2 kg to 10 kg range; and such Lightcraft nanosat systems appear capable of reaching LEO at 1/5th to 1/10th the cost required using multistage chemical rocket systems.\n\nAir to Space (Air to Orbit) [26]\n\nIf hypersonic magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) airbreathing propulsion research and development currently underway at the NSF, NASA and the AFRL (Dayton, OH) is successful, then Lightcraft dry masses as heavy as 100 kg can be launched from aircraft flying at Mach 10 to 12 at about 30 km above the Earth. Such Lightcraft could be propelled by laser power as high as 100 MW that can be generated from the electrical power of ionized-air-slowing by interacting electric and magnetic fields within hypersonic MHD airbreathing engines.\n\nAir to Space (Ballistic Missile Interception) [26]\n\nSufficient impact energy for destruction of high-speed ballistic missiles above the atmosphere is possible with chemical propulsion and uncooled IR detectors (for semi-active homing and axial/lateral acceleration during end-game) integrated into Lightcraft vehicles for an approximate 100% dry mass increase (from 1.0 kg to 2.0 kg). But multiple target interception within allowable time is limited by relatively long beam-riding time needed for the Lightcraft to reach and destroy each target.\n\nAlthough laser-propelled Lightcraft appear capable of performing certain Air Force tactical missions, and are much less expensive than missiles currently used for such missions, the laser and aircraft costs associated with Lightcraft launches are much greater. Also, clouds impair Lightcraft air-to-ground and air-to-air effectiveness while air-to-air and air-to-space effectiveness is limited by long Lightcraft beam-riding times. Thus, no truly attractive Lightcraft combat mission was found. On the other hand, Lightcraft were found to be extremely attractive, compared to chemical rockets, in boosting microsats, nanosats, and picosats to LEO whereby the Lightcraft plus ground/sea-based laser costs are significantly less than multistage chemical rocket costs. Thus, the selected Lightcraft missions are launch vehicle missions involving\n\n29\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nground, sea and air launches of Lightcraft to LEO with air launch occurring at either subsonic or hypersonic speed.\n\nLightcraft Ground/Sea to Space Investigation\n\nThe current Air Force Lightcraft vehicle concept has been designed for not only placing nanosats into LEO at low cost (Figure 14), but also for performing much of the nanosat function as well. In this concept the precision optics system that focuses ground/sea-based laser light into the Lightcraft's cowl area for propulsion is also used as a space telescope for viewing military targets on Earth and in space. And structural panels on the Lightcraft forebody are also used as solar panels that are unfurled in orbit for generation of satellite power. Thus, the current Lightcraft's design allocates only 0.1 kg of its 1.0 kg dry mass for exclusively nanosat functions. There is a military need for 1.0 kg to 2.0 kg nanosats with optical sensors for visual inspection of unknown objects in space and on Earth.\n\nSince conventional expendable rockets could conceivably be an alternative to laser-powered Lightcraft for the rapid placement of military nanosats in LEO, a cursory comparison of Lightcraft and conventional rockets was made by Froning and Davis [26] to get some idea of their comparative costs. Hybrid rocket sizing and costing was based upon tactical strategic missile sizing and costing information possessed by H. D. Froning. This information related costs (in 1982 dollars) to rocket and payload characteristics. Lightcraft sizing assumed a propellant mass fraction of 0.5 and 1.0 MW of laser power per pound of payload (dry mass) placed into orbit. Costs for laser power and refurbishment were based upon AFRL estimates (amortized over a fewer number of flights). Although these Lightcraft and laser costs are higher (based upon much fewer flights) than those of previous AFRL estimates, they are believed to be consistent with the conventional rocket costs, and therefore applicable for relative cost comparisons. More detailed future Lightcraft/conventional rocket designs and cost comparisons are, of course, needed before a strong argument can be made for either design.\n\nShown in Table 2 is the estimated performance and weights (masses) for 3-stage hybrid rocket launch vehicles and single-stage laser-powered launch vehicles that are capable of placing nanosats of 1.0 kg, 5.0 kg, and 10 kg into LEO. And Table 3 shows estimated costs for hybrid rockets and laser-powered Lightcraft assuming 100 flights over a 10-year period. These estimated costs indicate that Lightcraft could boost nanosats in the 2.0 kg to 5.0 kg range into LEO at about 1/10th to 1/5th the cost of expendable rockets. But Lightcraft cost superiority over conventional rockets is less overwhelming for satellites that are significantly heavier. Thus Lightcraft appear extremely attractive for satellite delivery missions only if Lightcraft dry masses, including the satellites being carried, are less than about 5.0 kg.\n\n30\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 2. Performance and Estimated Weights for a Hybrid Rocket and Lightcraft [26].\n\nHybrid Rocket Expendible Launch Vehicle – Assumed Performance and Estimated Weights\nPayload Mass (kg) 1.00 5.00 10.0\n3rd Stage Wt. (kg) 36.8 71.2 108\n3rd Stage Isp (s) 295 295 295\nPropellant Fraction .737 .766 .782\nImpulsive Velocity (km/s) 3.62 3.62 3.62\n2nd Stage Wt. (kg) 283 311 341\n2nd Stage Isp (s) 300 300 300\nPropellant Fraction .800 .814 .830\nImpulsive Velocity (km/s) 3.58 3.58 3.58\n1st Stage Wt. (kg) 394 427 462\n1st Stage Isp (s) 305 305 305\nPropellant Fraction .860 .868 .891\nImpulsive Velocity (km/s) 1.92 1.92 1.92\nTotal Velocity (km/s) 9.12 9.12 9.12\nTotal Weight (kg) 715 815 921\n\nLightcraft Expendable Launch Vehicle—Assumed Performance and Estimated Weights\nPayload Mass (kg) 1.00 5.00 10.0\nStage Wt (kg) 2.00 10.0 20.0\nEffective Isp (s) 1,452 1,452 1,452\nPropellant Fraction .500 .500 .500\nImpulsive Velocity (km/s) 9.84 9.84 9.84\n\n31\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nTable 3. Estimated Costs for Hybrid Rocket and Lightcraft Launch Vehicles for ETO Flight [26].\n100 Flights\n3-Stage Hybrid Rocket Launch Vehicle | 1.0 kg Payload | 5.0 kg Payload | 10 kg Payload\nPayload ($) 24,948 124,740 250,128\nBoosters ($) 399,503 440,927 477,131\nIntegration ($) 96,163 101,441 123,941\nTotal ($) 520,615 667,108 851,200\nLightcraft Vehicle+ Ground Based Laser | 1.0 kg Payload | 5.0 kg Payload | 10 kg Payload\nLightcraft ($) 24,948 124,740 250,128\nLightcraft Fuel ($) 2,495 12,474 25,013\nLaser Power ($) 500 2,500 5,000\nLaser Refurb. ($) 3,000 3,000 3,000\nTotal ($) 30,943 142,714 283,141\nRocketcraft Cost / Lightcraft Cost | 16.82 | 4.67 | 3.00\n1982 dollars multiplied by 1.62\n(2.7% annual inflation) for 2000 dollars"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nLightcraft Air to Space Investigation\nOne Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) mission already being investigated by the Air Force for high-power airborne laser systems is the focusing of their intense beam energy on enemy ballistic missiles over dwell times sufficient to heat missile materials to high temperature thus causing structural failure. Another BMD mission that involves high-power airborne laser systems was examined during this investigation (see Figure 15). This mission entails ballistic missile destruction above the atmosphere during the missile's unpowered descent phase of flight. In this case, it is envisioned that the high-pulsed power within high-energy laser beams would first be used to rapidly examine each object within the incoming threat cloud and, based on each threat-object's response, discriminate warhead-carrying vehicles from lighter decoys and non-threatening debris. Next the pulsed power within the high-energy laser beam would guide a Lightcraft to the warhead-carrying vehicles while accelerating the Lightcraft to the flight velocity needed for warhead vehicle destruction by kinetic energy kill. And intermittently during the trajectory, the laser illuminates the warhead vehicle instead of the Lightcraft for guidance updates and terminal semi-active seeker homing.\nThreats from space, other than ballistic missiles, were mentioned in the Rumsfeld 2001 Space Commission Report [27]. One threat to U.S. space assets specifically cited was microwave signal-jamming from relatively unsophisticated and inexpensive enemy satellites [28]. Eliminating such satellite threats has not been examined in detail, but they could be rapidly eliminated by air-to-space Lightcraft, if sufficiently precise azimuth and elevation information can be obtained to point Lightcraft lasers at the jammers.\n\"Hit-to-kill\" accuracy and high impact energy requires Lightcraft maneuvering such that ballistic missile intercept occurs at relatively small angles from a head-on collision course. Tables 4 and 5 show the influence of such angles, together with Lightcraft velocity and enemy ballistic missile velocity, on Lightcraft impact energy and required mass. It is seen in both tables that intercept angles up to 45° from head-on collision courses do not significantly influence Lightcraft impact energy or required mass; that high Lightcraft impact energies are achieved with relatively low masses (1.0 kg); and that required Lightcraft masses for relatively high impact energies (10 MJ) are very low for Lightcraft velocities in the 2 km/sec to 4 km/sec range. It is also seen that the interception of longer range ballistic missile threats results in higher collision energy for a given Lightcraft mass and speed. That is because the higher entry speed of longer-range missiles contributes more collision velocity (target plus Lightcraft velocity component along the target velocity vector).\nThis BMD air-to-space mission appears to be more favorable for Lightcraft than air-to-ground/sea or air-to-air missions, which are not considered here because they are beyond the scope of this report. This mission results in higher altitude flight where atmospheric propagation losses of laser beams are lower, and in higher impact velocities for higher Lightcraft impact energy or lower mass. But like air-to-air missions, BMD would require semi-active terminal guidance using uncooled IR detectors and chemical rocket thrusters for end-game maneuvering to ensure hit-to-kill accuracy. It is therefore estimated that the air-to-space Lightcraft dry mass would be about the same as the air-to-air Lightcraft (approximately 2.0 kg). This particular Lightcraft"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nsystem, like the air-to-air one, has reduced capability if an enemy can achieve nearly simultaneous arrival times for all of its ballistic missiles. If so, then a Lightcraft BMD system would have to serve as an adjunct to other BMD systems, such as the ground-based PAC-3 Patriot, THAADS, or NMD which are deployed for national or theater ballistic missile defense. However, this system could protect regions against limited ballistic missile attacks at the earliest phase of hostilities before ground-based BMD systems could arrive and be deployed.\nTable 4. Influence of Target Velocity and Intercept Angle on Impact Energy and Required Mass [26].\nLightcraft Intercept Velocity | Lightcraft Intercept Aspect | Impact Energy and Weight | SRBM R~1000 km V=2 km/s | IRBM R~2500 km V=4 km/s | ICBM R~10,000 km V=6km/s\n3 km/s | 0° from Head-on Collision | Impact E for 1.0 kg Wt. 25 MJ 49 MJ 81 MJ; Wt for 10 MJ of E .40 kg .20 kg .12 kg\n30° from Head-on Collision | Impact E for 1.0 kg Wt. 21 MJ 44 MJ 74 MJ; Wt. For 10 MJ of E .47 kg .23 kg .14 kg\n45° from Head-on Collision | Impact E for 1.0 kg Wt. 17 MJ 37 MJ 66 MJ; Wt. for 10 MJ of E .59 kg .27 kg .15 kg"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nTable 5. Influence of Lightcraft and Target Velocity on Impact Energy and Required Mass [26].\nLightcraft Intercept Aspect | Lightcraft Intercept Velocity | Impact Energy and Weight | SRBM R~1000 km V=2 km/s | IRBM R~2500 km V=4 km/s | ICBM R~10,000 km V=6km/s\n0° from Head-on Collision | 2 km/s | Impact E for 1.0 kg Wt. 16 MJ 36 MJ 64 MJ; Wt for 10 MJ of E .63 kg .28 kg .16 kg\n0° from Head-on Collision | 3 km/s | Impact E for 1.0 kg Wt. 25 MJ 49 MJ 81 MJ; Wt. For 10 MJ of E .40 kg .20 kg .12 kg\n0° from Head-on Collision | 4 km/s | Impact E for 1.0 kg Wt. 36 MJ 64 MJ 100 MJ; Wt. for 10 MJ of E .28 kg .16 kg .10kg\nRECOMMENDED LIGHTCRAFT MISSIONS FOR BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE\nLaser-powered Lightcraft, flown on air-to-space trajectories, show much promise for performing exo-atmospheric BMD missions, especially if the laser can also be used to discriminate warhead-carrying vehicles from decoys and non-threatening debris. Such Lightcraft also appear capable of eliminating enemy satellites in LEO, if the Lightcraft laser can illuminate them. But a significant effort would be required to analyze the engagement scenarios for such a system, and fully investigate the decoy discrimination and satellite tracking capabilities of the Lightcraft's pulsed laser and the hit-to-kill guidance requirements for the Lightcraft itself.\nLocating lasers and Lightcraft on existing aircraft, such as the Boeing 747, B-1 Lancer, or C-130, appears to be an attractive alternative to ground/sea-based laser Lightcraft systems. In this case, airborne laser beams at 12 km altitude will not suffer the significant propagation losses that occur when guiding and propelling Lightcraft through the lower atmosphere, and greater Lightcraft flight range should therefore be achievable. (The increase in laser range, due to reduced propagation losses, for high altitude operation will be somewhat diminished because of the smaller allowable apertures on aircraft-mounted laser optics, which are on the order of 1.0 m as compared to apertures on the order of 10.0 m for large ground/sea-based laser installations.) Furthermore, airborne laser Lightcraft systems possess much greater operational flexibility since their carrier aircraft can fly over significant distances to reach desired launch locations, and can be based at almost any major Air Force facility"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nthat has runways of reasonable length. An air-launched Lightcraft launch vehicle mission, involving the transport of lasers and Lightcraft on medium-sized bombers or transport aircraft, is also recommended if additional funding would become available.\nFUTURE NANO-/PICO-SATELLITE MISSION CONCEPTS\nCoherently cooperating \"swarms\" are a novel innovation for replacing structures with information by placing many formation-flown small satellites into a loose \"swarm\" and cause them to cooperate coherently. This is very different from the so-called distributed small satellite LEO constellations currently pursued in which individual small spacecraft perform essentially the same functions as larger satellites but at lower spacecraft mass (or weight) and cost. These smaller spacecraft can be proliferated to provide greater geographical coverage for the same cost. The lower mass also saves launch costs, so the total system costs less for the same function performed with larger spacecraft.\nIn contrast, the swarms, as described in the following sections, cooperate coherently and form a real distributed system in which the whole is more than the sum of the parts. A generic description would be a constellation of small spacecraft each performing its separate function, but these functions combine to create at a central location a much larger virtual spacecraft, or sensor aperture, that exists solely because of the cooperation of the spacecraft. The following sections provide several examples of the implementation of such systems in which each of a large number of small satellites in a swarm or other constellation will radiate or receive signals and combine them in phase, or coherently, regardless of their actual location in orbit. This creates coherent RF or optical apertures that are essentially unlimited in size.\nEach satellite's position is only crudely station kept, and the satellites adjust the time delay or phase delay of the signals they repeat to compensate for their position errors, causing their repeated signals to add coherently at a collection point. This technique can be easily applied to RF transmitters and receivers, and with more demanding accuracy to optical transmitters and receivers. The result in either case is a large \"swarm\" or loose constellation of satellites that act as one large antenna or optical array, even though they are separate and their positions are neither constant nor lie along a parabola or plane in space. The individual satellites can be as simple as one-element flying chips or as complex as today's self-contained sensing spacecraft of various sizes.\nThe advantage of coherently cooperating distributed systems is that they can form sparse RF antennas and optical sensors with diameters so large that they would be impossible to implement with filled apertures even if formed with adaptive membranes; and have orders of magnitude smaller mass. The relative locations of individual spacecraft in the swarm can be controlled by MEMS FEEP propulsion, tethers, or by cleverly conceived orbits in which the elements of the array appear to orbit a common center within it, thus eliminating the need to use propulsion at least for first order station keeping."} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThese array functions can be made coherent over very great distances. RF antennas with sizes of hundreds of kilometers and optical telescopes of hundreds of meters diameter can be formed. These systems can enable new capabilities not possible with single spacecraft either acting alone, as a proliferated but non-coherent constellation, or as relays for each other. Formed of nanosats and picosats, such swarms will contain so many spacecraft that the economics of true mass production will come into play in space for the first time, greatly reducing the cost of producing the system. In addition, these systems feature the advantages of truly distributed satellite systems, including fault tolerance, robustness, survivability, reconfigurability by software, and the ability to be incrementally emplaced and upgraded as budgets are available.\n\nThese swarms can be implemented in a cost effective manner using laser propulsion for both launch and orbital insertion. However, the system designs described in the following sections are flexible enough to allow for the use of alternative conventional launch vehicle technologies. The technologies to produce these swarms and their constituent nanosats or picosats probably can be demonstrated by 2015 and deployed in space by 2020.\n\nThe following concepts were provided via the voluminous research notes, lectures, and briefings provided courtesy of I. Bekey.\n\nROTATING PICOSAT SWARM ARRAY RADIO FREQUENCY COLLECTOR\n\nAn unconventional, large sparse antenna array RF collector spacecraft with a small surface footprint even when deployed in geosynchronous Earth orbit (GEO) separates different sources in proximity and also detects weak signals. Its implementation would result in a highly desirable, long dwell RF emitter detection capability.\n\nAt the heart of this system is a large antenna that is formed by a swarm of tiny elements that make up the lens of a space-fed array with no structure. The antenna is a sparse, self-cohering array formed from a large number of picosats rotating (in relative coordinates) in a plane around a central orbital point in GEO. The picosats are self-contained repeater spacecraft. Each one receives the ground signal, delays it, and retransmits the signal so that it arrives at the feeds at the same time as a direct ray through the center of the array. The time delay of each picosat is self computed based on its location in the swarm, as measured by a local differential global positioning system (DGPS)-like navigation signal, to compensate for its deviation from its assigned ideal location. Each picosat digitizes, delays, frequency shifts, and retransmits its received signals independently, causing an in-phase composite signal from the ground to be received at the feeds.\n\nThe relative positions of these picosat elements change slowly, and only small and infrequent propulsive maneuvers are needed for constellation maintenance. A tether along the local vertical at the central point holds the receivers and DGPS-like reference at the focus against a counterweight. A pseudorandom distribution of the picosats suppresses the antenna grating lobes, and intensive computation greatly reduces much of the remaining sidelobes, creates multiple beams, and steers the ensemble of the individual beams anywhere on Earth. The antenna system will function with far fewer elements as a more sparse array, though with limited sensitivity. This system can be"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nincrementally emplaced, upgraded, and even funded with capability growing as budget is available, as opposed to the usual all-or-nothing functioning of today's spacecraft.\n\nThe antenna size is 20 km x 40 km and contains 150,000 picosats, each of which weighs 23 grams. The feed array is held in position by a 50 km long, lightweight tether against a counterweight. There is no truss or other structure. Each picosat is gravity-gradient stable, has a dipole array facing Earth, and a broader beam antenna array facing the receivers.\n\nThe effective collecting aperture of the array is equal to that of an equivalent 80 m diameter filled aperture antenna. The coverage spot diameter can be varied by choosing the diameter of the array that is active, with spot sizes on Earth as small as 30 m at 10 GHz, 300 m at 1 GHz, or 3 km at 100 MHz. It can receive sub-watt signals from individual cell phones. The entire constellation weighs 3,500 kg, but that could be reduced in the future to 35 kg if Buckytubes are used to construct the system.\n\nHIGH RESOLUTION SURFACE SAMPLING RADIOMETRY\n\nHighly sensitive radiometry at low microwave frequencies with a small ground foot-print would result in high resolution microwave radiometry sampling maps of soil moisture and other surface characteristics, as well as passively detected larger targets. The constellation/array implementation follows that of the preceding concept (Future Nano-/Pico-Satellite Mission Concepts section), except that it is designed to map the surface radiation rather than detect discrete emitters. The antenna size is 8 km x 12 km and contains 12,000 picosats, each of which weighs 23 grams. The feed array is held in position by a 40 km long, lightweight tether against a counterweight. The constellation scans its coverage spot electronically in a 1,200 km zig-zag swath from its 4,000 km orbit by modulating the time or frequency shift of the ensemble of picosats. These picosats are similar to those in the Rotating Picosat Swarm Array Radio Frequency Collector section.\n\nThe effective collecting aperture of the array is the sum of those of the picosats, and in this example, equal to that of an equivalent 11 m diameter antenna. However, the coverage spot diameter is set by the total aperture diameter of 8 km x 12 km, and thus is 100 m at 1 GHz. Five constellation/arrays would result in a 5 hour global revisit with zig-zag coverage of the scanned swaths. The entire constellation weighs 3,000 kg, but that could be reduced in the future to 30 kg if Buckytubes are used to construct the system.\n\nHIGH RESOLUTION SURFACE MAPPING RADIOMETRY\n\nHighly sensitive radiometry at low microwave frequencies with a very small foot-print on the ground would result in high resolution microwave radiometry maps of soil moisture and other surface characteristics and passively detected larger targets, with 100% of Earth's surface mapped with a 5 hour revisit time. The principle of operation is the same as that of the previous concept (High Resolution Surface Sampling Radiometry section), except that a multiple element detector array is used in a"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\npushbroom scanning mode for complete Earth coverage rather than only sampling coverage.\n\nThe constellation/array implementation is similar to that of the preceding concept (High Resolution Surface Sampling Radiometry section), except that tethers hold a receiving array that must be 2 km long to obtain the 1,200 km instantaneous swath width with a resolution of 100 m. It consists of a 2 km long focal surface with 12,000 printed dipoles, shaped into a focal surface by gravity gradient forces balanced against magnetic forces from a superconducting conductor around its periphery, acting on a piezoelectric, electron beam-shaped, adaptive membrane substrate. The large antenna is formed by a swarm of tiny elements making up the lens of a space-fed array.\n\nThe antenna is a 4 km x 6 km diameter, sparse, self-cohering array formed from 12,000 picosats weighing 23 grams each, rotating in relative coordinates in a plane around a central orbit point. The picosats are similar to those of the preceding concept (High Resolution Surface Sampling Radiometry section). Their locations are initially selected to lie in a plane, and their spacings are pseudorandom to minimize the sidelobe levels, with each picosat designed to loosely stationkeep inside a box 10 m on a side. The relative positions of these picosat elements changes slowly, and only small and infrequent stationkeeping propulsive maneuvers are needed for constellation maintenance.\n\nThe effective collecting aperture of the array is the sum of those of the picosats, and in this concept, equal to that of an equivalent 6 m diameter antenna at 2 GHz. However, the coverage spot diameter is set by the total aperture diameter of 4 km x 6 km, and thus is 100 m at 2 GHz from a 4,000 km orbit. Five constellation/arrays would produce 100% global coverage with 5 hour revisit for time critical measurements. The entire constellation weighs 3,000 kg, but that could be reduced in the future to 30 kg if Buckytubes are used to construct the system.\n\nROTATING NANOSAT SWARM DISTRIBUTED RADAR\n\nAn extremely powerful space-based radar, this concept would allow detection of most air, land, sea, and space targets, as well as many \"low observable\" targets anywhere, with one or a few constellations in GEO. A large, sparse array antenna using a swarm of nanosats creates a space-based radar system. The constellation/array implementation is similar to that of the preceding rotating swarm concepts, except that it generates and radiates extremely large peak and average powers, and given the generally high angles of viewing can detect and track many air, space, and surface targets from GEO.\n\nThe constellation is composed of 10,000 nanosats that are self-contained repeater spacecraft weighing about 1 kg each. Each nanosat receives the ground signal, digitizes, delays, and retransmits it, causing it to arrive at the feeds at the same time as a direct ray through the center of the array. The time delay of each nanosat is self computed based on its location in the swarm, as measured by a local DGPS-like navigation signal, to compensate for its deviation from its assigned ideal location. Commands for beam sweep delays are superimposed on the time delays of each nanosat. Each nanosat generates 10 W of average power and 10 kW peak power at"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n0.001 duty cycle, has a helical film antenna that increases its gain and doubles as a solar sail for infrequent stationkeeping maneuvers, and has a tether for coarse gravity gradient stabilization. A 50 km tether supports the feed, transmitter, and DGPS reference assembly against a counterweight. The antenna lens is 2 km x 4 km.\n\nThe effective area of the array is the same as that of a 50 m diameter filled aperture. The total effective RF radiated power of the system is 3 GW peak and 3 MW average. Although specific performance calculations have not been done for this concept, these powers are so large that the radar should have the sensitivity from its location in GEO for detecting and tracking many targets simultaneously and most \"low observable\" targets as well because they are all designed and oriented so as to have their low observables in near-horizontal directions. Three constellations would provide essentially complete global coverage. The entire constellation weighs about 11,000 kg in GEO (this could be reduced in the future to 110 kg if Buckytubes are used to construct the system) and can be emplaced and replaced incrementally using laser-powered Lightcraft launch vehicles or even small conventional launch vehicles. It could even be funded incrementally.\n\nSimple, Distributed, Hyperspectral Sensor\n\nThis concept presents an unconventional method of implementing a hyperspectral sensor of great spectral and spatial resolution. Its implementation would allow the detection of very many spectral intervals simultaneously, and it has a small field of view from GEO so that the instrument can dwell on and resolve particular targets of interest. It also has a large field of regard so that one spacecraft covers a significant fraction of a hemisphere.\n\nThe concept uses a Fresnel zone plate, which is oriented roughly parallel to the local horizontal just below GEO. It is supported by a tether that extends well above the GEO altitude, and may or may not have a counterweight at the top end. The gravity gradient causes the ensemble to remain Earth pointing along the local vertical, with its center of mass in GEO.\n\nThe Fresnel zone plate has a long focal length, and thus the surface and ring locations can be imprecise compared with conventional optics. In addition, the lens is a thin film membrane and will be light and inexpensive. It is highly frequency dispersive, and thus its focal length is a sensitive function of wavelength. Small, self-contained optical sensor nanosats are placed on the tether at many locations with each nanosat's optics filtered for response at only that narrow spectral region focused at its distance from the lens. The nanosats can transmit directly to the ground or their signals can be combined in one transceiver, also on the tether.\n\nThis system has a 100 km long tether, which weighs only a few kilograms in GEO. The Fresnel zone plate is 100 m in diameter, has a collecting aperture equivalent to a 30 m filled aperture, and requires only a surface accuracy of centimeters in the visible light region. It is constructed of thin film with deposited aluminum rings and is an adaptive piezoelectric membrane kept flat by an electron beam in response to an optical figure sensor. MEMS FEEP thrusters are at the sensor's periphery for attitude control, with"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n1,000 nanosats attached to the tether. Each nanosat is a self-contained optical sensor spacecraft, integrated into a 0.1 kg package. The sensor thus detects 1,000 wavelengths simultaneously. The sensor has a resolution as small as 40 cm on the ground from GEO. Its field of view can be scanned over an area by tilting the ensemble using MEMS FEEP thrusters on the nanosats, or libration modes can be excited in the tether so that the field of view scans across a 2,000 km coverage area in a quasi-random mode, eventually covering the entire area. These thrusters also serve for stationkeeping. Its total weight is less than 900 kg in orbit, which can be reduced in the future to 9 kg if Buckytubes are used to construct the system.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 4: Summary of Multi-Megawatt Laser Study for Lightcraft Propulsion Applications\n\nSUMMARY OF LASER STUDY PERFORMED BY TEXTRON SYSTEMS\n\nIn 2002, V. Hasson (TEXTRON Systems Corporation) conducted a study of candidate multi-megawatt laser systems for laser Lightcraft propulsion [29].\n\nCandidate high-power/high-energy lasers identified in the study:\n\n• Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Laser: technical issues include large wavelength and atmospheric absorption of the laser beam.\n• Carbon Monoxide (CO) Laser: technical issues include large wavelength, atmospheric absorption of the laser beam, and toxicity of the lasing fuel (CO gas).\n• Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) or Deuterium Fluoride (DF) Laser: technical issues include atmospheric absorption of the laser beam, corrosive lasing fuel chemicals, pulse energy, running cost, and beam quality.\n• Chemical Oxygen-Iodine Laser (COIL): technical issues include fuel chemicals, pulse energy, and running costs.\n• Bulk Slab Solid-State Laser (BSSSL): technical issues include cost, average power, and run duration.\n\nThe first four gas dynamic and chemical laser candidates have already demonstrated megawatt-class average beam output power. The study then reviewed the development, testing and operational legacy of the first candidate laser technology, which included a review of the various system architectures that use other gas mixtures combined with CO2. The study recommended a new design for a 10 MW (beam output power) electron gun-driven CO2/gas mixture laser because this technology does not require additional R&D and can be implemented now. The other gases selected for the lasing fuel are N2 and H2, which, in combination with CO2, offer superior performance over systems using helium.\n\nHowever, very recent technologically disruptive innovations led to the 10-fold increase in the beam output power of bulk slab SSLs and their newly emergent solid-state cousin, called high-power fiber lasers, which has made these devices more competitive with high-power chemical and gas dynamic lasers on the basis of average beam power, peak beam power, electrical wall plug and optical efficiencies, cost, complexity, mass, and size. Free-electron lasers are another class of laser technology that was not reviewed by Hasson, but recent technological innovations are accelerating their development to the point where their present average beam output power of 20 kW will be increased to 100 kW or higher within the next 12 to 24 months following the publication of this report. The output beams of several of these laser devices can be optically combined to produce a single beam with megawatt-class average output power. It is for this reason that we will summarize their technology in Summary of Emergent High-Power Solid-State and Free-Electron Laser Technologies section.\n\n42\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAn outline of the conceptual design features of the proposed 10 MW electron gun-driven CO2/gas mixture laser is [29]:\n\n• Scalability of total beam output power, beam combining concept.\n• Power oscillator or master oscillator-power amplifier (MOPA) design.\n• Unstable optical resonator cavity with grating and rotating mirrors beam-combine techniques.\n• Flow and gas handling system with blow down and exhaust to the atmosphere.\n• Acoustics suppression with expansion horn downstream and anode muffler.\n\nIn this concept there are four separate laser transmitters each generating 2.5 MW output beams that are combined into a single 10 MW output beam. The oscillator parameters for each beam transmitter are [29]:\n\n• Energy loading, Ep: Ep = 300 J (higher loadings at reduced gas temperature); gain volume = 0.27 m3 (× 4 lasers); A to K = 0.3 m; gain length = 3 m.\n• Specific laser output = 65 J/I.\n• Estimated extraction efficiency = 20%.\n• Pulse repetition rate: 125 Hz @ 20μs.\n• Laser power, P = 2.5 MW/beam × 4 beams = 10 MW.\n• Laser energy per pulse = 18 kJ/beam × 4 beams = 72 kJ.\n• Output wavelengths: 10.6 μm, 10.2 μm, 9.6 μm, and 9.3 μm (mixed).\n• Gas mixture ratio (for N2:CO2:H2): 3:1:0.08.\n• Gas pressure = 1.013 × 105 Pa (or 1 atmosphere).\n• Flash factor = 1.3.\n\nThe optical resonator cavity and optical components specifications are [29]:\n\n• Resonator type: confocal unstable with rotating mirrors beam combining.\n• Magnification, M = 4.\n• Cavity length, L = 36.5 m.\n• Equivalent Fresnel number = 3.4.\n• Cavity end mirrors radius of curvature: RMirror1 = 97.3 m (concave), RMirror2 = 24.3 m (convex).\n• Gain cell: volume = 0.3 × 0.3 × 3.0 m3, length = 3 m.\n• Beam combine mirrors: 75 × 75 cm2 flat (30 × 30 cm2 apertures) @ λ = 10.59 μm.\n• Low pressure hot cell: 0.3 to 0.5 GHz suppression near line center.\n• Output scraper mirror: D = 0.075 m (taped).\n\nSee Figure 16 and Figure 17 for schematics of the power oscillator optics and the MOPA. The laser operation requirements for the gas flow system are (see Figure 18) [29]:\n\n• Flow System: blow down.\n• Gain Section\n ♦ Cross-section, A = 0.3 m × 3.0 m = 0.9 m2.\n ♦ Volume, V = 0.3 m × 0.3 m × 3.0 m = 0.27 m3.\n ♦ Flow speed, u = 50 m/sec (@ 125 Hz & flash factor = 1.3).\n ♦ Dynamic pressure, ΔP = 2000 Pa (or 0.02 atmospheres).\n ♦ Mass flow rate, Q = 60 kg/sec per module (45 m3/sec std).\n ♦ Run time, t = 300 seconds\n\n43\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n♦ Total mass flow rate, Qtotal = 240 kg/sec [for a total (run time) mass of 72 metric tons].\n• Plenum Chamber\n ♦ Volume, V = 0.5 m × 3.0 m × 1.5 m = 2.25 m3.\n ♦ Static pressure, P = 2.02 × 105 Pa (or 2 atmospheres).\n ♦ Sonic orifice plate perforation = 17.5%.\n ♦ Flow screen loss > 0.2 to 0.3.\n ♦ Skin friction loss ~ 0.08.\n• Gas Storage Tank\n ♦ Run time = 300 seconds & 4 to 5 runs.\n ♦ Pressure, P = 2.066 × 107 Pa (or 200 atmospheres).\n ♦ Volume, V = 68 m3 × 4.\n• Acoustics Suppression\n ♦ Pumping induced medium homogeneity, ΔP/P = 0.94 @ Ep = 300 J/I.\n ♦ Acoustic suppression\n ♦ Flow direction: expansion horn provides impedance match eliminating reflection of pressure waves.\n ♦ Normal to flow direction: using acoustics muffler to dump out transverse pressure waves.\n ♦ Muffler requirements: attenuation factor < 0.55; number of bounces between pulses n = 8.\n\n[Figure 16: Schematic of Power Oscillator Optics, with labels AM, SP, M1, M2, E-Gun, and end mirror, cavity length 36.5m, gain length 3m, aperture 0.3x0.3 m]\n\nFigure 16. Schematic of Power Oscillator Optics [29].\n\n44\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Figure 17: Schematic of MOPA, with labels SP, IST, M3, OE, M1, M2, AM, E-Gun, Master Oscillator, Power Amplifier]\n\nFigure 17. Schematic of MOPA [29].\n\n[Figure 18: Schematic of the Laser N2/CO2/H2 Gas Flow System, with labels Primary Gas Storage Tank, P1, P2, P0, Gas Tank, Flow control Valve, Screen, Sonic Orifice, Acoustic muffler, Plenum Chamber, Gain cell, Gas exit horn. Gas Pressure: P1 = 150 Atm, P2 = 2 - 2.5 Atm, P0 = 1 Atm (ambient), Flow speed: 50 m/s (gain). Gas Physical Parameters: Mixture: N2:CO2:H2 (3:1:0.08), a = 271 m/s (acoustics), M = 0.18 (Mach No), m=31.5 g, Density = 1.3 kg/m3]\n\nFigure 18. Schematic of the Laser N2/CO2/H2 Gas Flow System [29].\n\n45\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe total cost for an installed 10 MW power oscillator-based laser transmitter is estimated as follows [29]:\n\n• 2.5 MW Prototype = $80.0 Million.\n• 3 × 2.5 MW Additional Modules + 4 Module Integration = $133.0 Million.\n• Buildings/Installations ~ $17.0 Million.\n• Total Installed & Integrated Transmitter Cost ~ $230 Million.\n\nAnd the additional costs for the MOPA-based transmitters and cold-flow assessment are [29]:\n\n• 4 Master Oscillators ~ $20.0 Million.\n• Cold-Flow Subscale Upgrades & Evaluations ~ $5.0 Million.\n• Total Additional Cost ~ $25.0 Million.\n\nThe TEXTRON Systems study concluded that [29]:\n\n• A pulsed CO2 repetitively pulsed transmitter, which uses a 300 second blow down and beam combining, can provide the power levels and energies needed for Lightcraft propulsion applications.\n• Spectral tailoring of the beam and mountain-top operation should provide reasonable atmospheric transmission of the high pulsed-power laser beam.\n• Low cost operation is achievable with helium-free gas mixtures, which use N2, CO2, and small quantities of H2.\n• Subscale testing will be used to anchor the design and thus reduce risk.\n• Legacy programs support many aspects of this approach.\n• Growth potential with cold-flow and aero windows should double the beam power output.\n• Current pulsed CO2 laser technology blow down configuration is postured to provide power levels for propulsion of kilogram-sized spacecraft into orbit.\n\nPayload Cost Estimate for Lightcraft Launch Using a 10 MW CO2/Gas Mixture Laser\n\nFroning and Davis [26] used a proposed 10 MW electron gun-driven N2/CO2/H2 laser design to estimate the Lightcraft payload launch cost per kilogram, which is described in what follows. Each power oscillator optics module transmitting a 2.5 MW beam of 10.6 μm wavelength photons generates 1.334 × 1026 photons/sec, and 15 kg/sec of CO2 mass flow represents 2.053 × 1026 molecules/sec of gas flow. These figures taken together mean that 1.54 CO2 molecules are required to lase one photon. A 2.5 MW laser operating for 300 seconds of thrusting will allow us to send 5.25 kg of payload into LEO, and the total laser energy (Elaser) output is 750 MJ. If the laser efficiency is 0.20, then we will need to use 12.5 MW of electrical power for 300 seconds (or 3,750 MJ of total energy), which, at a cost of $0.10 per kWh (or $0.0278 per MJ), gives a total cost of $104 for the required electrical energy to launch the payload.\n\nThe kinetic energy (KE) of a Lightcraft in LEO is given by KE = ηαβγElaser, where [26]:\n\n46\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• η = 1: this is the conversion efficiency of laser rocket propellant-thrust-jet KE into vehicle KE, in which the propellant/laser is designed so that the rocket thrust-jet velocity is equal to the vehicle velocity throughout the mission, i.e., the laser rocket has variable Isp ≈ 100 seconds at beginning of mission to 1000 seconds at end of mission;\n• αβ = 0.5: α is efficiency of laser energy absorption and β is efficiency of conversion of propellant internal energy into thrust-jet KE;\n• γ = 0.7: this is the atmospheric transmission efficiency;\n• Elaser = 750 MJ.\n\nThese numbers multiplied together give a vehicle KE = 262.5 MJ in LEO. If the effective change in velocity (Δv) required to get to LEO is 10 km/sec (8 km/sec orbital velocity + 1 km/sec for gravity + 1 km/sec for drag loss), then 1 kg in LEO has 50 MJ of energy investment and a 5.25 kg payload in LEO has 262.5 MJ of energy investment.\n\nThe 60 kg/sec mass flow requirement of the 3:1 N2/CO2 lasing gases means that a mass flow of 15 kg/sec of CO2 and 45 kg/sec of N2 is required. For the 300 seconds of thrust we will therefore need 4.5 tons of CO2 and 13.5 tons of N2 gases (we are neglecting the tiny amount of H2) to launch a payload to LEO. Liquid CO2 costs $100 per ton and liquid N2 costs $154 per ton. The total lasing gas cost is therefore $450 for the liquid CO2 and $2,079 for the liquid N2. Adding these two gas fuel costs to the $104 cost of the required electrical energy gives a total of $2,633 to launch a 5.25 kg payload to LEO. This result represents a cost of $501 per kg of payload (or $228 per pound) launched to LEO, which is 44 times lower than the oft-quoted standard space launch industry cost of $10,000 per pound for conventional chemical propulsion rockets systems.\n\nHowever, this cost figure needs to be slightly adjusted to account for other factors. If we use the N2/CO2 gases at a temperature of 217 K in the laser, then we will have to boil the liquid CO2 and the liquid N2 with additional heating of the gaseous N2. Boiling 4.5 tons of liquid CO2 at 217 K requires 1,175 MJ of energy, boiling 13.5 tons of liquid N2 at 77 K requires 2,683 MJ of energy, and heating the 13.5 tons of gaseous N2 from 77 K to 217 K requires 1,890 MJ of energy. Therefore, the additional energy required to prepare the laser gases is 5,748 MJ (= 1,175 MJ + 2,683 MJ + 1,890 MJ), which represents an additional electricity cost of $160. Adding this additional energy cost to the previous total of $2,633 gives a final total cost of $2,793 to launch a 5.25 kg payload to LEO. This new final result represents a cost of $532 per kg of payload (or $241 per pound) launched to LEO, which is 41 times lower than the space launch industry cost of $10,000 per pound for conventional chemical propulsion rockets. Note that this final cost estimate excludes the operations, life-cycle, and maintenance costs that are listed in Table 1, which were based on the use of a bulk solid-state laser.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSUMMARY OF EMERGENT HIGH-POWER SOLID-STATE AND FREE-ELECTRON LASER TECHNOLOGIES\n\nBulk Slab Solid-State Laser\n\nUnder the auspices of the Joint High Power Solid-State Laser (JHPSSL) program, Northrop Grumman broke the all-important 100 kW beam power threshold in early 2009 by firing a 7-amplifier chain bulk slab solid-state laser (BSSSL) that produced a beam output power of almost 106 kW (see Figure 19). Each amplifier chain is assembled with several high-gain power modules. The laser operated for more than five minutes, achieved electro-optical efficiency of 19.3%, and reached full power in less than 0.6 seconds with a beam quality of better than 3.0, Whereas the test demonstration saw five minutes of continuous operation for the laser, altogether the system has been operated at above 100 kW beam power for a total duration of more than 85 minutes. Adding an eight amplifier chain that the system was designed for will increase the beam power to 120 kW.\n\n[Figure 19 photograph: a technician in a white cleanroom suit and goggles working on a laser system]\n\nFigure 19. Northrop Grumman's Joint High Power Bulk Slab Solid-State Laser (courtesy of the Directed Energy Professional Society).\n\nEven though 100 kW beam power has long been the proof-of-principle sought for weapons-class lasers, it should be noted that many militarily useful effects can be"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nachieved by laser weapons with 25 kW or 50 kW beam power, provided the energy is transmitted with good beam quality. Laser propulsion requires megawatt-class lasers which are only developed in directed energy weapons (DEW) programs. However, BSSSL beam power can be scaled up further by improving presently known gain media and doping combinations, inventing new gain media and doping combinations, by combining the beams of several lower-power devices, or a combination of all these until the ultimate optical/thermal/mechanical limit of slab gain materials is reached. BSSSL beam output power is projected to reach the multi-megawatt level within three to five years from the time of this writing (P. Zarubin, J. Albertine, and V. Hasson, private communications, 2010).\n\nFigure 20 shows DARPA's High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System (HELLADS) as an example of a liquid-cooled bulk slab solid-state (ceramic) laser. HELLADS is designed to be light and compact enough to fit on a jet fighter or drone aircraft, and yet powerful enough to fire a 150 kW beam of energy. HELLADS makes use of a unique cooling technique to save weight and size. The high-power laser uses a liquid that has the same index of refraction as the mirrors inside the laser. That way, the laser can fire away, even while it's being cooled. The HELLADS program will deliver a 150 kW laser weapon at 2 m3 of system volume and 600 kg of system mass (not including the prime power and cooling systems) to achieve the low specific mass (5 kg/kW) and compact size need to be mounted on small tactical airborne platforms like the C-130 transport, jet fighters, or Predator-class UAVs. The device will be built by General Atomics and the tracking system will be built by Lockheed-Martin.\n\nA bulk solid-state laser is based on a bulk piece of doped crystal, disordered or amorphous material (such as glass), glass ceramic (which is a combination of crystalline-ordered structure and glassy phases disordered structure), or mixed crystals as the laser gain medium. In most cases, the gain medium is doped either with rare-earth ions or transition metal ions. Typically, these ions replace a small percentage of other ions of similar size in the host medium. The laser-active ions have suitable optical transitions for pumping and laser emission at wavelengths where the host medium is transparent. A bulk laser resonator is often formed with laser mirrors placed around the gain medium. However, there are also laser gain media with a highly reflective dielectric mirror coating on one side, which serves as a resonator end mirror. Also, there are monolithic solid-state lasers where the beam path is entirely inside the gain medium. See Reference 30 for additional technical details."} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Figure 20 illustration: DARPA's High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System]\n\nFigure 20. DARPA's High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System (courtesy of P. Saunders, AFRL/RDS, Kirtland AFB, NM).\n\nUnlike chemical and gas dynamic laser devices, bulk solid-state lasers possess the following unique characteristics, which make them highly competitive with any chemical or gas dynamic laser systems [30]:\n\n• Reliability.\n• High level of safety.\n• User-friendly.\n• Maintenance-free.\n• Low-cost performance, high-volume production.\n• Compact size.\n• Wide range of wavelength selection and wavelength tunability.\n• Variety of power oscillator or master oscillator-power amplifier (MOPA) designs.\n• Scalability of beam output power, variety of beam combining techniques: scalable to 1 MW beam power within 2 years.\n\nTypical solid-state lasers have the following technical features [30]:\n\n• Gain medium:\n – Host crystal [e.g., Yttrium Aluminum Garnet (YAG)], glass or ceramic (amorphous materials).\n – Impurity lasing ions deposited (or doped) in host [e.g., Neodymium (Nd3+) or Ytterbium (Yb3+)].\n – Range of beam wavelengths (λ) produced: 0.7 µm to > 2 µm.\n• Optically pumped with flash lamps or diode lasers.\n• Capable of high peak power pulses.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Average power limited by low thermal conductivity of host material.\n• Wavelengths propagate extremely well in clear weather:\n – Very low absorption.\n – Higher scattering.\n\nThe requirements for high average power bulk solid-state lasers are [30]:\n\n• Efficient optical pumping of gain medium:\n – Flash lamp or laser diode well matched to absorption band.\n – Small wavelength difference between pump and lasing → low quantum defect.\n• Efficient heat removal from gain medium:\n – Improved heat removal techniques from host.\n – Large surface area per unit volume.\n – Or, large volume to store heat with low duty cycle operation.\n• Gain medium must retain good (correctable) optical quality.\n\nThe typical properties of widely used Nd:YAG lasers are [30]:\n\n• 4 nm absorption line width.\n• 24% heating from quantum loss.\n• Saturation intensity ≈ 3 kW/cm2 (at ≈ 2% dopant).\n• Multi-kilowatt average power demonstrated.\n• Maximum average power potential ~ several hundred kilowatts:\n – Heat removal makes continuous running a challenge at this power.\n – Current high-energy SSLs produce great amounts of heat (e.g., 600 kW of electrical power in and 100 kW of beam power out equals 500 kW of waste heat).\n – Must store the waste heat and reject it from the system at a lower rate, thus requiring storage and limited duty cycle.\n• Quantum defect = pump light photon energy minus laser light photon energy.\n\nThe typical properties of widely used Yb:YAG lasers are [30]:\n• 18 nm absorption line width.\n• Indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs) pump laser diodes at 0.941 µm wavelength:\n – 8.6% heating from quantum loss.\n• Saturation intensity ≈ 9.7 kW/cm2 (at ≈ 25% dopant).\n• Multi-kilowatt average power demonstrated.\n• Maximum average power potential is perhaps 5 × Nd:YAG laser.\n\nA new technology that enables the scaling-up of BSSSL beam power is a recently developed thermal management system that is used to remove and store the waste heat produced by BSSSL devices. General Atomics' Advanced Power Systems Division recently announced* that it has completed testing of an advanced thermal energy\n\n*Reported in Space War Newsletter, June 7, 2010.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nstorage device capable of cooling DEW systems. Their 3 MJ device is the first large-scale module capable of storing heat at a high rate as required for DEW systems, and it stores heat at an average rate of 230 kW. Heat is stored in a 35 kg module by melting a wax-type phase change material (see Figure 21). These materials, by themselves, cannot support the high heat transfer rate and must be combined with other materials to enhance their thermal properties in order to make them work. Thermal management is one of the many challenges of the high-power BSSSL devices used in DEW systems, which produce tremendous amounts of waste heat. Rejecting heat from these systems in real time is not practical, making thermal energy storage a necessity.\n\nThe cost of BSSSL systems and related infrastructure are becoming competitive with that of the proposed 10 MW electron gun-driven CO2/gas mixture lasers. BSSSL costs are continuously decreasing as their technology matures and as more systems become widely available for testing and operational deployment. The HELLADS matched-index-of-refraction liquid cooling technique and General Atomics' advanced thermal energy storage device will also dramatically improve the cost competitiveness of BSSSL systems compared to all chemical and gas dynamic laser systems by producing greater efficiencies in solid-state lasing operation while at the same time increasing the average beam power.\n\nFigure 21. Phase Change Materials Allow Storage of Large Intermittent Heat Loads While Slow Regeneration Removes Heat from Aircraft (courtesy of P. Saunders, AFRL/RDS, Kirtland AFB, NM).\n\nHigh Power Fiber Laser\n\nFrom 2006 to 2009, a newly emergent class of solid-state lasers, called high-power fiber lasers (HPFLs), has undergone transformational innovations resulting in a 10-fold increase in near diffraction-limited beam output power of a single-fiber laser operating with broadband output in the 1 µm wavelength region with 90% optical efficiency, >\n\n52\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n30% wall plug efficiency, and pulse repetition rates ranging from a few kHz to 1000 kHz. This exponential growth in beam output power is the result of many factors, including the parallel development of efficient, narrow-band pump diode lasers; and the development of novel fiber geometries such as double-clad fibers and photonic crystal fiber cores (a.k.a. photonic crystal fibers). At present, HPFLs for industrial use routinely achieve 50 kW to 70 kW of beam power, and such systems have already been modified for weapons applications with a goal toward achieving > 100 kW of beam output power within 18 to 24 months after the publication of this report.\n\nAs fiber beam output power continues to increase exponentially, individual fibers can be combined coherently for increasing the total beam output power well beyond what has already been achieved by BSSSLs while providing several advantages. HPFLs have several advantages over BSSSLs. They are more efficient, easier to cool due to the large surface area-to-volume ratio, more durable, smaller and lighter, more easily allow the beam to be directed to the target, and have excellent beam quality. Fiber lasers also benefit from economies of scale and are relatively inexpensive devices.\n\nHPFLs possess the following unique characteristics, which make them very highly competitive with any chemical, gas dynamic, or bulk solid-state laser systems [31]:\n\n• Reliability.\n• High level of safety.\n• User-friendly.\n• Maintenance-free.\n• Low-cost performance, high-volume production.\n• Compact size and low weight.\n• Wide range of wavelength selection and wavelength tunability.\n• Excellent beam quality and stability.\n• Very high wall plug and optical efficiencies.\n• Variety of power oscillator or master oscillator-power amplifier designs (see Figure 22).\n• Scalability of beam output power, variety of fiber beam combining techniques: scalable to 1 to 2 MW beam power within 1 to 2 years (see Figure 23).\n\n53\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMaster Oscillator, Power Amplifier (MOPA)\n\nFigure 22. Typical HPFL MOPA Design (courtesy of the Directed Energy Professional Society).\n\nState of the Art in Fiber Combining\n\nFigure 23. Fiber Laser Beam Combining Techniques (courtesy of the Directed Energy Professional Society).\n\n54\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTypical HPFLs that use fiber optical oscillators or amplifiers as an alternative to bulk rods and slabs have the following technical features [31]:\n\n• Active Gain Medium:\n– Common host glasses and their combinations: Silicates; silicates and phosphates; silicates, phosphates, and fluorides; silicates, germanates, and fluorides; silicates and fluorides.\n– Impurity lasing ions deposited (or doped) in host: Neodymium (Nd3+), Ytterbium (Yb3+), Erbium (Er3+), Thulium (Tm3+), Holmium (Ho3+), Praseodymium (Pr3+).\n– Range of beam wavelengths (λ) produced: 0.48 µm to 2.9 µm.\n– Stretched doped rod into a long thin fiber.\n– Simplifies heat removal (large surface area per unit volume).\n• Pump (see Figure 24):\n– Surround lasing fiber with optically transparent jacket.\n– End pump optical jacket with diode lasers.\n– Single diodes or diode bars are coupled into undoped pump fibers\n▪ Pump fibers are spliced or drawn together with the doped lasing fiber.\n▪ Pump light is coupled to the outer, undoped outer fiber.\n– Active medium pumped along entire length\n▪ Pump light then couples into the lasing fiber all along its length.\n– Resonator optics are coupled to the ends of the doped fiber.\n• Large Diameter Fibers (see Figure 25):\n– Handle more power.\n– Larger divergence with less beam quality.\n– Longer output fibers before limits are hit.\n• Small Diameter Fibers (see Figure 25):\n– Better divergence with greater beam quality.\n– Handle less power before limits:\n▪ Material limits – melt.\n▪ Stimulated Brillion Scattering (SBS).\n▪ Stimulated Raman Scattering (SRS).\n– Shorter output fibers.\n\n55\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPumping Fiber Lasers\n\nFigure 24. Pumping Fiber Lasers (courtesy of the Directed Energy Professional Society).\n\nActive Fiber (side view)\n\nActive fiber & Pump fibers (end view) Seven fibers is optimal packaging\n\nLaser Light with total internal reflection angle setting divergence and beam quality\n\nFigure 25. Large and Small Diameter Fiber Lasers (courtesy of the Directed Energy Professional Society).\n\n56\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 26 and Figure 27 show examples of very portable, compact single mode and multimode HPFLs used for industrial applications.\n\nCompact, Lightweight SM Modules\n\nPOUT up to 1,100 W\nλ = 1070 nm\nBPP = 0.34 mm x mrad\n( M² < 1.05 )\nW x H x D = 60 x 33 x 4.7cm\nDC wall-plug efficiency > 35 %\nWeight ~ 12kg\n12kg/kW\n\nFigure 26. Single Mode Fiber Laser Modules (courtesy of IPG Photonics).\n\nMultimode Fiber Lasers\n\n50kW Multimode\n\n• Output beam quality BPP~10 M^2~33\n• DC EOE ~ 33%\n• Output fiber core diameter 200um\n• Output NA ~ 0.09\n• Output fiber length 15m\n• Raman level at full power expected to be ~ -35dB\n• Linewidth (FWHM) ~5nm\n• Weight ~ 2,500kg\n• Size (HxWxD): 1.8m x 2.7m x 0.8m\n• Delivered August, 2008\n\nCourtesy of IPG Photonics\n\nFigure 27. Multimode HPFLs.\n\n57\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFree Electron Laser\n\nHigh-energy free electrons from a particle accelerator (e.g., a high-voltage, high-current electron injector gun) can emit amplified, coherent photons when they are sent through an undulator (or \"wiggler\" magnets), which generates a periodically varying magnetic field with a linear array of permanent or superconducting magnets. The electron accelerator produces a micro-pulse of \"electron bunches\" moving at relativistic speeds that are laterally accelerated (or \"wiggled\") by the alternating magnetic fields in the undulator, thus releasing laser photons at optical wavelengths (see Figure 28 to Figure 30). The optical laser radiation is amplified at the double-Doppler-shifted wavelength of the undulator. The resulting laser beam photon energy depends on the electron energy, the undulator period, and (weakly) the magnetic field strength. The electron beam gets spent at the end of the lasing process.\n\nFigure 28. Free-Electron Laser (courtesy of the Naval Post-Graduate School FEL Lab).\n\nelectron beam pulses\nwiggler\noptical\nlaser\npulses\n100 %\nreflecting\nmirror\nPhoton Emision\npartially\ntransmitting\nmirror\n\nFigure 29. Free-Electron Laser Mechanism (courtesy of the Naval Post-Graduate School FEL Lab).\n\n58\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nelectron beam\nundulator\nresonator\nmirror\nelectron beam phase-space evolution\n\nFigure 30. Free-Electron Laser Electron Beam Phase-Space Evolution (courtesy of the Naval Post-Graduate School FEL Lab).\n\nIn the quantum picture of how FELs operate, the \"wiggling\" electrons radiate light and that light then gets stored between the resonator mirrors. And additional light radiation (that enters the resonator) in the presence of \"stored light\" results in stimulated emission, which is the lasing process. The classical interpretation of this process is that the electrons travel with the light radiation and exchange energy with it. Some electrons gain energy while some lose energy to the light radiation. The electrons in the beam will \"bunch\" within each optical wavelength, thus these bunched electrons will radiate coherently to produce laser light. This mechanism is represented graphically in Figure 29 and Figure 30.\n\nThe main appeal of free-electron lasers (FELs) is that they can be built for emission frequencies ranging from the terahertz region, through the infrared and visible spectrum, up to X-rays. Also, a single device often allows wavelength tuning over a large range and the output power can be scaled up very high. As in many spectral regions, it is not easy to make resonator mirrors; many FELs work without such mirrors and rely on amplified spontaneous emission. This can still be relatively efficient if the gain is high enough. One then actually has a superluminescent source. The big disadvantage of FELs is their very large and expensive setup; they can only be used at large facilities. The benefits of FELs are:\n\n• Continuously wavelength tunable, i.e., they can produce different wavelengths during operation.\n• Designable to produce a range of wavelengths, from microwaves to X-rays.\n• Scalable to very high beam power because they use a vacuum for their gain medium – laser medium cannot be damaged.\n• Not affected by heat problems that are common in other laser technologies.\n\n59\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Efficient, generally a FEL can transform 10% (> 60% for microwave tubes) of its energy into laser radiation.\n• Reliable, systems now run 24 hours per day for weeks.\n• Can produce picosecond laser pulse widths.\n• Systems are big (40 m x 60 m) and expensive ($1 Million to $100 Million).\n\nThe Naval Sea Systems Command's (NAVSEA) Directed Energy and Electric Weapon Systems (DE&EWS) Program Office is supporting research, development and testing of advanced high-energy/high-power FEL designs for the purpose of deploying them as directed energy weapons onboard warships in the near future. The DE&EWS program is emphasizing the development of disruptive innovations to reduce FEL system size, weight, and operational (and lifetime) cost, as well as to increase overall system operating efficiency. One design that has emerged to reach all of these goals is the recirculating-beam FEL system (RBFEL), which uses a superconducting accelerator, RF power liquid helium refrigerator, an electron beam injector, an electron beam dump, and a modified laser resonator-undulator cavity that boosts the production of amplified, coherent laser photons (see Figure 31). The superconducting accelerator gives good efficiency and gradient while recirculation of the electron beam recovers beam energy to increase efficiency and reduce the beam dump size.\n\nElectron Accelerator\nBeam Dump\nRF Power\nLiquid Helium Refrigerator\nInjector\nReflecting Mirror\nUndulator\nOut-Coupling Mirror\n\nFigure 31. Recirculating-Beam FEL System (courtesy of the Naval Post-Graduate School FEL Lab).\n\nThe key (typical) technical features of the Navy RBFEL are as follows:\n\n• Total system volume: 16 m x 4 m x 4 m = 256 m3.\n• Undulator/Wiggler\n– Length: 46 cm to 60 cm.\n– Period: 2.9 cm.\n– Number of periods: 18.\n– Magnetic field strength: 1 Tesla.\n\n60\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n– K ≈ 1.5.†\n• Electron Beam:\n– Photocathode injector creates picosecond electron pulses at 7 MeV.‡\n– Superconducting accelerator increases electron energy to 100 MeV.\n– Peak current: 1100 A.\n– Average current: 0.5 A.\n– Length: 0.1 mm.\n– Radius: 0.1 mm.\n– Electron beam recirculated for energy recovery.\n• Optical resonator based on short Rayleigh length optical mode (see Figure 32):\n– Cavity length (resonator mirror separation distance), S: 16 m.\n– Optical waist (natural mode width), w0: 0.1 mm.\n– Mirror radius of curvature, w: 2.6 cm.\n– Rayleigh length, z0: 2 cm.\n• Optical (Laser Beam) Output:\n– Power: 2 MW.\n– Wavelength, λ: 1 μm (tunable by controlling electron beam, undulator and resonator properties).\n• Short Rayleigh length§ (SRL) optical mode gives several advantages:\n– Reduces optical intensity on resonator mirrors to avoid mirror damage.\n– Single optical wavefront is amplified giving excellent beam quality.\n– FEL interaction is altered with SRL mode.\n– SRL intensifies interaction at mode focus.\n▪ Rapidly changing optical amplitude and phase.\n– SRL accelerates electron bunching and energy extraction\n▪ Electrons interact with optical radiation field along undulator.\n▪ Electrons \"see\" intense optical electric field at mode focus.\n▪ Electrons \"see\" rapidly changing optical radiation phase at mode focus.\n• Natural mode width/optical waist (for S ~ meters & laser beam λ ~ microns) is millimeters.\n• High-power lasers typically run in multiple transverse modes; however:\n– High-power FEL requires short Rayleigh length and small optical waist.\n– High-power FEL amplifies single mode without damage to gain medium (a vacuum).\n• FEL efficiency increases as Rayleigh length decreases.\n• For megawatt-class FEL system, high operating current plus active mirror alignment system acts to stabilize optical mode against Naval warship vibrations,\n\n†K = eBrms λund/2πmc², where e is the electron charge, Brms is the root-mean-square magnetic field strength, λund is the undulator period, m is the electron mass, and c is the speed of light.\n‡MeV = Mega-electron Volt.\n§SRL = distance for the area of the beam waist to double.\n\n61\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nwhich usually result in mirror tilts (~ 0 to 400 micro-radians) and drastically reduced beam power, thus maintaining beam power output at maximum design value.\n\nS=16m\nw=2.6cm z0=2cm\nL=0.6m\nw0=0.1mm\n\nFigure 32. High-Power FEL Optical Resonator (courtesy of the Naval Post-Graduate School FEL Lab).\n\nESTIMATED PAYLOAD COST FOR LIGHTCRAFT LAUNCH USING A 10 MW BSSSL, HPFL, OR RBFEL SYSTEM\n\nNo detailed Lightcraft nano- or pico-satellite payload launch cost estimates can be performed at this time because the high-power solid-state and FEL laser devices are emergent technologies still under development and testing; operational deployment is expected to take place within the next two to five years depending on near-future funding and programmatics. However, Table 1 shows that the average cost to launch a laser-propelled Lightcraft (including payload) to LEO is $3,052 per kg. This figure was based on operations, life-cycle, and maintenance costs plus the cost of using a high-power bulk solid-state laser system that is 50% shared with another user.\n\nThe cost estimates shown in Table 1 were compiled in 2003, so this (average) launch cost estimate will likely go down significantly at present (possibly by 20% or more) due to significantly increased system efficiencies realized within each of these emergent advanced laser technologies, reduced system costs due to widespread acceptance, operational deployment along with dual-use commercialization, and system costs that trend downward as technology matures over time, etc. IPG Photonics sells their industrial HPFL systems (e.g., see Figure 27) for prices ranging from $50,000 to $500,000 depending on the beam power (higher beam power = higher price) and system application. Based on these factors, a simple back-of-the-envelope cost estimate for Lightcraft launch of a payload to LEO is approximately $100 to $300 per kg,** while the average cost to launch a laser-propelled Lightcraft (including payload) to LEO will be approximately $800 to $2,000 per kg which includes the operations, life-cycle, maintenance, and laser system costs. An in-depth study will be needed to obtain more precise cost estimates for Lightcraft launch using BSSSL, HPFL, and RBFEL systems.\n\nHIGH ENERGY LASER BEAM CONTROL\n\n**Costs could be reduced to as low as $20 per kg of payload if Buckytubes are used to construct the Lightcraft.\n\n62\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIn order to launch a laser-propelled Lightcraft nanosat or picosat from the ground, sea, or air, it will be necessary to control and steer the high-energy laser (HEL) beam, while at the same time making real-time adjustments to account for platform motion, optical train and atmospheric effects on beam propagation, so that the beam maintains high quality, low-loss, precision contact with the Lightcraft from launch all the way up to LEO. While the atmospheric effects on laser beam propagation were briefly discussed in the Lightcraft Nanosatellite Configuration section of Chapter 2, a more in-depth examination of this phenomenon can be found in Reference 32. In what follows, we briefly discuss what a HEL beam control system is designed to do and what innovations were recently developed by the various DoD directed energy weapons programs that are just now being successfully tested and deployed.\n\nA beam control system is designed to:††\n\n• Acquire and precisely track a designated target.\n• Handles the HEL beam emitted from the laser:\n – Aligns the HEL beam to the optical train's axis – from the laser resonator to the beam director's exit aperture.\n – Safely relays the HEL beam through the optical train with minimal loss of energy and beam quality.\n• Expands the HEL beam and focuses it at the range of the target.\n• Places and maintains the HEL beam on the desired target's aimpoint.\n• Corrects for beam quality degradations in the optical train or the atmosphere (if needed).\n\nHEL weapons usually have high-power optical trains containing more than a dozen mirrors. However, these systems need to be far more compact with minimal high-power trains. As directed energy weapon applications begin to employ smaller HEL systems, the size, weight and complexity of the accompanying beam control system has come down as well. The typical HEL beam control system includes:‡‡ 1) a gimbaled beam director, 2) tracking and pointing functions, 3) adaptive optics, 4) acquisition sensors, and 5) target illuminators. Solutions have been recently developed to drive towards a smaller, lighter and simpler beam control system while considering the entire end-to-end system architecture. Existing beam control solutions are robust but large and complex. The technical strides achieved in the past 20 years in wavefront sensing, aperture sharing elements, beam tracking and beam correcting provide new tools to offer a simplified low mirror count beam control system while retaining the ruggedness of function necessary for a laser weapon.\nFigure 33 and Figure 34 show schematics of a notional inertially-stabilized pointer/tracker mount and beam control system that was developed by NAVSEA's DE&EWS Program.\n\n††D. Kiel, Directed Energy Systems Symposium Short Course, Naval Post-Graduate School, Monterey, CA, 2010.\n‡‡D. Kiel, Directed Energy Systems Symposium Short Course, Naval Post-Graduate School, Monterey, CA, 2010.\n\n63\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nA novel new HEL beam control architecture being tested and deployed by the various directed energy weapons programs that offers reduced complexity and component count, and combines many functions into a compact arrangement has the following key features:‡‡\n\n• End-to-end boresight tracker with 0.1 micro-radian root-mean-square accuracy at 10 KHz.\n• No beacon illuminator laser (BILL) required.\n• Real-time beam quality measurements on target during each engagement.\n• Extremely compact and lightweight beam train suitable for ground, airborne and sea platforms.\n• Primary mirror which is also a deformable mirror (DM) and a fast steering mirror (FSM).\n\nFigure 33. Notional Long Range HEL Beam Control System (courtesy of the Directed Energy Professional Society).\n\n64\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 34. HEL Beam Pointer/Tracker (courtesy of the Directed Energy Professional Society).\n\nIn summary, this new architecture has only the HEL module and the beam director. All the measurement and correction functions are integrated into the beam director without increasing the number of high power components usually required in a coude path.§§ The three major advantages of this architecture are as follows (see Figure 35):***\n\n• Minimizing complexity and component count: The optical control architecture has far less than a dozen mirrors plus a turret window and two polarizers between the HEL module and the target. The resulting beam line is considerably simpler, smaller and lighter than current architectures. Almost every component in the beam line performs multiple functions, thereby dramatically reducing the component count. There is only one long-burn DM, one coarse steering mirror (CSM), one FSM, and all of these are integrated into the beam director. This approach also packages all beam control sensors, processors and drivers into the turret assembly.\n• End-to-End Boresight and High-Bandwidth Tracking: In this design, the HEL and track illuminating laser (TILL) trackers are integrated onto the same focal plane and are controlled by a single FSM which is also the primary mirror and DM. This eliminates the traditional split between local and target loop stabilization, combining both into a single controller. This is accomplished so that the high-power path is minimized to its fundamental limit of six mirrors, which are necessary to get the beam from the HEL module through the coude path and out through the exit aperture of the telescope.\n• Eliminating the BILL (see Figure 36): The BILL is a solid-state, kilowatt-class laser that measures atmospheric conditions, allowing the beam and fire control systems to compensate for atmospheric turbulence that the HEL beam would encounter in its path to a target. The beam from the BILL bounces off the target and returns to the HEL source, where optical and software equipment measures the amount of distortion in the atmosphere between the HEL source and the target. The HEL adaptive optics system compensates for the distortion using a deformable mirror. Thus, eliminating the BILL was a very important innovation towards decreasing the number of high-power components required in the coude path.\n\n§§Coude is French for \"elbow,\" meaning a beam of light is bent in a zigzag manner through an optical train.\n***D. Kiel, Directed Energy Systems Symposium Short Course, Naval Post-Graduate School, Monterey, CA, 2010.\n\n65\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 35. Basic Shared Aperture Beam Control System (TILL = Track Illuminator Laser; C4I = Command, Control, Computing, Communication & Intelligence equipment) (courtesy of the Directed Energy Professional Society).\n\n66\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMitigating the Atmosphere with Adaptive Optics\n\nBeacon\n\nComputer\n\nHartmann Sensor\n\nBILL\n\nDeformable Mirror\n\nLaser\n\nThe AO System needs to operate (sense, compute, and adjust the deformable mirror) approx. > 10X faster than the atmosphere changes (~10's – 100's hz)\n\nFigure 36. HEL Adaptive Optics System (courtesy of the Directed Energy Professional Society).\n\nAll of these HEL beam control innovations can be quickly adapted to laser propulsion applications with little or no additional technical modifications or R&DTE. It is expected that all of the R&DTE work presently being done by the various DoD directed energy weapons/HEL programs can be immediately leveraged for laser Lightcraft nano-/pico-satellite programs should they become established. Primary mirrors with exit apertures of ≤ 10 m will be required to launch laser-propelled Lightcraft from ground/sea to LEO while apertures on aircraft-mounted laser beam control optics will be ≤ 1.0 m.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n67"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 5: Conclusion\n\nTo reduce mission costs, advanced technology components and a novel laser propulsion system can make nanosats (and picosats) compact, lightweight, low power, and low cost. By producing a large quantity of nanosats for a given mission, the per-unit cost will be reduced to a small fraction of satellite procurements for traditional missions. Mission operation costs will be minimized by the incorporation of both onboard and ground autonomy, use of heuristic systems, and use of a novel laser propulsion system to launch the nanosats into LEO. Laser propulsion is an enabling technology in which a laser-propelled vehicle, called \"Lightcraft,\" harnesses the energy of a high-energy laser beam and converts it into propulsive thrust.\n\nThe laser-propelled Lightcraft is an ETO transportation system that develops quasi-steady (airbreathing) thrust by pulsing at a variable rate along the flight trajectory to orbit, and then when it climbs above the atmosphere it begins to operate in the thermal rocket mode using onboard propellant to convert and expand the laser energy for propulsion. The Lightcraft is spin-stabilized and can be launched vertically upward or on a slant upward trajectory, hover in mid-air, and undergo powered descent and landing. The system is single-stage-to-orbit and completely reusable with no onboard propellant required (the reaction mass is free air), except for the small internal amount of propellant needed for final ascent to orbit and orbital maneuvering. MEMS FEEP thrusters could provide onboard attitude and stationkeeping propulsion. The Lightcraft specific impulse is essentially infinite (several thousand seconds in rocket mode), while payload mass fractions are 50% to 95%.\n\nLaser-propelled Lightcraft systems are simple, reliable, safe, environmentally clean, and could have a very high all azimuth on-demand launch rate. This novel propulsion system reduces space launch costs by two to three orders of magnitude below today's levels, with estimated launch costs of $20 per kg to $600 per kg of payload, not including life-cycle and recurring launch operations costs. The entire Lightcraft launch system is comprised of a ground, sea, or airborne laser beam generator consisting of a power supply, a high-power (megawatt-class) laser beam generator/transmitter using novel beam optics, and automated tracking, hand-off and safety systems.\n\nThe most promising military mission for laser-propelled Lightcraft is the placement of Earth and space observing nano-/pico-satellites of up to 3 kg mass into LEO. Such Lightcraft could also serve as a \"Lightsat,\" because it would use the Lightcraft's laser propulsion optics as a telescope for observing military targets on Earth and in space. Such a Lightcraft system appears capable of reaching LEO at 1/5th to 1/10th the cost required for placing a similar Lightsat system into LEO using multistage chemical rocket systems. Other potential missions include using laser-propelled Lightcraft as ground/sea- or airborne-launched kinetic kill weapons to shoot down enemy ballistic missiles. Very innovative near-term missions could also include deploying Lightcraft nano-/pico-satellites to form swarms of small spacecraft which cooperate coherently to form a real distributed system in which the whole is more than the sum of the parts. This would be a constellation of small spacecraft each performing its separate function, but these functions combine to create at a central location a much larger virtual spacecraft, or sensor aperture, that exists solely because of the cooperation of the\n\n68\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nspacecraft. This creates coherent RF or optical apertures that are essentially unlimited in size, which could offer unprecedented high-resolution radiometry, hyperspectral imaging, radar, and RF interception (for mapping, surveying, MASINT, SIGNIT), etc.\n\nLaunching laser-propelled Lightcraft nano-/pico-satellites to LEO requires megawatt-class lasers. TEXTRON Systems Corporation's proposed 10 MW electron gun-driven CO2/gas mixture laser is a multi-megawatt-class system that can be implemented now because this technology requires little or no additional R&D. This system offers realistic near-term, low-cost Lightcraft launch capability. However, this system is large, requires a large amount of gas propellant to fuel the laser, and the system infrastructure will cost over $200 million.\n\nThe newly emergent bulk slab solid-state, high-power fiber, and free-electron laser technologies being explored by the various DoD directed energy weapons programs offer higher electrical-to-optical efficiencies and overall laser performance, compact and portable system size, less complexity and smaller weight, all at much lower system and infrastructure cost. These lasers are scalable to megawatt-class beam power, and so we roughly estimate that the overall system and infrastructure cost to deploy such laser systems to launch a Lightcraft to LEO will be from several factors to an order of magnitude (or more) lower than for the electron gun-driven CO2/gas mixture laser system.\n\nRemoving the waste heat produced by high-power laser systems is an important factor driving the physical limitations of scaling up the beam output power. An innovative matched-refractive-index liquid is used to rapidly remove the heat produced by a 150 kW bulk slab solid-state laser weapon while the very high surface area-to-volume ratio of high-power fiber lasers allows for the rapid removal of heat from the gain medium without the need for external cooling. Phase-change materials are being explored and devices using such materials have recently demonstrated the ability to store very large quantities of the waste heat produced by high-power solid-state lasers, which is a different way of rapidly removing large amounts of heat from the solid-state gain medium. Unlike solid-state laser systems, free-electron lasers are not affected by heat problems while their gain medium (a vacuum) cannot be damaged.\n\nLaunching a laser-propelled Lightcraft nanosat/picosat from the ground, sea, or air into LEO requires controlling and steering the high-energy laser beam, while at the same time making real-time adjustments to account for platform motion, optical train and atmospheric effects on beam propagation, so that the beam maintains high quality, low-loss, precision contact with the Lightcraft during the entire flight. Recent technical innovations in optical train design and other system architecture have evolved beam control devices for high-energy laser weapons toward new implementations. New beam control devices and high-power optical train combinations have a resulting beam line that is considerably simpler, smaller and lighter than current architectures. Almost every component in the beam line performs multiple functions, thereby dramatically reducing the high-power optical component count. This approach also packages all beam control sensors, processors and drivers into a single turret assembly.\n\nIn 2005, the AFRL/PRSP (Edwards AFB, CA) concluded their laser Lightcraft propulsion R&DTE program before launching a Lightcraft test vehicle into LEO was demonstrated\n\n69\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[33, 34]. At present, AFOSR is funding the Brazilian Air Force's hypersonic shock tunnel study of laser Lightcraft propulsion in collaboration with Leik Myrabo's laser propulsion group at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (Troy, NY) [35]. This author recommends that the Department of Defense, in collaboration with NASA, return laser Lightcraft propulsion R&D to the United States and restart the space launch test flight demonstration program of the Air Force X-50LR Lightcraft, which was originally proposed by Dr. Frank Mead [34].\n\nREFERENCES\n\n70\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[1] Forward, R. L. (1962), \"Pluto: Last Stop Before the Stars,\" Science Digest (Aug. issue), pp. 70-75.\n[2] Kantrowitz, A. (1972), \"Propulsion to Orbit by Ground-Based Lasers,\" Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 10, pp. 74-76.\n[3] Rom, F. E., and Putre, H. A. (1972), \"Laser Propulsion,\" NASA Technical Memorandum TM X-2510.\n[4] Pirri, A. N., and Weiss, R. F. (1972), \"Laser Propulsion,\" AIAA Paper 72-719, AIAA 5th Fluid and Plasma Dynamics Conference, Boston, MA.\n[5] Harstad, K. G. (1972), \"Review of Laser-Solid Interactions and Its Possibilities for Space Propulsion,\" NASA Technical Memorandum 33-578, NASA Jet Propulsion Lab, Pasadena, CA.\n[6] Pirri, A. N., Monsler, J. J., and Nebolsine, P. E. (1973), \"Propulsion by Absorption of Laser Radiation,\" AIAA Paper 73-624, AIAA 6th Fluid and Plasma Dynamics Conference, Palm Springs, CA.\n[7] Myrabo, L. N. (1982), \"A Concept for Light-Powered Flight,\" AIAA/SAE/ASME 18th Joint Propulsion Conference, Cleveland, OH.\n[8] Myrabo, L. N. (1983), \"Advanced Beamed-Energy and Field Propulsion Concepts,\" BDM/W-83-225-TR, BDM Corp., Final Report for CalTech and NASA-JPL, NASA Contract NAS7-100.\n[9] Myrabo, L. N., and Ing, D. (1985), The Future of Flight, Baen Books-Simon and Schuster, New York.\n[10] Kare, J. T., ed. (1987), Proc. of the SDIO/DARPA Workshop on Laser Propulsion, CONF-860778, Vol. 1 - 3, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, CA.\n[11] Myrabo, L. N., et. al. (1989), \"Lightcraft Technology Demonstrator,\" Final Technical Report, Contract No. 2073803 for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the SDIO Laser Propulsion Program.\n[12] Kare, J. T. (1990), \"Ground to Orbit Laser Propulsion Q Advanced Applications,\" in Vision-21: Space Travel for the Next Millennium, edited by G. Landis, NASA Conference Publication 10059.\n[13] Kare, J. T. (1990), \"Laser Supported Detonation Waves and Pulsed Laser Propulsion,\" in Current Topics in Shock Waves, 17th Int'l Symposium on Shock Waves and Shock Tubes, edited by Y. W. Kim, AIP Conference Proceedings 208, AIP Press, Melville, NY.\n[14] Kare, J. T. (1990), \"Pulsed Laser Propulsion for Low Cost, High Volume Launch to Orbit,\" IAF Conference on Space Power, Cleveland, OH.\n[15] Lawrence, R. J., et al. (1991), \"System Requirements for Low-Earth-Orbit Launch Using Laser Propulsion,\" in Proc. of the 6th Int'l Conference on Emerging Nuclear Energy Systems, SAND 91-1687C, Sandia National Laboratory, NM.\n[16] Messitt, D. G., Myrabo, L. N., and Mead, F. B. (2000), \"Laser Initiated Blast Wave for Launch Vehicle Propulsion,\" AIAA-2000-3848, AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE 36th Joint Propulsion Conference, Huntsville, AL.\n[17] Myrabo, L. N., Messitt, D. G., and Mead, F. B. (1998), \"Ground and Flight Tests of a Laser Propelled Vehicle,\" AIAA-98-1001, AIAA 36th Aerospace Sciences Meeting & Exhibit, Reno, NV.\n[18] Mead, F. B., Myrabo, L. N., and Messitt, D. G. (1998), \"Flight and Ground Tests of a Laser-Boosted Vehicle,\" AIAA-98-3735, AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE 34th Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, Cleveland, OH.\n\n71\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[19] Wang, T.-S., et al. (2000), \"Performance Modeling of an Experimental Laser\nPropelled Lightcraft,\" AIAA-2000-2347, 31st AIAA Plasmadynamics and Lasers\nConference, Denver, CO.\n[20] Wang, T.-S., et al. (2001), \"Advanced Performance Modeling of Experimental\nLaser Lightcrafts,\" AIAA-2001-0648, 39th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and\nExhibit, Reno, NV.\n[21] Wang, T.-S., et al. (2002), \"Advanced Performance Modeling of Experimental\nLaser Lightcraft,\" J. Propul. and Power, Vol. 18, pp. 1129-1138.\n[22] Myrabo, L. N. (2001), \"World Record Flights of Beam-Riding Rocket Lightcraft:\nDemonstration of 'Disruptive' Propulsion Technology,\" AIAA-2001-3798,\nAIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE 37th Joint Propulsion Conference, Salt Lake City, UT.\n[23] Mead, F. B., Larson, C. W., and Kalliomaa, W. M. (2002), \"A Status Report of the\nX-50LR Program - A Laser Propulsion Program,\" AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE 38th Joint\nPropulsion Conference, Indianapolis, IN.\n[24] Larson, C. W., Mead, F. B., and Kalliomaa, W. M. (2002), \"Energy conversion in\nlaser propulsion III,\" in Proc. of the 1st Int'l Symposium on Beamed Energy\nPropulsion, edited by A. V. Pakhomov, AIP Conference Proc. 664, AIP Press,\nMelville, NY, pp. 170-181.\n[25] Froning, H. D., et al. (2003), \"Study to Determine the Effectiveness and Cost of\na Laser-Powered 'Lightcraft' Vehicle System - Results to Guide Future\nDevelopments,\" in Proc. of the 2nd Int'l Symposium on Beamed Energy\nPropulsion, edited by K. Komurasaki, AIP Conference Proc. 702, AIP Press,\nMelville, NY, pp. 242-250.\n[26] Froning, H. D., and Davis, E. W. (2006), \"Study to Determine the Effectiveness\nand Cost of a Laser-Propelled 'Lightcraft' Vehicle System,\" Final Report AFRL-PR-\nED-TR-2003-0033, Air Force Research Laboratory, Air Force Materiel Command,\nEdwards AFB, CA. [See also, Knecht, S. D., and Mead, F. B. (2004), \"Increasing\nLaser Ramjet (LR) Thrust and Coupling Coefficient via Nozzle Design and\nPrevention of Plasma Wrap-Around,\" Final Report AFRL-PR-ED-TR-2004-0082,\nAir Force Research Laboratory, Air Force Materiel Command, Edwards AFB, CA.]\n[27] Rumsfeld, D. H., et al. (2001), Report of the Commission To Assess United\nStates National Security Space Management and Organization, U.S. Congress\nand the Dept. of Defense, Washington DC.\n[28] Scott, W. B. (2000), Aviation Week & Space Technology Magazine article on the\n2001 Report of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space\nManagement and Organization, Nov. 6, 2000, p. 61.\n[29] Hasson, V. (2002), \"Briefing on Multi-Megawatt Pulsed CO2 Laser Transmitter for\nPropulsion Applications,\" Advanced Concepts Office, AFRL/PRSP, Edwards AFB,\nCA (Nov. 18, 2002).\n[30] Kalisky, Y. (2006), The Physics and Engineering of Solid State Lasers, Tutorial\nTexts in Optical Engineering, Vol. TT71, SPIE Press, Bellingham, WA.\n[31] Motes, R. A., and Berdine, R. W. (2009), Introduction to High-Power Fiber\nLasers, Publ. by the Directed Energy Professional Society, Albuquerque, NM.\n[32] Nielsen, P. E. (2009), Effects of Directed Energy Weapons: High Power Lasers,\nHigh Power Microwaves, and Particle Beams, Publ. by the Directed Energy\nProfessional Society, Albuquerque, NM, Chapter 3.\n[33] Mead, F. B. (2007), \"Part I - The Lightcraft Technology Demonstration Program,\"\nFinal Report AFRL-RZ-ED-TR-2007-0078, Air Force Research Laboratory, Air\nForce Materiel Command, Edwards AFB, CA.\n\n72\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cbf7e5c7ece7357a","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[34] Mead, F. B. (2007), \"Part II - Experimental 50-cm Laser Ramjet (X-50LR)\nProgram,\" Final Report AFRL-RZ-ED-TR-2007-0079, Air Force Research\nLaboratory, Air Force Materiel Command, Edwards AFB, CA.\n[35] Salvador, I. I., et al. (2010), \"Experimental Analysis of a 2-D LightCraft in Static\nand Hypersonic Conditions,\" Proc. of the 6th Int'l Symposium on Beamed Energy\nPropulsion, edited by C. R. Phipps, AIP Conference Proc., AIP Press, Melville, NY,\nin press.\n\n73\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cc85b7a9e79a42c7","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n-1 of 3-\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nOFFICIAL RECORD\nDate of entry [REDACTED]/2026\nOn [REDACTED], 2026, [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] was interviewed by Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Special Agent (SA) [REDACTED], [REDACTED] SA [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]. After being advised on the identities of the interviewing agents, [REDACTED] provided the following information:\nPrior to his current role as [REDACTED] had previously worked for [REDACTED] was at [REDACTED] to support the [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nOn [REDACTED] 2026, [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] left the [REDACTED] [REDACTED]at approximately 7:45pm and were headed to a location on the central/northern portion of [REDACTED] Weather condition at the time was rainy with significant cloud cover. Approximately 30 minutes after passing through the [REDACTED] (approximately 8:00pm-8:30pm), [REDACTED] saw two unidentified lights in the sky, pulled over to the side of the road and exited the vehicle to investigate. [REDACTED] described the lights as \"dash\" shaped and dull red in color to the naked eye. The lights moved along the ridgeline of the mountains to his west. [REDACTED] was equipped with Night Optical Devices (NODs) and observed the lights through said optics as well. [REDACTED] relayed that, despite being \"dash-shaped\" to the naked eye, the lights appeared \"orb-like\" or circular through the NODs, with the characteristic \"NOD halo\" around them, which is typical when looking at a light source through NODs. [REDACTED] stated that he is very familiar with using NODs, as he has been using them for 25+ years and has many hours of experience. [REDACTED] stated that he has astigmatism and while the objects appeared \"dash-shaped\" to him, [REDACTED] stated they appeared triangular or diamond-shaped, which could possibly be attributed to [REDACTED] astigmatism.\nAfter approximately 20 minutes, both of the aforementioned unidentified lights disappeared. Shortly thereafter [REDACTED] observed, another, similar\nInvestigation on [REDACTED] at [REDACTED] United States [REDACTED]\nFile # [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Date drafted [REDACTED]2026\nby [REDACTED]\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"cc85b7a9e79a42c7","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED], On [REDACTED] 2026, Page 2 of 3\nunidentified light appear directly above their location and was visible for approximately 10 minutes, before it, too, disappeared.\nSometime between 10:00pm and 11:00pm, [REDACTED] observed another, similar unidentified light appear approximately 600 meters (estimated) to the east of their position and appeared to be approximately 500 feet above their vehicle. The unidentified light appeared to move toward them and stopped approximately 400 meters away. A second unidentified light appeared and moved toward, and then stopped in proximity of, the first. The second light appeared to be approximately 6 feet off the ground.\nAs [REDACTED] watched the two unidentified lights to the east, he noticed light in his peripheral vision descend from altitude and stop in a dry wash approximately 100 meters behind them. Although [REDACTED] could not directly see the light source, he observed the glow emanating from the wash. [REDACTED] watched the glow move through the wash.\n[REDACTED] entered their vehicle and drove up to the next intersection in attempt to get a better view of the unidentified lights to their east. Upon arrival, the lights were no longer observed. [REDACTED] [REDACTED] returned to their original position, but were unable to re-acquire the unidentified lights. [REDACTED] walked 10-20 meters away from the vehicle to look around the area; [REDACTED] remained near the vehicle.\nAt this time, [REDACTED] adjusted the filter on his NODs to look at his watch, which displayed approximately 1:00am (estimated based on memory). [REDACTED]s watch was a [REDACTED] Men's Automatic Analog Watch. [REDACTED] walked back to the vehicle to check his phone, which displayed 12:40am. [REDACTED] noted the discrepancy, compared the time displayed on his watch to the time displayed on his phone and observed that the time on his watch was 25 minutes ahead of the time on his phone and the vehicle's digital clock. [REDACTED] relayed the discrepancy to [REDACTED], whose digital watch displayed the same time as the phones and vehicle clock.\n[REDACTED] stated that he had owned that watch for approximately 5 years, and it had never been off by more than 60-90 seconds. [REDACTED] had last checked the time on his watch at approximately 10:00pm, and it was accurate at that time. [REDACTED] stated that his watch was the only mechanical/analog/non-digital clock in the vicinity at that time and it was the only clock that displayed a different time. [REDACTED] did not adjust his watch or reset the time for 24 hours to see if it continued to malfunction; the watch continued to keep accurate time but remained 25 minutes fast."} {"doc_id":"cc85b7a9e79a42c7","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED], On [REDACTED], Page 3 of 3\n[REDACTED] told agents that he had spent a considerable amount of time at a [REDACTED] facility looking up at the night sky, and was familiar with how stars/satellites/meteors look to both the naked eye and with NODs. [REDACTED] stated that the lights he observed and described were unlike anything he had seen before. [REDACTED] stated that the lights he observed on [REDACTED] did not behave like satellites, as satellites track linear across the sky, whereas these did not. [REDACTED] stated the unidentified lights moved around and changed direction, and also appeared to be as low as 6 feet off the ground.\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] The low-elevation lights described by [REDACTED] would have been backdropped by the mountains and below the relative horizon line.[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] stated that what he observed was not a UAS that he familiar with. [REDACTED] noted no exhaust or tail when these objects moved, and they exhibited no audible sound signature. [REDACTED] attempted to observed the objects through thermal optics, but was unsuccessful.\n[REDACTED] noted no physiological effects from the events. [REDACTED] stated that the observations did not induce a fear or agitation response - just curiosity. [REDACTED] conversed about this afterward, and given their backgrounds, found it strange that they did not feel fear or threatened during their observations.\n[REDACTED] provided his contact information and was open to further contact from agents.\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n62-83894-130\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 90986\n\nIN REPLY\nREFER TO:\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR DEFENSE COMMAND\nMITCHEL FIELD, NEW YORK\n\n12 September 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Object\n(Interview - Alpheus O. Powell)\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION:\n\nThe following information was received 12 August 1947 from Mr. Alpheus O. Powell, 28 Redwood Road, New Hyde Park, Long Island, relative to the sighting of a possible flying disc 4 August 1947.\n\nOn 4 August 1947, Mr Powell, an Airlines Captain with Pan American Airways, Inc., was the first pilot of a Constellation type aircraft on a flight from Gander, Newfoundland, to La Guardia Field, New York. Mr. Powell took over the aircraft at Gander, Newfoundland and departed at approximately 1230 P.M., Eastern Daylight Saving Time for La Guardia Field, New York. At 1600 P.M., at a position approximately midway between the Everett (Mass) Fan Marker and the Bedford Radio Beacon (Everett is 3 miles NW of Boston, Mass., and Bedford is 15 miles NW of the same city) both Mr Powell and Mr W. White, navigator on this trip, sighted unidentifiable flying objects. To the best of Mr. Powell's knowledge, the following weather conditions existed at that time: Visibility was good; cloud coverage was from 6-8/10ths, with tops at 10,000 feet; and the wind at the 8,000 foot level was estimated as being 270/25 miles per hour. The aircraft was at 8,000 feet; airspeed 265 mph; and the course was 244 degrees, magnetic.\n\nMr White, who was sitting in the co-pilots seat (the right side of the cockpit) first called Mr. Powell's attention to a bright orange object,, which was on the right side of the plane, and slightly below the level of the aircraft. Mr Powell was unable to see the object, as he had no visibility to the right and down, from his position. Mr Powell immediately glanced out his side window and noticed, at a 45° angle to the left, and unidentified flying object. It was about one mile away at an altitude of approximately 7,800 feet. Mr Powell banked to obtain a better view of the object. The object was under observation for approximately 30 seconds, and during this time was viewed by Mr Powell. Mr Powell described the object as being about the length of a P-40 fuselage, blunt at both ends, cylindrical in shape, and having a bright orange hue. Mr Powell stated that the object had a definite shape, and that there was no suggestion of gaseous dissipation as there would be if the orange color were the exhaust from a rocket, or a jet aircraft. Mr Powell estimated the course of the object to be 200° magnetic, and that the object was travelling at approximately 150 mph. Mr Powell lost sight of the object, when a cloud came between the aircraft and the object. The pursuit of the object was not continued, inasmuch as it would have necessitated a departure from the established airways."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nHEADQUARTERS AIR DEFENSE COMMAND MITCHEL FIELD, NEW YORK\n\n15 September 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Objects\n(Interview - Walter I. White)\n\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION:\n\nThe following information relative to the sighting of a possible flying disc 4 August 1947, was received 10 September 1947 from Mr. Walter I. White, 19-57 79th Street, Jackson Heights, New York.\n\nOn 4 August 1947, Mr. White, Pan American Airways Inc., was the navigator of a Constellation type aircraft on a flight from Gander, Newfoundland to La Guardia Field, New York. At 1600, at a position approximately 10 miles NW of Boston, Mass., Mr White sighted a flying object which he was unable to identify. At this time Mr White was sitting in the copilots seat, and looking out the right side for other aircraft that might be in the vicinity. Mr White stated that when he first sighted the object, it appeared to be about 5 miles away, and at least 1,000 feet below the level of the Constellation. Mr White believes that he studied the object for almost 30 seconds before he called the pilot's attention to it. Mr White described the object as being a deep gold in color, and that its' surface reflected light. It appeared to be about 15 feet in length, and from 2-3 feet in depth; elliptical in shape and blunted at the ends. Mr White estimated the speed of the object as being 175 miles per hour, and that it was travelling in an easterly direction, on a course of approximately 110° magnetic. Mr White then told the aircraft commander that there was an unidentified object to the right, and again glanced out to observe the object, catching a momentary glimpse of it before the pilot banked the plane to the left. When the aircraft banked Mr White lost sight of the object. At this point, Mr Powell, the aircraft Captain, exclaimed that he was able to see a similar object on his side. Mr White was unable to see the object on Mr Powell's side. He stated that he does not believe that it was the same object that he had viewed inasmuch as the one he saw if it had remained on the same course would have been hidden from view by that time by the wings and tail section of the Constellation. Mr White stated that the pilot then righted the plane. The entire incident transpired in less than a minute and one-half.\n\nMr White describes the weather condition at the time of sightings as follows: about 5/10th scattered cumulus, with tops at 10,000 feet; visibility 10 miles; wind at flight level, West at about 15 mph. The flight level of the aircraft at this time was 8,000 feet, TAS 270, and the magnetic course was SW.\n\nAGENTS NOTES: Mr Walter I. White has been employed by Pan American Airways for the past five years as a Navigator, and during the war worked with PAA"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in conjunction with contract flying for the AAF. Mr White states that he has flown with Mr Powell on a number of occasions, and he considers him to be a very stable person; completely reliable, and not given to \"flights of fancy\".\n\nRelated Report: See Summary of Information, 12 September 1947, Hq ADC, subject, \"Unidentified Flying Objects\" (interview - Alpheus O. Powell).\n\nPrevious Distribution:\n- None\n\nDistribution\n\n- AAF (3 copies)\n- ADC (2 copies)\n\nEvaluation\nof source 6 of information 3\n\n-2-\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AGENTS NOTES: Mr. A. O. Powell is a graduate of the Aviation Cadet Flying Training Program, having graduated from Maxwell Field, Alabama, with the Class of 41-C. Since graduation, Mr. Powell has flown for Pan American Airways and, at this date, has over 4,000 command pilot hours to his credit. Mr. Powell appears to be a calm, intelligent individual, not given to flights of fancy, or easily swayed by what he has previously read in the newspapers as regards reports of this type. Mr. Powell has a fear of publicity and seemed hesitant to even tell his story lest he become the object of ridicule. Mr Powell was questioned as to the possibility that what he sighted might have been a tow target, a pilot balloon, or a radiosonic device used for meteorological purposes. Mr Powell stated that he has seen numerous pilot balloons, radiosonic devices and tow targets, while on flights; the object observed on this flight definitely was not one of them.\n\nPrevious Distribution:\n- None\n\nDistribution\n- AAF (3 copies)\n- ADC (2 copies)\n\nEvaluation\nof source 6 of information 3\n\n2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nBASIC: Ltr. Hq. BAMTD, Birmingham AAF, Birmingham, Ala., dtd 6 July 47, subj: Report on Local \"Flying Disc.\"\n\n1st Ind.\n\nHEADQUARTERS, FOURTEENTH AIR FORCE, Orlando, Florida,\n\nTO: Commanding General, Air Defense Command, Mitchel Field, New York.\n\n1. Forwarded for information of your Headquarters.\n\n2. This Headquarters has made no investigation of \"Flying Disc\" reports because this is an isolated case.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n3 Incls: n/c\n\n92715\n\nRESTRICTED\n2"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nBIRMINGHAM AIR RESERVE TRAINING DETACHMENT\nBIRMINGHAM ARMY AIR FIELD\nBirmingham, Alabama\n\nA/J CY/alo\n\n8 July 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Report on local \"Flying Disc\"\n\n7795\n\nTO: Commanding General\nFourteenth Air Force, ADC\nOrlando, Florida\nAttn: A-2\n\n1. Inclosed herewith is a photograph of the \"publicized flying disc,\" which was reportedly witnessed over Birmingham on the night of Sunday, 6 July 1947.\n\n2. Attention is invited to the two light spots on the print and the light trail following the two discs. The arrow at the top of the photograph indicates the direction of flight. This has been examined by professional photographers in Birmingham and their general opinion is that the two spots shown on the light trail were no flaws in the negative, but instead, an actual photograph of the mysterious disc.\n\n3. The undersigned officer did not personally witness the flight of any disc, however, in view of the numerous reports received from the citizens of Birmingham, it is the general opinion in Birmingham that \"something was in the air.\" Attached hereto as inclosure number two is a statement made by the only military personnel of this organization who personally witnessed the flight of the mysterious disc. For additional information attached as inclosure number three are clippings from one of the local newspapers giving an account of the many persons who reported seeing the many mysterious objects.\n\n4. The intelligence officer of the Alabama Military District has forwarded a similar report through ground force channels to the Commanding General, Third Army, Atlanta 3, Georgia.\n\nJack C. White\nJACK C. WHITE\nMajor, Air Corps\nCommanding\n\n3 Incls.\n1. Photograph\n2. Statement\n3. Clippings\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nReport on Local \"Flying Disc\"\nD333.5 ID (8 Jul 47) 2nd Ind\nHQ., AIR DEFENSE COMMAND, Mitchel Field, New York, 25 July 1947.\n\nTO: Commanding General, Army Air Forces, Washington 25, D. C.\nATTN: AC/AS-2\n\nForwarded for your information.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nR. H. Smith\nR. H. SMITH\nColonel, GSC\nAsst Chief of Staff-Intell.\n\n3 Incls:\nn/c\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Age-Herald News\n\n'Flying Saucers' Reported From 39 States, But Seem To Be Concentrated Here\n\nCity Is Baffled By Dazzling Display Of Spooky Discs\n\nThe strange things that have been in night skies since June 25, were over Birmingham last night.\nOn one thing everyone who has seen the mysterious objects agree—they are round, saucer-like. After that, every story differs. Each of the hundreds of callers who reported witnessing the baffling sky demonstrations here last night had a different version of what they saw.\nSome said the objects were large, some small. They were moving at great speed. They were suspended in the air. There was sound along with their movements. They moved noiselessly through the black sky. They were at great distance from the earth. They had fallen to the ground. They were in perfect formation. They were colliding with each other.\nBut whatever the things are that have set the nation agog since first reported 12 days ago by a man in Washington State, they definitely were over the Magic City last night. It seems, in fact, that more Birmingham residents saw the objects than in any other place.\n* * *\nREPORTS BEGAN coming into the Age-Herald city room around 8 o'clock last night. For more than an hour thereafter, the place was bedlam. The switchboard operators were swamped with calls. Reporters, office boys, copy readers—everyone in the place was called into action.\nReports came in from Edgewood, Mountain Brook, Avondale, Southside, Fairfield, Pratt City, West End, Central Park, Bessemer.\nThere was fear, excitement, horror, skepticism in the voices. One\n\nCAMERA HERE CATCHES \"FLYING SAUCER\"—Robert Crossland, Age-Herald copy reader, has camera proof that the much-discussed flying discs were over Birmingham last night. The picture above was made by Mr. Crossland at 8:37 p.m. last night at his home at 29th Street and Highland Avenue. He said he gave the film a 15-second exposure."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5—THE BIRMINGHAM NEWS\n\nMysterious Flying Saucers Reported In Birmingham Skies\n\nContinued From Page 1\nAlthough the reports to The Age-Herald last night dwindled off at about 9 p..m., there was a final call from a man at 10, saying he had seen the objects over the southeastern section. This morning, there were more reports, more queries coming into The News.\nMaj. White issued a message to Birmingham residents: \"We'll do everything the Army Air Forces is empowered to do to run down the mystery of the discs. This thing seems to have gotten beyond the point of speculation. Birmingham can rest assured the air base will keep on the alert until the mystery is settled.\"\n\nBirmingham police headquarters was flooded with calls, too, last night. So was the Weather Bureau, the control tower at the airport, airline officers.\nAt the Birmingham Army Airfield, Maj. Jack C. White, commandant, ordered an alert and dispatched a plane to fly around the city. The plane, with Lt. L. S. Robinson at the controls, circled the city for an hour and 15 minutes at from 4,000 to 5,000 feet. He was unable to report any unnatural objects.\nScientists indicate that the objects are merely tricks of the eye. In fact, Howard Blakeslee, Associated Press scientific writer, has stated he has seen similar objects from his home on Long Island for many years and associated no mystery with them. They are a combination of eye and light tricks, is his answer.\nTurn to Page 5, Column 1\nman admitted having seen objects several weeks ago \"but was ashamed to tell my wife.\"\nWhatever it is going on in the night skies, it has the entire nation in a dither. The flying discs have eclipsed every other national and international event in the minds of the American people. Broadcasts from England last night said the Britishers were scoffing at the story. But when persons in 30-odd states have reported seeing the objects, there must be something to the story."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MONDAY, JULY 7, 1947\nRADIO-GUIDED, SAYS LAD\n\"I'd like to give my opinion about what the flying saucers really are,\" Michael Eisman, 10, told The News this morning.\nThe grammar school youth, \"in the fifth grade and going on to the sixth\" at Crestline Heights School, eagerly gave his theory.\n\"They are new radio-guided rocket discs from another country that is planning war on the United States,\" he said.\n\"They are equipped with cameras. They will be radio guided back to their home country. They go fast to keep anyone from seeing them. Then they hover and stand still to get their pictures.\n\"They have a reason for being over Birmingham,\" opined young Eisman. \"It has one of the biggest steel mills, and the biggest cotton gin.\" Eisman said the \"saucer cameras\" were clicking the fruit industry on the West Coast.\nAs to what country is sending the saucers, Eisman didn't guess. Nor has he seen any saucers, he said, over his home at 4 Clarendon Road."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Charles F. Bradley, Birmingham weather man, said he did not believe the spectacle was a weather phenomena, \"I have instructed my staff to be on the alert for any information they might gather on the matter,\" he said.\nGREATEST EXCITEMENT of the evening came when a man reported some of the discs had fallen in a ravine near Avonwood. A reporter and photographer went to the scenes--and found nothing. Residents of the district said the discs had passed low and appeared to have fallen in the trees.\nRobert Crossland, Age-Herald copy reader, rushed for his camera when the objects passed over his residence on 29th Street and Highland Avenue. His developed film revealed two round, white spots on the black, close together, one larger than the other. He said he gave the picture a 15-second exposure. Five other persons were with him when the picture was made.\nBut witnesses aren't needed any longer to bear out reports of the strange demonstration. Too many persons--good, solid citizens--have seen the things. In fact, they're thinking of calling the show out at Munger Bowl tonight, \"The Disclight Opera.\"\nScores Of People Report Seeing Mysterious Discs\nResidents of East Lake, Southside, West End, Woodlawn and Bessemer reported seeing the flying discs or saucers last night. One disc was reported seen yesterday afternoon over the Warrior River. The number seen at one time varied.\n* * *\nNine of the discs were seen by Connie Murdoch, 512 South 10th Court. \"They were gobs of light moving around the sky,\" she reported.\n* * *\nH. E. Reagor, 1318 45th Street, said he and neighbors saw \"40 or 50\" light spots in the sky, apparently over the Central Park Airport area.\n* * *\nOne resident of East Lake, hearing of the flying saucers, rushed into his front yard. \"I saw the landing lights of a DC-3 and 17 lightning bugs,\" he reported.\n* * *\nMrs. James Bain, 1225 South 29th Street, saw three discs traveling from east to west. Two more were spotted later, followed by a single disc, as neighbors gathered.\n* * *\nJ. L. Kardus, 2100 Clanton Street, Bessemer, reported seeing \"strange lights\" moving through the sky between Bessemer and Red Mountain. \"They were going very fast,\" he said.\n* * *\n\"Whirling saucers\" were reported seen by Dan Smirl, 14, 1429 10th Place, South, and Marvin Pharo, 15, 626 10th Avenue, South. \"We weren't looking for them,\" the boys reported. \"We were standing in the yard when we saw round silver flashes circling around. They came one at a time at first, then the number increased. They seemed to go over the mountain.\"\n* * *\nAt police headquarters, Officer E. E. McNeal said reports of the discs began at 8:10 p.m. and ceased about 20 minutes later.\n* * *\n\"Streaks of light flying very slow\" were reported seen by Mrs. H. M. Sockwell, 1360 Meadow Lane, Green Acres. She said she rushed into her yard as soon as she heard the report on the radio. She and her husband and five neighbors saw six of the discs flying \"fairly low.\" She said they were the size of a\n\"BIG AS TABLES\"\n\"I called to find out if I'm crazy,\" said Mrs. Gordon Mize, of the Bessemer Super-Highway, who telephoned The News this morning to report seeing mysterious flying discs.\nMrs. Mize said she and her husband and their hosts saw the \"balls of fire\" as they prepared to get into their car after a visit with Mr. and Mrs. Gordon Bush at Brighton, between 9:30 and 10 last night.\nShe said the flash lights, which appeared as beacon lights coming over a hill, came from the direction of Bessemer.\nThe lights would come at lightning speed and then stop dead still and hang in the sky, they said. Then they would dart off again, some returning in the direction of Bessemer and some going on. Some would circle. Others would pass each other and scarcely avoid collision.\n\"They were about as large as my dining room table,\" she said.\nbaseball and traveled in a \"big curve from southwest to southeast. The saucers came at intervals of about five seconds.\n* * *"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A citizen of Fairfield Highlands said the flying discs came over his residence at a speed of about 1,500 miles an hour. \"They would go in opposite directions, stop, and bump into each other,\" he reported.\n* * *\nGene Plumstead, program manager of WSGN, reported the flying discs over Edgewood Lake.\n* * *\nJ. A. Hafner, 3301 Avenue I, Ensley, said the lights appeared like a spot thrown by a huge searchlight. He said, however, he could see no beam such as would come from a searchlight.\n* * *\nA number of \"white round things\" were seen in the skies over West End by Mrs. Alfred Hackbarth, 1760 McMillan Avenue.\n* * *\nL. M. Cadenhead, 2000 48th Street, Central Park, saw the lights over Powderly, \"They looked like saucers,\" said\nMr. and Mrs. J. R. Martin and Mr. and Mrs. Frank Arnold, 732 47th Way, South. \"Some of them went as fast as bullets, while others floated around. They were the size of an automobile tire.\"\n* * *\nMr. and Mrs. William Howell, 1004 East Court, South, reported seeing 11 discs about 8:30 a.m.\n\"About 15 of them passed over our house shortly before 8,\" said Mrs. Helen Mallory, 1404 North 12th Court. Mrs. Mallory said the objects were first sighted by her son, Milo, who called the rest of the family. \"They looked like a flash of light that went by in such a hurry you couldn't describe it.\"\n* * *\nFrank S. Lovelace, policeman for the Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad Company, reported seeing eight or 10 of the objects. \"They looked about the size of a dishpan,\" he said. \"They came out of the southeast and whirled around several minutes.\"\n* * *\nS-Sgt. I. L. Livingston, of the Birmingham Army Airfield, observed the discs from his Green Acres residence. \"They were going zigzag from East to West,\" he said.\n* * *\nR. H. VAUGHN, III, who served as an anti-aircraft gunner in Europe, saw the \"flying saucer\" display with his father from their home in Ensley Highlands. \"I never shot at anything moving as rapidly as they were,\" he said. Vaughn believes the \"discs\" are some sort of natural phenomena, like the Aurora Borealis.\n* * *\nJimmy Dewberry, 11, of 1020 16th Avenue, South, said he saw a \"flying saucer\" while visiting at his grandmother's on 14th Avenue, South. \"It looked like a shooting star,\" Jimmy said, \"but it was too low for that. It had a long red tail.\"\nSearchlight Reflection\nTheory Is Advanced\nThe mysterious \"flying discs\" observed in Birmingham last night may be a carnival beacon light at Siluria, about 20 miles south of Birmingham.\nThat was a solution offered this morning by William B. Hayes, of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation in the Comer Building here.\nMr. Hayes, who served in the Army in the Pacific, said he and others there had seen similar sights throughout the South Pacific islands caused by searchlights.\nHe based his theory on high overcast skies last night and said the beacon at the Siluria carnival probably struck the high clouds and gave the indication of being \"flying saucers.\"\nMr. Hayes is a pilot."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nS-T-A-T-M-E-N-T\nI, Staff Sergeant Ira L. Livingston, RA 14 153 972, Air Corps, have approximately 250 hours flying time as pilot and Armorer Gunner have the following statement to make concerning the appearence of \"Flying Discs\" in the vicinity of Birmingham, Alabama.\nAt 2045 hours, 6 July 1947, while I was eating supper at my residence at 1354 Meadow Lane, Green Acres, Birmingham, Alabama, my next door neighbor, Mr. Herman M. Sockwell, called for me to come to the front door that there were some \"Flying Discs\" outside. Immediately I went out in the front yard to observe the objects. The objects appeared to the West of Birmingham traveling in a South Eastern direction. They appeared to be approximately 2000 feet above the horizon at a 45 degree angle from where I was standing at an unestimated distance away. The objects appeared to be approximately two (2) feet in diameter, round in shape, producing a dim glow of light and traveling at an estimated speed of five (5) to six (6) hundred miles per hour. The objects or object appeared to be traveling in a definite arc rather than straight and as soon as one was out of sight another would appear behind it, but not always in the same path. I saw one that seemed to come straight up. The view of where it came from was obstructed by a nearby house; and when it reached the altitude of approximately 2000feet, it started off in the same direction as the others. I did not at any time see any more than one at the time and even though there could have been only one, my personal belief is that there were seven (7) to ten (10). The Discs were silent and appeared to be composed of a single light.\nIra L. Livingston\nStaff Sergeant, RA 14 153 972\nSubscribed and sworn to before me this 7th day of July 1947.\nJAMES L. MACFARLANE\n1st Lt. AC\nAsst Adj.\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nHEADQUARTERS, NEWFOUNDLAND BASE COMMAND\nATLANTIC DIVISION, AIR TRANSPORT COMMAND\nFORT PEPPERRELL, NEWFOUNDLAND\nAPO 862, POSTMASTER, NEW YORK, N. Y.\nIN REPLY REFER\nNBC\nClassification cancelled or changed to Restricted by authority of CC, ADC-ATC, Capt. (Name) (Rank) 30 July 1947\nSUBJECT: Letter of Transmittal.\nTO: Commanding General, Atlantic Division, ATC, Fort Totten, Long Island, N. Y. (ATTENTION: AC/S, Intelligence)\nReference Letter of Transmittal, this office, dated 28 July 1947, with four (4) inclosures (Inclosures 1, 2 and 3, Final Reports of Sightings of \"flying saucers\"; and Inclosure 4, Signed Statement - Constable KEARSEY), transmitted herewith is Final Report of Sighting of \"flying saucers\" in Newfoundland, which occurred at Harmon Field, Stephenville, Newfoundland at 03452, 23 July 1947.\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\nMARION C. MILLER\nCaptain, Air Corps, AC/S, Intelligence\n1 Incl: Final Rpt of Sighting, 23 Jul 47\n1st Ind.\nHQ, ATLANTIC DIVISION, ATC, FORT TOTTEN, L.I., NEW YORK 6 Aug 47\nTO: Commanding General, Air Transport Command, Washington 25, D.C. ATTN: Chief of Staff\nForwarded in accordance with instructions outlined in TWX CM-95, your Headquarters.\nJAMES H. BREWSTER, JR.\nLt Col, GSC\nAC/S, Intelligence\n1 Incl: n/c\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nRESTRICTED FINAL REPORT OF SIGHTING\n\n1. Organization: 1388th AAF Base Unit\nAPO 864, c/o Postmaster, New York, N.Y.\n2. Sighting : Strange intermittent flashes that may tie in with \"Flying Discs\".\n3. Place : Harmon Field, Stephenville, Newfoundland.\n4. Time : 0345Z, 23 July 1947.\n5. Altitude : Approximately 10,000 feet high.\n6. Weather : High scattered condition; visibility better than fifteen (15) miles.\n7. Heading : From South, heading NNE (approximately 30° )\n8. Speed : High velocity; stated to be faster than a conventional airplane.\n9. Description : The observers saw a light which at first appeared to be a shooting star or airplane. It appeared again, and a number of intermittant flashes were seen for a period of approximately three (3) minutes. The flashes were reddish in color. Observers said it was not a falling star because it did not appear as such; nor was it an airplane, because manoeuvers were too abrupt and there was no noise of a motor.\n10. Reported by: Miss Patricia Abbott,(Newfoundland National) Government Employee and Lt. Hammaker, Navigator and Public Relations Officer.\n11. General : The informants (noted in Par.10) were walking when they noticed a peculiar reddish light. Both Miss Abbott and Lt. Hammaker stated that at first, they thought it was a falling star, but if left no streak. It appeared again; they thought it might be a plane flying at a very high altitude. After observing its manoeuvers, they concluded, because of the silence (no hum of motor) and abrupt darts of the light, it was definately not an airplane. Neither Miss Abbott nor Lt. Hammaker had seen anything like it before.\n\nWILLIAM H. SMITH\nCaptain, Air Corps,\nIntelligence Officer.\n\nRESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nNewfoundland Base Command, ATLD-ATC\nFort Pepperrell, Newfoundland\nAPO 862, c/o Postmaster, New York, N. Y.\n\n28 July 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Letter of Transmittal.\n\nTO : Commanding General,\nAtlantic Division, ATC,\nFort Totten, Long Island, N. Y.\n(ATTENTION: AC/S, Intelligence)\n\n1. Transmitted herewith, as inclosures 1, 2 and 3, are Final Reports of Sightings of \"flying saucers\" in Newfoundland and vicinity listed as follows:\n\nFinal Report of Sighting - 2000Z, 10 July 1947\n\" \" \" \" - 0030Z, 11 July 1947\n\" \" \" \" - 0015Z, 20 July 1947\n\n2. Reference TWX - EN 18469, this headquarters, dated 121730Z July 1947, regarding sightings of \"flying saucers\" by Constable ERIC KEARSEY, Newfoundland Constabulary, at Grand Falls, Newfoundland, on the night of 9 July 1947, attached herewith, as inclosure 4, is signed statement of this sighting by Constable KEARSEY.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nMARION C. MILLER,\nCaptain, Air Corps,\nAC/S, Intelligence.\n\n4 Incls:\n1. Final Rpt of Sighting, 10 Jul 47\n2. \" \" \" \" , 11 Jul 47\n3. \" \" \" \" , 20 Jul 47\n4. Signed Statement - Const KEARSEY\n\nRESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nRESTRICTED FINAL REPORT OF SIGHTING\n\n1. Org. : 1388th AAF BU, NBC, ATLD, ATC. Harmon Field, Newfoundland.\n2. Sighting : Flying Disc or other airborne object.\n3. Place : Approx six (6) miles SSW of Harmon Field.\n4. Time : 2000/Z, 10 July 1947\n5. Altitude : 8- 10,000 ft.\n6. Weather : Clear, Scattered Cumulus 8 - 10, 000 ft.\n7. Heading : NNE on horizontal course.\n8. Speed : Very high velocity.\n9. Shape & Size: Circular like a wheel, estimated to be same size as a C-54 as seen from 10, 000 ft.\n10. Color : Translucent or Silvery, left a Bluish Black trail approx 15 miles long.\n11. Photographs: Mr. Robert W. Leidy reported that he took two (2) Kodachrome snap shots of the trail.\n12. Reported By: Mr. John N. Merhman, TWA mechanic; Mr. John W. Woodruff, PAA mechanic; and Mr. Robert E. Leidy, PAA mechanic reported the above facts to the Intelligence Officer on 15 July 1947. A Flash Report was TWX ed to : Action copy Commanding General, Hq. ATC, Attn. Asst. Chief of Staff, Intelligence. Info copies: Commanding Generals Hq. ATLD and Hq. NBC\n13. General : Mister's Merhman, Woodruff, and Leidy were enroute from Stephenville Crossing to Harmon Field at the time of the sighting. Mr. Woodruff was the first to see the Disc, it appeared to rent or split the clouds thru which it passed and left a Bluish Black trail approx. fifteen (15) miles long behind it. The trail was similar to the afterglow of a powerful landing light or search light beam after it is suddenly switched off. The object maintained a straight and horizontal course according to Mr. Merhman and Mr. Woodruff, Mr. Leidy stated it appeared to be on a great curved course on a horizontal plane. The object disappeared into the North Northeast. Mr. Leidy says he took two (2) Kodachrome Photographs of the trail. The film has been transmitted to the Asst. Chief of Staff, Intelligence, Newfoundland Base Command for processing.\n\nWILLIAM H. SMITH\nCAPT. A.C.\nIntelligence Officer\n\nRESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nRESTRICTED FINAL REPORT OF SIGHTING\n\n1. Organization: 1388th AAF Base Unit\nAPO 864, c/o Postmaster, New York, N.Y.\n2. Sighting : Flying Disc or other airborne object.\n3. Place : Codroy, Newfoundland, 59°03' W Long.; 47°50' N Lat.\n4. Time : 0030Z hours, 11 July 1947.\n5. Altitude : Approximately 6,000 feet.\n6. Weather : Clear; at dusk.\n7. Heading : From northwest heading eastward.\n8. Speed : Very high velocity.\n9. Shape & Size: Disc shaped; was reported as being the size of a barrel-head, dinner-plate and size of a plane that is flying high. The trail gave the whole object the appearance of a cone.\n10. Color : Flame colored with a trail of a lighter flame color.\n11. Reported by : Mr. John Legge, Mr. Wm. Evans and Albert Samms of Codroy, Newfoundland.\n12. General : Mr. Legge and Mr. Evans were standing outside Mr. Legge's store when they both sighted the object. Both men stated that the disc was very bright with an after-glow which made the object look like a cone. It was a very clear night. In spite of the high velocity of the flying object, they said they could not possibly have mistaken it for a plane or a falling star. Besides the two men, the object was sighted by Albert Samms; he reported what he had seen to his mother. Mrs. Samms stated that Albert was in no way alarmed about it, he was alone and on his way home when he sighted it, and watched it while it was in sight. Albert was quite convinced from the color and behaviour of the object that it was not a plane, but definately some flying object.\n\nThe informant, Mr. Legge, is believed to be reliable. He is a man of approximately forty; has had considerable experience as foreman of Buchans Mine, Newfoundland, where he was in charge of three hundred men. During the war, Mr. Legge was a mamber of a civilian volunteer Air Detection Corps. With that background, Mr. Legge stated that he felt sure that the object he had seen was something new which he had never seen before.\n\nRESTRICTED CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nFinal Report of Sighting CONFIDENTIAL\n\nGeneral cont'd:\n\nAlbert Samms is a twelve year old boy. He was alone when he saw the flying object, he was very definite that he had never seen anything like it before. His mother, Mrs. Samms, is the Post Mistress of the town, and after hearing Albert's description, felt that it answered to the description of a \"Flying Disc\". Mr. Legge reported his sighting shortly afterwards to Mrs. Samms because he was sure it should be made known to her in order that the incident might be reported by telegram immediately.\n\nThere was one other sighting reported from a River Warden at South Branch. The man could not be contacted at time of interviews with other parties. However, a second-hand description of his sighting was obtained, and it agreed with the sightings at Codroy.\n\nWILLIAM H. SMITH\nCaptain, Air Corps,\nIntelligence Officer.\n\nRESTRICTED CONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nFINAL REPORT OF SIGHTING\n\n1. Organization: 1388th AAF Base Unit\nAPO 864, c/o Postmaster, New York, N.Y.\n\n2. Sighting : Flying Disc or other Airborne Object.\n\n3. Place : On board Steamship \"BURGEO\" enroute from Sydney, Nova Scotia to Port aux Basques, Newfoundland, about one hour out from Sydney.\n\n4. Time : 0015Z 20 July 1947.\n\n5. Altitude : 30° off the horizon at an estimated quarter mile range.\n\n6. Weather : Clear and dark.\n\n7. Heading : NNE (30° East of True North) on horizontal plane.\n\n8. Speed : High velocity, stated to be faster than a tracer bullet.\n\n9. Description : Observers did not see the object, they saw its flashes and all four observers agreed there were four (4) or five (5) flashes approximately one (1) second apart and equidistant. The flashes were said to be silvery to reddish in color, and were described by two observers to be like those of a Fire Fly only larger and at equal intervals, and did not look like a shooting star or airplane.\n\n10. Reported by: Messrs Maitland, Larkin, Douglas and Hamilton of Hamilton, Metcalfe and Kansas City Bridge Companies which concern is doing the construction at Harmon Field.\n\n11. General : The four gentlemen (noted in Par.10) and Captain Gullage, Master of the \"Burgeo\", were standing on the starboard deck, and as the Captain was trying to describe a previous sighting, he saw the flashes; the other four gentlemen also saw them as described herein, and believed that it was not a meteorite or airplane because of its speed, color, and evenly spaced discharges or flashes.\n\nCaptain Gullage told the four gentlemen that he had seen the same thing at approximately the same time and location (ship's position) on the evening of 15 July 1947, except at that time, the object or flashes were traveling faster and frequently changing course (he said it changed course abruptly several times) and was headed generally to the SSW. The Captain also told the four gentlemen that he was willing to make a complete report if the information is desired for official purposes.\n\nWILLIAM H. SMITH\nCaptain, Air Corps\nIntelligence Officer.\n\nand\nencl 3\n13"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Final Report of Sighting:\n\nGeneral cont'd : SSW. The Captain also told the four gentlemen that he was willing to make a complete report if the information is desired for official purposes.\n\nWILLIAM H. SMITH\nCaptain, Air Corps\nIntelligence Officer.\n\n-2-\n\nRESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL\n14"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nINTELLIGENCE OFFICE\nHEADQUARTERS 1388TH AAF BASE UNIT\nNEWFOUNDLAND BASE COMMAND, ATLD-ATC\nAPO 864, c/o Postmaster, New York, N. Y.\n\n16 July 1947\n\nInterrogation of JOHN E. WOODRUFF, Chief Mechanic, Pan American Airways, Harmon Field, Newfoundland, taken at 1415 MST, 16 July 1947, by Captain William H. Smith, AC, Intelligence Officer.\n\nQ. Did you see one of the so called \"Flying Disks\" or other object on the 10th July?\nA. Yes, I did.\n\nQ. Can you give the approximate time?\nA. Approximately 1700.\n\nQ. Tell me the circumstances under which you saw this object.\nA. We were coming back from a fishing trip, and coming over the hill between here and Stephenville Crossing you can see the cloud formation ahead. I saw the object break out where the clouds opened and it left its trail behind it.\n\nQ. Had you been drinking?\nA. No.\n\nQ. You were riding in a car at the time you saw it?\nA. Yes, in the front seat of the Pan American car.\n\nQ. What was the weather like that day?\nA. It was very clear and the clouds were very scattered.\n\nQ. What was the approximate altitude of the clouds?\nA. I'd say from 5000 feet to 10,000 feet.\n\nQ. Did you see the Disk itself?\nA. Yes, what it appeared to be was a translucent disk like a wheel travelling at a terrific rate of speed and opened the clouds as it went through the air.\n\nQ. How was this Disk travelling, horizontal, descending or ascending?\nA. It was horizontal.\n\nQ. About how big did it appear to you?\nA. From the height of it, I'd say it was about the size of a 5⁴ or a Constellation.\n\nQ. About how far apart did it break the cloud?\nA. It spread the clouds out about half mile.\n\nRESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL\n15"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nInterrogation of John E. Woodruff (Cont'd)\n\nQ. What kind of a break did it make in the clouds?\nA. It cut a straight path right through the cloud.\n\nQ. Did it leave a trail?\nA. Yes, it left a trail dark bluish in color similar to a high power light. The trail was from approximately fifteen (15) to twenty (20) miles long.\n\nQ. Have you ever seen a meteor?\nA. Yes.\n\nQ. Do you think this was a meteor?\nA. No, I don't think so, it was cut too clean. This was as straight as an arrow.\n\nQ. What was the course of the object?\nA. Well, looking at the map I'd say North North East.\n\nQ. Have you been working around airplanes long enough to know the size of an aircraft and the height from a distance?\nA. Yes.\n\nQ. How long have you been working around aircraft?\nA. Seven (7) years.\n\nQ. Were you in the Army during the time of the War?\nA. No.\n\nQ. Did you take any pictures?\nA. No, I did not, but one of the boys took some.\n\nQ. Do you think the pictures will show up?\nA. Yes, it was an ideal day for pictures.\n\nJOHN E. WOODRUFF\nChief Mechanic\nPan American Airways\n\nSworn and subscribed to before me this 17 day of July 1947.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nS. E. HINSON, JR\nCaptain, Air Corps\nAdjutant\n\nRESTRICTED\n-2-\n16"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nClassification cancelled or changed to Restricted\nauthority of CG, AD-ATC\n(Rank) (Date)\n\nINTELLIGENCE OFFICE\nHEADQUARTERS 1388TH AAF BASE UNIT\nNEWFOUNDLAND BASE COMMAND, ATLD-ATC\nAPO 864, c/o Postmaster, New York, N. Y.\n\n16 July 1947\n\nInterrogation of JOHN N. MERRIMAN, JR., Supervisor and Mechanic, Trans World Airways, Harmon Field, Newfoundland, taken at 1430 MST, 16 July 1947, by Captain William H. Smith, AC, Intelligence Officer.\n\nQ. How long have you been associated with aircraft and aviation?\nA. Since approximately 1935.\n\nQ. Were you in the Army during the War?\nA. Yes.\n\nQ. What did you do in the Army?\nA. Aerial Gunner.\n\nQ. Did your job during the war entail you to be able to judge distances and sizes of objects and ranges?\nA. Yes.\n\nQ. On the evening of 10 July 1947, did you see one of the so called \"Flying Disks\" or an object in the sky?\nA. Yes, we were coming up over the mountain between here and Stephenville Crossing. The car was going up hill and we could see the sky through the windshield. Mr. Woodruff said \"look at the cut in the sky\". I looked up and saw a blueish black vapor trail.\n\nQ. Did you see the object?\nA. No, I just saw the trail as it was left behind.\n\nQ. Can you describe the effect the object had on the cloud formation?\nA. The clouds were very scattered and were about from 5000 feet to 10,000 feet, the object passed through and cut the cloud leaving a gap where you could see the blue sky, like a knife had cut it. The edges were feathered similar to a weld, as if you cut a weld in half.\n\nQ. Did the object appear to be descending, ascending, or horizontal?\nA. It was horizontal and seemed to remain on true course.\n\nQ. What was your estimate of the course?\nA. Approximately North North East.\n\nQ. Can you give any estimate as to the size of the object?\nA. I did not see the object.\n\nRESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL\n17"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nRESTRICTED\n\nInterrogation of John W. Mehrman, Jr\n\nQ. Can you describe the trail?\nA. It was bluish black in color, very easily distinguished from the blue sky. A diesel exhaust would be similar to it.\n\nQ. Was the trail fan shaped?\nA. No it was more or less a band across the sky in a straight path.\n\nQ. Did it make a noise?\nA. No noise.\n\nQ. What went on in the car when you sighted the object?\nA. We stopped the car and got out and looked at it. One of the boys had a camera and took a photograph of the trail that the object left.\n\nQ. What was the name of the man who took the photograph?\nA. Robert Leidy.\n\nQ. Do you know what type of film Mr Leidy was using?\nA. Kodachrome, I believe.\n\nQ. Do you know whether Mr. Leidy saw the Disk or object?\nA. I don't believe so.\n\nJOHN W. MEHRMAN, JR\nSupervisor and Mechanic\nTrans World Airways\n\nSworn and subscribed to before me this 7 day of July 1947.\n\nS. L. HINSON, JR\nCaptain, Air Corps\nAdjutant\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nRESTRICTED\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nClassification cancelled or changed to Restricted\n\nINTELLIGENCE OFFICE\nHEADQUARTERS 1395TH AAF BASE UNIT\nNEWFOUNDLAND BASE COMMAND, AFLD-ATC\nAPO 564, c/o Postmaster, New York, N. Y.\n\n16 July 1947\n\nInterrogation of ROBERT W. LEIDY, Station Mechanic, Pan American Airways, Harmon Field, Newfoundland, taken at 1450 HPT, 16 July 1947, by Captain William H. Smith, AC, Intelligence Officer.\n\nQ. Were you with Mr. Woodruff and Mr. Mehrman on the evening when they saw an object or flying disk passing over the sky on 10 July 1947?\nA. Yes, I was.\n\nQ. Were you or any members of the party drinking?\nA. No, I had one can of beer, that was about half hour before that.\n\nQ. Can you tell me the circumstances under which you saw the object or its trail?\nA. Well, Mr. Woodruff saw it first and said he saw the thing travelling through the sky. We did not believe him at first but when he was so concerned about it we stopped the car and got out. I had my camera so took a picture of it. There was a bluish streak left in the sky which could not have been a cloud formation. It was a definite trail and caused the clouds to break open as it went through.\n\nQ. Did it cut a path through the cloud?\nA. Yes, it was very clear, and you could see the trail right through the cloud, it looked to be travelling in a big circle and it left sharp edges to the clouds.\n\nQ. What was the trail like?\nA. I would not say it was exhaust, it looked as if an object passed through similar to that of a pebble leaving a ring in the pond.\n\nQ. Was there any difference in the color?\nA. No, it looked as if the object broke the cloud and left this opening.\n\nQ. Was the trail horizontal, going up, or coming down?\nA. It looked horizontal.\n\nQ. What was the altitude of the clouds?\nA. I don't know, sir, they were pretty high though.\n\nQ. What time was this?\nA. I don't know exactly sir, but it was between three and five o'clock in the afternoon, we were coming back from fishing.\n\nRESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL\nR W L"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nInterrogation of Robert W. Leidy (Cont'd)\n\nQ. Did you see the object?\nA. No.\n\nQ. How long do you think the trail was?\nA. I don't know, sir, but the trail was very long, that is why I think something went through the sky because of the trail and I think space is 10 feet, you could easily see it.\n\nQ. Was the trail on a straight course?\nA. Well, as I said before, it looked to me as if the trail, that it was travelling at a terrific rate of speed in a circle because of the area in the path.\n\nQ. Have you ever seen a meteor?\nA. No.\n\nQ. Can you estimate the size of the cut in the clouds?\nA. No.\n\nQ. How long have you been working around planes, etc?\nA. Six (6) years.\n\nQ. Were you in the Army during the war?\nA. No.\n\nQ. How many pictures did you take?\nA. Two.\n\nQ. What type camera did you have?\nA. Argus, F-2.\n\nQ. Was the film black and white or Kodachrome?\nA. It was Kodachrome.\n\nQ. Where are the film now?\nA. Well, I took three or four rolls and I am not sure which one the pictures are on.\n\nQ. I understood from Mr. Woodruff that they are being developed.\nA. I think it is out of the camera air, but I have not sent them out yet.\n\nQ. Will you give us the four rolls of film so we can have them processed officially?\nA. Yes, sir.\n\nRESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL\n-2-\nR W L"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nInterrogation of Robert W. Leidy (Cont'd)\n\nQ. Are you willing to give the Army a copy of the pictures of the trail?\nA. Yes.\n\nROBERT W. LEIDY\nStation Mechanic\nPan American Airways\n\nSworn and subscribed to before me this 17 day of July 1947.\n\nS. L. HINSON, JR\nCaptain, Air Corps\nAdjutant\n\nRESTRICTED\nCONFIDENTIAL\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nSTATEMENT OF MR. JOHN P. LEGGE, CORDROY, NEWFOUNDLAND. TAKEN BY MERCEDES BURKE OF THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICE, HARMON FIELD, NEWFOUNDLAND. 17 July 1947.\n\nAt approximately 10 o'clock in the evening of 10 July 1947 I was standing by my store door; I happened to look up and saw what appeared to be a \"FLYING SAUCER\". It definately was not a shooting star; I'd seen several stars shoot before, but never like this! nor was it an airoplane, it was too \"lit up\" and traveling at too great a speed. It wasn't an airoplane on fire because it would have fallen in the water. It was a nice clear night, no clouds, it was just getting dark. I would say it was traveling at the rate of a shooting star but much closer. I'd say roughly at 6,000 feet. It was visible for about fifteen (15) seconds. It came from the North West heading Eastward. The circle looked to be about the size of a barrel head, and the trail behind looked to be about fifteen (15) feet long. The trail behind the disc made the whole object look like a cone. Another thing that makes me feel sure it wasn't a shooting star is; a shooting star usually leaves a temporary streak, this object I saw left no streak only the one that appeared to travel behind the circle which looked like an after-glow. The circle was a bright red, nearest I could describe it would be the color of a flame, the after-glow(cone-shaped) was a fainter shade. What I saw last Thursday night resembled a shooting star in no way whatsoever. There was only one.\n\nJOHN P. LEGGE\n\nWitness: F. W. Towpkins\n\nWitness: Mercedes Burke\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n4\nSTATEMENT OF MR. WM. EVANS, CORDROY, NEWFOUNDLAND. TAKEN BY\nMERCEDES BURKE OF THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICE, HARMON FIELD, NEW-\nFOUNDLAND. 17 July 1947.\n\nAt approximately 10 o'clock in the evening of 10 July 1947,\nI was standing outside Mr. Legge's store talking with him. We\nboth saw this thing dash across the sky. I couldn't be accurate\nabout the directions. If it was a shooting star, I'd never seen\none as large before, and it was much brighter than anything I've\never seen in the sky. It looked to be a round object, I couldn't\nsay it was anything else but round; it had a tail on it which\nshowed yellowish, but not as bright as the circle which appeared\nand nearest I could describe it would be sort of red and yellow.\nThe streak behind, I would say, was little over a yard long; the\ncircle looked to be about the size of a large dinner plate. It\nwent so fast, it was hardly in sight before it disappeared. I\ncould not give any idea of the height; all I can say is it was\nmuch closer than a shooting star and travelling at a great speed.\nWhatever it was it was flying through the air; it wasn't just\na streak across the sky. To me it wasn't in any way like a\nshooting star, and I am sure it wasn't an airoplane. I called it\na \"FLYING SAUCER\" because it seemed exactly like what we had been\nhearing so much about on the radio.\n\nWm Evans\nWM. EVANS\nWitness: F. W. Tomphins\nWitness: Mercedes Burke\n\n23"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nSTATEMENT OF ALBERT SAMMS, CORDROY, NEWFOUNDLAND. TAKEN BY\nMERCEDES BURKE OF THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICE, HARMON FIELD NEW-\nFOUNDLAND. 17 July 1947.\n\nLast Thursday night I was out by our house, I happened to\nlook up and saw what I thought was an airoplane. It was flying\nat the height of a plane that is flying high. Then I thought\nit looked strange for an airoplane, because it was all lit up\nso bright, planes do have a light or two, but this thing was very\nbright - sort of a bright reddish yellow. I saw it only for a\nminute because it was travelling at a teriffic speed. It shot\nout of sight so quickly I thought it strange if it was an airoplane. Then, I remembered what I'd been hearing about \"FLYIND\nSAUCERS\" I ran in and told my mother.\n\nAlbert Samms\nALBERT SAMMS\n\nWitness: F. W. Tomphins\nWitness: Mercedes Burke\n\n24"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n4 Albert rushed in and told me about this thing he'd just seen.\nat first he thought it was an airoplane but then he remembered\nhaving heard about \"FLYING SAUCERS\" and he thought that's what\nit must have been. I questioned him; he said it couldn't have\nbeen a plane because a plane wouldn't shoot down like that did,\nbesides it was too \"lit up\"\n\nMr. Legge reported the same thing to me in order that I might\nreport same to St. John's in the morning.\n\nMrs JOHN SAMMS.\nMrs John Samms.\n\n25"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NEWFOUNDLAND CONSTABULARY\n\n4\n\nSTATION Grand Falls,\nDATE July 13th. 1947.\n\nSUBJECT Re:- Strange objects seen flying over Grand Falls on night of July 9th. at approx. 11.15 and 11.40.\n\nSir:\nI respectfully report for your information that on Wednesday night, the 9th. inst. I arrived home from duty at approx. 11.30.\n\nUpon arrival at home I joined my wife, my mother-in-law, and Mr. John Jackman a resident of St. John's and friend of the family, who were sitting on the front steps of the house. I was asked by my wife if I had seen the \"flying saucers\" I thought she was joking and replied that I had seen nothing flying. Jackman and my mother-in-law then told me that they had really seen four objects flying in an easterly direction just before I arrived. I asked them to describe what they had seen. Jackman said that four round shaped figures had passed overhead at a terrific speed and were flying side by side.\nOn looking skywards again my wife, Jackman, and myself, saw a object which I would describe as being a huge jellyfish flash across the the sky. It would be difficult to determine its height and speed owing to the brief period it was visible. It's colour also would be hard to say, but there seemed to be a phosphorus glow about it, it was round in shape and about the size of a barrel head, it appeared to be flying in a rocking motion.\n\nThis sir, is about all I can say about the matter, we continued to scan the sky for about a half hour but no sign of them were seen again.\n\nEric Kearsey\nConstable.\n\nL.Strange Esq., J.P.,\nChief of Police.\nRespectfully submitted.\n\nL.Strange Esq., J.P.,\nChief of Police.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nencl 4\n\n26"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n4\n\nNEWFOUNDLAND CONSTABULARY\n\nSTATION Grand Falls,\nDATE July 13th. 1947.\n\nSUBJECT Re:- Strange objects seen flying over Grand Falls on night of July 9th. at approx. 11.15 and 11.40.\n\nSir:\nI respectfully report for your information that on Wednesday night, the 9th. inst. I arrived home from duty at approx. 11.30.\n\nUpon arrival at home I joined my wife, my mother-in-law, and Mr. John Jackman a resident of St. John's and friend of the family, who were sitting on the front steps of the house. I was asked by my wife if I had seen the \"flying saucers\" I thought she was joking and replied that I had seen nothing flying. Jackman and my mother-in-law then told me that they had really seen four objects flying in an easterly direction just before I arrived. I asked them to describe what they had seen. Jackman said that four round shaped figures had passed overhead at a terrific speed and were flying side by side.\nOn looking skywards again my wife, Jackman, and myself, saw a object which I would describe as being a huge jellyfish flash across the the sky. It would be difficult to determine its height and speed owing to the brief period it was visible. It's colour also would be hard to say, but there seemed to be a phosphorus glow about it, it was round in shape and about the size of a barrel head, it appeared to be flying in a rocking motion.\n\nThis sir, is about all I can say about the matter, we continued to scan the sky for about a half hour but no sign of them were seen again.\n\nEric Kearsey\nConstable.\n\nL.Strange Esq., J.P.,\nChief of Police.\nRespectfully submitted.\n\nL.Strange Esq., J.P.,\nChief of Police.\n\nRESTRICTED\n\nencl 4\n\n26"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"From detailed study of reports selected for their impression of veracity and reliability, several conclusions have been formed:\n\n(a) This \"flying saucer\" situation is not all imaginary or seeing too much in some natural phenomenon. Something is really flying around.\n\n(b) Lack of topside inquiries, when compared to the prompt and demanding inquiries that have originated topside upon former events, give more than ordinary weight to the possibility that this is a domestic project, about which the President, etc. know.\n\n(c) Whatever the objects are, this much can be said of their physical appearance:\n\n1. The surface of these objects is metallic, indicating a metallic skin, at least.\n\n2. When a trail is observed, it is lightly colored, a Blue-Brown haze, that is similar to a rocket engine's exhaust. Contrary to a rocket of the solid type, one observation indicates that the fuel may be throttled which would indicate a liquid rocket engine.\n\n3. As to shape, all observations state that the object is circular or at least elliptical, flat on the bottom and slightly domed on the top. The size estimates place it somewhere near the size of a C-54 or a Constellation.\n4. Some reports describe two tabs, located at the rear and symmetrical about the [REDACTED] axis of flight motion.\n5. Flights have been reported, from three to nine of them, flying good formation on each other, with speeds always above 300 knots.\n6. The discs oscillate laterally while flying along, which could be snaking."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2 Intelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA\n333.5/1208-I\n25 August 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of Flying Disc.\n\nTO: Headquarters, Army Air Forces, Washington 25, D. C.\nATTENTION: AC of AS-2\n\n1. The attached true copy of the letter of Mr. F. M. Johnson of Portland, Oregon, was received by this officer 22 August 1947.\n\n2. Your attention is invited to the similarity of statement by Mr. Johnson and Mr. Arnold.\n\n3. This letter is being referred this date to the Special Agent In Charge, FBI, San Francisco, for any investigation they may care to make.\n\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, GSC\nAC of S, A-2\n\n1 Incl:\nCy of ltr fr F.M.Johnson (in dup)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPORTLAND, OREGON, August 20th 1947\n\nLt. Col. Donald L. Springer, Assistant Staff\n\nSir. Saw in the portland paper a short time ago in regards to an article in regards to the so called flying disc having any basis of fact. I can say am a prospector and was in the Mt Adams district on June 24th the day Kennet Arnold of Boise Idaho claims he saw a formation of flying disc. And i saw the same flying objects at about the same time. Having a telescope with me at the time i can asure you they are real and noting like them I ever saw before they did not pass verry high over where I was standing at the the time, plobly 1000 ft. they were Round about 30 foot in dimater tapering sharply to a point in the head end in an oval shape. with a bright top surface. I did not hear any noise as you would from a plane. But there was an object in the tail end looked like a big hand of a clock shifting from side to side like a big magenet. There speed as far as i know seemed to be greater than anything I ever saw. Last veiw I got of the objects they were standing on edge Banking in a Cloud.\n\nYours Respectfully\n\n/s/ F. M. Johnson\n106 No. West 1st Ave\nPortland, Oregon\n\nA TRUE COPY:\n\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, GSC,\nAC of S, A-2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nPORTLAND, OREGON\n30 July 1947\n\nC-E-R-T-I-F-I-C-A-T-E\n\nOn 30 July 1947 Mr Richard Rankin, 834 N. E. Simpson Street, Portland, Oregon was interviewed by this agent and stated in substance as follows:\n\nMy name is Richard Rankin. I am 47 years old and have flown since I was nineteen years old. I first soloed in an air craft in 1919. I have flown over all the western parts of the United States many times and have mapped all of the western part of the United States during the years before the late war for the US Forest Service. I am familiar with almost every part of the western United States. During a great part of my life I have done stunt flying for air shows and various other types of aeronautical exhibitions. My brother was \"Tex\"Rankin who was quite well known in both civilian and Military flying circles for many years before his death and during the late war ran thousands of Flying Cadets through primary training schools owned and operated by him. To date I have accomplished 7000 hours in the air as pilot of both civilian and Military aircraft. I am well acquainted with most articles that one would see in the air and I feel that I am well qualified to say when I see articles flying through the air, although I would not attempt to say that I am infallable and state that I could definitely identify every object that might be flying through the air. The following is an account of what I saw on 14 June 1947 from the yard of my home at 1808 South \"M\" St, Bakersfield, California.\n\nAt approximately 1200 noon on the 14 of June I was lying in the front yard of my home. There was a lad mowing the lawn at the time. I looked up into the sky and saw ten articles flying from the South to the North at what I would judge to be 8500 ft. The objects were flying at approximately what I would judge to be 350 miles per hour. As I have stated before, I have done quite a lot of map work for the US Forest Service. I distinctly remember that at the time I saw the articles I mentioned it to the lad who was mowing the lawn at the time. I told the lad that the objects were in all probability some sort of Army or Navy test planes from the nearby test centers on the deserts of Southern California. Having quite a knowledge of aircraft in general I attempted to explain to the lad mowing the lawn that the objects were probably on some sort of training mission for either the Army or Navy. At that time I did not give the slightest thought to anything but that the objects were some sort of test ship for the Government Services. The objects resembled the pictures that I have seen of the XF5U-1, the so called \"Flying Flapjack\" that the Navy is testing. After the objects disappeared I proceeded into the house and had my noon meal. At approximately 1415 I went back into the yard to sit and lie in the shade. At this time the objects re-appeared going from North to South, although this time there were only seven of the articles. When I first saw the original ten objects they were flying in a \"V\" formation with one object seemingly straggling in the rear of the formation. When the objects appeared the second time they were still in the \"V\" formation although there was only seven of the objects at this time. I remember at this time that I told the lad, who was still working on the lawn, that probably three of the objects had proceeded back to their base on a different course. I actually thought that this was the case, that the other three objects had probably gone back to their base on the other side of the mountains from Bakersfield. A week or so later when I read of Mr Kenneth Arnold claiming that he had seen articles flying through the air over the Cascade Mountains in\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n(2)\n\nWashington I realized that the articles that I saw were probably the same thing. I was still reluctant to mention this to anyone thinking that they would probably say that I was crazy. After sometime I mentioned the incident to the editor of the \"Oregonian\", a Portland, Oregon newspaper. At this time I was in Portland for the remainder of the summer. The results of the conversation with the editor of the paper is put forth in the accompanying newspaper article.\n\nI fully realize that this is a broad statement in view of the fact that there has been so much publicity [REDACTED] put forth in various newspapers of the country. I am of sound mind in every respect and I am firmly convinced that the articles I saw are actually some sort of flying machines although I cannot say from where they came or to where they were going. I say what I have said with no idea of publicity or personal gain.\n\nSIGNED Richmond Rankin\nRichmond Rankin\nPortland, Oregon\n30 July 1947\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPilot Recalls Seeing Discs\nDick Rankin Tells Of Odd Aircraft\n\nMore reports of \"flying flapjacks\" turned up Wednesday, one from no less than Dick Rankin, brother of the late Tex Rankin, and himself an experienced pilot of more than 7000 hours' flying time.\nRankin, who is recovering from an old back injury received in an automobile accident, came to Portland over the week end to spend the summer. He saw the \"silver saucers\" over Bakersfield, Cal., June 23, while lying on the lawn sun bathing, he told The Oregonian.\n\"I hesitated to say much about them,\" Rankin said, \"until I noticed all the hullabaloo in the papers. I puzzled over their strange shape for a while and finally concluded that they were the navy's new XF5U-1 flying flapjacks, which are thin and round, with twin propellers and stubby tail.\"\n\nOnly One XF5U-1 Built\n\n(The navy and the manufacturer have announced officially that only one such machine was built and that it never left Connecticut.\n\"These planes were flying high, maybe 9000 feet, and fairly fast, about 300 or 400 miles an hour. I first counted ten of them in formation, going north. About 2:15 P. M. they returned on the reverse course, headed south. But there were only seven in the formation.\n\"They were not weaving or bobbing in formation I couldn't make out the number or location of their propellers and couldn't distinguish any wings or tail. They appeared almost round. They looked like pictures of the navy's flying flapjack.\" Rankin said.\nRankin, who plans to spend the summer here at 834 N. E. Simpson street, is now able to resume a little flying for fun, but not commercially, he said. He now operates a string of auto courts, spending his winters at Palm Springs.\n\n\"THE OREGONIAN\" Portland, Oregon. 3 July 1947"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 20, 1947\n\n65-480\nDirector FBI\nSAC Butte\nFLYING DISCS\n\nRefer teletype to the Bureau dated August 15, 1947.\n\nEnclosed please find the newspaper account carried by the Twin Falls, Idaho \"Times News\" on August 15, together with a sheet of paper on which A. C. URIE attempted to sketch his impression of the instrument which he claims to have seen.\n\nConcerning URIE's sketches, it may be noted that he believed the felled outer edge which he attempted to create in hisdrawing to have been about a foot through. URIE likewise believed that the tubinh or exhaust flame which he and his sons claim to have seen was about a foot through and extended at least to the back end of the device. The flame did not appear to taper off not to widen out toward the back.\n\nBILLY and KEITH URIE stated that they could see a knot on the side of the device from which the flames were shooting, and that they could see daylight between the exhaust flame and the side of the device. The flames did not leave any smoke or odor.\n\nThe URIE boys thought that the \"side view\" sketch should show that the device was more sharply angled from bottom to top, while URIE himself thought that it was more streamlined and carved. URIE said that the instrument came to a pointed or rounded top.\n\nIn his notations, URIE mistakenly said that he had seen it on Thursday. During interview, he stated that it actually had been on Wednesday, August 13, 1947, when he and his sons saw the contrivance about 1:00 P.M.\n\nURIE explained that he had sent his boys to the river to get some tape from his boat. When he thought they were overdue, he went outside his tool shed to look for them. He noticed them about 300 feet away looking in the sky and he glanced up to see what he called the flying disc. He said he could only see it for a moment before it disappeared behind a hill which obscured his view.\n\nURIE further stated that the contrivance was about seventy-five feet in the air. URIE resides in the depths of the Snake River Canyon, which is about four hundred feet deep and twelve hundred feet across at that place. According to his account, the contrivance was about three hundred feet below the rim of the canyon and he saw it against the steep walls of the canyon on the far side. He described its color as sky blue and stated that he doubted if it could be seen against the sky. He likewise said that it was purely by chance that he saw it. It did not spin like a top."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"As the machine went by the URIE place, the trees over which it almost directly passed (Norman Poplars) did not just bend with the wind as if a plane had gone by, but in URIE's words, \"spun around on top as if they were in a vacuum.\"\n\nKEITH URIE, eight years of age, said he first saw the machine coming down the canyon, heading from east to west and following the contours of the ground. KEITH, ago ten, saw it almost immediately. Both watched it fly out of sight behind a tree in a matter of moments. They said they then ran to their father and learned that he too had seen the machine.\n\nURIE's wife and daughter were in the house at the time and had not seen the machine. He questioned his brother, who also lives in the canyon, but his brother had been eating at the time and had seen nothing. URIE and his two boys maintained that they had never before seen one of the discs. URIE, when interviewed, appeared to be a sober, middle-aged man.\n\nJOHN BROSNAN, the \"Times News\" reporter who originally furnished Special Agents with information about the incident, likewise stated that URIE appeared completely sincere about the machine.\n\nNo further attempt was made to locate L. W. HAWKINS, inasmuch as J. H. BROWN's name was withheld from the newspaper because HAWKINS and BROWN were fishing at Salmon dam while HAWKINS was supposed to have been working in Twin Falls.\n\nBROWN said simply that he and HAWKINS could hear a roar. They looked up and could see two instruments flying at a great height, which BROWN mentioned might have been between four thousand and six thousand feet. However, he said he had no idea how large the devices were and consequently, they may have been several miles away. He said that he and HAWKINS were satisfied they had seen something and they were very doubtful that they had seen two planes."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Regional Newspaper Serving TWIN FALLS, IDAHO, FRIDAY, AUGUST 15, 1947\nNine Irrigated Idaho Counties\n\nHeads Up, Folks! The Discs Are Flying Again\n\n[drawing: side view, bottom view, end view of flying disc, 10 ft height, 20 ft length]\n\nThis is an artist's conception of the flying disc that A. C. Urie saw sweeping through Snake river canyon six miles west of Blue Lakes ranch. It seemed to be powered by jets emitting a fiery glow on both sides, and could well be the inspiration for something new in women's hats, such as a \"flying saucer\" creation. (Drawing by Vic Goertzen-staff engraving)\n\nFlying Saucer Reported Flashing Down Canyon At 1,000 Miles Per Hour; Two Others Are Seen\n\nBy JOHN BROSNAN\n\nJust as Magic Valley and the nation were starting to let go of lampposts after reeling under a welter of flying saucer reports, two more Twin Falls county men revived speculation on the mystery with vivid descriptions of discs they saw.\nFrom A. C. Urie, who operates the Auger Falls Trout farm six miles west of Blue Lakes ranch in Snake river canyon, came perhaps the most detailed account of one of the fast-flying objects the nation has yet produced.\nThe flying saucer Urie saw was skimming along through Snake river canyon at a height of about 75 feet at 1 p. m. Wednesday. At 9:30 a. m. the same day, L. W. Hawkins, Twin Falls county commissioner and former county sheriff from Filer, also saw two circular objects soaring along at a great height near Salmon dam 40 miles southwest of Twin Falls.\nHere is Urie's eye-witness description of the flying discs seen by him and his son, Keith, 8, and Billy, 10:\n\"I obtained a close-up view of the flying saucer as it passed by the trout farm at 1 p. m. Aug. 13 going down Snake river canyon at a height of about 75 feet from the canyon floor. I would estimate the speed at about 1,000 miles per hour.\"\nUrie explained that the incident occurred while the two boys were coming across the river from the north side in a boat. He had become concerned about what was delaying them, and had walked down toward the river to see if they were all right.\n\"I had a side view at a distance of about 300 feet and almost on a level with the thing,\" Urie continued. \"Two of my boys, Keith and Billy, were below me and they also saw it at about a 45-degree angle. They both got a bottom and a side view, and we were all looking at it from the south side of the river facing toward the north. The boys saw it coming about half a mile up the canyon, and we all lost sight of it in less than a mile.\"\n(Continued on Page 8, Column 6)"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Saucer' Seen Flying Down Snake Gorge\n(From Page One)\n\nWhile the impression was still vivid in their minds, the three got together and made rough sketches of what they had seen. These, in turn, were the basis for the artist's conception of the strange affair by Vic Goertzen of Twin Falls for the Times-News.\n\"It was all one color—sort of a light sky blue with a red, tubular fiery glow at the side of the top or hood,\" Urie continued.\n\"The canyon floor is rough at that particular point, and it rode up and down over the hills and hollows at a speed indicating some type of control faster than the reflexes of man. It is my opinion that it is guided by instruments and must be powered by atomic energy, as it made very little noise—just a s-w-i-s-h as it passed by.\"\nUrie described the size as about 20 feet long by 10 feet high and 10 feet wide, giving it an oblong shape. It might be described as looking like an inverted pie-plate or broad-brimmed straw hat that had been compressed from two sides.\nPressed for his candid opinion of just what it was, Urie said that he was convinced that there was something to this flying saucer situation. \"I know a number of the people who have also seen them and I know that they're not just imagining something or trying to get their names in the paper.\" Urie commented.\n\"I do know that it scared the boys and made me feel pretty uneasy,\" he added.\nTracing down a rumor that County Commissioner Hawkins had seen an unusual object in the air on the same day as Urie's experience, the Times-News called him at his Filer home.\n\"Yes, I did.\" he replied without hesitation. \"I'll have to admit I've been skeptical all along until I saw it with my own eyes. I can't say what it was, but I can say there's something in the air.\"\nHawkins related that while at Salmon dam Wednesday morning, a sound resembling the echo of a motor caused him to look upward, and there he saw two circular objects that reflected light. They were traveling at a great speed and higher than most airplanes, according to Hawkins.\nAside from this, he declined to add details, except to say, \"There's something in the air.\"\nHis general description, however, corresponded closely to those of hundreds of persons who reported seeing flying saucers after Kenneth Arnold, Boise businessman, had touched off the deluge by telling of coming upon nine disc-like objects while he was flying in his private plane in Washington.\nThereafter, the nation became increasingly flying saucer conscious, creating a state of mind that made it possible for four teen age Twin Falls boys to cause a mild sensation when they built a model flying disc and tossed into a local yard July 10. This was subsequently revealed as a hoax, following investigation by the army and FBI.\nThereafter the saucer reports tapered off into a few scattered incidents, until the question was revived by this week's occurrences.\nSpeculation has ranged from mention that the discs could be army or navy guided missile experiments, or that they could be similar experiments by some foreign country, to \"something out of this world.\"\nWhatever they are, a lot of people have seen \"something.\""} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nFLYING DIVISION, AIR TRAINING COMMAND\nOffice of the Commanding General\n\n1F\n\nRandolph Field, Texas\n10 July 1947\n\n333.5\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentifiable Objects\n\nTO: Commanding General\nTenth Air Force\nBrooks Field, Texas\nAttn: ACofS, A-2\n\n1. The inclosed MOIC is forwarded for your information.\n\n2. In the event that Lt. E. B. Armstrong has been interviewed by your Headquarters, request that a copy of the MOIC be furnished to this Headquarters.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n1 Incl\nMOIC\n\nH. L. CRISLER\nLt. Colonel, G.S.C.\nAsst. Chief of Staff, A-2\n\n333.5 1st Ind DC\n\nHEADQUARTERS TENTH AIR FORCE, OFFICE OF THE ASST CHIEF OF STAFF, A-2, BROOKS FIELD, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS, 16 July 1947\n\nTO: Commanding General, Flying Division, Air Training Command, Randolph Fld., Texas\nATTN: Asst Chief of Staff, A-2\n\nInclosed is Memorandum for the Officer in Charge in reference to Lt. E. B. Armstrong, as suggested in paragraph 2, basic communication.\n\n1 Incl\nMOIC, dtd 15 July 47\n1 Incl withdrawn\nMOIC, dtd 7 July 47\n\nS.H. MORROW\nColonel, GSC\nAsst Chief of Staff, A-2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIDENTIFIABLE OBJECTS\nWilliams Fld, Chandler, Aris.\n15 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n1. On 14 July 1947, 1st Lt Eric B. Armstrong, O-2059709, 170th AAF Base Unit, Ferry Division, Brooks Field, San Antonio, Texas was interviewed and the following information was obtained: Lt Armstrong departed Williams Field, Arizona at 1400 CST on 28 June 1947 in a P-51 for Portland, Oregon, by the way of Medford, Oregon. At approximately 1515 CST on a course of 300 degrees, and ground speed of 285, altitude 10,000 feet, approximately thirty miles northwest of Lake Meade, Nevada, Lt Armstrong sighted five or six white, circular objects at four o'clock, altitude approximately 6,000 feet, course approximately 120 degrees, and an estimated speed of 285 MPH. Lt Armstrong said the objects were flying very smoothly and in a close formation. The estimated size of the white objects were approximately 36 inches in diameter. Lt Armstrong stated that he is sure the white objects were not birds, since the rate of closure was very fast. Lt Armstrong was certain that the white objects were not jets or conventional type aircraft since he has flown both types.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES:\n\nLt Armstrong was very sincere in the explanation and was not the exaggerating type. He merely stated what he saw and has drawn no conclusions as to what the white objects were.\n\nLawrence R. King, Jr, Special Agent, CIC, ADC"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNIDENTIFIABLE OBJECTS\nWILLIAMS FIELD, CHANDLER, ARIZONA.\n\n7 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n1. On 1 July 1947, Lt William G. McGinty, USN, 195803, P-80 Student, Williams Field, Chandler, Arizona, was interviewed by this Agent, and stated in substance: That on 30 June 1947, at about 0910, MST, he was flying at 25,000 feet over Grand Canyon, Arizona, in a P-80 type aircraft. He stated that he was heading south towards Williams Field, Arizona, when he saw two round objects going at inconceivable speeds, straight down. He further stated that his reactions were to turn away from the objects. He further stated that one of the unidentifiable objects followed the other seconds apart. He further stated that due to the speed of the objects, he could only see that they were circular, and that they were possible light gray in color. He further stated that it was his opinion that the objects were approximately eight feet in diameter. In conclusion, he stated that the objects would have probably hit the ground approximately twenty-five miles south of the South Rim of Grand Canyon, Arizona.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Lt McGinty gave his permanent address as: N.A.M.T.C., Point Hugu, Port Hueneme, Calif.\n\n2. On 1 July 1947, Captain Malcolm G. Armstrong, O-734168, Instructor, Single Engine, Williams Field, Chandler, Arizona, was interviewed by this Agent and stated in substance: That his brother, 1st Lt E. B. Armstrong, stationed at Hq, 10th AAF, Brooks AAF, Texas had related to him that he saw a formation of unexplainable objects in the vicinity of Lake Mead, Nev. Captain Armstrong, further stated that his brother stated the objects were heading south, and were at approximately 10,000 feet altitude.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Captain Armstrong could not give too much information on the objects that his brother had seen. Lt. E. B. Armstrong can be contacted at Hq, 10th AAF, Brooks Field, Texas for further information.\n\nLynn C. Aldrich, Special Agent, CIC-AAF, FDTRC\n\nTHIS IS A TRUE COPY\n\nJOHN K. ORR, Major, A.C.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUnidentifiable Objects.\nD 333.5 ID (16 Jul 47) 1st Ind.\nHQ AIR DEFENSE COMMAND, Mitchel Field, New York, 21 July 1947.\n\nTO: Commanding General, Army Air Forces, Washington 25, D. C.\nATTN: AC/AS-2.\n\n1. Forwarded for your information and utilization.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nR. H. SMITH\nColonel, GSC\nAsst Chief of Staff-Intell.\n\nInfo cy:\nCG, AMC,\nWright Fld,\nDayton, O.\n\n2 Incls:\nn/c\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUnidentifiable Objects.\nD 333.5 ID (16 Jul 47) 1st Ind.\nHQ AIR DEFENSE COMMAND, Mitchel Field, New York, 21 July 1947.\n\nTO: Commanding General, Army Air Forces, Washington 25, D. C.\nATTN: AC/AS-2.\n\n1. Forwarded for your information and utilization.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\nR. H. SMITH\nColonel, GSC\nAsst Chief of Staff-Intell.\n\nInfo cy:\nCG, AMC,\nWright Fld,\nDayton, O.\n\n2 Incls:\nn/c\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nTENTH AIR FORCE\nBROOKS FIELD, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIN REPLY REFER TO:\n\nDC 333.5 16 July 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentifiable Objects\n\nTO: Commanding General\n Air Defense Command\n Mitchel Field, New York\n ATTN: Asst Chief of Staff, A-2\n\n\n1. Inclosed herewith for your information is investigation relative to Unidentifiable Objects which was initiated at Headquarters, Flying Division, Air Training Command, Randolph Field, Texas. This Office assisted, as noted in Inclosure 2, by completing a Memorandum for the Officer in Charge.\n\n2. No further action is contemplated by this Headquarters concerning investigation of this incident.\n\n\n2 Incls:\n 1. MOIC dtd 7 July 47\n 2. ltr, FDATC, w/1 Ind and 1 Incl, MOIC, dtd 19 July 1947\n\nW. H. LORROW\nColonel, GSC\nAsst Chief of Staff, A-2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n621-9\n21 JUL 1947"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TO: C G, AAF (ATTN: AC/AS-2)\nFROM: DIR. OF INTEL. DATE 5 AUG 47\nMAJ FISHER/74738\n\n2636 Magnolia Ave.,\nLos Angeles 7, Calif.\nAugust 1 1947\n\nDirector of Military Intelligence,\nWar Department, Washington 25, D.C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nOn Sunday afternoon, July the Sixth, I observed something very strange ; it is related --- at least in my own mind--- with the phenomena of the \"Fabulous Flying Saucers\" and I cannot report on this second phenomena , without speaking of the first.\n\nAs I do not wish to be considered the victim of mass psychology, a crack-pot or visionary , it is rather hard for me to make this report. I am doing it because I consider it my duty.\n\nA newspaper article spoke of the Bureau of Standards as \"Having a finger in the pie \" in many experiments so not knowing where to write or who to write to I wrote to the Bureau, and Mr. Hugh L. Dryden has suggested that you were the one to report to.\n\nI had been amused at accounts of the \" flying saucers \". Everyone was talking , laughing and joking about them and I did not believe in them .\n\nThe Hollywood Tarzana Bus was parked at the Tarzana end of the line and the driver was busy making out his reports preparatory to making the return trip./ I was the only one in the bus and I sat in the middle of the side next to Ventura so the bus was parked north and south.\n\nAs I looked to my right , a \"Saucer appeared out of nowhere: apparently out of nowhere and it was followed by several others ; they were of uniform size and spaced at regular intervals and it seemed as if they turned a corner from the West and they rolled along at great speed to the Northward and parallel to Ventura Boulevard .\n\nAs soon as I became convinced that what I saw was not an illusion but what every one was talking about I began to study them and it was right then that my eyes seemed to be drawn to this other phenoma in the air between me and the \"Saucers\".\n\nWhat I saw was milky white rays in the sunlight that seemed to criss cross like the search lights do at night ; it was nothing like the sun shining on some bright object for the rays were not spaced and they were not so close together and they criss crossed. However, they did seem to converge toward a center but they did not meet there . In this center --- a radious of about eighteen inches it seemed from where I sat, there were spinning objects of some red substance"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\n\nabout the color of the semi- precious stone Cornelian: these fragments were sharp and irregular and shiny. They were flying about as if flying to a magnet . This was momentary and I looked to see if the \"Saucers\" were still there. I saw one or two but the same thing happened again and I saw the second phenomena for a second . By this time the \"Saucers were out of sight.\n\nAll the way home I was trying to find some logical explanation for the \"Saucers\" but my mind kept reverting to the second phenomena and as I dwelt on it I could not help surmising if perhaps these rays I saw did not come out of the red fragments that were spinning in the vortex. I couldnt help wondering if this substance had been shot from the \"Saucers as they turned the corner from the west on their way to the North/.\n\nAs our army would not be shoting deadly rays over toward a very crowded highway and as this whole thing seems fantastic to say the least, I thought I had better trust some ones Judgement who really knows what is going on and so you have my report on what I really saw, and what I am very curious about.\n\nThanks to Mr. Dryden for his courtesy in letting me know just who to relate this incident to, and thanks to you for listening and I hope that it makes the right kind of impression.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nM. Lenore Corey"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OKLAHOMA CITY AIR MATERIEL AREA\nTINKER FIELD\nOKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA\n\nAPN/KDS/eb\n30 July 1947\n\n#3728-I\nIN REPLY REFER TO:\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE SECURITY OFFICER, OCAMA\n\nSubject: DAN NELSON, Attorney-at-Law, 926 Perrine Building, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.\n\nRe: Flying Saucer Mystery Solved.\n\nOn 30 July 1947 DAN NELSON was interviewed at his office, 926 Perrine Building, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, relative to his alleged solving of the Flying Saucer Mystery.\n\nSubject, whose age is 53, is at present engaged in practicing law and is the agent for the Dual Parking Meter Company. Subject advised he is married and has two sons, ages seven and ten, residing at 2613 N.W. 11th Street, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Nelson stated he was a sergeant in World War I, being wounded in action while serving with Company L, 58th Infantry, and that before entering the service he had an eighth grade education. After leaving the service he finished his education and graduated from the University of Oklahoma in 1929. He advised that since 1929 he has practiced general law in both Norman and Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.\n\nSubject stated he notified the War Department by letter on 19 July 1947, advising them of his discoveries concerning the Flying Saucer Mystery. He received an answer dated 23 July 1947 advising him his letter had been referred to the Air Forces. NELSON stated he had heard no more from the War Department as of 29 July 1947, at which time he released his statement to the \"Daily Oklahoman,\" Oklahoma City local newspaper.\n\nSubject advised the basis for his theory concerning the Flying Saucer Mystery was obtained from simple experiments which he conducted while driving his automobile. NELSON stated he believed that many people had seen lights or shining objects cast onto their windshields and side ventilator windows of their automobile and reflected as a saucer or disc shaped object. He stated that the movement of the automobile, plus the fact that the glass was not a perfect mirror and passing objects could be seen in relation to the objects gave them an appearance of great speed.\n\nSubject advised that the vibration of the car gave the objects an appearance of rotating and that the reflections caused them to appear flat or saucer shaped. NELSON stated that any number of objects might be seen according to the direction that the car is traveling and the number of bright objects being reflected onto the window. He further stated that these objects might be seen in an ordinary window in a house according to the lighting"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"conditions, and that the objects might be either vertical or horizonal. The subject related that any change in speed of the car resulted in a change in speed of the object, and that changes of direction resulted in a change in the angle of travel of the object.\n\nNELSON stated he has not talked to any persons that had actually seen flying saucers or discs but he believed that these reflections plus the excitement and hysteria caused by other reports has been the basis for most flying saucer reports. Subject also stated that this same theory could be true in relation to flying saucers seen from aircraft.\n\nAttached hereto is a detailed statement by NELSON covering his findings and explaining his solution to the so-called Flying Saucer Mystery.\n\nKALMAN D. SIMON\nC.I., U.S. Army\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FLYING SAUCER MYSTERY SOLVED\nJuly 12, 1947.\n\nThe most impressive reports of the so-called flying saucers or discs were those from aviators who claim they saw disc-shaped objects flying through the air in various formations at high altitudes and at a high rate of speed. The first report was from an aviator who stated that these so-called flying discs had a somewhat shiny appearance and would fly in formation and change their position from time to time. Most reports stated that they appeared in the late afternoon or about dusk.\n\nMost all reports were to the effect that these objects had the appearance of an inverted disc or saucer, and some of them reported that they appeared to be rotating in their flight.\n\nThe mystery of the flying saucers or discs may be solved by the use of a little applied science along with a few simple experiments.\n\nThese flying discs or saucers can be observed by any motorist traveling along the highways when the sun is shining on most any afternoon or evening. During the daylight most of these so-called flying discs are reflections from the sun shining upon some bright object in or on the automobile driven by the observer. For instance, if you were driving in a north-westerly direction with the sun shining on the handle of the front or rear door on the left side of the car, you may notice a shiny object appear in the ventilation wing of the window on the drivers left, if it is opened to about a 45° angle."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"These shiny objects may have various forms and there may be more than one, depending on the number of reflections. They may appear to be in the sky when the driver looks through the ventilation wing glass. Their position in the sky depends upon the angle at which the object is reflected in the ventilation wing and the position of the observer. They may have various forms but very frequently they are of a saucer shape or a flat shape when they appear to be in the sky.\n\nThe ventilation wing during day-light is not of course a perfect mirror, therefore, it appears to the driver or observer that he is actually looking through the glass into the sky. As he moves along, the bright objects appear to be traveling at a high rate of speed in comparison with the stationary objects on the ground, or the distant horizon, that he sees through the window, or in comparison with the faintly silhouetted objects on the landscape which at times are reflected in the window.\n\nThe flying saucer appears to be traveling in the same general direction as the automobile but sometimes a little to the right which makes it appear that it will eventually cross the drivers path. The apparent flight direction of the saucer is due to the angle of the ventilation wing glass in its relation to the direction in which the car is traveling. The number and position of the saucers reflected in the glass depend upon the number and contour of objects reflected therein by the sun. Bright objects on a car approaching from the rear may cast such reflections on your ventilation wing in the daytime.\n\n(2)"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"If the ventilation wing window were a perfect mirror the objects causing the reflections would appear therein, as well as all other objects within range, but the ventilation wing being a sort of a semi-mirror, does not reflect the object but only the bright spot, which leaves the impression that the observer is actually looking through the glass and that the object actually appears to be in the sky, or at times a long distance away. These results are best obtained in the late afternoon, or after sun down.\n\nThe aviators who reported seeing flying discs or saucers, undoubtedly were seeing the reflection of bright objects in or on their own plane. They saw them as reflected in their canopy or wind shield, but failed to recognize them as reflections. Otherwise they were reflections from other air craft.\n\nAs the aviator traveled along observing the movement of the disc in comparison with the mountains, clouds or stationary objects on the earth, made them appear to be traveling at a high rate of speed. The sloping angle of the aviators wind-shield and his position in the plane made it appear that the discs were in the sky. The position of the discs also depend upon the position of the observer and the angle at which they are reflected in the glass.\n\nSome of the reports stated that where there were more than one flying disc, they appeared to be fastened together and frequently performed a dipping or rising motion and when one would dip, they would all go through the same motion simultaneously. The simultaneous movement is due to the reflections all coming from the same object. For instance, if they\n\n(3)"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"are reflected from some bright object in or on the car or plane, the up and down motion of the car or plane causes the flying discs to appear to be going through a dipping and rising motion, or, if the reflecting object is stationary and the car moving, the results will be the same.\n\nThe statement that the discs appeared to be rotating as they sailed through the atmosphere is due to the vibration of the automobile or plane. Vibrations make them appear to be rotating at a very high rate of speed. Vibration is what gives them a flat or disc-like shape also.\n\nIf you wish to see some flying discs, make a drive at about dusk or at night, open your ventilation wing window at about a 45° angle from the drivers seat and watch the reflections of the stationary electric lights that appear on your left, if you are driving, after you pass them, and see how many discs you can observe flying through the air. If there are not too many lights to your rear, you may have a perfect formation of beautiful flying discs which may be red, green or silver according to the color of the electric lights which you have passed. They appear most realistic when traveling about forty-five or fifty miles per hour. If you do not get satisfactory results from your first experiments, try again. After you have learned when and where to look for them, your observations become more pleasing and interesting.\n\nEven the lights of an approaching automobile from your rear may appear as one flying disc in your ventilation wing. The reflections of the approaching lights will appear in your ventilation wing unless the side of your car protrudes out so far as to prevent the light beam from shining on the wing.\n\n(4)"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"These appear best when the approaching car is some distance away, perhaps a quarter or half a mile. The results at night may not be as impressive as those in the late afternoon because at night your ventilation wing window makes a more perfect mirror and the passing landscape is not as pronounced, therefore, the reflections therein are more easily detected as reflections. In the late afternoon, however, you have a feeling that you are actually looking through the glass and the reflected objects appear more real. The sun shining on a bright ring on your finger with your hand resting on the steering wheel may cast disc-like reflections in your wind shield. The form of the reflection will depend upon the ornamental decorations on your ring.\n\nThe rear door handle on my automobile reflects nine beautiful, little, silver, flying discs in the bright sun-light. These appear in the lower part of the ventilation wing and when traveling on a level highway, they appear to be racing along with me at the road side. These nine discs appear in a formation of two rows of four each, with the ninth one in the lead at the center of the formation. They appear as whirling propellers in a vertical position. These discs also have streamers which are due to the curveture and decorative pattern on the handle. While traveling north in the early afternoon under a bright sun, these nine discs appeared far below to my left, racing up the valley at a terrific rate.\n\nYou may be able to see flying discs in your own home. If you will turn on a small electric light in the hall-way and then look through the window at the other end of the hall,\n\n(5)"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"you may see as many as three flying discs from one electric light bulb, which may have more or less of a bell shape. These discs many times appear as inverted saucers, and if you will change your position slowly you will see that they change their position also. These are best observed in the late afternoon or between sun down and dusk, when it appears to you that you are merely looking through the window pane at the discs suspended in the distance. As darkness comes on, the window pane becomes a more perfect mirror and your discs appear as reflections in a mirror.\n\nTo watch the discs, through your ventilation wing, sail along with you as you drive through the country, becomes very fascinating, especially if you use a little imagination. It may absorb your thoughts completely, therefore, I would admonish automobile drivers watching the flying discs, to be cautious and not run off the road or into some other car.\n\nSome of the reports on flying saucers, heretofore not explained in this article, such as those reported seeing bright flashes in the sky, were no doubt reflected sun-light from planes. These light beams chanced to cross the line of vision of the observer. They frequently appear very brilliant and may more or less blind the observer for an instant. If the plane is very high it may not be seen by the observer, which may be due to impaired vision or the great height at which the plane is flying. We very often get these same blinding flashes from automobile wind-shields. Many of the reports around July 4th. were incited by various forms of fire works.\n\n(6)"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Some reports stemmed from pure imagination or hysteria, while others were deliberate hoaxes. Any other reports can be explained if all the surrounding facts are known.\n\nMost all of the reports and descriptions of the flying saucers coincide so clearly with the findings herein, that there could be no doubt but that we have the correct solution.\n\nThe foregoing statement may not be coached in precise scientific terms, and may not be scientifically exact, however, we believe it is so worded that the average layman can understand it and that it is sufficiently correct to prove the proposition.\n\nPersonally, I do not believe that the so-called flying saucers or the solution thereof, are of any military value, unless the Government wished to retain this information for the psychological effect upon any potential enemy nation, such as Germany did in regard to their so-called secret weapons during the war.\n\nDan Nelson\nOklahoma City"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Code 110A\nNRL\n\n7 August 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM\n\nSUBJECT: \"Flying Saucers\"\n\nTO: Asst Chief of Air Staff-2\nCollection Branch, AAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\n1. The inclosure is an excerpt from a letter to Dr. E. Tousey, Micron Waves Section Head, Naval Research Laboratory, from Mr. John F. Cole, pertaining to some unidentified objects which Mr. Cole reports to have seen some time prior to the first reports of \"flying saucers\" in the New England area.\n\n2. Dr. Tousey states that Mr. Cole is a well-known astronomer and a reliable observer as a result of his training.\n\n3. The inclosure is in addition to information contained in previous letters to your office taken from interviews at the request of Lt. Col. G. D. Garrett, AAF A-2.\n\n1 Incl.\nExcerpt fm ltr to\nDr. Tousey 2\n\nWILLIAM P. MELLEN\nMajor, Air Corps\nAMC Liaison Officer\nNaval Research Laboratory"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Excerpt from letter to Dr. R. Tousey from\nMr. John F. Cole\n\nSouth Brooksville, Me.\nJuly 28, 1947\n\nHaving in mind the ridicule which has been heaped on those innocent or perhaps gullible individuals who have reported disks, I would be a little cautious in interpreting. But it is safe to say truthfully, that something unusual attracted my attention, and I was in a perfectly sober condition, barring the mild stimulation, afforded by cool spring water filtering through North Haven greenstone cracks. It should be easy to determine if the \"disks\" were a new type jet plane, or bomber, or rocket. The fact that it was July 3, about 2:30 P.M. (summer time) or Greenwich Civil time 1830 might suggest that they were engaged in some naval demonstration from Eastport, Bar Harbor or Belfast. The group appeared to be at an altitude of about 50° -- I suffer from a mild cervical arthritis--but my eyes are well corrected for astigmatism and hypermetropia, and I doubt if my cerebral cortical Lesions are sufficiently advanced to affect my balance. What first made me look up was the unusually loud roar and I was surprised not to see a well defined group of planes quite near. Instead I had to look rather sharply to see the bunch of very light colored objects, in a general northerly direction and travelling roughly in a NW (true) direction. This was reasonably correct, as I was on Cox's hill, and looked over towards Backwood's Mount, that is the conspicuous flat top planated hill at Harborside. The group could hardly have covered more than 1 1/2° angular diameter in the sky, and bunched rather closely with no regular formation. There might have been 10, I couldn't say and with 90' of arc spread, would easily be within the limit of visibility for discreet objects. As a group they were going so as to cover 30° of arc, estimated of course, in perhaps 10 or 15 seconds. If one of them, say, subtended 1/10°, with a possible wing spread of 100 feet, it would put it at a distance of over 10 miles, and quite invisible for a light object. Besides, with 30° arc of travel at a 10 mi. distance would be roughly 5 miles in 15 seconds or 20 mi. per minute or 1200 mi. per hour!!--rather fast for a bomber--hi. A 50 ft. object, at 5 miles dist. would be about 600 mi. per hr.--also fast going. The only concrete evidence of form appeared on the left tangent of the group--two dark shaped forms: which may have been tail wings. Doesn't the Douglass bomber have these? And since they were in no regular formation, but seemed among themselves to be moving irregularly like a swarm of bees, why shouldn't all of them have shown wings? The loud roar suggests they may have been much closer, and rather small. The sky background was hazy blue, and the sun behind me. One plane towing a lot of balloons, I believe, would have been easily recognized. Havy any meteorites been reported? At that time of day, has there been any abrupt change of radio field strength? or ionization?"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF THE AIR INSPECTOR\n25 JULY 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM TO: AC/AS-2, Counter Intelligence Branch\n\n1. Information contained herein and opinions expressed are based upon conversation with and request by Mr. Butler of your office. All pertain to certain phenomena connected with recent widespread talk of \"flying saucers\".\n\n2. Approximately three weeks ago, on or about 7 July 1947, I prepared to go to bed around 2230 or 2300 EDT. I was living at 2607 North Glebe Road, Arlington, Virginia, with my wife. Illustration No. 1 shows the general layout of the room we occupied at that time. See Illustration No. 1.\n\n[Illustration No. 1: hand-drawn floor plan showing windows, bed, desk, radio, lamp table, and \"ME\" marker; labelled \"4 CASEMENT WINDOWS\"]\n\nIllustration No. 1\n56"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. I had just turned off the light by my bedside, but sat down on the side of the bed to listed to the end of a radio program before reclining. In the meantime, my wife and I were having some conversation about the selection of certain furniture for a home we had just purchased. At the time of these events, as I sat facing the windows, a light appeared at the right-hand edge of the extreme end window and moved rapidly along to disappear below the trees or horizon, or to be extinguished in some fashion at some place in a general southerly direction. This is illustrated on the following page by a very tentative sketch. See Illustration No. 2."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4. At the time, since my attention was divided and absorbed among the subjects mentioned, my reaction was simply that \"a light passed by,\" and I gave no further thought to the matter until some moments later, when the thought came to me that I had never seen such an object before, and that although the first explanation would have been that a meteor had fallen toward earth in that direction, it did not have the appearance of any meteor or \"shooting star\" I had ever seen. Thinking of the then-prevalent talk of flying disks, I reflected that probably some such thing as I had just seen was the source of a large amount of newspaper and radio publicity on the subject. The next morning I jestingly announced in the office that I saw a flying saucer the night before and thought that it was enroute to Alexandria,where some of our officers live. I then went on to say that I supposed it was a shooting star, but that it did look somewhat peculiar. After we had discussed the general topic for some time, I dropped the subject, not wishing to add to the supposed rumors, which I envisioned as a source of serious panic over the country.\n\n5. A description of the light, or object is almost impossible, since observation of it was so limited. As shown in Illustration No. 2, the object appeared to pass in closest proximity to me at the time it came into view. All of my mental calculations were based upon some impression or conception of its distance at the closest point, (AC). I had no way of judging this, except in the form of very crude depth-perception. If this by any chance were correct, and instead of a distant meteor some object had passed near-by, I would assume for purposes of description that the distance AC on the sketch was some three quarters of a mile. One factor which I could judge quite reliably was the angular elevation. This must have been approximately 3 or 4 degrees; at any rate, the light was intermittently behind the tallest trees forward of my position as it passed, and these trees are of a normal height, perhaps sixty or eighty feet at a distance several blocks. Based upon a mild assumption as to distance, and a reasonable assumption as to angular elevation, the object would be at a low altitude, considerably below 500 feet, and of a size approximating a small airplane, say 30 feet across. The shape may have been round, oval, discal, or irregular; at the speed with which it travelled, I could only perceive it as a \"blob.\" I do not consider the distance mentioned to be less than 3/4 mile, because had it been, I feel sure that, late in the evening and with all my windows open, I would have heard some sound, which I definitely did not in this case. It might be well to point out here the relative similarity in size, altitude and airspeed of a firefly at a distance of 30 feet, an airplane at about 3/4 mile, and a meteor at several hundred miles. Most of us are familiar with this illusion."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6. Although I could not accurately judge the time, I seem to recall the object or light was visible for a couple of seconds. Taking this figure literally and applying it to the sketch, No. 2, one could roughly compute the speed of the object at 1350 mph; however, I did not sense that it was moving with such great speed as this. It rather appeared to move with the speed of a jet-powered airplane. It did not deviate from a straight course while I observed it, and did not perceptibly lose altitude.\n\n7. In color, the subject had the appearance of a reflected white light, a cool, bright white light with no red in it, like the moon on a clear night. There was no train visible to me, in the form of fire, smoke, or sparks. The weather at the assumed time and date was checked through records of the Bolling Field weather office, and consisted of scattered to broken clouds with visibilities of 10 - 12 miles. The cloud condition is further indication that the object was not necessarily a meteor, since it might have been impossible to see a meteor. I do not personally remember the weather condition, except that I am sure it was not raining.\n\n8. At the time of this occurrence, I was not inclined to think of it seriously enough to wake my wife and describe it to her, nor by any reasoning to make official report. As time passed, I thought considerably about the fleeting glimpse I had of whatever I saw, and am still somewhat confused, but feel that it was some natural phenomenon which occurs but rarely. I have flown approximately 2500 hours during the past seven years and being generally familiar with aspects of aviation can emphatically state that (a) it was no weather balloon, (b) it was not the flash of a beacon on the cloud-base, (c) it could hardly have been an airplane on fire, since it would have at least crashed in this general area, (d) it was not entirely a result of imagination, and (e) it was not spending much time in one place.\n\nJAMES O. COBB\nLt Colonel, Air Corps"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ADDRESS REPLY TO DIRECTOR, NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY WASHINGTON 20, D. C. AND REFER TO: Code 110\n\nARMY LIAISON OFFICE\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nNAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY\nWASHINGTON 20, D. C.\n\n28 July 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Saucers\n\nTO: Asst Chief of Air Staff-2\nCollection Branch, AAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nSupplemental to that contained in a letter to your office, dated 18 July 1947, re interview with Mr. C. H. Zohn who purports to have seen an unidentified flying object, the following additional information was obtained on 21 July from C. C. Rockwood, who was mentioned in that letter as having also seen the object.\n\nC. C. Rockwood reports the object to have been either a silvery sphere or disc, which he would have taken to be a meteorological balloon except for the fact that it was travelling at a much higher velocity than the automobile and approximately in the same direction. The automobile was moving about 60 mph. There was little, if any, surface wind.\n\nWhen first seen at an elevation of about 45° it appeared about of the same size as the sun. He could hear nothing above the noise of the car. He saw no smoke or contrails.\n\nIts motion was apparently all horizontal. Its aspect did not change so far as could be observed during the time of observation. He thought it disappeared by simply becoming too small to see.\n\nWILLIAM P. MELLEN\nMajor, Air Corps\nAMC Liaison Officer"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This is an unparaphrased code (cypher) message. Text must be paraphrased if essential to retransmit it in another system or to communicate its contents to persons outside British or U.S. Government Services. One-time pad messages are excepted from this rule.\n\n28\n\nJOINT COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 9421\n\nSECRET\n\nIN MESSAGE T.O.O: 080800 Aug. 1947\nREC'D: 1200 EDT 9th Aug.\n\nFROM: A.M. LONDON\nTO: FAFDEL CYPHER MESSAGE\n\nAIX 6328 Aug. 8th 1947\n\nYour AIX 14 July 29th.\n\nDuring normal night flying practice at 2230 hours on 16th January, 1947, one of our Mosquitos was vectored on to an unidentified aircraft at 22,000 feet. A long chase ensued commencing over the North Sea about 50 miles from the Dutch coast and ending at 2300 hours over Norfolk. Two brief AI contacts were made but faded quickly. The unidentified aircraft appeared to take efficient controlled evasive action.\n2. No explanation of this incident has been forthcoming nor has it been repeated.\n\nACTION COPY\n\nA.C.M.\nA.M.\nC.I.O. (Action)3\n\n/ec"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n62-83894-130\n\nFLYING DISCS\n\n30 July 1947\n\nFor purposes of analysis by AFBIR-CO, eighteen reported sightings of \"Flying Discs\" were selected for breakdown into detailed particulars. Each report was assigned a number and each number appears in the left-hand column of the data on the following pages.\n\nOne report, Number 7, has not yet been received and therefore no information is included other than Date, Name of Observer, and Location. The Fourth Air Force is attempting to secure a statement from this observer.\n\nFour reports, Numbers 2, 4, 17, and 18, have not been analyzed.\n\nThe subject headings on which the breakdown has been made are:\n\nDate\nHour (Local standard Time)\nLocation\nObserver's Name\nObserver's Occupation\nObserved from Ground or Air\nNumber of Objects Sighted\nAltitude\nDirection of Flight\nSpeed\nDistance Covered\nLength of Time in Sight\nDeviation from Straight Flight\nColor\nSize\nShape\nSound\nTrail\nWeather\nManner of Disappearance\nRemarks\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Report Number / Date / *Hour / Location\n\n1 19 May 1215 Manitou Springs, Colorado\n2 22 May Oklahoma City, Oklahoma\n3 22 June 1130 Greenfield, Massachusetts\n4 24 June Mt. Rainier, Washington\n5 28 June 2120 Maxwell Field, Alabama\n6 29 June 1330 Nera White Sands, New Mexico\n7 1 July Bakersfield, California\n8 4 July 2015 Emmett, Idaho\n9 6 July 1345 Clay Center, Kansas\n10 6 July - Fairfield-Suisun, California\n11 7 July 1145 Koshkonong, Wisconsin\n12 7 July 1430 East Troy, Wisconsin\n13 8 July 1550 Mt. Baldy, California\n14 9 July 2330 Grand Falls, Newfoundland\n15 10 July 1600 Harmon Field, Newfoundland\n16 12 July 1830 Elmendorf Field, Alaska\n17 -\n18 -\n\n*Local Standard Time\n\n14"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Report Number | Observer's Name | Occupation | Observed From\n1 D. A. Houser | Railroad Employee | Ground\nF. J. Smith | \" \" | \"\nL. D. Jamison | \" \" | \"\n2 Byron Savage | Businessman-Pilot | Ground\n3 E. L. DeRose | *Not stated | Ground\n4 Kenneth Arnold | Business-man Pilot | Air\n5 Wilson H. Kayko | Captain, AAF | Ground\nJohn H. Cantrell | \" \" | \"\nRedman | \" \" | \"\nTheodore Dewey | 1st Lieut., AAF | \"\n6 C. H. Zohn | Employee, NRL | Ground\nJ. R. Kauke | \" \" | \"\nC. C. Rockwood | \" \" | \"\nNancy Rockwood | Wife of C.C. Rockwood | \"\n7 Richard Rankin | Civilian Pilot | Ground\n8 E. J. Smith | United Air Lines Pilot | Air\nRalph Stevens | \" \" \" Co-Pilot | \"\n9 A. B. Browning | Major, AAF | Air\n10 Jas. H. Burniston | Captain, AAF | Ground\n11 Not Stated | CAP Instructor | Air\n\" \" | CAP Student | \"\n12 Not Stated | CAP Pilot | Air\n\" \" | CAP Passenger | \"\n13 Alvin E. Moorman | 1st Lieut., ACCNG | Air\n14 Iric Kearsey | Constable, Newfoundland Constabulary | Ground\n15 Mr. Mehrman | TWA Representative | Ground\nMr. Woodruff | PAA \" | \"\n16 Grahm | Major, AAF | Ground\nand several other officers"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Report Number | Deviation from Straight Flight | Color | Size\n1 Climbed, dove, hovered overhead, resumed original course | Silver | Apparently small\n2\n3 None reported | Silver, very bright | Small\n4\n5 Zig zag course \"much like a waterbug\" | Brilliance slightly greater than a star | Not stated\n6 None reported | Some solar specular reflection | Not stated\n7\n8 None reported | Almost dusk; could not distinguish | Impossible to determine\n9 None reported | Very bright and silvery colored | 30-50' in diameter\n10 None reported | Reflection from sun | Comparable to a C-54 at 10,000'\n11 Descended edgewise, stopped at 4,000' and assumed horizontal position. Proceeded in horizontal flight for 15 seconds, stopped again, then disappeared | Not stated | Not stated\n12 None reported | Not stated | Not stated\n13 None reported | Of light-reflecting nature | Apparent depth of a P-51\n14 None reported | Phosphorous color | Not stated\n15 None reported | Silvery | Same span as a C-54 at 10,000'\n16 Followed contours of mountains five miles away from observers | Resembled a grayish balloon | Approx. 10' in diameter"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Report Number | Shape | Sound | Trail | Weather\n1 No definite shape could be determined | None | None | CAVU\n2\n3 Irregular; round, Dis not appear particularly disc-shaped | None | None | Not stated\n4\n5 None stated; seemed like a bright light | None | None | Clear moonlight\n6 No details other than that shape was uniform with no protuberances | None | Possible vapor trails | CAVU\n7\n8 None definite, but seemed flat on base with the top slightly rough in contour | None | None | CAVU\n9 Round, disc-shaped | None | None | CAVU\n10 No shape could be distinguished | None | None | Sunny\n11 Not stated, but report refers to \"saucer\" several times | None | None | CAVU\n12 Same as Report No. 11 | None | None | CAVU\n13 Flat object, of light-reflecting nature which appeared to be without vertical fin or any visible wings | None | None | Not stated\n14 Egg-shaped, or like barrel head | None | None | CAVU\n15 Circular in shape, like wagon wheel | None | Bluish black trail approx. 15 mi. long | Clear with scattered cumulus at 8 to 10,000'\n16 Resembled balloon | None | None | Not stated"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This image contains all the information on the document.\nReport Number | Manner of Disappearance | Remarks\n1 Climbed very fast and out of sight | No definite shape could be determined and even with the aid of 4 to 6 power binoculars object could not be brought into focus\n2\n3 Obscured by a cloud bank | From letter this observer wrote, it is obvious he is a well-educated person. Seeks no publicity.\n4\n5 Lost in brilliancy of the moon | Observers (2 rated, 2 air intell.) phoned Field Ops to ascertain no scheduled experimental a/c were in vicinity. Sky chart attached to report. Observer is Admin. Asst. in the Rocket Sonde Sect. of NRL. Two other \"scientists\", and wife of one, were in party and made same observation\n6 Cannot explain, except that reflection angle may have changed abruptly\n7\n8 Don't know whether they put on a tremendous burst of speed, or disintegrated. However, they did disappear into sunset | Observers were Pilot, Co-Pilot, of scheduled UAL DC-3. Stewardess also saw objects. Suggest reading of very detailed statements.\n9 Unexplained | When first sighting object near horizon, observer looked at chart in his lap to check position. When he looked out window again, object was off his left wing at 11 o'clock\n10 Disappeared at an angle of about 30° above the earth's surface | Rolled from side to side 3 times in its path across the sky. Sun reflected from top side, but never from underside, even when turning\n11 Unexplained | None\n12 Unexplained | None\n13 Pilot (at 300MPH) attempted to keep object in sight, but unable to do so | Observer contacted bases in area who reported no a/c in air at time\n14 Unexplained | First 4 discs flying line-a-trail\n15 Unexplained | Seemed to cut clouds open as it passed thru. Trail was like beam seen after a high-powered landing light is switched off.\n16 Not stated | Object was observed paralleling the course of a C-47 then landing."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS FIFTEENTH AIR FORCE\nColorado Springs, Colorado\n2 July 1947\nSUBJECT: Supersonic Platters\nSUMMARY OF INFORMATION:\nThe following information was related to Counter Intelligence Corps Personnel at Headquarters Fifteenth Air Force, Colorado Springs, Colorado on 27 June 1947 by Mr D. A. Hauser, 24 North Chesnut Street, Colorado Springs Colorado, Mr. F. J. Smith, 24 Fairview, Manitou Springs, Colorado and Mr. L. D. Jamison, 24½b West Kiowa, Colorado Springs, Colorado. All three of the men are empolyees of the Pikes Peak Railway, Manitou Springs, Colorado.\n\"On or about 19 May 1947 during their lunch period (1215-1315) a member of a train crew called attention to a silver object in the sky approaching from the North East. It appeared to be travelling at a great speed. All three men stated that the altitude of the object was very difficult to determine because of its apparent smallness. They further stated that because of this it was difficult to view the object as being large and having high altitude or small and being at a relatively low altitude. They did say though that it appeared to be higher than the top of Manitou Mountain which is over 1000 feet higher than the shops which are situated at its base. No definate shape of the object could be determined and even with the aid of binoculars it still could not be brought into focus. The binoculars used were of about 4 to 6 power. The men stated that they were certain that the object did not have any of the physical characteristics of modern conventional aircraft.\nThe day was described as being clear and sunny with not a cloud in the sky and no ground wind.\nOn reaching the area just North of Manitou Mountain the object remained in the immediate area for several minutes during which time it was seen to execute manuvers such as climbing, diving and reversal of direction of flight. This happened every few seconds. The distance and location between views prompted two of the men to think that there were more of the unidentified objects in the sky. At times the object seemed to hover in the air and then start on another path of flight. When last seen the silver object was climbing very fast towards the West almost directly into the wind.\nPrevious distribution:\nNone\nEvaluation\nof source of information\nDISTRIBUTION:\nE O\nHq SAC 3 copies"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"HQOCAMA FORM NO. 5-506\n31 MAY 1945\n\nOKLAHOMA CITY AIR MATERIEL AREA\nTINKER FIELD\nOKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO:\nOCAPN/KDS:cp\n#3724-I\n24 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM TO THE SECURITY OFFICER, OCAMA, TINKER FIELD.\n\nSUBJECT: BYRON B. SAVAGE, Field Engineer, Radio Corporation of\nAmerica, Dallas, Texas. (Residence: 416 N. W. 29th Street,\nOklahoma City, Oklahoma.)\n\nRE: Flying Disc.\n\nOn 23 July 1947, BYRON B. SAVAGE was interviewed at his residence,\n416 N. W. 29th Street, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, relating to his alleged\nviewing of a flying disc over the vicinity of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.\n\nSubject, whose age is 38, advised he is married and has one child,\nand is presently the holder of a Private Pilot's License, No. 39101,\n(Single Engine, Land). Subject averred he has extensively studied electron-\nics, sound engineering and aeronautics, and his present occupation, which is\nField Engineer for Radio Corporation of America, offices of which are\nlocated in Dallas, Texas, is that of installing theater sound equipment.\nSAVAGE stated that between the days 17 May to 21 May 1947, just after dusk,\nhe observed an object which he believed to be a small aircraft in the south.\nSAVAGE advised that the sun had just gone down and the moon had not arisen\non the horizon. SAVAGE related that he and his wife had just departed\ntheir residence and had started to enter their car in the driveway at\n416 N. W. 29th Street, Oklahoma City. He judged the time to be between\n8:30 p.m. and 9:00 p.m., and the lights from the city of Oklahoma City\nappeared to be shining on this object when he first saw it. He judged the\nobject to be about 160° in the south when he first saw it, and as it moved\ntoward him he remarked to his wife that \"a big white plane was coming over.\"\n\nSAVAGE stated that when this object was at a 45° angle from him, he\nrealized it was not a conventional type aircraft, and it appeared elliptical\nat first and as it moved closer it appeared perfectly round and was flat.\nSAVAGE advised the object, which appeared to him as a disc, had no appearance\nof being spherical and had a ratio of diameter to the thickness of approxi-\nmately 10 to 1, appearing thicker in the center, but this could not be\npositively ascertained. SAVAGE judged the object to be at an altitude of\nbetween 10,000 and 18,000 feet, and it left no trailing effects. SAVAGE\nrelated that it appeared to be in bulk as big as the bulk of six B-29s at\nan altitude of approximately the same height. SAVAGE advised that the object\nwas in his vision approximately 15 to 20 seconds and travelled at a speed\nwhich he judged to be approximately three times that of jet-propelled aircraft.\n\n1\nsee 116"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Memo to the Security Officer, OCAMA, Tinker Field, dtd 7/24/47, File\n3724-I.\n\nSAVAGE stated that there were no protrusions on this object and as it\nwent by he listened for a sound of noise, and at one time thought he dis-\ntinguished a swishing sound like the rushing of air. This swishing sound\noccurred a few seconds after this object had passed him. SAVAGE averred\nthis sound was not very loud and did not last very long, and it is very\npossible that the sound could have been his imagination or expectation, as\nhe was not sure of the sound. SAVAGE related that he called his wife to\nsee this object but it had disappeared before she could focus her eyes on\nit. Subject stated that the object appeared to diminish in size and\nspeed as it moved away, and it was moving in a direction of 350° to the\nnorth. Subject further stated that the object appeared to be frosty white\nin color at all times.\n\nSAVAGE advised that he has held a pilot's certificate since 1934 and\nhas been flying since 1929. He advised that he would be glad to answer any\nfurther inquiries and will cooperate in every way possible. SAVAGE stated\nhe was sure this object was not a meteor and in his opinion it must be\nradically built and powered, probably atomic.\n\nKalman D. Simon\nKALMAN D. SIMON\nC.I. U. S. Army\n\n2\nsee 116"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\n151 Meridian Street\nGreenfield, Massachusetts\nJuly 10, 1947\n\nCommanding Officer\nWestover Field\nChicopee, Massachusetts\n\nDear Sir:\n\nAfter having read several accounts of eye-witnesses who claim they\nhad seen the so-called \"flying discs\", it brought to mind a strange exper-\nience I had some two weeks ago. The reason I write to you is that radio and\nnewspaper reports state that the air forces have been alerted to investigate\nthese mysterious objects. Assuming that you are interested, I am making the\nfollowing report in the belief that it might possibly be of help to you. I\ndo not desire to have any kind of publicity whatsoever in this connection.\n\nAbout 11:30 AM, Sunday, June 22nd, I was working outdoors on a step-\nladder, looking up, and suddenly there appeared across my line of vision a\nspeeding, brilliant, small, round-shaped, silvery-white object at an altitude\nI would judge to be about 1,000 ft. or more. It was moving very fast in a\nstraight, northwesterly direction -- I would say as fast or possibly faster\nthan a speeding plane. It was so unusual and strange a sight that it arrest-\ned my attention for about 8 or 10 seconds until it was obscured by a cloud-\nbank.\n\nNaturally my curiosity was considerably aroused and I tried to think\nwhat this object might have been. I doubted very much that it could have been\na weather balloon because it was not at all like any weather balloons I had seen\nbefore. The object I saw, although small, reflected the sunlight very strong-\nly as though it were of polished aluminum or silver, and I can assure you was\nvery real. It appeared to have an irregular round shape and while it could\nhave been disc-shaped, it did not particularly impress me as such.\n\nI have attempted to give you this information as accurately and\nclearly as I know how, free from any imagination or exaggeration. Further-\nmore, my experience took place before I had any inkling that \"flying discs\"\nwere reported seen.\n\nThis information is being passed on to you for whatever it may be\nworth, purely and simply in the interests of national security, and once\nmore request that you do not publicize my name.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\n/s/ Edward L. DeRose\nEdward L. DeRose\n\nA CERTIFIED TRUE COPY:\n\nArchie F. Roy\nARCHIE F. ROY\nCaptain, Air Corps\n\n3\nReceived AFBIR-CO\n24 July 47\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA\n333.5 ID\n17 July 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of \"Flying Discs\"\n\nTO: Commanding General, Army Air Forces, Washington 25, D. C.\nATTENTION: AC of AS-2\n\n1. Attached statements and MOICs forwarded to your office per\nrequest TWX from Headquarters Air Defense Command, Mitchel Field, N. Y.,\ndated 10 July 1947.\n\n2. This headquarters is unable to locate Richard Rankin, however,\nas soon as he is located, statement and MOIC will be forwarded direct to\nyour office.\n\n3. Information copies furnished Headquarters Air Defense Command.\n\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, GSC\nAC of S, A-2\n\n4 Incls:\n1. MOIC 16 Jul/Brown (dup)\n2. MOIC 16 Jul/Brown (dup)\n3. MOIC 16 Jul/Brown (dup)\n4. MOIC 16 Jul/Brown (dup)\n\nInfo cc to ADC\n\n4\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Incident\n4AF 1208 I\n16 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n1. On 12 July 1947, a call was made at the newspaper office of\nthe \"Idaho Daily Statesman\", Boise, Idaho. The aviation editor of the\npaper, Mr. David N. Johnson, was interviewed in regard to how well he\nknew Mr. Kenneth Arnold of Boise, Idaho, and as to the credibility of\nany statement made by Mr. Arnold. The purpose of this interview was an\nattempt to verify statements made by Mr. Kenneth Arnold on 26 June 1947,\nto various national news services to the effect that he, Mr. Arnold,\nhad seen 9 objects flying in the air above the Cascade Mountain Range\nof Washington. These objects were subsequently referred to as flying\nsaucers or flying disks and will here-in-after be referred to as such\nin this report. Mr. Johnson stated that he had known Mr. Arnold for\nquite a period of time, having had relations with Mr. Arnold on various\noccasions, due to the fact that both he, Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Arnold\nwere private fliers and frequently got together to talk shop. Mr. Johnson\nstated that as far as he was concerned anything Mr. Arnold said could be\ntaken very seriously and that he, Mr. Johnson, actually believed that Mr.\nArnold had seen the aforementioned flying disks. Mr. Johnson stated that\nafter Mr. Arnold reported having seen the flying disks, that the editor\nof the paper had assigned him, Mr. Johnson, the assignment of taking the\nairplane belonging to the newspaper and exhausting all efforts to prove\nor disprove the probability of flying disks having been seen in the\nnorthwest area. The results of this assignment to Mr. Johnson and what\nhe subsequently saw is put forth in a sworn statement signed by Mr. Johnson\nattached to this report as Exhibit B.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Mr. Johnson is a man of approximately 33 to 35 years of\nage. From all appearances he is a very reserved type of person. Mr.\nJohnson has logged 2800 hours of flying time in various types of airplanes\nup to and including multi-engine aircraft. During part of the war years,\nMr. Johnson was the first pilot of a B-29 type aircraft being assigned to\nthe Twentieth USAAF and stationed on Tinian Island, in the Pacific. It\nis the personal opinion of the interviewer that Mr. Johnson actually saw\nwhat he states that he saw in the attached report. It is also the opinion\nof the interviewer that Mr. Johnson would have much more to lose than gain\nand would have to be very strongly convinced that he actually saw something\nbefore he would report such an incident and open himself for the ridicule\nthat would accompany such a report.\n\n1 Incl: Exhibit \"B\"\n\nFRANK M. BROWN, S/A, CIC 5th AF\n\nIncl #2\n116"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY.\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nStatement of David N. Johnson\nat Boise, Idaho, July 12, 1947\n\nTo Whom It May Concern:\n\nOn the sixth day of July, 1947, I received from James L. Brown,\ngeneral manager of the Statesman Newspapers, incorporated in Idaho as\nThe Statesman Printing company, an assignment which was in substance:\n\n\"Conduct an aerial search of the northwest states in an effort to\nsee and photograph a flying disc. Conduct this patrol for so long a time\nas you believe reasonable, or until you see a flying disc.\"\n\nIn accordance to these instructions, I took the Statesman's airplane,\nand with Kenneth Arnold as passenger, flew a seven and one-half hour mission\non the seventh day of July, 1947. This mission was without result. It\ncovered an area embracing the confines of the Hanford plant in Washington,\nand territory between and around Mt. Rainier and Mt. Adams, where Arnold\nfirst reported seeing objects henceforth described as saucers or discs.\n\nOn the eighth day of July, 1947, I took an AT-6 of the 190th Fighter\nsquadron, Idaho National Guard, of which I am a member, and flew to northern\nIdaho, into northwestern Montana briefly, to Spokane, Washington, and back\nto Boise by way of Walla Walla, Washington, and Pendleton, Oregon. This\nsearch also was negative.\n\nOn the ninth day of July, 1947, I continued the search, again using a\nnational guard AT-6, this time centering my efforts over the Owyhee mountains\nwest and southwest of Boise, a portion of the Mountain Home desert on a track\nsoutheast of the Mountain Home army air base, thence into the Sawtooth moun-\ntains, and back in the general direction of Boise on a line carrying me well\nto the north of the Shafer butte forest service lookout station, into the\nHorseshoe Bend area, and thence back in a southwesterly direction to a point"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nbetween Boise and the village of Meridian, west of Boise a few miles.\n\nDuring this search, which lasted approximately two and one-half\nhours, I flew under and around rapidly forming cumulus clouds over that\narea known as the Camas Prairie, east of Boise. The clouds were near the\nvillage of Fairfield in that valley, and Fairfield is 75 miles airline\ndistance east of Boise. At that time I saw nothing in the vicinity of\nthese clouds.\n\nAt the time I reached the point between Boise and Meridian, I was\nflying at an altitude of 14,000 feet mean sea level, which would be a mean\naverage of 11,000 feet above the earth in this area, not considering errors\nin the altimeter induced either by barometric changes since my takeoff, or\nby the temperature at that altitude.\n\nI turned the aircraft on an easterly heading, pointing toward Gowen\nField, and had flown on that course for perhaps a minute when there suddenly\nappeared in the left hand portion of my field of vision an object which was\nblack and round.\n\nI immediately centered my gaze on the object. At that time, due to its\nerratic movement, I thought I was seeing a weather balloon. I called the\nCAA's communication station at Boise, and asked if the weather station had\nrecently released a balloon. The reply from communicator Albertson was that\nthe bureau had not. I do not remember his exact words; I am under the\nimpression he said \"not for several hours\" or gave me the exact time of the\nprevious release, which was around 08:30 that day.\n\nUpon hearing this response, I turned the aircraft broadside to the\nobject, pulled back the plexiglass covering to avoid any distortion, took\nmy camera from the map case, and exposed about 10 seconds' duration of eight\nmillimeter motion picture film. During the time the camera was at eye level,"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nI could not see the object because of minuteness of scope introduced by the\noptical view finder with which the camera, an f.1.9 Eastman, was equipped.\n\nTaking the camera away and once again centering my gaze on the object,\nI observed it to roll so that its edge was presented to me. At this time it\nflashed once in the sunlight. It then appeared as a thin black line. It\nthen performed a maneuver which looked as if it had begun a slow roll, or\na barrel roll, which instead of being completed, was broken off at about\nthe 180-degree point. The object rolled out of the top of the maneuver at\nthis point, and I lost sight of it.\n\nThis entire performance was observed against the background of clouds\npreviously forming over the Camas Prairie. The object appeared to me,\nrelatively, as the size of a twenty-five cent piece. I do not know how\nfar away it was. I do not know, nor can I truthfully estimate, its speed.\nI can only say it was not an airplane, and if it was at a very great dis-\ntance from me, its speed was great, taking into consideration that apparent\nspeed is reduced to the viewer if an object is a very great distance away.\n\nI forgot to look at my clock to determine the exact time I saw the\nobject. The CAA's log of radio contacts shows my first contact to have been\nmade at 12:17 hours. But a few seconds elapsed between the time I first saw\nthe object, and the time I called the CAA's station.\n\nI subsequently related over the radio a description of what I saw, and\ncommunicator Albertson may remember it. The control tower may have a record-\ning of the conversation. I have not checked to determine that.\n\nThe purpose of my relating over the air what I saw was to enable rapid\ntransmission of the report to the newspaper, for at that time I was on\nassignment and my energies thenceforth were devoted to (1) transmitting the\ninformation and (2) conducting a further search, which I did after landing\nfor fuel and to make some telephone calls."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nThe next search, begun within half an hour after landing from the\nfirst one, consumed another two hours, but was negative. I explored thorough-\nly the region where I saw the object.\n\nImmediately after sighting the object, I asked if there were other\naircraft in the area. There was a P-51 of the 190th squadron practicing\nmaneuvers in the vicinity of Kuna, but that was behind me. A C-82 passed\nover Boise, but I saw that aircraft go beneath me by some 2,000 feet.\n\nThe P-51 in the vicinity of Kuna proceeded to the area where I saw\nthe object, at my request, and conducted a search. It was negative.\nDuring the afternoon, flights of P-51s were sent out to cover the area,\nand some of them flew high altitude missions on oxygen. These searches\nwere negative.\n\nI was subsequently informed that personnel on both the United Air\nLines side of Gowen field, and on the national guard side, observed a black\nobject maneuvering in front of the same cloud formation, which by now had\ngrown so that the clouds reached a probable height of 19,000 or 20,000 feet\nfrom a mean base of 13,500 or 14,000 feet, mean sea level. Three of these\nmen were national guard personnel and I talked to them, asking them to\ndescribe what they saw, before telling them my story, in order to avoid\nsuggestion or inference of a leading nature. They saw the object (from\nthe ground) while I was on my second search. They believed the time to\nhave been 14:00 hours. The object performed in the same erratic manner,\nthey said, as I observed.\n\nThe above is the extent of the story, and information concerning\nmyself is now in order.\n\nI have approximately 2800 hours of flying time in equipment ranging\nfrom primary trainers to B-29s. Of course, that does not increase my\npowers of observation except as to those practiced daily by an airman."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nIt does not make my eyesight any sharper except again as to the incidental\ndemands upon the eyes of a pilot.\n\nAt the time of the experience related above, I had flown fourteen\nand one-half hours on an assignment to find a disc and if possible, to\nphotograph it. In all frankness, I was tired. I may have been suffering,\nalthough slightly, from want of oxygen.\n\nPrior to sighting the object, I had concluded there was no point in\npressing the search, that I probably would never see the disc-like objects\nreferred to by Arnold and by Captain Smith of United Air Lines.\n\nAt all times during the search, both on that day and the two preceding\ndays (particularly when I was with Arnold) I had literally talked to myself\nto keep beating into my head that I would not fall victim to the power of\nsuggestion or self-hypnosis arising from a naturally very intent desire to\nfind a disc and bring success to the assignment given me.\n\nI therefore do not believe that I was the victim of suggestion or\nhypnosis. I am familiar with the optical illusion of a fixed object begin-\nning to move after it is watched a sufficient length of time. I know what\ntricks the eyes will play as to moving bodies, and have learned of this\nparticularly during night formation flying.\n\nI saw the object appear suddenly. If it had moved in a jerky fashion\n(as it did at first) for the full length of time I observed it, I would not\nbe so strong in saying that I saw something not an aircraft, not a balloon,\nand not a corpuscle moving across the retina of either eye. The maneuver\ndescribed by the object when its edge was presented to me convinces me that\nI saw an object actually performing in an erratic flight path.\n\nThe question remains, of course, whether I saw it. The motion picture\nfilm, developed and processed by R. A. Stohr in the Eastman laboratories at"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n241 Battery Street, San Francisco, showed no trace of any object. Stohr\nsays that if it was more than a mile distant from me at the size I described,\nthe object would not have registered sufficiently on the film to be shown.\nHe said it probably was too far away to be apparent even through great en-\nlargement of the negative, and enlargement in that case is limited because\nof the size of the film and the fact I did not have any telescopic equipment\non the lens. The exposure was f.16, stop set at infinity, at a speed of 16\nframes per second.\n\n I have worried over this matter a great deal since seeing it. I \"took\nmyself aside\" and said, \"come now, Johnson, don't be stupid.\" But I cannot-\nbring myself to the point of thinking I did not see anything. The impression\nof the moment was too vivid, too realistic, and I knew in the air when I saw\nthat partial slow roll or barrel roll, that I was not a victim of illusion.\n\n I trust this matter will be of help to those investigating the flying\ndisc phenomena which have been reported.\n\n A chart is attached depicting the movements of the object as I saw it.\n\n This statement is made voluntarily and freely, in response to the\nrequest of Mr. Brown and Captain Davidson, who called on me this morning.\n\n /s/ David N. Johnson\n\nSubscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public, this 12th\nday of July , 1947.\n\n /s/ Geo. L. Flaherty\n Notary public for Ada\n county Idaho. My\n commission expires Jan 2, 1949.\n\nCOPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nChart to which reference is\nmade on page six, statement\nof David N. Johnson.\n\nThis design portrays the movements of the object to\nwhich reference is made in the attached statement. At\nall times the object appeared as black. Positions (1), (2)\nand (3) show the jerky, rising motion. Position (4) is where\nthe object rolled, presenting its edge to me. It then\nfollowed the dotted line, rolling over the top of the maneuver\nand disappearing at position (5).\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"MEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\nIncident\nLAF 1208 I\n16 July 1947\n\n 1. On 12 July 1947, Mr. Kenneth Arnold, Box 387, Boise, Idaho,\nwas interviewed in regard to the report by Mr. Arnold that he saw 9\nstrange objects flying over the Cascade Mountain Range of Washington\nState on July 25th. Mr. Arnold voluntarily agreed to give the interviewer\na written report of exactly what he had seen on the above mentioned date.\nThe written report of Mr. Arnold is attached to this report as Exhibit A.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Mr. Arnold is a man of 32 years of age, being married and\nthe father of two children. He is well thought of in the community in\nwhich he lives, being very much the family man and from all appearances\na very good provider for his family. Mr. Arnold has recently purchased a\n$5,000 airplane in which to conduct his business to the extent of which is explained in the\nattached exhibit. It is the personal opinion of the interviewer that Mr.\nArnold actually saw what he stated that he saw. It is difficult to believe\nthat a man of Mr. Arnold's character and apparent integrity would state\nthat he saw objects and write up a report to the extent that he did if he\ndid not see them. To go further, if Mr. Arnold can write a report of the\ncharacter that he did while not having seen the objects that he claimed he\nsaw, it is the opinion of the interviewer that Mr. Arnold is in the wrong\nbusiness, that he should be writing Buck Rogers fiction. Mr. Arnold is\nvery outspoken and somewhat bitter in his opinions of the leaders of the\nU.S. Army Air Forces and the Federal Bureau of Investigation for not having\nmade an investigation of this matter sooner. To put all of the statements\nmade by Mr. Arnold in this report would make it a voluminous volume. However,\nafter having checked an aeronautical map of the area over which Mr. Arnold\nclaims that he saw the objects it was determined that all statements made by\nMr. Arnold in regard to the distances involved, speed of the objects, course\nof the objects and size of the objects, could very possibly be facts. The\ndistances mentioned by Mr. Arnold in his report are within a short distance\nof the actual distances on aeronautical charts of this area, although Mr.\nArnold has never consulted aeronautical charts of the type the Army uses.\nMr. Arnold stated that his business had suffered greatly since his report\non July 25 due to the fact that at every stop on his business routes, large\ncrowds of people were waiting to question him as to just what he had seen.\nMr. Arnold stated further that if he, at any time in the future, saw anything\nin the sky, to quote Mr. Arnold directly, \"If I saw a ten story building\n\nFRANK M. BROWN, S/A, CIC 4th AF"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Incident\nLAF 1208 I\n\nflying through the air I would never say a word about it\", due to the\nfact that he has been ridiculed by the press to such an extent that he\nis practically a moron in the eyes of the majority of the population of\nthe United States.\n\n1 Incls: Exhibit \"A\"\n\nFRANK M. BROWN, S/A, CIC 4th AF"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nSOME LIFE DATA ON KENNETH ARNOLD\n\n I was born March 29, 1915 in Subeka, Minnesota. My father's name was\nEdward Erb Arnold; my mother's maiden name was Bertha E. Barden. I was a\nresident of Minnesota until I was six years old when my family moved to\nScobey, Montana, where they homesteaded. My grandfather, Roland C. Arnold\nalso homesteaded in Scobey, Montana, and became quite prominent in political\ncircles along with Burton K. Wheeler, the famous Montana senator.\n\n I went to grade school and high school at Minot, North Dakota. I\nentered scouting at twelve years of age and achieved the rank of Eagle scout\nbefore I was fourteen. My former scout executive was H. H. Prescott, now a\nregional commissioner for the Boy Scouts in Kansas City, Kansas.\n\n As a boy, I was interested in athletics and was selected as an all-\nstate end in 1932 and 1933 in the state of North Dakota. I entered the\nU. S. Olympic trials in fancy diving in 1932; I was a Red Cross Life Saving\nExaminer during the years of 1932, '33 and '34. I taught swimming and diving\nat scout camps and the municipal pool in Minot, North Dakota. I went to the\nUniversity of Minnesota, where I swam and did fancy diving under Neils Thorpe,\nand also played football under Bernie Bierman, but upon entering college I\nwas unable to continue my football career because of an injured knee. My\nhigh school football coach was Glenn L. Jarrett, who is now the head football\ncoach of the University of North Dakota. I had little or no finances, and\nmy ambition in furthering my education in college was through my athletics.\nAs a boy in Minot, North Dakota, I did a good deal of dog sled racing, placed\nfirst with my dog in 1930 in the Lions Club Dog Derby.\n\n In 1938 I went to work for Red Comet, Inc. of Littleton, Colorado, a\nmanufacturer of automatic fire fighting apparatus. In 1939 I was made\ndistrict manager for them over a part of the western states, and in 1940 I\n\nEXHIBIT \"A\"\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"established my own fire control supply known as the Great Western Fire\nControl Supply. I have been working as an independent fire control\nengineer since, and I handle, distribute, sell and install all types of\nautomatic and manual fire fighting equipment in the rural areas over\nfive western states.\nMy flying experience started as a boy in Minot, North Dakota, where\nI took my first flying lesson from Earl T. Vance, who was originally from\nGreat Falls, Montana. Due to the high cost at that time, I was unable to\ncontinue my flying and did not fly of any great consequence until 1943.\nI was given my pilot certificate by Ed Leach, a senior CAA inspector of\nPortland, Oregon, and for the last three years have owned my own airplane\ncovering my entire territory with same and flying from forty to one hundred\nhours per month since. Due to the fact that I use an airplane entirely in\nmy work, in January of this year I purchased a new Callair airplane, which\nis an airplane designed for high altitude take-offs and short rough field use.\nIn the type of flying I do, it takes a great deal of practice and\njudgment to be able to land in most any cow pasture and get out without\ninjuring your airplane; the runways are very limited and the altitude is\nvery high in some of the fields and places I have to go in my work. To\ndate, I have landed in 823 cow pastures in mountain meadows, and in over\na thousand hours a flat tire has been my greatest mishap."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY CONFIDENTIAL\n\nBY KENNETH ARNOLD\n\nThe following story of what I observed over the Cascade mountains,\nas impossible as it may seem, is positively true. I never asked nor wanted\nany notoriety for just accidently being in the right spot at the right time\nto observe what I did. I reported something that I know any pilot would\nhave reported. I don't think that in any way my observation was due to any\nsensivity of eye sight or judgment than what is considered normal for any pilot.\nOn June 24th, Tuesday, 1947, I had finished my work for the Central Air\nService at Chehalis, Washington, and at about two o'clock I took off from\nChehalis, Washington, airport with the intention of going to Yakima, Wash.\nMy trip was delayed for an hour to search for a large marine transport that\nsupposedly went down near or around the southwest side of Mt. Rainier in the\nstate of Washington and to date has never been found.\nI flew directly toward Mt. Rainier after reaching an altitude of about\n9,500 feet, which is the approximate elevation of the high plateau from which\nMt. Rainer rises. I had made one sweep of this high plateau to the westward,\nsearching all of the various ridges for this marine ship and flew to the west\ndown and near the ridge side of the canyon where Ashford, Washington, is located.\nUnable to see anything that looked like the lost ship, I made a 360 degree\nturn to the right and above the little city of Mineral, starting again toward\nMt. Rainier. I climbed back up to an altitude of approximately 9,200 feet.\nThe air was so smooth that day that it was a real pleasure flying and,\nas most pilots do when the air is smooth and they are flying at a higher\naltitude, I trimmed out my airplane in the direction of Yakima, Washington,\nwhich was almost directly east of my position and simply sat in my plane observing the sky and the terrain."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"There was a DC-4 to the left and to the rear of me approximately\nfifteen miles distance, and I should judge, at 14,000 foot elevation.\nThe sky and air was as clear as crystal. I hadn't flown more than\ntwo or three minutes on my course when a bright flash reflected on my\nairplane. It startled me as I thought I was too close to some other air-\ncraft. I looked every place in the sky and couldn't find where the reflec-\ntion had come from until I looked to the left and the north of Mt. Rainier\nwhere I observed a chain of nine peculiar looking aircraft flying from north\nto south at approximately 9,500 foot elevation and going, seemingly, in a\ndefinite direction of about 170 degrees.\nThey were approaching Mt. Rainier very rapidly, and I merely assumed\nthey were jet planes. Anyhow, I discovered that this was where the reflec-\ntion had come from, as two or three of them every few seconds would dip or\nchange their course slightly, just enough for the sun to strike them at an\nangle that reflected brightly on my plane.\nThese objects being quite far away, I was unable for a few seconds to\nmake out their shape or their formation. Very shortly they approached Mt.\nRainier, and I observed their outline against the snow quite plainly.\nI thought it was very peculiar that I couldn't find their tails but\nassumed they were some type of jet plane. I was determined to clock their\nspeed, as I had two definite points I could clock them by; the air was so\nclear that it was very easy to see objects and determine their approximate\nshape and size at almost fifty miles that day.\nI remember distinctly that my sweep second hand on my eight day clock,\nwhich is located on my instrument panel, read one minute to 3 P.M. as the\nfirst object of this formation passed the southern edge of Mt. Rainier.\nI watched these objects with great interest as I had never before observed"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"airplanes flying so close to the mountain tops, flying directly south to\nsoutheast down the hog's back of a mountain range. I would estimate their\nelevation could have varied a thousand feet one way or another up or down,\nbut they were pretty much on the horizon to me which would indicate they\nwere near the same elevation as I was.\nThey flew like many times I have observed geese to fly in a rather\ndiagonal chain-like line as if they were linked together. They seemed to\nhold a definite direction but rather swerved in and out of the high mountain\npeaks. Their speed at the time did not impress me particularly, because I\nknew that our army and air forces had planes that went very fast.\nWhat kept bothering me as I watched them flip and flash in the sun\nright along their path was the fact that I couldn't make out any tail on\nthem, and I am sure that any pilot would justify more than a second look at\nsuch a plane.\nI observed them quite plainly, and I estimate my distance from them,\nwhich was almost at right angles, to be between twenty to twenty-five miles.\nI knew they must be very large to observe their shape at that distance, even\non as clear a day as it was that Tuesday. In fact I compared a zeus fastener\nor cowling tool I had in my pocket with them - holding it up on them and\nholding it up on the DC-4 - that I could observe at quite a distance to my\nleft, and they seemed smaller then the DC-4; but, I should judge their span\nwould have been as wide as the furtherest engines on each side of the\nfuselage of the DC-4.\nThe more I observed these objects, the more upset I became, as I am\naccustomed and familiar with most all objects flying whether I am close to\nthe ground or at higher altitudes. I observed the chain of these objects\npassing another high snow-covered ridge in between Mt. Rainier and Mt. Adams,"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and as the first one was passing the south crest of this ridge the last\nobject was entering the northern crest of the ridge.\nAs I was flying in the direction of this particular ridge, I measured\nit and found it to be approximately five miles so I could safely assume that\nthe chain of these saucer like objects were at least five miles long. I\ncould quite accurately determine their pathway due to the fact that there\nwere several high peaks that were a little this side of them as well as\nhigher peaks on the other side of their pathway.\nAs the last unit of this formation passed the southern most high snow-\ncovered crest of Mt. Adams, I looked at my sweep second hand and it showed\nthat they had travelled the distance in one minute and forty-two seconds.\nEven at the time this timing did not upset me as I felt confident after I\nwould land there would be some explanation of what I saw.\nA number of news men and experts suggested that I might have been\nseeing reflections or even a mirage. This I know to be absolutely false,\nas I observed these objects not only through the glass of my airplane but\nturned my airplane sideways where I could open my window and observe them\nwith a completely unobstructed view. (Without sun glasses)\nEven though two minutes seems like a very short time to one on the\nground, in the air in two minutes time a pilot can observe a great many\nthings and anything within his sight of vision probably as many as fifty or\nsixty times.\nI continued my search for the marine plane for another fifteen or\ntwenty minutes and while searching for this marine plane, what I had just\nobserved kept going through my mind. I became more disturbed, so after\ntaking a last look at Tieton Reservoir I headed for Yakima.\nI might add that my complete observation of these objects, which I\ncould even follow by their flashes as they passed Mt. Adams, was around two"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and one-half or three minutes -- although, by the time they reached Mt. Adams\nthey were out of my range of vision as far as determining shape or form. Of\ncourse, when the sun reflected from one or two or three of these units, they\nappeared to be completely round; but, I am making a drawing to the best of my\nability, which I am including, as to the shape I observed these objects to be\nas they passed the snow covered ridges as well as Mt. Rainier.\n\nWhen these objects were flying approximately straight and level, they\nwere just a black thin line and when they flipped was the only time I could\nget a judgment as to their size.\n\nThese objects were holding an almost constant elevation; they did not\nseem to be going up or to be coming down, such as would be the case of rockets\nor artillery shells. I am convinced in my own mind that they were some type\nof airplane, even though they didn't conform with the many aspects of the\nconventional type of planes that I know.\n\nAlthough these objects have been reported by many other observers\nthroughout the United States, there have been six or seven other accounts\nwritten by some of these observers that I can truthfully say must have observed the same thing that I did; particularly, the descriptions of the three\nWestern Air Lines employees, the gentleman from Oklahoma City and the locomotive engineer in Illinois, plus Capt Smith and Co-Pilot Stevens of United Air Lines\nSome descriptions could not be very accurate taken from the ground unless\nthese saucer-like disks were at quite a great height and there is a possibility\nthat all of the people who observed peculiar objects could have seen the same\nthing I did; but, it would have been very difficult from the ground to observe\nthese for more than four or five seconds, and there is always the possibility\nof atmospheric moisture and dust near the ground which could distort one's vision.\nI have in my possession letters from all over the United States and people\nwho profess that these objects have been observed over other portions of the"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"world, principally Sweden, Bermuda, and California.\n\nI would have given almost anything that day to have had a movie\ncamera with a telephoto lens and from now on I will never be without one --\nbut, to continue further with my story. When I landed at the Yakima, Wash.,\nairport I described what I had seen to my very good friend, Al Baxter, who\nlistened patiently and was very courteous but in a joking way didn't believe me.\n\nI did not accurately measure the distance between these two mountains\nuntil I landed at Pendleton, Oregon, that same day where I told a number of\npilot friends of mine what I had observed and they did not scoff or laugh but\nsuggested they might be guided missiles or something new. In fact several\nformer Army pilots informed me that they had been briefed before going into\ncombat overseas that they might see objects of similar shape and design as I\ndescribed and assured me that I wasn't dreaming or going crazy.\n\nI quote Sonny Robinson, a former Army Air Forces pilot who is now operating dusting operations at Pendleton, Oregon, \"What you observed, I am convinced, is some type of jet or rocket propelled ship that is in the process\nof being tested by our government or even it could possibly be by some foreign government\".\n\nAnyhow, the news that I had observed these spread very rapidly and\nbefore the night was over I was receiving telephone calls from all parts of\nthe world; and, to date I have not received one telephone call or one letter\nof scoffing or disbelief. The only disbelief that I know of was what was\nprinted in the papers.\n\nI look at this whole order as not something funny as some people have\nmade it out to be. To me it is mighty serious and since I evidently did\nobserve something that at least Mr. John Doe on the street corner or Pete\nAndrews on the ranch has never heard about, is no reason that it does not\nexist. Even though I openly invited an investigation by the Army and the"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FBI as to the authenticity of my story or a mental or a physical examination\nas to my capabilities, I have received no interest from these two important\nprotective forces of our country; I will go so far as to assume that any\nreport I gave to the United and Associated Press and over the radio on two\ndifferent occasions which apparently set the nation buzzing, if our Military\nIntelligence was not aware of what I observed, they would be the very first\npeople that I could expect as visitors.\n\nI have received lots of requests from people who told me to make a lot\nof wild guesses. I have based what I have written here in this article on\npositive facts and as far as guessing what it was I observed, it is just as\nmuch a mystery to me as it is to the rest of the world.\n\nMy pilot's license is 333487. I fly a Callair airplane; it is a three-place single engine land ship that is designed and manufactured at Afton, Wyoming as an extremely high performance, high altitude airplane that was made for mountain work. The national certificate of my plane is 33355.\n\n/s/ Kenneth Arnold\nBox 587\nBoise, Idaho.\n\n[Hand-drawn diagram: \"traveling this way\" arrow; circle labeled \"Top\"; arrow noting \"They seemed longer than wide, their thickness was about 1/20th of their width\"; \"Side view\" and \"traveling this way\" arrows; \"Mirror Bright\"]\n\nThey did not appear to me to whirl or spin but seemed in fixed position, traveling as I have made drawing.\n\n/s/ Kenneth Arnold"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nHEADQUARTERS TACTICAL AIR COMMAND\n\nLANGLEY FIELD, VIRGINIA\n\n7 July 1947\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO:\n\nSUBJECT: Report of Unusual Celestial Phenomena\n\nTO: Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nHeadquarters Tactical Air Command\nLangley Field, Virginia\n\n1. The following report is submitted concerning an unusual occurrence observed by the following AAF Personnel at Maxwell Field, Montgomery, Ala. on the night of 28 June 1947:\n\nCAPT. WILSON H. KAYKO, O-33841, Hq, TAC\nCAPT. JOHN H. CANTRELL, O-255404, Hq, TAC\n1ST LT. THEODORE DEWEY, O-2094172, Hq, TAC\nCAPT. REDMAN, Randolph Field, Texas\n\n2. At approximately 2120 Central time, a light, with a brilliance slightly greater than a star, appeared from the West. It was first noted above the horizon of a clear moon-light night, traveling in an easterly direction at a high rate of speed. There was no audible sound and it was impossible to determine the altitude, except that it appeared to be at great height. It traveled in a zig zag course with frequent bursts of speed, much like a water bug as it spurts and stops across the surface of water. It continued until it was directly overhead and changed course 90° into the south. After traveling in the above manner for approximately five (5) minutes, it turned southwest and was lost in the brilliancy of the moon. at 2145 Central it was no longer possible to observe it.\n\n3. A call was placed to Maxwell Field operations reference this phenomena and inquiry made if any experimental aircraft were scheduled for a flight in the vicinity. The reply was negative.\n\n4. No plausible explanation is offered for the unusual action of this source of light, which acted contrary to any common aerodynamical laws. This report is submitted upon request, in view of the many recent reports reference unusual aerial objects observed throughout the U. S.\n\n5. Two of the above noted observers are rated pilots and the other two are air intelligence officers. All observers were cold sober.\n\n6. Attached herewith a sketch showing approximate course of light.\n\nWILSON H. KAYKO\nCaptain, Air Corps\n\nADDRESS ALL COMMUNICATIONS TO: COMMANDING GENERAL, TACTICAL AIR COMMAND\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"ADDRESS REPLY TO\nDIRECTOR, NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY\nWASHINGTON 20, D. C.\nAND REFER TO:\nCode 110\n\nARMY LIAISON OFFICE\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nNAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY\nWASHINGTON 20, D. C.\n\nBIR\n8\n\n18 July 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Interview of Person Reporting Unidentified Aerial Object\n\nTO: Asst Chief of Air Staff-2\n Collection Branch, AAF\n Washington 25, D. C.\n\n 1. At the request of Lt. Col. G. D. Garrett, AAF A-2, the\nundersigned has interviewed this date Mr. C. H. Zohn, Administrative\nAssistant in the Rocket Sonde Section, NRL, who had previously\nreleased information to the press regarding an aerial object which\nhe stated he saw at White Sands, New Mexico, 29 June.\n\n 2. Substance of the interview is as follows:\n\n At between 1:00 and 1:30 p. m. Sunday, 29 June 1947,\nMr. Zohn, in the company of the following: Mr. J. R. Kauke, NRL Rocket\nSonde Section telemetering supervisor; Mr. C. C. Rockwood, NRL Rocket\nSonde high altitude spectrograph scientist; and Mrs. Nancy Rockwood,\nwife of the latter, was proceeding along Highway 17 in a North-Easterly\ndirection from Las Cruces, New Mexico to White Sands V-2 firing grounds\nin an automobile driven by Mr. Kauke. At some time between those given\nand about one-third of the distance from Las Cruces Mr. Kauke, who was\ndriving the car, noticed the subject device and called attention to the\nother occupants. Mr. Zohn opened the window nearest him and observed\nthe object moving at an unknown rapid velocity at an unknown altitude,\nwhich he estimated at about 10,000 feet, and which Mr. Kauke, who also\nobserved it through an open window, estimated at between 8,000 and\n10,000 feet, although the former puts little credence in the estimates.\n\n When first sighted the object was to the right and forward\nof the automobile at an unstated elevation and was apparently moving\nhorizontally in a Northerly direction such as to cross the highway from\nright to left. The object was observed by all persons in the automobile.\nMr. Zohn stated that he could not observe any details of the object\nother than that its shape was uniform, with no protuberances such as\nthe wings of an airplane. It was too distant to enable stereoscopic\nvisualization. There was apparently some solar specular reflection\nwhich seemed to change in intensity as the object receded until it\nwas lost from sight after an estimated 30 seconds from the time first\nnoticed. He could not explain how it disappeared except perhaps that\nthe reflection angle may have changed abruptly. There were apparently\nno clouds or visibility obstructions at the time. The sun was to the\nrear of the automobile. Mr. Kauke thought that at one time he saw\nvapor trails.\n\n6"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Ltr, ALO, NRL, 18 July 47 to Asst Chief Air Staff-2, Collection Br., AAF,\nsubj: \"Interview of Person Reporting Unidentified Aerial Object\"\n\n3. This interview was made in the presence of Dr. H. E. Newell,\nActing Rocket Sonde Section Head, who said that Mr. Zohn had recently\nbeen in the Navy and is familiar with the appearance of the majority of\naircraft types and with meteorological balloons. Mr. Zohn also stated\nthat none of the occupants of the car were intoxicated.\n\nWilliam P. Mellen\nWILLIAM P. MELLEN\nMajor, Air Corps\nAMC Liaison Officer\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nINTERVIEW REPORT\n\nSUBJECT: Interviews with Capt. E. J. SMITH and Ralph Stevens, United Air\nLines pilots, who reported seeing flying disks.\n\nCaptain E. J. SMITH was interviewed at 1500, 9 July 1947, concerning\nthe \"flying disks\", and stated substantially as follows:\n\n\"We left Boise, Idaho, at 2004 Pacific Standard Time. At approximately\n2015, the co-pilot, Ralph STEVENS, called my attention to the first object\nseen. We were then in the vicinity of Emmet, Idaho, our altitude was app-\nroximately 6500, and we were climbing to our proposed cruising altitude of\n8000 from there to Pendleton, Oregon. The heading of the plane at that time\nwas 300 degrees Magnetic North, and the object (one) was sighted at approx-\nimately 290 degrees, or ten degrees to our left. Then an additional four\nobjects appeared to the left of the main, or first, object. These four\nobjects appeared slightly smaller than the first object sighted, but all\nof the objects appeared on the same plane. I estimated the altitude of\nthe objects to be about 8500. They were within our sight for approximately\ntwo minutes, then they disappeared.\n\n\"Shortly after the first group disappeared, probably one or two minutes\nlater, the second group appeared about 310 degrees, or to the right of the\nplane. Their altitude was the same as the first group. Three of the objects\nappeared to be on the same plane, and one object appeared slightly higher\nand to the right of the others. The second group stayed within our sight\ntwelve to fifteen minutes, then disappeared. We had levelled off by the\ntime the second group disappeared.\n\n\"The objects were flat on the base, the top slightly rough in contour.\nThe dimensions appeared the same as a DC-3 approximately five miles from\nus. In other words, it could have been ninety miles away if it would be\npossible for an object as large as that would have to be to be flying, but\nsince we didn't know what we were looking at or how large it was, we de-\ncided that if it were the size of a DC-3 wing span (90 feet), it was about\nfive miles distant. Actually, we have no idea just how large it was since\nwe could not determine its distance from us. When we first sighted the\nobjects, we decided they were either going away from us or coming towards\nus. After a short while, however, we knew they couldn't be coming towards\nus, because we never approached them. I don't believe they could have\nbeen going a great rate of speed and still stayed in sight for as long as\nthey did. I would judge they might have been travelling about 300 miles\nper hour.\n\n\"My personal opinions regarding the objects are - that their speed\nvaried, was not constant. When first sighted, they were going slow and\nstayed within sight for quite some time. However, when we lost sight of\nthem, they seemed to disappear practically immediately. I think they\neither put on a tremendous burst of speed and disappeared from sight, or\nelse they dissipated. Also, it appeared that only one object, the large\none, was controlled, and it in turn controlled the other objects, and I\nthink they were ground controlled.\n\n8\n\n97"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"COPY\n\n\"In both instances, the co-pilot sighted the objects first and called\nmy attention to them. The weather was clear and unlimited, with not a cloud\nin the sky. We checked the wind, and it was 230-10, or out of the Southwest\nat ten miles per hour. The air speed of the ship was about 135 MPH. The\nsun was below the horizon and the objects were silhouetted against the sky,\nhence we could distinguish no color or reflection.\"\n\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n\nRalph STEVENS, co-pilot of the plane, was interviewed at 2130, 9 July\n1947. STEVENS corroborated the remarks made by SMITH concerning the flight\nof the plane, the time the objects were sighted, direction of the flight of\nthe plane, etc. There were two discrepancies in their statements as to the\nsize of the smaller objects and the altitude at which they were flying.\nSTEVENS stated that there was a big difference in the size of the large\nobjects and the smaller ones, and that it was hard to distinguish the shape\nof the smaller ones. STEVENS also stated that the objects were at the same\naltitude as their plane and seemed to be climbing with them. In addition to\nconfirming SMITH'S statements concerning the flight, etc., STEVENS stated\nsubstantially as follows:\n\n\"I was flying the plane when I spotted the first object at 2012 on the\n4th of July, eight minutes after departure from Boise, Idaho. I thought it\nwas an oncoming aircraft similar to ours (DC-3) about five miles away, so\nturned on our landing lights, which is the usual signal to another plane to\nlet it know you're in the vicinity. I mentioned this fact to SMITH, and he\nwatched the object also. While we were both watching, four more objects\nappeared at the same altitude as the first. They seemed to be at the same\naltitude as our plane, about 6000 feet. They were heading about 290 degrees\nmagnetic North, so I turned to follow them. We watched them for four or\nfive minutes, then they all merged as one and disappeared. I don't know\nwhether they merged in line of flight or not, nor do I know whether they\nwent beyond our vision or whether they dissipated.\n\n\"Two minutes later, the large object reappeared with three smaller\nones on its left and one smaller one a great distance to the right. We\nhad the second group in sight for about twelve minutes. The last time\nseen, they were still in that formation and disappeared into the sunset.\nAlso, when we last saw them, they seemed to have continued climbing after\nwe levelled off and were about nine or ten thousand feet.\n\n\"At the time we saw the objects, the sun was below the horizon, but\nthere was quite a bright red glow above the horizon from the sunset. I\ncouldn't really say what distance they were from us, not knowing what they\nwere or how large they were. However, while we were watching them we\nradioed ahead to Ontario, Oregon, about thirty miles distant, to the weather\nstation there, and told them what we were seeing and asked them to go out-\nside and see if they could see them. They radioed back and said they could\n\n- 2 -\n\n98"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nsee nothing, so the objects could have been beyond Ontario, since we had\ntold them that they were between our plane and Ontario. It should also be\nnoted that the personnel at Ontario would be looking at a dark sky and\nmay not be likely to be able to see them anyway.\n\n\"I can't say whether they are man-made disks or not, whether they are\nradio controlled or not, or anything about them. They did not maneuver much\nat all, except when the first group merged. All I can say is that they were\ngoing our direction and were climbing. I don't think they were clouds, as\nthere hadn't been a cloud in the sky, and it would have been quite a phen-\n-omenon as it was like nothing I had ever seen before. There was a big dif-\nference in the size of the objects. The smaller ones were hard to distinguish\nas to shape; they were not shiny, nor did the \"flip\". I couldn't swear on a\nstand that they were not clouds, but I think it impossible. Had they been\nclouds, they wouldn't have appeared and disappeared so suddenly, and we\nwould have approached them.\n\n\"As we were taxiing out to take off from Boise, the tower called us\nand asked us if we had seen any disks lately. As a consequence, we were and\nhad been talking about the flying disks when we sighted them. I don't believe,\nhowever, that it was a figment of the imagination, as SMITH and I were seeing\nthe same things, even the object far off to the right in the second group.\nWe also called the stewardess, who had not been in on the conversation, and\nwithout mentioning \"disks\" asked her what she saw. She stated that she saw\nthe same things we did, which seemed to prove to us that it was not our\nimagination.\"\n\nIn addition to the above, STEVENS stated, off the record, that he was\nrather disappointed in SMITH and all the publicity he was getting. He\nthought that SMITH was probably \"grand-standing\" some, and that as far as\nhe, STEVENS, was concerned, he was not going to be interviewed by any re-\nporters, or go on the radio, etc. He stated that he was glad to talk to\na Navy representative about it, or to any other government official, and\nhelp in any way he could, but he certainly didn't want to be bothered with\na lot of interviews with newspapers and radio stations. STEVENS seemed to\nthe writer to be a very level headed, sensible man, and not in favor of a\nlot of publicity, whereas SMITH, although a sensible man and all, seemed to\nbe more in favor of all the publicity he was getting.\n\n- end -\n\n- 3 -\n\n99"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Incident\nLAF 1208 I\n16 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n1. On 12 July 1947, Captain Smith, of the United Airlines, was interviewed at the Boise Municipal Airport, Boise, Idaho. Captain Smith was passing through Boise on a schedule flight at the time and had a 20 minute stop-over. Captain Smith reiterated the statements originally made by him to the press as to what he had seen in the late evening of July 4th, when 8 minutes out of Boise on the route to Seattle, Washington. It is the opinion of the interviewer that due to the position Captain Smith occupies, that he, Captain Smith, would have to be very strongly convinced that he actually saw flying disks before he would open himself for the ridicule attached to a report of this type.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFRANK M. BROWN, S/A, CIC 4th AF"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HEADQUARTERS, ARMY AIR FORCES\nWASHINGTON\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO:\n\n16 July 1947\n\nTO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN\n\nI, Major Archie B. Browning, AC, do hereby swear, this date, that the following statements are true to the best of my knowledge:\n\n'On 6 July 1947, while flying from Ogden, Utah, to Kansas City, Missouri, at 10000 ft in a B-25, I noticed a very bright object low and to my left, approximately 10 miles away. Time was 1:45 P.M., and position approximately 100 miles west of Kansas City. My first impression was that it was the top of a water tank. After checking my position on the map I again looked to my left (elapsed time 5 seconds). A round, disc shaped object, very bright and silvery colored, seemed to be flying one to two miles off my left wing at 11 oclock at 11000 ft. The brightness of the object which I would estimate at 30-50 ft. in diameter, was very great. It seemed to be traveling in same direction at same rate of speed (210 MPH until I started to turn into it, then it completely disappeared. Weather conditions at that time were CAVU.'\n\nARCHIE B. BROWNING\nMajor, Air Corps\n\nHis office is assigned to AC/AS-1, Pentagon Phone 73852\n\n(See attached diagram)\n\nReceived AFBIR-CO 16 July 47\n\nADDRESS REPLY TO: COMMANDING GENERAL, ARMY AIR FORCES, WASHINGTON 25, D. C."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"After having been advised of my rights and privileges under the 26th Article of War, I, James H. Burniston, Captain, Air Corps, 0-657517, Second Air Transport Wing (Provisional), Fairfield-Suisun Army Air Base, Fairfield, California, do hereby make this voluntary statement to Captain William J. Frazier, Jr., and Sgt. Tommy Stewart, whom I know to be members of the Intelligence Office. I make the following statement of my own free will, not under duress, promise of reward or immunity.\n\nOn Sunday, July the sixth, at Fairfield-Suisun Army Air Base, while in the company of my wife, Mrs. James H. Burniston, I saw an object traveling from northwest to southeast at an estimated height of 10,000 feet or above at an excessive rate of speed estimated to be faster than any type of aircraft seen by me flown at that approximate altitude. This object was in sight for approximately sixty seconds, during which time it traveled approximately three-quarters the distance of the visible sky. No shape or definite color could be distinguished, the object rolled from side to side three times in its path across the sky. At one time the top of the object could be seen, then the sun reflected strongly from its surface in a flash, and at other times the bottom of the object could be seen, with no reflection from the sun. The estimated size at that height could be compared to that of an aircraft of the type C-54. Between viewing the top of the object and what appeared to be the bottom, there was a period when it was hard to see, or it would almost disappear.\n\nAs far as shape is concerned, there was no way of recognizing shape due to the speed of the object and its motion through the air. Sight of this object was lost when it disappeared at an angle of about thirty degrees above the earth's surface.\n\nI cannot attribute any sound to this object, because of the noise of a distant aircraft engine.\n\nThe approximate time was verified by my wife as being less than one minute, during which time it was in sight.\n\nAs to the identity of this object, it was not the shape of any type aircraft known to the undersigned. There was no shape of wings or fuselage. The object was noticed at first by the sun's reflecting off its surface and then the speed at which it was traveling.\n\nJames H. Burniston\nCaptain, Air Corps\n\nReceived AFBIR-CO 23 July 47\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CIVIL AIR PATROL\nAUXILIARY OF THE U.S. ARMY AIR FORCES\nWISCONSIN WING HEADQUARTERS\n161 W. WISCONSIN AVENUE\nMILWAUKEE 3, WIS.\n\n7 July 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Report on Flying Saucers.\n\nTO: Commanding General\n32d AAF Base Unit\nBolling Field\nWashington, D. C.\n\n1. Following are statistics regarding reports by four witnesses while in flight in two airplanes.\n\n2. Weather CAVU. Visibility exceptionally good. Scattered altocumulus 6000 feet.\n\n3. First report: time 1145 hours CST. Alt. of observers 800 feet above the ground. Altitude of saucer 4000 feet MSL. Observed period - First sighted over Koshkonong, Wisconsin. Flight was observed from town of Koshkonong to Elkhorn, Wisconsin. This flight covered twenty-five (25) miles in fifteen (15) seconds, which is a speed of six thousand (6000) miles per hour.\n\n4. Second report: Time 1430 hours CST. Altitude of observers thirty-five hundred feet (3500) MSL. Altitude of saucer twenty-five hundred feet (2500). Observation period. Observers at East Troy, Wisconsin, flight observed from Eagle, Wisconsin to Muskego, Wisconsin. This flight covered twenty-two (22) miles in twenty (20 seconds, which is a speed of three thousand nine hundred sixty (3960) miles per hour.\n\n5. Flight maneuvers: First observation-saucer descended vertically edgewise through altocumulus clouds, stopped at four thousand (4000) feet and assumed horizontal position and proceeded in horizontal flight from a horizontal position for fifteen (15) seconds covering twenty-five (25) miles and again stopped and disappeared. S second observation: Observed in horizontal flight in a horizontal attitude for a period of twenty (20) seconds covering twenty-two (22) miles. By the time the pilot had removed his camera from the glove compartment of his plane, the saucer disappeared and again reappeared approximately ten (10) miles farther along its course after six (6) seconds making its final disappearance.\n\n6. The first two observers were an instructor and a student, having just taken off from Elkhorn Airport. The second two observers, one Capt. R. J. Southey, Wing Supply Officer and a passenger.\n\nJohn D. Schindler, Jr.\nMaj. Air Corps, AAF-CAP Liaison Officer"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WAR DEPARTMENT\nCLASSIFIED MESSAGE CENTER\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL IVI\nPRIORITY\n\nPARAPHRASE NOT REQUIRED. HANDLE AS CONFIDENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE PER PARAS 511 and 60a (4) AR 380-5\n\nFrom: CG SBAMA San Bernadino Calif\n\nTo: CG AAF Wash DC attn AC/AS 2, Counter Intelligence Division; CG Sixth Army, Attn: AC/S, G 2; CG Hq AMC thru Sacramento AMA, Calif attn Chief Security Section\n\nDTG: 102359Z 10 July 1947\n\nSpot report.\n\nOn 8 July 47 at approximately 1550 PST Alvin E Moorman 1st Lieut ACC 196 Ftr Sq, while flying routine test mission in CNG P 51 at 20,000 feet indicated, sighted a flat object of light reflecting nature which appeared to be without vertical fin or any visible wings with apparent depth of a P 51 airplane at approximately 35,000 feet altitude and approximate location of 34 degrees 5 minutes latitude 117 degrees 30 minutes west longitude. Object was in sight for approximately 30 seconds. Object was again sighted at 15505 PST at approximately 50000 feet altitude and over Mount Baldy approximate location of 34 degrees 20 minutes latitude-117 degrees 47 minutes west longitude.\n\nPilot attempted to keep object in sight but was unable to do so. Speed of P 51 approximately 300 mph and climbing. March Field and other bases in area were contacted and reported none of their ships in the air.\n\nACTION: AAF\nINFO: ID, P&O, Spec Wp, R&D\nCM IN 1870 (12 Jul 47) DTG 102350Z ws\nCONFIDENTIAL\nACTION COPY COPY NO. 13\nTHE MAKING OF AN EXACT COPY OF THIS MESSAGE IS FORBIDDEN"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Marked on map\n\nArstrie B 73657\n\"Mr. Browning - A-1 officer branch NW of Topeka (Clay Center - Kansas)\nFlying @ 10M' @ 90° B-25 @ 200 mph\nRise @ 170° a little higher\nWhen first seen he thought it was a water tower; - about a mile away it looked like a flying wing except it was flying vertically and almost completely round. No smoke, no fire, brste bright it almost hurt his eye\n\nThen he turned toward it and it disappeared almost immediately. He believes it must have been supersonic because of speed at which it disappeared.\n\nThis Co. pilot was doing at the time and by the time he was awake the object disappeared.\n\nOriginal reaction was to not recognize it, but it came up so fast, then appeared to stop, then disappeared.\n\nLanded at Kansas City 1400 hrs Central Time. This took place approx 1315"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FROM: CG ATLD ATC FORT TOTTEN, N.Y.\nTIME AND DATE FILED: 142323Z JULY 1947\nTO: CG ATC ATTN CHIEF OF STAFF\n\nMESSAGE FROM NEWFOUNDLAND BASE COMMAND SUBJECT QUOTE FLYING DISCS UNQUOTE GIVES FOLLOWING SUMMARY OF INTERVIEW WITH IRIC KEARSEY CMA NEWFOUNDLAND CONSTABULARY CLN CONSTABLE REPORTED SEEING FOUR EGG SHAPE PHOSPHORUS COLOR DISCS ABOVE GRAND FALLS NEWFOUNDLAND AT TWO THREE THREE ZERO HOURS LOCAL TIME NINE JULY AND A SINGLE DISC ONE ZERO MINUTES LATER PD AT FIRST APPEARANCE ACCORDING TO KEARSEY FOUR DISCS WERE CLOSE TOGETHER IN ABLE LINE A TRAIL FORMATION MOVING EAST PARALLEL TO GROUND PD SINGLE DISC LESS CLEAR BUT TRAVELING SAME DIRECTION PD KEARSEY WOULD ROUGHLY ESTIMATE ALTITUDE OF DISCS AT THREE ZERO THOUSAND FEET SEMICLN APPARENTLY MOVING VERY FAST AS THEY DISAPPEARED IN ABLE FEW SECONDS PD KEARSEY SAID SHAPE OF DISC WAS LIKE BARREL HEAD OR EGG SEMICLN BLACK SPOTS ON TAILEND SEMICLN NO SMOKE TRAIL SEMICLN AND HERE REPORTED THAT ANOTHER OBSERVER COMPARED SHAPE OF DISCS TO THREE LEAF PD END OF COMMUNICATION FROM NEWFOUNDLAND BASE COMMAND PD ESTABLISHED BY INTERVIEWER CMA NONCOM IN CHARGE REPEATER STATION GRAND FALLS CMA THAT CAVU WAS WEATHER AT TIMES INDICATED\n\nATC CM-IN 10044\n\n14\nCONFIDENTIAL\nReceived AFBIR-CO 15 July"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\nCOPY\nINCOMING CLASSIFIED MESSAGE\nFROM: STEPHENVILLE, NEWFOUNDLAND PRIORITY\nTIME AND DATE FILED: 151915Z JULY 1947\nTO: CG HQ ATC WASH 25 DC ATTN AC/S INTELLIGENCE INFO CG ATLD ATC FT TOTTEN LI NY CG NBC FT PEPPERELL APO 862 C/O PM NEW YORK FROM CO 1388TH AAF BU\nIN REPLY CITE: HFX 0215\n\nFOR INTELLIGENCE PD ONE FLYING DISC, SIGHTED 2000Z 10 JULY 47, OVER HARMON FIELD, NEWFOUNDLAND, AT APPROXIMATELY 10000 FEET, COURSE: NORTH NORTH EAST PD WEATHER: CLEAR WITH SCATTERED CUMULUS AT 8-10000 FEET PD COLOR: SILVERY PD DISC WAS FIRST SIGHTED ABOUT 6 MILES SOUTH SOUTH WEST FROM HARMON FIELD BY MR MERRIMAN, TWA REPRESENTATIVE AND MR WOODRUFF, PAA REPRESENTATIVE PD DISC APPEARED ABOUT THE SAME SPAN AS C-54 AT 10000 FEET, WAS CIRCULAR IN SHAPE LIKE WAGONS WHEEL, DISC SEEMED TO CUT THE CLOUDS OPEN AS IT PASSED THRU AND LEFT A BLUISH BLACK TRAIL APPROXIMATELY FIFTEEN MILES LONG PD TRAIL WAS SIMILAR TO THE BEAM SEEN AFTER A HIGH POWERED LANDING LIGHT OR SEARCH LIGHT IS SWITCHED OFF PD KODACHROME PICTURES WERE TAKEN AND ARE BEING DEVELOPED STATE SIDE PD PHOTOS WILL BE FORWARDED AS SOON AS THEY ARE RECEIVED BY MR WOODRUFF END\n\nMay Kimball 16/7/47\nX-0051\n15\nRESTRICTED Received AFBIR-CO 16 July 47"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MESSAGEFORM\nMESSAGE CENTER NO. CR-1\nTRANSMITTING MEANS\nCRYPTOGRAPH OR CLEAR TEXT\nCALLS V STA. SER. NO. NR\nPRECEDENCE PRIORITY\nDATE-TIME GROUP 1221482 July 47\nGROUP COUNT 88\nSPACE ABOVE FOR SIGNAL CENTER ONLY\nFROM: (Originator) FINYN 59th AACS Group Elmendorf Alaska\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION CONFIDENTIAL\nPRECEDENCE FOR ACTION INFORMATION\nORIGINAL MESSAGE\nREFERS TO ANOTHER MESSAGE IDENTIFICATION CLASSIFICATION\nACTION TO: CONAS ATTN ASST CHIEF STAFF INTELLIGENCE\nINFORMATION TO:\n\nOBJECT RESEMBLING A GRAYYISH BALLOON APPROXIMATELY ONE ZERO FEET IN DIAMETER OBSERVED FROM ELMENDORF FIELD FLYING IN NORTHWEST DIRECTION FOLLOWING CONTOUR OF MOUNTAINS FIVE MILES AWAY PD OBJECT FLYING ALTITUDE ONE FIVE ZERO ZERO FEET ESTIMATING ONE ZERO ZERO MILES PER HOUR IT WAS OBSERVED PARALLELING THE COURSE OF CHARLIE DASH FOUR SEVEN LANDING NORTHWEST INTO TWO ZERO MILE PER HOUR WIND PD OBJECT WAS OBSERVED ONE TWO ZERO FOUR THREE ZERO ZEBRA FOR SEVERAL MINUTES BY MAJOR GRAHM THIS HEADQUARTERS SEVERAL OFFICERS FROM ALASKAN DEPARTMENT SUBSTANTIATED HIS STORY PD\n\nCOPY\n\nReceived AFBIR-CO 14 July 47\n\nParaphrase not required. Handle as CONFIDENTIAL correspondence per paragraphs 511 and 60a (4), AR 380-5, 15 August 1946.\n\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION CONFIDENTIAL\nAUTHORIZATION\nWD AGO FORM 11-168\n16\n168"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MESSAGEFORM\nMESSAGE CENTER NO. CR 97\nTRANSMITTING MEANS ROUTINE\nCRYPTOGRAPH OR CLEAR TEXT\nCALLS V\nSTA. SER. No. NR\nPRECEDENCE CONFIDENTIAL\nTRANSMISSION INSTRUCTIONS\nORIGINATOR\nDATE-TIME GROUP 120047Z July 47\nGROUP COUNT 8R\nACTION\nINFORMATION\nEXEMPT\nOPERATING SIGNALS\nSPACE ABOVE FOR SIGNAL CENTER ONLY\nFROM: (Originator) 59th AACS Group FINYN Elmendorf Alaska\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION CONFIDENTIAL\nACTION TO: CONAS ATTN ASSISTANT CHIEF OF STAFF INTELLIGENCE\nPRECEDENCE FOR ACTION INFORMATION\nORIGINAL MESSAGE\nREFERS TO ANOTHER MESSAGE IDENTIFICATION CLASSIFICATION\nINFORMATION TO:\nOBJECT RESEMBLING AN ALUMINUM COLORED BALLOON ABOUT THREE FEET IN DIAMETER WAS REPORTED SEEN AT AN UNDETERMINED ALTITUDE FLYING AT A GREAT SPEED IN A NORTH TO SOUTH DIRECTION PD OBSERVATION WAS MADE IN VICINITY OF ELMENDORF FIELD AT ONE ONE TWO ONE ZERO ZERO ZEBRA BY COLONEL PERRY AND MAJOR GEYSER THIS HEADQUARTERS PD\nCOPY\nReceived AFBIR-10 14 July 47\nParaphrase not required. Handle as CONFIDENTIAL correspondence per paragraphs 51i and 60a (4), AR 380-5, 15 August 1946.\nSECURITY CLASSIFICATION CONFIDENTIAL ORIGINATING AGENCY\nAUTHORIZATION SIGNATURE\nSYMBOL DATE-TIME GROUP OFFICIAL TITLE PAGE OF\nWD AGO FORM 11-168 This form supersedes WD AGO Form 11-168, 23 Aug 44, and WD AGO Form 801, 12 Mar 43, which are obsolete."} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\nJuly 21, 1947\nDepartment of Army Intelligence\nWashington 25, D.C.\n39 E. Main St.\nFrostburg, Maryland\nEdward A. Plummer"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"a - This is an entirely new type of aircraft or\nb - It is a high powered jet propelled unit with a print job designed to hide the tail assembly and wing tips, since neither were in evidence.\nA check of aircraft in this area at the time specified should determine and possibly answer this mystery.\nIf possible, I should like very much to know the answer.\nHoward A. Zimmer"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Package received from Sheriff Merle T. Wilmoth, Watseka, Ill. His letter states the instrument in the package was found by a farmer at Danforth, Ill. It landed in the middle of a section of his farm land and burned weeds 2½ feet tall to fine ash an area of 1½ feet in diam. around where the object dropped.\nThe instrument consists of:\n(a) Plaster of paris body having an oval cavity thru it.\n(b) A power microphone which screws over one end of the oval cavity. The power microphone carried the name, \"Nathaniel Baldwin Inc.\" Salt Lake City, Utah. Pat May 10 1910 & Sept 14, 1916. Pat Nos 957403 (second number not readable)\n(c) A small \"Polymat\" filter condenser.\n(d) Two bakelite cylinders to which is attached a net work of fine copper wire. These were obviously coils and the impact has torn the wire from the core. (Our radio section definitely states that this is old stuff, or the coils were used quite some time ago, since having been replaced by smaller more efficient coils)\n(e) A piece of metal having magnetic properties obviously broken off the power microphone as a result of the impact.\nThe plaster of paris body was broken up by the impact but some of the pieces were held together by wire reinforcement inside the plaster of paris.\nMrs. Whedon 3B 274 Ext 73909 (Jig C) was shown this object by Mr. Zimmer of the FBI. Mrs Whedon claims she knew what it was, but couldn't tell Zimmer.\nMayo Utah\nMr. Boggs 7/4/53"} {"doc_id":"cd5325bf48a719ac","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Mr. Moxom, Regional Office No. 1, N.Y.\nFROM : Mr. Wright, WBAS, Richmond, Va.\nSUBJECT: \"Flying Disks\".\n\nDATE: 7/16/47\n\nWe hesitate to make this report concerning our pilot balloon observations in regards to a flying disk because of the considerable national skepticism regarding the subject at present. However, local newspapers inform us that the U. S. Government admits no authority for such a ship or object and for its flights. Then we must assume this strange object to be foreign. Therefore, we submit this report for your information. If sighted again, we wonder if it would be a good idea to drop the balloon and instead make observations on this disk.\n\nMr. Minczewski has observed this strange metallic disk on three occasions through the theodolite while making his pibal observation during the last six months. Miss Baron has reported observing it on one occasion. Miss Baron's report agrees with Mr. Minczewski's observations except as to the color-which she reported as a dull metallic luster.\n\nMr. Minczewski last observed this disk in April 1947 at the 1100E Pibal Observation when the balloon was at 15 thousand feet. The disk was followed for 15 seconds, apparently moving on level flight from east to west to the far north of the station. The object was a metallic like Chrome-shaped something like an ellipse with a flat level bottom and a dome like-round top. The disk appeared below the balloon, was much larger in size in the instrument, and shined like silver. It was impossible to estimate the height or speed of the disk except that it appeared to be moving rather rapidly. Miss Baron observed the disk when her balloon was at about 27 thousand feet. All days observed were either clear or with very few clouds and good visibility.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nGeorge A. Wright"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense Intelligence Reference Document\n\nDefense Futures\n\n01 November 2010\n\nICOD: 20 July 2010\n\nDIA-08-1011-005\n\nUltracapacitors as Energy and Power Storage Devices for Commercial and Military Applications\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nUltracapacitors as Energy and Power Storage Devices for Commercial and Military Applications\n\nThe Defense Intelligence Reference Document provides nonsubstantive but authoritative reference information related to intelligence topics or methodologies.\n\nPrepared by:\n\nTechnology Warning Division (DWO-4)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthors:\n\nAAP Person 84, AAP Person 85\n\n(U) COPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one of a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2010 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: JUIAF - DI/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington D.C. 20340-5100\n\ni\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nSummary ........................................................................................iv\n\nChapter 1: Concept Overview ........................................................ 1\n\nBatteries and Ultracaps ........................................................... 3\n\nHistory ........................................................................................ 5\n\nChapter 2: Materials Technology ................................................... 8\n\nElectrolytes ............................................................................... 8\n\nElectrodes ................................................................................... 9\n\nChapter 3: Applications ................................................................. 13\n\nElectronics and Telecommunications ..................................... 13\n\nIndustrial ................................................................................... 13\n\nTransportation ........................................................................... 14\n\nAerospace ................................................................................. 15\n\nChapter 4: Recent Developments ................................................. 17\n\nCNTs and Advanced Carbons ................................................. 17\n\nThin Films ................................................................................. 20\n\nMagnetic Capacitors ................................................................ 21\n\nChapter 5: Future Developments ................................................. 25\n\nChapter 6: Conclusions ................................................................ 27\n\nChapter 7: Endnotes ..................................................................... 28\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Ultracaps in Various Configurations. ....................... 1\nFigure 2. Operation of an Ultracapacitor ............................... 3\nFigure 3. Ragone Plot ............................................................. 5\nFigure 4. Electrolytic Capacitor as Designed and Patented by SOHIO ..................... 5\nFigure 5. Activated Carbon Porosity ..................................... 10\nFigure 6. Ultracapacitor Use in a Forklift ............................ 14\nFigure 7. CNT Forest ............................................................ 18\nFigure 8. Transmission Electron Microscope Image of Graphene ......................... 19\nFigure 9. Relationship Between Average Pore Size and Normalized Specific Capacitance ........................................................ 20\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 10. CDC Synthesis and Electrochemical Test Cell Preparation Schematic. 21\nFigure 11. Volumetric Capacitance of the Films in (A) TEABF4 and (B) H2SO4...... 21\nFigure 12. MCap Structure.. ....................................................................... 22\nFigure 13. Preliminary MCap Test Results.. ........................................................ 23\nFigure 14. Summary Chart of MCap Results to Date.. .......................................... 23\nFigure 15. Specific Energy and Estimated Costs vs. fGMC ...................................... 24\nFigure 16. Evolution of Ultracapacitors ............................................................... 26\n\nTables\n\nTable 1: Contrasting Properties of Batteries and Ultracapacitors. .......................... 4\nTable 2: Manufacturers of Ultracapacitors ............................................................. 7\nTable 3: Properties of Various Electrolytes Used in Ultracapacitors. ...................... 8\nTable 4: Properties of Various Materials used in Electrochemical Capacitor Electrode Materials ..........................................................................9\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nUltracapacitors as Energy and Power Storage Devices for Commercial and Military Applications\n\nSummary\n\nUltracapacitors (ultracaps) are energy storage devices capable of extremely rapid charge and discharge rates with the ability to be cycled hundreds of thousands of times. These unique capabilities make ultracaps attractive for a number of applications. The advantages over lithium ion batteries are somewhat mitigated by the fact that they have less than 10% of the specific energy (Wh/kg) and require a power converter to regulate their voltage. The high capacitance is achieved by the enormously high surface area of the carbon electrodes compared to planar electrolytic capacitors. Ultracapacitors are commonly used to provide voltage stabilization of power converters and to supplement peak-power loading of electrical systems. Their application has expanded from electronics and telecommunications to industrial load leveling and transportation. Due to their durability, their use in aerospace has been for munitions fusing and missile power load leveling. Ultimately, application will be pulsed power storage and delivery for electric propulsion and directed-energy weapons.\n\nRecent developments in ultracapacitors have focused on different active materials and electrode designs. By using advanced carbons, polymers, and metal oxides, increased power density and energy density can be achieved. Oxide-based thin-film ultracaps have demonstrated high-performance energy and power density, approaching theoretical limits. Carbon nanotubes and advanced carbons have been used as additives to and solely as electrode materials. Nanostructured materials and thin-film manufacturing process improvements will generate breakthroughs in mass production. Magnetic capacitors are a recent development, manufactured using semiconductor processes on silicon wafers. They possess a different storage mechanism and will transform energy storage and pulsed-power applications. Ultracapacitors are reaching widespread adoption and they are now available to support electronics through transportation. New advancements in materials will enable high-energy density devices with exceptional power capabilities.\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 1: Concept Overview\nUltracapacitors, also known as supercapacitors, hybrid capacitors, electrochemical capacitors, electrochemical double-layer capacitors, or ultracaps, are energy-storage platforms that offer energy storage capable of extremely rapid charge and discharge rates. Ultracapacitors also have the ability to be cycled hundreds of thousands of times. The phenomenal charge and discharge capabilities make them ideal for supporting volatile memory and computing applications, energy efficiency/capture processes, and high-power applications. Ultracaps store their charge in the electrical double layer between the electrode and the electrolyte. Charge storage is a physical mechanism rather than a chemical phase change, so these are theoretically capable of cycling an infinite number of times.2 One of the disadvantages of ultracaps can be a high self-discharge rate.3 The charge and discharge voltage output for an ultracap is a sloping linear curve, which allows for straightforward and accurate state-of-charge monitoring.4 The real advantage of an ultracapacitor is the ability to deliver or accept bursts of power in a short time.\nFigure 1. Ultracaps in Various Configurations.1\nUltracaps were introduced in 1966 and found initial use 12 years later as backup power devices for volatile memory and clocks. Over the last 30 years, numerous advances have been made that have led to many uses of ultracaps, from transportation to portable electronics and more. Ultracaps are becoming more affordable as activated carbon electrodes and manufacturing improvements have driven costs down. Several companies now make ultracapacitors to fill a broad spectrum of applications. Figure 1 shows a number of ultracaps with various capacities to fill a range of functions. Transportation, microelectronics, and aerospace markets are some of the many areas where ultracaps have become enablers. Advanced materials and improved cell designs will lead to improvements in both power density and energy density. The improved performance is expected to make ultracaps important components for efficient power leveling and high-power receiving and delivery. The unique signature of ultracapacitors must be understood for aerospace and military applications.\nAs an electrochemical capacitor, ultracapacitors store energy within the electric double layer formed at the interface between the electrode and electrolyte. In a conventional capacitor, the energy is stored by moving charge carriers from one plate to another, and the charge separation creates a potential. Voltage differentials in a conventional capacitor are dependent upon the dielectric material separating the plates. In the ultracap, the electrical double layer is the separation of charge in a vanishingly thin gap between two plates. Figure 2 depicts the components and basic design of the ultracap,\n1\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nshowing the electrochemical double layer responsible for the characteristic performance.5 The basic principles of operation have not changed with improved technologies, only the materials and cell design.\nThe two electrode plates are traditionally the same material, which is usually a carbonaceous material, such as activated carbon. Each layer is capable of storing a low voltage, and multiple layers serve to increase the potential. Individual cells are placed in series to create a higher voltage, in much the same manner as a battery. Recent advances in ultracapacitors have moved toward employing dissimilar electrodes, which create a higher potential; since the electrodes are now different, these are sometimes referred to as \"pseudo\" or hybrid capacitors. The pseudocapacitor uses a battery-like electrode to replace one of the carbon electrodes, yielding a high-energy-storage electrode and a highly capacitive electrode within the same system.\nThe capacitance of an ultracapacitor can be determined by the Helmholtz equation (equation 1), which describes the relationship between the electrolyte and the electrode:\nC = εA/d (1)\nHere, ε is the dielectric constant of the electrolyte, A is the available surface area, and d represents the distance between the center of the double layer and the electrode surface. Increasing the double-layer capacitance in an ultracap is generally accomplished by either manipulating the electrode (carbon) surface area or the electrolyte. Energy density (equation 2) is the product of the capacitance and the square of the voltage:\nE = ½ CV2 (2)\nStrategies for increasing the stored energy target improvements to both the electrodes and the electrolyte. Changing from an aqueous electrolyte to an organic electrolyte with a higher dielectric constant will increase the voltage from approximately 1 volt to more than 2.5 volts. Increasing the surface area of the electrode is another approach to increasing storage capability. There is a tradeoff between porosity and surface area that must be considered when constructing an electrode with an extremely high surface area. An activated carbon approaching a measured surface area of 3,000 m2/g may have less than half that as accessible or useable area.6 Increasing the pore size sacrifices surface area but provides more accessible material. By providing more interfacial area between the electrode and the electrolyte, a better electrochemical double layer can be produced, yielding a better ultracapacitor.\n2\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 2. Operation of an Ultracapacitor. A simple ultracapacitor utilizes two similar electrodes (typically carbon) with a separator and electrolyte to create the electrochemical double layer that governs operation.7\nBATTERIES AND ULTRACAPS\nFor an ultracapacitor, energy is stored within the electrical double layer, which is a physical storage mechanism. Contrast this with batteries, where charge and discharge take place through a chemical (Faradaic) reaction. Since charge is stored physically, there is no direct degradation mechanism that limits cycle life. Side reactions do occur, which prevents infinite cycle life, but ultracaps can often be cycled tens of millions of times.8 Batteries store their energy through chemical reaction; consequently, cycle life is much shorter and heavily dependent on the depth of discharge. In contrast, there are no limitations to the discharge depth with an ultracapacitor. Table 1 addresses some of the general characteristics of batteries and ultracapacitors, which can help to determine the preferred system for a specified application. The values are based upon 2008 data, so some numbers are outdated, but the relative values remain consistent. There are now hybrid devices that blur the boundaries further by introducing a battery-like electrode to replace one of the two identical electrodes in a traditional ultracapacitor.\n3\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nTable 1: Contrasting Properties of Batteries and Ultracapacitors9\nCharacteristic State of the Art | Lithium Ion Battery | Ultracapacitor\nCharge time | ~3-5 minutes | ~1 second\nDischarge time | ~3-5 minutes | ~1 second\nCycle life | <5,000 @ 1C rate | >500,000\nSpecific Energy (Wh/kg) | 100-200 | 5\nSpecific power (kW/kg) | 0.5 -1 | 5-10\nCycle efficiency (%) | <50% to >90% | <75 to >95%\nCost/Wh | $1-2/Wh | $10-20/Wh\nCost/kW | $75-150/kW | $25-50/kW\nThe voltage curve for an ultracapacitor is proportional to the depth of discharge, whereas batteries deliver a relatively constant voltage over a long discharge period. The sloping voltage curve of an ultracap can be advantageous for state-of-charge determinations. However, this is also responsible for the decreased energy density available in an ultracapacitor. For applications requiring energy to be delivered over a longer time scale or delivered at a constant voltage, the relatively flat voltage curve found in most batteries would be the preferred option. In instances where power is to be delivered or received quickly, or where many cycles are required, an ultracap is ideal.\nTo better understand the differences between batteries and ultracaps, it helps to think of batteries as storing watt-hours of energy and ultracaps as storing watts of power. A Ragone plot illustrates the distinctions by plotting power versus energy in a logarithmic scale. As can be seen in Figure 3, ultracaps make an excellent option where high power density is required. The times shown are rough estimates for a full charge or discharge, which are estimates to help understand the relationship between energy density and power density. Batteries have made significant improvements to power delivery recently, but batteries remain the high-energy-density solution. Ultracapacitors are often thought of as a stop-gap between conventional capacitors and batteries. Recent developments of hybrid capacitors have led to considerable progress toward higher energy density. However, there is a tradeoff between high energy density and high-power devices, and the distinctions between the two require consideration of application requirements when choosing the energy storage platform for a system. The differences between ultracaps and batteries do not make the two mutually exclusive. There are applications where either a battery or an ultracap is the preferred energy storage platform. Quite often, these two can be used together in systems to perform complementary roles.\n4\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 3. Ragone Plot. The graph illustrates the areas where ultracaps and batteries dominate in the power density versus energy density relationship.\nHISTORY\nThe concept of storing electrical energy in the electric double layer that is formed at the interface between an electrolyte and a solid has been known since the late 1800s. In 1966, Standard Oil Company of Ohio (SOHIO) invented the device in the format now commonly used, which forms the basis for hundreds of patents and thousands of journal articles. Figure 4 shows a drawing from the electrochemical double-layer device invented by SOHIO. NEC introduced the SuperCapacitorTM in 1978 under license from SOHIO.\nFigure 4. Electrolytic Capacitor as Designed and Patented by SOHIO.\nFrom this point on, ultracaps have rapidly evolved through several generations of designs. In the 1980s, Matsushita Electric Company developed a method of manufacturing ultracapacitors with improved electrodes. Initially, they were used as backup power devices for volatile clock chips and complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) computer memories. As the technology became more understood, more and more applications were developed for ultracaps. Many other applications have emerged over the past 30 years, including wireless communication, power quality, and improved energy efficiency through regenerative energy capture processes, as found in hybrid electric vehicles.10\n5\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nInitial ultracaps used aqueous electrolytes made with Al2(SO4)3 (aluminum sulfate), H2SO4 (sulfuric acid), or KOH (potassium hydroxide) . While these electrolytes have excellent ionic conductivity, the operating voltage is limited to 1.2 volts using carbon electrodes. Organic electrolytes have lower ionic conductivity, but the higher dielectric constant increases the nominal cell voltage up to as high as 3 volts. Carbon has been used as a high-surface-area electrode material since the inception of the electrochemical capacitor. It is still the material of choice for many ultracapacitors; one of the primary reasons is the low cost of carbon materials. However, there are many types of carbon that are available for use as an electrode material. In addition to carbonaceous electrodes, metal oxides and conductive polymers are finding increasing use in ultracap design. Advancements in the understanding of the electric double-layer and ultracapacitor behavior have led to better materials utilization and, consequently, improved devices.\n\nEarly electrochemical capacitors were rated at a few volts and had capacitance values measured from less than one farad up to several farads. Today cells range in size from small devices with exceptional pulse-power performance in the millifarad range up to devices rated at several kilofarads. There are even some specialized ultracapacitor cells now in production that have ratings of more than 100 kF. The technology is experiencing increasingly broader use, replacing batteries in some cases and in others complementing their performance. Ultracap technology has grown into an industry with sales of several hundred million dollars per year that is poised for rapid growth in the near term due to expansion of power quality needs and the emerging energy management/conservation applications.11\n\nAdvancements in ultracapacitors have led to numerous devices from an array of manufacturers. Table 2 compares the various products on the market, showing voltage, capacity, power density, and additional energy-storage characteristics. Ultracaps have moved away from aqueous electrolytes and are typically organic electrolytes due to the increased voltage performance. Electrodes vary from carbon/carbon systems to hybrid systems using metal oxides or conductive polymers paired with a carbon electrode. Packaging and sizes of ultracapacitors covers a large range as these are now used from cellular communications and small electronics to power delivery and management for seaport cranes. Ultracapacitor technology development is focusing on delivering better energy density, and this is being approached by improved carbon electrodes, better electrolytes, and alternative electrodes that provide pseudocapacitive behavior, including battery-like electrodes.12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 2: Manufacturers of Ultracapacitors13\n\nDevice | V rated | C (F) | R (mOhm) | RC (sec) | Wh/kg (1) | W/kg (95%) (2) | W/kg Match. Imped. | Wgt. (kg) | Vol. lit.\nMaxwell* | 2.7 | 2,885 | .375 | 1.08 | 4.2 | 994 | 8,836 | .55 | .414\nMaxwell | 2.7 | 605 | .90 | .55 | 2.35 | 1,139 | 9,597 | .20 | .211\nApowercap** | 2.7 | 55 | 4 | .22 | 5.5 | 5,695 | 50,625 | .009 | ---\nApowercap** | 2.7 | 450 | 1.4 | .58 | 5.89 | 2,574 | 24,595 | .057 | .045\nNess | 2.7 | 1,800 | .55 | 1.00 | 3.6 | 975 | 8,674 | .38 | .277\nNess | 2.7 | 3,640 | .30 | 1.10 | 4.2 | 928 | 8,010 | .65 | .514\nNess (cyl.) | 2.7 | 3,160 | .4 | 1.26 | 4.4 | 982 | 8,728 | .522 | .38\nAsahi Glass (pc) | 2.7 | 1,375 | 2.5 | 3.4 | 4.9 | 390 | 3,471 | .210 (est.) | .151\nPanasonic (pc) | 2.5 | 1,200 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 2.3 | 514 | 4,596 | .34 | .245\nEPCOS | 2.7 | 3,400 | .45 | 1.5 | 4.3 | 760 | 6,750 | .60 | .48\nLS Cable | 2.8 | 3,200 | .25 | .80 | 3.7 | 1,400 | 12,400 | .63 | .47\nBatScap | 2.7 | 2,680 | .20 | .54 | 4.2 | 2,050 | 18,225 | .50 | .572\nPower Sys. (AC, pc) ** | 2.7 | 1,350 | 1.5 | 2.0 | 4.9 | 650 | 5,785 | .21 | .151\nPower Sys. (GC, pc) ** | 3.3 | 1,800 | 3.0 | 5.4 | 8.0 | 486 | 4,320 | .21 | .15\n | 3.3 | 1,500 | 1.7 | 2.5 | 6.0 | 776 | 6,903 | .23 | .15\nFuji Heavy Industry- hybrid (AC/GC) ** | 3.8 | 1,800 | 1.5 | 2.6 | 9.2 | 1,025 | 10,375 | .232 | .143\nJSR Micro (AC/GC)** | 3.8 | 1,000 | 4 | 4 | 11.2 | 900 | 7,987 | .113 | .073\n | | 2,000 | 1.9 | 3.8 | 12.1 | 1,038 | 9,223 | .206 | .132\n(1) Energy density at 400 W/kg constant power, Vrated - 1/2 Vrated\n(2) Power based on P=9/16*(1-EF)*V2/R, EF=efficiency of discharge\n* Except where noted, all the devices use acetonitrile as the electrolyte (pc = propylene carbonate)\nAC = Activated Carbon; GC = Graphitic Carbon\n** Laminated pouches; all other devices are packaged in metal containers\n\n7\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 2: Materials Technology\n\nThe standard electrochemical capacitor is made of two electrodes, an electrolyte, and a separator, packaged in either a metal container or a laminated pouch. Ultracapacitors are often packaged in a fashion similar to a typical battery configuration. The separator is an ultrathin material that allows ion transport but is electrically insulating. There are several polymer separators on the market that have the desired porosity needed to create fast ion transport. The electrodes are traditionally the same material in an ultracapacitor—this is in stark contrast to a battery. Electrodes are typically carbon; this is advantageous in making a cost-effective energy/power-storage device. Activated carbon has a very high surface area, vital to storing energy in the electrical double layer between the electrode and the electrolyte. This thin double layer is responsible for the impressive high-power-storage capabilities of the ultracapacitor. The electrolyte's resistivity and dielectric constant play a vital role in behavior of the double layer; consequently, the choice of electrolyte impacts performance.\n\nThe earliest electrochemical capacitors were introduced 30+ years ago; they were symmetric designs (two identical electrodes) in aqueous electrolyte. While these electrolytes have excellent ionic conductivity, the operating cell voltage was limited to ~1.2 V/cell and these had a nominal cell rating of ~0.9 volts. In the second generation of electrochemical capacitors, the use of organic electrolyte led to an increase of the rated cell voltage from about 0.9 V/cell to 2.3-2.7 V/cell. Today, ultracapacitors using an organic electrolyte are the most popular.14\n\nELECTROLYTES\n\nInitial ultracaps used aqueous electrolytes, saturated with Al2(SO4)3, or 30% concentrations of H2SO4 or KOH. While these electrolytes have excellent ionic conductivity, the operating voltage is limited to 1.2 volts using carbon electrodes. Improvements to ultracapacitor performance were made by transitioning from aqueous electrolytes to an organic medium. Organic electrolytes have lower ionic conductivity, but the higher breakdown potential increases the nominal cell voltage. An increase in cell voltage up to as high as 3 volts has been realized by use of an organic electrolyte. These electrolytes are typically an ammonium salt dissolved in an organic solvent, such as propylene carbonate or acetonitrile. Table 3 highlights the comparison between the various electrolytes used in ultracapacitors. Ionic liquids are beginning to become more common in ultracapacitors, as they allow for an increase in cell voltage to as high as 4 volts. These ionic liquids have a higher resistivity, especially at lower temperatures. The tradeoff in resistivity for voltage may be beneficial for some high-power applications.\n\nTable 3: Properties of Various Electrolytes Used in Ultracapacitors15\n\nElectrolyte | Density (gm/cm3) | Resistivity (Ohm-cm) | Cell Voltage\nKOH | 1.29 | 1.9 | 1.0\nSulfuric acid | 1.2 | 1.35 | 1.0\nPropylene carbonate | 1.2 | 52 | 2.5-3.0\nAcetonitrile | 0.78 | 18 | 2.5-3.0\nIonic liquid | 1.3-1.5 | 125 (25°C) 28 (100°C) | 4.0 3.25\n\n8\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nELECTRODES\n\nCarbon has been the optimal electrode material for ultracapacitors since their commercial introduction over 30 years ago. Pseudocapacitor systems use a combination of a carbon electrode and a battery-like electrode, such as a conductive polymer or a metal oxide. The high surface area of carbon makes it an extremely attractive option for ultracap electrodes. Carbon chemistry is quite well known, and high surface area and low cost ensures carbon's continued use for the near future. While carbon has been used in electrochemical systems for many years, there are many nuances that make its properties and performance vary significantly amongst the many types of carbon. The use of a carbon electrode makes ultracaps affordable for use in many systems. Activated carbon is readily available, can be made from many source materials, and is inexpensive. Materials science activities for electrodes are focused on improving the carbon electrodes and introducing alternative materials to create an asymmetric electrode.\n\nTypes of carbon can include activated carbon, carbon cloth, aerogels, porous carbon, carbon nanotubes, and graphene. The properties of carbon can change dramatically based upon processing, having a major impact to the porosity and active surface area. Activated carbon has an extremely high surface area, is inexpensive, and is produced at a global scale for use in a number of applications. For these reasons, activated carbon is the traditional carbon of choice for ultracapacitor applications. Recent advances in carbon materials development have led to a number of options for ultracapacitor electrodes. Table 4 demonstrates a number of electrode materials in use today and the corresponding performance of these ultracaps.\n\nTable 4: Properties of Various Materials Used in Electrochemical Capacitor Electrode Materials16\n\nMaterial | Density (g/cm3) | Electrolyte | F/g | F/cm3\nActivated Carbon | 0.7 | KOH / Organic | 160 / 100 | 112 / 70\nCarbon Cloth | 0.35 | KOH / Organic | 200 / 100 | 70 / 35\nAerogel Carbon | 0.6 | KOH / Organic | 75 / 125 | 84\nPorous Carbon from SiC | 0.7 | KOH / Organic | 175 / 100 | 122 / 70\nPorous Carbon from TiC | 0.5 | KOH / Organic | 220 / 120 | 110 / 60\nAnhydrous RuO2 | 2.7 | Sulfuric Acid | 150 | 405\nHydrous RuO2 | 2.0 | Sulfuric Acid | 650 | 1,300\nDoped Conductive Polymer | 0.7 | Organic | 450 | 315\n\n9\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nActivated carbons are synthesized by a heat treatment of carbon-rich organic precursors in a controlled atmosphere. This carbonization process can be performed from natural sources, such as fruit shells, wood, pitch, or coke. Activated carbons can also be produced from synthetic precursors, such as select polymers. The heat treatment process uses a controlled partial oxidation of the precursor combined with a high-temperature processing. The high-temperature processing can be done in an inert atmosphere, an oxidizing environment, or with a chemical modification. The activated carbons contain a distributed porous network throughout, as shown in Figure 5.17 These materials can have an extremely high surface area, upward of 3,000 m2/g, but process conditions to create activated carbons have little control over pore size distribution, resulting in incomplete utilization of the surface area. Carbon cloth electrodes use processing conditions similar to those used to create activated carbons. The advantage with a fabric composed of activated carbon is these materials are directly used as active electrodes, requiring no binder or additional processing. However, these tend to be expensive to produce, which has thus far limited their use to specialized applications.\n\nFigure 5 diagram: macropores >50nm; micropores <2nm; mesopores 2-50nm\n\nFigure 5. Activated Carbon Porosity. These can be produced with a distribution of pore sizes ranging from less than 2 nm to greater than 50 nm.\n\nContinued improvements to the carbon electrodes are expected to provide additional performance enhancement to ultracaps. Current research is leading toward carbon materials with higher specific capacitance (F/g). Improved materials, such as carbon nanotubes and tailored porous carbons show promise as the next generation of carbon materials. Graphene is another advanced carbon material that shows promise to providing increased capacitance. One of the key design issues revolves around improved understanding of the relationship between the carbon pore size and the electrolyte ion. The nanostructured materials allow fine tuning of the porous structure to increase capacitance.\n\nCarbon nanotubes (CNTs) are commonly produced as powders where they can be cast as a distributed network to form an electrode, and they can be used as an additive to increase conductivity. Additionally, CNTs can be grown as a \"forest,\" where the CNTs are grown perpendicular to a substrate. These forests can be used as is or can be modified or coated to change specific structural or electronic properties. CNTs are grown by a number of methods, but most methods used currently are a derivative of a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) process. The specific properties of the nanotubes are extremely tailorable. CNT length, diameter, the number of tubes, and the electronic properties can all be tailored by growth conditions. The catalysts used to grow CNTs can affect tube properties, as well as CNT temperature and precursor variables. Carbon nanotubes are finding utility in both battery and ultracapacitor applications, where they are used for conductivity enhancement and energy storage. Their capacitive behavior suggests they may have a fundamentally different storage mechanism than traditional carbon. Storage potential includes CNT outer walls, inner diameter, and interwall spaces\n\n10\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY of some CNT types. Carbon nanotubes have been a rich area of study for many applications, which has translated to a broad understanding of synthesis techniques to produce CNTs with tailorable properties. Graphene can be thought of as a sheet of graphite, either a single layer or a few layers thick. The two-dimensional nature of graphene leads to extremely high electron transport across the surface, interesting magnetic properties, high strength, and a large accessible surface area.18 Graphene is generally made by exfoliation/separation of graphite or grown by CVD processes. Derivations from both of these methods can produce single-layer graphene or few-layer graphene. These methods include, but are not limited to, CVD methods, epitaxial growth, solvothermal synthesis, micromechanical exfoliation, and colloidal synthesis.19 Graphene has generated an enormous amount of attention due to its potential for transforming electronics. A number of approaches to graphene synthesis are being used that consider purity, scalability, and cost. Carbide-derived carbons are a unique class of porous carbons with extremely fine control over pore size.20 These porous carbons are derived by chlorination of metal carbides at very high temperatures. At temperatures of 500–1000°C, metals and metalloids are removed as chlorides, leaving behind a finely tunable nanoporous carbon. These porous carbons have a pore-size distribution that is tunable within 0.05 nm. The extremely accurate tunability has allowed these systems to serve as a model for the relationship of pore size and capacitance, thereby allowing for design of materials to be tailored for maximum capacitance within a specific system. The local maximum in capacitance is dependent on the ion solvation sphere, which is a product of the electrolyte ion, solvent, and interaction with the pores of the electrode. These findings will lead to new electrode materials and designs. Activated carbon and other porous carbon derivatives are commonly used for symmetric ultracapacitors. Metal oxides such as ruthenium oxide and conductive polymers replace one of the electrodes to create an asymmetric system. Asymmetric electrodes greatly increase the storage capacity of ultracapacitors. These are a different class of capacitor, as they store their charge both in the electrical double layer and using a surface redox (faradaic) reaction (in the same manner as a battery). While these undergo electron transfer reactions, they behave in a capacitive fashion. Often termed pseudocapacitor, this class of materials includes a variety of metal oxides and conductive polymers. The capacitance of an asymmetric electrode is twice that of a symmetric design. The electron transfer electrode essentially has a fixed potential, whereas the potential of the carbon electrode changes with state of charge. Additional storage capacity arises from the higher working voltage, due to the different rest potentials of the different electrodes. Asymmetric electrodes are becoming increasingly common due to the increased energy-storage capability. As energy is proportional to the voltage squared, the higher operating voltage has profound effects on the capacity. Ruthenium oxide (RuO2) has been shown to give capacitance of as high as 1300 F/cm3. By comparison, carbonaceous materials in an aqueous electrolyte have a capacitance of 110-125 F/cm3. There are many additional metal oxides being investigated for insertion into the ultracapacitor system. Many of these have their roots in lithium ion battery cathode materials. As ultracaps gain wider acceptance, market size is increasing rapidly and is expected to grow at an increasing pace. Investigations are being conducted into alternative metal oxide systems to ensure that cost, supply, and performance can be met on a global scale. Manganese oxide (MnO2) and nickel metal oxides/hydroxides are 11 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY leading alternative candidates for asymmetric ultracaps. Using a pseudocapacitive design will most likely not be able to deliver the cycle life of a symmetric ultracap, but it may be possible to achieve tens of thousands of cycles out of a battery-like electrode. Better capacitance and higher operating voltage of the asymmetric electrode design allow ultracapacitors to begin approaching batteries in terms of energy density. Additional ultracapacitor improvements will come from materials and cell design. Cell design factors include optimization and assembly techniques. Thinner electrodes and current collectors will be one of the primary paths for better performance. Electrolytes that provide cell voltages of at least 3 volts will be standard. Improvements such as these will likely lead to improvements in commercially available ultracaps from 4 Wh/kg to 5-6 Wh/kg.21 12 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Chapter 3: Applications ELECTRONICS AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS The most straightforward application of an ultracapacitor is to stabilize dc voltages, which is where they have found widespread use. Areas where a dip in voltage may occur and negatively impact performance is another natural fit for ultracaps. Initially, they were used as backup power for clock chips and CMOS memory; now, they find utility in power smoothing, flash photography, and digital cameras. Flash for mobile phone cameras is an ever-increasing market. Nearly one billion phones equipped with cameras were sold in 2009. Ultracaps enable flash photography integrated with mobile communication. Today's market is driving toward electronics devices with multiple functions to eliminate the need for multiple specialized electronics that each performs one task. Integrating components into one electronic device requires the use of ultracapacitors to help stabilize the short power spikes from the individual components. Ultracaps also serve to reduce thermal loading from power dissipation. Ultracaps have found extensive application in wireless communication, where they are used in wireless data cards for GSM, GPRS, and WiMAX data transmission. The peak current required during data transmission can exceed what is available under USB or PC-card standards, and the excess current is delivered with an ultracapacitor. Automated meter reading is another application where ultracaps have become an integral component, as the power required to send and receive the meter information is handled by an ultracapacitor. The mobile telecomm industry is currently using these in a number of ways; it is likely that additional uses for ultracaps will spring up along with needs to balance power requirements for increasingly complex and multifunctional devices contained within smaller areas. INDUSTRIAL Industrial applications are becoming much more ubiquitous as ultracaps are being used as a platform to deliver a large amount of power quickly. These are becoming increasingly important in cranes, forklifts, elevators, and power tools. As an example, power is stored by an ultracapacitor in hybrid forklifts every time a loading fork descends. The stored power is then delivered to the forklift when heavy lifting is required. Figure 6 shows the power requirements for a hybrid forklift. The peak power pulses are areas where using an ultracap to deliver or to receive the power greatly improves the operational efficiency. The blue shaded area represents the power distribution handled by a fuel cell, and the tan regions above and below the blue area represents the output from and the input to the ultracapacitor, respectively.22 In cranes and elevators, a similar application is used. Peak power is supplied for lift operations by the ultracap. During descent of the elevator or lowering of the loaded crane, generated power can be used to recharge the ultracapacitor. Power tools are becoming increasingly disconnected from an outlet. Many of these cordless power tools require significant amounts of peak power, which many batteries cannot adequately supply. The ultracapacitor used in conjunction with a high energy battery supplies the pulse power required during heavy use. 13 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Lift truck operating profile Power (kW) Time (hr) Ultracapacitor output Peak power Fuel-cell output Regeneration Ultracapacitor input Source: General Hydrogen Figure 6. Ultracapacitor Use in a Forklift. Ultracaps provide energy storage upon descent of a load and deliver peak power to lift heavy loads in fuel cell powered forklifts.23 Grid storage management is gaining more visibility as energy conservation and efficiency are becoming increasingly important. Many utility power sources generate a relatively continuous supply of electricity. The generated power is matched to expected use statistics. Daytime use and nighttime rest periods can cause power shortages or generate unused power if not managed efficiently. This is especially true during the hot summer months or heat waves, where air conditioning loads can tax a system. Ultracapacitors can store excess power generated in the night, which can then be delivered when insufficient power is available to match the daytime needs. Distributed power sources such as wind and solar require a higher level of operational efficiency with a fluctuating power supply. Wind farms experience power fluctuations due to wind shear or lack thereof. These spikes in power generation may be wasted on a system ill-equipped to handle the burst of power delivered. During periods where wind may be lacking, ultracapacitors can be used to help create a more stabilized power supply. TRANSPORTATION Earliest uses of ultracapacitors were in motor startup for tanks and submarines. Early adoption by the military led to cost reductions, which was a critical enabler for incorporation into diesel trucks and railroad locomotives. Ultracapacitors are finding use in transportation in engine startup, braking systems, acceleration, and waste-energy harvesting. Ultracaps have been placed in rail cars to generate power for acceleration and recapture it during braking. In some cases, they are placed alongside the tracks, and the power management is hosted by the rail stations. The ability to absorb and discharge energy rapidly makes ultracapacitors far better than batteries for regenerative braking schemes. Most of these applications have been in public transportation. Regenerative braking can recuperate as much as 38% of the propulsion energy when used in an ultracap/battery hybrid configuration. Electric hybrid public buses were some of the first adopters of ultracapacitors for automotive transportation. These buses also use ultracaps for acceleration, which enables a much faster acceleration. 14 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY AEROSPACE Ultracapacitors are suitable for applications requiring large bursts of power for relatively short periods of time, with the ability to be recharged rapidly. Ultracapacitors are finding ubiquitous use in electronics and transportation, and there are a number of applications in aerospace ranging from backup power to high pulse-power delivery. The electronics systems in military vehicles require failsafe operation; ultracaps can be designed to provide a continuous power source in the event of a power interruption. Fire-control systems are another example where continuous power is required, including higher power capability. Airbags require a backup power source to ensure they are deployed as required with or without a powered system. Small portable communications systems have ultracaps for backup power and to retain memory. Memory retention is critical in many systems; for example, the bridge power used during a transfer from ground to onboard power in aircraft systems can be supplied by an ultracap. Ultracaps are excellent for stabilizing the power that is either delivered or received. For example, communication systems may require additional power during transmission, which can be offset by using an ultracap to supplement the system. Bus voltages may need peak current stabilization. The high-power capabilities of ultracaps make them advantageous for several systems. The fast discharge is ideal for delivering the significantly higher power required for starting cold engines. Active suspension systems in vehicles require bursts of power that are delivered in response to the terrain; an ultracap can store the necessary power, deliver as necessary, and recharge quickly. GPS-guided missiles and projectiles may use ultracapacitors to provide the power required for communication and navigation. High-power discharge for naval systems has been identified as an area where ultracaps are especially useful, often used in hybrid systems in tandem with high-energy batteries. Extremely high power delivery makes ultracapacitors a potential vehicle for delivering the power required for directed-energy weapons. As pseudocapacitive systems reach higher energy densities, along with improvements to the materials and cell composition, ultracapacitors will have capabilities of delivering large amounts of power in a very short time, contained within an increasingly smaller footprint. Signatures and Vulnerabilities As mentioned above, ultracapacitors could be important in the development of ultrawideband energy weapons. Previously, this market has been dominated by bulk acoustic semiconductor switch (BASS) devices, but by stringing several capacitors together in parallel, a more formidable discharge can be created. Because ultracapacitors have very high discharge rates, they will emit a distinctive broadband RF signature when discharged. A modest wideband receiver may be able to detect this discharge; its proximity will depend upon the construction of the target device. Furthermore, the architecture of such a device may yield a unique signature that, with the proper equipment, can be identified and certainly warrants further study. When employed in a particular electronic device, this signature may be altered by its immediate environment, and this may further give an indication of both the type of use and device employed. When searching for ultracaps in the field that are not in use, the large electrostatic potentials may provide a clue. 15 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Stimulated Discharge Depending on the application and the implementation and construction of ultracaps in sensitive or destructive applications, vulnerabilities likely exist and warrant study in areas of research such as circuit vulnerability analysis, reversible manufacturing and construction techniques used in fabrication, stimulation of nondestructive and controlled discharge evaluations, and laboratory stimulated discharge experiments. 16 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Chapter 4: Recent Developments There have been several recent advances in ultracapacitors focused on increasing energy density by using different active materials24 and designs,25 activated carbons,26 polymers,27 and metal oxides.28 Conducting polymers have good performance,29 but lack microfabrication protocols. Oxide-based thin-film ultracaps have shown high performance, approaching the theoretical limit for capacitance (~1,000 F/g for MnO2).30 However, the poor electrical conductivity and high impedances associated with surface intercalation redox reactions of these oxides have limited practical film thicknesses to a few microns. Carbon nanotubes have been added to the films to increase the electrical conductivity, but the complexity of manufacturing limits practical applications of such composite electrodes. In this section we will discuss advances in application of CNT and advanced carbons to ultracapacitor materials, the application of thin-film manufacturing processes, and a revolutionary new super capacitor using a giant magneto capacitive effect. CNTS AND ADVANCED CARBONS Carbon electrodes constitute both electrodes in a symmetric ultracapacitor and one of the electrodes in an asymmetric, or pseudocapacitive, design. Improvements to the carbon electrode rely upon increasing the specific capacitance (in Farads per gram). These improvements come by tailoring the surface area and porosity to achieve the best balance that maximizes the interaction with the electrolyte. There is a linear relationship to the surface area and the capacitance up to a point where capacitance plateaus with activated carbons. By controlling the porosity and surface area, it is possible to increase the capacitance beyond this plateau. Carbon nanotubes could provide performance increases with aligned CNT forests of tailored sizes. The characteristics of an ultracapacitor are highly dependent on the nanostructure of the carbon used for the thin-film electrodes. Advanced carbons will provide better control over the pore size and distribution, leading to an expected 50- to 100-percent improvement over the carbons in use today. Carbon nanotubes can be produced with a wide variety of properties. Depending on synthesis parameters, nanotubes can be single walled or multiwalled, with varying numbers of tubes. CNT diameters can be tailored from a few nanometers to tens of nanometers, with lengths up to hundreds of microns. CNTs can be grown in random orientations or as aligned forests. CNTs have a fully accessible surface area and very high electrical conductivity. Methods for incorporating CNTs into electrodes for ultracaps include using CNTs as an additive for conductivity enhancement, creating dense mats of randomly oriented tubes, and creating electrodes from vertically aligned forests of tubes. Initial results of CNT-enabled ultracaps tended to show much lower capacitance than expected, which has been attributed to the hydrophobic nature of the CNT walls. Surface functionalization is a common approach to mitigating the hydrophobicity issues and thus enabling higher capacitance. Another benefit of the functionalization is the ability to introduce and control pseudocapacitance. Most efforts in CNT ultracaps are directed toward vertically aligned forests. It is possible to controllably grow a dense, aligned forest that is perpendicular to the current collector. The size and density of the tubes and the number of walls can be controlled with catalyst design and reaction parameters. Manipulation of the CNT forest leads to increased capacitance by fine-tuning the distance between tubes. Additionally, fine- 17 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY tuning the inner diameter may provide further enhancements. Figure 7 shows a vertically aligned CNT forest produced at Lockheed Martin's Advanced Technology Center (LMATC). Lockheed Martin has worked with a number of catalysts and surfaces to grow tailored CNT forests for a variety of applications. Select locations throughout Lockheed Martin have been developing CNT-based technologies, utilizing vertically aligned CNTs, CNTs dispersed onto surfaces, and CNTs dispersed into other media. LMATC possesses expertise in CNT growth processes and characterization and has capabilities for both materials development and ultracap testing. Lockheed Martin's NEARLab facility produces CNT-coated glass fibers, which may provide a cost-effective power storage solution that has structural elements built in. Ultracaps assembled from CNT forests appear extremely promising for use in microelectronics. Figure 7. CNT Forest. CNT forests grown in Lockheed Martin's laboratories can be tailored for specific sizes, lengths, and densities. Graphene is a relatively new discovery amongst carbonaceous materials. There are a number of types of graphene that can be characterized by the number of layers of graphene, the functionalization, or the oxidation status. Most graphene for ultracapacitor applications is going to be few-layer graphene and large-area flakes. The fewer the layers, the higher the active surface area will be. Single layer is ideal, but manufacturing considerations make single layer difficult, even at the laboratory scale. Functionalization will be directed toward improving capacitance or modifications to enable battery-like performance. Theoretical values of graphene indicate it could become an important material for the next generation of ultracapacitors. Graphene may be used as the sole electrode material, or it could be used as a conductive additive that also provides capacitance. The surface area is calculated to be as high as 2,600 m2/g, the thermal conductivity is 5,000 W/m·K, and the charge carrier mobility is 200,000 cm2/V·s. High surface area values and great conductivity are ideal properties for creating an electrode with very high capacitance and extremely favorable rate capabilities. Reported capacitances range from 135 to 205 F/g in aqueous electrolytes.31, 32 Figure 8 shows a transmission electron microscope image of graphene flakes used for ultracapacitor electrodes. These measurements come from few-layer graphene, rather than single layer, which suggest 18 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY there is room for improvement on these values. Optimization of graphene synthesis to produce finer control is an area receiving increased attention in research and development activities in universities, national labs, and industrial research facilities. Lockheed Martin is actively engaged in research investigating graphene and applications where graphene could be a critical differentiator. There are a number of companies that supply graphene made from various methods, as well as emerging startups geared toward producing graphene-based ultracapacitors or materials designed for ultracaps. Figure 8. Transmission Electron Microscope Image of Graphene. This could be an excellent ultracapacitor electrode material with its high surface area and excellent conductivity. 33 Manipulation of the porosity of high surface area carbons leads to the largest difference in specific capacitance. Understanding the relationship between the electrolyte ion size and the carbon pore size is critical to improving performance. There are a number of strategies being investigated for fine control over the pore-size distribution to increase the specific capacitance. The most common methods used currently are template methods and carbide-derived carbons. Template methods create a controlled mesoporous structure with a fairly narrow range. These structures have pores that range from 2 to 10 nanometers and are maximized to pore sizes roughly twice that of the solvated ions. The template process involves filling the pores of an inorganic template host with a carbon precursor (such as an alumina template). The template is removed after carbonization by acid treatment. The pore size is then dictated by the template as the pores are the remaining void space once occupied by the template. Similar methods have shown that smaller pores, including those less than two nanometers, may provide high specific capacitance. The realization that smaller pores contribute to charge storage in an electric double layer has led to the need to develop a better understanding of the charge storage mechanism. Carbide-derived carbons have a unique pore-size distribution that is tunable with sub-angstrom accuracy. These have served as models to study the charge storage behavior and ion adsorption in pore sizes ranging from 0.6 nm to 1.1 nm.34 The normalized capacitance decreases with decreasing pore size until a critical value is reached. Figure 9 shows the relationship between average pore size and the normalized specific capacitance. Pore sizes smaller than one nanometer significantly contribute to the charge storage despite the fact that the solvated ion size is larger than the pore diameter. The capacitance increase is explained by a distorted ion shell model. The ion solvation shell is perturbed such that it is capable of a closer approach of the ion and the carbon surface. The discoveries at Drexel University that utilize the fine control to create tailored porous carbon structures can maximize specific capacitance for a given ultracapacitor system. 19 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Figure 9. Relationship Between Average Pore Size and Normalized Specific Capacitance. As the average pore size decreases below 1 nm, the specific capacitance increases due to distorted electrolyte ion solvation. THIN FILMS CNT films have been used in 2D thin-film ultracapacitors having respectable gravimetric and volumetric capacitance. Activated carbon powders have a better performance in terms of energy per unit area,35 but they need to be processed into films before use, and this limits their choice for microdevice fabrication, which allows mass production of capacitors on semiconductor wafers. Carbide-derived carbon (CDC) is a class of carbon materials produced by selectively etching metals from metal carbides using chlorine at elevated temperatures in a process similar to current dry-etching techniques used in MEMS and microchip fabrication. CDC has been shown to have excellent performance as the active material in traditionally processed ultracaps36 since it can have its microstructure precisely tuned by tailoring the synthesis conditions for a particular electrolyte.37 For microfabricated supercapacitors, CDC is attractive for several reasons. The precursor carbides are conductive and can be deposited in uniform thin and thick films by well-known chemical and physical vapor deposition (CVD and PVD) techniques.38 In addition, the chlorination process can be performed at temperatures at least as low as 200°C,39 and the resulting coatings are well-adhered with an atomically perfect interface,40 which minimizes device impedance. This technology can be used to produce the microfabricated ultracaps on the same chip as the integrated circuits, which they are powering (shown in Figure 10).41 Chlorine-containing plasma etching of materials in semiconductor manufacturing is a well-established technique and is similar to the chlorination procedure in CDC manufacturing. Continuous porous carbon films cannot be produced by conventional CVD, PVD, or other techniques, and the high-temperature activation needed to produce the microstructures necessary for ultracapacitor performance in CVD carbons would destroy the devices they were intended to power. 20 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSintered TiC plate TiC plate CDC film Teflon plates Electrolyte + separator 1. Chlorination @ 500°C TiC-CDC film 2. Cell assembly 5 μm CDC TiC\n\nFigure 10. CDC Synthesis and Electrochemical Test Cell Preparation Schematic.42\n\nElectrochemical measurements of CDC films were carried out in a three-electrode configuration with a large, overcapacitive activated carbon counter-electrode in both 1M TEABF4 and 1M H2SO4, as well as two-electrode cells with symmetric bulk CDC film electrodes. Volumetric capacitance was calculated for each of the different film thicknesses (shown in Figure 11). For both TEABF4 and H2SO4, the volumetric capacitance decreases with increasing coating thickness. This is especially pronounced in the organic electrolyte, where there is a huge increase in volumetric capacitance as the film thickness decreases from 200 to ~2 mm.\n\nA B Volumetric capacitance (F/cm3) vs Coating thickness (μm) for TEABF4 (A) and Volumetric capacitance (F/cm3) vs Coating thickness (μm) for H2SO4 (B)\n\nFigure 11. Volumetric Capacitance of the Films in (A) TEABF4 and (B) H2SO4.43\n\nMAGNETIC CAPACITORS\n\nGiant magneto capacitance (GMC) is a quantum mechanical effect observed in thin-film structures composed of alternating ferromagnetic and nonmagnetic layers.44, 45 Such materials have been reported to have increased permittivity by 109.46 This material behavior normally occurs at temperatures well below 273K and has only recently been reported in the literature above this temperature.47 However, since 2007, Northern Lights Semiconductor Corp. (NLSC) has been developing a magnetic capacitor (MCap) that utilizes a material which exhibits the GMC above 300K.\n\nStructured like the basic flat-plate capacitor, an MCap nanocell features a proprietary dielectric layer sandwiched between two magnetized layers. Each magnetic material layer is made of multiple nanometer-thick thin-film layers. Millions of MCap nanocells are created and linked using a semiconductor thin-film process, producing the MCap cell on a wafer (Figure 12).\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMCap nanocell 1.6μm 0.55μm Magnetic materials Dielectric layer Magnetic materials (all proprietary compositions) MCap cell Made up of millions MCap nanocells\n\nFigure 12. MCap Structure. MCap nanocell and MCap cell are fabricated using traditional semiconductor fabrication processes.\n\nMCap cells are then packaged into larger MCap modules. The capacitance of the device is given by the equation , C = ε0 k A/d, where A is the area of the plate, d is the separation between plates, ε0 the permittivity of free space, and k is the dielectric constant (or relative permittivity) of the material. The MCap increases capacitance by increasing the dielectric constant k through the GMC effect (fGMC) given by the relationship, k' = k*fGMC. GMC acts like a charge trap that brings electrons closer, thus increasing electron densities at the plates. Based on quantum theory, GMC brings about a capacitance which, to date, has been measured to be 109 times larger than that observed in electrostatic capacitors. As shown earlier in equation (2), energy is proportional to the capacitance and the voltage squared. Moreover, capacitor leakage and self-discharge are essentially eliminated as electrons are \"trapped\" in the magnetic field.\n\nDue to the above effects, the available energy for a large range of storage devices, like smart cards and other products, can be increased substantially by simply packaging them in series-parallel connected modules to meet the energy and voltage requirements. Coupled with Lockheed Martin's extensive nanomaterials and device physics experience, it is likely that NLSC will be able to use its MRAM development expertise to accomplish this.\n\nExperimental Results\n\nOver the last year, NLSC has had MCap structures and nanocells tested by independent parties with results shown in Figure 13. These unbiased tests demonstrate the validity of the high-capacitance claims. Figure 14 quantifies the progress in improved performance throughout the development of the device. The number of devices that demonstrate the GMC behavior has increased substantially in 2009, which is reportedly due to improved materials development rather than an increased production load. The performances of the nanocells as well as the variability are plotted, which shows that potential improvement in the materials could lead to an increased GMC factor. There is promising evidence that improvements may allow a higher level of performance, which could match lithium ion batteries at ambient temperature and perhaps exceed them at low and high temperatures.\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 13. Preliminary MCap Test Results. These graphs demonstrate NLSC capabilities: MCap microstructure tested at different VDC (by Taiyo Yuden) (left) and single nanocell tests (right).\n\nFigure 14. Summary Chart of MCap Results to Date. Right Axis: High-Low value lines in red, Median value in black dot. Left Axis: number of nanocells exhibiting GMC phenomenon in blue bar.\n\nFigure 15 shows an estimate that has been made by NLSC of the potential specific energies and projected manufacturing costs of the MCap for comparison to current energy storage devices.\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 15. Specific Energy and Estimated Costs vs. fGMC\n\nThe mass production target of MCaps on a wafer of fGMC of ~109 would enable the achievement of exceeding the specific energy of lithium ion batteries at a significantly reduced cost. MCaps at these production targets would disrupt both the lithium ion battery and the ultracapacitor market.\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 5: Future Developments\n\nThere have been significant advancements in ultracapacitor technology in the last few years. Increased understanding of the physical mechanism behind this technology, combined with advancements in materials science, particularly on the nanoscale, has led to a rapid increase in capability. Improvements to ultracaps in the next 10 years (2010-20) will focus on electrodes, better electrolytes, packaging, and alternative designs. Electrode improvements will most likely include migration away from activated carbon, for both electrodes. Asymmetric electrodes will eliminate carbon on one side, and new carbon materials will provide better performance at a competitive price. Electrolytes will likely move toward additional organic materials and ultracaps with high temperature performance requirements likely will use ionic liquids.\n\nIn the near term, a transition to the asymmetric design is expected. Continued improvements to the electrodes and cell design will provide better capacitance. Many of the short-term improvements will likely be directed toward manufacturing capacity. Ultracapacitors are becoming more common, and as improvements to performance and cost make them more accessible to multiple applications, this trend will continue. Over the next few years, it is expected that the market for ultracaps will increase dramatically. Trends in materials for ultracaps will continue forward with improvements and utilization of activated carbons, thinner current collectors, and improved cell design and packaging. Research being done at universities and national labs will continue, but these will not become common materials for ultracapacitors in the next few years. However, as the demand for ultracapacitors increases, specialty materials will begin to see utility for some applications, driving down manufacturing costs, which in turn will enable their use in more systems. Significant use will be made in integrating into power converters to reduce size, mass, and cost. Both thin-film and MCap devices will become prevalent. If MCaps achieve lithium ion specific energy their adoption will be rapid and revolutionary as has occurred with LiFePO4 (lithium-iron-phosphate) batteries for both transportation and extremely high pulsed-power systems such as lasers.\n\nWithin the next 10 years, ultracaps will begin to see the incorporation of advanced carbon materials and electrodes designed with features on the nanometer scale. Carbon nanotubes, graphene, and porous carbons all have extremely high potential to unseat activated carbon as the electrode of choice. The replacement of carbon systems being used today (including activated carbon, aerogels, and carbon cloths) will occur as cost reductions take place in the manufacturing of nanostructured carbonaceous materials. The tradeoff between surface area and pore size can be exploited at the nanoscale. Optimization of these parameters will likely yield fairly significant improvements to the capacitance and result in higher power and better energy density.\n\nThe mid-range (2020-30) development of ultracapacitors will most likely be the full incorporation of advanced carbons and hybrid systems. It is hard to anticipate which technology has the most to offer, as there are unique benefits and hurdles for each. Hybrid systems will be common, utilizing a battery-like electrode combined with one of the advanced carbon electrodes. The pseudocapacitive electrode options will become diversified, with manufacturers using unique materials to differentiate their product. An alternative electrode to the ruthenium oxide (RuO2) used today will be used for both performance and economical reasons. Supply issues will drive electrode materials toward those with larger availability.\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIn the 2020-2030 timeframe, ultracapacitor cell designs will be different. Simple plate designs, coin cells, and laminated pouches will still be used for some applications. However, advanced designs and form-factors will be used to fit specialized applications. Ultracapacitors will be designed for incorporation into chip architectures. Several options will exist for micro- and nano-electronics. Electrolyte options will most likely be different from those used today. New electrolyte solvents and better salts will be discovered that produce higher voltage cells while maintaining good ionic conductivity. Ionic liquids and complex solvents that withstand higher voltages are likely candidates. Three dimensional architectures may begin to be introduced, which will greatly improve both energy density and power density. Manufacturing techniques will enable small- and medium-format three-dimensional electrodes, where the electrical double layer is stored perpendicular to the current collector. The manufacture and assembly of large-format ultracapacitors with extremely high power capabilities will be enabled by three-dimensional architectures of nano-engineered carbons and current collectors.\n\nBeyond 2030 it is difficult to project the future developments of ultracapacitors since materials science is experiencing a nanomaterials revolution. It can be expected, however, that nearly all microelectronic circuitry will incorporate thin-film ultracaps or MCaps, and laptop computers will become the size of an iPhone with mostly voice-activated functions. As depicted in Figure 16, advancements will occur on a much faster timescale than what has happened over the last 50 years.\n\nIn the energy storage area, particularly for PHEV and EV batteries, the major impact for ultracapacitors may allow not only reduced mass and size but also order-of-magnitude reduction in costs.\n\nULTRACAPS 2010 2020 2030 2050\n\nFigure 16. Evolution of Ultracapacitors\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 6: Conclusions\n\nUltracapacitors are becoming increasingly important in applications ranging from portable electronics to cargo transport cranes. Their introduction in electronic circuits for conversion and storage assistance will become the next major milestone. The virtually unlimited cycle life combined with high power capabilities has made them an integral component to many energy-management schemes. Early adoption of ultracaps by the military was an important differentiator for vehicle performance and a technology driver. Improvements to activated carbons and manufacturing techniques have brought costs down. The ultracapacitor is relatively young and is expanding rapidly as ultracaps are reaching a more widespread audience. Increased adoption has led to recognition of the benefits, and the attention has allowed researchers to develop a better understanding of the power-storage mechanisms.\n\nNew materials and cell designs will produce increased capacitance and higher voltages, which will in turn give ultracapacitors better energy density. Advanced carbons show great promise to generate a carbon electrode with much higher capacitance than the activated carbons in use today. These include porous carbons, carbon nanotubes, and graphene. Capacitance increases by the carbon electrode alone could double the energy density. Additional advantages in conductivity and the ability to functionalize these materials will generate improvements in power density as well as energy density. Hybrid systems utilizing a battery-like electrode are beginning to gain acceptance. These pseudocapacitive systems maintain the high power density of a symmetric ultracap and also have substantially higher energy density. While these systems sacrifice some cycle-life capability, it appears as though they will survive tens of thousands of cycles.\n\nUltracapacitors are a solution for generating or absorbing high pulse power. They also are excellent devices for backup power and stabilization of fluctuating power requirements. Increased power densities and energy densities will open up new applications for ultracaps, replacing fuel and batteries in some cases, supplementing them in others. Power management and generation for military systems will see increasing uses for ultracaps. Their unique capabilities will enable future designs. Their specific performance capabilities must be optimally utilized and we must have a keen understanding and awareness of the unique spectral signatures these devices generate when storing high power and in charge or discharge modes. Development of these advanced ultracaps must be performed, understood, and adopted by the U.S. government and those who are developing the systems to be used by the government.\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 7: Endnotes\n\n1 Tecate Group website\n2 B. E Conway, Electrochemical Supercapacitors: Scientific, Fundamentals, and Technological Applications, Kluwer, New York (1999).\n3 Wikipedia Commons\n4 J. R. Miller, P. Simon, Fundamentals of Electrochemical Capacitor Design and Operation; ECS Interface, 17, Spr. 2008, 31-33\n5 EPCOS White Paper on UltraCap Technology\n6 P. Simon, A. Burke, Nanostructured Carbons: Double-Layer Capacitance and More; ECS Interface, 17, Spr. 2008, 38-43\n7 EPCOS White Paper on UltraCap Technology\n8 D. Tuite, Get the Lowdown On Ultracapacitors; Electronic Design, Nov 2007.\n9 J. R. Miller, A. F. Burke, Electrochemical Capacitors: Challenges and Opportunities for Real-World Applications; ECS Interface, 17, Spr. 2008, 53-57\n10 J. R. Miller, A. F. Burke, Electrochemical Capacitors: Challenges and Opportunities for Real-World Applications; ECS Interface, 17, Spr. 2008, 53-57\n11 J. R. Miller, A. F. Burke, Electrochemical Capacitors: Challenges and Opportunities for Real-World Applications; ECS Interface, 17, Spr. 2008, 53-57\n12 K. Naoi, P. Simon, New Materials and New Configurations for Advanced Electrochemical Capacitors; ECS Interface, 17, Spr. 2008, 34-37\n13 Burke, Ultracapacitor Technologies and Application in Hybrid and Electric Vehicles; International Journal of Energy Research; July 2009\n14 J. R. Miller, P. Simon, Fundamentals of Electrochemical Capacitor Design and Operation; ECS Interface, 17, Spr. 2008, 31-33\n15 P. Simon, A. Burke, Nanostructured Carbons: Double-Layer Capacitance and More; ECS Interface, 17, Spr. 2008, 38-43\n16 EPCOS White Paper on UltraCap Technology\n17 P. Simon, Y. Gogotsi, Charge Storage Mechanism in Nanoporous Carbons and Its Consequence for Electrical Double Layer Capacitors, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A, 368, 3457 (2010)\n18 C. N. R. Rao, A. K. Sood, R. Voggu, K. S. Subrahmanyam, Some Novel Attributes of Graphene, J. Phys. Chem. Lett., 1, 572 (2010)\n19 S. Park, R. Ruoff, Chemical Methods for the Production of Graphenes; Nature Nanotechnology; 4, 217 (2009)\n20 J. Chmiola, G. Yushin, Y. Gogotsi, C. Portet, P. simon, P. L. Taberna, Anomalous Increase in Carbon Capacitance at Pore Sizes Less than 1 Nanometer; Science, 313, 1760 (2006)\n21 P. Simon, A. Burke, Nanostructured Carbons: Double-Layer Capacitance and More; ECS Interface, 17, Spr. 2008, 38-43\n22 D. Tuite, Get the Lowdown On Ultracapacitors; Electronic Design, Nov 2007.\n23 D. Tuite, Get the Lowdown On Ultracapacitors; Electronic Design, Nov 2007.\n24 A. S. Aricò, P. Bruce, B. Scrosati, J.-M. Tarascon,W. van Schalkwijk, Nat. Mater. 4, 366 (2005).\n25 S. W. Lee, B.-S. Kim, S. Chen, Y. Shao-Horn, P. T. Hammond, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 131, 671 (2009).\n26 D. Pech et al., J. Power Sources 195, 1266 (2010).\n27 W. Sun, X. Y. Chen, Microelectron. Eng. 86, 1307 (2009).\n28 J. Wang, J. Polleux, J. Lim, B. Dunn, J. Phys. Chem. C 111, 14925 (2007).\n29 K. Naoi, P. Simon, New Materials and New Configurations for Advanced Electrochemical Capacitors; ECS Interface, 17, Spr. 2008, 34-37\n30 H. J. Ahn, W. B. Kim, T. Y. Seong, Electrochem. Commun. 10, 1284 (2008).\n31 C. N. R. Rao, A. K. Sood, R. Voggu, K. S. Subrahmanyam, Some Novel Attributes of Graphene, J. Phys. Chem. Lett., 1, 572 (2010)\n32 M. D. Stoller, S. Park, Y. Zhu, J. An, R. S. Ruoff, Graphene-Based Ultracapacitors, Nano Lett, 8, 3498 (2008)\n33 M. D. Stoller, S. Park, Y. Zhu, J. An, R. S. Ruoff, Graphene-Based Ultracapacitors, Nano Lett, 8, 3498 (2008)\n34 J. Chmiola, G. Yushin, Y. Gogotsi, C. Portet, P. simon, P. L. Taberna, Anomalous Increase in Carbon Capacitance at Pore Sizes Less than 1 Nanometer; Science, 313, 1760 (2006)\n35 D. Pech et al., J. Power Sources 195, 1266 (2010).\n36 J. Leis, M. Arulepp, A. Kuura, M. Latt, E. Lust, Carbon 44, 2122 (2006).\n37 A. Jänes, E. Lust, J. Electrochem. Soc. 153, A113 (2006).\n38 E. N. Hoffman, G. Yushin, B. G. Wendler, M. W. Barsoum,Y. Gogotsi, Mater. Chem. Phys. 112, 587 (2008).\n39 R. K. Dash, G. Yushin, Y. Gogotsi, MicroporousMesoporous Mater. 86, 50 (2005).\n40 Z. G. Cambaz, G. N. Yushin, Y. Gogotsi, K. L. Vyshnyakova, L. N. Pereselentseva, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 89, 509 (2006)\n41 J. Chmiola, C. Largeot, P. Taberna, P.Simon, Y.Gogotsi, Monolithic Carbide-Derived Carbon Films for Micro-Supercapacitors, Science,328, 480 (2010)\n42 A. Jänes, E. Lust, J. Electrochem. Soc. 153, A113 (2006).\n\n28\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cda37a0bfda69e2f","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n43 J. Leis, M. Arulepp, A. Kuura, M. Latt, E. Lust, Carbon 44, 2122 (2006).\n44 T. Goto, T. Kimura, G. Lawes, et. al. Ferroelectricity and Giant Magnetocapacitance in Perovskite Rare-earth Manganites. Physical Review Letters, 92, 257201 (2004).\n45 N. Hur, S. Park, P. A. Sharma, S. Guha, and S-W. Cheong, Colossal Magnetodielectric Effects in DyMn2O5, Physical Review, Lett. 93, 107207 (2004).\n46 R. F. Mamin, T. Egami, Z. Marton, and S. A. Migachev, Giant dielectric permittivity and Magnetocapacitance in La0.875Sr0.125MnO3 Single Crystals, Phys. Rev. B 75, 115129 (2007).\n47 J. Wan, Qi Lu, Bo Chen, Fengqi Song, J. Liu, J.g Dong, and G.Wang, Giant Room-Temperature Magnetocapacitance in Co2+ Doped SnO2 Dielectric Films, Applied Physics Letters, 95, 152901 (2009)\n\n29\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"cdc548877bd83e13","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n-1 of 3-\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nOFFICIAL RECORD\nDate of entry 10/[REDACTED]/2025\nOn October [REDACTED], 2025 [REDACTED] was interviewed [REDACTED] by Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) [REDACTED] Special Agent (SA) [REDACTED] [REDACTED], and Task Force Officer (TFO) [REDACTED] After being advised of the identity of the interviewing agents and the nature of the interview, [REDACTED] provided the following information:\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] frequently watches aircraft, military, commercial and civilian fly in the airspace above and around Colorado Springs.\nOn October [REDACTED], 2023 between 8-9:30PM, [REDACTED] was working [REDACTED] Colorado Springs, Colorado. [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] walked over to his co-worker named [REDACTED] and began looking up, admiring the stars on a clear night.\nAs [REDACTED] looked up, he noticed a very bright star in the sky, which initially drew his attention. [REDACTED] was observing the star for about 5-10 seconds when he noticed movement in his left peripheral vision. [REDACTED] looked further up and to his left and saw what appeared to be a dark-gray\nInvestigation on 10/[REDACTED]/2025 at [REDACTED], United States [REDACTED]\nFile # [REDACTED]\nby [REDACTED]\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"cdc548877bd83e13","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED], On 10/[REDACTED]/2025, Page 2 of 3\ncolored cloud phasing into his sight. The cloud was stationary in the sky, and [REDACTED] stated it looked very strange, as if it was pixelated or distorted in some other manner. As he watched the cloud, he saw a constant, diffuse red light on the bottom front point of a solid black triangular shaped object coming out of the cloud towards the south, southeast. The object behind the point became wider and larger as it exited the cloud until [REDACTED] saw the entire equilateral triangular object with a red light in each of the three corners. [REDACTED] estimated the triangle UAP was very large and could have been as large as the parking lot in which he was standing. He estimated the UAP was the equivalent of 3-5 stories in thickness. Based upon [REDACTED] memory, at arm's length, each of the three lights on the triangle UAP was the size of a fingernail.\n\nInitially the UAP was moving south and slightly east at a steady speed comparable to a helicopter. [REDACTED] believed the UAP was at an altitude of 3000-5000 feet, comparable to small civilian aircraft in training flights. It then almost instantaneously accelerated to possibly Mach 1 or 2 and turned slightly, heading directly south or sightly southwest. [REDACTED] noticed there appeared to be waves surrounding and radiating from the object. He compared the waves to the mirage effect that can be observed when you look down a hot road into the distance. [REDACTED] did not hear the object make any noise, could not see any form of propulsion, and did not smell anything out of the ordinary. [REDACTED] believed the object was almost directly over his position, possibly over the [REDACTED] [REDACTED] As the object moved, it abruptly banked 90 degrees on its left side with its three lights still visible while veering towards the right, and then it quickly banked back down to level flight. The banking motion was opposite of a conventional aircraft would bank in the direction it was turning.\n\n[REDACTED] lost sight of the object as it went over the [REDACTED] [REDACTED] from his perspective, towards the south. [REDACTED] looked back to where it originally came into view and noticed that the dark-gray cloud had disappeared. He called his wife about 60 seconds later to tell her about the event, and she said that his voice sounded robotic, as if there was electronic interference occurring with the call. [REDACTED] cell phone service provider was [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"cdc548877bd83e13","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED], On 10/[REDACTED]/2025, Page 3 of 3\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"cdde5619a017226c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ce9d4e47fce4c286","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CD 000.92 1953\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 823015"} {"doc_id":"ce9d4e47fce4c286","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ROUTING SLIP (Classified)\nFROM The Secretary of Defense\nCLASSIFICATION\nMAR 13 1953\n\n1 Admin Sec TO THE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE INITIAL\nDIRECTOR, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY\nDEPUTY DIRECTOR, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE SEC.\nSECRETARY OF ARMY\nSECRETARY OF NAVY\nSECRETARY OF AIR FORCE\nASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (Compt)\nASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (M & P)\nASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (L & LA)\nCHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF\nJOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF\nCHAIRMAN, MUNITIONS BOARD\nCHAIRMAN, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD\nCHAIRMAN, MILITARY LIAISON COMMITTEE - A.E.C.\n\n2 ASSISTANT TO THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (ISA) INITIAL\n3 MW Vargo\nDIRECTOR, OFFICE OF FOREIGN MILITARY AFFAIRS\nDIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MILITARY ASSISTANCE\nDIRECTOR, NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY AFFAIRS\nDIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL POLICY\nCHAIRMAN, ARMED FORCES MEDICAL POLICY COUNCIL\nCHAIRMAN, DEFENSE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE\nDIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PUBLIC INFORMATION\nDIRECTOR, MILITARY TRAFFIC SERVICE\nDIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION\nDIRECTOR, OFFICE OF GUIDED MISSILES\n\nFOR PREPARATION OF REPLY FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE SIGNATURE / FOR INFORMATION AND RETENTION\n3 APPROPRIATE ACTION / 2 INFORMATION AND RETURN FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FILES\nPLEASE REPLY DIRECT FOR SEC. OF DEFENSE (Copy of reply to be forwarded to Sec. of Defense Files) / COMMENT AND/OR RECOMMENDATION\nPLEASE FURNISH DATA ON WHICH TO BASE A REPLY / 1 NOTE AND FORWARD\n\nFROM CIA (Richard D Drain Sec Intelligence Advisory Committee) DATE RECEIVED 17 March 1953\nTO Sec/Def\nDATE 13 Mar 53 SHORT TITLE Ltr\nNUMBER COPIES ORIGINAL 1 CARBON 1 OTHER\nSUBJECT A Report prepared by a Panel of Scientists on the Subject of \"Unidentified Flying Objects\". ENCLOSURES RECEIVED 1 copy Report of the Scientific Panel on Unidentified Flying Objects\nCOMMENT (Flying Saucers).\nDECLASSIFIED NND 823015 By ERC NARS, Date 1/15/85\nThis report appears to warrant action.\nCopy Panel Report to Sec Air Force by memo.\nDue in Correspondence Control Section, Executive Office, OSD: None\nCONTROL NUMBER 02610\nSD FORM 32 1 APR 52 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE. See reverse side of this form for instructions on handling attached material.\nCLASSIFICATION\nCONTROL NUMBER 02610"} {"doc_id":"ce9d4e47fce4c286","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COSMIC MATERIAL\n1. Do not send through the mail.\n2. May be handled only by specifically authorized personnel.\n3. Deliver to OSD Sub-Registry, Classified Records Group, Correspondence Control Section, Executive Office of the Secretary, if to be transmitted to any office other than the one to which routed from the OSD Sub-Registry or to any office outside of the Office of the Secretary of Defense.\n4. Do not release without receipt.\n\nTOP SECRET\n1. Do not send through the mail.\n2. May be handled only by authorized personnel.\n\nSECRET AND CONFIDENTIAL\n1. May be sent by registered mail if delivered to classified Records Group, Correspondence Control Section, Executive Office of the Secretary.\n2. May be handled only by authorized personnel.\n\nINSTRUCTIONS TO RECIPIENTS\n\nGENERAL (Top Secret, Secret and Confidential)\n1. Do not release without receipt.\n2. Deliver to Classified Records Group, Correspondence Control Section, Executive Office of the Secretary, if to be transmitted outside of the Office of the Secretary of Defense.\n3. When transferring this Routing Slip to another person or office within OSD without going through the Correspondence Control Section, obtain a signature on one of the receipts provided at the bottom of this form and return the receipt to the Correspondence Control Section for appropriate change in charge out.\n4. Indicate in Comment Section the disposition of all copies and inclosures if other than file in Correspondence Control Section.\n5. Do not remove this Routing Slip from the Original of the attached material without authority of the Head, Records and Reference Unit, Correspondence Control Section or one of his representatives.\n6. Return this Routing Slip and the attached material to the Correspondence Control Section as soon as possible for file.\n\nC 58063"} {"doc_id":"ce9d4e47fce4c286","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\nSecurity Information\nCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n13 March 1953\n\nThe Honorable\nThe Secretary of Defense\nDepartment of Defense\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Secretary:\n\nThe Director of Central Intelligence has asked that you be furnished a copy of the attached report prepared by a panel of scientists on the subject of \"Unidentified Flying Objects.\" This panel was convened at the direction of General Smith, following the recommendation of the Intelligence Advisory Committee.\n\nThe conclusions and recommendations may be of interest to you, in that they point out certain potential dangers to national security which are related to the subject and suggest ways of their elimination.\n\nAlthough this Agency does not consider problems arising from sightings of \"flying saucers\" primarily its concern, we shall be pleased to assist in any appropriate action that you may deem advisable.\n\nCopies of this report are also being sent to the Secretary of Defense and to the Chairman, National Security Resources Board.\n\nSincerely yours,\nRICHARD D. DRAIN\nSecretary\nIntelligence Advisory Committee\n\nEnclosure\n\nDECLASSIFIED NND 823015 By ERC NARS, Date 1/15/85\n\nSECRET\nSecurity Information\n\nThis material contains information affecting the national defense of the United States with the meaning of the espionage laws, Title 18, USC, Secs. 793 and 794, and transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\nSecDef Cont. No. 02610"} {"doc_id":"ce9d4e47fce4c286","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ce9d4e47fce4c286","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nSECRET\nSECURITY INFORMATION\n\nREPORT OF THE SCIENTIFIC PANEL\nON\nUNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\n\nJan 17 1953\n\n1. Pursuant to the request of the Assistant Director for Scientific\nIntelligence, the undersigned Panel of Scientific Consultants has met to\nevaluate any possible threat to national security posed by Unidentified\nFlying Objects (\"Flying Saucers\"), and to make recommendations thereon.\nThe Panel has received the evidence as presented by cognizant intelli-\ngence agencies, primarily the Air Technical Intelligence Center, and has\nreviewed a selection of the best documented incidents.\n2. As a result of its considerations, the Panel concludes:\na. That the evidence presented on Unidentified Flying\nObjects shows no indication that these phenomena constitute\na direct physical threat to national security.\nWe firmly believe that there is no residuum of cases which indicates\nphenomena which are attributable to foreign artifacts capable of hostile\nacts, and that there is no evidence that the phenomena indicate a need\nfor the revision of current scientific concepts.\n3. The Panel further concludes:\na. That the continued emphasis on the reporting of\nthese phenomena does, in these parlous times, result in a\nthreat to the orderly functioning of the protective organs\nof the body politic.\nWe cite as examples the clogging of channels of communication by irrelevant\nreports, the danger of being led by continued false alarms to ignore real"} {"doc_id":"ce9d4e47fce4c286","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"indications of hostile action, and the cultivation of a morbid national\npsychology in which skillful hostile propaganda could induce hysterical\nbehavior and harmful distrust of duly constituted authority.\n4. In order most effectively to strengthen the national facilities\nfor the timely recognition and the appropriate handling of true indications\nof hostile action, and to minimize the concomitant dangers alluded to\nabove, the Panel recommends:\na. That the national security agencies take immediate steps\nto strip the Unidentified Flying Objects of the special status they\nhave been given and the aura of mystery they have unfortunately\nacquired;\nb. That the national security agencies institute policies\non intelligence, training, and public education designed to prepare\nthe material defenses and the morale of the country to recognize\nmost promptly and to react most effectively to true indications\nof hostile intent or action.\nWe suggest that these aims may be achieved by an integrated program\ndesigned to reassure the public of the total lack of evidence of inimical\nforces behind the phenomena, to train personnel to recognize and reject\nfalse indications quickly and effectively, and to strengthen regular\nchannels for the evaluation of and prompt reaction to true indications\nof hostile measures.\n\n/s/ H. P. Robertson, Chairman\nCalifornia Institute of Technology\n/s/ Luis W. Alvarez\nUniversity of California\n/s/ Lloyd V. Berkner\nAssociated Universities, Inc.\n/s/ S. A. Goudsmit\nBrookhaven National Laboratories\n/s/ Thornton Page\nJohns Hopkins University\n\n-8-\nSECURITY INFORMATION"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VANDENBERG AFB\nLAUNCH SUMMARY\n1958 - 2000\n\n30th SPACE WING\nOffice of History"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISTRIBUTION LIST\n\n1 30th RANS/DOUS\n1 30th RANS/DOU\n1 30th SW/CP\n1 30th SW/PA\n1 30th SW/SEOO\n1 30th SW/XPR\n1 30th SW/CCT\n1 30th OSS/DOO\n1 30th Techical Library\n1 576th FLTS/TEE\n1 576th FLTS/TEM\n2 Aerospace Corporation\n1 Boeing Defense & Space Group\n2 ITT Federal Services Corporation\n2 TRW\n\n1 HQ USAF/XOFS\n1 HQ AFSPC/HO\n1 HQ AFSPC/DOSL\n1 HQ USSPACECOM/SPJ330S\n1 HQ USSPACECOM/HO\n1 2 SWG/DOOL\n1 45th SW/HO\n1 SMC/HO\n1 HQ NASA\n1 HQ AFMC/ORS\n2 Ogden ALC/LMIM\n1 JIC/ODT\n1 TRW/SEDD\n1 Jet Propulsion Laboratory\n1 PA-MSB, Kennedy Space Center\n1 KSC Library\n2 Orbital Sciences Corp\n\nAs of: 3 February 2000\n\ni"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FOREWORD\n\nThis is the official registry of all major launch operations conducted from Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. The vehicles are presented in chronological order beginning with the first launch on 16 December 1958. Launch dates reflect Vandenberg local time.\n\nThe information is further grouped into two matrixes titled: \"ANNUAL LAUNCH SUMMARY BY BOOSTER\" and \"ANNUAL LAUNCH SUMMARY BY COMMAND.\" Two additional items contained in this document are a \"LAUNCH FACILITY GUIDE\" and a \"GLOSSARY.\"\n\nIn the main chronology section, the two columns reporting cumulative numbers by booster and command represent only Vandenberg operations. They do not include, for instance, Titan IV launches conducted on the East Coast at Cape Canaveral, Florida.\n\nThe 30th Space Wing History Office (30th SW/HO) periodically updates the Vandenberg AFB Launch Summary book. Questions may be directed to the undersigned at DSN 275-6421 or commercially at (805) 605-6421.\n\nJEFFREY GEIGER\nOffice of History\n\nii"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ABRES Advanced Ballistic Reentry System\nABRV Advanced Ballistic Reentry Vehicle (Formerly LBRV)\nACC Air Combat Command (Strategic Air Command [SAC] prior to 1 June 1992.)\nACE Advanced Control Experiment\nADC Aerospace Defense Command\nAE Atmosphere Explorer\nAEC Atomic Energy Commission\nAFMC Air Force Materiel Command (Air Force Systems Command [AFSC] prior to 1 July 1992.)\nAFSC Air Force Systems Command (Air Research & Development Command [ARDC] prior to 1 Apr 1961.)\nAFSPC Air Force Space Command\nAMARV Advanced Maneuverable Reentry Vehicle\nAMROC American Rocket Company\nANT Advanced Nose Tip\nAST Airborne Surveillance Testbed\nASTP Army Special Test Program\nASTRID Advanced Single Stage Rapid Insertion\n\nBALLISTIC Flight exercise involving ballistic reentry\nBATSAT Basic Advanced Technology Satellite\nBOMARC Boeing and Michigan Aeronautical Research Center\nBMRS Ballistic Missile Reentry System\n\nCOBE Cosmic Background Explorer\nCOS Cosmic Ray Observation Satellite\nCRL USAF Cambridge Research Laboratories (Merged into AFSC on 1 April 1971)\nCTL Combat Training Launch\n\nDAD Dual Air Density\nDASO Demonstration and Shakedown Operation (Category III before 1 July 1963)\nDG Data Gathering\nDMSP Defense Meteorological Satellite Program\nDMSS Defense Meteorological Satellite System\nDT Dedicated Target\n\niii"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DT&E Development Test & Evaluation\nDT&E PHASE I Development Test & Evaluation (Missile Functional Performance [Peacekeeper])\nDT&E PHASE II Development Test & Evaluation (Missile Reentry Vehicle Capabilities and Silo Intergradation [Peacekeeper])\nDUAL LAUNCH The launch of two missiles one after another\n\nEOS Earth Observation System\nERCS Emergency Rocket Communications System (494L)\nEXOSAT X-Ray Observatory Satellite\nFAST Fast Auroral Snapshot Explorer\nFDE Force Development Evaluation (Replace the term OT PHASE II testing)\nFOT Follow-on Operational Test (Replaced by OT PHASE II) (Category IV before 1 July 1963)\nFTM Flight Test Missile\n\nGBI Ground Based Interceptor\nGEOS Geodetic Earth Orbiting Satellite\nGEOSAT Geodetic Satellite (Navy)\nGFO Geosat Follow-on\nGLCM Ground Launch Cruise Missile\nGRP Guidance Replacement Program\n\nHCMM Heat Capacity Mapping Mission\nHP Helicopter Pad\n\nICBM Intercontinental Ballistic Missile\nIDF Integrated Demonstration Flight\nIFT Integrated Flight Test\nIPA ICBM Penetration Aids\nIPMS Inertial navigation system Performance Measurement System\nIRAS Infrared Astronomical Satellite\nIRBM Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile\nIRR Industrial Research Rocket\nIRS Interim Recovery System\nITOS Improved Tiros Operational Satellite\nIWST Integrated Weapons System Training (RAF/SAC)\n\nJAWSAT Joint Air Force Academy Weber State\n\niv"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"KOMPSAT\tKorea Multi-Purpose Satellite\n\nLAGEOS\tLaser Geodynamic Satellite\nLANDSAT\tEarth Resources Satellite\nLBRV\tLarge Ballistic Reentry Vehicle (See ABRV)\nLE\tLaunch Emplacement\nLF\tLaunch Facility\nLLL\tLawrence Livermore Laboratory\nLLV-1\tLockheed Launch Vehicle 1. (Became Lockheed Martin Launch Vehicle, and in Sept 97 was renamed Athena.)\nLM\tLockheed Martin (Corporation)\nMACSAT\tMultiple Access Communications Satellite\nMAGSAT\tMagnetic Field Measurement Satellite\nMaST\tManeuvering Systems Technology\nMDA\tMcDonnell Douglas Aerospace\nMINT\tMiniaturized Instrumented Nose Tip\nMOD\tModernized Minuteman (R&D, DASO) Operational tests are identified by the suffix \"M\" in the nickname\nMS\tMotorola Satcom\nMSLS\tMulti-Service Launch System\nMSTI\tMiniature Seeker Technology Integration\nMSX\tMidcourse Space Experiment\nMUBLCOM\tMultiple Path Beyond Line of Sight Communications\n\nN/A\tNot Applicable\nNASA\tNational Aeronautics and Space Administration\nNAVSTAR\tNavigation Satellite (Formerly NDS)\nNDS\tNavigation Development Satellite\nNOAA\tNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration\nNTS\tNavigation Technology Satellite\nNTV\tNosetip Vehicle\n\nOBLSS\tOperational Base Launch Safety System\nORBCOMM (FM)\tOrbital Communications (Flight Module)\nORT\tOperational Readiness Test\nOSC\tOrbital Sciences Corporation\nOSL\tOgden Special Launch\nOSTF\tOperational System Test Facility\nOT\tOperational Test (Now OT PHASE I) (Category III before 1 July 1963)\n\nv"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OT PHASE I\t(See OT)\nOT PHASE II\t(See FOT)\n\nPALC\tPoint Arguello Launch Complex\nPAS\tPenetration Aids Study\nPLC\tProbe Launch Complex\nPRP\tPropulsion Replacement System\nPVM\tProduction Verification Missile\n\nQuickScat\tQuick Scatterometer\n\nRADARSAT\tRadar Satellite\nRADCAL\tRadar Calibration\nRAF\tRoyal Air Force\nR&D\tResearch and Development (Category I & II before 1 July 1963)\nREX\tRadiation Experiment\nRSLP\tReentry Systems Launch Program\n\nSAC\tStrategic Air Command\nSAFEGUARD\tAn Antiballistic Missile (ABM) test program\nSALVO\tSimultaneous launching of two or more missiles\nSAMAST\tSandia ABRES Material Systems Test\nSAMPEX\tSolar, Anomalous and Magnetospheric Particle Explorer\nSEASAT\tSea (Observation) Satellite\nSENT\tSevere nose-tip Environment Test\nSET\tSingle Engine Test\nSFT\tSupplemental Flight Test\nSLC\tSpace Launch Complex\nSLF\tSpace Launch Facility\nSLTF\tSilo Launch Test Facility\nSLV\tSpace Launch Vehicle\nSM\tSolar Mesosphere\nSMLV\tSingle Module Launch Vehicle\nSNOE\tStudent Nitric Oxide Explorer\nSOOS\tStacked Oscar On Scout\nSOT\tSpecial Operational Test\nSPACE\tOrbital space Operations\n\nvi"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SPACEPROBE\tNon-orbital space operations\nST\tSpecial Test\nSTEX\tSpace Technology Experiment\nSTM\tSpecial Test Missile\nSTP\tSpecial Test Program\nSTREP\tSystem Technology Reentry Experiments Program\nSWAS\tSubmillimeter Wave Astronomy Satellite\n\nTAC\tTactical Air Command\nTARGET\tMissile target for surface-to-air/air-to-air missile firing practice\nTAT\tThrust Augmented Thor\nTD\tTechnology Demonstration\nTDT\tTarget Development Test\nTDV\tTechnology Development Vehicle\nTERRIERS\tTomographic Experiment using Radioactive Recombinative Ionospheric EUV and Radio Sources\nTIP\tTransition Improvement Program\nTOMS-EP\tTotal Ozone Mapping Spectrometer-Earth Probe\nTREP\tThrusted Replica\nTP\tTest Pad\nTRACE\tTransition Region and Coronal Explorer\n\nUTE\tUnified Test Equipment\n\nWIRE\tWide Field Infrared Explorer\n\nvii"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH FACILITY GUIDE\n\nBLDG NMBR\tPRESENT DESIGNATION\tFORMER DESIGNATION\tBLDG NMBR\tPRESENT DESIGNATION\tFORMER DESIGNATION\tBLDG NMBR\tPRESENT DESIGNATION\tFORMER DESIGNATION\nNONE\tPALC-B\tN/A\t1788\tBMRS A-3\t576 A-3\t1920\t576-D\tN/A\n390\tSLC-6\tN/A\t\t\t4300 A-3\t1935\t576-G\tOSTF-2\n580\tSLC-5\tPALC-D\t\t\tABRES A-3\t1962\tLF-21\tN/A\n589\tPLC-C\tPALC-C\t1790\tBMRS A-2\t576 A-2\t1963\tLF-10\tLF-22\n715\tSLC-4E\tPALC-2-4\t\t\t4300 A-2\t1964\tLF-23\tN/A\n738\tSLC-4W\tPALC-2-3\t\t\tABRES A-2\t1965\tLF-24\tN/A\n751\tSLC-3E\tPALC-1-2\t1797\tBMRS A-1\t576 A-1\t1966\tLF-25\tN/A\n770\tSLC-3W\tPALC-1-1\t\t\t4300 A-1\t1967\tLF-26\tN/A\n939\tPLC-A\tPALC-A\t\t\tABRES A-1\t1971\tLF-02\t394 A-1\n1050\t395-C\tN/A\t1799\t395-B\tN/A\t1972\tLF-03\t394 A-2\n1520\t395-D\tN/A\t1815\tBOMARC-1\tN/A\t1976\tLF-04\t394 A-3\n1611\t576-E\tN/A\t1817\tBOMARC-2\tN/A\t1977\tLF-05\t394 A-4\n1620\tSLC-2E\t75-1-1\t1820\tABRES B-3\t576 B-3\t1980\tLF-06\t394 A-5\n1623\tSLC-2W\t75-1-2\t1825\tABRES B-2\t576 B-2\t1981\tLF-07\t394 A-6\n1635\tSLC-1W\t75-3-4\t1835\tABRES B-1\t576 B-1\t1986\tLF-08\t394 A-7\n1642\tSLC-1E\t75-3-5\t1836\t576-F\tOSTF-1\t1993\tLF-09\tN/A\n1651\tSLC-10E\t75-2-7\t1840\tTP-01\tN/A\n\t\tLE-7\t1861\tOSTF\tN/A\n1658\tSLC-10W\t75-2-6\t1875\t395 A-1\tN/A\n\t\t4300 B-6\t1877\t395 A-2\tN/A\n\t\tLE-6\t1879\t395 A-3\tN/A\n1661\tLE-8\t75-2-8\t1885\tSLTF\tN/A\n1681\t4300 C\tN/A\t1895\t576-C\tN/A\n\nviii"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANNUAL LAUNCH SUMMARY BY COMMAND\n1958 - 1998\n\nChart I\n1958 - 1978\n\nLAUNCH AGENCY\t58\t59\t60\t61\t62\t63\t64\t65\t66\t67\t68\t69\t70\t71\t72\t73\t74\t75\t76\t77\t78\tSUB TOTAL\nAFSC\t1\t8\t13\t29\t57\t63\t48\t51\t64\t63\t42\t42\t29\t28\t25\t24\t23\t22\t16\t12\t17\t677\nSAC\t\t1\t7\t2\t15\t45\t69\t50\t55\t38\t24\t34\t44\t43\t21\t13\t14\t14\t15\t12\t10\t526\nNAVY\t\t12\t\t\t2\t5\t\t\t3\t5\t6\t16\t8\t8\t10\t3\t5\t5\t6\t6\t1\t101\nNASA\t\t\t1\t2\t\t1\t\t\t1\t4\t4\t2\t2\t2\t7\t3\t5\t5\t2\t1\t3\t45\nADC\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t3\t2\t1\t2\t3\t2\t1\t2\t1\t2\t1\t1\t21\nRAF\t\t10\t5\t4\t2\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t21\nAEC\t\t\t10\t1\t2\t1\t2\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t16\nCRL\t\t\t7\t2\t1\t1\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t11\nSUB TOTAL\t1\t31\t43\t40\t79\t116\t119\t101\t123\t113\t78\t95\t85\t84\t65\t44\t49\t47\t41\t32\t32\t1,418\n\nix"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANNUAL LAUNCH SUMMARY BY COMMAND\n1958 - 2000\nChart II\n1979 - 2000 & Totals\nAs of 3 Feb 2000\nLAUNCH AGENCY | 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 | SUB TOTAL | GRAND TOTAL\nAFSC 13 15 10 5 16 13 9 9 10 5 3 2 6 2 118 795\nSAC 11 9 8 9 9 8 6 7 9 5 8 9 7 2 107 633\nNAVY 1 3 2 6 107\nNASA 1 3 1 3 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 27 72\nADC 1 1 22\nRAF 0 21\nAEC 0 16\nCRL 0 11\nACC 5 2 7 7\nAFSPC 1 2 5 9 7 9 8 7 7 55 55\nAFMC 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 13 13\nAMROC 1 1 1\nTAC 1 1 1\nLLL 1 1 1\nLM 1 1 3 5 5\nOSC (Taurus) 1 2 1 4 4\nOSC (Pegasus)1 2 4 2 3 2 12 12\nBoeing2 6 5 2 13 13\nSUB TOTAL 27 27 21 17 28 23 17 17 20 13 13 13 16 13 11 13 11 16 19 18 17 2 372 1790\n1The Pegasus flight program began with three \"captive\" flights using inert vehicles. These missions were conducted on 9 Nov 89, 15 Dec 89, and 30 Jan 90. The first seven \"live\" Pegasus flights, beginning on 5 April 90, as well as the inert flights, originated from the Ames/Dryden Flight Research facility at Edwards AFB, California. They were carried aloft by a modified B-52 aircraft provided by NASA. Beginning with the eight mission, Pegasus was carried by a modified Lockheed L-1011 aircraft and was staged from Vandenberg AFB.\n2The Delta II program was operated by McDonnell Douglas Aerospace until the company was purchased by Boeing Aerospace, 4 August 1997.\nx"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANNUAL LAUNCH SUMMARY BY BOOSTER\nChart I\n1958 - 1978\nLAUNCH VEHICLE | 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 | SUB TOTAL\nAMROC 0\nARGO-8 1 1 1 3\nASTRID 0\nASTROBEE 1500 2 1 3\nATLAS D 1 8 4 17 17 6 18 14 6 91\nATLAS E 1 3 7 2 3 12 7 5 4 2 7 1 1 2 5 16\nATLAS F 3 5 4 2 2 11 12 7 5 4 2 7 1 1 2 5 73\nATLAS H 0\nATLAS/AGENA A 1 1 2\nATLAS/AGENA B 5 8 3 16\nATLAS/AGENA D 4 10 10 15 3 1 43\nATLAS/BURNER II 1 1 2\nATLAS/PRIME 1 2 3\nBLACK BRANT III 2 2\nBOMARC A 3 5 6 16 8 8 10 56\nBOMARC B 2 5 5 6 6 1 25\nCASTOR/SCRAMJET 1 1\nDAC ROC 2 2\nDEACON ARROW II 3 1 4\nDELTA 0\nGLCM 0\nHONEST JOHN/NIKE/NIKE 1 2 3\nKIVA/HOPA 7 1 1 9\nMINUTEMAN A (I) 2 17 18 3 10 50\nMINUTEMAN B (II) 6 34 21 30 34 10 20 19 16 6 11 6 8 3 3 4 231\nMINUTEMAN F (III) 4 10 13 12 25 26 17 10 6 7 4 7 3 3 147\nMINUTEMAN G (III) 5 10 17 14 10 11 11 11 13 10 112\nNIKE/AEROBEE 2 2 4\nNIKE/ASP 12 12\nNIKE/CAJUN 3 3\nNIKE/JAVELIN 2 2\nNIKE/VIPER I 4 4\nPAIUTE TOMAHAWK 1 1\nPEACEKEEPER 0\nSCOUT 4 6 5 2 7 7 4 2 1 1 3 1 4 2 2 1 1 53\nSCOUT JUNIOR 1 4 4 2 11\nSEAGULL 1 1\nSERGEANT/LANCEA 1 1 2\nSMALL ICBM 0\nTAT/AGENA B 1 1\nTAT/AGENA D 10 20 15 11 6 1 63\nTAURUS 0\nTERRIER/ASP IV 2 2\nTHOR (IRBM) 1 10 5 4 2 22\nTHOR/ABLE-STAR 2 3 3 8\nTHOR/AGENA A 8 7 15\nTHOR/AGENA B 4 17 18 2 41\nTHOR/AGENA D 8 9 2 3 22\nTHOR/ALTAIR 4 2 6\nTHOR/BLOCK 5D-1 1 1 1 3\nTHOR/BURNER II 1 4 2 1 2 2 12\nTHOR/BURNER IIA 1 2 1 2 1 1 8\nTHOR/DELTA 1 4 4 2 2 2 5 3 1 5 2 2 33\nTHORAD/AGENA D 2 6 10 10 7 6 2 43\nTITAN I 2 5 10 1 2 20\nTITAN II 7 8 14 9 4 5 1 2 2 1 1 3 1 58\nTITAN II SLV 0\nTITAN IIIB/AGENA D 3 7 8 6 5 5 5 4 3 3 4 2 2 57\nTITAN IIID 1 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 16\nTITAN 34D 0\nTITAN IV 0\nUTE/TOMAHAWK 1 1\nSUB TOTAL 1 31 43 40 79 116 119 101 123 113 79 95 85 84 65 44 49 47 41 32 32 1,418"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANNUAL LAUNCH SUMMARY BY BOOSTER\nChart II\n1979 - 1998\nLAUNCH VEHICLE | 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 | SUB TOTAL | GRAND TOTAL\nAMROC 1 1 1\nARGO-8 0 3\nASTRID 1 1 1\nASTROBEE 1500 0 3\nATLAS D 0 91\nATLAS E 1 1 1 3 3 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 23 39\nATLAS F 2 4 1 7 80\nATLAS H 2 1 1 1 5 5\nATLAS/AGENA A 0 2\nATLAS/AGENA B 0 16\nATLAS/AGENA D 0 43\nATLAS/BURNER II 0 2\nATLAS/PRIME 0 3\nBLACK BRANT III 0 2\nBOMARC A 0 56\nBOMARC B 1 3 2 6 31\nCASTOR/SCRAMJET 0 1\nDAC ROC 0 2\nDEACON ARROW II 0 4\nDELTA 2 1 2 1 1 7 7\nDELTA II 1 2 6 5 14 14\nGLCM 1 1 1\nHONEST JOHN/NIKE/NIKE 0 3\nKIVA/HOPA 0 9\nLOCKHEED LAUNCH VEHICLE (LLV-1) 1 1 2 2\nMINUTEMAN A (I) 0 50\nMINUTEMAN B (II) 6 5 5 1 5 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 2 1 36 267\nMINUTEMAN F (II) 4 1 3 2 1 3 1 2 1 18 165\nMINUTEMAN G (III) 10 9 8 6 7 7 6 7 8 5 7 6 4 4 3 4 2 3 3 5 114 226\nNIKE/AEROBEE 0 4\nNIKE/ASP 0 12\nNIKE/CAJUN 0 3\nNIKE/JAVELIN 0 2\nNIKE/VIPER I 0 4\nPAIUTE TOMAHAWK 0 1\nPEACEKEEPER 3 3 4 5 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 1 45 45\nPEGASUS 2 4 2 3 11 11\nSCOUT 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 16 69\nSCOUT JUNIOR 0 11\nSEAGULL 0 1\nSERGEANT/LANCEA 0 2\nSMALL ICBM 1 1 2 2\nTAT/AGENA B 0 1\nTAT/AGENA D 0 63\nTAURUS 1 2 3 3\nTERRIER/ASP IV 0 2\nTHOR (IRBM) 0 22\nTHOR/ABLE-STAR 0 8\nTHOR/AGENA A 0 15\nTHOR/AGENA B 0 41\nTHOR/AGENA D 0 22\nTHOR/ALTAIR 0 6\nTHOR/BLOCK 5D-1 1 1 2 5\nTHOR/BURNER II 0 12\nTHOR/BURNER IIA 0 8\nTHOR/DELTA 0 33\nTHORAD/AGENA D 0 43\nTITAN I 0 20\nTITAN II 0 58\nTITAN II SLV 1 1 1 1 1 7 7\nTITAN IIIB/AGENA D 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 11 68\nTITAN IIID 1 2 1 2 6 22\nTITAN 34D 1 2 1 1 1 1 7 7\nTITAN IV 2 1 1 1 2 1 8 8\nUTE/TOMAHAWK 0 1\nSUB TOTAL 27 27 21 17 28 23 17 17 20 13 13 13 16 13 11 13 11 16 19 18 353 1,771\nxii"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ANNUAL LAUNCH SUMMARY BY BOOSTER\nChart III\n1999 - 2018\nLAUNCH VEHICLE | 99 00 | SUB TOTAL | GRAND TOTAL\nAMROC 1\nARGO-8 3\nASTRID 1\nASTROBEE 1500 3\nATHENA II (Formerly LLV) 2 2 4\nATLAS D 91\nATLAS E 39\nATLAS F 80\nATLAS H 5\nATLAS/AGENA A 2\nATLAS/AGENA B 16\nATLAS/AGENA D 43\nATLAS/BURNER II 2\nATLAS/PRIME 3\nATLAS IIAS 1 1\nBLACK BRANT III 2\nBOMARC A 56\nBOMARC B 31\nCASTOR/SCRAMJET 1\nDAC ROC 2\nDEACON ARROW II 4\nDELTA 7\nDELTA II 2 2 16\nGLCM 1\nHONEST JOHN/NIKE/NIKE 3\nKIVA/HOPA 9\nMINOTAUR 1 1\nMINUTEMAN A (I) 50\nMINUTEMAN B (II) 267\nMINUTEMAN F (II) 1 1 2 167\nMINUTEMAN G (III) 4 4 230\nNIKE/AEROBEE 4\nNIKE/ASP 12\nNIKE/CAJUN 3\nNIKE/JAVELIN 2\nNIKE/VIPER I 4\nPAIUTE TOMAHAWK 1\nPEACEKEEPER 1 1 46\nPEGASUS XL 2 2 13\nSCOUT 69\nSCOUT JUNIOR 11\nSEAGULL 1\nSERGEANT/LANCEA 2\nSMALL ICBM 2\nTAT/AGENA B 1\nTAT/AGENA D 63\nTAURUS 1 1 4\nTERRIER/ASP IV 2\nTHOR (IRBM) 22\nTHOR/ABLE-STAR 8\nTHOR/AGENA A 15\nTHOR/AGENA B 41\nTHOR/AGENA D 22\nTHOR/ALTAIR 6\nTHOR/BLOCK 5D-1 5\nTHOR/BURNER II 12\nTHOR/BURNER IIA 8\nTHOR/DELTA 33\nTHORAD/AGENA D 43\nTITAN I 20\nTITAN II 58\nTITAN II SLV 2 2 9\nTITAN IIIB/AGENA D 68\nTITAN IIID 22\nTITAN 34D 7\nTITAN IV 1 1 9\nUTE/TOMAHAWK 1\nSUB TOTAL 17 2 19 1,790\nNOTES: The Athena rocket was formerly called LMLV (Lockheed Martin Launch Vehicle). The name was changed in September 1997. Nicknamed Minotaur, it was officially called, \"Orbital Suborbital Program Space Vehicle.\"\nxiii"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n1. 16 Dec 58 TUNE UP 1001 75-1-1 THOR DEMONSTRATION 1 AFSC 1\n2. 28 Feb 59 FLYING YANKEE 1003 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 1 AFSC 2\n3. 13 Apr 59 EARLY TIME 1004 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 2 AFSC 3\n4. 16 Apr 59 LIONS ROAR 1005 75-2-8 THOR IWST 2 RAF 1\n5. 3 Jun 59 GOLD DUKE 1007 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 3 AFSC 4\n6. 16 Jun 59 RIFLE SHOT 1008 75-2-7 THOR IWST 3 RAF 2\n7. 25 Jun 59 LONG ROAD 1010 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 4 AFSC 5\n8. 14 Jul 59 SUNFLARE II • PALC-A NIKE/ASP SPACE PROBE 1 NAVY 1\n9. 24 Jul 59 N/A • PALC-A NIKE/ASP SPACE PROBE 2 NAVY 2\n10. 24 Jul 59 N/A • PALC-A NIKE/ASP SPACE PROBE 3 NAVY 3\n11. * Jul 59 N/A • PALC-A NIKE/ASP SPACE PROBE 4 NAVY 4\n12. • Jul 59 N/A • PALC-A NIKE/ASP SPACE PROBE 5 NAVY 5\n13. • Jul 59 N/A • PALC-A NIKE/ASP SPACE PROBE 6 NAVY 6\n14. • Aug 59 N/A • PALC-A NIKE/ASP SPACE PROBE 7 NAVY 7\n15. * Aug 59 N/A • PALC-A NIKE/ASP SPACE PROBE 8 NAVY 8\n16. • Aug 59 N/A * PALC-A NIKE/ASP SPACE PROBE 9 NAVY 9\n17. • Aug 59 N/A • PALC-A NIKE/ASP SPACE PROBE 10 NAVY 10\n18. * Aug 59 N/A • PALC-A NIKE/ASP SPACE PROBE 11 NAVY 11\n19. • Aug 59 N/A • PALC-A NIKE/ASP SPACE PROBE 12 NAVY 12\n(*) Data not available\nPAGE 1"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n20. 3 Aug 59 BEAN BALL 1011 75-1-1 THOR IWST 4 RAF 3\n21. 13 Aug 59 FLY HIGH 1012 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 5 AFSC 6\n22. 14 Aug 59 SHORT SKIP 1014 75-2-6 THOR IWST 5 RAF 4\n23. 19 Aug 59 HURRY UP 1013 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 6 AFSC 7\n24. 9 Sep 59 DESERT HEAT 1015 576 A-2 ATLAS D DEMONSTRATION 1 SAC 1\n25. 17 Sep 59 GREASE GUN 1016 75-1-2 THOR IWST 6 RAF 5\n26. 6 Oct 59 FOREIGN TRAVEL 1018 75-2-8 THOR CTL 7 RAF 6\n27. 21 Oct 59 STAND FAST 1019 75-1-1 THOR IWST 8 RAF 7\n28. 7 Nov 59 CARGO NET 1017 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 7 AFSC 8\n29. 12 Nov 59 BEACH BUGGY 1020 75-1-2 THOR IWST 9 RAF 8\n30. 20 Nov 59 LIVID LADY 1021 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 8 AFSC 9\n31. 1 Dec 59 HARD RIGHT 1022 75-1-1 THOR CTL 10 RAF 9\n32. 14 Dec 59 TALL GIRL 1023 75-1-2 THOR IWST 11 RAF 10\n33. 21 Jan 60 RED CABOOSE 1025 75-1-2 THOR IWST 12 RAF 11\n34. 26 Jan 60 DUAL EXHAUST 1024 576 A-3 ATLAS D DEMONSTRATION 2 SAC 2\n35. 4 Feb 60 HUNGRY EYE 1026 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 9 AFSC 10\n36. 4 Feb 60 N/A • PALC-B NIKE/VIPER I SPACE PROBE 1 AEC 1\n37. 19 Feb 60 DERBY DAY 1027 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 10 AFSC 11\n38. 2 Mar 60 CENTER BOARD 1028 75-2-8 THOR CTL 13 RAF 12\n(*) Data not available"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n39. 15 Apr 60 RAM HORN 1029 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 11 AFSC 12\n40. 22 Apr 60 QUICK START 1031 576 B-2 ATLAS D ORT 3 SAC 3\n41. 29 Apr 60 N/A • PALC-B NIKE/VIPER I SPACE PROBE 2 AEC 2\n42. 6 May 60 LUCKY DRAGON 1032 576 B-1 ATLAS D ORT 4 SAC 4\n43. 22 Jun 60 CLAN CHATTAN 1034 75-2-7 THOR CTL 14 RAF 13\n44. 27 Jun 60 N/A • PALC-B NIKE/VIPER I SPACE PROBE 3 AEC 3\n45. 29 Jun 60 RED GARTER 1030 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 12 AFSC 13\n46. 1 Jul 60 N/A 0045 PALC-B DEACON/ARROW II SPACE PROBE 1 AEC 4\n47. 8 Jul 60 N/A 0023 PALC-B DEACON/ARROW II SPACE PROBE 2 AEC 5\n48. 14 Jul 60 N/A 0001 PALC-B DEACON/ARROW II SPACE PROBE 3 AEC 6\n49. 20 Jul 60 N/A 0004 PALC-B NIKE/CAJUN SPACE PROBE 1 AEC 7\n50. 22 Jul 60 TIGER SKIN 1033 576 B-1 ATLAS D ORT 5 SAC 5\n51. 10 Aug 60 FOGGY BOTTOM 1035 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 13 AFSC 14\n52. 12 Aug 60 N/A 0071 PALC-B KIVA/HOPI SPACE PROBE 1 CRL 1\n53. 18 Aug 60 LIMBER LEG 1036 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 14 AFSC 15\n54. 12 Sep 60 GOLDEN JOURNEY 1037 576 B-3 ATLAS D DASO 6 SAC 6\n55. 13 Sep 60 COFFEE CALL 1038 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA A SPACE 15 AFSC 16\n56. 19 Sep 60 N/A * PALC-A SERGEANT/LANCEA SPACE PROBE 1 NASA 1\n57. 29 Sep 60 HIGH ARROW 1039 576 B-2 ATLAS D DASO 7 SAC 7\n(*) Data not available"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n58. 30 Sep 60 N/A 0002 PALC-B NIKE/VIPER I SPACE PROBE 4 AEC 8\n59. 11 Oct 60 LEFT RUDDER 1040 75-2-8 THOR CTL 15 RAF 14\n60. 11 Oct 60 GIBSON GIRL 1042 PALC-1-1 ATLAS/AGENA A SPACE 1 AFSC 17\n61. 12 Oct 60 DIAMOND JUBILEE 1043 576 B-1 ATLAS D DASO 8 SAC 8\n62. 12 Oct 60 N/A 0043 PALC-B KIVA/HOPI SPACE PROBE 2 CRL 2\n63. 26 Oct 60 SOUP SPOON 1041 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 1 AFSC 18\n64. 27 Oct 60 N/A 0042 PALC-B KIVA/HOPI SPACE PROBE 3 CRL 3\n65. 12 Nov 60 BOXING GLOVE 1046 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 2 AFSC 19\n66. 21 Nov 60 N/A 0007A PALC-B NIKE/CAJUN SPACE PROBE 2 AEC 9\n67. 22 Nov 60 N/A 0007B PALC-B NIKE/CAJUN SPACE PROBE 3 AEC 10\n68. 7 Dec 60 POWER TRACTOR 1047 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 3 AFSC 20\n69. 7 Dec 60 N/A 0047 PALC-B KIVA/HOPI SPACE PROBE 4 CRL 4\n70. 13 Dec 60 ACTION TOWN 1048 75-2-8 THOR CTL 16 RAF 15\n71. 14 Dec 60 N/A 0053A PALC-B KIVA/HOPI SPACE PROBE 5 CRL 5\n72. 14 Dec 60 N/A 0053B PALC-B KIVA/HOPI SPACE PROBE 6 CRL 6\n73. 16 Dec 60 HOT SHOT 1050 576 B-3 ATLAS D R&D 9 AFSC 21\n74. 16 Dec 60 N/A 0084 PALC-B KIVA/HOPI SPACE PROBE 7 CRL 7\n75. 20 Dec 60 TEE BIRD 1049 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 4 AFSC 22\n76. 31 Jan 61 JAYHAWK JAMBOREE 1051 PALC-1-1 ATLAS/AGENA A SPACE 2 AFSC 23\n(*) Data not available"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n77. 17 Feb 61 SPIRIT LEVEL 1052 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 5 AFSC 24\n78. 18 Feb 61 BENCH WARRANT 1053 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 6 AFSC 25\n79. 27 Mar 61 N/A * PALC-B DEACON/ARROW II SPACE PROBE 4 AEC 11\n80. 29 Mar 61 SHEPHERDS BUSH 1056 75-2-7 THOR CTL 17 RAF 16\n81. 30 Mar 61 FEATHER CUT 1054 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 7 AFSC 26\n82. 8 Apr 61 RUNNING BOARD 1055 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 8 AFSC 27\n83. 3 May 61 SILVER SADDLE 1058 SLTF TITAN I DEMONSTRATION 1 AFSC 28\n84. 24 May 61 LITTLE SATIN 1057 576 B-2 ATLAS D R&D 10 AFSC 29\n85. 7 Jun 61 SURE SHOT 1061 576-F ATLAS E R&D 1 AFSC 30\n86. 8 Jun 61 ISLAND QUEEN 1059 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 9 AFSC 31\n87. 16 Jun 61 MARKED CARDS 1060 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 10 AFSC 32\n88. 20 Jun 61 WHITE BISHOP 1063 75-2-7 THOR CTL 18 RAF 17\n89. 7 Jul 61 HIGH WING 1064 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 11 AFSC 33\n90. 12 Jul 61 POLAR ORBIT 1062 PALC-1-2 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 1 AFSC 34\n91. 21 Jul 61 STACKED DECK 1066 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 12 AFSC 35\n92. 1 Aug 61 N/A * PALC-A ASTROBEE 1500 SPACE PROBE 1 CRL 8\n93. 3 Aug 61 CRISP BACON 1067 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 13 AFSC 36\n94. 22 Aug 61 NEW NICKLE 1065 576 B-3 ATLAS D R&D 11 AFSC 37\n95. 30 Aug 61 FULL BLOWER 1069 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 14 AFSC 38\n(*) Data not available"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n96. 6 Sep 61 SKYE BOAT 1072 LE-7 THOR CTL 19 RAF 18\n97. 9 Sep 61 FIRST MOTION 1068 PALC-1-1 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 2 AFSC 39\n98. 12 Sep 61 TWISTED BRAIDS 1070 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 15 AFSC 40\n99. 17 Sep 61 CANE POLE 1073 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 16 AFSC 41\n100. 23 Sep 61 BIG SAM 1071 395 A-1 TITAN I R&D 2 AFSC 42\n101. 13 Oct 61 CAP PISTOL 1075 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 17 AFSC 43\n102. 21 Oct 61 BIG TOWN 1076 PALC-1-2 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 3 AFSC 44\n103. 23 Oct 61 DEAD HEAT 1079 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 18 AFSC 45\n104. 5 Nov 61 FOG CUTTER 1080 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 19 AFSC 46\n105. 15 Nov 61 CAT FIGHT 1081 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 20 AFSC 47\n106. 15 Nov 61 N/A * PALC-A SERGEANT/LANCEA SPACE PROBE 2 NASA 2\n107. 18 Nov 61 N/A * PALC-A ARGO D-8 SPACE PROBE 1 NASA 3\n108. 22 Nov 61 ROUND TRIP 1085 PALC-1-1 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 4 AFSC 48\n109. 29 Nov 61 BIG PUSH 1077 576 B-2 ATLAS D DASO 12 SAC 9\n110. 4 Dec 61 N/A 8201 PALC-A SCOUT JR SPACE PROBE 1 AFSC 49\n111. 5 Dec 61 PIPERS DELIGHT 1087 LE-8 THOR CTL 20 RAF 19\n112. 7 Dec 61 BIG CHIEF 1086 576 B-3 ATLAS D DASO 13 SAC 10\n113. 8 Dec 61 N/A • PALC-A ASTROBEE 1500 SPACE PROBE 2 CRL 9\n114. 12 Dec 61 SILVER STRIP 1088 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 21 AFSC 50\n(*) Data not available"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n115. 22 Dec 61 OCEAN WAY 6201 PALC-1-2 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 5 AFSC 51\n116. 13 Jan 62 CANDY WRAPPER 3201 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 22 AFSC 52\n117. 17 Jan 62 BLUE FIN 7201 576 B-2 ATLAS D DASO 14 SAC 11\n118. 20 Jan 62 DOUBLE MARTINI 1074 395 A-3 TITAN I DEMONSTRATION 3 AFSC 53\n119. 23 Jan 62 BLUE MOSS 1200 576 B-3 ATLAS D DASO 15 SAC 12\n120. 16 Feb 62 BIG JOHN 1201 576 B-2 ATLAS D DASO 16 SAC 13\n121. 21 Feb 62 CHAIN SMOKE 0201 576 B-3 ATLAS D DASO 17 SAC 14\n122. 21 Feb 62 CABLE SPLICE 8201 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 23 AFSC 54\n123. 23 Feb 62 BLUE GANDER 0202 395 A-1 TITAN I R&D 4 AFSC 55\n124. 27 Feb 62 CAREER GIRL 7201 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 24 AFSC 56\n125. 28 Feb 62 SILVER SPUR 5201 OSTF-1 ATLAS E R&D 2 AFSC 57\n126. 7 Mar 62 LOOSE TOOTH 1410 PALC-1-2 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 6 AFSC 58\n127. 14 Mar 62 N/A • PALC-B TERRIER/ASP IV SPACE PROBE 1 NAVY 13\n128. 19 Mar 62 BLACK KNIFE 8201 LE-7 THOR CTL 21 RAF 20\n129. 23 Mar 62 CURRY COMB I 7201 576 B-2 ATLAS D DASO 18 SAC 15\n130. 9 Apr 62 NIGHT HUNT 1201 PALC-1-2 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 7 AFSC 59\n131. 11 Apr 62 CURRY COMB II 7202 576 B-2 ATLAS D DASO 19 SAC 16\n132. 17 Apr 62 LONG SLICE 7201 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 25 AFSC 60\n133. 26 Apr 62 DAINTY DOLL 8202 PALC-1-1 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 8 AFSC 61"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n134. 26 Apr 62 BLUE SCOUT I 9201 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 1 AFSC 62\n135. 27 Apr 62 BLUE BALL 5201 576 B-2 ATLAS D DASO 20 SAC 17\n136. 28 Apr 62 TOTAL TIME 3201 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 26 AFSC 63\n137. 4 May 62 SILVER TOP 7201 395 A-1 TITAN I R&D 5 AFSC 64\n138. 11 May 62 CANNONBALL FLYER 0122 576 B-3 ATLAS D DASO 21 SAC 18\n139. 15 May 62 HOLE PUNCH 2201 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 27 AFSC 65\n140. 23 May 62 BLUE SCOUT II 1201 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 2 AFSC 66\n141. 29 May 62 LEAK PROOF 6201 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 28 AFSC 67\n142. 31 May 62 N/A 5201 PALC-A SCOUT JR SPACE PROBE 2 AFSC 68\n143. 1 Jun 62 KNOTTY PINE 8201 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 29 AFSC 69\n144. 17 Jun 62 RUBBER GUN 9201 PALC-1-1 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 9 AFSC 70\n145. 18 Jun 62 TASTY TREAT 0201 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 30 AFSC 71\n146. 18 Jun 62 BLAZING CIDERS 9201 LE-8 THOR CTL 22 RAF 21\n147. 22 Jun 62 TIGHT SKIRT 5201 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 31 AFSC 72\n148. 26 Jun 62 ALL JAZZ 7203 576 B-3 ATLAS D DASO 22 SAC 19\n149. 27 Jun 62 TRIAL TRACK 7201 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 1 AFSC 73\n150. 9 Jul 62 N/A • PALC-A ARGO D-8 SPACE PROBE 2 AEC 12\n151. 9 Jul 62 N/A • PALC-B ASTROBEE 1500 SPACE PROBE .3 AEC 13\n152. 12 Jul 62 LONG LADY 7201 576 B-2 ATLAS D DASO 23 SAC 20"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n153. 13 Jul 62 EXTRA BONUS 9202 OSTF-1 ATLAS E R&D 3 AFSC 74\n154. 18 Jul 62 ARMORED CAR 6201 PALC-1-1 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 10 AFSC 75\n155. 19 Jul 62 FIRST TRY 7202 576 B-1 ATLAS D DASO 24 SAC 21\n156. 20 Jul 62 ADOBE HOME 2201 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 32 AFSC 76\n157. 24 Jul 62 N/A 1201 PALC-A SCOUT JR SPACE PROBE 3 AFSC 77\n158. 27 Jul 62 ANCHOR ROPE 8201 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 33 AFSC 78\n159. 1 Aug 62 HIS NIBS 3202 576-E ATLAS F R&D 1 AFSC 79\n160. 1 Aug 62 APPLE GREEN 7201 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 2 AFSC 80\n161. 5 Aug 62 AIR SCOUT 7201 PALC-1-1 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 11 AFSC 81\n162. 5 Aug 62 N/A • PALC-B KIVA/HOPI SPACE PROBE 8 CRL 10\n163. 9 Aug 62 PEG BOARD 9201 576 B-3 ATLAS D DASO 25 SAC 22\n164. 9 Aug 62 PEG BOARD II 9202 576 B-2 ATLAS D DASO 26 SAC 23\n165. 10 Aug 62 CRASH TRUCK 1201 OSTF-2 ATLAS F R&D 2 AFSC 82\n166. 23 Aug 62 BLUE SCOUT III 2201 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 3 AFSC 83\n167. 28 Aug 62 APPLE RIND 5201 75-1-2 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 3 AFSC 84\n168. 1 Sep 62 BEADY EYE 8201 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 34 AFSC 85\n169. 17 Sep 62 BIG FLIGHT 3201 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 35 AFSC 86\n170. 28 Sep 62 AIR CRUSADE 5201 394 A-3 MINUTEMAN A R&D 1 AFSC 87\n171. 28 Sep 62 BIG GAME 8201 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 36 AFSC 88"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n172. 29 Sep 62 ARCTIC ZONE 4201 75-1-2 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 4 AFSC 89\n173. 2 Oct 62 BRIAR STREET 0201 576 B-2 ATLAS D ST 27 SAC 24\n174. 6 Oct 62 TIGHT BRACELET 0201 395 A-1 TITAN I ST 6 AFSC 90\n175. 9 Oct 62 CALL BOARD 4201 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 37 AFSC 91\n176. 26 Oct 62 ANCHOR BUOY 1201 75-1-2 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 5 AFSC 92\n177. 26 Oct 62 CLOSED CIRCUITS 8201 576 A-1 ATLAS D NIKE TARGET 28 AFSC 93\n178. 5 Nov 62 BAIL OUT 9201 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 38 AFSC 94\n179. 11 Nov 62 AFTER DECK 4202 PALC-1-1 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 12 AFSC 95\n180. 14 Nov 62 ACTION TIME 5201 OSTF-2 ATLAS F R&D 3 AFSC 96\n181. 21 Nov 62 N/A 5201 PALC-A SCOUT JR SPACE PROBE 4 AFSC 97\n182. 24 Nov 62 GOLDEN RUSH 9201 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 39 AFSC 98\n183. 4 Dec 62 CALAMITY JANE 8201 75-1-2 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 6 AFSC 99\n184. 5 Dec 62 YELLOW JACKET 4201 395 A-1 TITAN I R&D 7 AFSC 100\n185. 10 Dec 62 AMERICAN BEAUTY 7201 394 A-4 MINUTEMAN A R&D 2 AFSC 101\n186. 12 Dec 62 DEER PARK 6201 576 A-3 ATLAS D NIKE TARGET 29 AFSC 102\n187. 12 Dec 62 CORN FIELD 7201 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 7 AFSC 103\n188. 13 Dec 62 N/A * PALC-B TERRIER/ASP IV SPACE PROBE 2 NAVY 14\n189. 14 Dec 62 BABY DOLL 8201 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 8 AFSC 104\n190. 17 Dec 62 BARGIN COUNTER 5201 PALC-1-2 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 13 AFSC 105"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n191. 18 Dec 62 N/A 3201 PALC-A SCOUT JR SPACE PROBE 5 AFSC 106\n192. 18 Dec 62 BLUE SCOUT IV 5201 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 4 AFSC 107\n193. 18 Dec 62 OAK TREE 8202 OSTF-1 ATLAS E R&D 4 AFSC 108\n194. 22 Dec 62 FLY HIGH 2201 576 A-1 ATLAS D NIKE TARGET 30 SAC 25\n195. 7 Jan 63 CANDY KISSES 0048 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 9 AFSC 109\n196. 16 Jan 63 CIRCUS BOY 0180 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 10 AFSC 110\n197. 25 Jan 63 BIG SUE 0276 576 B-2 ATLAS D OT 31 SAC 26\n198. 29 Jan 63 TEN MEN 0210 395 A-1 TITAN I R&D 8 AFSC 111\n199. 31 Jan 63 FAINT CLICK 0192 576 A-3 ATLAS D NIKE TARGET 32 SAC 27\n200. 1 Feb 63 N/A 0096 PALC-A SCOUT JR SPACE PROBE 6 AFSC 112\n201. 11 Feb 63 N/A 0429 PALC-A ARGO D-8 SPACE PROBE 3 NASA • 4\n202. 13 Feb 63 FLAG RACE 0370 576 A-1 ATLAS D NIKE TARGET 33 SAC 28\n203. 16 Feb 63 AWFUL TIRED 0280 395-C TITAN II R&D 1 AFSC 113\n204. 19 Feb 63 BLUE SCOUT V 0240 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 5 AFSC 114\n205. 28 Feb 63 PITCH PINE 0561 576 A-3 ATLAS D NIKE TARGET 34 SAC 29\n206. 28 Feb 63 FARM COUNTRY 0583 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 1 AFSC 115\n207. 9 Mar 63 TALL TREE 3 0478 576 B-3 ATLAS D OT 35 SAC 30\n208. 11 Mar 63 TALL TREE 2 0477 576 B-2 ATLAS D OT 36 SAC 31\n209. 13 Mar 63 N/A 0264 PALC-A SCOUT JR SPACE PROBE 7 AFSC 116"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\nDATE\nNICKNAME\nOP #\nFACILITY\nVEHICLE TYPE\nPROGRAM\nCUM BY BOOSTER\nCOMMAND\nCUM BY COMMAND\n210. 15 Mar 63 TALL TREE 1 0479 576 B-1 ATLAS D OT 37 SAC 32\n211. 15 Mar 63 TALL TREE 5 0541 576-D ATLAS F OT 4 SAC 33\n212. 16 Mar 63 LEADING EDGE 0648 576 A-1 ATLAS D NIKE TARGET 38 SAC 34\n213. 18 Mar 63 CAMP OUT 0627 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 2 AFSC 117\n214. 21 Mar 63 KENDALL GREEN 0931 OSTF-2 ATLAS F R&D 5 AFSC 118\n215. 23 Mar 63 TALL TREE 4 0529 576-E ATLAS F OT 6 SAC 35\n216. 30 Mar 63 YOUNG BLOOD 0774 395 A-2 TITAN I NIKE TARGET 9 SAC 36\n217. 1 Apr 63 NICKEL STEEL 0720 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 11 AFSC 119\n218. 4 Apr 63 HALF MOON 0693 395 A-1 TITAN I R&D 10 AFSC 120\n219. 5 Apr 63 BLUE SCOUT VI 0804 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 6 AFSC 121\n220. 11 Apr 63 AFGAN RUG 0216 394 A-5 MINUTEMAN A R&D 3 AFSC 122\n221. 12 Apr 63 VELVET TOUCH 0968 394 A-1 MINUTEMAN A R&D 4 AFSC 123\n222. 13 Apr 63 RAMP ROOSTER 1100 395 A-3 TITAN I NIKE TARGET 11 SAC 37\n223. 23 Apr 63 PAT HAND 1069 394 A-4 MINUTEMAN A R&D 5 AFSC 124\n224. 24 Apr 63 BLACK BUCK 0410 OSTF-1 ATLAS E R&D 5 AFSC 125\n225. 26 Apr 63 BLUE SCOUT VII 1298 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 7 AFSC 126\n226. 26 Apr 63 FALL HARVEST 1008 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 12 AFSC 127\n227. 27 Apr 63 DINNER PARTY 1040 395-C TITAN II R&D 2 AFSC 128\n228. 30 Apr 63 BOLD JOURNEY 0911 394 A-2 MINUTEMAN A R&D 6 AFSC 129\n229. 1 May 63 MARES TAIL 1061 395 A-1 TITAN I R&D 12 AFSC 130\nPAGE 12"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\nDATE\nNICKNAME\nOP #\nFACILITY\nVEHICLE TYPE\nPROGRAM\nCUM BY BOOSTER\nCOMMAND\nCUM BY COMMAND\n230. 8 May 63 FINE SHOW 0963 394 A-5 MINUTEMAN A R&D 7 AFSC 131\n231. 9 May 63 DAMP CLAY 1105 PALC-1-2 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 14 AFSC 132\n232. 11 May 63 N/A 1169 PALC-B KIVA/HOPI SPACE PROBE 9 CRL 11\n233. 13 May 63 FLYING FROG 1085 395-D TITAN II R&D 3 AFSC 133\n234. 17 May 63 N/A 1110 PALC-A SCOUT JR SPACE PROBE 8 AFSC 134\n235. 18 May 63 GATE LATCH 0924 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 3 AFSC 135\n236. 24 May 63 HEY DAY 1144 394 A-6 MINUTEMAN B R&D 1 AFSC 136\n237. 4 Jun 63 DOCK HAND 0765 OSTF-1 ATLAS E R&D 6 AFSC 137\n238. 12 Jun 63 HARPOON GUN 1026 576 A-3 ATLAS D NIKE TARGET 39 SAC 38\n239. 12 Jun 63 GREEN CASTLE 0954 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 4 AFSC 138\n240. 12 Jun 63 BIG FOUR 1240 PALC-1-2 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 15 AFSC 139\n241. 15 Jun 63 BLUE SCOUT VIII 1292 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 8 AFSC 140\n242. 15 Jun 63 BUSY FLY 1341 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 13 AFSC 141\n243. 18 Jun 63 WAR AXE 1286 394 A-3 MINUTEMAN A DASO 8 SAC 39\n244. 20 Jun 63 THREAD NEEDLE 1322 395-C TITAN II R&D 4 AFSC 142\n245. 26 Jun 63 CALICO MISS 0999 75-1-2 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 5 AFSC 143\n246. 28 Jun 63 TRIM CHIEF 1382 394 A-1 MINUTEMAN A DASO 9 SAC 40\n247. 29 Jun 63 BABY BLUE 1440 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA B SPACE 1 AFSC 144\n248. 1 Jul 63 N/A 1428 PALC-A BLACK BRANT III SPACE PROBE 1 NAVY 15\n249. 3 Jul 63 GO BOY 1335 576-C ATLAS E DASO 7 SAC 41\nPAGE 13"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\nDATE\nNICKNAME\nOP #\nFACILITY\nVEHICLE TYPE\nPROGRAM\nCUM BY BOOSTER\nCOMMAND\nCUM BY COMMAND\n250. 5 Jul 63 GRAND TOUR 1307 394 A-4 MINUTEMAN A R&D 10 AFSC 145\n251. 11 Jul 63 TRIPLE PLAY 1460 394 A-2 MINUTEMAN A DASO 11 SAC 42\n252. 12 Jul 63 FISH POOL 1467 PALC-2-3 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 1 AFSC 146\n253. 16 Jul 63 SILVER SPUR 1488 395 A-2 TITAN I DASO 13 SAC 43\n254. 18 Jul 63 CHILI WILLIE 1266 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 14 AFSC 147\n255. 18 Jul 63 DAMP DUCK 1456 PALC-1-2 ATLAS/AGENA B SPACE 16 AFSC 148\n256. 26 Jul 63 SILVER DOLL 1365 576-F ATLAS E DASO 8 SAC 44\n257. 27 Jul 63 DIAL RIGHT 1596 394 A-5 MINUTEMAN A DASO 12 SAC 45\n258. 30 Jul 63 BIG FLIGHT 1618 576-C ATLAS E DASO 9 SAC 46\n259. 30 Jul 63 BIG TALK 1370 75-1-2 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 6 AFSC 149\n260. 31 Jul 63 COOL WATER 1 1651 576 B-1 ATLAS D ST 40 SAC 47\n261. 8 Aug 63 WELL DONE 1685 394 A-1 MINUTEMAN A DASO 13 SAC 48\n262. 15 Aug 63 HIGH RIVER 1776 395 A-1 TITAN I DASO 14 SAC 49\n263. 24 Aug 63 GHOST DANCE 1419 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 7 AFSC 150\n264. 24 Aug 63 PIPE DREAM 1823 576-F ATLAS E DASO 10 SAC 50\n265. 28 Aug 63 COOL WATER II 1786 576 B-3 ATLAS D ST 41 SAC 51\n266. 29 Aug 63 PELICAN PETE 1561 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 15 AFSC 151\n267. 29 Aug 63 GLASS WAND 1698 394 A-6 MINUTEMAN B R&D 2 AFSC 152\n268. 30 Aug 63 POLAR ROUTE 1536 395 A-3 TITAN I DASO 15 SAC 52\n269. 6 Sep 63 COOL WATER III 1814 576 B-2 ATLAS D ST 42 SAC 53\nPAGE 14"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\nDATE\nNICKNAME\nOP #\nFACILITY\nVEHICLE TYPE\nPROGRAM\nCUM BY BOOSTER\nCOMMAND\nCUM BY COMMAND\n270. 6 Sep 63 FIXED FEE 1947 PALC-2-3 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 2 AFSC 153\n271. 11 Sep 63 COOL WATER IV 1836 576 B-1 ATLAS D ST 43 SAC 54\n272. 17 Sep 63 DAILY MAIL 1938 395 A-2 TITAN I DASO 16 SAC 55\n273. 23 Sep 63 TAR TOP 1792 395-D TITAN II R&D 5 AFSC 154\n274. 23 Sep 63 FELLOW KING 1353 75-1-2 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 8 AFSC 155\n275. 25 Sep 63 FILTER TIP 2022 576-C ATLAS E DASO 11 SAC 56\n276. 26 Sep 63 STATE PARK 2342 394 A-7 MINUTEMAN B R&D 3 AFSC 156\n277. 27 Sep 63 BLUE SCOUT IX 1610 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 9 AFSC 157\n278. 28 Sep 63 DUCK TAIL 1968 75-1-1 THOR/ABLE-STAR SPACE 1 AFSC 158\n279. 3 Oct 63 HOT RUM 1856 576-G ATLAS F R&D 7 AFSC 159\n280. 4 Oct 63 GOLD DUKE 2032 394 A-6 MINUTEMAN B R&D 4 AFSC 160\n281. 7 Oct 63 COOL WATER V 2219 576 B-3 ATLAS D ST 44 SAC 57\n282. 17 Oct 63 CEDAR LAKE 2222 394 A-3 MINUTEMAN A OT 14 SAC 58\n283. 24 Oct 63 N/A 2522 PALC-A DAC ROC SPACE PROBE 1 NAVY 16\n284. 25 Oct 63 HAY BAILER 2196 PALC-2-3 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 3 AFSC 161\n285. 29 Oct 63 MARK DOWN 2437 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 9 AFSC 162\n286. 31 Oct 63 DRAG CHUTE 2313 394 A-5 MINUTEMAN A OT 15 SAC 59\n287. 2 Nov 63 HARD LINE 2271 394 A-2 MINUTEMAN A OT 16 SAC 60\n288. 4 Nov 63 HICKORY HOLLOW 2365 4300 A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 45 SAC 61\n289. 7 Nov 63 N/A 2548 PALC-A BLACK BRANT III SPACE PROBE 2 NAVY 17\nPAGE 15"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\nDATE\nNICKNAME\nOP #\nFACILITY\nVEHICLE TYPE\nPROGRAM\nCUM BY BOOSTER\nCOMMAND\nCUM BY COMMAND\n290. 9 Nov 63 FIRE TRUCK 2293 395-C TITAN II R&D 6 AFSC 163\n291. 9 Nov 63 JUMP SUIT 2268 75-1-2 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 16 AFSC 164\n292. 13 Nov 63 COOL WATER VI 2247 576 B-2 ATLAS D ST 46 SAC 62\n293. 14 Nov 63 FAST RIDE 2410 395 A-1 TITAN I DASO 17 SAC 63\n294. 18 Nov 63 N/A 2717 PALC-A HONEST JOHN/NIKE/NIKE SPACE PROBE 1 AEC 14\n295. 27 Nov 63 BIG CIRCLE 2673 394 A-6 MINUTEMAN B DASO 5 SAC 64\n296. 27 Nov 63 DRY DUNE 2260 PALC-1-1 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 17 AFSC 165\n297. 29 Nov 63 ARM CHAIR 2750 394 A-5 MINUTEMAN A OT 17 SAC 65\n298. 5 Dec 63 LIMIT LINE 2239 75-1-1 THOR/ABLE-STAR SPACE 2 AFSC 166\n299. 10 Dec 63 N/A 2549 PALC-A DAC ROC SPACE PROBE 2 NAVY 18\n300. 13 Dec 63 ANSWER MAN 2539 394 A-1 MINUTEMAN B DASO 6 SAC 66\n301. 13 Dec 63 BAMBOO SHOOT 2600 394 A-3 MINUTEMAN A OT 18 SAC 67\n302. 16 Dec 63 USEFUL TASK 2943 395-D TITAN II R&D 7 AFSC 167\n303. 17 Dec 63 N/A 1125 4300C SCOUT JR SPACE PROBE 9 SAC 68\n304. 18 Dec 63 LENS COVER 2874 4300 A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 47 SAC 69\n305. 18 Dec 63 REST EASY 2372 PALC-2-3 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 4 AFSC 168\n306. 18 Dec 63 DAY BOOK 2216 576-G ATLAS F R&D 8 AFSC 169\n307. 19 Dec 63 BLUE SCOUT X 2843 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 10 AFSC 170\n308. 20 Dec 63 BENT HOOK 2932 394 A-5 MINUTEMAN A OT 19 SAC 70\n309. 20 Dec 63 N/A 3007 PALC-A SEAGULL SPACE PROBE 1 NAVY 19\nPAGE 16"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n310. 21 Dec 63 WATER SPOUT 1388 75-1-2 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 10 AFSC 171\n311. 10 Jan 64 CLOCK WATCH 2985 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B DASO 7 SAC 71\n312. 11 Jan 64 EMPTY POCKET 3231 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 11 AFSC 172\n313. 16 Jan 64 DOUBLE BARREL 3210 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B DASO 8 SAC 72\n314. 19 Jan 64 BENCH TOP 3367 75-1-2 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 18 AFSC 173\n315. 23 Jan 64 RED SAILS 3345 395-C TITAN II R&D 8 AFSC 174\n316. 23 Jan 64 BLACK BUSH 3324 LF-04 MINUTEMAN A OT 20 SAC 73\n317. 25 Jan 64 RAMS HORN 3217 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 40 AFSC 175\n318. 29 Jan 64 ECHO HILL 3285 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B DASO 9 SAC 74\n319. 6 Feb 64 N/A 3393 PALC-A HONEST JOHN/NIKE/ NIKE SPACE PROBE 2 AEC 15\n320. 11 Feb 64 BLUE PAINT 3311 LF-06 MINUTEMAN A OT 21 SAC 75\n321. 12 Feb 64 BLUE BAY 3678 576-F ATLAS E ST 12 SAC 76\n322. 15 Feb 64 GARDEN PARTY 3444 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 12 AFSC 176\n323. 17 Feb 64 SAFE CONDUCT 1817 395-B TITAN II R&D 9 AFSC 177\n324. 24 Feb 64 SNAP ROLL 3705 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B OT 10 SAC 77\n325. 24 Feb 64 FAST ORBIT 3714 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 11 SAC 78\n326. 25 Feb 64 UPPER OCTANE 2423 PALC-2-3 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 5 AFSC 178\n327. 27 Feb 64 FIRST QUARTER 3722 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 13 AFSC 179\n328. 29 Feb 64 BRASS RING 3719 LF-04 MINUTEMAN A OT 22 SAC 79\n329. 29 Feb 64 BOX SEAT 3712 LF-05 MINUTEMAN A OT 23 SAC 80\nPAGE 17"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n330. 3 Mar 64 N/A 4018 PALC-A HONEST JOHN/NIKE/ NIKE SPACE PROBE 3 AEC 16\n331. 6 Mar 64 KITE TAIL 3725 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT 12 SAC 81\n332. 11 Mar 64 INK BLOTTER 3435 PALC-2-3 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 6 AFSC 180\n333. 13 Mar 64 APPLE PIE 3892 395-C TITAN II R&D 10 AFSC 181\n334. 23 Mar 64 BIG TREE 4106 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B OT 13 SAC 82\n335. 24 Mar 64 HEALTH FARM 3467 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 14 AFSC 182\n336. 25 Mar 64 CHROME PLATE 4178 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 14 SAC 83\n337. 26 Mar 64 CIGAR SMOKE 4196 LF-05 MINUTEMAN A OT 24 SAC 84\n338. 31 Mar 64 CRACKER BOX 4264 LF-04 MINUTEMAN A OT 25 SAC 85\n339. 3 Apr 64 HIGH BALL 4009 576-G ATLAS F DASO 9 SAC 86\n340. 13 Apr 64 COOPER FACE 4319 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT 15 SAC 87\n341. 21 Apr 64 USEFUL TOOL 4368 75-1-1 THOR/ABLE-STAR SPACE 3 AFSC 183\n342. 23 Apr 64 DARK LADY 4453 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 16 SAC 88\n343. 23 Apr 64 ANCHOR DAN 3743 PALC-2-3 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 7 AFSC 184\n344. 27 Apr 64 NICE BIRD 2921 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 15 AFSC 185\n345. 27 Apr 64 DRAG OUT 4462 LF-05 MINUTEMAN A OT 26 SAC 89\n346. 7 May 64 BLACK WASP 4399 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B OT 17 SAC 90\n347. 11 May 64 DIP NET 4395 LF-06 MINUTEMAN A OT 27 SAC 91\n348. 18 May 64 DRESS BLUES 4728 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 18 SAC 92\n349. 19 May 64 BIG FRED 3592 PALC-2-3 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 8 AFSC 186\nPAGE 18"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n350. 25 May 64 DEER HORN 4808 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT 19 SAC 93\n351. 3 Jun 64 ARROW PLANT 4412 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 11 AFSC 187\n352. 4 Jun 64 KICK BALL 3483 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 16 AFSC 188\n353. 9 Jun 64 GOLD CLUB 4815 LF-05 MINUTEMAN A OT 28 SAC 94\n354. 11 Jun 64 HIGH OCTANE 4905 LF-06 MINUTEMAN A OT 29 SAC 95\n355. 13 Jun 64 BEAGLE HOUND 3236 75-1-2 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 17 AFSC 189\n356. 15 Jun 64 CRUSH PROOF 4867 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B OT 20 SAC 96\n357. 17 Jun 64 INDIO IKE 4467 75-3-4 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 19 AFSC 190\n358. 18 Jun 64 IRON LUNG 4839 4300 A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 48 SAC 97\n359. 19 Jun 64 GREEN DOOR 3754 75-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 18 AFSC 191\n360. 25 Jun 64 CHERRY PIE 4926 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 12 AFSC 192\n361. 29 Jun 64 ELM BRANCH 4437 LF-04 MINUTEMAN A OT 30 SAC 98\n362. 29 Jun 64 BLACK PEPPER 5169 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B R&D 21 AFSC 193\n363. 2 Jul 64 FIRING ORDER 3395 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 19 AFSC 194\n364. 6 Jul 64 QUARTER ROUND 3684 PALC-2-3 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 9 AFSC 195\n365. 7 Jul 64 NORMAL TIMES 5306 LF-05 MINUTEMAN A OT 31 SAC 99\n366. 7 Jul 64 FIVE POINTS 5319 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B OT 22 SAC 100\n367. 9 Jul 64 GEORGIA BOY 5239 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT 23 SAC 101\n368. 10 Jul 64 OLD HAT 3491 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 20 AFSC 196\n369. 13 Jul 64 OLD FOX 5299 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 24 SAC 102\nPAGE 19"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n370. 27 Jul 64 GINGER FOOT 5425 LF-06 MINUTEMAN A OT 32 SAC 103\n371. 29 Jul 64 KNOCK WOOD 5418 4300 A-3 ATLAS D NIKE TARGET 49 SAC 104\n372. 30 Jul 64 COBRA SKIN 5342 395-D TITAN II DASO 11 SAC 105\n373. 5 Aug 64 LONG LOOP 3042 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 21 AFSC 197\n374. 7 Aug 64 LARGE CHARGE 5493 576-E ATLAS F DASO 10 SAC 106\n375. 7 Aug 64 GOLD REEF 5528 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 25 SAC 107\n376. 11 Aug 64 DOUBLE TALLEY 5427 395-C TITAN II DASO 12 SAC 108\n377. 13 Aug 64 GENTLE ANNIE 5440 395-B TITAN II DASO 13 SAC 109\n378. 14 Aug 64 BIG SICKLE 3802 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 10 AFSC 198\n379. 17 Aug 64 LIMBER POLE 5548 LF-05 MINUTEMAN A OT 33 SAC 110\n380. 21 Aug 64 KILO KATE 2739 75-1-2 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 22 AFSC 199\n381. 21 Aug 64 LIGHT HORSE 5682 LF-08 MINUTEMAN B OT 26 SAC 111\n382. 25 Aug 64 HURRY BABY 3826 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 13 AFSC 200\n383. 25 Aug 64 IVY TOWER 5563 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT 27 SAC 112\n384. 27 Aug 64 GALLANT GAL 5741 576-F ATLAS E ST 13 SAC 113\n385. 28 Aug 64 HULU MOON 5478 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA B SPACE 41 AFSC 201\n386. 29 Aug 64 CANDY BAG 1155 PALC-A SCOUT JR SPACE PROBE 10 AFSC 202\n387. 31 Aug 64 BIG DEAL 5773 576-D ATLAS F DASO 11 SAC 114\n388. 1 Sep 64 DAWN PATROL 5476 LF-04 MINUTEMAN A OT 34 SAC 115\n389. 8 Sep 64 LONG LINE 5808 LF-06 MINUTEMAN A OT 35 SAC 116\nPAGE 20"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n390. 10 Sep 64 HOT ROOF 5484 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B OT 28 SAC 117\n391. 14 Sep 64 QUIT CLAIM 3497 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 23 AFSC 203\n392. 15 Sep 64 BUTTERFLY NET 5783 4300 A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 50 SAC 118\n393. 15 Sep 64 QUICK LAUNCH 5892 LF-08 MINUTEMAN B ST 29 SAC 119\n394. 21 Sep 64 LONG RANGE 5694 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT 30 SAC 120\n395. 22 Sep 64 BUZZING BEE 5937 4300 A-3 ATLAS D NIKE TARGET 51 SAC 121\n396. 23 Sep 64 SLOW PACE 4262 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 11 AFSC 204\n397. 23 Sep 64 MOUNT UP 5811 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 31 SAC 122\n398. 29 Sep 64 PAINTED WARRIOR 5890 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT 32 SAC 123\n399. 2 Oct 64 BLACK WIDOW 4907 395-C TITAN II DASO 14 SAC 124\n400. 5 Oct 64 SOLID PACK 3333 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 24 AFSC 205\n401. 6 Oct 64 AIR ALARM 5798 75-1-2 THOR/ABLE-STAR SPACE 4 AFSC 206\n402. 8 Oct 64 BUSY LINE 4035 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 12 AFSC 207\n403. 9 Oct 64 GUS GOOSE 6072 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 14 AFSC 208\n404. 17 Oct 64 MOOSE HORN 3559 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 25 AFSC 209\n405. 23 Oct 64 BOON DECKER 4384 PALC-2-3 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 13 AFSC 210\n406. 2 Nov 64 BROWN MOOSE 5434 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 26 AFSC 211\n407. 2 Nov 64 PARIS ROYAL 6257 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 33 SAC 125\n408. 2 Nov 64 NET GAIN 6276 LF-08 MINUTEMAN B OT 34 SAC 126\n409. 3 Nov 64 ECHO HOLE 3062 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 27 AFSC 212\nPAGE 21"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n410. 4 Nov 64 HIGH RIDER 5897 395-D TITAN II DASO 15 SAC 127\n411. 4 Nov 64 BLACK FROST 5905 LF-06 MINUTEMAN A OT 36 SAC 128\n412. 5 Nov 64 LONG SHOT 6308 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT 35 SAC 129\n413. 6 Nov 64 POP FLY 6370 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT 36 SAC 130\n414. 6 Nov 64 ORANGE CHUTE 6317 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B OT 37 SAC 131\n415. 9 Nov 64 QUICK JUMP 5888 LF-05 MINUTEMAN A OT 37 SAC 132\n416. 18 Nov 64 VERBAL VENTURE 3660 75-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 28 AFSC 213\n417. 21 Nov 64 IMA BIRD 6328 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 15 AFSC 214\n418. 1 Dec 64 BROOK TROUT 6310 576 A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 52 SAC 133\n419. 4 Dec 64 OPERA GLASS 6212 576 A-3 ATLAS D NIKE TARGET 53 SAC 134\n420. 4 Dec 64 BATTLE ROYAL 4439 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 14 AFSC 215\n421. 8 Dec 64 WEST WING I 6589 395 A-1 TITAN I ST 18 SAC 135\n422. 9 Dec 64 NICKED BLADE 6356 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B OT 38 SAC 136\n423. 9 Dec 64 TOP RAIL 6681 LF-08 MINUTEMAN B OT 39 SAC 137\n424. 12 Dec 64 ASTRO ANNIE 6582 75-1-2 THOR/ABLE-STAR SPACE 5 AFSC 216\n425. 18 Dec 64 ROSY FUTURE 6772 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT 40 SAC 138\n426. 19 Dec 64 UTILITY TOOL 3358 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 29 AFSC 217\n427. 21 Dec 64 BARN OWL 3762 75-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 30 AFSC 218\n428. 21 Dec 64 QUAKER TOWN 6531 PALC-A SCOUT JR SPACE PROBE 11 AFSC 219\n429. 22 Dec 64 STEP OVER 6537 576-E ATLAS F ST 12 SAC 139\nPAGE 22"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n430. 8 Jan 65 PILOT LIGHT 6433 576-G ATLAS F ST 13 SAC 140\n431. 12 Jan 65 PENSIL SET 6973 576-B1 ATLAS D ABRES 54 SAC 141\n432. 14 Jan 65 WEST WIND III 6765 395 A-3 TITAN I ST 19 SAC 142\n433. 15 Jan 65 BUCKET FACTORY 3928 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 13 AFSC 220\n434. 18 Jan 65 ASTRAL LAMP 7040 4300 B-6 THOR/ALTAIR SPACE 1 SAC 143\n435. 20 Jan 65 PURPLE LIGHT 6751 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 41 SAC 144\n436. 21 Jan 65 BEAVERS DAM 6967 576 B-3 ATLAS D ABRES 55 SAC 145\n437. 23 Jan 65 SAND LARK 4703 PALC-2-3 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 15 AFSC 221\n438. 2 Feb 65 RED BRIDGE 7068 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B OT 42 SAC 146\n439. 2 Feb 65 SIDE TRIP 7065 LF-08 MINUTEMAN B OT 43 SAC 147\n440. 8 Feb 65 PRONTO ROSE 7094 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT 44 SAC 148\n441. 25 Feb 65 BOAT CAMP 4782 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 32 AFSC 222\n442. 27 Feb 65 DRAG BAR 7257 576 A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 56 SAC 149\n443. 1 Mar 65 GOLDEN ROSE 7308 LF-08 MINUTEMAN B OT 45 SAC 150\n444. 2 Mar 65 PORK BARREL 7184 576 A-3 ATLAS D ABRES 57 SAC 151\n445. 5 Mar 65 WEST WIND II 6759 395 A-2 TITAN I ST 20 SAC 152\n446. 8 Mar 65 DOCK BELL 7301 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT 46 SAC 153\n447. 9 Mar 65 DEUCE SPOT 4988 75-1-2 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 20 AFSC 223\n448. 11 Mar 65 BUSH CATTLE 7087 75-1-1 THOR/ABLE-STAR SPACE 6 AFSC 224\n449. 12 Mar 65 SHIP RAIL 4920 PALC-2-3 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 16 AFSC 225\nPAGE 23"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n450. 12 Mar 65 ANGEL CAMP 7288 576 B-3 ATLAS D ABRES 58 SAC 154\n451. 16 Mar 65 TAIL FIN 7384 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B OT 47 SAC 155\n452. 17 Mar 65 ASTRAL BODY 7353 4300 B-6 THOR/ALTAIR SPACE 2 SAC 156\n453. 24 Mar 65 ARCTIC SUN 7355 395-B TITAN II OT 16 SAC 157\n454. 25 Mar 65 PAPER ROUTE 4803 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 33 AFSC 226\n455. 25 Mar 65 QUICK NOTE 7395 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 48 SAC 158\n456. 26 Mar 65 FRESH FROG 7580 576 A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 59 AFSC 227\n457. 3 Apr 65 AIR PUMP 4682 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 17 AFSC 228\n458. 6 Apr 65 FLIP SIDE 7500 576 B-1 ATLAS D ABRES 60 AFSC 229\n459. 10 Apr 65 SMOKEY RIVER 7554 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT 49 SAC 159\n460. 13 Apr 65 SEA POINT 7399 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B OT 50 SAC 160\n461. 13 Apr 65 YELLOW LIGHT 7700 LF-08 MINUTEMAN B OT 51 SAC 161\n462. 16 Apr 65 BEAR HUG 7564 395-C TITAN II OT 17 SAC 162\n463. 28 Apr 65 DWARF TREE 4983 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 18 AFSC 230\n464. 29 Apr 65 MUSK OX 5023 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 34 AFSC 231\n465. 30 Apr 65 CARD DECK 7485 395-D TITAN II OT 18 SAC 163\n466. 30 Apr 65 WINTER BREW 7712 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 52 SAC 164\n467. 10 May 65 VIOLET RAY 7739 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT 53 SAC 165\n468. 18 May 65 IVY VINE 8431 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 35 AFSC 232\n469. 18 May 65 SILVER CLOUD 7567 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT 54 SAC 166\nPAGE 24"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n470. 20 May 65 ROYAL EAGLE 8386 4300 B-6 THOR/ALTAIR SPACE 3 SAC 167\n471. 21 May 65 FRONT SIGHT 7722 395-B TITAN II OT 19 SAC 168\n472. 27 May 65 BOTTOM LAND 5236 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 19 AFSC 233\n473. 27 May 65 TENNIS MATCH 7626 ABRES B-3 ATLAS D SPACE 61 AFSC 234\n474. 2 Jun 65 SURF SPRAY 7758 LF-08 MINUTEMAN B OT 55 SAC 169\n475. 3 Jun 65 OLD FOGEY 7530 ABRES B-2 ATLAS D ABRES 62 AFSC 235\n476. 7 Jun 65 WHEEL HORSE 8160 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 56 SAC 170\n477. 8 Jun 65 LEA RING 7608 ABRES A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 63 AFSC 236\n478. 9 Jun 65 FEMALE LOGIC 8425 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 36 AFSC 237\n479. 10 Jun 65 STOCK BOY 7603 ABRES A-3 ATLAS D ABRES 64 AFSC 238\n480. 10 Jun 65 SPEED KING 7751 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B OT 57 SAC 171\n481. 14 Jun 65 GOLD FISH 7799 395-C TITAN II OT 20 SAC 172\n482. 23 Jun 65 WHITE GLOVE 7767 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT 58 SAC 173\n483. 24 Jun 65 PARADISE TREE 8480 75-1-1 THOR/ABLE-STAR SPACE 7 AFSC 239\n484. 25 Jun 65 WORN FACE 5501 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 20 AFSC 240\n485. 29 Jun 65 MAPLE GROVE 7777 LF-08 MINUTEMAN B OT 59 SAC 174\n486. 30 Jun 65 BUSY BEE 7814 395-D TITAN II OT 21 SAC 175\n487. 1 Jul 65 BLIND SPOT 7617 ABRES B-1 ATLAS D ABRES 65 AFSC 241\n488. 2 Jul 65 SWEET TALK 7772 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT 60 SAC 176\n489. 6 Jul 65 STAR DUST 7745 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT 61 SAC 177\nPAGE 25"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n490. 12 Jul 65 WHITE PINE 5810 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 21 AFSC 242\n491. 16 Jul 65 LOST NOVEMBER 8411 75-1-2 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 37 AFSC 243\n492. 19 Jul 65 ROCKY RIVER 5543 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 38 AFSC 244\n493. 21 Jul 65 LONG BALL 7820 395-B TITAN II OT 22 SAC 178\n494. 3 Aug 65 WATER TOWER 5698 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 22 AFSC 245\n495. 4 Aug 65 PIANO WIRE 7611 ABRES B-1 ATLAS D ABRES 66 AFSC 246\n496. 5 Aug 65 SEA TRAMP 7650 ABRES A-2 ATLAS F ABRES 14 AFSC 247\n497. 13 Aug 65 BEAUTY SHOP 8464 75-1-1 THOR/ABLE-STAR SPACE 8 AFSC 248\n498. 16 Aug 65 MAGIC LAMP 7806 395-C TITAN II OT 23 SAC 179\n499. 17 Aug 65 LIGHTS OUT 7208 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 39 AFSC 249\n500. 18 Aug 65 REBEL RANGER 8338 LF-21 MINUTEMAN F R&D 1 AFSC 250\n501. 24 Aug 65 SHUTTLE TRAIN 0264 LF-06 MINUTEMAN A FOT 38 SAC 180\n502. 25 Aug 65 PILOT ROCK 8362 LF-04 MINUTEMAN A FOT 39 SAC 181\n503. 25 Aug 65 NEW ROLE 7835 395-D TITAN II OT 24 SAC 182\n504. 26 Aug 65 TONTO RIM 7963 ABRES B-2 ATLAS D ABRES 67 AFSC 251\n505. 2 Sep 65 WORD SCRAMBLE 3373 75-3-5 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 21 AFSC 252\n506. 9 Sep 65 VICTORIA CROSS 8068 4300 B-6 THOR/ALTAIR SPACE 4 SAC 183\n507. 21 Sep 65 BOLD GUY 7859 395-B TITAN II OT 25 SAC 184\n508. 22 Sep 65 NICKLE SILVER 7221 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 40 AFSC 253\n509. 29 Sep 65 WATER SNAKE 7661 ABRES B-1 ATLAS D ABRES 68 AFSC 254\nPAGE 26"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n510. 30 Sep 65 LOG FOG 6004 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 23 AFSC 255\n511. 5 Oct 65 SEETHING CITY 8051 ABRES B-3 ATLAS D SPACE 69 AFSC 256\n512. 5 Oct 65 UNION LEADER 5325 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 41 AFSC 257\n513. 6 Oct 65 DICE SPOT 8330 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F R&D 2 AFSC 258\n514. 14 Oct 65 OLD ABBEY 0517 75-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 42 AFSC 259\n515. 20 Oct 65 POWER BOX 7849 395-C TITAN II OT 26 SAC 185\n516. 28 Oct 65 HIGH JOURNEY 2155 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 43 AFSC 260\n517. 8 Nov 65 SHOP DEGREE 6232 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 24 AFSC 261\n518. 9 Nov 65 LOW TREE 8988 LF-21 MINUTEMAN F R&D 3 AFSC 262\n519. 27 Nov 65 RED WAGON 1404 395-D TITAN II OT 27 SAC 186\n520. 28 Nov 65 REHEAT 0533 75-1-1 THOR/AGENA D SPACE 22 AFSC 263\n521. 29 Nov 65 WILD GOAT 7927 ABRES A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 70 AFSC 264\n522. 30 Nov 65 CROSS FIRE 7844 395-B TITAN II OT 28 SAC 187\n523. 6 Dec 65 SQUEEKY HUB 0542 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 16 AFSC 265\n524. 9 Dec 65 LUCKY FELLOW 7249 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 44 AFSC 266\n525. 14 Dec 65 GRAND RIVER 0312 LF-04 MINUTEMAN A FOT 40 SAC 188\n526. 15 Dec 65 PUSH PULL 8989 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F R&D 4 AFSC 267\n527. 20 Dec 65 TAG DAY 7869 ABRES B-2 ATLAS D ABRES 71 AFSC 268\n528. 21 Dec 65 SOCIAL CIRCLE 1509 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 17 AFSC 269\n529. 22 Dec 65 SEA ROVER 7914 395-C TITAN II OT 29 SAC 189"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n530. 24 Dec 65 TALL STORY 4639 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 45 AFSC 270\n531. 6 Jan 66 PERSIAN LAMB 2394 4300 B-6 THOR/ALTAIR SPACE 5 SAC 190\n532. 18 Jan 66 RESTLESS DRIFTER 0874 LF-26 MINUTEMAN F R&D 5 AFSC 271\n533. 19 Jan 66 BLANKET PARTY 7253 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 25 AFSC 272\n534. 22 Jan 66 SUPREME CHIEF 2147 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F MOD/R&D 6 AFSC 273\n535. 27 Jan 66 ANCHOR POLE 2560 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 62 SAC 191\n536. 28 Jan 66 INVENTORY AID 1593 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 18 AFSC 274\n537. 2 Feb 66 SEA LEVEL 7291 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 46 AFSC 275\n538. 3 Feb 66 WINTER ICE 3662 395-D TITAN II OT 30 SAC 192\n539. 9 Feb 66 IRON BACK 1439 75-1-2 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 47 AFSC 276\n540. 10 Feb 66 YEAST CAKE 7642 ABRES A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 72 AFSC 277\n541. 11 Feb 66 LONELY MOUNTAIN 0591 ABRES B-2 ATLAS D ABRES 73 AFSC 278\n542. 11 Feb 66 CREEK BED 3016 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 63 SAC 193\n543. 15 Feb 66 MUCHO GRANDE 1184 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 26 AFSC 279\n544. 16 Feb 66 CALAMITY JANE 0643 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F R&D 7 AFSC 280\n545. 17 Feb 66 BLACK HAWK 1555 395-B TITAN II OT 31 SAC 194\n546. 19 Feb 66 SYCAMORE RIDGE 0959 ABRES B-1 ATLAS D ABRES 74 AFSC 281\n547. 24 Feb 66 BROAD ARROW [SALVO] 2571 LF-04 MINUTEMAN A FOT 41 SAC 195\n548. 24 Feb 66 SEA DEVIL 2982 LF-06 MINUTEMAN A FOT 42 SAC 196\n549. 4 Mar 66 ETERNAL CAMP 0812 ABRES A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 75 AFSC 282"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n550. 8 Mar 66 BAIT CAN 1381 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B FOT 64 SAC 197\n551. 9 Mar 66 EASY CHAIR 3488 75-3-4 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 48 AFSC 283\n552. 11 Mar 66 CLEAN SLATE 2004 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 65 SAC 198\n553. 17 Mar 66 FAINT CLICK 2551 LF-08 MINUTEMAN F MOD/R&D 8 AFSC 284\n554. 18 Mar 66 DUMB DORA 0879 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 27 AFSC 285\n555. 19 Mar 66 WHITE BEAR 0500 ABRES A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 76 AFSC 286\n556. 19 Mar 66 SAGE HEN 7132 PALC-A NIKE/JAVELIN SPACE PROBE 1 AFSC 287\n557. 21 Mar 66 TULIP TREE 0294 LF-06 MINUTEMAN A FOT 43 SAC 199\n558. 25 Mar 66 CLOSE TOUCH 1851 395-C TITAN II OT 32 SAC 200\n559. 25 Mar 66 LEAD PENCIL 7192 PALC-A NIKE/JAVELIN SPACE PROBE 2 AFSC 288\n560. 25 Mar 66 WHITE BOOK 0323 LF-04 MINUTEMAN A FOT 44 SAC 201\n561. 25 Mar 66 BEST GIRL 1117 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 19 AFSC 289\n562. 30 Mar 66 BRONZE BELL 7560 ABRES B-3 ATLAS D SPACE 77 AFSC 290\n563. 30 Mar 66 RESORT HOTEL 0340 4300 B-6 THOR/ALTAIR SPACE 6 SAC 202\n564. 4 Apr 66 ARROW FEATHER 1744 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 66 SAC 203\n565. 4 Apr 66 FLY BURNER 2607 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B FOT 67 SAC 204\n566. 5 Apr 66 GOLD RING 8020 395-D TITAN II OT 33 SAC 205\n567. 7 Apr 66 GAPING WOUND 1612 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 49 AFSC 291\n568. 15 Apr 66 GAY CROWD 2617 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 68 SAC 206\n569. 19 Apr 66 SHALLOW STREAM 0910 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 28 AFSC 292"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n570. 20 Apr 66 LONG LIGHT 7984 395-B TITAN II OT 34 SAC 207\n571. 22 Apr 66 LABRADOR RETRIEVER 1527 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 20 AFSC 293\n572. 22 Apr 66 ECHO CANYON 2602 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 69 SAC 208\n573. 2 May 66 LACE STRAP 2622 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B FOT 70 SAC 209\n574. 3 May 66 CRAB CLAW 7947 ABRES A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 78 AFSC 294\n575. 3 May 66 CARGO NET 1508 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 50 AFSC 295\n576. 13 May 66 SUPPLY ROOM 0001 ABRES B-1 ATLAS D ABRES 74 AFSC 296\n577. 14 May 66 PUMP HANDLE 1950 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 29 AFSC 297\n578. 15 May 66 BAD ULCER 2402 75-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 51 AFSC 298\n579. 16 May 66 DOCK WORKER 2599 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 71 SAC 210\n580. 16 May 66 SAGE GREEN 0275 LF-06 MINUTEMAN A FOT 45 SAC 211\n581. 17 May 66 TIGHT DRUM 3013 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 72 SAC 212\n582. 18 May 66 DANCE LESSON 0082 PALC-D SCOUT SPACE 21 AFSC 299\n583. 23 May 66 SHORT TON 1778 PALC-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 52 AFSC 300\n584. 24 May 66 SILVER BULLET 7955 395-C TITAN II FOT 35 SAC 213\n585. 26 May 66 SAND SHARK 1417 ABRES B-2 ATLAS D ABRES 80 AFSC 301\n586. 31 May 66 GREEN PEA 2636 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 73 SAC 214\n587. 31 May 66 NIGHT STAND 0245 LF-04 MINUTEMAN A FOT 46 SAC 215\n588. 2 Jun 66 FOUR ACES 2640 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B FOT 74 SAC 216\n589. 3 Jun 66 POWER DRILL 1577 PALC-2-4 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 30 AFSC 302"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n590. 9 Jun 66 MAMAS BOY 1960 PALC-1-2 ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 31 AFSC 303\n591. 10 Jun 66 VENEER PANEL 7854 ABRES B-1 ATLAS D ABRES 81 AFSC 304\n592. 10 Jun 66 EBONY ANGEL 2611 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 75 SAC 217\n593. 21 Jun 66 GAME LEG 1599 75-3-5 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 53 AFSC 305\n594. 23 Jun 66 CLOTH COAT 3051 75-1-1 TAT/AGENA D SPACE 54 AFSC 306\n595. 24 Jun 66 FOX TRAP 5671 LF-08 MINUTEMAN F MOD/R&D 9 AFSC 307\n596. 26 Jun 66 GOLDEN MOUNTAIN 5615 ABRES B-2 ATLAS D ABRES 82 AFSC 308\n597. 30 Jun 66 HEAVY ARTILLERY 0506 ABRES A-1 ATLAS D ABRES 83 AFSC 309\n598. 11 Jul 66 SOLID GOLD 2225 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 76 SAC 218\n599. 12 Jul 66 SUGAR CANE 2626 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 77 SAC 219\n600. 12 Jul 66 SNAKE CREEK 1850 SLC-4E ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 32 AFSC 310\n601. 13 Jul 66 YOUNG LION 2653 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B FOT 78 SAC 220\n602. 13 Jul 66 STONY ISLAND 0847 ABRES B-3 ATLAS D SPACE 84 AFSC 311\n603. 22 Jul 66 GIANT TRAIN 7968 395-B TITAN II ST 36 SAC 221\n604. 26 Jul 66 TATTERED COAT 2540 LF-08 MINUTEMAN F MOD/R&D 10 AFSC 312\n605. 26 Jul 66 RED MAN 2657 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 79 SAC 222\n606. 29 Jul 66 DAILY MAIL 3014 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 1 AFSC 313\n607. 1 Aug 66 STAR BRIGHT 1883 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F DASO 11 SAC 223\n608. 4 Aug 66 RUBBER MAT 3140 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 22 AFSC 314\n609. 5 Aug 66 PLAY BUSTER 2465 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 80 SAC 224\nPAGE 31"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n610. 8 Aug 66 BUSY RAMROD 0691 ABRES A-2 ATLAS F ABRES 15 AFSC 315\n611. 9 Aug 66 CURLY TOP 1545 SLC-1W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 1 AFSC 316\n612. 16 Aug 66 SILVER DOLL 1832 SLC-4E ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 33 AFSC 317\n613. 16 Aug 66 GIBSON GIRL 2978 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B FOT 81 SAC 225\n614. 16 Aug 66 WHITE ARC 2681 LF-06 MINUTEMAN A FOT 47 SAC 226\n615. 17 Aug 66 MARBLE HALL 2366 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 23 AFSC 318\n616. 19 Aug 66 HAPPY MOUNTAIN 2213 SLC-3E ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 34 AFSC 319\n617. 22 Aug 66 TOWN DOCTOR 2685 LF-04 MINUTEMAN A FOT 48 SAC 227\n618. 25 Aug 66 AUGUST CORN 2801 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 1 NAVY 20\n619. 26 Aug 66 CAREER GIRL 1260 LF-23 MINUTEMAN F DASO 12 SAC 228\n620. 29 Aug 66 MOTHER CAT 2677 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 82 SAC 229\n621. 15 Sep 66 IRIS DUKE 6026 4300 B-6 THOR/BURNER II SPACE 1 SAC 230\n622. 16 Sep 66 BLACK RIVER 7920 395-C TITAN II FOT 37 SAC 231\n623. 16 Sep 66 TAXI DRIVER 1686 SLC-4E ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 35 AFSC 320\n624. 16 Sep 66 SNOW HILL 7231 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 83 SAC 232\n625. 20 Sep 66 RED SPIDER 0289 LF-04 MINUTEMAN A FOT 49 SAC 233\n626. 20 Sep 66 BIG BADGE 1703 SLC-3W TAT/AGENA D SPACE 55 AFSC 321\n627. 22 Sep 66 HOT SPRINGS 2660 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 84 SAC 234\n628. 28 Sep 66 BUSY SCHEME 4096 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 2 AFSC 322\n629. 2 Oct 66 BUSY MALLET 5374 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 1 NASA 5"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n630. 3 Oct 66 GROVE HILL 0335 LF-06 MINUTEMAN A FOT 50 SAC 235\n631. 5 Oct 66 DWARF KILLER 1920 SLC-3E ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 36 AFSC 323\n632. 11 Oct 66 LOW HILL 7242 ABRES A-2 ATLAS F ABRES 16 AFSC 324\n633. 12 Oct 66 GLEAMING STAR 2055 SLC-4E ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 37 AFSC 325\n634. 13 Oct 66 SEA RAVEN 2471 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 85 SAC 236\n635. 14 Oct 66 FALL HARVEST 2827 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 2 NAVY 21\n636. 21 Oct 66 MATCHED CLUBS 2690 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 86 SAC 237\n637. 28 Oct 66 BUSY SERVICE 3820 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 24 AFSC 326\n638. 1 Nov 66 BLUE HAWK 2856 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 3 NAVY 22\n639. 2 Nov 66 GOLDEN AGE 3266 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F DASO 13 SAC 238\n640. 2 Nov 66 RED CABOOSE 2070 SLC-4E ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 38 AFSC 327\n641. 8 Nov 66 BUSY MEETING 1866 SLC-1W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 2 AFSC 328\n642. 16 Nov 66 LONG DOZEN 2672 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 87 SAC 239\n643. 22 Nov 66 WORKING GIRL 8848 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 88 SAC 240\n644. 24 Nov 66 BUBBLE GIRL 8807 395-B TITAN II FOT 38 SAC 241\n645. 5 Dec 66 BUSY MERMAID 1890 SLC-4E ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 39 AFSC 329\n646. 11 Dec 66 BUSY PANAMA 0848 ABRES B-3 ATLAS D SPACE 85 AFSC 330\n647. 13 Dec 66 WATER TEST 8899 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F ERCS/R&D 14 AFSC 331\n648. 14 Dec 66 BUSY SKYROCKET 8968 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 3 AFSC 332\nNOTE: Starting in 1981, all THOR/DELTA vehicles will appear as DELTA."} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n649. 20 Dec 66 SHELL BEACH 2487 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 89 SAC 242\n650. 21 Dec 66 BUSY PEACOCK 5972 SLC-3E ATLAS/PRIME SPACECRAFT 1 AFSC 333\n651. 22 Dec 66 WILD DUCK [SALVO] 2506 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 90 SAC 243\n652. 22 Dec 66 STONE AXE 2512 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 91 SAC 244\n653. 29 Dec 66 FRONT ROW 1584 SLC-2W TAT/AGENA D SPACE 56 AFSC 334\n654. 11 Jan 67 BONUS BOY 0016 LF-08 MINUTEMAN F MOD/R&D 15 AFSC 335\n655. 11 Jan 67 TREE MOSS 2403 4300 C CASTOR/SCRAMJET SPACE PROBE 1 AFSC 336\n656. 14 Jan 67 LONG ROAD 1664 SLC-3W TAT/AGENA D SPACE 57 AFSC 337\n657. 17 Jan 67 BUSY STEPSON 8762 ABRES A-2 ATLAS F ABRES 17 AFSC 338\n658. 22 Jan 67 BUSY NIECE 7257 ABRES B-2 ATLAS D ABRES 86 AFSC 339\n659. 24 Jan 67 TRUCK TRAVEL 0412 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 92 SAC 245\n660. 26 Jan 67 BUSY PENNY 7690 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 2 NASA 6\n661. 30 Jan 67 BUCCANEER SWORD 7119 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 93 SAC 246\n662. 31 Jan 67 BUSY MASON 5589 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 25 AFSC 340\n663. 2 Feb 67 BUSY PARTY 4399 SLC-4E ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 40 AFSC 341\n664. 2 Feb 67 SYCAMORE TREE 3775 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F ERCS/R&D 16 AFSC 342\n665. 7 Feb 67 PIANO TUNER 8939 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 94 SAC 247\n666. 8 Feb 67 ARROW POINT 6073 4300 B-6 THOR/BURNER II SPACE 2 SAC 248\n667. 8 Feb 67 BUSY NEEDLE 2202 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 4 NAVY 23\n668. 13 Feb 67 BUSY BOXER 1084 ABRES A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 18 AFSC 343"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n669. 21 Feb 67 GLORY TRAIL 4126 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 95 SAC 249\n670. 21 Feb 67 BUDDY BOY 5229 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 96 SAC 250\n671. 22 Feb 67 BUSY PAWNSHOP 4750 SLC-3W TAT/AGENA D SPACE 58 AFSC 344\n672. 24 Feb 67 BUSY PALEFACE 4204 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 4 AFSC 345\n673. 5 Mar 67 GIANT CHIEF 4477 SLC-3E ATLAS/PRIME SPACECRAFT 2 AFSC 346\n674. 7 Mar 67 OLD SAL 6212 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 97 SAC 251\n675. 16 Mar 67 LITTLE CHURCH 9035 ABRES A-2 ATLAS F ABRES 19 AFSC 347\n676. 17 Mar 67 GIFT HORSE 7941 395-C TITAN II FOT 39 SAC 252\n677. 22 Mar 67 GLYCOL JELL 6185 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 98 SAC 253\n678. 30 Mar 67 GIANT BANANA 4779 SLC-3W TAT/AGENA D SPACE 59 AFSC 348\n679. 7 Apr 67 BUSY SUNRISE 2997 ABRES B-2 ATLAS D ABRES 87 AFSC 349\n680. 7 Apr 67 BUCK PASSER 3677 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 99 SAC 254\n681. 12 Apr 67 GLAMOUR GIRL 7995 395-B TITAN II FOT 40 SAC 255\n682. 13 Apr 67 BUSY MINUTEMAN 0100 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 26 AFSC 350\n683. 17 Apr 67 BUSY MISSILE 2301 LF-08 MINUTEMAN F ERCS/R&D 17 AFSC 351\n684. 19 Apr 67 BUSY TOURNAMENT 7845 SLC-3E ATLAS/PRIME SPACECRAFT 3 AFSC 352\n685. 20 Apr 67 BUCKLE PAINTER 0620 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 3 NASA 7\n686. 21 Apr 67 OLYMPIC TRIALS 1 3339 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F ST 18 SAC 256\n687. 21 Apr 67 GIPSY CAMP 6128 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 100 SAC 257\n688. 26 Apr 67 BUSY TAILOR 4243 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 5 AFSC 353"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n689. 27 Apr 67 OLEO KNIFE 6264 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 101 SAC 258\n690. 28 Apr 67 BUSY MUMMY 7599 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B R&D 102 AFSC 354\n691. 5 May 67 BUSY WIFE 7102 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 27 AFSC 355\n692. 9 May 67 BUSY BANKER 4696 SLC-1E THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 3 AFSC 356\n693. 11 May 67 BUSY FELLOW 7217 LF-21 MINUTEMAN F R&D 19 AFSC 357\n694. 17 May 67 GLOSSY COAT 6295 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 103 SAC 259\n695. 18 May 67 BUSY OCEAN 7218 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 28 AFSC 358\n696. 19 May 67 OLYMPIC TRIALS 2 3282 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F ST 20 SAC 260\n697. 19 May 67 BUSY GIANT 1495 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B R&D 104 AFSC 359\n698. 19 May 67 BUSY PIGSKIN 0468 ABRES A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 20 AFSC 360\n699. 22 May 67 BUSY CAMPER 4321 SLC-4E ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 41 AFSC 361\n700. 22 May 67 GLOSS TWINE 6336 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 105 SAC 261\n701. 24 May 67 N/A 8611 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 4 NASA 8\n702. 25 May 67 BUSY SPOTTER 2612 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 5 NAVY 24\n703. 25 May 67 GIANT CIGAR 2203 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 6 NAVY 25\n704. 29 May 67 OLD FAD 8086 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 29 AFSC 362\n705. 31 May 67 COMIC STRIP 5712 SLC-2W TAT/AGENA D SPACE 60 AFSC 363\n706. 31 May 67 GLIB TALKER 6416 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 106 SAC 262\n707. 1 Jun 67 BUGGY ROAD 0055 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ST 107 SAC 263\n708. 4 Jun 67 BUSY WOLF 4360 SLC-4E ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 42 AFSC 364\nPAGE 36"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n709. 9 Jun 67 BUCK TYPE 2766 ABRES A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 21 AFSC 365\n710. 16 Jun 67 N/A 3559 SLC-1W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 4 AFSC 366\n711. 20 Jun 67 BUSY PLAYMATE 4882 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 6 AFSC 367\n712. 21 Jun 67 OHIO FARM 6382 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 108 SAC 264\n713. 23 Jun 67 BUGGY WHEEL 8022 395-B TITAN II FOT 41 SAC 265\n714. 28 Jun 67 BUSY COUSIN 1389 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B R&D 109 AFSC 368\n715. 29 Jun 67 DEER FOOT 6096 LE-6 THOR/BURNER II SPACE 3 ADC 1\n716. 5 Jul 67 GLOWING BRIGHT 40 6546 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 110 SAC 266\n717. 6 Jul 67 N/A 4801 ABRES B-2 ATLAS D ABRES 88 AFSC 369\n718. 6 Jul 67 BUCKBOARD SEAT 1921 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 7 NAVY 26\n719. 12 Jul 67 GLOWING BRIGHT 42 6577 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 111 SAC 267\n720. 13 Jul 67 OLD COIN 0728 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ST 112 SAC 268\n721. 15 Jul 67 GIN BABY I 2838 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B R&D 113 AFSC 370\n722. 15 Jul 67 BUSY JOKER 7591 LF-21 MINUTEMAN F R&D 21 AFSC 371\n723. 20 Jul 67 OLYMPIC TRIALS 3 2856 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F ST 22 SAC 269\n724. 22 Jul 67 N/A 2946 ABRES A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 22 AFSC 372\n725. 24 Jul 67 N/A 1879 SLC-2W TAT/AGENA D SPACE 61 AFSC 373\n726. 27 Jul 67 N/A 1342 ABRES B-3 ATLAS D SPACE 89 AFSC 374\n727. 28 Jul 67 N/A 2061 SLC-2E TAT/AGENA D SPACE 62 AFSC 375\n728. 29 Jul 67 BREAD HOOK 0510 ABRES A-2 ATLAS F ABRES 23 AFSC 376\nPAGE 37"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n729. 7 Aug 67 N/A 4827 SLC-1E THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 5 AFSC 377\n730. 8 Aug 67 GLOWING BRIGHT 45 6651 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 114 SAC 270\n731. 16 Aug 67 N/A 4886 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 7 AFSC 378\n732. 22 Aug 67 N/A 7202 LE-6 THOR/BURNER II SPACE 4 ADC 2\n733. 6 Sep 67 GLOWING BRIGHT 46 6611 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 115 SAC 271\n734. 11 Sep 67 GLOWING BRIGHT 44 8038 395-B TITAN II FOT 42 SAC 272\n735. 15 Sep 67 N/A 5089 SLC-1W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 6 AFSC 379\n736. 19 Sep 67 N/A 4941 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 8 AFSC 380\n737. 21 Sep 67 GLOWING BRIGHT 47 6638 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 116 SAC 273\n738. 25 Sep 67 N/A 4947 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 30 AFSC 381\n739. 26 Sep 67 GLOWING BRIGHT 48 6583 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 117 SAC 274\n740. 11 Oct 67 N/A 1264 LE-6 THOR/BURNER II SPACE 5 ADC 3\n741. 11 Oct 67 N/A 0251 ABRES B-3 ATLAS D ABRES 90 AFSC 382\n742. 14 Oct 67 N/A 0846 ABRES A-2 ATLAS F ABRES 24 AFSC 383\n743. 21 Oct 67 OLYMPIC TRIALS 4 4678 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F ST 23 SAC 275\n744. 25 Oct 67 N/A 4995 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 9 AFSC 384\n745. 27 Oct 67 N/A 3012 ABRES A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 25 AFSC 385\n746. 2 Nov 67 N/A 0562 SLC-1E THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 7 AFSC 386\n747. 3 Nov 67 GIN BABY II 5005 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B R&D 118 AFSC 387\n748. 7 Nov 67 N/A 4919 ABRES B-2 ATLAS D ABRES 91 AFSC 388\nPAGE 38"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n749. 10 Nov 67 N/A 8435 ABRES A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 26 AFSC 389\n750. 10 Nov 67 N/A 9200 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 5 NASA 9\n751. 14 Nov 67 GLOWING BRIGHT 52 6808 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 119 SAC 276\n752. 14 Nov 67 GLOWING BRIGHT 51 6745 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 120 SAC 277\n753. 17 Nov 67 GIN BABY III 0690 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F R&D 24 AFSC 390\n754. 21 Nov 67 BUSY LOBBY 0445 LF-08 MINUTEMAN F MOD/R&D 25 AFSC 391\n755. 1 Dec 67 GLOWING BRIGHT 50 6679 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 121 SAC 278\n756. 1 Dec 67 N/A 7236 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 8 NAVY 27\n757. 4 Dec 67 N/A 2027 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 31 AFSC 392\n758. 5 Dec 67 N/A 5000 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 10 AFSC 393\n759. 8 Dec 67 GIN BABY IV 0315 LF-02 MINUTEMAN B R&D 122 AFSC 394\n760. 9 Dec 67 N/A 1001 SLC-1W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 8 AFSC 395\n761. 18 Dec 67 GLORY TRIP 01B 6043 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 123 SAC 279\n762. 21 Dec 67 N/A 6948 ABRES A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 27 AFSC 396\n763. 21 Dec 67 GLORY TRIP 03B 2668 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 124 SAC 280\n764. 21 Dec 67 GLORY TRIP 02B 6703 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 125 SAC 281\n765. 23 Dec 67 OLYMPIC TRIALS 5 2945 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F ST 26 SAC 282\n766. 28 Dec 67 GIN BABY V 7188 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F R&D 27 AFSC 397\n767. 10 Jan 68 OLYMPIC TRIALS 6 2947 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F ST 28 SAC 283\n768. 11 Jan 68 N/A 0651 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 6 NASA 10\nPAGE 39"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n769. 16 Jan 68 GLOWING SAND 5930 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ST 126 SAC 284\n770. 17 Jan 68 N/A 1965 SLC-2W TAT/AGENA D SPACE 63 AFSC 398\n771. 18 Jan 68 N/A 5028 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 11 AFSC 399\n772. 24 Jan 68 N/A 2243 SLC-1E THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 9 AFSC 400\n773. 25 Jan 68 OLYMPIC TRIALS 7 5694 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F ST 29 SAC 285\n774. 31 Jan 68 N/A 6976 ABRES A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 28 AFSC 401\n775. 2 Feb 68 OLYMPIC TRIALS 8 2984 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F ST 30 SAC 286\n776. 2 Feb 68 OLYMPIC TRIALS B-1 6907 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B ST 127 SAC 287\n777. 10 Feb 68 N/A 0916 LF-08 MINUTEMAN F MOD/R&D 31 AFSC 402\n778. 26 Feb 68 N/A 7994 ABRES A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 29 AFSC 403\n779. 28 Feb 68 GLORY TRIP 04T 8126 395-B TITAN II FOT 43 SAC 288\n780. 1 Mar 68 N/A 7034 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 32 AFSC 404\n781. 6 Mar 68 N/A 3457 ABRES A-3 ATLAS E ABRES 14 AFSC 405\n782. 13 Mar 68 N/A 5057 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 12 AFSC 406\n783. 14 Mar 68 N/A 4849 SLC-1E THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 10 AFSC 407\n784. 29 Mar 68 OLYMPIC TRIALS 9 3938 LF-26 MINUTEMAN F ST 32 SAC 289\n785. 2 Apr 68 GLORY TRIP 10T 5576 395-C TITAN II FOT 44 SAC 290\n786. 4 Apr 68 N/A 7010 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 9 NAVY 28\n787. 6 Apr 68 N/A 6968 ABRES A-2 ATLAS F SPACE 30 AFSC 408\n788. 10 Apr 68 OLYMPIC TRIALS B-2 5270 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ST 128 SAC 291\nPAGE 40"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n789. 17 Apr 68 N/A 5105 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 13 AFSC 409\n790. 18 Apr 68 N/A 3214 ABRES A-1 ATLAS E ABRES 15 AFSC 410\n791. 23 Apr 68 GLASS POLE 5811 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ST 129 SAC 292\n792. 27 Apr 68 N/A 5886 ABRES A-3 ATLAS E ABRES 16 AFSC 411\n793. 30 Apr 68 GIANT BLADE 1 5857 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F DASO 33 SAC 293\n794. 1 May 68 N/A 1419 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 11 AFSC 412\n795. 3 May 68 N/A 4266 ABRES A-2 ATLAS F ABRES 31 AFSC 413\n796. 16 May 68 N/A 1631 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 33 AFSC 414\n797. 18 May 68 N/A 7716 SLC-2E THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 12 AFSC 415\n798. 22 May 68 OLYMPIC TRIALS B-3 3454 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ST 130 SAC 294\n799. 22 May 68 N/A 2909 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 10 NAVY 29\n800. 22 May 68 N/A 7869 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER II SPACE 6 ADC 4\n801. 23 May 68 OLD FAITHFUL 5933 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ST 131 SAC 295\n802. 1 Jun 68 N/A 7686 ABRES A-2 ATLAS F ABRES 32 AFSC 416\n803. 5 Jun 68 N/A 5138 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 14 AFSC 417\n804. 12 Jun 68 GLORY TRIP 08T 8172 395-C TITAN II FOT 45 SAC 296\n805. 20 Jun 68 N/A 5343 SLC-1E THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 13 AFSC 418\n806. 22 Jun 68 N/A 5261 ABRES A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 33 AFSC 419\n807. 27 Jun 68 N/A 6396 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 11 NAVY 30\n808. 29 Jun 68 N/A 0443 ABRES A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 34 AFSC 420\nPAGE 41"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n809. 4 Jul 68 N/A 6910 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 7 NASA 11\n810. 8 Jul 68 GIANT FIST 1 1842 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F MOD/DASO 34 SAC 297\n811. 11 Jul 68 N/A 5814 ABRES A-2 ATLAS F SPACE 35 AFSC 421\n812. 12 Jul 68 OLYMPIC TRIALS B-4 7366 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ST 132 SAC 298\n813. 6 Aug 68 N/A 5187 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 15 AFSC 422\n814. 7 Aug 68 N/A 5955 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 14 AFSC 423\n815. 8 Aug 68 N/A 2804 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 34 AFSC 424\n816. 16 Aug 68 N/A 8115 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 8 NASA 12\n817. 16 Aug 68 N/A 2918 SLC-3E ATLAS/BURNER II SPACE 1 AFSC 425\n818. 19 Aug 68 N/A 5824 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 12 NAVY 31\n819. 21 Aug 68 GLORY TRIP 18T 7537 395-C TITAN II FOT 46 SAC 299\n820. 1 Sep 68 SHORT ROUND 3455 LF-21 MINUTEMAN F ST 35 AFSC 426\n821. 10 Sep 68 N/A 5247 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 16 AFSC 427\n822. 18 Sep 68 N/A 0165 SLC-1E THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 15 AFSC 428\n823. 25 Sep 68 N/A 7258 ABRES A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 36 AFSC 429\n824. 27 Sep 68 N/A 5575 ABRES A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 37 AFSC 430\n825. 3 Oct 68 N/A 5669 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 35 AFSC 431\n826. 5 Oct 68 N/A 0964 SLC-1W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 16 AFSC 432\n827. 7 Oct 68 N/A 6316 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 13 NAVY 32\n828. 22 Oct 68 N/A 4078 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER II SPACE 7 ADC 5\nPAGE 42"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n829. 24 Oct 68 GIANT FIST 2A 2259 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F MOD/DASO 36 SAC 300\n830. 30 Oct 68 OLYMPIC TRIALS B-5 4565 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B ST 133 SAC 301\n831. 3 Nov 68 N/A 1315 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 17 AFSC 433\n832. 6 Nov 68 N/A 5296 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 17 AFSC 434\n833. 13 Nov 68 GIANT FIST 4 6053 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F MOD/DASO 37 SAC 302\n834. 13 Nov 68 N/A 0306 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 14 NAVY 33\n835. 16 Nov 68 N/A 7305 ABRES A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 38 AFSC 435\n836. 19 Nov 68 GLORY TRIP 26T 0852 395-C TITAN II FOT 47 SAC 303\n837. 21 Nov 68 GIANT BLADE 2 7494 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F DASO 38 SAC 304\n838. 24 Nov 68 N/A 2923 ABRES A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 39 AFSC 436\n839. 4 Dec 68 N/A 6518 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 18 AFSC 437\n840. 7 Dec 68 OLYMPIC TRIALS B-6 7806 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B ST 134 SAC 305\n841. 10 Dec 68 OLD FAITHFUL 2 4982 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ST 135 SAC 306\n842. 12 Dec 68 N/A 4740 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 18 AFSC 438\n843. 15 Dec 68 N/A 5577 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 9 NASA 13\n844. 20 Dec 68 N/A 2062 LF-08 MINUTEMAN F ST 39 AFSC 439\n845. 8 Jan 69 N/A 0446 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 15 NAVY 34\n846. 16 Jan 69 N/A 7335 ABRES A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 40 AFSC 440\n847. 21 Jan 69 OLYMPIC TRIALS B-7 2930 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B ST 136 SAC 307\n848. 22 Jan 69 N/A 7585 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 19 AFSC 441\nPAGE 43"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n849. 29 Jan 69 N/A 5265 LF-08 MINUTEMAN F ST 40 AFSC 442\n850. 29 Jan 69 SPEC TEST 1 5606 LF-02 MINUTEMAN F ST 41 AFSC 443\n851. 29 Jan 69 N/A 1154 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 16 NAVY 35\n852. 29 Jan 69 N/A 0149 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 10 NASA 14\n853. 30 Jan 69 GLORY TRIP 32B 2664 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 137 SAC 308\n854. 2 Feb 69 GIANT FIST 5 5263 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F MOD/DASO 42 SAC 309\n855. 5 Feb 69 N/A 3890 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 19 AFSC 444\n856. 20 Feb 69 OLYMPIC TRIALS B-8 5311 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B ST 138 SAC 310\n857. 21 Feb 69 N/A 1075 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 17 NAVY 36\n858. 4 Mar 69 N/A 4248 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 20 AFSC 445\n859. 7 Mar 69 SPEC TEST 2 0212 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F ST 43 AFSC 446\n860. 12 Mar 69 GIANT FIST 3 7844 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F MOD/DASO 44 SAC 311\n861. 15 Mar 69 N/A 0832 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 18 NAVY 37\n862. 17 Mar 69 N/A 0070 ABRES A-2 ATLAS F SPACE 41 AFSC 447\n863. 19 Mar 69 N/A 3722 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 20 AFSC 448\n864. 22 Mar 69 N/A 6089 LF-21 MINUTEMAN F ST 45 AFSC 449\n865. 24 Mar 69 GLORY TRIP 33B 3935 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 139 SAC 312\n866. 25 Mar 69 GLORY TRIP 34B 4245 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 140 SAC 313\n867. 11 Apr 69 N/A 8040 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G R&D 1 AFSC 450\n868. 13 Apr 69 N/A 1085 SLC-2E THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 21 AFSC 451\nPAGE 44"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n869. 15 Apr 69 N/A 5310 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 21 AFSC 452\n870. 16 Apr 69 GLORY TRIP 19M 0835 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT 46 SAC 314\n871. 17 Apr 69 N/A 8076 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 19 NAVY 38\n872. 18 Apr 69 SPEC TEST 3 7808 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F ST 47 AFSC 453\n873. 23 Apr 69 GLORY TRIP 35B 5813 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 141 SAC 315\n874. 25 Apr 69 GLORY TRIP 05F 4583 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F OT 48 SAC 316\n875. 30 Apr 69 N/A 2692 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 20 NAVY 39\n876. 1 May 69 N/A 1101 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 22 AFSC 454\n877. 2 May 69 N/A 8114 LF-21 MINUTEMAN F ST 49 AFSC 455\n878. 20 May 69 GLORY TRIP 09F 8041 LF-26 MINUTEMAN F OT 50 SAC 317\n879. 20 May 69 GLORY TRIP 39T 3226 395-B TITAN II FOT 48 SAC 318\n880. 21 May 69 N/A 3276 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 21 NAVY 40\n881. 28 May 69 GLORY TRIP 07F 6395 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F OT 51 SAC 319\n882. 29 May 69 N/A 0464 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G R&D 2 AFSC 456\n883. 3 Jun 69 N/A 1077 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 22 AFSC 457\n884. 5 Jun 69 N/A 7431 SLC-2E THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 23 AFSC 458\n885. 10 Jun 69 GLORY TRIP 11F 7870 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F OT 52 SAC 320\n886. 18 Jun 69 GLORY TRIP 37B 7583 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 142 SAC 321\n887. 19 Jun 69 N/A 7965 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 22 NAVY 41\n888. 20 Jun 69 N/A 2584 LF-21 MINUTEMAN F ST 53 AFSC 459\nPAGE 45"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n889. 21 Jun 69 N/A 6983 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 11 NASA 15\n890. 30 Jun 69 GLORY TRIP 38B 2915 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 143 SAC 322\n891. 2 Jul 69 OLYMPIC TRIALS B-9 4992 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B ST 144 SAC 323\n892. 3 Jul 69 N/A 7953 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 23 NAVY 42\n893. 8 Jul 69 GLORY TRIP 14F 3470 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F OT 54 SAC 324\n894. 12 Jul 69 N/A 8071 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 24 NAVY 43\n895. 15 Jul 69 GLORY TRIP 12F 7427 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F OT 55 SAC 325\n896. 15 Jul 69 GLORY TRIP 13F 0138 LF-26 MINUTEMAN F OT 56 SAC 326\n897. 22 Jul 69 N/A 1127 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER II SPACE 8 ADC 6\n898. 23 Jul 69 GLORY TRIP 41B 4261 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 145 SAC 327\n899. 23 Jul 69 N/A 3654 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 24 AFSC 460\n900. 25 Jul 69 N/A 3937 LF-08 MINUTEMAN F ST 57 AFSC 461\n901. 31 Jul 69 N/A 8285 SLC-1W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 25 AFSC 462\n902. 20 Aug 69 N/A 5359 BMRS A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 42 AFSC 463\n903. 21 Aug 69 GLORY TRIP 17F 5931 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F OT 58 SAC 328\n904. 23 Aug 69 N/A 7807 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 23 AFSC 464\n905. 24 Aug 69 N/A 7842 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 25 NAVY 44\n906. 26 Aug 69 GLORY TRIP 15F 3227 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F OT 59 SAC 329\n907. 28 Aug 69 GLORY TRIP 42B 7998 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 146 SAC 330\n908. 2 Sep 69 GLORY TRIP 20F 7729 LF-26 MINUTEMAN F OT 60 SAC 331\nPAGE 46"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n909. 3 Sep 69 N/A 8827 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 26 NAVY 45\n910. 10 Sep 69 GLORY TRIP 36B 6091 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 147 SAC 332\n911. 13 Sep 69 N/A 6083 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G R&D 3 AFSC 465\n912. 16 Sep 69 N/A 7498 BMRS A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 43 AFSC 466\n913. 20 Sep 69 OLYMPIC TRIALS B-107495 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B ST 148 SAC 333\n914. 20 Sep 69 N/A 8456 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 27 NAVY 46\n915. 22 Sep 69 N/A 3531 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 26 AFSC 467\n916. 23 Sep 69 MR CLEAN 8769 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 149 AFSC 468\n917. 24 Sep 69 GLORY TRIP 21F 5855 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F OT 61 SAC 334\n918. 30 Sep 69 N/A 7613 SLC-1W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 27 AFSC 469\n919. 1 Oct 69 N/A 8490 LF-21 MINUTEMAN F ST 62 AFSC 470\n920. 1 Oct 69 N/A 7981 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 36 AFSC 471\n921. 2 Oct 69 GLORY TRIP 44B 8000 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 150 SAC 335\n922. 10 Oct 69 N/A 7376 BMRS A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 44 AFSC 472\n923. 13 Oct 69 GLORY TRIP 22F 2264 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F OT 63 SAC 336\n924. 15 Oct 69 N/A 7918 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G R&D 4 AFSC 473\n925. 21 Oct 69 GLORY TRIP 45B 0970 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 151 SAC 337\n926. 24 Oct 69 N/A 8455 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 24 AFSC 474\n927. 31 Oct 69 N/A 8865 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G R&D 5 AFSC 475\n928. 6 Nov 69 OLYMPIC TRIALS B-114566 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B ST 152 SAC 338\nPAGE 47"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n929. 7 Nov 69 N/A 5766 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 37 AFSC 476\n930. 13 Nov 69 N/A 7017 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 28 NAVY 47\n931. 13 Nov 69 N/A 8850 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 29 NAVY 48\n932. 18 Nov 69 N/A 7048 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 30 NAVY 49\n933. 19 Nov 69 N/A 7059 LF-21 MINUTEMAN F ST 64 AFSC 477\n934. 25 Nov 69 GLORY TRIP 49B 7559 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 153 SAC 339\n935. 3 Dec 69 N/A 7905 BMRS A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 45 AFSC 478\n936. 4 Dec 69 N/A 6617 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 28 AFSC 479\n937. 5 Dec 69 GLORY TRIP 50B 7923 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 154 SAC 340\n938. 12 Dec 69 N/A 7412 BMRS A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 46 AFSC 480\n939. 16 Dec 69 MR CLEAN II 8044 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B BALLISTIC 155 AFSC 481\n940. 14 Jan 70 N/A 6531 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 25 AFSC 482\n941. 15 Jan 70 N/A 8838 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 31 NAVY 50\n942. 23 Jan 70 N/A 6522 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 12 NASA 16\n943. 3 Feb 70 N/A 1638 SLC-2E THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 29 AFSC 483\n944. 8 Feb 70 N/A 7449 BMRS A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 47 AFSC 484\n945. 11 Feb 70 N/A 0054 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER II SPACE 9 ADC 7\n946. 25 Feb 70 GLORY TRIP 53B 7433 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 156 SAC 341\n947. 4 Mar 70 N/A 0440 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 30 AFSC 485\n948. 4 Mar 70 GLORY TRIP 54B 7840 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B FOT 157 SAC 342\nPAGE 48"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n949. 7 Mar 70 N/A 6199 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 32 NAVY 51\n950. 7 Mar 70 N/A 2178 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 33 NAVY 52\n951. 10 Mar 70 GLORY TRIP 62B 8242 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B FOT 158 SAC 343\n952. 11 Mar 70 GLORY TRIP 24F 6560 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F OT 65 SAC 344\n953. 13 Mar 70 N/A 7525 BMRS A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 48 AFSC 486\n954. 23 Mar 70 GLORY TRIP 63B 8489 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B FOT 159 SAC 345\n955. 26 Mar 70 GLORY TRIP 25M 7843 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT 66 SAC 346\n956. 31 Mar 70 GLORY TRIP 23F 6314 LF-26 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I * 67 SAC 347\n957. 2 Apr 70 N/A 0094 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G R&D 6 AFSC 487\n958. 8 Apr 70 N/A 2620 SLC-2E THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 31 AFSC 488\n959. 15 Apr 70 N/A 2863 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 26 AFSC 489\n960. 18 Apr 70 N/A 5394 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 34 NAVY 53\n961. 21 Apr 70 GLORY TRIP 48F 7482 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 68 SAC 348\n962. 22 Apr 70 N/A 8003 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G R&D 7 AFSC 490\n963. 25 Apr 70 GLORY TRIP 57F 6510 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 69 SAC 349\n964. 4 May 70 GLORY TRIP 64B 6865 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II * 160 SAC 350\n965. 8 May 70 N/A 6412 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G R&D 8 AFSC 491\n966. 20 May 70 N/A 4720 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 32 AFSC 492\n967. 21 May 70 GLORY TRIP 55F 7841 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 70 SAC 351\n(*) Formerly OT\nPAGE 49"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n968. 27 May 70 GLORY TRIP 65B 5207 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 161 SAC 352\n969. 30 May 70 N/A 8643 BMRS A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 49 AFSC 493\n970. 8 Jun 70 GLORY TRIP 72B 6176 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 162 SAC 353\n971. 9 Jun 70 N/A 0525 BMRS A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 50 AFSC 494\n972. 17 Jun 70 N/A 3515 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G R&D 9 AFSC 495\n973. 19 Jun 70 GLORY TRIP 28M 5934 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 71 SAC 354\n974. 20 Jun 70 GLORY TRIP 27M 2688 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 72 SAC 355\n975. 23 Jun 70 N/A 2777 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G R&D 10 AFSC 496\n976. 25 Jun 70 N/A 6820 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 27 AFSC 497\n977. 25 Jun 70 GLORY TRIP 73B 5854 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 163 SAC 356\n978. 26 Jun 70 GLORY TRIP 59F 6998 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 73 SAC 357\n979. 2 Jul 70 N/A 0574 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 35 NAVY 54\n980. 9 Jul 70 GLORY TRIP 66F 1177 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 74 SAC 358\n981. 14 Jul 70 GLORY TRIP 71B-2 0166 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 164 SAC 359\n982. 18 Jul 70 GLORY TRIP 30M 5885 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 75 SAC 360\n983. 22 Jul 70 N/A 4324 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 33 AFSC 498\n984. 23 Jul 70 M1-3 4527 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 165 AFSC 499\n985. 28 Jul 70 N/A 8727 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G R&D 11 AFSC 500\n986. 29 Jul 70 N/A 7787 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 36 NAVY 55\n987. 3 Aug 70 GLORY TRIP 61F 7078 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 76 SAC 361\nPAGE 50"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n988. 4 Aug 70 GLORY TRIP 16L 3735 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F ERCS/OT PHASE I 77 SAC 362\n989. 11 Aug 70 GLORY TRIP 06F 2130 LF-26 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 78 SAC 363\n990. 14 Aug 70 GLORY TRIP 31M 6064 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 79 SAC 364\n991. 18 Aug 70 N/A 7874 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 28 AFSC 501\n992. 20 Aug 70 GLORY TRIP 74B 7089 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 166 SAC 365\n993. 26 Aug 70 GLORY TRIP 43M 4530 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 80 SAC 366\n994. 26 Aug 70 N/A 8329 SLC-1W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 34 AFSC 502\n995. 27 Aug 70 N/A 1033 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 38 AFSC 503\n996. 27 Aug 70 OLD FOX 01M 8694 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G DASO 12 SAC 367\n997. 28 Aug 70 M1-4 8753 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 167 AFSC 504\n998. 2 Sep 70 GLORY TRIP 75B 0108 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 168 SAC 368\n999. 3 Sep 70 N/A 0203 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER II SPACE 10 ADC 8\n1000. 14 Sep 70 GLORY TRIP 67F 5154 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 81 SAC 369\n1001. 17 Sep 70 GLORY TRIP 68F 5272 LF-26 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 82 SAC 370\n1002. 25 Sep 70 GLORY TRIP 76B 4727 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 169 SAC 371\n1003. 25 Sep 70 OLD FOX 02M 8278 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G DASO 13 SAC 372\n1004. 26 Sep 70 N/A 3464 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 37 NAVY 56\n1005. 26 Sep 70 N/A 1986 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 38 NAVY 57\n1006. 3 Oct 70 GLORY TRIP 46M 4000 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 83 SAC 373\n1007. 3 Oct 70 M1-27 1829 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 170 AFSC 505\nPAGE 51"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1008. 5 Oct 70 GLORY TRIP 77B 4286 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 171 SAC 374\n1009. 7 Oct 70 GLORY TRIP 47M 8798 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 84 SAC 375\n1010. 22 Oct 70 GLORY TRIP 69F [SALVO] 1207 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 85 SAC 376\n1011. 22 Oct 70 GLORY TRIP 70F 2748 LF-26 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 86 SAC 377\n1012. 23 Oct 70 N/A 7568 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 29 AFSC 506\n1013. 26 Oct 70 GLORY TRIP 78B 2227 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 172 SAC 378\n1014. 2 Nov 70 GLORY TRIP 51M 6921 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 87 SAC 379\n1015. 4 Nov 70 STM-1W 1226 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 14 AFSC 507\n1016. 5 Nov 70 GLORY TRIP 52M 7493 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 88 SAC 380\n1017. 8 Nov 70 GLORY TRIP 79B 1441 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 173 SAC 381\n1018. 13 Nov 70 OLD FOX 03M 1650 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G DASO 15 SAC 382\n1019. 18 Nov 70 N/A 4992 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 35 AFSC 508\n1020. 7 Dec 70 GLORY TRIP 56M 6249 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 89 SAC 383\n1021. 11 Dec 70 N/A 5173 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 13 NASA 17\n1022. 17 Dec 70 GLORY TRIP 58M 8669 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 90 SAC 384\n1023. 22 Dec 70 N/A 3047 BMRS A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 51 AFSC 509\n1024. 23 Dec 70 M1-12 1350 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 174 AFSC 510\n1025. 11 Jan 71 M1-30 2935 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 175 AFSC 511\n1026. 21 Jan 71 N/A 7776 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 30 AFSC 512\n1027. 27 Jan 71 OLD FOX 04M 2527 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G DASO 16 SAC 385\nPAGE 52"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1028. 28 Jan 71 GLORY TRIP 90B 7315 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 176 SAC 386\n1029. 3 Feb 71 GLORY TRIP 101F 3681 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 91 SAC 387\n1030. 4 Feb 71 GLORY TRIP 60M 7795 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 92 SAC 388\n1031. 8 Feb 71 GLORY TRIP 91B 6267 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 177 SAC 389\n1032. 16 Feb 71 N/A 5268 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER II SPACE 11 ADC 9\n1033. 16 Feb 71 OLD FOX 05M 2499 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G DASO 17 SAC 390\n1034. 17 Feb 71 N/A 3297 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 36 AFSC 513\n1035. 22 Feb 71 M1-28 4600 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 178 AFSC 514\n1036. 24 Feb 71 GLORY TRIP 102F 1254 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 93 SAC 391\n1037. 27 Feb 71 N/A 0256 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 39 NAVY 58\n1038. 27 Feb 71 N/A 4381 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 40 NAVY 59\n1039. 27 Feb 71 GLORY TRIP 80M 0695 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 94 SAC 392\n1040. 2 Mar 71 GLORY TRIP 92B-3 0277 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 179 SAC 393\n1041. 16 Mar 71 M1-13 7110 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 180 AFSC 515\n1042. 20 Mar 71 N/A 4788 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 31 AFSC 516\n1043. 23 Mar 71 GLORY TRIP 01GM 4032 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 18 SAC 394\n1044. 24 Mar 71 N/A 5300 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 37 AFSC 517\n1045. 31 Mar 71 GLORY TRIP 82M 7337 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 95 SAC 395\n1046. 31 Mar 71 N/A 4834 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 14 NASA 18\n1047. 5 Apr 71 N/A 0246 BMRS A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 52 AFSC 518\nPAGE 53"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1048. 8 Apr 71 STM-2W 6323 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 19 AFSC 519\n1049. 14 Apr 71 N/A 0946 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 41 NAVY 60\n1050. 14 Apr 71 N/A 0230 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 42 NAVY 61\n1051. 22 Apr 71 N/A 7899 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 32 AFSC 520\n1052. 23 Apr 71 OLD FOX 06F 7159 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G DASO 20 SAC 396\n1053. 26 Apr 71 GLORY TRIP 93B 5269 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 181 SAC 397\n1054. 18 May 71 GLORY TRIP 105F 3111 LF-24 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 96 SAC 398\n1055. 21 May 71 GLORY TRIP 83M 4425 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 97 SAC 399\n1056. 24 May 71 GLORY TRIP 103F 2390 LF-22 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 98 SAC 400\n1057. 26 May 71 GLORY TRIP 02GM 4582 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 21 SAC 401\n1058. 27 May 71 GLORY TRIP 03GM 1682 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 22 SAC 402\n1059. 4 Jun 71 GLORY TRIP 81M 4480 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 99 SAC 403\n1060. 8 Jun 71 N/A 3850 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER II SPACE 12 ADC 10\n1061. 11 Jun 71 STM-6W 3782 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 23 AFSC 521\n1062. 15 Jun 71 N/A 8709 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 1 AFSC 522\n1063. 18 Jun 71 GLORY TRIP 94B 0234 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 182 SAC 404\n1064. 20 Jun 71 M1-17 2709 395-C TITAN II SOT/SAFEGUARD 49 SAC 405\n1065. 23 Jun 71 GLORY TRIP 84M 1366 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 100 SAC 406\n1066. 26 Jun 71 M1-14 3828 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 183 AFSC 523\n1067. 29 Jun 71 N/A 7730 BMRS A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 53 AFSC 524\nPAGE 54"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1068. 29 Jun 71 CHASER 7601 PALC-C NIKE/AEROBEE PROBE 1 AFSC 525\n1069. 29 Jun 71 N/A 5334 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 43 NAVY 62\n1070. 29 Jun 71 N/A 1284 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 44 NAVY 63\n1071. 8 Jul 71 GLORY TRIP 04GM 4043 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 24 SAC 407\n1072. 12 Jul 71 GLORY TRIP 95B 7201 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 184 SAC 408\n1073. 6 Jul 71 N/A 8373 SLC-1W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 38 AFSC 526\n1074. 3 Aug 71 GLORY TRIP 96B 7161 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 185 SAC 409\n1075. 4 Aug 71 GLORY TRIP 104F-1 4274 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 101 SAC 410\n1076. 6 Aug 71 GLORY TRIP 85M 6113 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 102 SAC 411\n1077. 6 Aug 71 N/A 2663 BMRS A-2 ATLAS F SPACE 54 AFSC 527\n1078. 12 Aug 71 N/A 8607 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 33 AFSC 528\n1079. 13 Aug 71 GLORY TRIP 87M 6201 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 103 SAC 412\n1080. 27 Aug 71 M2-1 0291 395-C TITAN II SOT/SAFEGUARD 50 SAC 413\n1081. 1 Sep 71 N/A 0150 BMRS A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 55 AFSC 529\n1082. 2 Sep 71 GLORY TRIP 29M 6744 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 104 SAC 414\n1083. 3 Sep 71 GLORY TRIP 05GM 8045 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 25 SAC 415\n1084. 8 Sep 71 GLORY TRIP 97B-1 5795 LF-07 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 186 SAC 416\n1085. 10 Sep 71 GLORY TRIP 89M 8101 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 105 SAC 417\n1086. 10 Sep 71 N/A 5454 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 39 AFSC 530\n1087. 16 Sep 71 N/A 8118 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 45 NAVY 64\nPAGE 55"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1088. 16 Sep 71 N/A 8092 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 46 NAVY 65\n1089. 6 Oct 71 GLORY TRIP 86F 5937 LF-25 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 106 SAC 418\n1090. 7 Oct 71 M2-2 7662 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 187 AFSC 531\n1091. 14 Oct 71 N/A 4311 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER IIA SPACE 1 ADC 11\n1092. 15 Oct 71 GLORY TRIP 06GM 7287 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 26 SAC 419\n1093. 17 Oct 71 N/A 8535 SLC-1W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 40 AFSC 532\n1094. 18 Oct 71 GLORY TRIP 98B 6982 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 188 SAC 420\n1095. 20 Oct 71 STM-3W 6448 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 27 AFSC 533\n1096. 21 Oct 71 N/A 8210 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 15 NASA 19\n1097. 21 Oct 71 GLORY TRIP 40L 6389 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F ERCS/OT PHASE I 107 SAC 421\n1098. 23 Oct 71 N/A 7616 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 34 AFSC 534\n1099. 17 Nov 71 GLORY TRIP 07GM 6057 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 28 SAC 422\n1100. 22 Nov 71 GLORY TRIP 08GM 0394 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 29 SAC 423\n1101. 23 Nov 71 GLORY TRIP 09GM 5932 LF-05 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 30 SAC 424\n1102. 23 Nov 71 CHASER 7457 PALC-C NIKE/AEROBEE PROBE 2 AFSC 535\n1103. 2 Dec 71 GLORY TRIP 100B 8061 LF-09 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 189 SAC 425\n1104. 9 Dec 71 GLORY TRIP 99B-1 6293 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B OT PHASE II 190 SAC 426\n1105. 11 Dec 71 N/A 0377 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 39 AFSC 536\n1106. 4 Dec 71 N/A 7898 SLC-1W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 41 AFSC 537\n1107. 15 Dec 71 STM-4W 8482 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 31 AFSC 538\nPAGE 56"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n1108. 17 Dec 71 GLORY TRIP 10GM 5954 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 32 SAC 427\n1109. 19 Jan 72 N/A 0668 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 47 NAVY 66\n1110. 20 Jan 72 N/A 1737 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 2 AFSC 539\n1111. 26 Jan 72 GLORY TRIP 11GM 7262 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 33 SAC 428\n1112. 31 Jan 72 N/A 7851 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 16 NASA 20\n1113. 4 Feb 72 GLORY TRIP 12GM 0403 LF-05 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 34 SAC 429\n1114. 9 Feb 72 GLORY TRIP 13GM 6092 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 35 SAC 430\n1115. 16 Feb 72 N/A 1844 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 35 AFSC 540\n1116. 11 Mar 72 N/A 7867 SLC-2E THOR/DELTA SPACE 17 NASA 21\n1117. 16 Mar 72 M2-7 3497 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 191 AFSC 541\n1118. 17 Mar 72 N/A 1678 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 36 AFSC 542\n1119. 21 Mar 72 GLORY TRIP 200L 3673 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F ERCS/OT PHASE I 108 SAC 431\n1120. 24 Mar 72 N/A 5058 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER IIA SPACE 2 ADC 12\n1121. 13 Apr 72 GLORY TRIP 88M 6671 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE I 109 SAC 432\n1122. 14 Apr 72 N/A 6259 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 48 NAVY 67\n1123. 19 Apr 72 N/A 5640 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 42 AFSC 543\n1124. 21 Apr 72 N/A 0866 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 49 NAVY 68\n1125. 5 May 72 M2-11 8268 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 192 AFSC 544\n1126. 12 May 72 GLORY TRIP 106M 1706 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 110 SAC 433\n1127. 20 May 72 N/A 6574 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 37 AFSC 545\nPAGE 57"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n1128. 24 May 72 M2-10 6639 395-C TITAN II SOT/SAFEGUARD 51 SAC 434\n1129. 25 May 72 N/A 6371 SLC-3W THORAD/AGENA D SPACE 43 AFSC 546\n1130. 31 May 72 PVM-1 5477 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 36 AFSC 547\n1131. 6 Jun 72 GLORY TRIP 15GM 1560 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 37 SAC 435\n1132. 11 Jun 72 GLORY TRIP 14GM 5228 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 38 SAC 436\n1133. 13 Jun 72 GIANT PATRIOT I 4409 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OBLSS/R&D 111 AFSC 548\n1134. 17 Jun 72 STM-5W 3519 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 39 AFSC 549\n1135. 20 Jun 72 GLORY TRIP 107M 5387 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 112 SAC 437\n1136. 20 Jun 72 CHASER 2679 PALC-C NIKE/AEROBEE PROBE 3 AFSC 550\n1137. 7 Jul 72 N/A 7293 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 3 AFSC 551\n1138. 15 Jul 72 M2-15 7672 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 193 AFSC 552\n1139. 23 Jul 72 N/A 8050 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 18 NASA 22\n1140. 25 Jul 72 GIANT PATRIOT II 1611 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OBLSS/R&D 113 AFSC 553\n1141. 7 Jul 72 N/A 7270 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 50 NAVY 69\n1142. 27 Jul 72 N/A 1824 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 51 NAVY 70\n1143. 2 Aug 72 STM-7W 7243 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 40 AFSC 554\n1144. 1 Sep 72 N/A 8888 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 38 AFSC 555\n1145. 2 Sep 72 N/A 0349 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 40 AFSC 556\n1146. 19 Sep 72 GLORY TRIP 16GB 7798 LF-22 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 41 SAC 438\n1147. 25 Sep 72 GLORY TRIP 108M 5096 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 114 SAC 439\nPAGE 58"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n1148. 2 Oct 72 N/A 8180 BMRS A-1 ATLAS/BURNER II SPACE 2 AFSC 557\n1149. 3 Oct 72 GLORY TRIP 109M 8519 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 115 SAC 440\n1150. 10 Oct 72 N/A 8314 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 4 AFSC 558\n1151. 11 Oct 72 M2-14 4006 395-C TITAN II SOT/SAFEGUARD 52 SAC 441\n1152. 11 Oct 72 CHASER 5240 PALC-C NIKE/AEROBEE PROBE 4 AFSC 559\n1153. 15 Oct 72 N/A 2056 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 19 NASA 23\n1154. 16 Oct 72 GLORY TRIP 17GB 6618 LF-25 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 42 SAC 442\n1155. 20 Oct 72 GLORY TRIP 110M 7426 LF-02 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 116 SAC 443\n1156. 27 Oct 72 HK-1 5190 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ASTP 194 AFSC 560\n1157. 8 Nov 72 N/A 7323 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER IIA SPACE 3 ADC 13\n1158. 21 Nov 72 N/A 3657 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 41 NASA 24\n1159. 24 Nov 72 GLORY TRIP 18GB 6667 LF-22 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 43 SAC 444\n1160. 29 Nov 72 N/A 4994 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 52 NAVY 71\n1161. 1 Dec 72 N/A 6547 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 53 NAVY 72\n1162. 4 Dec 72 GLORY TRIP 41GM 8021 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 44 SAC 445\n1163. 8 Dec 72 M2-21 3965 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 195 AFSC 561\n1164. 10 Dec 72 N/A 6648 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 20 NASA 25\n1165. 12 Dec 72 GLORY TRIP 19GB 8633 LF-25 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 45 SAC 446\n1166. 12 Dec 72 GLORY TRIP 20GB 4103 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 46 SAC 447\n1167. 16 Dec 72 N/A 8347 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 42 NASA 26\nPAGE 59"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n1168. 18 Dec 72 N/A 7080 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 54 NAVY 73\n1169. 19 Dec 72 HK-3 4536 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ASTP 196 AFSC 562\n1170. 21 Dec 72 N/A 3978 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 39 AFSC 563\n1171. 21 Dec 72 GLORY TRIP 111M 6246 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 117 SAC 448\n1172. 27 Dec 72 N/A 8609 BOM-1 BOMARC A TARGET 55 NAVY 74\n1173. 29 Dec 72 N/A 9255 BOM-2 BOMARC A TARGET 56 NAVY 75\n1174. 30 Jan 73 PVM-2 5179 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G PVM-R&D 47 AFSC 564\n1175. 9 Mar 73 NTV-1 7028 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 197 AFSC 565\n1176. 9 Mar 73 N/A 8410 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 5 AFSC 566\n1177. 17 Apr 73 GLORY TRIP 112M 8109 LF-02 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 118 SAC 449\n1178. 25 Apr 73 HK-2 8637 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ASTP 198 AFSC 567\n1179. 26 Apr 73 GLORY TRIP 21GB 3546 LF-25 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 48 SAC 450\n1180. 3 May 73 GLORY TRIP 22GB 6353 LF-22 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 49 SAC 451\n1181. 4 May 73 M2-24 7277 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 199 AFSC 568\n1182. 16 May 73 N/A 2093 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 40 AFSC 569\n1183. 31 May 73 PVM-4 5411 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G PVM-R&D 50 AFSC 570\n1184. 7 Jun 73 M2-22 8325 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 200 AFSC 571\n1185. 26 Jun 73 N/A 4018 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 41 AFSC 572\n1186. 27 Jun 73 GLORY TRIP 114M 5527 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 119 SAC 452\n1187. 6 Jul 73 GLORY TRIP 23GB 7058 LF-25 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 51 SAC 453\nPAGE 60"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ\tDATE\tNICKNAME\tOP #\tFACILITY\tVEHICLE TYPE\tPROGRAM\tCUM BY BOOSTER\tCOMMAND\tCUM BY COMMAND\n1188. 13 Jul 73 N/A 8261 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 6 AFSC 573\n1189. 16 Jul 73 N/A 7473 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 21 NASA 27\n1190. 20 Jul 73 M2-18 7452 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 201 AFSC 574\n1191. 26 Jul 73 GIANT MOON 4 7489 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F ERCS/SOT 120 SAC 454\n1192. 2 Aug 73 GLORY TRIP 113M 8375 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 121 SAC 455\n1193. 9 Aug 73 M2-20 6599 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 202 AFSC 575\n1194. 16 Aug 73 N/A 8364 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER IIA SPACE 4 ADC 14\n1195. 21 Aug 73 N/A 7724 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 42 AFSC 576\n1196. 23 Aug 73 PVM-3 4109 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 52 AFSC 577\n1197. 29 Aug 73 N/A 7405 BMRS A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 56 AFSC 578\n1198. 5 Sep 73 GLORY TRIP 43GM 6260 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 53 SAC 456\n1199. 7 Sep 73 M2-44 7419 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 203 AFSC 579\n1200. 11 Sep 73 N/A 3264 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET/R&D 1 NAVY 76\n1201. 14 Sep 73 GLORY TRIP 25GB 6525 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 54 SAC 457\n1202. 25 Sep 73 GLORY TRIP 115M-1 7979 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 122 SAC 458\n1203. 27 Sep 73 N/A 6275 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 43 AFSC 580\n1204. 30 Sep 73 ACE 3923 BMRS A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 57 AFSC 581\n1205. 2 Oct 73 GLORY TRIP 116M 4913 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 123 SAC 459\n1206. 5 Oct 73 M2-27 8340 395-C TITAN II SOT/SAFEGUARD 53 SAC 460\n1207. 29 Oct 73 N/A 1063 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 43 NAVY 77\nPAGE 61"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1208. 2 Nov 73 M2-38 5144 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 204 AFSC 582\n1209. 6 Nov 73 N/A 1039 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 22 NASA 28\n1210. 10 Nov 73 N/A 6630 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 7 AFSC 583\n1211. 22 Nov 73 GLORY TRIP 42GM-1 8291 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 55 SAC 461\n1212. 29 Nov 73 M2-25 6678 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 205 AFSC 584\n1213. 11 Dec 73 N/A 8646 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ASTP/R&D 206 AFSC 585\n1214. 14 Dec 73 M2-20A 4570 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 207 AFSC 586\n1215. 15 Dec 73 N/A 8030 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 23 NASA 29\n1216. 17 Dec 73 N/A 8565 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET/R&D 2 NAVY 78\n1217. 22 Dec 73 STM-8W 3686 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 56 AFSC 587\n1218. 22 Jan 74 M2-28 8550 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 208 AFSC 588\n1219. 6 Jan 74 GLORY TRIP 24GB-1 3387 LF-25 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 57 SAC 462\n1220. 13 Feb 74 N/A 6889 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 44 AFSC 589\n1221. 1 Mar 74 M2-31 7443 395-C TITAN II SOT/SAFEGUARD 54 SAC 463\n1222. 6 Mar 74 SFT-1 8594 BMRS A-1 ATLAS F TRIDENT/SFT 58 AFSC 590\n1223. 8 Mar 74 N/A 8557 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 44 NASA 30\n1224. 12 Mar 74 GIANT MOON 5 6797 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F ERCS/OT 124 SAC 464\n1225. 16 Mar 74 N/A 8579 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER IIA SPACE 5 ADC 15\n1226. 20 Mar 74 N/A 6407 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET/R&D 3 NAVY 79\n1227. 23 Mar 74 ACE 6561 BMRS A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 59 AFSC 591\nPAGE 62"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1228. 27 Mar 74 GLORY TRIP 117M-1 8662 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 125 SAC 465\n1229. 2 Apr 74 GLORY TRIP 119M 5102 LF-02 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 126 SAC 466\n1230. 4 Apr 74 PVM-5 8679 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 58 AFSC 592\n1231. 10 Apr 74 N/A 6245 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 8 AFSC 593\n1232. 10 Apr 74 N/A 6768 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET/R&D 4 NAVY 80\n1233. 16 Apr 74 M2-135 8278 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 209 AFSC 594\n1234. 26 Apr 74 M2-35 6937 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 210 AFSC 595\n1235. 1 May 74 SFT-2 5075 BMRS A-1 ATLAS F TRIDENT/SFT 60 AFSC 596\n1236. 2 May 74 GLORY TRIP 44GM 8620 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 59 SAC 467\n1237. 30 May 74 N/A 5013 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET/R&D 5 NAVY 81\n1238. 3 Jun 74 N/A 4790 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 45 NASA 31\n1239. 6 Jun 74 N/A 1776 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 45 AFSC 597\n1240. 28 Jun 74 SFT-3 6511 BMRS A-1 ATLAS F TRIDENT/SFT 61 AFSC 598\n1241. 9 Jul 74 GLORY TRIP 120M 6830 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 127 SAC 468\n1242. 11 Jul 74 SAMAST 4240 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 211 AFSC 599\n1243. 13 Jul 74 NTS-1 7518 SLC-3W ATLAS F SPACE 62 AFSC 600\n1244. 16 Jul 74 N/A 2741 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 46 NASA 32\n1245. 18 Jul 74 M2-146 5095 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 212 AFSC 601\n1246. 1 Aug 74 M2-46 6001 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B SAFEGUARD 213 AFSC 602\n1247. 8 Aug 74 N/A 6983 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER IIA SPACE 6 ADC 16\nPAGE 63"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1248. 14 Aug 74 N/A 3004 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 46 AFSC 603\n1249. 17 Aug 74 GLORY TRIP 45GM 1015 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 60 SAC 469\n1250. 30 Aug 74 N/A 4930 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 47 NASA 33\n1251. 8 Sep 74 ACE 8401 BMRS A-1 ATLAS F ABRES 63 AFSC 604\n1252. 28 Sep 74 GLORY TRIP 46GB 4781 LF-22 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 61 SAC 470\n1253. 1 Oct 74 N/A 3851 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET/R&D 6 NAVY 82\n1254. 4 Oct 74 PVM-8 6578 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 62 AFSC 605\n1255. 7 Oct 74 GLORY TRIP 118M 8500 LF-02 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 128 SAC 471\n1256. 11 Oct 74 PVM-6 9292 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 63 AFSC 606\n1257. 12 Oct 74 PVM-7 4903 LF-25 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 64 AFSC 607\n1258. 12 Oct 74 N/A 8082 BMRS A-3 ATLAS F ABRES 64 AFSC 608\n1259. 16 Oct 74 N/A 2420 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET/R&D 7 NAVY 83\n1260. 22 Oct 74 GIANT MOON 6 6219 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F ERCS/OT 129 SAC 472\n1261. 25 Oct 74 GLORY TRIP 28GM 6696 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 65 SAC 473\n1262. 29 Oct 74 N/A 7122 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 9 AFSC 609\n1263. 15 Nov 74 N/A 1494 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 24 NASA 34\n1264. 26 Nov 74 PVM-9 3295 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 66 AFSC 610\n1265. 3 Dec 74 GLORY TRIP 47GB 3036 LF-25 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 67 SAC 474\n1266. 17 Dec 74 GLORY TRIP 121M 8458 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 130 SAC 475\n1267. 9 Jan 75 SOFT-1 2592 395-C TITAN II SOFT/SOT 55 SAC 476\nPAGE 64"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1268. 19 Jan 75 SFT-4 5459 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B TRIDENT/SFT 214 AFSC 611\n1269. 22 Jan 75 N/A 4869 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 25 NASA 35\n1270. 29 Jan 75 GLORY TRIP 48GM 3375 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 68 SAC 477\n1271. 5 Feb 75 GLORY TRIP 29GM-1 4526 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 69 SAC 478\n1272. 6 Mar 75 SFT-101 8489 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B TRIDENT/SFT 215 AFSC 612\n1273. 9 Mar 75 N/A 2439 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 47 AFSC 613\n1274. 20 Mar 75 N/A 3352 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET/R&D 8 NAVY 84\n1275. 9 Apr 75 GEOS-C 7891 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 26 NASA 36\n1276. 10 Apr 75 N/A 8333 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET/R&D 9 NAVY 85\n1277. 12 Apr 75 N/A 1418 SLC-3W ATLAS F SPACE 65 AFSC 614\n1278. 18 Apr 75 N/A 4883 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 48 AFSC 615\n1279. 6 May 75 PVM-10 5026 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 70 AFSC 616\n1280. 9 May 75 SFT-102 2522 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B TRIDENT/SFT 216 AFSC 617\n1281. 16 May 75 STM-9W 4943 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G PAVE PEPPER 71 AFSC 618\n1282. 22 May 75 N/A 5258 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET/R&D 10 NAVY 86\n1283. 23 May 75 NTV-3 8163 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 217 AFSC 619\n1284. 23 May 75 N/A 6226 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER IIA SPACE 7 ADC 17\n1285. 8 Jun 75 N/A 6381 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 10 AFSC 620\n1286. 11 Jun 75 GLORY TRIP 30GM 4227 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 72 SAC 479\n1287. 12 Jun 75 NIMBUS F 1797 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 27 NASA 37\nPAGE 65"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1288. 20 Jun 75 GLORY TRIP 31GM 7173 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 73 SAC 480\n1289. 1 Jul 75 PVM-11 5453 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 74 AFSC 621\n1290. 23 Jul 75 N/A 5895 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET/R&D 11 NAVY 87\n1291. 26 Jul 75 STM-10W 5184 LF-02 MINUTEMAN G PAVE PEPPER 75 AFSC 622\n1292. 7 Aug 75 DG-2 5006 395-C TITAN II SOT 56 SAC 481\n1293. 8 Aug 75 COS-B 5470 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 28 NASA 38\n1294. 14 Aug 75 GLORY TRIP 122M-1 3584 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 131 SAC 482\n1295. 14 Aug 75 ESCAPE I 2698 PLC-C PAIUTE TOMAHAWK PROBE 1 AFSC/CRL 623\n1296. 22 Aug 75 SFT-103 6329 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B TRIDENT/SFT 218 AFSC 624\n1297. 29 Aug 75 GLORY TRIP 49GM 2371 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 76 SAC 483\n1298. 5 Sep 75 GIANT MOON 7 7006 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F ERCS/OT 132 SAC 484\n1299. 10 Sep 75 SFT-104 7023 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B TRIDENT/SFT 219 AFSC 625\n1300. 16 Sep 75 GLORY TRIP 123M-1 2239 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 133 SAC 485\n1301. 23 Sep 75 OSL 8688 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OGDEN SPEC TEST 134 SAC 486\n1302. 30 Sep 75 SFT-05 1368 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B TRIDENT/SFT 220 AFSC 626\n1303. 6 Oct 75 AE-D 5377 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 29 NASA 39\n1304. 9 Oct 75 N/A 5499 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 49 AFSC 627\n1305. 11 Oct 75 TIP-II 3664 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 48 AFSC 628\n1306. 13 Nov 75 SFT-16 7217 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B TRIDENT/SFT 221 AFSC 629\n1307. 14 Nov 75 GLORY TRIP 50GM 6017 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 77 SAC 487\nPAGE 66"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1308. 4 Dec 75 N/A 4428 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 11 AFSC 630\n1309. 4 Dec 75 DG-4 5678 395-C TITAN II SOT 57 SAC 488\n1310. 5 Dec 75 DAD-A 7205 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 49 AFSC 631\n1311. 10 Dec 75 ESCAPE II 3268 PLC-C UTE TOMAHAWK PROBE 1 AFSC/CRL 632\n1312. 16 Dec 75 N/A 5431 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET 12 NAVY 88\n1313. 17 Dec 75 GLORY TRIP 51GB 8522 LF-22 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 78 SAC 489\n1314. 8 Jan 76 PVM-12 3832 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G PVM-R&D 79 AFSC 633\n1315. 23 Jan 76 SFT-105 6190 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B TRIDENT/SFT 222 AFSC 634\n1316. 29 Jan 76 GLORY TRIP 125M 3030 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 135 SAC 490\n1317. 6 Feb 76 GLORY TRIP 26GM-4 4172 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 80 SAC 491\n1318. 8 Feb 76 N/A 5140 SLC-10W THOR/BURNER IIA SPACE 8 ADC 18\n1319. 19 Feb 76 GLORY TRIP 126M 4460 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 136 SAC 492\n1320. 24 Feb 76 GLORY TRIP 124M 6306 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 137 SAC 493\n1321. 27 Feb 76 ANT-1 7396 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 223 AFSC 635\n1322. 4 Mar 76 GLORY TRIP 52GB 5280 LF-25 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 81 SAC 494\n1323. 14 Mar 76 PVM-13 5333 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G PVM-R&D 82 AFSC 636\n1324. 22 Mar 76 N/A 7600 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 50 AFSC 637\n1325. 30 Apr 76 N/A 6431 SLC-3W ATLAS F SPACE 66 AFSC 638\n1326. 3 May 76 LAGEOS 5504 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 30 NASA 40\n1327. 5 May 76 N/A 8818 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET 13 NAVY 89\nPAGE 67"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1328. 22 May 76 N/A 0030 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 50 AFSC 639\n1329. 2 Jun 76 N/A 7837 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 51 AFSC 640\n1330. 3 Jun 76 N/A 1976 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET 14 NAVY 90\n1331. 9 Jun 76 GLORY TRIP 127M 5683 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 138 SAC 495\n1332. 21 Jun 76 GLORY TRIP 33GM 4044 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 83 SAC 496\n1333. 22 Jun 76 GLORY TRIP 128M 8230 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 139 SAC 497\n1334. 27 Jun 76 ITF-1 8440 395-C TITAN II SOT 58 SAC 498\n1335. 30 Jun 76 GLORY TRIP 54GM 7090 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 84 SAC 499\n1336. 8 Jul 76 N/A 4699 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 12 AFSC 641\n1337. 13 Jul 76 N/A 8732 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET 15 NAVY 91\n1338. 15 Jul 76 STM-11W 6290 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 85 AFSC 642\n1339. 29 Jul 76 ITOS 5491 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 31 NASA 41\n1340. 6 Aug 76 N/A 7940 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 52 AFSC 643\n1341. 19 Aug 76 SAMAST III/MINT II 5688 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 224 AFSC 644\n1342. 26 Aug 76 GLORY TRIP 129M 8446 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 140 SAC 500\n1343. 1 Sep 76 TIP III 7731 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 51 AFSC 645\n1344. 11 Sep 76 DMSP F-1 5721 SLC-10W THOR/BLOCK 5D-1 SPACE 1 ADC 19\n1345. 15 Sep 76 N/A 8533 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 53 AFSC 646\n1346. 23 Sep 76 N/A 4815 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET 16 NAVY 92\n1347. 26 Oct 76 GIANT MOON 8 8080 LF-05 MINUTEMAN F ERCS/OT 141 SAC 501\nPAGE 68"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1348. 28 Oct 76 N/A 0388 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET 17 NAVY 93\n1349. 28 Oct 76 N/A 4340 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET 18 NAVY 94\n1350. 5 Nov 76 GLORY TRIP 55GM 6995 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 86 SAC 502\n1351. 8 Nov 76 GLORY TRIP 56GB 1160 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 87 SAC 503\n1352. 12 Nov 76 STM-12W 5649 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 88 AFSC 647\n1353. 30 Nov 76 GLORY TRIP 32GM-1 8741 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 89 SAC 504\n1354. 19 Dec 76 N/A 5705 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 13 AFSC 648\n1355. 21 Jan 77 GLORY TRIP 53GM-1 3445 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 90 SAC 505\n1356. 30 Jan 77 STM-13W 0565 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 91 AFSC 649\n1357. 1 Feb 77 GLORY TRIP 132M 7269 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 142 SAC 506\n1358. 4 Feb 77 N/A 1636 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET 19 NAVY 95\n1359. 16 Feb 77 GLORY TRIP 27GM-2 2065 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 92 SAC 507\n1360. 2 Mar 77 GLORY TRIP-57GB 2404 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 93 SAC 508\n1361. 13 Mar 77 N/A 4915 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 54 AFSC 650\n1362. 31 Mar 77 N/A 5605 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET 20 NAVY 96\n1363. 11 May 77 N/A 1399 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET 21 NAVY 97\n1364. 18 May 77 TDV-1 2333 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 225 AFSC 651\n1365. 28 May 77 GLORY TRIP 58GB 5165 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 94 SAC 509\n1366. 1 Jun 77 GLORY TRIP 34GM-1 5990 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 95 SAC 510\n1367. 4 Jun 77 DMSP F-2 5644 SLC-10W THOR/BLOCK 5D-1 SPACE 2 ADC 20\nPAGE 69"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1368. 16 Jun 77 STM-14W 6279 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 96 AFSC 652\n1369. 23 Jun 77 NTS-2 5580 SLC-3W ATLAS F SPACE 67 AFSC 653\n1370. 27 Jun 77 N/A 4800 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 14 AFSC 654\n1371. 28 Jun 77 GLORY TRIP 134M 2180 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 143 SAC 511\n1372. 13 Jul 77 N/A 8108 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET 22 NAVY 98\n1373. 14 Jul 77 N/A 6814 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET 23 NAVY 99\n1374. 3 Aug 77 GLORY TRIP 60GB 6715 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 97 SAC 512\n1375. 10 Aug 77 GLORY TRIP 59GM-1 4668 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 98 SAC 513\n1376. 19 Aug 77 PVM-14 3129 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 99 AFSC 655\n1377. 3 Sep 77 TDV-2 5733 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 226 AFSC 656\n1378. 14 Sep 77 GLORY TRIP 35GM 3790 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 100 SAC 514\n1379. 23 Sep 77 N/A 7471 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 55 AFSC 657\n1380. 27 Oct 77 N/A 4305 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 52 NASA 42\n1381. 3 Nov 77 PVM-15 5834 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 101 AFSC 658\n1382. 13 Nov 77 TDV-3 4220 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 227 AFSC 659\n1383. 30 Nov 77 GLORY TRIP 135M 5410 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 144 SAC 515\n1384. 6 Dec 77 GLORY TRIP 36GM 1255 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 102 SAC 516\n1385. 8 Dec 77 N/A 8781 SLC-3W ATLAS F SPACE 68 AFSC 660\n1386. 9 Dec 77 N/A 8538 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET 24 NAVY 100\n1387. 6 Jan 78 STM-15W 6626 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 103 AFSC 661\nPAGE 70"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1388. 8 Feb 78 GLORY TRIP 62GB 8630 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 104 SAC 517\n1389. 15 Feb 78 GLORY TRIP 61GM 5630 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 105 SAC 518\n1390. 22 Feb 78 NDS-1 8770 SLC-3E ATLAS F SPACE 69 AFSC 662\n1391. 24 Feb 78 N/A 6031 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 56 AFSC 663\n1392. 2 Mar 78 GLORY TRIP 37GM 6452 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 106 SAC 519\n1393. 5 Mar 78 LANDSAT-C 7055 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 32 NASA 43\n1394. 16 Mar 78 N/A 0460 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 15 AFSC 664\n1395. 24 Mar 78 N/A 8270 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET 25 NAVY 101\n1396. 5 Apr 78 TREP-1 5085 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 228 AFSC 665\n1397. 26 Apr 78 HCMM 2161 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 53 NASA 44\n1398. 30 Apr 78 DMSP F-3 6182 SLC-10W THOR/BLOCK 5D-1 SPACE 3 ADC 21\n1399. 13 May 78 NDS-2 1860 SLC-3E ATLAS F SPACE 70 AFSC 666\n1400. 2 Jun 78 GLORY TRIP 136M 5938 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 145 SAC 520\n1401. 8 Jun 78 GLORY TRIP 63GB 7933 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 107 SAC 521\n1402. 14 Jun 78 N/A 4515 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 16 AFSC 667\n1403. 16 Jun 78 ANT-3 6788 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 229 AFSC 668\n1404. 22 Jun 78 STM-16W 6085 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 108 AFSC 669\n1405. 26 Jun 78 SEASAT A 4952 SLC-3W ATLAS/AGENA D SPACE 43 AFSC 670\n1406. 27 Jun 78 GLORY TRIP 64GM 8833 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 109 SAC 522\n1407. 4 Jul 78 ANT-2 6544 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 230 AFSC 671\nPAGE 71"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1408. 25 Jul 78 GLORY TRIP 133M-1 0360 LF-09 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 146 SAC 523\n1409. 4 Aug 78 N/A 7310 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 57 AFSC 672\n1410. 6 Sep 78 GLORY TRIP 65GB 7907 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 110 SAC 524\n1411. 6 Oct 78 NAVSTAR III 4610 SLC-3E ATLAS F SPACE 71 AFSC 673\n1412. 13 Oct 78 TIROS-N 0688 SLC-3W ATLAS F SPACE 72 AFSC 674\n1413. 24 Oct 78 NIMBUS-G 5744 SLC-2W THOR/DELTA SPACE 33 NASA 45\n1414. 16 Nov 78 GLORY TRIP 130M-2 8310 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 147 SAC 525\n1415. 27 Nov 78 ANT 3A 8344 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 231 AFSC 675\n1416. 5 Dec 78 GLORY TRIP 38GM 6065 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 111 SAC 526\n1417. 8 Dec 78 STM-17W 8462 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 112 AFSC 676\n1418. 10 Dec 78 NAVSTAR IV 0730 SLC-3E ATLAS F SPACE 73 AFSC 677\n1419. 19 Jan 79 STREP-1 6278 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 232 AFSC 678\n1420. 24 Jan 79 ABRV-1 6595 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 233 AFSC 679\n1421. 30 Jan 79 GLORY TRIP 66GM 8292 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 113 SAC 527\n1422. 6 Feb 79 GLORY TRIP 67GB 1205 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 114 SAC 528\n1423. 15 Feb 79 PVM 16 7535 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 115 AFSC 680\n1424. 24 Feb 79 STP-78-1 2265 SLC-3W ATLAS F SPACE 74 AFSC 681\n1425. 27 Feb 79 N/A 2010 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET 26 NAVY 102\n1426. 16 Mar 79 N/A 3854 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 17 AFSC 682\n1427. 23 Mar 79 GLORY TRIP 137M 5865 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 148 SAC 529\nPAGE 72"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1428. 28 Mar 79 GLORY TRIP 39GM 4137 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 116 SAC 530\n1429. 19 Apr 79 PVM-17 6980 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 117 AFSC 683\n1430. 28 May 79 N/A 2108 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 58 AFSC 684\n1431. 6 Jun 79 DMSP F-4 5390 SLC-10W THOR/BLOCK 5D-1 SPACE 4 ADC 22\n1432. 27 Jun 79 NOAA-A 2910 SLC-3W ATLAS F SPACE 75 AFSC 685\n1433. 6 Jul 79 LBRV-1 4386 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 234 AFSC 686\n1434. 10 Jul 79 GLORY TRIP 40GM [DUAL] 2966 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE I 118 SAC 531\n1435. 10 Jul 79 GLORY TRIP 68GM 1713 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 119 SAC 532\n1436. 16 Jul 79 GIANT MOON 9 4030 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F ERCS/OT 149 SAC 533\n1437. 26 Jul 79 GLORY TRIP 69GB 3161 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 120 SAC 534\n1438. 3 Aug 79 STREP-2 8300 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 235 AFSC 687\n1439. 30 Aug 79 STM-18W 3460 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G STM/R&D 121 AFSC 688\n1440. 22 Sep 79 ABRV-2 5227 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 236 AFSC 689\n1441. 25 Sep 79 GLORY TRIP 138M 6318 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 150 SAC 535\n1442. 28 Sep 79 GLORY TRIP 70GM 3818 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 122 SAC 536\n1443. 30 Oct 79 MAGSAT 6959 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 54 NASA 46\n1444. 13 Dec 79 GLORY TRIP 139M 0559 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 151 SAC 537\n1445. 20 Dec 79 AMARV-1 4980 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 237 AFSC 690\n1446. 31 Jan 80 PVM-18 1767 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 123 AFSC 691\n1447. 5 Feb 80 GLORY TRIP 71GM 9039 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 124 SAC 538\nPAGE 73"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1448. 6 Feb 80 N/A 6167 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 18 AFSC 692\n1449. 9 Feb 80 NAVSTAR V 8240 SLC-3E ATLAS F SPACE 76 AFSC 693\n1450. 21 Feb 80 GLORY TRIP 72GB 4190 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 125 SAC 539\n1451. 23 Feb 80 GLORY TRIP 140M 3355 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 152 SAC 540\n1452. 27 Feb 80 GLORY TRIP 73GM 2410 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 126 SAC 541\n1453. 3 Mar 80 N/A 0408 SLC-3W ATLAS F SPACE 77 AFSC 694\n1454. 15 Mar 80 ABRV-3 0310 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 238 AFSC 695\n1455. 27 Mar 80 PVM-19 7434 LF-21 MINUTEMAN G PVM/R&D 127 AFSC 696\n1456. 10 Apr 80 STREP-4 1406 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 239 AFSC 697\n1457. 26 Apr 80 NAVSTAR VI 7633 SLC-3E ATLAS F SPACE 78 AFSC 698\n1458. 29 May 80 NOAA-B 4891 SLC-3W ATLAS F SPACE 79 AFSC 699\n1459. 18 Jun 80 N/A 6660 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 19 AFSC 700\n1460. 22 Jun 80 GLORY TRIP 74GM 3557 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 128 SAC 542\n1461. 14 Jul 80 DMSP F-5 7383 SLC-10W THOR/BLOCK 5D-1 SPACE 5 SAC 543\n1462. 1 Aug 80 N/A 3164 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET 27 NAVY 103\n1463. 20 Aug 80 GLORY TIRP 76GB 6993 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 129 SAC 544\n1464. 15 Sep 80 STREP-3 7187 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 240 AFSC 701\n1465. 17 Sep 80 GLORY TRIP 77GM 3772 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 130 SAC 545\n1466. 24 Sep 80 GLORY TRIP 78GM 4320 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 131 SAC 546\n1467. 8 Oct 80 AMARV-2 4959 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 241 AFSC 702\nPAGE 74"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1468. 17 Nov 80 N/A 3647 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET 28 NAVY 104\n1469. 8 Dec 80 N/A 3255 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 17 AFSC 703\n1470. 13 Dec 80 N/A 3844 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 59 AFSC 704\n1471. 16 Dec 80 ABRV-4 4555 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 242 AFSC 705\n1472. 19 Dec 80 N/A 6363 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET 29 NAVY 105\n1473. 9 Feb 81 GLORY TRIP 79GM 2763 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 132 SAC 547\n1474. 9 Feb 81 GLORY TRIP 80GM 0855 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 133 SAC 548\n1475. 18 Feb 81 IRS-1 8178 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 243 AFSC 706\n1476. 21 Feb 81 GLORY TRIP 81GB 3697 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 134 SAC 549\n1477. 28 Feb 81 N/A 6485 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 60 AFSC 707\n1478. 15 Mar 81 TDV-4 0511 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 244 AFSC 708\n1479. 1 Apr 81 GLORY TRIP 75GM-2 5544 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 135 SAC 550\n1480. 4 Apr 81 MARK 500-PAS-1 1460 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 245 AFSC 709\n1481. 24 Apr 81 N/A 9993 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 61 AFSC 710\n1482. 14 May 81 NOVA I 7280 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 55 NASA 47\n1483. 12 Jun 81 GLORY TRIP 82GM 4444 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 136 SAC 551\n1484. 23 Jun 81 NOAA-C 9060 SLC-3W ATLAS F SPACE 80 AFSC 711\n1485. 26 Jun 81 GLORY TRIP 83GB 9139 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 37 SAC 552\n1486. 3 Aug 81 DYNAMIC EXPLORER 3174 SLC-2W DELTA* SPACE 1 NASA 48\n(•) Formerly THOR/DELTA\nPAGE 75"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1487. 3 Sep 81 N/A 0714 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 20 AFSC 712\n1488. 12 Sep 81 MARK 500-PAS-2 4654 LF-06 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 246 AFSC 713\n1489. 4 Oct 81 AMARV-3 9240 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B ABRES 247 AFSC 714\n1490. 6 Oct 81 SM EXPLORER 6155 SLC-2W DELTA SPACE 2 NASA 49\n1491. 24 Nov 81 GLORY TRIP 84GM-1 7037 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 138 SAC 553\n1492. 9 Dec 81 GLORY TRIP 85GB 6857 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 139 SAC 554\n1493. 18 Dec 81 NAVSTAR VII 6627 SLC-3E ATLAS E SPACE 18 AFSC 715\n1494. 21 Jan 82 N/A 3605 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 62 AFSC 716\n1495. 29 Jan 82 GLORY TRIP 86GM 7190 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 140 SAC 555\n1496. 18 Mar 82 GLORY TRIP 141MS 8583 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 153 SAC 556\n1497. 31 Mar 82 GLORY TRIP 87GB 9110 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 141 SAC 557\n1498. 11 May 82 N/A 4367 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 21 AFSC 717\n1499. 22 Jun 82 GLORY TRIP 88GM 6358 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 142 SAC 558\n1500. 14 Jul 82 N/A 1645 BOM-2 BOMARC B TARGET 30 NAVY 106\n1501. 14 Jul 82 N/A 7232 BOM-1 BOMARC B TARGET 31 NAVY 107\n1502. 16 Jul 82 LANDSAT D (5) 8648 SLC-2W DELTA SPACE 3 NASA 50\n1503. 19 Jul 82 GLORY TRIP 142M 3918 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 154 SAC 559\n1504. 4 Aug 82 GLORY TRIP 89GM 8380 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 143 SAC 560\n1505. 24 Sep 82 GLORY TRIP 90GB 2240 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 144 SAC 561\n1506. 8 Oct 82 STREP-21 5393 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 248 AFSC 718\nPAGE 76"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n1507. 14 Oct 82 GLORY TRIP 143MS-1 4038 LF-08 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 155 SAC 562\n1508. 17 Nov 82 N/A 3718 SLC-4E TITAN IIID SPACE 22 AFSC 719\n1509. 2 Dec 82 GLORY TRIP 91GM 3419 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 145 SAC 563\n1510. 20 Dec 82 DMSP F-6 5423 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 19 AFSC 720\n1511. 7 Jan 83 LBRV-2 3397 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 249 AFSC 721\n1512. 25 Jan 83 IRAS 9405 SLC-2W DELTA SPACE 4 NASA 51\n1513. 7 Feb 83 STREP 11 9835 LF-05 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 250 AFSC 722\n1514. 9 Feb 83 N/A 5344 SLC-3E ATLAS H SPACE 1 AFSC 723\n1515. 24 Feb 83 GLORY TRIP 92GB 9623 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 146 SAC 564\n1516. 11 Mar 83 GLORY TRIP 93GM 1588 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 147 SAC 565\n1517. 16 Mar 83 GLORY TRIP 144MS 8140 LF-08 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 156 SAC 566\n1518. 28 Mar 83 NOAA E 3267 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 20 AFSC 724\n1519. 15 Apr 83 N/A 0621 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 63 AFSC 725\n1520. 5 May 83 STREP 22 0459 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 251 AFSC 726\n1521. 26 May 83 EXOSAT 4150 SLC-2W DELTA SPACE 5 NASA 52\n1522. 28 May 83 STREP 12 6029 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 252 AFSC 727\n1523. 9 Jun 83 N/A 4191 SLC-3E ATLAS H SPACE 2 AFSC 728\n1524. 17 Jun 83 FTM-1 6713 TP-01 PEACEKEEPER DT&E PHASE I 1 AFSC 729\n1525. 20 Jun 83 N/A 9844 SLC-4E TITAN 34D SPACE 1 AFSC 730\n1526. 25 Jun 83 GLORY TRIP 95GB 5682 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 148 SAC 567\nPAGE 77"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n1527. 25 Jun 83 GLORY TRIP 94GM 2583 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 149 SAC 568\n1528. 27 Jun 83 STP 83-1 7345 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 56 NASA 53\n1529. 14 Jul 83 NAVSTAR 8 1204 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 21 AFSC 731\n1530. 31 Jul 83 N/A 6849 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 64 AFSC 732\n1531. 21 Sep 83 GLORY TRIP 96GM 4161 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 150 SAC 569\n1532. 21 Sep 83 GLORY TRIP 97GM 9817 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 151 SAC 570\n1533. 28 Sep 83 GLORY TRIP 145MS 0777 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 157 SAC 571\n1534. 14 Oct 83 FTM-2 2543 TP-01 PEACEKEEPER DT&E PHASE I 2 AFSC 733\n1535. 17 Nov 83 DMSP F-7 8307 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 22 AFSC 734\n1536. 22 Nov 83 GLORY TRIP 98GB 5214 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 152 SAC 572\n1537. 16 Dec 83 STREP-12A 8011 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 253 AFSC 735\n1538. 20 Dec 83 FTM-3 8231 TP-01 PEACEKEEPER DT&E PHASE I 3 AFSC 736\n1539. 25 Jan 84 GLORY TRIP 99GM 9935 LF-08 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 153 SAC 573\n1540. 25 Jan 84 GLORY TRIP 100GM 7565 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 154 SAC 574\n1541. 5 Feb 84 N/A 9959 SLC-3E ATLAS H SPACE 3 AFSC 737\n1542. 29 Feb 84 GLORY TRIP 146MS 2154 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 158 SAC 575\n1543. 1 Mar 84 LANDSAT D/PRIME 6551 SLC-2W DELTA SPACE 6 NASA 54\n1544. 30 Mar 84 FTM-4 3176 TP-01 PEACEKEEPER DT&E PHASE I 4 AFSC 738\n1545. 8 Apr 84 GLORY TRIP 101GB 2927 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 155 SAC 576\n1546. 8 Apr 84 GLORY TRIP 102GM 0060 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 156 SAC 577\nPAGE 78"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n1547. 17 Apr 84 N/A 2188 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 65 AFSC 739\n1548. 10 Jun 84 STREP-13 2401 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 254 AFSC 740\n1549. 13 Jun 84 NAVSTAR 9 7887 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 23 AFSC 741\n1550. 15 Jun 84 FTM-5 8708 TP-01 PEACEKEEPER DT&E PHASE I 5 AFSC 742\n1551. 25 Jun 84 N/A 1714 SLC-4E TITAN 34D SPACE 2 AFSC 743\n1552. 28 Aug 84 N/A 8685 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 66 AFSC 744\n1553. 8 Sep 84 NAVSTAR 10 0307 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 24 AFSC 745\n1554. 13 Sep 84 GLORY TRIP 103GM 8106 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 157 SAC 578\n1555. 19 Sep 84 GLORY TRIP 104GB 4612 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 158 SAC 579\n1556. 1 Oct 84 FTM-6 3216 TP-01 PEACEKEEPER DT&E PHASE II 6 AFSC 746\n1557. 4 Oct 84 GLORY TRIP 105GM 0991 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 159 SAC 580\n1558. 11 Oct 84 NOVA III 8383 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 57 NASA 55\n1559. 18 Oct 84 IPA-1 4660 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 255 AFSC 747\n1560. 4 Dec 84 N/A 8252 SLC-4E TITAN 34D SPACE 3 AFSC 748\n1561. 12 Dec 84 NOAA-F 2158 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 25 AFSC 749\n1562. 1 Feb 85 FTM-7 0626 TP-01 PEACEKEEPER DT&E PHASE II 7 AFSC 750\n1563. 6 Feb 85 GLORY TRIP 106GM 5831 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 160 SAC 581\n1564. 7 Feb 85 N/A 7032 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 67 AFSC 751\n1565. 20 Feb 85 GLORY TRIP 107GB 6105 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 161 SAC 582\n1566. 12 Mar 85 GEOSAT-A 4975 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 26 AFSC 752\nPAGE 79"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n1567. 22 May 85 IPA-2 8698 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 256 AFSC 753\n1568. 3 Jun 85 FTM-8 9495 TP-01 PEACEKEEPER DT&E PHASE II 8 AFSC 754\n1569. 16 Jun 85 GLORY TRIP 108GM 8948 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 162 SAC 583\n1570. 16 Jun 85 GLORY TRIP 109GB 3307 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 163 SAC 584\n1571. 15 Jul 85 GLORY TRIP 110GM 5675 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 164 SAC 585\n1572. 2 Aug 85 SOOS 0219 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 58 NASA 56\n1573. 23 Aug 85 FTM-9 7846 LF-08 PEACEKEEPER DT&E PHASE II 9 AFSC 755\n1574. 28 Aug 85 N/A 1257 SLC-4E TITAN 34D SPACE 4 AFSC 756\n1575. 26 Sep 85 GLORY TRIP 111GM 7073 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 165 SAC 586\n1576. 8 Oct 85 NAVSTAR 11 6664 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 27 AFSC 757\n1577. 22 Oct 85 N/A G0007 HP-06 GLCM OT 1 TAC 1\n1578. 13 Nov 85 FTM-10 4435 LF-08 PEACEKEEPER DT&E PHASE II 10 AFSC 758\n1579. 9 Feb 86 N/A 6247 SLC-3E ATLAS H SPACE 4 AFSC 759\n1580. 14 Feb 86 GLORY TRIP 112GB 3610 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 166 SAC 587\n1581. 7 Mar 86 FTM-11 0202 LF-08 PEACEKEEPER DT&E PHASE II 11 AFSC 760\n1582. 15 Mar 86 GLORY TRIP 113GM-1 8012 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 167 SAC 588\n1583. 15 Mar 86 GLORY TRIP 114GM 3229 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 168 SAC 589\n1584. 17 Mar 86 IPA-3 3120 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 257 AFSC 761\n1585. 18 Apr 86 N/A 4676 SLC-4E TITAN 34D SPACE 5 AFSC 762\n1586. 21 May 86 FTM-12 0976 LF-08 PEACEKEEPER DT&E PHASE II 12 AFSC 763\nPAGE 80"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ | DATE | NICKNAME | OP # | FACILITY | VEHICLE TYPE | PROGRAM | CUM BY BOOSTER | COMMAND | CUM BY COMMAND\n1587. 15 Jun 86 GLORY TRIP 115GB 9966 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 169 SAC 590\n1588. 31 Jul 86 GLORY TRIP 116GM 5361 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 170 SAC 591\n1589. 23 Aug 86 FTM-15 9823 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER OT&E 13 AFSC 764\n1590. 28 Aug 86 GLORY TRIP 117GM 5674 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 171 SAC 592\n1591. 17 Sep 86 NOAA-G 8946 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 28 AFSC 765\n1592. 18 Sep 86 FTM-13 9278 LF-08 PEACEKEEPER OT&E 14 AFSC 766\n1593. 25 Sep 86 GLORY TRIP 118GB 9168 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 172 SAC 593\n1594. 13 Nov 86 POLAR BEAR 5853 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 59 NASA 57\n1595. 5 Dec 86 FTM-14 1712 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER OT&E 15 AFSC 767\n1596. 20 Jan 87 SENT-1 6607 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B SENT 258 AFSC 768\n1597. 28 Jan 87 GLORY TRIP 119GM 4292 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 173 SAC 594\n1598. 4 Feb 87 GLORY TRIP 120GB 2149 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 174 SAC 595\n1599. 11 Feb 87 N/A 5847 SLC-4W TITAN IIIB/AGENA D SPACE 68 AFSC 769\n1600. 13 Feb 87 FTM-16 1806 LF-08 PEACEKEEPER OT&E 16 AFSC 770\n1601. 16 Mar 87 GLORY TRIP 121GM 5475 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 175 SAC 596\n1602. 21 Mar 87 FTM-17 8699 LF-08 PEACEKEEPER OT&E 17 AFSC 771\n1603. 2 Apr 87 IPMS 2995 LF-06 MINUTEMAN G IPMS 176 AFSC 772\n1604. 15 May 87 N/A 2861 SLC-3E ATLAS H SPACE 5 AFSC 773\n1605. 19 Jun 87 DMSP F-8 8663 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 29 AFSC 774\n1606. 25 Jun 87 GLORY TRIP 122GB-1 9256 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 177 SAC 597\nPAGE 81"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1607. 7 Jul 87 GLORY TRIP 148M 0824 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 159 SAC 598\n1608. 12 Jul 87 GLORY TRIP 123GM-1 5362 LF-10 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 178 SAC 599\n1609. 1 Sep 87 IPMS 6121 LF-06 MINUTEMAN G IPMS 179 AFSC 775\n1610. 16 Sep 87 SOOS-2 8110 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 60 NASA 58\n1611. 21 Sep 87 SENT-2 9822 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B SENT 259 AFSC 776\n1612. 26 Oct 87 N/A 8993 SLC-4E TITAN 34D SPACE 6 AFSC 777\n1613. 28 Oct 87 GLORY TRIP 150M 4094 LF-04 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 160 SAC 600\n1614. 3 Nov 87 GLORY TRIP 124GM 4307 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 180 SAC 601\n1615. 9 Nov 87 GLORY TRIP 149M 9937 LF-07 MINUTEMAN F OT PHASE II 161 SAC 602\n1616. 18 Jan 88 TD MARV 5360 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 260 AFSC 778\n1617. 29 Jan 88 GLORY TRIP 125GB-1 0062 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 181 SAC 603\n1618. 2 Feb 88 DMSS F-9 2621 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 30 AFSC 779\n1619. 25 Apr 88 SOOS-3 4473 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 61 NASA 59\n1620. 3 Jun 88 GLORY TRIP-127GB 4369 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 182 SAC 604\n1621. 15 Jun 88 NOVA IV 3769 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 62 NASA 60\n1622. 12 Jul 88 GLORY TRIP 126GM 1166 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 183 SAC 605\n1623. 12 Jul 88 GLORY TRIP 128GM 6034 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 184 SAC 606\n1624. 25 Aug 88 SOOS IV 6456 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 63 NASA 61\n1625. 5 Sep 88 N/A 0305 SLC-4W TITAN II SLV SPACE 1 AFSC 780\n1626. 24 Sep 88 NOAA-H 9142 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 31 AFSC 781\nPAGE 82"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1627. 27 Oct 88 GLORY TRIP 130GM 6007 LF-10 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 185 SAC 607\n1628. 6 Nov 88 N/A 1305 SLC-4E TITAN 34D SPACE 7 AFSC 782\n1629. 25 Jan 89 GLORY TRIP 131GB 3491 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 186 SAC 608\n1630. 22 Feb 89 GLORY TRIP 132GM 5535 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 187 SAC 609\n1631. 7 Mar 89 GLORY TRIP 133GM 6490 LF-10 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 188 SAC 610\n1632. 19 Mar 89 FTM-18 8007 LF-08 PEACEKEEPER OT&E 18 AFSC 783\n1633. 11 May 89 FTM-1 2594 TP-01 SMALL ICBM DT&E 1 AFSC 784\n1634. 6 Jul 89 GLORY TRIP 129GB-2 9566 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 189 SAC 611\n1635. 11 Jul 89 GLORY TRIP 134GM 8238 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 190 SAC 612\n1636. 5 Sep 89 N/A 0979 SLC-4W TITAN II SLV SPACE 2 AFSC 785\n1637. 14 Sep 89 GLORY TRIP 01PA 0955 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER PHASE I 19 SAC 613\n1638. 26 Sep 89 GLORY TRIP 135GB 8154 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 191 SAC 614\n1639. 5 Oct 89 SET-1/SMLV 9892 BMRS A-3 AMROC/IRR SPACE 1 AMROC 1\n1640. 6 Nov 89 GLORY TRIP 136GM 1690 LF-10 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 192 SAC 615\n1641. 18 Nov 89 COBE 0704 SLC-2W DELTA SPACE 7 NASA 62\n1642. 6 Feb 90 GLORY TRIP 137GB 3398 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 193 SAC 616\n1643. 14 Feb 90 MaST 6516 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 261 AFSC 786\n1644. 8 Mar 90 GLORY TRIP 02PA 3370 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER PHASE I 20 SAC 617\n1645. 21 Mar 90 GLORY TRIP 139GM 0041 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 194 SAC 618\n1646. 24 Mar 90 GLORY TRIP 138GM 9783 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 195 SAC 619\nPAGE 83"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1647. 11 Apr 90 STACKSAT (P87-2) 4832 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 32 AFSC 787\n1648. 9 May 90 MACSAT 9427 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 64 NASA 63\n1649. 16 May 90 GLORY TRIP 03PA 6045 LF-08 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE I 21 SAC 620\n1650. 26 Jun 90 GLORY TRIP 140GB 1468 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 196 SAC 621\n1651. 13 Sep 90 GLORY TRIP 04PA 4524 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE I 22 SAC 622\n1652. 19 Sep 90 GLORY TRIP 141GM 4877 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 197 SAC 623\n1653. 6 Nov 90 GLORY TRIP 142GM 7506 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 198 SAC 624\n1654. 1 Dec 90 DMSS S10 0297 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 33 AFSPC 1\n1655. 28 Jan 91 GBI-1 2648 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 262 AFSC 788\n1656. 8 Mar 91 N/A 6496 SLC-4E TITAN IV SPACE 1 AFSC 789\n1657. 12 Mar 91 GLORY TRIP 05PA 7027 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE I 23 SAC 625\n1658. 18 Apr 91 FTM-2A 4068 TP-01 SMALL ICBM DT&E 2 AFSC 790\n1659. 11 May 91 GBI-2 3149 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 263 AFSC 791\n1660. 14 May 91 NOAA-D 0069 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 34 AFSPC 2\n1661. 11 Jun 91 GLORY TRIP 06PA 0734 LF-08 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE I 24 SAC 626\n1662. 20 Jun 91 AST 0757 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 264 AFSC 792\n1663. 25 Jun 91 GLORY TRIP 144GB 3726 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 199 SAC 627\n1664. 29 Jun 91 REX 9852 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 65 NASA 64\n1665. 2 Jul 91 GLORY TRIP 143GM 4946 LF-10 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 200 SAC 628\n1666. 3 Sep 91 GLORY TRIP 145GM 9714 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 201 SAC 629\nPAGE 84"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1667. 17 Sep 91 GLORY TRIP 07PA 6738 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE I 25 SAC 630\n1668. 7 Nov 91 N/A 8047 SLC-4E TITAN IV SPACE 2 AFSC 793\n1669. 11 Nov 91 GLORY TRIP 146GM 6694 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 202 SAC 631\n1670. 28 Nov 91 DMSP (F-11) 4199 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 35 AFSPC 3\n1671. 4 Mar 92 GLORY TRIP 08PA 1864 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE I 26 SAC 632\n1672. 13 Mar 92 GBI-2B 4898 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 265 AFSC 794\n1673. 25 Apr 92 N/A 9062 SLC-4W TITAN II SLV SPACE 3 AFSC 795\n1674. 5 May 92 GLORY TRIP 147GM-1 5975 LF-10 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 203 SAC 633\n1675. 2 Jun 92 GLORY TRIP 148GB 8204 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 204 ACC 1\n1676. 30 Jun 92 GLORY TRIP 09PA 4989 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE I 27 ACC 2\n1677. 3 Jul 92 SAMPEX 7339 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 66 NASA 65\n1678. 15 Sep 92 GLORY TRIP 10PA 5805 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE I 28 ACC 3\n1679. 28 Sep 92 GLORY TRIP 149GB 0818 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 205 ACC 4\n1680. 24 Oct 92 AST - DT 2 8398 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 266 AFMC 1\n1681. 3 Nov 92 GLORY TRIP 150GM 3178 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 206 ACC 5\n1682. 21 Nov 92 MSTI-1 7893 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 67 NASA 66\n1683. 28 Nov 92 N/A 4119 SLC-4E TITAN IV SPACE 3 AFMC 2\n1684. 4 Mar 93 GLORY TRIP 11PA 4648 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 29 ACC 6\n1685. 9 Mar 93 GLORY TRIP 151GB 6020 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 207 ACC 7\n1686. 15 Jun 93 TDT-1 3393 LF-03 MINUTEMAN B RSLP 267 AFMC 3\nPAGE 85"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH SEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM CUM BY BOOSTER COMMAND CUM BY COMMAND\n1687. 25 Jun 93 RADCAL 0457 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 68 NASA 67\n1688. 2 Jul 93 GLORY TRIP 152GM 8387 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 208 AFSPC 4\n1689. 13 Jul 93 GLORY TRIP 12PA 7945 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 30 AFSPC 5\n1690. 2 Aug 93 N/A 8260 SLC-4E TITAN IV SPACE 4 AFMC 4\n1691. 9 Aug 93 NOAA-I 1066 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 36 AFSPC 6\n1692. 31 Aug 93 GLORY TRIP 153GB 0671 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 209 AFSPC 7\n1693. 15 Sep 93 GLORY TRIP 13PA 4077 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 31 AFSPC 8\n1694. 5 Oct 93 LANDSAT 6 3810 SLC-4W TITAN II SLV SPACE 4 AFMC 5\n1695. 25 Jan 94 CLEMENTINE 7149 SLC-4W TITAN II SLV SPACE 5 AFMC 6\n1696. 2 Feb 94 GLORY TRIP 154GB 5290 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 210 AFSPC 9\n1697. 4 Feb 94 ASTRID 5255 LF-08* INTERCEPTOR VEH. DEMO (BALLISTIC) 1 LLL 1\n1698. 7 Mar 94 GLORY TRIP 14PA 6463 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 32 AFSPC 10\n1699. 13 Mar 94 T-1 7195 576E** TAURUS SPACE 1 OSC 1\n1700. 8 May 94 MSTI-2 4564 SLC-5 SCOUT SPACE 69 NASA 68\n1701. 17 May 94 GLORY TRIP 15PA 2971 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 33 AFSPC 11\n1702. 8 Jun 94 GLORY TRIP 155GM 0373 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 211 AFSPC 12\n1703. 6 Jul 94 GLORY TRIP 156GM 1626 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 212 AFSPC 13\n1704. 29 Aug 94 DMSP (F-12) 9001 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 37 AFSPC 14\n* Launched from a rail adjacent to LF-08.\n** Launched from a stand adjacent to Atlas silo 576E.\nPAGE 86"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH CUM BY CUM BY\nSEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM BOOSTER COMMAND COMMAND\n1705. 7 Sep 94 GLORY TRIP 16PA 4488 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 34 AFSPC 15\n1706. 5 Oct 94 GLORY TRIP 157GM 2129 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 213 AFSPC 16\n1707. 30 Dec 94 NOAA-J 7164 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 38 AFSPC 17\n1708. 19 Jan 95 GLORY TRIP 17PA 3733 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 35 AFSPC 18\n1709. 1 Feb 95 GLORY TRIP 158GM 7760 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 214 AFSPC 19\n1710. 17 Mar 95 GLORY TRIP 159GM 3406 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 215 AFSPC 20\n1711. 24 Mar 95 DMSP (F-13) 1970 SLC-3W ATLAS E SPACE 39 AFSPC 21\n1712. 3 Apr 95 ORBCOMM FM-1&2 8704 Air Lift PEGASUS XL* SPACE 1 OSC 2**\n1713. 14 Jun 95 GLORY TRIP 18PA 9193 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 36 AFSPC 22\n1714. 22 Jun 95 STEP-3 1135 Air Lift PEGASUS XL SPACE 2 OSC 3\n1715. 15 Aug 95 GEMSTAR 0404 SLC-6 LLV-1 SPACE 1 Lockheed 1\n1716. 30 Aug 95 GLORY TRIP 19PA 8205 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 37 AFSPC 23\n1717. 4 Nov 95 RADARSAT 9381 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 1 NASA 69\n1718. 5 Dec 95 K-15 3999 SLC-4E TITAN IV SPACE 5 AFSPC 24\n1719. 24 Feb 96 POLAR 8320 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 2 NASA 70\n1720. 6 Mar 96 GLORY TRIP 161GM 5237 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 216 AFSPC 25\n1721. 8 Mar 96 REX-2 8516 Air Lift PEGASUS SPACE 3 OSC 4\n1722. 24 Apr 96 MSX 6142 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 3 NASA 71\n*This was the eigth Pegasus flight, but the first staged from Vandenberg AFB. See note on page ix.\n**This number includes OSC's Taurus launch on 13 March 1994.\nPAGE 87"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH CUM BY CUM BY\nSEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM BOOSTER COMMAND COMMAND\n1723. 8 May 96 GLORY TRIP 20PA 5783 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 38 AFSPC 26\n1724. 12 May 96 K-22 7788 SLC-4E TITAN IV SPACE 6 AFSPC 27\n1725. 16 May 96 MSTI-3 4387 Air Lift PEGASUS SPACE 4 OSC 5\n1726. 30 May 96 GLORY TRIP 21PA 7210 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 39 AFSPC 28\n1727. 26 Jun 96* GLORY TRIP 162GM 4288 LF-10 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 217 AFSPC 29\n1728. GLORY TRIP 160GM 1464 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 218 AFSPC 30\n1729. 2 Jul 96 TOMS-EP 4672 Air Lift PEGASUS XL SPACE 5 OSC 6\n1730. 21 Aug 96 FAST 8894 Air Lift PEGASAS XL SPACE 6 OSC 7\n1731. 11 Sep 96 GLORY TRIP 22PA 9115 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 40 AFSPC 31\n1732. 27 Sep 96 ITF (DEMO FLIGHT) 6399 LF-03 MINUTEMAN F MSLS 162 AFMC 7\n1733. 6 Nov 96 GLORY TRIP 23PA 0207 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 41 AFSPC 32\n1734. 20 Dec 96 K-13 6777 SLC-4E TITAN IV SPACE 7 AFSPC 33\n1735. 16 Jan 97 ITF-1 6742 LL-03 MINUTEMAN F MSLS 163 AFMC 8\n1736. 30 Jan 97 GLORY TRIP 163GB 1360 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 219 AFSPC 34\n1737. 3 Apr 97 DMSP (S-14) 0252 SLC-4W TITAN II SLV SPACE 6 AFSPC 35\n1738. 5 May 97 IRIDIUM (MS-1A) 7304 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 4 MDA 1\n1739. 8 May 97 GLORY TRIP 24PA 1193 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER OT PHASE II 42 AFSPC 36\n1740. 21 May 97 GLORY TRIP 164GM 6066 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 220 AFSPC 37\n1741. 18 Jun 97 GLORY TRIP 165GM 7640 LF-10 MINUTEMAN G OT PHASE II 221 AFSPC 38\n*The first vehicle was launched at 0517 local time, followed by the second mission at 0759.\nPAGE 88"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH CUM BY AGENCY/ CUM BY\nSEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM BOOSTER COMMAND COMMAND\n1742. 23 Jun 97 IFT-1A 8590 LF-03 MINUTEMAN F MSLS 164 AFMC 9\n1743. 9 Jul 97 IRIDIUM (MS-2) 4040 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 5 MDA 2\n1744. 1 Aug 97 SEASTAR 4458 Air Lift PEGASUS XL SPACE 7 OSC 8\n1745. 20 Aug 97 IRIDIUM (MS-3) 6050 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 6 BOEING1 3\n1746. 22 Aug 97 LEWIS 7240 SLC-6 LMLV-1 SPACE 2 LM 2\n1747. 29 Aug 97 FORTE 6019 Air Lift PEGASUS XL SPACE 8 OSC 9\n1748. 17 Sep 972 GLORY TRIP 25PA 9601 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER FDE 43 AFSPC 39\n1749. 26 Sep 97 IRIDIUM (MS-4) 7180 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 7 BOEING 4\n1750. 23 Oct 97 K-18 0444 SLC-4E TITAN IV SPACE 8 AFSPC 40\n1751. 5 Nov 97 GLORY TRIP 26PA 3676 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER FDE 44 AFSPC 41\n1752. 8 Nov 97 IRIDIUM (MS-5) 2036 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 8 BOEING 5\n1753. 20 Dec 97 IRIDIUM (MS-6) 8070 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 9 BOEING 6\n1754. 15 Jan 98 IFT-2 0263 LF-03 MINUTEMAN F MSLS 165 AFMC 10\n1755. 10 Feb 98 GFO/ORBCOMM FM 3&4 6400 576E TAURUS SPACE 2 OSC 10\n1756. 18 Feb 98 IRIDIUM (MS-7) 0073 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 10 BOEING 7\n1757. 20 Feb 98 GLORY TRIP 166GM 4901 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G FDE 222 AFSPC 42\n1758. 25 Feb 98 SNOE/BATSAT 3908 Air Lift PEGASUS XL SPACE 9 OSC 11\n1The Delta program was originally operated by McDonnell Douglas Aerospace until the company was bought out by The Boeing Company on 4 August 1997.\n2Abouth this time, the Air Force began using the term FDE (Force Development Evaluation) to replace the term OT Phase II used for Peacekeeper and Minuteman G (III) missions.\nPAGE 89"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH CUM BY AGENCY/ CUM BY\nSEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM BOOSTER COMMAND COMMAND\n1760. 1 Apr 98 TRACE 0380 Air Lift PEGASUS XL SPACE 10 OSC 12\n1761. 7 May 98 GLORY TRIP 27PA 6388 LF-05 PEACEKEEPER FDE 45 AFSPC 43\n1762. 13 May 98 NOAA-K 3899 SLC-4W TITAN II SPACE 7 AFSPC 44\n1763. 17 May 98 IRIDIUM (MS-9) 3628 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 12 BOEING 9\n1764. 3 Jun 98 GLORY TRIP 167GB 7030 SLC-2W MINUTEMAN G FDE 223 AFSPC 45\n1765. 24 Jun 981 IDF-1 0118 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G GRP 224 AFSPC 46\n1766. GLORY TRIP 168GM 2513 LF-10 MINUTEMAN G FDE 225 AFSPC 47\n1767. 8 Sep 98 IRIDIUM (MS-10) 4826 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 13 BOEING 10\n1768. 18 Sep 98 IDF-2 7147 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G GRP 226 AFSPC 48\n1769. 3 Oct 981 STEX 0129 576E TAURUS SPACE 3 OSC 13\n1770. 6 Nov 98 IRIDIUM (MS-11) 3418 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 14 BOEING 11\n1771. 5 Dec 98 SWAS 7151 Air Lift PEGASUS XL SPACE 11 OSC 14\n1772 10 Feb 99 GLORY TRIP 169GM 3985 LF-04 MINUTEMAN G FDE 227 AFSPC 49\n1773 23 Feb 993 ARGOS 4585 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 15 BOEING 12\n1774 4 Mar 99 WIRE 1051 Air Lift PEGASUS XL SPACE 12 OSC 15\n1775 10 Mar 99 GLORY TRIP 28PA 1036 LF-02 PEACEKEEPER FDE 46 AFSPC 50\n1776 15 Apr 99 LANDSAT-7 6374 SLC-2W DELTA II SPACE 16 BOEING 13\n1The first vehicle was launched at 0191 local time, followed by the second mission at 0546.\n2Launched from a stand adjacent to Atlas silo 576E.\n3In addition to ARGOS, the Delta II carried a scientific Danish satellite, Orsted, and a South African communications satellite, SUNSAT.\nPAGE 90"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LAUNCH CUM BY AGENCY/ CUM BY\nSEQ DATE NICKNAME OP # FACILITY VEHICLE TYPE PROGRAM BOOSTER COMMAND COMMAND\n1777 27 Apr 991 IKONOS-1 0411 SLC-6 ATHENA II SPACE 1 LM 3\n1778 17 May 99 Terriers/MUBLCOM 8913 Air Lift PEGASUS XL SPACE 13 OSC 16\n1779 22 May 99 B-12 9111 SLC-4E TITAN IV SPACE 9 AFSPC 51\n1780 19 Jun 99 QuickScat 7778 SLC-4W TITAN II SPACE 8 NASA 72\n1781 29 Aug 992 GLORY TRIP 170GM-1 2923 LF-10 MINUTEMAN G FDE 227 AFSPC 52\n1782 GLORY TRIP 171 0441 LF-09 MINUTEMAN G FDE 228 AFSPC 53\n1783 24 Sep 99 IKONOS-II 6735 SLC-6 ATHENA II SPACE 2 LM 4\n1784 2 Oct 99 ITF-3 1939 LF-03 MINUTEMAN F MSLS 166 AFMC 11\n1785 13 Nov 99 FTM-01 4420 LF-26 MINUTEMAN G PRP 229 AFSPC 54\n1786 12 Dec 99 DMSP 1927 SLC-4W TITAN II SPACE 9 AFSPC 55\n1787 18 Dec 99 EOS TERRA 4359 SLC-3E ATLAS IIAS SPACE 1 LM 5\n1788 20 Dec 993 KOMPSAT/ACRIMSAT 1836 576E TAURUS SPACE 4 OSC 17\n1789 18 Jan 00 ITF-4 6118 LF-03 MINUTEMAN F MSLS 167 AFMC 12\n1790 26 Jan 004/5 JAWSAT 7744 SLF MINOTAUR SPACE 1 AFMC 13\n1The Athena rocket was formerly called LMLV (Lockheed Martin Launch Vehicle). The name was changed in September 1997.\n2The first missile was launched at 0145:59 local time, followed by the second one at 0427:00.\n3Launched from a stand adjacent to Atlas silo 576E.\n4The SLF (Space Launch Facility) was a commercial launch facility, built by Space Systems International, Inc., a limited parnership between ITT Industries and Californai Commercial Spaceport, Inc.\n5Minotaur was the nickname for \"Orbital Suborbital Program Space Launch Vehicle,\" a hybrid booster consiting of Minuteman II and Pagasus stages.\nPAGE 91"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VANDENBERG LAUNCHER STATUS AND HISTORY\nPrepared by the 1STRAD Office of History (HO) (Revised March 1983)\nLAUNCH FACILITY Bldg | ACCEPTANCE DATE BY AIR FORCE* | DATE OF FIRST LAUNCH | PRESENT STATUS | ORIGINAL PURPOSE | CURRENT OR (LAST) USE | FORMER DESIGNATION | REMARKS\nSLC-2E 1620 (soft) | 25 Jul 58 | 16 Dec 58** | Decommis-sioned & stripped | THOR IRBM | (THOR/DELTA) (Space) | 75-1-1 | FIRST VANDENBERG MISSILE LAUNCH** First space launch - 16 Jun 61 Last Launch - 11 Mar 72 Transferred to NASA\nSLC-2W 1623 (soft) | 25 Jul 58 | 17 Sep 59 | Active | THOR IRBM | THOR/DELTA Space | 75-1-2 | First space launch - 28 Aug 62 Transferred to NASA\nSLC-1E 1642 (soft) | 1 Oct 58 | 25 Jun 59 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | THOR/AGENA Space | (THORAD/AGENA) (Space) | 75-3-5 | Last launch - 18 Sep 68\nSLC-1W 1635 (soft) | 1 Oct 58 | 28 Feb 59 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | THOR/AGENA Space | (THORAD/AGENA) (Space) | 75-3-4 | FIRST VANDENBERG SPACE LAUNCH and the world's first polar-orbiting satellite. Last launch-14 Dec 71\nSLC-10E 1651 (soft) | 29 Oct 58 | 16 Jun 59 | Inactive | THOR IRBM | (THOR) (Training) | 75-2-7 LE-7 | Last launch - 19 Mar 62 (RAF CTL)\nSLC-10W 1658 (soft) | 29 Oct 58 | 14 Aug 59 | Inactive | THOR IRBM | (THOR/BLOCK 5D) (Space) | 75-2-6 LE-6 4300 B-6 | Defense Meteorological Satellite Program - Previously launched with Thor/Burner I/II. First Block 5D-1 11 Sep 76 - Last 14 Jul 80\nLE-8 1661 (soft) | 29 Oct 58 | 16 Apr 59 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | THOR IRBM | (THOR IRBM) (RAF CTL) | 75-2-8 | FIRST WEAPON SYSTEM TRAINING LAUNCH RAF/Thor IWST program. Final RAF and Thor IRBM launch -- 18 Jun 62\nBMRS A-1 1799 (soft) | 14 May 58 | 26 Oct 62 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | ATLAS D ICBM | (ATLAS F) (Space) | 576 A-1 4300 A-1 ABRES A-1 | First ABRES launch - 4 Nov 63 First space launch - 27 May 65 Last launch - 8 Sep 74\n*Acceptance of \"Brick and Mortar\" prior to Installation and Checkout (I&C) of aerospace equipment. **Underlined launch dates coincide with emphasized remarks. INDEX - page 8 GLOSSARY - page 7\n1"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VANDENBERG LAUNCHER STATUS AND HISTORY (1STRAD/HO - Mar 83)\nLAUNCH FACILITY Bldg | ACCEPTANCE DATE BY AIR FORCE | DATE OF FIRST LAUNCH | PRESENT STATUS | ORIGINAL PURPOSE | CURRENT OR (LAST) USE | FORMER DESIGNATION | REMARKS\nBMRS A-2 1790 (soft) | 4 Nov 58 | 9 Sep 59 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | ATLAS D ICBM | (ATLAS F) (BMRS) | 576 A-2 4300 A-2 ABRES A-2 | FIRST VANDENBERG ICBM LAUNCH First ABRES launch - 5 Aug 65 First space launch - 6 Apr 68 Last launch - 6 Aug 71\nBMRS A-3 1788 (soft) | 8 Apr 59 | 26 Jan 60 | Under Construc-tion | ATLAS D ICBM | (ATLAS F) (BMRS) | 576 A-3 4300 A-3 ABRES A-3 | Site being modified to accommodate special two-stage Minuteman booster for Army-related research program.\nABRES B-1 1835 Coffin Type (semi-hard) | 10 Jul 59 | 22 Jul 60 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | ATLAS D ICBM | (ATLAS D) (ABRES) | 576 B-1 | First ABRES launch - 6 Apr 65 Last launch - 10 Jun 66\nABRES B-2 1825 Coffin Type (semi-hard) | 19 Jun 59 | 22 Apr 60 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | ATLAS D ICBM | (ATLAS D) (ABRES) | 576 B-2 | First ABRES launch - 3 Jun 65 Last launch - 7 Nov 67\nABRES B-3 1820 Coffin Type (semi-hard) | 20 Aug 59 | 12 Sep 60 | | ATLAS D ICBM | (ATLAS D) (ABRES) | 576 B-3 | First ABRES launch - 21 Jan 65 First space launch - 27 May 65 Last launch - 11 Oct 67\nSLC-3W 770 (soft) | 10 Sep 59* | 11 Oct 60 | Active | ATLAS AGENA Space | ATLAS Space | PALC-1-1 | Converted from Atlas to Thor (1963) Back to Atlas space boosters (1973) First DMSP Block 5D-2 launch (1982)\nSLC-3E 751 (soft) | 10 Sep 59* | 12 Jul 61 | Active | ATLAS Space | ATLAS Space | PALC-1-2 | Site modified (1983) to accommodate Atlas H space boosters.\nOSTF 1861 Silo-lift (hard) | 15 Dec 59 | - - - | (A scarred hole in the ground remains) | TITAN I Test Facility | (Weapon) (System) (Demonstration) | | Destroyed 3 Dec 60 by in-silo explosion during simulated launch. No actual launches. Deleted from Real Property Records.\n*Transferred from U.S. Naval Missile Facility, Point Arguello, to USAF Vandenberg AFB, 1 July 1964.\n2"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VANDENBERG LAUNCHER STATUS AND HISTORY (1STRAD/HO- Mar 83)\nLAUNCH FACILITY Bldg | ACCEPTANCE DATE BY AIR FORCE* | DATE OF FIRST LAUNCH | PRESENT STATUS | ORIGINAL PURPOSE | CURRENT OR (LAST) USE | FORMER DESIGNATION | REMARKS\nPLC-A 939 (soft) | 8 Dec 59* | 14 Jul 59 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | PROBE VEHICLES Space | (SUPER LOKI) (Weather Probe) | PALC-A | Last launch - 9 Feb 73 Previous Scout Jr launcher Constructed for AEC\nPALC-B none (soft) | 8 Dec 59* | 4 Feb 60 | | PROBE VEHICLES Space | (KIVA/HOPI) (Space Probe) | | Last launch - 11 May 63 Constructed for AEC\n576-G 1935 Silo-lift (hard) | 18 Mar 60 | 10 Aug 62 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | ATLAS F ICBM | (ATLAS F) (Spec Test) | OSTF-2 | Last launch - 8 Jan 65\n576-F 1836 Coffin Type (semi-hard) | 20 May 60 | 7 Jun 61 | | ATLAS E ICBM | (ATLAS E) (Nike X) | OSTF-1 | Last launch - 27 Aug 64\n576-C 1895 Coffin Type (semi-hard) | 19 Jul 60 | 3 Jul 63 | | ATLAS E ICBM | (ATLAS E) (DASO) | | Last launch - 25 Sep 63\nSLTF 1885 Silo (hard) | 10 Aug 60 | 3 May 61 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | TITAN I/II Silo Test | (TITAN I/II) (Silo Test) | | FIRST VANDENBERG IN-SILO LAUNCH: a Titan I launched from a prototype Titan II silo to determine in-silo launch environment effect on the emplaced missile during liftoff.\n395-A LE-1 1875 Silo-lift (hard) | 30 Aug 60 | 23 Sep 61 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | TITAN I ICBM | (TITAN I) (Spec Test) | | Last launch - 8 Dec 64\n395-A LE-2 1877 Silo-lift (hard) | 30 Aug 60 | 30 Mar 63 | | TITAN I ICBM | (TITAN I) (Spec Test) | | Last launch - 3 Mar 65\n*Transferred from U.S. Naval Missile Facility, Point Arguello, to USAF Vandenberg AFB, 1 July 1964.\n3"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VANDENBERG LAUNCHER STATUS AND HISTORY (1STRAD/HO - Mar 83)\nLAUNCH FACILITY Bldg | ACCEPTANCE DATE BY AIR FORCE | DATE OF FIRST LAUNCH | PRESENT STATUS | ORIGINAL PURPOSE | CURRENT OR (LAST) USE | FORMER DESIGNATION | REMARKS\n395-A LE-3 1879 Silo-lift (hard) | 27 Sep 60 | 20 Jan 62 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | TITAN I ICBM | (TITAN I) (Spec Test) | | Last launch - 14 Jan 65\n395-B 1799 Silo (hard) | 15 Jun 61 | 17 Feb 64 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | TITAN II ICBM | (TITAN II) (OT) | | Last launch on 20 May 69 involved an ICBM that had been on strategic alert in this silo for a year.\n395-C 1050 Silo (hard) | 4 May 61 | 16 Feb 63 | Inactive | TITAN II ICBM | (TITAN II) (BMDTTP/SOT) | | FIRST VANDENBERG TITAN II LAUNCH Last launch - 27 Jun 76\n395-D 1520 Silo (hard) | 25 May 61 | 13 May 63 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | TITAN II ICBM | (TITAN II) (OT) | | Last launch - 5 Apr 66\n576-D 1920 Silo-lift (hard) | 30 Jun 61 | 15 Mar 63 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | ATLAS F ICBM | (ATLAS F) (DASO) | | Last launch - 31 Aug 64\n576-E 1611 Silo-lift (hard) | 7 Jul 61 | 1 Aug 62 | | ATLAS F ICBM | (ATLAS F) (Spec Test) | | Last launch - 22 Dec 64\nSLC-5 580 (soft) | 7 Nov 61* | 26 Apr 62 | Active | SCOUT Space | SCOUT Space | PALC-D | NASA/European Space Satellites launched aboard American boosters.\nLF 00-02 1971 Silo (hard) | 21 Nov 61 | 12 Apr 63 | Active | MM I ICBM | MM Training | 394 A-1 | WS-133AM Last launch - 26 Jul 75 \"Pave Pepper II\"\nLF 00-03 1972 Silo (hard) | 21 Nov 61 | 30 Apr 63 | Active | MM I ICBM | MM I RSLP | 394 A-2 | WS-133A (Minuteman I Model B) Non-Standard Launch Techniques\nLF-00-04 1976 Silo (hard) | 1 Nov 61 | 28 Sep 62 | Active | MM I ICBM | MM II OT | 394 A-3 | FIRST VANDENBERG MINUTEMAN LAUNCH WS-133AM/ILCS, Wings I & IV Improved Launch Control System\n*Transferred from National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to USAF Vandenberg AFB, 1 July 1967.\n4"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VANDENBERG LAUNCHER STATUS AND HISTORY (1STRAD/HO - Mar 83)\nLAUNCH FACILITY Bldg | ACCEPTANCE DATE BY AIR FORCE | DATE OF FIRST LAUNCH | PRESENT STATUS | ORIGINAL PURPOSE | CURRENT OR (LAST) USE | FORMER DESIGNATION | REMARKS\nLF 00-05 1977 Silo (hard) | 1 Nov 61 | 10 Dec 62 | Active | MM I ICBM | MM Training | 394 A-4 | WS-133AM Last launch - 26 Oct 76\nLF 00-06 1980 Silo (hard) | 28 Dec 61 | 11 Apr 63 | Active | MM I ICBM | MM I RSLP | 394 A-5 | WS-133A (MM I Model B) Non-Standard Launch Techniques\nPLC-C 589 (soft) | 30 Mar 62* | 29 Jun 71 | Inactive | PROBE VEHICLES Space | (Space Probes) | PALC-C | Not used originally because of its potential interference with nearby PALC-D (SLC-5).\nLF 00-07 1981 Silo (hard) | 3 Apr 62 | 24 May 63 | Active | MM I ICBM | MM II OT | 394 A-6 | WS-133AM/SSAS, Wing II Software Status Authentication Sys.\nSLC-4E 715 (soft) | 6 Nov 62 | 14 Aug 64 | Active | ATLAS AGENA Space | TITAN IIID TITAN 34D Space | PALC-2-4 | First Titan IIID launch 15 Jun 71. Site modified to also accommodate Titan 34D space booster (1 Mar 81).\nSLC-4W 738 (soft) | 6 Nov 62 | 13 Jul 63 | Active | ATLAS AGENA Space | TITAN IIIB Space | PALC-2-3 | First Titan IIIB launch 29 Jul 66\n4300 C 1681 (soft) | 24 Apr 63 | 17 Dec 63 | Decommis-sioned & stripped | SCOUT JR Space | (SCRAMJET) (Space) | 279L | FIRST SAC SPACE LAUNCH - a Scout Jr by the 4300th Support Sq (4000th Support Gp). Last launch-11 Jan 67\nLF 00-08 1986 Silo (hard) | 18 Mar 63 | 26 Sep 63 | Active | MM I ICBM | MM III OT | 394 A-7 | WS-133AM/CDB, Wings III & V Command Data Buffer\nLF 00-09 1993 Silo (hard) | 15 Jan 64 | 29 Jun 64 | Active | MM I ICBM | MM III OT | (394 A-8) (Proposed) | WS-133AM/CDB, Wings III & V Command Data Buffer\nLF 00-21 1962 Silo (hard) | 3 Aug 64 | 18 Aug 65 | Active | MM II ICBM | (MM III) (R&D) | (394 B-1) (Proposed) | WS-133B/CDB (Last launch-27 Mar 80) Command Data Buffer\n*Transferred from National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to USAF Vandenberg AFB, 16 August 1965.\n5"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VANDENBERG LAUNCHER STATUS AND HISTORY\n(1STRAD/HO - Mar 83)\nLAUNCH FACILITY Bldg | ACCEPTANCE DATE BY AIR FORCE | DATE OF FIRST LAUNCH | PRESENT STATUS | ORIGINAL PURPOSE | CURRENT OR (LAST) USE | FORMER DESIGNATION | REMARKS\nLF-00-22 Silo (hard) 963 | 2 Nov 64 | 6 Oct 65 | Decommissioned & stripped | MM II ICBM | (MM II/III) (OT) | (394 B-2) (Proposed) | WS-133B Last launch - 17 Dec 75\nLF 00-23 Silo (hard 1964 | 2 Oct 64 | 26 Aug 66 | Decommissioned & stripped | MM II ICBM | (MM II/III) (Training) | (394 B-3) (Proposed) | WS-133B (no refire modifications). Only one launch to determine effect on exposed Launcher Equipment Room.\nLF 00-24 Silo (hard) 1965 | 5 Jan 65 | 15 Dec 65 | Decommissioned & stripped | MM II ICBM | (MM II/III) (OT) | (394 B-4) (Proposed) | WS-133B Last launch - 18 May 71\nLF 00-25 Silo (hard 1966 | 5 Jan 65 | 16 Feb 66 | Decommissioned & stripped | MM II ICBM | (MM II/III) (OT) | (394 B-5) (Proposed) | WS-133B Last launch - 4 Mar 76\nLF 00-26 Silo (hard) 1967 | 2 Feb 65 | 18 Jan 66 | Active | MM II ICBM | MM III OT | (394 B-6) (Proposed) | WS-133B/CDB, Wings I & VI Command Data Buffer\nBomarc-1 (soft) 1815 | 18 Feb 66 | 14 Oct 66 | Inactive | BOMARC A Target | (BOMARC B) (Navy Target) | | For Fleet SAM/AAM target practice. Last launch - 14 Jul 82\nBomarc-2 (soft) 1817 | 18 Feb 66 | 25 Aug 66 | Inactive | BOMARC A Target | (BOMARC B) (Navy Target) | | For Fleet SAM/AAM target practice. Last launch - 14 Jul 82\nSLC-6 (soft) 390 | 26 Feb 70 | - - - | Under Construction | TITAN IIIM Space | - - - | | Old MOL site being modified for the Space Transportation System (Space Shuttle) launches from Vandenberg.\nTP-1 (soft) 1840 | 26 Mar 82 | - - - | Active | PEACEKEEPER Test Pad | Weapon System Development | | Surface launch pad for the initial flight tests employing canisterized Peacekeeper missiles.\nNumber of Sites Constructed: 53 | Number of Sites Inactive or Under Construction: 8\nNumber of Sites Currently Active: 17 | Number of Sites Decommissioned/Stripped or Destroyed: 28\n6"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GLOSSARY\nSOFT - Missile emplaced and launched from exposed launcher above ground (e.g., Gantry-type or Test Pad).\nSEMI-HARD - Missile emplaced in protective ground-level concrete housing prior to launch (see Coffin Type below).\nHARD - Missile emplaced in protective concrete housing underground prior to launch (see Silo and Silo-Lift below).\nSILO - Protective vertical tube-type housing from which missile is launched from its emplaced position (Minuteman and Titan II).\nSILO-LIFT - Missile is stored in silo, but is elevated clear of the tube for above ground launching (Atlas F and Titan I).\nCOFFIN-TYPE - Completely enclosed horizontal storage from which missile is raised to exposed vertical launch position (Atlas D and E).\nSTRIPPED - All recoverable materiel sold and removed under civilian contract, or retained by USAF but transferred to other activities.\nAAM Air-to-Air Missile | PALC Point Arguello Launch Complex\nABRES Advanced Ballistic Reentry System | PLC Probe Launch Complex\nBMDTTP Ballistic Missile Defense Test Target Program | RAF Royal Air Force (United Kingdom)\nBMRS Ballistic Missile Reentry System (ABRES) | R&D Research and Development\nCDB Command Data Buffer | RSLP Reentry Systems Launch Program\nCTL Combat Training Launch (RAF/Thor) | SAM Surface-to-Air Missile\nDASO Demonstration and Shakedown Operations | SLC Space Launch Complex\nICBM Intercontinental Ballistic Missile | SOT Special Operational Test (Titan II)\nILCS Improved Launch Control System | SLTF Silo Launch Test Facility\nIRBM Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile | SSAS Software Status Authentication System\nIWST Integrated Weapon System Training | TP Test Pad (Peacekeeper/MX Missile)\nLE Launch Emplacement | WS-133A Minuteman I Weapon System (MM IA and IB missiles)\nLF Launch Facility | WS-133B Minuteman II Weapon System (MM IIIG missiles only)\nMM Minuteman ICBM (I-II-III) | WS-133AM Modernized Minuteman Weapon System (MM IIF and IIIG missiles)\nMOL Manned Orbiting Laboratory | Wing I-VI Numerical identifiers for operational Minuteman wings: I = 341st SMW II = 44th SMW III = 91st SMW IV = 351st SMW V = 90th SMW VI = 321st SMW\nOSTF Operational System Test Facility\nOT Operational Test (Launch Programs)\n(1STRAD/HO - March 1983)\n7"} {"doc_id":"d0653e89dc9af842","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INDEX\nATLAS ICBM page | SCOUT SPACE page | DISTRIBUTION\nBMRS A-1 1 | *SLC-5 4 | 1 STRAD/CC /CV /CS /HO /TE /LG /DO /BM /SE HQ USAF/CHO AFSHRC/RI HQ SAC/HO HQ AFSC/HO SD/HO BMO/HO 8 AF/HO 15 AF/HO 44 SMW/HO 90 SMW/HO 91 SMW/HO 321 SMW/HO 341 SMW/HO 351 SMW/HO | 4392 AEROSG/CC /PA /RM 392 CG/CC 394 TMS/CC 3901 SMES/CC /HO 4315 CCTS/CC /CMCM /HO 4392 CES/CC /DEI SAMTO/DO WSMC/CC /HO 6595 ATG/CC 6595 MTG/CC 6595 STG/CC 6595 ATG/ASL Det 41/OG ALC SATAF/CC USA CE/CC AFTEC/OL-BC\nBMRS A-2 2 | 4300-C 5\nBMRS A-3 2 | SPACE PROBE\nABRES B-1 2 | PLC-A 3\nABRES B-2 2 | PALC-B 3\nABRES B-3 2 | PLC-C 5\n576-C 3 | SPACE SHUTTLE\n576-D 4 | SLC-6 6\n576-E 4 | THOR IRBM\n576-F 3 | LE-8 1\n576-G 3 | THOR SPACE\nATLAS SPACE | SLC-1E 1\n*SLC-3E 2 | SLC-1W 1\n*SLC-3W 2 | SLC-2E 1\nBOMARC | *SLC-2W 1\nBomarc-1 6 | SLC-10E 1\nBomarc-2 6 | SLC-10W 1\nMINUTEMAN | TITAN ICBM\n*LF-02 4 | OSTF 2\n*LF-03 4 | SLTF 3\n*LF-04 4 | 395 A-1 3\n*LF-05 5 | 395 A-2 3\n*LF-06 5 | 395 A-3 4\n*LF-07 5 | 395-B 4\n*LF-08 5 | 395-C 4\n*LF-09 5 | 395-D 4\n*LF-21 5 | TITAN SPACE\nLF-22 6 | *SLC-4E 5\nLF-23 6 | *SLC-4W 5\nLF-24 6 | (* = Active Sites)\nLF-25 6\n*LF-26 6\nPEACEKEEPER\n*TP-1 6\n8 | Boeing Co (Ralph Vernola) Martin Marietta (Bill Leary) Martin Marietta/MX40X (Kenworthy) TRW (Ed Kranz) Rockwell (Robt. Martin) (1STRAD/HO - Mar 83)"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Declassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007.\n\n8/11/1274194\nRRP039XHQ\n0062 83894\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n3 101 130\nHEADQUARTERS\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nDO NOT DESTROY\nFOIPA #389136\nSECTION 3\nSERIALS 101-130\nDO NOT DESTROY\nFOIPA #993087\nUSE CARE IN HANDLING THIS FILE\nTransfer-Call 421\nPICKETT STREET\n62-HQ-83894\nSERIALS 101-130\nSECTION 3\nINVESTIGATION\nBUREAU\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nMAY 13 1977\nCOPIED FOR FOIPA\nMAR 1 1978\nJAN 19 1979"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Director, FBI\nFROM : SAC, San Francisco\nDATE: September 4, 1947\nAIRMAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\nEnclosed is a copy of a letter dated August 25, 1947, with attachment from Lt. Col. DONALD L. SPRINGER of A-2, Hamilton Field, California. Even though Col. SPRINGER feels that Mr. JOHNSON may have read some of his claims in a newspaper, Col. SPRINGER believes that Mr. F. M. JOHNSON should be interviewed in this matter.\nIn accordance with Bureau Bulletin No. 42, dated July 30, 1947, Portland is requested to exhaustively interview Mr. F. M. JOHNSON, 106 N.W. First Ave., Portland, Oregon, regarding his alleged sighting of a \"flying disc\" on June 24, 1947. Copies of the result of this interview should be furnished the San Francisco Field Office for distribution to the 6th Army Intelligence.\nDWK:MR\nEncls. 2\n62-2938\ncc Portland (Encls. 4) - AMSD\nRECORDED\n62-83894\n135\n31 SEP 23 1947\nEX-85"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n4AFDA\n25 August 1947\nSUBJECT: Flying Disc.\nTO: Special Agent in Charge, FBI, U. S. Department of Justice, Federal Office Building, Room 422, San Francisco, Calif.\n1. The attached true copy of a letter from Mr. F. M. Johnson was received by this officer 22 August 1947.\n2. Your attention is invited to the similarity between Arnold's early report and this gentleman's report. A possibility exists that Mr. Johnson might have read some of this in the newspapers when Arnold was publicized re this matter.\n3. This headquarters does not intend to investigate this incident. It is requested that a result of any interview you may make be furnished this headquarters.\n1 Incl: (dup) Ltr fr F.M.Johnson (True Cy)\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, GSC\nAC of S, A-2\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PORTLAND, OREGON, August 20th 1947\nLt. Col. Donald L. Springer, Assistant Staff\nSir. Saw in the portland paper a short time ago in regards to an article in regards to the so called flying disc having any basis of fact. I can say am a prospector and was in the Mt Adams district on June 24th the day Kennet Arnold of Boise Idaho claims he saw a formation of flying disc. And i saw the same flying objects at about the same time. Having a telescope with me at the time i can asure you they are real and noting like them I ever saw before they did not pass verry high over where I was standing at the the time. plobly 1000 ft. they were Round about 30 foot in dimater tapering sharply to a point in the head end in an oval shape. with a bright top surface. I did not hear any noise as you would from a plane. But there was an objject in the tail end looked like a big hand of a clock shifting from side to side like a big magenet. There speed as far as i know seemed to be greater than anything I ever saw. Last veiw I got of the objects they were standing on edge Banking in a Cloud.\nYours Respectfully\n/s/ F. M. Johnson\n106 No. West 1st Ave\nPortland, Oregon\nA TRUE COPY:\nDONALD L. SPRINGER, Lt. Colonel, GSC, AC of S, A-2\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Director, FBI\nAtten: Assistant Director D. M. LADD\nFROM : SAC, San Francisco\nDATE: September 4, 1937\nAIRMAIL\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\nEnclosed for your information are copies of two letters from Lt. Col. DONALD L. SPRINGER of A-2, Hamilton Field, California, dated August 27, 1947, with attachments reporting the sighting of \"flying discs\" on Guam, and result of A-2 investigation at Tacoma and Kelso, Washington.\nDWK:MR\n62-2938\nENCLOSURE ATTACHED\n62-83894-112\nRECORDED\n36 SEP 24 1947\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964\n53 OCT 3 1947"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA\n333.5/1208-I\n\n27 August 1947\n\n62-2938*\n\nSUBJECT: Re Flying Disc.\n\nTO: Special Agent in Charge, FBI, U. S. Department of Justice,\nFederal Office Building, Room 422, San Francisco, California.\n\n1. Following is extract from the Weekly Intelligence Summary,\nAir Transport Command, Washington 25, D. C., dated 20 August 1947,\nCopy No. 120, Article I, pg 1:\n\n\"FLYING OBJECTS IN GUAM: Unidentified flying objects have\nbeen observed by three American enlisted men of the 147th Airways and Air Communications Service Squadron at Harmon Field,\nGuam. The men report that at 1040 hours on 14 August 1947 the\ntwo objects, which they describe as small, crescent shaped and\ntraveling at a speed twice that of a fighter plane, passed over\nthem on a zig-zag course in a westerly direction at an approximate altitude of twelve hundred feet. The objects disappeared\ninto clouds and a few seconds later a similar object possibly\none of those previously observed, emerged from the clouds and\nproceeded west. No further details have been reported.\"\n\n2. For your information.\n\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, GSC\nAC of S, A-2\n\nSECRET"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE\n62-83894-102"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA\n333.5/1208-I\n\n27 August 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of Flying Disc.\n\nTO: Special Agent in Charge, FBI, U. S. Department of Justice,\nFederal Office Building, Room 422, San Francisco, California.\n\nAttached summary forwarded for your information.\n\n1 Incl:\nSummary of Information.\n\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, GSC\nAC of S, A-2\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nAUG 30 1947\nSAN FRANCISCO\nROUTED TO\n\n62-83894-102 ENCLOSURE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA\n333.5/1208-I\n\n27 August 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of Flying Disc.\n\nTO: Special Agent in Charge, FBI, U. S. Department of Justice,\nSeattle, Washington.\n\nAttached summary forwarded for your information.\n\n1 Incl:\nSummary of Information.\n\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, GSC\nAC of S, A-2\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nSEP 12 1947\nSAN FRANCISCO\nROUTED TO\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY\nAIR RESCUE SERVICE\nDETACHMENT S (62d AAF BU)\nMcChord Field, Tacoma, Washington\n\n4 August 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Final Mission Report\n\nTO: Commanding Officer\nAir Rescue Service\nMacDill Field, Florida\n\n1. MISSION NUMBER Thirty-Nine.\n\n2. NATURE.\n\na. At 0400 PST, 1 August 47, ARMY FLIGHT SERVICE notified this detachment that a plane had been seen to crash and burn thirteen (13) miles south of KELSO, Washington (46°8'N, 122°55'W).\n\n3. ACTION TAKEN\n\na. 1 Aug 47. At 04:30 PST, AFS received information from Mr. O. C. Clark, local sheriff of KELSO, Wash., that the scene of the crash was fifteen (15) to twenty (20) miles east of KELSO in the vicinity of COBLE CREEK. The KELSO Chief of Police saw an aircraft fly low over the town, then crash and burn to the east. The time was about 0230 PST. A check of aircraft known to be in the vicinity revealed that B-25 #1316 had departed McCHORD FIELD at 0212 PST for HAMILTON FIELD, California. The weather was reported as CFR. A full moon made visibility exceptionally good. The pilot's name was CAPT. W. C. DAVIDSON; the plane carried three (3) additional persons. The Base Operations Officer and Base PIO were notified. This detachment began organizing a ground party of base personnel to supplement that being formed by the KELSO Chief of Police. At 0600 PST information was received from KELSO by AFS that ground fog in the valleys at the scene of the crash was preventing a ground party from locating the plane. Since no communication had been received from B-25 #1316, it was assumed that it was the plane reported as crashed. ARS C-47 was pre-flighted to transport the Army ground party to KELSO but a check of the field conditions there deemed it advisable to use a smaller aircraft. Of the two C-45s available, one belonging to AFS was unserviced after a night flight; the other, belonging to AACS, was readied even though a responsible officer of that organization was not present to authorize the flight. Fog at KELSO prevented take-off until 0700 PST. The ground party, led by CAPT. W. L. LITTRELL and CAPT. T. H. FORSBERG, consisted of six men including a medical technician and a photographer. At 0600 PST, the KELSO Chief of Police notified AFS that a passenger of the crashed airplane was in his office and had confirmed\n\n62-83894-102 ENCLOSURE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nInci #8"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Subject: Final Mission Report 4 August 1947\n\nThe belief that the crash was that of the unreported B-25. The Passenger, Sgt. E. L. TAFF, of FT. LAWTON, SEATTLE, was uninjured, but reported that the crew chief, T/Sgt. W. D. MATHEWS, was at a farm house near the scene of the crash and was injured. Sgt. TAFF then led an ambulance to Sgt. MATHEWS who was subsequently taken to a local hospital. At 0610 PST an attempt was made to telephone Sq B at HAMILTON FIELD but no answer was received; however, it was known that HAMILTON AFB was aware of the incident and would notify Sq. B. At 0700 PST Capt. LITTRELL departed in a C-45 for KELSO. At 0745 PST Sq B was contacted by phone and given a flash report. At 0905 PST CAPT LITTRELL phoned and informed that he had placed CAPTAIN FORSBERG in charge of Army personnel proceeding to the scene of the crash. No aerial search was necessary as civilians in the area knew the exact location of the crash and had reported finding one (1) body in the wreckage. CAPT. LITTRELL prepared to fly Sgt's TAFF and MATHEWS to MCCHORD FIELD for medical attention, arriving at 0945 PST. The survivors stated that they believed neither the pilot nor co-pilot has parachuted from the plane. The cause of the incident was at this time determined to be a fire in the left engine. CAPT LITTRELL was informed by Sgt. TAFF that he believed classified documents had been aboard the plane; CAPT FORSBERG was instructed to take necessary precautions. An ambulance met the plane at MCCHORD FIELD carrying the two survivors and took them to the hospital. Interrogation revealed that the left engine had caught fire in the power section and flames and smoke had spread to the flight deck almost immediately. The crew chief, MATHEWS, assisted TAFF in attaching his chest pack and TAFF abandoned the plane at an estimated altitude of 10,000 ft (this fact is doubted but is not considered necessarily relevant). MATHEWS helped the pilot and co-pilot attach their chest packs (all personnel had been wearing the harness) and as he left the plane was aware that the co-pilot was preparing to follow. The pilot had started to leave and, to the best recollection of MATHEWS, was partially standing and holding the control wheel with his left hand. MATHEW'S statements indicate that proper emergency procedures had been performed but that the flames had enveloped the entire left side almost immediately. TAFF stated that, because of the full moon and good visibility, he saw MATHEWS leave the plane and was able to follow the plane to the ground and that he saw no one else bail out. The ship was enveloped in flames and was beginning to fall apart before hitting the ground where it exploded and burned about one (1) mile from where he, TAFF, landed. He lit in a tree, and not knowing how to release his parachute of the quick-detachable kind, cut himself loose from the harness with his pocket knife. He kicked and struggled and eventually jumped to the ground, receiving a jolt on impact but was unable to guess how far he had fallen. He then followed a cow path for an estimated two (2) miles to a farm house, arriving after MATHEWS. Meanwhile, as MATHEWS cleared the plane he turned and saw the plane strike the ground, explode and burn. Just before or just at the time of impact he saw an object afire thrown clear of the plane but did not know whether it was a person or part of the plane. MATHEWS also lit in a tree, and after freeing himself from his harness, fell to the ground where he injured his back. He lost consciousness and on recovering went to the burning plane, about fifty\n\n2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Subject: Final Mission Report 4 August 1947\n\n(50) yards away. Flares were going off and he thought best to leave the scene. He heard a stream nearby and followed it until he came to a house and aroused the occupants. Soon TAFF arrived at the same house and, being uninjured, was driven into town. Then he led an ambulance to effect transportation of MATHEWS to a hospital. Meanwhile, civilians reached the scene of the crash where they found one body. At 0930 PST, a message from Sq B informed that top secret material was in the navigators kit and to request Commanding Officer MCCHORD FIELD to expedite all available information to Commanding Officer HAMILTON FIELD. Meanwhile, CAPT FORSBERG and four (4) enlisted men departed KELSO at 0830 PST for scene of the crash. They were transported by the WASHINGTON STATE POLICE who knew the exact location of the plane (46°09'N - 122°45'W). The ground party determined upon arrival at the scene, that two (2) bodies were in the wreckage. Indications led to the belief that the co-pilot was afire when he left the plane an instant before impact. The pilot's remains were found in the wreckage. Preliminary investigation by CAPT FORSBERG disclosed the planes left wing about one hundred twenty-five (125) yards from the widely scattered portions of the plane. The left wing was intact and had apparently torn off just outboard of the left engine before impact. The forward portion of the wing stub was melted but the rear two thirds indicated that it had ripped loose from the inboard section of the wing. The wing leading edge was undamaged. The navigation and landing lights were unbroken. The aileron was undamaged but the flap section was crushed, leading to the belief that the wing struck the tail section. From these indications it is believed the wing ripped from the airplane just after MATHEWS abandoned the plane. The resulting spin thus prevented the remaining crew members from bailing out although the co-pilot may have been in the hatch. A few civilians were in the area when CAPT FORSBERG arrived and he took precautions to prevent them from disturbing the wreckage. At 1157 PST CAPT LITTRELL flew CAPT RICE, M. C., to KELSO. An ambulance dispatched from MCCHORD FIELD, met them at KELSO, and was led to the scene of the crash by the STATE POLICE. The bodies were recovered and transported in the ambulance to MCCHORD FIELD. CAPT LITTRELL returned to MCCHORD FIELD where camping equipment was prepared to be dropped to the ground party. CAPT LITTRELL made a successful drop at dusk by sighting on a signal fire. The ground party set up camp at the wreckage scene to act as guard and to investigate further the following day. They were relieved of responsibility of all recovered documents by a CIC agent who had arrived about 1800 PST.\n\nb. 2 Aug 47. The ground party remained at the scene of the crash pending official securing of the incident. No aerial activity.\n\nc. 3 Aug 47. MCCHORD FIELD Operations Officer departed at 1000 PST to investigate the accident and to relieve CAPT FORSBERG, who returned at 1600 PST. Incident closed.\n\n3\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY\n\nSubject: Final Mission Report 4 August 1947\n\n5. STATISTICAL SUMMARY\n\na. GROUND ACTIVITY\n\n(1) Total man hours by ARS Personnel in field 72\n\n(2) Total man hours by other Army Personnel (estimate) 500\n\n(3) Total man hours by civilian personnel (est) 150\n\n(4) No. of miles driven by Army Vehicles 500\n\nb. AERIAL ACTIVITY\n\n(1) Total No. of sorties flown 3\n\n(2) Total hours flown by Army aircraft 5\n\nc. LOCAL PURCHASES\n\n(1) None\n\n6. COMMENTS\n\na. Cooperation received from all civilian agencies concerned was complete and excellent.\n\n7. RECOMMENDATIONS\n\na. None.\n\nROBERT H. MASONHEIMER\nCaptain, Air Corps\nCommanding Officer\n\n1 Incl:\n1-Photographs\n\n4\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2 Intelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\nTITLE Investigation of Flying Disc\nFILE No. 4AF-1208-I\nDATE 12 August 1947\n\nINVESTIGATION MADE AT Tacoma and Kelso, Washington\nCONTROLLING OFFICE Air Defense Command, Mitchel Field\nPERIOD COVERED 31 July through 7 August 1947\nCASE CLASSIFICATION Incident\nSTATUS OF CASE Pending\n\nREASON FOR INVESTIGATION: Investigation initiated at the request of Air Defense Command, reference ltr Hq ADC, dtd 7 Jul 47, file D353.51D, subj: Investigation of Flying Disc.\n\nSYNOPSIS:\n\nOn 31 July 47, Mr. Arnold, Aviation Editor of the Idaho Daily Statesman, telephoned Lt. Brown requesting he return to Tacoma because Arnold believed he had some very vital information on the flying disc.\n\nLt. Brown and Capt. Davidson interviewed a Mr. Fred L. Crisman and a Mr. Harold A. Dahl, along with Capt. Smith of the United Air Lines, and Mr. Arnold, at the Winthrop Hotel in Tacoma, Washington, on the night of 31 July 1947.\n\nThe summary of their interrogation and findings was related to Major Sander, Public Information Officer, McChord Field, by Mr. Arnold and Capt. Smith. Major Sander retold the results of the investigation to this officer from his notes.\n\nMr. Dahl and Mr. Crisman were not available for interview while this officer was in that area, although every effort was made to contact them.\n\nFurther investigation of this particular incident was left with Mr. Brady, Resident Agent, FBI, Tacoma, Washington.\n\nIt was apparent from newspaper clippings, telephone calls to this officer, and conversations with Major Sander, that a United Press correspondent, of the Tacoma Times, was instrumental in keeping this case alive. This officer and Major Sander, although quoted many times in the press, did not discuss this matter with the press during the period of this report.\n\nThe anonymous mystery caller in Tacoma could possibly be Mr. Crisman.\n\nDISTRIBUTION: AAF 2; ADC 1; G-2 6th Army 1; FBI, Seattle 1; FBI, San Francisco 1; AAF Files 1\n\nAPPROVED: DONALD L. SPRINGER, Lt. Colonel, GSC, AC of S, A-2\n\nW.D., P.M.G. Form No. 110, 1 April 1944 (This form supersedes W.D., O.C.S. Form No. 19, which will not be used upon receipt of this revision)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CI-R1 Report\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nDETAILS:\n\n1. During the afternoon of 31 July 47, Mr. Arnold, Aviation Editor of the Idaho Daily Statesman, telephoned Lt Brown, CIC Sub-Detachment Commander at Headquarters Fourth Air Force, and stated in substance: That he, Arnold, and Capt Smith had arrived in Tacoma to investigate the purported flying disc explosion on a surface craft on 21 June 47. This investigation was requested and financed by a Mr. R. A. Palmer of the Venture Press, 508 Studio Bldg., 1718 Sherman Avenue, Evanston, Illinois.\n\nAGENT'S NOTE: See Inclosure 1 and Inclosure 2. The signature to Inclosure 2, Mr. Dave Johnson, is that of the editor of the Idaho Daily Statesman. Mr. Johnson is a former Army Air Force officer and from all indications is a very patriotic American. On the receipt of Inclosure 2 at Headquarters Fourth Air Force, this officer requested the San Francisco FBI Office to check the Chicago FBI Office for R. A. Palmer and the Venture Press. The return answer, by telephone, was to the effect that the Chicago offices of the FBI, the Chicago Police, and Credit Bureau had no record on R. A. Palmer or the Venture Press.\n\n2. Lt Brown and Capt Davidson arrived at McChord Field during the afternoon of 31 July 47. They changed from their uniforms to civilian clothing in the aircraft and, on being queried by Operations as to why they desired transportation to Tacoma, they replied they were to make a speech.\n\nAGENT'S NOTE: This was in compliance with par 4, ltr fr Hq ADC, File D353.51D, 7 Jul 47, subj: Investigation of Flying Disc.\n\nAccording to Major George Sander, Public Information Officer, McChord Field, The Tacoma Times received an anonymous telephone call that Arnold and Smith were present in the Winthrop Hotel for the purpose of conducting an investigation on the flying disc. The Tacoma Times checked and found this to be true, much to Arnold's and Smith's surprise. Lt Brown and Capt Davidson did interview Mr. Harold A. Dahl, Mr. Fred L. Crisman, in a hotel room in the Winthrop Hotel, Tacoma, Wash., in the presence of Mr. Arnold and Capt Smith. If notes were taken of this conversation, they were destroyed in the aircraft accident. Mr. Arnold stated to Major Sander that Lt Brown obtained from Mr. Dahl and Mr. Crisman samples of an unidentified substance that were identical to those appearing in Inclosures 3 to 7. The samples pictured in Inclosures 5 to 7 were taken by Mr. Arnold from the same box that Dahl and Crisman offered Lt. Brown and from which he obtained his samples. T/Sgt Mathews, Crew Chief on the wrecked aircraft, upon being interrogated by this officer, stated that he placed a heavy cardboard carton in the rear compartment of the B-25 that crashed. He did not look in the box nor hear any comments from Lt Brown or Capt Davidson as to its contents.\n\n3. The following summarizes what was related by Mr. Arnold and Capt Smith to Major Sander as to the substance of the interrogation by Lt Brown and Capt Davidson: That on 21 Jun 47 Mr. Dahl was proceeding south of Maury Island in Mr. Crisman's boat. Five flying discs came down out of the clouds and circled slowly around the bay, dropping to an estimated elevation of 500 feet. These discs appeared round and\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nW.D., P.M.G. Form No. 110"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"flattened similar to a deflated automobile innertube. They were judged by Dahl to be approximately 100 feet across with a 25 foot opening in the center. The outer edge of the object had round portholes and the inner ring had square windows or portholes. The discs were silent and from his viewpoint he could see no means of propulsion. One of these discs appeared to falter and waver in the air, another of these aforementioned five discs dropped down close to the disc that appeared to waver and bumped it, dumping \"tons\" of the stuff as pictured in inclosure 3 to 7 on his boat, knocking off the handrail, horn, and generally damaging the boat to the extent of $200.00, and killing Dahl's dog.\n\nAGENT'S NOTE: This officer, in the company of Major Sander, boarded the aforementioned boat where it was docked in the Tacoma harbor on 6 Aug 47. A hand rail was missing, but the area where the hand rail was previously fastened had been painted over with several coats of paint and was cracked by the weather. The deck and roof of the cabin was of a very thin construction and the cabin further had glass on the front and sides. It is this officer's opinion that if any of the objects presented by Dahl as samples of the material dropped by the flying disc had hit this boat, it would have certainly been necessary to replace the foredeck and the cabin roof. These two areas were very heavily coated with several coats of paint and had deep weather cracks that would take several seasons to acquire.\n\nMr. Crisman, who owns the boat and operates a shoreline water patrol for various business firms, evidently visited the area at Maury Island to check Dahl's story. He is supposed to have stated that he found the material that he presented to Lt Brown and Capt Davidson in a sand pit near where the incident was supposed to have occurred. While he, Crisman, was at the scene of the incident, a flying disc came out of the clouds and behaved in a similar manner as the ones previously described.\n\nAGENT'S NOTE: The witnessing on two occasions, in broad daylight, of an object so large and clearly visible within several miles of the city of Tacoma certainly should have been seen and reported on by other than Dahl and Crisman. A check was made of the newspapers on and after 21 June and no mention could be found of a mysterious object appearing over the Tacoma harbor.\n\nMr. Crisman is supposed to have sent samples of the objects that he picked up in the Maury Island sand pit to a friend of his at the University of Chicago for an analysis report. He is reported to have not received the analysis report.\n\nAGENT'S NOTE: It is possible that the Mr. R. A. Palmer, reference Inclosure 1 and 2, might have come across this incident through the University of Chicago.\n\nThe interrogation of Dahl and Crisman by Lt Brown was completed about midnight on 31 July/1 August. Lt Brown and Capt Davidson returned to McChord Field and prepared for a night flight to Hamilton Field. The weather was clear with a bright moon shining. They departed approximately 0200 hours and crashed at approximately 0230 hours on 1 August 1947. (See Inclosure 9).\n\n6. On 6 August 47, this officer, in the company of Major Sander, McChord Field, and Mr. Brady, resident agent, Tacoma Federal Bureau of Investigation, attempted to"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"contact either Mr. Dahl or Mr. Crisman, without success. Capt Smith and Mr. Arnold departed the Tacoma area on 5 August 47, therefore, this officer did not have the opportunity of conversing with them directly.\n\nAGENT'S NOTE: A record check was made by telephone by Mr. Brady with the Seattle Field Office, FBI, for records on Mr. Crisman and Mr. Dahl. The check on Mr. Crisman was negative. The Seattle FBI indices indicated that a Harold Dahl had been charged with two incidents of illegal wearing of the uniform and one with theft of national property. It could not be determined at the time whether Harold A. Dahl, the subject in question, and Harold Dahl of the FBI indices, was one and the same.\n\n5. Mr. Crisman had indicated to Capt Smith, Arnold, et al, that he was a former fighter pilot and held commission as Captain in the Air Reserve.\n\nAGENT'S NOTE: On 8 August 47, this officer checked the records of the 400th AAF BU(RT) and determined that Fred L. Crisman was registered with that Reserve Unit as Captain, Serial Number O-758951, with residence at 125 Woodland, Tacoma, Washington, Primary MOS 1064 and 1065. In 1942 he was with the Criminal Investigation Division, State of Washington, and previously had been an oil technician with the Union Pacific Railway. Crisman entered the service in 1942 as an enlisted man and served as such for seventeen months. In 1943 he was commissioned on graduation from flying school and served a total of twenty-nine months. A check of the Tacoma city directory was made on Harold A. Dahl, which indicated his home was at 3903 N. Gobs St., telephone: Proctor 7117. Business address was listed as 235 Middle Waterway; telephone: Broadway 7753.\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\n1. That no further investigation be undertaken on this specific incident by Army Air Force personnel.\n\n2. That in view of the reported statements by Mr. Crisman, that consideration be given to revoke his Air Reserve commission and flying status as an undesirable and unreliable officer.\n\n8 Incls:\n1. Photostat, ltr fr R.A.Palmer.\n2. Photostat, telegram fr Dave Johnson.\n3. to 7. Photographs, Unidentified Substance.\n8. Final Mission Report, Air Rescue Service."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VENTURE PRESS\n305 STUDIO BUILDING\n1718 SHERMAN AVENUE\nEVANSTON, ILLINOIS\n\nJuly 22, 1947\n\nMr. Kenneth Arnold,\nBoise, Idaho\n\nDear Mr. Arnold:\n\nQuite obviously you have been ribbed so much you'd like to forget the flying saucers--but I'd sure like to have your personal story, your photo, pic of your plane, etc. as I asked before. And you won't be made to look silly, because there's more to this than the newspapers and the \"experts\" have made of it.\n\nBesides the article, I have another proposition. You seem to get around quite a bit, and if you can make a trip to Tacoma, Washington at all feasible, I'd be willing to pay expenses plus a nice amount to make it worth your while.\n\nI'd want you to see Mr. Harold A. Dahl, P. O. Box 154, Fern Hill Station, Tacoma, and Mr. Fred L. Crisman, owner of the Tacoma Harbor Patrol, Inc. Dahl, and two other seamen, on a patrol near Murry Island, off Tacoma, saw six discs, one in trouble, witnessed an explosion, saw falling stuff which smashed their wheelhouse and searchlight and landed on the beach. They sent me samples which Chicago U has failed to analyze. I want a picture of the beach and the stuff that landed there (about twenty tons, they said). And I want somebody who'll get the truth, to find out if these boys are on the up and up. You could do that. I hope you will. If agreeable, please write and perhaps we can talk business. I think you'd like to prove this thing too!\n\nAnyway, I still want that article!\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nR. A Palmer"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WUA41 PD\nBOISE IDA JULY 29 1947 255P\nLT FRANK M BROWN, A-2 (RPT A-2)\nOFFICE 4TH AIRFORCE HAMILTON FIELD CALIF.\nVENTURE PRESS 305 STUDIO BLDG 1718 SHERMAN AVE EVANSTON ILL. RA PALMER. SENT ARNOLD $200 TO GO TO TACOMA TO INVESTIGATE FLYING DISC REPORT THERE. SUGGEST THIS OUT OF LINE FOR PRESENT PUBLIC INTEREST IN STORY AND BELIEVE AS I SUGGESTED ON YOUR VISIT HERE VENTURE PRESS SHOULD BE CHECKED\nDAVE JOHNSON\n305 1718 $200\n308P"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-102\n\nOFFICIAL PHOTOGRAPH\nU.S. ARMY AIR FORCE\n401 BASE UNIT PHOTO\nLABORATORY\nHAMILTON FIELD, CALIFORNIA\nFILE"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nInd #4\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nInd #5\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nInd #6\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nInd #7\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, Boston\n\nDATE: 7-29-47\n\nSUBJECT: METAL FRAGMENTS OBSERVED AT WEST RINDGE, NEW HAMPSHIRE, JULY 7, 1947 SECURITY MATTER (X)\n\nReference is made to Boston teletype to the Bureau dated July 18, 1947.\n\nDean John M. Bunker, the original informant, has advised that a spectographic examination has been completed of the metal particles referred to. They were determined to be of ordinary cast iron which had been subjected to a very high degree of heat. The heat caused scales to be formed on the cast iron which were originally thought to be of some metallic alloy.\n\nThe scientist examining the particles concluded that if they had come through the air from any great altitude in as small pieces as they were found then most of the heat would have been taken from them by the time they reached the ground and fires would not have resulted. It is noted they landed approximately 700 feet from a railroad track and inquiries were conducted by MIT to determine whether or not the particles could have been originally a part of a liner in a smoke stack or some other part of the steam engine. These inquiries resulted in positive information that the particles did not come from a train or locomotive. Measurements of the four pieces examined revealed that they had most likely been originally all part of one hollow cylinder, eight inches in diameter and three sixteenths of an inch in thickness. It was felt that one piece falling from a great height would have still retained a good part of its heat and probably would have smashed when it hit the ground.\n\nA scientist, whom Dean Bunker did not identify by name, recalled that cast iron cylinders of similar measurements had been used in New Mexico on research work on a guided missile project. However, this unidentified scientist did not so conclude to the exclusion of all other possibilities.\n\nIt is interesting to note that the examination at MIT was actually conducted by (b) (7)(D) who furnished the Boston Office with an informal report similar in all major details to that supplied by Dean Bunker above. The men at MIT are gathering through friends all additional pieces of the original cylinder available. These will be turned over to the Boston Office. No further examination is being conducted by MIT and no effort is being made to reconstruct the original cylinder.\n\nUnless advised to the contrary by August 15, 1947 the Boston Office will destroy these specimens. In the interim they will be transmitted to the Bureau on specific Bureau instructions.\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964 EX-64\n\n55 OCT 1 1947\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED\n\n62-83894-103\n\n31 SEP 29 1947"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, Boston\n\nDATE:\n\nSUBJECT: METAL FRAGMENTS OBSERVED AT WEST RINDGE, NEW HAMPSHIRE, JULY 7, 1947 SECURITY MATTER (X)\n\n[illegible]\n\nReference is made to Boston teletype to the Bureau dated July 18, 1947.\n\n[illegible]\n\nINTERNAL SECURITY F.B.I. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It is noted that the original Boston teletype reflected that this inquiry was being treated as \"secret\" matter at MIT. (b) (7)(D) has advised that the comparatively small number of research scientists at MIT during the summer are all cognizant of the incident and the results of the research. However, no publicity has been given and it is not anticipated that any will result. The Bureau's interest is not known to the scientists at MIT. There has been no speculation that a guided missile originating in a foreign land landed in New Hampshire.\n\nAs indicated above, unless the Bureau requests specifically further investigative action, this case is being closed in the Boston Office.\n\nBSG:md\n100-20698"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Tolson\nMr. E. A. Tamm\nMr. Clegg\nMr. Glavin\nMr. Ladd\nMr. Nichols\nMr. Rosen\nMr. Tracy\nMr. Egan\nMr. Gurnea\nMr. Harbo\nMr. Mohr\nMr. Pennington\nMr. Quinn Tamm\nMr. Nease\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE COMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nAUG 15 1947\n\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI BUTTE 8-15-47 5-45 PM VGW\n\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\n\nFLYING DISCS. ON INSTANT DATE A. C. URIE OF TWIN FALLS, IDAHO, INFORMED LOCAL NEWSPAPER THAT COMMUNITY THAT AT ONE PM ON WEDNESDAY LAST, AUGUST THIRTEEN, HE AND TWO SONS BILLIE, AGE TEN, KEITH, AGE EIGHT, SAW AN OBJECT NINE MILES NORTHWEST OF TWIN FALLS, RESEMBLING FLYING DISC. URIE STATED THIS OBJECT WAS PROCEEDING DOWN SALMON RIVER AT TERRIFIC SPEED ESTIMATED BY HIM AT ONE THOUSAND MILES PER HOUR. URIE AND SONS DESCRIBED OBJECT TO NEWSPAPERS AS TWENTY FEET LONG, TEN FEET WIDE AND TEN FEET THICK, LIGHT SKY BLUE IN COLOR AND ALSO OBSERVED FLAMES EMANATING FROM SIDES OF OBJECT. AT TIME URIE AND SONS SAW OBJECT THEY ALL HEARD LOUD SWISH WHEN OBJECT DISAPPEARED FRIM SIGHT. CURRENT EFFORTS BEING MADE TO INTERVIEW URIE AND SONS PURSUANT TO BUREAU BULLETIN FORTY TWO, SUB DIVISION B, DATED JULY THIRTY NINETEEN FORTY SEVEN. BUREAU WILL BE PROMPTLY AND FULLY INFORMED OF ALL PERTINENT DEVELOPMENTS.\n\nBANISTER\n\nEND\n\nPLS ACK AND HOLD\n\n62 OCT 2 1947\n\n7-48 PM OK FBI WA BW\n\nRECORDED INDEXED 62-83894-104\n\nSEP 24 1947\n\n5-RF"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\n\nAug 15 7 50 PM '47\n\nF.B.I. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nFBI BUTTE 8-15-47 5-45 PM VGW\n\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\n\n[illegible]\n\nINTERNAL SECURITY F.B.I. DEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nAUG 19 10 36 AM '47\n\nRECEIVED\n\nINTERNAL SECURITY F.B.I.\n\nAUG 30 11 17 AM '47\n\nRECEIVED\n\nRECEIVED-DEPT\n\nAUG 15 8 36 PM '47"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : The Director\n\nDATE: August 14, 1947\n\nFROM : Mr. D. M. Ladd\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nIn connection with your request to be advised as to the facts concerning newspaper reports of flying discs in the Portland area and the reported conference of army officials in Portland concerning flying discs, the Portland Office has advised that Leaveritt G. Richards, aviation editor of the \"Oregonian,\" has stated that Captain William L. Davidson and Lieutenant Frank M. Brown of the Fourth AAF Headquarters, San Francisco, were in Portland on July 27, 1947. While in Portland they interviewed Dick Rankin, an experienced pilot, who had reported that he observed, on June 14, a formation of ten flying discs over Bakersfield, California. Richards added that Davidson and Brown had also interviewed the following four experienced pilots who were among the first to report seeing discs, Kenneth Arnold, businessman from Boise, Idaho; Captain E. J. Smith, a co-pilot; Ralph Stevens, United Airlines and Dave Johnson, aviation editor, Idaho \"Statesman.\" In order to determine the purpose of these interviews Richards contacted Major General Twining of Wright Field, Ohio, and from him gained the impression that the AAF instituted this investigation to wash out the disc reports since they are definitely not of AAF origin.\n\nOn Friday, August 1, the plane in which AAF investigators, Captain Davidson and Lieutenant Brown, were flying, crashed at Kelso, Washington and both were killed. The wreckage was screened by AAF Intelligence from McChord Field. The \"Tacoma News Tribune\" and through them the United Press put out a story that the plane was carrying parts of a disc which had struck a boat owned by Harold Dahl and Fred Chrisman. It has also been inferred that this plane was sabotaged to prevent these disc parts from being examined.\n\nSTATUS\n\nInvestigation by the Bureau has reflected that this plane was definitely not carrying parts of a disc and there appears to be no substantiation of a sabotage charge.\n\nFor your further information there is attached a blind memorandum setting forth in more detail the results of the investigation surrounding the above plane crash. No further inquiry is being made in this matter.\n\nACTION\n\nAir Force Intelligence has been advised of the results of our investigation.\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED\n\n162-83894-105\n\n14\n\nEX-81\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Received-Tamm FBI Aug 14 4 20 PM '47\n\nMR. JONES\n\nRECEIVED FBI Aug 18 9 35 AM '47"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 14, 1947\n\nFLYING DISCS\n\nThe \"Tacoma News Tribune\" and through them the United Press put out a story that an army plane which was allegedly carrying parts of a disc which had struck a boat owned by Harold Dahl and Fred Chrisman had crashed on August 1, 1947, killing two Air Force Intelligence officers who were interviewing persons who were alleged to have seen flying discs.\n\nHarold A. Dahl and Fred Chrisman, when interviewed by Bureau Agents, advised in a signed statement on August 7, 1947, that in the early part of June, 1947, they picked up some strange rock formations from a gravel pit on Maury Island, Washington. They sent a cigar box of these formations to one Ray Palmer, editor of the Venture magazine in Evanston, Illinois and also editor of the Fantasy magazine in Chicago, Illinois. According to them they requested Palmer to make only a chemical analysis of the rock formations. Palmer then wrote asking for additional samples stating he had been unable to analyze the material. Dahl and Chrisman remarked that a few days after the flying disc stories appeared during the latter part of June, Palmer contacted them by telephone saying he would pay for an exclusive story if the materials they had sent him were fragments of a flying disc. Dahl said he wrote Palmer a letter in which he represented the material as being a part of a flying disc, and both Dahl and Chrisman admitted that this statement was entirely false.\n\nDahl and Chrisman then received a call from one Kenneth Arnold of Boise, Idaho who requested them to meet him at the Winthrop Hotel in Tacoma on July 31, 1947. According to them Arnold called in army intelligence officers from Hamilton Field, California and one Captain Emil H. Smith of United Airlines of Seattle, Washington to attend this meeting. Dahl and Chrisman maintained they told the intelligence officers Captain Davidson, Lieutenant Brown, Kenneth Arnold and Emil H. Smith exactly how they got the rock formations and that they had no connection with any flying discs. Dahl and Chrisman stated that they then furnished some of the rock formation to the intelligence officers as samples.\n\nCaptain Davidson and Lieutenant Brown left Tacoma, Washington in a B-25 to return to Hamilton Field, California about 2:30 A.M. August 1, 1947, and were killed when their plane crashed at Kelso, Washington, after the left engine burned out an exhaust stack which in turn caught the left wing on fire which caused it to break off. The crew chief and each officer parachuted to safety.\n\nErnie Vogel, an Associated Press wireman at Tacoma advised that two or three days after the flying disc story started he contacted Dahl to check the story\n\nEXCLOSURE 62-83894-105\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that the Seattle Post-Intelligencer had received from the Fire Chief at Harbor, Washington, to the effect that Dahl had some flying disc fragments. At this time Dahl admitted to Vogel that the entire story was false.\n\nRelative to Arnold, Dahl and Chrisman stated that he was paid by Ray Palmer of the Fantasy magazine and possibly the Boise Statesman to come to Tacoma and obtain a story from them regarding the flying disc fragments.\n\nOn July 31 and August 1, a total of five anonymous calls were received by a Tacoma Times reporter and the United Press Wireman at Tacoma giving information regarding the meeting at the Winthrop Hotel over the disc fragments and stating that the B-25 had been shot down or sabotaged which killed Captain Davidson and Lieutenant Brown, inferring that this was done because the intelligence officers were carrying disc fragments in their plane.\n\nDahl and Chrisman stated that these calls could only have come from themselves, Arnold or Smith, who, they stated, had a friend on the Chicago Times and was possibly selling the story to the Chicago Times through this friend. Dahl and Chrisman denied making these calls.\n\nSmith, upon interview, stated that reporter Lantz of the Tacoma Times and Morello of the United Press office in Tacoma had informed him that Arnold had several anonymous calls and from the accuracy of the information transmitted Smith believes they were made by either Dahl or Chrisman.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\n407 U. S. Court House\nSeattle 4, Washington\nAugust 18, 1947\n\nDIRECTOR, FBI\n\nRE: FLYING DISCS SIGHTED BY FRED CRISMAN and HAROLD A. DAHL, TACOMA, WASHINGTON\nSM - X\n\nDear Sir:\n\nThe following, in general, are the facts regarding the flying disc story that started by FRED CRISMAN and HAROLD A. DAHL which subsequently resulted in news stories by the Tacoma Times, the Boise Statesman and the Chicago Times that a B-25 carrying Army Intelligence officers was shot down or sabotaged over Kelso, Washington on August 1, 1947 because it was carrying some flying disc fragments.\n\nThe original story, as related by FRED CRISMAN and HAROLD DAHL, was to the effect that DAHL, while patrolling in his boat near Maury Island, Washington, sighted six flying discs, one of which fluttered to the earth and disintegrated, showering his boat with fragments which caused some damage to the boat and killed his dog. HAROLD DAHL wrote a letter to RAY A. PALMER of Ziff-Davis Company which publishes fantastic adventure magazines in Chicago, sending him fragments of the flying disk and relating the above story. RAY PALMER requested Trans-Radio News in Chicago to verify the story as related by HAROLD DAHL and FRED CRISMAN, telegraphed RAY PALMER confirming DAHL's story. RAY PALMER then engaged KENNETH ARNOLD, Boise, Idaho, who was the first to report sighting the flying disc and whom RAY PALMER had previously made a contract for a story regarding the flying disc, to come to Tacoma and check the story as related by FRED CRISMAN and HAROLD DAHL.\n\nKENNETH ARNOLD came to Tacoma, Washington July 30, 1947 and arranged for a meeting the following day, July 31, with FRED CRISMAN and HAROLD DAHL in his room 502, Winthrop Hotel, Tacoma, Washington. KENNETH ARNOLD also called to attend the meeting Captain EMIL J. SMITH, United Airlines Pilot who had also reported seeing flying disc fragments, and Army Intelligence to attend\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED\n\n162-83894-106\n\n14\n\nEX-64\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 19, 1947 this meeting. KENNETH ARNOLD, Captain EMIL J. SMITH, FRED CRISMAN, HAROLD DAHL, Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN of Army A-2 Intelligence from Hamilton Field, California, all met in ARNOLD's room at various times during the afternoon and evening of July 31, 1947 and discussed the flying disc story as related by CRISMAN and DAHL. The Army Intelligence Officers, Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN, left about 2:00 A. M. the morning of August 1, 1947 to return to Hamilton Field, California for Air Force Day in a B-25 and were carrying some of the reported disc fragments. The left engine on the B-25 burned an exhaust stack which in turn caught the left wing afire, the wing subsequently breaking off and tearing off the tail. The B-25 crashed, killing Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN. However, the Crew Chief and a hitch-hiker parachuted to safety. Intelligence Officers at McChord Field, Washington advised there was no indication of any sabotage. The plane crashed at Kelso, Washington approximately 2:50 A. M. August 1, 1947. Five anonymous calls were received by a reporter, Tacoma Times, and the United Press Wireman, Tacoma, between 11:30 A. M., July 31, 1947 and 5:30 P. M., August 2, 1947. The first call was to a Tacoma Times reporter approximately 11:30 A. M., July 31, in which the caller stated that there was a meeting taking place at that time in room 502 of the Winthrop Hotel concerning the disc fragments found on Maury Island. The second call was received between 11:00 A. M. and 12:00 noon, August 1, 1947 by the Tacoma Times reporter in which the caller advised that at that moment a big meeting was taking place in ARNOLD's room number 502, Winthrop Hotel; that the B-25 which crashed was carrying disc fragments and that McChord Field officials had stated it was shot down or sabotaged. The third call was received Friday, August 1, 1947 at 5:30 P. M. by the United Press Wireman, Tacoma, in which the caller stated that the B-25 which crashed at Kelso, Washington was carrying flying disc fragments and that the dead officers were Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN, A-2 Intelligence Officers at Hamilton Field, California. This call was prior to the release of the dead officers' names by Army authorities and the caller indicated that when the names were released, it would verify the information he was furnishing was correct. The fourth phone call was received at approximately 6:45 P. M., Friday, August 1 by the United Press Wireman in which call the caller stated the B-25 was definitely shot down and that if he contacted Army Intelligence officers, they would not deny it. The fifth phone call was received by the United Press Wireman, Tacoma, at 5:30 P. M. August 2, 1947 at which time the caller stated the B-25 was shot down from the air with a 20 m.m. cannon; that the Marine plane found recently on Mt. Rainier had also been shot down and that Captain SMITH would be taken to Wright Field Tuesday morning. When the Army authorities released the names of the dead Intelligence officers which verified the information as given by the anonymous caller, the Tacoma Times printed this story on August 2, 1947 and carried several articles thereafter inferring that the B-25 had been shot down or sabotaged because of the fact that it was carrying disc fragments. DAHL and CRISMAN have admitted that the material which they sent to RAY PALMER had no connection with any flying discs and have given a signed statement to that effect which are being"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 19, 1947 forwarded herein. DAHL and CRISMAN deny, however, that they actually started the flying disc story and their actual part in the story. United Airlines pilot, EMIL J. SMITH, states that DAHL and CRISMAN on July 31, 1947, both related their original flying disc fragment story. Information gathered would indicate that the anonymous phone calls were possibly made by FRED CRISMAN in order to build up the flying disc story to the point where they could make a profitable sale of the story to RAY PALMER, Chicago, Illinois. No facts have been developed which would definitely prove that CRISMAN made these calls. However, from all facts and information gathered, it appears he is probably the most likely to have made the anonymous calls. The detailed interviews of the persons contacted in regard to this flying disc story are being set out below. The following investigation was conducted by Special Agent DAVID A. MacCULLOCH at Tacoma, Washington on August 6, 7, 1947: ERNIE VOGEL, Associated Press Wireman, Tacoma, Washington, advised that in the early part of June, 1947 he was requested by the Seattle Post Intelligencer to check on a story which he was informed had been obtained from the Fire Chief at Harper, Washington. The story was supposed to have originated with FRED CRISMAN. Mr. VOGEL stated that the story was to the effect that DAHL, while patrolling in his boat near Maury Island, saw five or six flying discs, one of which fluttered toward the ground and finally disintegrated. Fragments of the disc were reported to have showered down on the boat of HAROLD DAHL, causing some damage and killing his dog. Mr. VOGEL stated that he went to the home of HAROLD DAHL on 3903 North Gove, Tacoma, Washington to check with him on this flying disc story. He stated that as best he could recall, this was just a few days after the first flying disc stories had appeared in the paper and was on a Sunday evening. He believed it was the early part of June. He stated that DAHL took him in the kitchen and proceeded to talk about this flying disc story in low muffled tones. He stated that DAHL acted rather suspicious and that shortly his wife came into the kitchen and was in a considerable rage, telling DAHL to admit that the entire story was a plain fantasy which he had dreamed up. He stated that after his wife told DAHL to admit the entire story was false, that DAHL then admitted that there was nothing whatever to the story and it was an entire hoax. VOGEL stated that in view of the enraged condition of DAHL's wife, he immediately left and reported to the Seattle Post Intelligencer that the entire story was a hoax and that they should not print it in any way. He further stated that he advised the Seattle Post Intelligencer that DAHL was a mental case and that nothing which he had reported should be carried as far as a news story. Mr. VOGEL stated that since that time he had received repeated requests from the Boise Statesman requesting information as to the flying disc stories reportedly originating with FRED CRISMAN and HAROLD DAHL. VOGEL stated that he had never, in his experience, had such pressure brought upon him to release a news story and that he repeatedly advised the Boise Statesman that the story of seeing the flying discs by DAHL and CRISMAN was a complete fabri-"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 19, 1947 cation and should be in no way, carried as a news story and refused to furnish any information regarding these reports. He further stated that he advised the Boise Statesman shortly before, or at the time KENNETH ARNOLD left Boise to come to Tacoma to check on the flying disc stories with DAHL and CRISMAN, that ARNOLD should not come as the entire story was a hoax. The following information was obtained from PAUL LANTZ, 4513 South 7th, Tacoma, Washington, Proctor 8416, a reporter for the Tacoma Times: It was the Tacoma Times paper which first issued a story on August 2 and subsequent stories intimating that the B-25 which crashed at Kelso, Washington on the early morning of August 1, had been sabotaged or shot down because of the fact that it carried flying disc fragments. LANTZ stated that on Thursday, July 31, at approximately 11:30 A. M. he received an anonymous phone call in which the caller stated that KENNETH ARNOLD and Army Intelligence officers were meeting in room 502 of the Winthrop Hotel to check on the flying disc story from which fragments were obtained on Maury Island. LANTZ stated he turned around to speak to his editor and when he picked up the phone again the line was dead. He stated that the caller asked for BURT McMURTIE, a reporter on the Tacoma Times who was out at the time of the call. He stated that BURT McMURTIE called ARNOLD at room 502 in the Winthrop Hotel and was advised by ARNOLD that he could furnish no information as he was there on a Government mission. LANTZ stated that on Friday, August 1, between 11:00 A. M. and noon, he received another phone call for BURT McMURTIE in which the anonymous caller stated that he might have some information for him. LANTZ asked the caller if he was not the same party that had called the previous date and he said yes. The caller then related that at that moment there was a big meeting in progress in ARNOLD's room, 502, in the Winthrop Hotel; that the B-25 which crashed that morning in Kelso was carrying flying disc fragments from California and that McChord Field officials had stated the plane was sabotaged or shot down. The caller then hung up after making some statement to the effect that he was a switchboard operator. LANTZ stated that he went to the Winthrop Hotel on Friday about noon and found that there was no male operator on duty. He stated he then went to room 502 and ARNOLD answered the door and that Captain EMIL J. SMITH, United Airlines pilot, was on the phone. LANTZ stated that he heard SMITH make a statement to the effect that the information must be very strictly confidential. He stated that there were one or two others in the room besides SMITH and ARNOLD, but that he could not identify them. He stated that ARNOLD told him he could make no statement and that he had attempted to check the story with various people on Maury Island with negative results. He stated that about 3:30 P. M., Friday, he wrote a story regarding the mysterious informant and called ARNOLD at his hotel room, stating that he had written this story and that ARNOLD had better check it. He stated that he talked to TED MORRELLO, the United Press Wireman, Tacoma, who advised that the story sounded fantastic. LANTZ stated that about 5:30 P. M., Friday, August 1, an anonymous caller called TED MORRELLO, the"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 19, 1947 United Press Wireman, stating that Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN were the Intelligence officers that were killed in the crash of the B-25 and that civilians and the sheriff had been kept away from the wreckage with the Army guarding it. He stated the anonymous caller then said that the names had not been released yet by the Army and that this would verify his statements. PAUL LANTZ stated that the following morning, Saturday, August 2, the Army verified that the officers killed were Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN and two days later verified that they were Army Intelligence officers. LANTZ stated that the anonymous caller again later contacted TED MORRELLO, calling him by that name, and at this time stated he did not call the Tacoma News Tribune or the Associated Press and denied calling PAUL LANTZ or BURT McMURTIE. In this call the anonymous caller stated that, Don't think I'm doing this for you. He then asked if the story had been put on the wire and when MORRELLO said yes, the caller stated, We want this to get back to New Jersey. The caller further stated that the B-25 was shot down by a 20 m.m. cannon and that the marine plane which was recently found wrecked on the side of Mt. Rainier, having been missing for several months, had also been shot down. The caller stated to MORRELLO that he should get in touch with a flyer named MORGAN with United Airlines who, he stated, was with Captain SMITH when they were shot at over Montana. The caller then stated, I'll see you Tuesday. I'm going to San Francisco. LANCE stated that he had checked with Captain EMIL SMITH of United Airlines who denied knowing any pilot by the name of MORGAN; denied ever having flown over Montana. LANTZ stated that MORRELLO received another anonymous call in which the caller stated that SMITH would be sent to Wright Field on Tuesday and that Saturday one of the men who found fragments of the flying disc was to be flown to Alaska. LANTZ stated that in view of the fact that the information as to the Intelligence officers on the B-25 had been as furnished by the anonymous caller, had subsequently been verified by the Army, the story was released that the B-25 was carrying disc fragments returning to Hamilton Field, California and furnishing the inference that the plane had been sabotaged or shot down. LANTZ stated that about 8:00 P. M. on Sunday, August 3, he contacted Captain EMIL SMITH at his home, 3027 West Laurelhurst Drive, Seattle at which time SMITH stated he had not given any story out to the Post Intelligencer at Seattle; stated that he had gotten a telegram to call a number in Boise and when he called and found out it was the Boise Statesman, he had hung up. He stated that the Boise Statesman then contacted him, at which time he admitted he had seen the disc fragments, but that he did not take any of them. This time SMITH informed LANTZ that he had been with Major GEORGE SANDERS, Public Relations Officer from McChord Field, all afternoon until about 3:45 P. M. SMITH informed LANTZ that he had told the Army authorities everything that he and ARNOLD knew about the flying disc fragments story from the time that KENNETH ARNOLD left Boise, Idaho and he had left Seattle, Washington. This time SMITH admitted that there were some of the supposed disc fragments in ARNOLD's room at the Winthrop Hotel and that CRISMAN and DAHL had been in the room Thursday afternoon. On Monday PAUL LANTZ stated that he called HAROLD DAHL who advised that if this were not used in the paper, he and FRED"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 19, 1947 CRISMAN would see him after lunch. LANTZ stated that about noon DAHL and CRISMAN contacted him at which time DAHL stated that he and his son had been exploring a gravel pit on Maury Island and found some strange rock formations. He stated they picked up some of these samples and that FRED CRISMAN later saw them and they went back over to Maury Island at which time additional samples were obtained and that CRISMAN sent these to a friend of his at the University of Chicago to have analyzed. They stated that they received a report and that apparently this friend had asked a newspaperman to find out where the rock formations were obtained. CRISMAN and DAHL told LANTZ that sometime after the first flying disc story had appeared, they received a telegram from Trans-Ocean Press from Chicago wanting information on the flying disc fragments. FRED CRISMAN stated that they had at no time indicated the rock formations were a part of a flying disc and that Captain EMIL SMITH and KENNETH ARNOLD were not interested in the rock formations and they denied giving them to SMITH and ARNOLD. TED MORRELLO, a United Press Wireman, Tacoma, Washington furnished substantially the same information that was obtained from PAUL LANTZ, the Tacoma Times reporter, regarding the anonymous phone calls which he had received. He stated further that the first call he received was on Friday, August 1, at around 5:30 P. M. At this time the caller stated that the B-25 which crashed at Kelso, Washington was carrying disc fragments and that the two officers killed were Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN, officers with Army A-2 Intelligence at Hamilton Field and that the fragments were top secret material. He stated the caller indicated that when the Army released the names of the dead officers it would verify that the information he was furnishing was correct. MORRELLO stated that the second call he received at approximately 6:45 P. M. Friday, August 1 at which time the caller stated that the B-25 was definitely shot down and that if he contacted Army Intelligence A-2, the man in charge would not deny it. MORRELLO stated he thought the man said to contact Colonel GUYS, but it was found out it was Colonel GREGG who was in charge of Army Intelligence A-2. The caller further stated that the Sheriff's Office had been kept away from the crash and that no civilians had been allowed near the plane. MORRELLO stated the third call he received at 5:30 P. M., August 2, and that this time the caller stated that one of the men who had been conferring with Captain SMITH and KENNETH ARNOLD was taken to Alaska that day. The caller further stated that the B-25 was shot down from the air with a 20 m.m. cannon; that the Marine plane found recently on Mt. Rainier had also been shot down; that Captain SMITH would be taken to Wright Field Tuesday morning and that a United Airlines pilot by the name of MORGAN flew with Captain SMITH when they were shot at over Montana. The caller stated he was leaving for San Francisco and would be back Tuesday. PAUL LANTZ and TED MORRELLO both stated that they had made very little effort to question the anonymous caller to obtain his identity as they felt it was useless and that if they started questioning him he would"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"refuse to furnish any further information.\n\n On August 5, 1947 Special Agent DAVID A. MacCULLOCH was contacted in the resident agency office, Tacoma, Washington by FRED CRISMAN. At this time CRISMAN asked if the Seattle Office was investigation the crash of the B-25 and he was informed that no investigation was being conducted by the Seattle Office. CRISMAN at this time related in a rambling story that he had picked up some strange rock formations which he had forwarded to a friend of his in the University of Chicago to have analyzed and that later, in some manner unknown to him, these rock formations had been reported as being fragments of a flying disc.\n\n On August 7, 1947 FRED CRISMAN and HAROLD DAHL were interviewed at the Tacoma resident agency office. Both DAHL and CRISMAN at first denied any knowledge of how the rock formations which they had picked up to have alalyzed became connected with the flying disc stories. Both denied making any statement to anyone that these rock formations were portions of a disc fragment. It was apparent from the start of the interview that DAHL and CRISMAN were not telling their complete and true connection with the flying disc story. They refused to give any definite information as to what they said or had done which caused them to become involved in a flying disc story, but gave evasive answers and repeatedly stated that they had nothing to do with it and were at a loss to understand how they became connected with the flying disc story. After considerable questioning, they stated that in the early part of June they sent to RAY PALMER of the Ziff-Davis Publishing Company which published the Fantasy magazine in Chicago and the Venture magazine in Evanston, Illinois, some rock formations which they had found on Maury Island. They stated they sent these formations, asking PALMER to have them analyzed. They stated that later PALMER wrote and asked for more samples, advising he had failed to analyze the samples. CRISMAN and DAHL stated they have never sent any additional samples and that the next they heard regarding the rock formations which they had sent PALMER was when he called HAROID DAHL and asked if the rock formations could have come from a flying disc. DAHL stated he made some remark that they possibly could have come from a flying disc and that he immediately sat down and wrote a letter to PALMER, which was in the latter part of June in which he stated the material could have been portions of a flying disc. DAHL claimed that he thought he told PALMER over the phone something about being in his boat when he obtained these rock formations, but stated he could not recall what he had written to PALMER and claimed that he passed the whole thing off as a joke. CRISMAN and DAHL were questioned at length in an attempt to obtain specific information as to exactly what each one had done with regard to the rock formations. However, each stated that the only thing they had done was tell RAY PALMER the formations could have come from a flying disc in view of the fact it appeared \"that's what he wanted them to say\". No definite information could be obtained from either DAHL or CRISMAN as to what each specifically had done to start the flying disc story.\n\n The signed statement which was obtained from CRISMAN and"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DAHL and in which they admitted the rock formations had no connection with any flying discs is being forwarded to the Bureau herewith. The statement contains no information of value and therefore is not being set forth herein.\n\n Regarding the meeting which was held in the Winthrop Hotel on Thursday, July 31, CRISMAN and DAHL stated that they both met KENNETH ARNOLD there about 1:00 P. M. They stated that they all left ARNOLD's room about 3:00 P. M. and that CRISMAN took ARNOLD to Berry's Airport at Tacoma and ARNOLD flew his plane to Seattle where he picked up Captain EMIL SMITH. CRISMAN stated that he picked up ARNOLD and SMITH at Berry's Airport about 5:00 P. M. and that HAROLD DAHL came to ARNOLD's room about 7:00 P. M. CRISMAN stated that he and SMITH left about 8:30 P. M. when he drove SMITH to Seattle to get his car and that DAHL went home at this time. CRISMAN stated they returned about 11:30 P. M. at which time the Army Intelligence officers were in ARNOLD's room and that CRISMAN left about midnight. He stated that he returned to ARNOLD's room Friday afternoon for approximately one-half hour from 2:30 to 3:00 P. M., at which time ARNOLD and SMITH were still there and neither seemed to be able to recall if DAHL was in ARNOLD's room on Friday, August 1. The best that could be obtained from CRISMAN and DAHL as to what took place in ARNOLD's room was to the effect that most of the talk was about flying, that no one seemed very interested in the rock formations and that they had no connection as far as they knew with any flying disc. CRISMAN stated that KENNETH ARNOLD wanted to obtain pictures of the place where the rock formations were obtained and that the Army Intelligence officers did not appear to be interested in any manner whatever.\n\n HAROLD DAHL operates the Commercial Lumber Company at 235 Millwater Avenue, Tacoma, Washington and FRED CRISMAN has recently been working with him buying timber. They have also been associated with the Harbor Patrol Association at Tacoma, Washington which furnishes patrol and police protection to parts of the harbor area which are not patrolled by Tacoma police or Sheriff's officers. FRED CRISMAN resides at 125 Woodland, Tacoma, Washington, Army serial number O-758-951. During the war he was a pilot and it is believed presently holds a Reserve Officer's commission as a Captain.\n\n Regarding the B-25 which crashed, killing Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN of the 4th Aire Forces, Captain ROBERT G. BJORNING, A-2 Officer, Mc Chord Field, advised that this investigation of the crash reflected an exhaust stack had burned out on the left engine which in turn caught the left wing afire and that when the left wing broke off, it also broke off the tail. The plane at the time of the crash was carrying Captain DAVIDSON, Lieutenant BROWN, the hitch-hiker and a man as Crew Chief to take care of the airplane. The Crew Chief and the hitch-hiker parachuted to safety, but Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN were killed. He stated that their investigation reflected no indication of any sabotage whatever.\n\n A check of the records of the Winthrop Hotel at Tacoma, Washington revealed that KENNETH ARNOLD, giving his address as Route #1, Mountview Drive, Boise, Idaho rented room 502 from July 30 at 7:43 P. M. until\n\n- 7 -"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 3. A record of the phone calls made from room 502 during this period was made by Miss SARAH LANGBERG. This record reveals that KENNETH ARNOLD on July 31 called PALMER at AN-5200, Evanston, Illinois, collect. On the same date called Lieutenant BROWN at 5800 Hamilton Field, California, collect. ARNOLD also called 0109-J in Boise, Idaho on July 31. On August 1 ARNOLD called LON-4936, Portland; PALMER at Dearborn 5200, Chicago; and SMITH called RODDY at Dearborn 2323 at Chicago. Both Chicago calls were collect. The remainder of the calls appear to be personal calls and are not being set out. A record of the phone calls made are being retained as an exhibit in the Seattle Office.\n\n The following information was obtained by Special Agent PIERRE H. LEVEC in interview on August 12, 1947 with Captain EMIL J. SMITH, 3027 West Laurelhurst Drive, United Airlines pilot: It should be noted that Captain SMITH has previously received publicity for having supposedly seen flying discs or similar objects on July 4, last while on a routine United Airlines flight out of Boise, Idaho in company with his co-pilot RALPH STEVENS, concerning this incident. Captain SMITH states that they took off from Boise, Idaho at 8:12 P. M. and headed Northwest at 300 degrees and while still climbing at 8,000 feet, co-pilot STEVENS called his attention to some objects in the sky ahead of them about ten degrees left which neither one could identify. SMITH states that he called a CAA radio operator at Ontario, Oregon and requested him to step outside his radio shack and see if he could see any of these objects overhead. The CAA radio operator replied in the negative.\n\n Captain SMITH states that he first met KENNETH ARNOLD on July 5 in the offices of the Seattle Post Intelligencer where both were being interviewed concerning their sighting of flying discs. SMITH states that he next met ARNOLD about three weeks ago in Boise, Idaho at which time he, SMITH, was on another flight through Boise, Idaho and had a ten minute lay-over there. On this occasion ARNOLD was in company of Captain WILLIAM L. DAVIDSON and Lieutenant FRANK M. BROWN, Army Intelligence officers, and a reporter JOHNSON of the Boise Statesman. SMITH's next contact with ARNOLD was on Thursday, July 31, last when he received a telephone call from ARNOLD calling from Tacoma in the early afternoon at which time he asked SMITH to come over to Tacoma and join him as he was investigating a flying disc story for \"someone back East\" and some fragments were involved which SMITH might be interested in seeing. After some discussion SMITH agreed to join ARNOLD in Tacoma and ARNOLD told SMITH he would fly over and pick him up at Boeing Airport at 4:00 P. M. SMITH met ARNOLD at Boeing Field at about 4:00 P. M. and they flew to Berry's Airport at Tacoma, Washington where they were met by FRED CRISMAN. The three of them proceeded in CRISMAN's car to the Winthrop Hotel where ARNOLD was occupying room 502. ARNOLD ordered something to eat and during this time either ARNOLD or CRISMAN called a HAROID DAHL and invited him up to the room. By this time SMITH states he had learned from ARNOLD that CRISMAN and DAHL were the participants in the latest flying disc story and SMITH states that he had no previous acquaintance with either of these men before meeting them in Tacoma on this date. While in the Hotel Room ARNOLD showed SMITH a letter which he had received from RAYMOND PALMER of the Venture Press of Chicago requesting that ARNOLD investigate\n\n- 8 -"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the CRISMAN-DAHL story in Tacoma. ARNOLD informed SMITH at this time that after receiving this letter he had called PALMER by telephone in Chicago as a result of which call PALMER had forwarded him $200.00 expense money for covering the story. Shortly thereafter, at about 7:30 P. M. HAROLD DAHL arrived at the Hotel room and the discussion began among the four men present as to what DAHL and CRISMAN had seen on Maury Island. DAHL professed reluctance to tell the story, claiming that several unfortunate incidents had occurred subsequent to his seeing the flying discs and he believed the entire incident had brought him bad luck. In this connection he stated that four or five days subsequent to his sighting the flying discs, a man called at his home and had a conversation with him the course of which DAHL was warned to forget all about everything he had seen on or near Maury Island. In addition to that, DAHL stated that his sixteen year old son had run away from home following the incident and had been picked up by the police somewhere in Montana. After some further discussion DAHL finally agreed to tell his story of the flying disc incident in front of SMITH after eliciting a promise from SMITH that he would not discuss the matter for at least two weeks. It should be noted that DAHL had previously told his story to ARNOLD and CRISMAN. At this point DAHL related the incident which has already been described and which he alleged had taken place on or about June 23 or 24. While relating the incident DAHL mentioned that he had taken pictures of the flying disc which he had seen but that the printed films were marred with white spots. When DAHL had concluded his story, CRISMAN related that he had gone the following day to Maury Island to verify what DAHL had told him concerning the fragments and had at this time picked up several fragments and taken them with him. At this time CRISMAN related that he also saw one of the flying discs hovering over the Island but that it had disappeared into a cloud. When DAHL and CRISMAN had finished telling their story ARNOLD told the group that he had earlier in that evening called Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN, Army Intelligence officers and that they were on their way to the Hotel room. At this point DAHL protested that he did not wish to tell his story before anyone else and he was advised by SMITH that if such was the case why didn't he just leave and not be there when they arrived. CRISMAN, DAHL and SMITH then left the room and went downstairs. DAHL departed alone. CRISMAN drove SMITH back to Boeing Field near Seattle where SMITH desired to pick up his own personal car, which he did. They then returned to the Hotel where they found Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN in room 502 with KENNETH ARNOLD. ARNOLD met them at the door and seemed excited, explaining to SMITH that Captain DAVIDSON had just drawn a reproduction of a freak disc which had supposedly been seen by a woman in Arizona and that this drawing was an exact reproduction of the flying disc which he, ARNOLD, had seen several weeks before, nearing Mt. Rainier. SMITH states that shortly after this CRISMAN seemed very anxious to tell his and DAHL's story to the Army officers. Before this was done, however, SMITH had a discussion with Lieutenant BROWN, informing him that they had promised DAHL not to release the story for two weeks and that if CRISMAN were allowed to tell the story at this time, BROWN and DAVIDSON must agree not to release the story for one month. Following this agreement, CRISMAN related DAHL's and his story of the flying discs over Maury\n\n- 9 -"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Island to BROWN and DAVIDSON. Following this recitation, Lieutenant BROWN, in answer to a query from SMITH, said that he and Captain DAVIDSON were of the opinion that there might be some truth in the current flying disc stories, but that their immediate superiors (presumably A-2 at Hamilton Field) did not agree with them. BROWN and DAVIDSON then held a brief discussion as to whether they should return that same night to Hamilton Field and they decided that they would. All five of the men then went down to the lobby where BROWN detached himself from the group and entered a phone booth to call for a car from McChord Field. SMITH also left the group and met BROWN outside the phone booth where they held a short discussion relative to the credibility of CRISMAN and DAHL's story. BROWN indicated to SMITH that he should attempt to find out if the story was on the level and that BROWN would call him the following day regarding this matter. The group then proceeded to the front of the Hotel at which time CRISMAN brought his car to the front of the Hotel and took from his trunk a box of the alleged flying disc fragments picked up on Maury Island. He offered them to BROWN and DAVIDSON and when the Army car arrived from McChord Field the box of fragments was placed in the car with the officers. CRISMAN departed alone and ARNOLD and SMITH went in search of something to eat and later returned to the Hotel for the night.\n\n On Friday morning, August 1, 1947, ARNOLD received a call from CRISMAN informing him that a B-25 had crashed during the night and it was believed to be the same plane which BROWN and DAVIDSON were flying. Following this call CRISMAN and DAHL came to the Hotel room and from the room CRISMAN again called McChord Field in an attempt to get information about the crash. SMITH took the phone from CRISMAN and spoke to a Colonel GREGG, identifying himself and asking if the B-25 which crashed was the only one which had taken off from McChord Field the previous night. GREGG told him that it was. Following this call ARNOLD called RAYMOND PALMER in Chicago and informed him of the previous night's conversations and the fact that DAVIDSON and BROWN were believed to have been killed. PALMER told ARNOLD to discontinue his investigation of the incident and that he, PALMER, was no longer interested. SMITH then took the phone from ARNOLD and asked PALMER if he could shed any light on the situation. SMITH was unable to say what PALMER's reply to CRISMAN was. Following these telephone discussions SMITH says that he called MAURICE RODDY whom he identifies as a personal friend of his and an aviation editor of the Chicago Times. SMITH states that he had previously made an agreement with RODDY in Chicago that should he ever run across any flying disc stories which showed promise of news value, that he would contact RODDY and this call was a result of that agreement. Shortly afterward, Colonel GREGG called him from McChord Field stating that Hamilton Field had requested that ARNOLD, SMITH, CRISMAN and DAHL submit their addresses to Hamilton Field for convenience of any Army investigation of the incident which may be forthcoming. After this call the four men went to a restaurant for lunch. During the course of this meal SMITH excused himself from the table and attempted to call SAC BOBBITT of the Portland Field Office, Federal Bureau of Investigation with whom he claims acquaintance. BOBBITT, however, was unavailable and SMITH was unable to complete the\n\n- 10 -"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 19, 1947\ncall. After returning to the Hotel room, a Tacoma Times reporter called\nattempting to gain information, but they did not give him any. Later, a Mr.\nMORRELLO of the United Press called and SMITH spoke to him on the telephone\nbut refused to give out any information. SMITH further relates that while\nthe four men were in the room at this time, an envelope was shoved under the\ndoor and that he retrieved it from the floor. SMITH states that the appearance\nof this envelope seemed to startle CRISMAN considerably and that in fact, CRISMAN\nturned white as a sheet until SMITH read the note unsigned which was a communi-\ncation to the Hotel advising that a strike of Hotel employees was eminent and\nthat guests should not expect room and telephone service much longer. Shortly\nafter this incident DAHL and CRISMAN left the Hotel room after promising to\ntake ARNOLD and SMITH to Maury Island the following morning, (Saturday). ARNOLD\nand SMITH then went out for dinner and on their return, SMITH found a note in\nthe box requesting him to call a certain telephone number. He did this from\nthe Hotel room and was answered by LANTZ, Tacoma Times reporter who requested\nSMITH to go out and call him from a pay station. SMITH complained and was\ninformed by LANTZ that two anonymous telephone calls had been received by\nhim that a discussion regarding flying discs had been taking place in room 502\nat the Winthrop Hotel which involved Army Intelligence officers. From the\ninformation which LANTZ had received, SMITH was convinced that the anonymous\ncaller must have been present at the discussion also, as LANTZ was seemingly\nin possession of pertinent remarks which had been made in the room. SMITH\nstates that he did not give LANTZ any further information and that in conclu-\nsion of the call, he returned to the Hotel room and he and ARNOLD retired for\nthe night.\n\nOn Saturday morning, August 2, 1947 SMITH received a tele-\nphone call from MAURICE RODDY in Chicago, but was unable to give him any\nfurther information. SMITH advised him, however, that he would call him back\nat 2:30 that afternoon. DAHL then called from a coffee shop nearby and ARNOLD\nand SMITH joined DAHL, CRISMAN and an unknown man in the Coffee Shop for\nbreakfast. The unknown person was discussing some lumber business with DAHL\nand left after breakfast. On leaving the coffee shop, SMITH asked DAHL about\nthe negatives of the photographs which he claimed to have taken of the flying\ndiscs. DAHL said the negatives were in the glove compartment of his car, but\na search of the instant glove compartment was fruitless. The four then pro-\nceeded in CRISMAN's car to the dock where they were to embark for Maury Island.\nThe boat, however, could not be started and the trip was postponed until later\nin the day. While at the dock, however, SMITH asked to be shown the damage\nto the boat which had allegedly occurred when the fragments showered down on\nMaury Island. CRISMAN pointed out what may have been repairs to the windshield\nand lights on the boat, but SMITH was not personally satisfied that these repairs\nwere made as a result of any such incident. CRISMAN and DAHL then drove ARNOLD\nand SMITH back to the Hotel at approximately 10:45 A. M. and CRISMAN told them\nhe would call them later on and that they would go to Maury Island. On return-\ning to the Hotel, SMITH called LANTZ at the Tacoma Times as a result of which\ncall he and ARNOLD met LANTZ at the Coffee Shop across the street from the\n\n- 11 -"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 19, 1947\nWinthrop Hotel. SMITH stated that the purpose of this meeting was to try to\nfind out something more about the anonymous phone calls which LANTZ had told\nhim about. He and ARNOLD still refused to give out any further information\nregarding the Thursday evening conference to LANTZ and were informed by LANTZ\nthat the Tacoma Times was afraid of being scooped on the story and was going\nto print something on that day. SMITH and ARNOLD then returned to the Hotel\nand shortly thereafter received a phone call from CRISMAN, but the call was\ncut off by the switchboard operator since it was not an emergency call. SMITH\nand ARNOLD then returned to the Hotel lobby where they found a telegram from\nDAHL asking them to call him at either Broadway or Proctor 7733, SMITH is not\nsure of the exchange. SMITH called this number, but DAHL was not there. SMITH\nstates that he went then to the Western Union Telegraph Office and dispatched\na collect telegram to MAURICE RODDY at the Chicago Times which contained a\nbrief resume of the incidents which had occurred and which requested RODDY to\nwire SMITH a telephone number where RODDY could be reached after 6:00 P. M.\nSMITH states that he has never received an answer to that wire. Following\nthis, SMITH states that he and ARNOLD that he and ARNOLD were sitting in the\nlobby of the Olympic Hotel when LANTZ entered and gave them each a copy of the\nlatest edition of the Tacoma Times which contained a story hinting at sabotage\nin the crash of the Army B-25 which killed Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN.\nSMITH stated that he and ARNOLD continued to occupy seats in the Hotel lobby\nmost of the afternoon inasmuch as they were unable to receive calls in the Hotel\nroom due to the Hotel employees' strike. He relates that he received a call\nin the late afternoon from LANTZ advising him to call LANTZ that evening at\n8:30 as LANTZ had further information regarding the anonymous calls. SMITH also\nreceived a telegram requesting that he call Boise 6000 which he did and found\nthat it was JOHNSON of the Boise Statesman. He refused to give JOHNSON any\nfurther information at this time. However, shortly thereafter, JOHNSON called\nfrom Boise and advised SMITH that the Army had released a story through Brigadier\nGeneral SHRAM revealing the confidential assignment which BROWN and DAVIDSON\nhad been engaged on. In view of this release, JOHNSON requested SMITH to answer\none question for him which was, \"Were they carrying any alleged disc fragments\non the plane?\" and SMITH answered, \"Yes, they were.\" Following this SMITH\ncalled LANTZ as per his earlier request and was informed that MORRELLO of the\nUnited Press had received another anonymous phone call at which time \"the voice\"\nsaid that the Army B-25 carrying Captain DAVIDSON and Lieutenant BROWN had\nbeen shot down with 20 m.m. shells and that the Marine plane found on Mt.\nRainier had also been shot down with 20 m.m. shells. The voice went on to state\nthat SMITH would be called back to Wright Field on Tuesday. When MORRELLO\nasked why he was giving out this information the caller replied that it was\nnot for the benefit of the newspapers, but that he was interested in seeing\nthat the information got back to New Jersey. The voice also informed MORRELLO\nat this time that one of the two persons who had been talking to ARNOLD and\nSMITH had now left for Alaska. As a result of this latter bit of information\nSMITH decided to find out if CRISMAN or DAHL had left town. He located DAHL\nat the Sunset Theatre and DAHL came to the Hotel and met SMITH and ARNOLD.\nThey were unable to locate CRISMAN by phone and DAHL left saying that he would\ntry to find out where CRISMAN was and that he would call them tomorrow (Sunday)\nand that they would go out to Maury Island at that time. After DAHL left,\n\n- 12 -"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 19, 1947\nSMITH and ARNOLD went to the Tacoma Times Office where a reporter met them\nand took them to MORRELLO in the United Press Office. There they read the\nlatest press releases and had a discussion with MORRELLO regarding the anony-\nmous phone calls. In the course of this discussion MORRELLO mentioned the\nname of Major GEORGE SANDERS, Public Relations Officer at McChord Field as\nbeing one of the officers interested in the investigation.\n\nFollowing this discussion with MORRELLO, at which time\nSMITH states they still refused to divulge any further information, SMITH and\nARNOLD returned to the Hotel for the night.\n\nOn Sunday morning, August 3, 1947, DAHL appeared at the\nHotel room and told them that he had received a letter from CRISMAN which said\nin effect, \"Take care of my business. I'll be out of town for three or four\ndays.\" DAHL had a letter with him but he did not show it to SMITH or ARNOLD.\nThe three men then drove to DAHL's secretary's house in South Tacoma and\npicked her up and the four of them then went to breakfast on the South Tacoma\nhighway. While the four of them then went to breakfast SMITH excused himself\nand called Major SANDERS at McChord Field and arranged an appointment to meet\nhim at the Hotel lobby at 11:00 A. M. They then took DAHL's secretary to her\nhome where DAHL picked up a typewriter and then drove SMITH and ARNOLD back\nto the Hotel. They asked him if he was going to take them to Maury Island that\nday and he replied that he was not. He further stated that he was sick of the\nentire business and that if he was ever contacted by the Army or the authorities\nhe was going to deny ever having seen anything and claim to be \"the biggest liar\nthat ever lived\". Shortly after returning to the Hotel, SMITH met Major SANDERS\nin the lobby and they went in SMITH's car to a coffee shop in South Tacoma where\nSMITH proceeded to tell Major SANDERS the entire story of the incidents which\nhad occurred in Tacoma regarding the CRISMAN and DAHL story since Thursday\nafternoon. Following this, SMITH took Major SANDERS back to the Hotel and intro-\nduced him to ARNOLD and suggested to ARNOLD that he also tell Major SANDERS the\nentire story of what had occurred. ARNOLD did so. Major SANDERS after looking\nat the fragments which were still in the room suggested that they drive out to\nthe Smelter near Tacoma as he believed the slag at the Smelter would bear a\ndistinct resemblance to these fragments. The three men then drove to the Smelter\nand the slag was noted to be definitely similar to the fragments which CRISMAN\nand DAHL had left in the Hotel room. They then returned to the Hotel room and\nMajor SANDERS left them. After packing their bags, SMITH took ARNOLD to Berry's\nAirport where his plane was parked and then SMITH drove himself back to Seattle.\n\nAbout an hour after his arrival in Seattle, which was\napproximately 7:30 P. M., LANTZ of the Tacoma Times appeared at SMITH's home\nwith the newspaper containing the Associated Press story which had originated\nin Boise, Idaho in the Boise Statesman and which was written by JOHNSON following\nSMITH's admission to him that fragments had been carried by Lieutenant BROWN and\nCaptain DAVIDSON on the fatal B-25 flight. SMITH at this time continued to\nrefuse to give any statements for the Press and told LANTZ that he had placed\n\n- 13 -"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 19, 1947\nall of his information in the hands of the Army. SMITH stated that a couple\nof days later he called Major SANDERS at McChord Field and asked him if there\nwas any recent information concerning the incident. SMITH states that Major\nSANDERS informed him that CRISMAN had not yet been contacted, but that the\nFederal Bureau of Investigation was \"setting a trap for him\". SMITH further\nadvises that on Friday, August 8, 1947, he appeared before Lawyer JOHN NOLAN\nat the County-City Building, Seattle and made a deposition of the facts relating\nto the incidents in Tacoma from Thursday afternoon, July 31, last until Sunday\nmorning, August 3, last.\n\nA copy of this deposition is now in possession of the writer\nand is being forwarded herewith to the Bureau. It should be noted that this\ndeposition is in no way as complete as the statement taken by the writer above\nand any setting out of this deposition in this communication would be superfluous.\n\nCopies of this communication are being sent to the Butte,\nPortland, San Francisco and Chicago Offices for their information only. Unless\nadvised by the Bureau to the contrary, instant investigation is considered closed\nby this office.\n\nFor the information of the Bureau, Captain R. G. BJORNING,\nIntelligence Officer, McChord Field, Ft. Lewis, Washington advised at the weekly\nO.N.I.-S.I.D.-F.B.I. Intelligence conference that the Public Relations Officer\nat McChord Field had received a telephone call from an individual at Army Air\nForces Headquarters at Washington, D. C., during which call the Public Relations\nOfficer was requested to obtain a signed statement from DAHL and CRISMAN which\ncould be published and thus publicly close the matter. Captain BJORNING further\nrelated that he had no additional information in this matter and that he did\nnot handle it.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nJACK B. WILCOX\nSpecial Agent in Charge\n\nENCLOSURES\nDAM:PHL:MEK\n100-18945\nCC - Butte\nPortland\nSan Francisco\nChicago\n\n- 14 -"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE ENCLOSURE 62-80894-106"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"August 7,1947\n\nHAROLD A. DAHL and FRED CRISMAN make the following foluntary statement\nto SA DAVID A. MAC CULLOCH of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.\n\nIn the early part of June 1947 we picked up some strange rock formations\nfrom a gravel pit on Maury Island, Washington. We sent a box (cigar)\nof these fragments to RAY PALMER of Venture Magazine at Evanston Illinois\nto have it analyzed.\n\nLater PALMER wrote and asked for additional samples stating that he had\nfailed to have them analyzed.\n\nAround the later part of June a few days after the first disc stories\nstarted PALMER contacted us by phone. He told us not to tell the news-\npapers about the fragments and he would pay for an exclusive story if\nthe fragments could be from a flying disc.\n\nOne of us told him the fragments could have been from a flying disc.\n\nJust after our phone conversation HAROLD DAHL wrote a letter to RAY\nPALMER setting out some notes etc. regarding the fragments and\nindicating they could have come from flying discs.\n\nThe next thing we heard was about the first of July when we got a\nTrans Ocean Press telegram from Chicago asking about these flying\ndisc fragments. We told them to forget the entire matter.\n\nThe next we heard of these fragments was when we were called by\nKENNETH ARNOLD to meet with him in the Winthrop Hotel on July 31,1947\n\nWe told him exactly how we had found the fragments and had forwarded them\nto PALMER to be analyzed.\n\nThe above is the entire and true story as regards our connection with\nthe flying disc stories etc. which originated over the ore samples which\nwe sent to be analyzed."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STATE OF WASHINGTON )\n) ss\nCOUNTY OF KING )\n\nJ. E. SMITH, being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes\nand says:\n\nThis is a narrative statement as to what took place in\nTacoma from Thursday, July 31 until Sunday, August 3.\n\nThursday I received a telephone call from Tacoma from a\nKenneth Arnold. The gist of this conversation was that he thought\nit would be a good idea for me to come to Tacoma and listen to the\nstory of two men whose names were Fred Crismon and Harold Dahl.\nThis Kenneth Arnold I had met two times previous -- once on July 5\nat the office of the P.I. in Seattle for a very brief time and the\nsecond time in Boise, Idaho when I was passing through on one of\nmy trips.\n\nIn this conversation with Arnold on the phone, I made the\nstatement that it would be impossible for me to go over to Tacoma\ndue to my going out to Salt Lake City the next morning. He said\nthat he would fly over from Tacoma and pick me up at Boeing Field.\nI agreed to this proposition from Arnold. At 4 o'clock I met\nArnold at the Boeing Field and we flew back and landed at Barry's\nAirport. We were picked up at the airport by Fred Crismon, who\ndrove the two of us into the Winthrop Hotel. We went up to Room\n502 -- Crismon, Arnold and myself.\n\nFred Crismon put a telephone call into Harold Dahl and\nasked him would he come up to the room. A half hour later Harold\nDahl made his appearance. At this time there were four men in the\nroom -- Crismon, Dahl, Arnold, and myself. Mr. Arnold asked Mr.\nDahl to relate his story as to what took place on June 24. Mr.\nDahl was very hesitant about telling the story to me. Arnold and\nMr. Crismon were already aware of the statements that Dahl had made\nprevious. Mr. Dahl made the statement to me that if any statements\nhe would make relative to his story, if I would keep it confidential\nfor two weeks, that he felt definitely that I would want to forget\nthe whole thing. I made the statement to Mr. Dahl that as far as I\nwas concerned, I would keep any statements he made to me confidential\nfor at least two weeks.\n\nHere is Dahl's story: On June 24 (this date to be checked\nlater) he was in a boat owned by Fred Crismon, who owns the Harbor\nPatrol in Tacoma. They -- Mr. Dahl, a Mr. Knight, and Mr. Dahl's\nson age 16, were cruising around Maury Island looking for logs that\nhad broken away from booms. They were fairly close to shore of\nMaury Island when they saw four or five objects in the sky at an\naltitude of approximately 1500 feet. He said these objects were"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page #2\n\n100 feet in diameter, circular in shape, and it appeared that\nthere was a hole in the center of each as he could see the sky\nthrough this hole. He also mentioned that on the inside of the\ncircle or the hole, that portholes were visible. Their speed was\nnegligible as they appeared to hover over a given spot. One of\nthese objects appeared to be in trouble. Another object came\nover and appeared to make contact. After making this contact for\napproximately two minutes, it rose to its original position.\n\nAt this time the object that appeared to be in trouble\nseemed to throw a lot of debris from one of the portholes. These\nobjects then disappeared from view. Some of this debris that\nlanded broke in the wheelhouse of the boat, the spotlight, and\nthe klaxon. While this debris was falling, my boy and Mr. Knight\ngot off the boat and hid under some logs. This debris that fell\nkilled our dog and a sea gull. I asked Mr. Dahl what was done with\nthe dog. He made the statement they threw the dog into the water.\n\nThis story was told to Mr. Crismon, who the next day\nwent out to this Island to check on this story. He verified the\nfact of the damage to the boat, also to the fact that there appeared\nto be quite a few pieces of either rock or metal on the shore. Mr.\nCrismon also stated that while he was over there investigating on\nMaury Island, he also saw a disk. This disk was of the same shape\nand contour as the objects explained by Mr. Dahl.\n\nAt this point Mr. Arnold clarified for me as to the reasons\nhe was investigating this story. Mr. Arnold stated that he received\na letter from a Mr. Raymond Palmer, supposedly editor of the Venture\nPress, Evanston, Illinois. The gist of this letter was that Mr.\nPalmer received a letter from Mr. Dahl and Mr. Crismon, also a\npackage of these fragments that were found on Maury Island. Mr.\nPalmer also made the statement in the letter that the Chicago\nUniversity failed to analyze these fragments and that would Mr. Arnold\nplease investigate the story. Mr. Arnold was sent a Western Union\ncheck for $200.00 to take care of any expense that he might incur\nwhile making this investigation.\n\nMr. Arnold had made a telephone call to Hamilton Field to\ncontact a Captain Davidson and a Lieutenant Brown, who were with\nA-2 Intelligence at Hamilton Field, asking them would they make a\ntrip to Tacoma to also listen to this story of Dahl and Crismon.\nWhen Mr. Arnold acquainted me with the fact that he had made this\nphone call in front of Mr. Dahl, Mr. Dahl made the statement that\nhe would not tell this story to anybody in Army Intelligence. I\nmade the statement to Mr. Dahl that if he felt this way, that he\nshould not be in the room when these two Intelligence officers\narrived. Mr. Dahl thought this was an excellent idea."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page #3\n\nMr. Dahl, Mr. Crismon, and myself left the hotel room to\ngo downstairs as Mr. Crismon wanted to get some metal that was in\nthe back of his car that he had picked up on Maury Island, to\nbring back to the hotel room. Mr. Harold Dahl departed.\n\nAt this time I made the statement to Mr. Crismon that I\nshould like to pick up my car in Seattle. Mr. Crismon drove me to\nBoeing Field, Seattle. After leaving me at Boeing Field, he drove\nback to Tacoma and I drove my own car back to Tacoma. After I had\nput my car in the garage at Tacoma, I went up to the Winthrop Hotel\nand in the room at that time was Mr. Arnold, Mr. Crismon, and Captain\nDavidson from Army Intelligence. Lieutenant Brown was downstairs\ngetting sandwiches and coffee. When Lieut. Brown came back, the\nstories were again related and Lieut. Brown made a statement that\nall the facts of these stories would be held in strictest confidence\nuntil released by Mr. Dahl.\n\nAfter Mr. Crismon had told all the facts, relating not\nonly his own story but that of Mr. Dahl, he asked for the opinion\nof both officers as to what they thought. Lieut. Brown made the\nstatement that he would like to obtain some of these fragments to\ntake back to Hamilton Field.\n\nAt this time Capt. Davidson and Lieut. Brown were debating\nthe thought as to whether to stay over night in Tacoma or leave for\nHamilton Field immediately, as the B-25 they were flying was\nsupposed to be at Hamilton Field the next day for the Air Show.\n\nThe five of us then left the hotel room and went down to\nthe hotel lobby where Mr. Brown made a telephone call to McChord\nField asking them to send a driver to pick up Capt. Davidson and\nhimself. Lieut. Brown came up to me and made the statement that he\nand Capt. Davidson were going back to Hamilton Field and that he\nwould get in touch with me tomorrow and if after I had seen the\nfragments on Maury Island, if I thought in my own mind that this\nwas authentic, they would immediately leave Hamilton Field and\nreturn. I was to hold this statement by Lieut. Brown in the\nstrictest of confidence from the other group of three (Dahl, Crismon,\nand Arnold).\n\nWe then went down to the street where Mr. Crismon drove his\ncar up in front and took out a box of fragments and gave this box to\nDavidson and Brown. While waiting for the driver from McChord Field,\nLieut. Brown and I discussed Pacific operations and things not per-\ntaining to this mission. Capt. Davidson and Lieut. Brown departed at\napproximately 12:45 A.M. Mr. Arnold and I went back to our hotel\nroom after having a midnight snack."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page #4\n\nFriday the 1st: At approximately 8 o'clock in the\nmorning, Mr. Crismon called up our hotel room and acquainted us\nwith the fact that the B-25 had crashed. Also that he had called\nMcChord Field and from information he received also verified the\nfact that the two men in the ship were Capt. Davidson and Lieut.\nBrown, plus a flight engineer and a hitch-hiker. This left both\nMr. Arnold and myself in a very bad state of concern. Approximate-\nly an hour later Mr. Crismon and Mr. Dahl made their appearance in\nthe hotel room. I still wasn't sure that this was the same B-25\nthat the two Intelligence officers had left in last night. Mr.\nCrismon then again called McChord Field and talked to a Colonel\nGregg and the fact was verified again that the two pilots were\nDavidson and Brown.\n\nAfter an hour or so Mr. Crismon and Mr. Dahl left the\nhotel room with a plan in mind of the four of us meeting the next\nmorning (Saturday) for breakfast and going out to Maury Island.\n\nThat evening (Friday) there was a message for me to call\nthis particular telephone number that was on the message. I called\nthis number and was asked by the party to please call them from a\npaystation. This party was a Mr. Lantz, a reporter on the Tacoma\nTimes. He told me, \"I most certainly am doing myself out of a good\nstory but I thought you ought to know that somebody has been calling\nthis paper and giving us a blow-by-blow description of all that has\ntaken place in your room since you arrived.\" To verify this, Mr.\nLantz repeated back to me discussions that I felt had only been\ntaking place in our room.\n\nMr. Lantz also made the statement that there was a leak\neither from the switchboard operator or our room had been tapped.\nI asked Mr. Lantz why he was tipping us off with this information.\nHe made the statement that he didn't mind doing this if in return\nthat any information that I may let out would be given to him.\nAfter this conversation with Mr. Lantz I went back to our room and\ntold Mr. Arnold what took place on the telephone.\n\nSaturday morning: Mr. Arnold and I met Mr. Dahl and\nFred Crismon for breakfast. We then drove out to the boat to go\nto the island. The boat was unserviceable at the time so we went\nback to the hotel. Mr. Crismon said that he would call later on\nin the day and let us know when the boat would be repaired. That\nwas the last time I saw Mr. Crismon.\n\nApproximately 11 o'clock Saturday morning Mr. Crismon\nphoned me and made the statement it would be impossible for him to\nkeep this appointment with me. We were cut off by the switchboard\noperator as this was classified as not an emergency call. The\nreason we were cut off was due to a strike in all the Tacoma hotels."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page #5\n\nMr. Lantz called up and said if I would call him at 8:30 that evening, he would have some additional information for me. I called Mr. Lantz at 8:30 that evening. He told me that this anonymous caller had again called a Mr. Marillo of the United Press and said that one of the parties that Mr. Arnold and I had come down to see was flown to Alaska. Also he made the statement Mr. Smith would be called to Wright Field Tuesday. This anonymous caller made the statement to Mr. Marillo that this B-25 was shot down. Mr. Marillo asked this person calling what his interest was. This anonymous caller made a statement - \"Don't think I am doing it for the newspapers. All I am interested in is seeing that this information gets back to New Jersey.\"\n\nAfter I finished the conversation with Mr. Lantz, I went over to the United Press and talked with Mr. Marillo and had him read back to me the conversations that he had had with this anonymous caller. But no opinions at this time were voiced either by me or Mr. Marillo.\n\nSunday morning I called a Major Sander of S-2 McChord Field and asked him to meet me at the Winthrop Hotel at 11 o'clock. I met this Major Sander at 11 o'clock and we drove to a small coffee shop on the Tacoma Highway where this complete story was related to him by me. We then drove back to the Winthrop Hotel where Major Sander was introduced to Mr. Arnold by me and again listened to Mr. Arnold's story. Mr. Arnold and I departed from the Winthrop Hotel Sunday afternoon at approximately 4:30.\n\nThis is to certify that the foregoing statement was taken before me, a notary public; that prior to making said statement, the witness was first sworn to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth; that the statement was then reduced to writing and signed by me on the _____ day of August, 1947.\n\nIN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year last above written.\n\nNotary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Seattle."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Affidavit of EMIL J. SMITH\n\nRe: FLYING DISCS SIGHTED BY FRED CRISMAN and HAROLD A. DAHL,\nTacoma, Washington\nSM - X\n\n62-83894-106"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Signed statement of Fred L. Crisman and Harold A. Dahl\n\nRe: FLYING DISCS SIGHTED BY FRED CRISMAN and HAROLD A. DAHL\nTacoma, Washington\nSM - X\n\n62-83894-106"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: Director, FBI - AIR MAIL\nFROM: SAC, San Francisco\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: August 26, 1947\n\nThere are being transmitted herewith to the Bureau photostatic copies of three reports received from Lieutenant Colonel DONALD SPRINGER, A-2, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California, involving reported sightings of flying discs.\n\nThe Los Angeles Office is being furnished with a photostatic copy of the report of Lieutenant Colonel SPRINGER dated August 18, 1947 concerning the investigation conducted at the Muroc Flight Test Base, Muroc, California.\n\nThe Butte Office is being furnished with a photostatic copy of the report of Lieutenant Colonel SPRINGER dated August 20, 1947 which sets forth a letter received from Mr. R. J. MADDEN, Division Plant Engineer, Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, Helena, Montana.\n\nThis office is maintaining contact with Lieutenant Colonel SPRINGER and will furnish the Bureau with a subsequent report from him concerning the observations of Mr. RAY A. SWITZER, Sacramento, California, who has reported certain observations which he believes may involve a flying disc at Placerville, California, on August 14, 1947.\n\nHMK:EMB\nEnclosures - 3\ncc Los Angeles (with enclosure)\n Butte (with enclosure)\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED 32\n\n162-83894-107"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 90986\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nTITLE Investigation of Flying Disc.\nINVESTIGATION MADE AT Muroc AAF, Muroc, Calif.\nFILE No. 1208-I\nCONTROLLING OFFICE Air Defense Command, Mitchel Field.\nPERIOD COVERED 8 July 1947\nDATE 18 August 1947\nCASE CLASSIFICATION Incident\nSTATUS OF CASE Pending\n\nREASON FOR INVESTIGATION: Investigation initiated at request of Air Defense Command reference ltr Hq ADC, dtd 7 Jul 47, file D333.5 ID, subj: Investigation of Flying Disc.\n\nSYNOPSIS:\n\nOn 8 July 1947, approximately 1000 hours, two incidents occurred in the vicinity of Muroc Flight Test Base.\n\nNo further investigation of these incidents is being considered by this headquarters.\n\nDISTRIBUTION COPIES APPROVED:\nAAF 2\nADC 1\n6th Army 1\nFBI, S.F. 1\nFile 4AF 1\n\nDONALD L. SPRINGER, Lt. Col., GSC\nAC of S, A-2\n\nW.D., P.M.G. Form No. 110\n1 April 1944\n(This form supersedes W.D., O.C.S. Form No. 19, which will not be used upon receipt of this revision)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL ROUTED TO"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL COPY\n\nAFFIDAVIT\n\nSTATE OF CALIFORNIA )\n\nCOUNTY OF KERN )\n\nThe following is a statement given orally by Colonel Gilkey, Commanding Officer, Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California, given to Captain Harry D. Black, Intelligence Officer, on 11 August 1947.\n\nColonel Gilkey, stated that the object he saw, he believed at the time to be paper and of no significance or the objects not important enough to be reported. There was nothing clearly enough seen by the Colonel to make any further reports justifiable.\n\nThis oral statement was given freely and voluntarily without any threats or promises under duress. This statement consists of one (1) page, and is the truth to the best of my knowledge and belief.\n\ns/s harry d. black\nCAPT. HARRY D. BLACK, MAC\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL COPY\n\nAFFIDAVIT\n\nSTATE OF CALIFORNIA)\n\nCOUNTY OF KERN)\n\nThe following is a statement given by Major Richard R. Shoop, Office of Chief of Tech. Engineering Division, Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California, statement given on 11 July 1947.\n\nAt approximately noon on 8 July 1947, my attention was called to an object in the air by Colonel Gilkey. I observed between five (5) and eight (8) miles to the North what appeared to be a thin metallic object. It appeared to be metallic because the method in which it was flying caused the sun to reflect like an apparently aluminum colored surface. The object moved from an intermediate altitude in an oscillating fashion, almost to the surface of the ground and then started climbing again. It climbed to a fairly high altitude and moved off slowly into the distance. The object appeared to be the size of a pursuit airplane but did not have the shape of a conventional plane. The time that the object was in view was approximately eight (8) minutes. This same object was seen by my wife at the same time.\n\nThis statement has been given freely and voluntarily without any threats or promises under duress. This statement consists of one (1) page, and is the truth to the best of my knowledge and belief. I have initialed all corrections deemed necessary.\n\ns/s richard r. shoop\nMAJOR, RICHARD R. SHOOP, AC\n\nWITNESS:\n\ns/s thomas a. mcmillan\nTHOMAS A. MC MILLAN\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL COPY\n\nAFFIDAVIT\n\nSTATE OF CALIFORNIA )\n\nCOUNTY OF KERN )\n\nThe following is a statement given by T/Sgt. Joseph Ruvolo, 4144th. AAFBU, Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California, statement given on 14 July 1947, to 1st Lt J. C. McHenry, Billeting Officer.\n\nThis is my own written statement of what I saw on July 8, 1947.\n\nI am NCO in charge of the Billeting Office, this Field, and First Lieutenant Joseph C. McHenry, is Billeting Officer in Charge.\n\nAbout 09:45 he was returning from the Post Exchange when he called to me to come outside and asked me to look up to where he was pointing and to my surprise I saw two (2) flying objects which appeared to me like two (2) flying disc or saucer shaped silver colored objects, flying in a northwestern direction at speed approximately 350 or 400 miles per hour and at an altitude of about 7500 or 8000 feet. I could not hear a motor roar like one of our planes and it could not have been a balloon.\n\nI am of good health and sound mind and this was no hallucination.\n\nThis statement has been given freely and voluntarily without any threats or promises under duress. This statement consists of one (1) page, and is the truth to the best of my knowledge and belief. I have initialed all corrections deemed necessary.\n\ns/s joseph ruvolo\nS/SGT JOSEPH RUVOLO\n\nWITNESS:\n\ns/s thomas a mc millan\nTHOMAS A. MC MILLAN\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY\n\nAFFIDAVIT\n\nSTATE OF CALIFORNIA )\n\nCOUNTY OF KERN )\n\nThe following is a statement given by 1st. Lt. Joseph C. McHenry, Billeting Officer, Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California, statement given on 11 July 1947, to Mr. Thomas A. McMillan, CIC S/A. this Station.\n\nThe following statement concerning the actual observance of what has been termed as a \"flying Disc\" or a \"flying Saucer\" is true and correct and it will be noted that the above mentioned observance was made by me personally while enjoying complete health in mind and body.\n\nOn Tuesday 8 July 1947, at approximately nine-thirty A.M. (09:30) I was in conversation with personnel in the Post Exchange Office. My part of this conversation was as follows:\n\n\"Someone will have to show me one of these Disc before I will believe it.\"\n\nUpon leaving the Post Exchange, I went directly to my Office and before entering heard one of our local aircraft in the traffic pattern. Looking up, as I always do I observed the aircraft, and looked slightly to the left, whereupon I observed two (2) silver objects of either a spherical or disc-like shape, moving about three hundred (300) miles an hour, or perhaps less, at approximately eight thousand (8000) feet, heading at about three hundred twenty degrees (320°) due north.\n\nWhen I first observed these objects I called S/Sgt. Gerald E. Nauman, T/Sgt. Joseph Ruvolo and Miss Jannette Marie Scotte who immediately came to where I was standing. I pointed in the direction of the objects and asked them the question \"Tell me what you see up there.\" Whereupon, all the three (3) with sundry comments stated, \"They are flying Disc\". To further verify my observance I asked them to tell me in what direction the objects were traveling, without indicating their direction myself, and again, all three (3) in a consistent nature stated that the objects were moving toward Mojave, California.\n\nI had time to look away several times and renew my vision of the objects to make sure that there were not any results of eye strain, or in any nature an optical illusion. The objects in question were not repeat, were not aircraft, the objects could not have been weather balloons released from this station, since they were traveling against the prevailing wind, and since the speed at which they were traveling and the horizontal direction in which they were traveling, disqualified the fact that they were weather balloons."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY\n\nAfter the observance of these phenomenon and hoping that I might have time to enlist further witnesses, I immediately ran into the dispensary to get personnel who are Medical Officers to verify, for my own curiosity, the actual observance of these objects, but by the time I reached the back porch of the dispensary, Mrs. A. C. Naum, who is a registered nurse, and about seven (7) other personnel were with me, the objects, had by that time, disappeared, due to the speed with which they were traveling. Upon further investigation, two (2) of us at the same time sighted another object of a silver spherical or disc-like nature at approximately eight thousand (8000) feet, traveling in circles over the North-end. I called the objects to the attention of Mrs. Naum and pointedit out to the other personnel standing near by. All of us saw the object, with the exception of two (2) out of seven (7) personnel. All of us looked away from the object several times to make sure there was no eye strain or from permitting the object to become an optical illusion.\n\nFrom my actual observance the object circled in too tight a circle and too severe a plane to be any aircraft that I know of. It could not have been any type of bird because of the reflection that was created when the object reached certain altitudes. The object could not have been a local weather balloon for it is very impossible that a weather balloon would stay at the same altitude as long and circle in such a consistent nature as did the above mentioned object.\n\nI am familiar with the results of too constant vision of the sun or any bright object and am aware that optical illusions are possible and probable. I wish to make this statement that the above mentioned observance was that of actual subject matter.\n\nThis statement has been given freely and voluntarily without any threats or promises under duress. This statement consists of two (2) pages, and is the truth to the best of my knowledge and belief. I have initialed all corrections deemed necessary.\n\ns/s joseph c. mc henry\n1ST LT JOSEPH C. MC HENRY AC\n\nWITNESS:\n\ns/s thomas a. mc millan\nTHOMAS A. MC MILLAN\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY\n\nAFFIDAVIT\n\nSTATE OF CALIFORNIA )\n\nCOUNTY OF KERN )\n\nThe following is a statement given by Major J. C. Wise, Test Pilot, Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California, statement given to Mr. Thomas A. McMillan, CIC Agent, This station, on 13 August 1947.\n\nOn 7 July 1947, at approximately 10:10, while running up the XP-84 on the ground I noticed everyone was looking up into the air. Off to the north about 10,000 to 12,000 feet altitude, was an object that I assumed at first to be a weather balloon, but after looking at it for a while I noticed that it was oscillating in a forward whirling movement without losing altitude. It was traveling about 200 to 225 MPH, and heading from west to east.\n\nThe object was yellowish white in color and I would estimate that it was a sphere about 5 to 10 feet in diameter.\n\nI did not have time to chase it in a P-80.\n\nThis statement was given freely and voluntarily without any threats or promises under duress. This statement consists of one (1) page, and is the truth to the best of my knowledge and belief.\n\ns/s j. c. wise\nMAJOR J. C. WISE, AC\n\nWITNESS:\n\ns/s thomas a. mc millan\nTHOMAS A. MC MILLAN\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY\n\nAFFIDAVIT\n\nSTATE OF CALIFORNIA )\n\nCOUNTY OF KERN )\n\nThe following is a statement given by Captain John Paul Strapp, Flight Test, Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California, statement given to Mr. Thomas A. McMillan, CIC Agent, this Station, on 12 August 1947.\n\nAt 11:50 hours, 8 July 1947, while the undersigned was sitting in an observation truck located in Area # 3, Rogers Dry Lake, for the purpose of observing a P-82 ejection seat experiment, the following unfamiliarity was observed.\n\nThe undersigned was gazing upward toward a formation of two (2) P-82's and an A-26 aircraft flying at 20,000 feet, preparing to carry out a seat ejection experiment, when I observed a rounded object, white aluminum in color, which at first resembled a parachute canopy. The first impression was that a premature ejection of the seat and dummy had occurred. This body was ejected at a determined height lower than 20,000 feet, and was falling at three (3) times the rate observed for the parachute which was ejected thirty minutes later. As it fell it drifted slightly north of due west against the prevailing wind, toward Mount Wilson. The speed, horizontal motion could not be determined, but appeared slower than the maximum velocity 50-80 aircraft.\n\nAs this object descended through a low enough level to permit observation of its lateral silhouette, it presented a distinct ovular outline, with two (2) projections on the upper surface which might have been thick fins or nobs. These crossed each other at intervals, suggesting either rotation or oscillation of slow type.\n\nNo smoke flames, propellar arks, engine noise, or other clasuable (?) or visible means of propulsion were noted. The color was silvery, resembling aluminum painted fabric, and did not appear as dense as a parachute canopy.\n\nWhen the object dropped to a level such that comes into line of vision of the mountain tops, it was lost to the vision of the observer.\n\nIt is estimated that the object was in line of vision about 90 seconds. Of the five (5) people sitting in the observation truck, four (4) observed this object and made remarks about it. These people include:\nMr. Lenz - Civilian, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio\n(Other names not given)\n\nThe following is my own personal opinions about this object:\n\n1. I think it was a man-made object, as evidenced distaintly by the outline and functional appearance.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY\n\n2. It's size was not far from 25 feet with a parachute canopy.\n\n3. The path followed by this object appeared as though it might have been dropped from a great height.\n\nSeeing this was not a hallucination or other fancies of a sense.\n\nThis statement was given freely and voluntarily without any threats or promises under duress. This statement consists of two (2) pages, and is the truth to the best of my knowledge and belief. I have initialed all corrections deemed necessary.\n\ns/s john paul strapp\nCAPTAIN JOHN PAUL STRAPP, AC\n\nWITNESS:\n\ns/s thomas a. mc millan\nTHOMAS A. MC MILLAN\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL COPY\n\nAFFIDAVIT\n\nSTATE OF CALIFORNIA )\n\nCOUNTY OF KERN )\n\nThe following is a statement given on 14 July 1947, by Jannette Marie Scott, Secretary to 1st Lt J. C. McHenry, Billeting Officer, Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California.\n\nI am fully aware of my Civil and Constitutional Rights, and understand prior to making this statement.\n\nOn Tuesday morning 8 July 1947, at approximately 10:00, while typing some cards, and taking care of my routine work, Lieutenant McHenry called me, along with T/Sgt. Joseph Ruvolo and S/Sgt. Gerald E. Nauman, to the front of B.O.Q. \"A\" Bldg. Pointing up in a direction directly above me he asked us to explain what we saw. There were two, silver colored disc like objects flying toward Mojave, California, one directly back of the other, at a speed of about 300 to 400 miles per hour, having an altitude of approximately 8000 feet. I listened carefully for a few minutes, and heard no drone, such as should be heard from any aircraft. I also cast my eyes to another direction and looking back to the same spot, I was able to distinguish the same objects again. Having assured myself that there was no eye-strain, I was convinced these objects were not weather balloons due to the horizontal position in which they were flying. Nor could they have been birds of any nature, due to the definite reflection from the sun rays.\n\nI have been on this Base, considering an absence of six months, approximately eighteen months, and am familiar with all type aircraft.\n\nAbout three or four minutes, after these flying objects had nearly disappeared, I glanced around and sighted another flying object, similar to the above mentioned objects. This flying object was silver colored and was in the shape of a disc. Unlike the first two this object was flying in a tight circle, neither losing nor gaining altitude, at approximately eight thousand feet, therefore I was convinced it could not have been a weather balloon, and because of the tight circle it could not have been any type aircraft.\n\nThis statement was given freely and voluntarily without threats or promises under duress. This statement consists of one (1) page, and is the truth to the best of my knowledge and belief. I have initialed all corrections deemed necessary.\n\nI am of sound mind and body, and swear that this statement is true and correct.\n\ns/s jannette marie scott\nJannette Marie Scott\n\nWITNESSES:\ns/s thomas a. mc millan\nTHOMAS A. MC MILLAN\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nAFFIDAVIT\n\nSTATE OF CALIFORNIA )\n\nCOUNTY OF KERN )\n\nThe following is a statement given by S/Sgt. Gerald E. Nauman, 4144th AAFBU, Muroc Army Air Field, Muroc, California, statement given on 14 July 1947, to 1st Lt. J. C. McHenry, Billeting Officer.\n\nOn the eight of July 1947 at ten o'clock (10:00) in the morning I observed personally two (2) flying disc, flying in a north west direction at an estimated altitude of seven or eight thousand feet, traveling at approximately three or four hundred miles per hour.\n\nJust a few minutes before this I was in the Billeting Office and First Lieutenant Joseph C. McHenry, called me and two (2) others outside. He then asked us what we saw. I saw two (2) objects with my own eyes, and I am now and was then in perfect physical condition. I have 20-20 vision and I am positive these two (2) objects could not have been Aircraft, weather balloons or birds. Due to the altitude in which they were flying, they gave off a definite reflection from the rays of the sun.\n\nIn addition to these two (2) disc I saw another object a few minutes later at the same altitude doing certain maneuvers such as flying in a tight circle. The two disc had already disappeared. This object to my knowledge of aircraft could not have been an airplane because of the very tight maneuver it was undergoing. I have been flying in and have been around all types of aircraft since 1943 and never in my life have I seen anything such as this. If necessary I can and will swear to this statement.\n\nThis statement has been given freely and voluntarily without any threats or promises under duress. This statement consists of one (1) page, and is the truth to the best of my knowledge and belief. I have initialed all corrections deemed necessary.\n\ns/s t. c. robinson\nPFC T. C. ROBINSON\n\nWITNESS:\n\ns/s thomas a. mc millan\nTHOMAS A. MC MILLAN\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNIDENTIFIED OBJECT\n4AF-1208-I\n20 August 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n1. On 20 August 1947, this agent and Special Agent Hubbard interviewed Mr. Ray A. Switzer, Insurance Adjustor, at his home, 3431 David Way, Sacramento, California, and he stated in substance: On the afternoon of 14 August 1947, he was driving his automobile from Placerville, California, on the Cedar Ravine Road. Mr. Switzer's wife was in the front seat of the automobile and Mrs. Switzer's mother and the two Switzer children were in the back seat of the car. At about 1600 hours they were at a point approximately five miles southwest from Placerville when Switzer saw a white smoke trail out of the corner of his eye. In searching for a rocket ship (P80) he saw an object, four to six feet in length, ten to fourteen inches wide, and of a metal color, bright like highly polished chromium. In relation to the travel of the automobile the object was first seen at 1030, and when the object [REDACTED] reached a point at approximately 1200, it was engulfed in a puff of dark gray smoke about ten feet in diameter. The object was traveling at a terrific rate of speed and seemed to be in a very shallow dive. When the puff of smoke appeared, the object disappeared completely and there were no particles seen to have fallen from the smoke. The point where the object was engulfed in the smoke was about eight hundred yards distant (in front of) Switzer with no possibility of the object being hidden from view by vegetation or terrain. The object appeared rectangular in shape except for one very short period of time it appeared to have a top surface that was very slightly curved. Mr. Switzer turned to tell his wife about the object and found her with her mouth open in an effort to say something and with her hand in a pointing gesture toward where the object had disappeared. The object was not very high in relation to the terrain and seemed to be following the contour of a canyon.\n\n2. In a separate interview Mrs. Switzer concurred in the information obtained from Mr. Switzer with the following exceptions: The smoke trail and the puff that engulfed the object appeared dark gray in color and there was no change in the color. Mrs. Switzer estimated the object to be about five feet long and about a foot wide with the top surface being slightly curved. The object appeared to be some larger in front than in the rear.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: At the time this object was seen, the sun was to the Switzer's back, the sky was clear and the object gave off a very bright reflection. Mr. Switzer has been connected with the field of insurance investigation for the last eighteen years and appears to be a man not desirous of publicity. The other passengers of the car did not see the object. Mr. Switzer is in the process of moving to a ranch near Placerville, Calif., and his new address will be Box 45, Aukum, Eldorado County, Calif. Arrangements have been made to meet Mr. Switzer at 1400, 26 Aug 47 at Raffels Hotel, Placerville, Calif., for the purpose of going back over Cedar Ravine Road to locate the point where the object disappeared.\n\nBryden E. Moon, Special Agent, 4AF CIC\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA 20 August 1947\n333.6/1208-I\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Disc.\n\nTO: Special Agent in Charge, FBI, U. S. Dept. of Justice, Federal Office Building, Room 422, San Francisco, Calif.\n\n1. The attached letter was received by this office from Mr. R. J. Madden, Division Plant Engineer, Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, on 18 August 1947.\n\n2. No further investigation will be made of this reported incident by this headquarters.\n\n1 Incl:\nAs indicated.\n\nDISTRIBUTION:\nAAF - 2 cys\nADC - 1 cy\n6th Army - 1 cy\nFBI - 1 cy\n\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, GSC\nAC of S, A-2\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nAUG 21 1947\nSAN FRANCISCO\nROUTED TO\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL COPY\n\n427 W. 3d Avenue\nSpokane, Washington\nAugust 8, 1947\n\nMilitary Intelligence Division, U.S.A.\nMcChord Field, Washington\n\nGentlemen:\n\nFollowing the reading of an account of the visit of Mr. Kenneth Arnold, Boise, Idaho, as published in the Spokesman Review under date of August 7, 1947, the undersigned considered the enclosed account of an observation of a \"flying saucer\" would be of interest to you.\n\nThis account has not been given to any newspaper or other publication as yet.\n\nYours truly,\n\n/s/ R. J. Madden\nR. J. MADDEN,\nDivision Plant Engr.\nThe Pac. Tel. & Tel. Co.\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nAUG 21 1947\nSAN FRANCISCO\nROUTED TO\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nReport on a \"Flying Saucer\"\n\nAt or about 12:05 p.m., July 29, 1947, a sedan, driven by Steve Herrmann and carrying R. J. (Bob) Madden in the front seat and Karl Herrmann in the rear seat, was proceeding northwesterly along the road leading from Canyon Ferry to York, both in Montana some 25 miles N.E. of Helena.\n\nWhen at a point approximately ½ mile N.W. of Canyon Ferry, (as shown on Forest Service Map to be in the NE¼ of NE¼ of Sec. 10 T10N R1W) Karl suddenly shouted \"See it! See it! There's a flying saucer!\" Steve immediately slowed down and gradually brought the sedan to a stop, he and Bob meanwhile scanning the sky in the direction pointed by Karl in an effort to see the \"flying saucer\", but without success.\n\nApproximately ten seconds elapsed between the time Karl reported seeing the \"saucer\", coming over the horizon at high speed from the southwest,(Karl first thought it a meteor) and travelling northeasterly, and the bringing of the car to a stop.\n\nAs the car came to a stop, Steve, Karl and Bob, simultaneously, saw the following:\n\nDirectly ahead, (N.W) 2 to 3 miles distant and approximately 3000 ft. above the ground, a bright disc hovering and fluttering in the air. Descending and rising through a vertical distance of fifty or a hundred feet for a period of about five seconds then, while at the top of an ascent, the \"disc\" suddenly swooped to the Northeast at tremendous speed and disappeared into the clear air within a distance of 200 ft. That is to say it did not pass beyond an obstruction to further visibility but \"melted into thin air\" as if because of tremendous speed.\n\nThis disc was, from the viewpoint of the observers, apparently 3 ft. in diameter, circular and of no great thickness - approximately 3 or 4 inches.\n\nThe sky was blue with scattered small clouds, the sun was shining brightly and the disc gleamed and shimmered in the bright sunlight as if covered with highly polished nickel.\n\nAfter the \"disc\" disappeared from view, the sedan and its occupants proceeded northwesterly along the road, but could discern no evidence of the presence of the \"disc\" along or adjacent to that therefore.\n\nIt is to be remembered that the dimensions as stated above were as they appeared to the observers some 2 or 3 miles from the \"disc\" and the true dimensions must be considerably greater.\n\n/s/ R. J. Madden,\nR. J. MADDEN,\nDivision Plant Engr.\nThe Pac. Tel. & Tel. Co.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR\nDATE: 9-15-47\nFROM : SAC, San Francisco\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\n\nReference is made to my letter dated August 26, 1947. Enclosed is a copy of a letter dated September 9, 1947 from Lt. Colonel DONALD L. SPRINGER, of A2, with a memorandum prepared by BRYDEN E. MOON, 4th Air Force CIC on August 20, 1947 and August 26, 1947. The memorandum contains information regarding observations of RAY A. SWITZER of Sacramento, California.\n\nAlso enclosed is a letter dated September 10, 1947 from Colonel SPRINGER with attachment dated September 9, 1947\n\nFor the information of the Bureau, KENNETH ARNOLD of Boise, Idaho, who has been repeatedly interviewed in this matter by A2, has expressed his intention to A2 of selling for publication his detailed account of his investigation of flying discs.\n\n62-2938\nDWK.\n\nEX-64\n\nRECORDED\nEX-64\n\n62-83894-108\n15 SEP 24 1947\n\n6 OCT 2 1947"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA\n333.5/1208-I\n9 September 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of Flying Disc.\n\nTO: Special Agent in Charge, FBI, U. S. Department of Justice, Room 422, Federal Office Building, San Francisco, California.\n\nAttached MOIC for your information.\n\n1 Incl:\nMOIC, Moon, dtd 20 Aug 47.\n\nDonald L. Springer\nLt. Colonel, Air Corps\nDeputy AC of S, A-2\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nSEP 12 1947\nROUTED TO FILE\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY\n\n1030 hours 18 August 1947\n\nTelephone message received from Mr. Al Reek, City Editor, Oakland Tribune:\n\nMr. Ray A. Switzer, 3431 David Way, Sacramento 2, Calif, and insurance executive with the firm of McGuire and Wallis, of Sacramento, reported the following incident:\n\nAt 4:P.M. on August 14, while driving on Cedar Ravine Road, 4 to 6 miles southeast of Placerville, Calif, he, accompanied by his wife, observed a \"vapor\" trail moving from north to south. Closer observation revealed a piece of \"shiny metal\" at from 500 to 1000 feet altitude moving at a \"high rate of speed\". The object appeared to be more \"rocket-shaped\" than disc-shaped. It appeared to be approximately 5 feet in length and was \"tilted in a semi-circle\".\n\nThe object struck the ground with a \"puff of black smoke\" about 100 feet below the top of a hill which was approximately 750 feet ahead of the automobile driven by the observer. An intervening canyon prevented investigation of the location where the object was observed to have landed.\n\nThe observer is able to identify the location where the object was observed to land.\n\n(Mr. Switzer is a University of California graduate, and is personally known by members of the Oakland Tribune staff. He is a brother-in-law of Col. Gray of the Marine Hospital of Southern California.)\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNIDENTIFIED OBJECT\n4AF-1208-I\n20 August 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n1. On 20 August 1947, this agent and Special Agent Hubbard interviewed Mr. Ray A. Switzer, Insurance Adjustor, at his home, 3431 David Way, Sacramento, California, and he stated in substance: On the afternoon of 14 August 1947, he was driving his automobile from Placerville, California, on the Cedar Ravine Road. Mr. Switzer's wife was in the front seat of the automobile and Mrs. Switzer's mother and the two Switzer children were in the back seat of the car. At about 1600 hours they were at a point approximately five miles southwest from Placerville when Switzer saw a white smoke trail out of the corner of his eye. In searching for a rocket ship (P80) he saw an object, four to six feet in length, ten to fourteen inches wide, and of a metal color, bright like highly polished chromium. In relation to the travel of the automobile the object was first seen at 1030, and when the object reached a point at approximately 1200, it was engulfed in a puff of dark gray smoke about ten feet in diameter. The object was traveling at a terrific rate of speed and seemed to be in a very shallow dive. When the puff of smoke appeared, the object disappeared completely and there were no particles seen to have fallen from the smoke. The point where the object was engulfed in the smoke was about eight hundred yards distant (in front of) Switzer with no possibility of the object being hidden from view by vegetation or terrain. The object appeared rectangular in shape except for one very short period of time it appeared to have a top surface that was very slightly curved. Mr. Switzer turned to tell his wife about the object and found her with her mouth open in an effort to say something and with her hand in a pointing gesture toward where the object had disappeared. The object was not very high in relation to the terrain and seemed to be following the contour of a canyon.\n\n2. In a separate interview Mrs. Switzer concurred in the information obtained from Mr. Switzer with the following exceptions: The smoke trail and the puff that engulfed the object appeared dark gray in color and there was no change in the color. Mrs. Switzer estimated the object to be about five feet long and about a foot wide with the top surface being slightly curved. The object appeared to be some larger in front than in the rear.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: At the time this object was seen, the sun was to the Switzer's back, the sky was clear and the object gave off a very bright reflection. Mr. Switzer has been connected with the field of insurance investigation for the last eighteen years and appears to be a man not desirous of publicity. The other passengers of the car did not see the object. Mr. Switzer is in the process of moving to a ranch near Placerville, Calif., and his new address will be Box 43, Auburn, Eldorado County, Calif. Arrangements have been made to meet Mr. Switzer at 1400, 26 Aug 47 at Raffels Hotel, Placerville, Calif., for the purpose of going back over Cedar Ravine Road to locate the point where the object disappeared.\n\nBryden E. Moon, Special Agent, 4AF CIC\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNIDENTIFIED OBJECT\n4AF-1208-I\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Forester Young will communicate with the AC of S, A-2, Headquarters Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California, if any information regarding wreckage of an aircraft is located in the area in question. Young was not informed of the mission and was led to believe that the mission was an effort to locate possible aircraft wreckage in the area.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nUNIDENTIFIED OBJECT\n4AF-1208-I\n\n3. On 26 August 47, S/A Hubbard and this agent contacted Mr. Ray Switzer, Insurance Adjustor at the Raffels Hotel, Placerville, California. After traveling Cedar Ravine road to a point nine miles southeast of Placerville, known as Buck's Bar, Switzer decided that the place from where he had observed the object on 14 Aug 47 was nearer to Placerville. After a thorough check of the road, Switzer believed the spot where he had observed the object to be on the ridge just north of Webber Creek where the road breaks over the summit. This point is two miles from the Raffels Hotel, Placerville, California, on the Cedar Ravine Road. As the road approaches the summit it curves to the left which would provide an observer from an automobile a sweeping view through 40 degrees of the canyon and the horizon on the south side of Webber Creek. This point of observation lies 38 degrees 42' 45\" North Latitude and 120 degrees 47' 15\" West Longitude. The elevation at this point is 2,000 feet above sea level. The horizon from this point in the south is formed by a series of mountain peaks which lie generally through 38 degrees 39' 45\" and which are on the south side of Squaw Hollow Creek, a distance of four miles, and ranging in elevation from 2,300 feet to 2,500 feet above sea level. Switzer was not definite as to what part of the field of view he had seen the object and indicated that it could have been as far as the horizon. Any object, or particles of an object, that Switzer saw, if on the ground on the field of view, would be in a six square mile area of wooded, mountainous terrain which is full of canyons and ravines.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: This agent believes that Switzer could have seen an aluminum surfaced conventional type aircraft which, due to the distance at which he observed it, distinguishing features were not seen because of the bright reflection and the short period of observation. The aircraft would have been coming from the left as Switzer turned to the left, thereby giving the effect of a much greater speed than the object was really traveling. This agent has no explanation as to the smoke trail observed by Switzer. If reconnaisance is desired of the area to see if anything can be located on the ground, this agent suggests that a small type aircraft similar to an L-5, be used in low level flight between the hours of 1100 to 1300. Switzer was very cooperative and expended much of his own time in an effort to be of as much service as possible. Switzer will communicate with the AC of S, A-2, Headquarters Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California, in the event of any report of aircraft wreckage in the area.\n\n4. On 26 Aug 47, a check with Ranger Dixon, State Forest Service, Camino, California, and George B. Young, Forester, Federal Forest Service, Placerville, California, provided the following information: There has been no forest fires or reported aircraft crashes in the area in question within the last month.\n\nBryden E. Moon, Special Agent, 4AF CIC\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nHEADQUARTERS FOURTH AIR FORCE\nOffice of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\nIntelligence\nHamilton Field, California\n\n4AFDA\n333.5/1208-I\n10 September 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Investigation of Flying Disc.\n\nTO: Special Agent in Charge, FBI, U. S. Department of Justice, Room 422, Federal Office Building, San Francisco, California.\n\nAttached MOIC for your information.\n\nFOR THE AC OF S, A-2:\n\nDONALD L. SPRINGER\nLt. Colonel, Air Corps\nDeputy AC of S, A-2\n\n1 Incl:\nMOIC, Hubbard, dtd 9 Sep 47.\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n4AF-1208-I\nIncident\n9 September 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\nMr. Ward L. Stewart, 1242 Milvia Street, Berkeley, California, was interviewed 8 September 1947 at his place of employment, the Hearst Mining Building, University of California, concerning flying objects he reported to have seen on 29 July 1947 while with Captain William H. Ryherd of the 415th AAF BU (RT). Mr. Stewart stated in substance that he was a 1st Lt in the Reserve and that on the 29th of July 1947 shortly after 12 noon he and Captain Ryherd had just landed from a routine training flight when Captain Ryherd called Mr. Stewart's attention to an unidentified flying object that was following a P-80 aircraft at a terrific rate of speed. Mr. Stewart estimated the P-80 to be flying at approximately 250 miles per hour on a preliminary approach to landing at Hamilton Field. In Mr. Stewart's estimation the object he saw following the P-80 maintained a speed of three to four times that of the aircraft. A moment later a second object appeared and flew a course described as something similar to a fighter aircraft's maneuvers when accompanying heavier ships, or a left to right movement, over the object first sighted. Mr. Stewart stated that this maneuvering continued until the objects were out of sight. He estimated the time to be approximately 15 seconds, the course approximately 120 degrees. Mr. Stewart could not estimate the size of the objects nor actual altitude, though he did not believe them to be beyond six thousand feet. Mr. Stewart described the objects as being milky white in color, and unlike any conventional type aircraft he had ever seen. When questioned whether he was familiar with the Navy \"Flapjack\", Mr. Stewart stated that he was, and that he was certain the objects he reported seeing were not of this nature.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Mr. Stewart is a former officer of the U.S. AAF and a B-29 pilot of considerable experience. Mr. Stewart does not convey the impression of being the kind of person who would \"imagine\" that he was seeing objects, nor has he any apparent desire for publicity. Mr. Stewart is in charge of machine shops at the University of California, Berkeley, California.\n\nLESLIE S. HUBBARD, S/A, CIC ADC 4AF\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nFBI BUTTE 8-15-47 5-50 PM VGW\nDIRECTOR, FBI URGENT\nFLYING DISCS. ON INSTANT [REDACTED] DATE, AL W. HAWKINS, COUNTY COMMISSIONER AND EX SHERIFF, TWIN FALLS, IDAHO, AND [REDACTED] J. H. BROWN, IDAHO STATE WAREHOUSE INSPECTOR, SAME COMMUNITY, ADVISED THAT ON WEDNESDAY MORNING, AUGUST THIRTEEN LAST, AT APPROXIMATELY NINE THIRTY AM WHILE FISHING IN RIVER APPROXIMATELY FORTY MILES SOUTHWEST OF TWIN FALLS, IDAHO, IN ISOLATED COUNTRY, THEY SAW TWO OBJECTS FLYING THROUGH AIR AT GREAT HEIGHT, WHICH [REDACTED] APPEARED TO BE DISCS, AND AT SAME TIME HEARD ROAR SIMILAR TO NOISE CREATED BY MOTOR TRUCK. INFORMANTS ADVISED OBJECTS MOVING VERY RAPIDLY AND [REDACTED] THAT THEY EACH APPEARED TO BE APPROXIMATELY SIX FEET IN DIAMETER. OBJECTS QUICKLY DISAPPEARED FROM SIGHT AND HAVE NOT BEEN SEEN SINCE. NO FURTHER DESCRIPTION THESE OBJECTS PRESENTLY AVAILABLE. FURTHER INVESTIGATION BEING CONDUCTED BY THIS DIVISION PURSUANT TO BUREAU BULLETIN NO. FORTY TWO, SUB DIVISION B, DATED JULY THIRTY NINETEEN FORTY SEVEN. BUREAU WILL BE PROMPTLY INFORMED OF ALL PERTINENT DEVELOPMENTS.\n\nBANISTER\n\nEND\n\nHOLD PLS\n\n7-54 PM OK FBI WA BW\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nAUG 15 8 38 PM '47\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED\nAUG 19 10 36 AM\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\n\n[illegible]\n\nUNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nDIRECTOR, FBI\n\nAUGUST 28, 1947\n\n[illegible]\n\nATTENTION: [illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nFBI\n\nAUG 15 7 55 PM '47\nRECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nFBI DEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM : SAC, SAN FRANCISCO\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: August 28, 1947\n\nATTENTION: ASSISTANT DIRECTOR D. M. LADD\n\nOn August 27, 1947, Lt. Colonel DONALD SPRINGER, A-2, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California, advised that the Area Intelligence Requirements Division Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2 Headquarters, requested that one WILLIAM RHOADS of Phoenix, Arizona, be completely interviewed in connection with a report that he had seen on July 7, 1947, what he believed were flying discs. RHOADS is supposed to have taken several pictures of the discs with a 620 Box Camera.\n\nA previous report of this reported sighting of flying discs was forwarded the Bureau on August 8, 1947.\n\nColonel SPRINGER has advised that GEORGE F. FUGATE, Jr., an intelligence agent of A-2 stationed at Long Beach, California, would arrive in Phoenix, Arizona, on or about September 2, 1947, and would be instructed to contact the Phoenix Field Division Office.\n\nIn accordance with Bureau Bulletin No. 42, Series 1947, it is felt that an agent from the Phoenix Field Division should interview WILLIAM RHOADS at 4333 North 14th Street, Phoenix, if RHOADS has not already been interviewed. Colonel SPRINGER indicated that Mr. FUGATE should, if possible, sit in on this interview.\n\nA copy of the report from A-2 dated August 4, 1947, along with three photographic prints of the pictures allegedly taken by Mr. RHOADS, is being enclosed for the Phoenix Field Division.\n\nWWR/jo\n62-2938\n2 cc Phoenix (Encl.) (AMSD)\n\nAIRMAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED 32 15 SEP 24 1947\n62-63894-110\nEX-56\n\nSUBJECT DISCS"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM : SAC, SAN FRANCISCO\nSUBJECT: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\n\nDATE: August 27, 1947\n\nATTENTION: ASSISTANT DIRECTOR D. M. LADD\n\nOn August 27, 1947, Lt. Colonel DONALD SPRINGER, A-2, Fourth Air Force, Hamilton Field, California, advised that the Area Intelligence Requirements Division Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2 Headquarters, requested that one WILLIAM RHOADS of Phoenix, Arizona, be completely interviewed in connection with a report that he had seen on July 7, 1947, what he believed were flying discs. RHOADS is supposed to have taken several pictures of the discs with a 620 Box Camera.\n\nA previous report of this reported sighting of flying discs was forwarded the Bureau on August 8, 1947.\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nP 27 1 33 PM\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\n65-477\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nFROM : SAC, Butte\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS SIGHTED BY FRED CHRISMAN AND HAROLD A. DAHL, TACOMA, WASHINGTON SECURITY MATTER - X\n\nDATE: August 27, 1947\n\nRe Seattle tels August 7, 1947, and August 12, 1947, in the above captioned matter.\n\nKENNETH ARNOLD, Route 1, Mountain View Drive, Boise, Idaho, was interviewed at the Boise Resident Agency, Boise, Idaho, by SA JOSEPH E. JETTE on August 19, 1947. Mr. ARNOLD advised that he received a letter from RAYMOND A. PALMER, Editor, Venture Press, Evanston, Illinois, dated June 26, 1947, in which Mr. PALMER advised that he was interested in publishing an article in his magazine concerning the flying discs seen by Mr. ARNOLD near Mount Rainier on June 24, 1947, which letter is being enclosed to the Bureau. Mr. ARNOLD stated that he did not give much thought to PALMER's letter until PALMER wrote him again and informed him that FRED CHRISMAN and HAROLD A. DAHL of Tacoma, Washington, had sent him fragments of a flying disc and that he would like him (ARNOLD) to go to Tacoma, Washington, and contact CHRISMAN and DAHL to find out if there was any truth in their story about the disc fragments. He stated that he did not answer PALMER's letter, but inquired of several friends for their opinion in the matter, and that they all told him if PALMER desired to pay his expenses to go to Tacoma, Washington, and look into this matter, that they did not see where he had anything to lose. He informed that he gave a talk at the Boise Ad Club on July 25, 1947, about the flying discs he had seen, and also of the request contained in PALMER's letter to go to Tacoma to investigate additional information regarding the finding of disc fragments by CHRISMAN and DAHL.\n\n3 ENCL. ATTACHED\nEX-46\n\nARNOLD advised that following his talk, he was approached by a person who said he knew both CHRISMAN and DAHL and that they were very reliable individuals. He stated that after thinking it over, he called PALMER by telephone and at which time he informed PALMER that he would contact CHRISMAN and DAHL and investigate the matter regarding the disc fragments, if PALMER would send him $200.00 expense money. He also advised that he received $200.00 expense money from PALMER via Western Union the next morning. He informed that he left for Tacoma, Washington, via his personal plane on July 30, 1947. Upon arriving at Pendleton, Oregon, he told his story to ED LEACH, CAA Inspector from Portland, Oregon, who advised him to go ahead with his investigation.\n\nHe stated that he landed at Barry's Airport in Tacoma and obtained a room at the Winthrop Hotel. He informed that he then called CHRISMAN by telephone to make arrangements to talk to him regarding the disc fragments. He advised that DAHL insisted on coming to the hotel room immediately. Upon arriving at Mr. ARNOLD's hotel room, DAHL stated that he wanted to forget about the discs as too many things had been happening to him, and advised Mr. ARNOLD to return home and forget about the discs. Mr. ARNOLD stated that he informed DAHL that he wanted to obtain all\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964\n\nR-344\n\nFBI\nINTERNAL SECURITY"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED\nP 27 1 33 PM\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT OF JUSTICE\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tAugust 27, 1947\nRe: Flying Discs - Tacoma, Wn.\n\nof the information available regarding the disc fragments and that he understood\nthat DAHL had told the press about the disc fragments, stating there was nothing\nto the story and that it was a phoney. DAHL immediately replied that his story\nwas not false or phoney, but that what he had seen and what had happened to him\nwas so unusual and fantastic that he wanted to forget about the disc fragments.\nDAHL then agreed to tell Mr. ARNOLD the following story, providing his name and\nthe Harbor Patrols would be left out:\n\nDAHL stated that his dog had been killed and his boy hurt and that\nthe wheel mount on his harbor patrol boat had been struck by disc fragments,\nand that about twenty ton of this material had fallen on the beach at Mauri\nIsland, and into the bay, and that a day after this incident, a man about forty\nyears of age had contacted him and told him, \"I know what you saw at Mauri Island\nand I'm telling you in a nice way to forget about it and keep your mouth shut.\"\nDAHL stated that he had obtained a large number of the fragments and had taken\nthem home, but that FRED TRICKMAN, his superior officer, had told him to send\nthe fragments to RAYMOND PALMER at Chicago; that PALMER would analyze the specimens\nfree of charge. DAHL continued stating that on the afternoon of June 21, 1947,\nhe was on patrol with his boy, dog, and two seamen near a cove on the east side\nof Mauri Island. He stated that he looked up through the windshield of the boat\nand at a height of about 1,000 feet, he saw six round circular grey objects\nthat looked like large inner tubes slightly squashed. These objects appeared\nto be about 100 feet across and in the center was a hole about twenty-five feet.\nDAHL said he assumed they were some type of a balloon. The object in the center\nwas lower than the rest of the other objects, and the other objects were circling\naround it. The object in the center seemed to be descending while the others\nfollowed. As the objects descended he saw port holes around the inside of the\nobject and what appeared to be windows. He stated that the object in the center\ndescended to about 500 feet, and that suddenly one of the circling objects came\ndown and touched the object in the center and remained in this position for a\nfew minutes, while the other objects continued to circle above. The object\nwhich had descended and touched the object in the center and which was lower,\nthen rose and took its place with the other objects.\n\nAll of the objects then started to rise and what appeared to be news-\npapers came out of the center of the object in the middle of the circling object.\nThen the sky seemed to rain lava, the lava coming from the object in the center\nand DAHL headed the boat for shore. He stated that the lava coming from the\nobject in the center appeared to be a white metal, and as it fell into the water,\nclouds of steam rose from the water. He stated that some of the lava landed on\nthe beach. He also stated that his dog was killed and also a sea gull in addition\nto his boy being hurt by the falling lava. Mr. ARNOLD continued stating that\nDAHL had said that he had taken pictures of the object and that if Mr. ARNOLD\nwanted them, he could have the negatives. DAHL took Mr. ARNOLD to the home of\nhis secretary that evening and showed him some of the disc fragments he had\npicked up, which were smooth on one side and rough on the other, according to\nMr. ARNOLD.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tAugust 27, 1947\nRe: Flying Discs - Tacoma, Wn.\n\nMr. ARNOLD stated he received a telephone call from the press upon\nreturning to his hotel room, and that the press wanted to know about the flying\ndisc fragments, and he told them that he was not talking until he had proved\nit. He stated he did not know how the press ever knew he was in Tacoma or had\nseen DAHL.\n\nMr. ARNOLD informed that at 9:30 A.M. the next morning, July 31, 1947, DAHL and CHRISMAN appeared at his hotel room and DAHL again asked him to go home\nand forget about the discs, that his story was not false, but that he had had\nenough trouble. DAHL said that his boy had been missed one morning and had been\nfound at Lust, Montana, waiting on tables in a cafe; that he did not know how\nhe had got there and that too many things were happening. Mr. ARNOLD stated\nthat when DAHL and CHRISMAN came to his hotel room, they had an armful of\nfragments, and that CHRISMAN had then informed about how he had seen an object\nresembling those seen by DAHL. CHRISMAN stated he had taken the patrol boat\non July 23, 1947, and had gone to Mauri Island and had found the beach littered\nwith lava. CHRISMAN stated he had looked up and had seen a balloon-like object\nwith port holes and windows, which had disappeared into a large cloud. ARNOLD\nstated that he asked DAHL again to see the pictures of the objects; that DAHL\nhad again agreed to show them to him. Mr. ARNOLD informed that he had then\nasked DAHL and CHRISMAN if it would be all right for him to call a friend,\nCaptain SMITH, who had also seen some flying discs and let him see the fragments\nand hear Mr. DAHL's story. DAHL dissented, however, CHRISMAN readily agreed.\nHe also stated that he had placed a call to Lieutenant BROWN and Captain\nDAVIDSON, Army intelligence officers at Hamilton Field, and had asked them to\ncome to his hotel, as they had previously instructed him to report to them any-\nthing of an unusual nature or of interest regarding the flying discs.\n\nHe stated he flew to Seattle and got Captain SMITH, and that Lieutenant\nBROWN and Captain DAVIDSON had come to his room about 4:00 P.M. Mr. ARNOLD\nadvised that he had asked Lieutenant BROWN just what he had found out regarding\nthe discs, and Lieutenant BROWN had confidentially informed him that they had\nobtained a picture of a disc, which appeared to be authentic, which picture\nwas taken by a man in Phoenix, Arizona. The picture, according to Lieutenant\nBROWN, was of a circular object with a hole in the center, and of another object\nthat looked like a flying wing. He stated that when Lieutenant BROWN told him\nthis that he immediately thought of the object seen by DAHL. He stated that\nafter hearing DAHL's story, Lieutenant BROWN and Captain DAVIDSON's attitude\nhad changed immediately, and that they appeared disinterested. It was then\nsuggested that they all go to Mauri Island and look for the disc fragments.\nLieutenant BROWN and Captain DAVIDSON stated that they had to return to Hamilton\nField immediately. Mr. ARNOLD stated that Lieutenant BROWN and Captain DAVIDSON\nwere very careful to gather up all of the fragments which had been brought to\nthe room by DAHL and CHRISMAN.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tAugust 27, 1947\nRe: Flying Discs - Tacoma, Wn.\n\nHe stated that the next morning he received a call from CHRISMAN,\nwho told him that Lieutenant BROWN and Captain DAVIDSON had been killed in a\nB-25 crash. He stated he does not know how CHRISMAN knew who had been in\nthe plane before anyone else. He also stated that during the above conference\nnumerous telephone calls were received from the press, wanting to know about\nthe conference. He stated that someone kept tipping the press off as to what\nwas going on and what was being said daily verbatim. He informed that PAUL\nLAND and MORELLO, United Press men at Tacoma, appeared to know all that took\nplace during the conference, and even knew of the crash of the B-25 and those\naboard, before the Army released this information. Mr. ARNOLD informed that\nwhen he received news of the crash, that he and Captain SMITH fully expected\nto be contacted by Army Intelligence, as they were the last people with\nLieutenant BROWN and Captain DAVIDSON, however, they were never contacted.\n\nHe further stated that he and Captain SMITH went down to the United\nPress to see what the survivors of the crash had informed about the crash and\nthat MORELLO had told them that the mysterious informant who had been calling\nhad told him that the B-25 had not crashed, but had been shot down, also that\nMORELLO's Army informant had said that an observer at Kelso, Washington, had\nseen the plane throw out a landing flare after the two survivors had jumped\nfrom the plane, and that the plane had gone into a steep dive and dove into a\nhillside, and further that one engine had been on fire, but that the fire\napparatus, protecting the engine, had failed to function. Mr. ARNOLD stated\nthat DAHL then came to see him and Captain SMITH and told them to go home and\nforget about the discs, that such things as the B-25 crash had been happening\nto him all along.\n\nMr. ARNOLD stated that he then called Mr. PALMER at Chicago and told\nhim that the deal was off and that if he wanted his $200.00 back, he could\nhave it; that two men had been killed and he was getting frightened of the\nwhole thing. He stated that PALMER informed him that it was all right with him\nto keep the $200.00, however, he would send him an additional check for the\ntrouble he had put to. Mr. ARNOLD advised that previous to this telephone call,\nCaptain SMITH had called his friend, MORRIS RODDY, of the Chicago Times and had\ntold him that he did not have any faith in Army Intelligence and for RODDY to\nconduct an investigation on PALMER and get to the bottom of this disc fantasy.\nMr. ARNOLD also advised that previous to the two above telephone calls, he had\nasked the press to investigate PALMER, as Army Intelligence had informed him tha\nthey could not find PALMER and knew nothing concerning him, and appeared not to\nbe interested in PALMER, who seemed to know more about the flying discs than\nanyone else.\n\nMr. ARNOLD stated that he personally thinks that PALMER's business is\na blind for something else and that DAHL and CHRISMAN will do anything that\nPALMER asks him to and will not talk unless PALMER tells him to. Mr. ARNOLD\nstated that he still wanted to get to the bottom of the disc fragment story\nso he and Captain SMITH had decided to go to Mauri Island on Sunday, August 3,\n\n-4-"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tAugust 27, 1947\nRe: Flying Discs - Tacoma, Wn.\n\n1947, however, when CHRISMAN was approached in this regard, and they had gone\nto the boat house where CHRISMAN kept his boat, CHRISMAN could not seem to\nmake the boat run, and after making some excuses that he had to return to his\noffice, had stated that he would return in about an hour, and by that time\nhis mechanic should have the boat repaired and they could all proceed to Mauri\nIsland. Mr. ARNOLD informed that CHRISMAN never returned, and that they were\nunable to locate CHRISMAN at any of the telephone numbers he had given them.\n\nThey located DAHL in a movie, according to ARNOLD, and that DAHL,\nafter making some efforts to locate CHRISMAN, had informed them that CHRISMAN\nhad left town for a few days. He further informed that about this time the\npress contacted them and told them an informant had called and told them\nthat CHRISMAN was on his way to Alaska in an Army plane.\n\nMr. ARNOLD advised that Captain SMITH had informed him that he had\nmade an appointment with Major SANDERS at McCord Field and intended to tell\nMajor SANDERS the complete story. During the afternoon, Captain SMITH and\nMajor SANDERS came to the hotel room, according to ARNOLD, and some of the\nfragments that DAHL had brought to Mr. ARNOLD's room, following the conference,\nwere shown to Major SANDERS. Upon viewing the fragments, Major SANDERS, accord-\ning to Mr. ARNOLD, stated that they were nothing but slag from the copper mill,\nhowever, before Major SANDERS left, he gathered up every fragment in the room,\naccording to Mr. ARNOLD, and took them with him. Mr. ARNOLD stated that he\nthen left for Boise, Idaho.\n\nMr. ARNOLD produced a letter dated August 5, 1947, from PALMER\nin which PALMER attempts to encourage Mr. ARNOLD to continue his investigation\ninto the flying discs. This letter is also being enclosed to the Bureau.\nMr. ARNOLD also gave SA JETTE a copy of the article sent to Mr. PALMER and\nto the Commanding General, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio, regarding his sighting\nof the nine discs near Mount Rainier on June 24, 1947. This article is also\nbeing enclosed to the Bureau. Mr. ARNOLD advised that he is vitally interested\nin this matter and knows that there must be something to the flying discsstory\nHe stated that he will do everything in his power to help the Bureau in this\nmatter. He also advised that he has no connection whatsoever with the Boise\nStatesman. He stated that the Boise Statesman has never paid him for any\ninformation he has given them. He informed that he sincerely believes that\nthe Boise Statesman is attempting, as he is, to get to the bottom of the flying\ndiscs story. Mr. ARNOLD stated that he has told the above story to Army\nIntelligence and Major SANDERS and to no one else, with the exception of\nSA JETTE.\n\nDAVE JOHNSON, Boise Statesman, Boise, Idaho, advised that the Boise\nStatesman has never paid Mr. ARNOLD for any news item he has given them, and\nhas never approached him in this manner. He stated that the Boise Statesman\nis not attempting to push the flying discs story, but merely attempting to\n\n-5-"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tAugust 27, 1947\nRe: Flying Discs - Tacoma, Wn.\n\nget to the bottom of the flying discs story as they sincerely believe there is\nsomeone who knows the story of the discs and that they actually exist, and\nthat the Army, when approached for information, merely state that they know\nnothing concerning them. JOHNSON also informed that Lieutenant BROWN and\nCaptain DAVIDSON had contacted him on July 20, 1947, at Boise, Idaho, regard-\ning the discs and that is how he met them.\n\nUnless advised th the contrary, no additional investigation is\nbeing conducted in this matter, and it is being considered as Referred Upon\nCompletion to the Seattle Office.\n\nJEJ:FPMc\nEncs. (REGISTERED)\nAIR MAIL\nSPECIAL DELIVERY\n\ncc - Seattle"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES\nDEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nOFFICIAL BUSINESS\n\nP. O BOX 308\nBUTTE, MONTANA\n\nEncs. to Bureau\nRe: Flying Discs\nButte file 65-477"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VENTURE PRESS\n305 STUDIO BUILDING\n1718 SHERMAN AVENUE\nEVANSTON, ILLINOIS\n\nAUG 5 1947 CHICAGO\n\nMr. Kenneth Arnold,\nBox 387\nBoise, Idaho"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"VENTURE PRESS\n305 STUDIO BUILDING\n1718 SHERMAN AVENUE\nEVANSTON, ILLINOIS\n\nAugust 5, 1947\n\nMr. Kenneth Arnold,\nBox 387,\nBoise, Idaho\n\nDear Mr. Arnold:\n\nIt seems that Mr. Maurice Roddy of the Chicago Times got the story from Mr. Smith, because he called me, told me he was running it. I knew only what you'd told me over the phone. Now, it seems the newspapers are pestering the very devil out of all you fellows. Crisman wired me for instructions, and I told him to say nothing to the newspapers, because he'll look silly if the army explains this as \"meteors\" or something like that.\n\nI don't blame you for being alarmed, but I trust you've had no trouble in your flying since then. Let's get that straight--there's no horrible plot involved. It's probably true that the two men killed were just accidents. It could be true that it was not an accident, but I don't think there was any connection with the disks, or anything of that nature, nor is the material from Murray Island to blame.\n\nCertainly I don't think you'd suffer from completing your report on your mission, and sending me your affidavit. Also, you'll have some money coming for that, and no sense to tossing that out of the window. It is unfortunate that the thing seemed so big you had to call in army intelligence, but it will take them a long time to proceed to the point I've reached inthis disk mystery. You see, you aren't the first to see them. They've been known for nearly forty years, and I have ample proof of that. But your experience was the first real break toward a solution. I'd hate to have you drop the matter when all remaining to do is to file your report with me.\n\nCrisman is willing to contribute his share. I hope you will too. This thing must not be hushed up and forgotten. It's much too important to the people of America, if not the world. And no censorship of the matter is legal. You needn't fear that angle. You certainly did a bang-up job of investigation, also you wrote one of the best articles about your June 24 experience I've ever seen. Please do the same on this last business. You owe it to those two men who were killed.\n\nI'd also like to know what developed on those pictures you took of those \"disks\", or whatever they were."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-2-\n\nIn short, I'd like to have you continue to keep in contact with me, and relay to me anything further you learn.\n\nIn turn, I'll give you the whole story, which I'm just about ready to break (not in the newspapers). And if it was as dangerous as you seem to suspect, I'm afraid I'd have been a corpse long ago!\n\nBut, and this is all you need remember, those disks are not red corpuscles in your eyeball, and they are not something we can forget about with an ostrich in the sand attitude. We've got to solve them, public hysteria or no. As for that hysteria, if laughing is hysteria, that's all the hysteria I've noticed!\n\nBy all means, I want to thank you for the work you've done. You know your business, and you handled it like a major. But I'm hoping you do the easy part now and get that report on paper.\n\nA check for your June 24 article is going out to you.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nR. A. Palmer\n\nR. A. Palmer"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"-2-\n\nIn short, I'd like to have you continue to keep in contact\nwith me, and rely on me anything further you learn.\n\nIn turn, I'll give you the whole story, when the time is\nready to break (not in the newspapers). And if I was as\ndangerous as you seem to suspect, I'm afraid I'd have been\na corpse long ago!\n\nAnd this is all you need remember, these dicks are not\nred corpuscles in your eyeballs, and they are not something\nwe can forget about with an ostrich in the sand attitude.\nWe've got to solve them, public hysteria or no. As for that\nhysteria, if laughing is hysteria, that's all the hysteria\nI've noticed!\n\nYou have done a very good job and I'm very pleased with it.\nYou know your business, and you handled it like a major.\nBut I'm hoping you do the very part now and get that report\non paper.\n\nA check for your June 19 article is going out to you.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\n[signature]\nR.A. Palmer\n\n69-83894-111"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"VENTURE PRESS\n305 STUDIO BUILDING\n1718 SHERMAN AVENUE\nEVANSTON, ILLINOIS\n\nResidence\nR. A. Palmer\nGreenleaf\n3083\nBusiness\nWabash\n5200\n\nJune 26, 1947\n\nMr. Kenneth Arnold,\nBoise, Idaho\n\nDear Mr. Arnold:\n\nI have just read an account in the Chicago Tribune concerning an aerial train composed of at least 9 units shaped like a pie-plate and silvery in color, traveling at 1200 m.p.h. near Mount Ranier, as witnessed by you while flying in the vicinity.\n\nThis is quite important to me, because I have in my possession numerous independent confirmations of what you saw, although none in as great detail as your account. I am interested in publishing an article in our magazine, written from a personal account by yourself, and accompanied by pix of yourself, plane, and rough sketches by yourself, of what you saw.\n\nIf you care to do this for me, I am prepared to pay our usual rates of 2¢ perword, plus $5.00 for each photograph you can provide, or for each sketch which can be used by our art staff to illustrate the article.\n\nIncluded in this material, we'd like a short biographical sketch of yourself as \"author background\" material. The article would appear under your by-line.\n\nIf you are not interested, I would at least appreciate a letter from you, confirming the newspaper story.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nRaymond A. Palmer\nRaymond A. Palmer\nEditor, The Venture Press\n\nIn your reply, please use airmail."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"SOME LIFE DATA ON KENNETH ARNOLD\n\nI was born March 29, 1915 in Sebeka, Minnesota. My father's name was Edward Erb Arnold; my mother's maiden name was Bertha E. Barden. I was a resident of Minnesota until I was six years old when my family moved to Scobey, Montana, where they homesteaded. My grandfather, Roland C. Arnold also homesteaded in Scobey, Montana, and became quite prominent in political circles along with Burton K. Wheeler, the famous Montana senator.\n\nI went to grade school and high school at Minot, North Dakota. I entered scouting at twelve years of age and achieved the rank of Eagle scout before I was fourteen. My former scout executive was H. H. Prescott, now a regional commissioner for the Boy Scouts in Kansas City, Kansas.\n\nAs a boy, I was interested in athletics and was selected as an all-state end in 1932 and 1933 in the state of North Dakota. I entered the U. S. Olympic trials in fancy diving in 1932; I was a Red Cross Life Saving Examiner during the years of 1932, '33 and '34. I taught swimming and diving at scout camps and the municipal pool in Minot, North Dakota. I went to the University of Minnesota, where I swam and did fancy diving under Neils Thorpe, and also played football under Bernie Bierman, but upon entering college I was unable to continue my football career because of an injured knee. My high school football coach was Glenn L. Jarrett, who is now the head football coach of the University of North Dakota. I had little or no finances, and my ambition in furthering my education in college was through my athletics. As a boy in Minot, North Dakota, I did a good deal of dog sled racing, placing first with my dog in 1930 in the Lion's Club Dog Derby.\n\nIn 1938 I went to work for Red Comet, Inc., of Littleton, Colorado, a manufacturer of automatic fire fighting apparatus. In 1939 I was made district manager for them over a part of the western states, and in 1940\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Page 2 - Some Life data on Kenneth Arnold\n\nI established my own fire control supply known as the Great Western Fire\nControl Supply. I have been working as an independent fire control\nengineer since, and I handle, distribute, sell and install all types of\nautomatic and manual fire fighting equipment in the rural areas over five\nwestern states.\n\tMy flying experience started as a boy in Minot, North Dakota, where\nI took my first flying lesson from Earl V. Vance, who was originally from\nGreat Falls, Montana. Due to the high cost at that time, I was unable to\ncontinue my flying and did not fly of any great consequence until 1943.\nI was given my pilot certificate by Ed Leach, a senior CAA inspector of\nPortland, Oregon, and for the last three years have owned my own airplane\ncovering my entire territory with same and flying from forty to one hun-\ndred hours per month since. Due to the fact that I use an airplane\nentirely in my work, in January of this year I purchased a new Callair\nairplane, which is an airplane designed for high altitude take-offs and\nshort rough field usage.\n\tIn the type of flying I do, it takes a great deal of practice and\njudgment to be able to land in most any cow pasture and get out without\ninjuring your airplane; the runways are very limited and the altitude is\nvery high in some of the fields and places I have to go in my work. To\ndate, I have landed in 823 cow pastures in mountain meadows, and in over\na thousand hours a flat tire has been my greatest mishap.\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"By Kenneth Arnold\n\nThe following story of what I observed over the Cascade mountains,\nas impossible as it may seem, is positively true. I never asked nor wanted\nany notoriety for just accidently being in the right spot at the right\ntime to observe what I did. I reported something that I know any pilot\nwould have reported. I don't think that in any way my observation was\ndue to any sensitivity of eye sight or judgment than what is considered\nnormal for any pilot.\nOn June 24th, Tuesday, 1947, I had finished my work for the Central\nAir Service at Chehalis, Washington, and at about two o'clock I took off\nfrom Chehalis, Washington, airport with the intention of going to Yakima,\nWashington. My trip was delayed for an hour to search for a large marine\ntransport that supposedly went down near or around the southwest side of\nMt. Rainier in the state of Washington. (This transport has been dis-\ncovered at the time of this writing--July 29, 1947.)\nI flew directly toward Mt. Rainier after reaching an altitude of\nabout 9,500 feet, which is the approximate elevation of the high plateau\nfrom which Mt. Rainier rises. I had made one sweep of this high plateau\nto the westward, searching all of the various ridges for this marine ship\nand flew to the west down and near the ridge side of the canyon where\nAshford, Washington, is located.\nUnable to see anything that looked like the lost ship, I made a\n360 degree turn to the right and above the little city of Mineral, start-\ning again toward Mt. Rainier. I climbed back up to an altitude of\napproximately 9,200 feet.\nThe air was so smooth that day that it was a real pleasure flying\nand, as most pilots do when the air is smooth and they are flying at a\nhigher altitude, I trimmed out my airplane in the direction of Yakima,\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 2\nWashington, which was almost directly east of my position and simply sat\nin my plane observing the sky and the terrain.\n There was a DC-4 to the left and to the rear of me approximately\nfifteen miles distant, and I should judge, at 14,000 feet elevation.\n The sky and air were as clear as crystal. I had not flown more\nthan two or three minutes on my course when a bright flash reflected on\nmy airplane. It startled me as I thought I was too close to some other\naircraft. I looked every place in the sky and couldn't find where the\nreflection had come from until I looked to the left and the north of Mt.\nRainier where I observed a chain of nine peculiar looking aircraft flying\nfrom north to south at approximately 9,500 feet elevation and going,\nseemingly, in a definite direction of about 170 degrees north to south.\n They were approaching Mt. Rainier very rapidly, and I merely\nassumed they were jet planes. Anyhow, I discovered that this was where\nthe reflection had come from, as two or three of them every few seconds\nwould dip or change their course slightly, just enough for the sun to\nstrike them at an angle that reflected brightly on my plane.\n These objects being quite far away, I was unable for a few seconds\nto make out their shape or their formation. Very shortly they approached\nMt. Rainier, and I observed their outline against the snow quite plainly.\n I thought it was very peculiar that I couldn't find their tails\nbut assumed they were some type of jet plane. I was determined to clock\ntheir speed, as I had two definite points—Mt. Rainier and Mt. Adams—I\ncould clock them by and the air was so clear that it was very easy to see\nobjects and determine their approximate shape and size at almost fifty\nmiles.\n I remember distinctly that my sweep second hand on my eight day\nclock, which is located on my instrument panel, read one minute to 3 P.M.\nas the first object of this formation passed the southern edge of Mt.\nRainier. I watched these objects with great interest as I had never before\nobserved airplanes flying so close to the mountain tops, flying directly"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 3\nsouth to southeast down the hog's back of a mountain range. I would\nestimate their elevation could have varied a thousand feet one way or\nanother up or down, but they were pretty much on the horizon to me which\nwould indicate they were near the same elevation as I was.\n They flew like many times I have observed geese to fly in a rather\ndiagonal chain-like line as if they were linked together. They seemed to\nhold a definite direction but rather swerved in and out of the high moun-\ntain peaks. Their speed at the time did not impress me particularly, be-\ncause I know that our army and air forces had planes that went very fast.\n That kept bothering me as I watched them flip and flash in the sun\nright along their path was the fact that I couldn't make out any tail on\nthem, and I am sure that any pilot would justify more than a second look\nat such a plane.\n I observed them quite plainly, and I estimate my distance from them,\nwhich was almost at right angles, to be between twenty to twenty-five\nmiles. I know they must be very large to observe their shape at that\ndistance, even on as clear a day as it was that Tuesday. In fact, I com-\npared a sous fastener or cowling tool I had in my pocket with them—hold-\ning it up on them and holding it up on the DC-4 that I could observe at\nquite a distance to my left—and they seemed smaller than the DC-4; but\nI should judge their span would have been as wide as the furthest engines\non each side of the fuselage of the DC-4.\n The more I observed these objects, the more upset I became, as I\nam accustomed and familiar with most all objects flying whether I am close\nto the ground or at higher altitudes. I observed the chain of these\nobjects passing another high snow-covered ridge in between Mt. Rainier\nand Mt. Adams, and as the first one was passing the south crest of this\nridge the last object was entering the northern crest of the ridge.\n As I was flying in the direction of the particular ridge, I measured\nit and found it to be approximately five miles so I could safely assume\nthat the chain of these saucer-like objects were at least five miles long."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 4\nI could quite accurately determine their pathway due to the fact that\nthere were several high peaks that were a little this side of them as\nwell as higher peaks on the other side of their pathway.\n As the last unit of this formation passed the northern-most high\nsnow-covered crest of Mt. Adams, I looked at my sweep second hand and it\nshowed that they had travelled the distance in one minute and forty-two\nseconds. Even at the time this timing did not upset me as I felt confi-\ndent after I landed there would be some explanation of what I saw.\n A number of news men and experts suggested that I might have been\nseeing reflections or even a mirage. This I know to be absolutely false,\nas I observed these objects not only through the glass of my airplane\nbut turned my airplane sideways where I could open my window and observe\nthem with a completely unobstructed view.\n Even though two minutes seems like a very short time to one on the\nground, in the air in two minutes time a pilot can observe a great many\nthings and anything within his sight of vision probably as many as fifty\nor sixty times.\n I continued my search for the marine plane for another fifteen or\ntwenty minutes and while searching for this marine plane, what I had just\nobserved kept going through my mind. I became more disturbed, so after\ntaking a last look at Tieton Reservoir I headed for Yakima.\n I might add that my complete observation of these objects, which\nI could even follow by their flashes as they passed Mt. Adams, was around\ntwo and one-half or three minutes — although, by the time they reached\nMt. Adams they were out of my range of vision as far as determining shape\nor form. Of course, when the sun reflected from one or two or three of\nthese units, they appeared to be completely round; but, I am making a\ndrawing to the best of my ability, which I am including, as to the shape\nI observed these objects to be as they passed the snow covered ridges as\nwell as Mt. Rainier."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 5\nWhen these objects were flying approximately straight and level,\nthey were just a black thin line and when they flipped was the only time\nI could get a judgment as to their size.\n These objects were holding an almost constant elevation; they did\nnot seem to be going up or to be coming down, such as would be the case\nof rockets or artillery shells. I am convinced in my own mind that they\nwere some type of airplane, even though they did not conform with the\nmany aspects of the conventional type of planes that I know.\n Although these objects have been reported by many other observers\nthroughout the United States, there have been six or seven other accounts\nwritten by some of these observers that I can truthfully say must have\nobserved the same thing that I did; particularly, the descriptions of the\nthree Western Air Lines employees of Cedar City, Utah, the pilot from\nOklahoma City, the locomotive engineer in Illinois, Mr. John Corlett a\nUnited Press correspondent of Boise, Idaho, Dave Johnson, news editor at\nthe Boise Daily Statesman, Captain Smith-Co-pilot Stevens-and Marty\nMorrow of United Air Lines, and Captain Charles F. Cebian and Jack Harvey\nof United Air Lines both of whom only last night, July 28, 1947, made\ntheir observation on United Air Line flight 105 westbound out of Boise.\n It is my opinion that descriptions could not be very accurate\ntaken from the ground unless these saucer-like disks were at quite a great\nheight and there is a possibility that all of the people who observed\npeculiar objects could have seen the same thing I did; but, it would have\nbeen very difficult from the ground to observe these for more than four\nor five seconds, and there is always the possibility of atmospheric\nmoisture and dust near the ground which could distort one's vision while\nair observers I would judge to be very accurate.\n I have in my possession letters from all over the United States\nand Europe from people who process that these objects have been observed\nover other portions of the world, principally Sweden, Bermuda, and"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 6\nCalifornia.\n I would have given almost anything that day to have had a movie\ncamera with a telephoto lens and from now on I will never be without one—\nbut, to continue further with my story. When I landed at Yakima, Washing-\nton, airport I described what I had seen to my very good friend, Al Baxter\nwho is the General Manager of Central Aircraft Company. He listened\npatiently and was very courteous but in a joking way didn't believe [REDACTED]\n I did not accurately measure the distance between these two moun-\ntains until I landed at Pendleton, Oregon that same day where I told a\nnumber of pilot friends of mine what I had observed and they did not\nscoff or laugh but suggested they might be guided missiles or something\nnew. In fact, several former Army pilots informed me that they had been\nbriefed before going into combat overseas that they might see objects of\nsimilar shape and design as I described and assured me that I wasn't\ndreaming or going crazy.\n I quote Sonny Robinson, a former Army Air Force pilot who is now\noperating dusting operations at Pendleton, Oregon \"What you observed, I\nam convinced, is some type of jet or rocket propelled ship that is in the\nprocess of being tested by our government or even it could possibly be by\nsome foreign government\".\n Anyhow, the news that I had observed these spread very rapidly\nand before the night was over I was receiving telephone calls from all\nparts of the world; and, to date I have not received one telephone call\nor one letter of scoffing or disbelief. The only disbelief that I know\nof was what was printed in the papers.\n I look at this whole ordeal as not something funny as some people\nhave made it out to be. To me it is mighty serious and since I evidently\ndid observe something that at least Mr. John Doe on the street corner or\nPete Andrews on the ranch has never heard about, is no reason that it\ndoes not exist. Even though I openly invited an investigation by the Army"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 7\n\nand the FBI as to the authenticity of my story or a mental and physical examination as to my capabilities, I received no interest from these two important protective forces of our country until two weeks after my observation. I will go so far as to assume that if our Military Intelligence was not aware of what I observed and reported to the United and Associated Press and over the radio on two different occasions which apparently set the nation buzzing, they would be the very first people I could expect as visitors.\n\nI have received lots of requests from people who told me to make a lot of wild guesses. I have based what I have written here in this article on positive facts and as far as guessing what it was I observed, it is just as much a mystery to me as it is to the rest of the world.\n\nMy pilot's license is 333687. I fly a Callair airplane, which is a three place single engine land ship that is designed and manufactured at Afton, Wyoming an an extremely high performance, high altitude airplane that was made for mountain work. The national certificat of my plane is 33355.\n\n(no smoke trails or vapor trails)\n\nTop\nvery Bright\nlike Silver as\nmirror\n\none looked\nlike this the\nsecond from last\nof the formation\nseemed a little smaller\n\nDirection of travel\n\nSide View (black)\nColor\n\nappears Black\noutline is shine\nagainst snow of\nMt Rainier"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This is a copy of the same\narticle I sent to Com General.\nWright Field.\nDayton Ohio\n\nJuly 29, 1947\n\nAIR MAIL\n\nMr. Raymond A. Palmer\nEditor, The Venture Press\n305 Studio Building\n1718 Sherman Avenue\nEvanston, Illinois\n\nDear Mr. Palmer:\n\nI am enclosing the material you requested together with photographs, and also a sketch of my life history.\n\nYours very truly,\nKenneth Arnold\nKenneth Arnold\n\nThis copy is\nthe same as I sent to Palmer\nKen Arnold\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Form 3811\nRev. 1-4-40\n\nRETURN RECEIPT\n\nReceived from the Postmaster the Registered or Insured Article, the original number of which appears on the face of this Card.\n\n1 Raymond A Palmer\n(Signature or name of addressee)\n\n2 Roger P Graham\n(Signature of addressee's agent—Agent should enter addressee's name on line ONE above)\n\nDate of delivery 7-31, 1947\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—12421"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Post Office Department\nOFFICIAL BUSINESS\n\nPENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, $300\n(GPO)\n\nPOSTMARK OF DELIVERING OFFICE\n\nEVANSTON\nJUL 31\n5 30 PM\n1947\nILL.\n\nReturn to K Arnold\n(NAME OF SENDER)\nStreet and Number, or Post Office Box, Box 387\n\nREGISTERED ARTICLE\nNo. 1240\n\nINSURED PARCEL\nNo.\n\nBOISE,\nIDAHO."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\n\nAUG 14 1947\n\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI SEATTLE 8-14-47 5-18 PM FB\n\nDIRECTOR FBI ROUTINE\n\nBRUCE ARMSTRONG. M. A. NICHOLS. FLYING DISCS INTERNAL SECURITY-X.\n\nNEWSPAPER SEATTLE POST INTELLIGENCER CARRIED ARTICLE ON AUGUST TWELVE OF REPORT OF FLYING DISCS SEEN BY ONE BRUCE ARMSTRONG OF BOEING AIRCRAFT COMPANY, AND M. A. NICHOLS, ONE ONE TWO FIVE, SOUTH WEST ONE HUNDRED AND SECOND STREET, SEATTLE. INVESTIGATION OF SIGHTING BY ARMSTRONG REVEALS OBJECT TO HAVE BEEN PIECE OF BURNT PAPER WHICH HAD BEEN SEEN BY CONTROL TOWER AT BOEING FIELD. INVESTIGATION OF SIGHTING BY M. A. NICHOLS INDICATES OBJECT WAS A WEATHER BALLON. LETTER TO FOLLOW.\n\nA AND H PLS\n\n9-19 PM OK FBI WASH DC GAR\n\nEX-83"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAUG 14 9 20 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nPORTLAND FBI 8-14-47 -1-38 PM\n\nDIRECTOR FBI\n\nFLYING DISCS - SECURITY MATTER - X. MR. JOHN BARTLETT, AGATE BEACH, NEAR OCEAN LAKE, OREGON HAS REPORTED THAT THE EVENING OF AUGUST SEVEN, AT ELEVEN THIRTY PM HE SIGHTED WHAT HE BELIEVED TO BE A DISC BRIGHT IN COLOR WHICH HE WAS ABLE TO OBSERVE FOR ONLY A SHORT TIME BECAUSE OF ITS SPEED. BARTLETT TO BE INTERVIEWED.\n\nEND\n\nFLYING DISCS - SECURITY MATTER DASH X. INVESTIGATION OF REPORTED SIGHTING BY ARMSTRONG, A CIVILIAN WHO HAS BEEN SEEN BY FBI OFFICE AT PORTLAND, OREGON, TO BE INTERVIEWED BY H. A. BIRCHELL, EMPLOYEE OF PACIFIC TELEPHONE COMPANY, AND IN A. BIRCHELL, ONE OF THE FOUR SOUTHWEST ONE HUNDRED AND SECOND STREET, PORTLAND.\n\nRECEIVED-LADD FBI\nAUG 15 6 48 PM '47"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAUG 15 1947 TELETYPE\n\nPORTLAND FBI 8-15-47 -1-48 PM\n\nDIRECTOR FBI\n\nFLYING DISCS - SECURITY MATTER DASH X. A MR JOHN BARTLETT, AGATE BEACH, NEAR OCEAN LAKE, OREGON HAS REPORTED THAT THE EVENING OF AUGUST SEVEN, AT ELEVEN THIRTY PM HE SIGHTED WHAT HE BELIEVED TO BE A DISC BRIGHT IN COLOR WHICH HE WAS ABLE TO OBSERVE FOR ONLY A SHORT TIME BECAUSE OF ITS SPEED. BARTLETT TO BE INTERVIEWED.\n\nBOBBITT\n\nEND\nHOLD PLS\n\n5-50 PM OK FBI WASH DC L"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WASHINGTON 17 FROM PHILADELPHIA 8-7-47 9-30 PM DST\nDIRECTOR FBI URGENT Flying Discs\n\nFLYING OBJECT REPORTED OVER PHILA. AUGUST SIX, NINETEEN FORTY-SEVEN. SABOTAGE. THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER ON AUGUST SEVEN, NINETEEN FORTY SEVEN CARRIED ITEM CONCERNING FLYING OBJECTS OBSERVED OVER PHILA. ON EVENING OF AUGUST SIX, FORTY SEVEN. PEOPLE REPORTED AS OBSERVING SUCH INTERVIEWED BY PHILA. OFFICE, AND SUBSTANTIALLY FURNISHED FOLLOWING INFORMATION. AT TEN FORTY FIVE, AUGUST SIX, NINETEEN FORTY SEVEN, A BLUISH WHITE FLAMING OBJECT WAS OBSERVED AT A HEIGHT OF ONE THOUSNXXX THOUSAND FEET OR MORE OVER PHILADELPHIA PROCEEDING FROM A NORTHEASTERLY TO A SOUTHWESTERLY DIRECTION. THIS OBJECT LEFT A TAXXX TRAIL OF SMOKE WHICH LASTED FOR ABOUT TWO SECONDS AND W HISSING OR BUZZING SOUND WAS AUDIBLE AFTER THE SIGHT OF SUCH OBJECT. PEOPLE OBSERVING THE SAME SEEMED RESPONSIBLE AND RELIABLE, AND INCLUDE A FORMER XXX FORMER ARMY AIR CORPS PILOT. HE DOES NOT BELIEVE ABOVE MENTIONED OBJECT WAS A JET PROPELLED PLANE SINCE THE ACCOMPANYING SOUND WAS NOT AS LOUD AS THAT MADE BY JET PROPELLED PLANES. HE ESTIMATED ABOVE OBJECT TRAVELED AT A RATE OF\nEND PAGE ONE\n\nEX-41\n\ncc: Mr. Ladd\nMr. Baumgardner"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\nABOUT FOUR HUNDRED TO FIVE HUNDRED MILES PER HOUR. INQUIRIES BEING\nMADE BY ARMY AND NAVY INTELLIGENCE FORCES, PHILA. ON THE REQUEST\nOF THE PHILA. OFFICE TO DETERMINE IF EITHER ARMY OR NAVY ARE DOING\nANY EXPERIMENTAL WORK ON NEW TYPES OF PLANES IN VICINITY OF PHILA.\nTHEY WILL ADVISE PHILA. OFFICE IN NEXT SEVERAL DAYS. LETTER OF\nDETAILS WILL FOLLOW.\nBOARDMAN\nHOLD PLS"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAUG 7 9 35 PM '47\nF.B.I. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nRECEIVED\nAUG 29 10 56 AM\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nAUG 8 5 37 PM '47\nU.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE\nDIRECTOR"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n65-480\nTO : Director FBI\nFROM : SAC Butte\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nDATE: August 20, 1947\nRefer teletype to the Bureau dated August 15, 1947.\nEnclosed please find the newspaper account carried by the Twin Falls, Idaho \"Times News\" on August 15, together with a sheet of paper on which A. C. URIE attempted to sketch his impressions of the instrument which he claims to have seen.\nConcerning URIE's sketches, it may be noted that he believed the rolled outer edge which he attempted to create in his drawing to have been about a foot through. URIE likewise believed that the tubing or exhaust flame which he and his sons claim to have seen was about a foot through and extended at least to the back end of the device. The flame did not appear to taper off nor to widen out toward the back.\nBILLY and KEITH URIE stated that they could see a knot on the side of the device from which the flames were shooting, and that they could see daylight between the exhaust flame and the side of the device. The flames did not leave any smoke or odor.\nThe URIE boys thought that the \"side view\" sketch should show that the device was more sharply angled from bottom to top, while URIE himself thought that it was more streamlined and curved. URIE said that the instrument came to a pointed or rounded top.\nIn his notations, URIE mistakenly said that he had seen it on Thursday. During interview, he stated that it actually had been on Wednesday, August 13, 1947, when he and his sons saw the contrivance about 1:00 P.M.\nURIE explained that he had sent his boys to the river to get some rope from his boat. When he thought they were overdue, he went outside his tool shed to look for them. He noticed them about 300 feet away looking in the sky and he glanced up to see what he called the flying disc. He said he could only see it for a moment before it disappeared behind a hill which obscured his view.\nURIE further stated that the contrivance was about seventy-five feet in the air. URIE resides in the depths of the Snake River Canyon, which is about four hundred feet deep and twelve hundred feet across at that place. According to his account, the contrivance was about three hundred feet below the rim of the canyon and he saw it against the steep walls of the canyon on the far side. He described its color as sky blue and stated that he doubted if it could be seen against the sky. He likewise said that it was purely by chance that he saw it. It did not spin like a top.\nRECORDED\nINDEXED\n62-83894-115\nEX-65"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n65-480\nTO : Director FBI\nFROM : SAC Butte\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nDATE: August 20, 1947\nRefer teletype to the Bureau dated August 15, 1947.\nEnclosed please find the newspaper account carried by the Twin Falls, Idaho \"Times News\" on August 15, together with a sheet of paper on which A. C. URIE attempted to sketch his impressions of the instrument which he claims to have seen.\nConcerning URIE's sketches, it may be noted that he believed the rolled outer edge which he attempted to create in his drawing to have been about a foot through. URIE likewise believed that the tubing or exhaust flame which he and his sons claim to have seen was about a foot through and extended at least to the back end of the device. The flame did not appear to taper off nor to widen out toward the back.\nBILLY and KEITH URIE stated that they could see a knot on the side of the device from which the flames were shooting, and that they could see daylight between the exhaust flame and the side of the device. The flames did not leave any smoke or odor.\nThe URIE boys thought that the \"side view\" sketch should show that the device was more sharply angled from bottom to top, while URIE himself thought that it was more streamlined and curved. URIE said that the instrument came to a pointed or rounded top.\nIn his notations, URIE mistakenly said that he had seen it on Thursday. During interview, he stated that it actually had been on Wednesday, August 13, 1947, when he and his sons saw the contrivance about 1:00 P.M.\nURIE explained that he had sent his boys to the river to get some rope from his boat. When he thought they were overdue, he went outside his tool shed to look for them. He noticed them about 300 feet away looking in the sky and he glanced up to see what he called the flying disc. He said he could only see it for a moment before it disappeared behind a hill which obscured his view.\nURIE further stated that the contrivance was about seventy-five feet in the air. URIE resides in the depths of the Snake River Canyon, which is about four hundred feet deep and twelve hundred feet across at that place. According to his account, the contrivance was about three hundred feet below the rim of the canyon and he saw it against the steep walls of the canyon on the far side. He described its color as sky blue and stated that he doubted if it could be seen against the sky. He likewise said that it was purely by chance that he saw it. It did not spin like a top.\nRECORDED\nINDEXED\n62-83894-115\nEX-65"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BT 65-480\nAs the machine went by the URIE place, the trees over which it almost directly passed (Mormon Poplars) did not just bend with the wind as if a plane had gone by, but, in URIE's words, \"spun around on top as if they were in a vacuum.\"\nKEITH URIE, eight years of age, said he first saw the machine coming down the canyon, heading from east to west and following the contours of the ground. BILLY, age ten, saw it almost immediately. Both watched it fly out of sight behind a tree in a matter of moments. They said they then ran to their Father and learned that he too had seen the machine.\nURIE seemed completely sincere about the incident. He said his wife and daughter were in the house at the time and had not seen the machine. He questioned his brother, who also lives in the canyon, but his brother had been eating at the time and had seen nothing. URIE and his two boys maintained that they had never before seen one of the discs. URIE, when interviewed, appeared to be a sober, middle-aged man.\nJOHN BROSNAN, the \"Times News\" reporter who originally furnished Special Agents with information about the incident, likewise stated that URIE appeared completely sincere about the machine.\nNo further attempt was made to locate L. W. HAWKINS, inasmuch as J. H. BROWN, who was with HAWKINS at the time, was interviewed. BROWN's name was withheld from the newspaper because HAWKINS and BROWN were fishing at Salmon dam while BROWN was supposed to have been working in Twin Falls.\nBROWN said simply that he and HAWKINS could hear a roar. They looked up and could see two instruments flying at a great height, which BROWN mentioned might have been between four thousand and six thousand feet. However, he said he had no idea how large the devices were and consequently, they may have been several miles away. He said that he and HAWKINS were satisfied they had seen something and they were very doubtful that they had seen two planes.\nRJG:FO'S\nEnc. (2)\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE\n62-83894-115\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Heads Up, Folks! The Discs Are Flying Ag\n\nThis is an artist's conception of the flying disc that A. C. Urie saw sweeping through Snake river canyon six miles west of Blue Lakes ranch. It seemed to be powered by jets emitting a fiery glow on both sides, and could well be the inspiration for something new in women's hats, such as a \"flying saucer\" creation. (Drawing by Vic Goertzen-staff engraving)\n\nFlying Saucer Reported Flashing Down Canyon At 1,000 Miles Per Hour; Two Others Are Seen\n\nBy JOHN BROSNAN\n\nJust as Magic Valley and the nation were starting to let go of lampposts after reeling under a welter of flying saucer reports, two more Twin Falls county men revived speculation on the mystery with vivid descriptions of discs they saw.\n\nFrom A. C. Urie, who operates the Auger Falls Trout farm six miles west of Blue Lakes ranch in Snake river canyon, came perhaps the most detailed account of one of the fast-flying objects the nation has yet produced.\n\nThe flying saucer Urie saw was skimming along through Snake river canyon at a height of about 75 feet at 1 p. m. Wednesday. At 9:30 a. m. the same day, L. W. Hawkins, Twin Falls county commissioner and former county sheriff from Filer, also saw two circular objects soaring along at a great height near Salmon dam 40 miles southwest of Twin Falls.\n\nHere is Urie's eye-witness description of the flying discs seen by him and his son, Keith, 8, and Billy, 10:\n\n\"I obtained a close-up view of the flying saucer as it passed by the trout farm at 1 p. m. Aug. 13 going down Snake river canyon at a height of about 75 feet from the canyon floor. I would estimate the speed at about 1,000 miles per hour.\"\n\nUrie explained that the incident occurred while the two boys were coming across the river from the north side in a boat. He had become concerned about what was delaying them, and had walked down toward the river to see if they were all right.\n\n\"I had a side view at a distance of about 300 feet and almost on a level with the thing,\" Urie continued. \"Two of my boys, Keith and Billy, were below me and they also saw it at about a 45-degree angle. They both got a bottom and a side view, and we were all looking at it from the south side of the\"\n\n(Continued on Page 8, Column 6)"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TIMES-NEWS, TWIN FALLS, IDAHO\n\nTwin Falls News in Brief\n\nTo Visit Here\nAurelia Stark, Portland, Ore., is arriving here soon to visit Mr. and Mrs. Phil A. Snow.\n\nBirths\nA daughter was born Thursday to Mr. and Mrs. Rudy Wageman, Filer, at the Twin Falls county general hospital maternity home.\n\nReturn From College\nMr. and Mrs. Robert Van Engelen and Fred Van Engelen have returned from Moscow where they attended the summer session of the University of Idaho.\n\nMiss Povey Visits\nKathleen Povey, former Spanish instructor at Twin Falls high school, is visiting here this week. She now teaches Spanish in a high school at South Pasadena, Calif.\n\nAuto Recovered\nClifford J. Roth, 529 Fifth avenue north, reported the theft of his automobile from near the Legion hall to Twin Falls police at 5:42 p. m. Thursday and 18 minutes later reported he had recovered the vehicle.\n\nVisits Schuberts\nAgnes Schubert, Monterey Park, Calif., is visiting her brother and sister-in-law, Mr. and Mrs. Mel Schubert, this month. Miss Schubert, former art instructor at Twin Falls high school, now teaches in California.\n\nAttend Funeral\nOut-of-town persons who attended the Donald Spencer funeral include Mrs. George Robbins, Inglewood, Calif.; Mr. and Mrs. Clifton Adams, Mr. and Mrs. Ernie Vidun, Wayne and Dorothy Adams, and Mrs. Norma Lou Veneman, all Pocatello; Mrs. Sarah Adams, Mrs. Will Severe, Mr. and Mrs. Lyman Adams, Mr. and Mrs. Orvil Adams, Mr. and Mrs. Howard Adams, Mr. and Mrs. Ellsworth Adams, all Oakley; Mrs. Judson Tolman, Logan, Utah, and Mrs. Alice Miller, Salt Lake City.\n\nWilliam Munger, 38, Passes Here\nWilliam H. Munger, 38, 305 Locust street north, died at 11 a. m. Friday at the Twin Falls county general\n\nMarriage License\nKenneth Miracle and Esta Jay Pearson, both of Twin Falls, received a marriage license Thursday at the courthouse.\n\nRector Returns\nThe Rev. E. Leslie Rolls, rector of the Episcopal Church of the Ascension, and Mrs. Rolls returned Thursday from Tacoma, Wash., where they spent their vacation.\n\nReturn to Kansas City\nE. L. Hoffman and his son, Eugene, with Lucille Gahr, has returned to Kansas City after visiting Mr. and Mrs. H. B. Hogue. Mrs. Hogue is his mother.\n\nOn Trip to East\nMrs. John Hawes and her nephew, Pat Boland, have gone to Boston and New York City on a two-week's vacation to visit relatives.\n\nVisiting Sister\nMrs. Robert Swanson, Denver, Colo., is visiting her sister, Mrs. Kenneth Kail. Mrs. Swanson is a former resident of Rupert.\n\nBuilding Permit\nApplication for a permit to build a 12 by 20-foot private garage of frame construction was filed Friday in the office of the city clerk by Lola M. Vazquez, 350 Elm street, who estimated the cost at $400.\n\nMoose to Meet\nMembers of the fellowship degree of the Moose lodge will meet at 12:30 p. m. Sunday at the Moose hall, officials announced Friday. Refreshments will be served by Women of the Moose.\n\nHarry Piper, 71, Claimed by Death\nBUHL, Aug. 15—Harry Sylvester Piper, 71, Buhl plumber since 1926, died at 9:20 p. m. Thursday at the Twin Falls county general hospital from complications following an emergency operation.\n\nFour Parleys Set on Cassia School Plan\n(From Page One)\nSublett; 14, Almo; 24, Hazel; Bridge; 30, Springdale; 31, View; 32, Moulton.\n\nFuneral Held for Infant at Wendell\nWENDELL, Aug. 15 — Graveside services were held Thursday evening for Marian Kay Ems, Wendell.\n\nJenkins May Try Run Tests Friday\nWENDOVER, Utah, Aug. 15 (AP)— Ab Jenkins, holder of most of the world's land speed records..."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nUNITED STATES\nDEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\n\nOFFICIAL BUSINESS\n\nENCLOSURE TO BUREAU\n\nButte File 65-480\n\n62-83894-115"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'Saucer' Seen\nFlying Down\nSnake Gorge\n(From Page One)\nriver facing toward the north. The boys saw it coming about half a mile up the canyon, and we all lost sight of it in less than a mile.\"\nWhile the impression was still vivid in their minds, the three got together and made rough sketches of what they had seen. These, in turn, were the basis for the artist's conception of the strange affair by Vic Goerizen of Twin Falls for the Times-News.\n\"It was all one color—sort of a light sky blue with a red, tubular fiery glow at the side of the top or hood,\" Urie continued.\n\"The canyon floor is rough at that particular point, and it rode up and down over the hills and hollows at a speed indicating some type of control faster than the reflexes of man. It is my opinion that it is guided by instruments and must be powered by atomic energy, as it made very little noise—just a s-w-i-s-h as it passed by.\"\nUrie described the size as about 20 feet long by 10 feet high and 10 feet wide, giving it an oblong shape. It might be described as looking like an inverted pie-plate or broad-brimmed straw hat that had been compressed from two sides.\nPressed for his candid opinion of just what it was, Urie said that he was convinced that there was something to this flying saucer situation. \"I know a number of the people who have also seen them and I know that they're not just imagining something or trying to get their names in the paper,\" Urie commented.\n\"I do know that it scared the boys and made me feel pretty uneasy,\" he added.\nTracing down a rumor that County Commissioner Hawkins had seen an unusual object in the air on the same day as Urie's experience, the Times-News called him at his Filer home.\n\"Yes, I did,\" he replied without hesitation. \"I'll have to admit I've been skeptical all along until I saw it with my own eyes. I can't say what it was, but I can say there's something in the air.\"\nHawkins related that while at Salmon dam Wednesday morning, a sound resembling the echo of a motor caused him to look upward, and there he saw two circular objects that reflected light. They were traveling at a great speed and higher than most airplanes, according to Hawkins.\nAside from this, he declined to add details, except to say, \"There's something in the air.\"\nHis general description, however, corresponded closely to those of hundreds of persons who reported seeing flying saucers after Kenneth Arnold, a Boise businessman, had touched off the deluge by telling of coming upon nine disc-like objects while he was flying in his private plane in Washington.\nThereafter, the nation became increasingly flying saucer conscious, creating a state of mind that made it possible for four teen age Twin Falls boys to cause a mild sensation when they built a model flying disc and tossed into a local yard July 10. This was subsequently revealed as a hoax, following investigation by the army and FBI.\nThereafter the saucer reports tapered off into a few scattered incidents until the question was revived by this week's occurrences.\nSpeculation has ranged from mention that the discs could be army or navy guided missile experiments, or that they could be similar experiments by some foreign country, to \"something out of this world.\"\nWhatever, they are, a lot of people have seen \"something.\""} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OUT OUR WAY\nLET THAT ALONE, YOU FATHEAD, AN' GO ON ABOUT YOUR BUSINESS!\nTHAT'S FROM 'TH' C IS TR A R LETTIN DO WHO O\nTHE BUMP-OF\nSIDE GLANCES\nCOPR. 1946 BY NEA SERVICE, INC.\n\"If you quit driving to work save enough money to buy Jun the yard!\"\nCARNIVAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-115\nA close up view of the Flying Saucer Fablar 8 inch flame.\n10 ft. high\n(pipe of sounding)\n20 ft. long\nA close up view of the flying saucer as it passed by the Augen Falls Trout farm at 100 per augin going down Snake River canyon at a height of about 75 ft. from canyon floor at a speed of about 1000 per.\nI had a side view at a distance of about 300 ft. and almost on a level, and two of my boys was below me, and saw it at about a 45 degree angle they got both a bottom and side view we were all looking at on the south side looking toward the north. The boys saw it coming about 1/2 mi up canyon we all lost sight of it in less than a mile.\nIt was all one color sort of a light sky blue with a red tubular fiery glow on the side of hood.\nThe canyon floor is rough along here and it rode up and down over the hills and hollows.\nIt is my opinion that it is guided by instruments and must be powered by atomic power as it made very little noise just a swish as it passed by.\nKeith 8, Billy 10.\nBoys coming across river from a side in a boat."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"top hood.\nfront view\nback view\nside view\n10 ft. high\n10 ft.\n20 ft. long\nbottom view\n10 ft. wide.\n20 ft. long\nThe bottom and side view of the flying disc going down Snake river canyon at 1 p.m. Thursday at a distance of about 75 ft. up from ground. speed about 1000 per. very little noise just a swish as it passed by.\nA.C. Urie — (owns Trout Farm)"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nSTANDARD FORM NO. 64\nTO: D. M. Tadd\nFROM: E. G. Fitch\nSUBJECT:\nDATE: August 20, 1947\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: NND 90986\nThere is attached hereto copies of two memoranda dated July 24, 1947, and July 16, 1947, concerning Byron B. Savage, Field Engineer, Radio Corporation of America, Dallas, Texas, 416 N. W. 29th Street, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and Kenneth Arnold, Box 387, Boise, Idaho. These memoranda were made available to Special Agent S. W. Reynolds of the Liaison Section by General Schulgen of the Army Air Forces Intelligence. General Schulgen requested that the Bureau conduct a background investigation of these two individuals mentioned in the attached memoranda since they were among the first to sight the alleged flying discs. He indicated that he desired that the investigation be directed toward ascertaining whether or not either of these individuals have any subversive background and to ascertain whether or not they had any ulterior motives for reporting these sightings.\nRECOMMENDATION\nIt is recommended this memorandum be forwarded to the Internal Security Section.\nAttachment\nSWR:rhr\nHandwritten: Col George Garrett T.D.A.F. advised Bureau cannot any investigation. He was advised that a review of Bureau pay energy information ... individuals ... could be identified with these."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nOCAPN/KDS:cp\n\n#3724-I 24 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM TO THE SECURITY OFFICER, OCAMA, TINKER FIELD.\n\n SUBJECT: BYRON B. SAVAGE, Field Engineer, Radio Corporation\n of America, Dallas, Texas. Residence: 416 N. W. 29th Street,\n Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.)\n\n RE: Flyind Disc.\n\n On 23 July 1947, BYRON B. SAVAGE was interviewed at his residence,\n416 N. W. 29th Street, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, relating to his alleged\nviewing of a flying disc over the vicinity of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.\n\n Subject, whose age is 38, advised he is married and has one child,\nand is presently the holder of a Private Pilot's License, No. 39101\n(Single Engine, Land). Subject averred he has extensively studied electron-\nics, sound engineering and aeronautics, and his present occupation, which is\nField Engineer for Radio Corporation of America, offices of which are\nlocated in Dallas, Texas, is that of installing theater sound equipment.\nSAVAGE stated that between the days 17 May to 21 May 1947, just after dusk,\nhe observed an object which he believed to be a small aircraft in the south.\nSAVAGE advised that the sun had just gone down and the moon had not arisen\non the horizon. SAVAGE related that he and his wife had just departed\ntheir residence and had started to enter their car in the driveway at\n416 N. W. 29th Street, Oklahoma City. He judged the time to be between\n8:30 p.m. and 9:00 p.m., and the lights from the city of Oklahoma City\nappeared to be shining on this object when he first saw it. He judged the\nobject to be about 160° in the south when he first saw it, and as it moved\ntoward him he remarked to his wife that \"a big white plane was coming over.\"\n\n SAVAGE stated that when this object was at a 45° angle from him, he\nrealized it was not a conventional type aircraft, and it appeared elliptical\nat first and as it moved closer it appeared perfectly round and was flat.\nSAVAGE advised the object, which appeared to him as a disc, had no appearance\nof being spherical and had a ratio of diameter to the thickness of approxi-\nmately 10 to 1, appearing thicker in the center, but this could not be\npositively ascertained. SAVAGE judged the object to be at an altitude of\nbetween 10,000 and 18,000 feet, and it left no trailing effects. SAVAGE\nrelated that it appeared to be in bulk as big as the bulk of six B-29s at\nan altitude of approximately the same height. SAVAGE advised that the object\nwas in his vision approximately 15 to 20 seconds and travelled at a speed\nwhich he judged to be approximately three times that of jet-propelled aircraft.\n\n62-83894-116\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Memo to the Security Officer, OCAMA, Tinker Field, dtd 7/24/47, File\n3724-I.\n\n SAVAGE stated that there were no protrusions on this object and as it\nwent by he listened for a sound of noise, and at one time thought he dis-\ntinguished a swishing sound like the rushing of air. This swishing sound\noccurred a few seconds after this object had passed him. SAVAGE averred\nthis sound was not very loud and did not last very long, and it is very\npossible that the sound could have been his imagination or expectation, as\nhe was not sure of the sound. SAVAGE related that he called his wife to\nsee this object but it had disappeared before she could focus her eyes on\nit. Subject stated that the object appeared to diminish in size and\nspeed as it moved away, and it was moving in a direction of 350° to the\nnorth. Subject further stated that the object appeared to be frosty white in\ncolor at all times.\n\n SAVAGE advised that he has held a pilot's certificate since 1934 and\nhas been flying since 1929. He advised that he would be glad to answer any\nfurther inquiries and will cooperate in every way possible. SAVAGE stated\nhe was sure this object was not a meteor and in his opinion it must be\nradically built and powered, probably atomic.\n\n\n\n\n KALMAN D. SIMON\n C.I. U.S. Army"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nIncident\n4AF 1208 I\n16 July 1947\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICER IN CHARGE:\n\n 1. On 12 July 1947, Mr. Kenneth Arnold, Box 387, Boise, Idaho,\nwas interviewed in regard to the report by Mr. Arnold that he saw 9\nstrange objects flying over the Cascade Mountain Range of Washington\nState on July 25th. Mr. Arnold voluntarily agreed to give the interviewer\na written report of exactly what he had seen on the above mentioned date.\nThe written report of Mr. Arnold is attached to this report as Exhibit A.\n\nAGENT'S NOTES: Mr. Arnold is a man of 32 years of age, being married and\nthe father of two children. He is well thought of in the community in\nwhich he lives, being very much the family man and from all appearances\na very good provider for his family. Mr. Arnold has recently purchased a\nhome on the outskirts of Boise, recently purchased a $5,000 airplane in\nwhich to conduct his business to the extent of which is explained in the\nattached exhibit. It is the personal opinion of the interviewer that Mr.\nArnold actually saw what he stated that he saw. It is difficult to believe\nthat a man of Mr. Arnold's character and apparent integrity would state\nthat he saw objects and write up a report to the extent that he did if he\ndid not see them. To go further, if Mr. Arnold can write a report of the\ncharacter that he did while not having seen the objects that he claimed he\nsaw, it is the opinion of the interviewer that Mr. Arnold is in the wrong\nbusiness, that he should be writing Buck Rogers fiction. Mr. Arnold is\nvery outspoken and somewhat bitter in his opinions of the leaders of the\nU. S. Army Air Forces and the Federal Bureau of Investigation for not having\nmade an investigation of this matter sooner. To put all of the statements\nmade by Mr. Arnold in this report would make it a voluminous volume. However,\nafter having checked an aeronautical map of the area over which Mr. Arnold\nclaims that he saw the objects it was determined that all statements made by\nMr. Arnold in regard to the distances involved, speed of the objects, course\nof the objects and size of the objects, could very possibly be facts. The\ndistances mentioned by Mr. Arnold in his report are within a short distance\nof the actual distances on aeronautical charts of this area, although Mr.\nArnold has never consulted aeronautical charts of the type the Army uses.\nMr. Arnold stated that this business had suffered greatly since his report\non July 25 due to the fact that at every stop on his business routes, large\ncrowds of people were waiting to question him as to just what he had seen.\nMr. Arnold stated further that if he, at any time in the future, saw anything\nin the sky, to quote Mr. Arnold directly, \"if I saw a ten story building\n\n\nFRANK M. BROWN, S/A, CIC 4th AF\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nENCLOSURE\n62-83894-116"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nIncident\n4AF 1208 I\n\nflying through the air I would never say a word about it\", due to the\nfact that he has been ridiculed by the press to such an extent that he\nis practically a moron in the eyes of the majority of the population of\nthe United States.\n\n\n1 Incl: Exhibit \"A\"\n\n\n\nFRANK M. BROWN, S/A, CIC 4th AF\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n62-83894-116\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nSOME LIFE DATA ON KENNETH ARNOLD\n\n I was born March 29, 1915 in Subeka, Minnesota. My father's\nname was Edward Erb Arnold; my mother's maiden name was Bertha\nE. Barden. I was a resident of Minnesota until I was six years\nold when my family moved to Scobey, Montana, where they home-\nsteaded. My grandfather, Roland C. Arnold also homesteaded in\nScobey, Montana, and became quite prominent in political circles\nalong with Burton K. Wheeler, the famous Montana senator.\n\n I went to grade school and high school at Minot, North\nDakota. I entered scouting at twelve years of age and achieved\nthe rank of Eagle scout before I was fourteen. My former scout\nexecutive was H. H. Prescott, now a regional commissioner for\nthe Boy Scouts in Kansas City, Kansas.\n\n As a boy, I was interested in athletics and was selected\nas an all-state end in 1932 and 1933 in the state of North\nDakota. I entered the U. S. Olympic trials in fancy diving in\n1932; I was a Red Cross Life Saving Examiner during the years\nof 1932, '33 and '34. I taught swimming and diving at scout\ncamps and the municipal pool in Minot, North Dakota. I went\nto the University of Minnesota, where I swam and did fancy\ndiving under Neils Thorpe, and also played football under Bernie\nBierman, but upon entering college I was unable to continue my\nfootball career because of an injured knee. My high school foot-\nball coach was Glenn L. Jarrett, who is now the head football\ncoach of the University of North Dakota. I had little or no\nfinances, and my ambition in furthering my education in college\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\nEXHIBIT \"A\"\n62-83894-116"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"COPY\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nPage 2 - Some Life data on Kenneth Arnold\n\nwas through my athletics. As a boy in Minot, North Dakota, I\ndid a good deal of dog sled racing, placing first with my dog\nin 1930 in the Lions Club Dog Derby.\n\n In 1938 I went to work for Red Comet, Inc. of Littleton,\nColorado, a manufacturer of automatic fire fighting apparatus.\nIn 1939 I was made district manager for them over a part of the\nwestern states, and in 1940 I established my own fire control\nsupply known as the Great Western Fire Control Supply. I have\nbeen working as an independent fire control engineer since,\nand I handle, distribute, sell and install all types of auto-\nmatic and manual fire fighting equipment in the rural areas over\nfive western states.\n\n My flying experience started as a boy in Minot, North\nDakota, where I took my first flying lesson from Earl T. Vance,\nwho was originally from Great Falls, Montana. Due to the high\ncost at that time, I was unable to continue my flying and did\nnot fly of any great consequence until 1943. I was given my\npilot certificate by Ed Leach, a senior CAA inspector of\nPortland, Oregon, and for the last three years have owned my\nown airplane covering my entire territory with same and flying\nfrom forty to one hundred hours per month since. Due to the\nfact that I use an airplane entirely in my work, in January\nof this year I purchased a new Callair airplane, which is an\nairplane designed for high altitude take-offs and short rough\nfield usage.\n\n In the type of flying I do, it takes a great deal of\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"COPY\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nPage 3- Some Life Data on Kenneth Arnold\n\npractice and judgment to be able to land in most any cow\npasture and get out without injuring your airplane; the\nrunways are very limited and the altitude is very high in\nsome of the fields and places I have to go in my work. To\ndate, I have landed in 832 cow pastures in mountain meadows,\nand in over a thousand hours a flat tire has been my greatest\nmishap.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nAUG 14 1947\nTELETYPE\n\nFBI SEATTLE 8-14-47 5-21 PM FB\n\nDIRECTOR FBI URGENT\n\nL. R. BRUMMETT. SID DECKER. FLYING DISCS. INTERNAL SCURITY-X.\nAUGUST FOURTEEN NINETEEN FORTYSEVEN SEATTLE POST INTELLIGENCER\nPUBLISHED ARTICLE TO EFFECT THAT L. R. BRUMMETT, BOX TWO FIVE FOUR RED-\nMOND, WASH, AND SIDNEY DECKER BOX TWO NINE SIX REDMOND, WASHINGTON HAD\nSIGHTED TWO DISCS AT APPROXIMATELY NINE AM AUGUST THIRTEEN NINETEEN\nFORTYSEVEN. UPON INTERVIEW DECKER STATED THAT TWO VERY BRIGHT OJECTS\nTRAVELING AT AN EXTREME RATE OF SPEED WERE NOTICED BY HIM AS HE WAS\nSTANDING NEAR THE REDMOND POST OFFICE. DECKER DESCRIBED THE OBJECTS\nAS HAVING NO WINGS, NO TAIL, AND BOTH ENDS WERE TAPERED. DECKER ADDED\nTHAT THE OBJECTS RESEMBLED A BELLY TANK AND THAT THEY WERE NOISELESS.\nTHE OBJECTS WERE VERY BRIGHT AND TRAVELING IN A NORTHEASTERLY DIRECTION\nOVER REDMOND, WASHINGTON, ONE A BIT BEHIND AND A LITTLE ABOVE THE OTHER\nMAINTAINING EQUAL RATES OF SPEED FOR APPROXIMATELY EIGHT SECONDS AT\nWHICH TIME THEY DISAPPEARED FROM VIEW. DECKER ADDED THAT THEY WERE\nHIGHER THAN A PLANE GENERALLY TRAVELS. BRUMMETT ADVISED THAT HE NOTICED\nTHE OBJECTS AND CALLED DECKERS ATTENTION TO THEM AND ALSO POINTED THEM\nOUT TO A MRS MAMIE ENGLISH. BRUMMETT STATED THAT HE SAW TWO OBJECTS\nFLYING AT A FORTYFIVE DEGREE ANGLE NORTHEASTERLY OVER REDMOND AND\n\n162-83894-117"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"PAGE TWO\nTRAVELING AT LEAST THREE TIMES FASTER THAN A PLAN. BRUMMETT ADDED THAT\nHE WATCHED THE OBJECTS FROM FIVE TO EIGHT SECONDS AT WHICH TIME THEY\nDISAPPEARED FROM SIGHT. ACCORDING TO BRUMMETT THE OBJECTS WERE DESCRIBED\nAS BEING NOISELESS, HAVING NO WINGS OR TAIL, LIGHTER THAN ALUMINUM,\nTAPERED AT BOTH ENDS AND ONE STAYED A LITTLE BEHIND AND A BIT ABOVE THE\nOTHER AND BOTH MAINTAIND EQUAL RATES OF SPEED. FROM BRUMMETTS OBSERVATIO\nHE WAS UNABLE TO DECIDE WHETHER THE OBJECTS WERE FLAT OR ROUND. MRS\nMAMIE ENGLISH STATED THAT WHEN BRUMMETT CALLED HER ATENTION TO THE\nOBJECTS SHE TOOK A PASSING GLANCE AT THE SKY AND COULD OFFER NO\nDESCRIPTION OTHER THAN THEY LOOKED LIKE TWO SILVER BALLS TRAVELING\nAT A FAST RATE OF SPEED.\n\nWILCOX\n\nEND\nSHOLD PLS\n9-28 PM OK FBI WASH DC GAR"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED TELETYPE UNIT\nAug 14 9 29 PM '47\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Director, FBI\nDATE: September 20, 1947\nFROM : SAC, Chicago\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\nRICHARD F. SHAVER - Informant\n\nReference is made to your letter dated August 11, 1947 in the above captioned matter.\n\nSheriff FRED BAU, McHenry County, Woodstock, Illinois, advised that he had received no reports of flying discs in the community of Lily Lake, Illinois. He further stated that he had no record or knowledge of RICHARD F. SHAVER of Lily Lake.\n\nDeputy Sheriff FRANK KELLER, Lily Lake, Illinois, advised that he was personally acquainted with RICHARD SHAVER, whom he described as a successful writer of mystery stories. He said he had no information to the effect that SHAVER was mentally unsound and he believed him to be a substantial citizen.\n\nMrs. R. LANNES, Lily Lake Realty Company, advised she had sold property to SHAVER on two occasions and was well acquainted with SHAVER and his wife. She knew of no derogatory information concerning him.\n\nRICHARD SHARPE SHAVER was interviewed at Lily Lake, Illinois and advised that he was the featured writer of mystery stories for \"Amazing\" magazine, which magazine is edited by RAYMOND PALMER of the Ziff-Davis Publishing Company, Chicago, Illinois. SHAVER at the outset stated that PALMER had told him the FBI would contact him regarding flying discs.\n\nSHAVER indicated that the telegram received by the War Department, referred to in referenced letter, was probably sent by one of his readers, unknown to him. He said that he wrote mystery stories based on his firm conviction that under the earth are various caverns formerly inhabited by a super race, who have since fled to other planets. This region of caverns he calls Lemuria. He stated he believes there is valuable machinery and other resources in these caverns. He therefore explained flying discs, which he calls \"space ships\", as the mode of travel of the Lemurians coming from other planets to reclaim the valuable machinery. SHAVER indicated that his theories had aroused a wide following among readers of \"Amazing\" magazine.\n\nSHAVER exhibited an article from an edition of the \"Chicago Times\" for Sunday, August 3, 1947. The article stated that on June 24, 1947, on Murray Island, off the Washington Coast, there had occurred a mysterious explosion which was believed to have been caused by a guided missile or rocket. It further stated that the date of the explosion was the same date on which one KENNETH ARNOLD, a private pilot, sighted the first flying disc at Boise, Idaho.\n\n62-63894-118\nINDEXED\nRECORDED\nSEP 24 1947\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nSEP 26 4 56 PM\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\nRe: FLYING DISCS\nSeptember 20, 1947\n\nThe article went on to state that it was believed at the time that there was some correlation between the flying disc and the Murray Island explosion, and that RAYMOND PALMER, Chicago magazine editor, had employed ARNOLD to investigate and \"cover\" the Murray Island explosion.\n\nThe article went on to state that on August 1, 1947, at Tacoma, Washington, there was a conference among officials of the Army and Navy, who discussed the possible relation between the Murray Island explosion and the appearance of flying discs. ARNOLD was supposed to have been in attendance at this conference. At the conference, authorities brought samples of a lava oxide metal, allegedly taken from the scene of the Murray Island explosion.\n\nThe article stated that following the conference, two pilots left by plane for Hamilton Field, California, carrying samples of the lava oxide metal. The article further reported that the plane crashed near Hamilton Field, California, and it was conjectured that the plane had exploded by reason of the combustion of the lava oxide metal it carried.\n\nFrom the above newspaper article, it should be noted that RAYMOND PALMER, SHAVER's employer, was from the start \"exploiting\" the appearance of the flying discs, possibly to enhance the appeal of SHAVER's stories. It is possible, therefore, that the entire flying disc theory was conceived by PALMER and SHAVER.\n\nOAG:lab\n100-18999\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Director, FBI\nDATE: 9-17-47\nFROM : SAC, Anchorage\nSUBJECT: Flying Disks\n\nReference is made to Bureau Bulletin No. 42 dated July 30, 1947.\n\nThis is to advise that two army officers reported to the Office of the Director of Intelligence, headquarters Alaskan Department, at Fort Richardson, Alaska, that they had witnessed an object passing through the air at a tremendous rate of speed which could not be judged as to miles per hour.\n\nThe first officer stated that his attention was attracted to this airborne object, and he in turn pointed it out to the second officer. The object appeared to be shaped like a sphere and did not give the impression of being saucer-like or comparable to a disk. The first officer stated that it would be impossible to give minute details concerning the object, but that it appeared to be approximately two or three feet in diameter and did not leave any vapor trail in the sky.\n\nBoth officers attempted to determine the approximate altitude of the object, and from a weather group stationed nearby it was determined that cloud formations at the time the object was sighted were \"scattered above 10,000 feet.\" The object was noted to be traveling below the cloud formation.\n\nThe first officer stated that in his opinion the object appeared to be metallic and was silver in color, much like the color of many airplanes.\n\nThe second officer stated substantially the same facts and also pointed out that the object remained within his vision for approximately 15 to 20 seconds. When sighted, the object was traveling due south at a speed considerably in excess of any plane. The second officer stated that the object appeared to him to be approximately 10 feet in diameter and compared it to half the size of a full moon on an ordinary night. The second officer based the altitude at approximately the same as the first officer except for the fact that due to the size he believed the object to be, he estimated the altitude to be only approximately 3,000 or 4,000 feet. The object appeared broadside to the second officer, and no evidence of a spinning motion or reflection was noted. As to the color, the second officer pointed out that it appeared to be a dull metal finish.\n\n62-63894-119\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nP 26 1 48 PM\nRECEIVED\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nRECEIVED\nLIAISON SECTION\nRECEIVED\nF.B.I.\nS 23 8 57 AM '47"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Letter to Director, FBI\nRe: Flying Disks\t\t\t\t9-17-47\n\nIn conclusion, the second officer pointed out that one of the remarkable features of this object was that it was definitely traveling against the wind.\n\nThe exact date of the sighting of this object was not furnished this office, and inasmuch as it occurred previously to the receipt of Bureau instructions in this matter, no further investigation is being conducted by this office unless specifically requested to do so by the Bureau.\n\n\n100-1403\nHLM:GWH"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Director, FBI\t\t\tDATE: September 18, 1947\nFROM : SAC, Philadelphia\nSUBJECT: FLYING OBJECT REPORTED OVER PHILADELPHIA\nAUGUST 6, 1947\nSABOTAGE\n\nRemytel August 7 last.\n\nMiss ELEANOR NADDLE, 2114 Hobart Street, Philadelphia, who is employed by the GEORGE R. GREENWALD MANUFACTURING COMPANY, 1524 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, advised as follows:\n\nBetween 10:30 and 10:45 p.m. on August 6, 1947, she was sitting on the steps of her home with CECELIA FINE. She was facing north and observed a large white object traveling at a very fast rate of speed to the south. There was a buzzing sound, not too loud but plainly audible, just after this object passed through the air. This white object left in its trail a thin streak of smoke, which was grayish in color.\n\nMiss CECELIA FINE, 5617 Arlington Street, Philadelphia, who is employed by the PRESSMAN & GUTMAN COMPANY, INC., Room 1140, P.S.F.S. Building, Philadelphia, stated she was sitting on the steps of Miss NADDLE's home on the evening of August 6, 1947, around 10:45 p.m. engaging in conversation with Miss NADDLE, when Miss NADDLE abruptly stopped in the middle of her conversation and appeared to be frightened. Miss FINE at that time was sitting in a position in which she was facing south. She did not see any object in the sky after noting Miss NADDLE's change of expression, but she did hear a slight buzzing sound.\n\nJOHN SNYDER, 1440 Vankirk Street, Philadelphia, an insurance agent, who was a former pilot of B-24's in the Army Air Corps, advised as follows:\n\nHe was sitting on the steps of his home around 10:45 p.m. on August 6, 1947, with his wife; and his neighbors, the KELLY family, were sitting on their steps next door to the residence of SNYDER. All of the above parties were facing east. SNYDER noticed at this time an object, emitting a bluish-white flame, passing quickly through the air. The object was traveling from northeast to southwest. Using his experience in the Army Air Corps as a guide, SNYDER estimated the above object was between 1000 and 3000 feet in the air and traveling at a rate of between 400 to 500 miles an hour. This object did not lose elevation as it passed through the air and left either smoke or a condensation trail in its former path, which lasted for about two seconds. A hissing sound accompanied the passing of this object. This sound was moderate and not nearly as loud as the noise accompanying the passage of a rocket ship.\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED 37 SEP 1947\n62-83894-12\nCOPIES DESTROYED 270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\nTO : Director, FBI\t\t\tDATE: September 18, 1947\nFROM : SAC, Philadelphia\nSUBJECT: FLYING OBJECT REPORTED OVER PHILADELPHIA AUGUST 6, 1947 SABOTAGE\n\nRemytel August 7 last.\n\nMiss ELEANOR NADDLE, 2114 Hobart Street, Philadelphia, who is employed by the GEORGE R. GREENWALD MANUFACTURING COMPANY, 1524 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, advised as follows:\n\nBetween 10:30 and 10:45 p.m. on August 6, 1947, she was sitting on the steps of her home with CECELIA FINE. She was facing north and observed a large white object traveling at a very fast rate of speed to the south. There was a buzzing sound, not too loud but plainly audible, just after this object passed through the air. This white object left in its trail a thin streak of smoke, which was grayish in color.\n\nMiss CECELIA FINE, 5617 Arlington Street, Philadelphia, who is employed by the PRESSMAN & GUTMAN COMPANY, INC., Room 1140, P.S.F.S. Building, Philadelphia, stated she was sitting on the steps of Miss NADDLE's home on the evening of August 6, 1947, around 10:45 p.m. engaging in conversation with Miss NADDLE, when Miss NADDLE abruptly stopped in the middle of her conversation and appeared to be frightened. Miss FINE at that time was sitting in a position in which she was facing south. She did not see any object in the sky after noting Miss NADDLE's change of expression, but she did hear a slight buzzing sound.\n\nJOHN SNYDER, 1440 Vankirk Street, Philadelphia, an insurance agent, who was a former pilot of B-24's in the Army Air Corps, advised as follows:\n\nHe was sitting on the steps of his home around 10:45 p.m. on August 6, 1947, with his wife; and his neighbors, the KELLY family, were sitting on their steps next door to the residence of SNYDER. All of the above parties were facing east. SNYDER noticed at this time an object, emitting a bluish-white flame, passing quickly through the air. The object was traveling from northeast to southwest. Using his experience in the Army Air Corps as a guide, SNYDER estimated the above object was between 1000 and 3000 feet in the air and traveling at a rate of between 400 to 500 miles an hour. This object did not lose elevation as it passed through the air and left either smoke or a condensation trail in its former path, which lasted for about two seconds. A hissing sound accompanied the passing of this object. This sound was moderate and not nearly as loud as the noise accompanying the passage of a rocket ship.\n\nF.B.I.\nP 20 1 46 PM\nRECEIVED\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nRECEIVED"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSeptember 18, 1947\n\nJOHN J. KELLY, 1442 Vankirk Street, who is a retired police officer of the Philadelphia Police Department, advised as follows:\n\nAround 10:45 p.m. on August 6, 1947, he and his wife were sitting on the steps of their home, when KELLY noticed an object, resembling to him a giant firecracker, pass quickly through the air. KELLY heard no noise, but the object had completely passed from view in a southern direction within a split second. It left a fiery trail for about 100 feet. August 6, 1947, was a clear night, and no storm was brewing. KELLY was sure the object he saw was no falling star, and he noted the above object did not seem to be falling but maintained the same altitude.\n\nThe wives of SNYDER and KELLY verified the accounts of their husbands as to the above-mentioned object.\n\nIt is to be noted that the SNYDERS and the KELLYS live in Northeast Philadelphia near Oxford Circle, which is about ten miles removed from the residence of Miss NADDLE. Miss NADDLE's residence is located in the western part of Philadelphia. The Misses NADDLE and FINE are not known to the above-mentioned KELLYS and SNYDERS. It is further noted the observation of Miss NADDLE, the KELLYS, and the SNYDERS roughly correspond. All of the above persons seem reliable and not the type to seek publicity or to spread rumors.\n\nMiss NADDLE and JOHN KELLY called the \"Inquirer\", Philadelphia newspaper, and inquired if it could offer any explanation as to what they had seen. A representative of that paper had advised Miss NADDLE and KELLY that the object they saw may have been some product of an oil refinery or chemical company in their neighborhood.\n\nBoth the Offices of Naval Intelligence and Army Intelligence in Philadelphia were requested by the Philadelphia Office to ascertain if either the Army or the Navy was doing any experimental work on new types of planes or equipment, in the vicinity of Philadelphia. Such was done with negative results. The Office of Naval Intelligence indicated that an explosion had occurred at the CHARLES LENNIG CHEMICAL COMPANY on August 6, 1947.\n\nS. A. GIMBEL, Safety Department of the CHARLES LENNIG CHEMICAL COMPANY, INC., 5000 Richmond Street, Philadelphia, advised as follows:\n\nThe above company is a manufacturer and distributor of chemicals. A fire had occurred on a dump of the company on August 6, 1947, but was quickly gotten under control. Such fire was confined to the company's premises and could not have been observed from outside the plant. The CHARLES\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSeptember 18, 1947\n\nLENNIG COMPANY is about two and one-half miles southeast from Oxford Circle.\nThe account of the fire does not seem to fit into the general pattern of the\nabove-mentioned flying object, for itis noted that the flying object was\nallegedly traveling from a position northeast of Oxford Circle to a south-\nwesterly direction in Philadelphia. GIMBEL pointed out that, to the best\nof his knowledge, there are no oil refineries and chemical companies located\naround Oxford Circle or north of such, but that all of the companies of this\ntype are several miles south of Oxford Circle.\n\n\t\tAll logical investigation having been conducted, no further action\nwill be taken on the instant matter unless advised to the contrary by the\nBureau.\n\nFFB/ctg\n98-1762\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"September 27, 1947\n\nMajor General George C. McDonald\nAssistant Chief Air Staff - 2\nThe Pentagon\nWashington, D. C.\n\n62-83894-121\n\nDear General McDonald:\n\n\t\tThe Federal Bureau of Investigation has been requested\nby your office to assist in the investigation of reported sight-\nings of flying discs.\n\n\t\tMy attention has been called to instructions disseminated\nby the Air Forces relative to this matter. I have been advised\nthat these instructions indicate that the Air Forces would inter-\nview responsible observers while the FBI would investigate incidents\nof discs found on the ground, thereby relieving the Air Forces of\nrunning down incidents which in many cases turned out to be \"ash\ncan covers, toilet seats and whatnot.\"\n\n\t\tIn view of the apparent understanding by the Air Forces\nof the position of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in this\nmatter, I cannot permit the personnel and time of this organiza-\ntion to be dissipated in this manner.\n\n\t\tI am advising the Field Divisions of the Federal Bureau\nof Investigation to discontinue all investigative activity regard-\ning the reported sightings of flying discs, and am instructing them\nto refer all complaints received to the appropriate Air Force\nrepresentative in their area.\n\n\t\t\t\tSincerely yours,\n\n\t\t\t\tJohn Edgar Hoover\n\t\t\t\tDirector"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : THE DIRECTOR\t\t\t\t\tDATE: September 25, 1947\nFROM : D. M. LADD\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nThe Bureau was requested by the Air Forces Intelligence to assist the Air Forces in attempting to arrive at an explanation of the above phenomena. The Air Forces indicated that the alleged sightings of flying discs might have been made by individuals of Communist sympathies for the purpose of causing mass hysteria in the United States over the fear of a secret Russian weapon. The Bureau agreed to assist in the investigation of the reported sightings, and the Field was advised in Bureau Bulletin No. 42, Series 1947, dated July 30, 1947, that they should investigate each instance which was brought to their attention of the sighting of a flying disc in order to ascertain whether or not it was a bona fide sighting, an imaginary one, or a prank. The results of the investigation conducted by the Bureau Field Offices in this matter have failed to reveal any indication of subversive individuals being involved in any of the reported sightings.\n\nThe Bureau has received a communication in the captioned matter from the Special Agent in Charge at San Francisco, dated September 19, 1947, which attached a \"restricted\" letter that was furnished confidentially to the SAC at San Francisco by Lieutenant Colonel Donald L. Springer, A-2, Army Air Forces, Hamilton Field, California, a copy of which is attached hereto. It is noted that the letter, which is dated September 3, 1947, is signed \"By Command of Lieutenant General Stratemeyer\" by Colonel R. H. Smith, Assistant Chief of Staff Intelligence, Headquarters, Air Defense Command, Mitchel Field, New York, and is addressed to the Commanding Generals of the various Air Forces. This letter is entitled \"Cooperation of FBI with AAF on Investigations of 'Flying Disc' Incidents.\"\n\nThis letter states in substance that it was the original intent of the AC/AS-2, Headquarters, Army Air Forces that whereas the ADC Air Forces would interview responsible observers, the FBI would investigate incidents of so-called discs being found on the ground. Further, it indicates that the services of the FBI were enlisted in order to relieve the numbered Air Forces of the task of tracking down all the many instances which turned out to be \"ash can covers, toilet seats and whatnot.\"\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\nIt is recommended that the Bureau protest vigorously to the Assistant Chief of Air Staff - 2. It is also recommended that the Bureau discontinue all activity in this field and that the Bureau Field Offices be advised to discontinue all investigations and to refer all complaints received to the Air Forces. A proposed Bulletin is attached for your approval.\nAttachment.\n\nSWR:AJB"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nThe Bureau was requested by the Air Forces Intelligence to assist the Air Forces in attempting to arrive at an explanation of the above phenomena. The Air Forces indicated that the alleged sightings of flying discs might have been made by individuals of Communist sympathies for the purpose of causing mass hysteria in the United States over the fear of a secret Russian weapon. The Bureau agreed to assist in the investigation of the reported sightings, and the Field was advised in Bureau Bulletin No. 42, Series 1947, dated July 30, 1947, that they should investigate each instance which was brought to their attention of the sighting of a flying disc in order to ascertain whether or not it was a bona fide sighting, an imaginary one, or a prank. The results of the investigation conducted by the Bureau Field Offices in this matter have failed to reveal any indication of subversive individuals being involved in any of the reported sightings.\n\nThis letter states in substance that it was the original intent of the AC/AS-2, Headquarters, Army Air Forces that whereas the ADC Air Forces would interview responsible observers, the FBI would investigate incidents of so-called discs being found on the ground. Further, it indicates that the services of the FBI were enlisted in order to relieve the numbered Air Forces of the task of tracking down all the many instances which turned out to be \"ash can covers, toilet seats and whatnot.\"\n\nRECOMMENDATION:\n\nIt is recommended that the Bureau protest vigorously to the Assistant Chief of Air Staff - 2. It is also recommended that the Bureau discontinue all activity in this field and that the Bureau Field Offices be advised to discontinue all investigations and to refer all complaints received to the Air Forces. A proposed Bulletin is attached for your approval.\nAttachment."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR DEFENSE COMMAND\nMitchel Field, New York\n\nIn reply\nrefer to:\n\nD 333.5EX\t\t\t\t\t\t\t3 September 1947\n\nSUBJECT:\tCooperation of FBI with AAF on Investigations of \"Flying\n\tDisc\" Incidents.\n\nTO:\tCommanding Genrals, First, Second, Fourth, Tenth, Eleventh\n\tand Fourteenth Air Forces\n\tATTENTION: Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\n\n\t1. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has agreed to assist Air\nForce Intelligence personnel in the investigation of \"flying disc\"\nincidents in order to quickly and effectively rule out what are pranks\nand to concentrate on what appears to be a genuine incident.\n\n\t2. It was the original intent of the AC/AS-2, Headquarters,\nArmy Air Forces that whereas the ADC Air Forces would interview respon-\nsible observers whose names would be furnished by AAF, the FBI would\ninvestigate incidents of so called \"discs\" being found on the ground.\nThe services of the FBI were enlisted in order to relieve the numbered\nAir Forces of the task of tracking down all the many instances which\nturned out to be ash can covers, toilet seats and whatnot.\n\n\t3. It is requested that each A-2 informally coordinate and\ncooperate with the FBI, generally keeping the FBI informed of any\nproposed calls that intelligence personnel will make on this subject.\nVery shortly, with the separation of the AAF from the War Department,\na firm policy will be established to clarify the liaison arrangements\nbetween A-2's and FBI Special Agents. Presently, it is considered\ninadvisable to promulgate a formal interim policy -- only to have it\nreplaced in a month or so by another.\n\n\tBY COMMAND OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL STRATEMEYER:\n\n\t\t\t/s/ R. H. SMITH\n\t\t\t R. H. SMITH\n\t\t\t Colonel, GSC\n\t\t\t Asst Chief of Staff-Intell.\n\n62-83894-121"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO\t: MR. LADD\t\t\t\t\tDATE: SEPTEMBER 23, 1947\n\nFROM\t: E. G. FITCH\n\nSUBJECT: INSTRUMENT FOUND ON FARM NEAR\n\t DANFORTH, ILLINOIS\n\t Flying Discs\n\n\tReference is made to a memorandum to Mr. Harbo from Mr. Baughman\non the above-captioned matter, dated September 3, 1947. The reference\nmemorandum indicates that the instrument has been examined by the Laboratory\nand the Laboratory had contacted a Mrs. Whedon of the Army Engineers and she\nindicated that the instrument had been used by the Air Forces on tests which\nwere classified as \"Top Secret.\"\n\n\tThe memorandum indicates that Special Agent S. W. Reynolds of the Liaison\nSection contacted the Intelligence Division of the Air Forces and was advised that\nMrs. Whedon alluded that the instrument was used in \"Operation Mogul.\" The instru-\nment was loaned to the Intelligence Division of the Air Forces who in turn forwarded\nit to Wright Field. The report was received from Wright Field indicating the\ninstrument had no connection with \"Operation Mogul\" or any other operation at Wright\nField. It was classified as a hoax in view of the apparent discrepancy between\ninformation developed from Mrs. Whedon and information received from Intelligence\nDivision of the Air Forces that the Bureau might wish to pursue this matter further.\n\n\tMr. Zimmers of the Technical Laboratory advised Mr. Reynolds of the Liaison\nSection that Mrs. Whedon had told him that a Major Hopkins handled the Liaison in\nWashington for the tests in which this instrument was used. Lieutenant Colonel George\nGarrett of the Intelligence Division of the Air Forces advised Special Agent Reynolds\nthat he contacted Major Hopkins. He advised that Major Hopkins has had a great deal\nof experience in radio and along technical lines. Major Hopkins advised Colonel\nGarrett that the instrument could not have been used in the \"Operation Mogul.\" Hopkins\nindicated that from the pictures and particles recovered, it appeared to him to be a\npart or portions of an old-type radio loud speaker.\n\n\tIn view of the information received from Major Hopkins, Colonel Garrett\nstated that he was at a loss as to how to explain the actions of Mrs. Whedon other\nthan to say that she perhaps gave a false impression as to her knowledge of the\ninstrument and the \"Operation Mogul.\" Garrett pointed out that in view of the\nreport received from Wright Field, together with the statement made by Major Hopkins,\nhe felt that there was sufficient evidence that this instrument was not used in any\nWar Department Air Force classified project and that in all probability it was just a hoax.\n\n\tRECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that this memorandum be forwarded to\nthe Technical Laboratory for their information.\n\nSWR:hmm\n\n62-83894-122"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"TSNAD-2B/AC/bk\n25 August 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Saucer.\n\nTO:\tCommanding General\n\tArmy Air Forces\n\tWashington 25, D. C.\n\tATTN: AC/AS-2\n\t Lt Col George Garrett\n\n\t1. The specimens of an alleged \"Flying Saucer\" brought to this\nCommand by Colonel H. M. McCoy, which were obtained by the FBI and given\nto Lt.Col Garrett, were examined to determine their connection, if any,\nwith the so-called \"Flying Saucers\", or any project at Hq AMC, Wright\nField. The specimens were carefully examined by both technicians of the\nAnalysis Division (T-2) and Electronics Sub-division (T-3). The latter\norganization stated that these specimens definitely had no connection\nwhatsoever with the \"Mogul\" project nor with any other research and devel-\nopment project of this Command.\n\n\t2. It is also the opinion of this Command that these specimens\nhave no connection with the so-called \"Flying Saucer\" or \"Disc\". These\nspecimens, therefore, are considered as part of a hoax that could be per-\npetrated by most anyone seeking publicity or for any other reasons.\n\n\t3. The specimens shown in the attached photograph include frag-\nments of an undeterminable shape made from plaster of paris or similar\nceramic and containing some electrical resistance wire for measurement\nor heating purposes. The condition of the ceramic indicates that the\nresistance wire was heated electrically at one time or another. These\nfragments could not be connected with any AMC project. The other articles\nat the top of the photograph reading from left to right are identified as\nfollows:\n\n\t\ta. An outmoded type of magnetic speaker diaphragm made of alum-\ninum alloy, manufactured by The Nathaniel Baldwin Company of Salt Lake\nCity, Utah, which was first patented May 1, 1910. This article cannot be\nconnected with any AMC project.\n\n\t\tb. The second and third articles are bakelite coil forms\n\n62-83894-123"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nLtr. CG,AAF, Wash. DC\t\t\t\t\t\t25 August 1947\nSubject: Flying Saucers\n\nwrapped with ordinary thin enameled copper wire. These coils indicate\nthat they were skillfully made at one time but were crudely rewrapped by\none not familiar with the art of making a coil. These coils also have no\nconnection with any AMC project.\n\n\t\tc. The fourth article is a metallic box which is the remains of\nan electronic filter condenser made by the Polymet Manufacturing Company\nof New York, N. Y. This article also has no connection with any AMC pro-\nject.\n\n\t\td. The fifth article is the remains of a metallic magnetic\nring that could not be identified as any part of any device used at this\ncommand.\n\n\t4. This information and attached photograph may be transmitted to\nthe FBI to inform various agencies throughout the United States as to what\naction to take in the event other similar specimens are found.\n\n\tFOR THE COMMANDING GENERAL:\n\n\t\t\t\t\tH. M. McCOY\n1 Incl:\t\t\t\t\tColonel, Air Corps\n 1 Photo 8-1/2x11\t\t\tDeputy Commanding General\n \"Flying Saucer\"\t\t\tIntelligence (T-2)\n\n2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENCLOSURE\n\nENCLOSURE\n\n62-83894 -123"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"FLYING SAUCER\", ALLEGED SPECIMENS.\n\n5\n\n233138\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAF OFFICIAL PHOTO\n\nWRIGHT FIELD\nOHIO\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, Salt Lake City\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS.\n\nDATE: September 15, 1947\n\nRemytel tenth instant.\n\nOn September 10, 1947 an item relative to flying saucers appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune indicating that two young couples, Mr. and Mrs. GAYLON CALDWELL and Mr. and Mrs. RICHARD ANDERSON, Logan, Utah, who had been playing bridge, reported that they saw three brief flights of saucers, the first at 10:40 p.m. and two more before 11:10 p.m. the evening of September 8, 1947. This news article also contained the names of KEITH HUGHES, JOAN CROOKSTON, and Mr. and Mrs. FRED THUNELL of Logan who had likewise made separate reports of having observed these flying discs.\n\nMr. and Mrs. RICHARD ANDERSON, when interviewed by an Agent of this office, advised that they, in company with Mr. and Mrs. GAYLON CALDWELL, observed approximately a dozen objects flying in group formation at about two or three thousand feet in the air. They stated that they first observed these objects on September 8, 1947 at 10:30 p.m. when their bridge game broke up and both couples went out on the porch. The ANDERSONS believed these objects to be similar in size to pigeons and stated that they seemed to be rather white and illuminated. They informed that the objects could have been birds; however, they appeared to be moving faster than birds as they circled the city in approximately one to two minutes, and then disappeared in a northern direction.\n\nMr. and Mrs. ANDERSON claimed to have observed no wing movement during the flight, and are unable to make up their minds as to exactly what they saw. Mr. ANDERSON informed that Mr. and Mrs. CALDWELL are presently en route to an unknown city in Nebraska.\n\nMr. KEITH HUGHES and JOAN CROOKSTON both advised that they were unable to state how their names appeared in the newspaper as having observed flying saucers inasmuch as neither had ever had the opportunity to view these flying objects, and the newspaper report was erroneous.\n\nMrs. FRED THUNELL advised that she, her husband, and five other people had observed flying objects between 10:30 and 11:00 p.m. on the evening of September 8, 1947. She stated that they saw five groups, each containing thirty-five to sixty small objects, which were rather yellowish white in color and were circling the city at a high rate of speed. Mrs. THUNELL stated that these objects were several thousand feet in the air and it was impossible for them to determine the size due to the distance, speed and cloudy conditions.\n\nRECORDED INDEXED\n\nMrs. THUNELL informed that Mr. and Mrs. NORMAN HALL, Mr. and Mrs. H. P. ANDERSON, and Mrs. BESSIE HENDRICKS were present and observed the flying objects; however, none of them were able to determine what these objects might have been.\n\n127\n\nFIVE"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, Salt Lake City\n\nSUBJECT: [illegible]\n\nRemytel tenth instant.\n\n[illegible]\n\nRECEIVED\n\nFBI\n\nINTERNAL SECURITY\n\nLIAISON SECTION\n\nRECEIVED\n\nINTERNAL SECURITY\n\nF.B.I.\n\nRECEIVED\n\nINTERNAL SECURITY\n\nF.B.I.\n\nLIAISON SECTION"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. and Mrs. NORMAN HALL, Logan, Utah, advised that they viewed flying objects traveling clockwise above the city at approximately 10:30 p.m. the evening of September 8, 1947. They informed that they first believed the objects to be lights of an airplane. However, these objects seemed to change in formation and appeared to be similar to a group of moving stars.\n\nMr. and Mrs. HALL believed these objects were traveling much faster than birds.\n\nIt was determined that Mr. and Mrs. H. P. ANDERSON and Mrs. BESSIE HENDRICKS were not available for interview:\n\nCaptain B. E. NASON, Military Intelligence Division, Fort Douglas, Salt Lake City, Utah, is being advised by letter of the results of this investigation.\n\nIn view of the indefinite information furnished relative to this matter, no further investigation is being conducted by this office.\n\nSMK:LMS\n\nAMSD"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"427 W 3d Avenue\nSpokane, Washington\nAugust 8, 1947\n\nMilitary Intelligence Division, U.S.A.\nMcChord Field, Washington\n\nGentlemen:\n\nFollowing the reading of an account of the visit of Mr. Kenneth Arnold, Boise, Idaho, as published in the Spokesman Review under date of August 7, 1947, the undersigned considered the enclosed account of an observation of a \"flying saucer\" would be of interest to you.\n\nThis account has not been given to any newspaper or other publication as yet.\n\nYours truly,\n\n/s/ R. J. Madden\n\nR. J. MADDEN\nDivision Plant Engr.\nThe Pac. Tel. & Tel. Co.\n\nCOPY\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Report on a \"Flying Saucer\"\n\nAt or about 12:05 p.m., July 29, 1947, a sedan, driven by Steve Herrmann and carrying R. J. (Bob) Madden in the front seat and Karl Herrmann in the rear seat, was proceeding northwesterly along the road leading from Canyon Ferry to York, both in Montana some 25 miles N.E. of Helena.\n\nWhen at a point approximately 1/4 mile N.W. of Canyon Ferry, (as shown on Forest Service Map to be in the NE1/4 of NE1/4 of Sec. 10 T10N R1W) Karl suddenly shouted \"See it! See it! There's a flying saucer!\" Steve immediately slowed down and gradually brought the sedan to a stop, he and Bob meanwhile scanning the sky in the direction pointed by Karl in an effort to see the \"flying saucer\", but without success.\n\nApproximately ten seconds elapsed between the time Karl reported seeing the \"saucer\", coming over the horizon at high speed from the southwest, (Karl first thought it a meteor) and travelling northeasterly, and the bringing of the car to a stop.\n\nAs the car came to a stop, Steve, Karl and Bob, simultaneously, saw the following:\n\nDirectly ahead, (N.W) 2 to 3 miles distant and approximately 3000 ft. above the ground, a bright disc hovering and fluttering in the air. Descending and rising through a vertical distance of fifty or a hundred feet for a period of about five seconds then, while at the top of an ascent, the \"disc\" suddenly swooped to the Northeast at tremendous speed and disappeared into the clear air within a distance of 200 ft. That is to say it did not pass beyond an obstruction to further visibility but \"melted into thin air\" as if because of tremendous speed.\n\nThis disc was, from the viewpoint of the observers, apparently 3 ft. in diameter, circular and of no great thickness - approximately 3 or 4 inches.\n\nThe sky was blue with scattered small clouds, the sun was shining brightly and the disc gleamed and shimmered in the bright sunlight as if covered with highly polished nickel.\n\nAfter the \"disc\" disappeared from view, the sedan and its occupants proceeded northwesterly along the road, but could discern no evidence of the presence of the \"disc\" along or adjacent to that therefore.\n\nIt is to be remembered that the dimensions as stated above were as they appeared to the observers some 2 or 3 miles from the \"disc\" and the true dimensions must be considerably greater.\n\n/s/ R. J. Madden,\nR. J. MADDEN,\nDivision Plant Engr.\nThe Pac. Tel. & Tel. Co.\n\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT\nBUREAU OF THE CHIEF INSPECTOR\nOFFICE OF INSPECTOR\nT. H. Barkow\nINSPECTOR\nrcf\nChicago 7, Illinois\nSeptember 19, 1947.\nCASE No. 56114-F\n\nLAKE FOREST, ILLINOIS: Alleged violation of Section 2350, P. L. & R., by des Arc Foundation; sale of information on flying discs.\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation,\nWashington, D. C.\n\nGentlemen:\n\nThe subject involved in case of above description is C. W. Stevens, formerly of Lake Forest, Illinois, who may also have given a Chicago address at various times.\n\nCan you advise whether you have a record of this man and if so, will you please forward a copy of same to me.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nT. H. Barkow\nPost Office Inspector.\n\nRECORDED & INDEXED\n62-83894-126\nFBI\n31 SEP 27 1947\nEX-83"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\n\nFROM : SAC, SEATTLE\n\nDATE: September 13, 1947\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISC SIGHTED\nJuly 29, 1947, near CANYON FERRY, MONTANA, BY KARL HERRMANN, STEVE HERRMANN and R. J. (BOB) MADDEN;\nSECURITY MATTER - X\n\nEnclosed herewith for information of Bureau and Butte Division are copies of the following received September 2, 1947, from H. R. PETERSON, 4th Air Force, S-2, McChord Field, Washington:\n\nLetter to Military Intelligence Division, USA, McChord Field, Wash. from R. J. MADDEN, 427 W 3rd Ave. Spokane, Wash. dated 8/8/47, with enclosure of Madden's \"Report on a 'Flying Saucer'.\"\n\nNo action being taken by Seattle.\n\nEEB:hg\n100-18945\nEnclosures - 2\ncc: Butte\n\nRECORDED INDEXED\n62-83894\nOCT. 1 1947\n125\n\n2 ENCL\n\n500CT 14 1947"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\nLIAISON SECTION\nSEP 18 2 19 PM '47\nF B I\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED\nSEP 18 10 17 AM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I.\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\n\nRECEIVED\nSEP 24 3 19 PM '47\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nF.B.I."} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"September 24, 1947\n\nMr. T. H. Barkow\nInspector\nPost Office Department\nChicago 7, Illinois\n\nRECORDED\n62-83894-126\n\nEX-83\n\nAlleged violation of Section 2350, P. L. & R., by des Arc Foundation; sale of information on flying discs.\n\nReference is made to your letter dated September 19, 1947, requesting information regarding one C. W. Stevens, your case #56114-F.\n\nYou are advised that an effective search cannot be conducted through the files of the Identification Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation on the basis of the name only. If you are able to furnish the physical description of Stevens or other means of identification such as a registry number, a search will be conducted in an effort to furnish you with the information desired.\n\nRHG:jb\n\nCOMMUNICATIONS SECTION\nMAILED 9\nSEP 25 1947 P.M.\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : DIRECTOR, FBI\nFROM : SAC, SEATTLE\nDATE: Sept. 12, 1947\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISKS Reported by BRUCE ARMSTRONG and M. A. NICHOLS, Seattle, Washington, August 12, 1947\nSECURITY MATTER X\n\nThe newspaper, Seattle Post Intelligencer, carried an article in the morning issue of August 13 reporting the sighting of flying disks. The article appeared on the fifth page and was headed \"Blue Triangle Latest Thing Seen In Disks\". Under this caption there was a short writeup which stated, in substance, that one BRUCE ARMSTRONG, an electronics technician, and a number of other engineers at the Boeing Aircraft had sighted a mysterious flying object about 2:20 p.m. on August 12. The newspaper report further stated that the object seemed to be fluttering like a leaf, and appeared to be a black or dark blue triangular substance. In this article also appeared another report of a disk supposedly sighted by one M. A. NICHOLS, 1125 S. W. 102nd Street, Seattle, and NICHOLS described it as a big ball reflecting light, giving it a purplish tinge.\n\nInterview with BRUCE ARMSTRONG on August 13 revealed that ARMSTRONG was standing in front of Section D of the Boeing Aircraft Plant with about ten other research engineers and had noticed a small black object flying about 200 feet high, going south over Boeing Field runway. ARMSTRONG further stated, upon interview, that the object appeared triangular in shape and floated in the air like a leaf, and he estimated the speed to be about fifteen miles per hour. ARMSTRONG could not accurately determine the distance between him and the object, but it is noted that Section D is about half a mile from the opposite side of Boeing Field where he supposedly had sighted it.\n\nThe following other research engineers were also interviewed regarding this object:\n\nMr. JOHN H. STONER\nMr. GEORGE H. STONER\nMr. BEN HAGER\nMr. LEROY PERKINS\nMr. DAN HAGE\n\nThe consensus of opinion of these men was that the object resembled a black leaf in flight and looked more like a piece of tar paper than anything. When the object reached the end of the runway in Boeing Field it climbed into the sky in a southwesterly direction and disappeared.\n\nMr. KEN GRANT, operator of the control tower for the Northwest Airlines was then contacted. Mr. GRANT stated that he reviews all reports of objects seen in the vicinity of the field and makes a log of such. Mr. GRANT reviewed his log but could not see any record of such an item, but upon contact with Mr. VAUGHN LOCKWOOD, who was on duty at the time the object was supposedly sighted, the following information was obtained: LOCKWOOD stated that about 2 o'clock in the\n\nCOPIES DESTROYED\n270 NOV 18 1964"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DIRECTOR, FBI FLYING DISKS, Report of 8/26/47\n\nafternoon there were several pieces of burnt paper which flew over the field, and he did recall a large piece of burnt paper which the wind had blown across the runway and down the south end of the field. LOCKWOOD estimated that the paper was approximately three feet in length. Mr. GRANT stated that undoubtedly this was the object in question, and inasmuch as the control tower has a complete view of the area in which the engineers had sighted this object if anything further was noted it would have appeared in the log.\n\nMr. M. A. NICHOLS, 1119 S. W. 102nd Street, was then interviewed regarding his report of a flying object. NICHOLS stated that about 4 p.m. on August 12 he had sighted an object which he estimated to be about 35,000 feet in the air, which was flying over his home in a southwest direction. A neighbor, RAY STANLEY, also saw the object and STANLEY examined the same with a pair of binoculars. According to STANLEY the object looked like a white dock moving, cylindrical in shape, and reflected the light of the sun with a sort of purplish tinge. Other witnesses who had seen the object at this time were a Mr. and Mrs. GEORGE KROGSTADT, of 1113 S. W. 102nd Street, Seattle, and their version of the object corresponded with that of NICHOLS and STANLEY.\n\nContact with Mr. THOMAS E. GERMAIN, of the Seattle Weather Bureau Office at Boeing Field, revealed that weather balloons are released every six hours from his field commencing at 1:30 a.m. The balloons, according to Mr. GERMAIN, are of a white gum color and reflect the light of the sun at a high altitude. Although Mr. GERMAIN could not understand why a balloon could have been sighted at 4 p.m., he nevertheless was certain that, from the description of the object seen by these people, it must have been either one of his balloons or one released from some other area in the vicinity.\n\nNo further investigation is being conducted in this matter by this office.\n\nJJS:JG\n62-"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":181,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\n\n422 - Federal Office Building, Civic Center\nSan Francisco 2, California\nSeptember 19, 1947\n\nIN REPLY, PLEASE REFER TO\nFILE NO.\n\nDirector, FBI\n\nAttention: Assistant Director D. M. LADD\n\nRE: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI am transmitting herewith copies of a \"restricted\" letter dated September 9, 1947, which was furnished to me by Lieutenant Colonel DONALD L. SPRINGER, A-2, Army Air Forces, Hamilton Field, California, which letter is designated to certain Commanding Generals in the Army Air Forces from Colonel H. M. McCOY, Assistant Chief of Staff - Intelligence, Headquarters Air Defense Command, Mitchel Field, New York, concerning \"Cooperation of FBI with AAF on Investigations of 'Flying Disc' Incidents\".\n\nIt is my understanding from recent Bureau instructions that we are to assist the Air Force Intelligence personnel in the investigation of flying disc incidents. However, it will be noted from the attached letter that it is Army interpretation that it was their intent that the Bureau would investigate those incidents of the so-called \"discs\" being found on the ground and apparently not those which are observed only in flight. In fact, the attention of the Bureau is respectfully called to paragraph two of this letter and to the last sentence therein which states, \"The services of the FBI were enlisted in order to relieve the numbered Air Forces of the task of tracking down all the many instances which turned out to be ash can covers, toilet seats and whatnot.\"\n\nIn the first place, the instructions issued by the Army Air Forces in this letter appear to limit the type of investigations which the Bureau will be asked to handle and secondly it appears to me the wording of the last sentence in the second paragraph mentioned above is clearly unwarranted for language tending to indicate the Bureau will be asked to conduct investigations only in those cases which are not important and which are almost, in fact, ridiculous.\n\nThe thought has occurred to me that the Bureau might desire to discuss this matter further with the Army Air Forces to the end that the limitations which we will conduct and also to object to the sentence in paragraph two which, to say the least, is insulting.\n\nRECEIVED\nDEPT. OF JUSTICE\nF.B.I.\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nOCT 4 4 29 PM '47\n\nOCT 6 11 23 AM '47\nRECEIVED-LADD\nF B I\n\n6-21-47"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Director, FBI\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t9/19/47\nRE: REPORTS OF FLYING DISCS\n\n\tIn the event the Bureau decides to discuss the matter further with\nthe Army Air Forces, it is recommended that no indication whatsoever be\ngiven indicating this letter was referred to me by Lieutenant Colonel\nSPRINGER inasmuch as it would undoubtedly cause him serious embarrassment\nand would certainly cause the excellent personal relationship which exists\nbetween Lieutenant Colonel SPRINGER and this office to be endangered.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nHarry M. Kimball\nHarry M. Kimball\nSpecial Agent in Charge\n\nHMK:mhr\n62-2938"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"C O P Y\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nAIR DEFENSE COMMAND\nMitchel Field, New York\n\nIn reply\nrefer to:\n\nD 333.5EX 3 September 1947\n\nSUBJECT: Cooperation of FBI with AAF on Investigations of \"Flying\nDisc\" Incidents.\n\nTO: Commanding Generals, First, Second, Fourth, Tenth, Eleventh\nand Fourteenth Air Forces\nATTENTION: Assistant Chief of Staff, A-2\n\n1. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has agreed to assist Air\nForce Intelligence personnel in the investigation of \"flying disc\"\nincidents in order to quickly and effectively rule out what are pranks\nand to concentrate on what appears to be a genuine incident.\n\n2. It was the original intent of the AC/AS-2, Headquarters,\nArmy Air Forces that whereas the ADC Air Forces would interview respon-\nsible observers whose names would be furnished by AAF, the FBI would\ninvestigate incidents of so called \"discs\" being found on the ground.\nThe services of the FBI were enlisted in order to relieve the numbered\nAir Forces of the task of tracking down all the many instances which\nturned out to be ash can covers, toilet seats and whatnot.\n\n3. It is requested that each A-2 informally coordinate and\ncooperate with the FBI, generally keeping the FBI informed of any\nproposed calls that intelligence personnel will make on this subject.\nVery shortly, with the separation of the AAF from the War Department,\na firm policy will be established to clarify the liaison arrangements\nbetween A-2's and FBI Special Agents. Presently, it is considered\ninadvisable to promulgate a formal interim policy -- only to have it\nreplaced in a month or so by another.\n\nBY COMMAND OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL STRATEMEYER:\n\n/s/ R. H. SMITH\nR. H. SMITH\nColonel, GSC\nAsst Chief of Staff-Intell.\n\n62-83894-128\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Bu Bulletin #57\n10-1-47\n(D) FLYING DISCS --Effective immediately, the Bureau has discontinued its investigative activities as outlined in Section B of Bureau Bulletin No. 42, Series 1947, dated July 30, 1947.\n\nAll future reports connected with flying discs should be referred to the Air Forces and no investigative action should be taken by Bureau Agents.\n\n66-03-854\n162-83894-\nNOT RECORDED\n63 OCT 6 1947\nORIGINAL COPY FILED IN\n231\n51 OCT 14 1947"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : Director, FBI\nFROM : SAC, Butte\nDATE: September 27, 1947\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS SIGHTED MAY 5, 1947, BETWEEN ELLENSBURG AND SEATTLE, WASHINGTON\n\nWarden JOHN HENRY, Montana State Prison, Deer Lodge, Montana, has advised the writer that while driving between Ellensburg and Seattle, Washington, about 3:30 P.M., on May 5, 1947, he sighted a silver object streaking across the sky. This was also seen by MELBOURNE M. HILL, convict chauffeur, and Mrs. HENRY. This object went into a nose dive and they thought it would crash. However, before reaching the earth it disintegrated, leaving a long pillar of \"gas\" hanging in the sky. It was particularly odd because this remained in form and did not blow away. It was observed by these three people while they drove from twenty to thirty miles.\n\nThis smoky, gaseous pillar was a long ways off and remained high in the air. Warden HENRY said that this silver object was traveling at an excessively high rate of speed and when it disintegrated it was still a long way from the earth. Warden HENRY said when he first saw it he thought it was probably a jet propelled plane but that he couldn't tell except that its motions were erratic. He said he had not reported it until he had noticed so much in the papers about these discs. Although three people saw it, they decided that they must be \"seeing things\".\n\nThe Seattle Office is requested to advise Mr. H. R. PETERSON, 4th Air Force, S-2, McChord Field, Washington.\n\nNo further action is being taken by the Butte Office due to the time elapsing between the sighting of this object and the report.\n\nWGB:LB\n\ncc - Seattle\n\nInfo furnished to Major Carder\nI.D. Army\nRECORDED\nINDEXED\n62-83894-129\nFBI\n31 OCT 11 1947"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nRECEIVED\nFBI\nSEP 30 3 55 PM 1947\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nBUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\n9-3"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : MR. LADD\n\nDATE: October 9, 1947\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING DISCS\n\nThere are attached hereto, photographs of various reports received by the Air Corps in connection with the above-captioned matter. These photographs were made available to Special Agent S. W. Reynolds of the Liaison Section by Lieutenant Colonel K. L. Garrett of the Intelligence Division of the Air Force for completion of Bureau files.\n\nRECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that this memorandum be made available to Supervisor R. G. Fletcher of the Internal Security Section for his information.\n\nSWR:hmn\n\nno indexing necessary\nBy ENCL.\nEncl. behind file 11-12-47\n\nHANDLED IN SPECIAL FILES\nRECORDED\nEX-93\n62-83894-130\n19 OCT 13 1947\n5-R-7"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\nRECEIVED-LAND\nFBI\nU.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE\nOCT 9 12 46 PM 1947\n\nRECEIVED\nINTERNAL SECURITY\nFBI\nOCT 9 03 AM 1947"} {"doc_id":"d5242d751ddbcb66","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"F472\n11-23-70"} {"doc_id":"d5575a97844e489e","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62- HQ-83894\nSerial 403\nEBF\n62-HQ-83894-E403\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 1 403 ONLY\n9/18/226771\nRRP00AI1WL\nDO NOT DESTROY\nDIPA #1142292\n62-83894-403\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007."} {"doc_id":"d5575a97844e489e","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"$3.50\nThey Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers\nby GRAY BARKER\nOne by one, the leading figures among flying saucer researchers, who have challenged the government denial that saucers come from outer space, have been silenced.\nOutwardly, nothing seems to have happened to these men. They are still alive, still living where they used to. But they no longer publish saucer research material and they will not talk about saucers or why they no longer will speak of them.\nThree men in dark suits have visited these saucer researchers. Nobody knows what they said, but it was enough to reduce their hearers to silence.\nPerhaps the silenced men know who the three dark-clad visitors are, but they won't talk about this either. And nobody else seems to know who these men are. They might be government agents, they might even be men from outer space, or they might have muscled into a situation fraught with many possibilities.\nThis is part of the true story told by an otherwise prosaic and successful Clarksburg, West Virginia, business man, Gray Barker, whose busy film booking and buying agency in Clarksburg News Building scarcely seems to be the place to give forth this story stranger than that of any of the pictures that Mr. Barker is booking.\nMr. Barker never was interested in flying saucers until 1952 when one of the most astonishing ones allegedly landed near his home in West Virginia and he investigated the story and found the shaken and fearful eye witnesses convincing enough to go on with further investigations.\nThen, after several years of close contact with the leading men in the field, he found them suddenly silenced, one by one.\nWho they are, what they were doing when they were silenced, Mr. Barker's astonishing theories of what they had discovered that impelled others to silence them, is told in his book.\nH. G. Rhawn, publisher and owner of the daily Clarksburg News, the author's home town paper, has authorized University Books to publish a letter from him which, while carefully disclaiming any credence in flying saucers, concludes that when so sober and successful a business man as Mr. Barker finds the field important enough, flying saucers deserve serious investigation.\nThey Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers is a\n(continued on back flap)\nJACKET BY GROPPER ASSOCIATES, INC."} {"doc_id":"d5575a97844e489e","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"behind-the-scenes chronicle of civilian saucer research. It is an immensely readable book. We suggest you do not pick it up if you have work to do, for you will be unable to put it down until you reach the amazing climax.\nMr. Barker tells the story in such a straightforward and documentary manner that the reader's first moment of incredulity will give way to conviction as he is acquainted, page-by-page, with the terrifying inside facts.\nA six-footer, handsome, and with a warm, infectious laugh, Mr. Barker retains in his voice just a trace of the accent of the West Virginia farming country where he grew up, somewhat belying the rich and varied career he has crammed into his thirty years. He has been head of an English department in a Maryland school system, an audio-visual education consultant for a large school supplier, theatre manager and motion picture projection technician. Begun as a hobby, saucer research has taken more and more of his time as he has realized the stark reality behind the mystery.\nFinding time for his literary career between details of operating his business, he publishes The Saucerian, a flying saucer periodical, and contributes to educational journals and motion picture technical magazines.\nUNIVERSITY BOOKS, INC.\n404 Fourth Avenue • New York 16, N. Y.\nGRAY BARKER\n(continued from front flap)\nBuffington Studios\nKnew Too Much About Flying Saucers BARKER UNIVERSITY BOOKS\nThey Knew Too Much About Flying Saucers GRAY BARKER THE TRUE STORY OF WHAT HAPPENED TO CERTAIN RESEARCHERS AND INVESTIGATORS WHO FOUND OUT WHERE THE SAUCERS COME FROM"} {"doc_id":"d6d54833fed2e94b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 24 October 2025\n\nMisrep undefined-10431840\n\nNarrative\n\n(SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) (b)(1)1.4a DEPARTED OKAS AT 1740Z TO CONDUCT ARMED OVERWATCH IVO 38SKC59 (b)(1)1.4a ARRIVED ON STATION AT APPROXIMATELY 1930Z AND CHECKED IN WITH (b)(1)1.4a PERFORMED A WEAPONS CALIBRATION, HAVING RELEASED 20x105mm, 101x30mm, 1xAGM-176. (b)(1)1.4a 's CREW OBSERVED AN UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENA DURING ITS PGM SHOT (SEE UAP 1). (b)(1)1.4a WAS CLEARED OFF STATION AT 2323Z. GFC INTENT MET. (b)(1)1.4a LANDED AT OKAS AT 0046Z.\n\n(S/RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: REL TO USA, FVEY\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MS\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20490921\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFSOC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): SOTU 016\n• Submit Date:\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 001\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"d6d54833fed2e94b","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): HM\n• Mission Type: ARMED OVERWATCH\n• ATO Mission Number: (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: CAPT\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 16 SOS\n• Wing: 27 SOW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: 1 SOW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: SSgt\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: ACF\n• Wing: 379 AEW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 002\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"d6d54833fed2e94b","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination: AN/APN-241\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: AN/ALR-56M\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: ALR-56M\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: AAR-47\n• MWS Name or Designator: AAR-47\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• IRCM Name or Designator: AN-AAQ-24\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• ECM Name or Designator: AAQ-24B\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data: ALE-47\n• CMD Name or Designator: ALE-47\n• Chaff Designator: RR180\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: 716\n• Flare Designator: MJU-71, MJU-66, M206\n• Num Flares: 240\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator: -\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Num Towed Decoys: -\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Gun Name or Designator: 30MM, 105MM\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: 1.4(a)\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: MX-25\n• Additional Avionics: GPS/SADL\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 003\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"d6d54833fed2e94b","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n• Data Link: GATEWAY (IF BOTH)\n• Gentext: 1020x30mm / 80x105mm\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 201740:00ZSEP24\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes):\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Last Land Time: 210046:00ZSEP24\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 200101:00ZSEP24\n• Total Mission Time: 7 hours 6 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 201930:00ZSEP24\n• Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• JTAR Number:\n• Killbox (Location):\n• Mission Type: ARMED OVERWATCH\n• JTAC Callsign:\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 202323:00ZSEP24\n• Total Time On Station: 3 hours 53 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 004\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"d6d54833fed2e94b","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 202027:59ZSEP24\n• UAP Event Type: UAP Incident\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations: UAP FLEW THROUGH (b)(1)1.4a SENSOR IN BETWEEN MUNITION RELEASE AND MUNITION IMPACT\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions: NONE OBSERVED\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Tail Number: (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4g\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 38SKC59 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: FL130\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory: 096 STRAIGHT AND LEVEL\n• Observer Assessment of UAP: Benign\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: 170 KIAS\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns):: NO\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters: NO PARTIES REPORTED AN ADDITIONAL AIRCRAFT IN THE AIRSPACE WITH (b)(1)1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable): YES\n• Operational Range: AYN AL ASAD ROZ RAINDROP\n• UAP Physical State: Solid\n• Number of UAP Sighted:\n• UAP Propulsion Means:\n• UAP Payload:\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe):\n• UAP Signatures: IR SIGNATURE DETECTABLE BY MX-20 & MX-25\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): NONE OBSERVED\n• UAP RF Frequency:\n• UAP RF Duration:\n• UAP Event Serial Number: 202027ZSEP2024-CENTCOM\n• UAP Effects on Persons: NO\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP Effects on Equipment: NONE\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Rank/Grade: CAPTAIN\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE): 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Observer Engagement of UAP (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• First Coordinate: 38SKC59 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• First Seen Radius:\n• Last Accuracy: Precise\n• Last Coordinate: 38SKC59 (b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a\n• Last Seen Radius:\n• Kinetic Altitude Accuracy: Estimated\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 005\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"d6d54833fed2e94b","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 24 October 2025\n\n• Kinetic Altitude:\n• Kinetic Depth Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Depth:\n• Kinetic Velocity Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Velocity:\n• Kinetic Trajectory Accuracy: Estimated\n• Kinetic Trajectory:\n• UAP Date of DoD Acquisition: 210000:00ZSEP24\n• UAP Reaction to Observation, Interrogation, Engagement (yes/no; if yes, describe): NONE OBSERVED; PATH OF MOVEMENT APPEARED PREDETERMINED AND NOT IN RESPONSE TO [REDACTED]'s DETECTION\n• UAP Anomalous Characteristics/ Behaviors: IT IS UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME WHETHER AN OBJECT DETACHED ITSELF FROM THE PRIMARY UAP IMMEDIATELY BEFORE LEAVING THE SENSOR FIELD OF VIEW.\n• First Accuracy: Precise\n• Call Sign: [REDACTED]\n• UAP First Seen Location:\n• UAP Last Seen Location:\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): UAP CREATED IR LENS FLARE ON MX-20 & MX-25 SENSORS, INDICATING A SIGNIFICANT HEAT SOURCE. THE UAP MOVED AT A HIGH RATE OF SPEED THROUGH THE SENSOR FIELD OF VIEW. THE CREW MAINTAINED LASER ENERGY UNTIL THE MUNITION IMPACTED ITS DESIRED TARGET.[REDACTED]DID NOT REOBSERVE THE UAP.\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): (S//REL TO USA, FVEY)[REDACTED] ENTERED AYN AL ASAD AIRBASE's (AAAB) RESTRICTED OPERATING ZONE (ROZ) RAINDROP AT APPROXIMATELY 1930Z TO CONDUCT A WEAPONS CALIBRATION.[REDACTED] RECEIVED A CALL FOR FIRE AT APPROXIMATELY 2025Z TO EMPLOY AN AGM-176. AFTER WEAPONS RELEASE, THE WEAPONS SYSTEMS OFFICER (WSO) AND COMBAT SYSTEMS OFFICER (CSO) OBSERVED AN UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT \"FLY\" THROUGH THE AIRCRAFT SENSORS AT A HIGH RATE OF SPEED. THE UAP CREATED AN IR LENS FLARE ON THE MX-20 & MX-25 SENSORS, WHICH INDICATED A SIGNIFICANT HEAT SIGNATURE COMING FROM THE OBJECT. IT IS UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME WHETHER AN OBJECT DETACHED ITSELF FROM THE PRIMARY UAP IMMEDIATELY BEFORE LEAVING THE SENSOR FIELD OF VIEW. THE CREW MAINTAINED LASER ENERGY UNTIL THE MUNITION IMPACTED ITS DESIRED TARGET.[REDACTED]DID NOT REOBSERVE THE UAP.\n\n(S//REL) UAP EVENT SERIAL NUMBER IS CORRECT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE \"CCMD ASSIGNED NUMERICAL SEQUENCE,\" WHICH IS UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME.\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nUSCENTCOM MDR 25-0100 thru 25-0103 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/28/25 006\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"d749c5b830e52eb9","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026\n\nC O N F I D E N T I A L\n\nDomestic Collection Division\nForeign Intelligence Information Report\n\nDIRECTORATE OF\nOPERATIONS\n\nCOUNTRY USSR\nDCD REPORT NO. OO-B-321/33474-76\nSUBJECT Combating Fatigue in Crewmembers/ Aeroflot Work Cycles/Use of Drugs/ Biological Effects of Aircraft Noise/ Radiation Research/UFO Phenomena/ Prototype Pilot Biological Psychomotor Testing Equipment/Celestial Navigation/ Night Vision Testing\nDATE DISTR. 1 November 1976\nNO. PAGES 4\nREFERENCES [REDACTED]\nDATE OF INFO [REDACTED]\nTHIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION\n\nSOURCE [REDACTED]\n\nSUMMARY: Aeroflot officials are actively involved in aerospace medical research. They are concerned with the medical aspects of physical conditioning which impinge upon crewmember performance and have perfected several devices which test pilot biological functioning and motor response ability. Dr Inal Georgiyevich Akoyev, a noted radiation biologist explained cosmic ray particles (phosphenes) which are causing Aeroflot pilots to \"see\" flashes of light during night flying. Dr [fnu] Akutin, cybernetici st at the Civil Aviation Institute of Leningrad showed [REDACTED] prototype pilot biological psychomotor testing equipment which measures blood pressure, pulse rate, cardiovascular function and motor ability. The equipment is automatic and testing is completed in approximately three minutes.\n\n1. The Soviets deal with crewmember fatigue in several ways. First, they emphasize and promote physical conditioning. If a crewmember is physically fit, he will be less prone to fatigue and will recover sooner after tiring flights. Aeroflot provides exercise facilities at all major airports, and these facilities are supervised by a well known athlete. The second thing they do is to thoroughly test each crewmember prior to flight to insure his physical fitness and mental alertness. At the present time, these tests are conducted by a medical team headed by a doctor, usually a woman. A crewmember is not allowed to fly if he fails the examination. These tests are now being automated and will take only 1-3 minutes when the prototype equipment becomes operational. Finally, there is a third approach Aeroflot is using--a prophylactorium. Each major airport has one, a 3 to 4 story building set off from the main airport buildings, but easily accessible by foot. These facilities are well landscaped and are designed to provide total rest and relaxation for transient crewmembers. They have a large kitchen"} {"doc_id":"d749c5b830e52eb9","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"C O N F I D E N T I A L OO-B-321/33474-76\n\n3\n\n6. Dr Akoyev asked for [REDACTED] personal opinion of the UFO phenomenon. He was told that 99 percent of these occurrences were traceable to either natural or man-made phenomena such as celestial movement, aircraft or artificial satellites, and that the other one percent cannot be explained--possibly an hallucination. Akoyev then asked, \"Do you think it is possible...could there be something coming from outer space?\"\n\n7. Dr [fnu] Akutin, a cybernetici st at the Civil Aviation Institute of Leningrad has developed several prototypes of pilot testing equipment. The equipment is planned to replace most of the current duties of medical personnel who examine pilots prior to flight. The automatic devices will be installed in all airport flight operations facilities. Akutin and his associates demonstrated [REDACTED] a set of instruments which automatically measure a pilot's blood pressure and pulse rate, record his cardiovascular functioning with an electrocardiogram, and test his motor reaction process.\n\n8. The device is activated by inserting a small metallic plate into the testing machine. The plate, one of which is carried by each crewmember, contains a biological baseline on that particular individual. His normal blood pressure, pulse rate, electrocardiogram, and motor ability are coded into the metal plate. This plate is updated annually, or more often if required. After the plate is inserted into the machine, the pilot places the middle finger of each hand into two little holes and rests his wrists on two small metal plates on a table. Small, automatic pneumatic cups close around the fingers and inflate. The machine then measures the blood pressure and pulse rate by comparing the two fingers, computing a mean, and then comparing the result with the encoded information on the pilot's plate. The systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse rate are then displayed on the face of the machine in an electronic digital form. At the same time the machine automatically administers an electrocardiogram \"across the heart\" and displays this on a cathode-ray tube. If any of these values are outside the normal standard for that particular individual, a light illuminates and further examination is required by a medical doctor. If no light illuminates, the pilot is passed.\n\n9. The pilot then faces a panel of red and green colored lights. On the panel are green and red colored buttons. The lights begin to illuminate in a random fashion, with the pilot being required to press the corresponding color button immediately to extinguish the colored light. This test continues for approximately 20-30 seconds, during which the lights flash in a random sequence. At the end of the testing period, the machine scores the pilot's performance and digitally displays his score in the number of correct and wrong responses. If he scores as high or higher than his standard, he is passed; if his score is lower, a light illuminates and further examination is required by a medical doctor. There are three separate programs which are randomly selected, making it impossible to memorize the sequence of the lights.\n\n10. Finally, the pilot is seated before a miniature cockpit with a control stick and an attitude indicator. The control stick must be moved to keep the attitude indicator (artificial horizon) straight and level. The indicator pitches up and down and from side to side and very closely duplicates actual instrument flying conditions. The control stick also closely approximated necessary pilot skills. At the end of this test, the score is again displayed and, depending upon his standard, a pilot passes or fails. The entire sequence of testing, from taking blood pressure to the control stick evaluation, takes approximately three minutes. If a pilot passes all phases, his personal profile plate along with a certificate card is returned to him. He must present the certificate card to the flight dispatcher before he is allowed to board the aircraft."} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n2 March 2010\n\nICOD: 1 December 2009\n\nDIA-08-1003-002\n\nPositron Aerospace Propulsion\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPositron Aerospace Propulsion\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 69\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ........................................................................................ v\nAntimatter ........................................................................................... 1\nPositron Air-Breathing Propulsion ................................................ 2\nPTRE Applications ........................................................................... 5\nUnmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) ............................................ 5\nRamjet-Assisted Missile (RAM) ............................................. 7\nSingle-Stage Reusable Vehicle (SSRV) ................................. 8\nPositron-Powered Rockets ............................................................. 11\nThe Solid-Core Positron Rocket ........................................... 12\nThe Gas-Core Positron Rocket ............................................. 14\nThe Sänger Photon Positron Rocket .................................... 16\nPositron Rocket System Comparison ................................... 17\nPositron Energy Conversion for Onboard Power ................ 18\nPositrons for a Manned Mars Mission ......................................... 19\nPositron Production ........................................................................ 22\nPositron Costs ................................................................................. 23\nPositron Storage ............................................................................. 24\nFormation of Positronium in Porous Media ........................ 25\nLong-Term Storage of Positronium ..................................... 25\nConclusions ..................................................................................... 27\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Specific Energy for Chemical, Nuclear and Antimatter Materials.. ........... 1\nFigure 2. Tory-IIC Ready for Testing ........................................................................ 3\nFigure 3. PTRE Turbojet and Turbo-Ramjet Modes ............................................. 3\nFigure 4. Details of the PTRE Engine. ...................................................................... 4\nFigure 5. Combustion Turbo-Ramjet....................................................................... 4\nFigure 6. UAV Range vs. Positron Mass ................................................................. 5\nFigure 7. LOCAAS Turbojet Engine ........................................................................ 6\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 8. BOMARC and Talos Ramjet-Assisted Missiles ............................................ 8\nFigure 9. Positron SSRV Flight Profile ................................................................... 10\nFigure 10. Artist's Rendition of a Four-Engine Positron SSRV ................................ 11\nFigure 11. Solid-Core Positron Rocket Engine With a Hot-Bleed Configuration..... 12\nFigure 12. Fluid Systems ........................................................................................ 15\nFigure 13. Modified Sänger Photon Rocket Concept ............................................ 17\nFigure 14. Closed Brayton Cycle Using Positron Annihilation .............................. 18\nFigure 15. Conceptual 110 Watt Positron Closed Cycle Generator Based on the NASA Glenn Research Center Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG) .. 18\nFigure 16. Mars Trajectories (X-Coordinates Defined in Direction of Aries) ......... 20\nFigure 17. Spacecrafts Using Positron Engines.................................................... 21\nFigure 18. Proposed Undulator-Based Positron Source for the International Linear Collider ....................................................................... 22\nFigure 19. Penning Trap ........................................................................................ 24\nFigure 20. A Positron Forms Ps ............................................................................. 25\nFigure 21. Computer Simulation of Ps Atoms ....................................................... 26\nFigure 22. TEM of Silica Aerogel ........................................................................... 26\n\nTables\n\nTable 1. GLOW for Chemical SSRV ........................................................................ 9\nTable 2. GLOW for Positron SSRV ........................................................................ 9\nTable 3. Total Positron Requirement for SSRV With a Dry Mass of 60,500 kg ....... 10\nTable 4. Comparison of Space Propulsion and Power Systems - Solid Core ......... 13\nTable 5. Comparison of Three Positron Propulsion Concepts for Mars Mission ..... 17\nTable 6. Positron and Antiproton Expected Costs in the Next 10 Years ................ 23\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPositron Aerospace Propulsion\n\nIntroduction\n\nAntimatter is considered an extremely attractive fuel for aerospace propulsion because of its enormous advantage in energy density over all other known sources of energy. However, because antimatter does not occur naturally and is unstable in the presence of matter, no vehicles have ever flown using it.\n\nAfter a short overview of the various aerospace applications of antimatter, this paper provides a detailed analysis of air-breathing turbojets and turbo-ramjet missiles, as well as rockets for manned interplanetary missions. It discusses new methods of producing and storing large numbers of antielectrons, or positrons, and compares their costs with those of antiprotons. Finally, the paper considers the prospects for the first, modest demonstration of positron propulsive flight within the next 10 years. Interplanetary missions on positron-propelled spaceships are described in detail, with estimates of positron requirements for each mission. Standalone positron power systems are described briefly.\n\nStudies of positrons as a fuel for aerospace propulsion applications have been sponsored by the Air Force Research Laboratory, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, and the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts, Atlanta, Georgia. This paper is an anthology of that work and not a general review of antimatter propulsion.\n\nThe positron was predicted by Dirac in 1929¹ and discovered by Anderson in 1932.² Along with the antiproton, which was discovered in 1954,³ the positron has the largest specific energy of any known material. Because aerospace propulsion performance is ultimately limited by specific power, this advantage was immediately appreciated. However, compared with chemical sources of energy, positrons presented new and serious production and storage challenges.\n\nAntimatter has a long history of appearing in science fiction literature, dating to a 1942 short story in Astounding Science Fiction and the 1949 book Seetee. It later appeared in the Star Trek television and film series and continues to be an appealing subject for contemporary books and films, such as Angels and Demons.\n\nPositron aerospace propulsion is now entering a critical period owing to new technologies that bear on production and storage issues. To their advantage, positrons, unlike nuclear fission and antiprotons, present no radiation or environmental safety problems.\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAntimatter\n\nAntimatter appears in the form of fundamental particles that have their sign of electric charge reversed from their matter counterpart. For example, the positron, e+, is the antiparticle to the electron, e-. According to the CPT theorem,4 properties of matter and their counterpart antimatter particles are identical. This has been tested in the laboratory to an accuracy of roughly 1 part in 10 million.\n\nAntimatter is appealing for aerospace uses because its specific energy by annihilation is 180 MJ/µg, or 10 orders of magnitude larger than chemical energy, as shown in Figure 1.\n\nFigure 1. Specific Energy for Chemical, Nuclear, and Antimatter Materials\n\nIn the presence of matter, the positron binds with an electron to form a short-lived atom called positronium (Ps). Depending on the relative spin orientations of the positron and electron, Ps has a mean lifetime in a vacuum of 125 picoseconds (para-Ps, spins antiparallel), or 142 nanoseconds (ortho-Ps, spins parallel).\n\nFrom quantum number conservation, para-Ps decays into two gamma rays of equal energy, 511 kiloelectronvolts (keV), whereas ortho-Ps decays into three gamma rays whose energies add up to 1022 keV. Hence, when Ps self-annihilates, there is 100 percent conversion of mass into electromagnetic energy given by Einstein's famous equation, E = mc2, where c is the speed of light.\n\nAlthough the energies of positron annihilation gamma rays are on the nuclear scale, they have none of the undesirable features associated with nuclear energy. First, the annihilation evolves rapidly (nanoseconds) and is controllable under predictable electromagnetic forces. There is no long-term inertia as with nuclear reactors. Consequently, positron-generated thrust can be throttled.\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSecond, low-energy gamma rays from positron annihilation cannot make residual radioactivity in surrounding air and containment vessels. In contrast, antiprotons annihilate into a host of high-energy particles, including π-mesons and gamma rays that can induce residual radioactivity in nearby materials.\n\nFinally, low-energy gamma rays from positron annihilation can be readily converted into useful forms of energy, including heat and electricity required for propulsion systems. This contrasts with large, complex systems required for conversion of antiproton annihilation and nuclear fission/fusion energy.\n\nThere are two reasons why positrons have yet to be used for aerospace applications. First, it has not been possible to produce them in the numbers required. However, recent developments in high-energy physics research are resulting in expanding levels of positron production. Second, methods for storing positrons for basic research do not hold enough positrons long enough for propulsion applications. Recent developments in storage techniques may significantly improve the situation, with lifetimes up to months and possibly years.\n\nPositron Air-Breathing Propulsion\n\nAeronautical engines burn a mixture of aviation fuel and oxygen in air to heat a working fluid. To keep engines small, the combustion rate in the engine needs to be high.5 At sea level for a fuel-air mass ratio of 0.068, it is 500,000 kJ/m3-s. To maintain speed, the thrust specific fuel consumption (TSFC) for turbojets and turbo-ramjets is in the range of 0.075 - 0.11 and 0.17 - 0.26 kilogram/hour-Newton (kg/hr-N), respectively. All aeronautical engines are limited in range and flight duration by the fuel on board.\n\nBecause of the aforementioned performance bounds of combustion engines, the aeronautic industry has worked diligently to increase the range and payload of aircraft by maximizing the performance of combustion engines and optimizing aerodynamic design. Beyond this, the only way a combustion-powered aircraft can extend its range and endurance is by in-flight refueling.\n\nTwo projects investigated nuclear power as a way to increase performance. In 1946, the U.S. Air Force established the Nuclear Energy for Propulsion of Aircraft program. However, this program was disbanded in 1951 in favor of the joint Atomic Energy Commission-Air Force Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion program. Implementing nuclear fission to power an aircraft required two approaches. One was direct cycle, whereby air was heated by passing it through a nuclear reactor; the other was indirect cycle, whereby the reactor heated a liquid metal that in turn heated air in a secondary heat exchanger. The program never produced a prototype and was canceled in 1961.\n\nIn 1957, the Pentagon started development of a nuclear ramjet missile (SLAM, Supersonic Low-Altitude Missile) to fly below Soviet defenses. The Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Pluto program successfully tested two engines, Tory-IIA and Tory-IIC (Figure 2), at the Nevada Test Site. The program was canceled in 1964.6, 7\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 2. Tory-IIC Ready for Testing (courtesy LLNL)\n\nIn a positron turbojet/ramjet engine (PTRE),8 tungsten shells are heated by gamma rays, with heat transferred to air by convection.9, 10\n\nFigure 3. PTRE Turbojet (green) and Turbo-Ramjet (red) Modes (courtesy Positronics Research LLC)11\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 4. Details of the PTRE Engine (courtesy Positronics Research LLC)12\n\nA comparison with the combustion turbo-ramjet engine (Figure 5) shows that volume used for combustion heating is used by PTREs for convection heating.\n\nFigure 5. Combustion Turbo-Ramjet (courtesy Positronics Research LLC)13\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPTRE Applications\n\nThree uses for PTREs have been investigated: unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), ramjet-assisted missiles (RAMs), and single-stage reusable vehicles (SSRVs).\n\nUNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE (UAV)\n\nFigure 6 shows range versus positron mass for a 60-kg UAV with lift/drag of four that can circumnavigate Earth on 150 µg of positrons.14 It is modeled after the LOCASS turbojet (Figure 7) at the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.15\n\nRange (kNM) vs. Positron Mass (mg) chart: y-axis 0 to 350 kNM, x-axis 0.00 to 2.00 mg\n\nFigure 6. UAV Range Versus Positron Mass (courtesy Positronics Research LLC)16\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 7. LOCAAS Turbojet Engine (courtesy of AFRL, Eglin AFB, FL)17\nA UAV fueled with positrons would allow for an ultralong-endurance platform with many \"dual-use\" applications, including the following:\nMilitary\n• Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance.\n• Real-time battlefield command observation.\n• Monitoring and early warning of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.\n• Ordnance delivery.\n• Target laser illumination/covert target acquisition.\n• Coastal patrol.\n• Drug interdiction.\n• Search and rescue.\n• Geomagnetic and atmospheric surveys.\nCivil, State, and Local Government\n• Airborne early warning (storms, terrorist attacks, chemical/biological/nuclear).\n6\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n• Environmental/pollution monitoring.\n• Fire detection and monitoring.\n• Aerial surveying.\n• Weather and atmospheric monitoring.\n• Border patrol.\n• Emergency communications relay.\n• Drug interdiction.\n• Law enforcement.\n• Highway/road monitoring.\n• Search and rescue.\nCommercial\n• Iceberg patrol/tracking in shipping lanes.\n• Railway/pipeline/power line monitoring.\n• Commercial fishing reconnaissance/sea-life monitoring.\n• Environmental/pollution monitoring.\n• Livestock monitoring.\n• Mineral exploration.\n• Weather sensing.\n• Agriculture.\nAdditional advantages to the commercial airline industry:\n• Less propellant means increased payload/passenger per aircraft.\n• Global nonstop flights are possible.\n• Increase in structural mass allows more electronics/passenger amenities.\nRAMJET-ASSISTED MISSILE (RAM)\nThe BOMARC 440-kilometer (km)-range antiaircraft missile was developed by the U.S. Air Force in the 1950s to counter Soviet bombers. In the 1960s, the Talos, a long-range surface-to-air missile, was developed by the U.S. Navy and later converted to the Vandal missile. Both ramjets (Figure 8) activated at mach 1.\n7\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 8. BOMARC (left) and Talos (right) Ramjet-Assisted Missiles (courtesy Boeing and the U.S. Navy)\nThe BOMARC range could be increased to 2,000 km with 1 milligram (mg) of positrons. In addition, positrons could act as ordnance to destroy electronics on missiles or aircraft by electromagnetic pulse (EMP) by detonation of micrograms of positrons up to hundreds of meters from the target.18\nSINGLE-STAGE REUSABLE VEHICLE (SSRV)\nThe Department of Defense, NASA, and the aerospace industry are working to eliminate multistage rockets for access to low Earth orbit (LEO) to lower launch costs. An SSRV would integrate components and allow more rapid turnaround on missions.\nThe combustion SSRV has a lower payload ratio than conventional rockets. Current designs use combined-cycle or combination engines for the endoatmospheric phases of the mission. Use of air-breathing engines significantly reduces propellant mass and gross liftoff weight (GLOW). Improving payload mass requires reducing propellant and structural mass, both of which can be accomplished using positrons as fuel.\nA PTRE eliminates propellant mass during the endoatmospheric phase of operation. Any reduction of propellant mass has serious positive effects for three reasons. First, it allows an increased payload/number of passengers per aircraft. Second, adding positrons on the milligram level does not change the lift requirements for the aircraft, resulting in longer range flights, perhaps exceeding 100 kilonautical miles (kNM). Third, the structural mass may be increased.\nTables 1 and 2 provide a mass budget comparison between a chemically fueled SSRV19 and a positron-powered SSRV.20\n8\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nTable 1. GLOW for Chemical SSRV21\nVehicle Component Mass\nStructure 25,700 kg\nThermal Protection 12,300 kg\nPropulsion (4 engines) 14,900 kg\nElectronics 7,600 kg\nTOTAL DRY MASS 60,500 kg\n15% Margin + Unused Propellants 11,400 kg\nPayload 11,340 kg (24,948 lbs)\nBURNOUT MASS 83,240 kg\nTOTAL PROPELLANT 368,300 kg\nGLOW 451,540 kg (993,388 lbs)\nTable 2. GLOW for Positron SSRV22\nVehicle Component Mass\nStructure 25,700 kg\nThermal Protection 12,300 kg\nPropulsion (4 engines) 14,900 kg\nElectronics 7,600 kg\nTOTAL DRY MASS 60,500 kg\n15% Margin + Unused Propellants 11,400 kg\nPayload 11,340 kg (24,948 lbs)\nBURNOUT MASS 83,240 kg\nTOTAL PROPELLANT 176,000 kg\nGLOW 259,240 kg (590,328 lbs)\nThe GLOW of the positron SSRV is 43 percent less than that of the chemical SSRV owing to reduced propellant mass. The PTRE will dramatically increase the affordability of space transportation by increasing the useful payload.\n9\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 9. Positron SSRV Flight Profile (courtesy Positronics Research LLC)23\nThe SSRV takes off horizontally (Figure 9) from Edwards Air Force Base, accelerates to mach 1.8 as a turbojet, and then goes to the ramjet mode. At mach 8 the rocket is ignited and takes the vehicle into LEO.24 The positron mass budget for a 60,500-kg dry mass for ascension to LEO is 86.9 mg (Table 3).\nTable 3. Total Positron Requirement for SSRV With a Dry Mass of 60,500 kg25\nMission Mode Mass Of e±\nTurbojet – Launch 2.5 mg\nRamjet 76.5 mg\n10% margin (turbojet mode upon landing, inclination changes, etc.) 7.9 mg\nTOTAL 86.9 mg\nAn artist's rendition of the SSRV is provided in Figure 10.\n10\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 10. Artist’s Rendition of a Four-Engine Positron SSRV (courtesy of Positronics Research LLC)26\n\nPositron-Powered Rockets\n\nA positron rocket offers significant advantages over nuclear fission and antiproton rockets.27 Nuclear fission reactors contain enormous amounts of highly toxic radioactive material, and antiproton rockets produce radioactivity in surrounding materials by interactions of high-energy mesons and gamma rays from antiproton annihilation. The proposed nuclear fission gas core rocket and antiproton adaptations would release radioactive fission fragments into the atmosphere. In contrast, positron rockets are totally radioactivity free.\n\nSecond, in the event of an accidental detonation of the positron fuel, the prompt (nanoseconds) burst of gamma rays can be shielded from humans on spacecraft. The 1/e absorption length of a 511-keV gamma ray in lead is 5.6 millimeters. A 13-centimeter (cm)-thick shield thus reduces the gamma ray flux by a factor 8.3 x 10-11. To illustrate, a human behind such a shield at a distance of 10 meters from a 100-mg source of annihilating positrons would experience a whole-body radiation dose of 2 rem (roentgen equivalent man), which is within the annual tolerance for radiation workers in the United States.\n\nThe following sections investigate three positron rockets: solid core, gas core, and photon.28 In a solid-core positron rocket, positrons heat a hydrogen working fluid through an attenuating solid such as tungsten. In a gas-core positron rocket, gamma rays directly heat propellant through a one- or two-fluid process. In a photon positron rocket, solid propellant is ablated from a surface bombarded by gamma rays.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTHE SOLID-CORE POSITRON ROCKET\n\nFigure 11 depicts a solid-core positron-powered rocket, similar in many regards to the NERVA nuclear-thermal concept.29\n\nFigure 11. Solid-Core Positron Rocket Engine With a Hot-Bleed Configuration (courtesy Positronics Research LLC)30\n\nThe cryogenic hydrogen propellant is supplied from a storage tank through a high-pressure pump and routed to cool the regenerative nozzle, the casing of the heat exchanger, and the central positron target tubes. Ps enters the inlet plenum to the attenuator that is heated by gamma rays to high temperature. Hydrogen propellant passes through the attenuating matrix and is heated and exhausted through a nozzle to generate thrust.\n\nA small fraction of the hot exit propellant is bled off to a turbine that drives the high-pressure feed pump. The high-temperature bleed can either be mixed with cold hydrogen to reduce its temperature or directly fed to the turbine. If it is directly fed to the turbine, it must be made of materials that can withstand high temperatures. The bleed flow is exhausted from a turbine exit nozzle to space after driving the turbine.\n\nAs with the NERVA system, the positron solid-core concept is thermally limited by materials in the heating chamber. The difference is that the fission system requires a reactor and complex machinery, whereas the positron system relies on Ps atoms injected upstream from a storage unit. This has two advantages. First, a reduction in the engine mass for a given thrust is realized; second, there is greater choice in materials to be used in the heating chamber.\n\nA thermal-fluids analysis was conducted to predict performance. A specific impulse of 920 seconds is attainable with chamber temperatures at 3,000 Kelvin. The corresponding thrust and power emulate fission systems. Mars trip burn times are on\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthe order of 30 minutes, indicating that a spacecraft employing three 72-kN solid-core engines would require 6-9 mg of positrons per mission.\n\nSolid-core fission and positron systems are compared in Table 4.\n\nTable 4. Comparison of Space Propulsion and Power Systems – Solid Core\n\nFission-Based | Positron Powered\n\nTechnology: NERVA/Rover demonstrated; Never flight tested | Conceptual; Must demonstrate positron storage and controlled injection; Near-term technology demonstration for positron storage needed\n\nPerformance: Isp ≈ 950 sec; Thrust ≈ 72 - 123 kN; Power ≈ 367- 5320 MW (matched to thrust); Lifetime ≈ 2 hours total operation | Isp - as in fission systems; Thrust -variable, similar to fission systems; Power - matched to thrust; Lifetime - set by material considerations\n\nOperation: Design dictated by neutronics, fuel burn up and fission poisoning; High neutron & gamma radiation during operation; Requires active, accurate and massive control; Requires shutdown cooling to remove heat from nuclear waste; Radiation after shutdown due to fission products | No criticality, burn up or poison accumulation issues; Design based only upon heat transfer and gamma attenuation issues; Does not require shutdown cooling; Simple on-off control, power controlled by rate of positron utilization; Not a radiation source\n\nMaterials: Material dictated by neutronics; Propellant:-heated H2; Working fluids for power systems - inert gas; Uranium in graphite media; Corrosion issues require complex fuel | Material choices dictated by temperature; Propellant-heated H2; Working fluids for power systems - inert gas\n\nPayload Integration: Requires massive shield from reactor; Requires separation from reactor; Complex design issues due to neutron scattering | Shield required around manned area separated from positron storage; Propulsion and power sources can be integrated into vehicle\n\nPost Operation: Not able to return to earth or inhabited surface; Not reusable or refuelable | Able to return to Earth or inhabited surface; Reusable and refuelable\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTHE GAS-CORE POSITRON ROCKET\n\nThe gas-core positron concept follows nuclear gas-core concepts,31, 32, 33 which are different from the solid-core concept in that gamma rays directly heat a fluid under pressure. The limit of the solid-core approach is melting temperatures of the solid matrix gamma ray attenuator. By direct heating, temperatures can increase significantly as long as the gas does not appreciably heat the walls.\n\nFour versions of the gas-core concept are illustrated in Figure 12. Synchronous with pulsed Ps injection are (a-c) pulses of LN2 or LNe or LH 2 with LXe gamma ray attenuator and (d) pulses of LH2 where Ps is encapsulated in lead, a gamma ray converter. For fluid injection, a turbo-pump (not shown) is located upstream, with power obtained from a positron Brayton cycle system described later in this paper.\n\nResults from computational fluid dynamics codes reveal that high-density regions of the fluid move away from the gamma ray source when the power in the system exceeds 300 megawatts. Under these conditions, the propellant does not efficiently absorb gamma rays. Furthermore, calculations of heat required for continuous operation suggest the vortex configuration of (b) breaks down and reverts to two-fluid flow.\n\nHowever, both the two-fluid, flow-through model and the Ps lead-cartridge concepts show promise if the mass flow rate of the hydrogen propellant exceeds that of the xenon or lead by a factor of five. By operating in a pulsed mode, one should be able to control the positron delivery into the chamber core. With complete absorption of gamma rays in the 2-cm lead casing, performance of the system matches that of previously examined systems.34, 35\n\nThrusts of 130 kN (1,000 atmospheres) are predicted for a single-engine system with an efficiency of 85 percent. Burn times are 30 minutes for ΔV = 3.7 km/second (sec) with 25 mg of positrons consumed for a 50,000-kg burnout mass. The limit of the gas-core concept occurs near the thresholds for ionization of hydrogen, corresponding to Isp of ~ 2,500 sec.\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 12 diagram: (a) LN2 or Ne inlet, Positron Trap, Heating Chamber, Nozzle; (b) H2 and LXe two-fluid system with vortex; (c) two-fluid flow-through system with H2 and LXe; (d) H2 system with Pb ENCASED e+ and Expanding Plasma.\n\nFigure 12. Fluid Systems. (a) One-fluid system of LN2 or Ne propellant; (b) Two-fluid system of LH2 and LXe; (c) Two-fluid flow-through system with LH2 at higher mass flow rates than LXe; and (d) One-fluid LH2 system with lead encapsulated Ps (courtesy Positronics Research LLC)36\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTHE SÄNGER PHOTON POSITRON ROCKET\n\nIn 1953, German engineer Eugen Sänger proposed the photon rocket. One means of providing thrust was to shower a parabolic mirror with positron annihilation gamma rays.37 Unfortunately, there are no materials that reflect gamma rays at large angles.\n\nA schematic of a modified Sänger photon rocket is shown in Figure 13. Ps is emitted in 'pellets' from several storage banks located behind the engine. Positrons are programmed by supporting fields to annihilate in front of a stiffened pressure plate, the shape of which was assumed to be parabolic for this work.38\n\nTo make the Sänger photon rocket practical, solid propellant that can be ablated from the plate is added. Gamma rays deposit energy on the surface of the ablation material and jettison high-energy particles with large Isp. As the solid material recedes from the target, the location of the positron annihilation can be correspondingly moved inward to preserve focal properties of the system. A thickness of a few meters of material is sufficient for a planetary mission.\n\n[Figure 13 diagram: Modified Sänger Photon Rocket schematic with labels PAYLOAD, e+ TRAP BANKS, PRESSURE PLATE, PEC SYSTEM (OPTIONAL), SOLID ABLATION MATERIAL]\n\nFigure 13. Modified Sänger Photon Rocket Concept (courtesy Positronics Research LLC)39\n\nThe predicted Isp for this system results in fast transit times to Mars, warranting a positron power plant. Unlike the solid-core or gas-core concepts, there are no means to draw off some of the ablated material to provide power. A separate Brayton-cycle positron energy conversion system provides power to the pellet mass driver and other\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ncomponents. Alternatively, solar collectors or closed-loop nuclear reactors could be employed.\n\nTo improve ablation efficiency, annihilation gamma rays must be wavelength shifted (WLS) by passing them through a high-Z WLS material. The material of choice, lead, also serves as the shell of the Ps pellet. The pellet vaporizes into high-energy plasma, and the WLS photons propagate to the pressure plate. Silicon carbide ablation material has been adopted from the antiproton catalyzed microfission/fusion concept40, 41 developed at Penn State University by the author and coworkers. Photon energy distributions are shifted through 2 cm of lead to 1-10 keV from 511 keV with 85 percent efficiency.\n\nPerformance depends primarily on the energy of the WLS photons and the energy per pellet. At 8 keV, Isp is in the range 1,200-3,000 sec. Thrust is 40-145 kN, the latter at a pellet injection rate of 1 hertz. The total quantity of positrons consumed for a one-way trip to Mars over this range of Isp is 15-40 mg with 50 percent of gamma rays striking the plate and a 85 percent WLS efficiency.\n\nPOSITRON ROCKET SYSTEM COMPARISON\n\nA side-by-side comparison of three positron rocket propulsion concepts is presented in Table 5 for a one-way transit to Mars using ΔV = 3.7 km/sec.\n\nTable 5. Comparison of Three Positron Propulsion Concepts for Mars Mission\n\nSolid-Core | Gas-Core | Sänger Ablation\nIsp | 650 - 920 sec | 1000 - 2500 sec | 1200 - 3000 sec\nThrust | 72 kN, small class | 130 kN (1000 atm) | 40 –145 kN (1 Hz)\nLimits | Wall and nozzle temperature | Wall and nozzle temperature; H Ionization | Positron density per pellet\ne+ mass | 6-9 mg (100% efficiency) | < 25 mg (85% efficiency) | 15 - 40 mg (42.5% efficiency)\nSpecial Notes | Continuous burn; Multiple engines may be possible; Hot-bleed line possible | Pulsed burn; Multiple engines may be possible; Hot-bleed line possible; Engine can be throttled | Pulsed burn; Multiple engines may be possible; No direct onboard power; Engine can be throttled\nFuture work | Efficiency study | Efficiency study; Lower pressure possible? | Further WLS and radiation transport study\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPOSITRON ENERGY CONVERSION FOR ONBOARD POWER\n\nResearch was conducted on positron utilization in a standalone, closed-loop, high-power system.42 A Brayton cycle engine (Figure 14) was investigated with output power of 100 kW, consistent with Mars Reference Mission specifications.43, 44 Results show efficiencies of 25-30 percent and positron consumption of 7 µg/hour.\n\nSuch a power system would have practical meaning for fast transits to Mars where positron consumption does not dominate rocket positron consumption.\n\n[Figure 14 diagram: Closed Brayton cycle with Regenerator, Heater-Attenuator, Turbine, Compressor, Radiator, Work (Alternator)]\n\nFigure 14. Closed Brayton Cycle Using Positron Annihilation (courtesy Positronics Research LLC)45\n\nIn addition, a small, 110-watt, positron-driven generator (Figure 15) for small, onboard tasks was designed around the NASA Glenn Research Center Stirling Radioisotope Generator,46 with heat provided by Ps gamma rays.\n\n[Figure 15 diagram: Stirling Convertor 1 (55 We), Stirling Convertor 2 (55 We), Ps Storage, Cryocooler Units, Electric Power Outlet, Tungsten Converter and Blackbody Radiator, Magnetic Sleeve]\n\nFigure 15. Conceptual 110-Watt Positron Closed-Cycle Generator Based on the NASA Glenn Research Center Stirling Radioisotope Generator47 (courtesy Positronics Research LLC)48\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPositrons for a Manned Mars Mission\n\nPositron propulsion systems improve engine performance, making them an attractive substitute for chemical and nuclear systems for manned exploration of the planets. One of the boldest challenges is a manned mission to Mars. Onboard propellant requires an overall interplanetary system mass that prohibits use of any type of existing launch vehicle, including the Saturn V. The need to protect astronauts from radiation hazards in space inhibits use of low-impulse interplanetary trajectories to reduce propellant mass. Missions must be established that can transport astronauts to Mars in less than 180 days.\n\nDemands on a positron engine to get from LEO to Mars are based on two parameters: mass of the spacecraft after burnout and the ΔV provided by orbital mechanics. Efforts to minimize burnout mass for a positron-based rocket spacecraft prompted examination of previously designed systems. The NASA Mars Exploration Study Team studied such systems in 1997-98.49, 50\n\nConclusions reached by NASA and adopted for this study include:\n\n• To make the Mars mission economically feasible, multiple payloads should be launched to Mars instead of a single, \"all-in-one\" vehicle. This keeps payload masses within reach of existing chemical launch systems.\n\n• A solid-core nuclear-thermal rocket (NTR) was studied. The study adopted existing NERVA rockets with Isp = 900 seconds and a core temperature near 2,800 ºC. The 1993 study examined 15 kilopound-force klbf and 20 klbf rockets.51\n\n• Each launch had a payload consisting of the NTR with its Mars payload.\n\n• Unpiloted cargo was sent on a low-energy (\"C3\") Hohmann-type transfer, generally the slowest means of reaching Mars.\n\n• The Mars excursion vehicle should be sent on a \"fast transit\" to Mars from LEO. A fast, 180-day mission would not require artificial gravity on the spacecraft to protect astronauts from weightlessness.\n\n• The Earth return vehicle (ERV) sits in Mars orbit at 250-km periapsis and waits until astronauts have docked from Mars using a liquid oxygen (LOX)/methane propulsion system. The ERV uses a chemical propulsion system to return home to avoid use of a fission-based propulsion plant in the atmosphere.\n\n• Minimization of ΔV to Mars is performed by launching during estimated planetary conjunctions (every 778 days) and by using aerobraking.\n\n• Aerobraking uses the chemical propulsion system of the cargo vessel or lander. Payload is jettisoned from the NTR system (called the trans-Mars insertion system [TMI]) sometime during the trip to Mars.\n\n• To reduce the probability of impact with Earth, an additional ΔV is given to the TMI stage after the payload has separated.\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBenefits of using positrons for a Mars mission include:\n\n• The \"disposable ΔV\" used to propel TMI stages into low-probability Earth or Mars intercepts can be eliminated, reducing total propellant mass.\n\n• Reduction in shielding and engine mass give lower initial mass low Earth orbit for launch vehicles or faster transits for piloted missions.\n\n• The ERV uses a positron engine instead of LOX/CH4. This gives significant mass savings or an equivalent reduction in Mars-to-Earth return time for astronauts.\n\n• The improvement in Isp translates to either a reduced launch payload mass for cargo missions or reduced transit times for piloted missions to Mars.\n\n• More chemical propellant can be stored on the lander to improve aerobraking or landing strategies that reduce hazards for astronauts.\n\nLaunch dates are set for around 2030. Assuming minimum ΔV for Mars opposition-class missions, interplanetary scenarios are illustrated in Figure 16. The ΔV for an insertion trajectory into Mars for the manned mission (Figure 16b) is ΔV = 3.7 km/sec. Each manned trajectory assumes a 180-day transit time.\n\n[Figure 16 diagrams (a)-(d): Mars Trajectories plots]\n\nFigures 16. Mars Trajectories (X-coordinates defined in direction of Aries): (a) 2029 cargo mission; (b) 2031 manned lander to Mars; (c) 2033 manned return to Earth; (d) 2035 manned lander to Mars, if necessary (courtesy Positronics Research LLC)52\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe Mars reference mission53, 54 considered payload masses of 60,000 kg for 2015 missions. This can be reduced to 45,000 kg assuming technological advances by 2031 with a complete interplanetary spacecraft mass of 90,000 kg.\n\nIn summary, the mission scenario for a positron spacecraft is similar to that for existing studies, but with the use of less costly launch vehicles. Every 778 days, two 45,000-kg payloads are launched from Earth using a Saturn V or equivalent chemical rocket. One payload is the unmanned system or manned crew lander sent to Mars; the other contains the positron propulsion system and the propellant tank. They are assembled as a complete unit in LEO.\n\nUnmanned systems are launched in advance of the crewed system in order to ensure that the Martian habitat is well established. The crew arrives at Mars in late 2033, performs research for 1 year, and then returns home in a smaller positron spacecraft using a shorter trajectory. Artists' renditions of two possible positron spaceships previously described in this study are shown in Figure 17.\n\nFigure 17. Spacecraft Using Positron Engines. (a) Solid-core system enters Mars orbit; (b) Modified Sänger photon rocket system burns for landing on Mars (courtesy Positronics Research LLC).55\n\nArchitectures for Mars exploration using a positron SSRV are summarized below:\n\n• Before humans leave for Mars on initial flights, cargo ships precede them to Mars on low-energy trajectories to take the components of a Mars space station (MSS) and necessary supplies, including a Mars surface lander (MSL). The MSS will be similar to an Earth space station (ESS). The cargo ships will utilize positron rocket engines.\n\n• Manned positron SSRVs launched from Earth rendezvous in LEO with the ESS. The SSRV is a horizontal-takeoff, horizontal-landing winged-body, manned vehicle in which the first stages of flight use air-breathing engines with positrons heating the air. It switches to the rocket engine to complete the final ascent phase to LEO.\n\n• Once ready for interplanetary flights at the ESS, including refueling, the SSRV flies to Mars on a fast, high-energy trajectory, carrying a crew of five or six astronauts and powered by positron rocket engines. The SSRV conducts a rendezvous with the\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMSS, and the astronauts descend to the Mars surface on the MSL using a high-thrust variant of the positron rocket engine.\n\nPositron Production\n\nPositrons are currently produced at particle accelerators worldwide for basic and applications research. For example, the positron-emitting radioisotope Na22 (2.7 year mean lifetime) is made by bombarding targets with neutrons from a high-energy proton accelerator in the reaction Al27(n,x)Na22. Capture of these positrons is used to form beams with keV (slow) to MeV (fast) energies. Handling of large radioactive sources results in limits of 106 slow positrons/sec.\n\nFor intensities up to 1010/sec, bombardment of metal targets with electron beams in the 10– to 100-MeV range is used, followed by collection and acceleration (deceleration) of positrons to form fast or slow beams. In addition, it has recently been shown that slow positron beams of up to 10^11/sec can be realized by converting neutrons in reactors to electron-positron pairs in thin metal foils.\n\nMuch higher positron currents are being sought in a variety of proposed solutions. Illustrated below are a few of the more promising concepts.\n\nFirst, in 1996, the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory56 proposed developing an intense source of fast positrons (10^16/sec) utilizing compact electron betatron accelerators.\n\nSecond, tabletop femtosecond laser-driven positron sources currently under development at the National Ignition Facility (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory), the Rutherford-Appleton Laboratory (United Kingdom), and the Max Planck Institute (Munich) look promising, although more must be done to demonstrate efficient collection of positrons into beams.\n\nFinally, a most important step forward is multi-gigaelectronvolt (GeV) energy electron storage rings being developed for the high-energy physics International Linear Collider (ILC) project that uses undulators in electron beams to create intense photon beams that produce intense (10^14-16/sec) positron beams by pair production.57 A schematic drawing from one proposal for the ILC is shown in Figure 18.58\n\nLayout of ILC Positron Source\n\nFigure 18. Proposed Undulator-Based Positron Source for the International Linear Collider (courtesy KEK, Japan)59\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAssuming that 10^16 positrons/sec can be realized in the next 10 years, then 150 micrograms could be produced in 6 months to enable a globe-encircling flight of a small air-breathing turbojet UAV as discussed earlier.\n\nPositron Costs\n\nAn independent study has been done to determine future costs of positrons and, for comparison, antiprotons as well. The results, shown in Table 6, are based on data for existing sources and proposals for future sources.60, 61, 62\n\nTable 6. Positron and Antiproton Expected Costs in the Next 10 Years\n\nSource | Trap Injection Energy (MeV) | Filling Rate (sec-1) | When | $/JOULE (annihilation)\nCERN AD (pbar)25 | 0.01 – 0.1 | 4 x 10^5 | Now | ?\nFermilab (pbar)26 | <0.002 | 2.8 x 10^4 | Now | 333*\ne+/14 MeV e- linac27/ILC24 | 0.1 | 5 x10^12/10^16 | 2011/19 | 0.4/0.004**\n\n* $100 million/year (est. op. cost).\n** $5 million/year (est. op. cost, adjusted for inflation)/$100 million/year (est. op. cost).\n\nTwo clear results of the study should be noted.\n\nFirst, measured on a scale of dollars per joule of annihilation energy, positrons cost less than antiprotons by a factor of 1,000-100,000. Because each antiproton produces 1,836 times more energy per annihilation than a positron, this result appears to defy logic. However, the laboratory energy threshold for producing antiprotons is 6,000 times greater than for positrons, requiring a relatively complex proton synchrotron that is costly to construct and run. In addition, antiprotons are made at much higher laboratory energy than positrons and require costly apparatuses to decelerate them to trapping energies.\n\nOn the other hand, because electrons and positrons are relativistic at very low energy, their electron production and secondary systems are comparatively simple and less costly to operate and maintain than proton systems. These factors, combined with the absence of radioactive residue associated with positron annihilation, make positrons the obvious choice over antiprotons.\n\nSecond, the cost of positrons is projected to be $0.004/J x 180 MJ/µg = $720K/µg. Hence, the cost of 1 gram is $0.72T, or 5 percent of the 2008 U.S. gross domestic product (GDP). A 2000 NASA study63 on which this author collaborated placed the cost of antiprotons at $64T/g, consistent with the $333/J figure in the second line of Table 5, and roughly six times the 2000 GDP. Unfortunately, this is still being quoted in U.S. scientific and government communities. The dramatic reduction in the unit cost of antimatter since 2000 is due to a new emphasis on positrons by the physics community, and hopefully this paper will help spread that good news.\n\nEarlier, a nonstop flight around the globe by a small positron UAV was described as equivalent to the 1927 Spirit of St. Louis transatlantic flight of Charles Lindbergh. From\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 5, the required 150 µg for this epic flight could be manufactured in 6 months for $96 million, or 0.0007 percent of U.S. GDP.\n\nPositron Storage\n\nConfinement of antimatter has been reviewed extensively in the literature.64 Historically, the first approach was the Penning trap.65 Stores of 10^9 positrons for 1 hour have been achieved.66 Electric potentials are required to overcome space charge forces.67 To illustrate, confinement of 10^15 positrons in a 10-cm-radius sphere in a perfect vacuum requires an electric potential of 240 kilovolts. Laboratory control of such large potentials restricts stores to < 1 picogram (10^15).\n\nFigure 19. Penning Trap With Trapping Volume of 1,000 Cubic Centimeters (center), Injection Apparatus (left) and Controls (right) (courtesy Positronics Research LLC)68\n\nIn addition, with a magnetic field there are magnetic energy density restrictions on confinement of positron plasmas. The Brillouin Density Limit is:\n\nn_B = ε0 B^2/2m_e. (1)\n\nFor a practical magnetic field of 1 Tesla, nB = 9.7 x 10^12/cubic centimeters. In a 10-cm radius sphere, the Brillouin Number Limit is 4 x 10^16 (40 picograms). Therefore, by\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\neither space charge or magnetic energy considerations, the storage limit is tens of picograms, 7-8 orders of magnitude short of 100 micrograms, where practical uses of positrons begin to emerge, as illustrated earlier.\n\nThe second approach is confinement of neutral Ps atoms in manufactured porous media of either regular lattices of atoms, such as polymers, or irregular strands of insulator material encapsulating voids, such as silica aerogel.69, 70 Regardless of void size, Ps atoms ultimately annihilate with electrons attached to atoms on the boundaries of voids by the so-called \"pickoff\" process. Therefore, large, observable lifetimes require materials with extraordinarily large voids.\n\nFORMATION OF POSITRONIUM IN POROUS MEDIA\n\nPositrons are injected into a porous material at low energy (~100 keV) to ensure that they stop and form a Ps atom over a distance of a few millimeters.71 The positron rapidly loses its energy by collisions with electrons attached to atoms in the material. As it nears 6.8 electronvolts (eV)—the binding energy of the ground state of Ps—it captures a weakly bound electron and forms Ps. It diffuses through the material, and over about 1 nanosecond, its energy is rendered to the room temperature of the material, 0.025 eV. This is called thermalization.\n\nThe quantum mechanical model of Ps is remarkably similar to the hydrogen atom. The major difference is that Ps spontaneously annihilates, whereas hydrogen is stable. The \"self-annihilation\" of Ps due to overlap of electron and positron wave functions results in extremely short lifetimes, as noted earlier.\n\nFigure 20. A Positron Forms Ps on the Edge of a Void, Thermalizes, and Becomes Trapped in a Void Before Annihilating (courtesy University of Michigan)\n\nLifetimes against \"self-annihilation\" can be demonstrably increased if the following two conditions are met: (1) a way is found to isolate the electron wave function from the positron wave function, and (2) materials provide voids large enough to allow detection of lifetimes well beyond 142 nanoseconds (ns). A high vacuum is required to avoid Ps annihilation on gas molecules within the voids. The following describes how Positronics Research LLC has approached these issues in the laboratory.72\n\nLONG-TERM STORAGE OF POSITRONIUM\n\nUnder crossed magnetic and electric fields, Ps assumes a doubly oblate shape (Figure 21), with the electron and positron separated by hundreds of nanometers to tens of micrometers, depending on the size of the fields.73 Computation of lifetimes against quantum mechanical barrier penetration reveals lifetimes in excess of 1 year over a large range of magnetic and electric fields.\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nLifetime shortening owing to cyclotron radiation of the electron and positron gyrating in the magnetic field are not included in this model. Because this process is proportional to B², magnetic fields should be small—less than 0.1 Tesla based on our computations of the effect. This, in turn, renders the atom very large, with up to 1-micrometer elongation. If this can be verified in the laboratory, the first of the two conditions laid out in the previous section will be satisfied.\n\nNext, it is important to identify a storage medium with the largest possible voids. Silica aerogel is a promising material that was developed by NASA because of its extremely low density and excellent thermal insulating properties. It is composed of strands of SiO₂ (silica) grains suspended in a gel that has been dried and expanded by injection of gases to a very-low-density configuration of large voids within an irregular lattice of silica strands (Figure 22). Silica aerogel is available commercially with typically 20-nanometer average voids. Recent research has produced silica aerogel with up to 1-micrometer void sizes.\n\nFigure 21. Computer Simulation of Ps Atoms in a 5-Tesla Magnetic Field and 100 V/cm Electric Field (1 a.u. = 0.052 nm) (courtesy University of Bielefeld, Germany)⁷⁴\n\nExperiments in Japan and at Positronics Research LLC³³ with low-energy positrons in silica aerogel show a high efficiency (~35 percent) for making Ps through the interaction of the positron with silica grains. High radiation exposure from positrons implanted in the material result in it becoming \"paramagnetic,\" permanently at low temperatures, with a high density of \"dangling bonds\" containing very loosely bound electrons that explains the high efficiency for Ps formation. It therefore serves a dual role as source and storage medium for Ps. What lifetimes might be expected working with this material?\n\nFigure 22. TEM of Silica Aerogel (courtesy Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory)\n\nThe Ps decay rate in a porous material is given by:⁷⁵\n\nλ = k'/(R − r') + λT + λq (2)\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nwhere k' is characteristic of the electron density for silica strands = 0.0164 nm-ns⁻¹, R is the void radius (nm), r' is the silica strand thickness (0.68 nm), λT is the self-annihilation rate, and λq is the quenching rate for air (0.00427 ns⁻¹ at 0.1 torr vacuum, typical of a standard rotary pump). To illustrate, without magnetic and electric fields (λT = 1/142 ns = 0.007 ns⁻¹) and for R = 20 nm, λ= 0.0121 ns⁻¹, or τ = λ⁻¹ = 82.5 ns. This is consistent with our measurements.⁷⁶\n\nAssuming self-annihilation is suppressed (λT ~ 0) by crossed magnetic and electric fields, a high vacuum (10⁻⁵ torr) is maintained (λq ~ 0) and R = 20 nm, then λ = 8.5 x 10⁻⁴ ns⁻¹, or τ = 1.2 μs. Proprietary experiments at Positronics Research LLC show that Ps atoms in crossed magnetic and electric fields in silica aerogel with 20-nm voids live up to 10 μs. This is somewhat longer than the predicted lifetime owing to severe radiation damage induced in the silica aerogel by positrons that alters k' from the values quoted above.\n\nMeasured lifetimes in the present experiments at Positronics Research LLC are within limits set by diffusion to the trap walls. This is consistent with the expectation that Ps atoms \"stabilized\" in crossed magnetic and electric fields will be \"delocalized\" and drift freely across magnetic field lines.\n\nFuture experiments at Positronics Research LLC will use super-dilute media (R = 1,000 nm), large container volumes (10 cm), weak magnetic fields (< 0.1 Tesla), and electric fields. Substitution of R = 1,000 nm into Equation 2, assuming again a high vacuum and crossed magnetic and electric field suppression of self-annihilation, predicts a lifetime of 61 milliseconds. Assuming the following results are consistent with this prediction, it will be demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that Ps can be stabilized against \"self-annihilation\" in crossed fields.\n\nTo ultimately reach lifetimes of months and years required by aerospace propulsion, oscillating electric-gradient-field-confinement forces will be required to keep Ps atoms off the walls of a high-vacuum trap. Ps atoms will be produced by a beam of low-energy positrons intercepting silica aerogel and be stabilized in the trap using crossed magnetic and electric fields. Ps in crossed magnetic and electric fields has an enormous electric dipole moment, and confinement using the classical p•∇E force looks very encouraging at this time.\n\nConclusions\n\nConceptual designs and missions for turbojets, turbo-ramjet missiles, and interplanetary rockets powered by positron annihilation have been presented. Positron requirements range from 150 micrograms for a globe-encircling UAV turbojet flight to 100 milligrams for a mission to Mars. A positron-powered SSRV could take off from Earth horizontally, go to LEO, launch to Mars for a 1-year exploration of the Red Planet, and return to LEO and then Earth with a horizontal landing without refueling.\n\nWithin 10 years, the 150 μg of positrons required for a globe-encircling, nonstop turbojet flight could be made in 6 months at a cost of $69 million. This first-ever antimatter voyage, approximately 90 years after Lindbergh's 1927 Spirit of St. Louis transatlantic flight, would stir the public's imagination and eventually lead to positron-powered exploration of the solar system in the 21st century.\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nNew developments in stabilizing and storing positronium atoms in a matrix of dilute materials are encouraging. Lifetimes of 10 μs have been achieved, and tens-of-millisecond lifetimes are expected in the next round of experiments. Present limits are due to interactions on the walls of the trap container. Application of oscillating gradient electric fields to the huge electric dipole moment of the stable Ps atom should mitigate this problem. With the issue of stabilization in crossed fields now settled, very long lifetimes are but a matter of engineering!\n\n1 P. A. M. Dirac, Proc. Roy. Soc. A .126, 360 (1930).\n2 C. D. Anderson, Phys. Rev. 43, 491 (1933).\n3 O. Chamberlain, E. Segre, C. Wiegand and T. Ypsilantis, Phys. Rev. 100, 947 (1955).\n4 G. Luders, Ann. Phys. 2, 1-15 (1957).\n5 P. Hill and C. Peterson, Mechanics of Thermodynamics of Propulsion, 2nd ed., Addison - Wesley Publishing Co. (1992).\n6 G. Herken, \"The Flying Crowbar\", Air and Space Magazine, Vol. 5 (#1), p. 28, April/May (1990) (http://www.merkle.com/pluto/pluto.html).\n7 R. W. Bussard and R. D. DeLauer, Fundamentals of Nuclear Flight, McGraw-Hill Book Co. (1965)\n8 G. A. Smith et al., \"Revolutionary Positron Conversion\", Final Technical Report, AFRL Contract F08630-00-C-0010, Eglin AFB, FL, March (2002).\n9 O. Chamberlain, E. Segre, C. Wiegand and T. Ypsilantis, Phys. Rev. 100, 947 (1955)\n10 G. Luders, Ann. Phys. 2, 1-15 (1957).\n11 G. A. Smith et al., \"Revolutionary Positron Conversion\", Final Technical Report, AFRL Contract F08630-00-C-0010, Eglin AFB, FL, March (2002).\n12 Ibid.\n13 Ibid.\n14 Ibid.\n15 Ibid.\n16 Ibid.\n17 Ibid.\n18 Ibid.\n19 Northrop-Grumman Corp: Report to Kaiser-Marquardt for HTHL blended-body SSTO engine, \"Vision Vehicle Final Report,\" April 30 (1998).\n20 G. A. Smith et al., \"A Revolutionary Positron Based SSRV Vehicle for Application to Human Exploration and Development of Space\", The Advanced Space Propulsion Workshop, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, April 2-6 (2001).\n21 Northrop-Grumman Corp: Report to Kaiser-Marquardt for HTHL blended-body SSTO engine, \"Vision Vehicle Final Report,\" April 30 (1998).\n22 G. A. Smith et al., \"A Revolutionary Positron Based SSRV Vehicle for Application to Human Exploration and Development of Space\", The Advanced Space Propulsion Workshop, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, April 2-6 (2001).\n23 Ibid.\n24 Ibid.\n25 Ibid.\n26 Ibid.\n27 G. A. Smith, \"Positron Propelled and Powered Space Transport Vehicle for Planetary Missions\", NIAC Phase I Final Report, Research Subaward No. 07605-003-048, September 1, 2005 – March 31, 2006.\n28 Ibid.\n29 D. R. Koenig, \"Experience Gained from the Space Nuclear Rocket Program (Rover),\" LA-10062-H, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM., May (1986).\n30 G. A. Smith, \"Positron Propelled and Powered Space Transport Vehicle for Planetary Missions\", NIAC Phase I Final Report, Research Subaward No. 07605-003-048, September 1, 2005 – March 31, 2006.\n31 L. E. Thode et al., J. Propulsion and Power 14, 4 (1998).\n32 D. I. Poston and T. Kammash, Nuclear Science and Engineering 122, 32 (1996).\n\n28\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n33 S. K. Borowski et al., \"Nuclear Thermal Rocket/Vehicle Design Options for Future NASA Missions to the Moon and Mars,\" AIAA-93-4170 (NASA Tech Memorandum 107071), (1993).\n34 D. I. Poston and T. Kammash, Nuclear Science and Engineering 122, 32 (1996).\n35 S. K. Borowski et al., \"Nuclear Thermal Rocket/Vehicle Design Options for Future NASA Missions to the Moon and Mars,\" AIAA-93-4170 (NASA Tech Memorandum 107071), (1993).\n36 G. A. Smith, \"Positron Propelled and Powered Space Transport Vehicle for Planetary Missions\", NIAC Phase I Final Report, Research Subaward No. 07605-003-048, September 1, 2005 – March 31, 2006.\n37 E. Sänger, Ing. Arch. 21, 213 (1953).\n38 G. A. Smith, \"Positron Propelled and Powered Space Transport Vehicle for Planetary Missions\", NIAC Phase I Final Report, Research Subaward No. 07605-003-048, September 1, 2005 – March 31, 2006.\n39 Ibid.\n40 G. Gaidos et al., \"Antiproton-Catalyzed Microfission/fusion Propulsion Systems for Exploration of the Outer Solar System and Beyond,\" AIAA-98-3589, Presented at the 34th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit (1998).\n41 W. Lance Werthman, \"Antiproton-Catalyzed Microfission/fusion Space Propulsion,\" MS Thesis, Dept. of Aerospace Engineering, Penn State University (1995).\n42 G. A. Smith, \"High Density Storage of Antimatter\", Advanced High Energy Storage Conference, MITRE Corp., McLean, VA, Aug. 1 (2005).\n43 S. J. Hoffman and D. I. Kaplan, eds. \"Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team,\" NASA Special Publication 6107, JSC (1997).\n44 B. G. Drake, ed. \"Reference Mission Version 3.0: Addendum to the Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team,\" http://ares.jsc.nasa.gov/ HumanExplore/ Exploration/ EXLibrary/docs/ MarsRef/addendum/index.htm, June (1998).\n45 G. A. Smith, \"High Density Storage of Antimatter\", Advanced High Energy Storage Conference, MITRE Corp., McLean, VA, Aug. 1 (2005).\n46 J. Dion, \"Stirling Radioisotope Generator\", NASA Glenn Research Center, ME 388R.2, Spring (2005).\n47 Ibid.\n48 G. A. Smith, \"High Density Storage of Antimatter\", Advanced High Energy Storage Conference, MITRE Corp., McLean, VA, Aug. 1 (2005).\n49 S. J. Hoffman and D. I. Kaplan, eds. \"Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team,\" NASA Special Publication 6107, JSC (1997).\n50 B. G. Drake, ed. \"Reference Mission Version 3.0: Addendum to the Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team,\" http://ares.jsc.nasa.gov/ HumanExplore/ Exploration/ EXLibrary/docs/ MarsRef/addendum/index.htm, June (1998).\n51 S. K. Borowski et al., \"Nuclear Thermal Rocket/Vehicle Design Options for Future NASA Missions to the Moon and Mars,\" AIAA-93-4170 (NASA Tech Memorandum 107071), (1993).\n52 G. A. Smith, \"Positron Propelled and Powered Space Transport Vehicle for Planetary Missions\", NIAC Phase I Final Report, Research Subaward No. 07605-003-048, September 1, 2005 – March 31, 2006.\n53 S. J. Hoffman and D. I. Kaplan, eds. \"Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team,\" NASA Special Publication 6107, JSC (1997).\n54 B. G. Drake, ed. \"Reference Mission Version 3.0: Addendum to the Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team,\" http://ares.jsc.nasa.gov/ HumanExplore/ Exploration/ EXLibrary/docs/ MarsRef/addendum/index.htm, June (1998).\n55 G. A. Smith, \"Positron Propelled and Powered Space Transport Vehicle for Planetary Missions\", NIAC Phase I Final Report, Research Subaward No. 07605-003-048, September 1, 2005 – March 31, 2006.\n56 C.A. Kapatanakos, J. Synchrotron Rad. 3, 268-271 (1996).\n57 ILC undulator-based source, www.ippp.dur.ac.uk/~gudrid/source/BCD-source. ILC capitalization is estimated at $9B (see www.linearcollider.org).\n58 Ibid.\n59 Ibid.\n60 R. Landua, CERN, \"Precision Experiments with Antiprotons\", Feb. 24 (2003).\n61 S. Howe et al., AIP Conf. Proc. 746, 520 (2005).\n62 14 MeV Electron Linac @ $5M capitalization cost and $5M/yr operating cost (A. Herer et al., \"Applications of High Voltage High Powered Electron Beams\", IBA, Belgium, 1997).\n63 G. R. Schmidt et al., J. Propulsion and Power, 16, 923 (2000).\n64 J. Rejcek et al., Rad. Phys. Chem. 68, 655 (2003).\n65 G. A. Smith, \"High Density Storage of Antimatter\", Advanced High Energy Storage Conference, MITRE Corp., McLean, VA, Aug. 1 (2005).\n66 C. M. Surko and R. G. Greaves, Phys. Plasmas 11, 2333 (2004).\n\n29\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d822ccbbb2a1bbdb","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n67 G. A. Smith, \"Long-Term Confinement of Dense Positron Plasmas\", Final Technical Report, AFRL Contract F08630-02-C-0017, Eglin AFB, FL, January 23 (2007).\n68 Ibid.\n69 G. A. Smith, \"Positron Energy Conversion (PEC)\", 53th JANNAF Propulsion Meeting, Subcommittee on Future Technologies for Spacecraft Propulsion (2005 0356 EA), CPIAC JSC CD43 December (2005).\n70 G. A. Smith, \"Stabilization and Long Term Confinement of Atomic Positronium\", Final Technical Report, AFRL Contract F08630-02-C-0018, Eglin AFB, FL, January 23 (2007).\n71 S. J. Hoffman and D. I. Kaplan, eds. \"Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team,\" NASA Special Publication 6107, JSC (1997).\n72 G. A. Smith, \"Stabilization and Long Term Confinement of Atomic Positronium\", Final Technical Report, AFRL Contract F08630-02-C-0018, Eglin AFB, FL, January 23 (2007).\n73 J. Lu, \"Classical Trajectory Monte Carlo Simulation of Ion-Rydberg Atom Collisions\", Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Bielefeld, Germany, May (2003).\n74 Ibid.\n75 K. Sudarshan et al., J. Phys: Condens. Matter 19, 386 (2007).\n76 G. A. Smith, \"Stabilization and Long Term Confinement of Atomic Positronium\", Final Technical Report, AFRL Contract F08630-02-C-0018, Eglin AFB, FL, January 23 (2007).\n\n30\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies March Report April 10, 2009"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"March 2009 Report Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (aka) BAASS This information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PREFACE This Progress report summarizes BAASS activities and progress for the period March 1-March 31, 2009. TABLE OF CONTENTS Topics covered in this report are the following: Progress on Recruiting Staff.......Page 2 Progress on Obtaining Clearances for Existing Staff.......Page 4 Progress on Earthtech Contract to Deliver 24-30 papers.......Page 5 Progress on Development of Advanced Aerial Phenomena Databases.......Page 6 BAASS has Contracted to Purchase Information on UAPs from MUFON.......Page 17 BAASS is Becoming the Official UAP Reporting Center for the FAA.......Page 21 Executive Summary Report on: \"The UFO Assault on Brazil\" by AAP Person 8 .......Page 22 BAASS Continues Study of the Information on UAP Activity Released by the British, Canadian and Danish Governments.......Page 39 Conclusion.......Page 40 1 This information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Progress on Staff Recruitment • Between March 1-31, 2009 in response to job advertisements in multiple on-line locations, BAASS received a total of 526 resumes. • The first level of screening (removal of applications on the basis of too frequent job changes, those obviously inexperienced to work at BAASS, non-US citizens etc) was conducted on all resumes. • More than four dozen phone and face-to-face interviews were conducted during the month of February. • As a result of intensive interviewing and the transfer of some engineers from Bigelow Aerospace to BAASS, as of March 31, 2009 BAASS has thirty three full time employees and seven part time employees in addition to the administrator and deputy administrator (see table on page 4 below). Fulltime BAASS employees now include senior investigative personnel (backgrounds in law enforcement and AFOSI), engineers (specializing in electrical, software and astronautics), scientists (with expertise in physics and biology) as well as support personnel and security guards. 2 This information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS Employee List Administrator AAP Person 4 Deputy Administrator AAP Person 7 Fulltime BAASS Employees Significant Part-time BAASS Employees AAP Person 8 Senior Analyst level V AAP Person 95 Principal Engineer AAP Person 9 Lead Program Manager AAP Person 52 Senior Engineer level III AAP Person 10 Lead Program Manager AAP Person 53 Executive Assistant RTB AAP Person 11 Senior Project Manager AAP Person 54 Corporate Attorney AAP Person 12 Senior Project Manager AAP Person 55 Accountant AAP Person 13 Senior Project Manager AAP Person 56 Subject Matter Expert IV AAP Person 14 Mission Analyst AAP Person 95 Mission Analyst AAP Person 16 Mission Analyst AAP Person 96 Mission Analyst AAP Person 18 Lead Scientist level V The yellow legend : temporarily transferred from Bigelow Aerospace AAP Person 19 Lead Scientist level V AAP Person 20 Engineer Specialist AAP Person 21 Lead Engineer AAP Person 22 Engineer Specialist AAP Person 23 Lead Engineer AAP Person 24 Lead Scientist level IV AAP Person 25 Subject Matter Expert I AAP Person 26 Lead Op/Research Analyst AAP Person 27 Lead Op/Research Analyst AAP Person 30 Mission Analyst AAP Person 31 Mission Analyst AAP Person 42 Executive Secretary AAP Person 97 Receptionist AAP Person 44 Snr. Project Mgr Security AAP Person 46 Security Officer AAP Person 47 Security Officer AAP Person 48 Security Officer AAP Person 49 Security Officer Utah Ranch Security Officers 3 This information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"We are optimistic that in the next 4-5 months we can hire the full complement of\nstaff (possibly 50-60 personnel to begin the 2nd year) that will make BAASS the\nnecessary vibrant organization to make progress in this field. This will give BAASS\na solid foundational base. With increased funding for next year we hope to\ndramatically the number of employees.\n\nProgress on Obtaining\nClearance for Existing Staff\n\nAAP Person 4 the BAASS administrator, AAP Person 7 BAASS deputy\nadministrator AAP Person 8 BAASS senior analyst, AAP Person 53 executive\nsecretary to AAP Person 4 AAP Person 44 BAASS Senior Program Manager Security,\nAAP Person 9 BAASS lead program manager AAP Person 57 and [REDACTED] (from\nEarthtech and BAASS contractors) all have travelled to Washington DC to\ncomplete the security clearance process. Other BAASS employees are in multiple\nstages of investigation."} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Progress by Earthtech on Production\nof 24-30 Position Papers on Physics of\nAdvanced Aerospace Vehicles\n\nAAP Person 57\n\nOn December 31, 2008 BAASS awarded a contract to Earthtech International [REDACTED]\nAAP Person 57 to deliver 24-30 position papers that will be based on expanding and\nfocusing on strategically important sub-projects from the 12 position papers\npreviously delivered by the subcontractor on twelve (12) technical areas: 1.) Lift,\n2.) Propulsion, 3.) Control, 4.) Power Generation, 5.) Spatial/Temporal\nTranslation, 6.) Materials, 7.) Configuration/Structure, 8.) Signature Reduction\n(optical, infrared, radiofrequency, acoustic), 9.) Human Interface, 10.) Human\nEffects, 11.) Armament (RF and DEW), 12.) Other peripheral areas in support of\n(1-11).\n\nAAP Person 57\n\nAccording to an update from AAP Person 57 progress is being made. Delivery of\nall 24-30 papers is scheduled for July 2009. The following is an update from [REDACTED]\non the individual contributors and the titles of their reports as of the end\nof March 2009."} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Contributor Organization Topic Due Date\nAAP Person 58 EarthTech Intern'l Antigravity Studies 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 75 [REDACTED] Consulting SC-mediated gravity experimentation 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 69 Positronics Research Matter-antimatter energy source 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 74 [REDACTED] Cons. Warp drives 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 73 Wayne State Univ. Brain-machine interfaces 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 65 Univ. of Arizona Novel MEMS-based biosensors 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 70 Univ. of Illinois IEC fusion as a compact energy source 6/15/2009\nAAP Person 58 EarthTech Intern'l Vacuum energy applications 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 57 EarthTech Intern'l Spacetime modification 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 58 EarthTech Intern'l Wormholes in spacetime 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 66 Ohio State Univ. Advanced metallic alloys 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 63 Johns Hopkins Univ. Metallic glass materials 6/10/2009\nAAP Person 90 Programmable Matter Corp. Programmable matter 6/10/2009\nAAP Person 65 Univ. of Arizona Novel biomaterials 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 71 Univ. of Texas/Austin Metallic spintronics 6/10/2009"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 67 HyperTech Concepts Advanced aerospace technologies 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 68 Univ. of St. Andrews Metamaterials/invisibility cloaks 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 78 Univ.of Texas/Austin Metamaterials/signature reduction 6/10/2009\nAAP Person 80 Intern'l Acad. Astronautics Statistical Drake equation 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 81 Wayne State Univ. Field effects/biological tissues 5/15/2009\nAAP Person 79 DoD consultant Laser weapons 5/31/2009\nAAP Person 64 Northrop Grumman (ret.) Pulse-power-based weaponry 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 77 GravWave, LLC Gravity wave communication 5/1/2009\nAAP Person 76 Univ. of Washington FTL/quant entanglement communication 5/31/2009\nAAP Person 75 [REDACTED] Consulting Maverick vs. corporate inventor cultures 5/1/2009"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Progress on BAASS Database\nDevelopment-Project Capella\n\nData Warehouse\nStatistical Executive Summary\n\nThe data warehouse currently includes 234,364 unusual aerial phenomena\nreports of sightings occurring from 593 B.C. to present time. Some of the\nsightings in the data warehouse are duplicated reports and some have received\nclassical explanations as natural phenomena. Sighting reports of sufficient intent\nfor further analysis within the warehouse are divided into one of four\nclassifications:\n\n• 48% of reports are considered \"flyby\" (FB) events where the observed\nobject(s) travel without discontinuity\n• 31% of reports are considered \"close encounters\" (CE) where object(s) are\nobserved on or near the ground\n• 15% of reports are considered \"maneuver\" (MA) events where observed\nobject(s) display a discontinuous trajectory\n• 6% of reports are considered \"anomalies\" (AN) events which includes\nsightings such as amorphous lights, and other unexplained anomalous\nactivity\n\nThese four classifications are further divided into categories that define whether\nthe events were associated with lasting physical effects, living entities, reality\ntransformation, or physical injuries. BAASS does not believe that the breakdown\nof reports in the data warehouse accurately reflects the percentage of actual\nsightings. For example, 31% of sightings are not close encounters. This high\npercentage reflects the witnesses' increased likelihood to report their sighting\nwhen it is a close encounter compared to an unexplained phenomenon far away\nfrom the witness. Significant statistics from the BAASS data warehouse include:\n\n• Approximately 1.9% of sightings were reported by military personnel"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Approximately 0.6% of sightings were reported by police officers\n• Approximately 0.3% of sightings were reported by pilots\n• Approximately 0.8% of sightings reported physical traces\n• Approximately 0.5% of sightings reported physiological reactions by witnesses\n• Approximately 2.1% of sightings reported entities or lifeforms\n• Approximately 0.6% of sightings reported sightings with correlated radar data\n• Approximately 0.6% of sightings reported electro-magnetic effects\n\nData Warehouse - Statistical Summary\n\nBAASS DATA WAREHOUSE\n\nSummary: The BAASS Data Warehouse consists of six databases and associated supporting documentation. Five of the databases contain historical reporting information [NIDS 1843(a)(2) Blue Book, UFOCAT, and MUFON]. The MUFON database is continuously updated with current reports. The sixth component is the BAASS database which will contain all documentation associated with current and future BAASS case studies.\nTotal Reports: 234,364\nEvent Timeline: 593 B.C. - Present\nStatistics:\n\nAAP Person 5 Reports not yet assigned [REDACTED] Classification: 67,580\n\nAAP Person 5 Reports by [REDACTED] Classification (total number in category, percentage of assigned reports) :\n\nAN1: 3161 2.1% FB1: 67258 43.6% MA1: 17445 11.3% CE1: 20187 13.1%\nAN2: 1760 1.1% FB2: 5807 3.8% MA2: 5530 3.6% CE2: 12220 7.9%\nAN3: 3781 2.5% FB3: 226 0.1% MA3: 109 <0.1% CE3: 9308 6.0%\nAN4: 602 0.4% FB4: 53 <0.1% MA4: 60 <0.1% CE4: 4087 2.7%\nAN5: 779 0.5% FB5: 59 <0.1% MA5: 71 <0.1% CE5: 1611 1.0%"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 5 Additional Reports assigned [REDACTED] Classifications without category number:\n\nAN: 40 FB: 198 MA: 245 CE: 0\n\nAAP Person 5 Total Reports in each [REDACTED] Classification:\n\nAN: 10123 6.5% FB: 73601 47.6% MA: 23460 15.2% CE: 47413 30.7%\n\n• Approximately 1.9% of cases were reported by military personnel\n• Approximately 0.6% of cases were reported by police officers\n• Approximately 0.3% of cases were reported by pilots\n• Approximately 0.8% of cases reported physical traces\n• Approximately 0.5% of cases reported physiological reactions by witnesses\n• Approximately 2.1% of cases reported entities or lifeforms\n• Approximately 0.6% of cases reported sightings with correlated radar data\n• Approximately 0.6% of cases reported electro-magnetic effects\n\nSUBSECTIONS OF BAASS DATA WAREHOUSE\n\nNote: Events statistics may change as reports are analyzed and input in Capella format.\n\n1. NIDS Database\nSummary: Database developed by National Institute for Discovery Science containing reports on the full spectrum of anomalous activity.\nFormat: Capella 11-Screen\nTotal Reports: 1570\nEvent Timeline: 1946-2004\nStatistics:"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 5 Reports by [REDACTED] Classification:\n\nAN1: 51 FB1: 490 MA1: 383 CE1: 498\nAN2: 2 FB2: 5 MA2: 16 CE2: 44\nAN3: 2 FB3: 0 MA3: 0 CE3: 20\nAN4: 0 FB4: 0 MA4: 1 CE4: 20\nAN5: 2 FB5: 2 MA5: 0 CE5: 8\n\nMultiple Witness Events: 819\nGround Traces Events: 36\nPhysiological Events: 81\nLifeform Events: 42\nMemory Loss Events: 70 + 4 Possibles\nElectro-Magnetic Effects Events: 99\nLanding Events: 74 + 8 Possibles\nRadar Events: 2\nAnimal Reaction Events: 91\n\n2. 1843(a)(2) Pilot Database\nSummary: Database of international reports of anomalous activity observed by pilots. Database was filtered to contain only unexplained phenomena.\nFormat: Capella 11-Screen\nTotal Reports: 485\nEvent Timeline: 1942-2007\nStatistics:\n\nAAP Person 5 Reports by [REDACTED] Classification:\n\nAN: 40 FB: 198 MA: 245 CE: 0\n\nMultiple Witness Events: 335\nElectro-Magnetic Effects Events: 69\nInteracted with Aircraft Events: 174\nPhysiological Events: 14\nMilitary Events: 230\nRadar Events: 152\nFlight Safety Events: 185\n\n3. Sign/Grudge/Blue Book Database\nSummary: Database of all cases reported as part of U.S. Air Force Operations Sign, Grudge, and Blue Book.\nFormat: Capella 10-Screen\nTotal Reports: 13,123\nEvent Timeline: 1942-1969\nStatistics:"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 5 Reports by [REDACTED] Classification:\n\nAN1: 1 FB1: 4876 MA1: 72 CE1: 171\nAN2: 3 FB2: 256 MA2: 371 CE2: 52\nAN3: 0 FB3: 0 MA3: 0 CE3: 10\nAN4: 0 FB4: 0 MA4: 0 CE4: 5\nAN5: 0 FB5: 0 MA5: 1 CE5: 1\n\nAAP Person 5 Not yet assigned [REDACTED] Classification: 7304\n\nMilitary Events: 732\nMilitary Aircraft Events: 31\nAirfield Events: 667\nNuclear Events: 57\n\n4. UFOCAT Database\nSummary: Database initiated at conclusion of Project Blue Book to continue cataloging reports. Duplicate reporting from various sources occurs on numerous cases.\nFormat: Access Database\nTotal Reports: 203,805\nEvent Timeline: 593 B.C. - 2008\nStatistics:\n\nAAP Person 5 Reports by [REDACTED] Classification:\n\nAN1: 2565 FB1: 58912 MA1: 15384 CE1: 17827\nAN2: 1668 FB2: 5468 MA2: 5073 CE2: 11989\nAN3: 3717 FB3: 180 MA3: 89 CE3: 9122\nAN4: 569 FB4: 0 MA4: 28 CE4: 3917\nAN5: 765 FB5: 51 MA5: 58 CE5: 1592\nIFO: 4550\n\nAAP Person 5 Unknown [REDACTED] Classifications: 60,276\n\nContact Events: 614\nUFO Crash Events: 60\nNuclear Site Events: 352\nMilitary Events: 2841\nOccupant Events: 526\nPhysical Traces Events: 1623\nRadar Events: 923\nPolice Reported Events: 1280"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Physiological Events: 740\nAnimal Reaction Events: 570\nElectro-Magnetic Effects Events: 1121\n\n5. MUFON Case Management System Database\nSummary: Database of cases reported to MUFON via their web-based reporting system initiated in mid-2003. Does not contain MUFON's 13,000 reports received from 1969 through mid-2003.\nFormat: Web-based Database\nTotal Reports: 15,381 (as of February 23, 2009)\nEvent Timeline: 1890 - 2009\nStatistics:\n\nAAP Person 5 Reports by [REDACTED] Classification:\n\nAN1: ≈544 FB1: ≈2980 MA1: ≈1606 CE1: ≈1691\nAN2: 87 FB2: 78 MA2: 70 CE2: 135\nAN3: 62 FB3: 46 MA3: 20 CE3: 156\nAN4: 33 FB4: 53 MA4: 31 CE4: 145\nAN5: 12 FB5: 6 MA5: 12 CE5: 10\n\nHoax Events: ≈800\nIdentified Natural Phenomena Events: ≈396\nIdentified Man-made Object Events: ≈640\nIdentified (Other) Events: ≈836\nInsufficient Data Events: ≈2850\nEntity Events: ≈3828\nEvents within 500 feet of Witness: ≈3816\nEvents within 20 feet of Witness: ≈817\nReports in 2008: 5969\n\n6. BAASS Database\nSummary: The BAASS database will contain all documentation associated with current and future BAASS case studies.\nFormat: Capella 11-Screen\nTotal Reports: 0\nEvent Timeline: 2009 - TBD"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Statistical Summary - Definition of Terms\n\nTerm\tAcronym\tDefinition\nAAP Person 5 Flyby\tFB\tA [REDACTED] classification used when the observed object(s) travel without discontinuity\n\tFB1\tA simple sighting of an unexplained object \"flying by\" in the sky without discontinuity\n\tFB2\tA flyby with physical evidence, such as a recorded sound or radar tracking\n\tFB3\tA flyby where report of an object is accompanied by the observation of beings on board\n\tFB4\tA flyby in connection with which the witness claims he or she has undergone a transformation of reality\n\tFB5\twhere witnesses of a flyby suffer serious injuries\nAAP Person 5 Maneuver\tMA\tA [REDACTED] classification used when observed object(s) display a discontinuous trajectory, leading to the determination of specific ground locations where actions occurred\n\tMA1\tAn object with a discontinuous trajectory such as a drop, a maneuver, a hovering stop, or a loop\n\tMA2\tThe cases that give rise to physical effects in addition to a discontinuity in trajectory\n\tMA3\tThe cases of objects with discontinuous trajectories when beings are observed on board\n\tMA4\tInstances of maneuvers accompanied by a sense of transformation of reality for the percipient\n14"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MA5\tWhen permanent injury or death is related to a maneuvering object\nAAP Person 5 Close Encounter\tCE\tA [REDACTED] classification used when object(s) are observed on or near the ground\n\tCE1\tObjects seen on the ground or close to the ground\n\tCE2\tClose encounters where physical effects or traces were reported\n\tCE3\tClose encounters where \"occupants\" or \"entities\" were present\n\tCE4\tClose encounters with abduction reports in which the witness claims not only to have seen occupants but to have extensively interacted with them inside their vehicle or craft\n\tCE5\tClose encounters in which the witnesses have suffered permanent injury or other physiological or pathological effects\nAAP Person 5 Anomalies\tAN\tA [REDACTED] classification used which includes sightings such as amorphous lights, and other unexplained anomalous activity\n\tAN1\tAnomalies like amorphous lights or unexplained explosions in the sky, that do not have lasting physical effects\n\tAN2\treports involve lasting physical effects, such as poltergeist phenomena, anomalous photographs, flattened grass or \"apports\"\n15"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AN3\tAnomalies with associated entities -- could involve reports of ghosts, yetis and other instances of crytozoology, or elves or spirits\nAN4\tAnomalous reports in which witnesses describe personal interaction with entities in the reality of the entities themselves\nAN5\tAnomalous injuries or deaths are reported, such as unexplained wounds or spontaneous combustion\n16"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS has Contracted to Purchase Information on UAPs from MUFON\n\nIn order for BAASS to best serve the government it needs to become the central information source on UAPs in the United States and around the world. It is essential to receive information on current UAPs that are occurring in real time in the United States until BAASS has sufficient internal capabilities. One way for BAASS to achieve this goal is to contract with an organization that has hundreds of investigators already in place around the United States. The Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) is such an organization. MUFON has been in existence for four decades and currently has approximately 1000 volunteers who can investigate reports of UAP sightings in all 50 states.\n\nIn February 2009, BAASS executed a Purchase order with MUFON that entitles BAASS to: (a) receive notification of significant reports on UAP sightings from anywhere in the United States within hours, (b) receive timely reports from MUFON investigators regarding investigations of these incidents (c) receive physical evidence (including photographs, digital recordings, samples of soil, insects, plants, and animals) for scientific analysis. BAASS has multiple laboratories that are ready to conduct forensic, photographic, metallurgic, chemical, isotope, biological, chemical analysis of any specimens that BAASS receives from MUFON.\n\nBAASS has already hired a small team of ten high quality top investigators with extensive intelligence and law enforcement investigative experience. These investigators are currently located in Las Vegas and are trained to deploy as \"special forces\" rapid reaction investigative teams that are deployable anywhere in the United States if BAASS determines that high value UAP cases warrant additional investigations. However this investigative group is still far too small to cover the geographic area needed in both the United States and overseas.\n17"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"University of Nevada Research Project\n\nBAASS is creating a very valuable research program with the University Nevada Las Vegas (UNLV) involving multiple faculty, post doctoral fellows and graduate students. This unique program will examine the sociological, military and scientific consequences to the United States of a variety of scenarios involving UAP activity. During 2009, BAASS is funding UNLV to undertake dozens of parallel studies on sociological, military, political, religious, public health, academic and media effects of scenarios involving increasingly intrusive demonstrations of UAP activity in United States air space.\n\nIn the second year (September 2009-September 2010), BAASSs overarching objective for this program is to stimulate, motivate and encourage the senior levels of the academic community within the United States to involve themselves in study and research of very advanced aerial spacecraft that is presently considered phenomenological. This program will grow to a seven figure level of cost. UNLV will be at the center of this research.\n\nIn this effort, it is this program's goal to lay the seeds for serious exploration of this topic within the national academic community at its highest levels. After six decades of overt, blatant conspicuous and obtrusive global performance by very advanced anomalously behaving spacecraft, the academic community is still successful in maintaining the posture that these spacecraft either don't exist or are not worthy of serious research and study. Foundationally, there still remains a giggle factor which has been instrumental in squashing serious consideration and thought.\n\nThe second objective is to extract from this large untapped body of resource information not previously obtained.\n\nOur concern is that the top universities/technical institutes in some foreign countries MAY take this subject more seriously than we do in the United States and hence MAY already have devoted significant resources to their study. BAASS has acquired full support from both the [REDACTED] and the [REDACTED]\n18"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Progress on BAASS Becoming the Official\nreporting Agency for the FAA\n\no In January 2009, BAASS initiated contact with the FAA. The intent\nwas for BAASS to submit change recommendations in accordance\nwith FAA Order 7000.5C to the three FAA publications listed below\nwhich:\n▪ Changes \"National Institute for Discovery Sciences (NIDS)\" to\nBigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS).\"\n▪ Deletes NIDS from the list of acronyms.\n▪ Adds BAASS to the list of acronyms.\n▪ Includes BAASS contact information for:\n1843(a)(2)\n\nThe three FAA publications that will contain the wording that nominates BAASS as\nthe reporting agency are:\no USDoT FAA Aeronautical Information Manual, Change 1, dated July\n31, 2008\no USDoT FAA Order JO 7110.65S, dated February 14, 2008\n▪ Air Traffic Control\no USDoT FAA Order JO 7210.3V, dated February 14, 2008\n▪ Facility Operations and Administration\n\nOn March 4, 2009, BAASS received word from AAP Person 128 of the\nProcedures Development Group at the FAA stating that the FAA would be pleased\nto co-ordinate the changes that BAASS had requested. [REDACTED] delegated the AAP Person 128\ntask of this coordination to 1843(a)(2) an FAA Air Traffic System Operations\nSecurity Procedures Specialist who is currently working with BAASS to co-ordinate\nthese changes as expeditiously as possible."} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE UFO ASSAULT ON BRAZIL,\nWITH ITS EPICENTER AT COLARES\n\nThis report documents the enormous impact of the\nUFO assault on the people Brazil from 1977 - 2003.\nIt began in the town of Colares, in the state of\nPara, and spread throughout the country.\n\nExecutive Summary\n\nMarch 30, 2009"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 8\n\nSenior Scientist\n\nBigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies\n1843(a)(2)\n\nTHE UFO ASSAULT ON BRAZIL,\n\nWITH ITS EPICENTER AT COLARES\n\nEXECUTIVE SUMMARY\n\nIntroduction\n\nThe world is full of many terrors. This study is about one of them, a terror that\ncomes from some place other than Earth. It is a terror that the world's\ngovernments have completely ignored or claim doesn't exist, perhaps because\nthey know of no way they can protect their citizens from it. The terror comes\nfrom Unidentified Flying Objects and the beings that operate them."} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AAP Person 127\nSince the 1970s, and probably much earlier, these objects have been doing\nterrible things to people in Brazil – perhaps more so than in all other countries\ncombined. This fact has been documented by extensive on-the-scene\ninvestigations conducted by [REDACTED] a well-known private investigator and\n[REDACTED] an eminent scientist from the United States. The accumulated\nAAP Person 127\nresult of [REDACTED] work has been organized for BAASS into eight 1½\" thick three-ring\nnotebooks amounting to several thousand pages of data. The purpose of this\nexecutive summary is to reduce the mass of that information down to an easy to\nunderstand record of what took place in Brazil over a period of nearly three\ndecades starting in the 1970s.\n\nPossibly more important than just recording what happened to the people of\nBrazil, is the fact that the reports document hundreds of incidents demonstrating\nadvanced technologies that we are yet to understand and duplicate. The human\nphysiological effects recorded across hundreds of square kilometers of jungles,\nriver banks, hills, and small towns and villages give us clues to the types of\ntechnologies being demonstrated there. In addition, accounts describing the\nappearance and operational characteristics of the craft give us a broader view of\nhow advanced technologies operate while on Earth and are completely\nuntouchable by our own Earth-based technologies. These technology\ndemonstrations included: human effects, lift, propulsion, control, power\ngeneration, spatial/temporal translation, materials, configuration, structure,\nsignature reduction, human interfaces, and armament. A problem of this\nmagnitude can no longer be ignored.\n\nTo illustrate the potential impact on the future of the world, we have summarized\nAAP Person 127\nthe results of [REDACTED] Brazilian flap investigations under the following five\ncategories:\n\n• Human Effects"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Geographic Data\n• Spacecraft Data\n• Occupants\n• Government Interactions.\n\nThe data given below has been extracted from the transcripts of more than 370\non-site investigations, involving 514 victims, as conducted by AAP Person 127\nbeginning in the late 1970s and running through 2003. The attached map (Exhibit\n1) documents the location of many of the cities where these events took place.\nAAP Person 127 [REDACTED] work was further verified by the on-site investigations conducted by [REDACTED] AAP Person 5\nAAP Person 5 world recognized expert in this field. Their work is reinforced by\nsummaries of the additional investigations done by the following Brazilian\nexperts, as shown in the \"Government Interactions\" section of this report:\n\n[1843(a)(2)]\n\nBy comparison, 1843(a)(2) a private Brazilian UFO\ninvestigative group, conducted a series of expeditions to UFO hot spots beginning\nin 1969 and continuing into the early 1990s. He and his team traveled more than\n41,000 kilometers and spent over 2,000 hours conducting on-site investigations.\nThey traveled more than 16,000 kilometers during the 1977 - 1979 Colares assault\nalone.\n\nOther than this brief summary of the work done by 1843(a)(2)\nthis report does not attempt to cover the huge number of investigations\nconducted by as many as a dozen other private Brazilian UFO investigative"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"organizations working throughout the country at the same time. Very little of\nthat body of work has been translated into English.\n\nConversion factors used in this report are as follows:\n\n• Meter = 39.37 inches\n• Kilometer = 0.62 miles\n• Square kilometer = 0.3861 square miles\n\nHuman Effects\n\nPeople living in northeastern Brazil since the 1970s have been terrorized in a\nvariety of ways by exposure to UFO technologies. There have been so many\nincidents that the people now cringe in fear when they see a light that flies,\nchanges direction or drops to the ground. The fear factor becomes worse when\nan object suddenly appears overhead, bathing the victims in glaring light and\nextremes of temperature, often causing their horses, pets or other farm animals\nto bolt and run away. In many of the more extreme cases people are burned,\nwounded, and left unconscious, with after effects ranging from headaches,\nnausea, and scarring to long term illnesses and death. Many must deal with\nvarious kinds of physical evidence, extremes of reality transformations, and\nexposure to strange entities. Human effects incidents containing all of the above\nsituations and more have been thoroughly documented by AAP Person 127 the\nfamilies of the victims, government officials, multiple private investigators, and\nmedical practitioners.\n\nAAP Person 127 traveled to Brazil numerous times and worked with a group of\nBrazilian investigators, translators and medical people to show the important, but"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sinister nature of what happened to the people there. The data summarized\nbelow is based on an evaluation of [REDACTED] detailed investigative reports.\n\n• Deaths – 10 humans died after periods of prolonged illness following their\nexposure to this technology. More than 300 animals were found dead of\nunknown causes during the same period and in the same area of the\ncountry.\n• Burns – 54 people were burned during close encounters\n• Comas – 14 people were left in an unconscious state for short periods of\ntime\n• Paralysis – 54 people suffered from paralysis of fairly short duration, while\nparalysis plagued a few people for several weeks.\n• Skin problems\n • Puncture wounds – 23 of the people suffering from burns also had\npuncture wounds within the burned areas of their skin. Most felt that\nblood was taken via the puncture wounds.\n • Rashes – 2 persons had a rash from an unknown allergen. Perhaps it is\nbecause of climate and living conditions, but most people didn't mention\nrashes as a problem\n • Itching – Only one person mentioned being bothered by itching. Again\nthis may be because of climate and living conditions.\n • Scarring – 8 of the burned individuals had fairly extensive permanent\nscarring resulting from the burns\n• Eye problems\n • Irritation – 34 people complained of irritated eyes\n • Temporary blindness – 5 people suffered from blindness for a short\nperiod of time\n • Vision acuity changes – 8 people suffered from vision changes. No\nreports even mentioned the wearing of corrective lenses.\n• Nausea/Vomiting – 41 people suffered from bouts of nausea, with some\nhaving to deal with vomiting as well\n• Headaches – 55 people reported extreme headaches\n• Temperature\n • Hot – 46 people described extensive heat during their close encounter"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Cold – 28 people felt like they were enveloped in a pocket of cold air\nduring the event\n• Prolonged illness – 36 people were ill for long periods of time, ranging from\nmonths to years. The deaths reported above came from this select group\nof people.\n• Anemia – [REDACTED] located 3 people that were found to be anemic during\nperiods following their encounter, however, most victims were not tested\nfor anemia. Two additional women suffered from anemia following their\nseparate UFO encounters. Their condition was verified by 1843(a)(2)\n1843(a)(2) for the Legal Medicine Institute\nin Belem. Both women reported being engulfed by a beam of light that\nburned them and left each of them physically debilitated.\n• Weight loss – 2 people reported extensive weight loss. There may have\nbeen more weight loss cases, but the people did not focus on weight as a\nmeasure.\n• Extreme fear – 423 people claimed to be terrified by their close encounter\nand the resulting physiological effects. Thousands of other citizens that\nlived in the area where the incidents were occurring also claimed to live in\nfear because of what had happened to people they knew and many of\nthem would no longer go outside at night. Many people completely\nchanged their life styles because of this fear. 1843(a)(2) and the\nFAB team said: \"The town of Colares, Para, lives in a state of 'collective\nhysteria.' The inhabitants don't sleep, nor fish (which is their main\noccupation). As soon as night falls, bands of 20-30 people, mostly men\ncirculate around the town. The population lives in a state of terror.\" This\nsituation eventually spread throughout the region.\n• Abductions – 18 people claimed to have been abducted. Most were found\nafterwards in a location other than where the original encounter occurred.\n• Nearness to the craft – people with injuries claim to have been as near as 2\n- 4 meters (i.e. right over their heads) and others were up to 200 meters\naway. Non-affected observers were at distances of more than 200 meters\nto as much as 6,000 meters."} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Geographic Data\n\nBrazil is one of the largest nations in the world, with more than one hundred seventy-five million people living in a land almost as big as the United States. However, most of the investigations covered by this report are from northeastern Brazil, ranging from the Amazon, to northern Maranhao, to Colares, and down the Atlantic coast to Uruguay. No one has fully recorded when the UFO activity actually started or how much of Brazil it covered, but we do know it started in northern Maranhao as early as April 1977, continued there for four months and apparently then moved on to the Colares region for much of the rest of the year. It could have started earlier elsewhere in Maranhao or Piaui or other states but at this time we do not have the records to establish that fact. And it may have continued after 1977 in other parts of Para, Amapa, Amazonas, Roraima or even farther north or west beyond the borders of Brazil. What we have been able to document about the flap is the intensive level of activity taking place in Maranhao and the Colares area in 1977 and 1978, and continuing sporadically for years after that time, extending to surrounding areas. In many cases, the same individuals were revisited approximately one decade following their initial exposure. The following facts illustrate the breadth of the problem:\n\n• Land Statistics – Brazil has a land area of 8,465,510 square kilometers (3,265,075 square miles), with 7,491 km (4,655 miles) of coastline. The Brazilian UFO assault began in the state of Para, in the wetlands and tropical forests at the mouth of the Amazon River. By comparison, the Brazilian wetlands are ten times the size of the Florida Everglades. As time passed, the UFO activity moved through the states of Maranhao and Ceara and down the coastline along the Brazilian highlands from Fortaleza to Rio de Janeiro and beyond. The attached map (Exhibit 1) graphically illustrates the number of cities involved.\n\n• States where incidents occurred – number of incidents investigated by [REDACTED]\n\n• Ceara – 48 incidents\n\n• Marajo – 1\n\n• Maranhao – 17"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Minas Gerais – 44\n\n• Para – 92 (The cities of Colares and Belem are in this state)\n\n• Paraiba – 4\n\n• Parana – 1\n\n• Rio De Janerio – 11\n\n• Rio Grande do Sul – 4\n\n• Rio Grande do Norte – 121\n\n• Sao Paulo – 20\n\n• Vila – 3\n\n• Other – 5\n\n• Total locations – 371\n\n• Type of terrain where incident occurred\n\n• Land – 281\n\n• Water – 38\n\n• Unspecified – 52\n\n• Number of towns/villages affected – Not specified, but thought to be in the thousands. 1843(a)(2) and his FAB team said the objects were covering Brazilian air space in strips much the way aerial photographers would. Each strip could cover dozens to hundreds of villages. For example, the state of Para has a population of more than 8 million inhabitants living in 1.2 million homes. The village of Colares, the focal point of the 1977 UFO assault has a population of more than 10,000 people, living in 3,200 homes. Nearly everyone living in Colares was impacted by the UFO activity there. Similar statistics are available for each of the other Brazilian states.\n\n• Number of physically affected victims interviewed by [REDACTED] 514\n\n• Types of people reporting UFO incidents\n\n• Professionals – 48\n\n• Business owners & workers – 76\n\n• Fishers – 61\n\n• Hunters – 16\n\n• Farmers – 168\n\n• Students – 167\n\n• Spouses - 65\n\n• Unemployed – 10"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Number of people not directly affected – 10,000 to one million. People across northeastern Brazil watched the sky with fearful eyes, worrying that they would become victims. Fortunately, the UFOs usually kept their distance as they traversed the area. [REDACTED] work indicates that the UFOs needed to be closer than 200 meters to do any significant damage to humans.\n\nSpacecraft Data\n\nIn all cases where human effects were noted, some type of craft was involved. Sometimes the craft are seen coming from great distances, traveling at high speeds, and suddenly stopping in close proximity to the victims. At other times and without any warning, a blinding light suddenly turns on above the heads of the victims. They are subjected to variations of hot and cold temperatures. Some are wounded, burned and/or left unconscious at the scene.\n\nThe terrified victims almost always try to flee to a safe location, but many are pursued by the blinding light and have trouble hiding. Sometimes they flee to the interior of a nearby building, but the light continues searching for them, shining through a tiled or thatched roof as if it were transparent. When pursued out in the open, victims have described how the craft try to lift them from the ground, perhaps in an attempt to abduct them. And in some cases the abduction attempt appears to have been successful.\n\nThe presence of craft of a variety of shapes and sizes have been seen and documented during the close encounters, leaving little doubt in the reality of the situation. An extensive analysis of this data may give clues about how these"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"objects operate and perhaps lead to reverse engineering of the technology involved.\n\n• Shape (Multiple craft were observed in some of the incidents)\n\n• Lights – 279\n\n• Orbs – 120\n\n• Discs – 46\n\n• Spheres – 19\n\n• Triangles – 5\n\n• Cylinders – 18\n\n• Other (unusual shapes) – 6\n\n• Size – Ranges from baseball to basketball size for orbs, while the more structured type of craft ranges from a few feet to \"huge.\"\n\n• Speed\n\n• High speed – 51\n\n• Hover – 62\n\n• Low speed – 78\n\n• Rapid speed change – 21\n\n• Landed – 16\n\n• Color: The color often changes during the event. For example, a high speed object may appear yellow as it approaches but turns red before harming an individual, or may suddenly project a blue beam. In many instances the victims just described a bright light without specifying a color.\n\n• Yellow – 59\n\n• White – 30\n\n• Silver – 2\n\n• Multi-colored like fire – 47\n\n• Red – 116\n\n• Blue – 69\n\n• Orange – 4\n\n• Light beams\n\n• Engulf victim in light (sudden illumination) – 184. This action was extremely terrifying to the victims. Many of them lived in areas without"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"electricity and bright lights at night, other than an occasional automobile's headlights were unheard of.\n\n• Pursue victim – 54\n\n• Switch on/off – 58\n\n• Penetrate roofs/walls – 20\n\n• Search the area – 18\n\n• Craft becoming visible or invisible – 2. Many other victims said the craft just disappeared or the craft just appeared above them, but didn't elaborate, therefore the measure of invisibility is thought to be greatly understated here.\n\n• Noise (the victims did not always address this issue)\n\n• No – 82. The victims seem to be amazed that something so frightening can come so close to them and yet are completely silent.\n\n• Yes – 35. When noises were noted, the victims usually said it was a 'whooshing' or a low humming sound.\n\n• Levitation of witnesses – 30\n\n• Mechanical devices used on humans during levitation attempts\n\n• Nets – 6\n\n• Hooks – 3\n\n• Animal affects – The victims frequently told how their animals reacted during the incidents. Dogs barked furiously. Horses bolted and ran away. Farm animals were badly frightened. On occasion, however, a donkey would just stand there, unmoving and bathed in light throughout the event. In a couple of instances, the victim hid under a donkey and held on to its legs throughout the event. The actual quantity of animals affected is unknown because the investigations did not focus on the animals.\n\nOccupants\n\nIn an extremely large number of incidents the craft seem to operate intelligently but independently and no occupants were seen. One might equate such cases to our remote piloted war-fighting machines. In specific instances, however, solid, physically real craft were observed at close range and occupants from the craft"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"interacted with the victims on the ground. Some of the reported characteristics of the occupants are as follows:\n\n• Size (Approximate)\n• Three feet tall – 51\n• Four feet tall – 10\n• Adult human-sized – 35\n• Animal-like – 1\n• Features: Since the majority of the incidents occurred at night, the features of the occupants were not clearly visible to the victims, therefore the information in this category is sparse at best.\n• Big head – 2\n• Frail body – 7\n• Large eyes – 7\n• Normal human features – 8\n• Wearing special clothing – 16\n\nGovernment Interactions\n\nThe Brazilian incidents beginning in 1977 are unique in that they were intensively investigated by an official Brazilian Air Force team, having the time, equipment and authority to spend four months in the field observing events, interviewing victims and officially recording the extent of the problem. This was an intelligence operation lead by 1843(a)(2) and included First Air Force Command Sergeants that were technicians, photographers and other specialists.\n\nMilitary people (last names only) involved in the official investigations included the following:\n\n• 1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n1843(a)(2) a graduate of the National School of Intelligence in Brasilia, and his Air Force team interviewed around three hundred people who had had close encounters, including dozens of men and women who had been burned by UFOs. Villagers in Colares reported that sometimes UFOs would hover in the dark sky at night and beam down rays of light at houses – beams that passed through the tile roofs as if they did not exist. At times the rays were seen circling around inside the houses as if searching for someone or something."} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2) said his team photographed many UFOs and admitted he was once badly frightened when a huge UFO hovered just 100 meters above him and his men. \"I was terrified,\" he said. \"They could have done anything they wanted to with us. It was about seven o'clock - just after sunset. We never saw anything approaching. Suddenly a big disc-shaped object thirty meters in diameter and fifty meters high was hovering exactly above us. It was emitting a yellow glow that would grow and dim, grow and dim every two or three seconds. And after the fifth time, the lights turned light blue, dimmed – and then it disappeared with incredible speed toward the sea.\" This astonishing event was typical of what was happening to people throughout the area.\n\nIn addition, local mayors, police, and aviation officials became involved in the events over the next two decades.\n\n• Individuals involved\n• Military – 56 (Military individuals also served as police)\n• Police – 10\n• State officials – 3\n• City and village officials – 6\n• Doctors – 48. As an example, 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) located in Belem treated approximately 40 injured individuals during the rash of UFO incidents in Colares in 1977. She said most of the injured had burns on their chest and throat. These burns healed fairly quickly and the skin peeled off, but a few individuals had significant scarring following the healing process. Two small puncture wounds were almost always found in the center of the burned areas. She ran blood tests on the burn patients and all of them had low levels of hemoglobin.\n• Aviation officials (pilots and FAA operators) – 13.\n• Evidence collected\n• Visual observation of injuries\n• By officials – 5"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• By doctors – 48\n\n• Photographs – 7. The number of photographs is low because very few of the individuals interviewed by [REDACTED] owned cameras. However, during the Brazilian Air Force investigation at Colares, 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) said \"we took about 300 photographs of eight different shapes of UFOs.\" At one point, 1843(a)(2) said they photographed a huge ship that was 100 meters long. Small craft would come out of it and later go back in.\n• Medical records\n• Available – 11\n• Held by doctors – 48\n• Officials that actually witnessed an event – 40. 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) was one of the officials that witnessed a metallic, cylindrical UFO in Corales. It happened in November 1977, at 6 pm, when most of the stores were closed and many people had fled from the horror there. She, the sheriff and the priest were the only officials left in town. At the time she was down by the beach and the craft was about 200 meters away. People were imploring her to flee with them, but she wouldn't go. She was too fascinated by it. She said it was beautiful as it circled in the sky.\n• Car/truck engine failures – 11. In a high percentage of the cases investigated by [REDACTED] the victims were either on foot, bicycle or horseback. Nevertheless, he found 11 cases where people were trapped on the road when their car or motorcycle engine died and would not restart as long as the UFO was present. In addition, 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) had two cases involving close encounters with several police cars and about 25 cases of close encounters with civilian cars.\n• Radar data – 1 (People living in the rural areas and villages had no access to radar information)"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conclusion to Colares Report\n\nThe documentation shows that northeastern Brazil was a UFO hot spot for at least two decades. Since the activity may be continuing in some form, a follow-up investigation of the current UFO situation in that region is warranted.\n\nFrom the analysis of the rich treasure trove of recorded data from that era, it is evident that it is fertile with clues about the technology involved and how that technology is used in surveillance of the native population. Consideration should be given to a renewed on-site examination of the situation as it appears today with the goal of using high technology remote sensing equipment to record as many operational parameters of the craft as possible.\n\n####"} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BAASS Continues Study on Information on UAPs released by the British, Canadian and Danish Governments.\n\n• Over the past eighteen months, The Ministry of Defense (MoD) in the United Kingdom has released approximately 7297 pages of files pertaining to the performance of alleged UAPs in British air space. More recently the British MoD released a second group of files on March 21, 2009 comprising 1200 separate UFO cases in approximately 2000 additional pages. BAASS analysts have initiated the process of downloading, organizing and analyzing these files to determine the quality and quantity of reports that have been released by the UK government, particularly those reports that might pertain to events with national security implications.\n\n• In February 2009, the Canadian government authorized the release of 9500 pages of files pertaining to the behavior of alleged advanced aerospace vehicles in Canadian air space. The files cover the period 1947-1980. Many of the cases were investigated by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. BAASS analysts have initiated the process of downloading, printing, organizing and analyzing these files. The aim is to delineate the extent of high quality evidence pertaining to the topic of advanced aerial vehicle performance in the 9500 pages of Canadian files.\n\n• On January 29, 2009 the Danish Air Force released 329 pages of reports on unusual aerial phenomena. All reports are in Danish; therefore BAASS contracted a Danish-English translator to produce English translations of all 329 pages of released files. The translation will be complete by March 13, 2009. Once the files are translated, BAASS analysts will examine them to delineate whether there are any cases that merit further study.\n\n39\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"d887e7a04509d6bb","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conclusion\n\nAs BAASS makes progress in and accelerates the hiring of employees in the coming weeks, it will be crucial that the organization has rapid access to the information that will keep the scientific staff engaged.\n\nSecondly BAASS is currently accelerating the acquisition of all information pertaining to this topic in the open literature, increasingly from other countries.\n\n40\n\nThis information is proprietary and confidential and cannot be disseminated or used without prior written consent from the Operating Manager of BAASS®."} {"doc_id":"d8e79a3803e64b96","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR\n5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON\nWASHINGTON, DC 20301-5000\nINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY\nTranscript of an Unresolved UAP Report, Colorado, October 2023\nThis document is a transcript of a 27-second video recording contained in this collection under the title LLE-UAP-PR003, captured by a law enforcement officer in Colorado in October 2023. AARO removed the audio from the original recording to protect information whose release could reasonably be expected to affect the privacy or other protected interests of a U.S. person or commercial entity. This transcript is also redacted to protect the identity of the reporter and sensitive law enforcement information.\nAll descriptive and estimative language in this transcript reflects the reporter’s subjective interpretation at the time of the event. Such characterizations should not be interpreted as a conclusive indication of the presence or absence of any intrinsic object features or performance characteristics.\nBeginning of transcript.\nThis video contains only indistinct background noise and does not feature any discernible dialogue.\nEnd of transcript; nothing follows."} {"doc_id":"d942054671fe2ef8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nPlease do not use the purple \"submit\" button above. Save and email the complete file manually (see below).\n\nRange Fouler Reporting Form\n\nPlease complete this form to the best of your ability. If you do not have the requested information, please leave the field blank. If there was more than one \"group,\" please report each on a separate form for data collection purposes. You should receive a response within 5 business days.\n\nLast Name, First Name\nRank\nSIPR Email Address\nCrew Position\n[REDACTED]\nThis information is for contact only. [REDACTED] sanitizes all reports of identifying information.\nAbsolutely no identifying information for aircrew or squadron will be recorded for analysis.\n[REDACTED]\nDay\nDate (mm/dd/yy)\nTime of detection (hh:mm:ss Z)\nDay / Night\nSide No.\nBuno\nMission Description (CAS, BFM, etc)\n[REDACTED]\nContact Working Area (Ex: W-72 1A)\nContact Latitute (DD:MM:SS)\nN/S\nContact Longitude (DD:MM:SS)\nE/W\nContact Altitude (Ex: 22000)\nAltitude Constant?\nWind Dir at Contact Alt (From)\nWind Speed\nPlease attempt to determine a Lat / Long for the contact at initial detection. We recommend using [REDACTED] to reference the sensor-derived bearing and range relative to the bullseye you had in use. If that method is not available, any reasonable derivation of location will work, but please be as specific as possible and make a note in the comments section. These locations may be used to cue other means of tracking.\nWas the contact moving? Yes\nDirection/Speed (Ex. 090/15)\nPlease check all that apply:\n[REDACTED]\n# of Contacts in \"Group\": [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] (Check all that apply):\nRound: [ ] Moving Parts: [ ]\nSquare: [ ] Metallic: [ ]\nBalloon-shaped: [ ] Markings: [ ]\nWings/Airframe: [ ] Translucent: [ ]\nOther Shape: [ ] Opaque: [ ]\nApparent Propulsion: [ ] Reflective: [ ]\n[REDACTED]\nPlease use the field below to describe the contact and any interaction in your own words with as much detail as possible. Please be sure to include any detail not included in questions above.\n[REDACTED]\nDon't use the purple \"submit\" button! Save this form with filename \"Date_Squadron_RF.pdf\" and email it to [REDACTED] (Also in the global). For troubleshooting, call [REDACTED]\nThank you for your time. Please ensure all display tapes are ripped for the entire time of interaction and saved as a .wmv (Example: [REDACTED]. Squadron intel personnel shall upload those files to the repository located at\n[REDACTED]\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY"} {"doc_id":"d942054671fe2ef8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n[REDACTED] I, 2 other crewmembers [REDACTED] Navy civilian and [REDACTED] USAF Ret, contractor), and 2 pilots were onboard a civilian King Air [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] In between mission sorties, I noticed an object with flight characteristics unlike anything I had seen in my 28 years of performing [REDACTED] for the USAF and Navy. A small object was below us and appeared to be traveling in a straight line opposite our direction at high speed. I tracked it for ~10-15 seconds before we turned on the recorder to provide the attached video. When I zoomed in to try and achieve more resolution, the object's speed took out of my FOV and I was unable to reacquire, even at a lower zoom. Upon analysis after the flight, the object appeared to be rectangular. Others with equal or more experience were also unsure as to what this object might be.\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY"} {"doc_id":"da007ce8f34cae4b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Unclassified Controller Nuclear Information\n\nCNS | consolidated nuclear security, llc\nPANTEX PLANT | Y-12 NATIONAL SECURITY COMPLEX\n\nP.O. Box 30020\nAmarillo, TX 79120-0020\n\nOffice 806.477.3918\nFax 806.477.5690\n\nSEP 09 2015\n\n[REDACTED]\nDeputy Assistant Manager\nfor Safeguards & Security\nNNSA Production Office\nPost Office Box 2050\nOak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-8009\n\nDear [REDACTED]:\n\nPantex Unidentified Object Report\n\nEnclosed for your review is the complete report for the Pantex Unidentified Object that occurred on September 2, 2015. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me at [REDACTED] or [REDACTED] at [REDACTED].\n\nSincerely yours,\n\n[REDACTED]\nSr. Director - Pantex\nPantex SS&ES Operations\n\nGDW:ljv\n\nEnclosure: As stated\n\nc/enc: [REDACTED]\n\nDocument transmitted herewith contains UCNI. When separated from attachments, handle this document as Unclassified.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED CONTROLLED NUCLEAR INFORMATION NOT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE\nUnauthorized dissemination subject to civil and criminal sanctions under section 148 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2168)\nReviewing Official: [REDACTED], CNS Pantex\nDate: September 8, 2015\nGuidance Used: CG-SS-4, Sept 2000, Chg. 7, HQ OC\n\nSS&ES-15-1509514-4230-SS&ES\n\nUnclassified Controlled Nuclear Information"} {"doc_id":"da007ce8f34cae4b","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UCNI\n\nPantex Unidentified Object Incident Report\n\nOn September 1, 2015 at approximately 0710 hours, the Pantex Ground Surveillance Radar (GSR) detection system identified an unknown object flying in a non-threatening manner west of Pantex facilities in a northerly trajectory. The Protective Force (PF) responded in accordance with the NPO approved Security Incident Response to Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) plan. The object was initially identified just north of Highway 60 and was traveling in a northerly trajectory approximately 10-15mph. PF personnel were alerted to the object and subsequently dispatched to follow it in an effort to obtain as much information about the object as possible. PF personnel on the ground confirmed the presence of the object and maintained observation via PF vehicle. PF personnel followed the object for several miles north of the plant until it was no longer visible. All plant pedestrian and vehicle gates leading into and out of security areas were immediately secured upon identification of an unknown object by the GSR. Furthermore, PF patrols moved to a position to ensure the protection of assets.\n\nA subsequent comprehensive review of the incident was immediately initiated. The following text describes actions taken by Central Alarm Station (CAS) and Secondary Alarm Station (SAS) GSR operators, PF officers and Security Police Officers (SPOs) during the event.\n\nAt approximately 0708 hours, the [REDACTED] an object approximately 1.75 miles SW of Z-12 South traveling at 10-15 mph (see map below titled, Ground Surveillance Radar Tracks). Several other radar hits were received as the object traversed to the NNW. [REDACTED] to attempt to locate the object and report its position and direction of travel. A PF Lieutenant (Lt.) and SPO in the area spotted the object and followed it as it traveled north. The Lt. and SPO attempted to intercept the object as it traveled over Pantex Drive in an attempt to view the object directly from below. Although they were unable to catch up to the object, they stopped their vehicle and got out. Once outside, they noted that the object did not make any sound. Furthermore, the Lt. and SPO stated that they were unable to identify any type of propulsion system on the object while using binoculars to assess the object. After viewing it for 1-2 minutes, the object then continued north offsite. The Lt. and SPO then followed the object for several miles north of Pantex before they lost the object due to lack of roadway access. The location where the object was last seen was near County Road G and F.M. 1342. The Carson County Sherriff's office was notified when the object began to traverse off-site and requested to respond to the area and assist in locating the object. A Sheriff's Deputy met the Lt. and SPO at the point where the object was last seen. The Deputy stated that he did not see the object but would perform a search in the area for anything unusual. It was noted that the object seemed to increase in speed and changed direction as it was being followed. The last known direct of the object was that it was heading in an ENE direction. The Lt. and SPO were debriefed upon their return to the\n\nPage 2 of 6"} {"doc_id":"da007ce8f34cae4b","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UCNI\n\nPantex Unidentified Object Incident Report\n\nplant. Their perspective of the object was that it was a \"diamond\" type shape with it being more round at the top.\n\nSecurity Police Officers in a Bearcat with a Common Remotely Operated Weapon System (CROWS) unit were also able to locate and track the object via CROWS camera as it traversed the plant. The SPOs stated that it was 100-200 ft. above the ground and they were able to track the object for 3-5 minutes. The SPOs location was approximately 75-100 meters from the object.\n\nOther PF personnel that observed the object, including a SPO that was viewing the object through binoculars described it as being approximately 4 ft. tall and 2 ft. wide at the bottom. The object was also described as being thinner at the top. However, there were some discrepancies in the color of the object. Some personnel stated that it was black in color while others noted that it appeared to be silver, red and blue.\n\nVideo was obtained from the GSR tower that was closest to the object and subsequently sent to Sandia National Labs for further study (see image below titled, Image from Ground Surveillance Radar Tower). The video does not provide much detail of the object due to the distance of the object to the GSR tower. It should be noted that at no time did the object appear to be threatening in nature nor did it come to close proximity to any sensitive assets. The object remained over open unpopulated areas of the plant prior to it proceeding offsite. All evidence of the incident (i.e. statements, video, etc.) were turned over to FBI agent [REDACTED]\n\nPage 3 of 6"} {"doc_id":"da007ce8f34cae4b","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UCNI\n\nPantex Unidentified Object Incident Report\n\nGround Surveillance Radar Tracks\n\nPage 4 of 6"} {"doc_id":"da007ce8f34cae4b","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"da007ce8f34cae4b","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UCNI\nPantex Unidentified Object Incident Report\nImage from Ground Surveillance Radar Tower\nUCNI\nPage 5 of 6"} {"doc_id":"da007ce8f34cae4b","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UCNI\nPantex Unidentified Object Incident Report\nSandia National Labs Enhanced Images of the Object\nUCNI\nPage 6 of 6"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense Intelligence Reference Document\n\nDefense Futures\n\n01 November 2010\nICOD: 8 July 2010\nDIA-08-1011-002\n\nCockpits in the Era of Breakthrough Flight\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCockpits in the Era of Breakthrough Flight\n\nThe Defense Intelligence Reference Document provides non-substantive but authoritative reference information related to intelligence topics or methodologies.\n\nPrepared by:\n\nTechnology Warning Division (DWO-4)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 82\n\nAdministrative Notes:\n\n(U) COPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to [REDACTED] AAP Person AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: JUIAF - DI/DWO-3,1 Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\ni\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ............................................................................................ iv\nChapter 1: Predicting Implications of Propulsion Breakthroughs ........................... 1\nMARCH OF PROGRESS: REVOLUTIONARY PROPULSION PHYSICS ....................... 1\nVEHICLE and COCKPIT IMPLICATIONS ............................................................. 2\nChapter 2: Human-Machine Interface Lessons ........................................................ 18\nHUMAN PERCEPTION NORMS ................................................................... 18\nDESIGN FOR STRESS ................................................................................ 21\nDEVICES TO CONVEY INFORMATION ....................................................... 23\nDEVICES FOR RECEIVING PILOT COMMANDS ........................................... 27\nCONTEMPORARY AIRCRAFT COCKPITS ................................................... 28\nChapter 3: Provisional Cockpit for Breakthrough Flight ...................................... 32\nFLIGHT MODES ........................................................................................ 32\nPHYSICAL DISPLAYS ................................................................................ 34\nVIRTUAL SURROUND DISPLAY ................................................................. 40\nCONTROLS ............................................................................................... 41\nChapter 4: Future Work ........................................................................................ 43\nMULTIPLE FLIGHT REGIME GUIDANCE CONVENTIONS ............................... 43\nVECTOR MOTION DISPLAY ....................................................................... 43\nVECTOR MOTION CONTROL ..................................................................... 43\nOPTIMUM MIX OF CONTROL METHODS ................................................... 44\nAppendix A: Annotated Bibliography ................................................................... 45\nAppendix B: Endnotes ........................................................................................... 50\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Six Independent Degrees of Freedom ................................................... 3\nFigure 2. Comparing Conventions of Aircraft Motion ............................................ 5\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 3. Necessary Distinction Between External & Internal Force Environments. 6\nFigure 4. Warp Drive ........................................................................................8\nFigure 5. Hypothetical Gravitational Bias Drive ....................................................9\nFigure 6. Inertial Frame Bias Drive and Vehicle Zones ........................................10\nFigure 7. Typical Science Fiction Orientations ......................................................12\nFigure 8. Cosmic Microwaves as Universal Motion Reference Frame ...................... 15\nFigure 9. Human Fields of View ............................................................................20\nFigure 10. Flight Deck of Contemporary Aircraft ..................................................29\nFigure 11. Contemporary Primary Flight Display ..................................................30\nFigure 12. Space Cockpit Visions Circa 1959 ........................................................31\nFigure 13. Provisional Breakthrough-Era Cockpit .................................................33\nFigure 14. Functional Designation of Physical Cockpit Panels ...............................34\n\nTables\n\nTable 1: Comparing Reaction Time to Distance Traversed at Various Speeds ....... 13\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCockpits in the Era of Breakthrough Flight\n\nIntroduction\n\nResponding to the request to explore forefront science relevant to future cockpits for any form of aerospace craft and/or deep-space craft that is propelled by any unspecified advanced or breakthrough propulsion physics, this report offers a provisional cockpit design that employs the following:\n\n- Predictions of propulsion physics breakthroughs.\n- Lessons of human-machine interface.\n- Emerging technology for displays and controls.\n\nThis study discusses the implications of breakthrough propulsion, including the mastery over gravitational and inertial forces and the prospect for faster-than-light spaceflight. The main reference used to predict these possibilities is the book Frontiers of Propulsion Science [Millis & Davis, 2009]. Although the breakthroughs discussed in this book are not imminent, enough progress has been made to allow for thoughtful speculation about their characteristics and possible implementations.\n\nHow these advances may affect future cockpits is described, and this is the central message of this study. The most significant differences from legacy cockpits are identified and then used to set the baseline design requirements.\n\nAdditionally, substantial lessons about human-machine interfaces are reviewed and applied to this notional cockpit. Most of this progress relies on better accommodating the norms and limitations of human perception—lessons that do not change even when vehicle characteristics change.\n\nRecent advancements in the use of hand gestures for commands are also included, as well as advancements in brain-machine interfaces. In this conceptual study of far-future possibilities, these technologies are assumed to have reached full maturity, with one exception: in order to focus this study on future cockpits, the options for brain implants and for transhumanism—where humans are reengineered to adapt to new requirements—are not considered.\n\nNext-step investigations are suggested to refine the ideas presented herein. A caveat is that advances in cockpits for breakthrough flight might be further advanced by taking advantage of the gaming industry techniques or through science fiction speculation.\n\nNote: All projections in this report are based on public domain information.\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 1: Predicting Implications of Propulsion Breakthroughs\n\nMARCH OF PROGRESS: REVOLUTIONARY PROPULSION PHYSICS\n\nBreakthroughs in propulsion physics (such as the control over gravitational or inertial forces, propellant-less space drives, and even faster-than-light travel) are not imminent; however, enough progress has been made to allow for thoughtful speculation about their nature and implications. As a preview, the implications to cockpit design include added degrees of motion, combination of operational regimes (near ground, orbit, and beyond), greater range of speed (from zero-speed hover to beyond light speed), and loss of familiar motion cues (pilot's inertia and visual cues) resulting from the separation of external and internal environments.\n\nThe primary reference used to predict these possibilities is the book Frontiers of Propulsion Science [Millis & Davis, 2009],1 particularly chapters 3, 4, and 15. This book may be the first-ever scholarly compilation of science pertaining to breakthrough flight—methods sufficiently advanced to enable human voyages to other star systems. The book examines a wide range of works, offering introductory explanations and comparisons between approaches and identifying high-priority unknowns needing deeper study. References to specific ideas and issues cite that book and other original works.\n\nSetting Ideal Performance as Design Target\n\nThis report focuses on the most significant likely differences between contemporary cockpits and cockpits in the era of breakthrough flight. Possibilities that imply the most demanding changes are considered first, and explanations of the correlations between the propulsion characteristics and resulting cockpit features are provided. Looking to the far future, this study evaluates the impact of having achieved the following breakthrough advancements:\n\n• Control over gravitational and inertial forces:\n– The craft is propelled by interacting with the properties of the space-time and/or inertial frames surrounding the craft—and can accelerate at g levels beyond human endurance.\n– The environment inside a craft can be sustained anywhere between 0 g and 1 g (minimum range) without regard for either the motion of the craft or its outside gravitational environment.\n\n• Faster-than-light (FTL) speeds are possible by having mastered control over those aspects of nature that impose the light-speed limit. However, due to reasonable relativistic projections of the energy required for propulsion coupled with the limits of the human lifespan, it is reasonable to expect that travels will be limited to within our galaxy. For the sake of bracketing the scope of coverage, this study assumes that practical star flight will be limited to a 100-light-year radius around our Sun. Even with this constraint, thousands of star systems are within that range.\n\n6"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• The energy supply for these features resides on the vehicle and is considered to have a dynamic interplay with the motion of the vehicle. The energy can be transferred to and from the environment surrounding the craft as a consequence of the propulsive maneuvers.\n\nSanity Check on Predictions\n\nObjectively, the propulsion physics predictions offered in this report should be interpreted as informed conjectures or, at best, well-reasoned speculations. Absent of verified theories and engineering implementations, it is premature to consider this first study as the last word on this topic. Further progress will likely reduce the span of options and provide greater insight into implementation details.\n\nIt must also be stressed that these interpretive predictions and cockpit implications are solely generated by the author and, thus, have not yet been published or debated with other scientists and engineers. Therefore, the reader should consider these predictions to be an initial step into the process.\n\nVEHICLE AND COCKPIT IMPLICATIONS\n\nIdeally, it is desirable to have a vehicle that can move in any direction, at any speed, in both air and space, without limitations. These features imply the need to have technological mastery over the forces of gravity and inertia and mastery over those aspects of nature that impose the light-speed limit. Based on projections of the underlying physics, such abilities would have secondary characteristics that affect how such motions are monitored and controlled.\n\nDegrees of Freedom\n\nUnlike an aircraft, whose motion consists basically of deviations from constant forward motion, or a helicopter, whose motion is dominated by the dynamics of its main rotors, a breakthrough propulsion vehicle would allow the full six degrees of freedom, including the ability to remain fixed relative to a desired reference. For example, if we start with the situation of a vehicle hovering over the ground, the breakthrough vehicle should be able to change its orientation (yaw, pitch, or roll) without affecting its altitude or lateral position. Similarly, it should be able move up/down or laterally without the need to induce pitch or roll maneuvers (Figure 1).\n\nSuch novel motion leads to two major differences from legacy cockpits:\n\n• Independent control inputs are needed for the full six degrees of freedom (yaw, pitch, and roll; and laterally, x [fore-aft], y [left-right], and z [up-down]).\n\n• New display methods are required to convey position, orientation, and motion for all those degrees of freedom.\n\nThe control methods need not copy legacy methods from airplanes or helicopters—methods that are based on the mechanisms of their origin (Figure 2). Instead, future cockpit designs are now free to use control methods tailored to the natural action/reaction of pilots, while the vehicle's interfaces perform the function of converting pilot inputs to drive the vehicle's motion. Whether such a system consists of\n\n7"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\na single joystick with six degrees of freedom, some sort of gesture-based system, or one that has those degrees of freedom dispersed across multiple pilot inputs (e.g., head motion, legs and feet, and arms and hands) remains open for future study. As a provisional baseline, this report chooses the option of having a pair of six-degree-of-freedom joysticks, one for both the left and right hands and located at the edge of the cockpit chair's arm rests.\n\n[Figure 1 graphic: Six Independent Degrees of Freedom. Labels: Three equally available rectilinear axes of motion; Three equally available rotational axes of motion]\n\nFigure 1. Six Independent Degrees of Freedom. [Graphic: A. Szames] Note: the vehicle shown is strictly hypothetical and is a combination of three 1960s science fiction vehicles: Seaview submarine, Galileo shuttle, and Amtronic car.\n\nSimilar to requiring new control methods, new display methods are also required to convey more information than in legacy cockpits. In addition to the complete six degrees of freedom, these motions will take place near the Earth's surface, in orbit, and in deep space. A key difference spanning those regimes is the traditional role played by a gravitational field as a reference for orientation and motion. Since a gravitational reference will not always be present, and yet is extremely important when it is present, the new display system must accommodate all regimes in a way that feels natural to the pilots. These particular challenges are addressed in the section on Mixed Operational Regimes.\n\nSeparation of Internal and External Environments\n\nProbably the most significant and perplexing difference for breakthrough-era cockpits is that the sensations of motion inside the vehicle will not necessarily match the motion of the vehicle itself. This is both a consequence of the method of propulsion as well as cockpit features designed to ensure crew survival.\n\n8"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAs illustrated in Figure 2, when planning for breakthrough flight, there is no need to constrain designs to match the legacy conventions derived from prior vehicles. In the case of both the airplane and the helicopter, the control inputs available to the pilot are specific to the mechanisms of the control surfaces. When projecting breakthough flight, it is assumed that the controls will be tailored to match the natural characteristics of pilots, and the propulsion system will be designed to perform accordingly.\n\n9"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[Figure 2 graphic]\n\nFig 2A. Airplane Motion\nAircraft motion is dominated by its forward motion at relatively constant airspeed. Linear displacements are induced by changing orientation. Pitching up/down results in ascent/descent, and rolling left/right results in turning to the left/right.\n\nFig 2B. Helicopter Motion\nHelicopter motion is dominated by the upward thrust and dynamics of its main rotor. Like the aircraft, rolling (orientation change) results in left/right displacements. Unlike an aircraft, the helicopter can hover and change yaw without affecting its lateral position, with the exception of needing to compensate for secondary effects of the dynamics of the rotor.\n\nFig. 2C. Ideal Full Motion\nIt is desirable to be able to translate along any lateral axis without needing to change orientation, and to be able to change orientation without affecting translational motion. Although this might not be directly possible from the propulsion system, such a feature is assumed to be achieved by the programming of the control system.\n\nFigure 2. Comparing Conventions of Aircraft Motion. [Credit: A. Szames]\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY To make this easier to grasp and to provide a provisional concept, imagine that the vehicle is partitioned into concentric sections as shown in Figure 3. The central volume is for the crew, where it is required that the gravitational and inertial forces be sustained within survivable levels. The inner shell, or inner hull, surrounding that region contains whatever devices provide that safe environment. The outer shell contains the propulsion devices that induce the desired motion of the craft relative to the external space. The region between the two hull shells is a provisional separation for analyzing the interaction between those two functions. Coordinate system of the external environment Crew cabin where inertial and gravitational forces are maintained at normal, safe conditions Outer shell whose propulsion interacts with external environment Inner shell whose devices provides a safe internal force environment Figure 3. Necessary Distinction Between External and Internal Force Environments. [Graphic: A. Szames] For analytical purposes, it is advantageous to consider these volumes and control surfaces (the hull shells) as separate and then use them to define boundary conditions. In addition to its utility for assessing future cockpit designs, this multisectioned vehicle baseline is valuable for gedanken experiments about revolutionary propulsion concepts. Why This Is Odd Conventionally, gravitational and inertial effects permeate through everything, so the notion of having different conditions inside and outside of the craft runs contrary to 6 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY experience. If the gravitational environment outside the craft is 1 g, that same 1 g is expected inside as well. Similarly for accelerations, the entire mass of the vehicle, including its occupants, will experience the same inertial reactions as the vehicle accelerates. Upon the advent of breakthrough propulsion, mastery over gravitational and inertial forces will have been achieved. This implies, for example, that it is possible for a vehicle to accelerate at extreme g's while its crew remains within survivable limits or that, while cruising in deep space (absent of any acceleration or gravitational field), the crew can enjoy the familiar, constant 1 g upward. Because such possibilities run so contrary to established experience, it is difficult to comprehend how such things can be achieved and then contemplate the consequences that these advances impose onto other systems of the vehicle—in this case, how they affect cockpit designs. Not all known approaches to propulsion physics evoke the need for a double hull. 2 Versions that simply suggest a new thrusting mechanism and reaction mass would only need the double hull if also addressing how to provide a safe acceleration environment for the crew. As stated earlier, however, the most significant possible impacts are considered for this study. Therefore, two examples are described next for how breakthrough propulsion would require this provisional double-hull configuration. Why Double-Hull Needed: Example 1 (Warp Drive) The Alcubierre warp drive, which uses the physics from the Riemannian geometry of Einstein's general relativity, creates a \"warp bubble\" around the craft, and then this bubble of space-time is moved through the surrounding space-time. This effect is created (in theory) by expanding space-time behind the vehicle and contracting space-time in front. The vehicle within the bubble feels no acceleration forces. As illustrated in Figure 4, 3 the high peaks represent expanding space-time, while the low peaks represent contracting space-time. Note that the inner region is flat (meaning that the vehicle does not experience any acceleration forces), that the region far from the propulsion effect is also flat, and that these two regions are separate. 7 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Figure 4. Warp Drive. Taken directly from the Frontiers book, this image has become the iconic representation for a warp drive: the \"York Extrinsic Time Plot.\" In theory, the outer shell is presumed to create the propulsive effect of warping space-time outside the craft without affecting the inside. In short, the Alcubierre warp drive creates a separation of space-time environments inside and outside of the craft, although the exact details remain uncertain. Although there is no explicit function for the inner hull in this situation, this Alcubierre warp drive at least illustrates the concept of separation of these outer and inner environments. When planning future cockpits, the outer and inner inertial frames need to be treated as two distinct zones. The physics related to such considerations is still evolving 4 and beyond the scope of this report. Why Double Hull Needed: Example 2 (Field Space Drive) Another class of conceptual propulsion is a \"field drive\"—a subset of \"space drives\" where a spacecraft is propelled \"...using only the interactions between the spacecraft and its surrounding space...\" 5 Instead of using the Riemannian geometry of Einstein's general relativity, these approaches use the physics of fields and scalar potentials. 6 While several variants exist, the \"Bias Drive\" concept is selected here to illustrate the relevance of the double-hull configuration, specifically in the context of modifying the scalar potential that defines an inertial frame. By altering the properties of the surrounding inertial scalar, a gradient in that scalar is induced which, in turn, induces gravitational-like forces on matter located in that gradient. 8 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Figure 5 represents one version of this effect, 7 where the vehicle and its contents would be located at the steep gradient and therefore would jointly experience acceleration forces. Taken directly from the Frontiers book, this image represents what would happen if it were possible to asymmetrically modify Newton's gravitational constant to induce gravitational gradients that would then, in turn, accelerate the vehicle. Despite the similarity to the distortions in the warp drive (Figure 4), these surfaces represent scalar potentials of gravitational fields. Figure 6 is a modified version of this where the double-hull configuration of Figure 3 is imposed, along with the condition that the inner region remains unaffected. In Figure 6, the locations of the inner and outer shell are identified on the figure. The notion of the gravitational bias drive has been modified here to illustrate the concept of having two separate zones of inertial and gravitational forces. In this case, the plotted surface represents a scalar potential of an inertial frame, where a gradient has the same effect as a gravitational field. The smaller central flat area is the inside of the vehicle where no acceleration forces are felt. The outer edges of the diagram are also flat, representing the unaffected space sufficiently far from the propulsive effect. The distorted regions in between represent the effects of both the outer and inner hull shells. The outer hull shell induces a gradient that propels the vehicle, and the inner shell acts to prevent those distortions from reaching the crew cabin. It should be emphasized that these notions are at the level of thought experiments, as opposed to being mature theory. Figure 5. Hypothetical Gravitational Bias Drive. a) Multiplicative modification, B, Eq. (39a) b) Exponential modification, b, Eq. (39b) In short, this Inertial Frame Bias Drive has affected the space both outside and inside of the craft to propel the vehicle and to keep its crew isolated from the resulting acceleration forces. For example, if the outer hull creates a 10-g field outside the craft, the inner hull would compensate to create an opposing field such that the crew cabin is free of the 10-g acceleration forces. It can, therefore, be speculated that—if such field-affecting physics is discovered—the inner shell could create a 1-g field when the craft is coasting in 0-g deep space. 9 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Figure 6. Inertial Frame Bias Drive and Vehicle Zones. [Credit: M. Millis] Outer Hull Inner Hull Crew Safe Zone To be explicit, the physics and engineering to create such situations do not yet exist. The related physics can be categorized as still being at steps one and two of the scientific method: defining the problem and collecting data. 8 Among many other issues eluding discovery and resolution, major issues include momentum conservation, the role played by inertial frames, and methods to affect gravitational and inertial properties of matter and space. Secondary Consequences Pertinent to cockpit design, the normal sensations of motion inside the cockpit will likely not be the same. In contrast to the advantage of shielding the crew from harsh maneuvers, this shielding removes sensations of motion (seat-of-pants feeling) that pilots use to help judge the motion of their vehicle. This detriment is compounded by the likelihood of inducing motion sickness, since the visual cues of the vehicle's real motion will be different from that felt by the pilot. A difference between visual and vestibular cues is a cause of motion sickness. The option of allowing a certain portion of the vehicle's g-loading to be transferred to the cockpit can be considered as a mitigation strategy. Accordingly, cockpit controls to affect such changes are required. Also, it is likely that this double-hull notion would prevent direct visual contact between the occupants and the environment outside the vehicle, or perhaps distort such visual cues beyond easy interpretation. In other words, do not expect windows. Without the familiar visual and vestibular cues directly available to the pilot, it becomes vitally important for the cockpit displays to provide reliable and instinctive cues for the pilot to aptly judge the position, orientation, and motion of the vehicle. Mixed Operational Regimes A major desirable feature sought from propulsion breakthroughs is the ability to move from the surface of the Earth directly into space. This implies that the vehicle's displays and controls must readily encompass motion near the Earth's surface, ascent into space, 10 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ntransitions into and out of orbits, and long-duration sustained cruising in a 0-g environment.\n\nAs alluded to earlier, this deviates from prior displays where the Earth's gravitational field is available from which to gauge orientation. Similarly, the notion of an altimeter takes on a whole new meaning in this context. While visual cues for \"up\" are instinctively clear near the surface of the Earth (or even in closed rooms where 1 g is present), for a true breakthrough vehicle, these will be special conditions amongst a greater span of possibilities.\n\nA particular consequence of these added operational regimes is that unfamiliar situations are presented that must be made easy for the pilot to comprehend. Human instincts of motion and perception are honed from living in a 1-g environment with the majority of motions constrained to the (comparatively) two-dimensional ground. Also, lacking eyes in the back of our heads, our natural sense of attention is focused forward. While these instinctual characteristics serve well in travel near the ground, they do not apply to orbits or to deep-space flight.\n\nOrbit\n\nOrbits around the Earth—or any gravitating body, for that matter—present stable, constant energy situations. Orbits are convenient parking locations. A vehicle does not need to expend energy to stay in orbit indefinitely (unless drag forces from the atmosphere or long extensions of the vehicle come into play). Orbits, therefore, are common trajectories to select when loitering near gravitating bodies. But so far in the course of human evolution, developing an innate sense of placing a vehicle into an orbit does not exist. Although a human can instinctively run at just the right speed and direction to catch a ball thrown toward them, such natural instincts do not apply to placing a vehicle in orbit. Therefore, display systems will be required to provide readily interpretable cues for the pilots to transition into orbital flight. This implies presenting the natural relations between orbital altitude and orbital speed. This challenge is compounded since such cues must naturally blend with the motion cues used when flying near the surface.\n\nDeep-Space and Interstellar Flight\n\nDeep-space flight adds yet another challenge; namely, the almost total absence of familiar cues for motion, position, and orientation. Given the extremely large distances between astronomical objects and that relativistic effects do not become significant (>1% distortions) until reaching beyond 10% of light speed, the view outside the craft will appear stationary—even when traveling at 60 million miles per hour (9% c). The display systems that are tied to the navigation references (to be discussed later) must convey motion to the pilots in a natural manner despite the absence of familiar human cues.\n\nCompounding the absence of a sense of motion, there is an absence of orientation. There is no dominant direction for \"up\" during deep-space flight. If some form of artificial or synthetic gravity is provided for long-duration crew health, then that internal 1 g will create the most dominant sense of \"up\" for the crew, and the display\n11\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nsystem that conveys the spacecraft's orientation relative to the external space will have to be clear enough to overcome this prejudicial sense of orientation.\n\nNotice, for example, that in almost all science fiction stories, spacecraft move laterally (forward) relative to the vehicles' internal sense of \"up\" (Figure 7). Motion along the z-axis is seldom mentioned. Although this is a natural extension of how we move relative to the surface of the Earth, it is not the only scenario. In contrast, consider a rocket whose 1-g orientation is aligned with its major axis of motion. This is a consequence of its propulsive thrust. In other words, at least two conventions for direction during deep-space flight are possible: the notion of lateral motion across a landscape (where the internal 1 g is at right angles to flight), or vertical motion with an astronomical range (where the internal 1 g is coincident with the direction of flight).\n\nConveniently matching film studio conditions, the interiors of fictional spacecraft provide a comfortable 1-g environment for the crew. They also follow the terrestrial convention of motion: their major direction of motion is forward (a lateral motion), even though they are experiencing an acceleration force of 1 g upward (their internal, synthetic gravity). These two directions, up and forward, are at a right angle. In contrast, the thrusting direction and the internal g-axis of a rocket are in the same direction. The choice of orientation for real deep-space motion is a subject for further study.\n\n[Figure 7: UP same as FORWARD (rocket); UP (Internally) and FORWARD (Externally) (spacecraft illustrations)]\nFigure 7. Typical Science Fiction Orientations. [Images: A. Szames]\n\nSince propulsion breakthroughs have not yet been discovered, there is no way of knowing if the propulsion methods themselves will dictate the choice of orientation. Therefore, to plan for the uncertain future, this is a choice worthy of deeper study. Is the natural human instinct for forward-dominated motion a better human-machine interaction than the upward-dominated motion that might be dictated by the propulsion method? Such an assessment must also consider how well the convention works when transitioning from deep-space flight into orbit, then landing, and then back again to deep-space flight. Once any convention is set into place, it will be difficult to change later.\n12\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nCrew Size Considerations\n\nThe last aspect to take into account as a consequence of mixed operational regimes is that of the crew size. For short-duration missions (less than a few hours), it is reasonable to conceive of vehicles with only one pilot. For more complex missions, additional crew will be required, and thus additional displays and controls specific to their tasks will be required. Finally, for long-duration missions, sufficient crew will be required to carry out its mission and maintain optimal vehicle performance. These changes—for accommodating the roles and responsibilities of crew in relation to the overall mission—are likely to be the same as those distinctions in traditional vehicles (e.g., cars versus cruise ships). Those changes typically include a hierarchical organization, which is independent of the issues of propulsion physics.\n\nEssential elements will include monitoring and controlling the 1-g internal life-support environment as well as ensuring the long-term health of the crew.\n\nFull Span of Speeds\n\nIn addition to inertial effects previously addressed, the implications due to high speed remain. Accommodating the reaction time of the pilot is critical. The extreme high speed of breakthrough spacecraft will demand that automated flight controls take precedence over the pilot's manual flight control.\n\nAutomated controls for aircraft and even for automobiles are an ever-improving technology. For breakthrough flight, these technologies will be mandatory and will also have to include options for maneuvering near ground, into orbits, and through deep space. This should come as no surprise, since the advantages of having automated flight controls warrant their use even if pilot reaction times were not an issue.\n\nTable 1. Comparing Reaction Time to Distance Traversed at Various Speeds1\nSpeed (mph, km/h, c) | Distance Traversed in 1 Second (Feet, Meters, Miles, Km)\nWalking 2 3 - 3 1 - -\nDriving Around Town 40 64 - 60 18 - -\nCommercial Air Flight 500 800 - 730 220 - -\nHypersonic Flight 4,000 6,400 0.00001 5,900 1,800 1 2\nLow Earth Orbit 17,500 28,000 0.00003 26,000 7,800 5 8\nDeep-Space Probe 35,000 56,000 0.00005 51,000 16,000 10 16\nNonrelativistic Flight 60 Million 97 Million 0.09 89 Million 27 Million 17,000 27,000\nRelativistic Flight 400 Million 650 Million 0.60 590 Million 180 Million 110 Thousand 180 Thousand\n1 The distances traversed while waiting for the pilot to react are reasonable for speeds slower than hypersonic flight. If traveling at hypersonic speeds near the ground, however, the situation is different. At some point, regardless of the skill of the pilot, an automated system will be needed. Also note the huge disparity between the fastest achieved speeds (deep-space probe) in comparison to nonrelativistic flight. This disparity of three orders of magnitude is a clear statement about the state of our technology when contemplating deep-space flight.\n13\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nExtreme Relativistic 660 Million 1.07 Billion 0.99 970 Million 270 Million 180 Thousand 297 Thousand\nLight Speed 670 Million 1.08 Billion 1 980 Million 300 Million 190 Thousand 300 Thousand\nFaster Than Light? 13 Billion 22 Billion 20 202 Billion 6 Billion 4 Million 6 Million\n\nTable 1 is designed to put a pilot's reaction time into perspective; it compares distances traversed during the one second it takes the pilot to scan and comprehend his displays (\"dwell time\") and then react.9 In addition, it will take time for those commanded changes to take effect, but those durations are not known. The distances shown in the table are those traversed before any corrective actions are initiated. If these distances are determined to be excessive, then automated flight controls are mandatory.\n\nAnother aspect resulting from the effects of ultrahigh vehicle speed is the so-called \"relativistic twin paradox.\"10 Because of relativistic effects, there will be a mismatch between the time measured aboard the craft and that measured at its base of departure. The equations to track this situation are well established.11 The challenge is how to present this information so that both the crew and the mission personnel at the base can easily comprehend the implications.\n\nMore provocative than the implications of relativistic speeds is the possibility of faster-than-light (FTL) travel. Beyond the perplexing issues of causal violations and closed time-like curves inherent with all FTL notions to date,12 there is the question of tracking position, orientation, and motion when beyond light speed.\n\nIt is reasonable to assume that when a vehicle is traveling FTL, the normal flow of electromagnetic waves (i.e., light) to and from the craft will be cut off. To better visualize this, consider the Doppler shifts as a vehicle approaches light speed. The colors of light heading into the flight path will be shifted to such a short wavelength that it will cease to be detectable. Similarly, the light approaching the rear of the craft will red-shift so much that it also ceases to be detectable. Again, do not count on windows.\n\nNavigation References\n\nThe main difference between navigating with existing vehicles and breakthrough vehicles is that the breakthrough vehicles will have to navigate in deep space and around other astronomical bodies where GPS systems and location beacons do not exist. Another major difference is that the physics of the propulsion methods might distort or block information that is traditionally used for navigation.\n\nInertial Navigation (Acceleration Measurement)\n\nIn inertial guidance systems, accelerometers and ring laser gyros accurately track the changes in the vehicle's motion (lateral and rotational accelerations). These signals are integrated to keep track of position by evaluating changes in both velocity and acceleration.\n\nIn the case of the double hull, where the inertial effects might be different inside of the craft, these tools become more difficult to apply. If we assume that the physics and\n14\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ntechnology for manipulating inertial fields (or for warping space-time) can accurately track these effects, then that knowledge may compensate to keep these tools viable. Design of future guidance systems must address this issue.\n\nAbsolute Velocity – Universal Speedometer\n\nConveniently, nature provides another reference frame for deep-space navigation. The cosmic microwave background is a reference frame against which velocity can be measured relative to the mean rest frame of the universe. By comparing fore/aft Doppler shifts relative to this highly isotropic and homogeneous radiation, velocity measurements can be derived. For example, the net velocity of the Earth's motion relative to this background has been measured to be 365 km/s.13 However, the cosmic microwave background will not be detectable at FTL speeds.\n\nAs illustrated in Figure 8, although many of the pictures of the cosmic microwave background radiation remove the prominent dipole moment shown in this graphic (the major color difference), it is precisely this dipole—the difference between fore/aft Doppler shifts—that provides a navigation reference for deep-space flight. The projection of this image is a spherical shell that has been opened and flattened. The Doppler shift corresponds to the Earth's motion of over 1.3 million km/h relative to the mean rest frame of the universe. The Earth moves in the direction away from the red and toward the blue.\n\n[Figure 8 image: color sky map of cosmic microwave background dipole]\nFigure 8. Cosmic Microwaves as Universal Motion Reference Frame. [Credit: NASA]\n\nPosition-Reference Star Trackers\n\nFor deep-space flight, the star trackers that have been developed for existing spacecraft may still prove viable, new instrumentation will probably be required. Given the enormous expanse of space, the apparent locations of stars will not vary that much.14 Even those that do appear to move—our closest stars—are known well enough so that software can take into account how those positions will change as the vehicle's position changes. Due to Doppler shifting, as noted previously, checking positions relative to the stars will only be possible at sublight speed.\n\nFor speeds approaching light speed, corrections will be required for relativistic effects. Such effects will probably not become apparent until traveling well beyond about 9% c,\n15\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"which is a speed that is still three orders of magnitude beyond the highest speeds achieved to date.\n\nAnother modification for star trackers will be required for FTL travel. In essence, with FTL flight, the vehicle arrives at the destination ahead of time—in an unfamiliar way. To understand this, recall that all information we see from the cosmos is old. Those images have taken a while to reach us, and the reality at their point of emission has continued forward in time. For example, when we see sunlight, the image is more than 8 minutes old. The images we see from Alpha Centauri show what it looked like over 4 years ago. Thus, if we could zip to Alpha Centauri instantly, over 4 years of time would have elapsed since we last looked at it. Alpha Centauri's condition will be a surprise upon arrival.\n\nTherefore, any star tracker to accompany FTL flight must take into account the trajectories of astronomical objects so that their positions can be accurately predicted to correspond to the correct time of arrival in both spatial and temporal coordinates. There is no known precedent for this situation.\n\nIn support of the forgoing discussion, we are speculating that heretofore unknown advances in physics regarding the quantum vacuum and the nature of inertial frames will result in new motion-detection technology. In researching future propulsion breakthroughs, the utility of sensing and affecting such phenomena is pertinent.\n\nCompilations of Implications\n\nThe following list is a compilation of the characteristics discussed in this section about the possible features associated with breakthrough flight. While the list is admittedly incomplete, it conveys the most significant differences compared to conventional methods of flight.\n\n• Six degrees of independent motion/orientation:\n\n– Translational motion: fore/aft, left/right, up/down.\n\n– Rotational (orientation): pitch, yaw, roll.\n\n• Distinct inner and outer environments for inertial and gravitational forces.\n\n• Speeds encompassing zero, subrelativistic (<0.1 c), relativistic (0.1 c ≤ v < 1.0 c), and beyond light-speed, yet expecting a travel limit of about a 100-light-year radius around the Sun.\n\n• Three flight regimes:\n\n– Near the surface of gravitating body (where gravitational direction provides natural orientation).\n\n– Orbits around a gravitating body (where cues for entering orbit are required for the pilot).\n\n– Deep-space flight (without obvious orientation cues or obvious sense of motion).\n\n16"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Navigational information sources:\n\n– Position:\n\n▪ Master reference taken relative to starting position (Sun-Earth system).\n\n▪ Current location taken from the following:\n\no Star tracker:\n\n♦ Modified to handle 3D database of star locations for deep-space motion (yet less than 100-light-year radius around the Sun).\n\n♦ Predictive trajectories (to extrapolate positions for FTL travel).\n\n♦ Note: Can only take star tracker readings at sublight speed.\n\no First integration on measured velocity and relative to point of departure.\n\no Second integration on measured accelerations since point of departure.\n\n– Velocity:\n\n▪ Directly measured from cosmic microwave background Doppler shifts, where velocity is relative to the mean rest frame of the universe.\n\n▪ First integration on measured accelerations since point of departure.\n\n– Accelerations:\n\n▪ Linear:\n\no Accelerometers with corrections calculated based on the influence of the propulsion methods that affect gravitational and inertial forces.\n\no Differentiation of velocity changes as measured using the cosmic microwave background.\n\n▪ Rotational:\n\no Gyros (e.g., ring laser gyros) with correction inputs from the propulsion methods that affect gravitational and inertial forces.\n\no Orientation as inferred from star tracker measurements.\n\n17"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 2: Human-Machine Interface Lessons\n\nOver recent decades, substantial improvements have been made to human-machine interfaces.15 Most of this progress relies on better accommodating the norms and limits of human perception—lessons that do not change even when vehicle characteristics change. These lessons are reviewed in this chapter and then applied in the conceptual design offered in the third chapter. Examples of such characteristics include reaction times, tunnel vision under stress, instinctual association with position, interpretations of displayed colors, and lessons learned from interactions with display and control technologies.\n\nRecent progress on augmented reality displays, 16 voice control, 17 gesture-based computer inputs,18 and brain-machine interfaces (BMIs)19 are also considered. In this study of far-future possibilities, these technologies are assumed to have reached full maturity. Instead of going into the details of their status, only their implications will be addressed here.\n\nOne exception was made when considering emerging technologies—specifically the notion of modifying humans for breakthrough flight. This exception includes brain implants for BMIs and reengineering humans (transhumanism) to adapt to new requirements.20 Rather than requiring humans to be reengineered for breakthrough flight, this study focuses on adapting the cockpit to address natural human characteristics. This forces attention on the cockpit design requirements.\n\nNumerous references about human factors were consulted, focusing on those details most relevant to this study. Since similar assertions were echoed in many of these references, it is not always clear how to trace a given assertion to a specific reference. Instead, an annotated bibliography is included at the end of this report that has short descriptions of each reference.\n\nHUMAN PERCEPTION NORMS\n\nPhysical Object Analogs\n\nHuman interpretation mechanisms are rooted in the paradigm of a physical environment. Mimicking a physical environment in a display and control system enhances comprehension and allows features to be recognized with less effort than when translating dials, bar graphs, or alphanumeric displays.21 This not only pertains to perceptions of motion, but also to the comprehension of a vehicle's operation: understanding its limits, supplies of consumables, malfunction modes, and other parameters.\n\nAccordingly, humans naturally remember where to look for a particular piece of information or what direction to flip a particular switch. Humans are also adept at subconsciously applying models of social behavior and causal events. Hierarchies, similar to societal organizations, offer a natural model with which to categorize systems and subsystems. Causal relations (cause leads effect) match well with procedures and operational flow diagrams. For more abstract concepts and complex data sets, a combination of hierarchical and causal relations can be used, typically taking the form\n\n18"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of conceptual maps. Numerous templates for these tools are readily available and many are adaptable to gesture-based interaction.22\n\nColor\n\nColor is convenient for labeling different categories of information, providing status indications, and for adding redundant (corroborating) information to minimize errors. Humans mentally process color information first and do so more accurately and with less effort than when distinguishing shapes or alphanumeric indicators. The upper limit on the recommended number of colors to simultaneously display is only about 4 to 12 colors. To augment this number, it is acceptable to adjust the saturation or brightness of a given color to represent gradations, such as terrain height or the criticality of a variable.23\n\nAlthough research has not progressed to the point where absolute recommendations can be made for the use of colors, the tripartite system is a widely recognized and easily discernable status indicator:\n\n• Red = danger.\n\n• Yellow = caution.\n\n• Green = safe to proceed.\n\nConveniently, fewer pilots have colorblindness than the general public, and thus color-coded displays can be used more effectively than with the general public (data: 8% of males and 0.4% of females are colorblind to red–green or blue–yellow distinctions).24\n\nOther lessons regarding the use of color include the following:25\n\n• Use strong colors sparingly: strong colors draw attention, and too many of them can overstimulate the user.\n\n• Yellow is a rare color since it is simultaneously soft and intense.\n\n• The color of objects is more discernable than the color of text or lines.\n\n• Use soft colors (grays, pastels) for backgrounds and large areas.\n\n• A good color choice is one where that color is not conspicuous.\n\n• Use soft contrasts or graduated contrasts between areas, since hard contrasts can appear to vibrate.\n\n• Avoid having the color white next to strong colors since it is too much of a contrast.\n\n• Avoid framing a box of text since that creates clutter. Instead, place the text in a box with a different fill color.\n\n• If needed to strengthen boarders between softly colored areas, frame the area with a darker shade of its fill color.\n\n19"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Fields of View\n\nThere is a difference between what humans are physically capable of seeing and where they naturally concentrate their attention. Using a reference point that is straight ahead and level with the eyes, the normal full field of view extends laterally (left/right) ±100°, upward about +60°, and downward about -75°. Of course, turning the head can extend the lateral reach directly behind, but that rearward view would be in the edge of periphery vision. This full span, however, is not where humans normally direct their attention.\n\nWith the head in a fixed position, the normal field of view spans left/right ±100°. The periphery is most sensitive to motion even when discrete images cannot be resolved. The region shown that spans roughly ±60° is the area that can be easily scanned by moving the eyes and whose information can be mentally processed in parallel. A much narrower field, about ±6°, is where humans can discern details and begin processing information serially. This zone can be aimed anywhere in the normal field of view. Finally, the region of focus where alphanumerics can be read is only about ±2°, which corresponds to only one square inch at a distance of 2 feet. Another characteristic of human vision is the tendency to fixate in the upper right corner of a given display. In the figure insert, the percentages shown refer to the proportion of total time that the eye tends to fixate on those regions.\n\n[Figure 9. Human Fields of View. [Graphic: A. Szames] diagram: Normal field of view; Area where details can be discerned (Macula); Area of easy eye motion scanning; 47%, 20%, 13%, 20%]\n\nFigure 9. Human Fields of View. [Graphic: A. Szames]\n\n20"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nPeripheral Vision\n\nPeripheral vision has been used with some success to display rates of change and artificial horizons in aircraft. Evidence indicates that peripheral vision can process spatial information in parallel without appreciable mental attention. Also, evidence indicates that peripheral spatial cues (e.g., artificial horizon laser trace) may still be subconsciously processed during stress-induced tunnel vision, even though the pilot is no longer consciously noticing it.26\n\nAttention\n\nIn the absence of stimuli, visual attention is spread evenly across the full field of view, and that information is processed subconsciously in parallel. But in the event of motion or noise, visual attention aims toward those changes, and then that information is processed serially. In the context of cockpits, this means that all the panels and windows that are normally in the field of view are processed subconsciously in parallel, and a change in any one of those will be noticed, thus drawing attention to that change. Once attention has been triggered, the information is processed more serially.\n\nBlinking lights are a common way to draw attention. Sound can also be used, and the combination of sound and lights is commonly used in malfunction enunciator panels. It is possible, however, to saturate the pilot with too many blinking lights and sounds. Although firm values are not established, it is recommended to keep such functions to a minimum—preferably tied to the highest-priority status indications.\n\nAnother method to draw the attention is through physical feeling. Vibrations or a change in feel of the vehicle will get the attention of the pilot, and with experience, the correlation between physical sensations and the status of the vehicle can become second nature. Historically, there are many instances where the pilots were innately able to sense changes in operating condition of the vehicle just through feel.\n\nIn addition to naturally created sensations, having deliberate vibrations built into the seat is another option for sending information to the pilot. Force-feedback controls have also been found helpful, where the degree of resistance or vibration fed back through a control (e.g., joystick and pedals) provides interpretable information that can be mentally processed in parallel.\n\nUpon the advent of control over gravitational and inertial forces, it will likely become possible to deliberately provide the pilot with vestibular cues—mimicking inertial accelerations in association with the external conditions, but at survivable levels.\n\nDESIGN FOR STRESS\n\nThe most important time for the pilot-machine interface to work optimally is in moments of crisis. Thus, as a starting point for cockpit design, it is best to focus on the highest-priority information and controls and to present those displays and controls in a manner that accommodates human norms during stress.27 Accordingly, this section covers human limits and errors and advice for providing alarms and response options.\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDwell and Reaction Time\n\nIt takes about 0.4 to 0.6 seconds of dwell time at a particular display to extract the necessary quantitative information and at least 0.125 to 0.2 seconds for a qualitative recheck to reaffirm the reading has not significantly changed. In addition, the pilot needs another 0.125 to 0.2 seconds to act on that information.28 Taken together, this creates a total response time of 0.7 to 1.0 seconds between first looking at a display and commanding the appropriate response.\n\nAs an aside, displays whose update rates exceed this dwell time cannot be accurately read. This means that displays should be slowed down to the rate at which humans can absorb their information, roughly a half-second.\n\nTunnel Vision\n\nWhile under stress, humans tend to narrow their visual attention, often fixating on a single central display or task: the greater the stress, the greater the narrowing. Humans are oblivious to this effect as it is happening. (As an aside, hypoxia—breathing insufficient levels of oxygen—induces the same effect and can be used to simulate this condition during training.) Peripheral vision is ignored, although some evidence suggests that spatial peripheral cues are subconsciously retained. This tunnel vision tendency cannot be prevented, but can be accommodated by providing the most critical information on the central display in a natural symbolic format.29\n\nForgetful Visual Scanning\n\nHumans tend to lose track of when they last looked at a particular area of information, sometimes forgetting to recheck parameters when needed.30 This is where automated checklists can help,31 as well as vehicle management systems that process the vehicle's situation and then recommend the best corrective measures.\n\nLimiting Options\n\nHumans tend to be able to retain only about 3 to 10 different items in short-term memory. Some studies focus on seven items as the optimum. Thus, it is recommended in quick–selection menus, or when designing hierarchical categorizations, to have no more than four to seven items per level. For groupings of information that are not needed during critical moments, these constraints can be relaxed, but with the added consequence of requiring significantly more browsing time.\n\nAdaptive Display Errors\n\nIn computer displays having multiple layered windows, or where the display changes in different situations, it is common that a user will lose track of how their current display image relates to the whole system.32 This problem is called \"getting lost\" or referred to as a \"keyhole\" error. To prevent this error, it is best to simultaneously display some schematic indicator of where the user is in the system. This requires a pictorial representation of the relations of the system's operational windows. This situation is consistent with the evidence that humans tend to rely on a physical model for where to\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nlook for information rather than being proficient at remembering a sequence of steps from which to retrieve information.\n\nIn systems having different operating modes, a common error is for an operator to execute a command sequence that is inappropriate for the mode they are currently using but entirely correct for a different mode.33 This type of error is called a \"mode error.\" An example of this is when a pilot enters a new heading for the autopilot to follow when the plane is not in autopilot mode. To prevent this error, it is advised to have the most critical operating modes as fixed, physical displays.\n\nOther Distractions\n\nIt is important to remember that the cockpit might not always offer a smooth, distraction-free ride. Buffeting can cause a finger to press the wrong button (or a gesture-based command to misdirect), or the eyes might not be able to resolve a particular value. Excessive use of audible alarms and blinking lights can saturate the pilot. Other activities or distractions available to the pilot must be taken into account so that the most critical functions are easy to find and operate, including sufficiently large buttons and text.\n\nAlarms and Responses\n\nTraditionally, physical enunciator panels combined with audible alarms and blinking lights were used to highlight malfunctions. In addition to fixed enunciator panels, more complex systems can now computationally analyze a number of variables and only present the most pertinent values and alarm states.\n\nDEVICES TO CONVEY INFORMATION\n\nObservation and interpretation of displays is always secondary to the primary task of actually operating the system. Thus, it is important that displays be designed to first serve the user and to take on as much of the information-processing burden as possible. Also, it is suggested that the displays and control input devices should be designed according to the operator's preferences, as opposed to the more common practice of designing based on the system engineer's expectations. The following paragraphs describe lessons learned regarding various methods of conveying information to the pilot.34\n\nFixed and Adaptive Displays\n\nFixed displays, such as the gauges of older aircraft, do not change the type of information they display nor do they morph their format. These can be dials, bar graphs, an artificial horizon, or simple indicator lights. Such fixed displays can be projected with computerized screens where several interrelated values can be combined into a single, computed value. Adaptive displays, on the other hand, can change their formats or change the topics displayed to fit operational situations or individuals. Both have their respective optimum uses.\n\nDuring the advent of adaptive displays (circa 1990s), they tended to be overused. The advantage is that the information can be tailored to minimize the volume of information displayed at any one time. The disadvantages are that such systems require more\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\neffort on the part of the operator and are more prone to mode errors and keyhole effects, particularly during high–stress situations. It was also found that automatically changing display formats added anxiety and mistrust of the system, because the user was now burdened with the additional task of determining why the display just changed. A survey of Boeing 757 and 767 pilots in 1989 revealed that over half felt their workload had actually increased by the high levels of automation introduced into these cockpits. In practice, users forced adaptive displays into fixed displays to improve their utility.35\n\nThe ultimate lesson is that the most critical displays should be fixed to take advantage of the naturally efficient search method where humans use mental models that are analogous to physical objects. For other functions that are less time-critical and where further details are required (e.g., entering destinations and way points into a flight plan), adaptive displays are more advantageous because they require less console space. Other lessons include the following:36\n\n• Following the same recommendations for the individual elements of adaptive displays that are given for graphical and alphanumeric display components.\n\n• Matching the performance characteristics of the displays to the operator's own internal model of the system, and they should be structured to accommodate a user's knowledge.\n\n• Packaging information into appropriate, meaningful clusters.\n\n• Representing logical and causal relationships should be implemented.\n\n• Using \"fewer displayed variables with many states\" is recommended over the display of \"many variables with few states.\" This necessitates arranging variables in a hierarchy where the lower-level variables are combined into higher-level variables.\n\n• Using color to improve the speed of human comprehension.\n\n• Accessing back–up information should be easy (familiar procedure), and it should be easy to browse through the system without disturbing its operation.\n\nVirtual Displays and Augmented Reality\n\nAn extension of the adaptive screen is a virtual display where the information is projected into a field of view without the need for a physical display screen. These can function as adaptive displays or be used with gesture-based input systems.\n\nAlthough far-future cockpit technology is still being researched, this study assumes it to be fully matured, such that any information can be displayed clearly in the pilot's full field of view. That being said, the other recommendations about accommodating human norms and the lessons of adaptive displays should be heeded. By that, it is meant that the critical information should remain consistent, and the functions that can tolerate slower user actions can be accommodated with pop-up screens. Also, rather than relying solely on a virtual display, the critical displays should still have a physical, redundant set of displays.\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nA key feature of virtual displays will be the inclusion of augmented reality. This means that key elements in the field of view are highlighted with color or framing to draw attention37 to them. This includes adding obvious border lines to objects for which the pilot needs to be aware. Similarly, a virtual display of the environment outside the craft could be augmented to reveal characteristics outside the range of normal human vision such as infrared and ultraviolet light, or objects too small or fast to normally be noticed.\n\nGraphical and Alphanumeric Representations\n\nPictorial displays in combination with alphanumeric displays have been found to be an effective way to convey information to a pilot. A pictorial representation of the item or condition being controlled (maps, artificial horizons, graphical representations of vehicle stores, and others) takes advantage of the interpretation paradigm of physical models, and thus enhances comprehension and allows features to be recognized with less effort. Although reading alphanumeric displays are more time consuming and workload intensive, they provide more accurate values and are more easily relayed verbally to secondary users (i.e., the value can be read aloud). It has also been found effective to place the alphanumeric values in the upper-right corner of the graphical display. Other lessons include the following:38\n\n• Using consistent text, format, placements, axes, and other parameters.39 Consistency has been found to be more desirable than optimized displays.40\n\n• Displaying parameters relative to their expected values rather than just displaying the alphanumeric value. Some indication of the criticality of an off–nominal reading also needs to be displayed.\n\n• Using zero-value points as a reference and showing range settings on graphical displays to indicate how a given value compares to the desired or predicted value; all ranges should be roughly the same size if possible.\n\n• Displaying nonessential symbols as half–intensity helps declutter displays.\n\nEnunciators\n\nHistorically, all the major alarm indicators for a system were grouped together into what is called the \"enunciator panel.\" Usually, this panel is an array of rectangular lights with each representing a possible alarm or critical-state variable (e.g., 5 x 5 arrays of 25 discrete alarm channels). Frequently, the lights use the tripartite color convention, blink to alert, and are connected to an audible alarm. There is usually some means to acknowledge the alarm and thus stop the distracting blinking and noise without canceling the alert status indication (e.g., goes from blinking with audible alarm to just lit in red or yellow).\n\nOld hardware displays unintentionally maintained a manageable number of alarm states as an inadvertent, but positive, consequence of the difficulty of adding enunciator segments. With computerized systems, however, this number can grow to be overwhelming. Conversely, with computerized systems, analysis of vehicle operations can reduce a large number of variables into a composite key status variable for alarm states and offer pre-determined options of emergency responses to the pilot. Hence, the concept of an enunciator can be quite useful if following these recommendations:\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n• Limit the number of alarms.\n• Display alarms in a dedicated, predictable location.\n• Link alarms to a pictorial representation of the system to help recognize root causes, causal relations, and where to focus corrective action.\n• Provide a means to acknowledge the attention–getting aspect of the alarm without turning off its alert status indication.\n• In the case of multiple triggered alarms, the system's most prominent display should be the highest hierarchical alarm, the highest causal alarm, or the location on which to focus corrective action.\n• Link the alarm clearly to the control response options.\nChecklists\nChecklists are a standard and useful tool in the operation of vehicle systems. They can be displayed on adaptive displays where the list corresponds to the vehicle's current status (e.g., preflight readiness or postflight checks). Recommended features of a checklist should include the following:41\n• Display the desired and current value with each checklist item.\n• Require that buttons/switches have to be touched to acknowledge that each item has been checked off. This helps avoid skipping items and helps the user keep a sense of involvement in the process.\n• Include a completion call at the end of the checklist.\n• For long lists, subdivide using the following guides:\n– List critical items first.\n– Use geographical (i.e., physical location) flow or pictorial flow to help users retain relation between the model of the system and the procedures being performed in the checklist.\n– Use parallel tasks between the onboard operation and the ground operations to maintain fluency between pilot and mission control communications.\n– Include buffers in checklists to provide recovery time for anomalies. Decouple tasks if possible so that the failure to meet a given checklist item does not leave a parallel item in an open state.\n– Standardize checklists within the system (assuming nested, hierarchical, or multiple checklists) to minimize the mental burden necessary to extract information when going from one format to another.\n–\n26\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nDEVICES FOR RECEIVING PILOT COMMANDS\nIn much the same way that displays are configured to match the dominant norms of human behavior, so too are the command functions. As evidenced by the gaming industry, the motions of the pilot's hands—whether by a joystick or a Wii controller42— mimic the intended physical motions of the object under control. Some of these control technologies are described below.\nPhysical Controls\nDevices such as joysticks, toggle switches, thumb wheels, rotary switches, and even keyboards will still be mandatory in cockpits of the future. This is based on needing fixed locations for the most critical displays and controls. Additionally, tactile feedback helps the pilot know that their command has been entered. In moments of crisis, a human can react quickly to reach for just the right switch and detect the sensation when that switch is flipped.\nJoysticks take advantage of human nature, where hand motions mimic the intended motions of the object under control. Joysticks and pedals with force-feedback or vibration feedback add another element of information that humans can process in parallel—feedback that would not be possible with virtual controls.43\nDespite advances in other data-input technologies (e.g., voice), it is likely that there will be times when a keyboard is required, but its routine use is not expected. Keyboards are an efficient way to accurately enter alphanumeric data and especially narrative text. Conversely, keyboard use is time consuming, physically requires a large space (can be stowed, however), and is subject to errors during vibration or buffeting. Such errors are reduced when having some physical support to help anchor the hands.\nGesture-Based Inputs\nBy the time that propulsion breakthroughs become viable, it is likely that gesture-based commands will have evolved past the current systems' problems of misinterpreting wayward motions and will have become an effective way to replace the mouse for cursor control. In addition, it is expected that more options will be available through gestures than through existing mouse buttons (right click, left click, and scrolling).44 When used in combination with a voice-command system, it is expected to be an effective tool for the more complex and varied instruction sets, such as navigation. For example, the notion of being able to point to a location on an expansive virtual map and say, \"go there,\" seems an ideal implementation.\nFurthermore, the use of gesture-based inputs in analyzing new data seems appropriate, provided that the lessons from adaptive displays are heeded. Although fascinating, gesture-based commands are dependent on how well the information that they are manipulating is organized. Therefore, these inputs might be prone to the same keyhole errors and mode errors of adaptive displays.\nPrior lessons regarding quick emergency commands should also be heeded, specifically where all critical commands have dedicated physical controls. Gesture-based commands can be redundant, but again, the physical control should be the dominant source of critical inputs. Consider the event of buffeting, where the position of an\n27\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nextended arm is likely to waver. This would induce significant errors in the gesture system.\nVoice Commands\nVoice commands are promising for hands–free and parallel task initiation.45 By the time that propulsion breakthroughs become viable, it is likely that voice-command technology will have solved the problem of voice recognition (including when stressed) and the problem of accommodating the myriad of ways to ask for the same thing. That having been considered, voice commands are projected to be an excellent augmentation to the set of other cockpit controls, particularly with the more complex and varied instruction sets, such as navigating within gesture-based systems.\nBased on lessons from human-to-human communication, however, it is advised to have the pilot's commands repeated back to them as a form of confirmation.\nBrain-Machine Interface\nAlthough research is currently in the initial stages,46 this study of far-future cockpits assumes that this technology is fully matured, such that the pilots can issue commands with their thoughts. A limiting constraint here is that only non-invasive techniques are used (avoiding the need to modify the pilots).\nRegardless of the sophistication of the technology, a weak link in these systems is the human mind itself; that is, thoughts can wander. Much more study is required to determine the implications of distractions, loss of concentration, fright, levels of mental discipline, and many others.\nCONTEMPORARY AIRCRAFT COCKPITS\nFor comparative reference, some features of contemporary aircraft cockpits are examined next. Key displays and controls are becoming standardized, although the placement still varies across manufacturers and models.47 Regardless of differences, the functions are representative of similar functions to consider for breakthrough-era cockpits.\nThe layout of the Airbus A380 Flight Deck, shown in Figure 10, has major flight functions located in specific areas. There is a combination of fixed and adaptable displays. The following items of interest are identified:\n• Primary flight display.\n• Navigation display.\n• Flight mode control.\n• Vehicle status indicators.\n• Joystick, throttles, and keypads.\n28\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 10. Flight Deck of Contemporary Aircraft. As one example, the Airbus A380 Flight deck contains displays and controls that are indicative of displays and controls that will be needed in breakthrough-era craft. Image source: (September 2007)\nPrimary Flight Display\nThe primary flight display (PFD) provides information about the vehicle's orientation (pitch, roll, and compass heading), motion (speed and rate of climb), and altitude. It is centrally located in front of the co-pilot's seat, and a smaller version is available to the right of the pilot's navigation display. Figure 11 shows a close-up of a PFD that also shows its heritage from the mechanical instruments of older aircraft that have now been merged into a single computer-controlled instrument.\nThis instrument is vital to the safe operation of an airplane. It displays orientation (pitch, roll, compass heading), motion (forward airspeed, rate of climb), and position relative to a critical axis (altitude). This particular graphic was selected because it also shows the lineage to the individual mechanical displays of prior aircraft; artificial horizon, airspeed, compass heading, altimeter, and rate of climb. Per many of the recommendations from human factors research, a blend of graphical and alphanumeric elements are now used, and the central orientation graphic, the \"artificial horizon,\" is a direct physical analogy to the physical world.\n29\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 11. Contemporary Primary Flight Display. Source: \nAn analogous display will be required for the breakthrough-era craft, but with modifications to accommodate the full six degrees of freedom and the additional flight regimes of orbit and deep space. For example, the artificial horizon and altimeter have meaning near the surface of a gravitating body, but it is not clear how effective such references will be in flight regimes of orbit or in deep-space flight.\nThese orientation cues as well as compass headings are Earth dependent. Far from Earth, the value of maintaining these cues is unknown, and substitute cues have not been identified. Other orientation standards will have to be developed for breakthrough-era craft that will still be consistent with this aircraft convention when operating near the surface of a gravitating body.\nNavigation Display\nThe next most significant display is for navigation. Near Earth, this takes the form of a map that can be augmented to show terrain and weather. Due to its importance, it has a prominent place on the flight deck. Numerous related controls and displays are available for allowing the entry of destinations and waypoints into the system to augment this one display screen.\nBreakthrough-era craft will require additional navigation cues; these may include those that will direct pilots into orbits and those for navigating in deep space.\n30\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Flight-Mode Control In contemporary aircraft, the flight-mode control panel is often located prominently in the glare shield. It contains displays and controls for the autopilot and for setting headings, speeds, and other operational parameters. In breakthrough-era craft, there will likely be no need for a glare shield, since all images of the exterior will be projected indirectly; thus, the intensity of the light can be limited. Nonetheless, having a prominent location for the flight-mode display is critical. Vehicle Status Indicators The status of critical operating parameters of the vehicle, such as its fuel level and engine temperature, is essential. Note the prominence of those displays in the center of the flight deck. However, other than knowing that similar displays and controls will be required for breakthrough-era cockpits, it is too early to speculate on their details. Joystick, Throttles, and Keypads Some sort of physical controls are required to fly the aircraft. On contemporary aircraft, these include the joystick (side-mounted), rudder pedals, and throttle controls. Fine-tuning controls that manage features such as trim settings and flight heading can be located on separate panels. The details of these controls are dependent on the methods of flight. For a breakthrough craft, it is reasonable to speculate that six-degree-of-freedom controls will be accommodated by whatever method is most natural for pilots. Figure 12. Space Cockpit Visions Circa 1959. Taken directly from Seifert's 1959 book, Space Technology, this is an artist's rendering of a \"space travel control station.\" It is offered here to convey the provisional nature of far-future speculations, including the speculations offered in this report. 31 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Chapter 3: Provisional Cockpit for Breakthrough Flight Applying the strategy of using the most demanding situations to guide designs, the provisional cockpit presented here assumes a single pilot. Without any crew amongst whom to disburse the workload, such a cockpit must be more efficient and effective. The \"design for stress\" approach is also applied, which drives the design to have actual physical displays and controls that are concentrated in a \"tunnel vision\" zone. The elements on these physical panels are predictably fixed, owing to lessons of human factors. Newer technology such as virtual reality displays with augmented reality and gesture-based inputs are also included, along with voice and thought commands. Based on lessons from adaptive display errors, and considering the limits of human concentration, limits are imposed on the use of voice and thought commands. The overall configuration is shown in Figure 13 and consists of a modest set of physical panels surrounding a seated pilot, along with a large virtual display surrounding the entire area. The most critical displays and controls are condensed into the forwardmost panels. FLIGHT MODES The most fundamental flight mode is the full manual mode. Each subsequent flight mode offers increasing levels of automated assistance, up to and including a fully autonomous control mode that can operate even when the pilot is incapacitated. A provisional set of flight modes (whose buttons and indicators are presented across the central flight mode panel from left to right) include the following: Full manual. Manual w/safe assist. Interactive assist. Fully autonomous (keyed to emergency responses). Full Manual As the name suggests, this is where the pilot has full control over the motion of the vehicle through joysticks, switches, gestures, voice, and thought. This is the most difficult flight mode for the pilot, and accordingly provides the best situation from which to design the guidance displays and to set the requirements for the various control inputs. In subsequent studies,48 this would be the flight mode to specify when addressing the challenges of guiding the pilot for entry into orbits and navigating in difficult situations. 32 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Figure 13. Provisional Breakthrough-Era Cockpit. The spherical zone around the cockpit center represents the virtual surround display onto which images of the environment outside the vehicle are displayed. Keeping with lessons of prior human interfaces, a minimal set of physical displays are also provided, with the most important ones located deliberately in the \"tunnel vision\" zone in front of the pilot. [Graphic: A. Szames with background image through M. Cherfi] Manual With Safe Assist To prevent the pilot from inadvertently flying into a hazardous situation, this mode augments the manual flight controls by taking over to prevent collisions or to prevent entry into hazardous zones (e.g., dangerous radiation or gravitational fields too strong to escape). When the system must take over, it would be accompanied by force-feedback into the joysticks and obvious indications on the display. 33 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Interactive Assist This is a further automated augmentation of the prior flight mode. In this case, following commands from the pilot (voice, gesture, or thought), the pilot can request for the flight assistant to fly the vehicle as desired. In this mode, it is most likely that the pilot will not be touching the joysticks, but rather issuing \"drive to\" commands to the automated system. Fully Autonomous In the event that the pilot is incapacitated or performing non-flight tasks, the fully autonomous mode flies the vehicle in whatever flight command mode was last entered. This means that the system follows through with previously entered commands, including a selection of preset emergency responses, such as \"returning to base\" or \"flying to the nearest medical facility.\" These emergency response functions may have a dedicated physical panel. PHYSICAL DISPLAYS In keeping with human-factors lessons, particularly the use of physical analogies of human perception, the critical displays and controls will be anchored in physical hardware in fixed locations. The primary reason for providing an actual physical set of displays and controls is to minimize errors during stressful situations. This includes tunnel vision, mode errors, and keyhole errors. The controls also include tactile feedback. Following the precedents of modern flight decks and human-factors lessons, each of the panels will have a dominant function as identified in Figure 14. Although the look and feel of these panels has not yet been conjectured, their likely functions and features can be estimated. Navigation Display Survival Enunciator Vector Motion Display Flight Assist Interactive Display S E E R Emergency Response Flight Mode Key Pad Cabin Control Comm. Control Vehicle Status Pullout Keyboard External Sensing Internal Conditions Periphery Motion Display Periphery Motion Display Dual Six-Degree Joysticks Figure 14. Functional Designation of Physical Cockpit Panels. Basic layout of the physical displays and controls. The function of each is described in the text. [Credit: M. Millis] 34 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Vector Motion Panel (Primary Flight Display) The most critical, survival-dependant displays are in the \"tunnel vision\" zone, directly in front of the pilot. The main panel at the center of the display is analogous to the primary flight display (PFD) of contemporary aircraft (shown previously in Figure 11). In this case, however, it must be modified to accommodate the full six degrees of freedom and the additional flight regimes of orbit and deep space. Because of these modifications, and to distinguish from conventional aircraft displays, this text provisionally uses the term \"vector motion\" display. The main distinction between an aircraft PFD and this vector motion display is that the aircraft PFD is biased toward flight near the surface of a gravitating body and for which navigation conventions are firmly established (e.g., \"up\" and magnetic compass heading). The vector motion display, which must accommodate orbits and deep-space flight will also feature conventional functional subsets for near-Earth navigation. Since we have no established standards for deep-space navigation that are applicable beyond our solar system. Devising and designing such a system and the appropriate display requires further work. Orientation standards will have to be developed for breakthrough-era craft that are still consistent with this Earth-surface convention. The main axes adopted for this display would also be superimposed onto the virtual surround display. This display will include information to ensure a safe trajectory, avoid collisions, and handle other situations. In addition, visual cues for assisting a pilot to safely enter a correct orbit are required. Although it is expected that such maneuvers would be handled by an automated system, the more demanding condition, in which the pilot will have to manually enter orbit, presents an appropriate design goal for the display and is a subject for future work. Navigation Display Panel The navigation display is responsible for showing the pilot his location relative to base and all other points of interest. Following the common practice of aviation, this display is located immediately to the left of the central motion display. The navigation display will need a new coordinate system to address deep-space flight, transition into orbits, and maneuvering near to and landing on gravitating bodies. Such an orientation and guidance system does not yet exist. It is expected that most gravitating bodies can be conventionally mapped using systems analogous to those used for the Earth, where the rotation axis is a defining characteristic. The caveat is that not all gravitating bodies are spherical (asteroids and small moons). Flight-Assist Panel The flight-assist panel is located to the right of the vector motion display. Because of the variety of functions this panel must perform, it must be in the form of an adaptive display. This panel provides information and accepts pilot commands to assist in 35 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\noperating the vehicle and carrying out the mission. It is functionally similar to the \"flight management system\" 49 of commercial aircraft. The pilot needs critical information in real time that can be easily interpreted. If anything goes wrong, the pilot needs to know the options and probable consequences of each option. A simplified depiction of the nature of the emergency is also critical. Predicted consequences and risks of each response option should also be succinctly displayed as part of the adaptive display options. The pilot also needs to know, unambiguously and quickly, how to select any option. The envisioned functions include the following:\n\n• Automated assessment and display of the overall vehicle operational status.\n\n• Automated assessment and display of pilot's health and functional status. (If the system detects that the pilot is incapacitated, it automatically engages the \"get medical assistance\" emergency response mode.)\n\n• Provide short-list of anomaly/emergency response options\n\n• In emergency, time-critical situations, the system will automatically choose its top recommended response if the pilot does not enter in a command within the required time.\n\n• Checklists for various procedures (e.g., pre- and post-flight or diagnostics).\n\n• Monitor progress relative to mission goals and timeline.\n\n• Provide access to other databases (e.g., something akin to an Internet search).\n\n• Provide the option to project a larger version of the display on the virtual surround, whereupon gesture-based commands can be used.\n\nWhen designing this panel, the lessons discussed in Chapter 2 regarding adaptive displays and graphical and alphanumeric representations should be followed. This includes hierarchical organization, limit of displayed choices of four to seven, simultaneous display of the current mode of the display relative to a model of the system, and sound and verbal accompaniment for displayed information.\n\nAdditionally, the functions of the survival enunciator, flight mode panel, and emergency response panel are all tied into the flight assistant, but these fixed panels provide only the most critical alarm and response options. One of the emergency response panel buttons allows for selection of whatever response option is currently displayed on the flight assistant panel, while the other emergency response buttons are fixed functions.\n\nSurvival Enunciator Panel\n\nOn the left side of the flight mode panel, between the center and left main panels, is the survival enunciator. For this limited-size enunciator, only those alarms that are of a life-threatening nature are listed. Less critical alarms are either handled by the flight assistant or the side panels. Audio cues are also recommended for this enunciator, with the added feature that the direction of the source of the sound corresponds to the location of the alarm.\n\n36\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCopying the general organization of the other major panels, this tall and narrow enunciator is divided into three sections:\n\n• External Alarms (Upper Left): Alarm indicators corresponding to the most life-threatening conditions (limit of 4 to 10) that could occur external to the vehicle, such as impending collisions, hazardous radiation, or other critical situations.\n\n• Vehicle Alarms (Upper Right): Alarm indicators corresponding to the most life-threatening conditions (limit of 4 to 10) that could occur internally from the vehicle itself, such as catastrophic equipment malfunctions.\n\n• Cabin Alarms (Bottom): Alarm indicators corresponding to the most life-threatening conditions of the cabin's life support (limit of 4 to 10), such as loss of air pressure, excessive internal g's, temperature extremes, or pilot health conditions.\n\nEmergency Response Panel\n\nThe narrow vertical panel between the center and right panel is the emergency response panel: a fixed series of buttons for preprogrammed emergency responses, including at least one variable button tied to the recommendations on the flight assist display. These are deliberately set into the tunnel vision field of view. Each of these responses is programmed to perform without needing additional inputs from the pilot. A provisional set of these preprogrammed emergency response buttons is as follows:\n\n• Evasive collision avoidance.\n\n• Escape to safe loiter position.\n\n• Get medical assistance.\n\n• Effect automated repair.\n\n• Return to base.\n\n• Flight-assist recommendation.\n\nOne of the emergency response panel buttons is to select whatever response option is currently displayed on the assistant panel, while the other emergency response buttons are fixed functions.\n\nFlight-Mode Panel\n\nBecause selecting any of these emergency responses will change the flight mode into \"fully autonomous\" mode, the flight-mode panel is between the emergency response panel and the survival enunciator. Because the flight mode is a critical piece of information, it is also located between the vector motion display and the vehicle status panel.\n\nIn aircraft, the flight-mode controls are often on the glare shield, but in the breakthrough-era craft, there will not be a need for a glare shield. The light in the cabin is only from the display systems whose brightness can be set to prevent glare on the consoles.\n\n37\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nVehicle Status Panel\n\nBelow the vector motion panel is the vehicle status panel that contains the most critical vehicle status and controls. This is analogous to where fuel levels and engine temperatures would be displayed. In this central panel, only the most critical and highest hierarchical status conditions would be displayed in a fixed format.\nMore detailed, lower-level statuses and controls are on the right side panel and available through the flight-assist system. The proximity of this panel to the survival enunciator, the flight-mode panel, and the emergency response panel is deliberate.\nAlso flanking either side of this vehicle status panel are the cabin controls (on the left) and the communication controls (on the right).\n\nCabin Control Panel\n\nThe cabin controls are not just for temperature and pressure of the pilot's cabin, but also for the inertial and gravitational environment inside the cabin. This panel is deliberately located just below the section of the survival enunciator that displays alarm states for the cabin, and just adjacent to the vehicle status panel, with the expectation that related vehicle functions are displayed near the cabin controls.\n\nThe novel function of including controls for the internal inertial and gravitational forces is in keeping with the recommendation of the double-hull configuration from Chapter 1. If the pilot wishes to feel a portion of the vehicle's acceleration, that can be dialed in. If the pilot wishes to select a nominal background gravitational field of 0 g or 1 g (or other options), that can be done, too.\n\nCommunication Panel\n\nThe communication panel is the primary selection point for communicating with base. Accordingly, it is located just below the flight-assist system and the emergency response panel. An alphanumeric key pad serves both the communication panel and the flight-assist system.\n\nAvailable settings would likely include selection of communication methods, channels, and related functions. Further details are dependent upon factors that cannot yet be predicted.\n\nPullout Keyboard\n\nFor more intensive alphanumeric data entry, and when time allows, a pullout computer keyboard is available.\n\nExternal Sensing Panel\n\nOne of the two side panels flanking the pilot seat is the external sensing panel. It includes settings for external sensors, navigation cues, and related functions. It also includes controls for how the information obtained from the external sensors is processed, displayed, and recorded.\n\n38\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBoth side panels are deliberately not in the tunnel vision zone, since they provide additional functions that are less time critical. Each side panel is a mix of fixed and adaptive displays. The convention is that the panel on the left (consistent with the navigation panel on the left) is for displays and controls related to the environment outside the craft, while the panel on the right is associated with the function of the craft itself.\n\nOnly some of the sensors and functions are known at this time, and it is expected that further advances in sensor technology might provide other abilities that are not yet foreseeable. Following the requirements from Chapter 1, this panel will at least have controls for the following:\n\n• External visible spectrum cameras that provide input to the virtual surround display.\n\n• Augmented spectrum cameras (e.g., infrared or ultraviolet).\n\n• Star tracker.\n\n• Cosmic microwave background sensors.\n\n• Inertial sensors and their related integrations for velocity and position.\n\n• Object detection and trajectory determination.\n\nInternal Conditions Panel\n\nThe right panel flanking the pilot seat has more detailed displays and controls regarding the vehicle's functions, such as energy, propulsion, and computation. Similar to the left side panel, it is a mix of fixed and adaptive displays.\n\nThis panel provides deeper levels of detail for the elements displayed on the vehicle status panel, along with control settings for the same. The functions of this panel are closely integrated with the flight-assist system, especially in regard to recommending corrective actions to vehicle malfunctions.\n\nAbsent the technology for the vehicle's breakthrough propulsion and power systems, further details of this panel cannot be suggested at this time.\n\nPeriphery Motion Displays\n\nThe last two physical panels are the periphery motion displays, which are located on either side of the cockpit in the pilot's periphery vision. They are a physical back-up to the virtual surround display, where each offers more intense moving grid lines.\n\nThe panels simply display a grid whose motion is synced with the motion of the craft relative to the surrounding space. In this way, the pilot gets subtle cues to motions that can be mentally processed in parallel with the other displays. Such an additional motion display is expected to become necessary because of the added degrees of freedom available for the vehicle's motion. This can be particularly useful during hover,\n\n39\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nwhere careful changes in position are required that are difficult to infer from just looking at external landmarks.\n\nVIRTUAL SURROUND DISPLAY\n\nResponding to the likelihood that direct visual contact to the outside environment will not be available, images of the outside will have to be relayed to the pilot via exterior cameras and interior displays. Taking advantage of foreseeable advances, such images are likely to be in the form of virtual displays. This also allows the most critical motion and orientation cues, along with augmented reality functions, to be superimposed on these images. At this point, the method of virtual display is not important (e.g., helmet mounted, projected on screen, or contact lens). The issues addressed here discuss what is required rather than the details of how those functions are provided.\n\nExterior Visuals\n\nSince direct visual contact to the outside environment will not be available, images of the outside will have to be relayed to the pilot. A system of cameras that can see the external environment are required, plus whatever processing is required to seamlessly merge these images for projection on the virtual surround display.\n\nAdditionally, it would be advantageous to be able to focus in on and magnify the view of any particular area of the display.\n\nPoints of Interest\n\nTaking advantage of the technology for augmented reality,50 where objects of interest can be highlighted on a display, this function will be included in the virtual surround display to flag such things as points of interest, objects, and the trajectories of objects.\n\nOverlays\n\nIdeally, it would be advantageous to be able to superimpose false-color images representing light spectra beyond normal human perception, such as infrared or ultraviolet light.\n\nData Call Up\n\nWith such a large projection area available, any of the adaptive displays from the physical panels can also be projected onto the virtual surround display and then manipulated with gesture-based commands. This feature can employ ever-evolving techniques of visual information display.51\n\nSound Augmentation\n\nAudio cues shall be included so that the location of objects of interest and alarm states can be spatially inferred, and redundant information to their locations can be projected by visual displays. In addition, the vehicle's flight-assist system can speak information to the pilot. Techniques of using different sounds, as well as the manipulation of a given sound (i.e., changing the repetition rate of a given beeping tone), will be used.\n\n40\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCONTROLS\n\nSimilar to the blend of physical and virtual displays, the control methods will also be primarily physical controls (joystick), with augmentations possible through gesture, voice, and thought commands.\n\nVector Motion: Six-Degree Joysticks\n\nAdapting to human norms of physical analogies and taking advantage of force-feedback features, the primary control for the vehicle's motion will be a pair of six-degree-of-freedom joysticks, one for both the left and right hands, located at the edge of the arm rests. By moving either hand to mimic the orientation or direction of the desired motion, the craft will respond accordingly.\n\nStudies suggest that force-proportional, instead of displacement-proportional, operation of joysticks is optimum. Accordingly, the joystick does not require much space to encompass its motions. The intensity of the force input corresponds with the intensity of the resulting motion of the craft.\n\nThere is, however, a limit to the span of forces that can be input from the hand compared to the span of intensity of the vehicle's propulsion. For example, consider that the hand can resolve speed settings of ±2 mph, but only over a span of zero to 45 mph, while the vehicle is capable of speeds from zero to relativistic. Obviously, some additional input, analogous to a throttle, is necessary. The challenge for the breakthrough craft is that such a throttle is an option for all three linear axes, not just the primary axis of motion. With such uncertainty, and not having any simulations run on test subjects, it is uncertain how best to provide the directional intensity control. Provisionally, it is recommended to have a trigger and/or a combination of buttons that the user selects to convey the maximum intensity of the propulsion system that corresponds to the maximum force input to the joystick. For example, with a light trigger input, the full joystick force might only correspond to a speed comparable to driving a car. With a heaver trigger input or buttons selected to provide deep-space flight speeds, the maximum force on the joystick might correspond to 0.9 c. Accommodating such uncertainties would be a subject of future study.\n\nOwing to lessons of natural relaxed positions of wrist rotation,52 the neutral palm (with the thumb-side facing inward and forward) is at 35° upward relative to the horizontal and 25° forward. This deviates from the normally upward-pointed joystick, but recall that contemporary flight joysticks are just for rotational axes' command inputs.\n\nGesture Commands\n\nGesture-augmented commands are used in conjunction with the virtual surround display to identify and act on objects in that display. For example, the pilot can point to an object of interest, which is then highlighted, and issue the voice command, \"go there.\" This would be an option in the interactive assist flight mode.\n\nOther options for the gesture-based commands are difficult to define at this time, due to the uncertainty of actually operating such a vehicle. Regardless, however, provisions to account for buffeting and other possible input errors would need to be included in future plans.\n\n41\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nVoice Commands\n\nVoice commands are projected to be an excellent augmentation to the set of other cockpit controls, particularly with the more complex and varied instruction sets, such as navigating within gesture-based information interfaces.\nBased on lessons from human-to-human voice communication, it is advisable to have commands from the pilot repeated back by the flight-assist system as a form of confirmation.\n\nThought Commands\n\nThought commands are projected to be a faster method to input commands, but face the underlying limit of the concentration ability of the human. In the case of the breakthrough-era vehicle, the use of thought commands can be considered comparable to the use of voice commands. Accordingly, some form of confirmation from the flight-assist system is needed, which the pilot must acknowledge before that command is implemented.\n\n42\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 4: Future Work\n\nGiven the incomplete body of knowledge concerning futuristic propulsion and maintaining cognizance of ongoing human-factors research, it is probably premature to engage in specific research on cockpits for propulsion physics. Instead, more insights are likely to be gained from relevant physics research. A caveat is that advances in cockpits for breakthrough flight might be further advanced by taking advantage of the gaming industry or through science fiction speculation.\n\nWithout the actual technology for breakthrough flight, a game simulation or detailed science fiction show/movie could be used as the context around which to explore such options. A concern with this approach, however, is that the underlying stories serve the primary function of entertainment as opposed to user efficiency. It is conceivable to encounter a guidance system more intended to create dramatic tension (\"wow effect\") than ease of use.\n\nMULTIPLE FLIGHT REGIME GUIDANCE CONVENTIONS\n\nThe breakthrough vehicle will operate in regimes for which guidance standards do not yet exist, specifically orbit insertion and deep-space (interstellar) travel. Although motion near the surface of a gravitating body can copy the standards of aircraft flight (primary flight display and terrestrial navigation standards), further work is required to explore and select the best options for orbit and deep-space flight.\n\nAlthough it is expected that orbit insertion maneuvers would be handled by an automated system, the more demanding condition to use as a design target is to have a display system that can guide a pilot to manually enter a stable orbit.\n\nChoosing the convention for the primary axis of deep-space motion will require a trade study to determine if the natural human instinct for forward-dominated motion offers a better human-machine interface than the propulsion-dominant option for upward-dominated motion. Such an assessment must also consider how well the convention works when transitioning from deep-space flight into an orbit, then landing, and then back again to deep-space flight. Once any convention is set into place, it will be difficult to change later.\n\nVECTOR MOTION DISPLAY\n\nOnce the development of those guidance conventions is further along, a method to clearly display those conventions for the pilot would have to be developed. A complication that these future displays will encounter is the need for a seamless transition between these three conventions: flight above a gravitating body, orbit insertion, and deep-space flight beyond our solar system.\n\nVECTOR MOTION CONTROL\n\nAdding three linear axes (plus yaw) to the classic two-rotational degree-of-freedom joystick is a significant change. Although six-degree joysticks are available commercially, they are oriented toward computer interfaces rather than commanding the motion of a vehicle. To determine the optimum configuration for an actual six-degree vehicle control, simulations would likely be required. Perhaps one venue is to\n\n43\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nexplore the vehicle controls for exploration submarines that also have the full six degrees of freedom.\n\nAnother critical detail to be resolved with commanding a breakthrough vehicle is how best to accommodate the \"throttle.\" Should each linear axis have the same speed capability, or should only the primary motion axis have the full span of zero to maximum speed? With that characteristic specified, it will also be necessary to determine how best to provide adjustments to cover the speed ranges of each axis.\n\nOPTIMUM MIX OF CONTROL METHODS\n\nA variety of methods have been considered for commanding the breakthrough-era vehicle. What is not known is the degree and in what combinations they should be used, and whether constraints should be placed on some of them. The potential use of confirmation feedback for both voice and thought commands is suggested, but future research will need to determine whether (and how) such functions should be employed.\n\n44\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix A: Annotated Bibliography\n\nReferences used in the course of this report are provided here along with a short description of each. Although not all were explicitly cited, each influenced this study.\n\n50 Great Examples of Data Visualization. (2009, June). Web Designer Depot. Retrieved from \nArticle with examples and links to dozens of different ways to visually convey the interrelationships of multiple items – visualization techniques suitable for future gesture-based interfaces and/or art.\n\nAusubel, J. & Marchetti, C. (2001). The Evolution of Transport. The Industrial Physicist, April/May, 20–24.\nArticle (5 pg) gives historic data on human travel instincts compared to transportation technology – with projections aimed to advocate Maglev trains. The data appears constant over history that people average 1 hr/day of travel, typically round trips from home (80% of the time) and where school and work are the temporary destinations. Also, and again consistent over time, the resources devoted to travel is 12–15% of total resources. This means for walking (2.5 km/h), the village territory is 20 km². Driving (40km/h), territory is 1,000 km². For flying (600km/h), the territory was unspecified due to differences in the proportion of population using air flight and the differences in time devoted (different travel reasons).\n\nBass, L. & Dewan, P. (Eds.). (1993). Trends in Software, User Interface Software, New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.\nBook (216 pg) Addresses usability attributes and then how these are tested and improved.\n\nCohen, A. & Chen, E. (1999). Six Degree-of-Freedom HAPTIC System as a Desktop Virtual Prototyping Interface, Cambridge, MA: SensAble Technologies, Retrieved from \nTechnical Advertisement (2 pg) Mechanical version of a six-deg-interface that offers force-feedback on all 6 motions. Although not adaptable to cockpit joysticks, the issue of tactile feedback is relevant.\n\nCoombes, L. F. E. (2005). Control in the Sky: The Evolution and History of The Aircraft Cockpit, Pen & Sword Aviation: Leo Cooper Limited.\nBook (320 pg) A historical overview of the developments of the cockpit. Contains significant examples of contemporary cockpit displays.\n\nDegani, A. & Wiener, E. (1990). Human Factors of Flight-Deck Checklists: The Normal Checklist, NASA CR-177549, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL.\nReport (67 pg) Focuses on aircraft checklists and presents recommendations for improvements.\n\nDismukes, R. (1991). Aerospace human factors research division – Code FL. Internal document, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA.\nReport (83 pg) listing the projects and personnel of that division during that year.\n\nElm, W. C. & Woods, D. D. (1985). Getting Lost: A Case Study in Interface Design. In Proceedings: Twenty-Ninth Annual Meeting of the Human Factor Society, 927–931.\nReport (5 pg) Applies principles of spatial data management to solve the 'getting lost' and 'mode error' phenomena frequently encountered with multi-display networks.\n\nGenik II, R. J. (2009/ March/ 23). Technological Approaches to Controlling External Devices in the Absence of Limb-operated Interfaces, Defense Intelligence Reference Document, DIA-08-1003-012 (unclassified).\nReport (31 pg) summarizes the variety of approaches for having the brain directly control machines, called, Brain-Machine Interface (BMI), without the need for mechanical actions. While long-term projections suggest that implants might ultimately become viable, the most likely near-term embodiments are noninvasive means, such as the existing commercial products MindSet, by NeuroSky, and nia, by OCZ Technology. Accuracy is improving as this technology is further researched.\n\n45\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY • Grifantini, K. (2010). GM Develops Augmented Reality Windshield. Technology Review, MIT, March 17. Retrieved from News note on an advanced version or next generation of heads-up display to outline the road, pinpoint obstacles (people and signs), even in bad weather. Pertinent excerpt: \"To turn the entire windshield into a transparent display, GM uses a special type of glass coated with red-emitting and blue-emitting phosphors--a clear synthetic material that glows when it is excited by ultraviolet light. The phosphor display, created by SuperImaging, is activated by tiny, ultraviolet lasers bouncing off mirrors bundled near the windshield. Three cameras track a driver's head and eyes to determine where she is looking.\" • Hall, Kenji. (2007). The Big Ideas Behind Nintendo's Wii. Business Week. Retrieved from News note on the development of the Wii gaming interface which is a device-dependant gesture-based interface. • Hoover, G. (1992). Stop Saturating Pilots with Alphanumeric Hieroglyphics. Aviation Week and Space Technology, June. 15, 98-99. Editorial (2 pg) Asserting opinions by an accomplished researcher on what pilots need versus what flight instrument designers were providing at that time. In short, with the advent of computer capabilities, many displays were simply providing data in numeric form rather than in some form of interpretable graphic format: \"Nature does not use symbols, letters or numbers to convey information. As a result, the human being has evolved as an effective differentiator, but a poor integrator.\" • Joels, Kennedy, & Larkin. (1982). The Space Shuttle Operator's Manual, New York, NY: Ballantine Books. Book (179 pg) Public oriented book illustrating the displays and controls of the Space Shuttle, which itself is tightly coupled to the legacy aircraft methods. • Johannesen, L. & Woods, D. D. (1991). Human Interaction with Intelligent Systems: Trends, Problems and New Directions. In Conference Proceedings 1991 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1337-1341. Article (5 pg) Examines lessons and trends and emphasizing the need to have a visual model for the process being monitored. • McCandless, David. (2009). The Visual Miscellaneum. New York, NY: HarperCollins. Book (255 pg) Illustrating numerous ways to graphically convey complex information in readily interpretable forms. • Millis, M. & Davis, E. (Eds.). (2009). Frontiers of Propulsion Science, Volume 227 of Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA). Book (739 pg) First scholarly textbook about the physics issues, progress, and next-step research regarding such game-changing advances as control of gravitation or inertia, propellant-less space drives, faster-than-light travel, and related energy requirements. Includes physics regarding the quantum vacuum, space-time warping, quantum non-locality, cosmology, and others. Includes chapters to clearly document null-results of commonly recurring proposals, and a chapter about how to conduct such revolutionary research in contemporary circumstances. • Moravec H. (2000). Robot: Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind. Oxford University Press. Book (240 pg) Fitting introduction to the notion of transhumanism, plus other predictions about the ascent of artificial life. This is an updated version of his earlier seminal book, Mind Children: The Future of Robot and Human Intelligence. • Morgan, B. (1985). DOD enlists voice control and expert systems. Electronic Products, Oct. 1, 65-67. Article (3 pg) Relevant in reflecting the early trends to actually apply voice control in military cockpits, citing Wright-Patterson AFB as a leading center. • Moskowitz, S. & Devereux, W. (1970). Navigational Aspect of Transstellar Space Flight. In F. Ordway III (Ed.), Advances in Space Science and Technology. Academic Press, Vol.10, 75-126. 46 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Excerpt (15 pg) NASA and Kallsman Instrument Corporation (Syosset, NY) discuss how stellar charts change over distances traveled and address Doppler shifts. • Oran, Daniel. (1991). Apply Psychology to Product Design. Machine Design. Nov. 7, 37-40. Article (4 pg) Illustrates how to use different switch locations, groupings, and shapes to more readily convey functions. • Pavlovic', V. I., Sharma, R. & Huang, T. S. (1997). Visual Interpretation of Hand Gestures for Human-Computer Interaction: A Review. In IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 19, 677-695. Article (36 pgs) Summarizes recent progress toward using gestures of the arms and hands to interact with computers. Hand gestures, including those with different finger positions, can be used. These features are likely to mature soon into commercial products. • Russo, D., Tillman, B., & Pickett, L. (2009). Human Factors Engineering Standards at NASA, Presented at the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Conference (22-26 Sep. 2008, Manhattan, NY). NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston TX. Quoting Abstract: \"NASA has begun a new approach to human factors design standards. For years NASA-STD-3000, Manned Systems Integration Standards, has been a source of human factors design guidance for space systems. In order to better meet the needs of the system developers, NASA is revising its human factors standards system. NASA-STD-3000 will be replaced by two documents: set of broad human systems design standards (including both human factors and medical topics) and a human factors design handbook. At the present time the standards document is in final review with some disagreement on several critical issues. The handbook is progressing with November 2008 as the anticipated completion date.\" • Potter, S. S. & Woods, D. D. (1991). Event Driven Timeline Displays: Beyond Message Lists in Human-Intelligent System Interaction. In Conference Proceedings 1991 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1283-1288. Article (6 pg) Examines lessons and trends of fault monitoring, suggesting that timelines of events be visually conveyed, including causal connections. • Potter, S. S. et al. (1992). Visualization of Dynamic Processes: Function-Based Displays for Human-Intelligent System Interaction. In Proceedings 1992 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1283-1288. Article (6 pg) Although in the context of monitoring processes, it suggests that visual models of the processes (instead of alphanumeric displays) are crucial. • Proffitt, D. & Kauiser, M. (1991). Observer Properties for Understanding Dynamical Displays: Capacities, Limitations, and Defaults. NASA TM 102812. Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA. Report (15 pg) Examined human ability to understand and predict motion in the display of dynamic systems. They found that both physics-educated people and naive people perform about equally on the intuitive level: particle motion is relatively accurate, but rotational kinematics, especially that concerning moments of inertia, is relatively poor. • Reason, J. (1990). Human Error. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Book (316 pg) By examining major accidents, the correlation between psychology and the operation of hazardous technologies is described. As such, it presents a wealth of lessons of mistakes to avoid. • Sarter, N. & Woods, D. (1992). Mode error in supervisory control of automated systems. In Proceeding of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting. Atlanta GA, Oct. Report (5 pg) Illustrates and defines mode error: \"When an action entirely appropriate for a situation is performed, except that this is not the current situation.\" -Norman 1981. Describes how systems that have command sequences, which change their pattern in different operating modes, is a problem. • Seifert, H. (Ed). (1959). Space Technology. New York, NY: Wiley & Sons. 47 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Book (several hundred pages) Early scholarly textbook about space technology in general, including interesting projections on displays and controls [Figure 29-16]. Despite the age of this text, much of its foundational coverage is still valid. • Stanton, N., et al. (2005). Human Factors Methods; A Practical Guide For Engineering and Design. Aldershot, Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Book (571 pg) Title says it all. • Shneiderman, B. (1997). Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction, 3rd edition. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing. Book (639 pg) Covers a variety investigations, in particular the \"Visual Information Seeking\" (VIS) principles by which people look for information. Like so many other references, it discusses how people use visual models either directly or indirectly analogous to physical objects to arrange information. Also goes into detail about o Time to learn o Retention time o Rate of errors o Error recovery o Cultural and individual differences • Stokes, A., Wickens, C. & Kite, K. (1990). Display Technology - Human Factors Concepts. Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. Book (167 pgs) This was a major source of information for this study. Funded by General Motors, this is a compilations of a variety of display research results, focusing on systems for pilots and drivers. • Sutter, J. D. (2010/ June/ 18). New tech moves beyond the mouse, keyboard and screen. CNN. Retrieved from . News article describing a number of emerging technologies for the computer interface, including voice, gesture commands, brain-controlled computing, eye-tracking software, and even having the images appear virtually around you via special contact lenses. Cites the new Microsoft Kinect gesture-based gaming system, and John Underkoffler - the science advisor to the 2002 movie, Minority Report, where provocative interactions between the user and data are shown. Also reminds us that voice commands and touch screens are now common with cell phones. Regardless of such advances, the keyboard is still likely to be around for those lingering tasks that still cannot be comfortably done with the new \"Natural Interface\" technology. Also discusses the difficulty with such systems, citing the tiring aspect of gesture-based systems, the likelihood of misinterpretation of motions, and the lack of tactile feedback. • Tufte, E. (1991). Envisioning Information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press. Book (126 pg) Comprehensive examples about graphically presenting information, including bad examples to avoid. Useful for general rules on use of color, shading, lines, etc. Although focused on static display of information (print material instead of dynamic displays), many of the lessons of human perception equally apply. It does not address dynamic displays or system integration. • Tilley, A. R., & Dreyfuss, H. (2001). The Measure of Man and Woman: Human Factors in Design. Wiley. Book (104 pg) Comprehensive information regarding anthropometric charts - dimensions and positions of humans, male and female, to be used as references when designing chairs, consoles, or other human factors equipment. This builds on decades of work from designer Henry Dreyfuss who first started publishing in this field in 1955. • Underkoffler, J. (2010). John Underkoffler Points to the Future of User Interfaces. TED Talks, June 2, 2010, Retrieved from > Lecture (YouTube) About the status and projections of gesture-based user interfaces. Underkoffler was the science advisor to the 2002 movie, Minority Report, where provocative interactions between a user and data are shown. He is also a 15-year veteran of MIT's Media Laboratory. The key take-away points from this lecture include projections that gesture-based interfaces will be available in products before 2015, and will no longer require gloves or other devices to be worn by the user. Errors, however, such as the computer misinterpreting an unintended motion as a command input, are likely to remain issues. 48 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Although not mentioned in the lecture (advertising is not allowed at TED talks), Underkoffler's Oblong Industries is already working to make those systems real. • Van der Vaart, A. J. M. (1995). Arm movements in operating rotary controls (Doctoral dissertation). Techniche Universiteit Delft, Netherlands, Delftse Univ. Pres. Dissertation (169 pg) Intense detail into arm and hand motions when dealing with controls such as knobs and joysticks - including experimental test methods. Sections both in English and Dutch. Many useful diagrams for those designing the actual mechanics of controls. Suitable information if designing a new six-degree of freedom joystick. • Visual Understanding Environment (VUE). (2008). Tufts University. Site developed by Academic Technology. Retrieved from Downloadable, open source software to create flexible tools for managing and integrating digital resources in support of teaching, learning and research. \"VUE provides a flexible visual environment for structuring, presenting, and sharing digital information.\" • Wan, C, et al. (1991). \"Visé: A Visual Programming Environment for Data Analysis and Visualization.\" Presented at the 1999/Nov. Conference of Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) User Interface Software and Technology (National Information Display Laboratory). Report (7 pg) Pertinent in the context of reflecting the degree of difficulty when presenting information about the health of an electromechanical system, where comprehending and reacting to the data is not straightforward. Hierarchical organization covered. • Webb, P. (Ed.). (1964). SECTION 17. VISION, Bioastronautics Data Book. NASA SP-3006. Washington DC: Scientific and Technical Information Division. Section from Book containing data on human vision, field of view, effects of lighting, etc. • Woods, D. D. (1984). Visual momentum: a concept to improve the cognitive coupling of person and computer. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 21, 229-244. Report (16 pg), Examines the problem of getting lost when working with the multiple display windows that are now common in computer displays. The taxonomy is also useful. • Woods, D. D. (1988). The Significance Messages Concept for Intelligent Adaptive Data Display. Working Paper Series No. 1988-015. Columbus OH: Ohio State University. Report (21 pg) Discusses how intelligent monitoring systems can take on the function of combining a number of variables to calculated a condensed and meaningful \"Significant Message\" to the user. For example, instead of just displaying various states of a system, the intelligent system takes all those values to give the user a key message, such as \"Pump 1 at reduced capacity.\" • Woods, D. D. (1993). The price of flexibility. In Hefley & Murray (Eds.), Proceeding of the International Workshop on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). Report (7 pg) Illustrates how adding flexibility to information displays increased the burden on the users. Users dealt with this by setting a default fixed display and by avoiding using the systems during high-stress moments. A list of corrective measures is provided for designing intelligent user interfaces. 49 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Appendix B: Endnotes 1 Millis, Marc & Davis, Eric. (eds). (2009). Frontiers of Propulsion Science, Volume 227 of Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA). 2 Millis & Davis (2009) p. 150, Specifically refer to Table-6. Methods in the first 6 rows of that table would not require the double hull configuration. Also refer to the \"gravitational control\" methods discussed in the subsequent chapter, 4, for more approaches. 3 Millis & Davis (2009) p. 487-489. 4 Millis & Davis (2009) Chapter 15. 5 Millis & Davis (2009) p. 127. 6 Millis & Davis (2009) Chapter 3. 7 Millis & Davis (2009) p. 166. 8 Millis & Davis (2009) Chapters 3-13, & 18. 9 Stokes, A., Wickens, C. & Kite, K. (1990). Display Technology - Human Factors Concepts, Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. 10 Millis & Davis (2009) p. 460. 11 Millis & Davis (2009) p. 456-459. 12 Millis & Davis (2009) p. 496-499. 13 Millis & Davis (2009) p. 132. 14 Moskowitz, S. & Devereux, W. (1970). Navigational Aspect of Transstellar Space Flight. In F. Ordway III (Ed.), Advances in Space Science and Technology, Academic Press, Vol. 10, 75-126 15 Numerous references pertain to the overall study of human factors. The more sweeping of these include: • Dismukes, R. (1991). Aerospace human factors research division - Code FL. Internal document, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA. • Russo, D., Tillman, B., & Pickett, L. (2009). Human Factors Engineering Standards at NASA, Presented at the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Conference (22-26 Sep. 2008, Manhattan, NY). NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston TX. • Reason, J. (1990). Human Error. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. • Stanton, N., et al. (2005). Human Factors Methods; A Practical Guide For Engineering and Design. Aldershot, Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Limited. • Shneiderman, B. (1997). Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction, 3rd edition. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing. • Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990). • Tilley, A. R., & Dreyfuss, H. (2001). The Measure of Man and Woman: Human Factors in Design. Wiley. • Webb, P. (Ed.). (1964). Bioastronautics Data Book. NASA SP-3006. Washington DC: Scientific and Technical Information Division. 16 Grifantini, K. (2010). GM Develops Augmented Reality Windshield. Technology Review, MIT, March 17. Retrieved from 17 Morgan, B. (1985). DOD enlists voice control and expert systems. Electronic Products, Oct. 1, 65-67. 18 Only a few gesture-based computer articles were consulted considering the assumption in this study that these would be mature technologies by the time that propulsion breakthroughs become possible. • Hall, Kenji. (2007). The Big Ideas Behind Nintendo's Wii. Business Week. Retrieved from • Sutter, J. D. (2010/ June/ 18). New tech moves beyond the mouse, keyboard and screen. CNN. Retrieved from . • Underkoffler, J. (2010). John Underkoffler Points to the Future of User Interfaces. TED Talks, June 2, 2010, Retrieved from > 19 Only two Brain-Machine interface articles were consulted since the assumption of this study that these would be mature technologies by the time that propulsion breakthroughs become possible. • Genik II, R. J. (2009/ March/ 23). Technological Approaches to Controlling External Devices in the Absence of Limb-operated Interfaces, Defense Intelligence Reference Document, DIA-08-1003-012 (unclassified). • Sutter (2010). 20 Moravec H. (2000) Robot: Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind: Oxford University Press 21 Two references apply to this endnote: • Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990). • Hoover, G. (1992). Stop Saturating Pilots with Alphanumeric Hieroglyphics. Aviation Week and Space Technology, June. 15, 98-99. 50 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n22 Several references are available on the broad category of different method to display complex information in graphical formats. These are just some noteworthy examples:\n• 50 Great Examples of Data Visualization. (2009, June). Web Designer Depot. Retrieved from \n• McCandless, David. (2009). The Visual Miscellaneum. New York, NY: HarperCollins.\n• Shneiderman, B. (1997). Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction, 3rd edition. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing.\n• Tufte, E. (1991). Envisioning Information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.\n• Visual Understanding Environment (VUE). (2008). Tufts University. Site developed by Academic Technology. Retrieved from \n23 Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990).\n24 Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990).\n25 Tufte, E. (1991).\n26 Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990).\n27 Reason, J. (1990).\n28 Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990).\n29 Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990).\n30 Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990).\n31 Degani, A. & Wiener, E. (1990). Human Factors of Flight-Deck Checklists: The Normal Checklist, NASA CR 177549, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL\n32 Several references apply:\n• Bass, L. & Dewan, P. (Eds.). (1993). Trends in Software, User Interface Software, New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.\n• Elm, W. C. & Woods, D. D. (1985). Getting Lost: A Case Study in Interface Design. In Proceedings: Twenty-Ninth Annual Meeting of the Human Factor Society, 927–931.\n• Hoover, G. (1992).\n• Johannesen, L. & Woods, D. D. (1991). Human Interaction with Intelligent Systems: Trends, Problems and New Directions. In Conference Proceedings 1991 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1337–1341.\n• Potter, S. S. & Woods, D. D. (1991). Event Driven Timeline Displays: Beyond Message Lists in Human-Intelligent System Interaction. In Conference Proceedings 1991 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1283–1288.\n• Potter, S. S. et al. (1992). Visualization of Dynamic Processes: Function-Based Displays for Human-Intelligent System Interaction. In Proceedings 1992 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1283–1288.\n• Sarter, N. & Woods, D. (1992). Mode error in supervisory control of automated systems. In Proceeding of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting. Atlanta GA, Oct.\n• Wan, C, et al. (1991). \"Visé: A Visual Programming Environment for Data Analysis and Visualization.\" Presented at the 1999/Nov. Conference of Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)User Interface Software and Technology (National Information Display Laboratory).\n• Woods, D. D. (1984).\n• Woods, D. D. (1988). The Significance Messages Concept for Intelligent Adaptive Data Display. Working Paper Series No. 1988-015. Columbus OH: Ohio State University.\n• Woods, D. D. (1993). The price of flexibility. In Hefley & Murray (Eds.), Proceeding of the International Workshop on Intelligent User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM).\n33 Regarding adaptive displays, a number of references are pertinent:\n• Hoover, G. (1992).\n• Sarter, N. & Woods, D. (1992). Mode error in supervisory control of automated systems. In Proceeding of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting. Atlanta GA, Oct.\n• Woods, D. D. (1984).\n• Woods, D. D. (1988).\n• Woods, D. D. (1993).\n• Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990).\n34 Three references apply:\n• Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990).\n• Hoover, G. (1992).\n• Shneiderman, B. (1997).\n35 Three references apply:\n• Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990).\n• Woods (1984).\n51"} {"doc_id":"dc7082cf910500bc","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Woods (1993).\n36 Five References apply:\n• Bass, L. & Dewan, P. (Eds.). (1993).\n• Elm, W. C. & Woods, D. D. (1985).\n• Johannesen, L. & Woods, D. D. (1991).\n• Potter, S. S. & Woods, D. D. (1991).\n• Potter, S. S. et al. (1992).\n37 Grifantini, (2010)\n38 Two references apply:\n• Oran, Daniel. (1991). Apply Psychology to Product Design. Machine Design. Nov. 7, 37–40.\n• Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990).\n39 Woods (1984).\n40 Thee references apply:\n• Stokes, Wickens, & Kite, K. (1990).\n• Sarter, N. & Woods, D. (1992)\n• Woods (1993).\n41 Degani & Wiener (1990).\n42 Hall, Kenji. (2007).\n43 Two references apply:\n• Cohen, A. & Chen, E. (1999). Six Degree-of-Freedom HAPTIC System as a Desktop Virtual Prototyping Interface, Cambridge, MA: SensAble Technologies, Retrieved from \n• Van der Vaart, A. J. M. (1995). Arm movements in operating rotary controls (Doctoral dissertation). Techniche Universiteit Delft, Netherlands, Delftse Univ. Pres.\n44 Four references apply:\n• Hall, Kenji. (2007).\n• Pavlovic', V. I., Sharma, R. & Huang, T. S. (1997). Visual Interpretation of Hand Gestures for Human-Computer Interaction: A Review. In IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 19, 677–695\n• Sutter, J. D. (2010).\n• Underkoffler, J. (2010).\n45 Morgan, B. (1985). DOD enlists voice control and expert systems. Electronic Products, Oct. 1, 65–67.\n46 Genik (2009)\n47 Coombes, L. F. E. (2005). Control In The Sky: The Evolution and History of The Aircraft Cockpit, Pen & Sword Aviation: Leo Cooper Limited.\n48 Proffitt, D. & Kauiser, M. (1991). Observer Properties for Understanding Dynamical Displays: Capacities, Limitations, and Defaults. NASA TM 102812. Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA.\n49 Coombes (2005).\n50 Grifantini (2010).\n51 Multiple possibilities:\n• 50 Great Examples of Data Visualization. (2009)\n• McCandless (2009).\n• Shneiderman, B. (1997).\n• Tufte, E. (1991).\n• (VUE). (2008).\n52 Van der Vaart (1995).\n52"} {"doc_id":"ddd11d65d134890c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\nCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY\n\nINFORMATION REPORT\n\nREPORT NO. SO DB-27143\n\nCD NO.\n\nCOUNTRY Chile/Germany\n\nDATE DISTR. 31 July 1950\n\nSUBJECT German Scientist's Article on \"Flying Discs\"\n\nNO. OF PAGES 1\n\nPLACE ACQUIRED Chile, Santiago\n\nNO. OF ENCLS. 1 (LISTED BELOW)\n\nDATE OF INFO. Prior to mid-1950\n\nSUPPLEMENT TO REPORT NO.\n\nGRADING OF SOURCE\n\nCOLLECTOR'S PRELIMINARY GRADING OF CONTENT\n\nCOMPLETELY RELIABLE A. USUALLY RELIABLE B. FAIRLY RELIABLE C. NOT USUALLY RELIABLE D. NOT RELIABLE E. CANNOT BE JUDGED F. CONFIRMED BY OTHER SOURCES 1. PROBABLY TRUE 2. POSSIBLY TRUE 3. DOUBTFUL 4. PROBABLY FALSE 5. CANNOT BE JUDGED 6.\n\n* Documentary\n\nTHIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION\n\nSOURCE\n\nAttached for your information is a copy, in translation, of an article submitted by Dr. Eduard Ludwig for publication in Condor, a German language magazine published in Chile. The article is entitled \"The Mystery of the 'Flying Discs,' a contribution to its possible explanation\".\n\nGood report but very superficial.\n\nThe significant conclusion drawn by this scientist in this report is that the old handicap of \"boundary layer\" as a moving object or airfoil has been exploited to produce an advantageous reaction and is the factor controlling the success of the \"flying saucer\" type of airfoil.\n\nCLASSIFICATION RESTRICTED\n\nSTATE NAVY NSRB DISTRIBUTION\nARMY AIR FBI\n\nARCHIVAL RECORD PLEASE RETURN TO AGENCY ARCHIVES, BLDG. A-18\n\n232702"} {"doc_id":"ddd11d65d134890c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY SO DB-27143 Attachment 1\n\n-1-\n\nTHE MYSTERY OF THE \"FLYING DISCS\"\n\nA contribution to its possible explanation.\n\nBy Dr. Eduard Ludwig, Santiago, Chile. Av. Cristobal Colon 1916\n\nThough the continuously reappearing reports on the appearance of new, mysterious aircraft of unknown construction should be considered with severe skepticism as the result of a sort of mass-hypnosis, nevertheless some of the detailed and coinciding accounts of technically trained observers deserve attention and permit one to draw conclusions as to the probable classification of these new aircraft.\n\nSince so far the observations have been made mainly in the dark, which means that only the luminous parts of the craft are visible, every report brings the description of shining discs or circles. If one should discard the absurd conjecture that these aircraft originate from beyond this earth, then it is easy to arrive at the conclusion that the shining circles bear a relation to the exhaust of a rotary gas-turbine. The possibility exists that the rotor of a turbine is used at the same time as a stabilizing top and is therefore fixed vertically to the level of the other turbine rings, which in the darkness produces the effect of the \"rings of Saturn\".\n\nThose observations remind me of a completely new type of aircraft which was developed during the years I worked in the research plant of Professor Junkers in Dessau, which was attached to the airplane factories known all over the world. I do not know how many of my co-workers are still alive today, but I do know that Dr. Bock, Professor at the Technical High School of Berlin, and who was at that time my chief and friend of many years, has been deported to the Soviet Union.\n\nThe name of Professor Bock was never widely known due to his modest character, but he may have been the greatest genius of German airplane theoretics, and later, in view of his extraordinary faculties, he was named head constructor of the Ministry of German Airways and Director of the German Institute of Airways Research in Berlin-Adlershof.\n\nIn order to explain to a wider circle of readers the basic idea of the new aircraft, I should like to submit first the following explanations:\n\nThe first physicist and mathematician who considered the new Science of Aerodynamics after the commencement of purely experimental developments of aircraft construction was the Russian Professor Jukowski of Moscow. Before the first World War and together with my esteemed teacher, Dr. Kutta from the Technical High School of Stuttgart, Germany, he developed the theory of airplane-wingbeam. Professor Kutta succeeded in establishing the famous \"Differential equation of the boundary stratum\" which for the first time throws light on the processes in current particles and which in any case explains for the first time theoretically the reason why a planewing can bear a load while moving forward through the air. Since then the \"Kutta-Jukowski Theory of Airplane-wingbeam\" has been the foundation of all aerodynamics. As already mentioned, the core of this work is the so-called \"boundary layer\", which consists of the thin layer of air in which the transition of Velocity Zero to the Velocity of the Moving Object takes place. If the object is streamlined then the boundary stratum will endeavor not to sever, no whirlwinds will occur, and therefore no loss of energy will take place in that stratum. Since nature always functions most economically, it always tries to avoid loss of energy, and therefore a planewing would rather bear weight than cause a disruption of the course of the current and let the wing drop.\n\nThe logical conclusions based on these theoretic discoveries were obvious: already in the year 1915 Professor H. C. Bauman, also from the Technical High School of Stuttgart, received a patent on the \"Splitwing\" through which the artificial interruption of the course of the current, the tearing of the boundary stratum and the consequent braking and diminishing of the landing speed would be attained. This\n\nARCHIVAL RECORD PLEASE RETURN TO AGENCY ARCHIVES, BLDG. A-18 RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"ddd11d65d134890c","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY SO DB-27143 Attachment 1\n\n-2-\n\nprocedure was later applied to a great extent to the fighter plane Juster Ju. 88 under the name of \"dive-brake\". This patent had to be handed to the English factory Handley-Page after World War I, which explains that the name of \"Handley-Page Splitwing\" is more widely known.\n\nHowever, developments proceeded. It was principally the Aerodynamic Experimental Institute of the Gottingen University, directed by the renowned Professors Prandtl and Betz, and Constructor Flettner, which drew its conclusions from the theory of the airplane-wing-beam. Flettner proved that the conditions of a rotating object are similar to those which appear in a \"translatorischen\" movement. Thus evolved the \"Flettner-Rotor\".\n\nProfessor Junkers, head of the well known airplane works in Dessau, who in the year 1915 received his pathbreaking patent on the one-piece metal wing without junctures, ordered a research group, which was headed by Professor Dr. Bock, and to which I had the honor to belong, to investigate to what extent the uplift of a wing could be increased through the attachment of a Flettner-Rotor in the shape of a cylinder turning at great speed. The cylinder was two-thirds of the length of the wing and was installed in the nose of the wing, where it could best be adapted to the wing's profile. To assist us with aerodynamic problems, the Gottingen University sent us Professor Prandtl. The experiments turned out to be extremely difficult and involved many casualties. The purely technical question of the speedy uplift of a long cylinder of light construction could not be solved at that time. Inexplicable vibrations and axle breakages occurred time after time which Professor Junkers ordered us to investigate, and with which we were occupied for months. Not less than four men, all experienced and tried pilots of the first World War and outstanding engineers, died in these experiments. It was clear to us that only a gas-turbine could produce the direct uplift of the cylinder. However, since meanwhile more pressing problems awaited solution, experiments with this type of aircraft were interrupted.\n\nMeanwhile the Aerodynamic Experimental Institute of Gottingen made new and enlightening discoveries. Professor Betz found that supersonic speeds, such as are produced by quickly rotating propellers, created entirely new conditions. This investigation, however, needed the furnishing of a wind tunnel for supersonic speeds which could only be built many years later, and which after the war was forwarded to the United States where it greatly amazed all scientists.\n\nNow light was shed on many things. It was found that the tearing of the boundary stratum at supersonic speeds involved much greater resistance, so that an object with full atmospheric pressure practically \"hangs\" from the upper layer of air, and theoretically experiences there the same uplift as an object of the same surface in the water. The converting of the revelations found in research into reality, however, needed the solution of the starting force through a gas-turbine or another equivalent machine or instrument.\n\nMany heretofore unexplained phenomena now found an explanation rapidly. For example it had often been observed that the range of quickly rotating missiles (\"Drallwirkung\") was much greater than could be explained according to the laws of ballistics. Paradoxical explanations were sought for this such as that the air resistance decreases with growing speeds. Today we know that these quickly rotating missiles \"swim\" in the surrounding layers of air and therefore lose part of their weight. Full clarification was brought about only with supersonic speeds, which were obtained in the experiments with rockets (V-2) and were arrived at by flights of many hundreds and thousands of kilometers, and which can only be explained by the way in which these missiles literally \"hang\" in the air. The surprise of the specialized scientists the world over at the astounding results of the German V-2 was not less than that which is produced today by the appearance of the mysterious \"Flying Discs\".\n\nIn the same way in which the ingenious discernment of Professor Junkers pointed the way for airplane construction for the whole world, thus also may his idea of attaching Flettner Rotors have a revolutionary effect. Airplanes of this type must have such an enormous carrying capacity as to be practically comparable to amphibious planes of the same size. The lack of uplift produced by the Flettner Rotors can easily be achieved through the oblique position of the entire airplane\n\nARCHIVAL RECORD PLEASE RETURN TO AGENCY ARCHIVES, BLDG. A-18 RESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"ddd11d65d134890c","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RESTRICTED\n\nCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY SO DB-27143 Attachment 1\n\n-3-\n\nwith a positive starting angle in connection with the enormously high starting speed. The attaching of speedily rotating tops assures side stability. There is also the possibility of attaching horizontal auxiliary propellers of the helicopter type. And what about the question of the starting force? The safety of such an aircraft stands and falls on the starting force of the cylinders, and only too well do I remember the casualties inflicted by the lack of it. As I mentioned before, only the development of a gas-turbine can bring the solution, since it consists only of rotating parts and works with the dependability of a steam engine.\n\nThere is only one more question to be answered: could such an aircraft carry enough fuel for world-wide journeys? This question is easily answered in the affirmative. In the first place such an aircraft has a tremendous carrying capacity, as we have already seen; and in the second place chemical research has made astounding developments in this respect. We know today--quite apart from atomic energy--carriers of energy of unsuspected power and duration. It should be remembered that the missiles of German anti-tank weapons were coated with chemical substances which melted up to 20 cmts. of steel plates within fractions of a second. Energy carriers of this type, if applicable to a gas-turbine, should make an action-radius possible which far surpasses that of gasoline engines.\n\nThe future will show whether the \"Flying Discs\" are only the products of imagination or whether they are the results of a far-advanced German science which, possibly, as well as the nearly finished atomic bombs, may have fallen into the hands of the Russians.\n\nRESTRICTED"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1320.4 Aeronautics: UFO\n\nHeadquarters Action Tracking System (HATS)\nINCOMING CORRESPONDENCE ACTION\nID Number: L/1998-00407\n\nTitle: WARD/Sen Snowe fwds ltr from (b) (6) [REDACTED], who's interested in U.F.O. and the recent Mars photo\n\nRecipient: L/Heffernan\n\nAuthor: SNOWE\nOrganization: SENATE\nDate Written: 05/18/1998\nDate Received: 05/26/1998\nDate Concurred:\nDate Submitted:\nDate Signed: 06/24/1998\nDate Closed: 06/24/1998\nAction Office: L/Ward:S\n>>Current Due Date: 06/18/1998<<\nOriginal Due Date:\nStatus: Closed\n\nSignature Office: L/Heffernan\n\nInfo Offices: L/Heffernan, L/Heninger, L/Kerwin\n\nAbstract:\nSEN SNOWE FWDS LTR FROM (b) (6) [REDACTED] OF STOCKINGTON, MAINE, WHO'S INTERESTED IN U.FO.'S AND THE RECENT PHOTOS OF MARS WHICH WERE RECENTLY RELEASED.\n\nComments:\n\nEnclosures: NO\n\nRelated Records:\n\nKeywords: (b) (6) [REDACTED] MAINE U.F.O. MARS\nFile Plan: 1320.4\nAnalyst: BMoore\n06/24/1998 Page 1 of 1"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1320.4 Aeronautics: UFO's\n\nHeadquarters Action Tracking System (HATS)\nINCOMING CORRESPONDENCE ACTION\nID Number: L/1998-00729\n\nTitle: Rothman/UFO Sightings by Astronauts\n\nRecipient: L/Heffernan\n\nAuthor: Grassley\nOrganization: Senate\nDate Written: 08/03/1998\nDate Received: 08/31/1998\nDate Concurred:\nDate Submitted:\nDate Signed: 09/04/1998\nDate Closed: 09/10/1998\nAction Office: LD/Rothman:P\n>>Current Due Date: 08/22/1998<<\nOriginal Due Date: 08/22/1998\nStatus: Closed\n\nSignature Office: L/Heffernan\n\nInfo Offices: L/Heffernan, L/Heninger, L/Kerwin\n\nAbstract:\nSenator Grassley forwards letter from (b) (6) [REDACTED] who is requesting information on UFO sightings by Astronauts.\n\nComments:\n\nEnclosures: letter\n\nRelated Records:\n\nKeywords: (b) (6) [REDACTED] UFO,astronauts,sightings\nFile Plan: 1320.4\nAnalyst: JMassey\n09/10/1998 Page 1 of 1"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"yellow\nSEP - 4 1998\n\nL:HR:mtg:L/1998-729f\n\nThe Honorable Charles E. Grassley\nUnited States Senate\nWashington, DC 20510\n\nDear Senator Grassley:\n\nThank you for your letter of August 3, 1998, on behalf of (b) (6) [REDACTED] who is requesting information about the possible sightings of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) by NASA astronauts.\n\nOver the years there have been many objects sighted by the astronauts during space missions. Most of these items were later identified by photographs or NORAD records as material from launch vehicles or spacecraft or were such items as water droplets. No unidentified materials were seen on missions to the moon. The Air Force, in the interest of national security, received and investigated all reports for many years but has discontinued this activity. NASA has no program for investigating UFOs and has not withheld information on sightings.\n\nIn 1976, James Oberg thoroughly researched the UFO/astronaut allegations and published an article about it in SEARCH magazine. We are enclosing that article for (b) (6) [REDACTED] information. In addition, enclosed is a NASA Fact Sheet which summarizes the current status of NASA's involvement in UFO investigations.\n\nWe trust this information will aid you in responding to (b) (6) [REDACTED] inquiry.\n\nSincerely,\n\n[illegible]\n\nEdward Heffernan\nAssociate Administrator\nfor Legislative Affairs\n\nEnclosures"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"+\nbcc:\nZ/Roger Launius (with incoming) ; provided info\n\nSent to Sherry Kuntz in the Hill office\n\n[illegible]\n9/2/98\n\n[illegible] 9/3/98"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ASTRONAUTS & UFOs File Copy\n-- The Whole Story!\n\nSince the \"astronaut UFO\" genre is one of the main pillars of UFO evidence, this study claiming that the entire set of cases is invalid will obviously be received with skepticism and criticism from UFO buffs. Rational objections and arguments will be printed and answered in a subsequent issue of this magazine. Critics are urged to raise specific points not addressed in the study, or to cite and document facts which might modify or invalidate conclusions in the study.\n\nJames E. Oberg\nAssociate Editor\n\"Space World\" magazine\n\nSEARCH magazine WINTER 1976 (issue #129) PALMER PUBLICATIONS AMHERST, WISC. 54406 Single copy price $1.25\n\nSpace flight has opened many mysteries. True, scientists prefer to list the puzzles solved and unknowns discovered, but as men venture beyond the earth it is inevitable that new mysteries will be encountered.\nSomewhere out there, many observers believe, are intelligent species with technological civilizations far more advanced than that of Earth. Perhaps they are sending us radio signals we have not recognized. Perhaps they have left artifacts of past visits for us to find. Perhaps they are even now keeping the earth under surveillance.\nIf they are out there, someday we will meet them. As illustrated in science fiction, this meeting will probably occur in space.\nHave such meetings already occurred? Have astronauts and cosmonauts already seen alien spacecraft? The UFO literature is full of tales of \"space UFOs\". Are any of them valid? What can a careful study reveal?\n\nHardly a UFO book or movie is complete without the standard assertion that \"astronauts have seen UFOs too\". While critics may attack the character or intelligence of many UFO witnesses, they cannot use these tactics on American and Russian space pilots. Where UFO photographs can be accused of distortion and forgery, photographs taken by astronauts and processed by NASA must be of the highest trustworthiness. Hence, most UFO scholars consider the family of astronaut UFO sightings to be one of the strongest bodies of evidence in the past thirty years.\nThe best of these cases include astronaut James McDivitt's sighting of an \"unidentified spacecraft\" near his Gemini-4 space capsule in 1965, a curious photo of a pair of UFOs with glowing propulsion fields taken by the Gemini-7 astronauts, reports of nearby objects from X-15 and Mercury spacecraft, tales of how the 1968-1969 Apollo moon shots were followed by UFOs on their way to the moon, and reports and photographs of objects seen by crewmen on the Skylab space station. Last year, the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) selected the \"McDivitt UFO\" photo as one of the four best photographs ever taken.\nThe \"astronaut UFO\" sightings must appeal to many serious researchers for a number of reasons. The witnesses and the photographs are unimpeachable as to honesty and authenticity. The conditions of the space missions can be calculated and recorded, and every object near the spacecraft can be determined by consulting the giant space radars of the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD), headquartered inside Cheyenne Mountain in Colorado. Extensive crew debriefings and on-board tape recorder transcripts may be available to obtain direct eyewitness testimony.\nWith all these facts and assumptions in mind, and mindful of the numerous 'unsolved' cases which might tell much about the UFO phenomenon, I began a special research program into this particular body of evidence. As an aerospace writer, historian, and researcher, I felt that my experience with astronautics, computers, Air Force operations, and space missions might give me new insights into this most puzzling series of cases. I was not disappointed, and my results were startling.\nThe basic truths behind these sightings seems lately to have gathered an accretion of exaggeration, confusion, and outright fiction. The 1968 \"Condon Report\" on UFOs (conducted by the University of Colorado for the U.S. Air Force) found itself unable to penetrate three specific cases, which the analyst felt were a \"challenge\" to any serious investigator. Stories later began circulating about sightings of lunar surface lights and structures, and the discovery of artifacts on the moon, about near approaches of structured objects, and about attempts at radio contact between Apollo capsules and UFOs. Recent books on UFOs give lists of astronaut sightings which are out of numeric sequence, misdated, mispelled, and otherwise distorted.\nMy research has revealed a few examples of deliberate photo forgeries by UFO buffs or opportunistic authors. My investigations in the NASA"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"archives has revealed cases where UFO researchers withheld certain information freely given them by NASA officials, information which would have clearly explained many cases which the authors wanted to appear mysterious. So the time has come to take a new look at this whole phenomenon. What is the truth about \"astronaut UFOs\"?\nThe first step in any research might be with the Condon report, thought by many to have been commissioned as a \"whitewash\" of the UFO phenomenon. UFO enthusiasts are accustomed to hearing harsh criticism of almost all aspects of this study, but my own objections to the \"astronaut UFO\" section is from a novel angle.\nMy own research suggests that the Condon investigator, far from being the best man for the job, was clearly unqualified to evaluate the difficult cases. He was not familiar with the terminology of space flight or the basics of orbital flight trajectories, as I am. As a result, he ignored possible explanations while incorrectly eliminating other possible answers.\nIn other words, far from being a coverup, this chapter of the Condon report is superficial. It is entirely worthless as an endorsement of the unexplained and unexplainable nature of several astronaut sightings which I will discuss. I can prove this remarkable assertion to any investigator serious enough to consider all the evidence, much of which has never before been published.\nThe Condon report does give some details about the environment of astronaut sightings, but even here does not go far enough. More stress needs to be put on the visual and photographic limitations of space flight: the windows are far smaller than popularly realized (about half the size of this open magazine at arm's length), and for many years were subject to obscuration and smudging by seepage of sealant and by contamination by rocket fuel. At various points in the flight, the spacecraft was surrounded by clouds of debris (leaking fuel, dumped water, chipping paint, fraying insulation, ejected equipment, and more), while the inside of the weightless cabin was usually plagued with floating particles of dust and debris which often passed in front of cameras pointing out windows. Other satellites should have been visible, since few people realize that on any clear night an observer on Earth can see a number of orbiting objects with only half an effort. Out of this \"background noise\", can we separate the \"signal\" which will indicate the existence of UFOs?\nThese problems all are of interest to space officials, and numerous studies have been made. Fragments might imply a structural failure (a rescue ship was almost sent to Skylab-3 because of the crew's observation of leaking fuel droplets). Debris inside the cabin can irritate eyes and damage the electronic gear behind the instrument panels. Other satellites might be dangerous due to the potential of collision or they might be of intelligence interest if they are from some other nation. Therefore, any mysterious space sighting might as easily be vital for NASA to know about as it might be a true UFO. Careful investigations are called for.\nWhat are some of the most famous cases, and what are the facts? Interpretations may differ, but productive thinking can only be done when all the information is at hand. Some of it is hard to find or understand; other information, available to some researchers, may have been deliberately withheld. Some classical cases may consist of made-up fantasies. You can soon judge for yourself.\nHas there been any attempt to \"cover up\" space sightings (a common plea when no evidence is available, even in this age of sieve-like government secrecy)? Are astronauts \"muzzled\" about UFOs? Has fifteen years of manned spaceflight uncovered any evidence at all which even remotely suggests that Earth is being visited and observed by advanced spaceships from another world? Let's look at the evidence.\nOn June 3, 1965, rookie astronauts Jim McDivitt and Ed White blasted off from Cape Kennedy (now again Cape Canaveral), squeezed into their Gemini-4 capsule. The two youngest-ever American spacemen were to spend four days in orbit, tripling the previous US record. They would be the first American space crewmen to have time to sightsee in space, once major experiments like a booster rendezvous and a walk in space were completed.\nApproximately thirty hours into the flight (while White was asleep), McDivitt reported that he had seen an object in space near his space capsule. It appeared to be cylindrical with \"an arm sticking out\", possibly on a collision course. Interested NASA officials in Houston asked NORAD which other space satellites were near Gemini-4 at the time of the sighting, and NORAD came up with a list of about a dozen objects. All of them were pieces of tiny debris or small scientific satellites except one: the giant, \"winged\" meteor satellite, Pegasus-2. It seemed to fit the description radioed down by McDivitt, so NASA announced that the object had been identified.\nBut Pegasus had been more than a thousand miles away, and McDivitt clearly saw an object much closer, much more detailed, and in an orbit very close to his own (\"Collision course\" to a pilot means that the relative angle of sight is unchanging, which would not be the case for any satellite crossing McDivitt's orbit). The object became a UFO when nobody could identify it. It has remained a UFO up until today, but not any longer.\nMcDivitt's hasty attempt to take a photograph of the object through his smeared window was apparently fruitless, since the object's motion combined with the slow stabilization spin of the spaceship carried it into the glare of the sun after about 30 seconds. The astronaut later recounted how he went through all the films of the flight (every roll of film is accounted for on a flight manifest, so they do not disappear) and found many overexposed or blank. This mission had been the first flight in which space photography was a major experiment, and the glaring sunlight of space had invalidated many pre-flight exposure settings. McDivitt did not find anything which looked like \"his UFO\".\nWhat was it he saw? Why has it become such a prominent UFO case?\nAnd if the pictures did not turn out, where did NICAP get its \"top four\" photograph (which shows, not a winged cylinder, but a smeared blob)? We can answer these questions at last.\nThe first hint as to the true identity of this space UFO can be found in McDivitt's own words, given at a press conference a week after the flight when his memory was fresh: \"It looked a lot like an upper stage of a booster\". Gemini does have a booster just like it, and McDivitt had been carrying out maneuvers near it early in the flight. Why didn't the list from NORAD include the Gemini-4 booster rocket?\nNORAD had been tracking the objects, but NASA had not asked about Gemini-4 and its own associated debris--it had asked about Gemini-4 and any other earlier satellites. Anyone familiar with computerized information systems (one of my professional specialties) can guess what happened: the computer was given a \"query\" which told it to compare Gemini-4 with the other satellites. The computer never knew where the Gemini booster was relative to the spacecraft, since it had not been asked. McDivitt had been visually tracking the thirty foot long cylinder at a range of only 75 miles a few hours earlier, but this large satellite never made the \"NORAD list\" because"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"nobody thought to ask about it! The list was incomplete!\nWhat we do know from the complete Gemini-4 transcripts (including the on-board tape recorder as well as space-to-ground links), is that the UFO appeared at the same point in the Gemini orbit where the booster had been repeatedly spotted earlier in the flight. McDivitt had once described seeing his booster with straps hanging from it. Furthermore, on at least one occasion on the first day, McDivitt had at first been unable to recognize the booster when he saw it because it was close to the glare of the sun! This had been at a range of less than ten miles.\nYet another important factor unknown to the Condon report was that McDivitt was complaining to the flight surgeon about his eyesight during this phase of the flight. His eyes were red and teary due to a reaction with the cabin atmosphere and an accidental massive urine spill. \"I didn't think I was going to be able to hack it\", McDivitt later had radioed to Earth.\nThis famous UFO case now becomes that of a pilot with watering eyes catching sight of an object in parallel orbit, an object which he had already misidentified a few hours earlier. As to the photograph, an investigator must go through all the film of the flight to realize how common such blobs of light (overexposures, reflections, glare, etc.) were. Both NASA and McDivitt have agreed that the sequence of movie frames are a view out the window, showing sunlight reflecting off a bolt against the dirty window glass. NICAP thinks differently because of the back of its copy of the photo is a handwritten note (nobody known by whom) stating that McDivitt (nobody knows when) had communicated (nobody knows how) the fact that the picture showed \"his UFO\". (This was made clear by a telephone conversation between the author and Jack Acuff of NICAP on March 5, 1976).\nWhy has this case achieved such notoriety? It probably resulted from the enthusiasm of UFO believers, the naive openness of NASA public relations officials, and the publicity-seeking opportunism of some of the principals.\nMcDivitt himself did little to clear the case up, instead using it as a ticket onto national TV talk shows and news interviews (especially after his retirement in 1969). To add to the mystery, the former spaceman asserts, \"I have never been able to identify it, and I don't think anyone ever will.\""} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Despite the persistent rumors of 'secret space pictures', all photographs taken by NASA in space are in the public domain. That is, any picture taken by an astronaut or an earth resources satellite is available to anyone who wants to pay for it.\nThere are four tiers of photograph availability, but two are reserved for newsmen only. The structure is as follows:\nA. The most popular space photographs taken are lithographed for general free distribution to anyone who asks for them. Several dozen new photographs are added to this list every year. Cost to NASA is a few cents per print.\nB. The NASA Public Information Offices at various centers and at headquarters prints glossy photographs of timely news stories for distribution to the news media. Hundreds of these photographs are released every year, but only certified newsmen can receive them for free.\nC. Many thousands of other photographs and drawings may be of interest to the news media and are therefore filed at public information offices, but stock copies are not kept. Each request must be filled by actual photo lab orders, which costs NASA about one dollar per photograph.\nD. Any citizen who wants copies of any photograph listed in 'B' or 'C' above can get it, but it is entirely reasonable for NASA to expect him to pay for it. News bureau photographs, along with all other flight photography--stills and movies--can be ordered from Bara Studios, P.O. Box 486, Bladensburg, MD 20710. The cost of any photograph ordered by stock number is several dollars apiece. Any cross-referencing or researching will also cost money.\nSome ground photographs of astronaut accidents, autopsies, and medical examinations are not releasable for publication. On several Gemini flights, special photographic experiments were undertaken for the DoD, but these involved special cameras and exclusively earth surface targets. In neither case would it be possible to withhold any hypothetical UFO photographs from the public.\nAstronaut photographs are indexed by a code which specifies year taken and frame number. S66-12387, for example, would be a NASA photo (not necessarily a space photo) taken in 1966. Beginning with Apollo, space photos were also indexed with a mission code, roll number and frame number (neither of which were repeated on later flights). For example, AS16-108-13005 was taken on the Apollo-16 flight, with the 108th roll of the Apollo project flight film. Movie film is indexed per magazine with similar numbers.\nEvery photograph ever taken by American astronauts for NASA is on file with Bara Studios and can be obtained by anyone willing to pay for them. Writers who produce 'secret NASA UFO photographs' which they claim are being hidden from the American public are doing a gross disservice to one of the most open and cooperative public information offices of any federal agency.\n\nan observer on Earth can see a number of orbiting objects with only half an effort. Out of this \"background noise\", can we separate the \"signal\" which will indicate the existence of UFOs?\nThese problems all are of interest to space officials, and numerous studies have been made. Fragments might imply a structural failure (a rescue ship was almost sent to Skylab-3 because of the crew's observation of leaking fuel droplets). Debris inside the cabin can irritate eyes and damage the electronic gear behind the instrument panels. Other satellites might be dangerous due to the potential of collision or they might be of intelligence interest if they are from some other nation. Therefore, any mysterious space sighting might as easily be vital for NASA to know about as it might be a true UFO. Careful investigations are called for.\nWhat are some of the most famous cases, and what are the facts? Interpretations may differ, but productive thinking can only be done when all the information is at hand. Some of it is hard to find or understand; other information, available to some researchers, may have been deliberately withheld. Some classical cases may consist of made-up fantasies. You can soon judge for yourself.\nHas there been any attempt to \"cover up\" space sightings (a common plea when no evidence is available, even in this age of sieve-like government secrecy)? Are astronauts \"muzzled\" about UFOs? Has fifteen"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The \"McDivitt UFO\", prize-winning astronaut photograph taken on Gemini-4. Actually, McDivitt explained later after the flight that the sun was coming across the window as the spacecraft rolled, the sun rays struck a metal bolt, causing the \"flares in the camera lens\". NASA photo 65-H-1013.\n\nyears of manned spaceflight uncovered any evidence at all which even remotely suggests that Earth is being visited and observed by advanced spaceships from another world? Let's look at the evidence.\nOn June 3, 1965, rookie astronauts Jim McDivitt and Ed White blasted off from Cape Kennedy (now again Cape Canaveral), squeezed into their Gemini-4 capsule. The two youngest-ever American spacemen were to spend four days in orbit, tripling the previous US record. They would be the first American space crewmen to have time to sightsee in space, once major experiments like a booster rendezvous and a walk in space were completed.\nApproximately thirty hours into the flight (while White was asleep), McDivitt reported that he had seen an object in space near his space capsule. It appeared to be cylindrical with \"an arm sticking out\", possibly on a collision course. Interested NASA officials in Houston asked NORAD which other space satellites were near Gemini-4 at the time of the sighting, and NORAD came up with a list of about a dozen objects. All of them were pieces of tiny debris or small scientific satellites except one: the giant, \"winged\" meteor satellite, Pegasus-2. It seemed to fit the description radioed down by McDivitt, so NASA announced that the object had been identified.\nBut Pegasus had been more than a thousand miles away, and McDivitt clearly saw an object much closer, much more detailed, and in an orbit very close to his own (\"Collision course\" to a pilot means that the relative angle of sight is unchanging, which would not be the case for any satellite crossing McDivitt's orbit). The object became a UFO when nobody could identify it. It has remained a UFO up until today, but not any longer.\nMcDivitt's hasty attempt to take a photograph of the object through his smeared window was apparently fruitless, since the object's motion combined with the slow stabilization spin of the spaceship carried it into the glare of the sun after about 30 seconds. The astronaut later recounted how he went through all the films of the flight (every roll of film is accounted for on a flight manifest, so they do not disappear) and found many overexposed or blank. This mission had been the first flight in which space photography was a major experiment, and the glaring sunlight of space had invalidated many pre-flight exposure settings. McDivitt did not find anything which looked like \"his UFO\".\nWhat was it he saw? Why has it become such a prominent UFO case?"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"On a recent \"UFO recording\" released by Columbia, called \"UFOs: The Credibility Factor\", McDivitt clearly shows how his memories have changed or been changed to enhance the mystery of his experience: \"They (NASA) checked NORAD. . .to see what they had up on radar and there wasn't anything within very close range of us.\" Readers can measure the credibility of this statement against the facts.\n\nIf McDivitt was fooled by his own booster ten years ago, is it too much to expect him to admit it now? What would that do to all of his public assertions of mystery? There is an easier way out, and McDivitt took it when I sent him an advance copy of my manuscript. After keeping it two months, he wrote back, \"I was not able to read it very thoroughly and I cannot offer any extensive comments. I do not foresee the opportunity for me to provide any further review.\" There weren't any errors in my analysis, he implied, but it would be better kept quiet.\n\nNASA never had any real doubts. \"We believe it to be a rocket tank or spent second stage of a rocket,\" wrote a high space official on July 1, 1965. NORAD officials, confronted with my scenario, endorsed it: \"Your comments on the NORAD role related to the case appear to be logical,\" wrote NORAD Public Information Officer D.W. Kindschi on Feb. 23, 1976.\n\nSo the \"McDivitt case\" is closed. The best space UFO case has now been identified. Do not expect to see any change in the UFO press, however. Such results are simply ignored.\n\nPhotographs made in space show negative effects, such as the \"McDivitt UFO\" aura, often. Spacecraft and astronauts may be engulfed in a strange aura caused by overexposure to sunlight brighter than ever seen on Earth. Blowups of photographs of known space objects show them appearing as \"blobs\" due to the enlargement process and to the courseness of the grain. Ordinary space pictures are full of clouds of debris, constellations of man-made starlike points fluttering through space.\n\nThe Condon report was fascinated with the McDivitt case, and few UFO enthusiasts have not heard of it. But neither the Condon researchers nor the average reader had ever had all the facts. Now people can make up their own minds. I have no doubt that McDivitt was seeing his own Titan booster stage.\n\nDr. Roach was also fascinated with another McDivitt sighting, that of a point of light crossing the sky. The object sounded just like the appearance of an artificial earth satellite, and that is exactly what McDivitt thought it was. There is no information to suggest it was anything else.\n\nAnother Condon favorite is a Gemini-7 case. The report of sightings of a cloud of debris right at the moment of booster separation (these particles included frozen fuel droplets, the booster itself, assorted insulation and structural fragments from where the explosive bolts were fired, and other smaller objects never identified and never cared about) is not very impressive. The crew, on their first space mission, saw a few pieces they had not expected (the pilot guessed—wrongly—that they \"were in polar orbit\"). Only a partisan digging for evidence, and desperate to find such evidence, would make much of this common event.\n\nBut a sign of desperation is indeed found in connection with the Gemini-7 UFO case. It is not the desperation of government officials trying to cover up the truth about UFOs. Rather, it is the desperation of some outsider trying to manufacture counterfeit \"astronaut UFO\" evidence, an activity which should not be necessary if the \"real\" UFO evidence were as persuasive as many think.\n\nIt involves a photograph showing two very strange glowing objects. Each is hexagonal in shape, viewed at an angle, and supported by a dazzling \"force field\" below it. A cloud-covered earth is seen in the background. See plates 27 & 28\n\nThis photograph has appeared in books, magazines, newspapers, and pamphlets. It is part of the travelling slide show of UFO lecturers from the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) and elsewhere. I have heard it described as \"showing a typical UFO force field propulsion system\", and \"similar to other UFO photograph taken on Earth the same year\".\n\nThe photograph is a forgery. It is a hoax. What the anonymous counterfeiter did (I have reason to suspect a\n\n43"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"The author and NASA photo analyst Richard Underwood show \"space UFO\" photos to Dr. J. Allen Hynek, director of the center for UFO studies, July, 1976. Hynek subsequently endorsed Oberg's conclusions.\n\nSaturn booster S-IV-b and four open \"SLA\" panels. On moon flights the four \"petals\" fly free and, together with the empty booster, tumble through space a few miles from the Apollo capsule. They were often seen as bright flashing lights as they reflected the powerful sunlight. On Apollo-12, astronaut descriptions of these fragments were misinterpreted by UFO buffs and metamorphized into alien spacecraft.\n\n\"Mysterious\" bulls eye object seen and photographed by Gemini-6 astronauts in December, 1965. Unfortunately for flying saucer buffs, it is not a UFO; it is an out of focus photo of the approaching Gemini-7 spaceship, nose on. NASA photo S-65-65296.\n\nThe view from inside early space capsules was limited and often plagued by dirty windows and bright reflections. Gene Cernan, Gemini-9. NASA photo S-66-38024.\n\n44"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Photo of Gemini-7 from Gemini-6, December 1965. The brightness aura is a common space photo effect and often makes point sources appear to be surrounded by a \"force field\" or an \"exhaust trail\". NASA photo S-65-65304.\n\nJapanese UFO organization) was take an ordinary photograph of Earth made from the Gemini-7 spaceship on December 4, 1965. The nose of the spacecraft fills the lower part of the frame, and on the nose, catching the glare of the sun, is a pair of roll control rocket thrusters used to adjust the attitude and spin rate of the Gemini. The original photo (NASA S65-63722, which I have personally examined) was then retouched by the unscrupulous hoaxter to eliminate the edge of the nose from view, so the dark surface of the spaceship merged into the dark Earth beneath. This left the two now mysterious lights seemingly suspended in space, as it were. A normal space tourist photo was turned into convincing UFO evidence, and thousands of people were fooled.\n\nAmerican spacemen are not the only ones reporting UFOs, according to the popular press. Stories that allegedly come from Moscow tell about UFOs following Soviet manned spacecraft in the Vostok and Voskhod series ten years ago. But such secrecy surrounds the entire Soviet space effort that these stories cannot be checked out.\n\nThat very secrecy, however, is itself\n\n45"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"a powerful argument against the validity of the rumors. So many ordinary things about the Soviet space program are secret (and long prison terms await anyone who even accidentally divulges such data) that it is incredible that so sensitive and significant a fact as a UFO sighting could ever leak out, even if such a thing had really happened.\n\nThe rules of evidence have been stretched and broken by UFO partisans. It is not up to me to \"prove\" that these sightings never took place. Nobody has as yet seen any evidence apart from a simple statement of fact that the sightings did take place. I will be happy to consider evidence when it becomes available.\n\nLet's examine more of these \"cosmonaut UFOs\". In UFOs From Behind The Iron Curtain, the UFO magazine 'Clypeus' is quoted about an object seen by both Vostok-5 and Vostok-6, a fleet of disks seen by Voskhod-1, and \"strange cylinders in space which were perfectly formed and had no apertures\" seen by Voskhod-1, Voskhod-2, and Gemini-4 (sic!). UFOs have even been blamed for the malfunction of the Voskhod-2 autopilot. As I have said, these \"reports\" are hardly evidence, and can be far more easily manufactured than refuted.\n\nSurely one of the most specious and ghoulish \"space UFO\" stories deals with the Soyuz-11 flight, on which the crewmen perished during their return to Earth. UFO literature has recently been circulating a \"transcript\" between the cosmonauts and ground control. The crewmen describe several glowing red objects and discuss them with flight controllers.\n\nTo anyone familiar with typical space-to-ground communications, this \"transcript\" is patently counterfeit. Someone's vivid imagination, emboldened by the knowledge that the men were dead and could not argue, must have created the entire incident.\n\nWithout further evidence, the entire class of \"cosmonaut UFOs\" must be rejected. Deliberate attempts to \"muddy the waters\" and to manufacture fantasies are common in this UFO genre, as in others.\n\nIn investigating photographic evidence of UFO sightings by American astronauts, I worked closely with Richard Underwood at the NASA Johnson Space Center (formerly the Manned Spacecraft Center) near Houston. Underwood is an experienced photointerpreter who has examined every single photograph brought back from orbit and beyond, and his incredible memory can identify a decade old photograph, describe the situation, and find the citation in the old record books within minutes. The office of this photogrammetric engineer is full of stacked film cans, light tables, world and local maps, and piles of letters from ex-astronauts and ordinary citizens alike.\n\nHas he seen any UFOs? Underwood answered that with a smile: \"I've never found anything in these pictures that puzzled me for long, and I'm kind of disappointed. It would be terribly exciting to find evidence for someone else's spaceship!\" When UFO writers hint broadly about a \"NASA coverup\" or \"space censorship\", they are essentially calling Dick Underwood and his colleagues a pack of liars.\n\nDistortion and withholding of the truth is not a stranger to Underwood's office, however. When a UFO researcher named Alan Sandler was working on a book and a movie (\"UFOs: Past, Present and Future\", to be advertised as a \"documentary\") he visited Underwood's office and looked through dozens of rolls of film, writing down orders for prints of anything that looked interesting. This is a standard service provided by NASA to journalists.\n\nSandler chose a set of photographs for his movie, photographs which Underwood advised him probably only showed dust particles in front of the camera, debris outside the spacecraft, or glare on the windows (this was easy enough to prove by looking at pictures ahead of and behind the shots in question). Two photographs were particularly upsetting.\n\nThey both showed a black background with a string of lights in the middle of the photograph. In the book (with the same name as the movie, although written by another author, Robert Emeneggar) the two shots are\n\nPhoto of Agena-12 from Gemini-12. This is part of a sequence of photos which takes the Agena from light into dark. After dark, only the running lights are visible. One researcher has widely published this latter photograph as a \"UFO\", \"said by NASA to be Agena tracking lights\". NASA photo S 66-63101.\n\n46"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"\"Said to be ranging lights\" on Gemini-12, according to Sandler. Compare with earlier photo showing Agena in the sunlight. Deliberate slanting of evidence.\n\nreproduced with the caption: \"Shot during Gemini XII on November 13, 1966, and said to be Agena Ranging Lights prior to docking\". The erroneous implication of these twisted words is that this is another NASA excuse for some remarkable UFO photographs. Said to be ranging lights, indeed, sneers the book!\n\n\"That's exactly what they were!\" Underwood told me plaintively. \"They are part of the complete sequence of twenty photographs showing the Agena as it moves from the sunlit side of Earth into the shadow\".\n\nAs Underwood and I stood in the photo laboratory inside building No. 8 at the historic Houston space center, the sequence was right there in front of our eyes on the glowing viewing board. How did the \"UFO researcher\" react to this explanation, I asked?\n\nHe continued to explain: \"I took the whole sequence with me to Hollywood along with other films which NASA was providing. I showed the sequence to Sandler. He wasn't interested. Unfortunately he went ahead and used the photographs anyway\". Thousands more people were deceived.\n\nThe flight of Gemini-11 began a long battle between astronaut Charles \"Pete\" Conrad and UFO believers. The astronauts had taken three even more remarkable photographs. \"Pete\" Conrad had spotted a moving object outside his window and had snapped off a few frames of film, varying the exposure on each shot in an attempt to get at least one good view which would show something.\n\nPer a request from NASA, NORAD soon reported that the object had been a Russian cosmic ray laboratory called Proton-3. According to Air Force computers, it would have crossed Gemini's orbit several hundred miles behind the spacecraft. Yet this object was in a different direction and was much too close. It was a UFO!\n\nDespite these objections, NORAD was right for the wrong reasons. The object was indeed Proton-3, even though the Aerial Phenomenon Research Organization (APRO) and its research director, Dr. James Harder, has made much of the discrepancy and considers this the best Gemini UFO ever seen. (See plates 17,18,19, 23,24)\n\nFew researchers have noticed, and none had recognized the significance of the fact, that the Proton-3 satellite was only hours away from burning up in the atmosphere. As its orbit decayed toward a fiery doom, it circled Earth faster and faster, running ahead of the schedule predicted by NORAD.\n\nThe simple truth, often ignored or distorted by many writers, is that NORAD does not \"track everything in space\" like the radar screens of some air traffic control center. Instead, objects which pass through the beams of a handful of worldwide radar sites (at a range of a thousand miles or less) are observed and catalogued, and their orbits are calculated. These calculations are then projected forward in time (the mathematical term is \"extrapolated\") to plot where the spacecraft should be if its orbit hasn't been changed.\n\nGemini's orbit had been changed by a rendezvous rocket firing. Proton's orbit was changed by its decay. I ordered microfilm copies of the last few NORAD predictions from the Tracking Reports Section at the NASA Goddard Space Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and as soon as I read them I knew the answer.\n\nThe predictions were off by several hundred miles per day! Each new projection made a correction to the previous one. Using a combination of these figures, a new altitude difference between Gemini and Proton could easily be computed. It was entirely close enough to coincide with the astronauts' sighting.\n\nFurthermore, the astronauts had made a visual as well as a photographic record. Their eyewitness testimony describes a satellite that looks like Proton-3 looked, as shown by exhibits in Russian museums: a stubby cylinder\n\n47"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"with four large triangular canted solar panels. (Conrad compared the sight to the strap-on boosters of a Titan-3 rocket.) Even the photographs show this when studied with real Proton-3 photographs close at hand.\n\nAstronaut Conrad and the UFO people clashed again over his next space mission, Apollo-12. According to the Research Director of APRO, Dr. Harder, Conrad reported that he was being followed by a UFO on the way to the moon. Conrad claims that it was just a joke about the large panels which enclose the lunar module during launch but are jettisoned later in the flight and which tumble through space a few miles from the Apollo all the way to the moon. Harder says that Conrad, under pressure from a secret government agency, is lying.\n\nThese are Conrad's words: \"They've been after me for years because we were followed by a UFO on the way to the moon. That, of course, was untrue. The guy who came up with it was going by our transcript where we saw debris from our own rocket and we were joking with the ground crew about it. He took this out of context...I called the ground and said, 'hey, gang, we're being followed, there's some flashing object out there'. Some scandal sheet took that and made a helluva story out of it. But it was nothing like anything I was connected with\". Conrad has left NASA and lives in Denver, presumably beyond the reach of any NASA censors. He describes a phenomenon common to all Apollo moon flights; the claim that he saw a UFO is also common, but hardly as valid.\n\nConrad confirmed these quotations in a letter to me dated April 12, 1976. \"I hope your paper is widely printed,\" he added. Referring to Harder's claim of coverup, Conrad could only say: \"I think you have more than your share of Kooks.\"\n\n48"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Gemini-11 photo of Proton-3 (arrow) and extreme enlargement of image. UFO magazines often print fuzzy blobs without indicating that object was highly magnified. Film artifacts cause \"blobbiness\". NASA photo S-66-54661.\n\nLet's take a moment to look at the Apollo-12 flight more carefully. It probably rates as one of the most \"UFO-ridden\" space flights ever made, and probably did more than any Apollo mission to encourage the stories of astronaut sightings of UFOs. What lies behind all these stories? Who started them? What is the \"official\" NASA position?\n\nApollo-12 was launched on November 14, 1969, on the second moon landing mission. The crew consisted of Gemini-11 veterans \"Pete\" Conrad and Richard Gordon, and space rookie Alan Bean (Conrad had also flown into space on Gemini-5.) Taking off during a thunderstorm, the craft was twice hit by lightning which threatened to abort the mission.\n\nInstead, the flight proceeded successfully to the first pinpoint moon landing four days later. Astronauts Conrad and Bean flew their Lunar Module in to a precision touchdown near the Surveyor-3 automatic moon probe. During a scheduled moon walk, the men retrieved samples from the robot craft. The return on Earth was \"routine\", if flights to the moon can ever be considered routine.\n\n49"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Apollo-11 UFO, 1969. Object tumbled past window immediately after Apollo pulled away from Saturn booster. Metamorphosis of obvious spacecraft insulation fragment into \"odd-shaped UFO\" is courtesy of Bob Barry of the fringe \"20th Century UFO Bureau\". Hans Holzer's \"Ufonauts\" (1976) assigns object to John Glenn's flight, invents fictitious commentary and continues weaving myths unfettered by facts.\n\nground thought it was their S-IV-B booster rocket but quickly calculated that it would have been in a different direction. Next, they suggested that the lights could have been pieces of the Lunar Module \"garage\", called \"SLA Panels\", which are quite large and highly reflective. Conrad, so the UFO story goes, remarked that this was unlikely since one of them had suddenly taken off at a high velocity, something that a piece of space debris simply could not do. Finally, the astronauts decided to ignore the apparently harmless escort and carry on with their mission.\n\nIn lunar orbit, new (or perhaps the same) UFOs dogged the spacemen. During the descent to the lunar surface, millions of television watchers on Earth saw bright objects crossing the field of view of the Apollo TV cameras. Similar objects were seen during the launch from the moon and during the final approach to Earth.\n\nHere, then, is a major case for \"astronaut UFO sightings\". Besides the three astronauts, millions of Americans saw the TV images and heard the voices of the crewmen wondering what the objects could be. They were obviously unidentified, they were flying in space, and they were objects of some sort. Hence, they were UFOs.\n\nThe \"Fawcett List\" of space UFOs says that the astronauts \"said a UFO accompanied them all the way to within 132,000 miles of the moon, preceding them all the way.\" The origin of that mileage figure is obscure, but it lends unwarranted authenticity to the report.\n\nObservatories in Europe also watched the two UFOs, other sources reveal. Embellishing the story, another UFO source claims that \"Next day, the 15th, at 21.15 hours, one bright revolving light approached the Apollo 12 spacecraft.\" Fawcett, not to be outdone, also claims that the astronauts photographed the UFO (or UFOs).\n\n50"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Proton satellite shown for the first time at Paris air show, May 1967. Four canted solar panels contributed to bizarre shapes on the Gemini-11 photo. Proton weighed 27,000lbs. Its outer shroud was 14.8 feet in diameter.\n53"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"according to UFO sources. Saga reports that \". . .at 11:47 a.m. on November 24th, the spokesman for Apollo 12 reported in a startled voice that they were all watching a bright red object flashing brilliantly against the earth.\" This incident was carefully analyzed by Brad Sparks of APRO (I am indebted to his letter to Saga of August 28, 1970, a letter Saga editor never bothered to answer), who objects that \"the astronauts did not report that the object they were seeing was red, and they stated specifically that 'it's a steady light', not flashing.\" It was seen between them and the dark earth, somewhere off the coast of India by a guess of the crewmen. Perhaps it was a ship's searchlight, perhaps a fire, perhaps a violent lightning storm. . .there is no reason to suspect that it was a craft in space. The astronauts lost sight of the light as they turned the Apollo to take a series of photographs of the sunrise.\nThe wild fantasies printed in Saga do not end here. Beckley and Salkin claim that the astronauts had been \"startled by unaccountable seismic disturbances on the lunar surface.\" This event never occurred; there were no such earthquakes during their visit.\nBeckley and Salkin refer to \"a mysterious blue halo encircling one of our spacemen.\" Sparks of APRO considers this to have been lunar dust kicked up while the crewmen were walking around. Photo analyst Dick Underwood suggested that it is a defect in the development of the photo caused by the vivid solar glare off of a highly reflective surface; Underwood quickly located half a dozen similar \"haloes\" on other space photos taken during the 1960s. Whatever it was, this \"halo\" appeared only in the photo, and was neither seen nor remarked on by the astronauts.\nHouston radio commentator and UFO enthusiast Frank Haley has his own theory about why the Apollo-12 TV camera did not work on the moon (NASA says Bean accidentally pointed it toward the sun). Says Haley, \"The camera was intentionally shut off to avoid showing something on the moon that disturbed the astronauts\" (\"Haley's Comment\" newsletter, Mar. 22, 1976). It is only a matter of time before this nonsense is absorbed into the lore of the \"Apollo-12 UFOs\".\nBut Apollo 12 did see some unidentified flying objects, and NASA engineers were justifiably concerned that they could have been debris from important spacecraft systems which might indicate unexpected failures, or which might interfere with other spacecraft equipment. Hence, the Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston (now the Johnson Space Center) gave a contract to Lockheed to study the objects seen on the TV pictures and on some movie film.\nThe Lockheed report was quietly issued on March 18, 1970, about the same time that the sensationalized and fictionalized Saga story was being printed. Titled \"Unidentified Visual Phenomena Associated with Space Flight\" (NASA Contract NAS 9-5191, LEC/HASD No. 671-80-013), the report documents the \"moon pigeons\" (a term \"coined by NASA engineers to describe unexpected objects seen in operational photography that defy positive identification\") of Apollo-12.\nContract engineers were F.D. Beatty and J.G. Baron.\n\"Unidentified visual phenomena associated with space flight were rather common operationally,\" revealed the authors, but \"little or no documentation of past events has been made.\" Before UFO believers jump up and down with confirmation of a whole new family of \"astronaut sightings of UFOs\", the authors announce their intention of demonstrating that \"such events were spacecraft debris associated with an earlier pyrotechnical operation, or ice, or window reflections. Cases for each of these theories have been presented and exhibits of similar occurences are included. Positive identification was not possible. . . The quality of the imagery precludes a precise definition of the object under question. . . In general, it takes much more information to identify an object that it does to detect it.\"\nSixteen millimeter color magazine 1165M, exposed on Apollo-12, shows three objects, called \"A\", \"B\", and \"C\". The objects appeared during the LM jettison maneuver in lunar orbit. \"A\" is believed to be a small segment of the docking channel; \"B\" was identified by engineers as a portion of the docking ring, possibly the fiberglass seal; \"C\" was probably part of the electrical harness. All were near the spacecraft and were tumbling. From this and other examinations, Beatty and Baron concluded that \"most 'moon pigeons' have as their source a programmed pyrotechnic event and are the normal debris associated with such an incident. They are often spectacular. . . The main thing to be learned from this study is that the event (in question) was, in all probability, a normal result of routine spacecraft operations. . . These data will undoubtably be of use to the engineering, scientific, and public relations communities.\" The closing reference clearly indicates that Beatty and Baron were aware of the \"Apollo-12 UFOs\" controversy and felt that their study would be useful in demolishing any UFO buffs' wild rumors.\nUnfortunately, the \"moon pigeons\" report seems to have been filed away in the NASA archives. Baron, who still works at the Johnson Space Center, told me early in 1976 that he never got any feedback on his report, even though it was fun doing it and it had"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pretty obvious implications for UFO reports. NASA apparently decided to let the UFO writers spread their rumors, hoping that the stories would fade away if ignored.\nWhat had happened, though, was a new shot in the arm for \"astronaut UFO cases\". The explanations could never catch up with the misinterpretations and wrong impressions engendered by the overheard conversations and viewed images from Apollo-12. Millions of Americans were practically eyewitnesses to a \"space UFO\", and were suitably impressed.\n\"Exclusive NASA Photos\" and NASA censorship is another part of myth. These Apollo-11 spots are highly magnified window reflections in Lunar Module deep in space (Aldrin turned the camera on by accident while checking equipment).\nWhen presented with the Saga story and with APRO's (and MUFON's) account of the \"maneuvering alien spacecraft at 150,000 miles from Earth\", the average citizen could only assume that it might indeed be true. If NASA was denying it, well then, the government has been known to lie to us in the past.\nIt is a vain hope to imagine that the truth will ever catch up to the Apollo-12 and other UFOs. As detailed here, the Apollo-12 UFO never existed. Somehow, millions of people believe that it did. There is sufficient blame\n55\nThis photo was snapped only moments after Aldrin's other Apollo 11 shot. Here the two UFOs have begun their separation and a halo-like force field between the two is clearly shown.\n26\nEXCLUSIVE NASA PHOTOS\nThese Are The Photos Taken When Your TV Screens Went Blank!"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"for this delusion to be generously distributed to UFO buffs, NASA public affairs officers, sensation-seeking news media, and lazy readers. And the \"astronaut UFO\" genre is not yet complete. Let's return to some more examples.\nAnother example of selective omission of facts occurs in the\nGemini-7 photo of sunlight glinting off roll thruster rockets on nose. Photo forgers airbrushed the nose/Earth boundary out, making the two lights appear to be floating in space. NASAphoto SG5-63722.\nPHOTO ALSO REVERSED\n28\nForgery can be reprinted in spite of copyright regulations because this is a NASA photo. Even retouched, it cannot be copyrighted.\n27\n56"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA photo (right) SL3-118-2140 and variations (above and below) as published with erroneous captions.\n31\n\"Fawcett list\" of astronaut sightings. George Fawcett is a respected and level-headed UFO researcher in Maiden, North Carolina. But an example of his work gives a different impression:\n\"Gemini-XII: Jim Lovell and Edwin Aldrin saw four UFOs linked in a row. Both spacemen said the objects were not stars\" (quoted from The Edge of Reality, Hynek & Vallee, 1975, page 64).\nFrom the GT-12 Astronaut Debriefing, page K/3,4, Lovell relates: \"During the last EVA we discarded, in addition to the ELSE (life support system), three bags. About 2, maybe 3 or possibly 4, orbits later at sunrise condition, we looked out again and saw 4 objects lined up in a row and they weren't stars I know. They must have been these same things we tossed overboard.\"\nThe original distortion of this entirely ordinary event, according to the Condon Report, is the responsibility of UFO writer, John Keel, Fawcett took it and embellished it.\nAnother of Fawcett's favorites is Mercury-7: \"Scott Carpenter reported that he had what looked like a good shot of a saucer.\" Elsewhere he claimed that Carpenter \"took a photograph of a classical saucer-shaped UFO with dome that followed his capsule.\" See plate 21\nIn fact, the photographs show an entirely ordinary object: a space balloon ejected from the capsule for tracking practice. The balloon did not inflate but spun in a limp oblong sack. The flight schedule and the voice transmissions confirm this unexciting explanation—and confirm Fawcett's fantasizing.\nAn example of the difficulty of \"disproving\" an \"astronaut UFO sighting\" is the Mercury-9 case in 1963. Well established in the UFO lore, the story claims that on the 15th orbit, over Muchea, Australia, the astronaut (Gordon Cooper) saw a green object. More than one hundred people at the tracking station saw the bogie on a radar screen (this wasn't\nShot during Sky Lab III second manned Sky Lab Flight 263 day of 1973—1645 Zulu Time. NASA Photo =SL3-118-2140 (4 shots taken) Listed as unidentified object or satellite by NASA Photo Evaluation Lab\n32\n57"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sensational enough for fictional \"fact\" writer Frank Edwards: he had two hundred people actually see the object.)\n\nThe source of the story seems to have been an NBC newsman in Australia. But the problem seems to be that Cooper has never heard of it. He has been out of the space program for seven years, and talks freely about UFOs to reporters, to the Columbia \"UFO recording\"., to Mike Douglas, to friends and associates. Somehow he knows nothing about \"his\" space UFO—and he has no reason to be silent. His space UFO never existed.\n\nConfronted by this evidence, Fawcett (letter of May 10, 1976) insists that \"I sincerely believe some of the astronaut sightings are bonafide, based on some of my sources of information.\" John Keel, too, recalls (letter of March 26, 1976) that \"ex-NASA engineers have told me all kinds of fascinating UFO tales...\" Always these writers fall back on \"secret reports\" and \"private information\" when their published reports and open articles disintegrate in the face of the truth.\n\nOn October 18, 1973, the famous Mansfield, Ohio UFO sighting occurred, for which Captain Lawrence Coyne and his helicopter crew later were to receive the 'Best UFO Case of the Year\" award (and check) from a weekly tabloid's 'blue-ribbon panel' of UFO experts. A few months later, Coyne said he was told by the panel chairman, J. Allen Hynek, (the respected head of the Center for UFO Studies) that Skylab astronauts had photographed the same UFO from space. (Hynek ultimately denied this.) A reputable magazine, \"Army Reserve\" published the story with an intriguing photograph it had received from NASA and which it labeled \"NASA: Skylab\", clearly indicating that this was the astronaut photograph which had buzzed Coyne.\n\nIt would have been a neat trick for the Skylab astronauts to have photographed anything on October 18th, since they weren't even on board the space station. The previous crew had returned to Earth a month before and their relief crew was not scheduled to blast off for another three weeks. The photograph printed in the magazine was clearly labeled on its backside as taken by Scott Carpenter on Mercury 7 more than ten years before. It showed a limp balloon Carpenter had ejected from his spacecraft in an attempt to get visual tracking practice (this photo is often referred to as the \"classical domed UFO\" shot). UFO researchers and magazine editors had clearly not made even a minimum of effort to verify these transparent errors and mistakes, but instead passed on the false data to the public. Thousands more were deceived."} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Late in 1973, a strange object did appear in Skylab space photographs. Taken on Conrad's Skylab flight in June, the object was not noticed by UFO researchers but by government photo analysts.\n\nRather than \"sweep the UFO under the rug\", the officials took the other tack: it might be a mysterious Soviet Satellite and could be of great value to military intelligence. A prompt and energetic investigation was launched.\n\nThe object looked like a long cylinder with two square paddles resembling solar panels at each end. By measuring its angular size on the negative, analysts were able to determine that it was about 20 feet long a mile away or 2000 feet long a hundred miles away.\n\nA careful investigation revealed the surprising answer: the UFO was actually thousands of feet in length, but its altitude was zero! It was an airstrip in the Brazilian jungles! Further checking showed that the objected appeared at the same spot in Skylab photos taken months later; the airfield was also found on an international aviation chart.\n\nRecent UFO books and articles have resurrected the X-15 rocket plane sightings of fifteen years ago. This has prompted the NASA Headquarters Public Affairs Office to reissue a photograph taken by a belly camera of the spacecraft at an altitude of about 60 miles (photo 76-H-139).\n\nPublished reports speak of \"fleets of UFOs\" at a range of 30 feet from the X-15. But even a casual reader with any familiarity with spacecraft systems will recognize the effect for what it was: \"fireflies\". This is a phenomenon seen by many Mercury, Vostok, and later spacemen, as flecks of paint chipped off the spacecraft. On the X-15, it was flecks of ice clinging to the liquid oxygen tanks. The pilot clearly describes the pieces as being close-in, small, tumbling, and drifting along with his vehicle through the vacuum.\n\nConsidering these cases as I have described them (and there are other lesser ones which I have also investigated to a successful conclusion), what can we now say about authors who present such evidence of \"astronaut UFOs\"? While speaking ominously about a NASA coverup and of secret agencies which muzzle spacemen, these same researchers list such quotations as:\n\nJohn Young: \"Odds are UFOs exist\".\n\nEdgar Mitchell: \"We all know UFOs are real\".\n\nEugene Cernan: \"I believe UFOs belong to someone else and that they are from some other civilization\".\n\nGordon Cooper: \"I believe that UFOs, under intelligent control, have visited our planet for thousands of years\".\n\nNone of these men claim to have seen UFOs in space. By now it should be obvious to open-minded investigators that no other astronaut claims to have seen any either. Suggestions that they have really done so are either misconceptions, misrepresentations, or frauds on the part of UFO writers.\n\nYet another case in point has just been given, and it deals with the John Young quotation. Young, in Seattle in 1973, said that the chances were good that there were intelligent civilizations on other planets (AP, Nov. 27, 1973). The newsman started the article with the lead, \"John Young says that the odds are that Unidentified Flying Objects do exist\", even though none of Young's quoted words indicated that at all. Before you could say \"UFO flap\", the UFO writers had a new authority:\n\nJohn Young says, \"Odds are UFOs exist\".\n\nIt seems clear that astronauts as a class of the population do not possess any special knowledge about UFOs which they may have gained from their own experiences. They are about as well informed (or more truthfully, as badly misinformed) as the average citizen. To quote them as above with the suggestion that they are special authorities on UFOs is a misleading and intellectually dishonest tactic.\n\nThree time space veteran Wally Schirra, who according to UFOlogists saw \"glowing masses\" (actually lightning-lit clouds, over the Indian Ocean) has written, \"I do not know enough about this subject to render an opinion of any kind. The only information I have is that which has been released to the public through the years by the various news media\". UFO writers would have us believe that this is part of a vast conspiracy of lies which only they can penetrate.\n\nThe actual answer to the \"shapeless light\" mystery illustrates the way NASA faces real space mysteries. The crew was puzzled by the sighting but reported it to space officials who made no effort to conceal the incident. If NASA were trying to cover up actual UFO sightings by astronauts, this was a good candidate for one—and it would never have been publicized.\n\nAstronaut Dick Gordon revealed to me the unpublicized solution to the publicized mystery. In a letter dated September 15, 1976, Gordon wrote: \"I vividly recall the incident which occurred when a light of indistinct shape and size was spotted on our return to earth... (it) did appear to be in the Indian Ocean. In our discussions and debriefings that occurred later, Rusty Schweikart provided the answer. He simply said, 'how about the moon's reflection?' and, of course, that is what it was... How often those of us in aviation have seen the moon's reflection on the water in the course of a normal flight. We simply did not put it together in returning from lunar distance, where we had the black background of space, the dark night of the earth, and the moon behind us.\"\n\nOther spacemen have been asked to answer these questions). They have been forthright in their denials: \"I never have personally seen anything I could identify as a UFO\", says John Glenn, now a Senator from Ohio. Astronauts Grissom and Young said, \"We have never seen any UFOs\". Richard Gordon, who was with Conrad on Gemini-11 and Apollo-12, writes that \"I never saw a UFO\". Astronaut \"Deke\" Slayton claims that \"I don't recollect anyone reporting any UFOs on any of our flights\".\n\n\"Buzz\" Aldrin went to the moon on Apollo-11, on which the UFO press lists at least three separate UFO incidents. There were no UFOs: \"There are people who say there's a government conspiracy to cover up the existence of flying saucers.\" Aldrin told a Reuters reporter in 1973, \"That's a lot of hogwash.\"\n\nThe LM pilot on the next flight, Apollo-12, was Alan Bean. Following a new press conference in 1975 when James Harder repeated his stories of Apollo-11 and Apollo-12 UFOs, Bean told UPI that at no time during his mission did he ever see an unidentified object. \"At no time did we see anything which was not of our spacecraft, either during lunar orbit or during the voyage to and from the moon,\" Bean stated."} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The APRO Bulletin (Feb. 1976) continued to generate new astronaut UFO fairy tales with the anonymous revelation from \"Mr. X\", who heard the Apollo 11 astronauts describe \"three disc-shaped shadows that were pacing them across the surface of the moon.\" The best answer to this fabrication is in a letter from NASA Assistant Administrator for Legislative Affairs Robert F. Allnutt, to Congressman Bob Casey, dated January 29, 1970: \"Conversation between the Apollo 11 crew and Mission Control were released live during the entire Apollo 11 mission. There were between 1000 and 1500 representatives of the news media present at the Houston News Center listening and observing, but not one has suggested that NASA withheld any news or conversations of this nature.\"\nThe evidence is clear. There is, out of all the dozens of \"reports of astronaut UFO sightings\", no residue of authentic cases, no 20% or 5% or even 0.01% of \"true UFOs\" behind all the \"noise\". My research is compelling in its conclusion: after fifteen years of manned space voyages including space stations and landing on the moon, spacemen have brought back not a shred of evidence—verbal, photographic, or otherwise—for the existence of extraterrestrial spacecraft, or \"UFOs\".\nThat evidence, if it exists at all, must be sought elsewhere. The performance and standards of conduct of the UFO groups and of UFO writers cannot be cause for optimism that such evidence, if it exists, will be recognized and correctly evaluated. The lesson of the \"astronaut UFOs\", then, teaches us nothing about UFOs, but a lot about UFO investigators.\n\nScientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects (Condon Report), Bantam Edition, 1969, Chapter 6: Visual Observations Made by Astronauts/Franklin E. Roach. Pages 176-209, with bibliography through 1967. Good background material including unpublished valid solutions to a number of cases. Incorrect solution to Gemini-XI case. Inadequate analysis and unjustified endorsement of Gemini-IV case.\nThe Edge of Reality, by Hynek and Vallee, Henry Regnery & Co., 1975. Page 63-64 in a section called \"The Scientists at Work\", we find the phony Fawcett list. List has incorrect dates and many flights out of sequence. On July 1, 1976, Dr. J. Allen Hynek reviewed my evidence and endorsed it, and repudiated the Fawcett list, which he reported that he included in his book as a curiosity only. That is, just because he presented it as fact to thousands of readers was no reason for anyone to conclude he thought it was true. This appallingly irresponsible attitude towards rules of evidence seems to infect the whole UFO field.\nSightings by 26 Astronauts Confirm: UFOs Spied on Skylabs (sic) Many Other Space Shots—UFOs Watch Every Move NASA Makes, Say Astronauts Who Were Tailed on Space Shot, \"National Tattler\", March 17, 1974. This is an embellished version of the same Fawcett fantasies. Weekly tabloid newspaper \"conformed to the highest standards of modern reporting. Tattler and its staff are dedicated to total, truthful coverage...\" In fact, staffer Robert Abborino made no effort to check any of Fawcett's outrageous claims.\nUFOs Past, Present and Future, by Robert Emenegger, research by Alan Sandler. Ballantine, 1974. Chapter 15, \"Nasa\", pages 100-106. Extensive transcripts of space communications cover up the fact that Sandler carefully selected evidence and must have knowingly omitted information which would have explained many cases. An excellent photo section is included.\nUFO Report, People Press, 1975. \"NASA Hiding UFOs From You\", by Robert D. Barry, pages 4-10. Barry is associated with Carl McIntyre's fundamentalist Christian group, and is one of the wilder UFO writers. Even the mass media has learned to disregard his fictional descriptions of non-events. Here, he explains \"why NASA called in the CIA to keep these photos secret\", without explaining how, in that case, he got copies. He uses the forged Gemini-7 photo proudly.\nFlying Saucers—Here and Now!, by Frank Edwards, Lyle Stuart, New York, 1967. Astronaut fantasies wholly or in part created in the fertile (and unlimited by reality) mind of 'newsman' Frank Edwards are found on pages 13, 180, and 197. Through such entries a journalism student can trace the actual growth of the myth. APRO Bulletin, March-April 1970\n62"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Reply To:\n135 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510-1501 (202) 224-3744 TTY: (202) 224-4479 e-mail:chuck_grassley@grassley.senate.gov\n721 Federal Building 210 Walnut Street Des Moines, IA 50309-2140 (515) 284-4890\n206 Federal Building 101 1st Street SE. Cedar Rapids, IA 52401-1227 (319) 363-6832\nUnited States Senate\nCHARLES E. GRASSLEY\nWASHINGTON, DC 20510-1501\nAugust 3, 1998\nReply To:\n103 Federal Courthouse Building 320 6th Street Sioux City, IA 51101-1244 (712) 233-1860\n210 Waterloo Building 531 Commercial Street Waterloo, IA 50701-5497 (319) 232-6657\n116 Federal Building 131 E. 4th Street Davenport, IA 52801-1513 (319) 322-4331\n307 Federal Building 8 South 6th Street Council Bluffs, IA 51501-4204 (712) 322-7103\nMs. Mary D. Kerwin\nDeputy Assoc. For Legislative Affairs\nNational Aeronautics & Space Administration\n300 E Street, S.W.\nTwo Independence Square, Room 9L33\nWashington, DC 20546\nDear Ms. Kerwin:\nEnclosed please find a communication from (b) (6) regarding several concerns about the space program.\nI would appreciate any assistance you could provide pertaining to this matter. Please mark your return correspondence to the attention of Sherry Kuntz when responding to my office.\nThank you for your attention to my request.\nSincerely,\nCharles E. Grassley\nUnited States Senator\nCEG/sk\nEnclosure\nCommittee Assignments:\nFINANCE JUDICIARY\nAGRICULTURE BUDGET\nCHAIRMAN, SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING\nPRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Author: (b) (6) <(b) (6) > at internet\nDate: 7/6/98 04:14 PM\nPriority: Normal\nTO: chuck grassley at Grassley-DC\nSubject: Message from a Voter\nGreetings Honorable Senator Grassley,\nI have recently encountered a number of new and interesting tidbits of information concerning letters I have previously written to you in regard of the UFO phenomenon that seems to be happening in the United States as well as the rest of the world. I greatly appreciate all the information you have led me to through our past correspondence. I am hoping you can help me track down a few more specific things. Here is a something I heard from someone I was corresponding with:\n\"On Sunday, August 10, 1997 at around 9:45am CDT, I was watching TV and switched to the NASA channel for news of the ongoing shuttle mission. At the time, they were broadcasting a nighttime view of Earth. As I watched, I was surprised to see a light rising vertically from the bottom of the screen where Earth was displayed. As it continued to rise vertically (relative to the TV screen), the shuttle camera clearly began to track the light and kept the picture centered on it.\n\"After it rose well above the horizon of Earth, the light made an apparent 90-degree turn to the right (again relative to the screen) and continued off in that direction. The shuttle camera continued to track the object and began to zoom in for a closer look. At that point NASA cut off the feed from the external camera and displayed the Houston space center instead. Unfortunately, I wasn't prepared to record this on my VCR. The entire episode lasted less than a minute, so I was unable to get the VCR ready in time.\"\nI am also interested in any information that can be relayed about the Groom Lake Area, also know as Area 51, or Dreamland, and an area known as Area S-4. The media has stated that these areas in the Nevada desert are testing grounds for US \"Black Projects\". I believe that vehicles such as the SR-71 Blackbird, and the F-117 Stealth Fighter where tested here.\nThe government to date denies the existence of such places, even though I have in my possession of several videotapes, pictures, and even a Russian satellite image showing the area. Does such a place exist? Or at least, are you, the Air Force, or NASA, whoever happens to be in control of the site willing to tell us that is does exist. It is my understanding that the Nellis Air Force Base surrounds Area 51, so I imagine that the Air force is the one who has jurisdiction over the Area.\nMany people including Bob Lazar, Bill Uhouse, and the father of a guy I work with all claim to have worked in this secret area, and have seen and worked on craft of an alien origin.\nBill Uhouse claims that both President Nixon, and Bush visited the Area 51 facility to examine the progress of recreating alien technology. He also claims that the project was going on with the aid of an alien \"gray\" known as Jarod (JAY-rod).\nIf there is any truth to their claims and the claims of many others, I would wonder why such a spectacular secret would be kept from us, and why the aliens would not have made themselves known to the general populace of Earth.\nPlease do not just send me another list of Project Blue Book documents, and I have already seen the censored files released by the CIA. These documents have been censored so all that they do is bring more suspicion toward the government, and they just make me think even more that someone is hiding something. The thing I can't figure out is why."} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Anything you can do to help in my search for the hidden truth is greatly appreciated. Please help me find out if we do have aliens at Area 51, or even an admission that Area 51 exists.\nThanks Much.\n(b) (6)\nHere is a list of Organizations, and places which may be helpful in helping track down some information:\nOrganizations - Military groups and civilian contractors.\n* Nellis Air Force Base - Controls the land surrounding Area 51.\n* Nevada Test Site - Borders base on the west. Initially \"owned\" Area 51.\n* Security Anonymous \"Cammo Dudes\" patrolling base perimeter.\n* \"Janet\" Aircraft - Official EG&G \"airline\" ferrying workers to Groom Lake\n* Air Force Flight Test Center - Agency that controls Area 51. Based at Edwards Air Force Base.\n* EG&G Special Projects - General contractor at Area 51.\n* Bechtel - General contractor at Nevada Test Site, with some projects at Area 51.\n* Tonopah Test Range - \"Semi-secret\" aircraft testing base northwest of Area 51\n* Lockheed-Martin - Aircraft manufacturer for whom the base was built.\n* Johnson Controls - Contractor at Nevada Test Site, possibly also at Area 51.\n* Wackenhut Security - Security contractor at Nevada Test Site\nPlaces\n* Rachel, Nevada - Nevada's \"UFO Capital\", the closest town to Area 51\n* Basecamp Airfield - \"Secret\" airfield in plain sight\n* Green River Launch Complex, Utah- According to \"Popular Mechanics\" the site of the \"new Area 51\"\n* Papoose Lake - Site of Lazar's \"Area S-4\" south of Groom Lake\n* Tikaboo Peak - Last accessible viewpoint into Area 51"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Author: (b) (6) <(b) (6) > at internet\nDate: 7/6/98 04:48 PM\nPriority: Normal\nTO: chuck grassley at Grassley-DC\nSubject: NASA\nThis is a continuation of an e-mail I just sent you. These are some alleged conversations and observations made from NASA Astronauts. If there is ANY truth to this, there is a big shame shame, on NASA. If you could contact NASA on my behalf about these incidences I would be very grateful.\n(b) (6)\nMajor Gordon Cooper\nOne of the original Mercury Astronauts and the last American to fly in space alone. On May 15, 1963 he shot into space in a Mercury capsule for a 22 orbit journey around the world. During the final orbit, Major Gordon Cooper told the tracking station at Muchea (near Perth Australia) that he could see a glowing, greenish object ahead of him quickly approaching his capsule. The UFO was real and solid, because it was picked up by Muchea's tracking radar.\nCooper's sighting was reported by the National Broadcast Company, which was covering the flight step by step; but when Cooper landed, reporters were told that they would not be allowed to question him about the UFO sighting.\nMajor Cooper was a firm believer in UFOs. Ten years earlier, in 1951 he had sighted a UFO while piloting an F-86 Sabrejet over Western Germany. They were metallic, saucer-shaped discs at considerable altitude and could out-maneuver all American fighter planes.\nMajor Cooper also testified before the United Nations:\n\"I believe that these extra-terrestrial vehicles and their crews are visiting this planet from other planets... Most astronauts were reluctant to discuss UFOs.\"\n\"I did have occasion in 1951 to have two days of observation of many flights of them, of different sizes, flying in fighter formation, generally from east to west over Europe.\"\nAnd according to a taped interview by J. L. Ferrando, Major Cooper said:\n\"For many years I have lived with a secret, in a secrecy imposed on all specialists in astronautics. I can now reveal that every day, in the USA, our radar instruments capture objects of form and composition unknown to us. And there are thousands of witness reports and a quantity of documents to prove this, but nobody wants to make them public. Why? Because authority is afraid that people may think of God knows what kind of horrible invaders. So the password still is: We have to avoid panic by all means.\"\n\"I was furthermore a witness to an extraordinary phenomenon, here on this planet Earth. It happened a few months ago in Florida. There I saw with my own eyes a defined area of ground being consumed by flames, with four indentions left by a flying object which had descended in the middle of a field. Beings had left the craft (there were other traces to prove this). They seemed to have studied topography, they had collected soil samples and, eventually, they returned to where they had come from, disappearing at enormous speed...I happen to know that authority did just about everything to keep this incident from the press and TV, in fear of a panicky reaction from the public.\""} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ed White & James McDivitt\n\n- -.\n\nIn June 1965, astronauts Ed White (first American to walk in space) and\nJames McDivitt were passing over Hawaii in a Gemini spacecraft when they\nsaw a weird-looking metallic object. The UFO had long arms sticking out\nof it. McDivitt took pictures with a cine-camera. Those pictures have\nnever been released.\n\n\nJames Lovell and Frank Borman\n\nIn December 1965, Gemini astronauts James Lovell and Frank Borman also\nsaw a UFO during their second orbit of their record-breaking 14 day\nflight. Borman reported that he saw an unidentified spacecraft some\ndistance from their capsule. Gemini Control, at Cape Kennedy told him\nthat he was seeing the final stage of their own Titan booster rocket.\nBorman confirmed that he could see the booster rocket all right, but\nthat he could also see something completely different.\n\nDuring James Lovell's flight on Gemini 7:\nBorman: ER GEMINI 7, HOUSTON HOW DO YOU READ?\nControl: Loud and clear 7 go ahead.\nBorman: GOT A BOGEY AT 10 O'CLOCK HIGH.\n\nControl: This is Houston. Say again 7.\n\nBorman: SAID WE HAVE A BOGEY AT 10 O'CLOCK HIGH.\n\nControl: Roger\n\nControl: Gemini 7, is that the booster or is that an actual sighting?\nBorman: WE HAVE SEVERAL...ACTUAL SIGHTINGS.\n\nControl: ...Estimated distance or size?\n\nBorman: WE ALSO HAVE THE BOOSTER IN SIGHT...\nFurther controller cuts in: Gemini control here again, the reference in\nthat conversation was er bogey. It was er Borman who reported sighting\nthe bogey. Er this is Gemini control Houston at er 4 hours 24 minutes\ninto the flight.\nIronically, it was Lovell who made the classic statement \"Please be\ninformed that there is a Santa Claus\". This was during his Apollo 8\nflight on Christmas day in 1968 - some people believe there's a deeper\nmeaning to these words, although the sceptics believe that this was\nlittle more than American humour. However, Walter Schitta, who was\naboard Mercury 8, reputedly used Santa Clause as a code-name for a UFO\npresence, adding some weight to the argument that Lovell was\nexperiencing another sighting.\n\n\nNeil Armstrong & Edwin \"Buzz\" Aldrin\nAccording to the NASA Astronaut Neil Armstrong the Aliens have a base on\nthe Moon and told us in no uncertain terms to get off and stay off the\nMoon.\nAccording to hitherto un-confirmed reports, both Neil Armstrong and\nEdwin \"Buzz\" Aldrin saw UFOs shortly after that historic landing on the\nMoon in Apollo 11 on 21 July 1969. I remember hearing one of the\nastronauts refer to a \"light\" in or on a crater during the television\ntransmission, followed by a request from mission control for further\ninformation. Nothing more was heard."} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"According to a former NASA employee Otto Binder, unnamed radio hams with\ntheir own VHF receiving facilities that bypassed NASA's broadcasting\noutlets picked up the following exchange:\n\nNASA: What's there?\n\n Mission Control calling Apollo 11...\n\n\n\nApollo 11: These \"Babies\" are huge, Sir! Enormous!\n\n OH MY GOD! You wouldn't believe it!\n\n I'm telling you there are other spacecraft out there,\n\n Lined up on the far side of the crater edge!\n\n They're on the Moon watching us!\n\nThe two astronauts, talking to the NASA base in Houston.\nText of the conversation:\nAstronaut 1: Ha! What is it?\nAstronaut 2: We have some explanation for that?\n--BEEP--\nHouston: We have (not), don't worry, continue your program!\n--BEEP--\nAstronaut 1: Oh boy it's a, it's, it, it is really something (similar\nto)\n fantastic here, you, you could never imagine this!\n--BEEP--\nHouston: Roger, we know about that, could you go the other way, go back\n the other way!\n--BEEP--\nAstronaut 1: Well it's kind of (rigged) ha, pretty spectacular ......\n god ... what is that there?\n--BEEP--\nAstronaut 1: It's (hollow), what the hell is that?\nHouston: Go Tango, Tango!\n--BEEP--\nAstronaut 1: Ha! There's kind of light there now!\n--BEEP--\nHouston: Roger, we got it, we (watched it), lose communication,\n Bravo Tango, Bravo Tango, select Jezebel, Jezebel!\n--BEEP--\nAstronaut 1: ...... ya, ha! ...... but this is unbelievable!\nHouston: (we call you up Bravo Tango, Bravo Tango)!\nA certain professor, who wished to remain anonymous, was engaged in a\ndiscussion with Neil Armstrong during a NASA symposium.\n\n\nProfessor: What REALLY happened out there with Apollo 11?\n\n\nArmstrong: It was incredible, of course we had always known\n\n there was a possibility, the fact is, we were\n\n warned off!(by the Aliens). There was never any"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"question then of a space station or a moon city.\n\nProfessor: How do you mean \"warned off\"?\n\nArmstrong: I can't go into details, except to say that their\n\n ships were far superior to ours both in size and\n\n technology - Boy, were they big!...and menacing!\n\n No, there is no question of a space station.\n\nProfessor: But NASA had other missions after Apollo 11?\n\nArmstrong: Naturally - NASA was committed at that time, and\n\n couldn't risk panic on Earth. But it really was a\n\n quick scoop and back again.\nAccording to a Dr. Vladimir Azhazha:\n\"Neil Armstrong relayed the message to Mission Control that two large,\nmysterious objects were watching them after having landed near the moon\nmodule. But this message was never heard by the public -- because NASA\ncensored it.\"\nAccording to a Dr. Aleksandr Kasantsev, Buzz Aldrin took color movie\nfilm of the UFOs from inside the module, and continued filming them\nafter he and Armstrong went outside.\nArmstrong confirmed that the story was true but refused to go into\nfurther detail, beyond admitting that the CIA was behind the cover-up.\n\n\nDonald Slayton\nDonald Slayton a Mercury astronaut revealed in an interview he had seen\nUFOs in 1951:\n\"I was testing a P-51 fighter in Minneapolis when I spotted this object.\nI was at about 10,000 feet on a nice, bright, sunny afternoon. I thought\nthe object was a kite, then I realized that no kite is gonna fly that\nhigh.\"\nAs I got closer it looked like a weather balloon, gray and about three\nfeet in diameter. But as soon as I got behind the darn thing it didn't\nlook like a balloon anymore. It looked like a saucer, a disk.\nAbout the same time, I realized that it was suddenly going away from me\n-- and there I was, running at about 300 miles per hour. I tracked it\nfor a little way, and then all of a sudden the damn thing just took off.\nIt pulled about a 45 degree climbing turn and accelerated and just flat\ndisappeared.\"\n\n\nMajor Robert White\nOn July 17, 1962 Major Robert White reported a UFO during his\nfifty-eight-mile high flight of an X-15. Major White reported:\n\"I have no idea what it could be. It was grayish in color and about\nthirty to forty feet away.\" Then according to a Time Magazine article,\nMajor White exclaimed over the radio:"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"There ARE things out there! There absolutely is!\"\n\nNASA Pilot Joseph A. Walker\nOn May 11, 1962 NASA pilot Joseph Walker said that one of his tasks was\nto detect UFOs during his X-15 flights. He had filmed five or six UFOs\nduring his record breaking fifty-mile-high flight in April, 1962. It was\nthe second time he had filmed UFOs in flight. During a lecture at the\nSecond National Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Space Research in\nSeattle, Washington he said:\n\"I don't feel like speculating about them. All I know is what appeared\non the film which was developed after the flight.\" - Joseph Walker\nTo date none of those films has been released to the public for viewing.\n\n\nCommander Eugene Cernan\nEugene Cernan was commander of Apollo 17. In a Los Angeles Times article\nin 1973 he said, about UFOs:\n\"...I've been asked (about UFOs) and I've said publicly I thought they\n(UFOs) were somebody else, some other civilization.\"\n\n\nNASA's Maurice Chatelain\nIn 1979 Maurice Chatelain, former chief of NASA Communications Systems\nconfirmed that Armstrong had indeed reported seeing two UFOs on the rim\nof a crater. Chatelain believes that some UFOs may come from our own\nsolar system -- specifically Titan.\n\"The encounter was common knowledge in NASA, but nobody has talked about\nit until now.\"\n\"...all Apollo and Gemini flights were followed, both at a distance and\nsometimes also quite closely, by space vehicles of extraterrestrial\norigin - flying saucers, or UFOs, if you want to call them by that name.\nEvery time it occurred, the astronauts informed Mission Control, who\nthen ordered absolute silence.\"\n\n\nPilot Walter Schirra\n\"I think that Walter Schirra aboard Mercury 8 was the first of the\nastronauts to use the code name 'Santa Claus' to indicate the presence\nof flying saucers next to space capsules. However, his announcements\nwere barely noticed by the general public.\n\n\nJames Lovell\nIt was a little different when James Lovell on board the Apollo 8\ncommand module came out from behind the moon and said for everybody to\nhear: 'PLEASE BE INFORMED THAT THERE IS A SANTA CLAUS.' Even though this\nhappened on Christmas Day 1968, many people sensed a hidden meaning in\nthose words.\"\n\nThe rumors persist. NASA may well be a civilian agency, but many of its\nprograms are funded by the\ndefense budget and most of the astronauts are subject to military\nsecurity regulations. Apart from the fact that the National Security\nAgency screens all films and probably radio communications as well.We\nhave the statements by Otto Binder, Dr. Garry Henderson and Maurice\nChatelain that the astronauts were under strict orders not to discuss\ntheir sightings. And Gordon Cooper has testified to a United Nations\ncommittee that one of the astronauts actually witnessed a UFO on the\nground. If there is no secrecy, why has this sighting not been made\npublic?"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Shuttle Discovery - Mission 20\n\nThe voices of the astronaut and of the amateur radio station WA3NAN\nGoddard in the Space Center of Greenbelt Maryland.\nWA3NAN: We are retransmitting the Space Shuttle airground communication\n from mission 20. This is WA3NAN.\nAstronaut James F. Buchli...\nAstronaut: Houston, this is Discovery, we still have the alien\nspacecraft\n under observance..."} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"yellow\n\nJUN 2 4 1998\n\nL:ATW:mtg:L/1998-407f\n\nThe Honorable Olympia J. Snowe\nUnited States Senate\nWashington, DC 20510\n\nDear Senator Snowe:\n\nThank you for your May 18, 1998, letter on behalf of (b) (6) [REDACTED] regarding Unidentified Flying Objects and his concern over the \"authenticity of the recently released Mariner photographs.\"\n\nThere are no recently released Mariner photographs. We assume (b) (6) [REDACTED] is referring to the images taken from our Mars Global Surveyor (MGS). NASA does not tamper with images received from MGS. These images are received on Earth in digital format, meaning \"0 and 1\". NASA merely translates these digital images, using computer processing, into actual images. All images and other instrument data is deposited in a publicly accessible archive within six months after receipt where they are available to everyone. All the images currently released can be found on the Internet at http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov.\n\nWe appreciate your interest in these matters, and trust this information will be helpful to you in responding to (b) (6) [REDACTED]\n\nSincerely,\n\n[illegible] Signed by\n[illegible] W. Heninger\n\nEdward Heffernan\n(Acting) Associate Administrator\nfor Legislative Affairs\n\necc:\nS/Ruth Netting\nLB/Barbara Cherry\n\nSent to Mark Berumen @ Hill Office (250 SROB)\n\n6/22/98 dw\n6/22/98"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OLYMPIA J. SNOWE\nMAINE\nCOUNSEL TO THE ASSISTANT\nMAJORITY LEADER\n250 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING\n(202) 224-5344\n\nUnited States Senate\nWASHINGTON, DC 20510-1903\n\nCOMMITTEES:\nARMED SERVICES\nBUDGET\nCOMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION\nCHAIR OF\nOCEANS AND FISHERIES SUBCOMMITTEE\nSMALL BUSINESS\n\nMay 18, 1998\n\nMr. Lawrence E. Medway\nDirector, Congressional Inquiries Division\nNational Aeronautic and Space Administration\n300 E. Street, SW\nWashington, D.C. 20546\n\nDear Mr. Medway:\n\nI am writing to you regarding the concerns of my constituent, (b) (6) [REDACTED] (b) (6) [REDACTED] of Stonington, Maine.\n\n(b) (6) [REDACTED] is interested in U.F.O.'s and the recent photos of Mars which were recently released. (b) (6) [REDACTED] is not convinced with the authenticity of the recently released Mariner photographs. Further, he questions the authenticity based on the picture only having 75 shades of grey, rather than the 256 it is supposed to have. Any information you could provide which would help me address his concerns would be appreciated.\n\nThank you for your time and attention.\n\nSincerely,\n\n[signature]\nUnited States Senator\n\nOJS:mjb\n\nAUBURN\nTWO GREAT FALLS PLAZA SUITE 7B\nAUBURN, ME 04210 (207) 786-2451\n\nAUGUSTA\n68 SEWALL STREET, SUITE 101C\nAUGUSTA, ME 04330 (207) 622-8292\n\nBANGOR\nONE CUMBERLAND PLACE, SUITE 306\nBANGOR, ME 04401 (207) 945-0432\n\nBIDDEFORD\n231 MAIN STREET, SUITE 2\nBIDDEFORD, ME 04005 (207) 282-4144\n\nPORTLAND\n3 CANAL PLAZA, SUITE 601\nP.O. BOX 188\nPORTLAND, ME 04112 (207) 874-0883\nMAINE RELAY SERVICE TDD 1-955-3323\n\nPRESQUE ISLE\n169 ACADEMY STREET, SUITE 3\nPRESQUE ISLE, ME 04769 (207) 764-5124\n\nIN MAINE CALL TOLL-FREE 1-800-432-1599\n\nPRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"L98-407 - Sen. Snowe\n\nEnclosed is a fact sheet entitled \"The US Government and Unidentified Flying Objects.\" As stated in the second paragraph of the Fact Sheet, Congress, in 1993, directed NASA to end its search program. Today the search for extraterrestrials is conducted through The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Institute (SETI Institute) in Mountain View, CA.\n\nAs for your interest in the recent photos of Mars taken from our Mars Global Surveyor (MGS), not the Mariner, these images are received on Earth in digital format, meaning \"0 and 1\". NASA does not tamper with these images. However, the images do require computer processing before they are suitable for public viewing. All images and other instrument data obtained from the MGS will be deposited in a publicly accessible archive, and they will then be available to everyone, scientists and citizens alike, who wants to examine them and draw their own individual conclusions. You can access all the images currently released from the following website: http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/\n\nWe appreciate your interest in this matter and trust this information will be useful to you."} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"L98-407 - Sen. Snowe\n\nEnclosed is a fact sheet entitled \"The US Government and Unidentified Flying Objects.\" As stated in the second paragraph of the Fact Sheet, Congress, in 1993, directed NASA to end its search program. Today the search for extraterrestrials is conducted through The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Institute (SETI Institute) in Mountain View, CA.\n\nAs for your interest in the recent photos of Mars taken from our Mars Global Surveyor (MGS), not the Mariner, these images are received on Earth in digital format, meaning \"0 and 1\". NASA does not tamper with these images. However, the images do require computer processing before they are suitable for public viewing. All images and other instrument data obtained from the MGS will be deposited in a publicly accessible archive, and they will then be available to everyone, scientists and citizens alike, who wants to examine them and draw their own individual conclusions. You can access all the images currently released from the following website: http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/\n\nWe appreciate your interest in this matter and trust this information will be useful to you."} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ACTION REQUIRED\nCONGRESSIONAL INQUIRY\n\nOffice of Legislative Affairs\nNASA Headquarters\n300 E Street, SW\nWashington, DC 20546\n\nDATE: May 26, 1998\nPAGES, if faxed: 3\n\nTO: S/Ruth Netting | Anne Ward\nPHONE: | PHONE: (202) 358-1946\nFAX: | FAX: (202) 358-4343\n\nAction assigned to: S/Ruth Netting\nDue date: June 9, 1998\nInformation copies:\nAction number / Member: L98-407- Sen. Snowe\n\nINSTRUCTIONS:\nPlease prepare a draft reply to the attached Congressional inquiry and send it via electronic mail to the following address: Anne.Ward@hq.nasa.gov or send a copy of your reply on a diskette to the attention of Anne Ward. If you need clarification of this assignment or additional time to prepare this reply, please contact Anne Ward.\n\nMESSAGE:\nRuth, If you answer this before June 1, please send answer to me.\n\nThanks.\n\nHelen"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"< CONFIRMATION REPORT >\n05-26-1998(TUE) 10:26\n[ TRANSMIT ]\nNO. DATE TIME DESTINATION PG. DURATION MODE RESULT\n16502 5-26 10:25 NASA HQTS 2 0°00'52\" NORMAL OK\n2 0°00'52\""} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Headquarters Action Tracking System (HATS)\nINCOMING CORRESPONDENCE ACTION\nID Number: L/1998-00407\nTitle: Sen Snowe fwds ltr from [REDACTED], who's interested in U.F.O. and the recent Mars photo\nRecipient: L/Heffernan\nAuthor: SNOWE\nOrganization: SENATE\nDate Written: 05/18/1998\nDate Received: 05/26/1998\nDate Concurred:\nDate Submitted:\nDate Signed:\nDate Closed:\nAction Office: LD/Rothman:P\n>>Current Due Date: 06/18/1998<<\nOriginal Due Date:\nStatus: Open\nSignature Office: L/Heffernan\nInfo Offices: L/Heffernan, L/Heninger, L/Kerwin\nAbstract:\nSEN SNOWE FWDS LTR FROM [REDACTED] OF STOCKINGTON, MAINE, WHO'S INTERESTED IN U.FO.'S AND THE RECENT PHOTOS OF MARS WHICH WERE RECENTLY RELEASED.\nComments:\nAction S/ Ruth Netting\nDue DATE: 6/19/98\nEnclosures: NO\nRelated Records:\nMark Berumen @ 250 SROB\nKeywords: [REDACTED] STONINGTON, MAINE U.F.O. MARS\nFile Plan:\nAnalyst: BMoore\n05/26/1998 Page 1 of 1"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OK\nDRAFT\n6/19/98\nL:ATW:mtg:L/1998-407f\nThe Honorable Olympia J. Snowe\nUnited States Senator\nWashington, DC 20510\nDear Senator Snowe:\nThank you for your May 18, 1998, letter on behalf of [REDACTED] regarding UFO's and his concern over the \"authenticity of the recently released Mariner photographs.\"\nThe attached fact sheet, \"The US Government and Unidentified Flying Objects,\" gives a brief history of NASA's investigations into UFO's. However, neither NASA or any other branch of the government is currently investigating UFO's.\nThere are no recently released Mariner photographs. We assume [REDACTED] is referring to the images taken from our Mars Global Surveyor (MGS). NASA does not tamper with images received from MGS. These images are received on Earth in digital format, meaning \"0 and 1\". NASA merely translates these digital images, using computer processing, into actual images. All images and other instrument data is deposited in a publicly accessible archive within six months after receipt where they are available to everyone. All the images currently released can be found on the Internet at http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov.\nWe appreciate your interest in these matters, and trust this information will be helpful to you in responding to [REDACTED]\nSincerely,\nEdward Heffernan\n(Acting) Associate Administrator\nfor Legislative Affairs\nEnclosure"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ecc:\nS/Ruth Netting\nLB/Barbara Cherry\nSent to Mark Berumen @ Hill Office (250 SROB)"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1328.4 Aeronautics: UFO's\nHeadquarters Action Tracking System (HATS)\nINCOMING CORRESPONDENCE ACTION\nID Number: L/1998-00494\nTitle: Ward/White House Referral: UFO Hearings\nRecipient: A/Goldin\nAuthor: (b) (6)\nOrganization: White House\nDate Written: 05/17/1998\nDate Received: 06/18/1998\nDate Concurred:\nDate Submitted:\nDate Signed: 06/26/1998\nDate Closed: 06/26/1998\nAction Office: L/Ward:S\n>>Current Due Date: 07/15/1998<<\nOriginal Due Date: 07/15/1998\nStatus: Closed\nSignature Office: L/Heffernan\nInfo Offices: L/Heffernan, L/Heninger, L/Kerwin\nAbstract:\nWhite House Correspondence from (b) (6) who supports having congressional hearing regarding the existence of UFO's.\nComments:\nNote: Vanessa needs letterhead copy of signed/dated response.\nEnclosures: White House Memo\nRelated Records: A/1998-00416\nKeywords: (b) (6) , UFO, hearings\nFile Plan: 1320.4\nAnalyst: JMassey\n06/24/1998 Page 1 of 1"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"yellow\n\nJUN 2 4 1998\n\nL:ATW:mtg:L/1998-494f\n\n(b) (6)\n\nDear (b) (6) :\n\nThe White House has requested NASA to respond to your May 17, 1998, letter to President Clinton concerning possible hearings on Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs).\n\nWe are not aware of any hearings scheduled on UFO. Enclosed is a Fact Sheet, \"The US Government and Unidentified Flying Objects,\" which gives a brief history of NASA's investigations into UFO.\n\nWe appreciate your interest in this matter and trust this information will be helpful to you.\n\nSincerely,\n\nEdward Heffernan\n(Acting) Associate Administrator\nfor Legislative Affairs\n\nEnclosure\n\necc:\nS/Ruth Netting\nLB/Barbara Cherry\n\nSent to Sue J. Smith\nDirector, Office of Agency Liaison\nRoom 6, OEOB\nThe White House\nWashington, DC 20502\n\n6/22/98 am\n\n6/22/98"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\n\n6-4-98\nDATE\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nNASH, 24\n\nFROM:\nSUE J. SMITH\nDIRECTOR, OFFICE OF AGENCY LIAISON\n\nSUBJECT:\nREFERRAL OF CASEWORK IN BULK\n\nAn unprecedented number of individuals still write the President and the First Lady for help. I know that this has meant a far greater volume of mail for your agency than ever before. I appreciate your continuing cooperation in our efforts to be as responsive as possible.\n\nThe attached letters have not received a White House Staff response. I am forwarding this correspondence to your agency for any appropriate action.\n\nPlease return the original incoming letter, along with a copy of any written or telephone response, to me at the address below. I also would appreciate your sending a copy of your agency's log of the names and addresses of these individuals. Any misreferrals should be returned to my office. If you have questions you can reach me at 456-7486.\n\nSue J. Smith\nDirector, Office of Agency Liaison\nRoom 6, OEOB\nThe White House\nWashington, D.C. 20502\n\nAgain, thank you for your continuing help.\n\nA/1998-00461\n\nA98-01199"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"From nobody@www1.whitehouse.gov Sun May 17 17:57:37 1998\nDate: Sun, 17 May 1998 17:54:05 -0400\nFrom: (b) (6)\nSubject: Inbound-White_House_WWW_MAIL => PRESIDENT\nApparently-to: president@WhiteHouse.GOV\nTo: president@WhiteHouse.GOV\nErrors-to: The Postmaster \nReply-to: (b) (6) <(b) (6) >\nMessage-id: <199805172154.RAA07723@www1.whitehouse.gov>\n\nKeywords: WWW-Correspondence; ; Ask a specific question regarding Administration policy; Science or Technology; Private Citizen;\nComments: Forwarded from White House WWW\nComments: This message scanned by SCAN version 0.1 jms/960226\n\n[Connection Information]\n\nCLIENT: ww-tr02.proxy.aol.com[152.163.201.136]\nBROWSER: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.0; AOL 3.0; Windows 95; Sony\nURL: http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/Mail/html/Mail_President.html\n\n[Sender Information]\n\nPERSONAL-NAME: (b) (6)\nEMAIL-ADDRESS:\nORGANIZATION:\nRELATIONSHIP:\nSTREET-ADDRESS: (b) (6)\nCITY: Ventura\nSTATE-PROVINCE: Ca\nZIP-CODE: 93004\nCOUNTRY: usa\n\n[Message Information]\n\nPURPOSE: Ask a specific question regarding Administration policy\nTOPIC: Science or Technology\nAFFILIATION: Private Citizen\nSUBJECT: UFO's\n\n[Message]\n\nDear Mr. President,\n It is my understanding that you, Mrs. Clinton, Vice-President Gore and heads of Congress, including the CIA director, members of the Senate and House, the Executive Branch and senior military reps in the Pentagon were briefed in or around December of 1997 by Dr. Steven Greer, International Director of CSETI( The Center for the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence). Basically, he calls on you and other members of"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"congress to hold open congressional meetings. What is your positon and intent on this matter? Will you push for open hearings or are you stonewalled as well by MJ-12? Certainly on your appointment as President you were briefed on the existence of UFO's. Please use your Executive power to report and open the truth to the American people. It is time. Your personal reply is respectfully requested. Thank you.\n\nSincerely,\n\n(b) (6)"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DRAFT\n\nOK DR 6/19/98\n\nL:ATW:mtg:L/1998-494f\n\n(b) (6)\n\nDear (b) (6) :\n\nThe White House has requested NASA to respond to your May 17, 1998, letter to President Clinton concerning possible hearings on UFO's. (Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs))\n\nWe are not aware of any hearings scheduled on UFO's. The attached fact sheet, \"The US Government and Unidentified Flying Objects,\" gives a brief history of NASA's investigations into UFO's. However, neither NASA or any other branch of the government is currently investigating UFO's.\n\nWe appreciate your interest in this matter and trust this information will be helpful to you.\n\nSincerely,\n\nEdward Heffernan\n(Acting) Associate Administrator\nfor Legislative Affairs\n\nEnclosure"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ecc:\nS/Ruth Netting\nLB/Barbara Cherry\n\nSent to Sue J. Smith\n Director, Office of Agency Liaison\n Room 6, OEOB\n The White House\n Washington, DC 20502"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Headquarters Action Tracking System (HATS)\nINCOMING CORRESPONDENCE ACTION\nID Number: L/1998-00494\n\nTitle: Ward/White House Referral: UFO Hearings\n\nRecipient: A/Goldin\n\nAuthor: (b) (6)\nOrganization: White House\nDate Written: 05/17/1998\nDate Received: 06/18/1998\nDate Concurred:\nDate Submitted:\nDate Signed:\nDate Closed:\nAction Office: L/Ward:S\n>>Current Due Date: 07/15/1998<<\nOriginal Due Date: 07/15/1998\nStatus: Open\nSignature Office: L/Heffernan\nInfo Offices: L/Heffernan, L/Heninger, L/Kerwin\n\nAbstract:\nWhite House Correspondence from (b) (6) who supports having congressional hearing regarding the existence of UFO's.\n\nComments:\nNote: Vanessa needs letterhead copy of signed/dated response.\n\nEnclosures: White House Memo\nRelated Records: A/1998-00416\n\nKeywords: (b) (6) UFO, hearings\nFile Plan:\nAnalyst: JMassey\n06/18/1998\nPage 1 of 1"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6/17/98\n15:54:01\nCORRESPONDENCE ACTION STATUS HISTORY\nPage 1\nCorrespondence and Action Tracking System\nCode A\n\nID Number: A98-01199\nTitle: WHR BULK: CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS ON UFO'S\n\nRecipient: GOLDIN\nOrganization: A\nDate Written: 05/17/1998\nDate Received: 06/17/1998\nOriginal Date Due: 07/15/1998\n>> Current Date Due: 07/15/1998 <<\nSubmitted for Signature:\nDate Signed:\nDate Completed:\n\n*Other Recipients / Organizations*:\n\nAuthor: (b) (6)\nOrganization: WHR BULK\n\n*Other Authors / Organizations*:\n\nAction Office: L\nAction Officer: HEFFERNAN\nSignature Office: L\nSignature Officer: HEFFERNAN\nStatus: Open\nSecurity: Public\nPriority: Normal\nIn/Out: Incoming\nInfo Copies:\nA, P\n\nAbstract: WHR BULK: VIA E-MAIL, (b) (6) VENTURA, CA, SUPPORTS HAVING CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS REGARDING THE EXISTENCE OF UFO'S.\n\nEnclosures: NONE\n\nComment:\n\nKeywords: WHR BULK CALIFORNIA CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS UFO'S ET'S\n\nRelated Records:\n\nFileplan: 1320-1 G\nAd Hoc: A/1998-00461\nClerk: VC"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Headquarters Action Tracking System (HATS)\nINCOMING CORRESPONDENCE ACTION\nID Number: A/1998-00461\n\nTitle: WHR Bulk: Congressional Hearings on UFO's\n\nRecipient: A/Goldin\n\nAuthor: (b) (6)\nOrganization: WHR Bulk\nDate Written: 05/17/1998\nDate Received: 06/17/1998\nDate Concurred:\nDate Submitted:\nDate Signed:\nDate Closed:\nAction Office: L/Heffernan\n>>Current Due Date: 07/15/1998<<\nOriginal Due Date: 07/15/1998\nStatus: Open\nSignature Office: L/Heffernan\nInfo Offices: A/Goldin, P/WILHIDE\n\nAbstract:\nWHR Bulk: Via E-mail, (b) (6) Ventura, CA, supports having congressional hearings regarding the existence of UFO's.\n\nComments:\n\nEnclosures: None\nRelated Records: A98-01199\n\nKeywords: WHR Bulk California Congressional Hearings UFO's\nFile Plan: 1320-1 G\nAnalyst: VCoates\n06/17/1998\nPage 1 of 1"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1320.4 Heropautics: U.A.D.\n\nHeadquarters Action Tracking System (HATS)\nINCOMING CORRESPONDENCE ACTION\nID Number: L/1998-00470\n\nTitle: WARD/Rep. Gordon re taxpayers money on space aliens.\n\nRecipient: L/Heffernan\n\nAuthor: GORDON\nOrganization: HOUSE\nDate Written: 06/04/1998\nDate Received: 06/15/1998\nDate Concurred:\nDate Submitted:\nDate Signed: 06/18/1998\nDate Closed: 06/18/1998\nAction Office: L/Ward:S\n>>Current Due Date: 07/06/1998<<\nOriginal Due Date:\nStatus: Closed\nSignature Office: L/Heffernan\nInfo Offices: L/Heffernan, L/Heninger, L/Kerwin, LD/Rothman\n\nAbstract:\nREP. GORDON WRITES ON BEHALF OF (b) (6) , RE TAXPAYERS MONEY BEING SPENT ON SPACE ALIENS.\n\nComments:\n\nEnclosures: YES LTR\nRelated Records:\n\nKeywords: (b) (6) SPACE ALIENS TAXPAYERS MONEY, UFO\nFile Plan: 1320.4\nAnalyst: BMoore\n06/18/1998\nPage 1 of 1"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"yellow\nJUN 18 1998\n\nL:ATW:mtg:L/1998-470f\n\n(b) (6)\n\nDear (b) (6)\n\nCongressman Bart Gordon has asked NASA to respond to your recent letter to him wherein you enclosed an article on Congress funding the search for extraterrestrials.\n\nEnclosed is a fact sheet entitled \"The US Government and Unidentified Flying Objects.\" As stated in the second paragraph of the Fact Sheet, Congress, in 1993, directed NASA to end its search program.\n\nToday the search for extraterrestrials is conducted through The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Institute (SETI Institute) in Mountain View, CA.\n\nWe appreciate your interest in this matter and trust this information will be useful to you.\n\nSincerely,\n\nOriginal signed by\nLynn W. Heninger\n\nEdward Heffernan\n(Acting) Associate Administrator\nfor Legislative Affairs\n\nEnclosure\n\ncc:\nThe Honorable Bart Gordon\n\necc:\nS/Ruth Netting\nLB/Barbara Cherry\n\nSent to Patton Lane @ Hill Office (2201 RHOB)\n\n6/15/98\n6/16/98"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"(b) (6)\n\nRepresentative Bart Gordon\nHouse of Representatives\nWashington, D.C. 20515-4206"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"BART GORDON\n6TH DISTRICT, TENNESSEE\nCOMMERCE COMMITTEE\nSCIENCE COMMITTEE\nRANKING MEMBER\nSUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE\n\nCongress of the United States\nHouse of Representatives\n\n2201 RAYBURN BUILDING\nWASHINGTON, DC 20515-4206\n(202) 225-4231\nFAX: (202) 225-6887\n\n106 SOUTH MAPLE STREET\nP.O. BOX 1986\nMURFREESBORO, TN 37133\n(615) 896-1986\nFAX: (615) 896-8216\n\n17 SOUTH JEFFERSON STREET\nP.O. BOX 1140\nCOOKEVILLE, TN 38501\n(931) 528-5907\n\nJune 4, 1998\n\nMs. Mary D. Kerwin\nDeputy Associate Administrator For Legeslative Affairs\nNational Aeronautics and Space Administration\nTwo Independence Square, Room 9L33\n300 E St., SW\nWashington, D.C. 20546\n\nDear Ms. Kerwin,\n\nI am writing to you on behalf of my constituent, (b) (6)\n(b) (6) , and have enclosed a copy of her inquiry. I would\nappreciate it if you would respond directly to my constituent, as\nwell as send a copy to me for record keeping. I look forward to\nreceiving your response.\n\nThank you in advance for your time and consideration in this\nmatter. Please call if you need more information or have further\nquestions.\n\nStay in touch,\n\nBART GORDON\nMember of Congress\n\nBJG/pl\n\nemail: bart.gordon@mail.house.gov\nInternet: http://www.house.gov/gordon/"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"MY AMERICA By ED ANGER\nCongress blows $120 million\ntrying to talk to extraterrestrials\n...& TAXPAYERS ARE FOOTING THE BILL\nI'm madder than R2D2 with a loose bolt that our free-spending Congress is paying 120 million bucks of hard-earned tax money on a project to contact space aliens!\nLet's face it — why the hell are we spending big bucks looking for space aliens when they land here all the time?\nAll the eggheads at NASA have to do is look out the window on a clear night and they'd see more UFOs than you could shake a stick at.\nBut no, they'd rather waste tons of taxpayers' cash.\nDr. Ruth Jones Hamer is the scientific queenpin behind this stupid Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence project that is expected to cost a whopping $120 million over the next 10 years.\nBut what makes me so pig-biting mad is that we're aiming all these high-tech electronic listening devices at stars where only the most dimwitted aliens live.\nThat's right, folks — stupid aliens.\nIf they were smart, they would have already have contacted us, wouldn't they?\nOr at least buzzed Earth in one of those UFOs people are seeing all the time.\nThe bottom line is that smart aliens are already here and the only ones we'll contact by radio waves are so dumb they'll never answer us anyway.\nIn fact, even if we did make contact with these half-cockroach, half-fish civilizations, what the hell are we going to learn from 'em — how to live under rocks?\nWhy the hell don't WE get smart and try to learn everything we can about space creatures who are already here, for Pete's sake?\nThose are the light-bulb heads we have to worry about. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the only good space alien is a dead space alien.\nIf these suckers are so damn smart, don't you ever wonder why the hell they haven't gone public?\nBecause most of them are evil and want to colonize the Earth and make humans into slaves, that's why.\nSo I've got a better way to spend 120 million bucks — let's spend it on alien traps.\nWe could halt 'em with whatever these bug-eyed reptiles eat, and end this alien threat to Earth once and for all.\nEd Anger\nScientist wants to talk to E.T.\nSearch to start for smart aliens\nMOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. — Dr. Ruth Jones Hamer takes extraterrestrials seriously. She has to. Congress has entrusted her with $120 million this year to locate them.\nFor the next 10 years Hamer of Search for Extraterrestrial\nIT'S a waste of taxpayers' hard-earned money trying to contact space aliens, says Ed Anger. Inset, newspapers from around the world report on NASA's funding for Dr. Ruth Jones Hamer's project.\nSCIENTIFIC QUEENPIN: Dr. Ruth Jones Hamer.\nMY AMERICA MY AMERICA MY AMERICA\nWEEKLY WORLD NEWS May 19, 1998 17"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"The US Government and Unidentified Flying Objects\nhttp://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/facts/HTML/FS-017-HQ.html\nNASA Facts FILE COPY\nNational Aeronautics and\nSpace Administration\nNASA Headquarters\nPublic Affairs Office\nCode P\n300 E Street SW\nWashington DC 20546\nFS-1997-01-017-HQ\nThe US Government and Unidentified\nFlying Objects\nNo branch of the United States Government is currently involved\nwith or responsible for investigations into the possibility of alien life\non other planets or for investigating Unidentified Flying Objects\n(UFO's). The US Air Force (USAF) and the National Aeronautics\nand Space Administration (NASA) have had intermittent,\nindependent investigations of the possibility of alien life on other\nplanets; however, none of these has produced factual evidence that\nlife exists on other planets, nor that UFO's are related to aliens.\nFrom 1947 to 1969, the Air Force investigated UFO's; then in 1977,\nNASA was asked to examine the possibility of resuming UFO\ninvestigations. After studying all of the facts available, it was\ndetermined that nothing would be gained by further investigation,\nsince there was an absence of tangible evidence.\nIn October 1992, NASA was directed by Congress to begin a\ndetailed search for artificial radio signals from other civilizations\nunder the NASA Towards Other Planetary Systems (TOPS)/High\nResolution Microwave Survey (HRMS) program (also known as the\nSearch for Extraterrestrial Intelligence project). Congress directed\nNASA to end this project in October 1993, citing pressures on the\nUS Federal budget. The HRMS did not detect any confirmed signal\nbefore it was stopped. However, similar work will continue in a\nmore limited manner through efforts of private groups and through\nacademic institutions. The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence\nInstitute (SETI Institute) in Mountain View, CA, effectively\nreplaced the Government project, borrowing the signal processing\nsystem from NASA. The SETI Institute is a nonprofit corporation\nconducting research in a number of fields including all science and\ntechnology aspects of astronomy and planetary sciences, chemical\nevolution, the origin of life, biological evolution, and cultural\nevolution.\nDuring several space missions, NASA astronauts have reported\nphenomena not immediately explainable; however, in every instance\nNASA determined that the observations could not be termed\n\"abnormal\" in the space environment. The 1947 to 1969 USAF\ninvestigations studied UFO's under Project Blue Book. The project,\nheadquartered at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, was\n1 of 3\n06/16/1998 10:35 AM"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The US Government and Unidentified Flying Objects\nhttp://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/facts/HTML/FS-017-HQ.html\n\nterminated December 17, 1969. Of the total of 12,618 sightings reported to Project Blue Book, 701 remain \"unidentified.\"\n\nThe decision to discontinue UFO investigations was based on an evaluation of a report prepared by the University of Colorado entitled, \"Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects;\" a review of the University of Colorado's report by the National Academy of Sciences; previous UFO studies; and Air Force experience investigating UFO reports during the 1940's, '50's and '60's. As a result of experience, investigations, and studies since 1948, the conclusions of Project Blue Book were: (1) no UFO reported, investigated, and evaluated by the Air Force was ever a threat to our national security; (2) there was no evidence submitted to, or discovered by, the Air Force that sightings categorized as \"unidentified\" represented technological developments or principles beyond the range of modern scientific knowledge; and (3) there was no evidence indicating that sightings categorized as \"unidentified\" were extraterrestrial vehicles.\n\nWith the termination of Project Blue Book, the USAF regulation establishing and controlling the program for investigating and analyzing UFO's was rescinded. Documentation regarding the former Project Blue Book investigation was permanently transferred to the Modern Military Branch, National Archives and Records Service, in Washington, DC 20408, and is available for public review and analysis.\n\nSince the termination of Project Blue Book, nothing has occurred that would support a resumption of UFO investigations by the USAF or NASA. Given the current environment of steadily decreasing defense and space budgets, it is unlikely that the Air Force or NASA will become involved in this type of costly project in the foreseeable future.\n\nSince neither NASA nor the Air Force is engaged in day-to-day UFO research, neither one reviews UFO-related articles intended for publication, evaluates UFO-type spacecraft drawings, or accepts accounts of UFO sightings or applications for employment in the field of aerial phenomena investigation.\n\nUFO Points of Contact\n\n1. For further information on the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, please contact the SETI Institute, 2035 Landings Drive, Mountain View, CA 94043, (415) 960-4530.\n\n2. News media requiring Project Blue Book files should contact the National Archives Public Affairs Office, (202) 501-5525. Public queries should be addressed to the Project Blue Book archivist at (202) 501-5385. For queries not related to Project Blue Book, contact the National Archives receptionist at (202) 501-5400. Documentation is available from: Modern Military Branch, National Archives and Records Service, Eighth Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20408.\n\n3. The Air Force publication, \"The Roswell Report: Fact vs.\n2 of 3\n06/16/1998 10:35 AM"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Fiction in the New Mexico Desert,\" a lengthy document providing all of the details available from the Air Force on the Roswell incident, is available for $52 from the US Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328.\n\n4. There are a number of universities and professional scientific organizations that have considered UFO phenomena during periodic meetings and seminars. A list of private organizations interested in aerial phenomena may be found in Gale's Encyclopedia of Associations.\n\n5. Persons wishing to report UFO sightings are advised to contact law enforcement agencies.\n\nResponsible NASA Official: Elsie Weigel - eweigel@hq.nasa.gov\nWeb Page Curator: Woody Smith - woody.smith@hq.nasa.gov\nWeb Designer: Pamela Sams\n\nRevised: February 14, 1997\n3 of 3\n06/16/1998 10:35 AM"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DRAFT\n\nL:ATW:mtg:L/1998-470f\n\n(b) (6)\n\nDear (b) (6) :\n\nCongressman Bart Gordon has asked NASA to respond to your recent letter to him wherein you enclosed an article on Congress funding the search for extraterrestrials.\n\nEnclosed is a fact sheet entitled \"The US Government and Unidentified Flying Objects.\" You will note that in the second paragraph, the Congress in 1993 directed NASA to end its search for extraterrestrials.\n\nToday the search for extraterrestrials is conducted through The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Institute (SETI Institute) in Mountain View, CA.\n\nWe appreciate your interest in this matter and trust this information will be useful to you.\n\nSincerely,\n\nEdward Heffernan\n(Acting) Associate Administrator\nfor Legislative Affairs\n\nEnclosure\n\ncc:\nThe Honorable Bart Gordon"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ecc:\nS/Ruth Netting\nLB/Barbara Cherry\n\nSent to Patton Lane @ Hill Office (2201 RHOB)"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13204 Aeronautics; UFO\n\nLA98-00106 Security: U Type: I Written: 03/16/98\nReceived: 04/23/98\n\nTo: GOLDIN Name No. 1 0 0 Organization ADMINISTRATOR\n\nFrom: (b) (6) 43 0 0 WHR\n\nAction/Info: A\nDue Date - Current: 05/28/98\nDue Date - Original: 05/28/98\nSuspense Status: C\nDate Completed: 05/01/98\n\nAction Office: L/S WARD\nInfo Copy: AI,EH,LH,MDK\nSignature Office: HENINGER\nEnclosures: N\nClerk: JM\n\nInterim Replies\nDates:\nComments:\n\nResponse Progress:\n\nRel'd records: A98-00789\nFile plans: 1320.4\n\nStorage Location:\n\nSummary of Contents:\nWHITE HOUSE REFERRAL: (b) (6) , MEMBER OF CSETI, SUPPORTS OPEN CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS, OR A PRESIDENTIAL DISCUSSION, REGARDING EVIDENCE AS TO THE EXISTENCE OF ALIEN BEINGS AND SPACECRAFT.\n\nReferred From: No. 0 0 0 Organization\n\nTopics: Keywords: (b) (6) WHITE HOUSE CSETI HEARING PUBLIC UFO EXTRATERRESTRIAL EVIDENCE\n\nPublic Hearings on U.F.O."} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"yellow\n\nMAY 1 1998\n\nL:ATW:mtg:LA98-106f\n\n(b) (6)\n\nDear (b) (6) :\n\nThe White House has forwarded to NASA for response your letter of March 16, 1998, in which you advocate Congressional Hearings or a Presidential Discussion regarding alien beings and their spacecraft.\n\nEnclosed is a NASA Fact Sheet entitled \"The U.S. Government and Unidentified Flying Objects.\" This Fact Sheet gives a brief outline of NASA's research into UFO's and will give you other points of contact you may wish to pursue.\n\nWe appreciate your interest in this matter.\n\nSincerely,\n\nOriginal signed by Lynn W. Heninger\n\nEdward Heffernan\n(Acting) Associate Administrator\nfor Legislative Affairs\n\nEnclosure\nThis letter came to us via the White House Bulk Mail\n\n5/1/98 am\n\n5/1/98\n\n5/1/98"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4/22/98\n15:46:44\n\nCorrespondence and Action Tracking System\n\nCORRESPONDENCE ACTION\n\nCode A\n\nID Number: A98-00789\n\nTitle: WHR BULK: PUBLIC CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS ON EXTRATERRESTRIAL EVIDENCE\n\nRecipient: GOLDIN\nOrganization: A\n*Other Recipients / Organizations*:\n\nAuthor: (b) (6)\nOrganization: WHR BULK\n*Other Authors / Organizations*:\n\nDate Written: 03/16/1998\nDate Received: 04/22/1998\nOriginal Date Due: 05/28/1998\n>> Current Date Due: 05/28/1998 <<\nSubmitted for Signature:\nDate Signed:\nDate Completed:\n\nAction Office: L\nAction Officer: HEFFERNAN\nInfo Copies:\nA, AB, S, P\n\nSignature Office: L\nSignature Officer:\n\nStatus: Open\nIn/Out: Incoming\nPriority: Normal\n\n*Responsible Office / Responsible Officer (Due Date)*:\n\nAbstract: WHR BULK: (b) (6) MINNEAPOLIS, MN, & MEMBER OF CSETI, SUPPORTS OPEN CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS, OR EVEN A PRESIDENTIAL DISCUSSION, REGARDING EVIDENCE AS TO THE EXISTENCE OF ALIEN BEINGS AND SPACECRAFT IN OUR GOVERNMENT'S POSESSION.\n\nEnclosures: NONE\n\nComments:\n\nAd Hoc: Clerk: VC"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Headquarters Action Tracking System (HATS)\nINCOMING CORRESPONDENCE ACTION\nID Number: A/1998-00310\n\nTitle: WHR Bulk: Public Congressional Hearings on Extraterrestrial Evidence\n\nRecipient: A/Goldin\n\nAuthor: (b) (6)\nOrganization: WHR Bulk\n\nDate Written: 03/16/1998\nDate Received: 04/22/1998\nDate Concurred:\nDate Submitted:\nDate Signed:\nDate Closed:\n>>Current Due Date: <<\nOriginal Due Date:\n\nAction Office: L/Heffernan\nStatus: Open\n\nSignature Office: L/Heffernan\n\nInfo Offices: A/Goldin, AB/Heffernan, P/WILHIDE, S/HUNTRESS\n\nAbstract:\nWHR Bulk: (b) (6) Minneapolis, MN, Member of CSETI, supports open Congresional Hearings, or even a Presidential discussion, regarding evidence as to the existence of alien beings and spcecraft in our Government's posession.\n\nComments:\n\nEnclosures: None\n\nRelated Records: A98-00789\n\nKeywords: WHR Bulk Open Congressional Hearings Alien Beings ET's spacecraft CSETI\nFile Plan: Analyst: VCoates\n\n04/22/1998 Page 1 of 1"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"IGNORE POLITICAL COMMENTS\n\nFrom nobody@www1.whitehouse.gov Mon Mar 16 22:19:34 1998\nDate: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 22:16:43 -0500\nFrom: (b) (6) <(b) (6) >\nSubject: Inbound-White_House_WWW_MAIL => PRESIDENT\nApparently-to: president@WhiteHouse.GOV\nTo: president@WhiteHouse.GOV\nErrors-to: The Postmaster \nReply-to: (b) (6) <(b) (6) >\nMessage-id: <199803170316.WAA14132@www1.whitehouse.gov>\n\nKeywords: WWW-Correspondence; ; Ask a specific question regarding Administration policy; Science or Technology; Private Citizen;\nComments: Forwarded from White House WWW\nComments: This message scanned by SCAN version 0.1 jms/960226\n\n[Connection Information]\n\nCLIENT: 206.147.215.243[206.147.215.243]\nBROWSER: Mozilla/2.0 (compatible; MSIE 3.02; Windows 3.1)\nURL: http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/Mail/html/Mail_President.html\n\n[Sender Information]\n\nPERSONAL-NAME: (b) (6)\nEMAIL-ADDRESS:\nORGANIZATION: CSETI\nRELATIONSHIP: member\nSTREET-ADDRESS: (b) (6)\nCITY: Minneapolis\nSTATE-PROVINCE: MN\nZIP-CODE: 55405\nCOUNTRY: USA\n\n[Message Information]\n\nPURPOSE: Ask a specific question regarding Administration policy\nTOPIC: Science or Technology\nAFFILIATION: Private Citizen\nSUBJECT: public congressional hearings on extraterrestrial evidence\n\n[Message]\n\nDear Mr. President:\nDuring these trying days in your Presidency, I want to let\nyou know and appreciate the work you have done as President\n\nA/1998-00310 A98-00789"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and the warmth and good humor you've displayed. I would like to suggest as a way of changing the headlines about sex in the White House, to an area that would give you a real legacy and enlighten the world as to are place in the universe...\n\nAs a member of CSETI, I support open Congressional Hearings or even a Presidential Discussion - public - regarding evidence as to the existence of alien beings and spacecraft in our government's possession. Last April members of your staff were present during Congressional Hearings in private with people who were in someway connected with knowledge about alien beings, ET technology, spacecraft. Did those discussions make you more interested to know more or are you being advised not encourage any more meetings with CSETI?\n\nSometimes, sir... you have to take a positive risk on matters that can change the world for the better. The Richard Helms and Strom Thurmond types must be dealt with firmly. Whether it's opening Cuba to economic trade or a healthy discussion on a matter that will be far more remembered than whom you may or may not have had sex with, standing up to these dinosaurs and people like them, will go a long way in the American public's and historians recognition of you as a leader to another level.\n\nI do not have CSETI's telephone number in order for you and your staff to coordinate hearings with Dr. Steven Greer. But, his website address is: www.cseti.org\n\nI've heard early in your Presidency you asked former colleage Webster Hubbel to investigate what is\n\nknown about UFO's. I think compared to past presidents, you have been kept in the dark about ET\n\nmatters. Well, I hope that your interest in the topic hasn't totally diminished. Scientists, engineers, former astronauts, militay personnel and just plain citizens would like to speak up and discuss what they know. The American public's attitude would turn from initial cynicism to enlightenment. Even if it means we are not on good terms with are alien visitors, or we are not the smartest or strongest intelligent power out there, we can handle it."} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"So... I do hope you receive this e-mail and not just one of\nthe many assistants answering letters for you. This letter can\nmake a difference... and so can you Mr. President. It won't\ncost millions of dollars to conduct a hearing/investigation\nof potential huge benefits to so many.\n\nBest Regards,\n\n(b) (6)"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"ok\nWR\n5/1/98\n\nL:ATW:mtg:LA98-106f\nDRAFT\n\n(b) (6)\n\nDear (b) (6)\n\nThe White House has forwarded to NASA for response your letter of March 16, 1998, in which you advocate Congressional Hearings or a Presidential Discussion regarding alien beings and their spacecraft.\n\nEnclosed is a NASA Fact Sheet entitled \"The U.S. Government and Unidentified Flying Objects.\" This Fact Sheet gives a brief outline of NASA's research into UFO's and will give you other points of contact on the subject you may wish to pursue.\n\nWe appreciate your interest in this matter.\n\nSincerely,\n\nEdward Heffernan\n(Acting) Associate Administrator\nfor Legislative Affairs\n\nEnclosure"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"1320.4 Aeronautics. UFO\n\nHeadquarters Action Tracking System (HATS)\nINCOMING CORRESPONDENCE ACTION\nID Number: L/1998-00415\n\nTitle: ROTHMAN/Sen Snowe fwds ltr from (b) (6) [REDACTED], who's interested in U.F.O.'s sightings and abductions\n\nRecipient: L/Heffernan\n\nAuthor: SNOWE\nOrganization: SENATE\nDate Written: 05/13/1998\nDate Received: 05/27/1998\nDate Concurred:\nDate Submitted:\nDate Signed: 05/27/1998\nDate Closed: 05/27/1998\nAction Office: LD/Rothman:P\n>>Current Due Date: 06/17/1998<<\nOriginal Due Date:\nStatus: Closed\n\nSignature Office: L/Heffernan\n\nInfo Offices: L/Heffernan, L/Heninger, L/Kerwin\n\nAbstract:\nSEN SNOWE FWDS LTR FROM (b) (6) [REDACTED] WHO'S INTERESTED IN UFO'S SIGHTINGS AND ABDUCTIONS.\n\nComments:\nHelen spoke w/staffer referring him to Air Force; fwded fax sheet on UFOs.\n\nEnclosures: YES LTR\n\nRelated Records:\n\nKeywords: (b) (6) [REDACTED] U.F.O. SIGHTINGS ABDUCTION\nFile Plan: 1320.4\nAnalyst: BMoore\n\n05/27/1998\nPage 1 of 1"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"NASA\nDate: 5/27/98\nTime: 2:05\nTo: Mark Berumen\nPhone#:\nFax#: 224-1946\nFrom: Helen Rothman\nDirector, Congressional Inquiries Division\nOffice of Legislative Affairs\nVoice#: (202) 358-1943\nFax#: (202) 358-4343\nMessage: Mark- FACT Sheet per our\nconversation\nHelen Rothman\nNumber of Pages ____ including cover"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"NASA Facts\nNational Aeronautics and\nSpace Administration\nNASA Headquarters\nPublic Affairs Office\nCode P\n300 E Street SW\nWashington DC 20546\nFS-1997-01-017-HQ\nThe US Government and Unidentified Flying Objects\nNo branch of the United States Government is currently in-\nvolved with or responsible for investigations into the possi-\nbility of alien life on other planets or for investigating Uni-\ndentified Flying Objects (UFO's). The US Air Force (USAF)\nand the National Aeronautics and Space Administration\n(NASA) have had intermittent, independent investigations\nof the possibility of alien life on other planets; however, none\nof these has produced factual evidence that life exists on\nother planets, nor that UFO's are related to aliens. From\n1947 to 1969, the Air Force investigated UFO's; then in 1977,\nNASA was asked to examine the possibility of resuming\nUFO investigations. After studying all of the facts avail-\nable, it was determined that nothing would be gained by\nfurther investigation, since there was an absence of tangible\nevidence.\nIn October 1992, NASA was directed by Congress to begin\na detailed search for artificial radio signals from other civi-\nlizations under the NASA Towards Other Planetary Systems\n(TOPS)/High Resolution Microwave Survey (HRMS) pro-\ngram (also known as the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelli-\ngence project). Congress directed NASA to end this project\nin October 1993, citing pressures on the US Federal budget.\nThe HRMS did not detect any confirmed signal before it\nwas stopped. However, similar work will continue in a more\nlimited manner through efforts of private groups and through\nacademic institutions. The Search for Extraterrestrial Intel-\nligence Institute (SETI Institute) in Mountain View, CA,\neffectively replaced the Government project, borrowing the\nsignal processing system from NASA. The SETI Institute\nis a nonprofit corporation conducting research in a number\nof fields including all science and technology aspects of as-\ntronomy and planetary sciences, chemical evolution, the ori-\ngin of life, biological evolution, and cultural evolution.\nDuring several space missions, NASA astronauts have re-\nported phenomena not immediately explainable; however,\nin every instance NASA determined that the observations\ncould not be termed \"abnormal\" in the space environment.\nThe 1947 to 1969 USAF investigations studied UFO's un-\nder Project Blue Book. The project, headquartered at Wright-\nPatterson Air Force Base, Ohio, was terminated December\n17, 1969. Of the total of 12,618 sightings reported to Project\nBlue Book, 701 remain \"unidentified.\"\nThe decision to discontinue UFO investigations was based\non an evaluation of a report prepared by the University of\nColorado entitled, \"Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying\nObjects;\" a review of the University of Colorado's report by\nthe National Academy of Sciences; previous UFO studies;\nand Air Force experience investigating UFO reports during\nthe 1940's, '50's and '60's. As a result of experience, inves-\ntigations, and studies since 1948, the conclusions of Project\nBlue Book were: (1) no UFO reported, investigated, and\nevaluated by the Air Force was ever a threat to our national\nsecurity; (2) there was no evidence submitted to, or discov-\nered by, the Air Force that sightings categorized as \"uniden-\ntified\" represented technological developments or principles\nbeyond the range of modern scientific knowledge; and (3)\nthere was no evidence indicating that sightings categorized\nas \"unidentified\" were extraterrestrial vehicles.\nWith the termination of Project Blue Book, the USAF regu-\nlation establishing and controlling the program for investi-\ngating and analyzing UFO's was rescinded. Documentation\nregarding the former Project Blue Book investigation was\npermanently transferred to the Modern Military Branch,\nNational Archives and Records Service, in Washington, DC\n20408, and is available for public review and analysis.\nSince the termination of Project Blue Book, nothing has oc-\ncurred that would support a resumption of UFO investiga-\ntions by the USAF or NASA. Given the current environ-\nment of steadily decreasing defense and space budgets, it is\nunlikely that the Air Force or NASA will become involved\nin this type of costly project in the foreseeable future."} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Since neither NASA nor the Air Force is engaged in day-to-day UFO research, neither one reviews UFO-related articles intended for publication, evaluates UFO-type spacecraft drawings, or accepts accounts of UFO sightings or applications for employment in the field of aerial phenomena investigation.\n\nUFO Points of Contact\n\n1. For further information on the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, please contact the SETI Institute, 2035 Landings Drive, Mountain View, CA 94043, (415) 960-4530.\n\n2. News media requiring Project Blue Book files should contact the National Archives Public Affairs Office, (202) 501-5525. Public queries should be addressed to the Project Blue Book archivist at (202) 501-5385. For queries not related to Project Blue Book, contact the National Archives receptionist at (202) 501-5400. Documentation is available from: Modern Military Branch, National Archives and Records Service, Eighth Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20408.\n\n3. The Air Force publication, \"The Roswell Report: Fact vs. Fiction in the New Mexico Desert,\" a lengthy document providing all of the details available from the Air Force on the Roswell incident, is available for $52 from the US Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328.\n\n4. There are a number of universities and professional scientific organizations that have considered UFO phenomena during periodic meetings and seminars. A list of private organizations interested in aerial phenomena may be found in Gale's Encyclopedia of Associations.\n\n5. Persons wishing to report UFO sightings are advised to contact law enforcement agencies.\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"< CONFIRMATION REPORT > 05-27-1998(WED) 13:57\n\n[ TRANSMIT ]\n\nNO. DATE TIME DESTINATION PG. DURATION MODE RESULT\n18529 5-27 13:55 202 224 1946 3 0°01'31\" NORM.E OK\n3 0°01'31\""} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"< CONFIRMATION REPORT > 05-27-1998(WED) 13:57\n\n[ TRANSMIT ]\n\nNO. DATE TIME DESTINATION PG. DURATION MODE RESULT\n18529 5-27 13:55 202 224 1946 3 0°01'31\" NORM.E OK\n3 0°01'31\""} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OLYMPIA J. SNOWE\nMAINE\nCOUNSEL TO THE ASSISTANT MAJORITY LEADER\n250 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING\n(202) 224-5344\n\nUnited States Senate\nWASHINGTON, DC 20510-1903\nMay 13, 1998\n\nCOMMITTEES:\nARMED SERVICES\nBUDGET\nCOMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION\nCHAIR OF OCEANS AND FISHERIES SUBCOMMITTEE\nSMALL BUSINESS\n\nMr. Lawrence E. Medway\nDirector, Congressional Inquiries Division\nNational Aeronautic and Space Administration\n300 E. Street, SW\nWashington, D.C. 20546\n\nDear Mr. Medway:\n\nI am writing to you regarding the concerns of my constituent, (b)(6) of Portland, Maine.\n\n(b)(6) is interested in U.F.O. sightings and abductions. I have enclosed a copy of his correspondence for your review. Any information you could provide which would help me answer his questions would be appreciated.\n\nThank you for your time and attention.\n\nSincerely,\n\nOLYMPIA J. SNOWE\nUnited States Senator\n\nOJS:mjb\n\nAUBURN TWO GREAT FALLS PLAZA SUITE 7B AUBURN, ME 04210 (207) 786-2451\nAUGUSTA 68 SEWALL STREET, SUITE 101C AUGUSTA, ME 04330 (207) 622-8292\nBANGOR ONE CUMBERLAND PLACE, SUITE 306 BANGOR, ME 04401 (207) 945-0432\nBIDDEFORD 231 MAIN STREET, SUITE 2 BIDDEFORD, ME 04005 (207) 282-4144\nPORTLAND 3 CANAL PLAZA, SUITE 601 P.O. BOX 188 PORTLAND, ME 04112 (207) 874-0883 MAINE RELAY SERVICE TDD 1-955-3323\nPRESQUE ISLE 169 ACADEMY STREET, SUITE 3 PRESQUE ISLE, ME 04769 (207) 764-5124\nIN MAINE CALL TOLL-FREE 1-800-432-1599\nPRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"437983 MSA\nAPR 0 1 1998\n\nFEBUARY 22 1998 TIME- 9:11am\n\nDear Senitor Olyimpia Snow,\n\nMy name is (b)(6) I'm from Portland, Maine. I'm 12 years old. (b)(6) I heard about the fredom of information act. I would be so grateful it you could get any or all government documents released on the Roswell crash. I'm a U.F.O. researcher. I have heard about the following U.F.O. sightings and abductions:\n1. LAS LUNAS, NEW MEXICO LATE JUNE1977 11:30A.M.\n2. SHIROYAMA, KAWANOE CITY JAPAN FEB/2/75 16:00 MILITARY TIME\n3. WAIKIKI BEACH, HONOLULU, HAWAII MARCH/15/93 12:00 P.M.\n4. COLFAX, WISCONSIN APRIL/19/78 13:30 MILITARY TIME\n5. DENVER, COLARODO MAY/1991 AFTERNOON\n6. BARCELONA, SPAIN JUNE/1978 SUNDOWN\n7. MONTEMORELOS, NUEVA LEON, MEXICO SUMMER OF 1994 AFTERNOON\n8. VANCOUVER, B.C. CANADA OCTOBER/17/1992\n9. GULF BREEZ, FLORADA SEPTEMBER/24/1994 18:50 MILITARY TIME\n10. ZACATELCO, TLAXCALA, MEXICO OCTOBER/31/1991\n11. VIBORG, JUTLAND, DENMARK NOVEMBER/17/74 9:00 A.M.\n12. COCOYOC, MORELOS, MEXICO NOVEMBER/3/73 9:00 A.M.\n13. BELJUM MIDNIGHT\n14. MT. KIDTARDIN, MAINE MIDNIGHT 3 CAMPERS WERE ABDUCTED\n15. GROOM LAKE NEVADA AREA 51 FREQUNTLY\n\nAs you have read Ido know alot aboout U.F.O'S. I also knoew in RIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, OHIO THERE IS KEEPING ALIENS AND CRAFT IN HANGER 18. THERE IS ALSO A GOVERNMENT AGENCY CALLED M.J.12.\nI know that U.F.O'S visit america frequntly and our government knows about it. Soon every political persons are going to get a pitition from a high school in New Hampshire to have information on the Roswell crash released to the public. I have heard roomers that at HULAMAN AIR FORCE BASE A U.F.O. LANDED AND THE HIGH RANKING PERSON AT THE BASE TALKED TO THE ALIEN. The government made a big mistake by letting Aliens into the country and can do nothing about it.\n\nsincerly,\n(b)(6)\n\nP.S.\nI'm including my address, phone number, and P.O. box.\n\nNOT FAXED RECEIVED APR 07 1998"} {"doc_id":"ddd611a20c9e4927","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Headquarters Action Tracking System (HATS)\nINCOMING CORRESPONDENCE ACTION\nID Number: L/1998-00415\n\nTitle: ROTHMAN/Sen Snowe fwds ltr from (b) (6) who's interested in U.F.O.'s sightings and abductions\n\nRecipient: L/Heffernan\n\nAuthor: SNOWE\nOrganization: SENATE\nDate Written: 05/13/1998\nDate Received: 05/27/1998\nDate Concurred:\nDate Submitted:\nDate Signed:\nDate Closed:\nAction Office: LD/Rothman:P\n>>Current Due Date: 06/17/1998<<\nOriginal Due Date:\n\nStatus: Open\n\nSignature Office: L/Heffernan\n\nInfo Offices: L/Heffernan, L/Heninger, L/Kerwin\n\nAbstract:\nSEN SNOWE FWDS LTR FROM (b) (6) WHO'S INTERESTED IN UFO'S SIGHTINGS AND ABDUCTIONS.\n\nComments:\n\nEnclosures: YES LTR\n\nRelated Records:\n\nKeywords: (b) (6) U.F.O. SIGHTINGS ABDUCTION\nFile Plan:\nAnalyst: BMoore\n05/27/1998\nPage 1 of 1"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n30 March 2010\n\nICOD: 1 December 2009\n\nDIA-08-1003-017\n\nMaverick Inventor Versus Corporate Inventor: Where Will the Next Major Innovations Arise?\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMaverick Inventor Versus Corporate Inventor: Where Will the Next Major Innovations Arise?\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 75\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ....................................................iv\nMaverick Inventor ................................................ 1\nCorporate Inventor ............................................... 2\nTechnologies ..................................................... 4\nThe Type 1 Inventor .............................................. 6\nThe Type 2 Inventor .............................................. 7\nThe Type 3 Inventor .............................................. 8\nThe Type 4 Inventor .............................................. 10\nThe Type 5 Inventor .............................................. 10\nComparisons ..................................................... 11\nConclusions ..................................................... 12\n\nTables\n\nTable 1. Types and Examples of Think Tanks.................................................. 3\nTable 2. Essential Elements That Characterize the Types of Inventor .................. 11\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMaverick Inventor Versus Corporate Inventor: Where Will the Next Major Innovations Arise?\n\nIntroduction\n\nTechnological innovation has been advanced by several sectors of human society and via a diverse set of circumstances. In the early 20th century, the solitary maverick inventor was responsible for the bedrock of most of today's industrial and commercial enterprises. As these enterprises grew larger, they could afford their own research and development departments, tasking them with developing products and processes aimed at increasing the market share of the parent company. Generally speaking, as time went on these types of enterprises became less hotbeds of true innovation than places where improvements to the current technologies were tightly managed. Such management became stultifying for many inventors wishing to produce true innovation, and these mavericks shunned the commercial research agencies and went off to carry out their own brand of research.\n\nAnother institution where true innovation is fostered is the university. University research as it exists today started in Europe only in the 18th century. The bulk of the discoveries in science leading to technological innovation came from university research laboratories in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Currently there is considerable controversy surrounding the degree to which research at universities is free from external influences, whether from within the university, from the greater scientific community, or from public and/or private agencies that fund the research. As university salaries and expenses go up, there is increasing reliance on external funding sources, the majority of which wish to exert some influence over the type of research they are underwriting.\n\nHuman aggression and human needs gave birth to two additional areas of innovation. As governments became embroiled in conflicts, they found the need to fund \"think tanks\" for the purposes of stimulating scientific developments that could aid war efforts. As well, the needs of their constituents for food, shelter, health care, energy, economic development, space exploration, and so forth demanded the establishment of government-funded agencies to perform research and produce policy. To be effective, military planners needed access to the most innovative technologies in all areas of endeavor, not just armaments, and so established their own research and development departments.\n\nCircumstances determine the temporal requirement for innovation. Modern versions of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (wars, pestilence, lies, famine/death: read conflict, environment, economy, health) pretty well sum up the major stimulants that foster innovation. Fortunately, human society—at least so far—has shown a remarkable propensity for inventing methods of overcoming seemingly insurmountable obstacles.\n\nThis paper concentrates on two areas of technological innovation where solutions have been particularly hard to come by—namely energy and\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\npropulsion, in particular aerospace and space propulsion. It is now the case that new and exotic materials and their dimensions are driving the quality and quantity of energy and propulsion innovations and preventing the average inventor from contributing new and useful forms and assemblies. The capital outlay required to probe the limits of current high technology in search of a new breakthrough is also beyond the means of the vast majority of lone inventors. These are the major reasons for the shift in focus from the lone maverick inventor to the \"corporate inventor,\" the latter being a part of a large organization.\n\nThis paper compares the roles of the maverick inventor who is less constrained by the strictures of a large organization with those of the corporate inventor and provides some insight into where to expect required future innovations in the areas of energy and propulsion.\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMaverick Inventor\n\nMost of the easy combinations of components and materials have been investigated repeatedly since the time of Michael Faraday. However, it is still to this \"low-hanging fruit\" that the average maverick inventor is drawn for inspiration. For example, in the area of energy innovation, it is still attractive to many inventors to try various combinations of permanent magnets and wire to try to improve the efficiency of modern electrical machinery, or better yet, claim to extract possibly limitless energy from these magnets. The average energy inventor is not bothered by pesky Laws of Energy Conservation or that the devices he is spending endless time on have been investigated hundreds of times before.\n\nThere is also the role of the media, most important the Internet, in continuing to stimulate the creativity of the maverick inventor. Movies continue to depict the lone genius saving the planet via some invention, be it a physical weapon or a piece of computer code. This no doubt propels succeeding generations to believe that they may one day single-handedly develop a new free-energy or antigravity device and save the planet. Unfortunately, the Internet has fostered the belief that new inventions, especially in the areas of energy generation and gravity control, are relatively straightforward—one simply needs the correct combination of macroscopic components.\n\nOne of the disadvantages of the access to apparent technological innovation that the Internet provides is to foster and maintain intellectual and experimental laziness. This manifests itself in many ways, principally in that the prospective inventor increasingly believes that simply spending a few minutes on the Internet can give him all the background information about who has done what in a particular field of invention. Indeed, the would-be inventor does not even need to leave his chair and physically investigate the situation himself. A corollary concern is the lack of information on prior attempts that is available to maverick inventors. Whereas the corporate inventor has immediate access to a broad range of technical resources, including patents and scientific and technical publications, the cost of these resources and their publicly accessible concentration in university libraries drive the average maverick inventor to rely solely on the Internet. Fortunately there are now positive signs that at least as far as \"free energy\" and antigravity are concerned, there are Internet sites trying to be repositories for failed inventions in these areas (Reference 1, 2).\n\nAnother major problem is the decreasing reliance on a sound technical education, either in the sciences or in engineering. Why bother enduring 4 years of an extremely difficult undergraduate program when all the answers are right there on the computer screen. It is the age of instant, albeit self-proclaimed, geniuses. No need to bother with correct measurement procedures or proper control experiments when you can publish the results of your studies on YouTube without bothersome peer review.\n\nSo how might one characterize the maverick inventor? Useful categories of maverick inventors (assumed to be in the context of the late 20th and early 21st centuries) might include the following types:\n\n• Individual with no formal training and little money.\n\n• Individual with no formal training and some money.\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Individual with formal training and little money.\n\n• Individual with formal training and some money.\n\n• Small group (usually two or three) of knowledgeable inventors with money.\n\n\"Formal training\" is assumed to be in the specific scientific or engineering discipline in which the invention would naturally be situated. Of course, in the last entry in the above list, the maverick inventor begins to look more like the \"corporate inventor,\" but the idea should be clear.\n\nAlthough this paper does not dwell on the personality of the maverick inventor, it is useful to remind ourselves that the maverick inventor is by definition a loner both in social and scientific/technical areas. In an online article (Reference 3), maverick inventor Dean Kamen¹ writes: \"It's not that they're brilliant or well-educated...They work all the time. They don't let failure demoralize or destroy them. They pick themselves up and keep going and eventually, every once in a while, one of your ideas actually breaks through and works, and it makes all that stuff seem worthwhile.\"\n\nKamen's article goes on to state: \"Stubborn, delusionally optimistic, creative, fearless, flexible and focused are some of the ways psychologists and business people describe the personality of the maverick...'You need to be in denial or in ignorance about the huge challenges you face,' laughs Guy Kawasaki, a former Apple executive and entrepreneur who's starting the self-described \"magazine rack\" alltop.com. 'You have to believe that it wouldn't be hard for you to succeed.'\"\n\nCorporate Inventor\n\nThe corporate inventor is a part of and relies on a large organization, conveniently labeled a think tank, to both stimulate and sustain him. There is constant interaction between like-minded innovators that serves both as a stimulus to explore new areas and as a much-needed \"dead-end detector.\" Usually, sufficient cash and equipment are on hand, especially when the desired innovation is being funded externally. These think tanks may be government, military, academic, corporate, or private. The closest model to the freedom associated with the maverick inventor is usually found in a university setting, although a number of privately sponsored institutions exist (for example, Perimeter Institute in Waterloo, Canada). At least until recently, academic institutions prided themselves in the freedom granted to their research scientists and engineers.\n\nTable 1 provides examples of the various types of think tanks.\n\n¹ Dean Kamen is an experienced inventor in the medical field, where his inventions include the AutoSyringe. Among his many other inventions are devices using the Stirling cycle for energy generation and water purification and the Segway Personal Transporter.\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 1. Types and Examples of Think Tanks\n\nType | Examples\nUniversities | Radlab, MIT, Cambridge, MA\nGovernment | Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM\nLawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA\nBrookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY\nNASA (for example, Glenn Research Center, Brook Park, OH)\nQuasi-Government/Military | DARPA, Arlington, VA\nCorporate | GM Research Laboratory, Warren, MI\nAlcatel/Lucent – Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ\nSkunk Works, Palmdale, CA\nPrivately Funded | Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, Waterloo, Canada\nInstitute for Advanced Studies, Austin, TX\nSARA (Scientific Applications & Research Associates), Cypress, CA\nIndependent, Nonprofit | Battelle, Columbus, OH\nSRI International, Menlo Park, CA\nEPRI (Electric Power Research Institute), Palo Alto, CA\nAustrian Research Centers, Seibersdorf, Austria\n\nThese entities typically arose in response to a particular need or crisis. Perhaps the most famous and effective think tank was the vast agency known as the Manhattan District. Less well known to the public was, for example, the RadLab at MIT.\n\nExcept in the case of privately funded organizations, they all support many hundreds to thousands of researchers, of which a variable proportion could be termed \"inventors.\" Even the smaller entities support a dozen or so highly motivated scientists and engineers easily classified as inventors.\n\nA benefit of being an inventor in a large organization is access to information. The corporate inventor can quickly determine whether a certain avenue of approach has\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nalready been tried, using resources not generally available to the maverick inventor, such as patent searches, scientific and technical documents, or an in-house library.\n\nAnother benefit is access to the latest technical apparatus, prototyping, and machining capabilities. In most cases, the inventor does not need to be an expert in the operation of all types of analytical or experimental equipment or machine tools. There are technicians at his disposal able to convert his ideas into reality.\n\nA relatively recent development in the larger organizations is the establishment of a \"blue-sky\" team of highly creative individuals, sometimes just two or three people, whose job it is to think outside the corporate box and provide directions and policy, usually for the long term. However, in general, their tasks still fall within the general purview of the entity funding them. Sometimes government laboratories will allow such teams to investigate unusual areas and possibly set up experiments leading to eventual inventions assigned to the laboratory. A particular example is that of Tajmar (Reference 4). Other relevant models for this type of activity are found in research and university hospitals, where continuous innovation is the norm.\n\nCorporate inventors also benefit from belonging to an organization that includes people with business acumen. An invention is worthless as a commercial innovation if it cannot be produced or marketed at a competitive price. The business side of the corporation is an essential component of successful innovation. The maverick inventor typically does not have these skills close at hand, and often the enterprise fails not for technical reasons, but because the inventor has not thought out an appropriate business plan.\n\nHowever, there are drawbacks to the life of the corporate inventor. Fluctuations in the overall economy can put projects on hold, cause them to be canceled, or force layoffs that can stall or kill a project. The maverick inventor will strive to keep his project alive regardless of the external economy, which unfortunately sometimes means loss of savings, house, family, friends, and so forth. A Not Invented Here (NIH) syndrome often can interfere with overall progress in areas where a corporate inventor approach is the most suitable. If an idea did not originate with a particular organization, it may not be pursued, even though it may represent the best approach. Maverick inventors rarely suffer from NIH. Whereas the maverick inventor is generally accustomed to putting 100 percent of his time into the invention, the corporate inventor may suffer from burnout if he is not as personally motivated or has such a personal stock in the invention. After a while, \"group think\" syndrome can infect large organizations, including their innovators. This happens in organizations that do not recognize or encourage radical thinking, resulting in mediocre innovation performance. This process is exacerbated if the number of projects being attended to by corporate inventors starts to overwhelm them. The maverick inventor is usually single minded in his attention.\n\nTechnologies\n\nIn order to gain a clearer understanding of the relative roles of the maverick and the corporate inventor, it is instructive to observe how each addresses specific technological areas. This paper concentrates on innovations in the areas of unconventional energy and propulsion systems as examples of ideas pursued by the maverick inventor in particular. The study does not focus on how the personality of the maverick inventor determines his innovative capacity so much as it focuses on what tools and techniques are available to him in addressing a particular potential innovation.\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe inventors highlighted in this study investigate technologies encompassing the production or conversion of energy from novel sources, sometimes referred to as \"new primary energy sources,\" including permanent magnets, cold and warm fusion, \"zero-point fluctuations,\" and novel uses of batteries and rotating systems, as well as theoretical and experimental approaches to modulating the local gravity field. Some of these inventors and inventions are described in recent books (see Reference 5, 6).\n\nHistorically, what has been the relative contribution to the major innovations in these areas? Taking the specific area of electrical energy production as an example, it was the contributions, inspiration, and determination of maverick inventors such as Tesla that resulted in the design of many of the current power-generating technologies in use today. As far as radically new recent designs of alternators and motors is concerned, there have been very few innovations from maverick inventors, Flynn's dual-path magnetic circuit being a notable exception (Reference 7). Most of the innovations in this area come from corporate inventors in the electric power industry, as the only path left toward increasing efficiency is through novel materials such as high-temperature superconductors. Such research is generally out of reach of the maverick inventor. There has been no lack of attempts by maverick inventors to produce electrical \"free energy\" and related machines.\n\nIn the area of space propulsion and earth-to-orbit methods in particular, again it was the contributions of mavericks such as Tsiolkovsky and Goddard that laid the foundations for modern rocketry. Both inventors took a practical approach to rocketry, as the field was in its embryonic state. Initially denigrated as being \"only\" a high school math teacher with no formal scientific training, Tsiolkovsky developed the fundamental equation for rocket propulsion. Although Goddard was university trained, like Tsiolkovsky, his fundamental work on rocket dynamics was largely ignored until later in his life. During their early, creative years, neither man worked for large organizations. As far as radically new propulsive means are concerned, there have been innovations only in the efficiency and overall design, and the fundamental mass expulsion model has remained unchanged. The efficiency innovations have sprung from corporate inventors who have the resources to plan and test their increasingly costly designs only in the context of large organizations.\n\nThe current innovations in these two fields come from larger organizations such as those highlighted in the previous section. However it should be noted that these innovations, largely increased in efficiency, have been economically as well as technically viable. There are plenty of novel thruster designs that would be excellent candidates for inclusion in the breakthrough category if only they were not so expensive. Antimatter propulsion using positrons and antiprotons is a good example (Reference 8, 9). In the early development of electrical machines, many parts of the system were very expensive—electrical steel laminations, for example—but mass production brought prices down. Fortunately inventions are not completely discarded simply because they are too costly at the time of their conception. Increasingly today, materials costs rather than manufacturing costs drive economic decisions about the development and commercialization of inventions in this category. This is due in part to the replacement of human manpower with its robotic equivalent and the scarcity of certain strategic technologically important raw materials, such as rare earths.\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY The Type 1 Inventor One should examine the area of novel energy generation inventions from the standpoint of the maverick inventor who has no formal training. Because the approach and timeline of the typical energy inventor mimic those of the propulsion (read \"antigravity\") inventor,2 we will concentrate on the energy inventor. Often the invention involves a device that is purported to produce more energy than it consumes. In some cases the inventor naively thinks his invention is simply creating the extra energy from nothing. More often the inventor believes his device is tapping a new energy source, such as \"zero-point energy\" or \"magnetic energy.\" He typically begins his quest by literally playing with storage batteries or pulse-driven, simple, permanent-magnet-based motors. Since the typical maverick inventor has negligible funds for research and development, cheap measuring instruments are the norm. A very cursory understanding of electrical wiring and possibly a rudimentary capability in designing solid-state circuitry seem all that are necessary from an educational standpoint. Delving into thermodynamics, proper experiment design, error analysis, or even power factor is usually seen as taking valuable time away from construction of an invention prototype. Alas, it is most often in the area of measurement that the maverick inventor solidifies his belief that he has discovered the answer to the world's energy problems. His fear of ridicule and belief that the local university or testing agency would (a) steal the invention, (b) not do a proper test because they do not believe in the underlying concept (for example, zero-point energy), or (c) are in league with big oil and will suppress the invention ensure that proper measurements are rarely performed at the important early stages of the invention's development. Fear of suppression also contributes to the typical inventor's lack of proper note taking. The test instruments used usually are not suitable for use in measuring the various electrical parameters in, for example, pulsed-motor designs. Even if more expensive oscilloscopes are purchased, their internal math functions are overrelied upon without giving a second thought to applicability, calibration, or use of proper probes within specification, among a host of bothersome details. The measurement problem is generally compounded when attempting to measure the true power or energy output of a device, especially where the output is a rotating shaft or source of heat. The modern Type 1 inventor shuns publishing in the peer-reviewed literature for obvious reasons and instead makes a YouTube video or appears on a TV \"weird science\" program or news clip to further promote this incredible invention. Up to this point, the invention has been developed using personal or immediate family funds. Once the maverick inventor is convinced he has the ultimate solution, the next step is to raise the necessary funds to produce a larger, higher power prototype. Note the key step of independently verifying the technical validity of the device at low power is to be avoided. \"Only a big power output will convince the skeptics\" is the slogan at this stage. And a high-power prototype will take much longer to build, thus buying more time for the inventor to invent excuses for why the whole idea was unworkable in the first place. Usually the original prototype is either scrapped or robbed of components to make a new high-power device. 2 For typical examples of inventors concentrating on gravity and propulsion means, see Reference 10, 11, 12. 6 UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Where does the inventor find funding for such a development? The typical inventor (Reference 13) will canvas a wider network of friends, his church, a local venture capitalist or private investor who is not very savvy, or a fund specifically established to invest in exotic energy startups (Reference 14, 15). After convincing them of the incredible return on their investment in the technology by \"demonstrating\" it (without proper protocols, test equipment, and so forth), manpower, space, and new equipment are purchased. Usually the last thing on the inventor's mind at this stage is wasting investors' money on an independent laboratory test such as might be found at a local university's engineering or physics department or certified testing laboratory to determine whether there is any validity to the technology. Around this time, the major investors start to sense there might be something amiss in their original assessment of the validity of the technology. This might arise from any number of factors, including continual requests for more funding, continual delays in demonstrating the new high-power unit, more-informed friends asking probing technical questions, and so forth. Investors start to withdraw, accepting the fact of their bad investment, and the inventor eventually recedes into oblivion or skips town to start up again under a different guise somewhere else. This is typical behavior for the con artist (Reference 16, 17, 18), whose exploits will not be further analyzed herein. However, some enterprising individuals parlay their experience into related conventional businesses (Reference 19), and some investors hang on long past the time a reasonable person would quit (Reference 20). Patent protection generally is not sought by the Type 1 inventor. And if a patent is sought, either it is rejected outright by the patent office or a watered-down version is obtained that is usually worthless from either the physics or technical point of view or as part of the intellectual property to eventually be sold to an investor interested in commercializing the device. What can be learned from the Type 1 inventor? Given their lack of formal education in the relevant disciplines, there is a negligible chance that Type 1 inventors will contribute anything of significance to major innovations in the energy and propulsion areas. Their undisciplined approach, coupled with their lack of funds and interest in science by media, virtually guarantees failure. The Type 2 Inventor The major—and sometimes only—difference between Type 2 and Type 1 inventors is that Type 2 inventors tend to be even more confident in their inventions because they have been able to purchase fancy and costly measuring equipment and have high-quality machining done. However, because of their general lack of education in the relevant areas of instrumentation, they can misuse the instruments or misinterpret the resulting data just as badly as Type 1 inventors (Reference 21). However, Type 2 inventors have the advantage of being able to purchase external expertise in these areas (Reference 22). The degree to which they rely on and believe the external expertise—for example, a university laboratory—is dependent on several factors, most notably the personality of the inventor himself. The more self-assured personality relies less on outside expertise. Type 2 inventors generally have more to lose in terms of money, as they typically start out big and want to go bigger faster. They tend to investigate less speculative areas of 7 UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY a technology. Also, they are not generally plagued by the insecurities of the Type 1 inventor about subjecting their inventions to outside scrutiny, and some will be bold enough to publish in respected scientific journals (Reference 23). This means they keep better lab notes than Type 1 inventors. It does not mean they are intrinsically better scientists or inventors. Type 2 inventors generally have a bit more training in physics and sometimes start with a theory of which they request analysis from a local university professor, for example. Usually the theory is either partially formed or is not directly relevant to the proposed invention. The professor dutifully examines the theory presented while not being informed of the overall use to which his work is to be put and makes a pronouncement that the inventor can usually twist one way or another to suit his future fundraising efforts (Reference 24). Often the inventor has access to various theories about energy or gravity that are posted in non-peer-reviewed media and uses these to initiate or justify the proposed invention. Type 2 inventors have a generally greater success at securing a patent, as they have a better basis on which to make a claim and can afford better patent lawyers. Some of the more advanced Type 2 inventors realize they need to start with a more pure-physics experimental approach rather than going straight for the applied invention, although these are rare (Reference 23). Once the initial concept has proved infeasible on the bench, these inventors can burn through a large amount of additional money in a scatter-shot approach, trying to save face and what little money is left. Some will continually scan the Internet or underground press for other likely energy candidates to switch allegiance to (Reference 14, 15), or will simply convince other gullible investors to continue to prop up the technology with ever-more contorted descriptions of what is needed to succeed. Eventually the house of cards collapses, and all the players go home, licking their financial and psychological wounds. This occurs when an investor finally starts asking the tough technical and measurement questions that should have been addressed at the outset. What can be learned from the Type 2 inventor? On the one hand, these inventors can be much more dangerous than Type 1 inventors, as they can use their enhanced financial clout to make it appear as if they have something of value and thereby attract capital that might otherwise be used in more fruitful pursuits. On the other hand, Type 2 inventors can serve a useful purpose in showing others where not to tread. Their ability to instantiate some degree of professional sophistication—for example, university professor—marginally increases the likelihood of a true innovation. However, the personality of the Type 2 inventor will dictate their receptiveness to external advice. The Type 3 Inventor As the inventor gains more formal training, the foundation for the innovations tends to be a hypothesis or mathematical model leading to basic experiments, as opposed to starting with a full-blown embodiment of the hoped-for invention. In the best case, this is a staged approach in which the inventor already has sufficient knowledge about the area to know how to design a succession of experiments and interpret the results properly to make increasingly accurate assessments of the likely validity of the invention. Optimally, the hypothesis is based on an extension of known physical laws 8 UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY and calls on known or reasonably postulated primary energy sources. In contrast to Type 1 and 2 inventors, who seem never to realize that a permanent magnet cannot be an energy source in and of itself, for instance, the Type 3 inventor relies on the known conservation laws. Type 3 (and 4) inventors generally realize the enormity of the problems they face, whereas Types 1 and 2 have insulated themselves from this realization. As a result of his education, the Type 3 (and 4) inventor should know where to access specific technical and scientific literature to aid in the process of researching their ideas. The inventor may be associated with a local university or an emeritus professor and use this expertise on an informal basis to compensate for a lack of funds. Primary funding comes from personal or family finances or from small groups of like-minded aficionados (Reference 25). Generally the Type 3 (and 4) inventors are older than Types 1 and 2. They are also much better at explaining the scientific basis for their proposed invention and thus can attract additional funding from venture capitalists, foundations, or government granting agencies. This is a much more palatable approach in the eyes of prospective investors, as there is the feeling that their investment is based on science rather than on pure speculation and thus has a better chance of a positive return. In some cases, the individual or venture investors' funds can be matched by government grants if the idea is passed by a scientific review board. Most investors in Type 3 and 4 inventions are more sophisticated than those who invest in Types 1 and 2. Type 3 inventors generally have a record of publications in peer-reviewed literature. However, even with a greater degree of education, it is often the case that the inventor makes mistakes in measurement or interpretations of data (Reference 26, 27), especially when the initial results apparently confirm the inventor's hypothesis or physical model (Reference 28). This is most often what leads to the demise of the innovation. However, in these cases, the investors are not as angry or embarrassed as Type 1 and 2 inventors, and so may continue to support the inventor for some time as he tries to work out the problems in understanding the innovation more fully. The very fact of their higher education makes the Type 3 inventor more easily able to denigrate competing theories and experiments. This facet can be derived from or evolve into a rather dogmatic belief that the Type 3 inventor's theory is the only correct interpretation and the only one likely to succeed. This aspect must be taken into account when assessing the inventor's potential to accept other explanations or assistance when he eventually encounters difficulty with his theory or experiment. Typically the scope of the claims is more modest compared with Types 1 and 2. Instead of trumpeting that the invention will literally save the world, these inventors are more realistic, suggesting how the invention might be one part of an overall solution. What can be learned from the Type 3 inventor? Type 3 inventors' education and familiarity with the scientific method puts them in an entirely different league from Types 1 and 2. Access to their publications provides good insight into their capabilities. They are more realistic in their goals and expectations. It is easier for investors and other scientists to deal with Type 3 inventors, but Type 3 inventors are hungrier for funding than Type 4 inventors, so caution is still required in interpreting their spiel. A Type 3 inventor displaying a rigid and dogmatic approach should be avoided. 9 UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY The Type 4 Inventor If a maverick inventor educated in science or engineering already has personal funding, many of the attributes ascribed to the Type 3 inventor also apply. However, the Type 4 inventor is freer to pursue his innovation without as much concern for outside opinion. It is often the case that such inventors have made their money from previous inventions, so they already know the process. They have a much easier time attracting capital, as evidenced by their track records. However, not all have money from previous inventions. Some have family wealth, and some may have made money developing technology in areas somewhat removed from their current interest. Type 4 inventors generally are less inclined to pursue inventions in the areas of energy generation and propulsion as defined above. In fact, the likelihood of such inventors even being interested in novel primary energy generation or gravity modification is greatly diminished. They still tackle difficult technical challenges, but not generally fundamental issues like gravity and primary energy. It is by avoiding these supremely difficult areas that they have been able to invent in other areas and are thus already better funded! Type 4 inventors realize the necessity of a step-by-step approach and the pitfalls of developing ideas from scratch. They tend to apply their genius to improvements to status quo in these areas rather than providing complete breakthroughs. For instance, Kamen's Segway (Reference 29) contains no fundamentally new technology. Although Ovshinsky (Reference 30) did manage to develop new materials for solar electricity generation, the general idea of harnessing the Sun's energy to produce electricity was not new. Incidentally, Ovshinsky is included in this category even though he had no formal university education but is a self-taught genius. Notwithstanding their aversion to the fundamental issues relevant to this study, Type 4 inventors are capable of determining at an early stage whether an idea has merit and how it might properly be developed, assuming the basic concept is sound. It should be noted that Type 1 and 2 inventors usually are true loners, whereas Types 3 and 4 may be part of a small group of up to 3-4 people dedicated to a single objective. What can be learned from the Type 4 inventor is quite similar to that of the Type 3 inventor. The major difference is the track record of invention and the likely increased business sense of the Type 4 inventor compared with those of the Type 3 inventor. The Type 5 Inventor Here one starts to see an overlap in form and function with the corporate inventor. The primary distinction is the number of active inventors constituting the group: in this study, we assume that 5-6 inventors is a typical group size. The small group setting allows the individuals to bounce seemingly crazy ideas back and forth with little concern about ridicule. Depending on the nature of the organization, no topic is taboo. However, the inventor in this situation is usually required to contribute to near-term commercial products rather than exotic innovations. This is because most small groups of inventors are primarily interested in keeping their enterprise afloat. They realize that the effort required to tackle topics such as gravity and primary energy would be enormous, and although the payoff would be exceedingly large, the probability of success is small given that their competitors are in well-funded academic and government laboratories. 10 UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThese innovators have a high degree of motivation for near-term commercial projects but less motivation for exotic long-term projects and typically have specific educational qualifications in the relevant fields. They generally work on improvements to the technological status quo (Reference 31). These improvements are expected to be commercial products in the near-to-medium term, compared with the energy and propulsion technology discussed here, which have a long time horizon.\n\nWhat can be learned from the Type 5 inventor? He is significantly less interested than the lone maverick inventor in pursuing exotic inventions. As part of a commercial enterprise, a Type 5 inventor's motivation to investigate long-term possibilities with a low likelihood of success is small. This is not to say that the individual inventor within the group might not be the most suitable candidate for considering exotic inventions if he can operate with considerable freedom and enjoy the support and intellectual milieu of the small group.\n\nComparisons\n\nTable 2 below compares the essential elements that characterize the types of inventors discussed in the previous sections. The various attributes shown can be used as criteria for determining the inventor type most likely to produce the necessary innovations in the areas of advanced primary energy and exotic propulsion.\n\nTable 2. Essential Elements That Characterize the Types of Inventor\n\nAttribute | Type 1 (& 2) | Type 3 and 4 | Type 5 | Corporate\nAge | Younger | Older | Younger | Various\nMotivation | High | High | Medium | Various\nRealism | Low | Medium | High | High\nBureaucracy | Low | Low | Medium | High\nCapitalization | Low (& Medium) | Low (& Medium) | Medium | High\nEducation | Low | High | Mixed | High\nBusiness Sense | Low | Various | High | Medium\nMeasurement | Low | Medium | Medium - High | High\nLab Skills | Low | High | High | High\nExternals | Low | High | Medium | High\nFlexibility | High | High | Medium | Medium\nMedia Interest | High | Low | Mixed | Low\n\nFor clarity and compactness, Types 1 and 2 and Types 3 and 4 are combined, since in general the only meaningful difference is the capitalization. As discussed above, unfortunately, merely having more funding does not lead to substantially greater capabilities in other areas.\n\nMotivation: degree of commitment to initiating and completing the task and belief that it is possible a priori.\n\nRealism: degree of realization of the difficulties to be faced.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBureaucracy: amount of general and administrative overhead to be put up with by the inventor.\n\nCapitalization: relative amount of funding available to the inventor for the specific invention.\n\nEducation: level of education achieved by the inventor in the relevant fields of science or engineering.\n\nBusiness Sense: degree of business acumen associated with inventor.\n\nMeasurement: capability of the inventor to understand and properly use measuring instruments.\n\nLab Skills: ability to show orderly development from original concept, keep proper lab notes and communicate ideas to others.\n\nExternals: inventor's interest in and capability of using external assistance—for example, a university, including publishing.\n\nFlexibility: ability to work on different sorts of projects, even when highly exotic.\n\nMedia Interest: interest in self-promotion and reliance on various popular (nonscientific) media for guidance; this is more an indicator of the psychology of the inventor than of his technical skills.\n\nIn a 2003 NASA tutorial on breakthrough propulsion (Reference 32), Millis describes the division between \"masters\" and \"pioneers\" in the context of determining where the next space propulsion breakthrough might arise. At the extreme end of the masters are the \"pedantic prudes\" who consider that the process is already at the end-point of advancements in the field. This classification is similar to the least motivated corporate inventor. At the opposite end of the pioneers, he places the \"pathological pundits\" who characterize themselves using phrases such as \"My theory is great...I can't be wrong...If you don't agree, you are part of the suppression conspiracy,\" and can thereby be classified as Type 1 or 2 inventors. Millis also characterizes Type 1 and 2 inventors and \"nonrigorous enthusiasts\" (Reference 33).\n\nConclusions\n\nWe can draw several conclusions from the comparisons in Table 2.\n\nMaverick inventors of Types 1 and 2 score high in motivation and flexibility with little bureaucracy, but in all other areas, they are lacking. Especially troubling for the present scenario is the lack of education leading to substandard to nonexistent measurement capabilities and laboratory skills, together with overreliance on media.\n\nTypes 3 and 4 also exhibit beneficial attributes relating to motivation, flexibility, and bureaucracy, as well as their treatment of media. As far as the present scenario is concerned, in all other attributes, Types 3 and 4 rank higher than their Type 1 and 2 counterparts. Their measurement skills could be improved, particularly in view of the requirements of these new areas of energy and propulsion.\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nType 5 inventors are not as motivated as their Type 1 to 4 counterparts in these areas of innovation, possibly owing to their increased sensitivity to the difficulty of the task. Business sense is higher than Types 1 to 4, but the extent to which this impacts their ability to innovate is not clear. They are more constrained insofar as bureaucracy is concerned, which tends to hamper carrying out \"blue-sky\" innovations.\n\nFinally, the corporate inventor scores high in all areas except motivation, business acumen, and flexibility. As noted previously, the corporate inventor suffers from being employed in an agency that, except for the university, does not generally promote the types of innovations addressed in this paper. In many cases, university innovators are hidebound by dogma that prevents them from even entertaining the possibility.\n\nTherefore, as far as maverick inventors are concerned, Types 3 and 4 appear to be the best choice regarding where to expect the next innovations to arise and should be carefully selected based on criteria similar perhaps to those used above. Millis considers the same scenario (Reference 32) when he states that the innovators he seeks are published, credible risk-takers with vision. They should be monitored and encouraged by means of financial and other incentives to pursue these difficult areas of innovation.\n\nIf the corporate inventor, and especially the university-based inventor, could be motivated and granted sufficient flexibility, he would be an excellent candidate to carry out the required innovations in energy and propulsion and rival Types 3 and 4 for innovation capacity.\n\nType 5 inventors are the next best possibility, with Types 1 and 2 merely being watched casually, as no substantial innovation is expected to arise from these quarters.\n\n1 http://peswiki.com/index.php/Main_Page, accessed Jan 12, 2009\n2 http://www.americanantigravity.com/, accessed Jan 13, 2009\n3 http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/worklife/01/12/entrepreneur.psychology/index.html, accessed Jan 12, 2009\n4 http://www.ilsb.tuwien.ac.at/~tajmar/, accessed Jan 14, 2009\n5 Cook, N., The Hunt for Zero Point, Century/Random House, London, 2001\n6 Tutt, K., The Search for Free Energy, Simon and Schuster, London, 2001\n7 http://www.flynnresearch.net/, accessed Jan 12, 2009\n8 Chiang, P.R., Smith, G.A., et al \"An Antiproton Driver for Internal Confinement Fusion Propulsion,\" Kammash, T. (ed), Fusion Energy in Space Propulsion, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 167, AIAA, Washington, DC, 1995\n9 Smith, G.A., \"Positron Propelled and Powered Space Transport Vehicle for Planetary Missions,\" NIAC Phase I Final Report, Research Subaward # 07605-003-048, presented at NIAC Phase I Fellows Meeting, Atlanta GA, Mar 7-8, 2006\n10 Zinsser, R., \"Mechanical Energy from Anisotropic Gravitational Fields,\" Hathaway (ed.) The First International Symposium on Non-Conventional Energy Technology, University of Toronto, Oct 23 - 24, 1981 (privately published)\n11 Interavia, Vol. XI, No. 12, pp. 992, (Switzerland), 1956\n12 \"Anti-Gravity not so Crazy After All,\" New Scientist, Feb 14, 1980\n13 Ball, P. \"Burning water and other myths,\" Nature News, Sept. 14, 2007\n14 http://www.magneticpowerinc.com/, accessed Jan 15, 2009\n15 http://www.theorionproject.org/en/index.html, accessed Jan 15, 2009\n16 http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Tilley/fraud/index.html, accessed Jan 11, 2009\n17 http://www.phact.org/e/z/perendev.htm, accessed Jan 11, 2009\n18 Krieg, E. \"Examining the Amazing Free-Energy Claims of Dennis Lee,\" Skeptical Inquirer Magazine, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp 34 - 36, July/Aug 1997\n19 http://www.r-charge.com/about.html, accessed Jan 13, 2009\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ddec22f69f054376","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n20 http://www.searleffect.com/free/jt_biodetail.html, accessed Jan 12, 2009\n21 http://www.steorn.com/, accessed Jan 12, 2009\n22 Cambier, J-L., Micheletti, D.A., \"Theoretical Analysis of the Electron Spiral Toroid Concept,\" NASA Report NASA/CR-2000-210654, Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, Dec. 2000\n23 http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/, accessed Jan 12, 2009\n24 http://gammamanager.blogspot.com/, accessed Jan 14, 2009\n25 Woodward, J., \"Flux Capacitors and the Origin of Inertia\" Foundations of Physics, Vol. 34, pg 1475, 2004.\n26 Little, S.R., \"Null Tests of \"Free-Energy\" Claims,\" Frontiers of Propulsion Science, (in print), Millis, M.G., Davis, E.W. (eds), Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics Series, 227, AIAA, 2009\n27 Hathaway, G.D., \"Nightmares of the Art of Measuring,\" Space Technologies and Applications International Forum 2006, El Genk, M.S. (ed.) American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings, Melville, NY, 2006\n28 Graneau, P., Graneau, N., et al \"Arc-Liberated Chemical Energy Exceeds Electrical Input Energy\" J. Plasma Physics Vol. 63, part 2, pg 115, 2000\n29 http://www.dekaresearch.com/aboutDean.html, accessed Jan 13, 2009\n30 http://ovshinskyinnovation.com/, (under construction) accessed Jan 2009\n31 http://clever-fellows-innovation-consortium.sbcontract.com/profile.htm, accessed Jan 15, 2009\n32 Millis, M.G., \"The NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Project: Methods of Advanced Research,\" AIAA Professional Short Course, NASA Glenn Research Center, 2003\n33 Millis, M.G., \"Prioritizing Pioneering Research,\" Frontiers of Propulsion Science, (in print), Millis, M.G., Davis, E.W. (eds), Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics Series, 227, AIAA, 2009\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense Intelligence Reference Document\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n2 March 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-1003-001\n\nInvisibility Cloaking: Theory and Experiments\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nInvisibility Cloaking: Theory and Experiments\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 68\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to [AAP Person 1], AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ........................................................................ v\nCamouflage ......................................................................... 1\nTransparency ........................................................................ 3\nCloaking ............................................................................. 5\nMetamaterials ....................................................................... 9\nOptical Metamaterials ............................................................. 11\nFundamental Problem ............................................................. 15\nCurved Space ....................................................................... 17\nBroadband Invisibility ............................................................ 19\nImplementation ..................................................................... 20\nOptical Cloaking ................................................................... 22\nSummary .......................................................................... 23\nReferences ......................................................................... 23\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. B2 Stealth Bomber ............................................................ 1\nFigure 2. Optical Camouflage ........................................................... 2\nFigure 3. The Secret Optical Camouflage ................................................. 2\nFigure 4. H. G. Wells's The Invisible Man: Invisibility by Transparency .................. 3\nFigure 5. Complementary Media Invisibility Cloak ........................................ 4\nFigure 6. Cloaking Shell ................................................................. 5\nFigure 7. The Invisible Woman .......................................................... 6\nFigure 8. Fermat's Principle ............................................................. 7\nFigure 9. An Optical Material Deforms the Coordinates of Space ............................ 8\nFigure 10. Light Waves at Cloaking Device ................................................ 9\nFigure 11. Cloaking Device for Microwaves ............................................... 10\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 12. Lycurgus Cup (British Museum; AD Fourth Century). .......................... 11\nFigure 13. Idea for a Cloaking Device for Visible Light ....................................... 12\nFigure 14. Advances in Metamaterials ..................................................... 13\nFigure 15. Demonstration of Negative Refraction With \"Bulk\" Optical Metamaterials Made of Nano-Fishnets ..................................................... 14\nFigure 16. Demonstration of Negative Refraction With \"Bulk\" Optical Metamaterials Made of Nanowires ....................................................... 15\nFigure 17. Fundamental Problem of Transformation-Based Cloaking Devices ...... 16\nFigure 18. Wave Packets are Made by Combining Waves With Different Frequencies. ........................................................................ 17\nFigure 19. Stereographic Projection ....................................................... 18\nFigure 20. Non-Euclidean Cloaking Device in Two Dimensions ............................ 19\nFigure 21. Three-Dimensional Cloaking. ................................................... 20\nFigure 22. Coordinate Transformation Implemented by a Ground-Plate Cloak. .... 21\nFigure 23. Implementation of the Ground-Plate Cloak ....................................... 21\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nInvisibility Cloaking: Theory and Experiments\n\nIntroduction\n\nThe idea of invisibility has fascinated people for millennia, inspiring many myths, novels, and films. Invisibility cloaking has recently become a subject of science and technology. This paper describes the important current theoretical and experimental developments and tries to project into the future.\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCamouflage\n\nInvisibility may be achieved through three principal methods: camouflage, transparency, and cloaking. Many animals and some plants use camouflage to disguise themselves from predators—for example, by assuming the shapes and colors of objects in their surroundings. The military has long used forms of camouflage; a recent military application of camouflage is stealth technology.\n\nStealth planes have aerodynamically unusual, edgy shapes and are coated with a special material. Both features serve the same purpose: to make the plane \"invisible\" to radar. How does it work? In radar, electromagnetic microwaves are emitted by a source, and their reflection by an object—an airplane, for example—is detected. From the direction and the time delay of the reflected waves, the direction and distance of the object are inferred. If the object does not reflect the electromagnetic microwaves back to the source, it will not appear on the radar. This is precisely what stealth technology achieves. Owing to the edgy shape of the stealth plane, most of the incident electromagnetic waves are reflected in different directions; the coating of the plane absorbs the rest. In this way, the stealth plane has become completely black in the spectral range of radar. As for radar waves, the sky is black, not blue, and the plane has assumed the color of the background: the stealth plane is camouflaged.\n\nFigure 1. B2 Stealth Bomber\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAnother recent example of camouflage is optical camouflage, developed by the University of Tokyo's Tachi Laboratory. Figure 2 shows an example of optical camouflage. A camera captures the background scene behind the person. The image is processed and projected onto the person via a semitransparent mirror. The person wears an \"invisibility cloak\" made of a retroreflective material that reflects light back in the direction whence it came, like cats-eye-reflectors do. As the cloak carries the projected image of the background, the person seems to disappear, but surely the equipment standing around the person is clearly visible. In addition, optical camouflage works only in one direction; seen from the side, the person is visible. Nevertheless, optical camouflage may become a useful tool in some situations where obstacles are in the way of sight—for example in surgery, where the surgeon's hands and instruments may obstruct the view. Figure 3 shows how optical camouflage works.\n\nFigure 2. Optical Camouflage (Tachi Laboratory, Tokyo)\n\n[1] Camera Capturing the scene behind the person\n[2] Computer Processing the captured image as like you see the real scene\n[3] Projector Projecting the image onto the cloak\n[4] Peephole Seeing from here, you will see as if the cloak is transparent!\n[5] Half Mirror Reflecting the light partly, and let the rest through\n[6] Cloak The image from projector is projected here\nReal Scene\nThe Secret of Transparent Cloak\n\nFigure 3. The Secret Optical Camouflage (Tachi Laboratory, Tokyo)\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTransparency\n\nH. G. Wells's novel The Invisible Man represents another strategy for becoming invisible: transparency. In Wells's novel, the invisible man, a disgruntled college professor, invents a substance that somehow changes the refractive index1 of his body. Most transparent substances, like glass, air, or water, modify the speed of light, because the atoms or molecules of these substances absorb and re-emit light, which takes time. The delay caused by the atoms and molecules results in a reduced speed of light and hence in a refractive index larger than 1. It is, however, also possible to achieve a refractive index smaller than 1, although only in narrow bands of the spectrum. In these cases, the atoms or molecules advance the wave fronts of light because they are excited such that their electron clouds oscillate ahead of the light. If the refractive index is uniform in a material, light is reflected and refracted at the boundary but otherwise is traveling straight through. On the other hand, if the refractive index varies, light is scattered at the index inhomogeneities and gets lost. Most white substances appear white because of such scattering. Milk, for example, consists of minuscule oily droplets—fat—in water. The refractive index of the droplets differs from water, and hence light is scattered at them; it does not penetrate the substance, and the diffused light appears as white. Now, human bodies are visible, because they absorb light. Most of the absorption is due to the scattering of light in biological tissue, in the cells of which the bodies are made. If the refractive indices of a person's cells could somehow be changed to the refractive index of air, the person would become transparent and disappear from view—like the Invisible Man.\n\nSome animals (for example, some jellyfish) are transparent, but the cells of higher order animals are usually much too complex and diverse for transparency to become a serious option for disguise. Exceptions are the transparent parts of the body, most notably eye lenses, which consist of uniform cells kept in a state between life and death. If this balance is upset, the lenses become opaque as a cataract develops. Transparency is the idea behind some proposed forms of invisibility by technology. For example, in plasmonic covering,1 a particle should be surrounded by layers made of metals and transparent substances, such as glass. The layers are designed such that they cancel the scattering of light at the particle, hence making both the particle and the layers transparent—that is, invisible. Another proposal2 exploits the resonance of the particle with a negative-refractive material that cancels out scattering. In a material with negative refraction, the wave fronts of light appear to move in the opposite\n\n1 The refractive index is the ratio between the speed of light in vacuum and the speed of light in a material.\n\nFigure 4. H. G. Wells's The Invisible Man: Invisibility by Transparency\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndirection from the propagation. The clearest and most advanced form of this concept is the complementary media invisibility cloak.3 Here, an optical antiobject is placed beside the object one wishes to make disappear. The antiobject should be made of a negatively refractive material that exactly compensates the optical appearance of the object. An image is contained in the deformations of light-wave fronts caused by the imaged object. If these deformations are reversed, the image disappears, and the object becomes transparent—that is, invisible. The optical antiobject must be tailored to the object and placed precisely at the correct distance—that is, the distance where it is made to cancel the image of the object. The more complex the object is, the more complex the antiobject must be for reversing all the scatterings of light. Such cloaking at the distance cannot be instantaneous, as the light scattered by both object and antiobject must settle to a stationary state where it becomes synchronized. A stationary light field has only one color. So, in practice, these forms of transparency will work only for small objects and for small parts of the spectrum and not for large objects in many colors.\n\nFigure 5. Complementary Media Invisibility Cloak: (a) The slab of empty space x with 0 < x < L is optically canceled by a slab of negative-index material in −L < x < 0. (b) The same cancellation effect works with an object in 0 < x < L if the negative-index slab contains an antiobject. (c) A spherical shell b < r < c is optically canceled by a negative-index shell a < r < b. If the core r < a is optically equivalent to a sphere of radius c, then this device is invisible. (d) The same as (c), but with an object in the canceled shell b < r < c. The object is cloaked: both it and the cloaking sphere are invisible.\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCloaking\n\nCloaking4, 5 is a universal strategy for invisibility that works for objects of arbitrary compositions and shapes within a given size. In cloaking, the hidden object is enclosed by the cloaking device, a transparent shell that guides light around the object as if the light would propagate through empty space. In this way, both the interior of the cloaking device is hidden and the act of hiding is concealed.\n\nFigure 6. Cloaking Shell6\n\nHow does one find the right design for such a cloaking device? As the Invisible Man symbolizes transparency as a strategy for invisibility, inspiration for cloaking may come from the Invisible Woman, a cartoon figure from the Fantastic Four. The Invisible Woman is said to create a mysterious force field around her that bends space. Light follows the curved space such that it smoothly flows around the Invisible Woman, like water in a stream flowing around an obstacle. The key idea here is the concept of curved space used for invisibility. The idea that turns the Invisible Woman with her fabled force field from a fictitious character into something close to reality is the insight that no force field is needed, that light-refracting materials like glass or water appear as curved spaces by themselves.\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThis idea comes from Fermat's principle of the shortest optical path.7 Suppose that light travels from A to B. According to Fermat's principle, light follows the path that takes the shortest time. In refractive materials, the speed of light is modified—in most cases reduced—by the refractive index. The time it takes for light to pass through an infinitesimal element of space is proportional to the refractive index. So, if the index varies in an optical material or in the boundaries between materials, the optical measure of path length varies, which is the defining feature of a curved geometry. To provide a simple example, a lens focuses parallel light rays into a point; the parallels meet there, which is the hallmark of a non-Euclidian geometry. So something as familiar as a lens creates something as fantastic as a curved geometry.\n\nFigure 7. The Invisible Woman. Invisibility by bending light, an inspiration for cloaking.\n\n6\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 8. Fermat's Principle. The grey level indicates the refractive index. In traveling from A to B, light follows the path that takes the shortest time, traveling, if possible, through regions of low index.\n\nThe bending of light in materials or, equivalently, the change of the spatial geometry by optical materials is the cause of most optical illusions. For instance, the figure used to illustrate Fermat's Principle shows the path of light in a mirage. The air above a hot surface, hot tarmac, or desert sand is hotter than the air farther above. As hot air is thinner than cooler air, the refractive index is lower above the hot surface. Light rays are bent upwards, conjuring up images of water in the distance that, in reality, are images of the sky. Such optical geometries may also be employed for creating the ultimate illusion: invisibility. Imagine an optical material changing the geometry of space, as shown in Figure 9 below.\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 9. An Optical Material Deforms the Coordinates of Space. A: virtual space, B: real space.\n\nThe material acts like a transformation of space. In the device, each point in real space is put to a new location in a virtual space (outside of the device, space remains the same). The device creates the illusion that light propagates along straight lines through the virtual space, whereas in reality it is bent. Suppose the device encloses a hollow region that is not part of the virtual space or, to be more precise, a region with a surface that, in virtual space, has become a single point. The red circle in Figure 9B is reduced to the red dot in Figure 9A. As the hollow region is not part of the virtual space where light propagates, everything inside it has become invisible. As the coordinates of virtual space smoothly go over into the coordinates of real space at the outer surface of the device, light rays are not distorted. Any object inside the cloaking device is hidden, and so is the act of hiding itself. Moreover, the cloaking device not only would bend light rays but would modify the entire structure of light waves in such a way that detecting the hidden object is impossible. Light waves would advance around the hidden core of the device, engulfing it, as Figure 10 shows.8\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 10. Light Waves at Cloaking Device. Wave propagation in (a) virtual space and (b) real space.\n\nThis idea of cloaking by coordinate transformations was put forward by two independent groups. Their theories appeared in Science Express on 25 May 2006 and were published back to back in Science magazine later on. The first paper9 only considered isotropic materials, optical materials where the speed of light at each point is the same in each direction but may vary from point to point. Most natural optical materials, except for some crystals and all liquid crystals, are isotropic. In isotropic materials, invisibility is perfect only for light rays, but the cloaking device may cause dislocations of light waves. In addition to the optical implementation of coordinate transformations, some other tricks are required. The second paper10 considered anisotropic materials for cloaking or other manipulations of electromagnetic waves. Here, perfect invisibility is possible in principle (but not in practice, as is discussed later). In October 2006, the first cloaking device was demonstrated,11 for microwaves. Science magazine regarded cloaking as one of the top 10 science breakthroughs of the year (it was top in physics and engineering). Scientific American listed the inventors of cloaking devices—Sir John Pendry, David Smith, David Schurig, and Ulf Leonhardt—among the top 50 policy, business, and research leaders of the year. The first paper12 on cloaking had initially been rejected by most major science and physics journals before it finally appeared in Science, but since 2006, cloaking has become a mainstream subject on which about a thousand papers have been published so far.\n\nMetamaterials\n\nThe first prototype13 of a cloaking device was designed to operate in the microwave region of the electromagnetic spectrum, for a wavelength of about 3 cm. The device consists of 10 rings of flexible circuit board. The copper of the circuit board has been etched away, apart from characteristic structures of about 3-mm size, so-called split-ring resonators.\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe split-ring resonators are electromagnetic circuits; they respond to the electromagnetic field of microwave radiation. Their response depends on their shapes. For example, in the cloaking device shown in Figure 11, the double stripes in the middle of the split-ring resonators vary from ring to ring. As these stripes form an electric capacitor, the capacitance of the resonators also varies. The colored curves show how the electromagnetic functions change over the distance from the center of the cloaking device as a result of the varied capacitance. As they are always positive, negative refraction is not required for cloaking. At the inner ring, the red curve reaches zero, defining the boundary of the cloaking device. The rings with their split-ring structures are designed to perform an approximation of the coordinate transformation shown and explained in the previous section. How is this possible? The split-ring resonators act like the atoms or molecules of a normal optical or electromagnetic material: they absorb electromagnetic waves and re-emit them with a phase delay or advance that depends on their electromagnetic response. Like atoms or molecules, they are much smaller than the electromagnetic wavelength—3-mm cell size versus 3-cm wavelength in the case of the microwave cloaking device15—such that the waves cannot resolve them individually but, rather, react to them as if they were a bulk material with electromagnetic properties that may differ from point to point. Unlike atoms or molecules, the electromagnetic response of each split-ring resonator is tailor-made because it depends on the shape of the resonator that can be easily modified. For example, in the case of the microwave-cloaking device,16 the electromagnetic response depends on the capacitance that is varied by changing the length of the double stripes in the resonators. An unstructured circuit board reacts completely differently to the microwave radiation: it would simply reflect it like the mesh in the window of a microwave oven. A material with electromagnetic or optical properties that depends on structures much smaller than the wavelength is called a metamaterial.\n\nMetamaterials per se are nothing new; the ancient Romans invented the first optical metamaterial: ruby glass. The Romans probably did not know it, but their recipe for ruby glass contained one crucial ingredient:17 tiny gold droplets, typically 5–60 nanometers (nm) in size. These gold particles color the glass in an extraordinary way, as demonstrated by the exquisite Lycurgus Cup shown in Figure 12. In daylight, the cup appears a greenish color, but illuminate it from the inside, and it glows ruby. The gold particles act like the split-ring resonators of the microwave-cloaking device,18 but here on light, not on microwave radiation. Light consists of electromagnetic waves as well, but with significantly smaller wavelengths of around 500 nm. The gold particles are thus much smaller than the wavelength of light, and they turn out to be resonators as well: in them, electric currents flow in a way that is dictated by their shapes and sizes. When the light wave hits the resonance of the gold particle, most of its energy is\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nconverted into the electromagnetic oscillation of the gold particle in much the same way a tuning fork responds to sound of the right frequency.\nHowever, the electromagnetic oscillation is damped out by the electric resistance in the metal, and its energy is absorbed and ultimately turned into heat. The color of light corresponds to the frequency or wavelength. If one of the frequencies is absorbed, the corresponding color is missing in the spectrum. For the gold particles in the Lycurgus Cup, this color is green; a spectrum with green missing appears red, which produces the cup's exquisite color. (Light is also scattered in the material, and this scattering is enhanced near the green of the resonance; hence the greenish color of the cup seen in daylight.)\nFigure 12. Lycurgus Cup (British Museum; fourth century AD). This Roman cup is made of ruby glass. When viewed in reflected light—for example, in daylight—it appears green. However, when a light is shone into the cup and transmitted through the glass, it appears red. The cup illustrates the myth of King Lycurgus. He is seen being dragged into the underworld by the Greek nymph Ambrosia, who is disguised as a vine.\nWhat is new about metamaterials is the degree of control on their structures achieved by applying modern technology and the level of theoretical understanding of their workings. The Romans most probably never understood why ruby glass is neither golden like gold nor transparent like glass, its ingredients, but ruby. They did not know that light is an electromagnetic wave, nor did they know the basic laws of electromagnetism. And they would not have had the technological tools to use this knowledge in the design of novel optical metamaterials.\nOptical Metamaterials\nAs light is simply an electromagnetic wave with shorter wavelengths than microwave radiation, one could imagine an optical cloaking device as the microwave cloak but with much smaller cells, fitted to the smaller wavelength. However, this simple idea is too simple, for two different reasons. One is that metals like the copper of the circuit board or the gold of ruby glass are more electrically resistant to currents oscillating with the frequency of visible light than to currents in the microwave range of the spectrum. Second, and more important, the cells of a metamaterial also emit electromagnetic radiation in an incoherent way, not just as a coherent response to the incoming electromagnetic wave, similar to the spontaneous emission of light by atoms and molecules. The spontaneous emission is significantly stronger in the optical range of the spectrum. In short, metamaterials do not scale; they must be designed differently for visible light, and the loss of light by absorption and incoherent scattering usually is greater for visible light than for microwaves. Figure 13 below illustrates the idea19 for an optical cloaking metamaterial. Instead of split-ring resonators, nano-scale metal wires are embedded in a transparent host material, for example glass. The wires replace the split-ring resonators on the circuit board of the microwave-cloaking device. They act similarly to the gold particles embedded in ruby glass; their optical properties\n11\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ndepend on their lengths and on their arrangement, which, in principle, can be tailor-made and controlled using the tools of modern nanotechnology. The thin wires will have lower electric losses than split-ring resonators, and their radiation losses by the equivalent of spontaneous emission are reduced as well. Such optical cloaking devices do not yet exist, but one can gauge the progress in the required technology by considering the progress in negatively refracting optical materials.\nFigure 13. Idea for a Cloaking Device for Visible Light. Metal nanowires replace the split-ring resonators of the microwave cloaking device. Coordinate transformation and structure of the optical cloak. a: The coordinate transformation that compresses a cylindrical region r < b into a concentric cylindrical shell a < r < b. There is no variation along the vertical direction. The radii r1 and r2 define the internal and external radius of a fraction of the cylindrical cloak. b: A small fraction of the cylindrical cloak. The wires are all perpendicular to the cylinder's inner and outer interfaces, but their spatial positions do not have to be periodic and can be random.20\nFigure 14 below21 illustrates the route toward achieving negative refraction in the visible range of the spectrum. Losses typically are a greater problem for negatively\n12\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nrefractive materials than for the metamaterials of cloaking devices. So the graph indicates the possible progress toward optical cloaking.\nFigure 14. Advances in Metamaterials. The solid symbols denote materials with negative refraction; the open symbols denote optical materials with negative magnetic response. Orange: data from structures based on the double split-ring resonator (SRR); green: data from U-shaped SRRs; blue: data from pairs of metallic nanorods; red: data from the \"fishnet\" structure. The four insets give pictures of fabricated structures in different frequency regions.22\nOn the other hand, cloaking devices require bulk metamaterials with varying cell structures. The first moderately bulk negatively refracting materials23, 24 were made only recently.\nThe most severe practical problem of the currently discussed cloaking devices is not the technology for manufacturing and structuring the required metamaterials but a problem at the core of their principal design.25\n13\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 15. Demonstration of Negative Refraction With \"Bulk\" Optical Metamaterials Made of Nano-Fishnets26\n14\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 16. Demonstration of Negative Refraction With \"Bulk\" Optical Metamaterials Made of Nanowires27\nFundamental Problem\nThe demonstrated microwave-cloaking device only works correctly for microwave radiation of a specific frequency (wavelength), and the proposed optical cloaking device would also work for just one frequency; that is, for only one color. Light of different colors would be severely distorted. So, to see things disappear in a cloaking device, one should wear tinted glasses of the required color, which of course completely defeats the purpose. This design flaw is inevitable,28 no matter how much progress is made in the technology of metamaterials, for the following reason: the device is designed such that light waves traveling around the object enclosed by the cloaking device are completely indistinguishable from light waves propagating through empty space. This is achieved by implementing the coordinate transformation shown below in Figure 17.29\n15\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nA B\n\nFigure 17. Fundamental Problem of Transformation-Based Cloaking Devices30\n\nThe device creates the illusion of the empty virtual space A where light travels along straight lines, whereas in reality light rays are curved by the coordinate transformation from virtual space to real space B. If the light waves are indistinguishable from light propagating through empty space, the speed of light in the cloaking device must be larger than the speed of light in the surrounding material—air, for instance—to make up for the longer path on the detour through the cloak. To make matters worse, the speed of light must be infinitely large at the inner lining of the invisibility cloak. To understand this, consider a light ray that just straddles the red point in the virtual space shown in A. In real space, B, this point is enlarged to a finite volume that contains the hidden core of the cloaking device. Now, if for light propagation virtual space and real space are indistinguishable, the light ray should pass the extended path along the inner lining in precisely the time it takes to pass a single point, zero time. Consequently, the speed of light must approach infinity near the core of the cloaking device. The following argument shows that this is possible in principle, but also that such devices would be completely useless as a cloaking device in practice.\n\nIn wave propagation, one distinguishes between the phase velocity and the group velocity. The phase velocity is the velocity at which the phase fronts of waves appear to move. For light, the wave fronts are the features of oscillations across space and time; by themselves they do not transport energy or information. On the other hand, the phase fronts are orthogonal to the paths of light rays; if they are tilted, rays are refracted. Therefore, the refraction of light, the bending of light rays, is controlled by the phase velocity. The refractive index that enters Fermat’s principle of the shortest optical path is the phase index, the ratio between the speed of light in vacuum and the phase velocity in the material. The group velocity is the speed at which wave packets, pulses, and most information travels; it is the velocity of a wave group. Such a group consists of a range of single-frequency waves that, by their interference, establish the group, the wave packet, as Figure 18 below shows.\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nA B C\n\nFigure 18. Wave Packets are Made by Combining Waves With Different Frequencies. The picture shows the simplest example: two waves (A and B) that add up to the wave packet (C).\n\nSuppose that the phase velocity varies for different frequencies, what is called dispersion. In this case, the wave group made by the constructive interference of the single-frequency waves moves at a different speed than the phase velocity: group and phase velocities differ. So, in dispersive materials, the phase velocity may approach infinity without violating the principles of relativity, but only for a single frequency, because otherwise the group velocity would tend to infinity as well. The cloaking of electromagnetic waves of fixed frequency is possible, as the successful demonstration of the microwave-cloaking device has confirmed, but the cloaking of wave packets carrying information is impossible. It turns out31 that the group velocity actually tends to zero at the inner lining of such cloaking devices; wave packets would get stuck there instead of traveling around. Turning invisibility from a tantalizing idea into a practical device requires a new paradigm.32\n\nCurved Space\n\nLight rays are curved in materials with varying refractive index. In conventional cloaking devices, the rays are curved because the material performs a transformation to curved coordinates. However, the curvature of a space does not depend on coordinates; curved coordinates create the illusion of curvature, but the space they describe is still flat. A flat space obeys the axioms of Euclidean geometry, in particular the parallel axiom: through each point outside out of straight line goes exactly one parallel line; parallels never meet. The light rays focused by a lens clearly violate the parallel axiom, because parallel light rays meet at the focus of the lens. Optical materials establish non-Euclidean geometries in general; the Euclidian geometries of cloaking devices are rather the exceptions. The advantage of Euclidean spaces is that one can easily visualize them; curved space is difficult to comprehend, in particular three-dimensional curved space. However, two-dimensional curved spaces can be visualized as surfaces of three-dimensional curved objects. These surfaces are the virtual spaces that are implemented, by the optical material, in physical space.\n\nThe simplest example is the sphere. On the surface of the sphere, the equivalent of straight lines, the geodesic lines, are the great circles. The great circles originating from one point meet again at the antipodal points, which shows that the surface of the sphere establishes a non-Euclidean geometry. To implement this geometry in the two-\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndimensional plane, one can use the stereographic projection, the central ingredient of the Mercator projection in cartography that is used to map the surface of a round object, the Earth, onto a flat sheet of paper.\n\nA line drawn from the North Pole of the sphere through a point on the surface intersects the equatorial plane at one point. This point is the stereographic projection of the point on the sphere. Figure 19 shows that the stereographic projection of a circle on the sphere is a circle on the plane with a different radius. The stereographic projection distorts the measure of space, but the distortion around any given point is the same in all directions, because otherwise circles would be deformed. Therefore, an optical material that implements the geometry of the sphere via the stereographic projection must be isotropic. One can read off the required refractive index from the drawing as follows: in virtual space, on the sphere, light propagates at the speed of light in vacuum from a point to its infinitesimally close neighbor; in physical space the distance between the two infinitesimal neighbors is modified—the speed of light is changed by the refractive index that is given by the ratio between infinitesimal distances in virtual space and the corresponding distances in physical space. For the stereographic projection, the refractive index is smaller than 1 for points on the northern hemisphere and larger than 1 on the southern hemisphere. This device is known as Maxwell’s fish-eye lens.33 In this lens, light follows the great circles, light goes around in circles, and light rays meet at antipodal points; the fish-eye makes a perfect lens (although a fairly near-sighted one). It is possible to extend these ideas to three-dimensional curved spaces. For example, the surface of the four-dimensional sphere is a three-dimensional curved space, and the device implementing this hyperspace object is just a three-dimensional fish-eye. Hyperspace is not out of this world; it can be built, and it turns out to be practically useful for invisibility.34\n\nFigure 19. Stereographic Projection\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBroadband Invisibility\n\nTo understand why non-Euclidean geometry comes to the rescue of invisibility, consider the following two-dimensional example.35 Imagine a virtual space made of a flat space, a sheet of paper, and a curved space, the surface of a sphere. The two spaces touch at one line. Consider the fate of light rays in this two-dimensional virtual world. Light rays would either pass the sphere or enter, through the connecting line, the surface of the sphere, whereupon, after one loop, they would continue in the same direction as they entered, as if the tour on the sphere had never happened. The sphere is invisible; it shows only as a time delay of the light ray. Although the sphere is invisible, it does not make something else invisible yet. However, this is easily arranged. Imagine a mirror around the equator of the sphere. The ray bounces off at the mirror, but, after another bounce, is back on track. A mirror in this curved space reflects light back to itself! The mirror creates the illusion that the light performs a full great circle, whereas in reality it stays on one hemisphere. The other hemisphere is hidden. Alternatively, some lines on the sphere are never crossed by light rays. Such lines can be opened like an eye; the space they enclose is hidden from sight.\n\nA B\n\nC D\n\nFigure 20. Non-Euclidean Cloaking Device in Two Dimensions. The device creates the illusion shown in A: light propagates through a virtual space that consists of a plane and the surface of a sphere, a curved space, which touch along a line. Some incident light rays venture from the plane to the sphere; they return after one loop and continue in the same direction. Note that the rays never cross the red zigzag line on the sphere. Plane and sphere carry a coordinate grid that is mapped onto physical space B. The magenta circle defines the boundary of the device. Its interior has been expanded to make space for the grid of the sphere. In particular, the line where plane and sphere touch has been opened like an eye (thick black lines) to include the sphere. This is not a cloaking device yet, but one could place a mirror around the equator of the virtual sphere C, making the northern\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nhemisphere invisible and creating the same illusion as shown in A. Alternatively (D), one could expand the red line that light never crosses to create a hidden space.\n\nWhy are such curved optical spaces of any practical advantage? They seem more complicated, but the distortion of space in such spaces is always finite, never infinite as in the conventional Euclidean cloaking devices. As the spatial distortions directly correspond to the required refractive indices, the required optical properties are never infinite, and hence such devices can, in principle, operate in a broad band of the spectrum. Curved space is more practical than flat space, although the theory is more complicated. These ideas can be extended from the two-dimensional toy model to the three-dimensional world, but they can no longer be visualized. Figure 21 below shows some ray trajectories in three-dimensional non-Euclidean cloaking devices.\n\nA B\n\nFigure 21. Three-Dimensional Cloaking. One can extrapolate the ideas illustrated in the previous figure to three-dimensional space, replacing the plane by flat space and the sphere by a hypersphere. The lentil-shaped object indicates the hidden interior of the device; the partly shaded grid, the boundary of the invisibility device. For better contrast, light rays are shown in red. A: Rays are bent around the invisible region. B: In three dimensions, some rays turn out to perform two loops in hyperspace that appear in physical space as light wrapped around the invisible interior.\n\nSuch non-Euclidean cloaking devices are imperfect because they delay the light traveling through the cloak. With sensitive timing or wave-front sensing one could, in principle, detect the presence of the cloaking device. Perfect cloaking is impossible, but as long as time delays and wave-front dislocations are of no concern, invisibility could become reality.\n\nImplementation\n\nNon-Euclidean cloaking devices do not have an obvious symmetry like the Euclidean microwave-cloaking device.36 They require materials with an electromagnetic response that varies from cell to cell and is anisotropic. Most probably, such cloaking structures can be made for microwaves. A precursor of the necessary technology is the recently demonstrated ground-plate cloak.37 This device implements the coordinate transformation shown below (that already appeared in the first paper on cloaking by\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ncoordinate transformations). This is not a cloaking device: it compresses an extended region of space to a reflecting plate; the interior is hidden behind the plate, but the plate is clearly visible. Such a device conceals the extension and shape of the hidden region but not the fact of hiding itself.\n\nA — B\n\nFigure 22. Coordinate Transformation Implemented by a Ground-Plate Cloak\n\nIn order to implement the ground-plate cloak, thousands of cells with split-ring resonators with individual, tailor-made electromagnetic properties were designed, as Figure 23 shows.\n\nFigure 23. Implementation of the Ground-Plate Cloak38\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nOptical Cloaking\n\nCloaking in the optical range of the spectrum poses several challenges. The present design of non-Euclidean cloaking devices still requires materials where, in some parts of the device, the speed of light is larger than in the environment of the device, which, in practice, means larger than the speed of light in vacuum. Most probably, this problem can be circumvented by inventing new designs and new geometrical forms of suitable curved spaces, because there is no mathematical reason why non-Euclidean cloaking should be limited in this way. However, solving this problem takes imagination and mathematical creativity; it cannot be planned by a clear roadmap, but it can be encouraged and stimulated. It could take 1 or 2 years or a much longer time until such designs are invented; truly imaginative research is unpredictable. This research takes a specific mindset, clear mathematical thinking combined with playfulness and physical intuition, a stimulating environment, and freedom. The greatest challenge for turning invisibility from an idea into a workable device is not technology but imagination. The only way to solve this problem is to follow the Solomonic advice to invest in the right people.\n\nThe technology for cloaking will depend on the design of such advanced cloaking devices. Probably they will require highly anisotropic materials, but perhaps liquid crystals could be sufficient. Maybe metamaterials are not needed after all. In this case, invisibility could become a feasible technology within a generation. If optical metamaterials are needed, they will rely on structuring on extremely short scales, possibly on sub-nanometer distances. The technology for making such structures will be developed because the silicon-electronics industry will need them; but whether large-scale devices with sub-nanometer structures can be made remains to be seen.\n\nAnother practical challenge is impedance managing. Ideal cloaking devices require materials with equal electric and magnetic response because they implement geometries and geometries are universal—they act on both the electric and the magnetic fields of electromagnetic waves like light. In practice, broadband optical materials mostly respond to the electric field but not to the magnetic one. Optical magnetism has been demonstrated with metamaterials,39 but only in narrow regions of the spectrum. If the electric response differs from the magnetic response, the electromagnetic impedance is mismatched, which results in reflections. One could reduce such reflections by using smooth refractive-index profiles as appropriate antireflection coatings.\n\nMost probably, cloaking devices will be rigid shells; to make them flexible like wearable invisibility cloaks poses a significant challenge. The reason is that their optical properties must be adjusted to their geometrical shapes, as the refractive-index profile of a cloaking device depends on its shape. If the shape changes, the index-profile must follow suit. The required optical properties should be calculated in real time, and the material should change accordingly. Liquid crystals could adjust their optical properties, but controlling a large, complicated array of liquid crystals with possibly several layers appears to be difficult, despite the progress made in liquid-crystal displays.\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSummary\n\nA cloaking device is a passive device made of a transparent material that guides light around any object in its interior as if the light has passed through empty space. The cloaking device conceals the object and hides the act of hiding itself. Perfect cloaking devices are impossible because they require materials where the speed of light approaches infinity. Imperfect cloaking devices could be made. Such devices implement suitable curved-space geometries. For electromagnetic microwaves, cloaking devices are definitely within reach of the present technology. Whether invisibility in the visible range of the spectrum will become a reality is not entirely clear yet. Most probably, this will depend more on the new theoretical research than on advances in new materials, and on the application of mathematical intelligence, intuition, and imagination.\n\n1 A. Alu and N. Engheta, Achieving transparency with plasmonic and metamaterial coatings, Physical Review E 72, 016623 (2005).\n2 G. W. Milton and N.-A. P. Nicorovici, On the cloaking effects associated with anomalous localized resonance, Proceedings of the Royal Society London A 462, 3027 (2006).\n3 Y. Lai, H. Chen, Z-Q. Zhang, and C. T. Chan, Complementary Media Invisibility Cloak that Cloaks Objects at a Distance Outside the Cloaking Shell, Physical Review Letters 102, 093901 (2009).\n4 U. Leonhardt, Optical Conformal Mapping, Science 312, 1777 (2006).\n5 J. B. Pendry, D. Schurig, and D. R. Smith, Controlling Electromagnetic Fields, Science 312, 1780 (2006).\n6 J. B. Pendry, D. Schurig, and D. R. Smith, Controlling Electromagnetic Fields, Science 312, 1780 (2006).\n7 U. Leonhardt and T. G. Philbin, Transformation Optics and the Geometry of Light, preprint arXiv:0805.4778, to appear in Progress in Optics.\n8 U. Leonhardt and T. G. Philbin, Transformation Optics and the Geometry of Light, preprint arXiv:0805.4778, to appear in Progress in Optics.\n9 U. Leonhardt, Optical Conformal Mapping, Science 312, 1777 (2006).\n10 J. B. Pendry, D. Schurig, and D. R. Smith, Controlling Electromagnetic Fields, Science 312, 1780 (2006).\n11 D. Schurig, J. J. Mock, B. J. Justice, S. A. Cummer, J. B. Pendry, A. F. Starr, and D. R. Smith, Metamaterial Electromagnetic Cloak at Microwave Frequencies, Science 314, 977 (2006).\n12 U. Leonhardt, Optical Conformal Mapping, Science 312, 1777 (2006).\n13 D. Schurig, J. J. Mock, B. J. Justice, S. A. Cummer, J. B. Pendry, A. F. Starr, and D. R. Smith, Metamaterial Electromagnetic Cloak at Microwave Frequencies, Science 314, 977 (2006).\n14 D. Schurig, J. J. Mock, B. J. Justice, S. A. Cummer, J. B. Pendry, A. F. Starr, and D. R. Smith, Metamaterial Electromagnetic Cloak at Microwave Frequencies, Science 314, 977 (2006).\n15 D. Schurig, J. J. Mock, B. J. Justice, S. A. Cummer, J. B. Pendry, A. F. Starr, and D. R. Smith, Metamaterial Electromagnetic Cloak at Microwave Frequencies, Science 314, 977 (2006).\n16 D. Schurig, J. J. Mock, B. J. Justice, S. A. Cummer, J. B. Pendry, A. F. Starr, and D. R. Smith, Metamaterial Electromagnetic Cloak at Microwave Frequencies, Science 314, 977 (2006).\n17 F. E. Wagner, S. Haslbeck, L. Stievano, S. Calogero, Q. A. Pankhurst, and P. Martinek, Before striking gold in gold-ruby glass, Nature 407, 691 (2000).\n18 D. Schurig, J. J. Mock, B. J. Justice, S. A. Cummer, J. B. Pendry, A. F. Starr, and D. R. Smith, Metamaterial Electromagnetic Cloak at Microwave Frequencies, Science 314, 977 (2006).\n19 W. Cai, U. K. Chettiar, A. V. Kildishev, and V. M. Shalaev, Optical cloaking with metamaterials, Nature Photonics 1, 224 (2007).\n20 W. Cai, U. K. Chettiar, A. V. Kildishev, and V. M. Shalaev, Optical cloaking with metamaterials, Nature Photonics 1, 224 (2007).\n21 C. M. Soukoulis, S. Linden, and M. Wegener, Costas M. Soukoulis, Stefan Linden, and Martin Wegener, Negative Refractive Index at Optical Wavelengths, Science 315, 47 (2007).\n22 C. M. Soukoulis, S. Linden, and M. Wegener, Costas M. Soukoulis, Stefan Linden, and Martin Wegener, Negative Refractive Index at Optical Wavelengths, Science 315, 47 (2007).\n23 J. Yao, Z. Liu, Y. Wang, C. Sun, G. Bartal, A. M. Stacy, and X. Zhang, Optical Negative Refraction in Bulk Metamaterials of Nanowires, Science 321, 930 (2008).\n24 J. Valentine, S. Zhang, T. Zentgraf, E. Ulin-Avila, D. A. Genov, G. Bartal, and X. Zhang, Three-dimensional optical metamaterial with a negative refractive index, Nature 455, 376 (2008).\n25 U. Leonhardt and T. G. Philbin, General relativity in electrical engineering, New Journal of Physics 8, 247 (2006).\n26 [11] J. Yao, Z. Liu, Y. Liu, Y. Wang, C. Sun, G. Bartal, A. M. Stacy, and X. Zhang, Optical Negative Refraction in Bulk Metamaterials of Nanowires, Science 321, 930 (2008).\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"de50ca2502c418a3","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n27 J. Valentine, S. Zhang, T. Zentgraf, E. Ulin-Avila, D. A. Genov, G. Bartal, and X. Zhang, Three-dimensional optical metamaterial with a negative refractive index, Nature 455, 376 (2008).\n28 U. Leonhardt and T. G. Philbin, General relativity in electrical engineering, New Journal of Physics 8, 247 (2006).\n29 U. Leonhardt and T. Tyc, Broadband Invisibility by Non-Euclidean Cloaking, Science 323, 110 (2009).\n30 U. Leonhardt and T. Tyc, Broadband Invisibility by Non-Euclidean Cloaking, Science 323, 110 (2009).\n31 H. Chen and C. T. Chan, Time delays and energy transport velocities in three dimensional ideal cloaking devices, Journal of Applied Physics 104, 033113 (2008).\n32 U. Leonhardt and T. Tyc, Broadband Invisibility by Non-Euclidean Cloaking, Science 323, 110 (2009).\n33 M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999).\n34 U. Leonhardt and T. Tyc, Broadband Invisibility by Non-Euclidean Cloaking, Science 323, 110 (2009).\n35 U. Leonhardt and T. Tyc, Broadband Invisibility by Non-Euclidean Cloaking, Science 323, 110 (2009).\n36 D. Schurig, J. J. Mock, B. J. Justice, S. A. Cummer, J. B. Pendry, A. F. Starr, and D. R. Smith, Metamaterial Electromagnetic Cloak at Microwave Frequencies, Science 314, 977 (2006).\n37 R. Liu, C. Ji, J. J. Mock, J. Y. Chin, T. J. Cui, and D. R. Smith, Broadband Ground-Plane Cloak, Science 323, 366 (2009).\n38 R. Liu, C. Ji, J. J. Mock, J. Y. Chin, T. J. Cui, and D. R. Smith, Broadband Ground-Plane Cloak, Science 323, 366 (2009).\n39 C. M. Soukoulis, S. Linden, and M. Wegener, Costas M. Soukoulis, Stefan Linden, and Martin Wegener, Negative Refractive Index at Optical Wavelengths, Science 315, 47 (2007).\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"e03c6f9a4c1933f1","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nCLASSIFICATION: SECRET//NOFORN\nGood morning,\n\nBelow is the requested additional information (include the year) to the UNCLASS tear line.\n\n\nLet us know if you have any questions, comments or concerns.\n\n\nv/r\n(b) (6)\nPAROC Intel Data Analysis Technician\n\n15 AF / DET 1\n[REDACTED]\n\n//UNCLASSIFIED//\n\n31 OCT 24, U.S Aircraft observed a possible UAP. It appeared to be oval/orb"} {"doc_id":"e03c6f9a4c1933f1","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"shaped, likely moving at a low speed. The U.S Aircraft had eyes on the poss UAP for over 2 hours.\n\n//UNCLASSIFIED//\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nCLASSIFICATION: SECRET//NOFORN\n\nHello,\n\n\nCould you please approve the use of the year this incident took place?\nCurrently you have approved the month and the day, we request it includes the year.\n\n\nThank for your assistance.\n\n\nV/r\n(b) (6)\nInformation Disclosure Analyst\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Miss Reeves\nx20593"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"draft\n\n....... a little bit, my skin waswet and it didn't stick the way it had stuck when we tried it out in the trainer and in the capsule on the pad and I finally gave up on it and just kept one eye shut. This is marginally satisfactory, I guess, but I was not well nighted after coming up to the first night. There's a redundancy here but you sure do have the right information or cases so a few of these will be repeats. Now lets start out with the conditions of dark adaptation.\n\nWell, most of these things that we had planned to look into if we could on Astronomy sort of went by the board, and I apologize to the people at the Cape that we didn't get more done that we had planned to do but as I think most of you are aware, at the end of the first orbit we start having some difficulty with control system and from then on it was pretty much systems monitoring with some looking around outside and that was it. So a lot of the things that we had planned to do and a lot of the things I had hoped to bring back just had to go down the drain, but becoming night adapted--the first time around I did get the eye patch out that we had and this was not a very satisfactory eye patch. I was going to try to use it over one eye so that I was night adapted. I was sweating a little bit, my skin was wet, it didn't stick the way it had stuck when we tried it out in the trainer and in the capsule on the pad, and I finally gave up on it and just kept one eye shut. This is marginally satisfactary I guess but I was not well night adapted coming up to the first night. What it boils down to is that my dark adaptation was just a result of the sun going down and not normal dark adaptation from being on red light and dim light, which takes some 10 to 15 minutes to get any"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"2\n\ndegree of adaptation out of. I could notice a difference in the numbers of stars I could see at first going just after the sun first went down and later on then when I'd be well night adapted at the end of the period. This is some 37 minutes later when you're approaching sunrise so you'd have a -- I suppose there was actual a period there where you're really dark adapting of about a half hour, 33 minutes, something of that order.\n\nDid you have an opportunity to count the stars?\n\nNo, this is one of those things that went down the drain. I thought about this on a subsequent orbit but I didn't spend any time on it. I feel that my vision, the numbers of stars I could see was not appreciably increased. Now, I had expected to see a lot more stars. I had thought they'd really jump out once you got above the atmosphere but I--like it was in debriefing --- I think of the being out on the desert on a dark night in summer when the air is very clear and dry, and you know what it is like out around Reno and some of those places; how the sky really comes out at night and you can just see a million stars and thats what it looked like. It didn't look like any more than that.\n\nThis was a general impression but not anything you can put your finger on?\n\nThats right.\n\nYou had planned at the end of the second and third orbits--during the second and third orbits to run the star counts and we had the areas lined up U-O-RI-AN, CAS-I-O-PIA, and what was the other one--it was off a little triangle area by SERIOUS off O-RI-AN. We had those three areas lined up and it was just--I was doing systems monitoring at that time rather than counting"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3\n\nstars. But a general impression of looking out at these areas was that the numbers of stars I could see was not greatly increased.\n\nYou mention the transmission through the glass be comparable ... to the atmosphere. That's something you people can check?\n\nThat's right.\n\nMcDonald, through their studies of the window had felt that we probably would not see too many more stars because the transmission of light through the window is cut down by 27 per cent or something like that. The figure that they came up with was almost identical to what people have computed the atmospheric attenuation of light is. So they felt that when we got above the atmosphere it would probably be about the same looking through the window as it is looking through the atmosphere here, and I think they were just about right. It looked to be about the same to me.\n\nI think it might be wise for you to read the next 3 or 4 paragraphs. I think a lot of these are going to be real quick answers, so why don't you get to it.\n\nDid you see Magellanic Clouds? No. Andromeda Nebula? No. How much did the moonlight affect your ability to see faint surface areas?\nTremendously. We had moon out--almost full moon. You can look at this two ways, (1) it was a tremendously disadvantage or it was a tremendous advantage. I prefer to think it was an advantage because it did provide a visual capability on the clouds--on the dark side which was sufficient that I could use it for a yaw reference where it might have been questionable whether I could do that otherwise."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4\n\n- Was this bothered or being bothered by moonlight on the windows or was the sky actually bright?\n\nNo. The sky was not bright. I didn't notice the sky being bright at all nor was it moonlight bothering on the window of the capsule. It was moonlight on the surface of the earth back from the clouds when I looked down that direction I could use as a yaw reference.\n\nYes, but I heard you say that the moonlight very definitely did bother your ability to see faint areas. I'm trying to find out in what way.\n\nWell I don't--perhaps that was a misstatement. I don't think it really hurt on seeing fainters I don't believe. I was thinking of the more complete night adaptation we would have without any moonlight at all. This is so slight you couldn't--I doubt if you could pinpoint [REDACTED] differences.\n\nWhat about daytime stars?\n\nDaytime stars I couldn't--if I was going along and looking down at the horizon, the area behind the capsule and would look up, I couldn't see any at all. But when we had the small end of the capsule up above the horizon and over to the right where it was shaded from the sun, then if I stayed in that position for, oh, anything over a minute, I guess, then I could see the brighter stars start coming out. I never remained in that position long [REDACTED] [REDACTED] enough to become night adapted where I could identify constellations or pick out specific stars but I wanted to see whether we could pick up stars on the daylight side and you could after about I guess a minute adaptation.\n\nPerhaps we had better move on then to the question of stars very near the moon."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This didn't seem to be any problem. Looking up fairly close to the moon, I would guess a--counting a number degrees probably, you could see right up to the edge of the moon. The stars would be visible right up--very close, its not like it is when-[you observe the moon from the earth's surface]\n\nFaddy faint stars?\n\nYes, I think so, just like the other--the whole field of stars you're looking at, you come up and--the only way, when you swing the capsule around and you'd be approaching [REDACTED] area where the moon was, you could tell it because there would be moonlight coming in the window and you would see the light moving across on the capsule. [REDACTED] Thats the only way you would know that you're really coming close to the moon. You didn't know it by the sky getting [REDACTED] real light as you come to the moon like you do here. There was a little area around it where this was true. It wasn't just/complete cutoff, but it was nothing like the buildup we have here where you are looking through the atmosphere and get all this.[scattering]\n\nAny Comets?\n\nNo. No comets. I used the first sunset. I had this little poloroid filter out were were going to use so that we could look directly at the sun. This, while I think of it, this was another thing that was rather surprising to me. The sun is not as blinding as I thought it would be. I told the people in debriefing down there after experimenting very carefully with this a little bit, I looked directly at the sun with the naked eye just as you would do here. You've looked up and squinted so that you have really shielded your eyes and looked directly a t the sun/a little sliver of light through. And"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"this was very similar. You do the same thing there and I had no--there was no problem with the eyes. The light though, it was very noticeable. The light was a very brilliant clear, white light and what it looked like coming in the window and the way it looked on the suit--the best thing I could relate it to were the arc lights, the brilliant search light are lights that they have down at the Cape that are out on the pad at night. Its that type brilliant white light coming in--very bright. And it was warm enough that I remember commenting, I put it on the tape I believe at one time that riding along the sun was coming in and it was over on my right arm and I commented about my right arm getting appreciably warmer than the left when the sun was on it. It was a very intense light but as it came in the window and was on your arm here thats just what it looked like. It looked like being on the pad at night with these real bright search lights on. Same type light, it wasn't any of the orange-ish yellowish light.\n\n....(Inaudible).......... in size from the UV?\n\nOh, yes.\n\nThis is the difference.\n\nAny unanticipated celestial features?\n\nThe comets I--to get back to comets here a minute--I guess we didn't completely cover that one. See any comets? No. Not at all. When the sun goes down its a--well this was a very brilliant brilliant thing and the light was spread out much more in a much broader band out toward the horizons than I had anticipated. I had thought--I don't know why, no one had ever briefed me on this particularly--I thought the sun down. It would be a little bit of light right on the .......... and bang, thats it. There are nothing but stars"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"from there on. Thats what I was prepared to see, I guess, but this wasn't the way it was at all. The sun goes down and its a brilliant display. Theres all the spectrum lined up here almost. Just as the sun goes down--well before the sun goes down you have a broad band .......... down in the atmosphere that we show on the pictures that I took too and I'm sorry we don't have those there to brief you with those but you'll see those later where starting with the sun down on the horizon there a great band that runs way out here maybe I think I estimated some 45 to 60 degrees on each side of the sun, way out. And it gradually goes down to a point out here like that. Starting from a very bright white band close to the earth and going out to a point out here and the other bands of light going from, oh, yellowish and orange color on up into the blues as you get off toward the black of space. Just as the sun sets that last little sliver of light where I was looking for the green flash that everyone has been looking for, that I had been briefed on, just as I'm watching for that, just as the sun gets down on the horizon, why it joins this long sliver. So you don't actually see that last little sliver of sun. It goes down, you can tell when it goes down but its not a clear ball just going below the horizon like that. Its out in this broad sliver that goes out toward the horizon.\n\nThis band is primarily a horizon phenomena. It doesn't run [REDACTED] [REDACTED] perpendicular wise?\n\nNo. Its in the atmosphere. Very definitely.\n\nIts shows it quite well on that photograph there.\n\nThe zodiacal light I looked for and I never was night adapted enough to see it.\n\nSolar Corona?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Solar Corona. No. This--once again I think to observe these things properly we are going to have to be night adapted before we get there and thats what we lost by having other complications on the second [REDACTED].\n\nTo get back to the unanticipated celestial features.\n\nWell, unanticipated celestial features--the little light spots, luminous spots that I saw--I don't think these are celestial features. I don't know what they are. Can we get back to that later?\n\nUh huh.\n\nI think unanticipated features, another one to do with sunset is that the sunset lasted--the lightness much longer than I had anticipated. This went on for some 4 or 5 minutes that you could still see bright bands and things then they would gradually go to a more dim condition but this occurred--this was over some quite [REDACTED] lengthy period of time--about 5 minutes. I had expected the light to just go down very shortly after sunset. But it didn't, it was quite brilliant, quite bright for a long period of time.\n\nWould you concentrate on [REDACTED]. It would be a concentration over the horizon but were there many [REDACTED]?\n\nNo. Another unanticipated celestial thing at night though was this cloud that I described, the haze layer or whatever it is. I notice this at first because as the stars were coming down toward the horizon they move rather rapidly down toward the horizon at first. I was watching one particular star and it got rather dim and I thought well its going behind the horizon and then it got brighter again as it came down closer to the horizon and then went out of sight. Well then when I looked very carefully I could see [REDACTED] a band that was some--I think we estimated about 6 to 8 degrees above the horizon and was"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"probably a degree and a half to two degrees wide and it was quite visible once you start looking for it. It [REDACTED] seemed to go out and taper out. No, it didn't taper as much as the light at the horizon did during sunset. It was more of a solid type band. It looked like the color of it would be sort of a buff--look like a buff light color--I don't know, something like this rather than a pure white, be sort of an off color, just not a pure white.\n\n(Question by Dr. Roman inaudible)\n\nNo. All these things you see are things that we had planned to use at first orbit, mainly just hold position, get all the radar data, all the tracking, monitor systems closely and thats what we were doing and then we flew the first orbit then we were going to broaden this out a little bit on the second and third orbit and thats where we got trapped because the second and third orbit kept right on doing what we were doing on the first orbit.\n\nWe over time in Astronomy. Lets try to finish up real fast and come back\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nAny planets?\n\nYes. Venus, I believe it was--I identified it on the tape, on the chart. Wasn't it Venus that went down just above the [REDACTED] that particular day. Venus was very visible immediately after the sunset. The sun would go down. Just as quick as the last light was gone I could see that very clearly. In fact I believe on the tape I identified that before the sunset. I could see up that close to it.\n\n(Statement by Dr. Roman, inaudible)\n\nThat will come up on the star chart that day. Yes, and we had them all plotted where they should be. You may be right. I'll have to check the chart on that. Venus and Mercury had been right--closer. We had them"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"identified by the previous shot. I think maybe this one Mercury. Lee check the chart on it.\n\nSee any stars ________________________________?\n\nZodical light. No. Solar Corona. No. I was not well enough adapted to ________________ patterns along that line.\n\nShadow of earth of sky?\n\nNo.\n\nTo photograph the Orion region, it looked about the same as it does from the ground. This area in the center of the Orion that I was trying to use as a target area, the center star in the belt--we got several pictures of that. These were taken with different drift rates on the capsule. We tried to press the capsule on manual control and get it right on very accurately and in then use the camera but there was still some drift in the capsule at that time and I had to keep ______________ for it. This is not a stable a platform as you would like for this type photography. Made exposures of about 15 to 18 seconds. I was counting off the seconds myself without explosion. Thats about it. I been interested though to see whether those came out.\nI did see some prints and I don't know enough about evaluating those prints to know what we got.\n\n(Question inaudible)\n\nWell, we discussed this during debriefing some, I think we must have had spitting some thrusters that weren't cutting off absolutely clean, that would add just a hair of thrust in one axis or another at a time because I would have the rates zero-ed completely and be sitting right on the spot"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of magno control inputs and you'd start a little drift rate very slow. Probably the drift rates went out over a quarter of a degree per second during the time that I was trying to make the pictures. But thats enough if you drift off and you have to correct back the line you drift off a line correct back line, you do this for 15 or 20 seconds, its rather a crude way to take pictures.\n\n(Question inaudible)\n\nYes. Hand held and had it up against the visor to steadiness and turn it very slowly. We had the loose site on the top of it. A loose site with a cross hair and so that I could keep that right on the--lined up on the stars. It will be interesting to see if we came out with anything on that.\n\nMake any other comments about our ______________________________?\n\nNo. It looks about like it does on the desert on a bright summer night.\n\nM Twilight. Did the twilight bother you at all? Can you tell us anything about that.\n\nYou mean the light I described after sunset?\n\n(Statement by Dr. Roman, inaudible)\n\nThe only time twilight bothered either way was when you ______________ because sunrise is the--the early pickup sunrise coming up is in the scope facing backwards, of course, to the direction of motion and you see the sun come up and this would--this twilight, you watch it increasing in the scope, meanwhile we're holding manual control most of the time and this was very difficult. For some reasons, this was more difficult to hold accurate control on the periscope at sunrise than it was to look back out the window and hold"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it visually or on instrument. And since we were having automatic control trouble presentation on the attitude, I was trying to maintain control looking back out the window and to check back and forth between the very brilliant and bright light coming in at sunrise through the scope and look back out into the dark again, I finally just put filter over the scope and go back to looking out at the stars and what I could see on the clouds--moonlight coming off of them and that seemed to be easier to hold the position.\n\nThe moon look any different to you?\n\nNo. Not appreciably. It was brighter--a lot brighter. Just very clear. Once again, clearer than it is around here, brighter than it is around here. Once again, out on the desert on a real clear night, its very similar.\n\nLets push on to the earth questions on your next page, John. You said you had never used the interference filter.\n\nNo.\n\nOkay, haze and airglow band at night?\n\nYes, I did try the airglow band at night and I could see nothing. This may have been the lack of night adaptation--I don't know. I wasn't too concerned about the night adapting so perfectly to that. I tried the airglow particularly on the storm areas over the Indian Ocean. There was a very large storm there to the North, of course, and a smaller one to the South of course, over about the first third of the Indian Ocean. We had wondered if we could see lightening from above and lightening from above is very, very visible. Theres no problem at all on that. You can see the flashes--you don't see individual flashes like you see a lightening bolt hit the ground here"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"but you see a whole thunderhead light up and ______________________________ and another one would light up over here and there would be some light go back and forth from here like this very horizontally. And then you would see another one light up and there was a lot of thunderstorm activity particularly in the storm that was to the north, of course. A little less to the one south but the lightening was very visible.\n\nPretty much the same thing you see from a high flying jet, isn't it?\n\nYes. You're a little farther away, of course. Its similar to that if you've been up above the--40 or 50,000 feet at night and there is some little low thunderheads where you have the--maybe some of the flashing a little bit down at low altitudes, it would be a similar type thing. You're just farther away from it but there's no problem at all seeing flashes. It was on that area to the North, of course, in particular that I tried to use this airglow filter for a period of time but I didn't get any pattern out of it at all. This may have been my lack of night adaptation.\n\nAt twilight did you see the shadow of the earth on the atmosphere?\n\nNo.\n\nLast of these. Can you describe how the atmosphere changed during the twilight process? You've already gone over this, if there's nothing you can add--\n\nWell, I think that about describes it. One thing I was surprised at were the during the twilight period that might be of some interest with little discontinuities in it but I think they were just weather build-ups and high clouds off on the horizon. I though the horizon would be extremely even and"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that the weather would be so ______________________________ that you wouldn't see any of this but you could see little bumps along in the twilight glow after the sunset and this shows up in some of our pictures. You can see these little bumps along. Do you have copies of those up here?\n\nNot up here. I saw some that were first run yesterday down at the Cape.\n\nWe had a first look at these out at Grand Turk. I think the copies we got were not the best in the West. They seem to be a little rough. They had a lot of specs on them and I'm looking forward to getting back down there and going over them again. But you could see some of these. You could see a little bump out here, there would be a little discontinuity.\n\n.......... angle or altitude..........(question, partially inaudible)...?\n\nNo. They were in the lower part of the light band so I assume that they were weather build-ups.\n\nWhat did you estimate the height of the atmosphere to be under daytime conditions? In fact, this angle of the horizon business?\n\nWell, estimates on the angle, saying that this was some 6 to 8 degrees wide, up to this layer for instance was about 6 to 8 degrees wide and it was maybe a degree and a half or two degrees think. This sort of an estimate of the size of the ________ over here. We're about 30 degrees in the window our angle we can look out and a little less than a quarter, maybe a fifth of this business of--say if you estimate about 6 degrees. When I say 6 to 8 degrees this is not an accurate protractor type measurement.\n\nCould you use a spacecraft as a protractor?\n\nWell I used the window, just the window area\n\n..(Question, partially inaudible).... from the top of the window from the horizon up to the top of the atmosphere? ........................ read it off from the autopilot?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"You might be able to try this. I didn't try it that way. You might be able to, holding your head fix you might be able to do something like that. This would be fairly accurate. This would put it down, I think, where you could pick it off within a--our gradations on that attitude control system are fairly fine--about, I guess, three sixteenths of an inch is 10 degrees but you y could pick it off to within a degree and a half or 2 degrees with pretty fair accuracy.\nI notice in some of the pictures there is a second order image of the sun about 10 degrees from the primary image apparently due to the 2 thicknesses of glass.\nYes. I think thats what it was from. I don't recall seeing any of those at all. I notice them in the same pictures and there was another phenomena in the pictures you may have noticed. In quite a number of them--I think Bob noticed it first before I had--up above the horizon some 15 or 20 degrees there appeared to be a green band go across that parallel the earth's surface. Did you notice that in thepictures? And this was in quite a number of them. And I never saw any band like that at all. I don't know whether it was actually there and just showed up on the film and I just didn't see it or couldn't see it or whether it was always when the sun was at a particular area out here and it was just a certain reflection off the window or reflection off the lens of the camera but I think we should probably take those pictures and try to analyse what angle the sun was to them as well as we possible can.\nI think John is doing that right now.\nIs he? Because this green band is a new one on me. I never saw that until we got the pictures and I imagine its just a reflection on the IX lens."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"through the window like 2 suns or satellite......?\nDid.you.see.any multiple images./...(question partially inaudible.........XX\nNo, no.\nCould I ____________ a question here on the surface?\nGo ahead.\nI notice on the picture here and also the comet the description of the ______________________________on the horizon in the daytime. __________ ___________ around the horizon near the sun.. Was this a uniform thing ________ _______________.\nNo. It comes out even in broad daylight. It seems to go out to a little more of a pointed area out--way out the horizon if you leaned over and look out the window way out toward the North, for instance. This would not be as broad a band as it appeared to be when we're looking back directly on the flight path, for instance.\nIt does appear to exist 350 degrees?\nOh yes.\nWere there any appreciable irregularities in it or was it completely smooth?\nSmooth. These are very--there are fuzzy edges. You don't run up like you see on the spectrum to this color and to that color. They all fade into each other like a rainbow but its a--there are no discontinuities where a yellow band was more thick than a blue band here or something like that. They all just ran out even.\nAre you referring now to the sunset phenomena?\nThat true then too. I was speaking primarily just during broad daylight.\nDo you get different colors in broad daylight other than the blues?\nJust the Blues and whites during broad daylight. Yes."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"You notice any--very many clouds or any peculiar cloud formations?\nYes. We got quite a number of cloud pictures and you can pick out the relative types of clouds. We did wonder whether you could tell vertical clouds from SER-OS clouds. You can tell what clouds are vertical development and you get a three dimensional effect. Looking at them you can tell that some are higher than others.\nComparing what you said with what the picture showed, is there anything particular noteworthy that you might have seen that the pictures might not show?\nI don't think so other than the things we have mentioned here.\n(Question, inaudible)\nIs what Now?\nDoes your window produce any maximum polorization?\nWe have a real limited degree of polorization in the window.\nHow many ____________ do you have in M ___________ form?\nI will make a note on that one and check the exact polorization of it.\nWe had--this was checked at the time that we ran some star studies in St. Louis and I took the capsule out ___________________.\nThe reason I asked ____________________________________________ ____________________________________.\nThe exact figure on that I can't give you.\nDid you pass over any snow propagations, mountains __________?\nNo. I could see out in the West looking way up North from the area right over--well the South of San Diego at the end of the second orbit. There was so much cloud cover up to the North that I couldn't be real maximum positive."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It ran up and looked like it ran off the edge of a __________. Then there were some white areas way up to the North and I imagine these were probably snow fields. I thought at the time they probably were but I couldn't be sure. I didn't specifically go over any area where I could look right down at this cloud and that snow. I was surprised at my--and another thing, as far as the weather goes, and that is what a tremendous area of the earth was its covered by clouds that day. I don't know whether we're going to find that this is customary or not. But I was surprised. I had very little view of land.\nthe equatorial regions\nK.......(Statement, inaudible).........\nYes. The intertropical ________________. We had been briefed on that and, of course, that took care of things all the way across the Pacific. There was cloud cover all the way across there. There was cloud cover over all Eastern Africa. I never saw the Lake Chad area that I was looking for. It was covered. The only part of Africa we really got a good look at was Western Africa in the desert regions. You could see the big dust storms blowing and these were very visible. I commented on it and Kenya came back and said yes that they had been having these dust storms for about a week. Tremendous blowing clouds of dust that obscured large--very large areas of the ground. Coming across the states and, this whole area across WI-NAS and Northern Mexico, Southern California and that area had very large cloud decks and high SER-OS clouds obscured vision from above. There were some breaks in it and you could see through momentarily.\nWhat color were the dust clouds?\nThey just looked like dust. Brownish. Just looked like a dust storm you've seen out on the desert. Same color. The colors from above looked--"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I could see no difference in flying in an airplane at 50,000 feet and looking down and seeing colors on the ground then there is from the capsule.\nLets switch the subject again. Did you have an opportunity to try closing your eyes and seeing the Sorenkoff Radiation flashes?\nSeeing what?\nRadiation flashes from energetic particles fastened to your eyeballs.\nIs that another ____________. First time I heard of it.\nWhat do you call this again now?\nSorenkoff Radiation by a good Russian friend of that name.\nGolly, they missed that one on briefing.\n(statement, x inaudible)\nWhen a cosmic ray passes through a material in which the--its velocity exceeds the velocity of light in the medium you have this radiation given out-Sorenkoff Radiation and John Winckler of Minnesota thought that you might be able to observe this if you shut your eyes when the heavies came through.\n(statement, inaudible)......\nAre these suppose to be very visible, very bright or just--\nNo one knows because they never get down to the earth's surface. They would have been in the blue light.\nWe didn't ride around for any period of time with the eyes closed. There was not enough going on that--this eye patch, we had that. That was intentionally done, not to two eyes, just to one so that you'd still monitor everything that was going on. So I did not ride around with the eyes shut any period of time.\nAlright. Lets get to the luminous particles. Back to page 1."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20\nThats a good one. That sure is.\nWere they all traveling in the same direction and the same velocity?\nYes. They all just appeared to be me sitting out here floating and they particular didn't have any interaction with each other. They were-- some went running this way and some that way. They all appeared just to be static in their field. I was moving through them. The only ones that appeared to move were the ones that seemed to have a little flow characteristic around the capsule, and this was surprising too because there would be one that would come following up around the edge of the capsule and it would drift off like this and it would just more or less take its place back here. If this had been just a flash, just a momentarily thing, I don't know, it would have been--I don't know what I would have thought on one like that.\nI sat there and observed this thing just as carefully as I could observe it for some 3 to 5 minutes at three different periods. The lights were not very dim little lights as though reflections from something. They were every bit as brilliant or more so than fireflies out on a real black summer night.\nAnd you've seen fireflies out in the meadow or when they just stand out like very, very bright stars. They were as least as bright as the brightest fireflies you've ever seen in a situation like that and the light was very steady and they were about the same color as fireflies. This was a luminous yellow-green or green-yellow color. I'd say it was almost an identical to a firefly and they were just as far at that particular time. I would look out the window this way and there just seemed to be no end to them out here, no end back this way, no end on this side, up or down in particular.\n(Question, inaudible)......\nYes."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20\nThe density looking perpendicular to your path is about equal to that __________.\nI had 2 things came in mind. One was, I thought we founds the lost [REDACTED] Air Force needles, that was the first thing. But they weren't--wasn't like that at all. The other thing, I thought perhaps we were getting freezing of the water coming out of the capsule and we were having snow, something like that. In fact, later on they called me from the ground and asked if I thought that that is what it was. But it wasn't that type thing at all. It didn't appear to be eminating from the capsule. The particles were not closer together--closer to the capsule than they appeared to be further away. The average distance of the particles apart was probably--I estimated I think some 6 to 10 feet, in that neighborhood. Occasionally one would be right in the shadow of the capsule and would drift up pass the window and it looked rather white like a wee tiny little piece of cotton or a little--it looked like a little snow flake. Some little piece of thing like that. These white ones that I saw come up by like that I assume were the same things as the others out here because I never saw anything else outside of the window.\nDid you ever see the same one go into the shadow and come back out?\nWell, I was asked that before and I--my initial answer to it was yes and then I couldn't recall any real specific instance where I watched one go from luminousity to white and back to luminous again. So I can't say positively I did on that. I think they did but I don't want to make a positive [REDACTED] statement."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"21\n(Question, partially inaudible).............. in the shadow of the capsule they were simply white like snow?\nThats right, thats right. They were very liminous. When the first rays of the sun would come--when the first rays of the sun came by the capsule is when I'd see the first ones and this persisted then some--oh, 5 minutes.\n(Lengthy question, inaudible)......?\nIt could be. I won't say it was. I won't say it wasn't.\nI don't know how you could have much depth perception but do you have any idea about how far away the fartherest ones were?\nNo. I couldn't estimate how far away they were but you had a very definite feeling of depth perception through them, mainly, I think by looking out to the side out here. And if you had a lot or particles hanging out here and you move through them see the ones move as you move them them and the near ones move right within. Ones far out move very slowly so this gives you a sense of depth. And I think that the way I perceived most of that.\nYou say they're all moving in the same direction?\nThats right.\nDid any move faster than others?\nThey didn't appear to. They all appear to be hanging [REDACTED] except for the ones that seemed to come up around the capsule in this flow condition.\n(Question, partially inaudible) Did that flow look anything like __________?\nYes. Thats what we talked about. It did. The few particles that came by was just like a __________ almost."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"21a\n[REDACTED] (Statement, partially inaudible) __________________\n__________ advancing a new theory that this might very well be some full luminescence of areas __________________________ around the capsule __________________________ we talked about this N night and day change__________________. Whether theres anything of this kind ______________________________ recombination back in the shadow of the capsule______________________________. Five miles an hour ________________________motions ____________________ area of capsule speed and so on. It certainly seem--it seem to be some connection with the capsule in some way and not with something coming from outer space.\nI estimated 3 to 5 miles an hour differential speed and I--it wasn't over five miles an hour., thats definitely on the high side if we get up to that. They were just very slowly drifting by. They gradually start disappearing as the sun came up and we got up at more of an angle they gradually start disappearing. And I couldn't see anything.\nDid you see them before the sun rose?\nNo.\nDid you look for them before that?\nYes. The second time around I was watching for these things.\nBut you did see them as soon as the sun rose?\nThe very first light of the sun--the very first rays of the sun than came up, you could see the first ones appear just like that when the sun came up.\n(Question, inaudible.....?\nYes.\nDo you have an impression of the shape, the structure of the individual particles."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"22\nNo. These one that would come fairly close to the capsule I could see. Thats where I estimated they were just a very tiny size up to maybe 3/8 of an inch or half an inch.\nWould you characterize them as sort of irregular like cornflakes, like crystal, like snowflakes?\nThey didn't appear to have any oblong pattern to them or any particular circular pattern. No real semetry at all.\nWere they flat like snow flakes?\nThese little white things which I think were the same items were right up close to the window in the shade looked a lot like little snow flakes.\nWould you say they were apeherical or __________?\nI think more like sort of a __________ sphere.\n__________________________________ any distance at all and they were luminous and the sun was on them and there was no [REDACTED] shape to--just like looking at a firefly light. That's the nearest thing I can come--I keep coming back to because that's just what they looked like.\n(Question, Inaudible).....?\nNo. No. There was no on and off again type thing at all. This was another thing that going back to the stars it was noticable too as we had expected there wans't any of the--I didn't notice any particular amount of twinkling of the stars, not like they do down here.\nDid [REDACTED] you see any of these particles move __________?\nNo. Its just like you have a big static field like you have gone out here with strings and placed them in this room and if you cane back and through that door and back to way across the room that just what they looked like going by. It just wasn't--"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"23\nThey all went by in the direction of ____________________?\nThat's right. Now, I turned around once so I could see if they were coming toward me. I got around facing toward the [illegible] sunlight. As I came around and the sunlight was off to my right I could see far fewer of them at that time than I could see when I was facing backwards. This would be on the side away from the sun is where I could see most of them. But they--the ones out here were still coming towards me. Now this is--I want to check and see if these were eminating from the capsule. They were not. They were still coming toward me from out there so they couldn't have been eminating from the capsule.\nFrom the direction toward which you were moving.\nThat's right."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"How close ____________________?\nSix to ten feet apart.\n(Question, partially inaudible) .......you said you saw it 3 times. Did you? This was approximately the same.........................?\nWell, this was right at each sunrise. Now this was another thing we talked about. Bill Douglass, I think, felt that there might be some possibility if the earth does have its own band around the equator, just as some of the planets do, that perhaps were were at the edge of a little band like that that was appearing each time we came up past the equator on the dark side and it just happened to coincide with the sunrise at that time. We entered at sunrise each time. We don't have the data--I haven't checked back here to get the data on that yet as to whether this was always right at the equatorial region that we ran into.\n(Question, inaudible)....?\nRight at the first light of sunrise there was a--no other time. I specifically looked for them at sunset. As the last light of the sun went away I thought we might see them there. I didn't. This was always at sunrise. Now, this difference may be that I was more night adapted ____________________ at sunrise. Maybe they were there all the way around.\n(Question, inaudible).....?\nWe're running short of time here. Let me get through a couple of these right quickly.\nWhats the longest time you require watching any individual particle?\nOh, I can't answer that as to the length of time I specifically watched one particular particle but they were not blinking on and off or anything like that."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"25\nDid you have the impression they would be there if you ________?\n____________they were about 6 to 7 feet apart. The window is only a certain size -________________.\n(Statement, inaudible)\nWell, I had the impression I could have sat--I could have been sitting there and watch one particle for some distance as it went on back maybe for a minute or so.\nWhen they were in the shadows of the spacecraft, did they appear to vary any in brightness ?\nNo. They weren't luminous when they were in the shadows. I can't specifically say. I watched 8 particles from a luminous condition to in the shadows non-luminous and back to a luminous condition.\n(NH Question, inaudible)...?\nOh, yes. I think this is very probable. I could have seen it farther than that. They were bright. If you were night adapted and you can see a very bright firefly from a considerable distance and this was a--\nWhen you saw this the second and third time around did you have the feeling that there were any more of less than there was the first time?\nNo. We talked about that too and I think it was the same type. I don't think the density of it was any different. Completely snowed. The first time I saw these I looked down into the--I checked some systems--had been looking outside the __________ the cockpit and made a check a _____ check as I was doing all the time and had had my head in the cockpit for some little period of time and glanced back up at the window. I had been doing this just"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"26\nas I could start to begin to see some faint light down below and I glanced back up at the window and my first impression was, well we've gotten way out of attitude and probably come to the ________________ because here it was just like looking out on a complete star field, there was no other reference at all and looking backward toward this dark area what had happened, instead of the even horizon back here that I had had with the stars up above and the darker area down below. Now in this dark area down below too were all these other lights pinpointed in. They just looked, at first glance, like a continuation of the whole star field down into that area. I thought we had drifted up and here I am looking at nothing but a starfield and how did I ever get into this crazy attitude. I checked instruments again and checked the periscope again and I hadn't drifted. I was still in the same attitude I was in except this big darker area here that had been the earth back behind it that I had been looking at was now filled up with all these dots as the first light of the sun surfaced.\nHow long after the sunrise did you observe some of these in the shadows of the spacecraft? Was it almost immediately or towards the end of the this ____________ period?\nOh, I don't think there any difference on that as far as when they would drift up into that. This could well have been occurring just as well when I first came into them as they could at the end of the time. I didn't have any impression that there was more drift by the capsule at one time than another or more flow around the capsule that pulled them in past the window at one time or another."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"27\nYou can't see them on the film?\nNo. The ones we had out there at Grand Turk I couldn't very--we had to many scratches and spots on those pictures that I couldn't really pinpoint them. But when we get hold of the original pictures and can project those, I hope that we can see more, I don't know. Those reproductions we had out there were not very satisfactory. I hope the originals are better than that. Did you see the originals? Are they clear?\nI saw prints which I think ________ started to develop. They seem fairly clear.\nDid you see any of these spots on them? Did you have the film? Did you look at the film?\nI did not look at the film directly. But it not the sort of picture ____________________ you had in Grand Turk. You had a really good clear print that day.\nThats right. And the way they looked they were pretty ________. They weren't the best job I ever saw. I'm afraid ________ I don't know waht to tell you except that. I wish I could be more helpful. All I can say is we observed it and it was very clear and distinct. It wasn't a reflection from anything. It was very positive. We observed it a long period of time on three different orbits at exactly the same spot. Beyond that, I have not foggiest the slightest idea what it is.\nWe they all the same color?\nYes. Very even colored except that some of them would look a little larger than others, a little brighter than others. The color was identical."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in brightness\n\nWere there any changes/looking out the side cross your __________ and back?\n\nNo. I don't recall any. We talked about that too and I couldn't recall\nthat they looked any different in one direction than they did in another.\n\n(Question, inaudible)....?\n\nNo.\n\n(Statement, inaudible)...\n\nIt might well have something to do with differences in electrostatic\npotential._______________________________.\n\n(Question, inaudible)...?\n\nThe drift would be like--well if you were looking out--well if a snow\nflake come drifting by the window is something goes very rapidly, of\ncourse. As I was looking out the window, there be/little particles just\ncome ____________________just come up across the window and maybe\n_______________ around and then drift away and as it got out there a little\nbit it just seemed to assume its position out here.\n\n(Statement, inaudible)...\n\nOh, no. It was not a thing where the thing just came around on/very\nsmooth trajectory and run off like this. It would drift up around here\nlike that and then it would drift off on it own. It looked very much--it\njust looked like snow. It looked like you would see in a wind\ntunnel only with a single particle.\n\nDo you have any _________ on your capsule?\n\nI'm sure there is. I don't know what it is but I'm sure there must be\nsome."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"29\n\nThere would not only be an electric charge, there would be a differential\ncharge between the window and the outside of the capsule which could\nexplain________________________________.\n\n(Statement, inaudible).....\n\n(Question, inaudible)....?\n\nWell, thats a pretty tough one. I don't know. That would be like--\nI hate to be too positive because it might lead you astray but I keep coming\nback to the fireflies again. Very, very similar to looking out at this--\na big firefly or little firefly. Looking out on a real dark night in a pasture\nthis might be a small firefly up close and a big firefly farther away. As\nyou drift through these things they go by, they all look reasonably uniform.\nThe ones that are up close and some of the luminous ones were up very close.\n\nDefinitely, did that make sense?\n\nAs they would be up close and then drift away they didn't appear to\ndiminish their light very rapidly. Just like seeing a firefly again.\n\nWell John you kept your date with us promptly. I think we should let\nyou go promptly.\n\nI hate to break this up too because I want to find out what these\nthings are. I don't know what to tell you. I'm afraid I'm about dry on\nnew information.\n\nI won't ask you what did they say John __________________.\nI may have to go back and check them. I'm ready.\n\n(Statement, inaudible)...."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"30\n\nI'd like to get together again because this was the first real honest\nto goodness business like this we've conducted since I got back here and\nthis is what I want to get back to next week. I'm going back to the Cape\nMonday night. I'm going to be down there all next week on touring plan\nand then probably back down in the following week again until we get a lot\nof this. I want to go through the flicks films and _________________ and\nget back to work and finish _______ this type thing this week.\n\n(Statement, inaudible)...\n\nI don't think there's any great urgency from our point of view mainly\nit was to get the first impression there is always debriefing.\n\nAny time you would like to get even with us _______________.\n(Conversation, several people, inaudible)\nThank you Glenn.\n\nThank you."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Date Mar 13\n\nROUGH DRAFT: 3/13/62\nCODE SCG: MD:dd\n\nMEMORANDUM to Director, Office of Space Sciences\nSubject: Considerations and Recommendations of Manned\nSpace Exploration Following the Interview (February 27 1962)\nwith Lt. Col. John H. Glenn, Jr. Col. Glenn presented a\nvery detailed and factual description of his observations\nduring the MA-6 flight. He answered rather well the many\nand varied questions presented to him during the limited\ninterview. Despite the fact that he was never properly dark adapted,\na number of his observations remain of good interest for possible further exploration. Furthermore,\nit is evident that the astronaut can perform various scientific experiments, the has the capability of doing compact\nso despite the many limitations imposed by the Mercury capsule.\nSome comments on Col. Glenn's observations are presented\nbelow followed by a number of recommendations.\n\nLuminous particles: In response to a series\nof questions, Col. Glenn described the velocity field of\nthe luminous particles, their brightness in and outside the\nshadow of the spacecraft, the coloring and sunlight and\ntheir shape. For the velocity field, the particles all\nmoved at precisely the same speed and all moved at precisely\nthe same direction except for particles coming very close\nto the spacecraft. This occurred similarly in all three\norbits. From the velocity in a fashion for dynamic considerations alone, it may\nbe stated that the luminous particles observed by Col. Glenn\nwere not extraterrestrial particles but were particles associated\nwith the spacecraft or the launching or the booster."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-2-\n\nThe consistency in the observations on the three separate\norbits would require that the particles were associated\nwith the spacecraft itself (I have heard that O'Keefe\nhas suggested that dumped water may have been the source of the particles)\nhas investigated the life support system which would water into space) Col. Glenn described the\nparticles shape and the luminosity. The fact that the coloring\nwas a yellow-green and the observational description picture described by Glenn would indicate that the particles\nbecame fluorescent in sunlight. The particles observed\nin shadow were observed in the scattered light from the\nspacecraft and were probably illuminated only by visible\npart of the spectrum.\n\n-2-\nThe change of angles of the particles approaching\nclose to the spacecraft could be attributed to the\nrepulsive charge since the polarities of the particles\nand spacecraft were the same. The ability of Col. Glenn\nto observe the particles under improper dark adaptation\nwould indicate that an astronaut would be in a position\nto carry through a series of experiments to investigate\nthe physics of comets in the solar environment. Properly\ndark adapted the various gases and dust particles ejected\nfrom the spacecraft during sunlight conditions and while\nthe spacecraft is in sunlight could be observed with instruments and\nastronaut-scientist and the results could be recorded\nwith instruments.\n\nObservations of air glow and haze: Limited by poor\ndark adaptation, Col. Glenn was not able to desribe any"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-3-\nsignificant observations of the starfield or the moon. In the absence of atmospheric scattering the sun appeared a brilliant white, but showed no signs of corona. It is of interest, however, to consider Col. Glenn's observation of a band six to eight degrees of the twilight indicating a six-to-eight-degree-band above the horizon, with a haze layer about two degrees wide at the top. Although it has been speculated that the coloring of the observation the multiple layers of the window could cause the high angle to the horizon of haze with the air glow and haze layer, this appears may be unlikely because of the variations of the angle of view allow the window for different orientations of rotating the space craft. Col Glenn said and the fact that he did not see any double imaging during in observing in any of his other observations. Furthermore, he was able to state that the stars observed through the haze layer became less intense while changing angle near below the horizon. The USSR reports by Titov also indicated a high angle haze layer. It is evident that of the airglow was observed with the 5577 filter, no was it observed without it. The airglow should be detectable by usual observations after dark adaptation. Further investigations of the air glow and haze layer should be carried out.\nMeteorology: The striking intensity of lightning discharges as observed by Glenn point the way to consideration of an detection system for monitoring lightning storms over the earth using the meteorological satellite. The mapping of the distribution of thunderheads accompanied by lightning during the night appears to be relatively straightforward, while the similar mapping during daylight appears feasible because of the short time constant of the lightning flashes.\nRecommendations: There are A variety of number of"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-4-\nhave become evident\nrecommendations appear to be apparent following the very successful flight of the Mercury capsule.\n1. The astronaut-scientist carrying out the observations from a space vehicle should publish under his name (with an associate) a general article in a widely distributed scientific journal. In this manner, the observations would have wide distribution, be properly credited to the observer, and would be edited for correctness.\n2. Additional support to the astronaut in carrying out scientific observations is warranted particularly in consideration of Col. Glenn's attitude and interest in carrying out such observations. Several instruments may be added to the spacecraft, within engineering limitations, to assist in obtaining further detail data.\n3. Col. Glenn suggested that a following discussions would be to his interest. Such follow-on discussion is strongly recommended for further questions and exchanges, and inform the astronaut analysis to evaluate of the results of the [REDACTED] and study of his observations.\n4. It is very important that proper dark adaptation methods be incorporated into the spacecraft system so that the astronaut may optimize his visual observations.\n5. Investigations of the physics of comets and the feasibility of the capital \"Artificial Comet\" experiment may be carried out directly by the astronaut in a relatively straightforward way. [REDACTED] These experiments should be carried out as an urgent to the feasibility of this project."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-5-\nthe study of and twilight scattering and similar phenomena\n6. For air glow and optical studies, the photomultiplier detection system incorporating a series of filters available, a screen for observing the U.V. airglow visually (including a possible fluorescent plain filter to study by fluorescence) the ultra-violet) should be incorporated into the spacecraft.\nBecause a number of scientific experiments appear reasonable following the success of the Mercury orbital flight, and in consideration of the present/replanned manned-space-flight-program, some recommendations are we should take apparent to take advantage of the improvements in the program. this activity to improve the space science scientific exploration of the solar system and in astronomy. At headquarters it is recommended that consideration may be given to: the following:\na. The arrangement of a Program Chief and supporting staff in the space science reporting to the Director of Space Sciences for scientific exploration of in the Manned Space Flight Program and,\nb. The formation that a committee or sub-committee be formed including such people as Roche, Minnaert, Tousey, Sekera, etc. and so forth to include the scientific community and the in this activity and,\nc. The formation of that a branch or division at one of the centers be created as a scientific team for direct support of the astronaut-scientists who venture into sys-solar space. carrying out scientific experiments in carrying out scientific experiments\nM. Dubin\nHead Designing Program\nCMcLean Fillans CCarb-"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mr. Dubin\nIn reply refer to: SGA(JRG:sml)\nFEB 23 1962\nMEMORANDUM for the Files\nSubject: Telephone conversation with Dr. John O'Keefe from Cape Canaveral\nThe following information was gathered from a conversation with Dr. O'Keefe on Wednesday, Feb. 21, 1962:\nAstronaut Glenn reported having seen small luminous particles during his flight. They appeared to be moving at a speed of about three or four miles per hour. They were apparently not more than 100 feet away from the capsule, and were visible by binocular vision. Their color was golden like fireflies, and they seemed to be more to the rear of the capsule than ahead of it, though they were visible for great distances all around. These particles were visible only at sunrise (not at sunset), and the capsule seemed to be immersed in them. They very definitely had nothing to do with the capsule or its movement.\nGlenn also reported that very clear pictures of the stars, including Orion, had been taken with the UV camera, although the capsule motion had caused a \"wiggly\" view.\nJocelyn R. Gill\nStaff Scientist\nAstronomy & Solar Physics\nUV camera - 2300-3000 A° - thru Vycor window of Mercury capsule"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\nLOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY\n(Contract W-7405-ENG-36)\nP.O. Box 1663\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\nIN REPLY REFER TO: J-16-812\nJUL 17 1962 Dubin\nJuly 13, 1962\nSG JUL 17 1962\nDr. Jocelyn Gill\nRoom 62033\nFederal Office Bldg. No. 6\nHeadquarters, N.A.S.A.\nWashington 25, D. C.\nDear Dr. Gill:\nThe June 29 issue of Science brought to my attention J. H. Glenn's comments on \"The High Layer\". It seemed possible that the layer he described could be accounted for as a region of relatively large nitrogen peroxide (NO2) concentration, and the past two weeks have been spent in checking this hypothesis. Unfortunately I am not familiar with either photochemistry or upper atmosphere physics so the following analysis leaves much to be desired; the hypothesis seems tenable, however, so I would like to bring it to your attention.\nEffective path length and comparison with possible surface observations.\nReferring to Figure 1, the height (H) of a point at a distance (L) from a point on the surface of a sphere of radius (R) can be found from the formula\n(R+H)^2 = R^2+L^2+2RL sin Θ (1)\nwhich has the solution\nH = R [ -1 + sqrt(1 + (L/R)^2 + 2(L/R) sin Θ) ] (2)"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 1\n\nL\n\nθ\n\nH\n\nφ\n\nR\n\nFigure 2\n\nVertical path (No. 1)\n\nNo. 3\n\nNo. 4\n\nH1\n\nNo. 2\n\nHorizontal path\nfrom surface"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY\nUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\n\nTO: -2- DATE: July 13, 1962\n\nFor the following I will assume that the concentration of absorbing molecules in the region of interest can be described adequately by an exponential decrease with altitude above the bottom of the layer, hence, can be represented by\n\nρ = ρo e^(-H/Y) (3)\n\nwhere Y is the scale height in the layer and H must lie in the layer. Then the number of molecules per cm² is found to be\n\nN (molecules/cm²) = ∫ ρ(H)dl (4a)\n\nN = ρo ∫ e^(-R/Y [-1 + sqrt(1 + (L/R)² + 2(L/R) sin θ)]) (4b)\n\n= Rρo ∫ e^(-R/Y [-1 + sqrt(1 + y² + 2y sin θ)]) dy (4c)\n\n(Y ≡ L/R) (5)\n\nwhere the integral is over the range of y desired (usually 0 → ∞).\n\nFor a vertical view (sin θ = 1) path, the solution is simply\n\nN1 = Yρo (6)\n\nwhere ρo is the density at the base of the layer."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY\nUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\n\nTO: Dr. Jocelyn Gill -3- DATE: July 13, 1962\n\nFor a horizontal path (sin θ = 0) tangent to the base of a layer (path No. 3) we note that y << 1 in the contributing region, hence, can get an approximate form\n\nN ≈ Rρo ∫₀^∞ e^(-(R/Y) y²/2) dy (7)\n\nwhich has the value\n\nN = sqrt(πRY/2) ρo (8)\n\nHere ρo is the density at the base of the layer, as in equation (6).\n\nAn astronaut's view thru a layer from above would see twice the path computed by equation (7), giving\n\nN3 = ρo sqrt(2πRY) molecules/cm² (9)\n\nA line of sight tangent to the earth and passing thru a layer at base altitude H (path No. 2) will have\n\nN = (RY/L) [ρ1 e^(H1/Y)] (10)\n\nand we note that [ρ1 e^(H1/Y)] is the density at H1, the base of the layer, which we set equal to ρo as in equations (6) and (9),\n\nN2 = ρo RY/L = ρo sqrt(R/2H1) (11)"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY\nUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\n\nTO: Dr. Jocelyn Gill -4- DATE: July 13, 1962\n\nAssuming that Y = 7 km in an absorbing layer, we note that a surface observer viewing a layer at an altitude near 100 km will have available the ratio\n\nN2/N1 = 5.5 (12)\n\nAn astronaut viewing along path No. 3 would have a much greater thickness, as\n\nN3/N1 = 2πR/Y ≈ 75 (13)\n\nViewing thru the layer to a point near the surface and out again the enhancement would be much less,\n\nN4/N1 = 2N2/N1 = 11 (14)\n\nLight received by an observer from a \"point source\" in space is attenuated by a factor e^(-σN) where σ is the absorption plus scattering cross section, giving\n\nI/I0 = e^(-σN) (15a)\n\nand\n\nln I/I0 = -σN (15b)"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY\nUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\n\nTO: Dr. Jocelyn Gill -5- DATE: July 13, 1962\n\nFrom the report in Science, I infer that for the layer reported,\n\n1 < σN3 < 5 (16)\n\nor\n\nσN3 = 3 ± 2 (17)\n\ngiving\n\nσN1 = 0.04 ± 0.027 (18)\n\nand\n\nσN2 = 0.22 ± 0.15 (19)\n\nAny such absorbing layer present during the day would result in rapid heating, and reradiation in the infra-red range from whatever bands may be present. However, the absorbers postulated below would be destroyed by photodissociation and/or heating during the day. Hence, it is not surprising that solar spectra have not shown such an absorbing layer.\n\nStellar, planetary or lunar spectra might show the existence of such a layer, if the absorption spectrum has sufficient structure.\n\nSetting X1ρo = N1 (20a)\n\nwe find the effective path length X1.\n\nX1 = 7 x 10^5 cm (20b)\n\nX2 = 3.9 x 10^6 cm (starting absorption at 100 km altitude) (20c)"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY\nUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\n\nTO: Dr. Jocelyn Gill -6- DATE: July 13, 1962\n\nX3 = 5.4 x 10^7 cm (20d)\n\nX4 = 7.8 x 10^6 cm (20e)\n\nAbsorbers Present in the Upper Atmosphere\n\nThree constituents of the atmosphere near 100 km altitude absorb light through most or all of the visible range, as would be required to get a noticeable dimming of starlight.\n\nThey are: 1) NO2 (nitrogen peroxide)\n2) O- (negative atomic oxygen ion)\n3) O2- (negative molecular oxygen ion)\n\nOf these, I found no cross section data for O2-. For O-, Massey (Negative Ions; Cambridge U. Press) gives curves showing absorption cross sections starting at 5620 A and approaching ~ 4 x 10^-18 cm2/ion in the region λ < 5000 A. There is very little structure (only the onset at 5620 A).\n\nFrom equation (17) we find that\n\nN3(O-) ≈ (3 ± 2) / (4 x 10^-18) = (7.5 ± 5) x 10^17\n\ncould explain the observed attenuation.\n\nFor an effective path length of 5.4 x 10^7 cm, we have ρ0 = (1.4 ± 1) x 10^10 negative ions/cm3.\n\nSince the daytime free electron concentration in the E layer is 1.5 x 10^5 and the night value is ~ 10^4 it seems hard to believe such a high nighttime concentration of negative atomic ions."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY\nUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\n\nTO: Dr. Jocelyn Gill -7- DATE: July 13, 1962\n\nNitrogen peroxide has been extensively studied and two papers were found which gave absorption coefficients in the visible region of the spectrum. Wiley and Foord (Proceedings of the Royal Society A135, 174 (1932) give a coefficient which I convert to\n\nσ ~ 1 - 3 x 10^-19 cm2/molecule\n\ndepending on the wavelengths selected by their filters (the lower value was for the range 4900 < λ < 5250 A).\n\nHall and Blacet (J. Chem. Phys. 20, 1745 (1952) give a curve obtained with a Cary spectrophotometer having ~ 5 A resolution. Maximum absorption occurs in the range 3500 < λ < 4500 A and drops to ~ 1/2 the peak value at 5000 A. They give no data for longer wavelengths. I convert their absorption coefficients to ~ 6 x 10^-19 cm2/molecule at 4000 A, and ~ 3 x 10^-19 cm2/molecule at 5000 A. Structure produces changes in cross section of ~ 2 x 10^-19 cm2/molecule at wavelengths separated by a few angstroms.\n\nTaking an average value of 4 x 10^-19 cm2/molecule, we find\n\nN3(NO2) = (3 ± 2) / (4 x 10^-19) = (7.5 ± 5) x 10^18 molecules/cm2\n\nand using X3 = 5.4 x 10^7 cm\n\nρ0 = (1.4 ± 1) x 10^11 molecules/cm3"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY\nUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\n\nTO: Dr. Jocelyn Gill -8- DATE: July 13, 1962\n\nReadily detectable structure would produce variations of σN1 and σN2 of about half the attenuation figure given in equations (18) and (19) which is near the threshold of detectability.\n\nI have not yet found an author who estimates the concentration of NO or NO2 in the atmosphere; Bates and Nicolet discuss the reactions which lead to it in the book \"The Earth as a Planet\", edited by G. P. Kuiper (Volume II of The Solar System).\n\nNicolet calculates the photodissociation time as 200 seconds during daytime, and shows the concentration must be so low that no effect on solar observations would be found.\n\nAs a general conclusion, it seems to me more likely that NO2 would be responsible for an absorbing layer, generated perhaps with the aid of downward diffusion of NO to higher pressure regions favoring oxidation to NO2. The color suggested by Glenn fits very well, as may be quickly verified by looking thru the vapor space above concentrated nitric acid.\n\nExperimental Proposal.\n\nIdeally, one could ask for the absorption coefficient as a function of wavelength (over a very wide spectral range) and time after sunset on the air volume investigated.\n\nIt seems possible to get very useful data with a relatively simple experiment perhaps possible of inclusion in one of the manned orbital flights.\n\nUsing a slow-speed movie camera, photograph the star field and such planets (including the moon) as opportunity permits, with approximately a 10° field of view and enough exposure to permit photometric measurements as the light sources"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY\nUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\n\nTO: Dr. Jocelyn Gill -9- DATE: July 13, 1962\n\n\"pass through\" the atmosphere, especially the absorbing layer (perhaps such sequences already exist). At the expected orbital height, I estimate a 7 km thick layer would subtend ~ 1/2 degree and a given light source would \"pass through\" it in eight seconds. Attempts to derive a density distribution would require a fair number of points in the \"1-1/2 or 2 degrees\" (divide by 3 ?) so a frame interval near one per second seems desirable. If operated continuously thru the night passage approximately 100 feet of 16 mm film would be required per passage.\n\nAs a crude attempt at spectroscopy, color filters could be used on some of the sequences, without too serious light loss. For example, a Corning No. 5030 or No. 5543 filter would limit exposure to the wavelength range of maximum absorption by NO2 (light loss may be considerable) and a Corning No. 3480 filter would limit exposure to the wavelength range where O- absorption is negligible.\n\nRelatively broad band interference filters would be useable on the brighter stars and planets. Direct visual observation through such filters would also be useful, especially if photography is impractical and the astronaut tries to reproduce any attenuation noted by neutral density filters in combination with the same filters and stars used in space.\n\nPhotometric observations of some of the \"intense\" airglows mentioned by various authors would also be very instructive. The increased intensity due to external tangential viewing would help a great deal, and precise height determinations could be made.\n\nIt may be useful to ask Glenn and Carpenter to reproduce the dimming (as well as memory allows) by narrow strips of neutral density filters against the star"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY\nUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\nLOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO\n\nTO: Dr. Jocelyn Gill -10- DATE: July 13, 1962\n\nfield they saw, or to compare the intensity and color changes noted with that thru an absorbing cell containing NO2. The required thickness is readily available.\n\nAcknowledgments\n\nThe author has benefited greatly from discussions with several associates, especially as regards references to sources of upper atmospheric and photochemical data.\n\nDr. Robert Sherman has assisted in location of data on the absorption cross section of NO2. Dr. Arthur Cox suggested a number of references and confirmed the author's belief that reasonably accurate photometric observations could be made on photographs of a star field. Dr. Leston Miller has emphasized the importance of even crude control of the wavelengths responsible for exposure. All of the men mentioned above are members of the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory.\n\nDr. J. A. O'Keefe of the Theoretical Division of the Goddard Space Flight Center generously discussed the observations of J. Glenn and S. Carpenter, and my hypothesis regarding NO2 absorption. He has referred me to the excellent articles in \"The Earth as a Planet\" and encouraged my submission of this letter.\n\nFuture Work\n\nI would, of course, be interested in your opinion, and that of other experts in the field, of the above hypothesis. If your group recommends inclusion of such observations on a future flight, we may be able to help on some points in data acquisition. I am sure the project would deserve review and control by a panel of men such as Bates and Nicolet.\n\nRespectfully submitted,\n\nBOB E. WATT\nAssoc. J-Div. Ldr.\nand Grp. Ldr. J-16\n\nBEW:jo\nDistribution:\n1 - Dr. Jocelyn Gill\n1 - Dr. J. A. O'Keefe"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In reply refer to: SGC:ML:ml\n\n21 February 1962\n\nMEMORANDUM\n\nSubject:\t\tPossible Scientific Visual Information\nObtained by J. H. Glenn\n\n1. Two (2) interesting observations were reported in the Press, as described by Colonel Glenn during the MA-6 flight. It is of vital interest to obtain a more detailed description of these observations in order that the accuracy and the details of what was observed may be properly recorded for scientific evaluation. The two observations were:\n\n(a) The report of the great number of luminous particles apparently travelling with the spacecraft at Friendship-7 sunrise; and\n\n(b) The altitudes or angular view of the upper limb of the atmosphere.\n\n2. The thousands of luminous particles were described as travelling with the spacecraft. It is important that Glenn describe in detail precisely the observational characteristics under which he saw the particles in order to obtain an estimate of the brightness of these particles. The questions that we would like answered are what was the basis of Glenn's determination of that the particles were actually travelling with the spacecraft and whether this condition persisted on subsequent orbits. In addition, the geometry of the observations should be further described in order to derive the geometric distribution of the particles relative to the spacecraft's window. (The precise observational time and the position of sunlight luminosity can readily be determined from the orbit of the spacecraft itself). These particles may be geocentric in origin and may be suspended in the atmosphere. There are at least two hypothesis for explaining particles travelling with the spacecraft. The intensity compared to starlight should be determined also as this information is of importance in determining further information about the absolute number and cross-sections of the particles and may relate to the dust content of zodiacal light as well as the gegenschein."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- 2 -\n\nIn a similar manner, the observations of the horizon and the extent of the atmosphere are of great interest in determining the distribution of various atmospheric characteristics. The precise lighting conditions regarding the position of the sun and the intensity of the outer edge of the horizon as observed by Colonel Glenn may be used in the consideration of what Glenn actually saw. For example, he may have seen the limit of the atmosphere (based on the 8 degree limb described in the press, the atmosphere apparently extended to over 150 Km) by Rayleigh scattering; he may have seen the airglow; or he may have seen the MIE scattering from dust in the atmosphere. The true limiting angle of his observations and a graph of the intensity drop-off with angle from the earth should be obtained in addition to the lighting conditions.\n\nIt is recommended that this information be obtained from Colonel Glenn as soon as possible.\n\nMaurice Dubin\nHead, Aeronomy Program\nGeophysics & Astronomy Programs\nOffice of Space Sciences\n\nSG_____________________ SG_____________________\nFellows\t\t\t\tClark"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"NASA HEADQUARTERS ROUTING SLIP\n\nCODE\tNAME (if necessary)\tACTION\nAPPROVAL\nCONCURRENCE\nFILE\nINFORMATION\nINVESTIGATE AND ADVISE\nNOTE AND FORWARD\nNOTE AND RETURN\nPER REQUEST\nRECOMMENDATION\nSEE ME\nSIGNATURE\nREPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF:\n\n1. SGC Fellows\n2. SG Clark\n3. SG Cortright\n4. [signature]\n5. SG Dubin\n6.\n7.\n\nREMARKS:\n\nDubin\n\nFROM: SGC\tNAME: Dubin\tDATE: 2/21/62\n\nNASA Form 26 (Rev. July 1959)"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In reply refer to: SGC:ML:ml\n\n21 February 1962\n\nMEMORANDUM\n\nSubject:\t\tPossible Scientific Visual Information\nObtained by J. H. Glenn\n\n1. Two (2) interesting observations were reported in the Press, as described by Colonel Glenn during the MA-6 flight. It is of vital interest to obtain a more detailed description of these observations in order that the accuracy and the details of what was observed may be properly recorded for scientific evaluation. The two observations were:\n\n(a) The report of the great number of luminous particles apparently travelling with the spacecraft at Friendship-7 sunrise; and\n\n(b) The altitudes or angular view of the upper limb of the atmosphere.\n\n2. The thousands of luminous particles were described as travelling with the spacecraft. It is important that Glenn describe in detail precisely the observational characteristics under which he saw the particles in order to obtain an estimate of the brightness of these particles. The questions that we would like answered are what was the basis of Glenn's determination of that the particles were actually travelling with the spacecraft and whether this condition persisted on subsequent orbits. In addition, the geometry of the observations should be further described in order to derive the geometric distribution of the particles relative to the spacecraft's window. (The precise observational time and the position of sunlight luminosity can readily be determined from the orbit of the spacecraft itself). These particles may be geocentric in origin and may be suspended in the atmosphere. There are at least two hypothesis for explaining particles travelling with the spacecraft. The intensity compared to starlight should be determined also as this information is of importance in determining further information about the absolute number and cross-sections of the particles and may relate to the dust content of zodiacal light as well as the gegenschein."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- 2 -\n\nIn a similar manner, the observations of the horizon and the extent of the atmosphere are of great interest in determining the distribution of various atmospheric characteristics. The precise lighting conditions regarding the position of the sun and the intensity of the outer edge of the horizon as observed by Colonel Glenn may be used in the consideration of what Glenn actually saw. For example, he may have seen the limit of the atmosphere (based on the 8 degree limb described in the press, the atmosphere apparently extended to over 150 Km) by Rayleigh scattering; he may have seen the airglow; or he may have seen the MIE scattering from dust in the atmosphere. The true limiting angle of his observations and a graph of the intensity drop-off with angle from the earth should be obtained in addition to the lighting conditions.\n\nIt is recommended that this information be obtained from Colonel Glenn as soon as possible.\n\nMaurice Dubin\nHead, Aeronomy Program\nGeophysics & Astronomy Programs\nOffice of Space Sciences\n\nSG Fellows SG Clark"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DRAFT OF NOTE ON THE SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATIONS\n\nToward the end of the flight, between 16 hr and 47 min (UT) and 17 hr and 03 min (UT), 24 May 1962, Lt. Cdr. Carpenter made a series of observations on a luminous band visible around the horizon. The most decisive observation was made with an airglow filter supplied by Mr. Lawrence Dunkelman of Goddard Space Flight Center. The filter transmits a narrow band of wavelengths, approximately 11 Angstroms wide at the half power point and centered at the wavelength of the strongest radiation of the night airglow, namely 5577 Angstroms. The filter cut out all other light, but passed the light of the luminous band, which is thus identified as the 5577 layer.\n\nLt. Cdr. Carpenter noted that the layer was very bright. He found that Phecda Ursae Majoris, magnitude 2.5 was lost to sight at the brightest part of the layer. Assuming that the image of Phecda occupies about 1 square minute of arc on the retina, or 8.18 x 10-8 steradians, and assuming that a star of magnitude 0.8 yields 10-6 lux (lumens/m2) we find that the brightness of the layer is about 3 lumens/(m2)(steradian) or 3 x 10-4 stilbs. This is equivalent to about 4 x 10^4 ergs/(m2)(steradian)(sec), taking the least mechanical equivalent of light as 1.61 x 10-3 watts per lumen for 5560 A as per the AIP handbook. It is about 50 times as bright as a white surface illuminated by moonlight.\n\nThe angular height of the layer was found in 5 different ways:\n\n1. By direct estimate - 8° to 10°.\n\n2. By noting that it is approximately twice the height of the twilight layer. Lt. Cdr. Carpenter estimated the height of the twilight layer as 5 sun diameters, which means 2-1/2 degrees, hence the height of the 5577 layer would be 5°.\n\n3. By observation of the star Phecda (γU Ma) as it passed the middle of the luminous band."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4. By noting the time when Phecda was halfway from the luminous band to the horizon.\n\n5. By noting the fact that when the cross of the reticle is set diagonally, the horizontal bar just covers the distance from the band to the horizon.\n\nBy method 3, we make use of the time of passage through the middle of the layer. This point is marked by a reference to a mark on the telemetering. It is understood that this mark can only be found on the ground station tapes, which are not yet available, but by careful timing of the capsule tape, it appears to have been very close to a 4h 2m 29s, capsule elapsed time, i.e., 16h50m45s. UT. For this instant the capsule coordinates as interpolated from the Woomera tracking data, were - longitude = 127° 40:0, latitude = -18° 49:8, height = 226 kilometers.\n\nAt this moment, the line of sight to γ Ursae Majoris was tangent to the layer of maximum thickness of 5577. The angular zenith distance of γ U Ma at this time was found to be 101°42'. A line of this zenith distance is tangent to a spherical shell of the proper radius which is 137 kilometers below the capsule or 89 kilometers above sea level. Accordingly, this observation should be interpreted as indicating that the densest part of the 5577 layer is at a height of 89 kilometers, which is in good agreement with rocket measures.\n\nThe lower limit of the visible light appeared to be near 78 kilometers; but this determination is not considered as significant, since a luminous shell is expected to diminish gradually downward in apparent brightness, even if it is actually very thin.\n\nThe upper limit of the layer is at about 105 kilometers, so far as can be judged from the voice tape; this result is quite uncertain.\n\nThe filter observation on the airglow was made at 17h 02m 6s, UT."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Sunrise was observed at about 1m later, while the observation was going on. It follows that the airglow is visible even when the twilight band is very strong. An attempt to observe it in the day is certainly indicated. In this connection, it should be noted that Capt. V. I. Grissom reported a grayish band at the top of the blue sky layer. (Results of the Second U. S. Manned Suborbital Space Flight, NASA, GPO (1961). He remembers this layer as narrow and grayish in color, representing an actual increase in intensity. He pointed out the approximate position of the layer on one of Lt. Cdr. Carpenter's photographs at the height of 1.7 degrees above the horizon. Grissom may have observed the daytime airglow.\n\nCarpenter did not note any structures, either vertical or horizontal, in this layer. He did not observe it completely around the horizon but believes it to be continuous all the way. It does not appear possible that this layer can actually absorb starlight. Any layer at this level capable of absorbing a noticeable fraction of the light (25% or more) would also scatter light strongly; it would therefore be a very prominent object on the daylight side. In fact, it is not definitely visible on the photographs of the day side. This is entirely in agreement with Lt. Cdr. Carpenter's impression, namely that the decreased visibility of stars passing through the layer was a contrast effect.\n\nA remarkable feature of this observation is the discrepancy between the eye estimates of 8° to 10° for the altitudes above the horizon, on the one hand, and the results of timed observations on the other. The latter indicates altitudes of 2° to 3°. The latter are clearly correct; for example, Carpenter noted that when one arm of his reticle was at an angle of 45°, it covered the space between the horizon and the bright band. The crossarm is 1.21 centimeters in length and it is a distance of 26.2 centimeters from the astronaut's eye. At an angle of 45°, it subtends a vertical angle of about 2°.6."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It thus appears that there is a strong illusion which exaggerates angles near the horizon, and which was evidently also present in MA-6, since Lt. Col. Glenn also reports 7° to 8° as the height of the luminous band. The illusion is perhaps comparable to the well-known illusion which makes the moon seem larger near the horizon.\n\nCarpenter also noticed and photographed the Glenn effect. He reports white objects resembling snowflakes, seen at sunrise on all three orbits. However, he also saw these objects 7 minutes after the first sunrise and again 43 minutes after sunrise; and 2m, 11m, 23m, 26m, 36m and 45m after the second sunrise. It is thus quite clear that they are not related to sunrise, except perhaps in the sense of being most easily visible then.\n\nCarpenter managed to photograph a few of these particles. Some of them were very considerably brighter than the moon, which was then very near the first quarter. At this time, the moon is about -10; the particles may have been between -12.5 magnitude (10 x brighter than the moon) and -15 magnitude (100 x brighter than the moon). The second is considered more likely, in view of the appearance of the full moon (-12.5) as shown on MA-6 photographs. At -15, the particle brightness is consistent with centimeter size snowflakes. The particles were verbally described by Carpenter as between 1 mm and 1 cm in size, and having a strong visual resemblance to snowflakes.\n\nShortly before reentry, just at sunrise, Carpenter performed the decisive experiment of hitting the capsule walls with his hand. The blows promptly resulted in the liberation of large numbers of particles. It is thus clear that at least those particles observed in the MA-6 flight emanated from the capsule.\n\nThe possibility that the particles might be dye marker or shark repellant, both of which are green and both of which are exposed to the vacuum, was considered by Mr. Frank M. Crichton, NASA capsule inspector. Crichton had tests made which demonstrated that neither material tended to escape from the"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"package in a vacuum. The possibility that it might represent small particles\nfrom the fiberglass insulator was also considered; in view of the smallness of\nthe fibers, it appears likely that they would have been blown away at once,\nlike the Mylar confetti. The dynamic pressure of 1 dyne m² is sufficient to\nremove at once anything weighing less than about 10 to 100 milligrams cm²; which\ncorresponds to a thickness of the order of 0.3 to 1 millimeter for most\nordinary substances.\n\nAs mentioned in the MA-6 report, there are two plausible sources\nwithin the capsule for these particles.\n\n(1) Snow formed by condensation of steam\nfrom the life-support system.\n(2) Small particles of dust, waste, bits\nof insulation and other sweepings.\n\nThe latter are very conspicuous in a zero g environment, when there\nis nothing to keep them down; it is found to be extraordinarily difficult to\nfree the interior of the capsule of such material. Undoubtedly, the exterior\nparts of the capsule which are exposed to the environment will contain these\nthings, and they undoubtedly play a part in the Glenn effect. In particular,\na corkscrew shaped piece observed by Carpenter was probably a turning or\nperhaps a raveled piece of insulation.\n\nOn the other hand, there is considerable evidence which points to\nsnow as the source of the majority of the material. In the first place, water\nis dumped out of the capsule in far larger quantities than any other substance.\nIn the second place, the material looked like snowflakes both to Glenn and to\nCarpenter. In the third place, the frequency with which the Glenn effect is\nreported by Carpenter appears to be correlated with the temperature of the\nexterior of the capsule as recorded by thermocouples in the shingles. The\ntemperature was always lowest at night, falling to temperatures of -35°C just"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"before sunrise, and rising to plus 10°C just after sunrise. During the second\nday, the temperatures were lower, reaching about -25°C during portions of the day.\nFrom about 3h 30m, CET, on the second period of sunlight, the temperatures were\nhigher, and only one particle is mentioned.\n\nIf the effect is indeed due to condensation of moisture, then the\nbroad end of the capsule is a more likely source than the narrow end, because\nthe temperatures were 20°C or more higher at the narrow end.\n\nThe condensation probably took place inside the capsule, rather than\noutside, because even at the lowest recorded shingle temperature, around -50°C,\nthe vapor pressure over ice amounts to about 0.039 millibars. Although this\npressure is very low, it greatly exceeds the ambient pressure at the lowest\ncapsule altitudes. Accordingly, it is not possible that snowflakes should form\nunder these circumstances, even though it is true that the capsule must be\nsurrounded by an expanding atmosphere of water vapor.\n\nIf the water-vapor expands freely, it is clear that the pressure at a\ndistance of 1 meter from a hole 1 cm in diameter will be of the order of\n1/10,000 of the pressure at the hole. Hence it is fairly clear that the pressure\ninside the capsule will be far higher than the outside pressure, in spite of the\npresence of 18 one-centimeter apertures. Hence condensation within the capsule\nis more likely than condensation outside. It is noteworthy that no formation\nof rime was noticed either on the window or on the balloon string. It is con-\nsidered most likely that the particles of the Glenn effect are snowflakes formed\nin the capsule, between the cabin bulkhead and the heat shield by the steam\nexhaust from the life-support system. It is suggested that they escape into\nspace through the porte, being driven outward by the expanding vapor. Note\nthat at 02 52 47, Carpenter noted a particle moving faster than he. At 02 50 00,\nhe planned to observe sunrise and was facing forward. This particle was thereby\nprobably seen east of him. Most of the particles are seen behind him and falling"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"back. This supports the idea that the particles probably are pushed outward by\nthe expanding steam from the capsule, before they begin to stream backward. It\nis probable that many of the particles lodge on the outside of the capsule,\nsince Carpenter is quite sure, from the direction of streaming across the\nwindow, that the particles came from a point near where the knocking was done.\n\nCarpenter obtained two excellent photographs of the sun when just\nabove the horizon. These photographs plainly show the flattened, sausage-\nCarpenter notes that what he saw was like the photographs show with the exception of some reflections at the corners\nshaped form photographed earlier by Glenn. Calculations of this theoretical\nshape are being made at this time for comparison with the astronaut observations.\nThe flattened shape is due to the fact that the lower portion of the sun's disk\nis seen through layers which refract the light much more strongly than those\nthrough which the upper part is seen. As a consequence, the whole disk appears\nflattened. A similar, but much smaller flattening has long been known to be\nobservable from the ground. A part of the interest of this phenomenon comes\nfrom the fact that at great distances, as at the moon, the effect of this re-\nfraction is to make the sun appear as a red ring of light around the earth."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dr. M. Dubin\nNASA Headquarters\nCode SG\n\nSCIENTIFIC DEBRIEFING\n\nJune 1, 1963\n\n(First Experiment - Flashing Light)\n\nJohn McKee: One of the first questions that I have regards some estimates\nyou made of the beacon distance. Were those based entirely on the knowledge\nof how bright it was from previous aircraft training or do you feel there\nwas some other distance cue somehow involved in the test.\n\nCooper: No. If I had no previous experience on the light, I don't believe\nI would have had any possibility of telling how far it was except that on\nthat second night pass after ejecting the light. Apparently the sun was\nshining on it as I saw this steady glow, up to about my level on the orbital\npath. At that time I had a little bit more depth perception on it and could\nseem to note the proper drift on it. That was the first time that I saw it.\nOther than that, it was pretty well related back to what I saw in the planetarium\nand to the experiments we did on the aircraft when we had radar measurements.\n\nMcKee: At the time you deployed the light you said you felt it deploy; did\nyou notice the pitch rate? -- or what was the sensation?\n\nCooper: No, I didn't notice any rate as such. I could really feel it in\nthe spacecraft and to me it felt just like there were doors banging open\ndown there as it departed and just a little bit of a jolt through the\nspacecraft. It was a good solid thump when it took off."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -2-\n\nBill Armstrong: Actually Gordo, it turned out, it gave you about a half of\na degree per second in the opposite direction. This was very apparent on the\npostflight record. You can see your thruster action when you start to pitch\nup and then as you come right to the bottom of the curve you can see this\nlittle blip on your rate; and then the attitude started back the other way.\nIt was real definite. Something on the order of a half of a degree per second,\nor a little more. It was real definite where it occurred. Well what it does\nis start your pitch back the other way. If you remember, you never did use\nany thruster action to go back in the other direction, to pitch back down after\nyou deployed. You went to cage - to retroattitude and the attitudes just go\nand start back over. It was real clear on the records where it went out.\n\nShepard: Say, in regard to the first question, do you think because you\nhad the earth as background you could judge distance, because you had earth\nas background?\n\nCooper: I think possibly so. Of course it's like an airplane when it's\na considerable distance out. It is almost impossible to judge the distance\naway. You can talk yourself into believing it is almost any distance from\nyou. And when it gets on in closer you really have a bit more perspective\non it. I did feel that I had almost judged the distance on that first try.\nIn fact I didn't even believe that was it when I first saw it. I couldn't\nthink of anything else that it could be but it was just solid light. And\nas it turns out looking back now on it, I am sure this was because the sun"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"had not completely set; I'm sure my retro pack area was in the sunlight. I'm sure that is what I saw glowing,--was the sun reflecting off of it. Although I had not seen it from previous viewing on the day side or the night side.\n\nMcKee: When you didn't see it on the first night side, did you have any personal feeling that the light wasn't flashing? Did you correct your attitude when you didn't see it or did you have any feeling what the problem was?\n\nCooper: I just don't have any idea. I kept doubting myself. This was the first time of course that I had ever tried aligning to small end forward, a 180° yaw as we call it and of course aligning on the night side. I began to doubt that I was aligned properly. I went to the star charts and rechecked and found in fact that I was not quite aligned correctly at first. But then I did double check and found that I was --- I'm sure several times thru the night I was aligned exactly on and in using the horizon line just about in the middle of the window even moving up and down almost invariably. I just don't have any idea why I didn't see it.\n\nBill Armstrong: You did change your attitudes? That was one of the things I wanted to Know. Do you remember at the beginning of the night phase, did you first start looking low and then toward the end look high or did you just sort of scan the area or what?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -4-\n\nCooper: Well first I started trying to get my 180° yaw point. This is not the easiest thing in the world to get on the night side, and particularly when you have to go into your star charts 50 minutes ahead of where you had normally been used to using them. I finally did find star patterns that gave me the proper orientation. I was using, around 15 to 20 degrees pitched down, I was just keeping the horizon in the sort of bottom part of the window and I got around this area, I then tried varying the attitude up and down to look for the light.\n\nShepard: You mentioned in your report that,--you talked about approximately 25 minutes after you caged your gyros, that you saw a lot of lightning particularly in that area.\n\nCooper: Well, this is one possibility that there was a slight compromise to the light. Particularly on the first night side there was considerable large lightning down there. I found concentrations of large thunderstorms right up in there and saw quite a lot of light flashing through fairly large areas. I still don't believe that even on the other night side, in spite of these I still could see the light even with this as a background. It is really not an excuse for not seeing it and I really honestly can't say why I didn't. I had begun to doubt that it was really flashing.\n\nMcKee: Was the moon ever a problem?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -5-\n\nCooper: The moon was probably ideal. It was down to about a third moon. It was a very distinctive moon when you could see it but it wasn't causing the great amount of light that a full moon would have caused. I could see the glow on the ground, on the clouds and on the land, from the moon. It was not enough to obliterate all the stars, or when the light was sort of in the direction of the moon. It didn't matter. Q. Was the light ever close to the moon? A. No, the light was never close to the moon. The moon came up just at the last part of the night. It was never close to the moon because the moon was just coming,-- the moon came up just at the last part of the night. It had not been up very long before, before I began to get daylight.\n\nBill Armstrong: This is a real puzzler. We looked at the temperature traces in the retro pack area; they ran cooler, this flight. Around 60 or 62 degrees. Bill Carmines said that they had actually flashed the light at this lower temperatures without any problem. He talked to Langley people and he says that if the light had failed to work the first time it would have never warmed enough later in the flight to start flashing. It is hard to visualize it not having been working the first time and then worked the second time. Do you think your attitude ---- could you tell any difference in your attitude the second night when you saw the light. In yaw as compared with the first do you think you had your yaw pinned down better then?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -6-\n\nCooper: Well, not really. As I went into both night sides I could pretty well estimate 180° yaw. The first night side I was not completely around. I started yawing around and night was suddenly upon me and I wasn't quite in the full 180° position, so I did have to hunt for the 180° position a little bit. On the second night side after I ejected the light, I was already in my 180° position before going into the night side.\n\nMercer: How high above or below horizon line or window did you look for light? In other words how far down or how high did you go with your pitch attitude?\n\nCooper: On the first night side I allowed it to drift very, very slowly and changed them as I needed to, very very slightly to keep my yaw on 180° and it varied back and forth very slightly. But I went all the way down to where the horizon would fill the whole window and up to where I just barely had the horizon in sight.\n\nBill Armstrong: Did you see it come right away when you looked on the second night?\n\nCooper: I just barely got into the night.\n\nBill Armstrong: In other words you picked it up right away?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -7-\n\nCooper: Almost. Almost as it began to get dark. Of course it gets dark just like that. Zam it gets dark. I had just,--it was dark earth background and as I say my first feeling on seeing it was definitely coming from below very very slowly. As I watched it was getting higher in my line of sight to the earth. In other words as I was holding the earth on a fixed place on the window this was coming up. It was coming up in relation to me, and was finally up to my level. And as I saw it coming up it was solid light. My first though on it was that it looked just like the missiles that I have seen launched at night from Cape Canaveral; when you're flying at night at a high altitude and see them launched. It didn't have the same glow but it was very very bright, and solid and seemed to becoming up.\n\nBill Armstrong: That is something else we checked into. It would have been impossible for this light to have been steady for you. It is necessary to fully charge the condenser and then get a quick discharge.\n\nCooper: That's why I think it must have been the sunshine on it from behind. Because of the altitude we were both at, the sun would be shining on it at that point. I had just gone into the night side. Even though it was dark if I had yawed around to zero yaw it would have been in the bright sun.\n\nBill Armstrong: Was it above the horizon when you saw it flashing or was it still in the haze layer, or what?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -8-\nCooper: It was just still slightly below the horizon. It had come up almost to the horizon. It had been a fair amount below it when I first saw it. In fact I was pitched down to about -34° and I saw it towards the bottom part of the window when I first picked it up. By the time it got up to where it was maybe 15 degrees higher (in relation to me and my line of sight), I suddenly saw it flashing.\n\nBill Armstrong: That's just where it would have been. If would have been just coming to the horizon.\n\nJohn Boynton: Was this predominantly above the horizon?\n\nBill Armstrong: In the first orbit, no. On the first orbit it is very low. That is why he might not have seen it the initial part of the orbit. Somewhere about 20 or 30 minutes thru the night side, it passes through the horizon and then it goes about 25 or 30 degrees high. It goes through a fairly large angle change at first, and the further out it gets of course the smaller the angle change is. The second night after deployment just about at sunset it starts up through the horizon and then all the time during the second night phase it is above the horizon. Then the third one is above the horizon all of the time.\n\nJohn: If he is at zero roll what is the maximum visual angle of sight through the window?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -9-\nBill Armstrong: You get a 30 degree angle view through the window. From the top of the window to the bottom, 30½°. You can see over an elevation variation of 30 degrees.\n\nJohn: How far would he have to pitch down?\n\nBill Armstrong: He would probably have to be below retroattitude. He had to almost have all earth in the window. Probably about 30 degrees.\n\nCooper: I had a few comments that I made on the onboard tape about the light: \"I am at last daylight going into dark\" I had been looking for that flashing beacon. \"This light in sight is below me. It is quite a brownish reddish brown and considerable altitude above the ground.\" In other words I was convinced it was not a light down on the ground but it had movement. I mentioned several other items here such as this light being visible among the stars. \"The light is flashing, now. It is the light. It is quite bright and quite discernible. It appears to be about 10 to 12 miles away. I'm keeping it exactly in the window. About the order of a second magnitude star now.\" and that time was 05:11:34. \"The light is still in sight in the center of the window.\"\n\nBill Armstrong: Did you,--according to the voice tape it indicates that you may have yawed away a little bit then and then came back. Is that right? Did you yaw away and then come right back to it?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -10-\nCooper: Just once.\n\nBill Armstrong: Did you do it twice or just once?\n\nCooper: No, I kept it in sight for quite awhile and then yawed away from it and then came right back.\n\nCooper: At 05:13:40 I made some comments on the Milky Way and various things and at 05:16:35 the light was still in sight. Thunderstorms were in under it at the moment but it was still quite distinctive. And this is at 05:18:05.\n\nBill Armstrong: What brightness do you think you need if you are going to try to acquire some target in space.\n\nCooper: It was very distinctive both times. At this brightness where it was on the second night side after the ejection, both times it was very distinctive more than the brightness of course, it was the flashing. On the third night side it was extremely faint but the flashing allowed me to pick it up. I wouldn't have been able to see it the third night but for the flashing.\n\nBill Armstrong: Do you think that either at the initial acquisition of the thing or even toward the end of the second night phase the brightness would be sufficient if you would be trying to locate a rendezvous target?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -11-\nCooper: I think so. I think with that brightness, if you know approximately where to look for the thing and with it flashing, you certainly ought to be able to find it pretty readily.\n\nDay: Do you think similar experiments should be carried on or is this sufficient?\n\nCooper: I think this probably shows us what we really want to see. I think there is going to be problem like there is in aircraft. As you move in closer to it you are going to have to have something that gives a little bit more capability to obtain distance from it at the time; such as perhaps two lights that you could range on; like navigation lights on aircraft.\n\nQuestion: Were internal lights on in the night observations?\n\nCooper: On most night sides I had all the lights down completely and used just the glove lights to read critical items.\n\nBill Armstrong: On the third night phase you say you had to do a good bit of searching. Were you searching the entire third night, and when did you first see it?\n\nCooper: Slightly past the middle of the night. I think that on the third night side the brightness was such that it was sheer accident that I found it. If you just happen to pass it in the scan pattern you might see it flashing. It would, however, be very easy to miss."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -12-\nBill Armstrong: You feel brightness suitable for a rendezvous target would be something on the order of second or third magnitude.\n\nCooper: Yes.\n\nBill: That's one of the main things we wanted to find out. Does the brightness of the second night look about right? Was the third night too dim?\n\nCooper: Yes, the third one is getting a little too dim.\n\nBill: Do you think you have got to have good sighting information to pick these up even with bright light?\n\nCooper: Well, it is a pretty big sky at night up there and there are a lot of bright stars. I think you're going to have to have some sighting data to get within a reasonable cone area to hunt for it.\n\nMcKee: What about the flash frequency rate?\n\nCooper: I think the flash rate could be cut down. I think you could maybe halve the flash rate. I would rather see it twice as bright and see it flash half as often. A flash rate, even one every two seconds is still distinctive. Maybe not quite as distinctive as the one per second, but it still would attract your attention.\n\nBill: How about the deploy marks?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -13-\nCooper: Those deploy marks worked real well. They were excellent for getting in retroattitude also. They position your head to a real positive position.\nBill: We have read the attitude records pretty carefully. You were between 20 and 22 degrees, so you were right in there. Do you think the window smudges, the discoloration of the window, might have had significant effect? Do you think it produced enough attenuation to cause any trouble?\nCooper: Actually I tried and tried to note how much attenuation you get at night. It's just a few seconds until the time you get dark-adapted; I thought you became dark adapted very rapidly, and I didn't see or note any real attenuation. I am sure there was some as there was definitely smudge layers there. But it didn't seem to be.... The bright stars sure seemed bright.\nBill Armstrong: Did you actually see the light against the ground?\nCooper: Yes. I made this comment here that I even saw it against the thunderstorm.\nJohn Boynton: Gordo, you talked about the flash rate. The flash rate in your debriefing might have been slightly below a flash per second.\nCooper: I did it on the tape. I counted off here on the tape so you could get it off the tape. I counted 1,2,3,4,5,6,7. It seemed to me that it was slightly slower than one flash per second."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -14-\nQuestion: What did it check out?\nCarmines: 62 (flashes per minute).\nBill: Did you make attempts to see it on the day side?\nCooper: I sure did. I never saw it then.\nArmstrong: It should have been closer on the day side than in the night portion. It came in closer and started out away some time during the first day pass. Before you picked it up it had started out again. It should have been in to about two miles sometime during the first day side.\nCooper: At first I was on 180 degrees yaw, and allowed it to drift off. I didn't find it, but before I got to the next night side, I brought yaw back to 180 degrees. There was a possibility I missed it there.\nMcKee: Did the flash seem very consistant? Did the brightness vary?\nCooper: Yes, it seemed to be very consistant.\nCarmines: Did you see it tumble?\nCooper: I couldn't tell any tumbling.\nCarmines: I'm sure it was tumbling."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -15-\nBill: The spread of light isn't too great.\nCooper: It is pretty hard to judge the light level.\nMercer: Did you see the stars during this day?\nCooper: Not this particular orbit. No I didn't.\n(Second Experiment - Balloon Drag)\nDay: Mr. Carmines will you give us a quick run-down on the balloon experiment failure?\nCarmines: I talked with Instrumentation people and everyone agreed that we really don't know what happened. We had one relay actuate. There are several possibilities. To me the most likely place of trouble is the final plug. The pins are on the pigtail and in putting this together you can bend these pins and get a misalignment. We checked the plug and in this case the pin is near the case and if it bent it could ground.\nBill: The squibs were in parallel and a number of tests showed either one of the squib would fire the latch. The most probable cause is in the circuitry.\n(Discussion on Ground Light Observation)\nBill Armstrong: How hard was it to pick up the light when you first started. Did you have trouble picking up this ground light at all?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -16-\nCooper: No. It was just a bit further to the left than I thought it would be.\nBill: More toward the center of the window?\nCooper: No. More slightly to the left of the window. I could have been yawed off a little. I thought the pattern of the little town, it was by was really more distinctive than the light. If I hadn't known the light was there I wouldn't have selected it in preference to lots of other lights I saw on the ground,---if it hadn't been for the little horseshoe-shape town.\nBill Armstrong: What brightness did you see at this attitude?\nCooper: I would say it was about between third and fourth magnitude when I first saw it.\nBill: As you continued to observe it did you notice it dimming?\nCooper: No. I could see it for several seconds. One falicy of the ground lights is that you are moving on the ground pretty rapidly. You don't have many seconds to observe any fixed points on the ground. It's moving right on past you and gone fairly rapidly. Of course as it gets on out it gets dimmer and dimmer.\nQuestion: Have you any idea how long you were able to observe it?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -17-\nCooper: Maybe as long as a minute. I doubt if it was that long, probably 30 or 40 seconds. I lost it because it got too weak. It was a long ways from being straight out on the horizon but as it got on up towards that direction it faded out.\nBill: In checking the plot, it looks like it varies from a little over second magnitude when you forst saw it to about a sixth magnitude when the light was turned off.\nMcKee: Do you know what angle you pitched down to?\nCooper: I believe it was to -40. I was then at the angle we were supposed to pitch to. I apparently had eased off in yaw. However it tracked pretty well right up the window. So the yaw was fairly well on. But the light was off a little further to the left.\nBill: Did you ever look away from the light and then look back? Were you able to do this and pick it up again?\nCooper: I took my eyes off of it and had them on the photometer and looked through the hole in it and extincted it. Turned the dial the wrong way in the dark, and I did extinct all right. I thought I'd get a good reading on it. I gave that device up. It did extinct.\nBill: Did you ever notice any change in the light?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -18-\n\nCooper: Yes, it got dimmer.\n\nMercer: Could you see lights of cities through layers of clouds?\n\nCooper: I saw a lot of cities underneath the clouds. One of my best retrofire yaw alignments was over Shanghai.\n\nMercer: Were light patterns more distinctive than individual bright lights?\n\nCooper: Yes. I was over the east coast of Australia. I saw three very distinct city light patterns there around the Melbourne area.\n\nPaul: When the light dimmed out did you lose the light first, or the cities?\n\nCooper: I lost both in much the same period of time.\n\nJones: Did the ground-light appear sharp as a point source or was it diffused?\n\nCooper: It was more diffused. Not a sharp point. You could see it was a single light but it was not like the stars.\n\nSmith: You think a flashing light would be preferable?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -19-\n\nCooper: Definitely: The ideal would be a series of lights. A better combination would be a series of flashing lights arranged in some pattern. Maybe like a running rabbit strobe pattern. I am sure it wouldn't have to be synchronized.\n\nBill: You mentioned how fast fast you were moving. Do you think you had enough time to make use of some sighting device such as a sextant?\n\nCooper: You aren't going to be able to take very long readings. You're going to have to be set up and ready to go, and you're going to have to have some devices that are really usable. You figure that when you get from the west coast of the United States to the east coast of the United States, the ground is moving under you fairly rapidly in ten minutes. The ground is moving too fast. You need to have some devices that are really usable and you need to be set up and ready to go. I guess you have about 20 to 30 seconds for a reading.\n\nBill Armstrong: One of the phases of the Apollo mission requires a position fix while still in a holding orbit. Before going into the translunar phase sightings of earth fixed targets for navigation would be about the same as you experienced in the ground light. Would this be practicable?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -20-\n\nCooper: You're going to have to be right on in attitudes. You're going to have to know exactly what time it's going to occur. I'd guess you have about 20 to 30 seconds to do your actual sighting and you have to have a good angle off to do it.\n\nBill: How about the brightness Gordo? How do you feel about this part and leaving the flash part out of it? Was it bright enough light to be seen easily?\n\nCooper: There were a lot brighter lights on the ground.\n\nBill: I'm sure of that but do you think this is sufficient?\n\nCooper: You can see it. If you look for it and know it is there and if you're lucky. Knowing where to look for it and no clouds there, you can spot it. (And away from other background lights.) I still think a pattern would be better than going to a brighter light. I don't think the change in the brightness of the light would be as effective as making some kind of a pattern.\n\nJones: Did the ground lights twinkle?\n\nCooper: Yes. Just like the stars do looking at them from the ground, where as the stars don't twinkle there.\n\nMcKee: I would like to ask. You seemed to have seen our lights as we expected. You saw some objects on the ground better than we expected. Can"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -21-\n\n(McKee continued) you say why you saw such small items?\n\nCooper: I was coming from Houston the other day in a 102 and I noted I couldn't see nearly as clear around 40,000 feet, particularly in one area that I was in. There was a lot of haze and it was quite humid and I couldn't distinguish things on the ground very well but yet when I got into the west coast of Florida and got into an area that was somewhat clearer, at the same altitude I could see many things. I think again, that it depends on how much humidity you have and how much haze is in an area. I passed right over the vicinity of Los Angeles and San Diego and never saw them at all. I wasn't very surprised. I could see where they were but I couldn't see them. I passed right over Miami and Miami Beach and I could see that there was a town there. There was a lot of build up and civilization. I could see the streets but the buildings were not very distinct. But yet over areas of El Centro and the Salton Sea and the dry lake areas I could see tremendously greater detail, and individual roads. Over the Himalayas, up in Tibet, of course there you're above a good portion a certain amount of the atmosphere I suppose, I was really surprised what I could see. I found some real details and little villages with maybe 20 or 30 houses I suppose, stood out very distinctly. You could estimate the number of houses and if a house was out individually away from anything else I guess against the right color background, the yard, I could discern individual buildings. I saw a number of them with smoke coming out of the chimney. There was snow on this upper very sandy blowy, dusty Tibetan area. I could see a lot of lakes some partially frozen over and some frozen solid. The visibility was tremendous. I could see vehicles that I assumed were trucks. I could see them kicking up dust."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -22-\n\n(MIT Horizon)\n\nDr. Peterson: The purpose of these pictures is that we are trying to find definite information about the earth for Apollo guidance. This is one of a group of four pictures taken in four different yaw directions, one into the sun. Is this maneuver an expensive and troublesome thing to do?\n\nCooper: It takes control power; it takes control fuel, it takes time. However, it is not real expensive as far as fuel. You have to stay power up. We debated back and forth about the most accurate way of making sure we get these 90 degree points. We were a little concerned about accuracy and decided to stay powered up and utilized the gyros to locate the 90 degree positions. But it does take that period of time of power to drive the automatic system, and it does take that fuel to move around.\n\nDr. Peterson: I noted you mention 25 hours 20 minutes. At that moment there is a hole in the transcript. 25 hours and 26 minutes.\n\nCooper: I got those at 25 hours and some odd minutes when the moon was set in the west. It was right where we had planned to get it the first time. We rescheduled them later in the flight if we didn't get them at the original time. But I took them as planned initially. Did those come out all right?\n\nDr. Peterson: On two of those it was possible to locate the moon. This is not all of them.\n\nBill Armstrong: Yes, these are all of them. (Looking at pictures)"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -23-\n\nDr. Peterson: There is a smudge in the middle of the window. It could have been accidentally concealed. Since these negatives are only suitable for microdensitometry there doesn't need to be any discussion of the details of their significance.\n\n(Infrared Weather Photographic Experiment)\n\nMr. Day: I would like to move on to IR Weather photography.\n\nSoules: This experiment went very well and we got the information we wanted. Thank you very much. Did you have any trouble with the camera or filter holder?\n\nCooper: None at all. It worked very well.\n\nSoules: And the lens opening of 5.6?\n\nCooper: It was exactly-on what was marked on the magazine.\n\nSoules: There are six pictures at the end of the series and I can't identify them. Do you have any idea where they could have been taken?\n\n(There was a lot of table discussion of pictures here)\n\nCooper: This was after the Florida series."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -24-\n\nSoules: You made the remark that you were coming over Africa. Do you have any more information? There was none in the transcript.\n\nCooper: What base was this on?\n\nBill: Wasn't one of them over the coastline?\n\nCooper: Yes, I did one right on the coast of Africa. I got one coming right over the coastline. Another one I got almost over the other coast; down toward Johannesburg; it was an inland picture, almost the northern area.\n\nSoules: The last four are a mystery.\n\nBill Armstrong: It looks like you had about a quarter inch motion on frame.\n\nCooper: I'm sure I didn't. I was holding the camera just like I was before.\n\nSoules: We might check the camera.\n\nSoules: What was the dominant color of the earth over Baja California?\n\nCooper: I found that the green showed up very little. The only really distinct green that I saw which showed up much was in the high Tibetan area. It was a bright emerald green, by some of those lakes. It looked like a copper sulphate mining area. The browns of the Arabian Desert Sand showed up quite distinct. The Sahara was not quite so brown although it did have"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -25-\n\n(Cooper continued) a brown look. Everything predominantly had a bluish cast. All the water, all the sea water, looked very very bright blue. Even the Salton Sea looked very blue. And areas we know were heavy forest areas looked kind of blue-green. The areas that are definitely brown you can tell they are brown.\n\nSoules: I have a question on the thunderstorms. Could you hear static?\n\nCooper: I could hear it day or night and on both HF and UHF. It was almost instantaneous. As I would see the lightning and the clouds light up I would get the static.\n\nSoules: What is the frequency band on HF?\n\nCooper: HF is 15 megacycles. The static was louder in the HF than in the UHF. You could just hear it, it wasn't high magnitude.\n\nSoules: Was there a difference in loudness between day and night?\n\nCooper: I think night side was considerably louder. Of course I noted thunderstorms were louder on night side. There were large masses of thunderstorms out to the east of Australia.\n\nSoules: Did the flash come from below the capsule or could you look off at an angle?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -26-\n\nCooper: I could not see distinct lightning patterns. It just all lit up. The whole cumulus mass of clouds would light up.\n\nSoules: Did you notice thunderstorms between Hawaii and California.\n\nCooper: Yes, several off the west coast of the United States. I don't remember just how far. There were several cumulus buildups.\n\nSoules: Did they look like the usual thunderstorms?\n\nCooper: They went on down to a stratus deck on into coast on down about Los Angeles. They stood further off the coast than up north.\n\nSoules: Did you see any long white bands of clouds along the east coast in the tropical areas?\n\nCooper: Yes. One was over the Arabian desert that was quite distinct. I took a color photograph of that.\n\nSoules: Was it a very sharp line of clouds with build-up in it?\n\nCooper: Yes. Number 10 picture is over the Arabian desert area.\n\nSoules: Over the oceans did you notewide bands with perhaps clear area over it?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -27-\n\nCooper: No. I noticed several large cyclonics. I did not notice any very distinct sharp bands. However I did notice tropical thunderstorms. Near the Solomon Island Areas there were a lot of low streets and ridges of smaller cumulus clouds. There were little rows of them."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing\n-28-\n\nSoules: Was the horizon always a sharp line?\nCooper: Yes, day and night the horizon was sharp. In the day you have this bright blue band around it.\nSoules: Some photos show the horizon seemed fuzzy.\nCooper: In the Himalayas on a couple of occasions where the horizon was rough due to the mountains, the horizon was still very distinct.\nSqules: Did you see the moon at the time of occultation?\nCooper: Yes, several times. I was sorry I did not get pictures.\nSoules: Did you see a halo around the moon?\nCooper: I saw no sign of a halo. It was quite sharp.\nSoules: Did you ever see a slight flash? Did the moon's color change at all as it went through the atmosphere?\nCooper: No. I was looking for this too. I was disappointed in the moon scenes. I didn't see anything distinctive at all.\nSoules: I made a sketch of haze layer. Would you take a look at it and tell me what you think?\nVoas: Gordo, would you draw it on the board?\n\n(Period demonstrating on blackboard of horizon, haze, etc.)\n\nCooper: This is the earth with a sharp horizon on the earth. The lower haze level was always under me separated from the horizon. This was not a real distinct line. It was a little more distinct and it appeared to be the same color as if it were a cloud and as the stars would pass down through it you could track a fairly high order of magnitude of star and you could track it down through haze and it would appear real bright as it came down through it.\nSoules: About what magnitude could you see?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing\n-29-\n\nCooper: The stars in the Big Dipper could just be seen. I noted the Big Dipper with the bottom star sinking down into it.\nSoules: The top of the layer would be how many degrees above the horizon?\nCooper: I figured it was about six or seven degrees.\n\n(Long period of sketching.)\n\nPeterson: Would you estimate any appraisal in terms of stellar magnitude? You explained that the fifth magnitudes could be seen, did the weaker stars go out in that area?\n\n(Still illustrating.)\n\nNote: During this period when Cooper was talking and sketching on the board, the recorded comments are meaningless.\nCooper: I can't recall a single time at night but what I saw the haze layer.\nDr. Voas: I described the earth as being dark. Which is darker, the earth or the little band of sky?\nCooper: When there was no moon the earth was darker. In general there was more light from the sky. It is a difference in two different blacks. The sky is a shinier black. The earth is a dull black.\nDr. Voas: The horizon is very well defined?\nCooper: It is actually a different black. There is a distinct line of horizon and the earth is darker. This is in complete night.\nDr. Voas: When the moon comes up the earth becomes lighter as the moon shines on it?\nCooper: It shows up distinctly, especially when there are clouds.\nSoules: Here is a picture that Wally took. Does that look like a haze band on the horizon?\nO'Keefe: When was that picture taken?\nSoules: Is that too high?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing\n-30-\n\nSoules: You saw something over South America?\nCooper: Yes, there is this other higher level I saw over South America.\nStanley Soules: Did you see different cloud layers at night?\nCooper: Only if there was moonlight and if there were towns or cities below them. On several occasions I could see reflected light particularly through stratus type clouds.\nSoules: You could distinguish clouds. Does the earth appear as blue to your eye as it does in the photos?\nCooper: Yes. The overall color is pretty blue.\nSoules: What is the color of the twilight zone?\nCooper: It is a baby blue. It is a pure, pure blue, very, very bright.\nSoules: Did you see any meteor trails?\nCooper: No.\nSoules: Did you see a lot of sun?\nCooper: I sure did. I want to tell you I did!\nSoules: Was there any evidence of a corona?\nCooper: No. In fact, the sun appeared to be like the moon does from the earth. Very bright. You know down here there are all those rays around it. But up there it is just a glob and it is very very whitish bright. It doesn't look the same color. It is a very arc-like color, bluish white.\nQuestion: What about the looks of the day sky?\nCooper: The day sky just is not as dark as the night sky. It is black and dark but not as dark as the night sky. You can see the brighter stars on the day side when you are away from the sun and neither it nor the earth shine are coming in the window. Give yourself a few seconds to get dark adapted and you can see the brighter stars. They have to be fairly bright to see them. On the order of 3rd magnitude."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing\n-31-\n\nDr. Voas: The day sides get a lot lighter, at night they are about the same darkness as the inside of the spacecraft.\nCooper: The night sky and the day sky is about the same as the difference between a jet black and a dark gray. (It is about the same difference between the night sky and the day sky.) It is a softer kind of dark during the day. Not nearly as dark as the night sky.\nDr. Voas: Is it a smooth overall gray on the window? Do you see any chance at all that the grayness you noted could be minute amounts of scattered light from fog on the window?\nCooper: I don't believe so, Bob, because immediately when you got a faint amount of oblique light on the window it immediately looked like it was iced over. All you had to do was get just a faint amount on it and it appeared to be just like a canopy frozen over.\nO'Keefe: Was this scattered light in the window or not? I hoped you could see some kind of a pattern.\nCooper: That's what I'm saying. When you have any kind of scattered light on the window, when the window was in any kind of an attitude (demonstrated) say this is the window and out here is the sun, any time the window was moved around where there was any kind of light shining on the window - just a faint amount of it would completely obliterate the vision through the window. I just went completely IFR. There was just no looking through the window. Of course, the earth gives off an awful lot of light, and you can't see anything as long as the earth is shining in the window. Any time the sun was back here and I was faced away from the earth, regardless of attitude, the sky appeared to be a smooth gray.\nO'Keefe: You could see the grit on the window?\nCooper: You could see the light actually impinging on the window. You could see the scum all over the inside of the outside pane."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing\n-32-\n\nO'Keefe: Somewhat of a pattern?\nCooper: That's right. A pattern over the outside of the window as well as the scum on the inside.\nO'Keefe: If this had been scattered light you would have had this pattern?\nCooper: That's right.\n\n(Dim Light photographs.)\n\nDay: Presentation of Dim Light Phenomena: Roach, O'Keefe, Huch.\nRoach: You had above this haze layer another layer. Would you sketch that?\n\n(Illustration.)\n\nCooper: This one time I did have it. I am almost certain this was about 24 hours and 30 minutes over South America. I was facing to the east and was on drift, I think. I was looking to the east, northeast area. I was in full drift.\nO'Keefe: Reference was on page 26.\nCooper: That was the luminous activity on page 37. \"Right now I can make out a lot of luminous activities in an easterly direction.\" This was at 05 11 34 and on a 05 13 40. The Milky Way was quite distinct. This particular time (over South America) I couldn't make out on this layer. I wouldn't say it was much like a layer. It wasn't distinct and it didn't last long; but it was higher than I was. It wasn't in the vicinity of the horizon and was not well defined.\nRoach: More like a patch?\nCooper: Smoother. It was a good sized area.\nRoach: You didn't feel this had a discrete shape?\nCooper: It was very indistinct in shape. It was a faint glow with a reddish brown cast.\nRoach: Because of your altitude or what?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -33-\n\nCooper: It wasn't so distinctive as to move back on to it. It was very faint and definitely lighter than the sky. It was picking up some light of some type. It was light in contrast to the sky.\nDick Day: Could you see this better out of the corner of your eye?\nCooper: Yes. Sort of that type of thing. I'm almost certain that this was over South America, just coming up on to the northeastern part of South America. It was around 50 degrees West and about zero degrees of latitude.\nRoach: This reminds me of what Mr. Schirra saw off Madagascar.\nCooper: He saw it off North Africa. It seemed to be quite extensive but not well defined. It was rather diffused but not covering the whole earth.\nRoach: Could you tell us what happens when you pass from day into night, around twilight? We are interested in horizon effect after sunset.\n\n(Cooper draws some more pictures.)\n\nCooper: You never tire of looking at the sunsets. As the sun begins to get down towards the horizon it is very well defined and not diffused as it is when looking through the atmosphere, and it is quite difficult to look at. It is quite white and as it gets on down to where the sun begins to impinge on the horizon line it does give a spreading effect. The sky is getting quite dark here and you get the impression of blackness up here. (Illustrating.) The layer is bright orange color and light spreading out in this direction. . .\nAs the sun begins to go down it is replaced by this bright gold orange. It extends out for some way. It defines the horizon line fairly well at this time. The sun does begin to get this flattened effect.\nRoach: What was it's maximum flattening?\nCooper: I never got too much. It appears to get down part way below the horizon"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -34-\n\nand spread. It doesn't take long. As it goes on down you still have this orange light on the horizon and this area is all considerably lighter although black is coming on down. You do get glow up off it. You could actually swing away and tell right where the sun had set a number of seconds after. It is not ray-like. It is hard to describe. The sky area is lighter but there are not any rays.\nNote: At this time there was a general discussion of the night sky immediately after sunset. The transcript is too incomplete in this region to give a recorded account of this discussion. It appears that after describing the sunset and the airglow layer someone Ast. Cooper an additional glow extending vertical above the position on the horizon where sunset occurred. Obviously reference was being made to observation of the Zodiacal light.\nCooper: That's right. After this effect disappears (glow of sunset) and you think you're on complete darkness, I would guess on the order a minute after sunset, you get this other. I guess two different times I saw faint glow but not very far along. It was more on the order of 3 to 4 degrees farther on\n______________ and a fainter order.\nRoach: Did you notice this was cone shaped?\nCooper: A little bit cone shaped.\nRoach: Did you happen to sweep across it that way?\nCooper: It was a minute or so prior to sunrise and I moved back across and about the time I got back the sun was there.\nRoach: Did it seem to be confined in your window?\nCooper: Yes. The bright blue band grew wider as you moved away.\nRoach: Was this just before sunrise?\nCooper: The sun is getting ready to come up and at this particular time I got this glow prior to getting a blue band and in a few seconds the blue widens and widens."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -35-\n\nRoach: Is this phenomenon very close to the sun?\nCooper: I had the feeling that this was just a glow off the sun. It was not as bright as the Milky Way.\nMercer: Was it tipped to the right or left of sunrise?\nCooper: I was sitting tipped myself and don't remember which way it was. I have the impression it was not vertical.\nDr. Voas: It appears the red and gold you described at sunset does not occur at dawn.\nCooper: Sunset is more of a golden orange.\nDr. Voas: Did you notice any of the flattening as the sun rose?\nCooper: Not as much, but you do get a little bit.\nRoach: Going back to the time just preceding retro, were you constantly on stellar observation before the dawn? Were you able to follow any stars?\nCooper: Yes. With the sun to my back, the first thing I got was the moon glow and through the cloud below I got Shanghai. The first indication you get of the sun going up behind you is the lightening of the clouds underneath and you note the clouds getting lighter and lighter and you can still see the stars. As you reach a certain point, your window gets enough light - your window appears completely frosted over.\nRoach: What star were you using?\nCooper: I was using Betelgeuse and tracking on up from that to Sirius and Procyon and then I had a barren area. Then I believe Castor and Pollux and Corvus was the last. I couldn't pick up Antares. By this time I was getting good light on clouds. The stars don't give you much yaw determination. You can sit there for a long time and if you hold rates very close to zero you can get a fairly good indication, but it is a lengthy process when you are determining yaw by seeing the movement of stars."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -36-\n\nRoach: From that standpoint, is it better to retro in the daylight?\nCooper: You could probably do it at night, but it is preferable to do it in the day.\nNote: The next few comments are not interpretable, but it appears someone raised a question about the blue horizon band visible during daylight.\nCooper: This is predominantly blue and if you have land masses or things that you know are not blue - - - but this is about a two degrees thick band. It isn't quite as thick as the band underneath - - - the last layer at night is thicker than this blue band and it is a brilliant blue.\nRoach: Then, is there some structure above the blue layer?\nCooper: I never could see pattern structure above that. It is really not black. This is any time you have earth shine. This is not a real sharply defined - - - There is a little blue gray going thru this area here. The overall band is real bright pale bluw and just faintly diffuse on this side. (Explanation is made using a sketch at the blackboard.)\nQuestion: Is it diffuse on the upper side?\nCooper: It is not just a real sharp line or two different distinct colors. It does diffuse very slightly.\nQuestion: How wide is that band in angle?\nCooper: It is about two degrees.\nHuch: I understand it gave a little problem in roll and yaw. You said just as the sun was sinking.\nCooper: That's right. This is where I could tell where the sun had been. I moved back to that and put the gyros to free and went into the automatic mode. (Again using sketch.)\nHuch: With reference to the sunset, do you estimate the time when the Zodiacal light sequence was started?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -37-\n\nCooper: I would guess it was on the order of 20 to 30 seconds after sunset, that is just a guess. And this is all the counting I was doing to give you the timing and there was interference from the ground stations.\nHuch: Did you observe capsule stability - did you feel it was holding sufficiently still for time exposures?\nCooper: Of course, we knew it would be moving. Did better than I thought it would.\nHuch: For the most part they came out quite clear.\nBill Armstrong: You get pitch up at the rate of 4° per minute.\nCooper: Actually, you had more than that.\nShepard: During the Zodiacal light sequence, you had over 5 degrees per minute.\nQuestion: What are your attitude tolerances in ASCS?\nCooper: I would say within about 5 1/2 degrees. This will be a very slow variance.\nQuestion: How fast is this per minute? The period is 2 to 3 minutes per oscillation.\nJohn Van Bockel: It is about .05 degrees per second.\nShepard: The limits could be as much as 11 degrees.\nJohn Van Bockel: It is pretty close to plus or minus 10 degrees.\nCooper: Did you get anything from the latter portion of the picture? The airglow pictures?\nMercer: Yes.\nCooper: I worried that the angle of the camera was down too much.\nHuch: Was there anything unusual that happened through the night?\nCooper: There was a lot of lightning.\nHuch: Was there an accumulation of moisture on the window?\nCooper: No. To me it didn't seem to cut down too much.\nHuch: You reported a lot of lightning.\nCooper: Right when I was taking dim light pictures there were several thunderstorms and a lot of lightning."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -38-\nShepard: Did you get any readout on attitudes?\nMercer: We got good attitudes.\nHuch: On the pictures, can you relate the airglow band to what you drew on the board? Did you take any exposures into the sunlit sky?\nCooper: No, I didn't. I was going to try and snap one of this planet but couldn't get the camera out in time. After I once got it out of the equipment locker, the planet was gone.\nHuch: Was the camera easy to use?\nCooper: Yes, after I once got it out of the locker it was easy to use.\nHuch: Would it be possible to take a picture of the Milky Way?\nCooper: Yes. The last picture that I made was this haze layer when it was so bright. It should be somewhere right near. It was near the vertical coming through the window.\nHuch: The range of light intensity was very extreme.\nCooper: The last exposure I made was of this glow and I think I used a 20 or a 15 second exposure time.\nNote: A general discussion was carried on at this point concerning the number of exposures and general observations. It is not possible to decipher these comments into usable form.\n(Radiation Experiments.)\nWarren: We have some preliminary results I will give to you later. Did you take the chamber out of the ditty bag and fasten it on the hatch?\nCooper: I took it out of the storage container and fastened it to the hatch on the first orbit.\nWarren: Could you give me a time estimate?\nCooper: I would say within an hour after liftoff."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -39-\nWarren: Did you take it off prior to retro?\nCooper: Yes. I took it off just prior to retro. I stowed it in the glove compartment.\nWarren: Did you take a reading of it at any time?\nCooper: No, I didn't.\nWarren: Did you place it vertically? Where did you place it?\nCooper: I placed it vertically.\nWarren. We got from that and also from film badger you carried on under clothing - - - We got an estimate of 15-20 milliroentgens. I think you would get more in an X-ray than you had here. It was about what expected.\nWarren: Is there any particular reason that the 7th and 9th orbits were left out or were you just too busy?\nCooper: I don't remember which orbit I missed. I believe one of them I was quite busy trying to get this condensate water situation straightened out and debated turning it on later, but decided I had better not.\nWarren: It wouldn't have served much use later.\nCooper: That was the 5th orbit.\nWarren: The 6th and 7th were the ones missed.\nCooper: The 6th one was where I was having the condensate difficulty. I don't know why I missed the other one on the 9th orbit. We weren't schedule to run one on the 9th!\nBill: He had one at 9 hours and 40 minutes on the 7th orbit; then he had another one on the 8th, 11:15 to 11:25. And then you go into rest period after that.\nWarren: We got that.\nBill: He went into rest period after that.\nWarren: Late in the night, you turned the tape on continuous and it stayed on the rest of the flight. Was there any particular reason you could not have left the switch on?\nCooper: You mean the radiation? We hadn't planned to do this because of power co"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -40-\nconservation. It does take a certain amount of power.\nMcKann: That decision was made not to turn that on continuous because it had never been checked out for continuous operation because of some difficulties that might arise because of this.\nShepard: That seems to be a reasonable decision.\nWarren: That is all I had.\nCooper: Did you get anything at all?\nWarren: Particularly on the 7th orbit we got some date, that gave us quite a good bit of background. Thank you."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -41-\n(General Observations)\nDr. O'Keefe: I understand the hissing noise was completely negative. Can you be sure it was not then?\nCooper: I didn't ever hear it at all. I had good fitting ear caps.\nDr. O'Keefe: Were you listening for it at the time?\nCooper: Yes, except I had my visor closed and with the visor closed you can't hear too much.\nDr. O'Keefe: At one point a rumor circulated in the public mess that you had seen a meteor.\nCooper: This was a false rumor.\nDr. O'Keefe: At one point you said you saw frost on the window.\nCooper: This is the material that turned out to be oil.\nPaul Lowman: Have you seen the terrain photos? Have you seen number 8, east coast of Africa? Does it look this blue?\nCooper: Not quite. The film has fairly true reproduction but in several cases it might be a little more blue in film, than it actually is.\nPaul Lowman: How about the shots over Himalayas?\nCooper: They look fairly true to color.\nPaul Lowman: Where you're going over the ocean, could you distinguish different shades of blue?\nCooper: Yes, over GBI, Eleuthera and Cuba and right down the whole island chain, you could very definitely tell the shallower water areas. You could see reefs and green water in some of the lagoons. Not real distinctive green as you might think, and you could see sand at about its normal color. If you are looking straight down on things the color is more true than if you're looking at an angle. If you're looking at an angle, there is more of a bluish tint."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -42-\nPaul Lowman: When you were over the deep ocean could you see any evidence of currents at the coast of Africa or the coast of South America. Did you see different colors?\nCooper: There was some slight difference in color. I couldn't determine a pattern and couldn't determine what it was. I thought it might be wave patterns.\nPaul Lowman: Were there different colors going over forest areas, over Africa? Were there different shades of green?\nCooper: Not too many. They looked to be a blue-green instead of a pure green. Greens didn't come through too well. They were somewhat diffused with this blue color.\nPaul Lowman: Over the Himalayas, shot number 12, was the green true?\nCooper: Yes, fairly true.\nShepard: I think we should get weather records and corrilate the color with the moisture content.\nCooper: Did you get the list where I identified the pictures?\nPaul Lowman: Comparing with these rocket photographs over in El Paso area, do you recall looking there or to west over Arizona?\nCooper: I didn't. I noted I was over this area. It looked familar. I had the feeling in looking out I was right over the Mexican Border. I don't recall just what gave me this feeling.\nSoules: There is quite a bit of detail in IR photos.\nCooper: Just before that I noted the town of El Centro and the air base. I noted one little dry lake area east of there. I kept trying to see Muroc Dry Lake and Rosemond up north but never did see those, but saw several dry lakes. I saw one very clear. It was not a large one. It was about due east of Salton Sea area.\nPaul Lowman: Could you see Biggs Air Force Base.\nCooper: I didn't notice Biggs at all, in fact, I couldn't see the main part of"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the city of El Pase. I could see some little isolated civilized areas. I\nnever did see the main part of city.\nPaul Lowman: Did you see any distinct shadows from the terrain? Mountains?\nCooper: Yes. You could see shadows of the mountains quite clearly. Even more\nclearly than the mountains in the twilight were the shadows from clouds on ground.\nPaul Lowman: How did the camera operate while taking pictures? Do you recall\nshaking the camera at any time?\nCooper: No: I don't recall shaking the camera at all.\nPaul Lowman: They all look pretty good; I just wanted to make sure. Is there\nany vibration in the capsule when you are taking pictures?\nCooper: No. Very little. It is pretty smooth.\nPaul Lowman: Do you think if you had a chance to sit down with those photographs,\nyou could give us an idea of the inclination to the vertical or horizontal? You\nsaid over the West you couldn't see Los Angeles or San Diego, do you remember\nhow far north you could see? along the coast?\nCooper: I could see three or four hundred miles on up north. There was a lot\nof cloud cover-a lot of stratus. You could see patterns where the ground caused\ndifference in cloud formation.\nPaul Lowman: How about on the east coast? Could you identify anything there?\nCooper: I could see the Cape clearly on one pass and the St. Johns river and\ncould see where it came in the inlet at Jacksonville. Right to about Savannah,\nGeorgia and clouds became broken and I could see banks of clouds lined on up\nto what I believe was the bulge of the Hatteras area and prehaps 150 miles on\nfurther. But clouds were obscuring. I felt I could see quite clearly on up north\nto Hatteras and perhaps on up to the Washington area. My sight of this was when\nI made my turnaround. It looked just like a map. It was a great wide expanse of"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the East coast. But there was a quite a bit of clouds up north, broken clouds.\nPaul Lowman: Were there any unusual terrain features?\nCooper: ------\nDr. O'Keefe: Did you see anything that looked like a crater?\nCooper: No. I sure didn't. I was looking for it too.\nPaul Lowman: You went over one in Ghana, but I don't know if it was good or\nnot.\nCooper: Over Africa there was unusual rocky terrain up in the Atlas mountains.\nI didn't see any craters.\nDr. Voas: Do you--could you see clouds and shore lines at night with no moon?\nCooper: Fairly well. If there was no moon you could see them faintly.\nDr. Voas: Any other terrain features that you could see? At night with no moon?\nCooper: No. Not much. You could see the moonlight on the water.\nDr. O'Keefe: You mentioned these small particles. Do I understand correctly\nthat they seemed to be pushed outward from the capsule?\nCooper: If you consider this west and this east and the spacecraft is going east,\nregardless of spacecraft attitude, if any time I fired one of the thrusters at\nnight, I could see glow from almost every one of the thrusters. The pitch-down\nthruster I could see and the yaw I could see shortly after they got out of the\nnozzle. You get tremendous streams of luminous particles of fireflies, and\nregardless of what attitude you were in, ther appeared to come out from the\nspacecraft. A great many could be seen for some period and they seemed to go\nback along flight path.\nDr. Voas: Did they actually appear to flow around? Would you say now that they were\nparallel. As they go back, they will appear optically to come together. But did\nthey actually curve around as if there was a flow field.\nCooper: I felt they were actually moving around. Their relative movement was"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"not real fast. I could see them move right on out. In a matter of 4 or 5 seconds\nthey would be as far away as the other end of the room. (50 feet). Some you\ncould see for maybe as long as 30 or 40 seconds.\nQuestion: Do you mean back from you or back along the flight path?\nCooper: I mean back the actual flight path.\nDr. Voas: Were these paths actually curved? You're of course familiar with the\nfact that as things go backward they appear to converge. Did they actually seem\nto curve in?\nCooper: If I would be sitting facing this way, the ones out of the left yaw\nthruster would move right out and move directly back along the flight path;\nthe ones out of the right one would go out in front of me and would turn back.\nJohn Boynton: Did you note any difficulty in identifying lunar features?\nCooper: I couldn't distinguish anything on the moon. It seemed considerably\nbrighter. And seemed to have more light. I couldn't really distinguish anything.\nRoach: Would it be practicle to have binoculars aboard?\nCooper: I think it would. The moon was much clearer than on the ground.\nHuch: Could you see the earth shine on the moon?\nCooper: The moon was fuller when it was setting than at other times during the\nnight. I never realized that before just now. But it seemed to be almost full\nwhen it was setting. But on the night side there was only a third of the moon.\nHow about that now. The moon was almost fully round when it was setting. I think\nthe pictures will show it.\nRoach: That could be earth shine.\nCooper: That's right. It is a pale color, of course, in daylight.\nDr. Voas: Did it appear to you normal in brightness on the day side?\nCooper: Yes, it was just a lightish blue color."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Question: Could you determine wind direction and velocity by smoke?\nCooper: I could tell direction - over the Tibet area the wind was from the south.\nQuestion: Did you see industrial smoke?\nCooper: I remember one fairly large area there was considerable haze and factory\ntype smoke winding up, but don't remember where it was. It seemed to be like an\ninversion.\nHanel: You did not see the motion of the clouds?\nCooper: No I could not determine the motion of the clouds. Oh, you mean velocity\nby the way the smoke was moving.\nHanel: I mean the clouds were moving.\nShepard: Your first question was could he tellwind velocity and direction from\nthe smoke?\nCooper: I don't know whether I could judge velocity or not. I could tell the wind\nwas blowing fairly strongly, because the smoke appeared to come out of the smoke\nstacks flatly, it didn't drift up. But looking at the clouds, I could not tell\nwhich direction the wind was blowing.\nHanel: Did you have difficulty in seeing Cirrus clouds?\nHanel: Another question. We may have some trouble distinguishing snow from clouds\nin polar regions. You had no difficulty in distinguishing snow from clouds?\nCooper: No. I thought the snow was very very distinct. It is just like flying\nan airplane. Sometimes when the snow is very smooth and even, it is difficult\nto tellclouds from snow. You can determine the cloud height if you have a good\nperspective of the cloud height. You can tell whether the clouds are low or medium\nclouds or very high clouds.\nHanel: You never took two pictures of the same area? That is, two overlapping\npictures?\nCooper: Yes, I think I did over the Himalayas. I have two pictures of almost\nthe same area of the Tibetan High Lake area."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"O'Keefe: Yes, they do overlap. They are pretty badly tilted, but they do\noverlap.\nHanel: Did you have difficulty in seeing Cirrus clouds? Could you estimate how\nmuch of the surface was covered with Cirrus?\nCooper: Surprising little of surface was covered with Cirrus clouds. I would\nguess about half. There were some areas where clouds were fairly extensive.\nCirrus were biggest portion, about 75% of all clouds were Cirrus.\nQuestion: Did you see any dust storms?\nCooper: At no time did I note a dust storm. I looked for them over Africa. One\nplace I thought I might find them was over Arabia, but I saw no dust at all.\nJohn Boynton: You mentioned that particles of dust or water were attracted to\nthe window. Was this rapid or gradual?\nCooper: Very gradual. Numberous little dust particles, a little water and little\ncrumbs. The larger objects didn't seem to be attracted. They just moved slowly\nabout. There was less motion after we powered down cabin fan. Various pieces of\ndust or crumbs off of sandwiches I had eaten.\nJohn Boynton: Did you note they might have been attracted to other areas?\nCooper: I didn't note any particular pattern. I did note the sun was very very hot\nthrough the window. The particular pattern of the sun would be hot on my suit. I\nwould feel heat through my glove when I touched the window."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -48-\nDr. Voas: You seemed to have the general impression that you were stationary and everything else is moving.\nCooper: That's right. You sort of become the center of everything, and you think how you can move the earth around, when you want it, rather than move yourself.\nDr. Voas: Now, as you sat there with this moving picture in front of you, did you have the general feeling you were sitting upright or flying on your back?\nCooper: I did very distinctly feel I was sitting upright. A couple of times on account of the way you feel in the straps like hanging upside down. Every time I dropped something, I grabbed at it below. I never had trouble handling pencil. I never had any trouble putting it where I wanted or getting it. One time I made a wild grab for the camera as I thought it was going to fall, but of course it didn't.\nDr. Voas: On periods after you awakened, did you have feeling you had gone to sleep sitting upright?\nCooper: Yes. Definitely.\nDr. Voas: You mentioned sometimes you had the feeling of being upside down. Was this correlated with the spacecraft being inverted? Visually, I mean.\nCooper: No. I think this was purely a feeling of the straps. You're floating in the straps rather than being firm; like inverted flight in an aircraft.\nVoas: Did you have a general feeling of being stationary? This general feeling of being stationary was not changed by any control action?\nCooper: I tried to give them some pretty good rates, but had no feel for rates at all.\nCooper: Vision-wise, you would see things changing ou then pretty fast, but it wasn't bothersome at all.\nDr. Voas: When you say \"pretty good rates,\" this is 2 to 3 degrees per second?\nCooper: Three, four or five degrees."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -49-\nDr. Voas: At retro fire, did you note feelings of lateral motion?\nCooper: On the third one, it gave me pretty good little boot in yaw.\nDr. Voas: This is distinguished from what you could see looking out? As I understand it, you felt the retro rockets but they didn't change your impression that you were sitting stationary?\nCooper: All I did was feel them and I still had the feeling I was moving right along.\nDr. Voas: Did you feel you were moving backwards?\nCooper: I was moving backwards in retro attitude, then you get quite a motion as I stated over the earth.\nQuestion: Did you have any sensations of change in attitude between perigee and apogee, perhaps as a result of the amount of curvature you could see in the earth's surface?\nCooper: No, I couldn't see any noticeable change in that. What was more distinct was whether you had haze or were in a clear area.\nLou Fisher: We identified one of your pictures taken vertical off Calcutta.\nCooper: Did you note the one before that over the Rangoon area, with the little things out over the river; they look like warehouses or something?\nFisher: Did you see Calcutta?\nCooper: No.\nFisher: Did you see any airports?\nCooper: Yes, I saw numerous airports. The runway patterns show up very distinctly."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Scientific Debriefing -50-\nBoynton: Did you find that later in the flight audio inputs became more startling or more distinct? Did they seem to be more profound?\nCooper: Later in flight, I began to notice the relay panel wiping back and forth whereas I hadn't noticed it before. The music sounded pretty good. If I'd had a radio on board, I could have used it.\nJohn Boynton: Did you find you might look forward to hearing communications, say more so than in the first of the flight?\nCooper: No. Not that I noted.\nJohn B.: Could you hear better?\nCooper: No.\nDr. Voas: Did you at any time hear an unusual noise?\nCooper: No.\nRoach: Was there any change of radio static in electrical storms? In connection with the problem of radio static, there is a phenomenon of static going to and fro between the hemispheres, when it returns it comes back as a whistle. Did you ever hear a whistle?\nCooper: No, I didn't.\nNote: Some questions were then raised concerning the appearance of the horizon at sunrise and sunset. Cooper stated that the horizon near the sun was a golden color at sunset, spreading away from the sun. He stated: \"The real dominant thing is that it is gold as it is setting and it is real blue as it starts to come up.\" He stated again that he saw the Zodiacal light both night and morning. It was a very low order magnitude light, about the same at sunrise and at sunset. He estimated its elongation to be about 15 degrees."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SCIENTIFIC DEBRIEFING OF LT. CMDR. WALTER SCHIRRA HELD AT NASA HEADQUARTERS, TUESDAY MARCH 12, 1963"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n15 November 1963\nIn Reply Refer to: SM(JRG:nem)\nMEMORANDUM FOR: All Participants\nFROM: J. R. Gill\nSUBJECT: Scientific Debriefing of Lt. Cmdr. Walter Schirra, held at NASA Headquarters, March 12, 1963\nThis document is a literal transcription of the subject de-briefing made from the tape recording. It is issued to participants only for their comments and/or recommended deletion. Deadline for receipt of this is December 20, 1963. After that time an edited version may be prepared for wider distribution.\nJocelyn R. Gill\nJocelyn R. Gill\nEnclosure\nFOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"p 1 & 2\n\nDr. Eugene M. Shoemaker, Chairman, Manned Space Science\nWorking Group served as Chairman, substituting for Dr. John Clark,\nChief Scientist. The following people were present:\n\nMr. Carl Abraham, NASA Headquarters\nMr. Richard Daniels, NASA Headquarters\nDr. Winifred Cameron, Goddard Space Flight Center\nMr. Maurice Dubin, NASA Headquarters\nMr. Larry Dunkelman, Goddard Space Flight Center\nDr. Jocelyn R. Gill, NASA Headquarters\nDr. Dale Jenkins, NASA Headquarters\nDr. Urner Liddel, NASA Headquarters\nMr. Oran Nicks, NASA Headquarters\nDr. John Nordberg, Goddard Space Flight Center\nDr. John O'Keefe, Goddard Space Flight Center\nCmdr. Walter Schirra, Manned Spacecraft Center\nMr. George Tennyson, Goddard Space Flight Center\nDr. Eugene M. Shoemaker, NASA Headquarters\n\nDr. Shoemaker - I have a series of written questions to start\nthings off. These have been submitted by some of the people here\ntoday and we may then ask for some supplementary questions from\nthe rest of the people this morning. We might start off with\nthe question on airglow. Will you give us an account of\nMercury's passage through the airglow layers? How did you identify\nthe planet Mercury? Did it seem to have color? Were there any\nstars nearby?\n\nCmdr. Schirra - I think Larry Dunkelman and I discussed this at"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3\n\ngreat length and I don't know whether we could be any more\nexpansive on that subject than we have already. The only\nthing that I can think of that we didn't talk about is an\neffective color of the planet Mercury. It was as white to\nme as any other star. It was not blue, red or some other color.\nIt was definitely \"star-appearing\" to me. It would have a\ndefinite atmosphere where it would change colors and where it\ndidn't have any atmosphere, it didn't change colors. I would\nsay that from that it had no different appearance than if I could\nsee it from the earth as a star. Mercury itself was plotted on my\nstar chart, which is a very valuable tool for these flights. There\nis just no doubt where Mercury has to be and we checked on it and,\nof course, it was Mercury. I think Larry called me one day and we\nall were surprised that I saw Mercury longer than I should have seen\nit and I guess this was explained by its being seen through the\nrefraction of the atmosphere. Is this correct?\nDr. O'Keefe - Yes, that's the answer. Mrs. Cameron is the one who\nmade the contribution. This is her theory.\nSchirra - This was a tremendous yardstick as far as I was concerned.\nIt was so obvious to me that I just had to take the time to describe\nits passage through the various layers of light and the way I\ndescribed it in the handouts \"Results of Third U. S. Manned\nOrbital Space Flight; October 3, 1962\" that you have is about\nas accurate as I can describe it now.\nDr. Gill - Could you make a little drawing on the blackboard for us?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4\n\nSchirra - Again, Larry, do you have that? (Referring to drawing\nprepared by W. Cameron and L. Dunkelman)\n\nMr. Dunkelman - We have.\n\nSchirra - We sat down for about an hour and traced this very\ncarefully.\n\nMr. Dunkelman - It happens that the movement of Mercury behind\nour atmosphere is really not phenomenally related to airglow as\nsuch. Mercury is simply a pointer - an index finger. It gave us\na chance to see what parts of the upper atmosphere you were looking\nat and this has more to do with ozone and atmospheric constituents\nthan it has to do with airglow. We think the answer here lies in\nthe fact that the ozone is absorbing the orange, yellow, and green\nlight and leaves this interesting blue which is an ozone blue\nrather than a Rayleigh blue and we think the reason why Astronaut\nSchirra saw the several shades of blue is he may have been looking\nedge-on at the ozone layer. So it is really not so much related to\nairglow as it is to the way of looking at what produces the color.\nI think we are interested in finding out what causes the phenomenon,\nrather than to attempting to learn anything new about the atmos-\nphere.\nSchirra - I think one of the reasons that I was so enthused about\ntracking Mercury through these colors is that I am a fan of blue\ncolors. I grew up with a Maxfield Parish painting; if anybody\nknows his colors of blues - they are fantastic. Gold blues,\nelectric blues. As a result, these caught my attention. I am"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5\n\nnot that much of an artist or poet, but I was trapped with this\nset of blues and I did expand on it at greath length, I thought.\nThese electric blues -\n\nO'Keefe - (Interrupting) Subtraction is what it sounds like.\nSchirra - So it connotes ozone in that sense - electric blue -\nis exactly what it looked like. A very, very satisfying color.\nDr. Roman - Coming back to the color of Mercury, do I gather from\nyour comment that you feel it was distinctly yellow, yellowish\nfor example, or was it that you didn't pay a great deal of\nattention to?\nSchirra - No, Nancy, I would say it is very much like any other\nstar that I would see, rather than having a color. I didn't\ndetect a color.\nDr. Roman - Astronomers think of stars as having color.\nSchirra - I have seen different-colored stars from earth-bound\nenvironment and anticipated or, in fact, I was looking for different\ncolored stars or planets and did not detect any colors.\nRoman - This means that your background was just a little too\nbright to see colors.\nSchirra - That, and the window itself just isn't an optimum plate -\nseries of plates - to look through. I insisted that what I really\nfelt had happened is that I was seeing no more than about 5th or 6th\nmagnitude stars that the clouding of the windows, as a result of\nthe escaped rocket, reduced my visibility of the stars about one\nmagnitude. In other words there wasn't gross clouding of the win-\ndow. That is what I was trying to make clear by using magnitude of\nstars as the yardstick in this case. I'll stick with that. This"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6\n\nis about the best way I can describe it. I could see more stars,\nas Scott Carpenter described it, when back on the surface of the\nearth and many, many more stars in an airplane cockpit than in\norbital flight.\n\nRoman - You could see more in an airplane?\nSchirra - Yes. So in the debriefing of the flight I stated that\nthis is not a problem for pursuit of Mercury flights. It is a\nproblem for pursuit of space observation and with the Gemini\nvehicle, we have solved this by having the windows properly\ncovered and also we hope so - well, Gemini doesn't have an escape\nrocket for one, which helps us. Now on Apollo, we are plus or\nminus on whether we can afford the weight of having window\ncovers, but if we do, it does have an escape rocket. If we have\ncovers, then these windows should be protected. And better, be-\ncause we will need the stars on this particular mission. But to go\nback and try to cover the Mercury window at this late date would\nbe prohibitive hardware-wise and schedule-wise.\n\nO'Keefe - What would you cover it with?\nSchirra - First of all - for Gemini, we have no problem. There is\nno tower rocket. With Apollo they had window shutters the last\ntime I saw the mock-up which is not at all static. It is quite\ndynamic even though it hasn't flown. How this will be done I\ndon't know, but I think this is a requirement. I don't even think\nit; I know it is a requirement for Apollo.\n\nO'Keefe - You don't think there is a possibility of putting a thin -\nsay, some transparent grease over the window - which would come"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"off in the vacuum?\nSchirra - This might be a way of doing it. Having it sublime\naway or something of this order.\nO'Keefe - That could be done. If that were done ...\nSchirra - I definitely feel that this should not be a neglected\nproblem; if we, for example, do remove the window cover from the\nApollo command module. It definitely should have some type of\nprotection when the star rocket goes. This is going to be a\nby-product of its own combustion, it won't leave marks on the\nwindow. I saw marks on mine as well as a clouded effect and I\nfeel so strongly about this -- When I had the sun at oblique\nangles shallow to the window I could see this film much as you\ndescribe it. Smokers in the group will appreciate this. On the\ninside of an automobile window, you can see the smoke condensa-\ntion on there which you very rarely get washed off until you wash\nthe car yourself. You see this when you have light at very\noblique angles across this window. This is about the same type of\nintensity - it is not enough to restrict your vision although it\ndoes affect it at night. This is exactly why I make the point.\nI think that is about the easiest analogy I can make for you.\nDr. Nordberg - You say this was on the Mercury window after the\nexhaust.\nSchirra - Yes sir, this is the result of this exhaust gas bathing\nthis window as the rocket lit and left almost instantaneously, but\nthe gas does form over it."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Nordberg - Could you, were you able to observe, during the orbital\nflight any decrease in the film on the window. It may have evaporated\naway, or did it just stay?\nSchirra - I was hoping to see that and I did not observe a decrease.\nThis surprised me too. I would anticipate that that gas would sub-\nlime away. I suspect that the vehicle itself - we are getting\ninto the fireflies again - but the vehicle itself is surrounded by\nan environment. We have the same problem when we try to run a\ncapsule or spacecraft in an altitude chamber. It is outgassing\nthe water cooler systems and other components even in a man-\ncreated vacuum and as a result we can't maintain this vacuum\nbecause it is creating an environment all the time. I think this\nis what we have done in the Mercury spacecraft with the by-\nproduct hydrogen peroxide gas and the water coolers and this is\nwhere I feel our firefly, frost particles come from. Did you\nnotice by the way- getting into that, - that the particles were\nobserved almost immediately after I was in orbit? - I said, \"I\nsee frost flakes.\"\nMr. Dubin - You were in sunlight at that time too, ...\nSchirra - That's correct. This is my only definition of the\ndifference in the way the sunlight itself gets to where I was.\nMeaning that at sunrise it goes through a lot of atmosphere,\nand as I get into sun above my horizon, I have no atmosphere;\nso then its white again.\nNordberg - This deposit is of great interest to us. That is"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"why I asked the question because we observed this on Tiros too.\nOne of the two cameras was just completely clouded for a few\nhundred orbits and then gradually after a few hundred orbits it\nimproved a little bit.\nSchirra - I need a little more flight time! I'm all for it.\nNordberg - We eliminated this by putting a sheet over it in\nthird stage and since then we have never had any trouble.\nSchirra - Sure, that's it. I am sure this is something we\ncan't let rest. We've got to cover these windows to protect\nthem from clouding during the transition to where we are now\nto space itself.\nDubin - Do you ever detect any gas around the vehicle? In sun-\nlight due to shadowing of the vehicle.\nSchirra - No, I looked for that. The only vestige of something\naround me were these particles as we have described them.\nO'Keefe - Well, it is very helpful to know that they were seen\nthroughout the day.\nSchirra - Yes, I think really what it depended on was how much\nsunlight I had coming through the window. If it was really\nbright within the vehicle, I didn't see them as well. If I got\nan off-angle where the sun was fairly shallow in relation to my\nwindow, I could then see these particles; of course, up until my\nlocal noon, I did not see them anyway.\nO'Keefe - About this problem of condensation and the local environ-\nment you are speaking of, I think that someone investigated that at\nthe Manned Spacecraft Center. It is quite true that with an outflow"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of gas like that the ambient pressure - the general ambient\npressure - is quite different from the pressure right around\nyour vehicle. I still wonder whether you can get the pressure\nup around the vehicle for the level where condensation takes\nplace. I have been trying to persuade some people that the\ncondensation takes place before it leaves these ports of course\nas it spreads out in space. The pressure is certainly much higher\naround the bottom of the heat shield, but I do not know whether\nthat is right or not.\nShoemaker - Do we have any more questions on the airglow?\nThey are very useful.\nDr. Liddel - We have two problems here. One is the pressure and the\nother is the rate of evaporation.\nO'Keefe - That's true. Once formed, they may not sublime out.\nQuestion is how were they formed.\nSchirra - I think there is one thing that we might bring into this\nbefore we leave it unless there is a separate question on it.\nThe green-yellow, almost a chartreuse, coloring of these particles,\nI feel, did not permit you to see the edges of the particles as\nwell as they appeared when they were in the white band in the\nsense of looking like frost particles. So they looked more like\nblobs and this is typical of fireflies themselves. You can't define\nthe size of the blob you see as green-yellow, but if you see a snow-\nflake, which is white, you can very easily see its edges in a sense.\nNot that you focus on them but you can visualize that they have\nedges. This is a point that I don't think I have made in the past,"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"but I think this is basically why we refer to the white particles\nas frost because it does remind us of this. This is what probably\ntempts me to say that it has to be water.\nCameron - Do you think the chartreuse ones were maybe the ones that\nGlenn thought actually glowed, didn't he? They were lighted\nwrong.\nSchirra - I think - well this gets back to my opinion and I\nsaw myself on film yesterday at the press conference talking\nabout it and said that I guess we need some more opinions but we\nhave three opinions now and basically I put two together and made\nmy own, but the green I feel is strictly the case of the sunlight\ngoing through this tremendous amount of atmosphere at sunrise.\nWhat is left as a light spectrum is this green-yellow on these\nparticles. You can all explain this better than I can, I am sure,\nbut what gets through all this atmosphere would probably be this\ngreen-yellow. I think that in a sense they are not self-illumi-\nnated but they reflect as if they were self-illuminated.\nO'Keefe - Well, if you pass sunlight through a thick layer of\natmosphere then, of course, what you will get will be a red - a\ndeep red - however, that doesn't necessarily prove that you are\nwrong in what you are saying because the things would be illuminated\nin two ways. They would be illuminated not only by the direct\nsunlight, but also by the scattered light around the horizon\nwhich you have photographed at sunrise and the combination of these\ntwo colors might give you a chartreuse as you have said because it\nis a double illumination. However, there is another possible"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12\n\nexplanation. If it is really true that this chartreuse color\nonly turns up only at sunrise, we may be with the explanation\nthat Herzfeld 1/put forward for it.\nSchirra - This is the nitrogen effect?\nO'Keefe - Yes.\nSchirra - I would like to stamp that one out. We can't afford to\nhave nitrogen outgas in the vehicle. (Laughter) The only nitrogen\nwhich we have stored aboard is that which pressurizes the hydrogen\nperoxide system. If we lose any of that, this is almost fatal.\nO'Keefe - Well, there is plenty of nitrogen in the atmosphere at\nthat level. Still -\nSchirra - You mean in the external atmosphere?\nO'Keefe - Yes. Ambient atmosphere.\nSchirra - Fair enough. Well then, that paper - I was left with\nthe impression that the nitrogen came from the vehicle itself.\nO'Keefe - I am sure that it didn't cross Herzfeld's mind.\nDubin - There's also nitrogen . . .\nSchirra - Well, it read that way to me. I should say that I am\nvery conscious of what nitrogen does for me within the vehicle!\n(Laughter) This is basically my control field.\nDubin - I was going to say there is also nitrogen absorbed in metals...\nSchirra - The gaseous content of the vehicle is very carefully\nmeasured prior to sealing up the vehicle for lift off. It is\npurged and we go up to about 97 or 98 percent oxygen. Obviously,\nthere is not much left in the cabin, you can't get it all out because\n1/ Abstract published in Vol. 136, #3522, p. 1121, July 29, 1962 of\nScience by Charles Herzfeld."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13\n\nyou just can't purge particles in the interior in that these are\nangles and trap volumes, but I would suspect that we had a very\nlow order of nitrogen gas within the vehicle that could come out.\nNow it can come out if the vehicle's leak rate - in the vehicle is\nexcessive - and in this one it was somewhat less than 600 cc.\nI think it was about 500 -\nDunkelman - 588.\nRoman - I think your suggestion, Larry, was that it would be on\nthe outside of the vehicle.\nSchirra - That I hadn't had a feeling for and I suspect this is\nthe only way you could get it in contrast to getting it from\nwithin. So I won't argue this point. I am well aware of the\nfact that it could be adsorbed and then passed off in this\nenvironment.\nRoman - John, (to Dr. O'Keefe) is it obvious that sunlight coming\nthrough in the upper atmosphere would be red if you are above\nthe dust layer?\nO'Keefe - Well, when you look at the sun in the photographs\nwhich were taken, it looks red.\nRoman - I see.\nSchirra - The sunset is red. Same old sun that we see here.\nO'Keefe - Yes, but what you'd see on either side of it - flanking\nit - is Maxfield Parish cloud, at least in the color photographs.\nI think this is what Maxfield Parish went in for particularly.\nHe went in for very powerful colors - subtraction colors. Turquoise -\nrather than the pastels, rather than colors of the spectrum."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"14\n\nShoemaker - Any other items on airglow we should take up?\nSchirra - We will bring up this other thing I saw - I guess?\nShoemaker - The cloud (bright area) you saw over Madagascar?\nSchirra - Yes.\nDubin - I was wondering on these various effects on the horizon.\nYou make some statements about the blue horizon--the different\ncolors.\nSchirra - What time is this?\nDubin - This is at 06 44 GMT (See blue book, p. 104). (Now\nReport of Third U. S. Manned Orbital Flight.)\nSchirra - This was the beginning to what Mrs. Cameron has a sketch\nof, I believe. ...\nCameron - Actually you give two descriptions here. I believe\nthey conflict. I assume that one is an expansion of a part of\nthe other.\nSchirra - It is, and as you can see, it's a time span here where\nit obviously is changing as the sun is setting as well. Not\nmuch in time, but my time was pretty fast in relation to sun-\nsets, I guess.\nDubin - Question is what the heck did you really see?\nSchirra - Maybe if I just read it back myself, I can expand\non it. I'll read it out loud. How's that? I guess we can\npick up right at 0604 33 and I say there is a nice interesting\nhorizon, which meant that I was captured by it. The sun was\noff to the left and I would say about 40 degrees. This just"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"15\n\nmeant that it was off to the left of my yaw angle - I was in\nflight path in yaw at this instant of time - which means you\ncould determine where the vehicle was oriented and then also\nget the sun-line in relation to the window.\nCameron - Incidentally, the sun must have been very close to\nsetting at that time, wasn't it?\nSchirra - It was setting, in fact. This is where I went on.\nThere is a dark line at the surface of the earth, orange at\nthe clouds. Now there was a cloud horizon, as well, that I\ncould see. Then a light yellow, a light white, and then a\nblue band. This was coming from the surface of the earth\ngoing up. A very light blue and then I got all excited and\nsaid that I had the planet Mercury in sight at this point.\nMercury obviously was in the black. It had not come down\ninto the Mercury set. If you want to describe it in the sense\nof sunset, Mercury set. I think it deserves the term of having\nthe opportunity to set as well. I was coming up from the surface\nof the earth towards the darkness of space and then I detected\nMercury where it belonged, trailing the sun.\nDubin - Well! The sun was off to your left about 40 degrees.\nSchirra - As well as Mercury.\nDubin - In the same direction?\nSchirra - It was trailing almost above the sun in this sense.\nWhich is where I had it plotted on the star chart. Then I\nwanted to describe the blue band and I said that there is a"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"16\n\nrelatively dark blue band right at the surface of the earth.\nOf course, the orange and light yellow was changing at this\npoint and I then came into seeing this dark blue band. In\nother words, I had lost the orange cloud effect just above the\nsurface of the clouds. This was the same kind of red-orange\nwe typically see through the atmosphere on the surface of the\nearth which is, of course, the atmosphere. I realize this cuts\nout most everything but reds and yellow-orange. But the light\nyellow wasn't at all unusual either; I had seen this in many\nsunsets. The sun had set. I wanted to describe this blue band.\nI realized I had gone through some 34 seconds. When I say\ndescribing the blue band, it is some 30 seconds later. Took me,\nsay, 4 seconds to say that. Relatively dark blue band right at\nthe surface of the earth and a light blue band meaning a next\nband above it; another dark blue band, a large white band which\nis the airglow. This is the way I felt it should be. I have\nnot made a careful study prior to the time of the various layers\non the earth or above the earth. Then a deep black one and it\nsort of goes from a grayish blue to a dense black, almost looks\nlike the underneath surface of a summer cumulo-nimbus effect,\nwhere you have a nice bright earth and then you go into this\nblack cloud and then there is this roll cloud that precedes a\nthunder storm and it's a very, very choppy underneath surface.\nIt looks very turbulent, to you. This surprised me. I\nexpected to see another sharp line and I did not. This is what"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"17\n\nI was referring to here as the transition from the last blue band I could see to the total darkness of space. I guess this is the only way I can describe that. This was a surprise to me to see this, really.\n\nO'Keefe - Well, it is astonishing, isn't it?\n\nSchirra - Yes, it is. I expected to see a nice, sharply delineated arc, and this was not the case by any means.\n\nO'Keefe - Whatever it was, it was turbulence?\n\nSchirra - Yes, this is the way I would describe it. It has to be or the light in a sense made it look turbulent. I think you have all seen the base of a thunderstorm as it comes towards you and the light starts diminishing rapidly as you get a thunderstorm. Just because it is so thick and almost opaque in contrast to sunlight that can get through. Then we see this vortex effect underneath it and this is very much the way I would describe it myself. This was the transition from visible to no light. No sharp line. I think you probably have it fairly well sketched right there.\n\nDubin - Have you seen the sketches? (Mrs. Cameron's sketches of colored bands around the horizon.)\n\nSchirra - No, I haven't.\n\nO'Keefe - Why don't you take them around there, Mrs. Cameron ... so we can get additions and corrections (to the drawings).\n(Schirra and Cameron looking at the drawings)\n\nCameron - This is your first description (drawing shown to Schirra) ... This is the second description. ..."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18\n\nSchirra - Yes. Now as we progressed in time to the second drawing, the sun has now really set and the reds and yellows (in the drawing) are fine ... now just getting the afterlight ...that's the ragged effect I saw. ...\n\nSchirra - This isn't as thick as that grey to black band as I saw it. We are stuck with a small circle (radius of curvature used in the drawing) and I had a big circle.\n\nDubin - Okay, could you re-draw it on the board the way you saw it?\n\nSchirra - All it is is a straight line with a slight curvature to it. I had a broad angle of view, but the whole thing is flattened out. I don't see that much curvature at all.\n\nO'Keefe - (to Mrs. Cameron) Put in that remark about this band is too narrow?\n\nSchirra - This is too wide. (indicating drawing) It would be the grey to black (band).\n\nShoemaker - It faded out more rapidly in proportion to the white band?\n\nSchirra - It was definitely not something you would like to make with a compass.\n\nCameron - Narrower and wider ... I tried to indicate that, but as to scale, I didn't ... I was just trying ...\n\nO'Keefe - We made a first try at it ...\n\nSchirra - (Reading in the Blue Book) \"I will bring up the fingertip light.\" This will clue you. This will make it"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19\n\nclear to you that the internal lighting was off inside the vehicle. I don't know why I didn't bring that point out. This reminds me that it was dark and it was 0605 52. I had to see what time it was. We had this counter clock as you know, and to see the numerals I had to bring my fingertip lights up to see them. It was quite dark within the vehicle and this is quite an advantage to this observation. Then I say that Mercury is on the horizon and this meant that it was just coming down through what I described going up, if you can follow my directions here. This is where Mercury was as the pointer or index as it passed through these layers. Now again, we proceeded through time so that light patterns will change and that's why these descriptions do conflict as we progress on in time. I think this might explain why. As I come back through with Mercury now setting these same light bands are not the identical ones that I described previously and I used the word \"airglow\" and even the way it came out in the tape I said see the Mercury going through the - and I was searching for a term and so I just said \"airglow\" just so I wouldn't have to get into a big discussion about what I was going to report on. Actually, I could have said through the -- I was searching for a term -- but this \"airglow\" I was using simply as a term to describe what I was looking at. I could have said through the lighted horizon.\n\nO'Keefe - Twilight layer is probably a better way to say it."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20\n\nSchirra - Very good, a better way of saying it.\n\nO'Keefe - \"Airglow\" is a very complicated term. We don't know what it is all about. That's what we are after. ...\n\nSchirra - In fact, on occasion I have used airglow through here just out of ignorance. I think what we all are trying to do right here is to try and clear up some of this ignorance; so we need more data, of course. Then, I say (reading from the Blue Book again) \"We'll see if she holds up,\" meaning, can I track Mercury through all this? That was interesting in itself, that I could, I thought.\n\nO'Keefe - This was quite important. This was one of the questions raised by Glenn on his flight whether some layers are opaque or not.\n\nSchirra - I could track Mercury through all of these points or layers.\n\nNicks - Does it change its apparent size like the sun when it sets?\n\nSchirra - I don't recall having observed this.\n\nRoman - Did you see any additional stars ... the fact that it has a finite disk (Mercury)?\n\nSchirra - No, again the window cuts out the fun of that, I think.\n\nO'Keefe - No, you wouldn't see a disk. ...\n\nSchirra - It would have been great to have had some magnifying device at this point to make this observation. No, it just looked"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"21\n\nlike a star.\n\nO'Keefe - I think when Nicks asked if the sun changed in size, he really - the sun doesn't change in size as it sets. He meant change in brightness.\n\nSchirra - Apparent size - not the size, but the illusion at least. I've got to break off a second here. I don't recall seeing many moon sets on earth. Have any of you ever seen a good moon set?\n\nRoman - Yes.\n\nSchirra - You have to be on the West Coast to do it; but, of course, I saw a moon set on this flight and that is why I brought it up. To me, it was the first real good moon set I had seen. (Laughter)\n\nO'Keefe - There is a good solid reason for that. That is that a full moon will set at sunrise. Not many people are up at that time.\n\nSchirra - I hope you have had a chance to see the photographs I took of this moon set.\n\nGill - No.\n\nSchirra - There are two black and white sets of these. The original prints were very good. I understand there is a lot of halation around this. I definitely think you all should get these out and examine them. Now the subsequent prints were not very good. They were too fuzzy.\n\nGill - Who would have them?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"22\n\nSchirra - Paul Backer could trace them down at least.\nHe was the film-handler. He could chase them down.\nO'Keefe - Minnaert has suggested that after moonset, that\nthere might be a lunar zodiacal light. (Minnaert, Light\nand Color in the Open Air, p. 295.)\nSchirra - Oh.\nO'Keefe - It's a dim hope.\nSchirra - Getting back to this light magnitude in relation\nto stars is about 12 to 15 magnitude. I wouldn't even see\nthis. I suspect Gordon won't unless he just happens to look\nout at the right time and has enough lighting. Now with\ninstrumentation we could detect it, but visibly with the\nnaked eye you can't detect because you can't see through the\nwindow. You can't detect this low illumination level. I might\nadd that I saw something subsequent to the flight that really\nflipped me. I was on route to the West Coast on a night flight\n(commercial). I was sitting way in the back in the tourist\nsection in middle of a three-seater, and thought I was\nanonymous, when the stewardess came roaring back and said\n\"Cmdr. Schirra, would you come up front;\" and out of my\nobscurity I was drawn to the cockpit and I said to myself that\nwe've either lost a pilot or co-pilot. (Laughter) So I went\nroaring up front and the passengers were looking with a\ndegree of apprehension, at least. I went up to the cockpit\nand looked out and we were heading West just after sunset and a"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"23\n\nblue scout had been launched from Vandenberg (AFB). It had\nthe most fantastic lighting I have ever seen anywhere. It\nhad the exhaust trail and above the horizon it had this\nfantastic glow - ionization glow (like a vapor cloud) I\nwould describe it as - which would best pin down -resemble-\nthe zodiacal light if you ever wanted to do it. It had a\nband across the horizon about 60 to 70 degrees and it went\nright up the ecliptic and picked up the moon and the planets.\nIt was just amazing.\n\nShoemaker - How far could you trace it?\nSchirra - I could see it right up to the zenith as much as I\ncould see out the cockpit. We were all oohing and ahing.\nI think you have seen this same glow from a booster flight at\nnight, particularly if you can pick up a sunset or sunrise\nwhen you get above the earth's shadow and get into the lighted\narea where the booster is. There is a tremendous expansion wave\nthat's behind the vehicle and this is basically what it looks\nlike.\n\nDubin - These pictures of Glenn's Atlas flight show the same\nthing. ...\n\nSchirra - I think it was mine you saw...\nO'Keefe - What you saw from the cockpit - was it from the blue\nstreak or was it the zodiacal light?\nSchirra - I think the two just drew it together and that it was\ndefinitely stimulated by this blue streak as it went up almost\nup the ecliptic in relation to the arc field of view."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"24\n\nO'Keefe - It is not a difficult thing to see the zodiacal light\nunder reasonably favorable conditions.\n\nSchirra - No, I have seen it frequently, but not as brilliantly.\nGill - Have you seen it in Houston by any chance?\nSchirra - I have seen it just flying at night. I haven't seen it\nfrom Houston recently, no.\n\nGill - Well, this is the season to see it. You should see it...\nabout three-quarters of an hour after sunset.\n\nSchirra - From an airplane, you can see it better than you can\nfrom a Mercury spacecraft. You don't have this dimming of light\nthrough your canopy as you do from the spacecraft. This is really\na spectacular sight. Of course, the pilots were so concerned\nbecause they didn't know what it was. This was hundreds and\nhundreds of miles away, and yet they felt they were in danger.\n(Laughter) They wanted answers right away.\n\nGill - They got them, didn't they?\nSchirra - Of course, you've heard that the whole West Coast was\nenthralled by this sight. It was in the newspapers.\n\nRoman - Speaking of the brightness of the zodiacal light,\nDr. Mulders, NSF, was in Chile at a high altitude last fall,\nand he commented to me, that the zodiacal light was so bright\nthat he was able to see it from horizon to horizon without\ndifficulty.\n\nSchirra - Amazing--horizon to horizon--I am not sure what we are\ngoing to see at thousands of miles from earth. I suspect that"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"25\n\nwe are going to see a batch of clouds if it's lighted. (the\nearth) That's really what I saw a lot of. I was just amazed.\nObviously, when I flew over Africa, it was loud and clear and\nyou would see this if you were looking at Africa from some\nvantage point many, many miles away. I suspect that if you\nlooked at earth from a long distance away that there is so much\ncloud cover that it might have an appearance much like Venus in\nthis sense.\n\nShoemaker - While we are on Africa, would you like to go on\nand talk about the...(interruption)\nSchirra - You can't match my blues. Maybe Parish could help ...\nNordberg - Does anyone have anything on the altitude, particular-\nly on that top that sort of turbulent thing?\nSchirra - That's another one you should check into. Through\nthe trajectory tables, you should find my altitude. Now at\nthis point, I was just passed Indian Ocean ship as I recall.\nO'Keefe - We've done all that. If you say when Mercury went\nthrough that we will tell you what the height was. (To\nCameron) You have it?\nCameron - I have it. It's about 280 kilometers. Height of\nthe layers is about 66 kilometers. I only know the height\nof his observation, not knowing the width of it.\nO'Keefe - (to Schirra) But you made a mark when you went\nthrough it. The first \"time hack\" was when you were going\nthrough this turbulent area, right?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"26\n\nSchirra - Correct, that's when I came into it.\nO'Keefe - What was the height of the layers at this time -\n66 kilometers, is that right?\nSchirra - Right, that's what I was saying. I hope we can\nhold Mercury meaning that I'd like to see it go through this\nand I did not know that I could, but obviously I proved that\nI could; I did. This was quite a surprise. Didn't you say,\nJocelyn, that there aren't many people that have seen Mercury\nsets?\nGill - Very true. Mercury, (the planet) period. Very few\npeople know that it exists.\nO'Keefe - Can I point out that you used the word airglow just\nin general terms, a faint, glowing light seen from the atmosphere\nwithout your - What you called the airglow is not what is\ntechnically know as the airglow.\nSchirra - Yes, any time we use airglow I don't use it as we\nprofessionally talk about airglow. I was using it merely as\nan escape clause.\nDunkelman - There is one other point there. One isn't sure\njust in what plane these phenomena took place. They may have\nbeen ahead or behind this plane (of the spacecraft). We have\nto think of this... The 66 kilometers might indeed be reflected\nas something that had been before this point, you see.\nNordberg - (Comment inaudible).\nSchirra - My local vertical would be this hand as I show it\nand, of course, 40 degrees to the left where the sun and"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Mercury were traversing was in a plane something like this.\nThis is your point I think, Larry, Isn't it?\nDunkelman - That's one ...\nSchirra - So they come down this way which mathematically isn't hard to solve, but you should consider this.\nDubin - This plane may vary a certain amount and it is very difficult to know which way.\nSchirra - The spacecraft at this point was under attitude control and was fairly tight in a sense.\nRoman - I think Larry's point is that though we don't really know if we are ... if we are actually taking a traverse straight through the atmosphere, it may be something in front, a tangent line, or behind it.\nDunkelman - The first thought is to put a line right through there, and at this point this may be on the plane but it may not be that. Some may be ahead or behind, or both. ...\nSchirra - In other words, these layers in this sense could be all staggered out and this one stacked like a bunch of steps in a sense.\nDubin - And they could be higher in altitude than a simple right angle projection.\nO'Keefe - It's quite safe.\nSchirra - I was looking at two dimensions in a sense.\nCameron - The right angles of projection and this is the twilight zone of the spectrum."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Schirra - If there is another one of those coffees, I'll trade this one in. I don't mind it cool.\nBreak (General conversation)"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Schirra - And the rare occasions that I've had the timing for this.\nO'Keefe - There is a nice Delta Flight from Washington down to Houston. The thing goes exactly toward the sun - you can't miss it.\nCameron - You'll have to go to the cockpit.\nSchirra - Hmm - You have to make the Delta Flight, in this particular case, from Dallas to Los Angeles. I passed Albuquerque.\nShoemaker - This peculiar thing you saw over Africa - maybe you could tell us about it.\nSchirra - That, as I have said, was my biggest surprise. I talked to most of you at great length about things we would hope to see or expect to see. This I had no prior knowledge of and I basically can say that I was \"sucked\" in and originally called this airglow, if you recall. I guess it is best to refer back to the record again. This was 5 hours and 20 minutes.\nCameron - That's the time I got from you. The only thing I notice from the script was that you said Glenn was asking you when you were passing over California if you had seen what the airglow was. Then you said something about you were surprised at how high it was.\nSchirra - This was the same phenomena. I had come back from there, I think, isn't that correct? Let's see.\nDubin - The Indian Ocean.\nO'Keefe - David Stern at Goddard predicted that you would see something very unusual in this flight before you went up. ...\nSchirra - Really?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"O'Keefe - Yes, he gave me a note. I was supposed to pass that note down to the Manned Spacecraft Center; I don't think I did. I think it's my fault. (Ed. copies were forwarded to MSC.)\nRoman - What is this you are referring to?\nO'Keefe - There is a very strong magnetic anomaly in this region, and this is where ...\nDunkelman - I think the fact that Schirra had not heard of this makes the observation even better scientifically.\nSchirra - Hmm.\nO'Keefe - Quite exciting about this thing, but exactly what region is Cdr. Schirra talking about? ...He's talking about the South Atlantic - and the South Atlantic was in sunlight. This is probably as close to it as we could get to be in darkness.\nSchirra - I think what happened is I looked out as I was drifting and this happened to be in the right attitude to see this, which probably meant that I was looking toward the North although I can't confirm this.\nCameron - You said something about you would judge that the width was about a fourth of your window.\nSchirra - Yes.\nCameron - Can you say how far - anything about how high it was from the horizon?\nSchirra - I was surprised when I saw what I thought were city lights and they turned out to be stars below this thing. As a result, I was confused in the sense that I wasn't then looking for yardsticks."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cameron - Was this a patch, or do you think there was a layer there?\nSchirra - It was a layer across my whole visible horizon. It wasn't just a blob in other words.\nCameron - And is that the only time you saw it?\nSchirra - That is the only time that I recall ever having seen it. At one particular point - Was it at 5 hours 20 minutes (in the record)? I don't seem to refer to it too well in here.\nDunkelman - We had to find it.\nSchirra - You had to dig it out?\nDunkelman - We had to dig it out from your self-debriefing later.\nRoman - Was there any color apparent in this case?\nSchirra - I would like to refer to it, Nancy, as a little smog color, having a little brown in it. Sort of Brownish gray - rather it wasn't black or white. It was definitely toward the brown smog thing. I'm sure you have had the unfortunate privilege of letting down in Los Angeles and seeing what smog brown is.\nRoman - Right.\nSchirra - This isn't what you would see from the surface of Los Angeles, but above it when you look into this. Sort of a dusty color in a sense. If you'd like to use that term. I don't like to use that term because if you have seen a dust cloud you've seen more solidity to it in your mind at least. I don't want to give you that picture. Definitely a fog effect rather than seeing particles. I think of it that way."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dunkelman - We are here to hear yours and I think we should figure out some more of this. I don't want to inject my thought into this, but I was trying to quote you in saying that it is brownish smog layers and wasn't sure how to define it.\nSchirra - Yes. This is dirty brown, not a pleasant brown, not one you would like to see. Sort of like a tattle tale brown instead of a tattle tale gray.\nCameron - Venus was just off the edge of it. I have the report of it.\nSchirra - Let's see, where are we there?\nCameron - I don't think you are saying anything about that. I was wondering if you noticed Venus at that time?\nSchirra - There was some point in here where I miscalled Venus or Mercury, I forget which, but this is wrong. I told them to correct it and they never did. But anyway this is what I did say. I think you could disprove me very easily, because it just couldn't be there. I forgot which one it was I referred to. Venus and the moon were always together is the whole point, and they were to me in a horizontal line which gave me a good reference.\nO'Keefe - Cdr. Schirra, there are some important points here. First of all, of course, both Glenn and Carpenter saw stars underneath the ordinary airglow layer.\nSchirra - Yes, I remember.\nO'Keefe - So it clearly can't be seen and one would expect that anyway.\nSchirra - I would say that this is substantiated by my report of seeing Mercury as it passed through these layers as Mercury set which"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"would prove that the stars well could be seen going through the same traverse. This thing I saw - let's just call it the smog belt - on this southern pass, to go back and recap the sensation that brought this to mind which is not brought out here other than the fact that I can identify what I saw. I was coming over a land area. (I think I better take a second and break out my orbital map which I have here.)\nO'Keefe - If you have the tape, we might replay that.\nSchirra - This would be better because some of the nine hours there, I have not identified carefully enough, and I should have, by going back over the tape and these areas of interest - I think we should listen to the original tape again. Let's get down to where we were.\nCameron - Larry (Dunkelman) has listened to it at the Cape, I think.\nDunkelman - Did you see what I call normal airglow at night? That is the soft white band.\nSchirra - Yes, I did.\nDunkelman - All right, yes, that's important because I think later it will help.\nCameron - Was that the thing you saw?\nSchirra - This is distinctly different and this, I think, we identified in our earlier discussion (speaking of the use of the term airglow).\nDunkelman - Fine.\nSchirra - I had moonlight as well, but I could definitely see this faint white effect."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dubin - Was there any color whatever in it?\nSchirra - In the airglow that I saw? No, other than during sunset times where you would have sunlight itself.\nDubin - No color whatever?\nSchirra - I think of white as being all colors and you can see I've been trapped with painting a few times. This patch was denser as you came into the middle of this belt. It definitely had to have a light stimulus to it or I wouldn't have seen it. I was well aware of this and thought this as I saw it. The initial impression that brought to my attention is, first off, and this is the liability we have; we're wanting to see something that needs to be seen with the naked eye when the inside of the vehicle is dark.\nCameron - In the patch did you notice any variation in color either horizontal or vertical? Or was it all one?\nSchirra - The airglow now we are discussing?\nCameron - The patch over (Madagascar).\nSchirra - Oh, this patch, it seemed ... You can't keep track of whether you are over land or water continually and time is progressing fairly rapidly; for example, on this particular period where we are talking in terms of 5 hours and 20 minutes, going back just a few minutes, I am over Africa because I had left the southeast coast of Africa, in other words, Durban and this is the place I had one time in my mind wanted to see a flare and I did see cities and I know I saw Capetown which was in the clear. I talked to the Ambassador from that section of Africa when we were at Goddard for the 5th year celebration of satellites, and he said, \"Oh, I wish we had known that, because"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"everybody thinks that all you see is Perth! (laughter) Well, we see a lot of other places as well.\" To go back, I was trying to re-establish this phenomenon in my mind so I had passed over Africa and I was darkened within the vehicle. I was drifting. As I was drifting - we like to say that we can see a city because the people of the city get quite excited about it as we know Perth did - and I was proceeding across the Indian Ocean drifting, so my attitudes cannot be defined, I wanted to say to myself, oh, I see some more cities below me. Now I wasn't convinced in my mind that I was over the Indian Ocean, yet with the attitudes not carefully defined, I might well have seen cities. These I said, ah, those cities are quite constellation setups. They looked like constellations. Then I said, my gosh! they are constellations. They are stars and this was below what I then, in my mind at least, had planted as airglow. Again, a lump term, meaning a lighted horizon, and I looked above this brown smog effect and saw more stars again. Then I could see through this brown effect, stars, but they were dimmed considerably by it. Now, I did not have the opportunity in that the attitudes were dynamic to trace an individual star or planet through this particular area. I wasn't at this point too interested in knowing what constellations I was looking at. In drifting flight, you don't really have a requirement to navigate, that is, to know where you are in relation to a star field or surface.\nRoman - So you don't know what you were looking at?\nSchirra - So any particular star or constellation, I could not identify at this time. If I needed to, I would then have to destroy"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"my dark adaptation and light up my star chart and then identify these things. This is the problem we have.\nO'Keefe - One of the classic problems in astronomy - one of the solutions for it is to illuminate with a red light, because you don't destroy the dark adaptation so quickly.\nSchirra - This is why we went to these fingertip lights which are red. I started out, and this might interest you, I went to the planetarium in Chapel Hill and took both gloves with me. One had white lights and one had the red lights. This was my test of these lights. We used them while working in the planetarium. We lit up the white lights and the whole dome was just brilliant white. These are tiny little peanut bulbs, really minute. This was the last time I used those white lights. That very day - they were painted red as a result of this. You need very, very low orders of light to -\nDunkelman - I had the impression the first time we talked about this that you had not seen any stars through the patch, this brownish patch, but you feel that you had seen -\nSchirra - Yes sir, this is what I am trying to do; recreate the scene. That is why I went back to coming off Africa. Having looked for the lights, and having seen Capetown, I then felt that I was seeing more city lights and then I was so surprised to realize that these were stars. Now this only means that I was not pitched down enough to really see the earth itself. So this means that it was quite high.\nRoman - Do you feel that you were looking at the airglow layers at sunset or might you have been looking down at this sort of tangentially as you are at some angle?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"37\nSchirra - I feel that I was looking up at it now in relation to my local horizon.\nRoman - You were actually looking up at it? Have you any idea how high it was above the apparent horizon at that time?\nSchirra - That is where I am in trouble, Nancy, because there is no direct repeated knowledge of what this attitude is.\nRoman - Well, the other question is ...\nSchirra - But I saw a good batch of stars below it which meant that my axis had to be fairly well above the horizon.\nRoman - Any structure either turbulent or wave-like?\nSchirra - No, this was a very soft - we best describe this in clouds as being a cirrus layer rather than a cumulus layer; a stratus would be a better term, I think.\nNordberg - Sort of diffuse?\nRoman - I am still not quite sure I have the answer to my question then. I'm not a meteorologist.\nSchirra - If I were to do it, I'd take a chalk eraser and just make a streak across the blackboard, it would be more intense in the center of the eraser and then diffused as I got -\nRoman - But no other structure?\nSchirra - No other structure.\nRoman - The reason I am asking this is that it sounds as if it might be related to some other equatorial red airglow which has been observed from the ground. This has a distinct wave structure.\nSchirra - I see. No, I did not see the permanent wave effect or the"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"38\nmackerel effect that you see in clouds. This is very much a - well, I would say if you really wanted to do it - well, do it in water colors rather than chalk.\nNordberg - Did it cover your entire field of view?\nSchirra - It covered my whole field of view, yes. That's where I \"suckered-in\" thinking that I was looking at \"airglow-\" what we have used now - I think you understand how I have used airglow and that there were cities below it and stars above it. Then, these cities were defined rapidly as stars and then I -\nDubin - You actually saw no horizon then? And you saw none of the regular airglow?\nSchirra - No, I could not see any vestige of the surface of the earth, meaning the true airglow in this sense.\nDubin - What you saw then were some of the bands with stars above and below - you remember how high up you were looking?\nSchirra - No. If I had not had the fetish of conserving fuel in this drifting period - was most important - not only conserving fuel, but to see what effects the vehicle would get while it drifted over a period of time; in other words, what this minute atmosphere might do to the vehicle, whether it would spin it up or slow it down or what have you. I could have picked up my attitude just by pitching down and picking up the surface of the earth. But then I would have destroyed the period of time that we had been drifting to see if the vehicle attitude had been affected by the orbital period.\nRoman - For something like that, would it be desirable to carry a small mirror, something like a woman's pocketbook mirror, which you"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"39\ncould look down at the different angles.\nSchirra - We had a mirror on there. This permitted me basically to look toward the heat shield. Something like a rear view mirror, except it was a front view mirror in Mercury. But in any case, you almost need - we need something like a dental mirror to move around. I think again you get in trouble with a mirror; I considered this. In fact, I had a mirror on my hand which was a flat plate much like the woman's cosmetic mirror. It was about the same size, and when you use a mirror you lose so much just by the fact that you change distances. Your image has been ranged differently. So I found that I didn't have any luck at all.\nTennyson - It was just your disorientation.\nSchirra - That itself was another problem. (Cameron showing Schirra a drawing)\nCameron - I have a drawing here of what I think you saw out your window at 5 hours 20 minutes.\nSchirra - Oh, really, I'd like to see that, yes. ...\nCameron - It's just the star chart. I tried. ... I think this is where you were, well, I made a tracing of the thing and slid it (the plastic slide which represents the capsule window) up (on the star chart) here - here's the horizon and I tried to guess where you might have been, and I put the width about ... (showing Schirra) you thought it was -\nSchirra - Very good. But the thing is you see I could be tilted as well in roll and it would move this field--see what I mean?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"40\nCameron - I was wondering if you recognized this pattern here that you saw below it?\nSchirra - What really flipped me--this is where I got in trouble-- I said something about the Pleiades and I know I could not see those.\nCameron - You see according to this the Moon was up at the top (of the window) and Venus was off to the left. Did you see them?\nSchirra - I did not see them during this period, no.\nO'Keefe - Where is Delphinus? Delphinus is somewhere.\nRoman - I was just thinking about that. ...\nCameron - Well, he's in Ophiuchus and Hercules and --\n(General discussion which is inaudible)\nSchirra - Delphinus does look something like the Pleiades in a sense, yes.\nRoman - It's a little larger, but I'm sure that...\nSchirra - At one time I tried to trace this down and see what I really was looking at and I frankly have not done it. This is typical of everything we do, we always rushed into something else.\nO'Keefe - (to Cameron) Can you find Delphinus? It's right next to the (Northern) Cross.\nCameron - I don't see it. I don't think it's on here. ...\nSchirra - Did I identify - when I said Aldebaran, I may well have been talking about...\nCameron - There's a Norton (Star Atlas) in my bag - maybe I'm - if you'd hand it to me - maybe I've got the wrong page--I don't know - I don't know why - he's got it there very clearly.\nO'Keefe - You have Ophiuchus, Hercules?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"41\n(Conversation inaudible)\nSchirra - I used to carry my little star chart slide rule thing around with me.\nRoman - Alternatively, there are some (star) clusters - well, if it's the Pleiades, it would be well enough defined and you wouldn't confuse it - there are some clusters in a star field which at first glance give you the same haziness that you get from a cluster like the Pleiades.\nCameron - It's the wrong direction, of course.\nRoman - Well, but he is down in the Scorpio region if you think of it.\nSchirra - One of those things I do recall very vividly was that I talked about Aldebaran and it just couldn't have been there at the time I. ...\nGill - O, well maybe you didn't have the Pleiades then.\nSchirra - I know it wasn't. It wasn't the Pleiades.\nGill - Because you've got Orion here. Orion, the Pleiades and Aldebaran go nicely together.\nSchirra - They sure do, but they shouldn't be there.\nGill - But those were the wrong ones. (Laughter) They can't be there.\nDunkelman - I think Voas corrected that at that one time. You see Aldebaran wasn't there.\nSchirra - Yes, this is the liability you get into if you don't really know your attitude; with this star chart you can sweep out a whole new segment of the sky.\nO'Keefe - Why can't you have seen Aldebaran and these other things? Were they above the horizon?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"42\n\nSchirra - I don't think they are in this area. We have to expand this star chart. Now if I were yawed around 90 degrees, this star chart is absolutely worthless because this only goes a plus or minus 60 degrees.\n\nO'Keefe - I know, I know . . .\n\nSchirra - Maybe I could have . . .\n\nO'Keefe - But, your flight path did go over Aldebaran, Orion - the plane of the orbit.\n\nSchirra - As I recall, and my memory of course, is suffering from the time span (which has elapsed since the flight on October 5 1962.) As I recall, Orion was on the daylight side, you see it's...\n\nRoman - As I say, I was going to say that Orion was actually very late - just before dawn - if it were up at all.\n\nSchirra - Physically it was impossible to see - here is the constellation Orion way down here - in time, this is on my daylight side.\n\nRoman - I would think that Aldebaran would be much the same problem.\n\nCameron - Just the same thing.\n\nSchirra - It is right in this same family, of course.\n\nRoman - What time of night was this? Can you give me any idea of the distance between sunlight and sunset?\n\nSchirra - That's why I am perfectly convinced that I could not possibly see anything associated with the constellation Orion or Aldebaran. With this star chart, Nancy, what we do is have a time margin. (Looking at the chart.) Now Orion down here is actually in my local daylight. It just was impossible for me to see it at this point way back here. It was occluded frankly by the"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"43\n\nsurface of the earth; physically, I just couldn't see it.\n\nRoman - That's what I meant when I said at best you-d see those just before sunrise--if at all at this time of year.\n\nSchirra - Right. It was just impossible for me to see it at this point way back here, so it was occluded by the surface of the earth, frankly, I just couldn't - physically I couldn't see it. What really would be fun, by gosh, would be to go back up and have Tony Jenzano (Director, Morehead Planetarium) lay this out in the planetarium.\n\nGill - Yes, yes, you ought to be able to solve that.\n\nSchirra - I would be able to tell exactly what I saw. I'll do it - That's the way to solve this because then I can get the whole star field, the complete celestial heaven at this time and space. And then we can make some points. I think one of you should go there with me so we can have this pinned down. I think we should lay this out. He (Jenzano) can lay out the whole flight plan.\n\nGill - To get it pinned down.\n\nRoman - I would say here that Arcturus or Antares could have been confused for Aldebaran here.\n\nGill - Absolutely. Those would be good candidates.\n\nO'Keefe - Let's not let this point go. Who should go?\n\nShoemaker - I think we should plan to do this.\n\nSchirra - I think this is the way to answer this rather than trying to beat it to death. I'll bet I'll be able to give you a whole bunch of information in there (at the planetarium).\n\nO'Keefe - Should it be you, or Jocelyn?\n\nGill - It depends on when it comes off - what time it comes off."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"44\n\nShoemaker - Why don't we say we'll plan on this and then we can make the arrangements --\n\nSchirra - I am afraid that I can't do it rapidly, but I'd say the first part of April would be okay.\n\nShoemaker - Jocelyn, would you like to take this on to set it up and follow it through?\n\nGill - Certainly.\n\nSchirra - I would like to nail this one down. It has been bothering me for a long time and I just don't seem to be getting any answers that I would like to have as well.\n\nGill - It is possible to have hindsight here. In other words, we can reconstruct the crime and it is worth doing, I think.\n\nDunkelman - I am glad you mentioned that you could see some stars dimmed through this patch because-if you don't see any,-the patch turns out to be extremely bright.\n\nDunkelman - It's about 300 times higher than what the normal airglow (seen) edge-on is.\n\nSchirra - Well, it wasn't dim by any means.\n\nDunkelman - It wasn't dim - the answer I get is that it is about 3 ergs/cm2/sec which is extremely bright and its structure is extremely high. It is about three hundred times brighter than the normal airglow. I think we can \"home-in\" on this brightness rather nicely because, if you saw color, you know it is a dirty brown, but if it was color, that does require at least 50 to 100 times more than the normal night airglow.\n\nSchirra - That's why you were asking me earlier was there a color"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"45\n\nin the airglow and I did not see it?\n\nDunkelman - We are trying not to - (influence your reply).\n\nSchirra - Playing one (response) against the other is indeed a good way of doing it.\n\nDunkelman - Another think is that this was indeed brighter.\n\nSchirra - But, well below. . . .\n\nDunkelman - It is possible that the normal airglow was there - but you didn't see it?\n\nSchirra - It was well below my field of view though.\n\nDunkelman - But are we sure? I assumed that it was well below, too, but. . .\n\nSchirra - Yes. I saw what amounted to a clear starfield below this. . .\n\nDunkelman - About how many degrees worth though?\n\nSchirra - I was just trying to think - Well, the window itself - I'm just trying to think what I can see degrees-wise-this is -\n\nCameron - Thirty degrees.\n\nSchirra - It was roughly thirty degrees.\n\nO'Keefe - But there is a trap here because that window shapes out at such a steep angle - that if you attempt to estimate height by estimating portions of the window--\n\nSchirra - Oh, no, I wasn't doing that. All I am trying to say is that in the window - included in the window - let's forget this smog band, it were stars only, it was below the window which would be the earth. There was no horizon and even if I could have been inverted, we could just say that the window would be this way. There was still no earth vision, nothing of earth I could see, including airglow or"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"46\n\nanything else. So I was strictly looking, if you could almost say, I could even be looking straight up, which I know I wasn't. The stars were equally bright and equally in number almost on either side of this band.\n\nDubin - It was about through the middle of the window?\n\nSchirra - That is correct. I went even as far as to say that it wasn't a third of the window and then I modified this down to a fourth, but it was more than a fourth and less than a third. This means, in any case, that it's approximately ten degrees thick and this is a very rough estimate.\n\nO'Keefe - It wasn't the Milky Way?\n\nSchirra - No. No, I like to look at the Milky Way so I've seen it enough to say \"no.\"\n\nO'Keefe - Because you were facing according to your picture to - well - no - Sculptor, Fornax - no -\n\nRoman - The Milky Way in that part of the sky, should have a very distinct rift down the middle, it wouldn't be brightest to the center and shading off.\n\nSchirra - Yes, in fact, if I recall from the way we ran the planetarium, the Milky Way was almost on my horizon.\n\nDubin - How long can you see this by the way?\n\nSchirra - We can do this too, John. They have the Milky Way projected on this chart. It is a very fine tool, I might add, particularly when you want to reconstruct the crime.\n\nGill - Might be very good practice afterwards for the pilot to go"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"back to the planetarium (to reconstruct his flight path.)...\nSchirra - I sure wish I had thought of this a long time ago when I was fresher on this.\nGill - It would fix things in your mind too - you'd be able to see them again right away to pin them down.\nDubin - How long did you see this?\nSchirra - I would not say seconds, I would say minutes.\nNordberg - Did this go away simply because of your progression in orbit or because of your drifting?\nSchirra - I think more because of the drifting, perhaps.\nDubin - Did you see the stars through it?\nSchirra - There again, I didn't have time to track stars through it. When I say minutes, I don't mean a whole bunch of minutes, I mean one or two or three minutes.\nDubin - Yes, but do you know whether you saw stars moving relative to the band?\nSchirra - No, they weren't. It wasn't relative to the band. That's a good question, now that you bring it up.\nDubin - In other words, the stars seemed to stand still.\nSchirra - The band and the stars were planted together, much the same way as you would see the Milky Way in a sense. That's a very good point.\nO'Keefe - You saw a bunch of things there. It might have been Aldebaran or it might have been Antares.\nSchirra - I suspect that is what I did see at Antares or Alpheca, and I think that is in that same spectrum there. I think rather"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"than beat this any further, it's circumbent on us to go to the planetarium and really nail this down. All I have to do is just take this window box we have and just move it around and - ah ha - there it is.\nDunkelman - Something we would like to know is the dimming effect.\nSchirra - Uh huh.\nDunkelman - You say that this patch was quite bright, that's one thing, and then was it quite bright because it appeared bright or because there are many, many fewer stars. This is the question we have to answer.\nSchirra - Right. You know what went through my mind when I finally realized what I was looking at? I was livid about the fact that I had the periscope. Absolutely livid, because I would have shot up a whole roll of film right on that (using uv spectrograph). (Laughter) I was fighting for that thing and that's why you can look through and I make perisocpe sound like a dirty word. All through here the word periscope is shortened to four letters practically. (Laughter)\nShoemaker - Why don't we go on. Jocelyn, why don't you get together with Cdr. Schirra and write a conclusion on this.\nSchirra - We'll set up a rendezvous here.\nShoemaker - I think we have covered quite a few of the remainder of the questions partly in discussion. I would like to go back to dark-adaptation here which is the next question. You have talked about it and let's see whether there are any points that we haven't covered. The question is would you tell us when you think you were best dark-adapted? Was there any time during flight when you employed only red light in the"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"capsule?\nSchirra - We have answered that with the fingertips.\nShoemaker - Did the light of the \"time-correlation clock\" shine in your eyes throughout flight?\nSchirra - The answer is no. They put in a switch to turn that off and I turned it once and it was never turned on again. This was a very great annoyance. This was my prediction that I would turn it off and never turn it on again.\nGill - You were responsible for having the switch put in, weren't you?\nSchirra - Yes, I went through some very careful studies on the darkness of this interior. I ran a special test at the Cape and it is amazing how much light comes in there. John and Scott were surprised when I told them this. Scott came back from his flight furious about this time-correlation clock light. So I put in a switch-in-series and just clicked it off as soon as I got to the switch.\nGill - Good for you.\nSchirra - It was the first time it was dark outside, frankly, and that was the end of that light. (Laughter) The cabin lights are tube lights. They leak like mad. Just terribly. So I turned those off as well when I wanted darkness. Then I had pure darkness. The only light I could create then were the fingertip lights. When I blacked out that capsule, it was black dark other than when I needed to see something with the fingertip lights. This is where our crutches - as I described the map, the time and the star charts"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"became a liability, because we had then to bring on light again (I brought on the finger tip lights to do this). Gordon knows how strongly I feel about the star chart device. This is a valuable tool. But it required two tools and a slider. Actually, two tools, with sliders on each to use them. I had to take one tool which gave me a reference in the time that had elapsed to come back to the star chart which had a reference for one time - I think it was an hour's worth. So I had to come over here and compute. For example, say I had 5 hours and 20 minutes, so I'd run down 5 hours and 20 minutes and look across and this is equivalent to say 53 minutes. So then I would say, Ah, 53 minutes; so then I would race over here and set the little window thing on the index of 53 minutes and this thing is floating around and I would stamp it off and get it out of the way. This is quite a chore. It really is. So now we have included this on the flight plan itself, what index of the star chart to use. So we have simplified this task quite a bit.\nCameron - As far as the star charts are concerned, fluorescence --\nRoman - Suppose you had an ultra violet lamp in the capsule -\nSchirra - If you kept it up?\nRoman - That's what I was going to suggest --(fluorescent paint on charts) Not depending on storing it up and letting it go down afterwards.\nGill - You mean keep it on?\nRoman - Well, depending on which looks more desirable. But you could set that at a level where it would not blind you and"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and you could see what you needed on the chart.\nSchirra - Now this could be practiced in a planetarium.\nO'Keefe - There are plenty of fluorescent inks.\nSchirra - This star chart thing was a real problem even to get it to the degree of refinement that I had.\nGill - It has a white background now?\nSchirra - We had to take the surface and sand it in a sense to get it non-reflecting, because that was a problem.\nDunkelman - I want to caution you on that ultra violet light, though. It has to be very carefully designed, because if just a wee bit of 3615 leaks out of it; your eyeballs fluoresce. It must be carefully done.\nSchirra - I've become very interested in this as a problem in that on the Apollo mission, where you will need to find particular stars, we should have some kind of star map that you can see without blinding yourself. Those fingertips to me were awfully bright.\nRoman - You can't turn it down?\nSchirra - No.\nGill - You must have been well dark-adapted?\nSchirra - Yes, that's right. I feel very strongly about this dark-adaptation, by the way. I have felt this way about this ever since I have been involved with this. As a night carrier-pilot, it was always a problem as you know. We would sit in the ready room with red lights on and red goggles on and we then would go roaring up to flight deck and there would always be somebody there with a white light to shine right in your face."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"52\n\nDunkelman - The Navy has done this very carefully.\nSchirra - It can be destroyed very rapidly. It turns out quite frequently when you are in a cockpit and you're time-critical, more so than when you are on a carrier deck for a night launch than when you are on the pad. Things are in a frantic tempo. You make a very rapid checkout of the cockpit and you really don't care about light adaptation. You just want to be sure that everything is in its proper position. So all of a sudden--boom--you are shot off into the black and surprisingly you are very well adapted. I feel-- I know Scott has made a test on this--I think you come down to a very rapid adaptation in seconds and then you progress getting better dark-adapted over many, many minutes. I know this has been documented. It is not worth trying to adapt to this exponential curve that you are trying to get hold of.\nGill - Five minutes certainly helps a great deal.\nSchirra - I have said this in the past, for example, if it were night outside right now, we could step outside that door. With this lighting you have in here, you can see outside this door (assuming you are looking at the celestial night). You can see more than I could see out of the window of the capsule with perfect adaptation. I have done this. I have been in a lighted room since the flight and have stepped outside. Now we have done this frequently at the various control stations around the net. I did this at Guaymas which you well know is a tremendous place to look at stars. I walked out of a room just as lighted as this and got outside and boom, I saw more than I could see in the capsule."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"53\n\nCameron - I saw the zodiacal light once doing that in Chicago. I came out of a lighted building. It was the first time I had seen it. It was in a part of the sky where I didn't expect to see it.\nSchirra - I think that our test, frankly, that have been conducted to determine dark adaptation are not done well enough. I don't think we can really justify how fast we adapt by the tests we have run. I have yet to see that quantitative analysis made that should be made. Intuitively, I feel that I adapt faster than the test has ever proven to me. We had very complicated systems, such as that at Pensacola where you pick up the horizon and objects, trucks and airplanes and ships,--I'm sure you remember this routine--and I never was sympathetic to this study. I think there is a better way of defining it, however, by having you in an opaque room or rather going from a lighted room into an opaque room seeing what can you see. Have these measured light sources there and then identify them as rapidly as you can. Of course, you've got to keep identifying because you are adapting all the time.\nTennyson - Is it correct then that this window of ours (Vicor window) has never really been nailed down as far as transmissivity is concerned.\nSchirra - It has been carefully nailed down, I understand.\nRoman - Yes, but not under quite the flight conditions.\nSchirra - Well, I was carrying this photometer, and did make some measured readings on some objects, but this comes back to the photometer check on Aldebaran. This comes back to what I really made"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"54\n\nit on. I think they are trying to trace that through. It wasn't Aldebaran, that's for sure.\nDubin - You say that you never saw your fluorescent numbers on your watch?\nSchirra - No, I did not. This bothered me.\nDubin - Did you look at it?\nSchirra - Yes.\nDunkelman - Is this some watch that requires exposure to light for awhile?\nSchirra - Correct. There is another answer to this. The time function, meaning just running time, has the fluorescent, but the elapsed time that I used on this watch is just black and white. I wanted badly to get at least the hands coated and this is a real chore. Very few people do this for you. I would have liked very much to have had this done, but couldn't get it.\nDunkelman - I would sure like to see the CIC lighting people have a chance to put their two cents into this whole thing about the lights, for Apollo or something like that.\nSchirra - I have gone on record saying that Gemini will not fly until I personally run a lighting mockup on that vehicle as well as on Apollo. There are many people who know how strongly I feel on this subject.\nGill - Very good. Very good.\nSchirra - What I'm getting at is, if you can get the light out of the vehicle, you don't need to spend a lot of time adapting.\nGill - Right."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"55\n\nNordberg - I am curious if you had a chance to observe variations of brightness around the horizon; around as far as possible (during) both in day and night.\nSchirra - Again, the field of view isn't that big. I know just what you are asking for. I didn't take the liberty of making these, what would amount to, large yaw changes. I did not have the opportunity to observe that transition. The field of view I had did not show these various changes.\nO'Keefe - You see, this is like 30 degrees, that's half a radius. I don't think he could see much more than you could see overhead at night.\nSchirra - Yes.\nO'Keefe - It means that if he doesn't see patterns in the airglow from a single place at night, unless he has the freedom to yaw all around, he doesn't have the opportunity of tracing out the rather large patterns which must be in the airglow. They are of the order of a thousand miles in diameter.\nNordberg - I was also curious about daytime, because of the forward scattering and backscattering and 90° to the sun and actually, in daytime if your turnaround maneuvers are, say, they don't go around in a plane tangential to the surface of the earth? They go around in a radial plane, don't they?\nSchirra - Well, this is the awful thing about our vehicle. All the thrusters are not aligned through the body axis, therefore, you get two and three axes when you ask for one. If you were trying to track the horizon, using the yaw input, say the horizon being like an arc here, you go like this. Then you've got to roll,"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"56\n\npitch, like this, roll, pitch. In other words, you step your way around. It is not a smooth maneuver as you would anticipate in an airplane where you just roll and come around and cut a swathe without changing attitude.\nNordberg - In daytime, it should be really a striking thing, the horizon looking toward the sun and, on either side of the sun, and also looking straight away from the sun it could be extremely bright ... and at 90°.\nSchirra - You know where we are going to have the most fun? It's with the lunar module - the LEM or the Bug in earth orbit. By gosh, that's going to be great, because you practically have an observatory on your hands. A lot of open panel area that doesn't have to be protected for re-entry or exit. That will give us our first real opportunity to look in almost any direction at any time. You should see the fight we had, to keep a 5th window in the Apollo command module. They were about to rip it up and save 16 lbs. It was in the right seat where you spend 90% of the time on a trans-lunar trip. (gasp) Negative. (Laughter) We said no so we had a seance, that's what we call it. This is when we get a majority of the astronauts together and we agree. If there are any dissenters it is just too bad. If they are in the minority, well, we come out with a united opinion. This is how we got our window in Mercury. It was the result of a seance--it cost $500,000 and I think you know its worth it. It was for observation not only getting attitudes."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Schirra - These things you can't define by numbers. In spite of what my philosophy was for this flight you can't resist making scientific observations. That's taped? I think it's legal.\nGill - That's what I thought--You wouldn't be human if you didn't.\nNordberg - I would like to get away from the horizon now for a moment. This is going to clouds. There have been reports by all five of you on seeing cloud patterns and the like; is there any good indication when you look down of on depth cloud?\nSchirra - Very much so. You can get Paul Backer (try Charles Coler, MSC, better) to give you the Weather Bureau photos I took. It's fantastic what you can see. It is the meteorologist's dream to see this depth, cumulus effect, high cumulus, etc. As an example, I saw the Sierras, I could very definitely see the rising terrain. I was very much pleased. I can best say this by saying, if you've flown at 30 thousand or 40 thousand feet, which you must have, in a jet transport, you see this of course. Now, if the horizon itself is not visible to you when you are looking more towards the surface of the earth, if the curvature of the earth is not visible, you feel that you are at about 50 thousand feet.\nNordberg - And is this because of some sort of stereoscopic view that you can still see shadows and brightness?\nSchirra - I think you take every cue that you've got and you differentiate colors by grays, blacks, whites, but there is no doubt in your mind that you see depth and there is one striking picture, this Weather Bureau picture, that shows ten different types of cloud structure. One is a big towering cumulus, almost a cumulus"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"nimbus that stands out like a ruler in relation to the vertical plane. I think it might be here (in the record).\nNordberg - I have seen some of the films. I don't know if they were your flight or previous ones. I am just curious whether the eye sees something better than what shows up on the color film.\nSchirra - Yes, they do. You use every cue available.\nO'Keefe - He doesn't have the stereoscopic effect in the ordinary sense, but you remember that he is in motion when he sees that the peak of the clous moves at a different rate so he gets a sort of pseudo-stereoscopic effect like you get when you are driving along in a car-- by the fact that they are moving relative to the capsule.\nSchirra - Take page nine here, and put a sheet of paper on the top of it to cut off the curvature of the earth and you've seen this from an airplane. Haven't you?\nNordberg - Yes.\nSchirra - That is why I've used it in this example that I am trying to get across. You can see cloud structures in this yellow band here that are just terrific.\nNordberg - Well, how about at night? Have you been able to see any clouds in real darkness at all?\nSchirra - Yes, I did and they were lighted by lightning. In fact I gave Woomera a report on the first orbit saying I would not possibly see their flare because I was seeing lightning and they hadn't stepped outside their room. I said that you are about to have some real brutal thunder storms and the second orbit they agreed with me, because they were there then. This was during the night side."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"BEGINNING OF THIRD TAPE\nSchirra - I could not pick up cloud structure because I was looking down and at this point, you don't have time, and I don't think your cues are good enough to separate elevations.\nNordberg - You don't recall seeing any clouds when there was no lightning?\nSchirra - No. I don't recall this. I don't think I did really. I was really frantically trying to see this typhoon, and we called it a typhoon where Pacific Command Ship was. It was down south of it, and I could not see it. It was still too dark, and I think the other reason for it was that the periscope - here we go - was annoying to me, that picked up the sunrise before I had my sunrise, because it was looking in that direction, and it ruined my adaptation. That was when I threw the filter over it, and that was the end of the periscope forever. I forgot to remove that filter - not that I even intended to. On descent on the parachute, and in a way I would like to have had the prerogative of looking at the periscope and seeing the recovery forces deployed around there. It took me a long time to realize why I couldn't see the recovery forces. (Laughter). And it finally came out that I threw this filter over it just prior to retrofire. And that was the end of the periscope (laughter) which also showed that I didn't need it, obviously.\nNordberg - This question of frequency of lightning is a real important one. Would you say that you saw lightning through each night time orbit?"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Schirra - No, that was only during this area. This could best be described as the eastern half of Australia.\nDubin - Did you notice any lightning while looking down - you couldn't see the flashes away from the capsule?\nSchirra - No, oh no, no, I didn't get any light fed into the capsule. It was just my eyes that captured this light.\nDubin - In the daytime did you also see lightning the same way? Did your ...\nSchirra - I don't recall having seen lightning in the daytime. It's a good question, though, and I don't recall it. I'm sure I would have noted it if I had seen it.\nNordberg - One question, that I am sure you can't answer because of the orbit of your vehicle, but it's of tremendous importance to the geological satellite people, and this is, the distinction of clouds and ice and snow. I know, you probably never went over snow or ice.\nSchirra - I looked up at the Sierras when I was on the second or third orbit - we can pin this down - and I was talking to John Glenn about somebody water skiiing on the Salton Sea, and at this time, it was amazing how much I could see, because this area is practically crisp, clear air in the desert, and I lived there for a number of years, so I know that. I could look all at the Sierras and I could see snow-capped mountains up there.\nNordberg - But no clouds of course.\nSchirra - Not, not - well - on the other side of the Sierras, westward there was this terrible fog belt, and I do recall saying sometime I may fly over the Pacific and see the Pacific. I have"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"yet to do this - in aircraft - in all the times I've been out there - see all of the Pacific. I have never had that opportunity, and I don't know that anybody ever will.\nTennyson - I think what he was getting at is when in the TIROS satellite - the cottonpicker goes over and takes a picture perhaps of stratus deck which to a continual extent runs right up against the mountains that we know are snow-covered - where one stops and the other begins, the snow and the stratus. It is difficult or impossible to tell.\nSchirra - No - well, my daytime was, of course, northern latitude, and this was basically summer. I was in the snow-capped Sierras.\nNordberg - This question was really sort of just to make a point, that if ever an astronaut goes into a polar orbit...\nSchirra - Yes.\nNordberg - ...or has the opportunity to fly over the ice caps to look for this distinction, because this is something we find we are going to live with.\nSchirra - I have flown beyond a cloud deck in aircraft at 40,000 feet and had snow on the surface, and usually trees will come up out of the snow and then make you realize that you are no longer looking at a cloud surface.\nTennyson - Well, our definition of a TIROS Satellite - because of the width of the TV raster - which is just not good enough to pick up trees with the wide angle and the mediocre lenses we use.\nSchirra - Well, yes. When you are low enough, you get these terrain changes which helps you too, I think."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Nordberg - There are some thoughts that by polarization and so, one can distinguish it over a uniform surface; of course, the eye doesn't have this, but I'm just looking for a clue that the eye might have which we hadn't thought of in an instrument such as depth, because it's interesting when you say you can see all this depth in the clouds themselves.\nSchirra - Yes.\nNordberg - ...whether one could see because of depth difference and shadows, or something, this distinction between clouds and snow. On the first TIROS (satellite), TIROS I ...\nSchirra - This thing is stalled out (referring to tape recorder). Is that o.k. Is it finished? - No, no that's going.)\nNordberg - The first TIROS was just sort of an observation when we still were at this \"Ge Whiz\" stage on satellites. Boy, we see something ----\nSchirra - Sure, now you want more? (Laughter) - So do I.\nNordberg - People said look at those beautiful orgraphic clouds over northern India, and there is this huge band, until somebody saw valleys in these clouds and all there was - was snow-covered areas and with the valleys being clear.\nSchirra - Very good. ...\nTennyson - John O'Keefe has come up with a statement that I, at least, would like to think about some more and that is the relative motion involved here. TIROS and Nimbus, etc. are still picture-type items. I think his (Schirra's) statement there that watching the tops and bases and of the earth moving at different relative speeds may be, at least, as important to height determination as anything we can"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"do with spare part items or items like that.\nNordberg - It's again the depth.\nSchirra - Well, we are working a movie camera where TIROS is taking stills, is what you are saying.\nTennyson - Exactly, and you imply a height which the eye in itself in a still picture mode can't see, but as it goes you say, ah, ha - this moves at a different speed, and therefore, it had to be higher.\nSchirra - I would accept that, except for the photograph I have here which shows this depth. Or is it reminding me of it? I do not know. Do you see the depth I talk about in that photograph on page 9?\nTennyson - To some degree (perhaps), but, no, not as directly. I found that picture interesting, but as indecisive as a good many of these prints are.\nSchirra - Well now, do you have all of these Weather Bureau photographs?\nNordberg - I have not seen all of them - well, we may not have them - I find that sometimes it is very peculiar that as a NASA outfit - NASA Center - we often have less immediate access to some of these films than the Weather Bureau has - (Laughter).\nSchirra - Well, let's -- I find this disturbs me very much in that when I yielded to taking a camera, I actually did want to take one, but I wanted to make people fight to give me the best piece of equipment they could get rather than just take a camera. I wanted it very clear that those people who could use this data would get"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the best print available, and I definitely have this group on that list. For one, I am disappointed that this occasion where I pulled this Weather Bureau filter out of the back to take these two pictures of the moon, I have heard and I have yet to have seen the graphic results of those two black and whites on the moon, which are quite interesting to a lot of people. I have heard this. Now where they've gone, I don't know. Although I know they can be obtained again, I thought this was a shame.\nTennyson - I don't think that I have ever seen these prints. And, we are in the office that supposedly collects the requirements for meteorological satellites and I have not seen the direct prints of this. The only thing I have seen come out --\nSchirra - Well, I have heard that if you take - and I haven't had the prerogative either - if you take the motion and project it on a very good screen, it is really something to see -- at least of these two lunar pictures. And that's why I took the Hasselblad. To take this big piece of emulsion - the 70 mm film rather than a 16 or 35 mm. - and this I do know about photography that the larger the strip of film, the more you will get out of it. That's why we went first class with a Hasselblad (camera) and why I am not at all in favor of taking a 16 mm. camera along which is what we are using.\nNordberg - We had, in the early days, right after MA-6, we had written to Kleinknecht and had gotten periscope film, which, you know what the quality is, and we got always the answer that they"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"don't have the 70 mm. yet, but as soon as they become available, they'd send them to us, but actually we haven't really received anything from them since and the only time that I have seen some of these photographs that you are talking about ...\nSchirra - Well, Kleinknecht doesn't have control of this, MSC doesn't have control of these pictures I took, obviously, or actually I would have been able to see them.\nGill - Who does?\nTennyson - The person involved with this (at least in the past) is Stanley Soules.\nSchirra - Yes, when you think of the small number of pictures I did take, and the expense that was involved in taking these pictures, it is just amazing that first class reproductions haven't been disseminated widely.\nShoemaker - I think, Jocelyn, this is something that you and I and John O'Keefe should take up with our joint committee.\nGill - I'll look into it.\nSchirra - They should be all over the place ... is really what I am really getting at.\nShoemaker - This is something we can do something about.\nSchirra - Sure. I know Kleinknecht can't help you with this because he has no control over this.\nShoemaker - I think we can straighten this out.\nCameron - Did you ever think you could see highways?\nSchirra - I saw roads in areas such as Mexico where they disturb the terrain by being in a straight line. I never did have the"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"opportunity to see a highway, for example, and trace it,\nbecause I wasn't over those populated areas such as the Southern\nUnited States long enough or had the clear weather to just\nsit there and observe them. In contrast, I think what you\nwould do if you saw something and wanted to look at it, I\nthink what you would do is that you would pitch down more - to\nlook almost straight down and see it which Scott had the capability\nof doing and he could really take a careful look at it.\nO'Keefe - One curious fact that I haven't seen anybody take\nadvantage of is this. It is quite common in triangulation -\nthat two stations which are a couple of hundred miles apart, or\na hundred miles apart, and that therefore as far apart as you are\nfrom the ground and along a light path which is much inferior -\nit's nearly parallel to the earth. In order for one of those\nstations to see the other one - to measure on it - they provide\none of them with a 6-inch heliotrope, that's enough. That means\nthat somebody on the ground with a six-inch heliotrope who knew\nhow to point could point a light that you could see even in the\ndaytime if they had a dark background; and conversely, if you had\na heliotrope, you could also be seen from the ground. I have never\nseen this possibility discussed. Of course it also goes with the\nfact that instead of these tremendous flares, if they knew how to\npoint, they could make a much stronger light where you are with a\nsearch light.\nSchirra - Sure. . .\nO'Keefe - The army 5-foot searchlight gives 800 million candles"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"on the axis which is easily the equivalent of 800 million candle\npower...single flare on the ground . . .\nSchirra - uh - huh --\nO'Keefe - Well, I think 2 or 3 million is the biggest thing they\never tried to use. So the directed beam has quite a big advantage\nover the undirected beam, if people's orbital work is good enough.\nSchirra - Agreed. Our problem of course, is unless we have the window,\nmeaning, of course, attitude, fairly vertical in relation to the\nsurface of the earth, you can't take advantage of this. This is just\nthe confined attitude that we've been flying in. . . .\nShoemaker - I think this bears on another question that was\nsubmitted. I might read it and find out what else we can add to it.\nThe photographs of terrain were not successful. Some of the trouble\nwas obviously due to cloud cover, and some of the film was over-\nexposed. Can you comment further on this, and do you have any\nsuggestions for successful terrain photography on future flights?\nSchirra - Yes, I do. I used a BIWI automatic light meter which is\nstill ideal for the job, and again we were not briefed carefully\nenough on the BIWI automatic, and if I had this to do again, I\nwould get the manufacturer from BIWI to come down. In fact, many\nthings I've talked about for equipment, I would not ever -- I said\nthis years before this flight, but while on the program...If I needed\nsome information on the capsule, I would not feel adverse to calling\nMr. McDonell (McDonnell Aircraft) down, as an example. If I had a\nBIWI exposure meter, I would like to have Mr. BIWI or whoever is"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the man to brief me on it, and I since have read up a little bit further\non this exposure meter and there is a little soft, white cap\nthat goes over the eye of the exposure meter which takes diffused\nlight. It doesn't change the light meter reading, but it basically\nthen takes an average of all the light it sees. Now when I was\nusing it, I didn't have this cap on there and I then got the\nbrightest light of some area and that's why we overexposed the film.\nNordberg - Yes, yes . . . it's very simple. . .\nSchirra - It's as basic as that, and that's why I over-exposed\nthese light values that I came back with and which were recorded\nare really of no great value because of this, I think. It's a\nsmall focus - the exposure meter is just about that size cubed\n(demonstrating) it's a beautiful little piece of equipment and\nquite accurate. We had a calibrator, but it should have been\n(capped) . . . Gordon Cooper knows this and will have a cap on his,\nI might add.\nNordberg - Have all pictures been overexposed?\nSchirra - No, I looked out on occasion where I would be looking at\nan almost uniformly lighted area such as the surface of the earth.\nWhen I had the horizon in the picture, we usually overexposed\nbecause I had two different light levels.\nDunkelman - Well, the pity of it all is, since you do need an\nexposure meter to get a good picture, and exposure meters give you\na number, it's too bad the numbers isn't available.\nSchirra - I did record these.\nDunkelman - Sooner or later these numbers are going to give you a"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"lot of information about these flights.\nSchirra - That was my intent in taking the exposure meter and the\nHasselblad because you took light values rather than F-stops\nand shutter speeds and this means nothing... those numbers. The\nlight values connote exactly what you want to know.\nDunkelman - And a few of those and you've got it all made and\nyou know all the circumstances.\nSchirra - Cooper will have this very same type of light meter.\nNordberg - You know why I asked this question, Larry, because\nwe are measuring visible radiation in one channel of the TIROS\nsatellite which is essentially the same thing as an incident\nlight meter measuring in one direction and when we compute the\nreflected energy from the earth, it always comes out too little\nwhich is the same thing as overexposed pictures.\nSchirra - Sure, Sure. It just depends on how much it sees. If it\nsees the horizon, it's going to have some black in there relative\nto the bright surface of the earth, so it averages it out.\nShoemaker - I'd like to add some questions of my own to this.\nYou were over Africa during daylight on part of your flight,\nwere you not?\nSchirra - Oh yes.\nShoemaker - And how about Australia? Were you over there during\ndaytime at all?\nSchirra - No, never having daylight over Australia.\nShoemaker - I am curious as to how much detail you could see on the"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ground as to structure. Could you infer anything about it?\nSchirra - Amazingly enough I felt I saw every bit of what I see\nhere. The terrain changes, the rivers - one of the best shots -\nthis is of course, South America, that's the one I'd like to use\nin fact - when I came across South America, here we are, on the\nsixth orbit, in this area it was all clouded, and I finally broke\ninto the clear - in this sense - just before I got to Rio de Janeiro,\nand I could see, I think it was the Corono River, I am not sure.\nThis is about where it started clear again. I could trace that\nriver out very easily. Just follow it all the way through there.\nRoman - To the ocean?\nSchirra - No, I could not do that. I thought I could, but at this\npoint, it's sort of a local sunrise, so you don't have good vertical\nlighting on it at this point. Now in Africa, I had vertical\nlighting almost. This was almost its local noon when I crossed it.\nI would like to have seen this large lake right here almost in the\ncenter of the mass of Africa, and I don't recall seeing it.\nO'Keefe - Chad, Chad.\nSchirra - Yes, I think this is probably when I was conversing with\nConno and we had quite a bit of discourse about the suit circuit.\nO'Keefe - Chad is a very tricky lake anyway. Lots of the reeds in\nit, and it is very shallow; I think sometimes it just isn't there,\nso . . .\nSchirra - I think you just simply get a light reflection off it\npossibly. It looked so pronounced here that I wanted to see this\nas a check point and had it in mind, and I've forgotten . . ."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"72\nO'Keefe - I think this is swamp and it's very shallow.\nGill - You never would see it then.\nShoemaker - In photographs I've seen from previous flights, both Glenn's and Carpenter's flights, I think we got some pictures on Africa, and I was quite interested in these because they begin to show up the structure, the bedding, etc.\nSchirra - Yes, I was looking for this particularly over Africa and South America because this was supposed to be real prime in transition on the northwest part of South America which was really a beauty when you visualize how you hit that with the 6th orbit, and I didn't have that prerogative either. Yes, when you come down to it, this was all primed for geologic study, I thought ... Even Cuba was hard to see. (Laughter)\nCameron - Did you see anything on the order of craters?\nSchirra - No, this is not the map I flew with by the way - sort of blocked out for specific attention. I frankly was very disappointed about the cloud cover. I think you've detected that anyway.\nThat doesn't go too far North and South you are in this tropical zone which is the cloudiest part of the earth.\nSchirra - Yes.\nO'Keefe - It is most systematically cloudy. If you can go just a little further north and south, the chance of getting this weather will be better, although this would probably always be true, just as you've said, that most of the earth at any one time will be cloudy. This belt goes from about 35 degrees North to 35 degrees south. You didn't quite get an inclination of about 33 degrees."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"73\nSchirra - As an example, I was hoping that I could look up at Japan after retrofire, and I couldn't see it at all. It was clouded in too.\nTennyson - Japan, this time of year, looks like it would be cloudy.\nNordberg - Particularly at this time of year - this was October, so that was already in the Northern Hemisphere and should be out of the tropical convergence zone.\nTennyson - But still Japan by nature is .... (cloudy)\nSchirra - There was quite a bit of weather in the Pacific at that time.\nO'Keefe - Still, if he goes 28 degrees N to 28 degrees S, he was in the tropical convergence zone most of the time. So things aren't quite as bad as they would appear from this flight.\nShoemaker - The point is that this also is in the area which is mostly extensive deserts; these are the precise areas where you would see the geology best.\nSchirra - Yes.\nO'Keefe - This is 30 North and 30 South -- the deserts are 35 degrees.\nShoemaker - Well, actually the extensive deserts nearly all lie in (interrupted)...\nSchirra - Something I'm curious about is, I would like to have somebody - well there are two ways of doing this - I bet I probably had water underneath me about 90% of the time.\nCameron - About how much cloud coverage would you estimate? Would you estimate the amount of the earth that was covered by clouds?\nSchirra - I guess I could check this more carefully. I would"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"74\nestimate it to be about 80 to 90%. When I went over - the United States was clear east of the Sierra's, but it \"sacked in\" (clouded over) again by the time I got to the Gulf of Mexico, so I just had a small band when you look at this part of the United States. This is not very much percentage-wise. South America, I didn't get to until the 5th and 6th orbits, so I was over water all the other time. The northsic portion of the continent was cloudy and finally I got into the clear on the 5th and 6 orbits by the time I'd just left South America. Australia, of course, was night, so it turned out that there wasn't much I could say about it. Other than the fact that it was clouded over too. I saw lightning as I got to the eastern half of Australia.\nGill - You never saw any large view of water then? In other words, you didn't see any part of an ocean?\nSchirra - No, I expected to have some fun looking at shorelines. This is what I really wanted to look at, to see if I could see color contrast and even the Pacific Islands. I had hoped to see the Hawaiian Islands which would have been a real easy one to pick up, and I think I had one little glimpse; about as much as if you'd fly 9/10 cumulus structure and you pop one through there. That's about as much as I had and I couldn't even identify which Island I was looking at.\nO'Keefe - Probably Haleala or else ...\nSchirra - Might have even been Hawaii itself, I am not sure, which is probably the highest of the bunch, and it might have popped up through it."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"75\nO'Keefe - There's a 10,000 foot peak (Haleaki) or Maui.\nDubin - How were you overall set for time? You were up to the sixth orbit and you had some trouble with your suit, so we found out. Did you have time to basically do more scientific work than you had the privilege of doing?\nSchirra - I think as we - and this is the trouble with Mercury because this is just about phasing out - as you get your confidence in the systems to where you don't need to monitor them as often, you could take time for observation. But you continually, at this stage of the game, cannot rely on the systems running themselves and so you keep carefully monitoring these things. This draws your attention away from, say a five minute observation. The only time that you could make a lengthy observation would be when you are under this automatic control when the capsule is maintaining its attitude for you rather than you trying to maintain it. This is very hard to do; to maintain a capsule attitude. In that it's a three-axis motion everytime you make one motion because each one is influenced by another axis thrusting. So as a result, it gets quite expensive fuel-wise to point your field of view at an object. You have to sit there and just steam around like mad to do this.\nGill - Would you say that you ever had as much as five minutes at a time to look out of the window?\nSchirra - Oh, yes. I think I took a fairly long amount of time for example; observing this particular sunset that's representative of about three or four minutes. Even then, you keep checking things to see if what you see is really what you are seeing. For example,"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"76\nwas that really Mercury? Well, I knew it was Mercury just by having had the opportunity to have Mercury projected on approximate launch day, so I knew it had to trail the sun, and everytime we ran the planetarium, we had Mercury projected tracking the sun, on the same path, of course.\nGill - So it is a great help to know what things are there and where they are before you take off.\nSchirra - Yes. You've got to have most of this stuff in your mind rather than have to refer to something to remind you of it again. This is why you can get confused as I was, when I was drifting, as what star or constellations I was looking at.\nShoemaker - We have one more question. I think this is rather a trivial one. I don't think we need to dwell on it. Did the moon interfere with your view at anytime, or did you make use of it in anyway?\nSchirra - I used it liberally, of course, for attitude reference. One best example, on the third orbit, I was drifting and then restored my attitude during the night rather than during the daytime. We were trying to determine whether we could get the attitude back both daylight and night. Out of the unknown attitude, I first picked up the horizon which was on the night side, very easily, which then gave me roll and pitch and then I had no idea which way to go for yaw. We had no compass ... whether it would work or not is something else. I started looking around at this starfield which was not on my flight path, by far, and finally, Cassiopeia became quite obvious"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to me. I said, \"Well I, that means I must go left,\" and as\nI came left, I started picking up other stars which became known\nto me through the starfield that I had rehearsed. Then the moon\nand Venus showed up and that was here.\nO'Keefe - It must be very difficult to pick up constellations when\nyou have a starfield to look at that is as small as through your\nwindow.\nGill - It isn't ....\nSchirra - No, Orion, for example, was not included in the window, so\nyou might see the belt and that's about it, or maybe one or two others\nin the constellation. That's about all. When you see something\nlike Aldebaran, and the \"v\" (Hyades in the Constellation Taurus) -\nif you just saw that alone, you might very well get trapped,\nthinking it was the Pleiades, particularly, if you don't have an\nattitude. You know how well, I know you got trapped (turning\nto Dr. Gill) when we went into the Planetarium for the first time -\nthings were inverted for you?\nGill - Oh yes - yes, indeed.\nSchirra - When you have an unknown attitude, the star picture is bent\nout of shape. You can get into trouble fast.\nNordberg - I had a heck of a time the first time I was in Australia;\nit was difficult to recognize anything.\nSchirra - Isn't it! Yes and when we aren't changing attitude and\neven when we know the starfield, it's not changing once youv'e\nseen it on the first orbit. So I was sitting there with the star"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"chart, bending it around. (Laughter)\nGill - It's very hard to get oriented.\nDubin - Did you or Glenn or Carpenter see any meteors?\nSchirra - No, and we were naturally anxious to see them. I\nunderstand some little Japanese boy picked up one recently\n(Comet Ikeya). Isn't that right? That was a comet and we were\nlooking for meteors and comets and we never saw any.\nDubin - And so you never saw any?\nSchirra - So I suspect that you have to see the meteors from the\nsurface of the earth.\nDunkelman - No, again the field of view is too limited.\nSchirra - Again the odds are pretty grim. You take this little\nwindow and you project it through 180 degrees, and it's pretty\nhard to see anything. That's why I say this lab (lunar module)\nis going to be fabulous. It really will ... That's practically a\nbird cage.\nNordberg - How about the brightness of the sky looking as straight\nout as possible in the daytime?\nSchirra - I have asked Gordon to go ahead and do this again and\nconcentrate on it. I did not, but in my recollection, I did not\nsee anything in the heavens on the daylight side. I think what\ndid this was the reflections off the window with this smoked over\neffect which made it even less visible. This film - back to the\nwindshield thing - where the smoke is condensed on there - under\nthe right lighting conditions you can barely see through one of\nthese things. That's basically what happened there."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Nordberg - How about color? Was it very dark blue?\nSchirra - Oh it went from blue to black. Not an appealing\nblue by any means.\nDunkelman - Well, really to be fair to an astronaut, one ought to\ntake a replica of the window and go in the dark room and illuminate\nit side-wise with a xenon arc or a solar simulator or something\nthat will come near it and then look out and see what you can see,\nand I am afraid that it is going to be pretty miserable.\nNordberg - It worked well in an experiment.\nDunkelman - I think it should be done ...it's the sort of thing you\nshould do.\nSchirra - We continually do this in airplanes at 50,000 feet in\ndaylight and the sky is quite dark. It's very dark to you. It\nturns out that all this incident light that's reflecting around\nthis panel - just because its plastic, it feeds light through it\nmuch like a fibre optics system and becomes a glowing panel that\nyou are looking through here.\nO'Keefe - The full moon which is as \"black\" as ... yet we all\nknow that the full moon just about blasts the sky. That means\nthat if when you are looking out of that window, you see any\nobject which is illuminated by the sun, and which is as big as\none-inch ten feet away, you've got the equivalent of illumination\nby the full moon in terms of you know, disturbing your adaptation.\nSchirra - Oh yes.\nO'Keefe - Even if it's painted black and of course, you are not\nlikely to be that lucky ... you are likely to have some nice, bright"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"gleaming thing.\nSchirra - The only opportunities I had for looking vertically were\nduring boost and re-entry and a lucky chance while drifting.\nO'Keefe - If you are going to observe during the daytime, the whole\nwindow has to be turned so that the window doesn't look at the sun\nand so that it doesn't look at anything that looks at the sun and\nso that it doesn't look at anything that looks at something that looks\nat the sun.\nSchirra - Right.\nTennyson - Otherwise, this would imply that to know with reasonable\nexactitude what is being photographed through the window in terms of\nspectra or anything like that, you'd not only have to know the trans-\nmissivity of the window spectrum range by running it value by value\nacross it, but you would have to know what was on the window and\nwhat the angle, the incident, sunlight and everything else were\nbecause some of this is going to wind up inside on the camera.\nSchirra - Right.\nGill - So, you didn't go through the periscope hole, you say?\nSchirra - Basically, you were ...\nTennyson - I was talking about these weather bureau pictures ...\nGill - Oh you were ... those weather bureau pictures, oh well ...\nSchirra - Where we are trapped really is that we can't duplicate\nwhat amounts to being in the bottom of a well.\nTennyson - Well, I understand.\nSchirra - That's the whole thing.\nTennyson - This isn't a criticism ... it's just a comment really."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Schirra - That's our liability with the window being on an external\nsurface. You are that close to the top of the well, so you get\nincident light all over the place.\nO'Keefe - We don't want to create artificial problems here. That\nsmoke scum on the window would not really disturb a stella spectrum be-\ncause the absorption would be broad band and would not be confused\nwith the stellar lines.\nDunkelman - That's right.\nTennyson - I was thinking about the IQSY photographs.\nSchirra - Yes, yes.\nTennyson - We are going with the problem of, oh, the ultra violet\nand what is going to fog our nimbus pictures so to speak through these\nphotographs, well, the same still unknown film on this thin (capsule\nwindow) being reflected in sunlight at an unknown altitude through\nthis window...when you get through, what I'm saying is it would\nbe very hard for us to tell from these weather bureau pictures, etc.\n(inaudible)\nNordberg - Well, of course, but it's really more an intensity\nproblem-just brightness rather than spectral-I think spectral is not\ntoo much of a problem, but the fact that it just dims things under\ncertain angles makes me ... things that much clearer. But this\nexperiment you suggested there is a real excellent one (referring\nto Dunkelman's.\nSchirra - Oh yeah.\nDunkelman - Well, I mean it modifies it even more, makes it better\nbecause you can do the same thing outside at night in clear air -"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"just look at the night sky and then again, having a low level\nsource coming up and even if the window is absolutely clean what\nhappens with these eight reflections.\nSchirra - Sure.\nDunkelman - You see, the problem of not letting anything look at\nthe sun or letting that look at the sun look at this is very important\neven with automatic satellites.\nSchirra - Well, I'd be very glad to see it (except capsule window)...\nNordberg - Okay, can we get a window?\nSchirra - I think we have got enough used capsules around. I think\nmine is on its way to South America though (laughter). In fact, its\nto be there in three days.\nShoemaker - I wonder if we have one last question. If not, we should\nadjourn. Any further questions you'd like to pose to Commander\nSchirra?\nDubin - Yes, Commander Schirra, one question, what suggestions do\nyou have for improving the operation over and above what you have\nalready mentioned so far? That's not a very nice question.\nSchirra - No, you mean, as far as pursuing investigation scientifically\nis concerned?\nDubin - Yes.\nSchirra - I feel at this point, for example, in Cooper's flight, what\nwe are really trying to do is to get at least man in space for one\nday. We don't dare compromise that because we need to know how\nman can hold up for this and we design the capability in the systems."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I admit this is my old pitch, but still he will have a lot of time\nto do things. So he has a number of experiments on his flight and\nhe definitely will perform these. Now, in my case once I solved the\nsuit circuit problem, I really didn't have many problems. Frankly,\nnone to speak of. But, again to conserve the energy to stay in\norbit meaning the control fuel and the electrical power, I had to\nthrow away control attitudes. Once you try to get a control attitude\nback again, you've got to bring all electrical power back on the line.\nYou have to use a sizeable chunk of the control fuel. This cost us\ndearly with this weight-limited system. The way to get around\nthis, of course, is to have a larger field of view, since you don't\nneed to move the vehicle as much, and this is, I can already see,\nthe first salvation on this and this is the lunar module in earth\norbit. The Gemini has even less field of view than Mercury.\nApollo has possibly as much per man. To get a large field of view\nin space the first time, we can do it with the vehicle that\nisn't going to re-enter (lunar module) - basically that's what it\namounts to.\nNordberg - I think it's really fantastic that you fellows have\nseen what you have seen with such limitations. I think it really\nprobably is one of the reasons that people like ourselves are used\nto just looking at one dial and we stand in the laboratory and\nread one meter. These fellows are really looking for everything.\nSchirra - Well, I think that this is part of what fell out of the\ncriteria that we were selected from, and that is the inquisitive mind."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"84\nWe don't like to let things go on without knowing at what they are;\nand you explore them pretty thoroughly, maybe with limited knowledge, but at least you try to get it down. I have been fighting\nlike mad to get this continuous tape recording. This was invaluable\nto get answers just like Larry and I and Mrs. Cameron went back and\ntraced out some of this like the smog layer. I would have\nremembered this, but I probably couldn't have told you when I saw\nit without referring back to this continuous tape. This is something we are not getting.\nO'Keefe - It's quite a fascinating thing to listen to these tape\nrecordings; undergoing this is a tremendous experience. You can\nhear what the person is - I think that is a debt to humanity -\nthat it ought to be done.\nSchirra - I've been fighting for it all along. At least, we ought\nto be able to store for a period of time and then dump it in fast\ntime and then retape.\nDunkelman - And with your flight we actually see the beginning of\nan interesting turn of events. In the past, people on the ground -\nI think we had...\nSchirra - Sure.\nDunkelman - Would tell the astronaut what to look for - now in your\ncase, when you saw this brownish smog thing - here's a case where\nyou could have said to the ground, \"now, you look\" now, it seemed\nbright enough, so if there were any people on the ground -\nSchirra - Unfortunately, I'd left my last point of contact which was"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"85\nthe Indian Ocean Ship.\nDunkelman - Yes, but the point is this is the return, what I'm\ntrying to get at -- the moment you saw that which no one saw at the\ntime on the ground is the beginning of a new period which we have\nto take advantage of on the next flight.\nSchirra - Oh, of course.\nDunkelman - Here's the case where an astronaut can tell the ground,\n\"Now look\" - \"here now\", you see.\nSchirra - Interestingly enough - it was about that same time when\nthe Indian Ocean ship saw me.\nDunkelman - Oh, oh, now of course they are in the clouds and...\nGill - Much more interested (in seeing you).\nSchirra - I didn't know it at that point though.\nNordberg - That lightning case, though...\nSchirra - Yes, I gave them a weather report and they didn't believe\nme either. (laughter) They said, \"Oh, it's clear here.\" Well, of\ncourse, I had to look back on a very long slant line to see the\nflare, and this was then covered by clouds, well, then, if this\nwere Woomera, then the cloud structure would go up like this\nwe'll say, well, I was over here, so I really couldn't see Woomera\nat that time. That's how I satisfied myself I never would even\nthough they had a beautiful clear sky over their station for that\nfirst period.\nTennyson - This is not only great for you, it's great for the\nscientific world.\nSchirra - It is."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"86\nTennyson - It's good to have somebody else who isn't constrained to\nparty lines.\nGill - It's a privilege to meet with you, really.\nTennyson - Something that shocks me is that the discussion from\nScott Carpenter and your discussion is the picking out of clues\nfrom about, heaven knows, how many scientific disciplines from\nyour general experience etc., and integrate them all together and\nbe able to present them; frankly, I just find this very interesting\nthat anybody can do that. The wide range of experience.\nSchirra - I think it's the opportunities of so many exposures we've\nhad and we have taken advantage of them, and as an example, we can\nhave an audience with you people anytime we call, and if we have\nquestions and this is true throughout the whole program. I can\ntalk to Von Braun if I'd like to right now. I can talk to a technician\nthat's working on a nut and bolt on Von Braun's booster right now.\nWe have this prerogative which is very great for us. We are not\nstuck with the disciplines of crossing party lines or anything like\nthis or going up to the ladder and back down again. We go - we\njust take a straight path to where we want to get information. It\nis a tremendous opportunity for us, and we try not to abuse it, but\nwe use it liberally really. I might add that anytime you have a\nquestion, our phones are always available for this kind of thing.\nDon't ever think we are incommunicado.\nShoemaker - Good - that's very good, Commander. I'd like to thank\nyou very much.\nSchirra - Sure, I was glad to come by.\nTHE END"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"President L\nhe can observe and make plans\njudgments that no instrument Apollo s\nor animal can accomplish. Glenn,\nAs an example, Douglas said tried to\nthat Glenn, on his own initia- terious \"fi\ntive, had turned his space- held 35-mi\ncraft around 180 degrees on filled with\nhis second orbit to see Force doct\nwhether the mysterious \"fire- tives showed\nflies\" he had noticed on his ible but the\nfirst orbit might be paint or larged for clos\nother particles from his craft. perts.\nThe astronaut found that the In reloading\nunknown objects streamed Douglas said, G\npast his window in the same grip on a film c\ndirection as on his first sight- floated in front\ning, proving they were inde- weightless flight.\npendent of the spacecraft. for it, the tip of h\nScientists here believe the it and it \"sailed\nstill unknown luminous par- never could get\nticles, when further explored, again.\nmay lead to important new The astronaut r\nknowledge of space phenom- he had no trouble\nena. No unmanned satellite or tablets and a\nobservation from earth had de- squeezed from a\ntected anything like this be- Douglas said\nfore.\nGlenn reported they were MILK—From\nsmall, but as he lacked any\ncheckpoint, it could be that No Nee\nthe particles were more distant\nand larger than he thought. For Ant\nSimilarly, scientists are much\ninterested in the luminous wards year's end an\nhaze belt Glenn saw about 7 again next spring.\nto 8 degrees above the horizon If the estimated level\nover the dark part of the to be those actually\nearth Tuesday. Soviet cosmo- enced, they will still\nnaut Gherman Titov reported below the \"permissible\nseeing about the same thing, els set by Government\nbut there has been no expla- cials.\nnation of it as yet.\nThese observations, say Mer- No Marked Strontium Ris\ncury officials, are an answer The PHS yesterday also\nto those who have opposed ported that radioactive stro\nsending man into space when tium measurements from Se\ninstruments can make obser- tember through Novemb\nvations better and cheaper. 1961, do not \"differ materia\nAstronaut Glenn, himself, from those found prior to\nbelieves that the most signifi- sumption of Russian nucle\ncant technical result of his weapons tests.\" Milk sampl\nflight was to prove the im- from Washington, for exam\nportance of man as a pilot in ple, averaged seven micro\nspace travel. microcuries per liter during\n\"We have piped man aboard September and 10 micromicro-\nas the pilot of spacecraft,\" he curies during October and No-\nsaid in nautical lingo. \"Now vember.\nwe can get rid of some of that These figures do not vary\nautomatic equipment.\" greatly from those reported\nMuch of the weight of the for other American cities,\nFriendship 7 capsule includes with the exception of Port-\nduplicating systems put in be- land, Ore., which showed 3\ncause it was not known micromicrocuries per lit\nwhether man could function in during November. A P\na weightless state. spokesman said the Portl\nThe fact that man can be\nan active pilot and not largely CORRECTION\na passenger on a spacecraft Inadvertently, a price was omitted in Food Fair's a\nwill have its impact on future in this newspaper yesterday. The Post regre\nMercury flights and later and publishes the complete listing below:\nFRYERS or WHOLE\nBROILERS"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director Space Sciences\nSome Considerations and recommendations of Manned\nSpace Exploration Following the Interview (Feb. 27) with\nLt. Col. John H Glenn Jr.\n\nRecommendations\n1. Publication sci Journal - Instrument Observation\nAdditional support to instruments -\n-instruments-\nFollow-on discussion with Glenn and\nreport and evaluation of his observation\nDark adaptation - further experiments\nArtificial comets features\nPhoto electric photometers and two dimension filter -\nwith scan way to fluoresce therefore.\n\nNASA Administration\nCumulative of potential exposure\n- Direct support of instrument - scientific team - branch & division\n= Committee or subcommittee -\n~Roach Mennaert & Henry Schera\nAg - Program chief -"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memo Glenn\nSome considerations of Manned Scientific Space Exploration\nFollowing the Interview with Col John H Glenn Jr\n\n→ Glenn scientific paper ←\n→ ~~~ ~\nOrbit + nebula\n→ ſ\n- discovery - horizon bet - not under\nluminous particles - velocity 1\n→ Rear\n\"Artificial comets\"\n\nRecommendations\nSupport of instruments\n= Committee - subcommittee\nHenry - Roach, Mennaert, Ibery, Schera\n= Correspondent responsible groups\nInstruments -\n→ Instrumentation\n→\n= Paper - by Glenn\n- Followed meeting\n= Artificial comets feasibly -\nexample - expansion"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- condition description\n= Pu bind - do # 4 cm\n= Sphere 3 1/2 in diam - flux bin & cutoff\n= Covered on all sides (2) cells\n= Very luminous - Galaxy from color\n(bright blue/high ≡ color cut)\n= Not much as fluor on... 3 1/2 ...\n= velocity thin 5 ... at field - 3.4 sec ...\n= 2 & 3 meters separation\n→ Discovery (Possible) ...\n① Obsvn on distances\n② Geometric distribution → shape - distribution\n③ Velocity Influence - Gas - velocity distribution\n④ Spectrum of Sun ... fluorescence ... (Glorious lens)\n① Space ended ... Fluorescence of ... and Boston\n(Repeated observation of ... )\n⑤ Natural ...\n- Caution\n- Also -\n- Recent ...\n② Natural observations\n- artificial comet ...\n⑤ Comet effects -\n- Harmonic - Shape - ... \n- impact\n- observation\n- small ..."} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- IR\nU.V. camera\n- light meters"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- Glenn\n- draw-\n- 10 - 15 min normal dark adaptation ~46°-window 30°\n>20% window cut down\n- daytime stars > min adaptation\n= Sun not too blinding - could look at it-\nVery clear brilliant white light - like arc light\nSunset\n= broad band on atmosphere - 45 to 60° and -\nyellow - orange blue - black\n4 to 6 min\n- sun's zone ... glow\n- ... sky ... zodiacal light -\n- ... zodiacal ...\n- haze layer -\nstar dims - then - brighter -\nband - 6 to 8° above the horizon\n- about 2° wide\n- about buff white - beige\n- 1/4° sec - drift rate - ? spotting thunder\n- no airglow band -\nwould see lightning!\n- discontinuities - in daylight arcs -\n- probably weather build up\n? - 15° up - green band - ? & of sun - ~ 5 use\nMr. Wolfe Woodfest"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Nordhausen\nH₂ - RDX and composition A.\nand TNT - and Al\nNO O\nNo Al pow 30% Potassium perchlorate 30% Barium nitrate\n50 km to 150 km\n6 or 7 rockets\n~ Ned Dyer Dyer Dubin\n13 -\n~ Wsb - Lundy NASA →\nEditorial ~ board - meet - June 1\n~ Walker"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- all moving in same direction\n~ some seem to flow around\n- brilliant ... more so ... as filter ... on black summer night\n- very steady light\n= yellow green\n~ no end to them - in all directions\n- white - pest window - piece of cotton\n~ all moved at same speed -\nrotate spheroid\n~ no change in intensity\n- far fewer - ... doubled around\ncould see - about minutes\n~ 500' - ?\nsame number each time -\ndensity - same.\n- looks like aerodynamic flow"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Meteors\" (A Symposium on Meteor Physics): Special Supplement (Vol. 2) to J. Atmosph. Terr. Phys. (1955)\nMeteor Ionization in the E-region\nMAURICE DUBIN\nAir Force Cambridge Research Center, U.S.A.\nABSTRACT\nThe theories of meteoric interaction with the atmosphere have been reviewed to determine the total contribution by meteors to the ionization content of the E-region. From Herlofson's theoretical treatment of this interaction, and Watson's distribution of the size and numbers of meteoric particles entering the atmosphere per day, the number of electrons produced at various altitudes in the E-region was computed. These computations indicated that most of the ionization at higher altitudes resulted from meteors of large visual magnitude. Since, as Whipple has shown, the ablation process would probably not occur in the case of micrometeorites because of heat loss by radiation, the collision processes for ionization were reviewed; it seems that the ionization process is mainly a function of the relative energy of the collision, and therefore ablation prior to ionization would not be required for small particles. Using the value (of Greenhow and Hawkins, 1952) for the efficiency of the ionization process and the recently revised value for the amount of meteoric material entering the atmosphere per day, the rate of production of electrons was found to be 20 electrons/cc sec. From this value and the recombination coefficients in the E-region, the equilibrium electron density in the E-region was found to be between 2 x 10⁴ and 7 x 10⁴ electrons/cc. It is therefore proposed that the night-time value for the electron density in the E-region results from meteoric bombardment, and that sporadic E is caused by the same process on the assumption that the distribution of meteoric particles in space is non-isotropic and contains centres of high density. Perhaps, also, the interaction of charged micrometeorites with the earth's magnetic field, may be considered as a mechanism for the production of magnetic storms.\n1. INTRODUCTION\nMETEORS, as commonly known, are extra-terrestrial particles of only a few milligrams, which enter the earth's atmosphere at relatively high velocities. In their interaction with the air, they are vaporized by the heat generated and are responsible for the emission of light and production of ions along the meteor trail. The major portion of the kinetic energy of the meteoric particles is absorbed in the altitude region between 80 and 120 km. It is attempted below to consider whether the integrated effects of this meteoric interaction might contribute to the structure of the E-region.\n2. THEORY\nHERLOFSON (1948) has constructed a model for the interaction of meteoric particles with the atmosphere. It is assumed that in the region of meteoric flash, the mean free path of the molecule is much greater than the radius of the meteor. Under such conditions, the front surface of the meteor is bombarded by single air molecules and the major portion of them is trapped in the metal surface. The kinetic energy relative to the meteor which is given up to the meteor suffices to bring the temperature to that of evaporation. The meteor atoms evaporate off the meteor (ablation) with velocities appropriate to the temperature and the relative velocity of the meteor with respect to the air.\nFrom consideration of the physical interaction of the meteor with the air mass, using the differential form of the conservation of energy and momentum, HERLOFSON determined the equation for the rate of evaporation at any point along the trail.\nn = ¾ n_max (p/p_max) [1 - ⅓(p/p_max)]² (1)\nwhere n_max = 7 x 10²³ r∞³ = the maximum rate of evaporation.\np = the pressure at any point along the trail.\np_max = 4 x 10⁻² r∞ = pressure along the trail where n_max occurs.\nr∞ = the initial radius of the meteoric particle.\n111"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"112 MAURICE DUBIN\nSince the velocity distribution of meteors is over the range from 10 to 70 km/sec, for the purpose of computation an average velocity of 40 km/sec was used. p_max and n_max were determined accordingly.\nFrom equation (1) and WATSON's (1941) estimate for the number and size distribution of meteors entering the earth's atmosphere Table I was computed. The computation has been made for three altitudes, 85 km, 100 km, and 115 km, using the following rocket pressures:\nTable\nAltitude (km) | Pressure (mm of Hg) | Number density of air molecules (cm⁻³)\n85 | 4 x 10⁻³ | 10¹⁴\n100 | 4 x 10⁻⁴ | 10¹³\n115 | 4 x 10⁻⁵ | 10¹²\nThus equation (1) becomes\nn = 9/4 x 7 x 10²³/(4 x 10⁻²) pr∞² (1 - 1/3 p/(4 x 10⁻² r∞))²\nn_85 = 1.6 x 10²³ r∞² (1 - 1/(30 r∞))²\nn_100 = 1.6 x 10²² r∞² (1 - 1/(3 x 10² r∞))²\nn_115 = 1.6 x 10²¹ r∞² (1 - 1/(3 x 10³ r∞))².\nThe number of electrons per cm of path becomes, from HERLOFSON (1948),\nn_e cm⁻¹ = n x 10⁻²/v = n x 10⁻⁸/4.\nFrom Table I it is evident that the number of electrons for a shell of 1 cm thickness over the surface of the earth, resulting from meteors, is 10²⁰ electrons per day at 85 km produced mainly from meteors of visual magnitudes 1 to 4, about 10²⁰ electrons per day at 100 km with the major contribution for visual magnitudes 6 to 15, and again about 10²⁰ electrons per day at 115 km from mag. 7 to 20. The number of electrons produced per cm of path per cm² per sec at these three altitudes is thus 10²⁰/(4 . 4 x 10²³) = 2 x 10⁻⁴ electrons per cm³ per second.\nNow according to HERLOFSON, the kinetic energy of a typical meteor is divided in the ratio 10⁴ : 10² : 1 for the production of heat, light, and ionization, respectively. These values were used in the computation of Table I. However, from"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table I. Calculation of the number of electrons produced per cm of path per meteor and per twenty-four hours as a function of visual magnitude. (number in upper right is power of 10)\n\nVisual magnitude | Observed No. of meteors | True No. | Mass, g | Radius cm | Height = 85 km: No. of atoms evap. cm-1 | No. of electrons n_e cm-1 | Total No. of electrons n_e cm-1 | Height = 100 km: No. of atoms cm-1 | n_e cm-1 | Total n_e cm-1 | Height = 115 km: No. of atoms per cm | n_e cm-1 | Total n_e cm-1\n\n-3 2.8+4 2.8+4 4 6.5-1 6.0^22 1.5^14 4.2^18 6.7^21 1.68^13 4.7^17 6.7^20 1.68^12 4.7^16\n-2 7.1+4 7.1+4 1.6 4.83-1 3.0^22 7.5^13 5.32^18 3.7^21 9.25^12 6.56^17 3.7^20 9.2^11 6.6^16\n-1 1.8+5 1.8+5 6.3-1 3.54-1 1.72^22 4.3^13 7.73^18 2.1^21 5.25^12 9.45^17 2.1^20 5.3^11 9.5^16\n0 4.5+5 4.5+5 2.5-1 2.60-1 8.3^21 2.1^13 9.5^18 1.1^21 2.75^12 1.25^18 1.1^20 2.8^11 1.25^17\n1 1.1+6 1.1+6 1.0-1 1.92-1 4.0^21 1.0^13 1.1^19 5.6^20 1.4^12 1.54^18 5.8^19 1.45^11 1.60^17\n2 2.8+6 2.8^6 4.0-2 1.41-1 1.86^21 4.65^12 1.30^19 3.1^20 7.75^11 2.17^18 3.2^19 8.0^10 2.24^17\n3 6.4+6 7.1^6 1.6-2 1.04-1 8.0^20 2.0^12 1.42^19 1.6^20 4.0^11 2.84^18 1.7^19 4.3^10 3.0^17\n4 9.0+6 1.87 6.3-3 7.6-2 2.9^20 7.25^11 1.30^19 8.5^19 2.13^11 3.84^18 9.2^18 2.3^10 4.1^17\n5 3.6+6 4.57 2.5-3 5.6-2 8.0^19 2.0^11 9.0^18 4.4^19 1.1^11 4.95^18 5.0^18 1.3^10 5.6^17\n6 1.18 1.0-3 4.12-2 9.17^18 2.43^10 2.7^18 2.3^19 5.75^10 6.32^18 2.7^18 6.8^9 7.4^17\n7 2.88 4.0-4 3.03-2 1.46^18 3.65^9 1.02^18 1.15^19 2.88^10 8.05^18 1.46^18 3.7^9 1.02^18\n8 7.18 1.6-4 2.24-2 5.75^18 1.44^9 1.39^18\n9 1.89 6.3-5 1.65-2 2.82^18 7.1^9 1.91^18 7.8^17 1.96^9 ...\n10 4.59 2.5-5 1.21-2 1.20^18 3.0^9 2.4^18\n15 4.511 2.5-7 2.6-3 2.77 8.2^15 9.2^18\n20 4.513 2.5-9 6.0-4 1.16^14 2.05^7 1.30^19\n25 4.515 2.5-11 1.21-4 2.95\n30 4.517 2.5-13 2.6-5\n\nMeteor ionization in the E-region 113"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"114 MAURICE DUBIN\n\nconsideration of long-duration meteor echoes it has been suggested that the electron density in the trail is greater than the critical density for the radio wavelengths employed in probing meteors, and has led to a revision of the Herlofson ratios for the production of heat, light, and ionization. Greenhow and Hawkins (1952) thereby found that a meteor of visual magnitude +6 would produce approximately 10^12 electrons per centimetre of path. This is one hundred times greater than Herlofson's estimates, and leads to a discrepancy of roughly five stellar magnitudes between his theoretical estimate and the experimental determination of electron-line density in meteor trails. Greenhow and Hawkins conclude that meteors produce more ionization than was originally estimated. Instead of the kinetic energy of the meteor being divided between heat, light, and ionization in the ratio 10^4 : 10^2 : 1, the ratios are probably 10^4 : 10^2 : 10 for bright meteors, and 10^4 : 10 : 10 for faint meteors. These revised estimates imply that the visual magnitudes corresponding to an echo of given characteristics is about five magnitudes fainter than given by Herlofson. This means that the majority of echoes of short duration must arise from meteors which are below the limits of naked-eye visibility, and conversely, that all visible meteors must produce radio echoes of long duration—a well-known observational fact.\n\nA further consideration in the model of Herlofson is the fact that unmelted meteorites have been found on the surface of the earth. Whipple (1950, 1951) has shown that the micrometeorite, if below a certain size, can dissipate the energy gained sufficiently rapidly to permit these particles to be stopped by the atmosphere without melting. Recalling that the Herlofson model required that ablation of the meteorite was the initial step in the production of light and ionization, this point warrants some discussion. Greenhow and Hawkins (1952) have indicated that for radio meteors the amount of light produced is correspondingly reduced for small meteoric particles but the relative ionization is not reduced, but rather is generally larger than indicated by Herlofson's treatment.\n\nIt seems worthwhile to review briefly the physical process involved in the interaction of a micrometeorite with the atmosphere. Since it is not believed that ablation results for these very small particles, one might question whether or not the ionization efficiency would become correspondingly poorer. The physical problem is one of considering a collision of the micrometeorite with a molecule or atom of air, with the relative energy of collision in the range from 10 to 800 eV. The mean free path of the air is much greater than the diameter of the micrometeorite, and thus the problem may be treated by kinetic theory rather than fluid dynamics.\n\nThere are several processes which might occur: (1) An elastic collision of a molecule of air with the micrometeorite would yield a molecule with a velocity capable of ionizing. (2) An inelastic collision of a molecule of air with the micrometeorites such that the air molecule enters the surface of the micrometeorite, and thereby heats the micrometeorite and also forms a \"monolayer\" on the surface; such molecules if not chemically bonded to the surface might very easily evaporate off the surface with the velocity high enough for ionization. (3) Secondary ionization from collisions with a surface. (4) Attachment to oxygen by the collision and the eventual addition of a free electron to the atmosphere; and (5) sputtering of"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Meteor ionization in the E-region 115\n\nthe micrometeorite and the subsequent ionization by the freed particle. Experimental information on collisions of neutral particles and the resulting excitation and ionization is very limited. Much of the available information is contained in Massey and Burhop (1952).\n\nAlthough the ionization efficiency is much greater for electrons than for heavy ions, as long as the ion energy is greater than the threshold value for ionization, the possibility of ionization exists. For example, a recent technique for obtaining velocities for neutral particles near the range of meteor velocities is the shock-tube method of Resler et al. (1952). It was found that the extent of ionization as a function of Mach number was rather large. In the case of argon at Mach 18, argon at 1 cm of Hg pressure was 50 per cent ionized. Mach 18 corresponds to a linear velocity of 18 x 0.350 = 6 km/sec, somewhat less than meteor velocities. For this low velocity there also was a highly luminous region associated with the shock fronts in both argon and air.\n\nBerry et al. (1942) investigated the ionization of gases by collisions of their own accelerated molecules. They found that the onset energies observed for such ionization were roughly only three times the ionization potentials of the atoms. They also concluded that in the range of speeds for argon between 48 eV to 1,000 eV, relatively little change had occurred in the kinetic energy delivered to the newly formed argon ion, and therefore it seemed unlikely that the mechanism of ionization was one involving a transfer of kinetic energy. Also at energies of about 2,000 eV the cross-section for ionization of argon was greater than for N2 by only a factor of 2. In fact the arrangement of the cross-sections for ionization in decreasing order was found to be A, N2, H2, and He.\n\nAn estimate of the order of magnitude may be determined (for a few of the reactions) from Massey and Burhop. Although most experiments have been made with positive ions, it seems that the cross-section for ionization in the case of neutral atoms is at least the same order, but usually somewhat higher.\n\nThe secondary emission coefficient for surfaces, γ, is the number of ejected electrons per incident positive ion. Some observers have found a higher value of γ for surfaces which oxidize readily, implying that higher values arise from the oxide layer. Paetow and Walcher (1938) reason that since the electron emission cannot depend much on the work function of the adsorbed atoms, in the case of a monolayer of oxygen on caesium, it would follow that the extra electron emission came from the absorbed layer itself. The value of γ for the low-energy range in the case of micrometeorites and based on positive ion bombardment would probably be in the range from 0.02 to 0.5. Allowing for an energy absorption of 10 eV for a secondary electron, these coefficients are in themselves sufficient to give a ratio of kinetic energy absorbed in ionization for 200 eV of better than 10^3 : 1.\n\nNegative ions have been found to result from the impact of positive ions on surfaces. Arnot and Milligan (1936) have estimated that for incident Hg+ ions of about 200 eV energy, about 10^-3 Hg- ions were formed per incident ion. For neutral oxygen atoms and molecules which also form negative ions, this ratio could very well be higher. Positive ions incident on surfaces may be reflected without neutralization, although it is generally felt that an ion on striking a wall becomes neutralized. For rare gas ions incident on nickel, the reflection coefficient"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"116 MAURICE DUBIN\n\nfound by Healea and Houtermans (1940) was in the range from 0.2 to 0.05 for ions of He, Ne, and A at about 400 eV.\n\nThe impact of ions on a solid surface results also in a process known as sputtering, wherein atoms or clusters of atoms are ejected from the surface as a result of impact. The threshold for sputtering is of the order of 40 eV, and most values given for rate of sputtering lie between 1 and 10 gm/amp hour. For incident ions at 200 eV the sputtering rate would probably fall to one-third this range of values. For a surface containing atoms of mass number 60, one gram per ampere hour is equivalent to approximately 0.5 sputtered atoms per incident ion. Thus the sputtering rate for metallic meteorites might be of the order of one atom per incident air particle and possibly higher for stony meteorites.\n\nBasically, for all these processes the important parameter for ionization is the relative velocity. The relative amount of energy absorbed by ionization should not be different, whether or not ablation of the meteoric particle occurs. Because of the long-mean-face path of air compared to the size of the meteoric particle, the air particles must act independently of each other. Effectively the cross-section for ionization might increase during evaporation, but this is equivalent to increasing the air density to allow for a larger number of collisions. Indeed, one may, as a gross estimate, expect that on the average a fixed percentage of the kinetic energy absorbed by the air is transmitted into ionization with an efficiency given by Greenhow and Hawkins' correction of Herlofson's treatment.\n\nRecently Whipple (1952) has investigated the amount of meteoric material entering the earth's atmosphere. From experiments of Burnight, and Bohn and Nadig, using rockets; Crozier and Seely on air pollution; van de Hulst and Allen by observations of zodiacal light and eclipses, and Pettersson and Rotschi from observation of deep-sea sediments containing nickel: Whipple noted that data from these methods generally agree as to order of magnitude of the amount of material falling into the earth's atmosphere. From this, the frequency of small meteoric bodies encountering the earth's atmosphere should exceed the older estimates based on meteors and meteorites (Watson's) by a factor of possibly 10^4. The result is perhaps 10^3 tons or more per day on the entire earth.\n\nEarlier the value for the number of electrons formed per cc/sec was found to be 2 x 10^-4 electrons per cc/sec, based on Watson's estimates and Herlofson's theory. Since Greenhow has indicated that Herlofson's value should be increased by a factor between 10^2 and 10, and the number of micrometeorites should be increased by a factor of 10^4 to 10^3, the rate of production of electrons should be multiplied by a factor of about 10^5, giving an average production rate of electrons of twenty electrons per cc.\n\nHaving determined roughly the rate of production of electrons, the rate of disappearance of electrons must be considered in order to calculate the equilibrium electron density. The rate of loss of electrons along the meteor trail is given by\n\n∂n/∂t = D∇²n − αn² − γnn0\n\nWhere D is the diffusion coefficient, α the recombination coefficient, γ is the coefficient of attachment, n0 is the neutral atomic or molecular density, and n is"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Meteor ionization in the E-region 117\n\nnow the electron density. For small particles, where the number of electrons formed per centimetre of path is small, the diffusion term is predominant, and the train quickly decreases to the equilibrium electron density, which is thus given by\n\nαn² = rate of production of electrons.\n\nThe effective recombination coefficient for the E-region is α(O2) ≃ 5 . 10^-8 cm3 sec-1, when O2 is present, and α(O) ≃ 4 x 10^-9 cm3 sec-1 if oxygen has been dissociated. Thus n is approximately equal to 7 . 10^4 and 2 . 10^4 in the upper and lower E-region, respectively.\n\n3. CONCLUSIONS\n\nThe above is applicable to three effects in the E-layers. First, the diurnal variation of the E-layer is found to agree fairly well with the (cos χ)^½ law for the variation of the simple Chapman region (χ is the zenith angle of the sun). The variation is found to be almost symmetrical with reference to the maximum at noon (Mitra, 1952). However, with the accepted value of the recombination coefficient, the E-layer ionization at night should fall to a very low value. The residual ionization density as observed is much greater than it should be. It is therefore suggested that this night-time value results from the bombardment of micrometeorites.\n\nSecondly, measurements of effective electron density obtained by rockets (Lien et al., 1953) indicated that a bifurcation, or two maxima, in electron density were present in the E-region. It is suggested that one maximum results from solar radiation, the other from micrometeoric bombardment.\n\nAnd finally, it is proposed that the sporadic E-clouds of ionization result from micrometeorites. Although some correlation with meteor showers is found, the major portion of the ionization results from micrometeorites with a fine structure undetectable by radio probing. The cloud-like structure of the E-layer very possibly results from clouds of micrometeorites. The amount of micrometeorites, the penetration depth, the ionization efficiency, and the distribution of the micrometeorites are all consistent with the conditions required for such an explanation. Granted the laboratory evidence for the ionization process is not adequate, but the general physical reasoning based on ionization density measurements by radio methods of lower visual magnitude meteorites leads to an order of magnitude that seems very promising.\n\nIn conclusion, it may be possible also to relate the meteoric bombardment of the upper atmosphere to the high-latitude magnetic storms and aurorae. For this process it is necessary that sufficient photoelectric effect from solar ultraviolet radiation be present to charge the micrometeorites and thereby allow some control by the earth's magnetic field. This investigation will be described elsewhere.\n\nREFERENCES\n\nArnot, F. L., and Milligan, J. C. (1936) Proc. Roy. Soc. A 156, 538\nBerry, H. W. (1942) Phys. Rev. 62, 378\nBerry, H. W., Varney, R. H., and Newberry, S. (1942) Phys. Rev. 61, 63\nGreenhow, J. S., and Hawkins, G. S. (1952) Nature, Lond. 170, 355\nHealea, M. and Houtermans, C. (1940) Phys. Rev. 58, 608\nHerlofson, N. (1948) Phys. Soc. Rep. Prog. Phys. 11, 444\nLien, J. R., Marcou, R. J., Ulwick, J. C., McMorrow, D. R., Blundford, L., and Haycock, O. C. (1953) Phys. Rev. 92, 508"} {"doc_id":"e35da9e0bf393fcc","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"118 MAURICE DUBIN\nMASSEY, H. S. W., and BURHOP, E. H. S. (1952) Electronic and Ionic Impact Phenomena (Oxford, (Clarendon Press)\nMITRA, S. K. (1952) The Upper Atmosphere (The Asiatic Soc., Calcutta)\nPAETOW, H. and WALCHER, W. (1938) Zeits. f. Phys. 110, 69\nRESLER, E. L., SHOO-CHI LIN, and KANTROWITZ, A. (1952) J. Appl. Phys. 23, 1390\nWATSON, F. (1941) Between the Planets, pp. 140-177 (Blakiston)\nWHIPPLE, F. L. (1950) Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. (U.S.A.) 36, 687; (1951) Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. (U.S.A.) 37, 19; (1952) Bull. Amer. Met. Soc. 33, 13"} {"doc_id":"e372581a85e4f775","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e372581a85e4f775","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e372581a85e4f775","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e372581a85e4f775","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e372581a85e4f775","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e372581a85e4f775","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e3b368bc43d1c63c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A-83-001_2-1\n\nBL 11-23-70\n\nDear Mr. Tuck:\n\nI'm sorry that I cannot fill out the attached form since the times and dates of any sightings escape me. I can however, tell you that during the years 1948 through 1951 several sightings of Green lights were made at Los Alamos. These usually occured during the early part of the night, nine to eleven, and were usually in the Jemez Mountains.\n\nI can recall several instances of green lights weaving in and out of Mountain peaks. This was all reported to the Protective Force Headquarters and should be a matter of record on their logs.\n\nI also recall one instance of five objects flying over Los Alamos in the afternoon. They were flying from Southeast to Northwest and appeared to be flying in formation. I believe (b)(6) of the Protective Force was one of the five or six people that"} {"doc_id":"e3b368bc43d1c63c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"sighted these objects. Another person you might check with is (b)(6) of the Protective Force. Any of the Protective Force members that was on the \"Hill\" during the early '50 should recall all the reported sightings during this time.\n\nI'm sorry that I can't be of more help. I'm sure however, if you can obtain access to the pro force logs during the above periods that the information can be obtained as to time and date of the green light sightings.\n\nGood Luck.\n\n(b)(6)"} {"doc_id":"e3b368bc43d1c63c","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"P-DO 16 December 1970\n\n(b)(6)\nU. S. Army Engineering School\nFort Belvoir, Virginia 22060\n\nAttention: Department of Mechanical and Technical Equipment\n\nDear (b)(6):\n\nAs agreed in our telephone conversation of today's date, I would like to have the recipe that was used for the simulated atomic bomb demonstrations.\n\nWe are interested in the large atmospheric vortices which are produced as reported in the book \"Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects\" by Dr. Edward U. Condon.\n\nYours sincerely,\n\nJLT:gaa James L. Tuck"} {"doc_id":"e3b368bc43d1c63c","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"November 28\n\nDear Jim:\n\nMindful of your interesting report on ball lightning, I am enclosing comments on same by a UFO believer, James M. McCampbell, in his UFOLOGY, 1976, appearing on the new non-fiction shelf at the Mesa Library, call number 629.1338 M125u.\n\nHis chapter FLIGHT AND PROPULSION strengthens my conviction that Einstein, while seemingly straying from the main current of physical research in his later years, was on scent like a bloodhound when he persisted in trying to lock in on a unified field theory.\n\nRegards,\n\n(b)(6)"} {"doc_id":"e50c789d2da13949","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4a, 1.4g\n1.4a, 1.4g\n1.4a, 1.4g\n1.4a, 1.4g\n1.4a, 1.4g\n1.4a, 1.4g\n1.4a, 1.4g\n1.4a, 1.4g\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 30 June 2026\nFOIA / Privacy Act applies\nUSCENTCOM MDR 26-0084 to 26-0095\nApproved for Release to AARO - FOUO / PA applies\n06/30/26 030"} {"doc_id":"e7c482d4fd8d4a11","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"G2-HQ-83894 VOL 1 SERIAL 153 ONLY\n\nFBI - CENTRAL RECORDS CENTER\nHQ - HEADQUARTERS\nClass / Case # Sub Vol. Serial #\n0062 83894 1 153 ONLY\n8/11/1274168\nRRP003IXGA\nDeclassification authority derived from FBI Automatic Declassification Guide, issued May 24, 2007."} {"doc_id":"e7c482d4fd8d4a11","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"KNOXVILLE FILE #65-11\n\nRE: \"FLYING SAUCERS\" OBSERVED OVER OAK RIDGE AREA\nINTERNAL SECURITY - X\n\nENCLOSURES TO BUREAU:\n\nTwo photographs of reputedly \"flying saucers\" seen at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, during July 1947.\n\nPhotostatic copy of newspaper clipping appearing in the Knoxville News-Sentinel concerning these \"flying saucers.\""} {"doc_id":"e7c482d4fd8d4a11","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-153\nENCLOSURE"} {"doc_id":"e7c482d4fd8d4a11","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"KNOXVILLE NEWS-SENTINEL\nJULY 1947\n\n\"FLYING SAUCER\" PHOTOGRAPHED AT OAK RIDGE\n\nW. R. PRESLEY had snapped several pictures of his family and his house at 218 Illinois Avenue, Oak Ridge, the other afternoon and, noticing he had one film left on the roll, he turned and snapped it for a picture of the mountain.\n\nHe had the roll developed, and look what he got on that last shot! Now don't start trying to explain it off. Just go ahead and say what it looks like. Sure. Sure. You're right. It is a Flying Saucer. A lot of folks have reported seeing the things. This, however, is the first time that one has ever been photographed over Oak Ridge.\n\nMr. Presley says this picture has all of Oak Ridge talking."} {"doc_id":"e7c482d4fd8d4a11","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-153"} {"doc_id":"e7c482d4fd8d4a11","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e7c482d4fd8d4a11","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e7c482d4fd8d4a11","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e7c482d4fd8d4a11","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"62-83894-153"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Approved for Release 2026\nSecret NOFORN\nSecret\nThe Central Intelligence Agency and Overhead Reconnaissance: The U-2 and OXCART Programs, 1954 - 1974\nGregory W. Pedlow and Donald E. Welzenbach"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nThe Central Intelligence Agency and Overhead Reconnaissance:\nThe U-2 and OXCART Programs, 1954-1974\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nThe Central Intelligence Agency and Overhead Reconnaissance:\nThe U-2 and OXCART Programs, 1954-1974\nGregory W. Pedlow\nand\nDonald E. Welzenbach\nHistory Staff\nCentral Intelligence Agency\nWashington, D.C.\n1992\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Contents\n◆ Chapter 1\nSearching for a System\nThe Need for High-Altitude Reconnaissance ........................................... 1\nEarly Postwar Aerial Reconnaissance ..................................................... 2\nNew Approaches to Photoreconnaissance ............................................... 4\nThe Air Force Search for a New Reconnaissance Aircraft ............... 8\nLockheed CL-282 Supporters and the CIA ........................................... 13\nScientists and Overhead Reconnaissance ................................................ 17\nThe BEACON HILL Report ..................................................................... 17\nConcern About the Danger of a Soviet Surprise Attack ................ 19\nThe Air Force Intelligence Systems Panel .......................................... 21\nBritish Overflight of Kapustin Yar ........................................................ 23\nThe Intelligence Systems Panel and the CL-282 .............................. 24\nThe Technological Capabilities Panel .................................................. 26\nProject Three Support for the Lockheed CL-282 .............................. 27\nA Meeting With the President ................................................................ 32\nCIA and Air Force Agreement on the CL-282 .................................... 33\n◆ Chapter 2\nDeveloping the U-2\nThe Establishment of the U-2 Project ....................................................... 39\nFunding Arrangements for Project AQUATONE ................................... 43\nMajor Design Features of the U-2 ............................................................ 45\nThe Development of the Camera System ............................................... 48\nPreparations for Testing the U-2 ............................................................. 56\nSecurity for the U-2 Project ..................................................................... 59\nThe CIA - Air Force Partnership ............................................................. 60\nTechnical Challenges to High-Altitude Flight ........................................ 61\nDelivery of the First U-2 ........................................................................... 66\nInitial Testing of the U-2 ........................................................................... 68\nU-2s, UFOs, and Operation BLUE BOOK ............................................... 72"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nHiring U-2 Pilots ........................................................................................ 73\nPilot Training ............................................................................................... 75\nFinal Tests of the U-2 ................................................................................. 76\nThree Fatal Crashes in 1956 ...................................................................... 79\nCoordination of Collection Requirements ............................................... 80\nPreparations To Handle the Product of U-2 Missions .......................... 82\nThe Impact of the Air Force Project GENETRIX Balloons ................... 84\nAQUATONE Briefings for Selected Members of Congress ................. 88\nThe U-2 Cover Story ................................................................................. 89\n◆ Chapter 3\nU-2 Operations in the Soviet Bloc and Middle East, 1956-1958\nThe Deployment of Detachment A to Lakenheath ............................... 94\nThe Move to Wiesbaden ........................................................................... 95\nPresident Eisenhower's Attitude Toward Overflights ........................... 96\nFirst Overflights of Eastern Europe ....................................................... 100\nFirst U-2 Flights Over the Soviet Union ............................................... 104\nSoviet Protest Note ................................................................................... 109\nThe End of the Bomber Gap ................................................................... 111\nTactical Intelligence From U-2s During the Suez Crisis .................... 112\nRenewed Overflights of the Soviet Union ........................................... 122\nRadar-Deceptive \"Dirty Birds\" ............................................................. 128\nThe New Detachment C ........................................................................... 133\nDetachment B Flights From Pakistan ..................................................... 135\nThe Decline of Detachment A ................................................................ 139\nCooperation With Norway ....................................................................... 142\nDeclining Overflight Activity ................................................................... 143\nConcerns About Soviet Countermeasures Against the U-2 .............. 147\nMore Powerful Engines for the U-2 ...................................................... 149\nIntervention in Lebanon, 1958 ............................................................... 152\nBritish Participation in the U-2 Project ................................................. 153\nThe U-2 Project at the Beginning of 1959 ............................................ 157\n◆ Chapter 4\nThe Final Overflights of the Soviet Union, 1959-1960\nThe U-2 and the \"Missile-Gap\" Debate ............................................... 159\nThe Last Overflight: Operation GRAND SLAM .................................... 170\nThe Aftermath of the U-2 Downing ...................................................... 177\nThe Withdrawal of the Overseas Detachments .................................. 181\nThe Fate of Francis Gary Powers ........................................................... 183\nChanges in Overflight Procedures After May 1960 ............................ 187"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 5\nU-2 Operations After May 1960\nU-2 Operations in Latin America ................................................................. 197\nU-2 Support to the Bay of Pigs Invasion.......................................... 197\nAerial Refueling Capability for the U-2................................................ 198\nU-2 Coverage During the Cuban Missile Crisis................................ 199\nU-2s Over South America ........................................................................ 211\nU-2 Operations in Asia ................................................................................ 211\nDetachment C and the Indonesian Revolt of 1958......................... 211\nChina Offshore Islands Dispute of 1958 .......................................... 215\nU-2 Support for DDP Operations in Tibet.......................................... 216\nU-2Cs for Detachment C ........................................................................... 217\nU-2 Crash in Thailand ................................................................................ 219\nEnd of Detachment C Operations ....................................................... 219\nDetachment G Missions Over Laos and North Vietnam .............. 221\nNew Detachment on Taiwan ................................................................ 222\nUse of Detachment H Aircraft by US Pilots .................................... 230\nU-2s in India ............................................................................................. 231\nIncreasing Responsibilities, Inadequate Resources in Asia........... 233\nAdvanced ECM Equipment for Detachment H................................ 237\nUse of Infrared Scanner Over PRC Nuclear Plants ....................... 238\n.................................... 240\nThe End of U-2 Overflights of Mainland China ............................ 242\nPeripheral Missions by Detachment H ............................................ 244\nOperation SCOPE SHIELD Over North Vietnam ............................. 246\nImprovements in U-2 Technology ...................................................... 247\nModification of U-2s for Aircraft Carrier Deployment................... 247\nUse of Carrier-Based U-2 To Film a French Nuclear Test Site... 249\nA New Version of the U-2 .................................................................... 251\nReplacement of the Original U-2s With U-2Rs.............................. 253\nThe Final Years of the U-2 ................................................................... 253\nSupport to Other Agencies ................................................................... 254\nOverseas Deployment Exercises and Missions.............................. 255\nThe Phaseout of the Office of Special Activities .......................... 257\nChapter 6\nThe U-2's Intended Successor: Project OXCART, 1956-1968\nThe Evaluation of Designs for a Successor to the U-2 .................... 260\nCompetition Between Lockheed and Convair ..................................... 267\nThe Selection of the Lockheed Design................................................ 270\nEfforts To Reduce the A-12's Radar Cross Section............................ 274\nThe OXCART Contract ........................................................................... 277"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"New Technologies Necessitated By OXCART's High Speed............. 279\nDesigning the OXCART's Cameras...................................................... 281\nChoosing Pilots for OXCART ............................................................... 283\nSelection of a Testing Site for the OXCART...................................... 283\nDelivery of the First OXCART ............................................................. 286\nChanges in the Project Management.................................................. 286\nOXCART's First Flights......................................................................... 288\nSpeed-Related Problems ...................................................................... 290\nNew Versions of the OXCART ............................................................. 291\nThe Question of Surfacing a Version of the OXCART ..................... 292\nAdditional Problems During Final Testing........................................ 295\nDiscussions on the OXCART's Future Employment ........................ 297\nFirst A-12 Deployment: Operation BLACK SHIELD ............................ 304\nThe End of the OXCART Program ...................................................... 307\nPossible Successors to the OXCART................................................... 312\nSummary of the OXCART Program ..................................................... 313\nChapter 7\nConclusion\nU-2 Overflights of the Soviet Union ..................................................... 315\nParticipation of Allies in the U-2 Program......................................... 319\nU-2s as Collectors of Tactical Intelligence ........................................ 319\nAdvances in Technology....................................................................... 320\nCooperation With the Air Force ........................................................... 321\nImpact of the Overhead Reconnaissance Program on the CIA......... 321\nAppendix A: Acronyms ........................................................................... 325\nAppendix B: Key Personnel ................................................................... 327\nAppendix C: Electronic Devices Carried by the U-2 .......................... 335\nAppendix D: U-2 Overflights of the Soviet Union, ........................... 337\n4 July 1954-1 May 1960\nAppendix E: Unmanned Reconnaissance Projects.............................. 339\nBibliography ............................................................................................ 347\nIndex ........................................................................................................ 355"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Warning Notice\nIntelligence Sources or Methods Involved (WNINTEL)\nNational Security Information\nUnauthorized Disclosure Subject to Criminal Sanctions\nDissemination Control Abbreviations\nNOFORN (NF) Not releasable to foreign nationals\nNOCONTRACT (NC) Not releasable to contractors or contractor/ consultants\nPROPIN (PR) Caution—proprietary information involved\nORCON (OC) Dissemination and extraction of information controlled by originator\nREL... This information has been authorized for release to...\nWN WNINTEL—Intelligence sources and methods involved\nClassified by\nDeclassify: OADR\nDerived from multiple sources\nAll material on this page is Unclassified."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FOREWORD\nThis History Staff Monograph offers a comprehensive and authoritative history of the CIA's manned overhead reconnaissance program, which from 1954 to 1974 developed and operated two extraordinary aircraft, the U-2 and the A-12 OXCART. It describes not only the program's technological and bureaucratic aspects, but also its political and international context. The manned reconnaissance program, along with other overhead systems that emerged from it, changed the CIA's work and structure in ways that were both revolutionary and permanent. The formation of the Directorate of Science and Technology in the 1960s, principally to develop and direct reconnaissance programs, is the most obvious legacy of the events recounted in this study.\n\nThe authors tell an engrossing story. The struggle between the CIA and the US Air Force to control the U-2 and A-12 OXCART projects reveals how the manned reconnaissance program confronted problems that still beset successor programs today. The U-2 was an enormous technological success: its first flight over the USSR in July 1956 made it immediately the most important source of intelligence on the Soviet Union. Using it against the Soviet target it was designed for nevertheless produced a persistent tension between its program managers and the President. The program managers, eager for coverage, repeatedly urged the President to authorize frequent missions over the Soviet Union. President Eisenhower, from the outset doubtful of the prudence and propriety of invading Soviet airspace, only reluctantly allowed any overflights at all. After the Soviets shot down Francis Gary Powers' U-2 on 1 May 1960, President Eisenhower forbade any further U-2 flights over the USSR. Since the Agency must always assess a covert operation's potential payoff against the diplomatic or military cost if it fails, this account of the U-2's employment over the Soviet Union offers insights that go beyond overhead reconnaissance programs.\n\nIndeed, this study should be useful for a variety of purposes. It is the only history of this program based upon both full access to CIA records and extensive classified interviews of its participants. The authors have found records that were nearly irretrievably lost and have interviewed participants whose personal recollections gave information available nowhere else. Although the story of the manned"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"reconnaissance program offers no tidy model for imitation, it does reveal how resourceful managers coped with unprecedented technological challenges and their implications for intelligence and national policy. For this reason, the program's history provides profitable reading for intelligence professionals and policymakers today.\n\nMany people made important contributions to the production of this volume. In the History Staff's preparation of the manuscript, Gerald Haines did the final revision, Diane Marvin again demonstrated her high talent as a copy editor, and [REDACTED] provided staunch secretarial support throughout. As usual, we are indebted to more members than we can name from the Publications, Design, and Cartography Centers in the Office of Current Production and Analytic Support, whose lively interest in the publication went far beyond the call of duty. Their exceptional professional skill and the masterly work of the Printing and Photography Group combined to create this handsome volume.\n\nDonald E. Welzenbach, who began this study, and Gregory W. Pedlow, who completed it, brought complementary strengths to this work. A veteran of CIA service since 1960, Mr. Welzenbach began research on this study in 1983, when he joined the DCI History Staff on a rotational assignment from the Directorate of Science and Technology. After tireless documentary research and extensive interviewing, he finished a draft manuscript of the history before returning to his directorate. In early 1986, Gregory W. Pedlow, a new member of the DCI History Staff, was assigned to complete the study. A Johns Hopkins University Ph.D. who has served as an Army intelligence officer and University of Nebraska professor of history, Dr. Pedlow undertook important research in several new areas, and reorganized, edited, and revised the entire manuscript before leaving CIA to become NATO Historian in late 1989. The final work, which has greatly benefited from both authors' contributions, is the CIA's own history of the world's first great overhead reconnaissance program. ◆\n\nJ. Kenneth McDonald\nChief, CIA History Staff\n\nApril 1992"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nPREFACE\n\nWhen the Central Intelligence Agency came into existence in 1947, no one foresaw that, in less than a decade, it would undertake a major program of overhead reconnaissance, whose principal purpose would be to fly over the Soviet Union. Traditionally, the military services had been responsible for overhead reconnaissance, and flights deep into unfriendly territory only took place during wartime. By the early 1950s, however, the United States had an urgent and growing need for strategic intelligence on the Soviet Union and its satellite states. At great risk, US Air Force and Navy aircraft had been conducting peripheral reconnaissance and shallow-penetration overflights, but these missions were paying a high price in lives lost and increased international tension. Furthermore, many important areas of the Soviet Union lay beyond the range of existing reconnaissance aircraft. The Air Force had therefore begun to develop a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft that would be able to conduct deep-penetration reconnaissance missions over the Soviet Union. President Dwight D. Eisenhower and his civilian scientific advisers feared that the loss of such an aircraft deep in Soviet territory could lead to war and therefore authorized the development of new non-military aircraft, first the U-2 and later the A-12 OXCART, to be manned by civilians and operated only under cover and in the greatest secrecy. Primary responsibility for this new reconnaissance program was assigned to the Central Intelligence Agency, but the Air Force provided vital support.\n\nThe Agency's manned overhead reconnaissance program lasted 20 years. It began with President Eisenhower's authorization of the U-2 project in late 1954 and ended with the transfer of the remaining Agency U-2s to the Air Force in 1974. During this period the CIA developed a successor to the U-2, the A-12 OXCART, but this advanced aircraft saw little operational use and the program was canceled in 1968 after the Air Force deployed a fleet of similar aircraft, a military variant of the A-12 called the SR-71.\n\nNeither of these aircraft remains secret today. A great deal of information about the U-2 and its overflight program became known to the public after 1 May 1960, when the Soviet Union shot down a CIA U-2 and publicly tried its pilot, Francis Gary Powers. Four years\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nlater, at press conferences in February and July 1964, President\nLyndon B. Johnson revealed the existence of the OXCART-type of\naircraft, although only in its military YF-12A (interceptor) and SR-71\n(strategic reconnaissance) versions.\n\n The two CIA reconnaissance aircraft have also been the subject\nof a number of books, beginning with David Wise's and Thomas B.\nRoss's The U-2 Affair in 1962 and then Francis Gary Powers'\nmemoirs, Operation Overflight, in 1970. Two recent books give many\nmore details about the U-2 and OXCART aircraft: Michael\nBeschloss's Mayday: Eisenhower, Khrushchev and the U-2 Affair\n(1986) and William Burrows's Deep Black: Space Espionage and\nNational Security (1987). Although well written and generally ac-\ncurate, these books suffer from their authors' lack of access to\nclassified official documentation. By drawing upon the considerable\namount of formerly classified data on the U-2 now available to the\npublic, Beschloss has provided an accurate and insightful depiction of\nthe U-2 program in the context of the Eisenhower administration's\noverall foreign policy, but his book does contain errors and omissions\non some aspects of the U-2 program. Burrows's broader work suffers\nmore from the lack of classified documentation, particularly in the\nOXCART/SR-71 section, which concentrates on the Air Force air-\ncraft because little information about the Agency's aircraft has been\nofficially declassified and released.\n\n After the present study of the Agency's overhead reconnaissance\nprojects was completed, a new book on the U-2 was published in the\nUnited Kingdom. Chris Pocock's Dragon Lady: The History of the\nU-2 Spyplane is by far the most accurate unclassified account of the\nU-2 program. Pocock has been able to compensate for his lack of ac-\ncess to classified documents by interviewing many former\nparticipants in the program, especially former pilots. Pocock is also\nquite familiar with aircraft itself, for he had worked with Jay Miller\non the latter's excellent technical study of the U-2: Lockheed U-2\n(1983).\n\n There has also been a classified official study of the U-2 and\nOXCART programs. In 1969 the Directorate of Science and\nTechnology published a History of the Office of Special Activities by\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nHelen Hill Kleyla and Robert D. O'Hern. This 16-volume Top Secret\nCodeword study of the Agency's reconnaissance aircraft provides a\nwealth of technical and operational information on the two projects\nbut does not attempt to place them in their historical context. Without\nexamining the international situation and bureaucratic pressures af-\nfecting the president and other key policymakers, however, it is\nimpossible to understand the decisions that began, carried out, and\nended the CIA's reconnaissance aircraft projects.\n\nIn preparing this study of CIA's overhead reconnaissance pro-\ngram, the authors drew on published sources, classified government\ndocuments, and interviews with key participants from the CIA, Air\nForce, contractors, scientific advisory committees, and the\nEisenhower administration. The interviews were particularly impor-\ntant for piecing together the story of how the CIA became involved in\noverhead reconnaissance in the first place because Agency documen-\ntation on the prehistory of the U-2 project is very sketchy and there\nare no accurate published accounts. Research on the period of actual\nreconnaissance operations included the records of the Director of\nCentral Intelligence, the Office of Special Activities in the\nDirectorate of Science and Technology, and the Intelligence\nCommunity Staff, along with documents from the Eisenhower\nPresidential Library in Abilene, Kansas, and additional interviews.\n\nBoth authors are grateful for the assistance they have received\nfrom many individuals who played important roles in the events they\nrecount. Without their help a good deal of this story could never have\nbecome known. The assistance of Agency records management\nofficers in the search for documents on the overhead reconnaissance\nprogram is also greatly appreciated.\n\nTo ensure that this study of the Agency's involvement in over-\nhead reconnaissance reaches the widest possible audience, the authors\nhave kept it at the Secret classification level. As a result, some\naspects of the overhead reconnaissance program, particularly those\ninvolving satellites and related interagency agreements, have had to\nbe described in very general terms. The omission of such information\nis not significant for this book, which focuses on the Agency's recon-\nnaissance aircraft. ◆\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 1\n1\n\nSearching for a System\n\nTHE NEED FOR HIGH-ALTITUDE RECONNAISSANCE\n\nFor centuries, soldiers in wartime have sought the highest ground or\nstructure in order to get a better view of the enemy. At first it was tall\ntrees, then church steeples and bell towers. By the time of the\nAmerican Civil War and the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71, ob-\nservers were using hot-air balloons to get up in the sky for a better\nview of the \"other side of the hill.\" With the advent of dry film, it\nbecame possible to carry cameras into the sky to record the disposi-\ntion of enemy troops and emplacements. Indeed, photoreconnaissance\nproved so valuable during World War I that in 1938 Gen. Werner von\nFritsch, Commander in Chief of the German Army, predicted: \"The\nnation with the best aerial reconnaissance facilities will win the next\nwar.\" 1\n\nBy World War II, lenses, films, and cameras had undergone many\nimprovements, as had the airplane, which could fly higher and faster\nthan the primitive craft of World War I. Now it was possible to use\nphotoreconnaissance to obtain information about potential targets be-\nfore a bombing raid and to assess the effectiveness of the bombing\nafterward.\n\nPeacetime applications of high-altitude photography at first in-\ncluded only photomapping and surveying for transcontinental high-\nways and mineral and oil exploration. There was little thought given to\nusing photography for peacetime espionage until after World War II,\nwhen the Iron Curtain rang down and cut off most forms of communi-\ncation between the Soviet Bloc of nations and the rest of the world.\n\n1 Roy M. Stanley II, World War II Photo Intelligence (New York: Scribners, 1981), p. 16.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":15,"status":"blocked","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":null} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Interrogation of returning Germans offered only fragmentary information, and this source could not be expected to last much longer. As a result, in the late 1940s, the US Air Force and Navy began trying to obtain aerial photography of the Soviet Union. The main Air Force effort involved Boeing RB-47 aircraft (the reconnaissance version of the B-47 jet-propelled medium bomber) equipped with cameras and electronic \"ferret\" equipment that enabled aircrews to detect tracking by Soviet radars. At that time the Soviet Union had not yet completely ringed its borders with radars, and much of the interior also lacked radar coverage. Thus, when the RB-47s found a gap in the air-warning network, they would dart inland to take photographs of any accessible targets. These \"penetration photography\" flights (called SENSINT—sensitive intelligence—missions) occurred along the northern and Pacific coasts of Russia. One RB-47 aircraft even managed to fly 450 miles inland and photograph the city of Igarka in Siberia. Such intrusions brought protests from Moscow but no Soviet military response.\n\nIn 1950 there was a major change in Soviet policy. Air defense units became very aggressive in defending their airspace, attacking all aircraft that came near the borders of the Soviet Union. On 8 April 1950, Soviet fighters shot down a US Navy Privateer patrol aircraft over the Baltic Sea. Following the outbreak of the Korean war in June 1950, the Soviet Union extended its \"severe air defense policy\" to the Far East. In the autumn of 1951, Soviet aircraft downed a twin-engine US Navy Neptune bomber near Vladivostok. An RB-29 lost in the Sea of Japan on 13 June 1952 was probably also a victim of Soviet fighters. The United States was not the only country affected by the new aggressive Soviet air defense policy; Britain and Turkey also reported attacks on their planes."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 1\n4\n\nThe Soviet Union's air defense policy became even more aggressive in August 1952, when its reconnaissance aircraft began violating Japanese airspace over Hokkaido, the northernmost Japanese home island. Two months later, on 7 October 1952, Soviet fighter aircraft stalked and shot down a US RB-29 flying over Hokkaido. Aerial reconnaissance of the Soviet Union and surrounding areas had become a very dangerous business.\n\nDespite the growing risks associated with aerial reconnaissance of the Soviet Bloc, senior US officials strongly believed that such missions were necessary. The lack of information about the Soviet Union, coupled with the perception that it was an aggressive nation determined to expand its borders—a perception that had been greatly strengthened by the Soviet-backed North Korean invasion of South Korea in June 1950—increased US determination to obtain information about Soviet intentions and capabilities and thus reduce the danger of being surprised by a Soviet attack.\n\nNew Approaches to Photoreconnaissance\n\nWhile existing Navy and Air Force aircraft were flying their risky reconnaissance missions over the Soviet Union, the United States began planning for a more systematic and less dangerous approach using new technology. One of the leading advocates of the need for new, high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft was Richard S. Leghorn, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduate and employee of Eastman Kodak who had commanded the Army Air Forces' 67th Reconnaissance Group in Europe during World War II. After the war he returned to Kodak but maintained his interest in photoreconnaissance. Leghorn strongly believed in the need for what he called pre-D-day reconnaissance, that is, reconnaissance of a potential enemy before the outbreak of actual hostilities, in contrast to combat reconnaissance in wartime. In papers presented in 1946 and 1948, Leghorn argued that the United States needed to develop such a capability, which would require high-altitude aircraft and high-resolution cameras. The outbreak of the Korean war gave Leghorn an opportunity to put his ideas into effect. Recalled to active duty by the Air Force, Lieutenant Colonel Leghorn became the head of the Reconnaissance Systems Branch of the Wright Air Development Command at Dayton, Ohio, in April 1951.\n\nRichard S. Leghorn, interview by Donald E. Welzenbach, tape recording, Washington, DC, 19 August 1985 (S)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 1\n5\n\nIn Leghorn's view, altitude was the key to success for overhead reconnaissance. Since the best Soviet interceptor at that time, the MIG-17, had to struggle to reach 45,000 feet, Leghorn reasoned that an aircraft that could exceed 60,000 feet would be safe from Soviet fighters. Recognizing that the fastest way to produce a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft was to modify an existing aircraft, he began looking for the highest flying aircraft available in the Free World. This search soon led him to a British twin-engine medium bomber—the Canberra—built by the English Electric Company. The Canberra had made its first flight in May 1949. Its speed of 469 knots (870 kilometers per hour) and its service ceiling of 48,000 feet made the Canberra a natural choice for high-altitude reconnaissance work. The Royal Air Force quickly developed a reconnaissance version of the Canberra, the PR3 (the PR stood for photoreconnaissance), which began flying in March 1950.\n\nAt Leghorn's insistence, the Wright Air Development Command invited English Electric representatives to Dayton in the summer of 1951 to help find ways to make the Canberra fly even higher. By this time the Air Force had already adopted the bomber version of the Canberra, which the Glenn L. Martin Aircraft Company was to produce under license as the B-57 medium bomber. Leghorn and his English Electric colleagues designed a new Canberra configuration with very long high-lift wings, new Rolls-Royce Avon-109 engines, a solitary pilot, and an airframe that was stressed to less than the standard military specifications. Leghorn calculated that a Canberra so equipped might reach 63,000 feet early in a long mission and as high as 67,000 feet as the declining fuel supply lightened the aircraft. He believed that such a modified Canberra could penetrate the Soviet Union and China for a radius of 800 miles from bases around their periphery and photograph up to 85 percent of the intelligence targets in those countries.\n\nLeghorn persuaded his superiors to submit his suggestion to the Pentagon for funding. He had not, however, cleared his idea with the Air Research and Development Command, whose reconnaissance\n\nRichard S. Leghorn\n\n13,716 meters. To avoid giving a false impression of extremely precise measurements, original English measuring system figures in round numbers have not been converted to the metric system. To convert feet to meters, multiply by 0.3048. To convert airspeeds in knots (nautical miles per hour) to kilometers per hour, multiply by 1.85.\n\nDick van der Aart, Aerial Espionage, Secret Intelligence Flights by East and West (Shrewsbury, England: Airlife Publishing, 1985), p. 18."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 1\n6\n\nRAF Canberra Mark-PR3\n\ndivision in Baltimore, headed by Lt. Col. Joseph J. Pellegrini, had to approve all new reconnaissance aircraft designs. Pellegrini's unit reviewed Leghorn's design and ordered extensive modifications. According to Leghorn, Pellegrini was not interested in a special-purpose aircraft that was only suitable for covert peacetime reconnaissance missions, for he believed that all Air Force reconnaissance aircraft should be capable of operating under wartime conditions. Pellegrini therefore insisted that Leghorn's design meet the specifications for combat aircraft, which required heavily stressed airframes, armor plate, and other apparatus that made an aircraft too heavy to reach the higher altitudes necessary for safe overflights of the Soviet Bloc. The final result of Leghorn's concept after its alteration by Pellegrini's staff was the RB-57D in 1955, whose maximum altitude"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 1\n7\n\nwas only 64,000 feet. Meanwhile Leghorn, frustrated by the rejection of his original concept, had transferred to the Pentagon in early 1952 to work for Col. Bernard A. Schriever, Assistant for Development Planning to the Air Force's Deputy Chief of Staff for Development.\n\nIn his new position Leghorn became responsible for planning the Air Force's reconnaissance needs for the next decade. He worked closely with Charles F. (Bud) Wienberg—a colleague who had followed him from Wright Field—and Eugene P. Kiefer, a Notre Dame-educated aeronautical engineer who had designed reconnaissance aircraft at the Wright Air Development Center during World War II. All three of these reconnaissance experts believed that the Air Force should emphasize high-altitude photoreconnaissance.\n\nUnderlying their advocacy of high-altitude photoreconnaissance was the belief that Soviet radars would not be able to track aircraft flying above 65,000 feet. This assumption was based on the fact that the Soviet Union used American-built radar sets that had been supplied under Lend-Lease during World War II. Although the SCR-584 (Signal Corps Radio) target-tracking radar could track targets up to 90,000 feet, its high power consumption burned out a key component quickly, so this radar was normally not turned on until an early warning radar had detected a target. The SCR-270 early warning radar could be left on for much longer periods and had a greater horizontal range (approximately 120 miles) but was limited by the curvature of the earth to a maximum altitude of 40,000 feet. As a result, Leghorn, Kiefer, and Wienberg believed that an aircraft that could ascend to 65,000 feet before entering an area being swept by the early warning radar would go undetected, because the target-tracking radars would not be activated.\n\nThe problem with this assumption was that the Soviet Union, unlike Britain and the United States, had continued to improve radar technology after the end of World War II. Even after evidence of improved Soviet radar capabilities became available, however, many advocates of high-altitude overflight continued to believe that aircraft flying above 65,000 feet were safe from detection by Soviet radars.\n\nLeghorn interview (S).\n\nIvan A. Getting, interview by Donald E. Welzenbach, Los Angeles, 28 August 1988 (U)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nChapter 1\n\n8\n\nThe Air Force Search for a New\nReconnaissance Aircraft\n\nWith interest in high-altitude reconnaissance growing, several Air\nForce agencies began to develop an aircraft to conduct such mis-\nsions. In September 1952, the Air Research and Development\nCommand gave the Martin Aircraft Company a contract to examine\nthe high-altitude potential of the B-57 by modifying a single aircraft\nto give it long, high-lift wings and the American version of the new\nRolls-Royce Avon-109 engine. These were the modifications that\nRichard Leghorn had suggested during the previous year.10\n\nAt about the same time, another Air Force office, the Wright Air\nDevelopment Command (WADC) in Dayton, Ohio, was also examin-\ning ways to achieve sustained flight at high altitudes. Working with\ntwo German aeronautical experts—Woldemar Voigt and Richard\nVogt—who had come to the United States after World War II, Air\nForce Maj. John Seaberg advocated the development of a new aircraft\nthat would combine the high-altitude performance of the latest turbo-\njet engines with high-efficiency wings in order to reach ultrahigh alti-\ntudes. Seaberg, an aeronautical engineer for the Chance Vought\nCorporation until his recall to active duty during the Korean war, was\nserving as assistant chief of the New Developments Office of\nWADC's Bombardment Branch.\n\nBy March 1953, Seaberg had expanded his ideas for a high-alti-\ntude aircraft into a complete request for proposal for \"an aircraft\nweapon system having an operational radius of 1,500 nm [nautical\nmiles] and capable of conducting pre- and post-strike reconnaissance\nmissions during daylight, good visibility conditions.\" The require-\nment stated that such an aircraft must have an optimum subsonic\ncruise speed at altitudes of 70,000 feet or higher over the target,\ncarry a payload of 100 to 700 pounds of reconnaissance equipment,\nand have a crew of one.\"\n\nThe Wright Air Development Command decided not to seek pro-\nposals from major airframe manufacturers on the grounds that a\nsmaller company would give the new project a higher priority and"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"produce a better aircraft more quickly. In July 1953, the Bell Aircraft\nCorporation of Buffalo, New York, and the Fairchild Engine and\nAirplane Corporation of Hagerstown, Maryland, received study con-\ntracts to develop an entirely new high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft.\nIn addition, the Glenn L. Martin Company of Baltimore was asked to\nexamine the possibility of improving the already exceptional high-al-\ntitude performance of the B-57 Canberra. By January 1954 all three\nfirms had submitted their proposals. Fairchild's entry was a single-en-\ngine plane known as M-195, which had a maximum altitude potential\nof 67,200 feet; Bell's was a twin-engine craft called the Model 67\n(later the X-16), which had a maximum altitude of 69,500 feet; and\nMartin's design was a big-wing version of the B-57 called the Model\n294, which was to cruise at 64,000 feet. In March 1954, Seaberg and\nother engineers at Wright Field, having evaluated the three contend-\ning designs, recommended the adoption of both the Martin and Bell\nproposals. They considered Martin's version of the B-57 an interim\nproject that could be completed and deployed rapidly while the more\nadvanced concept from Bell was still being developed.12\n\nAir Force headquarters soon approved Martin's proposal to mod-\nify the B-57 and was very much interested in the Bell design. But\nword of the competition for a new reconnaissance airplane had\nreached another aircraft manufacturer, the Lockheed Aircraft\nCorporation, which submitted an unsolicited design.\n\nLockheed had first become aware of the reconnaissance aircraft\ncompetition in the fall of 1953. John H. (Jack) Carter, who had\nrecently retired from the Air Force to become the assistant director\nof Lockheed's Advanced Development Program, was in the Pentagon\non business and dropped in to see Eugene P. Kiefer, an old friend\nand colleague from the Air Force's Office of Development Planning\n(more commonly known as AFDAP from its Air Force office\nsymbol). Kiefer told Carter about the competition for a high-flying\naircraft and expressed the opinion that the Air Force was going about\nthe search in the wrong way by requiring the new aircraft to be suit-\nable for both strategic and tactical reconnaissance.\n\nImmediately after returning to California, Carter proposed to\nLockheed Vice President L. Eugene Root (previously the top civilian\nofficial in the Air Force's Office of Development Planning) that"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nChapter 1\n\n10\n\n[Photo: Designs for the Air Force competition for a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft (MX-2147 Fairchild, MX-2147 Bell, Martin Model 294)]\n\nDesigns for the Air Force\ncompetition for a high-altitude\nreconnaissance aircraft\n\nLockheed also submit a design. Carter noted that the proposed aircraft\nwould have to reach altitudes of between 65, 000 and 70,000 feet and\ncorrectly forecast, \"If extreme altitude performance can be realized in\na practical aircraft at speeds in the vicinity of Mach 0.8, it should be\ncapable of avoiding virtually all Russian defenses until about 1960.\"\nCarter added, \"To achieve these characteristics in an aircraft which\nwill have a reasonably useful operational life during the period before\n1960 will, of course, require very strenuous efforts and extraordinary\nprocedures, as well as nonstandard design philosophy.\" Some of the\n\"nonstandard\" design characteristics suggested by Carter were the\nelimination of landing gear, the disregard of military specifications,\nand the use of very low load factors. Carter's memorandum closed\nwith a warning that time was of the essence: \"In order that this spe-\ncial aircraft can have a reasonably long and useful life, it is obvious\nthat its development must be greatly accelerated beyond that consid-\nered normal.\" 13\n\nLockheed's senior officials approved Carter's proposal, and\nearly in 1954 the corporation's best aircraft designer—Clarence L.\n(Kelly) Johnson—began working on the project, then known as the\nCL-282 but later to become famous under its Air Force designator—\nthe U-2. Already one of the world's leading aeronautical engineers,\nKelly Johnson had many successful military and civilian designs to\nhis credit, including the P-38, P-80, F-104, and Constellation.\nJohnson quickly came up with a radical design based upon the\nfuselage of the F-104 jet fighter but incorporating a high-aspect-ratio\nsailplane wing. To save weight and thereby increase the aircraft's al-\ntitude, Johnson decided to stress the airframe to only 2.5 units of"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nChapter 1\n\n11\n\ngravity (g's) instead of the military specification strength of 5.33 g's.\nFor the power plant he selected the General Electric J73/GE-3 nonaf-\nterburning turbojet engine with 9,300 pounds of thrust (this was the\nsame engine he had chosen for the F-104, which had been the basis\nfor the U-2 design).14 Many of the CL-282's design features were\nadapted from gliders. Thus, the wings and tail were detachable.\nInstead of a conventional landing gear, Johnson proposed using two\nskis and a reinforced belly rib for landing—a common sailplane\ntechnique—and a jettisonable wheeled dolly for takeoff. Other fea-\ntures included an unpressurized cockpit and a 15-cubic-foot payload\narea that could accommodate 600 pounds of sensors. The CL-282's\nmaximum altitude would be just over 70,000 feet with a 2,000-mile\nrange. Essentially, Kelly Johnson had designed a jet-propelled\nglider.15\n\nEarly in March 1954, Kelly Johnson submitted the CL-282 de-\nsign to Brig. Gen. Bernard A. Schriever's Office of Development\nPlanning. Eugene Kiefer and Bud Wienberg studied the design and\nrecommended it to General Schriever, who then asked Lockheed to\nsubmit a specific proposal. In early April, Kelly Johnson presented a\nfull description of the CL-282 and a proposal for the construction and\nmaintenance of 30 aircraft to a group of senior Pentagon officials that\nincluded Schriever's superior, Lt. Gen. Donald L. Putt, Deputy Chief\nof Staff for Development, and Trevor N. Gardner, Special Assistant\nfor Research and Development to the Secretary of the Air Force.\nAfterward Kelly Johnson noted that the civilian officials were very\nmuch interested in his design but the generals were not.16\n\nThe CL-282 design was also presented to the commander of the\nStrategic Air Command (SAC), Gen. Curtis E. LeMay, in early April\nby Eugene Kiefer, Bud Wienberg, and Burton Klein from the Office of\n\n[Photo: Kelly Johnson]\n\nKelly Johnson"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nChapter 1\n\n12\n\n[Drawing: The Lockheed CL-282 three-view and perspective drawing]\n\nThe Lockheed CL-282\n\nDevelopment Planning. According to Wienberg, General LeMay\nstood up halfway through the briefing, took his cigar out of his mouth,\nand told the briefers that, if he wanted high-altitude photographs, he\nwould put cameras in his B-36 bombers and added that he was not\ninterested in a plane that had no wheels or guns. The general then left\nthe room, remarking that the whole business was a waste of his time.17\n\nMeanwhile, the CL-282 design proceeded through the Air Force\ndevelopment channels and reached Major Seaberg at the Wright Air\nDevelopment Command in mid-May. Seaberg and his colleagues care-\nfully evaluated the Lockheed submission and finally rejected it in early\nJune. One of their main reasons for doing so was Kelly Johnson's\nchoice of the unproven General Electric J73 engine. The engineers at\nWright Field considered the Pratt and Whitney J57 to be the most\npowerful engine available, and the designs from Fairchild, Martin, and\nBell all incorporated this engine. The absence of conventional landing\ngear was also a perceived shortcoming of the Lockheed design.18\n\nAnother factor in the rejection of Kelly Johnson's submission\nwas the Air Force preference for multiengine aircraft. Air Force re-\nconnaissance experts had gained their practical experience during"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"World War II in multiengine bombers. In addition, aerial photography experts in the late 1940s and early 1950s emphasized focal length as the primary factor in reconnaissance photography and, therefore, preferred large aircraft capable of accommodating long focal-length cameras. This preference reached an extreme in the early 1950s with the development of the cumbersome 240-inch Boston camera, a device so large that the YC-97 Boeing Stratocruiser that carried it had to be partially disassembled before the camera could be installed. Finally, there was the feeling shared by many Air Force officers that two engines are always better than one because, if one fails, there is a spare to get the aircraft back to base. In reality, however, aviation records show that single-engine aircraft have always been more reliable than multiengine planes. Furthermore, a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft deep in enemy territory would have little chance of returning if one of the engines failed, forcing the aircraft to descend.\"\n\nOn 7 June 1954, Kelly Johnson received a letter from the Air Force rejecting the CL-282 proposal because it had only one engine and was too unusual and because the Air Force was already committed to the modification of the Martin B-57.\" By this time, the Air Force had also selected the Bell X-16; the formal contract calling for 28 aircraft was signed in September. Despite the Air Force's selection of the X-16, Lockheed continued to work on the CL-282 and began seeking new sources of support for the aircraft.\n\nLockheed CL-282 Supporters and the CIA\n\nAlthough the Air Force's uniformed hierarchy had decided in favor of the Bell and Martin aircraft, some high-level civilian officials continued to favor the Lockheed design. The most prominent proponent of the Lockheed proposal was Trevor Gardner, Special Assistant for Research and Development to Air Force Secretary Harold E. Talbott. Gardner had many contacts in west coast aeronautical circles because before coming to Washington he had headed the Hycon Manufacturing Company, which made aerial cameras in Pasadena, California. He had been present at Kelly Johnson's presentation on the CL-282 at the Pentagon in early April 1954 and believed that this"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"design showed the most promise for reconnaissance of the Soviet Union. This belief was shared by Gardner's special assistant, Frederick Ayer, Jr., and Garrison Norton, an adviser to Secretary Talbott.\"\n\nAccording to Norton, Gardner tried to interest SAC commander LeMay in the Lockheed aircraft because Gardner envisioned it primarily as a collector of strategic, rather than tactical, intelligence. But General LeMay had already shown that he was not interested in an unarmed aircraft. Gardner, Ayer, and Norton then decided to seek CIA support for the high-flying aircraft. At that time the Agency's official involvement in overhead reconnaissance was limited to advising the Air Force on the problems of launching large camera-carrying balloons for reconnaissance flights over hostile territory (for the details of this program, see chapter 2). The Chief of the Operations Staff in the Office of Scientific Intelligence, Philip G. Strong, however, served on several Air Force advisory boards and kept himself well informed on developments in reconnaissance aircraft.\"\n\nGardner, Norton, and Ayer met with Strong in the Pentagon on 12 May 1954, six days before the Wright Air Development Command began to evaluate the Lockheed proposal. Gardner described Kelly Johnson's proposal and showed the drawings to Strong. After this meeting, Strong summarized his impressions of the Air Force's search for a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft:\n\nProposals for special reconnaissance aircraft have been received in the Air Staff from Lockheed, Fairchild, and Bell. . . . The Lockheed proposal is considered to be the best. It has been given the type designation of CL-282 and in many respects is a jet-powered glider based essentially on the Lockheed Day Fighter XF-104. It is primarily subsonic but can attain transonic speeds over the target with a consequent loss of range. With an altitude of 73,000 feet over the target it has a combat radius of 1,400 nautical miles. . . . The CL-282 can be manufactured"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"mainly with XF-104 jigs and designs. . . . The prototype of this plane can be produced within a year from the date of order. Five planes could be delivered for operations within two years.\n\nThe Bell proposal is a more conventional aircraft having normal landing gear. As a result, its maximum altitude over target is 69,500 feet and the speed and range are not as good as the Lockheed CL-282.\n\nGardner's enthusiasm for the CL-282 had given Strong the false impression that most Air Force officials supported the Lockheed design. In reality, the Air Force's uniformed hierarchy was in the process of choosing the modified version of the Martin B-57 and the new Bell X-16 to meet future reconnaissance needs.\n\nDuring their meeting with Strong, Trevor Gardner, Frederick Ayer, and Garrison Norton explained that they favored the CL-282 because it gave promise of flying higher than the other designs and because at maximum altitude its smaller radar cross section might make it invisible to existing Soviet radars. The three officials asked Strong if the CIA would be interested in such an aircraft. Strong promised to talk to the Director of Central Intelligence's newly hired Special Assistant for Planning and Coordination, Richard M. Bissell, Jr., about possible Agency interest in the CL-282.\n\nRichard Bissell had already had an active and varied career before he joined the CIA. A graduate of Groton and Yale, Bissell studied at the London School of Economics for a year and then completed a doctorate at Yale in 1939. He taught economics, first at Yale and then from 1942 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he became a full professor in 1948. During World War II, Bissell had managed American shipping as executive officer of the Combined Shipping Adjustment Board. After the war, he served as deputy director of the Marshall Plan from 1948 until the end of 1951, when he became a staff member of the Ford Foundation. His first association with the Agency came in late 1953, when he undertook a contract study of possible responses the United"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"States might use against the Soviet Bloc in the event of another uprising such as the East Berlin riots of June 1953. Bissell quickly concluded that there was not much hope for clandestine operations against Bloc nations. As he remarked later: \"I know I emerged from that exercise feeling that very little could be done.\" This belief would later make Bissell a leading advocate of technical rather than human means of intelligence collection.\n\nBissell joined the Agency in late January 1954 and soon became involved in coordination for the operation aimed at overthrowing Guatemalan President Jacobo Arbenz. He was, therefore very preoccupied when Philip Strong approached him in mid-May 1954 with the concept of the proposed spyplane from Lockheed. Bissell said that the idea had merit and told Strong to get some topflight scientists to advise on the matter. Afterward he returned to the final planning for the Guatemalan operation and promptly forgot about the CL-282.\n\nMeanwhile, Strong went about drumming up support for high-altitude overflight. In May 1954 he persuaded DCI Allen W. Dulles to ask the Air Force to take the initiative in gaining approval for an overflight of the Soviet guided-missile test range at Kapustin Yar. Dulles's memorandum did not mention the CL-282 or any of the other proposed high-altitude aircraft. CIA and Air Force officials met on several occasions to explore the overflight proposal, which the Air Force finally turned down in October 1954.\n\nAlthough Allen Dulles was willing to support an Air Force overflight of the Soviet Union, he was not enthusiastic about the CIA undertaking such a project. Few details about Dulles's precise attitude toward the proposed Lockheed reconnaissance aircraft are available, but many who knew him believe that he did not want the CIA to become involved in projects that belonged to the military, and the Lockheed CL-282 had been designed for an Air Force requirement."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Moreover, high-altitude reconnaissance of the Soviet Union did not fit well into Allen Dulles's perception of the proper role of an intelligence agency. He tended to favor the classical form of espionage, which relied on agents rather than technology.\n\nAt this point, the summer of 1954, Lockheed's CL-282 proposal still lacked official support. Although the design had strong backers among some Air Force civilians and CIA officials, the key decisionmakers at both Air Force and CIA remained unconvinced. To make Kelly Johnson's revolutionary design a reality, one additional source of support was necessary: prominent scientists serving on government advisory boards.\n\nSCIENTISTS AND OVERHEAD RECONNAISSANCE\n\nScientists and engineers from universities and private industry had played a major role in advising the government on technical matters during World War II. At the end of the war, most of the scientific advisory boards were disbanded, but within a few years the growing tensions of the Cold War again led government agencies to seek scientific advice and assistance. In 1947 the Air Force established a Scientific Advisory Board, which met periodically to discuss topics of current interest and advise the Air Force on the potential usefulness of new technologies. The following year the Office of Defense Mobilization established the Scientific Advisory Committee, but the Truman administration made little use of this new advisory body.\n\nThe BEACON HILL Report\n\nIn 1951 the Air Force sought even more assistance from scientists because the Strategic Air Command's requests for information about targets behind the Iron Curtain could not be filled. To look for new ways of conducting reconnaissance against the Soviet Bloc, the Air Force's Deputy Chief of Staff for Development, Maj. Gen. Gordon P. Saville, added 15 reconnaissance experts to an existing project on air"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 1\n18\n\ndefense known as Project LINCOLN, then under way at the\nMassachusetts Institute of Technology. By the end of the year, these\nexperts had assembled in Boston to begin their research. Their head-\nquarters was located over a secretarial school on Beacon Hill, which\nsoon became the codename for the reconnaissance project. The con-\nsultants were called the BEACON HILL Study Group.\n\nThe study group's chairman was Kodak physicist Carl F. P.\nOverhage, and its members included James G. Baker and Edward M.\nPurcell from Harvard; Saville Davis from the Christian Science\nMonitor; Allen F. Donovan from the Cornell Aeronautical\nLaboratory; Peter C. Goldmark from Columbia Broadcasting System\nLaboratories; Edwin H. Land, founder of the Polaroid Corporation;\nStewart E. Miller of Bell Laboratories; Richard S. Perkin of the\nPerkin-Elmer Company; and Louis N. Ridenour of Ridenour\nAssociates, Inc. The Wright Air Development Command sent Lt. Col.\nRichard Leghorn to serve as its liaison officer.30\n\nDuring January and February 1952, the BEACON HILL Study\nGroup traveled every weekend to various airbases, laboratories, and\nfirms for briefings on the latest technology and projects. The panel\nmembers were particularly interested in new approaches to aerial re-\nconnaissance, such as photography from high-flying aircraft and\ncamera-carrying balloons. One of the more unusual (albeit unsuccess-\nful) proposals examined by the panel was an \"invisible\" dirigible.\nThis was to be a giant, almost flat-shaped airship with a blue-tinted,\nnonreflective coating; it would cruise at an altitude of 90,000 feet\nalong the borders of the Soviet Union at very slow speeds while using\na large lens to photograph targets of interest.31\n\nAfter completing these briefings at the end of February 1952, the\nBEACON HILL Study Group returned to MIT, where the panel mem-\nbers spent the next three months writing a report detailing their\nrecommendations for ways to improve the amount and quality of in-\ntelligence being gathered on the Soviet Bloc. Published as a classified\n\n30 USAF, Project LINCOLN, BEACON HILL Report: Problems of Air Force Intelligence\nand Reconnaissance, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 15 June 1952, pp. v, xi; app.\nA (S, downgraded to C).\n\n31 Allen F. Donovan, telephone conversation with Donald E. Welzenbach, 21 June 1985\n(U) ; James G. Baker, interview by Donald E. Welzenbach, tape recording, Washington,\nDC, 24 April 1985 (S).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 1\n19\n\ndocument on 15 June 1952, the BEACON HILL Report advocated\nradical approaches to obtain the information needed for national intel-\nligence estimates. Its 14 chapters covered radar, radio, and photo-\ngraphic surveillance; examined the use of passive infrared and\nmicrowave reconnaissance; and discussed the development of ad-\nvanced reconnaissance vehicles. One of the report's key recommenda-\ntions called for the development of high-altitude reconnaissance\naircraft:\n\nWe have reached a period in history when our peacetime knowl-\nedge of the capabilities, activities and dispositions of a poten-\ntially hostile nation is such as to demand that we supplement it\nwith the maximum amount of information obtainable through\naerial reconnaissance. To avoid political involvements, such\naerial reconnaissance must be conducted either from vehicles\nflying in friendly airspace, or—a decision on this point\npermitting—from vehicles whose performance is such that they\ncan operate in Soviet airspace with greatly reduced chances of\ndetection or interception.32\n\nConcern About the Danger of a Soviet Surprise Attack\n\nThe Air Force did not begin to implement the ideas of the BEACON\nHILL Report until the summer of 1953. By this time interest in recon-\nnaissance had increased after Dwight D. Eisenhower became\nPresident in January 1953 and soon expressed his dissatisfaction with\nthe quality of the intelligence estimates of Soviet strategic capabilities\nand the paucity of reconnaissance on the Soviet Bloc.33\n\nTo President Eisenhower and many other US political and mili-\ntary leaders, the Soviet Union was a dangerous opponent that ap-\npeared to be moving inexorably toward a position of military parity\nwith the United States. Particularly alarming was Soviet progress in\nthe area of nuclear weapons. In the late summer of 1949, the Soviet\nUnion had detonated an atomic bomb nearly three years sooner than\nUS experts had predicted. Then in August 1953—a scant nine months\nafter the first US test of a hydrogen bomb—the Soviet Union deto-\nnated a hydrogen bomb manufactured from lithium deuteride, a tech-\nnology more advanced than the heavy water method used by US\n\n32 BEACON HILL Report, pp. 164, 167-168 (C). This section of the report was written by\nAllen Donovan and Louis Ridenour.\n\n33 Lundahl and Brugioni interview (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 1\n20\n\nscientists. Thus, new and extremely powerful weapons were coming\ninto the hands of a government whose actions greatly disturbed the\nleaders of the West. Only two months before the successful hydrogen\nbomb test, Soviet troops had crushed an uprising in East Berlin. And,\nat the United Nations, the Soviet Bloc seemed bent on causing dissen-\nsion between Western Europe and the United States and between the\ndeveloped and undeveloped nations. This aggressive Soviet foreign\npolicy, combined with advances in nuclear weapons, led officials such\nas Secretary of State John Foster Dulles to see the Soviet Union as a\nmenace to peace and world order.\n\nThe Soviet Union's growing military strength soon became a\nthreat not just to US forces overseas but to the continental United\nStates itself. In the spring of 1953, a top secret RAND study pointed\nout the vulnerability of the SAC's US bases to a surprise attack by\nSoviet long-range bombers.34\n\nConcern about the danger of a Soviet attack on the continental\nUnited States grew after an American military attache sighted a new\nSoviet intercontinental bomber at Ramenskoye airfield, south of\nMoscow, in 1953. The new bomber was the Myasishchev-4, later\ndesignated Bison by NATO. Powered by jet engines rather than the\nturboprops of Russia's other long-range bombers, the Bison appeared\nto be the Soviet equivalent of the US B-52, which was only then\ngoing into production. Pictures of the Bison taken at the Moscow\nMay Day air show in 1954 had an enormous impact on the US intel-\nligence community. Unlike several other Soviet postwar aircraft, the\nBison was not a derivative of US or British designs but represented\na native Soviet design capability that surprised US intelligence ex-\nperts. This new long-range jet bomber, along with the Soviet Union's\nlarge numbers of older propeller and turboprop bombers, seemed to\npose a significant threat to the United States, and, in the summer of\n1954, newspapers and magazines began publishing articles highlight-\ning the growing airpower of the Soviet Union. Pictures of the Bison\nbomber featured prominently in such stories.35\n\n34 RAND Corporation, Plans Analysis Section, \"Vulnerability of U.S. Strategic Power to a\nSurprise Attack in 1956,\" RAND Special Memorandum No. 15, Santa Monica, California:\nthe RAND Corporation, April 15, 1953 (TS, declassified May 1967).\n\n35 \"AF Cites Red Bomber Progress,\" Aviation Week, May 24, 1954, p. 14; \"Is Russia\nWinning the Arms Race?,\" US News and World Report, June 18, 1954, pp. 28-29;\n\"Russia Parades Airpower as 'Big Stick',\" Aviation Week, June 28, 1954, p. 15; \"Red\nAir Force: The World's Biggest,\" Newsweek, August 23, 1954, pp. 28-33.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 1\n21\n\nSoviet Myasishchev-4 bomber\n(the Bison)\n\nThe Air Force Intelligence Systems Panel\n\nEven before the publication of photographs of the Bison raised fears\nthat the Soviet bomber force might eventually surpass that of the\nUnited States, the Air Force had already established a new advisory\nbody to look for ways to implement the main recommendation of the\nBEACON HILL Report—the construction of high-flying aircraft and\nhigh-acuity cameras. Created in July 1953, the Intelligence Systems\nPanel (ISP) included several experts from the BEACON HILL Study\nGroup: Land, Overhage, Donovan, and Miller. At the request of the\nAir Force, the CIA also participated in the panel, represented by\nEdward L. Allen of the Office of Research and Reports (ORR) and\nPhilip Strong of the Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI).36\n\nThe chairman of the new panel was Dr. James G. Baker, a re-\nsearch associate at the Harvard College Observatory. Baker had been\ninvolved in aerial reconnaissance since 1940, when he first advised\nthe Army Air Corps on ways to improve its lenses. He then estab-\nlished a full-scale optical laboratory at Harvard—the Harvard\nUniversity Optical Research Laboratory—to produce high-quality\n\n36 Memorandum for Robert Amory, Jr., Deputy Director, Intelligence from Edward L.\nAllen, Chief, Economic Research, ORR and Philip G. Strong, Chief, Operations Staff,\nOSI, \"Meeting of the Intelligence Systems Panel of the Scientific Advisory Board,\nUSAF,\" 26 August 1953, OSI (OSWR) records, job 80R-01424, box 1 (S).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 1\n22\n\nlenses. Since the university did not wish to continue manufacturing\ncameras and lenses after the end of the war, the optical laboratory\nmoved to Boston University, which agreed to sponsor the effort as\nlong as the Air Force would fund it. Baker decided to remain at\nHarvard, so his assistant, Dr. Duncan E. Macdonald, became the new\nhead of what was now called the Boston University Optical Research\nLaboratory (BUORL). Baker's association with the Air Force did not\nend with the transfer of the optical laboratory to Boston University,\nbecause he continued to design lenses to be used in photoreconnais-\nsance.37\n\nThe ISP first met at Boston University on 3 August 1953. To\nprovide background on the poor state of US knowledge of the Soviet\nUnion, Philip Strong informed the other panel members that the best\nintelligence then available on the Soviet Union's interior was photog-\nraphy taken by the German Luftwaffe during World War II. Since the\nGerman photography covered only the Soviet Union west of the\nUrals, primarily west of the Volga River, many vital regions were not\nincluded. The ISP would, therefore, have to look for ways to provide\nup-to-date photography of all of the Soviet Union. Several Air Force\nagencies then briefed the panel members on the latest developments\nand proposed future projects in the area of aerial reconnaissance, in-\ncluding new cameras, reconnaissance balloons, and even satellites.\nAmong the Air Force reconnaissance projects discussed were multi-\nple sensors for use in existing aircraft such as the RB-47, RB-52, and\nRB-58; Project FICON—an acronym for \"fighter conversion\"—for\nadapting a giant, 10-engine B-36 bomber to enable it to launch and\nretrieve a Republic RF-84F Thunderflash reconnaissance aircraft; re-\nconnaissance versions of the Navajo and Snark missiles; the high-alti-\ntude balloon program, which would be ready to go into operation by\nthe summer of 1955; and the search for a new high-altitude reconnais-\nsance aircraft.38\n\n37 Baker interview (S). In 1957, after the Air Force decided to cut back its funding of\nBUORL, Duncan Macdonald and Richard Leghorn (by then retired from the Air Force)\nformed their own corporation—Itek—and purchased the laboratory from Boston\nUniversity (Leghorn interview [S]).\n\n38 Memorandum for Robert Amory, Jr., Deputy Director, Intelligence, from Edward L.\nAllen, Chief, Economic Research, ORR, and Philip G. Strong, Chief, Operations Staff,\nOSI, \"Meeting of the Intelligence Systems Panel of the Scientific Advisory Board, USAF,\"\n26 August 1953; Memorandum for H. Marshall Chadwell, Assistant Director/Scientific\nIntelligence, from Chief, Support Staff, OSI, \"Review of OSA Activities Concerned with\nScientific and Technical Collection Techniques,\" 13 May 1955, p. 6, OSI (OSWR) records,\njob 80R-01424, box 1 (S); Donovan interview, 22 May 1985 (S).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The wide variety of programs discussed at the conference were all products of the Air Force's all-out effort to find a way to collect intelligence on the Communist Bloc. Some of the schemes went beyond the existing level of technology; others, like the camera-carrying balloons, were technically feasible but involved dangerous political consequences.\n\nBritish Overflight of Kapustin Yar\n\nThe British were also working on high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft. In 1952 the Royal Air Force (RAF) began Project ROBIN, which was designed to modify the Canberra bomber for high-altitude reconnaissance. This project was probably inspired by Richard Leghorn's collaboration with English Electric Company designers in 1951, when they calculated ways to increase the altitude of the Canberra. The RAF equipped the new Canberra PR7 with Rolls-Royce Avon-109 engines and gave it long, fuel-filled wings. The range of this variant of the Canberra was now 4,300 miles, and, on 29 August 1955, it achieved an altitude of 65,880 feet.\n\nSometime during the first half of 1953, the RAF employed a high-altitude Canberra on a daring overflight of the Soviet Union to photograph the missile test range at Kapustin Yar. Because of advanced warning from either radar or agents inside British intelligence, the overflight did not catch the Soviet Union by surprise. Soviet fighters damaged and nearly shot down the Canberra. Rumors about this flight reached Washington during the summer of 1953, but official confirmation by the United Kingdom did not come until February 1954. While on a six-week tour of Europe to study aerial reconnaissance problems for the US Air Force's Scientific Advisory Board, James Baker was briefed by RAF intelligence officials on the Canberra overflight of the Soviet Union. On 22 and 23 March 1954, he reported on it to the full Scientific Advisory Board at Langley AFB, Virginia."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Baker also chaired the next meeting of the Air Force's Intelligence Systems Panel in late April 1954 but could not tell its members about the British overflight of Kapustin Yar because they were not cleared for this information. The panel did, however, discuss the modifications for high-altitude flight being made to the US Canberra, the B-57.\n\nThe Intelligence Systems Panel and the CL-282\n\nThe next Intelligence Systems Panel meeting took place on 24 and 25 May at Boston University and the Polaroid Corporation. Panel member Allen F. Donovan from the Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory evaluated the changes being made to the B-57 by the Martin Aircraft Company. Even without Martin's specifications or drawings, Donovan had been able to estimate what could be done to the B-57 by lengthening the wings and lightening the fuselage. He had determined that alterations to the B-57 airframe would not solve the reconnaissance needs expressed in the BEACON HILL Report. Theoretically, he explained to the panel, any multiengine aircraft built according to military specifications, including the B-57, would be too heavy to fly above 65,000 feet and hence would be vulnerable to Soviet interception. To be safe, Donovan explained, penetrating aircraft would need to fly above 70,000 feet for the entire mission.\n\nDevelopment of such an aircraft was already under way, Donovan continued, for Philip Strong of the CIA had told him that the Lockheed Aircraft Corporation had designed a lightweight, high-flying aircraft. ISP chairman Baker then urged Donovan to travel to southern California to evaluate the Lockheed design and gather ideas on high-altitude aircraft from other aircraft manufacturers.\n\nWhen he was finally able to make this trip in late summer, Donovan found the plane that he and the other ISP members had been seeking. On the afternoon of 2 August 1954, Donovan met with L. Eugene Root, an old Air Force acquaintance who was now a Lockheed vice-president, and learned about the Air Force's competition for a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft. Kelly Johnson then showed Donovan the plans for Lockheed's unsuccessful entry. A lifelong sailplane enthusiast, Donovan immediately recognized that the"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CL-282 design was essentially a jet-propelled glider capable of attaining the altitudes that he felt were necessary to carry out reconnaissance of the Soviet Union successfully.\n\nUpon his return east on 8 August, Donovan got in touch with James Baker and suggested an urgent meeting of the Intelligence Systems Panel. Because of other commitments by the members, however, the panel did not meet to hear Donovan's report until 24 September 1954 at the Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory. Several members, including Land and Strong, were absent. Those who did attend were upset to learn that the Air Force had funded a closed competition for a tactical reconnaissance plane without informing them. But once Donovan began describing Kelly Johnson's rejected design for a jet-powered glider, they quickly forgot their annoyance and listened intently.\n\nDonovan began by stressing that high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft had to fly above 70,000 feet to be safe from interception. Next, he set out what he considered to be the three essential requirements for a high-altitude spyplane: a single engine, a sailplane wing, and low structural load factors. Donovan strongly favored single-engine aircraft because they are both lighter and more reliable than multiengine aircraft. Although a twin-engine aircraft could theoretically return to base on only one engine, Donovan explained, it could only do so at a much lower altitude, about 34,000 feet, where it was sure to be shot down.\n\nThe second of Donovan's essential factors, a sailplane wing (in technical terms a high-aspect-ratio, low-induced-drag wing), was needed to take maximum advantage of the reduced thrust of a jet engine operating in the rarefied atmosphere of extreme altitude. Because of the thinness of the atmosphere above 70,000 feet, engineers estimated that the power curve of a jet engine would fall off to about 6 percent of its sea-level thrust.\n\nFinally, low structural load factors, like those used by transport aircraft, were necessary to reduce weight and thereby achieve maximum altitude. Donovan explained that strengthening wings and"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wingroot areas to withstand the high speeds and sharp turns mandated by the standard military airworthiness rules added too much weight to the airframe, thereby negating the efficiency of the sailplane wing.\n\nIn short, it was possible to achieve altitudes in excess of 70,000 feet, but only by making certain that all parts of the aeronautical equation were in balance: thrust, lift, and weight. The only plane meeting these requirements, Donovan insisted, was Kelly Johnson's CL-282 because it was essentially a sailplane. In Donovan's view, the CL-282 did not have to meet the specifications of a combat aircraft because it could fly safely above Soviet fighters.\n\nDonovan's arguments convinced the Intelligence Systems Panel of the merits of the CL-282 proposal, but this panel reported to the Air Force, which had already rejected the CL-282. Thus, even though the Lockheed CL-282 had several important sources of support by September 1954—the members of the Intelligence Systems Panel and high-ranking Air Force civilians such as Trevor Gardner—these backers were all connected with the Air Force. They could not offer funds to Lockheed to pursue the CL-282 concept because the Air Force was already committed to the Martin RB-57 and the Bell X-16. Additional support from outside the Air Force was needed to bring the CL-282 project to life, and this support would come from scientists serving on high-level advisory committees.\n\nThe Technological Capabilities Panel\n\nThe Eisenhower administration was growing increasingly concerned over the capability of the Soviet Union to launch a surprise attack on the United States. Early in 1954, Trevor Gardner had become alarmed by a RAND Corporation study warning that a Soviet surprise attack might destroy 85 percent of the SAC bomber force. Gardner then met with Dr. Lee DuBridge, President of the California Institute of Technology and Chairman of the Office of Defense Mobilization's Science Advisory Committee, and criticized the committee for not dealing with such essential problems as the possibility of a surprise attack. This criticism led DuBridge to invite Gardner to speak at the Science Advisory Committee's next meeting. After listening to"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Gardner, the committee members decided to approach President Eisenhower on the matter. On 27 March 1954, the President told them about the discovery of the Soviet Bison bombers and his concern that these new aircraft might be used in a surprise attack on the United States. Stressing the high priority he gave to reducing the risk of military surprise, the President asked the committee to advise him on this problem.\n\nThe President's request led Chairman DuBridge to ask one of the most prominent members, MIT President James R. Killian, Jr., to meet with other Science Advisory Committee members in the Boston area to discuss the feasibility of a comprehensive scientific assessment of the nation's defenses. At their meeting at MIT on 15 April 1954, the group called for the recruitment of such a task force if the President endorsed the concept.\n\nOn 26 July 1954, President Eisenhower authorized Killian to recruit and lead a panel of experts to study \"the country's technological capabilities to meet some of its current problems.\" Killian quickly set up shop in offices located in the Old Executive Office Building and organized 42 of the nation's leading scientists into three special project groups investigating US offensive, defensive, and intelligence capabilities, with an additional communications working group (see chart, page 28). The Technological Capabilities Panel (TCP) groups began meeting on 13 September 1954. For the next 20 weeks, the members of the various panels met on 307 separate occasions for briefings, field trips, conferences, and meetings with every major unit of the US defense and intelligence establishments. After receiving the most up-to-date information available on the nation's defense and intelligence programs, the panel members began drafting their report to the National Security Council.\n\nProject Three Support for the Lockheed CL-282\n\nEven before the final Technological Capabilities Panel report was ready, one of the three working groups took actions that would have a major impact on the US reconnaissance program. Project Three had"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 1\n28\nTechnological Capabilities Panel\nThe President of the United States\nDirector, Office of Defense Mobilization\nExecutive Staff\nDavid Z. Beckler, ODM\nLt. Col. V. T. Ford, USAF\nAdministrative Staff\nWilliam Brazeal\nM. Comerford\nC. Klett\nL. Wiesner\nE. Hockett\nD. Lewis\nK. Welchold\nTechnological Capabilities Panel of the Science Advisory Committee\nSteering Committee\nJ. R. Killian, Jr., Director\nJ. B. Fisk, Deputy Director\nL. A. DuBridge\nJ. P. Baxter\nM. G. Holloway\nJ. H. Doolittle\nL. J. Haworth\nE. H. Land\nR. C. Sprague, Consultant\nMilitary Advisory Committee\nLt. Gen. L. L. Lemnitzer, USA\nRAdm. H. D. Felt, USN a\nBrig. Gen. B. K. Holloway, USAF a\nMaj. Gen. H. McK. Roper a\na Constitute military consultant group.\nProject 1\nM. G. Holloway, Dir.\nE. P. Aurand\nR. L. Belzer\nS. C. Hight\nR. Mettler\nE. H. Plesset\nW. Stratton\nJ. West\nC. Zimmerman\nB. Horton\nProject 2\nL. J. Haworth, Dir.\nE. Barlow\nD. Dustin\nR. Emberson\nA. G. Hill\nB. McMillan\nR. Rollefson\nH. Scoville, Jr.\nM. A. Tuve\nR. Gilruth\nJ. L. Morton\nJ. Mouzon\nProject 3\nE. H. Land, Dir.\nJ. G. Baker\nJ. Kennedy\nA. Latham, Jr.\nE. Purcell\nJ. W. Tukey\nCommunications Working Group\nJ. B. Wiesner, Chmn.\nG. W. Gilman\nH. T. Friis\nW. H. Radford\nSubcommittee\nH. A. Affel\nW. B. Davenport, Jr.\nR. H. Scherer\nConsultant for Technical Personnel\nH. D. Chittim\nAgency Contacts\nKarl Weber, CIA\nCIA\nS. B. Clements, DOD"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 1\n29\nthe task of investigating the nation's intelligence capabilities. Its chairman was Edwin H. (Din) Land, the inventor of the polarizing filter and the instant camera. When James Killian asked Land to head Project Three, Land had to make a major decision about his career. At the time, the 45-year-old millionaire was on a leave of absence from Polaroid and was living in Hollywood, advising Alfred Hitchcock on the technological aspects of making three-dimensional movies. Land decided to give up his interest in cinema's third dimension and return east to Polaroid and the panel appointment.47\n\nLand's Project Three was the smallest of the three Technological Capabilities Panel projects, for he preferred what he called \"taxicab committees\"—committees small enough to fit into a single taxicab. The Project Three committee consisted of Land; James Baker and Edward Purcell of Harvard; chemist Joseph W. Kennedy of Washington University, St. Louis; mathematician John W. Tukey of Princeton University and Bell Telephone Laboratories; and Allen Latham, Jr., of Arthur D. Little, Inc., an engineer and former treasurer of the Polaroid Corporation.48\n\nIn mid-August 1954, Land and Baker went to Washington to arrange for the various intelligence organizations to brief the Project Three study group. As the briefings progressed, the panel members became more and more distressed at the poor state of the nation's intelligence resources. Land later noted, \"We would go in and interview generals and admirals in charge of intelligence and come away worried. Here we were, five or six young men, asking questions that these high-ranking officers couldn't answer.\" Land added that the Project Three members were also not overly impressed with the Central Intelligence Agency.49\n\nLand learned the details of Lockheed's proposed CL-282 aircraft soon after he arrived in Washington. Philip Strong showed him Kelly Johnson's conceptual drawing of the plane and told him that the Air Force had rejected it. Although Land had heard Allen Donovan\n\nEdwin H. Land\n\n47 James R. Killian, Jr., interview by Donald E. Welzenbach, tape recording, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2 November 1984 (S); Land interview (TS Codeword).\n48 TCP Report, p. 188 (S).\n49 Land interview (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 1\n30\nbriefly mention a Lockheed design for a high-flying aircraft at the 24-25 May meeting of Baker's Intelligence Systems Panel, he did not realize that that plane and the one in Strong's drawing were the same. As soon as Land saw Strong's copy of the CL-282 drawing, however, he telephoned Baker to say, \"Jim, I think I have the plane you are after.\" 50\n\nA few days later, when Land showed Kelly Johnson's conceptual drawing to Baker and the other Project Three members, they all became enthusiastic about the aircraft's possibilities. Although Baker had heard Allen Donovan's brief mention of the Lockheed design in May, he had not yet seen a drawing of the aircraft because Donovan did not report to the ISP on his early-August trip to Lockheed until 24 September. After seeing the CL-282 drawing, Baker began designing a camera and lens system that would fit in the Lockheed craft.51\n\nAt the end of August, Land discussed the CL-282 with Allen Dulles's Special Assistant for Planning and Coordination, Richard Bissell, who came away from the meeting without any definite ideas as to what Land wanted to do with the aircraft. Overhead reconnaissance was not uppermost in Bissell's mind at the time, and it was unclear to him why he had even been contacted.52 Bissell's outstanding academic credentials, his acquaintanceship with James Killian through his previous teaching experience at MIT, and his direct access to DCI Dulles may have led the Technological Capabilities Panel members to consider him the best CIA point of contact.\n\nAlthough surprised that he had become involved in the CL-282 project, Bissell's interest was piqued, and he set out to learn what he could about reconnaissance systems. In early September 1954, Bissell had Douglas E. Ashford, a young Air Force officer on his staff, put together a general status report on air reconnaissance programs. Bissell forwarded the 16-page study to the Deputy Director of Central Intelligence (DDCI), Lt. Gen. Charles Pearre Cabell, USAF, on 24 September. In a covering memorandum, Bissell called Cabell's\n\n50 Baker interview (S).\n51 Ibid.\n52 Bissell interview (S).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 1\n31\nattention to a section of the report about a \"stripped or specialized aircraft\" called the Lockheed CL-282.53\n\nBy September 1954, Land's Project Three study group had become very much interested in the Lockheed CL-282 design. Their interest grew even stronger when James Baker told them of Allen Donovan's strong case for the CL-282 at the 24-25 September meeting of the ISP. It is not possible to determine exactly when the Land committee decided to back the CL-282; in fact, there may never have been a formal decision as such. In view of Land's impulsive nature, he probably seized upon the CL-282 design as being a workable concept and immediately began developing it into a complete reconnaissance system.\n\nDuring September and October the Project Three study group met frequently to discuss the Lockheed design and the reconnaissance equipment it would carry. Meetings were small, generally with fewer than 10 participants; Garrison Norton was often the only government official in attendance. At times outside experts joined in the proceedings. When the discussion turned to cameras and film, Land invited Dr. Henry Yutzy, Eastman Kodak's film expert, and Richard S. Perkin, President of the Perkin-Elmer Company, to participate. For discussions on the J57 engine, the panel members asked Perry W. Pratt, Pratt and Whitney's chief engineer, to attend. Kelly Johnson also met with the panel to review plans for the CL-282 system.54\n\nBy the end of October, the Project Three meetings had covered every aspect of the Lockheed design. The CL-282 was to be more than an airplane with a camera, it was to be an integrated intelligence-collection system that the Project Three members were confident could find and photograph the Soviet Union's Bison bomber fleet and, thus, resolve the growing \"bomber gap\" controversy. It was not just the Lockheed aircraft that had captured the Land group's fancy; the plane was seen as the platform for a whole new generation of aerial cameras that several committee members had been discussing since the BEACON HILL and Intelligence Systems Panel meetings. James Baker was in the process of developing a revolutionary new\n\n53 Memorandum for DDCI Charles Pearre Cabell from R. M. Bissell, Special Assistant to the Director for Planning and Coordination, \"Aerial Reconnaissance,\" 24 September 1954, DCI Records, job 80-B-1676R, box 25 (TS, downgraded to S).\n54 Killian, Sputnik, Scientists, and Eisenhower, p. 82.\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 1\n32\ncamera with tremendously improved resolution and film capacity, and the Eastman Kodak company was working on new thin, lightweight film.55\n\nBy October 1954, the Project Three study group had drafted a complete program for an overhead reconnaissance effort based on the CL-282 aircraft. The one remaining question was who would conduct the overflights. The committee's members, particularly Land, were not in favor of the Air Force conducting such missions in peacetime. Firmly believing that military overflights in armed aircraft could provoke a war, they argued for civilian overflights in unarmed, unmarked aircraft. In their view, the organization most suited for this mission was the Central Intelligence Agency.56\n\nIn late October 1954, the Project Three panel discussed the CL-282 system concept with DCI Allen Dulles and the Secretary of the Air Force's Special Assistant for Research and Development, Trevor Gardner. Dulles was reluctant to have the CIA undertake the project. He did not like to involve the CIA with military projects, even ones that the military had rejected, like the CL-282. Furthermore, the DCI strongly believed that the Agency's mission lay in the use of human operatives and secret communications, the classic forms of intelligence gathering. Land came away from this meeting with the impression that Dulles somehow thought overflights were not fair play. Project Three committee members were nevertheless convinced that technology, particularly in the form of the CL-282 and the new camera designs, would solve the nation's intelligence problems.57\n\nA Meeting With the President\n\nAllen Dulles's reluctance to involve the CIA in the CL-282 project did not stop the Project Three committee from pursuing its aims because it was able to go over Dulles's head and appeal directly to the President. Having participated in the BEACON HILL Study and the Intelligence Systems Panel, several Project Three members had definite ideas on how to improve intelligence collection, ideas that they were determined to present to the highest levels of government. They were able\n\n55 Land interview (TS Codeword).\n56 Land interview (TS Codeword); Baker interview (S).\n57 Land interview (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to do so because the Land committee was part of a panel commissioned by President Eisenhower to examine the nation's intelligence community and recommend changes. The committee thus had a direct line to the White House through James Killian's contacts there.\n\nEarly in November 1954, Land and Killian met with President Eisenhower to discuss high-altitude reconnaissance. Killian's memoirs contain an account of this crucial meeting:\n\nLand described the [CL-282] system using an unarmed plane and recommended that its development be undertaken. After listening to our proposal and asking many hard questions, Eisenhower approved the development of the system, but he stipulated that it should be handled in an unconventional way so that it would not become entangled in the bureaucracy of the Defense Department or troubled by rivalries among the services.58\n\nThe scientists from the advisory committees and the President were thus in agreement that the new reconnaissance program should be controlled by the CIA, not the military.\n\nCIA and Air Force Agreement on the CL-282\n\nMeanwhile Edwin Land and his Project Three colleagues were working to convince Allen Dulles that the CIA should run the proposed overflight program. On 5 November Land wrote to the DCI strongly urging that the CIA undertake the CL-282 project:\n\nHere is the brief report from our panel telling why we think overflight is urgent and presently feasible. I [Land] am not sure that we have made it clear that we feel there are many reasons why this activity is appropriate for CIA, always with Air Force assistance. We told you that this seems to us the kind of action and technique that is right for the contemporary version of CIA: a modern and scientific way for an Agency that is always supposed to be looking, to do its looking. Quite strongly, we feel that you must always assert your first right to pioneer in scientific techniques for collecting intelligence—and choosing such partners to assist you as may be needed. This present opportunity for aerial photography seems to us a fine place to start.59\n\nKillian, Sputnik, Scientists, and Eisenhower, p. 82. The exact date of the meeting cannot be determined, but it occurred during the first half of November 1954.\n\nLetter, Project Three Panel to DCI Allen F. Dulles, 5 November 1954, in OSA History, chap. 1, annex 1 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The letter had two attachments: a two-page summary of a complete operational plan for organizing, building, and deploying the CL-282 within a period of 20 months at a cost of $22 million and a three-page memorandum, entitled \"A Unique Opportunity for Comprehensive Intelligence.\"\n\nAware of Dulles's preference for classical intelligence work, the Project Three memorandum stressed the superiority of the CL-282 program over traditional espionage methods:\n\nWe believe that these planes can go where we need to have them go efficiently and safely, and that no amount of fragmentary and indirect intelligence can be pieced together to be equivalent to such positive information as can thus be provided.60\n\nThe Land committee memorandum also stressed the need for the CIA to undertake such reconnaissance missions rather than the Air Force, noting that \"For the present it seems rather dangerous for one of our military arms to engage directly in extensive overflight.\" The committee members also listed the advantages of using the CL-282 rather than an Air Force aircraft:\n\nThe Lockheed super glider will fly at 70,000 feet, well out of the reach of present Russian interceptors and high enough to have a good chance of avoiding detection. The plane itself is so light (15,000 pounds), so obviously unarmed and devoid of military usefulness, that it would minimize affront to the Russians even if through some remote mischance it were detected and identified.61\n\nOne additional advantage of the Lockheed design over the Air Force's proposed high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft was a faster completion time. Kelly Johnson had promised the Land committee that his aircraft would be flying by August 1955, just eight months after he proposed to start construction. The Bell X-16 prototype was not scheduled for completion before the spring of 1956.\n\nThe strong advocacy of Killian and the other scientists on the various advisory committees concerned with overhead reconnaissance, combined with President Eisenhower's support, finally won\n\nMemorandum for DCI Allen F. Dulles from Project Three Panel, \"A Unique Opportunity for Comprehensive Intelligence,\" 5 November 1954, p. 3 (TS, downgraded to S) in OSA History, chap. 1, annex 1 (TS Codeword).\n\nIbid."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"over DCI Dulles, but a project of this magnitude also required the support of the Air Force. Some Air Force officials, however, feared that a decision to build the CL-282 might jeopardize the Air Force's own RB-57 and X-16 projects. Just one month earlier, in October 1954, the Wright Air Development Command had appealed to the Air Force Deputy Chief of Staff for Development, Lt. Gen. Donald L. Putt, to oppose the adoption of the Lockheed design. The officials argued that the Bell X-16 was a better design because it was more airworthy than the CL-282 and could be used throughout the Air Force in different types of missions because it had two engines, wheels, and an armor-plated, pressurized pilot's compartment. If J57 engines were diverted to the CL-282, the appeal to General Putt warned, there would not be enough of these popular powerplants to meet the needs of the X-16 program.62\n\nHaving heard of the Wright Air Development Command attack on the CL-282, Allen Donovan of the Intelligence Systems Panel met with General Putt on 19 October to argue in favor of the Lockheed design. This discussion led General Putt to meet with 15 scientists from the Technological Capabilities Panel on 18 November 1954 to discuss the merits of the four proposed reconnaissance aircraft. Also present as a briefer was Maj. John Seaberg from the Wright Air Development Command, who later recalled:\n\nWhat I did was present the results of my comparative analysis of all four designs. I showed the relative high altitude performance capabilities of all four. I pointed out that aerodynamically the Bell, Fairchild, and Lockheed designs were close. Martin's B-57, being a modification, was not quite as capable. I stated that, in my opinion, the J73 [General Electric engine] would not be good enough to do the job in Johnson's airplane. And further, I overlaid a curve showing that with the J57 [Pratt & Whitney engine] installed, it would then be competitive with the Bell and Fairchild designs.63\n\nThis meeting—along with the knowledge that President Eisenhower also supported the CL-282—helped win over the Air Force. To be on the safe side, however, the Air Force did not abandon the X-16 program until the Lockheed aircraft had begun flying.\n\nDonovan interview (S).\n\nQuoted in Miller, Lockheed U-2, p. 13."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"On 19 November, the day after Seaberg's briefing, the final decision on the CL-282 came at a luncheon hosted by Air Force Secretary Talbott. The participants—Dulles and Cabell from the CIA; Gardner, Ayer, and General Putt from the Air Force; Kelly Johnson; and Edwin Land—all agreed \"that the special item of material described by Lockheed was practical and desirable and would be sought. . . . It was agreed that the Project should be a joint Air Force–CIA one but that, regardless of the source of the funds, whether AF or CIA, CIA unvouchered channels would be needed to pass the funds.\"64\n\nIt is interesting to note that Lockheed, which had originally developed the CL-282 on its own and had devoted considerable effort to promoting it, had to be persuaded to undertake the project in November 1954 because the company had become heavily committed to several other civilian and military projects. When Kelly Johnson received a call from Trevor Gardner on 17 November asking him to come to Washington for conversations on the project, his instructions from Lockheed's senior management were \"to not commit to any program during the visit, but to get the information and return.\" When he returned to California, Johnson noted in his project log that \"I was impressed with the secrecy aspect and was told by Gardner that I was essentially being drafted for the project. It seemed, in fact, that if I did not talk quietly, I might have to take a leave of absence from my job at Lockheed to do this special project.\" 65 Of course, Kelly Johnson did not need to be drafted or persuaded into undertaking such a bold step forward in aircraft design. He used Gardner's statement to convince Lockheed's senior management to approve the project, which they did after meeting with Johnson when he returned to California on the evening of 19 November.\n\nFour days later, on 23 November, the Intelligence Advisory Committee (IAC) approved DCI Dulles's request to undertake the CL-282 project. The following day Dulles signed a three-page memorandum, drafted by DDCI Cabell, asking President Eisenhower to approve the overhead reconnaissance project. That same afternoon, at a meeting attended by the Secretaries of State and Defense and senior Air Force officials, Dulles and Cabell presented the document to the\n\nCharles Pearre Cabell, Memorandum for the Record, \"Luncheon Meeting with the Secretary of the Air Force,\" 19 November 1954, in OSA History, chap. 2, annex 4 (TS Codeword).\n\nJohnson, \"Log for Project X,\" 17 and 19 November 1954."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"President and received verbal authorization to proceed. Eisenhower told Dulles that the project was to be managed by the Agency and that the Air Force was to provide any assistance needed to get it operational.66\n\nThus, it was that the CIA entered into the world of high technology primarily because of decisions and actions taken outside the Agency: the Air Force's refusal to build the CL-282 aircraft, President Eisenhower's desire to have a sensitive overflight project conducted by a civilian agency rather than the military, and, above all, the determination by a small group of prominent scientists that the Lockheed design represented the best possible overhead reconnaissance system.67\n\nCharles Pearre Cabell, Memorandum for the Record, \"Meeting at the White House,\" 24 November 1954, in OSA History, chap. 2, annex 8 (TS Codeword); Beschloss, Mayday, pp. 82-83; Andrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum of Conference with the President, 24 November 1954,\" White House Office of the Staff Secretary, Alpha Series, Dwight D. Eisenhower Library (hereafter cited as WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL) (TS, declassified).\n\nScientists remained active in advising the government on overhead reconnaissance. In February 1955, the Technological Capabilities Panel issued its final report, which strongly urged the use of technology to gather intelligence. President Eisenhower strongly backed the panel's findings and directed government agencies to respond to the recommendations by June. The CIA's most important reaction to the Technological Capabilities Panel report was to create its own Scientific Advisory Board composed of the members of the Project Three Study Group with the addition of James Killian and Jerome B. Wiesner, professor of electrical engineering at MIT. Edwin Land served as chairman of the CIA Scientific Advisory Board for the next 10 years, and it soon became known unofficially as the Land Panel. This panel provided important advice to the Agency, particularly in the field of overhead reconnaissance.\n\nPresident Eisenhower also acted to increase the amount and quality of scientific advice he was receiving. In January 1956 he established the President's Board of Consultants on Foreign Intelligence Activities (renamed the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board in 1961) to oversee the intelligence community and advise him on intelligence matters. The board's first chairman was James Killian. In 1957 the President reorganized and upgraded the Office of Defense Mobilization's Science Advisory Committee, which became the President's Science Advisory Committee. He also named James Killian to be the first Special Assistant to the President for Science and Technology. In this new position Killian served as the President's scientific advisor and the chairman of the President's Scientific Advisory Committee (Killian stepped down as chairman of the President's Board of Consultants on Foreign Intelligence Activities but remained a member). These actions by the President brought scientists into the White House and gave them considerable influence."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-38-\nBlank"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n39\n\nDeveloping the U-2\n\nTHE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE U-2 PROJECT\n\nOn 26 November 1954, the day after Thanksgiving, Allen Dulles called his special assistant, Richard Bissell, into his office to tell him that President Eisenhower had just approved a very secret program and that Dulles wanted Bissell to take charge of it. Saying it was too secret for him to explain, Dulles gave Bissell a packet of documents and told him he could keep it for several days to acquaint himself with the project. Bissell had long known of the proposal to build a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft, but only in the most general terms. Now he learned in detail about the project that proposed sending aircraft over the Soviet Union.\n\nLate on the morning of 2 December 1954, Dulles told Bissell to go to the Pentagon on the following day to represent the Agency at an organizational meeting for the U-2 1 project. Before leaving, Bissell asked Dulles which agency was to run the project. The DCI replied that nothing had been clearly decided. Bissell then asked who was going to pay for the project. Dulles answered: \"That wasn't even mentioned. You'll have to work that out.\" 2\n\nBissell was accompanied by Herbert I. Miller, chief of the Office of Scientific Intelligence's Nuclear Energy Division, who soon became the executive officer of the overflight project. When Bissell and Miller arrived at the Pentagon on the afternoon of 3 December, they\n\n1 Although the Lockheed CL-282 was not designated as the U-2 until July 1955, this study will use the more widely known designator to avoid confusion.\n\n2 Bissell interview (S); OSA History, chap. 3, p. 1 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n40\n\n[photo: James A. Cunningham, Jr.]\nJames A. Cunningham, Jr.\n\nsat down with a group of key Air Force officials that included Trevor Gardner and Lt. Gen. Donald L. Putt. The participants spent very little time delineating Air Force and Agency responsibilities in the project, taking for granted that the CIA would handle the security matters. Much of the discussion centered on methods for diverting Air Force materiel to the program, particularly the Pratt & Whitney J57 engines, because a separate contract for the engines might jeopardize the project's security. The Air Force promised to turn over a number of J57 engines, which were then being produced for B-52s, KC-135s, F-100s, and RB-57s. Eventually Bissell asked who was going to pay for the airframes to be built by Lockheed. His query was greeted with silence. Everyone present had their eyes on him because they all expected the Agency to come up with the funds. Bissell rose from his chair, said he would see what he could do, and the meeting adjourned. 3\n\nAfter the meeting, Bissell told Dulles that the CIA would have to use money from the Contingency Reserve Fund to get the project going. The DCI used this fund to pay for covert activities, following approval by the President and the Director of the Budget. Dulles told Bissell to draft a memorandum for the President on funding the overflight program and to start putting together a staff for Project AQUATONE, the project's new codename.\n\nAt first the new \"Project Staff\" (renamed the Development Projects Staff in April 1958) consisted of Bissell, Miller, and the small existing staff in Bissell's Office of the Special Assistant to the DCI. During the months that followed the establishment of the project, its administrative workload increased rapidly, and in May 1955 the project staff added an administrative officer, James A. Cunningham, Jr., a former Marine Corps pilot then working in the Directorate of Support. Cunningham stayed with the U-2 project for the next 10 years. Two other key project officials who began their duties early in 1955 were [REDACTED] the finance officer, and [REDACTED] the contracting officer. 4\n\n3 OSA History, chap. 3, p. 2 (TS Codeword); Bissell interview, 8 November 1984 (S); Beschloss, Mayday, p. 89.\n\n4 OSA History, chap. 3, pp. 6-7, chap. 4, pp. 1-2, chap. 5, pp. 27-29 (TS Codeword); Chronology of the Office of Special Activities, 1954-1968, (CIA: DS&T, 1969), p. 2-4 (TS Codeword) (hereafter cited as OSA Chronology).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n41\n\nProject AQUATONE Personnel\n\nSpecial Assistant to the DCI\nfor Planning and Coordination\n\nHeadquarters\nCIA 18\nUSAF 7\n25\n\nUS Field Test Base\nCIA 26\n26\n\nForeign Field Base A\nCIA 16\nUSAF 34\nContract 52\n102\n\nForeign Field Base B\nCIA 16\nUSAF 34\nContract 52\n102\n\nForeign Field Base C\nCIA 16\nUSAF 34\nContract 52\n102\n\nTotal employees: CIA 92\nUSAF 109\nContract 156\n357\n\nDuring the first half of 1955, the project staff grew slowly; many of the individuals working on overhead reconnaissance remained on the rolls of other Agency components. To achieve maximum security, Bissell made the project staff self-sufficient. Project AQUATONE had its own contract management, administrative, financial, logistic, communications, and security personnel, and, thus, did not need to turn to the Agency directorates for assistance. Funding for Project AQUATONE was also kept separate from other Agency components; its personnel and operating costs were not paid out of regular Agency accounts. As approving officer for the project, Richard Bissell could obligate funds in amounts up to $100,000; larger sums required the DCI's approval. 5\n\nAt the end of April 1955, Bissell's staff developed, and the Deputy Director for Support approved, the first table of organization for Project AQUATONE. Once operational, the project would have a\n\n5 OSA History, chap. 3, pp. 5-7 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n42\n\n[photo: The Matomic Building]\nThe Matomic Building\n\ntotal of 357 personnel divided among project headquarters, a US testing facility, and three foreign field bases. CIA employees represented only one-fourth (92) of the total. The Air Force personnel commitment was larger, with 109 positions on the 1955 table of organization (this total does not include many other Air Force personnel, such as SAC meteorologists, who supported the U-2 project in addition to their other duties). The largest Project AQUATONE category was contract employees, with 156 positions in 1955. This category included maintenance and support personnel from Lockheed (five per aircraft), the pilots, and support personnel from other contractors for items such as photographic equipment. 6\n\nThe first project headquarters was in CIA's Administration (East) Building at 2430 E Street, NW. Continued growth caused the AQUATONE staff to move several times during its first two years. On 1 May 1955, the project staff moved to the third floor of a small red brick building (the Briggs School) at 2210 E Street, NW. Then on 3 October, the staff moved to Wings A and C of Quarters Eye, a World War II \"temporary\" building on Ohio Drive, NW, in the West Potomac Park area of Washington. On 25 February 1956, the project staff moved again, this time to the fifth floor of the Matomic Building\n\n6 Project AQUATONE Table of Organization, 28 April 1955 in OSA History, chap. 3, annex 15 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n43\nat 1717 H Street, NW. Here the staff remained for the next six years\nuntil it moved into the new CIA Headquarters building at Langley in\nMarch 1962. The final move came in January 1968, when the project\nstaff (by that time known as the Office of Special Activities) moved\nto the Tyler Building in Tysons Corner, Virginia.7\n\nBissell reported directly to the DCI, although in reality the\nDDCI, Gen. Charles Pearre Cabell, was much more closely involved\nin the day-to-day affairs of the overhead reconnaissance project.\nCabell's extensive background in Air Force intelligence, particularly\nin overhead reconnaissance, made him ideally qualified to oversee the\nU-2 project. Cabell frequently attended White House meetings on the\nU-2 for the DCI.\n\nFUNDING ARRANGEMENTS FOR\nPROJECT AQUATONE\n\nAlthough Allen Dulles had approved the concept of covert funding\nfor the reconnaissance project, many financial details remained to be\nsettled, including the contract with Lockheed. Nevertheless, work on\nthe U-2 began as soon as the project was authorized. Between 29\nNovember and 3 December 1954, Kelly Johnson pulled together a\nteam of 25 engineers, which was not easy because he had to take\nthem off other Lockheed projects without being able to explain why\nto their former supervisors. The engineers immediately began to work\n45 hours a week on the project. The project staff gradually expanded\nto a total of 81 personnel, and the workweek soon increased to 65\nhours.8\n\nKelly Johnson's willingness to begin work on the aircraft with-\nout a contract illustrates one of the most important aspects of this pro-\ngram: the use of unvouchered funds for covert procurement.\nLockheed was well acquainted with the covert procurement process,\nhaving previously modified several aircraft for covert use by the CIA.\n\nCovert funding for sensitive projects simplifies both procure-\nment and security procedures because the funds are not attributable to\nthe Federal Government and there is no public accountability for their\n\nDDCI Charles Pearre Cabell\n\n7 OSA History, chap. 18, pp. 7-8 (TS Codeword); OSA Chronology, pp. 4, 7, 10, 45 (TS\nCodeword).\n\n8 Johnson, \"Log for Project X,\" 29 November-3 December 1954 (U).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n44\n\nuse. Public Law 110, approved by the 81st Congress on 20 June 1949,\ndesignates the Director of Central Intelligence as the only government\nemployee who can obligate Federal money without the use of vouch-\ners. By using unvouchered funds, it is possible to eliminate competi-\ntive bidding and thereby limit the number of parties who know about\na given project. The use of unvouchered funds also speeds up the\nFederal procurement cycle. A general contractor such as Lockheed\ncan purchase much, if not all, of the supplies needed for a project\nwithout resorting at each step to the mandated procurement proce-\ndures involving public, competitive bidding. Covert contracting also\npermits the use of second and third parties, many of them dummy\ncorporations or unwitting suppliers, thus hiding the intended destina-\ntion or use of the various purchases.\n\nIn mid-December 1954, President Eisenhower authorized DCI\nDulles to use $35 million from the Agency's Contingency Reserve Fund\nto finance the U-2 project. Then on 22 December 1954, the Agency\nsigned a letter contract with Lockheed, using the codename Project\nOARFISH. The Agency had proposed to give Lockheed \"performance\nspecifications\" rather than the standard Air Force \"technical specifica-\ntions,\" which were more rigid and demanding, and Kelly Johnson agreed\nthat such a move would save a lot of money. Lockheed's original pro-\nposal to the Air Force in May 1954 had been $28 million for 20 U-2s\nequipped with GE J73 engines. During negotiations with CIA General\nCounsel Lawrence R. Houston, Lockheed changed its proposal to $26\nmillion for 20 airframes plus a two-seat trainer model and spares; the Air\nForce was to furnish the engines. Houston insisted that the Agency could\nonly budget $22.5 million for the airframes because it needed the balance\nof the available $35 million for cameras and life-support gear. The two\nsides finally agreed on a fixed-price contract with a provision for a re-\nview three-fourths of the way through to determine if the costs were\ngoing to exceed the $22.5 million figure. The formal contract, No.\nSP-1913, was signed on 2 March 1955 and called for the delivery of the\nfirst U-2 in July 1955 and the last in November 1956. Meanwhile, to\nkeep work moving at Lockheed, Richard Bissell wrote a check for\n$1,256,000 [REDACTED] and mailed it to Kelly Johnson's\nhome on 21 February 1955.9\n\n9 John S. Warner, Office of the General Counsel, interview by Donald E. Welzenbach,\nWashington, DC, tape recording, 5 Aug 1983 (S); OSA History, chap. 5, pp. 1-2 and annex\n42 (TS Codeword); Johnson, \"Log for Project X,\" 21 February 1955.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n45\n\nAs it turned out, no review of the contract was necessary at the\nthree-fourths point. Lockheed delivered the aircraft not only on time\nbut under budget. During the final contract negotiations in the spring\nof 1958, Lockheed and the US Government agreed on a price for the\noriginal 20 aircraft of $17,025,542 plus a profit of $1,952,055 for a\ntotal of $18,977,597—less than $1 million for each aircraft. Because\nits design was based on Lockheed's F-104, the U-2 was relatively in-\nexpensive even though only a small number of aircraft had been or-\ndered. Only the wings and tail were unique; Lockheed manufactured\nthe other portions of the aircraft using the F-104's jigs and dies.\n\nMAJOR DESIGN FEATURES OF THE U-2\n\nAware of the great need for secrecy in the new project, Kelly Johnson\nplaced it in Lockheed's Advanced Development facility at Burbank,\nCalifornia, known as the Skunk Works.10 Lockheed had established\nthis highly secure area in 1945 to develop the nation's first jet aircraft,\nthe P-80 Shooting Star. The small Skunk Works staff began making\nthe detailed drawings for the U-2, which was nicknamed the \"Angel\"\nbecause it was to fly so high.\n\nKelly Johnson's approach to prototype development was to have\nhis engineers and draftsmen located not more than 50 feet from the\naircraft assembly line. Difficulties in construction were immediately\nbrought to the attention of the engineers, who gathered the mechanics\naround the drafting tables to discuss ways to overcome the difficul-\nties. As a result, engineers were generally able to fix problems in the\ndesign in a matter of hours, not days or weeks. There was no empha-\nsis placed on producing neatly typed memorandums; engineers sim-\nply made pencil notations on the engineering drawings in order to\nkeep the project moving quickly.11\n\nA little more than a week after he had been authorized to begin\nthe project, Kelly Johnson wrote a 23-page report detailing his most\nrecent ideas on the U-2 proposal. The aircraft, he explained, would be\ndesigned to meet load factors of only 2.5 g's, which was the limit for\ntransport aircraft rather than combat planes. The U-2 would have a\n\n10 The Lockheed \"Skunk Works\" was named after the Kickapoo Joy Juice factory known\nas the \"Skonk Works\" in Al Capp's comic strip Li'l Abner.\n\n11 Ben A. Rich (current head of the \"Skunk Works\"), interview by Donald E. Welzenbach\nand Gregory W. Pedlow, Burbank, California, 26 August 1988.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n46\n\nSkunk Works Design Staff\n\nspeed of Mach 0.8 or 460 knots at altitude. Its initial maximum alti-\ntude would be 70,600 feet and the ultimate maximum altitude would\nbe 73,100 feet. According to these early December 1954 specifica-\ntions, the new plane would take off at 90 knots, land at 76 knots, and\nbe able to glide 244 nautical miles from an altitude of 70,000 feet.\nAfter discussing the reconnaissance bay with James Baker, Johnson\nhad worked out various equipment combinations that would not ex-\nceed the weight limit of 450 pounds. Johnson ended his report by\npromising the first test flight by 2 August 1955 and the completion of\nfour aircraft by 1 December 1955.12\n\n12 Kelly Johnson, \"A High-Altitude Reconnaissance Aircraft,\" 9 December 1954,\nLockheed Contract Files, OSA Records (S).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n47\n\nIn designing the U-2 aircraft, Kelly Johnson was confronted with\ntwo major problems—fuel capacity and weight. To achieve interconti-\nnental range, the aircraft had to carry a large supply of fuel, yet, it\nalso had to be light enough to attain the ultrahigh altitudes needed to\nbe safe from interception. Although the final product resembled a typ-\nical jet aircraft, its construction was unlike any other US military air-\ncraft. One unusual design feature was the tail assembly, which—to\nsave weight—was attached to the main body with just three tension\nbolts. This feature had been adapted from sailplane designs.\n\nThe wings were also unique. Unlike conventional aircraft, whose\nmain wing spar passes through the fuselage to give the wings continu-\nity and strength, the U-2 had two separate wing panels, which were\nattached to the fuselage sides with tension bolts (again, just as in sail-\nplanes). Because the wing spar did not pass through the fuselage,\nJohnson was able to locate the camera behind the pilot and ahead of\nthe engine, thereby improving the aircraft's center of gravity and re-\nducing its weight.\n\nThe wings were the most challenging design feature of the entire\nairplane. Their combination of high-aspect ratio and low-drag ratio\n(in other words, the wings were long, narrow, and thin) made them\nunique in jet aircraft design. The wings were actually integral fuel\ntanks that carried almost all of the U-2's fuel supply.\n\nThe fragility of the wings and tail section, which were only\nbolted to the fuselage, forced Kelly Johnson to look for a way to pro-\ntect the aircraft from gusts of wind at altitudes below 35,000 feet,\nwhich otherwise might cause the aircraft to disintegrate. Johnson\nagain borrowed from sailplane designs to devise a \"gust control\"\nmechanism that set the ailerons and horizontal stabilizers into a posi-\ntion that kept the aircraft in a slightly nose-up attitude, thereby\navoiding sudden stresses caused by wind gusts. Nevertheless, the U-2\nremained a very fragile aircraft that required great skill and concen-\ntration from its pilots.\n\nThe final major design feature was the lightweight, bicycle-type\nlanding gear. The entire structure—a single oleostrut with two light-\nweight wheels toward the front of the aircraft and two small,\nsolid-mount wheels under the tail—weighed only 208 pounds yet\ncould withstand the force of touchdown for this 7-ton aircraft. Because\nboth sets of wheels were located underneath the fuselage, the U-2 was\nalso equipped with detachable pogos (long, curved sticks with two\nsmall wheels on them) on each wing to keep the wings level during\ntakeoff. The pilot would drop the pogos immediately after takeoff so\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nChapter 2\n\n48\n\nU-2 at testing site before attachment of wings and tail assembly\n\nthat they could be recovered and reused. The aircraft landed on its front and back landing gear and then gradually tilted over onto one of the wingtips, which were equipped with landing skids.13\n\nTHE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CAMERA SYSTEM\n\nBy December 1954, Kelly Johnson was at work on drawings for the U-2's airframe and Pratt & Whitney was already building the J57 jet\n\n13 For the design features of the U-2 in early 1955, see R. F. Boehme, Summary Report: Reconnaissance Aircraft, Lockheed Aircraft Corporation Report 10420, 28 January 1955, pp. 7-9, OSA Records, job 74-B-645, box 1 (S).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 2\n\n49\n\nU-2 landing gear and pogos\n\nengine, but no firm plans existed for the all-important cameras. Existing cameras were too bulky and lacked sufficient resolution to be used in high-altitude reconnaissance.\n\nThe workhorses of World War II aerial photography had been the Fairchild K-19 and K-21 framing cameras with lenses of varying focal lengths from 24 to 40 inches. Late in the war, the trimetrogon K-17 mapping-camera system came into use. This system consisted of three separate cameras which made three photographs simultaneously: a vertical, an oblique to the left, and an oblique to the right. The major shortcomings of the trimetrogon system were the large amount of film required and the system's lack of sharp definition on the obliques.\n\nThe standard aerial cameras available in the early 1950s could achieve resolutions of about 20 to 25 feet (7 to 8 meters) on a side when used at an altitude of 33,000 feet (10,000 meters), or about 25 lines per millimeter in current terms of reference. Such resolution was considered adequate because aerial photography was then used primarily to choose targets for strategic bombing, to assess bomb damage after air raids, and to make maps and charts. Unfortunately, a camera with a resolution of only 20 to 25 feet at a height of 33,000 feet was too crude to be used at twice that altitude. Indeed, for intelligence purposes a resolution of less than 10 feet was necessary to discern smaller targets in greater detail. This meant that any camera carried to altitudes above 68,000 feet had to be almost four times as good as existing aerial cameras in order to achieve a resolution of less than 10 feet. As a result, some scientists doubted that useful photography could be obtained from altitudes higher than 40,000 feet.14\n\n14 Baker interview (S).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 2\n\n50\n\nJames G. Baker\n\nThe first success in designing very-high-acuity lenses came in the mid-1940s, when James G. Baker of Harvard and Richard S. Perkin of the Perkin-Elmer (P-E) Company of Norwalk, Connecticut, collaborated on a design for an experimental camera for the Army Air Force. They developed a 48-inch focal-length scanning camera that was mounted in a modified B-36 bomber. When tested over Fort Worth, Texas, at 34,000 feet, the new camera produced photographs in which two golf balls on a putting green could be distinguished (in reality, however, the \"golf balls\" were 3 inches in diameter). These photographs demonstrated the high acuity of Baker's lens, but the camera weighed more than a ton and was much too large to be carried aloft in an aircraft as small as the U-2.\n\nRealizing that size and weight were the major restraining factors in developing a camera for the U-2, James Baker began working on a radically new system in October 1954, even before the CIA adopted the Lockheed proposal. Baker quickly recognized, however, that he would need almost a year to produce a working model of such a complex camera. Since Kelly Johnson had promised to have a U-2 in the air within eight months, Baker needed to find an existing camera that could be used until the new camera was ready. After consulting with his friend and colleague Richard Perkin, Baker decided to adapt for the U-2 an Air Force camera known as the K-38, a 24-inch aerial framing camera built by the Hycon Manufacturing Company of Pasadena, California.\n\nPerkin suggested modifying several standard K-38 cameras in order to reduce their weight to the U-2's 450-pound payload limit. At the same time, Baker would make critical adjustments to existing K-38 lenses to improve their acuity. Baker was able to do this in a few weeks, so several modified K-38s, now known as A-1 cameras, were ready when the first \"Angel\" aircraft took to the air in mid-1955.15\n\nCIA awarded Hycon a contract for the modified K-38 cameras, and Hycon, in turn, subcontracted to Perkin-Elmer to provide new lenses and to make other modifications to the cameras in order to make them less bulky. In its turn, Perkin-Elmer subcontracted to Baker to rework the existing K-38 lenses and later design an improved lens system. To keep his lens-designing efforts separate from\n\n15 Ibid.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 2\n\n51\n\nA-1 camera\n\nhis research associate duties at Harvard and his service on government advisory bodies, Baker established a small firm known as Spica, Incorporated, on 31 January 1955.\n\nThe A-1 camera system consisted of two 24-inch K-38 framing cameras. One was mounted vertically and photographed a 17.2° swath beneath the aircraft onto a roll of 9.5-inch film. The second K-38 was placed in a rocking mount so that it alternately photographed the left oblique and right oblique out to 36.5° onto separate rolls of 9.5-inch film. The film supplies unwound in opposite directions in order to minimize their effect on the balance of the aircraft. Both cameras used standard Air Force 24-inch focal-length lenses adjusted for maximum acuity by Baker. The development of the special rocking mount by Perkin-Elmer's Dr. Roderic M. Scott was a major factor in reducing the size and weight of the A-1 system, because the mount provided broad transverse coverage with a single lens, ending the need for two separate cameras.16\n\n16 OSA History, chap. 1, annex 3, pp. 1-3 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 2\n\n52\n\nA-2 camera\n\nU-2s equipped with the A-1 camera system also carried a Perkin-Elmer tracking camera using 2.75-inch film and a 3-inch lens. This device made continuous horizon-to-horizon photographs of the terrain passing beneath the aircraft. Because the A-1 system was new, it also included a backup camera system, a K-17 6-inch three-camera trimetrogon unit using 9-inch film.\n\nWhile the A-1 system was still being developed, James Baker was already working on the next generation of lenses for high-altitude reconnaissance. Baker was a pioneer in using computers to synthesize optical systems. His software algorithms made it possible to model lens designs and determine in advance the effects that variations in lens curvatures, glass compounds, and lens spacings would have on rays of light passing through a lens. These \"ray-tracing\" programs required extensive computations, and, for this he turned to the most modern computer available, an IBM CPC (card-programmed calculator) installation at nearby Boston University.17\n\n17 Ibid., chap. 1, pp. 7-8 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Baker's new lenses were used in a camera system known as the A-2, which returned to a trimetrogon arrangement because of problems with the A-1 system's rocking mount. The A-2 consisted of three separate K-38 framing cameras and 9.5-inch film magazines. One K-38 filmed the right oblique, another the vertical, and a third the left oblique. The A-2 system also included a 3-inch tracking camera. All A-2 cameras were equipped with the new 24-inch f/8.0 Baker-designed lenses. These were the first relatively large photographic objective lenses to employ several aspheric surfaces. James Baker personally ground these surfaces and made the final bench tests on each lens before releasing it to the Agency. These lenses were able to resolve 60 lines per millimeter, a 240-percent improvement over existing lenses.18\n\nOnce Baker and Scott had redesigned the 24-inch lens for the K-38 devices, they turned their attention to Baker's new camera design, known as the B model. It was a totally new concept, a high-resolution panoramic-type framing camera with a much longer 36-inch f/10.0 aspheric lens. The B camera was a very complex device that used a single lens to obtain photography from one horizon to the other, thereby reducing weight by having two fewer lenses and shutter assemblies than the standard trimetrogon configuration. Because its lens was longer than those used in the A cameras, the B camera achieved even higher resolution—100 lines per millimeter.\n\nThe B camera used an 18- by 18-inch format, which was achieved by focusing the image onto two counterrotating but overlapping 9.5-inch wide strips of film. Baker designed this camera so that one film supply was located forward, the other aft. Thus, as the film supplies unwound, they counterbalanced each other and did not disturb the aircraft's center of gravity.\n\nThe B camera had two modes of operation. In mode I, the camera used a single lens to make seven unique exposures from 73.5° on the far right and far left obliques to vertical photos beneath the aircraft, effectively covering from horizon to horizon. Mode II narrowed the lateral coverage to 21.5° on either side of vertical. This increased the available number of exposures and almost doubled the camera's"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"B camera\n\noperating time. Three of the seven B-camera frames provided stereo coverage. The complex B cameras were engineered by Hycon's chief designer, William McFadden.19\n\nJames Baker's idea for the ultimate high-altitude camera was the C model that would have a 240-inch focal length. In December 1954, he made preliminary designs for folding the optical path using three mirrors, a prism, and an f/20.0 lens system. Before working out the details of this design, however, Baker flew to California in early January 1955 to consult with Kelly Johnson about the weight and space limitations of the U-2's payload compartment. Despite every effort to reduce the physical dimensions of the C camera, Baker needed an additional six inches of payload space to accommodate the bigger lens. When he broached this subject to Johnson, the latter replied, \"Six more inches? I'd sell my grandmother for six more inches!\"20"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Realizing that the 240-inch lens was both too large and too heavy for the camera bay, Baker scaled the lens down to a 200-inch f/16.0 system. This was still too big. Further reductions followed, resulting by July 1955 in a 120-inch f/10.9 lens that met both the weight and space limitations. Later in the year, Baker decided to make the mirrors for the system out of a new, lightweight foamed silica material developed by Pittsburgh-Corning Glass Company. This reduced the weight significantly, and he was able to scale up the lens to a 180-inch f/13.85 reflective system for a 13- by 13-inch format. In the past, the calculations for such a complex camera lens would have taken years to complete, but thanks to Baker's ray-tracing computer program, he was able to accomplish the task in just 16 days.\n\nWhen a C camera built by Hycon was flight-tested on 31 January 1957, project engineers discovered that its 180-inch focal length, which was five times longer than that of the B camera, made the camera very sensitive to aircraft vibration and led to great difficulty in aiming the C camera from altitudes above 68,000 feet. The engineers, therefore, decided to shelve the camera. More than five years later, a redesigned C camera was employed during the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962, but the results were not very satisfactory.\n\nThe failure of the C camera design was not a serious setback to the high-altitude reconnaissance program, because the B camera proved highly successful. Once initial difficulties with the film-transport system were overcome, the B camera became the workhorse of high-altitude photography. An improved version known as the B-2 is still in use. Both of the earlier A-model cameras were phased out after September 1958.\n\nDuring the period when he was designing lenses for the CIA's overhead reconnaissance program, James Baker was also working on classified lens designs for the Air Force and unclassified designs for the Smithsonian Institution. To protect the security of Baker's work for the Agency, Herbert Miller of the Development Projects Staff told Baker to work on lenses for the U-2 in the open and not make any effort to classify the documents connected with the project. Miller believed that by not calling attention to the effort through the use of special security measures, the project could be completed faster and still not be compromised. This \"hiding in the open\" strategy proved very successful.21"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In addition to the camera systems, the U-2 carried one other important item of optical equipment, a periscope. Designed by James Baker and built by Walter Baird of Baird Associates, the optical periscope helped pilots recognize targets beneath the aircraft and also proved to be a valuable navigational aid.22\n\nPREPARATIONS FOR TESTING THE U-2\n\nAs work progressed in California on the airframe, in Connecticut on the engines, and in Boston on the camera system, the top officials of the Development Projects Staff flew to California and Nevada to search for a site where the aircraft could be tested safely and secretly. On 12 April 1955 Richard Bissell and Col. Osmund Ritland (the senior Air Force officer on the project staff) flew over Nevada with Kelly Johnson in a small Beechcraft plane piloted by Lockheed's chief test pilot, Tony LeVier. They spotted what appeared to be an airstrip by a salt flat known as Groom Lake, near the northeast corner of the Atomic Energy Commission's (AEC) Nevada Proving Ground. After debating about landing on the old airstrip, LeVier set the plane down on the lakebed, and all four walked over to examine the strip. The facility had been used during World War II as an aerial gunnery range for Army Air Corps pilots. From the air the strip appeared to be paved, but on closer inspection it turned out to have originally been fashioned from compacted earth that had turned into ankle-deep dust after more than a decade of disuse. If LeVier had attempted to land on the airstrip, the plane would probably have nosed over when the wheels sank into the loose soil, killing or injuring all of the key figures in the U-2 project.23\n\nBissell and his colleagues all agreed that Groom Lake would make an ideal site for testing the U-2 and training its pilots. Upon returning to Washington, Bissell discovered that Groom Lake was not part of the AEC proving ground. After consulting with Dulles, Bissell and Miller asked the Atomic Energy Commission to add the Groom Lake area to its real estate holdings in Nevada. AEC Chairman Adm. Lewis Strauss readily agreed, and President Eisenhower also approved the addition of this strip of wasteland, known by its map designation as Area 51, to the Nevada Test Site. The outlines of Area 51"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Area 51, the Ranch\n\nare shown on current unclassified maps as a small rectangular area adjoining the northeast corner of the much larger Nevada Test Site. To make the new facility in the middle of nowhere sound more attractive to his workers, Kelly Johnson called it the Paradise Ranch, which was soon shortened to the Ranch.24\n\nAlthough the dry lakebed could have served as a landing strip, project managers decided that a paved runway was needed so that testing could also take place during the times when rainwater runoff from nearby mountains filled the lake (at such times the base acquired yet another unofficial name, Watertown Strip). By July 1955 the base was ready, and Agency, Air Force, and Lockheed personnel began moving in."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Area 51\n\nOregon\n\n0 20 Kilometers\n0 20 Miles\n\nArea 51\nGroom Lake\n\nM o j a v e\n\nAEC Nevada\nTest Site\n\nYucca\nLake\n\nD e s e r t\n\nFrenchman Flat\n\nIndian Springs\n\nNevada\n\nSan Francisco\n\nCalifornia\n\nsee inset above\n\nIndian Springs\n\nLas Vegas\n\nNorth\nPacific\nOcean\n\nArizona\n\nEdwards AFB\n\nBurbank Pasadena\n\nLos Angeles\n\nSan Diego\n\n0 50 100 Kilometers\n0 50 100 Miles\n\nSecret NOFORN\n\nMexico\n\n724741 (R00425) 4-92\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n59\n\nSECURITY FOR THE U-2 PROJECT\n\nOn 29 April 1955, Richard Bissell signed an agreement with the Air Force and the Navy (which at that time was also interested in the U-2) in which the services agreed that the CIA \"assumed primary responsibility for all security\" for the overhead reconnaissance project (AQUATONE). From this time on, the CIA has been responsible for the security of overhead programs. This responsibility has placed a heavy burden on the Office of Security for establishing procedures to keep large numbers of contracts untraceable to the Central Intelligence Agency. The Office of Security has also had to determine which contractor employees require security clearances and has had to devise physical security measures for the various manufacturing facilities. Keeping the U-2 and subsequent overhead systems secret has been a time-consuming and costly undertaking.25\n\nThe most important aspect of the security program for the U-2 project was the creation of an entire new compartmented system for the product of U-2 missions. Access to the photographs taken by the U-2 would be strictly controlled, which often limited the ability of CIA analysts to use the products of U-2 missions.\n\nThe terminology used to describe U-2 aircraft and pilots also played a part in maintaining the security of the overhead reconnaissance program. To reduce the chances of a security breach, the Agency always referred to its high-altitude aircraft as \"articles,\" with each aircraft having its own \"article number.\" Similarly, the pilots were always called \"drivers.\" In cable traffic the aircraft were known as KWEXTRA-00 (the two-digit number identified the precise aircraft; these numbers were not related to the three-digit article numbers assigned by the factory). The pilots were referred to as KWGLITTER-00 (the two-digit number identified the precise pilot). Thus, even if a message or document about overflight activities fell into unfriendly hands, the contents would simply refer to codewords or at worst to \"articles\" and \"drivers,\" giving no indication of the nature of the program.26\n\nEven the aircraft's onboard equipment required the involvement of CIA security planners. Thus, when Kelly Johnson ordered altimeters from the Kollman Instrument Company, he specified that the\n\n25 OSA History, chap. 7, pp. 4-6 (TS Codeword).\n\n26 Information supplied by James Cunningham to Donald E. Welzenbach (S).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n60\n\ndevices had to be calibrated to 80,000 feet. This immediately raised eyebrows at Kollman because its instruments only went to 45,000 feet. Agency security personnel quickly briefed several Kollman officials and produced a cover story that the altimeters were to be used on experimental rocket planes.27\n\nTHE CIA - AIR FORCE PARTNERSHIP\n\nAt the initial interagency meetings to establish the U-2 program in December 1954, the participants did not work out a clear delineation of responsibilities between the CIA and the Air Force. They agreed only that the Air Force would supply the engines and the Agency would pay for the airframes and cameras. With a myriad of details still unsettled, CIA and Air Force representatives began to work on an interagency agreement that would assign specific responsibilities for the program. These negotiations proved difficult. Discussions on this subject between DCI Allen Dulles and Air Force Chief of Staff Nathan Twining began in March 1955. Twining wanted SAC, headed by Gen. Curtis E. LeMay, to run the project once the planes and pilots were ready to fly, but Dulles opposed such an arrangement. The CIA-USAF talks dragged on for several months, with Twining determined that SAC should have full control once the aircraft was deployed. Eventually President Eisenhower settled the dispute. \"I want this whole thing to be a civilian operation,\" the President wrote. \"If uniformed personnel of the armed services of the United States fly over Russia, it is an act of war-legally-and I don't want any part of it.\" 28\n\nWith the issue of control over the program settled, the two agencies soon worked out the remaining details. On 3 August 1955, Dulles and Twining met at SAC headquarters in Omaha to sign the basic agreement, titled \"Organization and Delineation of Responsibilities-Project OILSTONE\" (OILSTONE was the Air Force codename for the project). This pact gave the Air Force responsibility for pilot selection and training, weather information, mission plotting, and operational support. The Agency was responsible for cameras, security, contracting, film processing, and arrangements for foreign bases, and it also had a voice in the selection of pilots. All aeronautical aspects of the\n\n27 Ibid.\n\n28 OSA History, chap. 3, pp. 8-15 (TS Codeword); Beschloss, Mayday, pp. 105-107.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 2\n61\n\nproject-the construction and testing of the aircraft-remained the exclusive province of Lockheed.29\n\nAs a result of this agreement, CIA remained in control of the program, but the Air Force played a very important role as well. As Richard Bissell later remarked about the U-2 project, \"The Air Force wasn't just in on this as a supporting element, and to a major degree it wasn't in on it just supplying about half the government personnel; but the Air Force held, if you want to be precise, 49 percent of the common stock.\" 30\n\nOne of the first Air Force officers assigned to Project OILSTONE was Col. Osmund J. Ritland. He began coordinating Air Force activities in the U-2 program with Richard Bissell in December 1954. On 27 June 1955, Ritland became Bissell's deputy, although Air Force Chief of Staff Twining did not officially approve this assignment until 4 August, the day after the signing of the CIA-Air Force agreement. In March 1956, Colonel Ritland returned to the Air Force and was followed as deputy project director by Col. Jack A. Gibbs.\n\nAnother Air Force officer, Lt. Col. Leo P. Geary, joined the program in June 1955 and remained with it until August 1966, longer than any of the other project managers. Using the Air Force Inspector General's office as cover with the title of Project Officer, AFCIG-5, Geary served as the focal point for all Defense Department support to the U-2 and OXCART programs. His 11 years with the overhead reconnaissance projects provided a high degree of Air Force continuity.31\n\nOsmund J. Ritland\n\nTECHNICAL CHALLENGES TO HIGH-ALTITUDE FLIGHT\n\nTo get the U-2 aircraft ready to fly, Lockheed engineers had to solve problems never before encountered. Among these problems was the need for a fuel that would not boil off and evaporate at the very high altitudes for which the aircraft was designed. Gen. James H. Doolittle\n\n29 OSA History, chap. 3, p. 15 and annex 14 (TS Codeword).\n\n30 Speech given by Richard Bissell at CIA Headquarters, 12 October 1965 (TS Codeword).\n\n31 Brig. Gen. Leo A. Geary (USAF-Ret.), interview by Donald E. Welzenbach, tape recording, 3 April 1986 (S); OSA History, chap. 3, p. 3 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n62\n\n(USAF, Ret.), a vice president of the Shell Oil Company who had long been involved in overhead reconnaissance (most recently as a member of the Technological Capabilities Panel), arranged for Shell to develop a special low-volatility, low-vapor-pressure kerosene fuel for the craft. The result was a dense mixture, known as LF-1A, JP-TS (thermally stable), or JP-7, with a boiling point of 300°F at sea level. Manufacturing this special fuel required petroleum byproducts that Shell normally used to make its \"Flit\" fly and bug spray. In order to produce several hundred thousand gallons of LF-1A for the U-2 project in the spring and summer of 1955, Shell had to limit the production of Flit, causing a nationwide shortage. Because of the new fuel's density, it required special tanks and modifications to the aircraft's fuel-control and ignition systems.32\n\nEven more important than the problem of boiling fuel was the problem of boiling blood, namely the pilot's. At altitudes above 65,000 feet, fluids in the human body will vaporize unless the body can be kept under pressure. Furthermore, the reduced atmospheric pressure placed considerable stress on the pilot's cardiovascular system and did not provide adequate oxygenation of the blood. Keeping the pilot alive at the extreme altitudes required for overflights therefore called for a totally different approach to environmental equipment; it required a system that could maintain pressure over much of the pilot's body. The technology that enabled U-2 pilots to operate for extended periods in reduced atmospheric pressure would later play a major role in the manned space program.\n\nAdvising the Agency on high-altitude survival were two highly experienced Air Force doctors, Col. Donald D. Flickinger and Col. W. Randolph Lovelace, II. Dr. Lovelace had begun his research on high-altitude flight before World War II and was a coinventor of the standard Air Force oxygen mask. In the early 1950s, he and Flickinger made daring parachute jumps from B-47 bombers to test pilot-survival gear under extreme conditions. Flickinger served as the medical adviser to Project AQUATONE for almost a decade.33\n\nFlickinger and Lovelace suggested that the Agency ask the David Clark Company of Worcester, Massachusetts, manufacturer of environmental suits for Air Force pilots, to submit designs for more\n\n32 Land interview (TS Codeword); Bissell interview (S); James A. Cunningham, Jr., interview by Donald E. Welzenbach, Washington, DC, tape recording, 4 October 1983 (TS Codeword).\n\n33 OSA History, chap. 10, pp. 29-34 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n63\nMC-2 partial-pressure suit (seen on pilot Francis Gary Powers)\nadvanced gear for the U-2 pilots. David Clark expert Joseph Ruseckas then developed a complex life-support system, which was the first partially pressurized \"spacesuit\" for keeping humans alive for lengthy periods at ultrahigh altitudes. The effort to provide a safe environment for pilots at high altitudes also involved the Firewel Company of Buffalo, New York, which pressurized the U-2 cockpit to create an interior environment equivalent to the air pressure at an altitude of 28,000 feet. The system was designed so that, if the interior cockpit pressure fell below the 28,000-feet level, the pilot's suit would automatically inflate. In either case, he could obtain oxygen only through his helmet.\nIbid., chap. 5, p. 19 (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n64\nThe early models of these MC-2 and MC-3 partial-pressure suits were very uncomfortable for the pilots. To prevent loss of pressure, the heavy coverall had to fit tightly at the wrists and ankles (in the early models of these suits, the feet were not included in the pressurization scheme). The pilot had to wear gloves and a heavy helmet that tended to chafe his neck and shoulders and was prone to fogging. Problems with the pilot life-support system were believed to have been the cause of several early crashes of the U-2.\nHaving gotten a pilot into this bulky suit and shoehorned him into his seat in the cockpit, the next problem was how to get him out in an emergency. The U-2 cockpit was very small, and the early models did not have an ejection seat. Even after an ejection seat was installed, pilots were reluctant to use it because they were afraid they would lose their legs below the knees when they were blown out of the cockpit. To save weight, the first pilot's seat was extremely simple with no height adjustment mechanism. Designed for pilots of above-average height, the seat could be adjusted for shorter pilots by inserting wooden blocks beneath the seat to raise it. In later versions of the aircraft, Kelly Johnson added a fully adjustable seat.\nThe Air Force undertook bailout experiments at high altitudes from balloons in the autumn of 1955 to determine if the suit designed for the U-2 pilot would also protect him during his parachute descent once he was separated from the life-support mechanisms inside the aircraft. To avoid getting the \"bends\" during such descents or during the long flights, pilots had to don their pressure suits and begin breathing oxygen at least 90 minutes before takeoff so that their bodies would have time to dissipate nitrogen. This procedure was known as prebreathing. Once the pilots were in their suits, eating and drinking became a major problem, as did urination. The first model of the pressure suit, used by Lockheed test pilots, made no provision for urination. A subsequent model required the pilot to be catheterized before donning his flying suit. This method of permitting urination during flight proved very uncomfortable and, by the autumn of 1955, was replaced with an external bladder arrangement that made the catheter unnecessary. To reduce elimination, pilots ate a low-bulk, high-protein diet on the day before and the morning of each mission.\nLecture by Maj. Gen. Patrick J. Halloran (former Air Force U-2 pilot) at the National Air & Space Museum, 24 April 1986 (U).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n65\nPilot undergoing prebreathing\nTo prevent pilots from becoming dessicated during the long missions—a condition aggravated by their having to breathe pure oxygen—provision was made for them to drink sweetened water. This was accomplished by providing a small self-sealing hole in the face mask through which the pilot could push a strawlike tube attached to the water supply. Project personnel also pioneered in the development of ready-to-eat foods in squeezable containers. These were primarily bacon- or cheese-flavored mixtures that the pilot could squeeze into his mouth using the self-sealing hole in the face mask. Despite all these precautions, U-2 pilots normally lost 3 to 6 pounds of body weight during an eight-hour mission.\nFood and water were not the only items provided to pilots on overflight missions: they also received a suicide pill. During the early 1950s, tales of Soviet secret police torture of captured foreign agents\nInformation supplied by James Cunningham and former U-2 pilots Carmine Vito, Hervey Stockman, Jacob Kratt, and Glendon Dunaway to Donald E. Welzenbach, May 1986.\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n66\nled Bissell and Cunningham to approach Dr. Alex Batlin of Technical Services Division in the Directorate of Plans for ideas to help \"captured\" U-2 pilots avoid such suffering. Batlin suggested the method used by Nazi war criminal Hermann Goering, a thin glass ampule containing liquid potassium cyanide. He said a pilot had only to put the ampule in his mouth and bite down on the glass; death would follow in 10 to 15 seconds. Project AQUATONE ordered six of the poison ampules, called L-pills, and offered one to each pilot just before a mission. It was up to each pilot to decide if he wanted to take an L-pill with him. Some did; most did not.\nDELIVERY OF THE FIRST U-2\nOn 25 July, less than eight months after the go-ahead call from Trevor Gardner, Kelly Johnson was ready to deliver the first aircraft, known as article 341, to the \"Paradise Ranch\" site. With its long, slender wings and tail assembly removed, the aircraft was wrapped in tarpaulins, loaded aboard a C-124, and flown to Groom Lake, where Lockheed mechanics spent the next six days readying the craft for its maiden flight.\nBefore \"Kelly's Angel\" could actually take to the air, however, it needed an Air Force designator. Col. Allman T. Culbertson from the Air Force's Office of the Director of Research and Development pointed this out to Lieutenant Colonel Geary in July 1955, and the two officers then looked through the aircraft designator handbook to see what the options were. They decided that they could not call the project aircraft a bomber, fighter, or transport plane, and they did not want anyone to know that the new plane was for reconnaissance, so Geary and Culbertson decided that it should come under the utility aircraft category. At the time, there were only two utility aircraft on the books, a U-1 and a U-3. Geary told Culbertson that the Lockheed CL-282 was going to be known officially as the U-2.\nAt the time this Directorate was known as the Deputy Directorate/Plans, with the slash interpreted to mean either \"for\" or \"of.\" Terminology for the major subdivisions of the CIA and their directors has varied over the past four decades. For the sake of consistency, all titles of Directorates and Deputy Directors have been placed in the current Agency format: the organization is known as the \"Directorate of X\" and the head is known as the \"Deputy Director for X.\"\nInformation supplied by James Cunningham to Donald E. Welzenbach; Sayre Stevens, Memorandum for the Record, \"Discussion with Dr. Alex Batlin Re Project MKNAOMI,\" July 1975 (S).\nGeary interview (S).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n67\nArrival of U-2 prototype at Area 51 (left); Article 341, the U-2 prototype (below)\nJohnson had designed the U-2 to use the Pratt & Whitney (P&W) J57/P-31 engine, which developed 13,000 pounds of thrust and weighed 3,820 pounds, giving it a power-to-weight ratio of 3.4:1. When the U-2 first took to the air, however, these engines were not available because the entire production was needed to power specially configured Canberra RB-57Ds for the Air Force. The first U-2s therefore used P&W J57/P-37 engines, which were 276 pounds heavier and delivered only 10,200 pounds of thrust at sea level; the resulting\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"power-to-weight ratio of 2.7:1 was almost 20 percent less efficient than the preferred P-31 version.40\n\nTo conduct lengthy missions over hostile territory, the U-2 needed to carry a large amount of fuel. Kelly Johnson used a \"wet-wing\" design for the U-2, which meant that fuel was not stored in separate fuel tanks but rather in the wing itself. Each wing was divided into two leak-proof compartments, and fuel was pumped into all the cavities within these areas; only the outer 6 feet of the wings were not used for fuel storage. The U-2 also had a 100-gallon reserve tank in its nose. Later, in 1957, Johnson increased the fuel capacity of the U-2 by adding 100-gallon \"slipper\" tanks under each wing, projecting slightly ahead of the leading edge.\n\nOne of the most important considerations in the U-2's fuel system was the need to maintain aircraft trim as the fuel was consumed. The aircraft therefore contained a complex system of feed lines and valves draining to a central sump, which made it impossible to provide the pilot with an empty/full type of fuel gauge. None of the first 50 U-2s had normal fuel gauges. Instead there were mechanical fuel totalizer/counters. Before the start of a mission, the ground crew set the counters to indicate the total amount of fuel in the wings, and then a flow meter subtracted the gallons of fuel actually consumed during the flight. The pilot kept a log of the fuel consumption shown by the counters and compared it with estimates made by mission planners for each leg of the flight. As a double check, U-2 pilots also kept track of their fuel consumption by monitoring airspeed and time in the air. Most pilots became quite expert at this. Several who did not came up short of their home base during the 20 years these planes were flown.41\n\nINITIAL TESTING OF THE U-2\n\nPreliminary taxi trials began on 27 July 1955, when the first run down the newly completed runway took the plane to 50 knots. Lockheed's chief test pilot, Tony LeVier, was at the controls. A second taxi trial"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"followed on 1 August. LeVier accelerated to 70 knots and began to try the ailerons. \"It was at this point that I became aware of being airborne,\" LeVier noted afterward, \"which left me with utter amazement, as I had no intentions whatsoever of flying. I immediately started back toward the ground, but had difficulty determining my height because the lakebed had no markings to judge distance or height. I made contact with the ground in a left bank of approximately 10 degrees.\" The U-2 bounced back into the air, but LeVier was able to bring it back down for a second landing. He then applied the brakes with little effect, and the aircraft rolled for a long distance before coming to a stop.42\n\nBissell, Cunningham, and Johnson saw the aircraft fall and bounce. Leaping into a jeep, they roared off toward the plane. They signaled to LeVier to climb out and then used fire extinguishers to put out a fire in the brakes. At a debriefing session that followed, LeVier complained about the poor performance of the brakes and the absence of markings on the runway. Damage to the prototype U-2 was very minor: blown tires, a leaking oleostrut on the undercarriage, and damaged brakes. This unplanned flight was but a foretaste of the airworthiness of the U-2. New pilots all had difficulty in getting the U-2's wheels on the ground because at low speeds it would remain in ground effect and glide effortlessly above the runway for great distances.\n\nTaxi trials continued for one more day and were followed by the first planned flight on 4 August 1955. LeVier was again at the controls and had been instructed by Kelly Johnson to land the U-2 by making initial contact with the main or forward landing gear and letting the plane settle back on the rear wheel. LeVier had disagreed with this approach, believing that the U-2 would bounce if he tried to touch down on the forward gear first. After flying the aircraft up to 8,000 feet, LeVier leveled off and began cycling the landing gear up and down; then he tested the flaps and the plane's stability and control systems. Finally, LeVier made his first landing approach. As the U-2 settled down, the forward landing gear touched the runway and the plane skipped and bounced into the air. LeVier made a second attempt to land front wheels first, and again the plane bounded into the air."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"First flight of the U-2, 4 August 1955\n\nWith Kelly Johnson watching from a chase plane and giving a constant stream of instructions, LeVier made three more unsuccessful landing attempts. With the light fading and a thunderstorm fast approaching from the mountains to the west, LeVier made one last approach using the method he had advocated: letting the aircraft touch on its rear wheel first. This time the U-2 made a near-perfect landing, which came just in the nick of time. Ten minutes later, the thunderstorm began dumping an unheard-of 2 inches of rain, flooding the dry lakebed and making the airstrip unusable.43\n\nNow that the first problems in flying and landing the U-2 had been worked out, Kelly Johnson scheduled the \"official\" first flight for 8 August 1955. This time outsiders were present, including Richard Bissell, Col. Osmond Ritland, Richard Horner, and Garrison Norton. The U-2 flew to 32,000 feet and performed very well. Kelly Johnson had met his eight-month deadline.44"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LeVier made an additional 19 flights in article 341 before moving on to other Lockheed flight test programs in early September. This first phase of U-2 testing explored the craft's stall envelope, took the aircraft to its maximum stress limit (2.5 g's), and explored its speed potential. LeVier soon flew the aircraft at its maximum speed of Mach 0.85. Flight tests continued, with the U-2 ascending to altitudes never before attained in sustained flight. On 16 August LeVier took the aircraft up to 52,000 feet. In preparation for this flight, the 42-year-old test pilot completed the Air Force partial-pressure suit training program, becoming the oldest pilot to do so. Testing at even higher altitudes continued, and on 8 September the U-2 reached its initial design altitude of 65,600 feet.45\n\nOn 22 September 1955, the U-2 experienced its first flameout at 64,000 feet—more than 12 miles up. After a brief restart, the J57/P-37 engine again flamed out at 60,000 feet, and the aircraft descended to 35,000 feet before the engine could be relit. Engineers from Pratt & Whitney immediately set to work on this problem. The P-37 model engine had significantly poorer combustion characteristics than the preferred but unavailable P-31 version and therefore tended to flame out at high altitudes. Combustion problems usually became apparent as the U-2 began the final part of its climb from 57,000 to 65,000 feet, causing pilots to refer to this area as the \"badlands\" or the \"chimney.\" Flameouts bedeviled the U-2 project until sufficient numbers of the more powerful P-31 engines became available in the spring of 1956.46\n\nMeanwhile, with the airworthiness of the U-2 airframe proven, Lockheed set up a production line in the Skunk Works, but delivery of even the second-choice J57/P-37 engines became a major problem. Pratt & Whitney's full production capacity for these engines for the next year was contracted to the Air Force for use in F-100 fighters and KC-135 tankers. Colonel Geary, with the help of a colleague in the Air Force Materiel Command, managed to arrange the diversion of a number of these engines from a shipment destined for Boeing's KC-135 production line, making it possible to continue building the U-2s.47"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"As the deliveries of U-2 airframes to the testing site increased, a major logistic problem arose: how to transfer Lockheed employees from Burbank to Area 51 without arousing a great deal of curiosity. The project staff decided that the simplest approach would be to fly the essential personnel to the site on Monday morning and return them to Burbank on Friday evening. Frequent flights were also necessary to bring in supplies and visitors from contractors and headquarters. Therefore, a regularly scheduled Military Air Transport Service (MATS) flight using a USAF C-54 aircraft began on 3 October 1955. James Cunningham promptly dubbed this activity \"Bissell's Narrow-Gauge Airline.\" Less than seven weeks after it started, a MATS aircraft bound for Area 51 crashed on 17 November, killing all 14 persons aboard the plane, including the Project Security Officer, CIA's William H. Marr, four members of his staff, and personnel from Lockheed and Hycon. This crash represented the greatest single loss of life in the entire U-2 program.48\n\nU-2s, UFOs, AND OPERATION BLUE BOOK\n\nHigh-altitude testing of the U-2 soon led to an unexpected side effect—a tremendous increase in reports of unidentified flying objects (UFOs). In the mid-1950s, most commercial airliners flew at altitudes between 10,000 and 20,000 feet and military aircraft like the B-47s and B-57s operated at altitudes below 40,000 feet. Consequently, once U-2s started flying at altitudes above 60,000 feet, air-traffic controllers began receiving increasing numbers of UFO reports.\n\nSuch reports were most prevalent in the early evening hours from pilots of airliners flying from east to west. When the sun dropped below the horizon of an airliner flying at 20,000 feet, the plane was in darkness. But, if a U-2 was airborne in the vicinity of the airliner at the same time, its horizon from an altitude of 60,000 feet was considerably more distant, and, being so high in the sky, its silver wings would catch and reflect the rays of the sun and appear to the airliner pilot, 40,000 feet below, to be fiery objects. Even during daylight hours, the silver bodies of the high-flying U-2s could catch the sun and cause reflections or glints that could be seen at lower altitudes and even on the ground. At this time, no one believed manned flight was possible above 60,000 feet, so no one expected to see an object so high in the sky."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Not only did the airline pilots report their sightings to air-traffic controllers, but they and ground-based observers also wrote letters to the Air Force unit at Wright Air Development Command in Dayton charged with investigating such phenomena. This, in turn, led to the Air Force's Operation BLUE BOOK. Based at Wright-Patterson, the operation collected all reports of UFO sightings. Air Force investigators then attempted to explain such sightings by linking them to natural phenomena. BLUE BOOK investigators regularly called on the Agency's Project Staff in Washington to check reported UFO sightings against U-2 flight logs. This enabled the investigators to eliminate the majority of the UFO reports, although they could not reveal to the letter writers the true cause of the UFO sightings. U-2 and later OXCART flights accounted for more than one-half of all UFO reports during the late 1950s and most of the 1960s.\n\nHIRING U-2 PILOTS\n\nIn authorizing the U-2 project, President Eisenhower told DCI Dulles that he wanted the pilots of these planes to be non-US citizens. It was his belief that, should a U-2 come down in hostile territory, it would be much easier for the United States to deny any responsibility for the activity if the pilot was not an American.\n\nThe initial effort to find U-2 pilots was assigned to the Directorate of Plans Air/Maritime Division (AMD). The DDP had excellent contacts [REDACTED] AMD operatives [REDACTED] asked that discreet inquiries be made to see if any [REDACTED] fliers were interested in a high-paying covert project. [REDACTED] brought to the United States for training. Meanwhile, AMD hired an [REDACTED] flier residing in England, and he also came to the United States for training.\n\nIn theory the use of foreign pilots seemed quite logical; in practice it did not work out. The [REDACTED] and could only fly light aircraft. Language was also a barrier for the [REDACTED] although several were good fliers. Because Lieutenant Colonel Geary had taken a class of [REDACTED] through flying school at Randolph AFB in 1950, he got the job of training the [REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"recruits in mid-1955. Geary arranged for an Air Force officer of [REDACTED] to stay with the group during a preliminary training program at Luke Air Force Base. The plan to use foreign pilots soon ran into trouble when only [REDACTED] pilots passed the school and reported to Area 51. They made only a few flights in the U-2, and by the autumn of 1955 they were out of the program.\n\nEven before the elimination of the [REDACTED] it was clear that there would not be enough trained foreign pilots available in time for deployment. Bissell therefore had to start the search for U-2 pilots all over again. Lt. Gen. Emmett (Rosy) O'Donnell, the Air Force's Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, authorized the use of Air Force pilots and provided considerable assistance in the search for pilots who met the high standards established by the Agency and the Air Force. The search included only SAC fighter pilots who held reserve commissions. The use of regular Air Force pilots was not considered because of the complexities involved in having them resign from the Air Force, a procedure that was necessary in order to hire them as civilians for the AQUATONE project.\n\nSAC pilots interested in the U-2 project had to be willing to resign from the Air Force and assume civilian status—a process known as sheep-dipping—in order to conduct the overflights. Although Air Force pilots were attracted by the challenge of flying U-2s over hostile territory, they were reluctant to leave the service and give up their seniority. To overcome pilots' reluctance, the Agency offered handsome salaries, and the Air Force promised each pilot that, upon satisfactory conclusion of his employment with the Agency, he could return to his unit. In the meantime, he would be considered for promotion along with his contemporaries who had continued their Air Force careers.\n\nThe selection process for Agency U-2 pilots was very rigorous. Because of the strain involved in flying at extreme altitudes for long periods of time, painstaking efforts were made to exclude all pilots who might be nervous or unstable in any way. The physical and psychological screening of potential U-2 pilots was conducted by the Lovelace Foundation for Medical Education and Research in Albuquerque, New Mexico, under a contract signed with the CIA on"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"28 November 1955. The CIA's insistence on more stringent physical and mental examinations than those used by the Air Force to select pilots for its U-2 fleet resulted in a higher rejection rate of candidates. The Agency's selection criteria remained high throughout its manned overflight program and resulted in a much lower accident rate for CIA U-2 pilots than for their counterparts in the Air Force program.\n\nPILOT TRAINING\n\nEven before the recruiting effort got under way, the Air Force and CIA began to develop a pilot training program. Under the terms of the OILSTONE agreement between the Agency and the Air Force, responsibility for pilot training lay with SAC. This essential activity was carried out under the supervision of Col. William F. Yancey, who was assigned to March AFB and flew to nearby Area 51 each day. Colonel Yancey was in charge of six SAC pilots who were to be trained by Lockheed test pilots to fly the U-2. Once they became qualified, these SAC pilots would become the trainers for the sheep-dipped former Reserve SAC pilots, who would fly U-2 missions for the CIA.\n\nThe original U-2 test pilot, Tony LeVier, trained several other Lockheed test pilots in the difficult art of flying the U-2. Eventually there were enough trained Lockheed pilots available to test the aircraft coming off the assembly line and also train the SAC pilots. Training was difficult because there was no two-seat model of the U-2. All instruction had to be given on the ground before takeoff and then over the radio once the craft was airborne. Almost 15 years elapsed before a two-seat U-2 was available for training new pilots. Despite the difficulties involved in training U-2 pilots, Colonel Yancey had a cadre of six qualified Air Force U-2 pilots by September 1955. These six were now ready to train the Agency's pilots.\n\nTraining pilots was not easy because the U-2 was a mixture of glider and jet. Although those chosen for the overflight program were all qualified fighter pilots, they now had to learn to fly the delicate U-2. Its large wings had tremendous lift but were also very fragile"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and could not survive the stresses of loops and barrel rolls. Moreover, the original U-2s were placarded, which meant that they could not be flown at sea level faster than 190 knots in smooth air or 150 knots in rough air. At operational altitude, where the air was much less dense, they could not exceed Mach 0.8 (394 knots). Speeds in excess of these limits could cause the wings or tail section to fall off.\n\nAirspeed was a very critical factor for the U-2. At maximum altitude only 6 knots separated the speeds at which low-speed stall and high-speed buffet occurred. Pilots called this narrow range of acceptable airspeeds at maximum altitude the coffin corner because at this point the U-2 was always on the brink of falling out of the sky. If the aircraft slowed beyond the low-speed stall limit, it would lose lift and begin to fall, causing stresses that would tear the wings and tail off. A little too much speed would lead to buffeting, which would also cause the loss of the wings or tail. Flying conditions such as these required a U-2 pilot's full attention when he was not using the autopilot. Airspeed was such a critical factor that Kelly Johnson added a vernier adjustment to the throttle to allow the pilot to make minute alterations to the fuel supply.\n\nAmong the unique devices developed for the U-2 was a small sextant for making celestial fixes during the long overflights. Because cloud cover often prevented U-2 pilots from locating navigational points on the earth through the periscope, the sextant turned out to be the pilots' principal navigational instrument during the first three years of deployment. When clouds were not a factor, however, the periscope proved highly accurate for navigation. During the final tests before the aircraft became operational, U-2 pilots found they could navigate by dead reckoning with an error of less than 1 nautical mile over a 1,000-nm course.\n\nFINAL TESTS OF THE U-2\n\nFlight-testing of the U-2 continued throughout the fall and winter of 1955-56 in order to test all the various systems. By mid-January 1956, SAC officials were so impressed that they also wanted to purchase a fleet of these planes. On 30 January, DCI Dulles agreed to"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A-2 camera being installed in U-2\n\nhave CIA act as executive agent for this transaction, which the Air Force called Project DRAGON LADY. To maintain secrecy, the Air Force transferred funds to the CIA, which then placed an order with Lockheed for 29 U-2s in configurations to be determined by the Air Force. The Air Force later bought two more U-2s, for a total of 31. The aircraft purchased for the Air Force were known as the Follow-On Group, which was soon shortened to FOG.\n\nOnce enough pilots had been trained, Project AQUATONE managers concentrated on checking out the complete U-2 system: planes, pilots, navigation systems, life-support systems, and cameras. From 10 through 14 April 1956, U-2s equipped with A-2 cameras took off from Area 51 and made eight overflights of the United States in order to test the various flight and camera systems as part of the standard Air Force Operational Readiness Inspection. Colonel Yancey and his detachment served as observers during this weeklong exercise."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n78\n\nU-2 detachment in formation over Nevada\n\nColonel Yancey's group carefully examined all aspects of the U-2 unit from flight crews to camera technicians and mission programmers. When the exercise was over, Yancey reported that the detachment was ready for deployment. He then briefed a high-level Pentagon panel that included the Secretary of the Air Force and the Chief of Air Staff. These officials concurred with Yancey's determination that the U-2 was ready for deployment.57\n\nDuring these final tests in the spring of 1956, the U-2 once again demonstrated its unique airworthiness. On 14 April 1956, James Cunningham was sitting in his office in Washington when he received a call from Area 51 informing him that a westward-bound U-2 had experienced a flameout over the Mississippi River at the western border of Tennessee. After restarting his engine, the pilot reported a second flameout and engine vibrations so violent that he was unable to get the power plant to start again. Early in the program Bissell and Ritland had foreseen such an emergency and, with the cooperation of the Air Force, had arranged for sealed orders to be delivered to every airbase in the continental United States giving instructions about what to do if a U-2 needed to make an emergency landing.\n\nCunningham had the project office ask the pilot how far he could glide so they could determine which SAC base should be alerted. The pilot, who by this time was over Arkansas, radioed back that, given the prevailing winds and the U-2's 21:1 glide ratio, he thought he could reach Albuquerque, New Mexico. Within minutes Cunningham was on the phone to Colonel Geary in the Pentagon, who then had the Air Force's Assistant Director of Operations, Brig. Gen. Ralph E.\n\nBissell interview (S); OSA History, chap. 11, pp. 15-16 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 2\n79\n\nKoon, call the commander of Kirtland AFB near Albuquerque. General Koon told the base commander about the sealed orders and explained that an unusual aircraft would make a deadstick landing at Kirtland within the next half hour. The general then instructed the base commander to have air police keep everyone away from the craft and get it inside a hanger as quickly as possible.\n\nAfter a half hour passed, the base commander called the Pentagon to ask where the crippled aircraft was. As he was speaking, the officer saw the U-2 touch down on the runway and remarked, \"It's not a plane, it's a glider!\" Even more surprised were the air police who surrounded the craft when it came to a halt. As the pilot climbed from the cockpit in his \"space\" suit, one air policeman remarked that the pilot looked like a man from Mars. The pilot, Jacob Kratt, later reported to Cunningham that, from the beginning of the first flameout until the landing at Albuquerque, the U-2 had covered over 900 miles, including more than 300 by gliding.58\n\nAside from this extraordinary gliding ability, however, the U-2 was a very difficult aircraft to fly. Its very light weight, which enabled it to achieve extreme altitude, also made it very fragile. The aircraft was also very sleek, and it sliced through the air with little drag. This feature was dangerous, however, because the U-2 was not built to withstand the G-forces of high speed. Pilots had to be extremely careful to keep the craft in a slightly nose-up attitude when flying at operational altitude. If the nose dropped only a degree or two into the nose-down position, the plane would gain speed at a dramatic rate, exceeding the placarded speed limit in less than a minute, at which point the aircraft would begin to come apart. Pilots, therefore, had to pay close attention to the aircraft's speed indicator because at 65,000 feet there was no physical sensation of speed, without objects close at hand for the eye to use as a reference.59\n\nTHREE FATAL CRASHES IN 1956\n\nThe first fatality directly connected with flying the U-2 occurred on 15 May 1956, when test pilot Wilburn S. Rose, flying article 345A, had trouble dropping his pogos, the outrigger wheels that keep the\n\nBissell interview (S); Cunningham interview (TS Codeword); Brig. Gen. Leo A. Geary, interview by Gregory W. Pedlow, Colorado Springs, Colorado, 12 October 1988 (S).\n\nJames Cherbonneaux, Carmine Vito, and Hervey Stockman (former U-2 pilots), interview by Donald E. Welzenbach, Washington, DC, May 1986 (S)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n80\n\nwings parallel to the ground during takeoff. Once airborne, Rose made a low-level pass over the airstrip and shook loose the lefthand pogo. When he attempted to make a righthand turn to come back over the runway to shake loose the remaining pogo, Rose stalled the U-2 and it plunged to earth, disintegrating over a wide area. Three months later, on 31 August 1956, a second fatal crash occurred during a night-flying exercise. Frank G. Grace stalled article 354 at an altitude of about 50 feet when he tried to climb too steeply at takeoff. The craft fell, cartwheeled on its left wing, and struck a power pole near the runway. More experienced U-2 pilots always cut back abruptly on the throttle as soon as the pogo sticks fell away in order to avoid such stalls.\n\nBefore the year was out, two more U-2s were destroyed in crashes, one of them fatal. On 17 September 1956, article 346 lost part of its right wing while on its takeoff ascent from Lindsey Air Force Base in Wiesbaden, Germany. The aircraft disintegrated in midair, killing pilot Howard Carey. The loss of article 357 on 19 December 1956 resulted from pilot hypoxia. A small leak prematurely depleted the oxygen supply and impaired Robert J. Ericson's judgment as he flew over Arizona. Because of his inability to act quickly and keep track of his aircraft's speed, the U-2 exceeded the placarded speed of 190 knots and literally disintegrated when it reached 270 knots. Ericson managed to jettison the canopy and was sucked out of the aircraft at 28,000 feet. His chute opened automatically at 15,000 feet, and he landed without injury. The aircraft was a total loss.60\n\nCOORDINATION OF COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS\n\nFrom the very beginning of the U-2 program, it was apparent that some sort of an interagency task force or office would be needed to develop and coordinate collection requirements for the covert overhead reconnaissance effort. In a three-page memorandum to DCI Dulles on 5 November 1954 setting forth the ideas of the Technological Capabilities Panel's Project 3 on this subject, Edwin Land wrote:\n\nIt is recommended that... a permanent task force, including Air Force supporting elements, be set up under suitable cover to provide guidance on procurement, to consolidate requirements\n\nU-2 Accident Reports, folders 4, 10, and 14, OSA records, job 67-B-415, box 1 (S).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n81\n\nand plan missions in view of priority and feasibility, to maintain the operation on a continuing basis, and to carry out the dissemination of the resulting information in a manner consistent with its special security requirements.61\n\nWhen the U-2's development and testing approached completion, Land's recommendation was put into effect. Following a meeting with Deputy Secretary of Defense Donald Quarles and Trevor Gardner (who had been promoted from his special assistant post to become Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Research and Development), Richard Bissell established an Ad Hoc Requirements Committee (ARC) on 1 December 1955. He then named James Q. Reber to be Intelligence Requirements Officer for the U-2 project and chairman of the ARC. Reber was already experienced in coordination with other intelligence agencies, for he had headed the Directorate of Intelligence DI Office of Intelligence Coordination for four years. The first full-scale ARC meeting took place on 1 February 1956 with representatives from the Army, Navy, and Air Force present. Attending for the CIA were representatives from the Office of Research and Reports (ORR) and the Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI). The CIA membership later expanded to include the Office of Current Intelligence (OCI) and a representative from the Directorate of Plans. In 1957 the National Security Agency (NSA) also began sending a representative. The State Department followed suit in 1960, although it had been receiving reports from the committee all along.62\n\nARC's main task was to draw up lists of collection requirements, primarily for the U-2, but also for other means of collection. These lists prioritized targets according to their ability to meet the three major national intelligence objectives concerning the Soviet Union in the mid-1950s: long-range bombers, guided missiles, and nuclear energy. The committee issued its list of targets for the use of the entire intelligence community using all available means of collection, not just for the CIA with the U-2.63\n\nJames Q. Reber\n\nOSA History, chap. 1, annex 1 (TS Codeword).\n\nMinutes of the Ad Hoc Requirements Committee of 1 February 1956, Intelligence Community (IC) Staff records, COMIREX, job 33-B-121A, box 1, \"ARC Minutes, 1956-1957;\" Memorandum for the Joint Study Group from James Q. Reber, \"Handling of Requirements for the U-2,\" 15 August 1960, IC Staff records, job 33-T-123A, box 10, \"CHALICE (General)\" (TS Codeword).\n\nMemorandum for the Joint Study Group from James Q. Reber, \"Handling of Requirements for the U-2,\" 15 August 1960, IC Staff records, job 33-T-123A, box 10, \"CHALICE (General)\" (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n82\n\nArthur C. Lundahl\n\nARC gave the top priority target list to the Project Director, and the project staff's operations section then used the list to plan the flightpaths for U-2 missions. Although the requirements committee was not responsible for developing flight plans, it assisted the planners with detailed target information as required. When a flight plan was ready for submission to the President for approval, the committee drew up a detailed justification for the selection of the targets. This paper accompanied the flight plan.64\n\nIn developing and prioritizing lists of targets, the committee members had to take into account the varying needs and interests of their parent organizations. Thus, the CIA representatives generally emphasized strategic intelligence: aircraft and munitions factories, power-generating complexes, nuclear establishments, roads, bridges, inland waterways. In contrast, the military services usually placed a heavier emphasis on order-of-battle data. The Air Force, in particular, had a strong interest in gathering intelligence on the location of Soviet and East European airfields and radars.\n\nAlthough the committee members kept the interests of their services or agencies in mind, their awareness of the vital nature of their mission kept the level of cooperation high. The group always attempted to reach a consensus before issuing its recommendations, although occasionally this was not possible and one or more agencies would add a dissent to the recommendation of the committee as a whole.65\n\nPREPARATIONS TO HANDLE THE PRODUCT OF U-2 MISSIONS\n\nOn 13 December 1954, DCI Allen Dulles and his assistant, Richard Bissell, briefed Arthur C. Lundahl, the chief of CIA's Photo-Intelligence Division (PID), on Project AQUATONE. At DCI Dulles's direction, Lundahl immediately set in motion within his division a compartmented effort, known as Project EQUINE, to plan for the exploitation of overhead photography from the U-2 project. With only 13 members, the PID staff was too small to handle the expected\n\nIbid.; James Q. Reber, interview by Donald E. Welzenbach and Gregory W. Pedlow, Washington, DC, 21 May 1987 (S).\n\nReber interview (S).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"flood of photographs that the U-2 would bring back, so in May 1955 the Directorate of Support (DS) authorized expanding PID to 44 persons. Soon afterward the division moved from its room in M Building to larger quarters in Que Building.\n\nThe Photo-Intelligence Division continued to expand in anticipation of large quantities of U-2 photography. Its authorized strength doubled in January 1956 when a new project known as HTAUTOMAT came into existence to exploit U-2 photography. All of the products from this project would be placed in the new control system. By the summer of 1956, the PID had moved to larger quarters in the Steuart Building at 5th Street and New York Avenue, NW. PID photointerpreters had already begun to work with U-2 photography following a series of missions in April 1956, when U-2s photographed a number of US installations that were considered analogous to high-priority Soviet installations. As a result of these preparations, PID was ready for the mass of photography that began coming when U-2 operations commenced in the summer of 1956.\n\nThe Steuart Building, home of the Photo-Intelligence Division\n\nFor a more detailed history of photointerpretation in the CIA, see Urban J. Linehan, The National Photographic Interpretation Center, vol. I, Antecedents and Early Years. Directorate of Science and Technology Historical Series NPIC-2, December 1972, pp. 171-194 (S)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THE IMPACT OF THE AIR FORCE PROJECT GENETRIX BALLOONS\n\nWhile the Agency was making its final preparations for U-2 overflights, the Air Force started a reconnaissance project that would cause considerable protest around the world and threaten the existence of the U-2 overflight program before it even began. Project GENETRIX involved the use of camera-carrying balloons to obtain high-altitude photography of Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union, and the People's Republic of China. This project had its origins in a RAND Corporation study from 1951. By the end of 1955, the Air Force had overcome a number of technical problems in camera design and recovery techniques and had manufactured a large number of balloons for use in the project. President Eisenhower gave his approval on 27 December 1955, and two weeks later the launches from bases in Western Europe began. By the end of February 1956, the Air Force had launched a total of 516 balloons.\n\nProject GENETRIX was much less successful than its sponsors had hoped. Once launched, the balloons were at the mercy of the prevailing winds, and many tended to drift toward southern Europe and then across the Black Sea and the desert areas of China. These balloons therefore missed the prime target areas, which lay in the higher latitudes. Large numbers of balloons did not succeed in crossing the Soviet Union and China, some because they were shot down by hostile aircraft, others because they prematurely expended their ballast supplies and descended too soon. Only 46 payloads were eventually recovered (one more than a year later and the last not until 1958) from the 516 balloons that had been launched. In four of these payloads the camera had malfunctioned, and in another eight the photography was of no intelligence value. Thus, only 34 balloons succeeded in obtaining useful photographs.\n\nThe low success rate of the Project GENETRIX balloons was not the only problem encountered; far more serious was the storm of protest and unfavorable publicity that the balloon overflights provoked. Although the Air Force had issued a cover story that the balloons were being used for weather research connected with the International Geophysical Year, East European nations protested strongly to the United States and to international aviation authorities, claiming that the balloons endangered civilian aircraft. The Soviet Union sent strongly worded protest notes to the United States and the nations from which the balloons had been launched. The Soviets also collected numerous polyethelene gasbags, camera payloads, and transmitters from GENETRIX balloons and put them on display in Moscow for the world press."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Photograph of Dodonovo Atomic Energy complex taken by a Project GENETRIX balloon\n\nAll of this publicity and protest led President Eisenhower to conclude that \"the balloons gave more legitimate grounds for irritation than could be matched by the good obtained from them,\" and he ordered the project halted. On 7 February 1956 Secretary of State Dulles informed the Soviet Union that no more \"weather research\" balloons would be released, but he did not offer an apology for the overflights.\n\nDespite the furor caused by GENETRIX, Air Force Chief of Staff Twining proposed yet another balloon project only five weeks later, in mid-March 1956. This project would employ even higher flying balloons than GENETRIX and would be ready in 18 months. President Eisenhower informed the Air Force, however, that he was \"not interested in any more balloons.\""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Although the photo intelligence gained from Project GENETRIX was limited in quantity, it was still some of the best and most complete photography obtained of the Soviet Union since World War II. It was referred to as \"pioneer\" photography because it provided a baseline for all future overhead photography. Even innocuous photos of such things as forests and streams proved valuable in later years when U-2 and satellite photography revealed construction activity.\n\nOf still greater importance to the U-2 program, however, was the data that US and NATO radars obtained as they tracked the paths of the balloons—whose average altitude was 45,800 feet—over the Soviet Bloc. This data provided the most accurate record to date of high-altitude wind currents, knowledge that meteorologists were later able to put to use to determine optimum flightpaths for U-2 flights.\n\nOne completely fortuitous development from Project GENETRIX had nothing to do with the cameras but involved a steel bar. This bar served a dual purpose: the rigging of the huge polyethylene gasbag was secured to the top of the bar and the camera-payload and automatic-ballasting equipment was attached to the bottom. By sheer chance, the length of the bar—91 centimeters—corresponded to the wavelength of the radio frequency used by a Soviet radar known by its NATO designator as TOKEN. This was an S-band radar used by Soviet forces for early warning and ground-controlled intercept. The bar on the GENETRIX balloons resonated when struck by TOKEN radar pulses, making it possible for radar operators at US and NATO installations on the periphery of the Soviet Union to locate a number of previously unknown TOKEN radars.\n\nThese radar findings, coupled with other intercepts made during the balloon flights, provided extensive data on Warsaw Pact radar networks, radar sets, and ground-controlled interception techniques. Analysis of these intercepts revealed the altitude capabilities and tracking accuracy of radars, the methods used by Warsaw Pact nations to notify each other of the balloons' passage (handing off), and the altitudes at which Soviet aircraft could intercept the balloons. All of this information could be directly applied to future U-2 missions."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nChapter 2\n88\n\nThese positive results from Project GENETRIX did not outweigh the political liabilities of the international protests. CIA officials became concerned that the ill will generated by balloon overflights could sour the Eisenhower administration on all overflights, including those by the U-2, which was just about ready for deployment. Therefore, DDCI Cabell wrote to Air Force Chief of Staff Twining in February 1956 to warn against further balloon flights because of the \"additional political pressures being generated against all balloon operations and overflights, thus increasing the difficulties of policy decisions which would permit such operations in the future.\" 73\n\nIn addition to its concern for the future of the U-2 program, the Agency feared that President Eisenhower's anger at balloon overflights might result in the curtailment of the balloon program that the Free Europe Committee—a covert Agency operation based in West Germany—used to release propaganda pamphlets over Eastern Europe.\n\nAQUATONE BRIEFINGS FOR SELECTED MEMBERS OF CONGRESS\n\nAlthough knowledge of the U-2 project was a closely guarded secret within both the Agency and the Eisenhower administration, DCI Dulles decided that a few key members of Congress should be told about the project. On 24 February 1956, Dulles met with Senators Leverett Saltonstall and Richard B. Russell, the ranking members of the Senate Armed Services Committee and its subcommittee on the CIA. He shared with them the details of Project AQUATONE and then asked their opinion on whether some members of the House of Representatives should also be informed. As a result of the senators' recommendation that the senior members of the House Appropriations Committee should be briefed, Dulles later met with its ranking members, Representatives John Taber and Clarence Cannon. Official Congressional knowledge of the U-2 project remained confined to this small group for the next four years. The House Armed Services Committee and its CIA subcommittee did not receive a CIA briefing on the U-2 project until after the loss of Francis Gary Powers's U-2 over the Soviet Union in May 1960.74\n\n73 Philip G. Strong, Attachment to Memorandum for DCI Dulles, \"Project GENETRIX Summary,\" 15 February 1956, OSI records (S).\n\n74 John S. Warner, Legislative Counsel, Memorandum for the Record, \"AQUATONE Briefings,\" 18 November 1957, Office of Congressional Affairs records, job 61-357, box 2 (S); Warner interview (S).\n\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n89\n\nTHE U-2 COVER STORY\n\nIn February 1956, while the controversy over balloon flights was still raging and the U-2 was completing its final airworthiness tests, Richard Bissell and his staff began working on a cover story for overseas operations. It was important to have a plausible reason for deploying such an unusual looking plane, whose glider wings and odd landing gear were certain to arouse curiosity.\n\nBissell decided that the best cover for the deployment of the U-2 was an ostensible mission of high-altitude weather research by the National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics (NACA). Such a cover story, however, needed the approval of all concerned: Air Force intelligence, the Air Weather Service, the Third Air Force, the Seventh Air Division, the SAC U-2 project officer, the Air Force Headquarters project officer, and NACA's top official, Dr. Hugh Dryden. Moreover, the CIA Scientific Advisory Committee was also consulted about the cover plan.\n\nSenior CIA officials and the other agencies involved in providing cover for the U-2 approved the final version of the overall cover story at the end of March 1956. The project staff then began working on contingency plans for the loss of a U-2 over hostile territory. Bissell advised the project's cover officer to \"produce a document which sets forth all actions to be taken... not only press releases and the public line to be taken, but also the suspension of operations and at least an indication of the diplomatic action.... We should at least make the attempt in this case to be prepared for the worst in a really orderly fashion.\" The cover officer then prepared emergency procedures based on the overall weather research cover story, and Bissell approved these plans. There was one final high-level look at the cover story on 21 June 1956, the day after the first U-2 mission over Eastern Europe, when Bissell met with General Goodpaster, James Killian, and Edwin Land to discuss the pending overflights of the Soviet Union, including the proposed emergency procedures. Killian and Land disagreed with Bissell's concept and made a much bolder and more forthright proposal: in the event of the loss of a U-2 over hostile territory, the United States should not try to deny responsibility but should state that overflights were being conducted \"to guard against surprise attack.\" This proposal was put aside for further thought (which it never received), and Bissell's weather research cover remained the basis for statements to be made after a loss. The project staff then went on to prepare a number of different statements to be\n\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 2\n90\n\nused in various scenarios, including one in which the pilot was captured. Even in such a case, however, the proposed policy was for the United States to stick to the weather research cover story, a course of action that would prove disastrous in May 1960.75\n\n75 OSA History, chap. 8, pp. 30-35; chap. 11, annex 73 (TS Codeword).\n\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nChapter 3\n93\n\nU-2 Operations in the\nSoviet Bloc and Middle East,\n1956-1968\n\nBy January 1956, everyone working on Project AQUATONE could see that the U-2 was nearing the time for operational deployment. During tests the aircraft had met all the criteria established in late 1954. Its range of 2,950 miles was sufficient to overfly continents, its altitude of 72,000 feet was beyond the reach of all known antiaircraft weapons and interceptor aircraft, and its camera lenses were the finest available.\n\nBecause the main targets for the U-2 lay behind the Iron Curtain, Bissell and his staff began looking for operational bases in Europe. The United Kingdom, America's closest ally, seemed the logical choice for U-2 bases, and, on 10 January 1956, Bissell flew to London to discuss the matter with Royal Air Force (RAF) and MI-6 officials. Their initial response was favorable, but they told Bissell that the proposal needed approval at a much higher level.\n\nBissell reported his findings to DCI Dulles, who promptly arranged to meet with Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd in London to explore the possibility of winning the British Government's approval for the project. Dulles presented his case to Lloyd on 2 February, and, by early March, Prime Minister Anthony Eden approved the basing of U-2s in the United Kingdom. The U-2s were to use Lakenheath AFB, an RAF base also used by the USAF Strategic Air Command (SAC).1"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nChapter 3\n94\n\nTHE DEPLOYMENT OF DETACHMENT A\nTO LAKENHEATH\n\nThe first Agency U-2 detachment, consisting of four aircraft and pilots, was known publicly as the 1st Weather Reconnaissance Squadron, Provisional (WRSP-1). The \"provisional\" designation gave the U-2 detachments greater security because provisional Air Force units did not have to report to higher headquarters. WRSP-1, known within the Agency as Detachment A, began deploying to the United Kingdom on 29 April 1956. By 4 May, all of the detachment's personnel and equipment, including four aircraft, had arrived at Lakenheath.2\n\nShortly after deployment, on 7 May, the National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics (NACA) released an unclassified U-2 cover story stating that a Lockheed-developed aircraft would be flown by the USAF Air Weather Service to study such high-altitude phenomena as the jet stream, convective clouds, temperature and wind structures at jet-stream levels, and cosmic-ray effects up to 55,000 feet.3\n\nBefore overflights could begin from Lakenheath, however, several incidents occurred that dampened Prime Minister Eden's interest in having the U-2s on British territory. In mid-April 1956, a Soviet naval squadron brought Soviet leaders Nikita Khrushchev and Nikolai Bulganin on an official visit to the United Kingdom. Although the ships were docked in Portsmouth Harbor, a British counterintelligence operative and underwater expert, retired Royal Navy Commander Lionel Crabb, apparently undertook a mission to examine the hulls of these vessels but vanished in the process. His headless body was later found washed up on a beach. This so-called Frogman Incident caused an uproar in Parliament and a protest from Moscow that soured relations between the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union. To avoid further deterioration of Anglo-Soviet relations, the Prime Minister wrote to President Eisenhower on 16 May asking that overflights be postponed. Only two days later, a U-2 on a training flight from Lakenheath inadvertently penetrated the British radar network, causing RAF fighters to scramble. Afterward the Air Ministry made a public announcement that a special NACA aircraft was conducting high-altitude research in the United Kingdom. At about the\n\n2 Ibid., pp. 17-18 (TS Codeword).\n3 Press Release of 7 May 1956 (U) in OSA History, chap. 7, annex 60 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nChapter 3\n95\n\nsame time, Richard Bissell learned that the State Department had told Prime Minister Eden that only one U-2 was based at Lakenheath, when in reality there were four.4\n\nTHE MOVE TO WIESBADEN\n\nTo avoid arousing further reaction in the United Kingdom and to begin the program of U-2 overflights beyond the Iron Curtain without further delay, Bissell moved Detachment A on 11 June 1956 to Wiesbaden, one of the busiest airfields in West Germany, without notifying West German authorities. The detachment commander, Col. Frederick McCoy, was disappointed in his hope that the redeployment of the U-2s could be accomplished without drawing undue attention. The strange-looking planes, with bicycle-type wheels and wings so long they touched the ground after landing, aroused considerable interest. Wiesbaden was to be only a temporary home for Detachment A; the Air Force began preparing Giebelstadt near the East German border for use by the U-2s. Giebelstadt was an old World War II airbase that had been one of the launching sites for the GENETRIX balloons.5\n\nSoon after the four U-2s arrived in Wiesbaden, they were refitted with the more powerful J57/P-31 engines. The new engines were better suited for operations behind the Iron Curtain because they were less likely to suffer flameouts than the earlier model. Once the new engines were installed, the aircraft received the designation U-2B.6\n\nBissell was anxious to get the overflights started by late June because SAC weather experts had predicted that the best weather for photographing the Soviet Union would be between 20 June and 10 July. Bissell, however, had not yet received final authorization from President Eisenhower to begin overflights of the Soviet Union. On 28 May 1956, when DCI Allen Dulles met with the President to discuss the U-2's readiness for operations, Eisenhower still made no decision on overflights. Three days later Dulles and Air Force Chief of Staff\n\n4 Christopher Andrew, Her Majesty's Secret Service: The Making of the British Intelligence Community (New York, 1986), pp. 495-496; Beschloss, Mayday, p. 116; OSA History, chap. 11, pp. 18-21 (TS Codeword).\n5 OSA History, chap. 11, pp. 21-23 (TS Codeword).\n6 Ibid., pp. 23, 26 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nChapter 3\n96\n\nNathan Twining prepared a paper for the President outlining \"AQUATONE Operational Plans.\" In the meantime, President Eisenhower had entered Walter Reed Hospital for tests for an abdominal ailment that turned out to be ileitis, requiring an operation. During his recovery from surgery, Eisenhower would make his final decision on the overflight program.7\n\nPRESIDENT EISENHOWER'S ATTITUDE\nTOWARD OVERFLIGHTS\n\nThe President had mixed feelings about overflights of the Soviet Union. Aware that they could provide extremely valuable intelligence about Soviet capabilities, he, nevertheless, remained deeply concerned that such flights brought with them the risk of starting a war. From the very beginning of the U-2 program, President Eisenhower had worked to minimize the possibility that overflights could lead to hostilities. He had always insisted that overflights by military aircraft were too provocative, and in 1954 he had therefore supported the Land committee's proposal for an unarmed civilian aircraft instead of the military reconnaissance planes favored by the Air Force. For the same reason, Eisenhower had resisted attempts by the Air Force to take the U-2 program away from the CIA in 1955.\n\nIn fact, the President's desire to avoid secret reconnaissance missions over the Soviet Union, with all their risks, led him to make his famous \"Open Skies\" proposal in the summer of 1955, when the U-2 was still under development but making good progress. At the Geneva summit conference on 21 July 1955, President Eisenhower offered to provide airfields and other facilities in the United States for the Soviet Union to conduct aerial photography of all US military installations if the Soviet Union would provide the United States with similar facilities in Russia. Not surprisingly, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev almost immediately rejected Eisenhower's offer. Although the President had hoped that the Soviet Union would accept his proposal, he was prepared for rejection. While Open Skies was still being considered, Eisenhower had stated, \"I'll give it one shot. Then if they don't accept it, we'll fly the U-2.\"8\n\n7 Ibid., pp. 23-25 and annex 73, \"AQUATONE Operational Plans,\" 31 May 1956 (TS Codeword).\n8 Quoted in Beschloss, Mayday, p. 105."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nChapter 3\n97\n\nEven though President Eisenhower had approved every stage of the U-2's development, knowing full well that the aircraft was being built to fly over the Soviet Union, the actual decision to authorize such flights was very difficult for him. He remained concerned that overflights could poison relations with the Soviet Union and might even lead to hostilities. One argument that helped overcome the President's reluctance was the CIA's longstanding contention that U-2 flights might actually go undetected because Soviet radars would not be able to track aircraft at such high altitudes. This belief was based on a 1952 study of Soviet World War II-vintage radars and on 1955 tests using US radars, which-unknown to US officials-were not as effective as Soviet radars against high-altitude targets. Shortly before U-2 operations began, however, the CIA's Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSI) conducted a vulnerability study of the U-2 that was published on 28 May 1956. The study's conclusion was that \"Maximum Soviet radar detection ranges against the Project aircraft at elevation in excess of 55,000 feet would vary from 20 to 150 miles.... In our opinion, detection can therefore be assumed.\" The OSI study added, however, \"It is doubtful that the Soviets can achieve consistent tracking of the Project vehicle.\" 9 Completed just three weeks before the initation of overflights, this study seems to have had little impact on the thinking of the top project officials. They continued to believe that the Soviets would not be able to track the U-2 and might even fail to detect it, except for possible vague indications.10\n\nSoviet radars were not President Eisenhower's only concern. Also fearing that a malfunction might cause a U-2 to crash inside the Soviet Union, he asked Allen Dulles what the consequences would be. The President's staff secretary, Col. Andrew J. Goodpaster, who was present at virtually all White House meetings on the U-2 project and served as the President's intermediary to the CIA on this issue, later recalled:\n\nAllen's approach was that we were unlikely to lose one. If we did lose one, the pilot would not survive.... We were told-and it was part of our understanding of the situation-that it was almost certain that the plane would disintegrate and that we could\n\n9 OSA History, chap. 11, p. 31 (TS Codeword). For the belief that the U-2 might go undetected see the Leghorn interview and Dwight D. Eisenhower, Waging Peace, 1956-1961 (New York, 1965), p. 41.\n10 Richard M. Bissell, Jr., interview by Gregory W. Pedlow, tape recording, Farmington, Connecticut, 28 October 1988 (S)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nChapter 3\n98\n\nColonel Goodpaster with\nPresident Eisenhower\n\ntake it as a certainty that no pilot would survive... and that al-though they would know where the plane came from, it would be difficult to prove it in any convincing way.\"\n\nCIA assurances that the U-2 would probably not be detected, and that a crashed U-2 could not be traced back to the United States, helped overcome the President's worries about overflights. The most important reason why President Eisenhower decided to send reconnaissance aircraft over the Soviet Union, however, was the urgent need for accurate intelligence to confirm or disprove claims of Soviet advances in long-range bombers and missiles. The initial sighting of the new Soviet Bison bomber in the spring of 1954 had been followed by reported sightings of more than 30 of these bombers in the spring and summer of 1955 (in reality these were sightings of the same group of 10 aircraft that circled around out of sight and made several passes during a Soviet air show). Soon members of Congress were calling for investigations into the relative strength of the US and\n\n\" Quoted in Beschloss, Mayday, p. 118.\n\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nChapter 3\n99\n\nSoviet Air Forces.\" Early in 1956, concern about a possible Soviet advantage in long-range bombers grew as Air Force Chief of Staff Twining informed the Senate Armed Services Committee that the Soviet Union already had more Bisons than the United States had B-52s and that the Soviets would be able to \"maintain this advantage for some time if they keep on the production curve we are now predicting.\" By May 1956, reporting on the growing Soviet air strength was no longer confined to aviation journals; U.S. News and World Report, for example, featured articles headlined \"Can Soviets Take the Air Lead?\" and \"Is U.S. Really Losing in the Air?\"\n\nAlongside fear of possible Soviet superiority in long-range bombers came a new potential threat: Soviet progress in guided missile research. Trevor Gardner, Air Force Assistant Secretary for Research and Development, warned in September 1955 that \"the most complex and baffling technological mystery today is not the Russian capability in aircraft and nuclear weapons but rather what the Soviet progress has been in the field of guided missiles.\" On 30 January 1956, Time magazine made the guided missile its cover story. The article began by describing a hypothetical crisis set in 1962 in which the United States suffered a humiliating defeat because it had lagged behind the Soviet Union in guided missile development. Just two weeks after this story appeared, the Soviets successfully tested a missile with a range of 900 miles, and President Eisenhower admitted at a press conference that the Soviet Union might be ahead of the United States in some areas of the missile field. Administration critic Senator Stuart Symington then claimed, \"The facts are that our missile development may be ahead in the short-range area, but their missile development is ahead in the area that counts by far the most—the\n\nRobert Hotz, \"Russian Jet Airpower Gains Fast on US,\" Aviation Week, 23 May 1955, pp. 12-15; \"Aviation Week Story Spurs Debate on US, Red Airpower Positions,\" Aviation Week, 30 May 1955, pp. 13-14.\n\nClaude Witze, \"Russians Outpacing US in Air Quality, Twining Warns Congress.\" Aviation Week, 27 February 1956, pp. 26-28; Robert Hotz, \"Russian Air Force Now Gaining in Quality,\" Aviation Week, 12 March 1956, p. 286.\n\n\"Can Soviets Take the Air Lead? What LeMay, Wilson, Ike Say,\" US News and World Report, 11 May 1956, pp. 108-114; \"Is U.S. Really Losing in the Air?\" US News and World Report, 18 May 1956, pp. 25-27.\n\nWilliam Coughlin, \"Gardner Defends Greater R&D Spending,\" Aviation Week, 26 September 1955, p. 14.\n\n\"Missiles Away,\" Time, 30 January 1956, pp. 52-55.\n\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nChapter 3\n100\n\nlong-range area.\" Fears of Soviet missile progress increased when Nikita Khrushchev stated on 23 April 1956, \"I am quite sure that we shall have very soon a guided missile with a hydrogen-bomb warhead which could hit any point in the world.\"\n\nFaced with growing Congressional and public anxiety over Soviet offensive capabilties, President Eisenhower approved the proposed overflight program. Colonel Goodpaster relayed this decision to Bissell, Land, and Killian at a meeting on 21 June. The President nevertheless maintained tight control over the program and authorized only 10 days of overflights when operations over the Soviet Union were ready to start in early July 1956.\n\nFIRST OVERFLIGHTS OF EASTERN EUROPE\n\nThe CIA initiated U-2 flights over hostile territory even before the President granted final approval for overflights of the Soviet Union. After consulting with the Commander of US Air Force Europe, Richard Bissell used existing Presidential permission for Air Force overflights of the Soviet Union's East European satellites as his authority to plan a mission over Poland and East Germany. Bissell had informed the President of his intention to conduct such missions in the \"AQUATONE Operational Plan\" submitted on 31 May.\n\nThe first operational use of a U-2 took place on Wednesday, 20 June 1956. Carl K. Overstreet flew a U-2 equipped with an A-2 camera over Poland and East Germany. At the end of the mission, Detachment A immediately rushed the exposed film to the United States for processing. The developed film arrived at the Photo-Intelligence Division (PID) on 22 June 1956. PID personnel considered the pictures obtained by mission 2003 to be of good quality.\n\nRobert Hotz, \"Firing of 900-Mile Russian Missile Spurs US Changes,\" Aviation Week, 20 February 1956, p. 27.\n\n\"Is Russia Really Ahead in Missile Race?,\" US News and World Report, 4 May 1956, p. 34.\n\nOSA History, chap. 11, pp. 27-29 (TS Codeword); A. J. Goodpaster, Memorandum for the Record, 21 June 1956, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS).\n\nOSA History, chap. 11, p. 27 (TS Codeword); Mission folder 2003 (20 June 1956), OSA records, job 67-B-328, box 7 (TS Codeword).\n\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nChapter 3\n101\n\nFollowing the success of this first mission, Bissell was eager to begin overflights of the Soviet Union. But even after the President granted his approval on 21 June, such missions could not yet take place for two reasons. First, President Eisenhower had agreed with a CIA and State Department recommendation that West German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer be informed in advance of US plans to overfly the Soviet Union from bases in Germany (in keeping with existing policies Adenauer was not informed about overflights of Eastern Europe). Second, Soviet party chief Nikita Khrushchev had invited representatives of the US Air Force to the Moscow Air Show, which opened on 23 June 1956. Led by Air Force Chief of Staff Nathan F. Twining, the delegation would be in the Soviet Union for a week, and General Twining requested that no overflights of the Soviet Union be staged until the Air Force delegation had left.\n\nBoth of these restrictions on overflights of the Soviet Union were cleared up by the end of June. Accompanied by General Cabell and the Chief of Station for Germany, Tracy Barnes, Bissell briefed Chancellor Adenauer and his trusted adviser, State Secretary Hans Globke, on 27 June. Adenauer enthusiastically endorsed the project.\n\nA few days later the Air Force delegation returned from Moscow, but now unfavorable weather prevented the start of operations against the Soviet Union.\n\nWhile waiting for the clouds over the Soviet Union to clear, Detachment A carried out two more overflights of Eastern Europe on 2 July 1956: mission 2009 over Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Bulgaria; and mission 2010 over East Germany, Poland, Hungary, and Romania. That afternoon Bissell and DDCI Cabell gave President Eisenhower a detailed briefing on the first U-2 overflight, which the President found \"very interesting, very positive.\" Eisenhower was anxious to know, however, whether radars had tracked the aircraft. Bissell replied that, although East European radars had picked up the 20 June flight, radar operators had misread the altitude as only 42,000 feet. He added that the Agency was awaiting reports on that morning's flights to see if they, too, had been detected. Noting that the U-2\n\nNathan F. Twining, Neither Liberty nor Safety (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1966), pp. 259-260; OSA History, chap. 11, p. 27 (TS Codeword).\n\nOSA History, chap. 11, p. 28 (TS Codeword).\n\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"102\n\nFirst Overflights, 20 June - 5 July 1956\n\nLegend:\nMission 2003 20 June\nMission 2009 2 July\nMission 2010 2 July\n\nNorway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, France, Germany, East Germany, West Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Austria, Switzerland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Albania, Greece, Turkey, Italy, Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Malta (U.K.), Tunisia, Crete, Mediterranean Sea, Black Sea, Baltic Sea, North Sea, U.S.S.R.\n\nCities: Oslo, Stockholm, Helsinki, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Brussels, Bonn, Berlin, Wiesbaden, Luxembourg, Warsaw, Prague, Bern, Vienna, Budapest, Bucharest, Belgrade, Sofia, Tirane, Athens, Rome, Tunis\n\nRivers: Rhine, Danube, Dnepr\n\nBoundary representation is not necessarily authoritative.\n\n724742 (B01373) 4-92\n\nSecret NOFORN"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"103\nSecret NOFORN\nBoundary representation is not necessarily authoritative.\nMission 2013 4 July\nMission 2014 5 July\nNorth Sea\nNorway\nSweden\nFinland\nOSLO\nSTOCKHOLM\nHELSINKI\nLake Onega\nLake Ladoga\nLeningrad\nR. S. F. S. R.\nVolga\nKhimki\nMOSCOW\nRamenskoye\nCOPENHAGEN\nBaltic Sea\nEstonian S. S. R.\nLatvian S. S. R.\nLithuanian S. S. R.\nKaliningrad\nR.S.F.S.R.\nMinsk\nBelorussian S. S. R.\nU. S. S. R.\nAMSTERDAM\nNeth.\nBRUSSELS\nBel.\nBONN\nLux.\nLUXEMBOURG\nFrance\nWEST GERMANY\nEAST GERMANY\nBerlin\nPoznan\nWARSAW\nPoland\nPRAGUE\nCzechoslovakia\nWiesbaden\nGERMANY\nVIENNA\nAustria\nBUDAPEST\nHungary\nUkrainian S. S. R.\nRomania\n200 Kilometers\n200 Miles\nSea of Azov\n724743 (B01374) 4-92\nU-2 photography of Leningrad, 4 July 1956\nFili Airframe Plant, Moscow, 5 July 1956\nSecret NOFORN"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n104\ndetachment had four aircraft working and could average up to two flights per day, Bissell told the President that the crews were \"ready and eager to go in beyond the satellites\" and overfly the center of the Soviet Union.23\n\nEisenhower replied that he thought it \"urgent\" to know whether the recent flights had been tracked by hostile radars. The President was obviously concerned that CIA estimates that the U-2 could fly virtually undetected were proving false. One of the reasons why he had approved the overflight program was the CIA's assurance that the Soviet Union would remain unaware of the flights or—at the very worst—receive only occasional, vague indications.\n\nFIRST U-2 FLIGHTS OVER THE SOVIET UNION\n\nThe question of how well the Soviets could track U-2 flights had not yet been settled when the first overflights of the Soviet Union took place. On Wednesday, 4 July 1956, the U-2 known as Article 347 began the first flight over the Soviet Union. Final authorization for mission 2013 had come shortly before takeoff. Late on the evening of 3 July, Bissell went to project headquarters in the Matomic Building to give the \"Go\" or \"No go\" decision. Although the President had approved the overflight, the final decision to start a mission depended on a number of factors, especially the weather over the target area and at the takeoff and landing sites. Bissell made the decision just before midnight Washington time, which was six o'clock in the morning in Wiesbaden. This pattern of last-minute approvals continued for the duration of the U-2 overflight program.24\n\nWhen Wiesbaden received the \"Go\" signal, a U-2 equipped with an A-2 camera and flown by pilot Hervey Stockman took off on a course that took it over Poznan, Poland, where riots had occurred on 28-30 June. After Poznan, Stockman headed for Belorussia, where he turned north to Leningrad. The last leg of the mission took the U-2 over the Soviet Baltic states before returning to Wiesbaden. The main target of this mission was the naval shipyards in Leningrad, center of\n\n23 Andrew J. Goodpaster's handwritten notes on 2 July 1956 meeting, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS).\n24 Bissell interview by Welzenbach (S); Cunningham interview (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n105\nthe Soviet Union's submarine construction program. Mission 2013's route also overflew a number of major military airfields to make an inventory of the new Bison jet-engine heavy bomber.25\n\nThe second overflight, on the following day, continued the search for Bison bombers. Pilot Carmine Vito's route was similar but somewhat to the south of Stockman's and also flew farther east, more than 200 kilometers past Moscow. Although the Soviet capital was almost completely hidden by clouds, the A-2 camera with haze filters took some usable photographs of the city. These turned out to be the only U-2 photographs of Moscow because no other mission was sent over the Soviet capital. Among the key targets photographed during mission 2014 were the Fili airframe plant, where the Bison was being built; the bomber arsenal at Ramenskoye, where the Bisons were tested; the Kaliningrad missile plant; and the Khimki rocket-engine plant.26\n\nWhen Allen Dulles returned to work on Thursday, 5 July 1956, he asked Bissell if any overflights had taken place during the Independence Day holiday. One had been made on the fourth and another just that morning, Bissell replied. (Because of the six-hour time difference, the 5 July flight was safely back in Wiesbaden by the time Dulles spoke to Bissell.) When Dulles asked the routes of these missions, Bissell told him that they had overflown both Moscow and Leningrad. \"Oh my Lord,\" Dulles exclaimed, \"do you think that was wise the first time?\" \"Allen,\" Bissell replied, \"the first is the safest.\" 27\n\nPresident Eisenhower also wanted to know the results of the 4 and 5 July flights, but his principal concern was whether there had been any indication that either flight had been discovered or tracked by radar. Eisenhower told Colonel Goodpaster \"to advise Mr. Allen\n\n25 Urban J. Linehan, National Photographic Interpretation Center: The Years of Project HTAUTOMAT, 1956-1958, Directorate of Science and Technology Historical Series NPIC-3, December 1974, 6 vols. (hereafter cited as NPIC History), vol. 1, p. 20 (S); Mission folder 2013 (4 July 1956), OSA records, job 67-B-328, box 7 (TS Codeword). Note on mission numbers: each proposed mission received a number, but not all of these missions were flown.\n26 NPIC History, vol. 1, p. 21 (S); Mission folder 2014 (5 July 1956), OSA records, job 67-B-328, box 7 (TS Codeword).\n27 Bissell interview by Welzenbach (S).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n106\nDulles that if we obtain any information or warning that any of the flights has been discovered or tracked, the operation should be suspended.\" Goodpaster called both Dulles and Bissell and was told that reports on tracking or attempted interception of the U-2s would not be available for another 36 hours. Later that day the two CIA officials met with Goodpaster to ask if flights could continue in the meantime. Goodpaster replied that his understanding of the President's directive was that the operation should continue \"at the maximum rate until the first evidence of tracking was received.\" 28\n\nAlthough President Eisenhower had originally spoken of suspending the overflights if they were \"discovered or tracked,\" his main concern was to learn if the Soviets could track U-2 missions, meaning that they could follow the flight on their radar screens for most or all of the missions and thus have numerous opportunities to attempt interception. Certainly the President hoped that U-2 flights could not even be detected, but reports received on the 20 June overflight of Eastern Europe had already indicated that this goal was unrealistic. The President's emphasis therefore shifted to tracking. If the Soviets could successfully track U-2 missions, he wanted the overflights halted.29 Reports on Soviet radar coverage of the first two overflights of the Soviet Union became available on 6 July. These reports showed that, although the Soviets did detect the aircraft and made several very unsuccessful attempts at interception, they could not track U-2s consistently. Interestingly, the Soviet radar coverage was weakest around the most important targets, Moscow and Leningrad, and the Soviets did not realize that U-2s had overflown these two cities.30\n\nDetachment A carried out three more overflights of the Soviet Union during the 10-day period authorized by the President. Two of the missions (2020 and 2021) took place on a single day, 9 July 1956. They covered much of Eastern Europe, and the Ukraine and Belorussia in the Soviet Union. Unfortunately, a broken camera\n\n28 Andrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum for the Record, 5 July 1956, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS).\n29 Gen. Andrew J. Goodpaster, interview by Donald E. Welzenbach and Gregory W. Pedlow, Washington, DC, 8 July 1987 (S).\n30 Mission folders 2013 (4 July 1956) and 2014 (5 July 1956), OSA records, job 67-B-328, box 7 (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"107\nAdditional Overflights, 9-10 July 1956\nMission 2020 9 July 1956\nMission 2021 9 July 1956\nMission 2023 10 July 1956\nNorway\nSweden\nFinland\nOSLO\nSTOCKHOLM\nHELSINKI\nLake Ladoga\nNorth Sea\nDenmark\nCOPENHAGEN\nBaltic Sea\nEstonian S.S.R.\nLatvian S.S.R.\nLithuanian S.S.R.\nMOSCOW\nR. S. F. S. R.\nVolga\nAMSTERDAM\nNeth.\nBRUSSELS\nBel.\nBONN\nLux.\nLUXEMBOURG\nFrance\nWEST GERMANY\nEAST GERMANY\nBerlin\nWARSAW\nPoland\nWiesbaden\nPRAGUE\nCzechoslovakia\nBERN\nSwitz.\nVIENNA\nAustria\nBUDAPEST\nHungary\nMinsk\nBelorussian S.S.R.\nU. S. S. R.\nKiev\nUkrainian S.S.R.\nL'vov\nMoldavian S.S.R.\nKishinev\nOdessa\nRomania\nBUCHAREST\nDanube\nBELGRADE\nYugoslavia\nSea of Azov\nKerch\nCrimean Peninsula\nSimferopol\nSevastopol\nBlack Sea\nBulgaria\nSOFIA\nTIRANE\nAlb.\nGreece\nATHENS\nItaly\nROME\nCorsica\nSardinia\nSicily\nMalta (U.K.)\nTUNIS\nTunisia\nTurkey\nANKARA\nNICOSIA\nCyprus (U.K.)\nMediterranean Sea\n200 Kilometers\n200 Miles\n724744 (B00997) 4-92\nSecret NOFORN"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"shutter ruined much of the photography of one of the flights. The third mission (2023), on the following day, included the Crimean Peinsula.\n\nThe film from the first overflight (4 July) was flown to the United States immediately after the U-2 landed at Wiesbaden. Several members of the Photo Intelligence Division were on hand when the film was developed to check on the results. Also present was James Baker, who had accepted an offer by project officials to get a first-hand look at how the new A-2 lenses were working.\n\nThe photos from July overflights were generally good, despite occasional problems caused by cloud cover. The huge amount of film taken by these missions provided more information about the Soviet Union's ability to track and intercept U-2s. Photointerpreters examining the films eventually discovered the tiny images of MiG-15s and MiG-17s beneath the U-2s in various pursuit and attack attitudes: climbing, flipping over, and falling toward Earth. It was even possible to determine their approximate altitudes. These photographs showed that the Soviet air defense system was able to track U-2s well enough to attempt interception, but they also provided proof that the fighter aircraft available to the Soviet Union in 1956 could not bring down a U-2 at operational altitude.\n\nOne problem with early U-2 photography became apparent only after the first films were developed. If there was surface water on the runway at Wiesbaden when the U-2 took off, the camera windows became begrimed. Although the water dried during the flight, the oily scum it left behind degraded the photographic image. To combat this problem, AQUATONE ground crews took brooms and spent several hours before takeoff sweeping puddles of water from the runway to be used by the U-2. Kelly Johnson eventually designed a jettisonable cover for the camera windows, which was released at the same time as the pogos so that it could be recovered and reused."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SOVIET PROTEST NOTE\n\nThe 4 and 5 July overflights brought a strong protest from the Soviet Union on 10 July in the form of a note handed to the US Embassy in Moscow. The note said that the overflights had been made by a \"twin-engine medium bomber of the United States Air Force\" and gave details of the routes flown by the first two missions. The note did not mention Moscow or Leningrad, however, because the Soviets had not been able to track these portions of the overflights. The Soviet note stated that the flights could only be evaluated as \"intentional and conducted for the purposes of intelligence.\" As soon as the note arrived at the White House on the evening of 10 July 1956, Colonel Goodpaster called Bissell and told him to stop all U-2 overflights until further notice. The next morning Goodpaster met with Bissell to review the U-2 situation. Bissell said three additional flights had taken place since the missions mentioned in the Soviet note but added that no more were planned.\n\nLater Eisenhower told Goodpaster that he \"didn't like a thing\" about the Soviet note and was going to discuss the matter with Secretary of State Dulles. With the strong approval of President Eisenhower, Goodpaster informed DCI Dulles that \"there is to be no mention of the existence of this project or of operations incident to it, outside the Executive Branch, and no mention within the Executive Branch to others than those who directly need to know of the operation, as distinguished from output deriving from it.\"\n\nDuring these initial overflights, the U-2 flew above 69,000 feet and could be seen only fleetingly by pilots of the Soviet interceptor aircraft. Thus, it appears that the Soviet claim that the intruder was a twin-engine bomber was probably based on the assumption that this was another overflight by a reconnaissance version of the twin-engine Canberra bomber, similar to the RAF overflight of Kapustin Yar in 1953. The US reply, sent to the Soviets on 19 July, truthfully denied that any US \"military planes\" had overflown the Soviet Union on the days in question. Meanwhile, on 16 July the Polish Ambassador to"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the United States delivered an oral protest concerning overflights of Poland on 20 June and 2 July. This was followed by a protest note from the Czechoslovak Government on 21 July. No formal reply was sent to the two Soviet satellite states.\n\nThe details of the flightpaths listed in the Soviet and Polish protests, along with the subsequent photographic evidence of Soviet interception attempts, made it clear that U-2s could not fly undetected over the Soviet Union or Eastern Europe and could even be tracked for extended periods of time. This news greatly disturbed President Eisenhower. In a meeting with Allen Dulles on 19 July 1956, the President recalled how he had been told that \"not over a very minor percentage of these (flights) would be picked up.\" He went on to question \"how far this should now be pushed, knowing that detection is not likely to be avoided.\" After discussing the possibility of basing U-2s in the Far East, President Eisenhower went on to say that he had \"lost enthusiasm\" for the U-2 activity. He noted that, if the United States were on the receiving end of a Soviet overflight operation, \"the reaction would be drastic.\" The President was also concerned that the American public might learn of the overflights and be shocked that their country had violated international law. He stated, \"Soviet protests were one thing, any loss of confidence by our own people would be quite another.\"\n\nThe President's rapid disenchantment with the project was not lost on Richard Bissell. Fearing for the U-2 program's survival, he met with the Land committee in early August 1956 to urge them to help make the U-2 less vulnerable to radar pulses. His goal was to reduce the aircraft's radar cross section so that it would be less susceptible to detection. Edward Purcell had some ideas on this and suggested that he supervise a new project in the Boston area to explore them. At the direction of the Land committee, Bissell set in motion a project known as HTNAMABLE to establish a proprietary firm called the Scientific Engineering Institute (SEI) in Cambridge. Former Air Force Col. Richard S. Leghorn headed the SEI operation for the Agency when it began on 26 November 1956. SEI was staffed by several MIT scholars who conducted studies and experiments into"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"radar-absorbing materials and techniques proposed by Purcell. The effort, known as Project RAINBOW, got under way by the end of the year.\n\nTHE END OF THE BOMBER GAP\n\nDuring the three-week period of 20 June to 10 July 1956, U-2s had made eight overflights beyond the Iron Curtain, including five over the Soviet Union. PID's photointerpreters were busy until the end of August with their initial evaluation of the photography obtained by these flights. Their efforts were complicated by the division's move on 9 July from Que Building to the Steuart Building, but, when the photointerpreters were finished, they were able to write \"finis\" to the controversy over Soviet bomber strength.\n\nAlthough the Air Force had claimed that the Soviet Union possessed almost 100 of the new Myasishchev-4 (Bison) heavy bombers, U-2 photography proved this assertion wrong. There were no Bison bombers at any of the nine long-range bomber bases photographed by the July missions. DCI Allen Dulles was particularly impressed by the photographs of the Soviet bomber bases, which in later years he called \"million-dollar\" photography. The actual value of the U-2 photos was probably even greater because, on the strength of their evidence, the White House was able to deny Air Force requests for additional B-52 bombers to \"catch up\" to the Soviets.\n\nBecause of the need to protect the source of the information about Soviet bomber strength, the controversy surrounding this issue did not immediately die down. In November 1956, when the CIA began providing new Bison production figures based on U-2 photography without identifying the source, some members of Congress—unaware of the existence of the U-2—questioned the motivation behind the reduced estimates. They suggested that either the earlier estimates of Soviet bomber strength had been inflated to increase Air Force appropriations or the new estimates had been reduced by White House direction in order to hold down military expenditures."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"No one in the White House, the CIA, or the Air Force could reveal that U-2 photographs had actually provided the primary evidence for this change in the estimates.\n\nThe need to keep the existence of the U-2 program secret caused problems even within the CIA itself. The Office of Security sharply restricted the number of persons who could be cleared for access to U-2 photography. The special clearance was granted on a \"slot\" basis, and only the person assigned to a particular position or \"slot\" could have the clearance. The U-2 photographs were kept in a secure room, and only those with special clearances were admitted to the room. In addition, the Office of Security considered U-2 information too sensitive to use in CIA publications. As a result, many analysts did not have access to information that would have greatly aided the production of intelligence estimates.\n\nTACTICAL INTELLIGENCE FROM U-2s DURING THE SUEZ CRISIS\n\nAlthough U-2s had ceased flying over the Soviet Bloc because of President Eisenhower's standdown order, they could still be used elsewhere in the world. The Middle East would be the next area for U-2 operations. On 26 July 1956, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal Company in retaliation for the decision by the United States and the United Kingdom to withdraw financial support for the Aswan Dam project. Nasser's action provoked an international crisis that would have a permanent effect on the U-2 program.\n\nLong before the Suez Crisis developed, the CIA had planned to deploy U-2s in Turkey for use in the Soviet overflight program. On 1 May 1956, US Charge d'Affaires Foy D. Kohler approached Turkish Prime Minister Adnan Menderes on this matter. He told the Prime Minister that the effort was a continuation of the GENETRIX program, during which balloons had been released from Turkey, and involved aircraft that could fly 10,000 feet higher than any Soviet plane. Menderes gave his approval immediately. At the time of the"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN- Chapter 3 113 Bases for U-2 Operations in the Middle East, 1956 NORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN WEST GERMANY Wiesbaden Black Sea Turkey Adana Mediterranean Sea 724745 (B00952) 4-92 -Secret NOFORN- Suez takeover, however, the second contingent of U-2 aircraft and pilots was still being trained in Nevada. This unit would not be ready for redeployment before the end of August and would not become established at Incirlik airbase near Adana, Turkey, until early September 1956. The Agency referred to the AQUATONE detachment at Adana as Detachment B, cryptonym KWCORK; the Air Force covername was Weather Reconnaissance Squadron Provisional 2; and the unit's unofficial name was Tuslog Detachment 10-10. By whatever name, the Adana detachment became the mainstay of U-2 activity for the next three and a half years. 43 The fast-moving events of the Suez Crisis would not wait for Detachment B pilots to complete their training. With tension growing between Egypt and the Suez Canal Company's former owners, the United Kingdom and France, as well as between Egypt and Israel, US 43 OSA History, chap. 11, pp. 9, 39-40; chap. 12, pp. 5, 12 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 3 114 military and foreign policy planners needed immediate information about developments in the eastern Mediterranean. Detachment A was, therefore, assigned the first Middle East overflights. On 29 August, U-2 missions 1104 and 1105 left Wiesbaden and overflew the eastern Mediterranean littoral, starting with Greece, then Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, and Turkey. Because these target areas were beyond the round trip range of the Wiesbaden-based U-2s, the planes landed at Adana for refueling. The next day, the same two planes, with different pilots, took off from Adana and overflew the same Middle East territory, this time including the Gaza Strip, before returning to Wiesbaden. The film contained evidence of large numbers of British troops on Malta and Cyprus and more new French-made aircraft in Israel than had previously been reported. 44 As the situation around Suez grew more tense, the Eisenhower administration decided to release some of the U-2 photos to the British Government. On 7 September, James Reber, chairman of the Ad Hoc Requirements Committee, and Arthur Lundahl, chief of the Photo Intelligence Division, flew to London, taking with them photos of the eastern Mediterranean area, including the Suez Canal, taken on 30 August. These were the first and the only photos of the Middle East that the President authorized to be given to the British during the 1956 crisis. 45 The Eisenhower administration viewed the developments in the eastern Mediterranean with great concern. To keep the President and Secretary of State abreast of developments in the area, Deputy Director for Intelligence Robert Amory established on 12 September a multiagency group known as the PARAMOUNT Committee to monitor the situation on a round-the-clock basis. The PARAMOUNT Committee worked inside PID headquarters in the Steuart Building. Composed of members from CIA, State, NSA, Army, Navy, and Air Force, this committee met daily frequently several times a day to produce reports based on information obtained from U-2 photography, communications and electronic intelligence, and agents. The photointerpreters working for the PARMOUNT committee also came from several agencies: the CIA, the Army, and the Navy. 46 44 Mission folders 1104 (29 August 1956) and 1105 (29 August 1956), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 6 (TS Codeword). 45 Lundahl and Brugioni interview (TS Codeword); NPIC History, vol. 1, pp. 56-58 (S). 46 NPIC History, vol. 1, pp. 47-49, 54-56 (S). -Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN- Chapter 3 115 The Suez Crisis was a major turning point in the use of the U-2 airplane. Before this crisis, the U-2 had been seen solely as a collector of strategic intelligence, with high-quality results considered more important than speed. U-2 film had, therefore, been returned to the manufacturer for optimum development and then interpreted in Washington using the most up-to-date devices. Now, because of the Middle East crisis, Project AQUATONE was expected to perform like a tactical reconnaissance unit, developing film immediately after landing for instant interpretation or readout. Photo-Intelligence Division personnel assigned to Project HTAUTOMAT (U-2 film exploitation), therefore, had to arrange for forward processing of the U-2 film to avoid unacceptable delays in providing intelligence on tactical developments around Suez. PID acted quickly to carry out its new assignment. Lundahl and Reber flew from the United Kingdom to US Air Force Europe headquarters in Wiesbaden on 12 September to make arrangements for processing and interpreting U-2 film in West Germany. They had been preceded by [REDACTED] chief of PID's Special Projects Branch. Following detailed discussions with Air Force photointelligence personnel, the CIA representatives arranged to use a portion of a nearby Air Force photo laboratory for developing U-2 film. With the assistance of [REDACTED] chief of the HTAUTOMAT photo laboratory, and Air Force personnel, [REDACTED] had the lab ready for processing on the following day, when the next U-2 mission returned from the Middle East. After quickly developing the film, [REDACTED] and his joint staff of CIA and armed forces personnel studied it for indications of British and French preparations for hostilities and sent their first report to Washington on 15 September. Although the Air Force provided considerable assistance in establishing [REDACTED] photo laboratory, Air Force officials did not like the idea of CIA personnel controlling overseas photo processing and interpretation centers, which were normally under Air Force control. Further negotiations led to a CIA-Air Force agreement at the end of October, under which the Air Force would name the commanding officer for such installations and the CIA would designate the deputy, who was responsible for technical and intelligence matters. 47 PID soon added two photointerpreters and a lab technician to the West German operation, which continued to develop and interpret U-2 photography of the Middle East throughout September and 47 Ibid., pp. 49-52 (S). -Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 3 116 October 1956. This unit's timely and accurate information enabled the PARAMOUNT Committee to predict the joint Israeli-British-French attack on Egypt three days before it took place. On 11 September, Detachment A pilot Jacob Kratt overflew the French Mediterranean naval base at Toulon. He brought back imagery revealing that France was loading troopships at Toulon. During the rest of the month, Detachment A pilots flew another eight missions over the Middle East. By this time, the new Detachment B in Turkey was ready for operations, and it was better positioned to provide coverage of the Middle East. Detachment B began flying missions in September and soon became the primary detachment for Middle East overflights, conducting nine out of the 10 such missions flown in October. 48 Detachment B's first U-2 flight, on 11 September 1956, made passes over Turkey, Cyprus, and Rhodes. The next flight, more than two weeks later, covered much the same ground but flew as far west as Malta, Sicily, and Crete. Both were special missions aimed at maintaining surveillance of the British and French fleets and forces as they prepared for the attack on Egypt. Meanwhile, Detachment A pilots flew four missions in the Western Mediterranean. During this period, the PARAMOUNT Committee's photointerpreters developed the new science of tent-ology counting the tents of British forces on the islands of Cyprus and Malta to determine the number of troops deployed. The photointerpreters used changes in the number of tents to determine that the British forces were beginning to move toward the beaches, where they were eventually lightered to offshore troopships. 49 Noting the U-2 activity in the Middle East, President Eisenhower wrote in his diary on 15 October 1956: Our high-flying reconnaissance planes have shown that Israel has obtained some 60 of the French Mystere pursuit planes, when there had been reported the transfer of only 24. 50 Other U-2 photographs revealed the presence 48 OSA History, chap. 19, annex 120, CIA U-2 Missions Flown, 1956-1968, pp. 1-2 (TS Codeword). 49 Lundahl and Brugioni interview (TS Codeword). 50 Dwight D. Eisenhower Diary, 15 October 1956, DDEL. -Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN- Chapter 3 117 of British Canberra bombers at Akrotiri, Cyprus. The Anglo-French military buildup greatly irritated President Eisenhower, who considered these activities a violation of the 1950 Tripartite Declaration, in which the United States, the United Kingdom, and France had agreed to maintain the status quo in armaments and borders in the Middle East. To Arthur Lundahl he remarked, It's a hell of a note when you have to G-2 your friends. 51 U-2 photography continued to keep the President and other key officials well informed about the progress of the crisis. Flights over Israel and Rhodes on 21 October and Cyprus on 25 October revealed heavy military concentrations and an increase in the number of troop transports and air forces. On the basis of this information, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles told the President on 28 October that he believed an Israeli attack on Jordan was imminent, adding that he thought the British and French would take advantage of such an attack to occupy the Suez Canal. 52 The 10-day Middle East war began on the afternoon of 29 October 1956 with Israeli paratroop drops in the Sinai peninsula, followed by mobile columns striking deep into Egyptian territory. The next day, 30 October, Francis Gary Powers conducted mission 1314. He overflew Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, and finally the Sinai where he photographed black puffs of smoke from the fighting between Israel and Egypt. Adana-based U-2s were in the air for the next two days filming the Suez Canal area and neighboring countries. 53 The United Kingdom and France entered the fray on the evening of 31 October with bombing raids against major Egyptian airfields. The Anglo-French bombing campaign continued for the next 48 hours. Early on the morning of 1 November, an Adana-based U-2, piloted by William Hall, took off to gather intelligence on the Anglo-French military activity. After photographing Cyprus, Hall flew south to the Sinai Desert, where he made several passes to obtain complete coverage of the Israeli-Egyptian fighting there. He then headed west to Cairo, passing directly over the main Egyptian airbase 51 Lundahl and Brugioni interview (TS Codeword). 52 Telephone calls, 28 October 1956, DDE Diary, DDEL. 53 Powers, Operation Overflight, pp. 308-309; Mission folder 1314 (30 October 1956), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 1 (TS Codeword). -Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"118\nMission 1316, 1 November 1956\nTurkey\nAdana\nIncirlik Airbase\nEuphrates\nGreece\nRhodes\nNICOSIA\nCyprus\n(U.K.)\nAkrotiri\nSyria\nMediterranean Sea\nLebanon\nBEIRUT\nDAMASCUS\nIsrael\nAMMAN\nJerusalem\nDead Sea\nGAZA STRIP\nArmistice Line\nJordan\nAlexandria\nPort Said\nSuez Canal\nCAIRO\nAlmaza Airbase\nSinai Peninsula\nGulf of Suez\nGulf of Aqaba\nSaudi Arabia\nEgypt\nNile\n0 100 Kilometers\n0 100 Miles\nBoundary representation is not necessarily authoritative.\nSecret NOFORN\n724746 (B00613) 4-92"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n119\nU-2 photography of Egyptian airbase at Almaza, 29 October 1956\nat Almaza, where he filmed neatly arranged rows of Egyptian military aircraft. Continuing past Cairo to film another airfield, Hall turned southeast and then north to fly along the Nile, again crossing directly over Almaza. The photography from this leg of the mission revealed the burning wreckage of the Egyptian aircraft. During the short period of time that had passed between Hall's two passes, a combined Anglo-French air armada had attacked the airbase. When shown the before and after photos of Almaza, President Eisenhower told Arthur Lundahl: \"Ten-minute reconnaissance, now that's a goal to shoot for!\" 54 Eisenhower was pleased with the aerial photography but\n54 Lundahl and Brugioni interview (TS Codeword); Beschloss (Mayday, p. 138) mistakenly identifies this quote as coming from the British, but they did not receive copies of these photos.\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n120\nangered by what it depicted: an Anglo-French attack on Egypt. He quickly called for a cease-fire and denied the United Kingdom any further U-2 photographs of the Middle East.\nThe 1 November mission over Cyprus and Egypt also photographed Anglo-French preparations to invade Egypt. President Eisenhower was informed of this impending invasion on Sunday, 4 November. On the following day, British and French paratroopers dropped near Port Said at the north end of the Suez Canal. This action prompted Soviet Premier Nikolai Bulganin to send messages to France, Britain, and Israel warning that the Soviet Union was ready to use force to crush the aggressors. 55\nEarly on the morning of election day, 6 November, the Anglo-French invasion armada arrived at Port Said and began landing troops. Back in Washington President Eisenhower met with Allen Dulles to discuss the deepening international crisis. Worried that the Soviet Union might be poised to intervene in the war, the President ordered Dulles to have the Adana-based U-2s fly over Syria to see whether the Soviets were moving planes to Syrian airbases in preparation for a strike against the forces attacking Egypt. The answer to Eisenhower's question came much sooner than expected because on the previous day a U-2 had already overflown Syria before making a run across northern Egypt. The film from this flight had reached Wiesbaden for processing and readout during the night. The results were in the hands of the PARAMOUNT Committee by midmorning on 6 November, while the President was motoring to Gettysburg to cast his ballot. By the time the President returned to the White House by helicopter at noon, Colonel Goodpaster was waiting for him with an answer: there were no Soviet aircraft in Syria. Because of the President's concern about possible Soviet moves, Syria was the target of 14 additional U-2 flights between 7 November and 18 December 1956. 56\nThe increasing reliance on Adana-based U-2s for coverage of the Middle East during the Suez Crisis made it difficult for the photointerpreters to supply timely information. When Detachment B aircraft returned to their base at Adana, there were no film-processing\n55 Donald Neff, Warriors at Suez: Eisenhower Takes America into the Middle East (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1981), p. 403.\n56 Memorandum of Conference, 6 November 1956, Eisenhower Diary, Whitman File, DDEL (U); OSA History, chap. 19, annex 120, p. 3 (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n121\nfacilities available, and the film had to be flown to Wiesbaden, adding a 10- to 15-hour delay. During the gradual buildup of the crisis, this delay had been tolerated, but, once actual hostilities broke out, US decisionmakers needed a more rapid response. On 29 October, Richard Bissell ordered Lundahl to establish a film-processing facility at Adana. Two PID employees went to Adana on 13 November to set up the facility, and two photointerpreters moved from Wiesbaden to Adana to help in the effort. Forward processing was, however, hampered by the location of the Adana facility on a flat, arid plain in southern Turkey, 35 miles from the Mediterranean at the very end of a long supply line.\nThe PID team obtained and outfitted a trailer for film processing, but many problems had to be overcome. The first major problem was obtaining enough clean water. Detachment B personnel, therefore, purchased large amounts of borax locally for use in purifying water. In fact, they bought so much borax on the local market that one of them was arrested by the Turkish police, who believed he was using the chemical to make drugs. It was also difficult to obtain a constant source of developers and fixers for processing the U-2 film, since the large Air Force supply facility at Wheelus AFB in Libya refused to provide the needed photographic chemicals. When PID personnel accompanied processed film from Turkey to the United States, they returned to Turkey sitting atop cartons of chemicals for the next day's processing. At first, film was developed in improvised tanks using flimsy wooden spools and hand-turned cranks to move the film through the solutions. Later, the Adana facility moved from its trailer to a building and received more up-to-date processing equipment. As was the case with the photo lab in Germany, the Adana lab's personnel came from the Agency and the armed forces. 57\nThe need to produce very timely intelligence diminished after the British and French agreed to a cease-fire on 7 November 1956. By the end of the month, foreign troops began evacuating Egyptian territory, and the pressure on the Adana photointerpretation unit eased. The facility remained in existence, however, and was used twice in December 1956 and 11 times in the first half of 1957. It was then placed in caretaker status, for emergency use only.\n57 NPIC History, vol. 1, pp. 53-54 (S); Lundahl and Brugioni interview (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n122\nRENEWED OVERFLIGHTS OF THE SOVIET UNION\nThroughout the fall of 1956, U-2s provided valuable coverage of the Middle East crisis, but they were not conducting their original mission of strategic reconnaissance of the Soviet Union. President Eisenhower had halted all such overflights by his order of 10 July, and, in the months that followed, he remained unconvinced by CIA arguments in favor of a resumption of overflights. On 17 September 1956, DDCI Cabell and Richard Bissell went to the White House to ask President Eisenhower to authorize more flights over the Soviet Union. Adm. Arthur W. Radford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also attended the meeting. Bissell and Defense Department representatives reviewed the valuable intelligence from the July U-2 flights, and Bissell then informed Eisenhower that many important intelligence requirements remained unfilled. To fill these requirements, Bissell noted, would require photography of approximately 15 separate areas of the Soviet Union. Pleading for the authority to resume overflights, Bissell stressed that conditions for photography were becoming less favorable as the days grew shorter. While the U-2 was then still safe from interception, he added, it might not be in the future. 58\nPresident Eisenhower acknowledged the value of the U-2 but emphasized that the international political aspects of overflights remained his overriding concern. He said he would talk further with John Foster Dulles about the matter, noting that the Secretary of State had at first seemed to belittle the political risk but had later found it increasingly worrisome.\nA little more than two weeks later, on 3 October, when the President again met with Bissell, Cabell, and Radford, John Foster Dulles was also present. In opening the meeting, Eisenhower said he had become discouraged regarding Project AQUATONE. Although he had been assured that \"there would be a good chance of not being discovered on most, if not all, operations, just the opposite had proved true.\" The President observed that arguments in favor of resuming U-2 operations did not take world opinion into consideration. He added that great efforts had been made for many years \"to create an opinion in the world that we are not truculent and do not want war,\" and, if knowledge of the U-2 overflights got out, world opinion would view them as \"provocative and unjustified.\" 59\n58 Andrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum of Conference, 17 September 1956, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS).\n59 Andrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum for the Record, 3 October 1956, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nChapter 3\n123\n\nSecretary of State Dulles said that, although he essentially agreed with the President's comments, he thought that \"really important results\" might be obtained by a seven to 10-day operation. He, nevertheless, questioned the long-term value of the results. DDCI Cabell replied that U-2 photographs would be useful much longer than the Secretary of State had implied because they would establish a reference bank of geographic and manmade features. Siding with Cabell, Admiral Radford pointed out the need for more intelligence to make estimates better.\n\nPresident Eisenhower was not convinced by these arguments. Although willing to consider extensions of the radar-seeking ferret flights he had authorized along the Soviet borders, he remained opposed to penetration flights over the Soviet Union.\n\nEvents in Eastern Europe in the fall of 1956 helped to change the President's mind. In October the Soviet Union backed away from a confrontation with nationalist Communist leaders in Poland only to find itself facing a similar situation in Hungary, where mass demonstrations led to the formation of a new government under Imre Nagy on 23 October 1956. Soviet troops and tanks temporarily withdrew from Budapest while awaiting reinforcements. By early November, however, the Kremlin leadership decided that events in Hungary were getting out of hand—particularly when Premier Nagy announced his nation's withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact—and ordered Soviet troops to suppress the Hungarian uprising. Although President Eisenhower deplored the Soviet intervention, he turned down CIA requests for permission to airdrop arms and supplies to the Hungarian rebels. In fact, the President forbid all overflights of that nation, including those by U-2 aircraft, and none was made.\n\nAlthough President Eisenhower had not been willing to allow overflights during the Hungarian crisis, the Soviet Union's actions in Hungary convinced him to authorize renewed overflights of the Soviet Bloc, a decision that was made easier by his reelection by a large margin in early November. Initially, however, the President only authorized overflights of Eastern Europe and Soviet border regions, not the deep penetration overflights that had been requested by CIA. At a 15 November 1956 meeting with Acting Secretary of State Herbert Hoover, Jr. (John Foster Dulles was recovering from cancer\n\nCunningham interview (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 3\n124\n\nsurgery), JCS Chairman Adm. Arthur Radford, DCI Allen Dulles, and Richard Bissell, Eisenhower explained why he refused to allow overflights of the Soviet Union: \"Everyone in the world says that, in the last six weeks, the United States has gained a place it hasn't held since World War II. To make trips now would cost more than we would gain in form of solid information.\" Hoover agreed and noted, \"If we lost a plane at this stage, it would be almost catastrophic.\" Torn between his desire to maintain a \"correct and moral\" position and his wish to know what the Soviet Union was up to, the President finally authorized several overflights of Eastern Europe and the Soviet border, \"but not the deep one,\" adding that the aircraft should \"stay as close to the border as possible.\"\n\nThe first of these flights, mission 4016 on 20 November 1956, was the first overflight of Soviet territory since 10 July. This mission left Adana and flew east over Iran, then reversed and flew west along the Soviet-Iranian border to Soviet Armenia, where it crossed into the Soviet Union and photographed Yerevan. An electrical malfunction then forced the pilot, Francis Gary Powers, to return to Adana. Soviet interceptor aircraft made several unsuccessful attempts to reach this U-2, and the Soviet Government sent a secret protest note to Washington.\n\nOn 10 December, Bulgaria was the target of two U-2 missions, one (4018) from Detachment B at Adana and another (2029) from Detachment A at Giebelstadt. Bulgarian fighter aircraft made 10 different attempts to intercept the first mission, but the flight proceeded without difficulty.\n\nThe second flight came close to crashing but not through the efforts of interceptors. The pilot of mission 2029 was Carmine Vito, who had flown the first U-2 mission over Moscow on 5 July. He was known to his colleagues as the Lemon-Drop Kid because he always carried these hard candies in the knee pocket of his flight suit. Despite\n\nAndrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum of Conference with the President, November 15, 1956, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS); Ambrose, Eisenhower: The President, p. 374.\n\nMission folder 4016, 20 November 1956, OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 7 (TS Codeword).\n\nMission folders 2029 (10 December 1956) and 4018 (10 December 1956), OSA records, job 67-B-328, box 7 and job 67-B-972, box 7 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 3\n125\n\nwarnings to all pilots about the danger of opening the helmet faceplate at high altitudes, several pilots were known to do so. Some ate candy bars; Vito favored lemon drops. On the morning of 10 December, while Vito was undergoing prebreathing, the Air Force enlisted man who oversaw his preflight regimen placed an L-pill in the righthand knee pocket of Vito's flight suit, unaware that this pocket also contained Vito's supply of lemon drops. After he took off, Vito began indulging in his habit of sucking lemon drops. About midway into the mission, he opened his faceplate and popped into his mouth what he thought was another lemon drop. After closing the faceplate, he began sucking on the object and thought it strange that it had no flavor and was much smoother than the previous lemon drops. Although tempted to bite down, Vito decided instead to reopen his faceplate and see what it was he had in his mouth. Spitting the object into his hand, he saw that he had been sucking on the L-pill with its lethal contents of potassium cyanide. Just a thin layer of glass had stood between him and death. The loss of his aircraft over Bulgaria would have exposed the U-2 program to worldwide publicity and would probably have resulted in an early end to overflights.\n\nDetachment A's security officer overheard Vito relating the L-pill story to a fellow pilot several days later and promptly reported the conversation to headquarters. When details of Vito's close call reached Washington, James Cunningham immediately ordered L-pills placed in boxes so that there would be no chance of mistaking them for anything else. The L-pill continued to be available for another three years. Then in January 1960, the commander of Detachment B, Col. William Shelton, raised an important question that had never been considered: what would happen if an L-pill with its volatile contents accidentally broke inside the cockpit of a U-2? Realizing that such an accident would result in the death of the pilot, James Cunningham ordered the destruction of all L-pills and then turned to the Technical Services Division (TSD) for a better idea. By this time the state of the art in lethal devices was a needle poisoned with algal, an extremely deadly shellfish toxin. The needle was hidden in a tiny hole in a silver dollar supplied by Cunningham. Only one poison-needle coin was made because Cunningham decided that, if any pilot had to use it because of capture, there would probably not be any more overflights.\n\nCunningham interview (TS Codeword); Carmine Vito, interview by Donald E. Welzenbach, Washington, DC, 7 May 1986 (S).\n\nCable from Detachment B to Development Projects Division (DPD), 4 January 1960; cable from DPD to Detachment B, 7 January 1960, OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 18, \"Operation KNIFE EDGE\" (TS Codeword).\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n126\n\nAlthough the U-2 overflights of Eastern Europe in late 1956 caused renewed Soviet protests, the sharpest protest came on 15 December 1956, after three specially modified USAF RB-57D bombers photographed the city of Vladivostok in a high-speed dash over the Far Eastern coast of the Soviet Union (as part of the Air Force's Operation BLACK KNIGHT). President Eisenhower had approved the mission after being told by the Air Force that the high-speed RB-57Ds would probably not be detected.\n\nReacting strongly to the Soviet protest, the President told Secretary of State Dulles on 18 December that he was going to \"order complete stoppage of this entire business.\" As for a reply to the Soviet protest, Dulles said, \"I think we will have to admit this was done and say we are sorry. We cannot deny it.\" Dulles noted that \"our relations with Russia are pretty tense at the moment.\" Eisenhower agreed, noting that this was no time to be provocative. He then instructed Colonel Goodpaster to call Secretary of Defense Wilson, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Radford, and DCI Dulles to order: \"Effective immediately, there are to be no flights by US reconnaissance aircraft over Iron Curtain countries.\"\n\nFlights along the borders of Iron Curtain countries continued, however, and, on 22 December 1956, Detachment B flew the first mission (4019) by a U-2 equipped for electronic intercept. The electronic-detection equipment known as the System-V unit (see appendix C) was installed in the bay normally used by the main camera, and the plane flew along the Soviet border from the Black Sea to the Caspian Sea and on to Afghanistan. The System-V unit worked well.\n\nEarly in 1957, a mission along the Soviet border accidentally turned into an overflight. On 18 March 1957, a U-2 collecting electronic intelligence along the Soviet southern border entered Soviet\n\nGoodpaster interview (S).\n\nTelephone calls 18 December 1956, DDE Diary, DDEL, (U); Andrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum for the Record, 18 December 1956, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS, downgraded to S); the Soviet protest note of 15 December 1956 and the U.S. reply of 11 January 1957 are contained in \"Alleged Overflight of Soviet Area by American Planes,\" US Department of State Bulletin, vol. 36, 28 January 1957, p. 135. Although Dulles's initial inclination had been to offer an apology, the U.S. reply stated that the \"only authorized United States Air Force flights in the general area of the Sea of Japan were normal training activities.\"\n\nMission folder 4019 (22 December 1956), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 7 (TS Codeword).\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n127\n\nairspace because of compass error compounded by a slight error in the pilot's dead reckoning. Because of heavy cloud cover, the pilot, James W. Cherbonneaux, did not realize he was over the Soviet Union until he saw Soviet fighters attempting to intercept him. These attempts at interception once again demonstrated the Soviets' ability to track the U-2 and their inability to harm it.\n\nAt this point in early 1957, the U-2 program was in limbo. Although the President would not allow U-2s to fly their primary mission of reconnaissance of the Soviet Union, he did not cancel the program and continued to authorize flights along Soviet borders. The CIA's overhead reconnaissance program also faced a renewed bid by the Air Force, which now had its own growing U-2 fleet, to gain control of the overflight program in the spring of 1957. The uncertainty surrounding the future of the project made planning and budgeting extremely difficult. In April 1957, Richard Bissell asked the DCI and DDCI to push for a decision on whether the U-2 program was to continue in civilian hands and what its scope was to be. In briefing papers prepared for the DCI, Bissell argued for maintaining a nonmilitary overflight capability, which could \"maintain greater security, employ deeper cover, use civilian pilots, keep the aircraft outside military control, and, therefore, make possible more plausible denial of US military responsibility in the face of any Soviet charges.\" In urging the resumption of overflights, Bissell stated that four U-2 missions over border regions of the Soviet Union or Eastern Europe had been detected by the Soviets without causing any diplomatic protest. He also noted that the President's Board of Consultants on Foreign Intelligence Activities had unanimously recommended the resumption of overflights.\n\nAll of these issues were discussed on 6 May 1957, when President Eisenhower met with Deputy Secretary of Defense Donald Quarles, Air Force Chief of Staff Nathan Twining, Acting Secretary of State Christian Herter, and three CIA officials—DCI Dulles, DDCI Cabell, and Richard Bissell. The President expressed concern about the impact of overflights on US-Soviet relations and about possible Soviet responses such as closing off access to Berlin. Although\n\nInformation supplied by James W. Cherbonneaux to Donald E. Welzenbach (S); Mission folder 4020 (18 March 1957), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 7 (TS Codeword).\n\nOSA History, chap. 4, pp. 15-16; annex 22 (TS Codeword).\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"remaining opposed to flights over most of the Soviet Union, Eisenhower finally agreed to permit some flights over peripheral areas such as Kamchatka Peninsula and Lake Baikal, as well as the Soviet Union's atomic testing area at Semipalatinsk. Such overflights could be staged from Pakistan if the Pakistani Government consented. The President rejected the Air Force's request to take over the U-2 program, stating that he preferred to have the aircraft manned by civilians \"during operations of this kind.\" 71\n\nThe President had once again agreed to allow overflights of the Soviet Union, although only over certain areas, because the need to learn more about the capabilities and intentions of the Soviet Union was too compelling. In particular, the President and top administration officials wanted to gather more data on the Soviet Union's missile program, a subject for which considerable Soviet boasting—but no hard data—was available.\n\nEven after he had authorized the resumption of overflights, President Eisenhower maintained tight control over the program. He personally authorized each overflight, which meant that Richard Bissell would bring maps to the White House with the proposed routes marked on them for the President to examine. More than once, according to Bissell, Eisenhower spread the map out on his Oval Office desk for detailed study, usually with his son John (an Army officer serving as a White House aide) and Colonel Goodpaster looking over his shoulder. On occasion, the President would pick up a pencil and eliminate a flight leg or make some other correction to the flight plan.72\n\nRADAR-DECEPTIVE \"DIRTY BIRDS\"\n\nOne additional reason why President Eisenhower had again authorized overflights of the Soviet Union was renewed CIA promises that Soviet detection or tracking of the U-2 was unlikely. At the 6 May 1957 meeting with the President, Richard Bissell reported on the progress that had been made in developing radar camouflage and\n\n71 Andrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum of Conference with the President, 6 May 1957 (TS); \"Record of Action—Meeting of May 6, 1957,\" WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS).\n\n72 Bissell interview by Welzenbach (S); Beschloss, Mayday, p. 140."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"absorption devices for the U-2. Once these devices were installed on the operational U-2s, he explained, the \"majority of incidents would be undetected.\" 73\n\nWork on methods of reducing the U-2's vulnerability to radar detection had begun in the fall of 1956 as the result of President Eisenhower's disenchantment with the overflight program following Soviet detection and tracking of the first series of U-2 missions. The CIA proprietary firm Scientific Engineering Institute was conducting this research under a project codenamed RAINBOW. SEI Chief Engineer Dr. Franklin A. Rodgers, formerly of MIT, converted the theories of Harvard physicist Edward Purcell into systems that could be used on aircraft. SEI's radar-deception system consisted of a series of attachments to the U-2. First bamboo poles and later fiberglass rods were attached to the wings, where they would not interfere with the control surfaces. At the ends of these poles, completely circling"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the aircraft, was a small-gauge wire with precisely spaced ferrite beads. The wire and beads were supposed to capture incoming 70-MHz radar pulses and either trap them in the loop or weaken them so much that they would not register as a valid radar return. This configuration was called the trapeze and was not very successful.\n\nA second approach, tested in early 1958, involved the use of plastic material containing a printed circuit designed to absorb radar pulses in the 65- to 85-MHz range. Nicknamed \"wallpaper,\" this material was glued to parts of the U-2's fuselage, nose, and tail. Although the \"trapeze\" and \"wallpaper\" systems provided protection against some Soviet radars, the systems proved ineffective against radars operating below 65-MHz or above 85-MHz. Furthermore, both of these additions degraded the U-2's performance. The weight and drag of \"trapeze\" reduced the aircraft's operating ceiling by 1,500 feet, and \"wallpaper\" sometimes caused engines to overheat.74\n\nSEI's research results were tested by another firm known as Edgerton, Germeshausen & Grier (EG&G), which was also composed of MIT faculty members. Under an Air Force contract to evaluate radars, EG&G operated a small testing facility at Indian Springs, Nevada, not far from Area 51. Although Kelly Johnson had been closely involved with the radar deception project since its early days, he cooperated reluctantly because he disliked adding attachments that made his aircraft less airworthy. (Johnson's dislike of the antiradar attachments was reflected in the unofficial nickname for aircraft that had been so modified—\"dirty birds.\") After Lockheed mechanics had mounted the various RAINBOW devices on the prototype U-2, a Lockheed test pilot would fly the plane over EG&G's Indian Springs installation. This was little more than a series of radar sets and a trailer containing instrumentation. EG&G technicians could thus record and evaluate the U-2's radar returns as it traversed a specified course over their facility.75\n\nThis method of testing radar-deceptive modifications proved both time consuming and dangerous. During a test flight on 2 April 1957, the \"wallpaper\" modification acted as insulation around the\n\n74 Records of the Scientific Engineering Institute (Project HTNAMABLE), OSA records (TS Codeword).\n\n75 References to EG&G programs for the U-2 are contained in the later Convair contracts for Projects FISH and KINGFISH, OSA records, job 67-B-415, box 1 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12 April 1957 article in the Chicago Daily Tribune was headlined, \"Secrecy Veils High-Altitude Research Jet; Lockheed U-2 Called Super Snooper.\" 76\n\nBecause of its large wingspan, an out-of-control U-2 tended to enter a classical flat spin before ground contact. This slowed descent and actually lessened the impact. If there was no fire after impact, the remains of crashed U-2s were often salvageable, as was the case with the wreckage of article 341. Kelly Johnson's crew at the Skunk Works used the wreckage, along with spares and salvaged parts of other crashed U-2s, to produce another flyable airframe for about $185,000.77 The U-2's ability to survive a crash in fairly good condition should have been noted by the Development Projects Staff for consideration in its contingency plans for a loss over hostile territory because the equipment on board the aircraft could easily compromise the weather research cover story.\n\nThe loss of one of Lockheed's best test pilots, as well as the prototype \"dirty bird\" U-2, led Kelly Johnson to suggest that Lockheed install a large boom at the Indian Springs radar test facility. Using the\n\n76 Accident folder, crash of 2 April 1957, OSA records (S).\n\n77 Lockheed contracts, OSA Records (S)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"boom, which could lift entire airframes 50 feet in the air, technicians could change the airframe's attitude and run radar tests almost continuously without having to fuel and fly the plane.78\n\nBy the summer of 1957, testing of the radar-deception system was complete, and in July the first \"dirty bird\" (DB) arrived at Detachment B. The first operational use of this aircraft occurred on 21 July 1957 in mission 4030 over Iran, Iraq, and Syria. On 31 July, the same aircraft made a run over the Black Sea. There were a total of nine DB missions over the USSR. The antiradar system did not prove very effective, and its use was curtailed in May 1958.79\n\nTHE NEW DETACHMENT C\n\nOn 8 June 1957, a U-2 took off from Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska to conduct the first intentional overflight of the Soviet Union since December 1956. This mission broke new ground in two respects: it was the first overflight conducted from American soil and the first by the new Detachment C.\n\nDetachment C (known officially as Weather Reconnaissance Squadron, Provisional-3) was composed of the third group of pilots to complete their training in Nevada. In the autumn of 1956, this third detachment needed a new base because Area 51 was about to become the training site for a large number of Air Force pilots who would fly the 29 U-2s purchased by the Air Force. The Agency decided that the best location for Detachment C would be the Far East and began looking for bases there.\n\nEven without the arrival of the Air Force pilots, Detachment C could not have stayed in Nevada much longer. In June 1957, the entire facility had to be evacuated because the Atomic Energy Commission was about to conduct a series of nuclear tests whose fallout was expected to contaminate the Groom Lake facility. All remaining CIA personnel, materiel, and aircraft were transferred to Edwards AFB, California, and became known as Detachment G.\n\n78 Ibid (S).\n79 Cunningham interview (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The search for a new home for Detachment C led the Agency to ask the Air Force in the autumn of 1956 for permission to locate the detachment at Yokota AFB, Japan. Because Yokota was already the base for one covert project (the very secret Air Force Project BLACK KNIGHT using RB-57s), Air Force Chief of Staff Twining did not wish to locate another one there and denied the request. The Agency then turned to the Navy, which granted permission for Detachment C to use the Naval Air Station at Atsugi, Japan. The Japanese Government received no notification of the proposed deployment because at that time it had no control over activities involving US military bases in Japan. Deployment of Detachment C began in early 1957 but was complicated by a recent decision to permit the families of Project AQUATONE employees to accompany them on overseas tours. As a result, program managers had to find housing facilities on the base or in nearby communities, not an easy task in crowded Japan.80\n\nDetachment C began conducting missions in June 1957 after several aircraft and pilots flew to Eielson Air Force Base near Fairbanks, Alaska. Air Force radar order-of-battle reports and NSA studies had revealed that the radar network in the Soviet Far East, with antiquated radar sets and personnel of a lower caliber than those in the western Soviet Union, was relatively ineffective. To take advantage of these weaknesses, Detachment C staged three missions from Alaska into the Soviet Far East. The first, on 7/8 June (the aircraft crossed the international date line during the flight), was unable to photograph its target, the ICBM impact area near Klyuchi on the Kamchatka Peninsula, because of bad weather and, therefore, never entered Soviet airspace. A second attempt to photograph Klyuchi on 19/20 June was marred by a camera malfunction that ruined every third frame of photography. This flight was tracked by Soviet radars, but there was no attempt at interception. After a pause of almost three months during which Detachment C received a dirty-bird U-2, the detachment's third mission over Klyuchi on 15/16 September 1957 achieved excellent results. The radar-deception devices proved ineffective, however, as the U-2 was tracked by Soviet radar and trailed by five fighters.81\n\n80 OSA History, chap. 15, pp. 2, 16-19; chap. 16, p. 1 (TS Codeword).\n81 Mission folders 6002 (8 June 1957), 6005 (20 June 1957), and 6008 (16 September 1957), OSA records, job 67-B-328, box 7 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n135\n\nDETACHMENT B FLIGHTS FROM PAKISTAN\n\nThe most important series of overflights in the summer of 1957 were those that Detachment B staged to gather intelligence on the Soviet Union's guided missile and nuclear programs. President Eisenhower had approved these overflights at the meeting on 6 May 1957, provided that Pakistan allowed the U-2s to operate from its territory (the desired targets were too far away from the U-2 base in Turkey). [REDACTED] Richard Bissell's personal assistant, and [REDACTED] met with President Iskander Mirza, Prime Minister Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, and Army Commander Gen. Ayub Khan between 3 and 7 June 1957 and received permission to operate from Lahore. The airfield at Peshawar, a more desirable location, was not available because of repair work. Detachment B at Ankara ferried four of its U-2s, two of which were dirty birds, to Lahore. A C-124 brought in eight pilots and ground crews to prepare for missions over the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China (PRC) beginning on 4 August (Operation SOFT TOUCH). During a 23-day period, these aircraft made nine flights: seven over the USSR and two over the PRC. Although one of the seven flights over the USSR was a failure because the camera malfunctioned after taking only 125 exposures, the remaining missions over Central Asia were a complete success, producing a bonanza of information that kept scores of photointerpreters busy for more than a year.82\n\nThe 5 August flight, a dirty bird piloted by Buster Edens, was the first to photograph the major Soviet space launch facility east of the Aral Sea in Kazakhstan. None of the mission planners was certain just where the range was located, so the U-2 pilot followed the rail lines in the area. As a result, the plane did not pass directly over the rangehead and obtained only oblique photography.\n\nAlthough known in the West today as Tyuratam, this missile installation had no name when it was first photographed in August 1957. In preparation for a briefing to President Eisenhower on the SOFT TOUCH photography, Dino Brugioni, an assistant to PID chief Arthur Lundahl, examined all the existing maps of the area to see if he could find a place name for the missile base. Only one map, made by the Germans during World War II, showed a community in the vicinity of the missile facility. The settlement's name was Tyuratam, which means \"arrow burial ground\" in the Kazakh language, and this\n\n82 OSA History, chap. 12, pp. 19-20 (TS Codeword); NPIC History, vol. 1, pp. 159-161 (S)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[Map: Operation SOFT TOUCH Overflights, August 1957, page 136]"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was the name Brugioni gave the missile base. Official Soviet releases concerning this base have always referred to it as Baykonur, but the community of Baykonyr is actually more than 200 miles north of Tyuratam.83\n\nWhile PID was still analyzing the SOFT TOUCH photography, the Soviet Union announced the successful launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) from Baykonyr (Tyuratam). On 26 August 1957, the Soviet news agency TASS stated that a \"super-long-range multistage intercontinental ballistic rocket\" had been successfully tested, adding \"it is now possible to send missiles to any\n\n83 Lundahl and Brugioni interview (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n138\n\nSemipalatinsk Nuclear Weapons Proving Ground, 22 August 1957\n\npart of the world.\" 84 The Soviet announcement made the intelligence community want even more information on Tyuratam, and a second U-2 piloted by Edwin K. Jones flew over the area on 28 August 1957, just one week after the Soviet ICBM launch. This mission obtained excellent vertical photographs of the main launch complex, and photointerpreters soon determined that the Soviets had only one launchpad at Tyuratam. The base was not photographed again until 9 July 1959, at which time it still had only one launch pad, although two more were under construction.85\n\nOn 20 and 21 August 1957, U-2s conducted the first overflights of the Soviet nuclear testing grounds at Semipalatinsk, north-northwest of Lake Balkhash. The first mission, piloted by Sammy V. C. Snider, passed over part of the proving grounds, flew on to Novokuznetsk, and then proceeded to Tomsk, where it began its return leg that included coverage of a very large uranium-processing facility at the new city of Berezovskiy. In the second mission, James Cherbonneaux flew directly over the Semipalatinsk proving grounds only four hours before a half-megaton device was detonated. In fact, the U-2 unknowingly photographed the aircraft that was to drop the\n\n84 \"Is Russia Ahead in Missile Race,\" US News and World Report, 6 September 1957, pp. 30-33.\n\n85 Mission folders 4058 (28 August 1957) and 4125 (9 July 1959), OSA records, job 67-B-972, boxes 8 and 11 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n139\n\nnuclear device. These photographs also revealed evidence of a recent, low-yield, above-ground nuclear test [REDACTED]\n\nOn its way to Semipalatinsk, the 21 August mission flew a search pattern over the western end of Lake Balkash looking for another Soviet missile-related installation and made the first photographs of what was later determined to be the new missile test center at Saryshagan. This facility was used to test radars against incoming missiles fired from Kapustin Yar, 1,400 miles to the west. Saryshagan later became the center for the development of the Soviet Union's advanced antiballistic missile (ABM) weapon system.\n\nOn 23 August 1957, DDCI Cabell, Richard Bissell, and Air Force Chief of Staff Twining met with President Eisenhower to report on the results of Operation SOFT TOUCH. They showed the President some of the photographic results of the earlier missions and reported on the effects of the antiradar measures. Although the antiradar measures had not proved successful, the photographic yield from the missions was extremely valuable. Bissell then informed the President that the SOFT TOUCH operation was just about to conclude with the transfer of the aircraft back to Adana. He asked permission for one of the U-2s to make another overflight of the Soviet Union on this return trip, but the President denied the request, not wishing to conduct any more overflights than were necessary.87\n\nTHE DECLINE OF DETACHMENT A\n\nDuring the summer of 1957, all overflights of the Soviet Union were conducted by either Detachment B or Detachment C. Detachment A in Germany was a less desirable starting point for overflights of the Soviet Union because such missions had to cross Eastern Europe first, increasing the likelihood of detection and diplomatic protests. Furthermore, the Soviet Union's air defense and radar networks were strongest along its western borders, so Detachment B missions over the southern portion of the Soviet Union and Detachment C missions\n\n86 Mission folder 4045 (20 August 1957) and 4050 (21 August 1957), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 8 (TS Codeword).\n\n87 Andrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum for the Record, 23 August 1957, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n140\n\nin the Far East were less risky than those conducted by Detachment A. Finally, the main target of U-2 photography after the bomber issue receded was Soviet missile and nuclear progress. The testing areas for these weapons were located in the vast open spaces of the south-central and eastern portions of the Soviet Union, which lay beyond the range of Detachment A's aircraft.\n\nThe decline in importance of Detachment A had begun with the President's standdown order of 10 July 1956. During the next three months, the detachment conducted only 11 missions, all over the Mediterranean region rather than the original target of the Soviet Union, and the slow pace of activity and change in mission adversely affected pilot morale. One of the detachment's aircraft was lost in a crash on 17 September, killing pilot Howard Carey and garnering unwanted publicity. Conditions improved when the detachment moved to the newly renovated facility at Giebelstadt in early October 1956, but security now became a problem there. Detachment A personnel discovered that a long, black Soviet-Bloc limousine was parked at the end of the Giebelstadt runway whenever the U-2s took off.88\n\nDuring the next year, Detachment A mounted only four overflights. The first two were over Eastern Europe: one over Bulgaria on 10 December 1956 and the other over Albania on 25 April 1957. Then a long period of inactivity followed, ending with a third mission on 11 October 1957, which conducted electronic surveillance of Soviet naval maneuvers in the Barents Sea. The final overflight of Detachment A, mission 2040 on 13 October 1957, flew north over Norway to the Bering Sea, turned southeast to overfly Murmansk, and then exited to the north, returning to Germany via Norway.89\n\nAlthough the final missions of Detachment A achieved excellent results, project headquarters had already decided that Western Europe was not a satisfactory location for overflights of the Soviet Union and had notified Detachment A on 20 September 1957 that its operations would cease in November. By 15 November 1957, all of the detachment's personnel and aircraft had returned to the United States. During Detachment A's 17-month period of operations, seven pilots\n\n88 OSA History, chap. 11, pp. 41-42 (TS Codeword).\n\n89 Mission folders 4018 (10 December 1956), 2036 (25 April 1957), 2037 (11 October 1957), 2040 (13 October 1957), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 7, and job 67-B-328, box 6 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n142\n\nhad flown a total of 23 missions: six over the Soviet Union, five over Eastern Europe, and most of the remaining 12 missions over the Mediterranean area.90\n\nCOOPERATION WITH NORWAY\n\nThe final missions of Detachment A had one unforeseen result: the beginning of cooperation between CIA and the Norwegian Intelligence Service on the U-2 program. Norwegian radars tracked the overflights of the Barents Sea and Murmansk in October 1957, and Col. Vilhelm Evang, Chief of the Norwegian Defense Staff Intelligence Service [REDACTED] In March 1958, Colonel Evang came to Washington and received a briefing from Arthur Lundahl together with sanitized photos that did not reveal the altitude of the aircraft or the focal length of the camera. The Agency provided additional photos to Norway during a visit by a PID staff member in July.91\n\nLater that year Norway agreed to provide an airfield for the United States to conduct U-2 flights that did not violate Soviet airspace. On 15 September 1958, a Detachment B staging party arrived at Bodo Air Force Base [REDACTED] this was followed by an ELINT collection flight over international waters (the Kara Sea) on 25 October. On 6 November, the U-2 returned to Adana by conducting a lengthy ELINT collection flight along the borders of the Soviet Union and East Germany. During the initial portion of the mission, when the U-2 flew along the Soviet-Finnish border and then turned east over the Gulf of Finland to come within 60 miles of Leningrad (while remaining over international waters), the aircraft was the target of 23 unsuccessful Soviet intercept attempts.92\n\n90 OSA History, chap. 11, p. 44; chap. 19, annex 120 (TS Codeword).\n\n91 Ibid., chap. 11, pp. 44-45 (TS Codeword); NPIC History, vol. 3, pp. 447-8 (S).\n\n92 Mission folders 1482 (9 October 1958), 4092 (25 October 1958), and 4093 (6 November 1958), OSA records, job 67-B-972, boxes 3 and 10.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n143\n\nDECLINING OVERFLIGHT ACTIVITY\n\nU-2 at Bodo, Norway\n\n·Operation SOFT TOUCH (4-27 August 1957) proved to be the high water mark of U-2 operations against the Soviet Union. Detachment B staged one more overflight on 10 September 1957, when a U-2 piloted by William Hall flew from Adana to photograph the Kapustin Yar Missile Test Range for the first time since the RAF's overflight in 1953, obtaining photographs of a large medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) on the launchpad. Six days later Detachment C conducted its successful overflight of the ICBM impact site at Klyuchi, and October saw the final two overflights of Detachment A. After these missions, penetration overflights became a rarity. There would be only six more during the next 32 months: one, in 1958; two, in 1959; and three, in 1960 (one of which was unsuccessful). During this period, President Eisenhower did authorize a number of flights along Soviet border areas that occasionally penetrated short distances inside the border, but the Chief Executive had become extremely wary of authorizing \"deep penetration\" overflights, which invariably brought protests from Moscow.\n\nThe border flights took place under tight controls. Beginning in the fall of 1957, all messages from Washington to Adana giving coordinates for flights along the Soviet border contained the statement: \"This is not a penetration overflight\" and warned about flying too close to Soviet borders. The Soviets even attempted to shoot down"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 3\n144\n\nU-2s flying well within international airspace above the Black Sea, as was the case on 27 October 1957, when electronic intelligence equipment on a U-2 flight over the Black Sea that never violated Soviet airspace revealed 12 attempts at interception by Soviet fighters.\n\nThe sole U-2 overflight of 1958 was conducted by a dirty bird from Detachment C. On 1 March 1958, mission 6011 overflew the Soviet Far East and photographed the Trans-Siberian Railroad, Sovetskaya Gavan', the Tatar Strait, and a strange installation at Malaya Sazanka, which was eventually determined to be a structure for mating nuclear devices with their detonators. This was the first and only U-2 overflight of the Soviet Union staged from Japan.\n\nOn 5 March 1958, the Soviet Union delivered a vigorous protest concerning this mission, prompting President Eisenhower to tell Colonel Goodpaster on 7 March to inform the CIA that U-2 flights were to be \"discontinued, effective at once.\" This standdown was to last more than 16 months, until July 1959. The Soviets had not been fooled by the antiradar devices carried by mission 6011, as was demonstrated by the detailed information about the mission contained in a Soviet aide-memoire delivered on 21 April 1958. It was clear that dirty bird aircraft were not effective and that Soviet radar operators had little difficulty in tracking them. At this point, the Agency abandoned the use of the antiradar devices on the U-2. As a substitute, Lockheed began working to develop a paint with radar-suppressant qualities, but this project also proved unsuccessful.\n\nThe U-2s were not the only cause for the Soviet protests that so vexed the President. On 27 June 1958, an Agency C-118 on a courier flight from Adana to Teheran strayed into Soviet Armenia and was shot down; the Soviets captured two survivors, including one Agency employee. Ten days later the Air Force began launching balloons designed to fly across the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. This new balloon project (known as WS-461L) had been authorized by President Eisenhower on 25 June after Deputy Secretary of Defense Donald Quarles argued that a small number of balloons should be\n\nMission folder 4061 (27 October 1957), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 8 (TS Codeword).\n\nMission folder 6011 (1 March 1958), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 13 (TS Codeword).\n\nAndrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum for the Record, 7 March 1958, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS, declassified).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n145\n\nlaunched to take advantage of a newly discovered change in the west-to-east jet stream. Normally, this fast-moving air current stayed at an altitude of 55,000 feet, but, during June and July, it turned abruptly upward over the Bering Sea just west of Alaska, climbed to 110,000 feet, and then reversed direction. One of the key arguments that convinced the President to approve the project was Quarles's claim that the balloons' \"chance of being detected is rather small and their identification or shootdown practically nil.\"\n\nRelease of the balloons took place from an aircraft carrier in the Bering Sea on 7 July 1958. Nothing was heard about them until 28 July, when Poland sent a note protesting the overflight of a US-made, camera-carrying balloon that had fallen to earth in central Poland. The loss of this balloon was because of human error. Each balloon was equipped with a timing device that would cause it to drop its camera and film payload after crossing the target areas. An Air Force technician aboard the aircraft carrier had calculated that the balloons should cross the Eurasian landmass in about 16 days. Thus, he adjusted regulators aboard the balloons to cause automatic descent after 400 hours aloft. When bad weather delayed the launch for three successive days, however, the technician forgot to reset the timing devices. As a result, one payload fell into Poland. None of the three WS-461L balloon payloads was recovered.\"\n\nThe Polish protest was quickly followed by a Soviet note protesting the balloons' violation of the Soviet Union's airspace. Several months later, the Soviets placed the US balloon and photographic equipment on display in Moscow for the world's press. President Eisenhower was angry that the Defense Department's assurances that the balloons would not be detected had proved false. Even worse, one of the balloons had been recovered by the Poles because the Air Force had disobeyed his instructions for the balloon project. When the Air Force had proposed the use of timers to bring down the balloons at the end of the mission, Eisenhower had said no, fearing that a malfunction could cause the balloons to come down prematurely. Furious at the Air Force's insubordination, the President ordered General\n\nAndrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum for the Record, 25 June 1958, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS).\n\nDonald E. Welzenbach, \"Observation Balloons and Weather Satellites,\" Studies in Intelligence 30 (Spring 1986): pp. 26-28 (S).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n146\n\nEquipment from a WS-461L balloon on display in Moscow, 11 October 1958\n\nGoodpaster on 29 July 1958 to tell the Air Force that \"the project is to be discontinued at once and every cent that has been made available as part of any project involving crossing the Iron Curtain is to be impounded and no further expenditures are to be made.\"\n\nTwo days later Eisenhower followed up this order with a formal memorandum to Secretary of Defense Neil McElroy telling him that \"there is disturbing evidence of a deterioration in the processes of discipline and responsibility within the armed forces.\" He cited, in particular, \"unauthorized decisions which have apparently resulted in certain balloons falling within the territory of the Communist Bloc\" and overflights over routes \"that contravened my standing orders.\"\n\nOn 2 September 1958, there was another violation of Soviet airspace when an unarmed Air Force EC-130 on an electronic intelligence collection mission crossed from Turkey into Soviet Armenia and was shot down by Soviet fighter aircraft. Six of the men on board were killed and the remaining 11 were never heard from again, despite State Department attempts to get the Soviet Union to reveal their fate.\n\nAndrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum for the Record, 29 July 1958, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (S); Goodpaster interview (S).\n\nQuoted in Ambrose, Eisenhower: The President, pp. 475-476.\n\n\"US Representations to the Soviet Government on C-130 Transport Shot Down by Soviet Fighter Aircraft.\" US Department of State Bulletin, 23 February 1959, pp. 262-271; Beschloss, Mayday, p. 159.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n147\n\nPresident Eisenhower was disturbed by the increased superpower tension that had resulted from violations of Soviet airspace by US balloons and aircraft because he still hoped to enter into arms limitation negotiations with the Soviets. On 8 September 1958, the United States sent a note to the Soviet Union calling for a Soviet answer to US proposals for a \"study of the technical aspects of safeguards against the possibility of surprise attack.\" One week later the Soviets agreed to participate and suggested that the talks begin in Geneva on 10 November 1958. President Eisenhower was also attempting to persuade the Soviet Union to begin talks aimed at eliminating the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons. These efforts began with a 22 August 1958 offer to suspend US nuclear tests for one year on the condition that the Soviet Union also refrain from further tests and join in negotiations. On 30 August, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev accepted the proposal and agreed to start talks on 31 October 1958 in Geneva. When the talks began, however, the Soviets refused to agree to a test ban and carried out nuclear tests at Semipalatinsk on 1 and 3 November. Nevertheless, during the late summer and early autumn of 1958, President Eisenhower, determined to reduce to a minimum any aggravation of the Soviets, kept the U-2 overflight program in limbo.\n\nIn November 1958, relations with the Soviet Union worsened after Khrushchev precipitated a new crisis over West Berlin by announcing plans to sign a peace treaty with East Germany by May 1959. He stated that such a treaty would terminate Allied rights in West Berlin. Four days later, Soviet troops began harassing US Army truck convoys on the highways leading from West Germany to West Berlin. Although this new Berlin crisis never became as threatening as the blockade of 1948-49, President Eisenhower wished to avoid any actions that would provoke the Soviets. Tension over West Berlin was, therefore, an additional reason for continuing to keep the U-2 away from the Soviet Bloc.\n\nCONCERNS ABOUT SOVIET COUNTERMEASURES AGAINST THE U-2\n\nAnother reason for President Eisenhower's growing reluctance to authorize flights over the Soviet Union may have been concern that the Soviets were developing countermeasures that would enable them to\n\nAmbrose, Eisenhower: The President, pp. 489-491.\n\nIbid., pp. 502-504.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"shoot down a U-2. Before the program started, Richard Bissell had estimated that the U-2 would be able to fly over the Soviet Union with impunity for only about two years. This period was already over, and the Soviets were working frantically to devise a means to stop U-2 overflights. From the very beginning, Soviet air defense units had not only tracked U-2s with radars, but had also made repeated efforts to shoot them down with antiaircraft weapons and interceptor aircraft. In 1956 such attempted interceptions had involved primarily MiG-15s and MiG-17s, which could barely reach 55,000 feet. The advent of MiG-19s and MiG-21s, which could climb even higher, provided a greater threat for U-2 pilots.\n\nRealistic training for pilots learning to intercept the U-2 became possible after the Soviets developed a new high-altitude aircraft, the Mandrake, which was actually an improved version of the Yakovlev-25 all-weather interceptor. The Mandrake used a high-lift, low-drag wing design similar to that employed by the U-2, but its twin engines made it heavier. The Mandrake's operating altitude was 55,000 to 65,000 feet, and its maximum altitude was 69,000, far less than the 75,000 feet reached by the U-2. Like the U-2, the Mandrake's wings would not tolerate great stresses, so it could not be used as an attack aircraft at the high altitudes at which both planes operated. Between 1957 and 1959, Yakovlev built 15 to 20 of these aircraft in two versions: the Mandrake-R or YAK-25RM and the Mandrake-T, sometimes called the YAK-26. These high-altitude aircraft were used to overfly the Middle East, India, China, and Pakistan, as well as border regions of NATO nations in Europe during the late 1950s and early 1960s. It is not believed that Mandrakes ever attempted to overfly the continental United States.\n\nBeginning in late 1957, the Mandrake served as a practice target for pilots of high-performance Soviet MiG-19 and MiG-21 interceptors. The Soviet technique that most concerned U-2 pilots was the \"snap up\" or power dive and zoom climb. In this maneuver, ground-based radar operators would direct the interceptor aircraft along the same flight path as the U-2. When the MiG pilot achieved the same compass heading as the U-2 flying more than 10,000 feet above him, he would put his aircraft into a shallow dive to pick up"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"speed, apply full throttle to the engine, then pull back on the stick and zoom as high as he could. In this manner the Soviet pilot hoped to come up directly beneath the U-2 so he could use his guns and missiles against the shiny U-2 etched in silver against the dark blue-black of space. Using this maneuver, some MiGs were able to climb as high as the U-2 but seldom got very close. At this height the MiGs were completely out of control; their small, swept-back wings provided insufficient lift; and their control surfaces were too small to maintain aircraft stability. U-2 pilots often spotted MiGs that reached the apex of their zoom climbs and then fell away toward the earth. The US pilots' greatest fear was that one of the MiGs would actually collide with a U-2 during a zoom climb.\n\nU-2 pilots complained that they felt like ducks in a shooting gallery under these circumstances and suggested that the underside of the silvery aircraft be camouflaged in some manner. Kelly Johnson had originally believed the U-2 would fly so high that it would be invisible, thus eliminating the need to paint the aircraft and thereby avoiding the added weight and drag that paint produced. The paint penalty was calculated to be a foot of altitude for every pound of paint. A full coat of paint cost the U-2 250 feet of altitude, substantially less than the 1,500-foot penalty paid for the addition of dirty bird devices.\n\nBy late 1957, Johnson agreed that something had to be done. After a series of tests over Edwards AFB, Lockheed began coating the U-2s with a standard blue-black military specification paint on top and a lighter cloud-blue paint below. Subsequent tests over Nevada revealed that the U-2s were less conspicuous when painted all over with a matte-finish blue-black color, which helped them blend with the dark canopy of space.\n\nMORE POWERFUL ENGINES FOR THE U-2\n\nLess conspicuous paints were not the only answer to the growing threat of Soviet interceptors. A more powerful engine would increase the U-2's maximum altitude, which was the surest way to protect the aircraft from all Soviet threats. During late 1958 and early 1959, Lockheed began refitting the Agency's 13 remaining U-2s—originally the Agency had taken delivery of 20 planes and the Air"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n153\n\nAbdel Nasser overthrew the Government of Iraq and assassinated the royal family. Long concerned by the growing influence of Nasser, who had close ties to the Soviet Union and now headed both Egypt and Syria in the new United Arab Republic. President Eisenhower decided that US intervention was necessary to stabilize the situation in Lebanon and to show Nasser that the United States was willing to use force to defend its vital interests in the region. Before intervening in Lebanon, the United States consulted with the United Kingdom, which also decided to intervene in the Middle East by sending paratroopers to assist the Government of Jordan on 17 July.\n\nWith US Marines and Army troops deployed in a potentially hostile situation in Lebanon, US military commanders and intelligence community analysts immediately requested tactical reconnaissance flights to look for threats to the US units and evidence that other Middle Eastern countries or the Soviet Union might be preparing to intervene. The U-2s of Detachment B in Turkey carried out these missions.\n\nBecause tactical reconnaissance required an immediate readout of the films taken, the Photographic Intelligence Center (the new name for the Photo-Intelligence Division from August 1958) quickly reopened the film-developing unit at Adana and staffed it with lab technicians and photointerpreters. Throughout the summer of 1958, Detachment B U-2s brought back photography of military camps, airfields, and ports of those Mediterranean countries receiving Soviet arms. The detachment also kept a close watch on Egyptian-based Soviet submarines, which posed a threat to US 6th Fleet ships in the Mediterranean. In addition, U-2s flew occasional electronic intelligence collection missions along the Soviet border and over the Black Sea without entering Soviet airspace. In late August, as the crisis in the Middle East eased, the United States began withdrawing its 14,300 troops. It was not until 25 October, however, that the last American soldier left Lebanon.\n\nBRITISH PARTICIPATION IN THE U-2 PROJECT\n\nShortly after the withdrawal of US troops from Lebanon, a new group of pilots joined the U-2 project. In November 1958, four RAF officers arrived at Detachment B at Adana, thus beginning the United Kingdom's participation in U-2 operations. The British had first\n\nAmbrose, Eisenhower: The President, pp. 462-473.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n154\n\nbecome involved in the U-2 project in September 1956, when the United States supplied them with photography from U-2 missions. To handle U-2 material, the British created a new control system, which later merged with the US control system. By 1957 cooperation between the United Kingdom and the United States had expanded to include frequent consultation between the requirements and photointerpretation organizations of both countries. James Reber and Arthur Lundahl made periodic trips to the United Kingdom for discussions with Alan Crick's UK Requirements Committee (generally known as the Crick Committee, later as the Joint Priorities Committee), the Joint Intelligence Committee, the Joint Air Reconnaissance Intelligence Center, and MI-6.\n\nThe idea of using British pilots in the U-2 program first arose in the spring of 1957, when Richard Bissell—upset that his aircraft had not been allowed to fly over the Soviet Union since the December 1956 standdown—was searching for ways to reduce the political risks of overflights and thus obtain more frequent authorization for missions over the Soviet Union. One of his proposals was to use non-US pilots—possibly British—to increase the possibility of plausible denial in the event of a loss. At a meeting with key CIA, Defense Department, and State Department officials on 6 May 1957, President Eisenhower approved the concept of British participation in the U-2 project.\n\nDuring the next six months, Dulles and Bissell met with Sir Dick White, head of MI-6, and Air Vice Marshal William M. L. MacDonald, Assistant Chief of the Air Staff for Intelligence, on several occasions to discuss the proposal in general terms. At first the CIA did not push the proposal too hard because at the same meeting in which he approved British participation, President Eisenhower had consented to the resumption of U-2 missions over the Soviet Union, resulting in 10 overflights during the summer and early fall of 1957. But when flights ceased in October, the thought of British participation became more attractive. By early 1958, Bissell was pressing the British to begin training pilots in the U-2 even though no final political decision on their participation had been made. On 7 February 1958, Bissell instructed the Chief of Station in London to ask Air Vice Marshal MacDonald if the RAF was prepared to\n\nSee, for example, the trip reports of the Ad Hoc Requirements Committee in the COMIREX records, IC Staff (TS Codeword).\n\nAndrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum of Conference with the President, 6 May 1957 (TS); idem, \"Record of Action—Meeting of May 6, 1957,\" WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n155\n\nselect a group of pilots for the U-2 project. MacDonald agreed to Bissell's proposal and began recruiting RAF pilots to fly the U-2.\n\nIn June 1958, representatives from the British Air Ministry came to project headquarters for an orientation and then sat down with CIA officials to work out an agreement on plans and procedures for the joint project. The two sides decided to establish a small RAF contingent that would be integrated into and supported by Detachment B at Adana. The British missions would be operationally controlled by CIA project headquarters. Soon afterward four British pilots began training in Texas. One of these pilots, Squadron Leader Christopher H. Walker, died in a training accident in July 1958. Because of the addition of RAF officers to the program, Project AQUATONE received a new codename, CHALICE. By the end of November 1958, three RAF pilots and a flight surgeon joined Detachment B at Adana with Turkish approval.\n\nFormal approval by the political leaders of the United Kingdom and the United States had come several months earlier. On 27 August 1958, Prime Minister Harold Macmillan gave his approval to British participation in the project as long as he had the right to approve or disapprove all operational flights by RAF pilots. On the same day, President Eisenhower gave his approval in principle for the joint project.\n\nBoth sides stood to gain from the joint nature of the U-2 project. For Richard Bissell, British participation was a means to gain an additional source of authorization for overflights of the Soviet Union. Six months earlier, Bissell had cabled to the London Chief of Station that he wanted British participation because it would \"facilitate operations by them at times or under circumstances beyond the scope of authority accorded by US political authorities.\"\n\nPresident Eisenhower viewed British participation as a way to confuse the Soviets as to the sponsorship of particular overflights and also to spread the risk in the event of a loss. Furthermore, he was used\n\nOSA History, chap. 13, pp. 1-2 (TS Codeword).\n\nIbid., pp. 5-6 (TS Codeword).\n\nIbid., p. 1 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n156\n\nto working closely with the British from his wartime experience and believed that their involvement in the U-2 program was a natural aspect of their alliance with the United States.\n\nOn the British side, participation in U-2 flights was a logical extension of the close cooperation that already existed between the two countries on the U-2 program. The direct involvement of the British also enabled them to conduct additional flights in areas such as the Middle East that were of more intelligence interest to the United Kingdom than to the United States. The British also may have reasoned that direct participation in the program was the best way to ensure that they had a right to share in the U-2's take. Otherwise, the United States might decide at some point to cut off the flow of U-2 photography, as it had done during the 1956 Suez Crisis.\n\nBy November 1958, British pilots had joined Detachment B, and arrangements had been made for the title to the aircraft they would be using to be transferred on paper to the British Government. In a final exchange of letters between President Eisenhower and Prime Minister Macmillan in December, the President summarized the lines of authority for the joint program: \"British missions are carried out on your authority and are your responsibility just as our activities are authorized and controlled here in accordance with the procedures I have established. In this sense, it could be said that we are carrying out two complementary programs rather than a joint one.\"\n\nRichard Bissell had achieved his goal of gaining another source of approval for overflights of the Soviet Union. In late 1959 and early 1960, this arrangement proved its value when British pilots conducted two highly successful missions over Soviet missile testing facilities at a time when President Eisenhower had not authorized an overflight for almost six months (see chapter 4). Most flights by the RAF pilots in Detachment B, however, took place in the Middle East, where the United Kingdom carried out 27 missions during the two years its pilots took part in overflights.\n\nIn Britain, the cover story for the RAF participation in the U-2 program was that British fliers were being trained to fly high-altitude weather-sampling missions for the RAF weather service. To support this cover, a U-2 was ferried to Watton RAF Base, England, in early\n\nGoodpaster interview (S).\n\nOSA History, chap. 13, pp. 10-11 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 3\n157\n\nMay 1959, and used to fly weather missions on 7 and 8 May before returning to Adana. Two more weather-sampling flights took place over England on 5 and 6 October 1959.\n\nTHE U-2 PROJECT AT THE BEGINNING OF 1959\n\nEarly 1959 saw Detachment B aircraft active primarily over Middle Eastern countries, with occasional overflights of Albania to check for reported Soviet missile installations. Detachment C mainly collected high-altitude weather data, although it also flew two missions over Tibet and Southwest China (see chapter 5). The overflight program against the Soviet Union seemed to be at a standstill, but pressures within the government were building to resume deep-penetration flights to resolve the growing \"missile-gap\" controversy.\n\nOrganizationally, the U-2 project underwent a major change after Richard Bissell became CIA's Deputy Director for Plans on 1 January 1959. At first glance, Bissell's selection seems unusual because he had spent most of his Agency career heading the U-2 project, but his first major assignment had been coordinating support for the operation that overthrew the leftist Government of Guatemala in 1954. Furthermore, Bissell's U-2 project was the major covert collector of intelligence against the CIA's primary target, the Soviet Union.\n\nDuring his years as head of the Development Projects Staff (DPS), Bissell had opposed proposals to bring all Agency air activities together into a single office, fearing that he would lose control of the U-2 project. Once he became Deputy Director for Plans, his viewpoint changed; he was now in a position to consolidate all air activities under his own control. On 16 February 1959, the DPS became the Development Projects Division (DPD) of the Directorate of Plans (at the time known as the Deputy Directorate/Plans or DDP). Despite the tremendous increase in the scope of his duties after assuming control of the DDP, Bissell retained personal control of his previous Development Projects Staff projects: the U-2 program, another project to develop a photosatellite, and a third project to design a follow-on aircraft for the U-2 (OXCART). Although the amalgamation of all Agency air operations and the transfer of the U-2 project to the DDP made sense, the question remained as to whether one individual could effectively control all these different activities.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"— 158 —\n\nBlank"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n159\n\nThe Final Overflights of the Soviet Union, 1959-1960\n\nTHE U-2 AND THE \"MISSILE-GAP\" DEBATE\n\nDespite President Eisenhower's reluctance to send U-2s over the Soviet Bloc, he once again authorized overflights in the summer of 1959, after a pause of more than a year. The overriding factor in his decision was the growing \"missile-gap\" controversy, which had its roots in a series of dramatic Soviet announcements during the second half of 1957. The first announcement revealed the successful test of an intercontinental ballistic missile in August. Then in October, the Soviets announced the successful orbiting of the world's first artificial earth satellite, Sputnik. One month later the Soviets orbited a second satellite containing a dog and a television camera. To many Americans, including some influential members of Congress, the Soviet Union's space successes seemed to indicate that its missile program was ahead of that of the United States. By the spring of 1958, after the United States had successfully launched several satellites, fears of a space technology gap between the two superpowers had eased. By the end of the year, however, new concerns arose that the Soviet Union was producing a missile arsenal that would be much larger than that of the United States. This was the famous missile gap that received widespread publicity beginning in early 1959.\n\nThe missile-gap controversy was fueled by Soviet boasts about the success of their missile program. On 4 December 1958, a Soviet delegate to the Geneva Conference on Surprise Attack stated: \"Soviet ICBMs are at present in mass production.\" Five days later, Soviet\n\nFor an overview of the controversy, see Roy E. Licklider, \"The Missile Gap Controversy,\" Political Science Quarterly 85 (1970):600-615.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n160\n\nLaunch of Sputnik, 4 October 1957\n\nPremier Nikita Khrushchev asserted that the Soviet Union had an ICBM capable of carrying a 5-megaton nuclear warhead 8,000 miles. These statements seemed all the more ominous because, during this same month of December, the first attempt to launch the new US Titan ICBM failed. In reality, all of the Soviet statements were sheer propaganda; they had encountered difficulties with the SS-6 ICBM, and the program was at a standstill. As a result, there were no ICBM launches from Tyuratam between 29 May 1958 and 17 February 1959, a space of almost nine months.\n\nTo conceal the difficulties in their missile program, Soviet leaders continued to praise its alleged successes. At the beginning of February 1959, Khrushchev opened the Soviet Communist Party Congress in Moscow by claiming that \"serial production of intercontinental ballistic rockets has been organized.\" Several months later Soviet Defense Minister Rodion Malinovsky stated that these missiles were capable of hitting \"precisely any point\" and added, \"Our army is equipped with a whole series of intercontinental, continental and other rockets of long, medium and short range.\" When asked at a press conference to comment on Malinovsky's statement, President Eisenhower replied, \"They also said that they invented the flying machine and the automobile and the telephone and other things.... Why should you be so respectful of this statement this morning, if you are not so respectful of the other three?\" Nevertheless, the Soviet statements were taken at face value by most Americans, including many members of the intelligence community.\n\nLawrence Freedman, US Intelligence and the Soviet Strategic Threat, 2nd. ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986), pp. 69-70.\n\nFord Eastman, \"Defense Officials Concede Missile Lag,\" Aviation Week, 9 February 1959, pp. 26-27.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n161\n\nAs concern about Soviet missile progress increased, even the interruption in Soviet ICBM testing was seen as evidence of a Soviet advantage. Although the CIA correctly reasoned that the Soviets were experiencing difficulties in developing an operational ICBM, the Air Force assumed that the Soviets had halted testing because the missile was ready for deployment.\n\nThe controversy intensified early in February 1959, when Secretary of Defense Neil H. McElroy testified before the Senate Preparedness Investigating Committee on Soviet missile capabilities for the next few years. McElroy told the Senators that in the early 1960s the Soviet Union might have a 3 to 1 advantage over the United States in operational ICBMs. McElroy stressed that the gap would be temporary and that at its end the United States would enjoy a technological advantage because it was concentrating on developing the more advanced solid-fueled missiles rather than increasing the number of obsolescent liquid-fueled missiles, but it was his mention of a 3 to 1 missile gap that made the headlines. Administration critics such as Senator Stuart Symington quickly charged that the actual gap would eventually be even larger.\n\nFaced with rising public and Congressional concern about the missile gap, Defense Department officials pressed President Eisenhower to authorize renewed overflights to gather up-to-date information about the status of the Soviet missile program. Following a National Security Council meeting on 12 February, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Twining, Secretary of Defense McElroy, and Deputy Secretary of Defense Quarles stayed behind to talk to the President about overflights. They hoped that the need to refute criticism of the missile gap from Symington and other Democratic Senators would persuade the President to loosen his policy on the use of the U-2. McElroy pointed out that no matter how often Allen Dulles briefed these critics, they would not believe his reassurances about the absence of a missile gap without positive proof such as photographs. More overflights would be needed to obtain the kinds of photographs required.\n\nThe President was not swayed by these arguments. Noting that the reconnaissance satellite project was \"coming along nicely,\" he stated that U-2 flights should be \"held to a minimum pending the\n\nFreedman, US Intelligence, p. 70.\n\n\"What About the Missile Gap?\" Time, 9 February 1959, pp. 11-13.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n162\n\navailability of this new equipment.\" Quarles objected that the satellites would not be ready for up to two years, but the President replied that this did not matter because the Soviets would not be able to build a first-strike force of ICBMs in the near future. President Eisenhower finally conceded that \"one or two flights might possibly be permissible,\" but he ruled out \"an extensive program.\" In light of the \"crisis which is impending over Berlin\" he did not want to be provocative.\n\nAs the missile-gap controversy raged, President Eisenhower stuck to his refusal to permit overflights of the Soviet Union, although the Soviet Union's resumption of ICBM testing almost persuaded him to change his mind. On 10 April 1959, the President tentatively approved several overflights, but, on the following day, he called in McElroy and Bissell to inform them that he was withdrawing his authorization, explaining that \"there seems no hope for the future unless we can make some progress in negotiation.\" Eisenhower remained worried by \"the terrible propaganda impact that would be occasioned if a reconnaissance plane were to fail.\" Although he agreed that new information was necessary, especially in light of the \"distortions several senators are making of our military position relative to the Soviets,\" Eisenhower believed that such information would not be worth \"the political costs.\"\n\nThe President remained willing to consider flights that did not overfly Soviet territory, and in June he authorized two electronic intelligence collection missions along the Soviet-Iranian border. The two missions of Operation HOT SHOP took place on 9 and 18 June 1959. The first of these missions was noteworthy because it involved both an Agency U-2 and an Air Force RB-57D Canberra. The two aircraft cruised along the Soviet border and made the first telemetry intercept ever from a Soviet ICBM during first-stage flight, 80 seconds after launch.\n\nEfforts to persuade the President to authorize penetration missions continued. On 7 July 1959, Allen Dulles and Richard Bissell met with Eisenhower to discuss the possibility of a penetration flight\n\nAndrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum for the Record, 12 February 1959, WHOSS Alpha, DDEL (TS); Ambrose, Eisenhower: The President, pp. 513-514; Beschloss, Mayday, p. 173.\n\nQuoted in Ambrose, Eisenhower: The President, pp. 514-515; Beschloss, Mayday, p. 176.\n\nMission folders 4120 (9 June 1959) and 4121 (18 June 1959), OSA records, job 67-B-972, boxes 10 and 11 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to gather intelligence on the Soviet missile program. Discussions continued the following day with the addition of Secretary of State Herter, who stated in support of the CIA proposal that “the intelligence objective outweighs the danger of getting trapped.” The strong backing of the proposed overflight by both CIA and the State Department finally convinced President Eisenhower to approve the mission.9\n\nOn 9 July 1959, more than 16 months after the previous overflight of the Soviet Union, a U-2 equipped with a B camera left Peshawar, Pakistan, flew over the Urals, and then crossed the missile test range at Tyuratam. This mission, known as Operation TOUCHDOWN, produced excellent results. Its photography revealed that the Soviets were expanding the launch facilities at Tyuratam. While this overflight was under way, another U-2 flew a diversionary mission along the Soviet-Iranian border.10\n\nDespite its success, this overflight remained an isolated incident. President Eisenhower was unwilling to authorize additional overflights of the Soviet Union, in part because he did not wish to increase tension before Premier Khrushchev’s visit to the United States scheduled for 15-27 September 1959. Nevertheless, the President still wanted as much intelligence on the Soviet missile program as possible. Because the Soviets were conducting an extensive program of missile tests in mid-1959, Eisenhower authorized a steady stream of the less provocative electronic intelligence (ELINT)-gathering missions (14 in all) along the Soviet border during the remainder of the year.11\n\nWithin the United States, concern about the Soviet missile program continued to grow. On 12 September 1959 the Soviets scored another space success when their Luna 2 rocket reached the moon, and Khrushchev stressed this success when he arrived in the United States three days later. He also boasted of Soviet missile progress in private conversations with President Eisenhower, while making no\n\n9 Andrew J. Goodpaster, Memorandum for the Record, 7 July 1959 (TS); idem, Memorandum of Conference with the President, 8 July 1959, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS).\n\n10 Mission folder 4125 (9 July 1959), OSA records (TS Codeword).\n\n11 OSA History, chap. 19, annex 120, pp. 12-14 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"mention of overflights by the United States. After the trip was over, Khrushchev and other leading Soviet officials continued to make exaggerated claims about the extent of their missile force, adding to the confusion and concern within the US intelligence community. Thus in November 1959, Soviet Premier Khrushchev told a conference of journalists, “Now we have such a stock of rockets, such an amount of atomic and hydrogen weapons, that if they attack us, we could wipe our potential enemies off the face of the earth.” He then added that “in one year, 250 rockets with hydrogen warheads came off the assembly line in the factory we visited.” 12 Because the Soviet Union had been launching at least one missile per week since early fall, US policymakers placed great weight on his remarks.\n\nDespite the intelligence community’s intense interest in the Soviet Union’s nuclear and missile programs, President Eisenhower did not authorize any more overflights of the Soviet Union during the remainder of the year. On the other hand, he raised no objections to (and probably welcomed) the first British overflight of the Soviet Union in December 1959. For almost a year, the RAF pilots of Detachment B had been ready to fly over the Soviet Union, but Prime Minister Harold Macmillan had not previously authorized any such missions because of his own visit to the Soviet Union, several international meetings, and other state visits. As a result, British U-2 missions had been confined to the Middle East. Now that the Prime Minister’s approval had been obtained, Detachment B conducted Operation HIGH WIRE with an RAF pilot. Squadron leader Robert Robinson left Peshawar on 6 December and overflew Kuybyshev, Saratov Engels Airfield, and the Kapustin Yar Missile Test Range before landing at Adana. The mission photography was excellent, but it did not provide intelligence on Soviet ICBMs, which were tested at Tyuratam, not Kapustin Yar.13\n\nBecause there had been so few overflights in 1958 and 1959, many questions about the Soviet missile program remained unanswered. Within the intelligence community there was still considerable disagreement over the size of the Soviet missile force. Thus, during testimony before the US Senate in January 1960, DCI Allen Dulles, Secretary of Defense Thomas Gates, and Air Force Chief of\n\n12 William E. Burrows, Deep Black: Space Espionage and National Security (New York: Random House, 1987), p. 101.\n\n13 OSA History, chap. 11, p. 33 (TS Codeword); Mission folder 8005 (6 December 1959), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 13 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Staff Nathan Twining each gave different figures for the number of deployed Soviet missiles. Although the CIA figures were based on evidence gained from overflights, Dulles could not reveal this fact to the Senate and, therefore, faced very sharp questioning.14\n\nAs a result of these Senate hearings, Dulles was determined to obtain permission for more overflights in order to settle the missile-gap question once and for all and end the debate within the intelligence community. To accomplish this, Dulles proposed photographing the most likely areas for the deployment of Soviet missiles. At this time there was still no evidence of SS-6 ICBM deployment outside the Tyuratam missile test range. Because the SS-6 was extremely large and liquid fueled, analysts believed these missiles could only be deployed near railroads. Existing U-2 photography showed railroad tracks going right to the launching pad at the test site. Dulles, therefore argued that SS-6 installations could easily be located by flying along railroad lines. Dulles was supported by members of the\n\n14 Licklider, “Missile Gap Controversy,” pp. 608-609.\n\nSaratov Engels Airfield, 6 December 1959"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"President's Board of Consultants on Foreign Intelligence Activities. At a meeting of the board on 2 February 1960, Gen. James Doolittle urged President Eisenhower to use overflights of the Soviet Union to the maximum degree possible. The President's response, as summarized in General Goodpaster's notes of the meeting, showed that the upcoming summit meeting was already an important factor in his attitude toward U-2 flights: “The President said that he has one tremendous asset in a summit meeting, as regards effect in the free world. That is his reputation for honesty. If one of these aircraft were lost when we are engaged in apparently sincere deliberations, it could be put on display in Moscow and ruin the President's effectiveness.” 15\n\nA few days later, another U-2 took to the sky on a mission over the Soviet Union. As in December, the pilot was British, and the mission had been ordered by Prime Minister Macmillan. On 5 February 1960, a Detachment B U-2C with squadron leader John MacArthur at the controls left Peshawar, Pakistan, to conduct Operation KNIFE EDGE. The plane overflew the Tyuratam Missile Test Range, headed northwest to Kazan', and then turned south, photographing long stretches of the Soviet rail network. The excellent photography from this mission did not reveal a single missile site, but analysts did discover a new Soviet bomber, dubbed the BACKFIN, at Kazan'.16\n\nDespite the outcome of this mission, the missile-gap debate continued. The Air Force still insisted that the Soviets had deployed as many as 100 missiles. The Army, Navy, and CIA, however, doubted that any had been deployed, because none could be found. Additional U-2 photography was needed to settle the debate. In mid-February, President Eisenhower reviewed plans for four additional U-2 missions. The success of the two British missions, along with the absence of Soviet protests, made the President more willing to consider a resumption of US overflights, and he agreed to allow one mission to be flown during the month of March. The President's continued restrictions upon the use of the U-2 disturbed DCI Dulles, who sent a memorandum to the National Security Council on 1 March 1960 asserting that the cardinal objective of obtaining information on Soviet missile deployment could be better achieved if the U-2 were given freer rein.17\n\n15 Ambrose, Eisenhower: The President, p. 568; Beschloss, Mayday, p. 233.\n\n16 Mission folder 8009 (5 February 1960), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 13 (TS Codeword); OSA Chronology, p. 25 (TS Codeword).\n\n17 OSA Chronology, p. 25 (TS Codeword); Philip K. Edwards, “The President's Board: 1956-60.” Studies in Intelligence 13 (Summer 1969):118 (S)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"In authorizing another overflight of the Soviet Union, President Eisenhower directed that it be conducted before 30 March. Because of complications in getting permission from Pakistan to use the airfield at Peshawar, however, the mission could not be staged in March, and the President agreed to extend his deadline until 10 April 1960. One day before the expiration of this deadline, a U-2 equipped with a B-camera took off from Peshawar on the last successful overflight of the Soviet Union, Operation SQUARE DEAL. As had been the case during the previous two overflights, a second U-2 flew a diversionary mission along the Soviet-Iranian border. After leaving Peshawar, mission 4155 headed first for Saryshagan, where it obtained the first pictures of two new Soviet radars, the HEN HOUSE and HEN ROOST installations. The U-2 then flew to the nuclear testing site at Semipalatinsk. Returning to the Saryshagan area, it crisscrossed the railroad network there and then proceeded to Tyuratam, where it photographed a new two-pad, road-served launch area that suggested a new Soviet missile was in the offing.\n\nIn his memoirs Nikita Khrushchev remarked that this U-2 should have been shot down, \"but our antiaircraft batteries were caught napping and didn't open fire soon enough.\" Khrushchev explained that Soviet missile designers had developed a high-altitude antiaircraft missile and batteries of this missile had been deployed near known targets of the U-2.\n\nThe CIA already had strong indications of improvements in the Soviet air defense system, and early in 1960 the Development Projects Division had asked Air Force experts at the Air Technical Intelligence Center (ATIC) for a frank assessment of Soviet capabilities against the U-2. On 14 March 1960, Col. William Burke, acting chief of the DPD, relayed the ATIC assessment to Richard Bissell:\n\nThe greatest threat to the U-2 is the Soviet SAM. Although the ATIC analysis concedes a remote possibility that the SAM may be less effective than estimated, their present evaluation is that the SAM (Guideline) has a high probability of successful intercept at 70,000 feet providing that detection is made in sufficient time to alert the site.\n\nMission folder 4155, 9 April 1960, OSA records, job 67-B-328, box 6 (TS Codeword).\n\nNikita S. Khrushchev, Khrushchev Remembers: The Last Testament (Boston: Little, Brown, & Co., 1974), pp. 443-444.\n\nMemorandum for Richard M. Bissell, Deputy Director (Plans), from Col. William Burke, Acting Chief, DPD, \"Evaluation of Proposed CHALICE Operations,\" 14 March 1960, IC Staff, COMIREX records, job 33-T-123A, box 10, \"CHALICE (General)\" (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"One of the reasons why Operation SQUARE DEAL had been selected for the 9 April flight was that mission planners believed that penetration from the Pakistan/Afghanistan area offered the greatest chance of escaping detection by the Soviet air defense system. Colonel Burke's 14 March letter recommending SQUARE DEAL as the preferred route for the next overflight had stated, \"There is a reasonable chance of completing this operation without detection.\" Escaping detection had become important because, if the Soviet SAMs received sufficient advanced warning, they posed a major threat to the U-2.\n\nCIA hopes that flights from Pakistan or Afghanistan might go undetected proved false. On the 9 April overflight, the U-2's ELINT-collection unit (System VI) indicated Soviet tracking at a very early stage of the mission. Although the Soviets failed to intercept the U-2, their success at tracking it should have served as a warning against future overflights from Pakistan (or anywhere else, for that matter). On 26 April 1960, Colonel Burke informed Richard Bissell that \"experience gained as a result of Operation SQUARE DEAL indicates that penetration without detection from the Pakistan/Afghanistan area may not be as easy in the future as heretofore.\" Unfortunately, neither Colonel Burke nor Richard Bissell took the logical step of recommending the cessation of overflights now that the risks had increased substantially. The lure of the prospective intelligence gain from each mission was too strong, and the Soviets' lack of success at interception to date had probably made the project staff overconfident. Furthermore, both DCI Allen Dulles and the President's Board of Consultants on Foreign Intelligence Activities were pressing for more photos of the Soviet Union in order to settle the missile-gap debate raging in the intelligence community and Congress.\n\nTHE LAST OVERFLIGHT: OPERATION GRAND SLAM\n\nEven before the 9 April overflight took place, President Eisenhower had consented on 28 March to an additional overflight during the month of April. His willingness to allow yet another overflight was"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"deployed SS-6 site because it could provide exemplars for photointerpreters to use in searching subsequent overhead photography for similar installations.\n\nThe two proposed overflights that would cover the northern railroad lines received the strongest consideration. Both plans contained new features. Operation TIME STEP called for a U-2 to take off from the USAF base at Thule, Greenland, which would be the first overflight staged from this base. The aircraft would then fly over Novaya Zemlya on its way to cover the railroad lines from the Polyarnyy Ural Mountains to Kotlas. The return flight would be over Murmansk with the landing to take place at either Bodo or Andoya on Norway's northeast coast. The other proposed overflight, Operation GRAND SLAM, was the first U-2 mission planned to transit the Soviet Union; all previous missions had penetrated not more than halfway and then left in the general direction from which they came. GRAND SLAM proposed to fly across the Soviet Union from south to north, departing from Peshawar, Pakistan, and landing at Bodo, Norway. The mission would overfly Tyuratam, Sverdlovsk, Kirov, Kotlas, Severodvinsk, and Murmansk.\n\nThe two preferred missions both required the use of the airfield at Bodo, which had been authorized by senior Norwegian intelligence and military officers. Because the Bodo airfield was involved in NATO maneuvers taking place in the Barents Sea area, Bissell informed the White House that neither mission could be flown before 19 April. Once the maneuvers ended, bad weather over the Soviet Union kept the mission from taking place when it was originally scheduled. Richard Bissell, therefore, asked President Eisenhower for more time, and, on 25 April, General Goodpaster relayed the President's instructions to Bissell that \"one additional operation may be undertaken, provided it is carried out prior to May 1. No operation is to be carried out after May 1.\" The President did not want to fly missions any later than that because the Paris Summit was scheduled to begin on 16 May 1960.\n\nBy this time, CIA planners were concentrating on Operation GRAND SLAM as the most likely route for the proposed mission because it offered the best chance of photographing suspected locations\n\nOSA History, chap. 12, pp. 35-36 (TS Codeword).\n\nAmbrose, Eisenhower: The President, p. 569; Beschloss, Mayday, p. 10."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Operation GRAND SLAM, 1 May 1960\nNorway\nBodo\nBarents Sea\nNovaya Zemlya\nMurmansk\nKandalaksha\nSweden\nSeverodvinsk\nR.S.F.S.R.\nFinland\nHELSINKI\nPlesetsk\nLake Onega\nLake Ladoga\nKotlas\nMOSCOW\nYur'ya\nKirov\nSverdlovsk\nKyshtym\nChelyabinsk\nU.S.S.R.\nUral Mountains\nKazakh S.S.R.\nTyuratam\nAral Sea\nLake Balkhash\nKirgiz S.S.R.\nUzbek S.S.R.\nTadzhik S.S.R.\nSea of Azov\nBlack Sea\nCaucasus Mountains\nCaspian Sea\nTurkmen S.S.R.\nTurkey\nSyria\nIraq\nTEHERAN\nIran\nAfghanistan\nKABUL\nPak.\nPeshawar\nRAWALPINDI\nLegend: Proposed mission route (dashed line); Actual mission route (solid line)\nBoundary representation is not necessarily authoritative.\nSecret NOFORN\n724751 (800946) 4-92"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 4\n174\nof Soviet ICBM sites. The other proposed overflight, Operation TIME STEP out of Greenland, was more likely to run into bad weather (which would affect both navigation and photography) because the flightpath would remain above 60° north latitude during the entire mission. Furthermore, mission planners opposed this route because of its greater risk. In his letter to Richard Bissell on 14 March 1960, Colonel Burke stated:\nOperation \"TIME STEP\" is our last choice because we can assume, with a 90 percent probability of being correct, that we will be detected on entry, tracked accurately throughout the period in denied territory (approximately four hours), and will evoke a strong PVO [Soviet Air Defense] reaction. This flight plan would permit alerting of SAM sites, and pre-positioning of missile equipped fighters in the Murmansk area (point of exit) thus enhancing the possibility of successful intercept. In addition, we must assume that even were the Soviets unable to physically interfere with such an incursion, sufficient evidence will be available to permit them to document a diplomatic protest should they desire to do so.\nThe concerns raised by Colonel Burke about TIME STEP should also have been raised about Operation GRAND SLAM, which would be the most adventuresome overflight to date because it proposed covering so much of the Soviet Union. If the Soviets could track the U-2 early in the mission, they would have plenty of time to prepare to intercept the aircraft.\nThe pilot selected for Operation GRAND SLAM was Francis Gary Powers, the most experienced U-2 pilot in the program. Powers had joined the project in May 1956 and had flown 27 operational missions in the U-2, including one each over the Soviet Union and China as well as six along the Soviet border.\nTo prevent the U-2 from being seen at Peshawar, project managers decided to ferry the aircraft from Adana to Pakistan the night before the scheduled flight. Once the plane was refueled and its camera was loaded, it would take off at daybreak, with little if any exposure to local residents because of darkness and its short stay—less than six hours on the ground. Originally scheduled for Thursday, 28 April, GRAND SLAM was canceled because of bad weather over the northern Soviet Union. This had been the case for the past several weeks. When this flight was canceled, the U-2 returned to Adana before sunrise. That evening the U-2 flew back to Peshawar for another attempt to stage the mission early on the 29th, but bad weather again forced cancellation of the mission, and the U-2 returned to Adana. Because of continued bad weather over the target areas, no mission was planned for Saturday, 30 April.\nMemorandum for Richard M. Bissell, Deputy Director (Plans), from Col. William Burke, Acting Chief, DPD, \"Evaluation of Proposed CHALICE Operations,\" 14 March 1960, IC Staff, COMIREX records, job 33-T-123A, box 10, \"CHALICE (General)\" (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n175\nhours on the ground. Originally scheduled for Thursday, 28 April, GRAND SLAM was canceled because of bad weather over the northern Soviet Union. This had been the case for the past several weeks. When this flight was canceled, the U-2 returned to Adana before sunrise. That evening the U-2 flew back to Peshawar for another attempt to stage the mission early on the 29th, but bad weather again forced cancellation of the mission, and the U-2 returned to Adana. Because of continued bad weather over the target areas, no mission was planned for Saturday, 30 April.\nMeanwhile, the plane ferried to Peshawar on 27 and 28 April had accumulated so many hours of flight time that it had to be removed from service for periodic maintenance. A different aircraft was, therefore, ferried to Peshawar on Saturday night, 30 April. This aircraft, article 360, had made a crash landing in Japan during the previous September (see chapter 5). Although it had been refurbished by Lockheed and now had the more powerful J75 engine that would give it greater altitude, pilots did not completely trust this aircraft and considered it a \"hangar queen.\" As Powers noted in his memoirs, \"Its current idiosyncrasy was one of the fuel tanks, which wouldn't feed all its fuel.\" The aircraft was equipped with a B-model camera, a System-VI electronic intelligence unit, and a System-IXB device, which generated false-angle information in response to the radar pulses used by some Soviet airborne-missile fire-control systems.\nOperation GRAND SLAM, mission 4154 and the 24th deep-penetration overflight of the Soviet Union, began almost 30 minutes late on Sunday, 1 May 1960, a delay due to difficulty in getting takeoff approval from Washington. This delay was caused by communications problems that are typical at sunrise and sunset during spring and autumn, when the ionosphere will not support reliable communications. In attempting to relay the authorization message, the radio operator in Adana was unable to reach the base in Peshawar, whose codename was HBJARGON. Realizing that neither the prearranged nighttime nor daytime frequencies were working, the operator began sending a message in the clear, using one of the guard frequencies in the transition area between the daytime and nighttime frequencies. The radio operators at Peshawar kept hearing the Morse\nMission folder 4154 (1 May 1960), OSA records (TS Codeword).\nPowers, Operation Overflight, p. 76.\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n176\ncode letters JGOHB, JGOHB as they tuned from one prearranged frequency to the other. Then one of the Peshawar operators decided to tune in the guard frequency where the Morse transmission was strongest. He was able to discern a break in the letters, making the message read \"HBJGO HBJGO.\" The Peshawar operators realized this stood for \"HBJARGON Go.\" The detachment chief, Col. William Shelton, who had been waiting anxiously inside the radio van for a \"Go\" or \"No Go\" message, leaped from the van and ran across the field to give the signal for takeoff to Powers, who was sitting in the U-2C at the end of the runway.\nPowers started his takeoff roll at 0159Z on 1 May 1960. Once airborne, Powers guided his aircraft toward Afghanistan. Following standard operating procedure, Powers clicked his radio switch when he reached penetration altitude of 66,000 feet, which signaled the operations unit at Peshawar that everything aboard the aircraft was working and the mission would proceed as planned. Aside from this simple signal, Powers and all U-2 pilots maintained strict radio silence during penetration missions.\nPowers' first target was the Tyuratam Missile Test Range after which he headed for Chelyabinsk, just south of Sverdlovsk. The planned route would take him over Kyshtym, Sverdlovsk, northwest to Kirov, north over Yur'ya and Plesetsk, then to Severodvinsk, northwest to Kandalaksha, north to Murmansk, and, finally, west to Bodo, Norway.\nMay Day turned out to be a bad time to overfly the Soviet Union. On this major holiday, there was much less Soviet military air traffic than usual, so Soviet radars could easily identify and track Powers' U-2. In addition, the Soviets responded to the intrusion by ordering a ban on civilian air traffic in a large portion of the Soviet Union. Soviet radar began tracking the U-2 when it was still 15 miles south of the Soviet-Afghan border and continued to do so as the aircraft flew across the Central Asian republics. When Powers reached the Tashkent area, as many as 13 Soviet interceptor aircraft scrambled in an unsuccessful attempt to intercept his plane.\nPowers never made it past Sverdlovsk. Four and a half hours into the mission, an SA-2 surface-to-air missile detonated close to and just behind his aircraft and disabled it 70,500 feet above the Sverdlovsk\nRichard K. Pero, \"Message Received—Unfortunately,\" Studies in Intelligence 27 (Winter 1983):29 (S).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n177\narea. The plane began spiraling down toward the ground and Powers looked for a way out. Unable to use the ejection seat because centrifugal force had thrown him against the canopy, he released the canopy and prepared to bail out, waiting to arm the destruction device at the last minute, so that it would not go off while he was still in the plane. When he released his seatbelt, however, he was immediately sucked out of the aircraft and found himself dangling by his oxygen hose, unable to reach the destruction switches. Finally, the hose broke and he flew away from the falling aircraft. After he fell several thousand feet, his parachute opened automatically, and he drifted to earth where he was quickly surrounded by farmers and then by Soviet officials. His aircraft had not been destroyed by the crash, and the Soviets were able to identify much of its equipment when they put it on display 10 days later. Even if Powers had been able to activate the destruction device, however, it would not have destroyed the aircraft. The small explosive charge was only designed to wreck the camera.\nHow had the Soviets succeeded in downing the U-2? Although some CIA project officials initially wondered if Powers had been flying too low through an error or mechanical malfunction, he maintained that he had been flying at his assigned altitude and had been brought down by a near miss of a Soviet surface-to-air missile. This turned out to be the case, for in March 1963, the US air attache in Moscow learned that the Sverdlovsk SA-2 battery had fired a three-missile salvo that, in addition to disabling Powers' plane, also scored a direct hit on a Soviet fighter aircraft sent aloft to intercept the U-2. Mission planners had not known about this SAM site before the mission because they always laid out flight plans to avoid known SAM sites.\nTHE AFTERMATH OF THE U-2 DOWNING\nThe first indication that something was wrong with Powers' mission came even before he was overdue at Bodo, Norway. The CIA Operations Center learned on 1 May at 0330 hours Washington time\nPowers, Operation Overflight, pp. 82-84; Beschloss, Mayday, pp. 26-28; Transcript of Debriefing Tapes of Francis Gary Powers, 13 February 1962, Board of Inquiry on the Conduct of Francis Gary Powers, Operations MUDLARK files, OSA records, job 74-B-605, box 6 (S).\nCunningham interview, 4 October 1983 (TS Codeword); OSA History, chap. 14, p. 55 (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that the Soviets had discontinued radar tracking of the flight's progress two hours earlier (0529Z), southwest of Sverdlovsk. Although there was no word from the Soviet Union concerning the missing U-2, key project personnel assembled in the Agency control center that morning (with the exception of Bissell, who was out of town and did not arrive until 1530) to analyze the latest information and discuss courses of action. They quickly established a new project, known as Operation MUDLARK, to gather and evaluate all available information about the downed U-2.\"\n\nBissell and the other project officials did not know whether Powers was dead or if the plane and camera had been destroyed, but they believed that there was no way that a pilot could survive a crash from an altitude above 70,000 feet. They, therefore, decided to stick with the standard cover story for U-2 flights: that they were weather flights staged by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)—originally the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, renamed in 1958. This cover story had been approved by the President in 1956.\n\nBy the end of the day, the Operation MUDLARK officials had prepared a statement based on the standard cover story but modified to fit the available information on Powers' flight and to show Adana as the aircraft's base in order to conceal Pakistan's role in the mission. This revised cover story, along with a mission flight plan consistent with it, was sent to the field commander at Adana, to Air Force Europe headquarters, and to the Chief of Station at Ankara to replace the cover story that had been prepared and distributed in advance of the mission. The first announcement of the new cover story came late on 2 May by the Adana base commander, but it did not appear in print until the following day. On Tuesday, 3 May, NASA released a statement about a high-altitude weather plane that was missing on a flight inside Turkey. The statement had been designed to provide an explanation for the presence of wreckage inside the Soviet Union by noting that \"the pilot reported over the emergency frequency that he was experiencing oxygen difficulties.\" Thus, if the Soviets protested and pointed to wreckage inside their borders, NASA could claim that the pilot had lost consciousness and the aircraft had then flown into the Soviet Union before crashing.\n\nGeary interview (S).\n\nBeschloss, Mayday, p. 39."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This statement had been prepared for a \"best case\" scenario, that is to say, one in which neither the pilot nor the plane and film survived. However, pilots had bailed out from extremely high altitudes and survived, and there was even evidence from previous U-2 crashes that much of the aircraft itself could be salvaged. The small destructive charge aboard the U-2 was not sufficient to destroy much more than the camera. The tightly rolled film, which could reveal the exact purpose of the mission even if the pilot and aircraft did not survive, was very hard to destroy. Kelly Johnson later conducted an experiment that revealed film taken out of a completely burned-out aircraft could still provide usable imagery. After almost four years of successful U-2 missions, Richard Bissell and the rest of the Development Projects Division had become overconfident and were not prepared for the \"worst case\" scenario that actually occurred in May 1960. This failure played directly into the hands of Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, who shrewdly decided to release information about the downed U-2 a little at a time, thereby encouraging the United States to stick with its vulnerable cover story too long. As he later wrote, \"Our intention here was to confuse the government circles of the United States. As long as the Americans thought the pilot was dead, they would keep putting out the story that perhaps the plane had accidentally strayed off course and been shot down in the mountains on the Soviet side of the border.\" The first word from the Soviet Union came on Thursday, 5 May, when Premier Khrushchev announced to a meeting of the Supreme Soviet that a US \"spyplane\" had been downed near Sverdlovsk. He made no mention of the fate of its pilot.\n\nKhrushchev's announcement aroused considerable interest in the media in the United States, and that same day the State Department and NASA issued another statement that continued the \"weather plane\" cover story, adding that the pilot became lost during a routine mission near the Caucasus Mountains. Soon afterward, the US Ambassador to Moscow cabled a report to the State Department indicating that the pilot might be alive after all. Two days later, on 7 May 1960, Khrushchev confirmed this report by revealing that the U-2 pilot was alive and had admitted his mission of spying on the Soviet Union.\n\nGeary interview.\n\nKhrushchev, Khrushchev Remembers: The Last Testament, p. 507."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Khrushchev and the U-2 wreckage\n\nThis revelation completely demolished the US cover story, and senior administration officials then debated what the appropriate course of action should be. Allen Dulles offered to take responsibility for the overflight and resign, but President Eisenhower did not want to give the world the impression that he was not in control of his administration. On Wednesday, 11 May, the President read a statement to the press in which he assumed full responsibility for the U-2 mission but left open the question of future overflights, even though four days earlier he had approved the recommendation of his key foreign policy advisers to terminate all provocative intelligence operations against the Soviet Union.\n\nThe U-2 affair had its greatest consequences when the long-awaited summit meeting in Paris began less than a week later on 16 May. Soviet Premier Khrushchev insisted on being the first speaker and read a long protest about the overflight, ending with a demand for an apology from President Eisenhower. In his reply Eisenhower stated that overflights had been suspended and would not be resumed, but he refused to make a formal apology. At that point the summit ended, as did all hopes for a visit to the Soviet Union by President Eisenhower.\n\nTHE WITHDRAWAL OF THE OVERSEAS DETACHMENTS\n\nThe loss of Powers' U-2 ultimately resulted in the end of Detachment B in Turkey. As soon as the Development Projects Division learned that Powers was alive in Soviet hands, it immediately evacuated the British pilots from Adana to protect the secret of their involvement in the project. Project officials hoped that flights might eventually resume from Adana, but President Eisenhower's order ending overflights of the Soviet Union made this very unlikely. Less than four weeks later, a coup ousted the government of Turkish Premier Adnan Menderes on the night of 27 May 1960. Because the new government had not been briefed on the U-2, Project Headquarters refused to allow any U-2 flights from Adana, even those necessary for maintaining the aircraft's airworthiness. As a result, no more U-2s flew out of Adana. Instead of being ferried home, three of the four remaining U-2s were disassembled and loaded aboard C-124 cargo planes for the return trip to the United States.\n\nThe fourth U-2 remained inside a hangar at Incirlik airbase for several years, looked after by a skeleton crew, in case the Adana installation needed to be reactivated. Finally the decision was made to close down the Adana U-2 facility. During Detachment B's 44 months of active existence, 21 pilots had flown its aircraft, including four RAF pilots and three pilots transferred from the deactivated Detachment A. Fourteen Detachment B pilots were later assigned to other U-2 detachments, but the closing down of Detachment B marked the end of Britain's direct involvement in U-2 operational overflights. A four-man unit of RAF U-2 pilots was stationed at Detachment G, Edwards AFB, until the end of the CIA U-2 program in 1974, but RAF pilots never again conducted an overflight in an Agency U-2.\n\nThe loss of Powers' U-2, the resultant failure of the Paris Summit, and the end of U-2 operations in Turkey were just the first in a series of setbacks for the U-2 program. On 8 July 1960, the"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Japanese Government, faced with growing anti-American sentiment and complaints in the press about the presence of \"spyplanes\" on Japanese territory, asked the United States to remove the U-2s. The very next day the CIA closed Detachment C; its U-2s were dismantled and returned to the United States aboard C-124s.\n\nIn the midst of the furor in Japan, on 1 July 1960, just six weeks after the Paris Summit, Soviet fighter aircraft shot down an Air Force RB-47 on an electronic intelligence collection mission over international waters near the Soviet Union's Kola Peninsula. Two survivors were captured. The Soviet Union claimed that the aircraft had violated its airspace, while the United States denounced the Soviets for downing the plane over international waters. The acrimony exacerbated an already tense international atmosphere.\n\nOne additional blow to the U-2 program came in the summer of 1960. NASA, concerned about the damage to its reputation from its involvement in the U-2 affair and hoping to obtain international cooperation for its space program, decided to end its support of the cover story that U-2s were conducting weather research under its auspices.\n\nThese developments resulted in a complete halt to all U-2 operations from overseas bases for more than six months. Pilots and aircraft from Detachments B and C were consolidated into Detachment G at Edwards Air Force Base, California, the unit formed after the CIA had vacated the Nevada testing site in 1957 as a result of AEC nuclear testing. Detachment G now comprised eight pilots from Detachment B and three pilots from Detachment C. Because Powers' capture had compromised Project CHALICE, the Agency assigned a new cryptonym to the U-2 effort; henceforth, it was called Project IDEALIST.\n\nOSA Chronology, p. 28 (TS Codeword).\n\n\"Mystery of the RB-47,\" Newsweek, 25 July 1960, pp. 36-37; \"Nikita and the RB-47,\" Time, 25 July 1960, pp. 30-31.\n\nAt a meeting of high-level CIA, NASA, and State Department officials on 31 May 1960, NASA was willing to continue its association with U-2 flights for the time being, but the Administrator of NASA, Dr. Keith Glennan, believed that his agency \"would be well advised to disengage from the U-2 program as rapidly as possible.\" James A. Cunningham, Memorandum for the Record, \"Telephone Conversation with Dr. Hugh Dryden, Deputy Director, NASA,\" 1 June 1960, DPD chrono file #4553-60, OSA records (S).\n\nOSA History, chap. 12, pp. 47-49; chap. 16, p. 10 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n183\n\nTHE FATE OF FRANCIS GARY POWERS\n\nDowned U-2 pilot Francis Gary Powers underwent extensive interro-\ngation at the hands of the Soviets. His instructions from the CIA on\nwhat to do in the event of capture were meager, and he had been told\nthat he might as well tell the Soviets whatever they wanted to know\nbecause they could get the information from his aircraft anyway.\nNevertheless, Powers tried to conceal as much classified information\nas possible while giving the appearance of cooperating with his cap-\ntors. To extract the maximum propaganda value from the U-2 Affair,\nthe Soviets prepared an elaborate show trial for Powers, which began\non 17 August 1960. Powers continued to conceal as much information\nas possible, but, on the advice of his Soviet defense counsel, he stated\nthat he was sorry for his actions. The Soviet court sentenced him to\n10 years' \"deprivation of liberty,\" with the first three to be spent in\nprison.\"\n\nDuring the next 18 months, confidential negotiations to obtain\nthe release of Powers took place as the United States explored the\npossibility of trading convicted Soviet master spy Rudolf Abel for\nPowers. These negotiations were conducted by Abel's court-ap-\npointed defense counsel, former OSS lawyer James Donovan, in cor-\nrespondence with Abel's \"wife\" (probably his Soviet control) in East\nGermany. In November 1961, Acting DCI Pearre Cabell wrote to\nSecretary of State Dean Rusk supporting such a trade, and on 10\nFebruary 1962 the actual exchange took place in the middle of the\nGlienecke Bridge connecting East and West Berlin. As part of the\ndeal, American graduate student Frederick Pryor, who had been jailed\nin East Germany for espionage, was released at another location.\n\nAfter Powers returned to the United States, he underwent exten-\nsive debriefing, for many questions about his mission remained unan-\nswered. To conduct the debriefing, the Agency immediately\nreconvened the Damage Assessment Team that had met for two\nmonths in the summer of 1960 to estimate what Powers knew about\nthe overflight program and could have told Soviet interrogators.\nGiven Powers' long involvement with the U-2 program, the team had\nconcluded in 1960 that his knowledge was extensive and he had prob-\nably revealed most of it to the Soviets. After two weeks of debriefing\nPowers in February 1962, however, the team found that the damage\nwas much less than had been estimated, and they were quite satisfied"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n184\n\n[Photograph: Trial of Francis Gary Powers]\n\nTrial of Francis Gary Powers\n\nwith Powers' behavior.\" After reading the debriefing reports, Allen\nDulles expressed support of Powers' actions and told Powers, \"We\nare proud of what you have done,\" but Dulles had already resigned as\nDCI in November 1961.\" The new DCI, John A. McCone, demanded\na closer look at Powers' actions and set up a Board of Inquiry headed\nby retired Federal Judge E. Barrett Prettyman. After eight days of\nhearings and deliberation, the board reported on 27 February that\nPowers had acted in accordance with his instructions and had \"com-\nplied with his obligations as an American citizen during this period.\"\nThe board, therefore, recommended that he receive his back pay.\n\n\" James J. White, \"Francis Gary Powers—The Unmaking of a Hero, 1960-1965,\" (draft),\nCIA History Staff, 1974, p. 19 (S).\n\n\" Powers, Operation Overflight, p. 307.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n185\n\nThe Prettyman Board's finding was based on a large body of evi-\ndence indicating that Powers was telling the truth about the events of\n1 May 1960: the testimony of the experts who had debriefed Powers\nafter his return; a thorough investigation of Powers' background with\ntestimony by doctors, psychiatrists, former Air Force colleagues, and\nhis commander at Adana; Powers' own testimony before the board;\nthe results of a polygraph examination that he had volunteered to un-\ndergo; and the evidence provided by photographs of the wreckage of\nhis aircraft, which Kelly Johnson had analyzed and found consistent\nwith Powers' story. Nevertheless, DCI McCone remained skeptical.\nHe asked the Air Force to convene its own panel of experts to check\nJohnson's assessment of the photographs of the U-2. The Air Force\nquickly complied, and the panel supported Johnson's findings.\nMcCone then seized upon the one piece of evidence that contradicted\nPowers' testimony—a report by the National Security Agency (NSA)\nthat suggested that Powers may have descended to a lower altitude\nand turned back in a broad curve toward Sverdlovsk before being\ndowned—and ordered the Prettyman Board to reconvene on 1 March\nfor another look at this evidence. The board remained unconvinced by\nNSA's thin evidence and stuck to its original findings. A few days lat-\ner, on 6 March 1962, Powers appeared before the Senate Armed\nServices Committee, which commended his actions. The Senate\nForeign Relations Committee also held brief hearings on the U-2\nAffair, with DCI McCone representing the CIA.\"\n\nAlthough all of these inquiries found Powers to have acted prop-\nerly, they did not release many of their favorable findings to the pub-\nlic, which had received a very negative image of Powers' behavior\nfrom sensational press reports and statements by public figures who\nwere not aware of (or chose to ignore) the truth about Powers' actions\nwhile in captivity. One member of the Senate Foreign Relations\nCommittee, Senator John J. Williams, expressed concern about the\nimpact of this silence on Powers' reputation in a question to DCI\nMcCone on 6 March 1962: \"Don't you think he is being left with just\na little bit of a cloud hanging over him? If he did everything he is\nsupposed to do, why leave it hanging?\" \" Doubts about Powers did\nremain in the public mind because he received no public recognition\nfor his efforts to withhold information from the Soviets. He was also\n\n\" Beschloss, Mayday, p. 352-354; Thomas Powers, Man Who Kept the Secrets, p. 328;\nPrettyman Board, DCI records (S).\n\n\" United States Congress, Senate, Foreign Relations Committee, Executive Sessions of the\nSenate Foreign Relations Committee (Historical Series), vol. 12, 86th Congress, Second\nSession, \"Report on the U-2 Incident,\" 6 March 1962, p. 265 (declassified 1982)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n186\n\nsnubbed by President Kennedy, who one year earlier had warmly wel-\ncomed two Air Force RB-47 fliers released by the Soviet Union.\nMcCone remained hostile to Powers, and in April 1963 he awarded\nthe Intelligence Star to all of the U-2 pilots except Powers. Finally on\n25 April 1965, just two days before McCone's resignation became ef-\nfective, Powers received the Star (which was dated 1963 on the back)\nfrom DDCI Marshall S. Carter.\"\n\nPowers' return from captivity raised the question of what his fu-\nture employment should be. This issue had already been discussed\none year earlier by John N. McMahon, executive officer of the DPD,\nwho noted that he and Col. Leo P. Geary (the Air Force project offi-\ncer) were concerned about a major dilemma for the CIA and the US\nGovernment: \"On the one hand we have gone to considerable lengths\nto prove that the U-2 program was a civilian undertaking and not mil-\nitary aggression; on the other hand there is on file a document that\nassures Francis Gary Powers that if he so desires he may be reinstated\ninto the USAF.\" On 21 March 1961 McMahon wrote:\n\nIf we grant him [Powers] the right that is now his, namely rein-\nstatement in the Air Force, then we would be subjecting our-\nselves to probable adverse propaganda by the USSR. Admitting\nlittle appreciation for the finer points of political and psycholog-\nical warfare, should Francis Gary Powers return to the USAF I\nsuspect that the Soviets would have a \"PP\" field day illustrating\nour big lie. The question then, since we cannot permit Powers to\nreturn to the USAF, is what do we do with him.\"\n\nDespite this negative recommendation, the Air Force agreed on\n4 April 1962 to reinstate Powers effective 1 July, a decision that was\napproved by the Agency, State Department, and White House. Then\nPowers' divorce proceedings began, and the Air Force, concerned\nabout adverse publicity, postponed reinstatement until the end of the\nproceedings. In the meantime Powers began working for Lockheed\nas a U-2 pilot. In March 1963, he met with Colonel Geary to discuss\nhis future plans and decided to stay with Lockheed.\" Powers re-\nmained at Lockheed until U-2 testing ceased in September 1969.\nEarlier in the year, he had published an account of his experiences on\n\n\" OSA History, chap. 14, p. 54 (TS Codeword); Beschloss, Mayday, p. 397.\n\n\" John N. McMahon to Chief, Cover Staff, DPD, 21 March 1961, Operation MUDLARK\nfiles, OSA records, job 74-B-605, box 6 (S).\n\n\" OSA History, chap. 14, p. 52 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n187\n\nthe U-2 project under the title Operation Overflight. Later he flew a\nlight plane as a traffic reporter for a Los Angeles radio station and\nthen a helicopter for a television station. On 1 August 1977, he and a\ncameraman from the station died when his helicopter crashed on the\nway to an assignment.\"\n\nCHANGES IN OVERFLIGHT PROCEDURES\nAFTER MAY 1960\n\nOne of the most important changes in the overflight program after the\nloss of Francis Gary Powers' U-2 was the institution of more formal\nprocedures for the approval of U-2 missions. During the first four\nyears of U-2 activity, very few members of the Eisenhower adminis-\ntration had been involved in making decisions concerning the over-\nflight program. The President personally authorized all flights over\nthe Soviet Union and was consulted by Richard Bissell and either the\nDCI or the DDCI about each such proposed mission. In addition to\nCIA officials, the President's discussions of individual U-2 missions\nor of the program as a whole generally included the Secretary of State\nor his Under Secretary, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the\nSecretary of Defense or his deputy, and the President's secretary,\nColonel (later General) Goodpaster.\n\nThe approval process under President Eisenhower was thus very\nunstructured. There was no formal approval body charged with re-\nviewing overflight proposals; the President kept this authority in his\nhands and simply consulted with selected cabinet officials and advis-\ners before reaching a decision. In 1959 the U-2 program had gained a\nsecond approval authority when British Prime Minister Harold\nMacmillan became the approval authority for missions conducted by\nthe RAF pilots in Detachment B.\n\nThe loss of Powers' U-2 in May 1960 led to major changes in\nthe approval process. For all practical purposes, Prime Minister\nMacmillan ceased to be a source of approval because the RAF pilots\nwho remained in the U-2 program did not conduct any more\noperational missions (although the use of British pilots was consid-\nered on several occasions). In the United States the approval process\n\n\" Beschloss, Mayday, pp. 396-401. Beschloss claims that Powers was fired by Lockheed\nfor criticizing the Agency in his memoirs (which he had shown to the Agency in draft\nform), but Kelly Johnson's \"U-2R Log\" records on 25 September 1969: \"We have no\nflight test activity at all. I must let Gary Powers go. Have protected him for about seven\nyears, but he doesn't have an ATR (Air Transport Rating), so we have no other job for\nhim—not even flying the Beechcraft.\"\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n188\n\nbecame more formal as the National Security Council became involved. Henceforth, proposed missions had to be submitted to the National Security Council (NSC) Special Group for approval. In the early 1960s, the Special Group consisted of the DCI, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, the Under Secretary of State, and the Military Adviser to the President. After the Military Adviser, Gen. Maxwell Taylor, became Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1962, his place on the Special Group was taken by McGeorge Bundy, the President's Special Assistant for National Security Affairs.50\n\nBefore requesting permission from the Special Group for a U-2 mission over denied territory, the CIA prepared a detailed submission giving justification for the proposed mission and maps showing the targets to be photographed, flight times, and emergency landing sites. Such submissions came to be known as \"black books\" because they were placed in black, looseleaf binders. The decision of the Special Group was generally final, although on occasion controversial issues were presented to the President for his decision.\n\nThis approval process did not come into play immediately after May 1960 because there was a long pause in U-2 operations as the detachments returned from overseas. It was not until late October 1960 that the next U-2 operation occurred, this time over Cuba. By this time the full approval procedure had been established, and the Special Group approved the mission (see chapter 5).\n\nThe approval process was not the only part of the U-2 program that changed after May 1960. The process for establishing requirements for overhead reconnaissance missions also became more formal. In August 1960 the US Intelligence Board took over the Ad Hoc Requirements Committee and merged it with the Satellite Intelligence Requirements Committee to form the Committee on Overhead Reconnaissance. DCI Directive 2/7 tasked COMOR with the \"coordinated development of foreign intelligence requirements for overhead-reconnaissance projects over denied areas.\" The DCID defined \"overhead reconnaissance\" to include \"all reconnaissance for foreign-intelligence purposes by satellite, or by any vehicle over\n\n50 The Special Group, which had been created by NSC Intelligence Document 5412/2 in 1955 to oversee covert activities, was originally known as the 5412 Committee. Later the Special Group became known as the 303 Committee and then the 40 Committee. United States Congress, Senate, Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, Foreign and Military Intelligence, book 1, (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1976), pp. 48-53.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n189\n\ndenied areas, whether by photographic, ELINT, COMINT, infrared, RADINT, or other means.\" The only exception to COMOR's area of responsibility was \"reconnaissance and aerial surveillance in direct support of actively combatant forces.\" 51\n\nBy this time the Air Force had developed a large overhead reconnaissance program of its own, including a fleet of U-2s, and, occasionally, there were conflicts between the areas of responsibility of COMOR and the military services for collection requirements. The Air Force had already won a major victory in 1958, when it claimed that the White House had given responsibility for peripheral reconnaissance of the Soviet Union to the military. DCI Dulles, who was always reluctant to become involved in matters that seemed to lie in the military's area of responsibility, did not resist this claim, and the Ad Hoc Requirements Committee stopped preparing requirements for peripheral flights. This ended a major requirements committee study, which sought to estimate what could be gained from U-2 oblique photography along the entire border of the Soviet Union.52 The last CIA U-2 mission along the Soviet Union's coasts occurred on 22 June 1958; thereafter, the only peripheral missions conducted by the CIA were those along the Soviet Union's southern border with Iran and Afghanistan from bases in Pakistan and Turkey under covert arrangements with the host governments.\n\nUntil the spring of 1961, there was virtually no coordination of military reconnaissance activities, even within the individual services. Each commander of a Theater or a Unified and Specified Command conducted his own independent reconnaissance activities. To meet the growing need for overall coordination of these activities at the national level, the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) established the Joint Reconnaissance Center (JRC) under the J-3 (Operations) of the Joint Staff. The JRC immediately began to coordinate and obtain approval for approximately 500 missions per month, assigning each a risk factor of Critical, Sensitive, Unique, or Routine. The JRC then prepared a monthly Activities Book giving details of the proposed missions and briefed the Joint Chiefs of Staff on the more risky missions. The CIA received a copy of the Activities Book.\n\n51 DCID 2/7, effective 9 August 1960 (S).\n\n52 Memorandum for DCI McCone from James Q. Reber, Chairman, COMOR, \"Proposed Procedures for Approval of Critical Reconnaissance,\" 21 March 1962, COMIREX records (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n190\n\nMost military reconnaissance missions were approved or disapproved at the JCS level, but the most sensitive missions were submitted through the Secretary of Defense to the Special Group for approval. In addition to this Department of Defense approval path, the military services could also submit requirements through the DCI using their representatives on COMOR. As a result, the military services had two channels for submitting reconnaissance missions to the Special Group. The Agency had only one—COMOR.53\n\nThe main conflicts between the requirements committee and the military services arose over missions in the Far East. In the early 1960s, North Vietnam had not been designated a denied area by the US Intelligence Board (USIB), so the military services could plan missions there without consulting COMOR. Such missions, however, came very close to China, which was a denied area and, therefore, came under COMOR's area of responsibility. Once the war in Southeast Asia escalated in 1964, the military services received responsibility for the entire area (see chapter 5).\n\nTo reduce the number of disputes between the competing CIA and Air Force reconnaissance programs and to manage the growing satellite program, the two agencies worked out an agreement to provide overall coordination for reconnaissance activities at the national level. The first such interagency agreement came in the fall of 1961, and it was followed by three additional agreements during the next four years.54\n\nInterest in coordinating the reconnaissance efforts of the military services and the CIA also affected the field of photographic interpretation. In the wake of the loss of Francis Gary Powers' U-2 on 1 May 1960, the President's Board of Consultants on Foreign Intelligence Activities (PFIAB) had urged the establishment of an interagency group to study ways to improve the entire US intelligence community. Formed on 6 May 1960, the Joint Study Group on Foreign Intelligence Activities met for the next seven months under the leadership of Lyman Kirkpatrick, CIA Inspector General. One of the study group's key recommendations in the report it issued in December 1960 was the creation of a national photointerpretation\n\n53 Ibid (TS Codeword).\n\n54 Problems of classification prevent a more detailed discussion of this aspect of the reconnaissance program, which will be covered in a future history of satellite reconnaissance at a higher level of classification.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n191\n\ncenter that would bring together photointerpreters from the Agency and the military services. The report further recommended that the CIA be placed in charge of the new center. Ignoring Air Force claims that it should head such a center, President Eisenhower approved the report's recommendation, and, on 18 January 1961, National Security Council Intelligence Directive (NSCID) No. 8 established the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC). Henceforth, the director of NPIC would be designated by the DCI and approved by the Secretary of Defense, and the deputy director would come from one of the military services. The first director of NPIC was Arthur S. Lundahl, head of the CIA's Photo-Intelligence Division.55\n\nOne additional major change in the U-2 program in the years immediately following the May Day incident—although not directly related to the loss of Powers' U-2—was the departure of Richard Bissell from the CIA and the subsequent reorganization of the Agency's reconnaissance and scientific activities. The roots of Bissell's downfall went back to 1 January 1959, when he became Deputy Director for Plans and decided to place all Agency air assets in the DDP in order to maintain control of his overhead reconnaissance projects (the U-2 and its two proposed successors, the OXCART aircraft and the reconnaissance satellite). The previously independent Development Projects Staff became the Development Projects Division (DPD) of the DDP and now controlled all Agency air operations, including air support for covert operations. As a result, U-2s were occasionally employed for gathering intelligence to support DDP operations in addition to their primary mission of gathering strategic and tactical intelligence.\n\nAlthough the reorganization made sense in terms of increasing the efficiency of Agency air operations, the use of the U-2 to support covert action disturbed Bissell's backers among the scientists advising Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy, especially James Killian and Edwin Land. They were concerned that Bissell was becoming too involved in covert action and was not able to devote sufficient time to the overhead reconnaissance program. Then came the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion in April 1961, which discredited Bissell with the Kennedy administration in general and the two scientists in particular. Later that year, Bissell lost another important source of support when Allen Dulles resigned as DCI in November 1961. During his final\n\n55 Lundahl and Brugioni interview (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 4\n192\n\nmonths as the Deputy Director for Plans, Bissell found himself involved in a major struggle with Killian and Land, who were serving on President Kennedy's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (successor to the Eisenhower administration's President's Board of Consultants on Foreign Intelligence Activities). These two influential Presidential advisers strongly advocated removing the Agency's overhead reconnaissance programs from the DDP and placing them in a new, science-oriented directorate, but Bissell resisted this proposal. With his position in the Agency becoming increasingly untenable, Bissell resigned on 17 February 1962, after turning down an offer from the new DCI, John A. McCone, to become the CIA's first Deputy Director for Research.56\n\nTwo days after Bissell's departure, the new Directorate came into existence, and it absorbed all of the Development Projects Division's special reconnaissance projects. Only conventional air support for the Clandestine Services remained with the DDP in the new Special Operations Division. The U-2 program was no longer connected with covert operations.\n\nThe first half of 1962 was a confusing period for the Development Projects Division. After losing the individual who had created and supervised it for seven years, the DPD also lost its feeling of autonomy when it was transferred from its own building to the new CIA Headquarters at Langley. Soon afterward, Col. Stanley W. Beerli, who had headed the DPD since 1960, returned to the Air Force. Then on 30 July 1962, the overhead reconnaissance projects underwent a major reorganization with the formation of the new Office of Special Activities (OSA) to replace the DPD. The original organization of OSA with 10 division or staff heads reporting directly to the director of the office (at that time known as the Assistant Director for Special Activities) proved too cumbersome, and, on 30 September 1962, a reorganization divided most of these offices between two major subordinates, the Deputy for Technology and the Deputy for Field Activities (see chart, page 193). The Office of Special Activities (OSA) continued to control reconnaissance activities and related research and development after the Directorate of Research was enlarged and renamed the Deputy Directorate for Science and Technology (DDS&T) on 5 August 1963 (along with the other\n\n56 Killian interview (S); Land interview (TS Codeword); Richard M. Bissell to John A. McCone, 7 February 1962, DCI records, job 80-B-1676R, box 18, folder 10 (S).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Office of Special Activities Assistant Director for Special Activities Special Assistant for Liaison Deputy Assistant Director Executive Officer Security Staff Programs Staff Deputy for Technology Deputy for Field Activities Support Division Advanced Projects Division Engineering Analysis Division Development Division Contracts Division Intelligence Division Communications Division Operations Division Materiel Division Directorates, DDS&T dropped the \"Deputy\" from its title in 1965 and became known as the Directorate of Science and Technology). In 1965 the head of OSA received a new title, Director of Special Activities. The Office of Special Activities remained in control of the CIA's overhead reconnaissance activities until 1974, when the Agency ended its involvement with manned reconnaissance aircraft.57 57 OSA Chronology, pp. 34-35 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Blank"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN Chapter 5 195 U-2 Operations After May 1960 The loss of Francis Gary Powers' U-2 over the Soviet Union on 1 May 1960 marked the end of the aircraft's use over the Soviet Bloc. Soon after the May Day incident, President Eisenhower ordered an end to overflights. Similarly, his successor, John F. Kennedy, told a 25 January 1961 press conference, \"I have ordered that the flights not be resumed, which is a continuation of the order given by President Eisenhower in May of last year.\" This was not a binding pledge, as John A. McCone (who became DCI in November 1961) pointed out to President Kennedy's successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, on 15 January 1964 in response to the new President's request for information on U-2 overflight policies: Contrary to popular assumption, President Kennedy did not make any pledge or give an assurance, at least publicly, that there would be no further overflights. He limited his response to a statement that he had ordered that the flights not be resumed. An order, obviously, is valid only until countermanded.1 Technically, McCone was correct, but no President was likely to order a resumption of overflights of the Soviet Union without very good reason, and such a situation never developed, in part because satellite photography gradually began to fill the gap left by the end of U-2 coverage. Although there were several proposals to resume overflights of the Soviet Union in the years that followed, none reached the mission planning stage. The Kennedy administration came closest to resuming 1 Memorandum for President Johnson from DCI McCone, \"Response to Query Concerning U-2 Overflight Policy,\" 15 January 1964, DCI records, job 80-B-1676R, box 17, folder 14 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN Chapter 5 196 overflights of the Soviet Union during the Berlin Crisis in the summer and fall of 1961. On 14 September 1961, Kelly Johnson noted in his project log: Have had request from Mr. Bissell to propose ways and means for increasing safety of the U-2 on probable overflights. ... It seems that President Kennedy, who publicly stated that no U-2's would ever be over Russia while he was president, has requested additional flights. Some poetic justice in this.2 One week later Colonel Geary called to order Lockheed to upgrade six older U-2s into U-2Cs with the more powerful engines on a priority basis, even if it meant taking people off the work on the successor aircraft in order to speed up the conversions. Shortly thereafter, the resumption of overflights became a major topic of discussion within the intelligence community. On 25 September 1961, the Committee on Overhead Reconnaissance prepared a detailed \"Justification for U-2 Photography over the USSR,\" which argued in favor of U-2 missions over selected, high-priority targets such as ICBM complexes. The COMOR paper stated that satellite photography did not provide sufficient detail to answer many critical questions about the Soviet ICBM program. To back up this contention, the report placed U-2 and satellite photography of the same Soviet targets side by side, clearly demonstrating the far superior resolution of the U-2's cameras. Not all members of COMOR supported the resumption of overflights, however. When COMOR formally recommended this course of action to the USIB on 1 October 1961, the State Department and CIA members dissented, having found \"insufficient justification for resuming U-2 overflights of the USSR at this time.\" 3 2 Johnson, \"Log for Project X,\" 14 September 1961. In preparation for the possible resumption of overflights, Kelly Johnson began thinking about what to do in a worst case scenario like that of 1 May 1960. He noted in the project log on 21 September 1961: One of the greatest technical problems and, of course, a great moral one, is how we insure destroying the aircraft and the pilot should the mission fail. I have proposed a time-altitude fusing setup for multitude bombs, that looks like it should do the trick. Beerli [Col. Stanley Beerli, USAF, Director of the Office of Special Activities] doesn't want anything to do with this, but we will go ahead and develop it in case someone decides it is necessary. 3 Memorandum for USIB from COMOR, \"Justification for U-2 Photography over the USSR,\" 25 September 1961, IC Staff, COMIREX records, job 33-T-123A, box 10, \"COMOR (General)\" (TS Codeword); Memorandum for USIB from COMOR, \"Requirements for Resumption of U-2 Overflights of the USSR,\" 1 October 1961, IC Staff, COMIREX records, job 33-B-119A, box 1 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN Chapter 5 197 Nothing came of the proposal to resume overflights in the fall of 1961, as both the USIB and the Special Group came out against it, but, as long as U-2 photography remained clearly superior to satellite photography, the thought of obtaining U-2 coverage of the Soviet Union remained tempting. In February 1962, the USIB seriously considered a COMOR proposal to send a U-2 over Kamchatka to photograph Soviet antiballistic-missile facilities but finally decided to wait for the results of an Air Force peripheral mission. The board later accepted DCI McCone's recommendation to seek satellite rather than U-2 coverage of the area.4 With both the CIA and the State Department strongly opposed to sending the highly vulnerable U-2 over the Soviet Union, prospects for resuming flights remained slight unless the international situation worsened to such a degree that overflights would be worth the risks involved. Since this never happened, Francis Gary Powers' flight on 1 May 1960 proved to be the last CIA overflight of the Soviet Bloc. Yet, the U-2 remained useful, for it could operate successfully in other areas with less developed radar and air defense systems. After May 1960, the main focus of U-2 activity shifted to two new areas: Latin America, where U-2s would play an extremely important role during the early 1960s, and the Far East, where CIA U-2s were active from 1958 until 1974, when the Agency's involvement in manned reconnaissance finally ended. U-2 OPERATIONS IN LATIN AMERICA U-2 Support to the Bay of Pigs Invasion During late summer 1960, the Directorate of Plans was planning a counterrevolutionary invasion of Cuba for the following year. To support this effort, the Agency asked the National Security Council's 4 Memorandum for the Special Group from COMOR, \"Illustrations of Policy Restraints on the Collection of Information through Overflight of Denied Areas during 1962,\" 14 December 1962, IC Staff, COMIREX records, job 33-B-119A, box 1 (TS Codeword); James S. Lay, \"The United States Intelligence Board, 1958-1965,\" (draft) CIA History Staff MS-2, 1974, p. 385 (TS Codeword). One year later Saryshagan was the topic of US Intelligence Board deliberations. In October 1963 the board asked COMOR to prepare recommendations on the need for an electronic intelligence-gathering mission against the Soviet ABM installations at Saryshagan. The proposed mission would not, however, violate Soviet airspace; instead, the U-2 would fly over the portion of the People's Republic of China closest to Saryshagan. Lay, \"USIB History,\" pp. 393-94 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n198\n\nSpecial Group to approve U-2 overflights of Cuba. Known as Operation KICK OFF, these flights were designed to obtain intelligence on Cuban air and ground order of battle and to provide geographic data for choosing an invasion site.\n\nTo allay fears that mechanical problems could lead to the loss of a U-2 over Cuba, the submission to the Special Group for overflights emphasized that, if a U-2 had a flameout anywhere over Cuba, it could still glide back and make a safe landing in Florida. The Special Group approved Operation KICK OFF but stipulated that only two overflights could be made. Detachment G staged the Cuban missions from Laughlin AFB near Del Rio, Texas, a base used by SAC U-2 aircraft. Agency photointerpreters went to Del Rio to read out the photography after these missions. The two flights, on 26 and 27 October 1960, were very long missions, covering 3,500 miles and lasting over nine hours. Because of cloud cover over Cuba, the results of both missions were poor. The Agency, therefore, asked the Special Group to approve additional missions. After receiving authorization, Detachment G conducted three missions (Operation GREEN EYES) on 27 November and 5 and 11 December 1960 with good results.\n\nOverflights of Cuba continued under the new administration of President Kennedy. Under the codename Operation LONG GREEN, two overflights on 19 and 21 March 1961 photographed Cuba extensively to aid the final preparations for the invasion. Two weeks later Detachment G again deployed from Edwards AFB, California, to Laughlin AFB, Texas. Beginning on 6 April, Detachment G U-2s made 15 flights over Cuba to provide photographic coverage of the ill-fated Bay of Pigs invasion and its aftermath. These flights were known as Operation FLIP TOP.\n\nAerial Refueling Capability for the U-2\n\nLong missions conducted over Cuba in late 1960 and over Southeast Asia in early 1961 pointed out the need to increase the range of the U-2. In May 1961, Lockheed began modifying Agency U-2s so that they could be refueled in flight to extend their operating range. The six Agency aircraft that were modified to achieve this capability received the designation U-2F. All Agency U-2 pilots then underwent training in the techniques of in-flight refueling.\n\nOSA History, chap. 16, pp. 13-15 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n199\n\nAftermath of the Bay of Pigs invasion, 20 April 1961\n\nRefueling a U-2 in flight was a very delicate task. When fully loaded with fuel, KC-135 tankers found it difficult to reduce airspeed to 200 knots, the safest speed for refueling a U-2. As for the U-2s, they were in a very vulnerable position when approaching a tanker at 200 knots because their frail wings could not stand much stress. As a result, U-2 pilots had to approach the KC-135 tankers very carefully in order to avoid the vortexes from the wingtips of the tanker and the turbulence caused by the four large jet engines. During the first few years of refueling operations, two U-2s crashed after their wings broke off as they crossed into the turbulent area behind the tankers; one of the pilots was killed.\n\nThe in-flight refueling capability was a useful modification to the U-2, but it could not dramatically extend mission length. The main limiting factor remained pilot fatigue, which prevented missions from lasting longer than approximately 10 hours.\n\nU-2 Coverage During the Cuban Missile Crisis\n\nCuba remained a high-priority target even after the Bay of Pigs invasion failed in April 1961. Soon afterward, Detachment G U-2s began flying monthly missions over Cuba in a program known as Project\n\nIbid., p. 11-12 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n200\n\nIn-flight refueling of a U-2\n\nNIMBUS. Most of the flights were staged from Laughlin AFB, Texas, but three were flown from Edwards AFB, California, using in-flight refueling to extend the range of the aircraft. By the spring of 1962, having received reports of increased Soviet activity in Cuba, the CIA requested permission for additional photographic coverage of the island. The Special Group authorized increasing the number of Cuban overflights to at least two per month, beginning in May 1962. At the same time, the National Photographic Interpretation Center began publishing a Photographic Evaluation of Information on Cuba series.\n\nBy early August 1962, CIA analysts had noted a substantial increase in Soviet arms deliveries to Cuba during the preceding weeks. The first U-2 overflight in August, mission 3086 on the 5th, flew too soon to detect the Soviet construction program just getting under way at various sites in Cuba. A second mission (3088) was originally set for 8 August, but bad weather forced repeated postponements until 29 August. This mission's photography provided the first hard evidence\n\nIbid., pp. 19-20 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n201\n\nof the nature of the Soviet buildup in Cuba. Two days after the mission, the CIA reported in the President's Intelligence Checklist that there were at least eight surface-to-air missile (SA-2) sites in the western half of Cuba. (The map on page 202 shows the routes taken by the two August overflights.)\n\nOn 5 September the next U-2 overflight (mission 3089) provided more evidence of the Soviet buildup. The mission's photography showed three more SAM sites and also revealed a MiG-21, one of the newest Soviet fighter aircraft, at the Santa Clara airfield.\n\nThe discovery of SAMs in Cuba had a twofold effect on the US reconnaissance effort over Cuba. First, it added substance to DCI McCone's fears that Cuba might become a base for Soviet medium-range ballistic missiles (he argued that SAM sites would only be set up to protect high-priority facilities such as missile bases). At this time, however, McCone's suspicions were not shared by other officials in the Agency or the administration. The second and most significant effect of the discovery of SAMs in Cuba was to make the administration far more cautious in its use of U-2s for reconnaissance of the island. As the loss of Francis Gary Powers' U-2 in May 1960 had demonstrated, the U-2 was very vulnerable to the SA-2 missile.\n\nWithin the administration, concern mounted about the U-2's vulnerability to SAMs in Cuba and the possibility that a loss could cause a major diplomatic crisis. Such fears increased as the result of two incidents in other parts of the world. On 30 August 1962, a SAC U-2 on a peripheral reconnaissance mission overflew Sakhalin Island in the Far East, prompting a Soviet protest on 4 September. The United States apologized for the intrusion. Then on 8 September, a U-2 with a Nationalist Chinese pilot was shot down over the People's Republic of China (this CIA reconnaissance program is discussed later in this chapter in the section on Asian operations). Increasing concern about U-2 vulnerability led to an impromptu meeting on 10 September 1962 of Secretary of State Dean Rusk, National Security Adviser McGeorge Bundy, and DDCI Marshall S. Carter (in place of the DCI, who was on his honeymoon in France). The Secretary of State objected to the CIA's plans for two extended overflights covering the remaining areas of Cuba not covered by the last two missions. Rusk wanted peripheral flights over international waters kept separate from\n\nDCI John A. McCone\n\nRichard Lehman. \"CIA Handling of the Soviet Buildup in Cuba, 1 July-16 October 1962,\" 14 November 1962 (Hereafter cited as Lehman Report). DCI records, job 80-B-1676R, box 17, folder 18 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"202\n\nU-2 Overflights of Cuba, August - October 1962\n\nMission 3086 5 August\nMission 3088 29 August\n\nGulf of Mexico\nUnited States\nStraits of Florida\nNORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN\nBahamas (U.K.)\nHAVANA\nSan Cristobal\nSanta Clara Airfield\nYucatan Channel\nBay of Pigs\nIsle of Pines\nCuba\nMexico\nCaribbean Sea\nCayman Islands (U.K.)\nU.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay\nHaiti\nDom. Rep.\nJamaica\n0 100 200 Kilometers\n0 100 200 Miles\n\nMission 3089 5 September\nMission 3093 26 September\nMission 3095 29 September\n\nGulf of Mexico\nUnited States\nStraits of Florida\nNORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN\nBahamas (U.K.)\nHAVANA\nSan Cristobal\nSanta Clara Airfield\nYucatan Channel\nBay of Pigs\nIsle of Pines\nCuba\nMexico\nCaribbean Sea\nCayman Islands (U.K.)\nU.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay\nHaiti\nDom. Rep.\nJamaica\n0 100 200 Kilometers\n0 100 200 Miles\n\nSecret NOFORN\n724752 (R00425) 4-92"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"203\n\nUnited States\nMission 3098 5 October\nMission 3100 7 October\nMission 3101 14 October\nGulf of Mexico\nBahamas (U.K.)\nNORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN\nStraits of Florida\nHAVANA\nSan Cristobal\nSanta Clara Airfield\nCuba\nYucatan Channel\nBay of Pigs\nMexico\nIsle of Pines\nCaribbean Sea\nU.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay\nHaiti\nDom. Rep.\nCayman Islands (U.K.)\nJamaica\n200 Kilometers\n100\n200 Miles\n\nUnited States\nMultiple missions, 15-22 October\nGulf of Mexico\nBahamas (U.K.)\nNORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN\nStraits of Florida\nHAVANA\nSan Cristobal\nSanta Clara Airfield\nCuba\nYucatan Channel\nBay of Pigs\nMexico\nIsle of Pines\nCaribbean Sea\nU.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay\nHaiti\nDom. Rep.\nCayman Islands (U.K.)\nJamaica\n200 Kilometers\n100\n200 Miles\n\nSecret NOFORN\n\n724753 (R00426) 4-92"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"204\nSAM Sites in Cuba, August 1962\nU.S.\nStraits of Florida\nGulf\nof\nMexico\nBahamas\n(U.K.)\nNORTH\nATLANTIC\nOCEAN\nHAVANNA\nLa Coloma\nSan Julian\nCuba\nCaribbean Sea\nCayman Islands\n(U.K.)\nU.S. Naval Base\nGuantanamo Bay\n0 100 Kilometers\n0 100 Miles\nJamaica\nHaiti\nSan Julian Airfield\nLa Coloma\nSecret NOFORN\n724754 (R00429) 4-92"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n205\n\noverflights of Cuban territory. He argued that the loss of an aircraft on\na mission that combined both types of flights would make it difficult\nfor the United States to stand on its rights to fly over international wa-\nters. Bundy and Carter therefore agreed to split the proposed recon-\nnaissance program into four missions: two overflights and two\nperipheral flights, all planned for maximum safety. The overflights\nwere thus designed to be quick \"in-and-out\" operations across the\nnarrow width of the island instead of flights along the entire length of\nCuba, as had been the case previously. (As the map on page 202 illus-\ntrates, the 5 September mission was the last one to fly along the\nlength of the island.) As an additional precaution, flightpaths would\nbe laid out to avoid known SAM sites. Although these changes\ngreatly reduced the danger to the U-2, they slowed the gathering of\ninformation on the Soviet buildup by reducing each mission's\ncoverage.⁹\n\nTo ensure that the photographs taken by these missions were of\nthe highest quality, the CIA decided to conduct flights only when the\nweather along the flight routes was less than 25 percent overcast.\nWeather proved to be a major problem during the month of\nSeptember. Unfavorable forecasts (along with a brief standdown of\nU-2 overflights after the loss of the Nationalist Chinese U-2) pre-\nvented the launching of any missions from 6 through 16 September.\nMoreover, when mission 3091 finally flew on 17 September, the fa-\nvorable weather forecast proved inaccurate and heavy clouds pre-\nvented the mission from obtaining usable photography. Bad weather\ncontinued to rule out missions until 26 September, when mission\n3093 covered eastern Cuba and found three additional SAM sites.\nThree days later mission 3095 flew over the Isle of Pines and Bay of\nPigs area, finding one more SAM site and a coastal-defense cruise\nmissile site.¹⁰\n\nThe cautious series of U-2 flights in September had turned up\nmany more SAM sites but no concrete evidence of the presence of\nsurface-to-surface missiles. Growing impatient with the restrictions\n\n⁹ Lehman Report, pp. 12-13 (TS Codeword).\n\n¹⁰ DCI John A. McCone, Memorandum for the Record, \"U-2 Overflights of Cuba, 29\nAugust through 14 October 1962,\" 27 February 1963, DCI records, job 80-B-1676R, box\n17, folder 18 (S). Although this DCI memo states that \"the delay in completing the photo-\ngraphic coverage was due solely to the unfavorable weather predicted during this period,\"\na more contemporary COMOR memo reported a standdown of U-2 overflights until 16\nSeptember as a result of the loss of mission No. GRC-127 over China on 8 September.\nMemorandum for DDCI Carter from James Q. Reber, Chairman, COMOR, \"Historical\nAnalysis of U-2 Overflights of Cuba,\" 24 October 1962, IC Staff, COMIREX records, job\n33-B-122A, box 1, \"Cuba Requirements, 1961-63\" (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n206\nthat had been placed on U-2 overflights of Cuba, DCI McCone told the Special Group on 4 October 1962 that their policy of avoiding SAM sites had restricted the Agency to using the U-2 only in Cuba's southeastern quadrant. He questioned \"whether this was a reasonable restriction at this time, particularly since the SAM's were almost certainly not operational.\" 11 The Special Group then requested the preparation of an overall program for reconnaissance of Cuba in time for its next meeting on 9 October.\n\nIn the meantime, CIA U-2s continued the reconnaissance program that the Special Group had approved in September. In early October two peripheral missions—3098 along the southeastern coast on 5 October and 3100 along the northern coast on 7 October (see map on page 203)—discovered an additional five SAM sites. This brought the total to 19, but there was still no evidence of surface-to-surface missiles.\n\nEvidence was mounting that the portion of Cuba that the September and early October missions had avoided was the most likely location for Soviet medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs). On 6 October 1962, the Committee on Overhead Reconnaissance recommended frequent and regular coverage of Cuba, pointing in particular to the need for renewed coverage of western Cuba:\n\nThe absence of coverage of the western end since August 29, coupled with the rate of construction we have observed, means that there may well be many more sites now being built of which we are unaware. Ground observers have in several recent instances reported sightings of what they believe to be the SS-4 (SHYSTER) MRBM in Cuba. These reports must be confirmed or denied by photo coverage.12 Attached to this memorandum was a list of targets, with the area around San Cristobal at the top.\n\nOn 9 October the Special Group met to discuss COMOR's recommendations, the most important of which was a U-2 flight over the \"suspect MRBM site as soon as weather permits.\" This mission was also designed to pass over one of the SA-2 sites that was thought to be most nearly operational in order to determine the status of SA-2\n\n11 Minutes of the Special Group meeting, 4 October 1962, in Memorandum for DCI McCone from J. S. Earman, Inspector General, \"Handling of Raw Intelligence Information During the Cuban Arms Buildup,\" 20 November 1962, DCI records, job 80-B-1676R, box 17 (TS Codeword).\n\n12 Lehman Report, p. 30 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-sonnet-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n207\n\ndefenses of Cuba. If this overflight did not provoke an SA-2 reaction,\nthe study recommended \"maximum coverage of the western end of\nthe island by multiple U-2s simultaneously.\" 13 Because the danger\nposed by the SA-2 sites was one of the major topics at the Special\nGroup meeting, DCI McCone brought along Col. Jack C. Ledford\n(USAF), head of the Office of Special Activities, who presented a\nvulnerability analysis that estimated the odds of losing a U-2 over\nCuba at 1 in 6. The Special Group approved the recommended flight\nover San Cristobal.\n\nAs the Special Group meeting was breaking up, Deputy\nSecretary of Defense Roswell Gilpatric and the Air Force repre-\nsentative questioned the adequacy of the Agency's cover story, which\nwas that its pilots were Lockheed employees on a ferry flight to\nPuerto Rico. The Air Force and DOD representatives argued that it\nwould be better to use Air Force pilots and state in the event of a mis-\nhap that the overflight was a routine Air Force peripheral surveillance\nmission that had gone off course. McCone then asked Colonel\nLedford's opinion of the proposed change. Ledford agreed that the\nDOD cover story was better but pointed out that the SAC U-2s were\nmuch more vulnerable than those of the Agency, which had superior\nelectronic countermeasures and a higher maximum altitude. Ledford\nthen suggested that Air Force pilots use Agency aircraft after receiv-\ning familiarization training. After leaving the Special Group meeting,\nMcCone and Gilpatric met with President Kennedy, who approved the\nSan Cristobal mission and the use of Air Force pilots.14\n\nTwo days later (11 October), Air Force and CIA representatives\nmet to discuss the change in cover stories. Herbert Scoville, CIA\nDeputy Director for Research, agreed that in the long run the Air\nForce cover story was best but emphasized that an Air Force pilot\nshould not be used until he had received adequate training. The con-\nversation then turned to the issue of who would run the next mission,\nthe CIA or the Air Force. Strongly favoring Air Force control of the\nU-2 missions over Cuba, the DOD representatives called DCI\nMcCone and obtained his consent. Shortly thereafter, McCone left\n\n13 Ibid., p. 31 (TS Codeword).\n\n14 Brig. Gen. Jack C. Ledford, USAF Ret., interview by Gregory W. Pedlow, Washington,\nDC, 20 February 1987 (S); Memorandum for DCI McCone from Herbert Scoville, Jr.,\nDeputy Director (Research), \"The Chronology of Events Leading to the Transfer of Cuban\nOverflight Responsibility,\" 28 February 1963, DCI records, job 80-B-1676R, box 17,\nfolder 18 (S).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN Chapter 5 208 DDCI Marshall S. Carter Washington for California and did not return until 14 October. Air Force control of the Cuban overflights became official on 12 October, when President Kennedy transferred \"responsibility, to include command and control and operational decisions, with regard to U-2 reconnaissance overflights of Cuba\" from the CIA to the Department of Defense.15 The Air Force then asked to borrow two of CIA's U-2Cs. The Acting DCI, Lt. Gen. Marshall S. Carter, US Army, reacted strongly to the Air Force takeover of a major CIA operation. At one point he remarked, \"I think it's a hell of a way to run a railroad. It's perfectly obviously a geared operation to get SAC in the act.\" 16 In a series of conversations with high-ranking Air Force and administration officials, Carter argued against changing command and control of the flights at such a crucial time. The Agency operation, Carter pointed out, was already in place and working well, whereas the Air Force lacked experience in controlling U-2 overflights, particularly with the U-2C, which was not in the Air Force inventory. Carter also emphasized that Air Force pilots lacked experience with the more powerful J75 engines in the U-2C. He told Roswell Gilpatric, \"To put in a brand new green pilot just because he happens to have on a blue suit and to completely disrupt the command and control and communication and ground support system on 72 hours' notice to me doesn't make a God damn bit of sense, Mr. Secretary.\" 17 DDCI Carter admitted that the Air Force's cover story was probably better than the CIA's but suggested at one point, \"Let's take one of my boys and put him in a blue suit.\" 18 Realizing, however, that the pilot would probably have to come from the Air Force, Carter concentrated his efforts on trying to convince DOD and administration officials to conduct an orderly transition by allowing the CIA to continue its operation for a few weeks using an Air Force pilot, and the Air Force gradually taking over command and control. Carter's efforts were in vain. The Air Force insisted on immediate control of the operation, and administration officials were unwilling to become involved in what they Memorandum for DCI McCone from McGeorge Bundy, \"Reconnaissance Overflights of Cuba,\" 12 October 1962, DCI records, job 80-B-1676R, box 17, folder 18 (TS). Telephone conversation between DDCI Carter and McGeorge Bundy, 13 October 1962, DCI records, job 80-B-1676R, box 17, folder 18 (TS Codeword). Telephone conversation between DDCI Carter and Roswell Gilpatric, 12 October 1962, DCI records, job 80-B-1676R, box 17, folder 18 (TS Codeword). Telephone conversation between DDCI Carter and Gen. William McKee, 12 October 1962, DCI records, job 80-B-1676R, box 17, folder 18 (TS Codeword). Secret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"perceived as a jurisdictional dispute. Presidential Assistant for National Security Affairs McGeorge Bundy told DDCI Carter that \"the whole thing looks to me like two quarreling children.\" 19 Furthermore, no one wanted to speak out against a decision that the President had already made. Once the decision was clearly irrevocable, the Agency gave its complete support to the Air Force in preparing for the upcoming overflight. A SAC U-2 pilot had already arrived unannounced at the CIA's U-2 Detachment at Edwards Air Force Base on 11 October, and the CIA U-2 detachment put him through a hasty training program to familiarize him with the U-2C. By Sunday, 14 October 1962, the weather over Cuba had cleared, and the first SAC overflight of the island took place. When the U-2 returned, its film was rushed to the National Photographic Interpretation Center. By the evening of 15 October, photointerpreters had found evidence of the presence of MRBMs in the San Cristobal area. NPIC Director Arthur Lundahl immediately notified DDI Ray Cline, who in turn notified DDCI Carter (DCI McCone had again left town). As the readout progressed and the evidence became firmer, the DDI notified National Security Adviser Bundy and Roger Hilsman of the Department of State's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, who informed Secretary of State Dean Rusk. On the following morning, 16 October, DDCI Carter briefed the President on the results of the 14 October mission.20 Now that the presence of Soviet medium-range surface-to-surface missiles in Cuba had been confirmed, the rules for U-2 mission approval changed. The Strategic Air Command received blanket approval to fly as many missions as needed to cover Cuba completely, without again consulting the Special Group. During the week that followed the discovery of the missiles, SAC U-2s conducted multiple missions each day (see map on page 203). U-2 photography was supplemented by low-level photography taken by high-performance Navy and Air Force aircraft. Throughout the remainder of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Agency's U-2 pilots remained idle, but the photointerpreters at NPIC did yeoman service in studying the Telephone conversation between DDCI Carter and McGeorge Bundy, 12 October 1962, DCI records, job 80-B-1676R, box 17, folder 18 (TS Codeword). For a more detailed account of NPIC's discovery of the Soviet missiles in Cuba, see Dino Brugioni, The Cuban Missile Crisis-Phase I, 29 August-16 October 1962, DDS&T Historical Series, NPIC-1 (CIA: NPIC, 1971) (S). Secret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN Chapter 5 210 7 MISSILE TRAILERS TENT AREA VEHICLES ERECTORS MISSILE TRAILER Soviet MRBM site in Cuba, 1 October 1962 thousands of feet of film returned by Air Force and Navy reconnaissance aircraft. President Kennedy used NPIC photographs to illustrate his address to the nation on 22 October 1962, when he revealed the Soviet missile buildup in Cuba and declared his \"naval quarantine\" to prevent the shipment of offensive weapons to Cuba. On 27 October, at the height of the crisis, one of the U-2Cs lent by the Agency to the Air Force was shot down over Cuba, killing the pilot, Maj. Rudolph Anderson. This loss again illustrated the U-2's vulnerability to the SA-2 missile. Nevertheless, SAC U-2 overflights continued, both during and after the crisis. Responsibility for photographic coverage of Cuba remained with the Air Force; Agency pilots never flew another mission over the island. Although SAC carried out most of the U-2 activity during the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Agency's U-2 missions had made vital contributions during the initial stages of the crisis. In all, Project IDEALIST pilots had spent 459 hours overflying Cuba during 1961 and 1962. They had provided concrete evidence of the Soviet buildup on the island, evidence that was simply not available through any Secret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN Chapter 5 211 other means. Although by late 1962 photographic satellites had become an integral part of the overhead collection program, only U-2s could provide the highly detailed photography that photointerpreters needed to spot the early stages of work on missile sites. Attempts had been made to photograph Cuba with satellites, but to no avail because the satellites' normal orbits placed them over Cuba at the wrong time of day, after clouds had formed. U-2s Over South America Agency U-2s again conducted operations in the Western Hemisphere in December 1963. The Directorate of Plans had requested photographic coverage of Venezuela and neighboring British Guiana because of guerrilla activities conducted by a pro-Castro movement inside Venezuela. Supplies for this movement appeared to be coming across the border from British Guiana. On 30 November 1963, the NSC Special Group approved overflights of the British Guiana-Venezuela border to determine the scope and rate of buildup of guerrilla forces. The Special Group stipulated that the entire effort was to be conducted without the knowledge of either the British or the Venezuelans. Within three days, several Detachment G aircraft and pilots deployed to Ramey AFB, Puerto Rico, from which they made six flights over the border areas between 3 and 19 December 1963 in an operation known as SEAFOAM. The results of the effort were inconclusive, and the task force returned to Edwards AFB on 22 December.21 U-2 OPERATIONS IN ASIA Detachment C and the Indonesian Revolt of 1958 U-2 operations in Asia began even before the end of overflights of the Soviet Bloc. By 1958 the Eisenhower administration, although very reluctant to approve U-2 flights over or near Soviet and East European borders, was not averse to using the spyplanes in the Third World, where radar detection was unlikely. Thus, in the spring of 1958, Agency U-2s from Detachment C conducted a major reconnaissance effort over Indonesia, Operation ROBIN HOOD. OSA History, chap. 16, pp. 35-36 (TS Codeword). Secret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":225,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN Chapter 5 212 Long unhappy with President Achmed Sukarno's perceived sympathy to Communism and his institution of \"guided democracy\" in Indonesia, the CIA, after consultation with the State Department, began in early 1957 to supply financial assistance to a group of dissident Indonesian Army officers on the island of Sumatra. By 25 September 1957, the National Security Council had become concerned with the course of events in Indonesia and on its recommendation President Eisenhower authorized the Agency to \"employ all feasible covert means\" to support the dissidents. Planning for increased aid of all types began immediately, and in January 1958 a US arms shipment for the dissidents arrived in Sumatra. Then on 10 February, the situation came to a head. While Sukarno was out of the country on a state visit to Japan, the dissident army colonels, without consulting CIA, organized a Revolutionary Council in Padang, West Sumatra, and demanded the abolition of President Sukarno's \"guided democracy.\" Five days later, this council proclaimed itself the new \"Revolutionary Government\" of Indonesia. President Sukarno's armed forces responded swiftly to this threat. In late February the Indonesian Air Force began bombing dissident strongholds, and by mid-March government forces were conducting an all-out air-sea-land drive against the rebel-held areas in central Sumatra. Although the Sumatran rebels were falling back, additional unrest broke out over 1,800 miles away in the islands of Celebes (Sulawesi), and CIA quickly began supplying weapons to these dissidents, too.22 Increasingly involved in Indonesia, the Agency urgently needed accurate information on the situation there. As in previous crises, U-2s flew reconnaissance missions. On 24 March 1958, the Development Projects Staff moved the entire complement of Detachment C's pilots and planes from Japan to a base more easily accessible to Indonesia: Cubi Point Naval Air Station in the Philippines. Cubi Point was far from any facility that could develop and interpret the U-2 photographs, so two Photo-Intelligence Division employees went to Clark Airfield, just 30 minutes by air from Cubi Point, to establish a forward processing center. They arrived on 28 March and had the photo lab ready to go on the following day.23 Covert Support to Indonesian Revolutionary Government, 1957-1958, 2 vols., Clandestine Service Historical Series, CSHP-53 (CIA: History Staff, 1970) (S); John Prados, Presidents' Secret Wars: CIA and Pentagon Covert Operations Since World War II (New York, William Morrow: 1986), pp. 133-144. OSA History, chap. 15, pp. 25-26 (TS Codeword). Secret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":226,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Detachment C and the Indonesian Revolt, 1958\n\nChina\n\nIndia\n\nBurma\n\nJapan\n\nTOKYO\n\nAtsugi\n\nEast China Sea\n\nOkinawa\n\nTAIPEI\n\nTaiwan\n\nPhilippine Sea\n\nMacau (Port.)\n\nVICTORIA\n\nHong Kong (U.K.)\n\nHANOI\n\nNORTH VIETNAM\n\nLaos\n\nVIENTIANE\n\nRANGOON\n\nThailand\n\nBANGKOK\n\nCambodia\n\nPHNOM PENH\n\nSAIGON\n\nSOUTH VIETNAM\n\nLuzon\n\nSouth China Sea\n\nForward processing center established, 28 March\n\nClark Airbase\n\nMANILA\n\nDetachment C moved from Japan, 24 March\n\nPhilippines\n\nJESSELTON\n\nBRUNEI\n\nNorth Borneo (U.K.)\n\nBrunei (U.K.)\n\nSarawak (U.K.)\n\nKUCHING\n\nBorneo\n\nCIA support for captured island, 27 April\n\nMorotai\n\nCIA arms delivery, mid-April\n\nCelebes\n\nKUALA LUMPUR\n\nMalaya\n\nSINGAPORE\n\nSingapore (U.K.)\n\nDissident uprising 10 February\n\nPadang\n\nGovernment troops retake city, 17 April\n\nUS advisors evacuated, 1 May\n\nSumatra\n\nDJAKARTA\n\nJava\n\nIndonesia\n\nAmbon\n\nCapture of Allen Pope, 17 May\n\nHOLLANDIA\n\nNetherlands New Guinea\n\nDILI\n\nPortuguese Timor (Port.)\n\nINDIAN OCEAN\n\nAustralia\n\n724755 (R00427) 4-92"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":227,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 5\n\n214\n\nThe first U-2 mission over Indonesia took place on 28 March 1958. By 12 June, when the operation was phased out, Detachment C U-2s had flown 30 missions over the major islands of Indonesia. Sanitized photos from these missions were used to brief members of the DDP's Covert Action Staff (CAS), who were in charge of a small force of World War II-vintage aircraft such as P-51s and B-26s used to support the rebel troops. The CIA's proprietary, Civil Air Transport, supplied the aircraft, which were based on the Indonesian island of Morotai and flown by mercenary pilots. Desperately short of pilots, the CAS asked if some of the U-2 pilots with experience in World War II aircraft could be detailed to the Morotai effort. Although such a request represented an improper use of the highly trained U-2 pilots and posed a potential threat to the entire U-2 program if one of them were captured, Richard Bissell agreed to send pilots James Cherbonneaux and Carmine Vito to help. Both were experienced with World War II aircraft, although Vito had never flown the rebels' fighter aircraft, the P-51 Mustang. After arriving on Morotai, Cherbonneaux explained to Vito how to fly the fast and powerful Mustang while the two were sitting at a makeshift bar on the edge of the airfield.\n\nSeveral days later, when Cherbonneaux was off the island on another mission, a flight of Indonesian twin-engine bombers of Czechoslovak manufacture was spotted making its way toward the island. Exclaiming, \"I'm not going to sit around and wait to be bombed,\" Vito had a Filipino mechanic start up a P-51 sitting on the tarmac. In his first and only flight in a P-51, Vito managed to get the plane off the ground. Once he was airborne and turned in the direction of the lumbering bombers, they all took flight in as many directions as there were aircraft. After firing a few . 50-caliber rounds in the direction of the closest bomber, Vito circled the field and landed the aircraft safely.24\n\nAgency efforts in support of the rebel government proved fruitless. By early May, Central Government forces had taken most of the remaining rebel strongholds, and the Sumatran rebellion was deteriorating into small-scale guerrilla activity. Then on 18 May, an American mercenary pilot, Allen Lawrence Pope, was shot down on a bombing mission over Ambon Island. Pope's capture ended Allen Dulles's enthusiasm for the effort, and President Eisenhower also\n\n24 Information supplied by Carmine Vito and James Cherbonneaux to Donald E. Welzenbach, May 1986.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":228,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nChapter 5\n\n215\n\nwanted no more part of it. The US Government rapidly withdrew its support, and the remaining remnants of the rebellion collapsed. Four years later, the Indonesians freed Pope after Attorney General Robert Kennedy personally appealed to President Sukarno.\n\nWhen the revolt ended, the U-2s returned to Atsugi. On the way back, one of the planes, which was equipped with a System-V electronic intelligence unit, flew along the coast of China to gather data on Communist Chinese radars.25\n\nChina Offshore Islands Dispute of 1958\n\nDuring the summer of 1958, tension between the People's Republic of China and Nationalist China (Taiwan) increased to such an extent that on 18 June Detachment C mounted a U-2 mission to film the Chinese mainland coast and adjacent island areas. On 11 August, People's Liberation Army (PLA) artillery began bombarding the offshore islands of Quemoy and Little Quemoy, where the Nationalists had stationed large numbers of troops to ward off any invasion. On 23 August the Communists increased the shelling. After five days of intense bombardment, which made resupply of the islands from Taiwan impossible, the PLA commander ordered the Nationalist garrisons to surrender, intimating that an invasion was imminent. The Nationalists refused to surrender and received support from the United States in the form of warships from the 7th Fleet, which began escorting Nationalist ships carrying supplies to the beleaguered garrisons.\n\nDuring this period, Detachment C U-2s flew four missions over the mainland, searching for troop movements that would indicate that the PRC was planning to invade the islands. Photos from these missions showed no evidence of a PRC buildup, but the atmosphere in the region remained tense. Detachment C U-2s flew two more missions (9 September and 22 October) to monitor PRC troop movements and again found no indications of preparations for an invasion. The Offshore Islands Crisis receded in late October 1958 after the PRC learned that it would not receive support from the Soviet Union if the crisis escalated into a confrontation with the United States.26\n\n25 Mission folder 1773, (10 June 1958), OSA records, job 67-B-328, box 7 (TS Codeword); OSA History, chap. 15, pp. 25-26 (TS Codeword).\n\n26 OSA History, chap. 15, p. 27 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":229,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nChapter 5\n\n216\n\nWhile the Offshore Islands Crisis was still in progress, Detachment C began conducting flights in support of its weather reconnaissance cover story. On 14, 15, and 16 July 1958, U-2s flew high above Typhoon Winnie, which was causing great damage on Taiwan. These missions provided the first photography ever obtained of such a massive storm system. Photographs of the storm were the subject of articles in the magazine Weatherwise and the 21 July edition of Aviation Week. In September, Detachment C aircraft photographed two more typhoons.\n\nU-2 Support for DDP Operations in Tibet\n\nThe consolidation of all Agency air activities under the DDP in 1959 led to increased involvement of the U-2 program with clandestine efforts against Communist governments. One important area of DDP activity during this period was Tibet. In March 1959, the PLA suppressed an uprising against the Chinese occupation of Tibet, and several thousand Tibetans fled the country along with their spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama. Afterward, Agency operatives from the DDP's Far East Division began training some of these Tibetan refugees for paramilitary operations inside Tibet. Once the Tibetans completed their training, FE Division planned to parachute them back into Tibet. Such missions, however, required detailed maps and aerial photographs of the areas of operation. Richard Bissell, therefore, obtained permission from the President to use Detachment C U-2s to provide the necessary photography.\n\nOperation MILL TOWN, as the reconnaissance missions over Tibet were known, consisted of two missions staged from Cubi Point Naval Air Station on 12 and 14 May 1959. The photography revealed that Communist China had built new roads with supply and defense points. Agency photointerpreters also discovered two large new airfields at elevations above 13,000 feet. Later in the year, the Far East Division needed photographs and maps of another area of Tibet. To conceal the target of this new operation, which was codenamed SOUTH GATE, the Development Projects Division planned and flew a total of six missions covering much of Southeast Asia-Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia [REDACTED] as well as the desired area in Tibet. Only four of the missions involved the area of operational interest. Five of the flights took place between 29 August and 9 September, and one additional flight (Operation QUICK KICK) followed on 4 November. All of these missions were \"Fast Move\" operations in which necessary supplies and personnel flew to a remote staging area in a C-130, where they rendezvoused with a U-2 that had been ferried\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":230,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nChapter 5\n\n217\n\n[Photograph: U-2 photography of Typhoon Winnie, July 1958]\n\nin. The staging base in this case was Ta Khli, Thailand. These flights did not go unnoticed; on 13 September 1959, Hong Kong's China Post published a story headlined \"U-2 of USAF Said Reconnoitering Red China at Unreachable Altitude.\" 27\n\nU-2Cs for Detachment C\n\nLate in 1958, Lockheed began refitting the Agency's 13 remaining U-2s with the more powerful Pratt & Whitney J75/P-13 jet engine. The first of these U-2Cs arrived at Detachment C in the summer of 1959. During a test flight of this aircraft (article 360) on 24 September 1959, the pilot decided to set a new altitude record.\n\n27 Ibid., chap. 18, pp. 6-7, 12; chap. 15, p. 29 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":231,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n218\n\nLhasa, Tibet, November 1959\n\nAlthough the plane was equipped with a camera, it carried no film and did not have a full load of fuel, which made it considerably lighter than an operational U-2C. As a result, the plane reached 76,400 feet—the highest altitude achieved by any of the original U-2 aircraft. In the process, however, the aircraft consumed more fuel than was called for in the test flight plan, causing the engine to flame out during the return to base. The pilot then made an emergency wheels-up landing at a glider-club strip near Fujisawa, south of Atsugi.\n\nThe crash did not cause any injuries or serious damage to the aircraft, but it did bring unwanted publicity to the U-2 program. Much of the publicity resulted from the actions of Detachment C's security unit, whose conspicuous Hawaian shirts and large pistols drew the\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":232,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n219\n\nattention of Japanese reporters. One reporter even flew over the area in a helicopter, taking pictures of the U-2. These photographs appeared in many Japanese newspapers and magazines.\n\nU-2 Crash in Thailand\n\nFlights by Detachment C U-2s over Tibet and western China continued during the first half of 1960 under Operation TOPPER. The first mission on 30 March was very successful. The second mission on 5 April took good photographs but encountered mechanical problems. At the start of the mission, the landing-gear doors failed to close completely, resulting in increased drag and higher fuel consumption. With no fuel gauge to warn the pilot of the critical fuel situation, the aircraft ran out of fuel far short of Ta Khli, forcing the pilot to make a crash landing in a rice paddy. The area was inaccessible to large vehicles, and the plane, article 349, had to be cut into pieces in order to remove it. With the help of local villagers, the retrieval team dissassembled the aircraft for transport to the base, where the pieces were loaded onto a C-124 under cover of darkness. The crash and subsequent recovery of the U-2 did not attract the attention of the press; there was only one report in a local Thai newspaper, which simply referred to the crash of a jet plane. In appreciation for the assistance provided by the villagers, the Agency's Thailand Station gave the headman funds to build a new school.\n\nEnd of Detachment C Operations\n\nThe loss of two aircraft in slightly more than six months left Detachment C with just two aircraft. Fortunately, the level of mission activity remained low because Detachment C was no longer conducting overflights of the Soviet Union.\n\nOne important remaining mission was high-altitude air sampling (HASP), in which specially equipped U-2s gathered upper-altitude air samples to look for evidence of Soviet nuclear testing. The direction of the prevailing winds made Detachment C ideally situated for this activity, which began in the fall of 1958 and continued in 1959. In late April 1960, Detachment C was preparing to stage to the Philippines to conduct additional air-sampling missions, when the loss of Powers' U-2 temporarily halted all U-2 activities.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":233,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n220\n\nRecovery of Article 349, April 1960\n\nThe publicity generated by the U-2 incident stirred considerable controversy in Japan, and there were soon demonstrations against the continuing presence of U-2s in Japan. On 6 June 1960, project headquarters decided on a phased-out withdrawal of Detachment C between 15 July and 1 September, but this timetable had to be accelerated when the Japanese Government formally requested the removal of the U-2s on 8 July.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":234,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n221\n\nDetachment G Missions Over Laos and North Vietnam\n\nIn the aftermath of the Powers loss, both of the overseas U-2 detachments returned to the United States and their aircraft and personnel were incorporated into Detachment G at Edwards Air Force Base in California. This detachment was now responsible for providing coverage in Asia, and its first mission came in Laos. After the neutralist Laotian Government of Souvanna Phouma collapsed in early December 1960, reports began circulating that leftist antigovernment forces were using Soviet arms. Then on 30 December, a new Laotian Government appealed for UN aid against what it said was an invasion from North Vietnam and possibly Communist China. Alarmed over the possibility of the civil war expanding because of the introduction of foreign troops, the Eisenhower administration ordered Detachment G to gather more information on the events in Southeast Asia.\n\nFive Detachment G pilots and planes were ferried to Cubi Point Naval Air Station in the Philippines to conduct an operation known as POLECAT. During the period 3 to 18 January 1961, these U-2s made seven flights over Laos and North Vietnam. To search for the reported foreign troops, these missions concentrated on the lines of communications leading into Laos from North Vietnam and China. In addition, the U-2s scanned North Vietnamese airfields for Soviet aircraft to determine the magnitude of the airdrop operation allegedly supporting the Pathet Lao troops. NPIC sent photointerpreters to Clark Air Force Base in the Philippines to obtain an immediate readout of the results of each mission. The photography did not substantiate the Laotian claims, and on 26 January the Laotian Government retracted its charges of a foreign invasion. Detachment G's U-2s returned to California in early February 1961.\n\nDuring the final stages of Operation POLECAT, there was a major threat to the security of the mission. The film from the flights made on 16 and 18 January had been sent to the United States for duplicate processing. Afterward the film was put aboard an Agency C-47 on 14 March to ferry it to Washington. During the flight one of the aircraft's engines failed, forcing the crew to jettison 43 boxes of highly classified film over mountainous terrain around Williamsport, Pennsylvania, to keep the craft airborne. After making an emergency\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":235,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n222\n\nlanding at the Scranton-Wilkes-Barre Airport, the pilot reported the incident to Headquarters. The Office of Security immediately contacted the Pennsylvania State Police, who sealed off the wooded area. Agency security officers soon arrived to search for the boxes. They recovered all 43 containers; not one had broken.\n\nDetachment G's only other activity during the summer of 1961 was a solitary overflight of North Vietnam, known as Operation EBONY. In preparation for this mission, a U-2 deployed to Cubi Point on 13 August 1961. Two days later it successfully conducted the overflight and subsequently returned to the United States.\n\nNew Detachment on Taiwan\n\nLong before the Nationalist Chinese became involved in the U-2 program, they were flying covert reconnaissance missions for the CIA. In 1952 the CIA began recruiting Nationalist Chinese crews to replace US personnel from the proprietary firm Civil Air Transport, who had been flying Agency aircraft to drop leaflets, agents, and supplies over the Chinese mainland. This project (BGMARQUE) also provided photographic coverage of the rail line from Shanghai to the border with French Indochina. CIA-sponsored aerial reconnaissance over the mainland increased substantially in 1955 with the establishment of Project STPOLLY, which used Agency aircraft with Nationalist Chinese crews to gather Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) and conduct psychological warfare against the People's Republic of China. At first the SIGINT equipment was installed in World War II-vintage aircraft such as PB-4Ys and B-17s, but in 1958 the project received a new aircraft procured covertly by the Agency from Lockheed, the P2V7, with an extremely sophisticated airborne SIGINT system. STPOLLY added the more advanced Lockheed P3A in 1963. Between 1955 and 1967, when the CIA terminated the project, STPOLLY conducted 399 overflights of the People's Republic of China, losing a total of eight aircraft and crews.\n\nIn addition to CIA-sponsored aerial reconnaissance projects, the Nationalist Chinese Air Force had its own reconnaissance capability with US-supplied RB-57 aircraft. In 1958 the US Air Force proposed\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":236,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lockheed P-2V7 and P3A reconnaissance aircraft\nsupplying the Nationalist Chinese Government with the most advanced reconnaissance aircraft available, the U-2. The CIA opposed a Nationalist Chinese U-2 program because such flights would destroy the existing unclassified cover for the U-2. In discussions with the Air Force, DDCI Cabell only consented to having Nationalist pilots trained to fly U-2s so that they would be ready in case they were needed in the future; he opposed any Nationalist overflights. The training of the Nationalist Chinese pilots began in March 1959. By the end of the year, there was a group of trained pilots ready for operations, and DCI Dulles met with the Joint Chiefs of Staff to discuss the program's future. Dulles reaffirmed the Agency's opposition to Nationalist Chinese U-2 missions, and the Air Force, which had"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":237,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wanted the Nationalists to be allowed to begin operations, reluctantly agreed to wait until conditions were favorable.14 The situation changed radically in May 1960 after the loss of Powers' U-2 destroyed the existing cover story for U-2 operations. Now there was no longer any reason not to use the Nationalist pilots. In addition, the Agency soon found itself in need of a base of operations in the Far East after Detachment C had to leave Japan.\n\nDuring discussions with Nationalist officials on 6 May 1960, the CIA's Chief of Station in Taipei, Ray Cline, raised the possibility of assigning U-2s to the Chinese Air Force. Two weeks later, Gen. Chiang Ching-kuo, head of the National Security Bureau, approached Cline informally to propose that the U-2 aircraft based in Japan be moved to Taiwan. This was followed three days later by an official offer on behalf of General Chiang's father, Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek. President Eisenhower learned of Nationalist China's proposal on 18 June. Several weeks later, Richard Bissell suggested that two U-2s be turned over to the Nationalists for use in overflying the mainland. The project would be conducted along the lines of Project STPOLLY.35\n\nOn 26 August 1960, President Eisenhower and the State Department approved Bissell's proposal to turn U-2s over to the Nationalist Chinese rather than move an American detachment to Taiwan. Using Nationalist pilots for overflights had the advantage of providing complete deniability for the United States, even if an aircraft was lost over hostile territory. The U-2s would belong to Nationalist China and would have Nationalist pilots, and there was no overt US involvement with the overflights. In reality, however, the United States would maintain strict control over the missions to be flown.36\n\nOn 7 December 1960, two U-2s were officially licensed for export to Nationalist China as part of a new effort codenamed TACKLE. These planes came from the Agency's U-2 inventory and arrived in\n\n14 Andrew J. Russo, Low-Level Technical Reconnaissance Over Mainland China (1955-1966) (draft), Clandestine Services Historical Program, CSHP-2.348 (CIA: History Staff, 1972) (S).\n\n35 OSA History, chap. 17, pp. 1-7 (TS Codeword).\n\n36 Ibid., chap. 17, pp. 12-13, 44 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":238,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Taiwan on 14 December. Within the Agency the Nationalist pilots and aircraft were known as Detachment H, and they were based at the Nationalist Chinese Air Force Base at T'ao-yuan. One of the U-2s was painted with the Nationalist Chinese insignia, and the other was left unmarked so that it could also be used by Agency pilots as needed. The planes were maintained by Lockheed mechanics under contract to the CIA. The Agency attempted to maintain at least two U-2s in Detachment H, so lost or damaged aircraft were replaced from the Agency's inventory.\n\nDetachment H U-2 at T'ao-yuan Airfield\n\nDuring 1961, Detachment H conducted training missions with both U-2s, and one Nationalist pilot was killed in a crash on 19 March. Although the detachment was ready to begin operations, the new Kennedy administration was not yet ready to authorize overflights of the PRC. In a 3 March 1961 meeting between State Department and CIA officials to discuss the possibility of such overflights, Under Secretary of State Chester Bowles noted that \"the President was feeling his way on the international scene, and time was needed to evaluate the new Sino-Soviet posture with relation to the United States.\" 37 In July 1961 the USIB considered the possibility of conducting overflights of the PRC, but the State Department remained opposed.\n\nBy the fall of 1961, interest in overflights of the PRC was growing because of indications that the Chinese were making progress in nuclear energy and missile development. As a result, on 4 October\n\n37 James A. Cunningham, Jr., Assistant Chief, DPD-DD/P, Memorandum for the Record, \"TACKLE STPOLLY Briefing for State Department Officials,\" 6 March 1961, IC Staff, COMIREX records, job 33-B-119A, box 1, \"IDEALIST/TACKLE, 1961\" (S)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":239,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1961 PFIAB recommended the initiation of a limited number of U-2 photographic missions over the Chinese mainland. The President approved the board's recommendation.\n\nBecause the US-Nationalist Chinese overflight program (Project TACKLE) was a joint effort, both countries participated in the approval process and also shared in the results of the missions. The USIB COMOR established the requirements for Detachment H's overflights, which had to be approved by the NSC's Special Group (5412 Committee) and the President. The Nationalist Chinese Government also approved all missions flown by its pilots. Under the terms of an agreement reached with the Nationalist Chinese Government, film from the overflights of the mainland would be processed in the United States, with a duplicate positive copy returned to Nationalist China within 10 days. NPIC was responsible for the initial reporting on these missions.38\n\nProject TACKLE overflights began early in 1962. Following a 5 January Special Group decision to approve three missions, a Detachment H U-2 with a Nationalist Chinese pilot flew its first mission over the PRC's missile-testing range at Shuangchengzi on 12 January 1962. Unfortunately, because of faulty navigation or faulty maps, the aircraft was poorly positioned and obtained only oblique, rather than vertical, photography of the range. En route to and from Shuangchengzi, the U-2 overflew Fukien and Chekiang Provinces looking for suspected deployed missiles, but none could be found in the mission photography.39\n\nThe second Project TACKLE mission took place on 23 February 1962, when a U-2 overflew the PRC's nuclear weapons establishment at Lan-chou. Photography from this mission revealed that the installation was at least two years away from operational capacity. Two more missions on 13 and 26 March flew over K'un-ming and central China covering numerous airfields that had been discovered in satellite photography. The U-2 photographs showed more detail than the satellite pictures, thereby, providing additional intelligence data, particularly\n\n38 OSA History, chap. 17, pp. 18-19, annex 107 (TS Codeword).\n\n39 Ibid., chap. 17, p. 45 (TS Codeword); Mission folder GRC100 (12 January 1962), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 19 (TS Codeword). Note: The numbers for missions flown by Nationalist Chinese pilots began with GRC (Government of the Republic of China)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":240,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Initial Overflights of China, January - March 1962\nLegend: Mission GRC 100 13 January 1962; Mission GRC 102 23 February 1962; Mission GRC 104 13 March 1962; Mission GRC 106 26 March 1962\nPlace names on map: Ulan Bator, Mongolia, Manchuria, U.S.S.R., Shuangchengzi, Peiping (Peking), Pyongyang, Demarcation Line, Seoul, South Korea, North Korea, Sea of Japan, Japan, Yellow Sea, East China Sea, Lan-chou, Chiang-yu, Lu-shan, Kiangsu, Nanking, Shanghai, Wu-ch'ang, Chekiang, Kiangsi, Ch'ang-sha, Fukien, Ma-tsu Shan, Taipei, T'ao-yuan Airfield, Taiwan, Quemoy, K'un-ming, Burma, Thailand, Laos, North Vietnam, Hanoi, Hainan, South China Sea, Philippines, Philippine Sea, Hong Kong (U.K.), Macau (Port), Victoria, Formosa Strait, Yangtze, Salween, Mekong, Kokonor, Yellow River.\nBoundary representation is not necessarily authoritative.\n724756 (R00428) 4-92"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":241,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"for air order of battle. In addition to the primary targets already described, the initial series of Project TACKLE missions obtained photography of the submarine construction facilities at Shanghai and Wu-ch'ang, which showed a low level of activity. Other photographs revealed tremendous expansion of the industrial complexes at Nanking and Ch'ang-sha and the presence of a previously unknown industrial area at Chiang-yu.\n\nEncouraged by the success of the first TACKLE missions, COMOR recommended in May 1962 that Detachment H cover as many as possible of the highest priority industrial and airfield targets in northeast China and the missile test ranges in north China. COMOR noted that, with the exception of the areas around Peiping and the Shuangchengzi missile test range, the chances of a U-2 being downed were low. The USIB concurred with COMOR's recommendations, and Detachment H therefore conducted three more overflights of the PRC during the month of June.\n\nOSA History, chap. 17, p. 45 (TS Codeword); Mission folders GRC102 (23 February 1962), GRC104 (13 March 1962), and GRC106 (26 March 1962), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 19 (TS Codeword).\n\nLay, \"USIB History,\" vol. 2, pp. 385-386 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":242,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Before the month was over, however, another confrontation between Nationalist China and the PRC over the Formosa Strait erupted. The Nationalist Government reported a massive buildup of PRC troops and aircraft in Fukien Province opposite the Nationalist-held Quemoy and Ma-tsu Islands. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara immediately ordered U-2 coverage of the Strait area to determine the extent of the PRC buildup. In response, Detachment H flew six missions over the Strait between 25 June and 28 July 1962. To speed up the readout of this photography, the films were processed at the Asian Photographic Interpretation Center (ASPIC) at Yokota, Japan, a joint military-CIA endeavor. The U-2 coverage ended in late July when it became apparent that the PRC did not intend to mount an invasion of the offshore islands.\n\nThe pace of Detachment H missions slowed considerably in August 1962; the sole Project TACKLE overflight covered Peiping and Manchuria. The following month the detachment mounted two missions, one over south China on the eighth and the second over Kiangsu Province on the ninth. Unfortunately, mechanical difficulties led to the loss of the latter aircraft near Lu-shan. A flameout forced the U-2 down to an altitude where PRC interceptors were able to hit the U-2 with an air-to-air rocket. The Nationalist Chinese pilot parachuted and was captured. At this point, President Kennedy ordered a standdown of overflights of the PRC.\n\nFollowing the capture of the Nationalist Chinese U-2 pilot, the People's Republic of China accused the United States of masterminding the overflights, but the State Department denied any involvement. Nationalist China then revealed that the United States had granted it a license to purchase two U-2 aircraft. In a 13 September 1962 response to the Chinese protest, President Kennedy denied any responsibility for the sale of the U-2s to Taiwan, noting that the sale had occurred under the previous administration. He stated that there were no current plans to sell any more U-2s to Nationalist China. Eight months later, however, the President approved an export license for the delivery of another U-2 to Taiwan. Such licenses were needed only for cover purposes. The Agency continued to maintain two U-2s on Taiwan, bringing new ones in to replace aircraft lost in training or on missions.\n\nOSA History, chap. 17, p. 46 (TS Codeword).\n\nIbid., pp. 46-47 (TS Codeword); Mission folders GRC125 (11 August 1962), GRC126 (8 September 1962), and GRC127 (9 September 1962), OSA records, job 67-B-972, boxes 20 and 21 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":243,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Detachment H resumed overflights of mainland China in December 1962, but its missions now concentrated on the southern portion where there were fewer radars and SAM sites. During December 1962 and January 1963, the detachment conducted two successful overflights of Sichuan, but a mission over south China had to be aborted prematurely. The results of Detachment H's continuing coverage of the People's Republic of China remained of considerable interest to the United States. On 17 December 1962, the Special Group approved plans for fiscal year 1963/64 that included requirements for photo coverage of mainland China and for maintaining at least two operational U-2 aircraft in Detachment H.\n\nUse of Detachment H Aircraft by US Pilots\n\nDetachment H's importance did not lie solely in the missions carried out by its Nationalist Chinese pilots against targets in mainland China; the detachment also provided aircraft for use by American pilots flying missions in other parts of Asia. Indochina was an area of particular interest as American involvement there began growing during the early 1960s. Beginning in February 1962, Detachment G pilots went to T'ao-yuan to use the unmarked Project TACKLE U-2 for overflights of North Vietnam. During the first half of 1962, Detachment G pilots made seven overflights of North Vietnam from the Tao Yuan base. Thereafter, Detachment G pilots could use their own aircraft because the unit began staging teams and aircraft from Edwards AFB to Ta Khli AFB in Thailand.\n\nBetween 1962 and 1964, Agency U-2s staged a total of 36 photographic missions over North and South Vietnam. By April 1964, however, photographic requirements were changing from strategic reconnaissance to tactical support as the Viet Cong became more active, taking advantage of the weakness of the South Vietnamese central government following the coup that overthrew President Ngo Dinh Diem in 1963 and subsequent coups by disgruntled army officers. During this period the South Vietnamese \"strategic hamlet\" concept began breaking down, and the Viet Cong forces stepped up the pace of their attacks. As a result of the increasing level of combat in Indochina, the USIB gave responsibility for aerial reconnaissance of the areas where fighting was taking place to the SAC. Henceforth, SAC U-2s would be used over South Vietnam, parts of Cambodia\n\nOSA History, chap. 17, pp. 48-49 (TS Codeword); Mission folders GRC134 (25 December 1962), GRC136 (28 December 1962), and GRC138 (20 January 1963), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 21, and job 66-B-664, box 1 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":244,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"within 30 miles of South Vietnam, all of Laos south of Paksane, and all of North Vietnam within 30 miles of South Vietnam or the coast. The remaining portions of Indochina remained the responsibility of the Agency's U-2s. Then in August 1964, following the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, the Air Force assumed responsibility for all of Indochina.\n\nU-2s in India\n\nIn October 1962, the People's Republic of China launched a series of massive surprise attacks against India's frontier forces in the western provinces of Jammu and Kashmir and in the North-East Frontier Agency (NEFA). The Chinese overran all Indian fortifications north of the Brahmaputra Valley before halting their operations.\n\nThe Indian Government appealed to the United States for military aid. In the negotiations that followed, it became apparent that Indian claims concerning the extent of the Chinese incursions could not be reliably evaluated. US Ambassador John Kenneth Galbraith, therefore, suggested to the Indian Government that US aerial reconnaissance of the disputed areas would provide both governments with a more accurate picture of the Communist Chinese incursions. On 11 November 1962, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru consented to the proposed operation and gave the United States permission to refuel the reconnaissance aircraft (U-2s) in Indian airspace.\n\nIn late November, Detachment G deployed to Ta Khli, Thailand, to carry out the overflights of the Sino-Indian border area. Since the U-2s were not authorized to overfly Burma, they had to reach the target area via the Bay of Bengal and eastern India and, therefore, required midair refueling.\n\nBecause of severe winter weather conditions, the first flight did not take place until 5 December. Poor weather and air turbulence hampered the mission, and only 40 percent of the target area could be photographed. A second mission on 10 December was more successful, but the U-2 experienced rough engine performance because of icing of the fuel lines.\n\nOSA History, chap. 16, pp. 18-19 (TS Codeword).\n\nIbid., chap. 16, pp. 26-27 (TS Codeword).\n\nIbid., p. 28 (TS Codeword); Mission folders 3201 (5 December 1962 and 3203 (10 December 1962), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 26 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":245,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Detachment G U-2s made four more overflights of the Sino-Indian border areas in January 1963, which led to a PRC protest to India. Photography from these missions was used in January and again in March 1963 to brief Prime Minister Nehru, who then informed the Indian Parliament about Communist Chinese troop movements along the border. Although Nehru did not reveal the source of his intelligence, a UPI wire story surmised that the information had been obtained by U-2s.\n\nThe United States had provided photographic coverage of the border area to India for two reasons. First of all, US policymakers wanted a clear picture of the area under dispute. In addition, the intelligence community wanted to establish a precedent for overflights from India, which could lead to obtaining a permanent staging base in India for electronic reconnaissance missions against the Soviet ABM site at Saryshagan and photographic missions against those portions of western China that were out of range of Detachment H. In April 1963, Ambassador Galbraith and the Chief of Station at New Delhi made the first official request to India for a base. The following month, President Kennedy agreed to DCI McCone's suggestion to raise the question of a U-2 base in India when he met with India's President Savepalli Radhakrishnan on 3 June. This meeting resulted in an Indian offer of an abandoned World War II base at Charbatia, south of Calcutta.\n\nThe Charbatia base was in poor condition and needed considerable renovation before it could be used for U-2 operations. Work on the base by the Indians took much longer than expected, so Detachment G continued to use Ta Khli when it staged four sorties over Tibet from 29 September to 10 November 1963. In addition to the coverage of the Sino-Indian border during this series of flights, the U-2s also photographed all of Thailand to produce a photomap of the border regions as a quid pro quo for the Thai Government. During one of these photomapping missions, a U-2 pilot conducted the longest mission ever recorded in this aircraft—11 hours and 45 minutes. At the end of this flight on 10 November 1963, the pilot was in such poor physical condition that project managers prohibited the scheduling of future missions longer than 10 hours.\n\nOSA History, chap. 16, p. 30 (TS Codeword).\n\nMission folder 3238 (10 November 1963), OSA records, job 67-B-972, box 29 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":246,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Charbatia was still not ready in early 1964, so on 31 March 1964 Detachment G staged another mission from Ta Khli. The first mission out of Charbatia did not take place until 24 May 1964. Three days later Prime Minister Nehru died, and further operations were postponed. The pilots and aircraft left Charbatia, but other equipment remained in place to save staging costs. In December 1964, when Sino-Indian tensions increased along the border, Detachment G returned to Charbatia and conducted three highly successful missions, satisfying all of COMOR's requirements for the Sino-Indian border region. By this time, however, Ta Khli had become the main base for Detachment G's Asian operations, and Charbatia served merely as a forward staging base. Charbatia was closed out in July 1967.50\n\nIncreasing Responsibilities, Inadequate Resources in Asia\n\nThe main focus of Agency U-2 activity in Asia remained the U-2s of Detachment H on Taiwan. In March and April 1963, the USIB met to consider COMOR proposals for aerial reconnaissance of Laos, North Vietnam, North Korea, and the People's Republic of China. All of COMOR's intelligence requirements could best be met by the U-2 because heavy cloud cover made it difficult to obtain satellite photography of the region. At the 28 May 1963 meeting of the Special Group, DCI McCone requested authorization for a series of overflights to meet these requirements and stressed the need for additional intelligence on the atomic energy facilities of the PRC. The Special Group then established a \"bank\" of four authorizations for overflights of the PRC, subject to monthly review by the Group.51\n\nAs a result of the increasing intelligence community interest in the Far East, both Agency U-2 detachments became very active in the region. Detachment G conducted a number of missions over the border areas of China, North Vietnam, and Laos during April and May of 1963. At the same time, Detachment H became more adventurous, sending U-2s deeper and deeper into the PRC. These missions included renewed overflights of the missile test range near Baotou and the Lan-chou nuclear facilities, as well as targets in northern China, Manchuria, and west-central China (as far as Koko Nor).\n\n50 OSA History, chap. 16, pp. 30-34 (TS Codeword).\n\n51 Lay, \"USIB History,\" vol. 3, pp. 391-392 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":247,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The increased level of U-2 activity in the Far East during the spring of 1963 exposed a serious weakness in Projects IDEALIST and TACKLE, a shortage of aircraft. The Agency only had seven flyable U-2s when the TACKLE overflights of the PRC began in January 1962, and one of these aircraft had already been lost during an overflight in September 1962. To deal with this shortage, DCI McCone asked Defense Secretary McNamara and the Joint Chiefs of Staff on 10 June 1963 to transfer two U-2s from the Air Force to the CIA. The Defense Department quickly approved this request. Before the two Air Force aircraft were placed in service, however, the Agency had them upgraded with J75/P-13A engines and various electronic devices, a process that took more than four months.52\n\nAs overflights over the PRC increased, so did concern about the growing number of Chinese surface-to-air missile sites. The Office of Special Activities, therefore, got permission from the Defense Department to equip Project TACKLE aircraft with System-XII SAM-warning units. These devices alerted the pilot that his aircraft was being tracked by the FAN SONG acquisition radar, part of the SA-2's electronic targeting system. The System-XII units also recorded each radar-tracking sequence. Analysis of these recordings revealed changes in the FAN SONG radar's characteristics, information that proved useful in designing electronic-countermeasure (ECM) devices for US aircraft operating over Vietnam during the late 1960s.53\n\nDespite the addition of System-XII in the spring of 1963, the Nationalist Chinese-piloted U-2s of Project TACKLE had far fewer ECM devices than other Agency U-2s. Project IDEALIST aircraft possessed a complete suite of ECM gear in addition to the previously mentioned System-XII unit. Among this ECM equipment was a device that told the pilot that an SA-2 missile had been launched (nicknamed the \"Oscar-Sierra\" unit, which was the acronym for the expletive U-2 pilots used when they learned that an SA-2 missile was on the way: \"Oh, shit!\") and a System-XIII unit that produced false-angle returns to the homing radar aboard the approaching missile in an effort to steer it away from the aircraft. The Defense Department opposed installing such devices aboard Detachment H's U-2s, for fear they could fall into Communist hands.\n\n52 OSA History, chap. 16, p. 10 (TS Codeword).\n\n53 Ibid., chap. 17, p. 50 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":248,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The danger posed by the growing number of SA-2 sites in the PRC was clearly demonstrated on 1 November 1963, when a second Project TACKLE U-2 was lost near the Kiangsi-Chekiang border on its way back from photographing the PRC's Shuangchengzi missile test range. As was the case after the first operational loss over China in September 1961, President Kennedy ordered a standdown of overflights of mainland China. This standdown lasted almost five months.\n\nAs a result of this second loss over the PRC, the Office of Special Activities began installing a new 30-channel telemetry system aboard Detachment H U-2s to monitor various aircraft functions. Known as BIRDWATCHER, this unit periodically broadcast a burst of data to the airbase that launched the U-2. This data burst contained a status report on all the major systems aboard the plane, such as airspeed, altitude, exhaust temperature, fuel supply, film supply, and oxygen supply. BIRDWATCHER provided project managers with a benchmark of aircraft performance that could be used to determine if a lost plane had been shot down at altitude or had suffered mechanical failure.54\n\nBIRDWATCHER's first operational use came on 16 March 1964, when overflights resumed with a mission over southern China. The PRC was now a high-priority target for the U-2 because more data were needed to prepare National Intelligence Estimates due in the autumn. Of particular concern was the PRC's nuclear program. Despite the high priority of its missions, Detachment H's resources remained scarce. It was short of both pilots and planes and never had more than three U-2s or six qualified Nationalist Chinese pilots at any one time. By the spring of 1964, crashes during training and the two losses over the mainland had reduced Detachment H to only two qualified pilots, one of whom suffered from ulcers and a nervous disorder. Indeed, this pilot had every reason to be nervous; he flew three of the next four Detachment H overflights and became the third Nationalist Chinese pilot to be shot down over the mainland.\n\nThis loss came on 7 July 1964. The Nationalist Chinese pilot's last transmission was that his System-XII unit had alerted him that he was being tracked by the FAN SONG radar. BIRDWATCHER data revealed that the aircraft was at penetration altitude and all systems\n\n54 Ibid., p. 51, 53 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":249,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"were normal when the pilot made this report. Project managers presumed that the U-2 was downed by a direct hit or near miss by an SA-2 missile.55\n\nPresident Johnson ordered a standdown of overflights of the PRC. This standdown was welcomed by the Nationalist Chinese Government, which told the Taiwan Chief of Station that it wanted \"to let some time go by\" before more overflights were scheduled. The Nationalists pointed out that the only remaining qualified U-2 pilot had \"disqualified\" himself because of nervous tension. No new pilots could be qualified for U-2 flights before mid-August.\n\nThe Nationalists then demanded faster and higher flying aircraft as well as better antimissile equipment for the planes. This request led some CIA personnel to suspect that Nationalist China had learned about Project OXCART, the successor to the U-2 that was still undergoing testing. Despite the Nationalists' request for better ECM equipment, the Defense Department remained reluctant to authorize the use of the System-XIII false-angle radar jammer on Project TACKLE U-2s. The Defense Department feared that the loss of this device with its highly advanced traveling-wave tube (TWT) would enable Communist Bloc technicians to devise countermeasures and also learn how to produce the highly efficient TWT themselves. As an incentive for the Nationalist Chinese to agree to more overflights, the CIA agreed to permit them to process the U-2 film on Taiwan and to use their own photointerpreters to exploit the film along with US photointerpreters.\n\nTo counter the shortage of pilots in Detachment H, DCI McCone suggested to the Special Group on 6 August 1964 that civilian CIA pilots be used to fly missions over mainland China. The group agreed that the matter should be taken up with President Johnson. On the following day, however, Presidential National Security Assistant McGeorge Bundy informed McCone that, because Secretary of State Rusk and Secretary of Defense McNamara opposed the idea, he would not take it up with the President.56\n\n55 OSA History, chap. 17, pp. 53-55 (TS Codeword); Mission folder C174C (7 July 1964), OSA records, job 66-B-664, box 7 (TS Codeword). Note: beginning in 1964 Nationalist Chinese mission numbers began with \"C\" instead of \"GRC.\"\n\n56 OSA History, chap. 17, pp. 58-59 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":250,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Advanced ECM Equipment for Detachment H\n\nDemand for overhead photography of the PRC continued to grow, spurred in part by the results of earlier U-2 missions that revealed the presence of Soviet-made MiG-21s in the PRC. In addition, there were indications that Communist China might be producing its own SAMs. Furthermore, satellite photography revealed that preparations for the first Chinese nuclear test were almost complete at the Lop Nor test site.\n\nThe need for photographs of the Lop Nor site was considered so urgent that the Defense Department finally relented and permitted the System-XIII false-angle device jammer to be installed in Project TACKLE aircraft, with the proviso that it not be turned on until after the pilot had been alerted by System-XII that he was being tracked by FAN SONG radars. Photographing Lop Nor, however, was not a simple task. Located more than 2,000 miles west-northwest of Taiwan, Lop Nor lay beyond the round trip range of T'ao-yuan-based U-2s and in-flight refueling was not possible. Lop Nor was closer to Ta Khli, Thailand, only 1,650 miles northwest of that base, and much closer to Charbatia, India, which lay only 1,200 miles south of the testing site.\n\nAfter refusing DCI McCone's suggestion to stage a Lop Nor overflight from Charbatia using a CIA civilian pilot, President Johnson approved a proposal to send a Project TACKLE unit to Ta Khli for the mission to Lop Nor. A Detachment H U-2 with a Nationalist Chinese pilot deployed to Ta Khli in mid-October to prepare for the overflight. Before mission preparations could be completed, however, the Chinese detonated their first nuclear weapon on 16 October 1964, and the mission was canceled.57\n\nThe first overflight of Communist China since the 7 July 1964 loss was a 31 October mission over Lan-chou. By mid-November, three more overflights had taken place, one over North Korea and northern China and two over southern and central China. An overflight of Manchuria on 9 December 1964 brought back photos of a G-class ballistic-missile submarine. By this time, the mass of data being provided by Project TACKLE overflights was overwhelming the analysts of the Office of Research and Reports (ORR). An ORR memorandum from 11 January 1965 reported that analysis of the \"large backlog of unexploited photography on Chinese Communist\n\n57 Lay, \"USIB History,\" vol. 6, pp. 751, 753-755."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":251,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n238\n\nground force installations...would require about two man-years work, backed up by a larger expansion of photointerpretation effort.\" 58\n\nUse of Infrared Scanner Over PRC Nuclear Plants\n\nPhotographic missions were not the only method used by the Agency to gather information on the PRC's progress in developing nuclear weapons. In fact, standard overhead photography was of little value in determining whether or not various nuclear-related facilities were producing weapon-grade materials. Such information could only be obtained from agent reports or infrared imaging of the targets, which would reveal the heat associated with nuclear-refining activity. Early in 1963 the Agency sought special funds from the Pentagon to develop a high-resolution infrared scanner for the U-2 in order to ascertain the operational status of Chinese nuclear reactors. After this request was turned down, the Agency decided to fund the development of such a scanner itself. In the spring of 1963, the Office of Research and Development (ORD) signed a contract with the Texas Instruments Corporation for the production of an infrared scanner that would operate [REDACTED] To conceal the intended purpose of the scanner, the devices were called forest fire detectors and assigned model numbers such as \"FFD-1.\"\n\nTests conducted in September 1963 proved that model FFD-2 was capable of revealing activity [REDACTED] Further improvements followed, and on 26 October 1964 ORD declared the infrared unit operational. In reporting the successful results of the infrared testing to DCI McCone, ORD Director Robert Chapman mentioned that there was only one such unit in existence. McCone immediately told Chapman to order more, and the Agency then purchased several for Project TACKLE and a stereo-configured FFD-4 for Project OXCART.\n\nDCI McCone reviewed these infrared detection developments with Defense Secretary McNamara and his new deputy, Cyrus Vance, on 30 October, being careful to point out that the new device was a product of Agency-sponsored R&D because the Pentagon had refused to fund it. [REDACTED]\n\n58 ORR, Memorandum for the Record, 11 January 1965, OSA records (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":252,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n239\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nThe FFD-2 unit was installed in a U-2C [REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nNo more U-2 flights over China used the infrared scanner. [REDACTED]\n\nThe loss of yet another U-2 and its pilot made Nationalist Chinese officials reluctant to resume overflights of the mainland. They insisted that their U-2 pilots be given permission to turn on the System-XIII false-angle device during the entire time they were over hostile territory, not just after they had been alerted by the System-XII radar-detection device. The Defense Department acceded to these demands in order to keep the TACKLE flights going. In addition, the Project TACKLE U-2s began receiving even more advanced ECM equipment.60\n\n59 Mission folders C284C (22 November 1964), C304C (25 November 1964), C344C (19 December 1964), and C015C (8 January 1965), OSA records, job 66-B-664, box 8, job 69-B-404, box 2, and job 66-B-597, box 1; USIB History, vol. 6, p. 758 (TS Codeword).\n60 Ibid., chap. 17, pp. 59-61 (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":253,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n240\n\nWith their demands met, Nationalist Chinese officials again consented to overflights by Detachment H, and operations resumed in February 1965 with three missions over the mainland. By this time US interest in the People's Republic of China was very high because of the PRC's development of nuclear weapons. The Special Group, therefore, approved an extensive reconnaissance program directed against the PRC. By the end of the year, Detachment H had flown 30 missions, the highest annual total during the entire program.\n\nThe level of activity declined during 1966, with only 10 missions flown over the mainland. Detachment H also suffered the loss of two more aircraft and pilots in crashes during training missions in 1966. In the fall of that year, joint US-Nationalist Chinese relations in the field of overhead reconnaissance were further strained by the unilateral US decision to kill the longstanding program of low-altitude nighttime overflights of the mainland (STPOLLY).61\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n61 Ibid., chap. 19, annex 120, pp. 22-24; chap. 17, p. 69 (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":254,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n241\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":255,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n242\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nThe next mission mounted by Project TACKLE [REDACTED] took place on 8 September 1967. The U-2C aircraft overflew central China and fell victim to a SAM in the vicinity of Shanghai; the fate of the pilot was unknown. This loss reduced the number of U-2s in the Agency's inventory to five.62\n\nThe entire U-2 overflight program was temporarily halted in early November 1967 after an Air Force U-2 in Vietnam was discovered to have cracks in its wing. All Air Force and CIA U-2s were ordered back to Lockheed for ultrasonic inspection of the wings and other stress points to check on metal fatigue. Upon completion of this inspection, both the Air Force and the Agency resumed their overflight activity.63\n\nThe End of U-2 Overflights of Mainland China\n\nProject TACKLE mounted a mission over northeastern China on 13 December 1967 and an overflight of central China on 5 January 1968. Later that month the Far East became very tense when North Korea seized the US electronic intelligence ship Pueblo on 23 January. One\n\n62 Ibid., chap. 17, p. 72 (TS Codeword).\n63 Mission folder C297C (8 September 1967), OSA records (TS Codeword).\n64 OSA History, chap. 16, p. 44 (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":256,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n243\n\nweek later the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese launched their Tet offensive in South Vietnam. The 303 Committee (the new name for the Special Group after 1964) decided on 1 February 1968 to suspend a group of overflights scheduled for February and called for mission-by-mission approval \"during this period of tension.\" The committee approved one additional overflight of southern China, which was flown by Detachment H on 16 March 1968, and two overflights of Cambodia, carried out on 27 March and 3 April 1968 by Detachment G in its first operations since early 1966. These three missions turned out to be the last overflights by U-2s in the Far East. By this time U-2 flights over the PRC had become so dangerous that the State Department opposed further overflights, and on 10 April 1968 the 303 Committee decided not to approve any mission that would fly closer than 20 miles from the coast of China.\n\nOne reason why Detachment H's overflights were stopped was the steady increase in the PRC's ability to track and engage U-2s, as evidenced by its success in downing five U-2s. By 1968 PRC radars along the coast opposite Taiwan were keeping a close watch on U-2 activity from the T'ao-yuan base and actively tracked U-2s as soon as they became airborne. The U-2s then had to face a growing PRC air defense system that not only consisted of SA-2 missiles but also the fast and high-flying MiG-21. The PRC's MiG-21 pilots had become adept at the power-zoom technique and were threatening almost every U-2 mission. The risks to U-2s now seemed too great.\n\nThe decision to end Asian overflights was also rooted in the Johnson administration's change in its whole approach to the war in Indochina in the spring of 1968. On 31 March 1968, the President limited the bombing of North Vietnam in order to improve the chances for peace talks. The end of flights over the People's Republic of China was viewed as another way to improve the peace process.\n\nDuring its six years of overflight operations, Project TACKLE had been extremely active, staging a total of 104 flights over the People's Republic of China (see table, page 244). These missions had brought back huge amounts of data about the PRC but not without a price: five Project TACKLE aircraft had been downed by the PRC, with two of the pilots killed and the other three captured (although later returned). In addition, five other Nationalist Chinese pilots had been killed in training accidents.\n\nOSA, \"Chronology of Events Leading to Present Impasse on Resumption of TACKLE Overflights of Mainland China,\" December 1968, OSA records (TS).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":257,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n244\n\nOverflights by Project TACKLE\n\nFiscal Year Overflights\nTotal 104\n1962 18\n1963 17\n1964 13\n1965 30\n1966 10\n1967 14\n1968 2\n\nPeripheral Missions by Detachment H\n\nDetachment H did not cease its activities following the termination of overflights of mainland China. Its next U-2 mission took place on 18 May 1968. This was an electronic intelligence mission that, in accordance with the new guidelines, never came closer than 20 miles to the Chinese coast. All future Detachment H missions against the PRC also conformed with this restriction but were still the target of interception attempts by PRC MiG-21s or hastily erected SAM sites on offshore islands. The use of peripheral missions prevented any further losses, although one aircraft crashed into the sea from unknown causes shortly after taking off to start a mission on 5 January 1969. Another pilot was killed on 24 November 1970 in a crash during a routine training mission.\n\nThe level of activity gradually increased during the remaining years of Project TACKLE, as can be seen in the table on page 245.\n\nThe U-2s flying these missions were generally equipped with the B or the newly designed 48-inch H cameras to obtain oblique photography and with various signal-intelligence-gathering systems. Beginning in May 1971, Project TACKLE began using a new communications-intelligence collection package known as LONG SHAFT. This system was used on 32 occasions through 12 December 1973, when the LONG SHAFT collection program ended.\n\n\"Office of Special Activities History, April 1969 to Phase-Out,\" (draft; hereafter cited as \"OSA History-2\") (CIA: DS&T, 1974), chap. 3, pp. 36-42 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":258,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n245\n\n[photograph: Display of downed detachment H U-2s in Peiping]\n\nProject TACKLE Peripheral Missions, 1969-1974\n\nFiscal Year Missions\n1969 9\n1970 14\n1971 19\n1972 23\n1973 31\n1974 17\n\nOnce the United States began seeking a rapprochement with the People's Republic of China, Detachment H U-2s came under more and more restrictions. Soon after the impending visit of President Richard M. Nixon to the PRC was announced, U-2 missions were ordered to stay even farther away from the mainland: 25 nautical miles instead of the previous 20. During the months of February and\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":259,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n246\n\n[photograph: Nationalist Chinese U-2R]\n\nMarch 1972, when the President's visit took place, Detachment H ceased all operational missions.\n\nIn March 1973, the TACKLE agreement with the Nationalist Chinese was renegotiated. Although no end date was set, the agreement contained a termination clause that would become effective three months after notification by either party. This clause provided more flexibility to the United States, which could now end the Nationalist Chinese U-2 program whenever US foreign policy considerations made such a step desirable.\n\nOperation SCOPE SHIELD Over North Vietnam\n\nIn addition to the Project TACKLE peripheral missions against the PRC, Detachment H (with Agency rather than Nationalist Chinese pilots) flew a series of missions known as Operation SCOPE SHIELD to gather intelligence on activities in North Vietnam. The Indochina area had become the responsibility of the Air Force in 1964, but, under the terms of the cease-fire agreement negotiated with North\n\nIbid., pp. 44-45 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":260,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n247\n\nVietnam in January 1973, US military flights in the area were forbidden. The Nixon administration, therefore, tasked the CIA with monitoring North Vietnam's compliance with the cease-fire accords.\n\nThe Agency dispatched several pilots to Taiwan under the cover of Lockheed employees working on a government contract to check weather conditions. Their highly sensitive missions had to remain at least 15 nautical miles away from the North Vietnamese coast, and they initially flew at low altitude in a deceptive direction in order to avoid PRC radars. These constraints made the missions difficult because at low altitude the U-2 consumed more fuel and encountered more turbulence and the pilots' pressure suits tended to overheat.\n\nThe first mission on 30 March 1973 was only marginally successful because of cloud cover and haze, which prevented it from photographing most of its targets. A second mission on the following day had somewhat better luck with the weather, but problems with the film processing reduced the mission's coverage. Afterward, the monsoon season prevented any further missions until 21 July 1973. This mission obtained usable photography of SAM sites and North Vietnamese supply operations, although the resolution was not as high as it should have been because the H camera lens had not been properly focused. The last SCOPE SHIELD mission, on 6 January 1974, finally succeeded in obtaining high-quality photography. The mission provided complete coverage of shipping in Haiphong Harbor, SAM defenses, and North Vietnamese naval order of battle.\n\nIMPROVEMENTS IN U-2 TECHNOLOGY\n\nModification of U-2s for Aircraft Carrier Deployment\n\nIn mid-1963, the Office of Special Activities set in motion Project WHALE TALE to examine the possibility of adapting the U-2 aircraft for operations from an aircraft carrier. In the past, protest notes from the Soviet Union to Turkey and Pakistan and from Communist China to India had been responsible for interrupting overflight operations. CIA planners believed that, if U-2s could be modified to operate from aircraft carriers, the United States could avoid the political problems\n\nIbid., pp. 48-51 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":261,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U-2 on the USS Kitty Hawk,\n5 August 1963\n\ninvolved in seeking permission to base U-2s in other nations. Kelly Johnson began working on changes to the aircraft, and Office of Special Activities Deputy Director James A. Cunningham, Jr., a former Marine Corps aviator, asked the Navy for assistance.\n\nThe first test of the U-2's capability for carrier operations took place in August 1963 from the USS Kitty Hawk operating in the Pacific Ocean off San Diego, California. A U-2C, which had been loaded aboard the carrier at North Island Naval Base, took off from the flight deck with a full load of fuel and was airborne within 321 feet. No assistance from catapults was necessary. Although the takeoff was very successful, the attempted landing was not. The aircraft bounced, hit hard on one wing tip, and then just barely managed to become airborne again before reaching the end of the deck. Kelly Johnson realized that the airframe would have to be altered in order to make carrier landings possible. These alterations involved strengthening the landing gear, installing an arresting hook at the rear of the fuselage, and fitting \"spoilers\" on the wings to cancel the aerodynamic lift once the aircraft was over the flight deck. Aircraft thus modified were designated U-2G. While several aircraft"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":262,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"underwent these modifications, Detachment G pilots began undergoing training in landing on aircraft carriers. The first successful carrier landing took place on 2 March 1964.\n\nUse of Carrier-Based U-2 To Film a French Nuclear Test Site\n\nWithin a few months after the completion of carrier testing, one of the carrier-modified U-2s conducted an operation in the Pacific. Its mission was to gather information on the activities of an ally. In\n\n\"U-2 Aircraft Carrier Operations: Project 'WHALE TALE,' Operation FISH HAWK,\" DS&T, 1964, pp. 1-13 (TS Codeword); Johnson, \"Log for Project X,\" 5 August 1963 and 2 March 1964."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":263,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"December 1963, France had announced its intention to detonate a hydrogen device over Mururoa Atoll in the Tuamotu Archipelago area of French Polynesia but had given no specific date for the event. The Committee on Overhead Reconnaissance had been following French nuclear developments since September 1963, when it had apprised the USIB of the need for overflights of this South Pacific area. At that time the USIB decided against recommending such overflights because of State Department concern about potential political difficulties with France in the event the mission was discovered.\n\nFollowing reports of a buildup of French troops and technical personnel in neighboring Tahiti, the Special Group on 24 April 1964 approved a mission to overfly the atoll to check for activity. This required photography with a resolution better than the 3 to 5 feet possible with the standard B-model camera that had been in use since October 1956. Work on a very-high-resolution camera had begun in early 1963, when the Agency contracted with the Itek Corporation to modify for placement in the U-2 a camera that had been developed for the satellite program. Known as the Delta-II, or the 112A, this device could photograph a 28-kilometer swath with 26° convergent stereoscopic lenses, resulting in a 70° lateral coverage and a ground resolution of 10 inches. This camera was installed in a Detachment H U-2 and used on two missions conducted over Indochina in late December 1963. Resolution was not as high as had been expected, and the unit was returned to Itek for modifications. By early 1964, the 112A had been reworked and was now known as the 112B. In tests it had proved capable of providing photography with resolution in the 10- to 12-inch range.\n\nDetachment G conducted Operation FISH HAWK in May 1964 by sending two pilots, an NPIC photointerpreter, and a U-2G equipped with the Itek 112B camera to make the first operational U-2 flights from an aircraft carrier. On 19 May the U-2 took off from the USS Ranger and overflew the French atomic test area. As soon as the aircraft returned to the Ranger, the film was developed in the carrier's photo lab, and the NPIC photointerpreter then read out the film to see if the photography met the requirements for resolution and quality. A second U-2 flight carried out a similar mission on 22 May. The photography provided all the detail needed to identify the preparations for the nuclear test that occurred later that year.\n\n\"U-2 Aircraft Carrier Operations: Project 'WHALE TALE,' Operation FISH HAWK,\" DS&T, 1964, pp. 17-25."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":264,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"There was never another Agency U-2 mission from an aircraft carrier. Although the idea of using a floating airbase to avoid political sensitivity proved feasible, the cost did not. Aircraft carriers are enormously expensive to operate and require an entire flotilla of vessels to protect and service them. The movement of large numbers of big ships is difficult to conceal and cannot be hastily accomplished, while the deployment of a solitary U-2 to a remote airfield can take place overnight.\n\nA New Version of the U-2\n\nBy the summer of 1966, the number of flyable Agency U-2s had dwindled to six—two at Detachment H in Taiwan and four at Detachment G in California—with three more at Lockheed undergoing repair. The Agency had originally ordered 20 U-2s in 1954-55 (the Air Force had purchased another 31 of these planes), and Kelly Johnson's crew at the Skunk Works had managed to assemble four additional craft for the Agency from leftover spare parts and usable sections of crashed aircraft. This brought the total number of U-2s acquired by the Agency to 24, for an average cost of $812,500 each.\n\nAt this point, the DCI and the Secretary of Defense on 1 August 1966 decided to place an order with Lockheed for eight more aircraft to be used in the Agency and Air Force U-2 programs—a completely new version of the aircraft. Kelly Johnson had been working on ways to improve the performance of the U-2 since early 1965 because he was concerned that all the modifications and additions to the aircraft over the years had made it so heavy that it had lost almost half of its range and several thousand feet in cruising altitude. The new model, known as the U-2R, had a longer fuselage and a wider wingspan than the original U-2. The U-2R's wings were 103 feet long with 1,000 square feet of lifting surface, in contrast to the U-2C's 80-foot wings with only 600 square feet. The longer fuselage of the U-2R made it possible to provide two pressurized bays with an additional 2.2 cubic meters of equipment space and also achieve a better weight distribution. The net result of all these improvements was a much better performing aircraft. No longer did the U-2 pilot have to worry about keeping the aircraft's speed at altitude within a 6-knot window in the stall/buffet corner of the flight envelope. The envelope was now extended to 20 knots, which greatly improved flyability.\n\nJohnson, \"Log for Project X,\" 2 February 1965, June to October 1965, 20 October 1965; Johnson, \"U-2R Log,\" January to August 1966."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":265,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"U-2C and U-2R\n\nThe U-2R used the upgraded Pratt & Whitney J75/P-13B engine and was able to fly higher—in excess of 74,000 feet—and faster—Mach 0.72 (410 knots), which is 12 knots faster than the U-2C. When flying at the higher altitude, however, the U-2R's range was less than the U-2C's. The restart capability of the P-13B engine was significantly better than the P-13A power plant. As a result, the U-2R could be restarted at 54,000 feet, which was 10,000 feet higher than the U-2C. Francis Gary Powers was one of the Lockheed test pilots who checked out this new aircraft when it first took to the air on 28 August 1967. The last of the U-2Rs was delivered on 11 December 1968.\n\nThe increased performance of the U-2R did not come cheaply. At $7.1 million per aircraft, the new models cost almost 10 times as much as the original U-2s. Much of the increased cost was due to inflation, but some was the result of technological advances. The initial order for eight of the new version of the U-2 was followed on 23 November 1966 by an order from the DCI and the Secretary of Defense for four more. This brought the total number of U-2Rs purchased by the CIA and the Air Force to 12.\n\nIn addition to a new aircraft, the U-2 program received a new camera. Agency managers felt that, because the B camera was now 10 years old, the U-2R needed a camera that incorporated the many important advances that had occurred in recent years. The 112B—the modified version of the satellite program's stereo camera that had been used in the U-2G—had not proved totally successful. Despite its stereo capability, this camera's shorter focal length could not provide\n\nOSA History, chap. 5, pp. 34-36 (TS Codeword); \"OSA History-2,\" chap. 5, pp. 1-2 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":266,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n253\n\nthe scale of imagery needed to obtain the highly technical data desired by analysts. As a result, the Office of Special Activities asked the Hycon Manufacturing Company of Pasadena, California, to adapt its successful high-resolution 48-inch 9- by 9-inch format camera developed for the OXCART aircraft for use in the U-2R. This camera was actually a very advanced version of the original B camera with a new lens designed by James Baker. The new camera was designed to resolve objects smaller than 4 inches.\n\nHycon began work on the HR-333 camera in 1966. Unlike the OXCART camera, the new unit was to use the split 18- by 18-inch format of the B camera, so the lens had to be redesigned. James Baker's contribution to this effort was a 48-inch f/5.6 system that provided remarkably sharp imagery. Hycon completed the camera in time for it to be installed in the first U-2Rs delivered to the Agency in 1968; it is known as the H camera.\n\nReplacement of the Original U-2s With U-2Rs\n\nAs the new U-2Rs began coming off the production line at Lockheed in the autumn of 1968, CIA and the Department of Defense had to decide who would get the new aircraft. At a meeting on 13 November, DCI Richard Helms and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara agreed that the Air Force and the Agency would each get six U-2Rs. The six older U-2s remaining from the original 1954-55 production were to be kept in flyable condition and be used as replacements if newer models were lost.\n\nDespite the greatly increased capabilities of the new model of the U-2, the era of overflights of hostile territory was over. The U-2R would have six years of useful service with the Agency, but its missions did not include penetration flights over hostile territory.\n\nTHE FINAL YEARS OF THE U-2\n\nWhen the OXCART's brief operational career with the Agency ended in 1968, the U-2 was once again the center of the Agency's manned reconnaissance program. But by this time, reconnaissance aircraft had declined in importance as collection systems. Overflights were a thing of the past. Although Project TACKLE U-2s with Nationalist Chinese\n\n\"OSA History-2,\" chap. 5, pp. 10-12."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":267,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n254\n\npilots were still flying missions targeted against the People's Republic of China, these missions did not overfly PRC territory. Increasingly, Agency U-2s flew missions that did not involve intelligence collection requirements.\n\nSupport to Other Agencies\n\nBeginning in 1964, the Agency conducted a program known as RED DOT for the Department of Defense. RED DOT involved the development and testing of various color, black and white, and infrared films, emulsions, and processing techniques for use in manned and unmanned high-altitude reconnaissance systems. From 1968 until 1974, Detachment G U-2s photographed areas within the United States that were analogous to portions of the Soviet Union in order to test films and techniques for spotting certain targets. This analogous filming was particularly valuable in connection with agricultural areas and nuclear test sites.\n\nSome U-2 missions supported agencies outside the intelligence community. In 1968 and 1969, Detachment G U-2s flew high-altitude photographic missions in conjunction with the Apollo VII and IX spaceflights in response to a NASA request. These flights provided photography of the western United States for comparison with the photography taken by the Apollo crews. The Department of the Interior also requested U-2 support in early 1969 to help determine the extent of damage caused by a leak in an offshore oil well in California's Santa Barbara Channel. After preliminary assessment of the film at NPIC, the mission photography was given to the US Geological Survey for further study.\n\nAlso in early 1969, Detachment G began providing coverage of the western United States at the request of the Department of Commerce. U-2s filmed the Sierra snowfield to aid hydrologists in forecasting snowmelt and flooding potentials. Later that year, Detachment G supported the Office of Emergency Preparedness by photographing 61,000 square miles of the southern United States as part of a Hurricane Baseline Survey. These photographs could be used for future damage assessment following a major hurricane. A subsequent mission in fiscal year 1971 continued the Hurricane Baseline Survey by photographing the Gulf Coast. When a major earthquake struck the Los Angeles area on 9 February 1971, Detachment G U-2s flew four sorties to obtain damage-assessment photos.\n\nIbid., chap. 3, pp. 3-29 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":268,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n255\n\n[Photograph: Earthquake damage, San Fernando Valley, 1971]\n\nEarthquake damage, San Fernando Valley, 1971\n\nSubsequent missions in support of Federal agencies included COMPASS TRIP in fiscal year 1973, when Agency U-2s photographed poppy fields that had been planted by the Bureau of Narcotics in order to provide a standard for comparison with satellite imagery. In the following year, U-2s assisted the Corps of Engineers in conducting a geological survey.\n\nOverseas Deployment Exercises and Missions\n\nWith the exception of the Chinese Nationalist-piloted U-2s of Detachment H, all of the Agency's U-2 assets were concentrated in Detachment G in California. To test the ability of Detachment G to respond to a crisis in Europe or the Middle East, the Agency staged an overseas deployment exercise known as SCOPE SAINT each year (unless there was an actual operational deployment, as was the case in 1970, 1973, and 1974). The first of these exercises, SCOPE SAINT-I, took place on 9 October 1968, when Detachment G deployed a U-2G to the [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] The U-2 conducted several training flights and then returned to California. SCOPE SAINT-II followed in April 1969 and demonstrated the feasibility of employing a C-141 aircraft to accompany a"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":269,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n256\n\nU-2 in flight to its destination. The C-141 carried support equipment to the [REDACTED] In October 1969, the third of these exercises took place at a different location. [REDACTED]\n\nNo overseas deployment exercise was necessary in 1970, for elements of Detachment G actually deployed overseas to provide photography of the Middle East. At the time, President Nixon's National Security Adviser, Henry A. Kissinger, was mediating between the Arabs and Israelis in order to obtain a cease-fire along the Suez Canal, where a virtual undeclared war was taking place. Once agreement was reached in August, Kissinger promised both sides that the United States would monitor the agreed upon 32-mile pullback from the waterway. Originally, Kissinger intended for photosatellites to do the monitoring. One satellite was tasked to photograph the Suez Canal area on 10 August, but the quality of its imagery lacked the detail needed to discover such small targets as gun emplacements and jeeps.\n\nIn early August, Kissinger asked the Air Force to provide U-2s to overfly the Canal, but the Air Force demurred, saying it would take several weeks to move a U-2 detachment from Del Rio, Texas, to the Middle East. At this point, DCI Helms told an NSC meeting that the Agency's Detachment G at Edwards Air Force Base could deploy aircraft to [REDACTED] and begin filming the Suez area within the week, and it did. In fact, the first U-2 arrived in [REDACTED] only 71 hours after receiving notification to deploy. Between 9 August and 10 November 1970, Agency U-2s flew 29 missions over the cease-fire zone as part of Project EVEN STEVEN. Most flights used the B camera, but 12 were equipped with the new, high-resolution H camera. The EVEN STEVEN U-2s also employed a dozen electronic-intelligence-collection packages, from System-X to System-XXIV. After 10 November 1970, Air Force SR-71s took over the task of photographing the cease-fire zone.\n\nThe Middle East was again the cause of a Detachment G deployment in October 1973 when another Arab-Israeli war broke out. Two U-2s deployed to the [REDACTED] on 7 and 8 October 1973, to be ready for possible coverage of the conflict. Detachment G received no such tasking, however, and the last of the aircraft returned to California on 13 November. The 1973 war did\n\nIbid., pp. 5-6, 10-11 (TS Codeword).\n\nIbid., pp. 15-20 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":270,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 5\n257\n\nlead to the overseas deployment of Detachment G U-2s in 1974, when the CIA was tasked to monitor the Israeli-Egyptian and later the Israeli-Syrian disengagement areas. On 21 April 1974, a Detachment G U-2 with appropriate support elements arrived at Akrotiri, Cyprus, to conduct Operation OLIVE HARVEST. Between 12 May and 28 July, the detachment conducted six overflights of the disengagement areas. During these missions the electronic warning systems of the U-2 registered numerous radar lockons, but no surface-to-air missiles were fired. On 1 August 1974, responsibility for the OLIVE HARVEST missions as well as the aircraft itself came into the hands of the Air Force as part of the transfer of the entire Agency U-2 program at that time.\n\nThe Phaseout of the Office of Special Activities\n\nThe Agency's U-2 program had been under review since the autumn of 1969 to determine if it should be continued along with the larger Air Force U-2 program. In December 1969, President Nixon decided to keep the Agency's program in existence through 1971 and asked for a formal review by the 40 Committee (the new name for the 303 Committee/Special Group). In August 1970, the committee recommended continuing the program through fiscal year 1972. On 12 August 1972, the 40 Committee again favored continuation of the CIA U-2 program. This recommendation was motivated primarily by a desire not to alienate the Nationalist Chinese Government by eliminating Project TACKLE. In June 1973, however, DCI James R. Schlesinger informed the 40 Committee that this project could be terminated without causing major difficulties with the Nationalist Chinese. On 30 August 1973, the 40 Committee approved the CIA's plans to terminate the U-2 program effective 1 August 1974. The Air Force would assume funding responsibility for the four U-2R aircraft assigned to the Agency and would take physical possession of them then or shortly thereafter. On 1 April 1974, Ambassador Walter P. McConaughy informed the Nationalist Chinese Government of the US intention to end the U-2 project, and the two countries then worked out a schedule for phasing out Project TACKLE.\n\nThe transfer of all Agency U-2s to the Air Force eliminated Detachments G and H. Their parent organization, the Office of Special Activities, began its phaseout immediately thereafter. The 20-year career of the U-2 with the CIA had come to an end.\n\nIbid., pp. 31-34 (TS Codeword).\n\nIbid., chap. 10, pp. 1-4 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":271,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":272,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n259\n\nThe U-2's Intended Successor:\nProject OXCART,\n1956-1968\n\nBefore the U-2 became operational in June 1956, CIA project officials had estimated that its life expectancy for flying safely over the Soviet Union would be between 18 months and two years. After overflights began and the Soviets demonstrated the capability of tracking and attempting to intercept the U-2, this estimate seemed too optimistic. By August 1956, Richard Bissell was so concerned about the U-2's vulnerability that he despaired of its ability to avoid destruction for six months, let alone two years.\n\nTo extend the U-2's useful operational life, project officials first attempted to reduce the aircraft's vulnerability to detection by Soviet radars. Project RAINBOW's efforts to mask the radar image of the U-2 not only proved ineffective, but actually made the aircraft more vulnerable by adding extra weight that reduced its maximum altitude. Because Soviet radar operators continued to find and track U-2s equipped with antiradar systems, the CIA canceled Project RAINBOW in May 1958.\n\nLong before the failure of Project RAINBOW, Richard Bissell and his Air Force assistant, Col. Jack A. Gibbs, had begun to look for a more radical solution to the problem of Soviet radar detection—an entirely new aircraft. In the late summer of 1956, the two officials visited a number of airframe contractors in a search for new ideas. Among the more unusual was Northrop Aviation's proposal for a gigantic aircraft with a very-high-lift wing. Because it would not be made of metal, the wing would require a type of bridge truss on its upper side to give it rigidity. The proposed aircraft would achieve"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":273,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n260\n\naltitudes of 80,000 to 90,000 feet but only at subsonic speeds, just enough to keep it airborne.'\n\nThe slow-flying Northrop design did not solve the problem of radar detection, and in 1957 the emphasis switched to supersonic designs. In August 1957, the Scientific Engineering Institute (SEI), a CIA proprietary firm that had been working on ways to reduce the U-2's vulnerability to radar, began to investigate the possibility of designing an aircraft with a very small radar cross section. SEI soon discovered that supersonic speed greatly reduced the chances of detection by radar.' From this point on, the CIA's attention focused increasingly on the possibility of building an aircraft that could fly at both extremely high speeds and high altitudes while incorporating the best ideas in radar-absorbing or radar-deflecting techniques.\n\nTHE EVALUATION OF DESIGNS FOR\nA SUCCESSOR TO THE U-2\n\nBy the autumn of 1957, Bissell and Gibbs had collected so many ideas for a successor to the U-2 that Bissell asked DCI Dulles for permission to establish an advisory committee to assist in the selection process. Bissell also felt that the support of a committee of prominent scientists and engineers would prove useful when it came time to ask for funding for such an expensive project. Edwin Land became the chairman of the new committee, which included some of the scientists and engineers who had served on previous advisory bodies for overhead reconnaissance: Edward Purcell, Allen F. Donovan, H. Guyford Stever, and Eugene P. Kiefer. The Air Force's chief scientist, Courtland D. Perkins, was also a member. The committee first met in November 1957 and held six more meetings between July 1958 and the late summer of 1959. The meetings usually took place in Land's Boston office and almost always included the Air Force's Assistant Secretary for Research and Development, Dr. Joseph V. Charyk, and his Navy counterpart, Garrison Norton. Designers from several aircraft manufacturers also attended some of the meetings.'\n\n' Donovan interview (S).\n\nMinnich, \"The OXCART Story,\" Studies in Intelligence 15 (Winter 1971):2 (S).\n\n'Clarence L. Johnson, Report No. SP-1362, \"History of the OXCART Program,\" Lockheed Aircraft Corporation, Burbank, CA, 1 July 1968, p. 1 (TS Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":274,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n261\n\nA-1, 23 April 1958\n\nA-1, 26 June 1958\n\nJohnson's first drawing of the \"U-3\" (A-1); revised version of the A-1\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":275,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n262\n\nThe two most prominent firms involved in the search for a new aircraft were Lockheed, which had designed the successful U-2, and Convair, which was building the supersonic B-58 \"Hustler\" bomber for the Air Force and also working on an even faster model known as the B-58B \"Super Hustler.\" Early in 1958, Richard Bissell asked officials from both firms to submit designs for a high-speed reconnaissance aircraft. During the spring and summer of 1958, both firms worked on design concepts without government contracts or funds.\n\nFollowing extended discussions with Bissell on the subject of a supersonic successor to the U-2, Lockheed's Kelly Johnson began designing an aircraft that would cruise at Mach 3.0 at altitudes above 90,000 feet. On 23 July 1958, Johnson presented his new high-speed concept to Land's advisory committee, which expressed interest in the approach he was taking. At the same meeting, Navy representatives presented a concept for a high-altitude reconnaissance vehicle that examined the possibility of developing a ramjet-powered, inflatable, rubber vehicle that would be lifted to altitude by a balloon and then be propelled by a rocket to a speed where the ramjets could produce thrust. Richard Bissell asked Johnson to evaluate this concept, and three weeks later, after receiving more details from Navy representatives, Kelly Johnson made some quick calculations that showed that the design was impractical because the balloon would have to be a mile in diameter to lift the vehicle, which in turn would need a wing surface area greater than one-seventh of an acre to carry the payload.'\n\nBy September 1958, Lockheed had studied a number of possible configurations, some based on ramjet engines, others with both ramjets and turbojets. Personnel at Lockheed's Skunk Works referred to these aircraft concepts as \"Archangel-1,\" \"Archangel-2,\" and so forth, a carryover from the original nickname of \"Angel\" given to the U-2 during its development. These nicknames for the various designs soon became simply \"A-1,\" \"A-2,\" etc.\n\nIn September 1958, the Land committee met again to review all the concepts then under consideration and to winnow out the few that were most practicable. Among the concepts rejected were the Navy's proposal for an inflatable, ramjet-powered aircraft, a Boeing proposal for a 190-foot-long hydrogen-powered inflatable aircraft, and a\n\n'Clarence L. Johnson, \"Development of the Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird,\" Studies in Intelligence 26 (Summer 1982):4 (U); Johnson, \"Archangel log,\" 23 July 1958, 14 August 1958.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":276,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Lockheed design for a hydrogen-powered aircraft (the CL-400). The committee examined two other Kelly Johnson designs at this meeting—a tailless subsonic aircraft with a very-low-radar cross section (the G2A) and a new supersonic design (the A-2)—and did not accept either one, the former because of its slow speed and the latter because of its dependence on exotic fuels for its ramjets and its overall high cost. The committee approved the continuation of Convair's work on a ramjet-powered Mach 4.0 \"parasite\" aircraft that would be launched from a specially configured version of the B-58B bomber. The design was termed a parasite because it could not take off on its own but needed a larger aircraft to carry it aloft and accelerate it to the speed required to start the ramjet engine. The Convair design was called the FISH.⁵\n\nTwo months later, after reviewing the Convair proposal and yet another Lockheed design for a high-speed reconnaissance aircraft (the A-3), the Land committee concluded in late November 1958 that it would indeed be feasible to build an aircraft whose speed and altitude would make radar tracking difficult or impossible. The committee, therefore, recommended that DCI Dulles ask President Eisenhower to approve further pursuit of the project and to provide funds for additional studies and tests.⁶\n\nOn 17 December 1958, Allen Dulles and Richard Bissell briefed the President on the progress toward a successor to the U-2. Also present were Land and Purcell from the advisory committee, Presidential Science Adviser James Killian, and Air Force Secretary Donald Quarles. DCI Dulles reviewed the results of the U-2 missions to date and stated his belief that a successor to the U-2 could be used all over the world and \"would have a much greater invulnerability to detection.\"\n\nBissell then described the two competing projects by Lockheed and Convair, noting that the chief question at the moment was whether to use air launch or ground takeoff. The next phase, he added, would be detailed engineering, at the end of which it was proposed that 12 aircraft be ordered at a cost of about $100 million.\n\n⁵OSA History, chap. 20, p. 8 (TS Codeword); Johnson, \"Archangel log,\" 17-24 September 1958.\n\n⁶OSA Chronology, p. 21 (TS Codeword); Minnich, \"OXCART Story,\" p. 3 (S); OSA History, chap. 20, p. 8 (TS Codeword); Johnson, \"Archangel log,\" 12 November 1958."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":277,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":278,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":279,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":280,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Although President Eisenhower supported the purchase of this type of aircraft, he questioned the plan to procure any before they had been tested. Promising that more thought would be given to the matter before such an order was placed, Secretary Quarles noted that CIA, the Defense Department, and the Bureau of the Budget were working on a funding plan for the project. The President suggested that the Air Force \"could support the project by transferring some reconnaissance money.\" At the close of the meeting, Eisenhower asked the group to return after completing the next work phase to discuss further stages of the project with him.⁷\n\nCOMPETITION BETWEEN LOCKHEED AND CONVAIR\n\nWith funding for the proposed new type of aircraft now available, Richard Bissell asked Lockheed and Convair to submit detailed proposals. During the first half of 1959, both Lockheed and Convair worked to reduce the radar cross section of their designs, with assistance from Franklin Rodgers of the Scientific Engineering Institute. In pursuing his antiradar studies, Rodgers had discovered a phenomenon that he believed could be used to advantage by the new reconnaissance aircraft. Known as the Blip/Scan Ratio but also referred to as the Rodgers' Effect, this phenomenon involved three elements: the strength of a radar return, the altitude of the object being illuminated by the radar, and the persistence of the radar return on the radar screen (Pulse-Position Indicator display).\n\nMost tracking radars in the late 1950s swept a band of sky 30° to 45° wide and 360° in circumference. Any object encountered in this area reflected the radar pulse in a manner directly proportional to its size—the larger the object, the stronger the returning radar signal. This return appeared on the cathode-ray tube of the radar screen as a spot or blip, and the persistence of this blip on the radar screen also depended on the strength of the radar return, with blips from larger objects remaining on the screen longer. During the late 1950s and early 1960s, a human radar operator watched the radar screen and kept track of the blips that indicated aircraft within the radar's field of view.\n\n⁷Andrew J. Goodpaster, \"Memorandum of Conference with the President, 17 December 1958, 10:26 a.m.,\" 22 December 1958, WHOSS, Alpha, DDEL (TS)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":281,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nChapter 6\n\n268\n\nRodgers determined that a high-altitude object moving two to three times as fast as a normal aircraft would produce such a small blip with so little persistence that the radar operator would have great difficulty tracking it, if indeed he could even see it. Rodgers estimated that for an aircraft to take advantage of this Blip/Scan Ratio phenomenon it must fly at altitudes approaching 90,000 feet and have a radar cross section of less than 10 square meters, preferably not much over 5 square meters. However, for a Mach 3.0 aircraft to achieve such a small radar cross section, its designers would have to make many concessions in its structural design and aerodynamics.\n\nBy the summer of 1959, both firms had completed their proposals. In early June, Lockheed submitted a design for a ground-launched aircraft known as the A-11. It would have a speed of Mach 3.2, a range of 3,200 miles, an altitude of 90,000 feet, and a completion date of January 1961. Kelly Johnson had refused to reduce the aerodynamics of his design in order to achieve a greater antiradar capability, and the A-11's radar cross section, although not great, was substantially larger than that of the much smaller parasite aircraft being designed by Convair.\n\nThe Convair proposal called for a small, manned, ramjet-powered, reconnaissance vehicle to be air launched from one of two specially configured Convair B-58B Super Hustlers. The FISH vehicle, a radical lifting body with a very-small-radar cross section, would fly at Mach 4.2 at 90,000 feet and have a range of 3,900 miles. Two Marquardt ramjets would power its Mach 4.2 dash over the target area. Once the FISH decelerated, two Pratt & Whitney JT-12 turbojets would bring it back to base. The ramjet exit nozzles and wing edges would be constructed of Pyroceram, a ceramic material that could withstand the high temperatures of very high speeds and would absorb radiofrequency energy from radar pulses. Convair stated that the FISH could be ready by January 1961.\n\nConvair's proposal depended on two uncertain factors. First and foremost was the unproven technology of ramjet engines. At the time, no aircraft in existence could carry a large, ramjet-powered craft into the sky and then accelerate to sufficient speed for the ramjet engines"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":282,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nChapter 6\n\n269\n\nto be ignited. Since ramjet engines had only been tested in wind tunnels, there was no available data to prove that these engines would work in the application proposed by Convair. The second uncertain factor was the B-58B bomber that was supposed to achieve Mach 2.2 before launching the FISH above 35,000 feet. This version of the B-58 was still in the design stage.\n\nConvair's proposal suffered a major setback in June 1959, when the Air Force canceled the B-58B project. Conversion of the older, slower B-58A into a supersonic launching platform for the FISH was ruled out by the high cost and technical difficulties involved. Moreover, the Air Force was unwilling to part with two aircraft from the small inventory of its most advanced bomber. Even had the B-58B program not been canceled, however, the FISH proposal would probably not have been feasible. Convair engineers had calculated that the added weight of the FISH would prevent the B-58B from achieving the speed required to ignite the parasite aircraft's ramjet engines.\n\nThe Convair proposal was therefore unusable, but the Lockheed design with its high radar cross section was also unacceptable to the Land committee. On 14 July 1959, the committee rejected both"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":283,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nChapter 6\n\n270\n\ndesigns and continued the competition. Lockheed continued to work on developing a design that would be less vulnerable to detection, and Convair received a new CIA contract to design an air-breathing twin-engine aircraft that would meet the general specifications being followed by Lockheed.\n\nFollowing recommendations by the Land committee, both Lockheed and Convair incorporated the Pratt & Whitney J58 power plant into their designs. This engine had originally been developed for the Navy's large, jet-powered flying boat, the Glenn L. Martin Company's P6M Seamaster, and was the most powerful engine available. In 1958 the Navy had canceled the Seamaster program, which had left Pratt & Whitney without a buyer for the powerful J58 engine.\n\nAlthough the Land committee had not yet found an acceptable design, it informed President Eisenhower on 20 July 1959 that the search was making good progress. Concerned about the U-2's vulnerability to detection and possible interception and aware that the photosatellite project was encountering significant problems, the President gave his final approval to the high-speed reconnaissance aircraft project.\n\nTHE SELECTION OF THE LOCKHEED DESIGN\n\nBy the late summer of 1959, both Convair and Lockheed had completed new designs for a follow-on to the U-2. Convair's entry, known as the KINGFISH, used much of the technology developed for the F-102, F-106, and B-58, including stainless steel honeycomb skin, planiform wing design, and a crew capsule escape system, which eliminated the need for the pilot to wear a pressurized suit. The KINGFISH had two side-by-side J58 engines inside the fuselage, which significantly reduced the radar cross section. Two additional"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":284,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nChapter 6\n\n271\n\nimportant design features that contributed to a small radar return were fiberglass engine inlets and wings whose leading edges were made of Pyroceram.\n\nLockheed's new entry was much like its first, but with several modifications and a new designator, A-12. It, too, would employ two of the powerful J58 engines. Lockheed's major innovation in reducing radar return was a cesium additive in the fuel, which decreased the radar cross section of the afterburner plume. This improvement had been proposed by Edward Purcell of the Land committee. Desiring to save weight, Kelly Johnson had decided not to construct the A-12 out of steel. Traditional lightweight metals such as aluminum were out of the question because they could not stand the heat that would be generated as the A-12 flew at Mach 3.2, so Johnson chose a titanium alloy.\n\nOn 20 August 1959, Lockheed and Convair submitted their proposals to a joint Department of Defense, Air Force, and CIA selection panel. As the table shows, the two aircraft were similar in performance"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":285,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":286,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"characteristics, although the Lockheed design's specifications were slightly better in each category. The Lockheed design was also preferable in terms of overall cost. In the vital area of vulnerability to radar detection, however, the Convair design was superior. Its smaller size and internally mounted engines gave it a smaller radar cross section than the Lockheed A-12.15\n\nComparison of Lockheed and Convair Designs\n\nLockheed A-12 Convair KINGFISH\n\nSpeed Mach 3.2 Mach 3.2\nRange (total) 4,120 nm 3,400 nm\nRange (at altitude) 3,800 nm 3,400 nm\nCruising Altitude\nStart 84,500 ft. 85,000 ft.\nMidrange 91,000 ft. 88,000 ft.\nEnd 97,600 ft. 94,000 ft.\nCost summary (for 12 aircraft without engines) $96.6 million $121.6 million\n\nSome of the CIA representatives initially favored the Convair KINGFISH design because of its smaller radar cross section, but they were eventually convinced to support the Lockheed design by the Air Force members of the panel, who believed that Convair's cost overruns and production delays on the B-58 project might be repeated in this new project. In contrast, Lockheed had produced the U-2 under budget and on time. Another factor favoring the A-12 was security. Lockheed had experience in running a highly secure facility (the Skunk Works) in which all of the key employees were already cleared by the Agency.\n\nDespite its vote in favor of the Lockheed proposal, the selection panel remained concerned about the A-12's vulnerability to radar detection and therefore required Lockheed to prove its concept for reducing the A-12's radar cross section by 1 January 1960. On 14 September 1959, the CIA awarded a four-month contract to Lockheed\n\n15 OSA History, chap. 20, pp. 18-19 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":287,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to proceed with antiradar studies, aerodynamic structural tests, and engineering designs. This research and all later work on the A-12 took place under a new codename, Project OXCART, established at the end of August 1959 to replace its more widely known predecessor, Project GUSTO.16 The CIA's project manager for OXCART was John Parangosky, who had long been associated with the U-2 program.\n\nEFFORTS TO REDUCE THE A-12'S RADAR CROSS SECTION\n\nDuring the spring of 1959, Kelly Johnson's Skunk Works crew—which then numbered only 50—had begun building a full-scale mockup of the proposed aircraft. The mockup was to be tested for its radar cross section by Edgerton, Germeshausen & Grier (EG&G) in cooperation with the Scientific Engineering Institute at a small testing facility at Indian Springs, Nevada. Lockheed objected to this site because its pylon would not support the full-scale mockup and because the facilities were in full view of a nearby highway. On 10 September 1959, EG&G agreed to move its radar test facility to the former U-2 testing site at Area 51 of the Atomic Energy Commission's Nevada Proving Grounds.17\n\nWhen the new radar test facility with its larger pylon was ready, Johnson put the A-12 mockup on a specially designed trailer truck that carried it from Burbank to Area 51. By 18 November 1959, the mockup was in place atop the pylon, and radar testing could begin. These tests soon proved that Lockheed's concept of shape, fuel additive, and nonmetallic parts was workable, but it would take more than 18 months of testing and adjustment before the OXCART achieved a satisfactory radar cross section.\n\nIt was in the course of this radar testing that the OXCART received its characteristic cobra-like appearance. Edward Purcell and Franklin Rodgers had come up with a theory that a continuously curving airframe would be difficult to track with a radar pulse because it would present few corner reflectors or sharp angles from which pulses could bounce in the direction of the radar. To achieve the continuously curving airframe, Kelly Johnson added thin, curved extensions to the engine housings and leading edges of the wings and\n\n16 Parangosky interview (S); OSA History, chap. 20, pp. 19-21 (TS Codeword).\n17 OSA History, chap. 20, p. 22 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":288,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Radar testing of A-12 mockup"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":289,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Antiradar features of the A-12"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":290,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"eventually to the fuselage itself, creating what is known as a chine on each side. At first Johnson was concerned that these additions might impair the airworthiness of the plane, but wind tunnel testing determined that the chines actually imparted a useful aerodynamic lift to the vehicle. Because titanium was very brittle and therefore difficult to bend, Johnson achieved the necessary curvature by combining triangular-shaped pieces of titanium called fillets. These fillets were glued to the framework of the chines with a special adhesive, epoxy resin.\n\nOn later OXCART models the fillets were made from electrically resistive honeycomb plastic with a glass-fiber surface that would not melt at high speed. When struck by a radar pulse, the composite chines tended to absorb the pulse rather than reflect it. A similar approach was used for the leading edges of the wings. Again electrically resistive honeycomb material was fabricated into triangular shapes, known as wing teeth, and fitted into the titanium wings. Both the metal and composite fillets and teeth were held in place with the newly developed epoxy cements.\n\nThe greatest remaining area of concern in the A-12's radar cross section was the two vertical stabilizers. To reduce radar reflections, Kelly Johnson canted the stabilizers inward 15° and fabricated them out of resin-impregnated nonmetallic materials. Once these changes were completed, the only metal in each vertical stabilizer was a stainless steel pivot. The Air Force, which later ordered several versions of the OXCART aircraft for its own use, never adopted the laminated vertical stabilizers.18\n\nTHE OXCART CONTRACT\n\nBy mid-January 1960, Lockheed had demonstrated that its concept of shape, fuel additive, and nonmetallic parts would reduce the OXCART's radar cross section substantially. Richard Bissell, however, was very upset to learn that the changes had led to a reduction in the aircraft's performance, which meant it would not be able to attain the penetration altitude he had promised to President Eisenhower. Kelly Johnson then proposed to reduce the aircraft's weight by 1,000 pounds and increase the fuel load by 2,000 pounds, making it possible"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":291,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to achieve the desired target altitude of 91,000 feet. Afterward, he noted in the project log: \"We have no performance margins left; so this project, instead of being 10 times as hard as anything we have done, is 12 times as hard. This matches the design number and is obviously right.\" 19\n\nThese changes satisfied Bissell, who notified Johnson on 26 January that the CIA was authorizing the construction of 12 of the new aircraft. The actual contract was signed on 11 February 1960. Lockheed's original quotation for the project was $96.6 million for 12 aircraft, but technological difficulties eventually made this price impossible to meet. Recognizing that fabricating an aircraft from titanium might involve unforeseen difficulties, the CIA included a clause in the contract that allowed costs to be reevaluated. During the next five years, this clause had to be invoked on a number of occasions as the A-12's costs soared to more than double the original estimate.20\n\nNEW TECHNOLOGIES NECESSITATED BY OXCART'S HIGH SPEED\n\nAccording to the specifications, the OXCART aircraft was to achieve a speed of Mach 3.2 (2,064 knots or 0.57 miles per second, which would make it as fast as a rifle bullet), have a range of 4,120 nautical miles, and reach altitudes of 84,500 to 97,600 feet. The new aircraft would thus be more than five times as fast as the U-2 and would go almost 3 miles higher.\n\nOne major disadvantage of the OXCART's great speed was high temperatures. Flying through the earth's atmosphere at Mach 3.2 heated portions of the aircraft's skin to almost 900°F. An aircraft operating at these high speeds and high temperatures required fuels, lubricants, and hydraulic fluids that had not yet been invented. The OXCART's fuel requirement called for a low-vapor-pressure fuel with a low volume at operating temperatures; the fuel would also be used as a heat sink to cool various parts of the aircraft. The J58 engines required lubricants that did not break down at the very high operating temperatures of Mach 3.2 speeds. This requirement led to the"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":292,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"invention of synthetic lubricants. Lockheed also had to search long and hard for a hydraulic fluid that would not vaporize at high speed but would still be usable at low altitudes. Finding a suitable hydraulic pump was just as difficult. Kelly Johnson finally modified a pump that was being developed for North American's B-70 bomber project.21\n\nSome of the greatest problems related to the high speeds and high temperatures at which the OXCART operated resulted from working with the material chosen for the airframe—titanium. After evaluating many materials, Johnson had chosen an alloy of titanium (B-120) characterized by great strength, relatively light weight, and good resistance to high temperatures, but high in cost. As strong as stainless steel, titanium weighed slightly more than half as much. Obtaining sufficient quantities of titanium of a quality suitable for fabricating aircraft components proved very difficult because methods for maintaining good quality control during the milling of titanium were not fully developed. Up to 80 percent of the early deliveries from Titanium Metals Corporation had to be rejected. It was not until 1961, when company officials were informed of the objectives and high priority of the OXCART program, that problems with the titanium supply ended. Even after sufficient high-quality titanium was received, Lockheed's difficulties with the metal were not over. Titanium was so hard that tools normally used in aircraft fabrication broke; new ones therefore had to be devised. Assembly line production was not possible, and the cost of the program mounted well above original estimates.22\n\nThe high temperatures that the OXCART would encounter also necessitated planning for the pilot's safety and comfort because the inside of the aircraft would be like a moderately hot oven. To save"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":293,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"weight, Kelly Johnson did not attempt to insulate the interior of the aircraft. The pilot would therefore have to wear a type of space suit with its own cooling, pressure control, oxygen supply, and other necessities for survival.\n\nDESIGNING THE OXCART'S CAMERAS\n\nProviding cameras for the A-12 posed a number of unique problems. In late 1959, OXCART managers asked Perkin-Elmer, Eastman Kodak, and Hycon to develop three different photographic systems for the new aircraft. These cameras would provide a range of photography from high-ground-resolution stereo to extremely-high-resolution spotting data.\n\nThe Perkin-Elmer (P-E) entry, known as the Type-I camera, was a high-ground-resolution general stereo camera using an f/4.0 18-inch lens and 6.6-inch film. It produced pairs of photographs covering a swath 71 miles wide with an approximately 30-percent stereo overlap. The system had a 5,000-foot film supply and was able to resolve 140 lines per millimeter and provide a ground resolution of 12 inches.\n\nTo meet severe design constraints in the areas of size, weight, thermal environment, desired photographic resolution, and coverage, Perkin Elmer's Dr. Roderick M. Scott employed concepts never before used in camera systems. These included the use of a reflecting cube rather than a prism for the scanner, a concentric film supply and takeup system to minimize weight shift, a constant-velocity film transport that provided for the contiguous placement of stereo images on one piece of film, and airbars for the film transport and takeup systems.23\n\nEastman Kodak's entry, called the Type-II camera, was a high-convergent stereo device using a 21-inch lens and 8-inch film. It produced pairs of photographs covering a swath 60 miles wide with an approximately 30-percent stereo overlap. It had an 8,400-foot film supply and was able to resolve 105 lines per millimeter and provide a ground resolution of 17 inches."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":294,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The Hycon entry, designed by James Baker and known as the Type-IV camera, was a spotting camera with extremely-high-ground resolution. In fact, it was an advanced version of the highly reliable B camera developed for the original U-2 program. It used a 48-inch Baker-designed f/5.6 lens to focus images onto 9.5-inch film. Like the B camera it could provide seven frames of photography covering a swath 41 miles wide with stereo overlap on 19 miles of the swath. The Hycon camera carried the largest film supply of the three cameras, 12,000 feet. It was able to resolve 100 lines per millimeter and provide a ground resolution of 8 inches. A version of this 48-inch Hycon camera, known as the H camera, later saw service in U-2R aircraft.\n\nEach of the three camera systems had unique capabilities and advantages, so all three were purchased for the OXCART. Before they could be effectively employed in the aircraft, however, new types of camera windows were needed. The OXCART's camera windows had to be completely free from optical distortion. Achieving this goal was difficult in a window whose exterior would be subjected to temperatures of 550°F while the interior surface would be only 150°F. After three years and the expenditure of $2 million in research and development, the Corning Glass Works, which had joined this effort as a Perkin-Elmer subcontractor, solved the problem of producing a camera window that could withstand tremendous heat differentials. Its quartz glass window was fused to the metal frame by an unprecedented process involving high-frequency sound waves.24\n\nLater in the program, the OXCART received yet another camera system. In 1964 the Texas Instruments Corporation developed an infrared camera for Project TACKLE U-2s that were being used to determine whether the People's Republic of China was producing weapons-grade nuclear material. This stereo device, known as the FFD-4, was adapted for use in OXCART. The camera had an effective focal length of 50 inches and a 150-foot supply of 3.5-inch film. The camera's resolution was 3°C thermally, 1 milliradian spatially, and 60 feet on the ground. It could be used for both day and night imagery collection."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":295,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":296,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n283\n\nCHOOSING PILOTS FOR OXCART\n\nJust as in the U-2 program, the Air Force provided considerable support to Project OXCART, including training, fuel storage, and weather service. One of the most important areas of support was the provision of pilots; all of the OXCART pilots came from the Air Force. Prospective pilots had to be qualified in the most advanced fighters and be emotionally stable and well motivated. In contrast to 1955, when cover considerations had limited the U-2 pilot selection process to individuals with reserve commissions, the Air Force was able to devise personnel and cover procedures that enabled both regular and reserve officers to volunteer to become OXCART pilots. Because of the limited size of the A-12 cockpit, they had to be under six feet tall and weigh less than 175 pounds. Following extensive physical and psychological screening, 16 potential nominees were selected for intensive security and medical screening by the Agency. By the end of this screening in November 1961, only five individuals had been approved and had accepted the Agency's offer of employment on a highly classified project involving a very advanced aircraft. A second search and screening raised the number of pilots for the OXCART to eleven. The thorough screening process produced an elite group of pilots; all but one of these 11 officers eventually became generals. The new pilots transferred from military to civilian status and received compensation and insurance arrangements somewhat better than those of the U-2 pilots.\n\nSELECTION OF A TESTING SITE FOR THE OXCART\n\nFrom the very beginning, it was clear that Lockheed could not test the OXCART aircraft at its Burbank facility, where the runway was too short and too exposed to the public. The ideal testing site would be far removed from metropolitan areas, away from civil and military airways, easily accessible by air, blessed with good weather, capable of accommodating large numbers of personnel, near an Air Force installation, and having a runway at least 8,000 feet long. But no such place was to be found.\n\nAfter considering 10 Air Force bases programmed for closing, Richard Bissell decided to upgrade the Area 51 site in Nevada where the U-2 had been tested. Although its personnel accommodations, fuel"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":297,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n284\n\nstorage capacity, and runway length were insufficient for the OXCART program, the site's remote location would greatly ease the task of maintaining the program's security, and a moderate construction program could provide adequate facilities. Construction began in September 1960; a C-47 shuttle service ferried work crews from Burbank to Las Vegas and from Las Vegas to the site.\n\nThe new 8,500-foot runway was completed by 15 November 1960. Kelly Johnson had been reluctant to have a standard Air Force runway with expansion joints every 25 feet because he feared the joints would set up undesirable vibrations in the speedy aircraft. At his suggestion a 150-foot wide runway was therefore constructed of six 25-foot-wide longitudinal sections, each 150 feet long but staggered. This layout put most of the expansion joints parallel to the direction of aircraft roll and reduced the frequency of the joints.\n\nAdditional improvements included the resurfacing of 18 miles of highway leading to the base so that heavy fuel trucks could bring in the necessary fuel. The need for additional buildings on the base was met by the Navy. Three surplus Navy hangars were dismantled, moved, and reassembled on the north side of the base, and more than 100 surplus Navy housing buildings were also transported to Area 51. All essential facilities were ready in time for the forecast delivery date of the first A-12 on 1 August 1961.\n\nUnfortunately, this delivery date began to slip further and further into the future. Delays in obtaining the titanium, and later the J58 engines, caused the postponement of the final assembly of the first plane. Eventually, Kelly Johnson and Agency project officials decided to begin testing without waiting for the J58 engines by using Pratt & Whitney J75/19W engines, designed for the Convair F-106, to test the A-12 at altitudes up to 50,000 feet and at speeds up to Mach 1.6. Such a change, however, meant that the engine compartment of the first aircraft had to be reconfigured to accommodate the J75 engine. Lockheed hoped that this substitution would permit the delivery of the first A-12 by 22 December 1961 and its initial test flight by 27 February 1962.\n\nLockheed ran into so many technological problems with the OXCART effort that by October 1961 its costs had swollen to $136 million and were still climbing. Something obviously had to be done"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":298,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n285\n\nto reduce expenditures. After much refiguring, project officials decided to decrease the number of deliverable aircraft. Amendment No. 11 to the contract reduced from 12 to 10 the number of A-12s, for a total cost of $161.2 million.\n\nThe cancellation of these two A-12s was offset by an Air Force order for the development of a supersonic interceptor variant of the A-12 to serve as a replacement for the North American F-108A Rapier interceptor project, which had been canceled in late 1960. With the assistance of the Agency's west coast contracting office, the Air Force entered into an agreement with Lockheed to produce three AF-12 aircraft, based on the A-12 design but modified to carry a second crewman and three air-to-air missiles. This effort was called Project KEDLOCK. The AF-12 (later redesignated the YF-12A) was designed to intercept enemy bombers long before they reached the United States, and initial Air Force plans envisioned a force of up to 100 of these supersonic interceptors. In fact, only three of these planes were built and delivered during the 1963-64 time frame because Secretary of Defense McNamara canceled the program as a cost-cutting measure. The Air Force bore all of the costs of the YF-12A project; CIA was only involved in helping to write \"black\" contracts.\n\nLockheed was not the only OXCART contractor having trouble containing costs; Pratt & Whitney was fighting an even bigger battle. In mid-1961, Pratt & Whitney overruns threatened to halt the entire OXCART project. At the suggestion of Cdr. William Holcomb in the office of the Chief of Naval Materiel, Richard Bissell asked the Navy to assist in funding the J58's development. After hearing Bissell and Holcomb's suggestion that the J58 might be used in future Navy aircraft, VAdm. William A. Schoech, Chief of the Navy Materiel Command that had originally financed the J58 engine, authorized the transfer of $38 million in end-of-year funds to the project, thus keeping the OXCART's head above water. As it turned out, the J58 was never used in a Navy aircraft."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":299,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n286\n\nDELIVERY OF THE FIRST OXCART\n\nThe first A-12, known as article 121, was assembled and tested at Burbank during January and February 1962. Since it could not be flown to the Nevada site, the aircraft had to be partially disassembled and put on a specially designed trailer that cost nearly $100,000. The entire fuselage, without the wings, was crated and covered, creating a load 35 feet wide and 105 feet long. To transport this huge load safely over the hundreds of miles to the site, obstructing road signs were removed, trees were trimmed, and some roadbanks had to be leveled. The plane left Burbank on 26 February 1962 and arrived at Area 51 two days later.\n\nAfter the fuselage arrived in Nevada, its wings were attached and the J75 engines were installed, but the aircraft was still not ready to be tested. This new delay was caused by leaking fuel tanks, a problem that would never be solved completely. Because the A-12's high speeds heat the titanium airframe to more than 500°F, Lockheed designers had to make allowances for expansion. When the metal was cold, the expansion joints were at their widest. In the fuel tanks, these gaps were filled by pliable sealants, but the fuel for the A-12's engines acted as a strong reducing agent that softened the sealants, causing leaks. Thus, when fuel was first poured into the aircraft, 68 leaks developed. Lockheed technicians then stripped and replaced all the sealant, a tedious and time consuming procedure because the sealant required four curing cycles, each at a different temperature over a period of 30 to 54 hours. The engineers were never able to discover a sealant compound that was completely impervious to the jet fuel while remaining elastic enough to expand and contract sufficiently. The A-12's tanks continued to leak, so when it was fueled, it only received enough fuel to get airborne. The plane would then rendezvous with a tanker, top off its tanks, and immediately climb to operating altitude, causing the metal to expand and the leaks to stop.\n\nCHANGES IN THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT\n\nRichard Bissell, whose concern for the viability of the U-2 in 1956 had led to the establishment of Project OXCART and who had directed its growth all along, was no longer in charge when the first"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":300,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n287\n\nDelivery of OXCART aircraft to Area 51\n\nOXCART aircraft took to the air. He resigned from the Agency in February 1962, and his departure brought a major reorganization of the reconnaissance program. The Development Projects Division of the Directorate of Plans, with its two aircraft (OXCART and U-2) and its satellite project, were transferred to the new Directorate of Research headed by Herbert (Pete) Scoville. The following year Scoville resigned and this Directorate was reorganized and its name changed to the Directorate of Science and Technology, with Albert (Bud) Wheelon, Jr. as its first head. The overhead reconnaissance"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":301,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"projects belonged to the Office of Special Activities, headed by Col. Jack C. Ledford, who now had the title of Assistant Director for Special Activities. These project management changes in the CIA had no immediate impact on the OXCART project because the aircraft was still in the development stage, handled mainly by the contractors. Moreover, a good deal of continuity was provided by officers who had served for a number of years with the U-2 program and were now involved with OXCART: James Cunningham, the Deputy Assistant Director for Special Activities; Col. Leo Geary, the Air Force's project officer for the two aircraft; and John Parangosky, who oversaw the day-to-day affairs of the OXCART project.\n\nOXCART'S FIRST FLIGHTS\n\nWith new sealant in its fuel tanks, the prototype OXCART was ready to take to the air. On 25 April 1962, test pilot Louis Schalk took \"article 121\" for an unofficial, unannounced flight, which was an old Lockheed tradition. He flew the craft less than two miles at an altitude of about 20 feet and encountered considerable problems because of the improper hookup of several controls. These were promptly repaired and on the next day, 26 April, Schalk made the official 40-minute maiden flight. After a beautiful takeoff, the aircraft began shedding the triangular fillets that covered the framework of the chines along the edge of the aircraft body. The lost"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":302,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"fillets, which had been secured to the airframe with epoxy resin, had to be recovered and reaffixed to the aircraft, a process that took the next four days.\n\nOnce the fillets were in place, the OXCART's official first flight took place on 30 April 1962, witnessed by a number of Agency personnel including DDR Scoville. Richard Bissell was also present, and Kelly Johnson noted in the project log, \"I was very happy to have Dick see this flight, with all that he has contributed to the program.\" This official first flight was also the first flight with the wheels up. Piloted again by Schalk, the OXCART took off at 170 knots and climbed to 30,000 feet. During the 59-minute flight, the A-12 achieved a top speed of 340 knots. Kelly Johnson declared it to be the smoothest first test flight of any aircraft he had designed or tested. On 2 May 1962, during the second test flight, the OXCART broke the sound barrier, achieving a speed of Mach 1.1.\n\nFour more aircraft, including a two-seat trainer, arrived at the testing site before the end of the year. During the second delivery on 26 June 1962, the extra-wide vehicle carrying the aircraft accidentally struck a Greyhound bus traveling in the opposite direction. Project managers quickly authorized payment of $4,890 for the damage done to the bus in order to avoid having to explain in court why the OXCART delivery vehicle was so wide.\n\nOne of the biggest problems connected with flight testing the A-12 was keeping its existence secret. Realizing that the nation's air traffic controllers would be among the first unwitting people to learn about the plane, the Deputy Assistant Director for Special Activities, James Cunningham, had called on Federal Aviation Administrator Najeeb E. Halaby in early 1962 to brief him about the craft's existence and ask his assistance in keeping it secret. Halaby cooperated fully with the Agency and personally briefed all FAA regional chiefs on how to handle reports of unusually fast, high-flying aircraft. Air controllers were warned not to mention the craft on the radio but to submit written reports of sightings or radar trackings. The Air Force gave similar briefings to NORAD, the North American Air Defense Command."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":303,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":304,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Initial testing could not explore the A-12's maximum potential, since the J58 engine was still not ready. Developing this power plant to OXCART specifications was proving much more difficult than had been expected because the J58 had to reach performance levels never before achieved by a jet engine, while operating under extremely difficult environmental conditions. To simulate the stress that the J58 would undergo during maximum power output (Mach 3.2 at 97,000 feet), the power plant was tested in the exhaust stream of a J75 engine. In the course of this extremely severe testing, the J58's problems were gradually overcome. By January 1963, Pratt & Whitney had delivered 10 J58 engines to the Nevada testing site. The first flight of an A-12 with two J58 engines took place on 15 January 1963.\n\nSPEED-RELATED PROBLEMS\n\nAs J58-equipped A-12s reached higher and higher speeds, more difficulties arose. Major problems developed at speeds between Mach 2.4 and 2.8 because the aircraft's shock wave interfered with the flow of air into the engine, greatly reducing its performance. Solving this problem required long and often highly frustrating experimentation that ultimately required a complete redesign of the air-inlet system that controlled the amount of air admitted to the engine. In the new, adjustable inlet the cone-shaped projection at the front—known as a spike—was designed to move in or out as much as three feet in order to capture and contain the shock wave produced by the aircraft at high speeds, thus preventing the shock wave from blowing out the fire inside the engine.\n\nAnother J58 engine problem in early 1963 was foreign object damage. Small objects such as pens, pencils, screws, bolts, nuts, and metal shavings that fell into the engine nacelles during assembly at Burbank were sucked into the power plant during initial engine testing at Area 51 and damaged impeller and compressor vanes. To control the problem Lockheed instituted a program that included X-rays, shaking of the nacelles, installing screens over various air inlets to the engine, and even having workers wear coveralls without breast pockets. Another source of foreign object damage was trash on the runways. The giant J58 engines acted like immense vacuum cleaners, sucking in anything lying loose on the paving as they propelled the A-12 down the runway for takeoff. To prevent engine damage, Area 51 personnel had to sweep and vacuum the runway before aircraft takeoff.\n\nNEW VERSIONS OF THE OXCART\n\nIn 1962 the Agency and the Air Force ordered two more versions of the OXCART (in addition to the A-12 and the YF-12A). One was a modification of the A-12 to carry and launch ramjet-powered, 43-feet-long drones capable of reaching Mach 3.3 The two-seater mothership received the designation M-12; the drone was called the D-21. This project was known as TAGBOARD. The original development of the drones and mothership was sponsored by the CIA, but in June 1963 the project was turned over to the Air Force, which had overall responsibility for unmanned reconnaissance aircraft. Development of the M-12/D-21 combination continued until 1966, when an unsuccessful D-21 launch caused the loss of its mothership and the death of one of the crew members. Afterward the Air Force turned to B-52 bombers to carry the drones."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":305,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The second new version of the OXCART was another reconnaissance aircraft. In December 1962 the Air Force ordered six \"reconnaissance/strike\" aircraft, which were designed to conduct high-speed, high-altitude reconnaissance of enemy territory after a nuclear strike. This new aircraft differed from other A-12 versions in that it was longer, had a full-blown two-seat cockpit, and carried a large variety of photographic and electronic sensors. The additional weight of all this equipment gave the Air Force craft a slower maximum speed and a lower operating ceiling than the Agency's A-12. In August 1963, the Air Force added 25 more aircraft to this contract, for a total of 31.\n\nTHE QUESTION OF SURFACING A VERSION OF THE OXCART\n\nAs the funds being spent on Air Force versions of the OXCART increased dramatically, the Defense Department became concerned that it could not offer any public explanation for these expenditures. At the same time, Agency and Defense Department officials recognized the growing danger that a crash or sightings of test flights could compromise the program. This led the Defense Department in late 1962 and early 1963 to consider surfacing the Air Force's interceptor version of the A-12 to provide a cover for OXCART sightings or crashes and an explanation for the rise in Air Force spending. Some journalists had also become aware of the aircraft's existence, raising concern that the secret would eventually come out in the press. Agency officials remained reluctant to reveal the existence of any version of the A-12, and the issue soon came to the attention of the PFIAB. James Killian and Edwin Land strongly opposed disclosing OXCART's existence, and in January 1963 they presented their views to President Kennedy at a meeting attended by DCI McCone and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara. Killian, Land, and McCone succeeded in persuading the President and Secretary of Defense to keep the OXCART's existence a secret for the time being.\n\nLater that year supporters of the idea of surfacing the OXCART found a more powerful argument for their proposal—the need to disseminate the supersonic technology that had been developed for the"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":306,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OXCART. This technology would be invaluable for Air Force projects such as the B-70 bomber and for the civilian supersonic transport (SST) then being discussed in Congress. In the fall of 1963, several Presidential advisers expressed their concern to DCI McCone that Lockheed had received a $700 million headstart in the development of supersonic technology, giving the firm a tremendous advantage over other aerospace companies working on a supersonic transport. McCone passed these concerns on to President Kennedy on 12 November 1963, just 10 days before the fateful trip to Dallas. The President instructed CIA and the Defense Department to develop a plan for surfacing the OXCART but to await further discussions with him before taking any action.\n\nPresident Lyndon B. Johnson received a detailed briefing on the OXCART program from McCone, McNamara, Bundy, and Rusk on 29 November, after just one week in office. McNamara strongly advocated surfacing a version of the OXCART. McCone was more cautious, calling for the preparation of a statement that could be used when surfacing became necessary but arguing that such a step was not yet needed. Agreeing with McCone's position, President Johnson said the issue should be reviewed again in February.\n\nOne additional argument in favor of surfacing the OXCART was the realization that the aircraft could not be used to fly undetected over the Soviet Union. By 1962 the United States had become aware of the effectiveness of a new Soviet radar system, codenamed TALL KING. The introduction of this computer-controlled radar undercut one of the basic premises of the OXCART program, the assumption that radar operators would not be able to track high-flying supersonic targets visually because of their small, nonpersistent radar returns. By coupling a computer to a radar, the Soviets could now weight the individual radar returns and identify those produced by high-flying, very fast objects."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":307,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"By February 1964 DCI McCone had become convinced that surfacing was necessary. Soviet development of the TALL KING radar system had eliminated his hope that OXCART would eventually be able to carry out its original intended purpose—overflights of the USSR. The final decision on the issue of surfacing the OXCART came at a National Security Council meeting on 29 February 1964, at which all of the participants supported the decision to surface. That same day President Johnson held a news conference at which he announced the successful development of an \"advanced experimental jet aircraft, the A-11, which has been tested in sustained flight at more than 2,000 miles per hour and at altitudes in excess of 70,000 feet.\"\n\nPresident Johnson had spoken of the A-11 rather than the Agency's A-12, and the aircraft that was actually revealed to the public was the Air Force's YF-12A interceptor, a project that had already been canceled. Following the President's announcement, two of these aircraft were hastily flown to Edwards Air Force Base. From this point on, the Air Force versions of the OXCART were based at Edwards and provided a diversion so that the faster and higher flying A-12s at the Nevada site could continue testing out of the public eye.\n\nThe President's announcement did not mention the CIA's involvement in the project, which remained classified, but keeping the Agency's extensive role in the OXCART a secret was not an easy task. The first step had been to separate the Air Force's versions of the A-12 from the Agency's by moving the Air Force aircraft to California. Next, those firms that were to be given the new technology had to be briefed on the program and agree to abide by the same secrecy agreements then in force with Lockheed. Moreover, everyone witting of OXCART (including those no longer associated with the program, such as Allen Dulles, Richard Bissell, and General Cabell) had been briefed about the impending Presidential announcement, so that they would not think that the need for secrecy about OXCART had ended.\n\nThe process of surfacing versions of the OXCART continued on 25 July 1964, when President Johnson revealed the existence of a new Air Force reconnaissance aircraft, which he called the SR-71. Actually, the President was supposed to say RS-71 (for \"reconnaissance-strike\"). Deciding that renaming the aircraft was easier than correcting President Johnson, the Air Force invented a new category—\"strategic reconnaissance\"—to explain the SR-71's designation."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":308,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ADDITIONAL PROBLEMS DURING FINAL TESTING\n\nThe first A-12 crash occurred on 24 May 1963, when a detachment pilot, realizing the airspeed indication was confusing and erroneous, decided to eject. The pilot was unhurt, but the plane was destroyed when it crashed near Wendover, Utah. A cover story for the press described the plane as an F-105. All A-12s were grounded for a week while the accident was investigated. The malfunction was found to be caused by ice that had plugged up a pitot-static tube used to determine airspeed.\n\nTwo more A-12s were lost in later testing. On 9 July 1964, article 133 crashed while landing when a pitch-control servo device froze, rolling the plane into a wing-down position. Ejecting from an altitude of 120 feet, the pilot was blown sideways out of the craft. Although he was not very high off the ground, his parachute did open and he landed during the parachute's first swing. Fortunately he was unhurt, and no news of the accident filtered out of the base. Eighteen months later, on 28 December 1965, article 126 crashed immediately after takeoff because of an improperly wired stability augmentation system. As in the previous crash, the pilot ejected safely, and there was no publicity connected with the crash. An investigation ordered by DCI McCone determined that the wiring error had resulted from negligence, not sabotage.\n\nThe A-12 made its first long-range, high-speed flight on 27 January 1965. The flight lasted 100 minutes, 75 minutes of which were flown at speeds greater than Mach 3.1, and the aircraft covered 2,580 miles at altitudes between 75,600 and 80,000 feet. By this time, the OXCART was performing well. The engine inlet, camera, hydraulic, navigation, and flight-control systems all demonstrated acceptable reliability.\n\nNevertheless, as the OXCART began flying longer, faster, and higher, new problems arose. The most serious of these problems involved the aircraft's wiring. Continuing malfunctions of the inlet controls, communications equipment, ECM systems, and cockpit instruments were often attributable to wiring failures. Wiring connectors and components had to withstand temperatures above 800°F, structural flexing, vibration, and shock. Such demands were more than the materials could stand. Not all of the OXCART's problems could be traced to materiel failures, however, and Agency officials believed that careless maintenance by Lockheed employees also contributed to malfunctions.\n\nConcerned that Lockheed would not be able to meet the OXCART's schedule for operational readiness, the Office of Special Activities' Director of Technology, John Parangosky, met with Kelly Johnson on 3 August 1965 to discuss the project's problems. Johnson not only assigned more top-level supervisors to the project but also"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":309,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"decided to go to Nevada and take charge of the OXCART's development himself. His presence made a big difference, as can be seen in his notes in the project log:\n\nI uncovered many items of a managerial, materiel and design nature.... I had meetings with vendors to improve their operation.... Changed supervision and had daily talks with them, going over in detail all problems on the aircraft.... Increased the supervision in the electrical group by 500%.... We tightened up the inspection procedures a great deal and made inspection stick.\n\nIt appears that the problems are one-third due to bum engineering.... The addition of so many systems to the A-12 has greatly complicated the problems, but we did solve the overall problem.\n\nThese improvements in on-site management got the project back on schedule.\n\nBy 20 November 1965, the final validation flights for OXCART deployment were finished. During these tests, the OXCART achieved a maximum speed of Mach 3.29, an altitude of 90,000 feet, and sustained flight time above Mach 3.2 of 74 minutes. The maximum endurance test lasted six hours and 20 minutes. On 22 November, Kelly Johnson wrote to Brig. Gen. Jack C. Ledford, head of the Office of Special Activities, stating, \"The time has come when the bird should leave its nest.\"\n\nThree years and seven months after its first flight in April 1962, the OXCART was ready for operational use. It was now time to find work for the most advanced aircraft ever conceived and built.\n\nDISCUSSIONS ON THE OXCART'S FUTURE EMPLOYMENT\n\nAlthough the OXCART had been designed to replace the U-2 as a strategic reconnaissance aircraft to fly over the Soviet Union, this use had become doubtful long before the OXCART was ready for operational use. The U-2 Affair of 1960 made Presidents very reluctant to consider overflights of the Soviet Union. Indeed, Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy had both stated publicly that the United States would not conduct such overflights. In July 1962, Secretary of"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":310,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":311,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n298\n\nA-12s at Area 51\n\nDefense McNamara told DCI McCone that he doubted that the OXCART would ever be used and suggested that improvements in satellite reconnaissance would very likely eliminate the need for the expensive OXCART program. Strongly disagreeing, McCone told McNamara that he had every intention of using OXCART aircraft to fly over the Soviet Union.\n\nMcCone raised this issue with President Kennedy in April 1963, at a time when the nation's photosatellites were experiencing a great number of failures and the intelligence community was clamoring for better photography to confirm or disprove allegations of the existence of an antiballistic missile system at Leningrad. Unconvinced by McCone's arguments for OXCART overflights, President Kennedy expressed the hope that some means might be devised for improving satellite imagery instead.\n\n\"John A. McCone, Memorandum for the Record. \"Summary of meeting with Secretary McNamara and Secretary Gilpatric, General Carter and Mr. McCone on 5 July 1962.\" 6 July 1962, DCI records (S); McCone, Memorandum for the File, \"Meeting with the President—5:30—15 Apr 1963 in Palm Beach, Florida.\" DCI records (S)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":312,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n299\n\nAlthough overflights of the Soviet Union appeared to be out of the question, the OXCART's eventual employment elsewhere in the world remained a strong possibility, particularly after the Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962 demonstrated the continuing need for manned strategic reconnaissance aircraft. Since satellites had not been able to supply the kinds of coverage needed, U-2s had carried out numerous overflights of Cuba. Nevertheless, the U-2 remained vulnerable to surface-to-air missiles (as had once again been demonstrated by the downing of a SAC U-2 during the Missile Crisis), and project headquarters had even briefly considered sending the A-12 over Cuba in October 1962, even though the aircraft still lacked the required J58 engines and would have had to use much less powerful ones. After the Missile Crisis ended, Air Force U-2s continued to photograph Cuba under a tacit superpower understanding that such monitoring of the withdrawal of the missiles would proceed without interference. But the possibility of future Soviet or Cuban action against the U-2s remained, raising the dismaying prospect that the United States would not be able to tell if the Soviet Union was reintroducing ballistic missiles into Cuba.\n\nSuch fears became acute in the summer of 1964 after Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev told foreign visitors such as columnist Drew Pearson, former Senator William Benton, and Danish Prime Minister Jens Otto Krag that, once the US elections had been held in November, U-2s flying over Cuba would be shot down. Project headquarters therefore began preparing contingency plans (Project SKYLARK) for the possible employment of OXCART over Cuba, even though the new aircraft was not yet ready for operations. On 5 August 1964, the Acting DCI, Gen. Marshall S. Carter, ordered the project staff to achieve emergency operational readiness of the OXCART by 5 November 1964, in case Premier Khrushchev actually carried out his threat to shoot down U-2s.\n\nTo meet this deadline, the Office of Special Activities organized a detachment of five pilots and ground crews to conduct flights to validate camera performance and qualify pilots for Mach 2.8 operations. Simulating Cuban missions during training flights, the detachment\n\nOn 23 October 1962 Johnson noted in his \"Archangel log\": that the performance of an A-12 with J75 engines (as suggested by project headquarters for possible use over Cuba) would be \"hardly spectacular.\"\n\nJohnson, \"Archangel log,\" 17 August 1964; Minnich, \"OXCART Story,\" p. 19 (S); OSA History, chap. 20, p. 81 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":313,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n300\n\ndemonstrated its ability to conduct overflights of Cuba by the 5 November deadline, which passed without any hostile action by the Soviets or Cubans. The detachment then worked to develop the capability for sustained operations with its five aircraft. All these preparations were valuable training for the OXCART program, even though the SKYLARK contingency plan was never put into effect. Since U-2s continued to satisfy collection requirements for Cuba, the A-12s were reserved for more critical situations.\n\nWhen the Agency declared that OXCART had achieved emergency operational status on 5 November 1964, the aircraft was still not prepared for electronic warfare, as only one of the several planned electronic countermeasure devices had been installed. Nevertheless, a senior government panel decided that the OXCART could conduct initial overflights of Cuba without a full complement of warning and jamming devices, should the need for such missions arise.\n\nOne reason for the delay in completing OXCART's electronic warfare preparations was the Air Force's concern that OXCART use of existing ECM devices could, in the event of the loss of an OXCART over hostile territory, compromise the ECM equipment used by Air Force bombers and fighters. Even if OXCART's ECM devices were merely similar to military ECM systems, the Air Force still worried that their use would give the Soviets an opportunity to work out countermeasures.\n\nSuch concerns led the Agency to an entirely different approach to antiradar efforts in Project KEMPSTER. This project attempted to develop electron guns that could be mounted on the OXCART to generate an ion cloud in front of the plane that would reduce its radar cross section. Although this project proved unsuccessful, the CIA also developed a number of more conventional ECM devices for use in the OXCART.\n\nAs the OXCART's performance and equipment continued to improve, there was renewed consideration of deploying the aircraft overseas, particularly in Asia, where US military activity was increasing. On 18 March 1965, DCI McCone, Secretary of Defense McNamara, and Deputy Secretary of Defense Vance discussed the\n\nOSA History, chap. 20, pp. 149-151 (TS Codeword); Notes on the OXCART project by John Parangosky, OSA records (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":314,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n301\n\ngrowing hazards confronting aerial reconnaissance of the People's Republic of China. In three years the Agency had lost four U-2s over China, and the Air Force had lost numerous reconnaissance drones. The three men agreed to go ahead with all the preparatory steps needed for the OXCART to operate over China so that it would be ready in case the President decided to authorize such missions.\n\nProject BLACK SHIELD, the plan for Far East operations, called for OXCART aircraft to be based at Kadena airbase on Okinawa. In the first phase, three planes would be flown to Okinawa for 60-day periods, twice a year, an operation which would involve about 225 personnel. Later there would be a permanent detachment at Kadena. In preparation for the possibility of such operations, the Defense Department spent $3.7 million to provide support facilities and real-time secure communications on the island by early autumn 1965.\n\nIn the summer of 1965, after the United States had begun introducing large numbers of troops into South Vietnam, Southeast Asia became another possible target for the OXCART. Because the continued use of U-2s for reconnaissance missions over North Vietnam was threatened by the deployment of Soviet-made surface-to-air missiles, McNamara asked the CIA on 3 June 1965 whether it would be possible to substitute OXCART aircraft for U-2s. The new DCI, Adm. William F. Raborn, replied that the OXCART could operate over Vietnam as soon as it had passed its final operational readiness tests.\n\nFormal consideration of proposed OXCART missions involved the same approval process that was used for U-2 overflights. In late November 1965, after the OXCART had passed its final validation tests, the 303 Committee met to consider a proposal to deploy the OXCART to Okinawa to overfly Southeast Asia and China. Although the committee did not approve deployment, it ordered the development and maintenance of a quick-reaction capability, ready to deploy to Okinawa within 21 days after notification.\n\nThere the matter remained for more than a year. During the first half of 1966, DCI Raborn raised the issue of deploying the OXCART to Okinawa at five separate 303 Committee meetings but failed to win\n\nOSA History, chap. 20, pp. 90-91 (TS Codeword).\n\nMinnich, \"OXCART Story,\" p. 21 (S)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":315,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n302\n\nsufficient support. The JCS and the PFIAB supported the CIA's advocacy of OXCART deployment. Top State and Defense Department officials, however, thought that the political risks of basing the aircraft in Okinawa—which would almost certainly disclose it to the Japanese—outweighed any gains from the intelligence the OXCART might gather. On 12 August 1966, the divergent views were presented to President Johnson, who upheld the 303 Committee's majority opinion against deployment for the time being.\n\nThe CIA then proposed an OXCART overflight of Cuba in order to test the aircraft's ECM systems in a hostile environment. On 15 September the 303 Committee considered and rejected this idea on the grounds that sending OXCART over Cuba \"would disturb the existing calm prevailing in that area of our foreign affairs.\"\n\nWith operational missions still ruled out, proficiency training remained the main order of business. This led to improvements in mission plans and flight tactics that enabled the detachment to reduce the time required to deploy to Okinawa from 21 days to 15. Records continued to fall to the OXCART. On 21 December 1966, a Lockheed test pilot flew an A-12 for 16,408 kilometers over the continental United States in slightly more than six hours, for an average speed of 2,670 kilometers per hour (which included in-flight refueling at speeds as low as 970 kilometers per hour). This flight set a record for speed and distance unapproachable by any other aircraft.\n\nTwo weeks later, on 5 January 1967, an A-12 crashed after a fuel gauge malfunctioned and the aircraft ran out of fuel short of the runway. Pilot Walter Ray ejected but was killed when he could not become separated from the ejection seat. To preserve the secrecy of the OXCART program, the Air Force informed the press that an SR-71 was missing and presumed down in Nevada. This loss, like the three preceding crashes, did not result from difficulties caused by high-speed, high-temperature flight but from traditional problems inherent in any new aircraft.\n\nProposals for OXCART operations continued to surface, and in May 1967 the CIA forwarded a detailed request to the 303 Committee to use the OXCART to collect strategic intelligence about a new\n\nMinnich, \"OXCART Story,\" p. 23 (S); OSA History, chap. 20, pp. 110-111 (TS Codeword).\n\nOSA History, chap. 20, p. 112 (TS Codeword).\n\nMinnich, \"OXCART Story,\" p. 24 (S)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":316,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Soviet missile system. As early as 1962, the intelligence community began to be concerned about the actual purpose of new missile installations that first appeared near Tallinn, Estonia, and soon spread along the northwestern quadrant of the Soviet Union. Attempts to photograph the sites using reconnaissance satellites had been frustrated by the prevailing cloud cover in the region. Because of the lack of accurate information about the missile sites, there was a wide divergence of views within the intelligence community about their purpose. These views ranged from the CIA's belief that the installations contained long-range, surface-to-air missiles designed to counter strategic bombers, to the Air Force's contention that Tallinn sites represented a deployed antiballistic missile system.\n\nPhotointerpreters insisted that imagery with a resolution of 12 to 18 inches was necessary to determine missile size, antenna pattern, and configuration of the engagement radars associated with the system. Electronic intelligence (ELINT) analysts also needed data about the Tallinn radars, but there were no collection sites that could monitor the Tallinn emanations when the radars were being tested. Moreover, the Soviets never operated the radars in the tracking and lockon modes, a fact that prevented analysts from knowing the frequencies or any other performance characteristics of the radar.\n\nTo settle the question of the purpose of the Tallinn installations, Office of Special Activities planners proposed a mission that would use the high resolution of the OXCART's camera along with the U-2's sophisticated ELINT-collection equipment. This project's unclassified name was Project SCOPE LOGIC; its classified title was Operation UPWIND.\n\nThe proposed project involved launching an A-12 OXCART aircraft from Area 51 in Nevada and flying it to a Baltic Sea rendezvous with a Project IDEALIST U-2 flying from an RAF facility in Great Britain. The OXCART would fly north of Norway and then turn south along the Soviet-Finnish border. Shortly before Leningrad, the A-12 would head west-southwest down the Baltic Sea, skirting the coasts of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and East Germany before heading west to return to Area 51. The entire flight would cover 11,000 nautical miles, take eight hours and 38 minutes, and require four aerial refuelings.\n\nAlthough the A-12 would not violate Soviet airspace during this dash, it would appear to Soviet radar network operators to be headed for an overflight penetration in the vicinity of Leningrad. It was"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":317,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"hoped that the A-12's passage would provoke Soviet air defense personnel to activate the Tallinn system radars in order to track the swift OXCART aircraft. As the A-12 made its dash down the Baltic, its Type-I camera would be filming the entire south coast. If Agency analysts were correct in their assumption that the Tallinn system was designed to counter high-altitude aircraft at long ranges, then the OXCART would be in jeopardy during this dash down the Baltic. Nevertheless, Agency weapons experts believed that the A-12 aircraft's speed and suite of electronic countermeasures would keep it safe from the standard Soviet surface-to-air missile installations.\n\nWhile the A-12 was conducting its high-speed dash along the Baltic coast of Eastern Europe, the U-2 would be flying farther out to sea, safely beyond the range of all Soviet SAMs. The U-2 would be able to collect the Tallinn radar installation's ELINT emanations.\n\nAgency and Defense Department officials supported the proposed mission, but Secretary of State Dean Rusk strongly opposed it and the 303 Committee never forwarded the proposal to President Johnson.59 The Tallinn radar installation remained of great interest to the intelligence community, and in the late 1960s the CIA attempted to develop a small, unmanned reconnaissance aircraft that could photograph Tallinn and other coastal areas. The project (AQUILINE) was abandoned in 1971 (see appendix E).\n\nFIRST A-12 DEPLOYMENT: OPERATION BLACK SHIELD\n\nAlthough the Tallinn mission was still being considered in May 1967, another possible employment for the OXCART came under discussion. This time the proposal was for OXCART to collect tactical rather than strategic intelligence. The cause was apprehension in Washington about the possible undetected introduction of surface-to-surface missiles into North Vietnam. When President Johnson asked for a proposal on the matter, the CIA suggested that the OXCART be used. While the State and Defense Departments were still examining the proposal's political risks, DCI Richard Helms\n\n59 Memorandum for DDCI R. L. Taylor from C. E. Duckett, DDS&T, \"Collection of Photo and ELINT Data on Tallinn Sites Utilizing the OXCART and the U-2,\" 4 May 1967, DS&T records (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":318,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"raised the issue at President Johnson's \"Tuesday lunch\" on 16 May. Helms got the President's approval, and the CIA put the BLACK SHIELD plan to deploy the OXCART to the Far East into effect later that same day.60\n\nThe airlift of personnel and equipment to Kadena began on 17 May 1967, and on 22 May the first A-12 flew nonstop from Area 51 to Kadena in six hours and six minutes. A second aircraft arrived on 24 May. The third A-12 left on 26 May, but the pilot had trouble with the inertial navigation system and communications near Wake Island. He made a precautionary landing at Wake, where a pre-positioned emergency recovery team was located. The problem was corrected and the aircraft continued its flight to Kadena on the following day.\n\nBefore the start of the operation, the CIA briefed a number of key US and Allied officials on the operation. Included were the US Ambassadors and Chiefs of Station in the Philippines, Formosa, Thailand, South Vietnam [REDACTED] he High Commissioner and Chief of Station on Okinawa; the Prime Minister [REDACTED] Thailand; the President and Defense Minister of the Republic of China; and the Air Force chiefs of Thailand and the Republic of China. All of these officials favored the operation.\n\nBy 29 May 1967, 13 days after President Johnson's approval, BLACK SHIELD was ready to fly an operational mission. On 30 May, the detachment was alerted for a mission on the following day. As the takeoff time approached, Kadena was being deluged by rain, but, since weather over the target area was clear, flight preparations continued. The OXCART, which had never operated in heavy rain, taxied to the runway and took off.\n\nThis first BLACK SHIELD mission flew one flight path over North Vietnam and another over the demilitarized zone (DMZ). The mission was flown at Mach 3.1 and 80,000 feet and lasted three hours and 39 minutes. While over North Vietnam, the A-12 photographed 70 of the 190 known surface-to-air missile sites and nine other priority targets. The A-12's ECM equipment did not detect any radar signals during the mission, which indicated that the flight had gone completely unnoticed by both the Chinese and North Vietnamese.\n\n60 Minnich, \"OXCART Story,\" p. 25 (S)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":319,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"During the next six weeks, there were alerts for 15 BLACK SHIELD missions, seven of which were actually flown. Only four detected hostile radar signals. By mid-July 1967, the BLACK SHIELD missions had provided sufficient evidence for analysts to conclude that no surface-to-surface missiles had been deployed in North Vietnam.61\n\nProject Headquarters in Langley planned and directed all operational BLACK SHIELD missions. To ensure secure communications between Headquarters and Kadena, [REDACTED]\n\nA typical mission over North Vietnam required refueling south of Okinawa, shortly after takeoff. After the planned photographic passes, the aircraft withdrew for a second aerial refueling in the Thailand area before returning to Kadena. So great was the plane's speed that it spent only 12.5 minutes over Vietnam during a \"single-pass\" mission, and 21.5 minutes during a \"two-pass\" mission. Because of its wide 86-mile turning radius, the plane occasionally crossed into Chinese airspace when getting into position for a second pass.\n\nAfter the aircraft landed, the camera film was removed and sent by special plane to processing facilities in the United States. By late summer, however, an Air Force photo laboratory in Japan began doing the processing in order to place the photointelligence in the hands of US commanders in Vietnam within 24 hours of a mission's completion.\n\nBLACK SHIELD activity continued unabated during the second half of 1967. From 16 August to 31 December 1967, 26 missions were alerted and 15 were flown. On 17 September one SAM site tracked the vehicle with its acquisition radar but was unsuccessful with its FAN SONG guidance radar. It was not until 28 October that a North Vietnamese SAM site launched a missile at the OXCART. Mission photography documented the event with photographs of missile smoke above the SAM firing site and pictures of the missile and its contrail. Electronic countermeasures equipment aboard the OXCART performed well, and the missile did not endanger the aircraft.\n\n61 Minnich, \"OXCART Story,\" pp. 25-28 (S); OSA History, chap. 20, pp. 119-124, annex 152 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":320,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The only time the enemy came close to downing an OXCART was on 30 October 1967. During his first pass over North Vietnam, pilot Dennis Sullivan detected radar tracking. Two SAM sites prepared to launch missiles but neither did. During Sullivan's second pass the North Vietnamese fired at least six missiles at the OXCART, each confirmed by vapor trails on mission photography. The pilot saw these vapor trails and witnessed three missile detonations near but behind the A-12, which was traveling at Mach 3.1 at about 84,000 feet. Postflight inspection of the aircraft revealed that a piece of metal had penetrated the underside of the right wing, passed through three layers of titanium, and lodged against a support structure of the wing tank. The fragment was not a warhead pellet but probably debris from one of the missile detonations that the pilot observed.62\n\nBLACK SHIELD missions continued during the first three months of 1968, with four missions flown over North Vietnam out of 14 alerts. The last OXCART overflight of Vietnam took place on 8 March 1968. During this same three-month period, the OXCART made its first overflight of North Korea after the USS Pueblo was seized on 23 January 1968. The goal of this mission was to discover whether the North Koreans were preparing any large-scale hostile move in the wake of this incident. When NPIC photointerpreters examined OXCART photography taken on 26 January, they found the missing USS Pueblo in Wonsan harbor.\n\nSecretary of State Dean Rusk was reluctant to endorse a second mission over North Korea for fear of diplomatic repercussions should the aircraft come down in hostile territory. The Secretary was assured that the plane could transit North Korea in seven minutes and was unlikely to land in either North Korea or China. The 303 Committee then endorsed a second mission over North Korea, which was flown on 19 February. A third and final overflight of North Korea on 8 May 1968 proved to be the last operational deployment of the OXCART aircraft.63\n\nTHE END OF THE OXCART PROGRAM\n\nAlmost a decade had elapsed between the time when the concept for the OXCART aircraft was first examined and the first A-12 was operationally deployed. Now after only 29 operational missions, the most"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":321,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n308\n\nUSS Pueblo in Wonsan Harbor\n\nadvanced aircraft ever built was to be put out to pasture. The aban-\ndonment of the OXCART did not result from any shortcomings of the\naircraft; the causes lay in fiscal pressures and competition between\nthe reconnaissance programs of the CIA and the Air Force.\n\nThroughout the OXCART program, the Air Force had been ex-\nceedingly helpful; it gave financial support, conducted the refueling\nprogram, provided operational facilities at Kadena, and airlifted\nOXCART personnel and supplies to Okinawa for the Vietnam and\nKorean operations. Air Force orders for variants of the CIA's A-12—\nthe YF-12A interceptor and the SR-71 reconnaissance aircraft—had\nhelped lower development and procurement costs for the OXCART.\nNevertheless, once the Air Force had built up its own fleet of recon-\nnaissance aircraft, budgetary experts began to criticize the existence\nof two expensive fleets of similar aircraft.\n\nIn November 1965, the very month that the A-12 had been de-\nclared operational, the Bureau of the Budget circulated a memoran-\ndum that expressed concern about the costs of the A-12 and SR-71\nprograms. It questioned both the total number of planes required for\nthe combined fleets, and the necessity for a separate CIA fleet. The\nmemorandum recommended phasing out the A-12 program by\nSeptember 1966 and stopping any further procurement of the SR-71"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":322,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n309\n\nmodels. The Secretary of Defense rejected this recommendation, pre-\nsumably because the SR-71 would not be operational by September\n1966.\n\nIn July 1966, at the Bureau of the Budget's suggestion, a study\ngroup was established to look for ways to reduce the cost of the\nOXCART and SR-71 programs. The study group consisted of C. W.\nFischer from the Bureau of the Budget, Herbert Bennington from the\nDepartment of Defense, and John Parangosky from CIA. The study\ngroup listed three possible courses of action: maintain both fleets,\nmothball the A-12s but share the SR-71s between CIA and the Air\nForce, or mothball the A-12s and assign all missions to Air Force\nSR-71s. On 12 December 1966, four high-level officials met to con-\nsider these alternatives. Over the objections of DCI Helms, the other\nthree officials—Deputy Secretary of Defense Cyrus Vance, Bureau of\nthe Budget Director Charles L. Schultze, and Presidential Scientific\nAdviser Donald F. Hornig—decided to terminate the OXCART fleet.\nConcerned that this recommendation would strip the CIA of its super-\nsonic reconnaissance capability, Helms then asked that the SR-71\nfleet be shared between CIA and the Air Force.\n\nFour days later, Schultze handed Helms a draft memorandum for\nthe President requesting a decision either to share the SR-71 fleet be-\ntween CIA and the Air Force or to terminate the CIA capability en-\ntirely. Having just received new information indicating that the\nSR-71's performance was inferior to that of the A-12, Helms asked\nfor another meeting to review this data. His concern was that the\nSR-71 could not match the photographic coverage that the A-12 could\nprovide. Only one of the SR-71's three camera systems was working\nanywhere near the original specifications, and that was its Operational\nObjective system which could only photograph a swath 28 miles wide\nwith a resolution of 28 to 30 inches. The A-12's Type-I P-E camera\ncould photograph a swath 72 miles wide with a nadir resolution of 12\nto 18 inches and oblique resolution of 54 inches. Thus, the A-12's\ncamera covered three times as much territory as the SR-71's camera\nand did so with better resolution. In addition, the A-12 could fly\n2,000 to 5,000 feet higher than the SR-71 and was also faster, with a\nmaximum speed of Mach 3.1 compared with the SR-71's Mach 3.0."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":323,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n310\n\nIn spite of Helms's request and the strength of his arguments, the\nBureau of the Budget memorandum was submitted to President\nJohnson. On 28 December 1966, the President approved the termina-\ntion of the OXCART program by 1 January 1968.\n\nThis decision meant that CIA had to develop a schedule for an\norderly phaseout of the A-12. This activity was known as Project\nSCOPE COTTON. Project headquarters informed Deputy Defense\nSecretary Vance on 10 January 1967 that the A-12s would gradually\nbe placed in storage, with the process to be completed by the end of\nJanuary 1968. In May 1967, Vance directed that SR-71s would as-\nsume responsibility for Cuban overflights by 1 July 1967 and would\nadd responsibility for overflights of Southeast Asia by 1 December\n1967. Until these capabilities were developed, OXCART was to re-\nmain able to conduct assignments on a 15-day notice for Southeast\nAsia and a seven-day notice for Cuba.\n\nAll these arrangements were made before the OXCART had con-\nducted a single operational mission, which did not occur until 31 May\n1967. In the months that followed the initiation of operations in Asia,\nthe OXCART demonstrated its exceptional technical capabilities.\nSoon some high-level Presidential advisers and Congressional leaders\nbegan to question the decision to phase out OXCART, and the issue\nwas reopened.\n\nThe CIA contended that the A-12 was the better craft because it\nflew higher, faster, and had superior cameras. The Air Force main-\ntained that its two-seat SR-71 had a better suite of sensors, with three\ndifferent cameras (area search, spotting, and mapping), infrared de-\ntectors, side-looking aerial radar, and ELINT-collection gear. In an ef-\nfort to resolve this argument, the two aircraft were pitted against each\nother in a flyoff codenamed NICE GIRL. On 3 November 1967, an\nA-12 and an SR-71 flew identical flight paths, separated in time by\none hour, from north to south roughly above the Mississippi River.\nThe data collected during these missions were evaluated by repre-\nsentatives of the CIA, DIA, and other Defense Department intelli-\ngence organizations.\n\nThe results proved inconclusive. Both photographic systems pro-\nvided imagery of sufficient quality for analysis. The A-12 Type-I\ncamera's 72-mile swath width and 5,000-foot film supply were supe-\nrior to the SR-71 Operational Objective camera's 28-mile swath and"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":324,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n311\n\n3,300-foot film supply. On the other hand, the SR-71's infrared,\nside-looking aerial radar, and ELINT/COMINT equipment provided\nsome unique intelligence not available from the A-12. Air Force plan-\nners admitted, however, that some of this equipment would have to be\nsacrificed in order to provide the SR-71 with ECM gear.\n\nAlthough the flyoff had not settled the question of which aircraft\nwas superior, the OXCART did win a temporary reprieve in late\nNovember 1967. The Johnson administration decided to keep both\nfleets for the time being, particularly because the OXCART was actu-\nally flying missions over North Vietnam. With expenditures for the\nVietnam war rising steadily, the question of reducing the costs of\ncompeting reconnaissance programs was bound to surface again. In\nthe spring of 1968, there was yet another study of the OXCART and\nSR-71 programs. On 16 May 1968, the new Secretary of Defense,\nClark Clifford, reaffirmed the original decision to terminate the\nOXCART program and store the aircraft. President Johnson con-\nfirmed this decision on 21 May.\n\nProject headquarters selected 8 June 1968 as the earliest possi-\nble date for phasing out all OXCART aircraft. Those A-12s already\nat the Nevada site were placed in storage, and the aircraft on\nOkinawa were scheduled to return by 8 June. Unfortunately, tragedy\nstruck before this redeployment took place. On 4 June 1968 during a\ntest flight from Kadena to check out a new engine, an A-12 disap-\npeared 520 miles east of Manila. Search and rescue missions found\nno trace of the plane or its pilot, Jack W. Weeks. Several days later\nthe remaining two A-12s left Okinawa to join the other eight\nOXCART aircraft in storage at Palmdale, California. Because the\nA-12s were smaller than either of the Air Force's versions, the only\nparts that could be salvaged for Air Force use were the J58 engines.\nThe OXCART's outstanding Perkin-Elmer camera cannot be used in\nthe SR-71 because the two-seater Air Force aircraft has a smaller\ncamera compartment than that of the A-12. Constructed from one of\nthe most durable metals known to man but unable to fly for want of\nengines, the OXCART aircraft are fated to remain inactive at\nPalmdale for many, many years."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":325,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 6\n312\n\nInitial storage arrangements for\nA-12s at Palmdale\n\nPOSSIBLE SUCCESSORS TO THE OXCART\n\nThe OXCART was the last high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft pro-\nduced for the CIA, although the Office of Special Activities did\nbriefly consider several possible successors to the OXCART during\nthe mid-1960s. The first of these, known as Project ISINGLASS, was\nprepared by General Dynamics to utilize technology developed for its\nConvair Division's earlier FISH proposal and its new F-111 fighter in\norder to create an aircraft capable of Mach 4-5 at 100,000 feet.\nGeneral Dynamics completed its feasibility study in the fall of 1964,\nand OSA took no further action because the proposed aircraft would\nstill be vulnerable to existing Soviet countermeasures. In 1965 a more\nambitious design from McDonnell Aircraft came under consideration\nas Project RHEINBERRY (although some of the work seems to have\ncome under the ISINGLASS designation as well). This proposal fea-\ntured a rocket-powered aircraft that would be launched from a B-52\nmother ship and ultimately reach speeds as high as Mach 20 and alti-\ntudes of up to 200,000 feet. Because building this aircraft would have\ninvolved tremendous technical challenges and correspondingly high\ncosts, the Agency was not willing to embark on such a program at a\ntime when the main emphasis in overhead reconnaissance had shifted\nfrom aircraft to satellites. As a result, when the OXCART program\nended in the summer of 1968, no more advanced successor was wait-\ning in the wings—only the veteran U-2."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":326,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SUMMARY OF THE OXCART PROGRAM\n\nIntended to replace the U-2 as a collector of strategic intelligence, the OXCART was never used for this purpose. Its brief deployment was strictly for obtaining tactical intelligence and its photographic product contributed very little to the Agency's strategic intelligence mission. By the time OXCART became operational, photosatellite systems had filled the role originally conceived for it. The most advanced aircraft of the 20th century had become an anachronism before it was ever used operationally.\n\nThe OXCART did not even outlast the U-2, the aircraft it was supposed to replace. The OXCART lacked the quick-response capability of the smaller craft: a U-2 unit could be activated overnight, and within a week it could deploy abroad, fly sorties, and return to home base. The OXCART planes required precise logistic planning for fuel and emergency landing fields, and their inertial guidance systems needed several days for programming and stabilization. Aerial tankers had to be deployed in advance along an OXCART's flight route and be provisioned with the highly specialized fuel used by the J58 engines. All of this required a great deal of time and the effort of several hundred people. A U-2 mission could be planned and flown with a third fewer personnel.\n\nAlthough the OXCART program created a strategic reconnaissance aircraft with unprecedented speed, range, and altitude, the program's most important contributions lay in other areas: aerodynamic design, high-impact plastics, engine performance, cameras, electronic countermeasures, pilot life-support systems, antiradar devices, use of nonmetallic materials for major aircraft assemblies, and improvements in milling, machining, and shaping titanium. In all of these areas, the OXCART pushed back the frontiers of aerospace technology and helped lay the foundation for future \"stealth\" research.\n\n\"On 26 January 1967 Kelly Johnson noted in his \"Archangel log\":\nI think back to 1959, before we started this airplane, to discussions with Dick Bissell where we seriously considered the problem of whether there would be one more round of aircraft before the satellites took over. We jointly agreed there would be just one round, and not two. That seems to have been a very accurate evaluation, as it seems that 30 SR-71's give us enough overflight reconnaissance capability and we don't need the additional 10 Oxcart aircraft."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":327,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"314\n\n— Blank —"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":328,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 7\n315\n\nConclusion\n\nU-2 OVERFLIGHTS OF THE SOVIET UNION\n\nBefore the first U-2 overflights in the summer of 1956, project managers believed that their aircraft could fly virtually undetected over the Soviet Union. They did not expect this advantage to last very long, however, because they also expected the Soviets to develop effective countermeasures against the U-2 within 12 to 18 months. Recognizing that time was against them, the U-2 project managers planned a large number of missions to obtain complete coverage of the Soviet Union as quickly as possible. At this time, the U-2 program focused solely on the collection of strategic intelligence.\n\nOnce operations began, however, project managers found themselves operating under severe constraints. Contrary to the CIA's expectations, the U-2 could not fly undetected. Its overflights led to Soviet diplomatic protests and numerous attempts at interception. Not wishing to aggravate the Soviet Union during periods of tension or to harm relations during more favorable intervals, President Eisenhower placed strict limits on overflights, personally authorizing each one and greatly limiting their number. Yet, the President never went so far as to eliminate the overflight program. As Commander in Chief, he valued the intelligence that the U-2 overflights collected, especially at times when the press and Congress alleged that the United States was falling behind the Soviet Union militarily, first in bombers and then in missiles. As a result of the President's ambivalence toward overflights, the years 1956-60 were marked by long periods during which no overflights occurred, followed by brief bursts of activity."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":329,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 7\n316\n\nThe low level of overflight activity did not prevent the U-2 from accomplishing a lot in the four years it flew over the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Twenty-four U-2 missions made deep penetration overflights of the Soviet Union: six by Detachment A from Germany, three by Detachment C from the Far East and Alaska, and 15 by Detachment B from Turkey and Pakistan, including the unsuccessful Powers mission.\n\nThe amount of information these missions gathered was impressive. By the summer of 1960, the U-2 project had developed more than 1,285,000 feet of film—a strip almost 250 miles long. The U-2s covered more than 1,300,000 square miles of the Soviet Union, approximately 15 percent of its total area. Information from U-2 photographs was used to prepare 5,425 separate photoanalytical reports.\n\nNumbers alone cannot describe the importance of the U-2 overflight project. In a 28 May 1960 memorandum, after Powers was shot down, DCI Allen W. Dulles described the program's accomplishments: \"Five years ago, before the beginning of the U-2 program, ... half knowledge of the Soviet Union and uncertainty of its true power position posed tremendous problems for the United States. We were faced with the constant risk of exposing ourselves to enemy attack or of needlessly expending a great deal of money and effort on misdirected military preparations of our own.\" Dulles went on to describe the U-2's contribution in gathering information on four critical aspects of the Soviet Union's power position: its bomber force, its missile force, its atomic energy program, and its air defense system.\n\nThe first major contribution of intelligence collected from U-2 overflights was the exposure of the \"bomber gap\" as a myth. Contrary to the US Air Force's claims, the Soviet Union was not building a large force of long-range bombers. Armed with information from U-2 overflights, President Eisenhower was able to resist pressure to build a large US bomber fleet to meet a nonexistent Soviet threat.\n\nDCI Allen W. Dulles, Memorandum for Brig. Gen. Andrew J. Goodpaster, \"Statistics Relating to the U-2 Program,\" 19 August 1960, Operation MUDLARK files, OSA records, job 74-B-605, box 2 (TS Codeword).\n\nThe original draft of this document was probably written by James Q. Reber. It was then revised by DCI Dulles, \"Accomplishments of the U-2 Program,\" 27 May 1960, Operation MUDLARK files, OSA records, job 74-B-605, box 2 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":330,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chapter 7\n317\n\nThe \"bomber-gap\" controversy was soon followed by a \"missile-gap\" controversy, provoked by an extensive Soviet propaganda campaign that claimed a substantial Soviet lead in developing and deploying ICBMs. U-2 missions searched huge stretches of the Soviet Union along the rail network, looking for ICBMs deployed outside the known missile testing facilities. These missions enabled the CIA to conclude, as Dulles explained to Congress in May 1960, that \"the Soviet ICBM program has not been and is not now a crash program; instead, it is an orderly, well-planned, high-priority program aimed at achieving an early ICBM operational capability.\" As with the controversy over Soviet bomber strength, information from U-2 photography enabled President Eisenhower to resist pressure to accelerate the US missile deployment program by building obsolescent liquid-fueled missiles rather than waiting to complete the development of more reliable solid-fueled missiles.\n\nU-2 missions also gathered considerable data on the Soviet Union's atomic energy program, including the production of fissionable materials, weapons development and testing activities, and the location and size of nuclear weapons stockpile sites. Such U-2 photography also revealed no evidence that the Soviet Union had violated the nuclear testing moratorium.\n\nOne of the greatest contributions of the U-2 program was to increase the capabilities of the US deterrent force. Before the U-2 overflights, most target information was based on obsolete materials dating back to World War II or shortly thereafter. With the assistance of U-2 photography, the Defense Department could allocate weapons and crews more efficiently and identify many new targets. U-2 photos also proved invaluable in determining the precise location of targets. One further contribution to the capabilities of the US deterrent force was the information that U-2s collected on the Soviet air defense system. U-2 photography located Soviet fighter airfields and gained intelligence on new fighter models. Special electronic intercept and recording equipment carried on many U-2 missions enabled the CIA to analyze the technical characteristics, operational techniques, and radar order of battle of the Soviet Union's electronic defenses. This information was vital both for planning the routes for US deterrent forces and for developing electronic countermeasures.\n\nIbid., p. 3 (TS Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":331,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 7\n318\n\nThe U-2 program not only provided information on individual Soviet weapons systems, but also helped analysts assess basic Soviet intentions, particularly during crisis situations, as Dulles wrote in May 1960:\n\nWhenever the international situation becomes tense because of a problem in some particular area, we are concerned whether the situation might get beyond control—that someone on the other side might suddenly and irrationally unleash big war. . . . Our knowledge of Soviet military preparations, however, resulting from the overflight program, has given us an ability to discount or call the bluffs of the Soviets with confidence. We have been able to conclude that Soviet statements were more rhetorical than threatening and that our courses of action could be carried through without serious risk of war and without Soviet interference.⁴\n\nDulles closed his report on the U-2's accomplishments by putting the program in perspective as part of the entire national intelligence effort, noting that \"in terms of reliability, of precision, of access to otherwise inaccessible installations, its contribution has been unique. And in the opinion of the military, of the scientists and of the senior officials responsible for our national security it has been, to put it simply, invaluable.\"\n\nThe impact of the U-2 overflights on international relations is harder to measure. On the one hand, the intelligence they gathered was a major factor in keeping the United States from beginning a costly and destabilizing arms race in the late 1950s and early 1960s by showing that the Soviet Union was not engaged in major buildups of strategic bombers and intercontinental ballistic missiles. On the other hand, violations of Soviet airspace by U-2s strained relations with Moscow at times and led to the collapse of the 1960 summit meeting. On balance, however, the impact of the U-2 on superpower relations was positive. Without the intelligence gathered by the U-2, the Soviet Union's strategic military capabilities would have remained a mystery, making it very difficult for the President to resist pressure from the military, the Congress, and the public to carry out major increases in strategic weapons, which would have poisoned relations with the Soviet Union far more than the small number of overflights did.\n\n⁴ Ibid., pp. 9-10 (TS Codeword).\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":332,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 7\n319\n\nPARTICIPATION OF ALLIES IN THE U-2 PROGRAM\n\nFrom the very beginning of the overflight project, US Allies provided valuable support. Bases in Germany, Turkey, Norway, and Pakistan played a major role in overflights of the Soviet Union. Bases in India, Thailand, Japan, and the Philippines greatly assisted operations in Asia. Two Allies—the United Kingdom and Nationalist China—made an even greater contribution to the U-2 program by providing pilots and conducting overflights. British pilots began flying in late 1958 and conducted two important overflights of the Soviet Union in late 1959 and early 1960. After the end of such missions in May 1960, the need for British participation lessened. RAF pilots henceforth flew only training or ferry missions, although their use for operational missions was considered on several occasions.\n\nThe end of overflights of the Soviet Union reduced the importance of British participation but resulted in the addition of a new source of pilots when the focus of interest for the U-2 in its strategic-intelligence-gathering role shifted to the People's Republic of China. The United States and Nationalist China had been conducting joint reconnaissance projects over the Chinese mainland since the mid-1950s, and in 1961 the CIA equipped the Nationalist Chinese with the latest in reconnaissance aircraft, the U-2. For the next 12 years, Agency U-2s with Nationalist Chinese pilots brought back large quantities of information on the development of Communist China's armed forces, nuclear technology, and economy. Such information was extremely important to US policymakers. Nationalist China paid a high price in lives for its participation in the U-2 program: seven pilots died (five in training accidents and two on overflights), and another three were captured.\n\nU-2s AS COLLECTORS OF TACTICAL INTELLIGENCE\n\nThe low level of mission activity over the project's original target—the Soviet Union—was initially very frustrating for CIA project managers, but the U-2 soon found new missions not originally envisioned for the program. With its strategic-intelligence-collection role often on hold, the U-2 became highly useful as a collector of tactical intelligence during crisis situations.\n\nBeginning with the Suez Crisis of 1956 and continuing with subsequent Middle Eastern wars, a rebellion in Indonesia, Sino-Indian border fighting, and culminating in support to the growing US"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":333,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 7\n320\n\ninvolvement in Indochina, U-2 photography provided accurate and up-to-date intelligence to US policymakers and field commanders, assisting them in crisis management and the planning of military operations. Agency U-2s also assisted in monitoring cease-fire agreements in the Middle East, with operations occurring after an undeclared war in 1970 and the 1973 Middle East war.\n\nBy the time the OXCART became fully operational, manned strategic reconnaissance of the Soviet Union was no longer seriously considered. The political risks were too high, especially since the quality of intelligence from reconnaissance satellites was increasing steadily. Thus, the OXCART's only operational use was for collecting tactical intelligence in the Far East. Like the U-2, the OXCART gathered valuable intelligence during crisis situations. Thus, in January 1968, OXCART photography revealed the location of the USS Pueblo and showed that the North Koreans were not preparing any large-scale military activity in conjunction with the ship's seizure.\n\nADVANCES IN TECHNOLOGY\n\nOne very important byproduct of the CIA's manned reconnaissance program was the many advances in technology that it generated. Thanks to simplified covert procurement arrangements and the lack of detailed and restricting specifications, creative designers such as Kelly Johnson produced state-of-the-art aircraft in record time. The U-2, designed to carry out reconnaissance missions for two years at best, proved so successful that, even after its original area of activity became too dangerous for overflights at the end of four years, the aircraft served the CIA well for another 14 years and still is in service with other government agencies.\n\nThe OXCART is an even better example of the technological advances generated by the CIA's reconnaissance program. Although the OXCART was designed almost 30 years ago and first flown in 1962, its speed and altitude have never been equaled. The development of this aircraft also led to the use of new materials in aircraft construction. Unfortunately, the technological breakthroughs that made the OXCART possible took longer than expected. By the time the aircraft was ready for operations, the missions originally planned for it were not practicable. The tremendous technological achievement represented by the OXCART ultimately led to the aircraft's demise by inspiring the Air Force to purchase its own version of the aircraft. The"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":334,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 7\n321\n\ngovernment could not afford to maintain two such similar reconnaissance programs. The elimination of the Agency's OXCART program did not, however, spell the end of the usefulness of the world's most advanced aircraft; its offspring, the SR-71, is still in service.\n\nIn addition to the aircraft themselves, many other items associated with the reconnaissance program have represented important advances in technology. The flight suits and life-support systems of the U-2 and OXCART pilots were the forerunners of the equipment used in the space program. Camera resolution improved dramatically as the result of cameras and lenses produced for the CIA's reconnaissance program.\n\nCOOPERATION WITH THE AIR FORCE\n\nIn this history, which concentrates on the CIA's involvement in overhead reconnaissance, it is easy to overlook the important role that the US Air Force played in the U-2 and OXCART programs. From the very beginnings of the U-2 program in 1954, the Agency and the Air Force were partners in advancing the state of the art in overhead reconnaissance. Air Force personnel served at all levels of the reconnaissance program, from project headquarters to the testing site and field detachments. The Air Force supplied the U-2's engines, at times diverting them from other high-priority production lines. Perhaps most important of all, the Air Force provided pilots for the U-2s after the Agency's original attempt to recruit a sufficient number of skilled foreign pilots proved unsuccessful. Finally, the day-to-day operations of the U-2s could not have been conducted without the help of Air Force mission planners, weather forecasters, and support personnel in the field detachments. The cooperation between the Agency and the Air Force that began with the U-2 and continued with Project OXCART remains a major feature in US reconnaissance programs today.\n\nIMPACT OF THE OVERHEAD RECONNAISSANCE PROGRAM ON THE CIA\n\nCIA's entry into the world of overhead reconnaissance at the end of 1954 ultimately produced major changes in the Agency. Classical forms of intelligence—the use of covert agents and clandestine operations—gradually lost their primacy to the new scientific and"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":335,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nChapter 7\n322\n\ntechnical means of collection. As soon as the U-2 began flying over the Soviet Union, its photographs became the most important source of intelligence available. The flood of information that the U-2 missions gathered led to a major expansion of the Agency's photointerpretation capabilities, which finally resulted in the creation of the National Photographic Interpretation Center to serve the entire intelligence community.\n\nThe U-2's tremendous success as an intelligence-gathering system led the Agency to search for follow-on systems that could continue to obtain highly reliable information in large quantities. Thus, the CIA sponsored the development of the world's most advanced aircraft—the OXCART—and also pioneered research into photo-satellites. Less than a decade after the U-2 program began, the Agency's new emphasis on technical means of collection had brought about the creation of a new science-oriented directorate, which would ultimately rival in manpower and budget the Agency's other three directorates combined.\n\nThe negative aspect of this new emphasis on technology is exploding costs. The Agency's first strategic reconnaissance aircraft, the U-2, cost less than $1 million apiece. With the U-2's successor, the OXCART, each aircraft cost more than $20 million, and the cost explosion has continued with each new generation of reconnaissance satellites.\n\nPerhaps the greatest significance of the CIA's entry into the world of overhead reconnaissance in December 1954 was the new national policy that it signaled. Although US military aircraft had frequently violated Soviet airspace in the decade after World War II, such shallow-penetration overflights, concentrating primarily on order-of-battle data, had been authorized and controlled by US field commanders, not by the President. In the autumn of 1954, however, President Dwight D. Eisenhower—determined to avoid another Pearl Harbor—authorized the construction of a new aircraft designed solely to fly over the Soviet Union and gather strategic intelligence. Peacetime reconnaissance flights over the territory of a potential enemy power thus became national policy. Moreover, to reduce the danger of conflict, the President entrusted this mission not to the armed forces, but to a civilian agency—the CIA. From that time forward, overhead reconnaissance has been one of the CIA's most important missions.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":336,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"323\n- Blank -"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":337,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"324\n- Blank -"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":338,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nAppendix A\n325\n\nAPPENDIX A\n\nAcronyms\n\nAEC\tAtomic Energy Commission\nAFB\tAir Force Base\nAFDAP\tAir Force office symbol for the Assistant for Development Planning under the Deputy Chief of Staff for Development\nAMD\tAir/Maritime Division\nARC\tAd Hoc Requirements Committee\nARDC\tAir Research and Development Command (USAF)\nASPIC\tAsian Photographic Interpretation Center\nATIC\tAir Technical Intelligence Center (USAF)\nBSAP\tBoston Scientific Advisory Panel\nBUORL\tBoston University Optical Research Laboratory\nCOMINT\tCommunications Intelligence\nCOMIREX\tCommittee on Imagery Requirements and Exploitation\nCOMOR\tCommittee on Overhead Reconnaissance\nDB\t\"Dirty Bird\"\nDCI\tDirector of Central Intelligence\nDCID\tDirector of Central Intelligence Directive\nDDCI\tDeputy Director of Central Intelligence\nDDI\tDeputy Director for Intelligence\nDDP\tDeputy Director (or Directorate) for Plans\nDDS&T\tDeputy Director for Science and Technology\nDPD\tDevelopment Projects Division\nDPS\tDevelopment Projects Staff\nECM\tElectronic Countermeasures\nEG&G\tEdgerton, Germeshausen & Grier, Incorporated\nELINT\tElectronic Intelligence\nFCRC\tFederally Controlled Research Center\nHASP\tHigh-Altitude Air Sampling Program\nIAC\tIntelligence Advisory Committee\nIAS\tIndicated air speed\nIC\tIntelligence community\nICBM\tIntercontinental ballistic missile\nIR\tInfrared\nISP\tIntelligence Systems Panel (USAF)\nJRC\tJoint Reconnaissance Center\nMATS\tMilitary Air Transport Service (USAF)\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":339,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nAppendix A\n326\n\nMRBM\tMedium-range ballistic missile\nNACA\tNational Advisory Committee for Aeronautics\nNAS\tNaval air station\nNASA\tNational Aeronautics and Space Administration\nNIE\tNational Intelligence Estimate\nNPIC\tNational Photographic Interpretation Center\nNSA\tNational Security Agency\nNSC\tNational Security Council\nNSCID\tNational Security Council Intelligence Directive\nODM\tOffice of Defense Mobilization\nORR\tOffice of Research and Reports\nOSA\tOffice of Special Activities\nOSI\tOffice of Scientific Intelligence\nPBCFIA\tPresident's Board of Consultants on Foreign Intelligence Activities\nP-E\tPerkin-Elmer Company\nPFIAB\tPresident's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board\nPI\tPhotointerpreter\nPIC\tPhotographic Intelligence Center\nPID\tPhoto-Intelligence Division\nPSAC\tPresident's Science Advisory Committee\nRAF\tRoyal Air Force\nRFP\tRequest for proposal\nSAB\tScientific Advisory Board (USAF)\nSAC\tScience Advisory Committee\nSAC\tStrategic Air Command\nSA/PC/DCI\tSpecial Assistant to the DCI for Planning and Coordination\nSAM\tSurface-to-air missile\nSEI\tScientific Engineering Institute\nSENSINT\tSensitive intelligence (USAF)\nSLAR\tSide-looking aerial radar\nTAS\tTrue air speed\nTCP\tTechnological Capabilities Panel\nUSIB\tUnited States Intelligence Board\nWADC\tWright Air Development Command (USAF)\nWRSP\tWeather Reconnaissance Squadron, Provisional\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":340,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nAppendix B\n327\n\nAPPENDIX B\n\nKey Personnel\n\nAYER, Frederick, Jr.\nSpecial assistant to Trevor Gardner in the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force, Ayer was a strong advocate of overhead reconnaissance by balloons and an early supporter of Lockheed's CL-282 design.\n\nBAKER, James G.\nHarvard astronomer and lens designer, Baker was a leading designer of high-acuity aerial lenses during World War II and continued this work after the war. He also headed the Air Force Intelligence Systems Panel and served on the Technological Capabilities Panel's Project Three committee that urged the development of the U-2 aircraft. Baker designed the lenses for the U-2's cameras.\n\nBISSELL, Richard M., Jr.\nHead of all CIA overhead reconnaissance programs from 1954 until 1962, a former economics professor at MIT and high official of the Marshall Plan, Bissell became Allen W. Dulles's Special Assistant for Planning and Coordination in January 1954 and received responsibility for the new U-2 project at the end of that year. Later he also headed the first photosatellite project and oversaw the development of the OXCART. In 1959 Bissell became Deputy Director for Plans but kept the reconnaissance projects under his control. He resigned from the CIA in February 1962.\n\nCABELL, George Pearre\nAir Force general and DDCI from 1953 until 1962. Because of Cabell's many years of experience in aerial reconnaissance, DCI Dulles delegated most of the responsibility for the reconnaissance projects to him.\n\nCARTER, Marshall S.\nArmy general who served as DDCI from 1962 until 1965. During the period leading up to the Cuban Missile Crisis, Carter served as Acting DCI on a number of occasions while DCI McCone was out of town. In October 1962 he fought unsuccessfully to keep the CIA involved in flying reconnaissance missions over Cuba. Carter became the Director of the National Security Agency in 1965.\n\nCHARYK, Joseph R.\nAn aeronautical engineer who had followed careers first in academia and then the aerospace industry, Charyk became the Chief Scientist of\n-Secret-"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":341,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the Air Force in January 1959. Five months later he moved up to Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Research and Development, and the following year he became Under Secretary of the Air Force. In these positions he was involved in coordination with the CIA on both the U-2 and OXCART projects. In 1963 Charyk left government to become the first chairman of the Communications Satellite Corporation.\n\nCUNNINGHAM, James A., Jr.\nAn ex-Marine Corps pilot, he became the administrative officer for the U-2 project in April 1955. Cunningham handled the day-to-day management of the U-2 program and brought only the more complex problems to Richard Bissell's attention. Later he served as the Deputy Director of the Office of Special Activities and then Special Assistant to the Deputy Director for Science and Technology.\n\nDONOVAN, Allen F.\nAn aeronautical engineer who had helped to design the P-40 fighter while working at the Curtiss-Wright Corporation, Donovan was one of the founders of the Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory after World War II. He served on several Air Force advisory panels and was a strong advocate of the proposed Lockheed CL-282 aircraft. Later he became vice president of the Aerospace Corporation.\n\nDOOLITTLE, James H.\nA vice president of Shell Oil Company and an Army Air Force reserve general, Doolittle headed General Eisenhower's Air Staff during World War II. After the war Doolittle served on many Air Force advisory panels, and in 1954 he chaired a special panel investigating the CIA's covert activities. Doolittle also served on the Technological Capabilities Panel and the President's Board of Consultants on Foreign Intelligence Activities.\n\nDUCKETT, Carl E.\nHeaded the Directorate of Science and Technology from September 1966 until May 1976, first as Acting Deputy Director and then as Deputy Director beginning in April 1967. During his tenure, the emphasis in the CIA's overhead reconnaissance program shifted from aircraft to satellites.\n\nDULLES, Allen W.\nDCI from 1953 until 1961. Although initially reluctant to see the CIA involved in aerial reconnaissance, which he viewed as the military's area of responsibility, Dulles became a strong supporter of the U-2"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":342,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"program when he saw how much intelligence it could gather on the Soviet Union. Because his own interests lay more in the area of human intelligence, he left the management of the reconnaissance program in the hands of DDCI Cabell and project director Richard Bissell.\n\nGARDNER, Trevor\nDuring World War II, Gardner worked on the Manhattan Project, and later he headed the General Tire and Rubber Company before starting his own research and development firm, the Hycon Company, which built aerial cameras. Gardner served as the Secretary of the Air Force's Special Assistant for Research and Development and then as the Assistant Secretary for Research and Development during Eisenhower's first term of office. Gardner's concern about the danger of a surprise attack helped lead to the establishment of the Technological Capabilities Panel. Gardner also urged the building of Lockheed's CL-282 aircraft.\n\nGEARY, Leo P.\nAir Force colonel (later brigadier general) who was James Cunningham's Air Force counterpart in the U-2 program. He was instrumental in diverting engines from other Air Force projects for use in the U-2, and his 10 years with the U-2 project provided a high degree of continuity.\n\nGOODPASTER, Andrew J.\nAn Army colonel who served as President Eisenhower's Staff Secretary from 1954 to 1961. During this period, he was the CIA's point of contact in the White House for arranging meetings with the President on the subject of overhead reconnaissance. Goodpaster's later career included service as the supreme commander of NATO and then commandant of the US Military Academy at West Point.\n\nHELMS, Richard M.\nDCI from 1966 to 1973. During his tenure as DCI, the CIA's manned reconnaissance program came under heavy pressure because of competition from the Air Force's reconnaissance program.\n\nJOHNSON, Clarence L. (Kelly)\nOne of the nation's foremost aeronautical designers, Kelly Johnson graduated from the University of Michigan's School of Aeronautics in 1933 and began working for the Lockheed Aircraft Corporation. During World War II he designed the P-38 fighter, and after the war his design successes continued with the F-104 jet fighter, the Constellation airliner, and the CIA's two strategic reconnaissance aircraft, the U-2 and the OXCART A-12."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":343,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"KIEFER, Eugene P.\nAn Air Force officer with a degree in aeronautical engineering who in 1953 informed a friend at Lockheed of the Air Force's search for a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft, thus, leading to the initial design of the CL-282. After leaving the Air Force, Kiefer became Richard Bissell's technical adviser for the OXCART and photosatellite programs.\n\nKILLIAN, James R., Jr.\nPresident of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Killian headed a high-level and very secret study of the nation's ability to withstand a surprise attack. While this project was still under way, he and Edwin Land persuaded President Eisenhower to support the development of a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft, the U-2. Later, Killian headed Eisenhower's Board of Consultants for Foreign Intelligence Activities, served as his Cabinet-level science adviser, and chaired the President's Science Advisory Board. Killian was also chairman of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board under John F. Kennedy.\n\nLAND, Edwin H.\nAn extremely talented inventor famous for the development of polarizing filters and the instant-film camera. Land also devoted considerable time and energy to voluntary government service. During World War II, Land worked for the Radiation Laboratories, and after the war he served on numerous Air Force advisory panels. As the head of the Technological Capabilitites Panel's study group investigating US intelligence-gathering capabilities, Land became a strong advocate of the development of a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft (the CL-282) under civilian rather than Air Force control. Land and James Killian persuaded President Eisenhower to approve the U-2 project and later the first photosatellite project. Land also served on the President's Board of Consultants for Foreign Intelligence Activities.\n\nLEGHORN, Richard S.\nAn MIT graduate in physics, Leghorn joined the Army Air Force in 1942 and went to work for reconnaissance expert Col. George Goddard. By the time of the invasion of Europe, Leghorn was chief of reconnaissance for the 9th Tactical Air Force. After the war, Leghorn began preaching the need for \"pre-D-day\" reconnaissance in order to gather intelligence on the Soviet Bloc. He returned to the Air Force during the Korean war and later worked for Harold Stassen's Disarmament Office. In 1956 he became the head of the Scientific"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":344,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Engineering Institute, an Agency proprietary working on ways to reduce the U-2's vulnerability to radar detection. In 1957 he founded Itek Corporation.\n\nLUNDAHL, Arthur E.\nA Navy photointerpreter during World War II and afterward. Lundahl became the chief of the Photo-Intelligence Division in 1953. To support the U-2 project, he established a separate photointerpretation center under Project HTAUTOMAT. Under his leadership the Photo-Intelligence Division grew rapidly and achieved office status as the Photographic Intelligence Center in 1958. In 1961 Lundahl became the first head of the National Photograhic Interpretation Center, which combined the photointerpretation efforts of the CIA and the military services.\n\nMcCONE, John A.\nDCI from 1961 to 1965. A strong supporter of the CIA's manned reconnaissance program, McCone presided over the OXCART's main period of development and pushed for a greater role for the CIA in its joint reconnaissance programs with the Department of Defense.\n\nMILLER, Herbert I.\nMiller worked in the Office of Scientific Intelligence's nuclear branch and became Richard Bissell's first deputy for the U-2 project. He later left the Agency to work for the Scientific Engineering Institute.\n\nNORTON, Garrison\nAn assistant to Trevor Gardner, Norton became an early supporter of the Lockheed CL-282 and started the CIA's interest in overhead reconnaissance by informing Philip Strong about the aircraft. Norton later became Navy Assistant Secretary for Research and Development and was involved with the OXCART program.\n\nOVERHAGE, Carl F. J.\nAfter working on the development of Technicolor, Overhage went to work for Kodak. He headed the Beacon Hill Panel in 1952 and later became director of Lincoln Laboratories.\n\nPARANGOSKY, John N.\nParangosky worked for Richard Bissell's Development Projects Staff in the mid-1950s. He served as deputy chief of the Adana U-2 unit in 1959 and became project manager of the OXCART program from its inception through the test flight stage."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":345,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PERKIN, Richard S.\nPresident of the Perkin-Elmer Corporation, Perkin was a close friend of James Baker and was also a member of several advisory panels, including the BEACON HILL project. He helped Baker decide what cameras to use in the first U-2 aircraft.\n\nPOWERS, Francis Gary\nAn Air Force Reserve Officer who became a CIA U-2 pilot in 1956, Powers flew 27 successful missions before being shot down over the Soviet Union on 1 May 1960. After his return to the United States in exchange for Soviet spymaster Rudolf Abel in 1962, Powers was cleared of all allegations of misconduct in his mission, capture, trial, and captivity. He became a test pilot for Lockheed and later piloted light aircraft and helicopters for radio and television stations. He died in a helicopter crash on 1 August 1977.\n\nPURCELL, Edward M.\nA physicist who won a Nobel prize in 1954 for his work in nuclear resonance, Purcell served on a number of advisory bodies, including the USAF Scientific Advisory Committee and Edwin Land's Technological Capabilities Panel study group. It was Purcell's ideas for reducing the radar cross section of the U-2 that led to the OXCART program. Purcell also contributed to the satellite programs.\n\nRABORN, William F., Jr.\nDCI from 1965 to 1966, Raborn pushed for the deployment of OXCART to the Far East but failed to sway the top officials of the Johnson administration.\n\nREBER, James Q.\nAfter serving as the Assistant Director for Intelligence Coordination in the early 1950s, Reber became the chairman of the Ad Hoc Requirements Committee in 1955 and continued to chair this committee after it was taken over by the US Intelligence Board in 1960 and renamed the Committee on Overhead Requirements. In 1969 he became the chairman of the USIB's SIGINT Committee.\n\nRODGERS, Franklin A.\nFormerly of MIT, Rodgers was the chief engineer at the Scientific Engineering Institute who converted the theories of Edward Purcell into practical systems to reduce the radar image of the U-2 and especially the OXCART."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":346,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nAppendix B\n333\n\nSCHLESINGER, James R.\nDCI from February to July 1973, Schlesinger supported the Nixon administration's proposal to terminate the Agency's U-2 program.\n\nSCOTT, Roderic M.\nAn engineer with Perkin-Elmer who worked with James Baker in designing the first cameras for use in the U-2. Scott helped design the 30001 camera for the OXCART.\n\nSCOVILLE, Herbert, Jr.\nIn February 1962 Scoville became the first Deputy Director for Research, which took over control of the Agency's reconnaissance programs from the Deputy Director for Plans. Frustrated by the lack of support from the DCI and the other directorates, he resigned in June 1963.\n\nSEABERG, John\nAn aeronautical engineer who was recalled to active duty with the Air Force during the Korean war, Seaberg drafted the first specifications for a high-flying jet reconnaissance aircraft in 1953.\n\nSTEVER, H. Guyford\nA professor of aeronautical engineering at MIT, Stever served on numerous Air Force advisory panels and later became the Air Force's chief scientist.\n\nSTRONG, Philip G.\nChief of collection in the Office of Scientific Intelligence, Strong kept himself well informed on developments in overhead reconnaissance and attended many Air Force advisory panel meetings as an observer. In 1954 he learned about the Lockheed CL-282 design and passed the information on to Edwin Land's study group investigating US intelligence-gathering capabilities.\n\nWHEELON, Albert (\"Bud\") D.\nWheelon became the Deputy Director for Science and Technology in August 1963 following the reorganization and renaming of the Deputy Director for Research. He held this position until September 1966.\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":347,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"334\n\n[Blank]"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":348,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nAppendix C\n335\n\nAPPENDIX C\n\nElectronic Devices Carried by the U-2\n\nFrom the beginning the U-2 was envisioned as more than a camera platform. In fact, the U-2 would ultimately carry only five types of photographic equipment but more than 20 different types of electronic devices, some for collecting electronic intelligence (ELINT), others (\"ferret\" equipment) for gathering intelligence on foreign radars, and a few for self-protection—electronic countermeasures to defeat enemy missile-control radars.\n\nThe various electronic, countermeasures and intelligence-gathering systems designed for the U-2 received designations using Roman numerals—Systems I through XXII. The first seven devices were built by the Ramo-Wooldridge firm, now part of the TRW Corporation. System-I used S- and X-band ELINT receivers to collect ground-controlled intercept and air defense signals. Weighing only 7.7 kilograms, this system was aboard all U-2s from 1955 through 1959. System-II, a communications and navigation system, never worked properly and was canceled. System-III, a 16-kilogram VHF recorder for communications intelligence (COMINT), was never used and was transferred to the Navy in 1958. System-IV, a ferret device that recorded electromagnetic energy in the 150- to 4,000-MHz range was used on 16 missions between 1957 and 1959, when it was given to the Air Force. System-V was similar to System-I but covered nine wave bands. The device was so heavy that U-2s using it could not carry a camera system. System-V was used on only three missions and was replaced by the lighter weight System-VI that covered the P-, L-, S-, and X-band frequencies and could be used with either the A or B camera. System-VI was used from 1959 through 1966.\n\nThe growing need for data on Soviet missile development led to a contract with the firm of Haller-Raymond-Brown (HRB) to build a missile-telemetry intercept system as quickly as possible. The resulting device (System-VII) could record up to 12 minutes of data from six simultaneous frequencies. This unit first saw service on 9 June 1959 and was used on another 22 missions during the next year. Following modifications to make System-VII suitable for use by the Navy, the designation was changed to System-VIII.\n\nSystem-IX was an electronic-countermeasures (ECM) device for generating false-angle information in response to X-band radar pulses from surface-to-air missile radars. Also known as the Mark-30, the"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":349,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nAppendix C\n336\n\nunit was manufactured by the Granger Company. One of these devices was aboard Gary Powers' U-2 when he was shot down.\n\nSystem-X was a modification of the HRB's System-VII that was specially built in 1962 for a mission over the Soviet Union that never took place. Systems-XI through XV were ECM devices used by U-2s overflying China and North Vietnam during the Vietnam war. System-XVI was a passive ELINT collector.\n\nSystem-XVII was built by HRB-Singer as a result of an October 1963 USIB requirement for the collection of antiballistic-missile (ABM) data from Saryshagan. The system was to be deployed in a U-2 that would fly over western China, along the Sino-Soviet border, collecting data on the ABMs being tested at Saryshagan. By the time the unit was completed in 1965, however, the tipoff time before test launches had been reduced from almost 24 hours to less than an hour, making it impossible to stage U-2 missions in time to collect the data.\n\nIn the late 1960s, additional ECM systems were needed to counter the increasing threats posed by more accurate SAMs and higher flying aircraft. System-XX was specifically designed to counter the acquisition and guidance radars used by MIG aircraft, and System-XXII was an infrared jammer to counter air-to-air missiles. System-XXI, a COMINT package that replaced the much older System-III, was originally developed for the OXCART program and was later adapted for use aboard the follow-on U-2, the U-2R.\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":350,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nAppendix D\n337\n\nAPPENDIX D\n\nU-2 Overflights of the Soviet Union,\n4 July 1954–1 May 1960\n\nDate | Mission | Pilot | Airfield | Unit | Payload | Route\n4 July 1956 | 2013 | Stockman | Wiesbaden | A | A-2 | East Germany, Poland, Minsk, Leningrad, Estonia, Latvia, Poland\n5 July 1956 | 2014 | Vito | Wiesbaden | A | A-2 | East Germany, Warsaw, Minsk, Moscow, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland\n9 July 1956 | 2020 | Knutson | Wiesbaden | A | A-2 | East Germany, Poland, Minsk, Poland\n9 July 1956 | 2021 | Overstreet | Wiesbaden | A | A-2 | Czechoslovakia, Vienna, Hungary, L'vov, Kiev, Minsk, Poland\n10 July 1956 | 2024 | Dunaway | Wiesbaden | A | A-2 | Poland, Kishinev, Kerch', Sevastopol', Simferopol', Odessa, Romania, Hungary\n20 November 1956 | 4016 | Powers | Adana | B | A-2 | Iran, Yerevan, Baku, Astara, Caucasus\n18 March 1957 | 4020 | Cherbonneaux | Adana | B | Sys-V | Soviet border to Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia\n20 June 1957 | 6005 | Rand | Eielson | C | B | Khaylyulya, Ust'-Kamchatsk, Kozyrevsk, Karaganskiy-Ostrov\n5 August 1957 | 4035 | Edens | Lahore | B | B | Afghanistan, Tashkent, Tyuratam, Kazalinsk, Aral Sea\n11 August 1957 | 4039 | McMurray | Lahore | B | B | Alma-Ata, Ust'-Kamenogorsk, Sinkiang\n21 August 1957 | 4045 | Snider | Lahore | B | A-2 | Novokuznetsk, Tomsk\n21 August 1957 | 4048 | Jones | Lahore | B | A-2 | Lake Balkhash, Karaganda, Omsk, Alma-Ata\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":351,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nAppendix D\n338\n\nAPPENDIX D\n\nU-2 Overflights of the Soviet Union,\n4 July 1954–1 May 1960 (continued)\n\nDate\tMission\tPilot\tAirfield\tUnit\tPayload\tRoute\n22 August 1957\t4049\tBirkhead\tLahore\tB\tA-2\tMerket Bazar, Kuldja, Abakan,\nKrasnoyarsk, Kansk, Sinkiang\n22 August 1957\t4050\tCherbonneaux\tLahore\tB\tA-2\tLake Balkhash, Semipalatinsk,\nBarnaul, Prokop'yevsk,\nNovokuznetsk, Leninogorsk\n28 August 1957\t4058\tJones\tLahore\tB\tA-2\tDushanbe, Tashkent, Tyuratam,\nKazalinsk, Aral Sea\n10 September 1957\t4059\tHall\tAdana\tB\tA-2\tKrasnovodsk, Gur'yev,\nAstrakhan', Tbilisi\n16 September 1957\t6008\tBaker\tEielson\tC\tA-2\tKamchatka Peninsula, Milkovo\n13 October 1957\t2040\tStockman\tGiebelstadt\tA\tA-2\tNorway, Finland, Murmansk,\nKandalaksha\n1 March 1958\t6011\tCrull\tAtsugi\tC\tA-2\tDal'nerechensk, Khabarovsk,\nBlagoveshchensk, Belagorsk,\nKomsomolsk, Sovetskaya Gavan'\n9 July 1959\t4125\tKnutson\tPeshawar\tB\tB\tTyuratam for suspected Sputnik\nlaunch\n6 December 1959\t8005\tRobinson a\tPeshawar\tB\tB\tKuybyshev, Kapustin Yar,\nCaucasus\n5 February 1960\t8009\tMacArthur a\tPeshawar\tB\tB\tTyuratam, Kazan\n9 April 1960\t4155\tErickson\tPeshawar\tB\tB\tLake Balkhash, Semipalatinsk,\nKyzylespe, Dzhezhkazgan,\nTyuratam\n1 May 1960\t4154\tPowers\tPeshawar\tB\tB\tTyuratam, Kyshtym, Sverdlovsk;\ndowned by SAM\n\na RAF pilot\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":352,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix E\n339\n\nAPPENDIX E\n\nUnmanned Reconnaissance Projects\n\nAQUILINE\nIn the early 1960s, there were many problems in obtaining coverage of hostile territory. The U-2 was too vulnerable to Soviet surface-to-air missiles, as had been demonstrated by losses over the Soviet Union, Cuba, and the People's Republic of China. The OXCART was still under development and even when completed might prove vulnerable to Soviet radars and missiles. Although safe from interception, the newly developed photosatellites could not provide coverage of a desired target on short notice. Because several of the intelligence community's primary targets such as Cuba and the new Soviet radar installation at Tallinn (Estonia) were not located deep in hostile territory, CIA scientists and engineers began to consider the possibility of using small, unmanned aircraft for aerial reconnaissance. They believed that recent advances in the miniaturization of electronic technology would make possible the development of a reconnaissance vehicle with a very-low-radar cross section and small visual and acoustical signatures. Such a vehicle could reconnoiter an area of interest without the hostile country realizing that it had been overflown.\n\nIn mid-1965, David L. Christ, chief of the Office of Research and Development's Applied Physics Division, and Frank Briglia of the same office began working on the concept of a small, inexpensive aircraft that would be about the size of a large bird and could carry various payloads for photography, nuclear sensing, and ELINT collection. ORD soon formed a Special Projects Group to develop the aircraft with Briglia as the project manager. Only one firm—the Douglas Aircraft Company—responded favorably to a request for proposal to study the feasibility of a low-altitude reconnaissance system. On 15 November 1965, Douglas received a study contract. This was followed by two Agency contracts on 21 November 1966 for the development of an operational low-altitude intelligence-gathering system. Further contracts followed in 1968 and 1969.\n\nThe AQUILINE prototype developed by Douglas Aircraft (which became part of McDonnell-Douglas in 1969 as the result of a merger) was essentially a powered glider with an 8.5-foot wingspan. The aircraft weighed only 105 pounds. AQUILINE's tail-mounted engine drove a two-bladed propeller. Powered by a small 3.5-horsepower two-cycle engine originally developed by the McCullough Corporation for chainsaws, the aircraft's designed speed was 60 knots at an altitude of 1,000 feet with a 15-pound payload. The aircraft could fly at this speed for up to 30 hours, thanks to the engine's extremely high fuel efficiency: 480 nautical miles per gallon of fuel.\n\nIn 1968 tests on an AQUILINE prototype at Randsburg Wash on the US Navy's Naval Ordnance Test Station at China Lake, California, showed that the aircraft was extremely difficult to see. To assist pilots of chase aircraft in keeping AQUILINE in sight, its entire upper surface was painted bright orange; even so, sighting remained difficult.\n\nThe testing process was very hard on AQUILINE because it was recovered by flying it into a net close to the ground, which almost always caused some damage to the wings or propeller. As a result, one\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":353,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix E\n341\n\nor more of the aircraft was always being repaired, and eventually three of the five AQUILINE prototypes were destroyed in testing.\n\nAlthough AQUILINE's visual and acoustic signatures were very small, its radar cross section continued to cause problems. The radar cross section at low frequencies was less than one-tenth of a square meter, giving it a radar signature smaller than that of an eagle, but there were flares in the VHF region that increased the likelihood of detection.\n\nStudies indicated that the radar cross section problems could eventually be reduced to acceptable levels, but the greatest weakness of the AQUILINE project was its navigational system. AQUILINE did not have a programmable autopilot; it had to be flown by remote control from the ground. Once the aircraft flew over the horizon, all navigational commands had to be relayed to it by high-flying aircraft. A DC-6 loitering at 25,000 feet would give AQUILINE a range of 250 nautical miles; use of a U-2 at 70,000 feet could increase this to 350 nautical miles.\n\n--Such a range was suitable for the targets originally conceived for AQUILINE, but the need for intelligence on targets located much deeper in the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China [REDACTED] and the development time and costs for AQUILINE began to soar. By 1971 ORD had spent six years and $33 million on AQUILINE but still had many important problems to resolve.\n\nAt this point the project was turned over to the Office of Special Activities for operational testing at Area 51 in Nevada. Flight tests showed the aircraft to be successful by the standards originally set for the project in 1967, as it flew 130 miles and obtained very high resolution photography of a target before returning successfully to the original launchsite. However, improving AQUILINE sufficiently to make it a practical long-range reconnaissance system was estimated to cost another $35 million and take two to three years. On the recommendation of DDS&T Carl Duckett on 1 November 1971, Project AQUILINE was canceled. The project's aircraft and equipment were eventually transferred to the US Army for use in a battlefield management system known as AQUILA, which has yet to be deployed because of continuing developmental problems.\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":354,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Appendix E\n342\n\nProject AXILLARY\n\nAXILLARY\nWhile Project AQUILINE was still under development, its chief aerodynamicist, Charles N. Adkins, left the program because he believed that its escalating costs would prevent it from ever producing a deployable aircraft. He wanted to build a small, inexpensive remote-controlled aircraft to test a low-cost lightweight autopilot currently being developed by ORD. Under a $5,000 time-and-materials contract with Melpar, Incorporated, Adkins hired a local model aircraft builder to assemble and modify a standard Hawk-750 glider kit and power it with a rear-mounted engine and pusher propeller. Following a series of successful test flights, Adkins installed a small camera and took a number of aerial photographs.\n\nBy this time the effort to build a \"Miniature Multi-Purpose Airborne Vehicle\" had become known as Project AXILLARY. Melpar, Inc., received a second contract for $50,000 to install ORD's autopilot in the aircraft, and the project managers now began searching for a use for their vehicle. The two main possibilites were (1) as a short-range reconnaissance vehicle for use in a peace-monitoring or intelligence-gathering system and (2) as a short-range warhead delivery system. In 1971 the Office of Special Activities evaluated AXILLARY flight-testing and determined that the small model aircraft was not suitable for use as a covert reconnaissance vehicle because of its large radar cross section and significant accoustical signature. The aircraft's radar signature made it potentially useful as a weapons systems, however. ORD suggested that AXILLARY be equipped with a radar-homing unit [REDACTED] which would make it an inexpensive means for [REDACTED] surface-to-air missile systems in North Vietnam. The Director of"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":355,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":356,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nAppendix E\n343\n\nDefense Research and Engineering, John Foster, liked the concept and provided DOD funding for ORD to develop two versions of AXILLARY, one with a radar-homer and one with a television reconnaissance package. The radar homing system proved successful as AXILLARY sought out and destroyed a radar during testing at China Lake Naval Air Station. However, the end of US involvement in Vietnam in early 1973 led to the cancellation of further DOD funding, and AXILLARY was placed on the shelf. Melpar, Inc., continued to work on the radar-homing version and eventually sold some AXILLARY-type aircraft to Israel, which used them to destroy Syrian radars in Lebanon in 1982.\n\nPINE RIDGE\n\nWhile work was still in progress on low-altitude, short-range reconnaissance systems like AQUILINE and AXILLARY, CIA scientists and engineers were also working on a high-altitude recoverable unmanned reconnaissance vehicle with an extremely-low-radar cross section that would enable it to fly undetected over hostile territory. During the 1960s there had been a study conducted by the Teledyne Ryan Aeronautical Company of San Diego on the construction of an undetectable drone known as SANDY HOOK. This 44-foot long drone would operate at 120,000 feet at Mach 0.9, with a range of 5,000 nautical miles. Its radar cross section 07zwould be 0.01 square meters. Project SANDY HOOK never advanced very far in development; projected high costs and substantial technical risks led to its cancellation in December 1969.\n\nSome of the concepts in SANDY HOOK were carried over into a new project known as PINE RIDGE, which was a proposal for an unmanned reconnaissance vehicle with an even lower radar cross section (0.001 square meter). Research on SANDY HOOK had indicated that a radar cross section this low was attainable and would prevent detection and tracking by existing radar defense systems. The PINE RIDGE proposal called for a delta-shaped vehicle, approximately 17 feet long with a 21-foot wingspan. Two vertical stabilizers would give the vehicle an overall height of three to four feet. An existing Teledyne J-100-CA-100 Turbojet engine could have been used to power the vehicle at Mach 0.9 at the operating altitude of 65,000 to 75,000 feet. Range was estimated at 3,300 nautical miles.\n\nDespite interest within the CIA and the Air Force for an undetectable reconnaissance vehicle, PINE RIDGE was never funded. In January 1971 high-level representatives from DOD and CIA rejected a proposal for a feasibility study to be conducted by Ryan Aircraft.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":357,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nAppendix E\n344\n\nThe following year, the Director of the Office of Special Activities, Brig. Gen. Harold F. Knowles, wrote a memorandum to the DCI proposing that the CIA develop a clandestine low-radar-cross-section vehicle like PINE RIDGE, but this proposal also failed to attract support. With all the improvements in satellite reconnaissance that had taken place during the previous decade, neither CIA nor the Air Force was willing to invest substantial funding in a project to send aircraft, manned or unmanned, over the Soviet Union.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":358,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Blue\nSHG"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":359,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"346\n- Blank -"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":360,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nBibliography\n347\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY\n\nPublished Works Cited\n\nAart, Dick van der. Aerial Espionage, Secret Intelligence Flights by East and West. Shrewsbury, England: Airlife Publishing, 1985.\n\n\"AF Cites Red Bomber Progress.\" Aviation Week, 24 May 1954, p. 14.\n\n\"Alleged Overflight of Soviet Area by American Planes.\" US Department of State Bulletin, vol. 36, 28 January 1957, p. 135.\n\n\"Alleged Violations of Soviet Territory: Soviet Note of July 10, 1956 with U.S. Reply.\" US Department of State Bulletin, 30 July 1956, pp. 191-192.\n\nAlsop, Stewart. The Center. New York: Popular Library, 1968.\n\nAmbrose, Stephen E. Eisenhower. Vol. 2, The President. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984.\n\nAndrew, Christopher. Her Majesty's Secret Service: The Making of the British Intelligence Community. New York: Viking, 1986.\n\n\"Aviation Week Story Spurs Debate on US, Red Airpower Positions.\" Aviation Week, 30 May 1955, pp. 13-14.\n\nBeschloss, Michael R. Mayday: Eisenhower, Khrushchev and the U-2 Affair. New York: Harper & Row, 1986.\n\nBrown, William H. \"J58/SR-71 Propulsion Integration.\" Studies in Intelligence 26 (Summer 1982): pp. 17-18 (Unclassified).\n\nBrugioni, Dino. The Cuban Missile Crisis-Phase I, 29 August-16 October 1962. DDS&T Historical Series, NPIC-1 (CIA: NPIC, 1971) (Secret).\n\nBurrows, William E. Deep Black: Space Espionage and National Security. New York: Random House, 1987.\n\n\"Can Soviets Take the Air Lead? What LeMay, Wilson, Ike Say.\" US News and World Report, 11 May 1956, pp. 108-114.\n\nChronology of the Office of Special Activities, 1954-1968. (CIA: DS&T, 1969) (Top Secret Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":361,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nBibliography\n348\n\nCoughlin, William. \"Gardner Defends Greater R&D Spending.\"\nAviation Week, 26 September 1955, p. 14.\n\nEastman, Ford. \"Defense Officials Concede Missile Lag.\" Aviation\nWeek, 9 February 1959, pp. 26-27.\n\nEdwards, Philip K. \"The President's Board: 1956-60.\" Studies in\nIntelligence 13 (Summer 1969): p. 118 (Secret).\n\nEisenhower, Dwight D. Waging Peace, 1956-1961. Garden City, NY:\nDoubleday, 1965.\n\nFreedman, Lawrence. US Intelligence and the Soviet Strategic Threat.\n2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986.\n\nGeorge, A. L. Case Studies of Actual and Alleged Overflights,\n1930-1953. Rand Study RM-1349. Santa Monica: Rand, 1955\n(Secret).\n\n[REDACTED] The Defector Reception\nCenter Germany, 1951 to 1967. Clandestine Service Historical\nSeries CSHP-41. CIA: History Staff, 1972 (Secret).\n\nHotz, Robert. \"Firing of 900-Mile Russian Missile Spurs US\nChanges.\" Aviation Week, 20 February 1956, pp. 26-28.\n\n———. \"Russian Air Force Now Gaining in Quality.\" Aviation\nWeek, 12 March 1956, pp. 286-291.\n\n———. \"Russian Jet Airpower Gains Fast on US.\" Aviation Week,\n23 May 1955, pp. 12-15.\n\n\"Is Russia Ahead in Missile Race?\" US News and World Report,\n6 September 1957, pp. 30-33.\n\n\"Is Russia Really Ahead in Missile Race?\" US News and World\nReport, 4 May 1956, pp. 34-35.\n\n\"Is Russia Winning the Arms Race?\" US News and World Report,\n18 June 1954, pp. 28-29.\n\n\"Is US Really Losing in the Air?\" US News and World Report,\n18 May 1956, pp. 25-27.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":362,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nBibliography\n349\n\nJohnson, Clarence L. \"Development of the Lockheed SR-71\nBlackbird.\" Studies in Intelligence 26 (Summer 1982): p. 4 (Un-\nclassified).\n\nJohnson, Clarence L. with Maggie Smith. Kelly: More Than My Share\nof It All. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institute Press, 1985.\n\nKhrushchev, Nikita S. Khrushchev Remembers: The Last Testament.\nBoston: Little, Brown, & Co., 1974.\n\nKillian, James R., Jr. Sputnik, Scientists, and Eisenhower: A Memoir\nof the First Special Assistant to the President for Science and\nTechnology. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1977.\n\nKistiakowsky, George B. A Scientist at the White House. Cambridge:\nHarvard University Press, 1976.\n\nKleyla, Helen H., and Robert D. O'Hern. History of the Office of\nSpecial Activities, DS&T. 16 vols. Directorate of Science and\nTechnology Historical Series OSA-1. CIA: DS&T, 1969 (Top\nSecret Codeword).\n\nLay, James S. \"The United States Intelligence Board, 1958-1965.\"\nCIA History Staff MS-2 (draft), 1974 (Top Secret Codeword).\n\nLicklider, Roy E. \"The Missile Gap Controversy.\" Political Science\nQuarterly 85 (1970): pp. 600-615.\n\nLinehan, Urban J. The National Photographic Interpretation Center.\nVol. 1, Antecedents and Early Years. Directorate of Science and\nTechnology Historical Series NPIC-2. CIA: NPIC, 1972 (Secret).\n\n———. National Photographic Interpretation Center: The Years of\nProject HTAUTOMAT, 1956-1958. 6 vols. Directorate of Science\nand Technology Historical Series NPIC-3. CIA: NPIC, 1974\n(Secret).\n\nMiller, Jay. Lockheed U-2. Aerograph 3. Austin, Texas: Aerofax,\n1983.\n\nMinnich, [REDACTED] \"The OXCART Story.\" Studies in Intelligence\n15 (Winter 1971): pp. 1-34 (Secret).\n\n\"Missiles Away.\" Time, 30 January 1956, pp. 52-55.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":363,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nBibliography\n350\n\n\"Mystery of the RB-47.\" Newsweek, 25 July 1960, pp. 36-37.\n\n\"Nikita and the RB-47.\" Time, 25 July 1960, pp. 30-31.\n\n\"Office of Special Activities History, April 1969 to Phase-Out.\"\n(draft) (CIA: DS&T, 1974), chap. 3, pp. 36-42 (Top Secret\nCodeword).\n\nPero, Richard K. \"Message Received—Unfortunately.\" Studies in\nIntelligence 27 (Winter 1983): p. 29 (Secret).\n\nPocock, Chris. Dragon Lady: The History of the U-2 Spyplane.\nShrewsbury, England: Airlife, 1989.\n\nPowers, Francis Gary, with Curt Gentry. Operation Overflight. New\nYork: Holt, Rinehart and Wilson, 1970.\n\nPowers, Thomas. The Man Who Kept the Secrets: Richard Helms and\nthe CIA. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1979.\n\nPrados, John. Presidents' Secret Wars: CIA and Pentagon Covert\nOperations Since World War II. New York: William Morrow, 1986.\n\n———. The Soviet Estimate: U.S. Intelligence Analysis and Russian\nMilitary Strength. New York: Dial Press, 1982.\n\n[REDACTED] Covert Support to Indonesian Revolutionary\nGovernment, 1957-1958. 2 vols. Clandestine Service Historical\nSeries, CSHP-53. CIA: History Staff, 1970 (Secret).\n\n\"Red Air Force: The World's Biggest.\" Newsweek, 23 August 1954,\npp. 28-33.\n\nRichelson, Jeffrey. American Espionage and the Soviet Target. New\nYork: William Morrow, 1987.\n\n\"Russia Parades Airpower as 'Big Stick'.\" Aviation Week, 28 June\n1954, p. 15.\n\nRusso, Andrew J. Low-Level Technical Reconnaissance over\nMainland China (1955-66). Clandestine Services Historical\nProgram, CSHP-2.348. CIA: History Staff, 1972 (Secret).\n\nStanley, Roy M., II. World War II Photo Intelligence. New York:\nScribners, 1981.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":364,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nBibliography\n351\n\nSturm, Thomas A. The USAF Scientific Advisory Board: Its First\nTwenty Years, 1944-1964. Washington, DC: USAF Historical\nOffice, 1967.\n\nTwining, Nathan F. Neither Liberty nor Safety. New York: Holt,\nRinehart & Winston, 1966.\n\nUnited States Air Force. Project LINCOLN. BEACON HILL Report:\nProblems of Air Force Intelligence and Reconnaissance.\nMassachusetts Institute of Technology, 15 June 1952 (Secret,\ndowngraded to Confidential).\n\nUnited States Congress. Senate. Foreign Relations Committee.\nExecutive Sessions of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee\n(Historical Series), vol. 12, 86th Congress, 2nd Session, \"Report\non the U-2 Incident,\" 6 March 1962 (declassified 1982).\n\nUnited States Congress. Senate. Select Committee to Study\nGovernmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities.\nForeign and Military Intelligence. Book 1. Washington, DC: US\nGovernment Printing Office, 1976.\n\nUnited States Office of Defense Mobilization. Science Advisory\nCommittee. Technological Capabilities Panel. Meeting the Threat\nof Surprise Attack, 14 February 1955. (Top Secret/Restricted Data,\ndowngraded to Secret).\n\n\"US Representations to the Soviet Government on C-130 Transport\nShot Down by Soviet Fighter Aircraft.\" US Department of State\nBulletin, 23 February 1959, pp. 262-271.\n\nWeber, Karl H. The Office of Scientific Intelligence, 1949-68.\nDirectorate of Science and Technology Historical Series OSI-1.\nCIA: DS&T, 1972 (Top Secret Codeword).\n\nWelzenbach, Donald E. \"Observation Balloons and Weather\nSatellites.\" Studies in Intelligence 30 (Spring 1986): pp. 21-28\n(Secret).\n\nWhite, James J. \"Francis Gary Powers—The Unmaking of a Hero,\n1960-1965.\" (draft) CIA: History Staff, 1974 (Secret).\n\nWise, David and Thomas B. Ross. The U-2 Affair. New York:\nRandom House, 1962.\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":365,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nBibliography\n352\n\nWitze, Claude. \"Russians Outpacing US in Air Quality, Twining\nWarns Congress,\" Aviation Week, 27 February 1956, pp. 26-28.\n\n\"Yakovlev Yak-25RM Mandrake,\" Jane's Defence Weekly, vol. 3, no.\n7, 16 February 85.\n\nInterviews and Speeches\n\nInterview with Robert Amory, Jr., by Donald E. Welzenbach and\nGregory W. Pedlow, Washington, DC, 22 April 1987 (Secret).\n\nInterview with James G. Baker by Donald E. Welzenbach,\nWashington, DC, 24 April 1985 (Secret).\n\nSpeech given by Richard Bissell at CIA Headquarters, 12 October\n1965 (Top Secret Codeword).\n\nInterview with Joseph V. Charyk by Donald E. Welzenbach,\nWashington, DC, 5 December 1984 (Top Secret Codeword).\n\nInterview with former U-2 pilots James Cherbonneaux, Carmine Vito,\nand Hervey Stockman, by Donald E. Welzenbach, Washington,\nDC, May 1986 (Secret).\n\nInterview with James A. Cunningham, Jr., by Donald E. Welzenbach,\nWashington, DC, 4 October 1983 (Top Secret Codeword).\n\nInterview with Allen F. Donovan by Donald E. Welzenbach, Corona\ndel Mar, California, 20 May 1985 (Secret).\n\nInterview with Brig. Gen. Leo A. Geary, USAF (Ret.), by Donald E.\nWelzenbach, 3 April 1986 (Secret).\n\nInterview with Gen. Andrew J. Goodpaster by Donald E. Welzenbach\nand Gregory W. Pedlow, Washington, DC, 8 July 1987 (Secret).\n\nSpeech by Maj. Gen. Patrick J. Halloran (former Air Force U-2 pilot)\nat the National Air & Space Museum, 24 April 1986 (Unclassified).\n\nInterview with James R. Killian, Jr. by Donald E. Welzenbach,\nCambridge, Massachusetts, 2 November 1984 (Secret).\n\nInterview with Edwin H. Land by Donald E. Welzenbach, Cambridge,\nMassachusetts, 17 and 20 September 1984 (Top Secret Codeword).\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":366,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Interview with Brig. Gen. Jack C. Ledford, USAF (Ret.), by Gregory\nW. Pedlow, Washington, DC, 20 February 1987 (Secret).\n\nInterview with Richard S. Leghorn by Donald E. Welzenbach,\nWashington, DC, 19 August 1985 (Secret).\n\nInterview with Arthur S. Lundahl and Dino Brugioni by Donald E.\nWelzenbach, Washington, DC, 14 December 1983 (Top Secret\nCodeword) .\n\nInterview with Garrison Norton by Donald E. Welzenbach,\nWashington, DC, 23 May 1983 (Secret).\n\nInterview with John Parangosky by Donald E. Welzenbach, 6 March\n1986 (Secret).\n\nInterview with James Q. Reber by Donald E. Welzenbach and\nGregory W. Pedlow, Washington, DC, 21 May 1987 (Secret).\n\nInterview with Carmine Vito by Donald E. Welzenbach, Washington,\nDC, 7 May 1986 (Secret).\n\nInterview with John S. Warner, Office of the General Counsel, by\nDonald E. Welzenbach, Washington, DC, 5 August 1983 (Top\nSecret Codeword)."} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":367,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"- Blank -"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":368,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A\n\nA-1 camera\n50\nA-2 aircraft\n262-263\nA-2 camera\n53, 77, 100, 104-105, 108\nA-3 aircraft\n263\nA-11\n268, 294\nA-12\n271, 273-274, 277-278, 281,\n283-286, 289-292, 294-297, 299,\n302-305, 307-311, 329\nAbel, Rudolf\n183, 332\nAd Hoc Requirements Committee\n81, 114, 188-189, 332\nAdana, Turkey\n113\nAdenauer, Konrad\n101\nAdkins, Charles N.\n342\nAdministration (East) Building\n42\nadvanced antiballistic-missile (ABM)\n139\naerial cameras\n13, 31, 49, 329\naerial lenses\n327\naerial photography\n3, 13, 33, 49, 96, 119\naerial tankers\n313\naerodynamic lift\n248, 277\naerodynamic structural tests\n274\naerodynamicist\n342\nAerospace Corporation\n328\n\nAfghanistan\n126, 170, 176, 189\nafterburner plume\n271\nailerons\n47, 69\nAir Research and\nDevelopment Command\n5, 8\nAir Staff for Intelligence\n154\nAir Weather Service\n89, 94\nair-cooled reactor\n239\nair-inlet system\n291\nair-to-air missiles\n285, 336\nair-traffic controllers\n72-73, 289\nAir/Maritime Division (AMD)\n73\naircraft carrier\n145, 247, 250\nairfields\n82, 95-96, 105, 117, 153, 216,\n221, 226, 317\nairframe\n5, 8, 10, 24, 26, 48, 56, 71,\n105, 132-133, 248, 259, 274, 279,\n286, 289\nairframe contractors\n259\nairspace\n3-4, 19, 127, 134, 142, 144-147,\n152-153, 182, 231, 239, 241,\n303, 306, 318, 322\nairspeed\n68, 76, 199, 235, 295\n[REDACTED]\nAlaska\n133-134, 145, 316"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":369,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Albania\n140, 157\nAlbuquerque, New Mexico\n74, 78-79\nAllen, Edward L.\n21\nAlmaza Airbase, Egypt\n119\naltimeters\n59-60\naltitude\n1, 4-6, 7, 8-11, 12, 13-19, 22-26,\n33-35, 39, 46-47, 49, 52, 54-55, 59,\n61-64, 71-72, 74, 76, 79-80, 84, 87,\n89, 93-94, 97, 101, 108, 125, 132,\n142, 145, 148-149, 152, 156-157, 168,\n175-179, 185, 207, 217-219, 229, 235,\n240-241, 246-247, 251, 254, 259-260,\n262, 263, 267, 268, 273, 277, 278-279,\n284, 286, 288, 292, 294, 296-297, 304,\n312-313, 320, 330, 339, 340, 343\naluminum\n271\nAmbon Island\n214\nAmerican Civil War\n1\nAmory, Robert\n114\nAnderson, Rudolph\n210\nAndoya, Norway\n172\n\"Angel\",\n45, 50, 66, 262\nAnglo-French bombing campaign\n117\nAnglo-Soviet relations\n94\nAnkara, Turkey\n135, 178\nantiaircraft missile\n168\nantiaircraft weapons\n93, 148\nantiballistic missile system\n298, 303\nantiradar studies\n267, 274\n\nApollo VII\n254\nApplied Physics Division\n339\nAQUATONE\n40-43, 59, 62, 66, 74, 77, 82, 88,\n93, 96, 100, 108, 113, 115,\n122, 134, 155\nAQUILA\n341\nAQUILINE\n304, 339-343\nArabs\n256\nAral Sea\n135\nArbenz, Jacobo\n16\n\"Archangel-1\"\n262\n\"Archangel-2\"\n262\nArea 51,\n56, 72, 74-75, 77-78, 130-131,\n133, 274, 283-284, 286, 291,\n303, 305, 341\nArizona\n80\nArkansas\n78\nArmenia\n124, 144, 146\narms limitation negotiations\n147\narms race\n318\nArmy Air Corps\n21, 56\nArmy Air Force\n50, 328, 330\narticle 121\n286, 288\narticle 126\n296\narticle 133\n296\narticle 341\n66, 71, 131-132"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":370,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"article 345A\n79\narticle 346\n80\narticle 347\n104\narticle 349\n219\narticle 354\n80\narticle 357\n80\narticle 360\n175, 217\narticle number\n59\narticles\n20, 59, 99, 216\nAshford, Douglas E.\n30\nAsia\n135, 190, 198, 211, 216, 221,\n230, 233, 300-301, 310, 319\nAsian Photographic Interpretation\n229\naspheric lens\n53\nASPIC\n229\nAswan Dam\n112\natmosphere\n278, 25, 152, 182, 215\natmospheric testing\n147\natomic bomb\n19\nAtomic Energy Commission\n56, 133, 182, 241-242, 274\natomic energy facilities\n233\nATR (Air Transport Rating)\n187\nAtsugi, Japan\n134, 215, 218\nautopilot\n76, 341-342\nAviation Week\n216\n\nAXILLARY\n342\nAyer, Frederick, Jr.\n14-15, 36, 327\n\nB\n\nB model camera\n53\nB-17 bomber\n222\nB-26 bomber\n214\nB-36 bomber\n22, 50\nB-47 bomber\n72\nB-52 bomber\n20, 111, 291, 312\nB-57 bomber\n5, 8-9, 13, 15, 24, 35, 72\nB-58 bomber\n262, 269-270, 273\nB-58 \"Hustler\" bomber\n262\nB-58A bomber\n269\nB-58B \"Super Hustler\"\n262\nB-58B bomber\n263, 269\nB-70 bomber\n279, 293\nBACKFIN\n167\n\"badlands\"\n71\nBaikal, Lake\n128\nBaird, Walter\n56\nBaird Associates\n56\nBaker, James G.\n18, 21-25, 29-31, 46, 50-56,\n108, 253, 282, 327, 332-333\nBalkhash, Lake\n138, 139\nballistic missiles\n2, 201, 206, 299, 318"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":371,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-Secret NOFORN-\nIndex\n358\n\nBaltic Sea\n3, 303\nBaltic states\n104\nBaltimore, Maryland\n6, 9\n[REDACTED]\nBarents Sea\n140, 142, 172\nBarnes, Tracy\n101\nbarrel rolls\n76\nBatlin, Alex\n66\nBay of Bengal\n231\nBay of Pigs\n191, 197-199, 205\nBaykonur, Soviet Union\n137\nBeacon Hill\n17-19, 21, 24, 31-32, 331-332\nBEACON HILL Report\n17, 19, 21, 24\nBEACON HILL Study Group\n18, 21\nBeechcraft\n56, 187\nBeerli, Stanley W.\n192, 196\nBeijing, China (see Peiping, China)\n228-229\nBell Aircraft Corporation\n9\nBell Laboratories\n18\nBell Telephone Laboratories\n29\n\"bends\"\n64\nBennington, Herbert\n309\nBenton, William\n299\nBerezovskiy, Soviet Union\n138\nBerlin, Germany\n16, 20, 127, 147, 162, 183, 196\nBerlin crisis\n147, 196\n\nBGMARQUE\n222\nbhangmeter\n240\nBIRDWATCHER\n235\nBison bomber\n20-21, 27, 31, 98, 105, 111\nBissell, Richard M., Jr.\n15-16, 30, 39-41, 43-44, 56, 59,\n61, 66, 69-70, 72, 74, 78, 81-82, 89,\n93, 95, 100-101, 104-106, 109-110,\n121-122, 124, 127-128, 135, 139, 148,\n154-157, 162, 168, 170, 172, 174, 178-179,\n187, 191-192, 196, 214, 216, 224, 259-260,\n262-263, 267, 277-278, 283, 285, 286-287,\n289, 295, 327, 328-329, 330-331\nBissell's Narrow-Gauge Airline\n72\n\"black books\"\n188\n\"black\" contracts\n285\nBLACK KNIGHT\n126, 134\nBlack Sea\n85, 126, 133, 144, 153\nBLACK SHIELD\n301\nBlip/Scan Ratio\n267-268\nBLUE BOOK\n72-73\nBoard of Inquiry\n184\nBodo AFB, Norway\n142, 172, 176-177\nBoeing RB-47\n3\nBoeing KC-135\n71\nbomb damage\n49\nbomber\n2-3, 5, 20-23, 26, 31, 50, 66, 98, 105,\n109, 111, 140, 167, 214, 262-263,\n269, 279, 293, 316-317\nBomber Gap\n31, 111, 316"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":372,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"borax\n121\nBoston, Massachusetts\n13, 18, 22, 24, 27, 52, 56,\n110, 260\nBoston camera\n13\nBoston University\n22, 24, 52\nBowles, Chester\n225\nBrahmaputra Valley\n231\nbridges\n82\nBriggs School\n42\nBriglia, Frank\n339\nBritish and French fleets\n116\nBritish Guiana\n211\nBritish Guiana-Venezuela border\n211\nBritish overflight of the Soviet Union\n23-24, 164\nBritish Parliament\n94, 232\nBritish radar network\n94\nBrugioni, Dino\n135, 137\nBudapest, Hungary\n123\nBudget, Bureau of the\n267, 308-310\nBudget, Director of the\n40\nBuffalo, New York\n9, 63\nBulganin, Nikolai\n94, 120\nBulgaria\n101, 124-125, 140\nBundy, McGeorge\n188, 201, 205, 209, 236, 293\nBUORL\n22\nBurbank, California\n45\n\nBurke, William\n168, 170, 174\n[REDACTED]\nByelorussia\n104, 106\n\nC\n\nC model camera\n54\nC-118 aircraft\n144\nC-124 cargo planes\n66, 135, 181, 219\nCabell, Charles P.\n30, 36, 43, 88, 101, 122-123, 127,\n139, 183, 223, 295, 327, 329\nCairo, Egypt\n117, 119\nCalcutta, India\n232\nCalifornia\n9, 13, 24, 26, 36, 45, 50, 54, 56,\n133, 182, 198, 200, 208, 221, 247,\n251-252, 254-256, 295, 311, 340\nCalifornia Institute of Technology\n26\nCambodia\n216, 230, 243\ncamera lenses\n93\ncamera technicians\n78\ncamera-carrying balloons\n14, 18, 23, 84, 145\ncameras\n1, 3-4, 12-13, 21-22, 31, 44, 49-51,\n53-55, 60, 77, 87, 196, 244, 281-282,\n310, 313, 321, 327, 329, 332, 333\nCanberra\n5, 9, 23-24, 67, 109, 117, 162\nCannon, Clarence\n88\nCapp, Al\n45\ncardiovascular system\n62"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":373,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Carey, Howard\n80, 140\nCarter, John H. (Jack)\n9-10\nCarter, Marshall S.\n186, 201, 205, 208-209, 299, 327\nCaspian Sea\n126\ncatheterized\n64\ncathode-ray tube\n267\nCaucasus Mountains\n179\ncelestial \"fixes\"\n76\nCentral Asia\n135\nCentral Asian republics\n176\nCentral Intelligence Agency (CIA)\n29, 32, 59\nAir Force competition\n308\nair operations\n157, 191\nGeneral Counsel\n44\nInspector General\n190\nproprietary\n260, 129\nproprietary firm\n110, 129, 222, 260\nU-2 program\n257, 181\ncentrifugal force\n177\nCHALICE\n155, 170, 182\nChamoun, Camille\n152\nChance Vought Corporation\n8\nCh'ang-sha, China\n228\nChapman, Robert\n238\nCharbatia, India\n232-233, 237, 239\nCharyk, Joseph V.\n260, 327-328\n\n[REDACTED]\nChekiang Province\n235\nChelyabinsk, Soviet Union\n176\nCherbonneaux, James\n127, 138, 214\nChiang Ching-kuo\n224\nChiang Kai-shek\n224\nChiang-yu, China\n228\nChicago Daily Tribune\n132\nChief of Station for Germany\n101\nChief of Station in Taipei\n224\nChief of the German General Staff\n1\n\"chimney\"\n71\nChina\n5, 85, 135, 148, 157, 174, 190, 201,\n211, 215-217, 219, 221-222, 224-226,\n228-233, 235-237, 239-240, 242-243,\n245, 247, 253, 282, 301, 305, 307, 319,\n336, 339-341, 343.\nSee also Nationalist China and\nPeople's Republic of China (PRC)\nChina Lake, California\n340\nchine\n277\nChinese Communist nuclear tests\n240\nChinese mainland\n319, 215, 222, 226\nChinese nuclear reactors\n238\nChinese nuclear test\n237\nChrist, David L.\n339\nChristian Science Monitor\n18\nCivil Air Transport\n214, 222\ncivilian supersonic transport (SST)\n293"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":374,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CL-282 Project\n10-17, 24-27, 29-37, 66, 327-331, 333\nCL-400 aircraft\n263\nclandestine operations\n16, 321\nClandestine Services\n192\nClark Airfield, Philippines\n212\nClifford, Clark\n311\nCline, Ray\n209, 224\n\"coffin corner\"\n76\nCold War\n17\ncollection requirements\n80-81, 189, 253, 300\nColumbia Broadcasting System\n18\ncombat aircraft\n6, 26, 45\nCombined Shipping Adjustment Board\n15\nCommerce, Department of\n254\ncommercial airliners\n72\ncommunications intelligence (COMINT)\n189, 311, 335-336\nCommunications Satellite Corporation\n328\nCOMPASS TRIP\n254\ncompetitive bidding\n44\ncompressor vanes\n291\ncomputer-controlled radar\n294\ncomputers\n52\nCongress, United States\n44, 88, 98, 111, 159-160, 170, 293,\n315, 317-318\nconstant-velocity film transport\n281\nConstellation airliner\n10, 329\nContingency Reserve Fund\n40, 44\n\ncontractors\n42, 72, 259, 288\ncontrails\n152\nConvair\n262-263, 267-271, 273, 284, 312\nConvair F-106\n284\nconvective clouds\n94\nCornell Aeronautical Laboratory\n18, 24-25, 328\nCorning Glass Works\n282\ncosmic-ray effects\n94\ncover officer\n89\ncovert activities\n2, 6, 40, 43-44, 73, 80, 88, 134,\n157, 189, 191-192, 212, 214,\n222, 320-321, 328, 342\nCovert Action Staff (CAS)\n214\ncovert funding\n43\nCrabb, Lionel\n94\nCrete\n116\nCrick, Alan\n154\nCrick Committee\n154\nCrimean Peninsula\n108\nCuba\n188, 197-201, 205-211, 299-300,\n302, 310, 327, 339\nCuban air and ground order of battle\n198\nCuban Missile Crisis\n55, 199, 209-210, 299, 327\nCubi Point Naval Air Station, Philippines\n212, 216, 221\nCulbertson, Allman T.\n66\nCunningham, James A., Jr.\n40, 66, 69, 72, 78-79, 125, 247,\n288-289, 328-329\nCurrent Intelligence, Office of\n81"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":375,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Curtiss-Wright Corporation\n328\n[REDACTED]\nCzechoslovakia\n101\n\nD\n\nD-21 aircraft\n291\nDalai Lama\n216\nDallas, Texas\n293\nDamage Assessment Team\n183\nDavid Clark Company\n62\nDavis, Saville\n18\nDayton, Ohio\n4, 8\nDC-6 aircraft\n341\ndeep penetration overflights\n316, 123\nDefector Reception Center (DRC)\n2\ndefectors\n2\nDefense, Department of\n33, 61, 122, 145, 154, 161, 234,\n236-237, 239, 267, 292-293, 301-302,\n304, 310, 317\nDefense, Deputy Secretary of\n81, 127, 144, 161, 188, 207, 300, 309\nDefense, Secretary of\n161, 298\nDefense Mobilization, Office of\n17, 26\nScience Advisory Committee\n37\nDel Rio, Texas\n256, 198\nDelta-II camera\n250\ndenied territory\n174, 188, 190\n\nDeputy Director of Central Intelligence (DDCI)\n30, 36, 43, 327, 329, 88, 101, 122-123,\n127, 139, 186-187, 201, 208-209, 223\nDetachment A\n94-95, 100-101, 106, 114, 116, 124-125,\n139-140, 142-143, 181, 316\nDetachment B\n113, 116, 120-121, 124-126, 133,\n135, 139, 142-143, 152-153, 155-157,\n164, 167, 181-182, 187, 316\nDetachment C\n133-134, 139, 143-144, 152, 157,\n182, 211-212, 214-220, 224, 316\nDetachment G\n133, 181-182, 198-199, 211, 221-222,\n230-233, 243, 248, 250-251, 254-257\nDetachment H\n225-226, 228-230, 232-237, 239-241,\n243-246, 250-251, 255\nDevelopment, Deputy Chief of Staff for\n7, 11, 17, 35\nDevelopment Planning, Office of\n12\nDevelopment Projects Division (DPD)\n157, 191\nDevelopment Projects Staff\n40, 55-56, 132, 157, 191, 212, 331\nDirty-Birds\n128, 130, 135\nDonovan, Allen F.\n18, 21, 24-26, 29-31, 35, 260, 328\nDonovan, James\n183\nDoolittle, James H.\n61, 167, 328\nDouglas Aircraft\n339\nDRAGON\n2\nDRAGON LADY\n77\ndrivers\n59\ndrone\n291, 343\nDryden, Hugh\n89, 182\nDuBridge, Lee\n26-27"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":376,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dulles, Allen\n16-17, 30, 32-37, 39-40, 43-44, 56,\n60, 73, 76, 80, 82, 86, 88, 93, 95, 97,\n105-106, 109-111, 117, 120, 124, 127,\n154, 161-162, 164-165, 167, 170, 180,\n184, 189, 191, 214, 223-224, 260, 263,\n295, 316-318, 327-328\nDulles, John Foster\n20, 86, 109, 117, 122-123, 126\ndummy corporations\n44\nDunaway, Glendon\n65\n\nE\n\nEarman, J. S.\n206\nearth's atmosphere\n278\nEast Berlin riots of June 1953\n16\nEast Germany\n100-101, 142, 147, 183, 303\nEastern Europe\n2, 84, 88-89, 100-101, 106, 110,\n123-124, 126-127, 139-140, 142,\n144, 304, 316\nEastman Kodak\n4, 31-32\neavesdropping\n2\nEBONY\n222\nEden, Anthony\n93-95\nEdens, Buster\n135\nEdgerton, Germeshausen & Grier (EG&G)\n130, 274\nEdwards AFB, California\n133, 149, 181, 198, 200, 211, 230\nEielson AFB, Alaska\n133-134\nEisenhower, Dwight D.\n19, 26-27, 33-37, 39, 44, 56, 60, 73,\n85-86, 88, 94-101, 104-106, 109-110,\n112, 114, 116-117, 119-120, 122-124,\n126-129, 135, 139, 143-147, 152-156,\n159-164, 167-168, 170-172, 180-181,\n187, 191-192, 195, 211-212, 214, 221,\n224, 263, 267, 270, 277, 297, 315-317,\n322, 328-330\nelectromagnetic energy\n335\nelectromagnetic pulse indicator\n240\nelectronic countermeasures (ECM)\n207, 239, 304, 313, 317, 335-336\nelectronic intelligence (ELINT)\n114, 126, 144, 146, 153, 162-163,\n175, 182, 215, 242, 244, 303, 335\nelectronic intercept\n126, 317\nelectronic sensors\n292\nelectronic warfare\n300\nELINT collection\n142, 339\nELINT emanations\n304\nELINT-collection gear\n310\nELINT-collection unit (System VI)\n170\nEmergency Preparedness, Office of\n254\nengine nacelles\n291\nengineers\n9-10, 12, 17, 25, 43, 45, 55, 61,\n71, 255, 260, 269, 286, 339, 343\nEnglish Electric Company\n5, 23\nepoxy resin\n277, 289\nEQUINE\n82\nEricson, Robert J.\n80\nespionage\n1\nEstonia\n303, 339\nEurasian landmass\n145\nEurope\n2, 4, 20, 23, 84-85, 88-89, 93, 100-101,\n106, 110, 115, 123-124, 126-127, 139-140,\n142, 144, 148, 178, 255, 304, 316, 330"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":377,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Evang, Vilhelm\n142\nEVEN STEVEN\n256\nExecutive Branch\n109\nexotic fuels\n263\n\nF\n\nF-100 fighter\n71\nF-102 fighter\n270\nF-104 fighter\n10-11, 45, 329\nF-106 fighter\n270, 284\nF-108A Rapier\n285\nF-111 fighter\n312\nFairbanks, Alaska\n134\nFairchild K-19 aircraft\n49\nFAN SONG acquisition radar\n234\nFar East\n3, 110, 133-134, 140, 144, 190,\n197, 201, 216, 224, 233-234, 242-243,\n301, 305, 316, 320, 332\n\"Fast Move\" operations\n216\nFederal Aviation Administrator\n289\nFederal procurement cycle\n44\n\"ferret\" equipment\n3, 335\nferret flights\n123\nFFD-1\n238\nFFD-2\n238-239\nFFD-4,\n282, 238\nFICON\n22\nField Activities, Deputy for\n192\n5412 Committee\n188, 226\nfighter\n4, 10, 14, 22, 66, 74-75, 108, 124,\n146, 177, 182, 201, 214, 312, 317,\n328-329\nfighter conversion\n22\nFili airframe plant\n105\nfillets\n277, 288-289\nfilm\n1, 31-32, 49, 51-53, 55, 60, 100,\n108, 114-115, 119-121, 145, 153, 179,\n209, 215, 218, 221-222, 226, 235-236,\n239, 241, 247, 249-250, 254, 281-282,\n306, 310-311, 316, 330\nfilm processing\n60, 121, 247\nfilm-transport system\n55\nFirewel Company\n63\nFirst Weather Reconnaissance Squadron,\nProvisional (WRSP-1)\n94\nFischer, C. W.\n309\nFISH\n250, 263, 268-269, 312\nFISH HAWK\n249-250\nFlickinger, Donald D.\n62\nFLIPTOP\n198\n\"Flit\"\n62\nFlorida\n198\nflying boat\n270\nfocal-length cameras\n13\nfocal-length lenses\n51"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":378,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Follow-On Group (FOG)\n77\nFord Foundation\n15\nForeign Intelligence Advisory Board\n192, 226, 292, 302, 330\nforest fire detectors\n238\nFormosa\n305 (See also Taiwan)\nFort Worth, Texas\n50\n40 Committee\n188, 257\nforward processing center\n212\nFoster, John\n343\nFrance\n113, 116-117, 120, 201, 249\nFranco-Prussian War\n1\nFrankfurt, Germany\n2\nFree Europe Committee\n88\nFrench atomic test area\n250\nFrench Indochina\n222\nFrench Mediterranean\n116\nFrench Mystere\n116\nFrench nuclear developments\n249\nFrench Polynesia\n249\nFrogman Incident\n94\nFujisawa, Japan\n218\nFukien Province\n226, 229\n\nG\n\nG-forces\n79\n\nG2A aircraft\n263\nGalbraith, John Kenneth\n231-232\nGardner, Trevor N.\n11, 13-15, 26-27, 32, 36, 40,\n66, 81, 99, 327, 329, 331\nGates, Thomas\n164\nGaza Strip\n114\nGeary, Leo P.\n61, 66, 71, 73-74, 78, 152,\n186, 196, 288, 329\nGeneral Dynamics\n312\nGeneral Electric J73/GE-3\n11\nGeneral Tire and Rubber Company\n329\nGENETRIX\n84-85, 87-88\nGeneva, Switzerland\n96, 147, 159\nGeneva Conference on Surprise Attack\n159\nGeneva summit conference\n96\ngeological survey\n254-255\nGerman Luftwaffe\n22\nGerman scientists\n2\nGettysburg, Pennsylvania\n120\nGibbs, Jack A.\n61, 259-260\nGiebelstadt Airbase, West Germany\n95, 124, 140\nGilpatric, Roswell\n207-208\nGlennan, Keith\n182\ngliders\n11\nGlienecke Bridge\n183\nGlobke, Hans\n101\nGoddard, George\n330"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":379,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Goering, Hermann\n66\nGoldmark, Peter C.\n18\ngolf balls\n50\nGoodpaster, Andrew J.\n89, 97, 100, 105-106, 109, 120, 126\n128, 144, 146, 167, 172, 187, 329\nGrace, Frank G.\n80\nGRANDSLAM\n170, 172, 174-175\nGranger Company\n336\nGRC-127\n205\nGreat Britain\n3, 7, 23, 93-95, 112-113, 115, 117,\n120, 153-156, 181, 303, 319\nAir Ministry\n94, 155\ncounterintelligence operative\n94\n[REDACTED]\nGreyhound bus\n289\nGroom Lake\n56, 66, 133\nGroton\n15\nground resolution\n281-282, 250\nGuatemala\n157\n\"guided democracy\"\n212\nGulf Coast\n254\nGulf of Finland\n142\nGulf of Tonkin Resolution\n231\ngust control\n47\nGUSTO\n274\n\nH\n\nH camera\n244, 247, 253, 256, 282\nHagerstown, Maryland\n9\nHaiphong Harbor\n247\nHalaby, Najeeb E.\n289\nHall, Wiliam\n117, 119, 143\nHaller-Raymond-Brown (HRB)\n335\n\"handing off\"\n87\n[REDACTED]\n\"hanger queen\"\n175\nHarvard University\n18, 21-22, 29, 50-51, 327, 329\nHarvard College Observatory\n21\nHawk-750 glider kit\n342\nhaze filters\n105\nHBJARGON\n175-176\nHBJGO\n176\nheavy water\n19\nHelms, Richard M.\n253, 256, 304-305, 309-310, 329\nHEN HOUSE\n168\nHEN ROOST installations\n168\nHerter, Christian\n127, 163\n\"hiding in the open\"\n55\nhigh-acuity cameras\n21, 50-51, 327\nhigh-altitude air sampling (HASP)\n219\nhigh-altitude aircraft\n4, 8, 16, 24, 59, 148, 304"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":380,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"high-altitude balloon program\n22\nhigh-altitude photography\n1, 55, 84\nhigh-altitude photoreconnaissance\n7\nhigh-altitude reconnaissance\n1, 4-5, 8-9, 13-14, 17, 19, 22-25,\n33-34, 39, 49, 52, 55, 254, 262,\n292, 312, 330\nhigh-altitude weather plane\n178\nhigh-impact plastics\n313\nhigh-resolution cameras\n4\nhigh-resolution infrared scanner\n238\nhigh-speed buffet\n76\nhigh-speed reconnaissance aircraft\n262-263, 270\nHIGH WIRE\n164\nHilsman, Roger\n209\nHitchcock, Alfred\n29\nHokkaido, Japan\n4\nHolcomb, William\n285\nHollywood, California\n29\nHong Kong\n217\nHoover, Herbert, Jr.\n123-124\nhorizontal stabilizers\n47\nHorner, Richard\n70\nHornig, Donald F.\n309\nHOT SHOP\n162\nHouston, Lawrence R.\n44\nHR-333 camera\n253\n\nHRB-Singer Corporation\n336\nHTAUTOMAT\n83, 115, 331\nHTNAMABLE\n110-111\nhuman intelligence sources\n2\nHungarian uprising\n123\nHungary\n101, 123\nHurricane Baseline Survey\n254\nHycon Manufacturing Company\n13, 50, 252\nhydraulic fluid\n279\nhydraulic pump\n279\nhydrogen bomb\n19-20, 242\nhydrogen weapons\n164\nhydrogen-powered aircraft\n263\nhydrologists\n254\n\nI\n\nIBM CPC (card-programmed calculator)\n52\nIDEALIST\n182, 210, 234, 303\nIDEALIST U-2\n303\nIgarka, Soviet Union\n3\nileitis\n96\nimagery\n116, 179, 252-253, 255-256, 282,\n298, 303, 310\nimpeller\n291\n\"in-and-out\" operations\n205\nin-flight refueling\n198-200, 237, 302"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":381,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nIndex\n\n368\n\nIncirlik Airbase, Turkey\n113, 181\nIndia\n148, 231-232, 237, 247, 319\nIndian Parliament\n232\nIndian Springs, Nevada\n274, 130, 132\nIndonesia\n211-212, 214, 319\nIndonesian Air Force\n212\ninertial guidance systems\n313\ninflatable aircraft\n262\ninfrared camera\n282\ninfrared jammer\n336\ninfrared scanner\n238-239\ninland waterways\n82\ninstant-film camera\n330\nintelligence, collection of\n16, 31-32, 80-81, 142, 146, 153,\n162, 170, 182, 189, 211, 245, 253,\n256, 282, 300, 303, 310, 315, 319,\n322, 333, 336, 339\nIntelligence and Research, Bureau of\n209\nintelligence community\n2, 20, 33, 81, 138, 153, 160, 164-165,\n170-171, 190, 196, 232-233, 254, 298,\n303-304, 322, 339\nIntelligence Coordination, Office of\n81\nintelligence requirements\n25-26, 80-82, 114, 122, 154, 188-190,\n226, 230, 233, 250, 253, 300, 332\nIntelligence Requirements Officer\n81\nIntelligence Star\n186\nIntelligence Systems Panel (ISP)\n21-22, 24-26, 30-32, 35, 327\n\nintercept\n87, 108, 124, 126-127, 142, 148,\n162, 168, 170, 174, 176-177, 259,\n285, 317, 335\ninterceptor aircraft\n93, 109, 124, 148, 176\nintercontinental ballistic missile\n137, 159\nInterior, Department of the\n254\ninternational date line\n134\nInternational Geophysical Year\n85\ninternational law\n110\ninterrogation\n2-3, 183, 241\nintruder\n109\n\"invisible\" dirigible\n18\nion cloud\n300\nionosphere\n175\nIran\n124, 133, 189\nIraq\n133, 153\nIron Curtain\n1, 17, 93, 95, 111, 126, 146\nISINGLASS\n312\nIsle of Pines\n205\nIsrael\n113-114, 116-117, 120, 343\nIsraeli paratroop\n117\nIsraeli-Egyptian conflict\n257, 117\nIsraeli-Syrian disengagement\n257\nItek Corporation\n331, 250\nIX spaceflights\n254"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":382,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Index\n\n369\n\nJ\n\nJ-3 (Operations)\n189\nJ75 power plant\n152\njamming devices\n300\nJammu and Kashmir\n231\nJapanese airspace\n4\nJapanese Government\n134, 182, 221\njet stream\n94, 145\njet-propelled glider\n11, 25\nJohnson, Clarence L. (Kelly)\n10-12, 13-14, 17, 24-26, 29-31,\n34-36, 43-48, 50, 54, 56-57, 59,\n64, 66-70, 76, 108, 130, 132, 149,\n179, 185, 196, 247-248, 251, 262-263,\n268, 271, 274, 277-279, 281, 284, 289,\n293-297, 320, 329\nJohnson, Lyndon B.\n195, 236-237, 243, 293-295, 302,\n304-305, 310-311, 332\nJoint Chiefs of Staff (JCS)\n122, 124, 126, 161, 187-190, 223,\n234, 302\nJoint Intelligence Committee\n154\nJoint Priorities Committee\n154\nJoint Reconnaissance Center (JRC)\n189\nJones, Edwin K.\n138\nJordan\n117, 153\nJP-7 fuel\n62\n\nK\n\nK-21 framing cameras\n49\nK-38 camera\n50-51, 53\nKadena Airbase, Okinawa, Japan\n301\nKaliningrad missile plant\n105\nKamchatka Peninsula\n128, 134, 197\nKandalaksha, Soviet Union\n176\nKapustin Yar, Soviet Union\n16, 23-24, 109, 139, 143, 164\nKara Sea\n142\nKazakh language\n135\nKazakhstan\n135\nKazan', Soviet Union\n167\nKC-135 tankers\n71, 199\nKEDLOCK\n285\n\"Kelly's Angel\"\n66\nKEMPSTER\n300\nKennedy, John F.\n186, 191-192, 195-196, 198, 207-208,\n210, 225, 229, 232, 235, 292-293,\n297-298, 330\nKennedy, Joseph W.\n29\nKennedy, Robert\n215\nKennedy administration\n191, 195, 225\nkerosene fuel\n62\nKhan, Ayub\n135"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":383,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nIndex\n\n370\n\nKhimki rocket-engine plant\n105\nKhrushchev, Nikita\n94, 96, 100-101, 147, 160, 163-164,\n168, 179-180, 299\nKiangsi Province\n235\nKiangsu Province\n229\nKICK OFF\n198\nKickapoo Joy Juice\n45\nKiefer, Eugene P.\n7, 9, 11, 260, 330\nKillian, James R.\n27, 29-30, 33-34, 89, 100, 191-192,\n263, 292, 330\nKINGFISH\n270, 273\n\nKirkpatrick, Lyman B.\n190\nKirov, Soviet Union\n172, 176\nKirtland AFB\n79\nKissinger, Henry\n256\nKistiakowsky, George\n171\nKlein, Burton\n11\nKlyuchi, Soviet Union\n134, 143\n\nKNIFE EDGE\n167\nKnowles, Harold F.\n344\nKohler, Foy D.\n112\nKoko Nor\n233\nKola Peninsula\n182\n\nKollman Instrument Company\n59\nKoon, Ralph E.\n79\nKorea, demilitarized zone (DMZ)\n305 (See also North Korea)\nKotlas, Soviet Union\n172\nKrag, Jens Otto\n299\nKratt, Jacob\n65, 79, 116\nKremlin\n123\n\nKunming, China\n226\n\nKuybyshev, Soviet Union\n164\nKWCORK\n113\nKWEXTRA-00\n59\nKWGLITTER-00\n59\nKyshtym, Soviet Union\n176\n\nL\n\nL'il Abner\n47\nL-pills\n66, 125\nLahore, Pakistan\n135\nLakenheath AFB, England\n93"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":384,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Index\n\n371\n\nLand, Edwin H. (Din)\n18, 21, 25, 29-34, 36, 80-81, 89, 96,\n100, 110, 191-192, 260, 262-263, 269-271,\n292, 307, 330, 332-333\nLand Panel\n37\nLangley, Virginia\n43, 192, 306,\nLangley AFB, Virginia\n23\nLaos\n216, 221, 231, 233\nLas Vegas, Nevada\n284\nLatham, Allen, Jr.\n29\nLatvia\n303\nLaughlin AFB, Texas\n198, 200\nLebanon\n114, 117, 152-153, 343\nLedford, Jack C.\n207, 288, 297\nLeghorn, Richard S.\n4-8, 18, 23, 110, 330\nLeMay, Curtis E.\n11-12, 14, 60\n\"Lemon-Drop Kid\"\n124\nLend-Lease\n7\nLeningrad, Soviet Union\n104-106, 109, 142, 298, 303\nlens\n1, 18, 21-22, 30, 49-55, 93,\n108, 250, 247, 253, 281-282,\n321, 327\nlens curvatures\n52\nlens designs\n52, 55\nLeVier, Tony\n56, 68-71, 75\nLF-1A fuel\n62\nLibya\n121\n\nlightweight film\n32\nLINCOLN\n18\nLindsey Air Force Base, Wiesbaden, West Germany\n80\nliquid-fueled missiles\n161, 317\nlithium deuteride\n19\nLithuania\n303\nLittle, Arthur D., Inc.\n29\nLittle Quemoy\n215\nLloyd, Selwyn\n93\nLockheed Aircraft Corporation\n9, 24, 329\nLockheed Day Fighter\n14\nLockheed mechanics\n66, 130, 225\nLondon School of Economics\n15\nLONG GREEN\n198\nlong-range bombers\n20, 81, 98-99, 316\nLONG SHAFT\n245\nLop Nor test site\n237\nLos Angeles, California\n186, 254\nLovelace, W. Randolph, III\n62, 74\nLovelace Foundation for Medical Education and Research\n74\nlow-radar-cross-section vehicle\n344\nlow-level photography\n209\nlow-vapor-pressure fuel\n278\nLuke AFB, Arizona\n74"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":385,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nIndex\n\n372\n\nLuna 2 rocket\n163\nLundahl, Arthur C.\n82, 114-115, 117, 119, 121, 135,\n142, 154, 191, 209, 241, 331\n\nM\n\nM Building\n83\nM-12 aircraft\n291\nM-195 aircraft\n9\nMacArthur, John\n167\nMacdonald, Duncan E.\n22, 154-155\nMacmillan, Harold\n155-156, 164, 167, 187\nMalaya Sazanka, Soviet Union\n144\nMalinovsky, Rodion\n160\nMalta\n114, 116\nManchuria\n229, 233, 237\nMandrake\n148\nManhattan Project\n329\nManila, Philippines\n311\nmanned space program\n62\nMarch AFB, California\n75\nMark-30\n335\nMarquardt ramjets\n268\nMarr, William H.\n72\nMars\n79\n\nMarshall Plan\n15, 327\n\nMartin, Glenn L., Aircraft Corporation\n5, 8-9, 24, 270\nMassachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)\n4, 15, 18, 27, 30, 110, 129-130, 327,\n330, 332-333\nMatomic Building\n42, 104\nMATS\n72\nMatsu Islands\n229\nMay Day\n20, 176, 191, 195\nMC-2 and MC-3 partial-pressure suits\n64\nMcConaughy, Walter P.\n257\nMcCone, John A.\n184-186, 192, 195, 197, 201, 206-207,\n209, 232-234, 236-238, 240, 292-294,\n296, 298, 300, 327, 331\nMcCoy, Frederick\n95\nMcCullough Corporation\n339\nMcDonnell Aircraft\n312\nMcElroy, Neil\n146, 161-162\nMcFadden, William\n54\nMcMahon, John N.\n186\nMcNamara, Robert\n229, 234, 236, 238, 253, 285, 292-293,\n298, 300-301\nmechanical fuel totalizer/counters\n68\nMediterranean Sea\n114, 116, 121, 140, 142, 153\nmedium-range ballistic missiles\n201, 206\nMelpar, Incorporated\n342\nMenderes, Adnan\n112, 181\nmercenary pilots\n214\nmetal fatigue\n242"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":386,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"meteorologists\n42, 87\nMI-6\n93, 154\nMichigan, University of, School of Aeronautics\n329\nmicrowave reconnaissance\n19\nMiddle East overflights\n114, 116\nMiG aircraft\n336\nMiG-15\n108, 148\nMiG-17\n5, 108, 148\nMiG-19\n148\nMiG-21\n148, 237, 244\nMilitary Adviser to the President\n188\nMilitary Air Transport Service\n72\nMILL TOWN\n216\nMiller, Stewart E.\n18, 21, 39-40, 55-56, 331\n\"million-dollar\" photography\n111\nminiaturization\n339\nmirrors\n54-55\nMirza\n135\n\"missile gap\"\n157, 159, 317\nmissiles\n2, 22, 81, 98-99, 137, 139, 149,\n160-161, 165, 167, 171, 201, 205-206,\n209, 226, 239, 243, 257, 285, 299, 301,\n303-304, 306-307, 315, 317-318, 336, 339\nMississippi River\n78, 310\nMKNAOMI\n66\nMonthly Activities Book\n189\n\nmoon\n163\nMorotai\n214\nMoscow, Soviet Union\n3, 20, 85, 94, 101, 105-106, 109,\n124, 143, 145, 160, 167, 177, 179, 318\nMUDLARK\n178\n[REDACTED]\nmultiengine aircraft\n12, 24-25\nmultiple sensors\n22\nMurmansk, Soviet Union\n140, 142, 172, 174, 176\nMururoa Atoll\n250\nMyasishchev-4 (see Bison bomber)\n\nN\n\nNagy, Imre\n123\nNanking, China\n228\nNarcotics, Bureau of\n254-255\nNasser, Gamal Abdel\n112, 153\nNational Advisory Committee on Aeronautics\n89, 94\nNational Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA)\n178-179, 254\nNational Air & Space Museum\n64\nNational Intelligence Estimates\n19, 235\nnational intelligence objectives\n81\nNational Security Agency\n81, 114, 134, 185, 327\nNational Security Bureau\n224\nNational Security Council\n27, 294, 161, 167, 187-188, 191, 197, 212"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":387,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nIndex\n374\n\nNational Security Council Intelligence\nDirective (NSCID)\n191\nNationalist China\n319, 215, 224, 226, 229, 236\nNationalist Chinese\n201, 205, 222-226,\n229-230, 234-237, 239-240,\n243, 245-246, 253, 257, 319\nAir Force\n223, 225\ninsignia\n225\npilots\n319, 223, 230, 235, 243, 246, 253\nU-2\n205, 223-224, 229, 246\nNavajo missile\n22\nNaval Air Station at Atsugi, Japan\n134\nnaval quarantine\n210\nNehru, Jawaharlal\n231-233\nNelson, Norman\n68\nNevada\n56-57, 341, 113, 130-131, 133, 149,\n182, 241, 274, 283, 286, 290, 295,\n297, 302-303, 311\nNevada Proving Ground\n56, 241\nNew Delhi, India\n232\nNgo Dinh Diem\n230\nNICE GIRL\n310\nnickel-cadmium batteries\n240\nNile River\n119\nNIMBUS\n200\n1973 Middle East war\n256, 320\n\n9th Tactical Air Force\n330\nnitrogen\n64\nNixon, Richard M.\n245-246, 256-257, 333\nNobel Prize\n332\nNorth American Air Defense\nCommand (NORAD)\n289\nNorth Atlantic Treaty Organization\n(NATO)\n20, 329, 87, 148, 172\nradars\n87\nNorth Island Naval Base, California\n248\nNorth Korea\n4, 233, 237, 242, 307\nNorth Vietnam\n190, 221-222, 230-231, 233, 243,\n246-247, 301, 304-307, 311, 336, 342\nNorth-East Frontier Agency (NEFA)\n231\nNorthrop Aviation\n259\nNorton, Garrison\n14-15, 31, 70, 260, 331\nNorwalk, Connecticut\n50\nNorway\n140, 142, 172, 176-177, 303, 319\nNorwegian Defense Staff\n142\nNorwegian Intelligence Service\n142\nNotre Dame University\n7\nNovaya Zemlya\n172\nNovokuznetsk, Soviet Union\n138\nnuclear energy\n39, 81, 225\nNuclear Energy Division\n39"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":388,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nIndex\n375\n\nnuclear fireball\n240\nnuclear resonance\n332\nnuclear strike\n292\nnuclear testing moratorium\n317\nnuclear tests\n133, 147, 240\nnuclear weapons\n2, 19-20, 99, 147, 226,\n238, 240, 317\n\nO\n\nOARFISH\n44\nO'Donnell, Emmett (Rosy)\n74\n[REDACTED]\noblique photography\n135, 189, 244\nOffshore Islands Crisis\n215-216\n[REDACTED]\nOILSTONE\n60-61\nOkinawa\n301-302, 305-306, 308, 311\nOld Executive Office Building\n27\nOLIVE HARVEST\n257\nOmaha, Nebraska\n60\n112A camera\n250\n112B camera\n250, 252\n\"Open-Skies\"\n96\nOperation Overflight\n186\noptical distortion\n282\n\nOptical Research Laboratory\n21-22\noptical systems\n52\norder-of-battle\n82, 134, 322\n\"Oscar-Sierra\" unit\n234\n[REDACTED]\nover-the-horizon radar\n241\nOverhage, Carl F. P.\n18, 21, 331\noverhead photography\n82, 87, 172, 237-238\noverhead reconnaissance missions\n188\nOverstreet, Carl K.\n100\nOXCART\n61, 73, 157, 191, 236, 238, 252-253,\n259, 274, 277-313, 320-322, 327-333,\n336, 339\noxygenation\n62\n\nP\n\nP-38 fighter\n10, 329\nP-40 fighter\n328\nP-51 Mustang\n214\nP-80 fighter\n10, 45\nP-80 Shooting Star\n45\nP2V7\n222\nP3A\n222\nPacific Ocean\n247\nPadang, West Sumatra\n212"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":389,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nIndex\n376\n\nPakistan\n128, 135, 139, 148, 163, 167-168,\n170, 172, 174, 178, 189, 247, 316, 319\nPaksane, Laos\n231\nPalmdale, California\n311\npanoramic-type framing camera\n53\nParadise Ranch\n57, 66\nPARAMOUNT Committee\n114, 116, 120\nParangosky, John\n274, 288, 296, 309, 331\n\"parasite\" aircraft\n263\nParis Summit\n172, 181-182\nPasadena, California\n13, 50, 252\nPathet Lao\n221\nPB-4Y aircraft\n222\nPearl Harbor\n322\nPearson, Drew\n299\nPeenemunde rocket project\n2\nPeiping, China\n228-229\nPellegrini, Joseph J.\n6\nPennsylvania State Police\n222\nPentagon\n5, 7, 9, 11, 13-14, 39, 78-79, 238\nPeople's Liberation Army (PLA)\n215\nPeople's Republic of China (PRC)\n85, 135, 201, 215, 222, 225-226,\n228-247, 253, 282, 301, 319, 339, 341\n(See also China)\nradars\n215\ntroop movements\n215\nnuclear plants\n238\n\nnuclear weapons establishment\n226\nShuangchengzi missile-test range\n235\nperiscope\n56, 76\nPerkin, Richard S.\n18, 31, 50-52, 281-282, 311, 332-333\nPerkin-Elmer (P-E) Company\n18, 31, 50, 281\nPerkin-Elmer tracking camera\n52\nPerkins, Courtland D.\n260\nPersonnel (USAF), Deputy Chief of Staff for\n74\nPeshawar, Pakistan\n135, 163-164, 167-168, 172, 174-176\nPhilippines\n305\nPhoto-Intelligence Division (PID)\n82, 100, 135\nphotographic chemicals\n121\nPhotographic Evaluation of Information on Cuba\n200\nphotographic resolution\n281\nphotointerpreters\n83, 108, 111, 114-116, 120-121, 135,\n138, 153, 172, 191, 198, 209, 211,\n216, 221, 236, 303, 307\nphotomapping\n1, 232\nphotoreconnaissance\n1, 4-5, 7, 22\nphotosatellite\n270, 313, 327, 330, 157\nPhouma, Souvanna\n221\nPID's Special Projects Branch\n115\nPINE RIDGE\n343-344\n\"pioneer\" photography\n87\npitot-static tube\n295\nPittsburgh-Corning Glass Company\n55\nPlans, Deputy Director for\n157, 191-192, 327, 333"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":390,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nIndex\n377\n\nPlans, Directorate of\n73, 81, 157, 197, 211, 287\nPlesetsk, Soviet Union\n176\nPoland\n100-101, 104, 110, 123, 145, 303\npolarizing filters\n330\nPolaroid Corporation\n18, 24, 29\nPOLECAT\n221\nPolish Ambassador to the US\n109\nPolyarny Ural\n172\npolygraph examination\n185\nPope, Allen L.\n214-215\npoppy fields\n254\nPort Said, Egypt\n120\nPortsmouth Harbor\n94\npotassium cyanide\n66, 125\npowered glider\n14, 25, 339\nPowers, Francis Gary\n88, 117, 124, 174-178, 181-187,\n190-191, 195, 197, 201, 219, 221,\n224, 252, 316, 322, 332, 336\nPoznan, Poland\n104\nPR3 aircraft\n5\nPratt, Perry W.\n31\nPratt & Whitney\n12, 31, 35, 40, 48, 67, 71, 152, 217,\n251, 268, 270, 284-285, 290\nPratt & Whitney J58 power plant\n270\nPratt & Whitney J75-P13 jet engine\n152\nPratt & Whitney J75/19W engines\n284\nPratt and Whitney J57\n12\n\nPresident's Board of Consultants on\nForeign Intelligence Activities\n37, 127, 167, 170, 190, 192, 328,\n330\nPresident's Foreign Intelligence\nAdvisory Board\n37\nPresident's Intelligence Checklist\n201\nPresident's Science Advisory Committee\n37\npressure suits\n64, 247\npressurized \"spacesuit\"\n63\nPrettyman, E. Barrett\n184-185\nPrettyman Board\n185\nPrinceton University\n29\nprocessing and interpretation centers\n115\nProject Director\n61, 82, 329\nProject Officer, AFCIG-5\n61\nProject Staff\n40-43, 56, 72-73, 82, 89,\n170, 299\nProject Three\n27, 29-34, 327\npropaganda\n88, 160, 162, 183, 186, 317\nPryor, Frederick\n183\npsychological warfare\n186, 222\nPueblo\n242, 307, 320\nPuerto Rico\n207, 211\nPulse-Position Indicator display\n267\nPurcell, Edward M.\n18, 29, 110-111, 129, 260, 263,\n271, 274, 332\nPutt, Donald L.\n11, 35-36, 40\nPVO [Soviet Air Defense]\n174"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":391,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nIndex\n\n378\n\nPyroceram\n268, 271\n\nQ\n\nQuarles, Donald\n81, 127, 144-145, 161-162, 263, 267\nQuarters Eye\n42\nquartz glass window\n282\nQue Building\n83, 111\nQuemoy\n215, 229\nQUICK KICK\n216\nquick-reaction capability\n301, 313\n\nR\n\nRaborn, William F., Jr.\n240, 301, 332\nradar\n3, 7, 15, 19, 23, , 82, 87, 94, 97, 101,\n104-106, 110-111, 123, 128-130, 132-134,\n139, 142, 144, 148, 168, 175-176, 178,\n197, 211, 215, 230, 234-237, 239, 241-243,\n247, 257, 259-260, 263, 267-271, 273-274,\n277, 289, 294, 300, 303-307, 310-311, 317,\n331-332, 335-336, 339, 341-342\n\nradar camouflage\n128\nradar cross section\n15, 260, 263, 267-270, 271, 273-274,\n277, 300, 332, 339, 341-343, 110\nradar deception\n130\nradar defense systems\n343\nradar image\n259, 332\nradar pulses\n87, 110, 130, 175, 268, 335\n\nradar signature\n341-342\nradar technology\n7\nradar-absorbing\n111, 260\nradar-deflecting\n260\nradar-homing unit\n342\nRadford, Arthur W.\n122-124, 126\nRadhakrishnan, Savepalli\n232\nRadiation Laboratories\n330\nRADINT\n189\nradio\n2, 7, 19, 75, 87, 175-176, 186,\n268, 289, 332\nRAINBOW\n111, 129-130, 259\nRamenskoye, Soviet Union\n20, 105\nRamey AFB, Puerto Rico\n211\nramjet-powered\n262-263, 268, 291\nRamo-Wooldridge firm\n335\nRAND Corporation\n20, 26, 85\nRandolph AFB, Texas\n73\nRandsburg Wash\n340\nRay, Walter\n302\n\"ray-tracing\" programs\n52, 55\nRB-29 aircraft\n3-4\nRB-47 aircraft\n3, 22, 182, 186\nRB-52 aircraft\n22\nRB-57 aircraft\n26, 35, 40, 134, 223\nRB-57D aircraft\n6, 126, 162"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":392,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nIndex\n\n379\n\nRB-58 aircraft\n22\nReber, James\n81, 114-115, 154, 332\nreconnaissance\n1-9, 12-19, 21-25, 27, 30-37,\n39, 41, 43, 46, 49, 52, 55, 59,\n61-62, 66, 80, 84, 94, 96, 98, 109,\n113, 115-116, 119, 122, 126-127,\n133, 153-154, 161-162, 188-193,\n196-197, 201, 205-206, 208, 210-212,\n216, 222-223, 226, 228, 230-233, 240,\n249, 253-254, 260, 262-263, 267-268,\n270, 287, 291-292, 295, 297-299, 301,\n303-304, 308-309, 311-313, 319-322,\n327-331, 333, 339, 341-344\nreconnaissance aircraft competition\n9\nreconnaissance drones\n301\nreconnaissance satellite project\n161\n\"reconnaissance strike\"\n295\nReconnaissance Systems Branch\n4\nrecords, altitude\n302\nrecords, speed\n302\nRED DOT\n254\nreflecting cube\n281\nreflective system\n55\nrefueling\n114, 198-200, 231, 237, 241,\n302, 306, 308\nrefugees\n2\nRepublic RF-84F Thunderflash\n22\nResearch, Directorate of\n192, 287\nResearch and Development, Director of\n66\nResearch and Reports (ORR), Office of\n21, 81, 237\nReturnee Exploitation Group (REG)\n2\nRevolutionary Council\n212\n\nRhodes\n116-117\nRidenour, Louis N.\n18\nRidenour Associates, Inc.\n18\nRitland, Osmond\n56, 61, 70, 78\nROBIN\n23\nROBIN HOOD\n211\nRobinson, Robert\n164\nrocket planes\n60\nrocket-powered aircraft\n312\nRodgers, Franklin A.\n129, 267-268, 274, 332\nRodgers' Effect\n267\nRolls-Royce Avon-109 engines\n5, 23\nRomania\n101\nRoot, L. Eugene\n9, 24\nRose, Wilburn S.\n40, 79-80\n[REDACTED]\nrunway\n57, 68-69, 79-80, 108, 140, 176,\n283-284, 291, 302, 305\n[REDACTED]\nRS-71\n295\nRuseckas, Joseph\n63\nRusk, Dean\n183, 201, 209, 236, 293, 304, 307"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":393,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nIndex\n\n380\n\nRussell, Richard B.\n88\nRyan Aircraft\n343\n\nS\n\nS-band radar\n87\nsailplane\n10-11, 24-26, 47\nSakhalin Island\n201\nSaltonstall, Leverett\n88\nSAM site\n177, 205, 306\nSan Cristobal, Cuba\n206-207, 209\nSan Diego, California\n247, 343\nSANDY HOOK\n343\nSanta Barbara Channel\n254\nSanta Clara Airfield, Cuba\n201\nSaratov Engels Airfield, Soviet Union\n164\nSaryshagan, Soviet Union\n139, 168, 232, 336\nsatellite imagery\n298, 255\nsatellite navigation systems\n341\nsatellite photography\n87, 195-197, 226, 233, 237, 241\nsatellites\n22, 100, 104, 159, 162, 211, 299,\n303, 312, 320, 322, 328\nSaville, Gordon P.\n17-18\nSchalk, Louis\n288-289\nSchlesinger, James R.\n257, 333\nSchoech, William A.\n285\n\nSchriever, Bernard A.\n7, 11\nSchultze, Charles L.\n309\nScience and Technology, Directorate of\n193, 287, 328\nScience and Technology, Special Assistant\nto the President for\n37\nScientific Advisory Board\n17, 23\nScientific Advisory Committee\n17, 89, 332\nScientific Engineering Institute (SEI)\n110-111, 129, 260, 267, 274, 331-332\nScientific Intelligence (OSI), Office of\n14, 21, 39, 81, 97, 331, 333\nSCOPE COTTON\n310\nSCOPE CRANE\n242\nSCOPE LOGIC\n303\nSCOPE SAINT\n255\nSCOPE SAINT-I\n255\nSCOPE SAINT-II\n255\nSCOPE SHIELD\n246-247\nScott, Roderick M.\n51, 53, 281, 333\nScoville, Herbert\n207, 287, 289, 333\nSCR-270 radar\n7\nScranton-Wilkes-Barre Airport, Pennsylvania\n222\nSea of Japan\n3\nSeaberg, John\n8-9, 12, 35-36, 333\nSEAFOAM\n211\nsealant\n286, 288\nsecrecy agreements\n295"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":394,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nIndex\n\n381\n\nsecurity\n2, 27, 40-41, 43, 55, 59-60, 72, 81,\n94, 112, 125, 127, 140, 161, 167,\n185, 187-188, 191, 197, 201, 209,\n212, 218, 221-222, 224, 236, 256,\n273, 283-284, 294, 318, 327\nSecurity, Office of\n59, 112, 222\nSemipalatinsk, Soviet Union\n128, 138-139, 147, 168\nSENSINT--Sensitive Intelligence\n3\nsensors\n11, 22, 241, 292, 310\nSeventh Air Division\n89\nSeverodvinsk, Soviet Union\n172, 176\nShanghai, China\n222, 228, 242\nsheep-dipping\n74\nShell Oil Company\n62, 328\nshellfish toxin\n125\nShelton, William\n125, 176\nshock wave\n290-291\nshort-range reconnaissance vehicle\n342\nshow trial\n183\nShuangchengzi, China\n226, 228, 235\nshutter assemblies\n53\nSiberia\n3\nSichuan, China\n230\nSicily\n116\nSieker, Robert\n131\nSierra snowfield\n254\nSIGINT Committee\n332\nSignals Intelligence (SIGINT)\n222\n\nSinai peninsula\n117\n\"single-pass\" mission\n306\nSino-Indian border\n231-233, 319\nSino-Soviet border\n336\n\"Skonk Works\"\n45\nSkunk Works\n45, 71, 132, 251, 262, 273-274\nSKYLARK\n299\nSmithsonian Institution\n55\n\"snap-up\"\n148\nSnark missiles\n22\nSnider, Sammy V. C.\n138\nsnowmelt\n254\nSOFT TOUCH\n135, 139, 143\nsoftware algorithms\n52\nsolar cells\n240\nsolid-fueled missiles\n161, 317\nsound barrier\n289\nSOUTH GATE\n216\nSouth Vietnam\n230-231, 243, 301, 305\nSoutheast Asia\n190, 198, 216, 221, 301, 310\nSovetskaya Gavan', Soviet Union\n144\nSoviet Bloc\n1-2, 4, 6, 16-20, 87, 93, 112, 123,\n147, 152, 159, 195, 197, 211, 330\nSoviet Communist Party Congress\n160\nSoviet Far East\n134, 144"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":395,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nIndex\n\n382\n\nSoviet Union\n1-3, 4-7, 14-27, 31, 39, 65, 81-89,\n93-101, 104-106, 108-112, 120,\n122-124, 126-130, 133-135, 137-\n140, 142-149, 152-157, 159-165,\n167-168, 170-172, 174-183, 186-187,\n189, 195-197, 200-201, 205-206,\n209-211, 215, 219, 221, 225, 232, 237,\n247, 254, 259, 294, 297-299, 301,\n303-304, 312, 315-320, 322, 329-330,\n332, 335-336, 339, 341, 344\nactivity in Cuba\n200, 201\nair defense system\n2, 3, 108, 168, 170, 317\nair power of the\n20\nair show\n98\natomic energy program\n317\nbomber\n21, 111, 167, 317\nborders\n123, 127, 143\ndiplomatic protests\n315\nelectronic defenses\n317\nfighters\n3, 5, 23, 26, 127, 144\nG-class ballistic-missile submarine\n237\nguided missile and nuclear programs\n135\nguided missile research\n99\nguided missiles\n81, 99\nguided-missile test range\n16\nintentions\n4, 318\nintercept attempts\n142\ninterception of U-2\n19, 24-25, 47, 87, 106, 108, 110, 122,\n127, 134, 144, 170, 244, 270, 315, 339\nmedium-range ballistic missiles\n201, 206\n\nmissile program\n128, 159-161, 163-164\nmissile test range\n16, 23, 143, 164, 167, 176\noverflight operation\n110\npropaganda campaign\n317\nProtest Note\n109\nradar coverage\n106\nradars\n3, 7, 15, 97, 130, 134, 168, 176,\n259, 339\nrail network\n167\nstrategic capabilities\n2, 19\nSupreme Soviet\n179\nsurface-to-air missile (SAM)\n177, 168, 304\nsurprise attack\n19, 26-27, 89, 147, 159, 329-330\nSoviet-Finnish border\n303, 142\nSoviet-Iranian border\n124, 162-163, 168\nSpecial Activities, Director of\n193\nSpecial Activities (OSA), Office of\n43, 192-193, 207, 234-235, 242, 247,\n252, 257, 288, 296-297, 299, 303, 312,\n328, 341-342, 344\nSpecial Assistant for National Security Affairs\n188\nSpecial Assistant to the DCI\n40\n\"special\" missions\n116\nSpecial Operations Division\n192\nSpica, Incorporated\n51\nspotting camera\n282\nSputnik\n159\nSQUARE DEAL\n168, 170"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":396,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SR-71\n295, 302, 308-311, 321\nSS-4 (SHYSTER) MRBM\n206\nSS-6 ICBM\n160, 165, 171-172\n\nstainless steel\n277, 280\nStassen, Harold\n330\nState Department\n81, 95, 101, 146, 154, 163, 179, 186,\n196-197, 212, 224-225, 229, 243, 249\n\"stealth\" research\n313\nstereo camera\n281, 252\nstereoscopic lenses\n250\nSteuart Building\n83, 111, 114\nSTEVER\n260, 333\nStockman, Hervey\n65, 104-105\nSTPOLLY\n222, 224, 240\nStrategic Air Command (SAC)\n11, 14, 17, 20, 26, 42, 60, 74-76, 78,\n89, 93, 95, 198, 201, 207-210, 299, 230\nmeteorologists\n42\nstrategic bombing\n49\n\"strategic hamlet\"\n230\nstrategic intelligence\n82, 115, 152, 302, 304, 313, 315,\n319, 322\nstrategic reconnaissance\n9, 122, 230, 295, 297, 299, 313,\n320, 322, 329\nStrauss, Lewis\n56\nStrong, Philip G.\n14-17, 21-22, 24-25, 29-30, 333\nsubsonic\n8, 14, 260, 263\n\nSuez Canal\n112-114, 117, 120, 256\nSuez Canal, Israeli-British-French attack on\n116\nSuez Canal Company\n112-113\nSuez Crisis\n152\nSuhrawardy, Huseyn Shaheed\n135\nsuicide pill\n65\nSukarno, Achmed\n212, 215\nSulawesi (Celebes)\n212\nSullivan, Dennis\n307\nSumatra\n212\nSUN SPOT\n171\nSuper Snooper\n132\nsupersonic designs\n260\nsupersonic interceptor\n285\nsupersonic technology\n292-293\nSupport, Directorate of\n40, 83\nsurface-to-air missile (SA-2) sites\n201\nsurface-to-air missiles\n257, 299, 301, 303, 339\nsurface-to-surface missiles\n205-206, 209, 304, 306\nSverdlovsk, Soviet Union\n172, 176-179, 185\nSymington, Stuart\n99, 161\nsynthetic lubricants\n279\nSyria\n114, 120, 133, 153\nSyrian radars\n343\nSystem-I\n335"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":397,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"System-II\n335\nSystem-III\n335-336\nSystem-IV\n335\nSystem-V\n126, 215, 335\nSystem-VI\n335, 175\nSystem-VII\n335-336\nSystem-VIII\n335\nSystem-IX\n335\nSystem-IXB device\n175\nSystem-X\n256, 336\nSystem-XII units\n234\nSystem-XIII\n234, 236-237, 239\nSystem-XVI\n336\nSystem-XVII\n336\nSystem-XX\n336\nSystem-XXI\n336\nSystem-XXII\n336\nSystem-XXIV\n256\n\nT\n\n\nTaber, John\n88\nTACKLE\n224, 226, 228-230, 234-239, 241-246,\n253, 257, 282\ntactical intelligence\n304\n\ntactical reconnaissance\n9, 25, 115, 153\nTAGBOARD\n291\nTahiti\n250\ntailless subsonic aircraft\n263\nTaiwan\n215-216, 222, 224-225, 229,\n233, 236-237, 239, 241-243,\n246, 251\nTaiwan Strait\n229\nTa Khli, AFB, Thailand\n230\n\nTalbott, Harold E.\n13-14, 36\nTALL KING\n294\nTallinn, Estonia\n303\n\nTashkent, Soviet Union\n176\nTASS\n137\nTatar Strait\n144\nTaylor, Maxwell\n188\nTCP\n27\nTechnical Services Division (TSD)\n66, 125\nTechnicolor\n331\nTechnological Capabilities Panel\n26-27, 29-30, 35, 62, 80, 327-\n329, 332\nTechnology, Deputy for\n192\nTeheran, Iran\n144\nTeledyne J-100-CA-100 Turbojet engine\n343\nTeledyne Ryan Aeronautical Company\n343"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":398,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"television reconnaissance package\n343\nTennessee\n78, 238\ntent-ology\n116\ntest ban\n147\nTet offensive\n243\nTexas Instruments Corporation\n238, 282\n\nThird World\n211\nthree-camera trimetrogon unit\n52\nthree-dimensional movies\n29\n30001 camera\n333\n303 Committee\n243, 257, 301-302, 304, 307\nThule, Greenland\n172\nTibet\n157, 216, 219, 232\nTime\n99\nTIME STEP\n172, 174\nTitan ICBM\n160\ntitanium alloy\n271\nTitanium Metals Corporation\n280\nTOKEN\n87\nTomsk, Soviet Union\n138\nTOPPER\n219\nTOUCHDOWN\n163\nToulon, France\n116\ntracker camera\n241\n\ntracking\n3, 7, 52-53, 87, 97, 106, 128-129,\n144, 170, 176, 178, 234, 259, 263,\n267-268, 303, 307, 343\ntracking radars\n7, 267\nTrans-Siberian Railroad\n144\ntransport aircraft\n25, 45, 66\ntraveling-wave tube (TWT)\n236\ntrimetrogon K-17 mapping-camera system\n49\nTripartite Declaration, 1950\n117\ntropopause\n152\nTruman administration\n17\nTRW Corporation\n335\nTuamotu Archipelago\n249\n\"Tuesday lunch\"\n305\nTukey, John W.\n29\nturbojet engine\n8, 11, 262, 268, 343\nTurkey\n3, 112-114, 116, 121, 135, 146,\n152-153, 178, 181, 189, 247,\n316, 319\nTuslog Detachment 10-10\n113\nTwining, Nathan\n60-61, 86, 88, 96, 99, 101, 127,\n134, 139, 161, 165\nTyler Building\n43\nType-I camera\n281, 304, 310\nType-II camera\n281\nType-IV camera\n282\nTyphoon Winnie\n216\nTysons Corner, Virginia\n43"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":399,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Tyuratam, Soviet Union\n135, 137-138, 160, 163-165, 167-168,\n171-172, 176\n\nU\n\nU-1\n66\nU-2\naccomplishments\n316\nassembly\n45, 47, 66, 75, 164, 280, 284, 291\nbailout experiments\n64\nbases\n93\nbicycle-type landing gear\n47\nblue-black color\n149\nbrakes\n69\ncanopy\n80, 149, 177\ncockpit\n11, 63-64, 79, 125, 283, 292, 296\ncost\n34, 124, 149, 250-252, 263, 269, 273,\n280, 285-286, 309, 322, 341-342\ncover story\n60, 85, 89-90, 94, 99, 132, 156, 178-180,\n182, 207-208, 216, 224, 295\ncoverage\n316\ndeadstick landing\n79\ndeployment\n2, 74, 76, 78, 88-89, 93-94, 134, 161,\n165, 167, 247, 250, 255-257, 297,\n301-302, 304, 307, 313, 317, 332\ndesign\n47\ndestruction device\n177\ndetachable pogos\n47\nejection seat\n64, 177, 302\n\nemergency landing\n78, 188, 222, 313\nfilm exploitation\n115\nflameout\n71, 78-79, 131, 198, 229\nflight plans\n82, 177\nflights approval process\n187-188, 226, 301\nforeign pilots\n73-74, 321\nfuel\n5, 23, 47, 61-62, 68, 76, 133, 161, 175,\n199, 218-219, 231, 235, 241, 247-248,\n271, 274, 277-278, 283-284, 286, 288,\n302, 313, 340\nfuel consumption\n68, 219\nfuel gauge\n68, 219, 302\nfuselage\n10, 24, 47, 130, 248, 251, 270, 277, 286\ninspection procedures\n297\nlanding gear\n10-12, 15, 47-48, 69, 89, 248\nlow-speed stall\n76\nmaiden flight\n66, 288\nmission 1104\n114\nmission 1105\n114\nmission 1314\n117\nmission 2003\n100\nmission 2009\n101\nmission 2010\n101\nmission 2013\n104-105\nmission 2014\n105\nmission 2020\n106\nmission 2021\n106"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":400,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"mission 2023\n108\nmission 2029\n124\nmission 3086\n200\nmission 3088\n200\nmission 3089\n201\nmission 3091\n205\nmission 3093\n205\nmission 3095\n205\nmission 3098\n206\nmission 3100\n206\nmission 4016\n124\nmission 4018\n124\nmission 4019\n126\nmission 4030\n133\nmission 4154\n175\nmission 4155\n168\nmission 6011\n144\nmission length\n199\nmission plotting\n60\nmission programmers\n78\nmissions\n59, 75, 82, 87, 106, 114, 124, 127,\n129, 154, 164, 167, 179, 187, 196, 207,\n210, 224, 237, 245, 254, 263, 316-317,\n322, 336\nNationalist Chinese crews\n222\noleostrut\n47, 69\noperational altitude\n76, 79, 108, 152\nOperational Objective system\n309\n\nOperational Readiness Inspection\n77\noutrigger wheels\n79\noverflights\n6, 32, 62, 74, 76-77, 84-86, 88-89,\n94-98, 100-101, 104-106, 108-111,\n114, 116, 122-128, 135, 138-140,\n142-143, 146, 148, 152, 154-157,\n159, 161-165, 167-168, 170, 172,\n180-181, 195-198, 200-201, 205-206,\n208, 210-211, 219, 222-226, 228-237,\n239-240, 242-244, 249, 253, 257, 259,\n294, 297-301, 310, 315-317, 318-320,\n322\npaint penalty\n149\npayload\n262, 8, 11, 50, 54, 340, 87, 145, 152\nperipheral missions\n189, 206, 244, 246\nphaseout\n257, 310\npilot fatigue\n199\npilot hypoxia\n80\npilot life-support system\n64\npilot selection\n60, 283\npilot-survival gear\n62\npilot training program\n75\npilot urination\n64\npilots\n42, 299, 47, 56, 59-60,62-66, 68-69,\n71-77, 79-80, 94, 109, 113-114, 116,\n125, 127, 132-135, 140, 148-149, 153-\n156, 164, 175-176, 179, 181-183, 186-187,\n198-199, 207-212, 214, 221, 223-226,\n229-230, 233-236, 238-240, 243, 246-248,\n250-253, 256, 283, 319, 321, 332, 340\npilots dessicated\n65\npitch-control servo device\n296\npogos\n47, 79, 108"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":401,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nIndex\n388\n\nprebreathing\n64, 125\nprojects\n39-40, 42-44, 56, 59, 61-62, 71, 73,\n74, 81-82, 88-89, 97, 153-155, 157,\n186, 257, 316, 327-331\nrocking mount\n51, 53\nstall envelope\n71\nstalls\n80\ntail section\n47, 76\ntaxi trials\n68-69\ntraining\n302\nvertical stabilizers\n277, 343\nvulnerability study\n97, 207\nU-2B\n95\nU-2Cs\n152, 196, 208, 210, 217\nU-2F\n198\nU-2G\n248, 250, 252, 255\nU-2R\n251-253, 257, 282, 336\nU-3\n66\nUkraine\n106\nUnder Secretary of State\n188, 225\nUnidentified Flying Objects (UFOs)\n72\nUnited Arab Republic\n153\nUnited Kingdom (See Great Britain)\nUnited Kingdom Requirements Committee\n154\nUnited Nations\n20\nUnited Press International (UPI)\n232\nUnited States\n2-4, 7-8, 19-21, 26-27, 73, 77-78,\n85, 89-90, 96, 98-100, 108-110, 112,\n117, 121, 124, 140, 142, 147-148, 153-156,\n159, 161, 163-164, 179, 181-183, 187, 201,\n205, 215, 221-222, 224-226, 229-232, 245-\n247, 254, 256, 285, 294, 297, 299, 301-302,\n306, 315, 60, 316, 318-319, 332\nunmanned reconnaissance aircraft\n291, 304\nUPWIND\n303\nUrals\n22, 163\nuranium gaseous-diffusion plant\n239\nuranium-processing facility\n138\nUS Air Attache in Moscow\n177\nUS Air Force, Secretary of the\n11, 32, 78, 81, 327-329\nUS Air Force\nAir Weather Service\n94\nChief of Air Staff\n78\nEC-130, 146\nInspector General\n61\noxygen mask\n62\nRB-57D Canberra\n162\nThird Air Force\n89\nUS deterrent force\n317\nUS Geological Survey\n254\nUS House of Representatives\nAppropriations Committee\n88\nUS Marine Corps\n40, 153, 247, 328\nUS Marine Corps Reserve\n14\nUS Military Academy at West Point\n329\nUS Navy\nChief of Naval Materiel\n285"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":402,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Neptune bomber\n3\nPrivateer patrol aircraft\n3\nNaval Ordnance Test Station\n340\nU.S. News and World Report\n99\nUS nuclear test monitoring system\n139\nUS nuclear tests\n147\nUS Senate, Armed Services Committee\n88, 99, 185\nUS Senate, Foreign Relations Committee\n165, 185\nUS 6th Fleet\n153\nUS 7th Fleet\n215\nUS Intelligence Board (USIB)\n196-197, 225, 228, 249, 332, 336\nUSS Kitty Hawk\n247\nUSS Ranger\n250\nutility aircraft\n66\n\nV\n\nVance, Cyrus\n238, 300, 309-310\nVenezuela\n211\nvernier adjustment\n76\nvery-high-acuity lenses\n50\nViet Cong\n230, 243\nVietnam\n190, 216, 221-222, 230-231, 233-234,\n242-243, 246, 301, 304-308, 311, 336,\n342-343\nVito, Carmine\n65, 105, 124-125, 214\nVladimirovka, Soviet Union\n171\nVladivostok, Soviet Union\n3, 126\nVogt, Richard\n8\nVoigt, Woldemar\n8\nVolga River\n22\nvon Fritsche, Werner\n1\n\nW\n\nWADC's Bombardment Branch\n8\nWake Island\n305\nWalker, Christopher H.\n155\nwallpaper\n130\nWalter Reed Hospital\n96\nWarsaw Pact\n87\nWashington University, St. Louis\n29\nWatertown Strip\n57\nWatton RAF Base, England\n156\n\"weather plane\" cover story\n179\nweather research\n85-86, 89-90, 132, 182\nWeatherwise\n216\nWendover, Utah\n295\nWest Potomac Park\n42\nWestern Europe\n20, 85, 140\nWestern Hemisphere\n211\n\"wet-wing\" design\n68"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":403,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nIndex\n390\n\nWHALE TALE\n247, 249\nWheelon, Albert (Bud)\n240, 287, 333\nWheelus AFB\n121\nWhite House\n33, 43, 97, 109, 111-112, 120, 122,\n128, 154, 172, 186, 189\nWienberg, Charles F. (Bud)\n7, 11-12\nWiesbaden, Germany\n80, 95, 104-105, 108, 114-115,\n120-121\nWiesner, Jerome B.\n37\nWilliams, John J.\n185\nWilliamsport, Pennsylvania\n222\nWilson, Charles\n126\nwind currents\n87\nwind tunnels\n269\nwing teeth\n277\nwings\n5, 8, 11, 23-25, 42, 45, 47, 66, 68,\n72, 75-76, 80, 89, 95, 129, 148-149,\n199, 242, 248, 251, 271, 274, 277,\n286, 312, 340\nwiretaps\n2\nWonsan Harbor\n307\nWorcester, Massachusetts\n62\nworld press\n85, 122\nWorld War I\n1\nWorld War II\n1-2, 4, 7-8, 13, 15, 17, 22, 42,\n49, 56, 62, 87, 95, 97, 124, 135,\n214, 222, 232, 317, 322, 327-331\n\nWright Air Development Command\n4-5, 8, 12, 14, 18, 35, 73\nWright-Patterson\n73\nWRINGER\n2\nWS-461L\n144-145\nWu-ch'ang, China\n228\n\nX\n\nXF-104\n(See Lockheed Day Fighter)\nX-16\n9, 13, 15, 26, 34-35\nX-band radar pulses\n335\nX-rays\n291\n\nY\n\nYAK-25RM\n(See Mandrake)\nYAK-26\n(See Mandrake)\nYakovlev\n148\nYakovlev-25\n148\nYale University\n15\nYancey, William F.\n75, 77-78\nYC-97 Boeing Stratocruiser\n13\nYerevan, Soviet Union\n124\nYF-12A\n285, 291, 294, 308\n50z(See also AF-12)\nYokota AFB, Japan\n134"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":404,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\nIndex\n391\n\nYur'ya, Soviet Union\n176\nYutzy, Henry\n31"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":405,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"392\n\n- Blank -"} {"doc_id":"e84736732086e351","page":406,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Secret NOFORN\n\nSecret"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\nINT 2-2-7 UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFO)\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 974373"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/tjc/71092\nWrtn 3 Jan 55\nINT 2-2-7\nFrankson, Robt. D. Mr.\nX Meteorite\n3 January 1955\nMEMORANDUM FOR MATERIEL AND OPERATIONS BRANCH, SAFLL\nATTN: Mr. Robert D. Wilson\nSUBJECT: Alabama Meteorite\nIn connection with the attached letter to Senator Sparkman concerning the \"seizure\" of the Alabama meteorite, the following is offered as a basis for reply:\nThe Air Force feels a very definite obligation to identity and analyse things that happen in the air that have in them a menace to the United States and, because of that feeling and in pursuit of that interest, the Air Force established an activity known as the Unidentified Flying Object Program.\nIn connection with reports of an unidentified flying object which fell from the sky at Sylacauga, Alabama, the Air Force authorities at Maxwell Air Force Base sent two officers to investigate. The investigating officers talked with the Mayor and the Chief of Police of Sylacauga, Alabama, and the object which had fallen from the sky through the roof of Mrs. Hodges' home was turned over to them by these two public officials for further examination. It was flown to the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, and there determined to be a meteorite by competent technical officials. Subsequent to that it was returned to Mrs. Hodges through the intermediary efforts of SAFLL.\n1 Incl\nMemo Route Slip\ndtd 27 Dec 54 to\nAFOIN fr Mr Wilson,\nSAFLL w/1 Incl\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nAFOIN-X\nLt Col Bloomer\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nSAFLL-1/Mr Wilson/kba/71304/4 Jan 55\nSAFLL 24547-KM\nX meteorite\nX Davidson, Leon M.\n5 JAN 1955\nDear Mr. Davidson:\nYou recently requested a copy of a press release concerning the meteorite which I returned to the attorney for Mrs. Hewlett Hodges on 9 December 1954 in the office of Congressman Roberts of Alabama.\nThere was no press release issued by the Air Force concerning this matter. For your information I am setting forth the basic facts concerning the Air Force's interest in this meteorite. In line with the responsibility of air defense of the nation, the Air Force feels a very definite obligation to identify and analyse things which happen in the air and which may indicate a menace to the United States. The Air Force has established an activity known as the Unidentified Flying Object Program to pursue that interest.\nAt the time of the reports that an unidentified flying object fell from the sky at Sylacauga, Alabama, two Air Force officers from Maxwell Air Force Base, Montgomery, Alabama, were sent to investigate. The investigating officers talked with the Mayor and the Chief of Police of Sylacauga, Alabama, and the object which had fallen from the sky was turned over to them by these two public officials for further examination. It was flown to the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, and competent technical officials there determined it to be a meteorite. The Air Force then took immediate steps to have the meteorite returned to the attorney for Mrs. Hodges of Sylacauga, Alabama, upon whose home the meteorite fell.\nMR: Case in L&L & M&O 29 Dec w/susp 13 Jan. Case held in M&O awaiting info fm AFOIN on similar case. Final ltr prep & fwded based on similar ltr prep & fwded 4 Jan to Sen Sparkman SAFLL 24519-KM.\nSincerely yours,\nCOORD\nCOMEBACK\nAFOIN\nSAFLL-1\nStayback\nJOE W. KELLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\nMr. Leon Davidson\n14 Soundview Avenue\nWhite Plains, New York\nSAFLL-1 SAFLL"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ltr 2-2-7\nSAFLL-1/Mr Wilson/kba/71304/4 Jan 55\nSAFLL 24519-KM\nX Sparkman, John J. Hon.\n5 JAN 1955\nDear Senator Sparkman:\nI refer to your recent expression of interest in behalf of Mr. Paul W. Mathews concerning Air Force interest in the meteorite which struck in Sylacauga, Alabama, during November 1954.\nIn line with the responsibility of air defense of the nation, the Air Force feels a very definite obligation to identify and analyze things which happen in the air and which may indicate a menace to the United States. The Air Force has established an activity known as the Unidentified Flying Object Program to pursue that interest. At the time of the reports that an unidentified flying object fell from the sky at Sylacauga, Alabama, two Air Force officers from Maxwell Air Force Base, Montgomery, Alabama, were sent to investigate.\nThe investigating officers talked with the Mayor and the Chief of Police of Sylacauga, Alabama, and the object which had fallen from the sky was turned over to them by these two public officials for further examination. It was flown to the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, and competent technical officials there determined it to be a meteorite. The Air Force then took immediate steps to have the meteorite returned to the attorney for Mrs. Hewlett Hodges of Sylacauga, Alabama, upon whose home the meteorite fell.\nI trust that this information will serve to indicate that the Air Force has no desire to encroach upon the lives of private citizens but acts only in the defense of the United States.\nMR: Case in L&L & M&O 27 Dec w/susp 11 Jan. Ackl by phone 27 Dec & fwded to AFOIN f/info f/reply w/susp 5 Jan. Final ltr prep & fwded 4 Jan based on memo f/L&L fm AFOIN dtd 3 Jan /s/L/Col Bloomer. Similar ltr also prep & fwded 4 Jan to Mr Davidson (SAFLL 24547-KM)\nSincerely yours,\nCOORD\nCOMEBACK\nAFOIN\nSAFLL-1\nStayback\nInclosure\nLtr to Sen Sparkman fm Mr Mathews dtd 14 Dec\nHonorable John J. Sparkman\nUnited States Senate\nJOE W. KELLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\nSAFLL-1 SAFLL"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nSUSPENSE\nORIGIN OF BASIC\nSAFLL-1\nDATE\n5 Jan 55\nTYPE (ccy) Pers Ltr to Senator Sparkman\nDATE\nASSIGNED BY\nNUMBER\nSUBJECT\nAlabama Meteorite\nAFOIN No. 3346\nROUTING\nInitial \"IN\" column to denote review prior to action. Initial \"OUT\" column to denote review of completed action. (X for action; ✓ for coordination.)\nIN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\nOIN-1 OIN-2 OIN-3 AFOIN\nOIN-1X OIN-2X OIN-3X AFOIN\nAFOIN-X\nAFOIN-X\nOIN-X1\nOIN-X2\nOIN-X3\nOIN-X4\nOIN-X5\nCABLES\nFILE\nDISPATCH\nTO: IN-X2B2 (File with SFOIs)\nFROM:\nDATE\nCOMMENT NUMBER\nCOMMENTS (Use reverse, if necessary)\nAFHQ FORM 0-86 15 JUL 54 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM MAY BE USED. GPO 878528"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\n\nwrtn 10 Jan 55/AFOIN-X/kg/71092\nSchibler, Edward Mr.\n\n10 JAN 1955\n\nMr. Edward Schibler\nEiusiedler Street 189\nHorgen\nSwitzerland\n\nDear Mr. Schibler:\n\nThank you for your recent letter concerning flying objects.\n\nWe certainly appreciate your interest in the flying object program and have noted that you may have a plan for the development of one. The Air Force has an active program in this field and welcomes all information and ideas submitted. Any information you care to send us will be turned over to our analysts for evaluation.\n\nThank you again for your interest in this program.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSIGNED\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT 11 JAN 1955 SUMMT HQ USAF\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy\nCy for Capt Hardin\nATIC"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wrtn 10 Jan 55/AFOIN-X/kg/71092\n\nInt 2-2-7\nWallaby E.Mr.\n\n10 JAN 1955\n\nMr. E. Wallaby\nP. O. Box 70\nCleveland\nTransvaal, South Africa\n\nDear Mr. Wallaby:\n\nThank you for your recent letter in which you stated you are interested in the unidentified flying object program.\n\nThe Air Force has an active program in this field and welcomes all information submitted. Any information you care to send us will be turned over to our analysts for evaluation.\n\nFor your convenience I am inclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\" which I hope you will find interesting.\n\nThank you again for your interest in this matter.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSIGNED\n\n1 Incl\nUFOB Summary\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT 11 JAN 1955 SUMMT HQ USAF\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy\nCy for Capt Hardin\nATIC"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Int 2-2-7\nwrtn 10 Jan 55/AFOIN-X/kg/71092 Rescinded Receipt No.\n\n10 JAN 1955\n\nMr. Ralph Desiderio\n306 Paladino Avenue\nNew York 35, New York\n\nDear Mr. Desiderio:\n\nIn response to your recent request for information concerning flying objects, I am inclosing a copy of \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\" which I hope you will find interesting.\n\nThank you very much for your interest in this field and in the Air Force.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSIGNED\n\n1 Incl\nUFOB Summary\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT 11 JAN 1955 SUMMT HQ USAF\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"R. Desiderio\n306 Paladino Ave\nN.Y 35 N.Y.\n\nTHIS SIDE OF CARD IS FOR ADDRESS\n\nDEC 22 1954\n\nGRAND CENTRAL STATION\n\nProject Sign OIN\nWashington D.C.\n\nUSAF"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dear Sir,\nPlease send me any free information on \"Flying Saucers\" for my school report.\nThank you\nRalph Desiderio"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wrtn 10 Jan 55/AFOIN-X/kg/71092\n\nMr. Ramon Guthrie\nNorwich, Vermont\n\nDear Mr. Guthrie:\n\n Thank you for your letter of December 14 in which you reported\nyour observation of a flying object.\n\n The Air Force has an active program in this field and any\ninformation you care to submit will be turned over to our analysts\nfor evaluation.\n\n I am inclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events\nand Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\"\nwhich I hope you will find interesting.\n\n Thank you again for your interest in this matter.\n\n Sincerely,\n\n1 Incl\n UFOB Summary\n\n JOSEPH A. BLOOMER\n Lt Colonel, USAF\n Directorate of Intelligence"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AIR TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nOHIO\n\n10 JAN 1955\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, AFOIN-X\nPOLICY AND MANAGEMENT GROUP\n\nSUBJECT: (U) Unidentified Flying Objects\n\n Inclosed for your information is copy of reply to Mr. James\nD. Gullett, Honolulu 14, Hawaii, concerning action taken in regard\nto his letter of 2 December 1954 and file concerning Major Keyhoe's\nbook, addressed to Colonel Bloomer.\n\n1 Incl\n Ltr to Mr. Gullett\n fm ATIC\n\nR. C. SCHUM\nCWO, USAF\nAsst. Adj."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wrtn 11 Jan 55/AFOIN-X/kg/71092\n\n11 JAN 1955\n\nMr. Harry D. Krauss\n202 Brookside Avenue\nWilmington, Delaware\n\nDear Mr. Krauss:\n\n Your recent letter addressed to the Secretary of Defense has\nbeen referred to the Air Force for reply.\n\n The Air Force appreciates your interest in Flying Objects and\nhas noted that you may have a plan for the development or construction\nof one. The Air Force has an active program in this field and welcomes\nall information and ideas submitted. Any information you may care to\nsend us will be turned over to our analysts for evaluation.\n\n Sincerely,\n\n JOSEPH A. BLOOMER\n Lt Colonel, USAF\n Directorate of Intelligence\n\n Coord Cy\n X-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wrtn 11 Jan 55/AFOIN-X/kg/71092\n\n11 JAN 1955\n\nMr. Kenneth Hansen\n129-02 94 Avenue\nRichmond Hill 19\nLong Island, New York\n\nDear Kenneth:\n\n Thank you very much for your recent letter expressing your\ninterest in Unidentified Flying Objects.\n\n As you are aware, the U. S. Air Force has had a major active\nprogram in this field for the past several years. I am inclosing\nfor your convenience a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of\nEvents and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object\nProgram\" which compiles the latest facts the Air Force has estab-\nlished in this field. I believe you will find the attached phamphlet\ninteresting and informative.\n\n Your interest in the Air Force is greatly appreciated.\n\n Sincerely,\n\n1 Incl\n UFOB Summary\n\n JOSEPH A. BLOOMER\n Lt Colonel, USAF\n Directorate of Intelligence\n\n Coord Cy\n X-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"129-02 94 Ave.\nRichmond Hill 19\nL.I. N.Y.\nJanuary 4, 1955\n\nU.S. Air Force\nProject Bluebook\n(Flying Saucers)\n\nDear Sirs:\n My name is Kenneth Hansen. I\nam a student at Richmond Hill High School\nin the borough of Queens, L.I. N.Y. I\nam in my third term and have Public Speak-\ning as a major subject. As a part of\nthe final mark we were all asked to give\na speech to convince. I decided that\nmyself and two other boys would try to\nconvince the class that Flying Saucers\nare real and that they are interplanet-\nary. We thought this would be easy.\nBut we soon found out that at least three\nquarters of the class did not believe us.\n Two very smart students in this\nclass have already seen a U.F.O. Our\nspeeches must have been good since my\nmark was 99, the two other boys marks\nwere 97, and 90.\n We asked those who did not be-\nlieve us what proof we could give them.\nThey said they wanted tangible proof.\nWe showed them pictures of U.F.O.s that\nGeorge Adamski took at Palomar Observat-\nory.\n I would like to know if you\nhave any information that is in leaflet\nform that I could buy. Also if you have\nany slide pictures I could by that we\nbe of some use to show to the class.\nIf you have any information concerning"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"these Flying Saucers I would very much\nlike to hear from you. I am very interest-\ned in the reports of these many U.F.O.\nsightings.\n\nIf you would write a letter\nto me even if you do not have any infor-\nmation I would like to read the letter to\nthe class to show them that the Air Force\nist taking a interest in these Flying\nSaucers. Thank you.\n\nYours truly,\nKenneth Hansen"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nwrtn 11 Jan 55/AFOIH-X/kg/71092\nx Frank, Mike Mr.\n11 JAN 1955\n\nMr. Mike Frank\n2611 Marcia Boulevard\nCuyahoga Falls, Ohio\n\nDear Mr. Frank:\n\nIn response to your letter I am enclosing a copy of the\n\"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning\nthe Unidentified Flying Object Program.\"\n\nThere is no charge for flying object information. The\nthirty cents 30¢ you sent us is enclosed herewith.\n\nThank you for your interest in the Air Force.\n\nSincerely,\n\n2 Incls\n1. UFOB Summary\n2. Thirty cents 30¢\n\nSIGNED\nJOSEPH A. BLOCKER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"X\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI would like some information\non flying saucers, on some of\nthe reports and some that have\nlanded and on the writing\nthat George Adamski who lives\nin California.\n\nFor this information I\nenclose 30¢\n\nFrom,\nmike Frank\n2611 Marcia Bold,\nCuyahoga Falls,\nOhio\n\nP.S. Please send some information\non what orbit (or orbit the planet it\ncame from, Please send some\npictures on the most\ninside\n\nCH-329\n329"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAFLL-1/Mr Wilson/kma/71304/14 Jan 55\nSAFLL 00845-KH\n\nX\n\nint 2-2-7\n\n5 JAN 1955\n\nDear Mr. Lewis:\n\nYour recent letter to The President of the United States\nconcerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program has been\nreferred to the Department of the Air Force for reply.\n\nFor your convenience I am attaching a copy of the \"Air\nForce Summary of Events and Information Concerning the\nUnidentified Flying Object Program.\" This summary compiles\nthe facts which have been proven in our investigations to\ndate.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJOE W. KELLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\n\nCOORD\nCOMEBACK\nAFOIN\nSAFIS\nAF Press Desk\nSAFLL-1\nStayback\n\nInclosure\nUFO Summary\nMr. Jim Lewis\n1352 Bedford Road\nSan Marino, California\n\nNR: Case in I&L & MAO 14 Jan w/susp 28 Jan.\nNo sekl necessary. Final ltr prep & fwded 14 Jan\nbased on policy answer & inclosing requested info.\n\nSAFLL-1 SAFLL"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nREC'D\n18 JAN 1955\nDIR/INT\nHD USAF\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wrtn 18 Jan 55/AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/kg/71092\n\n18 January 1955\n\nMr. Bill Wilson\nBox 1471\nPalacios, Texas\n\nDear Mr. Wilson:\n\n Your recent request for information concerning unidentified flying objects has been received by the Air Force.\n\n Attached you will find a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\" which I hope you will find interesting.\n\nSincerely,\n\n1 Incl\n UFOB Summary\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Box 1471\nPalacios, Texas\n\nDear Sir:\nI would like to have the latest information on the U.F.O.'s (flying saucers)\nThank you,\nBill Wilson"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/met/71092/18 Jan\nHoward Sockel\n\n18 January 1955\n\nHoward Sockel\n3321 W. Grenshaw Street\nChicago 24, Illinois\n\nDear Howard:\n\n Your recent letter addressed to the Secretary of the Air Force has been referred to this office for reply.\n\n As you are undoubtedly aware, the Air Force has had a major active program in the field of unidentified flying objects for the past several years. Far from withholding information from the public on this particular program, it is rather our policy to distribute to the press and radio and other news media periodic revisions of progress made.\n\n For your convenience, I am attaching a copy of \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program,\" which compiles all of the latest facts established by the Air Force in its program in this area.\n\n Thank you for your interest in the Air Force.\n\nSincerely,\n\n1 Incl\n \"USAF Summary\"\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"H-385\n\n12/31/54\n3321 W. Grenshaw Str.\nChicago 24, Ill.\n\nMy dear, Mr. Sec. of the Air Force:\n\n I am addressing this letter to you because I have good reason to believe that you above all would know about such things. In the past five years I have become extremely interested in flying saucers and anything to do with them.\n\n I am in my last year of high school and have been wondering about what kind of a course in college that might prepare me for a future hope of investigating these objects.\n\n Although your department has said that there is no such thing as a U. F. O. and since there is no such thing as a U F O there is no need to investigate them I would like your honest opinion of what I should do about my fascination for these saucers and my hope of being fit to examine anything to do with them.\n\n Since many of the worlds most famous scientists are now working on these saucers and so many have voiced their opinion on them, I do not think that I am out of place in writing to you about them.\n\n I would appreciate a reply from you personally.\n\nMost respectfully yours,\n\nHoward Sockel\n\nP. S. If I am not too bold in telling you a little honest advice. I wish that your department would go back to the policy of slowly letting the public know about these saucers instead of hiding the evidence."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCOMING 0465\nJAN 6 13.39'55\nVICE CHIEF OF STAFF\nEXEC SERV DIV\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"If war was ever to break out and it could at any moment\nor time, and if Russia would let out that they control\nthe saucers, you would most certainly have to tell the\nAmerican people the truth to prevent total havoc.\n But on the other hand if you would slowly let\ninfomation leak out about these saucers and thus\nprepare the people for the final truth, I know that\nnothing bad could come of it. In this age the American\npeople could [REDACTED] stand anything, even the fact\nthat we are being visited by ........................"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"0465\nOUT\nJAN 6 3 10 PM '55\nVICE CHIEF OF STAFF\nEXEC SERV DIV\nOUT\nJAN 5 17 09 55\nOFFICE SECRETARY OF\nTHE AIR FORCE\nIN\nJAN 5 14 57 '55\nOFFICE SECRETARY OF\nTHE AIR FORCE\nRECEIVED\nJAN 6 1955\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT2-2-7\nSAFLL-1/Mr Wilson/cba/71304/21 Jan 55\nSAFLL 01361-AF\nX\nDenton, Winfield K.\nHonorable\n24 JAN 1955\nDear Mr. Denton:\n I refer to your recent expression of interest\nin behalf of Mr. P. M. Conner concerning the\nUnidentified Flying Object Program.\n For Mr. Conner's convenience, I am inclosing\na copy of the Air Force Summary of Events and\nInformation. This summary compiles the facts\nproven by our investigations to date.\n Sincerely yours,\n [signature]\n JOE W. KELLY\n Major General, USAF\n Director, Legislative Liaison\n2 Inclosures\n1. Ltr to Hon Mr Conner dtd 18 Jan\n2. UFO summary\nHonorable Winfield K. Denton\nHouse of Representatives\nNR: Case in [REDACTED] 21 Jan w/susp 4 Feb.\nFinal ltr prep & typed 21 Jan based on\npolicy answer & inclosing requested info.\nSAFLL-1 SAFLL\nCOORD\nCONEBACK\nSAFIS\nAFOIN\nAF Press\nDesk\nHLO\nSAFLL-1\nStayback"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECD 25 JAN 1955 DIRINT HD USAF\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nOFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nONR:463:PLF:pn\nSer 1545\n24 January 1955\n\nMr. Donald E. Keyhoe\n214 Kent Road\nAlexandria, Virginia\n\nDear Mr. Keyhoe:\n\nThis will acknowledge your letter of 2 December 1954, in which you requested information about unidentified flying objects.\n\nMany of the questions contained in your letter concern sighting reports by naval personnel. This Office does not receive such reports and is in no position to comment on matters related thereto. All reports of unidentified objects originating within the armed forces are sent directly to the cognizant group at Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio, since the Air Force is the responsible agency in this investigation. You are advised to refer to the Air Force all inquiries concerning such reports, regardless of their source.\n\nBoth the Army and the Navy are actively cooperating in the expeditious handling of sighting reports and assisting to the best of their abilities when requested by the responsible group within the Air Force. This Office maintains liaison with the Air Force in order to keep advised of the status of the investigation. According to the information received to date, there is insufficient data available to prove any single hypothesis regarding this peculiar phenomenon. There is no indication whatsoever that any danger may be involved.\n\nWith reference to your question concerning a statement by Dr. Urner Liddel that was published in Look Magazine in 1951, it should be stated that the opinions expressed in that article were based on the information available to him at the time. There is no doubt that many unidentified objects noted during that period were high altitude research balloons. The Air Force is now informed of all such balloon operations under cognizance of the Navy.\n\nFor your further information the Office of Naval Research is currently interested in many applications of magnetics and magnetic materials, including basic factors affecting them. However, no work in the field of \"magnetic power\" as such, is under consideration as a possible means of propulsion for guided missiles and/or space vehicles."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D\n25 JAN 1955\nDIR/INT\nHD USAF\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nOFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ONR:463:PLF:pn\nSer 1545\n24 January 1955\n\nYour interest in contacting this Office relative to this matter is appreciated, and it is regretted that more information of the type requested is not available. It is suggested that you contact the cognizant military agencies for the answers to your other questions.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nL. D. COATES\nCaptain, USN\nDeputy and Assistant Chief of Naval Research\n\nCopy to:\nONR Code 109\nDirector of Intelligence, U. S. Air Force"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Chief, Office of Naval Research\nNavy Department\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nAttention: Lt.Cdr. Frank Thomas, ONR.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nIn the past few months, I have received conflicting statements from various sources about the Navy's part in the investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects, and its opinions in certain cases. I should greatly appreciate official answers clarifying the Navy position in regard to the following items.\n\n1. The Tremonton, Utah motion picutres, taken by Navy Warrant Officer Delbert C. Newhouse, July 2, 1952, in the May, 1954 issue of TRUE Magazine, Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt, USAF, states that photographic experts found the Navy's evaluation methods faulty. This is contrary to my understanding. I have been led to believe, by informed sources, that the Navy analysis made these points:\n\nA. They (the objects) appear to be a light source rather than reflected light. It is felt that if they were reflected light some blinking would have occurred as they passed through the flight movements observed on the film.\n\nB. The size of the objects could not be determined as they appear merely as points of light, however they all seem to be of the same size.\n\nC. The shape of the objects could not be determined for the same reason, but they appear circular.\n\nD. The general color of the objects seems to be bluish-white, the other colors noted apparently being due to color aberration in the lens and to processing defects.\n\nE. Speed of the objects can be calculated only on the basis of the distance from the observer and their movement relative to the observer. If the distance is assumed to be five miles and the movement perpendicular to the line of sight, the objects could have been identified if within a distance of 5 miles, as it is felt that if the objects were balloons or aircraft of known dimensions, they could have been identified if within a distance of 5 miles."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 2, letter dated Dec. 2, 1954, to the Chief of the Office of Naval Research, attention of Lt. Cdr. Frank Thomas.\n\nThe resolution power of the lens is insufficient to identify objects of such dimensions if in excess of five miles. If the distance is assumed to be fived miles and the movement perpendicular to the line of sight, the average velocity would be 653.5 mph; likewise, at 2 1/2 miles distance the average speed would be 326.75 mph, and at 7 1/2 miles, 980.25 mph.\n\nF. Generally, the movement of the individual object in flight appears to follow an ellipitical or circular pattern within the group.\n\nG. It cannot be determined what the objects are. However, there are a few things which it is believed they are not:\n\n1. Balloons -- with the telephoto lens used, weather balloons within five miles distance could have been identified. The speeds calculated for the objects if only 2 1/2 miles away of 326.75 mph is in excess of any wind blown balloons.\n\n2. Aircraft -- within a five mile range an aircraft of 40 foot wing span could be identified clearly. At the time the photographs were taken, there was no group flying by aircraft capable of the assumed speeds, and certainly not capable of such maneuvers at those speeds.\n\n3. Birds -- these objects appear to be a light source rather than reflecting light, but should they be only reflecting light no bird is sufficiently reflective to cause the film to react as strongly as it has done.\n\n(This ends the material which, I understand, constitutes the main points of the official Navy analysis by the U. S. Navy Photo Interpretation Center, Washington, D. C.)\n\nI should like to know whether the points listed above are in accordance with the Navy analysis, and also any other information which can be given me in regard to the Tremonton, Utah picutres. I should like to know whether Warrant Officer Newhouse was ever given back the original of this film, whether he received a copy of the Navy analysis, and whether he is permitted to discuss the pictures with the press, or to correspond in regard to them.\n\n2. In 1951, Dr. Urner Liddel, of ONR, was quoted in LOOK Magazine and elsewhere as stating that \"There is not a single reliable report (of UFOs or Flying Saucers) which is not attributable to the cosmic balloons.\" In 1952 and 1953, I was officially informed by the Air Force that this was not correct, though they had carefully matched the course and position of cosmic-ray balloons with UFO sighting reports. In view of this, does the Navy agree with Dr. Liddel's 1951 statement? If so, why is the Navy taking part in the continued investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 3, letter dated Dec. 2, 1954, to the Chief of the Office of Naval Research, attention of Lt. Cdr. Frank Thomas...\n3. I should like to know whether the July 23d (1954) Potomac River Naval Command directive on UFO reporting has been revised since, and if so I should like to have a copy of the revised directive. I understand, after a study of Air Force Regulation 200-2, August 12, 1954, that the PRNO directive was based on this Air Force Regulation 200-2, and that this Navy cooperation was at the request of the Defense Department. Is this correct?\nAlso, I should like to know whether this directive, in the same or similar form, was issued in other Naval Districts, and to our Navy forces abroad.\n4. An ARC chemist, or a chemist formerly with ARC, named Leon Davidson, has written me his contention that the so-called \"Flying Saucers\" are secret Navy devices. He refers to alleged Navy secret annual reports and references to round aeroforms and artificial meteors, some of which he states were at least partly developed in 1942. Several times, I have discussed these suggestions with Rear Admiral Calvin Bolster, USN (now retired), and Rear Adm. Delmar Fahrney, USN, Ret., both of whom are classified as from Davidson. Both convinced me that there was absolutely no basis for such claims as Davidson has made. In addition, I am sure such devices would have made present jets obsolete; we would have used them in Korea — perhaps toward the end of World War 2 — and certainly would not now be in any serious danger from any other nation's conventional aircraft or conventional missiles. (We would, however, have violated the boundaries of practically every nation on earth, in tests and practice operations, if this were the true answer, since \"flying saucers\" have appeared practically everywhere on the Globe.) For all these reasons, I am absolutely convinced that the UFOs are not a secret device of this country. But I should like a direct answer on this point, unless it is inconsistent with national security. (I realize that the armed services may now be experimenting with devices that could be mistaken for the unidentified Flying Objects seen in our skies, or that the smaller ones, but I am sure there is no foundation for believing that secret American devices explain the sightings of the past 10 years — for the smaller ones, but I am sure there is no foundation for belittling nor most of the present ones)\n5. On May 14, 1954, according to the Dallas Times and several radio commentators, Major Charles Scarborough, USMCR, reported sighting a group of 16 UFOs which he said they could only describe as \"flying saucers\". He quoted statement was reportedly confirmed by members of the Marine Corps Jet Flight which he was leading at the time. I should like to have any Navy material available in regard to this sighting, including the final conclusion.\n6. I have been informed by various sources that UFOs were reported on the night of August 6-7, 1953, by one or more Navy pilots stationed at Barbers Point Naval Air Station, Hawaii. I should like to have any material available on this sighting."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Page 4, letter dated Dec. 2, 1954, to the Chief of the Office of Naval Research, attention of Lt. Cdr. Frank Thomas...\n7. Finally, I should like to have a statement of the Navy's conclusions, if available, in regard to the probable motives for the UFO operations. In the Navy's opinion, does the accumulated information on \"flying saucers\" or what the Air Force now terms UFOB's, constitute grounds for believing there is any attendant danger?\n8. According to a source I believe reliable, the Navy is now experimenting in the field of magnetic power, for propulsion of missiles and/or space vehicles. Since the Air Force publicly announced, some time ago, that it had contracted for research into all phases of magnetics, it seems logical to believe the Navy is carrying on similar research. Will the Navy verify this?\nI should welcome any additional information which you feel is appropriate, in regard to the Navy's position on Unidentified Flying Objects.\nVery truly yours,\n/s/ Donald E. Keyhoe\nMajor, U.S.Marine Corps, Ret."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nwrtn 25 Jan 55/AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/kg/71092\nGross, Zelda Mrs.\n25 January 1955\nMrs. Zelda Gross\n1202 South Orange Avenue\nOrlando, Florida\nDear Mrs. Gross:\nThank you for your letter of December 14 which described in detail your sighting of an unidentified flying object.\nAs you are possibly aware, the Air Force has had a major active program in this area over the past several years and your report has been turned over to our analysts for evaluation. The public is kept abreast of our activities in this field through the medium of periodically revised information releases to the press and other news media.\nFor your convenience I am inclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\", which compiles all the latest facts established by the Air Force in this area.\nThank you for your interest in the Air Force.\nSincerely,\n1 Incl\nUFOB Sum\nSIGNED\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nCoord Cy\nCy for ATIC"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nwrtn 25 Jan 55/Lt Col Bloomer/AFOIN-X/kg/71092\nAugustus, Ellsworth H. Mr.\n25 January 1955\nMr. Ellsworth H. Augustus\n1120 Hanna Building\nCleveland 15, Ohio\nDear Mr. Augustus:\nThank you for your letter of December 30 which describes in detail your sighting of an unidentified flying object.\nAs you are undoubtedly aware, the Air Force has had a major active program in this area over the past several years and your report has been turned over to our analysts for evaluation. The public in general is kept abreast of our activities in this field through the medium of periodically revised information releases to the press and other news media.\nFor your convenience I am inclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\", which compiles all the latest facts established by the Air Force in this area.\nThank you for your interest in the Air Force.\nSincerely,\n1 Incl\nUFOB Sum\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nCoord Cy\nCy for ATIC"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nwrtn 26 Jan 55/AFOIN-X/kg/71092\nWeiss, Maurice Mr.\n26 January 1955\nMr. Maurice J. Weiss\n56 West Mount Eden Avenue\nBronx 52, New York\nDear Mr. Weiss:\nIn reply to your letter of 22 January, I am inclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\", which compiles the latest facts the Air Force has established in this field.\nThank you for your interest in this matter.\nSincerely,\n1 Incl\nUFOB Sum\nSIGNED\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"56 W. Mt. Eden Avenue\nBronx 52, N.Y.\n22 January, 1955\n\nAir Technical Intelligence Command\nDepartment of the Air Force\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI have recently been engaged by \"Main Events,\" an evening session\nweekly newspaper at the City College, to do a series of articles on\ninterplanetary flight, which shall shortly be published.\n\nIn one of my installments it shall be necessary for me to deal with\nthe subject of \"flying saucers.\" In connection with this, I should\ndesire to know if it would be at all possible for me to obtain some\nphotographs (preferably 8\" X 10\" glossy) of the supposed saucers or UFO's.\n\nI should also be greatly appreciative of a fact sheet(s) in reference\nto some important sightings and the conclusions reached by the ATIC in\nconnection with those sightings.\n\nI wish to impress upon you that this installment (like the others) is\nintended merely as an attempt to reiterate the \"facts\" to my readers.\nHowever, I will express my opinions concerning this subject after con-\nsideration of the evidence.\n\nThis particular installment will be published in early March. Thank\nyou for your kind consideration and cooperation in this matter.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nP.S. If this information is not available,\nI should appreciate the address of the\ndivision of General-Mills that under-\ntakes the Skyhook projects."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MUIR, WALTER KEITH\nINT 2-2-7\n\n26 JAN 55\n\nFROM: AFOIN-1A1-16\n\nTO: U. S. AIR ATTACHE, AMERICAN EMBASSY, MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA\n\n1st IND.\nSUBJECT: CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED FROM FOREIGN NATIONAL\n\nFILED: INT 1-8"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Int 2-2-7\nSAFLL-1/Mr Wilson/mba/71304/26 Jan 55\nSAFLL 01367-KH\nA Davidson, Dear Dr.\n\n27 JAN 1955\n\nDear Dr. Davidson:\n\nI refer to your continued expression of interest concerning the Mylasanga, Alabama, meteorite. My letter to you of 5 January contains no information which cannot be made public if you so desire. Although no official press release was made by the Air Force in this regard, members of the press were present at the time the meteorite was returned to its rightful owner in the office of Congressman Kenneth A. Roberts.\n\nWith respect to your request for a copy of the Air Force press release on flying saucers, I am attaching a copy of the latest Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program. This summary contains the facts which have been proven in our investigations to date.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nSigned\n\nJOSEPH W. KELLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\n\nCOORD\nCONCBACK\nSAFIS\nAF Press Desk\nAFOIN\nSAFLL-1\nStayback\n\nInclosure\nUFO Summary\nDr. Lane Davidson\n14 Sunnyview Avenue\nWhite Plains, New York\n\nHR: Case in LSL 6/26/55 w/sup 7 & Feb. No ceil necessary. Final ltr prep & fwded 26 Jan based on prev corres to Mr Davidson SAFLL 24547-KH. Fact that info can be made public checked w/Maj Neworth SAFIS x 55554 & Col Bloomer AFOIN x 55613.\n\nSAFLL-1"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Int 2-2-7\nwrtn 1 Feb 55/AFOIN-X/kg/71092\nY Bergman, Lola Miss\n\n1 February 1955\n\nMiss Lola Bergman\nStar Route, Box 49\nNicolaus, California\n\nDear Miss Bergman:\n\nIn reply to your letter of January 19, requesting information concerning flying objects, I am inclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\", which I hope will be of interest to you.\n\nThank you for your interest.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSIGNED\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n1 Incl\nUFOB Summary\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Star Rt. Box 49\nNicolaus, Calif.\nJan. 19, 1955\n\nAir Force Research\n& Development Dept.\nWashington, D.C.\n\nGentlemen -\n\n Please send me whatever information is available on flying saucers.\n\n Would like to determine just how much of what"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"we hear regarding them is fact and what is fiction.\n\nGratefully yours,\nLola Bergman"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\n\n1955 JAN 24 15 55\n\nHQ USAF\nAF DRD"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ant 2-2-7\n\nSAFLL-1/Mr Wilson/kba/71304/2 Feb 55\nSAFLL 02155-KM\n\n3 FEB 1955\n\nDear John:\n\n Your recent letter to The President of the United States concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program has been referred to the Department of the Air Force for reply.\n\n For your convenience I am attaching a copy of the Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program. This summary compiles the facts which have been proven in our investigations to date.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nSigned\n\nJOE W. KELLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\n\nCOORD\nCOMEBACK\nAFOLP\nSAFIS\nAF Press Desk\nSAFLL-1\nStayback\n\nIncloasure\n UFO Summary\nMaster John Henderson\n594 Glenview Avenue\nHighland Park, Illinois\n\nMR: Case in I&L & M&O 1 Feb w/susp 15 Feb. No ackl necessary. Final ltr prep & fwded 2 Feb based on policy answer & inclosing requested info.\n\n\nSAFLL-1 SAFLL"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ant 2-2-7\nValdez Leon\nLen\n\n14 Soundview Ave.\nWhite Plains, N.Y.\nFebruary 6, 1955\n\nMaj.Gen. John A. Samford\nDirector of Intelligence\nU.S.Air Force\nPentagon\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nDear Gen. Samford:\n\n I have received from Maj. Gen. Joe W. Kelly, Director of Legislative Liaison, U.S.A.F., a copy of the October, 1954, \"U.S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program.\"\n\n I would appreciate receiving answers to two questions concerning this \"fact sheet\". Your office is the only source for these answers, since the Air Technical Intelligence Center is \"charged only with the investigation\" and cannot give out results, while the Air Force Press Desk in the Office of Public Information can supply \"only that information which is readily available\" in that office.\n\n [1] The fact sheet, at the bottom of page 2, states that one of the explanations of known types of visual sightings is:\n\n \"6. Brilliant flashing lights that sometimes appear red and white in color have been reported by observers. This type has been traced to a new lighting system of commercial airlines and military aircraft....\"\n\nMy question is: In which specific cases did this lighting system prove to be the explanation? In particular, did it prove to be the explanation in the following cases:\n Feb. 15, 1953, at St. Matthews, S.C., reported to Shaw AFB. \"The object appeared to be a bright white light, which now and then would turn reddish.\"(Reported by Mr.and Mrs. Johnny Owings.)?\n\n Feb.9,1953, over Washington, N.C., reported to Second Marine Air Wing HQ at Cherry Point, N.C. \"White light with two red lights on the left hand side bouncing and flashing off the end, encircling an arc.\" (Reported by First Lt. Ed Balocco.)?\n\n Dec.29,1952, over northern Honshu,Japan,reported to Lt.Col.Russel, AF Intelligence. \"Rotating clusters of red, white, and green lights.\" ?"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-2-\n\n[2] The fact sheet, at the bottom of page 3, states:\n\n\"The Air Force would like to state that no evidence has been received which would tend to indicate that the United States is being observed by machines from outer space or a foreign government.\"\n\nIn sharp contrast to this, the Air Force press release of August 1952, based on the minutes of your press conference at the Pentagon on July 29, 1952, stated:\n\n\"The Air Force has stated in the past, and reaffirms at the present time, that these unidentified aerial phenomena are not a secret weapon, missile, or aircraft, developed by the United States. None of the three military departments nor any other agency in the government is conducting experiments, classified or otherwise, with flying objects which could be a basis for the reported phenomena. As far as is known there is nothing in them that is associated with material or vehicles that are directed against the United States, from another country or from other planets.\"\n\nMy question to you now is:\n\nWhat is the present official position of the U.S. Air Force on the question of whether or not \"flying saucers\" are,and have been in many of the important cases, merely secret aircraft, missiles, and weapons, under development or operational use by the United States Government and its agencies?\n\nIt is obvious,from a comparison of the two Air Force statements quoted above on this page, that the Air Force no longer denies that flying saucers are American devices. I would like to get from you, if possible, an explicit statement to this effect, rather than relying on the implication contained in the omitted sentences.\n\n(It is hardly necessary to remind you that the photograph on page 163 of OPNAV P-51-110, Oct.1, 1952, gives the direct lie to the Air Force press release of August 1952, quoted above. The blame for this prevarication attaches to the officer who wrote the press release, since you yourself very skilfully avoided any direct statements at that press conference. Your statement \"We have nothing that has no mass and unlimited power!\" is a classic which deserves preservation in the archives.)\n\nI would very much appreciate receiving whatever answer you care to make to the two questions propounded in this letter. It is my belief that nowhere but in the Office of the Director of Intelligence is there a person who has the cognizance to answer these questions, and I respectfully request that the answer come from your office.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nDr. Leon Davidson"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SHEPPARD AIR FORCE BASE\nTEXAS\n\nJan. 19, 1955\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI am a regular Airmen going into Air Force Intelligence. I must admit that the main reason or one of the main reasons I come into the Air Force was so I could go behind the scenes and see the Utah Films.\n\nI'm sure, sir, you have heard of the Utah films taken by Warrant Officer Delbert C. Newhouse at 11:10 A.M. on July 2, 1952 showing the Air Force that they had the proof that Flying Saucers, or Unidentified Flying Objects (UFO) were real.\n\nThis proof the Air Force had been waiting for since June 24, 1947 when Kenneth Arnold set off the \"Flying Saucer\" uproar.\n\nSir, I'm a citizen of the United States, the greatest country in the world, and I love my country and the people in it and I believe like most Americans in knowing the facts.\n\nI would like to see the film sir, because, going into Air Force Intelligence, I am most interested in the Flying Objects which have been observing our country for the past 5 years. Please help me in my request, sir, and"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"help me to understand the problem better by knowing the facts.\n\nI must tell you that Major Keyhoe is one man who made up my mind concerning these things. I think he is a great man.\n\nI feel that I know enough about these things and would like to understand further the problem that faces the United States Air Force which is the greatest outfit in the world.\n\nPlease help me in my request sir, I would appreciate it very much.\n\nThank you very much,\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nA/3c Thomas A. Russell\nAF 11281962\n3759 Student Squadron\nSheppard Air Force Base\nTexas\n\nOFFICE C/S USAF\n1955 JAN 31 08 45\nVICE CHIEF OF STAFF EXEC SERV DIV\nINCOMING\nOUT"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/tjc/71092\nWrtn 7 Feb 55\n\nINT 2-2-7\nRussell, Thomas A/3C\n\n7 February 1955\n\nA/3c Thomas A. Russell, AF 11281962\n3759 Student Squadron\nSheppard Air Force Base, Texas\n\nDear Airman Russell:\n\nYour letter to General Twining has been referred to this office for reply inasmuch as the Directorate of Intelligence has cognizance of the overall program in the investigation of Unidentified Flying Objects.\n\nAs you are probably aware, the Air Force has had a major active program in this area over the past several years and the responsible agency within the Directorate of Intelligence for this work is, and has been, the Air Technical Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio. The American public, through the various news media of newspapers, radio, and television, is kept abreast of our progress in this field by means of periodic summaries of progress made.\n\nFor your convenience, I am attaching a copy of the latest summary which compiles all of the facts available to the Air Force as a result of those investigations.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nSIGNED\n\n1 Incl\na/s\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nAFOIN-X\nLt Col Bloomer\n\nOUT FEB 8 1955\nD/I X-Ref Ptle Cy, X282\nAFCCS Cy, Attn: Col Moore"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nOFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nINT 2-2-7X\nDept of the Navy\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nONR:463:FLT:nd\nSer 0227\n8 FEB 1955\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nFrom: Chief of Naval Research\nTo: Director of Intelligence, U. S. Air Force\n\nSubj: Unidentified flying objects; request for information concerning\n\n1. Various technical personnel within this Office have an acute scientific interest in the results obtained in the current investigation of unidentified flying objects. For this reason it is requested that a briefing on this subject be arranged for the purpose of acquainting these personnel with the data obtained from reliable reports of sightings classified as being of unknown cause.\n\n2. It is suggested that an informal question-and-answer type discussion be scheduled on some mutually convenient date during February in Room 1803, T-3 Building. Those in attendance, approximately 25 in number, will be limited to senior technical personnel from this Office and certain individuals from other cognizant naval activities in this area. All those attending will have clearance through secret and a definite need-to-know. Final arrangements can be made with LCDR F. L. Thomas (extension 62945) who is acting as Liaison Officer to the Air Force on this problem.\n\n3. The cooperation of the Air Force in making such a briefing possible will be appreciated.\n\nF. R. Furth\nRear Admiral, USN\n\nNO REPLY SENT - ARRANGEMENTS MADE WITH LIAISON OFFICER (THOMAS) BY BROOMER AND BRIEFING HELD AT 1000 HOURS 2 MARCH IN T-3 BY CAPT HARTLEY\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n3904586"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\nREC'D\n10 FEB 1955\nDIR/INT\nHQ USAF\n[illegible]\nDEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY\nOFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REPORT RECEIPT\nNAVEXOS 2835\nNAVY DEPARTMENT\nEXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY\nOFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\nONR:463:nd\nTO: Director of Intelligence\nU. S. Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\nDATE 31 January 1955\nThe following is forwarded for information and retention:\nREPORTS\nSOURCE | COPY NO. | CLASSIFICATION\nReceipt is acknowledged of ONR Code 463 ltr Ser C227 | | CONFIDENTIAL\n-8 FEB 1955\nPlease sign and return to: ONR, Code 463\nOFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH, Room 2603, T-3 Bldg.\nRECEIPT IS ACKNOWLEDGED | (Date)\nSIGNATURE\nA18458 1059"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAFLI-1/Mr Wilson/kba/71304/7 Feb 55\nSAFLL 02581-UK\nDeputy Chief of Staff\nDear Mr. Giles:\nYour recent letter to The President of the United States concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program has been referred to the Department of the Air Force for reply.\nFor your convenience, I am attaching a copy of the Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program. This summary compiles the facts which have been proven in our investigations to date.\nSincerely yours,\nE. J. OLIZEE\nColonel, USAF\nFor and in the Absence\nJOB W. KELLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\nEnclosure\nUFO Summary\nMr. Neil Giles\n1526 Kensington Avenue\nEast Lansing, Michigan\nNB: Case in L&L & H&O 7 Feb w/susp 21 Feb. Final ltr prep & fwded 7 Feb based on policy reply & inclosing requested information.\nCOORD\nCLEARBACK\nSAFIS\nAF Press Desk\nAFOIN\nSAFLI-1\nStayback\n8 FEB 1955"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\nREC'D\n9 FEB 1955\nDIR/INT\nHQ USAF\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n8 FEB 1955\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wrtn 15 Feb 55/AFOIN-1/kg/71092\nTumarkin, George\n15 February 1955\nMr. George Tumarkin\n506 West End Avenue\nNew York 24, New York\nDear Mr. Tumarkin:\nIn response to your letter of February 8, I should like to inform you that the United States Air Force has had a major active program in the area of investigation of unidentified flying objects for the past several years. This program was begun as a result of the responsibility of the Air Force to investigate completely all objects penetrating the airspace of the United States.\nThe general public is kept abreast of our activities in this field by means of periodic summaries of progress made. These summaries are also released to newspapers, radio, and other news media. For your convenience I am attaching a copy of the latest summary on this subject, which I believe you will find to be of interest.\nVery truly yours,\n1 Incl\nUFOB Summ\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nOUT\nFEB 17 1955\nDIRINT HQ USAF\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"George Tumarkin\n505 West End Avenue\nNew York 24,N.Y.\nFebruary 8, 1955.\n\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Sirs:\n I was profoundly shaken upon reading Major Keyhoe's, \"Flying Saucers\nfrom Outer Space.\" A revelation to me,it amounted to an unofficial\nAir Force admission of the existence of these interplanetary objects.\nA February 6, Associated Press dispatch reported that a mysterious\nexplosion of terrific force shook the west coast of New Zealand's\nSouth Island.Synonymously a cigar-shaped object emitting a dazzling\nlight was sighted, travelling at a high speed as it disappeared into\nthe horizon.\n The world must be prepared both psychologically and materially\nin the event of any sudden maneuver by these hypothetical aliens.\nIf we are under surveillance by flying saucers I hope that we are\nmature enough to reconcile ourselves to that reality.However it\nwould be infinitely worse if we followed a policy of see no evil,\nhear no evil, speak no evil.It would be suicidal to lull ourselves\ninto a childish sense of security.\n It is imperative that you express your candid and firm belief as\nto the nature of these, \"Unidentified Flying Objects\" to the public.\n MUCH hinges on your prompt action.\n\nTruly yours,\nGeorge Tumarkin :Student\n\nP.S. Kindly answer my letter.Thank you."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Int 2-2-7\nwrtn 16 Feb 55/kg/AFOIN-X/71092\nLt Weiss, Laura H\n\n15 February 1955\n\nMiss Laura H. Weiss\n4930 Rubican Avenue\nPhiladelphia 44, Pennsylvania\n\nDear Miss Weiss:\n\n In reply to your letter of February 12, requesting\ninformation concerning unidentified flying objects, I am\nenclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events\nand Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object\nProgram\" which compiles the latest facts the Air Force has\nestablished in this field.\n\n As you are probably aware the Air Force has an active\nprogram in this area and the public in general is kept\nabreast of our activities in this field through the medium\nof periodically revised information releases to the press\nand other news media.\n\n Thank you for your interest in this matter.\n\n Sincerely.\n\n1 Incl\nUFOB Summ\n\nSIGNED\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT FEB 17 1955 DIRINT HQ USAF\n\nXcord Cy\nX-Ref Cy\nCy for ATIC, Capt Hardin"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Int 2-2-7\nwrtn 24 Feb 55/AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/\nkg/71092\nLt Novacek, Rose B. de\n\n24 February 1955\n\nMrs. Rose B. de Novacek\nc/o General Motors Interamerica Corp.\nApartado 666\nCaracas, Venezuela\nSouth America\n\nDear Mrs. Novacek:\n\n Thank you for forwarding to us your interesting letter\nof January 4 to the National Geographic Society.\n\n As you may possibly be aware, the United States Air\nForce has had a major active program in the investigation\nand analysis of reports of unidentified flying objects for\nthe past several years. Without further details, we are\nunable to comment on your observation, but for your conven-\nience we are attaching a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary\nof Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying\nObject Program\" which compiles the latest facts established\nby the Air Force investigations in this area.\n\n Very truly yours,\n\n1 Incl\nUFOB Summary\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT FEB 25 1955 DIRINT HQ USAF\n\nCorrespondence fr Mrs. Novacek forwarded\nto ATIC w/Cy of this letter.\n\nXcord Cy\nX-Ref Cy\nCy for ATIC-Capt Hardin"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This account is correct, yours truly R. Warrick. Oct 2-2-7 1 March 5\n\nThe Evening Journal\nIf It's for the Good of Marysville and Union County WE'RE FOR IT!\nVol. 8, No. 42. MARYSVILLE, OHIO\n'Combining the Union County Journal\n'Saucer' Experts Stumped\nJerome Teachers, Students Watch Strange Occurrence In The Sky\n\nLocal \"flying saucer\" scoffers were stumped today by the remarkable Friday afternoon experience of two Union county teachers and at least 60 youngsters.\n\nTheir observation: A cigar-shaped silver object traveling at terrific speed that wafted a blanket of \"angel's hair\" for a least three miles.\n\nThe account of the incredible phenomenon was told the Journal-Tribune by Mrs. George Dittmar of Marysville and Rodney Warrick of Raymond.\n\nMrs. Dittmar is a teacher and Warrick the principal at Jerome Special school in the southeastern corner of Union county.\n\nStory told by the two reliable teachers without their previous knowledge closely parallels the previous experiences of people in at least three countries.\n\nThe Friday phenomenon was first observed at the Jerome elementary school when youngsters on the playground about 3:15 p.m. called Warrick outside.\n\nWarrick, ill at home today with a cold and presumably no after-effects of his experience said when he first went outside the cigar-shaped object was hanging motionless.\n\n\"Then it took off quite rapidly,\" he said, \"disappearing in a short time.\" He said it traveled horizontally.\n\nMrs. Dittmar, in the building when Warrick called her, said she went to the fire escape but the object (said by the children to be \"blinding\") had already disappeared.\n\nhave been made in California, in France and in New Guinea in the past two years.\n\nHowever, neither teacher had heard of the previous accounts of what has been dubbed as \"angel's hair.\"\n\nThe term is the title of an article on such phenomenons in the November issue of \"Pageant\" magazine.\n\nWritten by Lt. Col. James C. McNamara, the article gives accounts of several witnesses to the fall of the substance termed \"angel's hair\" because of its resemblance to the spun glass fluff used in decorating Christmas trees.\n\nMcNamara also reports that some of the substance has been captured on cloth and placed in a jar for observance.\n\nSimilar experiences to that of the Union county group, according to the article, have been reported as follows:\n\nIn February of this year at Puente, Calif.; Nov. 1953 in San Fernando valley, Calif.; Oct. 1952 at Gaillac, France; August 1953 at Port Moresby, New Guinea.\n\nEach account tells of the webby vapor likened sometimes to \"bright whitish filaments like glass wool\" lacy ribbons,\" or \"a stream of white lacy substance.\"\n\nAnd in each case, the substance disintegrated with the touch of human hands leaving no trace for laboratory analysis.\n\nThere's been no decision on its origin outer space, foreign craft or governmental experiment?\n\nLocally it will remain a matter of conjecture and a never-to-be forgotten experience for Mrs. Dittmar, Warrick and their students.\n\nIn its wake was a trail of webs that Warrick and Mrs. Dittmar, driving home later, said were strung from one side to the other of wires along the road all the way to the Columbus road.\n\nWarrick said part of the cobweb-like substance fell in long strands and part of it came down in balls almost like cotton. Trees, bushes and wires were covered.\n\nWarrick said: \"It looked to be like asbestos and felt like asbestos.\"\n\nBoth Warrick and Mrs. Dittmar related that when they were able to catch two ends of a strand the stuff could be pulled out into a long thread\"so tough\". Warrick said, \"that it couldn't hardly be broken.\"\n\nWithin less than a minute after being touched, however, the substance would completely disappear.\n\nBoth teachers also concurred in the report that when only one end of a strand was touched, the substance would roll into a ball before disintegrating.\n\nPossibly the strangest part of the report is that when anyone even touched the substance their fingertips would turn green.\n\nMrs. Dittmar said she was able to rinse the green from her hands without even using soap. Warrick, as an experiment, didn't wash his hands. He said that they broke out into a cold sweat but that the green color disappeared in a half hour or 45 minutes.\n\nWarrick said today: \"I have never seen anything like it or heard of anything like it. It was the most unusual sight I ever saw.\"\n\nHe added that no one was frightened. The children all 6th, 7th, and 8th graders considered it \"quite a lark\" he said.\n\nExperience of the two teachers and the children is strengthened by the fact that similar reports"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT2-2-7X\nLLM\nX Dept of the Army\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nOFFICE OF THE ADJUTANT GENERAL\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nAGAO-CC 095 Kruvant,\nMichael W. (23 Feb 55)\n\n1 March 1955\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: CHIEF OF STAFF, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Saucer\n\nForwarded as a matter of primary interest to your Department.\nThe writer has been informed of this referral.\n\nFOR THE ADJUTANT GENERAL:\n\n1 Incl\nLtr 23 Feb 55\n\nFrank W. Mervaw\nAdjutant General\n\nOIN"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D 4 MAR 1955 DIR/INT HD USAF"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY\n\nMichael W. Kruvant\n764 Scotland Road\nSouth Orange, N.J.\n\nFebruary 23, 1955.\n\nWar Department\nWashington, D.C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI am compiling data on Flying Saucer sightings and cases for the purpose of writing a book explaining the facts behind the greatest mystery of our age. This book is mostly for the benefit of the teenage part of our population. I feel that the public should be prepared for anything to come, especially the younger part of our civilization. They are now maturing and to become the people that make up our world.\n\nI would appreciate any assistance that you could offer me.\n\nTrusting I will hear from you in the near future,\n\nRespectfully,\nMICHAEL W. KRUVANT"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAFLL-1/Mr Wilson/kba/71304/28 Feb 55\n\n1 MAR 1955\n\nDear Mr. Martanschik:\n\nYour recent letter to The President of the United States concerning unidentified flying objects has been referred to the Department of the Air Force for reply.\n\nFor your convenience, I am inclosing the Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program. This summary compiles the latest information proven in our investigations to date.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nSigned\nROB W. KELLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\n\nInclosure\nUFO Summary\nMr. Allen Martanschik\n314 Boonton Avenue\nBoonton, New Jersey\n\nNRi Case in LLL & HQO 28 Feb w/snap 14 Mar. No add necessary. Final ltr prep & fwded 28 Feb inclosing requested info."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D 1 MAR 1955 DIR/INT HD USAF\n\n[illegible]\n\n1 MAR 1955"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\n\nBERNARD M. BARUCH, JR.\n654 MADISON AVENUE\nNEW YORK 21, NEW YORK\n\nMarch 11, 1955\n\nMajor General John A. Samford USAF\nDirector of Intelligence\nDepartment of the Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear General Samford:\n\nThank you for your letter of December 8, 1954, concerning reports on unidentified flying objects made to attaches at our embassies.\n\nI have transmitted to my friend, a Science Attache at one of our European embassies, your suggestion that such reports should be made available to our Air Attache in the country concerned.\n\nI hope to again have the pleasure of seeing you.\n\nSincerely,\n\nBernard M. Baruch Jr.\n\nFWB"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nwrtn 15 Mar 55/kg/AFOIN-X/71092\n√xReynolds, Glenn\nmx\n\n15 March 1955\n\nMr. Glenn Reynolds\nBox 818\nPecos, Texas\n\nDear Mr. Reynolds:\n\nIn reply to your letter of March 11, requesting information concerning unidentified flying objects, I am inclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\", which compiles the latest facts the Air Force has established in this field.\n\nThank you for your interest in this matter.\n\nSIGNED\n1 Incl\n UFOB Summary\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT 15 MAR 1955 DIRMAT HQ USAF\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GLENN REYNOLDS\nBOX 818\nPECOS, TEXAS\n\nMarch 11, 1955\n\nDepartment of Unidentified Flying Objects\nAir Force Intelligence Headquarters\nThe Pentagon\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Sirs:\n\nI am writing my research theme on flying saucers.\n\nI would appreciate it if you could send me any information you might have on the subject that has or can be made public.\n\nIn the book by Major Donald E. Keyhoe, Flying Saucers From Outer Space, an Albert M. Chop, Air Force Press Desk, is mentioned. If he is around somewhere in the Pentagon, I would appreciate it if you would give him the enclosed letter. Otherwise, I wish someone in the intelligence headquarters would answer it.\n\nThank you very much for your trouble.\n\nYours truly,\nGlenn Reynolds\n\nP. S. I will appreciate your prompt reply, as my theme is due very shortly."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GLENN REYNOLDS\nBOX 818\nPECOS, TEXAS\n\nDear Mr. Chop: (Or anyone else in the Department of Unidentified Flying Objects)\nI would appreciate it if you would answer the following questions for me.\n\nHow did you happen to get in this line of work? Did you choose it in high school, college, or later?\nIs a college education necessary in this line of work?\nHow long did your education take?\nWhat college did you attend? What courses helped you most? Have you ever regretted your line of study?\nWhat are your working conditions, hours, etc.?\nWhat is the demand in the Air Force for a man of your training? Will this demand increase?\nOutside of everyday work and experience, what do you do to improve your knowledge and skills?\n\nI will appreciate your prompt reply, as my theme is due very shortly.\n\nThanking you, I am\n\nSincerely yours,\nGlenn Reynolds"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nwrtn 23 Mar 55/L/C Bloomer/kg/AFOIN-X/71092\n√xCraighead, Frank C., Dr.\n\n23 March 1955\n\nDr. Frank C. Craighead\nMoose,\nWyoming\n\nDear Dr. Craighead:\n\nThank you your letter of March 16 in which you relayed your observation of an unidentified aerial phenomenon.\n\nAs you are possibly aware, the Air Force has had a major active program in this area for the past several years and contributions such as yours on a voluntary basis are appreciated. Your letter has been turned over to our analysts for further evaluation.\n\nFor your convenience I am attaching a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\", which compiles the latest facts established by the Air Force in its program in this area.\n\nThank you for your interest in the Air Force.\n\nSincerely,\n\n1 Incl\n Summary\n\nSIGNED\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT 24 MAR 1955 DIRMAT HQ USAF\n\nOriginal incoming letter forwarded to ATIC w/cy of this letter\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy\nCy for ATIC - Capt Hardin"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT2-2-7\nwrtn 24 Mar 55/L/CnBloomer/kg/AFOIN-X/71092\n√x Draffone, P.A. Mrs.\n24 March 1955\n\nMrs. Priscilla Alden Draffone\nBrook Road\nP. O. Box 164\nHancmet, Massachusetts\n\nDear Mrs. Draffone:\n\n Thank you for your letter of 21 March 1955 in which you describe your observation of several unidentified aerial phenomena.\n\n For the past several years the Air Force has had a major active program in this area and all contributions such as yours, on a voluntary basis are appreciated. The information you submitted has been turned over to our analysts for further evaluation.\n\n For your convenience I am attaching a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\", which compiles the latest facts established by the Air Force in its program in this area.\n\nSincerely,\n\n1 Incl\n UFOB Summary\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOCHER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nLoord Cy\nI-Ref Cy\nCy for ATIC-\nCapt Hardin"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dab 2-2-7\nSAFLL-1/Mr Wilson/kba/71304/24 Mar 55\nSAFLL 05758-RM\n√x Redwine, Robert H.\n\nDear Mr. Redwine:\n\n Your recent letter to The President of the United States concerning your interest in the unidentified flying object program has been forwarded to the Department of the Air Force for reply.\n\n I am attaching a copy of the Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program. This summary compiles the facts which have been proven in our investigation to date.\n\nSincerely yours,\nR. J. BLIZER\nColonel, USAF\nFor and in the Absence\nJOHN W. REILLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\n\nCOORD\nCOMEBACK\nAFOIN\nSAFIS\nAF Press Desk\nSAFLL-1\nStayback\n\nInclosure\n Summary on UFO Program\nMr. Robert H. Redwine\n101 Allen L. Tenon Road\nSouth Houston, Texas\n\nMR: Case in I&L & M&O 23 Mar w/susp & 6 Apr. No ackl necessary. Final ltr prep & fwded 24 Mar inclosing summary which contains info requested by Mr Redwine."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT2-2-7\nwrtn 28 Mar 55/kg/AFOIN-X/71092\nX Drake, Alan L. Mr.\n\n28 March 1955\n\nMr. Alan L. Drake\n15404 10th Avenue, South\nSeattle 88, Washington\n\nDear Mr. Drake:\n\n In reply to your letter of March 26, requesting information concerning unidentified flying objects, I am inclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\", which compiles the latest facts the Air Force has established in this field.\n\n Thank you for your interest in the Air Force.\n\nSincerely,\n\n1 Incl\n UFOB Summary\n\n3/JOSEPH A. BLOCHER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"March 26, 1955\n\nDear Sir,\n\nI am gathering information on flying saucers & unidentified objects & wonder if you have any information in print available. If so it would be appreciated if the information could be sent to me.\n\nThank you.\n\nAlan L Drake\n15404 10th Ave So.\nSeattle 88,\nWash\n\nALAN L. DRAKE"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wrtn 28 Mar 55/Lt Col Bloomer/kg/AFOIN-X/71092\nINT 2-2-7\n[handwritten: Sun Co. Inc.]\n28 March 1955\n\nMiss Dee Phillips\nThe Sun Company\nSan Bernardino, California\n\nDear Miss Phillips:\n\n In reply to your letter of March 21, I am inclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program.\n\n During the past several years the Air Force has had a major active program in this area and the attached report compiles the latest facts which have been established in our investigations.\n\n Thank you for your interest in the Air Force.\n\n Very truly yours,\n\n1 Incl\n UFOB Summary SIGNED\n JOSEPH A. BLOOMER\n Lt Colonel, USAF\n Directorate of Intelligence\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy\nCy for Capt Hardin - AFIC"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nwrtn 28 Mar 55/Lt Col Bloomer/kg/AFOIN-X/71092\n[handwritten: Kindermann, B. Mr.]\n28 March 1955\n\nMr. Bruno Kindermann\n7 Lassa Road, Kitham\nLondon, S. E. 9.\nEngland\n\nDear Mr. Kindermann:\n\n In reply to your letter of March 21, I am inclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\".\n\n During the past several years the Air Force has had a major active program in this area and the attached report compiles the latest facts which have been established.\n\n I hope this will satisfy your requirement.\n\n Very truly yours,\n\n1 Incl\n UFOB Summary SIGNED\n JOSEPH A. BLOOMER\n Lt Colonel, USAF\n Directorate of Intelligence\n\nCoord Copy\nX-Ref Copy\nCy for AFIC-Capt Hardin"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Int 2-2-7\nwrtn 29 Mar 55/Lt Col Bloomer/kg/AFOIN-X/71092\n[handwritten: Doc Mr. Force]\n1 APR 1955\n[redacted]\n\nAFOIN\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, OSAF\nATTN: Mr. Robert Wilson\n\nSUBJECT: Letter From Editor of Challenge Magazine\n\n 1. Returned without action as agreed by Mr. Wilson and the undersigned in telecon of 25 March.\n\n 2. In view of President Eisenhower's unequivocal statements at his press conference and recent public statements on this subject by authorized Air Force spokesmen, it is believed by this Directorate that no useful purpose will be served in replying to the attached letter.\n\n1 Incl\n DD Fm 95 fr SAFLL to\n AFOIN, 23 Mar 55 w/\n 2 Incls SIGNED\n JOSEPH A. BLOOMER\n Lt Colonel, USAF\n Directorate of Intelligence\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\nMEMO ROUTING SLIP\nNEVER USE FOR APPROVALS, DISAPPROVALS, CONCURRENCES, OR SIMILAR ACTIONS\n\n1 NAME OR TITLE\nORGANIZATION AND LOCATION: AFOIN\n2\nINFORMATION: to base reply\nNECESSARY ACTION\nNOTE AND RETURN: incls\nSEE ME\n3\n4\nSIGNATURE\n\nAS SOON AS POSSIBLE, BUT NOT LATER THAN 1 APR 55.\n\nSAFLL 05740-KM The President\n\nSubject: Artile entitled \"I Know Where Flying Saucers Come From\"\n\nNo ackl necessary\n\nInclosures\n Ltr to The President from Arthur Unger, Editor of CHALLENGE\n May 1955 issue of CHALLENGE\n\nPLEASE INDICATE ACTION OFFICERS NAME AND ESTENSION\n\nFROM NAME OR TITLE: ROBERT D. WILSON\nDATE: 23 Mar 55\nORGANIZATION AND LOCATION: Materiel & Operations Branch, SAFLL-1\nTELEPHONE: 71304\n\nDD FORM 95 1 FEB 50"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\nCHALLENGE for men\n\nMadison Avenue - New York 22, N. Y. - Murray Hill 8-9215\n\nMarch 11, 1955\n\nPresident Dwight D. Eisenhower\nWhite House\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear President Eisenhower:\n\nI am enclosing a copy of the May issue of CHALLENGE For Men which contains a story entitled \"I know Where Flying Saucers Come From\". The author is concerned with the fact that on December 15, 1954, you remarked to your press that you had been assured by the Air Force that Flying Saucers were not from outer space. He feels that the Air Force should reveal the reasoning behind this conclusion.\n\nWill it be possible, in view os security regulations, for this information to be forthcoming?\n\nThank you very much for taking this into consideration.\n\n Sincerely,\n\n s/\n Arthur Unger\n Editor\nAU:CG\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\n√ xD/I X\n\nCORPS OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY\nOFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ENGINEER\nVICKSBURG DISTRICT\nU. S. POST OFFICE AND COURT HOUSE BLDG.\nVICKSBURG, MISSISSIPPI\n\nADDRESS REPLY TO:\nDISTRICT ENGINEER\nVICKSBURG DISTRICT\nCORPS OF ENGINEERS\nP. O. BOX 60\nVICKSBURG, MISSISSIPPI\n\nREFER TO FILE NO. LMKVC\n\n8 April 1955\n\nSUBJECT: Falling Object - Sardis Lake\n\nTO: Intelligence Officer, U. S. Air Force, Washington, D. C.\n\n1. Reference is made to letter of this office dated 26 January 1955, on the above subject, reporting the falling of a parachuted object which appears to be a meteorological instrument, into the Reservoir at Sardis Dam, Mississippi, an installation of this District. This object has been recovered and is being retained at the Sardis Dam Field Office pending instructions as to its disposition.\n\n2. Reply at your earliest convenience, containing disposition instructions, will be appreciated.\n\nFOR THE DISTRICT ENGINEER:\n\nJ. E. WINDHAM\nLt. Col., Corps of Engineers\nAssistant District Engineer"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISPATCHED\n1955 APR 11 PM 1:14\nVICKSBURG DISTRICT\nCORPS OF ENGINEERS"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\nSUSPENSE\nORIGIN OF BASIC\nDATE\nASSIGNED BY\nDATE\nTYPE\nNUMBER\nSUBJECT\nROUTING\nInitial \"IN\" column to denote review prior to action. Initial \"OUT\" column to denote review of completed action. (X for action; √ for coordination.)\nIN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\nOIN-1 OIN-2 OIN-3 AFOIN\nOIN-1X OIN-2X OIN-3X AFOIN\nAFOIN-X\nAFOIN-X\nOIN-X1\nOIN-X2\nOIN-X3\nOIN-X4\nOIN-X5\nCABLES\nFILE 1/14/65\nM & R DISPATCH\nTO: DATE\nFROM: COMMENT NUMBER\nCOMMENTS(Use reverse, if necessary)\nLtr mentined in attached letter answered 12 Apr 55 signed by Maj Albert K. Fowler.\nAFHQ FORM 0-86 15 JUL 54 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM MAY BE USED. GPO 876528"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wrtn 11 Apr 55/kg/AFOIN-X/71092\nInt 2-2-7\nMort, Patricia\n\nAPR 11 1955\n\nMiss Patricia Mort\nForbes Junior High School\nHooversville, Pennsylvania\n\nDear Miss Mort:\n\nIn reply to your letter of April 6, 1955, I am inclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\", which I hope will satisfy the requirement of your Class.\n\nThank you for your interest in this matter.\n\nSincerely,\n\n1 Incl\nUFOB Summary\n\nSIGNED\nFRANK B. CHAPPELL\nColonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"April 6, 1955\n\nDear Sirs:\n\nWe of the eighth grade of Forbes Jr. High School would like to have some information, if you would be so kind.\n\nOur instructor, Mr. Jack Dickey, is devoting one period a week to the study of Flying Saucers. We have sent to the Detroit Flying Saucer Club in Detroit, Michigan. We would like to know if they are a legitamate club. Also we would like to know if the information they are giving us, is good.\n\nWe would appreciate it very much if you would give us this information, if possible.\n\nSincerely\n8th grade of Forbes High\n\nP.S. Please send to:\nMiss Patricia Mort\nForbes Jr. High School\nHooversville, Pa."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nOffice of the District Engineer\nwrtn 12 Apr 55/Maj Fowler/AFOIN-X/kg/71092\nX copy\n\nAFOIN\n\n18 APR 1955\n\nSUBJECT: Falling Object - Sardis Lake\n\nTO:\tOffice of the District Engineer\nVicksburg District\nU.S. PO and Court House Building\nVicksburg, Mississippi\nATTN: LtC Windham, Asst Dist Eng\n\n1. Reference your letter of 26 January 1955, file number LMKVC, subject: Falling Object - Sardis Lake.\n\n2. The object described is an atmospheric detecting device used by the Air Force Air Weather Service in making upper air soundings.\n\n3. Request the instrument be sent to the following address:\n\nSacramento Air Materiel Area\nMcClellan Air Force Base\nSacramento, California\nATTN: Radiosonde Rehabilitation\n\n4. Your assistance in the recovery of this instrument is greatly appreciated.\n\nFOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nALBERT D. FOWLER\nMajor, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCoord Copy\nX-Ref Copy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"X\n\nB/Ltr fr Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army, Subject: \"Falling Object - Sardis Lake,\" dtd 26 Jan 55\n\nMAXIN\t\t3rd Ind\t\t3 Mar 55\n\nHQ MILITARY AIR TRANSPORT SERVICE, USAF, WASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\nTO:\tDirectorate of Intelligence, Headquarters USAF, ATTN: AFOIN, Washington 25, D.C.\n\nForwarded.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDER:\n\nWILLIAM L. TRAVIS\nColonel, USAF\nChief, Intelligence Div\nDCS/Plans\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"X\n\nCORPS OF ENGINEERS, U.S. ARMY\nOFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ENGINEER\nVICKSBURG DISTRICT\nU.S. POST OFFICE AND COURT HOUSE BLDG.\nVICKSBURG, MISSISSIPPI\n\nADDRESS REPLY TO:\nDISTRICT ENGINEER\nVICKSBURG DISTRICT\nCORPS OF ENGINEERS\nP.O. BOX 60\nVICKSBURG, MISSISSIPPI\n\nREFER TO FILE NO. LMKVC\t\t26 January 1955\n\nSUBJECT: Falling Object - Sardis Lake\n\nTO:\tIntelligence Officer, U.S. Army Air Force, Washington, D.C.\n\n1. On 8 December 1954 an object was found by local interests on Tract P-125, Sec. 1, T-7-S, R-5-W, Mississippi, and turned over to personnel of this District at the Sardis Dam Field Office, located approximately seven miles north of Batesville, Mississippi. The object is in fairly good shape and has a white parachute attached to it, a paper cover on it marked \"Signal Corps, U.S. Army, Radiosonde AN/AMT-3, Serial No. 2295 (number blurred and somewhat doubtful), Order No. 11083-Phila - 47-77, Washington Institute of Technology, Inc.\" Stamped on the inside of the cover of this device are the letters S-C and appearing directly under those letters are the numerals 81.\n\n2. This object is similar to another object which was observed to fall in the same vicinity on 8 June 1954 and which was later, upon direction, turned over to Personnel of the Greenville Air Base, Greenville, Mississippi. Report covering that object was forwarded to the Intelligence Office, U.S. Army Air Force, Washington, D.C., by letter of this office dated 6 October 1954, file LMKVE, on the subject \"Fallen Object - Sardis Lake, Mississippi.\"\n\n3. It is requested that this office be advised as to what disposition is desired to be made of the property referred to in paragraph 1 above.\n\nFOR THE DISTRICT ENGINEER:\n\nJ. E. WINDHAM\nLt. Col., Corps of Engineers\nAssistant District Engineer"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Bsc Ltr fr CE, U. S. Army, Vicksburg, Miss., Subj: Falling Object -\nSardis Lake, dtd 26 Jan 1955\n\nAFOIN 1st Ind 21 FEB 1955\n\nDept of the Air Force, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nTO: Commander Air Weather Service, Andrews AFB, Washington 25, D. C.\n\n Basic correspondence forwarded as a matter pertaining to your\ncommand.\n\n BY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"lmt 2-3-7\nwrtn 18 Feb 55/AFOIN-X/kg/71092 y AFBasa\n\nBsc Ltr fr CE, U. S. Army, Vicksburg, Miss., Subj: Falling Object -\nSardis Lake, dtd 26 Jan 1955\n\nAFOIN 1st Ind 21 FEB 1955\n\nDept of the Air Force, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nTO: Commander Air Weather Service, Andrews AFB, Washington 25, D. C.\n\n Basic correspondence forwarded as a matter pertaining to your\ncommand.\n\n BY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nSIGNED\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"B/Ltr fr Corps of Engineers, U. S. Army, dtd 26 Jan 55, Subj: Falling\nObject - Sardia Lake\n\nAWSPL 2nd Ind 25 February 1955\n\nHQ AIR WEATHER SERVICE, MATS, Andrews Air Force Base, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nTO: Commander, Military Air Transport Service, United States Air Force,\n ATTN: Intelligence Division, Washington 25, D. C.\n\n 1. The object described in Paragraph 1 of the basic letter is an\natmospheric detecting device used by the USAF Air Weather Service in\nmaking upper air soundings.\n\n 2. It is requested that the instrument be sent to the following\naddress:\n\n Sacramento Air Materiel Area\n McClellan Air Force Base\n Sacramento, California\n ATTN: Radiosonde Rehabilitation\n\n 3. Your assistance in the recovery of this instrument is greatly\nappreciated.\n\n FOR THE COMMANDER:\n\nROBERT P. CRAIG\nMajor, USAF\nChief, Intelligence & Communications\n Division\nDCS/Plans\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ltr 2-2-7\nwrtn 13 Apr 55/kg/AFOIN-X/71092 Carney Delgo\n\n13 April 1955\n\nMr. Del Carney Jr.\n1075 South Perry\nDenver, Colorado\n\nDear Mr. Carney:\n\n In reply to your letter of April 4, I am inclosing\na copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and\nInformation Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object\nProgram\" which compiles the latest facts established by\nthe Air Force in this area.\n\n Thank you for your interest in this matter.\n\n Sincerely,\n\n1 Incl\n UFOB Summary\n\nSIGNED\nALBERT D. FOWLER\nMajor, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nCoord Cy\nX-Ref Cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Del Carney Jr.\n1078 S. Perry\nDenver Colo\nApril 4, 1955\n\nProject Saucer\nWashington 25, D.C.\nDirector\n\nDear Sir:\n\tI am highly interested in the phenomena called \"Flying Saucers\"\nand would appreciate all available reports on the flying saucers that\ncan be released. I know security is pretty rough and would appreciate\nyour help.\n\n\t\t\t\tSincerly Yours\n\t\t\t\tDel Carney Jr."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ATIC\nINT 2-2-7\n16 Apr 1955\n\nFROM: AFOIN-2C1\n\nTO: ATIC\n\nMEMO\nSUBJECT: (S) S O U A A W N\n\n*\t\t\t*\t\t\t\t*\t.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFILED: INT 2-2-2 (Secret Files)"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18apr55 X\nINT2-2-7\n\nEjido Nuevo Leon\nApdo. Postal #334\nMexicali, B. Cfa., Mexico\n(no date)\n\nU. S. Air Force\nWashington, D. C.\n\n\tI am writing you to testify to the existence of the mysterious\nflying saucers. I am a Mexican, 37 years old and in full possession\nof my mental faculties. I am married, and the father of a large\nfamily of 6 girls and 3 boys. More than two years ago, I personally\nsaw a flying saucer. It happened one day when I came from Mexicali\nim my \"pick-up\", at the point called Cerro Prieto. This craft came\nin my direction, and I was able to get a full view of its design,\nsince I saw the flying saucer flying at an altitude of about 150 meters,\nat about 5 miles an hour, for about 150 meters. This happened one\nmorning about 9 A.M. So that your government may be interested, I will\ndescribe a small part to you: It was about 12 feet in diameter and the\nweight about 3 tons, which defies gravity. I am telling you this because\nwhen I saw it, it was practically 10 meters from the top of Cerro Prieto,\nsuspended in mid-air. I would appreciate your paying me a reward of\n$20,000 upon describing its design, which is authentic and genuine. I\nbelieve this information is worth much more, because it may be a secret\nweapon of some enemy nation. Please have some staff officers of your\nAir Force come to fetch me and please bring a commission of scientists\nhere who can investigate the design and its workings. Also someone\nversed in atomic science. I hope you will consider my offer.\n\n\t\t(signed) Santos Ruvalcaba Gonzalez\nAs to my identity, the Emigration Office at Calexico, California, can inform\nyou that I obtained a local passport [in? no?] 1934. Please excuse my\nspelling.\t/Sketch with English Captions enclosed/"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\n\n1955 MAR 29 AM 8 29\nAFCJA\n\nHQ USAF\nMAR 25 1955\nCAG MAIL FACILITY\n\nRECEIVED\n1955 APR 15 13 42\nHQ USAF AF DRD"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMO ROUTING SLIP\nNEVER USE FOR APPROVALS, DISAPPROVALS, CONCURRENCES, OR SIMILAR ACTIONS\n\n1 NAME OR TITLE\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nORGANIZATION AND LOCATION\nDCS/Operations\n2\nFILE\nINFORMATION\n3\nNECESSARY ACTION\nNOTE AND RETURN\n4\nSEE ME\nSIGNATURE\n\nREMARKS\nForwarded as a matter of primary interest\nto your Directorate.\n\nEDWARD W. GUEST\nMAJOR, USAF\nFROM NAME OR TITLE\nAsst Executive\nDirectorate of Research & Development\nORGANIZATION AND LOCATION\nOffice, Deputy Chief of Staff, Development\nDATE 18 Apr 55\nTELEPHONE 53834\nDD FORM 1 FEB 50 95\nReplaces DA AGO Form 895, 1 Apr 48, and AFHQ Form 12, 10 Nov 47, which may be used."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DD FORM 95 (faint, mostly illegible routing header)\nDISPATCHED\n1955 APR 19 12 59\nHQ USAF\nAF DRD\nREC'D 19 APR 1955 DIRINT HQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMO ROUTING SLIP\nNEVER USE FOR APPROVALS, DISAPPROVALS, CONCURRENCES, OR SIMILAR ACTIONS\n1 NAME OR TITLE\nLt Col B. A. Maddocks\nORGANIZATION AND LOCATION\nDir/Research and Development\nHeadquarters, USAF\nINITIALS\nDATE\nCIRCULATE\nCOORDINATION\nFILE\nINFORMATION\nNECESSARY ACTION\nX\nNOTE AND RETURN\nSEE ME\nSIGNATURE\nREMARKS\nIn accordance with paragraph 15, section 11, AFR 110-8 dated 25 August 1951, the following letter is forwarded herewith:\n\nUndated letter from Santos Ruvalcaba Gonzalez, Ejido Nuevo Leon, Apdo. Postal #334, Mexicali, B. Cfa., Mexico.\n\nFROM NAME OR TITLE\nWADE KOONTZ, Chief, Patents Division\nDATE 11 Apr 55\nORGANIZATION AND LOCATION\nAFCJA-16, Room 2450, Temporary \"U\"\nTELEPHONE 64832\nDD FORM 95 1 FEB 50"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-1-\n\nWashington D.C.\nPresente, \"a quien corresponda.\"\nPor la presente me dirijo al gobierno de los E.U.A. para declarar la existencia de los misteriosos Platos Voladores.\nyo Mexicano, con 37 años de edad, y en pleno uso de mis facultades mentales.\nCasado, y padre de numerosa familia 6 niñas y 3 niños, declaro ser testigo ocular de haber visto un Plato Volador.\nhace mas de 2 años, esto ocurrio, un dia mientras venia yo en mi pick up del pueblo de mexicali en direccion lugar del Cerro Prieto venia dicha nave en sentido contrario al mio y pude apreciar su diseño en total por averlo encontrado como a unos 150 metros, cierto Lincuenta metros de altura y una misma distancia el Plato Volador volaba como a unas 5 millas por hora en esos momentos esto ocurrio una mañana como alas 9 A.M."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-2-\n\nPara que su gobierno se interese de hoy describir una pequeña parte, mide como 12 pies en diametro y son puesto como de 3 - toneladas, compuesta ley de gravedad.\nesto le digo porque cuando yo lo vi estaba practicamente esta nave como a 10 metros de un pico de el Cerro Prieto parado en el aire. Agradeceria que al relatar su diseño que es autentico y genuino me gratificaran con veinte Mil Dolars, porque creo que vale mucho mas esta informacion porque esta puede ser una arma secreta de alguna nacion enemiga. Le ruego vengan a buscarme los de estado mayor de su air force favor traer una Comision de cientificos en esta materia de investigacion de diseño y su funcionamiento tambien en Ciencia Atomica\nRespectivamente"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-3-\n\nEspero de ud. tomen en cuenta mi oferta, y me repito de ud. un humilde Servidor y amigo.\nMexicali\nEstado, Baja California\nEjido Nuevo Leon\nP.O. Box 334\nSantos Ruvalcaba Gonzalez\n\npara mi identificacion pueden informarse en la oficina de emigracion de Calexico - California, ya que obtuve Pasaporte Local 1934. Respectivamente.\n\nPerdone, mi ortografia."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"mexicali City\nHighway for Tecate\nWalton Canal Concrete Bridge\nby 2 mi S of Canal Road\nLaguna Canal\nCanal Lateral\nNew Patrol Concrete Junction\nFuente Canal\nEjido\nHighway\nEjido\nLa Pasta\nElectrification\n15 miles from\nMexicali\napproximately"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dear Stephen:\n\nYour recent letter to The President of the United States concerning unidentified flying objects has been referred to the Department of the Air Force for reply.\n\nI am attaching a copy of the Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program. This summary compiles the facts which have been proven in our investigations to date.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nR. J. CUIBE\nColonel, USAF\nfor and in the absence of\nJOHN W. SMITH\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\n\nEnclosure:\nUFO Summary\nMr. Stephen Clark\n6200 Carpenter Street\nPhiladelphia 43, Pennsylvania\n\nRef: Case in LAL & MRO 19 Apr w/sup 3 May. Final ltr prep & fwded 19 Apr fwdng info requested.\n\nSAFIL-1 SAFIL\n\nRECD 20 APR 1955 DIRINT HD USAF"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\n[illegible] [REDACTED] [illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nRECD 20 APR 1955 DIRINT HD USAF"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\n6 May 1955\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE\nATTN: LT COL BLOOMER\n\nSUBJECT: Request for Information Regarding Flying Saucers\n\nInclosed correspondence, above subject, is forwarded in accordance with telephone conversation 5 May 1955 between Lt Col Bloomer, your office, and Major Ramsey, this office.\n\n2 Incls\n1. Post card fr Mr. Caldwell, 28 Apr 55\n2. Cy ltr of ack\n\nJOHN W. SMITH\nLt Colonel, U. S. Air Force\nExecutive\nDirectorate of Inspection Services\nThe Inspector General\n\nFor file - MCR\nReply necessary\nCol Bloomer\n17 May"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nRECD 6 MAY 1955 DIRINT HD USAF\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nSUBJECT: Request for Information Regarding Flying Saucers\n\nATTN: LT COL BLOOMER\n\n[illegible]\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"John Caldwell\n141 Wood Ave\nSyracuse 5, N.Y.\n4/28/55\nDear Sirs,\nPlease send me information\nI am referring to \"Flying Saucers\" ... the [illegible] ... by the [illegible] ... determination of [illegible] ... saucers and their occupants.\nSincerely,\nJohn Caldwell"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"\"Project Saucer\"\nThe Pentagon\nWashington D.C.\nSYRACUSE\nAPR 28 1955\nUNITED STATES\nPOSTAL CARD\nMAY 1955\nIN AF CIS"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MAY 5 1955\n\nMr. John Caldwell\n141 Wood Avenue\nSyracuse 5, New York\n\nDear Mr. Caldwell:\n\nThis will acknowledge receipt of your post card, dated 28 April 1955, addressed to Project Saucer, concerning your request for information regarding flying saucers.\n\nYour letter has been referred to the responsible staff agency for appropriate action.\n\nSincerely,\n\n[Signed]\n\nW. J. THOMPSON\nColonel, United States Air Force\nChief, Complaints & Investigations Div.\nDirectorate of Inspection Services\nThe Inspector General\n\nInd 1\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34746775 Page 118"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Ltr 2-2-7\nX Feleny, Dorla\nSAFLL-1/Mr Wilson/kba/71304/2 May 55\nSAFLL OSSIL-KN\n8 MAY 1955\n\nDear Miss Fedon:\n\nYour recent letter to The President of the United States requesting information on unidentified flying objects has been referred to the Department of the Air Force for reply.\n\nFor your convenience, I am attaching a copy of the Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program. This summary compiles the information which has been proven in our investigations to date.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\n[Signed]\n\nJOE W. KELLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\n\nCOORD\nGREENBACK\nSAFIS\nAF Press Desk\nAFOIN\nSAFLL-1\nStayback\n\nEnclosure\nUFO Summary\nMiss Doris Fedon\nBox 257\nHooversville, Pennsylvania\n\nNH: Case in I&L & HAO 29 Apr w/susp 13 May. No actn necessary. Final H/T prep & fwded 2 May providing requested info.\n\nSAFLL-1 SAFLL-\n\nFile 1-28 Col Blanton 31 May 55\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34746775 Page 119"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D 3 MAY 1955 DIRINT HD USAF\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nSEP AUG 8\n\n[illegible]\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34746775 Page 120"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAFLL-1 SAFLL\n[illegible]\nREC'D 29 APR 1955 DIR/INT HD USAF\nRef: Case in IAL 6 IMO 26 Apr w/map 10 May. No soul made as timed rep possible, final ltr prep & rel 27 Apr Mailing requested info.\nHouse of Representatives\n1. Ltr to Rep Bailey in Air Secretary did 10 Apr\n2. Summary on UFO Program\n3 Inclosures\nMajor General, USAF\nJoseph A. Bloomer\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nSincerely yours,\nFor your convenience in replying to Mr. Bowen, I am enclosing a copy of the Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning Unidentified Flying Objects. This summary contains the latest information which has been proven in our investigations to date.\nI refer to your recent expression of interest in behalf of Mr. Anthony F. Dolittle concerning his interest in unidentified flying objects.\nDear Mr. Bowen:\n8 APR 1955"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\nREC'D 29 APR 1955 DIR/INT HD USAF\n[illegible]\nHouse of Representatives\n[illegible]\nSincerely yours,\n[illegible]\nI refer to your recent expression of interest in behalf of Mr. [illegible] concerning unidentified flying objects. For your convenience, I am enclosing a copy of the Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning Unidentified Flying Objects. This summary contains the latest information which has been proven in our investigations to date.\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n22 APR 1955\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/tjc/54738\nINT2-2-7\nfor van Schravendyk, Y.O. mm\n11 May 1955\nMr. Y. O. van Schravendyk\nValkenboskade 166\nDen Haag\nNetherlands\nDear Mr. Schravendyk:\nIn response to your letter of May 3, 1955, I am enclosing a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\" which compiles the latest facts established by the Air Force in its program in this area.\nVery truly yours,\n1 Incl\na/s\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\nAFOIN-X\nLt Col Bloomer\nD/I File Cy\nD/I X-Ref File Cy\nOUT 11 MAY 1955 D/INT HQ USAF\nNW 91198 DocId:34746775 Page 123"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Y.O. van Schravendijk.\nValkenbaskade 166.\nDen Haag.\nNetherlands.\nDen Haag, 3-5-1955.\nDepartment of the Air Force.\nLt. Colonel J. A. Bloomer.\nWashington D.C.\nDear Mr. Bloomer,\nI am, because of several reasons, interested in the so called unidentified flying objects (U.F.Os) I am aware, the U.S. Air Force has had a major active program in this field for the past several years.\nThere is a very long list of questions I can ask you on this subject but I'll be short.\nYou can do me a very great pleasure when you sent me the officially released reports by the Air Force related to U.F.O.'s and \"U.S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information concerning the UFO program.\"\nThanking you very much.\nSincerely,\nSchravendyk\nP.S. This letter goes in a cover envelope that has a special value: \"10 years liberation stamps\". First day cover.\nEncl: 1 Folder, answer coupon."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT2-2-7\nAFOIN-1A1/Maj Fountain/ht/72891\nWrtn 25 May 55\nAFOIN-1A1\nSUBJECT: (Uncld) Unidentified Flying Objects Reporting\nTO: Commander Iceland Air Defense Force ATTN: Commander 57th Ftr Intep Sq APO 81, New York, New York\n1. Reference is made to information report, Subject: UFOB, dated 9 May 1955. Subject report was given a report number of IR-1-55.\n2. All future reports submitted on AF Form 112 should cite an IR number in accordance with USAF Intelligence Collection Instructions (ICI) dated June 1954.\nBY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nSIGNED CLIFFORD C. OPPER Colonel, USAF D/Intelligence\n26 MAY 1955 OUT D/INT HQ USAF\nNo M/R or statement of policy required.\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-1A1/Maj Fountain Colonel Opper\nD/A FILE COPY\nNW 91198 DocId:34746775 Page 125"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-1A-P Maj Buskey/ems/54544\nWrtn 3 June 1955\nINT2-2-7\nx Continental Air Defense\n3 JUN 1955 Command\n\nAFOIN-1A\n\nSUBJECT: CIRVIS Reports Over Canadian Territory\n\nTO:\tCommander-in-Chief\nContinental Air Defense Command\nEnt Air Force Base, Colorado\nAttn: Director of Intelligence\n\n1. The Canadian Department of External Affairs has informed this Headquarters through the State Department and the Joint Chiefs of Staff that permission has been granted, as an interim measure, for United States military and civil aircraft flying over Canadian territory to report vital intelligence sightings in accordance with the following principles:\n\na. If possible, sightings shall be reported by radio to a Royal Canadian Air Force ground station or the nearest Canadian or United States radar station.\n\nb. If efforts to establish contact with such stations are unsuccessful, sightings may then be reported by radio directly to United States authorities.\n\nc. If, after failing to establish contact with a Royal Canadian Air Force ground station, a United States aircraft reports directly to an authority in the United States, that authority shall transmit the information immediately to the Canadian Defense Command.\n\n2. These measures will hold until detailed procedures can be worked out between the Royal Canadian Air Force and the United States Air Force. An RCAF-USAF working group is presently meeting to do this.\n\n3. It is believed that it would be beneficial to have a representative from CONAD sitting in on these meetings with the Canadians to insure that insofar as possible CONAD's desires are made known and satisfied. If this is agreeable, cable notification will be given far enough in advance of each meeting to enable a representative from CONAD to be present.\n\nBY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\nMAURICE A. BENAY\nColonel, USAF\nD/Intelligence\n\nD/I File Copy\nAFOIN-1A-P Comeback cy\nAFOIN-1A-P Reader file copy\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL / AFOIN-1A-P / AFOIN-1A\nSignature of Responsible Officer / Internal Office Coordination"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"typed 15 Jun 55.\n\n15 JUN 1955\n\nAFOIN-1A1-19/Maj Fountain/eh/Annex #3/72891\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR AFOIN-4\n\nSUBJECT: (UNCLD) Theory of Flying Saucers\n\n1. The attached correspondence from the Air Attache, Argentina, subject as above, is forwarded for information upon which this office can base reply.\n\n2. Request that attached correspondence be handled in accordance with paragraph 3 basic letter.\n\n3. In reply cite A-1728.\n\n1 Incl\nLtr fr Atl, Argentina,\n24 May 55 w/1 incl\n\nWILLIAM H. TAYLOR\nColonel, USAF\nD/Intelligence\n\nNo m/r required\nAFOIN-1A1\nCol Taylor/\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\nMaj Fountain/\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nD/I FILE COPY"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/tjc/71092\nINT2-2-7\nx Johnson, C.\n\n16 June 1955\n\nMiss Claire Johnson\n2606 Coolidge Avenue\nWichita 4, Kansas\n\nDear Miss Johnson:\n\nThank you for your letter of June 8 which described your observation of an unidentified flying object.\n\nAs you are probably aware, the Air Force has a major active program in this area and is grateful for all reports such as yours on an initiative basis. The information you submitted has been turned over to our analysts for further evaluation.\n\nFor your convenience I am attaching a copy of the \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\" which compiles the latest known facts in our program in this area.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nSIGNED\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n1 Incl\na/s\n\nAFOIN-X\nLt Col Bloomer\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2\nATIC file cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/tjc/71092\nINT2-2-7\nx Feletman, L.\n\n17 June 1955\n\nMr. Lewis Feletman\n191 S.W. 18 Road\nMiami, Florida\n\nDear Sir:\n\nIn response to your letter of June 4, I am enclosing a copy of \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\".\n\nFor the past several years the Air Force has had an extensive active program in this area and the attached compiles all of the facts which have been established to date by this program.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nSIGNED\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n1 Incl\na/s\n\nAFOIN-X\nLt Col Bloomer\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"191 S.W.-18TH RD\nMIAMI, FLA.\nJUNE 4, 1955\n\nDear Sir,\nI would like to know if there is such a thing as flying saucers. If it is not true is there any photo play on it. I have read books and seen pictures of flying saucers. If you will please help me out because I don't know whom I should belive in the first place."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The Air Force say that\nsome one is feeding me lines.\nI would like to hear from\nyou on the subject right\naway.\n\nYours truly,\nGeorge Friedman\nFriedman"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/tjc/71092\n\nINT 2-2-7\nX Stone, T Mr.\n\n17 June 1955\n\nMr. Tim Stone\n4015 Quentin Avenue\nSt. Louis Park, Minnesota\n\nDear Sir:\n\nIn response to your letter of June 2, I am enclosing\na copy of \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information\nConcerning the Unidentified Flying Objects Program.\"\n\nFor the past several years the Air Force has had an\nextensive active program in this area and the attached\ncompiles all of the facts which have been established\nto date by this program.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nSIGNED\n\n1 Incl\n a/s\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nAFOIN-X\nLt Col Bloomer\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4015 Quentin Avenue\nSt. Louis Park, Minn.\nJune 2, 1955\n\nDear Sirs;\n\nI have become very interested in the subject\nof flying saucers. I have obtained and read as many\nbook that were within my grasp. I am now starting\na file on this subject and I was wondering although\nyou are trying to keep the cap on the lid, if it is\nat all possible to send me information on the sightings\nwithin and through 1940 & 55. Also I would appreciate\na form that is to be filled out when a sighting\nis made. I would appreciate this very much, although\nI know this is a big order. Thank you.\n\nSincerely,\nTim Stone"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Bloomer/tjc/71092\n\nInt 2-2-7\nX Taft, Glenn R\n\n17 June 1955\n\nMr. Glenn R. Taft\n501 Walnut Place\nPenfield\nHavertown, Pennsylvania\n\nDear Mr. Taft:\n\nThank you for your recent letter which described\nyour observation of an unidentified flying object.\n\nFor the past several years the Air Force has had\na major active program in this area and information\nsuch as yours submitted on a voluntary basis is\nextremely helpful. This information has been turned\nover to our analysts for further evaluation.\n\nFor your convenience, I am attaching a copy of\n\"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information\nConcerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\"\nwhich compiles all of the latest facts established\nby the Air Force in this program.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\n1 Incl\n a/s\n\nJOSEPH A. BLOOMER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2\nATIC FILE COPY"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Int 2-2-7\nX ATIC XI\n\nAIR TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nOHIO\n\n30 JUN 1955\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE\nPOLICY AND MANAGEMENT GROUP, AFOIN-X\n\nSUBJECT: (Uncl) UFO Summary\n\nAttached for your information is a summary of the UFO Program\ncovering Fiscal Year 1955.\n\nIncl\nStatus & Info Summary\n\nMARY L. STORM\n1st Lt, USAF\nAssistant Adjutant"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"JUN 30 1402 '55\n\nREC'D\n5 JUL 1955\nDIRINT\nHD USAF\n\n[illegible handwritten and faint typed text, largely unreadable]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STATUS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY\nPROJECT BLUE BOOK\nFOR THE FISCAL YEAR\n1 JULY 1954 - 30 JUNE 1955\n\nA. REPORTS\n\n1. During the reporting period specified, Project Blue Book has received a total of 430 UFO reports, processed in accordance with AFR 200-2 through appropriate military channels. Of this total, 325 or 76% of the reports were submitted by civilian observers, while 105 or 24% were sightings made by military personnel.\n\nB. STATISTICAL BREAKDOWN\n\n1. Monthly Receipts\n\nJuly 54 - 50 Jan 55 - 33\nAug 54 - 38 Feb 55 - 27\nSep 54 - 44 Mar 55 - 34\nOct 54 - 41 Apr 55 - 33\nNov 54 - 40 May 55 - 42\nDec 54 - 28 Jun 55 - 20\n241 189 = 430\n\nDay Sightings - 130 or 30%\nNight Sightings - 300 or 70%\n\nZI Sightings - 368\nO/S Sightings - 62\n430\n\n2. Evaluations Accomplished\n\n1st Half\n1 July 54 thru 31 Dec 54\n\nBalloons - 40 17%\nAstronomical - 57 23%\nAircraft - 76 31%\nOther (Reflec) - 30 12%\nInsuff Data - 23 10%\nUnknown - 15 7%\n241 100%\n\n2d Half\n1 Jan 55 thru 20 Jun 55\n\nBalloons - 52 28%\nAstronomical - 39 21%\nAircraft - 44 22%\nOther (Reflec) - 36 20%\nInsuff Data - 12 6%\nUnknown - 6 3%\n189 100%\n\nThe cooperative UFO Program between ATIC and the 4602d AISS (ADC) as established by AFR 200-2, dated 12 August 1954, reached its full effectiveness during this period. A series of conferences between ATIC Project Blue Book personnel and personnel of the 4602d AISS produced an evaluation guide and standard operating procedures."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"This program provides primarily for rapid \"on the spot\" UFO investigations and as a result the insufficient data cases have been reduced from 10%, during the first half of FY 1955, to 6% during the last half of the year. Unknowns have been reduced from 7% to 3% during the same time periods.\n\nC. GRAND BREAKDOWN\n\nBalloons - 92 21%\nAstronomical - 96 22%\nAircraft - 120 27%\nOther (Reflection) - 66 16%\nInsufficient Data for Evaluation - 35 9%\nUnknown - 21 5%\n430 100%"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-1A-P/Maj Buskey/ram/54544/Rm 203/\nAnnex #3 Written 19 Jul 55\n\nINT 2-2-7\nContinental Air Defense Command\n20 JUL 1955\n\nAFOIN-1A-P\n\nSUBJECT: Draft of Proposed Combined CIRVIS\n\nTO: Commander-in-Chief\nContinental Air Defense Command\nATTN: Director of Intelligence\nEnt Air Force Base\nColorado Springs, Colorado\n\n1. Inclosed are two copies of the draft for that part of the proposed combined CIRVIS which the working group has considered. Insofar as possible, the wishes of CONAD have been followed with the drafts left by Commander Thudium and other correspondence serving as guides.\n\n2. Note that US military communications stations in Canada, Alaska and Greenland will address CIRVIS reports to the Canadian circuit as well as the US addressee list when they receive a report of sighting within or adjacent to the North American continent. This is to insure that the Canadian authorities get the report quickly to allow quicker investigative action than might be possible if the report were passed to them later.\n\n3. Another item worth noting is 207a(1) which places the responsibility on one organization of making sure all addressees are notified. This will prevent several activities sending messages to one whose name might have been mistakenly left off the list. It is believed that CONAD is the appropriate US activity to do this.\n\n4. The remainder of the CIRVIS should be reviewed this week and the completed draft ready for final coordination and submission to the joint staff for approval within another week or ten days. CONAD comments are desired on both this and the final draft.\n\nBY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nMAURICE A. Buskey\nColonel, USAF\nD/Intelligence\n\n1 incl\nDraft CIRVIS (in dup)\n\nOIN-1A-P 8213\n\ncc: Comeback cy - 1A-P\nReading file - 1A-P\nD/I file cy\nOIN-1A Info cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFT 2-2-7\nX Senior, MR X\n\nSAFLL-1/Mr. Wilson/jpm/71304/22Jul55\nSAFLL 13689 BM\n\n25 JUL 1955\n\nDear Mr. Simon:\n\nYour recent letter to The President of the United States concerning unidentified flying objects has been referred to the Department of the Air Force for reply.\n\nI am attaching a copy of the United States Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program. This summary compiles all the latest facts proved in their investigations to date.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nJOE W. KELLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\n\nInclosure: Info sheet\n\nCOORD\nCOMEBACK\nAPOIN\nSAFLL-1\nstayback\n\nMr. Roger Simon\n34 Bliss Road\nLongmeadow 6, Massachusetts\nMR: Case rcd SAFL & M&O Branch 99 Jul w/susp 2Aug.\nReply based on policy ans\n\nSAFLL-1 SAFLL"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]\n[illegible]\nSTATE OF [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible] [illegible]\n[illegible] [illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-1A-P/Lt Col Holden/ram/54514/Wrtn 3 Aug 55\nRewritten from ltr wrtn 2 Aug 55\n\nAFOIN-1A-P\n\nAUG 3 1955\n\nSUBJECT: Draft of Proposed Combined CINVIS\n\nTO: Commander-in-Chief\nContinental Air Defense Command\nATTN: Director of Intelligence\nEnt Air Force Base, Colorado\n\n1. Forwarded herewith are three (3) copies of the final revised draft of the proposed revision to JANAP 146(c), CINVIS. This final draft represents a few minor clarifying changes in the partial draft which was forwarded you by letter dated 20 July 1955, subject as above, plus the revision of Sections III, IV, V, and VI, all of which are very brief.\n\n2. This draft is scheduled for review by the working group for final approval and forwarding to the Joint Communication-Electronics Committee approximately 10 August 1955. It is, therefore, requested that CONAD concurrence or comments be forwarded this headquarters by electrical means as soon as possible.\n\nBY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\n1 Incl\nFinal Draft - CINVIS\n(in trip)\n\nRAYMOND B. HOLDEN\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\ncc: Comeback cy - 1A-P\nReader file - 1A-P\nD/I file cy\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-1A-P\n\nOUT 14 AUG 1955 HQ USAF"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nSAFLL-1/Capt Schoenberg/bjg/77695/18 Aug 55\nSAFLL 15111 B-M\n\n18 AUG 1955\n\nDear Mr. Watts:\n\nYour letter to Major General John A. Samford concerning the observation of an unidentified flying object by Mr. George M. Allender of Nicholasville, Kentucky, has been referred to me for reply.\n\nThe data compiled by Mr. Allender has been given to the appropriate analysts for further evaluation.\n\nAs you are undoubtedly aware, the Air Force has a major program in this area, and voluntary contributions, such as those of Mr. Allender, are extremely beneficial.\n\nFor your convenience in replying to Mr. Allender, I am attaching a copy of \"United States Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\".\n\nI hope that this information will be of assistance to you.\n\nMR: Case Recd in SAFLL 4 Aug 55. Recd in MR Br. on 4 Aug 55. FWDED to AFOIN for [REDACTED] to base reply. Memo dtd 12 Aug 55 recd from AFOIN signed by Col Chappell was basis for final reply. Final ltr prepd and fwded on 18 Aug 1955.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nR. J. CLIZBE\nColonel, USAF\nFor and in the Absence of\nJOE W. KELLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\n\nCOORD\nCOMEBACK 5D 861\nAFOIN\nSAFLL-1\nSTAYBACK\n\nEnclosure ****\n\nHonorable John C. Watts\nHouse of Representatives\n\n****Brochure entitled \"United States Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\"\n\nSAFLL-1 SAFLL"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nWrtn: AFOIN-X/Col Chappell/pse/\n54738/12 Aug 55\nSecretary of the Air Force\nLegislative Liaison\n\nAFOIN-X\n\n12 August 1955\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE LIAISON,\nOFFICE, SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE\n\nSUBJECT: Observation of Unidentified Flying Object by Mr. George M. Allender\n\nThe following is offered as a basis for reply to Congressman Watts:\n\n\"Your letter to General Samford concerning the observation of an unidentified flying object with the accompanying data compiled by Mr. George M. Allender of Nicholasville, Kentucky, has been received and the information turned over to the appropriate analysts for further evaluation.\nAs you are undoubtedly aware, the Air Force has a major active program in this area and contributions such as those of Mr. Allender on a voluntary basis are extremely beneficial.\nFor your convenience in replying to Mr. Allender, I am attaching a copy of \"U.S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\" which compiles the latest facts established by the Air Force in its program in this area.\"\n\n2 Incls:\n1. Ltr to Congressman Watts\n2. AF Summary - UFO\n\nFRANK B. CHAPPELL\nColonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\ncc: Coord Cy : AFOIN-X2B2\nD/I X-Ref cy: X2B2\nAFOIN-4"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-1A-P/Maj Buskey/ram/54514\nWritten 22 Aug 55\nINT 2-2-7\nXDCS/0\n\n23 AUG 1955\n\nAFOIN-1A-P/Maj Buskey/ram/54514\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS\nATTN: Major York, AFOCS/O\n\nSUBJECT: AFOIN Comments on Proposed Revision to CINVIS\n\n1. Reference the proposed revision to CINVIS which is included as Enclosure \"A\" to Joint Communications-Electronics Committee Memorandum for the Joint Coordinating Panel dated 9 August 1955, subject: \"Communications Instructions for Reporting Vital Intelligence Sightings from Aircraft (CINVIS).\"\n\n2. AFOIN coordinates on the proposed revision with the following comments:\n\na. The title of the document should no longer contain \"from aircraft,\" \"while airborne\" or similar phrases since the paper will now cover sightings from the air and water and some from certain land observers.\n\nb. Enclosure \"A\" should have \"JANAP 146( )\" removed from the upper right-hand corner of page 1-1.\n\nc. In sub-paragraph 201a(1)(a) add \"Hostile or unidentified\" at the beginning of the sentence.\n\nd. In 201a(1)(f) delete all after \"unusual location.\"\n\ne. In 203 delete \"or include\" in the first line.\n\nf. In 205b add \"or erroneous\" after \"friendly.\"\n\ng. In 206a(1) add \"whichever is the more convenient,\" after \"St. Hubert, Quebec.\"\n\nh. In 206b add \"(2) Canadian and US military communications stations will multiple address the CINVIS reports to the following address designations:\" in the proper place after 206b(1)(a). Change the present (b) to (a) under this new (2). Then add under it after 1. \"5. RCAF Air Defense Command (CANAIRDEF), St. Hubert, Montreal, P.Q.,\" and \"6. Appropriate Flag Officer in Command:\" with subparagraphs a. and b. as follows: \"a. Canadian Flag Officer, Atlantic Coast, (CANFLAGLANT),"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memo, Subject: AFOIN Comments on Proposed Revision to CIRVIS (Cont'd)\n\nHalifax, Nova Scotia.\" and \"b. Canadian Flag Officer, Pacific Coast (CANFLAGPAC), Esquimalt, British Columbia.\" in the proper marginal positions. Finally delete all of the present sub-paragraph 205b(2).\n\n1. In 207a(1) delete \"insure that all CIRVIS reports\" in the first sentence and replace with \"review all CIRVIS reports to ascertain that they\". Also add \"and forward the reports to any addressees omitted.\" at the end of the sentence.\n\nj. After sub-paragraph 207a(1) add sub-paragraph (5) as follows: \"(5) Sea Frontier Commands will be responsible for notifying CNO concerning CIRVIS reports.\"\n\nk. In 207a, place a comma after \"addressees\" in the second line and remove the comma after \"authorities\" in the same line.\n\nl. Coordination of MATS and CINCONAD has been received by AFOIN including the comments above.\n\nMAURICE A. DEIRE\nColonel, USAF\nD/Intelligence\n\ncc: Comeback cy - 1A-P\nReader file - 1A-P\nD/I file cy\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Philmont Scout Ranch\nCIMARRON, NEW MEXICO\n12\nJuly 31, 1955\n\nDear Sirs,\n\nI thought you might be interested in an incident which happened here at Philmont Scout Ranch on the night of Wednesday, July 27 at approximately 9:30 P.M. At that time a group of JLT's (No. 51) were returning to Zastro after attending an astronomy lecture at Carson-Maxwell. On their hike back to Zastro they were amazed and startled to see approximately 8 UFO's race across Uracca Mesa toward the East. The UFO's began an eccentric maneuver back & forth using their ground lights a great deal of the time. Since it was the first time most of them had ever seen a \"flying saucer\", you can imagine the fright created. The amazing"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Philmont Scout Ranch\nCIMARRON, NEW MEXICO\n12\n(B)\n\nthing, however was the fact that two of them seem to have spotted the gray & did movements in that direction. Two of the scouts, whose names & addresses appear below, hit upon the idea of attempting some kind of communication. Since I had told them that the UFO's which the airforce had investigated were found to be built on the same mathematical scale as ours, they sent the number Pi (π) - 3.1416. Needless to say they were all astounded when the UFO returned the same signal. It frightened them so much that they hesitated about making another attempt. Before long the two UFO's left. The two main reps in this attempt were - James D. Nye, Rt. #1, Box 515, Brownsville, Texas, and Edward James Dodson, 14579 Northlawn, Detroit 38, Michigan.\n\nI hope this incident may help you in some"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3\nway is your \"Project Saucer\" investigation. For further information you may contact me here at Philmont Scout Ranch until August 24, 1955.\n\nSincerely yours,\nJack Gilby, B.S., M.A.\nEuntry Museum\nCarson-Maxwell\nPhilmont Scout Ranch\nCimarron, New Mex."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/T J Clay/tjc/54738\ninf 2-2-7\nGilby, Jack\n\n24 August 1955\n\nMr. Jack Gilby\nPhilmont Scout Ranch\nCimarron, New Mexico\n\nDear Mr. Gilby:\n\nThank you for your recent letter which described your observation of unidentified flying objects.\n\nFor the past several years the Air Force has had a major active program in this area and information such as yours submitted on a voluntary basis is extremely helpful. This information has been turned over to our analysts for further evaluation.\n\nFor your convenience, I am attaching a copy of \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\" which compiles all of the latest facts established by the Air Force in this program.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\n1 Incl\na/s\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2\nATIC FILE COPY"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/T J Clay/tjc/54738\n\nOct 2-2-7\nV Schwenzer, Eugen\n\n24 August 1955\n\nMr. Eugen Schwenzer\nWagenstetten (Aarg.)\nSchweiz\n\nDear Mr. Schwenzer:\n\n Thank you for your recent letter which described\nyour observation of an unidentified flying object.\n\n For the past several years the Air Force has had\na major active program in this area and information\nsuch as yours submitted on a voluntary basis is extremely\nhelpful. This information has been turned over to our\nanalysts for further evaluation.\n\n For your convenience, I am attaching a copy of\n\"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information\nConcerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\"\nwhich compiles all of the latest facts established\nby the Air Force in this program.\n\n Thank you again for your interest in this matter.\n\n Very truly yours,\n\n1 Incl\n a/s TIMOTHY R JOHNSON\n Lt Colonel, USAF\n Directorate of Intelligence\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2\nATIC FILE COPY"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/T J Clay/tjc/54738\n\nOct 2-2-7\nX Ericson, Richard\n\n24 August 1955\n\nMr. Richard Ericson\n519 Austin Avenue\nPark Ridge, Illinois\n\nDear Mr. Ericson:\n\n Thank you for your recent letter which described\nyour observation of an unidentified flying object.\n\n For the past several years the Air Force has had\na major active program in this area and information\nsuch as yours submitted on a voluntary basis is\nextremely helpful. This information has been turned\nover to our analysts for further evaluation.\n\n For your convenience, I am attaching a copy of \"U. S.\nAir Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning\nthe Unidentified Flying Object Program\" which compiles\nall of the latest facts established by the Air Force in\nthis program.\n\n Very truly yours,\n\n1 Incl\n a/s TIMOTHY R JOHNSON\n Lt Colonel, USAF\n Directorate of Intelligence\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2\nATIC FILE COPY"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/T J Clay/tjc/54738\n\nOct 2-2-7\nX Brown, Ernest C. K.\n\n24 August 1955\n\nMr. Ernest C. K. Brown\nApartado 363, Sucursal B\nHermosillo, Sonora, Mexico\n\nDear Mr. Brown:\n\n Thank you for your recent letter which described\nyour observation of an unidentified flying object.\n\n For the past several years the Air Force has had\na major active program in this area and information\nsuch as yours submitted on a voluntary basis is extremely\nhelpful. This information has been turned over to our\nanalysts for further evaluation.\n\n For your convenience, I am attaching a copy of\n\"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information\nConcerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\"\nwhich compiles all of the latest facts established\nby the Air Force in this program.\n\n Very truly yours,\n\n1 Incl\n a/s TIMOTHY R JOHNSON\n Lt Colonel, USAF\n Directorate of Intelligence\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2\nATIC FILE COPY"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/T J Clay/tjc/54738\n\nOct 2-2-7\nX Olwyler, John Mrs.\n\n25 August 1955\n\nMrs. John Olwyler\nShale Top Farm\nR. D. 2\nStroudsburg, Penna.\n\nDear Mrs. Olwyler:\n\n Thank you for your recent letter which described your\nobservation of an unidentified flying object.\n\n For the past several years the Air Force has had a\nmajor active program in this area and information such as\nyours submitted on a voluntary basis is extremely helpful.\nThis information has been turned over to our analysts for\nfurther evaluation.\n\n For your convenience, I am attaching a copy of \"U. S.\nAir Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the\nUnidentified Flying Object Program\" which compiles all of\nthe latest facts established by the Air Force in this program.\n\n Very truly yours,\n\n1 Incl\n a/s TIMOTHY R JOHNSON\n Lt Colonel, USAF\n Directorate of Intelligence\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2\nATIC FILE COPY"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/T J Clay/tjc/54738\n\nOct 2-2-7\nOlson, Kurt\nMoatic\n\n25 August 1955\n\nMaster Kurt Olson\n737 South Jackson Street\nHinsdale, Illinois\n\nDear Master Olson:\n\n In response to your letter of July 18, I am enclosing\na copy of \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Infomation\nConcerning the Unidentified Flying Objects Program.\"\n\n For the past several years the Air Force has had an\nextensive active program in this area and the attached compiles\nall of the facts which have been established to date by this\nprogram.\n\n Thank you very much for your interest in the Air Force.\n\n Very truly yours,\n\n1 Incl\n a/s TIMOTHY R JOHNSON\n Lt Colonel, USAF\n Directorate of Intelligence\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2\nATIC FILE COPY"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nOFFICE OF THE ADJUTANT GENERAL\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\nLL\nIN REPLY REFER TO\nAGAO-CC 095 Olson, Kurt 8 August 1955\n(18 July 55)\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: CHIEF OF STAFF, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nATTENTION: Ground Observer Corps Project Office\n\nSUBJECT: Request for Information Concerning Flying Saucers\n\n\tThe attached letter is forwarded as a matter pertaining to\nyour Department. The writer has not been advised of this referral.\n\n\tFOR THE ADJUTANT GENERAL:\n\n\n1 Incl Adjutant General\n Ltr 18 July 55 fr\n Kurt Olson\n\n4A 932\n\nOPERATIONS BRANCH\nDEPT OF ARMY\nDISPATCHED\nAUG 8 3 20 PM '55"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISPATCHED\nAug 8 3 20 PM '55\nDEPT. OF ARMY, TAGO\nOPERATIONS BRANCH\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LL\n\nAGAO-CC 095 Olson, Kurt 8 August 1955\n(18 July 55)\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR: CHIEF OF STAFF, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nATTENTION: Ground Observer Corps Project Office\n\nSUBJECT: Request for Information Concerning Flying Saucers\n\n\tThe attached letter is forwarded as a matter pertaining to\nyour Department. The writer has not been advised of this referral.\n\n\tFOR THE ADJUTANT GENERAL:\n\nFrank W. Morrow\n1 Incl Adjutant General\n Ltr 18 July 55 fr\n Kurt Olson\n\nOPERATIONS BRANCH\nDEPT OF ARMY\nDISPATCHED\nAUG 8 3 20 PM '55"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DISPATCHED\nAug 8 3 20 PM '55\nDEPT. OF ARMY, TAGO\nOPERATIONS BRANCH\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"LL\n\n737 South Jackson St.\nWinnedale, Ill.\nJuly 18, 1955\n\nDear Sir:\n\nChuck Skeels and I have started a Flying Saucer Spotter organization, we are both 11 years, we would like very much to get all the invormation about Flying Saucers as there is. Could you send us that. Here is a picture of our poster we put up\n\nRECROUT\nFOR A JOB AS A\nFLYING SAUCER SPOTTER\nAT AGGS 8-11\n737 S. JACKSON ST.\nHINSDALE, ILL.\nDO NOT NEED GLASSES\nBOYS or GIRLS\nTHE PAY IS 3¢ A WEEK\nYOU PAY US 5¢ A WEEK\n24 GOGS TO EQUIPMENT\nVICE PRESIDENT PRESIDENT\nCHUCK SKEELS HURT OLSON\n\nHow do you like its? If we site any where should we report? P.S. answer right away. Sincerly,\n Hurt Olson"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nDec 2-2-7\n+ Gillis, R.B.\n\n1 September 1955\n\nMr. R. B. Gillis\nDowney, California\n\nDear Mr. Gillis:\n\n\tThank you for your recent letter which described your observation of an unidentified flying object.\n\n\tFor the past several years the Air Force has had a major active program in this area and information such as yours submitted on a voluntary basis is extremely helpful. This information has been turned over to our analysts for further evaluation.\n\n\tFor your convenience, I am attaching a copy of \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\" which compiles all of the latest facts established by the Air Force on this program.\n\n\tVery truly yours,\n\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\n1 Incl\na/s\t\tLt Colonel, USAF\n\t\tDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nNOTE TO FILE ROOM: X2B2\n\nReplace file cy with this original. Letter returned undelivered due to insufficient address. For future reference in event no reply is challenged.\n\n\t\tSgt Evans, OIN-X"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Johnson/tjc/54738\nINT 2-2-9\nX Legislative Liaison\n/X Klok, R. Miss\n\n1 September 1955\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE LIAISON\nOFFICE, SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE, SAFLL-1\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Object\n\nThe following is offered as a basis for reply to Miss Roberta Klok:\n\n\"Your letter to the President concerning the observation of an unidentified flying object has been referred to the Department of the Air Force for reply.\n\nAs you are undoubtedly aware, the Air Force has a major active program in this area and contributions such as yours on a voluntary basis are extremely helpful.\n\nFor your convenience I am attaching a copy of \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program\" which compiles the latest facts established by the Air Force in its program in this area.\"\n\n2 Incls\n1. Ltr from Miss Klok dtd 12Aug55\n2. UFOB Summary\t\tTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\n\t\t\t\tLt Colonel, USAF\n\t\t\t\tDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nHandcarried to Lt L by Lt Col Johnson 9/2/55\n\nAFOIN-X\n\nLt Col Johnson\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Johnson/tjc/54738\nINT 2-2-7\nX Cgachor, R.R.\n\n1 September 1955\n\nMr. Robert Czachor\n212 Lynch Street\nBrooklyn 6, New York\n\nDear Mr. Czachor:\n\n\tIn response to your letter of 23 August, I am enclosing a copy of \"U. S. Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program.\"\n\n\tFor the past several years the Air Force has had an extensive active program in this area and the attached compiles all of the facts which have been established to date by this program.\n\n\tVery truly yours,\n\n1 Incl\na/s\t\tTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\n\t\tLt Colonel, USAF\n\t\tDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT 6 SEP 1955 DIR/INT HQ USAF\n\nAFOIN-X\n\nLt Col Johnson\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"212 Lynch St\nBrooklyn 6, N.Y.\nAugust 23, 1955\n\nDear Sirs,\n\tI am very intrested in flying sawcers. I have heard many things said about them. I would be very grateful if you would please send me any information you have about them and pictures.\n\n\tThank you\n\tRobert Czachor\n\t212 Lynch St.\n\tBrooklyn 6, N.Y."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nX aaa Argentina\n\nAFOIN-1A1-19/Maj Fountain/egt/52618\nWrtn: 1 Sep 55\n\nAFOIN-1A1-19\n\nSUBJECT: (Uncld) Theory of Flying Saucers\n\nTO:\tUnited States Air Attache\n\tAmerican Embassy\n\tBuenos Aires, Argentina\n\n1. Reference is made to your letter, file 197 R&D, subject as above, dated 24 May 1955.\n\n2. Subject document has been translated and is presently being evaluated. Results of this evaluation will be forwarded to your office as soon as possible.\n\nBY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nSIGNED\nJAMES T. BULL\nColonel, USAF\nD/Intelligence\n\n1 SEP 1955\n\nOUT 2 SEP 1955 DIR/INT HQ USAF\n\nNo M/R Required\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-1A1\nCol Opper JTB Maj Fountain\n\nFILE COPY - DISSEMINATION OF INTELLIGENCE"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Johnson/tjc/71092\n\n7 September 1955\n\nMr. Robert J. Gribble, President\nInternational Space Observers League\nP. O. Box 441\nSeattle 1, Washington\n\nDear Mr. Gribble:\n\n With reference to your letter of 19 July 1955, you are right in assuming that the Air Force is not firing test missiles over major American cities into the airways of major airlines. We are soon to release to the public information that has been gathered since 1948 pertaining to unidentified flying objects. This has been called Project \"Bluebook.\"\n\n Thank you for your interest in the Unidentified Flying Object Program and the United States Air Force.\n\n Yours very truly,\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nAFOIN-X\n\nLt Col Johnson\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A RESEARCH CLUB STUDYING THE GREATEST PHENOMENA IN HISTORY\n\nInternational\nSPACE OBSERVERS LEAGUE\nP.O. Box 441 Seattle 1, Washington\n\nJuly 19, 1955\n\nU. S. Air Force Intelligence\nc/o Project Bluebook\nThe Pentagon\nWashington, D. C.\n\nGentlmen:\n\n My subject is \"Flying Saucers\". I will keep my letter short as I am aware that your time is very important.\n\n In the August issue of Fate Magazine, there is an article titled \"Are The Saucers Made On Earth?\" by a James W. Moseley. In this article Mr. Moseley contends that the Saucers are made on earth, and in this country.\n\n I have but one question to ask you. If Mr. Moseley is right then this means that the Air Force is firing it's test missiles, or whatever they are, over major American cities, into the airways of the major airlines, with no regard to the hazard placed over the heads of millions of Americans.\n\n I personally, have great respect for the U. S. Air Force and the men who run it. I cannot make myself believe that the Personal at the top have all lost their marbles, and allow such a thing to happen.\n\n Thousands of people will read that article, and thousands will be asking themselves the same question which I have asked you. Such an article is a disgrace to our Air Force and all of it's members. This Moseley should be slapped down publicly.\n\nYours very truly\n\nRobert J. Gribble\nPresident"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Johnson/tjc/71092\n\n7 September 1955\n\nMr. George S. Wells\n7 Hillside Lane\nMill Valley, California\n\nDear Mr. Wells:\n\n Your letter of 10 July 1955 has been referred to this office and we are enclosing a copy of AFR 200-2 and AFR 200-7.\n\n Project \"Bluebook\" at this time is not ready for release, however, we will send you a copy when it becomes releasable.\n\n Very truly yours,\n\n2 Incls\n 1. AFR 200-2\n 2. AFR 200-7\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nAFOIN-X\n\nLt Col Johnson\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File, X2B2"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AIR TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nOHIO\n\n25 JUL 1955\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR CHIEF, POLICY AND MANAGEMENT GROUP\nDIRECTORATE OF INTELLIGENCE\n\nSUBJECT: (Uncl) Request for UFO Information for Publishing Purposes\n\nThe attached letter is forwarded for your disposition.\n\n1 Incl\nLtr fr Mr. G.S. Wells\n\nMARY L. STORM\n1st Lt, USAF\nAssistant Adjutant"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A.T.I.A.\n18 Aug\n\n7 Millside Lane\nMill Valley, Calif.\n\nJuly 10, 1955\n\nPublic Information Officer\nWright-Patterson Air Force Base\nDayton, Ohio\n\nDear Sir:\n\n I am studying the possibility of doing a magazine piece on the subject\nof Unidentified Flying Objects and the Air Force effort to check out all\nreports turned in on sightings or alleged sightings. I am especially\ninterested in whatever units have been assigned the special task of making\nsuch investigations and the procedures involved.\n\n Can you send me some preliminary information on this subject and tell\nme what part of the operation, if any, will be classified and therefore\nunobtainable? I am more interested, of course, in the men who do the job,\nthan in precise technical data. And I am sure the subject can be handled in\nsuch a way that the populace need not be disturbed, but rather reassured that\nthe Air Force is so thoroughly on the job.\n\n I would appreciate it if you could send me certain unclassified\ndocuments which I believe pertain to the subject. These would be AF Regulations\n200-2 and 200-7, plus an account of early UFOB operations which I believe is\ncalled Project Bluebook.\n\n If your office is not the correct one to approach for the above information,\nwill you please forward this letter to the proper contact? However, I believe\nthat the impetus for the operation must stem from Wright field.\n\n Should this idea turn into a story, I probably will do it in collaboration\nwith another Mill Valley writer, Monty Waite, with whom I work occasionally\non chores for Post and Colliers. Many thanks for any assistance you can give\nme.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nGeorge S. Wells\n\nCAT III - 4\n\nN144794"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECEIVED\n19 JUL 1955\nAIG\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Johnson/tjc/71092\n\n7 September 1955\n\nMr. William W. Shoemaker\n912 Wahler Place, S.E.\nWashington, D. C.\n\nDear Mr. Shoemaker:\n\n As per our telephone conversation of 15 August 1955,\nat which time you reported an unidentified flying object,\nI would like to inform you that this information has been\npassed along to the Special Studies Group the Air Force\nhas for such sightings. We are very interested in such\nsightings and I assure you proper action has been taken.\n\n You indicated an interest in joining a Ground Observer\nCorps. The following officers are Ground Observer Project\nOfficers and if you contact them I am sure they would give\nyou the necessary information:\n\n NAME ROOM NO. PHONE EXTENSION\nColonel O. F. Clarke .5543 74009\nCaptain C. H. Darling .5543 73812\nCaptain H. F. Hauser .5543 72043\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\n1 Incl\n UFOB Summary\n\nAFOIN-X\n\nLt Col Johnson\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nX Krok, Miss\n\nSAFLL-1/Capt Schoenberg/bjg/77695/6 Sept 55\nSAFLL 16666 B-M\n\n7 SEP 1955\n\nDear Miss Krok:\n\n Your letter to The President concerning the observation\nof an unidentified flying object has been referred to the\nDepartment of the Air Force for reply.\n\n As you are undoubtedly aware, the Air Force has a major\nprogram active in the field of unidentified flying objects.\nVoluntary contributions such as yours are extremely helpful.\n\n For your convenience, I am attaching a copy of \"United\nStates Air Force Summary of Events and Information Concerning\nthe Unidentified Flying Object Program.\" This summary compiles\nthe latest facts established by the Air Force in its program.\n\n The Air Force appreciates your interest and the effort\nyou have made to furnish us with information.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nCOORD\nCOMEBACK 5D 861\nAFOIN\nSAFLL-1\nSTAYBACK\n\nMR: Case recd in 30 Aug 55\nRecd in MMO 30 Aug 55 w/susp 9\nSept 55. Fwded to AFOIN for info\nto base reply. Memo dtd 1 Sept\n55 signed by Lt Col Johnson, staff\naction officer was Col Johnson\nInclosure ***** con'td\n\nJOE W. KELLY\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector, Legislative Liaison\n\nMR Con'td x-71092, was basis for this\nreply. Final ltr prepd and fwded on\n6 Sept 1955.\n\nMiss Roberta Krok\nRural Route #3\nPrinceton, Illinois\n\n**** Copy of United States Air Force Summary of Events and Information\nConcerning the Unidentified Flying Object Program.\"\n\nSAFLL-1 SAFLL"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"RECD 7 SEP 1955 DIRINT HD USAF\n\n[illegible]\n\n7 SEP 1955\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT2-2-7\n✓x Draffone, A.D.\nmo\n\n12 September 1955\n\nMrs. Americo D. Draffone\nP.O. Box 164\nManomet, Massachusetts\n\nDear Mrs. Draffone,\n\n\tWe have received your letter of September 1st, and have forwarded your account of the Unidentified Object sightings to the appropriate analysts for further evaluation.\n\n\tAs you know, the Air Force has a major active program in this field to investigate and identify all Unidentified Aerial Objects. For this reason, initiative reports such as yours are of considerable value and greatly appreciated.\n\n\tI am enclosing for your convenience a Summary of information compiled from this program. I hope you find it of interest.\n\n\tThank you for your letter and assistance.\n\n\tSincerely,\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nEncl\n\nNo green copy for DI File\n\nX2B2 FILE CY\nAFOIN-4 INFO CY w/Incl"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dft 2-2-7\n✓x Chorvat, Stefan\n\n12 September 1955\n\nMr. Stefan Chorvat\n6 Frederica Street\nOrange, N.S.W.\nAustralia\n\nDear Mr. Chorvat;\n\n\tYour letter of 3 June 1955 to General Kelsey has been referred to this office for reply.\n\n\tWe have read your letter with interest and have forwarded your account of sightings of Unidentified Aerial Objects to the appropriate analysts for further evaluation.\n\n\tIn reference to the various books you may have read on this subject, we would like to say that these writings are the authors own opinions and do not reflect the official conclusions of the United States Air Force.\n\n\tI have attached for your convenience a summary of information which is the only official position of facts concerning our program of investigations.\n\n\tI hope you find the summary of interest and wish to thank you for your information.\n\n\tSincerely,\n\nENCL:\nUFO Summary\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOIN-X2B2 File Cy\nAFOIN-4 Info Cy w/Incls"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Dft 2-2-7\n✓x Jens, Wayne H., Mrs.\n\n13 September 1955\n\nMrs. Wayne H. Jens\n72 Hazelton Circle\nBriarcliff Manor, New York\n\nDear Mrs. Jens;\n\n\tYour letter of August 27th, has been received by this office and forwarded to the appropriate analysts for further evaluation.\n\n\tThe Air Force does have an active program in effect to investigate and analyze all reported Unidentified Flying Objects. For this reason, initiative reports such as yours are of considerable value and greatly appreciated.\n\n\tFor your information, I am enclosing a summary of events compiled from this program. I hope you will find it of interest.\n\n\tThank you for your cooperation.\n\n\tSincerely,\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nEncl:\n\nX2B2 FILE CY\nAFOIN-4 INFO CY w/Basic Ltr"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDft 2-2-7\nAFOIN-4\n\nAFOIN-2B3/Mr. Gilmore/edn/73530/13 Sep 55\n\n14 SEP 1955\n\nAFOIN-2\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR AFOIN-4\n\nSUBJECT: (Conf) Unidentified Flying Objects\n\n1. On 12 September 1955 Lt. R. G. Burton, USN, now stationed at the U. S. Naval Academy gave information with respect to an unidentified object sighted by his mother who lives in Canada. Lt. Burton's address is 306 Rogers Heights, Annapolis, Maryland, Telephone CO. 83716.\n\n2. The information as reported by Lt. Burton is included in Tab \"A\" and is forwarded for your information and action as deemed appropriate.\n\n1 Incl\nTab \"A\" (Conf)\n\nLLEWELLYN E. HOLLINGER\nMajor, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nAFOIN Coord Cy\nAFOIN-CzRef Cy\nAFOIN-2B Gmbk Cy\nAFOIN-2B3 Stbk Cy\n\nWrtn 13 Sep 55\n\nNo M/R note or policy statement necessary\n\nCOORDINATION:\nAFOIN-2B3\nMr. Gilmore\n\nAFOIN-2B\nCol. Wynne\n\nCol. Kneen\n\nAFOIN-2\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTAB \"A\"\n\n\tMrs. Edith B. Burton, Box 173, Chase, British Columbia, Canada, observed an unidentified object near her home on 9 August 1955. The observation was made on a clear day with only one or two small clouds in the sky. The observation was made between 5 and 6 p.m. with the sun shining brightly. According to Lt. Burton, she saw an object, saucer in shape, both on top and bottom with something on top resembling a stack. The object was silver in color and passed from east to west and was under observation for about 20 to 30 seconds. No change in speed or altitude was noted while under observation. The object was estimated to be at 8,000 to 10,000 feet in altitude and about a quarter of the size of the moon in size. This sighting is the only time such an object has been sighted by this individual according to Lt. Burton. This one individual is the only person known to have observed this particular object.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\n1 x Colonial Airlines, Inc.\n1 x O'Neill, J. H. Mr.\n14 September 1955\n\nMr. J. H. O'Neill\nDirector of Flight Operations\nCOLONIAL AIRLINES, INC.\nLaGuardia Airport Station\nFlushing 71, New York\n\nDear Mr. O'Neill:\n\nYour letter of September 8th has been forwarded to our Technical Intelligence Center for necessary evaluation.\n\nQuite naturally, in view of our active program in this field and the very definite obligation of the Air Force to identify and analyze these things that happen in the air, we highly appreciate such a complete and prompt account from the highly qualified personnel of a commercial airline.\n\nOur thanks to you, Captains Cushing and Janss and First Officers Schecht and Darby.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nNo green Copy for D/I File\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nX2B2 FILE CY\nAFOIN-4 INFO CY"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"September 8, 1955\n\nChief of Staff\nUnited States Air Force\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nIn accordance with CIRVIS procedure for reporting vital intelligence sightings, attached are copies of three reports turned in by flight crews on an unidentified object sighted September 6, 1955.\n\nIf possible, we would be very interested in knowing what the object was and if there is any way we can prevent future occurrences.\n\nThanking you in advance, I am\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nCOLONIAL AIRLINES, INC.\n\nJ. H. O'Neill\nDirector of Flight Operations\n\nEnc."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director of Flight Operations 9-7-55\n\nCaptain F. W. Cushing\n\nFLIGHT 14 - SEPTEMBER 6, 1955\n\nOn Flight 14 of the 6th at approximately 1925 EST, geographical position approximately 16 nautical miles north of the FOX Omni Range, 004 degree track, at 5000 ft. with a clear sky above, unlimited visibility horizontally and a smoke layer below, sighted an unidentified object with a blue-white exhaust flame between a half mile or mile directly ahead at approximately 1000 ft. above our position on what appeared to be about a 200-210 degree heading in about a 15-20 degree angle descent.\n\nIn approximately 3 seconds the object had moved from directly in front of us to about 100 degrees from our track placing it off our left beam and was then omitting a lot of sparks as well as the blue flame. At that time, it exploded with a blinding flash within, I would say, a half mile or mile of our position.\n\nFlight 412, who, I believe, was in the vicinity of ALB at about 8000 ft. reported seeing the flash although he was northbound. Southbound Flight 33, who was approximately just south of Coxsackie at about 6000 ft., also reported seeing the flash.\n\nI could not see what the object was except that it appeared like a rocket ship - although that is, perhaps, partially imagination because all I really got a look at was this trail of flame and, just before it exploded, it seemed like pictures I have seen of a stage falling off of a rocket. I don't think it was an airplane as I did not observe any position lights. I feel certain that it was not a meteor as we had been looking in that direction and it just appeared. There was no trace of it until it got right in front of us. Its speed didnot seem to have been in excess of 400-500 mph.\n\nFWC:GA F. W. Cushing\n\nA. J. Schecht\nFirst Officer"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director of Flight Operations 9-7-55\n\nCaptain G. R. Janss\n\nAt approximately 1925 EST while southbound at 6000 ft. on B 18 at Red Hook intersection, noticed a bright flash above us. Because we were flying through slight Cu buildups with the fuselage lights on, I attributed it to the flash of these lights while inside one of these Cu's. I thought no more of it until I heard Flight 14 advise New York of his sighting and we then advised that we had seen the flash.\n\nG. R. Janss"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director of Flight Operations 9-7-55\n\nFirst Officer G. M. Darby\n\nOn Flight 33 over Red Hook southbound at approximately 1925 EST, there was a flash, which appeared more like an explosion rather than a lightning flash, approximately 10 or 15 degrees off our course at somewhere near our altitude of 6000 ft.\n\nG. M. Darby"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT2-2-7\nX Massarek, Mrs.\n\n14 September 1955\n\nMrs. Stephen Massarek\n12 Eastern Avenue\nOssining, New York\n\nDear Mrs. Massarek;\n\n\t\tThank you for your letter of August 21st describing your sighting of an Unidentified Flying Object. It has been forwarded to the appropriate office for further analysis.\n\n\t\tThe Air Force does have a major active program for investigating and evaluating these sightings. For this reason, initiative reports such as yours are of considerable value and greatly appreciated.\n\n\t\tFor your information, I am enclosing a summary of events concerning the UFO Program. I hope you find it of interest.\n\n\t\t\t\tSincerely,\n\n\n\t\t\t\tTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\n\t\t\t\tLt Colonel, USAF\n\t\t\t\tDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nEncl:"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SND-ESF-8\n\nlnt2-2-7 X\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nCOMMANDER EASTERN SEA FRONTIER\n90 CHURCH STREET\nNEW YORK 7, N. Y.\n\nADDRESS REPLY TO\nCOMMANDER\nEASTERN SEA FRONTIER\nAND REFER TO:\nFF15-3:32:mem\nAG\nSer: 1437\n16 SEP 1955\n\nFrom: Commander Eastern Sea Frontier\nTo: Distribution List\n\nSubj: Unidentified flying objects; reporting of\n\nRef: (a) COMEASTSEAFRON INST 3820.2\n\nEncl: (1) Mr. J. H. O'Neill, Director of Flight Operations,\n1tr of 8 Sep 55, with enclosures\n\n1. Reference (a) states that the U. S. Air Force has the primary responsibility for collection of subject information and has requested the cooperation of all naval activities in reporting such information.\n\n2. In compliance with reference (a), enclosure (1) is forwarded.\n\nDistribution List\nUSAF HQ WASH, DC\nATIC ATTN: ATIAA-2G\nCOMDR ADC\nCOMDR EADF\n\nCopy to:\nONI\nMr. J. H. O'Neill,\nDirector of Flight Operations\nLaGuardia Airport Station\nFlushing 7, New York\n\nAuthenticated:\n\nC. W. CANNON\nLieutenant, USN\n\nW. C. MURPHY\nAssistant Chief of Staff"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D\n21 SEP 1955\nDIR/INT\nHQ USAF\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]\n\nW. C. MURPHY\nAssistant Chief of Staff\n\n2. In compliance with reference (a), enclosure (1) is forwarded.\n\n1. Reference (a) states that the U. S. Air Force has the primary responsibility for collection of subject information and has requested the cooperation of all naval activities in reporting such information.\n\nEncl: (1) Mr. J. H. O'Neill, Director of Flight Operations,\n1tr of 8 Sep 55, with enclosures\n\nRef: (a) COMEASTSEAFRON INST 3820.2\n\nSubj: Unidentified flying objects; reporting of\n\nTo: Distribution List\n\nFrom: Commander Eastern Sea Frontier\n\n[illegible]\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nCOMMANDER EASTERN SEA FRONTIER\n90 CHURCH STREET\nNEW YORK 7, N. Y.\n\n16 SEP 1955\n\n[illegible]\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"September 8, 1955\n\nCommander\nEastern Sea Frontier\nNew York, N. Y.\n\nDear Sir:\n\nIn accordance with CIRVIS procedure for reporting vital intelligence sightings, attached are copies of three reports turned in by flight crews on an unidentified object sighted September 6, 1955.\n\nIf possible, we would be very interested in knowing what the object was and if there is any way we can prevent future occurrences.\n\nThanking you in advance, I am\n\n\t\t\t\tVery truly yours,\n\n\t\t\t\tCOLONIAL AIRLINES, INC.\n\n\n\t\t\t\tJ. H. O'Neill\n\t\t\t\tDirector of Flight Operations\n\nEnc.\n\nEncl (1)"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director of Flight Operations\t\t9-7-55\n\nCaptain F. W. Cushing\n\nFLIGHT 14 - SEPTEMBER 6, 1955\n\nOn Flight 14 of the 6th at approximately 1925 EST, geographical position approximately 16 nautical miles north of the PQW Omni Range, 004 degree track, at 5000 ft. with a clear sky above, unlimited visibility horizontally and a smoke layer below, sighted an unidentified object with a blue-white exhaust flame between a half mile or mile directly ahead at approximately 1000 ft. above our position on what appeared to be about a 200-210 degree heading in about a 15-20 degree angle descent.\n\nIn approximately 3 seconds the object had moved from directly in front of us to about 100 degrees from our track placing it off our left beam and was then emitting a lot of sparks as well as the blue flame. At that time, it exploded with a blinding flash within, I would say, a half mile or mile of our position.\n\nFlight 412, who, I believe, was in the vicinity of AIB at about 8000 ft. reported seeing the flash although he was northbound. Southbound Flight 33, who was approximately just south of Cassackie at about 6000 ft., also reported seeing the flash.\n\nI could not see what the object was except that it appeared like a rocket ship - although that is, perhaps, partially imagination because all I really got a look at was this trail of flame and, just before it exploded, it seemed like pictures I have seen of a stage falling off of a rocket. I don't think it was an airplane as I did not observe any position lights. I feel certain that it was not a meteor as we had been looking in that direction and it just appeared. There was no trace of it until it got right in front of us. Its speed didnot seem to have been in excess of 400-500 mph.\n\nFWC:Gk\t\t\t\t\tF. W. Cushing\n\n\t\t\t\t\tA. J. Schocht\n\t\t\t\t\tFirst Officer"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director of Flight Operations 9-7-55\n\nCaptain G. R. Janas\n\nAt approximately 1925 EST while southbound at 6000 ft. on B 18 at Red Hook intersection, noticed a bright flash above us. Because we were flying through alight Cu buildups with the fuselage lights on, I attributed it to the flash of these lights while inside one of these Cu's. I thought no more of it until I heard Flight 14 advise New York of his sighting and we then advised that we had seen the flash.\n\nG. R. Janas"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Director of Flight Operations 9-7-55\n\nFirst Officer G. M. Darby\n\nOn Flight 33 over Red Hook southbound at approximately 1925 EST, there was a flash, which appeared more like an explosion rather than a lightning flash, approximately 10 or 15 degrees off our course at somewhere near our altitude of 6000 ft.\n\nG. M. Darby"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\n\nSUSPENSE\n\nORIGIN OF BASIC\n\nDATE\n\nASSIGNED BY\n\nDATE\n\nTYPE\n\nNO.\n\nSUBJECT\n\nROUTING\n\nInitial \"IN\" column to denote review prior to action. Initial \"OUT\" column to denote review of completed action. (X for action; y for coordination.)\n\nIN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\n\nOIN-1 OIN-2 OIN-3 AFOIN\nOIN-1X OIN-2X OIN-3X AFOIN-X\nAFOIN-X\nOIN-XI\nOIN-X2\nSR ARMY OFF\nSR NAVAL OFF\nCABLES\nM & R FILE DISPATCH 1/23/9/55\n\nTO: Col Johnson DATE\n\nFROM: Lt Evans COMMENT NO.\n\nCOMMENTS (Use reverse, if necessary)\n\nThis is same sighting we acknowledged 14 Sep to Colonial Airlines. no action necessary.\n\ngood! TRB\n\nAFHQ FORM 14 JAN 53 0-86 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM MAY BE USED. GPO-888934"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Init 2-2-7\n\n19 September 1955\n\nMr. Leslie Clark\n801 Morton Street\nMattapan 26, Massachusetts\n\nDear Mr. Clark;\n\nYour letter of September 8th has been received and forwarded to the appropriate analysts for further evaluation.\n\nAs you know, the Air Force has a major active program in this field. For this reason, initiative reports such as yours are of immense value and greatly appreciated.\n\nFor your information I am enclosing a copy of our summary of events concerning this program. Attached you will find a sample questionnaire as you requested.\n\nThank you for your interest and prompt action.\n\nSincerely,\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Col, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nEncl:\n\nX2B2 FILE CY\nAFOIN-4 INFO COPY w/Incls\n\nOut 22 Sep 55"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7 / Dobritz, G.B.m.\n\n19 September 1955\n\nMr. George B. Dobritz\n15 45-10 Kissena Blvd\nFlushing 2, New York\n\nDear Mr. Dobritz;\n\nThank you for your reported sighting of an Unidentified Flying Object.\n\nYour initiative and prompt action are greatly appreciated.\n\nSincerely,\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT 21 SEP 55\n\nX2B2 FILE CY\nAFOIN-4 INFO CY w/Incl"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PLEASE SEND TO YOUR NEAREST AIR FORCE BASE\n\nDATE: Sept 13, 1955\nTIME OF SIGHTING: 8:26 PM.\nSIZE: I couldn't tell because it was so high\nSHAPE: I couldn't tell because it was lit up\nCOMPOSITION: too high to tell\nSPEED: 400-500 MPH\nALTITUDE: 1,500 ft.\nDIRECTION OF TRAVEL: past an apartment\nMANEUVER PATTERN: going straight\nCOLOR: white\nSOUND: no sound\nLENGTH OF TIME OBSERVED: 2 min.\nSKY CONDITIONS: partly cloudy\nVISIBILITY: good\nGROUND DIRECTION OF WIND:\nNAME, AGE, MAILING ADDRESS OF OBSERVER: George B. Dobie\n15 - 45-10 Kisiena Blvd.\nREMARKS: (General description of what you saw) (use back if necessary)\nIt was like a shooting star, only it did not have any tail. It went on a straight course and I didn't hear any noise"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-X/Lt Col Johnson/tjc/71092\nWrtn 20 Sep 55\nInt2-2-7\nXOIN-4\n\n20 SEP 1955\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR, AFOIN-4\nATTN: Mr. A. F. Arcier\n\nSUBJECT: UFOB Program\n\n1. Reference is made to our discussion, subject above, of 7 September 1955 concerning the release of AFIC Special Report No. 14.\n\n2. Present responsibility of AFOIN-4 is to bring Special Report No. 14 up-to-date as of June 1955.\n\n3. Twenty-five copies of this declassified document, which this Headquarters now has, will be withheld from public dissemination but will be made available on an office retention basis to interested persons in the USAF Office of Information Services and the USAF Office of Legislation and Liaison.\n\n4. It has been agreed that Mr. Arcier and Captain Hardin will attend a discussion in Washington on 28 September 1955, at which time the final release will be given to Information Services for necessary action.\n\n5. It is believed this release will clarify the many false impressions presently existing concerning the USAF UFOB Program.\n\nJOHN A. SANFORD\nMajor General, USAF\nDirector of Intelligence\n\nDispatch 21 Sep 55\n\nAFOIN-X\nLt Col Johnson\n\nD/I File Cy, X2B2\nD/I X-Ref File Cy, X2B2"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT2-2-7\n\nAFOIN-X2/Maj Smith/sm/73929/T-20 Sept 55\nXDCS/O\nXAREL-1\n21 SEP 1955\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF, OPERATIONS\nATTN: EXECUTIVE OFFICER\n\nSUBJECT: NATO Orientation Tour (Project Blue Plate)\n\nReference memorandum from the office of the Assistant Vice Chief of Staff, dated 1 March 1955, subject as above, and inclosure thereto, the following named officer has been selected to participate in the Project Blue Plate tour 4-24 November 1955.\n\nNAME GRADE AFSN SECURITY CLEARANCE\nJohn J. Morrow Colonel 367A Top Secret\n\nPosition: Deputy Director for Estimates, Directorate of Intelligence, DCS/O.\n\nFRANK B. CHAFFELL\nColonel USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT 22 SEP 1955 DIR/INT HQ USAF\n\nCoord cy X2B2\nDIX Ref X2B2\nStbck cy X2\n\nAFOIN-X\nCol Keach\nMaj Smith\nCol Chappell"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-1A1-19/Maj Fountain/hf/52618\nWrtn 23 Sep 55\nINT2-2-7\nlxa Argentina\n\n26 SEP 1955\n\nAFOIN-1A1-19\n\nSUBJECT: (Uncl) Theory of Flying Saucers\n\nTO: United States Air Attache\nAmerican Embassy\nBuenos Aires, Argentina\n\n1. Reference is made to your letter 197-R&D, subject \"Theory of Flying Saucers\" dated 24 May 1955 and our interim reply of 1 Sep 1955.\n\n2. The Aerodynamics Branch, Aircraft Laboratory of the Wright Air Development Center, have submitted the following evaluation of the theory contained in Dr. Neumann's manuscript.\n\na. The method of obtaining lift described in the report is considered very ineffective as it is based on the principle of imparting horizontal momentum to the jet and entrained air. Lift can only be produced by imparting vertical momentum to the air or jet stream.\n\nb. The method described for producing translational control through introducing an asymmetry in the jet should be effective. This type of control, however, does not provide all the control needed in an aircraft. In summary, this office does not consider the proposal to be worth further investigation.\n\n3. No further action in this matter is contemplated by this headquarters. In accordance with your request, the original manuscript is inclosed for transmission to Dr. Neumann.\n\nBY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nSIGNED\n\n1 Incl w/orig only\nManuscript in German, Theory of Flying Saucers.\n\nJAMES T. BULL\nColonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT 27 SEP 1955 DIR/INT HQ USAF\n\nAFOIN-1A1\nCol Opper\nOIN-1A1-19\nMaj Fountain"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D.C.\n\nINT2-2-7\nxaa Indonesia\n26 Sept 55\nXover\n\n13 September 1955\n\nAFOIN-X\n\nSUBJECT: Letter From T.M. Onverzaagt, Bandung, Indonesia\n\nTO: U. S. Air Attache\nAmerican Embassy\nDjakarta, Indonesia\n\nThe inclosed letter from Mr. T.M. Onverzaagt, Djalan Kamuning 9, Bandung, is forwarded for necessary action by your office. This Headquarters has no record of the previous letter referred to, presumably delivered to your office.\n\n2 Incls:\n1. Ltr fm T.M. Onverzaagt\n2. DA Translation\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nREL 3-2 (13 Sep 55) 1st Ind. SEP 26 1955\n\nOFFICE OF THE AIR ATTACHE, American Embassy, Djakarta, Indonesia\n\nTO: Director of Intelligence, Hq USAF, ATTN: AFOIN-X, Washington 25, D.C.\n\n1. Subject letter was delivered to the U.S. Army Attache, this station, by Mr. Onverzaagt.\n\n2. It is believed Mr. Onverzaagt obtained the name of the Air Attache from a nameplate on his desk, as the Air Attache's office was used to make delivery of the letter. This procedure was necessary as the Army Attache's office was disorganized due to redecoration.\n\n3. The Army Attache advises that the contents of the letter is of little value with Mr Onverzaagt expressing an interest in manufacture of conventional aircraft and otherwise (flying saucers), and wanted a visit to the United States under official status.\n\nLYLE R. BRANSTETTER\nMajor, USAF\nAir Attache\n\n2 Incls n/c"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REC'D A U.S. AIR FORCE DIRINT HQ USAF 1955 [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE [illegible] U.S. AIR FORCE"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Acft 2-2-7 Ltr Cwvm... T.M. Converzaagt, T.M. [illegible] Indonesia\n\n13 September 1955\n\nAPGIN-X\n\nSUBJECT: Letter From T.M. Converzaagt, Bandung, Indonesia\n\nTO: U. S. Air Attache\nAmerican Embassy\nDjakarta, Indonesia\n\nThe inclosed letter from Mr. T.M. Converzaagt, Djalan Kamuning 9, Bandung, is forwarded for necessary action by your office. This Headquarters has no record of the previous letter referred to, presumably delivered to your office.\n\n2 Incls:\n1. Ltr fm T.M. Converzaagt\n2. DA Translation\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT 15 SEP 1955 DIR/INT HQ USAF\n\nD/I COORD CY\nD/I X-REF CY"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ROUTING SLIP\n\nDATE AUG 11 1955\n\nTO / INITIAL / INFO COPY TO / ADV ACTION COPY TO\n\nSECRETARY OF DEFENSE\nDEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE\nADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY\nSECRETARY OF THE ARMY\nSECRETARY OF THE NAVY\nSECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE\nASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (Comptr)\nASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (M&P)\nASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (ISA)\nASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (S&L)\nASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (R&D)\nASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (P&I)\nASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (App'ns Eng)\nASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (H&M)\nASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (L&PA)\nDIR., OFFICE OF PUBLIC INFORMATION\nGENERAL COUNSEL\nASSISTANT TO THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (AE)\nASSISTANT TO THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (Spec Opns)\nSPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR\n\nTHIS IS AN: ADVANCE ACTION COPY / ACTION COPY (checked) / INFORMATION COPY\nFOR: PREPARATION OF DRAFT REPLY FOR WHITE HOUSE SIGNATURE AND / TRANSMITTAL LETTER FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE SIGNATURE / PREPARATION OF REPLY FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE SIGNATURE / PREPARATION OF REPLY FOR DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE SIGNATURE / NOTE AND FORWARD / APPROPRIATE ACTION (checked) / REPLY DIRECT FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (forward copy of reply to Sec of Def files) / REPLY FOR DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (forward copy of reply to Sec of Def files) / INFORMATION AND RETENTION / INFORMATION AND RETURN FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FILES / DATA ON WHICH TO BASE A REPLY / COMMENT AND/OR RECOMMENDATION / COORDINATION WITH / PREPARATION OF REPLY FOR SIGNATURE OF / PRIORITY\n\nREMARKS\n\nSUSPENSE DATE\nCONTROL NUMBER\n\nSD FORM 14 1 APR 55 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. AG8182"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SD FORM 14\n\nINCOMING\n\nAUG 12 14 06 [illegible] STAFF EXEC SERY DIV\n\nAUG 12 12 41 55 IN OFFICE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE\n\n[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Bandung, 1 Augustus '55.\n\nOnderwerp: Aan Hoofdofficieren van Pentagon\nAan: Pentagon\n\nGeachte Heer Olsen,\n\nlijding van mijn Brief die ik op 21 Juni j.l. persoonlijk afgaf bij de Amerikaanse Ambassade te Djakarta, of het 'Adviesbureau van Mr. Brandabakker, die toen Doeliart...\n\n[illegible] dagen aan het Pentagon alliet ... of ontvangen, verloof ik mij ... een antwoord te doen [illegible] ... Pentagon.\n\nWaar ik anders bij het ontvang antwoord blijven van mijn vorige brief, genoodzaakt zal zijn, mij dan een andere procedure te wensen.\n\nHopende, dat ik de volgende gunst, mijn bovenstaand verzoek in te willen inwilligen, verblijf ik met de meeste Hoogachting,\n\nP.M. Converzaagt\nEhrs. div. dd.\n\nDjalan Kamuning 9 Bdg.\nte Bandung (Indonesië)."} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INCOMING\nC20142\nAUG 12 1406 '55\nVICE CHIEF OF STAFF\nEXEC SERV DIV\n\nOUT\nAUG 15 3 55 PM '55\nVICE CHIEF OF STAFF\nEXEC SERV DIV"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY\nOFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT CHIEF OF STAFF, G-2, INTELLIGENCE\nWASHINGTON 25, D. C.\n\nG2 TRANSLATION NO. G-5144\nLANGUAGE: Dutch\nTRANSLATOR: GCC\nSUBJECT: Letter\n\nT. M. Onverzaagt\nDjalan Kamuning 9 Pav.\nBandung\nIndonesia\n\nBandung\n1 August 1955\n\nDepartment of Defense\nWashington 25, D.C.\n\nSubject: The manufacture of flying saucers and the like\n\nDear Sirs,\n\nWith reference to my letter, which I personally delivered on 21 June last at the American embassy in Djakarta in the office of Mr. Beanstatter, which would attend to forwarding it to the Pentagon, and since I have not yet received an answer up to today, I ask you to please send me an answer regarding it.\n\nOtherwise, in the case of the previous letter remaining unanswered, I shall be compelled to turn to another power.\n\nI hope that you will be so kind as to comply with the above request and remain\n\nVery respectfully yours,\n/s/ T.M. Onverzaagt\n\nC20142\n\nDISSEMINATION FORM FOR G2 TRANSLATION A60810"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-1B2/Maj Brame/52563/eav\nWrtn 28 Sep 55\n\nAFOIN-1B2/Maj Brame/52563/eav\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR AFOIN-4\n\nSUBJECT: Project Blue Book (Project No. 10073)\n\n1. Twenty one (21) copies of subject report forwarded your center this date under separate cover.\n\n2. The remaining four (4) copies, of the original twenty five (25) forwarded to this Headquarters, are accounted for as follows:\n\nOne (1) copy retained by OIN-X (Lt. Col. Johnson)\nOne (1) copy inadvertently destroyed by OIN-2X\nOne (1) copy each is being recalled from the files of OIN-3X and OIN-1B3 and will be forwarded when made available to this office.\n\n3. Distribution remains the same as previously furnished your center on 13 September 1955.\n\nWALTER W. BENNETT\nMajor, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nAFOIN 1B2 Maj Brame\nMaj Bennett"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nJy Batts, Jr.\n\n29 September 1955\n\nMr. James Batts\n130 South 17th Avenue\nMaywood, Illinois\n\nDear Mr. Batts,\n\nYour letter of September 20th has been forwarded to the appropriate agency for further analysis.\n\nAs you know, the Air Force has an active program in effect to investigate and evaluate all reported sightings of Unidentified Flying Objects. For this reason, initiative reports such as yours are valued and greatly appreciated.\n\nFor your information I am enclosing a summary of events concerning this program. I hope you find it of interest.\n\nSincerely,\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nEncl:\n\nX2B2 FILE CY\nAFOIN-4 INFO CY w/Incls"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Enc 2-2-7\nX Chamaillard\nJ.C.\n\n29 September 1955\n\nJ. C. Chamaillard\n22 rue Trachel\nNice, France\n\nDear Mr. Chamaillard;\n\nYour letter of September 12th has been received and forwarded to the appropriate analysts for further evaluation.\n\nThe detailed report concerning your recent experience is greatly appreciated in view of our active program of evaluating such phenomena.\n\nFor your information I am enclosing a Summary of Events compiled from our investigations. The complete findings of this program will be released to the public in the near future.\n\nSincerely,\n\nTIMOTHY R. JOHNSON\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nEncl:\n\nX2B2 FILE CY\nAFOIN-4 INFO CY w/Incls"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OIN-1A-P/Mr. Nelson/ram/71067\nWritten 28 Sep 55\nINT 2-2-7\n✓x Caribbean Air Command\n\n29 SEP 1955\n\nLt Colonel Paul N. Harlow, 5816A\nHeadquarters, Caribbean Air Command\nAPO 825, New Orleans, Louisiana\n\nDear Colonel Harlow:\n\nThe inclosed new copy of Project Blue Book, Special Report No. 14 is forwarded for your retention. Although the report is Unclassified, it is not releasable to the press at this time and should be handled accordingly.\n\nColonel Berry states that the previous report on this subject will not be approved for release and he requests that the copy forwarded to you last month be returned to him.\n\nSincerely,\n\nMAURICE A. BERRY\nColonel, USAF\nD/Intelligence\n\n1 incl\nProject Blue Book\nSp Rpt No 14,5 May 55\nCy No. 2\n\nOUT 30 SEP 1955\n\ncc: Reader file - 1A-P\nComeback cy - 1A-P\nD/I file cy\nD/I X-ref file cy\n\nOFFICE SYMBOL 1 OIN-1A-P 2 3 4 5 6\nSignature of Responsible Officer\nInternal Office Coordination"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AFOIN-1A-P/Mr. Nelson/ram/54544\nWritten 4 Oct 55\nINT 2-2-7\n✓x Caribbean Air Command\n\nAFOIN-1A-P\n\n4 OCT 1955\n\nLt Colonel Paul N. Harlow, 5816A\nHeadquarters, Caribbean Air Command\nAPO 825, New Orleans, Louisiana\n\nDear Colonel Harlow:\n\nThe information contained in the copy of Project Blue Book, Special Report No. 14, sent to you on 29 September has now been made available to the press in Washington. However, the previous edition has been recalled and it is still desired that the earlier copy forwarded to you in August be returned.\n\nSincerely,\n\nMAURICE A. BERRY\nColonel, USAF\nD/Intelligence\n\nOUT 5 OCT 1955\n\ncc: D/I file cy\nD/I X-ref file cy\nComeback Cy - 1A-P\nReader file - 1A-P\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-1a-P"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nAFOIN-2B3 KRAEMER\nCol Marchant bjm 77006 6 Oct 1955\n\nINT 2-2-7\n✓x Continental Air Defense Command\n\nBasic ltr fr Hq CONAD, Ent AFB, Colorado Springs, Colorado, subj: (Conf) Reporting of Intelligence Sightings by Friendly Nations\n\nAFOIN-2B 1st Ind\n\n10 OCT 1955\n\nDept of the Air Force, Hq USAF, Washington 25, D. C.\n\nTO: Commander in Chief, Continental Air Defense Command,\nATTN: DCS/Intelligence, Colorado Springs, Colorado\n\n1. The proposed Canadian-U.S. directive on an international system for reporting vital intelligence sightings is progressing favorably, and it is anticipated that an agreed draft will be referred to the JCS for its coordination in the very near future.\n\n2. The NATO does not have the collection capability suggested by basic communication, and the committee drafting the proposed joint Canadian-U.S. directive considered extension of the system to other nations. However, it was decided to defer this extension until the two-nation procedure had been through a trial period.\n\nBY ORDER OF THE CHIEF OF STAFF:\n\nTHEODORE FLETCHER\nLt Colonel, USAF\nDirectorate of Intelligence\n\nOUT 17 OCT 1955 3348\n\nNo N R or statement of policy necessary.\n\nCOORDINATION: AFOIN-2B3 AFOIN-2B AFOIN-2\nCol Marchant Col Wynne\n\nAFOIN coordination cy\nAFOIN-2B comeback cy\nAFOIN-2B3 stayback cy\n376/7-55\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nAFOIN-1A cy\nAFOIN-2A1 cy"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY\n\nHEADQUARTERS\nCONTINENTAL AIR DEFENSE COMMAND\nENT AIR FORCE BASE\nCOLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO\n\n16 Sep 1955\n\nCODOI\n\nSUBJECT: (Confidential) Reporting of Intelligence Sightings by Friendly Nations\n\nTO: Director of Intelligence\nHeadquarters USAF\nWashington 25, D. C.\n\n1. Considerable effort has been expended at both Headquarters USAF and Headquarters CONAD to develop procedures for reporting vital intelligence sightings which are broader in scope than those presently contained in JANAP 146(C). Some progress has been made in that reporting by U.S. aircrew personnel flying over Canada, Greenland, and Iceland is now authorized. In addition, it is understood that several conferences with Canadian representatives have been held at Headquarters USAF to draft a U.S.-Canadian document which will replace JANAP 146(C) and will be directive in both countries.\n\n2. The adoption by Canada and the U.S. of a common system of reporting is considered highly desirable, and brings to mind the possibility that other Allied nations might also participate in such an arrangement. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization in particular may offer the framework on which such an agreement could be based. It appears that there is considerable reporting potential in the merchant, fishing, and whaling fleets of NATO countries operating in the North Atlantic and contiguous northern seas; in their extensive transatlantic airline operations; and in the recently inaugurated transpolar operations of the Scandinavian Airline System. Other factors warranting investigation include the timeliness and reliability of reporting under a NATO system.\n\n3. In view of the paramount importance of warning, it is requested that the feasibility of a NATO reporting system be examined and this headquarters be advised of your findings.\n\nFOR THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF:\n\ns/ROBERT TAYLOR, 3d\nBrig Gen, USAF\nDCS/Intelligence\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nCOPY"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\n\n17 Oct 1955\n\nFROM: AFOIN-1B2\n\nTO: BJSM\n\nLtr\n\nApproximately three (3) weeks ago we furnished your office one (1) copy of the following report published by Air Technical Intelligence Center:\n\nProject Blue Book\n\n* * *\n\nFILED: INT 1-11"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\n\n17 Oct 1955\n\nFROM: AFOIN-1B2\n\nTO: Australian Joint Service Staff\n\nLtr\n\nApproximately three (3) weeks ago we furnished your office one (1) copy of the following report published by Air Technical Intelligence Center:\n\nProject Blue Book\n\n* * *\n\nFILED: INT 1-11\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775 Page 216"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"INT 2-2-7\nATIC\nMallan\nD/I\n\nAIR TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER\nWRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE\nOHIO\n\n28 OCT 1955\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE\nATTN: Lt Col T. Johnson, AFOIN-X\n\nSUBJECT: (U) Request for Interview\n\n1. The correspondence attached was received by this office from AMC PIO, WPAFB, Ohio, and is forwarded per previous instructions.\n\n2. AMC PIO informed Mr. Mallen that his letter would be referred to your office.\n\n1 Incl\nLtr\n\nE. E. DARVEAUX\nCapt., USAF\nAsst Adjutant\n\nfile\nfrd\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775 Page 217"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Telephone: FAr Rockaway 7-5853\n\nLLOYD MALLAN\n\nFormer Editor Fawcett Books\n\nContributor to N. Y. Times Sunday Magazine and Book Review\n\nThe Atlantic Monthly\n\nHarper's\n\nVirginia Quarterly\n\nAdventure\n\nCurrent History\n\nEsquire\n\nBusiness Week\n\n20-04 SEAGIRT AVENUE, Apt. 2-C\nFAR ROCKAWAY, LONG ISLAND, N.Y.\n\nOctober 23rd, 1955\n\nCaptain C.A. Hardim\nAFOIN-4E-4 ATIC\nWPAFB, Ohio\n\nDear Captain Hardim,\n\nI am writing to you at the suggestion of two persons: Captain Bob White, at the Press Desk of Air Technical Intelligence in the Pentagon, and Lew Zarem, Chief of Public Information at WADC. After speaking with both of these men, they felt that you might be amenable to an interview.\n\nAt present, with the cooperation of USAF Hq and ARDC Hq, I am working on a book devoted to various aspects of air research and development. Included among the chapters will be one on \"flying saucers.\" However, I should like to emphasize that this chapter will not in any way play up to the crackpot fringe of enthusiasts nor will it attempt, as so many other writers do, to imply that Air Force Intelligence is trying to hide things from the general public.\n\nIn fact, the major aim of my chapter will be quite the opposite: I want to give an honest human-interest report on how harrassing and even nerve-wracking the \"saucer\" situation has been to personnel of the Air Force, who are only trying their darndest to do an honest job of protecting the American people by keeping a close watch on the skies of the United States.\n\nActually, I would like to present the story in human terms such as this: little anecdotes that may have happened to you and other men on the project at WPAFB--false reports, false condemnations, even false accusations by the press; the scientific techniques or systems you use to evaluate reports of \"saucers\"; your attitudes toward the overabundance of irresponsible writers (without naming them, of course) who cause you unnecessary trouble and take up valuable time by inspiring hysterical people throughout the U.S. to bother you, etc.\n\nIf you agree to an interview (and I sincerely hope that you will), I can promise you three things: 1. the story will be\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775 Page 218"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Captain Hardim page 2\n\ntreated sympathetically--from your point of view; 2. it will be sent to you for review before publication--you may check Lew Zarem, who knows me well, on my integrity in this respect; and 3. I will try to take up as little of your time as possible in carrying out the interview.\n\nI would be extremely grateful to you both for an opportunity to interview and for a reply to my request as soon as possible--since the book is against quite a strict deadline. If you do not mind, you could give your answer to Lew Zarem and he will notify USAF Hq, which in turn will get in touch with me.\n\nThe best possible dates for an interview, in terms of my present schedule, would be any time on Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday, October 31st and November 1st and 2nd respectively.\n\nThank you very much in advance for whatever consideration you may give my request!\n\nCordially,\n\nLloyd Mallan\nLloyd Mallan\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775 Page 219"} {"doc_id":"e8cda6e723e47199","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COVER SHEET\n\nSUSPENSE\n\nORIGIN OF BASIC\nDATE\nASSIGNED BY\nDATE\nTYPE\nNO.\nSUBJECT\n\nROUTING\n\nInitial \"IN\" column to denote review prior to action. Initial \"OUT\" column to denote review of completed action. (X for action; y for coordination.)\n\nIN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT IN OFFICE OUT\n\nOIN-1 OIN-2 OIN-3 AFOIN\nOIN-1X OIN-2X OIN-3X AFOIN-X\nAFOIN-X\nOIN-XI\nOIN-X2\nSR ARMY OFF\nSR NAVAL OFF\nCABLES\nM & R FILE 12/7/53\nDISPATCH\n\nTO: DATE\nFROM: COMMENT NO.\n\nCOMMENTS (Use reverse, if necessary)\n\nSeveral attempts were made by Lt Col Johnson to contact Mr. Mallan, but to no avail.\n\nAFHQ FORM 14 JAN 53 0-86 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM MAY BE USED. GPO-888934\n\nNW 91198 DocId:34745775 Page 220"} {"doc_id":"e8e3b82cfc3d6f1b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR\n5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON\nWASHINGTON, DC 20301-5000\nINTELLIGENCE\nAND SECURITY\nTranscript of an Unresolved UAP Report, Colorado, October 2023\nThis document is a transcript of a 1-minute, 19-second video recording contained in this collection under the title LLE-UAP-PR001, captured by a law enforcement officer in Colorado in October 2023. AARO removed the audio from the original recording to protect information whose release could reasonably be expected to affect the privacy or other protected interests of a U.S. person or commercial entity. This transcript is also redacted to protect the identity of the reporter and sensitive law enforcement information.\nAll descriptive and estimative language in this transcript reflects the reporter's subjective interpretation at the time of the event. Such characterizations should not be interpreted as a conclusive indication of the presence or absence of any intrinsic object features or performance characteristics.\nBeginning of transcript.\n00:13: Speaker 1: [REDACTED] come here.\n00:26: Speaker 1: [REDACTED] Come here.\n00:51: Speaker 2: [Expletive] me.\nEnd of transcript; nothing follows."} {"doc_id":"e9529846783fedce","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONTRACT DIRIBUTION LIST\n\nVIRGINIA CONTRACTING ACTIVITY\nBuilding 6000, Bolling AFB\nWashington, D.C. 20340-5100\n\nDATE: 01 Feb 2010\nPIIN: HHM402-08-C-0072\nDelivery Order /Task Order:\nMOD: P00002\nREQ: 651-0003-10\nCS: (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\nKO: \n\nTO:\nCOPY SENT:\nADDRESS:\nNO. OF COPIES\n\n1. Contractor\nStamp the copy—\n\"Duplicate Original Contractor Copy\"\nX\nBigelow Aerospace Advanced\n4640 S. Eastern Ave\nLas Vegas, NV 89119\nRobert T Bigelow 702-456-1606\n1\n\n2. Payment Office\n\nNSA\nX\nNSA FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING OFFICE\nP.O. Box 1685 ATTN: DF2211\nFT George Meade, MD 20755-6000\n\nPhone: 410-854-7657 & 410-854-8742 (for Invoice status)\nNIPR: operationpayment@nsa.gov (for Invoice status)\n(b) (6)\n1\n\n4. COR/POC\nX\nAAP Person 1\n1\n\n5. DI FE Representative\nX\n(b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\n1\n\n6. Report Copy DD-350\nX\nAE-2A\n1\n\n7. Contract File\n(Original)\nX\nD.O. File\n1\n\n8. Other\n\nCOPIES:\nTOTAL NO.\n7\n\nDISTRIBUTION COMPLETED: (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\n2-4-10\n(Date)"} {"doc_id":"e9529846783fedce","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT\n1. CONTRACT ID CODE\nPAGE OF PAGES 1 of 6\n2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. P00002\n3. EFFECTIVE DATE FEB 02, 2010\n4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 651-0003-10\n5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)\n6. ISSUED BY CODE HHQ402\nVirginia Contracting Activity\nATTN: AE-2\nBolling AFB, Bldg. 6000\nWashington DC 20340-5100\n(b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\n7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE ZD50\nVirginia Contracting Activity\nATTN: DIAC, AE-2\nBuilding 6000\nWashington DC 20340-5100\n8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)\nBIGELOW AEROSPACE ADVANCED SPACE STUDIES, LLC\n4640 S EASTERN AVE\nLAS VEGAS NV 891196135\nDUNS: 827037768 Cage Code: 54JU7\n9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.\n9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)\n10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO. HHM402-08-C-0072\n10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13) SEP 22, 2008\nCODE 00000434 FACILITY CODE\n11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS\n12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)\nSee Schedule\nModification Amount: $11,948,810.00\nModification Obligated Amount: $11,948,810.00\n13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.\nC. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF: FAR 52.212-4(c) Changes Mar 2009\nE. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, x is required to sign this document and return 1 copies to the issuing office.\n14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION\nThe purpose of this modification is to accomplish the following:\n\na) Provide funding in the amount of $11,948,810.00 for the Exercise of Option Year I of Contract HHM402-08-C-0072 and thereby removing the availability of funding clause referenced in modification P00001 dtd 9/02/09.\nb) Identify impacts to deliverables as a result of reduced funding for Option Year 1. (see attachment)\nc) Incorporate the revised documentation showing utilization of 2010 funds and identify technical risks of reduced funding.\nd) The obligated funding for Contract HHM402-08-C-0072 is increased by $11,948,810.00. As a result, the total obligated amount for this contract is $21,948,810.00.\n\nAll other terms and conditions remain unchanged.\n\n15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER\nAAP Person 4\n15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR\n15C. DATE SIGNED 2/2/10\n16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\n16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA\n16C. DATE SIGNED\nSTANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)"} {"doc_id":"e9529846783fedce","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT\n1. CONTRACT ID CODE\nPAGE OF PAGES 1 of 6\n2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. P00002\n3. EFFECTIVE DATE FEB 02, 2010\n4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 651-0003-10\n5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)\n6. ISSUED BY CODE HHQ402\nVirginia Contracting Activity\nATTN: AE-2\nBolling AFB, Bldg. 6000\nWashington DC 20340-5100\n(b)(3):10 U.S.C. § 424, (b)(6)\n7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE ZD50\nVirginia Contracting Activity\nATTN: DIAC, AE-2\nBuilding 6000\nWashington DC 20340-5100\n8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR\nBIGELOW AEROSPACE ADVANCED SPACE STUDIES, LLC\n4640 S EASTERN AVE\nLAS VEGAS NV 891196135\nDUNS: 827037768 Cage Code: 54JU7\n9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICIATION NO.\n9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)\n10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO. HHM402-08-C-0072\n10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13) SEP 22, 2008\nCODE 00000434 FACILITY CODE\n11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS\n12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)\nSee Schedule\nModification Amount: $11,948,810.00\nModification Obligated Amount: $11,948,810.00\n13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.\nC. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF: FAR 52.212-4(c) Changes Mar 2009\nE. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, x is required to sign this document and return 1 copies to the issuing office.\n14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION\nThe purpose of this modification is to accomplish the following:\n\na) Provide funding in the amount of $11,948,810.00 for the Exercise of Option Year I of Contract HHM402-08-C-0072 and thereby removing the availability of funding clause referenced in modification P00001 dtd 9/02/09.\nb) Identify impacts to deliverables as a result of reduced funding for Option Year 1. (see attachment)\nc) Incorporate the revised documentation showing utilization of 2010 funds and identify technical risks of reduced funding.\nd) The obligated funding for Contract HHM402-08-C-0072 is increased by $11,948,810.00. As a result, the total obligated amount for this contract is $21,948,810.00.\n\nAll other terms and conditions remain unchanged.\n\n15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)\n15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR\n15C. DATE SIGNED\n16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)\n(b)(3):10 USC 424, (b)(6)\n16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA\n16C. DATE SIGNED\n(Signature of person authorized to sign)\n(Signature of Contracting Officer)\nNSN 7540-01-152-8070\nPrevious edition unusable\nlegible purpose\nSTANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243"} {"doc_id":"e9529846783fedce","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Unclassified\nSCHEDULE Continued\nITEM NO. | SUPPLIES/SERVICES | QUANTITY | UNIT | UNIT PRICE $ | AMOUNT $\n1001 (Changed Line Item) Option Year: 22 September 2009 - 21 September 2010 Monthly Status Reports Quantity 12 1.00 LO 1,549,100.00 1,549,100.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $1,549,100.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010\n1002 (Changed Line Item) Project Management Plan for Tasks 3.a.1 - 3.a.12 Quantity 12 1.00 LO 4,759,300.00 4,759,300.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $4,759,300.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010\n1003 (Changed Line Item) Research Report for Tasks 3.a.1. - 3.a.12 Quantity 12 1.00 LO 2,870,600.00 2,870,600.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $2,870,600.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010\n1004 (Changed Line Item) Comprehensive Integrated Threat Assessment 1.00 LO 220,200.00 220,200.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $220,200.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010\n1005 (Changed Line Item) Travel 1.00 LO 36,700.00 36,700.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $36,700.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010\n1006 (Changed Line Item) Other Direct Costs 1.00 LO 2,494,610.00 2,494,610.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1"} {"doc_id":"e9529846783fedce","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Unclassified\nSCHEDULE Continued\nITEM NO. | SUPPLIES/SERVICES | QUANTITY | UNIT | UNIT PRICE $ | AMOUNT $\n1106 610000 $2,494,610.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010\n1007 (New Line Item) Additional Travel 1.00 LO 18,300.00 18,300.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $18,300.00 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010\n1008 (New Line Item) UNUSED - This line item is unused but must remain part of the contract to insure proper accounting information is aligned to revised CLINS. Original 0001 from PR 1.00 LO 0.00 0.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $0.00\n1009 (New Line Item) UNUSED - This line item is unused but must remain part of the contract to insure proper accounting information is aligned to revised CLINS. Original 0002 from PR 1.00 LO 0.00 0.00\nAccounting and Appropriation Data: ACRN: AB 9700100.4400 1102A9 25201 S49205 CCXX 16P101T1 1106 610000 $0.00\nPAGE 3 OF Unclassified"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNND 857011\n\nTOP SECRET\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE DIVISION STUDY\n(DI/USAF-ONI)\n\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS\nIN THE UNITED STATES\n\nStudy No. 203\n\n10 DECEMBER 1948\n\n2 6167\n\nTOP SECRET"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MEMO ROUTING SLIP\n\nNEVER USE FOR APPROVALS, DISAPPROVALS,\nCONCURRENCES, OR SIMILAR ACTIONS\n\n1 NAME OR TITLE\nORGANIZATION AND LOCATION\n2\n3\n4\n\nINITIALS\nDATE\n\nCIRCULATE\nCOORDINATION\nFILE\nINFORMATION\nNECESSARY ACTION\nNOTE AND RETURN\nSEE ME\nSIGNATURE\n\nREMARKS\n\nAll extra copies of this document were ordered to be destroyed.\n\nBy being kept for record purposes only. Not to be disseminated without permission AFOIN-A\n\nAFF 2-7341\n\nFROM NAME OR TITLE\nWandolph\n6 Dec 47\n\nDATE\nTELEPHONE\n\nDD FORM 1 FEB 50 95\nReplaces DA AGO Form 895, 1 Apr 48, and AFHQ Form 12, 10 Nov 47, which may be used.\n16-48487-4 GPO"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\n2 6167\n\nAIR INTELLIGENCE DIVISION STUDY\n(DI/USAF-ONI)\n\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS IN THE U.S.\n\nStudy No. 203\n\n10 December 1948\n\nDISTRIBUTION\n\nCOPY NO.\n\nAir Intel Req Div\n1 and 3\nAir Hutimates Branch\n4\nOMI\n2\nAir Intel Div\n5\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority: AF INA Memo 3/5/85\nBy SKW NARS Date 3/2/85\n\nCOPY NO. 3\n\nTOP SECRET"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS IN THE U.S.\n\nINDEX\n\nAPPENDIX \"A\" - Analysis of Flying Object Incidents in the U.S. and Hypothetical Tactics Employed\n\nAPPENDIX \"B\" - Reported Sightings of Flying Objects as of 1 August 1948\n\nAPPENDIX \"C\" - Selected Reports of Flying Object Incidents\n\nAPPENDIX \"D\" - Flying Wing Type Aircraft\n\nTOP SECRET"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"TOP SECRET\n\n10 December 1948\n\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS IN THE U.S.\n\nPROBLEM\n\n1. To examine pattern of tactics of \"Flying Saucers\" (hereinafter referred to as flying objects) and to develop conclusions as to the possibility of existence.\n\nFACTS AND DISCUSSION\n\n2. A detailed discussion of information bearing on the problem as set forth above is attached as Appendix \"A\". The main points established therein are summarized below.\n\n3. The frequency of reported incidents, the similarity in many of the characteristics attributed to the observed objects and the quality of observers considered as a whole, support the contention that some type of flying object has been observed. Approximately 210 incidents have been reported. Among the observers reporting on such incidents are trained and experienced U.S. Weather Bureau personnel, USAF rated officers, experienced civilian pilots, technicians associated with various research projects and technicians employed by commercial airlines.\n\n4. The possibility that reported observations of flying objects over the U.S. were influenced by previous sightings of unidentified phenomena in Europe, particularly over Scandinavia in 1946, and that the observers reporting such incidents may have been interested in obtaining personal publicity have been considered as possible explanations. However, these possibilities seem to be improbable when certain selected reports such as the one from U.S. Weather Bureau at Richmond are examined. During observations of weather balloons at the Richmond Bureau, one well trained observer has sighted strange metallic disks on three occasions and another observer has sighted a similar object on one occasion. The last observation of unidentified objects was in April, 1947. On all four occasions the weather balloon and the unidentified objects were in view through the theodolite. These observations at the Richmond Bureau occurred several months before publicity on the flying saucers appeared in a U.S. newspaper."} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5. Descriptions of the flying objects fall into three configuration categories: (1) disk-shaped (2) rough cigar-shaped (3) balls of fire. Varying conditions of visibility and differences in angles at which the objects may have been viewed introduces a possibility that a single type object may have been observed rather than three different types. This possibility is further substantiated by the fact that in the areas where such objects have been observed the ratio of the three general configurations is approximately the same.\n\n6. Therefore, it appears that some object has been seen; however, the identification of that object cannot be readily accomplished on the basis of information reported on each incident. It is possible that the object, or objects, may have been domestically launched devices such as weather balloons, rockets, experimental flying wing aircraft, or celestial phenomena. It is necessary to obtain information on such domestic activity to confirm or deny this possibility. Depending upon the degree with which this may be accomplished, foreign devices must then be considered as a possibility.\n\n7. The pattern of sightings is definable. Sightings have been most intense throughout the states bordering the Atlantic and Pacific coast lines, and the central states of Ohio and Kentucky. A map showing location of sightings is attached as Appendix \"B\".\n\n8. The origin of the devices is not ascertainable. There are two reasonable possibilities: (1) The objects are domestic devices, and if so, their identification or origin can be established by a survey of all launchings of airborne objects. Domestic flying wing type aircraft observed in various aspects of flight might be responsible for some of the reported flying objects, particularly those described as disks and rough cigar shapes. (See Appendices \"C\" and \"D\".) Among those which have been operational in recent years are the XP5U-1 (\"Flying Flapjack\") developed by Chance-Vaught, the Northrup B-35, and the turbo-jet powered Northrup YB-49. The present existence of any privately developed flying-wing type aircraft has not been determined but one such aircraft, the Arup tailless monoplane, was operational at South Bend, Indiana, prior to 1935. (2) Objects are foreign, and if so, it would seem most logical to consider that they are from a Soviet source. The Soviets possess information on a number of German flying-wing type aircraft such as the Gotha P60A, Junkers EF 130 long-range, high-speed jet bomber and the Horten 229 twin-jet fighter, which particularly resembles some of the descriptions of unidentified flying objects (See Appendix \"D\"). As early as 1924 Tscheranowsky developed a \"Parabola\" aircraft, an all wing design, which was the outcome of considerable Soviet experimentation with gliders of the same general form. Soviet aircraft based on such designs might have speeds approaching transonic speeds attributed to some flying objects or greater overall performance assuming the successful development of some unusual propulsion device such as atomic energy engine.\n\n9. That the Soviets have a current interest in flying-wing type aircraft is suggested by their utilization of Dr. Gunther Bock who, at the end of World War II, was in charge of the flying-wing program in Germany (See Appendix \"A\", paragraph 3, page 4). Achievements satisfactory to the U.S.S.R. are indirectly indicated by the personal recognition he is reported to be receiving in the U.S.S.R. Recently it has been reported that the U.S.S.R. is planning to build a fleet of 1,800 Horten flying-wing aircraft. Information of low evaluation has been received stating that a regiment of jet night fighters, Model Horten XIII, is at Kuzmikha, an air base two miles southwest of Irkutsk."} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Kuzmikha is identified as one of a number of airfields for the protection of an atomic energy plant at Irkutsk. The Horten XIII as developed by Germany was a glider.\n\n10. Assuming that the objects might eventually be identified as foreign or foreign-sponsored devices, the possible reason for their appearance over the U.S. requires consideration. Several possible explanations appear noteworthy, viz:\n\na. To negate U.S. confidence in the atom bomb as the most advanced and decisive weapon in warfare.\n\nb. To perform photographic reconnaissance missions.\n\nc. To test U.S. air defenses.\n\nd. To conduct familiarization flights over U.S. territory.\n\nCONCLUSIONS\n\n11. Since the Air Force is responsible for control of the air in the defense of the U.S., it is imperative that all other agencies cooperate in confirming or denying the possibility that these objects have a domestic origin. Otherwise, if it is firmly indicated that there is no domestic explanation, the objects are a threat and warrant more active efforts of identification and interception.\n\n12. It must be accepted that some type of flying objects have been observed, although their identification and origin are not discernable. In the interest of national defense it would be unwise to overlook the possibility that some of these objects may be of foreign origin.\n\n4 Incls:\nAppendix \"A\" - Analysis of Flying Object Incidents in the U.S. and Hypothetical Tactics Employed\nAppendix \"B\" - Plot of Flying Object Sightings in the U.S.\nAppendix \"C\" - Selected Reports of Flying Object Incidents\nAppendix \"D\" - Flying Wing Type Aircraft"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APPENDIX \"A\"\n\nANALYSIS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS IN THE U.S. AND HYPOTHETICAL TACTICS EMPLOYED\n\n1. Introduction. To formulate the possible tactics of flying objects reported over the U.S. assumes from the outset that firm conclusions have been reached on both the existence and origin of the reported flying objects. The current status of information on such incidents and overall analysis does not allow substantiation for such conclusions. However, the lack of such firm conclusions points to the necessity for an immediate and sound statistical analysis of every aspect of the situation and does not preclude a concurrent examination of the reported incidents to develop explanations of their possible tactics. The latter will be useful at some future date should the existence and origin of the flying objects be definitely established. Therefore, the following analysis of available information is advanced in order to present evidence on the actual existence of some type flying object and to relate same to tactical purposes for which the objects are possibly designed. The following discussion must be considered a provisional analysis, pending a further detailed analysis of all aspects of the problem.\n\n2. Some Aspects Regarding Flying Object Incidents. A cursory examination of evidence on reported incidents has been made and it is possible to cite certain generalities which it appears may be borne out when detailed analyses have been completed.\n\nAmong the incidents reported there are many statements by reliable and experienced persons which tend to confirm that flying objects have been seen. The description of such objects seems to fall roughly into three categories: (1) Silver disks or balls, approximating a Horten wing type aircraft; (2) Balls of fire of various colors and intensities; (3) Cigar or pencil-shaped objects similar in appearance to V-2 type rockets in horizontal flight. The numbers of configurations"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"might be further reduced with the following considerations in mind:\nSilver disks or balls have, for the greater part, been observed in daylight and a number under clear weather conditions with visibility unlimited. In most instances, balls of fire have been observed at night. Cigar, or pencil-shaped objects have been sighted in fewer numbers but with about equal distribution in daylight and at night. A few accounts tell of the disks having a rough cigar-shape when viewed while maneuvering. Some of the disks are described as having luminosity in daylight. It therefore is possible that a single type of object may be involved in all sightings, and differences in description may result from viewing the objects at various angles and under differing conditions of visibility.\n\tThe above tends to indicate that some type object has been seen and the possibility exists that the object or objects seen are conventional domestic devices, such as weather balloons, test rockets, or jet-equipped aircraft with pancake or flying wing configurations.\n\tThe possibility exists that the reporting of flying objects may have been influenced by earlier reports on similar incidents in Scandinavia and Central Europe. The publication in newspapers of details on such incidents, both foreign and domestic, may have induced some of the description provided in reported domestic incidents. However, one of the earliest reported sightings in the U.S. was the one observed by U.S. Weather Bureau personnel in April 1947, at Richmond, Virginia, and on the basis of this one report it appears that the disks are not balloons. It would seem that this sighting was not influenced by the reports of foreign incidents, the newspaper accounts of domestic incidents, nor by misidentification of a conventional object.\n\tAlthough reported domestic incidents are widely scattered throughout the U.S., frequency of sighting and number of observers per sighting"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"assumes a definable pattern. There is a large concentration of sightings along the Eastern Seaboard; another large concentration throughout the Western Coast states, and a few sightings in the Middle West. Distribution of incidents by configuration of object and description of maneuverability is approximately equal in each of these areas and this is believed to further substantiate the possibility that one type of object might have been observed in different aspects of flight.\n\tIf sightings are induced by rumor, it seems unusual that more incidents have not been reported from the areas with high concentration of population. Reports from such areas would also have greater facility in channeling either to newspapers or official reporting agencies. For the most part, sightings have been made in fairly open country where there are few restrictions to visibility, which may indicate that obstructed vision has reduced sightings in built-up areas.\n\tIt therefore seems that some type of flying object has been observed; the identification of its origin requires the completion of other analyses.\n3. Possible Origin of Unusual Flying Objects. Provided, upon the completion of analyses, it is indicated that some or all of the reported flying objects over the U.S. are of foreign origin, the objects could from a logical viewpoint, be considered Soviet. It is evident from the performance characteristics attributed to the unidentified objects at this time that if they are foreign, they involve efficiencies of performance which have not been realized in any operational airborne device in this country. It would, therefore, be a mistake to analyze the technical aspects of the situation within the limits of our own knowledge of practical developments. It is more desirable to consider then the outer limits of possible Soviet developments and objectives in attempting to formulate some idea of the tactics which might be involved."} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"First of all, the scientific objectives of the U.S.S.R. have been stated many times and indicated in many forms. The most clearcut statement of this objective is probably the one contained in the preamble to the Fourth Five-year Plan (1946-1950) which states that the objective of Soviet science is to overtake and surpass the scientific and technical developments of the capitalist nations. It apparently would be an impossible task for the Soviet Union to accomplish such an objective by proceeding step-by-step along the same lines of development already achieved in the capitalist nations. This would mean that it would be necessary to rapidly proceed through each phase of aeronautical development that has already been accomplished in this country, and this probably would never have any prospects of accelerating Soviet development beyond any point reached by the U.S. The obvious answer to accomplish their objective of not only overtaking, but surpassing the capitalist countries would be a scientific shortcut. This possibility is not so remote when examined on the basis of our knowledge of the current situation in the U.S.S.R. Provided Soviet emphasis was given to the most promising and advanced ideas acquired from Germany in 1945 and the work aided by German scientists, the possibility of catching up and possibly surpassing other nations in technical developments becomes more realistic. It becomes even more realistic if the Soviets have shown a tendency to concentrate on certain developments which have still not received a maximum of priority in our own programs.\n\tIt is known that the U.S.S.R. has since 1945 enlisted the services of Dr. Guenther Bock, a German who headed all development of low aspect ratio (flying wing) type aircraft in Germany. Dr. Bock is believed to be the top German scientist in charge at TSAGI and TSIAM which are \"Air Materiel Command\" type organizations in the U.S.S.R. Further, it is believed that Dr. Bock has made available all German plans for flying wing type aircraft to the Soviets. Among the designs considered by"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the Germans and possibly exploited by the U.S.S.R., are jet-propelled, flying wing type aircraft whose configuration would be similar to descriptions of certain objects reported flying over the U.S. The estimated speeds of such aircraft are within range of the lower limits of speed attributed to flying objects over the U.S. It is not impossible that emphasis on surpassing foreign developments has led to unusual progress in fuels and propulsion by the U.S.S.R. In connection with possible advancements in the field of fuels and propulsion, it should be observed that the Russian oil situation (regardless of estimated oil reserves) is quite different from that in the U.S. For example, U.S. oil industry is prepared to turn out tremendous quantities of highly fractionated petroleum products, while the U.S.S.R. cannot reasonably approach such capabilities. This consideration dictates different solutions on fuels for propulsion in the two countries and in turn, dictates the direction taken in development of jet motors or the use of other propulsive devices. We must therefore, arrive at the conclusion that any Soviet device which may have made its appearance over the U.S. as described, would possess unusual performance characteristics which, in all probability, would include unusual range. The possibility that they could have been launched at fairly close range should not be discarded.\n4. Possible Reasons or Tactics for the Use of Soviet Unconventional Aircraft Over the U.S. Predicated on all the foregoing assumptions, Soviet unconventional aircraft may have been flown over the U.S. for one, all, or a combination of the following reasons:\n\ta. To negate U.S. confidence in atom bomb as the most advanced and decisive weapon.\n\tIf the objects have been used in a propaganda sense, it would be reasonable to assume that the Soviets would choose first to frighten pro-American nations in Europe with the appearance of a radically"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"new weapon to counteract the ability of the U.S. to obtain full propaganda effectiveness with the atom bomb. It will be remembered that strange objects first appeared over the Scandinavian countries in 1946. The objects observed there had unusual range and unusual performance characteristics. As this demonstration over the Scandinavian countries occurred the U.S. was making a vigorous campaign for the economic and political alignment of these nations with other pro-American Western European nations. When these incidents subsided, strange flying objects began to be observed at an increasing rate over the U.S. The conclusion on this point is that flying objects may have been used to frighten both European nations and the U.S. by the appearance of a new device, and that failure to identify such a Soviet object would give them invaluable indication that U.S. development is far behind that of the Soviets. Except for this indication, it is believed that the use of the objects to promote fear has been worthless in that the U.S. public has tended to characterize these incidents entirely as hallucinations by \"crack pots\", misidentification of conventional objects, or that they represent a secret American project which should not be publicized. Any fear that might result from Soviet use will come only by a discovery that the objects have been Soviet aircraft and that they involve radical developments which are in advance of our own accomplishments.\n\tb. For photographic reconnaissance.\n\tIt is possible that the Soviets have employed the flying objects for the collection of photographic intelligence or the mapping of certain areas in the U.S. The evasive action employed by all objects sighted indicates not so much an attempt to avoid being sighted, as an attempt to prevent disclosure of the exact type of flying craft and its mission. The sighting of objects over the U.S. has been most intense in Eastern and Western Coastal States. In addition, sightings of flying objects"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"have been made near Oak Ridge, Tenn., Las Cruces, N. M., and in the\ngeneral area of the Hanford Works in Oregon. Generally, sightings have\nnot been made over what we consider strategic industrial areas. The\nreason for this might be either that the flying objects have been ob-\nserved only enroute to or from missions over these more concentrated\nstrategic areas, or that the Soviets obtained sufficient information\nduring their World War II liaison with U.S. industry to satisfy their\nintelligence requirements and have a more active requirement for informa-\ntion on industries and areas which were not available to them during\nWorld War II contacts. This is of interest in connection with the\nsightings near Oak Ridge, Las Cruces, and in the general area of the Hanford\nWorks since these establishments were not, and are not, accessible to Soviet\ncollectors of photographic intelligence.\nc. Test of U.S. Defenses.\nIt is possible that the use of Soviet flying objects over\nthe U.S. is intended only to determine the ability of the U.S. defenses\nto spot foreign aircraft. This would be of extreme importance to the\nU.S.S.R. in the event that a one-way all-out attack of Soviet strate-\ngic bombers is planned. Ability to operate over the U.S. uninhibited\nat a time when the U.S. is supposedly re-arming and putting great stress\non defenses would provide valuable information on which to base estimates\nfor probability of success in bombing strategic objectives in the U.S.\nd. Familiarization Flights over U.S. Territory.\nThis possible reason is perhaps the most improbable. It\nis assumed that, should this purpose be involved, other purposes are\nprobably also accomplished in its execution. Provided the U.S.S.R. has\nunusually high performance aircraft they might find it advantageous to\nfamiliarize themselves with the topography of the U.S. in anticipation\nof future combat missions to strategic targets.\n7"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"5. Conclusion. The conclusion that some type of flying object\nhas been observed over the U.S. seems to be substantiated. It is not\nknown at this time whether these observations are misidentifications\nof domestically launched devices, natural phenomena, or foreign un-\nconventional aircraft. It is, therefore, impossible to make any re-\nliable explanation for their appearance over the U.S. or the tactics\nwhich they may employ if the objects observed include any foreign\ndevelopments in aeronautical fields. It is likewise impossible at\nthis time to contain discussions of possible performance characteristics\nor tactics within limits of practical reason, if for no other reason\nthan the fact that proof of the existence of a foreign development of\nthis type would necessarily introduce considerations of new principals\nand means not yet considered practical possibilities in our own re-\nsearch and development.\n8"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APPENDIX \"C\"\nSELECTED REPORTS OF FLYING OBJECT INCIDENTS\n1. A number of reports on unidentified flying objects come from\nobservers who, because of their technical background and experience do\nnot appear to be influenced by unfounded sensationalism nor inclined to\nreport explainable phenomena as new types of airborne devices. Some of\nthe details of their reports are presented in this appendix, along with\nthose from possibly less reliable sources who have reported evidence\nwhich is of such a nature that it cannot be entirely ignored.\n2. Descriptions of significant incidents, arranged chronologically,\nfollow:\na. During April 1947, two employees of the Weather Bureau\nStation at Richmond, Virginia reported seeing a strange metallic disk\non three occasions through the theodolite while making PIBAL observa-\ntions. One observation was at 15,000 feet when a disk was followed for\n15 seconds. The disk appeared metallic, shaped something like an ellipse\nwith a flat bottom and a round top. It appeared below the balloon and\nwas much larger in size. The disk appeared to be moving rather rapidly,\nalthough it was impossible to estimate its speed. The other observations\nwere made at 27,000 feet in like manner.\nb. The following month, Byron B. Savage, a field engineer for\nRadio Corporation of America, reported a disk flying near his home in\nOklahoma City, Oklahoma. The object was thought to be at an altitude\nbetween 10,000 feet and 15,000 feet, and was moving toward the north\nat a high rate of speed, leaving no trailing effects.\nc. While flying at 10,000 feet on a course of 300 degrees,\n30 miles northwest of Lake Meade, Nevada, an Air Force lieutenant re-\nported seeing five or six white circular objects in close formation and\ntraveling at an estimated speed of 285 miles per hour. This sighting\noccurred on 28 June 1947."} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"d. The following day a party of three, two of them scientists, were motoring along Highway 17 toward the White Sand, New Mexico, V-2 firing grounds and reported seeing a large disk or sphere moving horizontally at a high speed and an estimated altitude of 10,000 feet. It was of uniform shape and had no protruding surfaces such as wings. The object was in sight for about 60 seconds before it disappeared to the northeast. The three observers agreed on the details of the sighting except that one thought he had seen vapor trails.\ne. On 7 July 1947, five Portland, Oregon police officers reported varying numbers of disks flying over different parts of the city. All observations were made within a minute or two of 1305 hours.\nf. On the same day, William Rhoads of Phoenix, Arizona allegedly saw a disk circling his locality during sunset and took two photographs. The resulting pictures below show a disk-like object with a round front and a square rear in plan form. These photographs have been examined by experts who state they are true photographic images and do not appear to be imperfection in the emulsion or imperfections in the lens. (See Figs. 1, 2, 3, and 4.)\nORIGINAL PHOTOGRAPHS BY MR. RHOADS\nFig. 1 Fig. 2"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ENLARGEMENTS OF ORIGINAL PHOTOGRAPHS\nFig. 3 Fig. 4\ng. On 10 July 1947, Mr. Woodruff, a Pan-American Airways mechanic reported a circular object flying at high velocity, paralleling the earth's surface and leaving a trail which appeared as a \"burning up\" of the cloud formation. The sighting occurred near Harmon Field, Newfoundland. Two other persons also saw the trail which remained in the sky for about an hour and was photographed by another PAA employee. The resulting photographs support Mr. Woodruff's observation as far as the sky cleavage is concerned. (See Figs. 5 and 6.)"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Fig. 5\n4"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"h. On 29 July 1947, Kenneth Arnold, while flying near Tacoma, Washington, reported a formation of flying objects. His sketch of their shape corresponds closely to that shown in the photographs made by Mr. Rhodes. On the same day, two U.S. Air Force pilots at Hamilton Field reported two flying disks trailing a P-80, following it toward Oakland, California.\n\ni. On 4 August 1947, the pilot and co-pilot of a DC-3, flying for one Al Jones, near Bethel, Alaska, reported a flying disk larger than their aircraft. This disk crossed their path at about 1000 feet and they turned to give chase. The DC-3 was flying at 170 mph, but the disk flew out of sight in four minutes.\n\nj. On 12 November 1947, two flying disks trailing jet-like streams of fire were reportedly sighted from the bridge of the tanker Ticonderoga, according to the second officer. The Ticonderoga was 20 miles off the Oregon shore. This officer said the disks were in sight 45 seconds, moving at a speed estimated at 700-900 mph, curving in a long, low arc.\n\nk. On 7 January 1948, a National Guard pilot was killed while attempting to chase an unidentified object up to 30,000 feet. While it is presumed that this pilot suffered anoxia, resulting in his crash, his last message to the tower was, \"it appears to be metallic object.... of tremendous size.... directly ahead and slightly above.... I am trying to close for a better look.\"\n\nl. On 5 April 1948, three trained balloon observers from the Geophysics Laboratory Section, Watson Laboratories, N.J. reported seeing a round, indistinct object in the vicinity of Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico. It was very high and fast, and appeared to execute violent manuevers at high speed. The object was under observation for approximately 30 seconds and disappeared suddenly."} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"m. A yellow or light colored sphere, 25 to 40 feet in diameter was reported by Lt. Comdr. Marcus L. Lowe, USN, just south of Anacostia Naval Air Station, D.C., while he was flying on 30 April 1948. It was moving at a speed of approximately 100 miles per hour at an altitude of about 4500 feet. Although winds aloft were from the north-northwest, its course was to the north.\n\nn. On 1 July 1948, twelve disks were reported over the Rapid City Air Base by Major Hamner. These disks were oval-shaped, about 100 feet long, flying in excess of an estimated 500 mph. Descending from 10,000 feet, these disks made a 30-degree to 40-degree climbing turn accelerating very rapidly until out of sight.\n\no. On 17 July 1948, a report from Kirtland Air Force Base describes a sighting in the vicinity of San Acacia, New Mexico, of seven unidentified objects flying in a \"J\" formation at an estimated height of 20,000 feet above the terrain. The formation varied from \"J\" to \"L\" to circle after passing the zenith. Flashes from the objects were observed after passing 30 degrees beyond the zenith but there was no smoke or vapor trail. If the reported altitude is correct the speed was estimated at 1500 miles per hour, according to the report.\n\np. Other sightings of lights and trails, rather than disks, have been reported, viz:\n\n(1) On 12 September 1947, the pilot and co-pilot of a Pan American aircraft, en route from Midway to Honolulu, saw a blue-white light approaching, changing to twin reddish glows upon withdrawal. The pilot estimated the speed of the light at about 1,000 knots.\n\n(2) On 15 June 1948, Mr. Boonville, territory manager for the B. F. Goodrich Company, observed a reddish glow with a jet exhaust in the vicinity of Miles"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"City, Montana. This glowing light made no sound, traveled about twice the speed of a conventional aircraft and flew from north to south several times in a wide arc, finally disappearing over the horizon.\n\nq. During the early morning of 25 July 1948, two Eastern Airlines pilots reported having seen a huge flying craft similar to a V-2 pass their aircraft in flight. (See Figs. 7 and 8.) The attached drawings made by these two observers very closely resemble a flying object reported to have been seen on 20 July 1948, by A. D. Otter, chief investigator of Court of Damage Inquiry, and his daughter at Arnham, Netherlands. This object appeared to be a wingless aircraft having two decks. The craft, sighted four times through scattered clouds and unlimited visibility, was traveling at high speed at a high altitude. A sound similar to that made by a V-2 was reported.\n\nr. An object, similar in shape to the one in the preceding incident was reported by an experienced American newspaper reporter about 35 kilometers northeast of Moscow on 3 August 1948. A Russian acquaintance identified it as a rigid airship but the reporter disagrees because it flew at a high, but not excessive speed.\n\ns. On 1 October 1948 at approximately 2030 hours the pilot of a P-51 aircraft, 2nd Lt. George F. Gorman (North Dakota Air National Guard), flying near Fargo, North Dakota, sighted an intermittent white light about 3,000 feet below his 4500 foot cruising altitude. The pilot pursued the light which appeared to then take evasive tactics. The object or light out-turned, out-speeded, and out-climbed the P-51 in every instance during the attempt to intercept. The pilot lost contact 27 minutes after the initial sighting. The same light was observed by three other witnesses from the ground, Mr. L. D. Jensen, Air Traffic Controller, Mr. Manuel E. Johnson, Assistant Traffic Controller, and Dr. L. N. Cannon, Oculist. A comparison of all testimony"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"revealed that one object was sighted and that it consisted only of a small round ball of clear white light with no apparent shape attached. It was about 6 to 8 inches in diameter. At times it traveled faster than the P-51 and performed maneuvers in an evasive manner. When first sighted the ball of light was traveling at an estimated 250 miles per hour. Under this condition, the light was not continuous but blinked off and on. At high performance the white light was continuous. Subsequent investigation eliminated the possibility that this incident may have been another aircraft or a meteorological balloon.\n\nt. On 18 November 1948 at approximately 2145 hours, three reserve pilots, 2nd Lt. Kenwood W. Jackson, 2nd Lt. Glen L. Stalker, and 2nd Lt. Henry G. Combs, flying near Andrews Field, Maryland, encountered an unidentifiable flying object. When first sighted, it appeared to be lighted and flying at about 1700 feet. Three or four passes were made in an attempt to identify it. The pilot of the aircraft stated that while diving his aircraft at approximately 240 miles per hour, the object would climb vertically and then would drop below the aircraft from behind and continue to circle. On the last pass, the landing light was switched on and momentarily a dull gray glow from the object was observed. Lt. Combs stated he maintained contact for about ten minutes with the object flying between the lights of Washington, D. C. and his aircraft. All that could be observed was an oblong ball with one light, no wings and no exhaust flame. It finally made a very tight turn and headed toward the east coast at an estimated 500 to 600 miles per hour. At the same time Staff Sergeant John J. Kushner observed from the ground an unusual object in the air over Andrews Field. He stated that it was not very high and that it did not look like an aircraft.\n\nu. Reports of radar intercepts point to unusual air activity which may be related to flying objects."} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"a. On 1 July 1947, a GCA radar at Hokkaido, Japan picked up an unidentified target at 16 miles, with a speed in excess of 600 mph. This target split into two targets, each estimated to be larger than a P-51.\n\nb. On 16 September 1947, an MEW radar at Fukuoka, Japan, picked up a target at 89 miles and trailed it to 19 miles, where it faded. Speed was 640-900 mph. The speed measurement, made by a good crew through a 70-mile track, is believed accurate.\n\n4. Investigations conducted by Headquarters, Air Materiel Command, have definitely established the identification of 18 of approximately 210 so-called flying saucers which have been reported. Approximately nine per cent of the total number of incidents are, therefore, eliminated from further specific consideration. Among those incidents positively explained, three were hoaxes, two were from unreliable witnesses. In the remaining 13 eliminated incidents, objects were actually seen but investigation has shown that they were celestial bodies or phenomena, meteorological and carnival balloons, and airborne cosmic ray experimental equipment. The following examples are presented for comparison of the information reported by witnesses and true identification of the object involved:\n\na. On 22 July 1948, Captain Henry Glover (Ordnance Reserve) and his wife observed at Van Nuys, California, an object which they were unable to positively identify. Object at first appeared to be round and looked like a weather balloon at about 2,000 feet but there was no characteristic bobbing. The wind was blowing on the ground but the object was quite steady. During the time it was under observation, about an hour, it traveled through a vertical arc of about twenty-five (25°) degrees or more. The observer concluded that it was not a celestial body. It had a bluish luminescence and as the sun set, the object's color gradually changed to orange at dusk and ceased to be illuminated"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"almost instantaneously. The outline was clear and the air was clear with visibility unlimited. The object traveled from the east to the west.\n\nThis object was determined by investigation to have been a balloon carrying cosmic ray equipment.\n\nb. On 19 August 1948, at approximately 1050 hours an unidentified flying object was visible from the ground at Godman Air Force Base, Kentucky. This object was estimated to be at about 30,000 to 40,000 feet altitude, spherical in shape, bright silver color and gave a bright reflection from the sun. An F-51 was dispatched from Standiford Air Force Base, Kentucky, to observe the object. During observation from the ground, there was no change in the elevation of the object and it seemed to be moving southwest from Godman Air Force Base. The F-51 which was flying over Godman AFB at an altitude of 30,000 to 35,000 feet reported that it was unable to locate the object although it was still visible from the ground with the naked eye. Azimuth and elevation readings were taken by theodolite every minute and the path of the object was charted.\n\nThe object was determined to be the planet Venus by Mr. Moore, the head astronomer at the University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky. It is believed that earlier incidents at Godman Field (reference paragraph 3k, page 6, Appendix C) may also have been observations of the planet Venus.\n\n5. Among those incidents still not positively explained, reported observations differ to some extent, but three general categories of sightings emerge -- the flying disk, the ball of fire and the large jet rocket. Interesting observations that were noted are:\n\na. Most of the objects are a thin disk, round on top and flat on the bottom. The front half of the disk is often circular, sweeping back to a square tail across the full width."} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"b. A high rate of climb as well as the apparent ability to remain motionless or hover for a considerable length of time is indicated.\n\nc. Reported sizes have varied from that of a 25-cent piece to 250 feet in diameter, and from the size of a pursuit plane to the bulk of six B-29 airplanes.\n\nd. Speeds have been estimated throughout the entire range from very slow or hovering to supersonic.\n\ne. Sounds and visual trails are not normally associated with the sightings.\n\n14"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"APPENDIX \"D\"\nFLYING WING TYPE AIRCRAFT\n\n1. Aeronautical engineers in several countries have been engaged for some time in the design, construction, and flight of flying wing type aircraft. The study of flying objects requires, at least, a brief examination of proposed and existing unconventional aircraft whose configurations, when seen by the uninitiated, could lead to reports of strange flying devices. A description of some of the more significant types by country follows.\n\n2. Germany\n\nAt the end of World War II, German aircraft designers had numerous projects under way concerning tailless aircraft which conceivably could be mistaken for \"Flying Saucers\" or disc-like objects. It is not clear just what the Soviets are doing in the way of developing these projects but it is considered that German studies on tailless, delta-wing, and related configurations are available to the U.S.S.R.\n\na. Arado Night and Bad Weather Fighter, Project I\n\nThis is a tailless, low-wing monoplane with swept-back wing of large root chord and having a long, narrow fuselage.\n\nSpan 60.3 feet\nLength 42.5 feet\nPower Plant 2 HeS 011 turbo jet units\nMax. Speed (sea level) 441 mph.\nMax. Speed (29,500 feet) 503 mph.\n\nb. Arado E 581-4\n\nA high-wing tailless single-seater with a single jet unit mounted in the fuselage. Fin and rudder units are mounted on the wing midway between fuselage and wing tip at the trailing edge.\n\nSpan 29.3 feet\nLength 18.4 feet\nPower Plant 1 HeS 011 turbo jet unit\nMax. Speed (sea level) --\nMax. Speed (service ceiling) --"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"c. Gotha P 60 A\n\nThis was the first of the P 60 series of jet fighters. It is a flying wing type and, since the pilot and observer lie prone, there is no projecting canopy, thus permitting a particularly clean design. The jet units are mounted at the rear of the center section, one above and one below.\n\nSpan 40 feet 8 1/2 in.\nWing Area 504 square feet\nPower Plant 2 BMW 003 turbo jet units\nMax. Speed (23,000 feet) 596 miles per hour\n\nd. Heinkel P 1060\n\nThis is a single-seat fighter with a sharply swept-back wing, resembling a flying wing type, but having a single fin and rudder with no tail plane.\n\nSpan 29.2 feet\nWing area 218 square feet\nNo performance estimates are available.\n\ne. Junkers EF 130\n\nOf the flying wing type, this project was established as a long-range, high-speed jet bomber.\n\nSpan 78.8 feet\nWing Area 1290 square feet\nPower Plant 4 HeS 011 turbo jet units\nMax. Speed 620 miles per hour\nRange 3700 miles\n\nf. Me 329\n\nThis is a tailless mid-wing monoplane driven by two pusher propellers with the engines centrally located in the wings on each side of the stubby rounded fuselage.\n\nSpan 56 feet\nLength 35.4 feet\nMax. Speed 455-465 miles per hour\nPower Plant 2 DB 603 reciprocating engines\n\ng. Horten Wing\n\nThe closest resemblance to the estimated configuration of \"Flying Disks\" is represented by the Horten Wing aircraft. Work on\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the Horten 229, a twin jet fighter, had progressed to the final stages at the end of World War II. Its prototype, a Horten glider, successfully soared to an altitude of 14,200 feet as early as 1935, proving the soundness of this design. (Figs. 1, 2, and 3)\n\nFig. 1\n\n3"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Fig. 2\n\n4"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"WRIGHT FIELD, OHIO -- The Horten 229, flying wing twin-engine jet fighter, was in its finishing stages at the end of the war. The pilot of this airplane sat in the nose, between the two jet units. The soundness of this design was proved as early as 1938 when a Horten glider, prototype of the 229, soared to an altitude of 14,200 feet.\n\nCREDIT: \"U.S. AIR FORCE PHOTO., WASH. D.C.\""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nFig. 2\n\n4\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"33567 A.C.-WRIGHT FIELD, OHIO -- The Horten 229, flying wing twin-engine jet fighter, was in its finishing stages at the end of the war. The pilot of this airplane sat in the nose, between the two jet units. The soundness of this design was proved as early as 1938 when a Horten glider, prototype of the 229, soared to an altitude of 14,200 feet.\n\nCREDIT: \"U.S. AIR FORCE PHOTO., WASH. D.C.\""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nFig. 3\n\n5\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n3. Great Britain\n\na. The Armstrong Whitworth\n\nThe AW 52 G, a glider, and the AW 52, a twin-jet airplane,\nare British designs of tailless aircraft. The vertical stabilizers are\nlocated at the tips of the swept-back wing. (Figs. 4 and 5) Data on the\nAW 52 appear below.\n\nSpan 90 feet\nLenth 37 feet\nMax. Speed (sea level) 435 knots\nMax. Speed (20,000 feet) 435 knots\nMax. Speed (36,000 feet) 417 knots\nRange 1300 nautical miles\nPower Plant 2 Nene II turbo jet units\n\nARMSTRONG\nWHITWORTH\nA. W. 52\nExperimental\nFlying-wing\nAircraft\n(cf. No. 1403)\n34925A.C.\n\nFig. 4\n\n6\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n- AIR FORCE PHOTO -\nHEADQUARTERS U.S.A.F.\nWASH, D.C."} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"A-32714 A.C. Armstrong Whitworth A.W. 52 G.\nPrototype March 1945.\n\nSECRET - CREDIT: \"U.S. AIR FORCE PHOTO., WASH. D.C.\""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Fig. 5\n\n7\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"31622 A.C.-LOS ANGELES LOOKS UP AT THE FUTURE.\nThe U.S. Air Forces Northrop built XB-35 \"Flying\nWing\" casts a shadow of things to come over Los\nAngeles. This radical departure from conventional\nairplane design is capable of carrying the atom bomb\nor a 10,000 lb. bomb load 10,000 miles. The \"Flying\nWing\" has completed first test flights. This\nairplane has a span of 172 feet and a length of only\n53 feet.\n\nCREDIT: \"U.S. AIR FORCE PHOTO., WASH. D.C.\""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"4. United States\n\na. Northrop B-35\n\nThis is a flying wing type aircraft, powered by four re-\nciprocating engines and has a wing span of 173 feet and a length of\nonly 53 feet. (See Fig.6)\n\nFig. 6\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"34420 A.C.-Aerial view of the YB-49, jet-propelled\nversion of the Northrop Flying Wing. Fastest\nlarge bomber yet built for the U.S. Air Force, the\nYB-49 is powered by eight jet engines. It is\nundergoing extensive tests at Muroc Air Force Base,\nCalifornia, where this photograph was made.\n\nCREDIT: \"U.S. AIR FORCE PHOTO., WASH. D.C.\""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nc. Chance-Vought XF5U-1\n\nDeveloped by Chance-Vought Aircraft, this radical design promises the reality of high and low speed performance. Powered by two R-2000-2 engines, the airplane will have a speed range of from 40 to 425 miles per hour. (See Fig. 8)\n\nFig. 8\n\n10\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"32954 A.C.-NAVY EXPERIMENTS WITH NEW HIGH-LOW SPEED FIGHTER. Developed by Chance-Vought Aircraft in a revolutionary new Navy fighter designated XF5U-1, which promises the reality of extremely high and low speeds in the same plane, and has the added feature of one engine being able to turn over both propellers in the event of a failure. Powered by two R-2000-2 engines, the plane will have a speed range of from 40 to 425 miles per hour."} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nb. Northrop XB 49\n\nPowered by eight turbo-jet engines, this airplane is the jet-propelled version of the Northrop Flying Wing (B 35). (See Fig. 7)\n\nFig. 7\n\n9\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nd. ARUP Tailless Monoplane\n\nJane's \"All the World's Aircraft\" (1936 edition) describes this airplane as \"a two-seat machine with a 70 h.p. LeBlond engine.... This has a high aspect ratio wing with straight leading-edge and built in nacelle....\" In plan form, the wing is almost semi-circular.\n\nAn Air Force film, \"Aeronautical Oddities\", shows this airplane in flight at South Bend, Indiana and in some attitudes appears identical to the photograph included in Appendix \"C\" as Figure 4. Although it is believed that the ARUP Manufacturing Co. is no longer in existence, it is possible that later models of this or similar U.S. civil aircraft may have been observed.\n\nSpan 22 feet\nLength 19 feet\nPower Plant 1 LeBlond engine\nMax. Speed 86 miles per hour\n\nThree views of an Experimental Arup tailless Monoplane.\n\nFig. 9\n\n11\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n[The first image is a photograph of a cover sheet with a stamp reading \"AIR FORCE PHOTO - HEADQUARTERS U.S.A.F. WASH, D.C.\" mounted on a gray page. Below it is a faint, largely illegible typed paragraph block that cannot be reliably transcribed.]"} {"doc_id":"e9de3ba737887216","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"b. Northrop YB 49\n\nPowered by eight turbo-jet engines, this airplane is the jet-propelled version of the Northrop Flying Wing (B 35). (See Fig. 7)\n\nFig. 7\n\n9\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nNW 91410\nDocId:34750978 Page 46"} {"doc_id":"ea2867e7827afff2","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nSUBJECT:\t[REDACTED] USA/Colorado:\nAn Airborne Object Over Cheyenne Mountain in February 2022 was\nPossible Backscattering of Sunlight\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\npage 1 of 4"} {"doc_id":"ea2867e7827afff2","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\npage 2 of 4"} {"doc_id":"ea2867e7827afff2","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] An airborne object over Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado\n/was observed by five U.S. Army service members at Fort Carson,\n/Colorado at 0935 MNT on 15 February 2022, was possibly\n/backscattering of sunlight. [REDACTED] has low confidence in this\n/assessment based on uncertainty in the field of view of each\n/witness, amount of snow cover, and exact elevation and amount of\n/cloud cover. No anomalous data or characteristics were recorded or\n/assessed, and the event did not represent an unknown adversarial\n/capability.\n/\n/[REDACTED] According to the accounts of five U.S. Army service\n/members On 15 February 2022, an airborne object was observed\n/approximately 6 miles to the west over and slightly behind the\n/Cheyenne Mountain silhouette for approximately 30 - 180 seconds.\n/The witnesses describe the object as roughly the size of a large\n/jet and resembling an angular, non-symmetrical potato made of\n/uneven panels, which was completely stationary about 300-500 feet\n/above Cheyenne Mountain while slowly changing shape. It had a\n/slightly translucent, shimmering white appearance, with defined\n/edges and a milky shimmer that reflected sunlight. The witnesses\n/noted that the sky was clear, and despite keeping their eyes on the\n/object, it suddenly disappeared.\n/\n/[REDACTED] At 0945 MST on February 15, 2022, in Colorado Springs,\n/the sun was positioned at an altitude of about 27.5 over the\n/horizon in the southeast sky and roughly at an azimuth of 125,\n/casting shadows toward the northwest and providing soft, angled\n/light. According historical the National Water and Climate Center\n/reporting, snow depth on Cheyenne Mountain likely ranged from 6 to\n/12 inches. Although witnesses reported clear, blue skies, multiple\n/weather reports, including those from AFWA and Weather Underground,\n/indicated the presence of clouds, suggesting that the skies were\n/partly to mostly cloudy that morning.\n/\n/[REDACTED] Analysis possibly indicates that the positioning of the\n/sun in relation to Cheyenne Mountain would allow for backscattering\n/of sunlight reflecting off snow-covered ground. This reflection\n/could illuminate low-level clouds in the vicinity, which might\n/account for the visibility of the object followed by its sudden\n/disappearance. It is possible that either the clouds or the sun\n/shifted slightly, causing the reflection to vanish. [REDACTED] has low\n/confidence in this assessment based on uncertainty in the field of\n/view of each witness, and exact level of cloud cover.\n/\n/[REDACTED] Analyst Note: Altostratus clouds are a kind of mid-level cloud\n/known for their consistent gray or blue-gray appearance. These\n/clouds usually develop at altitudes ranging from 6,500 to 23,000\npage 3 of 4"} {"doc_id":"ea2867e7827afff2","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"/feet (about 2,000 to 7,000 meters) and can create a dense, uniform\n/layer across the sky or thin and wispy. While they often appear\n/opaque, altostratus clouds can permit some sunlight to pass\n/through, resulting in a luminous effect. Typically, the presence of\n/altostratus clouds suggests that precipitation is imminent, as they\n/may bring light rain or snow.\n/\n/[REDACTED] Analyst Note: Backscattering is the phenomenon where sunlight\n/reflects off the snow-covered ground and reflects upwards,\n/scattering through the atmosphere and illuminate low-level clouds.\n/This is especially noticeable when the sun is low over the horizon.\n/[REDACTED] No aircraft or balloons were noted active in or around\n/Cheyenne Mountain during the time the witnesses saw the airborne\n/object.\n/\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\npage 4 of 4"} {"doc_id":"ea42870249336665","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART I\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\nSECRET\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n1071367 (18)\nCOUNTRY\nU.S.A.\nREPORT NO.\nIR-1-57\n(LEAVE BLANK)\n1071367\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nSUBJECT\nReport of Unidentified Aircraft Sighting\nAREA REPORTED ON\nSaudi Arabia\nFROM (Agency)\n22d Bombardment Wing (M), March AFB, Calif.\nDATE OF REPORT\n19 January 1957\nDATE OF INFORMATION\n18 January 1957\nEVALUATION\nB - 2\nPREPARED BY (Officer)\nCapt Alva Smith\nSOURCE\nCrew, B-52 Aircraft Number 394\nREFERENCES (Control number, directive, previous report, etc., as applicable)\nN/A\nSUMMARY: (Enter concise summary of report. Give significance in final one-sentence paragraph. List inclosures at lower left. Begin text of report on AF Form 112—Part II.)\nB-52 aircraft number 394 from Castle AFB, California, Commanded by Lt/Col J.H. Morris, of the 328th Bombardment Squadron, 93d Bombardment Wing (H), made radar contact with an unidentified aircraft while participating in Strategic Air Command mission \"Operation Powerflight\". Coordinates at time of contact; 27 north - 47 east (approximately). Speed of aircraft (B-52) at contact; 642 knots per hour. Altitude; 39,000 feet. Visibility; night. Duration of contact; five (5) to seven (7) minutes. (approximately). Cell position of B-52 making contact; cell leader. Call sign of B-52; Runner 11. Gunner's name; M/Sgt C.H. Ballew.\n\nJust prior to making rendezvous with tanker aircraft B-52 aircraft number 394 picked up an unidentified aircraft on the A-3A gunnery scope. The return of the unidentified aircraft remained at the 6000 yard marker (center) of the scope for approximately five (5) to seven (7) minutes after which the B-52 made a bank to the left, and the unidentified aircraft return disappeared off the scope to the left. The disappearance may have been caused by the change in direction of the B-52; however the unidentified aircraft seemed to disappear in the direction of the Baghdad Flight Identification Region. The unidentified aircraft gave a smaller return on the scope than a simultaneously received return produced by a second B-52 aircraft riding at the 3000 yard marker of the scope.\n\nSignificance; The unidentified aircraft appeared on the scope where no aircraft were expected.\n\nRobert Sullivan\nROBERT SULLIVAN\nMajor, USAF\nAsst Chief Intelligence Division\n1 INCLS.\nDECLASSIFIED NLW 78452 DTL 6/24 NARA Date 3/19/24\nPage 1 of 2 pages\nDISTRIBUTION BY ORIGINATOR\n1 cy Hq 15th AF, 1 cy Hq SAC, 1 cy 93d Bomb Wg, 1 cy Hq USAF.\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nSECRET\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n00161\nMI 21360"} {"doc_id":"ea42870249336665","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AF FORM 112—PART II\nAPPROVED 1 JUNE 1948\nSECRET\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n20\nAIR INTELLIGENCE INFORMATION REPORT\nFROM (Agency)\n22d Bombardment Wing (M)\nREPORT NO.\nIR-1-57\nPAGE 2 OF 2 PAGES\nA-3A GUNNERY SCOPE PRESENTATION\nB-52 ACFT. NUMBER 394\n8,000\n7,000\nBlip of unidentified aircraft\n6,000\n(Smaller return than that produced by B-52)\nDisappeared off scope in direction of Baghdad Flight Identification Region\n5,000\n4,000\nBlip produced by second B-52 in cell\n3,000\n2,000\n1,000\nB-52 aircraft making contact altitude 39,000 feet, speed 642 knots - true air speed.\nNOTE: THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE ACT, 50 U.S.C. 31 AND 32, AS AMENDED. ITS TRANSMISSION OR THE REVELATION OF ITS CONTENTS IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW. IT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY OTHER THAN UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AGENCIES, EXCEPT BY PERMISSION OF THE DIRECTOR OF INTELLIGENCE, USAF.\nSECRET\n(CLASSIFICATION)\n00161\nMI 21360"} {"doc_id":"ea42870249336665","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ea42870249336665","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ea42870249336665","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nNORTH 22\n\nDECLASSIFIED\nAuthority:\nNW 91526\n\nGEMINI V\n\nTechnical Debriefing\n\nPart II\n\nCLASSIFICATION CHANGE\nTo UNCLASSIFIED\nBy authority of E011652, 6-1-72\nChanged by Cabeyam Date NOV 20 1973\n\nNOTICE: This document may be exempt from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). Requests for its release to persons outside the U. S. Government should be handled under the provisions of NASA Policy Directive 1382.2.\n\nTHIS MATERIAL CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE ESPIONAGE LAWS, TITLE 18, U.S.C. SECTION 793 AND 794. THE TRANSMISSION OR REVELATION OF WHICH IN ANY MANNER TO AN UNAUTHORIZED PERSON IS PROHIBITED BY LAW.\n\nGROUP 4\nDOWNGRADED AT 3 YEAR INTERVALS\nDECLASSIFIED AFTER 12 YEARS\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\nV"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPRELIMINARY\n\nGT-5 FLIGHT CREW DEBRIEFING TRANSCRIPT\n\nPART II\n\nPrepared By\n\nSpacecraft Operations Branch\n\nFlight Crew Support Division\n\nSeptember 2, 1965\n\nThis material contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18. U. S. C. Section 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.\n\nGroup 4: Downgrade at 3 year intervals\nDeclassified after 12 years\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nPREFACE\n\nThis preliminary transcript was made from voice tape recordings of the GT-5 flight crew debriefing conducted August 30, 1965 thru September 2, 1965 at the Crew Quarters, Cape Kennedy, Florida.\n\nAlthough all the material contained in this transcript has been edited, the urgent need for the preliminary transcript by mission analysis personnel precluded a thorough editorial review prior to its publication. Errors in this transcript will be corrected as soon as possible and an official transcript will be published at a later date.\n\nThis document contains a transcript of the second part of the total debriefing. A preliminary transcript of the first part was published on September 1, 1965, and it contains the crew's description of the mission from an operational standpoint.\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\n\nParagraph Page number\n\n8.0 SYSTEMS OPERATION\n8.1 Platform 1\n8.2 OAMS 16\n8.3 RCS 47\n8.4 Environmental Control System 54\n8.5 Communications 66\n8.6 Electrical System 80\n8.7 Computer 82\n8.8 Crew Station 90\n\n9.0 OPERATIONAL CHECKS\n9.1 Apollo Landmark Identification 132\n9.2 Cabin Lighting Survey 146\n9.3 SPADATS Tracking Check 147\n9.4 UHF Antenna Pattern Test 147\n9.5 Thruster Illumination Checks 148\n9.6 Dual Command Transmitter Test 148\n9.7 Radar Tests 148\n9.8 HF Evaluation 150\n\n10.0 VISUAL SIGHTINGS\n10.1 Powered Flight 152\n10.2 Orbital Flight 153\n10.3 Reentry 172\n\n11.0 EXPERIMENTS\n11.1 Visual Definition of Celestial Objects (D-1), Nearby Object Photography (D-2), and Terrestrial Features (D-6) 210\n11.2 Celestial, Space and Terrestrial Radiometry 222\n11.3 Synoptic Terrain (S-5) and Weather (S-6) Photography 228\n11.4 Visual Acuity and Astronaut Visibility (S-8/D-13) and Vision Test (M-9) 233\n11.5 Electrostatic Charge (MSC-1) 242\n11.6 Zodiacal Light Photography (S-1) 243\n11.7 In-flight Exerciser (M-3) 243\n11.8 In-flight Phonocardiogram (M-4) 244\n11.9 Cardiovascular Reflex Conditioning (M-1) 244\n11.10 Cloud Top Spectrometer (S-7) 246\n11.11 Miscellaneous 248\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n12.0 PREMISSION PLANNING\n12.1 Mission Plan (Trajectory) 255\n12.2 Flight Plan 255\n12.3 Spacecraft Changes 255\n12.4 Mission Rules 256\n12.5 Experiments 256\n12.6 Training Activities 257\n\n13.0 MISSION CONTROL\n13.1 GO/NO GO 261\n13.2 PLA and CLA Updates 261\n13.3 Consumables 261\n13.4 Flight Plan Changes 264\n13.5 Systems 267\n13.6 Experiments Real-Time Updates 268\n\n14.0 TRAINING\n14.1 Gemini Mission Simulator 270\n14.2 LTV, DCPS 284\n14.3 MAC Engineering Simulator 285\n14.4 Centrifuge 286\n14.5 Translation and Docking Trainer 286\n14.6 Planetarium 288\n14.7 Systems Briefings 292\n14.8 Flight Experiments 293\n14.9 Spacecraft Systems Tests 294\n14.10 Egress Training 296\n14.11 Parachute Training 297\n14.12 Launch simulation 298\n14.13 Network Simulation 298\n14.14 Reentry Simulation 298\n14.15 Simulated Network Simulations 298\n14.16 Zero \"G\" Flights 299\n14.17 Flight Plan Training 300\n\n15.0 CONCLUDING COMMENTS\n15.1 Crew Quarters 302\n15.2 Physical Training and Aircraft Flying 303\n15.3 Sea Lab 304\n15.4 Watches and Clocks 304\n15.5 Miscellaneous Discrepencies 306\n15.6 Medical Aspects 310\n\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8.0 SYSTEMS OPERATIONS\n8.1 Platform\nCooper By day we used standard procedure of finding a zero yaw, which is a little easier to do down at about retro position. The nose is a little bit in the way for determining zero yaw unless you pitch down just a little past nose low in zero-zero position. When pitched down just a tiny bit, zero yaw was very readily apparent to within a fairly reasonable degree of accuracy, and then ease it right on up. We had lines for the zero-zero position to give us our pitch and roll on the horizon. This was the regular day alinement.\nNight was pretty much the same except we'd get zero yaw by a star, get roll and pitch by the zero lines on the window (or knowing where they were approximately) line this with the top of the airglow or the horizon. At that point you'd go into Cage, hold it there at that position until it caged) then uncage the platform to BEF or SEF whichever the case might be, and then to to Platform and Attitude on the FDM and FDI's. Then aline the platform fine aline SEF or BEF by keeping"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the needles zeroed. It would slowly gyro torque itself and correct out the small errors for fine alinement. Anything to add, Pete?\nConrad Well, I didn't hear all of that, but I think the alinement is straightforward. One thing I had not read in either the GT-3 or GT-4 debriefings on this subject on out the window alinement was that we have a window gage that you can use that will put you right on in roll and pitch and, of course, for yaw you still have to use the same out the window reference.\nCooper One thing that I think that should very definitely training wise be readily available and we looked and looked and looked and couldn't find any was an actual scale picture of the left hand window and the right hand window with what the horizon should look like at zero-zero-zero and at retro attitude and at minus 90 degrees left and 90 degrees right and at 60 degrees left and 60 degrees right and this type thing. I've never seen an actual drawing showing the horizon line on a window and what it should look like."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Yes\nCooper I think this would be a tremendous benefit and shouldn't be difficult to come up with.\nConrad If you place your eye so that it goes through the lower left corner of the right window or the lower right corner of the left window and run that eye position right through the front RCS yaw thruster, the lower yaw thruster in the front ring, I guess that's ring A, anyway, you take a line between your eye, the corner of the window and the front RCS yaw thruster, right through the middle of it, and put that line on the top of the airglow or the horizon. Then the spacecraft, and this looks like an excessively nose up attitude, but it's not, you're zero degrees in pitch then the window frame is just about vertical to the horizon and it forms a perpendicular angle.\nCooper The inside edge of the frame.\nConrad The inside up and down edge of the window corner makes a perpendicular angle to the horizon and you can use that as a roll gage. If you set it up"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that way that platform isn't off 4 or 5 degrees in roll or pitch.\nCooper So, it really looks like, when you first start lining it up, it appears to you that from the left seat that you're actually rolled left.\nConrad Yes, that's right.\nCooper And from your seat it would look like it was actually rolled right.\nCooper It doesn't look horizontal at all, but that's due to the fact that you're sitting off by this offset.\nConrad One other thing that you might say about platform alinement is that if you're not on in roll and pitch, mainly roll, this really will eat you up in alinement time.\nCooper Roll and yaw are the bad errors creators. Pitch you can be off a lot in and it'll correct right out.\nConrad Not if the other two (roll and yaw) are off.\nCooper But if you're off in roll and/or yaw then it really takes a long time and its real rough."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad You don't want to be deceived by the fact that the needles are holding in the center pretty well.\nCooper That's right, one thing that we found when we were going through this real, real long platform alinement prior to getting all lined up for retro-fire was that we had the needles all alined, they were sitting all glued out. But you have to sit there with them for a little bit glued out. They sit there all zeroed out, it looks like everything was all alined and all of a sudden yaw begin to ease off quite a bit showing that we weren't alined.\nConrad At one time we went to Orbit Rate when we had not pulled the yaw all the way in and, boy, it showed up in roll as we started moving around.\nCooper Orbit Rate and Horizon Scan.\nConrad I mean it showed up in the roll axis.\nCooper Oh, yes. Right.\nConrad You have to take the time and be careful with the platform alinement, no doubt about it."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"6\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tAnd it takes time to do it and do a really good\njob on it.\n\nModes. The only thing I can say about Cage is\nthat it takes an excessively long time to Cage.\n\nConrad\tI'll comment on this even though we didn't get a\nchance to do the rendezvous, but even in simulation,\nit was apparent and the little bit that we did in flight caging the platform, getting ready for alinements and things like that, it was very time consuming. I think that you could find use for a fast slave cycle.\n\nCooper\tVery much so.\n\nConrad\tFast Cage cycle is what I should say. I'll say it's a luxury item but it sure could be helpful.\n\nCooper\tSEF and BEF worked just like advertised. SEF for fine aline and small-end-forward, BEF for reversing your phase angles so that you're still steering to and fine alining blunt end forward.\n\nConrad\tJim and Ed made the comment that they never alined BEF, that they always alined SEF. We alined SEF normally through the flight and when we were ready\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"7\nCONFIDENTIAL\nto retro, we wanted to save as much fuel as possible, so we alined BEF and I think alining BEF is easier than in SEF.\n\nCooper\tYes.\n\nConrad\tI think you can tell yaw better going backwards than you can going forward.\n\nCooper\tYes.\n\nConrad\tI don't know why, maybe it was just psychological.\n\nCooper\tI agree with you, I really think you're right. I think you can tell it better. It streams away from you a little more.\n\nConrad\tYes. It was easier to pull in in yaw. I thought it was a little more comfortable feeling. I enjoyed the riding around alining the platform BEF much more than when we alined it SEF, and I felt we were closer to being on most of the time when we pulled it in in yaw.\n\nCooper\tOf course, we had a little better control system there, it does help.\n\nConrad\tYes.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tI think either way (SEF, BEF) is good, both worked very adequately and it just depends on which way you want to aline for what you're going to do. BEF is certainly at least as acceptable as SEF.\n\nORBIT RATE was not bad off at all. We didn't have any large errors in it due to the fact that we had more nearly circularized our orbit from the burns that we did.\n\nConrad\tWe were about at 171-60 at that time period. I don't know what they had picked as an orbit rate number at the end finally for the REP.\n\nCooper\tWe were about 107, 166.\n\nConrad\tYes. I was really surprised with how well the platform stayed on after just taking a quick look at zero-zero-zero, not even trying to aline these. We just passed freely through this in drifting flight and uncaged the platform right into Orbit Rate, and it didn't get off five or ten degrees in any of the three axis.\n\nCooper\tFor about 20 hours.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"9\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad\tYes, for about 20 hours that we drifted around. It was finally off the most in roll. It got about 15 degrees off in roll.\n\nCooper\tOrbit Rate worked very well.\n\nConrad\tOther than inertial work, I just didn't see any big advantage in free. You'd still think in terms of the local horizon up there most of the time.\n\nCooper\tYes.\n\nConrad\tWe just never had much occasion during the flight to use FREE.\n\nCooper\tPlatform displays.\n\nConrad\tBall operation through the poles was just fantastic! It was so smooth. The only way you could tell that you were going through a pole is you could see the roll index, vehicle is on the roll gimbal, flip.\n\nCooper\tYes. This is something we had trouble finding out, whether this was the case or not and we deliberately ran several specific checks of this.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"10\nCONFIDENTIAL\nRegardless of which way you approached it from, whether you approached it fast or slow or whether you're going through the 90 or 270 point on the ball, you can go right smack through the middle of it, you can sit right in the middle of it, you can move up or down, right or left and the ball doesn't jump, doesn't jitter, doesn't do anything. It's just beautiful.\n\nConrad\tYes.\n\nCooper\tWe did a burn right through each one of the poles.\n\nI think the controls are pretty similar to what they are in the simulator. There are two exceptions, one of which I think is valid and which I think may be influenced by the fact that we had a lot of slow degredation in our OAMS system. I thought that the PULSE system in the spacecraft had a lot less torque, a reasonable amount less torque and it got a lot less, as we went along it got less and less and less.\n\nConrad\tYes.\n\nCooper\tBut even initially, it felt like the PULSE system\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"had less authority in the spacecraft than it does in the simulator. On the other hand, I felt the RATE COMMAND system had a heck of a lot more authority in the spacecraft than it does in the simulator.\n\nCooper\tThat RATE COMMAND just flat snaps you in. In the simulator, when you come around in RATE COMMAND and you let off it will go through 5 to 10 degrees. You have to let off on it 5 to 10 degrees early. By golly, in the spacecraft you didn't have to let off even a degree early. When you let go, it stopped right there just like you put on the brakes.\n\nConrad\tYeah. It was good and it was tight.\n\nCooper\tIt was so tight that you almost had to - -\n\nConrad\tThat was OAMS Rate Command.\n\nCooper\tYou almost had the feeling that the OAMS Rate Command was almost bending the Adapter Section. It had such high torquing rate.\n\nConrad\tOn day 2 and 3, our OAMS system was working completely correct. I was extremely impressed"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"with how nice a control system it was. We made several maneuvers using this control system and didn't have any gripes on that system at all. As Gordo said we were really impressed with the Rate Command system.\n\nFCSD REP\tWhen you turned around 90 degrees in order to get rid of the REP, did you use the 8-ball?\n\nCooper\tYes.\n\nConrad\tFDI's are on this Gimbal flip business too, you see. They do that in the trainer, but they were steady as a rock in the spacecraft.\n\nCooper\tYes, we used the FDI's for the fine aline. Although to get there we used the 8-ball.\n\nConrad\tWe had trained to use the IVI's.\n\nFCSD REP\tThat's right.\n\nCooper\tWe used the IVI's, not the FDI's. We used the IVI's as the real fine measure of being lined up. We used the FDI's too.\n\nConrad\tYou can use anything in the spacecraft."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper\tYou can't use the FDI's or the 8-ball as a reference in the mission simulation because you have this gimbal flip which just gives you fits.\n\nWe didn't use Rate Command very much, mainly just for the burns. In fact, the burns are the only times we used Rate Command. I used the Direct system several times and I thought the Direct was really good. It was good and crisp and you had good authority with it.\n\nConrad\tI had the impression that the spacecraft was a lot more stable vehicle in Direct than it was in the simulator.\n\nCooper\tThat's right.\n\nConrad\tIn the simulator you tend to sit there and go too much and go too much. When Gordo'd stick a shot of Direct in to go someplace, it never showed up in another axis. An equal shot in the other direction would stop it right now.\n\nCooper\tYes.\n\nConrad\tThe effects momentum of the spacecraft didn't seem to be as great in flight as they were in the"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"simulator. You didn't have to lead as much.\n\nCooper\tThat's right.\n\nThe Direct system was a much more precise system in the spacecraft than it is in the simulator.\n\nConrad\tI thought it was quite easy to fly, but there's no doubt about it, boy, that Rate Command eats up the fuel."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper\tDirect uses quite a bit of fuel also.\n\nConrad\tWe did use a little fuel that one day. We were doing so many experiments in a row that we had to very rapidly get the spacecraft back to a zero-zero-zero or a pitch down 30 position. When you track one of these targets and come through the nadir and keep on going, boy, you're really smoking towards a rearward direction.\n\nCooper\tYou're sitting inverted BEF.\n\nConrad\tThat's right, you've got rates built up going away from you and you'd have to use Direct to stop those rates, get yourself moved all the way back up here and stop them again. Maybe it'd be so tight that you'd use Direct to get down and start on it, and then switch to Pulse and track in Pulse and then right back up and start doing something else. Well, we did eat up a lot of fuel that day, but we got everything done that day. We hit darned near all targets.\n\nCooper\tDirect is a real responsive, real fine way to maneuver."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"16\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tPlatform controls were very straight forward. I\nthought they all functioned as expected.\nConrad\tThe Platform took the full 25 minutes to go through\nthe fast heat, and the first time on it was really\ncold and took another 3 minutes worth before start\nof the Cage Cycle. After that, it seemed to stick\nright around 25 minutes to get the platform up and\non the line and start into Cage.\nCooper\tRight now, I've got extreme confidence in that\nPlatform. I really think it does well.\nConrad\tThe platform did an outstanding job during the\nentire flight.\nCooper\tIt sure did.\n8.2 OAMS\nCooper\tWe fired the OAMS on the pad and it was mushy. You\ncouldn't hear them fire just gas mainly. About\nthe third round of firings however, you could really\nfeel them fire off, they were all good.\nCooper\tDuring flight the OAMS started out very good and in\nabout the third day began to degrade. The fifth day\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"17\nCONFIDENTIAL\nis when we found the two thrusters that were not\noperating correctly.\nConrad\tThe number 8 thruster was working real good when we\nfound that the number 7 thruster was out. So we\nshut the system down again and had a big talk with\nHouston about this. We went one more revolution\nand they gave us some tests to perform on 7 and\nthat's when we discovered 8 wasn't working.\nConrad\tTwo of them quit, within an orbit of one another.\nCooper\tWe had already run complete tests on it and\nnumber 8 had been working on the previous tests and\nquit on the next one. The story of the old OAMS\ninflight system was that gradually as the days went\nby there was more, and more that went wrong with\nit until finally at the end we had less than half\nthe thrusters left and they were pretty bad.\nConrad\tI realized a couple of heater blankets were probably\nout on the OAMS system, but I'm still convinced\nuntil somebody convinces me otherwise, that the\nthing that shot the OAMS system down, was the\ndecision to turn off the OAMS heater. I had ques-\nioned the decision in the air to only point that\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"18\nCONFIDENTIAL\nI could. I didn't think we were in that much\ntrouble for electrical power. I still think it\nwas a mistake because I think even with a couple\nof blankets out, if we'd have kept the system warm\nwith the rest of the heaters, we'd have never froze\nthem up.\nCooper\tThe thrusters themselves were actually working\nbecause you could actually get a glow off of them.\nThere was a little bit of fuel or oxidizer coming\nout of it and burning, but it wasn't getting the\nproper amount of mixture ratio.\nConrad\tNow, they could have been dirty. That could be it,\nbut it was purely in the valves in the thrusters\nthemselves because they were putting out thrust\neven at the end. If you wanted to hold it in full\nDirect with 7 and 8 circuit breaker engaged, you\nwere getting wet fuel thrust.\nCooper\tYes. You were getting a little wet thrust.\nConrad\tLet's go into how the whole thing occurred. We\nhad shut the heater down a long time ago and we\nreally hadn't agreed with that, but there wasn't\nmuch we could do about it. We were in the middle\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"19\nCONFIDENTIAL\nof doing experiments on the fifth day, and we had\nhad a little trouble alining the platform. What\nwas happening, apparently was the number 7 thruster\nwas getting cranky, but we also knew we were vent-\ning hydrogen and we knew this because we were\ngetting some torqueing out of that. At the time\nGordo was having trouble alining the Platform, we\nthought it was because the hydrogen was venting.\nFinally Gardo said, \"There's something wrong with t\nthe control systems.\" Once we decided there was\nsomething wrong with the control system, that's\nwhen it went just like back in the simulator. We\nshut everything down, went to Direct, thought about\nit for a second and turned off all the circuit\nbreakers, turned them all back on one at a time,\ntested all of the thrusters and, sure enough, when\nwe got to number 7, it was out, completely out.\nConrad\tSo then I tried secondary ACME bias power. We\ntried the seconday yaw and the secondary attitude\ndrivers with no effect so we were relatively as-\nsured that something had happened in either the\nhand controller or the fuel was not feeding. We\ndecided to power down right there, which we did,\nand we advised flight of what the problem was. I\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthink that's about the time we really decided the\nscanner wasn't any good, or had we already told\nthem about that?\nCooper\tYes. We'd already told them about that.\nConrad\tYes, you're right. I know what it was. That's\nwhen we discovered that the voice tape was out.\nWe were right in the middle of several experiments\nand it occurred approximately like 16:30:54 on\nthe fifth day. We reported to Houston that the\nvoice tape was out, the number 7 yaw left thruster\nwas out and that I had turned the OAMS heater back\non. I was suspicious of that all the time. That's\nwhen they called up and gave us this minimum power\ndown. Why did we go into that? They had us power\ndown everything.\nCooper\tAt about the same time that we came up with this,\nthey came up with this idea that the hydrogen was\nboiling off so fast that we were going to be out of\nhydrogen by about the end of the fifth day at the\nrate we were going if we didn't power down and stop\nthe usage of it.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tYes. That's when we came around on the next\nrevolution. They had us fire up everything again\nto take a look at it and that's when we found out\nnumber 8 had just gone down the tubes too. But\nnumber 8 was still giving us something; number 8\nwas still burning, but it was burning off mixture.\nYou could see a flame.\n\nCooper\tYou could see a glow out of it.\n\nConrad\tYou couldn't hear it like you could hear the other\nthrusters, but you could see lights on the night\nside so you knew something was coming out. The\ndrivers just weren't opening all the way or some-\nthing.\n\nFCSD REP\tThe fifth day at 16:30 is the first problem you\nhad with the OAMS, is that right?\n\nConrad\tNo, earlier. When we first powered the system\nup, we were having trouble with that very first\nplatform alining and we felt we were having some\nhydrogen venting problems. That's when we drifted\nway off, and Gordo said, \"The Pulse system isn't\ngoing to hack this hydrogen venting.\" He went\nto Direct and blipped the yaw left thrusters."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"All kinds of garbage came by the spacecraft. It\nlooked like we blew a whole bunch of junk out of it.\nI remember distinctly seeing gold balls.\n\nCooper\tGreat big balls of liquid.\n\nConrad\tSo it must have been raw fuel. Something at this\ntime wasn't working right, but I guess number 8\nwas putting out full thrust and number 7 was still\nworking but not all the way. Now maybe right then\nand there if we'd have really worked that system\nover; fired all the thrusters in Direct and a\ncouple of good healthy loads through it, and put\nthe heaters back on the line, we might have sal-\nvaged the w\nvaged the whole system. It must have been right\nat the point of freezing up.\n\nCooper\tThis was early in the fifth day."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tWe didn't hit the direct thrusters long enough to\nheat them I don't think. I do distinctly remember\nsaying to Gordo \"We blew all this junk out of there.\"\n\nConrad\tWe'd never seen anything like that before and we'd\nbeen up there 5 days and seen all sorts of things.\nWe could see liquid oxygen when we vented it, if we\nvented it under the right light conditions. We\ncould see when we vented hydrogen under the right\nlighting conditions. It would all float by the\nspacecraft and at low sun angles, either at sunup\nor sundown any one of these quantities, ECS O2,\nCRYO O2, or RSF hydrogen, you could see it come\nwhistling by the spacecraft. We were continually\nfloating around in these old silver balls of either\nhydrogen or oxygen.\n\nCooper\tOkay, well that was pretty well the background of\nwhat happened. Some thrusters that had checked\nout good would subsequently check out bad or be\ncompletely inoperative as the days went by. So\nfinally we wound up with maybe half of the total\nOAMS thrusters still operating properly."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tWe had some thrust remaining in every axis but yaw\nleft. We had some in yaw left if you just wanted\nto dump raw fuel overboard. I don't know whether\nit was fuel or oxidizer.\n\nCooper\tGenerally, what we'd do is roll and pitch to get\nour yaw left.\n\nConrad\tIf we were tumbling and wanted to damp we just\nwaited until we translated into the right axis in\nwhich we had some authority.\n\nCooper\tThe one axis that always seemed to work pretty good\nso far as control authority was pitch.\n\nConrad\tYes\n\nCooper\tPitch up and pitch down seemed to work reasonably\nwell all the time.\n\nConrad\tYes. I wonder if that had something to do with the\npitch thruster lines on the manifold being close\nto the source. Pitch was always good. Our trouble\nwas mainly coupling in the yaw thrusters both right\nand left.\n\nCooper\tSource pressure was easy to monitor. Source temper-\nature we could monitor and it was too cold."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tIt ran down in the 48 degree area.\n\nCooper\tIt showed that it was running too cold. That's why\nwe questioned turning the OAMS heater off.\n\nCooper\tRegulated pressure was fine.\n\nConrad\tRight on the money.\n\nCooper\tPropellant quantity seemed to read reasonably good\nuntil it got down towards the end. At that point\n(from about 10 percent on down) the propellant\nquantity just went on down to the bottom of the\nscale. It was reading below zero and yet ground\nreadouts indicated OAMS propellant quantity remaining.\n\nCooper\tMonitoring of OAMS propellant remaining onboard\ninformation was fairly good.\n\nConrad\tYes. I thought we were fairly close.\n\nCooper\tGround information agreed fairly good with onboard\ninformation in general.\n\nConrad\tThe whole OAMS systems got to be reviewed. I\nthink that they think we wasted a lot of fuel and\nI think that on day 3 we probably were a little\novergenerous with our fuel usage. But I'm still"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"26\nCONFIDENTIAL\nconvinced that because we went so long with the OAMS heater off that we were not burning a nominal fuel to oxidizer ratio.\nCooper\tYes. Even though we were in a rush to get a lot of these things done, I was still extremely conscious of fuel usage. Although I'd used Direct to get it started, I wouldn't just fire all the way around in Direct input, let it coast around, and then stop it right there.\nConrad\tYes. I never saw fuel usage in the simulator like we saw in flight.\nCooper\tIt just seemed to go down very rapidly on the gauge during that one period of time.\nConrad\tAnd yet we went night after night all night long in Horizon Scan or in Pulse and would hardly use any fuel at all. As a matter of fact, the ground gave me the figures. This was when we were running all night long in Horizon Scan so that we had a nice reference. They said \"You're using about 2 pounds a night.\" Now, that seems like a reasonable amount for what we were doing.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"27\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tWe were using it for Attitude Hold and for getting pictures and to get through the day side.\nConrad\tOh Yes. We never used Rate Command except for the maneuver burns.\nCooper\tWe were tracking the missile using Diredt. Had to get on it in a rush so I went to Direct.\nConrad\tI questioned propellant quantity prior to lift-off. It was 87 percent at lift-off. I thought we were supposed to be 100 percent on the gage at lift-off. I thought we had propellant quantity loaded to the maximum?\nCooper\tWell, they said we were about 50 pounds under.\nConrad\tYes, they said we had about 50 pounds less fuel than we were supposed to have.\nCooper\tWe asked them about this before we lifted off.\nCooper\tAt about 4 or 5 minutes before lift-off, we asked them about this.\nConrad\tWe got a \"We're checking\" and that's the last we heard from it. And off we went.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"28\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tSo then we asked again when we were in orbit, \"About this underload on OAMS fuel\". I suspect that something was fouled up because we didn't get a full OAMS load. That was pretty bad.\nCooper\tI think monitoring onboard of propellant remaining to complete the mission was pretty good. The forecast fuel for mission completion of Gemini V ought to be reviewed because somebody didn't quite come up with the right fuel figures. Twenty-six percent remaining after the REP would not have been nearly enough to have done the remainder of the mission.\nConrad\tYes. I think that in computing the amount of fuel used to perform a maneuver, they figure out how much to get the rates going but they must stop there. They must not figure how much fuel it takes you to get back to, say, zero-zero-zero. Apparently they assume that whenever you get done with a tracking maneuver, you just drift to get back to zero-zero-zero. Over the U.S. we had maybe 6 or 7 minutes between a 30 degree pitch-down target to the next 30 degree pitch-down target. You've got to track it all the way through, bring the spacecraft all the way back up and then go to and track the next target.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"29\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tAnd stop your rate at the back.\nConrad\tAs a matter of fact, that's about twice the fuel usage. They may take this into account, I doubt it. They're very conservative on their estimates.\nCooper\tSelector controls and switches were all right. Attitude controller was fine. Maneuver controllers. We had every intention of checking the right one and we never did check it because of other problems. Inflight malfunction irregularities we've already covered pretty well.\nCooper\tAttitude Control Modes, Rate Command was excellent. Reentry Rate Command we never checked.\nConrad\tI don't even think you need it.\nCooper\tAnd I think it could be removed from the spacecraft as far as I'm concerned. I never used or need it on the simulator. I never liked it.\nConrad\tPilots aren't going to tolerate these higher rates. They will damp before these rates are reached.\nCooper\tDirect is a good mode. There's nothing at all wrong with Direct. I thought it was much crisper, much crisper in the spacecraft than in the simulator\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"30\nCONFIDENTIAL\nshows that it is. The Pulse mode was very economical on fuel and I felt that in the simulator you had a little more authority than you actually did in the spacecraft. The spacecraft had slightly less authority in Pulse than the simulator does. Incidentally, you can use Pulse just for a month of Sundays and never see the fuel go down on the OAMS gage at all. You can use Pulse all day long with using little fuel usage. Horizon scan, the primary Scanner was inoperative as was stated earlier. The Secondary Scanner worked fine. The scanners, I think, operated quite satisfactorily. We had a lot of scanner dropout in the primary and even in the secondary. We had some dropout in the secondary when we first were going in and out of sunlight areas.\nConrad\tBut then it seemed to work allright.\nCooper\tHorizon Scan Control Mode worked fine. Real good.\nConrad\tIt's a loose mode but it still works fine.\nCooper\tIt's got wide limits on it of course, which is okay. The mode itself works fine. There was something really fouled up in the platform mode. It didn't work at all like it's supposed to. The platform mode is supposed to be plus or minus 5/10th of a degree. If it was plus or minus 10 degrees I'll eat my hat.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad I thought it held to about a degree and a half.\nCooper Not in yaw, you remember. It allowed yaw to wander off by probably a good 10 degrees there. Remember it allowed right yaw to wander off by about 10 degrees and just sit off there in right yaw several times. It wouldn't even bring it back.\nConrad Yes. That was the trouble.\nFCSD Rep Do you think this had anything to do with your control problem?\nCooper Well, it may have been. It may have been that control was somewhat intermittent right there. I don't know, but it might have been. But Rate Command sure worked good using those same controls.\nConrad Yes. I suspect that being the first time that it was cranked up since spacecraft number 2, it may not have been tweeked as well as it could have been.\nConrad It certainly didn't work like it did on the simulator, I'll put it that way.\nCooper It didn't work properly, and it was no good the way it was. We never used it after we originally tried it out and after we'd tried doing this one burn on it to see if it would hold. The one that it did hold on, our first perigee adjust, it held beautifully. During the next one, it got so bad it wasn't any"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"good. There again, it might have been a function of the thrusters going out.\nIn any event, I think that's an error that somebody needs to look into. I'm not sure that platform mode is doing what it should. I know that, theoretically, and by the diagrams on it and the limits that it ought to be a very precise control mode.\nCooper Spacecraft separation at SECO + 20 couldn't have been better, just fine. Translation perigee adjust went like clockwork.\nConrad That was our first real burn and I think we got something like 9.6 ft/sec on the IVI instead of 10.0, but the burn wasn't that critical.\nConrad I checked accelerometer bias and it seemed like the accelerometer bias increased later in the flight.\nI specifically checked it for the REP and it was okay. I'd just set up zeros in the window and went to Catch-Up and they stayed zero for 3 or 4 minutes or longer. So that satisfied me. I checked it later on in the flight and I don't think we ran more than a minute and we clicked up a foot per second on the fore-aft window. That can be checked on the tape. In the beginning it was entirely acceptable for the REP."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper I think we had some bias, just how much I don't know. The timing of the translation was fine, updating was fine. Operations and checklist were okay. Computer usage, okay.\nConrad It was easier to make a burn on the simulator that had no up-down or left and right in it than it was in the spacecraft. Gordo did a real good job of tracking on every burn and I didn't see it wander hardly at all.\nCooper And all the IVI's would be zero.\nConrad And all the IVI's would be zero, but we'd have 4/10 of a foot in one axis and 6/10 in another.\nConrad Yes. The worst cross-coupling, we had 8/10 in one axis, and when we burned in the platform mode, but we were checking that. It could have been accelerometer bias again, or, the spacecraft is more sensitive to picking up up-down and left-right velocities than I thought it was.\nConrad Gordo did a real good job of tracking. He tracked as well as he did in the simulator and we never had this show up in another axis in the simulator.\nCooper It would be zero, zero, zero in the simulator.\nConrad It was hardly worth my time checking address 81 and 82 in the simulator because I could just tell he"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"wasn't going to have any velocities in there, and very seldom did. But we never failed to have fairly sizeable ones, like 3/10 and 4/10 fps, in another axis and I'm not quite sure how it got there. I guess the spacecraft is extremely sensitive. If you're going to make precise burns, you've gotta really burn precisely and if you want to take out the errors, take out the address 81 and 82 errors so that you don't introduce anything else. During the difficult rendezvous maneuvers, you have to plan on more fuel usage because you're going to have to take it out with the up-down thrusters.\nCooper I think what you're going to have to do is stop short of burning off all your forward or aft velocity, particularly the forward velocity, and then use the canted thrusters to burn off the right-left and up-down and that will take out part of the remainder of the forward velocity. If it hasn't taken it all out, then bleep out the rest of the forward. I think that's the only way you can do it if you want to burn them all to zeros. I don't believe you can track any more precisely if you keep all your IVI's zeroed right down the money. If you burn it off and stop just at the right time so that everything should turn"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"up zero, then you still wind up with 4/10, 5/10, or 6/10 in all your windows. I just don't know how you're ever going to do any better than that. (Unless you use the above procedure).\nCooper Translation REP deployment was passable.\nFCSD Rep This one you didn't. You didn't fire back at the REP after jettison?\nCooper No.\nFCSD Rep Let's replace this maneuver with the simulated operation (phantom rendezvous).\nCooper We did deploy the REP and the radar did operate properly.\nFCSD Rep Originally when the debriefing guide was made out, this section covered the translation back after REP deployment and the subsequent translations.\nCooper Okay.\nFCSD Rep We'll just have to use the translations that they made on the simulated run.\nCooper We kicked the REP out at 90 degrees right yaw.\nConrad We kicked it out at 02 07 + 15, or 15 seconds late.\nCooper The reason we were 15 seconds late, as we stated earlier, was that going into the night side the night before, after all our careful platform alinements, all of a sudden the horizon scanner began to drop"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"out on us and we began to drift off in yaw.\nConrad\tDropping out wouldn't have been bad, but when it\ndropped out it also commanded some thrusting.\nCooper\tWe got some real good blips out of it.\nConrad\tWe were alining in the Horizon Scan Mode and I got\nthe impression that it pitched us up.\nCooper\tWe were already alined, and we had gone to Orbital\nRate and Horizon Scan, just to come along there in\ntime to go in. As soon as we had the platform all\nalined, and before we went in on the night side, I\ndecided I would realine the platform just very\nbriefly. So I had gone to SEF and to PULSE and I\nwas checking and pulsing it. But because then in\nSEF position all your torquing is done from your\nHorizon Scanner. When the Horizon Scanner began to\ndrop out we began to get real erratic needle display\nand it looked like our platform alinement was deteri-\norating. I was trying to correct this, but\nobviously, it was really kicking us off. That was\nwhen we went to CAGE, tried desperately to get it\ncaged and realined in time, and thought we had it\nrealined. We may have had it reasonably well alined\nby the time we finally yawed right. It looked like\nit was. The needles were all zeroed out and"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"everything was settled down. The Horizon Scanner\nwas working at that point. It quit working properly\nafter we turned to yaw right. We had already gone\ninto Orbital Rate, so we could care less about the\nscanner at this point. We got it alined, and we're\nalready in Orbital Rate. We yawed right, got squared\naway and 15 seconds late ejected the REP on the\nIVI's all zeroed. We then used a couple of DIRECT\npulses, zipped back around, picked it up going around\nto the 270. It was going right straight out to 270\non our ball. We could see the REP light whenever we\nwere passing through the 90 degree point. On my side,\nI could see it flashing on the nose. By the time we\ngot around it was in quite close, we could see it\ngoing out with a very slow tumble rate, flashing.\nFCSD Rep\tWhat would you estimate the tumble rate to be?\nCooper\tIt was tumbling very slowly, I would say maybe a\nhalf to 1 degree per second.\nConrad\tI'd say a degree per second.\nConrad\tI couldn't tell what it was in roll. It didn't seem\nto be tumbling in more than 2 axes.\nCooper\tThat was hard to tell.\nConrad\tWhen I saw it, you could see the dipole come around.\nWe couldn't tell anything about roll, but it was not"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"38\ntumbling in the other axes. The blanket was sitting\nright next to it.\nCooper\tThe blanket went out and was sitting right by it. It\nwent right on out with it. That was the funny part of\nit. The blanket was between the REP and us.\nConrad\tYes.\nCooper\tThe blanket goes out first. The REP has a lot more\nmementum, apparently the REP had gone by the blanket.\nApparently it had either hit it or moved it over or\nsomething because the blanket was between us and the\nREP.\nConrad\tYes. I don't know exactly what happened there.\nCooper\tIt was just a few feet outside of the REP. The REP\nwent straight on out to 270, radar was working fine,\nreading out everything just right, locked on, and went\nout to the point where it should have started slowing\ndown.\nConrad\tThis is where I had a mistake in the flight plan and\ndidn't catch it. The computer was in PRELAUNCH and I\nwas wondering why I couldn't get any digital readout.\nIt took me a few seconds to catch on to that one and\nI realized that I had to get the computer into\nCATCH-UP. We had never run into this problem where\nwe'd gone through a complete insertion checklist"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"39\nwhich calls for putting the computer to CATCH-UP.\nI had gone through and zeroed 25, 26, and 27, taking\nthe ascent routine numbers out of it. So that I knew\nthat we were getting the right readings. I had put\nthe computer back in PRELAUNCH, also had this discus-\nsion at that time and that's when I didn't blow the\ncold IR doors until the REP was out.\nCooper\tI've said it before, and I also said it after my\nMercury flight; that is, \"If you continually shove\nthings in on people very early in the flight, the\nquality of it is going to be degraded.\" You need the\nfirst two or three orbits to check the systems over,\nto get oriented, learn how to aline the platform, to\nlearn how to use the systems, to learn where things\nare, to do these things before you start giving\npeople complicated tasks. You just aren't going to\nget the quality out of them unless they're flying\nexactly the same vehicle for the second or third\ntime and they're very experienced in it and they're\nfamiliar with everything that's onboard and there's\nno change in equipment, no change in control system,\nno change in any of these things. Then, perhaps they\ncould leap right off and go right into the first\norbit and do these things. But to put somebody into"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"40\na strange vehicle, with strange control systems that\nyou've only simulated as about best you can, and no\nvisual simulation available for doing anything out-\nthe-window; you just cannot expect people to stay\nright on top of things when it occurs in the first\npart of the flight. This is an ideal example; we\nhad worked and worked and worked and worked and\nworked to have our timing down just right. If noth-\ning had happened, we would have had our timing down\njust right and everything would have gone just per-\nfect. Pete would have been right on his checklist\nand blown the cold IR doors right on time.\nCooper\tI'd have been right exactly on time on getting the\nREP out and everything would have gone peach-keen.\nJust that one thing, the Horizon Scanner failure,\nreally threw the skids to the thing and caused us\nto be running slightly late. There was added con-\nfusion in trying to figure out how to get things\ngoing and salvage the whole thing really threw the\nskids to it.\nCooper\tThe REP went out and it continued going out instead\nof slowing down as it should. It continued to move\non out at quite a separation rate. The thing that\nstill has us a little puzzled, instead of slowing"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"down and coming to a null out there, it appeared to\nstart moving somewhat at the same separation rate to\nthe south of us slightly towards a trail position very\nslowly. We tracked it for a long time. We were track-\ning it straight out and then all of a sudden, it be-\ngan to loop around slightly to the left.\nConrad It did something like I'd never seen before!\nCooper I'd never seen this happen in the simulator, and\nit still doesn't seem quite feasible to us that this\ncould ever happen.\nConrad One possible answer, and it's related to something\nthat we saw later in the flight, Gordo, where we\nalined the platform and had yaw error couple into\nroll. Might not this have given us bad steering in-\nformation as far as our radar needles were concerned\nif the scanner wasn't working properly? We didn't\nhave the platform alined right. We went along\n30 minutes, almost one-third of an orbit. If we\ndidn't have an alined platform, that would start\ncoupling up in some other axis like roll and we\nwould be off in yaw. Then when we thought we were\npointing at the pole, we really weren't. Maybe it\ndidn't really drift behind us, maybe it stayed out\non our wing. We must have put it out fairly well"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"out of plane, in that it hung around us so darned long.\nCooper It stayed with us for 20 orbits!\nConrad We saw it until the light burned out. It was never\nfar away from us. During five night cycles it was\nclose enough that the flashing light illuminated the\nspacecraft. At the proper times, when we would get\nnodal crossing, when we turned around and actually\nsaw the REP it was very close.\nCooper We thought we were going to hit it.\nConrad It was bright enough to illuminate the spacecraft and\nthe flashing light really impressed me.\nFCSD Rep Did you take pictures?\nConrad Yes, I think we have some 70-mm Hasselblad pictures\nand I took 16-mm moving pictures.\nCooper That was the last of the REP exercise.\nConrad I understand all the movie film came out, too. So\nyou'll have pictures of it.\nCooper At this point, we were rapidly running out of cryo-\ngenic fuel cell oxygen. We decided that the only way\nwe were going to salvage the flight was to stop\nusing it at this rapid a rate. We had to make the\nchoice whether we were going to power down and con-\ntinue the flight, or whether we were going to end\nthe flight very abruptly if it continued going down"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"at this rate.\nCooper We had a short discussion on this and decided that we'd\nbetter power down and forget the REP because we were\nin trouble.\nCooper So we tearfully decided to give up the REP and power\ndown. Houston agreed with us when we got in touch with\nthem that we had done the right thing. That ended the\nREP. We did see it for quite a few orbits later.\nThen Houston came up with the simulated Agena ren-\ndezvous exercise, which they put on one of their\ncomputers. The three burns they gave us to do went\noff very satisfactorily, the thrusters worked very\nwell. They would not allow us to use anything but the\naft firing thrusters because they wanted to keep the\ncryogenic oxygen in the right position in the cryo\ntanks. Apparently the burns went to their satisfac-\ntion too. They seemed to feel that it put us right\nwhere we should be.\nCooper We tried one of these burns with the Platform Mode.\nIt did not work satisfactorily so I used Rate Command\nwhich worked very well.\nConrad We tried to take the errors out and that's where we got\ninto trouble. We had about a 3/10 error left and right\nand a 3/10 error up and down, so Gordo fired off the 3/10"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"left and right. We wound up with too much going\nforward and we started to back up and suddenly we\nremembered we couldn't back up so then we\ndecided well, we'd just leave the errors on\nthe burn and burn it the best we could\nbecause no matter what happened we're going\nto translate into forward and what we should\nhave done and we didn't think of it at the\ntime--but you learn--we shouldn't have\nburned all the forward--we should have\nburned down to about a foot of what we\nwere supposed to have forward and then taken\nout the left, right, up and down and go\nahead and burn the forward again.\nFCSD rep The updates that they sent you on--\nConrad That worked fine. There was no problem.\nWe copied the numbers down, entered the\ncomputer. We had plenty of time to make\nthe maneuver. We burned right on the clock\nas advertised and we seemed to have gotten\napproximately in the position they wanted\nus to get to.\nFCSD rep What burns did you simulate?\nConrad Well, we did a--I've got them right here."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper We did a separation burn and we did a closing\nburn and a coelliptic burn. Those the ones\nwe did, Pete?\nConrad Well, it was--\nCooper We did not a standard coelliptic--it was\na--\nConrad No, we did a maneuver burn, which as--wait\na minute--we did an apogee adjust maneuver\nwhich was a retrograde of 20.1 feet, then\nwe did a phase adjust maneuver which was a\nforward burn of 15 feet. No.\nCooper Yeah.\nConrad 15.8 feet, then we did an out-of-plane\nburn, yawed left 90° of 15 feet and then\nwe did a reverse coelliptic burn--\nConrad We burned--let's see--we burned 16.4 feet\nforward and we did four burns altogether.\nFCSD rep Aft thrusters for all?\nConrad Aft thrusters for all--on out-of-plane--\nand that was the only time that we did\never, ever fly the translational left,\nright, up, down thrusters. We used them\nto take out some of the IVI readings there"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"a couple of times. And they were very\nstraight forward--left, right, up, down.\nCooper\tWe even fired the forward-one quick little\nblip.\nConrad\tWe fired the forward one then we suddenly\nremembered we weren't supposed to.\nFCSD rep\tWhat kind of visual out-the-window did\nyou see on these translations? In other\nwords--\nCooper\tLeft/right lights things up real well--\nI could see the glow from the aft--they\nwere--\nConrad\tJ. B. is referring to visual cues on the\nhorizon and we were on the gages--\nCooper\tThey were at night--middle of the night--\neverything we did was in the middle of the\nnight--this spacecraft only ran in the\nmiddle of the night (laughter).\nConrad\tI really don't remember making a burn--\nCooper\tWe never did anything in the day--\nConrad\tYeah, I think one or two of them were on\nthe day side--but by and large--\nCooper\tI never did so much night work in my life--"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FCSD rep\tOK- well, I don't think there is much we can\nadd then--did you get all of these readings\nout of--\nConrad\t80-81-82-58-59-69- Yeah, that stuff works\njust like the simulator. We got the readings.\nCooper\tOK - On to 8.3 - RCS.\n8.3 RCS\nFCSD rep\tLet's go into the RCS - yeah, I don't think\nthere is anything more--\nCooper\tThis is all--\nConrad\tYeah, this is all we can do on the REP.\nCooper\tOK-RCS Operational Checks - We did just like\nwe had planned in our little book. We\nactivated the RCS and Check Ring A and ACME\nand direct--all three axis- Ring B - Check\nRing B in ACME and direct--all three axis\nand they worked beautifully.\nFCSD rep\tHow about the pad checks--were they--\nCooper\tNegative\nFCSD rep\tNo pad checks?\nConrad\tNot with the sealed system--\nCooper\tA sealed system - I'm glad it was--\nCooper\tControl Modes - We used pulse and we used\nhorizon scan--"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tWe didn't even check reentry rate command--\nCooper\tWe used direct, used pulse. We used the\nrate command. We used horizon scan.\nConrad\tI know what it was--why don't you tell\nthem about this--and I'm going to see if I\ncan get the fuel figures--\nCooper\tOK. And they all worked very adequately.\nI thought the rate command system, I mean\nthe RCS system was an excellent system.\nIt was really crisp and just really, I\nthought, it was a real good solid system.\nRate command was much more--\nFCSD rep\tWhat about the retrofire - how did it\nhold retrofire?\nCooper\tBeautifully, it was just no effort at all--\nhold--\nFCSD rep\t± 1 degree or less?\nCooper\tOh, yeah, easily. We had a little offset\nin number 3 and number 4. I could feel\nthem offsetting us. I just cranked in a\nlittle bit of RCS. Boy, it just glued it\nright in there, it just wasn't about--\nI felt like we could have had four or five\ntimes the offset we had--and never have"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"budged it off there. RCS, I mean the rate\ncommand--One thing on rate command before\nretrofire and just after retrofire, waiting\nfor retrojet, and then starting the pitch\nup to go up and roll over inverted and go\nto zero lift, the dual ring rate command\nis just more than you can handle. It's\njust a lot more than control authority than\nyou want--you tend to over-shoot on things\nbecause there is just so much control\ntorque in there. As I had stated, after\nI fired retro and jettisoned the retropack\nand pitched up to roll over then from\nthereon I went to single ring pulse, and\nused that. Reentry rate command--we didn't\nuse. Direct - used direct to do the reentry\non single ring direct and used the pulse\nmode from retrojet to 400K.\nFCSD rep\tOn the single ring direct reentry did you\nhave--did you feel like you had all the\nauthority you wanted?\nCooper\tYeah--until very late--as I stated some\ntime down, oh, half way thru the reentry"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"where you really begin to get the high g,\nafter your high g, in fact, along about\ncoincidental with a real high g, when you\nbegin to get some fairly good oscillations,\nvery rapid rate, I had no problems damping\nthem at all but I didn't have the time to\nkeep switching back and forth from rate to\nattitude and go back to rate and damp them\nreal quick and then go back to attitude and\ndecide where I was on the guide and then\ngo back to rate and damp them and go back\nto guidance, so I finally--they got to\ngetting fairly good where I had to devote\na little bit of time to damping them, and\nI finally just went to guidance and stayed on\nguidance and just flicked over to single ring\nrate command to damp the oscillations and\nthen used the attitude control in the rate\ncommand to steer the computer steers. Which\nworked out very well and there was--there\nnever was really any oscillating-you never\nreally--I could go to rate on there and you\ncould hardly ever see the rate needles"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"jiggle--single ring was holding it just as tight as could be. Retrofire attitude control - I had already mentioned on there-dual ring. Rate Command, reentry attitude control--I had already mentioned how we shot the reentry. No primary heater lights. Heater lights on the RCS - they were on practically--we had the heater on 99 percent of the whole flight. We turned it off, got heater lights on Ring A first, brought the RCS heaters on then rechecked-heater light went off and turned the heater off and about five or ten minutes later-fifteen minutes later, the heater light came on and then it was on Ring B and we turned the heater back on and this went on five or six times and finally we just turned the heater on and left it on the whole flight. I monitored the temperatures frequently throughout the whole flight in the RCS Ring A - temperature ran about 70 degrees or about 65 degrees and the RCS Ring B temperature ran about 70 to 72 degrees the entire flight. At"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"one time I noted the RCS Ring B was up to 80 degrees. I watched it quite closely for a while and then it never went beyond that and came on back down to about 70. And they stayed there essentially the whole flight. I think you need those heaters on obviously the whole--all the time--I'd never have any of them off at all now. Thruster firing comments. When the RCS thrusters fire at night they blank out whatever you are looking at in the night side. The only way you are going to use any night attitude reference is to watch what you are doing, get lined up in a reference and then fire a thruster and plan on waiting a few seconds before you can tell where you are at again. They really light up the place. When you are firing them at night.\nFCSD rep\nCooper\nHow far does the flame stick out?\nThe plume goes out about--appears to go out about 4 feet and the plume is just the width of the outside diameter of that thruster as it comes out--it has a little bit of expansion ratio as it comes out and it goes"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"right up just about that size--it grows very slightly but not a heck of a lot and so it's just about something in the order of 4 inches diameter. Something like that--it has little expansion ratio--it expands as it comes out the nozzle slightly, and then it just goes sort of like a column and it fans out very slightly but it goes up something in the order of 4 to 5 feet distance from the thruster.\nFCSD rep\nCooper\nDid you ever get any pictures of that?\nNo, we didn't. We had all our cameras stowed at the time we got that cranked up.\nWe intended to. Systems Shutdown - It worked just like advertised and we turned the prop valves off, very shortly then it runs out of fuel and stops firing and you notice that there is a little burning around all the nozzles. There we got a little residual fuel--not much--just a little bit--it dribbles and fumes after impact--probably very neglible. I don;t really think we got them after impact, I think we got them while still airborne. But they were almost"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"neglible--you had to really be looking for them to tell they were there. There was just a very slight musty odor in there--fume. Not sure--I'm not sure that part of this odor isn't part of the ablating going on because fiberglass ablates with pretty high fume rates. Some pretty pungent fumes off-ablating fiberglass\n8.4 ECS\nThe mobility of the suit is no better or no worse than any other suit. It--suit definitely cuts you down and decreases mobility. In anything you do, it just limits you in what you can do, limits the movements you can make and I'm talking about unpressurized mobility at this point even. We didn't do any pressurized work in the cockpit but to unpressurize the suit definitely cuts you down a great deal in your mobility and where you can reach and takes up a great deal of room. Pressure - Are they talking about pressurized suit work here?\nFCSD rep\nWell, since you didn't do any pressurized, how about the half pound and--"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper\nYeah, when you are sealed up in it it gives you about a half a psi in pressure in there which doesn't decrease your mobility a great deal over what the regular suit does. Temperature in the suit, I certainly can't complain there. I had to sort of eat crow on that. That suit circuit ran consistently. We had to really shut it completely down to get above 55 degrees temperature on the suit heat exchanger outlet and generally it ran around 50 degrees which just froze my rear off and I had my suit flow.. the general configuration we had was both of us had the suit flow rates quite a bit back. I had mine clear back to almost a minimum position and we had the suit coolant loop shut down to where it was just about a half to one notch open from the fully OFF position. I really got quite concerned that they were going to freeze us to death. In fact one whole night side I had my suit inlet exhaust hoses off and laying down alongside the seat because it was just too cold in the suit. Humidity."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"56\nCONFIDENTIAL\nThe suit seemed to run pretty dry. I wasn't\nconscious of any great amount of perspiration\nin it at all. A couple of times when we\nhad fairly heavy work loads I was aware of\nthe feeling of cool air and felt\nlike it was drying sweat. CO2. We got 2\nor 3 indications of CO2 on the PCO2 gage.\nOne thing, whenever a station sends you a\ncalibrate, well, you get a big jump on that\ngage but there were other times when we\nweren't even near a station when that\ngage came up and began to give an indication\nand one time it gave such a positive\nindication for quite a period of time that\nwe got a little concerned about it because\nit was right when all this other stuff was\ngoing, on day 5 and we'd shut down control\nsystems had failed and we were destined for\n3 days of drifting and the PCO2 started up.\nSo we pulled out one of the tapes, one of\nthe CO2 tapes that we had onboard. It showed\nit was below 2 mm of mercury, below that anyway.\nIt was this usually erroneous gage. The\nsuit comfort is no darn good. It is worse than any\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n57\nother suit but there just isn't any way of\nhaving comfort in a pressure suit.\nDarn thing gives you pressure points and\nbulges and gouges and cuts down, scrapes\nyou here and there, prevents you from being\nable to stretch and scratch and have any\ncomfort. There isn't any comfort in a suit.\nI don't give a darn who says so. There just\nisn't any real comfort in a pressure suit.\nIn the configuration that we flew in from\nthe time we got 6-4 GO, our helmets and\ngloves came off--were stowed in the footwell,\nand they were never put on again until just\nbefore retrofire. We ran the whole flight\nin just the basic pressure suit torso\nwith the neck dam on and the wrist dams on\nand with the light-weight headset and I guess\nthe comfort was as good as you could possibly\nhave, but it still wasn't any good and we\ncuffed the pressure suits plenty of times.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"58\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper Humidity. The suit seemed to run pretty dry. I\nwasn't conscious of any great amount of perspiration\nin it at all. A couple of times we had fairly\nheavy work loads, I was aware of any little cool air\nand felt like it was kind of drying sweat. CO2.\nWe got two or three indications of CO2 on the PCO2\ngage. One thing, whenever a station gives you a\ncalibrate well you get a big jump on that gage\nbut there are other times when we weren't even near\na station when that gage came up and began to give\nan indication and one time it gave such a positive\nindication for quite a period of time that we got\n\na little concerned about it because it was right\nwhen all this other stuff was going on, day 5\nand we had shut down, control systems had failed\nand we were destined for three days of drifting and\nthe PCO2 started up. So, we pulled out one of the\ntapes, one of the CO2 tapes we had on board and gave\na check of the suit circuit there and it showed\nthat it was below 2 millimeters of a, two milli-\nmeters of mercury was what it was ... below that\nanyway. We probably assumed it was this usually\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"59\nCONFIDENTIAL\nerroneous gage. The suit comfort is no darn good.\nIt's no worse than any other suit but there just\nisn't any way of having comfort in a pressure suit.\nThe darn thing gives you pressure points and\nbulges and gouges and cuff dam scrapes you here and\nthere and prevents you from being able to stretch\nand scratch and have any comfort. There isn't\nany comfort in the suit, I don't give a darn who\nsays so, there just isn't any real comfort in a\npressure suit. In the configuration that we flew\nin, from time we got our 6-4 Go, our helmets and ...\ngloves came off, were stowed in the foot well and\nthey were never put on again until just before\nretrofire. We ran the whole flight in just a\nbasic pressure suit torso with the neck dam on and\nwith wrists dams on and with a light-weight head\nset. I guess the comfort was as good as you could\npossibly have,but it still wasn't any good and we\ncussed the pressure suit plenty of times. The\ncontrols were good on it. No problem there. The\nO2 Demand Regulator, as far as we could tell, worked\nfine. We had no real occasion to really stress\nit much or anything. The suit umbilical was\nalways in the way. Both my inlet and my exhaust\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"60\nCONFIDENTIAL\nmade my whole chest and rib area sore from the\nmainfold, the end inside the suit being gouged over,\nbeing cantilevered over and digging in side ways\non me. So, it's a real pressure point. It was the\nworst pressure point I had were from the suit\nhoses, and I had my suit hoses deliberately longer\nthan people said they should be so I could get away\nfrom this effect. So, I did have slack to\nprevent them from getting drug over but even so\nthey bothered me. Finger tip lights were good and\nI kept one glove out and kept it over on a piece\nvelcro on the side to use in the event we had any\nkind of cabin light failures. When Pete was asleep\nI frequently used my finger tip lights on that\nglove to light up some of the gages to look around\nwith. Cabin pressure sealed off high on our gage.\nThis is under section 2,Cabin. Our cabin pressure\nat launch sealed off high at about 5.9, which it\nalways did in the attitude chamber in all the runs\nwe made, in fact, in just exactly the same way.\nThen it bled down slowly to about 4.9 and never\nbudged from there the whole flight. It stayed\nright there. We never saw one flick out of it at\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"all. Cabin temperature ran 70 to 75 degrees and humidity ran about 62 to 67 per cent the whole flight. We have the figures somewhere here. We can get in here and get those out, but we have the figures where we ran daily checks; at least once a day and generally two or three times a day, of the wet and dry bulb readings.\nFCSD Rep Okay. We have that back in the original check.\nCooper Okay. CO2. The cabin, I thought was just really good. It was very seldom that you really got any smell in the cabin at all. We thought the cabin would have a dark green cloud evolve out of it when they finally opened it, but I think the cabin, to the time we landed, was still a pretty fresh cabin. It seemed to scrub the odors, defication odors would linger on for two or three or four hours perhaps, but it even scrubbed those out. You couldn't smell them at all. CO2; we had no--any kind of CO2. Comfort day or night. The cabin ran too cold at night, particularly when we were drifting and had some fairly high drift rates the cabin got quite cold and in fact even froze up the windows. The cabin fan we never used at all until we turned it on just before retrofire;"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"about 45 minutes before retrofire we turned the cabin fan on and let it run for about 30 minutes and it decreased the cabin temperature about 20 degrees. Got it down about 50 degrees and then turned it off prior to starting retrofire. Cabin pressure relief valve; never actually did we ... the cabin pressure dual regulator, the release side of the cabin pressure regulator was the only one that ever .... We never heard the cabin relief valve actuate after launch. During launch we were going up we heard it moan a couple of times. The cabin vent valve. The cabin vent valve, we actuated it on the way down once since we couldn't maintain positive pressure we actuated the vent and the snorkel. Cabin repressurization. We never checked it because we didn't need to. Cabin air inlet valve. We actually never ran any check on it. Cabin air recirc, we had open the whole time. Fully open. Primary O2. System monitoring, system monitoring was easy. Primary O2 was very good. The only problem we had with it, it kept yawing us around when it was venting. Whenever it would get up to vent pressure and vent, why, it would give us a bit of a yaw, left"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"yaw. Build up to any rate you wanted to. Over a period of time, one time we got up to about 12 degrees per second. You just sit there, and drift it will build you up more, and more and more. You can really hear it pop off back there. You can hear it \"shhh\". You see this tremendous big field of stars go by. If it's in the early or late night you just, the whole sky is just completely covered with this, just millions of stars...particles, liquid gases ... I guess. Quantity measuring system; worked perfectly satisfactory. Flow rates were good. Pressure was ... pressure was fine. It got up; I don't think you ever need to use, unless you are doing something like EVA, I don't think you ever should consider ever using a heater on that oxygen system because it all by itself fairly rapidly gets on up there to boil off pressures. Boil off temperatures I should say.\nFCSD Rep How about HIGH RATE. Did you ever use that?\nCooper Used O2 High Rate when they were purging the cabin. It worked fine, reset fine. We used it then for landing. Manual heater we never used. The controls; we did very little as far as doing anything with"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the ... Secondary O2. Mine was open, Pete's was closed the whole flight. That's the way they stayed, just like for the check list. Never saw one quiver in either one of them the whole mission.\nFCSD Rep Pressure stayed right?\nCooper Pressure stayed right where it was on launch. CO2 partial pressure. The gauge was somewhat erratic and gave us two or three readings that we had CO2 partial pressure, one of which we finally checked and found we did not have and so then we disbelieved the gauge.... After that, although it generally read down at zero. Coolant: Coolant loops worked real fine. ... we were running two coolant loops ON most of the time since we had fuel cells running. For 2 twenty-hour periods we had fuel cell, section 2 of the fuel cells shut off, and the coolant loops shut off. In one period of time we had circuit breaker pulled on coolant loop .... number 1 coolant loop. Secondary coolant loop, then we were running on pump B and with bypass ON. Bypassing it around so we were heating before bringing the section 2 back on the line after long shut down period we bypassed the coolant loop, the secondary coolant loop, in order to warm"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"up the fuel cell section and then went to normal configuration right on the line. Evaporator operation: for 45 minutes the ... Oh, this is not the suit. Yes, this is the water evaporator. 45 minutes after launch we got yaw deviations from the evaporator and after that they stopped. Somewhere just slightly beyond 45 minutes they were gone. By the time we got around one orbit anyway, I didn't notice any at all. Water management. Well, we ran the water management in the normal mode all the time. In our configuration the normal mode is the drink mode. We ran NORMAL, NORMAL, NORMAL and OFF the whole time. The only time we went to OFF was when we went to over-board and the FLUSH position on the urine heater system and they all worked fine. No problem at all, and the water was excellent water. It was full of air. It had a lot of air in it, a lot of air bubbles, but they didn't seem to effect us adversely. We decided to go ahead and just ignore it and drink it and it seemed to work out fine. The water was really nice and cold the whole time, so it tasted good. No objectionable taste to it at all. I thought the water was excellent. Humidity sensor."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"66\nCONFIDENTIAL\nYes, we took it. It worked fine. It dries out\nvery rapidly; you have to refill it with water\nfrequently, but that is no problem. The drink\ngun fills it very readily. It seems to be pretty\naccurate. Stowage, of course, is always a problem\nand we obtained readings at least once a day on it.\n8.5 Communications\nCooper Communications. Interphone: operation and quality\nwere excellent. UHF performance: countdown\nwas excellent, orbit was excellent, and recovery\nwas excellent, except that nobody was receiving\nour transmitter in the recovery area. However, they\nwere receiving it back here in Houston. Twice\nAIR BOSS finally shut up talking long enough, said\n\"some other station calling : me, say\", and\nthen immediately he'd launch off into another long\nspiel and I don't know whether he was just drowning\nus out or whether they just never got us. At any\nrate, nobody was getting us, except Houston, a\ncouple of times. But the UHF performance in gen-\neral throughout the whole flight was excellent.\nAnd even AIR BOSS received when we were on our\nway down in the parachute. He got two steers to\nus on the way down. Voice tape recorder worked\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n67\nfine for two cartidges worth and then quit.\nFCSD Rep Was it two or four?\nCooper I don't know, it was some low number. Maybe it was\nfour. Anyway, it quit fairly early in the flight.\nThe tape recorder was finished. DCS. Okay, until\nthe last 30 minutes of the flight, the DCS couldn't\nhave been better. The updates were good, the\nground coordination was fine on it. The things\nthey gave us to put in the MDIU were given in a good\nmanner and were put in. No problem. Pete got\nthem all loaded in fine. No problem at all\nuntil that last up-date we got from Carnarvon which\nthey updated us with our computer and reentry con-\nfiguration, after we were all ready supposed to have\nour last update from Houston and without telling\neverybody to look on his board and see what mode\nour computer was in, he sends this update which is\njust about ... blew our cork there. And which I\nthink at this point right now, having experienced\nthis one occasion of this happening at the worst\npossible time it could happen in, my recommendation\nright now to flight crews is that they fly the DCS\ncircuit breaker in the OFF position.\nFCSD Rep I concur.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":73,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"68\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper That's a drastic move to make, but just that one\nexperience was just enough to convince me that if\nyou can't 100 per cent trust everybody and the\nsystem isn't going to work, then you just don't\ndare trust it at all. I wouldn't even think of\nnot flying again with that DCS circuit breaker ON.\nConrad At least for reentry.\nCooper At lease in crew ....\nConrad You couldn't have hurt us any better than by sending\nthat load up.\nCooper Real-time transmitter, delayed-time transmitter, fine.\nStand-by transmitter ....\nConrad We were out of fuel on Ring A. And we had 4.9 and\n4.6 left in Ring B. Which is good. It says that\nRing A ran out sometime after Ring B came on, which\nsays we went around the world 1 1/2 times and re-\nentered on Ring A by itself. That's pretty impressive.\n33 pounds of fuel .... It also shows you how much\nfuel we used in Ring B. We tested Ring B and\nturned it off and didn't turn it on until sometime\nless than 70,000 feet and turned it back off again\nat 30,000 feet so we used the majority of the fuel\non RATE COMMAND in Ring B from 65 to 30 which says\nit probably fired continuously all the way down,\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":74,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n69\ndamping those rates. But it sure was steady. We\nused almost 80 percent of the, yes, 80 percent of\nthe fuel in Ring B from 65 to 30.\nCooper 65 down.\nFCSD Rep On this voice tape recorder. Didn't you say it\nbroke after you got 4 tapes.\nConrad Yes, what happened was that the thing worked just\nlike advertised. Two minutes before the tape ran\nout you get the little flicker on the tape recorder\nlight which is now up on the caution and warning\npanel, and at the end of the two minutes the TAPE\nOUT light comes on steady and that operates just\nas advertised and then one day I put a new tape\nin it and Gordo and I held a big debriefing on it,\nAbout what all our storage was and present\nconfiguration that we were in in the spacecraft,\nand what we thought the six, I mean, that the seven\ntroops would want to know about how we were using\nour storage and we thought the best place to do it\nwas in flight right there while we were using it\nand we really put down some good dope and we also\nhad some thoughts on Apollo on the darn thing and\nI figured we talked at least an hour on the thing,\nand I couldn't understand why it hadn't run out and\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":75,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"70\nCONFIDENTIAL\nI looked down in there and I marked the tape, you\nknow with my pencil, and put it back in the tape\nrecorder and turned it on and sure enough it\nwasn't running. The motor burned out in the tape\nrecorder. Now, when I turned the tape recorder\nswitch ON and OFF I could see a slight rise in\nthe ammeter but I think what was happening was that\nwe were getting the amplification part of it, but\nthat the motor to the tape recorder was not running, it\nwasn't driving the tape. That seemed to be the\nfailure.\nFCSD Rep While we're here why don't you flip back a couple\nof pages while you were out and see if there is\nanything that you want to add.\nConrad Okay. Yes, Gordo covered the heater operation on\nthe ECS. Okay, they came on pretty early in the\nflight and we kept checking to see that it was\ntruly working and it was. System check covered\nthe fumes and we got fumes at 27,000 and we were\nvery light because we did have the ....\nCooper Under ECS I covered how you loved your pressure suit\nfor mobility and comfort.\nConrad Yes, okay. I won't say anymore on that.\nConrad Finger tip lights. Listen, now there's a very in-\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":76,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"teresting thing. The finger tip lights were the only darn lights we had in the spacecraft that we could move around, which is ridiculous. We kept holding a glove up once in a while looking at lights all night because we ....\nCooper They sure were ....\nConrad We had the gloves stowed and I broke my auxiliary light because it was too hard to hold there. When I pulled it out, the very first time I pulled it out I shattered it and Gordo never used the one on his side because it's just not handy. What you really need in there is, we've got to quality one of those little pen lights.\nCooper One of those little pen flash lights.\nConrad A guy really needs one of those little pen flash lights up there and I really wish that we had taken the ones along but we couldn't get them qualified. They had an open switch in them and we couldn't get them qualified for 100 per cent oxygen.\nCooper You really need a little light that doesn't have an electric cord fastened to it that you can just stick in your suit or on a piece of velcro where you can just get to it and use it, you know."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":77,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad There is plenty of time at night when you are flying. Now the worst thing at all was a guy sleeping. If you turn on your instrument panel lights it only lights your instrument and the thing is you are interested in most is that center panel with the cabin press and the secondary O2 and all these things in it. So, the big thing is that you need an auxiliary light in there, like a pen light.\nCooper Yes, you did.\nConrad The umbilicals: I had about the right fit on the umbilicals and all that sort of jazz. The cabin press was great. The thing locked up a little high on lift off like it was supposed to but then a 4.9 never moved. We covered the CO2 bit. Did you cover the comfort day night and how the high rotation rates that effect us? We never used the cabin fan except just prior to lift off where it is called for in sequence and when we put the cabin cooler to the full cold position and brought on the cabin fan and flew it through re-entry that was it. Primary O2 did vent quite a bit. You covered that.\nCooper Yes."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":78,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad I'm sure that's all for now. It never bothered us, of any odor. The normal type venting system worked fine.\nCooper I covered that on the CO2 partial press ....\nConrad Did you cover the coolant splashing all over the nose of the spacecraft just after adapter sep. That must have been coolant, it's the only thing I can think of that wouldn't be frozen up there. But it was liquid and it actually splashed on the nose after adapter sep and retrofire. It came around behind the spacecraft and I saw it splash and the marks are still on the nose of the spacecraft where it hit. Water management I thought was great except it had air in it. It did have air in it but pressures were good, the water was cold, it tasted good, but we did have air in the water and it wasn't the amount that we had at the factory, but there was air in the water. You could see it when you filled your darn rehydratable food bags.\nCooper Yes.\nConrad But, it was good water.\nCooper I covered the humidity sensor, we used it ... communications, I don't think you say anything but"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":79,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"excellent on that.\nConrad They were great. Even the UHF worked well. I mean HF.\nCooper Voice tape recorder. Then we were on. I just covered that. It didn't work.\nConrad Did you cover the ... the exact details on this DCS? How we didn't get the light. The only time we didn't get the light.\nCooper No, I didn't cover the details on that except just that we had gotten DCS unforecast over Carnarvon after when we already had our load in from Houston, and then it came on unexpectedly, not even checking to see what mode we were in here. We were in re-entry mode and sent us this DCS updating our TR and updating our load, DCS load there, and just as he said he was sending, why rapidly then we switched out of reentry to prelaunch but never got any DCS light on either the TR or the load.\nConrad Yes, he sent two separate commands, and theoretically the light should come on each time but I never got the lights, so I'm highly suspicious of what happened and I've got to have an explanation why this load....\nCooper Which he verified to the cores and they checked out"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":80,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"all right.\nConrad Yes, it was address 03 and address 10 and they verified okay and that seemed to convince everybody except me that the load was correct and my mistake, in retrospect, I should have made them transmit the load and either satisfied myself that the DCS light had burned out, or that the operation did take place truly in the manner in which it was supposed to and it did light the DCS light. He knew the TR was right because he had his TR clock synched in with the spacecraft TR.\nCooper And he assumed the load was right because he got maps back on it, but .... I'm not too sure I ....\nConrad Yes, that's pretty dangerous. Pretty dangerous.\nCooper I think this is it as I just pointed out to J. B. and we were discussing in the corridor here, my feelings on it are right now are real strongly, that my recommendation would be to pilots during really critical time periods, \"I'd just turn the DCS circuit breaker off.\" I wouldn't even fiddle with it because that one violation that of everything we had agreed on has just completely destroyed my confidence in the whole set up. That's all it takes is that one time just to completely foul you up."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":81,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"76\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad\tBig Brother.\nCooper\tYes sir. I do feel that way, I really do. Okay.\nLet's see, all this real time, delayed time,\nstandby, that all worked fine, I thought.\nCooper\tYes, we had real little trouble.\nConrad\tThe coordination with the ground really in general\nwent excellent.\nConrad\tYes, the only guy that had any problem was Guaymas\ndoesn't have a command system so, poor old Guaymas\nwas stuck when he was first to pick us up coming\ninto the states with having to call us and tell us\nto turn on real-time and ack and then the Houston\npeople would have to remind us to turn it off again\nbut the rest of the flight the command system ran\nthat telemetry and dumped telemetry and everything\nelse just fine as far as I was concerned. We\nwere glad not to be bothered with it.\nCooper\tCommunications control and switches. The VOX. Man\nI tell you, that really worked slick, except those\ndarn rubber guards on there. Those have got to go.\nConrad\tYes. The cabin is dry enough. The only reason\nI can see they need them on there is in case you had\na catastrophic water spillage which you do very\neasily have....\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":82,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"77\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tYes, I pulled my ear plug and put the ear plug right\nin the bottom of my ear where it was barely hanging\nthere and I could hear anybody calling then. Then\nI put the plug back in. I thought the quality of\nthe communications was really, as far as we were\nconcerned, in the air anyway, was excellent.\nConrad\tOur beacons worked satisfactorily both adapter and\nreentry , C band beacons most of the time they were\nin the command position, the people used them\nas they wanted them.\nCooper\tLet's see, the sleep configuration, we covered\nthat, yes, that worked fine.\nConrad\tAntenna selection. I went to adapter and I really\ncouldn't tell much different and then we decided\nwe would go back to the check off list which called\nfor reentry. Oh, I know how I got in adapter position.\nCooper\tSomebody asked you .... Oh, it was that test.\nConrad\tYes, it was the UHF test that we pulled and we\nwere switching from reentry to adapter, from\nreentry to adapter, and I finally left it at\nadapter one time and the thing was working just\ngreat as far as I could tell.\nCooper\tYes, it was there for a day or so.\nCooper\tYes, it was there for a day or so. I really\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":83,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"78\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tYou could dump OUZD or something.\nConrad\tYes, I ....\nCooper\tBut the neoprene things are hard to see through,\nyou could actually push them up to the control\nknob to read what you got on there.\nConrad\tLet's face it Gordo, once we got those controls\nset, we never moved them.\nCooper\tYes, that's right. Once you set them you very\nseldom ever set them from there on. So, I guess it\nreally isn't too bad. It's kind of a Mickey Mouse\nthing, and it works, I guess.\nConrad\tThose light weight head sets. Those Plantronic\nhead sets that we had, I don't think anybody can\nargue about the voice quality and they are really\ncomfortable up there.\nCooper\tYes, and they were really good reception, too.\nConrad\tJust pull a plug out of my ear and let it hang\nand turn the sleep switch on when I wanted to sleep.\nNever took the think off my head in 7 or 8 days I\ndon't believe. I'd sometimes take it off and hook\nit under here for sleeping, but after a while I\njust got so used to having it on my head I just\nunpull the ear plug and let it hang and turn the\nsleep switch, and the sleep switch worked great....\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":84,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"79\nCONFIDENTIAL\ncouldn't see, we didn't have too much problem with\nthat, but they wanted it back to reentry and I\npresumed that they will get the right data out of\nthat UHF test to know what's wrong with the adapter\nantennas, if anything's wrong with it. But we\nstayed in reentry configuration most of the time.\nConrad\tETM controls?\nCooper\tWe didn't have any problems with it.\nConrad\tWe had no problems there at all.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":85,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"80\nCONFIDENTIAL\n8.6 Electrical\nCooper\tElectrical system monitoring.\nConrad\tWell, I can't say enough for the fuel cells, they\nreally performed they --\nCooper\tThey sure did, boy those little rascals really work.\nConrad\tThe purging, I recommend that we change those purge\nswitches, and I don't think this is dangerous. I\nrecommend that we change those purge switches to\nthree position. Maybe guarded ones. Yes, maybe\nguarded ones.\nCooper\tWhat you might do was put a little three position\nguard there.\nConrad\tBut that spring loaded business, that spring\ntension on those, so I tell you my fingers are still\nsore from doing that. I used my toothbrush ....\nthat's what I used all the time to purge them\nwith. You had to jack them up with your tooth-\nbrush because we've got them guarded and they are\nspring loaded, and you just don't think about it\nbut you just try and hold that spring in that\nposition for two minutes, it's like a year.\nCooper\tParticularly under zero g. You don't have anything\nto push against.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":86,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tSo I recommend they make the purging switches.\nWell, I recommend that they either come up with a gimmick that you can insert on the switches when it is time to purge so that you can flip them on and time it and then flip them off, or they make the switches three position. Especially in that 14 day flight. You purge every 6 hours you know, and that's minimum. If you are running higher loads you are purging every 4 or every 2. So, that's quite a chore and it's like house keeping. Those fuel cells have to be purged and 5 minutes of switching is what it takes, holding those spring loaded switches.\nCooper\t2, 2 and almost 1. Yes, 2, 2 and half a minute. 26 seconds. That's really hard on the fingers, hiding behind these guards we have, makes it even more difficult but the guards should be there. Let's see, monitoring electrical power remaining.\nConrad\tThere was no big argument there.\nCooper\tNo problem there at all, just watching the hydrogen fall.\nConrad\tThey were either there or they weren't.\nCooper\tGround information required to complete mission."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":87,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Well, that there again. The cryos were really the only problem we had with electrical. The main batteries ... the times that Pete touched them they were just exactly like advertised.\nConrad\tYes, they were 22½ volts every time we tested them.\nCooper\tNo problem at all. Squib batteries were fine, no problem.\nConrad\tSquib batteries came down about, I would say 2½ volts during the whole flight. We started out with a common control bus that had been 27½ volts and at the end of the flight it was 24.7 or something like that, 24.8 or something. It came down about 3 volts. But one thing that nobody ever told me, was man, when you fire thrusters and things like that you can see a lot of transients on that common control bus. That thing really gets to oscillating up and down. I wasn't sure something wasn't wrong at the beginning, and I just pass that on as a tip to people who go later.\n8.7 Onboard Computer\nCooper\tOnboard computer.\nConrad\tI can't say too much for the computer either. It worked fantastically."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":88,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper\tIt couldn't have worked better. It really did.\nConrad\tThe IGS Guidance was indicating everything that we did. We knew that we were going to loft a little bit and boy, it showed that we should pitch down at second stage and RGS did pitch us down, and when it pitched us down and put us on the IGS was centered up. I never saw any big needle deviations. I didn't see this big pitch transient at the end of the flight. I think it did wander just a little bit in pitch but none of this off the scale stuff. It looked like it was on the money all the way, and I felt that if we ever switched we would be right down the pipe with it.\nCooper\tYes. I did too. Real good.\nConrad\tIn the insertion, boy, that math flow 6 came up with all the right numbers. The numbers were just right. You didn't read the numbers. Where the tape began the numbers were on the money. Address 72 was 25,808. Address 94 R dot was plus 20 feet pga 97 was plus 2 feet. 52 said we had a perfect insertion that we had no apogee adjust. At perigee there was 00000 and then calculated, even though we didn't need one, the directions should be applied at 3,042 seconds and the nominal value is 3,008 seconds and I just don't think you can ask for better computations than that.\nCooper\tOkay. I think that everything that we did on it worked out quite well.\nConrad\tCatch-up mode worked well. The .... the one thing it did though, there was one anomaly that I saw on there and I almost had a heart attack at the beginning of the flight. Remember, we got into orbit and I don't know whether I did it or what, but I got in the mode where I got the darn IVI's running and it wouldn't stop running, and the worked until I switched into pre-launch nav again a couple of times and I finally got the IVI's to quit and then I was very careful about how I did any switching after that and I don't know what that was. I'll have to sit down and talk to the computer people about that. It seemed to me that what I did ....\nCooper\tIt happened once more.\nConrad\tYes, it happened one other time and we got out of it by going to pre-launch and letting it sit for"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":89,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"awhile and it finally ran itself out and stopped. But it looked like the accelerometer bias took off or did something that just made IVI's run. I don't really understand what happened but I wanted to note that an anomaly. I felt that the thing was running right and that this might have been a little glitch so I didn't report it to ground because, well, later on we didn't really have any need for catch up or anything like that and it seemed to operate okay.\nCooper\tOkay, let's see. Orbit maneuvers. I don't think there was ....\nFCSD REP\tHow about the powering down and powering up?\nConrad\tIt shut down and started up just as advertised. ON with the on switch and 18 seconds it went through it's self check and the green start comp light came on green and it did it every time.\nCooper\tOkay, Orbit maneuvers we have already covered that.\nConrad\tWe powered it up for all our updates and it accepted it every time, no strain.\nCooper\tRetro fire, you got those numbers through. We gave the number to .... IVI's after retro fire. Read 269 aft and 10 left and 181 down."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":90,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":91,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad 10 left and 181 down, 269 010 181.\nCooper Yes.\nConrad And as soon as those retro's fired the light came\non green and it went right into reentry guidance\n... reentry guidance ....\nCooper Reentry guidance was right on the money when it came\non, it came on exactly on time. Roll needle, roll\nbug ....\nConrad Stopped at 400,000 feet, right at the time Houston\ngave us our computed time to 400 K.\nCooper And the 290 K steering commands came in just right.\nCame in just where they should, the direction they\nshould come in and everything.\nConrad At about the right magnitude ....\nCooper And about the right magnitude. Then the problems\nstarted.\nConrad And that was the loose nut on the ground and not\nin the air, fortunately.\nCooper MDU, that worked fine.\nConrad That apparently worked fine.\nCooper Computer modes. Let's see, pre launch worked good.\nAscent worked beautifully, catch up .... we didn't\nreally do any catch up except the one ...."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":92,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Now, there was one thing there, I don't know if it\nwas the radar or the computer. But, the first\ntime we flew over the Cape and locked up on the\nback up REP on the ground, it read out the\ndigital millage to a gnat's eyebrow. It locked\nup at 248.66 miles and I don't believe it will read\nany higher than that supposed to be 250, but I had\nthe same number at the other end so I suspect\nthat that is as high as it will read out. And it\ntracked that thing right over the Cape where we got down\nto, I think we got down to .... our slant range at\nthe closest approach was 161 miles or something\nlike that, and everytime I punched it up to the\nrange went down and --\nCooper Man that was really beautiful, just beautiful.\nThe radar itself stayed locked on for .... I felt\nlike you could almost point out the tower it was\nright on the milage mode.\nConrad But in the catch up mode it read out to 248.66\nmiles both at the start of lock up and the end of\nlock up, and I was really impressed with that. Then\nafter that we always locked the Cape. The radar\nlocked on like it should on the REP, but we"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":93,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"never got it to read through the computer now I\n....\nCooper Yes, but my analog read-outs read.\nConrad Yes, but wait a minute, your analog readouts only\ngo to 300,000 feet and that's 50 miles and we were\nnever within 50 miles of it, so ....\nCooper Yes, but they read correctly and I got steering,\nradar steering.\nConrad Yes, but the analog couldn't have read correctly.\nIf it read anything on your scale it was wrong\nbecause it should have read only digital ....\nCooper What I saw it was showing that it was getting a\nreading.\nConrad Oh, yes, well, there was no doubt that we were\nlocked up.\nCooper The R dot was going right on out past there, you\nknow, and then it came on past.\nConrad But I don't know whether if the problem in the"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":94,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"digital read-out was a computer problem in the\ncatch-up and rendezvous mode of accepting radar data\nor whether it was radar problem, but I'll mention\nunder the computer because I sort of suspect it was\na computer problem.\nCooper But I don't understand why it worked so well the one\ntime and the other time it didn't work.\nConrad Something gave out. Either in the radar or in the\ncomputer. Well, then we never did get to check anything in the rendezvous mode.\nCooper No, reentry ....\nConrad We don't know what the problem was in reentry, but\nI think the computer did a 40 job it did just what\nit was suppose to do. It just had bum dope."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":95,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"8.8 Crew Station\nCooper Okay, controls and displays, sequence telelights.\nThe only comment I have on sequence telelights is\nthat the comp light on the computer is too bright.\nConrad That's right.\nCooper We are going to have to have some way of dimming\nthat or put some tape over it or something, because --\nConrad That's a comment for GT-6 especially.\nCooper Because when you are running it at night with the\ncomputer on for rendezvous, that comp light darn\nnear blinds you.\nConrad Yeah, it's really bright. That needs a dim feature\non it.\nCooper The other sequential telelights that are in there\nare all dimable, or turnoffable.\nConrad Say, there is one thing that we didn't try through.\nI wonder if that thing is on the bright-dim sequence\n... . We never did put the switch to dim. I never\nthought of it in 8 days either. I'll bet you it's\non the bright-dim circuit, but we never used that\nswitch. We've never had occassion to ever use that\nswitch. You know we always check sequence lights\nbright.\nCooper So, that is what that check is for. (laughter)"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":96,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Learn something new everyday.\nCooper I didn't think about that.\nConrad I'll bet baby it is.\nCooper Well, that's something somebody ought to check out. This is just a comment.\nConrad But we never did have any reason to dim it in the simulator. You never tried to look out the window.\nCooper You don't have anything to look out the window at.\nConrad Yeah.\nCooper Okay, event timer -- We stopped at 48 minutes after insertion and never ran it again until we cranked it up at 27 minutes prior to retrofire.\nConrad Yeah, that's right. That was one of those things they had us power down. We never powered it up in the flight.\nCooper Apparently, it is a fairly good power consumer.\nConrad But it worked all right.\nCooper The IVI's worked fine, other than the one comment Pete made while ago that they were continually running there for a while. The FDI's -- excellent. Range and range rate indicator worked good on the REP, boy, really, really good. It worked very good on the --"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":97,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad And the analog range was in close agreement with the digital range when the REP was going away from us.\nCooper Yep. The GLV fuel and oxidizer pressure gauges worked excellent except for the IPS. Stage two IPS fuel gauge failed to the full max deflection position just shortly before POGO started, and stayed in the OFF position until after staging. It came back on and worked for about a minute and then went back off again. The altimeter worked just like it worked in the altitude chamber. Stopped at 96 800 feet.\nConrad It was very jerky on the way up.\nCooper It was erratic going up.\nConrad And I don't guess you can expect a pressure altimeter like that to follow as fast as that booster is moving.\nCooper It's really winding up.\nConrad Coming back on reentry, why, we were apparently a lot slower on the other side of it, because it unwound in an extremely steady manner and it seemed to be right with the barostat.\nCooper It was right on the barostat, actually.\nConrad And this is really the important thing."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":98,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Rate of descent -- you know, I even forgot to look at the rate of descent.\nConrad Well, we didn't even worry about it. When the chute\nCooper When the main chute opened as good as it did --\nConrad -- out there, that we both watched the main chute and I saw the water coming at the corner of the window --\nCooper I didn't even think to look at the rate of descent. I knew it was good.\nConrad Yeah, we didn't have any reason to look at it.\nCooper I forgot about that.\nConrad No, we got busy doing a check there, too.\nCooper Well, we were also having a couple of radio calls in there and it was interrupting --\nConrad Yeah, radio calls, and we knew the chute was good, and there wasn't any reason to look at it.\nCooper I'm sure the rate of descent worked all right.\nCooper Accelerometer -- it seemed to work fine.\nConrad We'll look at it the next time.\nCooper Yeah, okay. I'll make a note.\nCooper The accelerometer worked fine. The switches and circuit breaker panels --\nConrad It's still extremely easy to knock off any circuit breakers --"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":99,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Anytime you move around in there.\nConrad You get in the habit of real fast checking that.\nCooper I would strongly recommend to anybody in any crew that anytime they do any moving around or turning around in the cockpit that they run a circuit breaker check.\nConrad We did.\nCooper Because, invariably, we would always find one off. Everytime we would run a check, somewhere or another we would find one knocked off.\nConrad We usually found a reason for it though, the overhead ones we knocked off with the water gun so we stopped putting it up there. And the one I thought I knocked off on the right hand side, I came to the conclusion that was one the O2 heater blew out. It just blew it off.\nCooper And the mirrors worked excellent. I must say, Deke, you do need that in-flight repair occasionally to tighten those mirror --\nConrad You mean the postlanding kit.\nCooper Whew! Gracious! I lost my head. The postlanding kit to tighten up the adjustments on those mirrors to keep them tight. Repair reticle, you know, things like that."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":100,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Suits.\nCooper The first thing that happened -- Pete's suit had to be repaired.\nCooper Swizzle stick -- I used the swizzle stick for quite awhile to punch off the DCS light when Pete was asleep, but, finally, it got to where it was just easier to reach over there. I've got pretty long arms. I think most people would probably need the swizzle stick to get over there to punch it off.\nConrad I never had the occasion to use it.\nCooper That's the only time I used it. I used it once for turning on the ACME power over there.\nFCSD REP Before we go any further, while I'm thinking about it, on the pad out here, you said you could see that umbilical tower when they started to raise it.\nConrad No, the erector.\nFCSD REP The erector. Yes.\nConrad You could take the mirror out of the holder and hold it at the bottom of the window, and you could measure the distance. Now I don't know exactly how high we are above the road, but where the road winds up to the pad and makes a left turn in and drive straight into the pad, you could see the intersection of that road. So, I say that you can see the ground some"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":101,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"350 feet away from the booster. You can see ground level, and we were going to use that procedure if we aborted. We didn't know if we were going to make a land or a water landing, but we felt that we could use the mirror to see if we were over water or over land, at least within 350 feet of the spacecraft in the direction of the windows. I didn't use the mirror on the water landing out over Bermuda, because I could see the water out of the corner of the window by just putting my head up and peering at it -- in the two-point attitude. I could see the water coming. I knew we were fairly low. As a matter of fact, that altimeter was just about on the money, wasn't it?\nConrad We were at just about zero feet when we hit the water. We had a good altimeter setting.\nCooper Almost exactly zero feet.\nConrad This is what McDivitt said. Don't go on that 29.92. They gave us a 30.10 altimeter setting, and when it read zero we were on the water.\nCooper Yes, that was a real good one.\nConrad So, I recommend they stick with this -- giving the altimeter setting in the recovery area because it can make the difference of a couple of hundred feet."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":102,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Okay, radar. Warm up time -- we don't have any comment on that?\nConrad No. That was straightforward.\nCooper Acquisition range --\nConrad It acquired in excess of 250 miles and read at 250 miles.\nCooper That's that. Acquisition attitude -- well, at one time I thought we were out of attitude, and it still was reading right on, locked up.\nConrad Yes.\nCooper Ease of lock on -- good. Capability of holding lock -- it seemed to hold lock very well. Flight display --\nConrad It was fine. All you needed.\nCooper Radar tests generally -- from our point of view it went very well. We never had any false lock problems at all. We didn't really give these a fair shake, however.\nConrad Yes.\nCooper But, from the testing that we did, we encountered no false locks.\nConrad We didn't get a false lock when we turned around and looked at the REP.\nCooper No, we didn't."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":103,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad We turned around and we waited until 1 minute was over, and banged on the radar and it didn't take this 23 seconds or anything. It just bammed. It just locked up on us right there.\nCooper Locked up instantaneously.\nConrad There it was. No doubt in your mind.\nCooper Lighting, indicators, and instruments.\nConrad Okay, there's a deficiency here. You need to see that center instrument panel, and --\nCooper You need some kind of glow. You need some kind of a little glow down that center instrument panel to be able to see that thing. That thing is really black. Without bringing that big darn --\nConrad I really don't understand why those guys took that red center light out.\nCooper While we are talking about lights, let's see if we cover that. No, we don't. But there is a real safety-of-flight item in that cockpit -- lighting. That is, if you leave any one of these lights on, and, in particular, the big bright center light which is the landing light -- I think it is on there -- in the light solenoid area, the reostat, you build up a heat thing that is actually to the point of being explosive. It actually gets to where it will burn --\nConrad Yes, you could smell paint.\nCooper It burns the paint in the spacecraft.\nConrad You can smell paint cooking. That's the first thing that we noticed, the first day. I'll tell you what heats up. It's the reostat. Well, the thunderstorm light that Gordo's referring to doesn't have a reostat. That just flat puts out heat.\nCooper It just flat puts out heat. You can burn your glove right off your hand on that one.\nConrad Your under-window right and left lights -- if we ran those at great periods of time with the light dimmed down, that reostat gets so bloody hot that you can smell the paint cooking again. I felt that that was a real bad situation and we have comments on that --\nCooper So we kept rotating these lights on and off.\nConrad We never did burn our lights too steadily unless we absolutely had to. The other problem there was that anything that generates that much heat is going to have a tendency to burn out, and I'll tell you, you lose one of those cockpit lights, buddy, and you are screwed.\nCooper You really are."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":104,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad I had already busted my auxiliary light and if I would have burned out the light on the right instrument panel, we would have had to run that center light a lot, and I don't think that center light would have lasted either.\nCooper No. I think that whole center console area is a very weakly lit area. It could certainly stand a very,very faint soft light. When you are running under night light conditions you'd be able to see the radio switches and this type of thing. Let's see, indicators and instruments--well, of course, a pet peeve of mine is that we couldn't get EL in the 8-balls. I still think the 8-balls could certainly be lit a lot better, although they are satisfactory for what we've got. I think the--\nConrad We really didn't use that except during lift-off and reentry, but it does shine. Mine shines in your eyes, doesn't it?\nCooper Yes, there is a real bad feature in the cockpit in that any lighting at all, either one of the right or the left lights--say Pete turns his right light on, particularly--if I'm trying to look through the reticle, it just zaps. It's gone. Can't see a thing in the reticle, it just zaps. It's gone. Can't see a thing in"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":105,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":106,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"101\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthere with any light on in the cockpit. In order to\nuse the reticle, you have almost got to dim out all\nthe lights in the cockpit, and this is pretty hard\nto do because you need to use some around.\nConrad And, you know, they had a light down on the center\npedestal shining aft that was supposed to light up\nthe water management panel, and everybody took it out.\nYou have to do most of your work on that water manage-\nment panel blind. I mean, you sort of put your hand\nin there backwards and everything, and, as long as\neverything runs all right, you only need that one\nswitch to go from off to overboard. The other two\nswitches stay in the normal position unless you have\nsome sort of problem. But it would be nice to light\nup that whole area down there. There is no way,\nwithout a flashlight or pulling that auxiliary light\nway over there, to tell how much water you have in\nthe water tank.\nCooper I don't think you can tell with it. I took that\nauxiliary light and got back in there and practically\ncrawled down in there. With that darn M-1 experiment\nthing installed on top of the tank there, you can't\nsee the water level bubble anymore. They installed"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":107,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"102\nCONFIDENTIAL\nPete's M-1 experiment right on top of the water tank\nwhere the water level bubble and the measuring gauge\nis. It's built right on over it, so you can't see it.\nConrad We used every combination of lights in there that you\ncould think of, depending on what we were doing.\nSometimes we ran with Gordo--if one guy was sleeping,\nthe other guy would run with his red lights on dim.\nAnd many nights, we ran with no lights at all. We\nhad that much confidence in things like cabin pres-\nsurization and so forth, that we just powered down the\nlights and we would go through whole night sides without\never turning the lights on and never even looking at\nthe instrument panel when we were in drifting flight.\nWe would both nod or look out the window.\nCooper Or sleep.\nConrad Yes, and one of the reasons we did this was because\nof this heating problem. I had a decided fear that we\nwould be in real trouble if we burned out any light.\nWe had no way of replacing them. So, any time I\ncould conserve electrical lighting, by saving the\nbulb, I would turn the thing off. I didn't want to\nbuild up big heat loads in them. We ran red lights,\nwe ran white lights, we ran the center lights only,\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":108,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"103\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwe ran the left side only, we ran the right side\nonly; we ran them in any combination you could think\nof, just dependent on what you wanted to do with them.\nSometimes you needed lights in the daytime, sometimes\nyou didn't need lights in the daytime. It depends on\nwhat your orientation was and what you were doing.\nThat was very interesting. It's an entirely lighting\nsituation than in an airplane.\nCooper Let's see. We checked out the one light that we hadn't\nmentioned here. I think we mentioned all of them ex-\ncept the doggone docking light. We did check it out,\nand it really throws out a nice light out there. We\ndidn't have anything to try it out on out beyond the\nnose, but it sure lights up the nose. As a matter of\nfact, on that one night side we kept wondering where in\nthe heck that light was coming from.\nConrad I kept saying, \"Hey, the sun is really shining on the\nnose for a long time.\" It was the night I blew up the--\nCooper We were pointing straight up.\nConrad Yeah, I'd blown up the shrimp and gotten it all over\nthe right console, and when I was cleaning it off, I\nhad inadvertently turned on the docking light switch.\nIt took me about 10 minutes looking out there trying\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":109,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"104\nCONFIDENTIAL\nto figure out what the heck it was shining out there\non the nose. It finally came to me in a flash that\nthe docking light was on. Now that is another thing--\nI don't know how they covered that REP with the re-\nflective tape, but, man, that thing was bright!\nCooper All you could see was the light.\nConrad No, I mean in the daytime.\nCooper Oh yes.\nConrad In the daytime with the sun shining on that thing, it\nalmost burned a hole in your head. Boy it was bright!\nCooper Yes, actually--\nConrad It looked like a little sun out there.\nCooper Pete went into it deciding that he was never going to\nsee it in the daytime, and I think he had a big sur-\nprise. I was determined that we were going to see it.\nConrad And we did see it in the daytime, several times after\nit had gotten a fair distance away from us, I'd say\n2 or 3 miles away.\nCooper It was bright. It was almost brighter on the day-\nside than it was at night. In fact, it was so bright\nit would blot out those blinking lights.\nConrad Yes, that's right. The REP, itself, was bright enough\nand reflective enough that it would blot out the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":110,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"105\nCONFIDENTIAL\nflashing light, but there were times when we saw it\nclose enough in the dayside that we could see the\nflashing light. it didn't get that far away from us,\nand thats why I still challenge this 375 miles--\nCooper You aren't going to see that dipole as long as we did.\nThe last time I saw that thing, I was still seeing the\ndipole antenna.\nConrad That's right. That's the last thing I saw.\nCooper You aren't going to see that dipole at several hun-\ndred miles.\nConrad That's right, and we saw it in the daytime.\nCooper Yes.\nConrad And it was on the 5th or 6th orbit.\nCooper Okay, utility light, interior lights, outside lights--\nFCSD REP Talking about outside lighting from external--\nCooper We didn't have any flashlights. All we had was the\ngloves.\nFCSD REP It says glove. It should be glare.\nCooper Glare--well, anytime the sun comes whopping in the\nwindow there, you are going to really have a glare\nAnd anytime you are sitting there watching the earth,\ntracking a target down on the earth, and you suddenly\ncome back into the cockpit, you aren't going to see a\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":111,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"thing. You are completely blinded because when you\nhave gotten used to the outside--sunlit earth--and\nyou come back in the cockpit, it takes a few seconds to\nadapt to seeing things inside.\nCooper\tIntensity controls--I think they were fine. I thought\nthey worked pretty well, and I must say, as Pete\nmentioned, I did like those red lights very well.\nFingertip lights--they worked out all right. A\nflashlight would have been better, but the fingertip\nlights are fine. Onboard data--\nConrad\tFlight plan strip we really didn't use. We used our\nown checkoff list, because all we had on the flight plan\nstrip was checkoff lists. You couldn't read it at night,\nand we just put something on there because it was\ngoing to be in the spacecraft.\nFCSD REP\tYou didn't use it?\nConrad\tI set it up in the proper places, but anytime I really\nused a checkoff list, I used this one right here. And\nI think that one is going to be replaced by a clock.\nCooper\tYes. Checklist cards--\nConrad\tI can't say too much for them.\nCooper\tThey are really good.\nConrad\tWe beat them over the head and we reworked them and"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":112,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"reworked them. I know we drove those guys nuts down\nthere, but I'll tell you, there are darn few things I'd\nchange on these set of cards right now, after having\nflown the flight. They really helped us. And the\nexperiments book helped us and the log book worked\nwell, and I think we kept things fairly straight.\nCooper\tIn general, I think the books worked out very, very\nwell.\nConrad\tOur big flight plan book worked out well, it didn't\nget in the way. Our reentry book, I think, could be\nmade smaller. I would recommend next time that they\nput the schematics together like Neil did in the GOH\nJunior, which turned out that he had the schematics\nin a book that was 10 inches high and 2 1/2 inches\nwide and about 1/2 inch thick. Just by folding them\na certain way, and this you would put away and never\npull out. Now, everytime we hauled out that reentry\nbook to do anything, we had all the schematics and\neverything. We really didn't need to haul those\naround all the time. We could have found a proper\nplace for them. So, I'm not complaining against the\nreentry book and I wouldn't take anything out of it.\nBy golly, we used everything in the books. We looked"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":113,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"at schematics when we were up there. Don't think we\ndidn't with the troubles we had. We used everything\nin that reentry book. There is only one book that we\ndidn't take out of its holder and that was the REP\nand that is because we gave up the REP, or we would\nhave used that one. And this big flight plan like this,\nI'd recommend that you make it even bigger. You've\nseen how much writing we did in it. I recomment that\nyou use the same procedure of keeping a log book and\na flight plan, because two guys are working all the\ntime. You put it down in the log book and then you\nwrite it down in the flight plan, and this helps you\norganize it. By writing it down in the flight plan\nis when we really recognized just what we had to unstow\nand how we had to put it together to make that series\npass work right. It took us three days to do that.\nWe still spent a lot of time thinking about this. The\nmaps--boy, that's another thing. If we didn't have\nthat map, we wouldn't have known where in the hell we\nwere.\nCooper\tYes, that orbital map--\nConrad\tThose map updates were the greatest!\nCooper\tI'll tell you the map that was the useful one was the"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":114,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"D-6 map that Harry Kozuma had in there.\nConrad\tYes, we used this one, too.\nCooper\tYes, this big map that he had in here was really a\ngood one.\nConrad\tYes, that helped you even better find out where you\nwere.\nCooper\tMan that's a good map. For instance, over here, we\nwere over here trying to find some details on some\nislands. Where was it?\nConrad\tYes, you could go to this map and get an orbit and come\ndown to--\nCooper\tOh, islands or something off here. Let's see, where were\nthey? Some of these little islands right here, off\nIndia--\nConrad\tWe could pick up these little tiny chains and these\nthings. The Solomons and these little messy things\ndown in here--boy, and all this stuff out in here. Here\nis all that junk we kept passing over in there--\nCooper\tYes! We were getting the New Hebrides, the Carolines,\nand the Marshalls. We were going over everyone of\nthose darn islands, just like on our maps, boy. Just\nbeautiful.\nConrad\tAnd you could really pinpoint your location. That"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":115,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"really impressed me.\nCooper\tHere is where we did all the photographing.\nConrad\tYes, that's right. Here is where we photographed\nAustralia one day.\n(Much Laughter)\nCooper\tWe were photographing the hell out of Australia coming\nright down across here. Then we thought, well, that's\nodd. Never had noticed that. Where is that island\noff here? Well, that does look kind of like Sumatra\ncoming across there. And there is another big island\nand I thought, well, darn, I know there isn't another\nbig island coming off there, and it was Borneo, and\nthen here comes Australia. Fortunately, we had the\ntime on it, so somebody can go back through and\nreconstruct where we really were.\nConrad\tI was trying to find where we struck out Australia and\nwrote down Palestine.\nCooper\tPalestine. Dear me. We had two cameras going just\nas fast as they would click. You know, clickety\nclick click. Nobody had gotten aerial photographs of\nAustralia before during the daylight.\nConrad\tListen, I taiked to Paul Backer and he told me the\n16mm film came out great. So, maybe we got the REP\npictures, too."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":116,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Okay, maps and overlays--they were really good.\nD-6 books and the data books were good and we used the star charts--\nCooper The only maps I thought weren't worth a darn were the Apollo landmark maps.\nConrad Yes, well you'll get to debrief on that through Apollo in here. But our straight data books and everything--\nCooper Yes, they were good.\nConrad We used all of them.\nCooper No comment on them.\nConrad We took the experiments procedure book and the experiments log book just like this, and whoever had the watch side put them in the Volkswagen bag. We'd take the reentry book, which we had the PLA updates in, and the other book, and we would just throw them down between our legs. If you wanted to look at the flight plan you would just flick it up, grab it, and read the thing, and throw it back down there again.\nCooper There was enough room so that Pete kept them on the side of his left leg, and I kept them on the side of my right leg, and we would just pass them back and forth.\nCooper Okay, start charts--by golly, I thought they were"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":117,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"really good, and I think anybody that wants to get lined up for a night retro, if they do it once and aren't convinced that star charts were pretty useful they're --\nConrad Well, it gave us a great deal of confidence to go into the star chart the last day and pick out the right yaw stars, and then, as we were alining the platform, to see those yaw stars go right through the middle like they were supposed to.\nCooper I think the star chart was very usable and very neat, much smaller and neater in this fashion than it is in this great big mechanism thing we have. I think they're very usable in that fashion.\nCooper Stowage. Hah! What are we supposed to say about stowage? Boy, it's probably the most critical thing in a long flight. It has to be kept up on an hourly basis. Belts and harness-- I thought they were perfectly satisfactory, except for one set of belts I wanted to get out before the flight and if I were doing it again, I'd take my own scissors down there and cut them out. That is the knee belt which was put in there for pressurized ejection. It is still in there, and it is in the way, and I hated the darn thing. Mine flopped and flapped around in there."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":118,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I finally took them and gouged them down in along side the seat. I took my scissors and crammed them down in there, and that is where they stayed the whole flight.\nConrad Yes, I'm not convinced they are necessary.\nCooper That knee restraint belt was put in there so that if you were ejecting at high altitude and you came out in a pressurized condition --\nConrad I think the arm restraints ought to be looked at the same way.\nCooper My arm restraints stayed in the down position, I launched with them down, I reentered with them down, and they never came out of the down position. They could have saved a good 2 or 3 pounds of weight on my seat by taking my arm restraints out. I told them that before and they said, \"Well, they wouldn't ever be able to get them off.\" You know the seat was out sitting over there and I could have removed them myself in 5 minutes when we were in Weight and Balance. They said the paperwork involved in removing them would probably take a year. So, those two items I flew with I thought were completely worthless. And the lifevest--I don't know what you are going to do better. I really don't"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":119,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"honestly know what you are going to do better because of the ejection situation, but they are in the way. They are in the way of everything you do, and they are real little bearcats to get on and off---these little lifevests.\nConrad We didn't have a place to stow them.\nCooper Yes, we left them on the whole darn time just because we didn't have anywhere to stow them. But they are really in the way. They are a real pain in the rear.\nConrad Yes, it's all part of the suit combination.\nCooper Well, that's right.\nConrad If you didn't have the suit, they wouldn't be so bad.\nCooper Waste disposal--pack harder.\nConrad Yes.\nCooper Pack tighter. That's a very grave problem, in the fact that as you start getting defecation wastes of this type you want an area where you are not going to mixing that with other items too much, and you want an area that you start packing right the first time so you don't have to keep dragging it all out and repacking. I don't know how you are going to do it any differently than we did in keeping one area completely open for it, and just working and using that for your disposal"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":120,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"area.\nFCSD REP How about urine?\nCooper The urine system worked just great.\nConrad Except for one problem. It leaked on occasion, and I really attribute that to the fact that this rubber device gets covered with tars. I covered this pretty thoroughly with the doctors. I recommend that you take new urine rubber receivers along, one per each day of the flight. We had four along and we changed them every two days. They get gummy and tarry and they don't have their holding power and urine tends to flow back."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":121,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"around the side. That is what it amounts to.\nCooper Yes.\nConrad We never had any trouble with them when we put on a new one. The new one would last about a day before it would start getting gummy. We tried everything to keep them clean.\nCooper It would get gummy.\nConrad ...wipe on them and we left them unrolled so that they would dry out.\nCooper The rubber gets so gummy you can put the two together and they just stick together. It gets all gummy and sticky. It may be a better material is available.\nConrad I still think its the urine that does it.\nCooper That's what I'm saying. There may be a better material available that the urine won't effect that way. The urine is eating into that latex--its latex rubber, I suspect. Either carry more good ones along or get a better material to use. That should have been evaluated by CSD. They should have determined that urine does effect them and makes them go to pieces in a hurry.\nConrad Yes, I'm not sure they don't even wash them out occasionally."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":122,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Two other things we have is that you leave preheat on for 4 minutes prior to flushing. We got one tremendous big glob of urine ice that broke off sometime about the fifth day.\nConrad Oh, yes.\nCooper And, man, that indicated that it really built up. It must have been as big as that box there.\nConrad It looked like one of those sand castles you build. It was a conical buildup of ice. The liquid had flowed out. It kept building up and building up. But it was still flowing out through the center like a volcano. The darn thing broke off one day out there, and, boy, I tell you that thing was about this big around and it was about 3 and 1/2 inches high. It just went floating right by the spacecraft and it was pure yellow. Ha, ha! It was about 3 by 4 by 3 or 3 1/2 or 4. About 3 inches in diameter and about 4 inches high. It was triangular, dribbled up, rough shaped, but you could see where it was smooth on the back side where it had actually started to freeze. Boy, that scared us. We didn't want the urine system to freeze up so we went to 4 minutes. We used the recommended McDonnell procedures and we revised those slightly when we found out the tar was beginning"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":123,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"to gum up the little valve too.\nCooper The little relief check valve.\nConrad We'd built up a pressure in there when you would start to urinate in that thing. We would open it up and dump for 30 seconds after we went through regular dump cycle and evacuated the bag. We would open it up to the cockpit and let it dump 30 seconds which is what MAC recommended. Then we would sit there and cycle it on and off and have that vacuum suck around down on that valve.\nCooper Open and close that valve dry.\nConrad We cycled it three or four times rapidly with the vacuum opening and closing it and then we shut the system down. I don't know whether that helped or not. We had the impression that it did.\nCooper It made us feel better about the whole situation. At least the thing worked the whole time.\n8.9 Biomedical\nCooper Medical Data Passes--They weren't really too big a problem. They're necessary. I guess they are as minimum in interference as you can get these medical data passes. They weren't too bad. I talked to Chuck Berry this morning about it. I think that getting the food down into a better type system where"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":124,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"you give the pilot more option in what he eats rather than try to give him meal A, B, C, D, E, F, G is going to alleviate their problem as well as the pilots a great deal. It'll make it easier and take a lot less transmitting. They were thoroughly confused by this numbering system. It made it more difficult for them to keep track of what we were eating. The excersior worked fine. No problem at all. In fact, I used that exercisor a lot of times other than medical passes. My knees got hurting me. About the third day they really started hurting. So I started using the exercisor regular and found that it helped. Pete did the same thing later when his--\nConrad I didn't use it as much as Gordo did, but I did use it for the same reason. Both my knees got sore from being bent all the time. For some reason, I don't know why, it settles in your knees. I just found out that maybe once or twice a day with that thing in addition to the medical data pass eliminated the whole thing.\nCooper Yes, it really helped. Food and water evaluation. We have already evaluated the water. The water was excellent. Having cold water is really a luxury."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":125,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It is sure different than Mercury. The food just boils down to the fact that we quit eating the bite size food entirely. We had absolutely no desire for it after the third day. I doubt whether we touched a drop of that bite size food after the third day. We ate strictly the rehydrated food. If I were sitting down right now to redo this flight, I would make up a recommendation for the food. I would have a number of bags made up just the size of these rehydratable bags. Bags that don't have to be folded, crushed, rolled, or steam rollers driven over them. I'd make up these packets of eight, ten, or fifteen or whatever the neatest package with a zipper or a velcro on it is. I'd put those in there and let the pilot pick out what he wanted for a meal. He could pick out one or two or three or whatever he felt like he wanted for a meal. He could do the same with the juices. I'd have other bags in with just juices. We'd have a great many juices all stacked in there, and they don't have to be all folded and crumpled up. I think they will probably package a lot neater this way. You just have two types of bags. You'd have"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":126,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"food bags and juice bags. And then I'd have another\nbag just full of these wet wipes. If somebody\nwanted a wet wipe they could go in and get a wet wipe.\nThey wouldn't have to be handed back and forth,\nback and forth. They wouldn't be hanging all over\nthe cockpit. And that way you'd have a very neat\nset up. You wouldn't have a lot of food that is\ndifficult to stow. The big difficulty in stowing\nthis food is the paper. This makes the bulk.\nAll this tinfoil and other things wrapped in\nindividual plastic and then more foil and a great\nbig package holding the whole thing. And When you\nget all this paper gathered up the best you can\npossibly packet you have at least equal volume to what\nyou had initially with the food. I think that you\ncan cut down a great deal by clever packaging and allow\nthe pilot to choose his foods per meal. I think he'll\nbe happier. I think the packaging of it will be\nneater and easier. I think you will get a lot more\neffective use of space. I think the biggest\nproblem for GT-7 will be that they are going to\nhave a 2-1 factor. Everytime they pull out a package\nof food, by the time they get that food plus the waste\nproducts back in and stowed it's going to be exactly"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":127,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"twice the size it was when it came out. I don't\nbelieve there is anyway to get around it the way\nthe food is packaged.\nConrad What are you going to do? Jim and Ed ate everything\nin the spacecraft. You and I hardly ate anything.\nIf we had known that we were going to eat what we ate,\nwe could have had twice the room in the spacecraft.\nCooper Yes.\nConrad We left 10 packages of food there. We never\never touched it. Plus we filled up the locker\nwith another third of the food we didn't eat from\nthe packages that we opened. Toast, apricot cubes,\nbrownie squares, fruit cakes, and I don't know\nwhat all were stuffed all over that spacecraft.\nWe didn't eat any of that. I couldn't eat it if\nI had wanted to. I just didn't have any desire\nfor that stuff at all.\nCooper I don't know what it was about, but it just seemed\nto be so dry, and chew and concentrated.\nConrad The doctors figured we were running on about\n1800 calories a day, and I don't feel that we were\ncheating ourselves. There is a big difference between\nour flight and Jim and Ed's. They went after this\nbig extravehicular thing, and I think that it probably--"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":128,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Well, I'll tell you, a couple of days we ate a\nlot more. That third day we had a real full day.\nWe were really busy. Man, we really had the appetite.\nWe really gobbled down the food and we ate good.\nThose days we were just drifting were--\nConrad That makes sense to me because if I'm working I eat\na lot and if I'm not working I don't eat much.\nCooper Maybe our morale was low all over. We didn't\nconsume much food. I got hungry and Pete did, too.\nI could tell when I was hungry, and we'd say okay\nlet's break out the food and eat. We really boiled\ndown to just about 2 meals a day when we powered\ndown and 3 meals a day when we were working hard.\nIt was only about 2 meals a day powered down that\nwe even wanted. The bite size food tastes awful\ngood when you just sit around and snack on bite\nsize food. It just didn't taste worth anything up\nthere. I may have finished off maybe one or possibly\ntwo packages of it up there just by having it\nsitting around in that little nook or cranny.\nMaybe once a day, I'd have one of them. Just an\nin-between meal snack but other than that it was\nreally a waste having them along. I think that if\nwe had all bite size food we would have quit eating"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":129,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"entirely. I imagine that would be an easy way to\npackage the food. But the rehydratable ones were\nreally good. There is just no getting around it.\nThey are good food. The are nourishing and...\nConrad Boy, I don't know what to say about the sleep periods.\nCooper The juices were good. They were really excellent.\nWe had some leaks. We had four bag failures on\nthose plastic bags. I think it was the function of\ncrumpling this bag all up again and having to wad\nit around to fit it tightly into a different\nshape from the fold that it was in. I think that\nthose four bag failures could have been real serious.\nPete had one that was worse probably--\nConrad I was eating merrily on the eighth day, shrimp creole,\nand it blew out the side, and it blew this itty bitty\ndehydrated, rehydrated shrimp all over the circuit\nbreaker panel. It was red and it looked like somebody\nhad flashed their hash all over--Ha,ha! You can't\nclean it up in zero g. Everytime you wipe a shrimp\noff one place it would float over somewhere else.\nI was snatching shrimp out of the air all over\neverywhere. I was bloody mad at the bag. I was\nabout to have a fit."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":130,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FCSD Rep Why don't we finish this sleep period? And we will\nbe through with systems and pick up those questions.\nConrad Start the experiments. Okay.\nCooper Okay, sleep period. I think the schedule needs to\nbe set somewhere around the normal sleep cycle that\na person has already, in other words, I don't think\nthat the sleep ought to be set for mid-morning or\nmid-afternoon. And I personally think that the\ncockpit is small enough that you're almost going\nto have to sleep both guys at the same time.\nConrad I concur. I don't think you can be doing the ex-\nperiments with one of them--\nCooper And have the other one asleep.\nConrad Yeah.\nCooper Pete and I both found that the times when we really\nslept the best and most comfortable and really got\nsome good sound sleep was when we powered that thing\ncompletely down and turned all the lights out and\nwere down around the backside area of South America\nand there wasn't anybody to cut in and be flashing\nin to tell us all kind of things and they would\nleave us alone and we just both power down and go\nto sleep and get a good sleep. And that is the only\nway you are going to do it, because if one guy is"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":131,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"doing experiments or working, or if one in the\nspacecraft, or doing all this other stuff, the other\none is just not going to sleep. This is pure and\nsimple as that.\nFCSD Rep How about mentioning about how quiet it is.\nCooper The inside of the spacecraft is just as quiet as\nthe inside of a very quiet office room.\nConrad Yeah. Well now, the big thing here is that we had\ntaken our helmets off and put these neck dams on\nso we had no, none of this suit air flow over the\nmikes. And when you get in that configuration so\nyou are not picking up any noises, as a matter of\nfact, we had our intercom volumes turned down. Most\nof our talking we were doing was to one another.\nCooper We were just talking in our normal tone of voice.\nConrad And our radio volume levels were extremely low. We\nwere carrying about 4 on our radio volumes. And\nthat was more than adequate volume. I mean that\nguy came in loud and clear in the headset. You\ncould hear a pin drop in that spacecraft. The only\nsound that you were aware of was a very gentle\nswishing sound of air which was flow due to the\nrecirc being open.\nCooper Right."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":132,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper And it was so quiet that you could hear a guy when\nhe picked the book up and started turning the page.\nConrad Yeah, I could hear in back in the adapter section\nafter really getting adapted to this thing, we\ncould hear the hydrogen vent, we could hear the\nfuel cell hydrogen purge. We couldn't hear oxygen\npurge. We could hear all thruster firing of the\nattitude thrusters. When we did our burns, we\ndidn't even have our helmets on. Did we? We had\nour helmets off when we did the maneuver burns,\nwhen we did those perigee--and we could hear all\nthrusters firing. Aft firing thrusters. We\nblipped the forward firing thrusters and we fired\nthe up-down and left and right thrusters and we\nheard them all fire -- all the maneuver thrusters\nand all the attitude thrusters. And I could hear\nmany other noises working back in the--There was a\npump package or something squeaking back there that\nsqueaked for all through the test period and I was\ncurious to see if I was going to hear it in flight\nand sure enough, it was loud and clear. It was\nback there behind my head in the adapter section.\nAnd you could hear just anything that was out of\nthe ordinary noise. And that was what the problem"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":133,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was, it was so blasted quiet in there that when\nsomething did click or snap or that was not cyclic\nin nature that you got used to it woke you up just\nlike that. And as Gordo says, turning the pages\nin a book, or he'd reach over and pull something\noff the Velcro, just a little food package and just\nthat little zip of the Velcro sounded like it was\nmagnified in there cause it was so blasted quiet\nin the spacecraft. He couldn't talk in the micro-\nphone without me hearing it.\nCooper I tried actually cupping my hands and talking into\nmy mike here so I could make as little noise as\npossible.\nConrad And I tried it too. We would wake each other up.\nSo our recommendation - I'm sure the spacecraft is\nsafe. You may want to look at something - I really\ndon't think you need this, but I think it should be\nlooked at from an engineering point of view - what\nwould - what are the catastrophic things that could\nbother you if you were both asleep that would need\nsomewhat of a warning to wake you up and I really\ndon't think you need any myself.\nCooper I don't either.\nConrad But I think that the spacecraft - and we felt that"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":134,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"way in flight, and we did; we both went to sleep\nat the same time. And I'm sure if we would start\nlosing pressurization our ears would have told us\nthat we were as sensitive to that as we were to\nnoise.\nCooper This schedule we have covered that, I think it\nshould be in. Because invariably, we could get busy\ndoing other things and have many interferences and\nit would wind up that we would both wind up sleeping\nduring the normal East Coast nighttime cycle. In-\nvariably, we just weren't sleepy at other times.\nConrad Yeah, I think the other thing is that now in the\nschedule my naptime always took place when we were\ncleaning the spacecraft. This was too short after\nthe stateside passes. That compressed the whole\nrest of the sleeping cycle. Although we tried to\nstick to it. Gordo would go to sleep for his long\nperiod which was usually 5 hours instead of 6 be-\ncause we'd slid into that time. We always ate our\nmeals together and we were scheduled not to. We\nalways took the vision test together. We weren't,\nthis way we compressed things down. And uh, then\nI usually wound up having about 5 hours off, but\nI never slept the full 5 hours. There was just one"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":135,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"night that I did. There was one night that Gordo\nslept maybe 6 or 7 hours and I let him sleep that\nwhole time because we were just exhausted. And\nthat was the same reciprocal thing -- he let me\nsleep for 6 or 7 hours. That was the only time in\nthe flight that we both really slept any long period\nof time. The rest of the time I don't think we ever\nslept longer than 2 hours at the most -- And most\nof the time it was 50 minutes between stations.\nCooper Well, that's the whole thing, that the -- on this\nschedule thing there are many, many, many inter-\nferences to sleeping and these stations just calling\nin letting you know that they have TM solid and are\nstanding by, interfere with you--they wake you up.\nConrad They shouldn't even do that--on backside passes un-\nless they got something to give you, they shouldn't\neven call you.\nCooper And then too, when they start handing you a bunch\nof flight plan updates and they want you to do this\nand that and one man is trying to be--they are try-\ning to keep one man real busy while the other sleeps,\njust doesn't work out. Configuration, well, just\nclose your eyes. The best configuration to sleep\nis to turn all lights off and sleep. I will say one"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":136,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"thing right now that we haven't mentioned before,\nI believe the Polaroid window filters we\ntook were the greatest things we had along.\nConrad Especially when we got on that drift in flight.\nCooper I'd really recommend those very strongly. We put\nboth of those up dim then down to where they com-\npletely block things out, turn the lights out, go\nto sleep and really have at it.\nConrad One guy could open his up and really see the ground\nwell with them in the open condition, but it was a\ncircular hole that was small and with the filter on\nthe other window it kept the spacecraft relatively\ndark if the other guy was trying to sleep.\nCooper Right. What's this mission briefing?\nConrad I think that was supposed to be the thing that we\nchanged courses in midstream and we did; we briefed\neach other and brought one another up on what was\ngoing on and what we had written down."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":137,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"9.0 OPERATIONAL CHECKS\n9.1 Apollo Landmark Identification\nFCSD Rep On these - let's try to get everything in that log\non these --it's going to take a little more time?\nI think --\nConrad Well, you want to take each Apollo landmark separa-\ntely? Is that what you want to do?\nFCSD Rep Yes. As your list -- go down and call out the ones\nyou did and whatever you have on your log there and\nwe'll put this in one neat little package.\nConrad Well, the first one they gave us--you want to do\nthis exactly fully like - time, rev?\nFCSD Rep I'd like to, yes, because we've had an awful lot of\ntrouble.\nConrad Okay, the first Apollo landmark was 208 and it was\non day one at 09:27 and it was covered by clouds.\nAnd it was Cape Rhir and we didn't get it.\nCooper In fact, the clouds were right over the edge and\nwe didn't see anything until just about off the\nland.\nConrad And the next one was -- Gordo, why don't you talk\nabout -- You took all these except--you took them\nall, as a matter of fact, so why don't you give\nthem the business on that, I didn't even look at"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":138,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"half of them. Most of them occurred during my sleep\ntime.\nCooper Okay, the next one was Sequence 212. And that is\non Lake Winemarka and it was a point out in the\nlakes in Brazil--down in the Brazilian area, and\nit's a large lake. There are no other lakes in the\nimmediate area. The lake was very, very distinctive.\nYou could see it from some 6 or 700 miles away very\nclearly--big, heavy jungle all around the lake and\nthe point that they selected was the finger of a\nlittle peninsula out in the lake in a particular\npoint right on the peninsula. I thought the lake\nwas easy to find, the peninsula was relatively easy\nto find from quite a distance out. There was no\nproblem getting on it. It was a fairly distinctive\nlandmark. The light was fairly low - it was late-\nin-the-day type pass, and the light was fairly low\nover in the West, but no particular problem getting\non it, holding on the target, and identifying it.\nApollo landmark--let's see, I took 1, 2, 3, sequences\nof pictures over that. And Apollo landmark 213 was\nthe next one, and I wonder if they want the magazine\nand sequence numbers. Okay, on 212 it was magazine 1\nand exposure 62, 63, and 64. On Apollo landmark 213"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":139,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it was magazine 4, exposure 10, exposure 11. 213\nwas Lake DePoopo in South America and here again\nthe lake was fairly distinctive although this was\na shallow water lake - the other lake was in the\nmountains in a fairly deep water - crater-type lake,\nwhereas this Lake DePoopo was a flat land lake fairly\nshallow, the lake was not the same shape as on the\nmap that we had of it. In fact, the map we have is\nquite a poor map and the island that the point is on,\nIsla de Panza, is not the same shape as the island\nthat is shown. It is the only island it can be,\nit is not exactly, quite different in reality than\nit is here on the thing. The island is changed in\nshape, but being a shallow water lake you can see\nthat the lake could very readily change with the\nwater level -- change shape with the water level;\nand these islands could very readily be modified\nfairly readily just by dredging or hacking away at\nthem. It was obviously the only lake in that im-\nmediate area that it could be and it had the same\ngeneral shape as this lake. And it had the river\nleading in. The lake was fairly distinctive, and\nfairly easy to find, the point was easy enough to\nget onto, and I got these two pictures of it. Light"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":140,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"conditions were again fairly late-in-the-afternoon\ntype light conditions, but they were good enough.\nI don't think this lake was nearly as distinctive\nhowever, as the Lago de Winemarga. I don't think\nyou can trust these shallow water lakes as being\nthat definitive in that they may change a little on\nyou and won't show up as good, particularly from\nhigher altitudes I don't believe, as the deeper\nwater lake perhaps. And the next one, let's see,\nas to time--days and times--first of all, I was\nskipping that, day 2, 21 hours 45 minutes 39 sec-\nonds was Sequence 212 which I covered, Sequence 213\nwhich we just covered was day 3, 21 hours 38 minutes\nand 2 seconds; these were all made at -- 212 was\nmade at 1/250 at f/8 because of the quite low light\nvalue, and Sequence 213 was made at 1/250 at 9.5 and\nthen one at f/8, because here again, it was a fairly\nlow light level. They were all made at fairly near\n90° pitch down. Sequence 207 was made by day 5,\n7 hours 14 minutes 27 seconds. I made two pictures\nthere. 57 and 58 are magazine 4, 1/250 at 9.5 and\napproximately 70° pitch down and 30 to 50° yaw.\nThese were yawed off at some slight angle. And\n207 was Canary Islands and it was the southern point"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":141,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"on the La Palma Island, and very distinctive; how-\never, one can get confused if there is any little\nbit of cloud cover at the islands you're looking\nat. There are approximately five or six islands\nout in this group and with some of the scattered\ncloud conditions, you can get on the wrong island\nthere fairly readily, particularly if part of one\nisland, where partially covered by clouds, maybe\njust a point--you can very readily get the wrong\npoint. However, I think we got the right point\nall right without any problem. And I think the\nlighting conditions were very excellent, really,\nexcept for the scattered clouds on the water down\nthere; the lighting conditions themselves were good\nfor these pictures. And on day 5, 10 hours 25 min-\nutes and 2 seconds, we got Sequence 208 which was\nthe one we had tried the first day and had had\ncloud cover. That was magazine 4, exposure no. 62\ntaken at 1/250 at f/9.5 90° with about a 20° yaw\nright, and there again that was the point near\nCape Rhir near Agadir and the comments that I had\nto make on this one are that there are three points\ngoing down this same general land mass that are\nneither one a great deal more distinctive than the"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":142,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"other. In fact, the one that is the most distinctive\nfrom quite a distance out is Cape Sim near Osaweira.\nIt is a lot brighter, lighter colored sand and is\nmore distinctive than Cape Rhir. However, once you\nlearn the place, Cape Rhir becomes a little more\ndistinctive when you learn what to look for, because\nCape Rhir is at the edge of the mountains and just\nto the southeast of Cape Rhir, there is a river and\na valley--a big, wide, green valley which travels\nup to the east along the edge of the mountains.\nWhen you once learn to look for it, this river and\nvalley are quite a give-away, because look just to\nthe left of it and that's Cape Rhir. I think, prob-\nably it is the most distinctive of these three. The\nthree points that show up immediately from perhaps\n800--1000 miles out are Cape Hodad and Cape Sim and\nCape Rhir. You can see all three little points\nsticking out there. Neither one of which are\nparticularly more distinct except this Cape Sim has\nbrighter colored sand and begins to show up a little\nmore distinctive, but once you learn where the land-\nmarks are, these mountains and valleys near Agadir\ngive away Cape Rhir. I believe it is the best\nlandmark--in that immediate area. I'm not sure that"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":143,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I agree, incidentally on all the Apollo landmarks\nlandmarks we've got here. I'm not sure I agree, in\ngeneral, with any of the Apollo landmarks that they\nhave. I think there are lots more distinctive land-\nmark features around the country. I think that\ntheir idea of selecting a point of land down in the\nwater is good, but I think that there are numerous\nplaces around the world where, say a large river\ncomes out and intersects with the ocean maybe at a\npoint, at a point in a river and things of this\ntype, would be even more distinctive or an inter-\nsection of a river and the ocean, or an intersection\nof something in the type of causeways in Miami or\nthe causeways here at the Cape where they cross the\nwater with a very prominent water landmark. They'll\ngive you a very accurate telescopic point to sight\non, whereas the particular points of land that they\nhave selected are not really accurate type sighting\npoints for real accuracy, I don't feel. They're\nreasonably distinctive, but I don't think any--nearly\nas distinctive as a lot of other areas around the\ncountry that could be selected.\nFCSD Rep Okay, why don't you look through these things here\nand see if there is anything there that you haven't\ncovered."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":144,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Okay, let's see, going down on the 9.0 Operational\nChecks - Acquisition..\nFCSD Rep That's Apollo Landmarks.\nCooper All right, the--I think to find these landmarks,\nthings of this type, one thing that I feel pretty\nstrongly that you really need is a platform. You\nneed a platform to operate from. You need pointing,\nsomething to give you pointing information. Now,\nyou can find it approximately with the plat-\nform off, and by knowing about what BEF or SEF are,\nand by yawing approximately so many degrees, knowing\nwhat time to look for it, approximately what degrees\nto pitch down. Chances are, if it is fairly dis-\ntinctive you are going to find it. But for certainly\nvery accurate acquisition, you certainly need a\nplatform up and some accurate pointing information,\nthen you really got it pinned.\nCooper We tried it both ways and there is no comparison.\nIf you really want to make sure you get on a target,\nif you've got a time and at the time you are at\nthis time, then the pitch angle and the yaw angle\nto be at, boy, you just can't miss it. If you go\nto those angles just a few seconds ahead of time\nand set right there and as you come up on the time,"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":145,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"there the point is, right there. You just don't\nmiss it. Updating, of course, you've got to keep\nthese times updated as you--depending on your\nephemeris, and how you are sliding around on your\noriginal time. Ours, fortunately, was just right\non the money practically the whole mission, fairly\nlate in the program we began to decay enough that\nwe were changing times fairly significantly, but\nthe weather is the biggest factor of all. Of course,\nif the weather is bad in the area, you don't get it.\nYou just don't get the target. If it exists, humidity\nlike you find along the West Coast of the United\nStates then you aren't going to get it although\nsome places out there like the point by Santa Barbara\nand Point Arguella and some of those points, even in\nspite of fog and haze, almost invariably show up.\nThese are the kind of things that should be taken\ninto consideration. The weather is probably the\nbiggest factor on whether you are going to get a\npoint or not. Sun angle is not so important as\nweather, although it definitely is a factor in that\nvery early or very late the sun angles really tend\nto cut down the visibility, particularly if you have\nthe addition of humidity in the air. If you have"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":146,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the addition of humidity in the air. If you have\nhigh humidity and then low sun angles, you are out\nof luck. If it is a very dry humidity, the low sun\nangles don't hurt you nearly so much. The sightings\n--there again the ease of which you are going to get\nyour sightings done, get on to them and get them\nspotted and so on, is going to be dependent on the\nlandmark itself. Those of them that we got, I think,\nare certainly reasonably landmarks, although some\nof the confusion things can be--\nConrad I just found out why the whip antenna didn't go up.\nIt was my fault.\nCooper Why is that?\nConrad Because I powered down the common control bus.\nRemember, I turned off all squib batteries to save\nbatteries later.\nCooper You didn't turn those off till later.\nConrad Well, I know I didn't, but I probably turned them\noff before we ran the antenna up though, or tried\nto. I'm not really sure.\nCooper I don't think so.\nConrad Well, don't mind that. If it comes out, well, that\nwas the reason.\nCooper I remember when you powered those down. We had"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":147,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"already gone through all the sequences and everything\nby then.\nCooper Okay, let's see. Designated targets--\nFCSD Rep I think you have covered that pretty much.\nCooper Yes, all the targets.\nFCSD Rep The targets that they have designated versus what..\nCooper Yes. Okay, well the designated targets--There are\nsome alternate targets right in the areas here that\nI've already mentioned. I mentioned a couple of\ncases there that could possibly be better targets\nthan the ones that they selected, although there\nis nothing wrong, particularly, with the ones that\nthey selected. I personally liked a little bit\nbetter than on target 212, or Sequence 212, this\npoint of land. I thought a little more distinctive\nwas the point of land that came out of a little\ntown called San Pedro, just north of there on the\nsame lake. That's something to consider. It's a\npoint of land that is quite distinct because it is\nfairly heavy. A big mountain sort of came right\ndown into the lake and dropped off into it, and it\nwas quite a prominent point of land. It is very\nshear and precise, whereas, it is a little bigger\npoint. Although, from a great distance farther out,"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":148,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the point they had might have proved to be better.\nMaps--Boy, we ran the gamut on them, but in general,\nthe Apollo maps we got were just stinking. They\nwere lousy and they didn't give you any lead-ins to\nwhere you were trying to find these things, and if\nit hadn't been for Harry Kazuma's map over there\nand our regular orbital map, we never would have be-\ngun to have found these places. We couldn't have\npossibly told where they were. And the Apollo maps\nthat they have on here, these colored lithograph types\ngizmoes things, are just worthless. They are not\nworth the powder to blow them up with. There are\nseveral real typical examples of why these maps are\nso bad. For instance, right here, just on the better\nmap of the group, they have the Canary Islands, but\nthey don't even have all of the islands in the group.\nThe island that you pick is sitting way up here at\nthe corner of the map and you don't know what's\nleading you into there, or whether there's maybe\nanother island just right by that one. You need a\nbigger scale map like this one. That was a little\ntoo big a scale perhaps, really, but that's the\nkind of map you need to really point out what you\nneed coming into it, and somewhat of a more reasonable"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":149,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"picture. I think the prime example we had of any\ndifficulty in map location was not on the Apollo\nmaps themselves, but it is exactly the same kind of\nthing. What was that one that had the little island?\nConrad Lake Depoopo.\nCooper No, no. It had one tiny little island right off\nthe coast and it wasn't on the Apollo maps. It was\nthe--\nConrad It was a D-6. That was that thing off Brazil. That's\nall it was. It was a chart of water with an island\nin the middle of it. It turned out that right at\nthe edge of the chart was another island. We took\nthe wrong island first because, heck, it looked like\nthere wasn't another island--\nConrad I'm just making this comment because it will apply\nto the Apollo map making, as well, and this was an\nideal example of how to really screw somebody up.\nCooper We also got another island right up there. We got\nit and we were sailing along thinking that was a\ngood shot we made of that island, and we looked\ndown and I said, \"Hey, look down there. What's\nthat. That's another one.\" I swung over on it,\nand he said, \"Let's get it, too.\" So, we discovered"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":150,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that it was the one. It was just by accident that\nwe got the right one.\nFCSD Rep Okay. Detail--which of these do you think would be\nbest? I think you covered some of this.\nCooper Well, I think that coastline is the best, distinctive\nfeatures on a coastline. Next best are rivers and\nmountains. Probably, if you can have combinations\nof the rivers, mountains, and coastlines, these are\nquite good. A river running into a coastline and\ninto the sea, I think, is a real excellent one.\nVery good. And roads--boy, there is just no getting\naround it that roads make an excellent landmark area.\nThey really show up. And a road in the right area\nwhere it is contrasty will really show up for a long,\nlong way away, like a white concrete road and darker\nbackground, a dark green background, really shows.\nAnd then, I guess cities show up probably the least\nof anything. They tend to have enough vegetation\nand foliage and everything and they kind of blend\nin. They don't really show. Lakes are excellent\nlandmarks. Airports are not as good as lakes and\nthings of this type. Airports tend to blend in a\nlittle bit. Let's see, color contrast--I've already\ncovered that. Readability --"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":151,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"146\nCONFIDENTIAL\nFCSD Rep Anything at night?\nCooper Coastline. On a clear night, boy, the best thing that will show up is coastline. The greatest light contrast is between your water and land.\nFCSD Rep Okay, I think that's enough on that.\n9.2 Cabin Lighting Survey\nCooper I'll let Pete comment on that one.\nConrad Well, it was very straightforward, and we didn't get very many of them, mainly because we wound up in drifting flight. We took the measurements as advertised, except there is one little glitch in the thing. They wanted you to take a light measurement out,the,window, and they wanted you to do it in either the heads-up, or heads-down. In doing this, that said the horizon was in front of you. Now the light meter reading looking at the black sky just above the horizon in the daytime, which was the total sky, was usually a number around 11.5. But looking at the earth, or just below the horizon, the meter reading was about 15.6. So, I always recorded two readings, the reading for the horizon and the black sky, because I didn't really know which one you wanted. With the spot meter the thing just turned out that way. Okay, we made one at 01+23+10. Gordo\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":152,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 147\nmade one at 05+04+30+00. I made another one at 03+01+45+00, and we had another one at 04+22+40+00. Out of those, two of them were in drifting flight, and the other two were heads-up. And I had this recording that 11.6 was equal to black sky and 16.8 was normally representative of earth background. That was it. It was straightforward.\n9.3 SPADATS Tracking Check\nConrad We did it. We did it by turning our beacon on so they could just track us, but we, of course, didn't get into it with the REP thing. The SPADATS thing, actually, was supposed to take place during the REP operation, and it didn't. But we did turn on our beacon so SPADATS could track us one time over this Williamtown site, or wherever it was. That's all there was to it, so there was nothing to---\n9.4 UHF Antenna Pattern Test\nConrad Now, these UHF antenna pattern tests were done just as written in the book and the data is recorded.\nDo you want it?\nFCSD Rep Why don't you read it out?\nConrad Okay. We did a UHF sequence 03 at 01+10+44+25, and the angles were 0°, 0°, 0°. We did a sequence 01 at 02+13+47+05, and the angles were 90°, 0°, and\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":153,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"148\nCONFIDENTIAL\n14° left. We did an 02+15+21+19, sequence 02, and the angles were 0°, roll left 132°, 0°, and they were done as advertised.\nFCSD Rep How about any updating on that?\nConrad No, they just sent it up and said to do it, and these were the angles they wanted. They set this up for us to do.\n9.5 Thruster Illumination Checks\nConrad Never did it. We were supposed to do it the beginning of the first night or something like that, and it was in a sleep period time and we were tired and we didn't do it. After that, we got into either a power down or drifting situation where we were unable to do it, so it was never done during the flight.\n9.6 Dual Command Transmitter Test\nConrad That was never done. That had to do with the REP too, if I remember right. I think it was DCS light resets. I think what they were trying to do was to find out if our radar was on. They sent DCS commands and we were transmitting or something--what could happen--We never got into that test.\n9.7 Radar Tests\nConrad Okay, Test 2, short range, boresight spacecraft on REP, no problem. We never got time to get into the\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":154,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"149\nCONFIDENTIAL\nrest of it. We never got more than a mile from him, so we got that 3000 foot transient but we never got the 30,000. What was the transient at 3000 feet like? Do you remember, Gordo? On radar when the REP went farther than 3000 feet, I don't think there was any transient to speak of.\nCooper I didn't notice any particular transient, or any noticeable one at all. I was looking for it.\nConrad Yeah. We did the--\nCooper I had it damped pretty well.\nConrad We never did get the radar to run for 3 hours, so we didn't get test 5, test 4, no correlation between range and range rate display and visual observations at short range, they all worked very well. Test 6, we observed the normal transients that you'd expect, just as advertised on here, and I also noticed that the lock-on light cycled on and off, on and off, when I was in a standby mode after warmup. Radar test 7, stand by to ON, you have to get Gordo on that.\nConrad Test 8. We dashed over there the first time and as soon as we were within about 260 to 270 miles, the radar locked up on 248.66 miles. I got the first digital readout on address 69 and it read down to\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":155,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"150\nCONFIDENTIAL\nsome 160 miles. I read the numbers out over the air. I'm not sure that they aren't on tape, too. The tape hadn't run out then. Then we tracked back out again and it pointed right to this MILA area here at the Cape when we had the needles centered. Gordo was tracking on the needles, and it seemed to work real well. We are really impressed with it. As you know, we got it to lock on the REP everytime after that over the Cape, but we never got the range to read right. I don't know whether that was a radar problem or a computer problem.\nConrad At that time, the voice recorder was working on the first test, and I think there is some information on the tape.\n9.8 HF Evaluation\nConrad HF evaluation test number 1. We transmitted all the way around the world. Then we gave up number 2, because it was keeping the other Astronaut awake. Then we did the other HF transmission test which was listen. We did hear Hawaii for awhile going away from them and coming back in -\nCooper That was a ridiculous test anyway.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":156,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"151\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper ....HF when they were playing music. It dropped\nout when we heard it, and we'd transmit once in a\nwhile to them and they heard us. It worked real\nwell.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":157,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"152\nCONFIDENTIAL\n10.0 VISUAL SIGHTINGS\n10.1 Powered Flight\nConrad Well, everything was straightforward up until\nFairing Jet. We told you about the problems we had\nat Fairing Jet. We want to take a look at that.\nCooper I didn't see anything--\nConrad I did see the horizon come into view at about 60°.\nCooper Yes, I saw it just as we began to stage over. I\nlooked out over your window.\nConrad That's right. Right after staging in guidance ini-\ntiate it came down to about 80° on the horizon and\nman, it looked great out there.\nCooper And the only thing that I noticed at SECO was a lot\nof debris.\nConrad Oh, yes, it was stuff all over everywhere. About\nthe funniest thing of all was --\nCooper Snow all over the whole area.\nConrad Yes, and just all sorts of glittering pieces of\nthis, that and the other thing.\nCooper Pieces and bits.\nConrad Then all these washers and goodies started floating\naround in the spacecraft, but the ..... was the\nwasher floating along --\nCooper That was three or four orbits later. Here we are\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":158,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"153\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwhipping along at 17,000 miles an hour or so and I\nlooked out and here's that washer floating right in\nfront of my window. It sat out there and floated\naround a while. I pointed it out to Pete and he\ngot over and looked at it and it floated on around\nand finally it just was drifting on off. Finally\nit disappeared. And about an hour later a bolt\ncame off.\n10.2 Orbital Flight\nConrad We didn't see our own booster. We were too busy.\nWe started the flight plan right away and we never\nturned around to look at it.\nCooper We never turned around to look at it.\nConrad We sure as heck saw the REP.\nCooper We saw the REP and saw the REP and saw the REP.\nConrad We saw the REP blanket too.\nCooper The REP blanket, I think we mentioned before, but\nthe REP blanket someway or other got between us and\nthe REP. This means that the REP either went through\nit or tumbled over it, because the blanket was be-\ntween us and the REP. Man-made objects in orbit.\nLet's see booster, REP--\nConrad Okay, now that satellite--\nCooper Satellites. We never saw any of the scheduled ones.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":159,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"154\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad We never saw any of the scheduled ones but you've\ngot to have the platform to see them. They gave us\nangles like pitch 82° and yaw 45. You're looking\nat the black sky. You haven't any idea of where\nyou're looking. You have to have the platform.\nOne thing that we did find, if their platform point-\ning at satellites was actually the pointing informa-\ntion they gave us for the ground objects, why we\nwouldn't have had any trouble finding them.\nCooper The pointing information that we got from the ground\nwas excellent.\nConrad We hacked that time on the second and we were\nreally pointed with the platform up and we were\nlooking right down the pipe at whatever it was that\nthey were wanting us to look at. The only reason\nwe didn't see it is we couldn't make it out. But\nwe were looking at it.\nCooper Satellites--There was only one time when Pete and\nI thought we saw something and we didn't have time\nto identify it. We were in drifting flight and we\nnever could identify it. I don't even know if it\nwas a satellite. So many things are going by when\nyou're drifting that it's difficult to say. Geo-\ngraphical--We saw millions of geographical details:\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":160,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"155\nCONFIDENTIAL\nrivers, lakes, oceans--\nConrad I think all of that will come out in the experiments\ntoo. We saw all kinds -\nCooper Towns, airports, railroads, roads, and all that\nstuff.\nConrad Airplanes.\nCooper Airplanes.\nConrad Anything you say, we saw at least one each.\nCooper I finally saw one and I nearly busted my rear end\ndoing it.\nConrad I saw the carrier. I saw an airliner. I saw con-\ntrails. I saw individual houses up in Tibet. One\nthing I didn't see for Gordo was a car.\nCooper I couldn't find him a car. He was sitting over there\nasleep. I turned on the whole control system and\nturned around to show him one. This was the only\none I could find during the whole stinking lousy\ntrip.\nConrad We saw just about anything you would expect us to\nsee.\nCooper But there again I think you've got to have the con-\ntrol system to point where you have your windows\nright to make sightings. You just can't catch them\nin drifting flight.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":161,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tOne day we went past El Paso and the lighting conditions were just right. You really could see the individual streets in El Paso. You could distinguish the streets but this wasn't always true. The lighting conditions had to be right. One day we made a pass over the United States and I could see the streets, the airports, the lakes and every principle town across the United States all on one orbit. We started at Los Angeles, went to Phoenix to Tucson, Abilene, White Sands, El Paso--\nCooper\tYou could see the details down there in Clear Lake - Taylor Lake area--like you were flying over coming in to land.\nConrad\tDallas, Nashville, Memphis--\nCooper\tIt was clear as a bell.\nConrad\tAnd when we went right out at Savannah and we were looking right down the pipe at Jacksonville, Florida. You could see the bridges and the St. Johns River and everything.\nCooper\tWhen we came over the Cape here you could see every one of the launch pads.\nConrad\tI should have two 70-mm photographs. I guarantee you that I got a 70-mm photograph of the Cape one day like nobody ever took before. If it came out,"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":162,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"it was the clearest picture of the Cape.\nCooper\tBoy, that was beautiful. You could see every detail. You could see every causeway and every street, everything that rode around the Cape, and buildings all over the Cape.\nConrad\tAll that was on the same day but it was another orbit.\nCooper\tCelestial--\nConrad\tGosh, we could see seventh magnitude stars--\nCooper\tMercury never had a window. Our windows were filthy. When we lifted off it just absolutely unforgiveable how dirty they were. Yet there were many times the magnitude of visibility the Mercury windows were. We could see easily seventh magnitude stars. Well, in Orion we could see all seven stars in the belt and we could see clusters down the side of the leg.. I've never seen those clusters before. I have seen big blowups of them, but you could definitely see two good size clusters. Celestial--We saw a lot of planets and we saw the moon under all kinds of conditions. We saw the sun. We took Polaroid testings on the sun. We ran the Polaroid filters at different angles. It looks to me like the sun has circular"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":163,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"polarization. I just can't find any linear definition of it. When the sun is setting you can get some linear polarity in a vertical plane, but otherwise I just can't see anything different one way than the other. I took the filter out and rotated it a number of times. I took the whole filter out. We saw a Zodiacal light. We saw--\nConrad\tYes, we really did a couple of times--just could see it where night vision was right. We had the lights out in cockpit and everything. Boy, you could really--\nCooper\tPete spotted an interesting phenomenon that he pointed out one night that I had never seen before. It looked like an Aurora. It was an Aurora type light and it was a very bright green. It changed in color and was in the airglow layer. It actually changed the height of the airglow below. It brightened it above where it -- but below it, it seemed to cut it down and make it more definitive. Where it wasn't it was kind of fuzzy along there and then where this glow was the airglow kind of jumped up and was sort of chopped off very sharply. This was very bright. I don't know what it was. It was apparently some kind of a Aurora effect. We saw a lot of meteorites"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":164,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in Australia was a good example. Two different days it was completely clobbered in where you couldn't see anything on the ground in that immediate area. This point Rhir was clobbered in one day. We were going to get an Apollo landmark on it and it was just back in under the clouds in fact. And Kano we were going to get a shot of the Kano air field, wasn't it?\nConrad\tYes, that was clobbered.\nCooper\tYes, it was clobbered. We got right up close to it and there were these low clouds hanging in there just scattered to broken clouds and we couldn't see.\nConrad\tActually on the D-6 stuff most of the time the experimenters were up on what was clobbered and they didn't even bother to give it to us, or if they gave it to us it became clobbered before we got there. They usually were able to tell us that it was going to be clobbered and then many times they gave us that the weather was pretty good, but there's three tenths cloud coverage so you may or may not. It didn't bother us too much around the coastal regions."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":165,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[illegible]"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":166,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 159 A\n\nCooper\tCloud Coverage. We had varied cloud coverage\nthroughout the flight.\nConrad\tBoy, I think we saw every phenomenon you could\nthink of with the clouds.\nCooper\tJust about everything you could think of. We saw\ntyphoons, and hurricanes, and--\nConrad\tWe saw well defined eyes in these tropical storms\nand others without--with such cirrus cover that you\ncouldn't define an eye. We saw some of the most\nfantastic thunder storms we have ever seen.\nCooper\tWe saw hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of miles\nof trememdous big thunder storm lines with squall\nlines going across it.\nConrad\tNear South America.\nCooper\tHad at times as many as 15 to 20 thunderstorms\nthat were lighting up all at the same time.\nConrad\tI think I have some good 16 mm camera coverage of\nthe thunderstorm lightning at night.\nCooper\tAnd these are--then we saw--then we had great\nexpanses over the same areas of excellent weather,\nclear weather. We saw a lot of dust storms"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":167,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 159 B\n\nin Arabia and Africa.\nConrad\tYes. You could see those desert storms real clear-\nly.\nCooper\tThe wind picking up and moving the sand along.\nOther days we saw the same areas just as clear with\nno wind. Beautiful weather.\nConrad\tIt was interesting in those deserts to notice that\nyou could really pick up the prevailing wind trails.\nCooper\tYes.\nConrad\tYou know from the sand flow.\nCooper\tThe way the sand dunes were--\nConrad\tAnd which as I sort of remember back somewhere\nthere was a lot of explanation about how the\nwhole desert moves, you know, and you could really\nsee these great--I mean for a hundred miles--\nhundreds of miles you could pick out these great\nobvious prevailing wind tracks in the sand that\njust stretched for hundreds of miles.\nCooper\tYes.\nConrad\tAnd again this was in Egypt and south of Egypt--\ndown in that area.\nCooper\tWell, you could actually see by the cloud\nformation--was odd, too. The thing I noticed was,"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":168,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 159 C\n\nyou really could see the lower altitude prevailing\nwinds in the cirrus clouds or the lower altitude\nstratus type cloud you all around and you really\ncould see the wind pattern and one thing that\nreally impressed me, was the--on cloud formations\nlow altitude cloud formations--up in the Himalayan\nareas,how that stratus-type cloud would hang--\nwould just completely define the land shape. You'd\nsee it hang in the valleys and swirl right down\nin the valleys and you'd see where the peaks\nwere, it would puff and was quite definitive of\nthe land mass. And then coming in off the--\nyou could see the prevailing wind direction in\nthe lower altitude clouds. You could see the way\nthe wind would come in and you'd get the wind\nshear where it would hit the mountain peaks\ncoming in off the desert areas there and it would\nkick it up over the peak areas.\nCooper\tOkay.\nFCSD Rep\tLet me ask one question.\nCooper\tOkay.\nFCSD Rep\tWas there--as far as good pictures are concerned--\nhow many pictures did cloud coverage prevent you"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":169,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"159 D\n\nfrom getting?\nCooper\tOh, well, a great many. Some areas--well, just in\ngeneral let's just say that some areas of the\ncountry would be completely clobbered in and we'd be\ntraveling over an undercast for great long expanses\nof hundreds and hundreds of miles, and anything\nthat was in there would be--anything to do with\nany areas we desired to photograph in there whether\nthey were specified immediate areas or whether\nthey were just general pupose or S-5, S-6, were\nnot available for photography, and yet the next\nday it might be wide open. The Himalayas was\nan ideal example of that too. For two different\ndays we traveled over that, you couldn't see\nany of the craters or any of the ice flows or\nanything due to the clouds. You could see just\noccasional areas and some of the lakes would be\nopen, so it was just heavy cloud cover through\nthere for about a 2 day period and then it just\nbroke up wide open one day. But there were a great\nmany areas that there were cloud covered to the\npoint that you could not find it. For instance,\nthe Carnarvon or I should say the woodly side"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":170,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL 159 E\n\nin Australia was a good example. Two different\ndays it was completely clobbered in where you\ncouldn't see anything on the ground in that imme-\ndiate area. This point Rhir was clobbered in\none day. We were going to get an Apollo landmark\non it and it was just back in under the clouds in\nfact. And Kano we were going to get a shot of\nthe Kano air field, wasn't it?\nConrad\tYes, that was clobbered.\nCooper\tYes, it was clobbered. We got right up close to\nit and there were these low clouds hanging in\nthere just scattered to broken clouds and we\ncouldn't see.\nConrad\tActually on the D-6 stuff most of the time the\nexperimenters were up on what was clobbered and\nthey didn't even bother to give it to us, or if\nthey gave it to us it became clobbered before we\ngot there. They usually were able to tell us that\nit was going to be clobbered and then many times\nthey gave us that the weather was pretty good,\nbut there's three tenths cloud coverage so you\nmay or may not. It didn't bother us too much\naround the coastal regions."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":171,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper\tThe carrier was the one thing that it really bothered us on. Two different days or the carrier shots doggone it you could see one day--for instance we saw the carrier wake and--\nConrad\tBut the sunlighting was such--\nCooper\tThe sunlighting and the--\nConrad\tYou lose the wake and everything--\nCooper\tAnd then the scattered clouds, too were such that you were kind of hunting for him in and around the scattered clouds and sunlight angle was low on it and we lost him.\nConrad\tThe day we got him there were clouds back there but gee we could see him for 500 miles out and we never lost them.\nCooper\tJust the lighting conditions were ideal that day and he was also out in kind of an open area in the clouds.\nOkay, horizons. The horizons were of course, as usual,I think day and night were fairly well defined except as you come into the--as you go in out and out of the terminator. Just at that period of time where you're going into the light or out of the light through the terminator it's a very fuzzy"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":172,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ill-defined, odd area--\nConrad\tYeah, looking down the sun.\nCooper\tWhere you have no defined horizon at all. It's very--a real messy situation. The only thing I noted different about the horizons this time was at one morning, at one sunrise, when we saw those tremendous thunder heads out clear on the horizon--you remember that?\nConrad\tYes.\nCooper\tWhere we saw the horizon well-defined and these great big thunder heads with the handles on them sitting up above the horizon. They were those ; big thunder storms. I would guess that those things must have gone well in excess of 50,000 feet probably to be that well defined--clear out on the horizon some 12 to 15 hundred miles away you could see that profile of them. Do you have anything more on horizons?\nConrad\tNo.\nFCSD Rep\tOne thing we might mention here while we're talking about these thunderstorms, you mentioned before the lighting in the spacecraft from this lightning."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":173,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tYes, the lightning was bright enough to light the shingles on the spacecraft.\nCooper\tYou--the whole spacecraft could be lit. You would, even through the polaroid windows--with the polaroid windows down full dark,some of these big thunderstorms were lighting the whole thing.\nConrad\tWell, I tell you we saw some lightning like I just never dreamed existed. I mean the lightning bolts must have covered a hundred miles.\nCooper\tIn general in this lightning--\nConrad\tCloud to cloud\nCooper\tIn the clouds, in this lightning, in general,these clouds light up like they were a big puff of cotton with a light bulb inside, and the whole thing just lights up. But Pete and I both saw several cases where we would see a thunderstorm a little ways out in the distance, and I actually saw air to ground lightning bolts come right out of the clouds and right down just \"choom\".\nConrad\tThere was one storm we looked at for them in the daytime where we saw air to ground lightning in the daytime--\nCooper\tWe saw lightning go all the way from the edge of"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":174,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"this big black cloud right down to the ground. Very clear.\nAnother thing that was different that I noted that was a little different than the usual type of the whole big mass of clouds lighting up--one long series of thunderstorms, I noticed where there was horizontal kind of a chain--horizontal lightning going over and you'd see it sort of travel along horizontally through the clouds like it was moving from cloud to cloud rather than from cloud to ground.\nOkay, thruster firing. You could see every thruster on the spacecraft fire in the middle of the night--you could see the glow from it.\nFCSD Rep\tThese aft firing thrusters too?\nConrad\tI don't know. I was just trying to think about the aft firing ones and we were so busy everytime we fired them that I wasn't aware of them.\nCooper\tI don't know. We had the lights up in the cockpit when we were firing the aft-firing because we were busy--\nConrad\tIt's unfair to say without pulling the test, you see, because when we were firing the aft firing"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":175,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"thrusters, we were also firing attitude thrusters and the attitude thrusters you could see all of them.\nCooper\tI don't know whether you see the glow off the aft firing thruster or not.\nCooper\tYou certainly can feel them firing. You can hear them fire.\nConrad\tIt's not annoying or anything.\nFCSD Rep\tSomewhere we ought to say here--you said you could hear all the thrusters firing.\nCooper\tEvery one of them.\nFCSD Rep\tNow, this is with the helmet on or off?\nConrad\tOff.\nCooper\tOff.\nFCSD Rep\tHow about with it on at separation?\nConrad\tI had the impression that at separation that I could hear them firing. The aft thrusters with the helmet on and that is--\nCooper\tYes, I did, too.\nConrad\tSimply because everybody said they couldn't hear them.\nCooper\tI thought I could hear the--"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":176,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tThere's no doubt in your mind that they are firing.\nCooper\tYes. I think it's almost more a matter of--\nFCSD Rep\tDid you fire them before you separated?\nCooper\tWe fired them just as we separated. We hit SEP--the spacecraft just as we--\nConrad\tGordo counted them down 1, 2 SEP and I hit the SEP button and I don't know when he started firing.\nCooper\tI fired just as you hit SEP.\nConrad\tYes. We came out clean as a whistle, I'll tell you that boy.\nCooper\tWe fired at the same second that we hit SEP.\nConrad\tThere wasn't any pitch or yaw of anything--we just separated as smooth as a bell.\nCooper\tAnd what I did, I--we held that on in there in direct and then switched over to rate command then a couple to 3 seconds later.\nFCSD Rep\tOkay, how about the--why don't you describe the plumes a little bit here on the different thrusters and what you saw.\nCooper\tOkay. Well, the only really--\nConrad\tYou don't see any plumes.\nCooper\tYou don't see any plumes off the OAMS and all you do is get the glow from them back there--you see"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":177,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the glow as they fire.\nConrad\tAnd it is pure white.\nCooper\tAnd--\nConrad\tMy recollection of it--like white light glowing.\nCooper\tOf the RCS Plumes?\nConrad\tNo, of the OAMS.\nCooper\tOh yes. The OAMS. The RCS had a little bit of a golden color to them.\nConrad\tYes.\nCooper\tAnd--\nConrad\tPlus you see on the RCS thrusters you see little bits of pieces of ablative material coming out like carbon.\nCooper\tYes. Right.\nThe RCS plumes tend to come out of the nozzle with a little bit of an expansion ratio and then just to come out in almost a column that doesn't change much. It just increases in size.\nConrad\tYes. I was surprised that it didn't expand out this way.\nCooper\tYes, I thought it would expand out.\nConrad\tBut it just went straight up.\nCooper\tI very much thought it would fan completely out."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":178,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tLike a nice candle flame.\nCooper\tIt just goes up in just a contained column almost--in fact the column appeared to me to be no bigger around than that saucer.\nConrad\tThat's right, if it was that round.\nCooper\tSome 4 to 5 inches maybe, in diameter at the most and just went right straight up for a period, distance of about 4 to 5 feet I guess where it faded, something like that.\nConrad\tOh, I didn't really think it went that high. I really didn't think the thing stuck up more than about a foot. That it was visible light that would bother you.\nCooper\tWell, it would bother you, but I could actually detect when they would fire, I could actually see from the pitch down--I could see that going almost to the top of the window on something on the order of about a 4 foot dent where you could see any line at all. I'm talking about where it fades you know completely. And it's actually only a couple of feet out from where the light is really bright.\nConrad\tThe thing that I thought of when first I ever"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":179,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"saw one fire was one of these 4th of July firecracker stand-up type bombs that you light the fuse, you know, and the thing sort of like the Roman candle--it sort of spits out flame and a few sparks you know and then--\nCooper\tYes, that's right.\nConrad\tThat really did it. And the other thing is that everybody's been talking about how bright they were at night and maybe again I was geared to see in the really, really brilliant light --I didn't really think they were that bright--now they do disrupt night vision and they did disrupt the horizon, but they're not that bright.\nCooper\tWell, of course you've got to recognize, too, that we saw them under different conditions and the fact that we were expecting them to be very bright and we had cabin lighting up full bright.\nConrad\tYes.\nCooper\tAnd they were by comparison with the full bright cabin lighting--they were not as bright as we expected.\nConrad\tWe also went around though with the lights on red there when we were alone and you were firing only"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":180,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in PULSE.\nCooper\tThat's right. We actually only had it in PULSE.\nConrad\tAnd really what it is--as a matter of fact, firing in PULSE and everything--you could always keep the horizon in sight.\nCooper\tYou could keep the horizon in sight and we had the red lights on, and only we didn't have them down dim and firing just in pulse you could hold the attitude visually very well, but when you go into any amount of RCS thruster firing you've lost the horizon.\nConrad\tYes.\nCooper\tOkay. One thing we have here on thruster firing both attitude and translation. I think we covered attitude pretty well. I think our OAMS was a very good attitude system to begin with. I think it was gradually degrading as the flight went on. Getting worse and worse and worse and mushier and sloppier so it was not fair to evaluate it later on in the flight because it was pretty miserable. But the RCS attitude was beautiful. It was really good. It was crisp and real precise and just a real pleasure to fly. Translation, we"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":181,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"170\nCONFIDENTIAL\nused all the translation thrusters only one little\nsplurt of it on the forward, in other words\nthe forward firing thruster-the small forward\nfiring thruster, but they were all very, very\npositive and you got very definite distinct\naction out of them. And you really got a feeling\nof real acceleration out of those aft firing\nones, I thought. I felt like you really were-\nreally had a big afterburner lit off when you\nlit those things.\nConrad\tYeah, man, I would have liked to have some more\nkinds to mess around-like turn off thruster 10\nor something like that, and burn a couple of\nfeet on one thruster because in the simulator\nyou can't hold it in Rate Command.\nCooper\tI think you probably can in the actual spacecraft.\nConrad\tWell, I don't know whether you can or can't but I\nthink that the difference between 2 thruster\noperation and 1 thruster operation is going to be\napparent to you just like that and these guys\nin FOD are making this big deal about having to\nburn after separation from the booster and maybe\nonly have one thruster or anything and I think\nanybody who has flown that thing once is going\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":182,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"171\nCONFIDENTIAL\nto have a good feel for whether he has two aft\nfire thrusters or one because boy, with those\naft firing thruster are firing you're just like\nyou're flying an airplane and you put the throttle\nto it. You really feel it.\nCooper\tYou really feel it. Yes, it's really got\nacceleration.\nConrad\tAnd you can hear it--it was that high speed water\njet type sound, it wasn't an explosive sound or\na roar or anything like that. It was more of a\na swishing sound.\nCooper\tMore like a big hose.\nConrad\tLike a couple of big hoses firing back there.\nFCSD REP\tOkay, you say you did fire the forward firing--\nyou checked out the forward firing?\nConrad\tJust a bleep.\nCooper\tRight.\nFCSD REP\tWhat did you see here?\nCooper\tOh, man. You really see the flames off that.\nConrad\tYes, well, you don't, I don't really think you really\nsee the flames, but it throws a great deal more light.\nCooper\tIt's a light rather than flames--alight more than\nflames.\nFCSD REP\tCould you see a distinct plume?\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":183,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"172\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad\tNo.\nCooper\tNo, not a plume as such, but just it really lit up.\nYou got a lot of lighting from it. Much more so than\nyou did the--It was distinctive enough that it really\nmade an impression on us.\nCooper\tLet's see, the side firing was really--the thing that's\nsurprising about the side firing was just as I--you\nmight anticipate, if you really stop and thought about it\nbut you don't get this in the trainer or anything\nwhen you fire a side thrust--\nConrad\tA side thrust--Yes, that was really weird.\nCooper\tYou really could feel that.\nConrad\tIt fired down, then up, then left and right then you\nraise up in the seat or you slide down in the seat\nor you go left in the cockpit or right in the cockpit.\nYou know that you really going to do this and you--\nCooper\tAnd you can see all the debris and everything coming\nthrough--swish!\nConrad\tYes, everything starts going sideways. And it's\npretty funny.\nCooper\tOkay, we're at paragraph 10.3 reentry. Number 1\nadapter separation. No doubt.\n10.3 Reentry\nConrad\tYes, there was no doubt but there again one of those\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":184,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"173\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthings where both Gus and John and Jim and Ed said,\n\"Man, that thing really went out there with this\nhorrendous bang,\" and I was really spring loaded. I\nwas waiting for a 16 inch gun to go off in my ear,\nand, therefore, there was no doubt that it fired,\nand there was no doubt that it left, but I didn't\nthink it was that loud--but then again, I think,\nit's what you're anticipating, and they had both\nsaid that they got quite a--\nCooper\tI think there again, you and I were keyed up to it\nbeing a tremendous explosion--when it went off--\nConrad\tBut there's no doubt about it that it is loud --\nCooper\tThere is no doubt about it--it's loud and it really\ngives you an acceleration--a delta acceleration.\nConrad\tI actually heard SEP ELEC and SEP OAMS lines squibs\nand I don't know whether you want to say whether we felt\nthem or heard them fire, but we could hear a definite\n\"kerplunk, kerplunk\" back there when you push both\nof them--not loud--\nCooper\tJust like the trainer. I think the trainer is very\nrealistic of those sounds.\nConrad\tYes, the trainer is very realistic.\nCooper\tAnd the trainer sound is really pretty realistic\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":185,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"174\nCONFIDENTIAL\nof the adapter sep now. I think they're all three\nfairly realistic of the trainer.\nConrad\tAnd now in adapter sep you get a little acceleration\nforce with it, and you feel that. You really feel\nthat--\nCooper\tWell, it shudders the whole thing as you come off--\nas you separate. And retrofire to me was a big\nsurprise.\nConrad\tIt was a big surprise to me, too.\nCooper\tI remember in Mercury that everybody had different\nfeelings on what retrofire felt like, and I didn't\nfeel that they were that distinctive or that great\nat all in my previous flight, but in this one I\nfelt like we were on the front of Stapp's rocket\nsled.\nConrad\tYes.\nCooper\tEveryone that fire.\nConrad\tWe were pretty G sensative by this point, 8 days of\nweightlessness.\nCooper\tIt felt to me like we were just hanging on the--\nConrad\tYes. Gordo said he thought we wound up going in the\nother direction and I had the decided feeling that\nwe pitched up and did a loop everytime one of them\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":186,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"fired, I had the feeling that we pitched up another 30 degrees and went streaming up that way you know, and then another one would fire, and I really thought we were going around a big circle. That was my physical sensations although the gages said we were right on the money. But, all through retrofire those darn retros did not overlap.\nCooper\tThat's right. They didn't. Number 1.\nConrad\tEspecially 3 and 4. As a matter a fact, there was enough of a delay--"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":187,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper\tLet's go through these now. Number 1 fired exactly on time. Boy, right on the money with TR. We were right on the money. Every clock we had in the spacecraft was just reading right 0 when it fired. No delay or anything anywhere. Just beautiful. Number 1 was still firing when number 2 started to fire.\nConrad\tThat's correct.\nCooper\tAnd there was no off-set whatsoever from number 1 and number 2.\nConrad\tThat's right.\nCooper\tThen number 2 had finished firing for a definite delta time period before number 3 fired.\nConrad\tThat's right.\nCooper\tThen number 3 fired and had an offset to the left--to the left--yes to our left which was not bad and I think they had r times that amount of off-set it had and still hold it with the RCS, no with the rate command. No problem at all. No doubt in your mind. You were way more than overpowering. You must keep it glued right there. But then number 3 finished firing and then there was an even greater delta time--"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":188,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad\tThat was a period of time that I--\nCooper\tBefore number 4--\nConrad\tI thought we weren't going to get number 4.\nFCSD Rep\tWhat would you estimate the time?\nConrad\tWell, I'd say it would have been a full second.\nCooper\tBoy, I think it was at least a full second.\nConrad\tTime up there is going to seem like--\nCooper\tTime--yes.\nConrad\tIt may have been shorter than that--but there was a definite delay.\nCooper\tI'm sure that our time sensing mechanism was overly tweaked at that period of time and we probably were overly sensitive to it, but there was no doubt I don't believe there was any doubt, and we both arrived at this conclusion independently too--that number 2 came in at the right sequence on number 1 and then there was a short delta time and then number 3 fired and then a longer delta time and number 4 fired.\nFCSD Rep\tOkay, how about the visual sightings during this.\nCooper\tMan--\nConrad\tWe were IFR completely the cockpit lights up full white, pitch black and--"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":189,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper\tAnd the whole window area was completely obliterated by flames. When the retros go off you're just in a big barrel of flames--because the whole thing is just covered by flames.\nConrad\tI wasn't even aware of that. I didn't even--I'd have said that we didn't see any flame at all.\nCooper\tWell, we had everything at full bright--\nConrad\tI guess I had my eyes locked on the instruments--\nCooper\tWell, I did, too, but I also was going to look and see what it looked like out the window there and I noted that everytime one of them went off you got tremendous flame coverage which surprised me because I didn't think you would. I thought maybe you'd see the glow from it but I had a distinct feeling that the whole--that the whole flame expanded to the point where you felt like it--maybe you just felt like it was so bright it just lit up the outside that much, but I had a distinct feeling that you really had flames all over when they went off.\nConrad\tReally that's the high light of the flight in my mind is going down through that--watching that TR clock count down and going through TR - 1"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":190,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"minute to TR+45 seconds throught retro-jet. You know seeing that sequential system go and everything work just like it was supposed to, and the checkoff list go and everything Boy, we were really spring loaded on that.\nCooper\tI know Pete had made some comment, \"Well, things have continued to fail and I just hope that is one that doesn't.\"\nConrad\tI had lost faith in sequential systems somewhere along the way. We had all the emergency systems out though, and we were ready to fire it any way we had to.\nCooper\tYes, we had gone through our little emergency retrofire and our emergency SEP ADAPT and all this. We were all set to go on those, and I think we'd have been in real good shape even if they hadn't occured. Retro-pack jettison --\nConrad\tStraightforward.\nCooper\tWe held retro-attitude, waited on the light, armed the reto-jet and when the light came on Pete toggled them and off they went \"Kaplunk\". They sounded just like in the simulator.\nConrad\tAgain we didn't see anything. It was pitch black. Had cockpit lights up full white.\nFCSD REP\tNow, you turned around, and you saw it burning up."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":191,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper No.\nConrad No.\nCooper After we started reentering we--\nConrad During the reentry and it was way, way behind us, but I did see it--now, I say the retro pack-- it could have been the adapter burning up. I don't know which one it was, because it was so far behind.\nCooper There was some object way behind.\nConrad It was some object, a large object, reentering behind but it must have been--what would you say? 5, 6, or 10 miles maybe?\nCooper Oh, yes!\nConrad It was way up the path.\nCooper I'd guess a good 5 or 10 miles.\nConrad And it was up in the--let's see, I was upside down, and it would have been--coming heads up--it would have been in the upper left-hand side. In other words, it was reentering to our south and above us. It was entering on the south side of the orbit, and it was slightly above our entry and you could see our trail clear back to it. You could see our plasma jet went way, way back there. I"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":192,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"don't know what it was, whether it was smoke or what it wasn't flame--you could definitely see it trailing right along side our trail just like we were leaving a con.\nCooper Yes, you could see our con--it was kind of a light color. I wouldn't say it was a flame color--it was kind of a light color compared to everything else.\nConrad We were looking at this in relation to what nobody else had seen it to. We were still looking at this down sun relatively nebulous horizon that you have. We were looking at it ourselves, a trail back there in the terminator.\nCooper Into the dark.\nConrad Yes. And that's another thing. A very important point here--no kidding, saying this spacecraft's in sunlight doesn't mean anything? That's a night retrofire. And we didn't have a definable horizon to fly on until we crossed the Mississippi River. That's way in the heck down the pipe on retrofire, because that terminator is nothing.\nCooper One thing I'd like to add here--I really think all of us always sweated night retrofire and it was a piece of cake."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":193,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad It really was.\nCooper However, if you don't have full instrument panel, I'd recommend you forget it. Because if you don't have an 8 ball and rate gyros and a darn good rate damping--well, that's not true. If you've got an 8-ball and rate gyros, then you could fire them just as well in Direct system as well as Rate Command; although, I think, you could handle them in direct with no problem.\nFCSD REP Do you think you need both the rate gyros and the platform?\nCooper I do. Yes. I would strongly recommend that for a night retro you not try them on purely rate gyros because you just--even the little--\nConrad And the reason--\nCooper The RCS attitude system disrupts your night vision so much out there that getting all squared away for it--just about the time you're getting right in to retro attitude there if you have to fire a thruster or two you'd completely lose you attitude--\nConrad I think the other big thing is that that is absolutely the world's biggest \"vertigo giver\", because you are really g sensitive and when those retros go off if you don't have the whole smear of"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":194,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"instruments--like I said I was watching the instruments and they were sitting right dead center. Gordo had that thing pitched down 30 degrees and we didn't hardly over 2 degrees off that darn retro attitude, and I was convinced we were doing a loop--even watching the gages. That is the worst set of vertigo that I ever had in my life.\nCooper And I had the distinct feeling that I had just lit off the biggest after-burner I'd ever had a hold of and was going back straight west just as hard as I could hold on.\nConrad That's exactly the feeling.\nCooper And everyone of them had fired.\nConrad Yes,--\nCooper Yes.\nConrad All over again and I really--if you were doing it on just rate needles--well, doing it on rate needles wouldn't be as bad as doing it just on the ball without rate needles. Listen, boy doing it just on the ball--that's just bad news.\nConrad I always felt even in the trainer that bad news."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":195,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Well, I don't know. You could do it on the ball. I think if I had my choice between ball and rate needles I'd rather have the ball.\nConrad Would you really? I'd rather have the rate needles, I think, because I could understand them even with this crazy sensation; where I might try to interpret the But, you see,\nCooper But, you see, our rate needles never ventured off the middle. We never got a rate on the rate needles.\nConrad Yes, well that's fine. Then you know you're staying right where you want to be.\nCooper And the ball--to me the ball is the real good indicator. If you keep your rates down to zero you still could actually get off slightly in attitude and still have almost, you know, essentially negligible rates.\nConrad I think the point is it, it's pretty comforting to have a whole bag of instruments.\nCooper Yes, it sure is.\nConrad I'm not saying it can't be done, but really there was no sweat on night retrofire. Gordo's right about that. I mean, we went through that, turned the lights up bright--matter of fact, it's just like you're back in the simulator."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":196,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n185\nCooper Like doing it in the simulator.\nConrad Until retros fired.\nCooper When they fire, it's quite a sensation.\nConrad But, we went clear to 400K--we went almost the 14 minutes before we had a horizon. We had the ground in sight previous to this\nCooper Well, not much previous to this.\nConrad But we were looking at that screwy gray--\nWell, I'll tell you, we fired them at Hawaii, and White Sands was the first thing I saw coming out of the termina-tor and that's looking straight down. It was still black right behind White Sands and no horizon looking at the nose. But looking straight down, White Sands was the first thing I saw. We still had a rather nebulous horizon about 45 degrees out the window when we crossed the Mississippi River, I had the decided feeling that we were right on the east coast, but by this time the plasma was so bad that I couldn't really tell. I had the decided feeling that we were crossing into the Atlantic Ocean by the time that we had a full horizon out there.\nCooper Well, now I think our windows on this flight--I was"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":197,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"186\nreally pleased. I think our windows were really stayed relatively clean. We built up a slight coating on them, or something.\nConrad I think everything we built up on them was on there at the beginning.\nCooper But most of it was there to begin with. Our windows were so much better than Mercury. There wasn't even any comparison. The things you could see out of them were just fantastic. We're going to have to crank up the planetarium stars much higher, in fact, because we saw so many more stars than we saw at the decreased Mercury values in the planetarium. It was very confusing, which was very pleasing. I think it's really great. But, even with this better window definition, when you crossed the terminator from day to dark or dark to day there's a very decided confusing area in there where you have absolutely no attitude reference at all out the window. In fact, I tried a couple of times when we were going through the terminator, to be completely blackened down, to have no lights on in the cockpit, and nothing to reflect outside; yet when you crossed the terminator"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":198,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"187\nyou can see both stars passing under you and the earth passing under you. I can't figure how you get all these odd reflections in there. There's a period of time when everything just gets completely jumbled and it's a real dim gray area there you're going through just for a few seconds where you have absolutely no visual reference at all. You're doing beautifully on a night horizon on the airglow and all of a sudden \"zunk\" you're into this cottony ill-defined mess, and you're getting all kinds of odd reflections and all kinds of odd light patterns, and then \"zoom\" here you suddenly have day reference on the ground. That period of time is a very poor time to have to do any kind of out-the-window attitude control. And it obviously is a very confusing light period because this is what confuses the horizon scanners, too. The times when you do get the-- when we had that one horizon scanner that was really screwing up. It was overly sensitive, of course, and it would just drop out. Every terminator we went through it would drop off the line. And even our no. 2 dropped off, initially there, a few times going through the terminator. You get a few ignores"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":199,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"188\ngoing through the terminator. Okay, retro-pack jettison, we covered. Reentry--our reentry was exactly like we had planned it. We flew single-ring pulse down to 400K. At 400K--\nConrad 400K came on the time that Houston gave us, the computer 400K guidance came in within a second or two--\nCooper The roll bug came in right on the second.\nConrad Right on the money.\nCooper At 400K, then, I switched the attitude control selector to Rate Command. The RCS Ring B came already off and Ring A I took to Direct--so it gave me single-ring Direct. I flew single-ring Direct then on down through the--\nConrad I think we covered the horizon adequately.\nCooper Let's see--\nConrad Spacecraft was--boy, I never even saw--\nFCSD Rep What do you recall on visual sight rings?"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":200,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"189\nConrad the updated blackout at 16 + 14 and end of blackout at 21 +20. He updated reverse bank as 19 + 25 for a bank left 54, a bank right 68, which was a change of 1 degree from 53 and 67. He gave us drogue at 22 + 05 and main at 23 +48. That was the latest updated quantity after retrofire.\nCooper Okay, spacecraft oscillations--\nFCSD Rep Could you tell anything visually?\nConrad Man, that thing was like a rock coming in! I'd been hearing about 40 degree yaw oscillations and the drogue and everything else. If we had anything over 5 degrees--maybe it is just me, but I don't think we had anything over 5 degrees.\nCooper Let's start farther up in the reentry. After we got to 280 K, I was switching back and forth at this point from rate to attitude. I would switch back to rate, and when I'd see we had a little rate build up, I'd tweak it, and then back to attitude and hold my attitude on the attitude needles. Then I'd wait just a few seconds and switch back to rate and tweak out the little rates set in, and go back to attitude--back and forth in this fashion. On single-ring direct, I had more control authority, initially,"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":201,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"than I needed. I had to be very careful to just put a little teensy tweak in to damp the rates. Later on, as we got on down, maybe half way through the g pulse area, the rates began to increase in amplitude and in frequency. I still was able to handle them very adequately. No problem at all on tweaking the rates out on pitch and yaw. However, at about this period of time, it began to take so much time to switch back and forth from rate to attitude and get the rates damp that I was getting concerned about the math flow guidance in here and making sure I stayed on it. At this point then, probably half way through or somewhere on down through the latter part of the reentry, I just switched over to the ACME position and allowed the RCS rate command to damp the rates. Then, I would reach over and check the rates once in a while to see how it was damping. But, then, I could concentrate on purely attitude and just fly this same single-ring attitude control. It left me plenty of attitude control. Never once when I checked the rates were the rate needles ever off zero. It"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":202,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"was just keeping it damped to zero. We weren't firing thrusters too overly often. You could see them fire now and then, but it wasn't a great task for them to fire at all. I really thought the whole reentry was quite stable and at no time did we have any real oscillations.\nConrad Somewhere in there Ring A ran out of fuel. But I am almost convinced that--\nCooper Well, let me say right here now Pete. I way flying the thing. Ring A didn't run out of fuel as long as I was flying. We still had control. Now you are talking about down after drogue deploy. I'm talking about during reentry. Until the time that we went to dual-ring RCS, we still had fuel left in Ring A.\nConrad Yes, I know we did.\nCooper Okay, I just wanted to make that clear on the record.\nConrad It ran out somewhere below 65,000 feet.\nCooper Yes, by those figures you got yesterday, it looked like we still had fuel in Ring A sometime after we brought Ring B on, which was at 60,000. Right?"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":203,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad That's right. You get an idea of how much fuel you use because Ring B was tested but never used until below 65,000 feet; we shot 80 percent of the fuel out of it on the drogue. So, it is no surprise to me that Ring A ran out of fuel. There is no doubt about it that Ring A was still running, unless somebody shows me otherwise on a traces, at least past drogue deploy. It was running until at least we got Ring B running.\nCooper I really firmly believe, based on what we tried on here and my feeling on the thing, you could shoot two or three orbits of attitude control and alignment and the whole smear of retrofire and the whole reentry and everything on one ring with no problem at all.\nConrad Now, let's look at another thing. When you are at drogue deploy, we were on rate command and there was a high frequency, low amplitude oscillation, but it was well outside the rate band. So, those thrusters went to steady-state firing.\nCooper Yes, they did.\nConrad They were firing full blower all the way, trying to damp. And they did. They did an excellent"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":204,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"job of keeping it damped. We were steady as rock coming in there.\nCooper Of course, this is the way to do it.\nConrad They were firing all the way, and it doesn't surprise me at all that we used all that fuel out of Ring B. But Ring B, I know, wasn't put on until the drogue was out. And I know that Ring B had no fuel taken out of it except to test it two orbits back. There are some 33 pounds in Ring B, and there was 4.9 oxidizer and 4.6 fuel left in Ring B. So, we shot almost 25 pounds of fuel on the drogue.\nCooper Which is fine. You might as well use the fuel up at that point. There's no sense in saving it.\nConrad Again, this tells me that up to drogue deployment you might as well take that reentry rate command and throw it away because the pilot isn't going to accept four degrees per second anyhow. He is going to damp before that. So, you might as well use the wire for something else. Use rate command, and if you fly the reentries just like that, you've got more than adequate fuel in Ring B to poop it away on the drogue and insure"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":205,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"yourself a nice steady ride. We never saw anything that approached over 5 degrees oscillation.\nCooper The nice thing about the control system is that it is a simple matter to switch back and forth between direct and rate command in the system that we had set up. If you are damping and the damping gets to be too much of a task, or it gets more than you can damp, all you do is switch over to the ACME position on this one switch and it will damp in the rate command. In that rate command, you have really good damping. You might as well have a system that will damp it right down to a gnat's eyebrow, and then you can switch back into direct, concentrate to what you are doing, and switch back and forth if you want to. Let's see, drogue--\nFCSD Rep Did you get enough of an oscillation during reentry? If you looked out the window was there enough trailing you that you could probably damp by looking at this? Was there any possibility to do this?\nConrad I don't think the spacecraft is that unstable.\nCooper We didn't have that much oscillation."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":206,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n195\nConrad I don't think you have to worry about it, to tell\nyou the truth. I really wasn't aware of any\noscillations at all. Gordo says he was damping.\nFor all I know we rode in there free.\nCooper He speaks highly of my damping.\nConrad The first time I really noticed anything was\nwhen we got on the drogue, and I didn't have a whole\nlot to do but to look out the window.\nCooper There would have been some oscillation, but it\nwould be kind of interesting to ride one down\nand not damp it, to see how it would do. I\nreally doubt if you'd get very large amplitudes\nor very much--\nConrad Not until you get down there below a 100,000.\nCooper I don't think this is true of a rolling reentry.\nThat's why we never were in favor of a rolling\nreentry. On the simulator the thing goes wild\non a rolling reentry. But, I think, as long as\nyou hold a steady bank angle, whether it is full\nleft or 90 or whatever you hold, I think the\nthing is really stable. It sure felt that way\nto me. It felt to me that it is a good stable\nvehicle. Now at drogue deploy--I very deliber-\nately deployed the drogue at 70,000 feet.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":207,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n196\nConrad You might put down that I was reading the check-\nlist off, and I called standby for 70,000, which\nis our point to put the second ring on RCS rate\ncommand, and we were going to put Ring B on. I\nsaid stand by for 70,000, and away went the drogue.\nCooper I reached down, uncovered the cover on it, and\npunched it out right at 70 K. I might say here\nthat the drogue went out beautifully, it squidded\na couple of times--a typical supersonic drogue\nfashion. No hard squidding.\nConrad I'm not sure that it stayed reefed. Did it?\nCooper Yes, it did.\nConrad It did a couple of gyrations up there. I wasn't\nreally sure what it was. I don't think it stayed\nreefed for 16 seconds.\nCooper Yes, it did. It stayed reefed for 16 seconds.\nConrad It looked to me like it flew out and opened.\nCooper It came out and opened in the reef condition.\nThat was that squidding you saw. It opened in\nthe reef condition and then it squidded about three\ntimes in the reef condition and then dereefed\nfully opened. It was as stable as a rock. And\nI fully anticipated some of the lines were\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":208,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n197\nprobably booken, and I began to look at them.\nThey looked good. I decided, well, it wasn't really\nany problem, even if I had broken the lines. All\nI had to do was reach up and deploy the emergency\nmain deploy if it departed, and we were still in\ngood shape, so--no problem on it. As a matter\nof fact, the combination of when the drogue went\nout and the RCS left us as stable as a rock.\nWe just came right straight down the glide slope\nand I don't think we had any oscillations of any\nkind all the way down, other than these very very\nminor little higher frequency ones that felt like\nvibrations off the drogue lines.\nConrad There seemed to be more interaction between the\nspacecraft and the drogue lines than anything\nelse.\nCooper Right. At the time that we came to the main\nchute, when I pickled off the main chute, it\ncame out completely straight; we didn't oscillate\nor swing on it at all.\nConrad Let's backup one second. The best calculations\nof mice and men were completely wrong though.\nAt 50 K we went on with full repress and O2 high\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":209,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n198\nrate. And past 27,000 feet that cabin indicator\nhit zero faster than you could say Jack Robinson.\nThat thing came off the peg and I had to go back\nto the old procedure of--\nCooper Snorkel open up.\nConrad Snorkel vent open, and recirc at 45 degrees.\nWe didn't seal it up again until 2,000, so that\ndidn't work.\nCooper Then, at 10.6 the altimeter and the barostat\nlight were exactly right together. I punched the\nmain and it came out reefed. It held reefed\nfor approximately 12 seconds. We were exactly\nstraight, no oscillations or swings or gyrations\non the chute at all. In fact, we were so stable\non the chute that in the reefed condition the\nskirt was exactly symmetrical around the bottom.\nThere was no breathing to one side or anything.\nConrad I think that is another thing that speaks highly\nof this rate command business, even though\nwe shut it off at 30,000 feet. By that time, we\nwere well slowed down, and there was no big os-\ncillation left on the drogue. So the rest of\nthe ride with no system was free. Now, when that\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":210,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n199\nchute deployed we weren't even swinging or anything.\nLike Gordo said, boy, when that thing came out of\nthe reefed condition, it was perfectly circular\naround the bottom. We looked at movies of these\nthings and we've seen them collapsed on one side,\nbillow out, and collapse, and everything. It\ndidn't do that. That chute came out, stayed\nperfectly circular. Whenever the number of seconds\nwent by, and the thing dereefed, it dereefed per-\nfectly circular. It never breathed, never\noscillated, never swung or anything.\nCooper And we never turned on it either.\nConrad We never turned or anything. The only oscilla-\ntion we got the whole time was when we went to\ntwo-point. We got the see-wawing action. That\nwas it. We went straight into the water. The\nchute almost landed on top of us.\nCooper Okay, on R and R separation--we might cover that\nafter drogue deploy--it is just exactly like it\nlooks in the sequences. You see all the whole\nsmear trunneling out there, the great long R and\nR section going out, and all the lines feeding\nout, and then the main opens, and the R and R\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":211,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"can goes on off. It looks just like it does in\nthose sequential drawings. Main chute deploy--\nwe've already covered. We anticipated the landing\nattitude as being kind of a jar. It is kind of a\nwhip action there, more than anything. As long\nas you are braced for it, it is no problem. And\nthen on landing--to me that was a surprise, because\non landing I could hardly believe we had hit.\nIt was so easy. We didn't go under water, didn't\nsplash water, or anything. The windows were\nclear when we hit. I could see the water as we\nhit. I could see the chute. When I punched the\nchute jettison, the chute just floated out in\nfront of us and slightly off to one side. The\nwindows were clear. They had some condensation\non them but not bad. We could see out of them\nvery clearly. We condensed them over a little\nmore just breathing on the inside, I guess.\nBut when the frogmen got there the windows were\nstill clear enough that they came up and got up\nclose to the window and we gave them the thumbs\nup. They visually got our thumbs up signal with\nno problem. The only abnormality was that after\nwe got on the water AIR BOSS apparently was not"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":212,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"receiving us. We were transmitting coming down on\nthe chute, on the main chute. We made two steerage\ntransmissions and counts, and AIR BOSS received\nthese and acknowledged them and got the clears\non them. After we were on the water, he apparently\nwas not receiving us.\nConrad Okay, now, I found a mistake, and that is my fault\non the HF antenna. I went down through the check-\nlist but I read this one item wrong. I had all\nthree squib batteries off. I should have left the\nNo. 3 squib battery on. The antenna goes up on\nthe common control bus, so that is my fault that\nthe antenna didn't go up.\nCooper But, I thought I remembered when you put those off\nwas after we had already gone through all this.\nConrad Well, I'm not sure that you are not right there,\nbut I still made the mistake of turning all three\nsquib batteries off. I'm sure that if it doesn't\ngo up with the squib batteries on, then there is\nsomething wrong with the antenna, but if it goes\nwith the squib battery on, why it was my fault.\nCooper But, in defense of Pete on this, I'm almost sure\nthat we had already gone through all the sequence"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":213,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and said, okay, let's go through and really see\nwhat we can power down here now. We had gone\nthrough to really see what we could power down here\nnow. We had gone through a sort of second power-\ndown checklist when he turned the squib batteries\noff--\nConrad Yes, you are right.\nCooper And we had tried several transmissions prior to\nthis and had gone through and rechecked this an-\ntenna switch location. So, I'm kind of inclined\nto think that was not the fault of the squib bat-\ntery being off.\nConrad I really don't know. Then, we powered the whole\nspacecraft down when we left it, so there was no\ntelling what was going on. I can't speak too\nhighly of this checkoff list. As many times as\nwe went over things in the simulator, boy, if\nyou don't check these items off item by item, in the\nheight of the excitement and the way it goes you\nare going to miss something. That is the way we\nwent through these checkoff lists. We checked\nthem off by the numbers. Anytime back here where\nI didn't do an item--where I left it open for some"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":214,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"reason like right here, suit fans 1 and 2--I\nmade a mark out to the side, \"faceplate closed\",\nso we would go back and pick them up later.\nYou've got to do it that way. That's all there\nis to it. It sure did make it easy.\nCooper Very briefly we would like to cover post-landing.\nFirst of all, we had ideal conditions. It was\nearly morning, the air was cool out on the water.\nThe wave condition was, at the worst, 2 to 3\nfeet easy swells. Almost calm conditions, low\nwind.\nConrad Let me add one thing on that. We sat there for\n4 or 5 minutes in these 2 or 3 foot waves, and\nevery once in a while a wave would wash over the\ntop of the spacecraft. I think you want to be\nreal careful, and I still say--\nCooper Not over the top, but they could wash into your\nwindow.\nConrad Right over the window.\nCooper Your window was the down window.\nConrad But it looked like it would roll up on your\nwindow.\nCooper That's right. That is a good point."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":215,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Even on as calm a day as that, boy, don't ever\nopen those hatches unless it is a dire emergency\nuntil they've got that collar on there.\nCooper I agree.\nConrad I could see that thing going right straight to the\nbottom.\nCooper I agree. Pete and I both were in complete agreement\non this.\nConrad It was as calm as you could get out there.\nCooper It was a beautiful, calm day. And even so, his\npoint is exactly valid. I think that if you open\nup even the left hatch, which is the higher hatch,\nthere would be an occasional wave which would\nthrow water into it. I think opening those hatches\nout there, even with the splash curtain, is a\nreal bad situation, unless you just absolutely\nhave to. You are risking really filling it.\nOf course, I think you can get them closed and\nshut down if you start taking water on board,\nbut there is no sense in getting the whole inside\nall smeared with salt water. However, we were\nperfectly cool inside with both suit fans operat-\ning when we got the repress off, the O2 high"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":216,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"rate off, and both suit fans back on the line.\nWe sat there and we were perspiring very lightly,\nbut the spacecraft was cool; we had cooled it down\nprior to reentry as cold as it can go. It was\n50 degrees cabin prior to retrofire and 50 degrees\nsuit loop--\nConrad We had thought when we hit the water if we were\ngoing to have any wait--and it was apparent when\nwe got down there we were going to have a wait--\nthe smartest thing to do is to get out of the\nsuit. It became real apparent that the smartest\nthing to do was to stay in the suit and get the\nsnorkel open, get the both fans running, and the\ncabin fan running.\nCooper And this was the answer, because we were really\ncool in there. There was no problem. We got our\nhelmets off, our gloves off, and our neck dams\non so we could recirc through the suits good. It\nwas nice and cool in there. No problem at all.\nWe could have sat there for hours on end if we\nreally had to. No problem. Of course, there\nagain, we want to emphasize that we were there\nunder ideal sea conditions, and I am sure that"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":217,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that little spacecraft could get mighty nauseous\nif you really had rough seas.\nConrad We did have just a twinge of RCS fumes in there.\nWe had sealed it off at 2,000 feet and it had only\nbuil up to a pound by the time we got on the\nwater, so that secondary O2 flow rate and O2\nhigh rate is just not putting out a heck of a lot\nof flow.\nCooper But it helps. I think you really had to really\nsniff to--you had to be hunting for it to smell\nthe fumes.\nConrad Once we got the snorkel open again on the water\nand had the cabin fan and the two suit fans running,\nthe smell disappeared shortly thereafter.\nCooper Yes, it was nice and fresh.\nConrad It got to be nice and fresh in there. As Gordo\nsays, we were perspiring lightly but our best\nbet there was we were getting good flow in the\nsuits from the two fans with the snorkel open.\nCooper I might recommend at this point for later crews\nthat this is a good point to take that doggone blood\npressure bulb and pump up the water system and\ndrink all the water you can drink right there."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":218,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Because once you hit the carrier, the medics\naren't going to let you drink for about a 3-hour\nperiod while they run all their little diddies on\nyou. They don't care how thirsty you are or how\nbad a situation it is. So, I would recommend that\nyou just fill up with water right there.\nConrad The most uncomfortable and the hottest we got was\nin the helicopter ride back, which was 35 minutes.\nIt was hotter than blazes in that helicopter.\nWe still had the suits on. We could have gotten\nout of them, but we had gotten out fairly dry to\nbegin with, and we just decided to--\nCooper We decided, as a matter of principle, we were\ngoing to arrive on the carrier with our suits on.\nConrad We arrived in uniform on the carrier rather than\nin a bathrobe.\nCooper Besides that, we didn't have patches on our bath-\nrobe.\nConrad Right.\nCooper Okay, that's all I think of. One thing, after we\ngot out--just to cover briefly--when the swimmers\ngot the flotation around the spacecraft we decided\nwe would open my hatch. We opened the hatch and"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":219,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I climbed on out over onto the nose section. I\nfelt no ill effects at all. I was kind of watch-\ning for it, being careful about it so I didn't\nfall in the water right off. We wanted to keep\nour suits dry. I climbed out on the nose section,\nand they wheeled one of the bigger rafts over\naround the flotation collar and I stepped on off\nover into the raft. Pete stepped on out. The only\ndampness we got on us was when the chopper came\ndown pretty low. He was sitting there blowing\nspray all over us. He had a heck of a time getting\nthe horsecollar over to us for some reason or other.\nHe finally got over. Pete took it and went up\nin it and dropped it back to me. I took it and\nwent up in it. We had no ill effects in the\nhorsecollar and no ill effects from there on.\nFCSC Rep Did you crawl out of the left hatch too, Pete?\nConrad Yes, Gordo got out and I powered the spacecraft\ndown and turned off all the batteries and the rest\nof the switches and got out on the left side, and\nthen with the flotation collar on, I climbed\nback over the right hatch and stood on the right\nside because it was plenty stable over there"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":220,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"once they got the collar on. A frogman and\nI closed the left hatch. I hooked up the little\ngizzy on the way out so that we could close the\nhatch and get it started---the lock release.\nCooper Incidentally, was that hard to close? The little\nlock release?\nConrad No, once the hatch was open and started open,\nthen it was free.\nCooper For some reason or another--that is the first\ntime I've seen it like that when you couldn't\nget it open.\nConrad I checked mine and it worked okay.\nCooper But mine was hung up for some reason where it\nwouldn't open.\nBut mine was hung\nConrad Once we opened the hatch it went free.\nCooper Okay, so much for that."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":221,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"11.0 EXPERIMENTS\n11.1 Visual definition of celestial objects (D-1), nearby object photography (D-2), and terrestrial features(D-6)\nConrad Okay. D-1, mode 01. These are going to be real straightforward. D-1 mode 01 was done in conjunction with D-4 and it was done photographing the moon. It was done as advertised at 01 days 16 hours 30 minutes, and we took the moon with magazine 11. We took 4 pictures at 1/30 of a second. We took the moon on magazine 9 at 1/60 of a second, 4 pictures. We took 4 pictures of the moon on magazine 10 at 1/125 of a second, and all at that time period or shortly thereafter 16:30. In the meantime, we were making the recording IR measurements of the moon, so we have 12 pictures of the moon on the three camera backs, 3400 film, 3401 film, and 8443 film. That was sequence 3 with the Questar lens, visual acquisition mode. Now, we did not track with the periscope. We found that the boresight was good enough, and we didn't want to screw anything up. So Gordo did all the tracking with the reticle.\nCooper I think we have mentioned it before, but we might"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":222,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"mention right here again that when the reticle was exactly boresighted on some object, like the moon or a star, so was the Questar lens. It was right on the moon."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":223,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"212\nCooper Reentry--Number 1--Adapter Separation. No doubt. We set the Magazine at 1/60th of a seccnd--4 pictures We took 4 pictures of the moon on Magazine 10 at 1/120th.\nConrad At that time period shortly, thereafter 16:30. In the meantime we were making and recording IR measurements of the moon so we have 12 pictures of the moon on the three camera backs using 3400 film, 3401 film, and 8443 film. And that was sequence 3 with the Questar lens, visual acquisition mode. Now, we did not track with the periscope. We found that the boresight was good enough and we didn't want to mess anything up so Gordo did all the tracking with the reticle.\nCooper We mentioned before, but we might mention again that when the reticle was exactly boresighted on some object like the moon or a star so was the Questar lens. It was right on the money.\nConrad Yes, really good boresight.\nCooper And the radar was also right on.\nConrad D-4/D-7, 422 was done at the same time. Do you want to cover that now seeing they were done together, or do you want to wait until we get over into D-4?"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":224,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"213\nFCSD REP Why don't we wait?\nConrad We did that portion of D-1 that was.... Then the next D-1 we did was Mode 2. This was done on Venus at 02 days 13 hours 00 minutes. We took 4 pictures of Venus at 1/30th of a second on magazine 11 which was the 8443 IR Film. It was taken through the Questar lens visually with reticle tracking. Let me check the book to see if that is all. D-1, Mode 2 we did at 02 days 13 hours 20 minutes, on Alpha Centauri using magazine 9 which was 3401 Film. We used the Questar lens, took 4 pictures and that completed the D-1 Experiments. Let's run through the updating techniques and communications procedures that are used with the other experiments and I'll only cover them once and that's this time. We send up the title of the experiment, the GMT of the experiment, the sequence number if required, a Mode number if required and then any other requirements went in the remarks section. Things such as pitch, yaw, up, down, filmspeeds, and delta times or anything else went in remarks. I think that this procedure worked extremely well. There was never any confusion on our part as to what"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":225,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"214\nexperiment or how it was to be done.\nCooper The only caution that we might throw in is right here--\nConrad Stick to sequential times.\nCooper Right, stick to sequential time exactly so that you have running sequential time. You can keep track of all the great number of things that they are sending up. They might also consider what--equipment set up and stowage problems you have when they're sending these things up. We had a great deal of equipment shuffling to do there. In general, it worked out fairly well. All the equipment worked extremely well except 35mm camera which jammed several times on....\nConrad Okay, now the reason it jammed was that photo event indicator, which straps on the film transport adapter cable, was too long when the trigger was squeezed. That had a tendency to jam the camera mechanism, and I had to back it off out of the thread zone so that it wasn't tightly in there. In zero g it would continue to back itself out. I would get a couple of pictures and then it wouldn't take a picture and I would have to reach down and screw it in. I"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":226,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"would screw it in too tight so I would get one more\npicture off and then it would jam, and I would back\nit out a little bit. We finally got to where it\nworked pretty good.\nCooper But this still is an equipment discrepancy that\nshould be--\nConrad Yes, and equipment discrepancy and it almost cost\nus a couple of good pictures. Especially, when\nwe hadn't found the ship about four times and all\nof a sudden the camera was jammed. ...wall light\nfit in there. I might say here that this is D-1,\nD-2, and D-6. D-1 we got, D-6 we got quite a\nbit of, and D-2 we did nothing. What we are talking\nabout is the camera equipment associated with D-1\nand D-6.\nCooper Acquisition Techniques--They varied. Acquisition\ntechniques varied depending on whether it was a\ncelestial or ground target. Again we can't\nemphasize enough to do experiments where you have to\npoint to certain places to find things the only way\nto do it in a professional manner is to have a platform up and use the pointing angles. It makes the\ntask a thousand times easier and it eliminates all"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":227,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"this sloppiness. If these experiments are worth\ntaking platform time and power to do.\nConrad We've got to say here that there was so much diffi-\nculty in finding these things and getting organized\nthat we made onboard decisions to drop this track-\ning technique and we used only one method. We both\nlooked for the target and when we found it, if we\nfound it, I got Gordo pointed in the right direction\nand he put the reticle on it. From then on, he did\nthe tracking and I took the pictures. I'd coach\nhim if he was off at all by looking in the lens.\nWe never tried the technique of me flying and taking\nthe pictures at the same time. We didn't because\nthe majority of pictures that they asked for in D-6\nwere Questar pictures. I would never have been\nable to find it if we were off the least little bit\nbecause the pictures that they wanted filled the\nwhole Questar lens. We found that the boresight\nwas perfect so rather than mess things up and we\n-- Things were getting worst. To make sure that we\ngot the pictures, we dropped these different tracking\nmodes and we used the same technique everytime.\nGordo tracked it in the reticle and I coached him\nif he wasn't right on for the picture. I told him"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":228,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"where to go and I took the pictures; and we used\nthat consistently. Now that's a switch from what\nthey wanted but I think it bought them some. It\nstill proves that you can do the job. The telescope\nhas too small a field of view. I recommend if you\nwant the man in the right seat to track and fly\nthem he should have a reticle on his side. Then he\ncan track with the reticle and not the telescope.\nHe tracks with the reticle and he looks in his view-\nfinder just to make sure that he's got the picture\nwhere he wants it in the view-finder.\nCooper Comparison of operational modes.\nConrad We covered that.\nCooper Voice recorder usage.\nCooper We used it while we had it.\nFCSD REP What about your D-6 logs?\nConrad This D-6 log is pretty long. Do you want it all?\nI can give you the time --\nFCSD REP Why don't you just go through it?\nCooper I think it might be better to reproduce.\nConrad It's not that long. It's S-5 and S-6.\nConrad At 01 days, 15 hours, 33 minutes, we had a Sequence\n053 which we didn't get. Target obscured by clouds.\n02 days, 13 hours, 41 minutes, we had 012 which was"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":229,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Monterrey, Mexico. It was covered by clouds, so\nwe took Tampico instead. We took two pictures.\n02 days, 15 hours, 16 minutes, 59 seconds, they\nasked for 020 which was James Connally AFB at Waco,\nTexas. It was obscured by clouds so I think we got\nthe Dallas Air Naval Station and it was sort of\nhurried but I think we got five pictures. The next\nthing they asked for was on 03 days, 16 hours,\n37 minutes, 28 seconds, we got our first missile.\nI got five pictures. I won't guarantee whether the\nmissile was in it or not. Shortly after that time,\nwe got seven of Holloman. I was so tickeled to see\nthe sled down there that I shot 6 pictures instead\nof four. At 03 days, 16 hours, 44 minutes, we took\nfive pictures of Bergstrom. On that same pass, we\ntook four pictures of the Cape and that's when we\nwere tracking with radar.\nCooper Yes.\nConrad Then they gave us a target on 04 days, 12 hours,\n08 minutes, 13 seconds of Los Palmos and we got\nfour pictures in the mode that they wanted. On\n04 days, 12 hours, 24 minutes, 02 seconds, we got\nMozambique. I'm not sure how well we got it, but I\ntook six pictures down here so I guess we got it"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":230,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pretty well. At 04 days, 13 hours, 29 minutes I\ngot Savannah Municipal even though they were asking\nfor something else and that was covered and then I\ntried to get them a picture of this Blantyre Airdrome\nat 04 days, 13 hours, 58 minutes, 50 seconds and\nall I got was the terrain around it, because it\nwas covered by clouds. I took a couple of pictures\ndown there anyhow, because this was IR film, and I\nthought they might want to look at Africa. At\n04 days, 15 hours, 56 minutes, 53 seconds we got\nWhite Sands again on a 424a. I got 5 pictures.\nThen we got the best one of all 04 days, 15 hours,\n04 minutes, 40 seconds. We got 6 pictures of the\nUSS Lake Champlain.\nCooper Let me interrupt one thing here. I think you said\n15 hours on White Sands.\nConrad Did I? White Sands was 14 hours, 56 minutes, 53\nseconds. Then we picked up the California missile\non the next one. I don't think I got any pictures\nof that. We saw the missile real clearly but Gordo\ndidn't get on track so I don't think we got the\nmissile in the picture--Every one of these pictures\nthat I mentioned are Questar except the Savannah\nMunicipal which was on a 200 mm. Then we came up"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":231,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"220\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwith object 65 which was this small island off\nBrazil and that was 04 days, 16 hours, 51 minutes,\n25 seconds and we have four lovely pictures of the\nfirst island which is 120 miles above the correct\nisland. We have four more pictures of the correct\nisland. We finally found it.\nCooper Here is the map problem that we remarked about earlier.\nConrad Here then is the only one that I really messed up.\n05 days, 11 hours, 43 minutes, 41 seconds was the\nCape radar test, and I had the darn lens on 1/250th\nand I should have had on 1/30th. I don't think those\n4 pictures will come out. And that's it for D-6.\nFCSD REP You might mention here the tracking of these missiles?\nConrad No strain. You've got to get on them right away.\nWhen Gordo finally saw it the second time it was\njust to far away to get him in PULSE. When they\ncome right off the pad you can see them all right.\nIt gets harder the higher they get. Especially\nthe second stage. I got the first missile all the\nway to first stage burnout. Then I was behind him.\nI kept seeing a piece of the contrail here and there\nbut I really didn't catch up with him until he\npassed our altitude. Just about that time he\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":232,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"221\nCONFIDENTIAL\nburned out again and then he was gone. We could\nhave tracked him through second stage. If you\nare going to get him on IR you better get him\ncoming off the pad because after that you can't\nfollow them very well with the naked eye. We had\ntwo entirely different lighting conditions.\nThe first day we had them against the clouds and the\nsecond day we had them against the land and water.\nCooper We had him against that one string of clouds.\nWe lost him going against those clouds. If you\nhad a solid land water background I think you could\nfollow him the whole way without any problem.\nConrad The first day he didn't come up out of the clouds\nbut he did to us. You know it was clear at Vandenburg\nbut the clouds were close enough to cut off our\nangular view. First, we saw him when he--\nCooper But we had good lighting conditions in spite of\nhis being above the clouds. The lighting was such\nthat we could follow him real easy.\nConrad But the second day I was looking right at the pad,\nand I saw the engine light. There's no two ways\nabout it, I saw the engine light or whatever the\nfire was coming out of the hole. I don't know how\nthey fired them, but from the time that flame was\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":233,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"222\nCONFIDENTIAL\nabove ground or wherever it was, I saw them come\noff the ground just as plain as day. You really\ncould see them. He really stood out the second time\nagainst the sand background.\nCooper You extended your eyes on that. You didn't save\nthem for the visibility targets.\nConrad We'll talk about those visibility targets. I\ntold you, before I went, I didn't think that was the\nway to measure eyesight up there.\nCooper I don't either. I think, that the problem--\n11.2 Celestial, Space, and terrestrial Radiometry (D-4/7)\nConrad Celestial space and terrestrial radiometry, D-4/D-7.\nI think, what I'd better do is just go right through\nthe log.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":234,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"223\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad All right we started out on D-4 on 01 day, 11 hours,\n40 minutes, 15 seconds with Mode 410. Let me just\nread them and look them up for you. 410 was a\nstar measurement. No camera was required.\nI have down here 410 and it was done so it must\nhave been Deneb. Anyhow it's annotated on the\nvoice tape and it was a 410. Pitch angle was\n70 degrees. The yaw was 0 degrees and the location\nwas Carnarvon, Australia. We put 4 minutes of\nD-4/D-7 data on the onboard tape. Okay at 01 days,\n11 hours, 48 minutes, 00 seconds we did 411 which\nwas a night land measurement, 90 degree pitch\ndown. The experiment was made while over an\nexperiment station. No camera was required.\nAnd it was done past Sydney. It was done for\n3 minutes. Okay, at 01 days, 14 hours, 14 minutes,\n00 seconds we did measurement No. 420. We started\nto do measurement No. 420 which was an IR cloud\nblanket sweep and the place they gave us had no\nclouds. We didn't do it. So at 01 days, 14 hours,\n42 minutes, 00 seconds we did 410A. That was\nVega and I have it marked as Vega. We got some\nrecorder time on it. It should be correlated.\nI know what it was. It wasn't 410. This was\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":235,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"224\nCONFIDENTIAL\ndone in conjunction with D-1. The first measure-\nment on there was a REP, don't forget that. The\nfirst twenty minutes of tape is the REP. Now\nat 01 days, 14 hours, 53 minutes, 10 seconds we\ndid a 405 and I have the notation \"boresight okay.\"\nAnd that was where we calibrated our RAD gages.\nThey were all right. At 16 hours, 03 minutes, we\ndid 422 which was the moon measurements. We\ngot 2 minutes and tape recorder on that. Then\nwe go to the next day. On the second day,\n14 hours, 06 minutes, 00 seconds 420 which was\na horizon to nadir measurement and back again,\nand I believe IR cloud findings sweep. You'll\nhave to correlate what part of the world that was\nin. I'm not sure that it wasn't over Ascension.\n03 days, 12 hours, 50 minutes, 00 seconds we\ndid a 408 which was a black sky measurement and\nvoid black space. It was done over an experiments\nstation. It was done over Carnarvon. Then on\n03 days, 16 hours, 02 minutes, 00 seconds we\ndid a 409 for 4 minutes over Carnarvon. This\nwas Zodiacal light measurement. At 03 days,\n16 hours, 07 minutes, 50 seconds we did a\n410B which was Alpha Signus or Deneb. We got\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":236,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"two minutes of record time. On 03 days, 16 hours, 37 minutes, 28 seconds we got our first missile, 423 Alpha. We have about a minute and 30 seconds of record time on that. 03 days, 22 hours, 48 minutes, 17 seconds we did 425A which was a Hawaii volcano measurement. I did Monique. It is the only one I could find sticking up out of the cloud. That's not active, but it's a volcano. Maybe they will find something. On the fourth day, 14 hours, 57 minutes, 33 seconds we did a 424A which was a White Sands engine measurement. I got one minute of record time. It should have been a good run. 04 days, 16 hours, 28 minutes, 07 seconds we got the second missile, 423B. I don't think it's on the track. I don't think Gordo was looking at it. We may have been pointed at it right at the beginning, but I doubt it. On the fifth day, at 10 hours, 27 minutes, 00 seconds we did a 414 in East Africa, correlated with some 16mm magazine film. 414 was a desert land. It was done in the area of the Sahara Desert. On the sixth day, 08 hours, 43 minutes, 00 seconds I did a 417 in the East African/Mediterranean. 417 was a water land measurement."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":237,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It's on the recorder. At 06 days, 08 hours, 44 minutes, 40 seconds I did a 418 which was mountains. Those were desert mountains in East Africa. Again I got some record time. On the seventh day, 09 hundred hours, 00 minutes, 00 seconds 419 I got the Ascension calibration except it was done in drifting flight over Carnarvon if I'm not mistaken. And that is the end of D-4/D-7. Updating techniques and communications procedures were exactly the same as covered. Equipment set up and usage was very straightforward. The checkoff list was good. The cooled spectrometer checks worked out fine over Carnarvon. We had a go the first time. We never did make the alinements. The only thing we looked at with the cooled spectrometer was the REP. The REP measurements were made 1 hour and 50 minutes after liftoff. We had a go at Carnarvon. I went to PROP GAGE-EXPERIMENTS, RAD-1, Cold IR-ON, IR-ON, power-ON, transmitter-ON, recorder-OFF. Shortly thereafter we had trouble with the scanner. At 2:05 we were still having trouble with the scanner. We were having trouble with the platform aline. We were in the process"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":238,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"of turning and I missed Agena BUS ARM EXPERIMENTS and I missed jettisoning the door on the cold IR. That's my fault and I jettisoned the door on the cold IR at 02 hours, 16 minutes, 15 seconds after liftoff. I started taking the first REP measurements and unfortunately it was at 2500 feet. I felt that it was still readable so that is where the data starts. We got some black sky along side the REP with the cold IR. The radiometric and IR spectrometer alinements were right on the button. So was the cold IR. We had no trouble with the power down procedures. It was very straightforward. We never did get to do the cryogenic gas lifetime updates. We never got the Milky Way with that cooled sensor. We did get the void black space with the cooled sensor. We got the Zodiacal light. We got most of the star measurements. We got the moon. We got the night land measurements. No, well, we got the numbers that I mentioned. I just don't remember all of them. I did not get any cloud illumination with lightning. I did get day land measurements. I got the Ascension calibration. I got an IR cloud blanket sweep, but I did not get the cumulus clouds."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":239,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I did get the moon measurements. I did get one missile measurement. I did get one volcano measurement. I did not get the sun measurements. We were in drifting flight then and we never drifted into the sun. The equipment tape recorder should have had by my calculations, which were generous and I think there was probably more left on it than I had calculated, 12 minutes and 40 seconds worth of record time left on it. This says we recorded some 41 minutes worth of data. The voice recorder was used until it broke down. The flight control procedures were straightforward and we did most of our tracking with the reticle. I ran the equipment. FCSD REP Did missile coordination turn out okay? Conrad It couldn't have been better. 11.3 Synoptic Terrain and Weather Photography Conrad I could sum up this synoptic terrain photography. We have over three hundred photographs. I'm just saying that I think we got some tremendous geological shots. I think we got some great weather shots. I can't say anything about it until I see the pictures. We've got them all"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":240,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"logged. We should be able to dig our way through them. Some of them were done on 35 mm film which was not requested by the man. It was done on the extra 35mm film that we carried with the 200mm lens so we may have some great shots. The relay of data was good. The voice recorder was used until it broke. All the equipment operated. The Hasselblad camera operated fine. It never jammed. It took every picture and I think they were all good pictures. The tape recorder quit somewhere in the third day. I've got a log over here that says voice recorder tapes. We had a tape that ran from launch to 01 days, 09 hours, 25 minutes, 00 seconds and we picked up the next tape at that time. It ran till 02 day, 13 hours, 10 minutes and we had another tape that we picked up at that time. It ran till the third day, 13 hours, 47 minutes. Tape 29 ran until the third day 17 hours, 15 minutes. There was another tape in there and that was the one that quit. We don't know how much we got on that one. That was the fifth tape. We ran 4 tapes and it quit on the fifth one. That fourth tape takes us through third day, 17 hours, 15 minutes. We took"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":241,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pictures of Betsy and Doreen and we got a couple of typhoons, also. We got them all marked down."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":242,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Let me just maybe give you a synopsis here of some idea of what we probably have down here on the log, and, just looking at the pages here -- started out pretty generally, lot of Baha California, few in Mexico, Island chains, sunrise, couple of shots down of Saigon, Tibet, Tibet, China, Japan, Arabian desert, Tibet, Tibet, China, Arabia, Hanoy, Phillipine Islands, desert dunes, Oasis, African continent, hurricane, coast line, Cairo, Gibraltar, Tripoli, Apollo landmark, Mexico, U.S. California coast, Cape, large storm on an S-6 at 01 day 17 hours 12 minutes, Florida, large thunderstorms over Antigua, Baha, California, Islands and coast, large circular swirls and clouds, river mouth in Shanghai, Japan, typhoon by Japan, Tibet, Tibet, Formosa, Cairo, an S-6 mode 07, Florida, Cuba (if I can mention the word), Guaymas clouds, Houston coastal weather, tropical storm - Central America, Lake Titticaca, Arabia, China, Carache, North Australian Islands, Africa, Cairo, Tibet, Pete (laughter), Apollo landmarks, Cyclonic clouds, Hawaiian Islands, Hawaiian Islands, Iran, Turkey, Tibet, Glazier, Tibet, Hong Kong, Nile, Florida, Cuba, West Coast, South America -- gee, he's got a lot of pictures of me in here -- Pete -- tropical"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":243,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"storm Doreen, West Coast, South America, Andes, Formosa, big Islands of Japan, Tibet mountains and clouds, Tibeten geology, Tibet village, China coast, North Coast of Australia, Australia, China, New Guinea, North Coast of Australia, Cairo, (got a lot of Cairo -- we really liked Cairo), Central Australia, clouds at Cape Rhir (oh, I got a really spectacular cloud shot at Cape Rhir of a cyclonic cloud formation -- a minature one), East Africa, Canaries, Dallas, Fort Worth, Jacksonville, Houston, U.S., Carribean, Getmo, Baha, California, Mexico, storm Doreen, urine ice, Amazon, Hawaii storm, coral reefs, Midpac, tropical storm, coral reef, urine dump, Tibet, Formosa, Africa, Arabia, weather, Crete, a string across the Meds, large something, India, Islands, Arabia, Palestine, Rev 87 - Australia, East African geology, African lakes south of Nirobi, east African coast north of Tananarive, Madagascar, clouds in the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone, Jacksonville, Florida, aircraft carrier West Coast by Windowhec, Africa, night photos, clouds, Baha, California, South Mexico, South America, Zodiacal light, moon, cloud formations in the Pacific, cloud formation Hawaii, South American geology, West-South American weather phenomena of sunrise in"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":244,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Japan, Japan weather, night pics, stars, Milky Way, thunderstorm and lightning, something village, China, something Shanghai, Marshall Islands, tropical storms, oil well fires in Africa, geology in India, Tibet, Solomon Islands, sequences across Arabia, New Guinea, China coast, Islands due west of someplace -- can't read it -- West Coast Africa, I can't read any of Gordo's writing, some other islands, 102 Rev Australia, Canaries, S-5 no. 48 -- wonder what that was -- East Africa, very hazy, African geology, Cape Kennedy, ice particles, and that's it. Pretty varied (laughter). That's a lot of film there, I'll tell you.\nFCSD Rep Greed on Tibet?\nCpnrad No, that was Gordo -- he really goes for that Tibeten country up there -- that's where he sees all his goodies. It's pretty clear and pretty up there.\n11.4 Visual Acuity and Astronaut Visibility (S-8/D-13) and Vision Test (M-9)\nCooper Okay.\nFCSD Rep Why don't we go --\nConrad Okay -- updating techniques and communications procedures. Again remain the same as before. Equipment set up -- the thing we had there, of course, was a"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":245,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"vision tester and photometer and the first thing there on the photometer -- I got the first day measurement with the photometer which required a 30 degree sun angle and this was really -- had been given a location to put the sun on the -- Gordo's side of the instrument panel to assure that we had the right sun angle -- okay, we made that measurement. We had the photometer in the window whenever we went by the S-8/D-13 target -- we got those measurements, but we didn't get the last day photometer measurement because we were in drifting flight and didn't have the fuel to set it up. But I don't think the window changed.\nCooper I don't either.\nConrad Yeah, okay.\nCooper Let's see, the vision tester, I thought worked very well. No problem on it -- everything worked just as advertised and we did run it just as we had agreed to run it and was scheduled to run it. In fact, increased our numbers of runs on it later on. Everything went fine on it. I sure noticed a variance from day to day in our performance -- back and forth, back and forth -- it would seem to me like we -- and I think this is probably a function of how much we"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":246,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"have been looking out the window --\nConrad Yeah, I think you hit the nail right on the head with that one --\nCooper Because once you have been looking out the window for a while, if you come back in and do anything for a while until your eyes kind of got settled down was very difficult. The M-9 -- it's not the M-9 vision test -- it was the M-9 vestibular functions tests of Dr. Miller's -- we ran that just as we had said we would run it -- we held our heads alined with the headrest, as straight as possible, and turned the thing on -- I took mine in my right eye, Pete took his in his left eye, so that I could read along the side of his and he could read along the side of mine.\nI alined with the top of my instrument panel which is offset by some 30 degrees, or so, and I assume that Pete alined with the top of his also. And we would spin the dial and then while looking in there, aline with what we thought was the parallel alinement with the top of the panel and then say read, and the other man would read their reading or would record the reading down then, and we did this five times to get the readings -- enough said for that. I just will say that I -- my personal opinion on this thing"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":247,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"is that it was put in here politically, that it was ill planned, ill defined, and is a worthless experiment. I hope someday somebody will have the courtesy to check some of these things out more thoroughly.\nGround observations -- we can't even say about the Australian site -- the Woodleigh site because the weather was such that we never got a look at it -- two times we could have gotten a look at it, the weather was very bad over the area and one --\nConrad We saw the smoke so clearly though, and the weather was so clear that I could sort of put that in a category with Yuma, you know, I just wished we had seen it --\nCooper Yeah, I do too.\nConrad That darned Laredo site -- even when we saw the smoke -- the contrast ratio was down so much on the target outlines --\nCooper Yeah --\nConrad That we had a great deal of difficulty finding the target. Now Gordo found them a couple of times when I didn't even find them even looking right at the right spot and I -- when I'd find them, why I'd be too late -- I mean we'd be already at the Nadir and going away from it and by that time, we'd usually be"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":248,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in rolling flight because of the tracking involved and the couple of times we saw the marks, you'd be messed up trying to decide whether it was the 1, 2, 3, or 4, just from orientation.\nCooper Well, here again, we were trying to salvage a little bit out of drifting flight and I realize why we continued that experiment where we could and doing what we could, but it's almost worthless to try and do anything of this type if you don't have attitude control systems --\nConrad And a platform --\nCooper And a platform -- because you have got to be able to get powered up, you have got to be able to have pointing information, be able to get on the thing at an early enough date to get your angles right and to get all set up and to be able to control the spacecraft so that you can take the right look angle. When you are trying to climb all over one side of the spacecraft, peer out the back corner of the other window and one in one another's lap, one peering out of one window and one out the other and there's just a mess and it doesn't do the experiment justice and it doesn't do us justice. If the experiments going to be done at all, it ought to be done right and"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":249,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"here again, I say I realize why we were trying to salvage what we could out of a bad situation but it didn't really do justice to the experiment. We never really once really gave the experiment as far as the ground observation, a really fair chance. And the one time when we really did give it the most fair chance, when we did have attitude control, was extremely bad weather -- the haze was bad -- it was just about like the day when we went over it in the airplane trying to do those observations, it was a low sun angle and haze and the visibility in the area was not real overly good. Pete's already covered the window measurements checklist. I think that this whole experiment was very well laid down and very well prepared for and that the people concerned with this experiment did a real fine job of it --\nConrad I have to make one comment though, I think that the target size was small enough such that the target itself, although it had the high contrast ratio with the surrounding background, that they were looking for, you know so it would stand out, was lost in the acquiring -- in other words, that thing was designed for our close overhead work to see it, and therefore,"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":250,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"besides the smoke there was nothing else to -- in a contrast nature -- to attract us to the target area --\nCooper That's right.\nConrad And that -- the problem was acquiring it -- we were always in the process of acquiring but by the time we acquired it, we were already overhead where we should have been making readings.\nCooper Yeah, I think that they might do well to put some big colored panels out or some type of something that would be more distinctive --\nConrad Let's say this -- the times that we saw the ships, the time we found the carrier, we had the carrier wake in sight for 500 miles even though we didn't have the ship in sight and we were boresighted, tracking spacecraft pitching down keeping track of that thing when we got close enough to actually see the carrier with our naked eyes, why it's because we had been tracking and looking and focusing right in the right spot all this time. You can't do that with that type target, and this was the thing that I was afraid that was going -- they've tried to control everything in this S-8/D-13 experiment -- measure the atmosphere, they have measured our eyes, they have made the targets the right size, but they"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":251,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"left out the one thing that really made -- just like being in the desert -- you are flying along out there over the desert and a very, very small think road stands out and the reason it does, is because it's got the right contrast ratio. You can put a 6 foot road in brown in a brown field and you're not going to see it from 100 feet in the air. And this was the whole trouble. The targets were to small that their contrast ratio didn't help us acquire. I feel the experiment was really a good one. I really feel badly about not getting the data, but my opinion hasn't changed from before flight -- I was worried before flight that the contrast was going to be such that we would never locate it and that was exactly what our problem was. Now the Woodleigh site, I feel might have been a little bit different. We had such a good sighting cue in that Sharksmouth Bay, and there was no doubt in our mind where the target was the one time we saw it with the smoke and in relation to Sharksmouth Bay, and everything that if we had had some fuel up there, we very well may have seen those targets far enough out to acquire the site and start tracking and then we might have gotten them some useful data. No doubt in our mind that we'd"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":252,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"have had a heck of a lot easier problem if the visual acuity targets had been located up in Yuma and not Laredo. Everytime we came over the West Coast, if I didn't see Yuma, why I was surprised because I think I acquired Yuma every time -- it's real easy to pick it out of the desert and there was many clues to lead you right where those vis targets might have situated if they had been in the Yuma areas, and I felt that you would probably see them. And I still think this is a real worthwhile experiment. I think it's good for 7, but it's got to be revised considerably. They have got to move that Laredo location.\nCooper Okay.\nFCSD Rep Have you got anything in the book there that you want to put in?\nConrad Well, yeah. Let's just run by it real quick. What happened on each one of the -- I have several passes listed and I have on the first day 00 hours 00 minutes that we took a vision test, well, those are all in the flight plan and they are all marked on the cards so that's not necessary to record. It was on the first day, 18 hours 26 minutes, when I did the window scan. The Laredo siting we did at 1 day, 18 hours, 34 minutes, 38 seconds and we didn't even see it. Then"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":253,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"at 18:25:05 on the second day, Gordo saw the targets and I didn't. On the third day, 13:32:40 we saw the smoke -- no targets -- bad sun angle -- then the third day, 18 hours, 16 minutes, 14 seconds, we saw a 1 in the first row, and a 4 in the second -- 1 in on the second row -- then on the seventh day, 16 hours, 40 seconds, we saw the smoke, saw the targets on Gordo's side and he scored a 4 and a 1 in the first two boxes and the window measurement was made at that time also. We had to, you know, had the photometer and that's the only S-8/D-13 data I have down.\n11.5 Electrostatic Charge (MSC -1)\nCooper . We did that just according to the flight plan.\nConrad Yeah, well, let's see -- I've got -- I'll give the readings here, if I can find them. MSC-1 -- We had an MSC-1 at 01+21+52+00 which ended at 01+22+44+00 and another one at 03+07+40+00 that ended at 03+08+40+00. And another one at 04+05+50+00 that ended at 04+07+00+00 and another one at 06+05+24+00 that ended at 06+06+24+00. Another one at 07+05+24+00 that ended at 07+06+25+00 and another one at 07+20+50+00 and that got cut short by a thruster"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":254,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"check and I didn't record the time that it was turned off, but I turned on again -- but I'm sure it's on the tape somewhere. So much for the MSC-1.\n11.6 Zodiacal Light Photography (S-1)\nConrad Why don't you give them the word on that.\nCooper Equipment set up and usage -- we didn't have any problems in setting up the camera -- all set to go by the procedure that we developed for using the Southern Cross and pointing up towards Alpha and Beta Centaurus with the top part of the reticle worked out all right. We don't know yet what kind of data we got, but we followed the pre-agreed method for where we put the reticle and for turning the camera on and how long it was held on there and then proceeded on around to Gruis, pointing up towards Fomalhaut and held on there and we didn't thrust any during the film. I think there was one film sequence we had to -- we still were doing a little thrusting to get into attitude on one of the longer observations and we recorded this on the recorder and should be on there as to the times and everything.\n11.7 Inflight Exerciser (M-3)\nWe used it extensively for both medical passes and"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":255,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"for regular exercise through the day--both of us used it. There was no noticeable changes in physiological condition. I think if anything, it is easier to use inflight than it is on the ground, under 1g I mean. One thing I might recommend is that it have some little better method of rolling up in maybe some kind of velcro strap fastened onto it to be able to roll the thing up into a stowage type configuration. This is one thing when you start to stow it anywhere, it tends to keep unrolling and getting all over the place. But it worked very well--no problem.\n11.8 Inflight Phonocardiogram (M-4)\nCooper As far as I know, it functioned all right. It was just like any other sensor, it itched and was troublesome as far as another sensor. It was not comfortable, but it was not overly painful, but it certainly was very noticeable just like other sensors.\n11.9 Cardiovascular Reflex Conditioning (M-1)\nCooper This worked for some 4 days on Pete. He was the one that had this on. There were no procedures or operational problems--it was turned on and left on for all this period of time in which time it ran out of air and quit and the cuffs were itching him very much under his suit, and we proceeded to get his suit"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":256,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"off -- enough off that we could cut the cuffs off\nand throw them back in the trash box. The cardio-\nvascular conditioning bottle valve was very objection-\nable. It was extremely noisy. It woke both of us\nup everytime it actuated -- with a loud thud and\nhisses of air-- and I don't care what anybody says\nin a very quite room, it was very definitely\nobjectionable and I won't change my opinion of it\none bit! It was too loud and my recommendation\nwould be if they can't decrease the noise of this\nvalve, that it be eliminated from any flights.\nYour M-1.\nConrad My M-1, huh? Yeah, that was a crazy one.\nFCSD Rep Let me ask one question on this. You didn't say here.\n Did you feel anything?\nConrad Yeah, let's go into that. I very definitely felt\nthat after we finally spent many hours down here\nwith Gene Tuggs and rebuilt the cuffs -- yeah, they\nwere doing the job that they were designed to do.\nThey were cutting off the venous flow and I could\nfeel that in flight. Very easily in my feet. So I\nthink it was working correctly. It was a shame it\nran out of poop -- gas, air.\nCooper I'm glad it did!\nConrad Yes."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":257,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"246\n\n11.10 Cloud Top Spectrometer (S-7)\n\nCooper Here again, there weren't any problems\nin the hardware in the flight that\nwe didn't know about before flight. There were two\noccasions where the spectrograph's shutter was re-\nleased inadvertently either in stowage or unstowing :\nand the main shutter had not been -- just as we knew--\nthis is a very weak point of the mechanism because all\nyou have to do is bump it against something and the\nspectrographic shutter was released -- which ruined\nthe whole -- that particular exposure -- you had to\nrecock the whole thing. As far as the procedures\nof using it, it was easy enough to use, it was a\nlittle bit cumbersome in shape but we used it holding\nit-- the lenses upright up high so that they got out\nthe window. I think we got them some good data if\nPete will get the log out here he can read over that.\nWe recorded on the voice recorder as long as we had\nany tape. We recorded comments on the clouds, their\nappearance, and all that while making the photographs.\nConrad Now, all the photographs taken were specific photo-\ngraphs requested at a specific time. There were\nsome that were requested at a specific time that we\ndidn't get. I think the experiments people have those"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":258,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"247\n\ndown or they can correlate it real easy if I give\nyou the ones that we got. So we had a -- and we\nalways took two sets, one at an eighth and one at\nquarter, so we had a set at 1 day 20 hours 2 minutes\nand 30 seconds, and we actually would up with four\npictures. Apparently they requested four. Then\nwe had another one and that was cumulus clouds\nwherever the location was -- Gordo took the pictures --\nand another one on the second day 21 hours 33 minutes\nand 02 seconds, four pictures of a tropical storm.\nOn the third day, 6 hours 32 minutes and 46 seconds\nwe had four pictures taken over the Philippines of\nclouds in the Philippines. Then the next frame,\nnumber 13, was exposed accidentally. And then on\nthe third day at 21 hours 20 minutes and 8 seconds,\nit doesn't say what the picture was made of -- but a\nset were made -- of an 03, mode 03 -- that was, let\nme look and see here.\nCooper Right, I think that was --\nConrad S-7, 03 Eastern Pacific and then we had on the fourth\nday at 3 hours 20 minutes and 25 seconds, we had a\nPhilippines/Guam area set again, then on the third\nday, 20 minutes 35 seconds, you had one taken there --\nGordo, what's that white something -- oh, that white"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":259,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"248\n\ncalibration card--that was frame number 18.\nConrad Then on the fourth day 16 hours 37 minutes 00 seconds,\nyou had thunderstorms over someplace--is that right--\nthunderstorms?\nCooper Yes, the tip of Florida, up right off--\nConrad Yes, thunderstorms off the tip of Florida--that's\nright, they ask for that. And then on the fourth\nday, 19 hours 44 minutes 02 seconds, we had another\nEastern Pacific for two pictures. Then on the fourth\nday, 21 hours 09 minutes 25 seconds, tropical storm\nDoreen--two pictures. Twenty-seven was tripped in\nthe spectrometer again--the twenty-seventh--\nCooper That's right.\nConrad Then on the seventh we had seventh day, 4 hours, 18\nminutes 21 seconds, we had another Philippine/Guam\narea.\nCooper Right\nConrad Two pictures.\nCooper Yes, and that was it for the cloud top spectrometer.\n11.11 Miscellaneous\nCooper Celestial and External Observations. We saw the\nZodiacal light.\nConrad Quite clearly--twice."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":260,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"249\n\nCooper Clearly. We saw the air glow as usual, always\naround everywhere -- around the night.\nConrad We did see streaks in the air glow that they talked\nto us about -- the dark streaks in it which Jim and\nEd mentioned. They are really definitely there.\nCooper Right -- banded areas. And we saw this one in the\nsouthern Aurora down on the southern celestial pole\nwhich was quite -- pretty unusual. Really hard to\ndefine at first too -- just what it was.\nConrad Yeah, it looked like a part of the air glow, but it\nwas actually an Aurora -- it changed the --\nCooper It changed the air glow thickness too --\nConrad Changed the air glow thickness and it changed the\nsmooth curvature of the earth -- it put a halt in\nthe black outline of the earth --\nCooper Right.\nConrad And it was a very green band of what you'd -- what\nkind of Aurora do you call that where it is sort of\nlike a sheet --\nCooper Yeah -- the stria or striden -- something like\nthat.\nConrad Yeah.\nCooper Then one other -- the only other observation other\nthan we did see a lot of micrometeorites and I saw"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":261,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"one large meteorite enter underneath us --\nConrad Observed quite a few underneath us--\nCooper There was very seldom a night went by that you\ncouldn't watch just for a few minutes to see a\nmicrometeorite or two of them enter. One meteorite\ncame from a long way out burning and went in underneath. There were two other significant things.\nOne was the observation of the moon. The moon was\nrising out of the airglow. We had about a quarter\nmoon and you could see the entire moon lit partially\nand then the one part of it lit brighter. It\nreally appeared in three dimensional with the sun\nback over back off the horizon lighting it. This\nwas quite spectacular, I thought. I thought it\nlooked very unusual. The other observations in the\nvicinity of the Magellanic Clouds, and actually in\nthe vicinity where this Gegenschein Light is--\nit appeared to me to be two to three areas that\nlooked like Magellanic Clouds, only much smaller.\nThere were two or three other little Magellanic\nCloud-appearing things. They weren't clusters or\nanything. I think you noticed them several times\ntoo over there when we were fiddling around the\nMagellanic Clouds, I never could decide what they"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":262,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"were.\nConrad Yes, we kept looking over the area of Gegenschein\nto see if we could see and I don't really think it\nwas the Gegenschein, but--\nCooper There was one area right almost in the immediate\narea of the Gegenschein, but not quite. It was\nvery near that area by maybe five degrees or so\nthough. There was this one area which appeared\nlike the Magellanic Clouds.\nConrad Like a real small one.\nCooper Yes, it looked like a small Magellanic Cloud.\nThat's really what it looked like. It was quite\nnear the area where we had been told the Gegenschein\nshould appear; but, then there were a couple of others\nof these that similar types back over closer toward\nthe other of the regular Magellanic Clouds. So,\nI don't know what they were, and I didn't notice\nthese before on my previous flight. These were\nsomething that were new to me. We saw a lot of\nplanets. We did try taking the polaroid, the two\nsheet polaroid filters, and rotating them to all\ndifferent positions to see if we had circular\nor linear polarity coming out of the sun. I\ntried the sun both while well up and while setting."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":263,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Everytime while setting, it seemed to have linear\npolarity, somewhat vertical, but I never could pin\nthis down to anything well-defined. While the\nsun was up, well into the sky, I could rotate\nthe filters and rotate them within themselves to\nany degree and couldn't discern anything but\nequal polarity coming out of them in all directions.\nIt didn't seem to have any linearity to it at all\nor any well-defined specific axis of linearity. I\nnever could see anything from the sun other than\nwith the polaroid filter in. After the sun had set,\nyou could see quite a glow with the polaroid filter\nin, but at the same time you could see it without the\npolaroid, too. A couple of times when we got the\nZodiacal light quite strongly--\nFCSD Rep Can you see the stars down through this airglow?\nCooper Oh yes. You can see the stars right on down through\nthe airglow. The Gemini window is much cleaner\nin general, apparently, or much better visibility\nout of it and night visibility than the Mercury\nwindow, because we were seeing down to about\nseventh magnitude of stars. We saw the clusters\nin Orion and we could see seven stars in the belt\nof Orion. We saw a great many stars which we couldn't"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":264,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"begin to see in the Mercury flights. In fact, on\nthe basis of the number of stars we've seen, our\nrecommendations are that you crank up the planetarium at Moorehead and increase the brightness of\nit over the level at which we were studying it because it was, to me, rather confusing when we got\nup there due to the number of stars we actually\nwere seeing. Didn't you think we needed to up the\nnumber of that you actually see?\nConrad Yes, very definitely. You see quite a bit of the\nsky.\nFCSD Rep Did you get any pictures of opportunity of something\n--something that you really remember--that wasn't\nscheduled?\nConrad Pictures. You mean photographs?\nFCSD Rep Yes.\nConrad Oh, I think we have some outstanding photographs\nin there if they came out.\nFCSD Rep I mean something that maybe you wanted to take a\npicture of that wasn't on the--\nCooper Oh, yes. We took a number of pictures because--\nConrad We got some real good pictures coming across the\nstates, with the clear day we never expected to see,\nwhere we got two or three of the big major cities"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":265,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in the middle of the States, like Dallas, Fort\nWorth, and Jacksonville.\nCooper I tried some nighttime photographs with the 200 mm\nlens on high speed film with several different\nspeed settings just to see if they would come out\nand what they would come out like--\nFCSD Rep Of what?\nCooper Oh, of Orion and several of the constellations--\nseveral celestial fixes--once of some airglow.\nI took a picture of that aurora that we saw over\nthere and, of course, all kinds of sunsets, sunrises, and the moon coming up through the airglow,\nand things of this type. A lot of dim light stuff\nwe took with high speed film. It may or may not\ncome out, I don't know. We were guessing at some\nof the exposures. A great many things on the ground,\nof course, we took pictures of that were unexpected\nthings that we just thought were real targets of\nopportunity.\nFCSD Rep Okay, that's the end of the experiments."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":266,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n255\n12.0 PREMISSION PLANNING\n12.1 Mission Plan (trajectory)\nCooper On these longer flights you have to be prepared for\nmore real-time mission planning, which we were.\nAnd we had planned on this perhaps being the case\nand we held all the flexibility that we could in\nour planning. You need to get all of the key things\nthat you're going to do planned and trained for as\nwell as possible, but the way you fit them together\nhas to be flexible. This applies more to the flight\nplan than it does to the over-all mission plan.\n12.2 Flight Plan\nCooper Flight plan almost invariably winds up being\nlargely real-time planning.\n12.3 Spacecraft Changes\nCooper Spacecraft changes has always been a sore point with\nme and still is. I can't emphasize enough to give\nthe crew and everybody else a fair shake by holding\nspacecraft changes to a real firm, hard freeze date.\nNo more changes should be made after a certain date\nbecause it adds hardship to everybody involved, and\ndoes not allow the crew time to train. Some changes\nare going to be necessary because of what you find\nout on the preceding flight, but I think they should\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":267,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"256\nCONFIDENTIAL\nbe held to an absolute minimum.\n12.4 Mission Rules\nCooper I think that the mission rules were in general very\nhealthy. I think the attitude of the FOD toward\nmission rules was very good. It was obvious that\njust as we have seen many times before, that FOD\nuses the mission rules as guidelines and certainly\nwill deviate from them to keep the flight going, but\nkeep everything as safe and as smooth as possible.\nI really can't quibble with the mission rules we\nwound up with at all. I think they were very good.\nConrad The mission rules on the fuel cells were the best\nthings we ever had, they were written real opera-\ntionally. I would like to compliment the people\nwho wrote those rules.\n12.5 Experiments\nCooper Experiments is a sore point with me because I again\nfeel like the flight crew get trampled on all the\nway down the line. There is no policy that has ever\nbeen held to or ever backed up on adhering to an\nexperiments cut-off date. Very obviously, there\nwere a couple of experiments thrown in on a politi-\ncal basis and nothing else. I feel that this is not\nfair to the experimenters and to the flight crew,\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":268,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"257\nCONFIDENTIAL\nnor is it fair to the operations people when ex-\nperiments get cranked in past the experiments freeze\ndates. I feel that these freeze dates should be\nestablished early, agreed to by everybody concerned,\nand should be held very rigidly to. Unless a safety\nof flight or a significant development occurs\nwarranting a spacecraft change, the freeze date\nshould be adhered to. If you don't, you affect\nhardware, you affect all the previous and subsequent\ntraining and planning involved, and you compromise\neverything as well as the experiments which did\nmeet the agreed-to schedule.\n12.6 Training Activities\nCooper We were extremely short on time to do adequate\nflight plan training. Although we had it pretty\nwell in hand, but it was still very marginal. I\nguess it was just as well since circumstances re-\nquired considerable real-time planning. It wouldn't\ndo much good to get timing patterns down real pat\non these things anyway. Usually it boils down to\ndoing them real time. There were several experiments\nthat I would have liked to have had a little more\ntime to run practice on the simulator, or, at least\nsit down and lay out exactly how we were going to\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":269,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"258\nCONFIDENTIAL\ndo it. Although experiments worked out relatively\nwell, we could have used a little more time on them.\nConrad Concerning mission planning. I would avoid wiring\nexperiments such as MSC-1. They clobber up very\ncritical time phasing in the mission. For instance,\narming the Bus Arm Switch at SECO added an unneces-\nsary step at an extremely time-critical time, which\nis just pure lousy engineering planning. That door\ncould have been blown by any number of circuits.\nIt didn't have to put it on that one.\nConrad The next thing is the laying out of the flight plan.\nIt became obvious that we were crowded. So, I think\nthey should take a more objective look at the se-\nquential aspects of flight planning, particularly\nin terms of how long it takes to complete one ex-\nperiment. This business of being pitched all the\nway to the nadir, going backward, then having to\npitch forward again to pick up the next target, is\ntime consuming. Neither the flight plan people,\nthe crew, nor anybody else for that matter picked\nthis up until we were flying.\nConrad Sleep cycles. On the long flights you have to plan\nfor dual sleep cycles. Stations should monitor and\nnot transmit. The crew should sleep at the same\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":270,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"259\nCONFIDENTIAL\ntime for a period of 6 hours, at least.\nConrad I am firmly convinced the first three orbits should\nbe devoted only to wringing the spacecraft out.\nThere was a tremendous mistake made in the planning\non our flight. We assumed that everything was going\nto run correctly in the very beginning. We didn't\neven test anything but the thrusters and that was\na mistake. We had the time to make several systems\nchecks. You have to do a good platform check. You\nneed to check the scanners. You ought to have a de-\ntailed procedure laid out in advance. If we'd have\ndone that, we'd have known that the primary scanner was\nno good. You should have a computer check, which con-\nsists of going into Catch-Up mode, hitting Start COMP,\nmaybe inserting a few numbers and see what they read\nout. We ran into one computer anomaly where the com-\nputer kept running and running and I still don't know\nwhat that was.\nCooper Had that occured during the REP exercise we would have\nreally been up the creek.\nConrad That's right. In pre-mission planning we should know\nwhat the most critical systems are to be checked. For\nus there was the Platform, Computer and Scanners. One\nof them bit us and that was the Primary Scanner. We\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":271,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"were forced into being put all the way back into the first orbit, and it was a mistake. The mission rules were good and I agree with the comments Gordo had on the experiments and the training activities."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":272,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13.0 MISSION CONTROL\n13.1 GO/NO GO\nCooper GO/NO GO's--I think we're fine. I don't see anything wrong with the GO/NO GO's.\n13.2 PLA and CLA Updates\nCooper I thought those went all right. Do you?\nConrad Yes, we had a hip pocket place to go on every orbit.\n13.3 Consumables\nCooper Consumables--In general we had a pretty good handle on those. The oxygen, the OAMS--\nConrad We had one anomally on the OAMS. I still don't think we lifted off with the right OAMS propellant.\nCooper No, I don't think so either. We had 87 percent--\nConrad 87 percent on liftoff and they never answered that question for us.\nCooper We did ask why we had this reading rather than 100 percent and we never got that answer. We asked this shortly before liftoff.\nConrad This may have had to do with the fact that we had full fuel but not a full load of oxydizer based on that 1.25 mixture ratio. My understanding was that we were supposed to liftoff with 100 percent on the gage. I'm not saying that was correct but it took us by surprise when they blew the Squibs a couple of minutes before liftoff and had 87 percent on the gage."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":273,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"on the gage.\nCooper Electrical--I don't think there was any problem on the electrical system. The problem was in the cryogenics rather than the electrical. I should say in the cryogenics and in the water product of the fuel cells. These were the limiting things rather than the electrical power we were using. As long as you could run the fuel cells there was no limit to the power you could pull off of them.\nConrad Let's put that to bed right now. The GPO fluffed powering up those fuel cells after they'd been powered down. If our electrical problems didn't do anything else, we got to cycle electrical loads all the way through the flight on those fuel cells.\nAs far as I'm concerned, those fuel cells are flight proven. Every fuel cell in every spacecraft that goes off should carry the maximum load of RSS supply so that he has all the electrical power that he wants to use. He can run that platform, computer, or any combination of electrical gear that he wants anytime during the flight. The same thing with the experiments. You've got to have that platform. We kept pinching electrical power and pinching electrical power. I think we proved that the fuel cells can take the load. It shouldn't be any problem to fix a couple of things like that. There's no doubt about it, those fuel cells can go up and down, and up and down under load and they will hack the course. We sure gave them a beating. Especially that Number 2 fuel cell.\nCooper Can't say enough about the fuel cells. I just think they did real well. I was extremely impressed at the end when we kept loading them down. We loaded them down even more and the doggone thing began to come up rather than fail, go down or poop completely out.\nConrad That thing stayed on sixty or seventy hours of the whole flight. That's a lot. It must have been sixty hours at least.\nCooper I think that the fuel cell really goes into a hybernation period when you cool it down. I think it almost hibernates like a storage battery.\nConrad The way to bring it back to life is to load it down to get it warmed up, and then to purge it. And I would have liked to super purge that Number 2 cell a couple of times to see if I couldn't have brought it up higher.\nCooper Yes, I think it probably would have worked. The batteries--"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":274,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad We didn't always agree with Mission Control. One example--I would have loved to argue with them about the heater circuit on the OAMS. I was against turning it off.\nCooper On fuel cell--do you want to go back to OAMS. We've already gone by it.\nConrad Yes, I'm a curious person by nature and so is everybody else that flies one of these spacecraft. When you send up something you ought to tell them why you're doing it. Especially when we get into these screwy conditions. We didn't have any choice when they said shut down the fuel cell but to shut down the fuel cell. It wouldn't have cost them another two words to say what they were trying to do. I think it was obvious to us what they were trying to do. I tell you, they made some decisions down there on the ground that I'll still sit back here and argue with them about.\nCooper Yes, you are right on that OAMS heater.\nConrad OAMS heater was one of them and another one is the manner in which they conducted that solenoid warmup idea on the OAMS system to unfreeze it. That was a poor way of doing it."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":275,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":276,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper\tThat was a very poor plan.\nConrad\tThat wasn't thought out very well. I think, in that particular case, we had all the time in the world to discuss that with the ground. We could have gone a couple of revs talking that one over and it wouldn't have made a hill of beans.\nCooper\tI think the time that they chose to do it was ill planned. Every test that they laid on us wound up to being a test in the middle of the night. I don't know why. I'm sure this wasn't planned that way, but that is the way it turned out. Anything else on the fuel cells, batteries, or mission control?\nConrad\tNo.\n13.4 Flight Plan Changes\nCooper\tFlight plan changes--I think here is one thing that we want to say about mission control. I'm well aware that the flight plan people were kept extremely busy having to do this tremendous amount of real time flight planning. I think in general Flight Planning back there did a fine job. I'm sure there were a lot of the people coming in and adding this and that and changing this and changing that. There wasn't enough thought given to the crew. The crew was extremely compromised throughout the whole"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":277,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"flight in the way the flight plan changes were made. This was unintentional, I'm sure.\nConrad\tWe had to blow the whistle on it.\nCooper\tThey did things like trying to keep one man busy all the time, just to keep him busy. It was obvious that was exactly what was being planned. Certain experiments were put on one man when the other man was asleep then the other man whe he was asleep without any thought being given to who had what or which side of the cockpit.\nConrad\tI think, that we documented this well enough, and I don't think the 4 crew emphasized it enough; but, the people on the ground don't realize how long it takes to perform these other mundane tasks that aren't scheduled such as: hygiene, food, etc. They did allow long time periods for food, but there were other things that they didn't allow the time for such as: garbage, cleaning, etc.\nCooper\tThat's right. General housekeeping and cleaning up the spacecraft.\nConrad\tI think we can straighten this out with them.\nCooper\tI do to, but we are talking here about flight plan changes in mission controlling. I don't mean this as critical as it sounds. I want to say I think"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":278,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"they did a fine job. I think they made a good effort to salvage all we could ou of a poor situation. I think they really did a fine job. As a result of what we found, and we didn't know before we got into the real time situation; we discovered that the people compromised are the flight crew. They wound up cutting into sleep periods and certain functions were performed at the wrong time for each one of us. It could have been better planned as for as who did what when.\n13.5 Systems\nCooper\tMission Control for systems. I think the biggest handle you have on systems is right on board, and I still think so. I think we had a good handle on what was going on. The things that presented a real question were the rate of decay, the rate of dwindling, some of these cyros, etc. The ground got a good handle on them and began to give us some good information on what we could expect. Although, I think some of them were new enough that the ground wasn't aware of what was going to happen. For example, they didn't know when they would vent and when they wouldn't, what the rate would be when they vented, etc."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":279,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"13.6 Experiment Real Time Updates\nCooper\tI think these worked out pretty well. We mentioned about needing a platform before and about needing attitude control. And our OAMS system got worse and worse where we had no attitude control to speak and weren't allowed to use any, I think, a great many of these things that were put in just hoping we might drift through. They were sort of wasted. It was a waste of time. They could have saved our time, theirs, the writing time, and everything involved, because trying to get some of these experiments while in drifting flight is completely impossible.\nConrad\tIt was really funny. It couldn't have been better planned to work out opposite. They'd say get a D-4/D-7, like the Milky Way--You'd expect to drift through the Milky Way long enough to get it. Anytime we had the gear fired up we never got anywhere near the Milky Way.\nCooper\tNo, we would always be pointing at the ground.\nConrad\tThere was one time when I tried to do it. We were pointed at the Milky Way. By the time I found out that we were going to drift through it and the ten minute warm up time for the gear passed, we were"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":280,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"out of it again. I'd leave the darn IR gear running for a while and we would never get near anything we could look at.\nCooper\tWe never did get that end of the sun picture and yet the sun was in our eyes every time you would turn around. When they would give us some of these locations to photograph and gave us pointing information, it was good. When we had a platform to use, I think, their pointing information was extremely accurate. I was well pleased with it. I thought it was right on the money. We never had a platform to work from so we couldn't evaluate the air-to-air. The air-to-ground was quite good.\nAnd you need this."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":281,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"270\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n14.0 TRAINING\n\n14.1 Gemini Simulator Procedures\n\nCooper\tThe procedures that we went through in it and our\ntraining was pretty accurate. I think that we used\nthe right procedures in the development of our\nchecklist. In going through the procedures we\nshould have had our flight type checklist at an\nearlier date in order to get a little bit\nmore familiar with them and to iron them out a little\nmore in the GMS. We should have had them 3 or 4 weeks earlier.\nSystem knowledge--I didn't feel we were too bad off\nsystem knowledge wise, did you?\n\nConrad\tNo.\n\nCooper\tWe were pretty well on top of everything. We had\na great deal of confidence in knowing the systems.\nThe systems training that we got in the GMS on the\nfailure analysis along with the lectures we got\nby the systems people, both the GMS people and the\nMcDonnell people, put us in pretty good shape\nsystem wise. We were in excellent shape concerning\nlaunch training. I might say that if there is any\nchanging to be done we should emphasize the nominal\nlaunch more. We ran through all types of emergencies.\nWe had some good sessions on the DCPS. We had some\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":282,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n271\n\nwasted time down here trying to crank up some of\nthese launch failures that take quite a while to\nreset on the GMS. We should have gone through them\non the DCPS and let them go at that. It was a\nwaste of valuable time during the last few days.\nMany precious hours were wasted cranking the program\ninto the GMS to go through some of the failure modes\nthat we could have done in a tenth of the time on\nthe DCPS. Due to the shortage of time we cut way\nback on nominal training. We could have had more\nnominal launches, nominal insertions, nominal\ninsertion checklist, nominal preretro, and nominal\nretro, etc.\n\nConrad\tThe best day we had was the day before the actual\nflight. The day after we had scrubbed. We ran\nabout 8 nominal launches. About 4 reentries all\nthe way through to the end and that really put\nthe frosting on the cake.\n\nCooper\tYes, we should have had another day of that before\nthe first attempted launch. As it turned out we\ngot into reasonable shape because of that one scrub\ndate. We really put it to good use.\n\nConrad\tWe got a chance to go over the books some more and\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":283,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n272\n\nlearn things that really helped.\n\nCooper\tWe were short on nominal time.\n\nConrad\tI can't say enough for the way Deke scheduled the\nthings when he asked for two weeks. He was right\non the button. We could have used a couple more\ndays.\n\nCooper\tYes.\n\nConrad\tA little more nominal training like that to polish\nit off. If we had, I don't think Gordo would have\nput the drogue out at 70. And I don't think I would\nhave left all the Squibb batteries off. We shouldn't\nmake those kind of mistakes.\n\nCooper\tWe would have had more time to run through the nominal\nprocedures and get them down.\n\nConrad\tWe're the first ones to admit that we made them,\nbecause we just didn't have the flight checklist\nfinished all the time. We didn't run that thing that\nmany times.\n\nCooper\tWe ran very little orbital training other than the\nREP. I think we spent a great deal of time on the\nrendezvous and the REP, because it was the first\npriority.\n\nConrad\tOne thing that slipped by us, too, was that it took\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":284,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n273\n\nus a whole day and a half in flight to realized\nthat these experiments were going to run so\nsuccessively close to one another. The one thing\nthat we were not prepared for on the ground and had\nto learn in the air was how to organize a series\nof different experiments to run them in a row.\nI'm not sure we could have figured this out on the\nground.\n\nCooper\tOne thing we could have done if we had had the time,\nwe could have taken one of these Stateside passes\nthat we knew would really be cluttered and run\nthrough it in real time.\n\nConrad\tI think the recommendation here is what\nshould be done in the future for a flight that\nhad experiments like this one. I'd run a\nsim-net-sim with Houston. We had individually\nerected and taken down and put up every experiment\nenough times that we had no problem in assembling\nanything. We had no problem in knowing where\neverything was, we knew where everything was in the\nspacecraft and we got it in the shortest amount\nof time as possible even in the flight. We didn't\nhave any trouble in that way. The one thing that\nwe did miss was, and they have a sim net sim of\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":285,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n274\n\nrevs 15 and 16. It might have been a good idea\nif we had listened to it in that we might have\npicked up the fact that the sequential running\nrequired just a little bit different operation.\nAgain, I'm not sure that you can practice this on\nthe ground, because at the times we had the gear\nout we wouldn't have been able to load any spacecraft\non the ground the way we wound up using it in zero g.\nI had lenses floating on the floor and film magazines\nhanging by just a couple of little velcro threads\non the overhead which you couldn't have done in a\n1 g horizontal environment. You couldn't stow your\ngear around the cockpit like you can during zero g.\nMaybe you might compromise here. You might consider\na sim net sim to get some idea of how things are\ngoing to run into one another, and then if you're\nup for 4 days or something like that, you might\ntake an orbit to lay out a series so you can learn\nhow to stick stuff around the spacecraft. It's\nnot apparent to you on the ground exactly how you\nwind up storing that stuff. We really came up with\nsome new places to stash gear as the result of being\nin zero g.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":286,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper Yes, that's right. Okay, rendezvous is not applicable.\nIf there was one area that we were pretty well trained\non, that was retrofire.\nConrad Yes.\nCooper I think we were in good shape for retrofire. We had\nour checklist for a long time for pre-retrofire\nand retrofire. We were in good shape, well-trained,\nand we went right through it like clockwork. I\nthink this area we were sitting right on top of. No\nproblem at all.\nConrad We were in good shape in SECO, too. We went through\nthose SECO procedures in dandy shape. Got the\nnumbers out of the computer and had all of the\nsequences and so forth and got that well down in\nthe GMS.\nFCSD REP On rendezvous, how do you feel about the GMS training?\nCooper The procedures that we learned in the simulator were\nfine, but you just can't take away that out-the-\nwindow simulation. When you add the out-the-window\nelement to it, it's different. It's easier when\nyou kick the REP out and there it is out there\nvisually you can do it fine. The training that\nwe had up at McDonnell on that simulator was just\nidentical to flight. Didn't you feel like we were"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":287,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"almost in the McDonnell simulator when we got the\nREP out? Just exactly. That training that we\ndid up there with the visual presentation was\ninvaluable.\nConrad A lot of people don't realize how time critical\nthat whole REP maneuver was. We didn't realize it\neven when we ran it at McDonnell. When we ran at\nMcDonnell, we had a visual display and no outside\nencumberances and no other systems. We had a\ncomputer. Gordo had a ball and an out-the-window\ndisplay, a reticle and a hand controller. I had\na computer and an MDIU over there and that was it.\nAnd we would sit there, shoot the breeze, talk to\nthe guys out the window and run that thing. I\ndon't think we became aware of how critical it was\nuntil we came down to the Cape and got in that\nfirst sim-net-sim. Then we had the ground honking\non the horn. They wanted information. We had a\nspacecraft around us in the GMS, and they could\nthrow in little cliches every once in a while,\nwhich they did. It turned out that we got little\ncliches in flight starting out. The one thing that\nwe spent an awful lot of hours on was the REP."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":288,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"I'll tell you I wouldn't have given you a nickels\nchance if we didn't have up systems. We would have\nhad to fallen back on one of those backup jobber\ndoos. That would have been pure luck. But I\nwouldn't have made a mistake reading it. You are\njust reading the checklist. They were extremely\ncomplicated and long-winded. Now I guess they\nsimplified this a lot in Spacecraft 6; we were up\nagainst the wall. We had to stop somewhere; take it\nand work with it or we weren't going to get it\ndone. They were still in the process or ironing\nout the procedures. We did more of an evaluation,\nalthough it was a learning process, but we were\ninvolved in the evaluation stage, which was not the\ntime for us to be doing this."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":289,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Let me just add one thing. My recommendation is\nthat you are going to have to be extremely careful\nwith the mission planning people because I saw what\nhappened to us. Every flight is going to have a\ndifferent rendezvous. Somebody is going to want\nto start changing something, or mickey-mousing\naround. I think it is going to wind up to be a crew\nresponsibility and that a couple of months before the\nflight they really put the axe to them to stop.\nWhether it is the best way to do it or not, the more\nyou do in rendezvous, the more complicated it is\nand the more time critical it is doing the maneuvers.\nThe computer is a complex little gadget and can really\nfoul you up if you make one mistake. So, training-\nwise I can't emphasize running the mission the way\nit is really going to run in real time. We haven't\nenough time to really get it down.\nCooper Cut it off at an early date, so you can adequately\ntrain on it. I can't conceive that you could ever\nget the off-sets that we were using in some of our\nretrofire training. Plus, I don't think we are using\nthe right torquing moments on our Rate Command\nsystem. The trainer doesn't have anywhere near the\nbrute power that the actual RCS Rate Command has."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":290,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"It is a great deal of difference.\nConrad Yes, it was a pretty tight system. This is probably\na function of each individual system because I\nremember Jim mentioning the fact that it was so much\nsloppier in Rate Command RCS and there is a differ-\nence in the tolerance. But it sure wasn't apparent\nto us. Both the OAMS and RCS Rate Command systems\nwere just as tight as they could be.\nCooper Well, the OAMS Rate Command system definitely was\ntighter because you could come zapping around with it\nand the second you let go of the handle it stopped\nright there. Bam, it never even quivered, just\nheld right there.\nConrad Yes, we must have had an outstanding set of rate\ngyros. The RCS Rate Command there had a wider\nband. There was so much power and authority\nin the RCS Rate Command that it actually gave me\na little bit of problem just hitting the point,\ngetting lined up on it for retrofire. There was just\nso much authority you had trouble getting just\nsmall amounts of control force until you got\nused to it. There was so much power there,\nalmost more power than you needed for fine\ncontrol. It would be interesting to simulate"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":291,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"similar control torques on the GMS to see what\nkind of off-sets it would take before control\nproblems are encountered. I don't believe that\nyou would actually set one of the rockets off\nenough to bother you. Possibly, you could\nsince it is not a straightline function.\nCooper We had had adequate amount of reentry training.\nIf we'd had a thousand hours more we would not have\ndone anything differently than we did.\nConrad The reentry in the simulator and the reentry\nin flight up to a point went right down the\nline, I would say to slightly after guidance\ninitiate. Then, the ball angles were extremely\nsteep in flight in comparison to the trainer. I\nwould very much like to go back and take a look at\nthis on the trainer while it is fresh in my mind.\nI always use the horizon for roll reference in addi-\ntion to the roll bug. The horizon disappeared too\nsoon on our reentry. We were looking at all white\non the ball there for a long time.\nCooper We pitched on up pretty good.\nConrad Yes, we trimmed out at an awful high angle. The\nstagnation point on the spacecraft indicated we were"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":292,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"in the ball park with the previous spacecraft.\nCooper It had to be traveling right because as long as you\nkeep your rates zeroed it is going to trim to its\nproper trim point. I agree with you completely. It\nseemed to me as though we trimmed a lot nose higher\nmuch earlier in the reentry than we did in the\nsimulator. You have less nose up above the horizon\nfor a longer period of time in the simulator than you\ndo in the actual case.\nConrad That was the only thing that seemed different about\nthe reentry.\nCooper It didn't concern me because I knew we were damped\nand trimmed out okay.\nConrad Yes, I knew we were in good shape, but it was a sig-\nnificant enough difference so as to be a glaring dif-\nference with the simulator.\nCooper I don't know whether it actually was the case or not,\nbut the reentry seemed to go much faster than it did\non the simulator.\nConrad From Guidance Initiate to 100 000 feet, it seemed to\npass at considerable less amount of time than it does\nin the simulator.\nCooper Yes, it sure seemed to me like it did. That is some-\nthing I think we ought to have people check into to"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":293,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"see what the actual time difference was. Maybe it\nwas just us.\nConrad They can ring that out real easy. We can improve\nthe reentry on the simulator a little bit, it's\ndifferent in this respect.\nCooper Okay, Crew Station. I have the same comment that I\nmade after Mercury on that. I think that it is just\ntoo bad that we can't have horizontal simulators be-\ncause that is exactly the way you are in orbit. You\nare not laying on your back, you are in a horizontal\nconfiguration. If your simulator ran horizontal you\nwould be standing just like you would be in orbit.\nOrientation is entirely different.\nConrad I compliment the Gemini crew station on the layout of\nthe parameters that are displayed to you. I feel that\nthere are some other parameters that I would like to\nhave seen displayed in the spacecraft throughout the\nflight. As an example, I hate to rely on the ground\nfor radiator temperatures or have them call me to\nheat up a cooling loop. That type of thing is an\nonboard function. It is very nice that the ground\nmonitors and takes care of you. The spacecraft was\nextremely well layed out, and as we thought in the\nsimulator it turned out to be true in flight."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":294,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Cooper I think the simulator people down here did a great\njob getting the simulator up to our spacecraft\nconfiguration.\nConrad Yes.\nCooper When we came down here it was pretty close to our\nflight configuration.\nConrad Yes.\nCooper Stowage wise, they had it in pretty good shape.\nConrad With particular reference with Apollo, having worked\nfor 2 years in the Apollo cockpits, and having now\nflown a Gemini, and knowing that these two cockpits\nhave been layed out as far as I'm concerned, with\ntwo different philosophies, and I think this is the\nright one."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":295,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"14.2 LTV and DCPS\nCooper I can't really say how accurate they were because\nwe had a nominal mission. I think that they were\ngood training. I think a certain amount of that is\nvery good, very essential. I think there again we\nhave to be very careful not to over emphasize it.\nI don't believe we did in our case. I think we had\njust about the right amount, although I think there\nwas a number of people who were concerned that we\ncould have used maybe more DCPS.\nConrad I'll say one thing about the DCPS horizon. I\nthought that that worked out just almost the way\nit actually happened.\nCooper Yes sir, I do to. I would like to--\nConrad Boy, that horizon came in the window just about\nthe same time you saw --\nCooper I think that DCPS should really be utilized to ad-\nvantage as far as this out-the-window reference. Just\ncrank it just a little beyond and do a little bit of\nwork as far as out-the-window referencing and I think\nit will be an extreme help.\nConrad I wonder if we might not be able to do some help\non platform aligning and this sort of stuff. I\nwould like to go back again and look at the DCPS"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":296,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"from now - having seen an alined platform. I really\nwas quite surprised at what 0-0-0 looked like. It\nwasn't anything like what I imagined it was going to look like. I think we were both surprised when\nwe got up there and got the platform alined and\nreally looked at 0-0-0, that it looked the way it\ndid.\nCooper And you are also banked.\nConrad Yes.\nCooper You are banked right and I'm banked left.\nConrad Yes.\n14.3 MAC Engineering Simulator\nCooper Okay. The MAC Engineering Simulator.\nConrad I can't say enough for that half a day we spent on\nlaunches reading out Math Flow 6, on the computer.\nCooper That's right. And the reentries....\nConrad That's the most worthwhile half a day I spent as far\nas my side of the spacecraft went.\nCooper The reentries I thought we did at MAC Engineering\nSimulator were just exactly like the reentry we did.\nI think it was real good. I think, of course, the\nrendezvous we did up there we have already mentioned,\nI thought were probably one of the best things we did."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":297,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"286\nCONFIDENTIAL\n14.4 Centrifuge\nConrad We didn't miss the centrifuge at all. The fact that\nwe didn't go, I didn't feel that I was left out of\nanything.\nCooper No, I don't think we missed a thing with the centri-\nfuge.\nConrad I think you should ride it, you know, a time or two\nor something like that.\nCooper I think if nobody has ever ridden centrifuge--\nConrad ....boost profile or reentry profile is worth running\na couple of nominals in your shirt sleeves. I don't\nthink you need instruments or anything, but--\nCooper I think if no one has ever ridden one before I think\nit is worthwhile they ride the centrifuge just to get\nthe feel of what it is like. But, so far as--you\nnever even feel those g's. You don't even know you've\ngot g's. You are so busy doing things and you're\njust \"clickty-clickty-click.\" You don't notice them\nat all. And that level of g is not enough to even\nworry about.\n14.5 Translation and Docking Trainer\nConrad The tracking tests that we did on the Agena, you know,\nfor the camera, was real good. I didn't do the one\nup in Denver but the one in the Agena was real good,\nup to, and of course we would only get up as far as"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":298,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"287\nCONFIDENTIAL\nthe nadir, but I think it was helpful and I think\nflight proved the same thing that we concluded in\nthis, that it was a very simple task, once you had\nacquired something. .....the track.\nCooper Once you had acquired something, yes.\nConrad The one thing that I, to this day gave me the funniest\nsensations though, is when you track through the nadir\nand the things started to speed up and reverse I get\nthe weirdest sensation that we passed the nadir and\ngot about 30° going behind us. I almost had myself\nreversed in flight, like I was coming up on it again.\nNow, I can't explain the feeling but it was weird.\nCooper It's a real odd optical illusion where you are like\nyou are in an inverted spin-type situation. You are\nlooking--going back over here and the angle out is\nchanging such that you almost do have the feeling\nthat it's - that you have suddenly started changing\nyour whole angle....\nConrad And if you're looking at the nadir, and you're track-\ning through in just one axis, pitch or something like\nthat, invariably you're off a little bit in yaw, you\nsee, and you'll get going, all of a sudden it will\nstart speeding up, and if there is any roll in there\nat all; all of a sudden the roll will pick up,"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":299,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"288\nCONFIDENTIAL\nso all of a sudden this target\nwhich has been going this way and getting a little\nbit smaller all of a sudden the whole world will\nstart to roll on you too as you are going away. I\nhad the feeling that I was falling over a cliff\nevery time we got back to the end of that thing.\nCooper It was pretty weird.\n14.6 Planetarium\nCooper Well, here again, I just can't emphasize enough\nI think that a lot of people under play the value of\nthe planetarium. I think Pete even agrees with me\nnow that boy, that doggone planetarium is pretty\nessential training.\nConrad Yes, it felt .... pretty good.\nCooper The planetarium, unfortunately, is an item in your\ntraining program that is very easy to cut out. You\nsay well I don't really know that, I can take along\na star chart and I can recognize these, and we all\ntend to do that. We all tend to try and fall into\nthat.\nConrad I tell you, we would never have gotten Nye's\nZodiacal light done without having gone up there at\nthe ... and taken his display on it.\nCooper Oh, yes. If we hadn't gone up there and actually\ngone through it we would never had done it."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":300,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"289\nCONFIDENTIAL\nConrad And with the gun site superimposed, excuse me,\nreticle superimposed on it. Put it right there to\norient it with the Southern Cross and Grus and\nFomalhaut we would have never gotten that\nexperiment done, without having gone through that\nreally that half a day did it for that experiment.\nCooper Yes. That salvaged the experiment. Of course he\nwill probably ruin the film anyway. The celestial\nidentification up there, I think one thing that I\nrecommend that we are going to have to crank up the\nbrightness of the stars because we have had them\ncranked down to the Mercury level here all this\ntime and it's just too confusing when you get up\nthere you see so many more stars than you did in Mercury\nso we are going to have to raise the level, brightness\nlevel of it back up. Up for the training that we\ndo because there were multitudes more stars than we\nhad been training on.\nConrad The stars move around in orbit too fast to use them\nfor spacecraft orientation, as far as I was concerned.\nIn other words I might recognize a constellation\nout there. The Southern Cross or Orion or something\nlike that, but unless you know your exact point of\ntime and have a star chart sitting in front of you"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":301,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"and even with a star chart sitting in front of you\nit wouldn't help you with spacecraft orientation.\nI take it that what you are saying. Do I know\nwhat I am in roll, pitch and yaw to the horizon, or\nsomething like that. I don't think so, because\nmost of that stuff is moving too fast up there.\nCooper Well, so far as it's yaw orientation it gives you\nrelatively good angle. For instance you always\nknow if you swing around just one little .... You\nremember when we would swing around and there was\nCassiopeia, you knew that you were headed generally\nnorth.\nConrad Well, yes that's true. You knew that you were on\none side of the track or the other.\nCooper Pleides and the ... whenever you would see the\nPleides, it always points east, so that gives you a\nclue and there are several pretty good clues and I\nalways know when I see Delphinus that the Summer\nTriangle is near by.\nConrad You're right, it would tell me where it was pointed\nbut it wouldn't have told me anything in roll. In\nother words I wouldn't say that I would use it\ncompletely for a three axis spacecraft orientation.\nIt might give me an idea of which way the sky was"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":302,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pointing but that wouldn't tell me whether I was\nupside down or right side up or anything, but I\ndon't know the stars that well.\nCooper With the accurate star chart updated and then finding\nthe stars on there, then you could use them for\nspacecraft orientation.\nConrad I'm taking this to mean you are talking about a\nquick orientation, you know, I aborted in the\nmiddle of the night on launch if I went on a\nnight launch, would I know which way I was going?\nI don't think so. I don't know.\nCooper You would be very lucky, you would just have to see\none you could recognize.\nConrad You can take your time when you are planning in\nadvance. Okay. Now you want to use Orion to\nline up in a certain way with my reticle. Now\nthat's a different story, but that would have to\nbe done at a specific time because Orion moves all\nthe way through the sky and it turns over on a 72\ndegree launch azimuth.\nCooper Well, tracking task. We didn't cover that but I\nthink it is pretty obvious that you can use it for\ntracking task we found."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":303,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Oh yes.\nCooper Spacecraft orientation. I agree, you need a little\nhelp on that. It would be a help to find a horizon,\nbut you could get pitch and yaw on it and then\nmaybe use the stars as a yaw orientation.\n14.7 Systems Briefing\nConrad Well, boy I can't say enough for the type we got\nat McDonnell - were relatively different in nature and\nthe type we got down here but I can't say enough for\nboth of them because they are both essential. I'll\ntell you old Bob Snyder's one remark about that cryo\nstuff being able to go through that heat exchanger\nas a liquid and not bother anything would ... I\njust can't say enough for how that took the load off\nof our minds when we were up there.\nCooper Yes, I think the --\nConrad A lot of little tidbits that we had out of these,\nspecifically the guys here at the Cape.\nCooper I would say that the content that we had at the\nsystems briefing was excellent. I would say the\nnumber we had scheduled, I would consider the absolute\nminimum. I think that you should have at an early\ndate some very thorough,extensive systems briefings\nand then at a later date, closer to the flight some"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":304,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"additional, maybe shorter, brush-ups on it. I\nthink the people who have done, the McDonnell\npeople and some of our own people and some of the\nMcDonnell people and up at McDonnell is the way to\ndo it. I think, I want the people to really know the\nsystems, to use the systems briefing. I don't\nthink they can be over emphasized, they're really\nnecessary. Simulations.\n14.8 Flight Experiments\nConrad Well, we can rule out Denver because we didn't go\nthere, and MAC, I'll never consider ever flying a\nflight without a horizontal seater on all the gear.\nCooper Wait a minute now, we are in flight experiments.\nConrad This is training. We got simulation, GMS, Translation\nand Docking and at Denver. This is all backwards\nbecause we didn't go to Denver. Oh, okay, simulation.\nWell, okay GMS, on flight experiments .... we really\ndidn't do an awful lot of flight experiments in the\nGMS.\nCooper No, the only thing we used the GMS for down here was\na final stowage revue when we got all changed around.\nWe used it for the REP of course. A brush through on\nthe REP.\nConrad We never rigged. I take it back we did rig. We"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":305,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"went so far as working out the REP that the D-2\ncamera wanted to pull it out at real time but we\nnever put it in the window. We rigged a 16 mm.\nYes, we did use the GMS for all the things that\nwere concerned with the REP which had to do with\nmany stowed items, experiment items.\nCooper Okay. Translation and docking trainers. Let me just\nsay this as far as the simulations on flight\nexperiments. I really think you can use a mock-up\nto greater advantage and most experiments than you\ncan the GMS.\nConrad Yes. I think you are right.\nCooper I think you are tying up the GMS in many cases over\nthings that you don't need to tie it up for.\nTranslation and docking trainer. I would like to have\nhad maybe a little more time in it although I think\nwe got 99 per cent of what we needed to get.\nConrad Yes, the afternoon I spent in it was worthwhile,\nrunning the D-6 camera equipment, taking some\npictures and tracking them. All put together\nthe GMS and the tracking thing and the horizontal\nSEDR up at MAC ended up to good familiarity with\nthe experiments equipment.\n14.9 Spacecraft System Tests\nCooper Okay, and at MAC we didn't really run, as you say,"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":306,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"the horizontal SEDR was - around the spacecraft -\nwas really the only\nflight experiments thing that we did on it up there.\nLet's see, flight experiments. Briefings. Well,\nI think some of the experiments, some were better\nthan others. Some were lousy and generally the ones\nthat got there in politically where the lousiest,\nor they didn't bother to show up. I think this is\nsomething that should be very carefully controlled by\nthe experiments board. If the experiment is going\nto be chosen the people who are the experimenters\nshould be forced to come in and give you a good\nbriefing on these, everything about them, or other-\nwise they ought to be thrown off. Equipment --\nnow this is along the same line -- I think that you\nneed desperately to observe freeze dates for the\noperation and availability of the experiments.\nEquipment for the experiments, if it isn't available\nit ought to be thrown off the flight. I think that\nsomebody somewhere along the line ought to back this.\nMaybe it has to go to the LBJ level or something, I\ndon't know. Spacecraft systems test .... I\npersonally am not very impressed with the multiple"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":307,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"parallel testing. I don't feel that the crew really\ngets an awful lot out of, out of the spacecraft\nsystems tests anymore because there are so many\ntests going on at the same time that you can't\nreally keep a handle on what's going on and really\nget much of a feel for what's going on. You evolve\nto an automated-type thing of calling three scripts\nat the same time and throwing switches and listening\nto quite a complex thing going on. I think that a\nfew of the systems tests that still go on such as the\nECS test and the altitude chamber type thing are\nstill well worthwhile, but I think that the parallel\nmethod of testing has decreased the value of the\nspacecraft systems test to the crew by great\nextent.\nConrad There's no doubt about it, though, in being present\nyou keep them honest on many occasions.\nCooper Well, that's right. On the--it is good in that re-\nspect, but as far as the training point of view it\ndoes give you some certain familiarity with the sys-\ntems too, but I was just pointing out that it was\ndecreased over what it used to be.\n14.10 Egress Training\nI really thought our egress training was well worth-\nwhile--"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":308,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Conrad Boy, I do too.\nCooper I think that was a good exercise--\nConrad It was well organized--\nCooper I thought it was well organized and well run and\njust very well done and I felt like it gave us a\ngreat confidence in the water situation.\nConrad I felt real good when we hit the water.\nCooper Yes, I don't think there was a qualm in our mind\nat all when we hit the water that we were right on\ntop of the situation--just no problem. In fact, I\ndidn't even bother listening for leaks.\nConrad Yes.\n14.11 Parachute Training\nCooper Parachute training. As far as I'm concerned I\nthink if you've had any--I don't feel that I missed\nparachute training at all. I personally think that's\none you could just delete. I think sometime, some-\nwhere along when people come in to the program,\nthey need parachute familiarity and parachute train-\ning. Of course, I'm of the banned school and I\nbelieve very strongly that we should have actual\nparachute jump training.\nConrad I do, too.\nCooper If people think this is too dangerous for this"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":309,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"unhazardous occupation...\n14.12 Launch Simulation\nCooper Launch simulation. I thought they were very worth-\nwhile and I think launch sims that we have with the\nwhole, with MCC tied in, are extremely worthwhile.\n14.13 Network Simulation\nCooper I think net sims are worthwhile.\n14.14 Reentry Simulations\nCooper I think the reentry sims we had were invaluable.\nIn fact, I would sort of liked to have had a few\nmore reentry sims.\nConrad Yes.\n14.15 Simulated Network Simulations\nCooper Sims, net sims. I thought were--\nConrad They were invaluable on the REP.\nCooper They were good for the REP.\nConrad I think we got something out of the launch sims,\ntoo, although that exercise is more for on the\nground.\nCooper Yes, the launch sims had diminishing returns--it\ntook us a long time to cover the ground that we\nshould have covered.\nConrad I think it stayed with the crew and was worthwhile\njust to get you plugged in to the neg again and get\nto hear some of the things you're going to actually"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":310,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"hear over the net...the reentry sims are more im-\nportant...because it's a more coordinated effort\nbetween you and the ground, and I'm convinced that\nfor any rendezvous situations that some net sims\nhave to be--be run...\n14.16 Zero \"G\" Flights\nCooper Yes, well, okay, zero g flights,...I'm not really\nsure just what value you get out of zero g flights.\nConrad Well, I learned one thing, it was the only oppor-\ntunity that I had before the flight to get--even\nthough it was a bunny suit at the time, a pressure\nsuit up there in zero g and get some idea--opening\nand closing it which we did many times in the flight\nand so forth...And I think we both learned a little\nsomething there. I would say now I've done zero g\nin the airplanes and I've done it in the spacecraft,\nand if I fly again I certainly don't need to go\nback and do any zero g work again.\nCooper I really--\nConrad As far as Gemini is concerned.\nCooper I really didn't--\nFCSD Rep ....\nConrad Oh, Oh, well that's a different story, yes. Well,\nwe did do EVA's...but if I was going to do something"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":311,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"300\nEVA again, yes,--\nCooper\tYes, I think this zero g airplane plane is well\nworthwhile for a specific mission, especially mis-\nsion training. But so far, as just in general...\nI don't believe it's particularly worthwhile.\nWell, it is worthwhile like Pete said, that if a\nman hasn't ever made a flight before and never ex-\nperienced zero g, certainly good to familiarize\nhim.\nConrad\tYes, I agree with you on EVA.\n14.17 Flight Plan Training\nCooper\tOkay, flight plan training. Well, we never did\nreally have much time to do any real flight plan\ntraining, other than--\nConrad\tYes, the only thing that we were involved in really\nwas the REP and how it was going to go. We let\nJerry Jones lay out the rest of it without us really\nputting much effort into it. There really wasn't\na heck of a lot we could do along that line...\nCooper\tAnd I think for long missions this real-time thing\nis going to go, is going to have to go on, many\nchanges to be made so I'm not sure that the over-all\nmission needs training...I think maybe you might just\nrun spot portions of it on the time-critical of course--\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":312,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n301\nConrad\tWhat do you mean by operational check, you were\ntalking about system checks; in flight?\nFCSD Rep\tYes, flight plan training...\nOperation checks.\nConrad\tThruster illumination. Well, I don't have much\nfeel for that one way or another other than what I\nsaid earlier this morning--yes, I think I don't\nknow why it's as plain as the nose on my face but\nI think we leaped off the wrong assumption--that\neverything was going to run right without checking\nand I think that we should flight plan up the first\norbit now with more checks in it. That was a very\npoor assumption on this part, the more I even think\nabout it, because it was a perfectly likely situation\nto have some part of those three systems to be not\nworking right, and it would have been a simple matter\nto have gone to the secondary scanners and elimina-\nting the problem at the very beginning that we had,\nbut we weren't smart enough to know that. We are\nnow."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":313,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n302\n15.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS\n15.1 Crew Quarters\nCooper\tOne comment on the crew area here. I think that the\ncrew area here is a real good place to stay and that\nthe kitchen facility we have set up is very worth-\nwhile, when a real tight schedule is almost a neces-\nsity. However, the bedrooms are not soundproof at\nall. You can hear anything throughout the whole\nthing. Any noise at all that goes on, or a tele-\nvision or radio playing anywhere throughout the whole\nthing is very easily heard throughout the entire\nbuilding. I say this only because this was one of\nthe suggestions that we had before the place was ever\nbuild, that the bedrooms be soundproofed. This was\nbased on our old Hangar S experiences. Due to the\nfact that heavy construction is going on all the\ntime, this place is completely useless so far as\ndaytime sleeping. There is no possibility of sleep\naround here during the day due to the jackhammers\nand construction work going on. So, if any shift\nwork is going on, I recommend that someone keep them\na motel room, and sleep during the day at the motel\nroom if you are working night shifts around here and\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":314,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n303\ntrying to sleep during the day and run any kind of\nnight tests.\nSo far as the people that we had with us that run the\nplace -- I think the place is very adequately run.\nI think one person here who certainly deserves\nbouquets is the maid, Joyce, who just can't do\nenough for keeping all the laundry done. She keeps\nthe place, I think, very, very satisfactorily clean\nand squared away. Pete, do you have anything to add?\nConrad\tWell, I didn't hear all of what you said, but I really\nthought the crew quarters were a great save for\nus. I agree with all the things about the noises and\neverything, with all the construction going on now.\nIt's kind of hard. I do think that there is one thing\nthat I'm going to have to go on record as saying we\nmissed in our training, and there's no doubt about\nabout it. We were so pressed that we didn't have\nenough time for adequate physical training.\n15.2 Physical Training and Aircraft Flying\nCooper\tThere were two things; we had inadequate physical\ntraining, and I think we were somewhat short on air-\nplane flight time. I would have liked to have had a\nfew more days to be able -- when we were down here on\nour last period of time -- to got out and just fly\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":315,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n304\nlocal.\nConrad\tI flew local once the whole time I was down here.\nCooper\tYes, I don't think I flew local at all.\nConrad\tNo, that's right.\nCooper\tAnd I think, here again, we were caught in the\nmiddle of a bad scheduling situation, which higher\nlevel would not allow us to do anything about. But,\nI think we did the best we could with the short\namount of time we had. I personally feel that we were\nextremely short on recreational time and on flying\ntime. We were pretty hard pushed there and on\nphysical conditioning time.\n15.3 Sea Lab\nFCSD Rep\tDid you all ever get to talk to Scott Carpenter?\nConrad\tYes.\nCooper\tYes.\nConrad\tThe last day, the second orbit before we were at\nretro.\nCooper\tYes, just before retro.\n15.4 Watches and Clocks\nFCSD Red\tDo you want to say anything about watches and clocks?\nConrad\tI think Gordo mentioned his Acutron stayed within\n4 seconds during the whole flight and we only set\nit twice.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":316,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"305\nCONFIDENTIAL\nCooper\tMy clock you talking about?\nFCSD Rep\tIt was the one--\nCooper\tMy own personal Acutron I never reset and it was some 15 seconds off at the end of the flight for the whole 8-day period. The Acutron on the panel, the panel mounted Acutron, was--I changed it about 4 seconds. It ran 4 seconds fast the entire flight. The Omega that I wore was some 2 minutes off the first day and the second day was another 1 minute and some odd off, at which time I just quit winding it. I quit winding it about the third day and never even bothered using it again. The stop watch that I was--that I took along--at the end of the third day was still only about 2 to 3 seconds off. It actually was quite good and I just didn't have occasion to use one and let it run on down. And then I cranked it up for reentry and started two minutes after retrofire. Your clock over there ran reasonably accurately -- your little 8 day clock over there, didn't it?\nConrad\tEight day clock ran real well. I kept it on GMT-- the two big wrist watches I carried, I carried mainly for the REP maneuver and didn't use them too much. I did use them to count down to retrofire and my Glycene"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":317,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"306\nCONFIDENTIAL\nwatch here I kept on G.m.t.\n15.5 Miscellaneous Discrepancies\nCooper\tOK, I have a little list of discrepancies that I might just include here. These are discrepancies that I noted during the flight and some of them have been noted before, but I might just hit them real briefly. Just to make sure we have all of them. 1. We lost the stage 2 IPS fuel gage shortly after launch. 2. We encountered this POGO effect at 2 minutes and 6 seconds. 3. We lost communications near SECO on UHF No. 1. many of these have already been explained why, but I just--I'll get these down. 4. We lost fuel cell O2 tank heaters. 5. The M-1 experiment pooped out and also I thought it was objectionably noisy. 6. The gray interior paint flecks off of the guard bars and off several areas of the cockpit areas and floats and flecks around on the inside. 7. The platform mode was no good for the burns and was not holding the spacecraft as it should.\nFCSD Rep\tLet me ask one question. Did you ever try that platform control mode on the RCS system?\nCooper\tNo, I didn't. Sure didn't. I wish I had, I just-- I guess I had just given it up at that point and just didn't get around to it. I should have. The"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":318,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"307\nCONFIDENTIAL\nplatform mode should work very well. There's no reason why it shouldn't work very well and I just can't help but believe it was probably in the OAMS system. 8. I would strongly recommend unsnapable legs on a harness like a regular aircraft parachute harness with adjustable buckle-snap combination things rather than the custom made harness that we have. I think they would be much more usable for flight. 9. The cabin temperature gage failed-- came back in the fifth day for one day and then went back out again. 10. We did not use the polaroid window covers for launch so we don't know how they will evaluate holding on for launch. However, they worked out extremely well for flight. 11. Rest cycles are not observed. Too many little things keep getting thrown in that require two people. 12. The PCO2 gage was very irratic. It kept coming up and indicating PCO2 up around 1 mm and it did that for a while and then back down. And, 13. Tape recorder quit some time during the fifth day. That's about it.\nConrad\tWe had a couple here--let's see, did we get the thing about cabin lights getting hot? And melting paint?\nCooper\tThe cabin lights get hot enough they will burn your"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":319,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"308\nCONFIDENTIAL\nhands and in particular the bright overhead one is very hot.\nConrad\tOne other--let's see, we talked about the purge switches being 3-positioned rather than spring loaded. And one other thing we noticed, one systems glitch which seemed to affect either scanner--out over the Pacific a couple of times we passed some really, really, really big areas of cloud cover, I mean we were almost--the whole visible sky or ground was covered with clouds or a good portion of it and this seemed to give the scanners fits.\nCooper\tThese same clouds were that big cloud that had all the lightning in it too--later on we--\nConrad\tWell, it may have been. I didn't make any correlation that way, but I, in the daytime, I noticed that the scanners had quite a hard time doing their job when they were looking at much horizon covered by clouds. Got very irratic. I think that's a known phenomena--with scanners, anyhow, but I just wanted to mention that they did kind of kick up when there were a lot of clouds around. We talked about the right auxiliary light bulb bug thing breaking off. And I have one question. There was one place in the world where we passed at night a great deal of"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":320,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"309\nCONFIDENTIAL\ngigantic fires on the ground and just out of curiosity I want to know where we were--and it happened on the sixth day at 01 hours 02 minutes and 15 seconds so maybe we'll be able to find out where we were. That's all I got, Gordo, how about you, anything more?\nCooper\tNo.\nFCSD Rep\tOh, I got--Pete, you mentioned you blew that oxygen--\nConrad\tBlew the OAMS squib--could not hear it blow. Had no way of telling that it really worked. You can't pulse a regulator up and I did and it works just like it does in the trainer. It gives it a blip, you know, and you got to keep blipping it up. And I built it up to about 325 from about 300 just to see if it would do it and it did. So the system worked OK. But I still don't know that the squib was blown--you know you pulse, anyhow.\nFCSD Rep\tWell, other than looking.\nConrad\tYeah. Well, I thought the squib was in the adapter. No way of telling, I don't think.\nCooper\tIf they are lucky they might have--(laughter)\nConrad\tWell, they found a booster--they might find the adapter.\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":321,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"310\n15.6 Medical Aspects\nCooper I agree completely that the crew area here should be\nisolated from the medics. I don't feel that the\nmedical department should have anything whatsoever to\ndo with crew quarters; otherwise, I think the crew\nshould just go right ahead and live up to flight day in\na motel or somewhere else, because I have a very\nstrong feeling that the medical department is trying\nto make a clinic out of this place up here.\n\nI think the crew area should be held completely devoid\nof medics. I don't think they should have anything to\ndo with the running of the crew quarters. I think the\ncrew should establish its own procedures of whether\nthey're going to have low residue diets, or whether\nthey're not going to have low residue diets, based upon\nrecommendations from previous crews, from previous\nflight experiences along the way, and what everyone\nwho has worked with it has passed on. We hope we can\nget all this information gathered up in a form that\neach crew coming along can be given a condensation perhaps\nof all the previous crew's comments on things of this\ntype, such as diets, methods of defecation and urination,"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":322,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"311\nurination systems, drinking water systems, and pre-\nflight set-up type things. As far as the medical--\nI'd like to hit that specifically.\n5 PAGES DELETED"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":323,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"312\nWe landed on the carrier at\nmid-morning, carrier time, and we accomplished not\none bit of debriefing or operational work throughout\nthat day at all. We went to bed that night without\never having done one bit of our own debriefing of any\nkind, whatsoever. The entire day was spent with\nthe medical community. I don't know that we lost\nanything there, particularly, but I still think there\nare a lot of things you could sit down and start\ntaping that would be a lot fresher in your mind.\nAlthough, I think with two people on the flight, you\ntend to jog one another enough that you don't forget\nabout things you might when one person has been on a\nflight. Now, so far as the preflight medical aspects,\nI still have some very strenous objections to it and\ncomments to make. I think that T-2 days physical --\ngiving that extensive a physical at that period of\ntime is kind of ridiculous. I think you really drag\na guy throught the hoops there just 2 days before his\nflight and completely grind him down on a very, very\nextensive physical that I don't agree with the medics\nas being necessary. And I don't agree with all the\nblood-letting that was involved in this. I think that\nall the number of injections and sticks and reinser-\ntions of isotopic blood and everything was completely"} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":324,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"313\nunnecessary, and, again, was just a matter of re-\nsearch rather than anything else."} {"doc_id":"ea4d436d2189460b","page":325,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"eb4c606f491a9094","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nEXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nNATIONAL AERONAUTICS and SPACE COUNCIL\nWASHINGTON\nDECLASSIFIED\nNND 913955 1\nBy ARS, Date\nJuly 18, 1963\nMEMORANDUM FOR\nMr. Robert F. Packard\nOffice of International Scientific Affairs\nDepartment of State\nWashington 25, D.C.\nSUBJECT: Thoughts on the Space Alien Race Question\nDuring recent discussions the question has occasionally, though rarely, arisen that perhaps we should consider the policy question of what to do if an alien intelligence is discovered in space. Some discussion of this occurred, as you will recall, during deliberations on BNSP Task I. This memo contains some miscellaneous thoughts on the question.\nThe consensus of scientific view says, with quite good reasons, that the possibility of running across an alien intelligent race in our solar system is negligible. This is due primarily to the presumed unsuitability of conditions upon other planets to support life as we know it. The flying saucer advocates claim, of course, that the scientific viewpoint is nonsense, and that there is overwhelming evidence of such beings. In my own mind, I find it difficult to side with the flying saucer advocates, but the almost total impossibility envisioned by most scientists also is disturbing. Therefore, I present the problem in current perspective, as I see it.\nUp until a few decades ago it seemed very improbable that intelligent life existed anywhere outside of the solar system. The chief reasons for this were a combination of scientific theory, scientific knowledge, and religious belief. The most widely accepted scientific theory as to the formation of the solar planetary system held that it was a result of the near collision of two stars. Since such a precise near-miss"} {"doc_id":"eb4c606f491a9094","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n- 2 -\nof two stars would be an extremely rare event, it followed that there would be very few other planetary systems in the universe and, indeed, perhaps this was the only one. Religious belief said, furthermore, that life was a gift bestowed by God. This was a relatively undisputed point since no scientific data existed to bridge the gap between non-living and living materials.\nThe situation today is vastly changed in these respects. The most widely held theory of stellar formation would predict the formation of planetary systems to be a natural consequence of stellar evolution. On this basis, most stars would possess planetary systems, and the number of habitable planets in our galaxy would be tremendous. Our biggest telescopes cannot resolve planets at the distances even of the nearest stars, so no direct confirmation is yet available. In my own mind, however, the wide prevalence of multiple stars is an overwhelming hint in support of this theory. In addition, the biological sciences have almost completely traced a series of natural occurrences which lead from inanimate molecules to elementary living viruses. Thus, we have the current scientific theory and data not only that there are a huge number of planets in the galaxy, but that life is quite likely to arise spontaneously on a large number of these. This, of course, does not necessarily imply intelligent life. Modern theology is not necessarily incompatible with this. The description in Genesis of the Creation certainly is a better picture of the current theory than of a stellar collision, and since God only spent seven days on this system, He has clearly had lots of time to create many more systems.\nEven granting a probable existence of much life in the galaxy, there is still the question of whether another intelligent race exists in our solar system. There are, of course, two methods of its establishment in our system. One of these is that it originated on some other planet, for instance, Mars. Some of the spectacular markings of Mars have been interpreted as indicating intelligence. In particular, the famous \"Canali\" are rather narrow, and always run from one prominent marking to another, frequently with round splotches at intersections. As far as I know, no one has discovered a \"Canali\" which goes nowhere. This has quite understandably stimulated much conversation. In fact, a number of decades ago, when scientists thought that any life on other stellar systems was very remote, they seemed to feel that intelligent life"} {"doc_id":"eb4c606f491a9094","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n- 3 -\nprobably existed on our other planets. Some of the discussions about life on Mars at the turn of the century seem to indicate a strong urge to want to find intelligent life elsewhere. Today, the situation is completely reversed, and although intelligent life is considered quite probable among the stars, it is held to be quite unlikely within the solar system. We seem more eager to listen with Ozma than to look closely at Canali.\nOne school of flying saucer advocates claims that the Martians have been mining our moon for natural resources for some time. At first thought, one would think they would rather mine earth. It is interesting to speculate, however, upon space flight from the point of view of a Martian. The escape speed of Mars is only 16,500 fps, and, of course, braking speed on our moon is less than 10,000 fps. Thus, Martians looking at earth would tend to view it the same way Terrestrials look at Jupiter. Our moon might not be less work to get to, since atmospheric braking to earth is possible, but would be very much easier to return from, while the energy requirements to go to and return from the surface of the earth might well be so high as to discourage interest, at least initially. Interestingly enough, even a normal high energy chemical rocket could make a trip from Mars to our moon at favorable times while carrying almost 10% of its gross weight in payload. Space flight starting from Mars, then, is a much easier prospect than starting from Terra. If a suitable refueling base had been painfully established on our moon, the operation could be done quite commendably with merely chemical energy. (The aforementioned high energy chemical rocket could carry at favorable times almost 50% payload back to Mars.) Of course, many flying saucer advocates claim that the discovery of both Martian moons within a week in the latter part of the Nineteenth Century indicates that they are large artificial space stations, otherwise they would have been found earlier. If we were to discover Martians on the moon, it would result in surprisingly little readjustment of our scientific thinking. The biggest question would be why they were there rather than among the Asteroids.\nIn fact, if we were not as scientifically sure of ourselves as we are, three recent events would be hailed as broad hints of intelligent life on the moon. (1) The discovery of hot gasses eminating from the crater Alphonsus when the moon was supposedly dead. This would be considered evidence of civilization and, since Alphonsus is close to the visible edge, interpreted to mean that the other side of the moon was teaming with population which had begun"} {"doc_id":"eb4c606f491a9094","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n- 4 -\nto spill around to this side. (2) The infra-red scans which show hot spots. These would be interpreted as indications of cities or at least mining camps. (3) The fact that no lunar or planetary probe of significance has been successful, in spite of major efforts on the part of two very successful earth orbitfaring nations. It would be supposed that someone was denying us deep space. (The other-side-of-the-moon pictures from Lunik III show no details of consequence, and the same can be said of the data from Mariner II compared to what we had already known about Venus from earth-based measurements.) Should the Martians have colonized the moon without discovering nuclear energy, then they represent no real problem, and our current national policy would be made to order for the situation. If all of this were true, of course, I would expect the Martians to be scared to death of what they have seen recently on this planet, and would expect that the highest priority development program in the solar system is being conducted by the Atomic Energy Commission of Mars.\nEven if we are secure in our belief that intelligent life never would develop on Mars or some other solar planet, there is still the question of visitors to the solar system from other stellar systems. This is normally written off as an extremely low probability, due to the tremendous distances between stars, and the Einstein limitation on travel faster than the speed of light. Therefore, even if there are a large number of intelligent life forms in the galaxy, and even if they are continuously searching for other races, the frequency of investigation of any stellar system would be only once in many thousand of years and contact would rarely, if ever, be achieved. It might never be achieved, since presumably intelligent races die out. (What happened to the planet whose pieces now are spread around the Asteroid Belt? Or, for that matter, why is Uranus lying on its side?) I am not sure that this travel restriction is quite as infallible as it sounds. I believe that it is possible with what we now know about nuclear energy to envision ships driven at half to three-quarters of the speed of light. This, since the galaxy is 100,000 light-years across, still does not make a search of the entire galaxy feasible within the life span of the average man. But suppose some race under pressure of population explosion were expanding as fast as technically feasible from star to star throughout the galaxy. If their ships averaged half the speed of light, and if, on the average, they stopped every 10 light-years for a twenty-year stay at a stellar system to deposit colonists, refuel, and build extra ships, they would only take two hundred thousand years, starting at the center of the galaxy, to spread"} {"doc_id":"eb4c606f491a9094","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n- 5 -\nthroughout the whole system. Since the earliest known remains of man have recently been dated at approximately one million seven-hundred thousand years, a sustained drive for merely two hundred thousand years may not be unreasonable. Of course, if we were to run across representatives of this kind of interstellar race, they would not be nearly as tame as the previously hypothesized chemical Martians, and our policy would need to be revised accordingly. Fortunately, travel time restrictions would inhibit their ability to bring all forces to bear, in case we should develop differences of viewpoint.\nThe third possibility, scientifically abhorrent, is that the Einstein theory may only be an approximation, and an alien race which actually travels faster than light exists. If we were to meet such a race, our policy had better be to negotiate fast, because the implications of their far better understanding and control of the fundamental forces of nature would be obvious. If all the scientific speculation were to turn out wrong and we were to stumble across an alien race, we would want to know as quickly as possible which of the three types I have indicated it was, as our diplomatic policy would damned well be influenced by the results.\nCONCLUSIONS\nAlthough all plausible scientific thinking suggests that we will not find any other intelligence race, the probability that we will is finite, and perhaps should not be completely ignored. Were we to find one, the question of whether it was a race with primitive chemical space flight, space flight equivalent to our best understanding of nuclear energy, or space flight based on physics beyond Einstein should be ascertained as rapidly as possible, since our policies would be affected in the most drastically possible way. In any event, a policy of the immediate burying of all Terrestrial hatchets would likely be in order. Even if we only found tame chemical Martians, or merely the debris from some intraglactic survey mission, it would be a good idea to proceed on the assumption that the human race would finally have found a bigger problem than the ones it has created for itself. There likely is nothing to be done at"} {"doc_id":"eb4c606f491a9094","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"-OFFICIAL USE ONLY-\n\n- 6 -\n\nthe moment to prepare for these possibilities (the only body of writing\non the subject available in an emergency is science fiction), because\nno one of consequence is going to take this rubbish seriously unless\nit happens. At that point, our policy will be determined in the tradi-\ntional manner of grand panic.\n\nMaxwell W. Hunter, II\nMember, Professional Staff\n\nOFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ebf15c8385dec54b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:20:48"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nDefense Intelligence Reference Document\nAcquisition Threat Support\nAerospace Applications of Programmable Matter\n14 December 2009\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-0911-016\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAerospace Applications of Programmable Matter\nPrepared by:\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 90\nAdministrative Note\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\nii\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nContents\nIntroduction ... iv\nFour Kinds of Atoms ... 1\nNatural Atoms ... 1\nQuantum Dots ... 1\nPhotonics and Metamaterials ... 3\nLiquid Crystals ... 4\n\"Impossible\" Materials ... 5\nAdvantages of Dynamic Materials ... 5\nEarly Commercialization of Smart Materials ... 8\nThermal Management of Spacecraft ... 9\nEnergy-Scavenging Spacecraft Skins ... 11\nAdvanced Concepts in Programmable Materials ... 12\nScenario for Possible Applications ... 13\nDirections for Future Research ... 14\nConclusions ... 16\nFigures\n1. Energy Levels of a Metal and a Semiconductor ... 2\n2. Quantum Dot ... 3\n3. Programmable Materials ... 3\n4. Wellstone Fiber ... 6\n5. Assorted views of RavenWindow and RavenLight Filters in the Cold (Transparent) and Hot (Reflective) State ... 8\n6. RavenWindow Smart Window Film Performance vs. Leading Incumbent Window Filters ... 9\n7. Peltier Junction Heat Pump ... 10\nTables\n1. Daily Household Energy Consumption (USA, 1993-1997) ... 11\niii\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAerospace Applications of Programmable Matter\nIntroduction\nFor the owners of a $100 million satellite—a TV broadcast satellite, for example—avoiding bankruptcy often depends on the spacecraft's continued good health until its scheduled replacement is in orbit. Unfortunately, numerous failure modes are possible, including blown fuses, failed sensors, and browned-out solar arrays. The common trait of most such failures is that they cannot be repaired from the ground. In addition, it is not typically possible to repurpose a spacecraft or its components for new services that no one foresaw at the time of manufacture. Either way, a new satellite is required. However, when sensors, filters, emitters, and photovoltaic solar panels are made of Programmable Matter smart materials, the solution to a component failure or new mission requirement might be as simple as a software update.\nOther advantages of dynamic materials include advanced energy management and energy scavenging from a variety of sources. Smart materials can even create new defensive capabilities, such as chameleon-style camouflage, deflection of laser beams, and even outright invisibility.\nIf it becomes possible to change the properties of certain materials on demand, based on remotely triggered instructions, the benefits for spacecraft—both crewed and autonomous—will be considerable. This white paper—by no means an exhaustive reference—is intended to serve as a primer on the principles behind smart materials and their possible aerospace applications over the next 50 years.\niv\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFour Kinds of Atoms\nAll matter is made of atoms and derives its properties, in part, from the fact that atoms are discrete objects yet are so small and so close together that light waves cannot \"see\" them individually. By extension, neither can electric and magnetic fields. To a photon, or to a large electrical current, matter appears to be made up of continuous substances rather than discrete building blocks. This fact is critically important in understanding the optical, electrical, and even thermal properties of materials. Equally important are the discoveries of recent decades, showing at least four different kinds of \"atoms\" that meet this same general description.\nNATURAL ATOMS\nNatural atoms are the 92 elements of the periodic table. Actually there are more, but the rest have unstable nuclei that will eventually fly apart into smaller atoms and loose subatomic particles that can damage the materials around them. For engineering purposes, this makes them unreliable building blocks.\nHowever, 92 building blocks allow for a staggering number of combinations, and all the materials with which we are familiar—natural ones like coal and diamonds, ancient ones like bronze and glass, and modern ones like silicon carbide and gallium arsenide—are merely \"Tinkertoy\" sculptures of these natural atoms.\nQUANTUM DOTS\nA quantum dot is a very small grouping of tightly confined electrons whose collective behavior resembles that of a natural atom. For this reason, quantum dots are sometimes known as \"artificial atoms.\"\nTo describe how this trick is accomplished, it is first necessary to talk about electrons and how they behave. Most materials are either conductors, which permit the free flow of electrons, or insulators, which resist it. Semiconductors are insulators that are capable of conducting electrons above a certain threshold energy—a useful trick that makes integrated circuits and other electronics possible. The most familiar semiconductor is silicon, which is used to make the vast majority of microchips found in today's consumer and industrial electronics. Because silicon's native oxide, SiO2, is the main component of sand and rocks, it is readily available and relatively inexpensive. In addition, when melted, purified, and hardened into sheets, silicon dioxide serves as one of our familiar insulators and building materials: glass. Unlike most other semiconductors, silicon is also nontoxic.\nThe electrical properties of a semiconductor like silicon are of course fixed by the laws of physics. Atoms hold electrons in shells that increase in size, capacity, and potential energy the farther they are from the nucleus. \"Valence\" electrons are found in full (or nearly full) shells, where there are few empty spaces through which electrons can move. These electrons tend to stay at home, so their levels exhibit a large electrical resistance and do not permit electricity to flow. \"Conduction\" electrons are found in shells that are more than half-empty and have lots of open space, enabling electrons to travel freely through them and move easily from one atom to another. Between these layers is a \"band gap\" of forbidden energies. Here, there exist no electrons at all—ever.\n1\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 1. Energy Levels of a Metal and a Semiconductor. In a metal, many electrons reside in the conduction band and can be pushed to neighboring atoms with only a tiny addition of thermal or electrical energy. In a semiconductor, enough energy must first be added to excite the electron out of the valence band, across the band gap, and into the conduction band. Thus, to conduct electricity, semiconductors require much higher voltages and temperatures than do metals.\nElectrons below the band gap of a semiconductor behave as though they were in an insulator, while electrons above the band gap behave as though they were in a conductor. They flow easily and can be used to store or transport energy and information.\nThe difference between a metal and an insulator is that the outermost electron shell of a metal atom is more than half-empty. It has lots of conduction electrons and lots of room for them to move around. An insulating material, such as sulfur, has an outer shell that is almost completely filled. All its electrons are valence electrons—homebodies that do not like to travel. Semiconductors have outer shells that are approximately half-filled. With the input of energy, their electrons can jump to a higher level where they find open space to travel through. Conduction electrons can also be \"donated\" by neighboring atoms.\nA \"quantum dot\" is simply a very small structure—usually on the order of 5-20 nanometers—that contains a modest number of conduction electrons, which it confines in all three dimensions and prevents from leaving the structure. In addition, because the Heisenberg uncertainty principle requires position uncertainty to increase when particle momentum is restricted, the trapped electrons are unable to hold a well-defined position and instead behave as standing waves that resemble the orbitals of, and exhibit many of the same properties as, a natural atom.\nHowever, there are two major differences between a quantum dot and a natural atom. First, there are far more than 92 possible configurations—an infinite number, in fact—for the confined electrons. Thus, with quantum dots it is possible to create designer atoms with properties that simply do not occur on the periodic table. If we want to, we\n2\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ncan exert precise control over their optical, electrical, thermal, and magnetic properties rather than simply selecting these properties from the limited catalog nature has provided.\nFigure 2. Quantum Dot. A quantum dot confines electrons in a very small volume of space, forcing them to behave as standing waves. Their structure thus resembles the electron clouds or \"orbitals\" of an atom.\nSecond, it is possible to pump electrons in and out of a quantum dot using electric fields. Thus, instead of a single designer material, it is possible to create a programmable material whose \"atoms\" can be changed on demand, allowing a bounded but infinite variety of material properties that can be summoned or dismissed at will.\nFigure 3. Programmable Materials. Various structures use electric fields to vary the confinement properties of quantum dots and can be assembled into bulk materials.\nPHOTONICS AND METAMATERIALS\n\"Sub-wavelength\" features are objects implanted on or embedded in a transparent material that are larger than atoms or molecules but smaller than a wavelength of light. They can have significant effects on the optical properties of the material, since they change the way it responds to electric and magnetic fields. However, because they are too small to be \"seen\" by the photons interacting with them, they do not directly block the passage of light. The result is a transparent material whose optical properties\n3\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n(permittivity, permeability, index of refraction, and coefficients of reflection, transmission, and absorption) do not necessarily match those of any natural material.\nPhotonic crystals exploit this principle by varying the density or refractive index of a material in a regular, periodic way. Just as light is affected by the spacing of atoms in a natural crystal, it can be affected by the (much larger) spacing of sub-wavelength features in a photonic crystal. Thus, photonic crystals can efficiently reflect some wavelengths of light while absorbing, transmitting, bending, or scattering others. This can be useful, for example, in telecommunications, where a single optical fiber may carry thousands of different signals. Because similar effects occur naturally in many gemstones (opal, for example), photonic crystals can also serve as artificial gems.\nWhereas photonic crystals are generally insulators, another class of materials—called superlattices—is made from semiconductors, metals, and other substances stacked in very thin layers. Such materials \"look\" like crystals to the electrons and photons moving through them but can have properties that do not occur—or occur only weakly—in nature. Two examples are \"magnetoresistive\" materials made from alternating layers of iron and a nonmagnetic material such as chromium. Even in very tiny quantities, such materials can be used to sense magnetic fields with much greater sensitivity than can any natural material and are widely used in hard disk drives and digital compasses.\nIn a \"metamaterial,\" the sub-wavelength features are conductive metals surrounded by a transparent dielectric material such as glass, air, or empty space. In much the same way a metal rod interacts with radio waves and can thus serve as an antenna, the \"atoms\" of a metamaterial create strong resonances at particular wavelengths that can have more profound effects on light than can any of the material systems described above. The best known of these is negative index of refraction, a property that allows materials to bend light \"the wrong way\" and thus defy the laws of classical optics.\nLIQUID CRYSTALS\nAlthough they were discovered in the late 19th century and have been used in video displays since the 1960s, liquid crystals can be thought of as an advanced 21st century technology that somehow fell backward in time. They are essentially a fourth state of matter, possessing some properties of a liquid and some of a crystalline solid. In addition, they are \"birefringent,\" meaning they have a different index of refraction, depending on the angle or direction of light passing through them. They are capable of serving as photonic crystals, and under the influence of light, heat, electric and magnetic fields, and mechanical or chemical alignment layers, they can be rearranged at a moment's notice so that their optical properties are transformed.\nToday, people are accustomed to thinking of liquid crystals as pixels in a video display. However, their capabilities extend far beyond this. With proper substrate design and the application of electric fields and other alignment or disalignment mechanisms, liquid crystals can be used to reversibly block, bend, focus, scatter, reflect, transmit, twist, polarize, diffuse, and absorb light in limitless combinations.\n4\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\"Impossible\" Materials\nWhen natural materials are shaped and combined in macroscopic ways, it becomes possible to produce what Roger Bacon described as \"natural magic\": devices such as mirrors, lenses, polarizers, magnets, wires, semiconductors, fluorescent dyes, and phosphorescent screens that glow in the dark. We take these devices for granted, but to our primitive ancestors they would have seemed supernatural, as indeed they are in the sense of not occurring naturally.\nHowever, by combining the same materials in nanostructured ways, we achieve a higher order of magic: Bragg mirrors that reflect a single wavelength while transmitting all others, superlenses that defy Newton's diffraction limit to focus with unnatural sharpness, superstrong magnets that measure the world around them with unprecedented sensitivity, photoluminescent materials that absorb light in a broad range of wavelengths and re-emit it in a single brilliant color. Soon we may have high-temperature superconductors and even materials that are functionally invisible.\nOne such \"impossible\" material hypothesized is the nanostructured \"metapolarizer.\" Where classical polarizers either reflect or absorb half the light that hits them (typically resulting in energy wastage of 50 percent or higher), a metapolarizer simply ignores one polarity of light and converts or rotates or \"retards\" the other. This principle can be harnessed, for example, to double the battery life of a laptop display or to double the brightness of a flat-screen TV.\nHowever, even these magical materials are \"static\"; that is, their properties are fixed at the time of manufacture. The greatest revolution in materials science may in fact come from materials capable of changing their properties on demand.\nAdvantages of Dynamic Materials\nLeaving behind the world of static materials, we come to a sort of programmable magic whose fruits already include switchable mirrors, dynamic optical filters, deformable lenses, magnets and polarizers that appear and disappear on command. Less glamorous but equally important are such \"behind the scenes\" capabilities as tunable electrical conductivity, tunable bandgap semiconductors, tunable lasers, and tunable photonic crystals.\nHowever, the ultimate exemplar of designer materials will be multifunctional smart materials, which are capable not only of switching a particular property on and off but of changing their properties—indeed, their very purpose—on demand.\n5\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nFigure 4. Wellstone Fiber. A notional \"Wellstone\" fiber uses careful arrangements of conductors, semiconductors, and insulators to produce a long, flexible cylinder whose surface is studded with artificial atoms. When woven together, these fibers create a bulk material whose properties are programmable via external signals.\nIn the future, advanced supercomputers may be able to monitor the objects around us—our desks, our countertops, our walls and windows and chairs—and modify their properties to suit the needs of the moment. Transparent or opaque? Reflective or absorptive? Conductive or insulating? Magnetic? Flexible? Luminous?\nIn theory, a block of true Programmable Matter should be able to select any point on any of these axes at any time. Other effects may be desired as well, including magnetoresistivity, photo-/thermo-/piezoelectric effects, superconductivity, and the ability to perform computations (a truly \"smart\" smart material).\nUnfortunately, many of these traits are strongly correlated, so that, for example, a material that managed to be both electrically conductive and thermally insulative probably could not be made transparent as well. A computer is unlikely to double as an air conditioner. Still, the possible combinations—the number of things we could actually do—would be much larger than the (already vast) range of natural material combinations.\nAlthough the smart matter of 2050 will probably be operated electrically, electrical operation presents a number of challenges today. First, the required nanostructures are very small and intricate, with manufacturing tolerances that push or exceed the limits of current technology. Second, the control wires, electrodes, and other conductors in such devices mean they will likely be vulnerable to electromagnetic interference. Like a pocket calculator in a microwave oven, programmable materials face a harsh electromagnetic environment and will need to be shielded and safeguarded against spurious behavior. In addition, there is the threat of hackers. As our society turns over the control of more and more infrastructure to computers, we add not only new strengths but also new vulnerabilities. We must be extremely cautious about handing malicious hackers the keys to matter itself!\n6\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe greatest challenge, however, is temperature. The resistance of an electrical wire varies with temperature, and while we scarcely notice the difference with the fat copper wiring in our houses, the delicate films and nanowires of Programmable Matter smart materials feel it very strongly. Other critical properties, such as the bandgaps of semiconductors, the optical spacing of photonic crystals, and the internal symmetries of liquid crystals, are also temperature sensitive and must be managed carefully to avoid overwhelming the control signals passing through the material.\n\nEarly attempts at programmable quantum dot materials were so temperature sensitive that researchers found that altering temperature, rather than the electric field, was actually the easiest way to control the response of the materials. In fact, by selecting materials with higher temperature sensitivity, we were able to enhance these effects to produce thermally activated smart materials with no need for electric controls at all.\n\nOf course, materials that respond to temperature are not new. Thermochromic (color-changing) liquid-crystal thermometers are well known, and in the mid-1990s, Chinese researchers developed a thermochromic paint that turns a cool-blue shade when warm, a warm-red shade when cool, and pale green at room temperature. This was done mainly for thermal regulation—the paint allegedly could increase the temperature of a building by about 4ºC in winter and decrease it by about 8ºC in summer—although the researchers also claimed an aesthetic benefit to having a home's color match the season. Even more impressive effects could be achieved if black and white (or clear and silver) were available color choices.\n\nAlthough thermochromic building materials were very rare until recently, a number of other mechanisms—including electrochromics, photochromics, and automatic mechanical blinds—have been used to create “dynamic windows” that actively control solar heat gain in buildings and display many of the properties (if not the principles) of a true smart material. Buildings account for 40 percent of all energy consumed in the United States, including 71 percent of all electricity and 38 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions. Managing solar heat gain and controlling the building's thermal envelope are the most effective ways of reducing energy use. The same principles apply, of course, to spacecraft, for which solar heat is even more intense and nighttime (in the shadow of the Earth) is colder.\n\nIn 2003, the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), on behalf of the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), performed a study focused on dynamic window systems capable of darkening or shading automatically such that the solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) varied between 0.26 and 0.40. Analyses were performed for eight U.S. cities: Boston, Denver, Jacksonville, Kansas City, Phoenix, Sacramento, Seattle, and Washington, D.C.\n\nThe ASHRAE study found that across all eight climate zones, buildings with low-emissivity (“low-E”) glass saved an average of 8-15 percent on their total annual energy (heating, cooling, and ventilation) costs, whereas the addition of dynamic window systems saved an additional 6-19 percent. In other words, the savings associated with a dynamic window are approximately as large as the savings associated with low-E. Furthermore, because dynamic windows and low-E coatings save energy\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthrough completely different mechanisms, their effects are complementary and, thus, their savings can be combined. In addition, while low-E glass reduced peak cooling loads by 2-14 percent, the dynamic windows provided an additional 5-38 percent reduction in peak cooling load, allowing significant downsizing of the building's air conditioning system.\n\nThe report concluded that dynamic windows “offer the potential for significantly greater HVAC savings than can be achieved with currently available high-performance windows,” have “much lower energy costs than static windows,” and “provide the best of all worlds.”\n\nEarly Commercialization of Smart Materials\n\nIn the third quarter of 2009, RavenBrick LLC introduced RavenWindow, an “active-passive thermoreflective” window film that is transparent when cold and partially reflective when hot. The dual-purpose smart film is intended to manage and harness solar heat gain in windows. The film costs much less than do existing smart window technologies and offers superior energy savings.\n\n[image]\n\n[image]\n\nFigure 5. Assorted Views of RavenWindow and RavenLight Filters in the Cold (Transparent) and Hot (Reflective) State.\n\nRavenWindow film is transparent when cold and partially reflective when hot, allowing an SHGC range between 0.12 and 0.43—more than twice the range studied by LBNL. Studies performed by RavenBrick using LBNL tools show energy savings up to three times those of low-E glass alone.\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDenver Five-Year Cumulative Savings (holding energy prices constant)\n\nFigure 6. RavenWindow Smart Window Film Performance vs. Leading Incumbent Window Filters.\n\nAssuming a retail cost of $25 per square foot, for large buildings across multiple climate zones, the payback period is 5-10 years. Even faster return on investment is possible if the retail cost can be reduced, which seems likely given the relative simplicity of the technology. The payback period does not include capital cost reduction on HVAC systems, reduction in the cost of window coverings, and the tax and building permit savings associated with Leadership in Energy Efficient Design (LEED) certification.\n\nThermal Management of Spacecraft\n\nThe three laws of thermodynamics, in their simplest form, are (1) you cannot win, (2) you cannot break even, and (3) you cannot quit the game. Energy is never free, and nanostructured dynamic materials are of course subject to the same laws as natural materials. However, while energy can neither be created nor be destroyed, it can be moved around, changed in form, and also stored. Thus, for thermal management of spacecraft, dynamic materials have much more to offer than simply regulating solar heat gain.\n\nOne example is active heat transport. A Peltier junction is a solid-state heat pump made from two dissimilar semiconductors. When a current is passed through the junction, one face grows hot while the other grows cold.\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n[image]\n\nFigure 7. Peltier Junction Heat Pump. Running an electrical current through this device will drive thermal energy into the upper conductor, which grows hot. The lower conductors lose energy and become cold. The same principle works in reverse: heating the top conductor (or cooling the bottom one) will create an electrical voltage across the device.\n\nUnfortunately, natural materials are relatively poor at this—the best efficiencies achieved with them so far are around 10 percent. An optimal thermoelectric material would be simultaneously a strong electrical conductor—perhaps even a superconductor—and an excellent thermal insulator.\n\nFortunately, in 2001, scientists at the Research Triangle Institute in North Carolina used semiconductor superlattices to create a Peltier junction that operated at 2.5 times the efficiency and 23,000 times the speed of all previous designs. The electrically semiconductive superlattice materials were unusually good radiators—and unusually poor conductors—of heat.\n\nFor spacecraft hulls fashioned from programmable materials, it should be possible to create Peltier coolers on any surface in order to pump heat out of one area and divert it to another. In addition, it may be desirable to manipulate the thermal conductivity of the spacecraft skin—highly conductive in some areas, highly insulating in others—either to smooth out temperature differences between the sunward and shadowed sides of the spacecraft or, in some cases, to accentuate them (for example, so that a radiator, precision blackbody, or cryogenic instrument on the shadowed side remains as cold as possible).\n\nFinally, it may be desirable to store heat for later release. This can be accomplished, for example, by placing an insulating barrier around a hot portion of the spacecraft skin while also reducing the emissivity of the hot spot so its ability to radiate the heat away into space is minimized. Later, the hot spot can be reconnected to the rest of the spacecraft skin through conductive bridges, allowing the heat to escape and spread out.\n\nIn addition, thermal management of the spacecraft interior will provide significant benefits for the overall energy budget. The table below details the energy consumption of a typical household (a reasonable analog for a crewed spacecraft, with the exception of energy required for air circulation and other life support functions).\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 1. Daily Household Energy Consumption (USA, 1993-1997)\n\nSpace Heating 41 kWh\nWater Heating 15 kWh\nRefrigeration 7 kWh\nSpace Cooling (air conditioner) 3 kWh\nLighting 3 kWh\nClothes Drying 2 kWh\nCooking 1 kWh\nDishwashing 1 kWh\nOther Appliances (TV, stereo, computer, etc.) 7 kWh\n\nOver 80 percent of the energy budget is spent heating and cooling things—often at the same time. It is clearly desirable to recapture the waste heat from cooling operations and divert it to subsystems, such as the water heater.\n\nEnergy-Scavenging Spacecraft Skins\n\nProgrammable materials can also be used to harvest, store, and redirect other forms of energy. Spacecraft are constantly bathed in a very high solar energy flux and experience sharp temperature gradients, as well as periodic changes in magnetic and electric field. All of these represent possible energy sources that can be scavenged from the environment without disrupting other spacecraft operations.\n\nThe photoelectric effect occurs when photons strike a material such as a semiconductor or metal. The energy of the photons is absorbed by the electron shells of atoms, and as a result, some electrons may shift from the valence band to the higher, looser energies of the conduction band. This is the source of the voltage in photovoltaic cells and allows the direct conversion of light energy into electricity. This effect generates electron-hole pairs (that is, knocks electrons off their parent atoms) in a material such as silicon, and if the electrons are forced to go in one direction and the holes in the other, then an electrical voltage is generated.\n\nToday's commercial solar cells are around 13-percent efficient at converting sunlight into electricity, which makes them economically marginal for use on Earth in any but the sunniest climates. Even NASA's most sophisticated—and expensive—solar cells are usually no more than 24-percent efficient, although experimental multilayered designs have achieved upwards of 40-percent efficiency in the laboratory. (Notably, such converters once blurred the lines between a designer material and a collection of nanoscale devices.)\n\nThese efficiency numbers reflect a practical limit, not a theoretical one. The available materials—primarily silicon and other semiconductors—are simply not very photoelectric, and the junctions we can place in them are not very efficient electron-hole separators. With natural atoms, the choices are quite limited. However, with artificial atoms and designer materials of various types, and particularly programmable materials that can adjust to changing conditions, much higher efficiencies are possible. Clearly, it is very desirable for the sunward face of a spacecraft to be as photovoltaic as possible.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIn addition, sharp temperature discontinuities can be an energy source. A Peltier junction can be run in reverse so that heating one side of it and cooling the other produces a voltage. This seems quite straightforward at the sunlight terminator of a spacecraft—the line dividing the sunward and shadowed faces. Here, although there exists very little direct solar energy, the temperature gradient can be quite steep, indicating a potentially quite large amount of harvestable energy that would otherwise go to waste.\n\nStill another way to harvest energy is through the piezoelectric effect—a voltage generated when certain materials are under pressure. Because the atmosphere within the spacecraft exerts a constant outward pressure on the hull, this seems a good candidate for energy scavenging as well. In addition, for areas of the spacecraft interior that are expected to receive intermittent pressure (for example, because crew members bump up against them), this energy can be harvested as well. The total energy of these interactions may not be very large, but for programmable materials that would otherwise be sitting idle, energy scavenging is an excellent activity even at very low efficiency.\n\nSmart materials can also be used to store the energy they generate. A capacitor is simply a pair of conductors with an insulator between them, which can separate charges under the influence of a voltage, sending electrons to one side and holes to the other. This separation of charges, like the separation of chemical ions in a battery, stores energy. Automotive ultracapacitors have a bright future, and replacing their \"holey carbon\" with nanostructured programmable materials may allow storage of even more concentrated charges.\n\nSuperconducting loop batteries are another possible storage mechanism, particularly on the shadowed side of the spacecraft, where cryogenic temperatures are easily achieved.\n\nAdvanced Concepts in Programmable Materials\n\nProgrammable materials can assume novel, unnatural configurations, but their primary advantage is that their properties can be changed on demand. Thus, it becomes possible, for example, to reconfigure a single spacecraft attitude sensor to operate as a sun sensor, horizon sensor, or star sensor, as required. The same technology can convert any black-and-white imaging sensor into a multispectral sensor—at low cost and with no moving parts. In fact, a single device could be a receiver for optical or infrared signals, a tunable optical or infrared filter, or a precision light source for calibrating other sensors. In addition, when not in use, the device can serve as a photovoltaic cell, converting sunlight into additional electricity.\n\nIn fact, the inherent re-programmability of the material properties means devices incorporating dynamic materials can be adapted to novel purposes that were not anticipated at the time of manufacture. In the future, dynamic materials may serve in such applications as polarizers, magnetic and electric field sensors, and color-changing solar sail controllers for station keeping. This open-ended flexibility has the potential to dramatically improve the value and performance of spacecraft that lie beyond our current capabilities.\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nQuantum computing is another possibility. Qbits were first demonstrated in 1995 by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Boulder, Colorado, and by the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. Because computing power increases exponentially with the number of qbits (versus linearly with the number of binary bits), a 64-qbit computer is roughly 18 billion billion times as powerful as a 64-bit binary one. In a quantum, programmable world, the concept of \"operations per second\" as a computing bottleneck may simply vanish.\n\nOpinions vary widely on how smart or intelligent or conscious a machine can ever be, but as IBM's chess champion Deep Blue demonstrates, even a stupid machine can appear brilliant if it runs fast enough. This is known in industry as \"weak AI,\" but with the power of quantum computing behind it, the results could in fact be extremely powerful.\n\nScenario for Possible Applications\n\nImagine a space station in low-Earth orbit. It is in darkness, its running lights blinking, but as it clears the terminator and swings around into full sunlight, we can see that its surface is one big, dead-black solar collector. Its exterior drinks in sunlight, taking some of it as stored heat and pumping the rest into electrical wires, which shuffle it off into a bank of capacitors. If we could see through the hull, we could watch the capacitors swelling—literally growing larger as more energy becomes available and more of the station's mass is allocated to storing it.\n\nBut we cannot see through the hull, there are no windows, and the station would be completely dark inside if not for dim little nightlights glowing here and there, lighting the way in case someone visits the galley in search of a nighttime snack. Beneath its layer of solar collectors, the hull is one big, opaque insulator, keeping the cold, bright \"morning\" of outer space at bay.\n\nThen, suddenly, the clock strikes 0600 Houston time, and an arrangement of diffusive portholes and mirrors gradually fades into existence, waking each of the station's inhabitants with the gentle morning sunlight. These fenestrations are not stationary; they crawl across the walls as the station moves in its orbit and changes its orientation to the sun. Greeted by the soft voice of the station's central computer, our astronauts awaken.\n\nWhile the astronauts eat their breakfast in a bright little galley, more portholes appear, looking down at Earth and at points of interest in the black sky above it. However, the crew's comfort and privacy are not compromised; through the mirrored glass, ground-based and space-based telescopes cannot see inside the station, and the amount of reflectivity is constantly controlled, balancing the needs of daylighting, solar heat gain, and the aesthetics of a good view. In a pinch, the station can even turn \"invisible,\" taking light and heat from one side and emitting a matching signal on the other side.\n\nAfter breakfast, some of the crew settle into office niches to check their email, voice, and video messages. Almost any surface in the station can serve as a desk, keyboard, computer screen, video camera, or drafting table. Others proceed to scientific experiments and routine maintenance activities throughout the station. Portholes and skylights follow them around, but now they are looking out mainly from the station's\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nshady side, avoiding direct sunlight. The station has absorbed and stored all the heat and electricity it will need to get through the orbital \"night\" of Earth's shadow and is becoming stingy about accepting more energy.\n\nSoon, the station has converted almost its entire exterior into a mirror, keeping only a small solar collector for maintenance voltage and a few shaded portholes for light and aesthetics. The central computer idly browses its library and encyclopedia and the Internet, finding news, entertainment, and educational material it knows the astronauts will want to see. With the power of quantum computing, it is even able to analyze this information.\n\nHalfway through its hour-long orbital \"day,\" despite every precaution, the station is in danger of becoming too hot. Peltier junctions begin to appear in the hull, their radiators—colored black and yellow and covered in HOT SURFACE warnings—swelling on the station's shadowed side. At the same time, a solar storm—predicted days ago—finally begins to kick up. The hull compensates by generating a strong magnetic field to deflect the charged particles. This could be troublesome to the people and equipment inside the station, but the fields are deflected outside by sheets of superconducting material, cooled by still more Peltier junctions. The shields are up; the station is circling the Earth in its own little magnetic bubble.\n\nSoon enough, though, the station's orbit carries it back into the planet's shadow. Sunset is brief and spectacular; the solar heat and solar wind vanish. Now the station is living on stored charge and stored heat. Windows look down on Earth—a warm object that radiates brightly in the infrared—but not in the cold vacuum of space. The hull becomes thermally conductive for a few seconds to ease any temperature imbalances that have developed and then switches to an insulative, low-emissivity mode to conserve heat.\n\nNow the astronauts are followed around by electroluminescent task lighting. The station seems to relax and to take things a little slower until \"dawn\" breaks again and the cycle repeats itself.\n\nHours later, the crew dines in the same galley where they breakfasted. As the sun sets, the station's interior lights come up dimmer than before. This is the astronauts' cue to begin getting ready for bed, so after a bit of conversation, they shuffle off to their respective cabins. At 2130 Houston time, the lights and portholes slide into an even dimmer setting, and the crew drifts off to sleep.\n\nDirections for Future Research\n\nAlthough the aerospace industry has traditionally been a source of spinoff technologies that are later adopted by consumers, in recent years the reverse trend has been equally prevalent. For example, although GPS technology was developed by and for the military, and integrated circuits were developed for the Apollo lunar missions, today the military often employs low-cost civilian GPS receivers, and Space Shuttle astronauts use laptop computers made for home and office use. This makes economic sense, as mass production for large consumer markets offers not only economies of scale but also vast potential for user feedback, design iteration, and direct measurement of the popularity (and, indirectly, the usefulness) of different designs. Thus, consumer\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nproducts may be both cheaper than, and of superior quality to, those produced by the aerospace industry.\n\nAssuming this trend holds true across the next four decades and applies even to exotic technologies such as programmable materials, it is logical to suppose that consumer applications such as smart windows and multispectral night-vision sensors are more likely to spin off to the aerospace industry than the reverse. Therefore, advancement of smart materials technology for aerospace applications will likely depend on research and development for consumer applications. In addition, the \"low-hanging fruit\" applications, with the largest markets and thus the highest profit potential, will have the greatest accelerant effect on the technology.\n\nTherefore, near-term applications such as smart windows and energy-saving metapolarizers, which offer direct and immediate economic advantages (namely energy savings) and which dovetail neatly with existing infrastructure, should be considered the most promising for research over the next 5 years.\n\nOver the longer term, a number of problems must be overcome for fully programmable material devices to be constructed. In the case of metamaterials, the primary challenge is fabrication. Numerous nanopatterning techniques have been developed for producing regular patterns on a surface, including grids, gratings, and patterns of dots or holes. However, the resonant properties of metamaterials typically require more complex structures that are not easily mass produced on the scales necessary for optical wavelengths—typically 100 nanometers or less, and often as little as 10 nanometers. Promising candidate technologies include nanoindentation lithography, extreme ultraviolet photolithography, and photolithography using metamaterials-based \"superlenses.\" Liquid crystal technology is more mature, but to survive in the harsh environment of outer space, it may need to evolve higher resistance to ultraviolet and other forms of ionizing radiation.\n\nPerhaps the most promising long-term technology is the addressable quantum dot array. However, for broadly programmable applications—particularly in aerospace—the issue of temperature sensitivity must be brought under control. This may involve direct temperature control of the active surfaces or development of high-bandgap material systems for which the coefficient of thermal expansion and bandgap versus temperature slope are both small. In addition, shielding the metallic nanostructures against interference from stray electric or magnetic fields will be very important and may rely on as-yet-undeveloped techniques or materials (for example, high-temperature superconductors).\n\nHowever, the vast potential of programmable materials and devices, as well as the clear advantages they hold in certain earthly and aerospace applications where traditional material limitations clearly constrain functionality, should not be underestimated. Building and vehicle skins, sensors, and windows are three areas that particularly lend themselves to enhancement with multifunctional materials, and the commercial advantages of developing these will be considerable. As with transistors, LEDs, LCDs, integrated circuits and other late 20th century technologies, the economic imperatives are likely to overcome many significant technological barriers, and by 2050 it seems likely that our grandchildren will have difficulty imagining a world where these objects are made from traditional, inert materials. Their relationship to material objects\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ec74f671ff163de5","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nmay be analogous to our present-day relationships with electronic graphs, data files, and web pages and documents. We think nothing of \"tweaking\" these over and over again in a way that we could not if they were simply printed on paper; indeed, we expect such files to be \"living documents\" that change as frequently as the world around them changes. Most of us would have a difficult time adapting to the technology of even 30 years ago.\n\nFinally, with any emerging technology, the number and scope of \"unknown unknowns\" may be considerable. Some things that appear easy now may in fact turn out to be extremely difficult. Conversely, many seemingly daunting problems turn out to have remarkably simple solutions. Indeed, the problems faced by—and solved by!—advanced programmable materials in 2050 may be impossible to forecast today with any accuracy or confidence. Rather, we must roll up our sleeves and begin experimenting.\n\nConclusions\n\nMany elements of the preceding scenario are based on current and emerging technologies; others are speculative. However, if even a fraction of these possibilities were to become reality in crewed and crewless spacecraft, the gains in energy efficiency, mass reduction, safety, comfort, and mission flexibility could be extremely significant and well worth pursuing. All that is needed is a commitment to develop the underlying technologies.\n\n1. : \"atom\"\n2. McCarthy, Wil: Hacking Matter, Basic Books, March 2003\n3. \"Global Green Building Trends,\" McGraw-Hill Construction, 2008\n4. Graham-Rowe, Duncan: Cool colours, man, New Scientist, 21 April 2001\n5. Joshua Apte, Dariush Arasteh, and Yu Joe Huang: ASHRAE report KC-03-12-3, \"Future Advanced Windows or Zero-Energy Homes,\" ASHRAE Transactions, Volume 109, Part 22003\n6. Internal research & modeling at RavenBrick LLC, 2006-2009\n7. Innovative Specialty Films corporate website, January 2003, \n8. \"At a Crossroad,\" Window Film, Volume 12, Issue 4 - July/August 2008\n9. \n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense Intelligence Reference Document\nDefense Futures\n\n01 November 2010\nICOD: 20 July 2010\n-08-1011-003\n\nAneutronic Fusion Propulsion\n\nCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAneutronic Fusion Propulsion\n\nThe Defense Intelligence Reference Document provides nonsubstantive but authoritative reference information related to intelligence topics or methodologies.\n\nPrepared by:\n\nTechnology Warning Division (DWO-4)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 83\n\nAdministrative Notes:\n\n(U) COPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2010 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: JUIAF - DI/DWO-3,1 Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\ni\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ........................................................................................v\n\nChapter 1: Theory ........................................................................ 1\nRocket Propulsion ........................................................................ 1\nComparison of Specific Impulse for Various Rocket Designs ............................. 5\nRadiation Shielding ........................................................................ 6\nSubatomic Particle Mass, Velocity, and Energy ....................................... 9\nNuclear Fission Rockets ........................................................................ 10\nChapter 2: Nuclear Fusion Rocket Design ........................................................ 13\nClassic Nuclear Fusion Schemes ........................................................................ 13\nFusion Initiation Methods ........................................................................ 14\nGravitational Confinement ........................................................................ 16\nMagnetic Confinement Fusion (MCF) ........................................................................ 16\nInertial Confinement Fusion (ICF) ........................................................................ 16\nMuon-Catalyzed Fusion ........................................................................ 17\nCavitation (Bubble) Fusion ........................................................................ 17\nRocket Design Using Fusion Energy ........................................................................ 17\nChapter 3: Aneutronic Nuclear Fusion Schemes ........................................................ 18\nChapter 4: Antimatter Propulsion ........................................................................ 20\nChapter 5: Aneutronic Fusion Propulsion Projects ........................................................ 21\nNuclear Pulse Propulsion ........................................................................ 21\nOther Aneutronic Rocket Designs ........................................................................ 22\nCommercial Development........................................................................22\nChapter 6: Speculation on Research Needs Over the Next 30 Years ........................ 25\nSurface to Low-Earth Orbit (100 miles) ........................................................................ 26\nLEO to Mars (34 to 249 million miles) ........................................................................ 27\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nLEO to the Moons of Jupiter and Saturn (460 to 940 million miles) .................. 28\nLEO to Alpha Centauri (4.22 light-years or 24.8 trillion miles) ........................... 28\nChapter 7: Conclusions ............................................................................... 29\nAppendix A: Relativistic Rockets ............................................................................... 30\nAppendix B: Aneutronic Fusion Rocket ............................................................................... 32\nAppendix C: Antimatter Annihilation Rocket ............................................................................... 36\nAppendix D: Relativistic Rocket Worksheet ............................................................................... 38\nAppendix E: Endnotes ............................................................................... 41\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Liquid-Fueled Chemical Rocket. ........................................................ vi\nFigure 2. Mass Ratio Increases as Objects Approach Speed of Light ................ 2\nFigure 3. Spherical Radiation Shield Surrounding Point Source ........................ 8\nFigure 4. Nuclear Fission Rocket Design ........................................................ 11\nFigure 5. Schematic Design of a Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) Generator ..... 13\nFigure 6. Nuclear Fusion of Deuterium and Tritium ....................................... 14\nFigure 7. Low-Temperature Fusion Reactions ............................................... 15\nFigure 8. Fusion Ignition Energies for D-T, D-D, and D-He3 .......................... 15\nFigure 9. Aneutronic Fusion Schemes ........................................................... 18\nFigure 10. Fusion of Hydrogen-1 and Boron-11 Produces 3 Alpha Particles .. 19\nFigure 11. QED Rocket Design ..................................................................... 23\nFigure 12. Time Dilation at Relativistic Velocities ........................................ 31\nFigure 13. Maximum Achievable Velocity Versus Fuel Usage .......................... 33\nFigure 14. Acceleration and Rocket \"Clock\" Ratio Vs Mission Time on Earth .. 33\nFigure 15. Spreadsheet for Sample Mission to Alpha Centauri..........................34\nFigure 16. Antihydrogen Atom.................................................................36\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTables\n\nTable 1: Specific Impulse for Various Rocket Engine Types ............................. 3\nTable 2: Rest Mass of Various Subatomic Particles ........................................ 10\nTable 3: Specific Impulse for Selected Drives ............................................... 35\n\niv\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAneutronic Fusion Propulsion\n\nIntroduction\n\nSpace exploration is limited by existing propulsion technology. Up to now, chemical rockets have been used to reach low-Earth orbit, the Moon, and the outer regions of the solar system. Chemical rockets can use either solid or liquid fuel. Regardless of the type of fuel, their design is similar to that shown in Figure 1. Oxygen is combined with hydrogen or a hydrocarbon fuel in a combustion chamber where high temperatures and pressures cause the exhaust to be ejected through a supersonic nozzle to provide thrust to the rocket. The momentum of the fuel ejected through the nozzle provides the force or thrust that accelerates the rocket forward.\n\nThere are many variations of chemical rockets, but they all suffer from the need to carry copious amounts of fuel. Other methods have been proposed to decrease the need to carry such a significant mass of fuel into space. Ion drives, for example, are used to provide the very low thrust required to maintain satellites in Earth orbit. The \"fuel\" that they carry is xenon gas accelerated by electric fields.\n\nNuclear fission propulsion has been proposed for space missions, and thermal nuclear fission reactor rockets were constructed and tested at the Nevada Test Site through Project Rover between 1956 and 1971.1 In these rockets, a nuclear reactor provides heat to liquid hydrogen through nuclear fission and ejects the hydrogen gas through a Laval nozzle to generate thrust. While these rockets must still carry hydrogen fuel as a propellant, these rockets can provide more than twice the performance of chemical rockets by using heat through fission rather than reactive chemicals. The results of the 72 reactor tests conducted under Project Rover were very promising and culminated in the successful 12-minute test of the Phoebus-2A NERVA (Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Application) reactor that generated over 4 gigawatts of thermal power. One problem associated with nuclear fission rockets is radioactive contaminants. These contaminants in the exhaust make this technology impossible to use in launching payloads from Earth. Additionally, for applications in space, radiation protection must be provided for the crew by adding heavy shielding materials or by locating the crew as far as possible from the reactor propulsion system.\n\nNuclear fusion, as opposed to fission, provides another potential propulsion technology. In a fusion propulsion system, isotopes of light elements are fused together under extreme conditions to form heavier elements, releasing large amounts of thermal energy. This thermal energy can be used to heat liquid hydrogen to high temperatures and expand it through a Laval nozzle to provide thrust in a manner similar to that shown in Figure 1. Typically, isotopes of hydrogen and helium would be used in fusion propulsion systems. Deuterium is an isotope of hydrogen and can be separated from the hydrogen in water. Fusion reactions are difficult to initiate due to the high temperatures and pressures required. Thermonuclear bombs, for example, combine a fusion device with a nuclear fission bomb to provide the high temperatures required to initiate the fusion reaction. Regardless of the conditions required to induce nuclear fusion, the energy release is large. From propulsion standpoint, an advantage of fusion over fission is that for a given amount of thrust, the fusion reaction requires less fuel than either fission or chemical propulsion systems.\n\nFusion reactors using deuterium or tritium fuels are easiest to initiate; however, they generate significant amounts of neutron radiation. This is a hazard for the crew on a\nv\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nspace ship, and there is a high probability that neutrons produced by fusion reactors would escape into space without providing much of their energy to a hydrogen propellant. Other fusion reactions using isotopes of helium and lithium will generate only charged particles, such as protons, that travel very short distances before giving up all of their energy as heat. These \"aneutronic fusion\" reactions take place without neutron production and decrease the need to carry large amounts of radiation shielding material for the crew. The energy from charged particles generated by aneutronic fusion can also be captured in conductive coils and converted directly into electricity. Aneutronic fusion promises to be an important mechanism for future space propulsion, although novel accelerator or laser systems must be researched and developed in order to initiate, sustain, and control the fusion reaction.\n\nAnother futuristic method of spacecraft propulsion involves the use of antimatter. Antimatter includes antiprotons, antineutrons, and positrons (anti-electrons). Although this propulsion process may be the most efficient, antimatter has some drawbacks. For example, antimatter is generated in only minute quantities at accelerator facilities around the world. Although it has been captured and stored, containment remains a problem. When antimatter combines with matter, it completely annihilates and converts to energy, which then can be converted into heat for a propulsion system. Antimatter reactions provide the greatest amount of energy per unit mass of any potential fuel, but the ability to generate significant quantities of antihydrogen or similar antimatter fuels at any accelerator facility is very limited.\n\nThe focus of this study is on aneutronic fusion propulsion. Integral to this study are the topics of fuel, rocket design, and the organizations that research aneutronic fusion development.\n\n[Figure 1 diagram: Payload; Liquid H2; LOX; Turbopumps; Combustion Chamber; Laval Nozzle]\n\nFigure 1. Liquid-Fueled Chemical Rocket.\n\nvi\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 1: Theory\n\nROCKET PROPULSION\n\nIt is difficult to compare propulsion technology without talking about how objects are accelerated in space. Within Earth's atmosphere, aircraft use the air to generate lift and thrust. Propellers or turbofans move a mass of air rearward and Newton's second and third laws require that the momentum in this exhausted air is equal to a thrust in the opposite direction. In equation form, the thrust, F, is equal and opposite to the change in momentum over time.\n\nF = -d(mV)exhaust/dt (1.1)\n\nThe momentum of the exhausted air is equal to the mass of air times its velocity and is provided by the propulsion system. The thrust can be used to accelerate a payload according to the following equation:\n\nF = m_payload a (1.2)\n\nHere, thrust is equal to the payload mass times its acceleration.\n\nThis method of momentum transfer works well for aircraft operating within the Earth's atmosphere; however, operating in space presents special problems. Space is nearly a complete vacuum, and there is no air mass to accelerate, i.e., no \"reaction mass\" that can be accelerated and exhausted at high speeds. In space, the reaction mass is carried by the rocket in the form of propellant mass, which is expended as the rocket accelerates.\n\nF = m a + (dm/dt) V (1.3)\n\nIn this equation, the thrust is provided by the momentum ejected from the rear of the rocket, but the total mass of the rocket is decreasing as the fuel is burned up and as propellant is lost. Examining equation 1.3, we see that there are two ways to increase rocket thrust. The first is to increase the mass flowrate, dm/dt, typically measured in kg/s (if mass flowrate is given in kg/s, then thrust, F, is given in newtons to maintain consistency). Unfortunately, this requires carrying increasing quantities of fuel. For flights to Mars, the outer planets, or to other star systems, it would not be possible to carry such large quantities of propellant.\n\nA second choice would be to increase V, i.e., the velocity of the ejected propellant reaction mass. There is an upper limit, however, to how fast we can eject the propellant. In his Special Theory of Relativity, Albert Einstein demonstrated that no object that has any mass when at rest can be accelerated beyond the speed of light or 2.998 x10^8 m/s in a vacuum. Einstein's relationship between an object's mass (m), its velocity (v), and the speed of light, (c) is given in equation 1.4:\n\n2\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nm = m_o / sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2) (1.4)\n\n[Figure 2 graph: mass ratio versus v/c, from 0 to 1, mass ratio from 0 to 10]\n\nFigure 2. Mass Ratio (m/mo) Increases as Objects Approach the Speed of Light.\n\nEquation 1.4 is plotted in Figure 2; we see that as an object's velocity approaches light speed its mass approaches infinity. Coupled with this, we see that as mass approaches infinity, the energy required to move the mass also approaches infinity. Thus, it would take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate an object to the speed of light. Equations 1.2 and 1.3 indicate that the best propulsion system would use the least amount of propellant but exhaust it at the highest possible velocity. Therefore, the rocket engine that has the highest exhaust velocity requires that the rocket be the least massive or carry the least amount of propellant. Unfortunately, this combination corresponds to the minimum efficiency in terms of rocket power. The point here is that for spaceflight to anywhere other than near destinations, our present rocket technology is insufficient.\n\n[Page number: 2 printed at foot]\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSpecific Impulse\n\nTo compare various propulsion systems and their fuel, rocket efficiency can be represented by the amount of momentum that can be obtained per unit weight of the propellant that is used. This is defined as the \"specific impulse\" (Isp) and is measured in units of seconds:\n\nIsp = Δ(m Vexhaust) / Δ(m gearth) = Vexhaust / gearth (1.5)\n\nHere, earth's gravitational acceleration, gearth, is 9.81 m/s². As described earlier, the best propulsion system is typically one that has the highest possible exhaust or propellant velocity. High specific impulse, or correspondingly high exhaust velocity, also produces low energy efficiency.\n\nTable 1: Specific Impulse for Various Rocket Engine Types\n\nEngine Type | Ve (m/s) | Isp (s)\n\nSaturn V Rocket, 2nd and 3rd Stages LH2/LOX Liquid Fuel | 4,130 | 421\nSolid Rocket | 2,500 | 255\nBest Chemical Rocket Tested F2/Li/H2 Chemical Rocket | 5,320 | 542\nNuclear Thermal Rocket | 8,340 | 850\nIon Thruster | 29,000 | 3,000\nVASIMR | 290,000 | 30,000\n\nThe efficiency of a rocket can be defined as the ratio of rocket thrust to the power required to generate the thrust. The resulting equations follow:\n\nPower = dE/dt = ½ (dm/dt) Ve² (1.6)\n\nThrust = (dm/dt) Ve (1.7)\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nη = (Thrust/Power) = 2/Ve (1.8)\n\nIn choosing a rocket engine, as the specific impulse (Isp) or the exhaust velocity (Ve) increase, the corresponding efficiency (η) decreases. The specific impulse for various fuels varies widely as shown in Table 1.2, 3\n\nTsiolkovsky Rocket Equation\n\nFor a spaceflight to Mars or other body, the exhaust velocity affects the time of flight and the amount of fuel that is needed to change the velocity of the spacecraft. The change in velocity (ΔV) can be expressed in terms of the initial mass of the rocket (minitial, rocket + propellant) and the final total rocket mass (mfinal rocket only):\n\nΔV = Vexhaust ln(minitial/mfinal) (1.9)\n\nThe mass of propellant used to generate thrust is given by:\n\nmpropellant = minitial − mfinal (1.10)\n\nIsp = (Vexhaust/go) = T/(ṁ go) (1.11)\n\nmfinal = minitial e^(ΔV/Vexhaust) (1.12)\n\nΔV = go Isp [ln(minitial/mfinal) − (1/R)(1 − mfinal/minitial)] (1.13)\n\nt = (minitial/ṁ)[1 − e^(−ΔV/Vexhaust)] (1.14)\n\nIn these equations, R is the thrust-to-weight ratio and t is the time required for an engine burn to produce a desired ΔV. These are the standard equations used for rocket engine performance.\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCOMPARISON OF SPECIFIC IMPULSE FOR VARIOUS ROCKET DESIGNS\n\nChemical Rockets\n\nChemical rockets burn solid or liquid propellant. The exhaust gas exits the rocket through a Laval nozzle and generates thrust. Figure 1 provided the outline of a liquid-fueled rocket using liquid hydrogen as the fuel and liquid oxygen (LOX) to combust the fuel. Unlike turbofan and RAM engines, rockets are not airbreathing and must carry their own oxidizer.\n\nThe Laval nozzle is a principle component of chemical rockets; its design is based on compressible fluid flow theory.4 In general, the nozzle is made up of contoured convergent-divergent cross sections. Conical cross sections are also sometimes used. Its purpose is to transform pressure energy into kinetic energy. Nuclear fusion rockets may also make use of Laval nozzles by heating up a liquid propellant and ejecting it as a supersonic gas. In subsonic flow, fluid can only be accelerated by decreasing the cross-sectional area of the duct section that it is traveling through, as in a Venturi tube. Once the velocity in a fluid reaches the speed of sound (Mach 1), the fluid can continue to accelerate only if it is expanded. The Laval nozzle combines a converging section where the flow is subsonic, a throat where the flow is accelerated to sonic speed (Mach 1), and a diverging cone where the flow is accelerated to supersonic speed. The performance of a rocket is based on its thrust, where T = (dm/dt) × Vexhaust, and by maximizing the exit velocity, the thrust reaches a maximum. The pressure of the combusting gases in the combustion chamber directly affect the amount of thrust that the rocket can achieve.\n\nWhether a rocket is propelled by gases from combusting propellant or by gases heated through a nuclear fission or fusion reaction, two equations determine the thrust of the Laval nozzle. The maximum mass flow rate through the nozzle can be computed in terms of the nozzle area (Athroat) the combustion or heated gas pressure (po), and the heated gas temperature (To).\n\n(dm/dt)max imum = (po Athroat/√To) √(γ/R (2/(γ+1))^((γ+1)/(γ−1))) (1.15)\n\nVexhaust = √(2γRTo/(γ−1) (1 − (pexit/po)^((γ−1)/γ))) (1.16)\n\nIn these equations, R is the gas constant of the propellant gas and γ is a thermodynamic property of the gas called the ratio of specific heats. These equations make it possible to compute the maximum thrust generated by a propellant gas through a Laval nozzle based on the pressure and temperature of the gas in the combustion chamber or heating tank.\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIon Drives\n\nIon thruster electrical propulsion provides a convenient and efficient method of generating thrust. A gas that is easily ionized, such as xenon, is carried onboard as a propellant. The voltage difference between an electrode and a metal screen accelerates xenon ions toward the screen and out the back of the spacecraft, generating thrust. The specific impulse of this kind of drive is about 3,000 seconds. It is relatively common for satellites to use ion drives, generating minute forces measured in millinewtons, to maintain orbit. Solar energy and radioactive decay are possible sources of electric power for satellites in Earth orbit. In deep space, fusion or fission reactors could provide electrical power. However, once the xenon propellant has been expended, the ion drive is no longer useful.\n\nIon drives include the VASIMR (Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket) designed by the Ad Astra Rocket Company in Webster, Texas. This system uses two RF radiowave antennae to couple energy into an ionized gas that is used for propulsion in space. While ion drives are often used to help maintain orbit for satellites circling the Earth, the VASIMR technology has been proposed for use in moving payloads throughout the solar system. The specific impulse for this technology is cited as 5,000 seconds compared to ~3,300 seconds for typical ion drives.5\n\nPhotonic Propulsion\n\nPhotons of visible light, infrared radiation, or x-rays can produce thrust through momentum transfer, where the momentum of each photon is given by p = h/λ (h = Planck's constant, λ = radiation wavelength). Photonic propulsion has been explored by Y. K. Bae Corporation (http://www.ykbcorp.com) who holds a patent on a photonic laser thruster. These drives generate no contaminants and require a source of electricity to produce photons. Their photonic laser thruster (PLT) uses an active resonant optical cavity formed between two mirrors on a pair of spacecraft to generate thrust. Photonic drives would be viable on fusion or fission-powered spacecraft if their power output were used to generate electrical power that could provide light.\n\nRADIATION SHIELDING\n\nRadiation shielding will be important for astronauts traveling to the Moon, to the other planets, and to other star systems. Radioactive particles and cosmic rays left over from the big bang, radiation from supernovae, x-ray emissions from black holes, and a constant flux of energetic protons from our own sun all contribute to the radiation dose received by humans in space.\n\nRadiation levels are typically measured in sieverts (Sv), expressing the amount of energy deposited in human tissue from radiation. One sievert is equivalent to 1 joule of energy absorbed for every kilogram of tissue.6, 7 An older unit, the rem (Roentgen equivalent, man) is still in common use: 1 rem = 0.01 Sv. Sieverts are now the international standard unit.\n\n6\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe energy absorbed is strongly related to the amount of radiation damage done to the tissue. On Earth, the magnetic field of the planet helps to shield people from most of the effects of radiation from the sun, but cosmic radiation and terrestrial sources of radiation (granite, potassium, radon gas) all contribute to an annual background dose that everyone receives. The average annual dose of radiation in the United States is about 2.5 mSv from background and another 1.0 mSv from other source, such as dental x-rays, commercial jet flights, and radiopharmaceuticals. The total annual dose in the United States is approximately 3.5 mSv (millisieverts) per person.\n\nIn space, away from the protection of the Earth's magnetic field, the radiation dose increases substantially to about 250 mSv per year. The radiation dose in space is continuous, and the effects of being in space for extended periods of time may be cumulative. As a comparison, 2,000 mSv of radiation in an acute dose can cause significant medical problems and 5,000 mSv is usually fatal. Leukemia and other forms of cancer are possible for people exposed to chronic doses of radiation at the levels encountered in space.\n\nThe logical conclusion would be to carry radiation shielding into space to protect the astronauts. The problem is that shielding is typically heavy and expensive. Four types of radiation must be shielded:\n\n1. Gamma Rays (γ)\nThese are energetic forms of electromagnetic radiation (photons) and tend to penetrate most materials. High-density metals, such as iron, lead, and uranium are usually used to shield gamma rays.\n\n2. Beta Particles (β+, β-)\nThese are electrons or positrons, the antimatter counterpart to electrons. They are emitted by the radioactive decay of certain isotopes and through nuclear fission. Because these are charged particles, they are fairly easy to stop with minimal shielding.\n\n3. Neutrons (n)\nThese uncharged particles are generated by nuclear fission and fusion. They may penetrate metals, yet they can be slowed down until they decay in light materials that contain hydrogen or carbon. Typical shielding material includes water, paraffin wax, and polyethylene blocks.\n\n4. Heavy Charged Particles (p, α)\nIons are atoms that have one or more of their electrons stripped from their outer orbital. Due to their positive electric charge, ions are generally easy to stop within any kind of material, unless the ions are very energetic. Typical ions include protons, which are ionized hydrogen atoms, and alpha particles, which are ionized helium nuclei. Cosmic radiation includes heavy ions emitted by exploding supernovae and may include ions as heavy as iron nuclei at extremely high energy.\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nLong-duration spaceflights will require copious amounts of water for the crew, and water can be used to provide some shielding from neutrons for the astronauts. Shielding material for gamma rays presents a weight problem. Lead is one of the best shielding materials for gamma, but at a cost of about $10,000/lb to launch material into space, lead shielding is expensive to use.\n\nThe International Space Station and other spacecraft designed for long-term human habitation usually have a small area that is heavily shielded to prevent excessive radiation exposure to the crew during solar events.\n\nIn addition to the dangers of natural sources of radiation in space that can endanger human health and safety, the propulsion techniques of nuclear fusion and fission generate large fluxes of radiation. Neutron production is of special concern because neutrons can penetrate metals and the structural material of space habitats.\n\nThe general equations that govern radiation shielding can help develop spacecraft designs that will minimize radiation exposure. The intensity of gamma rays will attenuate according to the following equation:\n\nφ (r) = φinitial e^(-μr) (1.17)\n\nIn equation 1.17, the flux of gamma rays or neutrons, given in particles per unit area per unit time, is represented by Φ(r); Φinitial represents the initial flux without the shielding; and μ is the linear attenuation coefficient, a function of the gamma ray or neutron energy and the type of shielding material. The thickness of the material is represented by r. The radiation flux decreases with distance since photons or radioactive particles typically expand outward through a spherical area of 4πr2 as shown in Figure 3. Equation 1.18 shows the relationship between total attenuation, particle flux, and radiation exposure.\n\nFigure 3. Spherical Radiation Shield Surrounding a Point Source.\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nφ (r) = φinitial e^(-μr) / (4 π r²) B(μ r) (1.18)\n\nThe radiation flux is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from a point source of radiation, such as a nuclear rocket engine. It also decreases through any intervening radiation shielding material. The last term in equation 1.18, B(μr), is called the \"buildup factor\"; it represents the process of reradiation following atomic collision with shielding material, thus contributing to the total radiation dose. This secondary radiation is a problem for all spacecraft since cosmic radiation impacting the spacecraft structural material can produce a cascade of secondary particles that can irradiate the crew.\n\nA standard technique to decrease the radiation exposure to the crew on a spacecraft using nuclear fusion as an energy source will be to locate the crew as far away from the engine as possible and place as much liquid hydrogen or other light shielding material between the crew and the engine as designs allow. A simpler solution would be to use nuclear fusion schemes that do not generate neutrons. These are the so-called \"aneutronic fusion\" propulsion techniques.\n\nSUBATOMIC PARTICLE MASS, VELOCITY, AND ENERGY\n\nAtoms are composed of a small nucleus containing neutrons and protons, along with electrons orbiting the nucleus in shells. The atomic number (Z) is equivalent to the number of protons or electrons in a stable atom.8 The atomic mass number (A) is the total number of neutrons and protons in the nucleus. The number of neutrons (N) can be found by subtracting Z from A. Atoms or nuclei are represented by a standard nomenclature based on A and Z.\n\nAZAtom\n\nSince chemical properties are governed by how many electrons circle the nucleus, Z defines the element and atoms with the same value of Z, but differing numbers of neutrons are referred to as \"isotopes\" of the same element. Some common isotopes of hydrogen are shown below:\n\nhydrogen 11H\ndeuterium 21H, or 21D\ntritium 31H, or 31T\n\nSubatomic particles, such as α, β, and neutrons, have a mass described in atomic mass units (amu). One amu is defined as the mass of one atom of carbon-12, and it roughly represents the mass of one neutron or proton. In terms of amu, the mass of various particles are included in Table 2. Due to relativistic effects, particle mass increases as the velocity of the particle approaches the speed of light, and because of special relativity, the mass of particles listed in the table is the \"rest\" mass corresponding to a particle that is not moving.\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 2: Rest Mass of Various Subatomic Particles\n\nSubatomic Particle | Particle Name | Mass (amu)\nα | alpha | 4.001506\nβ | beta | 0.000549\nη | neutron | 1.008665\nρ | proton | 1.007276\nD | deuterium | 2.014102\nT | tritium | 3.016049\nU-235 | uranium | 235.0439\n\nGamma rays, or photons, have no rest mass and only move at the speed of light (c = 3 x 10^8 m/s). Photons do have an effective mass since their momentum is given by p = mc = h/λ where h is Planck's constant (h = 6.626 x 10^-34 J·s) and λ is the wavelength of the photon.\n\nParticles also have energy, given by E = mc². Mass (m) was defined in equation 1.4.\n\nParticle or photon energy is usually expressed in terms of electronvolts (eV). Typical powers of eV are also used, including keV (1,000 eV) and MeV (1 million eV). For reference, 1 eV = 1.602 x 10^-19 joules.\n\nNUCLEAR FISSION ROCKETS\n\nDuring the Cold War, the United States and the USSR developed designs for intercontinental ballistic missiles to carry nuclear weapons. Conventional rockets used highly reactive chemicals and, as an alternative power source, the use of nuclear fission reactors was explored. Project Rover, supervised by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission and the U.S. Air Force, developed specialized fission reactors with hydrogen propellant. A number of nuclear rockets were built and tested at the DOE Nevada Test Site (NTS) Area 25 in the 1950s. Nuclear fission reactors require a \"moderator\" to operate. The moderator slows down neutrons generated by fission and absorbs their energy. Hydrogen is nearly the perfect moderator and was chosen as the moderator and the propellant in the construction of the NERVA (1) rockets under Project Rover. Figure 4 shows the main components of a nuclear fission rocket.\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 4. Nuclear Fission Rocket Design.\n\nNuclear fission rockets had numerous problems. The fission of uranium-235 emits about 200 MeV for every nucleus that undergoes fission. Approximately 11% of this energy is in the form of neutrinos and is unrecoverable. Approximately 4.8 MeV shows up as kinetic energy in the two or more neutrons that are created for every fission. At least one neutron must be absorbed by another U-355 nucleus and cause fission in order for a chain reaction to be sustained. Most of the energy goes into the kinetic energy of large fission fragments that are created by the breakup of the U-235 nucleus. Fission products are highly radioactive and may be ejected out with the rocket exhaust. Neutrons pose a radiation hazard to any human close to the rocket when it operates. In the tests of the NERVA series of rockets, on at least one occasion, pieces of radioactive material were ejected over a small region of the Nevada Test Site and had to be manually retrieved.\n\nOn the positive side, the NERVA rockets created large amounts of thrust, and the energy within the reactor was more than sufficient to send its payload to the desired location in the USSR. This prompted scientists to consider the use of thermal fission reactors for use in space exploration, although the persistent problem of radiation exposure to the crew remained unresolved.\n\nTwo classical designs were proposed. In one design, a reactor would be constructed as shown in Figure 4, and liquid hydrogen propellant would be passed through the reactor to create a supersonic exhaust and to provide thrust. The hydrogen fuel would be located between the reactor and the crew to serve as a radiation shield for neutrons produced during fission. The spacecraft would be elongated to move the crew as far away as possible from the reactor, taking advantage of the 1/r² attenuation of radiation with distance from a source.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIn a second design, a nuclear reactor would be used to generate electricity onboard a spacecraft. The electrical power would provide energy for life support and much of the reactor output could be used to power an ion drive where high voltages would accelerate an ionized gas (usually xenon) to generate thrust. The thrust generated by ion drives is typically small (millinewtons), but continuous acceleration could provide enough velocity to reach Mars or the outer planets.\n\nNuclear reactors have been used on spacecraft in the past, although their use is controversial. On 24 January 1978, for example, the Cosmos 954 Soviet spy satellite, complete with onboard plutonium-fueled nuclear reactor, crashed into the Arctic region of Canada.9 The cleanup cost the Canadian government over U.S. $6 million, half of which was reimbursed by the USSR. The launch of a reactor into space always poses the danger of problems related to an accidental reentry that could cause significant hazards to populated areas.\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 2: Nuclear Fusion Rocket Design\n\nCLASSIC NUCLEAR FUSION SCHEMES\n\nNuclear fusion, which powers the Sun and the stars, begins with the collision of two lightweight atomic nuclei to create two new particles with the release of energy. As an example, if two specific isotopes of hydrogen (tritium and deuterium) were to collide, the reaction would produce a neutron plus an alpha particle (ionized helium nucleus).\n\n2/1 D + 3/1 T → 1/0 n + 4/2 He + 17.6 MeV (2.1)\n\nThe 17.6 MeV of energy is split between the kinetic energy of the neutron (14.1 MeV) and the helium nucleus (3.5 MeV) based on conservation of energy and conservation of momentum. The kinetic energy is eventually converted into heat in a fusion reactor. The 14.1-MeV neutron will penetrate far into lead or steel shielding and can cause considerable material damage. The ionized helium nucleus, however, will not go very far through any material without being absorbed and dissipating its energy as heat. There is a novel way to capture the energy from the ionized nucleus. As shown in Error! Reference source not found., a magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) generator can be used to harness the energy from the helium ions and convert it directly into electricity. The electricity could be used to power an ion drive on a spacecraft or provide power for life support. Equation 2.2, known as the Lorentz force equation, illustrates which parameters are involved and how they are related:\n\nF = e (V × B) (2.2)\n\nFigure 5. Schematic Design of a Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) Generator.\n\nThe velocity (V) of the ions interacts with the magnetic field (B) and forces positively charged ions to move downward in the channel to an electrode where they impart an\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nelectric current. The ion charge is given in the equation as e. MHD generators have been proposed for highly efficient generation of electricity from the combustion of coal, for example. On a spacecraft, MHD generators can generate power from both ions and electrons, which deflect in opposite directions due to the magnetic field.\n\nEven if the ion energy cannot be converted directly into electricity, neutrons or ions can be used to heat up a propellant gas to provide thrust. Hydrogen gas would be the most efficient propellant for fusion reactions producing neutrons because the neutron energy is easily absorbed through collisions with the hydrogen nuclei.\n\nPropulsion fusion reactors, however, still generate radiation, including neutrons, which pose a health hazard for the crew of any spacecraft. By carrying hydrogen propellant and locating the crew as far away as possible from the fusion reactor, some degree of shielding is possible.\n\nWhile fusion reactors have the potential to produce incredible amounts of energy from relatively inexpensive fuel (deuterium, tritium, helium-3), the problems of initiating, controlling, and sustaining the fusion reaction remain unsolved.\n\nFUSION INITIATION METHODS\n\nThere are many possible fusion reactions that extend all the way up from hydrogen to the actinides (uranium). In each case, the two ions that \"fuse\" must collide to form a new nucleus that rapidly decays with the release of fusion energy, as shown in Figure 6. Both ions, however, are positively charged and tend to repel each other due to Coulombic repulsion:\n\nFigure 6. Nuclear Fusion of Deuterium and Tritium.\n\nThe Sun emits vast amounts of thermal energy through the fusion of hydrogen isotopes; it overcomes Coulombic repulsion through the high pressures and temperatures that exist in its interior. High temperatures create high ion velocities and high-velocity collisions are more likely to cause two ions to fuse together.\n\nControlled fusion reactions are difficult to achieve due to the temperatures required to initiate the process. The reactions that occur at the lowest temperatures are listed in Figure 7, including the D-T reaction which was discussed earlier.\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n2/1D + 3/1T → 1/0n [14.1 MeV] + 4/2He [3.5 MeV]\n\n2/1D + 2/1D → 1/0n [2.45 MeV] + 3/2He [0.82 MeV]\n\n2/1D + 2/1D → 1/1p [3.02 MeV] + 3/1T [1.01 MeV]\n\n2/1D + 3/2He → 1/1p [14.7 MeV] + 4/2He [3.6 MeV]\n\n3/1T + 3/1T → 2 x 1/0n + 4/2He + [11.3 MeV split between the neutrons and helium]\n\nFigure 7. Low Temperature Fusion Reactions.\n\nFigure 8. Fusion Ignition Energies for D-T, D-D, and D-He3.\n\nFigure 8 shows the probabilities of these reactions occurring, expressed in units of barns (1 b = 10^-28 m^2). The D-T reaction becomes increasingly probable as the energy of the deuterium nucleus (deuteron) reaches about 5 keV. In terms of temperature, this equals about 10 million degrees kelvin. At 10 keV (100 million degrees kelvin), the two D-D reactions listed in Figure 7 become more probable and D-He3 fusion becomes viable at 30 keV (300 million degrees kelvin). There are several ways to achieve these temperatures in a controlled manner. For example, Edward Teller and Stanislow Ulam developed a design for a fusion, or thermonuclear bomb, that used a plutonium fission atomic bomb to reach the ignition temperature for fusion. Deuterium is the most useful fuel for low-temperature fusion reactors, and there is a limitless supply available by centrifuging ordinary tap water to separate out heavy water (D2O).\n\nBecause of deuterium's availability, a strong incentive exists to develop manageable ways to initiate nuclear fusion, concentrating on the fusion schemes outlined in Figure 6;\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthese methods are discussed below. Fusion reactors for the production of electricity have been a goal for over 50 years, yet no method has yet achieved \"break even,\" where the amount of energy generated by fusion exceeds the energy required to initiate the fusion process. Fusion methods are often compared based on their ability to \"break even.\"\n\nGRAVITATIONAL CONFINEMENT\n\nTo initiate fusion, ions of hydrogen or its isotopes must be heated to high enough temperatures to increase the likelihood of a fusion reaction occurring during a collision. Another method is to increase the pressure of an ionized gas to a point where the number of collisions increase with an enhanced possibility of a fusion collision. This is the mechanism that stars employ to initiate fusion; for example, if the object were completely composed of deuterium, the minimum mass needed to generate gravitational pressures sufficient to initiate fusion would be equivalent to the mass of the planet Jupiter.\n\nMAGNETIC CONFINEMENT FUSION (MCF)\n\nDeuterium and other ions follow lines of magnetic flux, and tokamaks have been used to form a magnetic field in the shape of a torus to contain a plasma containing ions for fusion. Tokamaks contain powerful electromagnets that generate the magnetic field. Secondary electromagnets induce an electric current into the plasma to heat it to ignition temperature (ohmic heating). Other methods have been employed to heat the plasma, including the introduction of radiofrequency energy, magnetic compression, and neutral beam injection.\n\nINERTIAL CONFINEMENT FUSION (ICF)\n\nThe Teller-Ulam thermonuclear bomb was an example of inertial confinement where x-ray radiation pressure from a fission explosion is used to compress a mixture of deuterium and tritium to initiate fusion.\n\nThe National Ignition Facility in Livermore, California, is an example of a laser-based ICF system. In this facility, a 287,000-lb, 10-meter-diameter target vacuum chamber is equipped with a small metal cylinder, or holraum, that contains a 2-mm pellet of D-T gas or \"ice.\" An assembly of powerful lasers simultaneously fire 4 megajoules of infrared energy into a device that converts this energy into ultraviolet (UV) energy. The UV energy impacts the holraum, generating x-rays and rapidly heating the holraum. This induces an implosion that creates extremely high pressures and temperatures in the D-T pellet, initiating nuclear fusion. Less than 10% of the initial energy is imparted to the holraum. This is a pulsed system where multiple holraums and pellets would be required to sustain energy output.\n\nOther methods can be used to momentarily confine a plasma containing deuterium and tritium to initiate fusion. For example, instead of lasers, ion beams, electron beams, and conventional explosives could be employed. Several systems based on electron accelerators have also been used.. The Farnsworth-Hirsch fusor and the Polywell are examples of two tabletop devices used to demonstrate fusion.\n\nAnother accelerator design is called the Dense Plasma Focus (DPF), where a pulsed accelerator drives a magnetic field within a diffuse mixture of deuterium and tritium gas to the top of an anode. When the moving magnetic field reaches the top of the anode,\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nit collapses and generates a magnetic pinch for a fraction of a second that has high enough temperatures to generate fusion in the diffuse gas. The production of neutrons in D-T fusion can be on the order of 10^13 neutrons. While this production may seem high, if this pulsed system were fired 10 times in 1 second, and all of the energy of the electrons and ions could be captured, the energy production would amount to only 280 watts.\n\nMUON-CATALYZED FUSION\n\nThis method, sensationalized by Steven Jones at the University of Utah in the 1980s, makes use of the fact that certain material crystal shapes (hexagonal close pack, or HCP) tend to \"hide\" atoms of hydrogen in the interstitial space between atomic planes in the crystal. By diffusing deuterium into the crystal through electrolysis, fusion could be achieved. The famous scientist Sakarov observed this phenomenon as a way to account for the presence of He-3 in platinum. Platinum, palladium, and titanium are the materials that were used most often to demonstrate this technique. Initiating fusion by this method has been very poor.\n\nCAVITATION (BUBBLE) FUSION\n\nIn water, vapor bubbles are produced when pressures drop below 2,300 pascals (~2% of atmospheric pressure) through a process called \"cavitation.\" When these cavitation bubbles collapse, they produce high temperatures and pressures for a short period of time. Cavitation has been shown to release enough energy to pit ship propeller blades. In addition, heavy water (D2O) and deuterated acetone have been used to demonstrate that cavitation can cause particles from fusion. Unfortunately, to date, the performance of cavitation fusion systems has been low.\n\nROCKET DESIGN USING FUSION ENERGY\n\nWhile nuclear fusion releases large amounts of energy for a minimal quantity of fuel, initiation of the fusion reaction means that fusion ignition dictates the design of the system. Possible spacecraft designs include pulsed nuclear explosions with impact plates or sails; plasma confinement methods that generate charged particles used directly for propulsion; and confinement methods that heat a propellant, like liquid hydrogen, to be ejected through a Laval nozzle.\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 3: Aneutronic Nuclear Fusion Schemes\nUp to now, the fusion schemes described have the lowest fusion initiation temperatures ranging from 10 million kelvin to about 300 million kelvin. Most of the energy released from the fusion schemes in Figure 7 also release more than 80% of their energy in neutrons. Neutrons are difficult to shield and present a safety concern for the crew of a fusion-powered spacecraft. Unlike charged particles, their energy cannot easily be converted into electricity using magnetohydrodynamic generators and they cannot be focused into a propulsion beam to generate thrust. As a result, aneutronic fusion schemes have been explored for possible use in space propulsion. The schemes with the lowest temperature threshold are highlighted in Figure 9.\n2D + 3He → 1p [14.7 MeV] + 4He [3.6 MeV]\n2D + 6Li → 2 x 4He [11.2 MeV, each]\n1p + 6Li → 3He [2.3 MeV] + 4He [1.7 MeV]\n3He + 6Li → 1p + 2 x 4He + 16.9 MeV\n3He + 3He → 2 x 1p + 4He + 12.86 MeV\n1p + 7Li → 2 x 4He [8.6 Mev, each]\n1p + 11B → 3 x 4He + 8.7 MeV\n1p + 15N → 3He + 12C + 5.0 MeV\nFigure 9. Aneutronic Fusion Schemes\nDeuterium is readily available by centrifuging water, and protons are ionized hydrogen atoms. Helium-3, however, is very rare on earth, although quantities of it exist in lunar regolith due to ion impact on the Moon from the Sun. Over one million tons of helium-3 is estimated to exist on the lunar surface. Removing the helium-3 schemes does shorten the table, and one of the most attractive schemes uses boron-11. Boron is readily available on earth and 80.1% of naturally-occurring boron is boron-11.\nA consistent method of comparing each fusion scheme is based on how difficult it is to initiate fusion. In 1955, John D. Lawson established a standardized measurement of the performance of each fusion scheme based on the conditions required to initiate or ignite fusion. Three terms occur in his performance number, referred to as the \"Lawson criteria.\" The triple product includes the plasma density (ne), the energy confinement time (tE), and the plasma temperature. Lower values of the Lawson criteria indicate better fusion ignition performance.\nThe Lawson criteria for D-T fusion is 34; this figure of merit is only 0.43 for the first aneutronic fusion scheme, D-He3. Two of the best performing schemes are p-Li6 at 0.005 and p-B11 at 0.014. The ion temperatures required for both of these schemes\n18"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nare 800 keV and 300 keV, respectively, much higher than the 50 keV required for D-T neutronic fusion.\n1H\n5 11B\n4He\n4He\n4He\n3 x 4He + 8.7 MeV\nFigure 10. The Fusion of Hydrogen-1 and Boron-11 Produces Three Alpha Particles\nFortunately, both lithium-6 and boron-11 are readily available, while tritium must be manufactured due to its 12.6-year halflife. Lithium-6 represents 7.5% of all lithium on Earth. Lithium is mined at Silverpeak, Nevada.\nAnother concern in choosing an effective aneutronic fusion scheme is bremmstrahlung, or \"braking radiation.\" This term refers to the x-rays emitted as electrons pass through metals and interact with electrons in the outer shells of the metal atoms. In order to ignite a fusion reaction, the gases must be heated to the point where they ionize and form a plasma. Electrons stripped from the ions in the plasma will interact with the walls of the chamber that house the plasma and bremmstrahlung x-rays will result. Bremmstrahlung is a parasitic process that decreases the temperature of the plasma and reduces the chance of fusion. While the two favored fusion schemes, p-Li6 and p-B11, can generate significant bremmstrahlung losses, there are techniques proposed using electromagnets to direct both electrons and ions to minimize x-ray production.\n19"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 4: Antimatter Propulsion\nAlthough the focus of this report is aneutronic fusion propulsion, another possible propulsion technology involves the use of antimatter. Antimatter is created in certain nuclear reactions and minute quantities have even been collected from particle accelerators and stored for a short time in magnetic bottles. Antimatter has the highest energy density of any material known. When particles of antimatter and matter collide, they completely annihilate and convert their mass into energy according to Einstein's famous equation, E = mc2.10\nThere are various terrestrial sources of antimatter. Positrons are created spontaneously from high-energy gamma rays as they decay. Any gamma ray with an energy of more than 1.022 MeV can decay by pair production where an electron and a positron are generated. A positron is the antimatter counterpart to an electron and carries a positive charge. Due to the difference in charge between electrons (β-) and positrons (β+), they can be separated by magnetic fields and the positrons stored.\nCertain radionuclides decay through the emission of an antiproton, a negatively charged antimatter counterpart to a proton. If antiprotons are collected and combined with positrons, stable atoms of antihydrogen are produced. Antihydrogen has been created and stored in magnetic bottles. Up to 1012 antiprotons have been successfully stored for days at a time. Antihydrogen can also be potentially chilled to form liquid antihydrogen or \"ice\" to use as a rocket fuel. The specific impulse for antimatter rockets (Isp/c) are 1 for electron-positron annihilation and 0.60 for proton-antiproton annihilation. For nuclear fusion, Isp/c is only 0.119, followed by 0.04 for nuclear fission.\nAntimatter could be used to heat up a propellant gas and expel it through a Laval nozzle to generate thrust. If liquid hydrogen is carried onboard the spacecraft, the electrons and protons in the hydrogen can be annihilated by the antimatter to generate power. Annihilation products can also be reflected or directed by magnetic fields to be ejected as exhaust from the rocket to generate thrust. Antimatter is seen as the only fuel that can potentially accelerate rockets to near the speed of light, providing the potential for human flight to neighboring star systems.\n20"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 5: Aneutronic Fusion Propulsion Projects\nAs discussed above, several techniques are currently being explored by research groups and private companies to employ nuclear fusion for space propulsion. Their efforts over the past 60 years have resulted in three classes of fusion drives, which are representative of magnetic, inertial, and antimatter schemes. These include magnetic confinement fusion (MCF), inertial confinement fusion (ICF), magnetized target fusion (MTF), inertial electrostatic confinement (IEC), and antimatter-catalyzed fusion applications.\nMagnetic confinement fusion employs an electromagnet system that forces ions in a plasma to follow a toroidal-shaped magnetic field. Tokomaks and spheromaks employ this method and, between 1987 and 2004, the NASA Glenn Research Center developed the concept for Discovery II vehicle designed to deliver payloads to Jupiter and Saturn in a 4- to 6-month journey.\nThe simplest methods for fusion propulsion tend to use pulses from the detonation of nuclear devices. Other methods are based on the ejection of a propellant gas or ions to generate thrust.\nNUCLEAR PULSE PROPULSION\nIn this method, nuclear explosions are used to provide rocket thrust. The explosions act upon a steel pusher plate attached to the rear of the rocket and shock absorbers cushion the impact to the crew and payload. General Atomics first proposed this technique in the late 1950s under Project Orion.11, 12 With a maximum specific impulse of 100,000 seconds, this is one of the few fusion technologies that can be built with existing technology. Radiation exposure to the crew and the high period of acceleration induced by this propulsion system poses significant problems, yet a mission to Mars could only take 4 weeks using this technology instead of the 12 months required for conventional chemical rockets.\nProject Orion led to Project Daedalus in the 1970s, pioneered by the British Interplanetary Society for missions to nearby stars.1 In this design, a D-Li6 or D-He3 pellet would be imploded and the exhaust materials directed by an electromagnetic field to provide thrust for the rocket. The pellet would be ignited by multiple lasers that would strike the pellet and ablate the outer surface to generate a large implosive force.\nA concept known as \"Medusa\" was developed in the 1990s that employed a large \"sail\" ahead of the payload. Fusion explosions between the payload and the sail would carry the payload forward. Specific impulses of as high as 100,000 seconds were possible.\nProject Longshot, a conceptual spacecraft explored by the U.S. Navy and NASA in the 1990s, would have employed an electromagnetic funnel and ICF to power a rocket\n1 Project Deadalus, led by Alan Bond, was a 5-year design study undertaken by the British Interplanetary Association between 1973 and 1978. The study focused on designing an unmanned, interstellar probe. Specifications were that the probe must use current (or near-term ) technology and be able to reach its destination within a human lifetime. The probe's chosen destination was Barnard's Star (5.9 light years away), estimated to take 50 years at speeds up to 12% of the speed of light. The major stimulus for the project was Friedwardt Winterberg's ICF concept.\n21"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nusing D-Li6 fuel pellets. The estimated travel time of this system to Alpha Centauri was 100 years at an average velocity of about 0.5% of the speed of light.\nOTHER ANEUTRONIC ROCKET DESIGNS\nAntimatter-Catalyzed Fusion\nIn the 1990s, Pennsylvania State University worked on a fusion rocket design that employed antimatter to catalyze fission reactions in uranium. As a comparison, in order to make a nuclear fission bomb for space propulsion, approximately 12 kg of uranium-235 is required to generate the three critical masses required. Using antimatter, this can be achieved with gram-quantities of uranium.\nMagnetized Target Fusion\nPlasma guns are used instead of lasers to generate heat in a low-density fusion fuel mixture confined by magnetic fields. The fuel is rapidly compressed to ignite fusion. The NASA/MSFC HOPE (Human Outer Planets Exploration) Group estimates that this propulsion system could transport payloads to Jupiter within about 300 days.\nIon Drives\nThe VASMIR engine is a highly efficient ion thruster that uses an RF resonant cavity to accelerate ionized argon or xenon gas as a propellant. One concept is to generate electricity from aneutronic fusion by capturing the energy of the emitted ions in a magnetohydrodynamic generator. The electricity would then be used to power the VISMIR ion drive.\nThis direct conversion drive could capture useful energy from aneutronic fusion or from D-T fusion which is easy to ignite, but loses about 80% of its energy to neutrons. The neutrons can be used to generate secondary ions through impact on a target and the ion energy can be collected in the MHD generator.\nCOMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT\nIn addition to teams from universities and national laboratories, several companies have been formed to develop aneutronic fusion propulsion systems. Several are discussed below.\n1. EMC2 Fusion Development Corporation\nA prolific designer and author, Dr. Robert Bussard has explored inertial electrostatic confinement fusion as used in the Farnsworth-Hirsh Fusor.13, 14, 15, 16, 17 He and his colleagues formed EMC2, a private company based in Santa Fe, New Mexico, to test components of a practical fusion drive. Their work has been funded by DARPA, NASA, and the U.S. Navy.\nOutlined in Figure 11, his QED (charged particle electric discharge engine) is based on the Farnsworth-Hirsch Fusor, an ion accelerator patented in 1968. This accelerator works through the use of spherical electrodes that force ions toward the center of a spherical chamber by Lorentz forces. By injecting preheated ions of deuterium and helium-3 or boron-11 into the fusor core, the resulting fusion\n22"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nheat and particles are collected by an electron beam generator that heats hydrogen. The hydrogen is used as a propellant gas that is exhausted through a Laval nozzle to generate thrust.\n\nThe Farnsworth-Hirsch Fusor is a proven technology that is used in tabletop experiments to demonstrate nuclear fusion. This device is an example of inertial electrostatic confinement (ICF). Scaling this device up to production of ions for a propulsion system is a major task for EMC2 and Dr. Bussard.\n\nFigure 11. QED Rocket Design by Dr. Robert Bussard and EMC2.\n\n2. ESA Advanced Concepts Team\n\nThe European Space Agency (ESA), an international research consortium, has assembled their Advanced Concepts Team (ACT) to develop space propulsion systems based on nuclear fusion in open magnetic confinement. This system, an example of magnetic confinement fusion, uses gas dynamic mirrors (GDM) to constrain an ion plasma.\n\n3. JPL, Rocketdyne, Rockwell\n\nDesign of an inertial confinement fusion source for manned missions to Mars was conducted for this joint project where a magnetic thrust chamber was to be used to minimize contact between the plasma and the walls of the thrust chamber. With a 100-ton payload and a total vehicle launch mass of 6,000 tons, this spacecraft would deliver manned missions to Mars in 100 days.\n\n23"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n4. Crossfire Fusor\n\nThe Crossfire Fusor is as example of an inertial electrostatic confinement fusion (IEC) concept device combined with magnetic confinement. It was developed and patented by Dr. Moacir Ferreira (http://www.crossfirefusion.com). He has expanded his work to include the development of an electrodynamic space thruster, also based on the Farnsworth-Hirsh Fusor. This design uses aneutronic fusion along with superconducting electromagnets to help confine the ion plasma. An electron gun and an electric field are used to capture energy from the ions generated by fusion and to convert the resulting power into electricity. The use of the superconducting electromagnets eliminates the need for spherical electrodes. Hydrogen combined with Li-6, He-3, or B-11 would serve as the fusion fuel. This aneutronic concept device would theoretically allow interstellar travel to Alpha Centauri to take only 3 years.\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 6: Speculation on Research Needs Over the Next 30 Years\n\nWhat are the technological needs in space propulsion over the next 30 years (and beyond)? In 1961, Arthur C. Clarke observed, \"The short-lived Uranium Age will see the dawn of space flight; the succeeding era of fusion power will witness its fulfillment.\"18 Although the dawn of the uranium age occurred in the middle of the twentieth century, spaceflight is still in its infancy.\n\nEarly pioneers envisioning the technology that could propel humankind to the stars included the Austrian engineer Eugen Sanger, who in 1953 proposed the use of antimatter annihilation to generate photons for the creation of rockets that could approach the speed of light.19, 20 The propulsion technology chosen for space exploration depends very much upon the mission. For example, flight from the surface to low-Earth orbit requires considerable energy to break free of the Earth's gravitational field, yet the duration of the flight is short. Space travel to the nearest stars will be of long duration and will be strongly influenced by the type and quantity of fuel available for extended journeys.\n\nThere are many different propulsion systems proposed for space exploration. The systems listed below involve propulsion through the transfer of momentum to the spacecraft through ejection of a propellant, where the propellant is a gas (ion drives), combustion products (chemical rockets, nuclear thermal), high-energy particles (fusion drive, antimatter drive), or photons (Bae drive).\n\n• Chemical rocket, liquid fuel.\n• Ion drives (VASIMR, PTI, and others).\n• Bae photon drive (laser system).\n• Stationary laser systems.\n• Solar sails.\n• Fission rockets:\n– Pulsed.\n– Thermal reactor with ion drive.\n– Thermal reactor with propellant and Laval nozzle.\n• Fusion drives:\n– D-T fusion.\n– Aneutronic fusion.\n– Bussard (proton and boron-11).\n– Antimatter catalyzed.\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Antimatter drives:\n– Antimatter/fission.\n– Antimatter, propellant and Laval nozzle.\n– Antimatter, electrical generation, ion drive.\n– Antimatter, electrical generation, photon drive (Sanger).\n• Speculative technologies:\n– Heim graviphoton drive.\n– Black hole energy source.\n\nTo look at the role of fusion propulsion over the next 30 years and beyond, we can envision four kinds of missions: surface to LEO (low-Earth orbit); LEO to Mars; LEO to Saturn; and LEO to Alpha Centauri A, B, or C. While technical hurdles will certainly be at the forefront for each mission, safety factors and fuel concerns will also contribute to the optimal propulsion technology chosen.\n\nSURFACE TO LOW-EARTH ORBIT (100 MILES)\n\nThe energy required to move one kilogram of mass into LEO 100 miles above the surface of the Earth is about 30 MJ (8.5 kW-hr). The energy required to move this same mass from LEO to lunar orbit significantly smaller, yet the transit time can be very long. Chemical rockets, such as the Saturn V, have successfully launched satellites and the Apollo missions into earth orbit using RP-1 and LOX (liquid oxygen), along with LH2 (liquid hydrogen) in the second and third stages).\n\nProximity to the Earth's surface requires propulsion systems that are safe to the population and to the environment. The Rover Project in the 1950s explored the use of nuclear fission NERVA (Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Application) rockets, but ejection of radioactive debris made these rockets untenable for use on Earth. Fusion and antimatter systems suffer the same problem. Chemical rockets will continue to move humans into local space until another technology is available. Given sufficient technical and financial support, additional systems may be explored over the next 30 years:\n\n• The Space Tether: This involves a carbon nanotube tether that connects a spaceport on the Earth's surface to a station in geosychronous orbit above the equator. Carbon nanotubes are extremely strong, yet fibers of sufficient length to fabricate into a tether are not yet available. This is an active area of research (http://www.spaceelevator.com) with scientific progress presented at regular conferences. Cargo and passengers would be moved into LEO using an elevator attached to the tether.\n\n• SSTO (Single Stage to Orbit): Multistage rockets are now used to attain Earth orbit since most of the energy expended by the rocket is used to lift the rocket and its fuel. The space shuttle is based on an earlier design by Eugen Sanger in 1930s\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nGermany called the Silvervogel that was intended for use in suborbital bombing of distant targets. The shuttle requires expendable rockets to attain orbit. Several efforts are underway to manufacture aircraft that can attain orbit with less cost and environmental damage as the current rocket technology. While the Spaceship One and Spaceship Two designed by Scaled Composites and Virgin Atlantic can carry passengers into space, they lack the energy to propel a payload into orbit at the required 17,000 miles per hour. The Boeing X-37 is designed to carry unmanned payloads into orbit, yet still requires an Atlas V rocket to launch. The DARPA/USAF Falcon is designed for hypersonic flight at Mach 6, far short of the Mach 23 or so required for orbit. Through the use of RAM jets and hybrid systems (air breathing/rocket), the goal of SSTO is achievable over the next 30 years.\n\nLEO TO MARS (34 TO 249 MILLION MILES)\n\nChemical rockets have been used to launch probes to Mars with great success. The transit time is typically 9 months, each way. Aerobraking in the Martian atmosphere is used to slow down the vehicles, resulting in a considerable savings in fuel. For human flight to Mars, the transit time must be as short as possible to minimize radiation exposure from cosmic sources, including the proton flux from the Sun. The specific impulse of chemical rockets is low; Isp = 421 seconds for the last two stages of the Saturn V, for example. Ion thrusters are also existing technology and can generate much higher specific impulse (3,000 seconds for xenon electrostatic drives to 30,000 seconds for VASIMR). Ion drives, however, typically generate very low thrust.\n\nA high performance Hall effect ion drive with Isp = 8,000 seconds generates only 2.5 newtons of thrust, for example, which is enough to accelerate one kilogram of mass at 0.25 g, where g = earth's gravitation acceleration. This drive requires 140 kW of electricity to operate and a supply of xenon gas as a propellant. For a probe having the mass of the International Space Station (370 metric tons), we can use equation 6.1 to calculate the time required to transit to Mars with our Hall effect ion drive.\n\nt = sqrt(2 d m / F) (6.1)\n\nIn this equation, t is the transit time, F the thrust, d the distance, and m the mass of the object to be accelerated at a constant rate. Results show that it will take at least 4 years to make this transit. The use of multiple drives may decrease this time.\n\nFor manned flights to Mars, an estimated transit time of 30 days would be considered appropriate in order to minimize radiation exposure to the crew. For this scenario, 10,000 Hall effect ion drives would be needed along with 1.36 gigawatts of electrical power, slightly more than the power generated by a single reactor at the San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant. An alternative ion drive design is the Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket (VASIMR) developed by Franklin Chang-Diaz in 1977. These systems use hydrogen, argon, or neon gas and generate 1 newton of thrust for 100 kW of power. The VX-200, a 200-kW VASIMR engine, will be tested on the International Space Station in 2011 or 2012.21\n\nChemical rockets and nuclear electric propulsion can be used to reach Mars; both are based on existing technology. A third candidate is nuclear thermal propulsion. Rockets of this design were tested at the Nevada Test Site and were intended to launch payloads from the Earth's surface. With Isp = 850 seconds, the performance more than\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ndoubled that of typical chemical rocket designs. The largest NERVA rocket tested generated 867 kN of thrust using liquid hydrogen propellant. NERVA rockets were proposed for the Manned Mars Mission using a tethered cabin to protect the crew from reactor radiation. The NERVA project was cancelled in 1972.\nLEO TO THE MOONS OF JUPITER AND SATURN (460 TO 940 MILLION MILES)\nProject Prometheus, 2003-2005, concentrated on nuclear electric and nuclear thermal propulsion for unmanned missions to the moons of Jupiter. For manned flight, the nuclear thermal systems based on NERVA still provide high thrust, reasonable values of specific impulse, and a technology that requires no major breakthroughs in order to be achieved. For manned flights, tethered systems will likely be necessary to minimize radiation exposure to the crew from the reactor. For the next 30 years, nuclear thermal propulsion can be used to explore locations throughout the solar system based on new engineered designs with no unresolved scientific hurdles.\nFusion reactors or fusion propulsion can be developed for missions throughout the solar system, but there are many unresolved issues in their use. The fusion propulsion technology that may show promise in the far-term are pulsed propulsion systems. These concept designs include large sails or collectors that absorb the energy from thermonuclear explosions initiated at a specific distance from the collector. Each explosion generates a pulse that accelerates the vehicle forward. Design challenges include protection of the crew from the radiation of the nuclear blast, cushioning the crew from the incredible \"jerk\" or change in acceleration that occurs during each blast, and the design of a suitable collector.\nLEO TO ALPHA CENTAURI (4.22 LIGHT-YEARS OR 24.8 TRILLION MILES)\nAlpha Centauri contains three of the closest stars to our solar system. Alpha Centauri A and B are binary stars orbiting one another, yet each one is approximately the same size as the Sun. Alpha Centauri C, or Proxima Centauri, is the closest at 4.22 light-years and is a red dwarf. There is a limited possibility that Alpha Centauri has Earth-like planets.\nRockets optimal for flights to these stars and destinations of similar distance would require high specific impulse propulsion. Depending on other mission requirements, the thrust may be kept low since the application of a small, but continuous thrust over a long period of time leads to high velocities. Since aerobraking may not be possible, the spacecraft can accelerate for half the trip and must decelerate for the second half. Spacecraft acceleration can be low, and most designs for human flight focus on a continuous acceleration of 1 g (Earth gravity) to provide optimal crew conditions.\n28\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nChapter 7: Conclusions\nAmong the various aneutronic fusion propulsion technologies developed, Robert Bussard and his colleagues appear to have the best developed proposals. All nuclear fusion designs rely on ignition of the fusion reactions that will consume less energy than is produced by fusion. This hurdle is significant and has thwarted the ability for fusion reactors to generate commercial electricity.\nAntimatter engines are a more promising technology, since the technique to harvest and store small amounts of antihydrogen already exists. Antimatter is a denser form of energy than fusion fuels and presents the possibility of creating a rocket that approaches the speed of light relative to Earth. The major hurdles to antimatter propulsion include the production of commercial quantities of antihydrogen and the safe transport of antimatter from the earth's surface into space.\n29\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAppendix A: Relativistic Rockets\nSince the application of a constant acceleration for a long period of time can lead to very high velocities, these spacecraft may reach relativistic velocities where V > 0.5 c (speed of light). At these velocities, time dilation and Lorentz contraction can be significant.22 Special Relativity can be used to compute these effects based on the Lorentz factor, γ, as shown below:\nγ = 1 / sqrt(1 - (V/c)^2) (A.2)\nSpecific impulse for relativistic rockets is usually expressed in dimensionless form:\nIsp/c = γ (vexhaust/c) (A.3)\nTreating Earth as a nonaccelerating reference frame, time intervals measured on a rocket traveling at a velocity with respect to Earth will be \"dilated\" according to the following equation:\nΔt_earth = γ Δt_rocket (A.4)\nTime intervals measured by the crew on the rocket will be longer than the interval measured on Earth. The ratio of time measured on the rocket to time measured on earth follows the graph in Figure 12. When a spacecraft reaches 86% of the speed of light, their \"clock\" will run at half the speed of a clock located on earth.\nFor a constant acceleration, equations for rocket performance can be written in terms of the following variables:\nt = time measured on the rocket\nt' = time measured in the rest mass frame (Earth)\nD = distance traveled\na = acceleration\nc = speed of light\nVfinal = final rocket velocity at rocket time t'\nt' = (c/a) sinh(at/c) = sqrt((D/c)^2 + 2D/a) (A.5)\nD = (c^2/a)[cosh(at/c) - 1] = (c^2/a)[sqrt(1 + (at'/c)^2) - 1] (A.6)\nVfinal = c tanh(at/c) = at' / sqrt(1 + (at'/c)^2) (A.7)\n30\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nt = (c/a) sinh^-1(at'/c) = (c/a) cosh^-1(aD/c^2 + 1) (A.8)\n[Figure 12 graph: Time Ratio (y-axis, 1 to 5) versus V/c (x-axis, 0 to 1); a red curve rises sharply near V/c of 0.9 to 1]\nFigure 12. Time Dilation at Relativistic Velocities.\nThe Tsiolkovsky rocket equation is important as it relates the change in the mass of a rocket due to fuel consumption in order to generate a desired ΔV, or velocity change:\nΔV = Isp ln(m_initial/m_final) (A.9)\nFor a relativistic rocket, velocity is affected by time dilation resulting in the relativistic rocket equation:\nΔV = c tanh((Isp/c) ln(m_initial/m_final)) (A.10)\nThrough any propulsion method, kinetic energy must be added to the rocket through reaction mass (propellant) in order to accelerate the rocket to its final velocity. Since mass changes with velocity, we will need to use Einstein's equation to determine the kinetic energy required to accelerate the rocket to a final velocity based on its rest mass, mo.\nE = m c^2 = KE + mo c^2 (A.11)\nKE = m c^2 - mo c^2 = mo γ c^2 - mo c^2 (A.12)\nKE = mo c^2 (γ - 1) (A.13)\n31\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAppendix B: Aneutronic Fusion Rocket\nFor travel to the stars, aneutronic fusion combines a high specific impulse of Isp/c = 0.119 (ideal), compared to a maximum possible of 1.0, with minimal radiation to the crew. The Bussard fusion propulsion system is an example of this design and uses the Farnsworth/Hirsch electrostatic confinement method to initiate fusion of hydrogen and boron-11.23 The specific impulse of this design is reported from 1,500 to 6,000 seconds requiring 4.5 to 8 gigawatts of power from the fusion reactor. In this design, 0.078% of the mass converted into energy actually goes into thrust with the remaining energy converted into heat and gamma rays. For a long-duration space flight, the specific impulse of the fuel source must be very high since a great deal of fuel is consumed over time, but the thrust required is relatively small.\nTo explore the needs for high Isp, we can envision a flight to Proxima Centauri, a distance of 4.22 light-years. The maximum acceleration that the crew can survive is assumed to be 1 g (earth gravity). As the vehicle accelerates away from Earth, relativistic effects described through equations A.5 to A.10 become important. The clocks on the rocket appear to be moving slower than the clocks on Earth, the rest mass frame. During this mission, the rocket is assumed to accelerate for the first 2.11 light-years to its maximum velocity. At this midpoint in its journey, the rocket turns around and decelerates at the same rate until it reaches Proxima Centauri.\nTypical questions about the mission:\n• How long will the journey take (in terms of both Earth clocks and rocket clocks)?\n• How much fuel is consumed?\n• What maximum velocity is achieved?\nThe answers to these questions are dependent upon:\n• The distance to the star.\n• The mass of the rocket payload, engine, and fuel.\n• The effective specific impulse of the engine, when all inefficiencies are included.\nFor the trip to Proxima Centauri, the minimum duration flight is affected by how close to the speed of light the ship can travel. Unfortunately, the higher the maximum speed, the greater mass fraction of fuel required. This is shown in Figure 13. If the fuel is assumed to be no more than 50% of the initial mass of the rocket, for example, the maximum speed that could be attained is limited to 8% of the speed of light for the ideal fusion drive (Isp/c = 0.119).\nThe following equation is used in the figure:\nVmax imum/c = tanh(-(Isp/c) ln(1 - Δm/m_initial)) (B.14)\n32\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMaximum Velocity Achieved / Speed of Light\n\nFigure 13. Maximum Achievable Velocity Versus Fuel Usage.\n\nAcceleration / Earth's Gravitational Acceleration Time (rocket) / Time (Earth)\n\nFigure 14. Acceleration and Rocket \"Clock\" Ratio versus Mission Time on Earth.\n\nAnother item to consider is the value chosen for the constant acceleration of the spacecraft. We cannot exceed 1 g for crew safety, yet higher accelerations mean\n\n33\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nshorter trips to the stars. Figure 14 shows how much time is required for the trip (one way) based on the required acceleration. These equations are independent of the specific impulse of the rocket. The mission cannot be less than 4.22 years in duration, since the spacecraft cannot exceed the speed of light. If a 10-year mission were chosen, the fuel usage would be tremendous, but the vehicle could attain an acceleration of 0.20 g. At this acceleration, time on the rocket would pass at 72% of the rate of time on Earth.\n\nTo predict the amount of fuel required for the ideal fusion drive, the Bussard Aneutronic Propulsion system, weighing 14 tons, is assumed to be coupled to a craft the same mass as the International Space Station. By assuming a very gradual acceleration of 0.001 g, the trip will take about 127 years attaining a maximum velocity of 6.5% of the speed of light. Even at this modest acceleration, 85% of the initial mass of the spacecraft will have to be fuel/propellant. The Mathcad spreadsheet used to predict these values is included in Appendix D as the \"Relativistic Rocket Worksheet.\" Figure 15 shows the opening page of the worksheet. Any text in red can be modified to predict performance with different drives, vehicle mass, or distance traveled.\n\nRelativistic Rocket Calculator\nFigure 15. Spreadsheet for Sample Mission to Alpha Centauri.\n\n34\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 3: Specific Impulse for Selected Drives\n\nSpecific Impulse for Selected Drives\nChemical Rocket (Stages 2,3, Saturn V) 0.000014 421\nHall Effect Ion Drive 0.000082 2,500\nVASIMR Ion Drive 0.000196 6,000\nNuclear Fission Drive 0.040000 1,223,242\nBussard Aneutronic Fusion Drive 0.000196 6,000\nIdeal Fusion Drive (p --> He) 0.119000 3,639,144\nAntimatter, proton/antiproton 0.600000 18,348,624\nAntimatter, electron/positron 1.000000 30,581,040\n\nThe performance of the Bussard Aneutronic Drive used in the example actually has a much lower specific impulse as indicated in Table 3. Considerable work will be needed to design an aneutronic drive that can approach the maximum theoretical value of Isp/c = 0.119. Research challenges in the development of aneutronic drives should be studied over the next 20 to 30 years and include the following:\n\n• Fusion Initiation: Reliable fusion of p + 11B has only been demonstrated in a laboratory setting using a picoseconds laser in 2005 by V. S. Belyaev in Russia. The particle energies required to initiate p-B fusion are 300 keV, which corresponds to about 3.3 billion degrees C. For comparison, the easiest fusion reaction to initiate is D-T which requires only 66 keV or 730 million degrees C. D-T fusion is still difficult to initiate in the laboratory, and the energy generated by D-T fusion still exceeds the energy required to initiate the process with the exception of thermonuclear devices. Work on inertial confinement fusion, electrostatic confinement, magnetic confinement, laser ablation, and other techniques are under investigation at laboratories around the world and reliable, efficient fusion initiation devices will be developed over the upcoming 30 years.\n\n• Materials: New materials will be required to survive the temperatures and radiation within a fusion propulsion system ignition chamber and nozzle (if used). These materials must effectively stop the leakage of gamma rays from fusion production and x-rays emitted through bremmstrahlung due to electron impingement on the chamber walls. Materials development should be a major focus for research.\n\n• Generation of High-Tesla Electromagnets: Powerful electromagnets will be required to direct positively and negatively charged fusion products into generating thrust or for direct conversion into electricity. Superconducting magnets are viable, although they will be located near the fusion reactor—high temperatures and gamma radiation will heat and embrittle the material. Work will be needed to create magnets capable of generating 10 T magnetic fields.\n\n35\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix C: Antimatter Annihilation Rocket\n\nFigure 16. Antihydrogen Atom.\n\nUsing data from Table 3, the only propulsion system that can generate higher Isp than fusion will be due to antimatter annihilation. By using the Relativistic Rocket Worksheet in Appendix D, it is possible to decrease the time to reach Proxima Centauri to only 18.5 years by accelerating at 0.05 g to reach 43% of the speed of light. By using antihydrogen, two annihilation mechanisms are possible:\n\n• Electron-positron annihilation releases one energetic gamma ray (1.022 MeV) or, in the presence of a nucleus, two 0.511-MeV gamma rays. There is no effective way to reflect gamma rays, but they can be absorbed with suitable shielding and their energy converted into heat. Research into designs that convert gamma ray heat into propulsion or electrical power should proceed over the next 10 to 20 years.\n\n• Proton-antiproton annihilation releases charged and neutral pions, which decay after about 0.026 microseconds into charged muons and neutrinos. The charged pions can be used to directly generate thrust or to make electricity if they are directed by electromagnets. Unfortunately, 40% of the pions will be neutral and quickly decay into gamma radiation, which are lost from the system or absorbed in the rocket chamber wall and generate heat. Muons also decay into charged particles (electrons and positrons), along with neutrinos. Neutrinos and antineutrinos, along with their energy, are lost from the system. Novel rocket designs that capture gamma radiation with a tungsten insert allow the waste heat to be used to accelerate a propellant, such as hydrogen, to generate additional thrust. This system was proposed by Robert Frisbee and Ulrich Walter and deserves further study.24 Efficient ways to redirect the energy of gamma rays into thrust should be a major focus of research.\n\nAntimatter propulsion is fairly straightforward since ignition is not a problem. By mixing hydrogen with antihydrogen, annihilation begins immediately. Antimatter\n\n36\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\npropulsion has two major hurdles that are currently under investigation at CERN and at the Brookhaven National Laboratory.\n\n• Antimatter Generation: Only minute quantities of antimatter have ever been produced. Antiprotons are produced in accelerators and in some radioactive decay schemes. CERN has had an active program since 2000 in antimatter detection and collection.25 Studies of antimatter production will continue during the upcoming decade due to their importance as a dense storage medium for energy and for their use in particle physics experiments. Current patents should help decrease the costs of production of antihydrogen. Three programs have been part of the CERN Antimatter Factory:\n\n– ASACUSA: Antiprotons were directed through helium to generate atoms of helium-2 with antiprotons replacing the orbiting electrons.\n\n– ATHENA: An antiproton beam was fired through positrons generated from the decay of Na-22. To generate the antiprotons, a proton synchrotron is used to collide protons on an iridium surface. Antiprotons produced in the collision are directed with electromagnets into an antimatter decelerator and captured. By 2002, ATHENA made 106 antihydrogen atoms in this way. The estimated cost of generating antihydrogen using current technology is about $65 million/gram.\n\n– ATRAP: This device used a Penning trap to combine cold antiprotons and positrons to create antihydrogen.\n\n• Antimatter Storage: Penning traps and Penning-Malmberg traps have been used to contain antihydrogen for several weeks using a combination of RF and magnetic fields.26 Further research into antimatter storage will lead to the ability to transport and store nanogram or microgram quantities of antimatter.\n\nSpeculative Technologies: The Heim Quantum Theory\n\nBurkhard Heim was a theoretical physicist that explored a new theory to link quantum mechanics and the Theory of Relativity.27 He postulated that time and distance are quantized and that matter and energy can be described in terms of 12 dimensions. His worked was followed by the Extended Heim Theory from Walter Droscher and Jochem Hauser.28 The Heim Theory is able to predict, with a high degree of accuracy, the mass and charge of almost all subatomic particles. New particles, such as the neutral electron, are also predicted. The relationship of his work to space propulsion involves the prediction of a quantum gravity force mediated through graviphotons created from the interaction of matter and virtual particles. Droscher and Hauser have proposed the use of graviphotons to provide propulsion in space with no ejection of matter to generate thrust.\n\nThere are few peer-reviewed articles on Heim Quantum Theory, and physicists disagree with the formulation of the theory and its results. Nevertheless, this would be the first method that would not require the transfer of momentum by ejecting mass to generate thrust. The Heim Working Group and the work of Droscher and Hauser should be followed for possible application to spacecraft.\n\n37\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix D: Relativistic Rocket Worksheet\n\nEstimate of the Performance of an\nInterstellar Relativistic Space Vehicle\n\n1. Define the Specifications for the Rocket\n\na. Rocket mass\n\nm_payload := 370·10^3·kg Assume the same mass as the ISS with a crew of 6.\n\nm_engine := 14·ton m_engine = 1.27 × 10^4 kg\n\nm_rocket := m_payload + m_engine m_rocket = 3.827 × 10^5 kg\n\nb. Specific impulse for the engine\n\nIsp := 0.119·c\n\nIsp/c = 0.119\n\n2. Define the Requirements for the Mission to Alpha Centauri\n\na. Assume that the rocket will accelerate halfway to Alpha Centauri at 1 g (earth gravitational acceleration), and will decelerate during the last half of the trip at the same rate.\n\na := g/1000 a = 9.807 × 10^-3 m/s^2\n\nly := c·365·24·3600·s\n\nD := 4.22·ly Distance to Proxima Centauri in lightyears.\n\n38\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n3. Compute the Rocket Performance\n\na. Time required to reach Proxima Centauri in earth time (inertial reference frame) and in rocket time..\n\nt_earth := 2·sqrt([(D/2)/c]^2 + 2·(D/2)/a) t_earth = 127.903yr\n\nt_rocket := 2·(c/a)·acosh[a·(D/2)/c^2 + 1] t_rocket = 127.81yr\n\nb. Peak velocity.\n\nV_midway := c·tanh[a·(t_rocket/2)/c] V_midway = 1.975 × 10^7 m/s\n\nV_midway/c = 6.587%\n\nc. Compute the required kinetic energy that must be supplied by the fuel.\n\ngamma := 1/sqrt(1 - (V_midway/c)^2) Lorentz factor at the midpoint (peak velocity).\n\ngamma = 1.002\n\nKE := 2·m_rocket·c^2·(gamma - 1) KE = 1.497 × 10^20 J\n\n39\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nd. Compute the mass of fuel that must be consumed by the rocket to complete the one-way trip.\n\nΔV := V_midway ΔV/c = 0.066\n\nmass_ratio := e^((c/Isp)·atanh(ΔV/c)) mass_ratio = 1.741\n\nm_final := m_rocket/mass_ratio m_final = 2.198 × 10^5 kg\n\nΔm := 2·(m_rocket - m_final) Mass of fuel consumed.\n\nΔm = 3.257 × 10^5 kg\n\nΔm/m_rocket = 85.111%\n\n40\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix E: Endnotes\n\n1 U. S. Department of Energy, \"Nevada Test Site History: Nuclear Rocket Development Station,\" DOE/NV 707-Rev 1, June 2004.\n2 R. W. Bussard and L. W. Jameson, \"From SSTO to Saturn's Moons: Superperformance Fusion Propulsion for Practical Spaceflight,\" 30th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA 94-3269, 27-29 June, 1994.\n3 Inertial-Electrostatic-Fusion Propulsion Spectrum: Air-Breathing to Interstellar Flight, R. W. Bussard and L. W. Jameson, Journal of Propulsion and Power, v. 11, no. 2, pp. 365-372.\n4 Anderson, John D., Modern Compressible Flow, Third Edition, McGraw-Hill, 2003.\n5 VASIMR\n6 Foster, Arthur R., and Wright, Robert L., Basic Nuclear Engineering, 4th edition, Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1983.\n7 Schultis, J. K., and Faw, R. F., Radiation Shielding, American Nuclear Society (ANS), 2000.\n8 Duderstadt, James J., and Hamilton, Louis J., Nuclear Reactor Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, 1976.\n9 Voegeli, N., \"Space Nuclear Reactors: History and Emerging Policy Issues,\" The Nonproliferation Review, vol. 14, issue 1, pp. 163-175, March 2007.\n10 Forward, R. L., \"Advanced Space Propulsion Study - Antiproton and Beamed Power Propulsion,\" AFAL TR-87-070, 1997.\n11 General Dynamics Corporation, \"Nuclear Pulse Vehicle Study Condensed Summary Report, NTIS 1976006593, January, 1964.\n12 \"Nuclear pulse propulsion,\" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion, 7/17/2010.\n13 R. W. Bussard, \"Fusion as Electric Propulsion,\" Journal of Propulsion and Power, v. 6, no. 5, pp. 567-574, Sept-Oct, 1990.\n14 R. W. Bussard and L. W. Jameson, \"From SSTO to Saturn's Moons: Superperformance Fusion Propulsion for Practical Spaceflight,\" 30th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA 94-3269, 27-29 June, 1994.\n15 Inertial-Electrostatic-Fusion Propulsion Spectrum: Air-Breathing to Interstellar Flight, R. W. Bussard and L. W. Jameson, Journal of Propulsion and Power, v. 11, no. 2, pp. 365-372.\n16 R. W. Bussard, \"System Technical and Economic Features of QED-Engine-Driven Space Transportation,\" 33rd AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, AIAA 97-3071, 6-9 July, 1997.\n17 Bussard, Robert, \"The Advent of Clean Nuclear Fusion: Superformance Space Power and Propulsion,\" 57th International Astronautical Congress (IAC 2006), pp. 1-14, 2006.\n18 http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/~jfs/neep533_lect32_99_fusionProp.html, University of Wisconsin, Madison, NEEP 533, Fusion Propulsion, Lecture #32.\n19 E. Sanger, (1953) \"Zur Theorie der Photonraketen,\" Ingenieur-Archiv, Band 21, pp. 213 - 226 (in German).\n20 E. Sanger, \"Photon propulsion,\" in Handbook of Astronautical Engineering, First Edition, H. H. Koelle (Ed.), McGraw-Hill, New York, 1961.\n21 Irene Klotz (August 7, 2008). \"Plasma Rocket May Be Tested at Space Station\". Discovery News. http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/08/07/plasma-rocket.html. Retrieved August 10, 2010.\n\n41\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed0953067d83be5b","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n22 Gibbs, Philip and Koks, Don, \"The Relativistic Rocket,\" http;//www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/mirrors/physicsfaq/Relativity/SR/rocket.html, retrieved August 1, 2010.\n23 R. W. Bussard and L. W. Jameson, \"The QED Engine Spectrum: Fusion-Electric Propulsion for Air-Breathing to Interstellar Flight,\" AIAA paper 93-2006, 2006.\n24 Frisbee, Robert, H., JPL, \"Advanced Propulsion for the XXIst Century,\" AIAA Paper AIAA-2003-2589, July 14-17, 2003, Dayton, Ohio.\n25 CERN, \"The Antimatter Factory,\" http://livefromcern.web.cernch.livefromcer/antimatter/factory/AM-factory-4-b.html, retrieved on July 30, 2010.\n26 Marshall Space Flight Center, Alabama, \"Mofied Penning-Malmberg Trap for Storing Antiprotons,\" March 1, 2005, http://www.techbriefs.com/content/view, /414/34/, retrieved on July 30, 2010.\n27 \"Heim Theory,\" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heim_Theory, retrieved August 9, 2010.\n28 Droscher, Walter, and Hauser, Jochem, \"Heim Quantum Theory for Space Propulsion Physics,\" http://www.1000planets.com/papers/hqtforspacepropphysicsaip2005.pdf, downloaded on August 8, 2010.\n\n42\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n23 March 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-1003-011\n\nMetallic Spintronics\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMetallic Spintronics\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 71\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\n1. Introduction ....iv\n2. Giant Magnetoresistance ....1\n2.1 GMR Basics ....1\n2.2 GMR Applications ....3\n3. Spin-Transfer-Torque ....4\n3.1 STT Basics ....4\n3.2 STT Experiments ....7\n3.3 STT Applications ....10\n3.4 STT-Driven Motion of Magnetic Domain Walls ....12\n4. Antiferromagnetic Metal Spintronics ....12\n4.1 Antiferromagnetic GMR ....13\n4.2 Antiferromagnetic STT ....14\n5. Summary and Conclusions ....16\n6. References ....18\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. In a Magnetic Multilayer, Several Atomic Layers of Magnetic Material Alternate With Layers of Nonmagnetic Material ....1\nFigure 2. Resistance of a Magnetic Multilayer R Versus Magnetic Field ....2\nFigure 3. Differential Resistance dV/dI of a Mechanical Point Contact as a Function of Current for a Series of Magnetic Fields ....4\nFigure 4. Device Schematics for STT Experiments ....5\nFigure 5. Qualitative Picture of STT ....6\nFigure 6. Torques on a Magnetic Moment in a Magnetic Field and Subject to an Electrical Current ....7\nFigure 7. Spin-Torque-Driven Magnetic Switching ....8\nFigure 8. Oscillatory Voltage ....9\nFigure 9. Scanning Transmission X-ray Microscopy Images ....10\nFigure 10. Conventional MRAM Cell ....11\nFigure 11. Racetrack Memory Concept ....12\nFigure 12. Schematic of Point Contact to Sample Geometry ....15\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nMetallic Spintronics\n\n1. Introduction\n\nThe rapid pace of progress in the computer industry over the past 40 years has been based on the miniaturization of chips and other computer components. Further miniaturization, however, faces serious challenges—for example, increasingly high power dissipation. To continue on pace, the industry must go beyond incremental improvements and embrace radically new technologies. A promising nanoscale technology known as spintronics (a neologism for \"spin-based electronics\") has emerged. Spintronics refers to the role an electron spin plays in solid-state physics. Spintronics researchers aim to develop a revolutionary new class of electronic devices based on the spin of electrons in addition to the charge. In spintronic devices, information is carried not by the electron's charge, as in conventional microchips, but by the electron's intrinsic spin. Changing the spin of an electron is faster and requires less power than moving it. Therefore, if a reliable way could be found to control and manipulate spins, spintronic devices could offer higher data processing speeds, lower electricity consumption, and many other advantages over conventional chips, perhaps including the ability to carry out radically new quantum computations.\n\nSpintronics in ferromagnetic systems is built on a complementary set of phenomena in which the magnetic configuration of the system influences its transport properties and vice versa. Giant magnetoresistance (GMR) (Reference 1, 2) and spin-transfer-torque (STT) (Reference 3-5) phenomena exemplify such interconnections in multilayers composed of ferromagnetic (F) and nonmagnetic (N) layers. The physics and applications of metallic spintronics are discussed in this report from the perspective of these two phenomena. GMR, research on which was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2007, refers to a large change in resistance of magnetic multilayers when the relative orientation of magnetic moments in their constituent ferromagnetic layers is altered by an applied magnetic field. The inverse effect, STT, in which a large electrical current density j can perturb the magnetic state of a multilayer, has also been predicted (Reference 3, 4) and observed in experiments on current-induced reversal and precession of magnetization (Reference 5-9) and magnetic domain wall motion (Reference 10, 11).\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSpintronics is a broad research field with (currently) three major subfields: (1) materials research that is attempting to create new materials that are both magnetic and semiconductors, (2) research on novel magnetotransport effects in ferromagnetic metals, and (3) research on techniques that can be used to manipulate individual electron spins. The first subfield is targeting magnetic semiconductors because devices based on such materials would be the easiest to integrate with the present semiconductor device technology and processing capabilities. However, despite extensive research, most semiconductor spintronic devices are still theoretical concepts awaiting experimental demonstrations. This report focuses on spintronics research in metallic systems within the scope of the second and third subfields. The second subfield has experienced an unprecedented period of new discovery over the past 20 years, including the discovery of GMR, and has already spawned major technological change in the information storage industry with the use of GMR sensors and read heads. The third subfield is vital for spintronic devices, as virtually any processing of information in such devices is associated with transport and manipulation of spins.\n\nNew and efficient methods for manipulating spins that stimulate active research programs in spintronics at a large number of academic institutions and a half-dozen industrial research labs around the world are highly desirable. The prize to be gained is active control and manipulation of spin distributions (magnetic moments) for new and improved functionality in electronic/spintronic devices. The confluence of intense basic science and industry interest in ferromagnetic metal spintronics has not occurred on this scale in physics in a long time.\n\nThe report is arranged as follows: Section 2 is dedicated to magnetotransport effects in magnetic systems where magnetic configuration can influence the system's transport properties. It discusses GMR in magnetic multilayers and related phenomena, highlights basic physical principles responsible for GMR, and describes technological applications of the effect. Section 3 focuses on the reverse connection between the system's magnetic configuration and its transport properties—the so-called STT effect. The physical origin and potential applications are discussed. Section 4 discusses other new directions in metallic spintronics, with a particular focus on spintronics with antiferromagnetic materials. Section 5 summarizes, with an eye to the future, the development of spintronic technologies and their aerospace applications.\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n2. Giant Magnetoresistance\n\n2.1 GMR BASICS\n\nThis section discusses the phenomenon of giant magnetoresistance (GMR). Excellent reviews of GMR are available elsewhere (Reference 12-22). The focus on physical concepts important for the sections to follow are discussed.\n\nGMR in magnetic multilayers refers to a dramatic reduction in the resistance of the multilayers when subjected to an external magnetic field. GMR's size is usually defined as the resistance change in magnetic field relative to its peak value. The effect can be distinguished from the ordinary magnetoresistance (MR) coming from the direct action of the magnetic field on the electron trajectories via the Lorentz force (Reference 23), and from the anisotropic MR, which comes from dependence of the resistivity on the relative orientation of magnetic moment to the current (Reference 24).\n\nTo prepare the magnetic multilayers, where several atomic layers of one (ferromagnetic) material alternate by layers of another (nonmagnetic) material (see Figure 1), a wide variety of deposition methods have been used, such as electrochemical deposition techniques (Reference 25, 26) and various vacuum deposition techniques (Reference 27, 28). The latter shares mainly between two methods using either sputter deposition or molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) systems. Sputter deposition involves knocking off the atoms of the material of interest from a target by particle bombardment, followed by the deposition of high-energetic atoms (~2-30 electronvolts [eV]) onto the substrate. A principal advantage of sputter deposition is the ease with which many different materials can be deposited at relatively high deposition rates. In contrast, deposition rates in MBE systems are usually much lower than for sputtering systems, but much lower energies (~0.1 eV) of the evaporated material make this technique favorable for growth of highly oriented single-crystalline films.\n\nThe original observation of GMR (Reference 1) was made on MBE grown iron-chromium (Fe/Cr) multilayers with nearly perfect crystallinity. Subsequently, by using sputtered samples that are grown much more rapidly than MBE samples, it was possible not only to reproduce these results but also to observe oscillations in the magnetoresistance as the thickness of the nonmagnetic spacer layers was varied (Reference 29). Subsequent\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 1. In a Magnetic Multilayer, Several Atomic Layers of Magnetic Material (shown in grey) Alternate With Layers of Nonmagnetic Material (shown in white). GMR occurs in one of two different geometries: (1) when the current flows in the plane (CIP geometry) of the layers or (2) when the current flows perpendicular (CPP geometry) to the layers."} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"studies (Reference 30) on sputtered cobalt-copper (Co/Cu) multilayers revealed magnetoresistances at room temperatures 3 to 4 times larger than those for iron-chromium and 13 times greater than those for the permalloy films that were used as magnetoresistive sensors in magnetic reading heads at that time. The much higher numbers observed in magnetic multilayers predetermined the fate of GMR in magnetic recording technology.\n\nThe current understanding is that GMR observed in magnetic multilayers arises from the dependence of the resistivity on their internal magnetic configuration and the role of the external magnetic field to change this configuration. Figure 2b illustrates GMR in the simple limit where the electron mean-free-path is much longer than the layer thicknesses. The electrical transport properties of the system are described in terms of the so-called two-current model (Reference 31), based on the suggestion by Mott (Reference 32) that, at temperatures lower than the Curie temperature, the spin-up and spin-down electrons will be almost independent and carry current in parallel. Electrons are much more strongly scattered by a magnetic layer if they and the local magnetization spin in opposite rather than the same direction (R > r). For simplicity, the figure is drawn with scattering only at interfaces; however, there is also scattering within the layers. At zero magnetic field, where the magnetizations of adjacent magnetic layers are aligned antiparallel—for example, because of exchange coupling between the layers (Reference 29)—the spin-down electrons are weakly scattered in layer F1 but strongly scattered in F2. In contrast, the spin-up electrons are weakly scattered in layer F2 but strongly scattered in F1. As a result, two channels are equivalent, leading to a total resistance in this \"antiferromagnetic\" configuration RAF = (R+r)/2 (see the corresponding resistance circuit in Figure 2c).\n\nWhen the magnetizations of the two F layers are set into parallel configuration by an applied magnetic field, the spin-up electrons are weakly scattered in both layers and form a low-resistivity channel, whereas the spin-down electrons are strongly scattered in all the layers and form a high-resistivity channel. The reversal of magnetic field just interchanges the roles of spin-up and spin-down channels. The current's shunting by the low-resistivity channel produces a low total resistance RF = 2Rr/(R+r) in this \"ferromagnetic\" configuration. The size of the GMR is defined as (RAF-RF)/RAF = (R-\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 2. (a) Resistance of a magnetic multilayer R versus magnetic field. (b) Origin of GMR in terms of spin-dependent electron scattering: F1 and F2 are ferromagnetic layers with a nonmagnetic layer in between. At zero magnetic field, the magnetizations in F1 and F2 are aligned antiparallel (center panel) and can be switched to parallel orientation by an applied field. (c) The equivalent resistance circuits corresponding to the three magnetic configurations shown in (b). See text for details.\n\nMagnetic Field"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"r)2/(R+r)2 ≤ 1. The other definition ΔR/R = (RAF-RF)/RF = (R-r)2/4Rr (unbounded from above) is also in use. Figure 2a shows a magnetoresistance curve typical for magnetic multilayers. The resistance is constant at a minimum value RF above a saturation field BS (parallel Fs) and rises to a maximum value RAF as the applied magnetic field B approaches zero (antiparallel Fs).\n\nGMR occurs in two different geometries (see Figure 1): namely when the current flows in the plane of the layers, or CIP geometry, or when current flows perpendicular to the layers, or CPP geometry. Most of experiments on GMR are carried out in the CIP geometry because measuring the fairly large resistance of a thin film is quite easy (film length is typically orders of magnitude larger than its thickness). Experiments in the CPP geometry are more difficult (Reference 33) and require special techniques for precision measurements of very small resistances ~10-7-10-8 Ω resulting from the \"short and wide\" geometry of a 1-mm2 \"wide\" and 1-μm \"long\" sample. In order to increase the resistances to easily observable values, microfabrication techniques can be used to reduce the sample's cross-sectional area (Reference 34-36). Finally, a simple and inexpensive point-contact technique (Reference 37) may also be suitable for this purpose. The samples with a reduced cross-sectional area will be of interest for spin-transfer-torque experiments presented in Section 3.\n\n2.2 GMR APPLICATIONS\n\nGMR is currently used in magnetic field sensors, including those in read heads for computer hard drives, in galvanic isolators, and in nonvolatile random access memory devices. Reading information stored on magnetic hard disk drives in computers was the first large-scale commercial application of GMR. The information is stored by magnetizing small regions (magnetic domains) of a magnetic recording disk in different directions. The stray magnetic fields from these domains are detected by a GMR sensing element called spin valve. The simplest type of spin valve consists of two ferromagnetic layers separated by a thin, nonmagnetic spacer. The spin-valve resistance is smallest when the magnetizations of the two ferromagnetic layers are parallel and largest when the magnetizations are antiparallel. The antiparallel alignment is achieved by making the two layers respond differently to an external magnetic field; an antiferromagnet in contact with one of the layers is used to effectively \"pin\" the magnetization in this layer through an effect called \"exchange bias.\" The exceptional responsiveness of spin valves to magnetic fields has enabled very high areal packing densities in hard drives.\n\nOther sensor applications using GMR elements include monitoring of a ferrous gear rotation in machinery operation (Reference 38) via detection of a changing magnetic flux when a gear tooth passes near the sensor, monitoring of electrical current via detection of the current-induced Oersted magnetic field, and transferring high-frequency signals between isolated circuits (Reference 39) via magnetic fields generated by a high-frequency inductor in one circuit and replicated in another circuit by a GMR sensor.\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3. Spin-Transfer-Torque\n\nThis section focuses on the spin-transfer-torque (STT) phenomenon, which refers to a novel method to control and manipulate magnetic moments in nanostructures by spin currents—one of the forefront and most exciting areas in magnetism research today.\n\n3.1 STT BASICS\n\nThe previous section showed that the magnetic state of a ferromagnet can affect its electrical transport properties; for instance, the relative orientation of the magnetic moments in magnetic multilayers underlies the phenomenon of GMR (Reference 1, 2). The inverse effect, in which a large electrical current density can perturb the magnetic state of a multilayer, has also been predicted (Reference 3, 4). Here the current transfers vector spin between the magnetic layers and induces precession and/or reversal of the layer magnetizations. Altering the magnetic state with spin currents is based on quantum mechanical exchange interaction and represents a novel method of magnetization control on the nanometer length scale and the picosecond time scale.\n\nThe first observation of such a spin-transfer phenomenon in magnetic multilayers was recorded by Tsoi et al. (Reference 5) (see Figure 3). In this experiment, the spin-transfer-induced excitations were produced by injecting high-density electrical currents into a Co/Cu magnetic multilayer through a mechanical point contact. Point contacts smaller than 10 nanometers (nm) are formed when a sharpened Cu metal wire (tip) is carefully brought into contact with the multilayer. The extremely small cross-sectional area of such a contact makes it possible to achieve current densities in excess of 10^12 A/m2. Because of its extremely small size (<10 nm), point contact is a very efficient probe of electrical transport properties in extremely small sample volumes inaccessible with other techniques (for example, electron-beam-lithography patterning). The latter qualifies point contact as the smallest probe of STT today.\n\nThe STT phenomenon currently attracts considerable attention because it combines poorly understood fundamental science questions with the promise of applications in a broad range of technologies. In high-speed, high-density magnetic recording technology, for instance, SST could replace the Oersted field currently used for writing magnetic bits in storage media (for example, in magnetic random access memory [MRAM]). This may lead to a smaller and faster magnetic memory. Another possible application is based on the spin-transfer-induced precession of magnetization, which\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 3. Differential Resistance dV/dI of a Mechanical Point Contact as a Function of Current for a Series of Magnetic Fields. The peak in dV/dI indicates the onset of SST excitations. The inset shows that the threshold current at the peak in dV/dI increases linearly with the applied field. (Reference 5)"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"converts a direct current (dc) voltage input into an alternating current (ac) voltage output. The frequency of such a precession can be tuned from a few gigahertz (GHz) to > 100 GHz by changing the applied magnetic field and/or dc current, effectively resulting in a current-controlled oscillator for use in practical microwave circuits.\n\nSince its prediction in 1996, the STT effect has been observed in a number of experiments, including those with mechanical (Reference 5, 9, 40) and lithographic point contacts (Reference 6, 41), manganite junctions (Reference 7), electrochemically grown nanowires (Reference 8), lithographically defined nanopillars (Reference 42, 43), tunnel junctions (Reference 44), and semiconductor structures (Reference 45). These different methods all share one characteristic feature: they make it possible to attain extremely high current densities (>10^12 A/m2 for metallic structures) needed to produce sufficiently large spin-transfer torques (Reference 3, 4). This is achieved by forcing the electrical current to flow through a very small constriction. The latter can be a mechanical point contact, a lithographically defined point contact or nanopillar, or a nanowire, as illustrated in Figure 4. In all cases, the maximum current density jmax = I/A is defined by the current I flowing through the device and the minimum cross-sectional area A of the current path. For typical mechanical point contacts, I ~1 mA and A ~100 nm2 gives jmax ~10^13 A/m2. In lithographically defined structures, both I and A are typically larger, I ~10 mA and A ~10000 nm2, that gives jmax ~10^12 A/m2.\n\nmechanical point contacts | lithographical point contacts | manganite trilayer junctions | electrodeposited nanowires | lithographical pillar devices\n\nFigure 4. Device Schematics for STT Experiments. All experiments share one common feature: a small constriction for electrical current—that is, point contact, junction, nanowire, or nanopillar. Black (grey) indicates insulator; dark blue indicates magnetic material.\n\nThe basic physical mechanism underlying STT relies on conservation of angular momentum. Consider a pedagogically simple case where a conduction electron crosses an interface between a nonmagnetic metal (N) and a ferromagnet (F). We assume the initial state of the electron's spin S in N is noncollinear to the F's magnetization M. Once into F, S is subject to an exchange torque caused by M that tends to reorient S. Therewith, according to Newton's Third Law, there should also exist a reaction torque that acts on M – STT torque. Deep into F, S is aligned with M, and the change in angular momentum that occurs from its reorientation has been transferred to M. Hence the phenomenon's name: spin-transfer torque. Of course, the torque applied to M by a single-spin S is negligibly small owing to S being negligibly small compared with M. For high current density crossing the N/F interface, however, the number of such spins can be very large and the resulting effective S might become comparable to M. This highlights the need for high current densities to observe the STT phenomenon.\n\nA typical experiment on current-driven excitation of a ferromagnet usually involves two single-domain thin-film magnets separated by a nonmagnetic spacer. Here one magnet\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(Fa) is \"hard\" and used to polarize the current, while the spacer (N) is thin enough for the polarized current to get through and excite the second \"free\" magnet (Fb). This Fa/N/Fb trilayer structure is similar to a GMR spin valve. The GMR effect can thus be used to monitor the orientation of Fb relative to Fa – GMR varies linearly with cosθ, where θ is angle between magnetic moments of Fa and Fb, and a phenomenological description (Reference 46) gives the trilayer resistance R(θ) = RF + (RAF - RF) (1 - cosθ)/2. When current flows across Fa/N/Fb, the current-induced torques act on both Fa and Fb layers (Reference 3, 47). This is schematically illustrated in Figure 5. This qualitative picture of STT assumes both Fa and Fb layers are perfect spin filters, so that electron spins aligned with the magnetic moment of, for example, Fa layer are completely transmitted through the layer, while spins aligned antiparallel to the layer moment are completely reflected. When electron current crosses the Fb/N/Fa trilayer from right to left (Figure 5a), electrons transmitted through Fa will be polarized along Fa. If spin-diffusion length in N is long enough, this spin-polarized current will reach Fb and exert a torque on Fb in a direction so as to align Fb with Fa. Repeating the argument for Fb, we find that electrons reflected from Fb will be polarized antiparallel to Fb and, hence, in turn exert a torque on Fa trying to align Fa antiparallel with Fb. The net result is a pinwheel-type motion with both Fa and Fb rotating in the same direction (clockwise in Figure 5a), as described previously by Slonczewski (Reference 3). When the current crosses the trilayer from left to right, the directions of the torques are reversed (Figure 5b)—the torque on Fa is trying to align Fa parallel with Fb, while the torque on Fb is trying to align Fb antiparallel with Fa.\n\nFigure 5. Qualitative Picture of STT. (a) For left-going electrons magnetic moments (thin arrows) of both Fa and Fb are rotated clockwise. (b) For right-going electrons the directions of the torques (thick arrows) on Fa and Fb are reversed. (Reference 47)\n\nThe above discussion implies the asymmetry of STT with respect to current direction as follows. Let's fix the orientation of the polarizer Fa; in experiments this is usually accomplished by making Fa very thick (compared with Fb) or by pinning its orientation with an adjacent antiferromagnetic layer via the phenomenon of exchange bias. If initially Fb is almost parallel with Fa, the left-going electrons will stabilize this parallel alignment, and no STT excitation is present. When current bias is reversed, the torque on Fb will try to rotate Fb away from Fa and will result in STT excitation of the system. This asymmetry with respect to current polarity is one of the main features of STT in experiments; see, for instance, Figure 5, where STT excitations are present only at negative bias."} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"3.2 STT EXPERIMENTS\n\nSection 3.1 introduced the physics of STT in magnetic nanosystems. We have seen that a high-density electrical current can result in torques on magnetic elements of the system. These torques may be used to control and manipulate the system's magnetic state. However, the resulting behavior of the system can differ significantly from case to case, depending on particular conditions of observation. For instance, in modest external magnetic fields, magnetization of a small element can be repeatedly reversed between two stable configurations, while at higher fields, where the reversal is energetically unfavorable, the moment can be set into precession at a very high frequency. To understand details of what happens with a magnetic moment S in a particular situation, one can use Newton's Second Law.\n\nFor S this would be the Landau–Lifshitz-Gilbert equation, where the rate of change of S is set equal to the net torque acting on S:\n\nEquation 1: dS/dt = γ S×Beff − α/|S| S×dS/dt + η I μB/e S×(S* ×S)\n\nHere the first term on the right is the torque on a magnetic moment S in an effective magnetic field Beff, (including applied, demagnetizing, anisotropy, and other fields), with γ the gyromagnetic ratio; the second term is a phenomenological damping term introduced by Gilbert, with α the Gilbert damping parameter; the third term is the SST where small s and s* are unit vectors along S and the polarizer S*, I is the current, μB is the Bohr magneton, e is the electron charge, and η is the spin-polarization factor.\n\nThe diagram in Figure 6 shows the directions of the three torques from Equation 1. Note that, depending on the polarity of applied current, the STT torque can be either in the same or opposite direction as the damping torque. In the former case, STT will effectively result in an increased damping for any magnitude of the applied current and suppress any possible excitations of S from its equilibrium state along Beff. If, however, the STT torque is opposite to the damping, we can distinguish two situations. For currents below a critical current, where STT is small compared with damping, S spirals toward Beff (red trajectory in Figure 6). For\n\nFigure 6. Torques on a Magnetic Moment in a Magnetic Field and Subject to an Electrical Current"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"currents larger than the critical current, STT exceeds the damping torque and causes S to spiral away from Beff, with a steadily increasing precession angle. The ultimate result can be either stable steady-state precession of S around Beff (black trajectory in Figure 6) or magnetic reversal of S into a state antiparallel to Beff, depending on the angular dependence of STT and damping torques.\n\nAlmost all experimental observations of STT rely on the GMR phenomenon to detect the current-induced reorientation of magnetic moments in nanodevices. Typical measurements include (1) measuring static device resistance R=V/I as a function of applied dc bias current I in an applied magnetic field B and (2) measuring R versus B at a constant I. Figure 3 shows how the differential resistance dV/dI of a Cu point contact to Co/Cu magnetic multilayer varies with the bias voltage V (equivalent to I) applied across the contact. Here the multilayer magnetic moments are saturated out of the plane of the layers by a sufficiently large external magnetic field (B ≥ 2T). The onset of STT-driven magnetic precession is revealed by a peak in differential resistance of the contact. The peak in dV/dI indicates the transition into precession is a reversible process, and in a small range of currents, one can continuously increase or decrease the angle of precession. However, other scenarios are also possible—for example, fast transitions between static and steady-state precession states with current-dependent dwell time.\n\nIf the applied magnetic field is small, the magnetic system can have more than one low-energy state. In the simple case of a magnetic element with uniaxial anisotropy, STT can trigger a transition between two static states that are energetically favorable. An example of such behavior is shown in Figure 7. Here the current is driven across a trilayer Py20nm/Cu12nm/Py4.5nm spin-valve structure patterned by electron beam lithography into a nanopillar with a 40 x 120 nm2 cross-sectional area (Reference 48). The differential resistance of the nanopillar exhibits a hysteresis as a function of an applied bias current as the magnetization of the thin (free) permalloy (Py) layer is aligned parallel and antiparallel to the thick (hard) Py layer by the current.\n\nFigure 7. Spin-torque-driven magnetic switching for a Py20nm/Cu12nm/Py4.5nm spin valve with a 40x120-nm2 cross-sectional area, as the magnetization of the thin (free) magnetic layer is aligned parallel and antiparallel to the thicker magnetic layer by an applied current. (Reference 48)\n\nThe two examples presented above (Figures 3 and 7) demonstrate how simple dc resistance measurements can be used for STT observation. Here the measured resistance of a device provides indirect information about the relative orientation of magnetic elements in the device. However, measured critical currents highlighted by sharp variations in the resistance remain the only experimental information that can be used to quantitatively compare theory and experiment. Moreover, the dc measurements in Figure 3 provide no information about fast evolution of magnetization in the device"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"associated with high-frequency precession of magnetic moments. High-frequency techniques must be employed to provide such capabilities, as discussed next.\n\nThe first experiment providing unequivocal evidence that a dc electrical current can result in high-frequency (tens of GHz) precession of magnetic moments was reported by Tsoi et al. in (Reference 9). Here an STT device—point contact—was placed in a microwave cavity of a high-frequency, high-field electron spin resonance (ESR) spectrometer. This arrangement allowed performing dc transport experiments, such as those described above, while the contact was irradiated with high-frequency microwaves. When the frequency of external microwaves matched the precession frequency excited by the dc current, an additional (rectified) voltage was detected across the contact. By detecting this voltage while varying the external frequency, field, and applied current, Tsoi et al. (Reference 9) were able to map the frequency excited by dc current as a function of applied field and current. In a more recent experiment, Rippard et al. (Reference 49) fed microwaves to a point contact via electrical leads and reported observation of a similar dc response.\n\nFinally, the high-frequency dynamics of the free-layer magnetization can be measured directly by detecting high-frequency oscillations in voltage across a spin valve under dc current. Here the hard magnetic layer is fixed, while the free layer exhibits a high-frequency precession relative to the hard layer. GMR results in a high-frequency modulation of the spin-valve resistance, which in turn leads to a high-frequency component of the voltage across the spin valve traversed by a dc current. This voltage can be directly probed with a high-frequency spectrum analyzer, as was recently done by Kiselev et al. (Reference 50) and by Rippard et al. (Reference 41). Moreover the voltage oscillations owing to spin-torque-driven magnetic precession can be directly measured in time domain using a sampling oscilloscope (Reference 51), as illustrated in Figure 8.\n\nFigure 8. Oscillatory Voltage Generated by Precessional Motion of the Free Magnet in IrMn8nm/NiFe4nm/Cu8nm/NiFe4nm Nanopillar, in Response to a 335-mV dc Voltage Step Applied to the Device at B = 630 Oersteds (Reference 51)\n\nThe above examples illustrate how broadband instrumentation for measuring voltage in GMR devices may provide important and often unique information about high-frequency magnetic dynamics driven by spin-transfer torques. However, the detailed understanding of STT is still the subject of debate and requires new experimental techniques capable of probing magnetization dynamics on nanometer length scales and sub-nanosecond time scales. In principle, this can be accomplished by the use of synchrotron x-rays that were recently shown (Reference 52) to probe interfacial phenomena and directly image the time-resolved response of magnetic nanostructures to sub-nanosecond magnetic field pulses (Oersted switching) and spin-polarized current"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"pulses (STT switching). Figure 9 shows scanning transmission x-ray microscopy (Reference 53) images of in-plane components of magnetization M – Mx in panel (a) and My in panel (b)—in the free CoFe layer (indicated by blue ellipse) of a 100x150-nm2 magnetic nanopillar. The images were obtained by scanning a focused (diameter ~ 30 nm) circularly polarized x-ray beam across the CoFe layer, with the photon energy tuned to the characteristic Co L3 resonance to provide magnetic contrast through the x-ray magnetic circular dichroism effect (Reference 54), and by monitoring transmission of the x-rays as a function of the position x, y with a fast avalanche detector. The M-vector field of the free layer can be reconstructed from the measured Mx and My components as illustrated in Figure 9c, and the ultrafast x-ray microscopy technique provided a means to monitor this field as a function of time with ~100-picosond resolution. The spatial resolution of the technique is set by the spot size of the x-ray beam (~30 nm) and currently limits its application to spintronic devices >100 nm in size (Reference 52). Potentially, however, technical development of the ultrafast x-ray microscopy may lead to an ultimate technique for STT studies that can probe the M-vector field on the nanometer length scale with picosecond time resolution.\n\nFigure 9. Scanning transmission x-ray microscopy images of Mx (a) and My (b) components of magnetization M combine into the vector field (c), which represents the direction of M in the plane of the CoFe free layer. (Reference 52)\n\n3.3 STT APPLICATIONS\n\nThe STT method to manipulate magnetic moments by an electrical current offers unprecedented spatial and temporal control of spin distributions and attracts considerable attention because of its potential application in a broad range of technologies. The perspective of STT for GHz communication applications and in magnetic recording technology is discussed.\n\nThe STT application in high-frequency technologies is based on the spin-transfer-induced precession of spins. The previous section discussed how precession of magnetization in GMR devices can convert a dc current input into an ac voltage output. The frequency of this output can be tuned from a few GHz to > 100 GHz by changing the applied magnetic field and/or the dc current, effectively resulting in a current-controlled oscillator for use in practical microwave circuits. Hence, the STT effect in"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY GMR structures provides a means to engineer a nanoscale high-frequency oscillator powered and tuned by dc current. Such an oscillator could have frequency characteristics spanning more than 100 GHz and perhaps into terahertz range. Linewidths as narrow as 2 megahertz were demonstrated (Reference 55), leading to quality factors over 18,000. Potential applications for such high-frequency sources include integrated transceivers for wireless and wired applications, as well as wireless and wired chip-to-chip and on-chip communications. For the latter, logic circuits with a spin wave bus were proposed (Reference 56, 57) as an interface between electronic circuits and integrated spintronics circuits. Here spin waves are used for information transmission and processing, and the STT effect can provide a means for efficient spin-wave generation on the nanoscale. In high-speed, high-density magnetic recording technology, STT could replace the Oersted field currently used for writing magnetic bits in storage media (for example, magnetic random access memory [MRAM]), thus leading to smaller and faster magnetic memory. Figure 10a schematically shows a bit cell of a conventional MRAM. The bit state is programmed to a \"1\" or \"0\" by switching between the parallel and antiparallel states of a GMR-like storage element. The first-generation MRAM utilizes magnetic tunnel junctions (MTJ) as storage elements because of their higher magnetoresistance ratios and impedance-matching constraints. However in scaling MRAM to small dimensions, the same constraints are expected to drive a transition from MTJs to fully metallic spin-valve storage elements. The switching between \"1\" and \"0\" states (writing) relies on magnetic reversal of the MTJ's free layer, achieved by passing electrical currents down the \"bit\" and \"write\" lines, that generates a sufficiently strong magnetic field at their intersection (that is, for a given MTJ). However, as the spatial decay of this Oersted field is rather slow (~1/r2), it may affect neighboring cells. This makes scaling of MRAM to small dimensions questionable. Figure 10. Conventional MRAM Cell (a) Versus STT MRAM Cell (b) (Reference 58) STT MRAM (see Figure 10b) removes the constraints on scalability. Here the switching of the free layer magnetic moment is achieved by STT switching when a high-density electrical current is driven directly through the storage element (MTJ or spin valve). This writing is thus performed at high current levels, while the reading (measuring the resistance of the element) is done at low currents. Since STT MRAM eliminates the need for \"write\" and \"bypass\" lines, a more compact memory can be realized. 11 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 3.4 STT-DRIVEN MOTION OF MAGNETIC DOMAIN WALLS Yet another manifestation of STT in metallic ferromagnets is a motion of magnetic domain walls traversed by an electrical current. The original prediction of the effect dates back to 1978, when Luc Berger predicted that a spin-polarized current should apply a torque to a magnetic domain wall (Reference 59). In a series of remarkable but only recently appreciated works, Berger set the theoretical (Reference 59-62) and experimental (Reference 63-65) groundwork for current-induced domain wall motion (CIDWM), which is now documented in materials ranging from magnetic semiconductors (Reference 66) to perpendicular-anisotropy superlattices (Reference 67). But the most widely studied materials by far have been metallic ferromagnets (Reference 10, 11, 68-82), including Py (Ni81Fe19), CoFe, and Co, because of their decades-long ubiquity in magnetic storage technology. The CIDWM effect can be qualitatively understood on the basis of the following arguments. Consider an electrical current flowing between two magnetic domains (A and B) with opposite magnetizations and, thus, traversing a 180-degree magnetic domain wall. The situation is similar to that of a single N/F interface discussed in Section 3.1. While in domain A, spins of conduction electrons are preferentially aligned with the magnetic moment of A. Once into domain B, the spins reverse to align with the moment of B. In reversing the electron spins, magnetic moments in the domain wall experience a torque associated with the change in angular momentum that occurs from the rotation of electrons spins. This spin-transfer torque can move the domain wall in the direction of the electron flow. Moving magnetic domain walls with current was proposed as the basis for a new type of magnetic memory called \"racetrack\" (Reference 83). In contrast to today's hard disk drives (HDD), which rely on spinning motion of a disk to move their magnetic regions where the data is stored past a read head, the racetrack memory exploits the idea of moving magnetically stored data electronically. Figure 11 illustrates the concept of the racetrack. The racetrack is a ferromagnetic nanowire, with data encoded as a pattern of magnetic domains along the wire. Current pulses can move the entire pattern along the wire. The two cartoons of Figure 11a show the domain wall patterns in the racetrack before and after they have moved past read and write elements. Reading is achieved by measuring the resistance of a tunnel junction element connected to the racetrack (Figure 11b); writing (Figure 11c), by applying local magnetic fields—for example, the fringing fields of a domain wall moved in another nanowire. If U-shaped nanowires are placed normal to the plane of a chip and arranged into high-density arrays of racetracks (Figure 11d), the resulting storage density can be higher than that in solid-state memory devices like flash RAM and Figure 11. Racetrack Memory Concept. (Reference 83) A B Reading C Writing D Racetrack storage array Vertical racetrack 12 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY similar to conventional HDDs; but the racetrack memory would have much higher read/write performance than HDD. 4. Antiferromagnetic Metal Spintronics Recently, MacDonald and coworkers (Reference 84) predicted that effects similar to GMR and STT observed with ferromagnets ought to occur in multilayer systems where the ferromagnetic (F) components are replaced by antiferromagnets (AFM). First, they predicted that the resistance of an AFM spin valve—where two AFM layers are separated by an N spacer—could depend on the relative orientations of the magnetic moments in the two AFM layers (antiferromagnetic GMR = AGMR). Second, they predicted that injecting a sufficiently strong current density into an AFM should affect its magnetic state via current-induced spin torque. These new AFM effects could lead to new all-AFM spintronics where AFMs are used in place of Fs. Replacing F metals with AFM metals in a spintronic device has several advantages. While AGMR of an AFM spin valve was predicted (Reference 84) to be similar in magnitude to GMR in standard F spin valves, the critical current needed to alter the magnetic order in AFMs can be smaller than for Fs, partly because spin torques can act through the entire AFM volume. The estimate of the necessary current density j ~ 109 A/m2 (Reference 84) was less than the typical j ~ 1011 A/m2 needed to reverse the magnetic order in F/N/F multilayers (Reference 5-9, 40-43, 48-51). Finally, using AFM metals in spintronic devices in place of F metals would eliminate unwanted effects of shape anisotropy on the magnetic stability of small elements, thus potentially offering better control of the magnetic state in nanoscale systems and easing fabrication requirements. Following the original predictions of MacDonald and coworkers (Reference 84), Xu et al. (Reference 85) calculated the AGMR for a simple AFM/N/AFM/N = FeMn/Cu/FeMn/Cu multilayer, and Gomonay and Loktev (Reference 86) provided additional theoretical evidence that polarized current can destabilize the equilibrium state of an AFM. Note, however, that all calculations to date are for perfect samples and depend on quantum coherence. It is known that disorder can reduce the predicted effects. Experiments are thus crucial to see if any such effects are visible in real samples. 4.1 ANTIFERROMAGNETIC GMR To the author's knowledge, the only experimental study searching for AGMR was performed by Wei et al. (Reference 87). They have measured current-in-plane (CIP) and current-perpendicular-to-plane (CPP) magnetoresistances (MR) of magnetic multilayers containing two antiferromagnetic layers separated by a nonmagnetic layer. Such an antiferromagnetic spin valve, AFM/N/AFM, was predicted (Reference 84) to exhibit AGMR similar to GMR seen in ferromagnetic spin valves, F/N/F, containing two ferromagnetic layers separated by a nonmagnetic layer. Note, however, that calculations (Reference 84) assumed ballistic transport in samples with perfect layers and interfaces where AGMR is a consequence of quantum interference effects. Thus, any disorder that produces diffusive scattering and weakens quantum interference will weaken any such AGMR. 13 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY In F/N/F trilayers, the relative orientation of the magnetizations of the two Fs is controlled by an externally applied magnetic field B. To achieve well-defined antiparallel and parallel states of the two F layers, the moment of one F is often \"pinned,\" via exchange coupling (exchange bias) to an adjacent AFM layer (Reference 88, 89), leaving the moment of the other free to reverse in much smaller B. In a simple AFM/N/AFM sample, just applying a field B is not expected to be efficient because of the weak effect of external fields on magnetic moments in AFMs. To achieve better control of the AFMs, AFM/N/AFM spin valves can be sandwiched between two F layers to give F/AFM/N/AFM/F, with the two AFM layers differently exchange-coupled to their respective F neighbors. Applying a magnetic field to change the magnetic order of the F layers should then also affect the order of the AFM layers. In addition to AFM/N/AFM and F/AFM/N/AFM/F multilayers, Wei et al. (Reference 87) have studied a variety of structures—F/AFM/N/AFM, AFM/F/N/AFM, F/AFM, and single F and AFM layers—to isolate the MR observations of interest from potential spurious effects. For small applied currents, neither standard current-in-plane (CIP) MR measurements on extended multilayer films nor CPP MR measurements with point contacts showed any MRs for samples of all types. For larger applied currents, small positive CPP MRs (resistance is highest at saturation) were sometimes observed in samples with at least one F layer, while no MR was seen in samples with no Fs. These observations suggest sputtered AFM/N/AFM multilayers do not show AGMR, possibly owing to mostly diffusive transport in such imperfect films. Small MRs observed at higher currents in films with F layers may be associated with the suppression at high currents of spin accumulation induced within and around Fs (Reference 90). Further studies on high-quality films are still needed to verify any possible existence of AGMR in such structures. 4.2 ANTIFERROMAGNETIC STT Stimulated by the theoretical studies in (Reference 84-86), four experimental searches for effects of STT on AFMs have been published so far (Reference 91-94), all working with exchange-biased spin-valves (EBSVs) of the form AFM/F1/N/F2. Here the AFM lies outside the \"active\" GMR region of the two F layers and serves mainly to \"pin\" the magnetization of the adjacent F2 layer to a higher reversing (switching) field than that of the \"free\" F1 layer, leaving the F1 layer free to rotate at a lower field. The pinning is produced either by heating the sample to above the blocking temperature of the AFM, applying a magnetic field, and then cooling to room temperature with the field on or by applying a magnetic field during sample growth. Wei et al. (Reference 91) used a point contact to inject a high dc current density j ~ 1012 A/m2 approximately CPP into an EBSV film. Urazhdin and Anthony (Reference 92) sent a dc CPP current density j ~ 5 x 1011 A/m2 into electron-beam-lithography-fabricated nanopillar EBSVs. Tang et al. (Reference 93) sent a dc current-in-plane (CIP) current density ~ 1010 A/m2 into an EBSV film with a metallic AFM. Dai et al. (Reference 94) sent an ac CIP current density j ~ 109 A/m2 into an EBSV film with an insulating AFM. In all of the studies (Reference 91-94), it was found that a sufficiently high bias current can influence the magnetic reversal of the \"pinned\" F1 layer. As the pinning (exchange bias) is known to be associated with interfacial AFM moments (Reference 88, 89), this observation can be taken as evidence of effects of the current on the AFM predicted in (Reference 84-86), given that other spurious effects (for example, Joule heating) can be ruled out. 14 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY The original observation of the effect was reported by Wei et al. (Reference 91), who measured magnetoresistance of a point contact to EBSV film at room temperature (~295K) with negative current flowing from the contact tip into the film. The sample geometry is shown in Figure 12a. A point contact is used to inject a dc current into a sputtered N/F1/N/F2/AFM/N = Cu(50 or 100nm)/CoFe(3 or 10nm)/Cu(10nm)/CoFe(3 or 10nm)/FeMn (3 or 8nm)/Au(5nm) multilayer (or inverted versions thereof—that is, Cu/FeMn/CoFe/Cu/CoFe/Au). The sample is heated to ~450K (above the blocking temperature of FeMn) and then cooled in a magnetic field of 180 Oersteds to exchange-bias the \"pinned\" layer F2 to a higher magnetic field than needed to reverse the \"free\" layer F2. The top layer is covered by a 5-nm-thick layer of Au to protect it from atmospheric contamination. The magnetic field H is applied in the plane of the layers and along the direction of exchange bias. Magnetic coupling between the two F layers should be negligible, because the N layer is thick enough (10 nm) to eliminate exchange coupling, and the two F layers are wide enough (~ mm) to minimize dipolar coupling. The bottom N layer is Cu, made thick enough (50 or 100 nm) to approximate an equipotential, thereby generating an approximately CPP current flow through the F1/N/F2/AFM EBSV. Figure 12. (a) Schematic of point contact to sample geometry. Omitted is a 5-nm-thick protective Au capping layer between the point contact and the multilayer. The bottom N layer is also much thicker than shown to help produce a nearly CPP current. (b) R (vertical scale) versus applied magnetic field B for a series of currents I. The solid black curves are hysteresis curves starting from large positive B and finishing at large negative B. The grey curves start at large negative B and finish at positive B. In the dark curves, the \"free\" layer, F1, switches at ~ -5 mT and the pinned layer, F2, switches at fields ranging from below -40 mT (large positive I) to about -60 mT (large negative I). (c-e) Grey-scale plots of R versus B for different values of I. White is maximum R (antiparallel state) and black is minimum R (parallel state). Lines are linear fits to the data at 30 percent (dashed white), 50 percent (solid white) and 70 percent (dashed black) of maximum R. Sample (c) is the sample of (b), with the AFM layer on the bottom (furthest from the point contact). Sample (d) is similar to (c), except inverted, so that the AFM layer is on top (closest to the point contact). Sample (e) differs from (b) only in that it has two equally thick (8-nm) F layers. (Reference 91) Figure 12b shows magnetoresistance curves for a series of currents I applied to a point contact with resistance R = 0.92 Ω. The dark curves show sweeps from positive to negative field, and the lighter curves show sweeps back down from negative to positive field. For this contact, I = 30 mA corresponds to j ~ 2 x 108 A/cm2. For dark curves, a large positive field +B along the pinning direction causes the moments of both the \"free\" and \"pinned\" F layers to point along +B, producing the minimum resistance RP in this parallel orientation of the two Fs. Reducing the magnitude of B, the \"free\" F2 layer reverses at a small-magnitude negative B, giving the maximum resistance RAP in antiparallel configuration. Finally, a larger magnitude negative B breaks the exchange-bias pinning of the \"pinned\" F1 layer, and its moment rotates to along -B, returning the 15 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nsample to Rp. For lighter curves of back-sweeps (Figure 12b), the measured resistance follows these changes in reverse order.\n\nFocusing on the dark curves, we see that the switching field of the free layer F1 is essentially independent of the magnitude of I and shows little broadening. In contrast, the switching field of the pinned layer F2 broadens significantly as the magnitude of I increases, and the midpoint of the switching also shifts with I, increasing for - I and decreasing for + I. Similar behaviors are seen also in the lighter curves. Opposite shifts for + I and - I indicate these shifts cannot be due to Joule heating, which should cause shifts in the same direction for both directions of I. But Joule heating might contribute to the broadening of the switching transitions. The shifts of the dark curves are specified more clearly in Figure 12c, which shows grey-scale plots of the heights of the curves in Figure 12b, with white representing the antiparallel state of maximum resistance, and black the parallel state of minimum resistance. Data for three representative contacts (out of 29) on three different samples show that the behavior of interest is not limited to a single sample or contact, and that similar results are generally obtained for straight line fits to 30 percent (white dashed lines), 50 percent (solid white lines), and 70 percent (solid black lines) of the maximum change in R. The sample in Figure 12d is a contact with R = 1.6 Ω to an inverted version of the sample in Figures 12b and c, so that the \"directions\" of currents are reversed. The sample in Figure 12e has equal thickness F1 = F2 = 3-nm layers. All three samples show the same features—that is, electrons passing through F2 into the AFM layer enhance pinning, and electrons passing through the AFM layer into F2 reduce it. Similar to the case of AFM=CoFe, a negative current density ~10^12 A/m2 injected through the F=CoFe into an AFM=IrMn/CoFe interface (Reference 95, 96) was found to increase the exchange bias, while a positive current decreased it.\n\nWei et al. (Reference 91) proposed the following qualitative explanation for these asymmetric changes in switching (exchange bias) field with current. Near the switching field, the metastability of F2's opposite to field orientation is due almost entirely to exchange interactions with uncompensated moments in the surface layer of the antiferromagnet. Some of these spins are pinned, thereby inducing an energy barrier for ferromagnetic layer spin reversal (Reference 88, 89). Electrons flowing from F2 into AFM induce torques on moments in the AFM matrix, altering its magnetic configuration (Reference 84). These STT torques tend to favor parallel alignment of moments at the F2/AFM interface and will therefore tend to increase the exchange bias field. Electrons flowing in the opposite direction will tend to have the opposite effect. The observed variations in exchange bias mediated by an electrical current thus can be taken as good evidence of the STT effect in AFM. However, such transport measurements do not distinguish between effects of the current on the bulk AFM and those on interfacial AFM moments, and more elaborate techniques are needed to obtain a detailed understanding of the phenomenon.\n\n5. Summary and Conclusions\n\nThe semiconductor industry has distinguished itself by a long-term trend known as Moore's law (Reference 97) that foresees an exponential increase in transistor density on a chip, doubling approximately every 2 years. Continuing at this pace, the transistor density will reach ~ 10^13 cm-2 by 2035, which at clock speeds of ~10 GHz would result in ~40 MW/cm2 of power dissipated on a chip. Unless the energy dissipation from\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ntransistor switching can be reduced dramatically, the thermal load associated with 40 MW/cm2 will exceed that in a rocket nozzle. The failure of thermal management on a chip might end the continued progress of the semiconductor industry well before 2035. The International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors (http://www.itrs.net) has termed this imminent collapse the \"Red Brick Wall,\" where \"Red\" indicates no \"known manufacturable solutions\" (of reasonable confidence) exist for continued scaling in some aspect of the semiconductor technology.\n\nThe scenario above motivates the search for signal-processing devices that dissipate very little energy when they switch. The emerging spintronic technology might offer such devices where information is carried by spin—in contrast to CMOS transistors, where it is carried by charge—since spin has an inherent advantage over charge when it comes to energy dissipation. Therefore, if a reliable way can be found to control and manipulate spins, spintronic devices could offer higher data processing speeds, lower electricity consumption, and many other advantages over conventional chips, perhaps including the ability to carry out radically new quantum computations.\n\nA spintronic device calls for efficient methods to generate, conduct, process, and detect spin-encoded signals. We have reviewed the physics and emerging applications of two principal spintronic phenomena—giant magnetoresistance and spin-transfer-torque—that provide means to detect (GMR) and manipulate (STT) the spin signals. GMR has already spawned major technological change in the information storage industry with the usage of GMR sensors and read heads and, along with tunneling magnetoresistance (TMR), is expected to continue to dominate the detection of spin-encoded signals. STT is a more recent development in spintronics that provides an efficient means of controlling and manipulating spin distributions on the nanometer length scale and the picosecond-time scale, thus positioning STT as the method of choice for fast processing of spin signals in nanodevices.\n\nWhat is the future of spintronic applications? A number of new spintronic devices based on GMR and STT have been proposed. These include high-frequency (GHz) oscillators, sources, and detectors, as well as magnetic field sensors—for example, in nonvolatile memories such as racetrack and STT magnetic random access memory (STT-MRAM). However, much fundamental work remains to be done before we see commercial applications of these devices. For the memory industry, development of these spintronic applications may lead to a universal memory that would combine cost benefits of DRAM, speed of SRAM, and nonvolatility of flash RAM. Potentially all logic operations on a chip could be carried out by manipulating spins in metallic systems instead of manipulating charges in semiconductor transistors, as in conventional microchips. Moreover, such operations could be combined on a chip with a universal memory. This would result in a new scalable and radiation-resistant electronics, computers, and so forth. The radiation resistance would be of particular interest for aerospace applications because the radiation in space is known to severely damage conventional electronics by building up a destructive charge in transistors. Long space trips that would expose onboard electronics to years of radiation would benefit from the radiation resistance and reduced power consumption (for example, like a nonvolatile memory that can retain the stored information even when not powered) of metallic spintronic devices. More generally, the impact of reduced power consumption in electronic devices is hard to overestimate, as we rely on such devices in almost every aspect of our everyday lives.\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFinally, metallic spintronics and its applications discussed in this report are all based on already well-established physical phenomena such as GMR and STT. As the spintronics field is still in a relative state of infancy, new and more exciting phenomena are likely to be uncovered in the future.\n\n6. References\n\n(1) Baibich, M. N., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2472 (1988).\n\n(2) Binasch, G., et al., Phys. Rev. B 39, 4828 (1989).\n\n(3) Slonczewski, J. C., J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 159, L1 (1996).\n\n(4) Berger, L., J. Appl. Phys. 81, 4880 (1997).\n\n(5) Tsoi, M., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4281 (1998).\n\n(6) Myers, E. B., et al., Science 285, 867 (1999).\n\n(7) Sun, J. Z., J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 202, 157 (1999).\n\n(8) Wegrowe, J.-E., et al., Europhys. Lett. 45, 626 (1999).\n\n(9) Tsoi, M., et al., Nature 406, 46 (2000).\n\n(10) Beach, G. S. D., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 057203 (2006).\n\n(11) Beach, G. S. D., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 067201 (2009).\n\n(12) Fert, A., Bruno, P., in Ultrathin Magnetic structures II: An Introduction to the Electronic, Magnetic and Structural Properties, ed. by J.A.C. Bland and B. Heinrich (Berlin: Springer, 1994), p.82.\n\n(13) Levy, P. M., in Solid State Physics, ed. by H. Ehrenreich and D. Turnbull, vol. 47 (Boston, London: Acad. Press, 1994), p.367.\n\n(14) Dieny, B., J. Magn. Mag. Mat. 136, 335 (1994).\n\n(15) Gijs, M. A.M., Bauer, G. E. W., Adv. Phys. 46, 285 (1997).\n\n(16) Ansermet, J.-Ph., J. Phys.: Cond. Mat. 10, 6027 (1998).\n\n(17) Bass, J., Pratt, W. P., Jr., J. Magn. Magn. Mat. 200, 274 (1999).\n\n(18) Fert, A., Piraux, L., J. Magn. Magn. Mat. 200, 338 (1999).\n\n(19) Gijs, M. A.M., in Magnetic Multilayers and Giant Magnetoresistance: Fundamentals and Industrial Applications, ed. by U. Hartmann (Berlin: Springer, 2000), p.130.\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n(20) Coehoorn, P., in Magnetic Multilayers and Giant Magnetoresistance: Fundamentals and Industrial Applications, ed. by U. Hartmann (Berlin: Springer, 2000), p.65.\n\n(21) Barthelemy, A., Fert, A., and Petroff, F., in Handbook of Magnetic Materials, edited by K. H. J. Buschow (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1999), p.1.\n\n(22) Tsymbal, E.Y., Pettifor, D.G., in Solid State Physics, ed. by H. Ehrenreich and F. Spaepen, Vol. 56 (Academic Press, 2001) pp.113-237.\n\n(23) Ashcroft, W., Mermin, D., Solid State Physics (Saunders College Publishing, Forth Worth, 1976).\n\n(24) Ciureanu, P., in Thin Film Resistance Sensors, ed. by P. Ciureanu, S. Middelhoek (Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol, 1992), p. 253.\n\n(25) Electrocrystallization, ed. by R. Weil, R. G. Barradas (The Electrochemical Society, Pennington, 1981).\n\n(26) Lashmore, D. S., Dariel, M. P., J. Electrochem. Soc. 135, 1218 (1988).\n\n(27) Ohring, M., The Materials Science of Thin Films (Academic, Boston, 1992).\n\n(28) Slaughter, J. M., Pratt, W. P., Jr., and Schroeder, P. A., Rev. Sci. Instrum. 60, 127 (1989).\n\n(29) Parkin, S. S. P., More, N., and Roche, K. P., Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2304 (1990).\n\n(30) Parkin, S. S. P., Bhadra, R., and Roche, K. P., Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2152 (1991).\n\n(31) Fert, A., Campbell, I. A., J. de Physique 32, C1-46 (1971).\n\n(32) Mott, N. F., Proc. Roy. Soc. London, Ser. A 153, 699 (1936), and 156, 368 (1936), and Adv. Phys. 13, 325 (1964).\n\n(33) Pratt, W. P., Jr., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 3060 (1991).\n\n(34) Dieny, B., et al. J. Appl. Phys. 69, 4774 (1991).\n\n(35) Piraux, L., et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 65, 2484 (1994).\n\n(36) Blondel, A., Meier, J. P., Doudin, B., Ansermet, J.-Ph., Appl. Phys. Lett. 65, 3019 (1994).\n\n(37) Tsoi, M., Jansen, A. G. M., Bass, J., J. Appl. Phys. 81, 5530 (1997).\n\n(38) Smith, C., Proc. UK Conf. for Sensors, Test and Measurement Technology, Birmingham, England, Jan. 22-23, 1997.\n\n(39) Daughton, J. M., et al., IEEE Trans. Magn. 30, 4608 (1994).\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n(40) Ji, Y., Chien, C. L., Stiles, M. D., Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 106601 (2003).\n\n(41) Rippard, W. H., Pufall, M. R., Kaka, S., Russek, S. E., Silva, T. J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 27201 (2004).\n\n(42) Katine, J. A., Albert, F. J., Buhrman, R. A., Myers, E. B., Ralph, D. C., Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 3149 (2000).\n\n(43) Grollier, J., et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 78, 3663 (2001).\n\n(44) Liu, Y., Zhang, Z., Wang, J., Freitas, P. P., Martins, J. L., J. Appl. Phys. 93, 8385 (2003)\n\n(45) Moriya, R., Hamaya, K., Oiwa, A., Munekata, H., Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. Part 2 - Lett. Express Lett. 43, L825 (2004).\n\n(46) Dieny, B., et al., Phys.Rev.B 43, 1297 (1991).\n\n(47) Waintal, X., Myers, E. B., Brouwer, P. W., Ralph, D. C., Phys. Rev. B 62, 12317-12327 (2000)\n\n(48) Braganca, P.M., et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 87, 112507 (2005).\n\n(49) Rippard, W. H., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 067203 (2005).\n\n(50) Kiselev, S. I., et al., Nature 425, 380 (2003).\n\n(51) Krivorotov, I. N., et al., Science 307, 228-231 (2005).\n\n(52) Acremann, Y., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 217202 (2006).\n\n(53) Kilcoyne, A. L. D., et al., J. Synchrotron Radiat. 10, 125 (2003).\n\n(54) Stöhr, J., et al., Science 259, 658 (1993).\n\n(55) Rippard, W. H., Pufall, M. R., Kaka, S., Silva, T. J., Russek, S. E., Phys. Rev. B 70, 100406 (2004).\n\n(56) Khitun, A., Nikonov, D. E., Bao, M., Galatsis, K., Wang, K. L., Nanotechnology 18, 465202 (2007).\n\n(57) Schneider, T., et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 022505 (2008).\n\n(58) Driskill-Smith, A. A. G., Huai, Y., Future Fab Intl. 23, 28 (2007).\n\n(59) Berger, L., J. Appl. Phys. 49, 2156 (1978).\n\n(60) Berger, L., J. Appl. Phys. 55, 1954 (1984).\n\n(61) Berger, L., Phys. Rev. B 33, 1572 (1986).\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n(62) Berger, L., J. Appl. Phys. 63, 1663 (1988).\n\n(63) Freitas, P. P., Berger, L., J. Appl. Phys. 57, 1266 (1985).\n\n(64) Hung, C.-Y., Berger, L., J. Appl. Phys. 63, 4276 (1988).\n\n(65) Hung, C.-Y., Berger, L., Shih, C.Y., J. Appl. Phys. 67, 5941 (1990).\n\n(66) Yamanouchi, M., Chiba, D., Matsukura, F., Ohno, H., Nature 428, 539 (2004).\n\n(67) Ravelosona, D., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 117203 (2005).\n\n(68) Tsoi, M., Fontana, R. E., Parkin, S. S. P., Appl. Phys. Lett. 83, 2617 (2003).\n\n(69) Grollier, J., et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 83, 509 (2003).\n\n(70) Beach, G. S. D., Nistor, C., Knutson, C., Tsoi, M., Erskine, J. L., Nat. Mater. 4, 741 (2005).\n\n(71) Beach, G. S. D., Knutson, C., Tsoi, M., Erskine, J. L., J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 310, 2038 (2007).\n\n(72) Hayashi, M., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 207205 (2006).\n\n(73) Hayashi, M., et al., Nat. Phys. 3, 21 (2007).\n\n(74) Klaui, M., et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 83, 105 (2003).\n\n(75) Kimura, T., Otani, Y., Yagi, I., Tsukagoshi, K., Aoyagi, Y., J. Appl. Phys. 94, 7226 (2003).\n\n(76) Vernier, N., Allwood, D. A., Atkinson, D., Cooke, M. D., Cowburn, R. P., Europhys. Lett. 65, 526 (2004).\n\n(77) Laufenberg, M., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 046602 (2006).\n\n(78) Thomas, L., et al., Nature 443, 197 (2006).\n\n(79) Yamaguchi, A., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 077205 (2004).\n\n(80) Yamaguchi, A., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 179904 (2006).\n\n(81) Klaui, M., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 026601 (2005).\n\n(82) Meier, G., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 187202 (2007).\n\n(83) Parkin, S. S. P., Hayashi, M., Thomas, L., Science 320, 190 (2008).\n\n(84) Núñez, A. S., et al., Phys. Rev. B 73, 214426 (2006).\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed17e7a42fead59c","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n(85) Xu, Y., Wang, S., Xia, K., Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 226602 (2008).\n\n(86) Gomonay, H., Loktev, V., Low Temp. Phys. 34, 198 (2008).\n\n(87) Wei, Z., Sharma, A., Bass, J., Tsoi, M., J. Appl. Phys. 105, 07D113 (2009).\n\n(88) Meiklejohn, W. H., Bean, C. P., Phys. Rev. 102, 1413 (1956).\n\n(89) Stöhr, J., Siegmann, H. C., Magnetism: from fundamentals to nanoscale dynamics (Springer Series in Solid-State Sciences, Vol. 152, Springer, 2006).\n\n(90) Urazhdin, S., Chien, C. L., Guslienko, K. Y., Novozhilova, L., Phys. Rev. B 73, 054416 (2006).\n\n(91) Wei, Z., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 116603 (2007).\n\n(92) Urazhdin, S., Anthony, N., Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 046602 (2007).\n\n(93) Tang, X.-L., Zhang, H.-W., Su, H., Zhong, Z.-Y., Jing, Y.-L., Appl. Phys. Lett. 91, 122504 (2007).\n\n(94) Dai, N. V., et al., Phys. Rev. B 77, 132406 (2008).\n\n(95) Basset, J., Sharma, A., Wei, Z., Bass, J., Tsoi, M., Proc. SPIE 7036, 703605 (2008).\n\n(96) Wei, Z., Basset, J., Sharma, A., Bass, J., Tsoi, M., J. Appl. Phys. 105, 07D108 (2009).\n\n(97) Moore, G. E., Electronics Magazine (McGraw Hill, New York, 1965).\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ed239d5f371ea8ce","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:12:20"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MUFON Reports\nPrepared for\nBAASS\nNovember 2008\nCopies\n\nLift\n\nMUFON Advanced Technology Establishment\nNewport Beach, California\n\nABSTRACT\n\nLift is defined as the force or forces that permit a vehicle to hover or remain at constant altitude in flight, without expelling fluids as with a jet engine or rocket, which would be the subject of propulsion. We examine five ways that lift can be generated on our planet and have concluded that the use of the magnetic field of the earth for propelling vehicles using superconductors has merit. In addition, the study of superconductor materials and properties is a very attractive next step towards identifying the experiments having the potential of achieving gravity control.\n\nWays to generate lift: technical approach and concepts\n\nA. For planets that have an atmosphere, it is possible to generate lift in three ways:\n1. By displacing the atmosphere with an object. For a balloon in air, lift is the upward force equal to the weight of the air displaced. If the balloon is filled with a gas that weighs less than the air displaced, there will be a net upward force. The famous rash of sightings from the late 1890's, recently reported on by 1843(a)(2) at the Society for Scientific Exploration annual meeting in 2008, noted large numbers of airship reports having the characteristics of lighter than air balloons. Today it seems that balloon technology is well understood and the rewards from pursuing these technologies are not of the breakthrough sort.\n2. If a vehicle is made to move through the air (perhaps by using a propeller or jet), lift is the component of aerodynamic force perpendicular to the motion direction. For an airplane flying steadily horizontally, this force exactly balances the force of gravity. The technology of airplanes is constantly pushed by the Government and many corporations. We see promising ideas emerging, such as those using digital simulation of fluid flows. They will get better and better but it's not unique nor does it have breakthrough potential. There is little evidence of anomalous reports of aliens in airplanes.\n3. If a propeller shape is used, the axis can be made vertical and the blades push the air down, causing the vehicle to be suspended. Vertical takeoff or landing (VTOL) is a bit more interesting. For a helicopter, the blades are long and thin. Rotating blades inside a duct is the same principle but may offer advantages for noise, safety and fuel efficiency, leading one to consider ducted fans. Ducted fan designs may offer considerable advantage over helicopters. For UFOs, there are numerous reports of hovering craft. Unfortunately, the vast majority of them make little or no noise other than a humming sound, which suggests they do not move air around to stay afloat, since rapid air motion"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"always makes a lot of noise. The extensive reports of hovering craft of varied shapes and sizes strongly suggest that they are using technologies beyond our current skills. One would think it not unreasonable that the propulsion systems that got them here would also permit them to hover easily, especially if they involve gravity control\n\nB. The possibility of using the earth's magnetic field has been suggested, and is scientifically not a problem. For planets that have a permanent magnetic field locally of size B, it is possible to create a magnetic dipole of strength M, providing a force on the dipole that is given by F=M*gradB, and the orientation of the force depends both on the direction of the gradient of the field and the direction of the axis of the dipole. The torque on such a dipole is vector M X B. For the torque to be zero, the axis direction to have a vertical force depends primarily on the latitude. If the dipole were made, for example, by a superconducting toroid, a misalignment of torque would have the tendency to turn it upside down and suck it right into the earth. However, if the toroid were spinning, the gyroscopic effects would counteract this tendency, resulting in a wobbling motion. If some of the craft used toroidal superconductors to get a large magnetic moment, and spinning to avoid instability, the kind of motions one might expect would possibly be the \"falling leaf\" or that of a conical rotation. These have been observed, perhaps more in the past than recently, and can be easily explained as a gyroscopic response. There have been several reliable reports of compass disturbances associated with UFO flyovers, strongly suggesting large magnetic fields involved.\n\nC. It is not thought that planets have a net charge, and therefore they have no net electrostatic field. However, planets with atmospheres may have many local weather disturbances, resulting in charge exchange, which we call lighting. Interestingly, even on a clear day at sea level, there is an electric field on earth of the order of a hundred volts/meter. This is useful for floating objects in the field (just like Millikan floated his oil drop to measure the charge on an electron) only if the field strength does not exceed the corona discharge breakdown of the order of 100,000 volts/meter. Any object with a large charge in the atmosphere would be expected to show signs of ionization of some of the atmospheric molecules close to the vehicle where the field strength would be largest, probably resulting in colored lights near anomalous craft. The idea of charging an entire craft to levitate in the earth's electric field is fundamentally sound, and would take high voltage generators to get the energy to discharge the ions or electrons, whichever is needed. The expected observables would be various kinds of colors of glow close to the vehicle where the electric field strength is large, caused by the mild ionization of a variety of the molecules found in air. However, knowledge of the electric field strength at all times would seem necessary and it would be the equivalent of constantly flying in the optimum direction in a thunderstorm. The technology issues would revolve around light weight and reliable high voltage generators available to eject either positive or negative charge as required. There might be a possibility of using the electrostatic field at the same time as the magnetic field of the earth if the high magnetic field associated with the dipole would keep the charge from leaking off the craft.\n\nProspects for research payoff\n\nToroidal Magnet Craft\nThe development of craft that use the Earth's magnetic field for repulsion and therefore lift is an interesting challenge. The intense magnetic field required to make it work would probably favor an unmanned vehicle, unless internal magnetic shielding could be used to reduce the exposure to adequate levels. To get the necessary number of amp-m², of say with 1000 square meters for a 100 foot diameter craft, we might need 10^11 amps. If the superconductor had say 100 sq cm, then we are looking for a superconductivity of 10^9 amps/cm². In addition, the stabilization of the craft would be critical because upsetting torques would have to be neutralized and probably use physical rotation as a backup. If the inside is not spinning, then there needs to be bearings between the spinning superconductor and the non-spinning payload portion. In principle, these craft could operate anywhere on the planet since the magnetic field is significant everywhere. It would be easy to use the earth's magnetic field to launch a dipole-powered craft to orbit easily if it can be made to work at sea level,"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"since the earth's magnetic field only goes down 10% at 100 miles altitude. See Appendix A for more detailed design parameters.\n\nGravity Control Technologies\nIt is evident to most who study the UFO reports that the observed accelerations and the implied velocities from other star systems would clearly imply an ability to interact with both gravity and the space vacuum and perhaps time as well. There is no accepted theory available now, although several researchers claim to be working on it. The UFO data suggest that large magnetic fields have often been observed with some craft, and that others hover with a hum, and then accelerate at high g's. While it may be possible to create a gravity control device without superconductors, it is our consensus that an investment in advancing superconductor technology would have the largest payoff. Such a plan is recommended in connection with the propulsion scope of work, involving materials, nanotechnology and superconductivity research with defined interim goals. We would recommend that this more \"conventional\" research effort be augmented by studying a variety of \"leaked\" documents of earlier possible classified real research for the purpose of idea stimulation, such as notes allegedly involving Einstein.\n\nDucted fans\nIf you visualize the science fiction Jetson or the Flintstone daily lives, they involve cars that fly easily. Forgetting about balloons and airplanes as discussed above because we understand them pretty well, the first mild opportunity seen is the VTOL using ducted fans for lower noise, higher efficiency. Counter-rotating ducted fans might work very well on a variety of vehicle designs, with the objective of providing a lightweight efficient transportation system supported by sophisticated collision avoidance systems. It is our understanding that there is lots of room for optimization of fan technology, since most of the research to date has been driven towards improving single helicopter blade design or single blade horizontal wind turbine designs. Ducted fan optimization has not been a priority. One of the theories suggests that a large improvement in efficiency is possible, although one could not define this as a breakthrough technology, it might have a handsome ROI. As a footnote, the same technology that will help on vehicle design is applicable to the improving sophistication of wind turbines fans for the capture of wind energy. However, we do not recommend an investment in this area at this time.\n\nPlans of Action\n\nToroidal magnet craft\nTo establish the feasibility of this concept it would be reasonable to prove the concept by designing a small scale model using superconductors. Without an attitude control system, it would not be able to be untethered, but the principle could easily be established by comparing the expected forces with the actual ones in a simple test apparatus. A small team, once formed could probably demonstrate a preliminary conclusion in six months. The team should consist of one physicist who is familiar with magnetism, one superconductor engineer/scientist who is familiar with capabilities and sources, and one versatile laboratory technician who will actually do the physical work. No unusual power sources would be expected, since this should be a low power device. We would suggest the following milestones:\nWeek 0: Team under contract with facilities and equipment available\nWeek 4: Test model sized and designed\nWeek 8: Parts ordered and wooden fixture complete\nWeek 12: Parts arrived, assembly begun\nWeek 16: Testing begins\nWeek 17: Results surprise everyone, require redesign\nWeek 25: Proof of principle established\nWeek 26: Scale up to full size is underway, new budget planned"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Gravity Control with Superconductor Research\nOne of the milestones in this research would be to demonstrate 10^7 amps/cm².\n\nAppendix A – Hovering in the Earth's Magnetic Field\nA toroidal or doughnut shape containing a current will produce a magnetic moment M, determined by the strength of the circulating current i shown in slide 1. If it rests in an external magnetic field B, then the force and torque on the ring's current structure are given by the equations shown. The force depends on the gradient of B, or the direction in which it changes most rapidly, as well as the orientation of the toroid. It should be possible to always provide a vertical force for lift against the earth's gravitational pull.\nThe variation of magnetic field strength B is shown in slide 2, both for on the axis of a dipole and in the plane normal to the axis. Both in the plane and along the axis far away from the dipole, the strength drops off as 1/r². Therefore, since the earth's radius is about 4000 miles, at 8,000 miles the magnetic field is one-fourth as strong. However, there is no significant difference between sea level and orbital altitude of only a few hundred miles.\nSlide 3 shows that the variation of both the field strength and angle vary with latitude, with the strength being about twice as strong at the pole as at the equator. As expected, the magnetic field points straight up at the poles and is essentially horizontal at the equator.\nIf the orientation of the dipole is assumed to be positioned to minimize the unwanted torque that would cause it to change its orientation, the force on the dipole varies from a maximum near the north or south pole to a nominal value at the equator, roughly only a factor of two between the pole and the equator, as shown in slide 4. Fortuitously, the angle of the force with respect to the vertical varies only plus or minus about 20 degrees, so you always have more than 90% of the force in the lift direction. The value of the nominal force F⁰ depends on the current going around the toroid and the area of the area of the circle formed by the (circular) axis of the toroid. So, for one amp-m², the force is very small, since there are about 10 newtons associated with the mass of one kg. One newton is about 3 ounces of force.\nThe magnetic field strength produced by the toroidal dipole is proportional to both the current flowing and to the area surrounded by the toroid. From a practical point of view, designs that support a weight of less than 1000 pounds are probably not very interesting, so we will be operating above about 10^14 amp-m², seen on slide 5. For a 20 meter diameter toroid, one would expect about 10^10 gauss, or 10^6 tesla. This large a field would have major impact on living organisms, so internal shielding would be in order.\nFor the toroidal vehicle considered, the relationships between force, radius, size and vehicle density are known as shown. Lines of constant vehicle density correspond to lines of constant amp-m². The useful range for consideration is somewhere between that of water and air. Missile, spacecraft and airplane densities range between x and y. This says that we probably need 10^15 amp-m², and for a 10 meter radius craft we can get about a 500,000 pound force available, for the \"design noted\" point on slide 6. This will result in interesting designs if superconductors of 10^6 amps/cm² are available such as with yttrium barium copper oxide."} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Magnetic dipole\nMagnetic field for a dipole\nVariation with latitude\nEarth force on magnetic dipole\nMoment, field, size relations\nMagnetic vehicle parameters\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\nPage 5 of 5\nBAASS CONFIDENTIAL\nNov-08"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"POWER GENERATION\nMUFON Advanced Technology Establishment\nNewport Beach, California\nABSTRACT\nThis proposal suggests the purchase and subsequent use of an already-designed research facility to develop the principles of cold fusion to permit a breakthrough in the planning of full-scale development for low temperature nuclear power.\nIntroduction and background\nPower generation for aerospace vehicles has been studied extensively especially since the beginning of the space age due to the long-term requirements for satellite power. The discovery of how to extract energy from the zero point vacuum is still awaiting experimental demonstration and a useful theory. The use of conventional nuclear power in aerospace vehicles continues to be dominated by the negative effects of radiation safety and attendant weight penalties. If, however, nuclear sources could be found that would generate only heat and no hazardous radiation, this would be a potential breakthrough. The results of cold fusion experiments suggest that this is indeed the case.\nCold fusion has a marvelous data base of success, but usually at low temperatures, whereas the first anomalous reports involved reactions so hot that there was damage to the laboratory. We have not seen an aggressive attempt to replicate at high temperatures and pressures conditions that result in confirmed cold fusion nuclear reactions that emit no neutrons or gammas – nothing but heat.\nWhen [REDACTED] in 1989 reported anomalous heat generated during an experiment1 they failed to initially report that in 1985 they did an experiment that provided excess heat starting from an aqueous solution of deuterium and palladium. However, it boiled dry and got so hot that it melted some of the laboratory bench. As in many hard-to-accept anomalous results, there was no accepted theory that would reasonably permit the widespread acceptance of an explanation for the obvious nuclear reactions that were occurring (d+d→4He + 23.8Mev (heat)). The immediate reaction of scientists was to try to replicate these experiments, and the initial attempts were not generally successful. This gave opportunity to the powerful “hot fusion” community to gradually attack the results and the data, partly to ensure a strong continuing budget for hot fusion. In the meantime, laboratories all over the world, with many varied experiments, were able to show over the years very powerful evidence for the reality of the excess heat, but still lacking a theory. A beautiful summary was prepared for the Department of Energy by five respected scientists.2 This 30-page paper in effect says: (a) there are numerous reports of energy production at the levels of megajoules/cm3; (b) near- equal"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"atomic mixtures of deuterium and palladium work best; (c) it is more productive at higher temperatures; (d) there are unknown triggering effects to get the reactions started; (e) the ddHe reaction noted above is the main source of energy; (f) sometimes neutron emission is observed; (g) calorimetric studies have left no doubt that these excess energy results are valid. Nevertheless, the study of cold fusion research is still not an accepted national priority.\nIn spite of overwhelming evidence for the reality of the phenomena as reflected in the maverick publication Infinite Energy, and annual meetings of the International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF), theories to explain the data have slowly emerged. One idea that seems to survive is that in the experiments involving solid samples that photon exchange (high frequency acoustic vibration) are responsible for stimulating the nuclear reactions.3\nAnother theoretic approach was taken by former McDonnell Douglas employees, [REDACTED] and his innovative colleague [REDACTED] who interacted with [REDACTED] of SRI and [REDACTED] and developed some basic principles that would be aimed at replicating the conditions of the successful [REDACTED] experiment that apparently had high temperatures and internal pressures involved. Taking the position that in order for cold fusion to be a successful business venture, excess energies of Kw/cc will be required, and these will never occur unless we go to high temperatures and pressures. Therefore, by studying the “boil-dry” case of the F&P experiment, they were able to identify the operating regions of interest, shown in Figure 1. At 700 to 900 °C one could expect to attain 5 to 10 Kw/cc.4\n[Figure 1: Power Densities, Significant Experimental Data. Power Density [kw/cc] vs Temperature (°C). Labels include D2O Electrolysis (Hundreds of data points @ less than 0.005 kw/cc), SRI, et al, D2O Electrolysis (Dozens of data points @ about 0.1 kw/cc), F&P, Molten Salt Electrolysis (A few data points @ about 0.64 kw/cc), Liew, F&P Ignition Boil Dry (1 cc Pd) (Sample melted @ 1554°C. (off scale) Part of marble lab tabletop and concrete floor vaporized.), Life After Death Boil Dry (Many data points @ about 3.6 kw/cc), F&P, Minimum power density for commercial applications. SRI = Stanford Research Institute, Inc. F & P = Fleischmann & Pons]\nFigure 1. Based on nothing but experimental data, this shows that to get several Kw/cc we need to be operating at temperatures above about 600°C.\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Referring to Figure 1, when [REDACTED] allowed his electrolytic cells to increase in temperature from 20°C to 95°C, the power density increases from about 1 W/cc(Pd) to about 100 W/cc(Pd). This is a remarkable increase in power density for just a 75°C increase in temperature.\nWhile [REDACTED] molten salt experiments were very difficult to replicate, he measured about 640 W/cc(Pd) at 450°C.\nThe experiment that is critical, however, is the [REDACTED] “1 Cubic Centimeter – Ignition” experiment that went awry in 1985. [REDACTED] were using a 1 centimeter cube of palladium as the cathode in an electrolytic cell that was operating at a controlled 20°C and producing about 1 watt of excess heat. Unaware of an impending electrolyte replenishing system failure, they left the cell operating unattended over a weekend.\nWhen they returned, the lab was a mess. Apparently, the cell had run dry so that the heat transfer coefficient from the Pd cube to its surroundings decreased from about 0.9 in the liquid to something closer to 0.1 in air. The few watts of heat being generated was more than could be transferred to the air and positive temperature feedback occurred. The temperature rose as did the fusion reaction rate and the cube of Pd melted its way free of the test apparatus. The Pd temperature was driven to its melting point of 1554°C and part of the palladium vaporized. In addition, the heat from the Pd cube vaporized a hole in the marble-like lab table and created a depression in the floor by vaporizing the concrete. It was apparent that the high intensity reaction had endured for an extended period of time. There is little doubt that high-density heat had been produced at high temperature.\n[REDACTED] thought they had achieved “ignition” and they warned their colleagues never to let that happen to them. This was the first split in the road to practical applications that was missed!\n[REDACTED] later conducted controlled ‘boil dry’ experiments using palladium rod of varying diameters and experienced the same acceleration of the fusion reaction rate into the high-density range when the electrolysis was stopped. This was another split in the road that was missed!\nFigure 1 suggests that: (1) operating temperatures in excess of 500°C are required to enter into the ‘high density heat’ range and (2) the continuous flow of electric power is not required to accelerate the reaction rate.\nCan the conditions that existed when [REDACTED] produced ‘high density heat’ be replicated?\nThe main thrust should be to design and construct a new fusion reactor based on a ‘gas loading’ principle rather than ‘electrolytic loading’. With gas loading, the system temperature limitation is no longer the boiling temperature of the heavy water electrolyte but rather the strength of the pressure vessel that contains the fusion reaction. By choosing a space-age alloy with high strength at high temperatures, it is possible to create the conditions that existed when high-density heat was produced in the past.\nAlso, with the ability to maintain high D2 gas pressures at high temperature, it makes it possible to maintain system energy levels well above those threshold levels apparent from electrolytic experiments that produced fusion heat.\nThe key variables to control are the concentration of deuterium (D/Pd ratio), the deuterium gas pressure and the temperature. Fortunately, from the interpolation and extrapolation of data from other sources, an equilibrium diagram can be produced and is shown as Figure 2.\nPage 3 of 7\nBAASS CONFIDENTIAL\nNov-08"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[Figure 4: Deuterium-Palladium TCP Equilibrium Diagram. Experimentally determined D/Pd atomic ratios for a range of temperature & pressure conditions. Y-axis: Deuterium Gas Pressure - Atmospheres. X-axis: Concentration - D/Pd Atomic Ratio.]\nNote: (1) The published data represents the average concentration for a number of Pd samples. (2) The published data has been interpolated and extrapolated to produce this data plot.\nFigure 2. If the system is in equilibrium, this chart permits you to determine the pressure required to maintain a reaction at constant temperature and deuterium concentration.\nRanges of interest appear to be in the thousands of atmospheres to perform meaningful steady state studies. For example, if we are forcing deuterium gas into the palladium lattice at a concentration of 0.7 and 500 °C, we would need a pressure of 20,000 atmospheres. The goal is to produce an uncontrolled ‘high density heat’ and to repeat it at will. Thereafter, it is an engineering development job to learn how to control the fusion reaction and give it utility.\nEngineering Development\nThese kinds of requirements led to the design of a reactor capable of studying the reactions at high temperature and pressure, schematically shown in Figure 3. This reactor has actually been built and has never\nPage 4 of 7\nBAASS CONFIDENTIAL\nNov-08"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"had enough funding to perform any experiments yet. It will permit the evaluation of reaction rates as a function of temperature, concentration and pressure for gaseous deuterium forced into solid palladium. A great deal of thought and detailed design work has gone into making this a quality unit. The experimental program would turally pay high attention to the safety issues in the use of this scanning reactor. In collaboration with [REDACTED]\n1843(a)(2) [REDACTED] the reactor was designed and built by 1843(a)(2) EDTEK Corp, who is reportedly willing to sell it for cost, which was about $10K for materials only. Although this sketch is stamped \"Proprietary,\" we have been given verbal permission to use this sketch in the present context.\n1843(a)(2)\n\nThe EDTEK Scanning Reactor Configuration\nHigh-temp \"super insulation\"\nContainment chamber\n40 watt \"start-up\" heater\nThermocouple leads\nTemperature probe assembly\nPalladium test sample\nProprietary\nPressurized D2 gas\n(Room temp.)\n(Hot zone)\nVacuum\n\"Cross\" fitting (& external piping)\nVacuum\nReactor pressure vessel (Carpenter 680 Alloy)\nProprietary\nMax D2 gas pressure @ 1000°C ≈ 4000 atmospheres\nMax D chemical potential ≈ 27 kJ/mol ≈ 1.6 x 10 ^23 eV/mol\n[Note: All cross-sections shown are cylindrical in shape.]\n1843(a)(2)\nFigure 3. This design configuration has been built and is now in place at the EDTEK Corporation, under the control of 1843 (a)(2) who built it and paid for it.\nOnce the principle of producing high density heat has been proven, one would move on to characterizing the reaction enabling parameters and develop control methods for any anticipated unstable reaction. Intimately tied to the control development is the extraction of useful heat. It is called a scanning reactor, and was licensed to a company called EDTEK, partly owned by 1843(a)(2) an interested collaborator with 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2)\nPage 5 of 7\nBAASS CONFIDENTIAL\nNov-08"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The EDTEK Scanning Reactor is ideally suited to this kind of activity because its unique design allows for quick turnaround for the next test. The reactor pressure vessel is inexpensive and can be replaced in short order in the event of a 'melt-down'. The unique design of the scanning reactor makes it practical to modify it for installation of electric feed-throughs and for the introduction of electromagnetic stimuli to support reactor control development. The reactor is called a \"scanning reactor\" because of the ease of changing samples. Hydrogen is very difficult to contain and it is best to open only one high pressure joint when preparing a new test. (Note that the samples are loaded through the \"cross\" fitting which requires re-sealing only the one pressure joint.)\nAlso, four design features are worth noting: (1) the tapered pressure vessel reduces heat loss by conduction while maintaining uniform pressure vessel strength over its length (large wall thickness in the 'hot' zone); (2) Convection to the outer chamber wall is eliminated by operating in a vacuum; (3) radiation losses are greatly reduced by surrounding the hot pressure vessel with high temperature multi-layer \"super insulation\"; and (4) although not shown, there is a snug-fitting tube, made of 'alumina', inserted over the temp probe to fill the space inside the length of the pressure vessel to prevent significant convection and conduction losses in the high pressure deuterium gas. Alumina is very good insulator but its presence does not prevent rapid migration of deuterium molecules along the length to equalize pressure. The Carpenter 680 Alloy, used in the pressure vessel body, is one of several high temperature alloys developed for the manufacture of gas turbine blades in jet engines.\nOnce the principle of producing high density heat by gas loading is proven, we are on the pathway to a broad range of useful applications even without knowing the precise micro-physics involved. It is axiomatic that we are able to ensure that the products of the reaction are just helium and heat. Once the principles are established, there is no reason to not visualize scaling cold fusion reactors up and down in size.\nIt is virtually certain that successful production of high density heat in the existing scanning reactor will bring new insight to the micro-physics of solid state fusion and hasten its entry into the textbooks.\nIf we succeed in proving both the principle and the practical production of safe energy from cold fusion, we may also have done a great service to our country by moving toward energy independence from foreign oil, avoiding the eventual depletion of hydrocarbon fuels and be the leader in commercially producing and selling inexpensive energy.\nFor aerospace applications, it might turn out that to be possible to scale down the normal cold fusion power plant into a self-contained package providing the required energy for a long time. Feasibility needs to be proven first.\nPlan of Action, Milestones and Team\nOnce the principles of low temperature nuclear reactions using palladium and deuterium are proven, the possibilities for an inexhaustible source of power are excellent. Deuterium occurs naturally in sea water and can be easily extracted. It will be converted to helium that will escape the planet. Palladium is the first material discovered that seems to promote low temperature fusion, but there may be others. Palladium is not destroyed in the process – it is merely the catalyst or host that permits the reaction to proceed. Palladium has use as an auto catalyst for reducing emissions and in jewelry, and typically sells for $750 per ounce, so it's not cheap. Its density is about 12 times that of water (it is heavy) and can absorb 700 times its volume of hydrogen or deuterium. However, the basic cost information suggests that one could achieve thousands of watts with just one cubic centimeter costing only a few dollars. The cost of 50 liters of deuterium is about $250 but a small amount produces many Kw-hours of energy. The energy release from two atoms of deuterium combining to form helium is roughly a million times the energy of two hydrogen atoms in a fossil fuel burning with oxygen.\nThe first step would be to arrange to examine the scanning reactor to ensure its availability as described, and arrange for a purchase and transfer to a suitable testing location. Then, a test plan needs to be prepared by those familiar with other experimental work in cold fusion. I think that designer 1843(a)(2) and owner 1843 (a)(2)\nPage 6 of 7\nBAASS CONFIDENTIAL\nNov-08"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)\n[REDACTED] would be happy to assist in some planning part time. 1843(a)(2) of SRI at Menlo Park, California is reported to be enthusiastic in using such a test facility to more accurately assess the conditions that cause the deuterium atoms to fuse. The testing should be done by personnel who have knowledge of the field and the skills to deal with fire and explosion safety issues. A schedule could probably be provided by them if requested. The things that would need to be done are to ensure a safe location, order the measurement instruments if not available, order the palladium and deuterium, and prepare a testing schedule. This probably could be done in six months if a few of the right people were put on the job. Typical milestones would be:\nWeek 0: Make initial contact with owner\nWeek 3: Complete contract negotiation\nWeek 8: Complete staffing\nWeek 8: Move the equipment\nWeek 9: Order the palladium and deuterium\nWeek 10: Complete test plan\nWeek 16: Attain first positive feedback\nWeek 26: Obtain repeatable data records\nSteps that follow would address commercial design applications and implementation.\nIn conclusion, this is a great chance to pick up a well-planned unit designed to prove the reality of cold fusion, explain the scientific principles involved and pave the way for planning commercial energy sources independent of oil.\nPage 7 of 7\nBAASS CONFIDENTIAL\nNov-08"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"MUFON Mutual UFO Network\nControl\nMUFON Advanced Technology Establishment\nFort Collins, Colorado\nABSTRACT\nTraditional aircraft controls have been perfected over the long history of powered flight, evolving from mechanical hydraulic controls to fly-by-wire computer controls. Today's most sophisticated commercial and military aircraft are almost exclusively fly-by-wire systems with some allowing for manual override.\nAerospace vehicles of the next century will use breakthrough propulsion and lift technologies that will require equally innovative vehicle control systems. For example, if a lift vehicle is designed to nullify or counteract gravity, traditional aircraft controls that render proper pitch, yaw and roll could be replaced by non-airfoil manipulation technologies that maneuver the vehicle using the lift/propulsion field itself.\nTechnical Approaches and Concepts\nThe design of a control system for an advanced aerospace vehicle is directly dependent on the propulsion and lift method used. Electro-magnetic induced superconductor lift/propulsion could be controlled, for example, by modulating the current in the superconductor through a combination of:\no Phase shift modulation (PSM)\no Pulse width modulation (PWM)\no Frequency modulation (FM)\nPage 1 of 3\nBAASS CONFIDENTIAL\nNov"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Consider the control system that could be used to control a Superconducting Toroid craft:\nThe proposed Toroid craft is comprised of an inner ring and an outer ring. The inner ring contains the occupant compartment, power generation system compartment, controls compartment and navigational system.\nThe inner ring would consist of multiple sections of superconducting material and a supporting section. This supporting section would interlock with the corresponding outer ring's channel. The inner ring would not have to rotate.\nThe outer ring has to contain a channel for an interlocking section of the corresponding inner ring. There are many possible formats for each ring. The principal idea of this design is to maintain the stability of the outer ring and the integrity between the inner and outer rings. The primary purpose of sections 1 and 2 would be to rotate the ring, while section 3 of the ring would control the speed and direction of motion of the craft.\nA. For initial startup, we need to impart the energy necessary to bring the outer ring up to superconductivity. This would most likely be by means of direct contact to the outer ring from the vehicle's power source.\nB. After initial startup, we could use microwave beaming techniques to add power to the outer ring as needed to maintain superconductivity.\nC. The outer ring would be rotated by controlling the inner ring's sections using a push-pull control effect as accomplished by maglev train systems. Instead of moving in a straight line, however, this system would operate in a closed loop.\nIn order for the craft to have control in a magnetic field, we'd have to be able to alter the PSM/PWM/FM in sections which are opposed by 180 degrees – one side pushing against the magnetic field and one side pulling towards the magnetic field. This would be computer controlled allowing for changes on three different axes so as to affect the roll, yaw and pitch.\nThe strength of the magnetic field produced by the superconductors would allow you to accelerate and decelerate the craft in the desired direction within the earth's magnetic field. The limits would have to be controlled to protect the occupants of the craft from excessive G forces.\nVehicle Control Summary\nThe functional controls for the superconducting vehicle would consist of five primary systems:\nSystem 1 would control rotation of the outer ring.\nPage 2 of 3\nBAASS CONFIDENTIAL\nNov"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"System 2 would control the saturation of the superconductivity in the outer ring and control speed and direction of the craft.\n\nSystem 3 would counteract the magnetic effects between multiple rings.\n\nSystem 4 would prohibit the vehicle from exceeding G-forces which could be harmful to human occupants.\n\nSystem 5 would be a fail-safe system to protect the craft, including but not limited to, an anti-collision automatic control system.\n\nThe entire control system for superconductivity is dependent upon the pulse width, phase shift and frequency modulations.\n\nPlan of Action\n\nTo establish the feasibility of this concept it would be reasonable to prove the concept by designing a small scale model. A small team, once formed could probably demonstrate a preliminary conclusion in six months. The team should consist of one Pulse Power Engineer, one Mechanical Engineer, one Physicist and one Electrical Engineer with experience with Maglev technology. We would suggest the following milestones:\n\nMonth 0: Team under contract with facilities and equipment available.\nMonth 3: Computer modeling on superconductor-maglev vehicle control system finalized\nMonth 4: Parts for small scale mockup purchased\nMonth 6: Small scale mockup laboratory tested\n\nReferences:\n1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"HUMAN INTERFACE\n\nMUFON Advanced Technology Establishment\nDelafield, Wisconsin\n\nABSTRACT\n\nThe human mind is a remarkable instrument that may be used in the future to control various functions, including flight. The scientific study of implants found in human beings may lead to technologies which could lead to this giant leap. Unlimited possibilities for payoff exist in the form of mind control for everything from vehicles to military defense systems to medical advancements.\n\nIntroduction\n\nThe human mind \"is the most advanced device ever developed for information correlation, pattern recognition and anomaly detection. All of our senses are superbly designed to collect, correlate, and analyze continuous streams of information; to discard irrelevant information at high speeds; and to make intuitive connections.\"1\n\nCurrent flight technologies are completed by direct physical intervention of the operator. This is accomplished by the use of the hand, foot, eye or head movement. Will the remarkable human mind be tapped as a controlling force as well?\n\nFuture technologies may include:\n\nA. Direct mental telepathic interaction with a computer system to control aspects of flight.\n\nTelepathy has two aspects. First, there is the formulation of a particular thought; secondly, the individual who has the particular thought must have the ability, innate or learned, to send that thought to a receiver. Psychokinesis is a term used for a type of telepathy that goes one step further; it refers to a direct physical influence, such as distortion or movement, utilizing only the power of the mind. To date, studies in psychokinesis have yielded little in the way of statistically significant, repeatable results.\n\nPage 1 of 5 BAASS CONFIDENTIAL Nov-08"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"B. Utilizing the electrical activity in the brain via externally mounted sensors.\n\nReferred to as synthetic telepathy, this technology utilizes electrodes in contact with the human scalp. Emissions from the brain \"are passed through an amplifier, which sends the results to a computer for processing.\"2\n\nResearch in this area is ongoing both for military purposes and for gaming. Medical research, which is focused on the ability of a patient to move various types of controls using only the emissions from their brain, may offer the disabled new avenues of communication.\n\nThis technology has also being studied in relation to flight. Subjects at Wright-Patterson's Aeronautical Systems Center learned to control their brain emissions, enabling them to send instructions to a flight simulator.3\n\nOne of the problems encountered with this technology has been the difficulty in obtaining precise readings. A scientist in Berlin is attempting to improve those readings through the use of a cap that is embedded with electrodes. Conductivity is enhanced by the application of a gel between the cap and the skull.4\n\nC. Biologic interface to the vehicle.\n\nSome abductees have stated that while onboard a UFO, they observed a place for the craft operator's hands to rest in. This may have represented either the use of the hand operating as a lock function or as a tactile biologic interface to the vehicle.\n\nD. Virtual reality.\n\nVirtual reality permits an individual to interact with a computer-simulated environment. A virtual helmet, goggles with video display, full bodysuit including gloves, boom arm and omnidirectional treadmill provide tactile feedback. Outfitted in this manner, the operator would feel total immersion in whatever craft or vehicle he was controlling, permitting him to control and feel all actions and related effects. All body changes or actions would be directly converted to corresponding vehicle control or whatever the intended action was. Future studies may allow an operator to direct flight in a virtual environment which could be located anywhere.\n\nE. Bi-directional conversion of thought patterns to mental electrical stimuli through the use of biologically powered implants.\n\nNumerous implants have been discovered in humans and are being removed at an increasing rate. How the implants were placed or what activities and physiological states they monitor is unknown.\n\nPage 2 of 5 BAASS CONFIDENTIAL Nov-08"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The University of Copenhagen has been conducting studies, including one in which they focused a magnetic beam at the back of the subject's head. The beam affected the visual cortex and caused temporary blindness on a conscious level. The studies also indicated, however, that the individuals were able to react to certain directions on an unconscious level - as if they could still see.5 What other human reactions could be temporarily suspended or controlled by focusing a magnetic beam to other parts of the brain or body? Might there be an association with implants and transcranial stimulation?\n\nAn implant may serve as a targeting lead, to the individual and/or to a specific site on the body for magnetic beam placement. Could a study in this area give us clues as to why so many experiencers are unable to recall events on a conscious level, recalling them only under hypnotic regression or while in a subconscious state?\n\nProspect for Research Payoff\n\nIt is hypothesized that the implants noted above are bi-directional communication devices. If it were possible to reverse engineer the implants and understand how they function, we very well may have a direct mind-to-vehicle interface capable of controlling the flight characteristics and defense systems of a craft. Associated commercial ventures might include mind interface to control vehicles, equipment, and weapons systems. The possibilities are limitless.\n\nPlan of Action and Milestones: Implant Removal\n\nTo the best of our knowledge, current efforts to remove implants do not include proper, complete scientific investigation.\n\nMUFON is in possession of copies of x-rays which may provide evidence of implants in unsuspecting U.S. citizens.\n\nThe implants, which are about the size of the tip of a pen, were found in a 16-year old female and a 76-year old male from different parts of the country - one from the northeast and one from the southwestern part of the U.S.\n\nPage 3 of 5 BAASS CONFIDENTIAL Nov-08"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UFO literature reports that some implants exhibit magnetic properties and emit a frequency without any apparent external excitation. Upon removal, they become non-magnetic, cease transmitting and start to degrade. It is hypothesized that they derive the power to run from biochemical means. While it is known that RFID tags are already in military and public use, the implants of our proposed study are distinguished by their tiny size and by the fact that they do not require external excitation.\n\nA complete investigation protocol has been developed and proposed to MUFON (Implant Investigation Proposal). While other researchers have extracted and analyzed implants, MUFON's proposal is to study them in situ as well as to extract and analyze them through unique methods, maintaining their functional operation for external study or manipulation.\n\nThe investigation would seek to capture the waveform, analyze its data stream, and try to correlate possible brain activity with the waveform characteristics. This would be accomplished by using a CT scan, MRI scan, electroencephalograph, and a RF Spectrum Analyzer. One of the goals of the RF engineer would be to continue operation of the implant after extraction. A proposal identifying equipment for a Mobile Command Center for multiple purposes, including implant removals has been submitted to MUFON (Analysis of Equipment Needed to Conduct Field Investigations).\n\nThe team would be composed of:\n\n1. Physician or dental surgeon (licensed in the location of extraction) to perform minor surgery;\n2. Radio-frequency and digital electrical engineer with experience in the medical field;\n3. A biochemist with a metallurgical background;\n4. A biophysicist;\n5. Project administrator; and,\n6. Two mental health professionals. The role of the first mental health professional would be to discuss the pros and cons of the procedure with the experiencer prior to signing a consent form. The role of the second mental health professional would be to counsel the experiencer and to facilitate follow-up after the procedure.\n\nVolunteer patients with implants that have been detected in relatively current image scans (X-ray, CT scan, MRI scan or panoramic head scan) would be needed.\n\nMilestones:\n\nThree Months - Team recruitment complete.\n\nOne to Two Months - Equipment acquired. In this second phase, items may be purchased or rented depending upon the availability of funds. If renting, we would most likely be able to secure items within a short time frame. In the event that a mobile unit may be utilized as a removal site, there are a number of unknown variables which would affect the time frame.\n\nPage 4 of 5 BAASS CONFIDENTIAL Nov-08"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Four to Six Months - Volunteers recruited.\n\nOne Month - Cases selected. A committee would review and select cases for the project.\n\nTwelve to Eighteen Months - Data collected. This phase would include the actual removal, examination, disassembly and data collection relative to the implants.\n\nOne Month - Data reviewed and summarized. In this phase, data collected would be reviewed by our sponsor to identify potential engineering projects. At this point, a decision would also be made as to whether the project would continue and if so, its scope.\n\nTimes for the various phases may overlap in some instances. The goal for the initial project would be completion within 18 to 24 months. Costs incurred prior to actual equipment acquisition and testing would be minimal.\n\nReferences\n\n1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PROPULSION\n\nMUFON Advanced Technology Establishment\nAustin, Texas\n\nABSTRACT\n\nChemical based propulsion of space vehicles allows for the exploration of our solar system but is not feasible for interstellar travel. A solution to this must come in either the ability to travel near the speed of light or by changing the dynamics of travel through some type of warping of space.\n\nIntroduction\n\nTheories for interstellar travel have been discussed as early as the 1970s by the British Interplanetary Society in \"Project Daedalus\", which hypothesized the use of micro fusion explosions to develop thrust sufficient to reach near-light speeds. NASA supported the Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Project from 1996 through 2002. Their object was to seek the ultimate breakthroughs in space transportation: propulsion that requires no propellant mass, that attains the maximum transit speeds physically possible, and breakthrough methods of energy production to power such devices. Topics of interest included experiments and theories regarding the coupling of gravity and electromagnetism, vacuum fluctuation energy, warp drives, wormholes, and quantum effects. NASA continued this thought process with the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts from 1998 to 2007. The project ended due to funding cuts.\n\nThere are a myriad of possibilities regarding interstellar travel, but they are all still very hypothetical. It would be beneficial if there was something to point a development project towards a research area with the most hope for success. Although controversial, it is worth considering whether the properties of unidentified aerial phenomena that have been witnessed over the last 50 years could be explained by any of the current theories for interstellar propulsion. Observations of this phenomenon by pilots, military personnel, and witnesses with a scientific background, provide the following characteristics:"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1. Ability for rapid acceleration, deceleration, and hovering capabilities.\n2. Ability for sudden changes in direction.\n3. Vehicle shapes vary and are often not aerodynamic.\n4. Objects over 400 meters in size capable of hovering and/or moving slowly.\n5. No visible rocket nozzles or propulsion system.\n6. There is a lack of air displacement causing turbulence with movement of the object.\n7. There is no indication of the sound barrier being broken even though the witnesses claim speeds above Mach-1.\n8. Often there is no noise associated with the object while it is moving. Sometimes a slight hum is heard if the object is hovering.\n9. The presence of electromagnetic fields is suggested due to plasma glows, varied colors, and interference with electronics.\n\nA research team should compare the current theories for interstellar travel against these properties and then determine which of the theories best approximates the seven conditions noted. This was initially done by 1843(a)(2) a former research scientist at NASA and the Langley Research Center. The theory and mathematics is outlined in his book published in 1995, 1843(a)(2) 1843(a)(2) In his treatise he posits that a controlled repulsive field such as anti-gravity would best explain the flight characteristics that have been attributed to unidentified aerial phenomena. This theory still best supports the characteristics previously mentioned.\n\nThis paragraph summarizes how an anti-gravitational field could explain some of these characteristics. Assume that a spacecraft is developed which is capable of placing itself within a field that can repulse the earth's gravitational field in a controlled manner so that the craft can hover as well as move in different directions. Such a craft would be able to accelerate rapidly and change directions without large g-forces being experienced by the occupants of the craft because the acceleration that occurs is through the movement of a field not the movement of the object, per se. Since the craft is contained within a field, the need for an aerodynamic shape is not critical unless it needs the ability to move through an atmosphere using standard propulsion methods. Since aerodynamic requirements no longer affect the craft, the size of the craft could be very large. No external propulsion mechanisms would be needed as the craft is controlling the gravitational field around it in order to move. But would such a craft enclosed in a field displace air as it moves, and cause turbulence in the surrounding atmosphere? Or since gravity is a warping of space-time, would the craft not \"truly\" be in the atmosphere? This is a difficult question and should be addressed by the research team that is assembled as should the other points discussed in this paragraph.\n\nAnti-Gravity or Negative Gravitational Fields\n\nA controlled anti-gravitational field not only explains observations of unknown aerial phenomena but will also be beneficial to study for two reasons. The first support of this avenue of research is that there is literature indicating the possible development of this propulsion method using current technology. The second justification is that since this area of technology development requires the use of superconductors, research in this field may also have side benefits to other technologies and other propulsion techniques that utilize superconductors."} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Literature that supports the development of anti-gravity techniques was first mentioned in the 1960s. The Gertsenshtein Effect was postulated as a wave resonance solution to Einstein's general relativity field equation. It predicts an emitted gravitational wave due to an electromagnetic wave propagating through a static magnetic field. This effect was tested in the laboratory and described in a paper in 2001 by 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) Utilizing a ceramic superconductor to generate a high field, they describe an EM discharge that exerts a short repulsive force on small movable objects along the propagation axis. Within their measurement error, the impulse's effect is proportional to the mass of the objects and independent of their composition. It therefore resembles a gravitational impulse. The Gertsenshtein Effect has also been covered in recent theoretical papers by 1843(a)(2) argues that the development of gravitational propulsion should begin now 1843(a)(2) and 1843(a)(2) describe an experiment for the generation and detection of High-Frequency Gravitational Waves (HFGWs) in the laboratory utilizing a pair of tabletop X-ray lasers.\n\nThere is also a certain advantage and flexibility to exploring the use of anti-gravity for interstellar propulsion. Even if research in this area does not prove fruitful, the research related to the improvement of current superconductor technology will be a valuable business investment, which can improve the ability to create high-density magnetic fields that are used in other propulsion technologies and scientific fields. These include propulsion through electromagnetic plasma thrusters, magnetoplasmadynamic thrusters (8), fusion RAM jets that use a magnetic field to collect protons in space (9), antimatter containment (10), and electromagnetic rail guns for sub orbital launches. (11) Although these other propulsion technologies are less likely to provide a method of interstellar travel, but instead a more efficient method of travel within the solar system, what is learned here may also benefit those areas of research. There are also a myriad of other uses for this type of technology in the areas of high current transmission for power lines, improved MAG-LEV trains, and controlled EMP. This is an excellent area of research because it affects so many other technology fields and has the capability of generating potential profits.\n\nPlan of Action\n\nAnalytical Team\n\nThe areas of expertise required for the development of anti-gravity include individuals who have research experience in:\n\n(1.) (Material Scientist) The development of state of the art superconductors, especially YBa2Cu3O7-y or comparable high temperature superconductors. Experience in other types of superconductor materials besides yttrium-barium should be considered because it is not yet known what type of material would make the best superconductor.\n(2.) (Physicist) The physics associated with high-density electromagnetic fields.\n(3.) (Physicist) The understanding of the various theories related to gravitational fields.\n(4.) (Electrical Engineer) The ability to incorporate these concepts into a working model."} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(5.) (Material Scientist) Expertise in state of the art nanotechnology may be of value to this team. Some of the initial experimental work might be developed at a sub-micron level since quantum effects are easier to detect at this level. Whether a nano-technology expert is needed on the team may depend on the route that the team takes to evaluate anti-gravitation.\n\nIn addition to their technical expertise, the team members will need to be very open minded in their approach to the problem and must be able to work well with others. A patent attorney should also be made available to the team so that any ideas generated that are directly related to this project or that could be used in other fields, are patented. One of the team members, or another individual, will need to be selected as a team manager that can use brainstorming techniques and other open-minded methods to help the team develop their ideas. This individual will be the driver and motivator of the team and may be the most critical person to the success of the team. This individual does not need to be the strongest person technically on the team, but this individual's technical expertise must be sufficient to understand the basic concepts that the team will be addressing.\n\nOnce the team is selected, the next step will be to develop a project plan. Because this type of research can change its character due to discoveries, the milestones should be flexible and should be developed by the assembled team. An initial example of milestones for the beginning stages of this project could be as follows:\n\nWeek 0: Initiate hiring and selection process\nWeek 16: Identify team leader and complete hiring of key team members\nWeek 18: Team assimilation & brainstorming completed on next steps for anti-gravity project\nWeek 20: Team provides project plan to management with milestones for the next 6-12 months\n--project plan identifies key gates that could affect change in direction of project\n--project plan identifies necessary financial resources & additional manpower if needed\n--project plan identifies how intellectual property will be captured in the process\n\nREFERENCES\n\n1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"edbfba1be2a59849","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1843(a)(2)"} {"doc_id":"edc41b521913c67d","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n-1 of 3-\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\n\nOFFICIAL RECORD\nDocument participants have digitally signed. All signatures have been verified by a certified FBI information system.\n\nDate of entry 04/[REDACTED]/2024\n\nOn March [REDACTED] 2024 [REDACTED] phone number [REDACTED], residing in [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED], was interviewed [REDACTED] by Supervisory Special Agent [REDACTED], Special Agent (SA) [REDACTED] and SA [REDACTED]. Also attending the meeting was [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] was referred to the FBI by [REDACTED] After being advised of the identity of the interviewing Agents and the nature of the interview, [REDACTED] provided the following information:\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED] stated that starting in October 2023, a lot of pilots have been seeing the same event occurring, namely seeing lights in the sky. Pilots have been discussing the events over [REDACTED]. Pilots typically saw them between midnight and 3 AM. [REDACTED] did not know if the events occurred at that time because that was when it was dark enough or if it was because that was when the lights were present.\n\n[REDACTED] first observation of the lights occurred in October 2023. [REDACTED] was flying from Boston, MA to Dublin, Ireland where he saw the lights in the northeast towards Gander, Canada. [REDACTED] was at an elevation of 37,000 feet and believed the lights were higher than him, probably at 50,000 feet or higher. The lights were white in color, would start out as dim, and get brighter before they eventually faded out. The full cycle of the lights would range from 10 seconds to one minute. The lights looked like airplane landing lights, but [REDACTED] knew that it was not them, nor did he think it was\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nInvestigation on 03/[REDACTED]/2024 at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] United States [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n\nFile # [REDACTED]\n\nDate drafted 03/[REDACTED]/2024\n\nby [REDACTED]\n\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"edc41b521913c67d","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED], On 03/[REDACTED]/2024, Page 2 of 3\n\nStarlink, Starlink flares, satellites, or meteors. It ranged between one to four lights at a time in the sky. Some lights did not move, while others moved in straight lines, sometimes changing direction, and typically did not move in a coordinated fashion.\n\nSince spotting the lights the first time, [REDACTED] has seen them approximately ten times. At times the lights would disappear for minutes before returning. [REDACTED] has seen the lights for 45 minutes up to two hours. [REDACTED] has seen the lights in all directions except for towards the south. [REDACTED] saw the lights three times in the direction of North Dakota while flying to either Seattle or Phoenix. He has also seen them off the west coast and mid-Atlantic coast. [REDACTED] did not know how far away they were but ventured they were between 200-500 miles away. [REDACTED] never saw the lights below the horizon and had not heard about them prior to October 2023.\n\nDuring a trip on February [REDACTED], 2024, [REDACTED] was able to capture video on his Samsung Galaxy S22 phone an event involving white lights. [REDACTED] stated the lights were brighter in-person than on the camera, and the lights were similar in elevation to him or were slightly higher. The video is filmed from the cockpit of his aircraft with the lights turned off. [REDACTED] was located approximately 150 miles northwest of Minneapolis, Minnesota and was flying towards the east. The lights were seen towards the north in the North Dakota region at around 4:36 AM Eastern Standard Time on a clear night.\n\n[REDACTED]\n\nAs captured on the video, white lights were seen, sometimes ten or more present at once, moving around in straight lines and getting brighter/dimmer. At the 3:27 mark in the video, [REDACTED] was not sure if two of the lights were really close together or if it was a single light with a tail. At the 3:47 mark, [REDACTED] did not know if it was three separate lights. At the 5:22 mark you can see the flight panel, showing that the airplane was traveling at approximately .80 Mach, and that the airplane was 40-50 miles northeast of Sioux Falls and could see the KFSD airport on the radar. [REDACTED] never felt unsafe from the white lights, and did not believe the lights were within 100 miles of him.\n\nA third event that [REDACTED] witnessed occurred back in June 2002. While [REDACTED] as a reservist, [REDACTED] got activated to go to Afghanistan. One\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"edc41b521913c67d","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n[REDACTED]\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] Interview of [REDACTED], On 03/[REDACTED]/2024, Page 3 of 3\n\nnight he was outside looking at the stars with another pilot. At approximately 4:30 AM local time, [REDACTED] noticed that the stars were getting blacked out over Bagram. It appeared as if something huge went overhead, from west to east, and was an equilateral triangle shape. The object was moving silently, at a consistent speed and altitude, possibly 150 knots, with no lights visible. [REDACTED] estimated it was 500 feet in size, but he could not fully see the shape of the object. The other pilot with [REDACTED] also observed the triangle, and when it passed over stated, \"did you see that?\" [REDACTED] stated he did not further discuss the sighting with anyone else nor did he hear anyone else discussing the sighting.\n\nWhile serving in the military [REDACTED], [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]. Looking through the data, [REDACTED] never found information that could explain what he saw in Afghanistan in 2002. [REDACTED] [REDACTED], [REDACTED] was not aware of anything that would explain what he had seen.\n\nOverall, [REDACTED] believed that not a lot of discussions were happening openly about the events with the lights. [REDACTED] did not think there was as much stigma surrounding these events, but people were just not used to talking about it."} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n29 March 2010\n\nICOD: 1 December 2009\n\nDIA-08-1003-015\n\nAdvanced Space Propulsion\nBased on Vacuum (Spacetime\nMetric) Engineering\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAdvanced Space Propulsion based on Vacuum (Spacetime\nMetric) Engineering\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 57\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\ni\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nAdvanced Space Propulsion Based on Vacuum (Spacetime Metric) Engineering ....iii\n\nPreface and Introduction ...................................................................iii\n\nI. Spacetime Modification – Metric Tensor Approach ............................................. 1\n\nII. Physical Effects as a Function of Metric Tensor Coefficients ............................. 2\n\nTime Interval, Frequency, Energy ........................................................................ 3\n\nSpatial Interval ............................................................................................. 4\nVelocity of Light in Spacetime-Altered Regions ............................................. 4\nRefractive Index Modeling ................................................................................ 5\nEffective Mass in Spacetime-Altered Regions .............................................. 6\nGravity/Antigravity \"Forces\" ............................................................... 6\n\nIII. Significance of Physical Effects Applicable to Advanced Aerospace Craft\nTechnologies as a Function of Metric Tensor Coefficients ...................................... 6\n\nTime Alteration ............................................................................................ 6\n\nSpatial Alteration ......................................................................................... 8\n\nVelocity of Light/Craft in Spacetime-Altered Regions ................................... 8\n\nRefractive Index Effects ............................................................................... 9\n\nEffective Mass in Spacetime-Altered Regions ............................................. 9\n\nGravity/Antigravity/Propulsion Effects ...................................................... 10\n\nIV. Discussion ............................................................................................... 11\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Blueshifting of Infrared Heat Power Spectrum ........................................ 7\nFigure 2. Light-Bending in a Spacetime-Altered Reigon ........................................ 9\nFigure 3. Alcubierre Warp Drive Metric Structure ............................................... 11\n\nTables\n\nTable 1. Metric Effects on Physical Processes in an Altered Spacetime as\nInterpreted by a Remote (Unaltered Spacetime) Observer ....................... 4\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAdvanced Space Propulsion Based on Vacuum (Spacetime\nMetric) Engineering\n\nPreface and Introduction\n\nA theme that has come to the fore in advanced planning for long-range space exploration in the future is the concept that empty space itself (the quantum vacuum, or spacetime metric) might be engineered to provide energy/thrust for future space vehicles. Although far reaching, such a proposal is solidly grounded in modern physical theory, and therefore the possibility that matter/vacuum interactions might be engineered for spaceflight applications is not a priori ruled out (Reference 1). Given the current development of mainstream theoretical physics on such topics as warp drives and traversable wormholes that provides for such vacuum engineering possibilities (References 2-6), provided in this paper is a broad perspective of the physics and consequences of the engineering of the spacetime metric.\n\nThe concept of \"engineering the vacuum\" found its first expression in the mainstream physics literature when it was introduced by Nobelist T. D. Lee in his textbook Particle Physics and Introduction to Field Theory (Reference 7). There he stated, \"The experimental method to alter the properties of the vacuum may be called vacuum engineering.... If indeed we are able to alter the vacuum, then we may encounter new phenomena, totally unexpected.\" This legitimization of the vacuum engineering concept was based on the recognition that the vacuum is characterized by parameters and structure that leave no doubt that it constitutes an energetic and structured medium in its own right. Foremost among these are that (1) within the context of quantum theory, the vacuum is the seat of energetic particle and field fluctuations and (2) within the context of general relativity, the vacuum is the seat of a spacetime structure (metric) that encodes the distribution of matter and energy. Indeed, on the flyleaf of a book of essays by Einstein and others on the properties of the vacuum, there is the statement, \"The vacuum is fast emerging as the central structure of modern physics\" (Reference 8). Perhaps the most definitive statement acknowledging the central role of the vacuum in modern physics is provided by 2004 Nobelist Frank Wilczek in his book The Lightness of Being: Mass, Ether and the Unification of Forces (Reference 9):\n\n\"What is space? An empty stage where the physical world of matter acts out its drama? An equal participant that both provides background and has a life of its own? Or the primary reality of which matter is a secondary manifestation? Views on this question have evolved, and several times have changed radically, over the history of science. Today the third view is triumphant.\"\n\nGiven the known characteristics of the vacuum, one might reasonably inquire why it is not immediately obvious how to catalyze robust interactions of the type sought for spaceflight applications. For starters, in the case of quantum vacuum processes, uncertainties regarding global thermodynamic and energy constraints remain to be clarified. Furthermore, it is likely that energetic\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ncomponents of potential utility involve very-small-wavelength, high-frequency field structures and thus resist facile engineering solutions. With regard to perturbation of the spacetime metric, the required energy densities predicted by present theory exceed by many orders of magnitude values achievable with existing engineering techniques. Nonetheless, one can examine the possibilities and implications under the expectation that as science and its attendant derivative technologies mature, felicitous means may yet be found that permit the exploitation of the enormous, as-yet-untapped potential of engineering so-called \"empty space,\" the vacuum.\n\nThis paper introduces the underlying mathematical platform for investigating spacetime structure, the metric tensor approach. It then outlines the attendant physical effects that derive from alterations in the spacetime structure. Finally, the paper examines these effects as they would be exhibited in the presence of advanced aerospace craft technologies based on spacetime modification.\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFrom a viewpoint exterior to the region, however, from the above one finds that the remotely observed coordinate ratio measurement yields a different value\n\nv_L^e = dr/dt = sqrt(g00/-g11) c (7)\n\nTherefore, although a local measurement with physical rods and clocks yields c, an observer in an exterior reference frame remote from the mass speaks of light \"slowing down\" on a radial approach to the mass owing to the ratio sqrt(g00/-g11) < 1. Conversely, under (metric engineering) conditions for which sqrt(g00/-g11) > 1, the velocity of light—and exotic-technology craft velocities that obey similar formulas—would appear superluminal in the exterior frame. This gives our fifth entry for the table of physical effects.\n\nRefractive Index Modeling\n\nGiven that velocity-of-light effects in a spacetime-altered region, as viewed from an external frame, are governed by Equation (7), it is seen that the effect of spacetime alteration on light propagation can be expressed in terms of an optical refractive index n, defined by\n\nv_L^e = c/n, n = sqrt(-g11/g00) (8)\n\nwhere n is an effective refractive index of the (spacetime-altered) vacuum. This widely known result has resulted in the development of refractive index models for GR (References 14-17) that have found application in problems such as gravitational lensing (Reference 18). The estimated electric or magnetic field strengths required to generate a given refractive index change given by standard GR theory (the Levi-Civita Effect) can be found in (Reference 19).\n\nIn engineering terms, the velocity of light c is given by the expression c = 1/sqrt(mu0 e0), where mu0 and e0 are the magnetic permeability and dielectric permittivity of undistorted vacuum space (mu0 = 4pi x 10^-7 H/m and e0 = 8.854 x 10^-12 F/m). The generation of an effective refractive index n = sqrt(-g11/g00) != 1 by technological means can from an engineering viewpoint be interpreted as manipulation of the vacuum parameters mu0 and e0. In GR theory, such variations in mu0, e0 and hence the velocity of light, c, are often treated in terms of a \"THe mu\" formalism used in comparative studies of gravitational theories (Reference 20).\n\nAs discussed below, a number of striking effects can be anticipated in certain engineered spacetime regions.\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nEffective Mass in Spacetime-Altered Regions\n\nIn a spacetime-altered region, E = mc² still holds in terms of local (\"proper coordinate\") measurements, but now energy E and the velocity of light c take on altered values as observed from an exterior (undistorted) spacetime region. Reference to the definitions for E and c in Table 1 permits one to define an effective mass as seen from the exterior undistorted region as therefore taking on the value m → m(−g11)/√g00, providing a sixth entry for our table. Depending on the values of g00 and g11, the effective mass may be seen from the viewpoint of an observer in an undistorted spacetime region to have either increased or decreased.\n\nGravity/Antigravity \"Forces\"\n\nStrictly speaking, from the GR point of view, there are no gravitational \"forces\" but rather (in the words of GR theorist John Wheeler) \"matter tells space how to curve, and space tells matter how to move.\" (Reference 21) As a result, Newton's law of gravitational attraction to a central mass is therefore interpreted in terms of the spacetime structure as expressed in terms of the metric tensor coefficients, in this case as expressed in Equation (4) above. Therefore, in terms of the metric coefficients, gravitational attraction in this case derives from the condition that g00 < 1, |g11| > 1. As for the possibility for generating \"antigravitational forces,\" noted in equation (5), inclusion of the effects of charge led to metric tensor contributions counter to the effects of mass—that is, to electrogravitic repulsion. This reveals that conditions under which, say, the signs of the coefficients g00 and g11 could be reversed would be considered (loosely) as antigravitational in nature. A seventh entry in Table 1 represents these features of metric significance.\n\nIII. Significance of Physical Effects Applicable to Advanced Aerospace Craft Technologies as a Function of Metric Tensor Coefficients\n\nAs in Section III, metric tensor coefficients define the relationship between locally and remotely observed (that is, spacetime-altered and unaltered) variables of interest as listed in Table 1, and in the process define corollary physical effects. Table 1 thereby constitutes a useful reference for interpreting the physical significance of the effects of the alteration of spacetime variables. The expressions listed indicate specific spacetime alteration effects, whether owing to natural causes (for example, the presence of a planetary or stellar mass) or as a result of metric engineering by advanced technological means as might be anticipated in the development and deployment of advanced aerospace craft.\n\nTIME ALTERATION\n\nWith regard to the first table entry (time interval), in a spacetime-altered region, time intervals are seen by a remote (unaltered spacetime) observer to vary as 1/√g00 relative to the remote observer. Near a dense mass, for example, √g00 < 1, and"} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"therefore time intervals are seen as lengthening and processes as running slower,² one consequence of which is redshift of emission lines. Should such a time-slowed condition be engineered in an advanced aerospace application, an individual who has spent time within such a temporally modified field would, when returned to the normal environment, find that more time had passed than could be experientially accounted for.\n\nConversely, for an engineered spacetime associated with an advanced aerospace craft in which √g00 > 1, time flow within the altered spacetime region would appear sped up to an external observer, while to an internal observer external time flow would appear to be in slow motion. A corollary would be that within the spacetime-altered region, normal environmental sounds from outside the region might cease to be registered, since external sounds could under these conditions redshift below the auditory range.\n\nAn additional implication of time speedup within the frame of an exotic craft technology is that its flightpath that might seem precipitous from an external viewpoint (for example, sudden acceleration or deceleration) would be experienced as much less so by the craft's occupants. From the occupants' viewpoint, observing the external environment to be in relative slow motion, it would not be surprising to consider that one's relatively modest changes in motion would appear abrupt to an external observer.\n\nBased on the second entry in Table 1 (frequency), yet another implication of an accelerated timeframe due to craft-associated metric engineering that leads to √g00 > 1, frequencies associated with the craft would for a remote observer appear to be blueshifted. Corollary to observation of such a craft is the possibility that there would be a brightening of luminosity due to the heat spectrum blueshifting up into the visible portion of the spectrum (see Figure 1).\n\n[Figure 1. Blueshifting of Infrared Heat Power Spectrum: diagrams showing spectral power vs frequency ω; left panel labeled \"infrared\" and \"visible\"; right panel labeled \"visible (shifted infrared)\"]\n\nFigure 1. Blueshifting of Infrared Heat Power Spectrum\n\nWith regard to the third entry in Table 1 (energy), in a spacetime-altered region, energy scales as √g00 relative to a remote observer in an undistorted spacetime. In the vicinity of a dense mass where √g00 < 1, the consequent reduction of energy bonds correlates with observed redshifts of emission. For engineered spacetimes associated with advanced craft technology in which √g00 > 1 (accelerated timeframe case), a\n\n² In the case of approach to a black hole, to stop altogether.\n\n7"} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"craft's material properties would appear \"hardened\" relative to the environment owing to the increased binding energies of atoms in its material structure. Such a craft could, for example, impact water at high velocities without apparent deleterious effects.\n\nSPATIAL ALTERATION\n\nThe fourth entry in Table 1 (spatial measure) indicates the size of an object within an altered spacetime region as seen by a remote observer. The size of, say, a spherical object is seen to have its radial dimension, r, scale as 1/√(−g11). In the vicinity of a dense mass √(−g11) > 1, in which case an object within the altered spacetime region appears to a remote observer to have shrunk. As a corollary, metric engineering associated with an advanced aerospace craft to produce this effect could in principle result in a large craft with a spacious interior appearing to an external observer to be relatively small. Additional dimensional aspects, such as potential dimensional changes, are discussed below in \"Refractive Index Effects.\"\n\nVELOCITY OF LIGHT/CRAFT IN SPACETIME-ALTERED REGIONS\n\nInterior to a spacetime-altered region, the locally measured velocity of light, v_L^i = c, is given by the ratio of (locally measured) distance/time intervals for a propagating light signal, as expressed in Equation (6) above. From a viewpoint exterior to the region, however, the observed coordinate ratio measurement can yield a different value v_L^e greater or less than c as given by the fifth entry in Table 1 (velocity). As an example of a measurement less than c, one speaks of light \"slowing down\" as a light signal approaches a dense mass (for example, a black hole.) In an engineered spacetime in which g00 > 1, |g11| < 1, however, the effective velocity of light v_L^e as measured by an external observer can be > c.\n\nGiven that velocities in general in different coordinate systems scale as does the velocity of light—that is, v → √(g00/−g11) v —for exotic propulsion an engineered spacetime metric can in principle establish a condition in which the trajectory of a craft approaching the velocity of light in its own frame would be observed from an exterior frame to exceed light speed—that is, exhibit motion at superluminal speed. This opens up the possibility of transport at superluminal velocities (as measured by an external observer) without violation of the velocity-of-light constraint within the spacetime-altered region, a feature attractive for interstellar travel. This is the basis for discussion of warp drives and wormholes in the GR literature (References 2-6). Therefore, although present technological facility is far from mature enough to support the development of warp drive and wormhole technologies (Reference 22), the possibility of developing such technologies in the future cannot be ruled out. In other words, effective transport at speeds exceeding the conventional speed of light could occur in principle, and therefore the possibility of reduced-time interstellar travel is not fundamentally ruled out by physical principles.\n\n8"} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"REFRACTIVE INDEX EFFECTS\n\nWhen considering metric-engineered spacetime associated with exotic propulsion, a number of corollary side effects associated with refractive index changes of the vacuum structure emerge as possibilities. Expected effects would mimic known refractive index effects in general and can therefore be determined from known phenomena. Indistinct boundary definition associated with \"waviness\" as observed with heat waves off a desert floor is one example. As another, a light beam may bend (as in the GR example of the bending of starlight as it grazes the sun; see Figure 2) or even terminate in mid-space. Such an observation would exhibit features that under ordinary circumstances would be associated with a high-refractive index optical fiber in normal space (well-defined boundaries, light trapped within, bending or termination in mid-space). Additional observations might include apparent changes in size or shape (changes in lensing magnification parameters). Yet another possibility is the sudden \"cloaking\" or \"blinking out,\" which would at least be consistent with strong gravitational lensing effects that bend a background view around a craft, though other technical options involving, for example, the use of metamaterials, exist as well.\n\n[Figure 2. Light-Bending in a Spacetime-Altered Region: diagram of a light path curving past a sun]\n\nFigure 2. Light-Bending in a Spacetime-Altered Region\n\nEFFECTIVE MASS IN SPACETIME-ALTERED REGIONS\n\nAs noted in the preceding sections, spacetime alteration of energy and light-speed measures leads to an associated alteration in the effective mass of an object in a spacetime-altered region as viewed from an external (unaltered) region. Of special interest is the case in which the effective mass is decreased by application of spacetime metric engineering principles as might be expected in the case of metric engineering for spaceflight applications (reference last column in Table 1). Effective reduction of inertial mass as viewed in our frame of reference would appear to mitigate against untoward effects on craft occupants associated with abrupt changes in movement. (The physical principles involved can also be understood in terms of associated coordinate transformation properties as discussed above.) In any case, changes in effective mass associated with engineering of the spacetime metric in a craft's environs can lead to properties advantageous for spaceflight applications.\n\n9"} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GRAVITY/ANTIGRAVITY/PROPULSION EFFECTS\n\nIn the GR ansatz gravitational-type forces derive from the spacetime metric, whether determined by natural sources (for example, planetary or stellar masses) or by advanced metric engineering. Fortunately for our consideration of this topic, discussion can be carried out solely based on the form of the metric, independent of the specific mechanisms or dynamics that determine the metric. As one exemplar, consider Alcubierre's formulation of a \"warp drive,\" a spacetime metric solution of Einstein's GR field equation (References 2, 22). Alcubierre derived a spacetime metric motivated by cosmological inflation that would allow arbitrarily short travel times between two distant points in space. The behavior of the warp drive metric provides for the simultaneous expansion of space behind the spacecraft and a corresponding contraction of space in front of the spacecraft (see Figure 3). The warp drive spacecraft would thus appear to be \"surfing on a wave\" of spacetime geometry. By appropriate structuring of the metric, the spacecraft can be made to exhibit an arbitrarily large apparent faster-than-light speed as viewed by external observers without violating the local speed-of-light constraint within the spacetime-altered region. Furthermore, the Alcubierre solution showed that the proper (experienced) acceleration along the spaceship's path would be zero, and that the spaceship would suffer no time dilation—highly desirable features for interstellar travel. In order to implement a warp drive, one would have to construct a \"warp bubble\" that surrounded the spacecraft by generating a thin shell or surface layer of exotic matter—that is, a quantum field having negative energy and/or negative pressure. Although the technical requirements for such are unlikely to be met in the foreseeable future (Reference 22), the exercise nonetheless serves as a good example for showcasing attributes associated with manipulation of the spacetime metric at will.\n\nThe entire discussion of the possibility of generating a spacetime structure like that of the Alcubierre warp drive is based simply on assuming the form of a metric (that is, gμν) that exhibits desired characteristics. In like manner, arbitrary spacetime metrics to provide gravity/antigravity/propulsion characteristics can in principle be postulated. What is required for implementation is to determine appropriate sources for their generation, a requirement that must be met before advanced spaceship technology based on vacuum engineering can be realized in practice. The difficulties, challenges, and options for meeting such requirements can be found in the relevant literature (Reference 22).\n\n10"} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 3. Alcubierre Warp Drive Metric Structure\n\nIV. Discussion\n\nThis paper has considered the possibility—even likelihood—that future developments with regard to advanced aerospace technologies will trend in the direction of manipulating the underlying spacetime structure of the vacuum of space itself by processes that can be called vacuum engineering or metric engineering. Far from being simply a fanciful concept, a significant literature exists in peer-reviewed, Tier 1 physics publications in which the topic is explored in detail.3\n\nThe analysis presented herein, a form of general relativity for engineers, takes advantage of the fact that in GR a minimal-assumption, metric tensor approach can be used that is model-independent—that is, it does not depend on knowledge of the specific mechanisms or dynamics that result in spacetime alterations but rather only assumes that a technology exists that can control and manipulate (that is, engineer) the spacetime variables to advantage. Such an approach requires only that the hypothesized spacetime alterations result in effects consonant with the currently known GR physics principles.\n\nIn the metric engineering approach, the application of the principles gives precise predictions as to what can be expected as spatial and temporal variables are altered from their usual (that is, flat space) structure. Signatures of the predicted contractions and expansions of space, slowdown and speedup of time, alteration of effective mass, speed of light and associated consequences, both as occur in natural phenomena in nature and with regard to spacetimes specifically engineered for advanced aerospace applications, are succinctly summarized in Table 1.\n\nOf particular interest with regard to innovative forms of advanced aerospace craft are the features tabulated in the right-hand column of Table 1, features that presumably describe an ideal craft for interstellar travel: an ability to travel at superluminal speeds\n\n3 See Reference 1 for a comprehensive introduction to the subject with contributions from lead scientists from around the globe.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ef49b52bb8dad950","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nrelative to the reference frame of background space, energy bonds of materials strengthened (that is, hardened) relative to the background environment, a decrease in effective mass vis-à-vis the environment, an accelerated timeframe that would permit rapid trajectory changes relative to the background rest frame without undue internal stress, and the generation of gravity-like forces of arbitrary geometry—all on the basis of restructuring the vacuum spacetime variables. As avant garde as such features appear to be, they are totally in conformance with the principles of general relativity as currently understood. A remaining challenge is to develop insight into the technological designs by which such vacuum restructuring can be generated on the scale required to implement the necessary spacetime modifications.\n\nDespite the challenges, sample calculations as presented herein indicate the direction of potentially useful trends derivable on the basis of the application of GR principles as embodied in a metric engineering approach, with the results constrained only by what is achievable practically in an engineering sense. The latter is, however, a daunting constraint. At this point in the consideration of such nascent concepts, given our present level of technological evolution, it is premature to even guess about an optimum strategy, let alone attempt to form a critical path for the engineering development of such technologies. Nonetheless, only through rigorous inquiry into such concepts can one hope to arrive at a proper assessment of the possibilities inherent in the evolution of advanced spaceflight technologies.\n\n1 See, for example, a series of essays in the compendium Frontiers of Propulsion Science, Eds. M. G. Millis and E. W. Davis, AIAA Press, Reston, Virginia (2009).\n2 M. Alcubierre, \"The warp drive: Hyper-fast travel within general relativity,\" Class. Quantum Grav. 11, p. L73 (1994).\n3 H. E. Puthoff, \"SETI, the velocity-of-light limitation, and the Alcubierre warp drive: An integrating overview,\" Physics Essays 9, p. 156 (1996).\n4 M. S. Morris and K. S. Thorne, \"Wormholes in spacetime and their use for interstellar travel: A tool for teaching general relativity,\" Am. J. Phys. 56, pp. 395-412 (1988).\n5 M. Visser, Lorentzian Wormholes: From Einstein to Hawking, AIP Press, New York, 1995.\n6 M. S. Morris, K. S. Thorne and U. Yurtsever, \"Wormholes, time machines, and the weak energy condition,\" Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, p. 1446 (1988).\n7 T. D. Lee, Particle Physics and Introduction to Field Theory, Harwood Academic Press, London (1988).\n8 The Philosophy of Vacuum, Eds. S. Saunders and H. R. Brown, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1991).\n9 F. Wilczek, The Lightness of Being: Mass, Ether and the Unification of Forces, Basic Books, New York (2008).\n10 A. Logunov and M. Mestvirishvili, The Relativistic Theory of Gravitation, Mir Publ., Moscow (1989), p. 76.\n11 Op. cit., p. 83.\n12 S. M. Mahajan, A. Qadir and P. M. Valanju, \"Reintroducing the concept of 'force' into relativity theory,\" Il Nuovo Cimento 65B, 404 (1981).\n13 R. Klauber, \"Physical components, coordinate components, and the speed of light,\" www.arXiv:gr-qc/0105071 v1 (18 May 2001).\n14 F. de Felice, \"On the gravitational field acting as an optical medium,\" Gen. Rel. and Grav. 2, 347 (1971).\n15 K. K. Nandi and A. Islam, \"On the optical-mechanical analogy in general relativity,\" Am. J. Phys. 63, 251 (1995).\n16 H. E. Puthoff, \"Polarizable-vacuum (PV) approach to general relativity,\" Found. Phys. 32, 927 (2002).\n17 P. Boonserm et al., \"Effective refractive index tensor for weak-field gravity,\" Class. Quant. Grav. 22, 1905 (2005).\n18 X.-H. Ye and Q. Lin, \"A simple optical analysis of gravitational lensing,\" J. Modern Optics 55, no. 7, 1119 (2008).\n19 H. E. Puthoff, E. W. Davis and C. Maccone, \"Levi-Civita effect in the polarizable vacuum (PV) representation of general relativity,\" Gen. Relativ. Grav. 37, 483 (2005).\n20 A. P. Lightman and D. P. Lee, \"Restricted proof that the weak equivalence principle implies the Einstein equivalence principle,\" Phys. Rev. D 8, 364 (1973).\n21 C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne and J. A. Wheeler, Gravitation, Freeman, San Francisco (1973), p. 5.\n22 E. W. Davis, \"Chapter 15: Faster-than-Light Approaches in General Relativity,\" Frontiers of Propulsion Science, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics Series, Vol. 227, eds. M. G. Millis and E. W. Davis, AIAA Press, Reston, VA, pp. 473 (2009).\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f08168cf8e9a2aaa","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nMisrep undefined-7561279\n\nNarrative\n\n(S//REL) AT 1355Z, 1.4a TOOK OFF FROM SIGONELLA AIRBASE (LICZ).\n\nAT 1424Z, 1.4a HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE.\n\nFROM 1507Z TO 0906Z, 1.4a COLLECTED SIGINT VIA AIRHANDLER.\n\nAT 1551Z, 1.4a WAS ON STATION IN SRO TRACK (41EMD).\n\nFROM 1938Z TO 0230Z, 1.4a CONDUCTED IMINT ISO 603 AOC\\OP HUMMER SICKLE IVO 41EMD IVO EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN. SEE ISR LINE 1.\n\nAT 2147Z, 1.4a WAS REACTED TO BY 1-3 ACFT, INCLUDING 1X POSS RFAF SU-30. SEE REACTION LINE 1.\n\nAT 0117Z, ONE POSSIBLE SMALL UAP WAS OBSERVED. SEE UAP LINE 1.\n\nAT 0011Z,1.4a OBSERVED ONE PROBABLE SU-27/35 LANDING IVO AL ASSAD AFLD. SEE OBS LINE 1.\n\nAT 0230Z, WAS CLEARED TO RTB.\n\nAT 0616Z, WAS OFF STATION.\n\nAT 0934Z, HANDED BACK TO THE LRE.\n\nAT 1025Z, LANDED AT LRCT. FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS-IN AND DGS4\n\n(S/RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 001\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"f08168cf8e9a2aaa","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: REL TO USA, FVEY\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20470529\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: 1.4a\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 603rd\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): ACC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USEUCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 50ATKS\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): E149\n• Mission Type: ISR\n• ATO Mission Number: 1.4a\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: A1C\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: 50 ATKS\n• Wing: 432 AEW\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nQC\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 002\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"f08168cf8e9a2aaa","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n• Rank: Ctr\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: 12 AF PAROC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: SSgt\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 603 AOC\n\nINGEST\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination: -\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator: -\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• MWS Name or Designator: -\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data: -\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 003\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"f08168cf8e9a2aaa","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n• IRCM Name or Designator: -\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• ECM Name or Designator: -\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• CMD Name or Designator: -\n• Chaff Designator: -\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges: -\n• Flare Designator: -\n• Num Flares: -\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator: -\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data: -\n• Num Towed Decoys: -\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM: -\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Num IR-Guided AAM: -\n• Gun Name or Designator: -\n• Num Gun Rounds: -\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: -\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: ANDAS4\n• Additional Avionics: AH\\SAR\n• Data Link: -\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): 1.4a\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): LICZ\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 291355:00ZMAY22\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes):\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): LICZ\n• Last Land Time: 301025:00ZMAY22\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 004\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"f08168cf8e9a2aaa","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 301035:00ZMAY22\n• Total Mission Time: 20 hours 30 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 291551:00ZMAY22\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• JTAR Number: -\n• Killbox (Location): -\n• Mission Type: XREC\n• JTAC Callsign: -\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 300616:00ZMAY22\n• Total Time On Station: 14 hours 25 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 291938:00ZMAY22\n• Time-off Station DTG: 300230:00ZMAY22\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Msn Type: TARGET DEV\n1.4c\n• Tasking Type: PLANNED\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: 36SXD70[REDACTED]53 1.4a\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed: Yes\n• Number of EEIs: 10\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: (S//REL) AT 1551Z, 1.4a ENTERED THEIR SRO TRACK INTO OP AREA 41EMD. AT 1551Z, 1.4a CONDUCTED TARGET DEVELOPMENT ON OP 1.4a ISO 603 AOC IVO 41EMD. FROM 1938Z TO 0230Z, 1.4a COLLECTED ON 39X TGTS: SYRIAN NAVY OPS\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 005\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"f08168cf8e9a2aaa","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AREA (36SXD70[1.4a]53[1.4a]), SYRIAN NAVY OPS AREA (36SYD39[1.4a]54[1.4a]), SYRIAN NAVY OPS AREA (36SYE37[1.4a]41[1.4a]), SYRIAN NAVY OPS AREA (36SXE68[1.4a]40[1.4a], SYRIAN NAVY OPS AREA (36SXD70[1.4a]53[1.4a]), OPIR ISRAEL-LEBANON-SYRIA REGION DSA 2 E4YY (36SYD46[1.4a]46[1.4a]), OPIR ISRAEL-LEBANON-SYRIA REGION DSA 2 E4YY (36SXD33[1.4a]43[1.4a]), OPIR ISRAEL-LEBANON-SYRIA REGION DSA 2 E4YY (36SXA36[1.4a]81[1.4a]), OPIR ISRAEL-LEBANON-SYRIA REGION DSA 2 E4YY (36SYA52[1.4a]83[1.4a], OPIR ISRAEL-LEBANON-SYRIA REGION DSA 2 E4YY (36SYD46[1.4a]46[1.4a]), OSIC LATAKIA NAVAL MON DSA (36SYE21[1.4a]75[1.4a]), OSIC LATAKIA NAVAL MON DSA (36SYD24[1.4a]53[1.4a]), OSIC LATAKIA NAVAL MON DSA (36SYD65[1.4a]54[1.4a]), OSIC LATAKIA NAVAL MON DSA (36SYE61[1.4a]76[1.4a]), OSIC LATAKIA NAVAL MON DSA (36SYE21[1.4a]75[1.4a]), BASSEL AL ASSAD INTL AFLD (36SYE67[1.4a]21[1.4a]), 0426WR0135 (37SBT48[1.4a]97[1.4a]), TARTUS NAVAL BASE (36SYD62[1.4a]67[1.4a]), BEIRUT ARMY BKS FAKRIDINE (36SYC29[1.4a]51[1.4a]), JUNIYAH ARMY BKS SARBA (36SYC41[1.4a]62[1.4a], RUMYAH PRISON (36SYC39[1.4a]52[1.4a]), BEIRUT MILITARY FACILITY KARANTINA (36SYC34[1.4a]53[1.4a], BAMLKAH SIGINT FACILITY (36SYD72[1.4a]69[1.4a]), BEIRUT POSSIBLE TERRORIST CNO FACILITY (36SYC32[1.4a]48[1.4a]), IBN HANI COASTAL DEFENSE SITE (36SYE46[1.4a]41[1.4a]), BATRAH CD SITE (36SYE64[1.4a]23[1.4a]), TARTUS NAVAL MSL SPT FAC (36SYD64[1.4a]72[1.4a]), AL LADHIQIYAH ARMY BKS SE STAMO (36S YE 65[1.4a]30[1.4a], 0426CA1058 (37S BV 27[1.4a]05[1.4a], AYN ASH SHARIQIYAH CD BDE HQ (37S BV 34[1.4a]14[1.4a]), ADIMAH COASTAL DEFENSE SITE SOUTHWEST (36SYD65[1.4a]92[1.4a]), AR RAWDAH COASTAL OBSERVATION POST (36SYD63[1.4a]86[1.4a], ASH SHAMIYAH CD SITE (36SYE53[1.4a]47[1.4a]), ABU AFSAH CD SITE (36SYD66[1.4a]58[1.4a]), AL LADHIQIYAH SYRIAN NAVAL HEADQUARTER (36SYE53[1.4a]36[1.4a]), TALL SUKAS CD SITE (36SYE65[1.4a]10[1.4a]), LATAKIA SCHOOL 81 (36SYE53[1.4a]36[1.4a]), AND JABLAH NAVAL ACADEMY (36SYE65[1.4a]19[1.4a]), LOOKING FOR RFN SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE ROUTES, MUNITION HANDLING, AND PERSONNEL MOVEMENT. AT 1745Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED 1X SLAVA HEADING EAST IVO 35SPU35[1.4a]09[1.4a] WHILE TRANSITING TO SP. AT 1808Z, 1X PROBABLE GORSHKOV FFG HEADING EAST IVO 36STD29[1.4a]77[1.4a] WHILE TRANSITING TO SP. AT 2104Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED A GENERATOR OR POSS RADAR DISH IVO 36SYE67[1.4a]21[1.4a]. AT 2120Z, 1X A-50U MAINSTAY D AND 2X IL-38 OBSERVED PARKED IVO 36SYE68[1.4a]22[1.4a]. AT 0006Z, ONE PROBABLE IL-76 OBSERVED ACTIVE IVO 36SYE68[1.4a]22[1.4a]. AT 0011Z, ONE PROBABLE SU-27/35 OBSERVED LANDING IVO 36SYE68[1.4a]22[1.4a]. AT 0029Z, ONE PROBABLE SU-27/35 WAS OBSERVED TAKING OFF TO THE SOUTH. AT 0344Z, ONE PROBABLE GORSHKOV FFG, HULL 461 HEADED EAST IVO 36SUD74[1.4a]23[1.4a]. AT 0405Z ONE PROBABLE UDALOY I DD, HULL 626 HEADED EAST IVO 36STC86[1.4a]94[1.4a]. AT 0411Z ONE PROBABLE SLAVA CG, HULL 055 HEADED EAST IVO 36STD79[1.4a]12[1.4a]. AT 0530Z, 1X PROBABLE UDALOY 1 DD, HULL 564 HEADED WEST IVO 35SMU20[1.4a]19[1.4a]. AT 0230Z,[1.4a] WAS CLEARED OFF TASKING AND RETURNED TO BASE (RTB). ISR ASSET UTILIZATION • Supported Unit: 603 AOC • Supported Operation: OP[1.4a] • Precoord Time: -"} {"doc_id":"f08168cf8e9a2aaa","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Precoord Effectiveness: - WEATHER • Weather: (S//REL) WAS NOT A FACTOR EFFECTIVENESS • Tasker: • Intel Gap Filled?: No • Gentext: REACTION • Initial Contact DTG: 292147:00ZMAY22 • Friendly Aircraft Location: 37S BV 34[1.4a]14[1.4a] • Friendly Aircraft Heading: 300 • Friendly Aircraft Altitude: FL243 • Friendly Aircraft Airspeed: 148KIAS • # of Enemy Aircraft: 2 • Enemy Aircraft Type: SU-30 • Enemy Aircraft Nationality: RUSSIAN • Source of ID: NTIG • Enemy Aircraft Location: [1.4a] • Enemy Aircraft Heading: 270 • Enemy Aircraft Altitude: FL 190 • Enemy Aircraft Airspeed: - • Description of Enemy Formation: - • ESM (Yes, No): No • Countermeasures Employed: NONE RSLTREACTION • REACTION DTG: • Num AA Weapons Employed: • Num Enemy Aircraft Engaged: • Friendly Weapons Employed: • Num Enemy Aircraft Damaged: • Num Enemy Aircraft Destroyed: • Enemy Weapons Employed: • Results Observed:"} {"doc_id":"f08168cf8e9a2aaa","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"GENTEXT/REACTION • Gentext: (S//NF) AT 2147Z, [1.4a] WAS REACTED TO BY 1-3 ACFT, INCLUDING 1X POSS RFAF SU-30, THAT GOT APPROXIMATELY 5NM FROM [1.4a] THE ACFT APPROACHED WESTWARD FROM THE SYRIAN COAST, FLEW DIRECTLY UNDER [1.4a] ORBIT (FL190, VS [1.4a] FL243) FOR APPROXIMATELY 2 MIN, FLEW SOUTH FOR ABOUT 10NM, AND THEN RETURNED WEST. THERE WAS NO IMPACT TO THE MISSION. [1.4a] THEN CONTINUED MISSION AS PLANNED. [1.4a] DID NOT VISUALLY ACQUIRE THE REPORTED ACFT. WEATHER • Weather: (U) WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR. UAP • Initial Contact DTG: 300117:00ZMAY22 • MDS Type / Asset Type: [1.4a, 1.4g] • Tail Number: [1.4a, 1.4g] • Friendly Aircraft Location: 36SXD99[1.4a]98[1.4a] • Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: FL240 • Friendly Aircraft Speed: 142 KIAS • Friendly Aircraft State: - • Training Range (If applicable): - • Operational Range: - • UAP Physical State: - • Number of UAP Sighted: 1 • UAP Signatures: No • UAP RF Frequency: - • UAP RF Duration: - • UAP Effects on Persons: • Full Name: • Email: • Phone Number (VOSIP/STE): • UAP First Seen Location: 37SBV28[1.4a]19[1.4a] • UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured): - GENTEXT/UAP • UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): (S//REL) [1.4a] [1.4a] OBSERVED A UAP AT 0117Z FLY NORTH TO NORTH EAST AND FOLLOWED AS LONG AS POSSIBLE. [1.4a] SCREENER COULD NOT GET A POSITIVE ID ON THE UAP. OBSERVATION"} {"doc_id":"f08168cf8e9a2aaa","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"• Observation DTG: 300011:00ZMAY22 • Aircraft Callsign: [1.4a] • Aircraft Location: 36SYE68[1.4a]22[1.4a] • Aircraft Heading: - • Aircraft Altitude: - • Aircraft Airspeed: - • Relative Bearing or Clock Position: - • Range: - • Killbox & Keypad: - • Observed Activity Location: 36SYE68[1.4a]22[1.4a] • Observed Activity Description: ONE PROBABLE SU-27/35 OBSERVED LANDING • Method of Observation: FMV • EEIs Observed: No • Number of EEIs: GENTEXT/OBSERVATION • Gentext: (S//REL) AT 0011Z, [1.4a] OBSERVED ONE PROBABLE SU-27/35 LANDING IVO 36SYE68[1.4a]22[1.4a] WEATHER • Weather: (S//REL) WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR."} {"doc_id":"f2727e1da88fb623","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONTRACT DISTRIBUTION LIST\n\nDATE: 8-Sep-09\nVIRGINIA CONTRACTING ACTIVITY\nATTN: DAP; Bolling AFB, Bldg 6000\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20340-5100\nPIIN: HHM402-08-C-0072\nD.O.: / MOD: P00001\nCS: [REDACTED]\n\nTO:\tCOPY SENT:\tADDRESS:\tNO. OF COPIES\n1. Contractor\nStamp the copy—\n\"Duplicate Original Contractor Copy\"\tX\tBIGELOW AEROSPACE ADVANCED SPACE STUDIES\n1899 W BROOKS AVE\nNORTH LAS VEGAS NV 890323671\t1\n2. Administration Office (ACO)\n(Send copy of distribution list)\t\tVACA\t1\n3. Payment Office\nStamp copy—\n\"Duplicate Original\"\na. DCAS Component\nb. NSA\tX\tFinance and Accounting Office\nP.O. Box 1685 ATTN: DF2211\nFt. George G. Meade, MD 20755-6000\t1\n4. DCAA\n(Send copy of PNM when specified)\t\tUse Only if you have designated a DCAA Office\t\n5. POC\tX\tAAP Person 1\t2\n6. Consignee\na. DD Form 1155\nb. Other\t\t\t\n7. Financial Resource Manager\n(Applicable to all \"S\" #s and all 200 series #s - 6th set of numbers in ACRN)\tX\tDS-SE3 (Read the instructions in RED before X-ing this block)\t1\n8. Logistics Branch\tX\tAttn: DAL-2A (Contracts relating to supplies/equipment, maintenance and services)\t1\n9. FE-3\tX\tCentralized Distribution Box\t1\n10. Element Budget Office\t\tDAL-2B (Use if supplies and equipment are being delivered to the LAI Warehouse - otherwise, do not \"X\")\t\n11. Report Copy DD-350\tX\tDAP-1\t\n12. Contract File\n(Original)\tX\tD.O. FILE\t1\nCOPIES:\tTOTAL NO.\t10"} {"doc_id":"f2727e1da88fb623","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT\n1. CONTRACT ID CODE\nPAGE OF PAGES 1 4\n2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. P00001\n3. EFFECTIVE DATE SEP 02, 2009\n4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.\n5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)\n6. ISSUED BY Virginia Contracting Activity ATTN: AE-2 Bolling AFB, Bldg. 6000 Washington DC 20340-5100 [REDACTED]\nCODE HHQ402\n7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) Virginia Contracting Activity ATTN: DIAC, AE-2 Building 6000 Washington DC 20340-5100\nCODE ZD50\n8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR BIGELOW AEROSPACE ADVANCED SPACE STUDIES, LLC 1899 W BROOKS AVE NORTH LAS VEGAS NV 890323671 DUNS: 827037768 Cage Code: 54JU7\n9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.\n9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)\n10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO. HHM402-08-C-0072\n10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13) SEP 22, 2008\nCODE 00000434 FACILITY CODE\n11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS\nThe above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.\nOffers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods: (a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment your desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.\n12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) See Schedule\nModification Amount: $0.00\nModification Obligated Amount: $0.00\n13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.\nCHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.\nB. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).\nX C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF: FAR 52.217-9 \"Option to extend the term of the contract\" (March 2000)\nD. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)\nE. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return 1 copies to the issuing office.\n14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)\nSee attached document\nExcept as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.\n15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) AAP Person 4 OPERATING MANAGER\n16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print) [REDACTED]\n15C. DATE SIGNED 9/4/09\n16C. DATE SIGNED 9/25/09\nNSN 7540-01-152-8070 Previous edition unusable\nSTANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83) (48 CFR) 53.243"} {"doc_id":"f2727e1da88fb623","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Unclassified\nSCHEDULE Continued\nITEM NO. | SUPPLIES/SERVICES | QUANTITY | UNIT | UNIT PRICE $ | AMOUNT $\n(Changed Line Item) Option Year: 22 September 2009 - 29 September 2010\n1001 Monthly Status Reports Quantity 12 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010 (Changed Line Item)\t1.00\tLO\t3,241,200.00\tOPT 3,241,200.00\n1002 Project Management Plan for Tasks 3.a.1 - 3.a.12 Quantity 12 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010 (Changed Line Item)\t1.00\tLO\t9,957,600.00\tOPT 9,957,600.00\n1003 Research Report for Tasks 3.a.1. - 3.a.12 Quantity 12 Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010 (Changed Line Item)\t1.00\tLO\t6,006,000.00\tOPT 6,006,000.00\n1004 Comprehensive Integrated Threat Assessment Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010 (Changed Line Item)\t1.00\tLO\t460,800.00\tOPT 460,800.00\n1005 Travel Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010 (Changed Line Item)\t1.00\tLO\t115,000.00\tOPT 115,000.00\n1006 Other Direct Costs Period of Performance: 09/22/2009 to 09/21/2010\t1.00\tLO\t5,219,400.00\tOPT 5,219,400.00\nPAGE 2 OF Unclassified"} {"doc_id":"f2727e1da88fb623","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The purpose of this modification is to:\nA) Extend the current period of performance to 30 September 2009\nB) Revise Option year dates to be 1 Oct 2009 to 30 September 2010\nC) Exercise Option year I subject to availability of funds\nD) LAW FAR 52.232-18 (APR 1984)\nFunds are not presently available for this contract. The Government's obligation under this contract is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds from which payment for contract purposes can be made. No legal liability on the part of the Government for any payment may arise until funds are made available to the Contracting Officer for the contract and until the Contractor receives notice of such availability, to be confirmed in writing by the Contracting Officer.\nE) All other terms and conditions remain unchanged"} {"doc_id":"f27de390c8115c8c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:19:54"} {"doc_id":"f3e09887ddfb29e8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ORIGIN/ACTION\n\nDEPARTMENT OF STATE\n\nAIRGRAM\n\nSP 16 BRAZ\n\nFOR RM USE ONLY\n\nA-628\nNO.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nHANDLING INDICATOR\n\nTO : DEPARTMENT OF STATE\nINFO : Amconsul SALVADOR\nDepartment: Pass copies Defense, NASA\n\nFROM : Amembassy RIO DE JANEIRO DATE: November 20, 1963\n\nSUBJECT : Negative Report on UFO (Unidentified Flying Object) Reportedly Sighted Near Salvador, Bahia on November 8, 1964.\n\nREF : Embtel 94 to Amconsul Salvador (to SecState 1054) of November 14, 1963.\n\nInformation copies of the above Embtel were sent to the Department with the request that they be passed to Defense (for the Air Force) and NASA.\n\nMr. Harold Midkiff, the Consul in Salvador, replied by telegram No. 157 of November 14 to the above cited Embtel; as follows:\n\n\"Story of strange object descending in region of Conde Bahia apparently fabricated in Rio no such objects seen by anyone in the area according to newspaper reporters and others who rushed there before investigation reports were received Secretary Public Security speculated object might be weather balloon but no such sighting verified.\"\n\nIn addition, he forwarded by pouch also on November 14 two newspaper clippings from Salvadoran journals which substantiate the above message, respectively Diario de Noticias of November 9, and the Jornal da Bahia of November 11. The first of these states that the Ministry of Aeronautics categorically denies that there was any \"strange object\" in Conde. The other is entitled \"The Airship that wasn't there\".\n\nAccording to the Jornal da Bahia reporter, the only newsworthy aspect of the episode is that it produced an astounding by-product: he sent a telegram to his paper from the federal telegraphic office in Conde - by an old morse code transmitter -\n\nINTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC AFFAIRS\n\nUNCLASSIFIED\n\nFORM DS-323\n\nDrafted by: SA:ACSimonpietri/vmd 11-20-63\n\nClearances: AA:RDKalb (in substance) POL:CCCarson\n\nContents and Classification Approved by: John Gordon Mein"} {"doc_id":"f3e09887ddfb29e8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nPage 2 of A-628 from Rio\n\nand five minutes later he had a reply from Salvador.\n\nFor the Ambassador:\n\nAndre C. Simonpietri\nScientific Attache\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n6 April 2010\n\nICOD: 1 December 2009\n\nDIA-08-1004-005\n\nHigh-Frequency Gravitational\nWave Communications\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nHigh-Frequency Gravitational Wave Communications\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 77\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1, AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nSummary ........................................................................................................ v\n1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................ 1\n1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................ 1\n1.2 Definition of High-Frequency Gravitational Waves ........................ 1\n2.0 HFGW Communications ........................................................................ 2\n2.1 HFGW Generators (Transmitters) ........................................................ 2\n2.1.1 HFGW Generator Concepts ........................................................ 2\n2.1.2 Alternative Approaches ........................................................ 6\n2.1.3 Piezoelectric Approach ........................................................ 6\n2.1.4 Infrared-Excited Molecules Approach ........................................ 7\n2.2 HFGW Detectors (Receivers) ........................................................ 12\n2.2.1 Alternative Approaches ........................................................ 12\n2.2.2 Concept (Li-Effect) ........................................................ 14\n2.2.3 Quantum Back-Action Limit ........................................................ 16\n2.2.4 Li-Baker HFGW Detector ........................................................ 20\n3.0 Operational Concerns ........................................................................ 22\n3.1 Link Budget ........................................................................ 22\n3.1.1 Signal-to-Noise Ratio ........................................................ 22\n3.1.2 Link Budget Considerations ........................................................ 23\n3.2 Bandwidth ........................................................................ 25\n3.3 Frequency and Time Standard ........................................................ 25\n3.3.1 Improvements Accruing from a HFGW Time Standard ........................ 27\n3.3.2 Search Space Improvement Accruing From HFGW FTS ........................ 28\n3.3.3 The Impact of Phase Noise Improvements on Phase Shift Encoding ... 29\n3.3.4 The Impact of Frequency Noise Improvements on FDMA and FHSS..... 30\n3.4 Possible Future Upgrades to the FTS Devices ........................................ 30\n3.4.1 Propagating Signals From Optical Lattice Clocks for Timing ............... 31\n3.4.2 In Navigating and Mapping Interplanetary Geoids ............................. 31\n4.0 Future Potential ........................................................................ 32\n4.1 Developmental Roadmap ........................................................................ 32\n4.2 HFGW Communications Predictions to 2050 ........................................ 33\n4.3 Interplanetary Navigation and Geoid Mapping to 2050 ............................. 34\n4.4 Other Possible HFGW Applications ........................................................ 36\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n4.5 2050 and Beyond ........................................................................ 37\n5.0 Acknowledgements ........................................................................ 37\n6.0 References ........................................................................ 37\nAppendix A: Nomenclature ........................................................................ 44\nAppendix B: Li-Baker HFGW Detector ........................................................ 45\nAppendix C: Perturbative Photon Fluxes Generated By High-Frequency Gravitational Waves and Their Physical Effects ........................................ 52\n\nFigures\n\n[Figure list of 27 figures with page references, as shown in the contents page]\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nHigh-Frequency Gravitational Wave Communications\n\nSummary\n\n• Fourteen laboratory high-frequency gravitational wave (HFGW) generators (or transmitters) have been proposed in the past 45 years in peer-reviewed journal articles.\n\n• The most promising laboratory HFGW generators are those that utilize very large numbers of sub-microscopic radiation elements.\n\n• The Piezoelectric Approach to HFGW generation is best for the proof-of-concept test and the proposed IR-excited Molecules Approach is best for an operational communications HFGW transmitter.\n\n• Ten different HFGW detectors (or receivers) have been proposed since 1978 and reported in peer-reviewed journal articles.\n\n• Several different HFGW receivers can be utilized for communication, but the proposed Li-Baker detector (plans & specification development in Appendix B) shows the most promise (underlying concept in Appendix C). The Li-effect, upon which the Li-Baker detector is based, is not so new that it is untested in the literature. At least nine peer-reviewed research publications concerning the theory have appeared following the initial peer-reviewed article by Li, Tang and Zhao (1992).\n\n• Because HFGW communications are carried on an extremely narrow beam directly through the Earth, there is a very low probability of interception.\n\n• Theoretical results confirm that the Li-Baker detector is photon-signal limited, not quantum-noise limited—that is, the Standard Quantum Limit is so low that a properly designed Li-Baker detector can have sufficient sensitivity to observe HFGWs of amplitude A ≈ 10⁻³² m/m.\n\n• Utilizing the IR-excited Molecules HFGW generator approach and the Li-Baker detector, the theoretical information-transfer rate over 7,000 km of distance, beamed directly through the Earth, is about 1.9 × 10⁶ bits per second.\n\n• A means of propagating a Frequency Time Standard may be one viable early low-bandwidth application for HFGW communications.\n\n• HFGW sources on the Earth, the Moon, and Mars may act as reference standards for interplanetary navigation, with the advantage that they cannot be shielded or shadowed by planetary masses. Plasma interference seen at planetary entry would be eliminated, and precise charting of Lagrangian points would be possible.\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n1.0 Introduction\n\n1.1 INTRODUCTION\n\nOf the applications of high-frequency gravitational waves (HFGWs), communication appears to be the most important and most immediate. Gravitational waves have a very low cross section for absorption by normal matter, so high-frequency waves could, in principle, carry significant information content with effectively no absorption unlike electromagnetic (EM) waves. Multi-channel HFGW communications can be both point-to-point (for example, to deeply submerged submarines) and point-to-multipoint, like cell phones. HFGWs pass through all ordinary material things without attenuation and represent the ultimate wireless system. One could communicate directly through the Earth from Moscow in Russia to Caracas in Venezuela—without the need for fiber optic cables, microwave relays, or satellite transponders. Antennas, cables, and phone lines would be things of the past. A timing standard alone, provided by HFGW stations around the globe, could result in a multi-billion dollar savings in conventional telecom systems over ten years, according to the recent analysis of Harper and Stephenson (2007). The communication and navigation needs of future magneto hydrodynamic (MHD) aerospace vehicles, such as the MHD aerodyne (www.mhdprospects.com), which is high in electromagnetic interference, similar to plasma interference seen at reentry, would be another possible applications area for HFGW communications.\n\n1.2 DEFINITION OF HIGH-FREQUENCY GRAVITATIONAL WAVES\n\nVisualize the luffing of a sail as a sailboat comes about or tacks. The waves in the sail's fabric are similar in many ways to gravitational waves (GWs), but instead of sailcloth fabric, gravitational waves move through a “fabric” of space. Einstein called this fabric the “space-time continuum” in his 1915 work known as General Relativity (GR). Although his theory is very sophisticated, the concept is relatively simple. This fabric is four-dimensional: it has the three usual dimensions of space—east-west, north-south, and up-down—plus the fourth dimension of time. Here is an example: we define a location on this “fabric” (Einstein, 1916) as 5th Street and Third Avenue on the fourth floor at 9 AM. No one can see this “fabric,” just as no one can see wind, sound, or gravity. Nevertheless, those elements are real, and so is this “fabric.” If one could generate ripples in this space-time fabric, many applications would become available. Much like radio waves can be used to transmit information through space, gravitational waves could be used to perform analogous functions. Gravitational waves are the subject of extensive current research, which so far has focused on low frequencies. High-frequency gravitational waves, as defined by physicists Douglass and Braginsky (1979), are gravitational waves having frequencies higher than 100 kHz. Low-frequency gravitational waves (LFGWs), such as those detectable by interferometric GW detectors (for example, the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Observatory, or LIGO) are not applicable to communications due to their very long wavelengths, often thousands of kilometers in length and, even more importantly, the inability to generate them effectively in the laboratory. Furthermore LFGW detectors cannot detect HFGWs (Shawhan, P. S., 2004).\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n2.0 HFGW Communications\n\nConsider the case of a single point-to-point two station full duplex communication system, as is represented in Figure 1. Such a system is often characterized as a single data link, and requires two transmitters, one at each end, and two receivers, one at each end. To avoid self-interference the link in one direction often uses a frequency of radiation different than the link in the opposite direction.\n\nFull Duplex Communication Link Using Gravitational Wave Generators and Sensors. Station 1: GW Generator, Xmit 1, GW Sensor, Rcvr 1, ω1, ω2. Station 2: GW Sensor, Rcvr 2, GW Generator, Xmit 2, ω1, ω2. Signal 1 + Source Noise; Additional Link Noise; Signal 2 + Source Noise; Additional Link Noise.\n\nFigure 1. Communication Link Block Diagram\n\nIf one were to apply the emerging technology of gravitational wave control to such a link, one would use GW generators for the transmitters on each end, and GW sensors for the receivers at each end (Stephenson, 2009a). In the example shown in Figure 1, station 1 would have a GW generator transmitting at a frequency of ω1 and a GW sensor sensitive to a frequency of ω2, without being sensitive to a frequency of ω1. Likewise, station 2 would have a GW generator transmitting at a frequency of ω2 and a GW sensor sensitive to a frequency of ω1, without being sensitive to a frequency of ω2. This is the minimum functionality required to constitute a communication link. Signal strengths of the respective GW generators would need to be sufficient to overcome link loss, coupling losses, and noises sources. Signal to noise considerations and link budgets are covered in further detail in Section 3.1.\n\n2.1 HFGW GENERATORS (TRANSMITTERS)\n\n2.1.1 HFGW Generator Concepts\n\nSeveral sources for HFGWs or means for their generation exist. The first generation means is the same for gravitational waves (GWs) of all frequencies and is based upon the quadrupole equation first derived by Einstein in 1918. A formulation of the quadrupole that is easily related to the orbital motion of binary stars or black holes,\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nrotating rods, laboratory HFGW generation, and so forth is based upon the “jerk” or shake of mass (time rate of change of acceleration) and is derived by Baker (2006) as\n\nP = 1.76×10-52 (2rΔf/Δt)2 W (1)\n\nwhere P is the power of the GWs, W; r is the distance between two masses, m; Δf is a change in force, N; over the time interval Δt, s; that is, the jerk or shake of the two masses, such as the change in centrifugal force vector with time; for example, as masses move around each other on a circular orbit. Figure 2 describes that situation. Please recognize, however, that Δf need NOT be a gravitational force (see Einstein, 1918; Infeld quoted by Weber 1964, p. 97; Grishchuk 1974). Electromagnetic forces are more than 10^35 larger than gravitational forces and should be employed in laboratory GW generation. As Weber (1964, p. 97) points out: “The non-gravitational forces play a decisive role in methods for detection and generation of gravitational waves ...” Equation (1) is also termed “quadrupole formalism” and holds in weak gravitational fields (well over 100 g's), for speeds of the generator “components” less than the speed of light and for r less than the GW wavelength. This last restriction may not really apply. Certainly there would be GW generated for r greater than the GW wavelength, but the quadrupole formalism might not apply exactly. For very small Δt, the GW wavelength, λGW = cΔt (where c ~ 3x10^8 ms-1, the speed of light) is very small and the GW frequency vGW is high. As a numerical example, r is choosen to be 10 m (convenient laboratory size, though usually greater than λGW), Δf = 4x10^8 N; for example, the force produced by a large number of piezoelectric resonators and Δt = 2x10^-10 s; equivalent to about a vGW = 5 GHz jerk or shake frequency so that λGW = 6 cm and P = 2.8x10^-13 W or 0.28 picowatts. Clearly a very small HFGW power is generated.\n\nFigure 2. Change in Centrifugal Force of Orbiting Masses, Δfcf, Replaced by Change in Tangential Force, Δft, to Achieve HFGW Radiation\n\nOne of the first suggested means for the laboratory generation of HFGWs was the so-called gaser analogous to the laser for light. Simply described (Halpern and Laurent,\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n1964), the gaser consists of a long rod of a material and microscopic parts of which can be excited by a means, such as electromagnetic (EM) radiation, to emit HFGWs. They utilize linearized theory to treat the interaction of a gravitational field with matter: “Application is made to the emission … of gravitons by microscopic systems such as molecules and nuclei.” Grishchuk and Sazhin in early 1974 discussed the emission of gravitational waves by an electromagnetic cavity. In August of 1974 Chapline, Nuckolls and Woods suggested the generation of HFGWs by nuclear explosions. In this same regard Fontana suggested that the problem of efficient generation of HFGWs and pulses of gravitational radiation might find a reasonably simple solution by employing nuclear matter (Fontana and Baker, 2006; Fontana and Binder, 2009), especially isomers. A fissioning isomer not only rotates at extremely high frequency (~ 3.03x10^24 s-1) according to the aforementioned references, but is also highly deformed in the first stages of fission (the nucleus is rotating and made asymmetric \"before\" fission). Thus one achieves significant impulsive forces (for example, 3.67x10^8 N) acting over extremely short time spans (for example, 3.3x10^-22 s). Alternatively, a pulsed particle beam, which could include antimatter, could trigger nuclear reactions and build up a coherent GW as the particles move through a target mass. The usual difficulty with HFGWs generated by nuclear reactions is the small dimensions of their nuclear-reaction volumes—that is, the small moment of inertia and submicroscopic radii of gyration (for example, 10^-16 m) of the nuclear-mass system. Such a difficulty is overcome by utilizing small clusters of nuclear material, whose nuclear reactions are in synchronization; for example, through the use of a computer controlled logic system. Such nuclear-energized HFGW generators are currently very theoretical. Braginsky and Rudenko (1978) discussed the generation of gravitational waves in the laboratory and proposed a means utilizing small particles In 1981 Romero and Dehnen analyzed the generation of gravitational radiation in the laboratory also utilizing a linear array of piezoelectric crystals that will be analyzed in more detail in Section 2.1.3. In 1988 Pinto and Rotoli presented a paper on the laboratory generation of gravitational waves at the Italian Conference on General Relativity and Gravitational Physics. Another Italian, Giorgio Fontana (1998), suggested that the possibility of emission of high frequency gravitational radiation from junction between d-wave and s-wave superconductors. Kraus (1991) proposed that gravitational-wave communication might be possible in the IEEE Antennas & Propagation magazine. At the first HFGW Working Group Conference at the MITRE Corporation in 2003, Grishchuk analyzed electromagnetic generators and detectors of gravitational waves. At that same Conference Valentin Rudenko presented a paper on the optimization of parameters of a coupled generator-receiver for a HFGW Hertz experiment. At the second HFGW Working Group Conference in Austin, Texas, in 2007, Kolosnitsyn and Rudenko presented another paper on the generation and detection of the high-frequency gravitational radiation in a strong magnetic field. In 2007, and more recently this year, a new type of HFGW generator/detector and mirror system based on thin, type I superconducting films was proposed by R. Chiao, S. Minter, and K. Wegter-McNelly (2007; 2009a,b). Therefore it is evident that a number of devices for the laboratory generation of HFGWs have been proposed including the aforementioned gaser (as has been mentioned, was first proposed by Halpern and Laurent in 1964, some 45 years ago) discussed by Fontana and Baker (2003); as well as an actual laser generator of HFGWs as discussed by Li and Li (2006). Finally a rather practical laboratory HFGW generator, which may be appropriate for the initial proof-of-concept test, is one utilizing off-the-shelf components such as magnetron energized piezoelectric crystals or Film Bulk Acoustic Resonators or FBARs has been analyzed in Woods and Baker, (2005) and Baker, Woods and Li (2006).\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe figure of merit for a HFGW generator is given explicitly by Baker, Woods and Li (2006). This Figure of merit can be extended by considering other effects since in the laboratory the force change could not even approach those of the celestial sources. It would seem that the magnitude of any laboratory generated GWs could be best increased (1) by utilizing electromagnetic forces rather than gravitational, (2) by increasing the distance between the gravitational radiators, (3) by increasing the GW frequency (that is, reducing Δt) and especially (4) by developing a large number of in-phase system elements. This last effect enters as the square of the number of elements, N, as proved using General Relativity analyses by Dehnen and Romero-Borja's analyses (Romero and Dehnen, 1981; Dehnen and Romero, 2003). Such N2 dependence also may be the key to successful laboratory generation of GWs, especially HFGWs. In that regard, recent proposal by Woods (Woods and Baker, 2009; Black and Baker, 2009)) propose the use of infrared-energized atomic nuclei, electrons and or molecules, which have a very large N, contained in a stack of N waveguide rings (Patents Pending). The distance between GW radiators may be proportional to the GW wavelength in that it may have a limit that is less than or equal to a GW wavelength. The wavelength is inversely proportional to the GW frequency. Thus given some value for the proportional constant, say unity or the distance between radiators equal to one GW wavelength, the GW frequency cancels out. As already noted it is important to take advantage of square of the number of in phase elements for useful laboratory HFGW generation. If the elements are sliced in one dimension (the dimension along the axis of HFGW generation) in order to increase the number of elements, then the change in force per element will be inversely proportional to the number of elements. For example, if the elements are sliced into one hundred separate pieces, then each piece will have one hundredth of the force of the unsliced element. Essentially, f = ma and it is assumed that the acceleration of the element was the same after the split as before. This result also follows Equation (8), page 17 in Baker, Stephenson and Li (2008b) and if there were 100 splits of an FBAR, then the power to an individual slice, P and its mass, m would be both one hundredth of their un-split value and the square root of their product would again be one hundredth. The frequency of the split elements may be a higher value -- but the attendant increase in GW power proportional to the square of the higher frequency and the decrease in power due to a smaller distance between tracks (assuming that the distance between tracks is one GW wavelength, which would be smaller) would cancel and there would be no net effect on HFGW amplitude. It is concluded, therefore, that in this particular special situation the amplitude of the generated HFGWs is proportional to the number of in-phase elements, N (not the square). In any event a large number of elements for a given HFGW-generator length can be best realized by reducing the size of the individual elements to submicroscopic size (as discussed in U. S. Patent Number 6,784,591).\n\nIn the case of HFGW generation for communications applications, it is important to relate the amplitude of a GW, A, with the power, P, or more exactly with the GW flux, FGW, in Wm-2. For a viable communications link, the HFGW amplitude, A, must be large enough to be detected at the HFGW receiver. From Appendix B of Baker, Woods and Li (2006),\n\nA = 1.28x10^-18 ( FGW/vGW)1/2 m/m (2)\n\nwhere A has the dimensionless value of spacetime strain or m/m and vGW is the GW frequency s-1. Following the proceeding numerical example we will concentrate the HFGW on a diffraction-limited area of 4x10-3 m2 or 0.004 m2 for a HFGW flux of\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(2.8×10-13)/(4×10-3) = 7×10-11 Wm-2. Thus A = 2×10-33. It is an extremely small HFGW amplitude, but possibly a detectable signal.\n2.1.2 Alternative Approaches\nThere are several alternative approaches to the laboratory generation of HFGWs developed over the past 45 years as discussed in the preceding Section 2.1.1. They can be categorized as EM-cavity generated, nuclear-energy generated, superconductor-generated, laser-impact generated and energized microscopic & submicroscopic-particle generated HFGWs. Of these categories the last category appears to be the most promising for early deployment in HFGW communications systems. Furthermore, one embodiment of that category: the Magnetron-energized FBARs generator, utilizing off-the-shelf equipment, would seem the most useful for proof-of-concept tests. For a practical, operational communications system HFGW generator (transmitter) the strong dependence of HFGW generator's power on the number of radiating elements, N, recommends a system utilizing molecular elements as suggested by Braginsky and Rudenko (1978) or using Infrared (IR)-energized pentane molecules in a stack of circular waveguides as proposed by Woods and Baker (2009). The Magnetron-energized FBARs and the IR-energized pentane will be considered in the next-following sections.\n2.1.3 Piezoelectric Approach\nLet us consider the 1.8×108 cell-phone film bulk acoustic resonators or FBARs, 10,000 Microwave-Magnetron, proof-of-concept laboratory HFGW generator. Assuming a 10 µm distance or margin between the 100 µm square conventional FBARs, the overall length of the laboratory generator will be 110 × (10-6 m) × (1.8×108 elements) = 19.8 km. It will have a total HFGW power of 0.066 W and for a distance out from the last in-line, in-phase FBAR element of one HFGW wavelength (6.1 cm) it will have a flux of 3.53 Wm-2, yielding a HFGW amplitude there of A = 4.9×10-28 m/m. By the way, the inline set of FBAR elements also produces a more needlelike radiation pattern of HFGWs so that the flux and resulting A may even be larger. Although the frequencies may be different analyses (2003), one can extrapolate approximately from the results of Dehnen and Romero–Borja's analyses in which the angle of the needle-like radiation pattern is inversely proportional to the square root of the product of the distance between the radiators (the width between FBAR bands or tracks) and N. The distance for the system discussed here is 6.1 cm and for Dehnen's system 0.00001 m, for a factor of 6,100 and N differs by (1.8×108)/(5×107) = 3.6 for a product of 2.2×104 and the inverse of the square root is 6.7×10-3. Using the result from Dehnen's paper (Equation (4.51), page 12) of a needle half angle of 1.7 degrees we would extrapolate to 0.0115 degrees or very approximately 2×10-4 radians. Since there is no longer the constraint to the use of rudimentary off-the-shelf components as there was for the proof-of-concept apparatus, the specially designed submicroscopic elements can be manipulated. First, they will be staggered into two bands or tracks of 100 rows each or 110 × 100 µm = 1.1 cm wide bands of FBARs a wavelength or 6.1 cm apart. The rows will be staggered by displacing adjacent rows in the bands by 1.1 µm. Thus the overall length will be reduced to 198 m. Second, the 100 µm length of each FBAR element can be sliced, along the direction of travel of the HFGW build up, into one-hundred 1 µm wide slices (exhibiting 0.1 µm margins). The staggered row displacements are now reduced to 11 nm. The overall length will be reduced to about 198 cm. Concentrating the 10 MW power to each of these 1.1 cm wide bands may prove to be difficult. Thus, as an example, the continuous-wave Magnetrons will be replaced by a pulsed microwave source having"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"one-microsecond-long pulses one second apart. The required average power for each FBAR band will now be 10 W. As a practical nanotechnology limit, the slice width can be reduced by two orders of magnitude to 10 nm. This would also require that the row displacements would be 110 pm (we are now into atomic if not sub-atomic dimensional changes). The overall length could be reduced to about 2 cm or the amplitude of the HFGWs could be increased to A = 4.9×10-26. In this latter case the average energizing microwave power applied to each band would need to be increased to 1 kW. A preferred compromise in this apparent nano-technology limit might be to reduce the HFGWs generator's length to about 20 cm and increase the HFGW amplitude A to 4×10-27 m/m.\nThe complementary approach to optimizing a practical HFGW generator is to increase the force produced by each element without increasing the required power (that is, increasing element efficiency). This was initially done using the modern light-weight piezoelectric FBARs rather than the heavy 10-gram crystals considered by Dehnen and Romero-Borja that were of 1981 vintage. Special designs of FBAR-like elements for optimum force-generation efficiency will improve the HFGW generator performance beyond that for the usual cell-phone FBAR designs. Another approach to element design is to utilize nano-size lasers whose targets are the force-generating elements (Li and Li, 2006). Utilization of myriads of nano-size lasers would generate high-frequency HFGW pulses as noted in U. S. Patent Number 6,784,591. Thus there are a number of opportunities to enhance HFGW generation performance, utilizing special element designs, either by reducing the generator size or increasing the generated HFGW amplitude or both.\n2.1.4 Infrared-Excited Molecules Approach\nThe very theoretical IR-generated HFGWs suggested by Woods and Baker (2009) have significant promise. If one has a standing wave in a waveguide ring and excites it properly, then one will have a GW source at its center, as shown in Figure 3. The GW flux produced at its center is proportional to the n submicroscopic particle pairs (in this case pentane molecule pairs) in each ring. There is no n2 buildup, but there is an n buildup. If one has a stack of N plates of rings, which are excited in sequence at light speed as a generated, growing as a GW passes by, then one has an nN2 buildup in GW flux."} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 3. Circular Resonator Geometry Using Infrared Excitation\n[Figure: circular IR monomode waveguide ring with mirrors, high power IR source, and position of focused GW generated]\nAnalogous to Figure 2, we see in Figure 4 the radiation pattern for a pair of orbiting masses.\n[Figure: radiation pattern for orbiting masses with GW, A, B, r, and fcf labels]\nFigure 4. Radiation Pattern Calculated by Landau and Lifshitz (1975)\nNext consider a number N of such orbit planes stacked one on top of another with the gravitational-wave (GW) radiation growing flux (Wm-2) proportional to N2 as the GW moves up the axis of the N orbit planes as in Figure 5."} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"The stack of orbital planes are no replaced by a stack of N plates each containing n molecules in each waveguide ring as exhibited in Figure 6. Now there is a HFGW wave moving up the axis of the rings (or normal to the waveguide plates) and increasing in strength according to the product nN2.\n[Figure: Figure 5. GW Flux Growth Analogous to Stack of N Orbital Planes, and Figure 6. Stack of Circular-Wave-Guide Plates With Typical Molecule Jerks, Δf's]\nOne should consider the IR rings in more detail. As calculated, the IR wavelength is about 2.5×10-6 m. The IR waveguide has a cross-sectional area radius of λ/4 in order for it to be a monomode (lowest order mode) so that the phase doesn't change across the waveguide. Thus the cross-sectional area of each IR ring is π × (2.5×10-6 m/4)2 = 1.23×10-12 m2 and its diameter is 1.25×10-6 m. The volume of each 100-m radius nano-size toroidal ring is 2π × (100) × (1.23×10-12) = 7.7×10-12 m3. The mass density of pentane is divided by its molecular mass and that gives the density of jerkable masses of 6.3×1028 m-3. Thus the number of jerkable mass pairs, n, in a 100 m radius circular wave guide 2n = (6.3×1028) × (7.7×10-12) = 4.85×1017 submicroscopic \"particles\" or potentially jerkable masses or n = 2.45×1017 mass pairs. According to Table 1 of Woods and Baker (2009) for pentane Pi = 4.62×10-16 W. Thus the flux at one meter distance for all of the mass pairs in a single ring from Equation (8) of Black and Baker (2009) is n × (0.01146) × Pi = 1.29 Wm-2. It should be recognized that the axes of the opposite pentane molecules jerk (in response to the EM wave) may not be anti-parallel and tangential to the circular waveguides. On the other hand, the radiation pattern for the HFGW exhibits some omni-directional form, as shown in Figure 7, so significant HFGW radiation will be directed along the axis of the stack of circular waveguides (normal to the plates) and the HFGW will build up."} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 7. Omni-Directional Nature of the HFGW Radiation Pattern\nNext consider a more convenient laboratory arrangement for the rings. The ring radius is reduced to one meter, but set up 100 rings, concentrically (side by side concentric rings in the same plane or plate) with an average radius of the one meter. The reduced radius drops the Pi by (100)2 to 4.62×10-20, but because of the 100 concentric rings the n = 4.85×1017/2 remains the same. Thus the flux for a single \"plate\" of concentric rings is only reduced by 104 to 1.29×10-4 Wm-2. Now stack some 106 of these 1.25×10-6 m thick plates on top of one another. Thus a 1.25 m high stack, barrel or cylinder as described in Baker (2001) is created. In this case, as shown in Figure 6, N = 106 and the N2 law can be applied. Thus a HFGW total flux of 1.29×108 Wm-2 in a very narrow beam will be generated by the stack. Of course (as pointed out in Woods and Baker (2009)) caution needs to be taken on how much power is fed to each ring. One possible arrangement is to feed the output of one ring to the input of the next. The problem here is that the source won't have a long enough coherence length, even if the attenuation of the IR doesn't kill the power after a ring or two. To avoid this, from one source the available energizing power could be divided equally between all the rings and fed to them up the stack or cylinder at the speed of light. The practical difficulties would be how to drive them all in correct phase, but it is a challenge for future research in the IR-ring approach.\nFor an operational 50,000Å infrared (IR), 12.5 meter long, 10-meter radius (104 concentric rings per plate so Pi = 1.29×102 Wm-2 and 107 plates) cylindrical HFGW generator (Woods and Baker, 2009), the flux at a one-meter distance from the generator is, according to Table 1 of Black and Baker (2009) for N = 107, (1.146×1012) × (1.29×102) = 1.48×1014 Wm-2 (very large, but with a very narrow 2.3×10-4 radian half-power-point needle beam). The required generator power can be reduced by utilizing pulsed HFGWs. Suppose that the distance between the generating or transmitting device and the detecting or receiving device is a little more than an Earth's equatorial radius, or ~ 7×106 meters. At this distance, 7,000 km, the flux of the"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nreceived signal, S, is (1.48x10^14)/(7x10^6)^2 = 3 Wm^-2, more than adequate for an effective communication system.\n\nWith this configuration, the width of the needle-like, narrow HFGW beam at the receive end is (2.3x10^-4) x (7x10^6) = 1.6 km, and multiple HFGW carrier frequencies can be used, so the signal is very difficult to intercept, and is therefore useful as a low-probability-of-intercept (LPI) signal, even with widespread adoption of the technology. From Equation (2) the amplitude A of the HFGW at 7,000 km with the HFGW frequency (twice the IR frequency of vGW = 1.2x10^14 s^-1) given by: A = 1.28x10^-18 (S/vGW)^1/2 = 1.8x10^-32 (in dimensionless units or m/m), which would be detectable by the currently designed Li-Baker HFGW detector. Since the exact frequency and phase of the HFGW signal is known (unlike the stochastic relic HFGWs, for which the Li-Baker detector was designed), a much more sensitive, optimized HFGW detector will likely be developed.\n\nAs shown in Figure 8, from Grishchuk (2008), there will be negligible relic HFGW noise at the IR HFGW generator's frequency of 1.2x10^14 s^-1 and no other cosmic sources at these frequencies are currently hypothesized. Prior to the proof-of-concept test, one can assume a noise figure at the Li-Baker detector of 10^-8 Wm^-2.\n\nFigure 8. Predicted Relic GW Energy Density as a Function of Frequency"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n2.2 HFGW DETECTORS (RECEIVERS)\n\n2.2.1 Alternative Approaches\n\nOne of the first suggested means for the detection of HFGWs concerns electromagnetic detectors (Braginsky, et al. 1974 and Braginsky and Rudenko, V, 1978). Then Pegoraro, et al. (1978) suggested the use of tuned resonant chamber HFGW detectors. Rudenko and Sazhin in 1980 proposed a Laser interferometer as a gravitational wave detector (somewhat similar to the current Japanese approach). In 1995 Tobar characterized multi-mode resonant-mass HFGW detectors and three years later in 1998 (Ottaway, et al.) proposed a compact injection-locked Nd:YAG laser for HFGW detection. And in 1999 Tobar suggested, microwave parametric transducers for the next generation of resonant-mass gravitational wave HFGW detectors.\n\nIn the past few years, HFGW detectors have been fabricated at Birmingham University, England, INFN Genoa, Italy and in Japan. These types of detectors may be promising for the detection of the HFGWs in the GHz band (MHz band for the Japanese) in the future, but currently, their sensitivities are orders of magnitude less than what is required for the detection of high-frequency relic gravitational waves (HFRGWs) from the big bang. Such a detection capability is to be expected, utilizing the Li-Baker detector (please see Appendix B for Plans & Specifications development). Nevertheless, all four candidate detectors; plus, possibly, the use of superconductors (Li and Baker, 2007) should be analyzed for possible military applications. The Li-Baker HFGW detector was invented by R. M L Baker, Jr. of Transportation Sciences Corporation, California and patented in P. R. China (Baker, 2001). Based upon the theory of Li, Tang and Zhao (1992) termed the Li-effect, the detector was proposed by Baker during the period 1999-2000, a patent for it was filed in 2001, subsequently granted (Baker, 2001), and preliminary details were published later by Baker, Stephenson and Li (2008a). This detector was conceived to be sensitive to relic HFGWs (HFRGWs) having amplitudes as small as 10^-32 to 10^-30.\n\nThe Birmingham University HFGW detector measures changes in the polarization state of a microwave beam (indicating the presence of a GW) moving in a waveguide about one meter across (see Figure 9). Also see Cruise (2000), Ingley and Cruise (2001) and Cruise and Ingley (2005). It is expected to be sensitive to HFGWs having spacetime strains of A ~ 2 x 10^-13 (Hz)^-1/2, where Hz is the GW frequency, and as usual A is a measure of the strain or fractional deformation in the spacetime continuum (dimensionless m/m)."} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 9. Birmingham University HFGW Detector\n\nThe INFN Genoa HFGW resonant antenna consists of two coupled, superconducting, spherical, harmonic oscillators a few centimeters in diameter (see Figure 10). The oscillators are designed to have (when uncoupled) almost equal resonant frequencies. In theory, the system is expected to have a sensitivity to HFGWs with size (fractional deformations) of about ~ 2x10^-17 (Hz)^-1/2 with an expectation to reach a sensitivity of ~ 2x10^-20 (Hz)^-1/2 (Bernard, Gemme, Parodi, and Picasso (2001); Chincarini and Gemme. (2003)). As of this date, however, there is no further development of the INFN Genoa HFGW detector.\n\nFigure 10. INFN Genoa HFGW Detector\n\nThe Kawamura 100 MHz HFGW detector has been built by the Astronomical Observatory of Japan. It consists of two synchronous interferometers exhibiting an arms length of 75 cm. Please see Figure 11. Its sensitivity is now about 10^-16 (Hz)^-1/2"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAccording to Cruise (2008) of Birmingham University its frequency is limited to 100 MHz and at higher frequencies its sensitivity diminishes. In the case of the Infrared-excited molecules approach, on might employ a variant of the Robinson Gravitational Wave Background Telescope for the receiver or detector (Yoon, et al., 2006). It is a bolometric large angular scale Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) polarimeter, but might possibly be modifiable for direct HFGW detection.\n\nFigure 11. The National Astronomical Observatory of Japan 100 MHz Detector\n\n2.2.2 Concept (Li-Effect)\n\nThe Li-Effect was first published in 1992 and subsequently, some nine peer-reviewed papers have been published concerning it including a capstone paper, Li, et al. (2008) included as Appendix C. The Li-Effect is very different from the classical (inverse) Gertsenshtein-Effect. With the Li-Effect, a gravitational wave transfers energy to a separately generated electromagnetic (EM) wave in the presence of a static magnetic field. That EM wave has the same frequency as the GW and moves in the same direction. This is the \"synchro-resonance condition,\" in which the EM and GW waves are synchronized (move in the same direction and have the same frequency) and is unlike the Gertsenshtein- Effect.\n\nThe result of the intersection of the parallel and superimposed EM and GW beams, according to the Li-Effect, is new EM photons moving off in a direction perpendicular to the beams and the magnetic field directions. Thus, these new photons occupy a separate region of space (see Figure 12) that can be made essentially noise-free and the synchro-resonance EM beam itself (in this case a Gaussian beam) is not sensed there, so it does not interfere with detection of the photons. This Li-Effect was utilized by Baker (2001) in the design of the Li-Baker HFGW detector and Chinese Patent (Baker, 2000) of a device to detect HFGWs, the innovative Li-Baker HFGW Detector."} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 12. Detection Photons Sent to Locations That are Less Affected by Noise\n\nThe synchro-resonance solution of Einstein's field equations [Li et al. (2008), pp. 411 to 413] is radically different from the Gertsenshtein (1962) effect. The newer Li-Effect solution utilizes a coupling between EM and gravitational waves (Li, Tang and Zhao, 1992) that arises according to the theory of relativity. And a strong static magnetic field in the y-direction, B, is superimposed upon a GW propagating in the z-direction, as in the inverse Gertsenshtein effect. However, with the Li-Effect, there is an additional focused microwave beam (\"Gaussian beam\") at the expected frequency, phase and bandwidth of the HFGWs in the same direction (z) as the GW (as shown in Figure 12).\n\nUnlike the Gertsenshtein effect, a first-order perturbative photon flux (PPF), comprising the detection photons, will be generated in the x-direction. Since there is a 90 degree shift in direction, there is little crosstalk between the PPF and the superimposed EM wave (Gaussian beam), so the PPF signal can be isolated and distinguished from the effects of the Gaussian beam, enabling detection of the GW.\n\nHere's how it works:\n\nThe perturbative photon flux (PPF), which signals the detection of a passing gravitational wave (GW), is generated when the two waves (EM and GW) have the"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nsame frequency, direction and phase. This situation is termed \"synchro-resonance.\" These PPF detection photons a are generated as the EM wave propagates along its z-axis path, which is also the path of the GWs, as shown in Figure 12.\n\nThe magnetic field is in the y-direction. According to the Li-Effect, the PPF detection photon flux (also called the \"Poynting Vector\") moves out along the x-axis in both directions.\n\nThe signal (the PPF) and the noise, or background photon flux (BPF) from the Gaussian beam have very different physical behaviors. The BPF (background noise photons) are from the synchro-resonant EM Gaussian beam and move in the z-direction, whereas the PPF (signal photons) move out in the x-direction along the x-axis.\n\nThe PPF signal can be intercepted by electromagnetic-interference-shielded microwave receivers located on the x-axis (isolated from the synchro-resonance Gaussian EM field, which is along the z-axis). In addition, isolation is further improved by cooling the microwave receiver apparatus to greatly reduce thermal noise background (Baker, Stephenson and Li, 2008a).\n\nThe resultant efficiency of detection of HFGWs is very much greater than from the inverse Gertsenshtein effect, which has been exploited in some previously proposed HFGW detectors and found to have insufficient sensitivity to HFGWs (Eardley, et al., 2008). The amplitude of the PPF has space accumulation dependence—that is, it is proportional to the length of the wave overlap. This is because the GWs (gravitons) and EM waves (photons) have identical propagation velocities, so that the two waves overlap synchronously and coherently throughout and their interaction is cumulative (Boccaletti et al., 1970; DeLogi and Mickelson, 1977). This is the synchro-resonant condition or Li-effect. This means that for maximum signal, the interaction overlap coupling must be as long as possible. It should be noted that the identification of this coupling or Li-effect, upon which the Li-Baker HFGW detector is based, is not so new that it is untested in the literature. At least nine peer-reviewed research publications concerning the theory have appeared following Li, Tang and Zhao (1992), including those by Li and Tang (1997), Li et al. (2000), Li, Tang and Shi (2003), Li and Yang (2004), Li and Li (2006), Li and Baker (2007), Li, Baker and Fang (2007), Baker, Stephenson and Li (2008a), and Li et al. (2008).\n\n2.2.3 Quantum Back-Action Limit\n\nThe Standard Quantum Limit (SQL) will be introduced and reviewed in this section (Stephenson, 2009b), and design of the Li-Baker HFGW Detection System will also be reviewed to understand how the SQL might limit the sensitivity of this new type of GW detector.\n\nReview of the Standard Quantum Limit\n\nThe Standard Quantum Limit (SQL) is often defined as \"The limit on measurement accuracy at quantum scales due to back-action effects.\" But what is \"back-action\"? (See Kippenberg and Vahala, 2008.) From Clerk (2008) the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is\n\n(Δx) × (Δp) > ħ/2 (3)"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nwhere Δx is the position uncertainty, Δp is the momentum uncertainty, and ħ is Planck's reduced constant. Thus measuring x disturbs p, which in turn disturbs future measurements of x\n\nΔx(dt) = Δx(0) + dt[Δp(0)/m] (4)\n\nwhere Δx(0) is the initial position uncertainty is, Δp(0) is the initial momentum uncertainty, dt is the time of the future measurement, and m is the mass of the system under measurement. E/c² may be substituted for mass in an energy only system. This is depicted in Figure 13.\n\nTo summarize, the quantum effects of measurements on future measurements is quantum back action. Therefore the Standard Quantum Limit defines the lower sensitivity limit for all measurement instruments, including gravitational-wave detectors, according to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Detectors cannot avoid quantum back action, however the use of higher energies in the detection process can change the relative scale and impact of back action, and the use of squeezed states can shift the relative distribution of back action into states not involved in measurement.\n\n[Figure 13 diagram: TIME t = 0 and TIME t = dt panels showing position x of mass m being measured, Δx(0), Δp(0) > ħ/2 / Δx(0), Measurement of x drives down Δx(0) which drives up Δp(0); Quantum Back Action: x(dt) measurement affected by earlier x(0) measurement; Δp(dt); δx(dt); Δx(dt) = δx(dt) + dt[Δp(0) / m] Therefore Δp(0) drives up Δx(dt)]\n\nFigure 13. Quantum Back Action as a Mechanism for Creating the Standard Quantum Limit\n\nCalculating the Standard Quantum Limit (SQL)\n\nA method for calculating the Standard Quantum Limit (SQL) is introduced in this section. The calculation of coherent versus stochastic SQL is compared and contrasted. Important terms of the SQL calculation are described, including the impact of contained energy levels within the detector on SQL, and the sources of Quality Factor and its effect on SQL. Calculating the Standard Quantum Limit (SQL)\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCoherent Versus Stochastic SQL\n\nThe question under consideration in this paper is whether or not the Li-Baker detector, Figure 14, is quantum-limited when detecting relic HFGW. In other words, does the standard quantum limit (SQL) interfere with the sensitivity of the Li-Baker detector design? The answer will be negative if the SQL is less than 10⁻³² m/m. Grishchuk (1977, 2007) has calculated the SQL for GW detectors in general, which for a coherent GW is\n\nh_det = (1/Q)(ħω/E)^1/2 (5)\n\nand for a stochastic GW is:\n\nh_det = (1/Q)^1/2(ħω/E)^1/2, (6)\n\nwhere h_det is the metric (strain) detection limit in m/m, ω is the frequency of sensed gravitational waves (typically around 10 GHz in the Li-Baker detector), E is the effective energy contained within the detector cavity summed over the detection averaging time, and Q is the quality factor or selectivity of the signal over noise.\n\nThe SQL depends on the values of these parameters. For the remainder of this paper, we will consider the SQL of only the stochastic signal detection case. In the following subsections the best possible value of the SQL using current technology will be estimated to determine the fundamental limitations of the Li-Baker detector as now envisioned.\n\nImpact of Contained Energy Levels on SQL\n\nFirst attempt to estimate a realistic best case for the energy contained within the detection process, E. Typically it is expected that for a refrigerated microwave resonant cavity the best possible electrical quality factor will be around 2π×10⁵. Assuming a \"best efforts\" value of 1000 W for the power of the Gaussian beam in a laboratory installation, the effective total RF energy stored in the microwave resonant cavity of the Li-Baker detector, summed over the system averaging time, is estimated to be given by (Grishchuk, 2007):\n\nE_RF = (10³ W) × (1000s) × (2π×10⁵/2π) = 10¹¹J (7)\n\nover a typical 1000 s averaging time. Both the Li-Baker detector and a detector using the Gertsenshtein effect use a large static magnetic field B. For the present suggested outline design for the Li-Baker detector, the nominal value of B = 3 T, so that the magnetic energy density is given by\n\nE_B = (½B²/(μ_rμ_o) = 3.6×10⁶ Jm⁻³ . (8)\n\nThe interaction volume in a practical laboratory-based detector is likely to be a maximum of around 1 m³. So, the effective total stored energy from the Gaussian\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nbeam is much greater than the stored magnetic field energy, and it follows that E ≈ E_RF = 10¹¹ J to a reasonable approximation.\n\nSources of Quality Factor and Effect on SQL\n\nTo calculate the SQL, h_det, we also need the value of the detector quality factor Q (not the same as the cavity quality factor). Anything that concentrates or enhances the signal preferentially over noise, in any measurement dimension, can be considered a contributor to the quality factor Q. The quality factor can therefore be understood as the \"signal selectivity\" in each dimension, so that\n\nQ_tot = (Q_spatial)(Q_t) = Q_rQ_solid angleQ_t . (9)\n\nThe temporal quality factor in the Li-Baker detector arises from averaging the signal over time, so that at 10 GHz, Q_t = ω̄_int = (10×10⁹ Hz) × 1000s = 10¹³.\n\nThere is a contribution to Q arising from the fractal membranes that focus and concentrate the signal photon energy – but not the background photons – along the radial dimension. The radial selectivity arising from the general relativity solution, in conjunction with fractal membranes, is calculated by Li et al. (2008). Their table III gives Q_r = SNR(r=37cm)/SNR(r=3.5cm) = 3.4×10²¹.\n\nThis is mostly due to the effective Q contribution arising from the synchro-resonance solution to the Einstein field equations that limit the PPF signal to a radiation pattern in certain directions, whereas noise is distributed uniformly. By utilizing directional antennas, the Li-Baker detector can capitalize upon this gain due to the focusing power of fractal membranes as a contribution to Q in angular space as well. This is calculated in detail, octant by octant, by Li et al. (2008). Page 24 of Li et al. summarizes this in terms of angular concentration onto the detector. A non-directional antenna corresponds roughly to solid angle 2π steradians (one hemisphere), so that the effective antenna gain is estimated as (Q_solid angle) = 2π sr/10⁻⁴sr = 6.3×10⁴. Therefore, the predicted maximum quality factor will be Q_total = Q_rQ_solid angleQ_t = 2.1×10³⁹. This finally gives the Standard Quantum Limit (SQL) for stochastic GW detection at 10 GHz:\n\nh_det = (1/Q)^1/2(ħω/E)^1/2 = 1.8×10⁻³⁷ m/m . (10)\n\nComparison of SQL With Predicted Sensitivity\n\nAs noted in the previous section, h_det = 1.8×10⁻³⁷ m/m represents the lowest possible GW amplitude detectable by each RF receiver in the Li-Baker HFGW detector, limited by quantum back-action. An additional (1/√2) factor applies if the separate outputs from the two RF receivers are averaged, rather than used independently for false alarm reduction, resulting in a minimum h_det = 1.2×10⁻³⁷. Since the predicted best sensitivity of the Li-Baker detector in its currently proposed configuration is A = 10⁻³² m/m, these results confirm that the Li-Baker Detector is photon-signal limited, not quantum noise limited; that is, the Standard Quantum Limit is so low that a properly designed Li-Baker detector can have sufficient sensitivity to observe HFRGW of amplitude A ≈ 10⁻³² m/m.\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n2.2.4 Li-Baker HFGW Detector\n\nThe detector, shown in Figure 14, has five major components:\n\n1. A Gaussian (focused, with minimal side lobes) microwave beam (GB) is aimed along the +z-axis at the same frequency as the intended HFGW signal to be detected (Yariv, 1975), typically in the GHz band, and also aligned in the same direction as the HFGW to be detected. The microwave transmitter's horn antenna is not shown, but would be located on the −z-axis.\n\n2. A static magnetic field B, generated by two powerful magnets, typically using powerful superconductor magnets such as those found in a conventional MRI medical body scanner, is directed along the y-axis.\n\n3. Two paraboloid-shaped reflectors, which are formed from \"fractal membranes\" (Wen et al., 2002; Zhou et al., 2003; Hou et al., 2005), are located in the y-z plane at the origin of the coordinate system to aim and focus the detection photons at diffraction-limited spot antennas connected to two microwave receivers. These reflectors, shown in planer form in Figure 15, are segmented (similar to a Fresnel lens) and located back-to-back in the y-z plane. They are thin enough (less than a centimeter thick in the x-direction) to not block the z-directed Gaussian beam. These microwave reflectors reflect the x-directed detection photons (PPF) and reject the z-directed Gaussian-beam photons, which move parallel to the surface of the reflectors in the y-z plane.\n\n4. High-sensitivity shielded microwave receivers are located at each end of the x-axis each about one meter distant from the origin.\n\n5. Interior noise from thermal photon generation is eliminated by cooling the Li-Baker detection apparatus to below ~ 48 mK (0.048 Kelvin). Thus there are effectively no thermal photons at 10 GHz. Noise from the interior background photon flux (BPF) from the EM Gaussian beam is reduced to a negligible level by moving the receivers out to the side about a meter away from the EM beam and by a series of superconductor or microwave absorbent baffles to \"shade\" the receivers. Stray EM resulting from scattering of particulate matter near the apparatus and possible dielectric dissipation can be effectively suppressed by evacuating the apparatus to about 7.5×10⁻⁷ Torr (a rather high vacuum). External noise is eliminated by the use of a steel and titanium cryogenic containment vessel surrounding the low-temperature Li-Baker detection apparatus.\n\nIn summary, several different HFGW receivers can be utilized for communication; but the proposed Li-Baker detector (plans & specification development in Appendix B) shows the most promise (detailed underlying concept is derived in the paper included as Appendix C).\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Stainless Steel & Titanium Vacuum / Cryogenic Containment Vessel and Faraday Cage (7.5(10)^-7 Torr, <480mK) Z GB Fractal Membrane Magnet N S 9T, 61mm gap Superconductor magnet Microwave Receiver (Detector 2) Microwave Receiver (Detector 1) X Y GB 10 GHz, 10W microwave transmitter focused at fractal membrane 2 meters Sensitivity to HFGW: A = 10-32 m / m Figure 14. Schematic of Ultra-Sensitive HFGW Detector Figure 15. Fractal Membrane Component of Li-Baker Detector Exhibited in Planar Form 21 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 3.0 Operational Concerns 3.1 LINK BUDGET 3.1.1 Signal-to-Noise Ratio Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is an important figure of merit in communication systems because it is an indicator of whether or not a transmitted signal will be useful upon arrive at its destination, the receiver. Without processing gain an SNR > 1 will be required to maintain a link budget. On the transmitter's end, the signal to noise is determined by the useful signal that is produced by the transmitter after it is already in its transmission mode, such as the GW power at the output of the GW generator antenna, divided by the RSS (Root Sum Square) of the uncorrelated noise sources referred to the same spot in the signal chain—that is, output referred noise equivalent power (NEP). This signal to noise ratio is represented by the left hand column in Figure 16. The components of the transmitter's noise equivalent power may be sorted by the source of the noise. First, before the signal is converted to GW it is in the realm of EM or photon radiation. Photons themselves make noise, and this component goes as the square root of the total number of photons. Then there is thermal noise—that is, the photons generated by blackbody radiation of the transmitter components themselves. Other electronic and semiconductor components providing the source signal generate their own photon noise due to carrier activity. All these noise sources are carried along with the original EM signal and may be converted just as faithfully as if they were signals should they fall within the transmission bandwidth. All of this is just for the EM noise component. The generation process itself may also be a source of noise, and will vary widely depending upon the generator method used. For example, the generation process noise created in the GASER would be significantly different than that created in a tuned resonant EM toroid cavity. This of course would be an important consideration in selecting a generator type. Finally, it is expected that there are a variety of GW noise sources. Background sources from space are predicted, in low levels, across the entire frequency spectrum. Also, in a GW generator situation, parasitic vibrations may also have quadrupole moments, such as the walls of a generation cavity for instance, or an unwanted vibration within a slab of SC, and these could also generate GW noise. Then there is link loss to contend with. While it is expected that the attenuation of GW due to absorption and scatter will be quite low, geometry alone will dictate that a spherically uniform radiating source will fall off as 1/R2. This link loss will affect both the transmitted signal and the transmitted noise. 22 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Signal to noise ratios (SNR's) at the transmitter and at the receiver must be calculated to support a communications link design. Predicted SNR Components at the Transmitter Link Loss Predicted SNR Components at the Receiver GW Xmit Signal 1/R2 Loss GW Signal Rcv'ed GW Antenna & Receiver Noise Signal GW Source Noise Noise EM to GW Conversion Noise EM Source Noise EM Receiver Noise GW to EM Conversion Noise Figure 16. Conceptual SNR Fill Factors: Signal and Noise Components In the receiver all these same noise sources are duplicated in reverse, as shown on the right had side of Figure 16. Referring power now to the input, there will be a received power, and the created by the receiver that was not created at the transmitter, also GW to EM conversion noise, and EM receiver noise of the same types as received propagated transmit noise. Added to this will be GW noise admitted or outlined for transmitters. When all these noise components are referred the input of the receiver, the total NEP, which is the RSS of all the noise components, must be less than the signal present at the input of the receiver to qualify as a useful link. A few comments are in order regarding the \"Q-factor\" of the receiver. One way to increase Q is to narrow bandwidth. However, this has limited value. At some point, shrinking the bandwidth will shrink the signal received as quickly as the noise received, and some receiver noise components remain constant, resulting in a net drop in SNR. Another way to increase Q is to arbitrary increase sample times of the signal. This technique will, relatively speaking, shrink receiver end noise components as referred to the input of the receiver, but it will not have any impact of the noise generated at the transmitter. Therefore in this case the SNR will approach a constant. However, both of these approaches for improving sensitivity will have an adverse effect on the information capacity of the channel, which is important for a communication application. 3.1.2 Link Budget Considerations Now consider the signal side of the communication challenge. The central question is, How do we close the link? That is, how much signal is necessary at the input of a communication channel to have a useful signal at the other end? These questions may be answered, qualitatively in this case, by considering the terms of the expression in 23 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Figure 17. In general, an EM signal Si will be used to actuate some type of GW generation device, and this device will have a conversion efficiency of μeg, which represents the ratio of power of the EM input signal to power of the GW signal generated. Not all of the GW generated will be constructively used to radiate in the desired direction; some of the GW power will be lost to destructive interference, and some will not be radiated through the antenna aperture. Thus the transmitter will have a less than unity radiated power efficiency, Rx. An end-to-end power link budget from the transmitter to the receiver must be also calculated to support a communications link design. So = integral from l1 to l2 Rr uge{T(Rx ueg[Si])}dl Transmitter Terms Link Loss Receiver Terms Si EM ueg GW Rx GW T GW Rr GW uge EM So Input Signal Power EM/GW Conversion Efficiency Radiated Xmit Ant. Power Efficiency Propagation Losses (Transmission Factor) Receiver Antenna Power Efficiency GW/EM Conversion Efficiency Output Signal Power Figure 17. A Block Diagram of a Typical Link Budget Then there will be propagation link loss, or transmission loss, T, which will be the antenna pattern integrated across the solid angle of the receiver antenna aperture as seen from the source. The receiver may have an GW antenna that aids in focusing an otherwise wider solid angle into a narrower detection aperture, and if this is true, then there will be an efficiency associated with this receiver antenna, designated here as Rr. At the receiver's detector, there is another conversion factor to account for, the conversion efficiency of GW signal power to EM signal power uge, which would be much less than unity, except that the Q factor enters the equation as a component of uge. Of course Q may also impact the bandwidth range over which the signal is collected, L1 to L2. There is also a hidden integral here which occurs over the sample time, which is understood. All of these terms will have to be defined and well understood before a communication system can be successfully designed. Many of these parameters have been predicted for the components reviewed in prior sections, however, they will not be verified until a successful experiment can be performed. 24 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 3.2 BANDWIDTH An estimate of the bandwidth that a HFGW transglobal communication system might achieve, after a proof-of-concept test is successfully completed, based on a technical paper by Black and Baker (2009), is as follows: for a 50,000Å infrared (IR), 12.5 meter long,10-meter radius (10^4 concentric rings per plate so Pl = 1.29x10^2 Wm-2 and 10^7 plates) cylindrical HFGW generator (Woods and Baker, 2009), the flux at a one-meter distance from the generator is, according to Table 1 for N = 10^7, (1.146x10^12) x (1.29x10^2) = 1.48x10^14 Wm-2 (very large, and with a very narrow 2.3x10^-4 radian half-power point needle beam). The required generator power can be reduced by utilizing pulsed HFGWs. Suppose that the distance between the generating or transmitting device and the detecting or receiving device is a little more than an Earth's equatorial radius, or ~ 7x10^6 meters. At this distance, 7000 km, the flux of the received signal, S, is (1.48x10^14)/(7x10^6)^2 = 3 Wm-2, more than adequate for an effective communication system. With this configuration, the width of the needle-like, narrow HFGW beam at the receive end is (2.3x10^-4) x (7x10^6) = 1.6 km, and multiple HFGW carrier frequencies can be used, so the signal is very difficult to intercept, and is therefore useful as a low-probability-of-intercept (LPI) signal, even with widespread adoption of the technology. From Equation (2), derived in the Appendix of Baker, Stephenson and Li (2008a), the amplitude A of the HFGW at 7,000 km with the HFGW frequency (twice the IR frequency of vGW = 1.2x10^14 s-1) given by: A = 1.28x10^-18 S^1/2/vGW = 1.8x10^-32 (in dimensionless units or m/m), which would be detectable by the currently designed Li-Baker HFGW detector. Since the exact frequency and phase of the HFGW signal is known (unlike big-bang relic HFGWs, for which the detector was designed), a much more sensitive, optimized HFGW detector will likely be developed. Grishchuk (2008) indicates that there will be negligible relic HFGW noise at the IR HFGW generator's frequency of 1.2x10^14 s-1 and no other cosmic sources at these frequencies are currently hypothesized. Prior to the proof-of-concept test, we will assume a noise figure at the Li-Baker detector of 10-8 Wm-2. Using C.E. Shannon's classical equation (1948), the maximum rate of information transfer, C, is given by: C = Blog2(1+S/N) (3A) C = Blog2(1+3.0/10-8) ~ 1.9x10^6 bps (3B) The bandwidth, B, here is arbitrarily taken to be 100 kHz for a future advanced system. The necessity for large temporal Q factors, (Qt ~10^9), currently precludes bandwidths larger than a few Hz for early systems, but the use of coherent signals will represent an easing of sensitivity requirements significantly, improving bandwidth. Note that it is based on a single carrier chopping frequency, whereas in practice, one can spread the information over an entire band of HFGW frequencies. 3.3 FREQUENCY AND TIME STANDARD The first application of HFGW to the distribution of frequency and time standard (FTS) data would be to assist otherwise conventional communications equipment. A typical near-Earth distribution system could conceivably result in a number and configuration 25 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nof the ground stations, shown in Figure 18 where their latitude and longitude are given in parentheses.\n\n(60,-150)\n(60,120)\n\nLarge HFGW Transmitter Ground Stations\n\n(-30,-60)\n(-30,30)\n\nFigure 18. A Proposed Near-Earth Distribution of Frequency Time Standard\n\nThe large transmitter ground stations would provide the signals used as both the frequency and time standards. All FTS ground stations would be synchronized such that they emit signals exactly in phase with each other, all tied to a common frequency time source, such as the US Naval Observatory. Each station would use a different frequency such that the remote terminal (RT) user set could easily differentiate signals, and any phase or time difference observed would be due to either the relative position of the remote terminal with respect to each ground station, or the relative velocity of the remote terminal with respect to each ground station. Each ground station would transmit both a carrier wave (CW) signal for a frequency reference and a periodic pulse signal (PPS) for a time reference. At least 3 ground stations would be needed for self-triangulation by the remote terminals, at least 4 with redundancy. HFGWs will propagate through the Earth with little modification, but very slight HFGW phase modification may be observed in surveillance applications (Baker, 2007.)\n\nThe counterpart to the fixed ground infrastructure would be the remote terminal side or user side of the FTS infrastructure. Each remote terminal would need to be equipped with a small HFGW receiver, which could pickup all 3 or 4 ground stations simultaneously. The arrival times of the received PPS signals could be compared via time difference of arrival, or TDOA, and used to develop a position estimate. The CW signal phases could be compared to determine the Doppler velocity of the remote terminal with respect to an Earth Centered Inertial (ECI) coordinate system. Thus, the HFGW FTS system could be used as a navigational aid, akin to the GPS system. This end of the infrastructure would be receive only and could therefore be a very low power"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndevice. Therefore mobile devices, such as portable remote spaceborne terminals could be typical users of such a navigational service. An example is depicted in Figure 19.\n\nFigure 19. HFGW Supplemented Remote Terminal Design\n\nThe navigational sensitivity of the HFGW receiver would depend on the frequencies used in the HFGW FTS system, as the received CW HFGW signal would act as the remote terminal's \"built-in\" frequency standard, replacing the need for internal crystal oscillators or Cesium or Rubidium standards. An HFGW FTS carrier wave with a frequency of 300 GHz with a wavelength of 1 mm would result in 3 pico-second type time accuracy. The use of TDOA with these accuracies would allow for arbitrarily small navigational errors.\n\n3.3.1 Improvements Accruing from a HFGW Time Standard\n\nThe cost of the FTS infrastructure must be more than balanced by the benefit resulting from that infrastructure if the cost is to be justified. Given that the GPS already provides adequate navigation services for most applications, navigational benefits alone would not justify the cost of an HFGW FTS system. However, in the case of a universal HFGW FTS, there are additional benefits associated with applying the frequency and time standards to standard telecommunications problems. The universal nature of the HFGW frequency and time standards are especially helpful. The following telecommunication benefits of an HFGW FTS system will be described in this section: improvement in acquisition time from search space improvements, improvements in modulation and coding efficiency from phase noise improvements, and improvements in bandwidth efficiency from frequency noise improvements."} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n3.3.2 Search Space Improvement Accruing From HFGW FTS\n\nThe following points are relevant with respect to the universal use of HFGW FTS among all remote terminals (including for instance cell phone handsets and their associated cellular towers):\n\n• During signal acquisition the receiving terminal must perform a search of the search space of frequency, phase, and code to acquire the transmitting terminal signal.\n\n• If there is less noise in these parameters the search space is reduced, speeding acquisition.\n\n• Ultra-fast acquisition allows more efficient TDMA, or Time Domain Multiple Access style operations, such as transmit on demand, that use bandwidth more efficiently.\n\nThe smaller resultant search space is depicted graphically in Figure 20.\n\nFigure 20. Acquisition Search Space Improvement Accruing from HFGW FTS\n\nAn equation for acquisition search space time is presented in Equation (12)\n\nTacq = Nphase*Nfreq*Ncode*(ta) (12)\n\nwhere Nphase = number of phase space cases to check for acquisition,\n\nNfreq = number of frequency cases to check for acquisition,\n\nNcode = number of code sync possibilities to check and\n\nta = acquisition test time, per test case.\n\nIn a typical example, if 30 MHz chipping is used with a 5 µsec error, there will be 150 code sync possibilities to check. If a case where a frequency error of 1 Hz is used within the acquisition window would cause a missed acquisition, and the worst case frequency error is 150 Hz, then the number of frequencies that must be checked is also 150. Finally, we must check each possible phase possibility, say 16 different options for 16-PSK. PSK stands for Phase Shift Keying and is the encoding of data bits using incremental phase modulation. These acronyms are specified in the nomenclature"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nsection below. For a 5 µsec acquire test time, the result is Tacq = 150 x 150 x 16 x 5 µsec = 1.8 seconds acquisition time.\n\nHowever, with effectively perfect knowledge of time, frequency, and hence also phase, there will only be one case to check, so result is Tacq = 1 x 1 x 1 x 5 µsec = 5 µsec acquisition time. This is essentially instantaneous for applications such as TCP/IP or VoIP. This will favorably impact the overall TDMA efficiency in that it speeds the claiming process to the point where an \"always on\" link can be replaced by a \"link on demand.\" This is a savings of 25 to 50 percent in channel usage for VoIP and TCP/IP sessions over \"always on.\"\n\n3.3.3 The Impact of Phase Noise Improvements on Phase Shift Encoding\n\nThe use of a universal HFGW FTS would also benefit the relative phase noise of all terminals, allowing for finer phase encoding. Phase noise limits the type of modulation and manner of encoding that can be performed in phase space, commonly used for over the air telecommunication systems. An HFGW FTS system could reduce phase noise by providing a frequency reference with outstanding stability. For example, moving from QPSK to 8PSK or 16-PSK improves bandwidth efficiency by a factor of 2 to 4. The phase space improvement is summarized in Figure 21.\n\nFigure 21. The Impact of Phase Noise Improvements on Phase Shift Encoding\n\n(a) QPSK (b) Low Noise QPSK (c) Low Noise 8PSK (d) Low Noise 16-PSK\n\nIn the example of Figure 21 nominal performance allows only QPSK, but improved phase noise would allow higher density phase encoding. Data rate will scale linearly with encoding efficiency as shown in Equation (13):\n\nData Rate = (BW/2) x (Coding Efficiency) x (FEC Rate) / (PN Spreading Factor) (13)\n\nCoding efficiency will be a factor of 2 better when moving from QPSK to 8PSK, or a factor of 4 better when moving from QPSK to 16-PSK. This will translate directly into a linear increase in the allowable data rate that a given bandwidth can support. Put another way, a universal frequency time standard could quadruple over the air bandwidth efficiencies just by improving phase noise alone. Phase noise improvements would be limited only by the slight variations induced in the HFGW signal passing through the earth as described in Baker (2007)."} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n3.3.4 The Impact of Frequency Noise Improvements on FDMA and FHSS\n\nThe very low noise frequency standard that would be supplied by an HFGW FTS system would allow for much more efficient use of reserved frequency bandwidth. Frequency noise limits the type of modulation and manner of encoding that can be performed in frequency space, such as Frequency Division Multiple Access (FDMA) or Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum (FHSS). HFGW can reduce frequency noise by providing a frequency reference with outstanding stability. For example, guard bands can be shrunk in FDMA, and frequency slices can be smaller and more stable in FHSS.\n\nA frequency space representation of the FDMA and FHSS noise improvements are depicted in Figure 22.\n\nFigure 22. The Impact of Frequency Noise Improvements on FDMA and FHSS\n\nEfficiencies in guard-band structure can be defined as in Equation (14).\n\nGuard band BW Efficiency = (Total Bandwidth -{Sum of Guard BW})/Total Bandwidth (14)\n\nGuard bands often consume 30 to 50 percent of assigned frequency space. While guard bands would still be required to allow for the side lobes of signals, the frequency error component would be eliminated. Similar efficiencies may be gained in the FHSS approach. A better knowledge of absolute frequency allows better frequency coding efficiencies, as seen in Equation (13) and depicted in Figure 21.\n\n3.4 POSSIBLE FUTURE UPGRADES TO THE FTS DEVICES\n\nPer the 9 Feb 2009 issue of New Scientist, optical lattice clocks are under development that will lead to a dramatic improvement over the current standard Cesium atomic oscillation clocks that now provide frequency time standard references. Optical lattice clocks vibrate at optical frequencies rather than microwave frequencies, with the reference frequency mixed down via frequency combs to allow measurements back down in the microwave regime. Strontium lattice clock are already operating with measurement precisions of 1 part in 10^16, and theoretical performance approaches 1 part in 10^18. At this precision one could measure the time delay caused by changing once centimeter in height in the Earth's gravitational field."} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n3.4.1 Propagating Signals From Optical Lattice Clocks for Timing\nThe 1 part in 10^18 measurement precision of optical lattice clocks will be affected by general relativity effects, in other words propagation delays due to gravitational field gradients will be readily measureable. \"It will make us think a little harder about what we really mean by time,\" Kleppner (2008). In effect, measuring the propagation delays at this level allows very fine measurement of the \"geoids,\" or surfaces of constant gravity, surrounding planets and inhabiting interplanetary and interstellar space. The delay experienced by RF waves could therefore be precisely compared with the propagation delay experienced by gravitational waves, which are not as strongly affected by the presence of mass. Such a differential propagation delay comparison (between RF & GW) could lead to an important new technology in the mapping of geoids, which could for instance be applied to the problem of mapping the positions of the Lagrangian points, which vary slightly over time.\n3.4.2 In Navigating and Mapping Interplanetary Geoids\nThe importance of locating and navigating to Lagrangian points is well established (Baker, 1967). See Figure 23 for a depiction of the Earth's Lagrangian points and their uses.\nGravity holes\nThe Earth and sun's gravitational fields balance at five Lagrangian points, L1 to L5. Later this year the STEREO A and B spacecraft will explore the L4 and L5 regions for the first time\nNOT TO SCALE\nEARTH ORBIT\nSTEREO A ORBIT (Due to reach L4 September 2009)\nL3: Highly unstable due to gravitational pull of other planets\nGRAVITATIONAL FIELD CONTOURS\nL4: Stable. May contain dust and rocks from the early solar system\n150 million km\nSUN\nL3\nL1\nEARTH\nDIRECTION OF MOTION\nL1: 1.5 million km from Earth. Ideal location for monitoring the sun. Home to NASA's ACE, SOHO and WIND satellites\nL5\nL2\nL2: 1.5 million km from Earth. Permanently shielded from the sun. Home to NASA's WMAP satellite. The Planck satellite, Herschel and James Webb space telescopes will all sit here\nL5: Stable. May contain dust and rocks from the early solar system\nSTEREO B ORBIT (Due to reach L5 October 2009)\nFigure 23. The Earth's Associated Lagrangian Points [New Scientist, 9Feb09 and Baker (1967), p.128, Figure 2.2]\n31\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nL1 is an ideal location for solar monitoring, whereas L2 is permanently shielded from the sun.\n4.0 Future Potential\n4.1 DEVELOPMENTAL ROADMAP\nA development roadmap is suggested here for the application of High Frequency Gravitational Waves (HFGWs) in the field of communications. The development roadmap should be twofold:\n• Theoretical work should continue on HFGW transmitters (generators) and receivers (detectors).\n• Experimental devices should be built and tested in the laboratory and then transitioned over to a practical communications system.\nA suggested developmental roadmap schedule and phasing timeline is included as Figure 24. Theoretical research is always an ongoing enterprise, but it is especially important to encourage work in the development of experimental approaches aimed at demonstrating laboratory generation and sensing of gravitational waves for the next few years. This is the kind of academic work that is best done in a research university setting, at least for the next ten years or so, until laboratory experiments can verify laboratory generation. Without early confirmation the technology will not gain widespread acceptance and move forward.\nGW Communications Development Timeline Estimate\nDecade 201X 202X 203X 204X\nYears 2009 2020 2030 2035 2040 2050\nProgram Milestones: Exp R&D Go-Ahead, Prototype Go-Ahead, Device Design Go-No go, EMD Bid / No-Bid, Production Award, Space System Go-Ahead, 1st Space Delivery\nPerform Experimental Research: 2020, Exp. Research\nPerform Prototype Development: 2025, Prototype Development\nDevice Development: 2035, Device Development\nApplications Development: 2040, Applications Development, Interplanetary Upgrade / Delivery\nSystem Applications Production & Upgrades: 2035 1st Delivery, Applications Production\nFigure 24. HFGW Com Space Application Development Roadmap, Estimated Timeline\n32\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nThe most benefit would come from a coordinated effort spread over a number of different universities. Wherever possible, pre-existing assets should be utilized to stretch funding as far as possible. For example, if synchrotron light is needed to verify the Gertsenshtein effect and the Li-effect, a survey of existing national synchrotron light facilities should be part of the funded effort to find an appropriate host facility. The funding activity—that is, the National Science Foundation—would have the overall responsibility to coordinate this activity in an ongoing manner, through proposal review, contract awards, and progress reviews, and the approach should be flexible enough to allow the redirection of funding should a particularly promising new technology or invention move to the forefront.\nAssuming that positive laboratory results can be achieved and peer reviewed in a 10 to 12 year timeframe, the next step would call for a period of prototype development, in which the device physics and engineering needed to support the technology could be matured. As prototypes show promise they could be transitioned to device development, the first time that industry would likely enter the field. Once the individual devices required to support GW communication technology—for example, GW generators and GW sensors—are in place, at that point it will be possible to begin full-scale development of systems applications. This is a conservative timeline, based on scaling from the development of previous technologies. If breakthroughs materialize, or if the pace of technological development quickens, progress may certainly occur more quickly than this.\n4.2 HFGW COMMUNICATIONS PREDICTIONS TO 2050\nIn what follows, with an eye to the future, extrapolations are made concerning the development of a HFGW communications technology into the far future (for example, 2050 and beyond). It is difficult to predict even ten years in advance to the time when we expect to have the results of the proof-of-concept test (or \"Bell-Watson\" experiment) are available and the immediate applications to HFGW communications completed. Speculation beyond that time will be contingent upon advanced development of FBAR crystals, new materials within the toroidal waveguides, and so forth, or even entirely new approaches such as those proposed by G. Fontana, V. Rudenko, R. Chiao, et al. No doubt the Li-Baker detector performance can also be greatly improved with stronger magnetic fields, more intense Gaussian beams, and better baffles as well as new detector designs yet to be developed possibly based upon theories developed at Birmingham University, INFN Genoa and The National Astronomical Observatory of Japan. Optimum designs of communication channels, bands and modulation are also be anticipated. Many of these advanced concepts were discussed at the 3rd HFGW Workshop in Huntsville in February 2009. Nanotechnology advances will allow for the fabrication of smaller and smaller HFGW transceivers having millimeter dimensions and milliwatt power requirements by 2050 and \"Radio ID\" or rather \"HFGW ID\" nanochip tags may be ubiquitous. Gravitational wave transmissions would also have the advantage of being able to pierce the protective plasma shielding that may in the future be routinely used to protect the crew aboard manned vessels—that is, communications through artificial magnetospherics, a technological limit of RF communications.\n33\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n4.3 INTERPLANETARY NAVIGATION AND GEOID MAPPING TO 2050\nWhile there is no doubt that stellar tracking will remain the primary source of navigation for space missions in the foreseeable future, as introduced in Section 3.4.2, HFGW may also prove useful in conjunction with RF in providing a navigation aid for interplanetary missions (with no planetary shielding) by mapping geoids in interplanetary space via long baseline navigation. For instance, if there were one GW source on Earth, and one GW source on the Moon, such a pair of GW sources would provide relative beacons for missions to Mars that could serve multiple roles as navigation beacons, communication relays, and in conjunction with RF signals, map geoids via relative time difference of arrival signals. Very Long Baseline Navigation could be achieved by placing a source on Earth and one GW source on Mars for a baseline that would most often be very widely spread with respect to the outer planets, for outer planetary missions. See Figures 25-27 for a number of different navigation beacon pair options.\nRe = 6378 km x2 = diameter\nRlo = 384,400 km = .00257 AU\nMoon\nθmax ~ 2Re / Rlo rad ~ 2 degrees\nRlo\nGW1\nRe\nEarth\nGW2\nFigure 25. A GW Pair on Earth as Used by a Lunar Mission\n34\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nMars\nRem = Earth to Mars Max range 1AU + 1.5 AU = 2.5 AU\nRlo = 384,400 km = .00257 AU\nθmax ~ Rlo / Rem rad ~ 60 mdeg\nRem\nSun\nMoon\nGW1\nRlo\nEarth\nGW2\nFigure 26. A GW Pair on Earth and on the Moon, as Used by a Mission to Mars\nSaturn\nRange to Jupiter 5.2AU +/- 1.5AU Range to Saturn 9.6AU +/- 1.5 AU\nJupiter\nθmax ~ (Rem / 2Rjup) rad ~ 28 deg\nθmax ~ (Rem / Rsat) rad ~15 deg\nEarth\nGW1\nSun\nMars GW2\nFigure 27. A GW Pair on Earth and on Mars for an Outer Planetary Reference Pair\n35\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n4.4 OTHER POSSIBLE HFGW APPLICATIONS\n\nThe most stunning advances in HFGW applications will probably not be in communications, but in the remotely HFGW-generated nuclear fusion, HFGW propulsion and HFGW surveillance. If an ultra-high-intensity HFGW flux impinges on a nucleus, it is possible that it could initiate nuclear fusion at a remote location, or mass disruption. Also it may be possible to create radioactive waste-free nuclear reactions and energy reactions (Fontana, G. and Baker, R. M L, Jr. 2007). As they suggest: \"At high amplitudes, GR (Gravitational Radiation) is nonlinear, thus we might expect a departure from geometric optics. Fortunately, the problem has been already theoretically examined and the resulting effects are found to be advantageous. Nonlinearity improves the focusing process and h goes to one in finite time, producing a singularity \"regardless\" of the starting, non-focused amplitude of the impinging gravitational wave (Corkill and Stewart, 1983; Ferrari, 1988a; Ferrari 1988b; Ferrari, Pendenza and Veneziano, 1988; Veneziano, 1987; Szekeres, 1992). The effect of a Δh = 0.995 pulse of HFGWs on the couple formed by a deuterium nucleus and its electron is the reduction of their relative distance by a factor of 200. If this distance reduction is effective for a few picoseconds, then the two nuclei of a deuterium molecule can fuse and give an He atom plus energy, which is the usual nuclear-fusion process in a star.\"\n\nHFGWs could theoretically be used for propulsion and control of the motion of objects such as missiles, missile warheads, spacecraft, and asteroids, and remote control of clouds of hazardous vapors. Gravitational field changes by one or more HFGW generators could urge a spacecraft in a given direction, causing a lower static gravitational field in front of a vehicle (it \"falls\" forward) and a higher one behind (providing a \"push\"). The concept is that the mass essentially \"rolls\" down a \"hill\" produced by the static g-field; that is, potential energy increase of a mass is provided by the energetic HFGWs. The magnitude of the static g-field is proportional to the square of the HFGW frequency (Landau and Lifshitz, 1975, section 108, page 349). Specifically:\n\n\"Since it has definite energy, the gravitational wave is itself is the source of some additional gravitational field (static g-field). Like the energy producing it, this field is a second-order effect in the h_ik. But in the case of high-frequency gravitational waves the effect is significantly strengthened: the fact that the pseudotensor t^ik is quadratic in the derivatives of the h_ik introduces the large factor λ^-2. In such a case we may say that the wave itself produces the background field (static g-field) on which it propagates. This [static g] field is conveniently treated by carrying out the averaging described above over regions of four-space with dimensions large compared to λ. Such an averaging smooths out the short-wave \"ripple\" and leaves the slowly varying background metric (static g-field).\" (Brackets and underline added for clarity and emphasis.)\n\nSuch an application must also await the future development of very high-intensity HFGW generators.\n\nA novel means of imaging or HFGW surveillance might be developed in future to establish a system to allow for observing activities and materials in three dimensions, within and below structures and within the Earth and its oceans. Gravitational waves, including HFGWs, pass through most material with little or no attenuation; but although they are not absorbed, their polarization (Li and Nan, 2009), phase velocity (causing\n\n36\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nrefraction or bending of gravitational rays), backscatter, and/or other characteristics can be modified by a material object's texture and internal structure. For example, the change in polarization of a GW passing through a material object is discussed in Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler (1973): \"In the real universe there are spacetime curvatures due not only to the energy of gravitational waves, but also more importantly to the material [objects and structures] content of the universe ... its wavelength changes [based on gravitational red shift] and [the gravitational wave] backscatters off the curvature to some extent. If the wave is a pulse, then the backscatter will cause its shape and polarization....\" It is difficult to theoretically establish the actual magnitude of the changes, especially at very high frequencies (10^14 Hz and higher) and to quantify them prior to HFGW generation/detection laboratory experiments.\n\n4.5 2050 AND BEYOND\n\nThe phases of human space exploration may be divided into the following phases:\n\n• Epoch 1 - Interplanetary Exploration\n\n• Epoch 2 - Interstellar Exploration\n\n• Epoch 3 - Intergalactic Exploration\n\n• Epoch 4 - Universal Exploration\n\nEach phase will have its own challenges and opportunities, but one can certainly speculate that the human need for connectedness and communication knows no bounds. So any scope of expansion beyond Epoch 1 will have enormous challenges in the area of communication. The vast distances involved will require some form of communication that entails faster-than-light (FTL) propagation. While this is a highly speculative area, such schemes have been proposed for FTL HFGW. Both Fontana and Meholic (unpublished reports) have proposed models of the universe, such as the trispace model, in which subluminal or luminal gravitational waves may couple into a super-luminal \"parallel universe\" inside which FTL speeds are possible. Such as scheme would be required to communicate between star systems and galaxies if humankind is to maintain any type of cohesive civilization. Without communications we have a history of fractured civilization, and we slip into becoming our own worst enemy. Universal communication holds the lofty promise of universal peace.\n\n5.0 Acknowledgements\n\nThe research published in technical papers authored by Gary Stephenson, chief investigator for Seculine Consulting, (Stephenson, 2009a, Harper Stephenson (2007) and Stephenson (2009b)) were crucial in the preparation of this study and is gratefully acknowledged.\n\n6.0 References\n\nBaker, R. M L, Jr. (1967), ASTRODYNAMICS: Applications and Advanced Topics, Academic Press, New York and London\n\nBaker, R. M L , Jr. (2000), Chinese Patent Number 0510055882.2\n\n37\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBaker, R. M L, Jr. (2001), U. S. Patent Number 6,784,591\n\nBaker, R. M L, Jr. (2006), \"Novel formulation of the quadrupole equation for potential stellar gravitational-wave power estimation,\" Astronomische Nachrichten 327, No. 7, pp. 710-713.\n\nBaker, R. M L, Jr., Woods, R. C. and Fangyu Li (2006), \"Piezoelectric-Crystal-Resonator High-Frequency Gravitational Wave Generation and Synchro-Resonance Detection,\" Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF-2006), edited by M. S. El-Genk, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings Vol. 813, Melville NY, pp. 1280-1289.\n\nBaker, R. M L, Jr., Stephenson, G. V. and Li, F. (2008a), \"Proposed Ultra-High Sensitivity HFGW Detector,\" Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF-2008), edited by M. S. El-Genk, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings Vol. 969, Melville, NY, pp. 1045-1054.\n\nBaker, R. M L, Jr., Stephenson, G. V. and Li, F. (2008b), \"Analyses of the Frequency and Intensity of Laboratory Generated HFGWs,\" Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF-2008), edited by M. S. El-Genk, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings Vol. 969, Melville, NY, pp. 1036-1044.\n\nBernard, P. Gemme, G., Parodi, R. and Picasso, E. (2001), \"A detector of small harmonic displacement based on two coupled microwave cavities,\" Review of Scientific Instruments 72, Number 5, May, pp. 2428-2437.\n\nBlack, C. S. and Baker, R. M L, Jr. (2009), \"Radiation Pattern for a Multiple-Element HFGW Generator,\" Space, Propulsion and Energy Sciences International Forum (SPESIF), 24-27 February, ed. G. Robertson, 3rd High-Frequency Gravitational Wave Workshop (Paper 035), American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings, Melville, NY, in press.\n\nBoccalet D., Desabbar V., Fortini P. and Gualdi C. (1970), \"Conversion of Photons Into Gravitons and Vice Versa in a Static Electromagnetic Field,\" Il Nuovo Cimento B70, 129\n\nBraginsky, V. B. Grishchuk, L. P., Doroshkevich, A.G., Zeldovich, Ya. B. Noviko, I. D. and Sazhin, M. V. (1974), \"Electromagnetic Detectors of Gravitational Waves,\" Sov. Phys. JETP 38, p. 865.\n\nBraginsky, V. B. and Rudenko, Valentin N. (1978), \"Gravitational waves and the detection of gravitational radiation,\" Section 7: \"Generation of gravitational waves in the laboratory,\" Physics Report (Review section of Physics Letters) 46, Number 5, pp. 165-200.\n\nChapline, G. Nuckolls, F. J. and Woods, L. L. (1974), \"Gravitational-radiation production using nuclear explosions,\" Physical Review D. 10, Number 4, August, pp. 1064-1065.\\\n\nChiao, R. Y. (2007), \"New Direction for gravity-wave physics via 'Millikan oil drops,'\" 6 April, arXiv:gr-qc/0610146v6.\n\nChiao, R. Y., Minter, S. J., and Wegter-McNelly, K. (2009a), \"Do Mirrors for Gravitational Waves Exist?,\" arXiv:0903.0661v5 [gr-qc], March 23.\n\n38\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChiao, R. Y., Minter, S. J., and Wegter-McNelly, K., (2009b), \"Laboratory-scale superconducting mirrors for gravitational microwaves,\" arXiv:0903.3280v3 [gr-qc], March 26.\n\nChincarini, A and Gemme, G. (2003), \"Micro-wave based High-Frequency Gravitational Wave detector,\" paper HFGW-03-103, Gravitational-Wave Conference, The MITR Corporation, May 6-9.\n\nCruise, A. M. (2000), \"An electromagnetic detector for very-high-frequency gravitational waves,\" Class. Quantum Gravity 17, pp. 2525-2530.\n\nCruise, A. M. and Ingley, R. M. J. (2005), \"A correlation detector for very high frequency gravitational waves,\" Class. Quantum Grav. 22, 5479-5481.\n\nCruise, A. M. (2008), \"Very High Frequency Gravitational Waves,\" Gravitational Wave Advanced Detector Workshop (GWADW), Elba Conference, 17 May, slide presentation 132. https://indico.pi.infn.it/contributionDisplay.py?contribId=132&sessionId=13&confId=225\n\nClerk, A.A. (2008), \"Quantum Noise & Quantum Measurement,\" (APS Tutorial on Quantum Measurement),\"McGillUniversity website, http://www.physics.mcgill.ca/~clerk/PDFfiles/APSQMeasTutorialMar08.pdf.\n\nDehnen, H. and Fernando Romero-Borja (2003), \"Generation of GHz - THz High-Frequency Gravitational Waves in the laboratory,\" paper HFGW-03-102, Gravitational-Wave Conference, The MITRE Corporation, May 6-9.\n\nDeLogi W.K. and Mickelson A.R. (1977), \"Electro-Gravitational Conversion Cross-Sections in Static Electromagnetic-Fields,\" Phys. Rev. D16, pp. 2915-2927\n\nDouglass, D.H. and Braginsky, B. (1979), \"Gravitational-radiation experiments,\" in \"General relativity: an Einstein centenary survey\" Ed. Hawking S.W. and Israel W. (CUP, UK), 90-137.\n\nEardley, et al. (2008) \"High Frequency Gravitational Waves,\" JSR-08-506, October, the JASON defense science advisory panel and prepared for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.\n\nEinstein, Albert (1915), Einstein, Albert (1915), \"Die Feldgleichungen der Gravitation,\" Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin: 844-847, http://nausikaa2.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/cgi-bin/toc/toc.x.cgi?dir=6E3MAXK4&step=thumb, retrieved on 12 September 2006 (General Relativity)\n\nEinstein, Albert (1916), Einstein, Albert (1916), \"Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie\" (PDF), Annalen der Physik 49, http://www.alberteinstein.info/gallery/gtext3.html, retrieved on 3 September 2006 (Gravitational Waves)\n\n39\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nEinstein, Albert, (1918) Über Gravitationswellen. In: Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin (1918), 154-167. (Quadrupole equation and formalism)\n\nFontana, G. (1998), \"A possibility of emission of high frequency gravitational radiation from junctions between d-wave and s-wave superconductors,\" Preprint, Faculty of Science, University of Trento, 38050 Povo (TN), Italy, pp. 1-8. http://xxx.lanl.gov/html/cond-mat/9812070.\n\nFontana, G. and Baker, R. M L Jr. (2003), \"The high-temperature superconductor (HTSC) gravitational laser (GASER),\" paper HFGW-03-107, Gravitational-Wave Conference, The MITRE Corporation, May 6-9.\n\nFontana, G. and Baker, R. M L, Jr. (2006), \"Generation of Gravitational Waves with Nuclear Reactions,\" Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF-2006), edited by M. S. El-Genk, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings Vol. 813, Melville, NY, pp. 1352-1358.\n\nFontana, G. and Baker, R. M L Jr. (2007), \"HFGW-Induced Nuclear Fusion,\" Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF-2007), edited by M. S. El-Genk, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings Vol. 880, Melville, NY, pp. 1156-1164.\n\nFontana, G. and Binder, B. (2009), \"Electromagnetic to Gravitational wave Conversion via Nuclear Holonomy,\" Space, Propulsion and Energy Sciences International Forum (SPESIF), 24-27 February, ed. G. Robertson, Paper 015, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings, Melville, NY, in press.\n\nGrishchuk, L. P. and Sazhin M. V. (1974), \"Emission of gravitational waves by an electromagnetic cavity.\" Soviet Physics JETP 38, Number 2, pp. 215-221.\n\nGrishchuk, L. P. (1977), \"Gravitational Waves in the Cosmos and the Laboratory,\" Usp. Fiz. Nauk 121, pp 629-656.\n\nGrishchuk, L. P. (2003), \"Electromagnetic generators and detectors of gravitational waves,\" paper HFGW-03-119, Gravitational-Wave Conference, The MITRE Corporation, May 6-9.\n\nGrishchuk, L.P. (2007) \"High-Frequency Relic Gravitational Waves, their Detection and New Approaches,\" in the proceedings of the HFGW2 Workshop, Institute Austin (IASA), Texas, September 19-21; http://earthtech.org/hfgw2/, accessed 11/06/08.\n\nGrishchuk, L.P. (2008), \"Discovering Relic Gravitational Waves in Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation,\" Proceedings of the School, Eds. I. Ciufolini and R. Matzner, (in press) Springer 2008, arXiv:0707.3319v3\n\nHalpren, L. and Laurent, B. (1964), \"On the gravitational radiation of a microscopic system,\" IL NUOVO CIMENTO, Volume XXXIIIR, Number 3, pp. 728- 751.\n\nHarper, C. and Stephenson, G.V. (2007), \"The Value Estimation of an HFGW Frequency Time Standard for Telecommunications Network Optimization,\" Space Technology and\n\n40\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nApplications International Forum (STAIF-2007), edited by M. S. El-Genk, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings Vol. 880, Melville, NY, pp. 1083-1091.\n\nHou B., Xu G., Wong H.K., and Wen W.J. (2005), \"Tuning of photonic bandgaps by a field-induced structural change of fractal metamaterials,\" Optics Express 13 9149-9154.\n\nIngley, R. M. J. (2005), \"Implementation and Cross Correlation of Two High Frequency Gravitational Wave Detectors,\" Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Birmingham, January.\n\nKippenberg, T. J. and Vahala, K. J. (2008), \"Cavity Optomechanics: Back-Action at the Mesoscale,\" Science 321, 1172-1176, August 29\n\nKleppner, D. (2008) Ref link: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126941.900-super-clocks-more-accurate-than-time-itself.html?full=true\n\nKolosnitsyn, N. I. and Rudenko, V. (2007), \"Generation and Detection of the High Frequency Gravitational Radiation in a Strong Magnetic Field,\" in the proceedings of the HFGW2 Workshop, Institute of Advanced Studies at Austin (IASA), Texas, September 19-21; http://earthtech.org/hfgw2/\n\nKraus. J. D. (1991), \"Will gravity-wave communication be possible?\" IEEE Antennas & Propagation Magazine, Volume 33, Number 4, August.\n\nLandau, L. D. and Lifshitz, E. M. (1975), The Classical Theory of Fields, Fourth Revised English Edition, Pergamon Press, pp. 348, 349, 355-357.\n\nLi, F. Y., Tang M. and Zhao P. (1992), \"Interaction Between Narrow Wave Beam-Type High Frequency Gravitational Radiation and Electromagnetic Fields,\" Acta Physica Sinica 41 1919-1928\n\nLi, F. Y. and Tang M.X. (1997), \"Positive definite problem of energy density and radiative energy flux for pulse cylindrical gravitational wave,\" Acta Physica Sinica 6 321-333.\n\nLi, F. Y., Meng-Xi Tang, Jun Luo, and Yi-Chuan Li (2000) \"Electrodynamical response of a high energy photon flux to a gravitational wave,\" Physical Review D 62, July 21, pp. 044018-1 to 044018 -9.\n\nLi, F. Y., Meng-Xi Tang, and Dong-Ping Shi, (2003), \"Electromagnetic response of a Gaussian beam to high-frequency relic gravitational waves in quintessential inflationary models,\" Physical Review B67, pp. 104006-1 to -17.\n\nLi, F. Y. and Nan Yang (2004), \"Resonant Interaction between a Weak Gravitational Wave and a Microwave Beam in the Double Polarized States Through a Static Magnetic Field\" Journal-ref:Chin. Phys. Lett. 21, No. 11, p. 2113.\n\nLi, F. Y. and Li, Ruxin (2006), \"Ultra-High-Intensity Lasers for Gravitational Wave Generation and Detection,\" Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF-2006), edited by M. S. El-Genk, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings Vol. 813, Melville, NY, pp. 1249-1258.\n\n41\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nLi, F. Y. and Baker, R. M L, Jr. (2007), \"Detection of High-Frequency Gravitational Waves by Superconductors,\" 6th International Conference on New Theories, Discoveries and Applications of Superconductors and Related Materials, Sydney, Australia, January 10; International Journal of Modern Physics 21, Nos. 18-19, pp. 3274-3278.\n\nLi F.Y., Baker R. M L and Fang Z. (2007), \"Coupling of an open cavity to a microwave beam: a possible new scheme for detecting high-frequency gravitational waves,\" after peer review accepted for the Proceedings of the AIP Space Technology and Applications Int. Forum, Albuquerque, New Mexico 880, 1139-1147.\n\nLi F. Y., Baker R. M L, Jr., Fang Z., Stephenson G.V. and Chen, Z. (2008), \"Perturbative Photon Fluxes Generated by High-Frequency Gravitational Waves and Their Physical Effects,\" European Phys. J. C 22, Nos. 18-19, 30 July; available at http://www.drrobertbaker.com/docs/Li-Baker%20Chinese%20HFGW%20Detector.pdf http://www.gravwave.com/docs/Li-Baker%206-22-08.pdf (please see Appendix C).\n\nLi, Fangyu and Yang Nan (2009), \"Phase and Polarization State of High-Frequency Relic Gravitational Waves,\" Journal of Chinese Physics Letters (in press). Misner, C. W. Thorne, K. and Wheeler, J. A. (1973), Gravitation, W. H. Freeman and Company, New York.\n\nOttaway, D. J. et al (1998), \"A Compact Injection-Locked Nd:YAG Laser for Gravitational Wave Detection,\" IEE Journal of Quantum Electronic 34, Number 10, October 9.\n\nPegoraro, F., Radicati, L. A., Bernard, .Ph. and Picasso, E. (1978), Phys. Rev. Letters A 68, p. 165.\n\nPinto, I. P. and Rotoli, G. (1988), \"Laboratory generation of gravitational waves?\" Proceedings of the 8th Italian Conference on General Relativity and Gravitational Physics, Cavlese (Trento), August 30 to September 3, World Scientific-Singapore, pp. 560-573.\n\nRomero, F. B and Dehnen, H. (1981), \"Generation of gravitational radiation in the laboratory,\" Z. Naturforsch 36a, pp. 948-955.\n\nRudenko, V. N. and Sazhin, M. V. (1980), \"Laser interferometer as a gravitational wave detector,\" Sov. J. Quantum Electron 10, November, pp. 1366-1373.\n\nRudenko, V. N. (2003), \"Optimization of parameters of a coupled generator-receiver for a gravitational Hertz experiment,\" paper HFGW-03-113, Gravitational-Wave Conference, The MITRE Corporation, May 6-9.\n\nShannon, C. B. (1948), Bell Systems Technical Journal, Volume 27, Number 379, p. 623.\n\nShawhan, P. S. (2004), \"Gravitational Waves and the Effort to Detect them,\" American Scientist 92, 356. (Explains why LIGO cannot detect HFGWs.)\n\nStephenson, G. V. (2009a), \"Lessons for Energy Resonance HFGW Detector Designs Learned from Mass Resonance and Interferometric LFGW Detection Schemes,\" Space, Propulsion and Energy Sciences International Forum (SPESIF), 24-27 February, ed. G.\n\n42\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nRobertson, Paper 016, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings, Melville, NY, in press.\n\nStephenson, G. V. (2009b) \"The Standard Quantum Limit for the Li-Baker HFGW Detector,\" Space, Propulsion and Energy Sciences International Forum (SPESIF), 24-27 February, ed. G. Robertson, Paper 023, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings, Melville, NY in press.\n\nTobar, M, 1729-1736 E. (1995), \"Characterizing multi-mode resonant-mass gravitational wave detectors,\" Journal of Applied Physics 28, pp. 1729-1736\n\nTobar, M. E. (1999), \"Microwave Parametric Transducers for the Next Generation of Resonant-Mass Gravitational Wave Detectors,\" Dept. of Physics, the University of Western Australia, Nedlands, 6907 WA, Australia.\n\nWeber, J. (1964), \"Gravitational Waves\" in Gravitation and Relativity, Chapter 5, pp. 90-105, W. A. Benjamin, Inc., New York.\n\nWoods, R. C. and Baker, R. M L, Jr. (2005), \"Gravitational Wave Generation and Detection Using Acoustic Resonators and Coupled Resonance Chambers,\" Space Technology and Applications International Forum (STAIF-2005), edited by M. S. El-Genk, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings Vol. 746, Melville, NY, p. 1298.\n\nWoods, R. C. and Baker, R. M L, Jr., (2009) \"Generalized Generators of Very-High-Frequency Gravitational Waves Including Ring and Helix Devices,\" Space, Propulsion and Energy Sciences International Forum (SPESIF), 24-27 February, ed. G. Robertson, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings, Melville, NY, in press.\n\nYariv A. (1975), \"Quantum electronics,\" 2nd Ed. (Wiley, New York), 1975\n\nYoon, K. W., Ade, P. A. R., Barkats, D., et al. (2006), \"The Robinson Gravitational Wave Background Telescope (BICEP): a bolometric large angular scale CMB polarimeter,\" in Proceedings of the SPIE, 6275: Millimeter and Submillimeter Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy III, ed. J. Zmuidzinas, W. S. Holland, S. Withington, and W. D. Duncan, Bellingham, Washington, astro-ph/0606278\n\nZhou L., Wen W., Chan C.T. and Sheng P. (2003), \"Reflectivity of planar metallic fractal patterns,\" Appl. Phys. Lett. 82 1012-1014.\n\n43\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix A: Nomenclature\n\nA amplitude of gravitational wave, metric strain in spacetime, m/m\nB bandwidth, s-1\nB magnetic field strength, Tesla\nc speed of light in vacuum (2.998 x 108 ms-1)\nC maximum rate of information transfer, bits per second (bps), s-1\ndt time of future measurement, s\nE effective energy contained within the detector cavity summed over the detection averaging time, J\nFGW gravitational-wave flux, Wm-2\nh strain, m/m\nhdet (strain) detection limit, m/m\nη Planck's reduced constant 1.055 x 10-34 Js\nN noise, Wm-2\nN number of linearly arranged GW radiation elements, integer\nNphase number of phase space cases to check for acquisition, integer\nNfreq number of frequency cases to check for acquisition, integer\nNcode number of code sync possibilities to check, integer\nn number of pairs of oppositely jerking at one-time mass elements, integer\nP power of the generated gravitational waves, W\nQ temporal quality factor or selectivity of the signal-to-noise ratio, dimensionless\nR range, m\nRcvr1 receiver 1\nRcvr2 receiver 2\nRr receiver antenna power efficiency, dimensionless\nRx. radiated power efficiency, dimensionless\nS signal strength, Wm-2\nSi input signal strength, Wm-2\nSo output signal power, W\nr distance between two jerking-mass, gravitational-wave radiation elements, m\nT propagation or transmission-factor losses, dimensionless\nta acquisition test time per test case, s\ntint integration or signal averaging time, s\nXmit1 transmitter 1\nXmit2 transmitter 2\nΔf change in force of a jerking-mass, gravitational-wave radiation element, N\nΔp momentum uncertainty, kg-ms-1\nΔt time interval, s\nΔx initial position uncertainty, m\nμeg conversion efficiency (ratio of power of the EM input signal to power of the GW signal generated), dimensionless\nμge conversion efficiency (ratio of power of the GW input signal to power of the EM signal generated), dimensionless\nλ wavelength, m\nvGW gravitational-wave frequency, s-1\nω frequency of sensed gravitational waves, s-1\nω1 transmitting frequency, s-1\nω2 receiver-sensitivity frequency, s-1\n\n44\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix B: Li-Baker HFGW Detector\n\nAppendix B describes a joint academia/industry project to design the ultra-high sensitivity Li-Baker detector for high-frequency gravitational waves (HFGWs). The partnership consists of Louisiana State University (LSU) and Transportation Sciences Corporation (TSC) in California. The Li-Baker HFGW detector exploits a solution of field equations that couples photons and GW in first order, and the sensitivity of the detector will be much better than previously-proposed HFGW detectors. The outcome of this study will be an engineering-ready design for the HFGW detection system, to be developed under continued funding. Future construction of this detector will broaden the search spectrum of the existing LIGO low frequency GW detection system; it will be used to detect and characterize the relic HFGW cosmological background radiation, contributing to clarifying the origins of the universe. This offers the first and best hope of GW detection in a completely new GW frequency regime around 10GHz, near the cutoff of what is cosmically generated and a proof of the capability of the detector to sense the HFGW emissions of the HFGW generator discussed in Sections 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6.\n\nThis first activity is to develop designs, plans and specifications for the Li-Baker configuration for ultra-high sensitivity detection of relic high-frequency gravitational waves (HFRGWs) in the laboratory. The first goal will be to develop the design to a stage where the likely performance can be evaluated in detail. Following a future proposal, the Li-Baker detector will subsequently be built and used for the basic-science purposes of sensing HFRGWs having their origin related to the \"big bang,\" as well as for detecting laboratory-generated HFGWs (Romero and Dehnen, 1981; Baker, 1999, 2000; Woods and Baker, 2005, 2009). As discussed in Sections 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6 .Use will primarily be made of \"off-the-shelf\" components, and components described in the open scientific literature and in the various patents issued to Project Scientist Robert M L Baker, Jr. (Baker, 1999, 2000, 2001, and Patents Pending) who is the inventor of the Li-Baker HFGW Detector (Baker, 2001). Other components will be designed by the project participants during the Detector Design (DD) process. The project plan and timing are described below under separate headings for each component of the work.\n\nDD1.1 Containment Vessel\n\nDesign of the cryogenic containment vessel and vacuum system: Dr. R.C. Woods (LSU) + graduate student, G.V. Stephenson (TSC), Dr. R. M L Baker (TSC). This will be divided into four subtasks:\n\nDD1.1.1 Selection of material for the containment vessel: this choice will be made in light of the vessel's approximate size and shape, initially anticipated to be cylindrical, overall approximately 2m diameter and 3m length. Manufacturing ultra-high vacuum chambers requires fabrication that ensures leak-free performance. For example, Meyer Tool & Manufacturing, Inc. (Oak Lawn, Illinois) supplies custom chambers for ultra-high vacuum (UHV) applications. Companies such as Meyer will be consulted and/or visited to evaluate their manufacturing capability. The final selection from the expected short-list of titanium, stainless steel and/or aluminum containment vessels will be made based upon manufacturer recommendation and evaluation of test data.\n\n45\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n\"labeled\" as whatever is recovered from the receivers at the same frequency as (and indeed phase-locked to) the modulation, so therefore the PPF can be distinguished from scattered BPF very easily. Typically a lock-in amplifier (referenced to the field modulation) is used to recover the signal in such an arrangement, which provides significant noise rejection by effectively reducing the detection bandwidth.\n\nDD1.3 Microwave Transmitter (Gaussian beam)\n\nDesign of the microwave transmitter for the Gaussian beam, directed towards the central fractal membranes: Dr. R.C. Woods (LSU) + graduate student, Dr. R. M L Baker (TSC), G.V. Stephenson (TSC). This is expected to require 10 to possibly 10,000W (1,000W nominal) at around 10GHz, with an associated power supply and appropriate safety interlocks. Possible technologies include solid-state, magnetron, traveling-wave tube (TWT), or high-power klystron, and specifications will be developed under this component of the work. These are all mature technologies and commercial units will suffice. Possible suppliers include: Microwave Power Inc. (Santa Clara, California; solid-state, up to 500W); ETM Electromatic Inc. (Newark, California; TWT or klystron, up to 10kW); and Toshiba Electron Tube and Devices Co., Ltd. (Japan; TWT or klystron, over 10kW). Generally speaking, wideband solid-state amplifiers produce less output power than medium bandwidth models or narrow-band tube designs, so that the compromise here will be to decide whether to accept lower power in favor of wide tunability. Also required is a suitably matched transmit antenna. Again, commercial designs will suffice, such as those from Rozendal Associates Inc. (Santee, California), ETS-Lindgren (Cedar Park, Texas), or Orban Microwave Products (El Paso, Texas). The compromise that must be worked out in the antenna design is that a high-gain antenna is needed to constrain the GB to be within the resonance cavity or interaction volume (so that microwave input power is not wasted), but a high-gain antenna is less tunable than a broadband low-gain antenna. As in other work areas of this proposal, the complete design will need to establish the cost-performance tradeoff issues surrounding the various approaches.\n\nDD1.4 Fractal Membranes and Microwave Absorbers\n\nDesign of the fractal membranes as microwave reflectors/absorbers at select frequencies (Wen et al., 2002; Zhou et al., 2003) and other high-performance microwave absorbers: Dr. R. M L Baker (TSC), G.V. Stephenson (TSC).\n\nDD1.4.1 Design of the fractal membrane (FM) reflectors at the waist of the Gaussian beam including their paraboloidal form. An analysis will be completed to determine the optimal material of the FMs (copper, stainless steel, or aluminum are the obvious leading candidates). A paraboloidal surface will be designed that can be fabricated from the FM to focus the PPF at the planned locations of the microwave receivers. Hong Kong University of Science and Technology can fabricate the fractal membranes out of these metals in almost any form.\n\nDD1.4.2 The interior of the containment vessel (except for an opening at the Gaussian-beam transmitter end) must be treated to eliminate exterior sources of noise. Either a Faraday Cage (using a mosaic of HTSC tiles; for example, YBCO) or fractal membranes are possibilities. Both will be examined in detail to determine the optimal approach. A design compatible with the containment vessel shape (DD1.1.4) and placement of interior detector elements will be developed.\n\n47\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DD1.4.3 Selection of appropriate microwave absorbing material at around 10GHz; design of the interior baffles around the Gaussian beam, and a \"tunnel\" between fractal-membrane reflectors and receivers (Baker, Stephenson and Li, 2008). A computer program for ray tracing of the PPF and the BFF will be developed and utilized for the baffle design. An analysis will be made of the latest technology reported by Chan et al. (2006), Landy et al. (2008), and Yang et al. (2008), and these will be compared with those available from established suppliers of current technology high performance microwave absorbing materials including ARC Technologies, Inc. (San Diego, California), Millimeter Wave Technology Inc. (Passaic, New Jersey), Cuming Microwave (Avon, Massachusetts), and many others.\n\nDD1.5 Detection Receivers\n\nDesign of the microwave receivers (for the PPF) at each end of the detector containment vessel, tunable around 10GHz: G.V. Stephenson (TSC), Dr. R.C. Woods (LSU) + graduate student, Dr. R. M L Baker (TSC). Three possibilities have already been identified for the technology to be used here, and specifications will be developed for each option found suitable for use in the final design so as to enable a final choice to be made.\n\nDD1.5.1 Off-the-shelf microwave horn plus HEMT receiver: if tens to hundreds of photons per sample are available then standard microwave horns may be used, coupled to high electron mobility transistor (HEMT) amplifiers. This task will include a sensitivity analysis of this receiver type to determine the suitability of this approach, and a conceptual design will be developed using off-the-shelf components. Now highly developed, HEMT technology has previously been found reliable enough to use in the receivers for differential microwave radiometers (DMRs) flown in the NASA COsmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite mission.\n\nDD1.5.2 Rydberg-Cavity Receiver as developed at Kyoto University (Yamamoto et al., 2000): Rydberg atoms are excited atoms with one or more electrons that have a much higher principal quantum number than ground state, usually conditioned via laser pumping. The low binding energy of the excited electrons leads to very low photoionization energy; therefore, Rydberg atoms are sensitive to low-energy microwave photons, and allow a microwave device somewhat analogous to a conventional photomultiplier tube to be constructed. When a microwave photon strikes a high cross-section Rydberg atom, it causes the electron to be ejected and the atom is ionized. If a large electric field is established within the container, the electron is accelerated, causing cascading impact ionization. The advantage of this receiver is that it is sensitive to low-energy single-photon events, and has very good time resolution. The disadvantage is its cost and complexity. This task will include a conceptual design of an alternative Rydberg atom receiver apparatus suitable for the PPF arising from HFRGW, and will also include a sensitivity calculation of the proposed apparatus.\n\nDD1.5.3 Circuit QED microwave receiver as developed at Yale University (Schuster et al.,2007): a third option will also be explored, the Circuit QED microwave photon receiver. A resonant co-planar waveguide, containing a Cooper Pair Box (CPB) in the center and delineated by Josephson junctions, define a photo-sensitive area in the center of the cavity. The cavity qubit energy levels shift when the cavity encounters a microwave photon. The advantage of this type of receiver is that it is very sensitive to individual photons and can integrate multiple photons over time. It has the\n\n48\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"disadvantage that this device is of a unique design that is currently available only from Yale University, and is likely not to be exportable. This task will include developing a conceptual design using this alternative type of receiver for the PPF arising from HFRGW.\n\nDD1.6 Cryogenic System\n\nSpecification and design of the cryogenic system refrigeration unit, required for low-temperature operation to obtain the best possible reduction in intrinsic thermal noise: Dr. R.C. Woods (LSU) + graduate student, Dr. R. M L Baker (TSC), G.V. Stephenson (TSC). The required criterion is that the temperature T satisfies kBT << ħω (where kB is Boltzmann's constant); that is, T << ħω/kB ≈ 480mK for detection at 10GHz. This condition is satisfied by the target temperature for the interaction volume T < 48mK, which can be obtained using a common helium-dilution refrigerator. Then, the signal PPF will be significantly greater than the thermal photon flux.\nCost/performance tradeoffs may also be important in this design, so that other possible economic solutions to receiver cooling will also be considered before finalizing the design.\n\nDD1.6.1 Off-the-shelf cryogenic systems: a number of companies have developed ultra-low temperature systems (mK range) for a variety of applications. A common application is refrigeration of receivers as needed in the Li-Baker HFRGW detector. One possibility is the Oxford Instruments' KelvinoxMX range (see summary data attached) that appears to suit the present requirements subject to further evaluation of each model in the range. Other manufacturers to be investigated include Scientific Magnetics (UK), and Cryofab Inc. (Kenilworth, New Jersey).\n\nDD1.6.2 Specifications for system best suited to the detector: specifications will be established for the selected cryogenic system. This will include cryogen level monitoring devices (for example, Oxford Instruments Intelligent Level Meter ILM200) for warning if the cooling fails.\n\nDD1.7 Electromagnet\n\nDevelopment of the electromagnet specification needed to produce the required static magnetic field (up to 35T, ~3T nominal): Dr. R.C. Woods (LSU) + graduate student, Dr. R. M L Baker (TSC), G.V. Stephenson (TSC). It is expected that a commercial design can be identified for this task. The chosen design will be capable of providing the requisite magnetic field at least over the interaction cavity volume in the containment vessel. Exceptional field-uniformity is not a particularly important issue in this application, though the GW interaction volume or cavity (roughly cylindrical, 6cm diameter and 30cm long) plus extra volume for the surrounding apparatus is somewhat larger than many other experimental applications require, and the required field is perpendicular to the cylindrical axis. Hence, one solution is that the final solenoid design must completely surround the cylindrical axis of the interaction volume perpendicular to the applied field. An alternative approach is to use two solenoids, one each side of the interaction volume, similar to the popular Helmholtz coil configuration. In a development of this, a number of small (~6cm diameter) solenoids could be stacked along the length of the interaction volume, with their Helmholtz-like opposite paired solenoids the other side of the interaction volume. In the latter cases, since the paired solenoids are not perfect ring coils, the resultant field would be non-uniform. A\n\n49\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"quantitative estimate would be needed to ensure that the non-uniformity is not serious in the present application, but this is not expected to be a problem since field non-uniformity just produces non-uniform PPF generation in the interaction volume. The fractal membrane reflectors would still focus all the PPF at the receivers. The design tradeoff will be whether one or two large magnets are more cost-effective than a larger number of smaller magnets. The design effort will be divided into two major sub-tasks: off-the-shelf electromagnets currently available, and emerging-technology proposed magnets that may become available during the construction phase of the HFGW detector.\n\nDD1.7.1 Off-the-shelf hardware: Excepting major installations, iron-core magnets are limited to around 2T over small volumes so that superconducting magnets are expected to be used here. Cryogen-free (more accurately, the cryogen is completely enclosed and re-cycled each time the magnet is cooled for use) superconducting magnets producing fields up to 16T are available commercially from a number of manufacturers including Scientific Magnetics, Oxford Instruments, and Cryogenic Ltd. (all UK). As examples, Oxford Instruments can supply magnets producing 9T in a 20cm bore, and 5T in a 1m bore. Typically, cooling is provided by an integral Gifford-McMahon cryo-cooler at 4.2K. Use of a cryogen-free \"dry\" magnet means that there are no cold seals to be a source of leaks.\n\nDD1.7.2 Emerging technology: Since the detection PPF signal is directly proportional to the static magnetic field value, the detector sensitivity will be increased by using larger fields than currently-available commercial designs permit. To this end we will investigate the feasibility of co-developing with a third-party (for example, National High Magnetic Field Laboratory, Tallahassee, Florida) a custom-made high-field design capable of up to 35T (Bird, 2004), which may be realizable during the construction phase of the Li-Baker detector. If successful, achieving this value of magnetic field would improve the sensitivity of the Li-Baker detector by an order of magnitude. In this case, if a separate refrigeration system is required, the specification would include cryogen level-monitoring to ensure safe auto-rundown of the superconducting magnet if the helium level falls below a pre-set value, to reduce the danger associated with cryogenic-system related magnet failure. .l\n\nSystems Engineering Tasks\n\nFollowing the completion of the Li-Baker detector development tasks, plans and specifications will be drawn up by LSU in collaboration with TSC. Since overlap of tasks is possible, approximately 18 months will be allowed for the detector design, and approximately 8 months for the preparation of plans and specifications. With approximately two months overlap of the major tasks, a total of two years will be scheduled for the detector's design and development of the plans and specifications. Fig. 4.1a shows a Gantt chart for scheduling the project. For any large engineering project, coordination among investigators is important for the development of a coherent, unified design. This is the role of systems engineering tasks, depicted at the top of Fig. 4.1a. In the present case, the development of the detector will demand the close coordination of the detection link budget very early on, in order to carefully guide the component design for each of the component areas, and to ensure that the sensitivity goals can be met. This task culminates in a review of the predicted signal-to-noise ratio. A follow-on to this task is the development of key component requirements Interface requirements development is the next level of detail in systems engineering\n\n50\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ntask area, resulting in interface control documentation/drawing review prior to the critical design reviews of the component equipment areas. Finally, the systems engineering activity concludes with the development of test plans that will detail integration activities and reduce integration risk in subsequent phases. These activities are standard level-of-effort tasks that are rolled into other task bids as a background activity.\n\n[Schedule diagram: Systems Engineering Tasks and Component Engineering Tasks across months M2 to M24, showing Detector Link Budget, SNR Review, Component Reqts Development, Requirements Review, Interface Reqts Devl, ICD Review, Test Plan Development, Test Plan Review, 1.1.1 1.1.2 Vessel Design, 1.1.3 Vacuum Sys, 1.1.4 Vessel Spec, 1.4.1 Fractal Membrane Signal Reflector Design, 1.4.2,3 FM Int., 1.4.2 Fractal Membrane Specs, 1.6.1 Cryogenic System Trade, 1.6.2 Cryo System Spec, 1.2 Signal Processing Algorithms Trade, Sig Proc SW Design Spec, Sig Proc HW Design Spec, 1.5 Microwave Receivers Trade, Rcvr Design, 1.5 Detection Receiver Specs, 1.7 Magnetic Source Design Trade, Magnet Design, Magnet Spec, 1.3 Microwave Transmitter (GB), GB Spec, with milestones PDR, CDR, Decision.]\n\nICD = Interface Control Documentation/Drawing\nPDR = Preliminary Design Review = design approval\nCDR = Critical Design Review = design complete\n\n51"} {"doc_id":"f4fcc7e9962bf0ac","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix C: Perturbative Photon Fluxes Generated By High-Frequency Gravitational Waves and Their Physical Effects\n\n52\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n10 March 2010\nICOD: 1 December 2009\nDIA-08-1003-006\n\nInertial Electrostatic\nConfinement Fusion\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nInertial Electrostatic Confinement Fusion\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 70\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nPreface.......vii\nSection I. IEC Background and Basics ......1\nIEC Background ......3\nIEC Basics ......5\nBussard HEPS (or Polywell) Concept ......10\nBarnes Nebel Penning Trap ......10\nNebel POPS Device ......10\nMiley's \"Ion Injected\" Device ......11\nClosing Remarks ......12\nReferences ......13\nSection II. Select Experiments ......14\nClosing Comments ......20\nReferences ......20\nSection III. Other Geometries ......21\nCylindrical IECs ......21\nElectrically-Driven IEC Jet Thruster ......22\nRelation to Other Prior Thrusters ......23\nJET Extraction From a Spherical IEC ......24\nDescription of the IEC Jet Thruster ......24\nComparison to a Conventional \"Plasma\" Thruster ......24\nJet Extraction ......26\nExperimental Jet Design and Performance ......26\nScale-up to p-11B IEC Space Power Unit/Thruster ......28\nThe Dipole Assisted IEC (DaIEC) ......29\nDAIEC Experiments ......30\nKhachan's Studies at U of Sydney ......31\nConcluding Remarks......32\nReferences ......32\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSection IV. IEC Theory ......34\nPotential Well Structure ......38\nTzonev et al. - Deep Well Study ......39\nMomota et al. - Study of Virtual Electrode Structure ......41\nKim - Stability Analysis ......41\nRider - Energy Balance Study ......43\nNeutron Source Simulations ......44\nReferences ......46\nSection V. Potential Applications ......46\nNeutron/proton/Xray Sources ......46\nIntegrated X-Ray/Neutron Sources ......47\nNuclear and Chemical Explosive Detection Techniques ......47\nOverview for Weapons/Nuclear Material Simulation Articles ......48\nPulsed Power for the Inspection Station ......49\nDesign of the Total Integrated Interrogation System ......50\nDetector Array and Analysis System ......52\nSpace Propulsion ......54\nMagnetically-Channeled Spherical IEC Array (MCSA) Concept ......56\nRecirculation of Radial Belt Cone Losses ......57\nRetrapping of Axial-Loss Particles ......58\nConcluding Remarks ......59\nReferences ......59\nSection VI. Possible Next Step Breakeven Experiment ......60\nDemonstration of Net Energy Gain using IEC Aneutronic Fusion ......60\nVision of a Future p-11B Fusion Plant ......61\nProposed Breakeven Experiment ......62\nConcluding Remarks ......64\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1.1. An UIUC Spherical IEC ......1\nFigure 1.2. Idealized Potential Structure Calculated by Hirsch for Monoenergetic Ions With No Angular Momentum ......6\nFigure 1.3. Discharge Modes in Gridded Devices Identified by Miley ......9\nFigure 1.4. Photo of Star Mode Seen Through a Reaction Vessel Port Window ......9\nFigure 1.5. Schematic of the UIUC RF Gun Injector for IEC Experiments ......11\nFigure 1.6. RF Gun Attached to an IEC Chamber in the UIUC Laboratory ......12\nFigure 1.7. Photo of Center Spot Formation ......12\nFigure 2.1. The \"Historic\" Early IEC Ion Injection Experiment ......14\nFigure 2.2. Neutron Rates Measured With the IEC Neutron Rates Measured With the IEC of Figure 2.1 Exceeded 10^9 DT n/s at 150 kV ......14\nFigure 2.3. Photograph of a STAR Mode Discharge ......16\nFigure 2.4. IEC Landmine Detection Project at Kyoto University ......17\nFigure 2.5. Scheme for Landmine Detection Using a Hybrid Magnetron Type IEC Neutron Source ......18\nFigure 2.6. 3He Ion Source for Use in 3He -3He Fusion Rate Studies at the U Of Wisconsin ......19\nFigure 3.1. Two Types of Cylindrical IECs ......22\nFigure 3.2. Jet Operational Mode in Experimental IEC Device and Jet Set-Up ......24\nFigure 3.3. Illustration of the IEC Jet Thruster Experiment Showing Central Grid and Two Jet Grids ......27\nFigure 3.4. Dipole Reactor Propulsion Scheme ......29\nFigure 3.5. Dipole Magnetic Field and Layout of Devices ......30\nFigure 3.6. Electron Density Vs. Dipole Magnet Field Strength at 25mtorr, 20mA ......31\nFigure 4.1. Cross Section of the Experimental Layout of the PFX-I Experiment ......34\nFigure 4.2. Detail of the Anode and the Ion Injection Port in PFX-I ......35\nFigure 4.3. Plot of the Q-Value ......37\nFigure 4.4. Sketch of Two Opposite Limits of the Beam-Maxwellian Equilibrium ......38\nFigure 4.5. The Definition of the Double Well Depth ......39\nFigure 4.6. The Definition of the Parallel and Perpendicular Velocities at the IEC Cathode Grid ......39\nFigure 4.7. The Double Well Potential Calculated With IXL Code ......40\nFigure 4.8. Ion Density Profile for Potential Well ......40\nFigure 4.9. The D-D Fusion Reaction Rate Versus Cathode Current ......40\nFigure 4.10. Plot of Growth Rate of Spherically Converging/Diverging Ion-Beam Instability ......42\nFigure 4.11. Diagram Showing Equipotential Surfaces of the IEC Cathode Grid ......45\nFigure 4.12. Results for Calculations for Ion Energy Distributions 1st Pass ......45\nFigure 5.1. Block Diagram of the IEC Pulsed Power System ......49\nFigure 5.2. Schematic (View From Top) of a Broad Coverage IEC Inspection System for Luggage Inspection ......51\nFigure 5.3. Further Illustration of the Integrated System for Airport Luggage Inspection ......53\nFigure 5.4. Further Illustration of the Integrated System for Ship Container Inspection ......53\nFigure 5.5. Image of a Fusion II Spaceship, a 750-MWe IEC Fusion-Powered Manned Spacecraft With Ion Thruster Propulsion ......54\nFigure 5.6. Scale Schematic of Fusion Ship II, a 750-MWe IEC Fusion Spacecraft ......55\nFigure 5.7. Illustration of a Three-Unit MCSA Device ......57\nFigure 5.8. Diagram of Belt-Cusp Fields and Particle Recirculation ......57\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 5.9. Axial Magnetic Field Strength Along Two-Unit MCSA Centerline ......... 58\nFigure 5.10. Diagram of Direction Randomization (KAM Effect) Due to the\nMagnetic Field Null Region in the IEC ................................................ 59\nFigure 6.1. p-11B Fusion Cross Section Energy Requirements. ............................... 62\nFigure 6.2. IEC System With Radio Frequency Ion Gun ......................................... 63\nFigure 6.3. Multiple Ion Gun Concept ............................................................... 63\nFigure 6.4. Differentially Pumped RF-Driven Ion Gun ............................................ 63\n\nTables\n\nTable 3.1. Estimated Performance Parameters or the IEC Ion Thruster ............... 28\nTable 4.1. Comparison of Analytical and Numerical Estimates of Q-Values in a\nBeam-Dominated Solution -- for a 50-kV Square Well .......................... 32\nTable 5.1. Three Kinds of Techniques Previously Used in Explosives Detection\nSystem ............................................................................................... 48\nTable 5.2. Comparison of IEC Design and Magnetic Fusion Design ....................... 56\n\nvi\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nInertial Electrostatic Confinement Fusion\n\nPreface\n\nThis report is intended to provide the reader with an overview of the basics, current experimental status, supporting theory, and potential applications of inertial electrostatic confinement (IEC) fusion. Emphasis is placed on work in these areas at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, although some other research is brought in.\n\nThe report shows that IEC is a unique approach to fusion in that it offers a number of “spin-off” applications, such as a small neutron source for neutron activation analysis on the route to fusion power. The report further shows that IEC is one of the few potential fusion approaches that can potentially burn aneutronic fuels like p-11B (hydrogen – Boron 11). In aneutronic fusion, neutrons carry no more than 1% of the total released energy, greatly reducing problems associated with neutron radiation. That ability, combined with its simple mechanical structure and small size, make the IEC reactor, if achieved, an ideal fusion power unit. Present experimental devices are four to five orders of magnitude below breakeven (energy out/in = 1) energy gain for p-11B. However, it is argued that the ability to study the physics in very-small-volume plasmas makes it possible to rapidly investigate scale-up to a power-producing device. As an example, the report concludes with a conceptual experiment proposed for demonstration of breakeven conditions for p-11B using a hydrogen plasma simulation.\n\nThe author has purposely tried to avoid use of equations in this report to enhance readability and to stress concepts rather than analysis. However, considerable analysis is provided in a number of the source references cited.\n\nvii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSection I. IEC Background and Basics\n\nBefore considering detail, it is helpful to obtain a rough idea of how inertial electrostatic confinement (IEC) fusion works.\n\n[Figure 1.1 schematic and photographs: Gas Feed Line; Spherical Vacuum Chamber; Grid; To Vacuum Pump; High-Voltage Feedthrough; High-Voltage Power Supply]\n\nFigure 1.1. An UIUC Spherical IEC. The plasma discharge between the grid and vacuum wall creates an ion source that is extracted and directed towards the center by the highly charged negative grid. A photograph of a typical IEC chamber is shown in the center. A photograph of the discharge through the view port shows the “Star Mode” discharge where ion beams are created that pass through the grid openings. This is important for long run times since ion bombardment of the grids, hence grid wire sputtering, is minimized.\n\nFor this purpose the experimental IEC device of Figure 1.1 is considered. As shown, this “gridded” type IEC has a spherical mesh grid suspended on a high voltage feed-through in the center of a metal vacuum vessel. The fusion “fuel”, e.g. deuterium gas, is first fed into the chamber originally prepared at high vacuum, e.g. 10-7 Torr. The fuel gas brings the pressure up into the 10's of Torr region. Then the voltage on the grid is raised into the many (-) kV range, creating a plasma discharge between the high voltage grid and chamber wall (electrically grounded). The high negative voltage on the grid serves to extract the ion from the plasma, accelerating them towards the center of the grid where in principle they interact and fuse. In practice however, the scattering cross section is larger than the fusion cross section. Thus many ions scatter without reacting (fusing). Many “near misses” essentially pass straight through the center of the plasma core and exit. This dominance of scattering over fusion reactions is the central issue of all fusion confinement approaches, forcing use of strong confinement so the ions have many passes and hence a good probability of fusing before being lost from the fusion reaction chamber. In the IEC multiple passes occur because the ions are trapped in a potential “well” created by the buildup of positive charge due to the large flow of the accelerated ions into a small “core” region in the center of the negative grid. Viewed in another way, the ions extracted from the region between the grid and the wall can scatter and pass back through the grid, but can only return to the same potential surface they were born on. Thus they cannot reach the vessel wall, but instead lose their kinetic energy, stop, and are accelerated by the grid potential back into the center of the grid. This then provides many “recirculations” through the center of the grid volume where they have a finite probability of fusing. If not for the existence\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nof various loss channels such as hitting the grid, charge exchange, or up-scattering in energy, the ions would be prematurely trapped in the potential well until they fused.\n\nThe conventional requirement for fusion confinement is given in terms of the confinement parameter, nτ, where n = the ion density and τ is the confinement time. Also the ion energy (or temperature T) must be in the 20 or more keV range assuming D-T fuel. For breakeven, J. Lawson developed his famous “criterion” nτ = 1014 cm-3-sec at T > 15 keV for DT fusion. Here τ = energy confinement time, sec; n = ion density, cm-3 and T = ion “temperature” or average energy.\n\nThe Lawson criterion is independent of the confinement method, but does depend on the fuel via the selection of cross sections in the derivation. Magnetic confinement is generally limited to n ~ 1014 cm-3 by pressure balance. Then a confinement time τ of ~ 1 sec is required. For Inertia Confinement Fusion (ICF) or “laser fusion”, compression of targets can achieve n ~ 1024, so a confinement time of only 10-10 sec is need (corresponding to the disassembly time of the compressed target). (For a general review of energy breakeven requirement for D-T fusion and other fuels like D-3He and p-11B, the reader referred to: G. Miley, Fusion Energy Conversion, American Nuclear Society, La Grange, IL 1973).\n\nNow consider the IEC. In principle, the ions focused on the center of the IEC can achieve a density of n ~ 1016, giving a required confinement time of 10-2 sec for DT fusion breakeven. This time can be restated in terms of the number of ion recirculations in the IEC potential well by dividing the well diameter by the average velocity of the recirculating ion. In later cases discussed in this report, this number is typically quite large, usually ~1000 recirculations. Achievement of this large number of recirculations requires strong reduction of all of the loss channels noted earlier. Grid losses can be reduced by STAR mode operation discussed later where the recirculating ions possess beam-like trajectories passing through the center of the grid opening. The ideal, however, is the elimination of the grid altogether which can be done via formation of virtual potential structures, originally proposed by Farnsworth and discussed in following sections. The temperature requirement also leads to a fundamental difference in the IEC physics vs. other confinement approaches. (Note that “temperature” is not a proper term here since it implies an equilibrium distribution while the IEC is far from that with its beam-like ions. Thus, the reader should view “temperature” as meaning average energy of the ions. In doing that, however, it is assumed that the ion energy distribution is known so that averaging is possible). Most ions in the IEC are born near the chamber wall so are accelerated to an energy close to the applied voltage on the grid during the extraction process. A reasonable estimate is that the ions reaching the fusion region in the center have an energy near 80 percent of the grid voltage on average. Thus it becomes relatively easy to achieve the Lawson D-T requirement by applying a voltage of ~ 25 kV. In fact most IEC neutron sources discussed later operate at voltages > 80 kV to get into an energy range giving a higher fusion cross section. In sharp contrast, magnetic fusion devices struggle to obtain a temperature in the 10 keV range since the entire plasma population must be heated (vs. direct ion acceleration in the IEC) due to the equilibrium distribution maintained in these plasmas. Another very important point is that Lawson assumed that the ions and electrons were in thermal equilibrium, at the same temperature, T. This is a reasonable approximation for magnetic confinement, but not so for the IEC. In the latter, the electrons form a “distorted” Maxwellian distribution at an effective temperature well below that of the\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nbeam-like ions. Since electron energy loss processes such as radiation emission are serious, the Lawson temperature criterion must be modified for the IEC. A first rough estimate is the Te/Ti < 1/3 for DT. (Here Ti and Te are the ion and electron “temperatures”, respectively). Control of this ratio is a complex physics issue, involving the relative ion and electron source rates and energies and the potential well structure. In later sections use of p-11B (hydrogen-boron-11) fuel in the IEC is considered. This is very attractive since it provides all charged particle reaction products, making this an unique “aneutronic” system. Such a reactor represents a truly ideal system from an environmental and energy sustainability perspective. However, for such fuels, the Larson criterion becomes much more demanding, increasing nτ by two orders of magnitude and T to 150 kV. Also, for the IEC, a Te/Ti < 1/9 becomes essential. (Using temperature ration is a very simplified representation. The radiation losses are quite sensitive to deviation in the actual energy distribution of the ions and electrons. For example, electron Bremsstrahlung emission primarily comes from the high energy “tail” of the electron distribution while energy transfer with ions is dominated by the “foot” of the electron distribution. At high powers, interactions in these regions can become quite non-linear, depleting or “burning out” the local populations in these regions. This effect causes energy losses to saturate, hence can be quite beneficial under some circumstance. However, the phenomenon is complex to evaluate numerically, so little has been reported on it for IECs to date). The very aggressive p-11B Lawson requirement is employed in the design of the breakeven experiment of Section VI.\n\nWhile this discussion of IEC physics has been greatly simplified, it hopefully provides more insight into the basic concepts and issue before delving into more detail.\n\nIEC BACKGROUND\n\nInertial Electrostatic Confinement (IEC) was conceived of by Philo Farnsworth, the inventor of electronic television, as an approach to fusion power using electrostatic fields for confinement (Reference 1.2). When he did this in 1955, the prime approaches being pursued worldwide were magnetic confinement or inertial (laser compression of targets) confinement. In fact, electrostatic confinement had been written off by most scientists due to Earnshaw's theorem (Reference 1.4) which stated that plasma could not be confined by electrostatic fields alone. That was simply an expression of the fact that use of a biased plate to confine one species, say ions, would automatically attract the opposite species, electrons, such that the whole plasma would transport to the plate. Farnsworth seemed to intuitively understand that this theorem assumed steady-state, so that if, as in IEC, the ions were dynamically moving and confined, they would electrostatically confine the electrons. Farnsworth went further and realized that in a spherical system virtual electrodes would form a high density plasma region if the confined ions were focused at the center of the sphere (Reference 1.2).\n\nWhile Hirsh worked with Farnsworth to demonstrate early experimental success with IEC experiments (Reference 1.2), the concept passed from view as magnetic and inertial confinement research exponentiated. Then in the late 1990s R. W. Bussard revived the concept with the hybrid IEC magnetic approach (Reference 1.6-1.7). In this approach the electrons were confined in the magnetic field, forming a potentials trap for ions. [Note the similarity to the original conceptual potential well discussed by Elmore, et al. (Reference 1.1)]. Upon invitation by R.W. Bussard to join this effort, the author, George Miley, undertook supporting experiments that were a variation of the original\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Hirsch approach, using electrostatic grids to form a trap with ions that then brought electrons in. He realized that this approach could result in a very attractive low level neutron source for neutron activation applications, and began that development. Such work was soon taken up in several other laboratories, including Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), University of Wisconsin and Kyoto University. Meanwhile Bussard's work continued with strong funding from the military. However, little was published or known about this until 2008 when he made public appeals on \"YouTube\" to regain funding stopped just when the experiment achieved a major success. Subsequently, funding resumed but R. W. Bussard passed away shortly thereafter due to a long battle with cancer. His company and work were then taken over by R. Nebel who took leave from LANL to undertake this new work. That effort is now in progress and represents the largest IEC power oriented project in the US or elsewhere (but still modest with a half dozen senior scientists involved). Meanwhile, laboratories elsewhere working on IEC neutron sources have continued while the U of Wisconsin has added an IEC proton source as an option using similar technology. The labs, including the UIUC, have fusion power as an ultimate goal, but must focus on their funded near-term \"spin-off\" projects. At this point the IEC still receives no funding from DOE which remains focused on the Tokomak route to fusion power. Thus, with little funding, slow progress has been made in answering the key question of whether or not the IEC can be developed for fusion power. If it can, the device would be simpler and smaller than a Tokomak, making it an extremely attractive option. In addition, its beam-like reactions (highly non-Maxwellian) make the IEC very well suited for burning alternate (\"advanced\") fuels like D-3He and p-11B which are much more environmentally favorable than conventional DT fusion. Unfortunately Tokomaks are not well equipped to go forward to such fuels. On the other hand, the use of non-power-producing IECs for other applications, such as small neutron, proton, and x-ray sources, has been amply demonstrated. Now, the issue is how well and in what applications the IEC sources compete commercially with other options such as accelerator target sources. This report is intended to provide the reader with important insight into the physics and technology of IECs relative to both power and neutron/proton/x-ray sources. With this background, hopefully the reader can formulate an opinion about the potential for IEC applications. Due to the limited funding for IEC research to date, much more has to be done to actually demonstrate its application, especially for power production. Thus that opinion must remain a personal one for the reader. One other limitation of this report is that it largely provides details based on the author's work on IECs over the last decade. Thus it will not do justice to the ongoing work by others, notably at EMC2 on the Bussard Polywell device or the advanced gridded IEC neuron/proton source development work at the U of Wisconsin, Kyoto University, and Tokyo Institute of Technology. Some insight into these efforts is given in comments and in references supplied, but the reader is encouraged to discuss that work with those individuals directly. 4 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY IEC BASICS We begin by presenting the early very basic theoretical study by Elmore, Tuck, and Watson (Reference 1.1). That addresses the key question of the fusion power density obtainable with potential well confinement. One of their basic assumptions is that the potential well is \"dug\" by electrons which trap ions. Certain added assumptions lead to well depth, etc, and finally they conclude that the system is unstable for ion densities sufficiently high that appreciable thermonuclear yield is expected. They qualify this conclusion saying \"admittedly, a more thorough investigation is required to obtain a complete understanding of stability of this electrostatic device\". This result was quite negative for electron formation of potential wells, but left the route possibly open since the subject \"needed a more thorough investigation.\" Later, for various reasons, R. W. Bussard still pursued this concept by introducing the High-Energy Power Source (HEPS) Polywell device which uses a spherical simulated magnetic field to stabilize the potential well formed by electrons. This represents a \"hybrid\" magnetic-IEC confinement system where electrons are confined by the magnetic fields, forming the potential well which \"traps\" ions. Apparently, Bussard's view was that this added magnetic stabilization would overcome the earlier Elmore and Tuck criticism. Subsequently, some of his reports used particle-in-cell simulations to support the view that such a stabilized electron potential well would allow adequate density for attractive fusion densities. However, the next IEC experiments following the Elmore et al. analysis (prior to Bussard's) were the Hirsch-Farnsworth experiments (Reference 1.2) which used ion (vs. electron) injected traps (as does the present author's work). This selection was largely driven by the desire to gain added stability by the large momentum of recirculating ions that form the potential well. More about ion vs. electron injection routes will be covered in later sections. Next, it is important to review the multiple well (\"poissors\" solution) Farnsworth-Hirsch found for ion injected formation of potential wells in spherical geometry. This is described in the paper by Hirsch (Reference 1.2). As seen from Figure 1.2, monoenergetic ions with angular momentum \"drag in\" electrons to create \"onion skin\" like nested potential wells around the center of the sphere such that the ion density goes to infinity in zero volume at the origin. 5 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Figure 1.2. Idealized Potential Structure Calculated by Hirsch for Monoenergetic Ions With No Angular Momentum. The nested virtual anodes and cathodes observed were originally termed \"poissors\" by the inventor, Philo Farnsworth. This is a very striking result that enthused these researchers to push on with this research. It, in effect, circumvents the Elmore et al. restriction by changing the potential well physics fundamentally. Of course in practice, there will be a spread in energy and angular momentum, so one would not expect more than a single potential well (vs. the infinite poissors of Farnsworth) to form in practice. The questions remaining then were (and still are): \"How deep can such a well be in practice and how high an ion density can be trapped in it?\" Various studies followed to study these issues more thoroughly using simulation codes. For example, Klevens and Black found in Reference 1.3 that: \"A model of an electrostatic confinement device with ion injection has been developed which provides strong correlation between theory and experiment. The ion density profile was determined in position velocity throughout the two concentric grids by considering the processes of charge transfer and grid capture. A shallow-well approximation was incorporated in the model by assuming that ions encountering charge transfer in the inner grid region were accelerated up to a maximum of 5 percent of the applied grid voltage, and that the velocity of beam ions was constant in this region. Distribution functions in total energy and angular energy were developed for both ions and electrons. The ion distribution function consisted of three parts: a beam created at the anode and accelerated by the applied cathode voltage; a low-energy group produced by charge transfer near the cathode or in the center; and a intermediate-energy group resulting from charge-transfer reaction between anode and cathode. For each group the angular energy was assumed uniform up to a maximum value, which was different for each energy group. The electrons were assumed to be isotropic in velocity space, and to be uniformly distributed in total energy in the potential well in which they are trapped. The distribution functions were substituted into Poisson's equation and potential and density profiles for various 6 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY experimental parameters were obtained. The parameters which were varied include the background pressure, the ratio of electron to ion circulating currents, the applied potential difference between the grids, and the inner grid variables such as measured current, transparency, and construction error. When estimates of each of these parameters which simulate the ion injection mode experiment were inserted into the model, the resulting potential profile exhibited no more than a shallow potential well. This result is consistent with that of beam defection measurements in the ion injection mode experiments. In spite of these assumptions, the model is extremely valuable in determining the relative (sensitivity of the potential well profile and depth to effects of many of the system parameters. It has been found that for the \"medium\" level of ion currents under discussion, the most critical factors which inhibit deep well formation are inadequate spherical focusing and charge neutralization. The focusing is determined to a great extent by the degree to which the grids are spherical potential surfaces. The grid must approach a spherical shape within a few percent before other factors such as grid transparency and background pressure play an important role. However, as the current is increased, the requirements for sphericity are somewhat relaxed. For a grid construction error of less than 5 percent, increasing the grid transparency and decreasing the pressure will also lead to significant improvement in well depth.\" These results were somewhat encouraging. However, they showed that grid deformation could be very harmful. This deserves several comments. First, the present author (G. Miley) later showed that design of grids with larger openings provided the STAR mode where ion beams passed through the center of the openings, avoiding grid collisions and making sphericity of the grid itself less important. This is important for small neutron/proton source type devices. However, the assumption of grids fails to address the question of how a grid could survive in a power reactor or if they could be eliminated to use a potential well with virtual electrode formation. The use of grids cannot be completely ruled out for power reactors. Magnetic field protection techniques, active cooling, etc. are conceivable. Another question relates to the role of background gas in the IEC. The point is this: When Miley moved to simplify the device for small neutron sources, he used the discharge between the grid and vessel to form the ions needed for acceleration and fusion. This inherently forces use of a modest background neutral gas pressure of the fuel (typically deuterium) inside the reaction vessel. That in turn results in ion reactions with the background gas becoming a dominant process in these IECs. Such interaction includes fusion itself, scattering, charge exchange, etc. This greatly changes the plasma physics of the IEC as opposed to the ideal of a potential well with \"zero\" background pressure. Some key differences in the physics of such IECs were brought out by Tim Thornson in his experimental study described in Reference 1.4. He noted that: \"In present gridded systems, convergence is not important since beam-target fusion reaction dominate the reactivity of these devices, as evidenced by the linear scaling of reactivity of these devices, as evidenced by the linear scaling of reactivity with the cathode current. In fact, convergence may reduce the reactivity by forming a virtual anode that limits the central ion density. However, this space charge effect can be overcome by proper introduction of electrons. Good convergence is required to achieve optimal beam-beam reactivity scaling for the application that require higher fusion reaction rates, and the importance of symmetry in determining convergence places a 7 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY constraint on any Spherical IEC device planned for these applications. The observed loss of convergence with decreasing pressure and increasing current makes achieving significant beam-beam scaling far less favorable.\" In addition to the issue of beam-background fusion dominating in the gridded systems at higher pressures, Thornson pointed out the importance of energetic ions undergoing charge exchange and being lost from the system. This work and others on the small gridded systems at that time showed several important problems which are best understood by considering beam-background vs. beam-beam fusion scaling. The former scales with density and pressure as nb · nbk <σv> ~ nb · p <σv> while beam-beam fusion goes as nb2<σv>. Here: nb = beam ions per cm3; nbk= background atoms per cm3; p = background pressure; <σv> is the fusion reactivity averaged over the appropriate beam-background (or beam-beam) distribution functions. If ions are produced as done in most small gridded experiments by electron ionization collisions with neutral gas during a plasma discharge between the grid and vacuum vessel wall, reduction of background gas pressure will also reduce the ion source, reducing the reaction rate. Thus, it becomes apparent that to get the favorable beam-beam scaling needed to go into the power reactor regime, ions must be produced externally while the main reaction chamber is keep at very low background pressure to avoid charge exchange losses. Indeed, without explaining that this was the reason, Hirsch used external ion \"guns\" in his early experiment at Farnsworth labs. The present author (G. Miley), however, went back to the internal discharge ion source technique to simplify the device for portable neutron source applications. Power devices will need to go back to external production of some type however. Again, this issue will be addressed further later. While earlier workers sought small grid openings designed to provide uniform ion flows for good core plasma convergence (stressed in the earlier papers already noted), Miley disclosed in a paper in Reference 1.5 that the STAR mode could be produced with wider grid openings. In fact, Miley noted that three key modes can be formed in gridded IECs depending on the pressure and grid openings. These are described as: \"Glow discharge operation of the IECGD is categorized by three distinct discharge \"modes\": Star, Central Spot, and Halo (illustrated in Figure 1.3). These names are quite descriptive of the visual appearances of the visible light emitted from the discharges. All three modes are reproducible and stable; each is associated with a different potential well structure, hence neutron production rate. The star mode was used extensively in recent experiments. It is distinguished by microchannels or \"spokes\" radiating outward from a bright center spot (Figure 1.4). As verified by magnetic deflection experiments, the spokes are primarily composed of ion beams aligned so that they pass through the center of the openings delineated by the grid-wires. This mode is very efficient for neutron production, since the large effective grid transparency allows numerous passes of ions through the center spot before being intercepted by the grid or being ion by charge exchange. The Star mode is typically obtained at lower operating pressures (<10 mTorr) and higher voltages (>30 kV), using a carefully formed grid with good sphericity and high transparency (>95 percent). The halo (or \"jet\") mode occurs when one of the grid openings is slightly enlarged compared to the others.\" 8 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 1.3. Discharge Modes in Gridded Devices Identified by Miley\n\nFigure 1.4. Photo of Star Mode Seen Through a Reaction Vessel Port Window\n\nIn summary, the basic IEC approach is to create a potential well through electrostatic confinement of one of the plasma species in a dynamic (inertial) configuration. \"Inertial\" effects associated with dynamic motion of the confined species are essential to avoid plasma losses predicted for systems by Earnshaw (as noted earlier). The two primary approaches can be termed, \"ion injected\" or \"electron injected\", the \"injected\" species being the one forming the potential well. In order to maintain the well, the second species brought in with the injected one must not completely neutralize the plasma, i.e., the IEC plasma is inherently \"quasi-neutral\". This well then provides trapping and convergence of the ion \"streaming\" towards the center of the trap region, forming a dense fusing plasma there. For a power reactor the objective is to obtain ion beam-beam collisions in this central core. For neutron/proton production satisfactory reaction rates can come from beam background collisions. However, this scaling with injected current would require excessive input power for a practical power-producing unit. Thus beam-beam scaling of the reaction rate as the current squared (or higher powers as noted earlier may be possible due to nonlinear effects) is essential. The vision of a power reactor seeks a \"zero\" background pressure, thus generally involves an external ion source with acceleration into the trap at ultra low pressure to obtain beam-beam collisions. As described earlier, this changes the details of the physics just discussed for an ideal \"zero\" background pressure device. The issue of whether the trap should be formed by ion injection or by \"digging a well\" with electrons remains open, but involves stability and reaction volume (focusing) optimization issues. Since the discussion to here has been largely on gridded devices, we next briefly review some other approaches: the Bussard HEPS concept, the Barnes Nebel Penning trap, the Nebel POPS device, and the Miley ion injected device.\n\n9"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBussard HEPS (or Polywell) Concept\n\nIn Bussard's Polywell IEC, a spherical magnetic field termed a \"Polywell\" is approximately obtained with a multi-pole cusp magnetic field (Reference 1.6). More about the theory of flows in this configuration is given in the paper by N. Krall (Reference 1.7), and some stability issues are addressed in the Wang and Krall paper of Reference 1.8. One of the key physics revolves around electron losses from the poles in the cusp field. Krall and Bussard argue that a plasma \"waffle-ball\" effect causes the loss cone angle to be reduced due to the high pressure developed in the IEC plasma. The issue still needs further experimental verification. The Polywell approach is very important and it is currently pursued by R. Nebel's EMC2 company in Santa Fe with significant DOD funding. More insights will be provided throughout this report, but the reader is encouraged to study the reports/articles, as already explained earlier, since the present report is directed more at \"ion injected\" type devices studies at UIUC.\n\nBarnes Nebel Penning Trap\n\nThe Penning trap concept described in Reference 1.9 is explained by Barnes et al. as: \"The Penning Fusion (PF) device uses a unique plasma confinement principle. In PF, a nonneutral electron plasma is confined in a modified Penning trap by a combination of applied magnetostatic and electrostatic fields. The electron space charge, in turn, electrostatically confines a minority, unmagnetized ion species. To apply such a system to fusion energy production, it is necessary to raise the applied voltages (producing the confining electrostatic field) to the order of 100 kV or greater. Even with such a high potential, in a practically sized system, the electron density (and to a greater degree the ion density) falls short of that required to give reasonable fusion reactivity. Thus, intrinsic to PF being an interesting concept is the idea of ion focusing, either in space or time, or some other means of enhancing ion reactivity. In this way the reactivity may be greatly enhanced over that available with the background density. Penning Fusion is strongly related to the IEC, but it attempts to address two limitations of the IEC. First, following the Bussard-Krall Polywell theory (Reference 1.6, 1.7) the grid is replaced by an electron cloud, which forms a virtual cathode. In this way, ion-grid collisions and associated limitations (such as secondary electron emission from the grid and grid heating) are avoided. Second, high rates of ion–ion collisions, which limit the theoretically achievable fusion gain Q (fusion power/input power) to around unity are avoided to some extent with this type of well. However, issues of electron loss and cone losses, radiation damage of the magnets and cooling, and the ability to circumvent the Elmore et al. density limit remain as questions.\"\n\nNebel POPS Device\n\nTheoretical studies by Barnes and Nebel (Reference 1.10) show that a small internal oscillating ion cloud may undergo a self-similar collapse in a harmonic oscillator potential formed by a uniform electron background. This then forms a dynamic IEC device, but with a quite different ion distribution factor vs. the \"conventional\" beam-like one. A key issue for this concept is how much plasma compression can be achieved by the POPS (Periodically Oscillating Plasma Sphere) oscillations. Recent work has shown that by properly programming the distribution function of the injected electrons it is possible to significantly improve the space dynamic charge neutralization and the plasma compression. Reference 1.10 extends that previous work in a systematic fashion by developing a formalism that determines the required velocity distribution of\n\n10"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthe injected electrons so space charge neutralization can be achieved. This formalism is then included as a boundary condition in a gridless particle code. Results indicate that although the formalism works well during the early phases of compression, when the compression gets large the solution bifurcates and becomes unphysical. Subsequent experiments on POPS at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) were encouraging, but have not been continued at a high level of effort due to key staff leaving for EMC2. Thus, the practicality of this concept remains an open question which deserves more research.\n\nMiley's \"Ion Injected\" Device\n\nThe key to developing a IEC power device is to use external ion \"guns\" to form and inject ions into the spherical IEC chamber. This eliminates the need for a grid and differential pumping between the gun and chamber allows the high vacuum needed in the chamber. (Ion injection by external guns was originally used by Hirsch as already noted. Also, more recently other labs, e.g. the University of Wisconsin and University of Kyoto/Tokyo Institute of Technology, have started gun injection work. Some of that is described later in this report). The ion formation is done in the high pressure gun discharge region outside of the chamber. Miley at UIUC (see Sections IV and VI) has been studying such a system, both theoretically and experimentally. The theoretical studies confirm that such an IEC plasma can exist stably and has sufficient confinement time for aneutronic fusion. This assumes, however, very precise control is maintained over the energy and angular momentum of injected ions and a balanced supply of electrons is provided. A radio-frequency (RF) ion injector (or \"gun\") capable of such operation has already been developed. A sketch of this design is shown in Figure 1.5.\n\nFigure 1.5. Schematic of the UIUC RF Gun Injector for IEC Experiments\n\n11"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIn this RF gun, a graded index magnetic field is used to increase the ionization efficiency. A key component is the magnetic focusing lens at the extraction port. This allows very efficient differential pumping between the high pressure gun chamber and the low pressure IEC chamber. It also provides some control of the angular velocity of entering ions.\n\nThe UIUC RF ion-injector is shown attached to an IEC chamber in Figure 1.6, and a photograph of the focal spot achieved with injection from this single injector is shown in Figure 1.7. Note that ion scattering off of the center dense plasma \"core\" causes noticeable (but \"faint\") recirculating ion beams observed in the photograph of the discharge. With additional injectors, the recirculation pattern should become quite symmetrical about the center. These studies did include differential pumping so that number of recirculating passes, β, by an ion was very low, roughly 2. The injected ion current, I, was about 50 mA. Still, based on measurements of neutrons emitted using deuterium fuel, the Q (fusion energy gain/energy in) was remarkable for such a small device, order of 10-6. Based on these results, an aggressive p-11B breakeven experiment using this type of IEC is discussed in Section VI.\n\nFigure 1.6. RF Gun Attached to an IEC Chamber in the UIUC Laboratory\n\nFigure 1.7. Photo of Center Spot Formation. The main beam observed is a direct path along the injector angle. Other faint light channels indicate beams for scattering of the central core region.\n\nCLOSING REMARKS\n\nAs seen, a wealth of information has been developed in studies of gridded IEC devices. However, the beam-background fusion used in these devices involves important differences in physics compared to what is needed for future beam-beam IEC reactors. Most notable is the need to maintain an extremely low background pressure to prevent interactions with background neutrals. Further, physical grids are subject to damage at high power levels. As pointed out, some studies show grids can survive at modest powers. But, for aggressive power units such as the p-11B plant of Section VI, they must be replaced with virtual electrode surfaces creating a deep potential well for ion confinement. Upscattering out of the well must be minimized while electron\n\n12"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ntemperatures are suppressed. These issues will be discussed further in Section IV on theory and Section VI on a proposed breakeven experiment.\n\nREFERENCES\n\n1.1 W. Elmore, J. Tuck, and K. Watson, \"On the Inertial-Electrostatic Confinement of a Plasma\", Phys. Fluids, vol. 2, No. 3, (1959) pp. 239-246.\n\n1.2 R.L. Hirsch, \"Inertial-electrostatic confinement of ionized fusion gases,\" J. of Appl. Phys., vol. 38, (1967) pp. 4522-4534.\n\n1.3 W. M. Black and E. H. Klevans, \"Theory of Potential-Well Formation in an Electrostatic Confinement Device\", J. of Appl. Phys., Vol. 45, No. 6 (1974) pp. 2502-2511.\n\n1.4 T. A. Thorson, R. D. Durst, R. J. Fonck, and L. P. Wainwright, \"Convergence Electrostatic Potential, and Density Measurements in a Spherical Convergent Ion Focus\", Phys. Plasmas, vol. 4, no. 1, (1997) pp. 4-5.\n\n1.5 G.H. Miley, et al., \"Inertial-electrostatic confinement neutron proton source,\" Third International Conference on Dense 2-pinches, AIP Conference Proceedings 299, (1993) pp. 675-689.\n\n1.6 R.W. Bussard, \"Some Physics Considerations of Magnetic Inertial-Electrostatic Confinement: A New Concept for Spherical Converging-Flow Fusion\", Fusion Technology, vol. 19, no. 2, (1991) pp. 273-293.\n\n1.7 N. A. Krall, \"The PolywellTM: A Spherically Convergent Ion Focus Concept\", Fusion Technology, vol. 22, no1, (1992) pp. 42-49.\n\n1.8 S. K. Wong and N. A. Krall, \"A Nonlocal Theory of Counterstreaming Ion Instability\", Phys. Fluids B, vol. 5, no.6, (1993) pp. 1706-1714.\n\n1.9 D. C. Barnes, M. M. Schauer, K. R. Umstadter, L. Chacon, and G. H. Miley, \"Electron equilibrium and confinement in a modified Penning trap and its application to Penning fusion\", Phys. Plasmas, vol. 7, no. 5, May (2000).\n\n1.10 R. A. Nebel, D. C. Barnes, Fusion Technology 38, 28 (1998).\n\n1.11 D. C. Barnes, R. A. Nebel, \"Stable, thermal equilibrium, large-amplitude, spherical plasma oscillations in electrostatic confinement devices\", Physics of Plasmas 5, 2498 (1998).\n\n1.12 J. Park, R. A. Nebel, S. Stange, S. K. Murali, \"Periodically oscillating plasma sphere\", Physics of Plasmas 12, (2005) 056315.\n\n13"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nSection II. Select Experiments\n\nIn this section some select experiments are briefly reviewed with the main focus on ion-injected IECs. Beginning with the early Hirsch gun injected IEC experiments that are important both historically and from a physics perspective. Other experiments aimed at \"spin-off\" applications are then covered, followed by a discussion of several recent gun injection type studies. Readers interested in more detail should consult references.\n\nIn Reference 2.1, Robert Hirsh disclosed experimental results with very high D-T neutron rates from an ion-injected IEC shown if Figure 2.1.\n\nNote that six ion \"guns\" were used to create a low energy ion beam that entered the chamber and was trapped via electrostatic structures to form the potential well structure desired for IEC operation. However, differential pumping was not used so beam-background and charge-exchange collision must have still played a significant role in this experiment. Still Hirsch obtained \"record\" neutron rates for DT fusion shown in Figure 2.2.\n\nFigure 2.1. The \"Historic\" Early IEC Ion Injection Experiment of R. Hirsch Working With Philo Farnsworth\n\nFigure 2.2. Neutron Rates Measured With the IEC of Figure 2.1 Exceeded 10^9 DT n/s at 150 kV. For perspective, note that, as discussed later, UIUC IEC gridded devices routinely produce 10^8 DD n/s at ~ 80 kV. This is slightly above Hirsch's result but uses higher ion currents.\n\nThe key point about this remarkable result is that the neutron production rates are well about that predicted by simple beam-background fusion reactions, implying that benefit\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nwas obtained from recirculation beam-beam reactions in a potential well such as in Figure 2.1 (but without multiple structures). Indeed, to further confirm the existence of a potential well, Hirsch did both collimated neutron and gamma measures. As shown in the paper, he found structure for both consistent with well formation. One possible explanation is that the ion-electron densities obtained were high enough to \"burn out\" (completely ionize) the background neutrals in the potential well. There is no direct evidence to support this view however.\n\nThese important results have never been fully explained. Attempts to reproduce his experiments were done by Gardner and co-workers at Brigham Young University (Reference 2.1) who borrowed the original device used by Hirsch. However, despite many months of effort, the neutron production they obtained was significantly lower than that reported by Hirsch. They attributed this problem to a failure to regain the gun alignment necessary to have a highly converged plasma \"core\" in the center of the device. A major hurdle to this appears to have been that no provision was made to allow precision alignment of the gun ions entering the device (although the investigators did not mention this explicitly). Later when Miley reinitiated gun experiments, his first gun design followed many of the design elements used by Hirsch, but incorporated electrostatic beam steering. This worked well, but the design was eventually discarded to move to RF guns with much higher beam currents. In addition, the gun design of Figure 1.5 uses a magnetic nozzle for reducing the exiting beam diameter and to allow strong differential pumping (not used in the prior Hirsch experiments).\n\nIt should be stressed again here that the terms \"injector\" and \"gun\" are misleading. The objective is to simply \"flow\" low energy ions into the device such that they are then accelerated to fusion energies by either the grid or the virtual electrode structure. Thus, a loss of \"excess\" energy after injection is needed trap the ion, i.e. prevent it from simply passing through the potential well and hitting the opposite wall. A biased reflector on the opposite wall can be introduced to help prevent this, but this only works well if the entering ions have little excess energy. To further understand this problem, the reader is advised to study the design of the Hirsch chamber of Reference 2.2 which uses an auxiliary biased grid (\"reflector\") near the wall. Indeed the issue of how to best introduce ions into the potential well so that their energy falls below that required to escape the well is a key for proper design of the IEC. In addition to designs to cause an initial ion energy loss to \"drop\" them into the potential well, designs with ion sourced \"imbedded\" in the well such that ions are born trapped are discussed later.\n\nGridded devices for near-term applications such as neutron activation analysis (NAA) do not rely on virtual well potential traps. Rather, the negative bias of the grid forms a potential trap, and ions are born within the potential trap by ionization collisions in the internal plasma discharge.\n\nNote that the electron injected case faces the same problem of getting ions into the potential trap. The approach used with the Polywell employs an embedded ion source plus relies on \"burn out\" densities to eliminate neutrals. Success with this technique, after many problems, was the key that lead to the \"breakthrough\" reported by R. W. Bussard (as noted earlier) just before he passed away.\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIn 1997 Miley and his group published an IEEE paper that summarized their internal ion injected grid experiments (Reference 2.3). (As noted earlier \"ion injected\" has been used to define the species forming a potential well. It is not to be confused with external \"gun\" injection where ions form the well, but are introduced from an external source). It discusses the discharge physics and plasma characteristics for various modes of operation. It explains how the STAR mode is created by the defocusing properties concave inward (towards the center core) in open grid structures. Indeed the concept is somewhat anti-intuitive since one might hope for focusing \"optics\", but this is not possible in these configurations. (Indeed various multi-grid approaches have been studied with the objective of improving beam optics for reflection of ions, hence recirculation. See for example, Reference 2.4. When ions pass through the concave potential, all but those in the exact center of the curved surface are deflected and lost. The centered ions pass through to the opposite side and go through the grid opening, then are reflected and repeat this trajectory. Subsequently ionization events along this path cause a rapid increase in the recirculating current through the center of the grid openings. This then produces the beautiful STAR mode discharge shown in Figure 2.3.\n\nFigure 2.3. Photograph of a STAR mode discharge. The \"vane\" type grid shown is only one of a number of large opening grids designed and used for STAR mode operation of the neutron source type IEC. This particular design (but with variations) has been used by the UIUC, Daimler-Chrysler and Kyoto University. It is rugged, shows little sputtering and has proven very efficient for neutron production. Materials used vary from stainless steel to Mo.\n\nThe use of a pulsed power supply represents a very important way to study the physics of high current IECs without employing expensive, very large power supplies and also avoiding the need for strong cooling to remove the waste heat. The key physics point is that the beam-beam fusion rate scales as the ion current squared. Most steady state experiments employ 100s of mA, while pulsing peak values of many amps are possible. By selecting the pulse width to match or exceed the ion confinement time, typically order of ms in present devices, a quasi equilibrium is established during the pulse. This allows study of \"equivalent\" steady-state physics during the pulse.\n\nMiley's device in Reference 2.6 used a Marx bank technology to provide peak currents of 10's of amps with a ~0.1 sec width and a low repetition rate (selected to minimize cooling requirements and also reduce bank recharging requirements).\n\nAnother important technology regarding the IEC vessel pumping was developed in the mid-1990s by staff from Miley's group working at the Idaho National Environmental and Engineering Laboratory (INEEL), Idaho with Robert A. Anderl (Reference 2.5). This work substituted a metallic hybrid getter for the external pumping on the IEC chamber. With this arrangement, the deuterium is absorbed in the getter material while the vapor pressure, hence chamber background pressure, is controlled by regulation of the getter\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ntemperature. With proper selection of the size and type of getter material, plus a good temperature feedback control, this arrangement was found to work exceedingly well. This allows a \"sealed\" IEC unit and removes the bulky pumps. Such an arrangement is essential for small mobile neutron sources. Daimler-Chrysler licensed use of this IEC neutron technology through the UIUC and used this approach for their NAA quality control units.\n\nThe general strategy employed by Daimler-Chrysler and others is to send sealed units into the field for NAA application. The impurity buildup in the chamber gas eventually causes the performance to deteriorate. At that point, the unit is returned to the originating \"factory\" or originating laboratory for refueling by pumping down and, if necessary, replacing the getter. As it occurred, Daimler-Chrysler uses such units in Germany on some of their ore delivery belts for NAA inspection of ore composition. In this role they directly replaced Cf-252 neutron sources, allowing on-off operation, simpler licensing, and lower costs. Their plan to distribute commercial units externally for sale did not materialize, however, due to company financial problem.\n\nAnother important example of the use of a compact IEC neutron source is the work at Kyoto University, Japan (Reference 2.7). These investigators used a crane-type device which was design for mounting on a crane as shown in Figure 2.4 for land mine detection.\n\nFigure 2.4. IEC Landmine Detection Project at Kyoto University\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe basic principle of this detection method, shown in Figure 2.5, is common to most NAA but is now specialized for detecting the basic elements in the land mines. Key design considerations are the source strength required, the neutron energy desired (i.e. D-D vs D-T fusion) and the type and location of neutron and x-ray detectors (from Reference 2.7).\n\nFigure 2.5. Scheme for Landmine Detection Using a Hybrid Magnetron Type IEC Neutron Source (From Reference 2.7)\n\nThe IEC developed for this work used a magnetron ion generation technique to improve the neutron production efficiency (Reference 2.6). A built-in magnetron discharge ion source was installed in the IEC. With the magnetron discharge, ions are produced in the vicinity of the vacuum chamber (anode) at negative electric potential. Therefore, the ions produced are expected to have nearly full energy corresponding to the applied voltage to the IEC cathode but slightly smaller energy than the anode potential. This prevents them from hitting the anode of the opposite side improving both fusion reaction rate and ion recirculation life. (Note that this approach is yet another way to address the problem of preventing ions created externally from escaping after entering the potential well. The technique here is to use the internal source to create the ions at a potential level less than the height of the potential well).\n\nIn addition to an internal source, the magnetron can produce ample ion current to maintain the discharge under low-pressure conditions. Ions generated in the ion source are attracted by the IEC central cathode because of its high negative electric potential. Therefore, the Kyoto investigators expected that a higher applied voltage would increase the extraction current, giving a higher IEC cathode current. However, it was\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nfound that there is an optimum voltage in terms of a maximum IEC cathode current. Ions supplied by the magnetron ion source are essential to maintain the hybrid (glow and magnetron) discharge under low gas pressure conditions. The reason for this voltage limit is not clear. Unfortunately this effect limits the cathode voltage despite the need for high voltage for neutron production near the peak energy of the fusion cross section. Thus this issue deserves more study to optimize use of a hybrid magnetron source IEC operation. Still the design worked reasonably well for the initial mine detection experiments. Unfortunately, the project was terminated prematurely due to financial constraints, so information on optimization possibility remains incomplete.\n\nThe design of the ion source also depends on the ion species being injected. Sources described thus far have focused on deuterium or, in some cases on tritium. However, workers at the University of Wisconsin (U. Wisc.) have had a great interest in 3He reactions (both D-3He and 3He-3He), so have developed a gun specialized to 3He ion production (Reference 2.8). To maximize the ion current, a Helicon source was selected since Helicons are well known for production of very high density plasmas from which high ion currents can be extracted. This source is illustrated in Figure 2.6 and discussed in Reference 2.8. They state that this source has produced steady-state ion currents of 10 mA into IEC systems with background gas pressures as low as 200 µtorr.\n\n[Figure 2.6 image: 3He Ion Source for Use in 3He-3He Fusion Rate Studies at the U of Wisconsin]\n\nFigure 2.6. 3He Ion Source for Use in 3He-3He Fusion Rate Studies at the U of Wisconsin\n\nThese developments are aimed at observation of the 3He-3He reaction in an IEC device. Scoping calculations of beam-background fusion rates predict that a 3He-3He reaction product spectrum should be distinctly observable in an IEC operating below 200 kV.\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThis capability can provide valuable data regarding 3He fusion cross sections at \"low\" energies with better counting statistics than accelerator measurements. It appears that good progress has been made in this direction.\n\nCLOSING COMMENTS\n\nThe experiments selected for this section are far from exhaustive. The main concentration here is on ion-injected IECs such as studied at the UIUC, although various electron injected devices such as the \"Polywell\" are mentioned. The experiments were selected then to explain some issues and status relative to gridded devices for near-term applications such as neutron sources and also to address some issues such as ion injection related to future fusion power units. The latter issues revolve around how to create deep potential wells in the IEC and trap the reacting ions in the well while excluding neutral gas atoms. The use of external ion sources with differential pumping then becomes a key approach for production of ions while keeping ultra low background pressure in the reacting chamber. This is the approach used at the UIUC. However, introduction of the source into the configuration such that the ions are born at potentials below the well depth is another possibility as shown by the hybrid magnetron source work in Japan. Another point noted is the advantage of using pulsed operation to obtain high peak ion currents to take advantage of the ion density squared scaling for beam-beam reactions.\n\nREFERENCES\n\n2.1 R. L. Hirsch, \"Inertial-Electrostatic Confinement of Ionized Fusion Gases,\" J. Appl. Physics 38, no.11, (1967) pp. 4522-4534.\n\n2.2 A. L. Gardner, \"Studies of Charged-Particle Distributions in an Electrostatic Confinement System,\" U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Final Report N. C00-2180-7, Washington, D. C. (1974).\n\n2.3 G. H. Miley, Y. Gu, J. M. DeMorea, R. A. Stubbers, T. A. Hochberg, J. H. Nadler, and R. A. Anderl, \"Discharge Characteristics of the Spherical Inertial Electrostatic Confinement (IEC) Device,\" IEEE Transactions Plasma Science, Vol. 24, No. 4, (1997) pp. 733-739.\n\n2.4 T.J. McGuire and R.J. Sedwick, \"Improving IEC Particle Confinement Times Using Multiple Grids\" 7th US-Japan IEC Workshop, Los Alamos National Laboratory, NM, March 14-16 (2005).\n\n2.5 R.A. Anderl, J.K. Hartwell, J.H. Nadler, J.M. DeMora, R.A. Stubbers, and G.H. Miley, \"Development of an IEC Neutron Source for NDE,\" 16th Symposium on Fusion Engineering, eds. G.H. Miley and C.M. Elliott, IEEE Conf. Proc. 95CH35852, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, (1996) pp. 1482-1485.\n\n2.6 Y. Gu, M. Williams, R. Stubbers, and G. Miley, \"Pulsed Operation of Spherical Inertial-Electrostatic Confinement Device\", Fusion Technology, Vol. 30, no. 3, (1996) pp. 1342-1346.\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n2.7 T. Takamatsu, T. Kyunai, S. Ogawa, K. Masuda, H. Toku, and K. Yoshikawa, \"A Magnetron Discharge Ion Source for an Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Fusion Device\" 7th U.S.-Japan IEC Workshop, Los Alamos National Laboratory, NM, March 14-16, (2005).\n\n2.8 G. R. Piefer, J. F. Santarius, R. P. Ashley, G.L. Kulcinski \"Progress in the Development of a 3He Ion Source for IEC Fusion\", 7th U.S.-Japan IEC Workshop, Los Alamos National Laboratory,, NM, March 14-16, (2005).\n\nSection III. Other Geometries\n\nA unique feature of the IEC is the ability to vary its geometry to adapt to a number of important near term and future applications. Here we consider cylindrical IEC geometries, the IEC Jet extraction geometry, dipole assisted, and magnetically-coupled IEC unit which add flexibility for use in some power applications. Other important configurations, which are quasi-spherical, include the magnetic assisted HEPS (Polywell) configuration, the Penning trap IEC, and the POPS oscillating IEC. These concepts are discussed briefly elsewhere in this report so will not be included here.\n\nCYLINDRICAL IECS\n\nThe prime alternate geometry studied for IECs is cylindrical. While originally developed at the UIUC, the configuration has spread to other labs including the University of Wisconsin, Kyoto University, and the Tokyo Institute of Technology. The objective is to obtain a dense core region extending along the axis of the cylinder. This is especially important for neutron sources since it offers a very long source that can be used for broad area coverage of large objects such as container boxes. Other conventional sources would require multiple \"ganged\" sources to do the same. A downside however, is the high power input required for such configurations. Thus the advantage of source length must be weighed against the alternative of moving a smaller point source over the surface of interest.\n\nIt is not clear that the cylinder is useful for scaling to a power reactor. It can be viewed as a 2-D version of the spherical unit. As such, the beam convergence (compression) is limited to lower values, hence lower core densities (an important effect for beam-beam fusion desired for power reactors, but less so for beam-background reactions used in most current neutron sources).\n\nTwo types of cylindrical sources (References 3.1-3.5), shown schematically in Figure 3.1, have been studied - a gridded type which is essentially the spherical unit converted into a cylinder, and a quite different hollow cathode design. The gridded design was a natural variation of the original Farnsworth device and was first studied experimentally in the 1970s by T. Dolan at the UIUC who used laser diagnostics with a noble gas discharge to study density-temperature and species profiles. The hollow cathode design was later proposed by G. Miley as an attempt to retain the long axial reaction region but do away with grids.\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 3.1. Two Types of Cylindrical IECs. The hollow cathode on the left (often termed the C-Device) and the 2-D gridded version on the right, often just called \"the\" cylindrical IEC.\n\nThe hollow cathode \"C-Device\" of Figure 3.1 has an insulated vacuum chamber with an alternating series of hollow cylindrical cathodes and anodes spaced along a common longitudinal axis. Biased end plates serve as charged particles \"reflectors\". The anodes, cathodes and end plates are biased to steady state and/or pulsed voltages, depending on the operational mode. This configuration is used to initiate a plasma discharge, resulting in electrostatic confinement of fusion fuel ions in both the axial and radial directions (Reference 3.4). Present operation produces about 10^7 n/s (D-D) steady state while for pulsed output 10^9 n/s (D-D) is obtained.\n\nIn \"the\" cylindrical version 2-D IEC (Figure 3.1), a cylindrical cathode grid is placed with its axis concentric with the axis of the surrounding vacuum vessel. This is then, in effect, a 2-D version of the spherical IEC. It operates by convergence of ions created between the grid and wall onto a small volume along the axis, hence has sometimes been called the \"Radial Converging IEC (RC-IEC)\". As already noted, the basic physics of this version was originally studied in pioneering work by T. Dolan in 1970. However, the concept lay dormant until revised and upgraded several decades later with improved grid designs for neutron production by UIUC workers.\n\nELECTRICALLY-DRIVEN IEC JET THRUSTER\n\nThe use of an IEC design for space propulsion was originally proposed by R.W. Bussard (Reference 3.6). (His concept was for a high thrust scram jet device. While very attractive, this concept (and Miley et al.'s \"Spaceship I & II concepts discussed later) are for far-term use. Here we discuss near-term electronically driven IEC designed for space applications. In this case, electrical power would come from a solar panel.\n\nThe IEC jet thruster is intended as an ultra-maneuverable space thruster for satellite and small probe thrust operations. The IEC Jet design potential offers a unique capability to cover a wide range of powers (few Watts to Kilowatts) with good efficiency while providing a plasma jet that can start with a large diameter but be narrowed directionally to focus on targets. The IEC thruster uses a spherical configuration, wherein ions are generated and accelerated towards the center of a spherical vacuum chamber. A virtual cathode forms in the high-density central core region, and combined with a locally distorted cathode grid potential field, extracts accelerated ions into an\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nintense quasi-neutral ion jet. The configuration, low gas leakage, and good heat removal make it possible to scale the design to either low powers or high powers, covering a range of interest for present small satellites on to future medium and large satellites. In addition to maneuverable thrusting, the jet channel extraction technique enables directing and focusing the plasma stream down on an asteroid or other object for interrogation of it. Analysis of the plasma emission spectra would provide an identification of the materials and surface features of the object. With further development the IEC system potentially offers an attractive fusion power source. Another advantage of the IEC jet thruster is that it provides a step towards a future p-11B IEC power source and/or thruster for satellite operations. This possibility is also briefly discussed here.\n\nRelation to Other Prior Thrusters\n\nNASA and other laboratories have worked toward developing advanced Hall Thrusters for future satellite applications. Such thrusters, however, do not scale well to lower powers for small satellites, nor are exhaust plasma modifications possible to provide fast maneuverability. The IEC-jet thruster appears uniquely able to address both issues. Conventional plasma thrusters such as the Hall thruster have undergone much more experimental study than the IEC-jet thruster. However, the simplicity of the IEC-Jet thruster design and its thermal scalability makes it feasible to quickly develop and test, making the lack of data base less of a liability.\n\nIn the jet thruster concept the plasma target at the center of the chamber, created by the intersection of the multiple ion beams, serves to deflect ions into the escaping jet plasma. The resulting virtual anode, in combination with curved potential lines created by the cathode grid diverts ions, forming a strong plasma jet. This is channeled out through an enlarged hole and guide structure in the grid (Figure 3.2). This design promises a good efficiency and thrust while providing a low weight, and due to the very open accelerator grid structure, a very long lifetime. Thus it provides a good thruster for basic satellite operations and with the added jet control/focusing also provides maneuverability.\n\nIn addition the IEC jet offers two added features that increase its potential effectiveness for probing various space objects. The fact that the IEC jet can be controlled to form over multiple areas around the sphere would allow the platform to maneuver itself close to a target and then simply open a second jet offset 180 degrees from the propulsive one. The second jet would serve the integration purpose of the platform without having to expend time or additional resources such as fuel to reorient itself to direct the plume at the target. Other current systems, such as Hall thrusters, would first have to position itself close to the target, and then reorient such that the exhaust plume is properly oriented. Thus, the IEC jet thruster would not be subject to expending the resources of time and fuel that other platforms require. Another option for the IEC jet thruster is to operate as a pulsed device. This becomes especially important when considering how long it may take to disable a defensive target (the platform's impulse time to disable). The use of an intense pulsed jet could disable the target before it has time to maneuver or apply defensive layers. As discussed later, the basic IEC has been operated experimentally in a pulsed mode using a capacitive power unit. However, to date, formation of the jet has only been studied under steady-state operation.\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nan added long-term potential advantage of developing the IEC-jet thruster is that the concept can eventually be extended to an ultra high impulse fusion power/propulsion unit. Indeed, the thruster concept arose from work on a fusion based IEC (Reference 3.5). To move to fusion power, however, would require advances such as discussed for terrestrial IEC power plants as Section VI.\n\nJET Extraction From a Spherical IEC\n\nA plasma jet can be extracted from the gridded spherical IEC by enlarging a grid opening. This forms the basis for various exciting applications including a jet thruster and various plasma processing uses such as gasification of municipal wastes and future materials recycle. Here, to illustrate this asymmetrical geometry, we briefly consider the IEC jet thruster for use in satellite operations and maneuvering (Reference 3.6).\n\nDescription of the IEC Jet Thruster\n\nFor conventional star mode operation, such as discussed earlier, the IEC grid is designed to be highly symmetric so that the microchannel beams are also symmetric, providing good convergence. However, experiments have demonstrated that enlarging one of the grid openings distorts the potential surfaces. This results in the creation of a very intense, tightly coupled space-charge-neutralized ion jet directed outward from the central core plasma region (see Figure 3.2) (Reference 3.7), and it is this mode of operation (star with jet) that would be employed for the proposed thruster.\n\nFigure 3.2. (a) Jet Operational Mode in Experimental IEC Device and (b) Jet Set-up\n\nThe jet formation has been explained theoretically (Reference 3.5) in terms of the large distortion of the potential surface at the enlarged grid opening. The local gradient initiates electron flow that in turn drags ions out across the surface. The result is the formation of the intense space charge neutralized ion beam (or \"plasma jet\") at that location. Such operation has been routinely obtained in laboratory IEC devices under steady-state operation, with the plasma jet being maintained for hours. The power carried by the jet has been demonstrated by heating a target plate placed in its path. Over half of the energy imparted to the ions by the accelerating grid is effectively funneled into the jet, and no major losses of ions to the vacuum chamber wall or grid\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"are observed. For example, with the device of Figure 3.2b, the input power is about 2 kW with over 1.5 kW being carried out by the jet flow. Consequently, this configuration provides a way to efficiently convert the energy stored by accelerated ions in the symmetric microchannels into a directed beam or jet.\n\nComparison to a Conventional \"Plasma\" Thruster\n\nThe IEC thruster can be viewed as transforming a conventional ion thruster into a spherical form. In the IEC thruster of Figure 3.2b, ions are produced in the gas discharge region through the injection and oscillation of electrons about a guide grid that is held to a slightly positive potential. A second grid extracts ions from the discharge region and accelerates them towards the center of the device. This type of ion formation in the IEC has been studied extensively by workers at Nambe Tech, a \"spin-off\" company by LANL workers (Reference 3.8). In the case of a planar thruster, ions are also formed in a discharge region. However, instead of a guide grid, a magnetic field is used to contain electrons, providing a long path to maximize ionization collisions. The ion source regions are basically the same, then, for both IEC and planar ion thrusters, and the extraction/acceleration provided by the grids and the magnetic fields play equivalent roles in the respective devices. However, the IEC jet thruster concept must extract a net thrust from the spherical configuration. That is where the two concepts (planar vs. IEC) diverge, and the star-jet operational mode becomes essential. The micro-channel formation in the STAR mode acts to maintain and store the accelerated ions until they are diverted directionally and escape out through the plasma jet opening. The opening is biased, enabling the control of the potential gradient between the grid and the opening, hence allowing for increased control of the intensity of the plasma jet.\n\nThe maintenance of STAR mode is then fundamental to the success of IEC jet operation. Both experimental data and particle-in-cell (PIC) code simulations show that the energetic ions can be maintained in microchannels for hundreds of passes. The jet opening allows escape into it in less than ten passes. Consequently, a majority of the ions, >95 percent, escape at full energy. Thus, the star-jet provides an amazingly good method to both store and direct the energetic ions.\n\nOverall, the IEC configuration offers distinct advantages. First, the grid structures used in the IEC thruster are much more open than those used in the conventional planar thruster designs. When combined with microchannel ion focusing, this prevents ion-grid collisions, greatly reducing grid erosion and significantly increasing the thruster lifetime. Second, transforming the device into a sphere makes the overall unit more compact per unit-ion-source volume, implying a weight reduction advantage. Third, unwanted neutral propellant gas leakage would be reduced, due to the smaller net opening required by the high-density jet, vs. a conventional planar thruster having multiple grid openings. This advantage becomes especially important for thruster applications. Assuming that the IEC thruster efficiency would be comparable to that of the planar Ion thruster design, based on these operational improvements, the IEC thruster then offers significant advantages. [Note that an alternate IEC thruster concept is described later in the section on J. Khachan's work. It too looks very promising.]\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nJet Extraction\n\nTo obtain thrust from an IEC device, a valley or trough must be created in the electrostatic potential, and a hole must be physically cut into the ground sphere. This allows high-speed ions to escape in the form of a plasma jet as described in the preceding section. Ions are generated near the ground potential with the aid of electron emitters and additional grids. A central spherical electrical grid accelerates ions to the core region. A cylindrical \"channel\" grid with the same electrostatic potential as the central spherical grid creates a passage through which ions can escape to the outside. Thus this trough in the electrostatic potential profile across the centerline (thrust axis) of the IEC thruster is a unique feature compared to the linear profile for a planar device.\n\nThe ion beams finally exit through an opening in the ground sphere of the IEC device. The channel grid must be well insulated from the ground potential to prevent short-circuiting or arc-over; thus a separate insulated feed-through cable maintains the negative potential on the inner spherical and channel grids. Makeup propellant gas is fed into the ionization region through needle-valve-controlled tubing located around the chamber wall. Ionization of the propellant uses the electron emitter-guide grid design described earlier. The inner grid serves to both extract and accelerate ions, forming the microchannels. To control neutralization of the plasma jet, additional electron emitters are attached close to the jet discharge hole. A combination of electron emission rates and jet grid bias can be used to control the beam space charge, hence the growth of focusing of the beam during propagation. In present experiments, however, the electron rate is fixed at a suitable value while the jet grid bias is varied.\n\nControl of the jet diameter and focus is obtained in two ways: first, the channel grid will be separately hinged with a small servo motor such that its axis can be moved over a volume defined by a 10 percent cone angle; second, the grid bias can be varied over a range up to the chamber potential to provide focus control over the jet flow. A large negative grid bias will cause a narrow focus while small potential values will allow the plasma to expand giving a broad cross section beam.\n\nExperimental Jet Design and Performance\n\nFigure 3.3 shows the thruster experiment components. It is also of interest to consider the typical dimensions involved to illustrate the compactness of the unit. The experimental studies use an existing spherical IEC chamber of ~30-cm with a 1-cm diameter port on one side of it for beam extraction. (This is somewhat larger than envisioned for application to micro-satellites). An 8-cm diameter spherical electrical tungsten or tantalum wire grid, having a geometric transparency of ~90 percent, will mount inside the chamber. A ~1-cm diameter hole will be cut into the side of the wire grid, and this hole will be aligned with the hole in the chamber wall and connected to it by a 2-cm diameter cylindrical guide grid. The insulator covering the grounded wall must be of sufficient size to prevent arc-over from the ground to the cylindrical grid. The inner electrical grids are connected to a 500-kV dc power supply through the insulated feed-through cable. A positively-charged outer grid with a variable voltage of ~ 10-100 V is mounted on a swivel connector at the outside of the beam extraction port of the chamber, in combination with four electron emitters, generates ions. The choice for the voltages on the outer grids is flexible, so long as a sufficient ion\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"generation rate is achieved. The net accelerating voltage must be kept within the order of 1 kV to ensure that the resultant exhaust velocity is in the range of 30,000 m/s (Isp < 3000 seconds). The mission for a communications satellite is optimized with a specific impulse in this range. A higher specific impulse would reduce propellant requirements, but the power requirements and the mass associated with power source components would increase correspondingly. Xenon is bled into the chamber through holes at appropriate locations around the wall of the vessel.\n\nFigure 3.3. Illustration of the IEC Jet Thruster Experiment Showing Central Grid and Two Jet Grids, Opposite to Each Other With On-Off Action\n\nTable 3.1 lists the estimated performance parameters for an IEC electrostatic ion thruster based on experimental data available to date plus extrapolation of other ion thruster data. The IEC device will have higher densities and temperatures in the central core plasma than a conventional thruster, but the increased losses due to Bremsstrahlung radiation are still negligible when compared to the other power losses. Thermal radiation losses should be comparable to that in conventional thrusters. The energy expenditure per ion for conventional ion thrusters and is ~ 300 eV per ion. The energy expenditure per ion for the IEC device has not been established experimentally, but was estimated in Table 3.1 from simulation studies.\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTable 3.1. Estimated Performance Parameters or the IEC Ion Thruster\n\nParameter | IEC Ion Thruster\nPropellant | Xenon\nMolecular Weight ( amu) | 131.3\nSpecific Impulse (s ) | 3000\nThrust (mN) | 34\nJet Power (W) | 500\nNet accelerating Potential (V) | 600\nBeam Current (mA) | 832\nPower Loss to Grid (W) | ≤50\nPower Loss to Bresstrahlung Radiation (W) | < 1\nPower loss to Ionization of Propellant (W) | 200-250\nInput Power (W) | 750-800\nThruster Efficiency (%) | 62-68\n\nIn summary, the power efficiency of the IEC thruster appears to be competitive to existing ion thrusters. What are the advantages then? These were outlined earlier and include a more compact design, large heat rejection area, an exhaust jet closer to quasi-neutrality, reduced neutral propellant leakage, and reduced grid erosion. Thus, the mass of the IEC jet thruster system can potentially be reduced compared to a high-power Hall-type thruster and also its lifetime can be increased significantly. In this overall context, then, the IEC thruster potentially offers an important improvement in performance for high power thruster applications.\n\nScale-up to p-11B IEC Space Power Unit/Thruster\n\nThe electrically driven IEC jet thruster provides an important data base for a next step p-11B IEC jet thruster. Jumping to p-11B for this application may appear overly ambitious. However, neutronless fusion seems essential in a small space thruster to avoid excessive weight from shielding of electronics. Considerable experience with fusing plasmas in IECs has been gained through development of IEC DD neutron sources. These devices operate with ~ 80- keV D-ion beams using the non-Maxwellian character of the IEC. This important characteristic makes use of p-11B a realistic goal. In fact, operation with circulating ion energies at the desired 150 keV energy for p-11B has already been achieved at the UIUC and several other laboratories working on IECs. The issue then is how to achieve adequate confinement times. The approach being pursued at UIUC is the formation of deep potential wells with angular ion injection using a differentially-pumped RF ion gun, as discussed in later sections. A proposed experiment to demonstrate p-11B physics is discussed in Section VI.\n\nIn summary, the extraction of a jet plasma from a gridded IEC opens the way to a number of added plasma applications for the IEC. This present discussion is intended to identify an orderly progress of IEC applications in commercial space power, starting with an electrically driven IEC thruster to a self-powered IEC p-11B unit. The attractive characteristics of the electrically driven device, namely light weight, low maintenance,\n\n28\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY low fuel leakage and extreme maneuverability make it a near-term competitor with other devices such as Hall thrusters for future commercial thruster applications in the multi-kW range. The extension to a p-11B self-powered unit would resolve many problems anticipated as larger power requirements develop. It would be extendable to large power units needed for eventual fast deep space propulsion. Much more research and development is required to ensure that step in a timely fashion, however. The Dipole Assisted IEC (DaIEC) The dipole assisted IEC DaIEC is similar to the IEC concept discussed above except a dipole magnet is located in the center of two hemispherical grids (Reference 3.9). The DaIEC was first proposed by G. Miley at the UIUC and has been under investigation there. This concept is closely related to the levitated dipole reactor (Reference 3.10) but is much simpler, being smaller and not requiring levitation. It also differs considerably in the physics of the associate plasma confinement. Two ion sources inject 40-keV deuterium and helium-3 ion beams toward the center of the dipole magnet. The magnetic field will compress the ion beams by trapping ions along the magnetic field lines; therefore, they fuse within the dipole magnet. The products of the D-3He fusion reaction are 14.7-MeV protons and 4-MeV alpha particles. These can be used for direct charged particle propulsion or direct conversion to electricity (or both- propulsion and station keeping). A schematic of the setup is shown in Figure 3.4. Figure 3.4. Dipole Reactor Propulsion Scheme Stabilizing coil Those ions that exit toward the right in Figure 3.4 are trapped by the magnetic field produced by the stabilizing coil and are exhausted to produce thrust. Since the magnetic field does not close at the nozzle but is open, protons and particles are not required to be neutralized. This configuration of the magnetic field in the DaIEC system reduces the mechanical components. A neutralizer (electron injection into the exhaust) will be required in this system so as to avoid possible charging up at nozzle. 29 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY There are several advantages of the dipole-assisted IEC. By applying the desired voltage to the cathode grid, high-energy ions are easily obtained, hence plasma heating is straightforward. Indeed in this case fusion is dominated by beam-beam (non-Maxwellian reactions). Also, the dipole magnet at the center of the device produces field lines that trap ions and compresses them within the inner radius of the dipole. Thus, a very high ion density can be achieved leading to high reaction rates via beam-beam fusion. Biasing the dipole magnet to the same potential as the cathode grid solves the problem of space charge build-up due to the high ion density at the center of DaIEC. DAIEC EXPERIMENTS The purpose of current experiments is to investigate the focusing effect of a dipole magnetic field in a spherical IEC. In particular, the primary goal is to measure the increase in plasma densities achieved by a dipole-assisted IEC. In theory, the introduction of a current ring or dipole coil into the base configuration would focus particles into the center of the dipole, increasing the plasma density at the core of the device. A schematic of the current experimental setup is shown in Figure 3.5. Figure 3.5. (a) Dipole Magnetic Field and (b) Layout of Devices 10cm upper grid 30cm distance = 15 cm lower grid 10cm This experiment employs two split spherical grids as shown in Figure 3.5. Ions are created in the discharge between these grids and the vessel wall. They are extracted and accelerated by the grid potential so they pass through the dipole field of Figure 3.5a. Experiments have confirmed that an order of magnitude density increase (vs. no dipole present) can be achieved in the center region. A double Langmuir probe is inserted at various positions throughout the center region. The use of a bias on the dipole magnet structure to control space charge build-up was also studied. In an ion-injected IEC partial space-charge neutralization at the core 30 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY region is essential to decrease the center potential and consequently allow incoming beam ions to penetrate into the core region. In the DaIEC, it is possible to assist this effect by an external control of the centerline potential by applying a bias voltage to the dipole coil. In the UIUC experiment this was done by applying a voltage to a small copper ring inserted in the core of the dipole magnet. The increase in the electron density with a small center line bias applied was about 30 percent while the applied voltage to the dipole structure was ~3 percent of the discharge voltage. The present setup prevented the use of larger applied voltages which could further improve neutralization, but these results still demonstrate the basic concept of dipole focusing with coil bias control. Figure 3.6 shows how the electron density changes with increasing magnetic field measured at various coil biases in the current experiment. It is found that electron density increases about 17 times more than that of non-magnetic field measurement. So far, this increase is very close to our theoretical estimations. Electron density vs B-field 25mTorr 1.00E+10 Electron density(cm-3) 1.00E+09 1.00E+08 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 B-field strength (Gauss) Ground Vc=-100V Vc=+100V Figure 3.6. Electron Density vs. Dipole Magnet Field Strength at 25mTorr, 20mA The next section turns to some very interesting diagnostic studies of IEC devices, including a jet thruster configuration, done by Joe Khachan's group at the University of Sydney, Australia. KHACHAN'S STUDIES AT U OF SYDNEY Joe Khachan's IEC research at the University of Sydney has stressed studies of optical emission spectroscopy of gridded IEC devices (Reference 3.11, 3.12). Using Doppler spectroscopy of the Hydrogen Ha line they have shown that the micro-channels in an IEC discharge operating in the units at tens of mTorr pressure range (for voltages less than 30 kV) are mostly composed of molecular ions with approximately 20 percent atomic hydrogen. They have also developed a spectroscopic model based on collisional radioactive modeling to spectroscopically measure ion densities, electron energies and 31 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY predict fusion rates. This latter achievement makes spectroscopic measurements simpler to carry out since hydrogen can be used to predict these fusion rates, which excludes the radiation hazard in a laboratory situation where shielding is not possible. In follow-on work, they simplified the modeling of charge exchange with an analytical approach to charge exchange modeling based on Markov chain theory. Table 4.1. Comparison of Analytical and Numerical Estimates of Q-values in a beam-Dominated Solution -- for a 50-kV Square Well. Analytical BAFP (Chacon) With co-moving ions Q ~ 0.21 - Ref. 4.1, Nevins - Without co-moving ions Q ~ 1.3 - Ref. 4.2 , Chacon Q ~ 1 The movement of neutrals moving away from the cathode seen from the spectroscopic measurements was also confirmed by carrying out a dusty plasma measurement to show charged micron sized insulating spheres (dust) experience a force away from the cathode centre (Reference 3.13). The explanation of this was attributed to a local potential maximum established at the center of the cathode, which accelerates ions at that point away from the center. Due to charge exchange, ions become neutrals and are able to leave along the microchannels out to the anode. The ion drag force on the dust moved the dust particles away from the center. Based on this observation, Khachan has engineered the collimated beam of exiting neutrals from the cathode to make a simple electric propulsion thruster where a unidirectional micro-channel emerges from a conical cathode (Reference 3.14). He claims that the specific impulse of the thruster and its efficiency greatly exceed existing electric propulsion thrusters. Note that this concept, while having some similarities, differs in some details from Miley's jet thrusts describe earlier. CONCLUDING REMARKS The primary focus of this section has been on two key alternate geometries: The cylindrical and jet IECs. Both provide unique capabilities for applications using IEC sources and IEC space thruster, respectively. These uses, however, require competition in commercial markets with other options. This IEC technology is just now emerging, so its success in commercialization has yet to be established. More about such applications is discussed in Section V. In conclusion, the DaIEC is a very interesting alternate IEC configuration. However, it has received little experimental study to date, so much more needs to be done to fully evaluate its potential. REFERENCES 3.1 B. Bromley, L. Chacon, and G. Miley, \"Approximate Modeling of Cylindrical Inertial Electrostatic Confinement, (IEC) Fusion Neutron Generator,\" Proc. 16th International 32 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Conference on Numerical Simulation of Plasmas, UCLA Dept. Physics, Los Angeles, CA, Santa Barbara, CA, Feb10-12 (1998) pp. 191-192. 3.2 G. Miley, T. Bauer, J. Nadler, H. Hora, \"Converging Beam Neutron Source for Driving a Sub-critical Fission Reactor\", Proceedings, ICONE 8, CD/Track 8, 8500 Apr 2-6 Baltimore, MD, (2000)pp. 1-8. 3.3 R. A. Stubbers, H. J. Kim, and G. H. Miley, \"Two-Dimensional Modeling of a Radically-Convergent Cylindrical Inertial Electrostatic Confinement, (IEC) Fusion Device,\" 5th US/Japan Workshop, IEC Fusion, Madison WI, Oct 9-10 (2002). 3.4 G. H. Miley, R. A. Stubbers, and H. Momota, \"Advances in Cylindrical IEC Neutron Source Design for Driven Sub-Critical Operation,\" to be published in the proceedings of ICONE 11: 11th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering, Nuclear Energy-Dawn of a New Era, ICONE 11, Tokyo, Japan, Apr 20-23 (2003). 3.5 G. H. Miley, J. Javedani. R. Nebel, J. Nadler, Y. Gu, A. Satsangi and P. Heck, \"An Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Neutron/Proton Source,\" Third International Conference on Dense Z pinches, editors. Haines, Malcolm, Knight, and Andrew, AIP Conference Proceedings 299, AIP Press, (1994), pp. 675-689. 3.6 R. W. Bussard, \"Fusion as Electric Propulsion,\" J. of Propulsion, Vol. 6, No. 5, (1990), pp. 567-574. 3.7 Y. Gu, .B., Nadler, J.H., Satsangi, A.J., Javedani, J.B., Miley, G.H., Nebel. R.A. and Barnes, D.C., \"Physics and Effects of Grid-Electric Field Perturbation on Spherical Electrostatic-Inertial Confinement Fusion\". 21st EPS Conference on Controlled Fusion and Plasma Physics, editors Joffrin, E., Platz, P. and Stott, P.E., Montpellier, France, Vol. 436, (1994). 3.8 D. C. Barnes, R. A. Nebel, F. L. Ribe, G. H. Miley, J. Javedani, Y. Gu. and A. Satsangi, \"Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Experiments at Low Working Pressure,\" Prepared under U.S. Army contract DAAK70-93-003 8 by the Nambe Tech Corp., NTTR-101, Santa Fe, NM (1994). 3.9 G. H. Miley, H. Momota, P.J. Shrestha, R. Thomas, and Y. Takeyama, \" Space Propulsion Based on Dipole Assisted IEC System\", AIP Conference Proceedings, Albuquerque, New Mexico STAIF , vol. 813, (2006)pp. 1240-1248. 3.10 A. Hasegawa, L. Chen, and M.E. Mauel, \"A D-3He Fusion Reactor Based on a Dipole Magnetic Field,\" Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 30, Sept. (1990), pp. 2405. 3.11 J. Khachan, S. Collis, \" Measurements of ion energy distributions by Doppler shift spectroscopy in an inertial electrostatic confinement device\", Phys. of Plasmas, vol. 8, no. 4 (2001) pp. 1299-1304. 3.12 O. Shrier, J. Khachan, S. Bosi, M. Fitzgerald, N. Evans, \"Diverging ion motion in an inertial electrostatic confinement discharge\", Phys. of Plasmas, vol. 13, no. 1, (2006). Art. No. 012703. 33 UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n3.13 J. Khachan, A. Samarian, \"Dust diagnostics on an inertial electrostatic confinement discharge\", Phys. Letters A, vol. 363, no. 4 (2007) pp. 297-301.\n3.14 L. Blackhall, J. Khachan, \"A simple electric thruster based on ion charge exchange\", vol. 40, No. 8, (2007) pp. 2491-2494.\nSection IV. IEC Theory\nEarly basic IEC theory was briefly described in Section I. Section IV will now turn to some more recent studies starting with an early study by Bill Nevins (Reference 4.1) that has caused concern in the community about the suitability of the IEC for a fusion power reactor. Nevins did a semi analytic analysis where IEC systems are predicated including a non-equilibrium ion distribution function. Coulomb collisions between ions cause this distribution to relax to a Maxwellian on the ion-ion collisional time scale. His analysis suggests that the input power required to prevent this relaxation, thus maintaining the IEC configuration for times beyond the ion-ion collisional time scale, is greater than the fusion power produced. Thus, he concluded that IEC systems show little promise for the development of commercial electric power plants. Nevin's analysis appears to be very thorough, however, as discussed next, it suffers from several key, but subtle assumptions that may force the pessimistic results.\nFigure 4.1. Cross Section of the Experimental Layout of the PFX-I Experiment. The emitter -electron source, onion-shaped anode and reflector form an axial electrostatic well for electron axial confinement. Radial confinement is provided by the axial magnetic field. The reflector is biased slightly more negative than the emitter to avoid electron losses to the reflector.\nLater, to further explore issues raised by Nevins, Luis Chacon, doing his thesis with G. Miley, decided to use a Fokker Plank model for analysis of the IEC so that some of the questionable assumptions used by Nevins could be relaxed. This study, presented in Reference 4.2, specifically dealt with a Penning-type IEC due to interest in the Penning trap experiment at LANL. The experimental device, PFX-I is illustrated in Figure 4.2 while the reactor-like configuration modeled by Chacon is shown in Figure 4.2. It should be stressed however, that the conclusions still apply in principle to the ion injected IEC since the issues involve the potential well trapping common to both. The Penning trap and the ion injected devices differ in how the well is formed and stabilized, but the physics of trapped plasma confinement is the same. Namely, the time scale for collisional degradation of the beam-like ion distribution function is crucial since short times (as the fusion time) would prevent a power reactor. Nevins addressed this issue by calculating collisional relaxation rates from a beam-like, monoenergetic ion population, absolutely confined in a square potential well. From his analysis, Nevins concluded that the IEC will thermalize and lose ion focusing before enough fusion"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"events take place. Accordingly, he predicted that the Q-value (defined the ratio of fusion power out to ion input power) of an IEC device operating with a 50/50 percent deuterium-tritium (D-T) mixture would be ~0.21 for a 50-kV square well. This conclusion would rule out the possibility of a fusion reactor, but would leave open the development of driven neutron sources. However, this analysis contains several questionable assumptions. For example, a tightly focused monoenergetic ion beam is in fact a pessimistic scenario, because different co-moving ion species (such as D and T with the same energy) result in a finite speed difference, thus fostering ion-ion collisions and the degradation of the ion distribution function. It would be more realistic to consider that, in a square well, friction between species would homogenize the speed within the ion beam after some time, making the speed difference infinitesimal. This line of argument was pursued earlier by Barnes et al., (Reference 4.3) who found Q ~ 1.3 for the same system.\nION INJECTION PORT\nIon extraction grid\nIon divertor\nVext\nElectron divertor\naD\na\nPseudo-spherical well for ion confinement\nE=Emax\nE=Eo\nAnode wall (ground)\nFigure 4.2. Detail of the Anode and the Ion Injection Port in PFX-I (not to scale). Ion and electron divertors are indicated, as well as the Eo and Emax equipotential lines that define the ion confinement region. The Eo contour line determines the region of absolute ion confinement.\nIn Chacon's work, a bounce-averaged Fokker-Planck (BAFP) model was employed to obtain steady-state solutions for the ion distribution function and to calculate associated fusion energy gains (Q-values) in a variety of operating conditions. These is done in terms of source and sink strengths, ion injection energies, well depths, and electrostatic potential shapes. Thus, the limiting assumptions by Nevins- namely that ions are confined in a square potential well, and that their distribution is tightly focused and monoenergetic, are relaxed. When these restrictive assumptions are removed, it is found that large energy gains (Qs of hundreds) for beam-like solutions in square wells"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"are possible in Penning IEC devices provided that: 1) The electrostatic well is deep enough (E0 > 100 kV); 2) Ion confinement time is long enough ( θ > 0.01); and 3) Ion source strength is moderate (Ŝmax < 300). Another important effect which enters these calculation concerns is relative to ion motion in the well. To emphasize the difference between Q values studies from Nevins and Chacon are summarized in Table 4.1. (Here, the BAFP calculation was done for off-optimal conditions (vs. the BAFP obtained for beam-like cases) to compare with the Nevins' calculations).\nFurther, calculated Q-values from the BAFP simulation by Chacon for the beam-like cases are about five to ten times larger than those obtained in by Nevins in Reference 4.1. This added inconsistency can be traced back to the different treatment of the D and T ion species in the two calculations. Thus, while BAFP treats both species as one with average mass, Nevins treats both species separately but assumes they follow the same monoenergetic distribution function. This results in a finite velocity difference between species that boosts collisionality, rendering smaller Q-values. The inconsistency in the Q-value disappears when BAFP is compared against theoretical estimates with a similar multispecies treatment in Table 4.1.\nThe BAFP calculations in Reference 4.2 eliminated most of the assumptions that limited Q values in prior studies, plus they concentrated on conditions in parameter space where promising Q values could be expected. These conditions include that the electrostatic well is deep enough (E0 ~ 100 kV); Ion confinement time is long enough (θ ~ 0.01); the ion source strength is moderate (Ŝmax < 300), while the ion injection energy is slightly below the potential-well maximum. (Here θ and Ŝmax are normalized quantities defined in Reference 4.2).\nThese results again confirm that proper formation of the electrostatic well is essential to achieve large fusion gains, and demonstrate that the distorted Maxwellian ion distribution-neglected in previous analyses-can play a positive role in the IEC gain. Results also show that the square well assumption, used in previous analytical estimates by Nevins is in fact a pessimistic one. Thus, parabolic wells result in larger density peaks at the center, yielding Q-values 3 to 5 times larger (for E0 ~ 150 kV) than those obtained with square wells. Parabolic wells are also more forgiving with respect to the source to ratio requirement. As previously noted Chacon found steady-state distributions in which the thermalized component of the distorted ion population is significant and can produce high gains. Such operating regimes with Q-value > 100 have been identified, as plotted in Figure 4.3. These results ignore electron Bremsstrahlung loss however. That effect on the Q-value was addressed heuristically by Chacon using a semi-analytic model, indicating that quite large Q-values are still possible, provided that electron particle losses are kept small and well depths are large.\nThese results show that in addition to potential well shape, the source strength vs. up-scattering losses plays a crucial role in the IEC energy gain. More insight into this can be obtained from the distribution functions for trapped ions, sketched in Figure 4.3."} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 4.3. Plot of the Q-value (including electron losses) as a Function of (a) Ŝmax and γ with fe=10-3, (b) Ŝmax and fe with γ = 5, (c) Ŝmax and fe with γ = 100, and (d) Ŝmax and E0 with γ= 5 and fe =10-3. These plots have been obtained for E0 =100 keV [except (d)], θb =0.01, and Ês =1.04. (Nomenclature is defined in Reference 4.2).\nThe source to sink issue noted several times here can be explained as follows. Two opposite limits of this kind of solution are depicted in Figure 4.4. The realization of either of these limits depends on the equilibrium between two competing effects, namely up-scattering of the Maxwellian ion component confined in the well (which increases as the Maxwellian temperature increases and tends to empty the well), and down-scattering of the beam (which tends to fill it). The relative importance of these effects is directly related to the strength relatives of the source and the sink. They are characterized here by Smax = maximum value of the ion source, and t = ion replacement time, respectively. Thus, weak sinks and strong sources will result in a large beam population, increasing the beam down-scattering rate and hence increasing \"effective\" Maxwellian temperature, given in the dotted line profile in Figure 4.4. Conversely, weak sources and strong sinks will result in a small beam population, thus decreasing the beam down-scattering rate and resulting in lower Maxwellian temperatures, leading to the solid line profile in Figure 4.4."} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 4.4. Sketch of Two Opposite Limits of the Beam-Maxwellian Equilibrium. The solid line corresponds to a case in which the Maxwellian population is dominant; the dashed line corresponds to a case in which the beam contribution is dominant.\nIn summary, unlike the original Nevins \"calculations\", the subsequent Chacon, et al. results are quite encouraging but leave open the issue of whether or not satisfactory deep potential wells can be created. To pursue this issue further, Ivan Tzonev et al. considered well formation with emphasis on angular momentum effects (Reference 4.4). Earlier studies had assumed that very low angular momentum (zero in the ideal case) is necessary to achieve a potential well structure capable of trapping energetic ions. In contrast, Tzonev et al. considered high-current ion beams as having a significant angular-momentum spread. The results found were positive, and this is important due to the need to create wide wells to provide a large reaction volume, hence larger power IECs. Before discussing this work, some definitions for the potential well structure will be reviewed.\nPOTENTIAL WELL STRUCTURE\nThe potential structures are called double potentials because two extremisms (\"outer\" and \"inner\" wells) are observed in the plots of electrostatic potential versus IEC radius, excluding the real cathode grid minimum. A schematic representation of a typical calculated potential from Tzonev's work is shown in Figure 4.5. These cases are different from Hirsch's ideal case described in Section I, where multiple potential wells"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nwith sharp peaks were observed. In Tzonev's study, spread-out potential extremisms are observed due to the high angular momentum spread. The virtual anode is defined as that position where the potential increases from its minimum value at the real cathode up to about 95 percent of its maximum value. The virtual cathode is defined as the position where the potential is 95 percent as deep as its minimum value in the center of the IEC device. The depth of the \"inner\" potential minimum, more frequently called the double well. Depth is defined as a percentage of the height of the \"outer\" potential maximum. For the case shown, the double well has a depth of about 60 percent.\n\nFigure 4.5. The Definition of the Double Well Depth: Double Well Depth [%] = -dV/Vtot x 100. The case shown assumes 30-keV injection.\n\nFigure 4.6. The Definition of the Parallel and Perpendicular Velocities at the IEC Cathode Grid\n\nThe definition of angular momentum is also illustrated in Figure 4.6. In spherical geometry, the velocity component perpendicular to the radius axis represents the angular momentum.\n\nTZONEV ET AL. - DEEP WELL STUDY\n\nTzonev et al. (Reference 4.4) used the IXL (ion accelerated code), a 1-D electrostatic Poisson-Vlasov equation solver for use in spherical geometry. IXL was originally developed by Mission Research Corporation for R.W. Bussard. The primary purpose of the code is to determine an electrostatic potential consistent with the dynamics of the charged particles within that same potential, and to determine the charged particle density distribution inside of the spherical cathode. While IXL neglects collisional effects, it still provides an important limiting case where space charge effects dominate. The boundary conditions for each particle population are characterized by five parameters: injected beam current, average injection energy, energy spread associated with the velocity component in both parallel and perpendicular directions, and the number of recirculations through the core.\n\nTzonev et al. found that deep double electrostatic potential wells can occur at high ion and electron currents (30 A-60 A); high perpendicular ion energy spread (3 keV-14 keV); low perpendicular electron energy spread (3 eV), and low radial ion energy spread (0.1 eV-0.5 eV). An example is given in Figure 4.7.\n\n39\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe corresponding ion density profile, shown in Figure 4.8, has a high value inside the virtual cathode (center core plasma) and also a peak in front of the grid (real cathode).\n\nFigure 4.7. The Double Well Potential Calculated With IXL Code for d3perp, i=14keV, Ii=55A, Ie=59A\n\nFigure 4.8. Ion Density Profile for Potential Well Shown in Figure 4.7\n\nAn important new insight obtained in the study revealed that these potential profiles create ion density distribution functions completely different from the ones observed when a single well electrostatic potential exists. Two ion density peaks were commonly observed - one in the central IEC core region, and one near the cathode wire grid as seen in Figure 4.8. In this manner, the single ion peak created by the single well potential is split into two peaks. The central ion peak has a much smaller radius than the original peak. This causes higher ion densities to occur in the central potential well, which is essential for the achievement of high fusion rates. However, since the fusion core radius in these calculations is very small - on the order of 0.4 cm - 0.9 cm, the total number of neutrons emitted per second is too low to create useful fusion power (see Figure 4.9). Still, the physics principles illustrated provide important insight into injection issues.\n\nFigure 4.9. The D-D Fusion Reaction Rate Versus Cathode Current for dEperp, i = 8 keV\n\nA reduced angular momentum spread and higher injection energies would be required to correct the well volume problem. Still, the D-D fusion rate scaling of I5 is encouraging, and it is indeed surprising that this large angular momentum spread achieves such distinct double well structures. As stated in Section I, the current scaling for beam-beam reactions is strictly I2. However, as shown by Tzonev et al., nonlinear changes in the potential well shape and ion density profile combine to cause the higher power current scaling law. It would be anticipated, however, that this effect would saturate at some current, tending back to the fundamental I2 relation. Along these lines, it should be noted that prior investigators also predicted scaling laws with\n\n40\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nexponents greater than 2. The first suggestion of this was By R. W. Bussard based on theoretical arguments (see Section 1). Later, PIC studies by M. Ohnishi at Kyoto University (now at Kansai University) also showed such strong scaling (not covered here- but see M. Ohnishi in Proceedings of 16th IEEE/NPSS, vol. 2, pp. 1468-1471). The unanswered question is at what current level this occurs. Future simulations should address that issue and also examine low angular momentum spread and higher ion injection energies.\n\nIn summary, this study by Tzonev et al. is very encouraging for formation of deep wells in IEC devices designed for reactors using beam-beam dominated fusion. However, much more work needs to be done along these lines to fully identify the optimal ion injection strategy for deep wells with minimum power input. As stressed earlier, the potential well parameters must also be combined with a consistent calculation of the energy gain (Q) following the methods of L. Chacon et al. to establish a complete picture of energy gain possible in a power type IEC.\n\nMOMOTA ET AL. - STUDY OF VIRTUAL ELECTRODE STRUCTURE\n\nIn another related study, Momota and Miley (Reference 4.5) used an analytic solution to examine the angular momentum effects. \"Double-well\" potential structure (virtual cathode formation) was studied in a stationary spherical IEC using the nonlinear Poison's equations and particle densities derived from kinetic theory. A novel method to obtain a spherically symmetric stationary distribution function is introduced and an integral-differential equation is simplified by applying a relevant approximated formula for an integral. Electron and ion beams are collision-free, and their velocities are roughly aligned toward the spherical center, but with a slight divergence. Analyses show that the angular momentum of ions and the smaller one of the electrons create a virtual cathode, i.e., a double-well structure, of the electrostatic potential on a potential hill near the center. The density limit of an IEC well was found and the conditions relevant to form a deep potential well was presented.\n\nThese results show trends roughly similar to the numerical studies of Tzonev, et al., and may be useful to persons wanting to study the effects analytically.\n\nKIM - STABILITY ANALYSIS\n\nIn addition to achieving adequate potential well trapping for net energy production, the question of stability of the non-Maxwellian plasma in the well must be considered. (Note that \"stability\" is a separate question from the thermalization of the beam-like distribution in the IEC discussed earlier. However, they are coupled nonlinear problems due to the fact that the distribution function used for both calculations should be consistent). N. Krall did some earlier studies to show that the distribution in the R.W. Bussard type Polywell IEC are stable against key instabilities such as two-stream. These studies however, were internal company reports and not openly published. Some information is given, however, in Reference 1.7. More recently, H. J. Kim, in his thesis done with G. Miley, did an in-depth study of two stream-like instabilities in the ion-injected type IEC (see Reference 4.6). His work is very encouraging in that he identifies a possible \"window of stability\" which depends on the injected energy distribution and angular velocity spread. This result is summarized in Figure 4.10. The analysis is briefly described as follows.\n\n41\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nA particle-in-cell method with explicit time integration has generally dominated earlier plasma simulations. However, this method is inappropriate in multiple time scale problems primarily because the explicit time-step algorithms become numerically unstable when they cannot resolve the fastest time scale supported by the model. Indeed, the fastest time scale may be orders of magnitude faster than the dynamical time scale of interest. The simulation also has to resolve the smallest length scale of system to avoid finite-grid instabilities that require resolution of spatial scales comparable to the Debye length. In order to improve the conservations property of implicit moment particle-in-cell algorithm, H.J. Kim developed a fully implicit particle-in-cell scheme and implemented it using a Jacobian-free Newton-Krylov algorithm that does not require actual formation and storage of the Jacobian matrix to minimize the computational costs. The scheme features the following properties: 1) fully implicit method where all quantities of both the particle and the field equations are consistent at each time step, and 2) a good property for energy conservations.\n\nFigure 4.10. Plot of Growth Rate of Spherically Converging/Diverging Ion-Beam Instability for the Variation of the Angular Velocity Spread, i.e., for β = T/|eφc| (Nomenclature defined in Reference 6.1)\n\nH. J. Kim's study verified that the algorithm correctly handles the typical electrostatic modes. For example, the results agree with the linear dispersion relations for simple limits of two cold electron counter-streaming instabilities, electron Landau damping, and ion acoustic waves. The simulation experience presented here demonstrates the energy conservation property of the systems and the efficacy of nonlinear solver combined with an efficient pre-conditioning which is derived from the nonlinear Poisson equation and particle description relations. For ion acoustic waves, the maximum variation in the total energy is much less than 0.1 percent, indicating that a fully implicit technique performs well in that particular simulation. The number of linear and nonlinear iterations is significantly reduced when the preconditioner is applied. In fact, for the case of linear iterations, the iteration number of a preconditioned linear system is 10 times smaller than that of a linear solver without preconditioner. In addition, grid convergence test shows that the scaling of CPU time is virtually linear according to the grid number. The time convergence test suggests that employing the largest time step compatible with accuracy in a given calculation is the most efficient route for obtaining the solution because the CPU time decreases as the time step increases.\n\nH. J. Kim performed a normal mode analysis of the ion-ion counter-streaming instability in a spherical inertial electrostatic confinement in order to gain insights into the ion-injected inertial electrostatic confinement equilibrium configuration. To do this, it is assumed that the electrostatic confinement equilibrium ion beams are proportional to 1/r2, effectively neutralizing the background electron density. It is evident from the analysis of cold ion beams that two-stream instability in finite spherical systems may be excited for small beam velocities compared to those of homogeneous and infinite\n\n42\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nplasma. When an ion beam is hot, the waves excited by the instability are ion acoustic type waves. Then one observes that a certain temperature ratio is required before the wave will go unstable.\n\nHe also developed a two-dimensional perturbative (δf) particle-in-cell algorithm to simulate the electrostatic interaction of electrons and ions in spherical inertial electrostatic confinement. δf scheme is applied, because the noise level in δf algorithm is significantly reduced, compared with conventional particle-in-cell simulation. Since a particle-in-cell simulation in two or three-dimensions is very computationally and memory intensive, it is necessary to seek computational methods and options which lead to solutions in a reasonable amount of time. A distributed computing approach is implemented by using parallel libraries. Applying a uniform grid spacing in spherical coordinates may lead to a stability problem due to singularity at the spherical center. In order to avoid the singularity issue, a two-dimensional rectangular domain and an immersed boundary method are applied so that a spherical domain inside the cathode gird of spherical electrostatic confinement is simulated by r-z coordinates. It is evident from the result that the growth rate of instability, a decreasing function of the longitudinal energy spread of ion distribution function, becomes reduced because the large energy spread induces strong Landau damping by parallel kinetic effects. Besides the effects of longitudinal Landau damping by the bam ions, a more monoenergetic beam is able to stabilize the instability because a growth rate of instability can be reduced for a higher beam density when the beam speed is fixed and located on the left hill in the diagram of growth rate versus beam speed. The growth rate does not change dramatically as a mode of angular perturbation increases.\n\nThe results summarized in Figure 4.10 indicated that the two-stream instability is stabilized if the angular momentum spread of the beam ions is small enough, due to enhanced ion densification at the center of the device. This is very encouraging for future IEC development. However, an experimental study should be performed to verify this result.\n\nRIDER - ENERGY BALANCE STUDY\n\nTodd Rider in Reference 4.7 reports a quite different type of energy balance analysis. While the prior papers used various methods to concentrate on up-down scattering in various potential well configurations, Rider considered a \"block diagram\" type energy flow balance to determine the net gain from a power unit. In such an analysis the reaction and scattering rates, plus the electron-ion equilibration rates, enter as (<σv>) averaged over the distribution functions for ions and electrons. Thus, the distribution functions were not calculated explicitly in Rider's analysis. In addition to the base function, any spatial variations in the distribution, such as pointed out by Tzonev et al., must be envisioned via the assumed distribution function. In traditional magnetic confinement analyses a Maxwellian distribution function has generally been assumed. In prior Tokomak studies, this technique has been widely used with reasonable accuracy since such systems are indeed near thermal equilibrium. In sharp contrast, as stressed repeatedly here, the IEC is not.\n\nThis uncertainly in <σv> makes an analysis of the type attempted by Rider very challenging, and leaves it open for possible criticism. In fact, it appears that Rider used Maxwellian key averages and critics generally cite this as the cause for his pessimistic\n\n43\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nresults. Rider was particularly interested in the claim that due to its beam-like non-Maxwellian plasma, the IEC can burn \"advanced fusion fuels\" such as D-3He and p-11B easier than traditional Maxwellian type plasma devices (Tokomaks, etc.). Thus, he considered use of D-T, D-D, D-3He, 3He-3He, p-11B and p-6Li fuels. Due to their high Z components, all of these fuels must battle large energy losses via Bremsstrahlung. These losses were evaluated using the traditional formula, but his evaluation has a built in bias since the loses depend heavily on the electron ion temperature ratio which in turn depends strongly on the <σv> values assumed as already discussed. Deviation from an equilibrium electron energy distribution also strongly affects radiation emission. Using the Maxwellian average values, he found that Bremsstrahlung losses would be prohibitively large for 3He-3He, p-11B, and p-6Li reactors and will be a considerable fraction of the fusion power for D-3He and D-D reactors limiting use to D-T. As a corollary, he concludes in contradiction with earlier claims that it does not appear possible for the dense central region of a reactor-grade IEC device to maintain a significantly non-Maxwellian ion distribution or keep a low electron to ion temperature ratio. The problem, however, is that the assumed rate constants would naturally force this conclusion. Further, these rate constants lead to Rider's build-in result forcing the ions to form a Maxwellian distribution with a mean energy close to the energy of the potential. Consequently, in his analysis, ions in the energetic tail of the distribution are lost at rates faster the fusion rate, giving low Q values.\n\nRider considered the Polywell type IEC and even with exceedingly optimistic assumptions about the potential well, he found the electron losses are intolerable for all fuels \"except perhaps DT\". Based on these results, Rider concludes that for the IEC system to be used as a fusion reactor it will be necessary to find methods to \"circumvent these problems, especially the excessive Bremsstrahlung losses\". Certainly reducing radiation losses should be an ongoing study, but his pessimism appears to be overdone.\n\nThe problem with Rider's analysis is his not using reaction and scattering rates averaged over the non-Maxwellian distribution characteristic of an IEC reactor. This includes both the beam-like ion distribution and the large ion-electron temperature ratio. This very basic energy analysis should be redone with revised reaction rate data, but to date have not been reported. Despite questions about Rider's analysis and pessimistic conclusion, his recommendations of issues to study and overcome remain quite valid.\n\nNEUTRON SOURCE SIMULATIONS\n\nSeveral simulation studies have focused on neutron source type IECs. In this case, as opposed to future power reactors, the background gas is of sufficient pressure, resulting in beam-background scaling of the fusion rate (i.e., theoretically this gives a current x pressure scaling). Charge exchange also becomes a significant factor in device performance. In Reference 4.8, Miley et al. used an analytical model of charge-exchange collisions in the IEC plasma to include ion time-of-flight and fusion neutron generation rates. Results from the model simulating 10 mA of D+ ion current in a 30-cm diameter IEC device at 50 kV matched the experimental results of 10^6 fusion neutrons per second. The model was also used to find the effects of grid diameter on neutron yield and show that the yield scales as grid diameter is raised to the power -0.41. This factor is very close to the experimental scaling observed from the UIUC neutron source"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ngridded IECs. Further, the model provides more insight into operation in the STAR mode. This effect, described earlier in Section 1, is summarized in Figure 4.11.\n\nFor higher pressure operation, charge exchange severally limits the number of passes possible through the grid despite the very high effective transparency achieved by the STAR mode. This is emphasized by results for the calculations in Reference 4.7 shown in Figure 4.12. (Note that related calculations by J. Khachan discussed earlier in Section II show similar results, but emphasize the role of molecular ions at lower operating voltages).\n\nFigure 4.11. Diagram Showing Equipotential Surfaces of the IEC Cathode Grid and Their Focusing Effect on a Beam of Ions in the Star Mode Discharge at High Voltages (> 50 keV)\n\nFigure 4.12. Results for Calculations for Ion Energy Distributions 1st Pass\n\nThese computational results are for the UIUC IEC \"A-device\" using a diameter grid with conditions of 50 kV, 10 mA, and 4-cm, and background gas pressure of 4.6 mTorr. At this pressure, charge-exchange (CX) collisions occur quite frequently for D+ ions. In their first pass through the IEC, about half of these ions CX within the cathode region and are lost. After only four passes, most of the remaining ions have lost a large amount of their original potential energy and the fusion rate from subsequent passes becomes negligible. D2+ ions have a smaller CX cross section and it takes about 20 passes for most of the D2+ ions to lose their energy and be lost to the grid. (D2+ ions and also D3+ ions are naturally produced at diminishing quantities in ionization reactions along with D+. As pointed out by Khachan his work noted D2+ becomes more significant in lower voltages).\n\nIn summary, the design of an optimal IEC neutron source is seen to be quite different from a power-producing IEC. In the source design, the grid parameters, grid/vessel diameter ratio, chamber diameter, surface conditions, background pressure, current, and voltage all become important parameters. In power-producing devices the ion injection parameters-- including ion current, ion energy relative to height of the well potential, the ion angular momentum, and the ion to electron temperature ratio, along with the chamber diameter ---determine performance. The calculations and simulations cited here provide much insight into these issues and also provide insight into theoretical and computational tools for IEC study.\n\n45"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nREFERENCES\n\n4.1 W.M. Nevins, Can inertial electrostatic confinement work beyond the ion-ion collisional time scale?\" Phys. Plasmas, Vol. 2, No. 10, October (1995) pp. 3804-3819.\n\n4.2 L. Chacon, G. H. Miley, D. C. Barnes, and D. A. Knoll, \"Energy gain calculations in Penning fusion systems using a bounce-averaged Fokker-Planck modelz\" Phys. of Plasmas, vol. 7, no. 11, (2000) p. 4547.\n\n4.3 T .N. Tiouririne and D. C. Barnes, Optimization of SCIF Fusion Systems\", Bull. Am. Phys. Soc., vol. 40 (1995) pp. 1665.\n\n4.4 I.V. Tzonev, J. M. DeMora, G.H. Miley, \"Effect of Large Ion Angular Momentum Spread and High Current on Inertial Electrostatic Confinement Potential Structures\", Proc. 16th IEEENPSS Symp. On Fusion Engr. (Miley and Elliott, eds.) IEEE paper 95CH35852, 1476-1481 (1996).\n\n4.5 G.H. Miley and H. Momota, \"Virtual Cathode in a Stationary Spherical Inertial Electrostatic Confinement\", Fusion Science and Technology, Vol. 40, July (2001).\n\n4.6 H.J. Kim, \"Instability Studies on a Spherical Inertial Electrostatic Confinement\", Dissertation, Submitted in partial fulfillment for the requirements of degree of Doctor of Philosophy, NPRE Department, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Illinois (2006).\n\n4.7 T.H. Rider, \"A general critique of inertial-electrostatic confinement fusion systems\", Phys. Plasmas, Vol. 2, No. 6, June (1995) p. 1853.\n\n4.8 G.H. Miley, John M. DeMora, Brian E. Jurczyk, Martin Nieto, \"Computational Studies of Collisional Processes in Inertial Electrostatic Glow Discharge Fusion Devices,\" 18th Symposium on Fusion Engineering, (1999) p 23.\n\nSection V. Potential Applications\n\nThe ultimate application for IECs is for electrical power production. This is discussed further in Section VI. Section V concentrates on various near-term \"spin off\" applications of neutron/proton/x-ray sources and also non-electrical power applications such as space propulsion.\n\nNEUTRON/PROTON/XRAY SOURCES\n\nAs seen from the discussion to this point, the main application of the IEC to date has been as a small portable neutron source for NAA. In addition, since both D-D and D-3He reactions can be used for proton production, IECs have also been pursed for medial isotope and PET scan isotope production. However, due to the need for high source strengths to fully compete in this arena, that use is still undergoing research. Another novel application noted earlier is the use of the IEC to simulate implantation of D+ and He+ in candidate fusion reactor first wall materials. Yet another novel use involves running the IEC with reverse polarity such that the trapped electrons produce soft x-"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nrays which can be extracted through a special port (requires a thin low-Z window for transmission). This can be viewed as a small scale soft source for individual laboratory studies such as done at various large scale national laboratories like ANL, BNL, and LBL (synchrotron \"light sources\"). However, this use has not progressed much past the initial laboratory studies.\n\nThe cylindrical geometry offers a unique configuration for security inspection applications. To illustrate this we next consider a design proposed for such a system.\n\nINTEGRATED X-RAY/NEUTRON SOURCES\n\nThis integrated inspection system was proposed by G. Miley, et al., in Reference 5.1. It incorporates combined 2.5- and 14-MeV IEC neutron sources and an IEC x-ray source. Such neutron sources have already been described, but some comments about the x-ray version are worthwhile. The cylindrical IEC, like the spherical one, can be converted to an attractive tunable x-ray source with minimum alteration of the apparatus. X-ray operation involves reversing electrode polarities and adding electron emitters along the vessel wall. Hydrogen gas is substituted for deuterium since in this configuration the main function of gas ions is to provide electron Bremsstrahlung emission. Intense emission is concentrated in a small volume surrounding the central axis due to the high electron density formed there. The resulting x-ray energy spectrum is peaked at an energy equivalent to about two-thirds of the applied voltage. In the inspection station, a voltage around 120 kV is employed to obtain ~80-kV x-rays with some distribution of energies above and below this mean value. X-ray production is spread along the axis over a long line-like region in the IEC providing broad area coverage for imaging, consistent with the broad coverage of the companion IEC neutron sources. Consequently, the basic concept of the integrated inspection unit is to combine IEC neutron and x-ray sources plus appropriate detectors into a single \"package\". This combination expands the range of elements that can be detected during a single scan and incorporates x-ray imaging with the 3-D detector array for NAA to obtain improved identification of the shape and location of suspected objects in a container. In cases where the object is too large to allow good x-ray penetration, information is still obtained from the 3-D NAA detector array.\n\nNuclear and Chemical Explosive Detection Techniques\n\nMost current inspection systems concentrate on x-ray imaging. This interrogation relies on the photoelectric effect or Compton Scattering Imaging (CSI). It provides good localization and some geometric information for higher Z materials. The NAA technique, including both thermal neutron analysis (TNA) and fast neutron analysis (FNA), are powerful methods for detecting certain types of explosives. Basic elements such as oxygen, carbon, and chlorine present in the explosives can be identified through the (n, n'γ) reaction initiated by fast neutrons. The gamma rays produced in the reaction are characteristic of elements being interrogated. Another basic element in many explosives, nitrogen, is usually measured through (n, γ) reactions initiated by thermal neutrons. Either steady-state or pulsed sources can be employed for TNA. However, increased sensitivity can be obtained with pulsed FNA (PFNA). This method uses a pulsed high-energy neutron source and the time-of-flight (TOF) diagnostics to reduce the \"noise\" effect resulting from scattered neutrons and x-rays."} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe three detection techniques shown in Table 5.1 have previously been used independently in inspection units. The present integrated unit makes use of all three simultaneously. Thus, the strengths of each device combine to provide consistent overall coverage of elements/objects.\n\nTable 5.1. Three Kinds of Techniques Previously Used in Explosives Detection System\n\nHere, TNA and FNA represent thermal and fast neutron activation, respectively.\n\nElement Identification | | Element Density\nNitrogen | TNA High | FNA Medium | -\nCarbon | Very Low | Very High | -\nOxygen | NA | High | -\nHydrogen | Very High | High | -\nChlorine | Very High | High | -\nC/O Ratio | NA | High | -\nBackground Noise | High | Low | NA\nImaging: geometry & localization information | Limited | Pulsed FNA provides depth information | High resolution\nApplication | Small suitcase | Suitcase to cargo | Suitcase to cargo, not good for plastics objects\nConfiguration | Complicated | Complicated | Simple\nOperation & Maintenance Cost | High | High | Low\n\nThe integrated IEC system employs a combination of PFNA/TNA methods and conventional x-ray techniques to collect elemental information as well as a 3-D imaging of any suspected objects. The 14.1-MeV neutrons from the D-T reaction will be the primary source for TOF FNA while thermalized neutrons from a block of neutron thermalizing plastic in front of the 2.45-MeV DD IEC will be used for TNA. This combination will increase spatial resolution and significantly reduce the false alarm rate to a low level compared to conventional methods which employ single sources and are limited to yield due to lack of broad area sources.\n\nOverview for Weapons/Nuclear Material Simulation Articles\n\nThe following three categories of items provide a overview of articles of interest for detection in inspection stations.\n\nA. Explosives which are of high O and N, low C and H elemental densities are listed below with sizes ranging from 8 x 8 x 8 cm3 to 20 x 20 x 20 cm3.\n\n• RDX (Cyclonite, C3H6N6O6) with ρ = 1.83 g/cm3.\n\n• TNT(Trinitrotoluene, C7H5N3O6) with ρ = 1.654 g/cm3.\n\n• PETN(Penthrite, C5H8N4O12) with ρ = 1.773 g/cm3.\n\n• TATB(Triaminotrinitrobenzene, C6H6N6O6) with ρ = 1.93 g/cm3.\n\n48"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":56,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Tetryl (Nitramine, C7H5N5O8) with ρ = 1.93 g/cm3.\n\n• Landmine - includes plastic explosives, such as Semtex, which is made of RDX and PETN, and C-4, which is made of RDX.\n\nB. Nuclear Materials such as natural uranium (U-238) and weapon grade with enriched (U-235). Testing can be done with this natural uranium which can be obtained without special restrictions.\n\nC. Drugs like Cocaine (C17H21NO4) and Heroin ( C21H23NO5 ) are of high in C and H, low in O and low-medium Cl densities.\n\nD. Common articles such as ethanol alcohol/wine (C2H6O) with ρ = 0.789 g/cm3, clothes like silk (C3H11N3O6) with ρ = 0.789 g/cm3, and nylon (C6H11NO) with ρ = 1.1 g/cm3, and metal utensils, including knives.\n\nThe list provides a guide for use of articles for simulation testing in the IEC inspection station. Fortunately, the combination of sources in the integrated station provides good coverage of this wide variety of items. Conventional single source units suffer \"gaps\" in coverage.\n\nPulsed Power for the Inspection Station\n\nAdvanced materials and methods are used in its design to minimize weight and size. This extends use of stationary units (e.g. at airports) to mobile platforms such as vans, law enforcement vehicles or light military trucks. Figure 5.1 shows a block diagram of the power control circuits.\n\nFigure 5.1. Block Diagram of the IEC Pulsed Power System\n\nThe power is taken from the platform power system and can be either 12-48 VDC or single phase 120 VAC. The high voltage power supply is a solid-state switch-mode inverter followed by a voltage multiplier circuit that incrementally steps the voltage up a series of capacitors fed by high voltage diodes. The energy storage unit is composed of high voltage capacitor segments with a low series inductance and resistance. The capacitor bank is charged and discharged at the pulse repetition rate. The custom capacitor sections are engineered to withstand the mechanical stress caused by rapid charge/discharge cycling. The nominal capacitor bank voltage is 120 kV at full pulse power output. A triggered spark gap is used to switch rapidly a high-energy pulse of current from the capacitor bank to pulse modulate the magnetron. The triggered gap is a compound three-element spark gap design. The arc is sustained until the capacitor\n\n49"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":57,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nbank discharges. The pulse shaper is a tapped inductive line with each tap terminated by a pulse-forming network (PFN). Each tap performs a filtering function for a discrete Fourier function or band of frequencies, which results in a smoother, and more uniform pulse rise and fall, and also provides more constant load impedance matching, as the IEC tube has high input impedance. This aids in the forward coupling of energy into the IEC by minimizing backward or reflected standing waves generated by the dynamic impedance discontinuity presented by the spark gap and the cathode to anode circuit path. The PFN, in effect, serves as a pulsed coupled transformer with a low input impedance and a high output impedance to drive the IEC tube. Components for the PFN are off-the-shelf and commercially available. The spark gap trigger is activated by an IGBT (isolated fate bipolar transistor) driven by the power control circuits.\n\nA stable multivibrator timer circuit is reset each time the spark gap is fired by a fast phototransistor circuit that detects spark-generated photons. This is coupled by a light wave-guide or optical fiber to provide high voltage isolation between the solid-state control circuits and the high voltage sections. This optically isolated signal is input to signal processing to give time of flight measurements. A digital or manual potentiometer range selector controls the time delay by increasing or decreasing the resistance in an RC network. When the capacitor in this network charges to a nominal voltage threshold, the timer circuit changes its logic state and drives the gate of the spark gap trigger IGBT on, and this initiates the spark gap arc. This RC time period ramp is an analog of the energy storage capacitor charging ramp, which also begins after the main arc occurs and drains the energy store. The longer the charge time, the higher the charge in the energy storage capacitor bank and the higher the voltage is when the next pulse is initiated. The voltage applied to the IEC tube is thus varied over a nominal 40 percent range. The peak output voltage can therefore be varied over a range of 50 kV to 120kV. There is a reciprocal relationship between the pulse repetition frequency and the output pulse peak power.\n\nDesign of the Total Integrated Interrogation System\n\nThe integrated system is illustrated conceptually in Figure 5.2.\n\n50"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":58,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 5.2. Schematic (view from top) of a broad coverage IEC inspection System for luggage inspection\n\nThis unit employs two broad area neutron sources to provide both 14.1-MeV and 2.45-MeV neutron coverage. The IEC Bremsstrahlung source provides broad area 80 kV x-rays. An array of gamma and x-ray detectors is provided for simultaneous x-ray analysis using a fuzzy logic artificial intelligence system to interpret the combined signals. In the inspection station, shown in Figure 5.2, typical of airport luggage inspection stations, objects being interrogated pass between sources and detection array on a conveyor belt. For maximum efficiency a duplicate conveyor belt and detection array (not shown in Figure 5.2) would be placed on the left hand side of the IEC sources. For other cases, such as unloading container from a ship the detectors system might be suspended along the side of the vessel with containers as they are lowered from the upper decks to the waiting cargo train cars or trucks (see Figures 5.3 and 5.4 and related discussion). The challenge in these systems is that the unloading time is short and the container is large and thick. The present system with its multi-IEC broad coverage and fast fuzzy analysis technology is designed to overcome these issues. Further, conventional accelerator type systems that are candidates for such use are hampered by size and cost. Thus, they have not received wide use in sea ports. The increased accuracy and reduced cost of the present system should enable wide use. This would close a vital gap in our seaport/airport cargo security that has been widely cited by critics of the present handling of port security.\n\n51"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":59,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDetector Array and Analysis System\n\nThe final imaging quality is determined by neutron source yield integrated over the area of coverage by the number of detectors, the detector configuration, the collimated beam size, the acquisition time, and other scan-related parameters. Scintillators such as NaI, CsI, and BGO as well as Plastic NaI (T1) are candidates for gamma and x-ray detectors. Due to their small size, they can be used in a large array along with TOF spectrometry to provide detailed special information. Recently, UIUC staff has studied use of an advanced thick HgI2 detector which appears to be particularly advantageous for this application. HgI2 is a room temperature semiconductor material with an excellent stopping power and a relatively large photo-fraction for detecting high energy gamma rays. Assuming successful development, HgI2 detectors would provide superior array performance.\n\nWith the combined sources, the detector array receives a vast amount of information in a short scan time. To handle this flow of data most efficiently, a fuzzy logic system is employed. The development of this advanced fuzzy logic system is patterned after a methodology developed for the diagnosis of abnormal situations in nuclear reactor safety analysis. The knowledge box employs a goal tree (and/or decision tree) for representation. This system will use learning-based rules that evolve from extensive simulation tests to provide training about the simultaneous occurrence of specific elements and embedded object shapes. It will also learn to differentiate between positive and negative data by creating rules from these test runs. Materials listed early in the simulation study discussion would be employed. The advantage of this system is twofold. The broad area scan analysis is optimized for fast through-put of objects while the multiple neutron/x-ray identification reduces the probability of false identification. The fuzzy logic system will pass the integrated item or sound an alert (suspicious object in the container) automatically without human involvement. Humans will only be involved when an alert is sounded. An alert occurs for a range of positive identification of materials on to suspected identification. The multiple source detector array concept is designed to minimize items that fall into the category of \"in-between\" positive identification and clearance.\n\nThe overall concept described here is illustrated for an airplane luggage scan in Figure 5.3. Data from the detection system (TNA, PFNA and x-ray) is processed through fuzzy logic system. If the item undergoing inspection passes this test, it continues on its way to baggage claim. If an alert is sounded, the item can either be passed through the machine for a second scan or be manually inspected, depending on the confidence level of the alert.\n\nSince the integrated system is modular, the basic components can easily be assembled in a variety of configurations for use at different facilities. An example is the extension to inspection of container ships being unloaded in port as illustrated in Figure 5.4.\n\n52"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":60,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 5.3. Further Illustration of the Integrated System for Airport Luggage Inspection. If desired, a second belt and detector array could be located above the IEC units to provide increased capacity.\n\nFigure 5.4. Further Illustration of the Integrated System for Ship Container Inspection\n\nThis example of a IEC inspection station provides some insight into the flexibility offered by IEC devices for adaptation to a variety of NAA-type applications. We next\n\n53"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":61,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"move to high power IEC operations which are non-electrical. Deep space propulsion is used as an example.\nSPACE PROPULSION\nThe IEC can be used for both near-term electrically driven thrusters for satellite operations (using the jet mode discussed earlier) and for fusion-powered deep space propulsion. The latter is illustrated in Reference 5.3 where a D-3He reactor was utilized. This design concept is briefly summarized here.\nFigure 5.5. Image of a Fusion II Spaceship, a 750-MWe IEC Fusion-Powered Manned Spacecraft With Ion Thruster Propulsion\nThe IEC Spaceship \"Fusion Ship II\" is shown in Figures 5.5 and 5.6. (Note: Fusion Ship II represents an upgrade to high power of an earlier design termed \"Fusion Ship I\"). The overall spaceship length is 300 meters and the initial mass at mission start is 500 metric tons. Crew and avionics/computers are located in the central compartment at the forward end of the vehicle. The crew compartment uses 12-m diameter chamber and could contain a rotating centrifuge for sleep and exercise. A steerable antenna located on the side of this module provides communication. Twin 175-meter long assemblies, comprised of 5 D-3He spherical IEC reactors and Traveling Wave Direct Energy Convertors (TWDECs) each, generate 1394 MW of 14.7- MeV proton flux and 469-MW of thermal heat which is converted to 1197 MWe of RF electric power. 242 MW of the electrical power, then, re-circulates to run the reactors while 750 MWe is used to drive ion thrusters while the remainder of the energy is rejected as waste heat. A fusion fuel re-circulation and separation system is operated continuously to remove the fusion product 4He from the D-3He reactants. Any unburned fuel is collected via the TWDEC energy convertors and recirculated back to the IEC reactors. This conserves the\n54\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":62,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"valuable fuels, especially the 3He. The ion thrusters run on Argon propellant at a specific impulse of 35,000 sec and an efficiency of 90 percent. The thrust is produced 4370 Newtons, probably an initial acceleration of .0087 m/s2. A typical trip time for an out-and-back mission to Jupiter is 210 days out and 153 days to return. This is comparable to or faster than that predicted in prior fusion studies.\nTop View\nBack view\nFigure 5.6. Scale Schematic of Fusion Ship II, a 750-MWe IEC Fusion Spacecraft\nThe initial spaceship mass at mission is 500 metric tons start; 222 metric tons are the Argon propellant needed for a Jupiter round trip with ΔV of 220 km/s. The IEC reactor, direct energy converters and ion thrusters contribute 178 metric tons. The remaining 100 metric tons includes 20 metric tons for the crew areas, 15 metric tons for the electronics/computers, 20 metric tons for food and life support, 15 tons for crew shielding and 1.2 metric tons for the antenna. Inclusion of a contingency of 30 percent of the dry mass adds 60 metric tons and provides a 30-day \"safety factor\" to the round trip flight time.\nHuman factors have not been fully evaluated in this design, but are thought to be acceptable with the short mission time achieved. Fusion Ship II would be one of the largest propelled vehicles ever built, although its mass would be ¼ that of the Space Shuttle at liftoff.\nTable 5.2 compares IEC Fusion Ship I and II designs with a concept based on an \"advanced\" spherical Tokamak reactor \"scaled up\" from the spherical Tokamak experiment at Princeton's Plasma Physics Laboratory as reported in an NASA-GLENN Laboratory study in 2001. The Tokamak has a shorter trip time by employing a power level that is six times the IEC units. Further, it is designed for D-T use (D-3He is difficult to burn in such Tokomaks), but tritium handling, radiation damage, and radioactivity issues are not addressed. Thus, if the IEC and Tokamak were compared on the same operational basis (i.e., same fuels and power levels), the IEC would clearly show a distinct advantage. Note that this is even true with the Tokamak using a very \"advanced\" conceptual design well beyond reach of ITER (originally International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) technology.\n55\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":63,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Table 5.2. Comparison of IEC Design and Magnetic Fusion Design\nFusion Ship I | Fusion Ship II | Spherical Tokamak\nOverall Mass (Metric T) 500 500 1690\nOverall Length (m) 174 300 240\nNumber of crew 10 10 6-12\nThrust Power (MW) 86 750 4830\nReactor gain 4 9 73\nReactor power (MW) 296 2178 7895\nThrust system Krypton ion Argon ion H2 - magnetic nozzle\nSpecific impulse (sec.) 16,000 35,000 35,435\nJupiter one way trip time (days) 400 210 118\nThe design of Space Ship II uses \"coupled\" IEC reactors that use magnetic guide channels. This concept, termed the Magnetically-Channeled Spherical IEC Array (MCSA) concept is briefly discussed next (Reference 5.3).\nMAGNETICALLY-CHANNELED SPHERICAL IEC ARRAY (MCSA) CONCEPT\nThe Magnetically-Channeled Spherical IEC Array (MCSA) concept for a hybrid magnetic assisted spherical IEC configuration maintains the basic ion-injected IEC reactor configuration but adds magnetic channels for coupling exhaust plasma and reaction products. The MCSA is illustrated conceptually in Figure 5.7. The SIEC is confined in a hexapole field configuration is quite different from the hexapole field used in R.W. Bussard's Polywell. It is in turn located in a field channel (Bz field) created by a column of Helmholtz coils. The field strengths of these coil sets is adjusted such that the fields cancel in the center of the IEC, giving a larger field null region compared to that in a cusp confined field. The MCSA configuration retains the advantage of stability due to good field curvature obtained in a cusp. In addition, it also effectively closes the \"belt\" loss cone. As shown later, leakage in that direction is led around the hexapole coils and back into the confinement region, termed here as \"recirculation.\" Losses include scattering into the spindal loss cone along the z-axis and stochastic scattering due to the violation of adiabatic invariance in the field null region. However, with the present channel configuration, the axial losses from one IEC configuration enter a neighboring unit. Thus, as they pass through the field null region in that unit, stochastic scattering leads to \"retrapping\" of much of this flow. Experimental verification of this \"retrapping\" is then a second physics Proof-of-Principle (POP) objective. In this fashion, an array of multiple IECs increase the overall confinement time roughly in proportion to the number of units. In operation, electrons would be magnetically confined as described, providing electrostatic confinement of ions injected into the Spherical IEC region. An additional benefit of this configuration is that in a reactor embodiment, both leaking fuel plasma and energetic charged fusion products (e.g. the 14-MeV proton from D-3He), can be collimated and aimed into a direct energy converter such as a TWDEC (Reference 5.4). This results in a high overall energy conversion efficiency. Alternately, for space propulsion, the proton beam, augmented by injection of heavy atoms to increase the flow mass, can be directly exhausted for thrust.\n56\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":64,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 5.7. Illustration of a Three-Unit MCSA Device\nSolenoid Coil. Confined Plasma. Floating (Hemholtz) Field Coils.\nNext we consider in more detail the new physics concepts, recirculation and retrapping, that provide the basis for magnet channel coupling.\nRecirculation of Radial Belt Cone Losses\nThe field configuration and a hypothetical particle trajectory through a belt cusp are shown in Figure 5.8. Because the magnetic field lines that exit the cusp-like field reconnect to the confinement region within the coils, plasma particles that exit through the belt cusp loss cone will recirculate back into the confinement region. This recirculation significantly increases the confinement time verses that of a simple cusp devise, leading to a favorable concept. The linear scaling of an MCSA fusion device with plasma radius, as well as successful operations of multiple units in the array, is in large part controlled by this recirculation effect.\nFigure 5.8. Diagram of Belt-Cusp Fields and Particle Recirculation\n57\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":65,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Retrapping of Axial-Loss Particles\nAxial plasma particle loss escaping out through the end cone (spindle cone) of the first MCSA unit should be retrapped in the second unit because of \"KAM effective scattering\". This KAM scattering occurs as particles move into the null-field region within each SIEC unit. Figure 5.9 illustrates the axial magnetic field component along the centerline of a two-unit MCSA. Particles escaping from the low field region of one unit pass into the neighboring unit through the high magnetic field region between the two-units. Upon entering the IEC region, the direction of the particle is effectively randomized (i.e. Kam Scatter) when it loses adiabatic invariance in the field null region. Although particles with high velocities parallel to the magnetic field will not experience as much effective scattering, a majority of the particles entering the null field region should experience scattering and retrapping.\nLow-Field Confinement Regions. High-Field Magnetic Channel Region. Centerline Magnetic Field Strength. Axial Position (m)\nFigure 5.9. Axial Magnetic Field Strength Along Two-Unit MCSA Centerline\nThis KAM scattering process is illustrated conceptually in Figure 5.10. Before entering the null-field region, particles have a gyroradius that depends on their perpendicular velocity. If v is large compared to vII, the effective scattering angle will be large, resulting in retrapping in the case of the MCSA. In the high-field region, the gyro-radius of the particle is small. When the low-field region is reached, the particle moves in a straight-line path along the vector direction at the edge of the null region. Since the phase of the gyro motion of the particles is random at this point, the vector direction they assume in crossing the null is random. The result then can be viewed, as a random, collisionless, scattering process. Particles that stream along the axis and enter a neighboring IEC scatter in this way and become confined in the neighboring IEC (termed axial-loss \"re-trapping\"). This re-trapping greatly increases the confinement time of a MCSA fusion device.\n58\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":66,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY In summary, if the physics principles are demonstrated successfully, the MCSA fusion power plant will offer numerous advantages for space propulsion as well as for terrestrial power sources. The non-Maxwellian plasma involved is well suited for operation with D-3He fuel that provides much of the energy output in the form of very energetic 14-MeV protons. Proton energy can be employed for either direct conversion to electricity or directed thrust. As demonstrated in the Fusion Ship II design study, the MCSA power plant is especially well suited for manned deep space missions where the high power-to-weight of the MCSA enables fast trip times. The concept introduces several important new physics. The basic concept of the MCSA system is use of recirculation from escaping particles from one unit into the neighboring one where retrapping occurs. These physical principles have not yet been demonstrated experimentally, but formulated initial tests could be done with a modest size experiment and stepped up in size to eventually demonstrate a full-scale prototype power unit. Figure 5.10. Diagram of Direction Randomization (KAM effect) Due to the Magnetic Field Null Region in the IEC. CONCLUDING REMARKS This section has concentrated on various near-term \"spin off\" applications of neutron/proton/x-ray sources and also non-electrical power applications such as space propulsion. The homeland security inspection station described here show how versatile the IEC concept is, allowing mufti-device broad area inspection. Space propulsion and related space power seems quite far term due to the large size powers demanded for such applications. However, the possibility of using magnetic coupling of smaller unit provides a modular approach that has many advantages, plus expediting development by allowing concentration on the smaller modules. In addition, use of near-tem electrically driven IEC jet plasma devices allows a \"product\" along the way to the eventual development of the high power fusion devices. REFERENCES 5.1 G. H. Miley, L. Wu, H. J. Kim, Nuclear Techniques in National Security Studies on Contraband Detections IEC-based neutron generator for security inspection system\", Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, Vol. 263, No. 1 (2005) pp.159-164. 5.2 R. Burton, H. Momota, N. Richardson, Y. Shaban, and G. H. Miley, \"Fusion Ship II- A Fast Manned Interplanetary Space Vehicle Using Inertial Electrostatic Fusion\", Space Technology and Applications International Forum - STAIF-2003, Albuquerque, NM, 654, Feb 2-5 (2003) (M.S. El-Genk, ed.), American Institute of Physics Conf. Proceedings, pp. 553-562. 59 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":67,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 5.3 G. H. Miley, R. Stubbers, J. Webber, H. Momota, \"Magnetically-Channeled SIEC Array (MCSA) Fusion Device for Interplanetary Missions\", Space Technology and Applications International Forum-STAIF 2004 (M.S. El Genk, Ed.) American Institute of Physics Conf. Proceedings (2004). 5.4 H. Momota, G. H. Miley, and J. Nadler, \"Direct Energy Conversion for IEC Propulsions\", Report to National Institute for Fusion Science of Japan, Report NISF-641, ISSN 0915-633X, August (2000). 5.5 Y. Gu, M. Williams, R. Stubbers, G. Miley, \"Pulsed Operation of Spherical Inertial-Electrostatic Confinement Device,\" Proceeding of 12th Topical Meeting on the Technology of Fusion Energy, ANS, Reno, NV, 16-20 June (1996), pp. 1342-1346. Section VI. Possible Next Step Breakeven Experiment The prior sections have presented much information about the existing data base and theory for IEC operation. The potential for use in applications such as a neutron source and related radiation sources (proton and x-ray) are well established. However the ultimate goal is to develop a power-producing IEC. Better yet to do this taking advantage of the unique ability of the IEC to use non-Maxwellian plasma to burn advanced fuels to minimize radioactive and radiation emission involvement. However the best current device results are 5 or 6 orders of magnitude down in energy gain Q (energy out/ in) from breakeven. Thus it may appear that such a hope is many years off. Fortunately, the IEC can be scaled up in energy gain while keeping a small size since the losses are in velocity space (i.e. via ion upscattering out of the potential well trap). This is in sharp contrast to Tokomaks where loses occur via diffusion across the outer surface, so increased confinement times have been achieved by going to the massively large ITER type devices. The problems and costs for construction of ITER have thrown its development in to the distant future, making this approach ineffective for addressing the present energy crisis (or as a LLNL associate director recently bemoaned, \"Fusion is irrelevant- no politicians even mention it in the energy scenario\"). To provide the reader with some insight into the IEC \"vision\" for power, we next present a conceptual proposal for a near term IEC breakeven experiment to prove the physics of operation with aneutronic p-11B fuel. If such a program can be initiated aggressively, the IEC could have a major impact on the energy crises. DEMONSTRATION OF NET ENERGY GAIN USING IEC ANEUTRONIC FUSION The IEC is one of the few approaches to fusion that has the potential of burning aneutronic fuels such as D-3He and p-11B in a reasonable scale device. This fuel results in charged-particle reaction products which allow efficient use of direct energy conversion technology with no direct greenhouse emissions and minimal radioactivity or radioactive wastes. Such a power source has all of the features sought for future power plants needed worldwide to turn the tide of the growing energy crisis. The experiment proposed here would provide verifiable and reproducible proof of break-even conditions necessary to burn p-11B as a practical aneutronic fuel in an IEC fusion power-generating device. 60 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":68,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY The proposal is to develop a revolutionary small IEC fusion power unit that could be commercialized in time to impact the energy crisis we now face. This device would have the aggressive goal of burning relatively inexpensive aneutronic p-11B fuel, avoiding issues of tritium breeding and radioactivity that the D-T burning ITER type devices face. This breakthrough technology is the result of new understanding of ways to create a deep potential electrostatic 'well' for improved confinement in an ion injected IEC. This will be done with specially designed ion guns to inject ions into the IEC with strong focus and controlled angular momentum. This concept builds on a combination of prior small scale experiments with gun injected IECs and simulation of their scale-up to power production using particle-in-cell (PIC) codes and particle tracking analysis described in earlier sections. The small size of the IEC is a key characteristic. If rapid development is to be achieved, the ability to employ small size experiments is essential. Fortunately, confinement scaling in the IEC is in velocity space (vs. physical space which brings in reducing the surface-to-volume ratio), allowing breakeven and power production in small-volume plasmas. Thus in principle, energy breakeven could be demonstrated in the IEC in a very dense plasma \"core\" occupying only a few cc volume with only a few 100's of watts in and out. This extreme is not currently possible, but use of the new gun injected technology to obtain breakeven in a dense plasma core in the IEC of 100's of cc volume and with 20-25 kW input power seems practical. This proof-of-principle device would demonstrate the physics of energy production and provide the basis for going rapidly going to practical IEC power plants. This route could lead to power reactors for distributed power applications in the range of a MW that are only a fraction of the size of an ITER Tokomak type plant or even current fission nuclear plants. Small units of this type could be rapidly deployed to allow fusion power to have a real impact on the growing need for energy. Fusion power would then become a vital element in our goal of energy independence. VISION OF A FUTURE P-11B FUSION PLANT In the ultimate power plant, the preferred fusion reaction would employ aneutronic p-11B fuel, which fuses to produce energetic alpha particles with no neutrons and minimal radioactivity. This eliminates radioactive tritium breeding and corresponding tritium inventory, activation and damage to reactor structural materials and the massive shielding and radiation protection in traditional fission and D-T fusion reactor systems. In this case, p-11B reactors in the central IEC core result in MeV energy alpha particles according to the reaction: p+11B→3α. Due to its inherent non-Maxwellian (beam-like) plasma, the IEC is especially well suited for burning a fuel such as p-11B which requires high energies (~150 keV). [See Figure 6.1]. In operation, a bulk of the IEC driving energy is given to ions so an applied voltage of ~180 kV provides ion energies near the peak of the p-11B cross section. In contrast, in Maxwellian-type plasmas typical of magnetic confinement devices, energy is expended to create ions over a wide distribution of energies. Thus, Tokomaks are designed to operate at much lower ion energies (~20-30 keV) suitable for D-T fusion. The key physics challenge then for the IEC is to achieve good ion confinement via strong ion trapping (i.e. large number of recirculations) in the potential well. This trapped plasma must meet the Lawson criterion for energy to break-even with p-11B, nτ ~ 1016 cm-3- sec (two orders of magnitude above the requirement for D-T fusion). Here n is the ion density and τ is the ion confinement time. Assuming the converged core density in the potential well of 61 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":69,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ~1016 cm-3, ion trap times of ~ 1 sec are required. While very demanding, plasma simulations show that carefully controlled injection can provide the potential well formation (trap) required to achieve this goal. PROPOSED BREAKEVEN EXPERIMENT Studies of gridded configurations discussed earlier have achieved reaction rates of up to 1012 reactions per second (~ 1 Watt of fusion power). Although these power levels fall well below the requisite \"break even\" condition for power production, corresponding neutrons production makes the IEC an excellent compact source for practical NAA. Consequently this application and then related \"spin-off\" type projects have continued to advance IEC basic physics understanding to the point where a pathway to a power reactor can now be envisioned. Present IEC experiments at UIUC are designed to baseline Q impact of ion injection conditions combined with supplemental electron sources to maintain the desired quasi-neutrality. One of the current experiments, shown in Figure 6.2, consists of a 16-inch diam. spherical vacuum system with a spherical grid held at a high potential. This system produces about 108 reactions/sec based on neutron counting experiments. A specially designed radio frequency (RF) ion gun is installed on the side of the chamber to study controlled ion injection and corresponding potential well formation for ion trapping. Figure 6.1. p-11B Fusion Cross Section Energy Requirements. The p-11B reaction rate approaches that of D-T at very high energies, i.e. deep potential wells. 62 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":70,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY These studies did not yet include differential pumping so that number of recirculation passes by an ion, β, was low, roughly 2, due to major charge exchange losses. The injected ion current, I, with one gun was only ~ 50 mA. Still, based on measurements of neutrons emitted using deuterium fuel, the Q (fusion energy gain/energy in) was order of 10-6 which is remarkable for such a small device. These results, plus supporting computer simulation studies, show that the scale-up of this device to 12 injector guns plus adding strong differential pumping, could potentially achieve breakeven. The proposed ion injected IEC device with 12 guns is shown schematically in Figure 6.3. The key to achieving breakeven conditions in this device is to inject ions with good focus and the desired angular momentum. The RF ion gun has a unique magnetic nozzle to achieve that. Electrons are simulateously introduced in a measured fashion. This eliminates the need for a grid by formation of a deep potential well (ion trap). Also, differential pumping between the guns and the main chamber provides the high vacuum needed to avoid charge exchange. This configuration is highly non-Maxwellian due to the beam dominated nature of the trapped ions. Figure 6.2. IEC System With Radio Frequency Ion Gun (Although, as pointed out in the disuccion of L. Chacon's work, thermalized ions build up and additional quasi- Maxwellian distriution in the trap). Still, detailed analysis such as done by Momota and Kim (discussed earlier) shows that the beam ion momentum provided sufficient \"stiffness\" to the system to maintain stability. This assumes, however, very precise control is maintained over the energy and angular momentum of injected ions and a balanced supply of electrons is provided. An RF ion injector capable of such operation has been demonstrated at UIUC as discussed earlier. Figure 6.3. Multiple Ion Gun Concept. Figure 6.4. Differentially Pumped RF-Driven Ion Gun. Six guns shown for simplicity, but twelve are proposed for the breakeven study. 63 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":71,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 4 is a schematic sketch of the ion injectors shown in Figure 6.3. A key component is the magnetic focusing lens at the gun extraction port. This allows very efficient differential pumping between the high pressure gun chamber and the low pressure IEC chamber and provides focus control. This experiment will involve very high power inputs (about a MW). To avoid excessive power supply and thermal controls, a Marx bank pulsed power input with peak powers of ~ 1 MW over 1 msec at 0.01 Hz will be used. Pulsed experiments with equivalent power inputs on one gun have already been performed successfully. The pulse length is set long enough to provide quasi equilibrium physics conditions in the trapped plasma during the \"flat top\" region of the pulse\". Thus the data obtained is relevant to eventful steady-state reactors where the internal fusion power production alleviates the input power supply requirement.\n\nThe energy gain (Q) scaling for such a device goes as βI/a² where a is the radius of the dense core spot formed in the IEC sphere, β is the number of ion recirculations in the trap before the ion is lost, and I is the ion injected current. The 12 gun breakeven design will provide an increase in β to ~ 1000 due to differential pumping effects, I will increase to 6000 mA (due to multiple pulsed guns), and a will be cut down by 10 due to improvements in focusing both and reduced collisionality. This predicts an increase in Q (compared to prior gun experiment) of ~10⁸, giving Q=1 (\"breakeven\") as required for a p-¹¹B plasma (as noted earlier, this breakeven Q assumes a Lawson breakeven confinement parameter of nτ that exceeds the DT requirement by a factor of 100. In other words, this could also be thought of as a Q=100 DT equivalent breakeven!) Such an experiment would provide a physics proof-of-principle for this ion injected IEC concept and provide the base for extending this configuration on to a power-producing plant.\n\nTo accomplish this result quickly on a modest budget, we need to simplify the work by avoiding the need to develop new injection technology for hydrogen-boron fuel plus avoid the need to handle the fusion energy produced. Thus we propose to confirm the achievement of breakeven conditions using a hydrogen plasma and diagnostics to show that the nτ and T corresponding to Q = 1 (p-¹¹B) are obtained. (An alternate approach might be to use deuterium as is done in present IEC neutron source studies. However, that would require a massive shielding and other access restrictions for the neuron flux levels). Modern plasma diagnostics can make quite precise measurement of the plasma conditions needed for the confirmation, so the hydrogen equivalent approach is recommended.\n\nCONCLUDING REMARKS\n\nOnce achieved in hydrogen, these conditions could be fairly quickly confirmed with p-¹¹B fuel in later experiments once the needed fuel handling system is added. Thus the proposed hydrogen simulation of p-¹¹B breakthrough conditions would be a landmark achievement, leading the way to rapid deployment of the technology needed to build small fusion power plants. The technology development needed to proceed largely involves the design and engineering of subsystems for the balance-of-plant (BOP). Many of these can employ conventional equipment, but several require new developments. These include the hydrogen-boron fuel injection system, the direct energy conversion system to convert the charged particle product energy to electricity,\n\n64\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f53cddfdc4fa9ccf","page":72,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nand the exhaust plasma collection/recovery system. Also the chamber wall must incorporate advanced cooling methods to handle the large surface heat loads caused by near surface absorption of the bremmstrahlung emission. There are no \"show stoppers\" however, so the road map to IEC fusion power seems clear. The main challenge is to find funding sources with the \"will\" to proceed.\n\n65\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f5cfed1039572499","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nOFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY OF WAR\n5000 DEFENSE PENTAGON\nWASHINGTON, DC 20301-5000\n\nINTELLIGENCE\nAND SECURITY\n\n05 JUNE 2026\n\nMEMORANDUM FOR RECORD\n\nSUBJECT: All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) Unidentified Anomalous\nPhenomena (UAP) Case Analysis Update: Western U.S. Event “Orbs Launching\nOrbs”\n\nReferences: (a) https://www.war.gov/ufo/#Western-US-Event, Incident 1 of 4, VIRIN: 260508-\nD-D0360-1052, 08-MAY 2026.\n\n1. Executive Summary.\n\nThis memorandum summarizes the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office’s (AARO) ongoing analysis of a reported incident near a sensitive national security site in the western United States involving unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) over a period of two days in October 2023. As of June 2026, the case remains unresolved.\n\n2. Incident Summary.¹\n\nOver a period of two days in October 2023, six federal law enforcement special agents reported observing “orbs launching other orbs,” near a sensitive national security site in the western United States at approximately dusk. Each team of two agents reported observing phenomena with similar morphological features and performance characteristics from multiple viewing angles.\n\nThe phenomena’s most distinctive reported feature was the repeating nature of their pattern of behavior, in which a luminous orange “mother orb” appeared to produce smaller red “orbs,” one after another, multiple times over a period of several hours. Reporters described the orange “mother orbs” as appearing for one to two seconds, releasing a cluster of two to four red “orbs,” and subsequently disappearing. The reporters characterized the behavior of the red “orbs” as anomalous, describing varied kinematic profiles including seemingly coordinated horizontal motion and apparent changes in altitude. The red “orbs” reportedly persisted for several seconds before disappearing, however, in at least one instance, the agents described a red “orb” as remaining stationary above a ridgeline for several hours. The reporters also described the phenomena as “silent.” The agents provided consistent accounts using similar language to characterize their experiences and the apparent behavior of both the red and orange “orbs.”\n\n3. Analytic Factors.\n\n¹ AARO’s use of source-derived descriptive and evaluative language in this summary is intended to preserve the integrity of narrative testimony as provided by first-hand observers.\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"f5cfed1039572499","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\na. The reporting agents did not collect video footage, photographic imagery, or other technical data during the incident. Human capacity for optical estimation regarding the distance, size, speed, and direction of travel of unreferenced phenomena in low-light conditions is constrained by intrinsic biological and perceptual limitations. As a standard analytic practice, AARO considers the influence of such limitations when assessing narrative descriptions of a phenomenon’s morphological and performance characteristics. In this case, AARO assesses that contextual factors supersede those limitations, and that the nature of the reported incident warrants further investigation. These factors include:\n\ni. The close alignment of the phenomena’s reported morphological features and kinematic profiles with those of other reported incidents in the western United States region.\nii. AARO’s favorable assessment of the reporting agents’ contextual awareness of the operational environment and overall familiarity with U.S. military systems.\niii. The high degree of consistency in the agents’ narrative descriptions of potentially anomalous features, as seen from multiple viewing angles.\n\nb. Due to a lack of instrument-measured distance data, AARO cannot determine whether the phenomena’s reported silence corresponds to an inherent characteristic or to acoustic attenuation.\n\nc. The total number of orange “mother orbs” is unclear based upon the narrative reporting. As described, AARO finds two interpretations plausible:\n\ni. A single orange “mother orb” periodically “launching” smaller red “orbs.”\nii. Multiple orange “mother orbs” periodically “launching” smaller red “orbs.”\n\n4. Current Case Disposition and Hypotheses.\n\nApproximately 40 percent of the reported phenomena lack a plausible explanation after first stage analysis and thus remain unresolved. To evaluate this incident, AARO cross-correlated the agents’ narrative accounts against commercial and military flight logs, radar data, spatial estimates, and Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) data. AARO considered several hypotheses to account for the currently unresolved component of the phenomena.\n\na. Misidentified Military Aircraft Exhaust (Ruled Out): The reported characteristics do not align with those of military aircraft exhaust. Though military aircraft were present in the airspace, their altitudes were too high for standard exhaust to appear as orange “orbs.” This hypothesis is also inconsistent with the agents’ characterization of the phenomena as “silent,” the reported loitering behavior, and the apparent “launching” of red “orbs.”\n\nb. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) (Unlikely): Agents reported that, in at least one case, red “orbs” persisted over a period of several hours. A loitering time of several hours\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"f5cfed1039572499","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nexceeds the standard battery capacity and operational limits of typical military and commercially available multi-rotor UAV systems.\n\nc. Military Aircraft Dispensing Flares (Partially Plausible):\ni. Supporting Factors: Historical flight logs confirm that U.S. military aircraft operating in the area were equipped with, and actively deployed, infrared countermeasure flares as a component of a standard exercise. The reported morphology and behavior of these phenomena align with known characteristics of certain military infrared flares. The phenomena’s position relative to the observers, perceived direction of travel, and time of observation strongly align with historical radar and ADS-B data, suggesting that approximately 60 percent of the reported activity is plausibly attributable to military aircraft. The agents, who are professionally familiar with the visual characteristics of military flares, stated that the phenomena did not exhibit those characteristics. However, the visual and behavioral characteristics of the specific types of flares carried by the military aircraft operating in the area differ from those of standard illumination flares.\nii. Contradictory Factors: For the remaining 40 percent of reported observations, radar and ADS-B data indicate that no known aircraft were active within the observers’ estimated line-of-sight from the ground. In at least one case, the agents’ report of a red “orb” remaining stationary for several hours is physically incompatible with the burn-time and descent rate of any known military flare.\n\nd. U.S. Capability Deconfliction (Blue Force) (Plausible, inconclusive): AARO conducted a comprehensive review of programs and activities across the Department of War and the Intelligence Community to ascertain whether the time, date, location, and reported features of the phenomena align with those of any U.S. developmental program, test event, or operational capability. AARO assesses that the characteristics described in the agents’ narrative account align with those of certain U.S. military technologies. However, historical records are inconclusive regarding whether those technologies were present at the time and place of the reported incident. Furthermore, while each reported characteristic shares features with known U.S. military systems, no single Blue Force capability fully accounts for all the phenomena’s reported characteristics.\n\ne. Foreign Intelligence Activity (Red Force) (Highly Unlikely): AARO consulted with partners in the Intelligence Community to assess the likelihood that the reported phenomena indicate the presence of foreign intelligence activities. While AARO cannot definitively rule out the deployment of entirely novel foreign collection platforms, the reported kinematic profiles diverge significantly enough from those of known adversary systems that AARO assesses this hypothesis as highly unlikely.\n\nf. Phenomenological & Environmental Factors (Unlikely): AARO consulted with subject matter experts to explore possible natural phenomena whose characteristics may account for those of the reported phenomena. Potential attributions included:\n\ni. Meteorological phenomena. Weather conditions were generally inconsistent with those necessary to produce rare phenomena such as ball lightning or sprites.\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"f5cfed1039572499","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED\n\nii. Atmospheric anomalies, (e.g., temperature inversion and refractive effects). Weather conditions were generally clear, with seasonable temperatures and typical levels of light pollution for the area. AARO assesses as unlikely that such conditions would contribute to misperceptions of a phenomenon’s physical or kinematic features.\niii. Space-based phenomena, (e.g., stars, planets, meteors, satellite flaring, rocketry). The agents’ diverse viewing angles make it highly unlikely that misidentified celestial bodies account for the phenomena. In instances in which reporters described stationary “loitering” behavior, misidentified celestial bodies are more plausible, though still unlikely. Attribution to meteors or other ephemeral space-based phenomena, including satellite flaring, is inconsistent with the reported persistence of at least one of the red “orbs” over a period of several hours. Bolides, for example, typically exhibit a characteristic tail, which is inconsistent with the reported morphology of the “mother orbs.”\n\ng. Unrecognized Technology (Pending): AARO’s preliminary exclusion-based hypothesis is that, given the otherwise unexplained kinematic and physical characteristics described in narrative reports, unrecognized technology may account for up to 40 percent of the phenomena associated with this incident. However, this provisional assessment is based solely upon narrative testimony, as well as the elimination of competing hypotheses, and is unsubstantiated by technical data or physical evidence.\n\n5. Next Steps.\n\nAARO assesses that the features described by the reporting agents are sufficiently anomalous to warrant continued investigation into the nature of the underlying incident. AARO intends to integrate scientific modeling capabilities from partner agencies within the Federal Government, expertise from scientific and academic institutions, and insights from multi-domain, multispectral data exploitation techniques to inform its assessment of this and other reported UAP cases in the western United States region. AARO will continue to update its analytic tradecraft to incorporate the best scientific and intelligence analysis practices to resolve anomalies with higher confidence.\n\nAARO will also seek opportunities to broaden its relationships with partners possessing relevant technical and domain expertise to enhance its ability to efficiently deconflict Blue and Red Force programs and activities, as well as to optimize data collection protocols to incorporate more diverse sources. AARO may revise its assessment and provide updates if additional intelligence and data sources become available.\n\nJon T. Kosloski\nDirector, AARO\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense Intelligence Reference Document\nDefense Futures\n\n20 November 2010\nICOD: 30 August 2010\n-08-1012-001\n\nDetection and High Resolution Tracking of Vehicles at Hypersonic Velocities\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDetection and High Resolution Tracking of Vehicles at Hypersonic Velocities\n\nThe Defense Intelligence Reference Document provides nonsubstantive but authoritative reference information related to intelligence topics or methodologies.\n\nPrepared by:\n\nTechnology Warning Division (DWO-4)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\n\nAAP Person 83\n\n(U) COPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one of a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2010 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapons System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: JUIAF - DI/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington D.C. 20340-5100\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ........................................................................................ 1\nChapter 1: Theory Governing Objects in Flight ........................................ 3\nSubsonic Flow and Drag ........................................................................ 3\nSupersonic Flow ..................................................................................... 6\nChapter 2: Hypersonic Compressible Flow Theory ..................................... 10\nChapter 3: Detection Technologies ............................................................ 11\nElectromagnetic Methods ..................................................................... 13\nRADAR (Reflected Energy) ................................................................... 13\nDoppler RADAR ..................................................................................... 14\nRadio Reflection Detection ................................................................... 15\nOptical Methods ................................................................................... 16\nSky Cameras and Photographic Methods ............................................. 16\nInfrared Detection ................................................................................. 17\nLIDAR ..................................................................................................... 23\nAcoustic and Seismic Methods ............................................................. 25\nInfrasound ............................................................................................. 25\nSeismic ................................................................................................... 27\nChapter 4: Vision of Progress Over the Next 30 Years ............................... 28\nDetectability of New Hypersonic Aircraft ............................................. 29\nRecommendation #1 – Build a Database of the Wake Characteristics for Existing Aircraft ........................................................ 29\nRecommendation #2 – Exploit the Detectability of Hypersonic Aircraft Based on the Features That Allow Them To Fly Efficiently at High Speeds ....................................... 30\nRecommendation #3 – Explore the Detection of Vehicles Designed To Be Undetectable 30\nRecommendation #4 – Explore the Development of Novel Detectors .......................... 31\nSummary ............................................................................................... 31\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Boundary Layer Development in Subsonic Flow about a Projectile ........................ 4\nFigure 2. Subsonic Flow Past a Projectile ........................................................................ 5\nFigure 3. Strouhal Frequency as a Function of Reynolds Number for Flow over a Circular Cylinder ........................................................................ 6\nFigure 4. Supersonic Flow Past a Wedge-Shaped Body ........................................ 8\nFigure 5. Supersonic Flow Past a Blunt Body (Spheroid) ........................................ 8\nFigure 6. Ratios of Mach Number, Temperature, and Pressure Across a Normal Shock ....... 10\nFigure 7. Hypersonic Vehicle Detection Techniques ........................................ 11\nFigure 8. Laser-Based Chronograph ........................................ 12\nFigure 9. Electromagnetic Spectrum as a Function of Wavelength ........................ 13\nFigure 10. Schematic of a RADAR System ........................................ 14\nFigure 11. Radio Reflection Detector ........................................ 16\nFigure 12. Energy Spectrum of the Sun at 5,778 K. ........................................ 19\nFigure 13. Hypersonic Flow Past a Sphere. ........................................ 20\nFigure 14. Infrared Energy Spectra for Mach 3 and Mach 3.5. ........................................ 21\nFigure 15. Peak Wavelength of the Infrared Radiation Emitted by Hypersonic Objects ....... 22\nFigure 16. Peak Shock Layer Temperature for Hypersonic Objects. ........................................ 22\nFigure 17. Schematic of a Pulsed LIDAR System ........................................ 24\nFigure 18. Mach Cone Generated by a Supersonic Object. ........................................ 26\nFigure 19. Comparison of Detection Technology for Hypersonic Objects. ........................................ 32\n\nTables\n\nTable 1: Normal Shock Values for Mach 3 Flow ........................................ 9\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIntroduction\n\nAn object is supersonic when its speed through the atmosphere is greater than the local speed of sound. The Mach number is defined as the speed of the object divided by the local speed of sound. For Mach numbers greater than 1 (supersonic flow), shock waves develop in the flowfield and near the surface of the object due to the air's compressibility. Traditionally, the lower Mach number limit for the so-called hypersonic speed regime is about Mach 5 (1.7 km/sec). \"Low hypersonic\" values range between Mach 5 to about Mach 10, while \"high hypersonic\" values range between approximately Mach 10 to Mach 30 or above. Mach 30 (10 km/s), for example, is close to Space Shuttle reentry velocity. Few objects can travel at hypersonic velocities. The most common object that we see moving at these speeds are meteors entering the Earth's atmosphere. As meteors fall to the Earth's surface, their velocities may reach 30 miles per second (48 km/s),1 and their corresponding Mach number as they enter the upper layers of the atmosphere will exceed 150. Meteors are preceded by a bow shockwave as they compress the air immediately in their path. Temperatures and pressures increase dramatically across the shockwave to a point where the gases in air ionize and disassociate, leading to the emission of visible light and radio waves. These conditions also lead to rapid heating of the meteor surface causing them to fracture and break up as they enter the atmosphere. Optical and RADAR-based surveillance systems are now used to scan outer space to detect asteroids and other objects with orbits that may lead them to collide with Earth.\n\nA second class of hypersonic objects includes reentry vehicles moving into the Earth's atmosphere from orbit. In the case of a reentry vehicle returning from low-Earth orbit at 100 km altitude, the velocity of the vehicle will reach 8 km/s (about 5 miles per second). The Mach number of this vehicle will exceed 26.5 in the upper atmosphere. As the vehicle moves through the atmosphere, flow-induced drag forces will slow down the vehicle; if the vehicle has sufficient thermal protection, it can survive reentry and be recovered.\n\nA third class of hypersonic vehicles includes the reentry payload used in ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles). The payload in these missiles is launched using a rocket that boosts them above the atmosphere to a suborbital velocity. The payload velocity may exceed 7 km/s as they reenter the atmosphere, equating to M > 23. The coupled high velocity and high kinetic energy of these objects creates an ionized wake and shock wave that can be used to detect their position and to determine their velocity. This information, along with their ballistic trajectory, is used to locate their target and the time to impact.\n\nA fourth class of hypersonic vehicles includes manned and unmanned rockets and aircraft. The North American X-15, for example, exceeded a speed of 7,274 km/hr in 1964, equating to about M = 6.5. This aircraft also exceeded 100 km in altitude on two occasions, qualifying the X-15 as a spacecraft. The SR-71 Blackbird, an air-breathing strategic reconnaissance aircraft, has exceeded Mach 3.2 at 80,000-ft altitude, and its actual maximum speed may have reached into the hypersonic flow regime. Other real and conceptual aircraft capable of reaching hypersonic speeds include the alleged Aurora SR-91 (Mach 4 to 6), the Boeing X-51, an unmanned Mach 6 scramjet, the HTV-2 from the DARPA Falcon project (designed for M=20 flight to low-Earth orbit), the HyperSoar (M = 12), the Russian Leninetz Ayaks, and the Skylon (designed for single-stage-to-orbit flights). Certain rockets are also designed to travel at hypersonic speeds. The Patriot missile, for example, travels at Mach 5, a high speed necessary for it to be able to intercept and destroy other missiles while they are in flight.\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY There are a number of different techniques available to detect hypersonic objects and to determine their position, velocity, and trajectory. These detection methods can be broadly divided into electromagnetic, optical, and acoustic/seismic methods. Each method relies on the properties of the surface of the object to reflect incident radiation or upon the properties of the hot ionized gases caused by the bow shock and entrained into the object's wake. The theory of external fluid flow around objects in subsonic, supersonic, and hypersonic regimes will be reviewed and various detection methods will be compared in this report. 2 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Chapter 1: Theory Governing Objects in Flight Many of the detection technologies for hypersonic aircraft are based on the properties of the air flow around the object. The fluid mechanics affecting supersonic and hypersonic aircraft are well described in textbooks on compressible flow by J.D. Anderson;2,3 subsonic flow, including the affect of boundary layers, is covered in the textbook by F. M. White.4 Hypersonic flow usually refers to the regime where objects are moving faster than Mach 5, but technically refers to the Mach range where pressure, temperature, and density ratios across shock waves reach constant values, and this does happen at about Mach 5. Fluid flow changes dramatically at Mach 1 defined at the point where the velocity of a projectile, V, equals the local speed of sound, a, in the atmosphere: M = V/a (1) Flow regimes are defined by the following: - M < 1, subsonic flow - M = 1, sonic flow - M > 1, supersonic flow - M > 5, hypersonic flow The speed of sound varies with temperature and with the type of gases in the atmosphere. A simple equation for the speed of sound includes the ratio of specific heats, γ, the gas constant, R, and the temperature, T: a = sqrt(γRT) (2) For air at room temperature, γ = 1.4, R = 287 J/kg.K, and T = 20° C or 293 K. The subsequent speed of sound is 343 m/s (1,125 ft/s or 767 mph). It is easier for a projectile to exceed the speed of sound at higher elevations since the temperature of the atmosphere is lower, reducing the speed of sound and the subsequent velocity necessary to break the sound barrier. The viscosity of the fluid flowing around an object induces drag and retards its forward motion. Supersonic flow has some of the viscous characteristics of subsonic flow, but adds in the complication of shock waves. To understand the nature of how a projectile affects the flow of fluid around it, consider the case of a subsonic projectile. SUBSONIC FLOW AND DRAG Subsonic flows, such as the flow shown in Figure 1, are heavily influenced by collisions between molecules of air and the surface of the projectile. The equations for this interaction were first developed by Sir Isaac Newton in the seventeenth century, where he determined that fluids have a property called “viscosity” that is the cause of drag on projectiles. The key parameter that affects subsonic fluid flow is the ratio of viscous forces to inertial forces, where inertial forces are associated with the tendency for a moving fluid to keep moving in the same direction. The ratio of these two forces is defined as the Reynolds Number, Re. 3 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Re = viscous forces / inertial forces = V D / v (3) In this expression, V is the velocity of the projectile, D is its effective diameter, and v is the kinematic viscosity of the fluid. As flow passes over the projectile in Figure 1, viscous forces are especially strong near the surface where the velocity changes from zero at the surface of the projectile to the free stream velocity. Direction of Flow Streamlines Boundary Layer Velocity Distribution within the Boundary Layer Figure 1. Boundary Layer Development in Subsonic Flow About a Projectile. The region where this transition in velocity occurs is called a “boundary layer,” which grows in thickness as flow moves along the surface from the nose to the rear of the projectile. The boundary layer forms around the surface of the projectile and “separates” from the surface at the back end of the projectile. Pockets of fluid spill off of the back end of the projectile and form rotating pockets of fluid called Strouhal eddies or vortices. These eddies “shed” from the surface at a rate that is strongly dependent upon the Reynolds number in the flow. Figure 2 demonstrates that these eddies form a “wake” downstream of the projectile that can extend far into the fluid. 4 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Boundary Layers Strouhal Eddies or Vortices Streamlines Turbulent Wake Projectile Direction of Flow Figure 2. Subsonic Flow Past a Projectile. Visible examples of a “wake” are the contrails observed in the upper atmosphere when water vapor in the exhaust of jet aircraft freezes into ice crystals, highlighting the wake generated by the aircraft and its engines. In still air, the wake can be visible for many miles behind the aircraft. The wake rapidly becomes turbulent as it extends downstream. The Strouhal eddies are detectable and have a shedding frequency that is expressed in terms of the Strouhal number, St = f D/V, where f is the Strouhal shedding frequency (hz), D is the diameter (m) of the projectile, and V is its velocity (m/s) through the air. The Strouhal number is a function of Reynolds number, as shown in Figure 3. By measuring the Strouhal frequency, the velocity of the projectile can be determined with moderate accuracy. At low speeds, and corresponding low Reynolds numbers, the flow is “laminar” where streamlines move in smooth “laminae” or layers over projectiles. At high Reynolds numbers, the fluid flow becomes unstable and forms a widely distributed set of small eddies defined as “turbulence.” In turbulent flow, rapid mixing of the flow in the wake, even in the boundary layers, will occur. 5 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY St = fD/V Re_D = V D/v Figure 3. Strouhal Frequency as a Function of Reynolds Number for Flow Over a Circular Cylinder. The high velocities present in the wake generate low pressures on the downstream side of the projectile that pull the projectile backwards into the wake. This is defined as “wake” or “form” drag and is a predominant cause of drag forces on aircraft or on any object moving through the atmosphere. The viscous forces that create the boundary layers on the surface of a projectile also contribute a small amount of drag, usually referred to as “skin friction.” Boundary layers and wakes also affect supersonic flow, but the effect of shock waves tends to be the predominant mechanism affecting flow around supersonic projectiles. Total drag force, F_D, exerted on projectiles or aircraft is usually summarized by this equation: F_D = 1/2 ρ A_f C_D V^2 (4) The drag force is dependent upon the density of the air, ρ, the frontal area of the aircraft, A_f, the aircraft velocity, V, and the drag coefficient, C_D. The drag coefficient is a function of the geometry of the aircraft and the two “dimensionless” groups, Mach number, M, and Reynolds number, Re_D, that relate inertial, viscous, and elastic forces in the flow: C_D = f(Re_D, M, geometry) (5) Drag coefficients for various types of aircraft and projectiles are obtained from theory, from computational fluid mechanics, or, most commonly, from experiments in wind tunnels. These coefficients are usually presented in tables or in graphical form.5, 6, 7 SUPERSONIC FLOW Air is predominantly made up of molecules of nitrogen (78%) and oxygen (21%). At room temperature, air behaves as an ideal gas where the density, ρ, the pressure, p, and the temperature, T, are related through a gas constant, R, which is a property of the air. The ideal gas law gives the relationship between these values. The gas constant for air is R = 287 J/kg.K. 6 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\np = ρ R T (6)\n\nIt is possible to statistically model the motion of the molecules of oxygen and nitrogen in air,\nand their kinetic energy, KE, can be determined based on the mass, m, of each molecule and\nthe temperature of the gas.\n\nKE = (1/2) m V² = (3/2) k T (7)\n\nIn this equation, k is the Boltzmann constant (1.3807 × 10⁻²³ J/K). We can calculate the\nvelocity of air molecules based on the temperature of the air.\n\nV = √(3 k T / m) (8)\n\nOr, for the average velocity of a molecule:\n\nV̄ = √(8 R T / π) (9)\n\nFor air near sea level (p = 101,320 Pa, T = 293 K) the average velocity of molecules in air is\n463 m/s or 1,035 MPH. This value is just a little higher than the speed of sound in air (343\nm/s or 767 MPH) as computed earlier. These molecules only travel a short distance before\nthey collide with each other. This distance is defined as the \"mean free path\" given by the\nsymbol λ.\n\nλ = 1 / (√2 π d² ρ) (10)\n\nIn this expression, d is the diameter of a molecule, which is approximately 0.3 nanometers.\nFor air at 20° C and 101,325 Pa, the mean free path (λ) is approximately 100 nanometers or\nabout 333 molecular diameters.\n\nWhen the supersonic projectile in Figure 4 moves through the air, molecules of nitrogen and\noxygen in the air bounce off the vehicle's surface and collide with other molecules of air a\nshort distance away. At the speed of sound, these molecules are not moving fast enough to\nget out of the way and a large number of molecules pile up along a straight line that\nemanates from the nose or leading edge of the projectile as a \"shock wave.\"\n\nSupersonic flow in the atmosphere labeled as region 1 passes through the shock and moves\nparallel to the surface of the body. The flow \"expands\" through a Prandtl-Meyer expansion\nfan at the end of the airfoil and speeds back up to its original Mach number. Flow in the\nboundary layer separates from the end of the airfoil and forms a highly turbulent wake\ndownstream of the airfoil. The wake is also composed of Strouhal eddies that can subsist in\nthe air long after the airfoil has passed by. The flow density, pressure, and temperature\nincreases dramatically across the bow shockwave and returns to the original Mach number\ndownstream of the airfoil.\n\nFor a blunt-nosed object, as shown in Figure 5, the magnitude of the impact that the\nshockwave has on the flow is easier to explain. For a blunt object, the shock detaches from\nthe surface of the object into the freestream in front of the object. Since the original flow\nmoving at M1 is traveling at 90° with respect to the shock near the nose of the object, the\nshock in this region is referred to as a \"normal\" shock. The properties across a normal shock\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nare described by the Rankine-Hugoniot equations, which yield the ratio of certain\nthermodynamic properties.\n\nExpansion Fan Bow Shockwave β Region 2 Region 1 M1 > 1 Turbulent Wake θ\n\nFigure 4. Supersonic Flow Past a Wedge-Shaped Body.\n\nTurbulent Wake Detached Shock Expansion Fans M2 < 1 M1 > 1 Blunt Body\n\nFigure 5. Supersonic Flow Past a Blunt Body (Spheroid).\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThese equations can be expressed in a form where the ratio of density, temperature, and\npressure across the normal shock are a function of the upstream Mach number, M1.\n\nM2/M1 = √((1 + (γ−1)/2 M1²) / (γ M1² − (γ−1)/2)) (11)\n\nT2/T1 = [1 + (2γ/(γ+1))(M1² − 1)][(2 + (γ−1) M1²) / ((γ+1) M1²)] (12)\n\np2/p1 = 1 + (2γ/(γ+1))(M1² − 1) (13)\n\nρ2/ρ1 = ((γ+1) M1²) / (2 + (γ−1) M1²) (14)\n\nAs an example, if the object shown in figure 4 is traveling at Mach 3 through air at sea level,\nthe pressure in the region between the nose of the object and the shock changes as shown in\nthe following table:\n\nTable 1: Normal Shock Values for Mach 3 Flow\n\nFreestream Values | Ratio of Properties Across the Normal Shock | Values Downstream of the Normal Shock\nM1 = 3 | M2/M1 = 0.158 | M2 = 0.475\np1 = 101,325 Pa | p2/p1 = 10.333 | p2 = 1,047,000 Pa\nT1 = 293 K = (20°C) | T2/T1 = 2.679 | T2 = 785.0 K = (512°C)\nρ1 = 1.293 kg/m³ | ρ2/ρ1 = 3.857 | ρ2 = 4.976 kg/m³\n\nFor a normal shock, the Mach number on the downstream side of the shock is always\nsubsonic, and in this example, the Mach number abruptly drops from M1 = 3 to M2 = 0.475.\nThe temperature always increases across a shock, and for a Mach 3 flow, the temperature\nrises from room temperature at 20° C up to 512° C. It is apparent that, for supersonic\naircraft traveling at this speed, the fuselage and wings will need to be made of materials that\ncan withstand the high temperatures and the dramatic pressure increase of 10.333. Shocks\nare always accompanied by significant increases in pressure, temperature, and density in the\nflow across the shock.\n\nFlow about an Ogive or wedge-shaped airfoil as shown in Figure 4 can be analyzed in a\nsimilar fashion; however, the wall deflection angle, θ, will affect the flow and the formation of\nthe oblique shock wave that surrounds the airfoil.\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 2: Hypersonic Compressible Flow Theory\n\nHypersonic flow is typically assumed to apply to objects traveling at M > 5. Figure 6 shows\nthat, for Mach numbers above 5, the ratio of Mach numbers across the shock approaches a\nconstant value of 0.378, although temperature and pressure ratios continue to increase. In\nhypersonic flow, the bow shock, or Mach angle, β, approaches the half-angle, θ, of slender\nairfoils and the drag coefficient reaches a constant value that does not change with Mach\nnumber. The drag coefficient actually becomes a simple function of the half-angle of the\nairfoil, and the boundary layer is squeezed between the shockwave and the airfoil surface.\n\nFigure 6. Ratios of Mach Number, Temperature, and Pressure Across a Normal Shock\n\nIn hypersonic flow, the Rankine-Hugoniot equations, which are based on the perfect gas law\n(p = ρRT), fail to predict the real behavior of air at extremely high temperatures. Equation\n12, for example, predicts a temperature of 29,787° C in the air near the surface of a blunt\nobject traveling at the reentry Mach number of 26.5, while the actual temperature only\nreaches 7,600° C. The reason for this discrepancy is due to ionization of molecules of air as\nelectrons are stripped away by the high temperatures that exist across the shock. Some\nenergy is used to produce this ionization, and above temperatures of 550° C, equation 15\ndoes not accurately predict air temperatures due to shocks. Ionization is responsible for the\nglowing wake that follows reentry vehicles and meteors as electrons rush to recombine with\nions releasing x-rays and visible light. The ionization also interferes with radio transmissions,\nbut provides a convenient way to identify hypersonic objects due to the emitted light. A\n\"rule of thumb\" is that the peak shock layer temperature in degrees kelvin is 1,000 times\nlarger than the aircraft speed in km/s. By this standard, a reentry vehicle at 8 km/s\n(Mach 26.5) would have a maximum shock layer temperature of 8,000 K. At temperatures\nabove 2,000 K, nitrogen and oxygen gas in the form of O2 and N2 will disassociate into\nindividual ions, consuming more energy from the flow.\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nChapter 3: Detection Technologies\n\nHypersonic objects passing through the Earth's atmosphere leave traces that can be\nobserved using a number of detection methods. The bow shock introduced by such objects\nreflects and refracts radio waves, RADAR pulses, and visible light. The ionized air\nsurrounding the object also creates electromagnetic interference that is visible on RADAR and\nthe emitted visible light in the wake is observable in photographs. The shock and turbulent\nwake also create low frequency sound that can be sensed by ground-based sensors. These\ndetection methods can be characterized as electromagnetic, optical, and acoustic and seismic\nas shown in Figure 7. Each method will be discussed along with the limitations and\nadvantages for the detection of hypersonic objects passing through the atmosphere.\n\nElectromagnetic: RADAR (Energy Reflection, Doppler RADAR), Radio Reflection Detection; Optical: Sky Cameras and Photographic Methods, Infrared Detection, LIDAR, Chronograph; Acoustic and Seismic: Infrasound, Seismic\n\nFigure 7. Hypersonic Vehicle Detection Techniques.\n\nOne of the fundamental tools for detecting the velocity of high-speed objects is the\nchronograph. These devices are used to measure the velocity of automobiles using\npneumatic tubes, and simple systems using laser diodes or LEDs are used to measure the\nvelocity of bullets. Figure 8 outlines a laser-based chronograph that is commercially\navailable for measuring the velocity of projectiles in two-stage gas guns capable of speeds in\na vacuum of 12 km/h, or approximately Mach 36 if the projectile passed through air. As a\nhigh-speed object passes through the first laser beam followed rapidly by the second,\nphotodetectors sense the change in intensity of the laser beam and send these signals to a\nstorage oscilloscope or to a counter. The time delay between the two signals, Δt, is used to\nfind the velocity of the object based on the distance between the two photodetectors, L.\nDigital clocks are capable of accurately measuring time delays to within a fraction of a\nnanosecond (10⁻⁹ seconds), so chronographs are capable of very high accuracy in\ndetermining the velocity of objects. As noted earlier, their use at gun ranges or in high-\nspeed gas guns requires that the path of the hypersonic object must pass through the laser\nbeams for the chronograph to be effective, which limits their usage for the detection of\nhypersonic aircraft except at instrumented test ranges.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Storage Oscillo- Scope L Photodetectors Hypersonic Aircraft Test Range Laser Beams Lasers Δt Velocity = L/Δt Figure 8. Laser-Based Chronograph. Currently, the best devices for the detection of hypersonic vehicles are based on the reflection of radio and microwave radiation through RADAR and upon the detection of infrared energy emitted by the ionized gases surrounding high-speed vehicles and in their wake. Optical and RADAR methods are also based on electromagnetic energy, yet make use of different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum as shown in Figure 9. Longer wavelength photons, or quanta of electromagnetic energy, have less energy than short wavelength photons. As a result, detection of short wavelength radiation tends to be more line-of-sight as in infrared or other optical methods. Longer wavelengths, used in RADAR, tend to bend around the Earth and can provide over-the-horizon detection of ICBMs, reentry vehicles, and other hypersonic vehicles. 12 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Electromagnetic Spectrum Wavelength Type of Radiation 1 nm x-rays 10 nm 100 nm Ultraviolet (UV) 1 μm Visible Light (0.4 to 0.7 μm) 10 μm Near Infrared 100 μm Thermal Infrared 1 mm Far Infrared 10 mm Microwaves 100 mm Radar 1 m Radio Waves 10 m 100 m AM Radio Figure 9. Electromagnetic Spectrum as a Function of Wavelength. ELECTROMAGNETIC METHODS RADAR (Reflected Energy) RADAR, or “radio detection and ranging,” has been heavily used since World War II for the detection of aircraft and sea vessels. First patented by Christian Hulsmeyer in 1904, this technique was first demonstrated by Nikola Tesla in 1917; RADAR was exploited in the defense of Britain through the Chain Home RADAR network initiated in the late 1930s.8 RADAR uses an antenna or a dish to transmit pulses of microwaves or radio waves toward a potential target. Energy reflected from the target is collected by the antenna and the time of flight of the transmitted and reflected signals yields the distance to the target. Early RADAR systems emitted radiation in the high-frequency band (HF) from about 10 to 30 MHz. Modern systems can operate well above 300 GHz. As a single pulse travels at the speed of light toward a target, the time delay between the generation of the pulse and the time that its echo is received is 2L/c where L is the distance to the target and c is the speed of light. For a target located 30 km from the source, the time delay is 200 microseconds, an easily measurable delay. By using microwave radiation emitted from a dish, target distance and bearing can both be measured. While it was possible to use low-frequency radio waves (~30 MHz) for RADAR systems in the 1940s, the wavelength of these waves (100 meters) made it difficult to resolve small targets, including aircraft. This made it desirable to develop systems that could operate at higher frequencies. UHF energy (300 to 1,000 GHz, 0.3- to 1-meter wavelength) radiation is used for long-range surveillance, including the detection of intercontinental ballistic missiles. Air traffic control uses the L band (1 to 2 GHz, 0.15- to 0.3-meter wavelength). X-band (8 to 12 GHz, 25- to 37-millimeter wavelength) energy is now used for airport RADAR where the range to aircraft is short. Higher frequency radiation is used for imaging systems and for meteorological data acquisition. 13 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY RADAR systems are widely used for aircraft surveillance and can detect the distance to objects and the position of an object (through triangulation); with Doppler RADAR, the velocity can be directly measured. RADAR does have limitations. While low-frequency RADAR systems are capable of following the curvature of the earth, the long wavelength of this energy makes it difficult to resolve small objects. Higher frequency RADAR tends to be more “line of sight.” Since it depends upon reflected energy, several problems are highlighted by the RADAR Equation: P_received = P_transmitted G A σ F^4 / ((4π)^2 R_t^2 R_r^2) (15) In this equation, P_transmitted represents the transmitted power, P_received the received power, G the transmitting antenna gain, A the aperture area of the receiving antenna, σ the RADAR cross section, F the pattern propagation factor, and R_t and R_r are the distance from the transmitter to the target and the target to the receiver, respectively. If the RADAR transmitter and receiver are in the same unit, the power returned as a reflection from a target decreases as R^4. This means that energy received in reflected energy decreases by 94% every time the distance to the target is doubled. RADAR depends upon the reflection of electromagnetic waves off of a target’s surface, thereby making objects with a small RADAR cross section difficult to detect (e.g., stealth aircraft). Atmospheric phenomenon, including inversions and turbulence, can lead to interference with RADAR reflections. Even with these limitations, RADAR is widely used to monitor high-speed aircraft, meteors, and man-made objects reentering the atmosphere from Earth orbit. Velocity Vector Radar Dish Hypersonic Vehicle θ Radial direction Reflected Energy Transmitted Energy Rotat Pedes R = radial distance Figure 10. Schematic of a RADAR System. Doppler RADAR Doppler RADAR systems yield velocity data for a target. Pulsed RADAR systems send out a short burst of high-frequency radiation that is reflected from a target. The RADAR unit processes the delay time between the transmitted pulse and the received echo to determine the range or distance to the target. The energy reflected from the target is, however, 14 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Doppler-shifted from its original frequency due to its velocity toward or away from the RADAR transmitter.9 The frequency shift, Δf, is given by the following equation: Δf = f_reflected − f_transmitted = 2V/(c − V) f_transmitted ≈ 2V f_transmitted / c (16) In this equation, c is the speed of light, and V is the target speed in the direction toward or away from the RADAR transmitter. The frequency shift is typically small since V << c, but the shift is easily observable due to “beating” between the transmitted and reflected signals. The development of fast Fourier transforms (FFTs) greatly increased the rate that Doppler reflections could be processed to compute target velocity. By triangulating between two RADAR transmitters, the position of a target can be determined along with its velocity and direction of travel. Doppler RADAR systems are used for monitoring high-speed aircraft, turbulence and shear in meteorology, and even in hand-held police RADAR guns. RADAR technology has been used for the detection of missiles, reentry vehicles, and space objects near the Earth since the 1960s. On 9 September 1961, for example, a Naval Research Laboratory RADAR installation at the Chesapeake Bay Annex was used to detect a Mercury/Atlas flight during its launch phase.10 The RADAR system sensed the range to the rocket, its rate of climb, and the range of its exhaust plume. This RADAR system worked “over the horizon” and demonstrated that a RADAR system could be used to identify targets and compute their trajectory. A wide range of RADAR systems are now available to monitor the Earth and space for high-speed objects in the atmosphere.11 Cobra Dane and Cobra Judy, L-band phased-array RADAR systems located on land (Alaska) and on ships (X- and S-band), are used for the detection of reentry vehicles above 35 km. RADAR systems in Florida and Massachusetts are capable of monitoring objects in space at a distance of 5,000 km to yield data on their size and shape. Ballistic missile early warning systems still operate in Alaska, Great Britain, and in Greenland to detect and track missile launches. On Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific Ocean, Altar tracks reentry vehicles at distances of up to 2,500 km with high resolution using a 100-kW, millimeter-wave RADAR system. TRADEX, a multitarget tracking system using L- and S-band RADAR was developed in 1963 to track missile signatures at a distance of up to 1,400 km. The venerable RC-137 (converted Boeing 707) can also be deployed with onboard RADAR and optical systems that can track missile launches and reentry vehicles. Radio Reflection Detection This method can be used to detect meteors or any other object entering the Earth’s atmosphere during the day or night. The principle of this method is based on passive electromagnetic energy emitted from the Earth’s surface in the form of radio or television signals. If these signals are relatively high frequency, the signal is line of sight and cannot normally be received over the horizon. A radio or television located over the horizon and tuned into the signal frequency will only detect static or hiss. When a meteor or other object enters the Earth’s atmosphere, its bow shock and turbulent wake containing ionized air reflects radio signals causing an over-the-horizon receiver to hear pings and whistles that change pitch as the meteor passes by and breaks up in the atmosphere.12 It is possible to receive reflections off of the surface of the hypersonic meteor in addition to the wake and the shock. Sound files from the Aurigid Meteor Shower caused by radio echoes are available13 with data obtained from a directional antenna at 61 MHz and 217 MHz. The data demonstrates that it is possible to differentiate reflections from the bow shock and the 15 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ionized wake. This technique for detecting hypersonic meteors is not fully developed and appears to be employed only by hobbyists. Since a receiver can be tuned to a specific over-the-horizon transmitter, it may be possible to develop a network of radio receivers to provide information on high-speed objects in the atmosphere. Multiple stations would allow triangulation of the object to determine velocity and position as a function of time, i.e., tracking and path prediction. The sound files also contain information that could provide information on the hypersonic object. Detection of the shock provides information on the position of the object while the transient “whistles” reflected from the ionized wake may provide information on the Strouhal eddy frequency that could directly infer the object’s velocity. This detection technology should be further developed. Hypersonic Aircraft Radio Receiver The radio receiver is not in line-of-sight with the transmitter, yet receives reflected energy from the transmitter by the aircraft. Radio Transmitter Figure 11. Radio Reflection Detector. OPTICAL METHODS Sky Cameras and Photographic Methods A classic example of a hypersonic object passing through the Earth’s atmosphere is a meteor. Meteorite hunters and astrophysicists have worked to develop methods to detect these objects as they fall to the Earth. Motion-detection video systems provide information on location and direction of meteors passing through the atmosphere by detecting their visible wake. The El Paso All Sky Camera project14 is one example and even provides live streaming video of meteoric events. Photographs of objects in orbit with diameters ranging from 0.1 meter to several meters have been used to determine their expected trajectory as meteors as they entered and fell through the Earth’s atmosphere.15 This technique was first used to monitor the Pribram meteorite simultaneously by several observatories in 1959. This technique was even used to locate a 1.75-kg enstatite chondrite meteorite called Neuschwanstein reported in 2003. The 16 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nEuropean Fireball Network16 uses cameras at several stations separated by distances of about 100 km and covering an area of about 1,000,000 km2. Fisheye lenses allow each station to observe the sky every night to monitor meteors and other nebular objects. The network is operated by the German Aerospace Center (DLR) and the Institute of Planetary Research in Prague.17 Other networks include the Meteorite Observation and Recovery Project (MORP) in Canada and the Prairie Network in the United States; all have been in operation since the 1960s and 70s.\n\nAnother recent meteorite recovery was made when asteroid 2008 TC3 entered the Earth's atmosphere on 7 October 2008 over Sudan.18 The meteor's path left a wake that was visible through dawn. A total of 280 fragments weighing 11 pounds were collected in the Sudanese desert. The photographic evidence of this hypersonic reentry was interesting. The 4.2-meter William Herschel Telescope in the Canary Islands optically recorded the spectrum of this asteroid 2 hours before it burned up in the Earth's atmosphere. This information can be used to identify the chemical makeup of the surface of the object or of the vaporized products in its wake. A sequence of photographs taken at 4-second intervals over a period of about 50 seconds provided information on its velocity as it reentered the atmosphere and its brightness as a function of time.\n\nAlthough these photographic methods have been applied to meteors, data from the European Fireball Network and similar camera systems can be used to monitor the flight of hypersonic aircraft that produce a visible wake through the ionization of air. The photographic methods described here are limited to nighttime use. Multiple stations recording the same event have been used to measure both position and velocity of objects moving at hypersonic velocities through the Earth's atmosphere and the computed trajectories have been used to successfully predict meteorite impact points on at least two occasions.\n\nOptical systems are constantly monitoring the Earth for possible missile launches. Two KH-II satellites are constantly in orbit 250 to 500 km above the Earth's surface with multispectral cameras that resolve objects to within 2 to 3 meters. Big-Bird, at an orbit 160 to 280 km above the Earth, can take video or photographs with a resolution of 250 mm. The photos must be sent back to Earth for processing. Close-Look, operating from 130 to 300 km, has a resolution of 50 to 150 mm. Landsat, with an orbit of 800 km, can transmit multispectral video of the Earth with a resolution of 20 to 30 meters. The space shuttle, the U-2 aircraft, and the SR-71 have all been used to provide high-resolution images of objects from high altitude.\n\nInfrared Detection\n\nInfrared detection of reentry vehicles and ICBMs by satellites has been available since the early 1960s, with the United States leading the effort through detection of possible missile launches from the Soviet Union. In addition to RADAR, infrared detection is one of the best techniques for the detection of hypersonic vehicles.\n\nTheory of Infrared Detection Systems.\n\nAll objects emit radiation that is a function of their temperature according to equation 17, the Stefan-Boltzmann Law:19\n\nq = ε σ A T4 (17)\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nIn this equation, q represents the amount of radiant energy emitted in watts, ε is the emissivity (a dimensionless quantity that gauges the relative ability of an object's surface to emit energy by radiation), A is the surface area, σ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant (σ = 5.67 x 10-8 J·s-1·m-2·K-4), and T is the temperature of the object's surface. A simple example of emission of heat as radiant energy is an infrared bathroom heater where electric current is passed through a metallic element that reaches several thousand degrees and emits considerable thermal radiation.\n\nAll objects in the environment exchange radiant heat with each other and seek equilibrium temperatures. At high temperatures, many objects behave as \"black body radiators\" defined by their surface emissivity, ε = 1. The surface temperature of an object causes electromagnetic radiation to be emitted with a spectrum given by Planck's Distribution Law, equation 18, where the energy density is emitted by the surface of the object per wavelength per unit volume:\n\nu(λ,T) = (8 π h c / λ5) x 1 / (e^(hc/λkT) - 1) (18)\n\nThe terms in this equation are as follows:\n\n• c: speed of light, (3 x 108 m/s).\n• h: Planck's constant, (6.62 x 10-34 J.s).\n• λ: wavelength of the emitted radiation, (m).\n• k: Boltzmann constant, (1.38 x 10-23 J/K).\n• T : surface temperature, (K).\n• u(λ,T): spectral energy density, (J·m-3·m-1).\n\nThe surface of the sun behaves as a black body radiatora with a surface temperature of 5,778 K. For the sun, the Planck distribution of energy versus wavelength looks like that of Figure 12. The horizontal axis is the wavelength in units of meters and shows that peak energy occurs at a wavelength of about 5.02 x 10-7 meters or 0.502 microns (1 micron = 10-6 meters). This falls within the visible band (0.38 microns to 0.65 microns) and corresponds to the yellow color of our sun. The peak wavelength, equation 19, is given by Wien's Displacement Law:\n\nλmax = 2.8977685 x 10-3 (m · K) / T (19)\n\nThis shows that as the temperature of an object increases, the amount of radiant energy released by the surface increases and the value of the peak wavelength becomes smaller.\n\na A black body is an idealized object that absorbs all electromagnetic radiation that falls on it. Since a black body is a perfect absorber of radiant energy, by the laws of thermodynamics it must also be a perfect emitter of radiation.\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 12. Energy Spectrum of the Sun at 5,778 K.\n\nApplication of Planck's Law to Hypersonic Vehicles.\n\nAs described in the theory of hypersonic fluid flow, any object moving through the atmosphere with an M > 1 will result in a shock wave emanating from the leading edge of the object. If the object has a blunt nose, such as a meteor entering the atmosphere, the shock will be detached from the surface. If we consider a spherical object moving through the atmosphere at hypersonic speed, as shown in Figure 13, the expected spectrum of emitted radiation can be computed. In this example, the altitude is assumed to be 10 km above the Earth's surface. At this altitude, the ambient static temperature is 223 K (-50° C), the pressure is 26.1% of sea level atmospheric pressure (see Appendix A for the properties of the U.S. Standard Atmosphere).\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 13. Hypersonic Flow Past a Sphere.\n\nIf the sphere in Figure 13 were traveling through the atmosphere at Mach 3, could we identify the speed of the sphere by the peak wavelength of the infrared radiation that it emits? From compressible aerodynamics relationships, conditions behind the bow shock, in region 2, can be calculated. We find that the peak static temperature would reach 597 K and the peak wavelength 4.85 microns. Figure 14 shows the expected infrared spectrum. For comparison, the spectrum for Mach 3.5 is also shown. In the figure, the wavelength has units of microns (i.e., 10-6 meter).. As the Mach number increases, the peak temperature also rises while the peak wavelength decreases (shifts to the left). The higher the Mach number, the greater the amount of infrared energy emitted. For Mach 3.5, the peak wavelength is 3.92 microns. The energy difference between a Mach 3 and Mach 3.5 aircraft would be significant enough to detect with an infrared camera or FLIR (forward looking infrared) detector.\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 14. Infrared Energy Spectra for Mach 3 (red line) and Mach 3.5 (blue dashed line).\n\nThe peak wavelength changes for hypersonic aircraft with speeds that range from Mach 1 to Mach 100 are included in Figure 15. Satellite systems currently monitor 2.5- to 5-micron IR emissions and could detect aircraft with speeds as low as Mach 3. While Figure 15 plots the peak wavelength, aircraft at Mach 5 or higher have lower temperatures in the turbulent wake that would still be detectable. The peak temperatures are shown in Figure 16. Above 550 K, the perfect gas law cannot be used to accurately predict the peak temperature due to ionization and disassociation of molecules in the air. Figure 15 and Figure 16 use the \"rule of thumb\" described earlier in the theory of hypersonic vehicle flight to determine peak temperature and the corresponding wavelength.\n\nMilitary satellite systems monitor infrared energy emitted by objects on the surface of the Earth. Kidd and Caldwell20 reported on the use of IR systems for defense support in 1992 and highlighted the problems in resolving missile launches and wakes from background \"clutter\" caused by the infrared emissions from other objects on the surface of the Earth. Typical satellite IR systems detect energy between 2 and 5 microns. To verify that an object is an actual missile, the object must be detected in the 2.6- to 3.2-micron band, which corresponds to the emission from water vapor in the hot exhaust of a rocket. It must simultaneously be identified in the 4.1- to 4.8-micron range to differentiate the missile from background clutter. One problem encountered in missile detection involves the \"glint\" that occurs as aircraft at high altitude passing over land at night reflects sunlight to an overhead satellite. Computer software to discriminate signals from background heat combined with detection in the two different infrared bands helps to identify actual missile launches. FLIR (forward looking infrared) is also now used for atmospheric surveillance to detect objects in the 3- to 5-micron band and in the 5- to 14-micron band.\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nPeak Wavelength of Emitted Radiation\nPeak Wavelength (microns)\nMach Number\nTypical Satellite IR Systems\nMeasure Radiation from\n2.5 to 5 microns.\nFigure 15. Peak Wavelength of the Infrared Radiation Emitted by Hypersonic Objects.\nTemperature Downstream of a Normal Shock\nTemperature on the Rear Side of the Normal Shock (K)\nMach Number\nAbove 550 C (823 K), Ionization and\nDisassociation of Oxygen and\nNitrogen Lead to Lower\nTemperatures in the Gases\nDownstream of the Bow Shock.\nFigure 16. Peak Shock Layer Temperature for Hypersonic Objects.\n22\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nCommercial and Governmental IR Systems\nThere is a long history in the United States of the usage of IR detectors to sense launches and to track the trajectory of ICBMs.21 ARPA initiated studies of the possible use of IR detection of aircraft and missiles in the 1950s. Under their Defense Support Program (DSP), Joseph Knopaw studied the possible use of IR detectors in satellites to detect missiles and the hot exhaust plumes of ICBMs. Rand Corporation submitted a report in 1955 that outlined the detection of ICBM launches from satellites in Earth orbit. In 1956, the U.S. Air Force chose Lockheed as the lead designer with Joseph Knopaw as the project manager for Subsystem G, ICBM Attack Alarm System (WS-117L).\nBy 1958, control of the Air Force system shifted to ARPA (Advanced Research Projects Agency) as the MIDAS missile defense alarm system. The satellite IR detection system could alert the Strategic Air Command of possible Soviet missile launches 15 minutes earlier than the DEW system could. The first successful satellite launch occurred in 1960 with a 300-mile orbit. In 1963, MIDAS 9 with a 2,250-mile polar orbit succeeded in detecting nine missile launches using an 8-inch concentric telescope and an Aerojet-General IR detector.\nIn 1964, the Air Force launched the RJS-2 satellites into geosynchronous orbit over the equator. The MIDAS system was renamed the Defense Support Program in 1969 and an agreement between the United States and Australia provided communication to the constellation of MIDAS satellites from the Overseas Ground Station (OGS) in Australia and the Continental Ground Station (CGS) at the Buckley Air National Guard Station in the United States. Four Phase 1 Integrated Missile Early Warning Satellites (IMEWS) were launched between 1970 and 1973 followed by Phase 2 satellites from 1975 to 1977, the Multi-Orbit Satellite/Performance Improvement Modification (MOS/PIM) models from 1979 to 1984, two Sensor Evolutionary Development (SED) satellites from 1984 to 1987, and DSP-I satellites since 1989. The DSP satellites are designed for the global monitoring of ICBMs, SLBMs, and tactical missiles. Their operating life is 5 to 7 years, and they weigh approximately 5,000 lbs. With 6,000 IR telescopic detectors, these satellites monitor IR emissions between 2.7 and 4.3 microns. The 23rd, and last, DSP satellite was launched in November 2007.\nThe DSP system is capable of monitoring more than ICBMs. In 1972, the system detected a large meteor passing over several western states 94 km above the Earth. This meteor, moving at 18 km/s, was on a trajectory over Salt Lake City that would have done significant damage if it had impacted the Earth. In 1991, DSP satellites detected the launch of 88 Iraqi SCUD missiles. The DSP system is currently controlled under the ALERT (attack and launch early report to theater) system under the ALERT Control Center located at Shriever Air Force Base in Colorado. The current operational inventory is classified.\nOther commercial IR detection equipment includes the Lucid Dimensions Spherical Detection System (SDS) using a 3D spherical sensor array.22 This system is designed to track ballistic missiles, aircraft, and vehicles. Developed under an SBIR, this system can be mounted on ground-based vehicles, ships, or aircraft.\nLIDAR\nLIDAR, or \"light detection and ranging,\" uses pulses of laser light directed toward a target. Reflected light is detected and, through the time of flight of the laser beam, the distance to the target can be computed. While LIDAR systems are similar in function to RADAR systems, the highly directional nature of the laser beam permits a very accurate determination of target distance. As an example, reflected panels left on the moon's surface by the Apollo astronauts are now used to accurately monitor the distance from the Earth to the moon using\n23\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nLIDAR. By attaching a rotating mirror to vary the direction of the laser beam, it is possible to traverse the laser across surfaces to develop 3-D maps of objects using \"imaging LIDAR.\" As an example, during the DARPA challenge held in the Nevada desert in 2005, autonomous automobiles used LIDAR to build a map of all objects in front of the vehicle and used it for collision avoidance and navigation. LIDAR systems have also been used to obtain accurate maps of the surface of mars from the Mars Orbiting Global Surveyer. LIDAR systems for meteorological studies are often mounted in aircraft and fired from the side of the fuselage to obtain a two-dimensional horizontal map of the atmospheric conditions.\nA measurement technique known as Laser Doppler Velocimetry (LDV) uses the Doppler shift in the transmitted and reflected laser light to measure the velocity of the target and the properties of the air along the axis of the laser beam.\nLIDAR systems using pulsed YAG lasers are capable of measuring many properties of air along the path of the laser beam. As shown in Figure 17, if a laser pulse is fired toward a distant target, light is reflected from particles in the atmosphere and this light is collected through a beamsplitter and directed to a photodetector. By knowing the time interval between generation of the laser pulse and the time that each reflected signal is received, the distance along the beam can be accurately determined for each data set. By recording this optical information as a function of time, using Raman spectroscopy, particle light scattering, and absorption theory, multiple properties of the air and particles in the air along the path of the laser can be measured as a function of distance from the transmitter. Particle density, velocity, and chemical species can be measured using pulsed LIDAR systems. Concentration of airborne gas species (oxygen, nitrogen), air temperature, and air velocity can also be measured in this fashion.\nSupersonic Vehicle and Turbulent Wake\nLaser Beam\nBeamsplitter\nPhotodetectors\nPulsed YAG Laser\nFigure 17. Schematic of a Pulsed LIDAR System.\n24\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nLIDAR can be used to detect and monitor hypersonic objects in several ways. By using a micropulse laser, a LIDAR system could be used to scan the sky for supersonic airborne objects. LIDAR can also detect the presence of a hypersonic vehicle by measuring the air velocities in the long turbulent wakes that they leave in the atmosphere. Electro Optic Systems in Sydney, Australia,23 has announced a laser tracking system that can track objects in low-Earth orbit that are as small as 100 mm (4 inches). These objects pose a risk to satellites and manned space vehicles due to their high velocities (~ 8 km/s). There are an estimated 200,000 such objects greater than 10 mm in size currently orbiting the Earth.\nIn the testing of hypersonic aircraft, a dedicated LIDAR system trained on the turbulent wake could measure the temperature and velocity distribution within the wake. This information can be used to design aircraft that would minimize detectability and increase vehicle reliability. The U.S. Army, for example, reported on the use of a LIDAR system to monitor atmospheric particulates from the erosion of nose-cones on Athena-H reentry missions at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico in 1973.24 The LIDAR system monitored the path of the reentry vehicles at altitudes of 9.3 km and 14.3 km and determined the concentration of erosion products and ice particles along the laser beam path.\nACOUSTIC AND SEISMIC METHODS\nInfrasound\nMicrophones can be used as a chronograph to measure the velocity of airborne objects. A supersonic aircraft generates a three-dimensional bow shock referred to as a \"Mach cone.\" If the aircraft's Mach cone, which is actually a pressure pulse, sweeps over two microphones separated by a distance, the velocity of the aircraft can be measured. In Figure 18, two microphones can sense the dramatic pressure increase that occurs behind a shock wave and determine the velocity by dividing the microphone separation distance by the delay time.\nSound waves generated by the aircraft and the shock do not reach a terrestrial microphone until the Mach cone reaches the detector. The Mach cone has a half angle given by β = arcsin (1/M), and this yields a method of detecting the aircraft altitude, H:\nM = sqrt(1 + D²/H²) (20)\n\"Infrasound\" refers to subaudible (< 100 Hz) sound waves that are generated by explosions, sonic booms, and rocket exhaust. Infrasound can be sensed by pressure transducers that detect the very small changes in atmospheric pressure that are induced by these events. The U.S. Air Force installed a network of infrasound stations around the country in the 1960s to detect the detonation of nuclear devices. Each station was composed of multiple pressure transducers so that the direction of the sound waves could be detected at the location of each station.\n25\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nMach Cone\nβ = arcsin(1/M) = Mach Angle\nBow Shock\nwake\nH\nAcoustic Detector\nD\nFigure 18. Mach Cone Generated by a Supersonic Object.\nThe Los Alamos National Laboratory still operates four of these stations that were installed in 1983 at various locations in the United States.25 These infrasound detector stations are relatively inexpensive and are easy to maintain. While they have not yet been used to sense nuclear detonations, they do detect sonic booms, and they were responsible for identifying and tracking two large bolides, or brilliant meteors, that entered the Earth's atmosphere in 2000 and 2001. While capable of sensing meteors as small as a baseball, in 2001, a large bolide entered the Earth's atmosphere over the Pacific Ocean and exploded near Baja California. The bolide was estimated to have a 3.6-meter diameter and exploded with the energy of 6,000 tons of TNT.\nEven a single infrasound station can track a meteor. On 4 October 1996, a station in Colorado observed a meteor near Bakersfield, California.26\nAnother infrasound station network includes the International Monitoring System, a network of 321 stations around the world designed to monitor explosions that would represent violations of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Although this network may be a useful worldwide resource for the detection of meteors, reentry vehicles, and hypersonic flights, its use in the detection of nuclear explosions is dubious given the circumstances of November 1999. During this event, a sonic boom was monitored in the skies above northern Germany. The information provided by the network could not differentiate between a meteor and a nuclear explosion.\n26\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Infrasound stations, or observatories, could also be used to monitor the acoustic signature of meteors or supersonic aircraft based on their shock waves or the disturbances caused by their turbulent wake. Some meteors, for example, produce subsonic sound from 1 to 5 Hz for several minutes during their flight through the atmosphere. This data could be developed to identify the speed, altitude, and type of object moving through the atmosphere. Seismic When a sonic boom is generated by a meteor or an aircraft, the sound waves pass through the atmosphere at the speed of sound in air at about 343 m/s. Infrasound stations pick up the pressure variations caused by the shock wave many minutes after the event occurred, depending upon the distance between the supersonic object and the station. When a Mach cone generated by a shockwave strikes the ground as shown in Figure 18, the pressure pulse is propagated into the ground and travels as a high-speed N-wave at a velocity far exceeding the speed of sound in air. Ground-based vibrations caused by sonic booms have been detected by seismic sensors originally designed to detect earthquakes as documented by Cates and Sturtevant.27 Caltech and the U.S.G.S. operate 200 seismographic stations throughout Southern California as part of the TERRAscope seismic network. The network employs detectors that can sense ground vibration between 1 and 20 Hz. The network was actually used to detect the sonic boom and pressure vibration induced by the flight of supersonic aircraft and reentry vehicles. On 9 December 1993, the network successfully detected the flight of an SR-71 flying over Edwards Air Force Base at a maximum speed of Mach 3.2. On 30 January 1992, the network was also used to detect the reentry of the space shuttle Discovery, STS-42, over the Pacific Ocean and landing at Edwards Air Force Base. Another Discovery landing on the west coast was monitored by 66 seismic stations in Washington and Oregon. The shuttle was monitored by this seismic network for 500 km of its trajectory through the atmosphere. The seismic data from these stations showed the hyperbolic shape of the Mach cone as it impacted the surface of the earth. The angle of the Mach cone showed that the shuttle was traveling at Mach 14, corresponding to an altitude of 55 km. One interesting investigation that involved the use of these seismic arrays involved mysterious sonic booms heard over Southern California in 1991 and 1992. By using data from the TERRAscope array, the source of these disturbances was traced to two F-4 Phantom aircraft flying over Edwards Air Force Base at speeds near Mach 1. Since the TERRAscope array is designed to detect seismic activity, including earthquakes and volcanoes, the detection of meteors and supersonic aircraft generate unwanted data. Caltech has been adding atmospheric pressure transducers to its seismic network to detect and remove airborne signals from the seismic data. Conversely, by combining the infrasound network data operated by the Los Alamos National Laboratory with data from seismic arrays, data from explosions, volcanic eruptions, and other terrestrial sources can be eliminated from infrasound data to better detect the presence of meteors, reentry vehicles, and supersonic aircraft. 27 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Chapter 4: Vision of Progress Over the Next 30 Years While there are several methods that can be used to sense high-speed supersonic objects, technology changes in aircraft will generate the need for newer detection and tracking techniques. Listed below are five important categories of objects capable of hypersonic speeds. Over the next 30 years, the ability to reliably and accurately detect them will be critical. • Space Debris – Technology is currently available to detect space debris using RADAR and cameras. Novel methods using coronographs28 during daylight have been shown to detect the reflected light from millimeter-size debris particles in orbit, and existing telescopes are capable of detecting meteors that pose a risk to Earth. Space debris reentering the Earth's atmosphere can reach speeds of over 17,000 miles per hour or Mach 23. • Reentry Craft – The highest recorded speed for any manmade vehicle was the Apollo 10 reentry capsule in 1969. It reached a velocity of 24,790 mph, or Mach 36. Reentry vehicles are currently monitored by ground-based telescopes and RADAR and through satellite imagery. • Meteors – The systems used to monitor missiles and satellites based on RADAR and optical devices can currently detect and track meteors entering the Earth's atmosphere. Further development of acoustic and radio detection techniques should be pursued over the next 30 years. • Missiles – The Cold War generated the need for equipment to monitor hostile missile launches, to track their path, and to estimate the location of their targets based on ballistic trajectories. The United States Space Surveillance Network, for example, is composed of a worldwide collection of RADAR, electro-optical detectors, and passive RF devices that can track satellites, missiles, and aircraft. They maintain an inventory of satellites in Earth orbit and, through the Space Surveillance Telescope program (SST), asteroids and other faint objects in space are detected and tracked. GEODSS (Ground-Based Electro-Optical Deep Space Surveillance) telescopes monitor space at 3 different locations around the globe with high enough resolution to detect a basketball 20,000 miles from the Earth. Continued vigilance from governments around the world will likely increase the development of technology to detect and track high-speed objects in the atmosphere and in space over the next 30 years with an emphasis on RADAR and optical detection. • Hypersonic Aircraft – Over the next three decades, hypersonic aircraft development will likely spur an increased need for new technology to detect their presence. While the X-15 rocket plane exceeded Mach 6 (4,520 mph) as early as 1967, continued development of high-speed aircraft will continue to meet needs in the following areas: o SSTO (Single Stage to Orbit) – Long the dream of NASA and space exploration enthusiasts, technology has been under development to replace the Space Shuttle using aircraft that can take off from a conventional runway and attain low-Earth orbit. The X-43A scram jet, part of NASA's Hyper X Program and fueled by hydrogen fuel was successfully tested in 2004. This aircraft is capable of 7,000 mph or Mach 9.8 flight. 28 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY o Manned military jet fighters – The fastest military jet is the MIG-25 Foxbat at 2,115 mph (M = 3). The fastest U.S. jet is the F-15 at 1,875 mph (Mach 2.6). Current U.S. efforts are concentrating on unmanned vehicles, such as the X-43A. o Surveillance aircraft – The SR-71a \"Blackbird\" achieved 2,056 mph (Mach 3.3) in 1976 using an air-breathing engine. Its rumored replacement, the SR-91 Aurora, would have been capable of Mach 6. In 2008, the U.S. Air Force entered into an agreement to design a Mach 6 unmanned \"blackswift\" aircraft using a scramjet. o Passenger jets – The current record holder is the Tupolev Tu-144 \"charger\" at 1,553 mph (Mach 2.15). Reaction Engines Limited has proposed the A2 hypersonic passenger liner using liquid hydrogen to fuel the aircraft and to cool the wings and fuselage. This aircraft is expected to achieve Mach 5. In 2000, Russia and the People's Republic of China entered into a 25-year agreement to develop the Leninetz AYAKS hypersonic transport plane using kerosene fuel and a variety of techniques to attain Mach 8 to 10. An MHD (magnetohydrodynamic) engine is used to further accelerate combustion products produced by the engine. Lasers and RF generators are employed to disrupt the bow shock, reducing drag and doubling the velocity of the vehicle. o Stealth missiles – The USAF Falcon Project planned for building a Mach 6 HTV-3V \"Blackswift\" platform but was cancelled in 2008. The NASA X-51 scramjet vehicle is based on the Falcon scramjet and is scheduled for testing in 2010. This vehicle is capable of Mach 7+. DETECTABILITY OF NEW HYPERSONIC AIRCRAFT While conventional RADAR and optical systems may be able to track existing vehicles, future aircraft capable of Mach 8 and above are now being designed and tested. New propulsion technology and drag reduction techniques also offer new ways to detect such aircraft. Based on a review of hypersonic vehicle detection and tracking, four recommendations are made for research and technology development over the next 30 years to increase the detectability of hypersonic objects passing through the Earth's atmosphere. Recommendation #1 – Build a Database of the Wake Characteristics for Existing Aircraft There is considerable information about the aircraft contained within the turbulent wake that trails it. The wake provides an indication of the vehicle's path and its current bearing. By analyzing the Strouhal eddy formation, it is possible to ascertain its velocity and hydraulic diameter. The wake can also provide information on the chemical combustion products that can be obtained through LIDAR and can indicate the fuel used by the aircraft. Some aircraft, such as the X-43A and the proposed Reaction Engines Limited A2, use hydrogen as the fuel, so the absence of carbon molecules in their turbulent wakes could aid in their identification. Authors Mark Garnet and Aaron Altman from the University of Dayton29 proposed the development of a database of turbulent wake data for conventional aircraft to allow their identification. They point out that, although the aircraft may be designed for stealth, their wakes cannot be hidden. They presented data on the unique characteristics that can be used to identify the wakes generated by the F-15, F-16, F-18, and B-52. They also point out the 29 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY need for computational modeling of hypersonic wakes to predict the characteristic signature of new, unknown aircraft. A hypersonic vehicle database of wake characteristics for existing aircraft should be developed based on optical and Doppler RADAR data. Doppler RADAR provides information on turbulent intensities and eddy formation within the wake. Computational fluid mechanics models of hypersonic wakes have been done since the early 1960s, such as the work done by Zieberg and Bleich.30 Such modeling work should continue capitalizing on the increasing computer performance that will be available during the next 30 years. Recommendation #2 – Exploit the Detectability of Hypersonic Aircraft Based on the Features That Allow Them To Fly Efficiently at High Speeds Several new propulsion systems for hypersonic aircraft will be tested over the next 30 years. These include pulsed detonation engines (PDE) successfully tested in 2008 by the Air Force Research Laboratory and Innovative Scientific Solutions, Inc. over the Mojave Desert. While these engines are capable of Mach > 6, they have one characteristic that makes them very detectable. The pulsed detonation of combustible fuel creates a wake with periodic bulges referred to as \"donuts on a rope.\" As mentioned earlier, measurements of the turbulent wake behind hypersonic aircraft can be used for detection, identification, and tracking. The AYAKS hypersonic transport plane under development in Russia uses an MHD engine, lasers, and RF generators to decrease aircraft drag. The lasers and RF ionize the air ahead of the aircraft, creating a plasma to disrupt the bow shock and significantly reduce aerodynamic drag. Drag reduction allows the aircraft to double its maximum speed. The RF and laser emissions from this aircraft can possibly be used to detect the aircraft in flight from ground-based antenna or telescopes or from satellites. The MHD engine also generates electromagnetic radiation that can possibly be detected. Every new propulsion or drag reduction system under development will have some characteristic that may make it more detectable from the ground or from satellite. The Aerospike engine proposed for the SSTO and under development by Rocketdyne and Garvey Spacecraft involves the use of a novel virtual Laval nozzle that is external to the engine. The IR emissions from an Aerospike engine may increase its detectability. Recommendation #3 – Explore the Detection of Vehicles Designed To Be Undetectable Over the next 30 years, hypersonic cruise missiles will have the ability to travel at speeds of up to Mach 8 decreasing the chances of being detected or defeated by antimissiles. The unmanned NASA X-51 tested in 2010 is capable of greater than Mach 7 (over 4,000 mph), for example, and is designed to be launched from a B-52. The DARPA/USAF Falcon Project has resulted in the testing of the HTV-2 at Mach 6.7 over the Pacific Ocean, designed as a hypersonic cruise vehicle. Efforts to disguise aircraft through the use of novel vehicle shapes and stealth materials can also increase their detectability in other ways. Golovitichev and Hansson presented a paper in 199931 that stated the following: \"The concentrated energy drag reduction concept has proven to be effective for the cruise range vehicles, preventing the missile deceleration with the benefit that the spike \"products\" could envelope the missile in a film of ionized gas which would be impervious to RADAR pulses, thereby rendering it electronically \"invisible\". The infra- 30 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY red penalty at close range would be significantly offset by the high speed of the flight.\" This discussion about the AJAX engine concerned the generation of ion combustion products that would be further accelerated by an MHD (magnetohydrodynamic drive). The increased number of various carbon-based molecules in the wake of this aircraft could be detected using LIDAR. The increased temperature near the surface of this aircraft would also increase its detectability due to increased emission of infrared radiation. For AJAX (AYAK) vehicles, development of enhanced LIDAR systems and IR detectors should proceed over the next 30 years to increase their detection and tracking. Recommendation #4 – Explore the Development of Novel Detectors One characteristic of hypersonic flight (M > 5) is the ionization of air in the region downstream of the bow shock and the disassociation of oxygen and nitrogen at very high speeds. When electrons recombine with ions generated by the shock, they emit electromagnetic radiation that can be detected. This radiation extends from the visible range, as evidenced by the glowing trail left by meteors entering the Earth's atmosphere, but the emitted radiation also extends into the ultraviolet and x-ray range. Although such electro-optical sensors are likely part of the existing DARPA/USAF space surveillance system, telescope systems that monitor the UV range should be developed, along with x-ray detectors capable of monitoring the atmosphere. Hypersonic objects passing through the atmosphere disassociate nitrogen and oxygen which recombine in the object's turbulent wake. During recombination, new molecules are created, including NO, NO2, ionized O and N, and combustion products.32 LIDAR can detect the presence and concentration of these compounds in vehicle wakes and improved LIDAR systems should be a priority. As hypersonic objects pass through the atmosphere, the object becomes ionized with a significant positive charge. Technology should be developed to sense the flight of objects with an electrostatic charge as they pass through the atmosphere. SUMMARY Each detection system discussed in the previous section has both benefits and problems. A comparison of the various detection techniques is shown in Figure 19 based on their ability to detect specific properties, relative cost, and accuracy. Infrared detection systems and multispectral cameras installed on satellites, such as the KH-II, provide surveillance of large portions of the Earth for possible missile launches, reentry vehicle trajectories, meteor wakes, and hypersonic vehicles. RADAR systems based on satellites, ships, and aircraft can detect the position and velocity of such hypersonic objects at varying range. AWACS, for example, can detect objects at up to 370 km with a resolution of 0.5 meters. TRADEX can track up to six objects at a distance of 1,400 km with an accuracy of 3 meters and a velocity resolution of 0.01 m/s. 31 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDetection Method | Properties Detected | Availability | Useful for Detection of:\nDistance To Target | Velocity | Altitude | Whole Sky Or Directed | Commercially Available | Existing Network | Expense | Meteor Detection | Reentry Vehicles | Aircraft\nElectromagnetic\nRadar | x | x | x | Both | x | x | Modest | x | x | x\nRadio Reflection Detection | | | | Whole Sky | | x | Low | x | x |\n\nOptical\nSky Cameras, Photographic | | | | Whole Sky | x | x | Low | x | x | x\nInfrared | | possible | | Both | x | | Modest | x | x | x\nLidar | x | x | | Directed | x | | Medium | x | x | x\nChronograph | | x | | Directted | | | Low | | |\n\nAcoustic and Seismic\nInfrasound | x | x | | Whole Sky | x | x | Low | x | x | x\nSeismic | x | x | | Whole Sky | | x | Modest | x | x | x\n\nFigure 19. Comparison of Detection Technology for Hypersonic Objects.\n\nLIDAR systems provide detailed information on velocity, temperature, particle velocity, and atmospheric composition along the path of the laser beam that can be used to interrogate vehicle wakes and exhaust plumes. Seismic and infrasound systems continuously operate and can provide information on the path followed by a high-speed aircraft or object by tracking its sonic boom and low-frequency acoustic signature. Finally, optical cameras aimed toward the Earth provide valuable information on hypersonic object tracks by recording their tracks. Aimed toward space, optical cameras are tracking asteroids and other spaceborne objects that may enter the atmosphere as a meteor posing a risk.\n\n32\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAppendix A: MathCad Program Used To Estimate Hypersonic Vehicle Surface Temperature\n\nModeling of the Thermodynamic Properties\nOf Airflow about Hypersonic Vehicles\n\nI. Purpose: Compute the properties across the bow shock of a hypersonic vehicle moving through the earth's atmosphere.\n\nA. Define the Aircraft Velocity\nV := 3300·MPH Vehicle Velocity.\nH := 10·km Vehicle Altitute.\nNote that the Karman Level corresponds to 100 km altitude where the atmosphere essentially ends.\n\nB. Compute the Mach number for the Vehicle\nT_atm(H) = 222.986K\na := sqrt(γ·R_air·T_atm(H)) a = 299.326 m/s\nM1 := V/a M1 = 4.929\n\nC. Compute the Stagnation Properties Upstream of the Bow Shock\nT1 := T_atm(H) T1 = 222.986K\nTo1 := T1·(1 + (γ-1)/2·M1^2) To1 = 1.306 x 10^3 K\np1 := p_atm(H) p1 = 0.261·atm\npo1 := p1·(1 + (γ-1)/2·M1^2)^(γ/(γ-1)) po1 = 126.94·atm\n\n33\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nD. Compute the Properties on the Downstream Side of the Bow Shock at the Nose\n\n1. The following functions describe the change in properties across a normal shock.\n\nM2(M1) := sqrt((1 + (γ-1)/2·M1^2)/(γ·M1^2 - (γ-1)/2))\nρratio(M1) := ((γ+1)·M1^2)/(2 + (γ-1)·M1^2)\npratio(M1) := 1 + 2·γ/(γ+1)·(M1^2 - 1)\nuratio(M1) := 1/ρratio(M1)\nTratio(M1) := [1 + 2·γ/(γ+1)·(M1^2 - 1)]·[(2 + (γ-1)·M1^2)/((γ+1)·M1^2)]\n\na. Stagnation temperature and pressure ratios.\nTo.ratio(M1) := 1.0\npo.ratio(M1) := pratio(M1)·[(1 + (γ-1)/2·(M2(M1))^2)^(γ/(γ-1))] / (1 + (γ-1)/2·M1^2)^(γ/(γ-1))\n\n2. Compute the properties across a normal shock for this problem.\nM2 := M2(M1) M2 = 0.416\nT2 := T1·Tratio(M1) T2 = 1.263 x 10^3 K\np2 := p1·pratio(M1) p2 = 7.447 x 10^5 Pa\npo2 := po1·pratio(M1) po2 = 3.624 x 10^8 Pa\n\n34\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTo2 := To1·Tratio(M1) To2 = 7.396 x 10^3 K\nβ := asin(1/M1) = 11.707·deg This is the Mach angle for a blunt-nosed object.\n\nE. Compute the Peak Wavelength of Emitted Infrared Energy\n\n1. Using Wien's Displacement Law, compute the peak wavelength of emitted radiation.\nb := 2.8977685·10^-3 ·m·K\nλmax := b/T2\nλmax = 2.295 x 10^3 ·nm\nλmax = 2.295·micron\nλmax = 2.295 x 10^-6 m\n\n2. Using Planck's Law, compute the distribution of emitted energy with wavelength.\nu(λ,T) := (8·π·h·c)/λ^5 · (1./(e^(h·c/(λ·k·T)) - 1))\nSpectral Energy Density for a Black Body Radiator in energy per unit volume per unit wavelength.\n\n35\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n600 540 480 420 360 300 240 180 120 60 0\nu(λ,T2)\n2x10^-6 4x10^-6 6x10^-6 8x10^-6 1x10^-5\nλ\n\n36\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nII. Definition of Units\n\nMPH ≡ mile/hr\n\nh ≡ 6.62606896·10^−34·J·s Planck's Constant.\n\nk ≡ 1.3806504·10^−23 J/K Boltzmann Constant.\n\nc ≡ 2.99792458·10^8 m/s Speed of light in a vacuum.\n\nIII. Properties of Atmospheric Air\n\nA. Fundamental properties.\n\nγ ≡ 1.4 Ratio of specific heats for air.\n\nR_air ≡ 287· J/(kg·K) Gas constant for air.\n\nB. U.S. Standard Atmosphere\n\n1. The raw data is included in the matrix \"data.\"\n\n2. Functions will be developed from a cubic spline interpolation of the data\n\ndata ≡ csort(data,0)\nheight ≡ (10^3 data)^<0> ·m\npressure ≡ (10^3 data)^<1> ·Pa\ntemperature ≡ data^<2> ·K\ndensity ≡ data^<3> · kg/m^3\npressure_fit ≡ cspline(height, pressure)\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n37"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndata =\n0.000 101.32 288 1.226\n0.305 97.72 286 1.191\n0.610 94.21 284 1.156\n0.914 90.81 282 1.122\n1.219 87.51 280.1 1.089\n1.524 84.31 278.1 1.056\n1.829 81.2 276.1 1.025\n2.134 78.18 274.1 0.994\n2.438 75.26 272.2 0.963\n2.743 72.43 270.2 0.934\n3.048 69.68 268.2 0.905\n3.353 67.02 266.2 0.877\n3.658 64.44 264.2 0.850\n3.962 61.94 262.2 0.823\n4.267 59.52 260.3 0.797\n4.572 57.18 258.3 0.771\n4.877 54.92 256.3 0.747\n5.182 52.72 254.3 0.722\n5.486 50.6 252.3 0.699\n5.791 48.45 250.4 0.674\n6.096 46.56 248.4 0.653\n6.401 44.64 246.4 0.631\n6.706 42.79 244.4 0.610\n7.010 41 242.4 0.589\n7.315 39.27 240.5 0.569\n7.620 37.6 238.5 0.549\n7.925 35.99 236.5 0.530\n8.230 34.43 234.5 0.512\n8.534 32.93 232.5 0.493\n8.839 31.48 230.5 0.476\n9.144 30.09 228.6 0.459\n9.449 28.74 226.6 0.442\n9.754 27.45 224.6 0.426\n10.058 26.2 222.6 0.410\n10.363 25 220.6 0.395\n10.668 23.84 218.7 0.380\n10.973 22.73 216.7 0.365\n11.278 21.66 216.5 0.349\n11.582 20.65 216.5 0.332\n11.887 19.68 216.5 0.317\n12.192 18.75 216.5 0.302\n12.497 17.87 216.5 0.288\n12.802 17.04 216.5 0.274\n13.106 16.24 216.5 0.261\n13.411 15.47 216.5 0.249\n13.716 14.75 216.5 0.237\n14.021 14.06 216.5 0.226\n14.326 13.4 216.5 0.216\n14.630 12.77 216.5 0.206\n14.935 12.17 216.5 0.196\n15.240 11.6 216.5 0.187\n16.180 10 216.3 0.161\n18.442 7 216.3 0.113\n20.576 5 217.2 0.080\n23.849 3 220.3 0.047\n26.481 2 223.1 0.031\n31.055 1 227.6 0.015\n100 0 0 0\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n38"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ntemperature_fit ≡ cspline(height, temperature)\n\ndensity_fit ≡ cspline(height, density)\n\n3. These functions provide atmospheric pressure, temperature, and density for the U.S. Standard Atmosphere from 0 to 100 km in height.\n\np_atm(h) ≡ interp(pressure_fit, height, pressure, h) Pressure (Pa).\n\nT_atm(h) ≡ interp(temperature_fit, height, temperature, h) Temperature (K).\n\nρ_atm(h) ≡ interp(density_fit, height, density, h) Density (kg/m^3).\n\np_atm(height) plot: vertical axis 0 to 1×10^5, horizontal axis height 0 to 1×10^5.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n39"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nT_atm(height) plot: vertical axis 0 to 300, horizontal axis height 0 to 1×10^5.\n\nρ_atm(height) plot: vertical axis 0 to 1, horizontal axis height 0 to 1×10^5.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n40"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n1 Dyrud, L. P., et al, \"Meteor velocity determination with plasma physics,\" Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 4, pp. 817-824, 2004.\n\n2 Anderson, John D., Modern Compressible Flow, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, 2003.\n\n3 Anderson, John D., Fundamentals of Aerodynamics, 5th ed., McGraw-Hill, 2007.\n\n4 White, Frank M., Fluid Mechanics, 7th ed., McGraw-Hill, 2003.\n\n5 White, Frank M., Fluid Mechanics, 7th ed., McGraw-Hill, 2003.\n\n6 Carter, R. T., et al, \"Estimating the Drag Coefficients of Meteorites for All Mach Number Regimes,\" 40th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, pp. 2059-2060, 2009.\n\n7 Macrossan, M. N., \"Scaling parameters for hypersonic flow: correlation of sphere drag data,\" Center for Hypersonics, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.\n\n8 Brown, Louis, A RADAR History of World War II, Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol, England, 1999 (ISBN 0-7503-0659-9).\n\n9 Luck, David G., Frequency Modulated RADAR, RCA Labs, McGraw-Hill, 1949.\n\n10 Headrick, J.M., et al, \"A MADRE ICBM Detection: Some Trajectory Parameter Determinations when Employing Ionospheric Refraction,\" Naval Research Laboratory Report, AD596673, December 1, 1961.\n\n11 \"Technical Verification Systems, Detection of Reentry Vehicles,\" Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 41, No 1, p. 39, January, 1985.\n\n12 West, Adrian, \"Detecting Meteors using Radio,\" http://newburyas.wordpress.com/2009/12/12/detecting-meteors-using-radio/, 7/15/2010.\n\n13 Barricklow, Sam, \"Aurigid Meteor Shower Radio Echoes, September 1, 2007,\" http://www.k5kj.net/Aurigid_2007.htm, 7/15/2010.\n\n14 Gamble, Jim, http://elpallskycamera.us, 2010.\n\n15 P. Spurný, J. Oberst, D. Heinlein (2003). \"Photographic observations of Neuschwanstein, a second meteorite from the orbit of the Pribram chondrite\". Nature 423 (6936): 151-153.\n\n16 Oberst, J.; Molau, S.; Heinlein, D.; Gritzner, C.; Schindler, M.; Spurny, P.; Ceplecha, Z.; Rendtel, J.; Betlem, H.. \"The \"European Fireball Network\": Current status and future prospects\". Meteoritics & Planetary Science 33 (1): 49, 1998.\n\n17 http://www.rcktmom.com/njlworks/MeteorTrackingPpr.html\n\n18 Beatty, Kelly, \"Meteorites Found from Asteroid 2008 TC3, http://www.skyandtelescope.com/community/skyblog/newsblog/41873107.html, retrieved 7/10/2010.\n\n19 Bird, R. B., Steward, W., Lightfoot, E., Transport Phenomenon, John Wiley & Sons, p. 432, 1960.\n\n20 Kidd, J., and Caldwell, H, USAF, \"Defense Support Programs to Support a Changing World,\" AIAA Space Programs and Technologies Conference, Huntsville, AL, March 24, 1992.\n\n21 Bayne, Walter J., Air Warfare: An International Encyclopedia,Volume 1, ABC-CLIO, Inc., Santa Barbara, CA, pp. 169 - 172, 2002.\n\n22 \"Lucid Dimensions Spherical Detection Systems (SDS) 3D Passive Infrared (IR)\", http://www.defensereview.com/lucid-dimensions-spherical-detection-sds-3d-passive-system, downloaded 7/14/2010.\n\n23 \"Australian laser system to track space junk,\" http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100720/sc_afp/technologyaustraliasciencespacelaser_2010, 7/20/2010.\n\n41\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f605bc6b10cb1e14","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n24 Roberto, Rubio, \"LIDAR Detection of Subvisible Reentry Vehicle Erosive Atmospheric Material,\" Army Electronics Command, Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, DTIC Number ADA041085, March, 1977.\n\n25 Britt, Robert Roy, \"Listening for Nukes: A Meteor Detection Project,\" http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/nuke_meteor_010524.html, May 24, 2001.\n\n26 Bedard, A. J., \"Infrasonic and Near Infrasonic Atmospheric Sounding and Imaging,\" U.S. Department of Commerce, http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/programs/infrasound/infrasound.html, 7/15/2010.\n\n27 Cates, Joseph E., and Sturtevant, Bradford, \"Seismic detection of sonic booms, \" Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, vol. 111, no 1, part 2, pp. 614 – 628, January, 2002.\n\n28 Koutchmy, S. and Nitshelm, C., \"Optical Detection of Space Debris using a Large Achromatic Coronograph,\" Astrophysics and Space Science, vol. 143, pp. 45-49, 1988.\n\n29 Garnet, M., and Altman, A., \"Identification of Any Aircraft by Its Unique Turbulent Wake Signature,\" AIAA, Journal of Aircraft, vol. 46, no 1, pp. 263-268, 2009.\n\n30 Zeiberg, S. and Bleich, G., \"Finite-Difference Calculation of Hypersonic Wakes,\" AIAA Journal, vol 2, no 8, pp. 1396, 1964.\n\n31 Golovitchev, V. I., and Hansson, J., \"Some Trends in Improving Hypersonic Vehicles' Aerodynamics and Propulsion (Fundamentals of AJAX Project),\" XIV ISABE Conference, September 5-10, 1999, Florence Italy.\n\n32 Stepanov, M., \"Study of Thermochemical Nonequilibrium in Hypersonic Far Wakes in the Atmosphere,\" Fluid Dynamics, vol. 37, no 1, pp. 138-146, 2002.\n\n42\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"f695a83697a727dd","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302 (Rev. 5-8-10)\n-1 of 2-\n[REDACTED]/[REDACTED]\nFEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION\nDate of entry 10/[REDACTED]/2023\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] On September [REDACTED] 2023, [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] and FBI Special Agent [REDACTED] [REDACTED] interviewed [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n([REDACTED] office and [REDACTED] cell), in Building [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] thee [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]\nsupervisor sat in on the interview. After being advised of the identity of\nthe interviewing agents and the nature of the interview, [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nprovided the following information:\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] [REDACTED] had been the [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] / [REDACTED] at\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] for [REDACTED] years.\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] On [REDACTED] September [REDACTED] 2023, [REDACTED] was with [REDACTED] contractors\nworking on a special project with [REDACTED] She had restricted the air spacee\ninе[REDACTED] [REDACTED] for the upcoming tests. At 7:02 am, the contractors receivede\nthe bases' standard [REDACTED] [REDACTED] ([REDACTED] brief, got into threee\nvehicles, and began driving to the site they were going to use for testing.\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] drove the first vehicle with [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] as the front passenger. [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\ncontractors [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] [REDACTED] were in the second ande\nthird vehicles.\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] Between 7:15 and 7:30 am, [REDACTED] drove down [REDACTED] [REDACTED] to ae\ngate that restricted access to part of the [REDACTED] [REDACTED] attempted to opene\nthe gate remotely using a fob. The gate opened just a little and then closede\non three separate tries. On the fourth attempt the gate opened completelye\nand stayed open. There were no prior operational problems with thate\nparticular gate and there were no operating issues with the gate aftere\nSeptember [REDACTED]\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] As [REDACTED] was driving through the gate she looked up and saw ae\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]/[REDACTED]\nInvestigation on 09/[REDACTED]/2023 at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] United States (In Person)\nFile # [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] Date drafted 10/[REDACTED]/2023\nby [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED]\nThis document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the property of the FBI and is loaned to your agency; it and its contents are not to be distributed outside your agency."} {"doc_id":"f695a83697a727dd","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-302a (Rev. 5-8-10)\n[REDACTED]/[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED] - [REDACTED] - [REDACTED]\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] September [REDACTED] 2023 [REDACTED] [REDACTED] UAP\nContinuation of FD-302 of [REDACTED] [REDACTED] , On 09/[REDACTED]/2023 , Page 2 of 2\ncigar shaped object with an extremely bright light southwest of them\napproximately 500 to 3000 feet above the nearest tree line (agent note: the\ntree line was approximately one mile south west of [REDACTED] position). The\nobject was already there when she looked up. The object was almost hovering,\nslowly moving from east to west. The light was an intense diamond white\nlight with what appeared to be a ring around the light and was located on\nthe eastern end of the object. The light was pointing south east and looking\nat it (the light) was like looking into the sun. The object was \"metallic\nbronze in color\" and was the length of two or three Blackhawk helicopters\nlined up nose to tail. The width of the object was approximately the width\nof one and a half Blackhawks but was hard to determine due the light on the\nobject's eastern end which may have been obscuring part of the body. The\nobject was completely silent.\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] [REDACTED] was initially annoyed when she saw the object because she\nhad restricted the ranges for the tests they were going to conduct that\nmorning but then she realized the object was not an aircraft or drone.\n[REDACTED] inched her vehicle forward while she and [REDACTED] watched the\nobject. They watched the object for five to ten seconds and then the object\njust disappeared. The sky was clear with no clouds and the object did leave\nany contrails. [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] searched the sky but did not see the\nobject again. [REDACTED] did not notice any interference with her vehicle's\nengine while the object was visible. She only observed the one object and\nfelt it left when it saw them.\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] [REDACTED] drove to the test site where [REDACTED] [REDACTED] who was a passenger\nin the second vehicle said he saw the object too.\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] [REDACTED] would not have reported the object if she had seen it by\nherself. Several of her co-workers subsequently made fun of her due to her\nreport.\n([REDACTED]/[REDACTED] No photos or video of the object were taken by [REDACTED] or the\ncontractors. [REDACTED] had seen most of the aircraft and drones used by the\nUS military during her fifteen years working at [REDACTED] [REDACTED] [REDACTED] and had\nnever seen anything like the object she observed.\n[REDACTED]/[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"f69e66357ffb029c","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"12/31/99 18:19:19"} {"doc_id":"f7088a8178e7f006","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nI just got off the phone with the unit that flies 1.4(a) They said to me\nthat the two lines listed are on the UNCLASSIFIED level and that adding in\nthe AOR as INDOPACOM is also at the UNCLASSIFIED level.\n\n[REDACTED]\nPAROC Intel Data Analysis Technician\nTeam Lead\n12 AF / DET 3\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nCLASSIFICATION: SECRET//NOFORN\n\nHello,\n\nPer our conversation, can you please confirm that the 1.4(a) tearlines below\nare at the UNCLASSIFIED level? Also, could you please confirm that we can\nuse the AOR INDOPACOM.\n\nThank you,\n[REDACTED]\n\n1"} {"doc_id":"f7088a8178e7f006","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"[REDACTED]\nCLASSIFICATION: SECRET//NOFORN\n\n[REDACTED]\nCLASSIFICATION: SECRET//NOFORN\n\nHello,\n\nI wanted to clarify that these tearlines are approved at the UNCLASSIFIED\nlevel.\n\n1.4(a) on 10APR25\n//UNCLASSIFIED//\nUS AIRCRAFT OBSERVED 1X POSS UAP FOR 12 SECONDS AT 2353Z, FLYING AT UNK\nALTITUDE AND UNK SPEED, NO INTERFERENCE WAS NOTED.\n//UNCLASSIFIED//\n\n1.4(a) on 11APR25\n//UNCLASSIFIED//\nUS AIRCRAFT OBSERVED 1X POSS UAP FOR 23 SECONDS AT 0007Z, FLYING AT UNK\nALTITUDE AND UNK SPEED, NO INTERFERENCE WAS NOTED.\n//UNCLASSIFIED//\n\nThank you,\n[REDACTED]\nInformation Disclosure Analyst\nOffice of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security\n[REDACTED]\n\n2"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Form No. 1—D. of I.\n\nU. S. Department of Justice\n\n(MATERIAL MUST NOT BE REMOVED FROM OR ADDED TO THIS FILE)\n\nFEDERAL BUREAU\n\nof\n\nINVESTIGATION\n\nwhole file\n\nDO NOT DESTROY WITHOUT CONSULTING FOI/PA COORDINATOR\n\n190-87\n\nSEATTLE FILE NO. 100-18945\nREVIEWED ON 4/84\nFOR FOI/PA 190-306\n\nSee also Nos.\n\nU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 16—52991-1\n\nFile No. 100-18945\nSub. Flying Discs\n\nVol. 1"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"PASCOITES SPOT\nMYSTERY' OBJECT\n\n'Saucer' Like Giant 'Pinwheel'\n\nA brilliant and high speed object that flashed through the sky over Pasco was reported by five persons living in the Navy Homes Project.\n\nPresence of the objects aroused much speculation as result of the final admission by the Army Air Force that such objects have been sighted on radar screens and have been chased by fast jet airplanes.\n\nThe object reported over Pasco last night was described in almost identical detail by all persons who reported they had seen it. The time of the object's appearance also coincided.\n\nMrs. Fern Jorgenson, 10-B Navy Homes, said the \"saucer\" was round and seemed ringed with flashing lights, mostly green.\n\n\"It seemed to be traveling at terrific speed,\" she said. \"I blinked my eyes once after I first saw it and it appeared to have gone miles during the fraction of a second my eyes were closed.\"\nMrs. Jorgenson's husband also witnessed the strange sight.\nThree boys who were playing in a field back of the Navy Homes' registration office, also reported seeing the strange sight.\n\"It was just like a giant pinwheel,\" said Timothy Hogland, 9-B Navy Homes. \"It seemed to spin but it went so fast you hardly could follow it.\"\nRobert Greeno, 53-B Navy Homes, said:\n\"It came out of the west and streaked across the sky. It disappeared in the east.\"\nThomas Thompson, 10-D Navy Homes, had another comment. It was:\n\"It couldn't have been an airplane with running lights. I've seen too many of them. This was round and it was ringed with lights. It traveled too fast for an airplane.\"\nThe closest check possible last night disclosed that there were no scheduled flights of airplanes over this area at the time.\nAnother party also said he saw the object but refused to be named in the matter. He is an experienced flyer and said it definitely was not an airplane.\n\"I can only describe it by saying it was something out of this world. I never have seen the like of it before.\"\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n\"Columbia Basin News\" July 29, 1952 Pasco, Washington\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED JUL 30 1952 FBI - SEATTLE\n\n100-18945-35"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"More Saucer Witnesses\n\nFurther reports of \"flying saucers\" over the Kennewick-Pasco area continued to pour in last night.\n\nThomas Richardson, who operates the drive-in theater at the Richland \"Y\" reported yesterday he observed a circular or disc-like object that seemed to have lights all around its perimeter, on Monday night.\n\nA new flying saucer report was given to the Kennewick police by William J. Luedke, 1614 West Fifth, Kennewick. He said he saw an \"eerie object\" in the sky that \"appeared round at times and triangular at times.\"\n\nA whole cluster of flying saucers was reported to The News last night by five persons, four of them youths who live in the Navy Homes area.\n\nThe youngsters who reported seeing the \"saucers\" were Timothy Hogland, 14; Bobby Greno, 13; Larry Luci, 11 and Mike May, 7.\n\nE. C. Keller of 520 South Rainier also said he saw the \"tandem-saucers,\" at 10:15 last night.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nColumbia Basin News Pasco, Washington July 29, 1952\n\n18945-36\n100-18550\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED JUL 31 1952 FBI - SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, SEATTLE\n\nAugust 12, 1952\n\nLLOYD A. DUCOMMUN\n\nSEMI-MONTHLY INTELLIGENCE CONFERENCE\nDIO,13ND, OSI, RO No. 3,\nFBI - 8/7/52\n\nThe semi-monthly intelligence conference was held at the offices of Col. SPENCER RAYNOR, Commanding Officer, 20th District, Office of Special Investigations, McChord Field, Washington. The following individuals were present:\n\nOSI\nCol. Spencer Raynor\nSA Paul Blair\nMajor Robert Lee Ager\n\nDIO, 13ND\nCapt. R. S. Fahle\nCommander R. A. Kotrla\nRobert King\n\nRO No. 3\nMajor Edward V. Bosse\nCapt. McClennan\n\nCapt. Joseph M. Nowicki, 31st AAA, Ft. Lewis, Wn.\n\nFBI\nASAC Fred T. McIntyre\nSA Charles H. DeFord\nSA Lloyd A. Ducommun\n\nMATTERS DISCUSSED\n\nImpersonation case - SYLVIA MARGARET PLESKAC, was., SE File 47-2061. Col. Raynor stated that Subject in this case has been in Portland, Oregon. He said recently she had been back to the Seattle area and had called the Commanding Officer of McChord Field and claimed that an officer of the Air Force was blackmailing her. Col. Raynor said that he had called the Commanding Officer of the CID in Fort Lewis and had learned that the Subject had been in San Francisco and that the CID at Fort Lewis was checking to see if she had applied for, or received, medical aid alleging to be a dependent of a man in the military service. He said that she has been barred from McChord Base. Col. Raynor requested that\n\nLAD:eon 94-207\ncc: 47-2061\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n100-18945-37\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED AUG 14 1952 FBI - SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Semi-Monthly Intelligence Conference\nAugust 7, 1952 August 12, 1952\n\nhe be furnished with any additional information on her subsequent to the report of SA JAMES R. HEALY, dated 1-18-52. Copies of subsequent reports are being furnished to Col. Raynor by separate letter.\n\nESTIMATE OF SUBVERSIVE SITUATION BY OSI\n\nCol. Raynor stated that he had sent back to OSI Headquarters at Washington, D.C. his report prepared on the estimate of the subversive situation in this area. He said that recently when he had an inspection of his office it was suggested to him that the report be approved at Washington before it was disseminated locally.\n\nCOMIC BOOKS UNDERMINING MORALE OF ARMED FORCES\n\nThere was a discussion concerning the distribution of comic book type booklets to members of the armed services which undermined their morale. These books would emphasize the horrors of war. All of the armed forces are very much interested in these books and it has been reported that outdated copies have been distributed without charge to members of the services. Capt. FAHLE, of DIO 13ND, advised that instructions have been issued to all naval commands that servicemen were prohibited from having them. It was noted that this type of comic book has been received by the FBI Office and has been forwarded to the New York Office, the office of origin of the publishing company. Apparently they have not come within the sedition statute.\n\nREPORTING AND EXCHANGING OF INFORMATION CONCERNING FLYING SAUCERS\n\nExtended discussion was had concerning the reporting of information concerning flying saucers and the following understandings were reached.\n\n1. Flying saucer reports received by the FBI from the USCG would be disseminated to (a) Regional Office No. 3, 115th CIC; (b) Security Office, AEC (this request for dissemination to the AEC was received from Mr. McHale at the last AEC conference). Both the DIO 13ND and OSI stated that the information concerning flying saucers would be received by them from the Coast Guard and therefore it would not be necessary to report to them directly unless some additional information was received from other sources.\n\n-2-"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Semi-Monthly Intelligence Conference\nAugust 7, 1952\n\n2. Any report of a flying saucer or similar matter received from a complainant by the FBI would be disseminated to all intelligence agencies if the report was an immediate one, that is the sighting had just been received and it appeared to be a matter that the other agencies would not know about. It was agreed, however, that if it was a sighting that had occurred some time before, that all that was necessary was for a letter to be written to the OSI for their referral to Air Force Intelligence.\n\nPARACHUTE LANDINGS\n\nThere was a general discussion concerning parachute landings and it appeared to be the concensus of those present that the most important thing to determine on a parachute landing was if it came from an unidentified plane. This can only be determined through a check with Air Force Intelligence through OSI. It was suggested, therefore, that OSI maintain a liaison with Air Force Intelligence at McChord Field, who received reports of incidents such as unidentified planes, parachutes, etc. from the Civil Air Patrol, Civilian Defense Air Watchers, etc., so that if a parachute report was received from Air Force Intelligence as coming from an identified plane that the information could be immediately disseminated to all intelligence agencies. There was some discussion about the recent incident of a parachute landing which occurred in the vicinity of Walla Walla, Washington, where there was approximately a ten-hour delay before the information was received from OSI, McChord.\n\nAs concerns submarine sightings, it appeared that all agencies desired to be notified immediately of sightings of submarines that were not identified as friendly. It also appeared that Major Bosse, Regional Office No. 3, was most anxious to receive any kind of report, whether it be flashing lights, flying discs, etc. immediately for referral to his headquarters.\n\n-3-"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(C) FLYING DISCS -- Reference is made to Bureau Bulletin #57, Paragraph D, dated October 1, 1947, and SAC Letter #38, dated March 25, 1949, in the captioned matter.\n\nIt is noted that some Bureau field offices are not furnishing to OSI locally complaints regarding flying discs, pursuant to existing Bureau instructions.\n\nUpon receipt of information by your office relating to the sighting of a flying disc, you should endeavor to determine from the complainant details of the type referred to in the Air Force memorandum, which was furnished to your office as an enclosure to SAC Letter #38. The information should then be promptly furnished to OSI locally by your office. As you are aware, the investigation of so-called flying discs is the responsibility of the Department of the Air Force.\n\nSAC Letter #83\n8/29/52\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nMemo\n\n100-18945-38\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED 1952 FBI"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"'FLYING SAUCER' SEEN OVER CITY\n\nA \"flying saucer\" that hung motionless for nearly five minutes, then streaked away, was observed Sunday over South Seattle by several persons.\n\nArthur Owley, 4430-49th Ave. S., who was a major in an anti-aircraft artillery unit during World War II, said the object appeared to have four sources of light. Owley and two friends observed it through binoculars.\n\nOwley said the saucer moved extremely fast after hovering for a while and it disappeared in a matter of seconds.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nSEATTLE POST INTELLIGENCER PAGE 3 COL. 6\n\nOCT 8 1952\n\n100-18945-39\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED OCT 8 1952 FBI - SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Federal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\n\nFD-71 (7-30-45)\n\nCOMPLAINT FORM\n\nUNKNOWN OBJECT - POSSIBLE FLYING SAUCER.\nSubject's Name and Aliases\n\nMRS. NELVAR SPURGEON\nName of Complainant\n\nUPPER STRATOSPHERE OF THE UNIVERSE.\nAddress of Subject\n\nDOUGLAS HOTEL\nAddress of Complainant\n\nPOSSIBLE FLYING SAUCER.\nCharacter of Case\n\nTelephone Number of Complainant 10:35P.M. 10-23-52\nDate and Time Complaint Received\n\nDESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT: Object resembled a falling star, with one exception; as object was falling, it seemed to suddenly change course. Object was a round difused light.\n\nFACTS OF COMPLAINT: Complainant stated that she first observed the object around 10:30P.M. this date. At the time she was standing in front of the above named hotel and observed the object moving from overhead to an easterly position.\n\nThis is all the information that the complainant could offer. She stated that she would immediately call the Bureau in the event she could furnish any more information.\n\nThe above is submitted for record purposes and what ever action you deem necessary.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED BY AGENT:\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n100-18945-40\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED Special Agent FILED OCT 24 1952 FBI - SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, SEATTLE (65-new)\nDATE: 2-13-53\nFROM : SA W. MARK FELT\nSUBJECT: SIGHTING OF UNUSUAL OBJECTS\n\nAt 10:30 A.M., 2/10/53 Miss DELMA J. SEGRAM, Seattle Civil Defense, telephonically contacted the office to advise that a Mrs. WISKERKEN (first name not obtained), 7355 - 33rd N. E., informed by telephone at 10:10 A.M. the same date that she, Mrs. WISKERKEN, had observed a very large object \"quite high\" directly above and somewhat West of Sand Point Naval Air Station. Mrs. WISKERKEN described the object as very like a large parachute and stated that it was \"so silver\" that she could hardly look at it. After approximately two minutes the object appeared to fade away to the North.\n\nThe above information was furnished to Colonel SPENCER RAYNOR, OSI; to SA SULLIVAN of IFO #3, and to Lt. Commander ROBERT KING, DIO, 13th ND, at 10:45 and 10:50 A.M. respectively.\n\nOn 2/12/53 Mr. BRANDES, IFO #3 furnished SA DUCOMMUN the following information:\n\nBRANDES stated that other Intelligence Agencies had been notified. According to BRANDES, Mrs. KATHLEEN CARTER, 4499 Union Bridge Lane, Seattle, an employee of the Signal Division, Seattle Port of Embarkation, informed IFO #3 at 1627 hours on 2/10 last that at approximately 1508 hours on 2/9/53 while passing over the University Bridge in a bus she observed a bright object in the sky high over Sand Point Naval Air Station, but a little to the south. She said the sky was fairly clear at the time and it was the extreme brightness of the object which called her attention to it. She could furnish no description and no information as to the speed of the object. No one else on the bus observed the object.\n\nWMF:EP\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n100-18945-44\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED FEB 27 1953 FBI - SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COPY\n\n1405 Haupt Ave.\nRichland, Washington\n\n16 July 1953\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nBuilding 762\nHandford Works\nRichland, Washington\n\nGentlemen:\n\nOn the afternoon of July 15th, 1953, I had taken off the afternoon to entertain guests from Portland and was engaged in small talk about the various target shooting equipment I have accumulated. My guest and I spotted an object in the sky which appeared to be a large kite. We turned my 30 power Bausch and Lomb observation telescope on the object and it turned out to be a large sheet of brown paper at about 10,000 feet elevation. Having been impressed with the tremendous resolving power of the instrument we scanned the skies with our naked eye for other objects such as birds at high altitude. Our reward for this observation was most remarkable.\n\nAt about 14:30 hours we sighted a bright shimmering speck at very extreme altitude, perhaps 30,000 feet perhaps much lower. This speck hovered at a north azimuth to Richland of about 80 degrees. I tried to pick up the object in the telescope and while trying to locate it in the very small field, about 15 minutes angle, my friend located another similar speck a short distance away. At this time we were convinced that they were birds, but had not yet sighted one in the glass because of the small field. Suddenly one of the specks ceased hovering and darted off to the west and disappeared. Still not giving this much thought I continued to search for the original object. After about three minutes searching I was able to bring it under observation and held it continuously for a period of two minutes until 14:44 hours.\n\nAt first I thought I had found a large bird, but closer examination proved to be an unusual object. The first glances gave an impression of a heliocopter with the rotor stationary, but I was soon convinced I had never seen anything like this before. No heliocopter has wings too, nor hovers with a stationary rotor. I shouted to my guests and all four held the bright speck under observation until it eventually disappeared. As I examined the object in the glass very carefully it seemed as though the white parts were surface features [REDACTED] transparent"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"disc-like body. I cannot be sure as the object only covered about one fortieth of the diameter of the field, which would make it about 20 seconds of arc; it was either very small or very high. At no time did any part appear to rotate, but the heliocopter like arms, four in number, appeared to be surrounded by a thin vaporous ring about witish blue in color. The attached sketch, showing the object as it appeared from the bottom will give you my last impression. Just as I had become convinced this was a radar target balloon made of transparent plastic, the object began to move. It moved at incredible speed toward the east disappearing on the eastern horizon in about 10 seconds. The latter motion could only be observed with the naked eye due to the tremendous speed.\n\nI spend about 4 hours a week looking through this glass while target shooting and am confident that I observed a factual object of very unusual nature. As you will find upon examination I am a design supervisor in charge of the CA 512 R design encompassing some rather important aspects of the present expansion program, being designed by the Engineering Department of the General Electric Company. I deal strictly in facts, and hope you will treat this report factually. I am willing to enlarge upon this matter if called on to do so; no short discription being adequate.\n\nSincerely yours,\n\nROBERT T. JASKE /s/"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"AS APPEARING IN GLASS\n\nGLIMMERING PURE WHITE\n\nINDISTINCT RING\n\n15 MIN FIELD\n\nThis B&L glass will pick out the rungs on the ladders of the 200E area from the top of Badger Mountain. I guess a distance of 15 or 20 miles."} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC ( 100-18945 )\n\nDATE: 8-3-53\n\nFROM : SA D. J. KRAUTER\n\nSUBJECT: UNUSUAL OBJECT SIGHTED IN SKY OVER HOO, AEC.\n\nThe attached letter is self-explanatory.\n\nImmediately on receipt of the letter, the matter was taken up with the Security Division of AEC, inasmuch as the object was sighted in area over the AEC reservation space.\n\nO. R. SIMPSON, Asst. Chief, checkdd with the 5th AAA group onascertaining that their airport records indicating tracking over the reservation on July 15. The AAA group reported that they had released a meteorological balloon, equipped with radio and other meteoroological equipment at 2:05 PM on July 15th. The radar had tracked it at 25,000 feet, losing it at that height going in the same area as that described by the complainant.\n\nEven though the object was over the AEC reservation and the AEC and 5th Group Radar believe they have explained it, it is felt desirable to refer the report to the attention of the Air Force as they may wish to discuss it with the two other interested services.\n\n[REDACTED]\n\n100-18945-43\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED AUG 4 1953 FBI - SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"100-18945\n\n1015 Second Avenue\nSeattle 4, Washington\nAugust 10, 1953\n\nColonel Spencer Raynor\nCommanding Officer\n20th District\nOffice of Special Investigations\nMcChord Air Force Base, Washington\n\nDear Sir:\n\nI am enclosing for your information and any action you deem appropriate a letter dated July 16, 1953, received from Robert T. Jaske, 1405 Haupt Avenue, Richland, Washington, concerning an unusual object he sighted in the sky over Richland, Washington, on July 15, 1953.\n\nImmediately upon receipt of this letter the matter was taken up with the Security Division of the Atomic Energy Commission at Richland, Washington, inasmuch as the object was sighted in an area over the AEC reservation space.\n\nMr. O. R. Simpson, Assistant Chief, Security Division, AEC, checked with the Fifth AAA Group and determined that they had released a meteorological balloon equipped with radio and other meteorological equipment at 2:05 p.m. on July 15, 1953. The Fifth AAA Group radar had tracked it at 25,000 feet and then lost it at that height going in the same area as described by Mr. Jaske.\n\nNo further inquiry will be made by this office.\n\nSincerely,\n\nR. D. AUERBACH\nSpecial Agent in Charge\n\nENCLOSURE\nLAD:hz\n100-18945\n\n100-18945-44"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SAC, SEATTLE (100-19550)\t\t\t\t\t8/4/53\n\nSA DOUGLAS J. KRAUTER\n\nUNUSUAL OBJECT IN AIR\nHOO, AEC\n8/2/53\n\nATTENTION: SA DUCOMMUN\n\nOn this date Mr. ALLEN EDDY, in charge of CIC Resident Agency, Richland, Washington, contacted the writer and requested that he meet with Mr. EDDY at the office of Mr. J. F. McHALE of the AEC Security Division. The reason was to relate a report which he had received concerning some unusual objects seen over the Hanford Reservation area at 9:20 p.m. on August 2, 1953.\n\nMr. EDDY advised that he had been contacted by Mr. A. I. MOORE, 2433 Clearwater Avenue, Kennewick, Washington. The objects were also seen by Mrs. MARY ELEANOR HODSON, 2504 Clearwater, Kennewick, who is employed as a nurse at Kadlec Hospital, Richland.\n\nMr. EDDY advised that they had related to him that on the evening of August 2 while finishing an outdoor supper in Mr. MOORE's yard in Kennewick, they had noticed two reddish-orange balls of fire going at a speed estimated by Mr. MOORE as very fast and actually stated by him to be about three times as fast as a B-47 flies. He stated that these objects were traveling south by west, almost due west, were very brilliant, and disappeared when dropping over the horizon over Rattlesnake Mountain which borders the southwest edge of the Hanford Reservation.\n\nMr. EDDY advised that Mr. MOORE appeared to be a very substantial individual who was very sincere in this story.\n\nAt the meeting, Mr. McHALE contacted his airport and ascertained that there had been no reports of any radar testing or any planes over the area at the particular time involved. Mr. McHALE himself landed in the AEC plane at 9:15 p.m. and stated that neither he nor the two pilots had noticed anything unusual while they were coming in for the landing.\nIt was Mr. McHALE's feeling that very possibly the objects seen were some slight fog banks which he had noticed forming, showing up in the Pasco airport beacon.\n\nMr. EDDY advised that he would like for the Bureau to pass the information on to the Air Force immediately\n\nDJK;hz\ncc Flying Saucer file\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nAUG4 1953 FBI SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SE 100-19550\t\t\t\t\t8/4/53\n\nIt is suggested that the information be passed on immediately to the Air Force who will probably want to discuss it with Mr. McHALE and Mr. EDDY's office.\n\n- 2 -"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1015 Second Avenue\nSeattle 4, Washington\nAugust 5, 1953\n\nMr. Robert T. Jaske\n1405 Haupt Avenue\nRichland, Washington\n\nDear Sir:\n\nThis will acknowledge your recent letter concerning the unusual object signted by you in the vicinity of Richland, Washington. On the day the letter was received the matter was referred to the Security Division of the Atomic Energy Commission since it appeared that such information would be of primary interest to that organization and to the Army and Air Force.\n\nYou may be assured that your report will be treated factually. In the event any of the interested services desire to contact you further, they will probably do so directly.\n\nI appreciate your interest in referring this to our attention, and hope that anything else which comes to your attention which you think might be of interest to this office will be referred to us.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nR. D. AUERBACH\nSpecial Agent in Charge\n\n100-18945\nDJK:lgn\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-71 (7-30-45)\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\n\nCOMPLAINT FORM\n\nIN REPLY, PLEASE REFER TO\nFILE NO.\n\nFYYING SAUCER\nSubject's Name and Aliases\n\nROBERT LEE\nName of Complainant\n\n1207 SW 152nd St. Seattle\nAddress of Complainant\n\nAddress of Subject\n\nCH 6325\nTelephone Number of Complainant\n\n7-14-53 7:25 PM\nDate and Time Complaint Received\n\nCharacter of Case\n\nDESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT:\n\nFACTS OF COMPLAINT: Lee called this date advising he had just seen an object in the sky which he believed to be a Flying Saucer. He stated this object was at an altitude of about 50000 ft. and was located over the channel between Vashon Island and the Mainland. Lee described the Saucer as large, about 100 to 200 ft. across and he believed it had lights on. Lee states he and his wife had been watching the object for about 5 minutes and that his wife was still watching it while he called. Lee states he had been in the Air Force and he has never seen any thing like this before.\n\nMr. Charles Crutchfield, OSI was contacted at 7:40 PM and given the above information.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED BY AGENT:\n\nNo additional action\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nSpecial Agent"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-71 (7-30-45)\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\n\nCOMPLAINT FORM\n\nIN REPLY, PLEASE REFER TO\nFILE NO.\n\nFLYING SAUCERS\nSubject's Name and Aliases\n\nHILTON BROWN\nName of Complainant\n\n3245 47 SW\nAddress of Complainant\n\nAddress of Subject\n\nHO 0661\nTelephone Number of Complainant\n\n10:40Pm 6/9/54\nDate and Time Complaint Received\n\nCharacter of Case\n\nDESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT:\n\nFACTS OF COMPLAINT: Complainant stated he had seen two metallic objects in the sky moving westerly taking about 1½ hours to travel from above him to the horizon. He stated he could not say they were metal but they had a metallic lustre. He stated they were about 9 to 10 degrees apart and he guessed they were about 30 miles up and about 1000 feet in diameter. He stated he and his neighbors saw them and he watched them through binoculars. He stated that he saw little pips of white smoke eject from them every 15 minutes. Complainant stated this occurred about 6:30 PM last night 6/8/54 and was viewed from the rear pdf his home. He stated he watched the objects continuously for 1½hrs. until it became too dark. He stated there were jets in the sky at the time and he assumed they had seen the objects. He also stated he assumed there was a gondola type object hanging from the under side of the objects\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED BY AGENT:\n\nROUTE TO AGENT DUCOMMUN\n\nJ. FRANCIS SULLIVAN\nSpecial Agent\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\n65-3236 (handwritten: nubs)\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC\nDATE: 6-4-54\n\nFROM : SA Joseph P. Mac Farland\n8.03 AM\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\n100-18945 (handwritten)\n100-11333 (handwritten, struck through)\n\nColonel Raymer, Mc Chord Field by telephone advised that in last nigts edition of the Tacoma News Tribune an artice appears about the observatioh of three policemen of Tacoma of flying saucers. The article stated that Oliver Tiedeman stated to the paper that he was much impressed about the closeness of the saucers. His observation apparently was made while en route from Doty--Mc Chord Field to Chehalis. These saucers, five or six having been obs erved by other persons, travelled at a terrific speed in northerly direction.\n\nThe Colonel stated that he would have the news article typed and forwarded to this office .\n\nNo report of the incidence was made to the Air Corp and no action is going to be taken by the said Corp.\n\n[Stamp: ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE, struck through; handwritten 4/11/54 CJ]\n\n100-18945-49 (handwritten)\n[Stamp: SEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED JUN 3 1954 FBI - SEATTLE]\n\nNW 90291\nDocId:34714596 Page 21"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC\nDATE: 6/7/54\n7:40 AM\n\nFROM : Al Lau - Night Clerk\n\nSUBJECT: SIGHTING OF UNIDENTIFIED OBJECTS OVER PASCO, WASH.\n6/6/54, 11:35 PM\n\nP. V. HOWELL, Chief, Counter Intelligence, 20th OSI, advised as follows:\n\nGAIL PECK, Pasco, Wash., Phone Pasco 6054, supervisor of a local ground observer group at pasco, reported sighting two half-moon shaped objects about six times as large as a half moon. One object formed into a large fire-ball, the original color of both objects was white, and the other formed into two fireballs. Both objects were estimated to be at about 1000 feet altitude. The distance could not be estimated. The objects were both at a five degree angle from the line of sight of the observer. The location was slightly north of Pasco. The location has been pinpointed on the Aeronical planning map at grid coordinate AB 5517. They were obsefved for a period of ten minutes.\n\nThe Intelligence Officer, 25th Air Division is not going to submit a written report, however he will follow this verbal report up with a letter to this office. He has not made a report to the press and it is assumed that they received their information from local sources.\n\nAFL/\n\n[Stamp: ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE, struck through; handwritten 4/11/54 CJ]\n\nHandwritten: Try 100-18945\nHandwritten: 100-18945-50\n[Stamp: SEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED JUN 7 1954 FBI - SEATTLE]\nHandwritten: 6/7/54 Forwarded to end agencies\n\nNW 90291\nDocId:34714596 Page 22"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"THURSDAY, JUNE 3, 1954\n\nPoliceman Sees Flying Saucer\n\nThree Tacoma policemen have now seen flying saucers, so they must be \"real,\" they say.\n\nLatest to witness the mysterious phenomena is Oliver Tiedeman who said he was much impressed Monday night in a close view of one of the saucers while driving from Doty toward Chehalis.\n\nTiedeman said he and his passenger, Phil Raboin, Olympia organist, saw the whatsit at the same moment while in a dark wooded area.\n\n\"I stopped the car and we both jumped out to watch it,\" said Tiedeman. \"It seemed to be traveling northward at a terrific speed and then was suddenly slowed to a stop. It seemed entirely motionless for a few seconds and then sped suddenly eastward, disappearing over the foothills.\" While other reports from the Puget Sound district told of some persons seeing as many as five or six of the objects, Tiedeman said the one he saw was traveling alone.\n\nOn July 7, 1947, at 2:30 a. m., Prowl Car Officers Stan Johnson and Evan Davies were cruising on the Jackson-Alexander Road when one of the saucers stopped several minutes over The Narrows before later veering southeasterly over the city suburbs. Their accounts were also verified by several other Tacomans.\n\n[Stamp: ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE, struck through; handwritten 4/11/54]\n\nHandwritten: 100-18945-57\n[Stamp: SEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED JUN 12 1954 FBI - SEATTLE]\n\nHandwritten: Encl 1\n\nNW 90291\nDocId:34714596 Page 23"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\nPVH:ms\n\nTHE INSPECTOR GENERAL USAF\n20th DISTRICT OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS\nMcCHORD AIR FORCE BASE, McCHORD FIELD, WASHINGTON\n\n20D OSI 24-0 10 June 1954\n\nMr. R. D. Auerbach\nSpecial Agent in Charge\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n1015 Second Avenue\nSeattle 4, Washington\n\nDear Sir:\n\nRe: (Unclassified)\nReporting of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOB)\nSPECIAL INQUIRY\n\nAttached is a copy of a newspaper article reference subject, which appeared in the Tacoma News Tribune, afternoon edition, 3 June 1954.\n\nMajor EUGENE L. ZECHMEISTER, Director of Intelligence, 25th Air Division (Defense), McChord AFB, was queried on 4 June 1954 as to the information contained in this newspaper article. Major ZECHMEISTER stated that no report on this UFOB had been received by his office and that information contained in the newspaper article was not of sufficient substance to warrant investigation by the USAF.\n\nOn 4 June 1954 at 0810 hours, the information contained in the newspaper article and the information received from Major ZECHMEISTER was telephonically reported to the Duty Agent, Seattle Field Division, FBI.\n\nThe above is for your information and no investigation of this matter is contemplated by this district office.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSPENCER W. RAYNOR\nColonel, USAF\nDistrict Commander\n\n1 Incl\nNewspaper Clipping\n\ncc: Dir OSI\n\n[Stamp: ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE, struck through; handwritten 4/11/54]\n\nHandwritten: 100-68945-52\n[Stamp: FBI - SEATTLE, JUN 12 1954]\nHandwritten: 8/25/59 (initials)\n\nSMAMA—Dec 53—10M\n\nNW 90291\nDocId:34714596 Page 24"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\nPVH:ms\n\nTHE INSPECTOR GENERAL USAF\n20th DISTRICT OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS\nMcCHORD AIR FORCE BASE, McCHORD FIELD, WASHINGTON\n\n20D OSI 24-0\n\nMr. R. D. Auerbach\nSpecial Agent in Charge\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n1015 Second Avenue\nSeattle 4, Washington\n\n10 June 1954\n\nDear Sir:\n\nRe: (Unclassified)\nReporting of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOB)\nSPECIAL INQUIRY\n\nOn 7 June 1954 at 0735 hours, the following information was transmitted by Special Agent PHILIP V. HOWELL, JR., this office, to the Duty Agent, Seattle Field Division, FBI.\n\nOn 7 June 1954, Major EUGENE L. ZECHMEISTER, Director of Intelligence, 25th Air Division (Defense), McChord AFB, reported to this office that two unidentified flying objects had been sighted simultaneously by GALE PECK, Supervisor of local Ground Observer Corps Post, Pasco, Washington, telephone Pasco 6054. The objects were described as traveling together and were in the shape of half-moons, approximately six times larger than a half-moon and of a white color. The two objects formed into one large fireball and disappeared, after being observed for approximately 10 minutes. The time of the sighting was given as 2335 hours, 6 June 1954 and the geographical references were AB5517, Aeronautical Planning Chart 1 to 5,000,000. The altitude was estimated to be 1,000 feet, speed unknown, and the object was at a 5 degree angle to the horizon.\n\nMajor ZECHMEISTER stated that the report of the sighting was not considered to be of sufficient substance to warrant investigation by the USAF.\n\nOn 8 June 1954 at 2115 hours, Major COURTLAND D. SAWTELLE, Public Information Officer, 25th Air Division (Defense), advised this office that in response to inquiries by newspaper reporters with reference to this sighting, the PIO was making an official release that there had been no radar pickup of the UFOB in question. This information was telephonically transmitted to the Duty Agent, Seattle Field Division, FBI, at 2125 hours, 8 June 1954, by Special Agent HOWELL.\n\nThe above is for your information and no investigation of this matter is contemplated by this district office.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSPENCER W. RAYNOR\nColonel, USAF\nDistrict Commander\n\nSMAMA—Dec 53—10M\n\nHandwritten: 100-18945-53\n[Stamp: FBI - SEATTLE, JUN 12 1954]\nHandwritten: 8/25/59 (initials)\n\nNW 90291\nDocId:34714596 Page 25"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Saucer Again Is Reported Over Tacoma\n\nFlying saucers returned to Tacoma at midnight Monday, according to at least seven persons who reported watching an orange ball appear, then shrink and disappear.\n\nThe ball was first noticed by a Tacoma transit driver, Richard K. Hirist of 914 So. Wright St., who stopped to let off a passenger at Union as he made the 6th Ave. run into town.\n\nHis three passengers also saw the glow, so Hirist stopped at a restaurant, where he found three more believers and put in a call to McChord Air Force Base. At McChord's tower, however, they were unable to locate the phenomenon.\n\nThe seven persons then watched while the glow \"shrunk to the size of a grapefruit, then to the size of an orange, and disappeared,\" Hirist reported.\n\nHe estimated the object was about 1,000 feet in the air.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n1 Incl.\n\n100-18945-54\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED JUN 18 1954 FBI - SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\n\nPVH:ms\n\nTHE INSPECTOR GENERAL USAF\n20th DISTRICT OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS\nMcCHORD AIR FORCE BASE, McCHORD FIELD, WASHINGTON\n\n20D OSI 24-0\n\n10 June 1954\n\nMr. R. D. Auerbach\nSpecial Agent in Charge\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n1015 Second Avenue\nSeattle 4, Washington\n\nDear Sir:\n\nRe: (Unclassified)\nReporting of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOB)\nSPECIAL INQUIRY\n\nReference is made to the attached newspaper article which appeared in the afternoon edition of the Tacoma News Tribune of 8 June 1954.\n\nMajor EUGENE L. ZECHMEISTER, Director of Intelligence, 25th Air Division (Defense), McChord AFB, was queried with reference to the article and advised that no report on the UFOB had been received by the 25th Air Division (Defense). Major ZECHMEISTER further advised that the telephone number of the McChord Air Force Base Tower is restricted and cannot be obtained through the McChord Air Force Base Operators. Major ZECHMEISTER advised that the information contained in the newspaper article was not of sufficient substance to warrant investigation by the USAF.\n\nAt approximately 1930 hours, 8 June 1954, the information contained in the attached newspaper article and information obtained from Major ZECHMEISTER was telephonically reported to the Duty Agent, Seattle Field Division, FBI.\n\nThe above is for your information and no investigation of this matter is contemplated by this district office.\n\nSincerely,\n\nSPENCER W. RAYNOR\nColonel, USAF\nDistrict Commander\n\n1 Incl\nNewspaper Clipping\n\ncc: Dir OSI\n\n8/5/59 cm\n\n100-18945-55\n\nSMAMA-Dec 53-10M"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Memo\n\nTo: SAC\nFrom: SA Lt Col E. Mason\n\nFlying Saucers\nMisc.\n\nColonel Raynor, McChord AFB, telephoned at 7:30 PM 6/8/54 to advise that a report of flying saucers appearing in Tacoma News Tribune, front page, column 3.\n\nThis message is a follow-up to his earlier phone call at 5:4 discussed the date.\n\nHe stated the base towers recommended no complaints or calls relating to a \"saucer\" as alleged in the article. Mr. Richard K. Hirist, 914 S. Wright, 3 persons, 12:44 (away ) 6/8/54 print) 6/9/54 Tacoma, was allegedly reported to have sighted the phenomenon, according to the newspaper.\n\n100-18945-57\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: SAC\nDATE: June 9, 1954\n\nFROM: S.A. L.A. Ducommun\n\nSUBJECT: Flying Saucers\n\nOn At approximately 7:30 PM on 6/8/54 Colonel Raynor, OSI McChord AFB telephoned that an item in the Tacoma News Tribune indicated that a transit driver for the Tacoma bus company had seen a flying saucer on the previous night over Tacoma. Colonel Raynor said that he was checking with the Operations Office at McChord to see if it had been reported to them.\n\nI called Major Robinson R-3 and passed on Colonel Raynor's call.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n100-18945-56a\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED JUN 9 1954 FBI - SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: SAC SEATTLE\nDATE: 6/22/54\n\nFROM: SA J. FRANCIS SULLIVAN\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS; Neah Bay 6/22/54\n\n100-18945\n\nAt 11:10 PM this date Special Agent Phil Howell OSI telephonically contacted this office to report that an identified flying object was picked up by the Radar station at Neah Bay between 1930 and 1945 this date. The object was 38 to 40 miles S.W. of Neah Bay at an Altitude of 1500 to 2000 feet. Two planes were \"scrambled\" from McChord Field to intercept and picked up a \"blip\" on the radar scopes in their planes. The \"blip\" separated into two \"blips\" as they were watching. They chased the \"blips\" for 8 to 12 minutes. The \"blips\" faded from the scopes presumably due because of fast air speed. The objects flew South then turned east when they faded. None of the pilots sighted the objects visually. The pilots were being interrogated by the intelligence officer at McChord. Other Radar stations were being contacted to ascertain if any further sightings were made. The 25th Air Division is submitting a report to the Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright Patterson Field, Ohio.\n\nHOWELL stated the report was received from the Intelligence Officer of the 25th Air Division.\n\nThe above information was furnished to GEORGE DAVIS of CIC at 11:25PM this date. Attempts to furnish information to DIO 13ND. were to no avail as no duty officer was available at DIO.\n\nJFS\n\n6/23/54 advised\n\n18945-57\n\n100-18945\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED JUN 28 1954 FBI - SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\nDEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE\nHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE\nWASHINGTON\nHLW:rs\n\nTHE INSPECTOR GENERAL USAF\n20th DISTRICT OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS\nMcCHORD AIR FORCE BASE, McCHORD FIELD, WASHINGTON\n\n20D OSI 24-0\n24 June 1954\n\nMr. R. D. Auerbach\nSpecial Agent in Charge\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n1015 Second Avenue\nSeattle, Washington\n\nRe: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nDear Sir:\n\nThe following is quoted for your information from an Intelligence Summary, 25th Air Division to Air Technical Intelligence Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, concerning Unidentified Flying Objects, as reported to Special Agent SULLIVAN, your office, on 22 June 1954:\n\n\"SUMMARY\n\n\"FLYING OBJECT REPORT GROUND AND AIRBORNE RADAR SIGHTINGS OF UNKNOWN BLIPS OR TARGETS\n\nAn unknown blip or target was picked up on TIMOTHY radar control scope in Georef LE 1604, estimated 200 knot speed, estimated altitude 15 angles, originally at 0314Z and intermittently thereafter for a total of three (3) sightings by TIMOTHY within a ten (10) minute period after which time blip or target remained off. Upon first pickup, TIMOTHY relayed information to MERCURY (Direction Center) who took immediate action to vector two fighter interceptors, Pronto Blue #1 and 2, (who were on CAP, at 0400Z) off CAP to vicinity of blip or target. Pronto Blue #2 obtained an airborne radar pickup lower left portion scope, approximately twenty-eight (28) miles from blip or target which separated into two \"clear distinct\" blips at 0435Z; altitude 25,000 feet. Blue #2 attempted to close on 30 degree port heading in attempt to center blip, descending from 25,000 feet to 6,000 feet and to within estimated six (6) miles with speed increasing from .85 to .9 Mach. Blip then slid off scope from 30 degree port to 60 degree port. Blue #1 obtained an airborne radar pickup at 30 degrees at approximately 0436Z at 20,000 feet altitude. Blue #1 held pickup for approximately twenty (20) seconds, or three sweeps of AI radar after which time blips or targets slid off scope from 30 degrees port to 60 degrees port."} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n20D OSI 24-0\nRe: Unidentified Flying Objects\n24 June 1954\n\n\"Information for this report was received from Senior Controller, GCI Site, TIMOTHY; Senior Controller, Direction Center, MERCURY; Senior Controller, Division Combat Center, LAST CHANCE; the two F-86D pilots; a 25th Air Division pilot who was flying locally in T-33 and who heard all ground-air transmissions between F-86D pilots and ground stations.\n\n\"RELIABILITY\n\nA. (Pronto Blue #2) 2nd Lt Edward E. McBride, 317th Fighter Interceptor Squadron, 1124C pilot; approximately 145 hours, of which over half has been in fighter-interceptor work; approximately 270 hours in fighter aircraft; for approximate total hours of 463.\n\nB. (Pronto Blue #1) 2nd Lt Hilson L. Sewell, 317th Fighter Interceptor Squadron; approximately 29 hours in F-86D aircraft; 80 hours (approximately) in fighter aircraft; 251 hours other type aircraft; for a total of 360 hours. The F-86D pilots were interrogated singly by Major Eugene L. Zechmeister, Director of Intelligence and CWO Odin E. Sorensen, Asst Director of Intelligence, within four (4) hours of incident.\n\nC. At the time of first mode return picked up by TIMOTHY, question arose as to possibility of malfunction. The site Tech Representative was on hand and monitored scope. In his opinion, malfunction of radar was definitely ruled out.\n\nD. All weather stations, as well as Seattle AMIS; Navy; Coast Guard; 5 ADDC at Vancouver, B. C. Canada, were checked with negative results, ruling out possibility of weather balloons; boats or ships; or aircraft. One Navy P2V was found to be flying at time, but over one-hundred (100) miles from location of incident. A slight 3 degree inversion at 5,000 feet was present at 1900, but would possibly affect only a limited area.\n\nE. The F-86D pilots were queried at great length in reference to the size and general appearance of blips presented on scopes. Both pilots appeared to have a very clear and firm concept of the difference between the observed blips as opposed to seaborne blips and B-36, B-52 type blips previously encountered.\n\nF. All statements were obtained individually either in person or by telephone, ruling out possibility of subconscious innocent collusion. Superficially, all statements appear to support one another and to coincide.\"\n\n2\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"20D OSI 24-0\nRe: Unidentified Flying Objects\n24 June 1954\n\n\"EVALUATION\n\nThe blips or targets observed are tentatively evaluated as true airborne targets, similar in presentation size and general configuration (on ground-based and airborne equipment) to B-36, B-52 type aircraft with an estimated pullout speed of Mach One or better.\"\n\nAt the present time the Director of Intelligence does not expect any further information concerning this incident. In the event there are further developments, your office will be immediately advised.\n\nSPENCER W. RAYNOR\nColonel, USAF\nDistrict Commander\n\ncc: Dir OSI\n\n3\nCONFIDENTIAL"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"United States Department of Justice\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nFD-71 (7-30-45)\n\nIN REPLY, PLEASE REFER TO\nFILE No.\n\nUNIDENTIFIED AIRCRAFT\nMc Murray, Wash. AREA\n\nCOMPLAINT FORM\n\nWILLIAM FLENER\nAIR ROUTE TRAFFIC CONTROL CENTER - CIVIL AERONAUTICS ADMIN.\n\nSubject's Name and Aliases\n\nName of Complainant\nSEA-TAC AIRPORT\n\nAddress of Subject\n\nAddress of Complainant\nCHERRY-6100\n\nCharacter of Case\n\nTelephone Number of Complainant\n6/21/54; 3 PM\nDate and Time Complaint Received\n\nDESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT:\n\nFACTS OF COMPLAINT: Complainant advised that he was referring information furnished to him by a Mr. DAWSON a reliable CAA employee. Dawson resides at 8543 - 10th 119th St., Seattle, tel: MOHAWK-4069. Dawson recently visited his mother in McMurray, Wash. and received the following info. from a pilot who lives next door to Dawson's mother and whom Dawson believe reliable ... This pilot state that on several occasions an unidentified aircraft which the pilot believes to be a helicopter has appeared in the early hours of the morning and has hovered over the highway in the vicinity\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED BY AGENT: Route & Agate. DUCOMMON for info.\n\n6/21/54\n\nJ. F. FLYNN\nSpecial Agent\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nJUN 21 1954 FBI-SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"United States Department of Justice\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\n\nFD-71 (7-30-45)\n\nIN REPLY, PLEASE REFER TO\nFILE No.\n\nCOMPLAINT FORM\n\nSubject's Name and Aliases\n\nName of Complainant\n\nAddress of Subject\n\nAddress of Complainant\n\nCharacter of Case\n\nTelephone Number of Complainant\n\nDate and Time Complaint Received\n\nDESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT:\n\nFACTS OF COMPLAINT: ity of McMurray. This aircraft, according to the pilot has no running lights. Pilot believes it to be a helicopter based on the fact that when the aircraft reaches the highway area it throttle back and the sound of the engine is constant rate then advancing and retreating. The pilot believes this situation is suspicious based on his own knowledge of flying. The pilot states aircraft remains 10-20 minutes visit and then departs.... Flener (complainant) furnished the above for our information.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED BY AGENT:\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nJUN 21 1954 FBI-SEATTLE\n\nSpecial Agent"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"CONFIDENTIAL\n\n23 AUG 1954\n\nAFCSI-6D 24-185-20-15\n\nSUBJECT: (Unclassified) Unidentified Flying Objects\nSPECIAL INQUIRY\n\nTO: District Commander\n20th OSI District (IG)\nMcChord Air Force Base\nWashington\n\nnot within scope of request\n\n1. Reference is made to letter from your District, dated 8 June 1954, subject as above.\n\n2. This office interposes no objection to the dissemination of information concerning \"Unidentified Flying Objects\" to the local Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, provided that such dissemination meets with the approval of the Commander, 25th Air Division (Defense). Disposition of actual or suspected items of material relating to \"Unidentified Flying Objects\" will continue to be made in accordance with the provisions of AFR 200-2.\n\n3. Dissemination of information of this type is not made by this office to the FBI at national level, nor has Headquarters FBI expressed an interest in receiving this type of information.\n\nFOR THE DIRECTOR:\n\nGILBERT R. LEVY\nChief, Counter Intelligence Division\nDirectorate of Special Investigations\nThe Inspector General\n\nMaj. Leckmiller, 25 AD. FO informed of above on 25 Aug 54.\n\nUNITED STATES AIR FORCE THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 20th DISTRICT OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS 25 AUG 1954\n\nCONFIDENTIAL\n\n10694\n\n100-18945-60\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED SEP 2 1954 FBI - SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"FD-71 (7-30-45)\n\nFederal Bureau of Investigation\nUnited States Department of Justice\n\nIN REPLY, PLEASE REFER TO FILE NO.\n\nCOMPLAINT FORM\n\nUNKNOWN(FLYING SAUCERS)\nSubject's Name and Aliases\n\nAddress of Subject\n\nCharacter of Case\n\nE. H. WHITSON\nName of Complainant\n5739 KIRKWOOD AVE.,\nAddress of Complainant\nKE 6906\nTelephone Number of Complainant\n11-10-54 10-31 PM\nDate and Time Complaint Received\n\nDESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT:\n\nFACTS OF COMPLAINT: Complainant advised that between 10-25 and 10-30 PM on this date he saw two white very bright objects in the sky in the north east direction of his residence. He stated they resembled two stars following one another but were not blinking and were traveling at a high rate of speed. He continued they were traveling one behind the other in a southern direction(toward town). He related subsequently after observing them for approximately one minute they disappeared into a cloud and only one appeared to come out of the cloud and it subsequently disappeared. Lt. Commander HENRY J. VOGT staff duty officer Pier #91, was furnished the above information and he said he would notify OSI at Mc Chord Field. SA R. E. Nelson, CIC, R #3 was also furnished the above information.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED BY AGENT:\n\nFile in 105-0\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n100-18945-61\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED NOV 10 1954 FBI - SEATTLE\n\nEDWARD J. KAIL\nSpecial Agent\n\nNW 90291 DocId:34714596 Page 37"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: MAC\n\nFROM: SA Robert M. MacNamara\nATT: SA L. DUCOMMUN\n\nDATE: 6/27/55\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT IN SKY 8:50 PM 6/27/55\n\nRAYMOND KENT, (EL4341) Virginus Hotel, 804 Virginia telephonically contacted this office and reported that at approximately 8:50 PM this date while standing in front of the Virginus Hotel that he observed an unidentified object in the sky. It had no definite form and had a silver glow. The object was heading south parallel to the coast. It was on an elevation of 45 degrees.\n\nMr. Kent added that before calling that he contacted the Air Force at Boeing Field and they treated the matter as a joke and told him to call the FBI.\n\nRM 6-28-55 For OSI advised pw Dillman 1-3\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n100-18945-62\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED SERIALIZED FILED JUN 28 1955 FBI - SEATTLE\n\nNW 90291 DocId:34714596 Page 38"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO: SAC, SEATTLE (62-\n\nFROM: SA CLEMENT W. PARKHURST\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCER SEEN OVER KENNEWICK, Washington; Gordon Richardson, Informant\n\nDATE: 6/1/56\n\nSgt. GORDON RICHARDSON, Kennewick, Washington Police Department advised that for several years he has been very interested in flying saucers and has read everything available concerning this topic. GORDON advised that he has some information which he considers to be of utmost importance to the defense of the U.S. concerning a flying space ship which he observed over Kennewick, Washington about a year ago. RICHARDSON stated that he had never told anyone about this matter and had not discussed it with other officers of the police department because they \"never pay any attention to what he says\". GORDON prefaced his remarks by stating that he realizes his information sounds like a \"nut complaint\" but assures the writer that this is not so.\n\nRICHARDSON stated that the thing he saw has been weighing very heavily on his mind and he believes the information should be passed on to the Air Force or other interested Defense Agency.\n\nRICHARDSON stated that about a year ago he was on night shift and was in the vicinity of 1st and Washington, Kennewick at about 10 p.m. when he observed a large, shining, metal ball about 30' in diameter swoosh in from the West at rather low altitude--only 200 or 300 feet in the air or less. The ball was travelling at a high rate of speed and when it got about three blocks east of Washington Street it came to a complete stop. RICHARDSON stated that the ball had left a tail of fire until it stopped and then emitted no fire or smoke. RICHARDSON described the ball as perfectly spherical and made of shiny metal. He stated that apparently the ball had at least two different kinds of motors to propel it, because when it was standing still he could hear the \"chug chug\" of the engine sounding like a tractor engine and apparently an internal combustion engine. The ball stood still several minutes and then took off with a speed so great that it disappeared from sight in a matter of seconds. RICHARDSON stated that obviously some different type of engine was utilized in flight such as a jet engine because of the speed with which the ball left. RICHARDSON noted no fire or smoke on leaving.\n\nRICHARDSON stated that the most disturbing thing to him is that apparently the builders of the ball have mastered the pull of gravity. He stated that this fact puts this country in a poor position defensively as the ball obviously either came from Russia or some outerspace planet in which case the Russians might get hold of it first. RICHARDSON noted that the ball was flying too low for radar detection and too fast for interception by any known US device. RICHARDSON commented that the U.S. does not have this ball or they would not be producing winged aircraft, jet planes, nikes, etc. RICHARDSON stated that he theorizes that whoever built the ball is using the principle of likes attract and positives repel to defy gravity and that the ship is flying on electron beams or some other natural phenomena such as light waves. He stated he never saw the ball again and has not advised other persons other than the FBI. He also stated that he did not hear of anyone else seeing the ball but commented that due to his training he is a skilled observer.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n100-18945-63\n\nJUN 4 1956 FBI-SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1015 Second Avenue\nSeattle 4, Washington\nJune 12, 1956\n\n100-18945\n\nColonel Spencer W. Raynor, USAF\nDistrict Commander\n20th District, OSI\nMcChord Air Force Base, Washington\n\nRe: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nDear Sir:\n\nThe following information was furnished to Special Agent Clement W. Parkhurst, resident agent, Richland, Washington, on June 1, 1956:\n\nSergeant Gordon Richardson, Kennewick, Washington Police Department, advised that for several years he has been very interested in flying saucers and has read everything available concerning this topic. Gordon advised that he has some information which he considers to be of utmost importance to the defense of the United States concerning a flying space ship which he observed over Kennewick, Washington about a year ago. Richardson stated that he had never told anyone about this matter and had not discussed it with other officers of the police department because they \"never pay any attention to what he says\". Gordon prefaced his remarks by stating that he realizes his information sounds like a \"nut complaint\" but assures the writer that this is not so.\n\nRichardson stated that the thing he saw has been weighing very heavily on his mind and he believes the information should be passed on to the Air Force or other interested Defense Agency.\n\nRichardson stated that about a year ago he was on night shift and was in the vicinity of 1st and Washington, Kennewick, at about 10 PM when he observed a large, shining, metal ball about 30' in diameter swoosh in from the West at rather low altitude--only 200 or 300 feet in the air or less. The ball was traveling at a high rate of speed and when it got about three blocks east of Washington Street it came to a complete stop. Richardson stated that the ball had left a trail of fire until it stopped and then emitted no fire or smoke. Richardson described the ball as perfectly spherical and made of shiny metal. He stated that apparently the ball had at least two different kinds of motors to propel it, because when it was standing still he could hear the \"chug chug\" of the engine sounding like a tractor engine and apparently an internal combustion engine. The\n\n2 - OSI\n1 - Seattle (100-18945)\nLAD/pjf\n(3)\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n100-18945-64\n\nNW 90291 DocId:34714596 Page 40"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"ball stood still several minutes and then took off with a speed so great\nthat it disappeared from sight in a matter of seconds. Richardson stated\nthat obviously some different type of engine was utilized in flight such\nas a jet engine because of the speed with which the ball left. Richardson\nnoted no fire or smoke on leaving.\n\n Richardson stated that the most disturbing thing to him is that\napparently the builders of the ball have mastered the pull of gravity. He\nstated that this fact puts this country in a poor position defensively\nas the ball obviously either came from Russia or some outerspace planet\nin which case the Russians might get hold of it first. Richardson noted that\nthe ball was flying too low for radar detection and too fast for interception\nby any known United States device. Richardson commented that the United\nStates does not have this ball or they would not be producing winged air-\ncraft, jet planes, nikes, etc. Richardson stated that he theorizes that\nwhoever built the ball is using the principle of likes attract and positives\nrepel to defy gravity and that the ship is flying on electron beams or some\nother natural phenomena such as light waves. He stated he never saw the\nball again and has not advised other persons other than the FBI. He also\nstated that he did not hear of anyone else seeing the ball but commented that\ndue to his training he is a skilled observer.\n\n The above is for your information and no investigation is being\nmade by this office. There is no objection by this office to your investi-\ngation of this matter and your interview of Sergeant Gordon Richardson.\n\n Very truly yours,\n\n\n R. D. Auerbach\n Special Agent in Charge\n\n - 2 -"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, SEATTLE DATE: 9-29-56\n\nFROM : ROBERT E. PRINGLE\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED OBJECTS REPORTED\nNEAR CAPE DISAPPOINTMENT - 9-28-56\n\n At 4:30 PM this date the duty officer, U. S. Coast Guard\ncalled stating that he had advised this office on 9-28-56 of\nunidentified objects near Cape Disappointment. He stated that\nit had been determined that this was a \"Mark Six, Aircraft Flare.\"\nHe advised that others had been reported at Willapa, Point Granville\nand Neah Bay. He advised that all of these with the exception of\nNeah Bay had been destroyed by the demolition squad and that those\nat Neah Bay would be destroyed on Monday. He advised that a\nsearch was being made of the coast for any more of these objects\ndue to the fact that so many had been reported.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nEXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nSEARCHED INDEXED\nSERIALIZED FILED\nOCT 1 1956\nFBI-SEATTLE"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1015 Second Avenue\nSeattle, Washington\nOctober 17, 1956\n\nColonel Spencer W. Raynor, USAF\nDistrict Commander\n20th District, OSI\nMcChord Air Force Base, Washington\n\nRe: Unidentified Flying Objects\n\nDear Sir:\n\n On June 12, 1956, a letter was directed to your office\nreporting information furnished by Sgt. Gordon Richardson,\nKennewick, Washington Police Department, relative to his sighting\nof an unidentified flying object. Sgt. Richardson has contacted\nour Senior Resident Agent at Richland, Washington on a number\nof times since his original reporting of this incident and has\nstated that he is most anxious to talk to a representative of the\nAir Force concerning his observations of this unidentified flying\nobject. Sgt. Richardson stated that he had some new information\nwhich apparently is not a new observation, but some theories on\nhis previous sighting, which he desires to pass on to the\nappropriate representative of the Air Force. Sgt. Richardson\nhas been advised that his original information was turned over to\nyour office and that his subsequent contacts will also be\nfurnished to you for your information. This matter was discussed\nwith Major Russell Womack of your office on October 9, 1956 and\nhe suggested that this letter be forwarded.\n\n Sincerely yours,\n\n\n R. D. AUERBACH\n Special Agent in Charge\n\n2 Addressee\n1) Seattle (100-18945)\nLAD:EMP\n(3)\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nEXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n100-18945-66"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"COMPLAINT FORM\nFD-71\n(9-29-54)\n\nNOTE: HANDPRINT NAMES LEGIBLY; HANDWRITING SATISFACTORY FOR REMAINDER\n\nSUBJECT'S NAME AND ALIASES: SPACE SHIPS\nADDRESS OF SUBJECT:\nCHARACTER OF CASE: Miscellaneous\n\nCOMPLAINANT: ALBERT CRESSEY\nADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF COMPLAINANT: Elliot Hotel, 105 1/2 Pike St. Seattle, Washington\nDATE AND TIME COMPLAINT RECEIVED: 11-6-57 2:10 PM\n\nSUBJECT'S DESCRIPTION\nRACE:\nSEX: MALE FEMALE\nAGE:\nHEIGHT:\nWEIGHT:\nOTHER DATA:\nHAIR:\nEYES:\nBIRTH DATE:\nBIRTHPLACE:\nBUILD:\nCOMPLEXION:\nSCARS AND MARKS:\n\nFACTS OF COMPLAINT\n\n MR. ALBERT CRESSYE, telephoned that while fishing on Alaska Way, near the\nUnion Oil Company Docks yesterday, 11-5-57, he observed what appeared to be a disk\nin the air, as he looked out west over the water. He stated another unknown man\ncame up with a pair of glasses (binoculars) and stated that he thought he saw some-\nthing, but that he was partially blind. MR. CRESSEY states he tooke the glasses\nand that he saw one large object like a big disk and that he saw six other\nsmaller objects fly away from the big disk. He is positive that he saw this happen.\nHe could not furnish the name of anyone else that might have seen the same object.\nHe states he realizes that he should have called yesterday.\n\nACTION RECOMMENDED\nIndex and file\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nEXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n100-18945-67\nSEARCHED INDEXED\nSERIALIZED FILED\nNOV 6 1957\nFBI\n\nE. Brekke\nSPECIAL AGENT"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1015 Second Avenue\nSeattle 4, Washington\nNovember 15, 1957\n\nColonel Spencer W. Raynor\nDistrict Commander\n20th District\nOffice of Special Investigations\nUnited States Air Force\nMcChord Air Force Base, Washington\n\nRe: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS\nINFORMATION CONCERNING\n\nDear Sir:\n\n On November 6, 1957 a Mr. Albert Cressye telephoned\nthis office and advised that while fishing in Puget Sound\nnear Alaskan Way and near the Union Oil Company docks on\nNovember 5, 1957 he observed what appeared to be a disc in\nthe air as he looked out west over the water. He stated\nanother unknown man had a pair of binoculars and that he\nlooked through the binoculars and thought he saw one large\nobject, similar to a big disc, and six other small objects\nflying away from the big disc. He was positive that he\nsaw this happen but could not furnish the names of anyone\nelse that might have seen the same object.\n\n This is being passed on to your office for information\ntion and any disposition you may see fit. No inquiry is\nbeing made by this office.\n\n Very truly yours,\n\n\n D. S. HOSTETTER\n Special Agent in Charge\n\n1 - Addressee\n1 - Seattle (100-18945)\nLAD:jcj\n(2)\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nEXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\n100-18945-68"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Did Satellite Section Fall?\n\nTwo Hanford engineers, who saw a brilliant light fall from the sky Thursday morning have concluded that they may have seen a piece of a satellite drop.\nExplorer III was due to fall from its orbit today.\nThe men, Abe Dunning and Carl Wait, were traveling due south from White Bluffs to the 200 Area when a brilliant light came within the view of the windshield.\nThey spotted the light simultaneously. Dunning figured it was about 20 degrees above the horizon and a little east of south.\nThe object seemed to burn out before it reached the ground.\nBoth men checked their watches. It was 11:16 a.m.\n\"The brilliance of the object is what was so remarkable,\" Dunning said. Even in the bright sunlight, the object shown.\nDunning said he could make no estimate of how far distant the light was.\n\nFrom: \"Columbia Basin News\",\nPasco, Wash., 6/27/57, Page 2.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nEXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nNW 90291\nDocId:34714596 Page 46"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC\nDATE: 6/27/58\n\nFROM : HARRY W. WILSON, Jr., SA\n\nSUBJECT: POSSIBLE INFORMATION REGARDING SATELLITE\n\nOn June 27, 1958, B. K. PHILLIPS, Central Motors, Pasco, Washington, advised that two Hanford engineers, ABE DUNNING and CARL WAIT had reportedly seen a brilliant light fall from the sky Thursday morning about 11:16 a.m., at which time they [REDACTED] within the barricade of the Hanford project at Richland, Washington, and that inasmuch as Explorer III was due to fall from its [REDACTED] orbit today, they concluded that it possibly was a piece of the satellite.\n\nMr. PHILLIPS stated that two car salesmen at Central Motors Used Car lot in Pasco had told him that they had seen something similiar about the same time, while at the used car lot, and that the object appeared to fall in the Columbia River near Pasco. The used car salesmen are CLAUDE GREGORY and GEORGE HOWARD.\n\nThe above information was furnished to THOMAS E. BELL, CIC Office, Camp Hanford, Washington.\n\nHandwritten: 6-30-58 info furnished to Richland, OSI & Plumbing. K.2. 11 Ric Mumford who had rec'd info from CIC, Richland\n\n100-18945-70\n\nNW 90291\nDocId:34714596 Page 47"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1015 Second Avenue\nSeattle 4, Washington\nOctober 31, 1958\n\nMr. Alvin A. Wilcox\nSouth 2816 Monroe\nSpokane 41, Washington\n\nDear Mr. Wilcox:\n\nYour letter of October 25, 1958 enclosing a completed questionnaire that had been furnished by Aerial Phenomena Research Group, 5108 Findlay Street, Seattle, Washington, has been received.\n\nI am forwarding your letter and completed questionnaire to the Office of Special Investigations, United States Air Force, McChord Air Force Base, Washington, for their information.\n\nYour interest in making this data available is appreciated.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nD. S. HOSTETTER\nSpecial Agent In Charge\n\n1 - Addressee\n2cc: OSI, McChord AFB (Encls. 2)\n1 - Seattle\nLAD/pg\n(4)\n\n100-18945-71\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nEXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nNW 90291\nDocId:34714596 Page 48"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, SEATTLE (62-0)\nDATE: 12/3/58\n\nFROM : SA JAMES F. FLYNN\n\nSUBJECT: FLYING SAUCERS\nBERTHA HARRISON, Complainant\n\nOn 12/1/58, Mrs. BERTHA HARRISON, 2812 Moore Street, Bellingham, Washington appeared at the Bellingham R.A. and advised she had received a letter from a Veterinarian in Kansas City who was interested in newspaper reports that Mrs. [REDACTED] HARRISON had spotted a second flying saucer over Bellingham. The letter bore the return address Dr. and Mrs. RICHARD BUCHLI, DVM, 6621 El Monte Drive, Kansas City 15. Mrs. HARRISON explained that on the occasion of her first sighting of a flying saucer she had furnished details to Mr. HOOVER who had replied that he was furnishing the information to Air Force authorities in San Diego.\n\n(1)\nJFF/\n\n100-18945-72\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nEXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nNW 90291\nDocId:34714596 Page 49"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, Seattle (62-0)\nDATE: 4/20/59\n\nFROM : SA John E. Conner\n\nSUBJECT: Unidentified Flying Object;\nMarysville, Washington\n4/19/59\nMrs E.R. WITHROW\nComplainant\n\nAt Everett, Washington\n\nOn 4/20/59 Mrs E.R. Withrow, Cemetary Road, Marysville, Washington (OL-9-3915) telephonically advised that on the preceding evening she and four of her neighbors observed an unidentified flying object over the Whidbey Island area. She went on to say that she personally looked at this object for some 40 minutes with binoculars and that it was no figment of her imagination. She related that she did not want any publicity about this but that she felt it her duty to report as one of her relatives had seen such a thing down in California and the authorities had been unhappy because he was late in reporting it. Mrs Withrow was advised that her information would be made available to the United States Air Force who would contact her if necessary.\n\nOn 4/20/59 this information was furnished to Lt DeLeon Wilson, Provost Marshal at Paine AFB who advised that the Air Force is interested in such matters and would contact Mrs WITHROW and others observers in order to attempt to determine to logical explanation for such.\n\nJEC/\n\nHandwritten: advised O. Lyons, OSI 4/21/59\n\n100-18945-73\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED\nHEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED\nEXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nNW 90291\nDocId:34714596 Page 50"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, SEATTLE\n\nDATE: July 17,1959\n\nFROM : SA JAMES H. SANDUSKY\n\nunidentified flying objects\n\nSUBJECT: INFO RE STRANGE FLYING OBJECT\n\nOn instant date, MRS. RUTH LINHOFF, 9040 Mercer Way, Mercer Island, Wn., advised that on July 7, 1959 while walking on a stretch of beach in the vicinity of LA PUSH, Wn., she observed a man dressed in neat sun tans walking on the beach some distance away. This man appeared to be carrying a quantity of rope hung in loops from his arm. LINHOFF advised that she was aware of a series of brilliant flashes which she supposes emnated from the sky. Shortly after noticing the flashes, MRS Linhoff noted a parachute floating in from over the ocean and it appeared that the man on the beach had in some manner attached his rope to it. The complainant stated that just before noticing the chute she heard a swishing like blast reminiscent of the noise made by fourth of July sky rockets.\n\nThe man was described as white, male, large (over 6') strong features, about 30 yrs.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nNW 90291 DocId:34714596 Page 51"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, SEATTLE (105-0)\n\nDATE: 10/10/59\n\nFROM : SA VERNON P. COYNE\n\nSUBJECT: \"FLYING DISC\" REPORT\n\nAt 9:15 a.m., 10/10/59, Mrs. NEIL GOTSCHALL, residence address - 7525 - 28th S.W., Seattle, telephone - WE 7-6896, wife of an Administrator in the \"Bomarc Air Space\" section of Boeing Airplane Company, telephonically advised that between 4 a.m. and 4:45 a.m. she observed a very bright light toward the east from her residence and this light had a tremendous brilliance, which appeared to be about the size of a dime and the light kept moving vertically in and out of sight but did not seem to move horizontally.\n\nMrs. GOTSCHALL said she awakened her husband and asked him to look at this strange light and her husband observed it and said it was very weird and he had no explanation as to what it might be.\n\nMrs. GOTSCHALL said both she and her husband are skeptics on the matter of flying saucers but both of them are now ready to \"join the club.\" She said that she even put her coat on and went out on the patio and observed the strange light which kept disappearing and then coming back into sight and she noted when two airplanes went across the sky, this light disappeared.\n\nIt is suggested that a letter be written on this matter to OSI.\n\nVPC/map\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nNW 90291 DocId:34714596 Page 52"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1015 Second Avenue\nSeattle 4, Washington\nOctober 16, 1959\n\nCol. Paul A. Hurst, USAF\nDistrict Commander, OSI\n20th District Headquarters\nMcChord Air Force Base\nWashington\n\nRE: \"FLYING SAUCER\" REPORT\n\nDear Sir:\n\nFor your information, Mrs. Neil Gotschall, 7525 28th S.W., Seattle, telephonically advised that between 4:00 A.M. and 4:45 A.M. on October 10, 1959, she had observed a very bright light toward the East from her residence. Mrs. Gotschall said that this light, which appeared to be about the size of a dime, had a tremendous brilliance. The light reportedly was moving vertically in and out of sight, but did not seem to move horizontally.\n\nMrs. Gotschall said that she awakened her husband, who is an administrator at the Boeing Airplane Company working on the Bomarc project, and asked him to observe this weird light. She said that her husband had also observed it for a period of time and had no explanation as to what it might be.\n\nMrs. Gotschall said that both she and her husband had been complete skeptics on the \"business of flying saucers\", but that after observing this phenomenon they are now ready to\"join the club.\" She said that she even put on a coat and went out into the yard to observe the light more clearly. She said the light kept appearing and disappearing, but that she noticed that after two airplanes had crossed the sky between her and the light, the light disappeared.\n\nNo inquiry is being conducted into this matter by the FBI and the above is being provided for whatever value it may be to you.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nJ. E. MILNES\nSpecial Agent in Charge\n\n2 - Addressee\n1 - Seattle (100-18945)\nCHD:msd\n(3)\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nNW 90291 DocId:34714596 Page 53"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Air Force Asks Reports on 'Saucers'\n\nWASHINGTON, Feb. 27.—(U.P.I.) — The Air Force has sent its commands a new warning to treat sightings of unidentified flying objects (U. F. O.'s) as \"serious business\" directly related to the nation's defense, it was learned today.\n\nAn Air Force spokesman confirmed issuance of the directive after portions of it were made public by a private \"flying saucer\" research group.\n\nThe new regulations were issued by the Air Force inspector general December 24.\n\nThe regulations, updating similar ones issued in the past, outlined procedures and said that \"investigations and analysis of U. F. O.'s are directly related to the Air Force's responsibility for the defense of the United States.\"\n\nExistence of the document was revealed by the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena.\n\nThe big-name, privately-financed committee accused the Air Force of deception in publicly describing unidentified-flying-object reports as delusions and hoaxes while sending the private admonition to its commands.\n\nVice Adm. R. H. Hillenkoetter (ret.), a N.I.C.A.P. board member and former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, said in a statement that a photo-copy of the inspector general's warning had been sent to the Senate Space Committee.\n\n\"It is time for the truth to be brought out in open congressional hearing,\" Hillenkoetter said.\n\nSEATTLE TIMES FEB 28 1960 PAGE 6 COL 5\n\nCOPY SENT TO BUREAU\n\nFEB 28 1960 FBI-SEATTLE\n\n100-18945-79\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nNW 90291 DocId:34714596 Page 54"} {"doc_id":"f7702f2492444280","page":55,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"STANDARD FORM NO. 64\n\nOffice Memorandum · UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT\n\nTO : SAC, SEATTLE\n\nDATE: 8/18/60\n\nFROM : SA MERTON R. ANDERSON\n\n100-18945\n\nSUBJECT: UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECT\nSighted 8/12/60 by MURIEL BASS, Spokane,Wash.\n\nOn 8/18/60 Captain HAROLD REAUME, OSI, Fairchild AFB, Spokane, Wash. advised that his office received a telephone call from DOUGLAS BASS, the husband of MURIEL BASS, 1223 E. Celesta, Spokane, and she had informed her husband that she observed an unidentified flying object in the skies over Spokane.\n\nREAUME said he personally contacted her and determined the following information:\n\nShe was in front of her house about 2 or 2:30 P.M. on 8/12/60, and gazing up in the sky she observed a bomber and a fighter plane in the sky. She said she saw an object approach from the southeast which appeared to be traveling straight across at a very fast rate. The object had a slight orange shde, looked like a football, and was almost illuminated. She saw no trail or exhaust fumes, and heard no sound except from the planes.\n\nShe told REAUME she did not believe the object was \"going straight\", however it maneuvered slightly, and she lost it from her field of vision behind a hill. She said the light was good, the sky was clear and the sun was shining.\n\nShe told REAUME this was the second sighting for herself of an object of this type, having formerly seen another one at Longview, Washington some six years ago, which was corroborated by others.\n\nREAUME stated that he determined MURIEL BASS is 36 years of age, a housewife and nurses aid, and from observation at her residence, the home was clean, and she appeared from her conversation to be well educated. He stated MURIEL BASS is of the negro race.\n\n2 - MRA/\n(1)\n\nIt is noted that an item appeared in today's Spokesman Review of Spokane concerning unidentified flying objects, which appeared to be similar to those described by Mrs. BASS.\n\nALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED EXCEPT WHERE SHOWN OTHERWISE\n\nDO NOT DESTROY WITHOUT CONSULTING FOIPA COORDINATOR\n\n100-18945-78\n\nNW 90291 DocId:34714596 Page 55"} {"doc_id":"f99484f6950a54c8","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nMisrep undefined-7528881\n\nNarrative\n\n(S//REL) AT 0542Z, 1.4a TOOK OFF LATE FROM OKAS. AT 0551Z, 1.4a HANDED OVER FROM THE LRE. FROM 0614Z TO 2346Z, 1.4a COLLECTED SIGINT VIA AIRHANDLER VERSION 2. FROM 0927Z TO 2121Z, 1.4a SUPPORTED OP PHANTOM FLEX IVO 38SMC36 1.4a 20 1.4a ISO MAG (SEE ISR 1). AT 2121Z, 1.4a WAS CLEARED TO RTB. AT 0005Z, 1.4a HANDED BACK TO THE LRE. AT 0036Z, 1.4a LANDED AT OKAS. FMV WAS EXPLOITED BY DGS 1.\n\n(S//RELIDO) Mission Narrative\n\nAdmin\n\nCLASSIFICATION\n\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: REL TO USA, FVEY\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): MULTIPLE SOURCES\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20470521\n\nOPERATION\n\n• Operation: INHERENT RESOLVE\n• Domain: AIR\n• Operations Center: 609th\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): ACC\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): USCENTCOM\n\nMSGID\n\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): 196 ATKS\n• Submit Date:\n\nMSNID\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY"} {"doc_id":"f99484f6950a54c8","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n• Tasking Order (ATO): AP\n• Mission Type: RECONNAISSANCE\n• ATO Mission Number: 1.4a\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\n\nPoc\n\nPOC\n\n• Rank: SrA\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: Unavailable\n• Wing: 163 AW\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nQC\n\n• Rank: Ctr\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Unit: 12 AF PAROC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: Other\n\nAPPROVER\n\n• Rank: TSgt\n• Full Name: 3.5c, FOIA Exemptions (b)(3), 130b, (b)(6)\n• Unit: 609 AOC\n• Wing: Other\n• Phone Number: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Email: 3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: 609 CAOC\n\nINGEST\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY"} {"doc_id":"f99484f6950a54c8","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\n\nACEQUIP\n\nACEQUIP\n\n• Aircraft Callsign: 1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination:\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator:\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data:\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator:\n• Chaff Designator:\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges:\n• Flare Designator:\n• Num Flares:\n• Towed Decoy Name or Designator:\n• Towed Decoy Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Num Towed Decoys:\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM:\n• Num IR-Guided AAM:\n• Gun Name or Designator:\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each:\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: ANDAS4\n• Additional Avionics: AHv2\n• Data Link:\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY"} {"doc_id":"f99484f6950a54c8","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\n• Gentext:\n\nTimeline\n\nTakeoff\n\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: 1\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): 1.4a, 1.4g\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Takeoff Time DTG: 200542:00ZMAY22\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes): 2232\n• Gentext/Additional Details: (S//REL) AT 0542Z, 1.4a TOOK OFF LATE FROM OKAS DUE TO COMM ISSUES.\n• Mission Canceled:\n\nOn Station\n\n• Time On Station DTG: 200551:00ZMAY22\n• Callsign: 1.4a\n• JTAR Number:\n• Killbox (Location): 89AS\n• Mission Type: RECONNAISSANCE\n• JTAC Callsign:\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: 210005:00ZMAY22\n• Total Time On Station: 18 hours 14 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nLanding\n\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): OKAS\n• Last Land Time: 210036:00ZMAY22\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: 210046:00ZMAY22\n• Total Mission Time: 18 hours 54 minutes\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY"} {"doc_id":"f99484f6950a54c8","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nISR\n\n• Time-on Station DTG: 200927:00ZMAY22\n• Time-off Station DTG: 202121:00ZMAY22\n• Aircraft Callsign: [REDACTED]\n• Msn Type: RECON\n1.4c\n• Tasking Type: Planned\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#) 1.4a\n• BE Number (if NTISR):\n• Tasked Start Point: 38S MC 36 1.4a 20 1.4a\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR):\n• EEIs Observed:\n• Number of EEIs:\n\nGENTEXT/ISR\n\n• Gentext: (S//REL) 1.4a COORDINATED WITH MAG 136 MINUTES PRIOR TO TAKE OFF. PRE-COORDINATION WAS SATISFACTORY DUE TO THE SUPPORTED UNIT PROVIDING ADEQUATE MISSION INFORMATION. AT 0927Z, 1.4a ARRIVED ON OP 1.4a ISO MAG AND CONDUCTED FMV AND SI. AT 2121Z, 1.4a WAS CLEARED OFF STATION AND RETURNED TO BASE.\n\nISR ASSET UTILIZATION\n\n• Supported Unit: MAG\n• Supported Operation: OP 1.4a\n• Precoord Time: 136 MINUTES\n• Precoord Effectiveness: SATISFACTORY\n\nWEATHER\n\n• Weather: (U) WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR\n\nEFFECTIVENESS\n\n• Tasker:\n• Intel Gap Filled?: Yes\n• Gentext: (S//REL) 1.4a WAS EFFECTIVE.\n\nUAP\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY"} {"doc_id":"f99484f6950a54c8","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\n\nDeclassified by MG Richard A. Harrison\nUSCENTCOM Chief of Staff\nDeclassified on: 8 October 2025\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: 202043:00ZMAY22\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: UNK\n• Tail Number: UNK\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: 38S MC 85 1.4a 77 1.4a\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: 18,000FT\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: -\n• Friendly Aircraft State: -\n• Training Range (If applicable): -\n• Operational Range: -\n• UAP Physical State: -\n• Number of UAP Sighted: 1\n• UAP Signatures:\n• UAP RF Frequency: -\n• UAP RF Duration: -\n• UAP Effects on Persons:\n• Full Name:\n• Email:\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE):\n• UAP First Seen Location: 38SMC79 1.4a 70 1.4a\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured): UNK\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): (S//REL) 1.4a\n1.4a OBSERVED A UAP AT 2043Z FLY NORTH TO NORTH EAST AND FOLLOWED AS LONG AS POSSIBLE. 1.4a SCREENER COULD NOT GET A POSITIVE ID ON THE UAP.\n\n3.5c, FOIA Exemption (b)(6)\n\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY\nMDR 25-0094 thru MDR 25-0099 / JS-250710-TM8S 10/17/25 006\nApproved for Release to AARO"} {"doc_id":"fbf32757f9605168","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"fbf32757f9605168","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"fbf32757f9605168","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"fbf32757f9605168","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)"} {"doc_id":"fbf32757f9605168","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"1.4(a)\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• Description: (S//REL) AT 1258Z, 1.4(a) OBSERVED POSS UAP IVO 34SDG9041417044. BRIEF OBSERVATION PRECLUDED UAP ALTITUDE ESTIMATES. VELOCITY ESTIMATED AT 321 KNOTS. UAP INCREASED SPEED AND CHANGED DIRECTION TOWARDS THE EAST.\nPILOT: (b) (6)\n(b) (6)\n\n(b) (6)\nSECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY"} {"doc_id":"fce215a60dca44af","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(b)(1)1.4a\nMisrep 8799515\nNarrative\n(b)(1)1.4a (b)(1)1.4a, (b)(1)1.4c\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\nAdmin\nCLASSIFICATION\n• Classification: SECRET\n• Associated Caveats: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Classification Source (MS or Classification Guide ID): (b)(1)1.4a\n• Declassification Date (YYYYMMDD): 20480603\nOPERATION\n• Operation: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Domain: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Operations Center: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Major Command (MAJCOM): AFCENT\n• Combatant Command (COCOM): (b)(1)1.4a\nMSGID\n• Report Type: MISREP\n• Originator (Unit or Squadron): (b)(1)1.4a\n• Submit Date (Auto-generated):\n(b)(1)1.4a\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"fce215a60dca44af","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(b)(1)1.4a\nMSNID\n• Tasking Order (ATO): (b)(1)1.4a\n• Mission Type: (b)(1)1.4a\n• ATO Mission Number: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Country Tasked: US - UNITED STATES\n• Service Tasked: A - AIR FORCE\nPoc\nPOC\n• Rank: [REDACTED]\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: [REDACTED]\n• Wing: [REDACTED]\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]@mail.smil.mil\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: [REDACTED]\nQC\n• Rank: [REDACTED]\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: [REDACTED]\n• Wing: [REDACTED]\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED]@mail.smil.mil\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: [REDACTED]\nAPPROVER\n• Rank: [REDACTED]\n• Full Name: [REDACTED]\n• Unit: [REDACTED]\n• Wing: [REDACTED]\n• Phone Number: [REDACTED]\n• Email: [REDACTED] .smil.mil\n• Service: Air Force\n• Operations Center: [REDACTED]\n(b)(1)1.4a\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"fce215a60dca44af","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(b)(1)1.4a\nINGEST\n• Rank:\n• Full Name:\n• Unit:\n• Wing:\n• Phone Number:\n• Email:\n• Service:\n• Operations Center:\nACEQUIP\nACEQUIP\n• Aircraft Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Radar Name or Destination:\n• Radar Software Load or Mission Data:\n• Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) Name or Designator:\n• RWR Software Load or Mission Data:\n• MWS Name or Designator:\n• MWS Software Load or Mission Data:\n• IRCM Name or Designator:\n• IRCM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• ECM Name or Designator:\n• ECM Software Load or Mission Data:\n• CMD Name or Designator:\n• Chaff Designator:\n• Num Chaff or Cartridges:\n• Flare Designator:\n• Num Flares:\n• (b)(1)1.4a\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n• Type of Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Num Radar-Guided AAM:\n• Type of IR-Guided AAM:\n• Num IR-Guided AAM:\n• Gun Name or Designator:\n• Num Gun Rounds:\n• Air-to-Ground Wpn to Include Num of Each: (b)(1)1.4a\n• TGT Pod Name or Designator: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Additional Avionics: (b)(1)1.4a\n(b)(1)1.4a\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"fce215a60dca44af","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(b)(1)1.4a\n• Data Link:\n• Gentext:\nTimeline\nTakeoff\n• Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Number of Aircraft: [REDACTED]\n• Asset Type (Aircraft): (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Tail Number(s): (b)(1)1.4a\n• Takeoff Location (ICAO Code): (b)(1)1.4a\n• Takeoff Time DTG: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Mode 3 (IFF Codes):\n• Gentext/Additional Details: (SECRET//REL TO USA, FVEY) WEATHER WAS (NOT) A FACTOR\n(EXPLAIN WHY IF IT WAS)\n• Mission Canceled:\nLanding\n• Last Land Location (ICAO Code): (b)(1)1.4a\n• Last Land Time: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Last Engine Shutdown Time: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Total Mission Time: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\nISR\n• Time-on Station DTG: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Time-off Station DTG: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Aircraft Callsign: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Msn Type: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Primary Sensor: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Sensors Available: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Tasking Type: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Tasking or Request Number (JTAR#, AEM#, PRI#, or TIC#): -\n• BE Number (if NTISR): -\n• Tasked Start Point: (b)(1)1.4a\n• Activity Description: ISR\n• FMV or Image File Name (if NTISR): -\n• EEIs Observed:\n• Number of EEIs:\n(b)(1)1.4a\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"fce215a60dca44af","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(b)(1)1.4a\n• Global Campaign Plan:\n(b)(1)1.4a\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n[REDACTED]\n(b)(1)1.4a\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"fce215a60dca44af","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(b)(1)1.4a\n\n• Killbox (Location):\n• Mission Type: [REDACTED]\n• JTAC Callsign:\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n• Did not Arrive On Station:\n\nOff Station\n\n• Time Off Station DTG: [REDACTED]\n• Total Time On Station: [REDACTED]\n• Gentext/Additional Details:\n\nUAP\n\n• Initial Contact DTG: [REDACTED]\n• UAP Event Type: [REDACTED]\n• UAP Maneuverability Observations:\n• UAP Response to Observer Actions:\n• MDS Type / Asset Type: [REDACTED]\n• Tail Number: [REDACTED]\n• Friendly Aircraft Location: [REDACTED]\n• Friendly Aircraft Altitude/Depth: [REDACTED]\n• Friendly Aircraft Trajectory:\n• Observer Assessment of UAP:\n• Friendly Aircraft Speed: [REDACTED]\n• Observation Interrogation of UAP (yes/no; if yes list sensor(s) and returns)::\n• Third-party Observers and/or Reporters:\n• Friendly Aircraft State:\n• Training Range (If applicable):\n• Operational Range:\n• UAP First Seen Location: [REDACTED]\n• UAP Last Seen Location: [REDACTED]\n• UAP Altitude, Depth, Velocity, and Trajectory (indicate estimated or measured):\n• UAP Physical State: [REDACTED]\n• Number of UAP Sighted: [REDACTED]\n• UAP Propulsion Means:\n• UAP Payload:\n• UAP Under Intelligent Control (yes/no; if yes, describe):\n• UAP Signatures:\n• UAP Advanced Capabilities And/Or Materials (yes/no; if yes, describe): NO\n• UAP RF Frequency:\n• UAP RF Duration:\n• UAP Event Serial Number: -\n\n(b)(1)1.4a\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"fce215a60dca44af","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"(b)(1)1.4a\n\n• UAP Effects on Persons:\n• UAP Objects/Material Recovered (yes/no; if yes, describe):\n• UAP Effects on Equipment:\n• Full Name:\n• Rank/Grade:\n• Email:\n• Phone Number (VOSIP/STE):\n\nGENTEXT/UAP\n\n• UAP Description (e.g., size, shape, color, markings, recognizable features): 4X UAP OBSERVED FLYING IN [REDACTED] FOV. CLOUD COVERAGE OBSTRUCTED [REDACTED] FROM FOLLOWING AND GETTING A CLEAR VISUAL. (SEE ISR 1).\n• Gentext (UAP Event Description): AT APPROX 1736Z 4 UAP WERE OBSERVED BENEATH [REDACTED] 1X UAP OBSERVED AT 17:36:22, 2X UAP OBSERVED SIDE BY SIDE AT 17:36:30, AND 1X UAP OBSERVED AT 17:36:49.\n\n[REDACTED]"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense Intelligence Reference Document\n\nDefense Futures\n\n10 December 2010\n\nICOD: 10 December 2010\n\nDIA-08-1102-005\n\nQuantum Computing and Utilizing Organic Molecules in Automation Technology\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nQuantum Computing and Utilizing Organic Molecules in Automation Technology\n\nThe Defense Intelligence Reference Document provides non-substantive but authoritative reference information related to intelligence topics or methodologies.\n\nPrepared by:\n\nTechnology Warning Division (DWO-4)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 73\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2010 under the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to this document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program Manager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: JUIAF - DI/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington, DC 20340-5100.\n\n1\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nSummary ........................................................................................ 5\nIntroduction ....................................................................................... 7\nUltrafast Computing Power in Aerospace Applications ............................................ 7\nMaking Digital Circuits Faster ........................................................................ 8\nApplications of Quantum Computers ................................................................... 10\nThe Closed Box and Fault Tolerance ................................................................... 11\nScalability ........................................................................................ 12\nUniversal Logic ..................................................................................... 12\nInitialization and Measurement ....................................................................... 13\nThe Quantum Dot Approach ......................................................................... 13\nElectrostatic Quantum Dots in Graphene .............................................................. 14\nQuantum Dots in Graphene Nanoribbons .............................................................. 15\nGraphene Disc in Single-Layer Graphene ............................................................. 16\nGraphene Disc in Bilayer Graphene .................................................................. 17\nManipulation of Spin Qubits in Graphene Quantum Dots Relative to GaAs ........... 18\nSpin Relaxation and De-phasing in Graphene Quantum Dots ............................. 19\nSpin Relaxation Due to Spin-orbit Interaction ....................................................... 20\nResearch with Graphene Quantum Dots ............................................................. 21\nSummary of Additional Inorganic Technologies ...................................................... 21\nPhoton Technologies ................................................................................ 21\nIon and Atomic Trap Technologies ................................................................... 22\nNuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Technologies ..................................................... 22\nSuperconducting Technologies ...................................................................... 22\nDNA-based Designs for Molecular Computers ........................................................ 23\nDNA Background ................................................................................... 23\nError Suppression Mechanisms in DNA Self-Assembly ................................... 28\nSelf-assembly with DNA-based Microfluidic Devices ................................... 31\nDNA Origami ....................................................................................... 32\nEngineering DNA-Based Logic Gates ................................................................ 35\nLogic Operation by Deoxyribozymes ................................................................. 35\n\n2\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDeoxyribozyme-based Boolean Automata ............................................................ 39\nRobotic Bases (The DNA Robot) ..................................................................... 40\nDNA Nanomotors ................................................................................... 41\nThe Nano Walker; a Spider-like Approach ........................................................... 43\n\nDiscussion ........................................................................................ 45\n\nConclusion ........................................................................................ 46\n\nReferences ........................................................................................ 48\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Hexagonal structure of graphene.................................................................. 14\nFigure 2. Quantum dot in graphene nanoribbon.............................................................15\nFigure 3. Left; Energy diagram for quantum dot in single-layer graphene. Right; Bound state levels as function of dot radius.............................................................. 16\nFigure 4. (a) Color scale plot of the transconductance. (b) One of the vertices of the honeycomb structure at Vsd = 800 µV: Charge stability diagrams for series-coupled quantum dots.......................................................................... 16\nFigure 5. Quantum dot in bilayer graphene.................................................................17\nFigure 6. Bilayer graphene tunneling device structure. ....................................................... 18\nFigure 7. Qubit piano.......................................................................................19\nFigure 8. Long distance coupling of three graphene qubits............................................. 19\nFigure 9. A DNA nanomachine driven by repeated sequential addition of DNA control strands........................................................................................... 23\nFigure 10. Recombinant DNA molecule with restriction enzyme cleavage and sticky end ligation. ........................................................................................ 25\nFigure 11. Two symmetric DNA nanomotifs and the crystals grown using them.. ........ 26\nFigure 12. (top a-e) The XOR Cellular Automaton and Its Implementation by Tile-Based Self-Assembly.. ........................................................................................ 27\nFigure 12 (continued). (bottom a-e) AFM Images of Algorithmic Self-assembly of Sierpinski Triangle Crystals........................................................................ 28\nFigure 13. Error Suppression with the PTM Method.......................................... 30\nFigure 14. Simulation results of growth in (A) the OTM, (B) the PTM, and (C) the LTM.30\nFigure 15. Three Types of Error in DNA Tile Self-assembly (a) Growth error (b) Facet error (c) Nucleation error. Red lines indicate the mismatched sides. ......... 31\nFigure 16. Micro-fluidic device for DNA tile self-assembly.......................................... 32\nFigure 17. (A) Schematic diagram of a 16-column microfluidic DNA synthesizer (B) Close up schematic of the column array. ............................................. 33\nFigure 18. Design of DNA origami. ........................................................................ 34\nFigure 19. Several DNA origami folding paths. ............................................................. 34\nFigure 20. Functional design of a DNA based logic gate. ........................................... 37\nFigure 21. Simplistic rendering of a DNA logic gate.......................................................... 38\nFigure 22. Basic gate structures, derived from allosterically regulated deoxyribozyme E6, for playing tic-tac-toe against a human opponent. ............................... 39\nFigure 23. First Generation (MAYA I) DNA-based Logic Circuit that plays tic-tac-toe... 40\nFigure 24. A single molecule DNA-based nanomotor driven by photons...................... 42\nFigure 25. AFM Scan of walkers as they follow a track pattern places on the surface. . 43\n\n3\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 26. The Nano walker made at Columbia University is a protein molecule decorated with three legs--single-stranded DNAzymes, synthetic DNA molecules that act as enzymes and catalyze a reaction. ............................. 44\nFigure 27. Deoxyribozyme-based molecular walker and origami prescriptive landscape.\n.......................................................................................... 45\n\n4\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nQuantum Computing and Utilizing Organic Molecules in Automation Technology\n\nSummary\n\nPowerful onboard computing hardware is a desired option for future space travel. Without large data processing capability, the copious amounts of data acquired during flight from astronomical sensors as well as crew and vehicle sensors will need to be sent back to earthbound machines for processing, introducing delays measured in hours for routine calculations. Current commercial computer hardware trajectories in silicon substrate semiconductors are not likely to produce a radiation-hard or small and portable supercomputer without significant mission-specific alteration. Alternatives to traditional computing technology include computers based on entangled quantum states and molecular computing hardware based on DNA molecules.\n\nIncluded in this review is significant introduction to the necessary elements of quantum computing and a summary of the state-of-the-art technologies. Following is background on DNA and production of engineered DNA chains. Finally, DNA logic gates are presented along with a treatment of nanomachines that will repair DNA circuitry. Forecasts of technology development in the 10-20 and 40-year horizons are included along the way, as well as summary discussion and a conclusion.\n\nThe first operating quantum computers capable of solving real-world problems will commence within 10 years and be based on ion trap technology. This is entirely based on the amount of research resources dedicated to the problem and the fact that there appear to only be engineering challenges remaining. Atomic and ion traps require very substantial cryogenic and EM shielding systems and are not practical for space travel.\nPure photonic technologies available today have difficulty with both miniaturization and scalability. However, the amount of active work in the field makes a disruptive advance likely in the 10-year timeframe. Optical computers will likely be realized in the 20-year horizon; however, the very powerful promise of quantum computing will still have issues with photon loss in any solid state device. The 40-year horizon will see photon technologies play an essential but supporting role in distributed quantum computing. Realized all-optical non-quantum systems will have radiation tolerance advantages over current semiconductor technology and are likely to augment or even replace general-purpose computing devices for space travel.\n\nHybrid designs utilizing arrays of quantum dots and photon communication channels will be an option for space travel supercomputing on the 40-year timescale. These systems operate at attainable temperatures without cryonics, and require no more shielding than humans. It is likely that spintronics will be an essential ingredient.\n\nSimple organic computing based on DNA tiles will be realized in the next 20 years. On the 40-year time horizon, useful DNA-based devices will be essential space exploration tools. These could take the form of orbital-delivered wireless sensors searching planetary/asteroid features or for essential compounds such as high concentrations of water. DNA computers will also be realized on the 40-year timeline. Their advantage over solid state devices will be the ability to repair nanoscale elements damaged in normal use or by cosmic radiation.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThese will not be the fastest systems in the astro-arsenal, but self-repair may make them the most robust.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\nComputers today are not what they used to be. In the 17th century, a computer was merely a person who performs computations. In this sense, the first computers were universally programmable and were ultimately utilizing organic (DNA) hardware architecture. The modern sense of a computer as a machine that manipulates input to produce deterministic output emerged from the work of Turing in the 1930s. A Turing machine consists of four parts: tape containing cells of symbols, read head, action table, and state register. In operation, the state register is initialized, the first cell of the tape is read by the head, the table translates the symbol into an action in the state register, and the tape is advanced to read the next symbol. The read, action, advance tape loop is repeated until the program ends.(1) Any calculation a modern digital computer can perform can be accomplished using a Turing machine.a\n\nModern digital processing hardware, first used in the ENIAC in the 1950s, is based on logic gates. All functions of a computer consist of the basic logic elements AND, OR, NOT, etc. These are accomplished electronically by producing logic gates, combinations of transistors that perform the logic function on input data. A common exercise in didactic digital logic pedagogy is to design all of the basic logic gates using only NAND or NOR gates; thus, any hardware element that can execute the NAND function can build a complete computer.b Optimum designs are regularly more elegant than combining a single two-input gate, but it is sufficient as proof of principle for any architecture to be able to produce an inverter and a simple logic gate (AND/OR).\n\nThe quest for faster computing can be accomplished by making current hardware architecture faster, or by designing new hardware based on different architecture that solves the calculation in fewer steps. The current treatise concentrates on the latter, dramatically changing the architecture of modern computers to perform calculations in a different manner. Two methods are explored: that of creating logic gates, and that of creating a general Turing machine. The second of these is explored in the context of quantum computing with an emphasis on organic molecules as a core technology. Designs of logic gates utilizing DNA are covered. Background on all these areas of research is included first. Finally, DNA machines that can assemble and repair DNA technology are outlined.\n\nULTRAFAST COMPUTING POWER IN AEROSPACE APPLICATIONS\n\nThe history of manned spaceflight does not include powerful computers as integrated companions; space-borne supercomputers have so far been reserved to the world of science fiction. The main issue on space stations has been radiation hardness, while the main issue on vehicles such as the space shuttle has been safety. The amount of testing required for a microprocessor to be certified for space precludes the most current technology from becoming astro-worthy. Indeed, the most powerful general purpose computers riding in the shuttle are the laptops the astronauts bring with them.\n\na The complete history of computers up until the 1950s is a fascinating story. A good summary of this history is available in the Wikipedia entries for \"computer\" and \"Turing machine\" among other places. The model of a Turing machine presented is simplified.\nb The didactic exercise is usually followed by a laboratory exercise on breadboards and measurement of the truth table. NAND gates are popular because they are particularly simple to manufacture with current technology.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe first challenge to overcome in supercomputing in space is radiation causing temporary and permanent errors in calculation. The current approach is to make the solid state components radiation-hard, a time-consuming and costly process. An alternate approach is to use multiple commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components in parallel architecture. George's group at the University of Florida pursued this approach with earthbound success.(2, 3) A good question arises that if 50 years of space travel hasn't required one onboard supercomputer, why start now? It seems NASA asked this question as well and, after years of preparation, cancelled the space test of the technology in late 2009.\n\nRegardless of the need for current missions, one can imagine many future applications where it would be more convenient to data process on long space missions without downloading data to Earth-based system and uploading the results. This is especially true for long-duration spaceflight where communication delays could be minutes to hours (Mars ~13 minutes, Jupiter ~45 minutes, and Neptune ~4 hours). Spacecraft active in the 40-year horizon will require supercomputing technology on-board to process all of the data to be acquired during flight. This includes astronomical data as well as ship and crew data.c Example missions include Mars with a goal to analyze the planet using thousands of semi-autonomous sensors or millions of independent, wirelessly communicating nanomachines (\"magic dust\"). In such scenarios, it is not necessarily numbers that need lots of crunching, but algorithms that need to be run on powerful systems that could be non-traditional in their design; for example, massively parallel.\n\nMAKING DIGITAL CIRCUITS FASTER\n\nIn consideration of the underlying physics in the electrodynamics of transistor operation, the scale of the constituent elements dominates the type of analyses required. In the macroscopic regime, constituents are measured in microns or larger, properties are dominated by well-defined statistical averages in bulk matter, and non-classical effects due to the underlying fact that all particles involved in the interactions are really fluctuations within a relativistic quantum field can safely be ignored. For 40 years making a fast transistor was primarily accomplished by avoiding saturation between states in an arrangement known as emitter coupled logic (ECL, pronounced \"ek-el\"). The ECL family of logic circuits could achieve sub-nanosecond switching times and dominated the leading-edge of high-speed computing up until the early 1990s. The drawback of ECL was that without reaching saturation, no depletion zone existed within the individual transistors and thus current flowed through much of the device hardware instead of the usual small leakage current associated with gates in a defined state. ECL's large current flow makes cooling and power requirements challenging, especially for space-based platforms where heat dissipation is an issue.\n\nSaturation technologies, primarily MOSFET-based, surpassed the speed of high-current devices when the footprint of individual elements became small enough that a change between depletion states could be quickly stabilized, given the comparably slow drift velocities of primary charge carriers. These CMOS-family technology devices are the current state-of-the-art in integrated circuits, and device speed increases, until recently, were dominated by making the circuit elements smaller (see below). Intel produces high volume ICs with circuit elements size at 32 nm, and has demonstrated memory elements in 22 nm\n\nc The scenario of several massive data acquisition channels was presented at the Workshop for Technology Breakthroughs for Human Space Exploration, June 17th 2010, NASA Headquarters, Washington DC. Navigation is and will continue to be handled by traditional computing machines - it is only rocket science that needs to be solved for navigation purposes.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\npitch.d By comparison, atomic diameters range from around 0.1 nm to 0.5 nm, with silicon ~0.2 nm, or only a factor of 100 smaller.\n\nAs circuit elements decrease in size, the number of atoms making up the bulk materials decreases and ignoring individual quantum effects becomes problematic. This is the mesoscopic scale. At this size, quantum effects can introduce noise into the circuit as the unpredictablee nature of the underlying wave functions. Once the circuit size shrinks to only a few atoms, quantum effects will emerge from the noise domain to dominate the electrical behavior. It is thought that exploiting rather than avoiding quantum phenomena may prove useful in this regime for inorganic technologies.\n\nFollowing Moore's law, in less than 10 years inorganic circuit elements will be less than 5x5 molecules in 2-D extent. (Molecular machines built of organic components, primarily DNA, are discussed in a later section.) Shrinking traditional silicon-based general-processing technology to this microscopic scale is one motivation for developing new types of machines based on quantum phenomena, but it is not the only one. Smaller circuit elements decreased the settling time of transistors and thus gates on CPUs, allowing increasing clock speed (the CPU can execute the next instruction with shorter delay from the last instruction). CPUs today get most of their performance with parallel architecture, executing several instructions at once in different pipelines. Using smaller circuitry in general consumes less power, and this allows more parallel elements to be packed into a reasonable wattage package. The march toward smaller circuitry is continuing unabated so planning for the eventual quantum-dominant characteristics is essential.\n\nIt is common to use the analogy of the laser to elucidate the application developments possible with quantum computing. In one sense, the laser is just another hardware technology that makes light. Earlier light technologies include organic-fueled fire (~50,000 BC), incandescent bulbs (early 19th c.), and fluorescent chambers (mid-19th c.). The light source to utilize is not governed by the highness of the technology, but by requirements of the application. One can read by laser light, but older and cheaper incandescent light will provide superior perceptible illumination to a page. Traditional semiconductor-based computing is cheap and plenty powerful for controlling navigation or driving ship status displays.\n\nThe laser analogy is further revealing in that it is quantum effects producing a special kind of light that is coherent. Coherent light is single wavelength with all photons travelling in the same direction.f This coherence is a natural consequence of conservation of momentum in the absorption/emission process. (4) Coherent light is very useful for some applications that require low dispersion; for example, bouncing a beam off of a mirror on the moon, or the more pedestrian pinpoint highlight of a projected PowerPoint presentation.\n\nThe practical uses of the laser are not universally bigger or smaller, faster or slower, or more or less energy efficient than the other hardware technologies that produce light, they are just different. Similarly, when we think of what hardware and applications will arise for quantum computing, they too are not necessarily bigger, smaller, or faster than traditional methods; they are just different, and many could not be accomplished with traditional technologies. (5)\n\nd Pitch is the distance between repeat circuit elements. What is most interesting about the 22 nm technology is that it was produced with 192 nm lithography.\ne At the mesoscopic scale, individual wave functions are not prepared a priori or controlled in their propagation. Some of the noise components are correlated.\nf Laser light is actually very narrow bandwidth rather than single-valued.\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nAPPLICATIONS OF QUANTUM COMPUTERS\n\nAlthough smaller circuitry and supercomputing is a motivator, the driving application behind quantum computing is cryptography. First, there is cracking cipher codes. The vast majority of secured communications utilize a method known as public-key cryptography. In this method, the code is based on the prime number factors of a very large integer which is publically available. The private key is one of the integer factors and this allows the receiver of information to decipher the code easily. The strength of this technique is that traditional computer algorithms will take a long time to guess the correct factors of the public key, on the order of months.9 Traditional brute force methods require a number of steps that increase as an exponential function of the size of the public key. However, in 1994 Shor presented a quantum algorithm that would only require a polynomial number of steps, thus dramatically decreasing the required time to factor, assuming a quantum computer would ever be physically realized. (6) This speedup is primarily due to the nature of quantum waves; specifically, they can follow several parallel paths instead of the usual stepwise procedural execution of instructions. This acceleration by superposition concept is more easily understood in a random search of data. Consider an algorithm that has a 50% probability to locate a specific phone number in a database of N phone numbers by a random search. The procedural algorithm on average will require 0.5N inquiries to locate the correct number. A quantum algorithm on the other hand can be devised that accumulates information by examining multiple numbers with each step. Such a scheme has been shown to reduce the number of examinations required to √N . (7, 8) The superposition of states allows examination and processing of several tape cells simultaneously in a Turing-inspired machine.\n\nSecond, there is quantum communication. Once public key encryption is easily broken by the quantum computer, a new cipher needs to replace it. The canonical quantum communication experiment defines a sender, Bob, and a receiver, Alice. In most scenarios, Alice and Bob communicate over a distance using entangled particles and a traditional open line. The open line relays information about measurement settings, but is useless to an observer without access to the entangled wave function (entanglement is discussed below, and the open line information is an analogue to the public key of current ciphers). The other advantage of this setup is that almost any disturbance in the communication line between Alice and Bob would destroy entanglement and thus the information would be lost instead of intercepted. Additional archetypical participants in a communications experiment/scenario follow the English alphabet: Charlie (or Chuck if his intent is malicious), Dave, Eve, etc. Quantum communication is thus an application replacing one performed by a general purpose computing machine; the classical and quantum systems do not operate in similar fashion other than the function of securely transmitting information. Additionally, quantum communication has been suggested as a method to connect isolated quantum systems without disturbing closed box requirements like classical interventions would. (9, 10)\n\nBeyond cryptography is a third application, quantum metrology, where time and/or distance are measured to an extremely high accuracy. A fourth obvious application is simulation of quantum systems. (11, 12)\n\n9 Or hours if one has farms of supercomputers. The point is that the value of most communication is much smaller than the cost to decipher by brute force. The 128-bit web standard is a compromise between security and speed.\n\n10\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTHE CLOSED BOX AND FAULT TOLERANCE\n\nIn traditional silicon transistor circuits, once a bit is set to 1 or 0 by a gate or other device locking the output voltage, that value is expected to remain through subsequent clock cycles until deterministically changed.h Additionally, traditional circuits behave by the same rules for each clock cycle; that is, as more information is processed, repeated gate operation does not deteriorate the bit latching mechanism. This behavior is achieved by constantly providing energy to the circuits. Any interruption in this constant need for power from the outside and the integrity of the information in the computing circuit is lost.i\n\nA fundamental principle of quantum mechanics is that any external influence on a system necessarily disturbs the state of that system. This influence could be external disruption or internal leakage – either interaction will change the internal quantum state. This destructive process is known as decoherence. External influences will disturb the system and thus the circuits need to be isolated from the rest of the universe, also known as the 'closed box' requirement.\n\nTrial to trial variations in a quantum circuit produce an increasing deviation from an initial phase as the wave function evolves. This trial-to-trial deviation causes decoherence on a timescale termed T2*. Although a single trial in a quantum circuit could retain coherence longer than T2*, absent external influence the isolated internal circuit components must eventually come to thermal equilibrium through random processes: this occurs on timescale T1. Moreover, the closed box cannot be perfect since a useful device requires some kind of input and output, thus some small interaction with the external environment is necessary. Random interactions with the environment from this isolation 'leakage' will dephase internal signals on timescale T2. These three time constants that describe the internal signal decays are very similar to the same named quantities in nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). NMR is indeed a technology path under development for quantum circuits. Each technology and hardware design will be characterized in its isolation from external and internal influences by T2* (stable repeatability), T1 (resistance to entropy), and T2 (isolation from the rest of the universe).\n\nNo design can be completely free of decoherence and the next consideration is how much decoherence is acceptable, or more precisely, what is the fault tolerance threshold for successful operation? Fault tolerance isn't much of a consideration in traditional processing architecture,j although it is a major consideration in storage and communication of information. To illustrate fault tolerance, consider a scheme of hard disk storage configuration where each 8-bit byte is written across 9 disks in a stripe-set configuration (one bit per disk, read in parallel). The extra disk holds parity information about the byte. Consecutive bytes shift the location of all bits one disk so the parity information isn't all stored on the same disk.k In the event one disk fails, each byte can be reconstructed from the other 8 disks using a software algorithm that automatically starts when the disk failure is detected. The broken hardware can be replaced and the data reconstructed while the system is operating in this slower 'limp' mode. This storage system is said to be fault tolerant. The\n\nh For those new to quantum phenomena, it may seem redundant to use the phrase \"deterministically changed.\" The phrase emphasizes the point that absent any error, classical circuits are always changed by intent, while quantum circuits include the element of random occurrence.\ni Here we refer to the processing circuits themselves. Some types of memory and long term storage can of course hold information in isolation indefinitely.\nj A non-deterministic result in processing hardware causes a fatal error in current designs.\nk The bitwise stripe-set is instructive on the principle at hand, but for engineering considerations, more complex configurations are used in practice. See Wikipedia \"RAID\" for actual data distribution schemes.\n\n11\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndrive failure detection and algorithm takeover in the readout phase is the error correction scheme.\n\nIn a quantum system the error correction is accomplished in a similar manner; that is, the state of a qubit is defined across multiple subspaces of the logic space and then several measurements are performed on the subspace that do not disturb the state itself. The original state can be reconstructed by the partial measurement. As an illustrative example consider the one-qubit space defined by an electron spin-up or spin-down. First, re-define this 1-d state in an oblique three-dimensional system such that spin-up is in the (+x,+y,+z) octant, and spin down is thus in the (-x,-y,-z) octant. If one measures x as positive the original state was up; measuring x and y both positive provides additional assurance the state was actually up. Measuring x and y different allows z as a tie-breaker. In this example system, 33% error rates are allowed. Of course realizable systems are more complex and only tolerate error rates in the 3% range. This difference is mainly due to the need to disturb the system as little as possible in what is known as a quantum non-demolition measurement (a QND measurement). (13, 14) In summary, fault tolerance is possible if a QND mechanism to measure qubits can be demonstrated.\n\nSCALABILITY\n\nOnce a closed box has been constructed, the next consideration in successful quantum information processing (QIP) technology is whether circuit elements are scalable. That is, whether elements shown to perform as quantum bits can be combined into larger circuits at a reasonable cost of resources (computation time, decoherence time, physical space, or required power). The exact nature of the required engineering scale-up is specific to each technology.\n\nThe unit of QIP (quantum information processing) is the qubit.l Different from digital logic, quantum mechanics increases the information content in N qubits through superposition. That is, quantum waves can travel through several paths and contain a superposition of states, increasing the amount of information in each channel. Furthermore, any system of N qubits can have degrees of entanglement. This entanglement makes the simple example state (1,0,0) different from (1,0,0) with (x,0,0) entangled, different from (1,0,0) with (1,0,x) entangled, etc. When there are 4 qubits, entanglement can occur with 2, 3 or all 4 bits, as well as 2 with 2. The logic space quickly grows to Bunyanesque proportions and is easily outside of the realm of simulation or even representation by N or even N2 classical bits. Considering that one could start with qupits or qudits (see footnote l) it is quickly obvious that quantum computers have enormous computational potential when scalable.\n\nUNIVERSAL LOGIC\n\nThe very large number of possible states of a quantum computer spans what is known in mathematics as a Hilbert space, a generalized version of Euclidean space with arbitrary (finite or infinite) dimension (Euclidean space having 3 dimensions). The concept of a universal logic requires that this large Hilbert space be accessible with a finite set of control operations. For most designs these control operations are small in number and are the quantum analogues of digital gates performing operations on qubits.\n\nl For pedagogy, the discussion is limited to qbits; however, p and d states could also be used as a basic unit (qpits or qdits) thus greatly expanding the possible information content in a single channel.\n\n12\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTwo special schemes that operate differently than digital analogues of gate-based technology are adiabatic and cluster-state quantum computation. In an adiabatic design, the answer is the ground state of a complex network of interactions and the interactions are slowly turned on to evolve qubits from the initial state to the final ground state. In the cluster-state scheme, the system is placed in a particular state through use of a small set of control gates and the output is repeatedly measured using arbitrary basis (the fault-tolerance mechanism). In the adiabatic case, the computation is 'programmed' in the setup of interactions. In the cluster-state case, the calculation produces a superposition of states that need several measurements to ensure correct interpretation. Both schemes have been shown to be equivalent to gate-based circuit technologies. (15-17)\n\nINITIALIZATION AND MEASUREMENT\n\nImplied in the discussions above is the ability to set the quantum computer into a known initial state, measure various states during computation if needed, and output the final state. These processes can be tricky while maintaining isolation and low entropy. The initialization and measurement techniques are discussed with each technology.\n\nThe Quantum Dot Approach\n\nA major obstacle in the quest to design and construct a radically new kind of inorganic quantum computer has been finding a way to manipulate the single electrons that are likely to constitute the new machines' qubits. The ability to manipulate and alter a single electron without disturbing the trillions of electrons in the immediate surroundings has become a research focus for many studies. (18) (19)(20) A candidate is to utilize properties of the intrinsic spin of the electron. In 1925, Austrian physicist Wolfgang Pauli proposed that an electron in a quantum state can assume only one of two states-\"spin-up\" or \"spin down.\" (21) One approach to manipulate spin state and electrical charge independently for use in quantum computing has arisen in the quantum dot.\n\nQuantum dots (QDs) are tiny islands within a solid state lattice where electrons experience charging effects as well as quantum confinement, like an electron in an energy level around a nucleus. (22) Besides fundamental insights into matter, these artificial atoms can also work as building blocks for the control of electronics at the single electron level. The so called single-electron transistors are able to switch on and off electron transport through a dot by means of electrical gates using the effect of Coulomb blockade.\n\nConversely, one can use spin rather than charge to control electrical conduction in mesoscopic-scale electronics; such \"spin-controlled electronic devices,\" and their development and study, are termed spintronics. (23) Exploiting the spin degree of freedom, a quantum dot can act as a spin filter (24)(25)(26) or as a spin-blockade device. (27) Quantum dots have been proposed as host for an electron-spin qubit. Arrays of such quantum dots with tunable tunnel-couplings between them would work as a universal quantum computer. (28) Recent progress in this field using GaAs-based two-dimensional electron gases is impressive (29), though decoherence can arise from spin-orbit and hyperfine interaction with the nuclear-spin(s) of the host material (30) (31) (32). These decoherence effects can be reduced by using a lattice structure with low magnetic moment. Carbon has near zero magnetic moment due to the six each paired protons and neutrons in carbon isotope 12C; a small net magnetic moment comes from the natural 1% contamination of 13C.\n\n13\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nElectrostatic Quantum Dots in Graphene\n\nThe graphene form of carbon, a hexagonal sheet array single atom thick, is a candidate substrate for quantum dots. However, two fundamental challenges need to be overcome before graphene can be used to form and operate spin qubits. First, it is difficult to create a tunable quantum dot in graphene because of the absence of an energy gap in the band spectrum. Electrons in such low energy gap materials exhibit Klein tunneling, and complicating efforts to confine particles (33) (34) (35). Second, due to the valley degeneracy that exists in graphene, (36)(37)(38) it is non-trivial to form two-qubit gates using Heisenberg exchange coupling for spins in tunnel-coupled dots. Attempts have been made to solve the first problem, such as to use suitable transverse states in graphene ribbons to confine electrons (39), to combine single and bilayer regions of graphene (40), or to achieve confinement by using inhomogeneous magnetic fields. (41) The second problem has only been realized recently, and scientists have created a method to confine the electrons in a unique valley through suitable transverse states in a ribbon of graphene which appears to overcome these limitations. (42) The approach as used in GaAs quantum dots (43) is not possible due to Klein tunneling.\n\n[Figure 1. Hexagonal structure of graphene. Image: hexagonal lattice photograph, no text.]\n\nFigure 1. Hexagonal structure of graphene.\n\nSeveral ways are possible to induce a gap in bulk graphene. In general, quantum confinement can lead to the opening of a gap in ribbons (44) (45) (46). Within the tight-binding approximation of graphene, armchair boundary conditions can lead to an insulator and gate-tunable quantum dots (Figure 2).\n\nAnother promising direction is to start with bulk grapheme and induce a gap via the interaction with a substrate. (47)(48)(49) Three quantum dot architectures that allow for bound states tunable by electrostatic fields are: (i) graphene nanoribbons with armchair-terminated boundaries, (ii) discs in single-layer graphene, and (iii) discs in bilayer graphene. Special emphasis is given on the ability to controllably break the valley degeneracy, a prerequisite for two-qubit spintronic gates (50) (51) in graphene.\n\n14\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nQuantum Dots in Graphene Nanoribbons\n\nGraphene ribbons are one dimensional stripes of graphene. They can be considered as unfolded carbon nanotubes. Graphene ribbons were proposed by Nakada et al in 1996 (52). Nakada used the same single orbital tight-binding model that successfully portrays two-dimensional graphene as a semimetal; graphene ribbons are either metallic or semiconducting depending on their crystallographic orientation and width. More realistic calculations using the Hubbard model in a mean field approximation and density functional calculations show that zigzag ribbons are insulating due to the magnetization of their edges with opposite spin orientation in each edge. It has been found that this anti-ferromagnetic insulator phase has a hidden underlying ferroelectric order that can be described as excitonic insulator whose order parameter is the spin-resolved dipole operator, the analog of the spin current operator (53). Long (g1 μm) graphene nanoconstrictions display gapped behavior: conduction is suppressed by several orders of magnitude for a wide range of gate voltages around the Dirac point, and for tens of millivolts of source-drain bias (54) (55).\n\nFigure 2. Quantum dot in graphene nanoribbon. A ribbon of graphene with semi-conducting armchair boundaries is schematically shown. Two barrier gates (blue) define the rectangular size of the quantum dot (with width W and length L). A back gate (red) allows one to shift the energy levels in the dot. Two or more quantum dots of this type can be easily put in series in a single nanoribbon.\n\n15\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 3. Left; Energy diagram for quantum dot in single-layer graphene. Right; Bound state levels as function of dot radius.\n\nGraphene Disc in Single-Layer Graphene\n\nSingle layer graphene is attracting attention because its charge carriers are massless, relativistic particles (56). The relativistic effects result from a unique, zero-gap band structure that leads to quantum states described by the two-component Dirac–Weyl equation. This allows relativistic physics to be explored in a solid state system and has many potential applications ranging from high frequency electronics (57) to quantum computing (58).\n\nGraphene dots can be formed from external potentials or nanocrystals but this work is only concerned with external potentials. The physics of nanocrystals has been discussed recently (59) (60) and is different from the situation treated here. The quantum states, in external potentials are quasi-bound: they have a low amplitude oscillatory tail and are similar to the scattering resonances studied in undergraduate physics. A perpendicular magnetic field enhances the localization of these states (61) and true bound states can occur in graphene dots defined by a spatially non-uniform field (62). So a magnetic vector potential has a localizing effect that tends to cancel the delocalizing effect of a scalar potential.\n\nFigure 4. (a) Color scale plot of the transconductance. (b) One of the vertices of the honeycomb structure at Vsd = 800 μV: Charge stability diagrams for series-coupled quantum dots.\n\n16\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nGraphene Disc in Bilayer Graphene\n\nBilayer graphene is the two-layer analog of the single layer. The two sublattices are coupled by the so-called Bernal stacking. A voltage V between the two layers breaks inversion symmetry (like the mass term Δ in the single layer) and opens a gap proportional to the voltage. In addition, the combination of a top gate and a back gate allows tuning the gap and the average potential U(r) independently.\n\nA central issue, from a computational electronics perspective, is to quantitatively study the condensed state. In materials-based device models, one has an underlying Hamiltonian, such as an ab initio Hamiltonian.m\n\nIn principle, the excitonic condensate emerges from the interacting particles described by the Hamiltonian. It is shown that both true bound states and quasi-bound states occur, depending on the form of the potentials. In addition, there is a third and most interesting possibility where the character of the states depends on the parameters of the potentials and can be controlled at will. A confinement–de-confinement transition then occurs in which the character of the states changes from oscillatory to exponential as in the Klein paradox for particles with mass. This gives a way of probing the Klein paradox experimentally in a solid state system and numerical studies of the quantum states in a realistic dot model show it is feasible. Further, the same effect could be used to fabricate a graphene dot which has true bound states. This only requires a uniform magnetic field and a gate which can be made lithographically, a geometry that is much easier to fabricate than the non-uniform magnetic field geometry.\n\nThe relativistic nature of the transmission, exactly 100%, does not depend on E and U0 is a consequence of the zero mass. If the particles had mass m0, the energy–momentum relation would be (E − V)2 − p2c2 = m02c4 and the amplitudes of the wave function components in equations of motion would depend on k or k ' and m0. Then the right side amplitude in equations would be different from the left side amplitude, so a reflected wave would have to be introduced to satisfy the boundary condition at x = 0 and the transmission coefficient would not be 100%.\n\nFigure 5. Quantum dot in bilayer graphene.\n\nm Ab initio Hamiltonian is one derived from first principles.\n\n17\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 6. Bilayer graphene tunneling device structure. Two sheets of graphene are separated by a one-nanometer thick insulating of graphene.\n\nManipulation of Spin Qubits in Graphene Quantum Dots Relative to GaAs\n\nFor universal quantum computing, single-qubit and two-qubit manipulations are necessary. Single-qubit rotations of spin qubits are naturally done by electron spin resonance (ESR) (63) and by electric- dipole-induced spin resonance (EDSR) (64). The Rabi frequency fRabi at which the qubit rotates, for instance, in the ESR experiment (65) is proportional to the electron spin g-factor, fRabi = gμBBac/2h where μB is the Bohr magneton and Bac the external oscillating magnetic field used to rotate the spin. Notably, the electron spin g-factor differs for different materials. In GaAs quantum dots, it has been measured to be |g| < 0.43 (66) whereas, in graphene quantum dots, it has been determined to be close to |g| = 2. (67) Thus, it is possible to rotate the electron spin in graphene quantum dots using ESR about five times faster than in GaAs quantum dots using the same field strength of the external oscillating magnetic field. This is an important gain because all qubit manipulations need to be done fast to avoid decoherence and implement fault-tolerant quantum computing (68).\n\nAnother important advantage of graphene spin qubits is related to the small band gap in graphene nanoribbons. (For a ribbon width of about 30nm, the band gap can be estimated to be of the order of 60 meV.) This fact yields additional flexibility for two-qubit operations. Two-qubit operations are usually done via the Heisenberg exchange interaction (69). The tunneling matrix element can, however, be easily tuned by increasing or decreasing the overlap of the wave functions of the electrons in the two quantum dots. In graphene or any small band gap semiconductor, this manipulation can be done in two distinct ways: either through tunneling via conduction band states (i.e., normal tunneling) or through tunneling via valence band states (i.e., Klein tunneling). This has been predicted for graphene nanoribbons and experimentally realized in carbon nanotube quantum dots in (70)(71).\n\nThe most important physical consequence of this additional flexibility is the appearance of a new type of long-distance coupling between graphene spin qubits as illustrated in Figure 8.\n\n18\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nBy means of Klein tunneling, two distant qubits can be strongly coupled without touching the states of intermediate qubits that might be located between the two. Thus, a ribbon of graphene hosting many spin qubits in a line can be viewed as a qubit piano where any two of them can be entangled with leaving the states of the others unchanged; see Figure 7. Interestingly, this feature, i.e., the availability of non-local interactions, is important for quantum error correction since it raises the threshold for fault-tolerant quantum computing (72).\n\nFigure 7. Qubit piano. Illustration of many spin qubits in a line hosted within a graphene nanoribbon. Quantum dots are red bars and barrier regions are blue bars. Different spin qubits that are strongly coupled to each other via Klein tunneling are marked with the same color.\n\nFigure 8. Long distance coupling of three graphene qubits.\n\nSpin Relaxation and De-phasing in Graphene Quantum Dots\n\nWhy can we expect stable spin qubits in graphene quantum dots? There is hope that spin relaxation and dephasing will be very weak in graphene for the following reasons: (i) Carbon\n\n19\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"is a light element with atomic number 6. Hence, its atomic spin-orbit interaction is weak as compared to heavier elements. However, such a statement should be taken with care because, in the solid state, spin-orbit coupling is oftentimes dominated by bulk inversion or structure inversion asymmetry. Therefore, crystal structures of light elements can (under certain circumstances) exhibit rather strong spin-orbit coupling.\nPrime examples are carbon nanotubes where theory predicted a substantial spin-orbit coupling (a few hundred μeV) due to the curvature of the tube (73) (74)(75) which has been nicely confirmed in recent transport experiments on carbon nanotube quantum dots (76). Since the surface of graphene is less curved than that of carbon nanotubes, the spin-orbit coupling in graphene – due to ripples – should still be rather weak (roughly ten times less than the spin-orbit coupling due to curvature in carbon nanotubes (77)). (ii) Carbon has two stable isotopes: 12C and 13C. The natural abundance is 99% 12C and 1% 13C. Since 12C has nuclear-spin 0 and 13C has nuclear-spin 1/2, the electron spin of the qubit can only interact with 1% of the nuclei via hyperfine interaction. This ratio can even be further decreased because it is possible to artificially make 12C-enriched graphene.\nSpin Relaxation Due to Spin-orbit Interaction\nThe spin-orbit coupling arises from the band structure and is enhanced by ripples in the graphene sheet. The orbital motion is influenced by scattering centers and ripple-induced gauge fields. Spin relaxation due to Elliot-Yafet and Dyakonov-Perel mechanisms and gauge fields in combination with spin-orbit coupling are discussed. In intrinsic graphene, the Dyakonov-Perel mechanism and spin flip due to gauge fields dominate and the spin-flip relaxation time is inversely proportional to the elastic scattering time. The spin-relaxation anisotropy depends on an intricate competition between these mechanisms.\nAs Pauli noted, when an electron is in a quantum state it can simultaneously be partially in the spin up state and partially in the spin down state. During this phenomenon known as “superposition states” an electron can exist in a free spin cycle oscillating between the up and down states. A qubit based on the spin of an electron could have nearly limitless potential because it is neither strictly on or off. Recently, researchers at Princeton University discovered how to manipulate a single electron without disrupting any surrounding electrons (78). By utilizing an interferometer technique where one or two electrons are trapped in microscopic corrals that are created by applying voltage to miniscule electrodes, “spin qubits” were formed. This effort is ground-breaking in that previous research utilized techniques where the electrons were exposed to microwave radiation.\nThe previous method was ineffective to manipulate individual spin qubits because the microwave was incapable of isolating to only a single electron. Whereas commonly used single-spin rotation mechanisms rely on gigahertz frequency magnetic fields, the coherent rotations between S and T+ demonstrated here occur on a nanosecond time scale set by the Zeeman energy and are solely driven with local gate-voltage pulses. As a result, it will be feasible to scale this quantum control method to a large number of spin qubits operating in close proximity. In addition, it is possible that the spin-flip mechanism employed here, which relies on coupling to the nuclear-spin bath, could be harnessed under the appropriate conditions to create a nuclear-spin memory (79).\n20"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Research with Graphene Quantum Dots\nGraphene is an ideal candidate for spin qubits due to its low intrinsic spin-orbit coupling and the sparse amount of nuclear spins. We discussed bound states in gate-tunable graphene quantum dots realized in both graphene nanoribbons and gapped single-layer and bilayer graphene. In contrast to quantum dots realized in edged graphene flakes, gate-tunable quantum dots are defined electrostatically rather than by the physical edge of a graphene sample. This allows one to controllably break the valley degeneracy, a prerequisite for spin-based quantum computing, e.g., by using a magnetic field. We have also discussed quantum manipulation of spin qubits in such dots, as well as recent theoretical studies on the consequences of spin-orbit interaction and hyperfine interaction with nuclei for spin-relaxation and spin-decoherence. Both theoretical and experimental efforts have focused on single-layer graphene quantum dots. The next major area is likely to be bilayer graphene. Bilayer graphene is potentially superior to single-layer graphene due to the creation of a tunable bandgap by electric fields which allows for an all electrical control of graphene quantum dots.\nThese new capabilities may be a boon for spintronic quantum information processing. Single-qubit gates, based on single-spin electron spin resonance, have achieved significant breakthroughs. Fast (~200 ps) two-qubit operation has been demonstrated, but single-qubit operations on a similar time scale still remain a challenge. A proposed new configuration of two-spin encoding of the qubit, where a single and a triplet state play the role of the 0 and 1, shows promise. With this type of qubit, the interferometer, demonstrated by the Princeton researchers, could be used for single-qubit gates on a nanosecond time scale. Alternatively, fast qubit rotations in a slightly different singlet-triplet qubit can be obtained by aligning nuclear spins to create different nuclear polarizations in the two dots. Fast single-qubit and two-qubit gates available in the same system allow for efficient quantum error correction and could provide an important head start in the battle against decoherence. However, no two-qubit gates for this type of qubit, which would involve four spins, have yet been demonstrated. Utilizing graphene as a structural basis for quantum computing, coupled with other carbon based materials such as self-assembling DNA, motifs, may lead the revolutionary development in quantum computing.\nSUMMARY OF ADDITIONAL INORGANIC TECHNOLOGIES\nThe advancement of quantum computing schemes is the subject of significant investment and development over the past two decades. Recently, Ladd reviewed inorganic technologies. (5) Ladd proposes that ion traps are the most probable technology based on their long T2, but then concludes that a comparison between the technologies is incomplete without further development on all fronts. The current treatise concentrates on organic technology but summarizes here the work of Ladd and others for completeness.\nPhoton Technologies\nUsing the polarization state of a photon is an appealing approach to store, communicate, and manipulate qubits. Photons do not require a vacuum or very low temperature for fairly good isolation from thermodynamic interactions. They do require special, non-linear media for robust, reliably predictable manipulation. A major advance in 2001, known as the KLM scheme, showed that a scalable quantum computing was possible using linear optics and single-photon detectors and sources. (80) The major hurdle, according to Ladd, is photon\n21"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"loss within waveguides, and is equivalent to decoherence time in other quantum hardware.ⁿ The size of quantum gates is currently on the order of cm; this hurdle becomes less as gate size decreases. It is finally concluded that photons will likely be used in a hybrid technology with another quantum element serving as the basis for gates and other interactions. This scheme is known as distributed quantum computing, where elements can be separated by significant distance. This distance is either large by comparison with gate or gate array size, or actually large (km) in a communications network.\nPhotonic technologies are a very active development area: the raw number of publications found for “photon computers” or “photon computing” shows more entries for 2009 than for 2008 and 2007 combined.º Furthermore, many devices operate at or near room temperature and most do not require expensive cryogenic systems (temperature below He boiling point), making them inexpensive to research versus other technologies. These objective measures make breakthroughs more likely, and in 10 years all-optical computing should be addressing problems that cannot be accomplished via classical systems. In 40 years, manufacturing engineering will decrease the cost of these devices and they will be an option for many computing tasks in the space environment.\nIon and Atomic Trap Technologies\nIndividual atomic ions can be trapped in free space by nanoscale electrodes, while atoms can be trapped in an optical lattice created by lasers. In the ion systems, manipulation of electrode voltages move ions around the lattice and interact them with each other. In atomic systems, modulation of the optical lattice and/or external optical interference is used to manipulate the atoms. Ladd concludes that scaling is the primary hurdle in trap-based technologies.\nMore detail of such hurdles in trap technologies is revealed in a year earlier (much longer) review by Haffner. (81) Ion-trap-based gate operations are shown to have arbitrarily high fidelity, or higher fidelity than required for fault-tolerant computation. The current bottleneck in trap technology versus classical systems is the trapping frequency of a few hundred microseconds, even though massive parallel operations are possible. Haffner concludes that there are no fundamental barriers to scaling trap-based computing, but the technology is challenging and will progress as evolution rather than revolution. This is encouraging given that 40 years ago 20-nm transistors seemed challenging, but without fundamental operational barriers.\nNuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Technologies\nNMR storage and manipulation has been shown in liquid media up to a dozen qubits. Liquids are preferred because of their longer T2. However, thermal motion in the liquid state made scalability an issue. Moving to solid state NMR to address thermodynamic issues dramatically decreases T2. Ladd concludes that NMR technologies are a good testing ground for fault-tolerant algorithm development, but of little practical use for quantum computing.\nSuperconducting Technologies\nSuperconductivity is the flow of electricity without resistive losses. Similar to the laser, this macroscopic phenomenon has quantum mechanical origins. When cooled below a critical\nⁿ A waveguide is the equivalent “wire” that isolates the transmission of photons between interaction and storage devices.\nº Web of Science database, inquired 30 June 2010.\n22"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"temperature, some materials such as copper form a lattice that allows electrons to pair and flow as a bosonic charged (2e) particle. The components of superconducting circuits can be fabricated with current technology; however, decoherence times are limited to several microseconds maximum due to the large size (100 micrometers) of the circuit elements and thus large number of charge carriers in a qubit device (~10¹⁰). Additionally, the current qubit device designs only operate at the scale of 10’s of mK. Superconducting elements, specifically Josephson junctions, may play a role in hybrid designs such as the distributed ion traps of Haffner (81), but are currently not seen as a stand-alone technology for quantum computation.\nDNA-BASED DESIGNS FOR MOLECULAR COMPUTERS\nWhile traditional silicon-based circuits reach their fundamental atomic limitation, researchers search for alternative mediums for computation. The most logical solution to overcome this restriction in silicon-based integrated circuit architectures resides within our own bodies, deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). Living organisms also carry out complex physical processes under the direction of digital information. Biochemical reactions and ultimately an entire organism’s operation are ruled by instructions stored in its genome, encoded in sequences of nucleic acids. When the workings of bimolecular machines inside cells that process DNA and RNA are compared to Turing’s machine, striking similarities emerge: both systems process information stored in a string of symbols taken from a fixed alphabet, and both operate by moving step by step along those strings, modifying or adding symbols according to a given set of rules.\n[Figure 9: A DNA nanomachine diagram with labels “Set strand”, “‘Open’”, “Waste”, “Unset strand”, “‘Closed’”]\nFigure 9. A DNA nanomachine driven by repeated sequential addition of DNA control strands (82).\nDNA Background\nWatson and Crick may have never realized the full potential of the double helical structure they identified nearly 60 years ago, (83) for little was known about this amazing molecule that harnesses life. Biochemists in the late nineteenth century had found that these nucleic acids, long-chain polymers of nucleotides, were made up of sugar, phosphoric acid, and\n23"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"several nitrogen-containing bases consisting of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). By the late 1940s the scientific community widely accepted DNA as the carrier of genetic information. But, it wasn’t until 1977 that Fred Sanger developed the first dideoxynucleotide chain termination bottom up assembly method for DNA. (84) This technique would later usher in a new age of nucleic acid research and open the door for the modern era of biotechnology. With the advent of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) (85) technology a virtual treasure trove of capabilities now exist for genetic and biochemical engineers to create customized DNA strands. This revolutionary process has created a multidisciplinary field of work within nanotechnology that intersects at the crossroads of computer science, biochemistry, material science, and engineering. This section on DNA-based nanosystems and computing will introduce several state of the art research applications and concepts currently being employed to produce DNA-based devices.\nIt is crucial to formulate a basic understanding of the structure and chemical principles of the DNA molecule to fully grasp its potential as a building material for DNA-based nanosytems. For the lay reader we have constructed a simplistic outline to illustrate the general principles of the DNA molecule that hold true to their biochemical properties as they apply to bottom-up nanostructure assemblies.\n1. DNA consists of two long polymers made of simple units called nucleotides, with backbones made of sugars and phosphate groups joined by ester bonds. These two strands run in opposite directions to each other and are therefore anti-parallel. The double strands of DNA form a double helical structure.\n2. The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). The order, or sequence, of these bases determines the information available for building and maintaining an organism. These nucleotides bind through a chemical bonding process known as Watson and Crick base pairing. A bonds with T, and G bonds with C – a given sequence of such nucleotides will always bond with the complementary sequence.ᵖ\n3. In its double helical configuration, DNA is a relatively rigid molecule. This rigidity can be further enhanced by bundling several double helixes to form DNA lattices and tiles to form synthesized nanoarchitechtures (87)(88)(89).\n4. The Watson and Crick base-pairing principles have created predictable binding affinities in bench top applications. This knowledge of the intra- and inter-molecular physical properties of the DNA molecule enable the programming of desired interactions within the sequences to produce a customized sequence of DNA.\n5. The ease in sequencing DNA based on the Sanger technique, which today has evolved into advanced automated processes, have made designer DNA strands readily available. Customized strand lengths or oligonucleotides (strands typically 100-200 base pairs long) can be easily ordered from various sequencing services or produced within the lab at relatively low costs with high throughput and quality.\n6. Today biotechnologists can employ a library of unique restriction enzymes that can cut the DNA strand between specific nucleotides leaving “sticky ends”, or single stranded\nᵖ Sometimes transcription errors will result in an incorrect bond, such as A with G. These are single nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs (pronounced “snips”). SNPs are not uncommon in the human genome and have important implications in disease; however, in the current treatise we consider such “wrong” pairings to be errors that need correction.\n24"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\noverhangs at the end of the double helix (Figure 10). These fragments can be exploited to create a recombinant molecule of DNA by;\na. Inserting or removing a specific sequence of DNA.\nb. Attaching a fluorescent molecular beacon.\nc. Amplifying the sequence through the PCR process.\n\nFigure 10. Recombinant DNA molecule with restriction enzyme cleavage and sticky end ligation.\n\n7. By carefully using the recombinant tools and technologies available to genetic engineers, one can properly program a customized Watson-Crick base-paired DNA motif that will self-assemble in solution. This method of self assembly is preferred on small scale applications due to the difficulties experienced when assembling nanoscale objects through the traditional top down method. Assembly of DNA motifs with the aid of various branched DNA strands with sticky ends can be directed by the geometry and connectivity of the varying motifs. Once the structure is assembled a range of DNA lattices can be produced (Figure 11).\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 11. Two symmetric DNA nanomotifs and the crystals grown using them. (a) and (d) show a symmetric cross motif and a three-point-star motif, respectively. Images (b) and (e) are atomic force micrographs showing the crystal structure, and (c) and (f) are fluorescence microscopy images of DNA 2D crystals assembled from the DNA motifs (86).\n\n8. Another widely accepted bottom up method to construct DNA nanosystems is through a process known as strand displacement or branched migration. This assembly method displaces one DNA strand and selectively replaces it with a strong complementary strand which usually consists of more Watson Crick base pairs. This method can be utilized to correct sequence errors made during strand synthesis and DNA tile assembly and in complex logic gates, and for controlling DNA motors.\n\nIn 1996, Winfree devised a theoretical proposal that addressed how crystal morphology and patterning can be programmed by tile design in an inherently asynchronous assembly process, in which it was addressed by the abstract Tile Assembly Model (aTAM). (90) Winfree explored how physical parameters, such as tile concentration and temperature, affect crystal growth and influence error rates, based on reversible tile association and dissociation rates (91). This work was built on previous efforts by Wang's (92)(93) embedding of computation in geometrical tiles showing that two-dimensional (2D) self-assembly of DNA can perform Turing-universal computation. This implies that any algorithm can in principle be embedded in, and guide, a potentially aperiodic crystallization process. In this \"algorithmic self-assembly\" paradigm, a set of molecular \"Wang tiles\" is viewed as the program for a particular computation or molecular fabrication task.\n\nLater collaboration between Winfree and Seeman resulted in the first successful fabrication of a two-dimensional DNA lattice structure that utilized the mathematical principle of tiling (94). The self named DX (double crossover) molecule has two double helical motifs that are rigidly bound together by several single strands that are organized in a double crossover pattern forming a rigid structure of DNA. These DNA strands are oriented in a parallel direction. This method allows for the production of DNA based lattices by exploiting the use of sticky ends at four ends. These ends can then be further constructed to build up a scaffold of DNA based on\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nthe complementary binding of the Watson-Crick base pairs that correspond to each sticky end. In this way, a lattice structure can be built upon the base structure by synthesizing additional DX motifs to construct what is known as a \"DNA tile.\" These tiles can be further utilized as a scaffold for additional molecular structures.\n\nIn order to envision the aTAM tiling process, it is easy to picture various tiles with different numbers written on the sides, indicating matching rules where two tiles would stick only if their contacts matched. Additional matching interactions can be arranged in a manner that adjacent tiles can strongly hold the next one in place, but a single interaction creates a weak bond. Figure 12 illustrates an instantiation of the algorithmic self assembly process, in which sets of four species tiles that represents XOR (exclusive OR) function to create a Sierpinski triangle pattern. The so called seed structure is used to input the initial values that commence the algorithmic self assembly process. However, it must be noted that random nucleation events may occur. Nevertheless, algorithmic self-assembly has created a means to emulate cellular automata.\n\nFigure 12. (top a-e) The XOR Cellular Automaton and Its Implementation by Tile-Based Self-Assembly. (bottom a-e) AFM Images of Algorithmic Self-assembly of Sierpinski Triangle Crystals.\n\n28\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 12 (continued). (top a-e) The XOR Cellular Automaton and Its Implementation by Tile-Based Self-Assembly. (bottom a-e) AFM Images of Algorithmic Self-assembly of Sierpinski Triangle Crystals.\n\nIn theory, this process allows scientists the ability to build a computer from nanoscale material with DNA tiles (95). The experimental success of this trial demonstrated that 2D algorithmic self-assembly offers new capabilities for computation and construction, as well as a new range of physical phenomena and experimental challenges as well.\n\nError Suppression Mechanisms in DNA Self-Assembly\n\nMolecular self-assembly is an emerging technology that will ultimately enable the fabrication of great quantities of complex nanoscale objects such as computer circuits at very low costs. Because the DNA-tile-based bottom-up assembly technique relies on the logic of programming self-assembly, it requires a situation where sticky-end binding specificity is infallible. Realistically, however, correctness of matching between tiles cannot be guaranteed due to the thermodynamics and kinetics of DNA tile self-assembly. This process alone results in occasional erroneous assembly steps. The number of assembly errors increases with the number of tile types, and accruing errors render large scale complex computation practically infeasible.\n\nAssembly errors can be classified into three types: 1.) Growth errors. 2.) Facet errors. 3.) Nucleation errors. Growth and facet errors are the errors that occur on the growth front of an existing assembly, while nucleation errors deal with the spurious initiation of assemblies. A growth error occurs when a DNA tile with one or more mismatched sticky ends is embedded in the assembly. A facet error occurs on the flat surface (facet) of the aggregate when two DNA tiles attach on a growth front (facet) side by side, and thus stabilize each other's binding. This is considered an error because the identity of these tiles may not be correct with respect to the computation being performed. Nucleation errors are similar to facet errors in that a number of tiles spontaneously assemble a cluster by stabilizing each other through\n\n29\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nbinding. This then seeds ordinary, but meaningless computation. Growth errors, facet errors, and nucleation errors all occur because of tiles that make only weak contacts with the assembly (Figure 15). These erroneous tiles must fall off in order for correct growth to proceed. One approach is to design the lattice such that each tile is first stabilized by the arrival of another tile before it secures itself in place.\n\nPrior analysis predicted that the error rates of tile assembly can be reduced by optimizing physical parameters such as tile concentrations and temperature. In order to suppress different types of errors, several methods have been proposed based on the idea of increasing the amount of time required to lock in erroneously assembled tiles. In order to minimize the errors, several methods have been proposed. Unfortunately, some of these methods cannot effectively suppress all types of errors. For example, the tile proof reading model first proposed by Winfree and Bekbolatov (96) can correct errors in growth if an incorrect tile attaches in the next position. This error correction technique uses redundancy to correct errors. In this method, each tile is replaced in the system with four tiles, arranged in a 2 X 2 block. The compact resilient tile model as proposed by Reif (97) attempts to reduce the increase in scale of the final pattern produced by self-assembly. While both of these methods are effective in reducing errors, they are only limited to those errors produced by growth. However, the error suppression models Protected Tile Mechanism (PTM) and Layered Tile Mechanism (LTM) proposed by Fujibayashi and Murata can suppress all three error types illustrated in Figure 15. (98)(99). The functional method of suppression in these models is the control of sticky end hybridization. In these mechanisms the implementation of the DNA tiles is altered by the introduction of a structural motif protection strand and protection tiles (see Figure 13 and Figure 14). In this technique, the protection strand is a single oligomer that covers the input side of the tile. Each sticky end remains uncovered and it works as the toehold for initiating a branch migration process that removes the protection strand. The combination of a tile and a protection strand is called a \"protected tile,\" or just \"tile\" when it is clear from context, and \"foundation tile\" refers to the unprotected foundation tile. The output sides of all tiles are unprotected, thus the growth front always displays unprotected sticky ends. As seen in Figure 13 the protected tiles associate to the growth front by the exposed 3-nt sticky ends first, then branch migration results in strand displacement on each of the matching input arms; if both arms are matched, the protection strand is completely displaced, and it dissociates. In Figure 14, this method undergoes Monte Carlo simulation to evaluate its suppressive properties. Surprisingly, it was discovered that the PTM and LTM suppression methods can prevent nucleation errors as well as growth and facet errors.\n\n30\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n(a) Mismatched\n(b) Facet\n(c) Random assembly\n\nFigure 15. Three Types of Error in DNA Tile Self-assembly (a) Growth error (b) Facet error (c) Nucleation error. Red lines indicate the mismatched sides.\n\nSelf-assembly with DNA-based Microfluidic Devices\n\nThus far we have explored DNA computing through methods based on linear DNA molecule hybridizations (100) and \"DNA tiles\" with four \"sticky ends\"(101). While it has been proven experimentally that DNA tiles have much stronger computational power compared to linear DNA strands (102)(103), the suppression of assembly errors is the central problem of the DNA-tile-based nanotechnology. Even though several error reduction methods have been proposed thus far, many of them only consider the design of DNA tile sets. (104) Traditionally, the result is a complicated tile set and these approaches are rarely implemented. To overcome these restraints, researchers in Tokyo devised a microfluidic device specially designed for DNA tile assembly (105).\n\nTraditional DNA Tile assembly methods require that all the DNA tiles are mixed in a single test tube, annealed for self-assembly, and then the mixture is dropped on a mica surface for AFM observation. Since all kinds of tiles are assembled in one pot, DNA tile sets must be very carefully designed such that each sticky end has an appropriate bonding specificity and strength to obtain desired structure. In practice, it is very difficult to keep concentrations of each monomer tile in one-pot self-assembly. Additionally, the assembly process is strongly affected by the concentration of the DNA tile and the temperature of the water solution.\n\nWith the microfluidic DNA tile self-assembler, a series of stepwise assembly processes are incorporated into construction of the tile lattice. In the microfluidic device, pre-assembled DNA lattices are anchored on the microfluidic channel to initiate tile growth through the following steps: 1) Single-strand DNAs are immobilized on the surface of a reaction chamber. This provides scaffolds to initiate the self-assembly process, while anchoring the assembled structure against the flow. 2) Monomer DNA tiles are supplied by flow in the microchannel. A\n\n31"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"constant concentration around the crystal can easily be realized by a constant flow. This ground-breaking work in DNA synthesis technology has opened the door for several applications in genetic engineering and lab on a chip technology (107)(108)(109).\n\nThis kind of controlled self-assembly will drastically improve the size and yield of errorless nano structure. It is also possible to produce desired nano structures on a patterned template in the reaction chamber for various applications.\n\nFigure 16. Micro-fluidic device for DNA tile self-assembly.\n\nDNA Origami\n\nThe idea of holding helical domains in a parallel arrangement via the juxtaposition of antiparallel crossovers has become a general principle in DNA nanotechnology, used in at least a dozen constructions. For example, it has been extended to molecules with three parallel helixes (110) and it has been used to attach triangles rigidly to a nanomechanical device. (111) However, these techniques do not create a generalized multi-crossover molecule with parallel helices due to the inability to have the ratio of the component short strands exactly equal.\n\nSingle-stranded origami such as William Shih's octahedron (113) cannot, by definition, suffer from this problem. Scaffolded origami sidesteps the problem of equalizing strand ratios by allowing an excess of helpers to be used. As long as each scaffold strand gets one of each helper, all scaffolds may fold correctly (some might get trapped in misfolding). Because origami are easily differentiable from the helpers, separating them is not difficult (e.g. large origami stick much more strongly to mica surfaces than do tiny helpers and so excess helpers can be washed away). Single-stranded origami and scaffolded origami thus seem the best candidates for the creation of large complex structures. As Shih has observed, the geometry used for the octahedron should generalize and allow the creation of arbitrary polygonal networks. Generalization of the parallel helical geometry introduced by double-crossover molecules is simple using scaffolded DNA origami; Ruthemond has recently demonstrated the technique for the creation of six arbitrary shapes and six arbitrary patterns (including the one shown here); the design method and experiments showing its generality are described in (114). To get a feeling for the method, look at Figure 18. Shapes are approximated by laying down a series of parallel helical domains inside of the shape (Figure 18a). Helices are cut to fit the shape, in a series of sequential pairs from top to bottom, so\n\n32"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"that the resulting geometry approximates the shape within one DNA turn (~ 3.6 nm) in the x-direction and two helical widths (~ 6 nm, including an inter-helix gap) in the y-direction. To make a molecular design, a scaffold is run exactly once through each helix; performed in a raster-fill manner, this creates a 'folding path' (Figure 18b). To hold the scaffold in this shape, helper strands are added to create a regular pattern of antiparallel crossovers (Figure 18c).\n\nFigure 19 illustrates the versatility of shapes-programmed DNA origami with a high yield in excess of 70%. Each shape seen in Figure 19 uses 7000-base long scaffolds requiring more than 200 DNA strands for a final molecular weight of 15,000 nucleotides. Thus, the DNA origami structure has a molecular weight that is 100X that of the original DX model and nearly 6X larger in geometric construction where 50 billion copies of the pattern are created at once. With this technique, a device has been created that has a molecular weight of the component of cells that can synthesize proteins and amino acids- the ribosome. For the first time, we are now capable of self-assembling structures whose size and complexity rival that of Nature's most complex self assembled machines.\n\nFigure 17. (A) Schematic diagram of a 16-column microfluidic DNA synthesizer. The control lines are shown in red, the fluidic lines in blue, the herringbone mixers in yellow, and the square profiled binary tree and reactor columns in green. (B) Close up schematic of the column array (106).\n\n33"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Figure 18. Design of DNA origami. (112)\n\nFigure 19. Several DNA origami folding paths. (112)\n\n34"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Engineering DNA-Based Logic Gates This branch of nanotechnology employs DNA enzymology to induce molecular behavior in solution that responds to an appropriate nucleic acid input. The goal is to make reliable DNA-based logic gates that can be used to assemble complicated logic circuits, which, in turn, can be used to control complex molecular devices (115). Strictly speaking the silicomimetic solution-phase approaches are not connected to traditional DNA nanotechnology, or Adleman's model of DNA computing (116). However, there is some overlap of concepts, and all these approaches can be integrated in order to achieve complex functional behaviors. There are two primary requirements that a DNA-based logical device has to fulfill: first, the device should have the ability to integrate the presence or absence of several inputs into a single output. Second, a device has to be designed in such a way that a limited number of simple devices can be combined into a variety of complex circuitries. This usually means that one device can communicate with other components through some kind of information transfer. Furthermore, devices that could communicate with sensors, and produce outputs for autonomous therapeutic and diagnostic devices are of our interest, because they may one day function as silicon-free expert systems. DNA-based logic gates are intended to perform as traditional binary logic gates, which turn 1's and 0's of input into 1's and 0's of output, which form the central processing units in digital computers. Recently, Seeman and colleagues at New York University have found a clever new way to tease DNA strands into mimicking exclusive OR (XOR) logic gates (117). In the case of an XOR gate, the rule is simple: when the same two digits enter the gate, a 0 comes out; two different entering digits return a 1. In this latest case of DNA computing, inputs are replaced by single-stranded molecules, and how they bind with each other--base pair to base pair--dictates the operations. In essence, the collection of input molecules that are used set up the problem; once that's done, the answer self-assembles in a single step. The near term goal is to build DNA-based computing modules and to develop nanoscopic machines that could exist in living organisms, sensing conditions and making decisions based on what they sense, then responding with actions such as releasing medicine or killing specific cells. Logic Operation by Deoxyribozymes This biocomputing approach is based on two libraries of nucleic acids, one consisting of an allosterically modified deoxyribozyme (nucleic acid catalysts made of DNA) and the second, its substrates. A DNAzyme is associated with gene replication only, and they exist only in the laboratory. Nevertheless, they are very powerful tools for building DNA-based nanosystems. The functions of these molecular units are essential for molecular logic gates and the seamless integration into DNA-based computing devices. These constructs are capable of carrying out simple arithmetic operations (118) and have the capability to arrange several gates around a common substrate. (119) These devices have oligonucleotides (short ssDNA) as both inputs and outputs. Phosphodieseterase deoxyribozymes cleave other oligonucleotides, producing shorter strands as outputs. For example, operation of the simplest sensors is illustrated in Figure 20. The stem-loop of YESx molecule inhibits the catalytic module through the overlap of the stem with the substrate recognition region. Hybridization of ix to the complementary loop opens the stem to allow substrate binding to proceed. The YESx gate behaves as a two-state switch, with the active state in the presence of input. The combination of these sensors for input to gate logic is illustrated in Figure 21. Generalized approaches have three-input gates (including NOT, AND, ANDNOT, ANDANDNOT gates) based on the deoxyribozyme logic. (121) These gates are generic and modular, in the sense that other deoxyribozymes could be"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":37,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY combined in parallel into similar constructs, with the expectation of similar behavior. That means, in principle, we can construct enzymatic networks that perform Boolean calculations of any complexity. At this moment, serial connections are prohibitively slow to be used in practical devices, thus reported circuits are limited to implicit OR connectivity between individual elements. UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":38,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY To perform as logic gates analogous to silicon ones, a technology must produce specific outputs in response to a variety of inputs. DNA enzymes and recognition modules provide these output and input functions for a system based on DNA in solution. OUTPUT ENZYME A DNA enzyme called a deoxyribozyme (top) consists of single-stranded DNA folded into a core structure with arms at each end that can bind to a substrate DNA strand that has the complementary sequences of bases separated by a specific sequence of three other bases (dark gray). The enzyme cleaves the strand into two pieces (bottom). The process can be monitored by attaching a fluorescent molecule at one end of the substrate strands and a quencher molecule at the other end. The quencher molecule blocks fluorescence until the cleaving of the strand takes it out of range. DEOXYRIBOZYME Enzyme core Substrate binding region Substrate Quencher group Fluorescent group Cleaved substrate INPUT SENSOR In a DNA structure called a stem-loop, the DNA folds onto itself and zips together to form a double-stranded stem with a single-stranded loop (left). When a matching input strand binds to the loop, it pries the stem apart (right). CLOSED STEM-LOOP OPEN STEM-LOOP Input binding region Input SENSOR GATE A stem-loop attached to the arm of an enzyme blocks the enzyme's function (1) until an input DNA strand opens the controller and exposes the arm (2), enabling the enzyme to bind and cleave substrates (3). This structure is also called a YES gate because it signals, Yes, the input is present. Figure 20. Functional design of a DNA based logic gate. UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":39,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Combining DNA enzymes with stem-loop controllers yields a variety of fundamental logic gates that use short strands of DNA as both inputs and outputs. The cleaving action of the enzyme produces the strands that serve as the gate's output of 1. No cleaving is an output of 0. AND GATE A logical AND gate has two inputs and produces an output of 1 only if both inputs are 1. A deoxyribozyme with a stem-loop on each of its arms acts as an AND gate. The closed stems disable the enzyme (left), and only when both loops' matching input strands are added can the enzyme cleave substrates (middle). Truth table (right) summarizes the gate's function. AND-AND-NOT GATE A stem-loop controller on the back of a deoxyribozyme acts as a NOT input that inhibits the enzyme when the matching input strand is present. If the stem-loop's input strand is not present (0), the stem remains closed and the enzyme cleaves substrates to produce output strands, provided that the enzyme's arms are free (left). When the input strand binds to the controller, the stem opens, deforming the enzyme core and rendering it inactive (middle). A deoxyribozyme with controllers on both arms and its back thus behaves as an AND-AND-NOT gate. The enzyme is active, cleaving substrates and thus producing the 1 output, only if inputs X (blue) AND Y (purple) AND NOT Z (yellow) are present. Figure 21. Simplistic rendering of a DNA logic gate. UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":40,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Deoxyribozyme-based Boolean Automata The deoxyribozyme logic gates were applied to the construction of the first DNA-based Boolean automata capable of autonomously responding to human inputs: MAYAs are automata playing a game of tic-tac-toe against a human player. In tic-tac-toe there are a maximum of 4 moves by the human player when MAYA has the first move. The initial MAYA automaton played a simplified game, always claiming the center first, and the first human move is symmetry-restricted to one corner or one side move. These simplifications led to a representation of the game as a series of Boolean formulae that compute the automaton's output in each well, based on the human inputs present in all wells. These formulae were mapped to 23 deoxyribozyme-based logic gates by arranging gates in the individual wells around a common substrate. These hard-wired automata give the human no chance to win (Figure 22, Figure 23). (120, 122) One, two and three input deoxyribozyme-based logic gates are allosterically modulated by 32 human-operated input oligonucleotides: 97 logic gates distributed across 9 wells which calculate automaton moves, and 32 gates (boxed) display human moves by implementation of a two-color fluorogenic output system. Even though this mechanism is simplistic in nature, it has performed flawless Boolean calculations. Figure 22. Basic gate structures, derived from allosterically regulated deoxyribozyme E6, for playing tic-tac-toe against a human opponent. The truth tables constructed are sufficient to ensure the human player cannot win the game. (120) UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":41,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe first-generation automaton, MAYA-I, proves the potential of DNA logic gates by playing a perfect game of tic-tac-toe, albeit with some restrictions to simplify its programming. MAYA plays first, selecting the central square (5), and the human player's first move must be in either the upper left corner (square 1) or the left side (square 4).\n\nMAYA-I'S STRUCTURE\nThe computer's 3 x 3 array of wells contains a variety of molecular gates in solution, along with substrate strands (not shown). In wells where any enzymes become active, the cleaved substrates fluoresce red. The \"gate\" in the central well is a DNA enzyme with no stem-loop controllers.\n\nEXAMPLE GAME\nThe human, \"Harry,\" adds magnesium ions to all nine wells to switch MAYA on. The enzymes in well 5 cleave substrate strands, and the well lights up, signaling MAYA's opening move (X).\n\nFor his first move, Harry takes square 4. He tells MAYA by adding input strand 4 to all the wells.\n\nTo block MAYA from taking the diagonal, Harry takes square 9 by inputting strand 9 to all the wells.\n\nHarry desperately tries blocking MAYA by taking square 7.\n\nInput strand 4 activates the YES-4 gates in well 1, which lights up; MAYA has taken square 1 for its second move.\n\nHis two inputs activate the 4-AND-9 gates in well 3; MAYA takes that square.\n\nUnfortunately for Harry, his inputs now activate the 7-AND-9-AND-NOT-1 gate in well 2 (he has not added strand 1), and MAYA takes that square to win.\n\nFigure 23. First Generation (MAYA I) DNA-based Logic Circuit that plays tic-tac-toe.\n\nRobotic Bases (The DNA Robot)\n\nIllustrated thus far are various structures that can be built by DNA-based approaches, and such components can be combined into even more complex systems at a nanoscale. As an example of the integration of different DNA components, we present here an approach that that will eventually lead to the design of DNA \"robots.\" In order to make such robots, we must integrate three, up to now separate, molecular functions into either the molecule itself, or into the interactions between the molecule and the environment it traverses. These three functions are sensing, information processing, and movement. In principle, DNA provides us with all these functions, and we should be able to build functional units that could be justifiably called molecular robots solely out of nucleic acids. We hope that DNA robots will enable us to approach on a molecular scale, the important issues in the field of 'ordinary' robotics such as; evolution, learning, multi-robot interaction, self-replications, and self-repair. Sensing devices are necessary to extract information from the environment such as existence of a specific molecular species in the solution and shape and properties of the\n\n40\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":42,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nlandscapes traversed by molecules. The capability for computation is also needed to analyze these data and, in many applications, some rudimentary processing units such as the logic gate networks shown in the previous section would be enough to achieve useful functionalities.\n\nTo exhibit these capabilities, a team of scientists from Columbia University, Arizona State University, the University of Michigan, and the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) (123) have programmed an autonomous molecular \"robot\" made out of DNA to start, move, turn, and stop while following a DNA track. This development could ultimately lead to molecular systems that might one day be used for medical therapeutic devices and molecular-scale reconfigurable robots—robots made of many simple units that can reposition or even rebuild themselves to accomplish different tasks. The researchers constructed a trail of molecular \"bread crumbs\" on the DNA origami track by stringing additional single-stranded DNA molecules, or oligonucleotides, off the ends of the staples. These represent the cues that tell the molecular robots what to do—start, walk, turn left, turn right, or stop, for example—akin to the commands given to traditional robots. We will discuss the \"nano walker\" in greater detail in a later section in this treatise. It is this third function, the controlled movement of molecules through the aid of nanomotors that will be discussed next.\n\nDNA Nanomotors\n\nMolecular-size motors have evolved in nature, where they are used in virtually every important biological process. In contrast, the development of synthetic nanomotors that mimic the function of these amazing natural systems and that could be used in man-made nanodevices is in its infancy. Building nanoscale motors is not just an exercise in scaling down the design of a macroworld engine to nanoscale dimensions. Many factors such as friction, heat dissipation and many other mechanical behaviors are just very different at this scale – everything is constantly moving (under kinetic energy supplied by the heat of the surroundings) and being buffeted by other atoms and molecules (Brownian motion). The concept of a single DNA molecule nanomotor was already introduced in early 2002. (124) DNA nanomotors are synthetic biochemical devices whose motion can be controlled at the molecular scale.\n\nDNA molecular motors will be indispensable parts for the construction of molecular robots. The motion of a robot should be well-controlled by means of some molecular input, or it should be driven autonomously by cues from the environment. First approaches to encode molecular motion in DNA structures were based on the reversible and input-sensitive conformational changes. For example, the first reported use of a DNA motor was a nanomechanical device which generated twisting motion along the helix axis based on B-Z transition controlled by ionic strength of a solution. (125) Then, the first molecular tweezers were driven by successive reversible branch migrations of DNA strands, and these strands were called \"fuel\" and \"anti-fuel.\" (126) The next level in complexity were \"remotely-controlled\" walkers introduced by Seeman and Pierce, as they were based on a series of successive unidirectional conformational changes driven by strand displacement. These sequential conformational changes were microscopic analogs of macroscopic commands such as: \"lift the first leg\", \"drop the first leg to the next available position\"; \"lift the second leg\", \"drop the second leg to the next available position\", with a cumulative result of a translational movement of a molecule along a track. One drawback of these systems was that they were not autonomous, and that each conformational change had to be triggered separately, while one advantage was that they could have been monitored easily in bulk with fluorescence measurements. The first autonomous systems were based on nucleic acid\n\n41\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":43,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nenzymes, e.g., deoxyribozymes, and performed either solution phase conformational changes, or were proposed to move autonomously along a linear track over up to four steps. (127)\n\nA new paper published in the journal Nano Letters details how the researchers created the first light-powered nanomotor (Figure 24) out of a photoreactive chemical and a short length -- only 31 base pairs -- of DNA. (128) The motor looks a bit like a pair of tweezers. When UV light hits it, the photoreactive chemical causes the DNA to bend, which acts as the power stroke of the motor, opening the tweezers. Light in the visible spectrum, in turn, resets the chemical, closing the tweezers. The team from the University of Florida built a new type of \"molecular nanomotor\" driven only by photons, or particles of light. While it is not the first photon-driven nanomotor, the almost infinitesimal device is the first built entirely with a single molecule of DNA, offering a simplicity that increases its potential for development, manufacture and real-world applications in areas ranging from medicine to manufacturing. In the coming years, nanomotors could become a component of microscopic devices that repair individual cells or fight viruses or bacteria. Although in the conceptual stage, those devices, like much larger ones, will require a power source to function. Because it is made of DNA, the nanomotor is biocompatible. Unlike traditional energy systems, the nanomotor also produces no waste when it converts light energy into motion.\n\nAzobenzene\n\n5'FAM-CCT AGC TCT AAA TCA CTA TGG TCG CGC TAG G-Dabcyl3'\n\n5' Stem Loop 3' Stem\n\nFigure 24. A single molecule DNA-based nanomotor driven by photons. (128)\n\nNanomotors can be daisy-chained together, so that small movements on the microscopic scale add up to large movements at the macroscopic scale. In biology, muscle contraction and plant movement both result from small motors working together to create big changes. Scientists are attempting to mimic the many molecular motors that have been proven in nature. Today, biology is acting as a blueprint for the development of many DNA-based devices. One such biologically based mechanism is the spider-like-inspired nanowalker.\n\n42\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":44,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 25. AFM Scan of walkers as they follow a track pattern places on the surface. Each can take up to 50 steps. Visible is the body of each walker as they carry cargo (gold atoms) along the designed path. Scale bar is 50 nm. (129)\n\nThe Nano Walker; a Spider-like Approach\n\nA simple cargo carrying robot was demonstrated by Gu. (129) Spiders follow a designated path placed on a surface, picking up gold atoms as they pass over them. Such a device could be used to collect samples from asteroid or planetary surfaces. On a massive scale, they could collect mission critical materials from an exploration site.\n\nIn a different approach, a nano-scale molecular proto-robot with a potential for integration with computing and sensing (i.e., into a real molecular robot), (130) was introduced by Stojanovic: This design starts with a consideration of the following situation; a surface covered with substrates in a scaffold configuration is exposed to a single deoxyribozyme that will bind to its substrate, cleave it, release both products, and then bind again to another substrate, repeating the cycle, for as long as there are substrates available on the scaffold. (Figure 26) This deoxyribozyme would move over the surface with the process called self-repelling random walk, being attracted more by substrates, than by the residual product on the surface. But every loss of the contact with surface could lead to the removal of the deoxyribozyme in the bulk solution, with experimentally determined processivity (cleaving substrates without leaving into bulk solution) into single digits. However, combining the concepts of self–repelling walk of deoxyribozymes and multivalency, led to testing assemblies with 2-6 deoxyribozyme legs displayed on inert bodies (i.e., spiders), and the processivity was increased to up to several thousands. Essentially, the cumulative binding of multiple catalysts to substrates would attach the spider tightly to the matrix, whereas individual catalysts would still be able to rapidly cleave substrates, release products, and bind new substrates through the process of dissociation and rebinding. If density of\n\n43\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":45,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nsubstrates and size of legs are adjusted well, the assembly is continuously moving to new substrate-covered areas. Due to residual binding of deoxyribozymes to products, even if the spiders were surrounded by the product-covered areas, they would be able to move over them by ordinary random walk, until they would find substrates again. Importantly, directional movement of spiders can be accomplished by aligning substrates in directional paths, for example, by displaying them on self-assembled structures, including origami (Figure 27). Further, simple computing can be introduced by logic gates as legs. The nano walker could be hybridized to repair DNA based machinery, including DNA computers, when they are being assembled, or when they are damaged from cosmic rays, for example.\n\nFigure 26. The Nano walker made at Columbia University is a protein molecule decorated with three legs--single-stranded DNAzymes, synthetic DNA molecules that act as enzymes and catalyze a reaction.\n\n44\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":46,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\na. Capture leg ... (figure) ...\n\nFigure 27. Deoxyribozyme-based molecular walker and origami prescriptive landscape. a, The NICK3.4A311 spider consists of a streptavidin core, with a 20-base single-stranded DNA (green) that positions the spider at the start, and three deoxyribozyme legs. b, The 8-17 deoxyribozyme cleaves its substrate at an RNA base, creating two shorter products (respectively 7 and 11 bases in length). Dissociation from these products allows legs to associate with the next substrate. c, Spider actions: after release by a 27-base single-stranded DNA trigger, the spider follows the substrate at a STOP position. d, Schematic of the DNA origami landscape with positions A–E labelled; track EABD is shown with I indicating a topographical imaging marker. e, A representative origami landscape showing the START position (green), the substrate track (brown), STOP and CONTROL sites (red), and a topographical imaging marker (blue). rA, ribonucleotide position at which cleavage occurs; dA, deoxyribonucleotide within non-chimeric and non-cleavable analogue of substrate at a STOP position. (123)\n\nDISCUSSION\n\nThe first operating quantum computers capable of solving real-world problems will commence within 10 years and be based on ion-trap technology. This is entirely based on the amount of research resources dedicated to the problem and the fact that there appear to only be engineering challenges remaining. Atomic and ion traps require very substantial cryogenic and EM shielding systems and are not practical for space travel.\n\nPure photonic technologies available today have difficulty with both miniaturization and scalability. However, the amount of active work in the field makes a disruptive advance likely in the 10-year timeframe. Optical computers will likely be realized in the 20-year horizon; however, the very powerful promise of quantum computing will still have issues with photon loss in any solid state device. The 40-year horizon will see photon technologies play an essential but supporting role in distributed quantum computing. The realized systems will have radiation tolerance advantages over current semiconductor technology and are likely to augment or even replace general purpose computing devices for space travel.\n\nHybrid designs utilizing arrays of quantum dots and photon communication channels will be an option for space travel supercomputing on the 40-year timescale. These systems operate at attainable temperatures without cryonics, and require no more shielding than humans. It is likely that spintronics will be an essential ingredient.\n\n45\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":47,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"Simple organic computing based on DNA tiles will be realized in the next 20 years. On the 40-year time horizon, useful DNA-based devices will be essential space exploration tools. These could take the form of orbital-delivered wireless sensors searching planetary/asteroid features or for essential compounds such as high concentrations of water. DNA computers will be realized on the 40-year timeline. Their advantage over solid state devices will be the ability to repair nanoscale elements damaged in normal use or by cosmic radiation. These will not be the fastest systems in the astro-arsenal, but they may be the most robust.\n\nCONCLUSION\n\nWe have presented an introduction to quantum computing and the technologies that comprise the current state-of-the-art. In the 10-20 year horizon, we will see optical and DNA-based computers realized on small production scales, but their readiness level for space travel will be lacking. On the 40-year horizon four major advances in space-ready technology will be seen: devices developed for optical computing will allow an all-optical computer to augment or replace general purpose computers; optical communication will play an essential role in hybrid designs of space-based quantum computers along with quantum dots; DNA devices will perform simple distributed sensor data analyses; and fault tolerant DNA computers will be available for mission-critical analysis tasks.\n\n46\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":48,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nREFERENCES\n\n1. Turing A. On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society 1937;42:230-65.\n2. Cho K, George AD, Subramaniyan R. Fault-tolerant parallel algorithms for adaptive matched-field processing on distributed array systems. Journal of Computational Acoustics. 2005;13(4):667-87.\n3. Cho K, George AD, Subramaniyan R, Kim K. Fault-tolerant matched-field processing in the presence of element failures. Journal of Computational Acoustics. 2006;14(3):299-319.\n4. Einstein A. Zur Quantentheorie der Strahlung (On the Quantum Theory of Radiation). Physikalische Zeitschrift. 1917;18:121-8.\n5. Ladd TD, Jelezko F, Laflamme R, Nakamura Y, Monroe C, O'Brien JL. Quantum computers. Nature. 2010 Mar 4;464(7285):45-53.\n6. Shor PW, editor. Algorithms for Quantum Computation: Discrete Logarithms and Factoring. 35th Annual Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science; 1994: IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA.\n7. Grover LK. Quantum mechanics helps in searching for a needle in a haystack. Physical Review Letters. 1997 Jul;79(2):325-8.\n8. Grover LK. Fixed-point quantum search. Physical Review Letters. 2005 Oct;95(15).\n9. Bennett CH, Brassard G, Popescu S, Schumacher B, Smolin JA, Wootters WK. Purification of noisy entanglement and faithful teleportation via noisy channels. Physical Review Letters. 1996 Jan;76(5):722-5.\n10. Gottesman D, Chuang IL. Demonstrating the viability of universal quantum computation using teleportation and single-qubit operations. Nature. 1999 Nov;402(6760):390-3.\n11. Feynman RP. Simulating Physics with Computers. International Journal of Theoretical Physics. 1982;21(6-7):467-88.\n12. Ortiz G, Gubernatis JE, Knill E, Laflamme R. Simulating fermions on a quantum computer. Computer Physics Communications. 2002;146(3):302-16.\n13. Knill E, Laflamme R. Theory of quantum error-correcting codes. Phys Rev A. [Article]. 1997 Feb;55(2):900-11.\n14. Li YF, Dumer I, Pryadko LP. Clustered Error Correction of Codeword-Stabilized Quantum Codes. Physical Review Letters. [Article]. 2010 May;104(19):4.\n15. Mizel A, Lidar DA, Mitchell M. Simple proof of equivalence between adiabatic quantum computation and the circuit model. Physical Review Letters. 2007 Aug;99(7).\n16. Raussendorf R, Briegel HJ. A one-way quantum computer. Physical Review Letters. 2001 May;86(22):5188-91.\n17. Raussendorf R, Harrington J, Goyal K. A fault-tolerant one-way quantum computer. Annals of Physics. 2006 Sep;321(9):2242-70.\n18. B. Trauzettel, D.V. Bulaev, D. Loss, G. Burkard. Spin qubits in graphene quantum dots, Nat Phys 3, 192–196 (2007).\n19. WeinsteinY S, Hellberg C S and Levy J 2005 Quantum-dot cluster-state computing with encoded qubits Phys. Rev. A 72 020304.\n20. A.N. Jordan, B. Trauzettel, G. Burkard. Weak-measurement theory of quantum-dot spin qubits, Phys. Rev. B 76, 155324 (2007).\n\n48\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":49,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n21. W. Pauli, Z. Physik, 31 (1925) 373.\n22. Kouwenhoven LP', Sch\"on G', and Sohn LL', in Mesoscopic Electron Transport', NATO ASI Series E', Vol. 345 (Kluwer Academic Publishers', Dordrecht', 1997).\n23. Wolf SA, Awschalom DD, Buhrman RA, Daughton JM, vonMoln'ar S, Roukes ML, Chtchelkanova AY, and Treger DM, Science 294, 1488 (2001).\n24. Recher P, Sukhorukov EV, and Loss D, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1962 (2000).\n25. Folk JA, Potok RM, Marcus CM, and Umansky V, Science 299, 679 (2003).\n26. Hanson R, Vandersypen LMK, Willems van Beveren LH, Elzerman JM, Vink IT, and Kouwenhoven LP, Phys. Rev. B 70, 241304 (2004).\n27. Ono K, Austing DG, Tokura Y, and Tarucha S, Science 297, 1313 (2002).\n28. For a comprehensive recent review on the topic, see Cerletti V, Coish WA, Gywat O, and Loss D, Nanotechnology 16, R27 (2005).\n29. Hanson R, Kouwenhoven LP, Petta JR, Tarucha S, and Vandersypen LMK, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 1217 (2007).\n30. Novoselov, K.S. et al. Electric field effect in atomically thin carbon films. Science 306, 666-669 (2004).\n31. Novoselov, K.S. et al. Two-dimensional gas of massless Dirac fermions in graphene. Nature 438, 197-200 (2005).\n32. Zhang, Y., Tan, Y.-W., Stormer, H.L. & Kim, P. Experimental observation of the quantum Hall effect and Berry's phase in graphene. Nature 438, 201-204 (2005).\n33. Cheianov, V.V. & Fal'ko, V.I. Selective transmission of Dirac electrons and ballistic magnetoresistance of n - p junctions in graphene. Phys. Rev. B 74, 041403(R) (2006).\n34. Dombay, N.& Calogeracos, A. Seventy years of the Klein paradox. Phys. Rep. 315, 41-58 (1999).\n35. Katsnelson, M.I., Novoselov, K.S.& Geim, A.K. Klein paradox in graphene. Nature Phys. 2, 620–625 (2006).\n36. McClure, J.W. Diamagnetism of graphite. Phys. Rev. 104, 666-671 (1956).\n37. Semenoff, G.W. Condensed-matter simulation of a threedimensional anomaly. Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 2449-2452 (1984).\n38. DiVincenzo, D.P. & Mele, E.J. Self-consistent effective-mass theory for intralayer screening in graphite intercalation compounds. Phys. Rev. B 29, 1685–1694 (1984).\n39. Silvestrov, P.G. & Efetov, K.B. Quantum dots in graphene. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 016802 (2007).\n40. Nilsson, J., Castro Neto, A.H., Guinea, F. & Peres, N.M.R. Transmission through a biased graphene bilayer barrier. Preprint at www.arXiv.org/cond-mat/0607343 (2010).\n41. De Martino, A., Dell'Anna, L. & Egger, R. Magnetic confinement of massless Dirac fermions in graphene. Preprint at www.arXiv.org/cond-mat/0610290 (2010).\n42. Silvestrov, P.G. & Efetov, K.B. Quantum dots in graphene. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 016802 (2007).\n43. Hanson R, Kouwenhoven LP, Petta JR, Tarucha S, and Vandersypen LMK, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79,1217 (2007).\n44. Nakada K, Fujita M, Dresselhaus G, and Dresselhaus MS, Phys. Rev. B 54, 17954 (1996).\n45. Brey L and Fertig HA, Phys. Rev. B 73, 235411 (2006).\n46. Son Y-W, Cohen ML, and Louie SG, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 216803 (2006).\n47. Giovannetti G, Khomyakov PA, Brocks G, Kelly PJ, and van den Brink J, Phys. Rev. B 76, 073103 (2007).\n\n49\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":50,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":""} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":51,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n48. Zhou SY, Gweon GH, Fedorov AV, First PN, de Heer WA, Lee DH, Guinea F, Castro Neto AH, Lanzara A, Nature Mater. 6, 770 (2007).\n49. Enderlein C, Kim YS, Bostwick A, Rotenberg E, and Horn K, New Journal of Phys. 12, 033014 (2010).\n50. Trauzettel B, Bulaev DV, Loss D, and Burkard G, Nature Phys. 3 192 (2007).\n51. Recher P, Nilsson J, Burkard G, and Trauzettel B, Phys. Rev. B 79, 085407 (2009).\n52. F. Muñoz-Rojas, D. Jacob, J. Fernández-Rossier, and J. J. Palacios, Coherent transport in graphene nanoconstrictions. PRB 74, 195417 (2006).\n53. Reddy, C.D., Ramasubramaniam, A., Shenoy, V.B. & Zhang, Y.-W. Edge elastic properties of defect-free single-layer graphene sheets. Applied Physics Letters 94, 101904 (2009).\n54. Han, M. Y.;O¨ zyilmaz, B.; Zhang, Y.; Kim, P. Phys. ReV. Lett. 2007, 98, 206805.\n55. Chen, Z. H.; Lin, Y. M.; Rooks, M. J.; Avouris, P. Physica E 2007, 40, 228–232.\n56. Geim AK, Novoselov KS. The rise of graphene. Nat Mater. 2007 Mar;6(3):183-91.\n57. Geim AK, Novoselov KS. The rise of graphene. Nat Mater. 2007 Mar;6(3):183-91.\n58. Trauzettel B, Bulaev D V, Loss D and Burkard G 2007 Nat. Phys. 3 192.\n59. Schnez A, Ensslin K, Sigrist M and Ihn T 2008 arXiv:0810.3216v1.\n60. Peres N M R, Rodriquez J N B, Stauber T and Lopes dos Santos J M B 2008 arXiv:0810.4768v\n61. Chen H-Y, Apalkov V and Chakraborty T 2007 Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 186803.\n62. De Martino A, Dell'Anna L and Egger R 2007 Phys. Rev. Lett. 98.\n63. Engel H-A and Loss D, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4648 (2001).\n64. Borhani M, Golovach VN, and Loss D, Phys. Rev. B 73, 155311 (2006).\n65. Koppens FHL, Buizert C, Tielrooij KJ, Vink IT, Nowack KC, Meunier T, Kouwenhoven LP, and Vandersypen LMK, Nature 442, 766 (2006).\n66. Hanson R, Witkamp B, Vandersypen LMK, Willems van Beveren LH, Elzerman JM, and\nKouwenhoven LP, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 192802 (2003).\n67. Engel HA, Loss D. Detection of single spin decoherence in a quantum dot via charge currents. Physical Review Letters. 2001 May;86(20):4648-51.\n68. Nielsen MA and Chuang IL, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, Cambridge University Press (2000).\n69. Burkard G, Loss D, and DiVincenzo DP, Phys. Rev. B 59, 2070 (1999).\n70. Burkard G, Loss D, and DiVincenzo DP, Phys. Rev. B 59, 2070 (1999).\n71. Recher P, Nilsson J, Burkard G, Trauzettel B. Bound states and magnetic field induced valley splitting in gate-tunable graphene quantum dots. Physical Review B. 2009 Feb;79(8).\n72. Svore KM, Terhal BM, and DiVincenzo DP, Phys. Rev. A 72, 022317 (2005).\n73. Ando T, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 69, 1757 (2000).\n74. Huertas-Hernando D, Guinea F, and Brataas A, Phys. Rev. B 74, 155426 (2006).\n75. Bulaev DV, Trauzettel B, and Loss D, Phys. Rev. B 77, 235301 (2008).\n76. Kuemmeth F, Ilani S, Ralph D, and McEuen PL, Nature 452, 448 (2008).\n77. Huertas-Hernando D, Guinea F, and Brataas A, Phys. Rev. B 74, 155426 (2006).\n78. Petta J. R., et al. A Coherent Beam Splitter for Electronic Spin States, Science 327, 669 (2010)\n79. Taylor, J. M. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 236803 (2005).\n80. Knill E, Laflamme R, Milburn GJ. A scheme for efficient quantum computation with linear optics. Nature. 2001 Jan;409(6816):46-52.\n81. Haffner H, Roos CF, Blatt R. Quantum computing with trapped ions. Physics Reports-Review Section of Physics Letters. 2008 Dec;469(4):155-203.\n50\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":52,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n82. Bath J. and Turberfield A.J. DNA nanomachines. Nature Nanotechnology, VOL 2 : MAY 2007.\n83. Watson JD, Crick FH. Molecular structure of nucleic acids; a structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature. 1953 Apr 25;171(4356):737-8.\n84. Sanger F, Nicklen S, Coulson AR. DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1977 Dec;74(12):5463-7.\n85. Saiki RK, Scharf S, Faloona F, Mullis KB, Horn GT, Erlich HA, et al. Enzymatic amplification of beta-globin genomic sequences and restriction site analysis for diagnosis of sickle cell anemia. Science. 1985 Dec 20;230(4732):1350-4.\n86. Mao, C and Yu, H. Growing millimeter-sized DNA crystals. SPIE Newsroom, April 2006.\n87. Seeman N C. Nucleic acid junctions and lattices J. Theor. Biol. 99 237–47, 1982.\n88. Seeman, N. C. De novo design of sequences for nucleic acid structural engineering. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyns 8, 573–581, 1990.\n89. Carbone A., Seeman NC. Molecular Tiling and DNA Self-assembly. Aspects of Molecular Computing. 61-83,\n90. Winfree E, Yang X, Seeman NC (1998b) Universal computation via self-assembly of DNA: Some theory and experiments. In: Landweber LF, Baum EB, editors. DNA-based computers II. Providence, Rhode Island: American Mathematical Society. pp. 191–213.\n91. Winfree E Simulations of computing by self-assembly. Technical report CS-TR:1998.22. Pasadena, California: California Institute of Technology. 1998.\n92. Wang H. Proving theorems by pattern recognition II. Bell System Tech J 40: 1–42, 1961.\n93. Wang H An unsolvable problem on dominoes. Technical report BL-30 (II-15). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Computation Laboratory.1962.\n94. Winfree E., Liu F., Wenzler L A, Seeman N C. Design and Self-Assembly of Two-Dimensional DNA Crystals, Nature, VOL 394 6 AUGUST, 1998.\n95. Winfree, E. Algorithmic Self-Assembly of DNA: Theoretical Motivations and 2D Assembly Experiments. Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics 11: 263—270, 2000.\n96. Winfree E. and Bekbolatov R. Proofreading tile sets: Error correction for algorithmic self-assembly. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Meeting on DNA Based Computers. Madison, Wisconsin, June 2003.\n97. Reif, J.H., Sahu, S. and Yin, P. “Compact Error-Resilient Computational DNA Tilings,” Nanotechnology Science and Computation (Chen, J. et al. Eds.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 79-103, 2006.\n98. Fujibayashi, K., Murata, S. “A method of error suppression for self-assembling DNA tiles,” DNA Computing 10 (Ferretti et al. Eds.), LNCS 3384, Springer- Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 113-127, 2005.\n99. Fujibayashi, Yu Zhang D., Winfree E., Murata S. Error Suppression Mechanisms for DNA Tile Self-Assembly and their Simulations. Nat Comput. Springer, 2008.\n100. Adleman, L.: Molecular Computation of Solutions to Combinatorial Problems, Science, Vol.266, pp.1021-1024, 1994.\n101. Winfree, E.: Algorithmic Self-Assembly of DNA, Ph.D Thesis, California Institute of Technology, 1998.\n102. Winfree, E., Yang, X. and Seeman, N. C.: Universal Computation via Self-assembly of DNA : Some Theory and Experiments, DNA based Computers 2, DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, Vol.44, pp.191-213,1999.\n51\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":53,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n103. Winfree, E., Liu, F., Wenzler, L., Seeman, N.C.: Design and self-assembly of two-dimensional DNA crystals, Nature, Vol. 394, pp.539-544, 1998.\n104. Several papers related to error suppression of DNA tiles are presented in: Preliminary Proceedings of Tenth International Meeting on DNA Computing (Edtors. C. Ferretti, et. al), Milan, 2004.\n105. Somei, K., Kaneda, S., Fujii, T., and S. Murata, “A microfluidic device for DNA tile self-assembly,” DNA Computing 11 (A. Carbone and N.A. Pierce Eds.), LNCS 3892, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 325-335, 2006.\n106. Somei, K., Kaneda, S., Fujii, T., and S. Murata, “A microfluidic device for DNA tile self-assembly,” DNA Computing 11 (A. Carbone and N.A. Pierce Eds.), LNCS 3892, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 325-335, 2006.\n107. Huang,M.C., Ye,H., Kuan,Y.K., Li,M.H. and Ying,J.Y. (2009) Integrated two-step gene synthesis in a microfluidic device. Lab. Chip, 9, 276–285.\n108. Mueller,S., Coleman,J.R. and Wimmer,E. (2009) Putting synthesis into biology: a viral view of genetic engineering through de novo gene and genome synthesis. Chem. Biol., 16, 337–347.\n109. Lee CC, Snyder TM, Quake SR. A microfluidic oligonucleotide synthesizer. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010 May;38(8):2514-21. Epub 2010 Feb 21.\n110. LaBean T.H., Yan H., Kopatsch J., Liu F., Winfree E, Reif J.H., and Seeman N.C. Construction, analysis, ligation, and self-assembly of DNA triple crossover complexes. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 122:1848–1860, 2000.\n111. Yan H, Zhang X, Shen Z, Seeman NC. A robust DNA mechanical device controlled by hybridization topology. Nature. 2002 Jan 3;415(6867):62-5.\n112. Rothemund PW. Folding DNA to create nanoscale shapes and patterns. Nature. 2006 Mar 16;440(7082):297-302.\n113. Shih W.M., Quispe J.D., and . Joyce G.F. A 1.7-kilobase single-stranded DNA that folds into a nanoscale octahedron. Nature, 427(6453):618–621, 2004.\n114. Rothemund P.W.K., Scaffolded DNA origami: From generalized multicrossovers to polygonal networks Nanotechnology: Science and Computation, pp 3-21 (2006).\n115. Seelig, G., Soloveichi, D., Zhang, D.Y. and Winfree, E., “Enzyme-Free Nucleic Acid Logic Circuits,” Science, 314, pp. 1585-1588, 2006.\n116. Adleman, L.: Molecular Computation of Solutions to Combinatorial Problems, Science, Vol.266, pp.1021-1024, 1994.\n117. N. C. Seeman, C. D. Mao, T. LaBean, and J. H. Reif, “XOR operations by algorithmic assembly of DNA tiles,” Biophys. J., pt. 2, vol. 80, no. 1, p. 45, Jan. 2001.\n118. Stojanovic MN, Stefanovic D. Deoxyribozyme-based half-adder. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2003 Jun;125(22):6673-6.\n119. Stojanovic, M.N., Nikic, D.B. and Stefanivic, D. Implicit OR tiling of deoxyribozymes: construction of molecular scale OR, NAND and four input logic gates. J. Serb. Chem Soc. 68, 321-326 (2003).\n120. Stojanovic MN, Stefanovic D. A deoxyribozyme-based molecular automaton. Nat Biotechnol. 2003 Sep;21(9):1069-74.\n121. Stojanovic MN, Mitchell TE, Stefanovic D. Deoxyribozyme-based logic gates. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2002 Apr;124(14):3555-61.\n122. Macdonald J, Li Y, Sutovic M, Lederman H, Pendri K, Lu WH, et al. Medium scale integration of molecular logic gates in an automaton. Nano Letters. 2006 Nov;6(11):2598-603.\n52\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"fd1d7bfe8b1d70b1","page":54,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n123. Lund K, Manzo AJ, Dabby N, Michelotti N, Johnson-Buck A, Nangreave J, et al. Molecular robots guided by prescriptive landscapes. Nature. 2010 May 13;465(7295):206-10.\n124. Li JWJ, Tan WH. A single DNA molecule nanomotor. Nano Letters. 2002 Apr;2(4):315-8.\n125. Mao CD, Sun WQ, Shen ZY, Seeman NC. A nanomechanical device based on the B-Z transition of DNA. Nature. 1999 Jan;397(6715):144-6.\n126. Yurke B, Turberfield AJ, Mills AP, Jr., Simmel FC, Neumann JL. A DNA-fuelled molecular machine made of DNA. Nature. 2000 Aug 10;406(6796):605-8.\n127. Tian Y, He Y, Chen Y, Yin P, Mao CD. Molecular devices - A DNAzyme that walks processively and autonomously along a one-dimensional track. Angewandte Chemie-International Edition. 2005;44(28):4355-8.\n128. Kang HZ, Liu HP, Phillips JA, Cao ZH, Kim Y, Chen Y, et al. Single-DNA Molecule Nanomotor Regulated by Photons. Nano Letters. 2009 Jul;9(7):2690-6.\n129. Gu HZ, Chao J, Xiao SJ, Seeman NC. A proximity-based programmable DNA nanoscale assembly line. Nature. 2010 May;465(7295):202-U86.\n130. Pei R, Taylor SK, Stefanovic D, Rudchenko S, Mitchell TE, Stojanovic MN. Behavior of polycatalytic assemblies in a substrate-displaying matrix. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 2006 Oct;128(39):12693-9.\n53\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":1,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nDefense\nIntelligence\nReference\nDocument\n\nAcquisition Threat Support\n\n23 March 2010\n\nICOD: 1 December 2009\n\nDIA-08-1003-012\n\nTechnological Approaches to Controlling External Devices in the Absence of Limb-Operated Interfaces\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":2,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTechnological Approaches to Controlling External Devices\nin the Absence of Limb-Operated Interfaces\n\nPrepared by:\n\nAcquisition Support Division (DWO-3)\nDefense Warning Office\nDirectorate for Analysis\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n\nAuthor:\nAAP Person 73\n\nAdministrative Note\n\nCOPYRIGHT WARNING: Further dissemination of the photographs in this publication is not authorized.\n\nThis product is one in a series of advanced technology reports produced in FY 2009\nunder the Defense Intelligence Agency, Defense Warning Office's Advanced Aerospace\nWeapon System Applications (AAWSA) Program. Comments or questions pertaining to\nthis document should be addressed to AAP Person 1 AAWSA Program\nManager, Defense Intelligence Agency, ATTN: CLAR/DWO-3, Bldg 6000, Washington,\nDC 20340-5100.\n\nii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":3,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nContents\n\nIntroduction ........................................................................................v\nDirect Neural Signals ........................................................................... 1\nIndirect Neuronal Signals – The BOLD Effect ....................................... 3\nControl of External Devices ................................................................... 4\nNoninvasive Technologies ..................................................................... 6\nEEG ........................................................................................... 7\nMEG ........................................................................................... 8\nEMG ........................................................................................... 9\nMRI and fMRI ............................................................................. 9\nNIRS ........................................................................................... 10\nInvasive Technologies ........................................................................... 10\nOpen-Loop Direct Cortical Array Algorithm Modeling ....................................... 11\nClosed-Loop Peripheral Arrays Utilizing Visual Feedback ............................... 13\nMEMS, ECoG, and PSoC Circuitry ............................................................. 14\nChronic Neural Implants and fMRI ............................................................ 16\nNew Electrode Designs ........................................................................... 18\nHybrid Neuro-Robotic Systems for True Closed-Loop BMI ............................... 20\nTrials Using Human Subjects ..................................................................... 22\nOptical Stimulation of Action Potentials ....................................................... 23\nDiscussion ........................................................................................... 23\nNoninvasive Electrical Devices ................................................................ 24\nNoninvasive BOLD-Based devices............................................................. 25\nNoninvasive Magnetic Devices ................................................................ 26\nInvasive Technologies – General, Optical, and Ex-Vivo Engineering ................. 26\nImplantable Chips, Ladders, and Arrays ..................................................... 27\n\niii\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":4,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nConclusions ........................................................................................... 27\n\nFigures\n\nFigure 1. Simplified Rendering of a Neuron ............................................................ 1\nFigure 2. The General Layout of a Closed-Loop Control Interface ............................ 5\nFigure 3. Two Commercially Available EEG Sensors ................................................ 8\nFigure 4. Experimental Overview of Brain-Controlled Robot in a Closed Loop\nWith Visual Feedback Experiment ........................................................... 13\nFigure 5. Schematic of the Neurochip Functional Blocks ....................................... 15\nFigure 6. Implant Location ..................................................................................... 16\nFigure 7. Histology and Electrode Tracks ................................................................ 17\nFigure 8. The Michigan Electrodes ........................................................................ 18\nFigure 9. Image Distortion and Custom Microwire Electrode Assembly to\nImprove It ............................................................................................... 19\nFigure 10. Example of T2 Variability ....................................................................... 19\nFigure 11. T2 Value Analysis Summary of T2 Values in All the Image Slices That\nSpanned the Electrode Arrays in All Animals ......................................... 20\nFigure 12. A Hybrid Neuro–Robotic System ............................................................ 21\nFigure 13. Experimental Arrangements ................................................................... 21\n\niv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":5,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nTechnological Approaches to Controlling External Devices in the Absence of Limb-Operated Interfaces\n\nIntroduction\n\nSince the advent of modern interactive control of computers, technologies have been sought to directly connect the biological and the physical to form a seamless entity. While science fiction explores the possibilities of shared consciousness between brains and mainframes, real-life scientists work toward an equally fantastic but more pedestrian goal of eliminating required electromechanical human-machine interfaces (HMIs). Such technologies promise integration of thought and computer-controlled action, without the need for a limb-operated device to translate intent from physiological networks to physical circuits.\n\nThis paper first briefly reviews underlying neural structure, function, and activity to provide background on the type of signals and the scale of temporal changes that arise from conscious control within the nervous system. A short primer on brain-machine interfaces (BMIs) is included at the end of the background material. This is followed by a survey of the state-of-the-art detection and stimulation technologies available utilizing noninvasive and invasive methods, including several studies that exemplify research paths currently being undertaken. Discussion brings together elements of the technology survey, application limitations, a timeline for useful commercial deployment, and predicted future research directions. Two technology research paths are highlighted as the most probable to produce functionally useful devices (defined as nearly equal or even superior to the control capabilities of current HMIs) in the near and far term.\n\nThe technology endpoint this paper seeks is thought-based operation of remote machinery during normal human activities without mechanical device interaction—that is, control of external devices without the need to go to a specified location, such as a shielded room; without the need to remain perfectly motionless to reduce signal noise; and without the need for interaction with a normal electro-mechanical device, such as an i-Phone or other handheld device with buttons and trackballs. Data transfer rates are sought to exceed 5-10 bits/second to be useful for operation of complex devices; this rate range and above is referred to as high-bandwidth BMIs. Response time for a 1-of-N selection of commands is targeted at 300 milliseconds or less. These are the operational parameters assumed for final implementation unless some limitation or supercapability is described.\n\nThe paper concludes that noninvasive electrical monitoring of neural activity, primarily reading combined action of muscles and neurons, is the most promising commercial technology in the near term. Inherent limitations in the noninvasive electrical approach require future development of different research paths. The paper argues, mainly by eliminating other approaches, that the most probable technology in the long term involves invasive single-neuron-based direct cortical connections to form a network of high-bandwidth duplex communication pathways. Currently the most promising technologies\n\nv\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":6,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nfor robust construction of such an interface are optical stimulation, gating, and sensory devices, and chip-based electrode arrays that have been encased in ex-vivo–engineered neural tissue.\nvi\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":7,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nDirect Neural Signals\nThe human nervous system has two classes of cells, neurons and glia. Based on all research to date, it is believed that signals within the network of neurons constitute the whole of information processing, with glial cells playing a purely supporting role. This neural doctrine has dominated research in BMI until recently and still constitutes the only major research path in direct technologies. Furthermore, all technologies directly measuring human neuronal action rely on detecting or influencing electrical activity of these cells; no current in situ research selectively affects neurotransmitter activity between local cells for the purpose of information exchange. Therefore, the focus for the foreseeable future will be on the electrical activity of neurons as the primary target of BMI.\nNeurons consist of four parts: axon, dendrites, cell body or soma, and pre-synaptic terminals. Electrical information is transmitted to the neuron through the dendrites, proceeds through the cell body, and leaves the cell through the axon at one or more pre-synaptic terminals. Neurons have one axon and from one to tens of thousands of dendrites.\nFigure 1. Simplified Rendering of a Neuron. The arrows indicate the direction in which signals are conveyed. The single axon conducts signals away from the cell body, while the multiple dendrites receive signals from the axons of other neurons. The nerve terminals end on the dendrites or cell body of other neurons or on other cell types, such as muscle or gland cells. (Reference 1)\ncell body dendrites axon (less than 1 mm to more than 1 m in length) terminal branches of axon\nChemical details of how the action potentials travel through the cell or are transmitted across the synapse are not important to the current treatise, other than the distinction that in these biologically based electrical networks, ions of sodium, potassium, and chlorine move through the cell membranes perpendicular to the propagation of the action potential down the axon. This allows information to be transmitted faster than ions could flow down the axon. The propagation of information is similar to a wave traveling down a garden hose: quickly move one end of the hose back and forth with sufficient force, and a wave will travel to the other end of the hose; however, any part of the hose structure has only moved (nominally) perpendicular to the direction of wave propagation. In a similar fashion, ions flow through channels across the axon’s cell membrane, changing the local membrane potential and thus propagating the electrical signal down the axon.\n1\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":8,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nThe signal transmission down the axon of a neuron is an all-or-nothing process. When the cell body is stimulated above threshold, the axon transmits the same action potential at the same speed and in the same direction, regardless of the extent above threshold or duration of the input. Action potentials have durations of 1-10 milliseconds. Input signals can result in transmission of multiple action potentials, and thus the frequency and number of neuronal firings do vary with the input. Neurons require some time to reset between firings, nominally the duration of the pulse for that axon, yielding a typical maximum firing rate of between 100 hertz (Hz) and 1 kilohertz (kHz).\nIt is instructional at this point to contrast this mechanism with propagation of signals through a physical electrical circuit, the planned external portion of our BMI. In a copper wire, electrons carry the signal. Electrons drift along the signal path, but the signal itself moves as a compression wave rather than a transverse wave as in the biological system. Going back to our garden hose example, consider the hose now filled with small marbles: inserting a marble at one end will move each marble in the hose just a little, but very rapidly the last marble in line will pop out of the far end of the hose. As with the biological system, the signal is propagated to the far end of the hose by local actors rather than physical motion of a single ion or electron moving the whole distance. The underlying physics governing the signal transmission makes metallic and semimetallic circuits about a million times faster than the biological system.\nThis difference in the carriers and underlying mechanisms of signal transmission between biological and physical circuits has so far prevented the invention of a direct connection between the two disparate systems. Instead, both noninvasive and invasive direct-detection technologies rely on placing physical sensors or transmitters in close proximity to the neurons of interest and utilizing classical electrodynamics to govern signal jump between the systems. Additionally, given the maximum typical firing rate for neurons of 1 kHz, sampling of action potentials at a few kHz will be fast enough to detect firing of any individual neuron, though super-sampling above 10 kHz can be used to reduce noise. Higher sampling frequencies also may be required if multiple neurons are monitored and quantitative information about their relative firing sequence is desired. Frequencies of a 1 kHz or below are sufficient to stimulate action potentials, and again, higher system frequency may be required for multiple neuron sequential stimulation. Finally, higher frequencies may be required if monitoring or stimulation of some aspect of signal transmission other than action potentials is sought, such as monitoring single ion channels.1 There is currently no evidence that transduction frequencies above 100 kHz have any advantage in BMIs, thus the main challenge is the connection dynamics, since even this ultra-maximum frequency is easily attainable with current electronic manufacturing technology.\nThe human brain doesn’t process information as a traditional computer does. Information is moved around through pathways and at certain neurons it is allowed or not allowed to pass based on excitory or inhibitory dendritic signals arriving before triggering of action potentials. Local groups of neurons can act nearly coherently, for example in volition of motor action like a hand movement. Detecting such coherent firing at nodes around the brain is robust both noninvasively and invasively, though noninvasive techniques currently cannot resolve firing sequences of individual neurons within such groups.\n1 Technologies that monitor single ion channels on a neuronal membrane are important for research on neural function and neurotransmitter action. However, these devices are ultra-sensitive to physical motion, and have so far not proven useful in large scale information transfer required in BMIs.\n2\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":9,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nLiving neurons in an active tissue fire in the rest state. Changes in the frequency of these firings imply that a given neuron is currently involved in the processing of information. Bulk changes in local field potential oscillations imply that several neurons are active. This is the signal seen in the noninvasive direct-measurement techniques of electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG).\nMovement as simple as an eye blink involves signal communication through a million neurons. Several locales in the nervous system thus offer the possibility of placement of an invasive monitoring device for detecting electrical activity associated with an eye blink or other signal of interest. Many other factors will influence the placement decision, but considering only catching the signal as an action potential, using any neuron along the complete pathway is equally as good, assuming detection of individual neuronal firing can be accomplished.\nConsidering cortical placement of detection devices, the most common area of activity under study is the outer covering of gray matter of the cerebral cortex, the neocortex. The neocortex is about 2.5 mm thick in humans and follows the ridges and fissures of the brain (gyri and sulci, respectively, or gyrus and sulcus, if singular). The neocortex is roughly divided into six layers and different cortical probes can concentrate on activity in different layers, or just measure the combined activity on the surface of the cortex, or the combined activity that is detectable noninvasively through the layers of tissue and bone of the cranium.\nDetecting single firings of individual neurons is a difficult process because the signals are weak to start with, and not isolated from the rest of the electrical activity within the brain. Large groups of coherent neurons, perhaps a few thousand to tens of thousands all firing at once in relation to an external event, are the most studied of single firing signals.2 One of the most studied signals is the so-called P300 which occurs in many cognitive tasks (References 2-4).\nP300 is a term used to indicate a pulse signal from a large group of neurons that appears about 300 milliseconds after a stimulus event. Peaks that occur between 200 and 400 milliseconds are commonly grouped into the P300 category. The “P” stands for a positive measured voltage, while “N” signals are negative.3 The P300 signal has been shown to be influenced by top-down executive function and is therefore a prime candidate for a trainable interface (Reference 5). Earlier signals, like P50 and N100, are of a greater interest for differential diagnosis of pathology in current research.\nThe preceding discussion is greatly simplified version of the electrical dynamics of neuronal firing and does not include differences between axon and dendrite signals, or the transmission of signals across the synapse. Complete discussion of underlying electrical signals in the nervous system can be found in (References 6, 7).\nIndirect Neuronal Signals – The BOLD Effect\n2 Single firing signals here mean a single peak of combined electrical activity relative to an event. This is not necessarily the same as single firings of each neuron.\n3 The literature is not consistent with plotting P signals up, and N signals down; however, P peaks are always in the opposite direction of N peaks.\n3\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":10,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nThe brain activity mentioned above is a complex chain of ionic motion within the central nervous system. Ionic production, release, and movement within and between cells all consume energy. This energy is supplied by the conversion of blood-borne oxyhemoglobin to deoxyhemoglobin. The rate of oxygen consumption in a localized volume varies based on local neural activity. The circulatory system compensates for changes in energy demand by increasing or decreasing both the flow rate and volume of blood, regionally and locally. Local energy demand, expressed in the capillary beds, will alter the rate at which oxygen is metabolized, called the cerebral rate of oxygen metabolism, abbreviated CMRO2. When brain activity increases in a region, the circulatory response, called the hemodynamic response, will be increases in flow and volume, while the local areas increase CMRO2.\nThe hemodynamic response consistently provides an excess of oxygen over what is required, and this results in some oxyhemoglobin traveling through the capillary bed and local venous structure without being converted into deoxyhemoglobin. Oxy- and deoxyhemoglobin have different magnetic susceptibilities, and different infrared spectra. The hemodynamic response, by changing the net ratio of oxy- to deoxyhemoglobin in the local venous structure, thus changes the local magnetic susceptibility and local infrared resonance spectra around focused brain activity. This complex chain reaction is called the Blood Oxygen Level Dependent, or BOLD effect (Reference 8). The BOLD effect leads to a method to indirectly measure the local brain activity by monitoring the hemodynamic response using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) or Near Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS).\nThe BOLD response to any event peaks about 4-6 seconds after the event occurs, limiting the applications for which monitoring these signals and their associated delay may be useful, given the BMI operating parameters defined above Furthermore, person to person variation in distributed signals show significant differences in regions activated (Reference 9), though there is evidence that these inter-subject variations are stable intra-subject over time (Reference 10).\nControl of External Devices\nIn general, there are two types of BMI design called open-loop and closed-loop. Open loop designs, those either detecting activity or providing stimulation, are important for BMI research and application other than the practical control of an external device. Closed-loop systems include both output signals from the brain to effect a change in the state of a device, and a stimulation channel, which can be used as feedback. In some system designs, the feedback can be via visual cues such as watching a display (Reference 11). Open-loop systems are important for BMI research and have application in sense replacement such as artificial hearing, or when extensive output signal processing is combined with external device state feedback (see remote robot operation below). For learning and fine, efficient control of external devices without significant external processing, closed-loop systems are typically needed.\nSeveral components constitute a general BMI system for control of an external device (Figure 2). As mentioned in the previous section, the interfaces where the information signal makes the jump between biological and physical pathways are the most challenging part of the system. These connections can be placed to stimulate or read peripheral or cerebral neurons. The processing step could be as simple as amplification\n4\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":11,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nof a spiking train to trigger a switch, or as complex as decoding signal from noise utilizing a 300-channel EEG cap.\n\nComponents of a Closed-loop BMI Control System\nAdditional sensory\nInput signal processing\nInput interface\nBrain\nOutput signal processing\nOutput interface\nExternal Device\n\nFigure 2. The General Layout of a Closed-Loop Control Interface. The input and output interfaces can attach to read or affect activity of cerebral or peripheral neurons. Additional sensory feedback channels such as visual displays, audio tones, or haptic feedback are possible. In some system designs, especially noninvasive types, these sensory feedback channels replace stimulation inputs. In an open-loop interface, either the input or output signal paths are absent.\n\nOne consideration in developing a BMI control system is the utility of the application: does it make sense to directly tie these controls to neural activity? The bulk of research in direct neural interfaces is toward the goal of restoring mechanical capabilities to those individuals who have either lost limbs or lost control of limbs through central nervous system injury or disease. In these cases it is of obvious utility to produce a system that moves a cursor across screen to select an item over the course of several seconds; however, for a healthy individual, it is far more practical to execute a hand movement to control a mechanical device4 to achieve the same goal.\n\nAn exception to consider is the case of applications where the subject's hands or feet are already occupied with other essential tasks in the overall application. A research question for any such application is whether training a subject to utilize a BMI is advantageous over a more complex mechanical interface. Furthermore, whether training on a new BMI affects learning/retaining proficiency with similar BMIs is an additional concern.\n\nMoreover, for any BMI, one can quantitatively describe the information transfer in controlling the magnitude of human motor action (Reference 12). Since the advent of digital control of external devices, this information is expressed in equivalent bits per second transferred.\n\n4 Mechanical device as used here represents any limb-operated interface, such as a mouse or touchscreen.\n\n5\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":12,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nsecond transferred. Higher bit rates equate to more efficient interfaces. Baseline examples of performance include finger pointing, which can convey 14 bits/s of information (Reference 13), operation of a mouse about 8 bits/s (Reference 14), while stylus tapping a soft QWERTY keyboard on a PDA has a lower rate, around 5 bits/s (Reference 15).\n\nOnce these questions are researched and answered for a given application, the design choice should be made whether a new mechanical interface, or an optical interface that tracking detailed motion of the eyes, body and limbs, may be the optimum solution rather than a BMI.5\n\nAnother consideration in developing a BMI control system is the cognitive limit of supervisory control of external devices. The current state of the art for human interfaces involves volition of control, meaning that there is some executive supervision, typically involving the pre-frontal cortex, active during the control process. Recent studies relating to control of semiautonomous vehicles show that there are significant limits on the number of supervisory activities that can be undertaken simultaneously (Reference 16). In response to these limits, one can consider utilization of nonsupervised brain networks in control of external devices, similar to those brain systems that initiate very complex muscle coordination activity such as martial arts or playing a musical instrument, or systems like those that are responsible for autonomic function. Application from such research is long term, but there are current studies that show BMI training of at least one spinal cord patient exhibited differential activity in the cerebellum, owing to extraordinary plasticity (Reference 17). It is therefore not out of the realm of possibility that sufficient input and output interfaces that include neural pathways through the cerebellum could result in over-learning a BMI application to the point that supervisory control is developed and thus significant cognitive effort is not required.\n\nNoninvasive Technologies\n\nThere are four noninvasive technologies currently in widespread use in monitoring brain activity. The two direct-measure technologies involve detecting surface currents from the relative voltage changes at or just below the scalp, electroencephalography (EEG), and detection of near scalp magnetic fields associated with neural pathway current flow, magnetoencephalography (MEG). The remaining two indirect measures involve monitoring BOLD response through rapid successions of whole brain MRI (functional MRI or fMRI), and near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS).6\n\nThe primary technology used for BMI is also the oldest. EEG was first described in 1929 (Reference 18) and now exists in several derivative forms. Traditional EEG uses electrodes at the surface of the scalp to measure and amplify potential differences between points above the cortical surface and a fixed reference such as the average reading from the earlobes. Traditional EEG data is analyzed by breaking up the power spectrum into several bands between 0.5 and 100 Hz. A derivative form of EEG developed about 10 years later is called event-related potentials, or ERP. In ERP, scalp\n\n5 There is a valid argument to be made that optical tracking and analysis, especially of the eyes, is a BMI technology as defined in the current treatise. It is excluded as one merely by fiat.\n6 NIRS is occasionally referred to as functional NIRS or fNIRS. NIRS using multiple sources to produce 3D images of internal changes in blood flow is occasionally called diffuse optical tomography (DOT). DOT is a more general technology that can also refer methods such as to visible-light laser excitation of tissue.\n\n6\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":13,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndata is averaged over several electrodes time-locked to a stimulus (Reference 19). Both the previous methods record summed electrical activity of nominally 50,000 local neurons, thus large coherent group spiking activity7 is required to produce appreciable signal.\n\nEEG\n\nEEG-based BMI systems use pattern recognition among the several electrodes to transmit information. In closed-loop systems, audio or visual feedback is utilized. Training on the system and adaptation by the processing software can increase target detection efficiency, though some recent work shows that systems can be produced that nearly work right out of the box. Blankertz demonstrated a system that required only 20 minutes of training on naïve subjects (Reference 20).\n\nDevelopment is partially being driven by the need to provide a means of communication or action on the environment to patients that have lost control of their body. Much of this clinically-orientated research has focused on 'locked-in' patients, who suffer from total paralysis following brainstem stroke or degenerative diseases such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) (Reference 21). The goal has been to extract control signals either from surface EEG signals or from electrodes implanted near or within the cerebral cortex: ECoG (see next section on invasive technologies for details on ECoG). ALS deteriorates peripheral motor function before progression to cognitive areas. This greatly reduces a primary source of bioelectric noise, cranial and facial muscle action, and thus provides a reduced signal processing problem to decode neural signals. Successful communication has been established via EEG BMI in several studies based on both spiking activity and P300 signals (References 22-25). The response time to execute a command using these systems is measured in seconds. The results from ALS patients represent a best-case scenario for what could be accomplished using EEG-only sensors in a normal, healthy human who would have significant muscle noise to sift through.\n\nThe number of electrodes and the time-consuming application of conducting gel make EEG arrays bulky and slow to put on. An improvement would be a reduction in the number of electrodes, typically a few dozen for traditional EEG, and electrodes that could operate without conducting gel. Commercial versions of dry-electrode devices are being released on the market from companies such as Neurosky, OCZ Technology, and Emotiv.8 The Neurosky and Emotive systems claim proprietary processing algorithms, lack peer-reviewed literature supporting their claims, and even discuss using facial muscle movement to send signals (References 26, 27), raising doubt about whether neural signals are being measured at all. The NIA, for Neural Impulse Actuator, from OCZ clearly states that the electrodes pick up a combination of EEG, EMG, and EOG,9 and that the algorithm is only interpreting the net signal patterns instead of trying to sort out the EEG component.\n\n7 Spiking activity is the term used for recognition of action potentials. Spikes are fast and easy to recognize with electronic triggering circuits, while more complex waveforms require additional processing.\n8 Websites www.emotiv.com, www.ocztechnology.com, and www.neurosky.com, last accessed 12 May 2009.\n9 The electrco-myogram (EMG) reads signals from muscle activity, in this case facial muscles. The electro-oculogram (EOG) measures electrical signals arising from muscles associated with the eyes.\n\n7\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":14,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCommercial EEG sensors\n\nMindSet, by NeuroSky\nnia, by OCZ Technology\n\nFigure 3. Two Commercially Available EEG Sensors. The MindSet utilizes two sensors, one in the right earphone and one for placement on the forehead (what looks like a microphone arm is to be pressed against the forehead). The nia records signals from three sensors on the forehead.\n\nIn a documented and peer-reviewed study, Popescu and colleagues have shown a system that uses 6 dry electrodes and is 90 percent accurate in operation of a 1-D cursor by untrained subjects. Additionally, a measurement of error rates as a function of number of electrodes show that an increase to 12 electrodes could drop the error rate to around 5 percent, but that additional electrodes much beyond a dozen do not significantly improve the accuracy of their algorithm (Reference 28).\n\nMEG\n\nMEG-based BMI systems have been shown to be feasible utilizing a subject imagining limb movements for binary decisions (References 29, 30). Future work could improve the methodology to parallel that achieved with EEG; however, there are significant technological hurdles to a field deployment of MEG. The magnetic fields from neural activity are detected with very sensitive devices called superconducting quantum interference devices, or SQUIDs. These detectors are sensitive to the neural activity induced 100 fT (femtoTesla) changes near the scalp. SQUIDs only operate at very low temperatures thus requiring a cryogenic system as well significant detection and amplification electronics. The availability of a cold sink and high vacuum, such as in a space-based application, could reduce the support system overhead, but there is still the matter of the weakness of the signals. Even if future detector development like atomic magnetometers would solve the equipment overhead issue for Earthbound application, the fact that 100 fT is about 100 million times smaller than the Earth's magnetic field will prove an insurmountable barrier to sifting signal from noise in anything but a heavily-shielded, metal-free environment. Attempts have been made to use High-Tc superconductors as a shielding material with some success (Reference 31), but significant further development is needed.\n\n8\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":15,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nEMG\n\nInstead of measuring nerve impulses and amplifying them, one can design a system that monitors muscle movement in a hands-free approach to a mechanical interface, essentially using the muscles as a biological amplifier of neural signals. One may close the feedback loop using a heads-up display, monocle, or other visual device, or another traditional sensory feedback. The advantage of such a design is that controls may be actuated through a lightweight wireless system, effectively providing control stations anywhere such a wireless system would work. Such a system could be used to untie a pilot from the cockpit. Recent work has shown that performance of 1-2 bits/s is possible with minimal training, about four times the current performance of a comparison EEG forehead sensor (Reference 14).\n\nMRI AND FMRI\n\nMagnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) works by a simple excitation and relaxation of spin states. When molecules containing hydrogen are placed in a strong static magnetic field, a small but detectable number of hydrogen protons align their intrinsic spins along the direction of the external field. An applied radiofrequency (RF) pulse near the proton resonant frequency, 42.6 MHz/Tesla or 128 MHz at 3 Tesla, knocks the spins perpendicular to the field and the relaxation back to ground state releases RF energy in patterns that can be reconstructed to show both composition and distribution of any hydrogen-rich materiel. The resonant frequency is a direct function of the local magnetic field defined by the Larmor relation: ω = γ B; where ω is the frequency of precession, B is the local magnetic field, and γ is a constant of the material, 42.6 MHz/Tesla for bare protons as mentioned above.\n\nSmall perturbations to the static field will change the resonant frequency. By applying a small gradient to the static field, for example 100 milliTesla/meter along the z-axis, and limiting the bandwidth of the RF excitation signal to δω, one may select a slice of the brain perpendicular to the z-axis for excitation to δz. A change in the gradient field will change the position of the excited slice for the next excitation. Similar gradients in the x and y directions can limit the excitation to a single small volume of brain tissue. In current MRIs, these gradient fields are produced with electromagnets, and the series of time-dependent imaging gradient manipulations is called the scan sequence.\n\nFree hydrogen (H) would produce a resonant signal slightly different than the bare proton due to the local field changes induced by its valance electron. Hydrogen gas (H2) would produce a still different frequency since the local field around each proton is altered by the two shared electrons. Water molecules (H2O) contain two hydrogen atoms and an entirely different \"electron shield\" than either H or H2 and thus shows still another slightly different resonant frequency. Fat and other lipid molecules, important cell structure building blocks, have long chains of hydrocarbons, and the resulting ensemble of electron screening produces a wide peak that is substantially shifted10 from that of water.\n\nBrain gray matter and white matter have different macroscopic lipid content and are thus able to be differentiated in an MRI scan. Different signals also arise in bone,\n\n10 Frequency detection sensitivities in MRI are very good, and \"substantial\" here means about 3 parts per million. The frequency shifts caused by imaging gradients ranges in the parts per thousand.\n\n9\n\nUNCLASSIFIED// FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":16,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ncerebral-spinal fluid (CSF), and internal tissue structures of various other organs. Unlike x-ray based technologies, MRI scans can be optimized to contrast any of the many parts of the physics signal: total density of protons, water content, lipid content, and even particle motion in advanced techniques involving diffusion or spin labeling. Using such scans sequences that take several minutes, one can construct very high resolution images of gray and white matter structure for comparison with, and also mapping onto a “standard brain” template.\n\nIn addition to electron screening, macroscopic susceptibility will also change the local response to RF stimulation. The presence of even a small amount of metal, say as small as a hairpin, will greatly distort the reconstructed images. Indeed, the usual effect is a shift of frequency completely outside the sensitivity of the machine RF receiver in what is known as “drop-out.” Smaller changes in local susceptibility, like produced in the BOLD effect, are measureable.\n\nA series of fast scan sequences, typically collecting an entire brain volume at a resolution of 3 mm3 in 2 seconds, that are calibrated to optimize detection of the BOLD signal will show the dynamics of brain function under the specific internal or applied conditions; this is known as a functional MRI, or simply fMRI.11 The major advantages of fMRI are unmatched 3D spatial resolution, compared to other noninvasive imaging methods, and complete skull penetration, making it the only imaging modality to unambiguously detect limbic activations important for determining emotionally-laden neuropsychological states. The main disadvantage for BMI is that the BOLD signal is detected several seconds after the neuronal firing takes place, making fMRI inappropriate for many naturalistic applications.\n\nA long term prospect, likely in the 20- to 40-year timeframe, is that combined low-field MRI and MEG technology could detect neuronal firing deep in the brain and with high temporal accuracy. Initial experiments indicate some level of feasibility, but there is substantial development work required in room temperature low field magnetic field detection devices, such as atomic magnetometers, and signal processing algorithms to sift through the substantial electromagnetic background (References 32, 33).\n\nNIRS\n\nNear-infrared spectroscopy is an additional technology to monitor the BOLD effect noninvasively. Studies have shown it correlates well with the fMRI signal in animal models, although with reduced coverage and lower resolution (Reference 34). This lowered resolution greatly affects the accuracy of the technique, with recent work involving single trials and a decision attaining only 80 percent accuracy (Reference 35).\n\nInvasive Technologies\n\nThe most prolific invasive BMI for use in humans is the cochlear implant (Reference 36), a sensory neuroprosthesis designed to aid in hearing for deaf individuals. This device, under continued development and refinement for more than 30 years, consists of a microphone, sound processor, and a receiver that is attached to an array of\n11 Specifically this is T2* Echo-Planar Imaging, also called BOLD EPI, Gradient Echo EPI, or BOLD fMRI. This approach is used in well over 95 percent of published functional studies, though there are more advanced techniques that concentrate on smaller portions of the hemodynamic signal. For example, Spin-Echo EPI will provide a higher localization within the gray matter, but the cost is a loss of 90 percent of the signal amplitude.\n10\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":17,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\ncurrently 22 electrodes directly implanted into the cochlea of the inner ear. The microphone and sound processor replaces the outer and middle ear, while the electrodes replace the frequency selective hair fibers of the inner ear that normally would transmit electrical signals to the cochlea. The quality of the sound is much less than natural hearing, but the only option for patients who have lost hearing or were born deaf. It has been estimated that 100,000 cochlear implants provide sound to users worldwide (Reference 37). The cochlear implant is an open loop stimulation system that provides complex signals to the nervous system through a peripheral connection.\n\nBMI technologies have evolved from assistive technology devices solely targeted for the healthcare industry, into apparatuses designed for intracortical microstimulation to deliver sensory feedback. Such systems allow the simultaneous recording and microstimulation of neuronal and behavioral events. The primary device that has emerged leading this technological transformation is the direct cortical array containing either surface or neocortex penetrating electrodes. The direct cortical array is implanted on the surface of the brain near the functional area of interest, and then the connection is reverse-engineered: individual electrodes are tested to determine if they should be assigned as input, output, or neither.12 These devices are designed to fuse neural signaling pathways with external machinery into a 3D control system, such as those apparatuses designed to modulate the movement of appendages (e.g. robotic arms), though the signals could be used for control of any complex machine. The control circuits on these systems are intricate and often bulky, and they can be designed with either open- or closed-loop sensory feedback.\n\nAn additional device is the penetrating cortical electrode. These electrodes contain a ladder of input/output probes and can be selected to transmit or receive signals in any layer of the neocortex. Research is ongoing regarding the optimal layer with which to place an interface. When using penetrating electrodes, tissue response is an additional challenge as these devices frequently cause scarring. Animal studies are in progress to quantify this effect.\n\nTechnological challenges in development of all types of invasive BMI devices include signal decoding/stimulation algorithms, and localization of brain activation near the implant. Functional MRI (fMRI) is utilized in conjunction with the invasive implants to confirm additional neural network activity during interface tasks. Modifications in the design of electrodes is necessary for experiments involving fMRI (Reference 38).13\n\nThe majority of invasive experiments to date use animal or even tissue models, though a few human trials have been conducted (with the exception of the cochlear implant described above).\n\nOPEN-LOOP DIRECT CORTICAL ARRAY ALGORITHM MODELING\n\nIn traditional open loop experiments, eye movement systems are utilized to develop a linear model for a physiological system.14 In such experiments, invasive signals are recorded from the cortex and the motion of the eye is recorded in tandem. The location\n12 This procedure eliminates the need to directly locate the neuron(s) of interest during implantation.\n13 Field potentials at the points of metal electrodes cause concentration of RF energy from the excitation pulses of the MRI. This effect is used in a similar setup for tissue ablation therapy; however, such energy concentration is undesirable in the studies at hand.\n14 These techniques may be generally applied to any motor control systems.\n11\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":18,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\non the cortex to implant cortical arrays is determined from previous experiments in fMRI (References 39, 40). In this way, a map is constructed correlating electrical neural activity with muscle movement. The goal of this exercise is to develop an algorithm that will predict which muscles move based on reading the neural activity alone. The reading of the neural activity for eye movement can then be used to move a device such as a camera lens.\n\nThere are two main models of fine motor control, one where the cortical motor areas perform all of the control functions and receive all sensory feedback, and a second where the cortical areas direct the function and receive interpreted feedback through sub-cortical or even peripheral networks. For open-loop invasive BMI applications, this is an academic question since peripheral interfaces would receive and send the same signals in both models, and cortical interfaces would blindly adapt external decoding algorithms based on the signals present regardless of model.\n\nThere have been numerous demonstrations of nonhuman primates controlling robots or graphical cursors in real-time through signals collected from cortical areas that employ open loop experimentation (References 41, 42). Kim, et al. conducted experiments where monkeys are trained on tasks prior to implantation, and then the tasks are repeated multiple times while muscle action and cortical activity are monitored (Reference 42). In these trials, shoulder and elbow torque were measured while the arm itself was constrained in an exoskeleton such that the hand would only move in a plane axial to the monkey's torso. A visual cursor was introduced and projected on a screen above the monkeys hand to follow the 2-D motion from the center starting point to the various task targets, which are also projected on the screen. The shoulder and elbow position recorded the state of flexation of 6 sets of muscle groups, collectively called the musculoskeletal arm model (MAM). Relating the spiking activity from implanted arrays to even this simplified 2-D MAM motion proved quite complex, and no fit correlating the observed movements and neural activity could be obtained with a linear model when kinematic impedance was considered.15\n\nEven considering the six inputs, the 2-D problem is essentially a computer cursor control and therefore a relatively simple device, fully specified by a Cartesian coordinate system. The ultimate goal of these control systems is to manipulate something much more complex, like an arm, which may have many more degrees of freedom organized in a completely different coordinate system. For these tests a more elaborate “tracking system” may be utilized in teaching a primate to feed itself16 using a directly observed cortically controlled robotic arm.\n\nOpen-loop control systems have an inherent drawback in cases where cortical activity controls movement directly via an adaptive algorithm. Training the algorithm is the critical part of interface development. The adaptive algorithms use an iterative process to create a brain-to-cursor motion decoding scheme based on how the neurons fire when different targets are presented and therefore rely on previous normal feedback training – the brain knows how to move an arm because it has been moving an arm for most of its life.\n15 Impedance to motion is essential for realistic operation of artificial limbs.\n16 Food in this experiment is used as a reward.\n12\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":19,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nAn issue develops when an entirely new device is considered. The form of the movement control algorithm is similar to a population vector in that movement at each time step is determined by a vector sum of the neurons' normalized firing rates multiplied by a set of linear coefficients. Modern neuroscience has proven that tens of thousands, even up to millions of neurons fire in concert to perform even the most mundane of movements. These extended neural pathways developed through full-duplex closed loop training. It will thus be quite an issue in an open-loop design to develop an algorithm that can decode control signals for a system the brain has never controlled before, say a 12-direction rocket stabilization system.17 This places another limitation on the open-loop model, even using complex nonlinear fitting, and has driven development of the closed-loop model.\n\nCLOSED-LOOP PERIPHERAL ARRAYS UTILIZING VISUAL FEEDBACK\n\nIn a closed-loop system that provides feedback to a control system, the differences between the two models of movement become apparent. Sensory feedback within the system is used for error correction of fine motor control, such as balance – without fine motor control and error correction for balance, the human body could not stand up. In the model with abstract cortical control, feedback corrections are processed externally to the BMI and sensory feedback to the brain is usually limited to observation. This is a subtle distinction between open-loop with visual feedback and closed-loop abstract control that includes visual feedback. In the former, the visual feedback is intended to show success of a control command being sent by the brain, whereas in the latter, visual feedback is showing success of supervisory function of a semiautonomous mechanical device.\n\n[Figure 4: Neural Recording; Network Interface Architecture; Multi-level autonomous control; JST JAPAN; Duke University USA]\n\nFigure 4. Experimental Overview of Brain-Controlled Robot in a Closed-Loop With Visual Feedback Experiment. After decoding walking-related information from a monkey's brain activity while walking on a treadmill, these data were relayed from Duke University in USA to the Advanced Telecommunication Research in\n17 Twelve directions is the minimum number of positive controls commands to +/- x, y, and z thrust, as well as increasing or decreasing roll, pitch, and yaw. These are six degrees of freedom but as far as a BMI control system is concerned, increasing x and decreasing x are separate commands to decode.\n13\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":20,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\nJapan in real time. Using visual feedback to the monkey via live streaming video, the humanoid robot in Japan was shown to execute locomotion-like movements in a similar manner as the monkey. (Reference 43)\n\nAn example of a closed loop peripheral system is the creation of the humanoid robot called CB-i (Computational Brain Interface). This system is illustrated in Figure 4. In a recent experiment, CB-i successfully mimicked the physical actions being performed by a monkey that was positioned in a remote location (Reference 43).\n\nMEMS, ECOG, AND PSOC CIRCUITRY\n\nTo address the issue of signal interface between the biological and physical systems, development has focused on hybrid devices that are created by fusing together biomolecules, cells, and other tissues, with innovative micro-size current sensors using Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS). These systems often employ the use of biomaterials and functional high polymer materials that enable the device to sense information about the human body and the environment with greater speed and sensitivity than conventional metallic sensors. These devices are built from materials and mechanisms that are compatible with the human body, and they are proving to be powerful tools for interfacing between the human body and machines.\n\nThe emergence of MEMS biotechnology has motivated various strategies to detect electrical signals generated from a stimulated region within the brain into a captured electrical response that is translated to a machine interface. One advantage of these devices is that the fusing of biological to physical circuitry is performed external to the body and the interface connection of the implants is thus biological to biological. This avoids a natural reaction of the nervous system to form scar tissue around penetrating chronic physical probes.18 Scar tissue leads to degradation of proximal signal transfer over time. These neural-tissue encapsulated chips offer significant advantages over other technologies because of their ability to be rapidly integrated into the biological environment.\n\nNoninvasive EEG platforms often utilize a cap that covers the skull and reads the electrical signals generated from the brain on the surface of the skin atop the head. However, a technical limitation in the bandwidth of EEG-based methods often provides low information rates. Currently EEG methods are limited to 20–30 bits/min (< 0.5 bits/s). This drawback has prompted the use of a more accurate and speedy recording method based on invasive techniques such as the electrocorticogram (ECoG), where electrode arrays are placed on top of the cortex, but electrode penetration into brain tissue is minimal. ECoGs have become synonymous with the pre-surgical monitoring of epileptic seizure foci (Reference 45). Valuable insights can be gained by combining both invasive and noninvasive schemes. For example, combining functional MRI (fMRI) and intracortical recording has yielded important information about metabolic mechanisms that are most highly correlated with recorded neural activity. Microelectric neurochip developments seek to combine signal sensing and processing for bidirectional BMI systems.\n\nStudies in the feasibility of using adaptive input–output models for reconstructing hand trajectories have recently been published. These studies have focused on the\n18 Chronic devices are intended for long-duration implant, in contrast with acute implanted devices, which are utilized for a short duration and then removed. Formation of scar tissue is dependent on the material used for the electrodes.\n14\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":21,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nmicroelectric design of chronic neural implants. In 2006, Fetz et al. illustrated an intracranial operated neural implant that could function as neural prosthetic to assist upper limb movement for individuals that suffered from spinal cord injuries. The intriguing part of the Fetz design is its ability to function as an autonomous battery operated device. This is a departure from traditional BMI devices that are cumbersome and difficult to operate. Clearly this is a step forward in the development of microwire electrode design applications (Reference 44). Figure 5 illustrates the schematic flow chart of the Fetz MEMS neurochip, also called a programmable system-on-chip (PSoC) architecture.\n\nProgrammable System on Chip Architecture\n\nFigure 5. Schematic of the Neurochip Functional Blocks. Parallel PSoC microcontrollers record neural and muscle signals to independent memory modules. Primary PSoC also controls a constant-current stimulator circuit and communicates via IR to a PC or hand-held PDA. (Reference 44)\n\nTraditional PSoC designs operate on a high power consumption and short battery life of radiotelemetry systems (Reference 46). In the Fetz study, researchers implanted electronic devices that collected data in unrestrained monkeys. The system operated without the power limiting and cumbersome restraints exhibited by these previous systems. For this design, an onboard spike processing and a stimulator circuit were employed to allow for real-time bidirectional interface with the nervous system. After several modifications, Fetz et al. successfully created a device that was able to simultaneously record electromyogram (EMG) activity and neural activity at the implant. The lithium battery operated power source and electronic data systems were skillfully packaged within a compact percutaneous (inner skin) titanium casing that was attached to a monkey's skull; the entire implant weighed only 56 g. Neural data was acquired from 12 microwire electrodes chronically implanted in the primary motor cortex. Leads run subcutaneously from the head casing to a connector on the monkey's back. Two pairs of stainless-steel wires were inserted percutaneously into the forearm muscles where they were attached to an EMG signal recorder (Reference 44).\n\n15"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":22,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nCHRONIC NEURAL IMPLANTS AND FMRI\n\nWhile developing microelectric neural chips for functional studies appears revolutionary on the surface, it only presents a piece to the greater puzzle of understanding the feasibility between neuroprosthetic chips and BMI development. For a BMI system to succeed, researchers must understand the brain, its regions of activity and how those area correlate to real time stimulation and neural responses, and how the brain may evolve with training on use of the BMI. This will require the employment of sensitive neural mapping devices such as fMRI.\n\nFigure 6. Implant Location. Cartoon shows location and orientation of the different electrode sites in the various layers of an animal's neocortical implant (layer thicknesses are approximately scaled). The gray band is the 200µm separation region between the upper and lower layers of the neocortex.\n\nTo address this question, studies performed by Parikh et al., have targeted tissue-specific layers within the motor cortex region, essentially a modified ECoG, where penetrating microelectrodes exhibit the greatest functionality in cortical prosthetic design (Reference 47). The interesting parameter of this experimental design is its ability to successfully employ a behavioral task paradigm where electrodes could accurately record brain activity and animal response based on audible and visual cues. With this information the researchers discovered that the lower layers of the cortex are more likely to encode directional information as compared to units in the upper layers. This understanding has prompted the use of prosthetic neural implants as critical instruments for developing accurate BMI models and the mapping all neurological (brain triggered) responses.\n\nFor these experiments, accurate measurement of responses was placed solely into the unique design of chronic implantable neural prosthetic devices. These devices enabled investigation of activity in the upper or lower brain tissue layers, including whether either had a preference for ipsilateral (same body side) versus contralateral (opposite side of body) movement. In addition, chronic neural implants provided an innovative method to target isolated brain regions. During this experiment a craniotomy was performed over the target cortical area. In this procedure, a 2 mm diameter hole is made into the skull to expose the dura mater. This dura matter is then removed to reveal the cortical surface. An electrode scaffold array is inserted by hand with the use of fine PTFE-coated forceps into the target cortical area. Typically, the electrode will be\n\n16"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":23,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nlocalized in a manner where the top site will be below the cortical surface. The electrode assembly was then wrapped with Gel Foam (Pfizer, Inc., New York) and then cemented with dental acrylic (Reference 47). Once the experiment was concluded, precise location of the cortical arrays was obtained by passing currents though the electrodes to cause micro-lesioning, then post-mortem examination of brain slices could locate the lesions and reconstruct the precise 3-D position of the electrodes (Figure 7). This test provided an initial understanding of brain activity and the ability to utilize microelectrodes to localize specific neural regions.\n\nSample slices from all implants\n\nFigure 7. Histology and Electrode Tracks. The left panel shows Nissl-stained coronal sections of sample slices from all animals D1–D4 showing electrode tracks or lesion marks for all seven implantations. The black line marks the boundary between the upper and lower layers. The right panel shows seven coronal sections arranged rostro-caudally, as indicated by the schematic, for one implant (D4Left) showing alternating lesions and electrode tracks which were used to reconstruct site locations. (Reference 47)\n\n17"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":24,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nNEW ELECTRODE DESIGNS\n\nBuilding upon studies like Parikh et al., designs look toward invasive systems capable of pinpointing cortical regions and monitoring their neural activity at or near single neuron resolution. Clement et al. employed microwire neural implants to combine fMRI and intracortical recordings to yield important information about metabolic mechanisms that correlate with neural activity. While modeling studies have been conducted in numerous experiments, they served as a baseline to understand the potential dangers associated with the strong static magnetic field alone or while exposed to typical MRI protocols on the surrounding tissue and the design of an MRI compatible electrical array (References 48, 49). On the surface this may seem a trivial task, however the study shows this is not only a challenging design detail, but decisive in the resulting recorded data of neural activity. Examples of the electrode designs are shown in Figure 8.\n\nFigure 8. The Michigan Electrodes. Left: A variety of different silicon probes have been placed on the back of a U.S. penny. The copper scaffold in the background is the array of columns on the Lincoln Memorial. Right: Four 64-site probes have been assembled into a three-dimensional structure. (Reference 49)\n\nPrevious work addressed important issues related to short-term compatibility of silicon microelectrodes. In that report, identification and replacement of appropriate components of a silicon microelectrode system resulted in virtually artifact-free MR images and stable recordings of motor unit activity, although chronic studies were not performed (Reference 50). By utilizing this knowledge the authors designed a microwire electrode array capable of surviving the strong magnetic fluctuations exhibited from an fMRI. Figure 9 shows the device and its related connective components (Reference 51). Figure 10 shows the before and after MR images when connectors and structural screws compatible with MR are employed as well as the compatible electrodes.\n\n18"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":25,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 9. Image Distortion and Custom Microwire Electrode Assembly to Improve It. (A) Image distortion induced by metallic bone screws and connectors. No feature can be identified. Spin echo sequence: TR=1s, TE=6.75ms, NT=4, Matrix=128×128. FOV=60×60mm². Experiment time=512 s. (B) (Top) Microelectrode array used in the study. (Bottom) Close-up of the connector piece that was constructed for multiple connection/disconnection cycles. Interface piece to connect the nano-miniature Omnetics connector of the head stage with the head-cap-embedded custom connector for extracellular multiunit activity monitoring. (C) Improvement in image quality after replacement of bone screws and connectors with compatible equivalents. TR=3500ms, TE=20ms, averages=2, acquisition matrix=128×96, FOV=21×21mm², slice thickness=0.4mm, total acquisition time (TA)=672sec, resolution=164µm×220µm. (Reference 51)\n\nWith this system, the authors successfully recorded spontaneous extracellular multiunit neural activity in 16 electrodes (four in each animal) for 6 weeks post-implant. Of those 16 electrodes, 12 registered data verifying distinct neural activity prior to MR exposure. To determine the overall effectiveness and feasibility of this procedure, a tissues damage assessment associated with the MRI was conducted by utilizing T2 maps from tissue dissections (Figure 10). Thorough examination of the electrode location and resultant tissue survivability revealed little damage from the operation of the BMI. The locations of the microwires are visible as dark lines in the image (indicated by ovals).\n\nFigure 10. Example of T2 Variability. (A) T2 maps from MRI rat 16 at day 7 post-implant show elevated values proximal to the implant location (circled). (B) T2 maps from MRI rat 18 at day 30 post-implant shows no difference between the implant and control hemispheres. TR=3500ms, TE=10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60ms, averages=2, acquisition matrix=128×96, FOV=21×21mm², slice thickness= 0.4mm, TA=75mins, resolution=164µm×220µm. The ovals indicate the site of electrodes. (Reference 51)\n\n19"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":26,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe results of statistical analysis are shown in Figure 11 comparing the T2 values obtained in the implanted hemisphere versus those in the contralateral (unimplanted) hemisphere. There was no significant difference in T2 values between the two hemispheres. These results prove the feasibility of fMRI neural tracking and the use of microelectrode arrays. With these findings the use of microelectrical implants and fMRI will become a vital instrument in understanding neural activity in invasive BMI. With the growing use of chronic microelectric implants for neurophysiological mapping studies, future studies will be able to explore a new realm of possibilities in BMI applications.\n\nFigure 11. T2 Value Analysis Summary of T2 Values in All the Image Slices That Spanned the Electrode Arrays in All Animals. There was no significant difference between the implanted and contralateral control hemispheres in the susceptibility-free regions proximal to electrodes. p-values (one-sided student t-test assuming equal variance): day0: 0.2, day7: 0.7, day14: 0.4, day28: 0.8, day42: 0.4. Combining all imaging sessions for all animals: p=0.\n\nHYBRID NEURO-ROBOTIC SYSTEMS FOR TRUE CLOSED-LOOP BMI\n\nWhile many innovations have been seen in BMI technologies that detect neural stimulation from direct cortical regions of monkeys and rats, another approach has been pursued through the use of lamprey eels. Chordates, like the lamprey are ideally suited for neurological studies because of their distinct and readily accessible hollow dorsal nerve cord or brain stem. In the realm of neuroscience the brain stem is often regarded as the most primitive region of the human brain. In one study, Mussa-Ivaldi et al. (References 28, 29) investigated the possibility of using the feedback from a BMI for inducing controlled plastic changes at specific synapses. Figure 12 shows the bidirectional connections between a mobile robotic device and a lamprey brain stem that has been used to investigate the repertoire of operations carried out by neurons in the reticular formation. Signals generated by the two optical sensors of the robot were translated into electrical stimuli and applied to the vestibular pathways, and to two populations of reticular neurons. The resulting discharge frequency of the reticular neurons commanded the right and left wheels of the robot. In this simple arrangement, the reticular neurons acted as a processing element that determined the closed-loop response of the neuro-robotic system to a source of light. These studies revealed that:\n\n• Different behaviors can be generated with different electrode locations.\n\n• The input-output relationship of the reticular synapses is well approximated by simple linear models with a recurrent dynamic component.\n\n• The prolonged suppression of one input channel leads to altered responsiveness long after it has been restored in the variable frequency pulse generator.\n\nThe results of this lamprey study hints that cerebellar connections in mammals could provide excellent plastic interface points for full closed loop technologies.\n\n20\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":27,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nFigure 12. A Hybrid Neuro-Robotic System. Signals from the optical sensors of a Khepera (K-team) mobile robot (bottom) are encoded by the interface into electrical stimulations, the frequency of which depends linearly on the light intensity. These stimuli are delivered by tungsten microelectrodes to the right and left vestibular pathways of a lamprey brainstem (top) that is immersed in artificial cerebrospinal fluid within a recording chamber. The electrical stimuli are delivered to the axons of the intermediate and posterior octavomotor nuclei (nOMI and nOMP, respectively). Glass microelectrodes record extracellular responses to the stimuli from the posterior rhombencephalic neurons (PRRN). Recorded signals from right and left PRRN are decoded by the interface. First, the electric artifacts generated by the stimulation impulses are removed. Then, population spikes are detected. The resulting spike train is passed through a low-pass filter, which calculates an average firing rate over a 300-millisecond firing window. The average firing rate detected from each electrode is translated into a command to the corresponding wheel of the robot. The angular velocity of the wheel is set to be proportional to this average rate.\n\nFigure 13. Experimental Arrangements. (A): arrangement for simultaneous recordings of neuronal activity, electromyograms (EMGs), and movements in the freely behaving animal. Electrophysiological recordings and the video recordings were synchronized by pulses (1 Hz) recorded simultaneously by both systems (Synchro). (B): arrangement for recording vestibular responses in RS neurons during swimming. Central, denervated region of the body was fixed in the experimental device. Lamprey could perform locomotor-like undulatory movements by its anterior and posterior body parts (indicated by arrows). Device could be rotated manually (a, roll tilt angle).\n\nAdditional studies utilizing neurological signals generated from the lamprey have been equally promising in eliciting cognitive responses that translate a controlled response into a machine's activity. In a similar experiment, Deliagina, and coworkers (Reference 30) used the activity of reticulospinal neurons recorded from a swimming lamprey to\n\n21\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":28,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nrotate the platform supporting the fish. The lamprey was able to stabilize the hybrid system, and this compensatory effect was most efficient in combination with undulating swimming motions. The experimental setup is seen in Figure 13. These studies demonstrate the feasibility of closed-loop interactions between a specific region of the nervous system and an artificial device. Closed-loop brain-machine interfaces offer an unparalleled opportunity to investigate how plastic changes can be guided by modulating the input signals of the neurons based on the behaviors generated by the output of the same neurons. Furthermore, in such hybrid systems it is possible to replace the neural tissue with a computational model, thus providing a direct means for testing the predictions of specific hypotheses about neural information processing. Adaptation to the variable dynamics of the limbs and of the limb environment has generated an increasing volume of research that is relevant to brain-machine interfaces.\n\nTRIALS USING HUMAN SUBJECTS\n\nTesting BMIs on normal human subjects presents ethical dilemma since any volunteer outside of the research team itself would likely have difficulty understanding all of the risks involved in neural implantation. Even well-known volunteers such as Jans Naumann now admit they truly did not understand the risks involved and are considering having chronic implants removed.19 Not all human trials have produced such poor results.\n\nSignificant ECoG arrays are implanted in epileptic patients prior to surgery to provide high resolution spatial localization of seizure activity (Reference 45). In these clinical tests, the arrays are implanted in the patient and then monitored until seizures takes place. This procedure can take more than a week and the patient has little to do between random onsets of seizure activity. Epilepsy is generally considered a localized pathology, almost always lateralized to the right or left lobe. The remaining brain networks, especially from the nonseizure half of the brain, are generally normal. This provides an opportunity for cohort cognitive studies since they represent minimal additional risk for volunteers undergoing the procedure as a medical necessity. Blakely et al. utilized such a patient to decode brain network patterns associated with different English phonemes (Reference 52). Mapping all of the phonemes could constitute an open-loop technology to communicate without speaking using normal language instead of learned motor patterns. Schalk and colleagues utilized a sample of five pre-surgical epileptics to demonstrate ECoG to control one- and two-dimensional cursor movement. Movement times to target were on the order of 1-2 seconds with up to 75 percent accuracy with training time on the order of 30 minutes or less (Reference 53).\n\nSpinal cord injury (SCI) is another clinical condition where the normal brain is intact and ECoG arrays may be implanted for testing a neuroprosthetic. Researchers in Toronto recently reported good hand movement and grasping control using ECoG arrays (Reference 54). Similarly, Hochberg showed good results in 2-D cursor control, but still seconds or more slower than a mouse control, even after 90 days of training. A following task was more successful, though the accuracy for use in fine manipulations needs improvement (Reference 55).\n\n19 Jans Naumann was the first recipient of a second-generation artificial vision system (AVS) designed by the Dobelle Institute. The AVS project was based in New York, but the procedures themselves were conducted in Lisbon, Portugal, to avoid U.S. prohibitions against implant surgery.\n\n22\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":29,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nEMG interfaces for limb amputees have advanced dramatically in the last several years, with several devices controlled by remaining muscles that have been implanted with otherwise unused nerves in an invasive process called reinnervation (References 56, 57). Twelve electrode pairs were utilized in the recording of intended arm motion. The classifier algorithm used to determine hand control was able to provide a new prediction 10 times a second, and for controls, a motion selection from 1 of 10 possibilities could be achieved in less than 170 milliseconds. Interesting with this procedure is that a direct biological amplification of the neuronal signal is achieved by connecting it to a muscle. The amplified signal is then read by a noninvasive EMG probe. Although not yet approaching normal, the speed and dexterity of these artificial limbs is impressive.\n\nFinally, one trial utilizing a normal, healthy human self-experimenter in 2002 showed that sensation and control is possible through a peripheral array implant in the median nerve of the left arm. This trial lasted 3 months before the physical connection between the nerve and the microarray deteriorated beyond use. Subsequent examination and testing has revealed no long-term damage at the implant site (Reference 58).\n\nOPTICAL STIMULATION OF ACTION POTENTIALS\n\nA final invasive technology that utilizes light to gate action potentials shows promise (Reference 59). In this technology, the biological switch is controlled by a locally inserted LED and possibly guided using optical fibers, but there is no contact between the physical circuits and neurons, thus avoiding the issue of scar tissue caused by operation of invasive probes. Application to artificial vision have already interesting pre-clinical results in rat brain tissue (Reference 60).\n\nDiscussion\n\nAny successful BMI hardware technology relies on at least one, and in most cases all, of the following three essential elements: brain plasticity through user training, neural decoding by a machine learning algorithm, and neuroscience knowledge. Advances in the latter two will help all BMI research paths, but the former element is the most research path dependent since different technologies have different training limitations such as the inherent visual feedback delay of a noninvasive BOLD monitor.\n\nOne approach to the training issue is to greatly simplify the control information bandwidth required. Research here has placed a focus on scenario-based controlling that is not from millisecond-to-millisecond updating of some 3-D trajectory like a full-duplex BMI specified in the introduction would perform, but rather is controlled by high level commands from the user in a low-bandwidth supervisory mode. It is conceivably useful to tell a wheelchair to \"Go Left,\" \"Stop,\" or \"Veer Right,\" and let sensors and actuators on the wheelchair work out the trajectory details, as opposed to constantly setting and resetting the trajectory of the wheelchair. In this manner, much of the feedback error-correction is done in the physical circuit. This approach can be viewed as a series of simple asynchronous decisions, and relies on the artificial intelligence of the execution algorithms rather than tapping the general adaptability of mammalian brain architecture. Mention is made of this research path because it is important to the advancement of the field as a whole, though the concentration in this treatise is on tapping the plasticity of neural systems rather than creating a program to imitate them.\n\n23\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":30,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nThe remainder of discussion concentrates on the surveyed studies into five technology areas, and listing their advantages and disadvantages, as well as their critical barriers to further development and likely future paths of research.\n\nNONINVASIVE ELECTRICAL DEVICES\n\nThe current state-of-the-art BMI devices that have shown the most promise in the near term utilize muscle amplification of the neural signal. This is the result of commercial investment in development. These primarily EMG based systems are noninvasive connections to existing or constructed nerve-muscle pairs. Neurally operated prosthetics have been demonstrated such as the artificial hand. Decoding algorithms are nearly as fast as muscle response itself at selecting 1 of 10 actions. Commercial products for entertainment are available for normal, healthy consumers. These entertainment devices contain few sensors but make use of more complex decoding algorithms. All sensors don't just turn on and off, rather they can relay amplitude, polarity, and frequency of muscle action, as well as detect underlying spiking signals from neurons. This combination, along with algorithms developed from a support vector machine, will allow device selection of many more actions than the simple binary combinatorics of the number of sensors. The gaming market will drive this noninvasive technology in the next 5 years with advances in signal processing from current sensors.\n\nThe EMG based systems can be scaled to a large number of sensors for a more complex control task. It has been demonstrated with amputees the feasibility to move existing nerves around to control existing muscles. There has not been a study yet to explore how many nerve-muscle pairs may be available for such use in a normal human, with or without reinnervation. Such a study could be done theoretically based on current and near term work with patients. The longer term for EMG will likely evolve toward very small, wireless chronic implants that operate near the skin surface and are easy to install and remove.\n\nDevices based solely on noninvasive detection of EEG signals from the cortex in normal, healthy individuals are unlikely in the next 5 years. This is primarily because of muscle noise filtering issues which will need to be solved through development of better EMG sensors and detection algorithms mentioned above. Even though such devices have been shown to work in laboratory settings, moving them to the arbitrary conditions in naturalistic settings introduces significant complication to signal detection and filtering that greatly limits the information transfer bandwidth to a fraction of the target 5 bits/sec. Also an issue is the origin of surface EEG signals, which are still under theoretical study even after 80 years. Some of the frequency bands directly related to spiking activity in axons are somewhat understood, but the whole of the signals contain many transients that are likely the more interesting and possibly more robust parts of brain activity. In the medium to long term, many applications are envisioned in surface or near surface detection of cortical spiking activity or ERP, once the background separation issue in naturalistic environments is addressed. However, these signals still require localized coherent firing of tens of thousands of neurons, a biological requirement that has limited the information transfer rates of these techniques to 1 bit/sec or less, which is well below target rates but could be useful for some applications.\n\nOne can suppose an ultra-high density EEG, thousands of sensors with wireless micro probes embedded subcutaneously that track electrical activity and relative location\n\n24\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":31,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nbased on skin movement using technology similar to the operation of GPS. This system would have the same inherent problem of signal conduction through tissue from all directions. The key indicator of a future advance in EEG technology would be a study showing noninvasive spiking or ERP signal detection from a coherent group of less than 10,000 neurons. Until progress in localization on this order is demonstrated, EEG-only devices will remain low bit rate application technologies.\n\nEEG-only sensor control of devices has been pursued with the supposition that signal transmission directly from the motor cortex will outperform conventional mechanical operation because the signal transmission delay between the neocortex and muscles in the extremities will be augmented via a physical circuit. While this is true, the inherent assumption that complex mechanical interface operation can be replaced with a 1 bit/second low-delay control pathway is incorrect for naturalistic environments. The millions of channels of two-way communication between the extremities and the brain naturally present will control naturalistic mechanical devices far better, and provides the ability to react to an ever-changing environment. Adding significant computer control and relegating the motor cortex to a supervisory role of low data bandwidth could have benefits and is a possible path to real-world improved reaction time application. Also beneficial to reaction time is the combined EMG EEG devices mentioned above since the pathways between the brain and facial muscles are far shorter than those to the extremities.\n\nNONINVASIVE BOLD-BASED DEVICES\n\nThe detection resolution of hemodynamic responses using fMRI and NIRS type technologies is expected to improve in the near, medium, and far terms. NIRS has been deployed in naturalistic experiments, specifically, automobile driving, and it is reasonable to envision such systems becoming small enough to wear in the medium to far term. The limiting issue with BOLD technologies is that the detectable response is delayed several seconds from neuronal firing, greatly limiting the cognitive control applications available to these technologies. Progress in localization to below 0.5 mm3 in a mobile device could indicate the possibility of high bit transfer rates with the use of state vector machines, albeit with the inherent delay of the physiology. Until the localization and portability issues are addressed in tandem, BOLD-only devices are unlikely to be used for commercial cognitive control interfaces.\n\nThe vast majority of experiments in fMRI utilize the General Linear Model (GLM) and something akin to a canonical hemodynamic response. There exists significant physiological noise in these data analyses that are traditionally filtered out. The differential results from Independent Component Analysis (ICA) and GLM analysis of the same data sets indicate that there may be additional circulatory response mechanisms with faster onsets than typical BOLD. Future studies indicating that filtering or analysis methods may be ignoring important detectable signals that have inherently faster response times would provide a breakthrough path for hemodynamic response technologies. The current research to monitor on this matter is the technology known as Inverse MRI which can capture high temporal resolution (100 frames a second for single slices) T2* variations.\n\n25\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":32,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\nNONINVASIVE MAGNETIC DEVICES\n\nDetection of magnetic fields arising from neural activity using MEG or a future technology have the same inherent limitations as EEG-only noninvasive sensors. Resolving these signals from background in any naturalistic environment will not occur without the development of a disruptive technology in shielding that is portable and lightweight enough to be worn comfortably on the head, and will attenuate background amplitude nearly 10 orders of magnitude across the entire range of neural signal frequencies, and the entire range of frequencies where the detection electronics may be sensitive. Body-temperature superconducting materials may accomplish the shielding if engineering development continues, and these could be combined with atomic magnetometer technology to produce a portable system, though the inherent limitations of the method will still be present.\n\nINVASIVE TECHNOLOGIES – GENERAL, OPTICAL, AND EX-VIVO ENGINEERING\n\nAll invasive technologies will have to undergo substantial rigorous testing to determine the long-term side-effects of implantation and operation, as well as drift in the operational performance with extended use. Several pre-clinical devices detailed above and discussed below show promise, but the handful of human trials show that direct interface technologies based on proximal action potential stimulation and detection are still a long way off from practical application since the trials themselves in duplex operation show functional failure after only a matter of weeks. The mammalian auditory system is well studied, and the cochlear implant has been in use and continued development for more than 30 years, and there is yet to be any practical application for implanting a cochlear device into a normal healthy individual. Proximal electrode interfaces do not appear to be the answer for high bandwidth BMI, and further development in the machine-biology contact is required. If the 30-year advancement of cochlear is a realistic guide of innovation, the proximal electrical technology path to success is 30-40 years off save for a disruptive advance in the development of penetrating electrodes.\n\nTwo invasive research paths that are promising are optical stimulation and gating, and ex-vivo growth of neural cells on physical circuits.\n\nThe advantage of optical stimulation and gating is that one could theoretically design an optical link to act as a connected input dendrite on a single neuron. Theoretically, one should also be able to use spectroscopic sampling to determine if an action potential is progressing down an axon, thus providing a single neuron output (read or monitor) capability as well. This invasive but noncontact full-duplex information channel would effectively hook-up the physical computer seamlessly to the network structure of the brain. Proof of principle studies in this technology could emerge at any time, and given the demonstrated plasticity of neural networks in both closed-loop visual feedback and lamprey experiments, could provide a disruptive path for advancement of BMI.\n\nThe ex-vivo growth of neural tissue on electrode arrays provides a controlled platform for:\n\n• Testing long-term effects of electrode use on proximal neural tissue.\n\n26\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":33,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n• Developing complex neural networks on top of chips prior to implant.\n\n• Development of chronic electrode materials such as biopolymers that may be suitable for implant without an ex-vivo grown sheath.\n\n• Creating a biological to biological interface upon implant.\n\nThis technology does still rely on proximal sensing and stimulation of action potentials, but the neural tissue at the biological to physical interface is engineered rather than native, thus providing the opportunity to develop an effective bridging network to seamlessly integrate between the two systems. Development of such chronic implant capability could make feasible the nondestructive addition of cerebellar pathways for control activity that incorporates the huge potential of brain plasticity without adding significant cognitive burden on the prefrontal cortex. This would effectively turn the controlled device into part of the body as far as the brain is concerned.\n\nIMPLANTABLE CHIPS, LADDERS AND ARRAYS\n\nResearch utilizing ECoG or neocortical ladder array technology is the state of the art in neural communication. However, stimulating nerves or peripheral pathways in this matter without damage to the receiving cells has proven difficult. Even in cochlear arrays, normal functioning of the surrounding tissue is lost and only a fraction of the quality of natural stimulation is available. Locating single neurons has also been challenging, though new electrode designs are being developed. These devices will continue to be useful for research applications such as better understanding of network structure and network function in conjunction with fMRI. BMI application will continue in the foreseeable future to be limited to instances where closed-loop with visual or other traditional sensory feedback is sufficient. Until new electrode designs develop a robust method of two-way communication with single neurons, they will not be the dominant BMI technology for use in normal, healthy individuals.\n\nConclusions\n\nThe gamut of modern technologies that connect neural systems to physical systems has been surveyed, with attention to the underlying physiological signals. Many examples have been presented of studies illustrating the different research paths under way. Two of these technologies show the most promise of near term and long term successful high-bandwidth integration of brain and external systems.\n\nIn the near term, noninvasive electrical sensors that primarily rely on EMG signals, but also include those weaker signals directly from neuronal firing, are expected to dominate real-world applications. The decoding of these signals from just a handful of dry sensors can produce a large combination of on-off and variable strength control commands that should surpass the information capability of traditional electro-mechanical interfaces in the next 5 years. This technology is limited, however, by the number of available EMG sites and the required coherent firing of very large numbers of neurons. To surpass these limitations, technologies capable of connections to individual neurons on a large scale will be necessary.\n\nIn the far term, an invasive approach to establish high-bandwidth duplex communication networks, 5-20 bits/second, using interfaces with single neurons\n\n27\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":34,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\ndirectly in the cortex or cerebellum can take the fullest advantage of neural training and processing capability. Two research paths currently showing the most promise are optical interfaces and ex-vivo preparation of electrode arrays encased in engineered neural tissue. New electrode designs that could establish two-way communication with single neurons are also promising. The cerebellar connection point is extremely interesting to perhaps provide a connection that would effectively make the external device a part of the body as far as the brain is concerned.\n\nThe current state of the art using metal electrode arrays for proximal stimulation and sensing does not appear to be advancing toward long duration viability as a commercial BMI without some unforeseen advance in two-way communication. Peripheral connections have some theoretical promise, but an example of such an implant in a human trial did not shown terrific success over several weeks it functioned. Implantation of cortical arrays in human trials has not been conducted on a wide scale for durations longer than a few weeks, and two-way electrical communication has yet to be realistically demonstrated, limiting the possible commercial application portfolio for this technology.\n\nMany possible research directions for disruptive advances have been presented. These areas and the physiological-physical interconnection field of study as a whole should be monitored regularly for advances, as well as the ancillary technology areas of brain plasticity, neural signal decoding, and general basic neuroscience. Advances in any and all of these areas could alter the future landscape of commercial applications and dramatically alter our understanding of what is possible through thought-directed control.\n\n1 Alberts B. Molecular biology of the cell. 4th ed. New York: Garland Science; 2002.\n2 Polich J. Updating P300: an integrative theory of P3a and P3b. Clin Neurophysiol 2007 Oct;118(10):2128-48.\n3 Ravden D, Polich J. On P300 measurement stability: habituation, intra-trial block variation, and ultradian rhythms. Biol Psychol 1999 Oct;51(1):59-76.\n4 Sutton S, Braren M, Zubin J, John ER. Evoked-potential correlates of stimulus uncertainty. Science 1965 Nov 26;150(700):1187-8.\n5 Sawaki R, Katayama J. Top-down directed attention to stimulus features and attentional allocation to bottom-up deviations. J Vis 2008;8(15):4 1-8.\n6 Huettel SA, Song AW, McCarthy G. Functional magnetic resonance imaging. Sunderland, Mass.: Sinauer Associates, Publishers; 2004.\n7 Kandel ER, Schwartz JH, Jessell TM. Principles of neural science. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Health Professions Division; 2000.\n8 Ogawa S, Tank DW, Menon R, Ellermann JM, Kim SG, Merkle H, et al. Intrinsic signal changes accompanying sensory stimulation: functional brain mapping with magnetic resonance imaging. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1992 Jul 1;89(13):5951-5.\n9 Emerging Cognitive Neuroscience and Related Technologies. Washington DC: National Research Council of the National Academies; 2008.\n10 Miller MB, Van Horn JD, Wolford GL, Handy TC, Valsangkar-Smyth M, Inati S, et al. Extensive individual differences in brain activations associated with episodic retrieval are reliable over time. J Cogn Neurosci 2002 Nov 15;14(8):1200-14.\n11 Hatsopoulos NG, Donoghue JP. The Science of Neural Interface Systems. Annu Rev Neurosci 2009 Mar 24.\n12 Fitts PM. The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J Exp Psychol 1954 Jun;47(6):381-91.\n13 Drury CG, Hoffmann ER. A model for movement time on data-entry keyboards. Ergonomics 1992;35(2):129-47.\n14 Choi C, Micera S, Carpaneto J, Kim J. Development and quantitative performance evaluation of a noninvasive EMG computer interface. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2009 Jan;56(1):188-91.\n15 Soukoreff RW, MacKenzie IS. Theoretical upper and lower bounds on typing speed using a stylus and soft keyboard. Behaviour & Information Technology 1995;14(6):370-9.\n\n28\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":35,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n16 Cummings ML, Guerlain S. Developing operator capacity estimates for supervisory control of autonomous vehicles. Hum Factors 2007 Feb;49(1):1-15.\n17 Enzinger C, Ropele S, Fazekas F, Loitfelder M, Gorani F, Seifert T, et al. Brain motor system function in a patient with complete spinal cord injury following extensive brain-computer interface training. Exp Brain Res 2008 Sep;190(2):215-23.\n18 Berger H. Uber das elektrenkephalogramm des menschen. Archiv fur Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten 1929;87(1):527-80.\n19 Davis P. Effects of acoustic stimuli on the waking human brain. Journal of Neurophysiology 1939;2:494-9.\n20 Blankertz B, Dornhege G, Krauledat M, Muller KR, Curio G. The non-invasive Berlin Brain-Computer Interface: fast acquisition of effective performance in untrained subjects. Neuroimage 2007 Aug 15;37(2):539-50.\n21 Kubler A, Kotchoubey B, Kaiser J, Wolpaw JR, Birbaumer N. Brain-computer communication: unlocking the locked in. Psychol Bull 2001 May;127(3):358-75.\n22 Bai O, Lin P, Vorbach S, Floeter MK, Hattori N, Hallett M. A high performance sensorimotor beta rhythm-based brain-computer interface associated with human natural motor behavior. J Neural Eng 2008 Mar;5(1):24-35.\n23 Iversen I, Ghanayim N, Kubler A, Neumann N, Birbaumer N, Kaiser J. Conditional associative learning examined in a paralyzed patient with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis using brain-computer interface technology. Behav Brain Funct 2008;4:53.\n24 Iversen IH, Ghanayim N, Kubler A, Neumann N, Birbaumer N, Kaiser J. A brain-computer interface tool to assess cognitive functions in completely paralyzed patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Clin Neurophysiol 2008 Oct;119(10):2214-23.\n25 Sellers EW, Kubler A, Donchin E. Brain-computer interface research at the University of South Florida Cognitive Psychophysiology Laboratory: the P300 Speller. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2006 Jun;14(2):221-4.\n26 Greene K. Brain sensor for market research: A startup claims to read people's minds while they view ads. 2007 [May 12, 2009]; Available from: http://www.technologyreview.com/Biztech/19833/?a=f.\n27 Greene K. Connecting Your Brain to the Game Using an EEG cap, a startup hopes to change the way people interact with video games. 2007 [May 12, 2009]; Available from: http://www.technologyreview.com/Biztech/18276/?a=f.\n28 Popescu F, Fazli S, Badower Y, Blankertz B, Muller KR. Single trial classification of motor imagination using 6 dry EEG electrodes. PLoS ONE 2007;2(7):e637.\n29 van Gerven M, Jensen O. Attention modulations of posterior alpha as a control signal for two-dimensional brain-computer interfaces. J Neurosci Methods 2009 Apr 30;179(1):78-84.\n30 Mellinger J, Schalk G, Braun C, Preissl H, Rosenstiel W, Birbaumer N, et al. An MEG-based brain-computer interface (BCI). Neuroimage 2007 Jul 1;36(3):581-93.\n31 Ohta H, Matsui T, Uchikawa Y. Whole-head SQUID system in a superconducting magnetic shield. Neurol Clin Neurophysiol 2004;2004:58.\n32 Kraus RH, Jr., Volegov P, Matlachov A, Espy M. Toward direct neural current imaging by resonant mechanisms at ultra-low field. Neuroimage 2008 Jan 1;39(1):310-7.\n33 McDermott R, Lee S, ten Haken B, Trabesinger AH, Pines A, Clarke J. Microtesla MRI with a superconducting quantum interference device. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004 May 25;101(21):7857-61.\n34 Chen Y, Intes X, Tailor DR, Regatte RR, Ma H, Ntziachristos V, et al. Probing rat brain oxygenation with near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Adv Exp Med Biol 2003;510:199-204.\n35 Luu S, Chau T. Decoding subjective preference from single-trial near-infrared spectroscopy signals. J Neural Eng 2009 Feb;6(1):016003.\n36 Loeb GE. Cochlear prosthetics. Annu Rev Neurosci 1990;13:357-71.\n37 Bailey L. New cochlear implant could improve hearing. University of Michigan News Service [serial on the Internet]. 2006: Available from: http://www.umich.edu/news/index.html?Releases/2006/Feb06/r020606a.\n38 Cheng YC, Brown RW, Chung YC, Duerk JL, Fujita H, Lewin JS, et al. Calculated RF electric field and temperature distributions in RF thermal ablation: comparison with gel experiments and liver imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998 Jan-Feb;8(1):70-6.\n39 Kamitani Y, Tong F. Decoding the visual and subjective contents of the human brain. Nat Neurosci 2005 May;8(5):679-85.\n40 Kamitani Y, Tong F. Decoding seen and attended motion directions from activity in the human visual cortex. Curr Biol 2006 Jun 6;16(11):1096-102.\n41 Fagg AH, Hatsopoulos NG, de Lafuente V, Moxon KA, Nemati S, Rebesco JM, et al. Biomimetic brain machine interfaces for the control of movement. J Neurosci 2007 Oct 31;27(44):11842-6.\n42 Kim HK, Carmena JM, Biggs SJ, Hanson TL, Nicolelis MA, Srinivasan MA. The muscle activation method: an approach to impedance control of brain-machine interfaces through a musculoskeletal model of the arm. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2007 Aug;54(8):1520-9.\n43 Kawato M. Brain controlled robots. HFSP J 2008 Jun;2(3):136-42.\n44 Jackson A, Moritz CT, Mavoori J, Lucas TH, Fetz EE. The Neurochip BCI: towards a neural prosthesis for upper limb function. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2006 Jun;14(2):187-90.\n45 Leuthardt EC, Miller KJ, Schalk G, Rao RP, Ojemann JG. Electrocorticography-based brain computer interface--the Seattle experience. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2006 Jun;14(2):194-8.\n46 Diorio C, Mavoori J. Computer electronics meet animal brains. IEEE Computer 2003;36(1):69-75.\n47 Parikh H, Marzullo TC, Kipke DR. Lower layers in the motor cortex are more effective targets for penetrating microelectrodes in cortical prostheses. J Neural Eng 2009 Apr;6(2):026004.\n\n29\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"} {"doc_id":"ff99df558c8a0fac","page":36,"status":"ok","model":"claude-haiku-5-5","text":"UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\n\n48 Baker KB, Nyenhuis JA, Hrdlicka G, Rezai AR, Tkach JA, Shellock FG. Neurostimulation systems: assessment of magnetic field interactions associated with 1.5- and 3-Tesla MR systems. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005 Jan;21(1):72-7.\n49 Wise KD. Silicon microsystems for neuroscience and neural prostheses. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 2005 Sep-Oct;24(5):22-9.\n50 Martinez Santiesteban FM, Swanson SD, Noll DC, Anderson DJ. Magnetic resonance compatibility of multichannel silicon microelectrode systems for neural recording and stimulation: design criteria, tests, and recommendations. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2006 Mar;53(3):547-58.\n51 Paralikar KJ, Neuberger T, Matsui JT, Barber AJ, Webb A, Clement RS. Feasibility and safety of longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging in a rodent model with intracortical microwire implants. J Neural Eng 2009 Apr 15;6(3):34001.\n52 Blakely T, Miller KJ, Rao RP, Holmes MD, Ojemann JG. Localization and classification of phonemes using high spatial resolution electrocorticography (ECoG) grids. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2008;2008:4964-7.\n53 Schalk G, Miller KJ, Anderson NR, Wilson JA, Smyth MD, Ojemann JG, et al. Two-dimensional movement control using electrocorticographic signals in humans. J Neural Eng 2008 Mar;5(1):75-84.\n54 Marquez-Chin C, Popovic MR, Cameron T, Lozano AM, Chen R. Control of a neuroprosthesis for grasping using off-line classification of electrocorticographic signals: case study. Spinal Cord 2009 Apr 21.\n55 Hochberg LR, Serruya MD, Friehs GM, Mukand JA, Saleh M, Caplan AH, et al. Neuronal ensemble control of prosthetic devices by a human with tetraplegia. Nature 2006 Jul 13;442(7099):164-71.\n56 Kuiken TA, Li G, Lock BA, Lipschutz RD, Miller LA, Stubblefield KA, et al. Targeted muscle reinnervation for real-time myoelectric control of multifunction artificial arms. JAMA 2009 Feb 11;301(6):619-28.\n57 Kuiken T. Targeted reinnervation for improved prosthetic function. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2006 Feb;17(1):1-13.\n58 Warwick K, Gasson M, Hutt B, Goodhew I, Kyberd P, Andrews B, et al. The application of implant technology for cybernetic systems. Arch Neurol 2003 Oct;60(10):1369-73.\n59 Nagel G, Szellas T, Huhn W, Kateriya S, Adeishvili N, Berthold P, et al. Channelrhodopsin-2, a directly light-gated cation-selective membrane channel. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003 Nov 25;100(24):13940-5.\n60 Degenaar P, Grossman N, Memon MA, Burrone J, Dawson M, Drakakis E, et al. Optobionic vision--a new genetically enhanced light on retinal prosthesis. J Neural Eng 2009 Jun;6(3):035007.\n\n30\n\nUNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY"}